Studies in Cola History and Administration c10: V. Uttaramērūr: I. A General Survey of its Administration
Studies in Cōḻa History and Administration c10
- Language
- English
V. Uttaramērūr: I. A General Survey of its Administration
c10.2
A fresh study of local government at Uttaramērūr in the Cōḷa period after so many writers have traversed the ground may appear at once futile and venturesome. We may be told by those who have heard all about democracy and pot-tickets at Uttaramērūr (and they are not few) that there can be nothing new in this twice-told tale and that it would be more useful to leave Uttaramērūr well alone and turn to some less trodden part of the field. And the promise implied in an attempt like the present one to discover new information, or to reinterpret old and well-known data may, in view of the narrow limits of the subject and the eminence of the scholars who have worked on it before, seem to be more courageous than discreet. Nevertheless the fact is that with the exception of Mr. Venkayya who did great work on the two inscriptions from Uttaramērūr which are best-known, and that only on account of his work, not many writers have done aught else than repeat his statements uncritically; and that this has happened a number of times has contributed most to prejudice the chances of a fresh examination of the Parāntaka inscriptions above-mentioned and of a more comprehensive study of the new material published since 1904.
c10.3
Our aim is to give in this essay a general account of the local history and administration of Uttaramērūr so far as it can be gathered from the inscriptions, and then, in the next paper, to re-examine the two
c10.4
UTTARAMERUR
c10.5
inscriptions of Parāntaka’s reign which deal with the constitutional arrangements of the local *Sabhā* in the light of the fresh evidence that has come to hand since Mr. Venkayya drew such pointed attention to them.
c10.6
The history of institutions is not so exciting as the study of political history and ‘holds but small temptation to the mind that requires to be tempted to the study of truth.’ It takes considerable effort to comprehend by patient study and reflection the true nature and functions of the different parts of a social mechanism evolved and worked under the stress of ideas much unlike our own. Nothing seems easier than to discover, if one is so minded, in the records of past ages traces of the latest devices in political and social organisation. And the quest for the new in the old sometimes imparts colour and feeling to a task in itself not so attractive.
c10.7
Democracy as we now understand it, as a form of popular government, a state of society and an outlook on economic life, is essentially a modern conception. To import the associations of democracy in the interpretation of early Indian records, because some of them happen to mention elections and ballot, is unconsciously to raise fresh obstacles in the way of a correct understanding of the atmosphere surrounding the working of these and other institutions in ancient India. By stressing the committee-system, the elections to the committees, and the employment of ballot in the elections, and then almost ignoring the whole complex of notions associated with caste, custom and religion which dominated social life in those times, one may find it easy to paint the picture of a society in which people cared much for political rights and representative institutions and regulated their conduct almost entirely on secular and rational considerations. But it seems hardly worth while to make the attempt; for the doubtful satisfaction that may be derived from claiming modern wisdom for our ancestors is purchased at the cost of any chance of our knowing them as they were. From this point of view, it is perhaps an advantage that democracy does not rouse the same enthusiasm at the present day as it did some years ago. To cast a doubt on the democratic nature of ancient Indian society and government is no longer a mortal sin against patriotism.
c10.8
The village that forms the subject of our study was doubtless a very large one. It was big enough to form a separate *kūṟu* by itself and the numerous inscriptions that have come down to us are engraved on the walls of no fewer than seven temples * in the locality. Of these inscriptions, about sixty have been selected as the basis of the general account that follows of the administration and social life of Uttaramērūr.
c10.9
Uttaramērūr, which is about fifty miles by road to the south-west of Madras, is to-day a small and apparently flourishing town with a population of nearly 11,000. Despite the vicissitudes that have marked its history in the course of the wars waged by the English at first with the French and later with Haidar Ali and his son, Uttaramērūr has fairly preserved many of its most interesting antiquities. As will be seen from the plan of the town, the location of its chief temples shows that the site of the modern town has been in continuous occupation for more than 1200 years. The Kailāsanātha and the Mādari-Ammaṇ shrine opposite to it mark practically its eastern limit, if we omit from
c10.10
∗ They are: the temples of (1) Vaikuṇṭhaperumāḷ (2) Sundaravaradap-erumāḷ (3) Subrahmaṇya (4) Kailāsanātha (5) Kōḷambēśvara (6) Iraṭṭaittaḷigai-Īśvara and (7) Mādari-Ammaṇ.
