Pallava period (Social and Cultural History)

by S. Krishnamurthy | 2017 | 143,765 words

This study examines the Social and Cultural History of the Pallava period (as gleaned through the Sculptural Art). The Pallavas (6th-9th century A.D.) mainly ruled over the Tondaimandalam (Tondai Nadu) region in the Northern part of Tamil Nadu (South-India). The Pallava dynasty ensured a golden age of architecture, arts, and spirituality and while ...

Other Gods and Goddesses

[Full title: Religious Beliefs (during the Pallava period): Other Gods and Goddesses]

Apart from the main forms of Siva and Vishnu, people also worshipped various goddesses like Durga, Sridevi or Lakshmi, Jyesthadevi and Sarasvati. Of all the goddesses, the worship of Durga in Pallava period seems to be of utmost importance as an embodiment of victory and warfare. The earliest temple dedicated to Durga can be seen in the Pallava period from Mamallapuram in Kotikal mandapam and in the so called Draupadi-ratha, both of the time of Narasimhavarman I. For the first time iconographical representation of Durga in Pallava period can be seen in the Draupadi ratha at Mamallapuram (fig. 69), where she is portrayed not only in the sanctum, but also on the three niches on its outer wall, facing north, south and west. Perhaps, such an arrangement was intended to give the look of a sarvtobhadra shrine. Here and also in the Varaha cave temple, Durga was portrayed as a four handed goddess carrying sankha and chakra in the upper right and left hands and placing the lower right and left hands in abhaya and kati posture. She is seen standing in samabhanga pose over the severed head of Mahisha.

Kneeling on either side of her feet are shown two devotees, with the one on her proper right in the act of either offering his head or shedding blood by means of his sword and the other one is seen with hands kept in anjali pose. This particular representation was identified first by Dubreuil as the navakandam sacrifice. Additionally in the Varaha cave temple She is flanked on either side by a bust of a lion and stag, along with a pair of ganas. Perhaps, the idea here is to show both the ugra and saumya aspects of Dugra and as a universal mother, She is also provided with a chattri over her head. The association of the lion symbolizing victory and valour with Durga is also interestingly portrayed by carving a more than life size figure of lion in front of the so called Draupadi ratha and also in the two monolithic lions with niches enshrining Durga at Mamallapuram. In the latter, the figure of Durga is seen carved in a niche set into the chest of the lion.Whereas, in Adivaraha cave temple at Mamallapuram of slightly later date, she is shown standing in beautiful tribhanga pose, having eight arms accompanied by a pair of dvarapalikas; in the Trimurti cave temple She is standing in samabhanga pose on a severed head of a Mahisha. Perhaps, the pose of samabhanga was choosen to hint that slaying of Mahisha was accomplished just at that moment and Durga is standing over his head with undiminished furiousness and tribhanga may indicate Her relaxed stance.

Another variant in the portrayal of Durga in the sculptural art of Pallava period is the narrative depiction of the story of Durga in the act of fighting with Mahishasura seen in the Mahishasuramardini cave temple at Mamallapuram (fig. 70) and on a stone panel opposite the Atiranachandesvara cave temple at Saluvankuppam. The juxtaposition of the panel of Mahishasuramardini opposite the Seshasayi-Vishnu in the Mahishasuramardini cave temple is interesting as it matches very well with the sequence of description given in the Devi-mahatmyam and this shows the popularity of this text, which was taken as a source of inspiration.

Vaikhanasagama suggests that in a Siva temple, the image of Durga should be placed in the niche on the outerwall of the ardhamandapa facing north[1]. That this rule was followed in the allocation of Durga images in the Saivite temples of Pallava period is attested in many structural temples from the time of Rajasimha (close of 8th century A.D.). In the niches adoring the structural temples, a simpler version of eight-armed Durga standing in a beautiful tribhan?ga pose, along with her mount lion is normally depicted.

All these various aspects of Durga seen either in situ adoring the temples or as loose finds belonging to the Pallava period, attests to the devotion shown to this goddess of victory by the Pallava monarchs, who were facing frequent political incursions and warfare from their neighboring kingdoms, especially the Chalukyas of Badami.

