chap10 chapter_09.html chapter_10.html chapter_11.html Tamil Nadu, The Land of the Vedas R. Nagaswamy 10. COPPER PLATE GRANTS
Contents | Previous | Next | Academy

10.1. Paramēśvara’s Gifts of Ekabhoga Brahmadēya

 A very early inscription, dating around 670 CE during the reign of the Pallava king Paramēśvaravarmaṉ I, refers to the construction of a Śiva temple. It also mentions the settlement of 20 Vedic Brāhmaṇas to recite the Vedas in the temple located in Kūram village, near Kāñcīpuram. The village was already a Brāhmin settlement, inhabited by 108 Brāhmaṇas. A Pallava subordinate of the king, named Vidyāvinīta, purchased 5 1/4 pāṭaka of land by paying money, with each pāṭaka consisting of 1200 pits measurement. In this land, he built the temple in the first pāṭaka, a maṇḍapa in the central part, and used some part for manufacturing bricks for constructing the temple. He divided the land into 25 parts. After using five parts for the temple and maṇḍapa, he equally divided the remaining twenty parts between 20 Vedic Brāhmaṇas. He also dug a tank for the village and named the temple “Vidyā-Vinīta-Pallava-Paramēśvara-Graham”. The share allotted for the temple was given to one Ananta Śivācārya, his sons, and his grandson to arrange for Śrī Bali and daily food offerings, as well as one Pullaśarman. The Śivācārya’s descendants were to arrange for periodical restorations (navakarma). The twenty parts were utilized for building houses and backyards for the Vedic Brāhmaṇas and their livelihood. The houses were to be built with stories using burnt bricks. The Vedic Brāhmaṇas were Caturvedins, and the land so gifted was called Brahmadēya. Some cultivable lands nearby were gifted for their livelihood. Out of this, three shares were to be utilized for the religious services, repairs, and renovations of the temple. One share was to be used for expounding the Mahābhārata regularly in the maṇḍapa situated in the centre of the village and to provide a lamp and drinking water. The village was exempt from paying regular taxes to the royal government. Instead, the taxes were to be paid to the 20 Brāhmaṇas, who then shared it among themselves. The exemptions included taxes on houses and their backyards, on village administration, on oil press, on cultivated grains, and the like. Additionally, tax on the barber and all other common taxes were also exempted and were to be paid to the Brāhmins. The village was named “Paramēśvara-maṅgalam” after the name of the king. The expenditure on the temple worship is listed as pūjā, which includes snapana, kusuma, gandha, dhūpa, dīpa, havis, upahāra, bali, patāha, etc., and also the exposition of the Mahābhārata. This is an illustration of how a Brahmadēya for the Vedic Brāhmaṇas was made along with temple building. It seems that such Brāhmin settlements were called in the early Pallava period as “maṅgalam” and the usage “caturvedi-maṅgalam” became more popular later.

10.2. Ekabhoga Brahmadēya

 The same ruler gifted a village named Kubuṉūru to one Dēvaśarman, who is described as abhijana vidyā satvṛtta satata satya vrata samyukta, and sadkarma nirata. He is described as the son of one Droṇaśarman, a follower of yama, niyama, svādhyāya, pārāyaṇa, and sarva śāstra tattvavid. His father is described as Svāmi Śarma, who belonged to the Maudgalyāyana gōtra, Āpastamba caraṇa, Veda vedānga itihāsa purāṇa tattvavid. Thus, we get the Vedic tradition of one family for three generations. All three were Vedic scholars. Secondly, they had also studied the six aṅgas of the Vedas, and they were exponents of the Itihāsas (the Rāmāyaṇa and the Mahābhārata) and Purāṇas. This grant shows that the study of the Rāmāyaṇa and the Mahābhārata was a part of Vedic culture. The Pallava king Paramēśvara Varman gifted the village for his physical well-being, long life, and prosperity. The gift was made on an Ayana day. He mentions that this village gifted was made into a Brahmadēya village. It is an example of “Ēkābhoga Brahmadēya” land for one Brāhmaṇa.

