Annual Reports

INTRODUCTION

kaḍigai in these records some of which refer to the god as Akkārakkani Nāraśiṅgapperumāḷ. The Nālāyiradivyaprabandham, a Vaishṇava anthology of hymns, contains some verses in praise of this god, which attribute the epithet Akkārakkani (fruit of sugar) to him. One of the inscriptions (No. 207) refers to the place as Chōḷēndraśiṅgapuram of which the modern Sholinghur or Śoḷiṅgapuram is a corruption (cf. Ep. Ind., Vol. IV, p. 221).

  Among the inscriptions copied in the village Paṭṭaraipperumbudūr (Tiruvallur Taluk, Chingleput District), a late edpigraph assignable to the Vijayanagara period (No. 246) records the dedication of the services of two persons as Tiruviḷakkukuḍi by the chief Ophaḷanāthagaḷ for the merit of his overlord Tipparājauḍaiyar. These men whose services were so dedicated were, according to the epigraph, śādakkuḍis in the donor’s estate Palaiyanūrppaṭṭaḍai. In a number of inscriptions from Paḍavēḍu in the Pōlur Taluk, North Arcot District, (cf. Nos. 47, 48, 59, 60, etc., of 1940-41), phrases such as Puttūrkku śādam irukkum kuḍi, Āndināṭṭukku śādam irukkum kuḍi, Kaḷamūrkōvaikku śādam irukkum kuḍi, etc., occur indicating that the term śādam stands for a kind of tax or levy for a particular area.

   No. 278 on a pillar in the prākāra of the Sītārāmasvāmin temple at Kanuparti (Guntur District) belongs to the Sambeṭa chief Mahāmaṇḍalēśvara VīraAvubhaḷadēva Chōḍamahārāja, son of Ālamandala Nuṁkayadēva Chōḍamahārāja. It records the confirmation of the sarvamānya grant, formerly made by the rāya in favour of the temples and Brāhmaṇas of Kanuparru, by this chief for the merit of Vīra Dēvarāya-mahārāya, his queen Dēmā-ammaṅgāru and the crown-prince (paṭṭaṁ kumāruṇḍu) Vijaya-Bukkarāya-mahārāya. The record is dated in the Śaka year 1348, Parābhava, Māgha śu. [11 Thursday], corresponding to 1427 A.D., January 9. An inscription from Karshanapalle (Punganur Taluk, Chittoor District) records a grant by the Śammaṭṭi chief Vīra-Obaḷadēva Chōḷamahārāja when Vijayarāya-uḍaiyar was ruling at Muḷuvāyil in the Śaka year 1332 (cf. No. 324 of 1912). The Daṇḍepalle plates (Ep. Ind., Vol. XIV, pp. 68 ff.), which are also dated in Śaka 1332 (1410 A.D.) and record a grant of a village by prince Vijayabhūpati, mention his mother name Dēmāmbikā as the daughter of Nūka-bhūpāla of the solar race. The full name of this prince as given in this record is Vijaya-Bukka. As Nuṁkayadēva of the Kanuparti inscription appears to be identical with Nūka-bhūpāla of the Daṇḍapalle plates, it may be surmised that the Sambeṭa or Sammaṭṭi chiefs were matrimonially connected with the Saṅgama dynasty of Vijayanagara.

   Ramanchēri (Chingleput District) has yielded seven inscriptions (Nos. 252-258) all of which throw some light on the original name of the village and thereby also bear eloquent testimony to the irrigation policy of the Vijayanagara kings. The earliest inscription (No. 257), dated in Śaka 1390 in the reign of Virūpāksha, is engraved on a stone, called Iluvaikkallu in the inscription, which is stated to have been set up at Irāmadagukāvalśēri by Appaya-nāyaka. Irāmadagu-kāval-śēri literally means the settlement guarding the sluice at night. This stone is set up on an elevated spot affording a bird’s eye view of the area surrounding the village of Rāmanchēri. Probably the sluice was exactly on or near the present site of the village where a contingent of men were posted to guard it, thus accounting for the name Irā-madagu-kāval-śēri. There is, however, no vestige either of the tank or of its sluice in the village now, barring this inscribed st one. The village is called Padaṭṭai-madagai in another inscription in verse (No. 258) in the deserted temple of Rāmaliṅgasvāmin in the village.

   No. 320 on the west wall of the Vāmana shrine at Śrīraṅgam, a Tamil record engraved in late Grantha characters, states that Śrīraṅgadēvarāya, the disciple (śishya) of Tātāchārya, caused the construction of the garbhagṛiha, ardhamaṇḍapa, mahāmaṇḍapa, gōpura, etc., [of the temple] at Vāmanakshētra and endowed a village to the same. It is obviously the Vāmana temple itself that was renovated by this king. The date of the record is wrongly quoted as Śaka 4112, Parābhava. Even if the first two digits of the date are construed as interposed by mistake, the cyclic year does not agree with the Śaka year cited and the date is too early by about 80 years for Śrīraṅga I. If, however, the inscription belongs to Śrīraṅga I, then Tātāchārya figuring in the inscription and bearing the epithet Śrīraṅgadēva-śikhāmaṇi may be identical with the famous Vaishṇava teacher Kōṭikanyādānam Tātāchārya who is known to have been the guru of Vēṅkaṭa II, successor of Śrīraṅga.