Texts
Texts database last updated .
This interface allows you to look for texts in the DHARMA collection. The search form below can be used for filtering results. Matching is case-insensitive, does not take diacritics into account, and looks for substrings instead of terms. For instance, the query edit matches "edition" or "meditation". To look for a phrase, surround it with double quotes, as in "old javanese". Searching for strings that contain less than three characters is not possible.
Per default, all metadata fields are searched (except "lang", see below). Metadata fields are (for now): "title", "editor", "editor_id", "author", "summary", "lang", "script", "repo", "ident". You can restrict search to a specific field by using a field prefix, as in editor:manu or title:"critical edition". Several clauses can be added successively, separated with whitespace. In this case, for a document to be considered a match, all query clauses must match. Try for instance editor:manu title:stone.
Note the use of quotation marks: the query editor:"emmanuel francis" matches all documents edited by Emmanuel Francis, but the query editor:emmanuel francis matches all documents edited by someone called Emmanuel and that also include the name Francis in any metadata field.
The "lang" field is special. If you look for a string that contains two or three letters only, as in lang:en or lang:san, it is assumed to refer to an ISO 639 language code, and an exact comparison is performed. If you look for a string longer than that, it is assumed to refer to a language name and the above-mentioned substring matching technique will be used instead. You can consult a table of languages here.
Documents 1251–1300 of 2890 matching.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This inscription contains an order of a king who bore the titles Tribhuvanachakravartin Kōnēriṉmaikoṇḍāṉ.1 He granted certain privileges to the artizans (Kaṇmāḷar) of the district of Veṅgāla-nāḍu,—to take effect from the month of Āḍi of the 15th year of his reign.
An almost identical duplicate of this inscription (No. 562 of 1893) is engraved on the central shrine of the Gōshṭhīśvara temple at Pērūr near Coimbatore. It differs chiefly in being addressed to the Kaṇmāḷar of Southern Koṅgu (Teṉ-Koṅgu) and in the king’s bearing the title Kōṉērimēlkoṇḍāṉ instead of Kōnēriṉmaikoṇḍāṉ.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv03p0i0025.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This inscription contains an order of a king who bore the title Kōṉērimēlkoṇḍāṉ. The date of the order was the 438th (!) day of the 23rd year of his reign (l. 4). The king granted the village of Āndaṉūr, surnamed Vīra-Śōḻa-nallūr, for the maintenance of the temple servants, whom he had settled in a quarter which was called Vīra-Śōḻaṉ-Tirumaḍaiviḷāgam after his own name. From this designation and from the surname of the village granted, it follows that his actual name was Vīra-Chōḷa.
The village of Āndaṉūr was bounded in the west by Nelluvāyppaḷḷi, which is the object of the grant recorded in No. 22 above.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv03p0i0026.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This inscription is dated in the 6th year of the reign of the Chōḷa king Rājakēsarivarman1 (l. 2). It opens with two Sanskrit verses, which state that a person whose name is not given made a grant to the Vishṇu temple at Ratnāgrahāra or Ratnagrāma, i.e. Maṇimaṅgalam. From the following Tamil passage it appears that the donor had purchased the land from the inhabitants of Maṇimaṅgalam. The grant consisted of 4,000 kuḻi of land, of which 2,000 were situated on the west of Maṇimaṅgalam and south of Kuḷattūr, the modern Koḷattūr.2 The remaining 2,000 kuḻi were situated on the south of Maṇimaṅgalam and east of Amaṇpākkam—the modern Ammaṇambākkam.3
In this archaic inscription the virāma is marked above several letters by a dot (puḷḷi), just as in the modern Tamil print. The Grantha ṇā of praṇāśa (l. 1) is expressed by a compound letter which differs from the Tamil ṇā.4
Languages: Sanskrit, Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv03p0i0027.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This inscription is dated in the 29th year of Rājakēsarivarman, alias Rājādhirājadēva, surnamed Jayaṅkoṇḍa-Chōḷa (l. 7).1 It opens with a panegyrical account of the king’s deeds. The text of this passage has been settled by comparison with the corresponding introductions of three other inscriptions, viz.—
1. Tk. = an inscription of the 29th year in the Śvētāraṇyēśvara temple at Tiruveṇkāḍu in the Tanjore district (No. 114 of 1896).
2. Tr. = an inscription of the 31st year in the Ādhipurīśvara temple at Tiruvoṟṟiyūr near Madras (No. 107 of 1892).
3. Tai. = an inscription of the 32nd year in the Pañchanadēśvara temple at Tiruvaiyāṟu near Tanjore (No. 221 of 1894).
Among the achievements of Rājādhirāja the subjoined inscription mentions that he “destroyed the palace of the Chalukya king in the city of Kampili” (l. 6). As I have said before,2 this statement enables us to identify Rājādhirāja with the king who, according to the Kaliṅgattu-Paraṇi (viii. 26), “planted a pillar of victory at Kampili,” and to place his reign immediately after that of Rājēndra-Chōḷa I. and before that of Parakēsarivarman, alias Rājēndradēva. Rājēndra-Chōḷa I. ascended the throne in A.D. 1001-2 and reigned until at least A.D. 1032.3 An inscription at Miṇḍigal proves that Rājādhirāja’s anointment to the throne took place in A.D. 1018.4 This would be about the 17th year of the reign of his predecessor Rājēndra-Chōḷa I. Consequently, Rājādhirāja appears to have been the co-regent of the latter and cannot have exercised independent royal functions before the death of the other. It is in perfect accordance with this conclusion that his inscription which have been discovered so far are all dated in the later years of his reign, viz. between the 26th and 32nd years.
The introduction of the subjoined inscription states that Rājādhirāja appointed seven of his relatives to be governors over the Chēra, Chalukya, Pāṇḍya and Gaṅga countries, the island of Ceylon, the Pallava country, and Kanyakubja (l. 1). This statement is evidently exaggerated, at least as far as it refers to the Chalukya dominions and Kanyakubja.5 Next are mentioned three Pāṇḍya kings (l. 1f.). The first of them, Mānābharaṇa, was decapitated; the second, Vīra-Kēraḷa, was trampled down by an elephant; and the third, Sundara-Pāṇḍya, was expelled to Mullaiyūr. Further, Rājādhirāja killed an unnamed king of Vēṇāḍu, i.e. Travancore, and three princes of Irāmaguḍam (?). Having routed the Chēra king, he followed the example of his ancestor Rājarāja I. in destroying the ships at Kāndaḷūr-Śālai6 (l. 2f.).
