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 1401–1450 of 2606 matching.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This is clearly an inscription of Uttama-Chōḷa. It states that this temple with the snapana-maṇḍapa (bathing hall), gōpura, the śuṛṛālai (enclosed verandah) and the shrines for the parivāra-dēvatas was constructed by queen Śembiyaṉ-Mahādēviyārī mother of Uttama-Chōḷa, the daugther of the chief Maḻapurumānaḍigal and queen of Gaṇḍarādityadēva who was the son of Periya-Śōḻaṉār (the great Chōla 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 ladyship 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 plate (paṭṭam) weighing one kaḻañju for God Naṭarāja (Kūttapperumāḷ), a gold tāli for Goddess Umā-Bhaṭṭārakī, a pearl necklace (pañchasari) fastened with 3 iḍaikkaṭṭu and 2 tāḷimbam and another necklace with a gold middle piece (palagai) and a siver iḍaikkaṭṭu and (lastly) a gold flower for Kūttapperumāḷ.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv19p0i0302.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This is an inscription of Uttama-Chōḷa. It records an endowment in money made by Baṭṭaṉ Dānatoṅgiyār Maḻapāḍi Tennavaṉ-Mahādēviyār, Vānavaṉ-Mādēviyār daughter of Iruṅgōḷar and two others the daughters of Viḻupparaiyar and Paḻavēṭṭaraiyar (chiefs)-all queens of Uttama-Chōḷa for special worship and offerings in the temple on the days of Kēṭṭai (asterism) in Chittirai month, that being the natal star of their mother-in-law (queen Śembiyan-Mahādēvi). The amounts are said to have been entrusted for the purpose with the Chaturvēdibhaṭṭa-Tānapperumakkaḷ by which seems to be meant the committee of management who were bound by obligation (śāsana-baddha). The inscription is built in at the right end and bottom.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv19p0i0311.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This records a gift of 384 sheep for burning 4 perpetual lamps in the temple of Śrī Vijayamaṅgalattu-Mahādēva at Periya Śrī Vānavaṉ-Mahādēvi-chaturvēdi maṅgalam by Ambalavaṉ-Paḻuvūr-Nakkaṉ alias Vikramaśōḻa-Mārāyaṉ, who had built this temple of stone. This is and inscription of Uttama-Chōḷa.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv19p0i0314.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: The inscription is much damaged. It seems to record an endowment of land after making it cultivable, for offerings in temples of Tiruppaḻanam, Tiruvaiyāṟu, Tiruneyttanām, Tiruvēdikuḍi and two others, by Pūdi Kūttaṉ of [Pu*]ḷḷamaṅgalam in Nālūr-nāḍu probably at the instance of the king while he was staying at Paḻaiyāṟu. This might be assigned to Uttama-Chōḻa.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv19p0i0329.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This registers an agreement given by the Śivabrāhmaṇas headed by Kāśyapaṉ Kuṉṟaṉ Śiṅga-Bhaṭṭaṉ and Bhāradvāji Koṟṟaṉ Tiruvaraṅga-Bhaṭṭaṉ of Periya Śrī-Vānavanmādēvi-chaturvēdimaṅgalam to Araiyaṉ Śaṅkaranārāyaṇaṉ alias Śōḻa-Muttaraiyar, that they would regularly conduct all the specified worship and offerings in the temple of Kailāsattu-Āḷvār constructed by him in the village, for the endowment of land made by him under the Vaḍaguḍi tank. The services comprised daily worship, special bath, offering and worship on the two Ayana-Saṅkrānti and two Vishu days, and also on the day of Viśākhā in Vaigāśi month, and the maintenance of a perpetual lamp. They bound themselves to be supervised by the Māhēśvara-Nāṟpatteṇṇāyiravar and to pay fines in case of default to the vāriya-perumakkaḷ of the assembly.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv19p0i0331.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This states that Ambalavaṉ Paḻuvūr-Nakkaṉ alias Vikramaśōḻa-Mārāyaṉ of Kuvaḷālam (Kolar) the Perundaram of Uttama-Chōḷadēva built of stone the Śrīvimāna of the temple of Vijayamaṅgalattu-Dēva at Periya Śrī-Vāṉavaṉmādēvi-chaturvēdimaṅgalam.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv19p0i0332.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This records a gift of 96 sheep for burning a perpetual lamp with an uḻakku of ghee everyday in the temple, by Aparāyitaṉ Śeyyavāymaṇi wife of Ambalavaṉ Paḻuvūr-Nakkaṉ who built this stone temple. This is an inscription of Uttama-Chōḷa.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv19p0i0333.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This records a similar gift of sheep by Śiṅgapaṉmaṉ Kañji-Akkaṉ another wife of Paruvūr-Nakkaṉ.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv19p0i0334.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This is a bilingual record in Sanskrit and Tamil, stating that Ambalavaṉ Paḻuvūr-Nakkaṉ of Kavuḷālam (Kolar) who was a nobleman of the king’s council and who had obtained the title Vikramaśōḻa-Mahārājaṉ after the surname of his over-lord, built the temple of Vijayamaṅgalattu-Mahādēva with stone at Periya-Śrīvānavaṉmahādēvi-chaturvēdimaṅgalam a brahmadēya on the nothern bank of the river and made an endowment of the village Neḍuvāyil with its surrounding hamlets for offerings, worship and all other requirements of the temple after purchasing it tax-free from the assembly of the village. In the Sanskrit portion with which the inscription begins, the donor is said to have been a member of the fourth caste and a personification of all the good qualities, with whose valour the king was greatly pleased and conferred on him the title ‘Vikrama-Chōḷa-Mahārāja’. The inscription has been assigned to king Uttama-Chōḷa M.E.R. for 1929 (Part II, para 29).
The inscription from line 42 to 83 which is in continuation of the above is in smaller and also ornate style of writing and is faulty throughout. It purports to register an order issued in the 7th year of Rājarājadēva by the same donor (who is here called Rājarāja-Pallavaraiyaṉ) while he was camping at Śrī Vijayamaṅgalam, fixing in elaborate detail all the requirements in terms of paddy, for feeding 30 Śivayōgins and 20 Brāhmaṇas daily in the temple and for the maintenance of the several members of the temple staffs, which were to be met from the annual produce of the land granted.
Languages: Sanskrit, Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv19p0i0357.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: The inscription is written in faulty language. This records an agreement given by Kāśyapaṉ Chandraśēkharaṉ Mūvāyiratteḻunūṟṟuva-Bhaṭṭaṉ a servant of the temple to Vēṇṇambi the agent of Ambalavaṉ Paḻuvūr-Nakkaṉ mentioned in No. 357 above to the effect that with the help of two assistants he would conduct special worship and offerings to the god on all the days of eclipse, saṅkrānti and vishu (ayanas) during the year, providing therefore the necessary requirements such as rice and ghee for the midday and ardha-yāma services, and oil for 5 lamps during each of the three sandhis and 2 during the śrībali offering, out of the piḍiligai-vāri (land ?) he had received free of cost. The gaṇa-pperumakkaḷ (trustees ?) of the temple represented by Tirunīlakantha-Kramavittaṉ were responsible for this service under the supervision of the sabhā of the village.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv19p0i0358.
Emmanuel Francis.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv01p0i0093.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This is a fragment of an inscription which seems to record an exchange of some dēvadāna lands with those belonging to Ōlochchaṉ Gaṇavadi Vaḍugaṉ with the permission of the Nāṭṭār and the Ūrār of Siṟṟūr.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv19p0i0471.
Emmanuel Francis.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv01p0i0094.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: The end of this inscription is lost. As, however, the preserved part is identical with the above-published inscriptions Nos. 40, 41 and 66, it may be safely concluded, that the inscription belongs to Ko-Rājarāja-Rājakesarivarman, alias Rājarāja-deva. The mention of Iraṭṭa-pāḍi shows, that the inscription dates after the twenty-first year of the king.1
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv01p0i0095.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: The inscription is not correctly engraved. It is also unfinished. It seems to record a purchase of some land from the sabhā of Śiṟupuliyūr by the ūrār of Karainalūr in Pērāvūr-nāḍu for gift to god Kavaiyāḷvār (?).
