The Colas c28: Chapter XX. Population: Social Divisions: Standard of Life

The Cōḷas c28

Language: English

c28.10 — 4 parts
c28.19 — 4 parts

Chapter XX. Population: Social Divisions: Standard of Life

c28.2

Caste was the basis of social organisation and many examples of caste organisations have been incidentally passed under review in the course of our study of social and economic life. Each caste was more or less a hereditary occupational group with an active organisation for the regulation and protection of its economic and social interests; and the Indian society of those days is best conceived as a loose federation of strong self-regulating groups which shared a common background of social rights and obligations making for mutual understanding and accommodation. There is practically no evidence of ugly social conflicts and jealousies such as those between the right-hand and left-hand castes, or between Brahmins and non-Brahmins of more recent times. The general impression derived is one of social harmony, removed alike from the placid content which knows no ambition and the blind and ruthless pursuit of class-interests.

c28.3

There was on the whole greater social freedom, especially among the upper classes, than is now found in rural areas, and heredity was not always a bar to a person changing his occupation and his group-relations with it. This is clear from the fact that the Brahmins who took to trade at Eṇṇāyiram were counted along with the Vaḷañjiya merchants of the South bazaar of Eṇṇāyiram in one common group.¹ These were exceptions, and the Brahmins as a class were still devoted to their time-honoured ideals of spiritual culture and plain living, and commanded the voluntary homage of the other classes, as may be seen from the numberless endowments in their favour made in all parts of the country and by all classes without distinction.

c28.4

We lack all means of reaching a reliable conclusion on the important question of the numbers of the population. There is not even a passable guess on this subject in any of our records, Indian or foreign. And it seems never to have occurred to a government, which was very strict about maintaining a very minute record of land rights for its revenue purposes, that it might order a periodical census of the population under its control; for it is extremely unlikely that if such a practice had existed, we should have heard nothing of it in the thousands of inscriptions to which we owe practically all our knowledge of the organisation and working of the government in those days. We are therefore driven to depend solely on rather vague personal impressions derived from a study of the records of the age. It is remarkable that most of the villages and towns known to us now are mentioned with almost the same names in the inscriptions; some of them, like Uttaramērūr in Chingleput, Śendalai and Tiruviḍaimarudūr in Tanjore, Tiruverumbūr and Lālguḍi in Trichinopoly, and others that could be named in the Madura and Tinnevelly districts, were clearly more populous and flourishing than the places that now go by those names. On the other hand, there is no evidence that the larger cities were not quite as large as the average Indian city of to-day, very large modern centres like Madras, and perhaps Madura and Trichinopoly, excepted. The average administrative unit in charge of one officer of the central government was more or less of the same size as the modern Taluq; but it may also be that the size of the Taluq is itself the result of an ancient administrative tradition. The evidence on the state of agriculture, industry and trade, on the army and navy, and on the amount of labour and resources applied to the erection of public works of a useful as well as ornamental nature also tells in favour of our postulating a numerous and busy population. Internal peace was on the whole well maintained; and there was no great difference between now and then in the ideas relating to marriage or the standard of life. There cannot be the slightest doubt that under the Cōḻas of the Vijayālaya line, Southern India was vastly more populous and that social life had become far more complex than in the Śaṅgam Age. It seems equally clear that the numbers of the people could not have been anywhere near what they are now after nearly 150 years of *pax Britannica*. We may imagine that we may find a parallel in this respect immediately before the establishment of British rule, say about the end of the eighteenth century.

c28.5

Caste and group life formed no hindrance to social co-operation for common ends. The manner in which the burden of maintaining the services in a temple and the cost of feeding ten Brahmins regularly were shared by all the groups residing at Talaiccangāḍu³ at the instance of the *mūlaparuḍai* (of the temple) is typical of their readiness to recognise a public interest and co-operate in its pursuit. Signs of exclusiveness and class-rivalry are not altogether wanting, but these tendencies were apparently well under control. Brahmins evinced a desire not only to live in separate rural communities with *sabhās* of their own, but as far as possible to exclude other castes from ownership of land in their villages; in both these respects, their attitude seems to have had the general approval of the government and the people.⁴

c28.6

Other classes also succeeded in obtaining special exemptions and privileges for themselves. The *veḷḷālas* of Kuṉṟa-Vattanakkōṭṭam gained exemptions from certain local dues in the reign of Rājarāja I;⁵ the artisans (*śilpis*) of the Ōvikula of Kāñcī had apparently the privilege of engraving the important copper-plate grants of the king in the reign of Rājēndra,⁶ just as weavers of Kāñcī were the makers of royal robes in Uttama Cōḷa's reign.⁷ On the other hand there were restrictions placed on the activities of some sections of the populace. In the *dēvadāna* of Paḻaiyanūr, the *Iḷavas* were not to tap coconut and palmyra palms for toddy.⁸

c28.7

Apart from such exceptional privileges and disabilities which formed the subject of regulation by specific agreements, the place and duties of each class in society were largely a matter of ancient custom which doubtless underwent slow and imperceptible modification under the stress of new circumstances. The economic bonds which united the members of each profession or caste come prominently into view in the arrangements recorded in inscriptions. The principle of collective responsibility was commonly observed, and even a sort of frank-pledge by which the group guaranteed the proper conduct of each of its members was not unknown.⁹

