discredited the dates assigned to them by Indian scholars. But I now see no sufficient reason to doubt the chronology of these ancient classical works on grammar and ethics, some of which in scientific accuracy, in originality of design, in beauty of expression and thought, and in faithfulness to nature would stand comparison with the best works of similar kind in other languages.
(2) The second and third periods, namely, the eighth and ninth centuries, are characterised by a bitter struggle between Jainism and Brahmanism. As will be seen from the lives and works of Tirumalisai and Tirumangai Alvars, the Vaishnava Saints had an equal share with the Saivas in the suppression of Jainism. It is not, therefore, correct to call it a struggle between Jainism and Sivaism. It may be that very few Buddhists came from Ceylon to Chidambaram, and had religious disputations with Manikkavachagar about the middle of the ninth century. But this was only a minor incident which left no permanent impress on either the literature or the religion of the Tamil people. Moreover, it was Brahmanism—not Sivaism—that had attained its supremacy so early as the ninth century, though Jainism had still a lingering existence. And it was during these two centuries that a great number of the Saiva Nayanmars and Vaishnava Alvars flourished and did their proselytizing work.
(3) During the fourth period (tenth century)not only the Saivas but also the Vaishnavas were left undisput-