10.3. Subrahmaṇya Temple at Kūram

 We have seen the temple of Śiva erected in the village of Kūram, named after the Pallava ruler Paramēśvara Varman I, by his commander Vidyāvinīta as “Vidyāvinīta-Pallava-Paramēśvara-graham”. There was a central temple of Viṣṇu in the village. Almost three hundred years later, the village sabhā received some lands for food offerings to the Subrahmaṇya of this village. There was a provision for offering in the midday worship to this lord. But now, another land was gifted for providing two more Sandhis, one in the morning and another in the evening for food offerings. Three Vedic Brāhmaṇas, residents of this village, gifted part of their lands to Lord Subrahmaṇya. These three Brāhmaṇas are called Kuḍimakkaḷ of this village and were Kramavittas. We have seen that this village was already a Brāhmin settlement in the 7th century when the Śiva temple was built. We know there was a Viṣṇu temple in the famous Uttaramērūr village and that by its side, a Subrahmaṇya temple is present. That village was laid out according to Vāstu and Āgama śāstra. These traditional treatises prescribe building a Subrahmaṇya temple in the middle of the village. Thus, the presence of Subrahmaṇya temple at Kūram further proves the role of Āgama and Vāstu texts in a village layout. The inscription referring to the Subrahmaṇya temple at Kūram is dated in the reign of Rājarāja I, around 995 CE. The inscription further states that the lands were verified in the already existing registers. Evidently, as early as the 10th century, each temple had accurate registers about its landed properties, and every transaction was meticulously verified before any action was taken with the donation of gifts. The Subrahmaṇya temple had lands for food offerings for three Sanidhis, for burning perpetual lamps, and for conducting festivals with processional deities. Other points of interest are the lands entrusted to the Śiva Brāhmaṇas, Govindaṉ Aṅgadi Śivaṉ, his brother, and other members of the family who had the privilege of worshipping in the temple. The role of Śiva Brāhmaṇas, in addition to serving as reliable bankers of the village, also included being given the lands and being requested to arrange regular worship. The Mahāsabhā was always bound by duty to oversee the endowment.

10.4. Rājasimha’s Gifts

 A similar Ēkābhōga grant was given by Rājasimha Pallava, son of Paramēśavara, to one Kumāra maṇḍa śarmaṉ. He was a dwivedi (a scholar of two Vedas) who studied Vedāṅgas, had performed Sōmayāga, was a follower of Apastamba-sūtra-adhyāyī, and belonged to the Rathīfara gōtra. His father was a dwivedin, and his grandfather was also a dwivedi, a scholar of ṣadaṅga, and a knower of Itihāsa Purāṇa tattvañja. (Reyuru plates) Rājasimha Pallava’s son was succeeded by Nandivarman Pallava Malla.

10.5. Nandivarman’s Gift

 Nandivarma Pallava Malla ascended to the Pallava throne at the age of 12 and had a long reign of 65 years from 732 to 797 CE. His reign was marked by many victories and failures. He had to flee from Kāñcīpuram soon after his coronation, unable to withstand the onslaught of his Chālukya rival, Vikramāditya. He later returned when he was imprisoned at Nandipuram near Kumbakōṇam and was rescued by his commander, Udayachandra, who destroyed his enemies and led him back victoriously. This general secured several victories all around for Nandivarman. In honor of his victories, his commander requested Nandivarman to make a gift of a Brahmadēya village to Vedic Brāhmaṇas. During his 21st ruling year, Nandivarman gifted a village to 108 Vedic Brāhmaṇas, naming it after his commander as Udayachandra-maṅgalam. The record known as the Udayēndram plates has survived. The gifted village was situated between two other Vedic Brāhmin settlements called Kumāra-maṅgalam and Samudra-datta-caturvedi-maṅgalam. Although the early Vedic villages were generally called maṅgalams, this record shows that there were also Catur-vedi-maṅgalams around 700 CE. All the donees in this record were mentioned as Śarmans, but neither their Vedic qualifications like Trivedis, nor the Yāgas they performed were recorded. However, their sūtrās and gotras were recorded. They belonged to one of the following sūtrās.
  1. Prāvacani - 16
  2. Āpastamba - 61
  3. Bahvrica - 4
  4. Vāseni (VajasaneyĪ)
  5. Chandoga
  6. Hiranyakēsin
  7. Āsvalāyana
  8. Kalārāsya
  9. Kālārccā and
  10. Agnivesyasūtrās
 The following were the gotras:
  1. Kauṇdiṇya - 11
  2. Kācyapa
  3. Bhāradvāja
  4. Jātu karṇa
  5. Vatsa
  6. Agnivesya
  7. Vātūla
  8. Ātreya
  9. Viṣṇuvṛtta
  10. Lohita
  11. Vasiṣta
  12. Gautama
  13. Parāsara
  14. Hārita
  15. Mudgala
  16. Kaucika - 9
 Another copper plate of the same king, issued two years later (765 CE), refers to the gift of four villages: Pullūr, Kudiyūr, Nellūr, and Takkāru. These were clubbed together and gifted under a new name, “Nayadhira-maṅgalam”, to 108 Brāhmaṇas at the request of Avanicandra yuvarājā. Among the Vedic Brāhmaṇas, some are called Ṣadaṅgavits, some Caturvēdī, and some were called Trivedī, while the rest of them were simply mentioned as Śarmans. Among the sūtrās, a large number were followers of Āpastambas, numbering 62. Prāvacanas were 21, Vāseni were 12, Hiraṇyakēsin were 6, and there were also Chandogas. Among the Gotra names, the following names are found: Sāndilya, Gautama, Bādarāyaṇa, Parāsara, Kācyapa, Ātrēya, Kaucika, konduba, Bhāradvāja, Varsa, Sāvarni, Maudgala, Māṣala, Hārita, Lohita, and Gārga are the common names. Some rare gōtras, such as Lohita and Saṅkrityāyana, are newly found in the list.