Alongside Durga, the worship of Sridevi or Lakshmi, as a goddess of prosperity seems to be very popular. Most often She was depicted in two forms viz., Srivatsa and Gajalakshmi. Srivatsa is portrayed as an amalgamation of aniconic or abstract and anthropomorphic form having a human head and torso, but with the hands and legs curled up at the sides. The earliest image of this kind in the period under study is found adored in the middle of the makara-torana adoring the facade in Avanibhajana-pallavesvara-griham at Siyamangalam (fig. 71) belonging to the reign of Mahendravarman I. She is seated on a lotus, wearing the suvarnavaikakshaka, a more delicate variety of chennavira of military origin worn usually by warriors. This ornament thus associates her with victory and power and can be called as Rajyalakshmi or Jayalakshmi in this depiction. The context matches very well with the warrior figures flanking the facade.

Sculptural depiction of Srivatsa as a separate panel is found from places such as Kanchipuram (Durga temple) and Kaverippakkam (now in Government Museum, Chennai). The sculpture from Kaverippakkam (fig. 72) is carved on a slab flanked by the elephants in the act of bathing her and also by a pair of lamps, Sankha and Padma-nidhis in the form of lotus and conch with coins rolling from them. Here, the presence of elephants, lamp, coins and the suvarnavaikakshaka ornament adoring Her projects the idea that She is an embodiment of wealth, prosperity, victory and fame. Thus, this sculpture dated to 9th century A.D., is one of the earliest representation of Srivatsa conveying all the attributes in a symbolic manner. Of almost the same period, C. Sivaramamurti[2] describes an unique miniature image modeled out of copper found from Enadi in Thanjavur district (now preserved in the Government Musuem, Chennai). Image of Srivatsa as symbolysing prosperity and good luck can also be seen depicted on the sati panels found from places like Munnur (Adavallesvara temple), Manimangalam (Dharmesvara temple), Tenneri, Madhurantakam (Chandesvara shrine in the Siva temple), Uttaramerur (one from Merkatti Amman temple and another from Madari temple[3]), Ukkal and Brahmadesam (Ganesa temple).

The other variety which is commonly seen is the Gajalakshmi type, where she is depicted with human limbs in its entirety. She was portrayed as a norm, with only two arms holding the lotus buds and is found seated on a full blown lotus in pralambapada posture, attended by four celestial women and bathed by a pair of elephants. The earliest such depiction of this period is from the Varaha (fig. 73) and the Adivaraha cave temples at Mamallapuram. It will be of interest to note here that the description given in the Kasakkudi plates of Nandivarman II Pallavamalla[4] in respect of Gajalakshmi matches very well with the sculptural representation. The Vishnudharmottara-Purana[5] describes the elephants as symbols of royalty and identifies these four celestial women as representing four goddesses viz., Rajya-sri, Svarga-lakshmi, Brahmi-lakshmi and Jaya-lakshmi. It has to be noted that in the creation of Varaha-mandapa, the patron king Narasimhavarman I, had grouped the sculptures with a view to convey not only the religious message but also its underlying political aspect. Thus, here the juxtaposition of Varaha with Gajalakshmi coveys that he like Varaha rescued the earth, which in this case is to be understood as his territory, form the flood of difficulties caused by the enemies i.e. primarily the Chalukyas of Badami and thereby attained prosperity and victory, which is conveyed through the adjacent portrayal of Lakshmi+, who indeed symbolized Rajyasri.

The portrayal of Gajalakshmi+ in the niches and as a part of ornamental torana and door-ways continued well into the structural temples of this age. For example, in the niche on the southern wall of the mandapa in the Kailasanatha temple at Kanchipuram, She is portrayed along with Jyestha-devi and in the Piravatanesvara temples from the same place She is seen occupying the southern niche of the vimana. Whereas, in the Kailasanatha temple at Tirupattur She is seen gracing the lintel in the form of lalata-bimba, in the Chandramoulisvara temple at Brahmadesam, she adorns the makara-torana embellishing over the western niche of the vimana.

Thus, from these different spatial contexts in which Gajalakshmi or Srivatsa was portrayed, it can be concluded that She was depicted not only as an object of worship, but also to convey the meaning of auspiciousness, good luck, victory and prosperity.