c10.11
consideration suburbs like Tiruppulivalam. Almost in the heart of the town, on the main road stands the Vaikuṇṭha-perumāḷ temple, of which nothing of the original structure seems to have survived except the high basement which carries the most valuable inscriptions of the locality on its sides. A little to the west within a few furlongs, are the Sundaravarada and Subrahmaṇya temples very close to each other. To reach the big tank of Uttaramērūr, doubtless the celebrated Vairamēgha-taṭāka of our inscriptions, a name no longer remembered, one has to go more than a mile to the west from the westernmost limits of the modern town, bearing the historic names Rājāmēḍu and Māḷigaimēḍu, the mound of the king and the mound of the palace. It is possible that excavation at these spots may yield results that would justify these popular names.
c10.12
The oldest name of the village known to us is Uttaramēru-caturvēdimaṅgalam. The form of the name suggests that, as Mr. Venkayya pointed out, the first member of this name must be the title, like Prabhumēru and Abhimānamēru, of some king whose identity still remains unknown. In the inscriptions of Vijayakampavarman, of somewhat uncertain date, and in the Rājakēsari and Parakēsari inscriptions some of which may be earlier than Parāntaka I, the place is generally described in the following terms: "Kaliyūr-kōṭṭattu tan-kūṟṟuttaramēru-caturvēdimaṅgalam," that is 'Uttaramēru - caturvēdimaṅgalam of its own division (kūṟu) in the Kaliyūrkōṭṭam.' From the time of Rājēndracōḷa I Parakēsari, the son and successor of Rājarāja, the place came to be called also Rājēndracōḷa-caturvēdimaṅgalam, and its earlier name was abridged into Uttaramēru or Uttaramēlūr, the latter form giving rise to Uttiramallūr, which is the most common form to-day.* Very much later, about the middle of the thirteenth century, in the time of the ill-starred Rājarāja III, the village carried for a time the name of Gaṇḍagōpāla-caturvēdimaṅgalam, after an aggressive Telugu-Cōḍa chieftain of the time.
c10.13
Our inscriptions range from the late Pallava times, that is from the last quarter of the eighth century A. D., to the downfall of the Cōḷa empire in the middle of the thirteenth. Viewed generally, they furnish a striking, though by no means unique, example of the continuity of social life amidst political changes. They comprise records citing late Pallava monarchs, the early Cōḷa conquerors of the Toṇḍaināḍ of the ninth and tenth centuries including Parāntaka I, his Rāṣṭrakūṭa enemy Kṛṣṇa III who gloried in his "capture of Kacci and Tañjai," and the somewhat mysterious Pārthivēndra-varman, before the almost unbroken series of Cōḷa records commences with the reign of Rājarāja I.† Not only do the inscriptions thus reflect all the changes in the political situation in the land, but they furnish tangible evidence that the village Sabhā supplied the element of continuity in local life through such changes. Of many records at Uttaramērūr (and elsewhere) that go to prove such continuity, one of Kulōttuṅga III dated in his thirty-seventh year, about A. D. 1215, is of peculiar importance. In this record of the thirteenth century are recalled transactions which were over three centuries old, and at the instance of the authorities of the temple concerned, the *Sabhā* gives a fresh undertaking to carry out, although on a somewhat reduced scale, the obligations laid upon their ancestors several generations before. The nature of this agreement and the employment of the phrase ‘our ancestors’ (*eṅgal pūrva puruṣāhaḷ*) by the *Sabhā* in mentioning the old endowments, alike show that the idea of a corporation with a continuous life of its own, independent of its personnel which naturally varied from time to time, was clearly grasped by both parties to the agreement. And a little consideration shows also that the primary sanction behind such long-standing engagements is to be found in a general readiness to act up to a proper standard of equity which, though not precisely defined beforehand, can yet be ascertained in each separate case by argument and accommodation. In this instance, though it is not explicit, we may infer that the *Sabhā* had for some time defaulted in the maintenance of some old endowments for eight lamps in the temple; the authorities of the temple, when they discovered the default, drew the attention of the *Sabhā* to it, citing the old records engraved on the stone walls of two temples as evidence; the *Sabhā* pleaded inability to provide for the daily requirements of all the lamps concerned (*niṭṭattēvai - iṟukka - muṭiyāmai*). It would appear that the temple authorities had not been very prompt in their discovery of the default and were constrained to admit the force of the *Sabhā’s* pleading that, in the conditions prevalent at the time, they found it impossible to meet the ancient obligations in their entirety, and a compromise was reached. It is conceivable that if no agreement had been arrived at, an appeal might have been carried by either side to the appropriate official representing the king in the locality, or in the last resort to the king himself, who would have had then to adjudicate the matter.