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv19p0i0068.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This records an allotment of 6 mā of land to the person singing the Tiruppadiyam (hymns), a quarter śey (i.e. 5 mā) to those supplying water for the sacred bath of the god, and another quarter to the uvachchar (of the temple) out of the land purchased at Śiṟṟānaichchūr by Kaṟṟaḷippichchaṉ of Tiruvāḍutuṟai. This donor figures in a few inscriptions of Parāntaka I, in one of which dated in his 25th year (M.E.R. No. 126 of 1925) he is stated to have built the temple. This may therefore be assigned to a successor of Parāntaka, probably Uttama-Chōḷa.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv19p0i0069.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: On the base of this temple, there are at least three obliterated inscriptions besides the preceding one. In the second line of the fourth inscription there occurs the following passage.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv01p0i0096.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This inscription is dated in the Durmati year (tuṉmativaruṣaM) and mentions the temple of Rājendra-Choḷeśvara at Śoṛapuram (coḻapuram Uṭaiyār Irācentiracoḷicuramuṭaiya nāyaṉār koyil).
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv01p0i0097.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This inscription is dated in the Raktākshi year, which was current after the expiration of the Śālivāhana-Śaka year 1546. It mentions Śoṛapuram and seems to record some meritorious gift in connection with the tank by Veṅkaṭappa-nāyaka.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv01p0i0098.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: A considerable-number of inscribed stones are built into the walls of this temple; but they are not in their original order, and it must be assumed, that either the temple had been destroyed and was rebuilt, or that it was constructed from stones which belonged to another old temple. The subjoined fragments contain the following dates and names:—
No. 106 is dated in “the forty-first year of Tribhuvanachakravartin, the illustrious Rājarāja-deva,”1 and No. 103 in the Dhālu year, which was current after the expiration of the Śaka year 1258. No. 100 begins with the name of “Sakalalokachakravartin Rājanārāyaṇa Śambova.”2 Nos. 104 and 105 mention Gāṅgeya-nallūr, alias Śrī-Mallinātha-chaturvedi-maṅgalam, and according to No. 102, Gā[ṅgeya-nallūr] was a village in Karaivaṛi-Āndi-nāḍu,3 (a division) of [Pa]ḍuvūr-koṭṭam. Other localities mentioned in the subjoined fragments are: Paḍaivīḍu,4 Kāṭṭuppāḍi5 and Kaṟugeri in No. 103, and Aṇaippāḍi in No. 104. No. 99 mentions the Ammaiappeśvara Temple,6 and No. 101 the same and the Kailāsa Temple.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv01p0i0099.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This inscription consists of nine sections engraved on the north wall and four sections on the west wall of the central shrine. It opens with a Sanskrit ślōka, according to which it is an edict of Rājarāja, (alias) Rājakēsarivarman. The remainder of the inscription, like all the other Tañjāvūr inscriptions, is written in Tamil.
After the list of conquests, which is found at the beginning of many inscriptions of the Chōḷa king Rājarāja, paragraph 2 contains the date, after which this and all the other Tañjāvūr inscriptions were incised. On the 20th day of the 26th year of his reign, Kō-Rājakēsarivarman, alias Rājarājadēva, issued orders, that the gifts made by himself, those made by his elder sister (viz., Kundavaiyār), those made by his wives, and those made by other donors should be engraved on the stone walls of the temple. A second important fact, which we learn from paragraph 2, is, that the Tañjāvūr temple had been built by Rājarājadēva himself, and that it was called after him Rājarājēśvara, i.e., the Īśvara (temple) of Rājarāja.
Paragraphs 3 to 107 contain a list of gold images, vessels and ornaments, which the king himself presented to the temple of Rājarājēśvara (paragraphs 3 to 98) and to the image of Dakshiṇa-Mēru-Viṭaṅkar (paragraphs 99 to 107) on the following dates:—
Paragraphs 3 and 4: 25th year, 312th day.
Paragraphs 5 to 9: 26th year, 14th day.
Paragraphs 10 to 16: 26th year, 27th day.
Paragraphs 17: 26th year, 34th day.
Paragraphs 18: 25th year, 275th day.
Paragraphs 19 to 32: 26th year, 104th day.
Paragraphs 33: 26th year, 318th day.
Paragraphs 34 to 50: 26th year, 319th day.
Paragraphs 51 to 107: 23rd to 29th year.
The last set of paragraphs (51 to 107) was incised at a later date than the preceding part of the inscription, to which it refers as previously engraved (paragraph 51).
Part of the gifts, which the king made between his 23rd and 29th year, were taken from the treasures, which he seized after having defeated the Chēra king and the Pāṇḍyas in Malaināḍu1 (paragraphs 34, 51, 52 and 107). A number of gold trumpets were presented to the temple, after he had assumed the titles of Śivapādaśēkhara, ‘the devotee of Śiva,’ and of Rājarāja, ‘the king of kings’ (paragraph 55), and a number of gold flowers, after he had returned from the conquest of Satyāśraya (paragraph 92).
Each of the gifts is stated to have been weighed by ‘the stone called (after) Āḍa-vallāṉ.’ This was evidently a standard weight for gold, or a set of such weights, made of stone and preserved at the shrine of the god Āḍavallāṉ or Āḍavallār, who was also called Dakshiṇa-Mēru-Viṭaṅkar.2
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv02p0i0001.
DHARMA team.
Summary: Vijayarāya-Mahārāya “who witnessed the elephant hunt” (Dēvarāya II ?) —Śaka 1368. The details of the date are given as Akshaya, Tulā, śu. 10, Friday, Aviṭṭam corresponding to A.D. 1446, September 30.
This is a copy of No. 23 of 1905 from Kīḻūr. It states that as a result of (the forcible) collection of kāṇikkai (presents) from the ryots of the Valaṅgai and Iḍaṅgai classes by the officers of state on each change of regime or administra-tion (manvantara) the former became impoverished and ran away from their homes to other kingdoms consequently worship and festivals in temples ceased and the land became infested with disease causing intense mental anguish to the people. This reached the ears of the king who forthwith issued orders through Aṇṇappa-Uḍaiyar prohibiting such extortion of the iṉavari and iḍaṅgai-vari in future and to get his command recorded on stone (throughout the state). As it was left out in some places people petitioned to Nāgarasa-Uḍaiyar to rectify this omission. On receipt of his permission this is stated to have been engraved in this temple also in the presence of the members of the nāḍu (assembly) of Vaḻudilam-paṭṭu-chāvaḍi, the karaṇika, the parivāra and Toṇḍaimānār Kachchiyarāyar.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv22p0i0161.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This is a Sanskrit inscription in early Grantha characters. It gives the genealogy of the family of Koḍumbāḷur Chiefs. The first line is mutilated and hence the name of the original ancestor is not known. He is said to have captured an elephant battalion evidently from some enemy. In his family was born Paravīrajit Vīratuṅga; his son was Atīvīra, the unrivalled (Anupama); his son was Saṅghakṛit to whom was born Nṛipakēsari; his son was Paradurgamarddana, the glorious conqueror of Vātāpi. To him was born Samarābhirāma who killed Chaḷukki in a battle at Adhirājamaṅgala. He married a princess named Anupamā the daughter of the Chōḷa king. His son by this princess was Bhūti who by his prowess in battle obtained the title Vikramakēsari. He is stated to have made the waters of the Kāvēri red with the blood of the Pallava army slain by him. He also conquered Vīra-Pāṇḍya in battle and destroyed one Vañchi-Vēḷ. It is stated that he was living at Koḍumbāḷūr with his two wives Kaṟṟaḷi and Varaguṇā, by the former of whom he had two sons Parāntakavarman and Ādityavarman. This Bhūti Vikramakēsari built three shrines in the name of himself and his two consorts for god Mahēśvara at Koḍumbāḷūr, and presented a maṭha to Mallikārjuna of Madura, a teacher of the Kāḷāmukha sect of Śaivas and eleven villages for feeding 50 ascetics of that sect (every day).
