Annual Reports

INTRODUCTION

Chōḷa throne. The record refers to a transaction that took place on the 352nd day of the 41st year of his reign. We learn that this was a Tuesday, in the month of Āni when the nakshatra was Rōhiṇī. These details regularly correspond to A. D. 1111, June 6, Tuesday, Rōhiṇī and would show that Monday, 20th June, A.D. 1110, on which day the nakshatra was Pushya, was the day on which the 41st year of his reign commenced. As this anniversary date fell, according to the Indian Calendar, on Āshāḍha śu. 2, Pushya, it may be supposed that it was precisely in this month and nakshatra in the year 1070 A.D. that Kulōttuṅga I ascended the Chōḷa throne. The afore-mentioned details correspond to A.D. 1070 June 13, Sunday, on which day the asterism was Pushya. Apparently, therefore, it was on this day and nakshatra that he became the king of the Chōḷa country. It may be noted that an inscription of his at Peṇṇāḍam, South Arcot District (A.R. No. 242 of 1929), records provision made in a local temple for special worship on the day of Pushya every month for the king’s welfare. It has been supposed, mainly on the evidence of this record, that Pushya was the star of his nativity. But, from what has been stated above, Pushya may as well be the asterism of his assumption of ruling powers over the Chōḷa dominions. Many of the other inscriptions of Kulōttuṅga I copied at Śrīraṅgam have one main theme ; and that is, of assigning, by sale, to a person or groups of persons, portions, of a vast stretch of temple land that had been inundated and buried under sand by the overflow of the river Kāvērī and was consequently rendered unfit for cultivation for a century. In every one of these cases it was stipulated that the recipients should reclaim these lands, bring them under cultivation and make over a specified quantity of the produce into the temple granary or raise flower or fruit gardens for the benefit of the great temple.

   A few inscriptions of the Chōḷa period copied at Pērambākkam, Chingleput District (Nos. 66, 67, 72, 73-5), are interesting inasmuch as they level that the affairs of the village were conducted by an administrative body called the niyāyattār. It is well known that in South India local administrative bodies functioned with great efficiency and inscriptions disclose the existence of many of them which had different names like the āḷuṅgaṇattār, etc. The niyāyattār was a similar body, which is not, however, frequently met with in inscriptions.

   The practice of rewarding posthumously persons who laid down their lives in defence of their village is attested by an inscription (No. 54) of the tenth century of the time of Chōḷa Parakēsarivarman. The record which was copied at Kākkaḷūr in the Chingleput District states that when Kalivīriya Muttaraiyan a Vaḷḷuvan of Kākkaḷūr died fighting a gang of robbers who raided the village, the assembly of the village granted to his son a piece of land as kalippaṭṭi (i.e., land given to a hero.)

   At the village of Bāḷehaḷḷi in the Dharwar District there are eight hero-stones, one of which (No. 182) records the death of some warriors who died defending the village against the attack of the Hoysaḷa prince Sōma, i.e., Sōmēśvara.