Epigraphia Indica Vol 09

SR No.: 032563
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: E Hultzsch, Sten Konow
Publisher: Archaeological Survey of India
Publication Year: 1907
Total Pages: 498
Language: English
Classification: Book_English
File Size: 28 MB

Page 302

No. 32.] MAMBALLI PLATE OF SRIVALLAVANGO DAI; KOLLAM 149.
on a Sunday corresponding to the Asvati-nakshatra in the month Vrischika when the planet Jupiter stood in the constellation Tula. Professor Kielhorn kindly contributes the following remarks on the date:-"If the date were correctly recorded, it would correspond, for the year 149 of the Kollam era, to Sunday, the 9th November A.D. 973, which was the 15th day of the month of Vrischika, and on which [the 11th tithi of the bright half of Margasira ended 11 h. 12 m., while] the nakshatra was Rêvati for 16 h. 25 m., after mean sunrise, and Asvini (Asvati) for the rest of the day. On the same day Jupiter's mean longitude was 191' 44', and his true longitude 195° 27', i.e. in either case Jupiter was in the sign Tula."
235
"The difficulty here is, that the day should have been described as the day of the nakshatra Asvini, when this nakshatra only commenced 16 h. 25 m. after mean sunrise; and I have no doubt whatever that either Asvinî (Asvati) has been quoted erroneously instead of Rêvati, or Sunday instead of Monday. If the week-day were Monday, the date would regularly correspond to Monday, the 10th November A.D. 973, the 16th day of Vrischika, when the nakshatra was Asvini (Asvati) for 16 h, 25 m. after mean sunrise, and when Jupiter of course still was in the sign Tula."
The inscription informs us that Umaiyammai of Tirukkalayapuram, daughter of Adichchan, set up a bhaṭṭuraka (image) in the temple at Ayurûr. The king Śrivallavangôdai made a gift of land to Umaiyammai for the purpose of keeping up the services of the bhaṭṭuraka set up in the Ayurûr temple; and she, in her turn, made over the subject matter of the gift to the Tiruchchenguprûr temple, in order that it might be placed under the management of the Poduvals of that temple. From the produce of the land so given, the Poduvals of the temple of Tiruchchengunrûr had to supply to the temple daily 4 nális of rice for daily offerings and annually 200 parais (of 9 nalis each) of paddy. If the word uḍai used in 1. 18 was really meant to be used in the sense of of or belonging to,' the inscription would warrant us to draw the conclusion that Umaiyammai was a near relation of Brivallavangodai - either mother or wife. It would then be more probable to consider her as his wife than as his mother, as the passage Srivallavangódaiy-udai Adichchan-Umaiyammai means Âdichchan Umaiyammai belonging to Srivallavangodai. She might perhaps be the daughter of the Chôja king Aditya II., to whose time this record belongs. If, on the other hand, udai be a mistake for iḍai then no sort of relationship need exist between the two.
The inscription employs several peculiar terms which require some explanation each. The word attippêru (11. 8 and 19) implies acquisition by the pouring of water.' This mode of acquisition differs from others, such as purchase, etc. The meaning of the expressions kiliḍu and idaiy-idu is not definitely known. Kil-idu literally means that which is placed under,' and idaiy-idu, that which is placed in the middle.' A piece of land placed under the management of a person was perhaps called a kilidu with reference to that person. If this person sublet to a third party, the person subletting seems to be the iḍaiy-idan, i.e. he is the middle man between the owner of the property and the sub-tenant. It is in this sense that the passages of the inscription, in which these terms occur have been translated. The name poduval was given to a class of people who were eligible for service in temples. It has now
1 [According to the Editor's footnote 4 on p. 236, the name of the week-day is engraved over an erasure.-P. K.] 2 [See below, p. 238, note 3.-V. V.]
[The record may belong either to the reign of Aditya II. or of his successor Madhurantaka. If Umaiyammai was the daughter of the Chola king Aditya II., it is difficult to understand why he is described as a native of Tirukkalayapuram. In all probability she was a private individual.-V. V.]
[See below, p. 238, note 10.-V. V.]
[See below, p. 237, note 12.-V. V.] [Compare Hultasch, Ind. Ant. Vol. XX. p. 292.-V. V.]
2 H 2