Since this chief Bhūti Vikramakēsari is known from other stone records to be identical with Teṉṉavaṉ Iḷaṅgōvēḷ a feudatory of Chōḷa Āditya I, it is possible that the destruction of the Pallava army claimed by him was in connection with his liege-lord Āditya’s overthrow of Pallava Aparājita in battle and his annexation of the latter’s territory sometime before A.D. 890. In this case Vīra-Pāṇḍya over whom also, Bhūti claims a victory cannot be equated with his namesake who was killed in fight by Āditya II Karikāla (vide An. Rept. for 1908, Part II, para 88), because that event took place more than 70 years later. He should have been a contemporary of Parāntaka Vīra-Nārāyaṇa and probably belonging to a collateral Pāṇḍya line as surmised by Mr. K.V.S. Aiyar (Q.J.M.S. Vol. XLIII, Nos. 3 and 4).
Languages: Sanskrit, Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv23p0i0129.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This is a mutilated inscription of Rājēndra-Chōḷa I with only a part of his historical introduction in good preservation, the rest being lost.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv23p0i0130.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This is an inscription of Jaṭāvarman Vīra Pāṇḍyadēva dated in his 17th year, Siṁha, śu. 10, Thursday, Mūlam, corresponding to A.D. 1269, August 10. He seems to be the same as the ruler whose accession took place in A.D. 1253. The record begins with a short introduction mentioning his victories over Koṅgaṇam (Koṅgu), Vaḍugu (Vaḍugar), Gaṅgai-nāḍu (?) and the Kāvēri and his coronation of heroes and victors at Puliyūr (Chidambaram). It registers the sale of five pieces of land by the Kaikkōḷas and Kaikkōḷa-mudalis of Koḍumbāḷūr to the temple of Tirumudukuṉṟamuḍaiya-Nāyanār of the same village, in lieu of certain sums of money which seem to have been borrowed from the temple by them sometime previously and by their forebears (?). Owing to the damaged state of the record the sense of the inscription in its details is not clear. Mention is made of Poṉ, Paḻan-Śōḻiyan-kāśu and Vīra-Pāṇḍyan-kāśu of which the values seem to have stood in the ratio 110: 670: 1050. Again 150 Paṇam is said to answer to 10505 kāśu and 110 kaḻañju to 12505 kāśu in which the paṇam and kāśu are general terms to be understood specifically according to the prevalent usage.
Koḍumbāḷūr is said to be situated in Uṟattūr-kūṟṟam a division of Koṅāḍu otherwise called Kaḍalaḍaiyād-ilangai-koṇḍa-Śōḻa-vaḷanāḍu.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv23p0i0131.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This belongs to Jaṭāvarman Sundara-Pāṇḍyadēva. This is badly damaged. It seems to register a sale of land to the temple. With this are found two other pieces of an inscription which may not however form part of this record. One of them mentions a certain Pichchaṉ Toṇḍaṉ Vikrama-Pāṇḍya-paṉmaṉ the donor of some land to the temple of Tirumudukuṉṟam-uḍaiya-Nāyaṉār. He figures in No. 136 below of Māṟavarman Kulaśēkhara I.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv23p0i0132.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This is a damaged and incomplete inscription of the [14]th year of Māṟavarman Sundara-Pāṇḍya (I) ‘who was pleased to present the chōḷa Country’. The details of the date are given as Mithuna, śu. 2, Sunday, Pushya which would give the equivalent A.D. 1229, May 27. It registers a gift of land called Māchchāttan-vayal by one Āḻvāṉ Tirukkoḍuṅ kuṉṟamuḍaiyāṉ alias Kulaśēkhara-Brahmārāyaṉ a Śivabrāhmaṇa of the temple of Tiruvattīśura-Nāyanār at Kāraiyūr in Śōḻa-Pāṇḍya-vaḷanāḍu to provide for the renewal of worship and offerings and for burning lamps during the ardhayāma service in the temple of Tirumudukuṉṟam-Uḍaiya-Nāyanār at Koḍumbāḷūr which had been discontinued. Reference is made to a temple of Māśāttīchchuram uḍaiya-Nāyaṉār.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv23p0i0133.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This seems to be an unusual record―in faulty style―purporting to be an inscription dated in the 7th year of a Koḍumbāḷūr chief Vīraśōḻa-Irukkuvēḷ with the Chōḷa title Parakēsarivarman prefixed to his name. It states that on the representation (made to the chief) by Aḻagaṉ Vīraśōḻa-Aṇukkamāl of the uḍankūṭṭam (?), the kaṇmāḷar and some others (not clear), an image of the diety called Akkaśāliśvaram-Uḍai[yār] was consecrated in the temple of Tirumudugaṟam at Koḍumbāḷūr, and provision was made for its daily worship and offerings by means of a gift of a land known as Śēral-ēndal as dēvadāna.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv23p0i0134.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This is a record of the 5th year of Māṟavarman Kulaśēkhara, which states that this kitchen called the Vijayapañjaraṉ-tirumaḍaippaḷḷi is the gift of the Nāṭṭavar of Muduśolkuḍi-nāḍu. Tirumudukuṉṟam is said to be situated in Vaḍa-Kōnāḍu a division of Uṟattūr-Kūṟṟam in Kōnāḍu.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv23p0i0135.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This registers the perpetual lease of the tenancy right over a land known as Iluppaikkuḍi, given by the temple authorities (sthānattār) of Tirumudukuṉṟam-uḍaiya-Nāyaṉār to one Dēvaṉ Tirunelvēli-Uḍaiyār. The land which is said to have been endowed to the temple, by a kaikkōḷa of Koḍumbāḷūr by name Vīraṉ Toṇḍaṉ alias Vikkira[ma*]-Pāṇḍyapanmar, for the conduct of the ardhayāma service, had been left fallow for a long time following a breach and destruction of the tank-bund and consequent spread of wild growth. The lessee now paid 100 paṇam to the temple as parivaṭṭamudal (price of temple honour ?) and undertook to repair the breach, and after clearing the wilderness, to bring the land under cultivation and to measure out 7 kalam, 1 tūṇi and 1 padakku of paddy on every mā of land, whether cultivated with paddy or some other products like turmeric, ginger, betel or sugarcane.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv23p0i0136.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This pillar is stated to be the gift of one Śeṭṭi Kambaṉ alias Jaṉanātha Aṇukkap-Pallavaraiyaṉ. Another inscription evidently engraved on a different pillar gives the name of the donor as Maṅgan Tāmattaṉ alias Kolōttuṅgaśōḻa . . . . . . . . . Both the donors were Kaikkoḷa residents of the place.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv23p0i0137.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This is dated in the 5th year of some king whose name is not given. Perhaps it was Vīra-Pāṇḍya. Mention is made of Rishabhapperumāṉaḍigaḷ (Nandi) in the Tiruppūdīśvaram temple.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv23p0i0138.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This is a mere fragment of an inscription mentioning Uḍaiyār Madhurāṉtakan Śundaraśōḻaṉ. Reference is made to a woman servant of the royal palace by name Kaḷḷichchi Uttama cha . . . . . . . . . and one Pūdi Paṭṭālakaṉ Nakka . . . . . . and also to two classes of smiths (Kottar) of Koḍumbāḷūr.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv23p0i0139.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This is a small inscription in characters of about the 9th century A.D. which states that this (cave) is the gift of one Pūdi Kaḷari alias Amarūṉṟi-Muttaraiyaṉ.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv23p0i0142.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This records the gift of a gold fillet for ornament and three silver vessels for holding the offerings to god Mahādēva (in the temple) at Tiruviśalūr in Śōḻamārttāṇḍa-chaturvēdimaṅgalam a brahmadēya village to the east of Vēmbaṟṟūr in Maṇṇi-nāḍu a subdivision of Rājendraśiṅga-vaḷanāḍu on the north bank (of the Kāvēri). The donor was a sēnāpati (military officer) by name Śōlaimāṇikkam also called Śōlai Naralōkasundaraṉ alias Uttamaśōḻa-Mūvēndavēḷān. Rājēndra-siṁha and Śōḻamārttāṇḍa were surnames borne by the king’s father Rājarāja I and Uttama-Chōḷa was a title of Rājēndra himself. Two different weights are mentioned in the inscription, one called the kuḍiñaikkal and the other the baṇḍārakkal.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv23p0i0001.
