chap17
chapter16.html
chapter17.html
chapter18.html
Art and Culture of Tamilnadu
R. Nagaswamy
17. SOME BRONZES FROM TAÑJĀVŪR TEMPLE
Tañjāvūr is well-known as the capital of the Cöḻa rulers who were holding sway over the entire part of the southern country from 9th century A.D. to 13th century A.D., for four hundred years. It is here that Rājarāja, the illustrious Cöḻa monarch built the Rājarājeśvara temple, which is a masterpiece of Indian temple architecture. Fortunately it is still well-preserved with all its sculptural beauty. Tañjāvūr is the most fertile district of the Tamil country and plays a vital role in the supply of food grains to the people. The rise of this city into prominence will, therefore, be particularly interesting for the study of south Indian history.
Though Tañjāvūr was the capital of the Imperial Cöḻas of the Vijayālaya line from about the 9th century, it was not the capital of the Cöḻas of the Saṅgam age, whose rule is placed at the beginning of the Christian era. According to the mythological ancestry of the Cöḻas, one Kandan, contemporary of Agastya and Parasurama, entrusted his kingdom to his Kakandan, in order to escape the wrath of Parasurama. He ruled from Champa, which later on came to be called Kakaṇḍi, Puhār and Kāveripūmpaṭṭiṉam. Thus Kāveripūmpaṭṭinam seems to be the earliest capital of the Cöḻas.
Karikāla, who was the greatest Cöḻa monarchs of the Saṅgam age, seems to have had his capital at Kaveripūmpaṭṭiṉam. It is well known that he was responsible for ushering in a glorious era by promoting agriculture and commerce. He raised embankments on other side of Kāver along its course and was the first king who conceived the idea of an aṇikut (stone dam) across the Kāveri. Kalaṇai now called the Grand Aṇikut is his glorious creation. During his reign Kāveripūmpaṭṭinam played a vital role and is vividly described in the Paṭṭinappālai.
A rival branch of the Cöḻa family is mentioned as ruling a part of the country with Uraiyūr as its capital. Nalaṅgiḷḷi, a son of Karikāla, had his capital at Puhār and his rival Neḍuṅgiḷḷi ruled from Uraiyūr. A battle ensued between these two rivals in which Nalaṅgiḷḷi emerged victorious and Neḍuṅgiḷḷi was put to death at the battle of Kariyaru?. Another illustrious name of the Saṅgam age, is Kocheṅgaṇṇan? who inflicted a crushing, defeat on the Chera king Kaṇaikkal Irumporai. He was a great Śaivite, who is said to have built a good number of temples to Śiva and is praised by Tirujñānasambandar, Tirumaṅgai and Sundaramūrti. His capital seems to be Uraiyūr. Uraiyūr as the capital of the Cöḻas has been Sung in many poems of the Saṅgam age. Evidently as an inland capital it had many advantages over Kāveripūmpaṭṭiṉam which was essentially a seaport. Military strategy, seems to be an important factor for such a shift in its importance. This Uraiyūr is none other than the modern town of the same name, situated on the southern bank of the Kāveri, within the city limits of Tiruccirāppaḷḷi. That Uraiyūr continued to be the capital city of the Cöḻas is borne out by later inscriptions.
During the beginning of the seventh century A.D. the Cöḻas lost all their eminence and were practically sandwiched between the rising powers of the Pāṇḍyas in the south and the imperial Pallavas in the north and were literally non-existent as a power, but for their name. The Pallava king Simhaviṣṇnu, the father of Mahendra I. swept over the Cöḻa country and seems to have captured their capital. That Uraiyūr, was directly under the Pallavas is brone by another factor. The Upper rock-cut cave at Tiruccirāppaḷḷi bearing the name of Śatrumaleśvarālaya, was excavated by Mahendra I, who has left his inscription there. The inscription refers to the mountain as that of the Cola Country. It also refers to the wealth of the Cöḻa country as being seen from the top of the an. It is evident that the capital was Uraiyūr and the inscription of Mahendra I was almost in the heart of the Cöḻa kingdom.