Along with Lakshmi, Jyestha was also worshipped in this period. Bodhayana Grhyasutra[6] describes Her in glorious terms and devote an entire chapter. Jyestha is considered as the elder sister of Lakshmi and was depicted as a stout goddess having saggy breasts, flabby belly, drooping lower lips with her hair braided with a single-knot, carrying a broomstick in one of Her hands and the crow as the insignia on Her banner. She is accompanied by Her bovine-headed son and contrastingly beautiful daughter[7]. However unusually She is also portrayed solitarily as can be seen in the sculpture found from the erstwhile Chengalpattu district (now deposited in Government Museum, Chennai).

The figure of Jyestha is not found in any of the cave temples of this period under study and was found in situ for the first time adoring the north facing devakostha niche in the Kailasanatha temple at Kanchipuram, built under the aegis of Narasimhavarman II, and as a later addition, probably at the end of Pallava period outside the Vasantesvara cave temple (no. 01) at Vallam.

The very fact that most of the sculptures of Jyestha are found in loose and neglected condition hint at the subsequent development of sacrilegistic feelings towards her worship. Thus, loose sculptures of Jyestha are found from several places like Mylapore (fig. 74) (now deposited in Government Museum, Chennai), Kumbhakonam, Tiruvellavayil temple, Pallikonda, Uttaramerur, Tiruvellarai etc. A fragmentary sculptural panel from Merkatti Amman temple at Uttaramerur, show Her seated along with three devotees[8]. Perhaps, this panel if complete could be a sati panel and might have comprised of other deities such as Brahma, Siva, Parvati, Skanda, Narasimha and Srivatsa.

Thus, it seems that the worship of Jyesthadevi in the Pallava period could only be seen from the beginning of 8th century A.D. Even though, the contemporary literature like Nandikkalambakkam[9] (9th century A.D.) refers to Her as an elder sister of Lakshmi, it also regards Her as a goddess of evil and further states that She is mainly propitiated for warding off evil. Similarly the alvar saint Tondaradippodi (circa 850 A.D.) in his hymns known as Tirumalai[10] condemns Her worship and little later Sendan Divakaram, one of the earliest lexicons of Tamil dated to 10th century A.D., calls Her as Kedalanangu or goddess of evil[11]. It is interesting to note here that the image of Jyestha, which is kept outside the temple of Naganathesvara, datable to late Pallava period, is now under worship by the local people by the application of vermilion and offering of flowers.

Along with Lakshmi, Bhudevi was also depicted in this period. But She was always shown as part of the panel illustrating either, Varaha-avatar or Seshasayi-vishnu as can be seen in the Varaha (fig. 75) and Mahishasuramardhini cave temples at Mamallapuram. Later in the Kailasanatha temple at Kanchipuram, She is shown seated along with Vishnu and Sridevi in one of the angalaya niches. However unlike Sridevi, Bhudevi has no cultic following and She is shown always in association with Vishnu as part of an image or panel.

The contemporary alvars like Periyalvar[12] and Tirumangai[13] also mention Nappinnai as a consort of Vishnu. The only sculptural representation of Nappinnai in this period is from the Govardhanadhari panel at Mamallapuram (fig. 11), in which She is bejeweled like a princess looking in awe at the marvelous feat of Krishna lifting the mount Govardhana. Interestingly She wears a breast-band, thus, justifying the belief of the later day alvar saint i.e. Andal[14] that She was none other than Lakshmi, because in the Vaishnavite iconography, of the two consorts of Vishnu, only Sridevi wears a breast-band.

The worship of Saptamatrikas viz., Brahmi, Vaishnavi, Mahesvari, Kaumari, Indrani, Varahi and Chamundi, as a group seems to be not much popular in Pallava period until the mid 8th century A.D., as known from the sculptural remains. The image of Chamundi at Mamallapuram (fig. 76), placed alongside other Saptamatrikas of later Pallava period, on the basis of its gigantic size, simple dress and ornamentation, can be regarded as one of the earliest sculptural creations of this period. As no other sculpture in this group matches with Chamundi in its proportion and style, it can also be interpreted as a goddess of local importance, worshiped in solitary without any affiliation with the Saptamatrika cult. Except this image of Chamundi, there is no further evidence of this cult in any rock-cut cave temples and monolithic rathas till the time, when Narasimhavarman II Rajasimha, incorporated the Saptamatrika group as a whole in one of the angalaya in the Kailasanatha temple at Kanchipuram (fig. 77). Separate temples dedicated to Saptamatrikas can be seen in the time of Dantivarman (796 A.D.–846 A.D.), as gleaned through an inscription of his reign in the Selliyamman temple at Alambakkam[15] (Tiruchchirappalli district). Sculptural panel of Saptamatrikas can also be seen fixed on the inner wall of the Svastika tank at Tiruvellari, belonging to the same period. The Virattanesvara temple at Tiruttani (Tiruvallur district) of the reign of Aparajitavarman preserves an unique Saptamatrika group, which for the first time displays the mount for respective matrikas on the pedestal. Normally this feature seems to be the usual practice in the area ruled by the Chalukyas[16].