Dorotea Operato.
Summary: This is built in at the end. It records the construction of the prākāra (tiruchchuṟṟālayam) and the gōpura (in front) by the members of the Valaṅgai-Vēḷaikkāṟa body-guard regiment of the king; and also the consecration of some deity in a shrine.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv23p0i0341.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: Registers a gift of land by Uyyakkoṇḍāḷśāṉi, wife of Kunikkumpirāṉbhaṭṭaṉ of Rājakēsari-chaturvēdimaṅgalam, a brahmadēya in Nallūr-nāḍu, a subdivision of Nittavinōda-vaḷanāḍu, as tiruviḍaiyāṭṭam to god Aḻagiyamaṇavāḷa-Perumāḷ. The gift was made in the 37th regnal year of the king.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv24p0i0150.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: Fragments. Seem to refer to a gift by purchase, of land by Mūtta Gōvindakramavittaṉ and his brothers to the god. One of the fragments refers to endowment to Purushōttamattu-Emberumāṉ by the Peruṅguṟisabhā of Uttamaśīli-chaturvēdimaṅgalam and another mentions Śrīkaṇṭha-chaturvēdimaṅgalam.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv24p0i0184.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: Records a decision of the members of the Peruṅguṟisabhā of Śrīraṅgam disqualifying persons who were not residents of the village from holding the dēvadāna and other lands from the 5th year onwards of the king’s reign and stipulates a fine of 25 poṉ on the members of the paṇḍāravāriyam and the karaṇattār who violated this decision.
The record is dated in the 4th year and 89th day of the reign of Rājakēsarivarman who may be identified with Āditya I (A.D. 871-907) on palaeographical consideration.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv24p0i0001.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: West base of the verandah in the first prākāra in the Mantrapurīśvara temple.
Tribhº Rājēndrachōḷa: year 12: 1257 A.D.
This inscription may be assigned to the 13th century on palaeographical considerations.
Except the solar month Āḍi of the above regnal year, other details of date are not furnished in the record.
This is an order (ōlai) of Paiyyuḻān Pallavarāyan Vāṇarāyaṉ alias Śōḻiyavaraiyaṉ. It records the grant of oru-mā-mukkāṇi-araikkāṇi-kīḻaraiyēiraṇḍu-mā lands at Nambankuṟuchchi, a hamlet (piḍāgai) of Śākkāṉam alias Kēraḷakulāśaṉich-chaturvēdimaṅgalam as maḍappuṟa-iṟaiyili to a maṭha called Vāṇarāyaṉ-maṭha, located in the street to the north of the tirumaḍaiviḷḍgam of the temple of Tiruvuśāttāṉam-uḍaiya-nāyaṉār. It is stated that the above lands were to be enjoyed as iṟaiyili along with Makkuḻan-kāṇi and the income from taxes (kaḍamai) accrued out of the above. The document was attested by Ādikāram Vāṉavan Pallavaraiyan and by others called mudal-kaṇakku (names of four of these persons are furnished).
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv25p0i0211.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: North wall of the first prākāra of the Pālvaṇṇanāthasvāmi temple.
Chaḍaiyavarmaṉ Tribhº Kōnērin-maikoṇḍāṉ Abhirāma Varatuṅga-rāma Vīrapāṇḍya Śaka 1511: 1588 A.D.
This epigraph commences with a Sanskrit verse invoking Śiva.
The details of date viz., Śaka 1511, regnal year 2, Sarvadhāri, dakshiṇāyana, Dhanu-Ravi 6 Wednesday, ēkādaśi, Svāti-nakshatra corresponding to 1588 A.D., December 4.
It records the grant of Vaṅgaikuḷam in Mallayampaṭṭu in Āriya-nāḍu as kuḍinīṅg-dēvadāṉa to Śeṇbagavaṉap-perumāḷ Irāmīchchuraṉ, who has to expend annually 20 paṇam to meet the expenses of the birth-day celebration of the king on the star of Pūsa falling in the month of Puraṭṭāśi.
An order (ōlai) was issued to this effect by the vāśalttāṉigar to the kaṇakkar (accountant) and drafted in the name of Ādichaṇḍēśvaran.
Languages: Sanskrit, Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv25p0i0272.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: North wall of the first prākāra of the Pālvaṇṇanāthasvāmi temple.
Perumāḷ Parākrama-pāṇḍya Śaka 1469, year 5:
This inscription furnishes the details of date viz., Śaka 1469, year 5, Plavaṅga, Kārttigai, . . . 3, Monday, Tiruvādirai-nakshatra.
It seems to record the assignment of tiruvilāñchiṉai and karuvēlagam, obtained as kāṇiyāṭchai, to Āṇḍukoṇḍunayiṇāṉ Kaḍaiyōgakāttāṉ of Aḷḷikuṉṟa Mārttaṉūr-udaiyāṉ in Vaḍamuṭṭa-nāḍu.
The details of the grant are lost as it is incomplete. The division Vaḍamuṭṭa-nāḍu figures in a record of Āttūr in Tiruchchendur taluk (Cf. S.I.I., Vol. XIV, No. 214).
The king is stated to have been the son of Aḻagaṉ Perumāḷ Parākrama-pāṇḍyadēva, who bears a string of epithets in the present record and also mentioned to have been born on the day of Aśvati (Aśvini)-nakshatra.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv25p0i0277.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: In the same place as above.
Kulōttuṅgachōḷadēva I: Year 49 = 1118-19 A.D.
This inscription records the gift of tax and all other levies such as antarāya from the village Kīḻkkaṇṇamaṅgalam for food offerings to god Tirumalaiuḍaiyanāyanār of Tirukkuṉṟakkuḍi, at the time of the procession of the deity, by Vīraśēkharan alias Adalaiyūr-nāḍāḻvān, who is described as Nāṭṭāṉ.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv26p0i0032.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: In the introductory remarks to No. 58 (page 229 f.) I had occasion to refer to four inscriptions of Rājarājadēva, the lower portions of which are buried underground. Two of these (Nos. 65 and 66),—which, to judge from their beginnings, promised a rich harvest of proper names,—were since temporarily excavated, and impressions of them taken, by my assistants. This led to the discovery of two further inscriptions, which are engraved underneath No. 66, one of Rājēndradēva (No. 67), and one of Vikrama-Chōḷadēva (No. 68). I did not consider it worth while to excavate and copy the whole of Nos. 63 and 64, but shall now publish their first two lines as specimens.
From the published portion of No. 63, we learn that this inscription consists of a list of shepherds who had to supply ghee for temple lamps from the milk of a number of cattle, which had been presented to the temple before the 29th year of the reign of Rājarājadēva by the king himself and by others, or bought from the funds of the temple. To each lamp were allotted 96 ewes,1 or 48 cows, or 16 she-buffaloes. The daily supply for each lamp was one uṛakku of ghee.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv02p0i0063.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: As appears from its 1st paragraph, this inscription is a continuation of No. 63. The published portion of the 2nd paragraph refers to a shepherd who had received 96 ewes,1 viz., 69 ewes given by Rājarājadēva, and 27 ewes purchased for 9 kāśu, in order to supply ghee for a temple lamp.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv02p0i0064.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: The beginning of the first five lines of this inscription is hidden by a flight of steps, which has been constructed in front of the shrine after the time when the inscription was engraved. The record is dated in the cyclic year Kshaya which was current after the expiration of the Śaka year 1368 (A.D. 1446-47), and during the reign of Dēvar[āya II.] (of Vijayanagara). It describes a few gold and silver ornaments which were presented to the temple by a certain Vallabhadēva. This person was probably a military officer of Dēvarāya, as he professes to have made the gift with the object of effecting in return the conquest of the world.
