Studies in Cola History and Administration c12.22

c12.22

In all the numerous and profound contributions of Venkayya to South Indian Epigraphy, it is hard to find another paragraph which beats this, or even approaches it, in its utter disregard for the sources. As we have seen already, the Sabhā of Uttaramērūr appears to have adopted the committee system (vāriyam) for the first time in the twelfth year of Parāntaka. The speculations of Venkayya concerning the reasons which led to the reform are based entirely on his translation of ‘mūvaṭṭin ippaṛam’ (l. 5) into “for the last three years.” He also introduces a new word ‘(just)’ in his translation of the phrase ‘*vāriyañjeydoḷinda-perumakkaḷukku*.’ The extent to which the meaning of our simple text is distorted as a result of these slight devices in translation can be seen by placing Venkayya’s version by the side of a more literal rendering given as far as possible in his own words. Venkayya’s version is: “From among (the residents) who have not been on (any of) the committees for the last three years and who are not close relations of the great men (just) retired from the committees” (*italics ours*). A more literal rendering would be: “From among those who have not done *vāriyam* on this side of three years and who are not close relations of the great men who have done *vāriyam* and retired.” There is nothing here* either about the men who served on committees at the time the settlement was made or during the three years preceding the settlement. There is also no evidence of ‘implied indignation’ against or ‘wholesale condemnation’ of any body of persons. Venkayya’s speculation about members of committees bringing the administration of the village into disrepute by their embezzlement of communal funds and their refusal to submit to any scrutiny is utterly groundless. The only reference to such transgressions in the two records of Uttaramerūr occurs at the end of l. 4 of ‘B’ where it is laid down that failure to produce accounts for audit at the end of a period of office (*vāriyam*) shall permanently disqualify a person and his relatives for election to the *vāriyam*. This provision is part of a more detailed statement of disqualifications for election to the *vāriyam* that distinguishes the later record from that of two years before. In other words, what we have here is not the statement of a concrete fact, but provision against a possible contingency.