Read an inscription found by Dr.Rajamanickanar institute of Historic research in Pullamangai Thiru Alanthuraiyar temple (Near Kumbakonam).
It belongs to 24th regional year of Rajaraja.
The king had made few of the lands tax free (Iraiyili) since they were belonging to odhuvars (Nindrothum sattap peru makkal) in his 12th regional year. In 24th year he found that there was no thiruppatiyam chanting happening - there were no odhuvars available. Probably the inspecting officer should have observed this and silently made an observatory remark - so the king issued a royal order to take away the iraiyili and make it taxable land.
This inscription throws a rare glipmse of how endowments provided to temples were not only audited but were even taken back when the purpose was not served.
Given their rudimentary infrastructure, it is amazing to see the quality of governance.
Ladies and Gentlemen, I am a fairly newcomer to this group, having been introduced to the same by Mr.Gokul, whom I have met very recently. While, for a long time I have been interested in History, I was not prepared to learn wrongly from any number of hacks that are there, unfortunately, But Mr.Gokul has introduced me here and I am eternally grateful to him for that. But all of you will have to excuse me for my ignorance, since I have just started to learn. Quite a few of you mention, in this mail, the term "REGIONAL YEAR". Could one of you please clarify what this is and how it is different from the English year?
Hi Sriraman Balasubramanian, Welcome.It is not regional but regnal year.Regnal is the adjective for reign and regnal year means the years elapsed after a king's ascension to the throne. GR
Hi SPS, Can u tell me the basis for identifying Tiruvallam near Ranipet with Vallam of the Vana kings?In PS it is stated that Vandiyatevan spent all his earlier years in the dry regions to the north of Palar river.Ranipet being almost near Palar does not fit this description.Banas are contemporaneous with Vaidumbas and Gangas and Parantaka Cola is said to have fought a battle successfully against Krishna II (Rashtrakuta king) at Tiruvallam.In this battle the Banas are said to have lost their territory.(KAN Sastri).Pulikesi II is also said to have attacked Banas who were ruling in Rayalaseema as feudatories of the Pallavas.Thus Rayalaseema seems to be a more likely location of the Bana kingdom. GR
Dear Madam, Thank you for the clarification. I would also be grateful if you or one of the group members would give me some links which I can study to get my basics clear.
Dear SPS, It is still not evident to me that Vandiyatevan was from Tiruvallam near Ranipet.U have not answered how this can be reconciled with Kalki's statement that Vtevan spent all his early years in the dry regions north of Palar and was therefore afraid of water.That he was from Vanarkulam is well known and this can plausibly be identified with the Bana dynasty.What Vtevan and Kundavi did after their marriage and where they lived is also something which needs historic documentation and not just conjecture. GR