10.6. Tandantottam Plates

 The plate was issued at the request of one Dayāmukha and was gifted by King Nandivarman II to 308 Vedic Brāhmaṇas. Over 60 percent were called Caturvedin in the Tamiḻ portion. A considerable number were called Trivedin at some places. However, the Sanskrit part says all the Brāhmaṇas were Veda traya smritjuṣās. It must be taken that the usage is to suit the poetic meter, for the Tamiḻ part clearly distinguishes the Caturvedins and Trivedis. Some plates were missing from this charter, so all the 308 names are not available. Only 213 are found. Some of the Caturvedis are also mentioned as Somayajis. There were some Ṣadaṅgavits, some Vasanta Yājis, some Dasapuriyas, some Kramavittan, and two Sarva kratu yājis. Some more were called Bhaṭṭas, evidently exponents of Śāstras. There is one mentioned as caturvedi bhaṭṭa agnicit sarvakratu vājapeyi. Evidently, those with five distinct accomplishments were called Duvedi. Some other interesting facts are that Vaiṣṇavas were called Vaikhānasa. We also find such usage in the Cōḻa records. Vaiṣṇavas were in general called Vaikhānasa in the 10th century. We also know that during the Cōḻa period until the 11th century, the study of the Vaiṣṇava Śāstra was called Vaikhānasam in Vedic colleges. Among the donees we find followers of the following sūtras:
  1. Āpastamba
  2. Prāvacana
  3. Bhaviṣya
  4. Chandoga
  5. Hiraṇyakēsin
  6. Kalarāsya
  7. Kālārccā
 It is interesting to note that the maximum number is Āpastambhiyas, but not a single Bodhāyaniya. Out of 214 names available, 145 were followers of Āpastamba. The next comes Prāvacana sūtrā. The following are the gōtras mentioned: Ātreya, Gautama, Bhāradvāja, Vatsa, Mudgala, Sunkai(?), Rātītara, Kamaka, Vātūla, Lohita, Kaucika, Sālāvata, Kutsa, Vāsishta, Sāvarni, Parāsara, Vārakya, Kapi, Dūmrāyaṇa, Kacyaoa, Samkriti, Hārita, Mādra, Gārga, and Bhadārani. Among the gotras, Kācyaps is the maximum in number with 145, followed by Bhāradvājas with 53. As mentioned earlier, from this time, that is, the end of the 8th century, the caturvedi Brāhmaṇas predominate among the Vedic Brāmaṇas. The Brahmadēya lands, which were simply called maṅgalam, seem to have gained currency as Catur-vedi-maṅgalam.

10.7. Pāṇḍya Copper Plates

 There are three Pāṇḍya copper plates, all of which were original judicial documents. The first one is the Madurai plates of Pāṇḍya Arikēsari, (mid-7th century), the second called Vēḷvikkuḍi grant of Parāntaka Pāṇḍya Neduñjaḍaiyan, and the third the Daḷavāypuram plates of Parāntaka Vīra Nārāyaṇa (9th century). All three relate to gifts of lands made to Vedic Brāhmaṇas’. The first one details the king conferring land to a Brāhmaṇa for his erudition. The second was a land gift made to a Vedic Brāhmaṇa at the conclusion of a yāga by the king, but it was snatched away by a subsequent ruler of a different dynasty. When the previous dynasty was re-established a descendent of the original donee claimed return of the land. The ruling king after verifying documents conferred the land back to the descendent. The third was also a gift of a Vedic village to a group of Brāhmins which was misappropriated by a cultivator, but after inquiry by the king ordered it returned. The details of the three cases are as follows. As all three of them relating to lands gifted to Vedic Brāhmaṇas were Judicial documents verified after several centuries, the king’s knowledge of Dharma Śāstras is seen through these cases. These cases also show that Vedic education had established a very highly organised society. For more details, see the chapter on Vedic Courts (Chapter 12).

