Sethupathi: The dynasty of Ramnad, Guardians of Rama Sethu for Centuries
Dhananjaya Bhat in Deccan Herald goes back into history to take a look at 'Sethupatis', the royal family who guarded the Rama Sethu.
Today when the description of Rama and creation of the Rama Sethu as a myth is creating a furore, it is interesting to note that for thousands of years, there was a royal family in South India with its headquarters at Ramanathapuram near Rameshwaram, known as the Sethupati Rajas or the guardians of the Sethu. Like the Maharajas of Kashi in North India, the specific task of these kings was to guard the sanctity of Rameshwaram temple and protect the Sethu – now so much under the limelight.
In fact even today, though the famous Rameshwaram temple (which technically belonged to the Sethupatis) is administered by the Government of Tamil Nadu, the head of the Sethupati dynasty, at present Rajeshwari Nachiar, is the hereditary head of the temple’s board of trustees.
Detailed information about the Sethupathis is available in the ‘Ramnad Manual’ maintained by Tamil Nadu archives. It states that, “The Sethupatis built several chattrams (dharmsalas) along the main roads of the pilgrimage to Rameshwaram. Roads were opened through the forests. Immense sums were spent on the restoration of the Rameshwaram temples, which were falling into ruins, and the splendid Chockattan Mantapam or the cloistered precincts of the temple at Rameshwaram being finally completed by the Sethupati representatives..” Although the dynasty claims that they are mentioned in the 2000-year-old sagas of Tamil literature, as the brave Marava community guarding the Sethu since the times of Rama, the first historical reference comes only in the 11th century AD, when Chola king Rajaraja made the head of Marava community as Sethupati to protect the pilgrims to Rameshwaram temple and the Rama Sethu.
The temple complex itself was built by Sethupati rulers in the 12th century, with Sethupathy Maravar beginning the construction of the grand Ramanathaswamy temple. Then again reference is made in A D1434 to the repair of the temple walls by the head of the Sethupati clan, known as Udayan Sethupati. Geologists state that till AD1480, when a tsunami damaged the present Rama Sethu, one could walk from India to Sri Lanka on the Sethu!
But only from AD 1605, we find detailed history of these chiefs, who are described as masters of Sethu and their kingdom described as Sethu Nadu (Land of Sethu). After the destruction of the Vijayanagar empire in 1565, their viceroy in South India, the the Nayak ruler of Madurai, re-appointed head of the same Marava community as the Sethupatis.
The most important of these monarchs was the Raghunatha Sethupati II alias Kilavan Sethupati (1671 AD to 1710 AD), who ensured that Sethupatis with their fiefdom over the area known as Ramnad, remained all powerful. It was during his time, that the magnificent still existing palace of Ramlingavilasam was created as the residence of the Sethupatis. No other palace in Tamil Nadu has such extensive mural paintings. As soon as you enter the Mahamandapam, you are surrounded by murals that glint like gem-encrusted jewels on the walls. Some are dull and faded, while others flash forth their brilliance, even 300 years after they were executed. In 1978, the Sethupati family, unable to maintain the palace handed it over to the Government of Tamil Nadu.
But in the18th century, the British entered the politics of South India and as a measure to reduce the importance of the Sethupatis, they were demoted as mere zamindars under the British in1803. Of all the services, this royal family has done to India, the most important was that of financing the visit of Swami Vivekananda in 1893 to Chicago, to address the World Religions Conference. Swami Vivekananda reached Ramnathapuram in 1892 and met the then scion, Bhaskara Sethupati at his palace, and stayed there as the official guest for eight days.
http://sangam.org/2010/08/Tamil_Struggle_4.php?uid=4040
Kalinga Magha was a prince from the Kingdom of Kalinga which was in the Orissa state of modern India. His family was connected to the rulers of Ramanathapuram in Tamil Nadu. Kalinga Magha’s relatives of Ramanathapuram administered the famous temple of Rameswaram.
Kalinga Magha landed in Karainagar in 1215 AD with a large army of 24,000 soldiers mostly recruited from Chola and Pandyan territories. He camped his soldiers in Karainagar and Vallipuram and brought the Jaffna principality and the chieftaincies in Vanni under his control.
Initially, it was Bhaskara Setupati as the Raja of Ramnad, who had earlier decided to go to US to attend the Parliament of Religions as the representative of Hinduism. But after conversing with Swami Vivekananda, he decided that Swamiji was the right person to attend the conference.
Vivekananda decided to accept the Raja’s offer. When Vivekananda returned from USA after his grand success, as he was about to land at Rameshwaram, the overjoyed Raja was waiting with his entourage to give him a royal welcome. Because of the achievement of Swamiji and as well as the regard, the Raja had for him, he bowed his head and offered it as step for Vivekananda to get down from the boat. But, Swamiji tactfully avoided this offer, by jumping from the boat to the land. Then the Raja unyoked the bullocks from Vivekananda’s ceremonial chariot and pulled the conveyance manually with his entourage, till it reached his palace. Later he erected a victory pillar of 25 feet height with the Upanishad expression Satyameva Jayate to commemorate the success of Swami Vivekananda at Chicago.
After Indian Independence, the Sethupatis still retained their importance in the politics of Tamil Nadu. In fact Shanmuga Raja Sethupati won the elections to the Tamil Nadu Assembly and held the seat thrice from 1951 to 1967, besides being a minister in the Rajagopalachari Ministry of 1952. He was well-known in horse racing circles and had a stable of over 50 horses in Calcutta and a huge garage of cars in Madras, including Rolls Royces and a Bentley. But the abolition of zamindaries by the Government of India, removed all sources of their wealth and today, the former Sethupatis are just well-known prominent magnates of Tamil Nadu.
AREA: 6,089.09 km2 VILLAGES: 2,162 REVENUE: 338,686 (1872) ACCESSION: 1948
LOCATION: Tamil Naidu (Ramnadapuram Dist.) DYNASTY: Sethupati/Thevar RELIGION: Hindu
CAPITAL: Ramanathapuram POPULATION: 723,886 (1901) TRIBUTE: Rs3.75 lakhs (1904)
PRESENT RULER: Raja KUMARAN SETHUPATHI, 11th and present Zamindar of Ramnad since 1979
President of the Tamil Sangam, married Rani Lakshmi Kumari
PREDECESSORS AND SHORT HISTORY: The Kingdom, founded in 1590, became a Zamindari Estate under the Perminent Settlement of 1801, and thus became non-sovereign (along with all other Estates which survived until 1948 in Madras Presidency, India). Ramnad was one of the largest and most populous estates in the Madras Presidency and was a permanently settled Zamindari in the Ramnad subdivision of the Madura district of the erstwhile Madras Presidency in British India. It comprises the southern and eastern parts of Madura district. The first historical reference to the Sethupati (= protector of the bridge or Lord of the Sethu, a region now in Tamil Naidu) comes in the 11th century AD, when Chola king Rajaraja made the head of Marava community (also known as the Kingdom of the Greater Marava) as Sethupati to protect the pilgrims to Rameshwaram temple and the Rama Sethu, later he was officially recognized as Sethupathi by the Nayak king of Madurai, and in return, the Chief of Ramnad recognized the sovereignty of the Nayak king over his lands. When the power of the Nayak kings of Madurai began to decline in the late 17th century, the chieftains of Ramnad asserted their independence. The British took control of the administration of Ramanathapuram in 1795. It was demoted to a Zamindari in 1803 and Rani Mangaleswari Nachchiyar was made a Zamindarani. Ramnad and Sivaganga continued to be Zamins till the system of Zamindari was abolished in 1948 after India attained Independence. Rulers and estate holders were....