The Pallava rule was at its zenith during the period of Narasimha I, the conqueror of Vātāpi and Ceylon. But during the rule of his successor Parameśvara I, the Chālukya king Vikramāditya I invaded South, in order to avenge the ransack of Vātāpi. His march was successful and he penetrated into the Cöḻa country. While camping at Uragapura on the south bank of Kāveri in the Cöḻa country, Vikramāditya issued a grant. Soon Parameśvara mustered all his strength and defeated Vikramāditya at Peruvaḷanallur and sent him back to his country and probably followed him as far as Vātāpi. That this part of the country was directly under the Pallava rule, till the end of their supremacy is brone out from the inscription of Teḷḷārerinda Nandi Pottarasar at Kovilaḍi village, which is about a few kilometres away from Thiruccirāppaḷḷi, though it has gone over to the Pāṇḍyas at times. Till this period Uraiyūr was the attraction for all the kings. There seem to be no reference to Tañjāvūr till this time.
Only at the beginning of the eighth century, we come acorss references to Tañjāvūr, interestingly not as the capital of the Cöḻas but as a city, which was ruled by a line of powerful chieftains called Muttaraiyars. Some of the Muttaraiyars appear in the records of the later Pallavas as well as in the records of the Pāṇḍya king Māranjaḍaiyan. Their capital was Nemam near Cendalai, there is an interesting inscription of a Muttaraiyar Chieftain, which mentions three generations of the king. This king named Suvaran Māran alias Perumbiḍugu Muttraiyan is mentioned in the record as Tanjaiar Kön, the lord of Tañjāvūr. He is also referred to as Kālavar kalavan? and Tañjai Naṟpugaḷāḷan. The inscription also refers to a poet's name Tañjai Tiram Pāṭinār and mentions bards "who remain singing on the state of Tañjai appearing in the midst of fields ever filled with water. To cause destruction to the Pāṇḍyas and cause success to the Pallavas Māra advanced that day to the battle. Evidenty Māran fought on the side of the Pallavas.
Tirumaṅgai maṉṉaṉ, the great Vaiṣṇavite saint, is said to be the of Nandivarman Pallavamalla. In his songs of Divyaprabandham, he sings the praise of a Vishnu temple of Tanjavur as Tañjai Māmaṇikövil, (vempulam cölai māmatil tañjai māmaṇi kövilai vaṇaṅki). The same temple is referred to by him, as Tañjai Kovil and Tañjai Ālai. This may be placed about A.D. 750.
LANDMARK
The Muttaraiyar chieftains seem to have changed their allegiance to either the Pallavas or the Pāṇḍyas according to the success gained in the battle. Thus we find them as feudatories of the Pāṇḍya king Varaguṇa in the middle of 9th century A.D. Vijayālaya the founder of the Imperial Cöḻa line and who was in all probability feudatory of the Pallava king, captured Tañjāvūr and conquered the Muttaraiyar chieftains. This was a signal victory, which not only gave rise to the Imperial Cöḻas also raised the status of of Tañjāvūr. The conquest of Tañjāvūr by Vijayālaya is an important landmark in the history of Tamil Nadu. It is vīvdly described in all the subsequent records of the Cöḻas.
The Tiruvālṅkāṭu copper charter of Rājendra Cöḻa I, mentioning the event states that "He (Vijayālaya) of the solar race, took possession of the town Tañcāpuri, which was picturesque to the sight, was a beautiful as Alaka, the cheif town of Kubera, had reached the sky by its high turrets and the white wash of mansions, just as he would seize by the hand, his own wife, who had beautiful eyes, graceful curls, a cloth covering her body and sandal paste as white as lime in order to sport with her. Having next consecrated there the image of Nisumbhasūdani, whose lotus feet are worshipped by gods and demons, he by the grace of that Goddess, bore just as easily as a garland, the weight of the whole earth resplendent with her garment of the four oceans". The Kanyākumāri inscription of Vīrarājendra goes a step further and states that "The King Vijayālaya constructed in the Cöḻa country a town named Tañcāpuri with all the advantages of a new City, praised by Gods such as Brahma seated on the lotus filower.”
