In recent times, an alarming narrative has emerged within the Malaysian blogosphere, suggesting a historical event that appears to be a misinterpretation or perhaps a deliberate misinformation campaign. The claim revolves around a so called Malay prince named Manabharana from Srivijaya, purportedly attacking and conquering the Chola kingdom. This misleading story has gained traction and is spreading like wildfire across various social media platforms. The need to address and rectify such inaccuracies is crucial not only for the sake of historical accuracy but also for fostering a responsible and informed online community. To delve into the matter, it is essential to clarify that historical records reveal the existence of multiple individuals named Manabharana throughout history. However, a nuanced understanding reveals that all these figures were Tamils (Damila) hailing from the Pandya kingdom, with references to their exploits documented in Tamil inscriptions and Sri Lankan chronicles
Picture Credit: huffingtonpost In my previous two articles on Tamil New Year, I wrote about the two types of solar calendar, the myth of Tamil calendar starting in Thai instead of Chitra, the 60 years cycle and the science of the calendar itself. I even explained in detailed why the Tamil Calendar starts on 1 Chitra. You can read both articles at the following links. Tamil New Year Date The Science Behind Tamil Calendar Today I will explain about another important matter. The Dravidian ideologist claim that the present calendar followed by Tamils is not suitable because the years do not have a numeric value. They claim that only the Tiruvalluvar Calendar has a numeric value. So according to them, the Gregorian Year 2016 AD is Tiruvalluvar Year 2047 because they claim that Tiruvalluvar was born in 31 BC. But as explained in my previous articles, there is no evidence to show that Tiruvalluvar was born in 31 BC. So we cannot assume. Furthermore, Tamil civilization existed