Book Title: Indian Antiquary Vol 46
Author(s): Richard Carnac Temple, Devadatta Ramkrishna Bhandarkar
Publisher: Swati Publications

Previous | Next

Page 169
________________ JULY, 1917] THE HISTORY OF THE NAIK KINGDOM OF MADURA 157 if imaginative,31 story is current ir. regard to Mangammâl, which at once gives an adequate idea of the remarkable affection she commanded among her contemporaries, not only at Madura but abroad. It is a story illustrative of the generosity of the Queen-Regent and the parsimony of a contemporary king of Mysore. A few months before Mangammal's32 death the Mysore monarch, a miser, had died and gone to hell, while his crown was inherited by a more miserly son. About the same time, a Vangia merchant of Mysore died and was carried by the a,ents of the god Yama, but on reaching the city of death they were told that a wrong man 'ad been brought by them. The Vangian was therefore about to be taken back to the arth, when the royal sufferer, who was undergoing the tortures of hell, recognised him as a former subject and took advantage of his return to the world of life to send a message to his son, the then king! The penitent and fallen chief said that, waile he was ruling Mysore, he had amassed an abundance of wealth, but instead of spending it on behalf of the people he had buried it. No thought of charity or benevolence had ever entered into his mind and the result was his terrible fate. On the other hand, Queen Maigammal of Madura had done innumerable acts of benevolence, and the beings of heaven were erecting triumphal arches to receive her and honour her. The repentant chief therefore asked the merchant to proceed to his son, take the buried treasure out, and expend33 it in charities, so that he might be emancipated from the trials of hell. The Vannian, the story continues, did so, and a lesson was learnt by all future kings. The general events during her regency. Such was the golden opinion that Mangammâ inspired in her own days. What Tirumal Nâik did in regard to architecture, she did in regard to roads and choultries. The one was famous for his architectural monuments, the other for her philanthropic labours. The one appealed to the artistic instinct in man, the other to his heart. The former again dazzled men by his splendour, the latter won them by her generosity. And yet Mangamma]'s claim to greatness consisted not merely in her generous nature or her benevolent virtues. Endowed with many masculine virtues, she proved a politician of no mean talents. For a space of seventeen years3 she conducted the affairs of State in such excellent spirit that her regency became, if not a model of good government, at least strong enough to secure order within the state and victory abroad. She had a certain vigour and independence of character which ensured the security of her reign and the discomfiture of her enemies. The circumstances under which she found herself in power were more gloomy 31 The Telugu Record of the Carnatic Governors from Tirumal Ndik onward. 32 Mangammal died in 1705 and Chikka Dêva in 1704. The latter is thus clearly the person referred to. 33 The story, of course, is a myth and has been invented by a fertile imagination to contrast the liberality of Mangammal with the parsimony of the contemporary Mysore ruler, Chikka Dêvs Raja, (1672-1704) who, in spite of his victories, introduced a number of vexatious taxes, and never broke his fast every day till he deposited two bags of pagodas in the treasury out of the revenues. See Wilks. Mysore, I, 63; Rice I, 306 to 369. 34 1689-1705. The Hist, Carna, Govrs, attributes her reign to S. 1617-1635, i. e., A.D. 1685:1713, from Yuva to Nandana. The Pand. Chron. says that she was regent from Raudri for 12 years. It does not specify particularly the date. The Supple. MS. agrees with the Hist. of Carna. Gours., which assigns 19 years from Pramoduta to Vikrama. Kali Kavi Rayan's chronicle, with its usual vagueness, attributes 8 5 years to her regency and further says that she was the sister of Vijaya Ranga! The Telugu chronicle says that she ruled from 1707-1725. This is wrong. Epigraphy shows that she came to power before -1690. (Sewell's Antiquities II, 85.)

Loading...

Page Navigation
1 ... 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508