c28.8

Some curious instances of mixed castes and their duties are recorded in the inscriptions; these show that the theories of mixed castes, *anulōma* and *pratilōma*, were not the purely fanciful concepts of law-givers that we generally take them to be; either they had some basis in the facts of social life, or what is perhaps more likely, particular sections of the population began to pin their faith to particular sections of what was originally a mythical scheme. At any rate it is difficult to believe that the scheme of the four original *varṇas* ever conformed to the facts of South Indian social life; even less credible are the theories of particular castes arising from mixed unions of particular types. Towards the close of the reign of Kulōttunga I, the *bhaṭṭas* of Rājāśraya-caturvēdimangalam consulted the *śāstras* and laid down the professions to be followed by the *anulōma* caste of Rathakāras, viz. architecture, coach- and chariot-building, the erection of *gōpuras* with icons on them and of *maṇḍapas*, the manufacture of sacrificial instruments and so on.¹⁰ It is to be noted that the decision here recorded is in close conformity with the views of Vijñānēśvara, the contemporary jurist and author of the *Mitākṣarā*, the celebrated commentary on the *Yājñavalkyasmṛti*. From an inscription dated 1169, the class of Rathakāras is seen to have included blacksmiths, goldsmiths and stone masons, besides carpenters.¹¹ Two inscriptions of the reign of Vikramacōḷa give accounts of a class of *utkṛṣṭa-āyōgavas* or *paṭṭinavans* which do not seem to fit in so easily with the extant legal texts, at any rate, not with the *Mitākṣarā*. The two inscriptions differ from each other and from Yājñavalkya with regard to the origin of this class; the *smṛti* makes them children of Vaiśya women and Śūdra men; one of the inscriptions calls them children of Brahma-Vaiśya, perhaps Brahmins following Vaiśya occupations,¹² while the second inscription quotes a Sanskrit verse which says that an *āyogava* is born of the union of a Kṣatriya woman with a Vaiśya;¹³ on the whole they seem to have been accepted as a *pratilōma* caste. Their profession was weaving, and it was their privilege to supply fresh cloth for *upanayana* and other domestic ceremonies, for *dhvaja-paṭas* to the temples during festivals and generally to supply all things made of yarn and required by gods, Brahmins, and kings. In 1127, some families of this caste accepted some *iraiyili* land at Tribhuvani and in return undertook to supply cloths to the local temple on specified occasions and in stated quantities; they authorised the Śrī Vaiṣṇavas of the temple to surround (their dwellings), to imprison them, and take all steps necessary to force them to keep the engagement if they were in default.¹⁴ In the very next year, 1128, twenty families of this class migrated from five different villages to Tirukkaṇṇapuram to settle there and accept service in the *brahmadēya* village and its temple; the terms of their settlement being placed under the protection of *mahāsabhai ēlaimbadinmar*, the *Mahāsabhā* 350, and Śrī Vaiṣṇavas of the eighteen *nāḍus*.¹⁵

c28.9

Inscriptions from Karuvūr and Pērur contain records of privileges accorded to Kaṇmāḷar stone masons, of Vengalanāḍu and Ten-kongu, and to other artisans elsewhere.¹⁶ These privileges were granted by a Cōḷa monarch whose identity could not be made out as he is described only as Konerinmaikoṇḍān. The privileges were: the blowing of two conches, the beating of drums and so on at domestic occurrences good or bad; the use of sandals when they went out of their homes; and plastering of the walls of their residences with lime plaster. The construction of houses with two storeys and with double doors is also mentioned together with the right to decorate the front of their houses with garlands of water-lilies.¹⁷

c28.10.1

No picture of the social divisions in South India under the Cōḷas will be complete without a reference to the broad division of the industrial population of the country into the Right-Hand and Left-Hand, *Valangai* and *Iḍangai* divisions. The quarrels among these divisions often threatened to fill the streets of Madras with blood in the days of the East India Company. The origin of this division is unknown.¹⁸ Legend ascribes it to the design of Karikāla Cōḷa and also, with more plausibility, to a famous occasion when the two sections of the population laid their disputes before a Cōḷa king, one party standing on the right hand side of the monarch, the other taking a position on the left.¹⁹ Several regiments of the army were counted as of the *Valangai* in the reign of Rājarāja I,²⁰ and this section is also mentioned in an inscription of the third year of Rājēndra I from Tiruviśalūr.²¹ In the second year of Kulōttunga I, a clash between the Right and Left hand castes resulted in the burning of the village (Rājamahendra-caturvēdimangalam, Papanasam tq. Tanjore dt.), the destruction of its sacred places, and the looting of the temple treasury by robbers. The property left was not safe in the temple. For the rehabilitation of the place, the *sabhā* borrowed 50 *kalañjus* of fineness half *māttu* less than that of *Rājēndraśōḷan-māḍai* which with interest for one year amounted to 75 *kalañjus*.

c28.10.2

Of this sum, 5 *kalañjus* were spent in the third year on renovation and reconsecration of the temple, and the balance for the purchase of some lands and for making them tax free for the upkeep of the temple. The inscription giving this decision regarding remission of taxes was recorded in the eleventh year of Kulōttunga I, and, for some unknown reason, at Śrīrangam.21a There is a curious inscription of the reign of Kulōttunga III which gives the earliest account so far known of the beliefs of the *Iḍangai* classes regarding their origin.²² They claimed to have been created from the *agnikuṇḍa* (fire-pit) for the protection of the sacrifice of Kaśyapa, and to have settled in the Cōḷa country in the time of the emperor Arindama; this emperor imported a large colony of holy Brahmins from Antarvēdi, and the *Iḍangai* classes accompanied these Brahmin colonists as the bearers of their slippers and their umbrellas. They got some lands in five villages, all of them now in the Trichinopoly district, and had long lost the memory of their origin when they recovered it about A.D. 1128. They then entered into a compact among themselves to the effect that they should thenceforth behave like sons of the same parents. 'If anything derogatory happens to the *Iḍangai* class, we will jointly assert our rights till we establish them.