• Raja SADASICA THEVAR SETHUPATI, 1st Raja of Ramnad 1590/1623, he was named as the 1st Sethupati.
• Raja KOOTEN SETHUPATI, 2nd Raja of Ramnad 1623/1637
• Raja DALAVAI SETHUPATI, 3rd Raja of Ramnad 1637/1638 (deposed)(first time)
Unknown 1638/1640
• Raja Dalavai Sethupati. Raja of Ramnad 1640/- (second time)
• Raja DANO KANTHA SETHUPATI, 4th Raja of Ramnad -/1659
• Raja RAGHUNATHA SETHUPATI I, 5th Raja of Ramnad 1659/1685
• Raja (name unknown) SETHUPATI, 6th Raja of Ramnad in 1685 (he reigned about 2 months)
• Raja (name unknown) SETHUPATI, 7th Raja of Ramnad 1685/1686 (he reigned 3 months)
• Raja RAGHUNATHA SETHUPATI II [Kilavan Sethupati], 7th (8th) Raja of Ramnad 1673/1710 or 1670/1708 or 1686/1710, he crowned himself Raja of Ramnad and changed his seat from Pogalur to Ramnad close to the east coast, where he erected massive fortifications to protect his capital; it was during his rule, that the magnificent still existing palace of Ramlingavilasam was created as the residence of the Sethupati Dynasty; he supported the Nayak King of Madurai against Rustam Khan, later he was granted the title of Para Rajakesari (Lion to alien kings) by Raja Chokkanatha Nayak; he constructed a dam across the Vaigai River; married Rani Kathali Nachiyar, sister of Raja Raghunatha Raya, 1st Tondaiman Raja of Pudukottai, and had adoptive issue.
o (A) Raja Muthu Vijaya Raghunatha Sethupati (qv)
• Raja MUTHU VIJAYARAGHUNATHA SETHUPATI, 8th (9th) Raja of Ramnad 1710/1725 or 1708/1720, married and had issue.
o Akilandeshwari Nachiyar, married Sasivarna Thevar, 1st Zamindar of Sivaganga, and the son of Nalukottai Peria Oodaya Thevar.
• Raja SUNDARESWARA RAGHUNATHA SETHUPATI, 9th Raja of Ramnad 1725/1726, during his reign he lost the Aranthangi region in the northern part of Ramnad in 1725, to the Raja of Tanjore, and later the Sivaganga region in the western part of Ramnad was also lost.
• Raja BHAVANI SANKARAN SETHUPATI, 10th Raja of Ramnad 1726/1729 or 1720/-
• Raja KATTAYA THEVAN SETHUPATI, 11th Raja of Ramnad 1730/1761 (brother of Raja Sundareswara Raghunatha Sethupati)
REGENT 1761/1772, Rani Muthu Tiruveya Naiker, she was deposed and placed in jail, where she died.
• Raja MUTHU RAMALINGA SETHUPATI I, 12th (13th) Raja of Ramnad 1761/1772 (first time), deposed by the British authorities for misrule in 1772 and jailed for eight years, and his sister was placed in charge of the state, but it was no longer sovereign.
REGENT 1772/1780, sister of the Raja
• Raja Muthu Ramalinga Setupati I, Raja of Ramnad 1780/1795 (deposed) (second time)
BRITISH OCCUPATION 1795/1803
• Rani Mangaleswari Nachiyar, 13th Rani of Ramnad 1795/1803 and 1st Zamindarani of Ramnad 1803/1807, by a sanad of 1803, the state was reduced to the status of a zamindari.
• Raja ANNASAMI SETHUPATI, 2nd Zamindar of Ramnad 1807/1820
• Raja RAMASWAMI SETHUPATI, 3rd Zamindar of Ramnad 1820/1830, married Rani Parvata Vardhani Nachhiyar [Parvathivardhini] (qv), sister of Kottasami Thevar, and had adoptive issue. He died sp in 1830.
o (A) Ponnuswami Thevar, Zamindar of Palavanatham, born 1837, he acted as estate manager during the minority of his younger brother, married and had issue, three sons. He died 1870.
(name unknown) Thevar, married and had issue.
(name unknown) Thevar, he was adopted by the Rani of Raja Bhaskara Sethupati, and succeeded as Rajarajeswara Muthu Ramalinga Sethupati III (see below)
Pandithurai Thevar [Ukkira Pandya] (third son), Zamindar of Palavanatham/Pazhavanattam 1884/1911, born 21st March 1867 in Palavanatham, a zamin in the then Ramanathapuram district, educated privately by English and indian tutors, he founded the 4th Tamil Sangam at Madurai; he constructed Somasundara Vilasam Mansion in Ramnad. He died 2nd December 1911.
o (A) Raja Muthu Ramalinga Sethupati II (qv)
• Raja DORAI RAJA MUTHU CHELLA THEVAR SETHUPATI, 4th Zamindar of Ramnad 1830/1845
• Rani Parvatha Vardhani Ammal Nachchiyar, 5th Zamindarani of Ramnad 1845/1862, she adopted the younger son of her sister; married Raja Ramaswami Sethupati, Zamindar of Ramnad, and had adoptive issue.
o (A) Raja Muthu Ramalinga Sethupati II (qv)
• Raja MUTHU RAMALINGA SETHUPATI II, 6th Zamindar of Ramnad 1862/1873, born 1841, he was adept in the arts and a great lover of music; married, Rani Muthathaal Nacciyar, and had issue. He died 15th March 1873.
o Raja Bhaskara Sethupati (qv)
COURT OF WARDS [15.3.1873] - [xx.10.1889]
• Raja BHASKARA SETHUPATI [Hiranyagarbhayaji Ravikula Muthuvijaya Raghunatha Bhaskara], 7th Zamindar of Ramnad [xx.10.1889] - [27.12.1903], born 3rd November 1868, installed 3rd April 1889, Manager of Rameswaram 1895/1901 and a leader of the Maravar community; he was educated in Madras in both the English language and in Western manners by his English tutor who also taught him English literature and music; his great philanthropy (he funded many charitable activities and events), combined with inherited debts and costs of litigation, bankrupted the estate, forcing the Raja to place the estate in a trust for his son in 1895; married 1888, Rani Sivabhagyam Nacciar, daughter of one of his kinsmen, and had issue, two sons. He died 27th December 1903.
o Rajarajesvara Dorai Muthu Ramalinga Sethupati III (qv)
• Raja RAJARAJESVARA MUTHU RAMALINGA SETHUPATI III [alias Muthu Ramalinga Dorai Avergal], 8th Zamindar of Ramnad 1903/1929, married and had issue. He died 1929.