10.8. Kampavarmaṉ- Participation of Pārppaṉappaṭṭi

 Small Brāhmaṇa holdings were called Pārppaṉappaṭṭi in the late Pallava times. The residents of these holdings participated along with others in the maintenance of public utilities in the 9th century. The record comes from Kīḻpudūr, in the Chinglepet district, and is dated in the reign of Pallava Kampavarmaṉ. It records that a certain Mahādevaṉ, son of a chieftain, Perumbāṇaṉ-Sakkaḍi-Araiyaṉ, paid gold into the hands of the villagers who agreed to pay annual paddy at the rate of one Kāḍi per Paṭṭi of cultivable land as a “tank levy (ērikkāḍī)” for the maintenance of the tank so that the village may flourish. The lands cultivated with tank irrigation and lift irrigation were temple lands (Dēva Bhōgam), lands of the Jaina paḷḷis, land of the medical practitioner of the village (vaidya bhōga), and the lands of the Brāhmin holders Pārppaṉappaṭṭi (Brāhmin quarters). The villagers agreed to collect and maintain the tank, failing which the defaulters would be fined 24 kāṇam per day and if the village as a whole fails, the residents have to pay 48 kāṇams as a fine in the dharmāsana. Besides paying this fine, they must continue to measure and pay annual paddy as stipulated. The villagers, having received the gold from the donor, agreed to measure the paddy for the maintenance and arrange to maintain the village tank/lake. This stipulation was protected by the ruler of the respective period. It is evident that four institutions, temples, Jaina paḷḷi, village doctor, and the Brāhmin settlers had exemptions on equal footing. However, when it came to a common purpose, all were expected to pay as stipulated. Brāhmins were not exempted from paying taxes.

10.9. Two Copper Plates from Tiruttaṇi – Aparājita Pallava

 There are two copper plates, both coming from Tiruttaṇi located north of Chennai. Both relate to the gift of Brahmadēya villages in the hands of the Brāhmin sabhā of one village. These gifts were made to supply thousand Kāḍi of paddy annually to the temple of Subrahmaṇya on top of the hill for its pūjā and maintenance. So, both these gifts are called Dēvatāna Brahmadēyas. One was made by the last of the Pallava ruler Aparājita, in his 9th regnal year that is around 880 CE, and the other was the Cōḻa ruler Parāntaka almost fifty years later around 930 CE. Both the gifts were made with great devotion by these kings themselves. The Pallava ruler granted one village named Puttūr (probably identical with modern Puttūr near Tiruttaṇi). This village was under some other tenants as a tenure land Kāṇi. Their holding was terminated and was entrusted with the sabhā of the Meliruncchēru, now called Vēlañcēri (வேலஞ்சேரி) as Dēvatāna Brahmadēyakāṇi with usual rights and exemptions, given to Brahmadēya lands. The grant also details the boundaries of the village gifted. The king ordered that the villagers should include the gifted village as one with their village and should pay to the Lord Subrahmaṇya-pirāṉ on top of the hill as Pañcavāram 1000 Kāḍi of paddy annually and enjoy the rest of the proceeds themselves. The grant is in two parts like all other copper plates, the first part is in Sanskrit and the second part is in Tamiḻ (Tiruttaṇi and Vēlañcēri copper plates, R. Nagaswamy, 1979). The Sanskrit part is again in two parts: the first is poetry giving the genealogy and exploits of the donor King. The second part is in prose, which is an excellent example of Sanskrit used in civil administrative documents. The Tamiḻ part gives the details of the grant. I am providing the Sanskrit part to show how Sanskrit was used effectively and naturally as an official documentary language: देव: अपराजितपोत्तवर्मा स्व साम्राज्य अभिषेक सम्वत्सरे नवमे वर्त्तमाने कुन्दवर्द्धन कोद्ध अन्त: पातिनि तनियल नाम्नि राषट्रवर्त्तमानम् पूतूर् समाह्वयम ग्रामवरम् करिणी सम्चार कारितम् पताकम् अखिल जनपद जन विलिखित चतुस्सीम असादित सकल परीहार मुकुलित पुरातन क्रीषीवल कुटुम्बम् अवनितरौजग्राह्य विविधकरम् पूर्वॉक्त तनियल् आह्वय, अग्रहार वर्त्तिनि भूधरेन्द्रे सतत सन्निहिताय माहेश्वरसूनवे षण्मुखाय प्रति सम्वत्सर प्रदेय खारि सहस्र व्रीहिकरम् पूर्वाभिहितम् ग्रामान्त कॉट्ठान्त : राष्ट्रान्त वर्त्तिना मेलिरिन्चेरुनाम्ना लोक विख्याते महाग्रहारेण सह एकीक्रत्य तदग्रहार निवासिभ्य: धरणी गीर्वाण गणाग्रगण्येभ्य:निखिल वेदवेदाङ्ग पारावार पारगेभ्य: महीसुरेभ्य: निजकर कलित कनक कलश वान्त वारि धारा पुरस्सरम् परमया भक्त्या प्रायच्छत् । deva: aparājitapottavarmā sva sāmrājya abhiṣeka samvatsare navame varttamāne kundavarddhana koddha anta: pātini taniyala nāmni rāṣaṭravarttamānam pūtūr samāhvayama grāmavaram kariṇī samcāra kāritam patākam akhila janapada jana vilikhita catussīma asādita sakala parīhāra mukulita purātana krīṣīvala kuṭumbam avanitaraujagrāhya vividhakaram pūrvokta taniyal āhvaya, agrahāra varttini bhūdharendre satata sannihitāya māheśvarasūnave ṣaṇmukhāya prati samvatsara pradeya khāri sahasra vrīhikaram pūrvābhihitam grāmānta kañṭhānta : rāṣṭrānta varttinā melirincerunāmnā loka vikhyāte mahāgrahāreṇa saha ekīkratya tadagrahāra nivāsibhya: dharaṇī gīrvāṇa gaṇāgragaṇyebhya:nikhila vedavedāṅga pārāvāra pāragebhya: mahīsurebhya: nijakara kalita kanaka kalaśa vānta vāri dhārā purassaram paramayā bhaktyā prāyacchat |