c28.10.3

It is also understood that only those who, during their congregational meetings to settle communal disputes, display the *birudas* of horn, bugle and parasol shall belong to our class. Those who have to recognise us now and hereafter, in public, must do so from our distinguishing symbols—the feather of the crane and the loose-hanging hair. The horn and the conch-shell shall also be sounded in front of us and the bugle blown according to the fashion among the *Iḍangai* people. Those who act in contravention to these rules shall be treated as the enemies of our class. Those who behave differently from the rules (thus) prescribed for the conduct of *Iḍangai* classes shall be excommunicated and shall not be recognised as *Śrutimāns*. They will be considered slaves of the classes who are opposed to us.’ This record was engraved at Ūṭṭattūr and Tiruppaññili by the *Śrutimāns* of the area. The ninety-eight sub-sects of the *Iḍangai* are again mentioned in a later inscription from Āḍutuṟai,²³ which records the hardships to which these sub-sects were exposed at the hands of the Vanniye tenants and the Brāhmaṇa and Veḷḷāḷa landlords, backed by government officials. In 1227 the *nāṭṭavar* of eleven *nāḍus* of Milāḍu (which comprised 79 *nāḍus* in all) met in Tiruvalañjuram-uḍaiyār temple at Varañjuram (Kallakurichi tq. S. Arcot dt.) to admit into the *Iḍangai* group the two classes of people known as Malayamakkaḷ and Nattamakkaḷ, and take an oath to keep to this settlement for ever;

c28.10.4

the same oath is taken by other *Iḍangai* people of the area—*Iḍangaittanattom*. Such are the beginnings of an obscure, but deep-seated antagonism between two sections of the populace which often burst into open hostilities in later days. At Kāñcīpuram the *Valangai* and *Iḍangai* sects would not worship in the same temple, or use the same pavilion (*maṇḍapa*) for religious purposes,²⁴ and the division affected even the class of courtesans and dancing girls.²⁵

c28.11

²¹ 341 of 1907.

c28.12

21a 521 of 1922.

c28.13

²² 34 of 1913.

c28.14

Names of individuals very often gave little indication of their social status. Thus Ariñjimādēvaḍigaḷ, for example, was not, as her name might lead one to suppose, a queen herself, but only a queen’s maid (*peṇḍāṭṭi*); and her daughter, who lived in concubinage with a certain Arumoḻidēvan, bore the name Bhaṭṭan Gandarāditti.²⁶ Numerical names like Munnūṟṟuvan, Īrāyiravan and so on were apparently borne by members of all classes.

c28.15

Women were placed under no restraints in their social life and activities, though modesty was considered the highest among their graces. The inscriptions give many examples of women of the upper classes owning property in their own right and disposing of it as they chose. The influence exerted by some of the princesses of the royal family on the public policy of ruling princes has already been noticed. Though kings and nobles indulged in a plurality of wives, the monogamous family was doubtless the normal unit of social life. The employment of female labour in the less skilled occupations was perhaps quite as common as at present.

c28.16

*Satī* or the self-immolation of a woman on the funeral pyre of her husband is occasionally mentioned in the inscriptions, but the references are so few that it can hardly be regarded as a common practice in the Tamil country under the Cōḷas. Gaṅgamādēviyār, the wife of Vīra-śōḷa Iḷaṅgōvēḷār, is said to have endowed a lamp before she entered the fire;²⁷ this was perhaps early in the reign of Parāntaka I. The Tiruvālangāḍu plates²⁸ mention the case of Vānavan-mahādēvi, the queen of Sundara Cōḷa, recorded in more detail in an earlier Tamil inscription of the reign of her celebrated son Rāja-rāja I.²⁹ The language of these inscriptions, together with the absence of any other instance of a Cōḷa queen practising *satī*, shows that the action of Vānavan-mahādēvi was indeed applauded, but not often imitated. Three instances of women from among the nobility and the common folk committing *satī* come from Mysore country. In 1057, a man killed a relative of the king in a wrestling contest, and was sentenced to death; his wife, Dekabbe, the daughter of a chieftain of Nuṅganāḍ, followed him in spite of violent opposition from her parents, and the whole story is recorded in the form of a pathetic Kannaḍa poem in *Kāvya* style.³⁰ The two remaining instances occurred in 1067 and 1068, one of them being just recorded as a fact,³¹ while the other is mentioned incidentally in an endowment of a charity by the son of the deceased couple for their spiritual benefit.³² A reverse instance of a father commemorating the death of his son and daughter-in-law who committed *satī* also occurs in the Mysore country in A.D. 1088.³³ Nothing can more truly illustrate the tragic conflict of feelings in a mind torn between the dread of physical suffering and the eagerness to live up to an inhuman standard of duty than the pathetic declaration of a woman, recorded in an inscription of the reign of Vīrarājēndra from South Arcot; she avers that if she lived after the death of her husband, she should become the slave of the other wives of her husband and utters imprecations against those who seek to persuade her to refrain from immolating herself, nay even against people who do not come forward to bind and throw her into the fire, imprecations too shocking to be transcribed here.³⁴ Such a record could be only understood to indicate the prevalence of an atmosphere normally unfavourable to the practising of *satī*.

c28.17

The class of courtesans has always held a considerable place in Indian society. From pre-historic times the nautch-girl has been a great social attraction. Her public appearances were usually associated with religious festivals and she was generally an expert in music and the dance. She mixed freely with men and was under no obligation to observe the restraints imposed on matrons in their social intercourse. Her private company was given to select friends, and her choice was guided at least as much by sentimental and aesthetic as by mercenary motives. To judge by the evidence of literature and epigraphy, there is little to justify the squeamishness with which the institution is viewed by the 'social reformer' who derives his notions from the hideous traffic in helpless women and girls that has grown up in large modern cities. At her best the courtesan led a life of cultured ease and pleasure, and like her Greek cousin, the hetaera, provided amusement and intellectual companionship to those who could afford the luxury; at her worst she was a temple-drudge who, when she consented to serve a passing stranger, still believed that she was performing an act of worship. The testimony of Muhammadan writers is clear and unanimous that the earnings of the courtesans attached to temples were surrendered into the hands of the priests or other authorities of the temple for defraying the expenses of worship.³⁵ As these writers, however, were prone to repeat uncritically statements made by their predecessors, we should be slow to accept their evidence, which is not confirmed by indigenous sources.