Representation of Sarasvati in the art of this period is seen only twice. For the first time She is depicted in the southern niche of the mandapa wall in the Kailasanatha temple at Kanchipuram and for the second time on the southern parapet wall of the steps leading into the adjunct sanctum, on the ground floor of the Sundaravaradaperumal temple at Uttiramerur. In the latter, She is depicted in a rare form resembling Gajalakshmi, with two elephants one on either side bathing Her with water (fig. 78). Two ascetics are also seen offering their salutations on either side. However, from the attributes in Her hand like kalasa, pustaka and akshamala, She can be identified as Sarasvati.

Among the gods, the worship of Ganesa also seems to be popular. Scholars like T. P. Minakshisundaram views that, the worship of Ganapati became popular in Tamilnadu only in the time of Narasimhavarman I, when his commander-in-chief Paranjoti, after successfully conquering Vatapi brought back an image of Ganapati and installed it in the temple at Tiruchengattankudi (Tiruvarur district). This story is narrated often in support of the significance behind the name Vatapi Ganapati. But this view has been refuted by scholars like Arunachalam[17], who traced the reference to Ganapati worship in the Sangam literature.

The Nayanmar trio Appar, Sambandar and Sundarar refers to Ganapati in their hymns and Sambandar in his Tevaram[18] refers to the customary practice of installing an image of Ganesa in the niche on the southern wall of the ardhamandapa in a temple[19]. Even the Tiruchengattankudi temple, which was supposed to have been built by Paranjoti, was mentioned in the hymns of Appar[20] known as Ganapatisvaram, i.e. the place where Ganapati worshipped Siva. The relationship of Ganesa with Siva also seems to have been well established by this time as known from the Tevaram[21] hymn of Appar, wherein Siva was called as the father of Arumugan and Anaimugan. The popular belief of Ganesa as the removal of obstacles is also well known in the Tevaram hymns. It is interesting to note in this connection that Sankaracharya, a late contemporary of this period in his commentary to Bhagavadgita[22] interprets the sect Bhutavratas i.e. those who worship the spirits, as comprising three schools i.e. those who worship Vinayaka, the Matrugana (Saptamatrikas) and Chaturbhaginis (the four sisters). Thus, Sankaracharya groups Vinayaka as one of the bhutas. These bhutas are regarded as bhuta-ganas or attendants of Siva and Ganapati was the leader among them[23].

The earliest iconographical representation of Ganesa in the temples of Pallava period can be found from the the Ramanuja cave temple at Mamallapuram of the time of Paramesvaravarman I. He was portrayed along with other ganas as a frieze on the vallabhi portion of the facade. It is interesting that, Ganesa was again portrayed in a similar fashion in the adhisthana portion of the Kailasanatha temple at Kanchipuram (Figure 79) and also in the crest of the torana arch over the devakosthas, in spite of the fact He is represented as a deity in one of the niches of the temple. In both the cases, He was depicted as a two armed pot-bellied gana with the head of an elephant. He was also portrayed as a decorative element in the kudu arches over the kapota of Kshatriyasimhesvara shrine and on the miniature shrine in the tank adjacent to the Shore temple at Mamallapuram.

