SOUTH INDIAN INSCRIPTIONS
VOLUME
XVII
INSCRIPTIONS
COLLECTED DURING 1903 - 1904
INTRODUCTION
The earliest epigraph in the
present volume is No. 262 from Tirunatharkunru near Singavaram in the South
Arcot District, Madras. It is engraved
on a rock, which is stated to have been the nisidika of Chandranandi
Asirigar who fasted for 57 days. The
cave inscriptions from the Ramanathapuram, Madurai and Tirunelveli Districts,
apart, this short inscription appears to be the earliest epigraph in
Tamil. Its palaeography is interesting
as a few letters (a, ai, ma, ta, na and ra) reveal distinctly the
archaic forms of the Vatteluttu alphabet and a few others (ka, cha, ra)
point to their evolution direct from the Brahmi alphabet. One can discern a connection of the present
record, though separated by a long interval, with the records of
Narasimhavarman
and Isvaravarman
and the Tirukkalukkunram inscription
of Narasimhavarman I, which are written in a mixed variety of the Tamil
alphabet. The provenance of the present
record representing the earliest form of this mixed alphabet seems to indicate
that Vatteluttu might have once been used all over the Tamil land.
Another short inscription No.
261 copied from the same place records the fasting of Ilaiya-Bhatarar for 30
days. This practice of fasting (anasana)
is called Sallekhana in Jaina religious literature, which requires the
monks to gradually reduce their food and finally to starve themselves to death
in order to avoid the sufferings due to disease or old age.
The next important inscription
is No. 49 from Kudatini in the Bellary District, Mysore State. It consists of three different pieces. Though all of them may be palaeographically
assigned to about the tenth century, one is unconnected with another. The beginning of piece A containing the date
of the record is badly damaged.
However, it contains the details, viz., Vikrama, Magha su. Rathasaptami, Sunday. It then refers to the reign of a king called
Nityavarshadeva Prithvivallabha who meditated on the feet of
Akalavarshadeva. Nityavarsha who
succeeded Akalavarsha is obviously identical with Indra III (917-18 A.D.). Hence the cyclic year Vikrama cited in the
record would correspond to Saka 842 expired, equivalent to 920-21 A.D.
According to the Indian Ephemeris the details given in this record will
correspond to January 19, 921 A.D., which was, however, a Friday but not Sunday
as stated in the record. On the basis
of this and a few other records it has now been proved that the reign of Indra
III extended beyond 918 A.D., the earliest available date for his successor
Govinda IV. Piece B engraved in similar
characters records in verse the exploits of a chief called Aiyanaiya. He is stated to have defeated his enemies
and to have captured a fort. It
mentions a title Sri-Bharadankakara and a princess of Sindhu-kula. The piece being a fragmentary one, a
connected account of the facts referred to cannot be made out. The copper-plate charters
of the Western Chalukya dynasty refer to a chief called Ayyana as one of the
ancestors of the Chalukyas of Kalyana who married the daughter of a certain
Krishna. Whether Aiyanaiya whose
exploits are described at length in the present record is identical with
Chalukya Ayyana cannot be determined without further light on the subject.
Piece C records the exploits of
Balavarman and his son Dasavarman, born in the Chalukya family. The former is stated to have crowned one
Dhora king of a territory wrested by him from Prabhuta and to have defeated and
lord of Kanchi and to have installed the teeth of a tusker in front of god
Brahmesvara at Alampura. The
inscription being incomplete, the details of the adventures of Dasavarman are
lost to us.
By far the largest number of
inscriptions incorporated in the volume belong to the Imperial Cholas. One (No. 501) of the earliest records of
this dynasty belongs to the Chola king Parantaka I (907-953 A.D.) This inscription is dated in the 32nd
year (in words) of Parantaka described as the destroyer of the fortified city
of Madurai. It records the gift of a
lamp by Gunavan, an illustrious native of Idaiyur and a vassal of the Chola
king (valavan). The inscription
then proceeds to describe what appears to be an encounter between the Chola monarch
land the king of Ceylon. The epigraph
is unfortunately very faintly engraved at this portion of the stone leaving us
in doubt as to the exact meaning of this section. If it really refers to an encounter, we have reason to surmise
that the actual invasion of Ceylon was preceded by several attempts to drive
the Ceylonese intruders from the mainland.