o The Hon. Sri. Raja Sri Shanmugha Rajeswara [Naganatha] Sethupati (qv)
• The Hon. Sri. Raja Sri SHANMUGHA RAJESWARA NAGANATHA SETHUPATI, 9th Zamindar of Ramnad 1929/1967, born 9th November 1909, graduated in Law; M.L.A. (Madras) 1951/1967; Minister, House Rent Control [10.4.1952] - [13.9.1953]; Minister, Public Works, Accomodation Control [9.10.1953] - [12.4.1954]; Minister, Public Works, Accomodation Control, Engineering Colleges, Stationery and Printing, [1.3.1956] - [31.3.1957]; a thoroughbred race-horse owner with a stable of over 50 horses in Calcutta; owner of an extensive car collection of Bentleys and Rolls Royces; a First Class cricketer for the Madras Cricket Team; married and had issue as well as further issue. He died 4th March 1967.
o Raja Ramanatha Sethupati (qv)
o Rajkumari Latha Sethupati (by a secondary union), born 1957, she is a well-known film actress, starring in over 100 Tamil, Telugu and Malayalam movies, and who was ancouraged by her aunt, actress Kamala Kotnis, to enter films at a young age, her first film being Ulagam Sutram Valiban, (1973); she won a Filmfare Award for her performance in Vattathukkul Sadhuram and the Kalaimamani award was bestowed upon her by the State Government of Tamil Nadu for her achievements in the film industry; married and has issue.
COURT OF WARDS 1935/1945 due to a number of disputes and lengthy court cases.
• Raja RAMANATHA SETHUPATI, 10th Zamindar of Ramnad 1967/1979, married Rani Indira Devi, and had issue. He died 1979.
o Rajkumari Rajeswari Nachiyar, 11th Zamindarani of Ramnad 1979/-, she assumed the hereditary title of the ruler of Ramnad on the death of her father, in opposition to her cousin, and is the managing trustee of a number of temples and the palaces owned by the family.
• Raja KUMARAN SETHUPATI, 11th Zamindar of Ramnad (see above)
•
•
• The Poligar System in the Tamil Country : Its Origin
• and Growth.
• by
• By C. S. Srinivasachari, M.A.
• Professor of History, Pachaiyappa’s College , Madras
• [ A paper read at the Eleventh Public Meeting of the Indian Historical
• Records Commission, held at Nagpur in December 1928]
• This was published by the Government Of India Press – Calcutta in 1929 .
• It is being brought back to e-book format in memory of Prof.C.S.Srinivasachari by
• VenuGopalaswamy Educational Trust ( VGET ) – Hosur , Tamilnadu, India in 2011
• 2
• The Poligar System in the Tamil Country : Its Origin and Growth.
• (By C. S. Srinivasachari, M.A.)
• The Madura country, as organised by Visvanatha Nayak, the son of Nagama Nayak,
• and the founder of the Nayak rule of that region (cir 1529-1564 A. D.) stretched from
• Cape Comorin to Valikondapuram on the north and from Coimbatore, Erode, and the
• Western Ghats Rameswaram and the sea on the east, according to the Mrtyunjaya
• Manuscripts1
• translated by W. Taylor. Visvanatha and his chief co-adjutor, Ariyanaatha
• (or Ariyanayaga) Mudali who combined in himself the double offices of commander-in--
• chief and prime-minister (Dalavay and Pradhaani) were very efficient administrators and
• restored order in the country by the institution of the Paalaiyam2
• system of
• administration as the most practical solution of the difficulties. Visvanatha was trained in
• the administrative system of the Vijayanagara Empire and "made his mark in applying
• its principles in a systematic manner". The chronicles of the time attribute a larger share
• of constructive work to Ariyanaatha than even to Visvanaatha, in the matter of the
• establishment of the Palaiyakar (Poligar) system. 3
• The number of Poligars in Tinnevelly and Madura is considerable even to-day; and the
• title is said by Colonel M. Wilks to have been given by the Vijayanagara Kings to the
• chiefs of the Telugu colonies planted in the neighbouring provinces for the purpose of
• overawing the original inhabitants. Visvanatha Nayak had brought with him to Madura a
• large number of his own dependents and adherents whom he had to reward; besides
• these there were the old hereditary Tamil chieftains and the Telugu adventurers who
• had previously settled in the land and whose good-will it was necessary for him to
• secure; and above all there were the impoverished and discontented adherents of the
• ancient Pandyas whom he had practically abolished as well as " the bold and turbulent
• Canarese and Telugu adventurers who had seized with a strong grip the northern and
• western divisions of country".
• 1
• J Taylor-Oriental Historical Mss. (1835), Vol. II, pp. 117-8; and Satyanatha Aiyer -- History of the Nayaks
• of Madura; 1924-pp. 55-56.
• 2
• “Although the system was not completely new, in as much as we find some Palalyakarans in the
• southern country before the enthronement of Visvanaatha nevertheless to him was due its institution as a
• permanent and efficient body for the administration of the country and for the defence of the Capital."-H.
• Heras. The Aravidu Dynasty Vijayanagar; (Vol. I), p. 134. The Palayam system grew up in the Mysore
• and Carnataca regions as well and spread even up to the Ceded Districts.
• 3
• These Poligars, predecessors of the present Zamindars of Tinnevelly; Ramnad Madura and Tricinopoly
• districts, still look upon Ariyanaatha as a sort of patron saint, and in the words of Nelson (The Madura
• Country, A Manual; 1868-Part III, page 90) pray to him as the founder of their order. Tradition makes
• much of him and his equestrian statute in the Puthu Mantapam at Madura was erected by the greatest of
• the Nayaks and is still crowned with garlands by the hero-worshippers of to-day. His achievements are
• summarised by Taylor (Oriental Historical Mss., Vol. II, pp. 15 et seg.) and by Nelson, according to whom
• “if he (Ariyanaatha) lived long enough, he lived not one moment too long". Aryanatha died in 1600, in ripe
• old age, after having been at the helm of nearly half a century.
• 3
• The Poligar system was the solution of Visvanaatha and Ariyanaatha of the difficult
• problem of reconciling the conflicting interests of all these classes; its object was to
• enrich and ennoble the most powerful of each class, and at the same time to secure
• their and their descendants' allegiance.4
•
• The details of the scheme of the institution of Poligars as given in the chronicles are
• thus condensed by Nelson. There were 72 bastions to the fort of Madura and each one
• of them was now formally placed in charge of a particular chief who was bound for
• himself and his heirs to keep his post at all times and under all circumstances. He had
• to pay a fixed annual tribute and to supply besides a quota of cavalry and troops and
• maintain peace over a particular tract of country. In return he was given charge of aI
• number of villages proportioned to his rank as well as the title of Paalaiiyakaran
• (Poligar), besides other valuable gifts and privileges. The sources of Nelson's
• information are now somewhat discounted in their historical value. "All that can be
• regarded as probable is that the existence of the Poligars as a class dates from the
• period of the commencement of the rule of the Nayakas. Very few of the Zamindars
• (the principal exception is the Sethupathi of Ramnad) can claim that their estates or
• chief-ships were conferred upon them, prior to the Nayaka period by the old Pandya
• Kings". 5
• 4
• The term poligar is peculiar to the Madras Presidency; and "the persons so called were properly
• subordinate feudal chiefs occupying tracts more or less wild and generally of predatory habits in former
• days; they are now much the same as Zamindars in the highest use of the term. The word is Tamil
• Paalaiyakaran, the holder of a Paalaiyum or feudal estate; Tel. Paalegadu; and thence Mahr. Palegar;
• the English form being no doubt taken from one of tho two latter ".-Yule and Burnell-Hobson-Jobson-New
• edition by W. Crooke (1903, p. 718). In Tamil the word Paalaiyam means the country or district of a
• feudal chieftain-a camp, or town, or village surrounded with stones; and Paalaiyappattu means a town or
• village governed by a Poligar or his estate. (M. Winslow; A Comprehensive Tamil and English Dictionary
• of High and Low Tamil (1862), p.766.)