c28.18

The social standing of courtesans in the ancient Cōḷa country is clearly indicated by the numerous records registering rich endowments made by them for various public benefactions and the recognition afforded by local powers to their public spirit; in a record from Tiruvoṟṟiyūr, dated A.D. 1049, a certain *dēvaraḍiyāḷ* (courtesan), Catuṟaḷ Caturi, by name, is also described as the wife (*ahamuḍaiyāḷ*) of a citizen, Nāgan Peruṅgāḍan.³⁶ The marriage of another dancing-girl belonging to a temple in the Tanjore district is recorded in an inscription of the reign of Kulōttunga III.³⁷

c28.19.1

That a considerable element in the population, especially among agricultural labourers, lived in a condition not far from slavery is clear from the literature of the age. There are several inscriptions which show that the most odious form of private property, property in human beings, signalized by their being bought and sold by others irrespective of their own wishes, was not unknown. Free men and women fell into slavery for various reasons, and it would appear that there were several grades among slaves. Most of the sales recorded in the inscriptions are sales of persons to temples. Sometimes they are voluntary; two ladies sold themselves and their dependants and their relatives to a temple in the Tanjore district;³⁸ in these instances, the religious motive must have been more dominant than the economic. But when six persons are sold to the same temple in the same year for thirteen *kāśus* by another person, neither the voluntary nor the religious character of the transaction is so apparent.³⁹ There is another sale of eight persons recorded in the same place some years before, the price not being stated.⁴⁰ All these inscriptions are dated in the regnal years of some unknown Cōḷa king. About a.d. 948, a *madhyastha* of the village of Nandivarman-mangalam presented to the temple of Vayalur (Trichinopoly dt.) three women to sing *Tirupadiyam* and serve as *Kavarippinā* (chauri-bearers) to god Parameśvara;

c28.19.2

he had acquired these women six years earlier as *Kuḷḷāḷ* (?) Another record of the reign of Rājarāja I from Tiruvaḍandai (Chingleput), dated in the seventeenth regnal year, a.d. 1002, states that twelve families of fishermen (*paṭṭinavar*) were dedicated to the temple of Śrī Varāha Dēva at the instance of two officials serving in the locality as *nāḍu-kaṇkāṭci* and *nāḍu-vagai*; the families of the twelve persons named had each to pay, out of their income from weaving and fishing, ¾ *kaḷañju* of gold, and to assist in the celebration of two annual festivals in the temple, one of them being of seven days' duration and ending with the day of Śadaiyam in the month of Āvaṇi, the day of the king's nativity. The *sabhā* and the *ūr* of Tiruvaḍandai undertook to hold them and their decendants strictly to their obligations.⁴¹ The terms of this dedication are on the whole liberal and do not constitute slavery; they even included some privileges of the dedicated families such as the receipt of *prasādam* (food-offering) on the festival days. But the element of compulsion, the hereditary nature of the dedication, the part played by two officials of the state and the undertaking of the *sabhā* and *ūr* to enforce the terms, prove that the dozen families of *paṭṭinavar* would not have readily accepted the arrangements of their own choice. Kulōttunga I ordered in A.D.

c28.19.3

1088 that some *dēvaraḍiyār* of the temple of Kāḷahasti who had been wrongly appropriated to the palace service should be restored to the temple; these persons had been stamped with the king’s seal which was erased and the trident stamped on their bodies in token of their servitude to the temple.⁴² At Tiruvallam, in 1119, one of the *villikaḷ*, (bowmen) of Bāṇapuram, dedicated some women of his family as *dēvaraḍiyār* after stamping them with the trident.⁴³ In the reign of Rājādhirāja II is recorded a sale, in A.D. 1175, of four women to the temple of Tiruvālangāḍu for a sum of seven hundred *kāśus*.⁴⁴ As the term *kāśu* is applied to coins of varying value, it is not possible to compare the price recorded here with prices stated in some of the inscriptions cited above. An inscription⁴⁵ of somewhat uncertain date from Tiruvālangāḍu (Tanjore) mentions some facts which bring out the general prevalence of slavery and the treatment meted out to slaves. A certain Vayirādarāyar had a number of slaves, some belonging to him and others forming part of the dowries of his wives. With the consent of his wives, he sold some of these slaves to the local temple which purchased them for employment as slaves of a *maṭha* (*maḍa-aḍimaigal*).

c28.19.4

In accordance with a sale deed, and a royal order (*rāja-sādana*), the *māhēśvaras* and the authorities of the temple recorded the transaction in a stone inscription, marked the slaves with the trident-mark, and resolved to assign specific duties to them and punish them suitably when they failed in their duty. The inscription then states that after some time some of the slaves defied the orders of the *sthānattār* of the temple and took to mischievous and roguish ways, and the matter was laid before a general assembly of the authorities of the temple and of the *maṭhas*. Their decision is not easy to make out owing to gaps in the record. In fact the slaves would have been more than human had they not chafed at their lot. And as slavery was not confined to temples, the idea that slaves consoled themselves by looking on their lives as dedicated to the service of God can only have a limited range of application, if it had any at all.⁴⁶ There are also instances of slavery due directly to poverty; in times of famine, destitute persons escaped death by literally selling themselves and sometimes their unborn descendants for their keep. Only temples seem to have left records of this mode of accession to the numbers of their slaves; but we cannot be sure that rich and powerful individuals did not trade on the necessities of their less fortunate brethren.⁴⁷

c28.20

Some idea of the economic condition of the different classes of labourers may be had by a review of the data on wages and prices yielded by the inscriptions.⁴⁸ No general statement on the standard of life of the people is possible; much less can we now trace the changes in the standards and tastes of the population. The sources of our information are not sufficiently copious or precise to allow of such attempts being made with success. The permanent staff of village servants and others in the enjoyment of hereditary service-holdings are, of course, not included in the discussion which follows. So also the serfs and slaves are excluded.