In this connection it may be noted that an inscription from
Kudumiyamalai
belonging to 33rd regnal year of Parantaka I, re-engraved under the
orders of Maravarman Sundarapandya I, speaks of an invasion of Ceylon launched
by Pirantakan Kunjiramallan alias Virasola Ilangovelan. The title Maduraiyum Ilamum konda was assumed by Parantaka I only from the 36th
year of his reign, although there are two stray records attributing the conquest of Ceylon to
Parantaka I. The Kudumiyamalai
inscription seems to suggest that the conquest of Ceylon which came to be
largely attributed to Parantaka I only from his 36th regnal year was
actually preceded by several attempts to expel the invader who came to the
rescue of Rajasimha, the Pandya contemporary of the Chola king. Among the queens of Parantaka I figuring as
donors in some of the records published in the volume, Muttakilanadigal, the
daughter of Kadupattigal, deserves mention.
She gave a fly-whish gilt with gold and silver to the god at Vedaranyam,
Tanjore District (No. 517). The title Muttakilanadigal seems to indicate that she was the senior
queen of apparently the reigning king in whose 38th year the record
is dated. I so, Parantaka I should have
continued the policy of his father in contracting marriage alliances with the
Pallava family.
The Chandramaulisvara temple at
Tiruvakkarai in the South Arcot district, which has yielded 45 inscriptions
(Nos. 186 â 230), enjoyed the patronage of the well-known royal personage
Sembiyan-mahadeviyar, the queen of Gandaraditya and the mother of
Uttamachola. Inscription No. 222
engraved on the south base of the ruined Siva shrine within the
Chandramaulisvara temple records that the shrine called sivalokam in the inscription was raised in stone by her
for god Paramasvamigal and that the village of Manali in Anmur-nadu in
Oyma-nadu was granted to it. The inscription gives elaborate details
regarding the apportionment of the produce to be measured out by the villagers
of Manali to the temple for the various items of worship and offerings as also
the minor incidental charges incurred in the transit of the produce and such
other processes. All expenses are
counted in terms of paddy. The
scrupulous care with which every item is provided for, recalls to oneâs mind
the similar arrangements made in the Big Temple at Tanjore built and
well-endowed by Rajaraja I in whose reign the present record is dated. It is no wonder that temples, wherever they
were, were richly endowed during his reign.
Another inscription (No. 227)
copied from the west all of the mandapa in front of the
Varadarajaperumal shrine
in the Chandramaulisvara temple at Tiruvakkarai dated in the reign of
Adhirajendradeva (1067 â 70 A.D.) records the rebuilding of the vimana (Chakresa-Parameshthi-vimana) in
stone. The vimana is stated to
have been originally built of brick by Kota Chola whose identity is very
obscure.
No. 627 from Kalla Perumbur,
Tanjore district, is dated in the 49th year of the reign of a king
whose name is not mentioned. It lays
down the conditions for re-election of members to the sabha of
Rajasundari-chaturvedimangalam. People
elected for one year could stand for re-election only after two years of
interval. If in the third year the
assembly was summoned and if their names were proposed again, they might be
elected. Those who transgressed this
regulation by any means were punishable under the law as traitors to the
village. At this portion the
inscription is badly damaged and hence some of the details are lost. Several of inscriptions containing instances
similar injunctions have been noticed in the Annual Reports on Epigraphy. A record of Kulottunga III from Talainayar,
Tanjore district, lays down that those who did not stand for election for the
previous ten years but satisfied the other conditions viz., that of age and
scholarship, might be elected. A similar condition was laid down by the
assembly of Rajendrasola-chaturvedimangalam in an inscription from Ayyampettai. Thus the condition of excluding members for
two years after their first election and of calling for candidates who did not
compete for election for ten years
seems to have the same object of protecting people from the undue influence of
members continuing to serve for a long time on the assembly or its
committees. The present record may be
assigned to Kulottunga I on account of palaeography, the high regnal year and
the name Rajasundari-chaturvedimangalam of the village probably so called after
Rajasundari, a daughter of the king.