• Poligar according to Wilson (A Glossary of Judicial and Revenue Terms of British India; 1855; p. 391)
• means a petty chieftain in the south of India especially in Carnatac, occupying chiefly tracts of hill and
• forest, subject to pay tribute and service to the paramount state, but seldom paying either, and more or
• less independent, subsisting in a great measure by plunder .... these have now subsided into peaceable
• land-holders.
• The Poligars founded by the dynasty of the Madura Nayaks are known by the name of Southern
• Poligars; many of them are of the Totier caste and preserve the language of their ancestors as distinct
• from that of the Tamils. (Vide Mark Wilks: Historical Sketches of the South of India in an attempt to trace
• the History of Mysoor; 2nd Edn., Vol. I, p. 34, note.)
• Caldwell gives the literal meaning of Palaiyakara as the holder of a camp and secondly as the holder of a
• barony or military tenure. The English seem to have taken their favourite name Poligar, not from the
• Tamil Paalaiyakara, but from the Telugu Paalegadu, or the Canarese Paalegara, the meaning of which is
• the same. Similarly the Anglo-Indian word Pollam (Poligar's holding) is derived rather from the Telugu
• Paalemu than from the Tamil paalayam. (History of Tinnevelly-p. 58.) According to the Fifth Report from
• the Select Committee on the Affairs of the East India Company (1812), Vol. ll. Madras Presidency-the
• Poligars were military chieftains bearing a strong affinity to the Zamindars of the Northern Circars, whose
• origin may be traced to similar events and causes. Some were leaders of banditti or freebooters, others
• derived their descent from ancient rajahs or from those who held high offices of trust under the IIilldu
• dynasties (ed. of 1866, Vol. II, pp. 88-89).
• 5
• H Calunull-A Political ancl General History of the District of Tinnevelly, 1881, pp. 57-58. -
• 4
• A list of the names of the chiefs actually appointed by Visvaaatha and Ariyanatha
• can be made out from the materials contained in Ward's Survey and in the two lists
• published in Taylor's Oriental Historical M anuscripts (Vol. II, pp. 160-8) as well from an
• unpublished Mackenzie Manuscript. Many of these chiefs arc called Nayakkars6
• ; one is
• a Reddiyar, another is a Tondaimanar and others are Kaunder, Servai, Tevar, and
• Nayanar. The actual number must have frequently fluctuated. Taylor's list divides the
• fiefs into nine secions, beginning with the kingdom of Malayalam (Travancore) and the
• principalities of Ramnad, Sivaganga, and Pudukkotta, which were "like adopted children
• of the Madura Government".7
• Ramnad was founded in the year 1605 by
• Mthukrishnappa rather restored to the ancient line of the Sethupathis-guardians of the
• Isthmus of Rameswara, (according to the manuscript history of the Carnataka
• Governors, and the account of the Sethupathis, translated by Taylor and the historical
• memorandum furnished to Nelson by Ponnuswamy Thevan, the then manager of the
• Zamindari). The ancient line of the Sethupathis had always been dependent on the
• Pandya and had been in existence for centuries before Sadeika Thevan Udaiyan
• Sethupathi was crowned as Sethupathi by the Nayak; and Sivaganga was an off-shoot
• from Ramnad; and it dates as a Zamindari only from about 1730 A. D.; from which time
• Ramnad came to be known as the Great Marava, and Sivaganga as the lesser Marava
• or Nalukottai. The Tondaimans of Pudukkotta got first into prominence on account of
• their services to the Nayaks; and Pudukkotta, was given the same rank as Travancore,
• Ramnad, and Sivaganga-the, four being called the adopted sons of the Kings of
• Madura", while the other chieftains were called Paalaiyakaara servants.
• Dr. Caldwell condemns the system of poligars as having been productive of great evil;
• for down to the period of their final subjection and submission to British authority in
• 1801, whenever they were not at war with the central power, they were at war with one
• another; and it was rarely possible to collect from them the tribute or revenue due to the
• central authority without a display of military force which added greatly both to the
• 6
• The Tottiyars are, according to H. A. Stuart, writing in theMadras Census Report of 1891, a caste of
• Telugu cultivators settled in the districts of Madura, Tinnevelly, Coimbatore, and Salem; and they are
• probably the descendants of Poligars and soldiers of the Nayakkan Kings of Vijayanagar who conquered
• the Madura country about the beginning of the 16th century. The traditional story of their migration to the
• Madura district is given in several of the Mackenzie Manuscripts. They are also called Ka mbalattans, and
• they reverence the Pongu Tree (Pongamia Glabra) and believe themselves to have originally lived north
• of the Tungabhadra river from where they migrated and took service under the Kings of Vijayanagar.
• There are two sections of them, cultivators and petty Zamindars and those who wander about begging
• and doing menial work. They are divided into endogamous sects, and their most important sub-divisions
• correspond to the Telugu Gollas and Yerragollas. (Thurston and Rangachari-Castes and Tribes of South
• IndIa, 1909, Vo!' VIl, pp. 183-197.)
• 7
• Besides the first section comprising these, the second section contains the palaiyams of Ariyatur
• (Malava Rayar or Nainar, Turaiyur (Reddiyar), Iluppaiyur, Kulattur, and Kattalur-Perambur. In the
• succeeding sections are included the paalayams of Periyakulam, Sivagiri, Ettaiyapuram, Seitur,
• Uttumalai, Kadambur, Maniacchi, Talaiankottai, Singampatti, Urkadu, Kuruvikkulam, Palani, etc. The list
• should have been suhject to perpetual fluctuations, being "increased or diminished with the absence or
• existence of any one preponderating power among them". •Wilson's Historical Sketch of the Kingdom of
• Pandya (Eng. Tamil Ed.)-p. 43.
• 5
• unpopularity and the expense of the collection. The Poligar considered his territory as a
• Paaliam or encampment, and the Nayak rulers and their successors (the Nawabs) did
• not attempt to exercise or even to claim the right of exercising civil or criminal
• jurisdiction in the limits of his poligars' dominions. If his tribute were paid and his
• feudatory sent him assistance in his wars, his demands were satisfied.8
• In the time of the famous Tirumala Nayak, (1623-59) the greater part of the lands
• constituting the several territories under his rule were held as military fiefs by the
• Poligars; the Sethupathi of Ramnad (the Great Marava of early Anglo-Indian historians)
• did him homage, but paid no tribute and the ruler of Travancore paid tribute only when
• compelled; and the others were held under a fairly firm grip.
