Principles of Forensic Sciences found in Ancient Tamil Literature
Prof Dr P Chandra Sekharan, MA MSc PhD BL DEL FInstP (Lond) FFSc FAFSc DABFE Fellow of the American College of Forensic Examiners
Forensic Science, as the police interpret, is the science used in crime investigation. When law looks at it, it is the science used in courts of law.
But according to the noted author, F.E.Camps, Forensic Science is the application of Laws of Nature to Laws of Man”. This author has revised the definition as ‘Forensic Science is the conglomeration of all bits of human knowledge, experience and endeavour which are used as fact finding tools for all legal requirements. Forensic evidence is scientific evidence. The latter two definitions fit in more when I attempted to find the principles of Forensic Sciences in ancient Tamil Literature
Evidence in wider sense includes everything that is made use of in determining or demonstrating the truth of an assertion. Collecting evidence is the process of using those things that are either (a) presumed to be true, or (b) were themselves proven via evidence, to demonstrate an assertion's truth. Evidence is the asset with which one can fulfill the burden of proof.
Evidence while playing its major role in law, is an important partner in many academic disciplines, including science adding to the discourse surrounding it. In scientific research evidence is accumulated through observations of phenomena that occur in the natural world, or which are created as experiments in a laboratory or in fields under controlled conditions. Scientific evidence usually goes towards supporting or rejecting a hypothesis.
An important distinction in the field of evidence is that between circumstantial evidence and direct evidence, or evidence that suggests truth as opposed to evidence that directly proves truth. One must always remember that the burden of proof is on the person making the positive claim. The evidence is classified into five types, namely, Intuition, Personal experience, Testimonial, Anecdotal evidence and Scientific evidence
Handwriting Comparison – Forensic evidence found in Periyapuranam
Besides, being a regular student and practitioner of science and law, I have always been an ardent lover of my language a Tamil. I was amazed to find a vivid description and discussion about the ‘law of evidence’ and the ‘science of documents’ narrated by Sekkizhar Peruman (சேக்கிழார் பெருமான்) in his celebrated treatise Thaduththatkonda puranam (“தடுத்தாட்கொண்ட புராணம்”).
The words chosen by Sekkizhar in the versus are so selective and deep as to show how law and science played a vital role in all public inquests conducted by the Tamils in those days. (12th century Anabaya Chozhan Period)
When Nambiyarurar (நம்பியாரூரர்) arrives at the scene of marriage, an old Vediyar (வேதியர்) arrives at the scene and confronts him with a bid to prevent him from getting married to his chosen bride. [Actually it is Lord Shiva who appeared in disguise like an old Brahmin]
“You have to settle an old pending case between us before you go through your rituals for the marriage” thus exclaimed the Vediyar .
Nambiyarurar asserted “If you have a case against me, I won’t go ahead with my wedlock without settling the same. But furnish me with full details of the case”
Turning towards the other Brahmins assembled there Vediyar said, “My case is that this Navaluran (நாவலூரான்}is bonded to be my slave” [Navaluran is another name for Nambiyarurar.] Listening to what the Vediyar had said, those who assembled there wondered at this claim. Some gathered around the Brahmin. Some became angry and some others were amused.
Looking directly at the face of the Vediyar, Nambiyarurar rebuked “Indeed the language of this old man appears good”.
Nearing Navaluran, the Vediyar displayed a Oolai [ஓலை= palm-leaf, used as paper] exclaimed, “How dare you deride me”. “This is the bond executed by your grandfather to show that you are my slave-labourer”.
Nambiyarurar: “It is for the first time we hear from you that a Brahmin could be bonded to become a slave to another Brahmin. Are you mad?” [Nambiyarurar wants to disprove the claim by referring to the tradition that such a practice had never prevailed].
Caring not to what Navalurar had said, the Vediyar insisted that he should carry out his orders. But Nambiyarurar wanted to know the facts behind the Oolai and therefore he requested him to show the Oolai .
But the Vediyar questioned “Are you qualified to examine the Oolai? I will show it to the learned gathering here. However you may be prepared to carry out my orders.” Saying this, the Vediyar moved towards the central stage.
Nambiyarurar followed him and snatched the Oolai questioning “In what manner is it justified to make an innocent Brahmin to work for another Brahmin” and tore the Oolai to pieces.
The Vediyar complained this to the people who gathered there. Finding that the case brought forth by the Brahmin to be strange, the relatives and people around there questioned him about his whereabouts. [to make sure about the jurisdiction of the case].
