Tamil Versus Sanskrit

Of late, there has been a much of a talk comparing the classical languages namely Tamil and Sanskrit.

Apparently it leads to a debate seeking which one of the languages is oldest and rich in heritage. Though it is of no pivotal use for us now to debate this lingual issue, it would be great to revive our past and even to carry a glimpse of such topics would be considered as stupendous contribution for generations to come.

So, Tamil versus Sanskrit.
I assure you, I am not going to be biased or eccentric with my post just because my mother tongue is Tamil.
As per the literatures of Tamil, one should respect others mother tongues as such he expects others to respect his own language. To each his own...


Before we go into the lingual debate, let us take a look at Hinduism which is considered as indigenous religion if India. Though India is secular and 'few' Indians are secular, we have to embrace the fact that Hinduism had played a pivotal role in shaping India all over the years.

Both Sanskrit and Tamil are associated with Hinduism.
In Hinduism, Manu has been considered as progenitor (first man) of humanity. It is said that Manu was once a king of Dravida kingdom, which is apparently located at Southern part of India. By then it should very much different. Besides, it is said that Manu moved to north along with seven sages to protect himself from great flood (Tsunami?). Later he went on to write Manusmriti, some sort of handbook for Hindus but Manusmriti wasn't a holy book for Hindus.

On the other hand, Kumari Kandam (Lemuria) is believed to have eaten up by Tsunami. Lemuria or Kumari Kandam is believed to be the oldest civilization ever existed, way ahead of Atlantis, Indus Valley and Sumerian.
If Manu was a king of Dravida kingdom, shouldn't he be a Dravidian having some indigenous language of his own other than Sanskrit. Could that be Tamil ? or some language that served as a prototype for Tamil. Speculations...

Besides, 55 percent of the inscriptions found in India had Tamil-Brahmi scripts.
However, experts say that Sanskrit had a rich grammar and had the ability to record it in written format.

Though Tamil still survives in both forms of speech and text, Sanskrit is by and large exists only in texts. Amount of Sanskrit speakers is way less compared to the native speakers of Tamil. Though we argue Sanskrit as mother of many European languages, perhaps Sanskrit might have had one for itself.

My speculation is that, Sanskrit could have evolved from Tamil (just a speculation, no proofs). Latter one survived and survives in vast area such as Malaysia, Singapore, Sri Lanka and some of Maldives. So the concept of Kumari Kandam, a submerged Lemuria civilization could be a plausible fact.

Apart from the that, it is widely accepted that Dravidians supplied food for Pandyas during the Kurukshetra. It should be possible either Dravidian kingdom must have been extended till today's Maharashtra and Gujarat. Supporting the speculation, even Indus Valley civilization had the Dravidian style of ponds with ghats on four sides.

I might be so wrong with my concepts, correct me if I'm wrong.
Comments and debates are welcome...
But I am so strong on saying one known fact here, contributions of Dravidians and anything from South such as the mightiness of Chera, Chola, and Pandyas were overshadowed by someone or something from the North.

Useful Links:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manu_(Hinduism)

http://www.quora.com/Vedic-Hinduism/Why-did-ManuSmriti-created-four-varna-system-and-looks-at-Shudras-so-low-Why-didnt-the-ancient-scholars-oppose-it

http://appiusforum.net/indusvalley.html