• Every considerable town and village in the Nayak Kingdom was fortified and garrisoned
• with regular troops, artillery, trained elephants and horses; and a dalakartan was in
• charge of the defences of each town and responsible for its safety. Madura was also
• under a dalakartan who commanded the garrison and the police of the capital and
• became a most powerful official before the commencement of the 18th century. The
• Poligars in order to perform their military duties effectually, were to keep in perpetual
• readiness a kind of militia properly equipped for service and ready to take the field at a
• moment's notice. "This militia was exceedingly numerous, in fact nearly all the ablebodied
• ryots resident in the Poligar's dominions were militia men and liable to be called
• out whenever there was danger of invasion or a prospect of foreign service". Some of
• the nobles other than the Poligars, who lived at the capital, held large estates subject to
• military service and maintained regiments of infantry and cavalry. Some of the Poligars
• were placed in authority over others and they were made answerable for the good
• conduct of their subordinates. Thus the Sethupathi of Ramnad was the head of a
• section of them; the Poligar of Dindigal was the chief of 18 Poligars and "occupied a
• most distinguished position in the time of Tirumala". Whenever troops were required by
• the Nayak for military operations the Dalavay (Dalakartan) of Madura sent requisitions
• to such and such Poligars, to furnish so many armed men within a certain time; the
• Poligars immediately sent round orders to the dalakartans and headmen of the towns
• and villages; and on the day named, or soon afterwards, the levies were ready for
• service and in marching order. In times of pressing necessity the Sethupathi and every
• great leader of men in the kingdom would be called to arms, and swarms of troops
• would hurry to the king's asistance from every quarter. The soldiers of the Poligars were
• mostly ryots supporting themselves by lands granted to them rent-free on condition of
• rendering niilitary service and received only batta when on march; while the expense of
• maintaining them in efficiency was very trifling. The defects of such an organisation
• 8
• A very considerable portion of the country south of Trichinopoly had thus passed into tho hands of the
• Poligars. Hardly anything remained in the hands of the sovereign In the Madura and Dindigul regions;
• while all the country north of the Tamraparani river was in the hands of Poligars. The Palaiyam
• organisation likewise spread into the Carnatic and Mysore regions as well.
• 6
• have been well pointed out by Nelson.9
•
• The Poligar's men exercised police duties not only in their own villages but presumed to
• protect the property of the inhabitants and travellers in the adjoining villages and roads.
• This extension of authority wholly based on encroachment was converted into a pretext,
• “for the most severe oppressions of the people in the form of fees and ready money
• collections".10 They also claimed rights over lands in the circar villages which they
• presumed to hold as rent-free. This was partially caused by the fact that the Pollam
• lands were indiscriminately intermixed in many places with the circar villages and to
• some extent caused by the Poligars being allowed by the Nawab's Government to farm
• the lands in those villages. They frequently ejected the ryots from the lands of which
• they themselves held the inam rights and acquired a permanent interest in the kaual
• villages.
• 9 Apart from the lack of training and discipline characteristic of such troops "they were kept in order only
• so long as their leaders continued to be animated by a common hope of plunder and personal
• advancement, or restrained by a common fear of the enemy, or of the king's vengeance. A jealous quarrel
• among the leading chiefs or the retirement from the scene of action of one or two Poligars, who fancied
• themselves slighted or ill-used, would be amply sufficient to break up a force in the presence of the
• enemy or even in the very hour of success. Consequently however numerous might be the king's
• battalions, however brave his generals and officers, he could never for a single moment feel absolutely
• safe or regard even the slightest indications of disaffection with indifference. This was a fatal obstacle in
• the way of Madura becoming a first-rate Hindu Power and ultimately, as we shall see, contributed not a
• little to the bringing about her downfall". (The Madura Country, A Manual; Part III, p. 158).
• 10 The power exercised by the Poligars of the Carnatic (the dominions of Nawah Muhammad Ali) in regard
• to police and the manner in which it was exercised either. to raise revenue or to augment their influence is
• described in the report of Mr. Lushington, tho Collector of the Poligar Peshcush in the Southern Districts,
• dated 20th August 1799. The Poligars collected two sorts of fees, as district-watchers and villagewatchers.
• The village fees known as Tallum Kaval were of a much older creation than the Poligar's
• influence and authority, "being coeval with the establishment of villages and constituting the feud for the
• support of the tallian; or officers of police". The Poligars had so encroached upon and assumed these
• rights that more than four-fifths of the villages in Tinnevelly had come under their influence and their
• peons had superseded the talliars or' retained them on condition of receiving from them a share of their
• perquisites. The Desha Kaval ordistrict watching-fees originated either from a grant of the ruler or from
• the voluntary action of the villagers, who, being unable to protect themselves, submitted to such
• contributions. In later times these were levied by the Poligars from defenceless villagers as the price of
• forbearing to plunder them.
• "These contributions consisted in payments of money, grain, plough, or cattle, and various other articles,
• and were made by armed peons detached from the fort of the Poligar for that purpose; they were not
• regulated by any fixed principle; but the amount depended upon the conscience of the Poligar; and when
• the payment of them was resisted or not quickly submitted to it was enforced by torture and the whip; the
• whole village was put into confinement; every occupation was interdicted, the cattle pounded, and the
• inhabitants taken captive into the pollam, lands or murdered .... The fees and collections thus made on
• account of the police, were exclusive of other assessments to which the inhabitants of the neighbouring
• circar villages were subject equally with those in the pollams, under various pretences such as hunting,
• batta, marriage expenses, and presents" :--The Fifth Report from the Select Committee on the Affairs of
• the East India Company (1812), Vol. II, Madras Presidency (1866 edn.), pp. 89-90.
