Texts

Emmanuel Francis.

Summary: The officer Śiṟṟiṅgaṇuḍaiyāṉ Parāntaka Mūvēndavēḷāṉ who has been mentioned in the previous records (Nos. 200 and 202) is stated to have enquired into the temple affairs and to have enhanced the scale of offerings from the unpaid balance of paddy collected from the assembly of Tiraimūr which was a dēvadāna village of the temple. The record belongs to the 4th year and the 170th day of the reign of Parakēsarivarman who took the head of the Pāṇḍya king.

As shown in the Madras Epigraphical Report for 1916, page 118, paragraph 15, the days given after the regnal year of the king have to be taken as those that expired after the completion of that year.

Language: Tamil.

Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).

DHARMA_INSSIIv03p0i0203.

Emmanuel Francis.

Summary: This is dated in the 5th year of Parakēsarivarman who took the head of the Pāṇḍya king and records a gift of gold by a female-servant of the palace, who was living in the quarter of Tañjāvūr called Paḻaiya-vēḷam, for feeding a śivayōgin in the temple of Tirukkīḻ-kōṭṭam in Tirukkuḍamūkkil. The names Tirukkuḍamūkkil and Tirukkīḻ-kōṭṭam occur in the Dēvāram and refer respectively to Kumbakōṇam and the Nāgēśvara temple. Śivayōgin is a technical term and is explained in a recent commentary on the Kriyākramadyōtikā as the name of a Śaiva worshipper who “at the approach of death bathes his body in ashes, utters certain Śaiva mantras and worships the liṅga on his chest.”

Language: Tamil.

Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).

DHARMA_INSSIIv03p0i0204.

Emmanuel Francis.

Summary: These are five copper-plates belonging to the Pārijātavanēśvara temple at Tirukkaḷar, a village ten miles south-east of Mannārguḍi in the Tanjore district¹. A short notice of these appeared in Dr. Hultzsch’s Annual Report on Epigraphy for 1902—03, paragraph 17. The report also contains a list of 23 stone inscriptions which were copied from the same temple.² These five copper-plates, strung on a copper-ring of 5" diameter, have flat rims, measure 1’(7/8)" x 5(1/2)" each, weigh together 566 tolas and have ring-holes bored in the middle of the left margin about an inch from the edge. They contain in them five complete inscriptions of different Chōḷa kings. The first of them, which is also the earliest, is a record of Parakēsarivarman Rājēndra-Chōḷa I who ascended the Chōḷa throne in A.D. 1012. It begins with the king’s usual historical introduction commencing with the words tiru maṉṉi vaḷara, enumerates his conquests up to the capture of Kaḍāram, is dated in the 18th year of his reign and registers the extent of the dēvadāna lands belong-ing to the temple of Mahādēva at Tirukkaḷar which is said to be a village in Puṟaṅgarambai-nāḍu, a subdivision of Arumoḻidēva-vaḷanāḍu.

Compared with the inscription of this king found at Tirumalai³, dated in the 13th year of reign and his Tanjore epigraph⁴, dated in the 19th year of reign, the present inscription furnishes a few differences in reading which are noticed in foot-notes.

The identification of all the place names occurring in the historical introduction has been made by Professor Hultzsch⁵, and it remains to note here only a few facts in this connection. Iḍaituṟai-nāḍu which has been taken to be Yeḍatore, a small village in the Mysore district by Mr. Rice, has since been shown by Dr. Fleet to be identical with the territorial division Eḍedoṟe, two thousand, a tract of country lying between the rivers Kṛishṇā on the north and Tuṅgabhadrā on the south, comprising a large part of the present Raichur district⁶. The Kanyākumāri inscription of Vīrarājēndra shows that Maṇṇaikaḍakkam is not to be identified with Maṇṇe in the Nelamaṅgala taluk of the Bangalore district but is the same as Mānyakhēṭa, which Rājēndra-Chōḷa is said to have made a playground for his armies⁷. Chakkara-kōṭṭam has been satisfactorily identified by Rai Bahadur Hira Lal with Chitrakūṭa or ºkōṭa, eight miles from Rājapura in the Bastar State: he has also adduced epigraphical evidence to show that its king was really Dhārāvarsha in A.D. 1111⁸, as stated in the epigraphs of Kulōttuṅga I. Dakshiṇa-Lāḍam has been taken to be Dakashiṇa-Virāṭa or Southern Berars; but it looks likely that it is identical with Dakshiṇa-Rāḍha in Bengal⁹. Śrī-Vijaya appears under the form Śrī-Vishaya in a Kaṇḍiyūr inscription¹⁰ of the same king; and the large Leyden grant states that Māravijayōt-tuṅgavarman was the overlord of this territory¹¹. This has been taken to be the same as San-fotsai of the Chinese annals and has been identified with Palembang, a residency of Sumatra¹².