c28.21

The wages of common labour can be estimated from the following instances. The Madras Museum Plates of Uttama Cōḷa record a wage of one *kuṟuṇi* per day and two *kalañjus* per annum for clothes for a watchman; and six *nāḷis* per day with half a *kalañju* per annum, for a gardener. At Lālguḍi (Trichinopoly district), about A.D. 960, digging was done at the rate of fifty *kuḷis* per *kāśu*, each *kuḷi* being about 10 feet square by two feet and a half.⁴⁹ In the village of Kiḷiyanūr (South Arcot), the man appointed to sound the bugle for summoning the *sabhā* had, from A.D. 1001, a fixed wage (*nivandam*) of two meals a day at the cost of the village, besides the supply of such things required for his personal use as were sold in the village.⁵⁰ In A.D. 1018, the daily wage of a wood-cutter at Nattam (Chingleput) was four *nāḷis* of paddy per day,⁵¹ which was also the daily wage of a Brahmin cook.⁵² The wage of a palanquin bearer at Tirumukkūḍal (Chingleput) was also four *nāḷis* of paddy in the reign of Rājēndra I.⁵³ This was obviously not a full day's wage, for we find that garden labour in the same place and about the same time commanded a wage of ten *nāḷis* per diem.⁵⁴ The same rate is given in a record of Rājādhirāja I as a sort of family wage for the same kind of labour.⁵⁵ For lifting water and irrigating gardens and fields, and for gathering flowers and other like operations, the wage of male labourers was eight *nāḷis* per day at Tiruvāmāttūr (South Arcot) in A.D. 1030; but women employed in making garlands and flowers were paid only at half the rate.⁵⁶ In the reign of Rājādhirāja I, however, the women servants employed in a feeding house at Tiruveṇkāḍu earned a wage of two *nāḷis* per day.⁵⁷ A man employed to supply drinking water in a public place at Tiruvoṟṟiyūr in 1077 was paid two *kāśus* per annum besides a daily wage of one *kuṟuni*.⁵⁸ The rather low wage of two *nāḷis* per day for a potter and for a fuel supplier at Kuḍumiyāmalai in 1213 was, no doubt, only remuneration for part-time work,⁵⁹ the men being free also to work and earn wages elsewhere.

c28.22

Work that demanded some kind of skill or special equipment in the workman commanded correspondingly higher rates of wages. A certain Tiruvēḷ Araiccākkai was remunerated at the rate of two *kalams* of paddy for each *kūttu*, some kind of operatic dance, performed by him; and seven such performances were guaranteed to him in a year in one temple in the reign of Āditya II.⁶⁰ Possibly he was free to accept other engagements elsewhere. With this may be compared the permanent endowment of a house and one hundred *kalams* of paddy per annum for each of the four hundred dancing-girls settled by Rājarāja I round the big temple of Tanjore.⁶¹ Three *kuṟuṇis* per day was the wage-rate fixed by the same monarch for each of the fifty persons of the choir established by him for singing *Tiruppadiyam* in the same temple.⁶² The wages mentioned in another Tanjore inscription of the same monarch may also be noted:⁶³ each *māṇi* (*brahmacāri*) serving in the temple got one *padakku* (sixteen *nāḷis*) of paddy per day and four *kāśus* (two *kaḻañjus*) of gold per year;⁶⁴ ten among them who had vowed permanent service in the temple were to get an extra *kuṟuni* (eight *nāḷis*) of paddy per day; twenty others who apparently made garlands were to receive one *padakku* each per day and five *kāśus* per annum. An accountant received 200 *kalams* of paddy per annum, and his assistant seventy-five, which works out at 6⅔ *kuruṇis* and 2½ *kuruṇis* respectively for a day. An accountant of another, perhaps smaller, temple at Periyakoṟukkai, Trichinopoly district, earned 1½ *kuruṇis* of paddy a day in the reign of Rāja-rāja III.⁶⁵ An inscription from Tiruvoṟṟiyūr⁶⁶ of A.D. 1038 states that two garland makers were employed each on a wage of 10 *nāḷis* (one *padakku* and four *nāḷis* for both) per diem in addition to a *kalañju* and a half of gold per annum for clothes; and four Brahmins to recite *stotras* and Vēda at 12 *nāḷis* (*kuruṇi* and four *nāḷis*) each per day together with 1½ *kalañjus* of gold per annum for clothes. At Eṇṇāyiram, about the same time,⁶⁷ the persons who recited *Tiruvāymoḻi* were paid, like the reciters of *Tiruppadiyam* at Tanjore, three *kuruṇis* per day, which is twice what the Brahmins of Tiru-voṟṟiyūr got. The rate of three *kuruṇis* also obtained at Tri-bhuvani for reciting *Tiruvāymoḻi* in A.D. 1048⁶⁸ whereas the officiating priest got only a *padakku* per day. A Brahmin appointed to expound the Śivadharma at Tirunāgēśvaram in A.D. 1054 was also paid seventy-five *kalams* of paddy in a year,⁶⁹ the same as the wage of the Junior Accountants of the Tanjore temple. A *nambi*, officiating priest in a temple, got two *kuruṇis* of paddy per day at Tirumaṇañjēri, Tanjore district, in addition to sixteen *kalams* per annum in lieu of two *kāśus*.⁷⁰