10.10. Tiruttaṇi – Parāntaka Cōḻa’s Plates

 The second set of copper plates from Tiruttaṇi relates to the grant of three villages in the hands of the same Brāhmin sabhā of Meliruncchēru, and the purpose was the same. The said sabhā was expected to measure three thousand Khāri for the three villages to Lord Ṣaṇmukha on top of the hill. The charter is also in two parts: the first is in Sanskrit, and the second is in Tamil. The Sanskrit part in these plates is also in two parts, and the second is in chaste Sanskrit prose, like the previous one in the administrative draft, pointing out that Sanskrit was used in addition to Tamil as an official language. As the format is the same, we deal only with the additional information provided in this plate. The sabhā in whose hands the three villages were entrusted was expected to pay three thousand Khāri of paddy as Pañcavāra. In addition, they must pay nine kaḻañcu of gold, evidently at the rate of three kaḻañcu per village. The plate also says the Meliruncchēru village sabhā consisted of Vedic Brāhmaṇas, who were Sāma vedins following the Sahasra Sākhā. These two plates are a class by themselves as the Brahmadēyas were not gifted to any Vedic Brāhmaṇas individually, but as a collective Brahmadēya, which was also expected to provide a measure of the produce to Lord Subrahmaṇya on top of the hill for his pūjā and other temple expenses. The remainder of the produce must have been shared among the members of the sabhā.

10.11. Anbil Plate of Sundara Cōḻa

 Another important gift of Ekabhōga Brahmadēya of historic interest is the Anbil plate of Sundara Cōḻa, the father of Rājarāja Cōḻa I, who gifted a village Karuṇākara-maṅgalam mentioned in the record as Ekabhōga Brahmadēya. The first part of the plate, written in beautiful Sanskrit poetry, had attracted the attention of scholars. In brief, it first mentions the first great Cōḻa emperor, Vijayālaya Cōḻa, who established the Cōḻa Empire at Tañjāvūr. Then it mentions his son, Āditya Cōḻa, who had the title Rājakēsari. Mentioning his exploits, the record says he built a row of stone temples to Śiva, from the Sahyādri mountain to the shores of the ocean on the banks of Kāvēri. These are great Cōḻa temples that have survived to this day. Āditya’s son was Parāntaka Cōḻa, a great conqueror who married the daughter of the Kerala king, Paḻuvettaraiyar. His son through her was Ariñjaya, who married Kalyāṇī, a daughter of the Vaitumba family, who was known by her coronation name, “Kalyāṇa Mahādevī”. Their son was Sundara Cōḻa, the donor of the grant. Sundara Cōḻa gifted ten vēlis of land in the village Nanmulāṅkudi, renaming it Karuṇākara-maṅgalam as Ekabhōga Brahmadēya to his Brāhmin minister, Aniruddha Brahma Mārāyar. This minister is praised as having great fame, being a Sāma Vedin, and belonging to the Āvēsani-gōtra and Jaimini-sūtrā. His father was Nārāyaṇa, a great teacher of Vedic traditions, who was praised by his disciples for his great qualities and fame. Aniruddha’s grandfather was also another Aniruddha who performed great Yāgas and arranged to feed devotees with food offered to the lord of Śrīraṅgam during midnight worship. Similarly, Aniruddha’s great-grandfather was Ananta, a great devotee of Brāhmins whom he fed. Aniruddha, who served as Sundara Cōḻa’s minister, was praised as the very abode of valour and good qualities, and the king honored him with the title Brahmādhirājan. The Tamiḻ part of the record gives the boundaries of the village gifted and briefly mentions the rights and privileges of the gifted village.