Language: Tamil.

Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).

DHARMA_INSSIIv03p0i0207.

Emmanuel Francis.

Summary: This inscription in six lines is engraved on the second plate of the Tirukkaḷar set. It is dated in the 31st year of the reign of the Chōḷa king Rājakēsarivarman Rājādhirāja I and registers an arrangement made, by a certain Tirumaṇappichchaṉ, who bore the double surname Araiyaṉ Nāgaraiyaṉ and Mahīpālakulakālappēraraiyaṉ, whereby one brahmin had to perform worship in the temple at Tirukkaḷar in addition to another who was doing that service till then. From the short historical introduction which states that the king with the help of his army took the head of Vīra-Pāṇḍya, Śālai of the Chēra king and Ilaṅgai, it is clear that “Śālai is an important place in the Chēra dominions and not a feeding house” as the late Mr. T.A.Gopinatha Rao had taken to be.¹

Language: Tamil.

Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).

DHARMA_INSSIIv03p0i0208.

Emmanuel Francis.

Summary: This inscription in 19 lines is engraved on the third plate of the Tirukkaḷar set. It is dated in the twenty-eighth year of the reign of Tribhuvanachakravartin Kulōttuṅga-Chōḷadēva without any distinguishing epithet or historical introduc-tion. In the absence of these, though it is not generally possible to say to which of the three kings who bore that name this record must be attributed, yet it appears to be a record of Kulōttuṅga-Chōḷa I, since it is stated in the fourth inscription in this set in referring to this record that the king abolished tolls—which is generally a feat attributed to Kulōttuṅga I. It registers a gift of paddy made by a certain Śivaṉ Tillaināyakaṉ alias Śiṟuttoṇḍanambi of Taṇṇīrkuṉṟam in Neṉmali-nāḍu to the temple of Mahādēva at Tirukkaḷar in Puṟaṅgarambai-nāḍu which was a sub-division of Rājēndraśōḻa-vaḷanāḍu for the purpose of taking in proces-sion Aravābharaṇadēva, for offerings to Piḷḷaiyār and the god in the Mūlaṭṭānam and for feeding devotees on the days of the new-moon.

Taṇṇīrkuṉṟam, to which the donor belonged, is a village 7 miles to the east of Maṉṉārguḍi in the Tanjore District. The modern village of Nemmeli in the same Taluk, must have been the principal place in the division Neṉmali-nāḍu in which Taṇṇīrkuṉṟam is said to have been situated.

Language: Tamil.

Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).

DHARMA_INSSIIv03p0i0209.

Emmanuel Francis.

Summary: This inscription refers itself to the time of Rājakēsarivarman, alias Vīrarājēndradēva (I.) (line 11), and records a royal grant which was to take effect “from the year which followed after the third year,”¹ i.e. from the fourth year, of the king’s reign. It opens with a panegyrical account of the donor, which resembles the introductions of four other inscriptions of his, viz.—

• 1. Tv. = an inscription of the second year in the Śvētāraṇyēśvara temple at Tiruveṇkāḍu in the Tanjore district (No. 113 of 1896).

