The Indian Analyst
 

Annual Reports

 

 

Contents

Index

Introduction

Contents

PART I.

Tours of the Superintendent

Collection

Publication

List of villages where inscriptions were copied during the year

Appendix A

Appendix B

Appendix C

Appendix D

Appendix E

Appendix F

PART II.

General

Ikhaku kings

Velanandu Chiefs

Kakatiyas

Cholas

Later Pallavas

Pandyas

Hoysalas

Vijayanagara kings

Madura Nayakas

Miscellaneous

Other South-Indian Inscriptions 

Volume 1

Volume 2

Volume 3

Vol. 4 - 8

Volume 9

Volume 10

Volume 11

Volume 12

Volume 13

Volume 14

Volume 15

Volume 16

Volume 17

Volume 18

Volume 19

Volume 20

Volume 22
Part 1

Volume 22
Part 2

Volume 23

Volume 24

Volume 26

Volume 27

Tiruvarur

Darasuram

Konerirajapuram

Tanjavur

Annual Reports 1935-1944

Annual Reports 1945- 1947

Corpus Inscriptionum Indicarum Volume 2, Part 2

Corpus Inscriptionum Indicarum Volume 7, Part 3

Kalachuri-Chedi Era Part 1

Kalachuri-Chedi Era Part 2

Epigraphica Indica

Epigraphia Indica Volume 3

Epigraphia
Indica Volume 4

Epigraphia Indica Volume 6

Epigraphia Indica Volume 7

Epigraphia Indica Volume 8

Epigraphia Indica Volume 27

Epigraphia Indica Volume 29

Epigraphia Indica Volume 30

Epigraphia Indica Volume 31

Epigraphia Indica Volume 32

Paramaras Volume 7, Part 2

Śilāhāras Volume 6, Part 2

Vākāṭakas Volume 5

Early Gupta Inscriptions

Archaeological Links

Archaeological-Survey of India

Pudukkottai

THE CHOLAS

His feudatory, the Malaiyamān of Kiḷiyur.
  in the 7th and 11th year of the king. Of the other inscriptions which refer themselves to the reign of Kulōttuṅga-Chōḷadēva without any qualifying attributes, Nos. 223 and 259 from the Tirukkoyilur taluk, dated in the 6th and 15th years respectively could be assigned to Kulōttuṅga II, with some probability. The former records a gift of land to the temple at Tirukkōyilūr by Periyān alias Kulōttuṅga-Chēdiyarāyan, the Malaiyamān chief of Kiḷiyūr, and the latter a gift of land to a Śiva temple at the place called Perumpuṇam by Periyuḍaiyān Attimallan alias Kulōttuṅgaśōla-Chēdiyarāyan, the Malaiyamān of Kiḷiyūr. The donors in both these records seem to be identical with the chief of that name mentioned in a record of this king from Kīlūr in the same taluk (S. I. I., Vol. VII, No. 913). The gift land in the latter inscription is stated to have been named Palavāyudavallavanallūr, which would imply that it was so named after a possible surname or title of the donor-chief. We also incidentally learn of the existence of a fort in the vicinity.

His officer Akaḷaṅka-Brahmārayan.
   In an inscription of the 18th year of Kulōttuṅga-Chōḷa engraved on a rock by the side of the Śittēri tank at Tirukkōyilūr (No. 225), we are told that this tank and its sluice were newly constructed for irrigating the tiruviḍaiyāṭṭam lands of god Tiruviḍaikkali-Emberumān at Tirukkōyilūr by a certain Ulagamuṇḍaperumāḷ alias Akaḷaṅka-Brahmārāyan. This donor is stated to have also constructed the big tirumāḷigai of the Periyakōyil* at Tiruvaraṅgam, by which is evidently meant the temple at Śrīraṅgam, as it cannot refer to Tiruvaraṅgam in the South Arcot distrcit, since all its inscriptions are later and are of the Vijayanagara times. In Śrīraṅgam itself, according to the Kōyilolugu the fifth prākāra of the temple with the four gōpuras on its sides and some other structures are said to have been the work of Vikranaśōla alias Akaḷaṅkan. It is probable that these constructions were supervised by an officer of Vikrama-Chōḷa bearing the title of Akaḷaṅka-Brahmārāyan and the same officer should have constructed this tank at Tirukkōyilūr in the reign of his successor Kulōttuṅga II. Against this identification may, however, be mentioned the high regnal year 18, which has not been found for him so far.

>

Rājādhirāja II.
   31. Of Rājādhirāja II there are two inscriptions from Śrīraṅgam (Nos. 63 and 73) both dated in his 9th year. They record gifts of money to the temple,
one for a lamp and the other for the expenses of conducting certain festivals. The former was by a certain Perumāḷ alias Rājarāja-Uttamaśeṭṭi, a native of Kuraṭṭippaṭṭaṇam in Kaivāra-nāḍu, a subdivision of Poysaḷa-nāḍu, who had presented a big forehead jewel (śuṭṭi) to the god Periyaperumāḷ (Raṅganātha) of the temple. As Kaivāra-nāḍu was situated in Nigariliśōla-maṇḍalam which was comprised in Hoysaḷa-nāḍu, Kuraṭṭippaṭṭaṇam must be looked for somewhere in the border between Salem and Kolar. It may be mentioned that Kuraṭṭi was the village wherefrom hailed the author of an Andādi in praise of the god at Tiruvallam (No. 233 of 1921). The donor of the other inscription was a certain Virrirundān
His subordinate Akaḷaṅka-Nāḍālvār.
Śēman alias Tirukkuraivaḷatta-Akaḷaṅka- Nāḍālvār of Tiruttavatturai (Lālguḍ¬i). This Akaḷaṅka-Nāḍālvār is identical with the chief who is stated in certain inscriptions copied at Vaḷappūr-nāḍu in the Salem district (Nos. 496, 499 and 500 of 1929-30) as leading an expedition against Kollimalai on behalf of the king, and also in three records from Śrīraṅgam (Nos. 267-69 of 1930).

Kulōttuṅga-Chōḷa III.
   32. Kulottuṅga III is represented in the collection by 11 inscriptions ranging in date between his 3rd and 38th years. Four of them (Nos. 75, 61, 76 and 17) begin with the introduction Puyalvāyttu,
etc., while the others commence with the short eulogy “who took Madura and the crowned head of the Pāṇḍya” or “who took Madura, Īlam, Karuvūr and the crowned head of the Pāṇḍya.” He is called Vīrarājēndra in Nos. 61 and 76 and Tribuvanavīradēva in Nos. 17, 32 and 34. No. 61 from Śrīraṅgam dated in his 6th year records an undertaking given by the gōpālas (cowherds ?) who owned the tenancy rights in Vaḷḷuvappāḍi-nāḍu, a subdivision of Karikālakanna-vaḷanāḍu, agreeing to pay the tax on 250 vēli of tiruviḍaiyāṭṭam lands at Tiruvāyppāḍinallūr for worship and offerings to god Alagiyamaṇavāḷa-Perumāḷ and the goddess, on the day of a festival called Daivatta- rāyan-tirunāḷ in the temple. It is not known who this Daivattarāyan, who had instituted this festival could be. The document is signed by ninety-eight representatives (ūrkku-chchamainda) from sixty-seven villages who should have constituted the assembly of the Vaḷḷuvappāḍi-nāḍu. It may be noted that the
The Gōpālas of Vaḷḷuvappāḍi-nāḍu.
subdivision Vaḷḷuvappāḍi-nāḍu comprised a portion of the Musiri taluk in the

_______________________________
*Periyakoyil is the particular epihet of the srrangam temple.

 

Home Page

>
>