Of Nos. 205, 217, 244, 540,
583, 585, 587 and 588 dated in the reign of Rajadhiraja II only three give full
details of date. No.244 from Melsevur
in the South Arcot District, is dated in the 13th regnal year of the
king. The details given, viz.,
Karkataka 13, ba. 11, Rohini and Wednesday, do not admit of easy verification
in spite of their completeness. If we
take March 1163 A.D., as the date of the kingâs accession, the details may
correspond to 1175 A.D., July 15, Tuesday (not Wednesday), in which case it
will be Karkataka 19 and not 13 as mentioned in words in the record. If 1166 A.D. is taken as the date of his
accession, the date may correspond to 1178 A.D., July 2, Monday. No. 540 from Vedaranyam is dated in the year
14, Mithuna ba. 5, Wednesday, Sodi (Svati).
The combination of ba. 5 and Svati is impossible in the month of Mithuna
and even if it is taken as a mistake for Mina, the date appears to be
irregular. Another date available with
details for the 2nd year of the reign from No. 583 well corresponds
to 1168 A.D., April 15, Monday, thus yielding some day in 1166 A.D., as the
date of the kingâs accession. This
inscription records a grant of land by Palaiyanur-udaiyan Vedavanam-udaiyan
Ammai-Appan alias Rajaraja-Vilupparaiyan of
Menmalai-ppalaiyanur-nadu. The officer
is evidently identical with one of the same name, but with the title
Pallavarayan (Pallavarajan) who figures in the Pallavarayanpettai inscription
and two other records of the same king from Tiruvarur (Nos. 585 and 587). The title Rajaraja-Vilupparaiyan in this
record indicates clearly that this officer had served under Rajaraja II and
continued to serve also Rajadhiraja II.
It is possible that he assumed the title Pallavarayan after the death of
Tiruchchirrambalamudaiyan Perumal Nambi alias Pallavarayan who held a very high office during the days of
Rajaraja II and Rajadhiraja II. That
Vedavanam-udaiyan Ammai-Appan Pallavarayan might have continued to serve also
Kulottunga III seems to be indicated by No. 582 from the same place. This possibility is strengthened by the fact
that this officer continued to carry out the commissions assigned to his
predecessor in the office of Pallavarayar, especially in relation to the
campaign against the Singhalese in the course of the Pandyan cilvil war.
|
>
|
Of the two records from
Tiruvarur mentioned above, No. 585 is dated in the 10th year and the
details given, viz.,, Mina su. 13, Tuesday, Magha, yield two equivalents one
corresponding to 1173 A.D., February 27, Tuesday, and the other to 1176 A.D.,
February 24, Tuesday. This inscription
which commences with the prasasti (Kadal sulnda parelum, etc.,)
of Rajadhiraja II affords a variant from the 5th line up to which it
resembles the prasasti of his predecessor Rajaraja II. Line 5 describes how the queens were given
royal honours with the king and continues to describe one of the queens as âthe
jeweled lamp to the Chola race, that appeared from the Yadava stockâ. The contemporary ruling family that belonged
to the Yadava stock was evidently that of the Hoysalas, with whom the Cholas
might have had some marital connections
The inscription then proceeds to describe the queen consort in glowing terms. It says that she enjoyed the rights of
kingship in full by being crowned with the king. It is further stated that she ruled from the
following places in the order, viz., Uraiyur, Peruragai (?), Udakai, and
Madhurapuri. She is also given the title Ulagudai
Mukkokkilanadigal. The description
of a queen consort as found in this record is not ordinarily met with in any prasasti
of the Cholas or even of the Pandyas.
No. 593 from Tiruvarur in the
Tanjore district records that, while the god Vidividangadevar of Tiruvarur was
pleased to be seated in the pavilion of Devasriyan,
he witnessed a dance performance by Pungoyil-nayaka-ttalaikkoil
and afterwards orally ordered the grant of land in Vayarrur, a brahmadeya,
as kani to Pungoyil Nambi who composed a poem called
Viranukkavijayam in honour of Nammakkal Virasola anukkar. The order was passed through the kelvi (i.e., at the instance of )
Tyagavinodakkadigaimarayan (Ghatikamaharaja). The inscription does not mention the kingâs
name but is dated in the 13th year and 202nd day. It may be paleographically assigned to the
12th or 13th century.