• 7
• When the Poligars of the Carnatic including the Southern Districts were transferred to
• the control of the Company in 1792 by a treaty concluded with the Nawab, 11 the
• Company regarded them as usurpers of authority, but subject to the Nawab whose
• camp they were bound to attend whenever they were summoned with a military force
• proportioned to their power and territory. They had been a perpetual source of violence
• and distraction to the weak government of the Nawab upon whose officers they
• frequently retaliated. He had frequently tried to interfere with them but not to much
• purpose. As early as 1756, i.e., soon after Muhammad Ali was firmly established in the
• Nawabship, the English resolved to take more decisive action with regard to the political
• settlement of the Madura and Tinnevelly country. Orme describes in a detailed and
• admirable manner the desultory warfare that had to be waged by the "Company officers,
• Caillaud and Yusuf Khan, who, according to Malcolm, was the bravest and ablest of the
• native soldiers that ever served the English in India "-against the Poligars and their
• tools, the Mussalman adventurers from the Nawab's court. In 1760 Hyder Ali, having
• made a secret alliance with the French, fought with some Poligars whose estates lay
• between Dindigul (already in the possession of Mysore) and Trichinopoly. Yusuf Khan
• made himself very powerful in Madura, subdued most of the Poligars, over-ran the
• Sivaganga and Ramnad countries and even exacted tribute from the Rajah of
• Travancore. The capture of Pondicherry by the English in January 1761 and the
• departure of Mahfuz Khan, the rebellious brother of the Nawab, from the Tinnevelly
• country where he was so long giving trouble, had damped the rebellious ardour of very
• many Poligars. The subsequent rebellion of Yusuf Khan, his besiegement in Madura by
• an army of English soldiers and Maravas, and his subsequent execution which at this
• distance of time seems all but inexcusable, should not blind us to the fact that it was for
• the first time during his governorship of Madura, the tribute from the Poligars was
• regularly collected, the property of individuals was secured from the depredations of the
• Kallars (the Colleries of Orme) and the public revenue was greatly augmented.12
•
• The subsequent administration of the Madura country under the Nawab continued to be
• troubled as before, while the situation grew worse after Hyder's celebrated invasion at
• the Carnatic in 1780. The campaign of Col. Fullarton in 1783 into the country south of
• Trichinopoly following on the Assignment Treaty of 1781 produced some quiet as was
• reflected in his report of 1785 on the state of the country.13
•
• After the Company took up the management of the Carnatic, the Court of Directors
• 11 Schedule o. 1, showing the list of Poligars with the amount of their respective tributes
• or peshcush,
• according to the 5th article of the treaty and article 3 empowering the Company to garrison all the
• forts in
• and exercise full authority oyer the Carnatic in Aitchison.-A Collection of Treaties, Engagements,
• and
• Sanads reluting to India and the Neighbouring Countries, Vol. X (4th Edn., pp. 49 and 54-55).
• 12 John Sullivan's Tracts upon India, 1795 (p. 142) quoted as Appendix F in S.Charles Hill's Yusuf
• Khan,
• the Rebel Commandant,. (1914).
• 13 A view of the English interest in India ( Republished in Madras in 1867 )
• 8
• issued a despatch in 1795 in which they entered into a very full discussion of the
• principles underlying the treaty of 1792 and of the rights acquired by the Madras
• Government to reform the administration of the Poligar possessions. An interesting
• report was submitted by the Board of Revenue on this subject in 1797 and a minute was
• afterwards recorded by Lord Hobart in which he pointed out to the Court of Directors the
• means by which the Poligars might be rendered useful subjects and obedient tributaries
• of the British Government. The Directors expressed their agreement with the views of
• Lord Hobart, and in the despatch of 5th June 1799 insisted on "the absolute
• suppression of the military power of the Poligars and on the substitution of a pecuniary
• tribute, more proportionate than the ordinary peshcush to the revenues of their pollams,
• and more adequate to the public demands for defraying the expenses of general
• protection and government".
• The Collectors of the Southern and Western Poligar countries were ordered to report
• fully on the military establishments of the Poligars and the mode of their maintenance as
• well as on the revenue and other resources of each Poligar, and on the nature of the
• various oppressions to which the inhabitants were subjected. The events preceding
• Major Bannerman's expedition on the so-called Bannerman-Poligar War which centered
• round the conduct of Kattaboma Nayak, the Poligar of Panjalam-Kurichi, convinced
• Government that the time had come to fully and finally vindicate their authority and quell
• the rebellious spirit that was beginning to spread; but they temporised a little till
• Seringapatam was taken and their anxieties had vanished. Major Bannerman restored
• peace in soome measure; but within two years there had to be waged another Poligar
• War which has been well described in the Military Reminiscences of General Welsh
• who was Staff Officer to the Commander throughout the campaign. After the final
• suppression of this rebellion Government, in a proclamation dated 1st December 1801,
• suppressed the use of all weapons of defense and promised besides a general amnesty
• a permanent assessment to the Poligars on the principles of Zamindari Tenure.
• According to Bishop Caldwell, writing in 1881, the most remarkable of the changes
• brought about is that of the Poligar himself. "The Poligar has become a Zamindar and
• has changed his nature as well as his name. One can scarcely believe it possible that
• the peaceful Nayaka and Marava Zamindars of the present day are the lineal
• descendants of those turbulent and apparently untamable chiefs of whose deeds of
• violence and daring the history of the last century is so full. One asks also: can it be
• really true that the peaceful Nayaka ryots of the present day are the lineal descendants
• of those fierce retainers of the Poligars? The change brought amongst the poorer
• classes of the Maravas is not perhaps quite so complete, but many of them have
• merged their traditional occupation of watchmen in the safer and more reputable
• occupation of husbandmen; and it may be fairly said of the majority of the members of
• this caste, that though once the terror of the country, they are now as amenable to law
• and reason as any other class" .14
• 14 A Political and General History of the District of Tinnevelly (p. 219).
A Topographical List Of The Inscriptions Of The Madras Presindency
(collected Till 1915) With Notes And References"
These are the sethupathi inscriptions taken by Robert Sewel and Rangachari
in british goverment
MADURA TALUK
1 . C.P. No. 22 of Mr. Sewell’s List. — (Tamil.) In the District
Court of Madura. Records a grant of property in some lands to a
Siva temple dedicated to the god VisveSvara and the goddess
Akhilandesvari, in S. 1691 (A.D. 1769) = Kaliyuga 4780, Virodhi,
by Hiranyagarbha Ragunatha Setupati Kattar Avargal, lord of
Tevainagara. The grant is said to have been made when “the
MADURA TALUK
1001
Athipati, Narapati, Gajapati and Setupati kings were reigning over
the countries of Cholamandalam, Tondamandalam, Yapanapatta-
nam (Jaffna) and Yerumandalam (Ceylon).”
82 . C.P. No. 23 of Mr. Sewell’s List. — (Tamil.) Records a grant
of some lands by Muttu Kumara Vijaya Raghunatha Setupati, son
of Kumara Muttu Vijaya Raghunatha Setupati, and son-in-law of
Hiranyagarbhayaji Raghunatha Setupati Kattar, to a Brahman
in S. 1658 (A.D. 1736), Nala.
ARUPPUKKOTTAI TALUK
84 . C.P. Lo. 59 of Mr. Sewell’s List . — Records grant of lands for
a charitable purpose, viz., for an Annadana matham, or place where
food is cooked and distributed gratis, by the chief of Punnalpalai-
nadu, Muttu Vaduganatha Periya Udaya Tevar, son of Vijaya
Raghunatha Sevaran Periya Udaya Tevar, in S. 1681 (A.D. 1759),
Pramadi.
15 . 4160/1914. — (Tamil.) On a slab set up in a field two miles
east of the same village. Records in Dundubhi (A.D. 1664) gift of
land in the village of Bommakottai for the daily worship of Valavan-
dal-ammai at Aruppukkottai by an agent (Tambi Udaiya Tevar)
of Tirumalai Setupati Katta Raghunathadgva for the merit of the
latter. The Government Epigraphist apparently thinks that the
Tambi refe'rred to in this epigraph was the opponent of Dalavai
Setupati, for whose sake Ramappaiya, the General of Tirumal
Naik, led his celebrated campaign against Ramesvaram. But as
a matter of fact the Tambi of the present epigraph was, it seems
to me, a later man. See my History of the Naik Kingdom of Madura
in Ind. Antq,, Dec. 1916, p, 201.