It is, therefore, evident that Tañjāvūr was captured by Vijayālaya who enlarged and fortified the city and consecrated his favourite deity Nisumbhasūdani. Thus, we find Tañjāvūr becoming the capital of the Cöḻas for the first time.
An image of Nisumbhasūdani now under worship in Tañjāvūr town is of historic interest. The eight-armed seated image, about 184 cm in height, is wielding a trident in the main right arm and points to the retreating demon with the main left. Other arms carry various emblems among which a kapāla in the left arm is noteworthy. The Devi is shown as an emaciated skeletal figure with her head slightly thrown back and with a grim look, piercing the asura. The head of Nisumbha is trampled under her right foot and his brother Sumbha, though vigorously defending himself with a sword and shield, is fleeing unsuccesfully. The other subordinates of the asura brothers have also been brought under her seat. The figure of the goddess is illustrative of built-in power in revolt, exerting every nerve to overpower the formidable opponents and establish the rule of glory. The demons under her feet though very much alive are aware of their helplessness against the supreme valour of the Goddess, and are suggestive of the waning power of the opponents. The very first impression one gets on seeing this sculpture is that here is a royal icon replete with the potentialities of yielding a thrill and joy to the spectator. The sculpture from its style is neither Pallava nor Muttaraiyan, who were masters of Tañjāvūr for a considerable time but has the qualities of a Cöḻa idiom in its emerging state. Further it is a rare sculptural representation not to be seen either in the Cöḻa land or in other parts of the Tamil country. The sculpture is to be dated to the middle of the ninth century. It is of interest to recall here the establishment of the line of the Imperial Cöḻas at Tañjāvūr by Vijayālaya in about AD 850. The Cöḻas are described as one of the crowned rulers of the Tamil country, in the beginning of the Christian era, but gradually were thrown into oblivion by the Pallavas in the north and the Pāṇḍyas in the South, the Cöḻa country becoming the battlefield for supremacy between these two powers. From the sixth to the ninth century nothing is heard of the Cöḻa dynasty.
Vijayālaya, a Cöḻa by descent, wanted to tear open the veil of obscurity for his dynasty by casting away the overbearing power of the Pallavas and the Pāṇḍyas. It was no easy task and he had to face these formidable opponents with grim determination and an iron will. He achieved this aim with great success and signalled the emergence of his dynasty by capturing Tañjāvūr, and in no time the dynasty rose to such eminence that for nearly four hundred years, it remained the supreme power in the South—supreme not only in its victories but also in its administrative thoroughness, architectural achievements, and sculptural splendour.
It was such aspirations that Vijayālaya sought to represent in the image of Nisumbhasūdani which he installed at Tañjāvūr immediately on his victory. Undoubtedly it ought to have been a great image, portraying the magnificent personality of the ruler who installed it reflecting not only the conditions of the time, but also the culmination of his achievements.
The Tiruvālaṅkāṭu copper plates of Rājendra I, mention that Vijayālaya captured Tañjāvūr, installed the goddess Nisumbhasūdani and ruled the country with her blessings. The reason for choosing the Goddess Nisumbhasūdani is obvious. According to the Devīmahātmya, the worship of this Devi stirs terror in the minds of the opponents in the battlefields and brings victory to the king. Vijayālaya had this in his mind when he chose Nisumbhasūdani as his fevourite deity. Perhaps there was another reason as well for this choice. The Pallavas were great patrons of Durgā as Mahiṣāsuranardini. In all their foundations, not only temples but also village settlements, the emphasis was laid on Durgā Mahiṣamardini. Vijayālaya wanted to strike a note of individuality in his creation. It may be noted that the cult of Bhadrakāḷi (The Devi as the destroyer Sumbha and Nisumbha is popularly called Bhadrakāḷi) gains prominence only from Vijayālayas time.