c10.14
∗ Uttiramēlūr, Uttaramallūr are other forms. The total ignorance that has prevailed in modern times of the true origin of the name is seen from the local tradition, recorded by Crole, that the town was built by Uttiakumaran son of a rāja who reigned in Virāṭa, a town on the Jumna river (Manual of the Chingleput District p. 132). I have not been able to get at the local sthalapurāṇa, the existence of which was reported to me by a teacher in the local High School when I visited the place.
c10.15
† There is a considerable gap of over three quarters of a century, not merely in our list here, but in the collection itself between Vikrama Cōḷa and Kulōttuṅga III.
c10.16
The *Sabhā* was only one among several corporations organized on more or less similar lines, though doubtless the most important among them as administering the general affairs of the locality and looking after local interests as a whole. The details of the constitution of the *Sabhā* of Uttaramerūr and its standing committees will form the subject of a full discussion later. Some attention may be given here to the other bodies which shared with the *Sabhā* the tasks of managing local concerns and ensuring local well-being. We have just noticed the authorities called Māhēśvaras and Sthānattār who were particularly concerned with the daily affairs of the temple of Tiruppulivalam-uḍaiyār. The Pērilamaiyār, who are once said to be ‘ of two sides ’, the Śraddhāmantar, the Vīragaṇattar, the Kāḷigaṇattar, and the Śrī-kṛṣṇagaṇattar, as also the Śrī-vaiṣṇava Vāriyar appear to be instances of religious corporations of a quasi-public character which received the recognition due to the public importance of their work and the degree of success that attended them in its performance. The occurrence of *gaṇa* and *vāriyar* in these names must be noticed.
c10.17
There were also groups bound by ties of contiguity and several examples of such groups occur in our inscriptions. Thus the residents of Śaṅkarappāḍi in the north-bazaar (*vaḍakkilaṅgāḍi śaṅkarappāḍiyōm*) acted as trustees for some charitable funds, and elected three persons to a committee for testing the fineness of gold. The *māḍavīdiyār* (residents of the main streets) elected four other members to the same
c10.18
committee. We learn from the inscriptions of the twelfth and fourteenth years of Parāntaka I that Uttaramerūr was divided into twelve śēris (streets, as Mr. Venkayya renders the word). We shall see that an attempt to get the standing committees of the Sabhā to represent the śēris as such had to be given up within a couple of years after it started. But the people of each of the śēris—the names of eight of them occur in the inscriptions *—often became trustees for charitable funds. † Manifestly the most important, after the Sabhā, among such groups united by the bond of contiguity, was the Ūr of the village. ‘Ūr’ may not at first sight seem to convey the notion of a specific corporate body with separate functions in the local economy of a place and an independent existence of its own. A superficial acquaintance with the texts of the numerous Tamil inscriptions in which these terms occur is enough, however, to lead one to the conclusion that it is often necessary, in the contexts, to interpret these words as conveying the idea of a body analogous to the Sabhā in many respects, and that a vague translation of Ūr and Ūrōm into ‘village’ and ‘we, the inhabitants of the village’ is hardly satisfactory. Uttaramerūr, moreover, is not the only place where we get evidence of the Ūr existing by the side of the Sabhā in the same locality.