RAMNAD DISTRICT
Il68
71 . No. I of Tamil and Sanskrit Inscriptions, p. 57. — Over a
figure of a Ramnad Zamindar between the third prakaram and
the entrance to the Amman temple, left side. Records the name
Hiranyagarbhayaji Vijaya Raghunatha Setupati Katta Tevar.
79 . No. 13 ibid. — On the front of the silver swinging cot in
the Palliyarai. Records that it was the gift of Vijaya Raghunatha
Setupati Katta Tevar, son of Hiranyagarbhayaji Raghunatha
Setupati Katta Tevar. The amount of silver and its cost given.
80 . No. 14 ibid. — Over the figure of a zamindar on the left
side of the passage from the third prakara to the entrance of the
Amman temple. The name of Hiranyagarbhayaji Raghunatha
Setupati Katta Tevar recorded.
81 . No. 15 ibid. — On the west wall of the first prakara. ,A
record of S. 1545, Rudhirodgari, Mar 21, Wednesday, uttiram,
saying that the Nadamalikai mantapam and “ Arudhamantapam ”
were built by Kuttan Setupati Katta Tevar, son of Udaiyan Setu-
pati Katta Tevar.
82 — 87 . Nos. 16, 17, 181 19, 20 and 23 Records the
names on their respective statues of Vaduganatha Tevar, Peria
Udaiya' Tevar, Raghunatha Servaikaran, Pradhani Muttu Tiru-
malappa Pillai and Rajarajesvari Amman and Sinnana Tevar.
RAMNAD DISTRICT
102 . 9 of 1915- — (Tamil.) In the same place, left side. A
damaged record of the Pandya king Tribhuvanachakravartin
Sundara-Pandyadeva in the eleventh year, Kanya, fifteenth day,
Saturday, 12 , Magha.
103 . C.P. No. 7 of igil. — (Tamil.) A record of Muttu Rama-
lihga Vijaya Raghunatha Setupati Katta Tevar, dated S. 1692,
Vikriti, making gift of land for feeding people and providing a
water-shed. [This Setupati was the adopted son of Hiranyagar-
bhayaji Raghunatha Setupati and an opponent of the Nawab of
Trichinopoly and the English. He was defeated by the latter near
Trichinopqly in 1773 ) made prisoner and deprived of his posses-
sions. He was restored by the Nawab in 1780, but deposed in
1794 and sent as State prisoner to Madras. See Antiquities, Vol. I,
p. 228.1
104 . C.P. No. 90/1911* — (Tamil.) A record of Muttu Vijaya
Raghunatha Setupati Katta Tevar (A.D. 1709 — 23) who performed
the Hiranyagarhha ceremony, dated S. 1635, Vijaya, making gift of
houses and lands at AttiyQttu to 14 Brahmana families. [He was
known as Tiruvudaiya Tevar.l
105 . C.P. No. 10 oj I911. — (Tamil.) A record of Tirumalai
Raghunatha Setupati Katta Tevar (1645—1670), dated S. 1579
(A.D. 1656), making a gift of land to Ahobalaiya of the Kaundinya
gotra,
106 . C.P. No. II 0/1911.— A record of Dalavai Setupati Katta
thevar (A.D. 1604 2i), dated S. 1529 (A.D. 1607), making
gift of five villages to the temple of Ramanathasvamin at Rames
varam. [This is No. 30 of Mr. Sewell’s C.P. list. He has however
read the date wrongly as S. 1521. It has been edited in Tam. and
Sans Insrrns., pp. 66 — 8.]
107 . C.P. No. 12 of 1911. — A record of Dalavai Setupati
(A.D. 1604 21), dated S. 1530, Plavariga, registering gift of eight
other villages to the same temple. This is No. 32 of Mr. Sewell’s
list and edited in Tam. and Satis. Inscrns., pp. 68 — 70.
108 . C.P. No. 14 of 1911. — (Tamil.) A record dated in the
year Nandana registering an agreement between the Dharmakarta
Ramanatha Pandaram and the 512 Arya mahdjanas of the Ramesh
varam temple.
109 . C.P. No. 16 of 1911.— (Tamil.) A badly engraved record
of a . . . Vijayan Setupati in the year Prabava.
110 . Setupati grant No. 2 (in Tam. and Sans. Inscrns., pp 656) —
In the possession of Raghunatha Gurukkal of Rameshvaram
Records in S. 1529, expired, Plavahga, fourth lunar day in
Ramnad taluk
1171
Adi, gift of lands by Tirumalai Udayan Setupati, on the occasion
of his pilgrimage to the people of “ the five countries ” who served
as priests and cooks in the Ramesvaram temple.
111 . Setupati grant No. 5 {in Tam. and Sans. Incrns., pp. 70 — 72). —
A grant of land by Raghunatha Setupati in S. 1581 (A.D. 1659),
to a “ Mahratta Brahman Sankara Gurukkal and others.” The
donor is called the son of Hiranyagarbhayaji Raghunatha Setupati.
The object of the grant was to provide for the comfort of Mahratta
and other pilgrims who had now a priest of their own.
112 . Setupati grant No. 6 {Ibid., pp. 72 — 4). — A record of
S. 1580, expired, Hevilambi (Uttarayana, Hemanta Ritu, Sukla-
paksha, new moon, Monday) recording a grant by Raghunatha
Tirumalai Setupati Katta Tevar, son of Tirumalai Setupati Katta
Tevar, to Sankara Gurukkal and others for conduct of Navaratri
festival.
113 . Setupati grant No. 7 {Ibid., pp. 75 — 8). — A grant, dated
S. 1589, expired, Plavariga, Uttarayana, Vaikasi, Suklapaksha 3,
Thursday, Punarvasu, by a Perumal Servaikaran of Pandi to the
Ramesvaram temple for the merit of Tirumalai Hiranyagarbhayaji
Raghunatha Tevar, son of Dalavai Setupati Katta Tevar. The
objects of grant were the two villages Anandur and Paparikudi.
114 . Setupati grant No. 8 {Ibid.,pp. 79-80). — A record of S. 1601,
expired, year Chitra, Uttarayana, Purvapaksha, dvitlya in Makara
Thursday and Sataya. Records the grant of villages by Raghu-^
natha Setupati Katta Tsvar, son of Hiranyagarbhayaji Raghunatha
Setupati Katta Tevar, for festivals and offerings. These were
placed under the mirds of Raghunatha Gurukkal, son of Sankara
Gurukkal. His functions, privileges and honours are enumerated.
[The record is interesting for the insight it gives into the position
and emoluments of the priesthood.]
115 . Setupati grant No. g{Ibid.,pp. 81— 6). — A grant of S. I606,
K. 4785, Raktakshi, Uttarayana, Vaikasi, Suklapaksha, new moon,
Sunday, Vaisakha, by Hiranyagarbhayaji Raghunatha Setupati
Katta Tevar, to God Visvesvara and Goddess of Eluvapuri in
Tennalainadu, in Kalayar koil Simai. The objects of the grant
were the three villages Pudukkottai, Kallikkudi and Edayanvayal.