|
>
|
The main interest of the record
lies in the expression Virasola-anukkar. It is clear from the expression nammakkal with reference
to Virasola-anukkar that the latter represents a group of persons
attending on Virasola, thus necessitating their being always close to the
kingâs person. Thus they might have
been a group of bodyguards in whose honour the poem Viranukka-vijayam
was composed. An inscription
from Lalgudi in the Tiruchirappalli district dated in the 31st year
(937-38 A.D.) of Parantaka I registers a gift of land purchased from the sabha
of Nityavinita-chaturvedimangalam by Koyil Tavatturai of Murramam, a member of
the body called Nitta-Virasola-anukkar of Arinjigai-Isvaram in
Idaiyarru-nadu for burning a perpetual lamp in the temple of
Tiruttavatturai-Isvarabhattaraka. It
may be recalled that Parantaka I had Virasola as one of his several titles and,
if this record is the earliest that mentions this group of anukkar, as it kappears to be, it is possible that the group came into being during
the reign of the same Chola king. Among
the inscriptions of Parantaka I published in this volume No. 466 from
Vedaranyam, Tanjore district, records the gift of money by a person who is
referred to as a Virasola-anukkan
No. 480, of the king mentions a person Chaman Achchan as Irumudi-chchola-anukkili. Irumudi-chchola was another title of
Parantaka I. These instances clearly
indicate that the body styled Virasola-anukkar originated in the days of
the said Chola king. That this group of
attendants or bodyguards, if we may call them so, had continued to function for
a long time is evident from two inscriptions of Kulottunga III published in
this volume. One of them (No. 446) from
vedaranyam records the gift of money by a person who is referred to as a member
of Virasola-anukkar. Another
(No. 599) from Tiruvarur refers to an officer of the king as Tiruvaykkelvi
Anukka-Nambi, which indicates that Anukka-Nambi was on the immediate
attendance of the king.
Nos. 563 and 564 from
Tirunellikkaval in the Tanjore District mention an institution called
Tirunanasambandanguhai. Both of them
belong to the Chola king Rajaraja III and record gifts of land for a lamp and a
garden respectively. In the former the
lamp, for which provision was made, was to be burnt at the Kulachchirai-matha
and in detailing the boundaries of the gift-land, a plot of land once exchanged
for a piece of land belonging to the Tirunanasambandan-guhai is
mentioned. The latter record mentions
two persons named Marainanasambandhan and Alitter-vittagar who were probably
ascetics in charge of the guhai.
During this period many Saiva centers were flourishing at
Tiruchchattimurram and Sembaikkudi in the Tanjore District. While all of them were mathas named
after some famous saint or god,
it is interesting to note here a guhai named after the famous
Adisaiva-bahmana saint Tirunansambandhar.
The term guhai recalls to our mind an incident that took place in
the 22nd regnal year of Kulottunga III (c. 1200 A.D.) as recorded in
an inscription
of the 22nd year of Rajaraja III from Tirutturaippundi in the
Tanjore District, very near Tirunellikkaval the find spot of the records under
review. It is stated that a certain
ascetic was honoured by the residents of Tirutturaippundi and was provided with
a guhai to reside and feed itinerant pilgrims (desantaris) and
that due to the bad maintenance of the charity a crusade against the monastery
(guhai idi kalaham) was launched in the course of which monastery was
destroyed. The present record indicates
that such institutions might have been flourishing in several places during
this period.
Vira Narasimha Yadavaraya, a
well-known feudatory of Kulottunga III and Rajaraja III, is represented by Nos.
705 and 711 both citing the 36th year of his own reign. These two records testify to his
semi-independent position during this period of his rule, though he could not
have continued to be so on account of the rising power of the Pandyas in the
south and the Kakatiyas in the north.