The image is now worshipped as Vaṭabhadrakāḷ in Tañjāvūr. The portrayal of its trennendo Striking power, the grim expression on its face, its great size, the lively depiction of the asuras under her seat, the presence of Nisumbha's head below her feet and the rarity of such a sculptural representation, make us feel that this is the image of Nisumbhasūdani installed by Vijayālaya in Tañjāvūr.
Vijayālaya's son Āditya, ruled for sometime as a feudatory of the Pallava king, Nṛpatuṅga. The Pallava king, Aparājita, aided by his ally, the Gaṅga King Pṛthvipati fought with the opposing army of the Pāṇḍya king, Varaguṇa and probably with Cöḻa Āditya. Though the Gaṅga King Pṛthvipati lost his life in the battle, the Pāṇḍya forces were utterly routed by Aparājita, which marked the downfall of the Pāṇḍya empire in the South. Śrīpurambiyam is the modern Tiruppurambiyam near Kumbhaköṇam.
But soon after, Āditya consolidated his power and killed Aparājita as he was marching on his elephant. This event marked the downfall of the great Pallava empire on the north. Āditya soon led a victorious expedition into the heart of Toṇḍaināḍu and probably conquered Kāñci. One of Āditya's inscriptions is found at Tirukkaḻukuṉṟam not far away from the Pallava capital. Āditya also seems to have ruled from Tañjāvūr.
By about A.D. 1000 the great Vimāna of the Bṛhadīśvara temple was rising in its glory under the orders of Rājarāja I as also the greatness of Tañjāvūr. The city became the centre of great cultural activity and was enlarged on well-laid out plans. A study of Rājarāja's inscription reveals the names of many streets, shopping centres etc., of Tañjāvūr.
It will be interesting to locate the original seat of the great city From the modern town of Tañjāvūr on the way to Tiruvaiyaru is the river Veṇṇār, which forms the outskirts of Tañjāvūr. On the southern bank of the river, which is called the bank of Veṇṇār (Veṇṇāṟṟaṅkarai) is the Viṣṇu temple celebrated in the hymns of Tirumangai Āḻvar as Tañjaimāmaṇikkövil. Rājarāja also refers to Tañjaimāmaṇikkövil from where he transferred some servants to the Great temple. There is a small Śiva temple in the place which seems to have undergone extensive renovation as a result of which no inscription is found on the temple. However, there are number of sculptures, which are coeval with the sculptures of the Great temple of Tañjāvūr and may be ascribed to the beginning of 11th century A.D. They are well-proportioned, gracefully modelled and retain the splendour of the early Cöḻa sculptures in their flexions and beauty. Particularly interesting are the sculptures of Durgā in a delightful tribhaṅga pose, Brahma in ecstatic ease and a sculpture of Nataraja portrayd in great rhythm. Amongst stone sculptures, of Nataraja so far noticed, this sculpture is undoubtedly a fine creation. The Lord of this temple is called Tañcāpurīśvara. The existence of Tañjaimāmaṇikkövil and the Tañcāpurīśvara temple, together with the fact Tañjāvūr received extention in the south, seems to suggest that the original seat of this city was located on the southern bank of Veṇṇār. This almost corresponds to the description of Tañjai in Ceṉdalai inscription of Perumbiḍugu Muttaraiyar, as being surrounded by paddy fields all found.
TAÑJAI AḺAKAR
Tañjāvūr is the most illustrious name for the student of south Indian history, for it contains the lofty vimāna of the great Rājarājeśvara temple now called Bṛhadīśvara. The temple carries exquisitely carved sculptures of Śiva, in various poses, and is one of the maginficient achievements in the temple building activity of the whole country. The Śivaliṅga in ths sanctum and the Nandi at the open court are unique in their size and volume. The deity is reffered to as Rājarājeśvaramuṭaiyār in inscriptions. The entire treasury of Rājarāja, which was always overflowing with presents of gold, silver, and precious gems, brought by the vassal kings, was emptied and lavished to make this monumental temple unparalelled in the history of the nation.