• 2. Tk. = an incomplete and undated inscription in the Jalanāthēśvara temple at Takkōlam in the North Arcot district (No. 19 of 1897).²

• 3. M. = an inscription of the fifth year in the Rājagōpāla-Perumāḷ temple at Maṇimaṅgalam in the Chingleput district (No. 2 of 1892).

• 4. G. = a much damaged inscription of the fifth year in the Bṛihadīśvara temple at Gaṅgaikoṇḍa-Śōḻapuram in the Trichinopoly district (No. 82 of 1892).

The historical introductions of these four inscriptions have been compared with the text of the subjoined inscription, and a selection of their various readings is given in the footnotes.

The period of the reign of Rājakēsarivarman, alias Vīrarājēndradēva I., can be approximately fixed in the following manner. According to his inscriptions, he defeated Āhavamalla and his two sons, Vikkalaṉ and Śiṅgaṇaṉ, at Kūḍalśaṅgamam.³ This battle is mentioned in the Kaliṅgattu-Paraṇi (viii. 29) and in the Vikkirama-Śōḻaṉ-Ulā.⁴ In these two poems the victor at Kūḍalśaṅgamam is placed after the Chōḷa kings Rājarāja I. (Kaliṅgattu-Paraṇi, viii. 24, and Ind. Ant. Vol. XXII. page 142, note 3), Rājēndra-Chōḷa I. (viii. 25, and l.c. note 4), Rājādhirāja (viii. 26, and l.c. note 5), Parakēsarivarman, alias Rājēndradēva (viii. 27, and l.c. No. VII.),⁵ and a king who has not yet been identified (viii. 28, and l.c. No. VIII.). After the victor of Kūḍalśaṅgamam, the Vikkirama-Śōḻaṉ-Ulā places another king, of whom no particulars are given (l.c. No. X.), Kulōttuṅga-Chōḷa I. (l.c. note 7), and Vikrama-Chōḷa (l.c. note 8).⁶ Now, Professor Kielhorn’s astronomical calculations have definitely established the two facts that Rājādhirāja reigned from A.D. 1018 to about 1050, and that Kulōttuṅga-Chōḷa I. was crowned in A.D. 1070.⁷ Consequently, the victor at Koppam (Parakēsarivarman, alias Rājēndradēva) and the victor over the Kuntaḷas⁸ at Kūḍalśaṅgamam (Rājakēsarivarman, alias Vīrarājēndradēva I.) must have reigned between A.D. 1050 and 1070. Further, as I have stated before,⁹ Āhavamalla and his two sons, Vikkalaṉ and Śiṅgaṇaṉ, who were the opponents of the three Chōḷa kings Rājēndra, Vīrarājēndra I. and Kulōttuṅga I., have to be identified 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 Jayasiṁha III. (A.D. 1064 and 1081-82).¹⁰

Kūḍalśaṅgamam, the site of Vīrarājēndra’s victory over the Chālukyas, has been located by Mr. V.Kanakasabhai Pillai at the junction of the Tuṅgabhadrā and Kṛishṇā.¹¹ But both kūḍal and saṁgama mean ‘junction’ and might refer to the confluence of any two rivers, e.g. to Kūḍali at the junction of the Tuṅgā and Bhadrā.¹² The battle of Kūḍalśaṅgamam was the third occasion¹³ on which Vīrarājēndra I. professes to have defeated the Chālukyas. He had already before driven Vikkalaṉ from Gaṅga-pāḍi over the Tuṅgabhadrā (l. 3 f.), and on a second occasion he had defeated an army which his enemy had sent into Vēṅgai-nāḍu under the Mahādaṇḍanāyaka Chāmuṇḍarāja. The latter was killed and his daughter Nāgalai, who was the queen of Irugayaṉ, mutilated (l. 4 f.). Chāmuṇḍarāja is probably identical with the Mahāmaṇḍalēśvara Chāvuṇḍarāya of Banavāsi, who is mentioned by Dr. Fleet¹⁴ as a feudatory of Sōmēśvara I. with the dates A.D. 1045-46 and 1062-63. Two other chiefs whose names occur in the account of the battle of Kūḍalśaṅgamam,—though the context does not show on which side they were fighting,—Kēśava-Daṇḍanāyaka and Mārayaṉ (l. 6), are perhaps identical with two other feudatories of the Chālukyas, the Daṇḍanāyaka Kēśavādityadēva (l.c. p. 443) and Mārasiṁha (ibid. p. 439).