Then followed a victorious war against Āhavamalla, Vikki, Vijayāditya and Śāṅgamayaṉ, which was led by a general named Kēvudaṉ, and in the course of which two of Āhavamalla’s officers, named Gaṇḍappayaṉ and Gaṅgādhara, were killed and the city of Koḷḷippākkai7 was set on fire (l. 3 f.). Koḷḷippākkai or, in Kanarese, Koḷḷipāke was included in the territory of the Western Chālukyas,8 and Āhavamalla, Vikki and Vijayāditya are identical with the Western Chālukya king Āhavamalla-Sōmēśvara I. (A.D. 1044 and 1068) and two of his sons, Vikramāditya VI. (A.D. 1055-56 and 1076 to 1126) and Vishṇuvardhana-Vijayāditya (A.D. 1064 to 1074).9
The next of Rājādhirāja’s expeditions cost their crowns to four kings of Ceylon, viz. Vikramabāhu, Vikrama-Pāṇḍya, Vīra-Śalāmēgaṉ, and Śrīvallabha Madanarāja (l. 4 f.). The second of these is said to have ruled over the southern Tamiḻ country before taking possession of Ceylon, the third to have originally ruled over Kanyakubja, and the fourth to have taken refuge with a certain Kṛishṇa. Worst of all fared Vīra-Śalāmēgaṉ. The Chōḷa king seized his elder sister and his daughter (or wife)10 and cut off the nose of his mother, and the Ceylon king himself fell in battle. An independent and somewhat different account of these struggles is given in the 56th chapter of the Mahāvaṁsa,11 which mentions successively the reigns of Vikramabāhu, who is supposed to have reigned from A.D. 1037 to 1049, Vikrama-Pāṇḍu (A.D. 1052 to 1053), Jagatipāla (A.D. 1053 to 1057), and Parākrama-Pāṇḍu (A.D. 1057 to 1059). Of Jagatipāla it is said that he came from the city of Ayōdhyā, that the Chōḷas slew him in battle, and that they carried his queen and his daughter to the Chōḷa country. As the two first names, Vikramabāhu and Vikrama-Pāṇḍya, are the same in Rājādhirāja’s inscriptions and in the Mahāvaṁsa, we may identify Jagatipāla with Vīra-Śalāmēgaṉ, who came from Kanyakubja, who was killed by the Chōḷas, and whose elder sister and daughter were carried away by them. It remains uncertain whether he was a native of Kanyakubja (Kanauj) or Ayōdhyā, as stated respectively in Rājādhirāja’s inscriptions and in the Mahāvaṁsa. The fourth king, Śrīvallabha12 Madanarāja, is perhaps the same as the Parākrama-Pāṇḍu of the Mahāvaṁsa, who is said to have been killed by the Chōḷas.
On a second raid to the north Rājādhirāja defeated four chiefs, whose names are given, but whom I cannot identify, and destroyed the palace of the Chalukya king at Kampili (l. 5 f.), a place in the Hosapēṭe tāluka of the Bellary district, which is also mentioned in a Western Chālukya inscription.13
As I have stated before (p. 39 above), Rājādhirāja was the elder brother of his successor Parakēsarivarman, alias Rājēndradēva, and met with his death in the battle of Koppam. Hence I suspect that it is Rājādhirāja who is meant in a Western Chālukya inscription of A.D. 1071 at Aṇṇīgere in the Dhārwār district, which states that “the wicked Chōḷa, who had abandoned the religious observances of his family, penetrated into the Beḷvola country and burned the Jaina temples which Gaṅga-Permāḍi, the lord of the Gaṅga-maṇḍala, while governing the Beḷvola province, had built in the Aṇṇīgere-nāḍu,” and that “the Chōḷa eventually yielded his head to Sōmēśvara I. in battle, and thus, losing his life, broke the succession of his family.”14 “The record adds that the temples were subsequently restored by the Maṇḍalika Lakshmadēva.”15
According to Professor Kielhorn’s calculation,16 the date of this inscription (l. 7 f.) corresponds to Wednesday, the 3rd December A.D. 1046. On this day the villagers made over to the temple 2,200 kuḻi of land and received in exchange 100 kāśu from the temple treasury.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv03p0i0028.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: Above, Vol. II. p. 303, I noticed two inscriptions of the 4th year of the reign of Parakēsarivarman, alias Rājēndradēva. One of these is the subjoined inscription. It is dated on a week-day (l. 14 f.) which will probably admit of astronomical calculation as soon as a second, similarly dated record of the same reign may be discovered.1 The text of the historical introduction has been settled with the help of two other inscriptions, viz.—
1. Tv. = an inscription of the 4th year in the Bilvanāthēśvara temple at Tiruvallam in the North Arcot district (No. 190 of 1894).
2. Tm. = an inscription of the 8th year in the Vaidyanātha temple at Tirumalavāḍi in the Trichinopoly district (No. 84 of 1895).
Like the inscriptions of his predecessor Rājādhirāja (p. 55 f. above) and those of his successor Vīrarājēndra I. (p. 33 above), this inscription of Rājēndra opens with a list of relatives on whom the king conferred certain titles (ll. 1 to 6). The recipients of these honours were a paternal uncle of the king, four younger brothers of his, six sons (?)2 and two grandsons (?).3 The fifth of the sons—Muḍikoṇḍa-Chōḷa with the title Sundara-Chōḷa4 —is perhaps identical with a prince of the same name and title, who is mentioned in the inscriptions of Rājēndra’s successor, Vīrarājēndra I.5
Lines 6 to 12 give a detailed account of the battle of Koppam, which is only briefly noticed in the hitherto published inscriptions of Rājēndra.6 His enemy Āhavamalla (-Sōmēśvara I.) is here expressly called Śaḷukki, i.e. the Chalukya king (ll. 7, 9 and 10). The Chōḷa king invaded Raṭṭa-maṇḍalam and was met by Āhavamalla at Koppam. At first the advantage seems to have been on the side of the Chalukya king. Rājēndra himself and his elephant were wounded by arrows, and the men who had mounted the elephant along with him were killed. But fresh troops were advanced and turned the fortune of the battle. Āhavamalla fled, and several of his officers fell. Among these the inscription mentions a younger brother of the Chalukya king—Jayasiṁha,7 Pulikēśin,8 Daśapaṉmaṉ,9 Aśōkaiyaṉ, Āraiyaṉ, Moṭṭaiyaṉ and Naṉṉi-Nuḷambaṉ,10 and among those who took part in the flight, Vaṉṉiya-Rēvaṉ, Tuttaṉ and Kuṇḍamayaṉ. The first of these three chiefs is perhaps identical with the Haihaya Mahāmaṇḍalēśvara Rēvarasa, who is mentioned as a vassal of Sōmēśvara I. in an inscription of A.D. 1054-55.11 Among the spoil of the battle were many elephants, three of which are mentioned by name (l. 11), the banner of the boar, and two queens by name Śattiyavvai and Śāṅgappai (l. 12).
Finally, Rājēndra despatched an army to Ceylon, where the Kaliṅga king Vīra-Śalāmēgaṉ was decapitated and the two sons of the Ceylon king Mānābharaṇaṉ were taken prisoners. Another Vīra-Śalāmēgaṉ, who is stated to have migrated to Ceylon from Kanyakubja, had been killed by Rājēndra’s predecessor Rājādhirāja.12 The same Chōḷa king had decapitated another Mānābharaṇa, who was, however, a Pāṇḍya king and not a king of Ceylon.13 The Mahāvaṁsa mentions two princes of the name Māṇābharaṇa, and two others of the name Kittisirimēgha. Māṇābharaṇa I.14 and Kittisirimēgha I. were nephews and sons-in-law of the Ceylon king Vijayabāhu I. (chapter lix. verses 42 and 44). His queen Tilōkasundari was a princess of Kaliṅga (ibid. verse 29 f.).15 Mānābharaṇaṉ and Vīra-Śalāmēgaṉ in the subjoined inscription might correspond to Māṇābharaṇa and Kittisirimēgha in the Mahāvaṁsa, and the reason why Vīra-Śalāmēgaṉ is styled a Kaliṅga king in the inscription might be the fact that his mother-in-law was a Kaliṅga princess according to the Mahāvaṁsa. On the other hand king Vijayabāhu I. is supposed to have reigned from A.D. 1065 to 1120, and Vikkamabāhu I., in whose time Māṇābharaṇa I. and Kittisirimēgha I. usurped the government of Ceylon, from A.D. 1121 to 1142, while Rājēndra and Vīrarājēndra I. have to be accommodated between A.D. 1050 and 1070.16 Consequently, Mānābharaṇaṉ and Vīra-Śalāmēgaṉ in the inscription must be distinct from, and prior to, Māṇābharaṇa I. and Kittisirimēgha I. in the Mahāvaṁsa. But, as I have previously stated (p. 39 above), the conquest of Ceylon by Rājēndra is established by the existence of an inscription of his in that island.
