Studies in Cola History and Administration c10.36

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?