While, in the Chōḷa inscriptions of the Tanjore temple, the weight of ornaments is given in kaṛañju, mañjāḍi and kuṉṟi, the subjoined inscription employs for this purpose the tūkkam of ten paṇa-iḍai. From the table of weights, which is contained in Sir Walter Elliot’s Coins of Southern India, p. 47, and which is based on a Malayāḷam work entitled Kaṇakkusāram, it appears that the tūkkam and paṇa-iḍai of the subjoined inscription must be identical with the kaṛañju and paṇattūkkam (= 2 mañjāḍi) of the metrical system. Although the paṇa-iḍai or paṇattūkkam (=1/10 kaṛañju) is not mentioned in the Tanjore inscriptions of the Chōḷas, it is there presupposed by the fact that the Tamil term mā (1/20) is used to denote ‘one tenth whenever it follows the word mañjāḍi (= 1/2 paṇa-iḍai or paṇattūkkam).1
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv02p0i0071.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: The rock-cut Śaiva shrine at Vallam near Chingleput1 bears two Tamil inscriptions. One of them, which belongs to the 13th century A.D., is engraved on the lower portion of the right door-pillar.2 It records the gift of a lamp in the 14th year of Sakalabhuvanachakravartin Kōpperuñjiṅgadēva3 (i.e., Kō-Perum-Siṁhadēva) to the temple of Vayandīśura (i.e., Vasantēśvara) at Vallam in Valla-nāḍu, (a subdivision) of Kaḷattūr-kōṭṭam.4 The second, very archaic inscription is engraved on the upper portions of both door-pillars and records that the temple was built by Skandasēna, the son of Vasantapriyarāja, who was a vassal of Mahēndrapōtarāja. From the later inscription of Kōpperuñjiṅgadēva, it follows further that Skandasēna called the temple Vasantēśvara after his father Vasanta. Mahēndrapōtarāja, whose vassal Vasanta professes to be, must have been a Pallava king. This is already suggested by the first part of his name, which occurs twice in the list of the Pallavas, as far as it is known (Vol. I, p. 11). The second part of the king’s name, Pōtarāja,5 forms part of Īśvarapōtarāja,6 as the Pallava king Paramēśvaravarman I. is called in a grant of Vikramāditya I. (Vol. I, p. 145), and of Nandipōtarāja,7 which is used as an equivalent of Nandivarman in the Kaśākūḍi plates (No. 73 below, line 90). Finally, the birudas which the king receives in the Vallam cave-inscription, have their parallels in other Pallava inscriptions. With Lalitāṅkura compare Lalita and Nayāṅkura in the Dharmarāja Ratha inscriptions (Vol. I, p. 3). Śatrumalla and Guṇabhara occur also in the two cave-inscriptions on the Trichinopoly rock (Vol. I, p. 29). Though birudas are a somewhat unsafe basis for identification, it may be provisionally assumed that both the Trichinopoly cave-inscriptions of Guṇabhara, alias Śatrumalla, and the Vallam cave-inscription of Mahēndrapōtarāja belong to one of the two Pallava kings called Mahēndravarman, i.e., to the first half of the seventh century of our era.8
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv02p0i0072.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: On the 30th April 1891, Professor Julien Vinson, of Paris, was good enough to send me a reprint1 of his paper Spécimen de Paléographie Tamoule, which contains an analysis of, and extracts from, the subjoined copper-plate inscription. The original plates had been discovered in 1879 at Kaśākūḍi, 4 kilometres from Kāraikkāl (Karikal),2 by M. Jules de la Fon, of Pondicherry. Professor Vinson’s paper, which is based on a tracing prepared by M. de la Fon, convinced me of the importance of the inscription and induced me to apply through Government to His Excellency the Governor of the French Settlements in India for a loan of the original plates. This request was most graciously and promptly complied with. After I had transcribed the plates and prepared impressions of them, they were returned to their present owner.
The Kaśākūḍi copper-plates, eleven in number, are strung on a ring. On this is soldered the royal seal, with the figure of a bull which faces the left and is surmounted by a liṅga. The bull was the crest of the Pallavas,3 while their banner bore the figure of Śiva’s club (khaṭvāṅga).4 The Grantha and Tamil characters of the inscription resemble those of the Kūram plates (Vol. I, No. 151). The major portion of the inscription is in the Sanskrit language (lines 1 to 104). The particulars of the grant are repeated, with considerable additions, in the Tamil language (ll. 104 to 133). The concluding portion of the inscription is again in Sanskrit (ll. 133 to 138), with a short parenthetical note in Tamil (l. 137).
The immediate object of the inscription is to record the grant of a village, made in the 22nd year of the reign (ll. 80 and 105) of the Pallava king Nandivarman (verses 27 and 30, and l. 79). As in other Pallava copper-plate inscriptions, the grant proper is preceded by a panegyrical account of the king’s ancestors, which adds a large number of new details to our knowledge of the Pallava history. After nine benedictory verses, the author names the following mythical ancestors of the Pallava dynasty:—
Brahmā (v. 10). Aṅgiras (11). Bṛihaspati (12). Śaṁyu (13). Bharadvāja (14). Drōṇa (15). Aśvatthāman (16). Pallava (17). Aśōkavarman (19).
This last king can scarcely be considered a historical person, but appears to be a modification of the ancient Maurya king Aśōka. Then follows a passage in prose, which informs us that, after this Aśōkavarman, there ruled a number of other Pallava kings, viz., [S]kandavarman, Kal[i]ndavarman, Kāṇagōpa, Vishṇugōpa, Vīrakū[r]cha, Vīrasiṁha, Siṁhavarman, Vishṇusiṁha and others (l. 48 f.). Some of these names actually occur in the inscriptions of that ancient branch of the Pallavas, whose grants are dated from Palakkada, Daśanapura and Kāñchīpura, viz., Skandavarman, Siṁhavarman, Vishṇugōpavarman,5 and Vīrakōrchavarman.6 The Amarāvatī pillar-inscription (Vol. I, No. 32) mentions two kings named Siṁhavarman. But the order in which these names are enumerated, is completely different in each of the three available sources for the history of the early Pallavas, viz., the Amarāvatī pillar, the early copper-inscriptions, and the prose introduction of the Kaśākūḍi plates. For this reason, and on account of the summary manner in which the early kings are referred to by the author of the Kaśākūḍi inscription, it is a mistake to derive a regular pedigree from the latter, as was done by Professor Vinson (l.c., p. 453); and it must be rather concluded that, at the time of Nandivarman, nothing was known of the predecessors of Siṁhavishṇu, but the names of some of them, and that the order of their succession, and their relation to each other and to the subsequent line of Siṁhavishṇu, were then entirely forgotten.
With verse 20 we enter on historical ground. The list of kings from Siṁhavishṇu to the immediate predecessor of Nandivarman agrees with the Udayēndiram plates of Nandivarman Pallavamalla (No. 74). Siṁhavishṇu appears to have borne the surname Avanisiṁha, and is stated to have defeated the Malaya, Kaḷabhra, Mālava, Chōḷa, Pāṇḍya, Siṁhaḷa and Kēraḷa kings.
His successor Mahēndravarman I. “annihilated his chief enemies at Puḷḷalūra” (v. 21). The ‘chief enemies’ were probably the Chalukyas, who, in their turn, considered the Pallavas their ‘natural enemies.’7 As Puḷḷalūr is the name of a village in the Conjeeveram tālluqa,8 it appears that the Chalukya army had made an inroad into the Pallava dominions, before it was repulsed by Mahēndravarman I.