The subjoined inscription records that the villagers received an unspecified sum from Kāmakkavvaiyaḷ, the mother of the Sēnāpati Jayaṅkoṇḍa-Chōḷa-Brahmādhirāja, and granted in return a piece of land at Amaṇpākkam—the modern Ammaṇambākkam—on the south of Maṇimaṅgalam17 to the temple. This land was situated “to the south of the land that has been formerly granted to this god by a stone inscription.” The reference is to an inscription of Rājakēsarivarman (No. 27 above), which registers a grant of land on the south of Maṇimaṅgalam and east of Amaṇpākkam.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv03p0i0029.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This inscription is dated in the 13th year of the reign of Rājarāja-Kēsarivarman. The king receives the epithet “who destroyed the ships at Śālai,” and must be identified accordingly with the great Chōḷa king Rājarāja I., who ascended the throne in A.D. 984-85.1
The inscription records that a certain Nārāyaṇa Rājasiṁha, a native of the Chōḷa country, purchased 550 kuḻi of land, and made them over to the assembly of the village, under the condition that their produce should be utilised for supplying the god with 4 nāḻi of rice daily.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv03p0i0002.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: On a hero-stone now preserved in Madras Museum.
Parakēsarivarmaṉ, who took Tañjai (Vijayālaya). Year 3: C. 853 A.D.
Records that a certain Karambai Kalituḍaṉ Mukkaṉ of Attiyūr in Kaṟpūṇḍi-nāḍu died while rescuing cattle from a raid launched by Aṇiyaṉ. The figure of a warrior aiming an arrow from a bow is carved in relief on the slab.
Published in A.R.Ep., 1935-36. Part II, Page 72. para 34.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv32p1i0001.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: On the south wall, central shrine, Kailāśanātha temple.
Year 12: 983 A.D.
Built in. Seems to be a directive issued to the chaturvēdibhaṭṭa-ttāṉapperumakkaḷ (of Sembiyanmahādēvi-chaturvēdimaṅgalam) a brahmadēyam in Aḷa-nāḍu on the southern bank (of the river Kāvēri), to feed themselves (probably in the temple of Śrī-Kailāśam-uḍaiya Mahādēvar) on the day of the asterism of kēṭṭai in the month of Chittirai, the birthday of the queen Sembiyan mahādēvi, (the mother of Uttamachōḷa), with the endowments of gold donated by the queens of Uttamachōḷa, Baṭṭaṉ Dāṉatoṅgiyār, Maḻapāḍi Tennavan-Mahādēviyār, Vāṉavaṉ mahādēviyār, the daughter of Iruṅgōḷar and also another queen, (name damaged and she is described as the) daughter of Viḻupparaiyar and also another queen (name lost) the daughter of Paḻuvēṭṭaraiyar, to the above mentioned chaturvēdibhaṭṭa-ttāṉapperumakkaḷ for the above purpose. (cf. S.I.I. Vol. XIX. No. 383)
Published in S.I.I., Vol. XIX, No. 311.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv32p2i0100.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: On the east wall, central shrine, Avanisundarēśvara temple.
Year 12: 983 A.D.
Incomplete records the gift of 5 lamp-stands by Sembiyaṉ-mahādēviyār, the queen of Gaṇḍarāditta-perumāṉ, to Mahādēva of Tiru-Avanīśvaram at Pāchchil in Maḻa-nāḍu.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv32p2i0101.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: On the south wall, central shrine, Gaṅgājaṭādhara temple.
Year 12: 983 A.D.
This records a gift of 384 sheep for burning 4 perpetual lamps in the temple of Śrī-Vijayamaṅgalattu-Mahādēva at Periya Śrīvānavaṉ-Mahādēvi-chaturvēdimaṅgalam at the rate of ninety-six sheep per lamp by Ambalavaṉ-Paḻuvūr-Nakkaṉ alias Vikramaśōḻa-Mārāyaṉ, who had built this temple in stone.
Published in S.I.I., Vol. XIX No. 314.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv32p2i0103.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: On the north wall, central shrine, Gaṅgājaṭādhara temple.
Year 12: 983 A.D.
Incomplete. Records that Śekkiḻān Araiyaṉ Saṅkaranārāyaṇaṉ alias Śōḻa Muttaraiyaṉ, a native of Kāvaṉṉūr in Paḷuvūr-kūṟṟam in Toṇḍai-nāḍu endowed two vēli, thirteen mā and 1 kāṇi of land under the irrigation of lake Vaḍakuḍi, purchased from the sabhaiyār of Chandaśēri and got the same made tax-free (iṟaiyili). He entrusted the same to the sabhā of Chōḷasūḍāmaṇi-chēri, who were the members of the peruṅguṟiāḷuṅgaṇattār of Periyavāṉavaṉmādēvi for the sake of various services to god Paramasvāmigaḷ of Śrī-Kayilāyam in Periyavāṉavaṉmādēvich-chaturvēdimaṅgalam and also determined the extent of the endowed land that would be required to provide the paddy necessary to conduct each of the various rituals and services.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv32p2i0104.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: On the south wall of the maṇḍapa infront of the central shrine, Vṛiddhagirīśvara temple.
Year 12: 983 A.D.
It states that this temple with the snapana-maṇḍapa (bathing hall), gōpura, the suṟṟālai (enclosed verandah) and the shrines for the parivāra-dēvatas was constructed by queen Sembiyaṉ-Mahādēviyār, mother of Uttama-chōḷa, the daughter of the chief Maḻaperumānaḍigaḷ and queen of Gaṇḍarāditya, who was the son of Periya-Śōḻaṉār, the great Chōḷa king, Śrī-Parāntakadēvar. It also gives a list of the several gold and silver ornaments and utensils and other articles of worship presented by her to the temple. These comprised five copper lamps, one gold diadem five kaḻañju in weight less a mañjāḍi, a silver plate weighing 389 kaḻañju, a silver jar (keṇḍi) of 199 3/4 kaḻañju 2 gold flowers weighing a kaḻañju and half a gold fore-head band (paṭṭam) weighing one kaḻañju for god Naṭarāja (Kūttapperumāḷ), a five stringed chain with a tāli etc., for Umābhaṭṭāraki and such other ornaments of the said deities.
Published in S.I.I., Vol. XIX. No. 302.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv32p2i0114.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: On the west wall, central shrine, Gaṅgājaṭādhara temple.
Year 13: 984 A.D.
Incomplete. This states that Ambalavaṉ Paḻuvūr-Nakkaṉ alias Vikramaśōḻa-Mārāyaṉ of Kuvāḷālam, the perundaram of Uttama-chōḷadēva built of stone the śrīvimāna of the temple of Vijayamaṅgalattu Dēva at Periya Śrī-Vāṉavaṉmādēvichaturvēdimaṅgalam, a brahmadēyam on the northern bank.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv32p2i0122.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: On the west wall, central shrine, Gaṅgājaṭādhara temple.
Year 13: 984 A.D.
Records a gift of 96 sheep for burning a perpetual lamp with an uḻakku of ghee everyday in the temple by Aparājitaṉ Seyyavāymaṇi, the wife of Paḻuvūr Nakkaṉ alias Vikramaśōḻa Mārāyar who built this temple in stone.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv32p2i0123.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: On the west wall, central shrine, Gaṅgājaṭādhara temple.
Year 13: 984 A.D.
Records a gift of ninety six sheep for burning a perpetual lamp by Siṅgapanmaṉ Kañchi Akkan, the wife of Ambalavaṉ Paḻuvūr Nakkaṉ alias Vikramachōḻamārāyar, a native of Kuvaḷālam, who had got the stone temple constructed. The perpetual lamp was apparently meant to be burnt in the main shrine of the temple (built by the donor’s husband Ambalavaṉ Paḻuvūr Nakkaṉ).
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv32p2i0124.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: On the north and west walls, central shrine, Gaṅgājaṭādhara temple.
Year 14: 985 A.D.
This inscription has two sections. The first one is in Sanskrit and the second portion in Tamil.
