The Colas c25.34

c25.34

We have an instance reported in an inscription⁸² of Uttama Cōḻa which furnishes an early example of remissness and neglect with regard to details, partly due to the fact that the system of audit and control elaborated in later times had not yet arrived. The village Śiṟṟiyāṟṟūr was granted as a *dēvadāna* and *brahmadēya* in the twenty-first year of Āditya I, apparently soon after his overthrow of Aparājita and the annexation of Toṇḍaimaṇḍalam. Although a *śāsana* was drawn up in the very next year, the grant was not entered in the account books till the fourth year of Parāntaka I or more than twelve years later. Again, in the 36th year of Parāntaka I a fresh allocation was made of the dues from the lands (granted to the temple) for which the assembly of Puduppākkam was responsible; the assembly apparently managed to evade the enhanced assessment due from it in consequence; towards the close of Uttama Cōḷa's reign the whole subject was brought up for enquiry before the king at Kāñcīpuram, the defaulters punished, and the rights of the temple restored. The confusion in this instance may have also been partly due to the disturbed state of the times following the Rāṣṭrakūṭa invasion.⁸³ In this instance, the complaint against the *sabhā* of Puduppākkam, is laid before a high official at the Court, having the title Śōḻamūvēnda-Vēḷān, by the authorities of the temple; that official takes it to the king;⁸⁴ the king himself summons to his presence the parties concerned and delivers judgement after enquiry, confirming the old grants to the temple and the responsibility of Puduppākkam for the supply of a certain quantity of paddy and a fixed amount of gold, and orders the necessary entries to be made in the rolls. The officers present on the occasion were one *karumi*, two *naḍuvirukkai*, who acted as *āṇatti* and *vāykkēḷvi*; the order was written out by an *uttaramantri* on duty (*ōlai-eḻudum*), and compared and attested by the *ōlaināyagam*; then a *karumi*⁸⁵ ordered the entry to be made in the registers (*variyiliṭṭuk-koḷga*) in accordance with this document (*tīṭṭu*); and then, four officers of the *puravu-vari* one of whom was an *uttaramantri*, one of the *varippottagam*, four *mukaveṭṭi* officers, three officers of the *puravu-vari* of Toṇḍai-nāḍu, two of the *varippottagak-kaṇakku*, and two of the *variyilīḍu* were present together and made the entries in the official records and attested them. In the Leyden grant are enumerated all these stages in almost identical form,⁸⁶ and there is one more step at the end; an officer called *mandira-ōlai* sends a *tirumugam* to the *nāṭṭār* of the Paṭṭinakkūṟṟam requesting them to make an *aṟavōlai* (charity-deed) after marking off in a solemn manner the boundaries of the village granted, which they do in the presence of a *puravu-vari* officer. It may be observed, in passing, that this particular grant seems to be signed by the representative officers of all the villages of the Paṭṭinakkūṟṟam. The Tiruvālaṅgāḍu plates mention also these later stages culminating in the drawing up of an *aṟavōlai*, and further introduce the names of some new officers like *puravuvari-tiṇaik-kaḷam*,⁸⁷ *paṭṭōlai*, *kīḻ-mugaveṭṭi*, *puravuvaritiṇaik-kaḷattuk-kaṇkāṇi* in addition to those already named.