For the first time Ganapati is shown occupying the devakostha niches as a regular deity in the Piravatanesvara, Iravatanesvara and Kailasanatha temples of Kanchipuram of the time of Rajasimha. The same is followed in the subsequent creations, in the Muktesvara, Matangesvara, Tripurantakesvara temples at Kanchipuram of the time of Nandivarman II, Chandramoulisvara temple at Brahmadesam of the time of Kampavarman and Virattanesvara temple at Tiruttani of the time of Aparajitavarman, to name a few. He is also included as one of the devakostha deities in the purely Vaishnava temples like Adikesavaperumal temple at Kuram of the time of Dantivarman. As a later addition of the time of Nandivarman II, He is seen flanking the Vasantesvara cave temple at Vallam. In most of the early specimens, He is shown along with the Saptamatrika group as can be seen from the Kailasanatha temple at Kanchipuram. An interesting sculptural panel from Madari temple at Uttaramerur includes a four-handed image of Ganesa seated on a lotus pedestal along with the other deities like Brahma, Siva-linga, Parvati, Skanda, Vishnu and Srivatsa[24]. The images of Ganesa in this period are invariably of the valampuri type i.e., with the trunk turned to the right and occupies the southern niche of the ardhamandapa. He may be sitting, standing or dancing. His weapons are the pasa, ankusa, danda, etc., and He often holds in His right hand a modaka.

Inscriptional evidence to the construction of a shrine dedicated to Ganesa in this period is found only in one case i.e. from Paramesvaramangalam, of the reign of Nrpatungavarman (circa 884 A.D.)[25]. It mentions about the construction of a shrine and consecration of an image of Ganapati-bhatarar in the temple of Sailesvaram at Paramesvaramangalam, by a brahmana lady, who also provided 40 kadi of paddy as archanabhogam for providing food-offerings, maintenance of the lamps and to conduct worship in the temple. Thus, it is seen that the worship of Ganapati has not attained cultic status in the time of the Pallavas and initially He was regarded as one among the ganas of Siva and portrayed as such in the decorative friezes and only later on, probably due to the influence from the Chalukyan territory, where He became popular, Ganapati seems to have attained an identity as a separate deity and therefore came to be enshrined in the niches of the ardhamandapa of the main temple and in the sub-shrines.

Murugan or Seyon ‘the red-hued one’ of the Sangam fame has been and still continues to be one of the favorite gods of the people of this region. The nayanmars referred to Muruga by various names such as Sendan, Kumaran, Kadamban, Vel, Kandan, Murugavel, Saravanattan, Velan, Arumugan, etc[26]. From the extant archaeological evidences, it can be said that the earliest temple dedicated to this god was built at Saluvankuppam as far back as circa 6th century A.D.[27] and it continued to receive the patronage of the Pallava kings up to the 9th century A.D. as known through the inscriptions of Nandivarman II, Nrpatungavarman and Kampavarman[28]. The earliest sculptural representation of Muruga in Pallava period is ambiguous.The deity on the back of an elephant adoring the eastern wall of the Arjuna-ratha at Mamallapuram has been variously identified as Skanda or Indra, as both have elephant as their mount. The neighboring apsidal Sahadeva-ratha based on its shape and the presence of a monolithic elephant nearby may be regarded as a Murugan shrine, but with an iota of doubt. Similarly the deity seated in a howda on the back of two large elephants in the Yali mandapam at Saluvankuppam and also in a smaller Yali mandapam at Mamallapuram has been variously identified as either Skanda or Sakra. He is more popularly depicted in the cave temples of this period in the form of Brahmasasta. The eastern wall of the first storey in Dharmaraja-ratha (fig. 80) and the Trimurti cave temple at Mamallapuram portray Muruga in the form of Brahmasasta. From the time of Paramesvaravarman I Muruga as a child can be seen in seated or standing posture in the Somaskanda panel (fig. 81), which started adoring the rear walls of the cave temples and rathas and subsequently followed by Rajasimha in his structural creations. From an inscription[29] of the time of Narasimhavarman II it is known that the Kandasvami temple at Tirupporur was already in existence by his time.

Few loose sculptures dated to about 9th century A.D., depicting Him in seated posture was found from Kaverippakkam (fig. 82) (now in Government museum, Chennai), Kilperumpakkam, Tiruvamattur and Tiruvorriyur also hints at the existence of sub-shrine dedicated to him[30]. Of these, the sculpture from Kilperumpakkam (fig. 83) is of interest and can be identified as of Subrahmanya. It is shown seated on a padmasana, holding in the upper hands the vajrayudha and akshamala thus, incorporating within the concept of Brahmasasta as well. Similarly a standing image of Subrahmanya sharing the same attributes of weapon is found recently from the village Poondi (Tiruvannamalai district)[31]. Both these sculptures can be fairly regarded as of 9th century A.D. and can be identified as Subrahmanya. The discovery of Tiruttani copper plate grant of Aparajitavarman (circa 904 A.D.)[32], which describes the king as a devotee of Shangmuga facilitated to take back the antiquity of the Subrahmanya shrine at Tiruttani to the Pallava period. He is called perhaps for the first time as Subrahmanya in the Mallam inscription of Nandivarman II Pallavamalla (circa 746 A.D.)[33]. It is seen from the sculptural art of this period that mostly Muruga is portrayed as Brahmasasta or Somaskanda and later on as Subrahmanya only. Perhaps, the reason could be attributed to the fact that Muruga is more popular as a god of the common people and not of the royal elite, who got more attracted towards Durga as a war goddess rather than Muruga. As a result, it is possible that Muruga continued to be worshipped through the images carved out of perishable materials like wood and stucco.