The first portion eulogises that Ambalavan Paḻuvūr-Nakkaṉ of Kuvuḷālapuram was born in a good caste and that he founded one dynasty. He was an embodiment of munificience and his foes knew him as a personification of bravery. The damsels knew him as an incarnation of cupid and scholars knew him as dharma incarnate. He had gained the appreciation of Vikramachōḻa by the show of his valour. In the 14th regnal year of the King he converted the temple of Sambhu at Vijayamaṅgalam in the agrahāra of Śrī Vānavanmahādēvi-chaturvēdimaṅgalam into stone and gifted the village Neḍuvāyil, attached to the same greater Vānavaṉmahādēvi-chaturvēdimaṅgalam, after purchasing it and getting it made tax-free from the Mahāparishad of the same agrahāra for the worship of the god and celebration of festivals in the said temple.
The Tamil version of the record states that Ambalavaṉ Paḻuvūr Nakkaṉ alias Vikrama chōḷa mahārājan of Kuvaḷālapuram, the perundaram official of the king had constructed the temple of Vijayamaṅgalattu-Mahādēvar at Śrī Vāṉavanmahādēvichaturvēdimaṅgalam, a brahmadēyam on the northern bank (of the river) in stone. He also gifted Neḍuvāyil, a northern hamlet of the village of Vānavaṉmahādēvichaturvēdimaṅgalam with all its appurtenances, after purchase from the peruṅkuṟipperumakkaḷ of the above village and donated it as a bhōgam to the god of Vijayamaṅgalam for providing food offerings and also for conducting various services, worship and festivals to the deity. He also gave seven hundred kāśu and got the donated village freed from taxes by the same sabhā. The madhyastha of the village Niṉṟāṉ Āra Amudan Vānavamādēvipperuṅgāvidi wrote this charter.
Published in S.I.I., Vol. XIX No. 357.
Languages: Sanskrit, Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv32p2i0138.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: On the south wall, Chidambarēśvara shrine, Vēdapurīśvara temple.
Year 14: 985 A.D.
Incomplete. It seems to state that the sheep which had been earmarked earlier for burning a perpetual lamp to the god Tiruvottūr Mahādēva had been misappropriated by Uttamachōḻa-mārāyaṉ. Subsequently on supplication to Sembiyan Mādēvi the 200 sheep were recovered and endowed for burning two perpetual lamps. It was stipulated that sixteen nāḻi, one uri and one uḻakku of ghee as measured by the pañchavārakkal would be contributed every month for these two lamps. The tiruvuṇṇāḻigaiuḍaiyārgaḷ (priests serving in the sanctum sanctorum) are mentioned.
Published in S.I.I., Vol. VII. No. 114.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv32p2i0140.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: On the south wall, central shrine, Umāmahēśvara temple.
Year: lost.
This inscription was engraved below a group sculptures. Records that Mādēvaḍigaḷ alias Sembiyaṉ Mādēviyār constructed the temple of Tirunallam-uḍaiyār in stone in the name of her husband Gaṇḍarādittadēvar and setup the image of Śrī-Gaṇḍarādittadēvar in the posture of worshipping, when her son Madhurāntakadēvar alias Uttamachōḷa was ruling.
Published in S.I.I., Vol. III No. 146.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv32p2i0218.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: On the south wall, central shrine, Anantēśvarasvāmi temple.
King: Parakēsarivarman Year 2: 973 A.D.
This might be assigned to Uttama chōḷa1. This records a gift of ninety-six sheep and a ram for a perpetual lamp in the temple of Tiruvanantēśvarattāḻvār at Vīranārāyaṇa-chaturvēdimaṅgalam by Parāntakan Mādēvaḍigaḷ alias Sembiyan Mādēviyār, the daughter of Maḻavaraiyar, and queen of Gaṇḍarādityadēvar, who was pleased to go west ie deceased.
Published in S.I.I., Vol. XIX. No. 11.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv32p2i0002.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: On the west wall, Bhikshāṇḍār shrine, Śivayōganāthasvāmin temple.
Year 6: 977 A.D.
Incomplete. Contains a royal order issued to the sabhaiyār of Vembaṟṟūr, a brahmadēyam-taniyūr in Maṇṇi-nāḍu, on the supplication made by his official who managed the king’s affairs, Parittikkuḍaiyāṉ Kodukulavaṉ Sāttan alias Parakēsari Mūvēndavēḷāṉ, when the king was at the hall of the palace at Paḻaiyāṟu, to deduct from his sixth regnal year onwards, 47 1/2 kaḻañju of gold, being the tax on 4 3/4 vēli of land purchased and endowed by the queen-mother of the king at Vembaṟṟūr, out of the total amount of tax 3917 kaḻañju and 3 mañjāḍi of gold due from the village to the sabhā. The land had been purchased and endowed by the queen even in the king’s third regnal year for providing 108 pots of water for conducting the sacred bath on every saṅkrānthi day and also for providing mid-night food offerings daily to the god of Tiruviśalūr, a hamlet of Vembaṟṟūr, for the merit of the king. Several officials figure as signatories for this transaction.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv32p2i0032.
Emmanuel Francis.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv32p2i0052A.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: On the south and east walls, central shrine, Umāmahēśvarasvāmin temple.
Year 8, 143 day: 979 A.D.
This inscription begins with a statement that Sembiyan Mahādēvi, the dowager queen had converted the temple of God Mahādēva at Tirunallam in Veṇṇāḍu into a stone temple in the name of (her husband) Gaṇḍarādittan and had arranged for the raising of a flower garden (tirunandavanam) also in the name of Gaṇḍarādittan. To meet the expenditure on the maintenance (for koṟṟu and puḍavai) of the four persons who were appointed to tend that garden she set apart the yield of 224 kalam from 2 vēli of land at Kīḻaḍuguvilai in Veṇṇāḍu which she had purchased from the sabhā of Tirunallam. This land of two vēli was made iṟaiyili with the status of nandavānappuṟam and dēvadāna-iṟaiyili in favour of God Mahādēva of Tirunallam by the king, Parakēsarivarman, on the representation made to him. Those who were already in the occupation of this land, were removed (to enable the grantee, temple, to make its own arrangement for the cultivation of the said land). It is also stated that the donee ie the temple was entitled to the rights of kārāṇmai and miyāṭchi. The grant was made effective from the third regnal year of the king. Several officials figure as those involved in this process.
Then again when the king Parakēsarivarman was staying in the courtyard in the Viṭṭavīḍu of Vaḍakku Pichchankōyil in Kaḍambūr on the 240th day of his 7th year (978 A.D.) it was represented to him that on or after constructing the temple she Sembiyaṉ Mahādēvi had reviewed the arrangements that had been made for carrying out the various services to God Mahādēva and also for feeding 25 brāhmaṇas daily for the merit of Uḍaiyār (king ?) for which she had established a śālai, the expenses on which were designed to be met by the apportionment of the pañchavāra income of 600 kalam from 12 vēli of land in Pūṅguḍi, the old dēvadāna of the god and another 200 kalam remittable as pañchavāram from 4 vēli of land in Musiṭṭaikkuḍi which lands had been made dēvadāna-iṟaiyili after removing the old occupants with effect from the regnal year six (977 A.D.). However, the above said eight hundred kalam had been found insufficient for carrying out the expenses on the said services on the apportionment (nibandam). For the carrying out of the nibandam as stated above a further 652 kalam, tūṇi and padakku was found as essential. Further the feeding of the 25 brāhmaṇas for one year a total of 937 kalam, tūṇi and padakku of paddy was separately required. Thus a new arrangement for securing the total 1590 kalam of paddy had to be made for this purpose. For this, twelve vēli of Iḷanilaṁ land in Veṇṇāḍu was required to be granted as dēvadānam and sālābhōgam free of taxes (iṟaiyili). On being so represented the king granted the required land as dēvadānam and sālābhōgam after removing the old occupants and entitling the land to kārāṇmai and miyāṭchi with effect from the paśāṉam of the seventh regnal year (978 A.D.) after observing all the official formalities. The boundaries of the land-village granted were mentioned in great detail and the irrigation rights to which the said village land was entitled was also specified in detail. In this context while detailing the boundaries, a garden called Sembiyanmahādēvi-tirunandavānam is also mentioned.