10.12. Āṉaimaṅgalam Grant of Rājarāja

 The Cōḻas were the greatest administrators and even among them, Rājarāja was the greatest. He perfected the administrative system, which was reflected in every department. One of his extraordinary records relates to a gift of a village for the maintenance of a Buddha chaitya. This chaitya was built by the side of a vihāra built by the king of Śrī Vijaya, Śrī Māravijayottuṅga-varman, in the name of his father, Cūḍāmaṇi-varman, at Nāgappaṭṭiṇam. It involved the transfer of many villages that were clubbed together, including Brahmdēyas, Nāḍus, and so on. The record issued by him is inscribed on a copper plate charter, which is now preserved in the Leiden Museum, Holland. It is known as the Leiden grant, or more accurately, the Āṉaimaṅgalam grant. A study of these grants reveals many aspects and roles of Vedic Brāhmaṇas, Brahmadēya villages, etc. The plate is written in two parts: the first part is in Sanskrit and the second is in Tamil. The grant was issued in the 21st ruling year of Rājarāja and took effect from that year. However, inscribing the same on copper plates took some years, which took place after the demise of Rājarāja, and the copper plates were later issued in the time of his son, Rājēndra Cōḻa I. The draft remained unchanged as issued by Rājarāja, with the additional information that the copper plate was inscribed during Rājēndra’s time. The original draft, written in palm leaves and sent to the respective villages, might have been in operation then. We shall first look at the Tamiḻ part regarding the administration. The main administration was in two parts, one functioning from the royal secretariat at the capital and the second in the respective regional centres and the concerned villages. The king’s orders were issued verbally and recorded by the royal scribe who accompanied the king. As the king was considered the God on earth his orders were considered divine, and it was customary to record it with a phrase “tiruvāymoḻi moḻintaruliṇa”. It was also required to record when and where the king uttered the order. In the case of this grant, the king says he issued the order in his 22nd year, on the 92nd day, when he was seated in the outer Palace called Rājāśrayan, at Tañjāvūr. The order was issued to the assembly of cultivators, Brahmadēya villages, Dēvatānas, the villages of Jains and Buddhists, astronomers, villagers, and hunter settlements. The gift mentioned as 100 vēli of land (the original consists of some fragmentary measurement, the one mentioned here is the rounded figure) in Āṉaimaṅgalam, excluding some lands that had been exempted earlier. A tax of 8940 and odd kalam of paddy (it should have been a total of 10,000 kalams) in Kṣatriya sikhāmaṇi vaḷanāṭṭu, paṭṭiṇa kūṛṛrattu Āṉaimaṅgalam village. This was meant to meet all required expenses of the Buddha-chaitya in the Cūḍāmaṇi-varma vihāra being constructed by the king of Kadāram at Nāgappaṭṭinam. This should be measured from the 21st year, ordered Rājarāja. This order was committed to writing by the royal scribe Amudaṉ Tīrttakaraṉ. It seems while the orders were issued three high officials were appearing as Senāpatis elsewhere. The three officers verified the correctness of the draft. They were
  • Kṛṣṇaṉ Rāmaṉ, who had the title Mummuḍi Cōḻa Brahmamārāyaṉ, was called “Chief Superintendent of Documents” (Ōlai Nāyakam).
  • Īrāyiravaṉ Pallavaraiyaṉ, who had the title Mummuḍi Cōḻa Bōjaṉ.
  • Uttama Cōḻaṉ, who had the title Madurāntaka mūvēnda vēlāṉ.
 These three officers verified and approved the draft. It may be seen that among the highest royal officers, one was a Brāhmaṇa (Brahmādhirājaṉ), the second was a chieftain (Bōjaṉ), and the third was a Veḷḷālaṉ (Mūvēndavelāṉ). There was no caste distinction among the senior-most officers, nor was there a hierarchy. These officers issued orders to have the grant entered into the tax registers. It is pertinent to mention that this is an important procedure. Whenever the kings issue a tax exemption on any land, it is necessary first to remove the entry about that land as a “tax-paying Land” at the royal secretariat. This function was verified and examined by as many as 14 high-ranking officers who were called karmam ārāyvār, or “examining functionaries”. Some functionaries were called “Keepers” of registers. As most of these entries were maintained in palm leaves, a large number of bundles had to be maintained, which was an important function. Out of these 14 officers, the majority of them were Veḷḷāḷars’, two were Brāhmins, and