Temples, Donors, and Gifts: Patterns of Patronage in Thirteenth-Century South India

Abstract

The common model of the Hindu temple of South India has stressed its significance as the main integrative factor binding the disparate elements of precolonial society into one social fabric. As a focal point for economic redistribution, the South Indian temple was the conduit through which exchange occurred: material goods were transformed into the symbols of prestige and influence known as temple honors (Appadurai and Breckenridge 1976). The legitimacy of the medieval South Indian ruler rested on his role as the donor par excellence, and his sovereignty had a ritual basis that was far stronger than his more mundane methods of control (Stein 1980: 45–46). The foremost reason South Indian temples were able to perform this integrative function was their wide appeal in the society—their ability to incorporate members of different communities into one community of worship. By providing employment to artisans, peasants and shepherds and by lending money to agriculturalists in their vicinities, South Indian temples also redistributed the property of the wealthy to other segments of society (Spencer 1968:292). The widespread approval accorded to patrons of temples meant that, during the later Vijayanagara age, religious gifting could be used as a strategy by outside warriors for creating allegiances on the local level in Tamil Nadu (Appadurai 1977:55–59).

Temples and Trade Network in South India: The Cult of Gavareshvara

“…Cynthia Talbot indeed proposes that the temples performed the integrative function as they had 'wide appeal' in society by their ability to incorporate members of different trade guilds into 'a community of worship'. 12 Thus, the cult of Gavareshvara brought together an assortment of traders, craftsmen, agriculturists and mercenaries who benefited from their association with the supra-local trade guild Ayyavole Five Hundred. Most of the works mentioned above did not recognise the importance of group identity.…”

Jewels Set in Stone: Hindu Temple Recipes in Medieval Cōḻa Epigraphy

“…Priests like Babu Shastri and scholars like Breckenridge have supposed that regular naivedya practices in temples came about to sustain increasingly voluminous crowds of pilgrims who needed refreshment during and following temple visits. However, I theorize that the feeding of gods as a regular feature of temple life was more direct in intention: one feeds god to nourish god, with as lavish an offering as one can offer on display in the public arena 77 that is the Tamil temple (versus giving vast offerings at home, which feeds and impresses the god, but impresses the community and visitors at large less so) (Appadurai and Breckenridge 1976;Talbot 1991Talbot , 2001. I suggest that the Cōla medieval practice of offering naivedya for god is first and foremost for feeding, sustaining, and nourishing god, which goes against the sociologico-functional explanation that naivedya was institutionalized to feed large numbers of pilgrims.…”

Issues of Power and Identity

“…Her role was limited to that of the wife of the king, mother of the successor and rarely as the daughter of the king. Insights can be drawn from the work of Cynthia Talbot, where the case of Rudramādevī, the queen of the Kākatiya dynasty is discussed at length (Talbot, 1995). 5 Talbot draws attention to the fluidity in society, which made it possible for a woman to exercise power through the adoption of masculine titles, attire and attributes.…”