Again on the 143rd day in his eighth regnal year (979 A.D.) the king Parakēsarivarman when he was present at the palace Ādibhūmi in Viṭṭavēḍu of Karaikāṭṭu-Paṉaiyūr it was represented to him the apportionment (nibandam) for the above income of the temple may be made and he arranged for the same to be done. On making the nibandam it was realized that from the income fifteen more brāhmaṇas could also be fed in addition to the twenty-five already stipulated for. The apportionment made is recorded in great detail.
Published in S.I.I., Vol. III. Nos. 151 and 151A.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv32p2i0052.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: On the west wall, central shrine, Matsyapurīśvara temple.
Year 9 = 980 A.D.
This inscription is incomplete. It records an endowment of several plots of land after purchase from various persons, made by the queen-mother of Gaṇḍarādittaṉ Madhurāntaka Uttamachōḷa for the merit of her son, to the temple of Tiruchchēlūr Āḻvār at Rājakēsari-chaturvēdimaṅgalam to provide for the sacred bath to god with 108 pots of water on all the days of Saṅkrānti, for providing sumptuous food offerings (for general feeding) and (parivaṭṭam) to the god and also for the remuneration of the nambi (priest) who performed the abhishēkam and for the worship of the deity in the temple. The names of the villages and channels occurring in the record such as Naratoṅgavadi, Śrīkaṇṭa-vāykkāl, Sōḻachūḷamaṇivāykkāl etc, are suggestive of the surnames of the king’s predecessors.
Published in S.I.I., Vol. XIX No. 235.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv32p2i0064.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: On the south wall, central shrine, Gaṅgā-Jaṭādhara temple.
Year 10: 981 A.D.
This records a gift of 96 sheep for a perpetual lamp in the temple of Śrī-Vijayamaṅgalattu-Mahādēva at Periya-Śrī Vānavaṉmahādēvi-chaturvēdimaṅgalam, a brahmadēyam on the northern bank of the river, by Ambalavaṉ Paḻuvūraṉ alias Śrī-Vikramaśōḻa-Mārāyar, who is stated to have also constructed this stone temple for the god. Another gift of two shares for two perpetual lamps for the same God made by one Maḻavar of Aṇḍāḍu, evidently a close relation of the donor is also recorded at the end. It is not clear as to what was meant by two shares.
Published in S.I.I., Vol. XIX No. 272.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv32p2i0084.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: On the south wall, central shrine, Tirukkōṭīśvara temple.
Year 11: 982 A.D.
Records that while Parāntakaṉ Mādēvaḍigaḷār alias Sembiyan Mahādēviyār, the mother of Uttamachōḷa and the daughter of Maḻavaraiyar caused to be rebuilt of stone, the original brick-structure of the central shrine of the temple of Mahādēva at Tirukkōḍikāval in Nalāṟṟūr-nāḍu, and ordered the re-engravement on its walls, of the several records of endowment originally incised on loose slabs, and which were strewn in many places and that this is one such document. It is dated in the 9th opposite the 4th regnal year of the Pāṇḍya king Māṟaṉ Śaḍaiyaṉ and records the gift of 120 kaḻañju of gold which was entrusted to the sabhā of Mahēndra-Koṭṭūr by Varaguṇa-Mahārāja to the god of Tirukkōḍikkāval for burning perpetual lamps with the daily supply of a nāḻi of ghee.
Published in S.I.I., Vol. XIX No. 292.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv32p2i0093.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This inscription is dated in the 5th year of the reign of Rājakēsarivarman, alias Vīrarājēndradēva (I.), and on a week-day (l. 37) which will probably admit of astronomical calculation if a second, similarly dated record of the same reign should be discovered. It opens with a long and interesting historical passage, the first portion of which agrees on the whole with the introduction of the Karuvūr inscription of the same king (No. 20 above). But the statement that the king conferred certain titles on some relatives of his (No. 20, ll. 1 to 3) is omitted here. For the reconstruction of the text of the fresh portion of the introduction no materials are available besides the incomplete introduction of the Takkōlam inscription and some stray fragments of the Gaṅgaikoṇḍa-Śōḻapuram inscription.1
Vīrarājēndra I. is said to have defeated the Kēraḷas at Ulagai, which seems to have been a place on the western coast, and to have tied in his stables the elephants of the Chālukyas and Pāṇḍyas (l. 16 f.). In a battle on the bank of an unspecified river he cut off the heads of a number of chiefs, some of whom are mentioned by name, but cannot be identified (l. 17 ff.). As the Gaṅga and Nuḷamba chiefs figure among them, they were probably feudatories of the Western Chālukya king. Vīrarājēndra I. was going to exhibit the heads of his victims at Gaṅgaikoṇḍa-Śōḻapuram, when his old enemy, the Chalukya king (Āhavamalla-Sōmēśvara I.), prepared to take revenge for his former defeat at Kūḍal (or Kūḍalśaṅgamam)2 and despatched an autograph letter, in which he challenged the Chōḷa king to meet him once more at Kūḍal (l. 20 ff.). Vīrarājēndra I. proceeded to Kāndai (or Karandai ?), which seems to have been a place near Kūḍal, on the appointed day. Though he waited there for a full month, his enemy did not put in his appearance, but took to flight (l. 24 f.). The Chōḷa king occupied and burnt Raṭṭa-pāḍi and planted an inscribed pillar of victory on the Tuṅgabhadrā river (l. 25 f.).
Then follows a passage which states that Vīrarājēndra I. appointed “the liar who came on a subsequent day” to be Chalukya king or heir-apparent, and that, in derision, he placed round the neck of the candidate a board on which was written that the bearer had escaped execution by an elephant and had run away in public (l. 26 ff.). The Maṇimaṅga- lam inscription does not name the person who was the object of this mockery. But an inscription of the 7th year of Vīrarājēndra I. at Tirukkaḻukkuṉṟam (No. 175 of 1894) says that the king “tied (round the neck) of the Śaḷukki Vikramāditya, who had taken refuge at his feet, a necklace (kaṇṭhikā), (which) illumined the eight directions, and was pleased to conquer and to bestow (on him) the seven and a half lakshas) of Raṭṭa-pāḍi.”3 Thus it appears that the Chalukya king or heir-apparent appointed by Vīrarājēndra I. was Vikramāditya VI., the son of his enemy Āhavamalla-Sōmēśvara I., and that Vikramāditya’s coronation was not a mere sham act, as which it is represented in the subjoined inscription. As it is now an established fact that, after the wars between Sōmēśvara I. and Vīrarājēndra I., the latter entered into friendly relations with Vikramāditya VI., it cannot be doubted any more that the Chōḷa king whose daughter, according to the Vikramāṅkadēvacharita, became the wife of Vikramāditya VI., is identical with Vīrarājēndra I.4
The king next undertook an expedition into Vēṅgai-nāḍu, i.e. the country of Vēṅgī, which he had already conquered on a former occasion5 (l. 28). His army defeated the enemy “on the great river close to Viśaiyavāḍai,” i.e. at Bezvāḍa on the Kṛishṇā, proceeded to the Gōdāvarī, and passed Kaliṅga and Chakra-kōṭṭa (l. 29 f.). The king bestowed the country of Vēṅgī on Vijayāditya (l. 30 f.). Formerly I identified this prince with the Eastern Chalukya viceroy Vijayāditya VII.6 But Mr. Venkayya aptly suggests that he may be the same as Vishṇuvardhana-Vijayāditya, a younger brother of Vikramāditya VI., who bore the title ‘lord of the province of Vēṅgī.’7
On his return to Gaṅgaikoṇḍa-Śōḻapuram the king assumed the surname Rājādhirājarāja and exhibited the booty which he had brought from the country of Vēṅgī (l. 31 ff.).