His son Narasiṁhavarman I. is reported to have conquered Laṅkā, i.e., Ceylon, and to have captured Vātāpi,9 the capital of the Western Chalukyas. The Kūram and Udayēndiram plates supply the name of the conquered Chalukya king, Pulakēśin or Vallabharāja, i.e., Pulikēśin II.10 The conquest of Ceylon to which the Kaśākūḍi plates refer, is confirmed from an unexpected source. From the 47th chapter of the Mahāvaṁsa11 we learn that the Singhalese prince Māṇavamma lived at the court of king Narasīha of India and helped him to crush his enemy, king Vallabha. The grateful Narasīha supplied Māṇavamma twice with an army to invade Ceylon. The second attack was successful. Māṇavamma occupied Ceylon, over which he is supposed to have ruled from A.D. 691 to 726. As both the Pallava inscriptions and the Mahāvaṁsa mention the war with Vallabha and the conquest of Ceylon, the identity of Narasīha and Narasiṁhavarman I. can hardly be doubted. As, however, the latest date of Pulikēśin II. is A.D. 642,12 the accession of Māṇavamma must have taken place about half a century before A.D. 691.13
No details are given about the reign of Narasiṁhavarman’s son Mahēndravarman II. The latter was succeeded by his son Paramēśvarapōtavarman I. who, as we know from the Kūram and Udayēndiram plates, defeated the Western Chalukya king Vikramāditya I. at Peruvaḷanallūr. The Kaśākūḍi plates do not contain any historical information about him, nor about his son Narasiṁhavarman II. and his grandson Paramēśvarapōtavarman II.
According to the Udayēndiram plates, the next king, Nandivarman, was the son of Paramēśvaravarman II. The Kaśākūḍi plates contain an entirely different account of Nandivarman’s parentage. In line 72, he professes to be “engaged in ruling the kingdom of Paramēśvarapōtarāja;” and in verse 27, he is said to be ruling, at the time of the inscription, the kingdom of Paramēśvarapōtavarman II., i.e., to have succeeded or supplanted the latter on the throne, and to have been “chosen by the subjects.” This plebiscite may have taken place after the death of the legitimate king; or, more probably, Nandivarman may have been an usurper who ousted and destroyed him and his family. At any rate, he was a remote kinsman of his predecessor. For, he was the son of Hiraṇya (verses 9 and 30) by Rōhiṇī and belonged to the branch (varga) of Bhīma (verse 30). According to verse 28, this branch of Bhīma took its origin from Bhīmavarman, who was the younger brother of Siṁhavishṇu. The names of three princes who intervened between Bhīmavarman and Hiraṇya, are recorded in the same verse. The name Hiraṇyavarma-Mahārāja occurs several times in a much obliterated inscription of the Vaikuṇṭha-Perumāḷ temple at Kānchīpuram. At the beginning of this inscription, Paramēśvarappōttaraiyar of the Pallava-vaṁśa is mentioned as deceased (svargastha). It is therefore not improbable that the inscription recorded the accession of Hiraṇyavarman or of his son Nandivarman after the death of Paramēśvarapōtavarman II. The latter may have been the founder of the Vaikuṇṭha-Perumāḷ temple, which is called Paramēśvara-Vishṇugṛiha, i.e., ‘the Vishṇu temple of Paramēśvara,’ in another inscription of the Vaikuṇṭha-Perumāḷ temple.14 With the addition of the new branch, the list of the later Pallavas stands as follows:—
Unnamed ancestor.[C1]1. Siṁhavishṇu. [C1]2. Mahēndravarman I. [C2]Bhīmavarman. [C1]3. Narasiṁhavarman I. [C2]Buddhavarman. [C1]4. Mahēndravarman II. [C2]Ādityavarman. [C1]5. Paramēśvarapōtavarman or Paramēśvaravarman I. [C2]Gōvindavarman. [C1]6. Narasiṁhavarman II. [C2]Hiraṇya. [C1]7. Paramēśvarapōtavarman or Paramēśvaravarman II. [C2]8. Nandivarman.
Other forms of the name Nandivarman are Nandipōtarāja (l. 90) and simply Nandin (l. 88). The form Nandipōtavarman occurs in the Vakkalēri plates,15 which refer to the defeat of the Pallava king by the Western Chalukya king Vikramāditya II., and the form Nandippōttaraiyar in an inscription of his 18th year in the Ulagaḷanda-Perumāḷ temple at Kāñchīpuram.16 He bore the sovereign titles Mahārāja and Rājādhirāja-paramēśvara and the birudas Kshatriyamalla, Pallavamalla (l. 78), and Śrīdhara (verse 29). According to verse 30, he was a devotee of Vishṇu. At the request of his prime-minister (l. 89), Brahmaśrīrāja (l. 91) or Brahmayuvarāja (ll. 103 and 106), the king gave the village of Koḍukoḷḷi (ll. 99, 105 f.) to the Brāhmaṇa Jyēshṭhapāda-Sōmayājin (l. 93) or (in Tamil) Śēṭṭiṟeṅga-Sōmayājin (l. 108 f.), who belonged to the Bharadvāja (l. 94) or Bhāradvāja (l. 108) gōtra, followed the Chhandōgasūtra (ll. 94 and 108), and resided at Pūniya (l. 95) or Pūni (l. 108), a village in the Toṇḍāka-rāshṭra (l. 95). The village of Koḍukoḷḷi, on becoming a brahmadēya, received the new name Ēkadhīramaṅgalam (l. 100). It belonged to Ūṟṟukkāṭṭu-kōṭṭam (l. 105) or (in Sanskrit) Undivanakōshṭhaka (l. 98), a subdivision of Toṇḍāka-rāshṭra, and was bounded in the east and south by Pālaiyūr, in the west by Maṇaṟpākkam and Koḷḷipākkam, and in the north by Veḷimānallūr (ll. 98 f. and 111 ff.). Connected with the gift of the village was the right to dig channels from the Śēyāṟu or (in Sanskrit) Dūrasarit, the Veḥkā or Vēgavatī, and the tank of Tīraiyaṉ or Tīralaya (ll. 101 f. and 115 ff.).
Of these geographical names, the following can be identified. Toṇḍāka-rāshṭra is,—like Toṇḍīra-maṇḍala, Tuṇḍīra-maṇḍala and Tuṇḍāka-vishaya,17—a Sanskritised form of the Tamil term Toṇḍai-maṇḍalam. One of the 24 ancient divisions (kōṭṭam) of the latter was Ūṟṟukkāṭṭu-kōṭṭam, which owed its name to Ūṟṟukkāḍu, a village in the present Conjeeveram tālluqa.18 This kōṭṭam was divided into four subdivisions (nāḍu), one of which was Pālaiyūr-nāḍu.19 The head-village of this subdivision, Pālaiyūr, appears to be identical with the village of Pālaiyūr, which formed the south-eastern boundary of the granted village, and perhaps with the modern Pālūr at the north-western extremity of the Chingleput tālluqa.20 The western boundary of the granted village, Maṇaṟpākkam, would then be represented by the modern Mēlamaṇappākkam.21 For the granted village, Koḍukoḷḷi, itself and for the two remaining villages which formed its boundaries, no equivalents are found on the maps at my disposal. The village at which the donee resided, Pūni, may be the modern Pūṇḍi, which belongs to the Conjeeveram tālluqa,22 but is in close proximity of Pālūr and Mēlamaṇappākkam in the Chingleput tālluqa. The proposed identification of these three villages is made more probable by the reference, made in the Kaśākūḍi plates, to two rivers near which the granted village of Koḍukoḷḷi was situated. Of these, the Vēgavatī or Veḥkā passes Conjeeveram and falls into the Pālāṟu near Villivalam.23 The Śēyāṟu forms the southern boundary of the modern Conjeeveram tālluqa and joins the Pālāṟu opposite Mēlamaṇappākkam, which I have identified with Maṇaṟpākkam, the western boundary of Koḍukoḷḷi.
The executor (ājñapti) of the grant was Ghōraśarman (ll. 103 and 106), and the author of the Sanskrit portion, which, as in the Kūram plates (l. 89) and the Udayēndiram plates (ll. 101 and 105), is called a praśasti or eulogy, was a certain Trivikrama (verse 31). To the Sanskrit portion is affixed a Tamil endorsement (l. 104 f.), which directs the inhabitants of Ūṟṟukkāṭṭu-kōṭṭam to execute the order of the king. The subsequent Tamil passage (l. 105 ff.) records that, on receipt of the royal order, the representatives of Ūṟṟukkāṭṭu-kōṭṭam marked the boundaries of the granted village under the guidance of their headman, and formally assigned all rights to the donee. Another Tamil sentence (l. 132 f.) states that the grant was executed in the presence of the local authorities (?), the ministers and the secretaries.