c28.23

The currency of money of small denominations did not altogether displace the ancient habit of ex-changing things for corn. The earliest Tamil poems state that salt and venison were exchanged for paddy; to this day, in the villages of South India, housewives may be seen pouring out the grain from their stores into the baskets of hawkers and dairy-women in return for the veget-ables, ghee or curd supplied by them. The picture of economic conditions under the Cōḷas will not be complete without some idea of the relation of paddy to other commodities and to money. Ghee was converted into gold at 9 *kuruṇis* per *kalañju* and fifteen *kalams* of ghee are equated to twenty *kalañjus* of gold. If this rate of conversion followed the prices prevailing at Kāḷahasti in A.D. 1012, the date of the record,⁷¹ the price of ghee in those days must have been about a sixth or seventh of what it is to-day. A *nāḷi* and a half of curd was to be had for one *nāḷi* of paddy,⁷² and paddy was selling at seven *kalams* per *pon-kaḷañju*, a price which to all appearance is slightly higher than the prices of 1937. We shall see, however, that the price of paddy in gold varied very much with time and place. At Nattam (Chingleput), three *nāḷis* of paddy fetched forty-eight betel leaves and twelve areca nuts⁷³ in A.D. 1018. In the same year, at Tiruppangili in the Trichinopoly district, a *nāḷi* of good *dhal* was of the same value as five *nāḷis* of paddy; one *palam* of crude sugar as two *nāḷis* of paddy; and one *nāḷi* of paddy was required to make one curry-offering in the temple.⁷⁴ At Tirumukkūḍal in Chingleput, in A.D. 1016, one *nāḷi* of oil was bought for four of paddy, one *nāḷi* of ghee for ⅓ *kalam* of paddy,⁷⁵ and one measure of curd for two of paddy; milk was had also at the same rate, and one *nāḷi* of turmeric was got for one *kuruṇi* of paddy.⁷⁶

c28.24

⁷² 153 of 1928-9.

c28.25

⁷³ 265 of 1910.

c28.26

⁷⁴ 170 of 1914.

c28.27

⁷⁵ 137 of 1912.

c28.28

⁷⁶ 128 of 1912.

c28.29

Inscriptions recording endowments for charitable feeding often lay down schedules of expenditure calculated to give an idea of the quality of the food supplied and of the prevailing prices of food-stuffs. One record of A.D. 1004 from Tiruvaḍandai⁷⁷ states that it took ⅚ of a *kalam* of paddy for providing one meal to twelve Brahmins, the items of expenditure being: 21 *nāḷis* of rice at 1¾ *nāḷis* per head, (equal to 52½ *nāḷis* of paddy); 6 *nāḷis* of paddy for 1 *uḷakku* and 2½ *śeviḍus* of ghee; 5 *nāḷis* for vegetables and 5 for curds; ½ *nāḷi* for salt; 2 *nāḷis* for the man who supplied fuel, four for the Brahmin cook, three for the potter who supplied earthenware, and two *nāḷis* for betel leaves and nuts. Considering that this allowance of ⅚ *kuruṇi* of paddy per head sufficed for a square meal for an adult, the provision of ¾ *kuruṇi* for each of the junior pupils and 1¼ *kuruṇis* for the seniors in the college at Eṇṇāyiram, and of ¾ and 1 *kuruṇi* respectively at Tribhuvani must be considered fully adequate to their requirements. An inscription of the reign of Kulōttunga I,⁷⁸ dated A.D. 1115, records that an endowment for feeding fifty Brahmins in a Vaiṣṇava *maṭha* on new moon days was made on the basis of one *kuruṇi* per head, and that this included provision for rice, curry, salt, pepper, ghee, curd, earthenware pots, fuel, areca nuts and betel-leaves.

c28.30

⁷⁷ 261 of 1910.

c28.31

⁷⁸ 471 of 1912. temple, (Korukkai, A.D. 1235); 110 of 1892, same as 122 of 1912, (Tiru-vorriyūr, A.D. 1235); and 216, 217-219 of 1925 (Mēlapperumbaḷam, n-d).

c28.32

Some variations are recorded in the price of paddy and the rate seems to have generally differed with the fertility of the area concerned. Often these rates are not temporary prices prevalent at the time of the record, but some standardised average rates to hold good for all future time. At Tiruvallam in North Arcot we find the rate 40 *kāḍis* or 13⅓ *kalams* per *kalañju* recorded in A.D. 992;⁷⁹ and this is repeated in A.D. 1015 in another inscription from the same district.⁸⁰ Yet another record of A.D. 1012 from Kāḷahasti equates one *pon* to seven *kalams*, and the *pon* was the same as the *kalañju*.⁸¹ Differences in the measures employed often make close comparison difficult. An inscription of Vīrarājēndra's reign from Tirumukkūḍal (Chingleput) states that 16 *kalams* of paddy by the *Rājakēsari* measure was the equivalent of one *kalañju*.⁸² At Tiruppugalūr (Tanjore district) eight *kalams* per *kāśu*, i.e., sixteen to the *kalañju*, was the price in A.D. 1006.⁸³ At Cidambaram the spurious inscription of Rājakēsari Rājēndra gives the rate 8½ *kalams* per *kāśu*,⁸⁴ or seventeen *kalams* to the *kalañju*. A Rājakēsari record gives 15 *kalams* per *kalañju* for Paṇḍāravāḍai (Tanjore);⁸⁵ the rate of ten *kalams* at Tribhuvani in A.D. 1048 is high, though not the highest price recorded in the inscriptions of the early period as the basis of a permanent endowment of charities.⁸⁶ Twelve *kalams* per *kalañju* is found at Nattam (Chingleput district) in A.D. 1018.⁸⁷ Early in the reign of Kulōttunga I, the *kāśu* still equal to half a *māḍa*, fetched only 2¾ *kalams* of paddy at Kōlār and 4 *kalams* at Tiruvoṟṟiyūr;⁸⁸ the relatively high price must have been due to scarcity consequent on the disturbances which caused the death of Adhirājēndra and led to the war between Cāḷukya Vikramāditya VI and Kulōttunga. At the end of Kulōttunga's reign, the *kāśu* paid for thirteen *kalams* of paddy in the Tanjore area;⁸⁹ but even the *māḍa* fetched only eight *kalams* at Emappērūr (South Arcot) in A.D. 1136.⁹⁰