The temple was endowed with vessels made of gold, silver, copper and other metals. Many metal images of gold, brass and copper were gifted, which were worshipped and carried in processions on festival days. Countless jewellery made of gold and set with very preicious gems were presented to these deities. There are over forty such images mentioned in inscriptions, which were set up either by Rājarāja, his sister, queens or lieutenants. But nothing is known at present about these images, the ornaments, etc. Whether these magnificent and pious gifts, destroyed and wiped out of existence, or were all these unfortunately melted for their base metal value, or have they been stealthily removed to far off places or do they still lie buried under some corner of the temple, it is not possible to say at the present moment. Nothing is known so far and no piece could be definitely attributed as coeval with the temple.
However, their is one image, which may be mentioned here as an interesting specimen. It represents a copper image of standing Śiva with four arms. The usual emblems of Śiva are noticed in the upper pair of arms while the lower pair is either in the pose of playing vīṇā or holding bow and arrow. The right leg is placed steadily on the lotus pedestal and the left is bent and placed on the dwarf who is shown at the feet. It is accompanied by the figure of Umā as well. This image of Śiva according to Āgamic description may represent either Vīṇādhara Dakṣiṇāmūrti or Tripurāntakamūrti. Since it is accompanied by the consort Umā, it cannot be identified as Vīṇādhara, for in the Vīṇādhara aspect, Umā is not associated with Śiva. Therefore, it may be taken to be the representation of Tripurāntaka. This group was originally in the Great temple at Tañjāvūr and is now in the Tanjore Art Gallery.
As stated earlier there are a good number of images mentioned in inscriptions, said to have been set up in the temple, which include various representations of Śiva as Kalyāṇasundara, Vṛṣbhavāhana, Ardhanāri, Dakṣiṇāmūrti, Kirāṭamūrti, Bhikṣāṭana and others. Even rare representations such as Liṅgapurāṇadeva were said to have been made of copper and set up in the temple. But significantly there is no mention of Vīṇādhara or Tripurantaka in inscriptions, so far noticed. However, an inscription in the temple records that before the twenty-ninth year of the reign of Rājarājadeva, his queen Pañcavan Mahādevi set up copper images of Śiva, His wife Umāparameśvari and their son Gaṇapati, to which she presented a number of valuable ornaments.
"One solid image bearing the sacred name of Tañjai Aḻagar, having four divine arms of measuring two muḻam and viraḷ height from head to foot, including the image of Mucalakan who was under the bent foot on which the God stood. One solid image of his consort Umāparameśvari measuring one muḻam and, three quarters, two viraḷ and a half in height from head to foot." The above description exactly corresponds to the bronze under Study.
THE TRIPURĀNTAKA
It is interesting to note here that the base of the Tañjāvūr vimāna carries two courses of niches the lower one carries figures of Śiva in various aspects, as Dakṣiṇāmūrti, Ardhanāri, etc. But the upper course of niches carry the same forms resembling each other. This represents the figure of Tripurāntakamūrti mentioned in āgamas. It is, therefore, evident that Rājarāja was so enamoured of the Tripurāntaka aspect that he represented the same over and over again. Even the most beautiful mural in the temple, painted under order of Rājarāja, depicts Śiva as Tripurāntakamūrti. It is, therefore, evident that Rājarāja enthusiastically named the figure of Tripurāntakamūrti as Tañjai Aḻagar, the beautiful lord of Tañjāvūr, his beloved capital. The present bronze figure is probably the same Tañjai Aḻagar set up by Rājarāja in Tañjāvūr temple and referred to in the inscriptions.
I had occasion to notice an inscription on the pedestal of the Nataraja image in the temple. It was also observed that the image Nataraja has undergone repairs. The inscriptions is on the Original pedestal in modern Nāgari characters and is in four lines. It reads "Under orders of the queen Kāmākṣi, the wife of king Śivāji her agent Nāgarāja repaired the worn out image of Nataraja in the temple of Bṛhadīśvara in the Sālivāhana Saka 1807 (A.D. 1885) equivalent to Tarana, on a full-moon day, which fell on a Tuesday and reconsecrated the image.”