Then follow, in Sanskrit, three imprecatory verses (l. 133 ff.) and the statement that the document was written by His Majesty’s great treasurer (l. 136). The inscription ends with a docket in Tamil (l. 137) and a few auspicious Sanskrit words.
Languages: Sanskrit, Source Language (other), Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv02p0i0073.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This inscription has been already published by the Rev. T.Foulkes in the Indian Antiquary (Vol. VIII, p. 273 ff.) and in the Manual of the Salem District (Vol. II, p. 355 ff.). The original plates, together with the originals of four other copper-plate inscriptions1 which were also edited by Mr. Foulkes, are preserved at Udayēndiram,2 a village at the southwestern extremity of the Guḍiyātam tālluqa of the North Arcot district, and were kindly borrowed for me from their present owner by Mr. F.A.Nicholson, I.C.S., Acting Collector of North Arcot. The present whereabouts of two other copper-plate inscriptions from Udayēndiram,3 of which Mr. Foulkes obtained transcripts in the Telugu character, I was unable to ascertain. According to Mr. Foulkes, these two inscriptions formed part of a find of “five, or, by another account, seven sets of copper-plate inscriptions,” which was made in 1850 in a subterranean chamber in the Brāhmaṇa street at Udayēndiram. Mr. Foulkes then believed that the remaining three or five sets of the find were lost. As, however, Mr. Foulkes’ other grants (I, II, III, IV and V) are now preserved at Udayēndiram and are five in number, I think that they must be identical with the apparently missing five of the seven sets discovered at Udayēndiram in 1850.
The copper-plates which bear the subjoined inscription, are five in number. When they reached my hands, they were strung on a ring, which is cut and bears a circular seal. This contains, in high relief, on a counter-sunk surface, a recumbent bull, which faces the proper right and is placed on a pedestal between two lamps. Over the bull is a seated figure on a pedestal, and between two symbols which I cannot make out. The diameter of the seal is 3(1/4) inches, and that of the ring 4(1/2) to 4(7/8) inches. The ring is about (3/8) inch thick. A comparison of this description of the ring and seal with that given by Mr. Foulkes in the first paragraph of his edition of the plates, suggests that, when he examined the plates, they were accompanied by a different ring and seal. Besides, the seal which is now attached to the plates, does not resemble the seals of other Pallava grants, but is closely allied to the seal of the Udayēndiram plates of the Bāṇa king Vikramāditya II. (Mr. Foulkes’ No. V) and of the Gaṅga-Bāṇa king Pṛithivīpati II. Hastimalla (No. 76 below).4 I therefore believe that it may have originally belonged to one of the two Udayēndiram grants of the Bāṇa dynasty, which are now missing (Mr. Foulkes’ grants B and C), and that the original seal-ring of the Pallava plates may have been attached by mistake to one of these two grants and lost along with the latter.
The inscription consists of two distinct portions,—a grant of the Pallava king Nandivarman Pallavamalla in the Sanskrit language and the Grantha character (ll. 1 to 105), and a short inscription of the time of the Chōḷa king Madirai-koṇḍa Kō-Parakēsarivarman in the Tamil language and character (ll. 105 to 109), which, however, looks as if it had been written by the same hand as the first or Pallava part of the inscription. Further, the Grantha and Tamil alphabet of both portions of the inscription is considerably more modern than that of other Pallava grants, and even than that of two other copper-plate inscriptions of Madirai-koṇḍa Kō-Parakēsarivarman.5 Consequently, the plates are either a forgery, or they are a copy, made at a later date, of two inscriptions, one of Nandivarman Pallavamalla, and one Madirai-koṇḍa Kō-Parakēsarivarman, the originals of which are not within our reach.
The Sanskrit portion of the inscription records that, in the twenty-first year of his reign (l. 38), the Pallava king Nandivarman (v. 4, ll. 36 f. and 37 f.), surnamed Pallavamalla (ll. 36, 46 and 47), granted a village to one hundred and eight Brāhmaṇas (l. 64 f.). This grant was made at the request of one of his military officers or vassals, named Udayachandra (v. 1 and l. 61), who belonged to the race of Pūchān (v. 2, l. 45 f. and v. 7), that had been in the hereditary service of the Pallava race, and who resided at the city of Vilvala (v. 2 and l. 44) on the river Vēgavatī (l. 41). This river passes Conjeeveram, and falls into the Pālāṟu near the village of Villivalam,6 which accordingly must be the Tamil original of Vilvala, the Sanskrit name of the capital of Udayachandra. The three opening verses refer to the god Sadāśiva, the chief Udayachandra, and the race of the Pallavas, respectively. Then follows, in prose, a genealogy of the reigning Pallava king, the mythical portion of which (l. 8 ff.) contains the following names:— Brahmā. Aṅgiras. Bṛihaspati. Śaṁyu. Bharadvāja. Drōṇa. Aśvatthāman. Pallava.
The list of the historical descendants of Pallava from Siṁhavishṇu to Paramēśvaravarman II. (l. 11 ff.) need not be repeated here, because it agrees with the list in the Kaśākūḍi plates (p. 344), and because the battles which Narasiṁhavarman I. and Paramēśvaravarman I. are reported to have won,7 were noticed in the introduction to the Kūram plates (Vol. I, p. 145). A long prose passage (l. 19 ff.) opens with the words: “The son of this Paramēśvaravarman (II.) (was);” is interrupted by verses 4 to 6, which refer to the Pallava king Nandivarman; and appears to be taken up again by the words: “His son was Nandivarman Pallavamalla” (l. 36 f.). Mr. Foulkes concludes from this, that there were two successive Pallava kings of the name Nandivarman, the second of whom was the son of the first and bore the distinctive surname Pallavamalla.8 I do not think it probable that verses 4 to 6 are to be considered as forming one sentence with the first prose passage (l. 19 ff.), but would prefer to treat these verses as a parenthesis, and the second prose passage (l. 36 f.) as the end of the same sentence which begins with the first prose passage. In this way we obtain only one Pallava king named Nandivarman, who bore the surname Pallavamalla and was the son of Paramēśvaravarman II. This statement is at variance with the Kaśākūḍi plates, according to which Nandivarman Pallavamalla was not the son of his predecessor, but belonged to an entirely different branch of the Pallavas. Here is another point which might induce us to stamp the Udayēndiram plates as a forgery. For, it is difficult to understand how one and the same king could call himself the son of his predecessor in an inscription of his 21st year, and the son of somebody else in an inscription of his 22nd year. Two explanations might, however, be attempted. Nandivarman may have thought it political to give himself out for the adopted son of his predecessor; or it may be assumed that, through mere carelessness, the scribe who drafted the inscription, used the word putra, ‘son’ (ll. 19 and 37), while he wanted to represent Nandivarman only as a successor, and not as the son, of Paramēśvaravarman II.