The latter of the two records refers to the Sivabrahmanas
of the Narpattirandu-vattam. It will be seen from some of the
inscriptions published here that endowments of money for burning lamps in the
temple were ordinarily entrusted into the hands of Sivabrahmanas who had the
right of worship in the temples. They
arranged for their services by agreement for periods usually of thirty days (muppadu
vattam). It is clear from an
inscription
from Karuntattangudi that they could sell the right of worship for a certain
number of days to their collegues in the same temple or any other as
circumstances demanded. The phrase narpattirandu
vattam in the context of the
similar phrase muppadu vattam obviously
means âthe cycle of 42 daysâ (for which an agreement was made among the
Sivabrahmanas).
|
>
|
No. 131 from Tiruchchopuram in
the South Arcot district dated in the reign period of Jatavarman
Tribhuvanachakravarttigal Sundarapandyadeva seems to record a gift of l and for
worship and offerings to a deity in a temple (name lost) on the full moon and
new moon days by Sariputtira-pandita. The land was left in the care of the Sangattar. The stones on which the text of this
inscription is engraved have been built into the roof of the mandapa in
front of the central shrine in the Mangalapurisvara temple. The position of the stone and the name of
the donor and of the body called Sangattar (Sangha) clearly indicate
that the inscribed slab must have originally belonged to a Buddhist temple
nearby. The practice of giving
offerings on the full moon and the new moon days seems to echo the uposatha
ceremony observed by the Buddhists. It is interesting to note that even as late
as the 13th century to which period the present record may be
palaeographically assigned, Buddhist institutions lingered on in the Tamil
country though not in their old glory.
It is very rarely that we get vestiges of Buddhism in the Tamil country,
while it must be admitted that Jainism enjoyed a better position. Tiruchchopuram has been eulogized by the
Saiva saint Tirunanasambandhar who in the tenth verse of the hymn refers to the
activities of the Buddhar and the Samanar :
It will be pertinent here to
draw the readerâs attention to a report contained in the Culavamsa,
stating that Pandita Parakramabahu (II, who ruled during the 13th century),
the king of Ceylon âsent many gifts to the Cola country and caused to be
brought over to Tambapanni many respected Cola Bhikkhus who had moral
discipline and were versed in the three Pitakas and so established
harmony between the two ordersâ. The
chronicle further adds that the grand Thera Dammakitti (Dharmakirti)
was brought over to Ceylon from
Tamba-rattha which is conjecturally identified with a âprovince in Southern
Indiaâ. The colophon of the Rupasiddhi,
a Pali grammatical work of this period describes the author, a Bhikku called Coliya Dipankara alias Buddhappiya
as a resident superior of two monasteries in the Tamil country, one of which
according to the commentary is called Cudamanikya. While thus the Ceylonese chronicle and the
Pali work speak eloquently of the position of Buddhism in the Tamil country, it
is surprising to note that the present record appears to afford the only
epigraphical reference to a Buddhist Sangam in the 13th century.
No. 397 from Ammasattram in the
former Pudukkottai State is assignable to the 13th century. It registers a grant of land by a merchant
as pallichchandam to the God
Tirumanamalai Alvar. It mentions Kanakachandra-pandita
and his disciple Dhanmadeva Acharya. In
this connection it may be stated that the hillocks near Ammasattram served as
abodes of the Jaina ascetics.
|
>
|
Some Pandya inscriptions copied
from the South Arcot district afford a synchronism to establish the
contemporaneity of Maravarman Kulasekhara, Maravarman Virapandya and
Vikramapandya. Two inscriptions of
Maravarman Virapandya, one (No. 141) from Tirthanagari in the Cuddalore taluk
and the other (No. 248) from Singavaram in the Gingee taluk record endowments
providing for the conduct of worship and festivals with a view to pray for the
god health of the kingâs person (perumal tirumenikku nanraga). The former which is incomplete gives a very
interesting list of tolls, the proceeds from which were assigned for worship
and offerings and the procession to be conducted during the festival in the
month of Vaikasi terminating on the Vaisakha day
as also other festivals by the inhabitants of Andagalur-parru. The other also records a similar endowmnt
providing for worship and offerings for the good health of the king. The palaeography, provenance and purpose of
the gifts strongly suggest the identity of the kings mentioned in both the
records. An epigraph of Maravarman
Kulasekhara from Singavaram (No. 253) dated in the 30th year of his
reign is definitely assignable to the first king of that name, on account of
its palaeography and provenance and the high regnal year. This inscription also records an endowment
for a similar purpose of offerings, festivals, etc., for the sound health of
the king (Perumal tirumeni kunrada). The record is signed by Irukaimadavarana Rajaraja Brahmarayan. Since the signatories in this record and in
one of the two inscriptions (No. 248) of Maravarman Virapandya discussed above
appear to be identical, it may be surmised that Maravarman Kulasekhara and
Maravarman Virapandya of these records are not far removed from each other in
point of time.