In lines 36 ff. the inscription records that 4,450 kuḻi of land near the village were granted to the temple by the Sēnāpati Jayaṅkoṇḍa-Chōḷa-Brahmādhirāja, whose mother had made the grant described in the preceding inscription of Rājēndra (No. 29). The land had been purchased from the villagers by Mañjippayaṉār,8 alias Jayasiṁhakulāntaka-Brahmamārāyar, the father of the Sēnāpati.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv03p0i0030.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This inscription belongs to the 48th year of the reign of Rājakēsarivarman, alias Kulōttuṅga-Chōḷadēva (I.), and opens with the same introduction as two inscriptions at Kāñchī, which I have published in Vol. II. (Nos. 77 and 78). It is dated on a week-day (l. 8) which, according to Professor Kielhorn’s calculation,1 corresponds to Friday, the 25th January A.D. 1118. On this day a private person purchased from several other persons 1,050 kuḻi of land near the village and granted them to the temple, with the condition that the produce of the land might be used for defraying the cost of processions on new-moon days.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv03p0i0031.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This inscription is mutilated at the end. It records the purchase of some land near the village, the produce of which was assigned to the temple for providing offerings. The name of the purchaser and donor was Vīravali Tiruvaraṅgam-uḍaiyāṉ Sahasraṉ, and the two temple managers at the time of the purchase were Kēśava-Bhaṭṭaṉ of Aḷḷūr and Tiruvāykkula-Pittaṉ of Araṇaippuṟam. As the same three persons are mentioned in the preceding inscription (No. 31), which belongs to the reign of Kulōttuṅga I., it follows that the subjoined inscription, which is dated in the 48th year of Tribhuvanachakravartin Kulōttuṅga-Chōḷadēva, has to be assigned also to Kulōttuṅga I.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv03p0i0032.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This inscription is dated in the 4th year of the reign of Parakēsarivarman, alias Vikrama-Chōḷadēva (1. 17), and opens with an introduction which resembles that of the Tañjāvūr inscription of this king, but is only partially preserved. It records that certain land was purchased from the villagers and granted to the temple. The land was situated in Pulvāyppāppāṉ-Kuḷattūr—evidently a portion of the village of Kuḷattūr which is referred to in No. 27 above.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv03p0i0033.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This inscription is dated in the 8th year of the reign of Tribhuvanachakravartin Kulōttuṅga-Chōḷadēva. It records that the villagers gave to the temple two pieces of land near the village, the first of which had been purchased from Sāhaṇai Mādhava-Bhaṭṭaṉ. The second piece of land had been purchased in the 13th year of the reign of Vikrama-Chōḷadēva.
As it is improbable that a very long time could have passed between the purchase of the land in the 13th year of Vikrama-Chōḷadēva and its grant to the temple in the 8th year of Kulōttuṅga-Chōḷadēva, it may be assumed that Kulōttuṅga-Chōḷadēva was the immediate successor of Vikrama-Chōḷadēva. According to the Chellūr plates of Kulōttuṅga II.,1 Vikrama-Chōḍa reigned for 15 year (A.D. 1112-1127)2 and was succeeded by his son Kulōttuṅga-Chōḍa II. Hence the former may be identified with Vikrama-Chōḷadēva who is mentioned in the subjoined inscription, and the latter with Kulōttuṅga-Chōḷadēva to whose reign the inscription belongs.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv03p0i0034.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This inscription is dated in the 8th year of the reign of Parakēsarivarman, alias Tribhuvanachakravartin Rājarājadēva (l. 5), and opens with a panegyrical passage, from which we learn nothing of any importance but that his queen bore the name or title Mukkōkkiḻāṉaḍigaḷ.1 It records that some land near the village was purchased from Sāhaṇai Mādhava-Bhaṭṭaṉ and assigned to the temple, with the condition that the produce of the land should be applied for providing offerings of boiled rice to the god.
At the time of the inscription the overseer of the Śrī-Vaishṇavas was Araṭṭamukkidāsaṉ. As the same officer is referred to in two inscriptions of the 12th and 28th years of the reign of Kulōttuṅga-Chōḷa III. (Nos. 36 and 37 below), it may be assumed either that Parakēsarivarman, alias Rājarājadēva, was identical with that Rājarājadēva who succeeded Kulōttuṅga-Chōḷa III. or that he was the predecessor of the latter. I am inclined to adopt the second alternative, because the present inscription mentions as the person from whom the granted land was purchased a certain Sāhaṇai Mādhava-Bhaṭṭaṉ, whose name occurs in a similar connection in the inscription of Kulōttuṅga-Chōḷa II. (No. 34 above). Hence the king to whose reign the subjoined inscription belongs has to be styled Rājarāja II., and the successor of Kulōttuṅga-Chōḷa III. will be Rājarāja III. The reign of Rājarāja II. would fall between A.D. 1132, the latest date of Kulōttuṅga II.,2 and A.D. 1178, the date of the accession of Kulōttuṅga III.3
I have impressions of two other inscriptions of Rājarāja II. which open with the same panegyrical introduction. The first of them, in the Śvētāraṇyēśvara temple at Kaḍappēri near Madurāntakam in the Chingleput district (No. 132 of 1896), is dated in the 9th year; and the second, in the Ēkāmranātha temple at Conjeeveram (No. 9 of 1893), is dated in the 15th year of the reign, “on the day of Punarvasu, which was a Thursday and the fourteenth tithi of the first fortnight of the month of Tai.”4
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv03p0i0035.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This inscription is dated in the 12th year of the reign of Kulōttuṅga-Chōḷadēva III.1 on a week-day which, according to Professor Kielhorn’s calculation,2 corresponds to Monday, the 4th December A.D. 1189. It records that a military officer purchased 600 kuḻi of land near the village and assigned them to the temple, with the condition that the produce of the land should be applied for providing offerings of boiled rice to the god.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv03p0i0036.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This inscription is dated in the 28th year of the reign of Kulōttuṅga-Chōḷadēva III. and records that the same military officer who is mentioned in the preceding inscription (or a relation of his) deposited with the temple authorities a sum of money, from the interest of which four lamps had to be supplied with fuel.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv03p0i0037.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This inscription is dated in the 13th year of the reign of Rājarājadēva (III. ?). It registers several payments of money into the temple treasury for feeding lamps in the temple.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv03p0i0038.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: The subjoined inscription belongs to the 18th year of the reign of Tribhuvanachakravartin Rājarājadēva. This king is probably identical with Rājarāja III., who is known to have ascended the throne about A.D. 1216 and seems to have been the immediate successor of Kulōttuṅga-Chōḷa III.1 In this case the week-day on which the inscription is dated will admit of astronomical calculation. The inscription records that a flight of stone steps leading to a maṇḍapa was built at the expense of two brothers.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv03p0i0039.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This inscription is dated in the 14th year of the reign of Rājarāja-Kēsarivarman. Like No. 2, which is dated one year earlier, it refers to the destruction of the ships at Śālai, and mentions in addition the conquest of Vēṅgaiññāḍu (or Vēṅgai-nāḍu), Gaṅga-pāḍi, Taḍiya-vaḻi (instead of which most other inscriptions of Rājarāja I. read Taḍigai-pāḍi), and Nuḷamba-pāḍi.
The inscription records that a certain Peṟṟāṉ Adittaṉ, a native of the Chōḷa country, purchased two pieces of land, the first piece from a private person and the second from the assembly of the village, and that he made over both pieces of land to the villagers for maintaining a flower-garden for the temple.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv03p0i0003.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This inscription consists of a single Sanskrit verse in the Indravajrā metre and of a passage in Tamil prose. It is dated on a week-day (l. 3) which will probably admit of calculation, in the 18th year of the reign of Tribhuvanachakravartin Rājarājadēva, and records the gift of two lamps to the image of Vishṇu, and to an image of Narasiṁha which was set up in the same temple.