The whole Chālukya camp fell into the hands of Vīrarājēndra I., including the wives of the enemy, the boar-banner, and the female elephant Pushpaka (l. 8 f.). In the concluding portion of the introduction (l. 9 f.), the king claims to have killed the king of Pottappi,¹⁵ the Kēraḷa king, the younger brother of Jananātha of Dhārā, the Pāṇḍya king, and others.

Towards the beginning of the introduction (ll. 1-3) we learn the names of a few of the king’s near relatives. On his elder brother Āḷavandāṉ he conferred the title Rājarāja; on his son Madhurāntaka the Toṇḍai-maṇḍalam (i.e. the Pallava country) and the title Chōḷēndra;¹⁶ on his son Gaṅgaikoṇḍa-Chōḷa the Pāṇḍi-maṇḍalam (i.e. the Pāṇḍya country) and the title Chōḷa-Pāṇḍya; and on Muḍikoṇḍa-Chōḷa the title Sundara-Chōḷa.¹⁷ According to the Tañjāvūr inscription of Kulōttuṅga I.¹⁸ the name of Vīrarājēndra’s wife was Arumoḻi-Naṅgai.

The immediate purpose of the subjoined inscription is to record that the king, residing in his palace at Gaṅgaikoṇḍa-Śōḻapuram¹⁹ (l. 11 f.), granted to the Karuvūr temple the village of Pākkūr, which, like Karuvūr itself (l. 14), belonged to Veṅgāla-nāḍu, a district of Adhirājarāja-maṇḍalam (l. 12).

Language: Tamil.

Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).

DHARMA_INSSIIv03p0i0020.

Emmanuel Francis.

Summary: This is the fourth inscription in the Tirukkaḷar set. It is engraved on the second side of the third plate and belongs to the 18th year of the reign of Tribhuvanachakravartin Rājarājadēva. It records that some of the families of the donees, who received the gift made by Śivaṉ Tillaināyagaṉ of Taṇṇīrkuṉṟam in the twenty-eighth year of the reign of Kulōttuṅga-Chōḷa; the abolisher of tolls, ceased to have male members and that in consequence a question arising as to how the feeding pertaining to these families should be conducted in future, the Māhēśvaras settled that the feeding stipulated in the grant to be done by the donees devolved on the female descendants as well and that arrangements were made in accordance with that order. The inscription may probably belong to the reign of Rājarāja II, though the distinguishing epithet of the king is missing and the characters appear to belong to a later period.

Language: Tamil.

Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).

DHARMA_INSSIIv03p0i0210.

Emmanuel Francis.

Summary: This is the fifth inscription in the Tirukkaḷar set. It is engraved on both sides of the fourth plate and the inner side of the fifth. It is dated in the 29th year of the reign of Kulōttuṅga-Chōḷadēva (i.e., Kulōttuṅga III) who took Madura, Ceylon, Karuvūr and the crowned head of the Pāṇḍya king and furnishes a list of gold and silver ornaments belonging to the temple at Tirukkaḷar with their weights as measured by the standard weight called the kuḍiñai-kal and the fineness in each case.

Language: Tamil.

Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).

DHARMA_INSSIIv03p0i0211.

Emmanuel Francis.

