Note that Tirumankai A ̄l
̄
va ̄r says clearly that he knows the grammar of Tamil
and the grammar of love in Tamil lands do not countenance women doing the
matal. However, he says, he accepts the “northern” path. Women in the north,
he says, ride the matalto show their unbridled passion for men. In his poems, he
lists some of these women.
It is obvious that the concept and ritual ofmatalis completely south Indian.
Yet, when Tirumankai lists his examples of women who recklessly proclaimed
their love in northern India, he rounds up the usual suspects and then some. His
lists include Uma ̄, Ulupi, Us.a (daughter of Banasura), Vega ̄vatı ̄ and Va ̄savadatta,
all women whose passion for their lovers has been celebrated in written and oral
traditions. He also includes Sı ̄ta ̄, who though known for the love she had for
Ra ̄ma, is hardly the hotheaded exemplar of a matalriding lover. What Tiru-
mankai is saying is that these women articulated their love in public and were
prepared to die if it was not reciprocated. Understandably, some of this is exag-
geration, but one gets the point. Uma ̄ is Parvati and as Sa ̄tı ̄ had burnt herself
to display the pride of her love for S ́iva. Ulupi married Arjuna, Va ̄savadatta, and
Ve ga ̄vatı ̄ figure in stories in the Kathasarita sa ̄gara. Ulupi, a woman, actually
kidnapped Arjuna and took him to her land; Us.a had a young man called
Aniruddha (Kr.s.n.a’s grandson) abducted and brought to her chambers.
Uma ̄/Sa ̄tı ̄ killed herself. By stating this, Tirumankai says that it is acceptable for
women to go public with their passion because it is done in northern India, even
though he is aware it is not inadmissible in the Tamil country. What we have
in this traditional literature is the painting of north and south Indian cultures and
womanhood according to south Indian texts in broad strokes; what we have is a kind
of “essentializing” of cultures and gender, and a ninth-century “protest” against the
essentializing of gender.And so, while Tirumankai, a man, has adopted the stance
of a woman in love, he feels that desperate times call for desperate deeds and he
is willing to take the initiative and declare his love publicly.
In any event, the love-sick woman is only oneof the many kinds of women
portrayed in literature. Speaking just about women in love, there are many dis-
cernible in texts and drama. This figure of the “heroine” or the primary char-
acter/dancer is developed in the Natya S ́a ̄straor “Treatise on Dance,” attributed
to the sage Bha ̄rata. This text, possibly compiled around the first two centuries
of the Common Era, outlines the principal features of classical dance in its reli-
gious context. The Natya S ́a ̄strabecomes the reference for almost all classical
dance forms of India in later centuries. In this text, Bha ̄rata speaks about eight
different kinds of “heroines.” These are women in different kinds of romantic
situations whom the dancer can portray in her performance. The “heroines” in
these dramatic situations are: one who adorns herself expecting union with her
lover; one who controls her husband by her love; one who is separated from her
lover because of a quarrel; one distressed by separation from her lover; one who
is enraged with her lover; one who is deceived by her lover; one whose husband
is away on work; and one who boldly proceeds to meet her lover. Obviously, some
of these are not quiet, resigned and patient women; they are dramatic, passion-
ate, and subjects of the story, not characters who have been objectified. In text
gender in a devotional universe 575