> The valuables have been accumulated in the temple over several thousand years, having been donated to the Deity, and subsequently stored in the Temple, by various Dynasties, such as the Cheras, the Pandyas, the Travancore royal family, the Kolathiris, the Pallavas, the Cholas, and many other Kings of both South India and beyond.[10][11][12][13][14][15][16] Most scholars believe that this was accumulated over thousands of years
Remember that most Roman gold ended up in India. India was the main far East recipient and trading partner of Rome, not China (trade with China was mediated by Indian kingdoms). And that was one empire with which South India traded. It's unfortunate that a lot of narratives about India are driven by the North. The South is way more interesting, in my opinion (I'm biased).
> It's unfortunate that a lot of narratives about India are driven by the North. The South is way more interesting, in my opinion (I'm biased).
It's not from North India though. North India is not on the land-based trade routes between the Middle East and the Far East due to mountains along Myannmar.
It's from Central Asia and the Middle East, who's views are often followed by Indian Muslims for political scoring against Non-Muslims. A lot of the people in Central Asia and the Middle East absolutely hate Indians and South Indians, so they often tend to write narratives that avoid India. So something like discussing direct contact between the Middle East and the Far East but avoiding India. If you want to read about the genuine geopolitics of ancient India then read some historic texts from the Far East.
The idea of there being a strong conflict between the north and the south is something driven by corrupt left wing separatist and regionalist politicians in South India, but most North Indians don't think like that.
I am ethnically Indian but not an Indian citizen. I honestly don't really care about Indian politics or religious factionalism. For me, I find the history of my own family interesting, and don't like how 'india' is presented in history books as primarily the gangetic plain when there are hundreds of millions of Indians in other parts who have a related, but different history.
I mean even customs that are 'Indian' in the diaspora are often north indian customs. It's fine, but it'd be like asking a new Yorker to make southern bbq
It wasn't donated money entirely - at least not in the sense of offerings from regular devotees. They were donations/remittances by the monarchy. The history is that the southern half of Kerala was a kingdom named 'Travancore'. During the establishment of the kingdom, the first king declared himself and his successors to be 'Padmanabhadasa' or 'servants of lord Padmanabha'. Lord Padmanabha is the deity worshiped at this particular temple. The temple was considered as the seat of Travancore's power and therefore a big part of the kingdom's tax revenue ended up there.
There are a lot of royal families still present in India. But they're all in ceremonial roles and have no constitutional roles or powers like the one in Britain enjoys. They mostly live off their estates (similar to the British royals) or business enterprises.
I have visited this temple. The security inside the premises is handled by regular police, but the temple also has a strict dress code.. so you get to see shirtless men in dhotis carrying badges and pistols in cloth holsters. It's really funny to look at.