116 . Setupati grant No. 10 {Ibid., pp. 83—7)- — -A. record of
S. 1636, expired, Jaya (Chitrai 12, Monday, Sravana, Da^ami) by
Hiranyagarbhayaji Vijaya Raghunatha Setupati Katta Tevar, son
of Hiranyagarbhayaji Raghunatha Setupati Katta Tevar. [This
is a very interesting document which enumerates the various
sources of revenue granted to the deities of Ramesvaram.]
117 . Setupati grant No. II {Ibid., pp. 87 — 9 )- — A record of
S. 1637, Manmatha, Mar 2, Monday, giving the details of an agree-
ment between Ramanatha Pandaram and Vitthala Nayakar, son of
RAMNAD district
118 . Setupati grant No. 13 {Ibid., pp. 90-92).— A record of
S. 1655, expired, Saturday, full moon, Karttikai lO, Rohini (year
Pramadicha), recording the grant of the village of Kulattur to God
Sabhapati of Tevai (Ramnad).
119 . Sejupati grant No. 14 {Ibid., pp. 92 — S)* — A record of S. 1656,
expired, Ananda, Karttigai, Aparapaksha Trayodai, Monday,
Svati. Records a grant of villages by Hiranyagarbhayaji Kumara
Muttu Vijaya Raghunatha Setupati, son of Hiranyagarbhayaji
Raghunatha Setupati Katta Tevar, to God Velayudhasvami of
Palni.
120 . Setupati grant No. {Ibid., pp. 95 — 8). — A record, dated
in S. 1659, Nala,Uttarayana, Hemanta Ritu, Pushya Krishnapaksha,
Amavasya, Thursday, Sravana nakshattra, made by Muttu Vijaya
Raghnatha Setupati Ayyar Avargal, the son of Kumaramuttu
Vijaya Raghunatha Setupati Avargal who was the nephew of
Hiranyagarbhayaji Raghunatha Setupati Avargal. Records the
gift of the village of MudalQru or Govindarajasamudram to Rama-
nayya, the son of Kalanidhi Konayya of the KaiypagOtra, A 4 va-
layana Sutra and Rig Sakha.
121 . Setupati grant No. I6 {Ibid., pp. 98 — 100). — A record,
dated S. 1585, expired, Subhanu Pushya, Aparapaksha- Amavasya,
Monday, Uttira nakshattra. Grants the hereditary priesthood
( pur obit a-khdniydksh) of the Setupati family by Hiranyagarbhayaji
Ravikula Muttu Ramaliriga Vijaya Raghunatha Setupati to
Raghunatha Gurukkal, the son of Tatta SivarUma Bhatfar of the
Kasyapagotra, Apastamba Sutra and Yajus Sakha.
122 . Setupati grant No. 17 (Ibid., pp. 100 — 3). — A record,
dated S- 1706, expired, Sobhakrit, Chaitra Suklapaksha, Guru-
vasara-Ashtami-Punarvasu. Records grant of the village of
Seppodukondan or Mutturamalirigapuram to Krishna "Aiyarigar,
son of Seshadri Aiyarigar of the Harltagotra, Apastamba sutra and
Yajus sakha, during Mesha-Sarikranti, by Muttu Ramaliriga Vijaya
Raghunatha Setupati Katta Tevar, descendant of Ravikulasekhara
Hiranyagarbhayaji Raghunatha Setupati Katta Tevar, The
village was in Kaiki nadu.
123 . Setupati grant No. l8 {Ibid., pp. 103— 5).— A record, dated
S. 1705, expired, K. 4884, Sobhakrit, Mithuna, Suklapaksha-Trayo-
dasi, Anusha, Friday. Records grant of the village of Bhuvane 4 -
varapuri or Mudindanavayal in the Brahmade^a of Varagunavala-
nadu to Sarikaraliriga Gurukkal, the son of Mantranatha Gurukkal
by Hiranyagarbhayaji Muttu Ramaliriga Vijaya Raghunatha
Setupati Katta Tevar.
Sivagahga.
167 . C.P. No. 28 of Mr. Sewell’s List. — Dated in S. 1706 (A.D.
1784), K. 4885, Sdbhakrit, Chitrai 5. By this document the then
Zamindar of Sivagahga makes over certain lands in sarvamanyam
(freehold) to a Muhammadan named Mottai Fakir Saheb of Siva-
gahga. The Zamindar’s name is given as “ Muttu Vaduganatha
Tevar, son of Vijaya Raghunatha Sivanna Periya Udaya Tevar.”
[The dates are not quite consistent. This is the same as C.P. 19
in Tam. and Sans. Inscrns., pp. 105 — 7.]
Tiruvadanai Taluk.
Hanmnantagiidi.
279 . 4080/1907. — (Tamil.) On stones lying in front of the
Malavanatha (Jaina) temple. A fragment of record in S. I 455 »
expired, of the Vijayanagara king whose name is lost. One of
them mentions Jinendramarigalam alias Kuruvadimidi . . .
in Muttooru-khrram and Ahjukottai in the same kurram.
280 . In the local masjid. A stone epigraph recording gift of
' lands to a Mussalman in S. 1595 (A.D. 1673) by Tirumalai Setupati
Katta Tevar. {Antiquities, Vol. I, p. 298.]
281 . A C.P. grant in the masjid. Records gift of lands to a
Mussalman in S. 1666 (A.D. 1744) by Muttukumara Vijaya
Raghunatha Setupati, son of Muttu Vijaya Raghunatha Setupati
and grandson of Hiranyagarbhayaji Muttu Vijaya Raghunatha
Setupati. {Ibid., p. 298.]
Tiruvadanai.
283 . 433 0/ 1914.— (Tamil.) On the main gopura of the Adi-
ratne 4 vara temple, -right of entrance. Registers in S. 1557, Yuva,
TiRUVADANAi tALUIC
1197
Tai, fourteenth day, 4 u. di. Paurnami, Pushya, fiortesponding to
January 12, A.D. 1636, an order of Tirumalaiyan that each village
had to pay one kdhi, one panam and one kalam of paddy to the
temple of Adanai Nayakar for the merit of Sethpatidevar. [The
local god was so called because, it is said, Bhrigu got relief from
God Siva from the goat’s head and elephant’s body with which
he had been cursed by sage Durvasas.]
285 . 435 0/1914. — (Tamil.) On the .same gopura ; left of en-
trance. A record in the sixteenth year of the Pandya king Mara-
varman alias Sundara-Pandya “ who having taken the Chola
country was pleased to perform the anointment of heroes and the
-anointment of victors at Mudigondacholapuram.” The stone is
cut off at the right end. Seems to register a gift of land.
286 . 436 0/1914. — (Tamil.) On a slab set up near the tank in
the same temple. Records in S. 1642, Vikari, the digging of the
Stiryaputkarani tank in front of the temples of Adanai Nayakar
and Anbirpiriyada-Amman for the merit of Muttuvayiravanatha
Setupati Kattadevar.
287 - 288 . Mr. Sewell mentions two C.P. grants in the temple,
dated S. 1601 (A.D. 1679) recording gift of lands by Hiranya-
garbha Setupati. [Antiquities, Vol. I, p. 302.]
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.