c10.19
Though there is a great amount of uncertainty about the origin and the early history of these organisations, the suggestion may be made that the Ūr represents in every case the more primitive local organisation indigenous to the Tamil country, the lineal descendant of the ancient *manram*; and that the *Sabhā* was, generally, a later superimposition. It is clear, at any rate, that as the *Sabhā* was the general local assembly in *Brahmadēya* villages, the *Ūr* was the prevalent form in some other types. And the simplest explanation of the existence side by side, as in Uttaramērūr, of both the organisations is to suppose that the *Ūr* was the more ancient form and that the *Sabhā* came on top of it when, at the will of some king or chieftain, a considerable number of new Brahman residents, often representing the highest learning in the land, were settled in the village, and endowed with perpetual rights of property in a part of the village lands. That *dānas* (gifts) came to take the place of importance among acts of religious merit, and that the *bhūdāna* (gift of land) was considered more meritorious than any other *dāna* in the period we are dealing with, are facts sufficiently well-established on the evidence of epigraphy and literature. The lands were usually purchased by the donors from previous owners, individuals or corporations of one kind or another, and then given away for the purpose intended. Several instances can be cited in which all the previous owners of the lands in a certain locality were bought out and the existing leases for cultivation terminated by payment of compensation,[*] in order that an absolutely unencumbered *dēvadāna* might be made, or a fresh *brahmadēya*, usually a *caturvēdimaṅgalam*, might be formed. But doubtless there were villages which, though too large to be so bought up, on account of the numbers involved and the extent and complexity of property-rights in them, yet afforded ample facilities
c10.20
∗ Viz., (1) Gōvindaccēri, (2) Hṛṣikēśaccēri, (3) Nārāyaṇaccēri, (4) Paṇmaiccēri, (5) Trivikramaccēri, (6) Vāmanaccēri, (7) Madhusūdanaccēri, (8) Abhimānamēruccēri. The names Mahipālakulakālaccēri, and Muḍikoṇḍaśōlaccēri also occur; but one cannot be sure that they were not new names for older divisions, rather than separate divisions.
c10.21
for the creation of new settlements in their neighbourhood. It was in such cases that the problem arose of adjusting the relations between the old and the new settlements; and it seems reasonable to suppose that the continued existence of the more ancient *Ūr* by the side of the new *Sabhā* was secured as part of the new order.
c10.22
The relations between the two bodies in Uttaramerūr are seen, though only in a rather hazy manner, from our records, all of which belong to the period after Uttaramerūr became a *caturvēdimaṅgalam*.¹ Almost all of them are engraved in the name of the *Sabhā*; there does not seem to have been at Uttaramerūr a single instance in which the *Ūr* made an independent record of its transactions. This feature together with the fact that the *Ūr* almost ceases to be heard of early in the period of our study—we have apparently no reference to it from the time of Rājarāja I—may raise the presumption that the *Ūr* and the *Sabhā* were partners in an unequal combination which in the long run worked to the disadvantage of the weaker side. That the *Ūr*, however, had in the beginning some distinct rights and privileges of its own and that it continued to exercise them actively, though in collaboration with if not under the supervision of the *Sabhā* and its committees, till at least the end of the tenth century A. D., is amply borne out by the epigraphs. In the fifteenth year of Parāntaka I (A. D. 922), for instance, the *Ūr* sold some lands * to two temples for lamps and offerings and was, by special sanction of the *Sabhā*, allowed to perform some duties, which normally attached to the *samvatsaravāriyam* of the *Sabhā*. Again, it took charge of a gold endowment for a lamp,† and agreed to submit to the supervision of the *samvatsaravāriyam* in this matter. More significant of the extent of the powers exercised by the *Ūr* is its assignment* of taxes and dues to be paid by the entire hamlet of Uḷḷiyūr for the benefit of the *Īśvara* temple in that locality—an assignment coupled with the specific exemption of the people of Uḷḷiyūr from all external interference in their management of the affairs of their temple. We have also instances† in which the *Sabhā* required the *Ūr* not to collect any dues (*irai*) from certain lands which had been made tax-free, and gave away lands from among those that, owing to default in payment of the dues (*irai*), had become the property of the *Ūr*; in one of these cases the *Ūr* gave its consent and agreed not to make any collections, and in the other, it was apparently reimbursed for the loss of revenue. Lastly, the *Ūr* had an executive committee of its own which was called the "ruling group," (*āḷuṅgaṇattar*).‡ We learn nothing, however, as to the method by which its members were chosen, or the period of their office.
c10.23
¹ No. 8 of 1898.
c10.24
† 89 of 1898.
c10.25
The existence by the side of the *Sabhā* of numerous corporations, religious and local, some doubtless economic also, and the way in which they dominated some little corner or other in the local polity is thus one of the most significant and well-attested facts of mediaeval life in Uttaramērūr. It was a veritable network of diverse jurisdictions and liberties not always clearly
c10.26
∗ 41 of 1898. † *S. I. I.* III, Nos. 152 and 162. ‡ No. 3 of 1898: '*emmūr-yāḷuṅgaṇattāruḷ*' (l. 1). There is a slight difficulty, easily got over by a little experience, in our distinguishing the different senses in which '*ūr*' is used in the inscriptions. It seems to have at least two meanings, one corporate and the other geographical. Thus '*emmūrtten-piḍagai*' which immediately follows the expression quoted above can hardly mean anything other than 'the southern division of our village.' See also 58 of 1898 (l. 3—*ivvūr-yāḷuṅgaṇattāruḷ*.)