the rest belonged to other castes. There was no caste-based discrimination in the Cōḻa administration, with people of all castes serving in the same capacity. The king nominated some officers to oversee the demarcation of boundaries. These officers were to verify the boundaries by visiting the designated places, arranging for an elephant with a person mounted, holding a flag, and going around planting boundary stones. This order was again rechecked by high-ranking officers Kṛṣṇaṉ Rāmaṉ, Mummuḍi Cōḻa Bhōjaṉ, and Mūvēndavēlāṉ mentioned earlier. An alternate name for the officers is also mentioned in the grant. The royal scribe was called “tiru-mantira ōlai” and three chief officers were called “tiru mantra ōlai nāyaka”. This shows that any royal order by the king was equated to the sacred mantra of the Vedas, hence the word mantram. These officers gave the final orders for its dispatch to the concerned village. All the above work took place in the royal central secretariat of the capital. The praṣasti of the king, found in inscriptions, usually begins with “This order, now called the Tirumukham, comes to the Nāṭṭār.” This bears the royal personal seal of the king. When it arrives at the village, the Nāṭṭār should get up and go, receive it, and place the same on their head. As ordered, they should go around on an elephant, mark the boundaries of the gifted land, plant boundary stones, milk the Kaḷḷi plant, and write the gift deed for the villages. From that time on, one gets the name of the village, its revenue division, boundaries, village landmarks like canals and pathways, the owners of some lands with it, etc. Here we see Veḷḷāḷar, Brāhmaṇas, Potters, and Barbers as residents in the village. The following villages were adjoining Āṉaimaṅgalam:
  • Kōvūr
  • Āṉaimaṅgalam Brahmadēyam
  • Civalaikkuḍi Brahmadāyam,
  • Veṭṭappērus
  • Munchikkuḍi
  • Munchikkuḍi Veḷḷāḷar
  • Munchikkuḍi Brahmadēyas
  • Munchikkuḍi vēḷḷāṉ vāhai
  • Āṉaimaṅgalam feeder canal Rājarājaṉ vāykkāl
  • Brahmadēyam muṅgirkuḍi
  • Brahmadēyam Nallūrcceri
  • Pirambil
 The boundaries of the gifted village skirted the above villages. In marking the boundaries, the work started with the boundary of a carpenter at Kōvūr and after going around, all the boundaries ended up with the land of the same carpenter. The land so situated included:
  1. Wetlands
  2. Dry lands
  3. The village
  4. Village habitation
  5. Tank
  6. Temples
  7. Paraicceri (drummers’ quarters)
  8. Kammāṉacceri (craftsmen quarters)
  9. Cremation ground
The following lands were also included:
  1. The residential house yards
  2. Shops
  3. Shopping centres
  4. Open grounds
  5. Gracing grounds of cattle
  6. Tanks
  7. Granaries
  8. Warehouse (Kiḍaṅgu)
  9. Well
  10. Anthills
  11. Mounds
  12. Forests
  13. Pit-like low land
  14. Waste land
  15. Salty land
  16. River
  17. Riverbeds
  18. Idai
  19. Fishing tanks
  20. Honeycombs
  21. Trees growing up
  22. Wells going down
All were inclusive without exception, any land falling within:
  • Excess or shortage.
  • Using rainwater and use feudatory rights.
  • Grant of permission relates mainly to irrigation.
The following were the permissions:
  • For building storied houses: Permission granted for digging useable well.
  • Permission granted to rear coconut groves
  • Flowers like damanakam, marukkoḻuntu, iruvēli, ṣeṇbakam, seṅgaḻunīr,
  • Mango grove
  • Jack fruit trees
  • Betel nut trees
  • Palm trees
  • Betel (creepers)
  • And other useful trees could be planted
  • Toddy tappers were not permitted to climb coconut and palm trees.
  • Permission was granted to plant a drum and triple umbrellas per the customs of their families.
  • Then the grant goes on to list taxes exempted.
These are called Parihāram:
  1. Nādāṭci
  2. Ūrāṭci
  3. Vadu nālum
  4. Pitānāli
  5. Kaṇṇālakkkāṇam
  6. Vaṇṇārap Pārai
  7. Idaippāttam
  8. Māttukkūrai
  9. Nallā
  10. Nallerudu
  11. Nāḍukāval
  12. Kucakkānam
  13. Munnirkkūḻi
  14. Īḻakkūlam
  15. Taraku
  16. Tarippuḍavai
  17. Tattārpāttam
  18. Virpidi
  19. Vāla Mancādi
  20. Ulku
  21. Odakkūli
  22. Manrupādu
  23. Māvirai
  24. Iḻampūṭci
  25. Kūttik-kāl
All these were the taxes levied by the king, which he relinquished and ordered to be given to the Paḷḷi of the Buddhist, which was being built by the king of Kiḍāram at Nāgappaṭṭinam. Then we find a large number of members who were present while the boundaries were demarcated. Nearly twenty-seven villages were party to the marking of boundaries, out of which eight were Brahmadēyas.