V;ediyar replied; “I belong to this place only and my residence is at Thiruvennainallur (திருவெண்ணெய் நல்லூர்). This man has proved the truth that he is my slave simply by snatching the Oolai and tearing it”.
Nambiyarurar, looked at the Vediyar deeply and thought to himself that he must surely be an old litigant (வழக்காடி). He told him” If you are a resident of Thiruvennainallur, you better go over there to speak about this false litigation”.
“It is better that you come to Vennaainallur, where I can exhibit before the learned people the ‘Mula Oolai’ [‘மூல ஓலை’ =Original Document] and prove that you are bonded to be my slave” said the Vediyar.
The Vediyar, Nambiyarurar, his relatives and the people around that place reached Thiruvennainallur and appeared before the “Assembly of the exponents in Vedas” (வேதபாரகரில் மிக்கார் விளங்கு பேரவை).
The Vediyar reported to the Assembly, “This Nambiyaruran of Thrinavalur, who is standing before you, had torn the Oolai that contained the evidence to show that he is bonded to be my slave.”
The learned from the Assembly put before the Vediyar “One Brahmin becoming slave to another Brahmin is unheard of in this great land of ours”.
The Vediyar replied “this case arose as a result of the agreement entered into by the grandfather of this man. The Oolai which contained the above evidence was destroyed by him”.
The exponents questioned Nambiyarurar “you think you will succeed in the case if you tear away the document shown by the old man. He has appropriately presented his case. What have to say?”
“You all know that I am a Brahmin, If this Vediyar maintains stubbornly that I am his slave, it appears to me as an illusion which I could not apprehend. I do not understand this and do not know what else to say” replied Nambiyarurar
Turning towards the Vediyar, the exponents asked him to prove his case. They directed him to produce any of the three types of evidence, namely, statutory, documentary or anecdotal (oral). Vediyar agreed to produce the evidence provided they assure him that Nabiyaruran shall not tear the document again. The exponents assured that they will not permit such a wrong to happen again.
Vediyar presented the Olai (original) before the assembly. The exponents ordered the ,karanaththan (கரணத்தான்=village accountant) to receive the document. The accountant received the document with great reverence and removed the Oolai from its sheath and satisfied himself after examining it for its antiquity. [The age of the document is assessed by the accountant to know whether it is old or freshly prepared].
He then read the contents aloud.
“I, Aruran, hailing from Adhi saiva [a sect among Brahmins] community of Thirunavalur hereby write down the information that I had agreed mentally and physically that I and my descendants from generation to generation would serve the Pithan of Thiruvennainallur and thereto I signed the document.” The exponents after listening to the readings they looked at the signature of the executants as well as the signatures of the witnesses and found them to be in order. Then they asked Navalurar to examine the writings in the Ooali and to get satisfied.
The Vediyar reacted to this by saying, “Is he competent to examine the Oolai? If some other handwritten documents of his grandfather are available, bring them and you (exponents) compare the writings in the documents and express your opinion. (தந்தைதன் தந்தைதான் வேறெழுது கைச்சாத்துண்டாகில், இந்த ஆவணத்தினோடும் எழுத்து நீர் ஒப்பு நோக்கி வந்தது மொழிமின்-The phraseology used here are exactly the same in English which the forensic examiners use to-day in in their reports)
The exponents also thought the same way to clear the doubts of Navalurar. They obtained a different Oalai in which Navalurar’s grandfather had made the writings with his hand and compared the writings and found them to be similar and declared that they have nothing to say against in the matter. The Assembly upheld the Vediyar’s claim and directed Navalurar to go with Pithan and serve him. The Assembly then directed the Vediyar to show them his residence and prove that he was living there for generations. It is a different story when all realized that the Vediyar is none other than Lord Siva as he had led them to the sanctum sanctorum of Thiruvennainallur temple to show it as his abode and disappeared.
The above proceedings indicate that they are exactly similar to the present day court proceedings. We also realize with great admiration that the forensic practice of examining questioned documents for its age and comparison of handwritings to establish authenticity was in vogue as early as in 12th century in addition to maintaining originals and copies of documents during the rule of Anabaya Chozhan (அநபாய சோழன்).