Languages: Sanskrit, Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv03p0i0040.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: Like No. 40, this inscription is dated on a week-day which will probably admit of calculation, in the 18th year of the reign of Tribhuvanachakravartin Rājarājadēva. It records that the same two brothers, who are mentioned in No. 39 above, paid to the authorities of the Dharmēśvara temple two kaḻañju of gold, from the interest of which the cost of feeding two lamps had to be defrayed.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv03p0i0041.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: Chōḻa, Kulōttuṅga II, 2nd year = A.D. 1135.
Gift of an amount of 90 kāsu, deposited with some Śivabrāhmaṇas, for a lamp to the temple of Tirumaṇañjēri-uḍaiyār, by a native of Gaṅgaikoṇḍa-chōḻapuram.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv34p0i0001.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: Insert intro.
This inscription is engraved on the slightly sloping surface of a large boulder in the bed of the Nīvā river, one mile north-east of Tiruvallam. The alphabet is Tamil and Grantha of an archaic type. It resembles the alphabet of the inscriptions of the Western Gaṅga king Kampavarman (Nos. 5 and 8 above) and lies between the two Kīḻ-Muṭṭugūr inscriptions of Vijaya-Narasiṁhavarman1 as the upper limit and the two Āmbūr inscriptions of Vijaya-Nṛipatuṅga-Vikramavarman2 as the lower one. As in other archaic Tamil inscriptions,3 the virāma is expressed by a vertical dash over the letter in a number of cases, though not throughout. In the word Maṉṟāḍi (l. 8) the syllable ṟā is expressed by two separate symbols.4 The letter ṉ has generally its archaic form, but in two cases5 its central loop is fully developed. The language of the inscription is Tamil; but line 1 contains some invocations in Sanskrit prose, and line 15 f. a Sanskrit verse.
The record is dated in the 62nd year of the reign of Vijaya-Nandivikramavarman (l. 2 f.). Three other inscriptions of the same king are noticed in Vol. I. (Nos. 108, 124 and 125). As I have shown before,6 he is probably identical with Nandivarman, the father of Vijaya-Nṛipatuṅgavarman and the son-in-law of the Rāshṭrakūṭa king Amōghavarsha I. If this identification is correct, the inscription would have to be placed before the end of the 9th century A.D.
Vijaya-Nandivikramavarman appears to have been the sovereign of Mahāvalivāṇarāya (l. 11) or Māvalivāṇarāya (l. 5), who was a descendant of the family of Mahābali (l. 5) and ruled the twelve thousand (villages) of Vaḍugavaḻi (l. 6), i.e. ‘the Telugu road.’ This province is mentioned in the Muḍyanūr plates of the Bāṇa king Malladēva as ‘the twelve thousand villages in Āndhra-maṇḍala,’7 and in the Udayēndiram plates of the Bāṇa king Vikramāditya II. as ‘the land to the west of the Āndhra road.’8 The attributes which are prefixed to the name of Mahāvalivāṇarāya in the subjoined inscription (l. 3 ff.) are also found in an undated inscription of Mahāvalibāṇarasa at Gūlgānpode.9 As I have stated before,10 Mahābalibāṇarāja seems to have been the hereditary designation of the Bāṇa chiefs. Hence it is impossible to say which individual chief is meant in the present inscription.
The inscription records that a goldsmith granted some land to a temple at Vāṇapuram (ll. 6 and 14), and that Mahāvalivāṇarāya confirmed this grant (l. 10 f.). Vāṇapuram, ‘the town of the Bāṇas,’ seems to have been the residence of the Bāṇa chief and to have been situated close to Tiruvallam.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv03p0i0042.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This inscription and No. 44 are written continuously, the first two words of No. 44 occupying the end of line 46 of No. 43. The two first lines of No. 43 state that both inscriptions are copies of earlier stone inscriptions, and that these copies were made when the maṇḍapa of the temple was pulled down and rebuilt. Consequently the alphabet of Nos. 43 and 44 exhibits more recent forms than No. 42, though the date of No. 43 is anterior to No. 42.
No. 43 belongs to the 17th year of the reign of the same king as No. 42,—Vijaya-Nandivikramavarman (l. 3 f.). It records that three villages were granted to the temple at the request of the Bāṇa king Vikramāditya (l. 12 ff.). Two chiefs of this name are mentioned in the Udayēndiram plates of Vikramāditya II.1 The grant recorded in these plates must be prior to the time of Pṛithivīpati II., because the Chōḷa king Parāntaka I. transferred to the latter the Bāṇa kingdom, which he had wrested from two Bāṇa chiefs.2 The accession of Pṛithivīpati II. has to be placed before the 9th year of Parāntaka I., i.e. before about A.D. 909.3 Consequently, as pointed out by Dr. Fleet,4 Kṛishṇarāja, the friend of the Bāṇa king Vikramāditya II.,5 seems to have been the Rāshṭrakūṭa king Kṛishṇa II. (A.D. 888 and 911-12); and the Bāṇa king Vikramāditya, who is mentioned in the subjoined inscription as a contemporary of Vijaya-Nandivikramavarman in the 17th year of this king, may be identified with Vikramāditya I., the grandfather of that Vikramāditya II. who issued the Udayēndiram grant.
One of the three villages granted was Aimbūṇi (l. 6), apparently the modern Ammuṇḍi6 near Tiruvallam. The three villages were clubbed together into one village, which received the new name Viḍēlviḍugu-Vikkiramāditta-chaturvēdimaṅgalam (l. 9 ff. and 1. 20 ff.). The executor of the grant was Kāḍupaṭṭi-Tamiḻa-Pērarayaṉ (l. 15). The same title was borne by the executor of the Bāhūr plates of Vijaya-Nṛipatuṅgavarman. In the transcript of these plates, which is in my hands,7 he is called vīṭōlaiviṭukkakāṭupaṭṭittamiḻappērarayaṉ, which is evidently a mistake of the copyist for Viḍēlviḍugu- Kāḍupaṭṭi-Tamiḻa-Pērarayaṉ. This title and the surname of the village granted by the present inscription8 suggest that Viḍēlviḍugu, i.e. ‘the crashing thunderbolt,’ may have been a surname of Vijaya-Nandivikramavarman and of his son Vijaya-Nṛipatuṅgavarman.
Of great interest is the mention of persons who had to sing the Tiruppadiyam, i.e. the Dēvāram, in the temple (l. 32 f.). Hitherto the earliest known mention of the Dēvāram was in an inscription of Rājarāja I.9 The subjoined inscription proves that it was considered a holy book already in the 9th century A.D.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv03p0i0043.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: As stated in the introductory remarks to No. 43, the subjoined inscription was copied from an earlier stone inscription when the maṇḍapa of the temple was pulled down and re-erected. It is dated in the Śaka year 810 (in words, l. 4 f.) and in the time of a Bāṇa chief who is not mentioned by name, but only by his title Mahāvalivāṇarāja (l. 3 f.).
The inscription records that a Brāhmaṇa of Eṭṭukkūr near Kāvirippākkam (ll. 10 to 12) paid 25 kaḻañju of gold to the villagers of Vaṉṉipēḍu (ll. 5 and 19), who, in return, pledged themselves to supply oil to a lamp in the temple. Kāvirippākkam is the modern Kāvēripākkam,1 and Vaṉṉipēḍu is the modern Vaṉṉivēḍu,2 about a mile south of Wālājāpēṭ. At the time of the inscription Vaṉṉipēḍu belonged to Kārai-nāḍu, a subdivision of the district of Paḍuvūr-kōṭṭam (l. 5). Kārai-nāḍu owes its name to Kārai,3 a village on the north of Rāṇipēṭ.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv03p0i0044.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: Like the preceding inscription, this one is dated in the time of some Mahāvalivāṇarāya. As the alphabet looks decidedly more modern than that of Nos. 42 and 46 and resembles that of Nos. 47 and 48, it must be assumed that, like the two last-mentioned inscriptions, this one is a copy, which was prepared when the central shrine was pulled down and rebuilt.