From other inscriptions found in thi this temple, as well as elsewhere, we know that the queen Kāmākṣi Bamba Bai was the chief queen of the Marāṭha king Śivāji of Tañjāvūr and that she was incharge of all the Tañjāvūr temples and was responsible for carrying out extensive renovations to temples in and around Tañjāvūr. Pandit Nāgarāja Rāmāji was her agent for this purpose and under her orders carried out many renovations. At her instance, he constructed an ardhamaṇḍapa in the temple of Rajagopalaswamy inside the Fort, and consecrated Śrī Satprabhavaśivendra Sarasvati Svāmi as well as the Shoḍasabhuja Chakrapāṇi (the sixteen-armed Chakrapāṇi image).
The Nāgari inscription on the pedestal of Nataraja referred to above, makes it clear that the present image of Nataraja was repaired under the orders of queen Kāmākṣi. It is thus evident that an old worn out image of Nataraja was lying in the temple requiring repairs and that it was in fact repaired and reconsecrated. The pedestal of the image under discussion has been repaired on either side. The prabha has also been repaired from the pedestal up to the middle. Thus the upper part of the circular prabha is original while the lower part on either side has been recast. The inscription is found on the original portion of the pedestal. At the junction of the old prabha and the new addition, a makara motif is introduced. One can easily perceive the difference in the metals of the original and new parts of the prabha. The original is fine copper, while the repaired portion seems to be pañcaloha. The difference in the treatment of flames of the prabha may also be noted. The leg placed on the back of the dwarf (Muyalagan) is also broken at the ankle and has been repaired. The artist who carried out this repair has cleverly introdied a snake curling around the ankle thus hiding the repaired portion. That the snake was not part of the original image can be seen from its crude workmanship and difference in the quality of the metal. No snake is noticed at the ankle in most Nataraja. images. Since the inscription is specific about repairs to this image: and since the repairs are evident, there can be no doubt that the image is the original one belonging to the temple and being in need of repairs was lying in the temple without being worshipped. According to Manasara? repairs are permitted to metal image other than to the face and the body. The repairs carried out in the present case are comparatively unimportant parts of the icon and the main image still retains all its original splendour. It is a perfect image Nataraja and in all probability is of the age of Rājarāja who built Great temple to which it belongs.
It is necessary here to mention that in the inscription of Rājarāja I, the term Nataraja is not mentioned. It is referred to as Āṭavallāṉ—Master dancer. The term Āṭavallāṉ is not an innovation of Rājarāja I. Apparasvāmigal, the contemporary of the Pallava king Mahendravarman (A.D. 600-630) and Tirujñānasambandha his younger contemporary, have both referred to Nataraja as Āṭavallāṉ. Appar refers to the Nataraja of Chidambaram as Kūttāṭavallān and the Nataraja in a number of temples as Āṭavallār. Sambandar uses the word Āṭavala adikaḷ. In the Tañjāvūr temple itself is an inscription which records the setting up of an image of Āṭavallāṉ, by Cöḻa Mahādevi, the queen of Raja Raja I. From the description of the image, it is clear that the term Āṭavallār refers to Nataraja. Another inscription in the same temple refers to the image of Āṭavallāṉ set up by Rājarāja I himself.
As stated earlier, there are two images referred to as Āṭavallāṉ and Āṭavallār in the Tañjāvūr temple inscriptions. One was set up by Raja Raja I and the other by his queen Cöḻa Mahādevi. Is the present image the one set up by Rājarāja I or his queen? It would have been difficult to arrive at a conclusion, had not been for the inscriptions themselves. The measurements given for the image of Āṭavallāṉ set up by Cöḻa Mahādevi do not tally when compared with the present figure, which is a much larger one. Unfortunately The detailled description of the Āṭavallāṉ image set up by Rājarāja is not available. However, the present image being much larger in size than the one set up by Choa Mahadevi, it would follow that it is Āṭavallāṉ image set by Rājarāja I, to whose reign it can be ascribed also on grounds of style.