Supremacy of Physical Evidence
Thanks to the revolutionary growth of science and technology, physical evidence is given primary role in crime investigation in these days. Astonishingly the central theme of the Tamil epic Cilapathikaram (சிலப்பதிகாரம்) is conceptualized to stress the supremacy of physical evidence over oral evidence. According to this researcher, the choice of Kovalan preferring to sell only one anklet, leaving the other with Kannaki, is to prove later by Kannagi by producing the other anklet that Kovalan was trying to sell only one of his wife’s anklet and to deny the charge that he has stolen the queen’s anklet. The scientific principle-that ‘even if two objects may look alike, one can find the difference or otherwise only by thorough examination of those objects’- is enunciated in the following couplet.
‘எப்பொருள் எத்தன்மைத்து ஆயினும் அப்பொருள் மெய்ப்பொருள் காண்பது அறிவு’
In fact the main principle of Forensic Science revolves around the above concept. The niceties of the sound produced by different types of beads in anklets, even though they look alike in external appearance are perhaps known very well to Kannagi, the daughter of the great trader, Masathuvan.
Examination of Foot Prints.
Identification of the individuals by examining their footprints is one of the techniques employed in Forensic Sciences. It has been gazetted by the British that the Tamils are well versed in tracking footprints. Evidence of tracking footprints has been narrated beautifully in the ancient Tamil poem to unravel the mystery of the missing girl .The governess (செவிலி), after examining the footsteps seen on the sands of the thorny path (Kurunji Nilam), remarks ‘The man very cleverly made careful strides testing for the presence of the thorns and then making the girl to walk upon the footprints left by him. Though two people walked there was only one pair of footprints, the larger footprints belong to that of the man (with whom your daughter eloped) and the smaller insets are those of your deer-eyed daughter’. The poem reads thus –
நாலடி வள்ளுவராமே இப்பாலை நடந்த பெரும் காலடி மேலடி மான் அடியே கட்டு உரலிற் பட்டும் பாலடிசில் வெண்ணெயுண்டோன் அரங்கன் பனிவரையில் வேலடி முள்ளூக்கு உபாயம் இட்டு ஏகும் விரகு நன்றே. [விரகு=தந்திரம்]
The word ‘adi’(அடி) means footstep. It would also mean a ‘a line of verse’. The poet says the young lad has converted four line verse (நாலடியார்) into two line verse (வள்ளூவர்) meaning that the walking of two persons had resulted in one set of foot prints, the bigger one being that of the man and the smaller inlay is that of the girl.
Modus operandi of thieves
The modus operandi adopted by the robbers of yester years is very humourusly described in a different connotation in Thandi Alangaram (தண்டியலங்காரம்).
The thalaivan {( தலைவன்) a hero or lover in ancient Tamil literature} who was flirting with another woman decides to go back to his thalaivi (தலைவி) heroine. But the thalaivi rejects his homecoming. The thailaivan feels sad and wanting to make peace with his love, sends to her his panan, who is actually minstrel (பாணன்= more of a minstrel than a friend). The panan informs thalaivi that if she refuses to accept him he will commit suicide by setting fire to himself. Laughing at what the minstrel told, thalaivi tells her thozhi (தோழி=girlfriend) ‘Thalaivan unable to guess my reactions if he returns to me, sends his minstrel just to feel my pulse. He is like the kallan (கள்ளன்=thief) who cannot see anything in darkness but makes use of his hands to have a feel of the things and steal. The Kallan after making a hole on the wall using his konnakkole (கொன்னக்கோல்= a tool like a crowbar) won’t stretch his head first, but would insert the head of a doll first to test whether the people inside the house are asleep or on alert. (கைத்தலம் கண்ணா(க) களவு காண்பான் ஒருவன் பொய்த்தலை நீட்டியற்றும் போந்து) “Exactly like the kallan the thalaivan sends his minstrel first to know my intentions” .The term “கள்ளான்” (Kallan) in Tamil would also mean “a good masquerader”
The description how the burglars use to operate in yesteryears at nights is what is known as modus operandi in police jargon of today. Indeed the ancient literature of the Tamils have many episodes to tell us about the prevalence of many ideas and principles we think are modern and believe to have come from the West. The reality is that many things we learn in our literature, for example, the niceties of life as conceptualized by the Tamils in the characters of ‘thalaivan- thalaivi’, and their spokespersons ‘thozhi and panan’ are unique to Tamil culture and civilization.
[This paper was sent to the World Tamil Chemmozhi Coference 2010 but the author was not invited for presentation]
Contact : pcsekharan2000@yahoo.com
________________________________________
Your Mail works best with the New Yahoo Optimized IE8. Get it NOW!.