c28.33

Of the money prices of commodities relatively little is learnt from the inscriptions. Only the more precious articles which formed the staples of long distance trade seem to have been bought and sold for money. The Tanjore inscriptions tell us, for instance, that one *kāśu* (half-*kalañju*) fetched towards the close of the reign of Rājarāja I, 1½ *kuruṇis* of cardamum seeds, 2 *kuruṇis* of campaka buds, 605 palams of *khaskas* roots, 2½ to 3 *kalañjus* of camphor,⁹¹ and two palams of sugar which seems to have been a luxury at the time.⁹² One *kāśu* (*pon*) fetched nine ewes at Mēlappaḷuvūr, (Trichinopoly district) in A.D. 931,⁹³ and at Śenkunṟam (North Arcot) in A.D. 1014,⁹⁴ but a Tanjore inscription gives only three ewes for a *kāśu*.⁹⁵ A *paśu* (cow) is valued at fifteen *kāśus* at Tiṭṭaguḍi (South Arcot) in 1136.⁹⁶ The price of a cocoanut tree was 150 *kāśus* at Nallūr (Tanjore district) in 1221 if it was yielding fruit (*kā-tengu*) and 100 if it was not;⁹⁷ but the *kāśu* of the time of Rājarāja III was a very depreciated coin.

c28.34

Of the value of metals we learn incidentally that bronze sold at 35 palams per *kāśu* (half *kalañju* of gold), copper at 30 palams, tin at 26⅔ palams, and *tarā* (alloy) at 70 palams; these rates are found in a record of A.D. 1099 from Tiruppanandāḷ.⁹⁸

c28.35

Some instances of scarcity and famine are incidentally recorded in the inscriptions, but they are not many. About 1131 (thirteenth year of Vikramaśōḷa) as the result of a famine in the mountainous regions of S. Arcot people began to move out from Arakaṇḍanallūr (Tirukoyilur tq.) after selling their lands; the *sabhā* of the place met and redistributed the 24 shares in the village to new persons with the condition that no sale or barter to outsiders was permissible, and that violation of this condition would involve loss of the land besides a fine of 64 *kalañjus*. Individuals were sometimes hard hit and had, as pointed out already, to seek livelihood at the price of their personal freedom. The most outstanding instance of a somewhat widespread distress and the measures adopted for combating it is found in an inscription from Ālanguḍi (Tanjore district) of A.D. 1152.⁹⁹ Its import is unfortunately not free from uncertainty. It states that there was a *kāladōṣam*, 'bad time', in the third year of the reign of Vijayarājēndradēva who, after taking Kalyāṇapuram and Kollāpuram, died on the back of an elephant. The king so described nearly a century after his time must have been Rājādhirāja I or his younger brother and successor, Rājēndra II.¹⁰⁰ The cause of the scarcity from which the people of Ālanguḍi suffered is by no means clear.¹⁰¹ But we are told that the people borrowed from the treasury of the local temple all the gold jewels and silver articles that could be spared to the extent of 1011 *kalañjus* of gold and 464 *palams* of silver in order to be able to maintain themselves and buy seed and manure for resuming cultivation. These transactions are recalled on the occasion of a fresh agreement with the temple relating to the terms of the repayment of the loan.

c28.36

2. An inscription of a.d. 1219 from Tuṟaiyūr (Trichinopoly district) mentions the *ūr-madil* (town-wall), and *pulaḳkaḍai-madil* (wall at the backs of houses), an indication that towns and houses were sometimes walled for safety. (701 of 1909).

c28.37

3. 198 of 1925.

c28.38

4. 46 of 1897; 311 of 1911.

c28.39

5. 375 of 1911.

c28.40

6. Tiruvalangaḍu Plates ll. 517-24. The Anbil plates were engraved by a single worker Vīra Cōḷa *takṣan*. Leyden grant ll. 107 ff.

c28.41

7. Museum Plates, l. 10.

c28.42

8. Tiruvalangaḍu Plates, l. 456.

c28.43

9. 197 of 1923; *SII*. ii, p. 251; *TAS*. v. pp. 29-30.

c28.44

10. 479 of 1908. *ARE*. 1909, II, 45. Also the *Mitākṣarā* on Yājñavalkya I, 95.

c28.45

11. 189 of 1925.

c28.46

12. 208 of 1919. Cf. Brahma-Kṣatris of N. Indian inscrr. The statement in *ARE*. that they were the offspring of Brahmins and Vaiśya women seems unwarranted.

c28.47

13. 508 of 1922.

c28.48

14. 208 of 1919.

c28.49

15. 508 of 1922.

c28.50

16. 66 of 1890, (*SII*. iii. 25); 562 of 1893; *ARE*. 1905, II, 43.

c28.51

17. 136 of 1905.

c28.52

18. M. Srinivasa Aiyangar, *Tamil Studies*: pp. 100 ff.

c28.53

19. *ARE*. 1921, II, 47.