No. 142 of Maravarman
Virapandya copied from Tirthanagari records the grant of land made for worship
and offerings on the day of the annual festival in the month of Vaikasi. Part of the gift land called Iladattaraiyan kandam
is stated to have been formerly granted as tirunamattukkani by
Tennavarayan of Perunganur Tamandai. It
is dated in the 9th year of the king. On account of this date and the mention of the Vaikasi festival
in this and the other record (No. 248) discussed above, the kings of both the
records may be considered to be identical.
The grant, which is stated to
have been formerly made by Tennavarayan is probably the same recorded in No.
144 from Tiruthanagari dated in the 4th year of Vikramapandyaâs
reign. Hence Maravarman Virapandya and
Vikramapandya of the latter record may be contemporaries.
Among the inscriptions of the
kings of Vijayanagara, a record (No. 562) from Tevur in the Tanjore District
dated in the reign of Devaraya II sets out in detail how of the officials of
the king to whom the right of collecting the taxes was leased out, used
coercive measures against the subjects, subjects, especially the members of the
Valangai and Idangai classes. The
inscription also describes the enquiries periodically conducted by different
officers from the time of Devagalnayan Bukkana Udaiyar thereby indicating that
the malpractices were going on for a pretty long time. Similar records
of the period containing references to oppression are found in several places
of the Tamil country.
Nos. 531 and 532 copied from
Vedaranyam in the Tanjore district are dated in the reign of Praudhadevaraya
and Pratapadeva-maharaya respectively.
While the former is dated in Saka 1386 with the other details of date
enabling us to equate it to 1465 A.D., January 5, the latter cites only the
cyclic year Vyaya which, considered with the other details of the date, may
suggest 1466 A.D., June 23.
Praudhadevaraya mentioned in the former record may be identified with
Mallikarjuna,
but Pratapadeva-maharaya of the latter cannot be identified with the same king,
for Mallikarjuna is known to have passed away sometime in 1465 A.D., and
Virupaksha III was crowned in the succeeding year, i.e., Saka 1388 (1465-66
A.D.). Virupaksha had a son called Prataparaya â
maharaya for whom the earliest known date is Saka 1408 (1487 A.D.). Hence Pratapadeva-maharaya of this record
may be identified with Virupaksha himself.
No. 220 of Saluva
Narasingadeva-maharaja from Tiruvakkarai begins with the typical Saluva titles Medini
misuraganda Kattari-Saluva and the usual title Mahamandalesvara
attributed to Narasingadeva (Narasimha) without mentioning any overlord. It registers an order by Saluva Narasimhaâs
agent Narasa-Nayaka in Sobhakrit corresponding to 1483 A.D., exempting the devadiyar
of the temple of god Aludaiya-nayanar at Tiruvakkarai from the payment of a
certain levy called kalattutti.
It is stated that they were exempted from the levy since
Karaikkattu-pparru and Sengattu-pparru were not included in
Koliyanallur-simai. It seems that
Tiruvakkarai was probably not included in one of the above two parrus. No. 221 engraved on the west base of the gopura of the same temple seems to record a final
fixation of 1 panam per loom on the inhabitants of Narasapanditar-nadu. The residents are stated to have left the
place during a period of trouble for kaikkolar (kaikkolar-sikalam). The record is dated in Sbhakrit, Avani
28. The mention of
Narasa-panditar-nadu, the date and the cess on looms seem to suggest that this
record also belonged to Saluva Narasimha and was re-engraved on a subsequent
occasion. These records appear to
confirm the independent position of the Saluva chief inasmuch as it omits to
mention the overlord, for we know that very soon after the date of this record,
if not on this date itself, Saluva Narasimha commenced to rule in his own right
from Vijayanagara. It may be added that
Narasa-Nayaka of the former record is evidently identical with the Tuluva
general of the same name who succeeded the Saluvas.
|
>
|
Reference to certain
interesting practices of sheep sacrifice on every Sunday before the Pillaiyar
at Karikarai, now known as Ramagiri,
and to the sale of slaves to the authorities of the temple at Vedaranyam,
Tanjore district, throws some light on the social customs of the period.
Home
Page
|
\D7
|