Brahma in early stages of Pallava art is never represented individually and was normally shown associated with either Siva or Vishnu, as a subordinate deity or represented as part of the concept of Trimurti. Even Brahma was superimposed by Skanda in His form as Brahmasasta. Separate angalaya for Brahma and His consorts is seen in the Kailasanatha temple at Kanchipuram (fig. 84). He is also seen represented on the sculptural panels found from places such as Mangadu, Uttaramerur, etc. Later on He is included in one of the devakostha niches as subsidiary deity in the structural temples of the period.

Footnotes and references:


K. R. Srinivasan, “Some Aspects of Religion as Revealed by Early Monuments and Literature of the South”, in Journal of the Madras University, vol. 32, no. 1, Section A–Humanities, p. 22.


C. Sivaramamurti, Goddess Lakshmi and her symbols, in Journal of the Uttar Pradesh Historical Society Vol. 14, p. 24, fig. 4.


R. Nagaswamy op.cit., plates.


South Indian Inscriptions, vol. II, no. 73.


Vishnudharmottara-Purana, Part III, Ch. 82, vv. 1–16.


T. A. Gopinatha Rao, op.cit, vol. I, part II, pp. 391–393.


Jitendra Nath Banerjea, The Development of Hindu Iconography, Calcutta, 1956, 2nd ed., pp. 382–83.


R. Nagaswamy, op.cit., plates.


Nandikkalambakkam, V. 112


Divyaprabandham, 880


Vaiyapuri Pillai, History of Tamil language and literature, Madras, 1956, pp. 164– 165.


Periya Tirumol, V-9-8.


Tirumoli, I-5-7.


Tiruppavai, v. 20, l. 6.


South Indian Inscriptions, vol. XIII, no. 314.


K. R. Srinivasan, op.cit., p. 25.


M. Arunachalam, “Purananuru and a rethinking on Ganapati worship in Tamil Nadu”, in South Indian Studies –II, Madras, 1979, pp. 41–42.


Sambandar Tevaram, V. 1266


K. R. Srinivasan, op.cit., p. 37.


Tirumurai VI, padigam 84


Tirunavakkarusar Tevaram, V. 6984


Bhagavadgita, V. 25, ch. 9


R. Nagaswamy, Facets of South Indian Art and Architecture. Vol. II, New Delhi, 2003, pp. 227–228.


R. Nagaswamy, Uttaramerur, Chennai, 2003, plates.


Annual Report on Indian Epigraphy, 1912, nos. 257 and 258.


K. R. Srinivasan, op.cit., p. 43.


Sathyabhama Bhadhreenath, Saluvankuppam Excavations (2005–07), New Delhi, 2015, pp. 115 ff.


Ibid., pp. 138–141.


South Indian Inscriptions, vol. XII, no. 27


L’ Hernault, Francois, L’Iconograpie de Subrahmanya au Tamilnad, Pondicherry, 1978.


M. T. Saju, Tale of a sculpture from Pallava glory to dump yard, in The Times of India, Dated 10-07-2015.


R. Nagaswami, Thiruttani and Velanjeri copper plates, Madras, 1979, pp. 5–9.


T. V. Mahalingam, Mallam Inscription of Nandipottarasar, in Transactions of the Archaeological Society of South India, 1959–60, p. 20.

Let's grow together!

I humbly request your help to keep doing what I do best: provide the world with unbiased sources, definitions and images. Your donation direclty influences the quality and quantity of knowledge, wisdom and spiritual insight the world is exposed to.

Let's make the world a better place together!

Like what you read? Consider supporting this website: