Latest / The Chola Empire: How South India Dominated the Indian Ocean — Fexingo History / The Chola Empire's Royal Women: Power Behind the Throne
Transcript
- Lucas: So, we've talked a lot about Chola kings—their conquests, their temples, their inscriptions. But we haven't really looked at the women who were part of that world. And that's a gap, because the epigraphical record actually tells us quite a bit about them. Luna: I've seen mentions of queens in temple inscriptions, but I never knew how much detail there was. What's a good example? Lucas: One of the most fascinating figures is Sembiyan Mahadevi. She was the wife of Gandaraditya Chola, who ruled in the mid-10th century, and she lived well into her old age, outliving her husband and even her son. She became a major patron of temples, especially Shiva temples in the Kaveri delta. Lucas: Inscriptions from her time show her donating gold, land, and even entire villages to temples. She was also responsible for commissioning some of the earliest bronze Nataraja images that we associate with the Chola period. It's really her patronage that set a standard for later Chola queens. Luna: So she wasn't just a figurehead—she was actively shaping religious and artistic culture. Lucas: Exactly. And she wasn't alone. Rajaraja Chola I's sister, Kundavai, was another powerhouse. She's mentioned in the Brihadeeswarar Temple inscriptions as a donor and a manager of temple affairs. But more than that, she seems to have been a key political advisor to Rajaraja. Luna: Wait, his sister? Not his queen? Lucas: Right. Kundavai never married, which is unusual for a royal woman of that time. But instead of being sidelined, she wielded immense influence. Some historians argue that she was instrumental in Rajaraja's early reign, helping him consolidate power after a succession dispute. The inscriptions call her 'the elder sister of the king' with titles that suggest she held her own court. Lucas: There's also the case of Queen Lokamahadevi, Rajaraja's chief queen. She had her own set of attendants and administrators, and she was involved in the construction of the Brihadeeswarar Temple itself. The temple's inscriptions record her donations and even the names of her personal staff. Luna: It sounds like elite Chola women had real agency. But what about women who weren't royalty? Lucas: That's a trickier picture. Most of our records come from temple inscriptions, which naturally focus on donors—so we see women from wealthy merchant families or landowning communities who made grants. For example, there are inscriptions of women called 'devadasi'—temple women—who were dancers and musicians, but also managed temple finances in some cases. Lucas: But 'devadasi' is a loaded term. In the Chola period, it wasn't the stigmatized institution it became later. These women were often highly educated, owned property, and had a respected role in temple rituals. They could even adopt daughters to pass on their rights and properties. Luna: So the devadasi system wasn't always about exploitation—it had a different meaning in the Chola context. Lucas: Exactly. And that's something we have to be careful about: not projecting later social attitudes onto earlier periods. In Chola times, temple women could be quite influential. There's an inscription from a temple in Tiruvidaimarudur that records a devadasi named Anukkaperra Nangai who donated a whole street of houses to the temple. Luna: That's a significant donation. So she had wealth and status. Lucas: Right. But we also see women from the lower strata in the inscriptions—mostly as wives or mothers of donors, listed as part of family donations. Their roles were more circumscribed, but they were still acknowledged as part of the community. Lucas: One of the most striking things about Chola inscriptions is how often they mention women by name. That's not common in many other parts of medieval India. The Chola bureaucracy seems to have been remarkably inclusive in recording women's contributions. Luna: Why do you think that was? Was there a specific policy or cultural reason? Lucas: Part of it might be the matrilineal traditions in South India, especially among certain communities. But it also reflects the pragmatic approach of the Chola state: if a woman owned land or made a donation, the state wanted that recorded for tax and legal purposes. So women's property rights were recognized, at least among the elite. Lucas: We have a famous example from Uttaramerur, where a woman named Nakkan Kandan, whose husband was a village assembly member, donated a lamp for the temple. The inscription lists her full name, her husband's name, and the exact details of the donation. That's typical for the period. Luna: It's interesting that her husband's identity is included—so she's still defined by her marital status. Lucas: True, but it's also evidence that she could independently own and donate property. That's more than many medieval European women could do. So it's a mixed picture—some autonomy, but within patriarchal structures. Lucas: And then there's the question of queens like Sembiyan Mahadevi, who lived to be over 80, which was exceptionally old for the time. She saw the reigns of four Chola kings and remained influential throughout. Her longevity meant she could build a lasting legacy. Luna: Did she have political power, or was it just religious patronage? Lucas: It's hard to separate the two in the Chola world. Temple patronage was political. By funding temples, you were building networks of loyalty, displaying wealth, and legitimizing your family's status. Sembiyan Mahadevi's donations were so extensive that they effectively shaped the religious landscape of the Kaveri delta for generations. Lucas: And there's evidence that she was involved in succession politics. After her son Uttama Chola died, she supported Rajaraja's ascent—some scholars think she was a kingmaker. So her power was real, even if it was exercised behind the scenes. Luna: That reminds me of some of the powerful women in other empires—like the Byzantine empresses or the Mughal queens—but it seems like the Chola women are less known. Lucas: That's partly because the sources are more fragmented—stone inscriptions rather than chronicles or biographies. But the picture is there if you look. And it's worth remembering that the Chola Empire was not just a masculine enterprise—women were integral to its cultural and economic life. Lucas: If today's episode was useful to you in seeing that side of the Chola world, these conversations stay ad-free because of listener support. So if you'd like to help keep that going, you can buy me a coffee dot com slash fexingo. Just a small gesture that makes a big difference for us. Luna: Yeah, it really does. And we appreciate every bit of it. Lucas: So, to bring it back to Sembiyan Mahadevi: her legacy is still visible today. The bronze Nataraja in the Brihadeeswarar Temple? That's from her patronage. When you look at that iconic image, you're seeing the result of a queen's vision and resources. Luna: That's a powerful thought. The Chola bronzes we admire so much—they're not just art, they're also the work of royal women. Lucas: Exactly. And that's why we need to tell their stories. They weren't just wives or mothers—they were patrons, administrators, and sometimes even kingmakers.