The inscription records that an inhabitant of Poṉpaḍukuṭṭam near Kachchippēḍu, i.e. Kāñchīpuram,1 purchased some land from the inhabitants of Tiruvallam. The produce of the land had to be used for providing offerings and for feeding a lamp in the temple.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv03p0i0045.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: The alphabet of this inscription is Tamil and Grantha of an archaic type and resembles that of the rock inscription No. 42. It records a gift of gold for maintaining a lamp by the queen of Vāṇavidyādhara-Vāṇarāya. As will be shown below (p. 99), this king may be identified with Vikramāditya I., the sixth of the Bāṇa chiefs whose names are given in the Udayēndiram plates.1 Nos. 47 and 48, which record grants by a queen of the same king, as well as Nos. 43 and 44, are copies of lost originals2 and hence exhibit comparatively modern characters. The archaic alphabet of the subjoined inscription and the fact that it is engraved on a single stone, which does not form part of the temple itself, prove that it is an original record of the time of Vāṇavidyādhara. Evidently it owes its preservation to the accident that, when the central shrine and the maṇḍapa were rebuilt, the stone which bears it was utilised for the new pavement of the temple.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv03p0i0046.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This inscription and No. 48 are written continuously, the first few words of No. 48 occupying the end of line 4 of No. 47. At the beginning of No. 47 it is stated that both inscriptions are copies of earlier stone inscriptions, and that these copies were made when the central shrine of the temple was pulled down. This is the reason why the alphabets of Nos. 47 and 48 are more developed than that of No. 46, though No. 46 records a grant by a queen of the same king as Nos. 47 and 48. In No. 47 she bears the title Vāṇamahādēvī, i.e. ‘the great queen of the Bāṇa (king).’ As the queen mentioned in No. 46, she is stated to have been the consort of the Bāṇa king Vāṇavidyādhara. She was the daughter of Pratipati-Araiyar, the son of Śivamahārāja-Perumāṉaḍigaḷ, who had the surnames Śrīnātha and Kokuṉi.1 This word is a variant or a corruption of Koṅguṇi, the title of the Western Gaṅga kings,2 and the name Pratipati is a corruption or, more probably, a misreading of the copyist for Pṛithvīpati. Hence I would identify Pratipati, the son of Śivamahārāja, with the Western Gaṅga king Pṛithivīpati I., who was the son of Śivamāra3 and the contemporary of the Rāshṭrakūṭa king Amōghavarsha I.4 and of the Gaṅga-Pallava king Vijaya-Nṛipatuṅgavikramavarman.5 The name of the residence of Śivamahārāja was Kuṇilapura according to No. 47, and Nipuṇilapura according to No. 48. Both forms of the word are clearly misreadings of the engraver for Kuvaḷālapura, the modern Kōlār, which was the traditional capital of the Gaṅga family.6
The Udayēndiram plates of Vikramāditya II. mention a Bāṇa chief named Bāṇavidyādhara. This person must be distinct from the Vāṇavidyādhara of the subjoined inscription, because he stood two generations before Vikramāditya I., the contemporary of Vijaya-Nandivikramavarman7 and consequently of Amōghavarsha I.,8 while Vāṇavidyādhara was the son-in-law of Pṛithivīpati I., another contemporary of Amōghavarsha I. An inscription at Gūlgānpode opens with a Sanskrit verse which attributes to the Bāṇa king Vikramāditya-Jayamēru the surname of Bāṇavidyādhara.9 Dr. Fleet10 proposes to identify this Vikramāditya with the Vikramāditya I. of the Udayēndiram plates and with the Vāṇavidyādhara of the subjoined inscription. This identification would suit the fact that Vāṇavidyādhara’s queen was the daughter of Pṛithivīpati I.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv03p0i0047.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: As stated in the introductory remarks to No. 47, the subjoined inscription was copied from an earlier stone inscription when the central shrine of the temple was pulled down. It records the gift of a lamp by the same queen as No. 47, who was the consort of the Bāṇa king Vāṇavidyādhara and the daughter of Pratipati-Araiyar (i.e. the Western Gaṅga king Pṛithivīpati I.), the son of Śivamahārāja. From the subjoined inscription we learn that her actual name was Kundavvai.1
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv03p0i0048.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This inscription belongs to the 7th year of the reign of Rājarāja-Kēsarivarman, i.e. of the Chōḷa king Rājarāja I. It contains a date which admits of astronomical calculation, and which has been repeatedly discussed since its discovery in 1890.1 Professor Kielhorn has shown that it corresponds to the 26th September A.D. 991.2
The inscription records a visit to the temple by a certain Madurāntakaṉ-Kaṇḍarādittaṉār, who caused one thousand jars of water to be poured over the god. When he had finished his worship, he observed that the offerings in the temple had been reduced to a minimum and that the temple lamps were only feebly burning. He called for the authorities of the temple and of the village and asked them for a detailed statement of the temple revenue and expenditure.
Here unfortunately the inscription is built in. But from the preserved portion it is evident that Madurāntakaṉ-Kaṇḍarādittaṉār, i.e. Gaṇḍarāditya, the son of Madhurāntaka, must have been a person of high standing and influence. He cannot be identical with the Chōḷa king Gaṇḍarādityavarman, because the latter had died before the reign of Ariṁjaya, the grandfather of Rājarāja I.3 Perhaps he was an (otherwise unknown) son of Madhurāntaka, the son of Gaṇḍarādityavarman and immediate predecessor of Rājarāja I.4
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv03p0i0049.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This inscription is dated in the 29th year of the reign of Rājakēsarivarman, alias Rājarājadēva, and records that Kaṇṇaṉ Ārūraṉ, a native of the Chōḷa country and a servant of the king, founded near Ukkal a well, which he named after the king, and assigned an allowance of paddy to the men who distributed water in a shed which was erected near the well.1
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv03p0i0004.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This inscription is dated in the same year of the reign of Rājarāja I. as No. 49. It records that a Brāhmaṇa set up an image of the goddess and granted a lamp to the temple. He also purchased 1,700 kuḻi of land from the inhabitants of the village of Mandiram in Tūñāḍu and made it over to the temple authorities, who had to feed the lamp and to supply offerings from the produce of the land.
Tūñāḍu, to which Mandiram belonged, was the name of the country round Mēlpāḍi.1 Mandiram had the surname Jayamēru-Śrīkaraṇamaṅgalam (ll. 2 and 15 f.), which seems to be derived from Jayamēru, one of the surnames of the Bāṇa king Vikramāditya I.2
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv03p0i0050.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This inscription is dated in the 16th year of the reign of the Chōḷa king Rājarāja I. (l. 2) and records that the citizens of Vāṇapuram (ll. 2 and 6), i.e. Tiruvallam,1 sold 700 kuḻi of land to Śaṁkaradēva, the son of Tiruvaiyaṉ (ll. 5 and 6), who granted it to the temple of Tiruvaiya-Īśvara (l. 6). This temple was situated on the south of the Bilvanāthēśvara temple and was evidently named after Tiruvaiyaṉ, the father of the donor. Tiruvaiyaṉ seems to have claimed descent from the Western Gaṅga kings. For, to his name are prefixed the name and the epithets of Śivamahārāja (l. 4 f.), as we have found them in Nos. 47 and 48. As these epithets are spelt with almost exactly the same mistakes as in No. 48,2 I believe that the donor copied them from that very inscription, which he found engraved on the temple.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv03p0i0051.