At present there are two metal images of Nataraja in the Big Temple. One is larger image alrady identified above as the Āṭavallāṉ set by Rājarāja I, while the other is about 66 cm in height including the pedestal. It is also a beautiful image and has all the characteristics of an early Cöḻa icon. The question may arise as to whether this image is the Āṭavallār set up by Cöḻa Mahādevi, the queen of Rājarāja I. According to the inscription, the image set up by the queen, should have nine jaṭas and seven puṣpamālas. It should be about 40.6 cm in height. The pedestal should also be proportionately small. But the present figure has thirteen jaṭas and eleven puṣpamālas. Its height is also greater. Hence, the smaller Nataraja image found in the temple is not the one set up by Cöḻa Mahādevi. It is an image probably set up by someone else, about which we have no records.
Another icon, Dakṣiṇameruviṭaṅkar, is also mentioned frequently in the inscriptions at the Tañjāvūr temple. Unfortunately, as in the case of Āṭavallān, the detailed description of Dakṣiṇameruviṭaṅkar is also not available in the inscriptions. Attempts to identify the main deity of the temple itself as Āṭavallān and also as Dakṣiṇameruviṭaṅkar have been made. But this viewpoint is not correct. It is quite clear that Āṭavallān is a metal image and refers to Nataraja. The main deity which is the Mulasthana Liṅga is always referred to in the inscriptions as Rājarājeśvaramuṭaiyār and Rājarājeśwarmuṭaiyār Paramasvāmi. Hence the term Āṭavallān cannot be applied to the main deity. So also the term Dakṣiṇameruviṭaṅkar cannot be applied to the main deity. The inscriptions found in the temple clearly make a distinction between Rājarājesvaramuṭaiyār and Dakṣiṇameruviṭaṅkar. Inscription No. 26 of South Indian Inscriptions, Vol. II speaks of provisions made for both Rājarājeśvaramuṭaiyār and Dakṣiṇamervitaṅkar. Hence Dikṣiṇameruvitaṅkar is a different icon from the main deity. The term viṭaṅkar is taken to mean a deity who has not been sculptured but is a svayambhu (Self-born). By the time of Tirunāvukkarasu (A.D. 600) the term has come to be used with reference to utsavavigrahas (metal images). Tirvārūr has a very famous temple and the main deity is called Vānmīkinātha. The Somaskanda image (the main utsavavigraha) of his temple is called Vīdhiviṭaṅkar. There are seven temples in south India where the Somaskanda images (usayayigraha) are famous by their name viṭaṅkars. These places are called saptaviṭaṅkasthānas (the seven places of viṭaṅkas).
Tirunāvukkarasu refers to the processional image of Tiruvārūr as Vīdhiviṭaṅkar, Bhavanivīdhiviṭankar. It may be mentioned that in all Saiva temples, the Somaskanda image is the most important and is considered to be the representative of the main deity in metal (chalabhera). It receives daily worship with care and is the principal processional deity in all Saivite shrines. For all festivals, the Somaskanda image is taken out in procession while others are taken Out only on specific occasions. Further, though the Somaskanda group consists of Śiva, Umā and Skanda, a separate image of Umā is also set up for this group and is generally known as Bhogaśakti Amman. According to an inscription in the Tañjāvūr temple, a Sakti was set up for Dakṣiṇameruviṭaṅkar and this Goddess was taken out in procession separately. Further in all the temples, whether the other forms are available or not, the image of Somakanda with Bhogaśakti and the image of Nataraja are invariably noticed. Having regard to the above facts it is quite possible that Dakṣiṇameruviṭaṅkar was the main Somaskanda image of Rājarājeśvara temple. In this connection it may be noted that none of the inscriptions of the temple refers to a Somaskanda image, though almost all other forms of icons are mentioned. Two further facts may be taken into consideration :
(a) Inscription No. 26 refers to provision made for the daily abhiṣeka of both Rājarājeśvaramuṭaiyār and Dakṣiṇameruviṭaṅkar. It is evident that the reference is the main deity and the principal image of Somaskanda.
(b) The inscriptions of Rājarāja I mention two important weight standards. They are called Dakṣiṇanmeruviṭaṅkadar. and Āṭavalān. From this we may assume that the weights were named after the two principal ut utsavavigrahas of the temple