PANDYAS

record of the time of Māravarman Sundara-Pāṇḍya I, copied in previous years from Tiruppattūr itself definitely calls the chiefs of Śembonmāri by this surname (Ep. Rep. for 1909, Part II, para 25). It is not certain if Mummuḍiśōḷan Māḷava-māṇikkam referred to above, is identical with this chief of Śembonmāri who bears the additional name Tirukkānappēruḍaiyān. Chiefs with the name Māḷavamāṇikkam also figure in inscriptions of Jaṭāvarman Vīra-Pāṇḍya (Nos. 42 and 44 of 1924) and Jatāvarman Parākrama-Pāṇḍya (No. 3 of 1916).

Mulaparishan-Mahasabha at Tiruppattur.
  50. Inscriptions of Tiruppattūr belonging to the 13th century refer to the Mūlaparishad-Mahasabha functioning as one body at that period. The expression seems to be an equivalent of the Tamil word ‘ Peruṅkuṛi-Mahāsabhai Generally the Mūlaparishat and the Mahāsabhā find mention as independent assemblies, but their functions as one unit is not generally known. A record at Suchīndram in the Travancore State, however, indicates that the Mūlaparuḍai-sabhai supervised the affairs of the local temple under the direction of the Mahāsabhā (Travancore Archaeological Series, Vol. II, p. 7). It is stated in the body of this record that owing to certain difficulties in its functioning, the Mūlaparishat gave over the management of the temple into the hands of the Mahāsabhā. From this it cannot be inferred that the Mūlaparishat ceased to exists as a separate body for ever afterwards. The activity of this body as an executive under the Mahāsabhā is clearly indicated by a record of Tribhuvanachakravartin Kulaśēkharadēva copied this year (No. 185). This inscription states that when Patagātrayan Śēndasvāmi Tiruttaḷikkūttan, son of Kāraiyūr-Kilār, with his brothers and nephews took to evil life and committed murders, the Mūlaparishat, under the orders of the Sabhā confiscated their lands and sold them for 500 Śōliya-nar-paḷankāśu to the temple of Tiruttaḷi-Paramēśvara. Incidentally it may be mentioned that the inscription invokes at the end the protection of the Āyiratteḷunūrruvar for the above transaction. It is not known what this expression means. It might refer to a community of merchants or a regiment consisting of 1700 persons. A maṇḍapa named after this body is noticed in a record of Māravarman Kulaśēkharadēva from the same place (No. 171). Similarly we meet with a merchant guild called Ayirattainnrruvar in Chōḷapāṇḍya-vaḷanāḍu with a temple of its own dedicated to Āyirattainnūrruva-iśvaram-Udaiyar (No. 31 and 32 of 1928-29).

Dēvargaṇḍan’ probable surname of Kulasekhara.
  51. A damaged inscription of Tribhuvanachakravartin Kulaśēkhara dated in the 13th year of his reign (No. 190) mentions a lady called Kaṇḍan. . . .alias ‘ Avanimuluduḍaiyār. She is evidently the person referred to as the wife of Dēvargaṇḍan in a record from the same place (No. 135 of 1908), and as the honorific title ‘ nambirāṭṭiyār’ is applied to her in the present inscription it would appear as if her husband Dēvargaṇḍan was no other than the king himself.

Māravarman Sundara-Pāṇḍya
     52. Next in chronological order come the records of with the distinguishing title ‘who presented the Chōḷa country’, and they range in date from ’ the 2nd year (No. 166) to the 2011 + 1st year (No. 170) of his reign. Of these, Nos. 166 and 183 commence with the introduction ‘Pu-malai tiruvum’ and ‘pū-maruviya tirumaḍandaiyum’ respectively and No. 170 distinguishes him by referring to his conquest of Śōṇāḍu and to his anointment of victors at Muḍigoṇḍaśōlapuram. From internal evidence, Nos. 176 and 186 have also to be assigned to this king.

Important officers mentioned in his records collected this year are :—
(1) Gāṅgēyan, who is evidently identical with Kaṇḍan Udaiyañcheydān alias Gāṅgēyan (Nos. 152, 153, 165, 176, 186).
(2) Aiyan Malavarāyan, (Nos. 166 and 176).
(3) Āḷavandān alias Nāratioṅgarāyan, the chief (araśan) of Niyamam in Tēnārruppōkku, a subdivision of Adaḷaiyūr-nāḍu (No. 154).

Home Page