c10.27
marked off from one another. The *Sabhā* was indeed the most considerable among them all; but it had to respect the privileges, even the susceptibilities, of the numerous other *gaṇas* and associations of a voluntary and quasi-public character, of the hereditary caste and trade corporations and so on, and might itself be called upon to explain its default in particular matters by the associations affected by it. Almost every sphere of life was so dominated by group-organisations that the individual was of little account and had to function through some group or other. There was no written law, or even a distinctly formulated principle intended to govern the conduct of these groups; they acted for the most part in their separate spheres of social work, and came together occasionally for considering specific questions of common concern. In this manner they found it possible to evolve a workable procedure to secure mutual understanding and adjustment. And in the days when there existed an organised central government not altogether lacking in executive strength—this was the rule under the Cōḷa kings—the power of the king and his officials was a sort of reserve in the background to be drawn upon when the forces of local regulation failed to function properly or, in extreme cases, broke down altogether.
c10.28
The inscriptions furnish much valuable information on the history and the functions of the *Sabhā*, and these may now be briefly discussed. In the earliest inscriptions in our collection of the reign of Dantivarman, the *Sabhā* comes before us as a mature and well-established institution apparently exercising all the powers that it ever exercised in later times. It sold land, accepted and undertook the administration of an endowment for dredging a tank, and made an important settlement (*vyavasthai*) * in which the *Ūr* was assigned some duties with regard to lands deserted by poor tenants who could not pay the dues on them; a little later, under Nandivarman, it laid down the qualifications and the tenure for the place of *arcaka* in the temple of Tirup-pulivalam-uḍaiyār. These early records also contain noteworthy references to *vāriyar* and *vāriyapperumakkaḷ*. In one instance † the *vāriyar* are clearly officers subordinate to the *Sabhā*, and take their orders from it. There is nothing to show whether they were individual officers or members of a committee; and we have no information on the period for which the office was held. Another record ‡ of about the middle of the ninth century mentions the *vāriyapperumakkaḷ*. The phrase may mean ‘great men doing *vāriyam*’ and may be only another form of the term ‘*vāriyar*’; but it looks very much like meaning “members of the *vāriyam*,” the last being understood as a committee. But it should be noticed that there is no reference whatever to the *Sabhā* in this record, and possibly the *vāriyam* of this record had nothing to do with the *Sabhā*. Further, even if the omission to mention the *Sabhā* be neglected, and the *vāriyam* understood as a committee of the *Sabhā*, it should still be observed that the *vāriyam* would then be a general committee of a non-specialised character, unlike the specialised ‘tank’, ‘garden’ and other committees of later times. The inscriptions of Vijayakampavarman,
c10.29
∗ The word “*sāmanthu*” (61 of 1898) is not easy; and until it is properly interpreted, the nature of the settlement made on this occasion must remain doubtful. The *Ūr* seems to have been responsible for the proper payment of land dues by the cultivators. In a later inscription we get the phrase; “lands that escheated to the *Ūr* (lit. fell towards it) because the dues on them were not paid.” (17 of 1898).
c10.30
† 74 of 1898.
c10.31
‡ 68 of 1898.
c10.32
as also of the unidentified Cōḷas, Rājakēsari and Parakēsari, mention the ‘annual tank committee’;* but the chronological place of these kings is so uncertain that no definite inference can be drawn from these records as to the period when specialised committees came into existence at Uttaramērūr. We must observe also that the *Sabhā* used the term *vyavasthai* for describing the record of important decisions arrived at on matters that came up for consideration before it.