Summary: This short inscription in seven lines is engraved on the first side of the first plate of the set of copper-plates obtained from M.R.Ry. Muthuswamy Konar of Tiruchcheṅgōḍu. It is dated in the 10th year of the reign of king Rājakēsarivarman and registers evidently an order of one of the feudatory chiefs of the sovereign named Maḻavaraiyaṉ Sundaraśōḻaṉ, stating that the taxes on full house-sites and half house-sites shall be recovered at 1/4th and 1/8th (kāśu ?) respectively from the citizens of Tūśiyūr and that fines and faults, if any, shall be realised at the rate prevailing in Nandipuram. The chief Maḻavaraiyaṉ Sundaraśōḻaṉ gets the surnames Piradigaṇḍaṉ and Kolli-Maḻavaṉ in B and Oṟṟiyūraṉ Piradigaṇḍavarman in No. 213. Rao Bahadur H. Krishna Sastri has identified the king Rājakēsarivarman of this and the following record with Rājarāja I and notes as follows regarding the donor’s father who, in B is stated to have died at Īḻam (i.e., Ceylon):—“He was evidently a military officer of Rājarāja I or of one of his predecessors. An inscription from Tiruveṇkāḍu of the time of Rājarāja I refers to the general Śiṟiyavēḷāṉ of Koḍumbāḷūr who fell in a battle-field in Īḻam in the ninth year of Poṉmāḷigai-tuñjiṉa-dēva (i.e., Sundara-Chōḷa Parāntaka II). It is not impossible that the father of Maḻavaraiyaṉ was also connected with the battle in which Śiṟiyavēḷār fell”¹.

It is not possible to identify Tūśiyūr mentioned in this inscription.

Language: Tamil.

Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).

DHARMA_INSSIIv03p0i0212.

Emmanuel Francis.

Summary: This inscription, engraved on three plates—the last bearing writing only on the inner side—is dated in the 5th year of the reign of the Chōḷa king Rājakēsarivarman (identified with Rājarāja I) and registers gifts of lands made by the chief Kollimaḻavaṉ Oṟṟiyūraṉ Piradigaṇḍavarman, to the temple of Paramēśvara of the sacred Mūlasthāna at Tūśiyūr. Boundaries of the lands granted are furnished in detail and therein figure Kaṉṉāḍu, the dams called Pūnāṟṟu-aṇai and Kallōḍu-aṇai, the tanks Śūḷai-kuḷam also known as Kāndaḷēri, Tāmaraikkuḷam and Kaṟṟaḷi-ēri also named Pudukkuḷam, the temple of Tāṉtōṉṟipirāṉ, Mūkkuṟukkā, Kaṭṭināgaṉkūval-iṭṭēr and Kaṇavadinallūr, otherwise called Amaṇkuḍi.

Kaṉṉāḍu (kal-nāḍu) which occurs more than once in this inscription refers evidently to hero-stones which are stated in ancient Tamiḻ literature, as having been put up with great ceremony in honour of persons who had done valorous deeds in guarding their country and given up their lives in that cause. Being associated with the word peruvarampu it may even be an engraver’s mistake for kaṇṇāṟṟu.

Traces of writing found in lines 13, 28, 29, 30 and 33 indicate that the present inscription is a palimpsest.

It is not possible to identify the places mentioned in this inscription.

Language: Tamil.

Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).

DHARMA_INSSIIv03p0i0213.

Emmanuel Francis.

Summary: This inscription is dated in the 9th year of the reign of Parakēsarivarman, alias Rājēndradēva, the successor of Rājādhirāja.¹ An unpublished inscription of the same year in the Vaidyanātha temple at Tirumalavāḍi (No. 87 of 1895) states that Rājādhirāja was Rājēndra’s elder brother, and that he fell in the battle of Koppam. The subjoined inscription and others² mention Rājēndra’s elder brother,’ but do not give his name.

The inscription records that the king granted the village of Kaṇavadinallūr in Veṅgāla-nāḍu, a district of Adhirājarāja-maṇḍalam, to the Tiruvānilai temple. It is signed by five officers, whose names appear also in the Karuvūr inscription of Vīrarājēndra I. (No. 20, l. 15 ff. and l. 22 ff.). This fact corroborates the conclusion drawn above (p. 32), that Vīrarājēndra I. succeeded Rājēndra within a single generation.

One of the five officers whose names occur in Nos. 20 and 21, is Araiyaṉ Rājarājaṉ, alias Vīrarājēndra-Jayamurināḍāḻvāṉ. This person is very probably identical with the Sēnāpati Jayamurināḍāḻvār, who is mentioned in an inscription of Rājēndradēva at Sangili-Kanadarāva in Ceylon.³ This inscription proves that the island of Ceylon, or at least a portion of it, was in Rājēndra’s possession.