The most interesting portion of the inscription is the account of the services which Udayachandra rendered to his royal master. When Pallavamalla was besieged in Nandipura by the Dramiḷa princes, Udayachandra came to his rescue and killed with his own hand the Pallava king Chitramāya and others (l. 46 ff.). The name Chitramāya sounds more like a biruda than a real name. Thus the ancient Pallava king Narasiṁha had the biruda Amēyamāya,9 and Rājasiṁha that of Māyāchāra.10 It is not improbable that the Dramiḷa princes whose leader was Chitramāya, were the relations and followers of Nandivarman’s predecessor Paramēśvaravarman II. and that they had to be overcome by force, before Nandivarman could establish himself on the throne. Further, Udayachandra is said to have bestowed the kingdom many times on Nandivarman by his victories at Nimba[vana], Chūtavana, Śaṁkaragrāma, Nellūr, Nelvēli, Śūṟāvaṛundūr, etc. (l. 48 ff.). Of these localities, Nellūr is the head-quarter station of the present Nellore district. Another of them, Nelvēli, is mentioned a second time immediately after, as the place near which Udayachandra killed the Śabara king Udayana (l. 52). The Śabaras are generally identified with the modern Sauras, a hill-tribe in the Gañjām and Vizagapatam districts. As, however, the different names of savage tribes are often treated as synonyms by Sanskrit writers, and as the Tamil name Nelvēli cannot possibly be located in the Telugu districts, it may be that the author of the inscription is referring to one of the hill-tribes of the Tamil country, and that Nelvēli is meant for the modern Tinnevelly.11 An additional argument in favour of this view is that, immediately after the description of the war with the Śabaras, the author refers to Udayachandra’s achievements “in the Northern region also.” He there pursued and defeated the Nishāda chief Pṛithivivyāghra, who was performing an Aśvamēdha, and drove him out of the district of Vishṇurāja, which he subjected to the Pallava king (l. 55 ff.). Nishāda is, like Śabara, one of the words by which Sanskrit writers designate savage tribes. The district of Vishṇurāja, which was situated to the north of the Pallava country, can be identified with certainty. As Nandivarman was a contemporary of the Western Chalukya king Vikramāditya II. who reigned from A.D. 733-34 to 746-47,12 he was also a contemporary of the Eastern Chalukya king Vishṇuvardhana III. whose reign is placed by Dr. Fleet between A.D. 709 and 746.13 He is evidently the Vishṇurāja of the Udayēndiram plates,14 and his district (vishaya) is the country of Vēṅgī, over which the Eastern Chalukyas ruled. The last two items in the list of Udayachandra’s deeds are, that he destroyed the fort of Kāḷidurga,15 and that he defeated the Pāṇḍya army at the village of Maṇṇaikuḍi (l. 59 ff.).
The grant which was made by Nandivarman Pallavamalla at the request of Udayachandra, consisted of the village of Kumāramaṅgala-Veḷḷaṭṭūr, which belonged to the district called Paśchimāśrayanadī-vishaya, and of two water-levers (jala-yantra) in the neighbouring village of Koṟṟagrāma, which appear to have been added in order to supply the former village with means of irrigation. As in the case of other grants, the original name of the village was changed into Udayachandramaṅgalam in commemoration of Udayachandra, at whose instance the donation was made (l. 62 ff.). The description of the boundaries of Udayachandramaṅgalam is given in great detail (l. 65 ff.). Among the boundaries we find, in the east, a small river; in the south, the temple of Koṟṟagrāma, the same village, a portion of which had been included in the granted village; in the north, the village of Kāñchidvāra, which, in its Tamil form Kāñchivāyil, is referred to in line 107 of the present inscription, and in another copper-plate grant from Udayēndiram;16 and in the north-east, the river Kshīranadī, the Tamil name of which is Pālāṟu. As the modern village of Udayēndiram is situated on the Pālāṟu river; as the original of the present inscription is preserved, and was most probably discovered, at Udayēndiram; and as the Tamil name Udayēndiram bears a close resemblance to the Sanskrit name Udayachandramaṅgalam, and still more so to the forms Udayēnduchaturvēdimaṅgalam and Udayēndumaṅgalam, which occur in two other Udayēndiram grants,17—there is no doubt that Mr. Le Fanu is correct in identifying the granted village of Udayachandramaṅgalam with the modern Udayēndiram.18 This village is now situated on the northern bank of the Pālāṟu, while Udayachandramaṅgalam is said to have been bounded by the Kshīranadī on the north-east, and by an unnamed small river on the east. It must be therefore assumed that either, as Mr. Le Fanu suggests, the Pālāṟu has changed its bed, or that the name Udayēndiram has travelled across the river in the course of the past eleven centuries. Paśchim-āśrayanadī-vishaya, the name of the district to which the granted village belonged, is a literal Sanskrit translation of the Tamil territorial term Mēl-Aḍaiyāṟu-nāḍu, which, according to another Udayēndiram grant (No. 76 below), was a subdivision of the district of Paḍuvūr-kōṭṭam.
The remainder of the prose portion enumerates the Brāhmaṇa donees (l. 75 ff.), who, according to line 64, were one hundred and eight in number. The actual number of the donees is, however, sixty-three, and that of the shares one hundred and thirty-three. This discrepancy is a third point which suggests that the inscription may be a forgery.
Of the two concluding verses, the first (v. 7) refers to the race of Pūchān, and the second (v. 8) informs us that the inscription,—which, like the Kūram and Kaśākūḍi inscriptions,19 is styled a eulogy (praśasti, ll. 101 and 105),—was composed by the poet Paramēśvara, who also received one of the shares of the granted village (l. 101 f.).
The Tamil endorsement (l. 105 ff.) is dated in the 26th year of the reign of Madiraikoṇḍa Kō-Parakēsarivarman, i.e., of the Chōḷa king Parāntaka I.,20 and records that the villagers of Udayachandramaṅgalam agreed with those of the neighbouring village of Kāñchivāyil,21 which was also called Igaṉmaṟaimaṅgalam, to form one village of the two. Another copy of the Tamil endorsement has been added on the first, originally blank side of the first plate of another Udayēndiram grant.22
Languages: Sanskrit, Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv02p0i0074.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This short inscription is engraved on a pillar in the south-east corner of the veranda which surrounds the shrine of the Ujjīvanātha temple at Uyyakkoṇḍāṉ-Tirumalai, a village 3 miles west of Trichinopoly. It records the gift of a perpetual lamp in the 34th year of the reign of Madirai-koṇḍa Kō-Parakēsarivarman, i.e., of the Chōḷa king Parāntaka I.1 The donor was Pirāntakaṉ-Mādēvaḍigaḷār, a queen of Pirāntakaṉ-Kaṇḍarādittadēvar. The only king with a similar name, of whom we know, is Gaṇḍarādityavarman, the second son of Parāntaka I.2 As the inscription belongs to the time of Parāntaka I. himself, and as it prefixes the word Pirāntakaṉ to the name of Kaṇḍarādittadēvar,3 it is evident that Gaṇḍarādityavarman, the son of Parāntaka I., is actually meant here. The name Parāntaka also forms the first member of the name of the queen of Kaṇḍarādittadēvar; Pirāntakaṉ-Mādēv-aḍigaḷār probably means ‘the devotee (of the temple) of Mahādēva, (founded by) Parāntaka (I.).’
The hitberto published inscriptions of Parāntaka I. are dated in the 13th,4 15th,5 24th6 and 26th7 years of his reign. The latest sure date hitherto found is the 40th year in an inscription of the Pañchanadēśvara temple at Tiruvaiyāṟu.8
The large Leyden grant (l. 48 ff.) states that Gaṇḍarādityavarman, the second son of Parāntaka I., “founded, for the sake (of bliss) in another (world), a large village, (called) by his own name, in the country on the northern bank of Kavēra’s daughter (i.e., the Kāvērī river).” This village appears to be identical with Gaṇḍarāditya-chaturvēdimaṅgalam, which is mentioned in several Tanjore inscriptions9 as belonging to a district on the northern bank (of the Kāvērī), and with the modern Kaṇḍarādityam in the Uḍaiyārpāḷaiyam tālluqa.10 The fifth of the nine Śaiva hymns known as Tiruviśaippā was composed by Kaṇḍarādittaṉ, who calls himself ‘king of the people of Tañjai,’ i.e., Tanjore, and must be accordingly identified with the Chōḷa king Gaṇḍarādityavarman.11 The carpenter Kaṇḍarāditta-Perundachchaṉ in No. 66, paragraph 505, is apparently named after Gaṇḍarādityavarman, the grand-uncle of the then reigning king Rājarājadēva.
According to the subjoined inscription, the ancient name of Uyyakkoṇḍāṉ-Tirumalai was Nandipanmamaṅgalam, which suggests that the place may have been founded by one of the Pallava kings named Nandivarman. The temple was called Tirukkaṟkuḍi-Paramēśvara. This enables us to identify it with Kaṟkuḍi, a shrine which is referred to in the Periyapurāṇam as situated in the Chōḷa country to the south of the Kāvērī river.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv02p0i0075.