c28.54

20. *SII*. ii, Intro. p. 10.

c28.55

21. 341 of 1907.

c28.56

21a. 31 of 1936-7; *ARE*. II. 27.

c28.57

22. 489 of 1912; *ARE*. 1913, II, 39.

c28.58

23. 34 of 1913.

c28.59

23a. 184 of 1940-41; *ARE*. 1939-40—1942-3, II, 42.

c28.60

24. *ARE*. 1921, II, 47.

c28.61

25. The real history of the division between the right hand and left hand sections of society may indeed date from a much earlier time than we suspect or even the *Śrutimāns* of the reign of Kulōttunga III believed. A Chinese author of the 3rd century, cited by another in the 10th, says of Fu-nan: ‘Les regions vassales ont toutes leurs mandarins; *les grands officers de droite et de gauche du souverain s' appellent tous K'ouen-louen'* P. Pelliot, Le Fou-nan, *BEFEO*, iii, p. 282; also vii. pp. 316-17 for the same feature in Campā.

c28.62

27. 376 of 1903.

c28.63

28. vv. 65-66.

c28.64

29. 236 of 1902.

c28.65

30. 141 of 1898; *EC*. iv, Hg. 18; *EI*. vi, pp. 213-9.

c28.66

31. 174 of 1911; *EC*. ix, Dv. 14.

c28.67

32. 188 of 1911; *EC*. x, Ct. 161.

c28.68

33. 499 of 1911; *EC*. iv, Hg. 100.

c28.69

34. 156 of 1906; *ARE*. 1907, II, 41.

c28.70

35. Abu Zayd, in Ferrand *Voyage*, p. 124.

c28.71

36. 147 of 1912.

c28.72

37. 411 of 1925.

c28.73

38. 218 of 1925 (seven persons for thirty *kāśus*); 219 of 1925 (fifteen persons for the same amount). *ARE*. 1925, II, 18.

c28.74

39. 217 of 1925.

c28.75

40. 216 of 1925.

c28.76

40a. 149 of 1936-7, *ARE*. II, 21.

c28.77

41. 274 of 1910.

c28.78

42. 141 of 1922.

c28.79

43. 230 of 1921. It is not clear what process was adopted for impressing the mark (*ilaccinai*) on the skin. The words ‘*iṭṭu*’ or ‘*śātti*’ do not necessarily mean ‘branding’ as they are often rendered in the Epigraphical reports.

c28.80

44. 80 of 1913.

c28.81

45. 94 of 1926.

c28.82

46. *ARE*. 1925, II, 18.

c28.83

47. Some of the other instances known may be briefly mentioned here: Sale by three Veḷḷāḷas of two women and their descendants as *dēvaraḍiyār* at Tiruvakkarai, South Arcot in 1099 (183 of 1904); a *dharmadāna* by a *mahārāya* of an uvacca aḍimai in the Tinnevelly district in 1105 (280 of 1928); the gift of two slaves for service in a *maṭha* in Drākṣārāma in 1113 (354 of 1893); lists of aḍimais belonging to the temple and *maṭha* in Kiḷaiyūr, Tanjore district, dated 1184 (74 and 76 of 1925); the large numbers of *maḍa-aḍimais* bought and given to the *maṭha* in Tiruvālaṅgāḍu by a nobleman in the years 1198 and 1208 (91 and 90 of 1926); the case of a Veḷḷāla and his two daughters who sold themselves to the temple at Tiruppāmburam to escape starvation in 1201 (86 of 1911); and the sale by two accountants of a temple of number of women who were slaves forming part of their ancestral estate—*eṅgaḷukku kramāgatamāy varugiṉṟa aḍiyār* (296 of 1911). Yet other instances are found in 499 of 1904 (Vēdāraṇyam, A.D. 1219); 409 of 1925, a stone mason, his wife and four sons, (Acyutamangalam), A.D. 1219; 223 of 1917, a host of over 100 male and female slaves of the 48\. See also *SII*., ii, Intr. 17-8 for a discussion of the data from the Tanjore inscriptions.

c28.84

49\. 104 of 1929. I have assumed that a piḍi is equal to 4''.

c28.85

50\. 156 of 1919.

c28.86

51\. 263 of 1912.

c28.87

52\. 267 of 1910, (Tiruvaḍandai). Same wage in A.D. 1115 (281 of 1910).

c28.88

53\. 175 of 1915: *Tiruppaḷḷiccivikaik-kāvalar* in the temple, possibly Vaiṣṇava Brahmins.

c28.89

54\. 172 of 1915.

c28.90

55\. 45 of 1925. The *tapasyar* who supplied water for *tirumañjanam* in the temple at Tiruvārūr had the same rate of remuneration, 671 of 1919 (A.D. 1094).

c28.91

56\. 18 of 1922. 57\. 450 of 1918. 58\. 154 of 1912. 59\. 364 of 1906. 60\. *SII*. iii, 202. 61\. *SII*. ii, 66. 62\. *SII*. ii, 65.

c28.92

63\. *SII*. ii, 69. The schedule is unfortunately not complete on account of gaps in the record.

c28.93

64\. A record from Nattam (Chingleput) of A.D. 1018 (263 of 1912) gives two *Kāśus* per annum as the price of clothes to be supplied to each *māṇi* in a year. The Museum Plates of Uttama (ll. 44-6) give the rate six *nāḷis* per day and one *kaḷañju* per annum.

Linked texts (4)

Yājñavalkyasmṛti — Yājñavalkya, Sanskrit
Kāñchī
Kalahasti
Nattam

The Colas c28: Chapter XX. Population: Social Divisions: Standard of Life

Contents

Chapter XX. Population: Social Divisions: Standard of Life

Linked texts (4)