Language: Tamil.

Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).

DHARMA_INSSIIv03p0i0021.

Emmanuel Francis.

Summary: This inscription bears the same date as No. 21, but the king is here named Rājēndra-Chōḷadēva instead of Rājēndradēva. The historical introduction is identical with that of No. 21 and proves that Rājēndradēva, the victor at Koppam, and not his ancestor Rājēndra-Chōḷa, the son of the great Rājarāja, is meant here.

The inscription records that the king granted to the Tiruvānilai temple the village of Nelvāyppaḷḷi, which belonged to Veṅgāla-nāḍu, a district of Adhirājarāja-maṇḍalam, and was bounded in the east by the village of Āndaṉūr. The grant is signed by the same five officers as No. 21.

Language: Tamil.

Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).

DHARMA_INSSIIv03p0i0022.

Emmanuel Francis.

Summary: This inscription is dated in the 23rd year of the reign of Tribhuvanachakravartin Kulōttuṅga-Chōḷadēva, who claims to have conquered Īḻam (Ceylon), Madurai (Madhurā) and Karuvūr and to have cut off the head of the Pāṇḍya king. The time of this Kulōttuṅga-Chōḷa is settled by an inscription in the Raṅganāyaka temple at Nellūr (Nellore), which couples Śaka-Saṁvat 1119 with the 19th year of his reign.¹ On the basis of this inscription and of some others which contain elements for astronomical calculation, Professor Kielhorn has shown that the king’s reign commenced between the 5th June and 8th July, A.D. 1178.² Kulōttuṅga-Chōḷadēva I. ascended the throne in A.D. 1070,³ and Kulōttuṅga-Chōḷadēva II. issued the Chellūr plates in A.D. 1132.⁴ Consequently, the king, to whose reign the present inscription belongs, has to be designated Kulōttuṅga-Chōḷadēva III. In other inscriptions he bears the names Parakēsarivarman, Vīrarājēndradēva (II.) and Tribhuvanavīradēva. His latest date is the 39th year in an unpublished inscription at Chidambaram. Accordingly, he must have been the immediate predecessor of Tribhuvanachakravartin Rājarājadēva, who ascended the throne about A.D. 1216.⁵

The immediate purpose of the subjoined inscription is to record that the king granted to the Karuvūr temple the village of Maṉṉaṟai and a portion of Kēraḷapaḷḷi⁶ in Taṭṭaiyūr-nāḍu.

Language: Tamil.

Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).

DHARMA_INSSIIv03p0i0023.

Emmanuel Francis.

Summary: This inscription is dated in the 25th year of the reign of Tribhuvanachakravartin Kulōttuṅga-Chōḷadēva (III.), who receives here the same attributes as in No. 23. It records that the villagers of Tēvaṇappaḷḷi sold some land to the temple for three kaḻañju of gold, which a hunter had paid into the temple treasury. This person was a native of Pūvāṇiyam near Puṉṉam in Veṅgāla-nāḍu, a district of Śōḻa-Kēraḷa-maṇḍalam. Tēvaṇappaḷḷi belonged to Taṭṭaiyūr-nāḍu, another district of the same maṇḍalam. The land granted was bounded in the east by the village of Nōmbalūr.

Puṉṉam is found on the map of the Coimbatore district, about 6 miles west-north-west from Karuvūr. From inscriptions of Rājarāja I. and Rājēndra-Chōḷa I. on the walls of the small deserted temple of Sōmēśvara at Sōmūr near the junction of the Kāvērī and Amarāvatī rivers, 7 miles east of Karuvūr, it appears that Tēvaṇappaḷḷi was the ancient name of Sōmūr, and that the Sōmēśvara temple belonged to Tirunōmbalūr, a quarter or hamlet of Tēvaṇappaḷḷi.

Language: Tamil.

Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).

DHARMA_INSSIIv03p0i0024.

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.