10.13. Agrahārams at Tāramaṅgalam, in the 13th Century

 A remarkable set of inscriptions from the Tāramaṅgalam village, Salem district, of the Koṅgu region refers to the setting up of an Agaram for Brāhmins. For nearly 400 years, the village of Tāramaṅgalam remained a famous headquarters of agriculturalists called Veḷḷāḷars, also known as Getty Mudaliyārs. These Veḷḷāḷars were endowed with many heroic titles like “Mastakakūḍēri”, “Makuṭacūḍāmaṇi”, “Vaṇṇattadukkum”, and “Vādātamālaiyum” (colorful plate, fresh garlands as their royal emblem). They were also called landlords (Nilam Kiḻārs) in the later Pāṇḍya period. At the end of the 13th century, during the 6th regnal year of Jaṭāvarmaṉ Sundara, one Nallār Udaiyāṉ Mudaliyār called Tāramaṅgala Mudaliyār purchased some lands from the Nāṭṭār (territorial assembly) and established an Agaram. The land was allotted to Caturvedi Bhaṭṭas as Agaram in the name of his father Iḷaya Perumāḷ. The Koṅgu country was greatly attracted towards the Tamiḻ Rāmāyaṇa written by Kambaṉ in which the name Iḷaya Perumāḷ was used for Lakṣmaṇa, the brother of Rāma. The father of Nallappā Udaiyāṉ was called Iḷaya Perumāḷ after Lakṣmaṇa. Thus, Nallappā Uḍaiyār called the Agaram as “Iḷayaperumāḷ-lakṣmaṇa-caturvedi-maṅgalam”. A number of Nāṭṭārs of that region have signed the sale deed as Mudaliyār. Seven years later additional lands were purchased by the same donor and added to the same Agara Bhaṭṭas. Later, in the time of Hōysala Vīrarāmanātha, a land gift was recorded in the same village as temple land “Dēvatāna” to a Śiva temple called Iḷamiśvaram Uḍaiyār, by the Mudalis and villagers. The name Iḷamīśvaram seems to suggest it was a part of that Agaram. In the same year, we find another parcel of land given to the temple by the same family of Mudaliyārs. It is interesting to see an undated record in the same place referring to a great Ācārya from Bengal, with names such as “Gauḍa Cūḍāmaṇi”, “Khadai Vakula”, “Vidyā samudra”, “Śrīkaṇṭha dēvar”, etc. This Ācārya had earlier gifted some lands to the temple of Iḷamiśvara in memory of his mother, but in the Śivaite name of his father Sōmanātha. The present record indicates that after Sōmanātha’s demise, his wife, the mother of Gauḍa Cūḍāmaṇi mentioned in this record, consecrated a Liṅga in the temple of Iḷāmiśvara Udaiyār of the village, in the name of Sōmanātha (obviously as a memorial temple). The six Mudalis of the village gave land to that Ācārya as gurudakṣiṇā. The record belongs to the same date, the end of the 13th century, the age of Hoysala Vīra Rāmanāthan. As the entire transaction is in Tamiḻ, the Ācārya from Gauda dēśa seemed to have settled in the region and served as a guru of these Mudalis. An Agaram named Koṭṭai Samudram was gifted by Vaṇaṅgāmudi Mudaliyār, Nalludai Appar, in Tāramaṅgalam. This Mudaliyār had the same titles as “Mastakakūdēri”, “Makuṭacūḍāmaṇi”, “Vaṇṇattaḍukkum” and “Vāḍamālai”. He is called a landlord and seems to have lived in a fortification “Koṭṭai” and so the Agaram was called Koṭṭai Samudra. The record is dated in the reign of Achyutarāya, the successor of Kṛṣṇadeva Rāyar in the year 1539. It may be noted that the Brahmin colonies came to be called “Samudram”. The name Catur-vedi-maṅgalam which was used till the 13th century disappeared from usage. The record (no. 28 of SII vol VII) says the Mudaliyār who was also called Koṭṭai Mudaliyar gifted the village Kāvērippaṭṭi, named the place as Koṭṭai Samudram, an Agrahāram (Koṭṭai mudaliyar, innāttu kāvērippaṭṭi, koṭṭai samudram ennu nāmadeyam paṇṇi agrāram vittēṉ). Nine years later, in the reign of Vijayanagara king Sadāśiva, his officer, one Tuppaiyyaṉ, a Mudaliyār of Tāramaṅgalam Koṭṭai, while on his way to Kurattūr fort (on invasion), gave a gift of an Agrahāram on the banks of the river Kāvēri on a sacred day. The Agrāhāra was called Vaṇaṅgāmuḍi Samudram. (No 27 of SII Vol VII).

10.14. Sabha, a Vedic Tradition

 It is necessary to note that Tamiḻnāḍu has a very large number of villages, running into several thousands. In most of these villages, we have ancient inscriptions. All these inscriptions reveal that the majority of these villages had village assemblies (Sabhas), which were administered by the village people, and the members were all elected to the assemblies who had signed the documents. The word Sabha indicates they were Vedic institutions. The mode of election and functioning was through pot tickets (kuṭa-olai) methods and committees called “Vāriyams”. These are well attested by the Uttaramērūr inscription of Parāntaka Cōḻa. A close reading of the wordings shows they were Vedic terminology. Evidently, the village administration of the whole of Tamiḻnāḍu was based on Vedic tradition. In no part of India do we have such a large number of inscriptions through the centuries. This is one of the areas where we have solid evidence of Vedic tradition so well spread out in villages as in Tamiḻnāḍu.
Contents | Previous | Next | Academy