c10.33
The inscriptions of the twelfth and fourteenth years of Parāntaka I, discussed in the next study, will be seen to fall in their proper perspective only when viewed on the background furnished by the data gathered so far from the earlier records of Uttaramērūr. The Parāntaka inscriptions would thus appear to be not a ready-made constitution imposed *ab extra* by royal writ, but only to mark a stage, albeit an important stage, in a continuous evolution from within, brought about by the pressure of circumstance and the wisdom born of experience. That the *Sabhā* of Uttaramērūr was the architect of its own constitutional arrangements, that it showed an uncommon readiness to follow the method of trial and error in its efforts to solve the local problems of the time, is rendered clear by another curious record of the fifteenth year of Parāntaka I, the year following that in which Parāntaka is generally supposed to have finally fixed the constitution of Uttaramērūr. Published only three years ago, this inscription † has long escaped the attention that is due to it. It is a *vyavasthai* of the *Sabhā* which regulated the procedure to be followed for testing the fineness of the gold that was in current use in the village, ‘*emmūril parimārum poṉ samañjasaṉ-gaṇbadakku.*’ By this resolution, a committee was set up consisting of nine persons neither too old nor too young, from those among the tax-paying citizens who had a reputation for testing gold (irai-kuḍikaḷil poṉ-kāṇa vallāreṉappaḍu-vārai). These were to be chosen by the method of pot-tickets, four from the māḍavīdi; two from śēṉai (?), and the remaining three from śaṅkarappāḍi. They were to test gold for all people impartially, and to adopt certain methods laid down for the test; they had to hand over to the tank committee the entire quantity of the meḷuku on which gold was rubbed (for the test) and to take an oath, once in three months, before the saṃvatsaravāriyam (year-committee), in the prescribed manner, that they would discharge their duties truly and honestly in accordance with the resolution of the Sabhā inscribed on stone. Though it is not expressly stated, it seems very likely that in this decision the Sabhā was reconsidering arrangements implied in the constitution of the ‘gold committee’ (poṉ-vāriyam) by the inscription of the preceding year. The new committee either superseded the old one, or was probably intended only to assist it in the discharge of its duties. One important qualification insisted on for membership of the new committee is competence in the assaying of gold; it may have furnished the technical assistance required for the work of the poṉ-vāriyam for which no provision had been made before. Although, therefore, every act of the Sabhā was in form an act for all time, for ‘as long as the sun and moon endure’ or something to that effect, nothing was immutable, and there was no lack of readiness to make fresh adjustments to meet new situations as they arose.
c10.34
∗ 65 of 1898 ; 10 of 1898 ; 75 of 1898. † No. 12 of 1898 (S. I. I. VI., No. 295.)
c10.35
Few records throw any clear light on the normal relation between the Sabhā and the central government. Besides the two inscriptions of Parāntaka’s reign
c10.36
on the constitution of the committees, there appears to be only one of the time of Kulōttuṅga III which contains a direct reference to an order made by the king to the Sabhā and carried out by it. Though there are two copies * of this interesting inscription, the circumstances that led to the king's interference are by no means clear. On being petitioned by a priest, a certain Cēdirājadēva had decided to set apart (nīkkina paḍiyē) ten vēlis of land as arcanābhōga for two shrines in the village; and the king's order required that in accordance with that decision, the Sabhā was to convert the land into arcanābhōga-iraiyili, and engrave the deed on the walls of the temple named. The order was addressed to the Sabhā (namakku prasādañjeydaruḷi tirumugam vandamaiyil). There are many examples of alienation of land as iraiyili by the Sabhā for religious purposes without the slightest reference to the king or his officers. In this transaction, however, the initiative in the act of alienation was taken by Cēdirājadēva, perhaps an officer in the king's service, and the matter went up to the king either on account of a hitch that arose with the Sabhā in putting the transaction through, or simply because no official could deal with the Sabhā in such matters except through the king. Another difficulty in understanding this record fully arises from the fact that the status of the land proposed for alienation is not clear. There is no suggestion of any payment having been made either for the value of the land or as compensation for the loss of revenue incurred. The land therefore should have belonged either to the village or to the king. Or was it an unappropriated common in which both the Sabhā and the king had somewhat indefinite rights?
c10.37
∗ 175 of 1928 and 76 of 1898.
c10.38
The amplitude of the functions exercised by the *Sabhā* and its sustained regard for the physical and cultural amenities then available to the inhabitants of the locality are fully borne out by our inscriptions which range over nearly five centuries. A careful study of the details recorded in them will not fail to convey the impression that during these centuries the people of Uttaramerūr were, to a very large extent, left free to work out their own destinies without let or hindrance and that, on the whole, they seem to have done this very well indeed. It would be too long a task to write out fully the innumerable little details that help to form the impression. Attention may be drawn, however, to some of the more salient aspects of local life in which the *Sabhā* evinced an interest. Incidentally, we shall touch upon some aspects of the *Sabhā's* administration which cannot be more adequately treated in the present state of our knowledge, or rather the lack of it.
c10.39
Agriculture was naturally the primary concern of the *Sabhā*. Not only was it the mainstay of the economic life of the country in which every peasant was interested, and they were all peasants then, but the *Sabhā* itself was, in one way and another, a great landowner, perhaps the greatest in the locality, and was as such interested in the proper maintenance of facilities for irrigation, transport and so on. And it is a remarkable fact that private charity often came to ease the work of the *Sabhā* by adding considerably to the financial resources at its disposal. Thus the large irrigation tank of the village, the Vairamēgha-taṭāka, was kept in good repair by the silt being removed once a month with endowed funds ear-marked for the purpose and placed at the disposal of the *Sabhā* by a private donor.*
c10.40
∗ 74 of 1898
c10.41
Another inscription,* undated but doubtless among the earliest on the south wall of the Vaikuṇṭha-perumāḷ temple, records another large private gift of 100 kalañju of gold which was handed over to the Peruṅguṟi Sabhā to enable it to employ a second boat (ōdam) and pay wages (āḷ kūli) for removing one kuḷi of earth every day from the bed of the tank to the top of its bund, and thus to remove 360 kuḷis of mud every year. There are some more records of a like nature. These records and the creation of a special tank committee (ēri-vāriyam) by the assembly show that the proper maintenance of this large tank was among the primary pre-occupations of the villagers. The deputy tahsildar of Uttaramērūr performs to-day some of the functions discharged in olden days by the ēri-vāriyam with reference to this tank; for as Mr. Crole notes, † "one of the most important duties of the deputy tahsildar is securing the yearly supply of the tank, which is effected by the construction of a temporary dam in the river Cheyyār, several miles west of Uttaramērūr." The special emphasis laid in our inscriptions on the extent and regularity of dredging operations in the tank is also easily explained by the observation of Mr. Crole that "owing to the want of a masonry sluice and protective works at the head of this channel the tank is silting up very much"; and his further remark that "the supply is rendered precarious owing to the river topping its banks and breaching into and obliterating the channel", may have been equally true of the period of the Pallava and Cōḷa rulers. Altogether the creation and maintenance of this splendid tank 'with a revenue of Rupees 25,000 dependent on it' (the figure relates to 1879 or thereabout), and the solicitous care shown by the *Sabha* and the people of the locality in keeping it in constant repair furnish striking testimony to the enlightened methods of ancient Hindu administration which have compelled the wonder and admiration of thoughtful critics.
c10.42
∗ 69 A of 1898 S. I. I. VI, 353.
c10.43
† Chingleput Manual p. 135.
c10.44
When a road was submerged under water and thereupon became unfit for use, the *Sabha* decided to renew the road and widen it by purchasing adjacent lands from the ryots, * the cost being provided apparently from its own funds. The supply of drinking water in a public place was provided by income from a private endowment of funds invested at 15% per annum and supervised by the tank committee of the *Sabha*. † When the *Sabha* lacked funds for capital expenditure of an urgent nature it had resort to a loan from the treasury of a temple, and we have an instance of a large loan paid off with interest by the *Sabha* by the alienation of some land and the dues thereon, and the record of the transaction is described by the expressive name *iranakrayavana-kkaiyeluttu*, a deed of sale-for-debt. ‡ The record of this sale shows that the *Sabha* had its own *pottakam* and *vari*, record books showing existing property-rights and tax-dues, ¶ and that these books were kept up-to-date by appropriate entries being made in them at the end of every transaction affecting these rights and dues.
c10.45
† 75 of 1898.
c10.46
‡ 68 of 1898.
c10.47
¶ It will be seen that the names of many of these dues occur in our records I refrain from a discussion of these difficult terms in this study.
c10.48
Most of the inscriptions furnish evidence that, in collaboration with the authorities of each separate temple, the *Sabha* exercised a constant general supervision and control of the affairs of the temples, regulated the qualifications of the priests conducting
c10.49
∗ 9 of 1898.
c10.50
worship, fixed the turns of worship among them, and administered the endowments for the supply of flowers, oil, ghī or other offerings, and so on. It has been rightly said of Hindu temples * that "they were fortresses, treasuries, court-houses, parks, fairs, exhibition-sheds, halls of learning and of pleasure, all in one," and unless the large place filled by the temple in the social and economic life of its neighbourhood is firmly grasped, it would not be easy to understand why the kings and their chieftains, the village-assemblies and the people were so constantly pre-occupied with the temple and its affairs. It may be observed, in passing, that when private persons rendered any extraordinary service of lasting value to a temple, it was recognised by distinctions, sometimes of a hereditary character, being conferred on them by the Sabhā and the authorities of the temple concerned. † The subtle appeal to personal vanity that is made by public honours and that often leads to large benefactions from the rich is thus not altogether modern.
c10.51
The education of the people was recognised as important. We have no direct information on the arrangements that obtained for imparting instruction in the more elementary stages of the pupils' course, or on the extent to which the people were generally eager to secure the benefits of schooling to their children. It is hardly to be expected that inscriptions can tell us everything, especially on routine matters of life about which there was nothing striking. But considering that Uttaramērūr was a dominantly Brahman village, and taking into account the number of special schools for higher study that are mentioned by the inscriptions, it appears legitimate to infer that educational facilities must have been more general, and more generally availed of than we are apt to imagine on a *priori* grounds. We must not also imagine that all education was Sanskritic in character and that no attention was paid to Tamil. The facts that inscriptions were engraved in prominent public places where people could read them, that the language of most of them was Tamil though with a large mixture of Sanskrit terms, that the inscriptions often reflected features of the *patois* of the time and were engraved by artisans of the village—these point to the conclusion that there was no wide gap between the language of the people and the education and administration of the land. Higher education was necessarily Sanskritic in character especially in places where, as in Uttaramerūr, it was in the hands of the *Sabhā*. The *Sabhā* of Uttaramerūr, endowed at different times* a *Vyākaraṇa-śāstra-vyākhyā-vṛtti* for the study of grammar and language, a *Bhaviṣya-kiḍaippuram* for instruction perhaps in the *Bhaviṣya Purāṇa*, if not in a *Bhaviṣya Śākhā*, being imparted by a teacher resident in the village, and a *Taittirīya-kiḍaippuram* obviously for the study of the Black Yajur-Veda, as well as a *Vājasanēya-kiḍaippuram* for the White Yajur-Veda. Another very interesting record which, though it bears no date, may be assigned with confidence to the tenth or the eleventh century, registers an important educational endowment by a lady. The inscription† is unfortunately partly built in, and some words are thus lost at the beginning of every line. The general drift of the record is, however, very clear. A lady by name Saṇṇaicāni‡ alias Uttaramēruṅgai created a *Bhaṭṭavṛtti* (teaching-endowment),
c10.52
∗ *Ind Ant* Vol. XXIV p. 256 n 41.
c10.53
∗ 18, 29 and 30 of 1898, also 194 of 1923 The word "Kiḍai" means a Vedic School, more generally a religious school.
c10.54
† 39 of 1898
c10.55
‡ cāni (-sāni) often appears as an honorific suffix to female names in our inscriptions
c10.56
and placed it under the perpetual supervision of her younger brother, a certain Nārāyaṇadatta-bhaṭṭa, and his descendants and the Mahāsabhā of the village who undertook to pay all the dues on the lands set apart by the terms of the endowment. The nature of the supervision is laid down in considerable detail. Among the qualifications for admission to a share in the Bhaṭṭavṛtti are mentioned proficiency in not less than one Veda together with Vyākaraṇa and the two darśanas of the Mīmāṃsā; something (?) combined with a knowledge of Nyātabhāṣya; proficiency in not less than one Veda together with competence in expounding Vyākaraṇa, the Nyāyabhāṣya with vārttika, and the Vaiśeṣika with its ṭīkā (commentary). It is also laid down that no one who had a share in the village-lands was entitled to participate in the Bhaṭṭavṛtti. Those who, having satisfied the trustees with regard to their qualifications, gained admission to the Bhaṭṭavṛtti were to reside for a period of three years in the maṭha raised by the donor on the shore of a tank dug out by her, and during the period of their residence, they were apparently to impart instruction in their respective subjects to pupils selected by them after a preliminary examination (parīkṣai koṇḍu apūrriḷukkē paṇippadāgavum). Not only does this inscription throw much welcome light on the state of higher learning at the time, but it furnishes a model for the administration of higher education which many a modern university of our country might envy.
c10.57
The permanent appointment of a ‘curer of poisons’* (viṣahara), the provision for the recital of hymns† in temples and the mention of maṭhas‡ are other noteworthy facts.
c10.58
∗ 36 of 1898. † 194 of 1923, 181 of 1923.