|
South Indian Inscriptions |
EPIGRAPHIA INDICA TELUGU CHOLA RECORDS FROM ANANTAPUR AND CUDDAPAH The genealogy consists of two collateral lines representing the descendants of two of the three sons of Nandivarman. Of the decsendants of the remaining son, viz., Siṁhavishṇu, the eldest, if there were any, we have no knowledge. But that the sons were each endowed with the wealth of a kingdom that remained in the continuous and separate enjoyment of their sons and grandsons is implied by the statement in the Mālēpāḍu plates of Puṇyakumāra viz., tē pu[trā]nu-putry ān ubhūta-rājya-śriyah, made in reference to all the sons of Nandivarman. The passage conveys the meaning that at the time when Puṇyakumāra, ruling over Rēnāḍu and Hiraṇyarāshṭra, issued the plates, the two senior lines were in existence exercising sway at other centres[1] ; probably Erigal[2] and Būdili which are known to have been other capitals of the Telugu Chōlas. The descendants of Sundarananda, who are represented in the lineage of Śrīkaṇṭha seem to have carved out a separate territory for themselves, viz., the country round Būdili, as can be gathered from the fact that Mahēndravarman II and his son Kāpi-Bōḷa-Mutturāju of this line are stated to be ruling form Būdili in the Būḍidigaḍḍapalle inscription (ins. L above). Coming to the third branch founded by Dhananjaya I, it becomes known from the Mālēpāḍu inscriptions and other records in the region of Rēnāḍu left by the members of this line (inss. A to K) that Dhanañjaya I and his decendants who hailed from Erigal established themselves in the territories of Rēnāḍu, Hiraṇyarāshṭra, and Siddhi 1000. They seem to have exercised sway from two capitals, Chirpali or Chippili in Madanapalle taluk, the capital of Rēnāḍu, and from Biripāru or Mālēpāḍu in Hiraṇyarāshṭra. The details as to whether the three branches held independent charges over their respective territories or ruled conjointly over the entire Chōla dominions are by no means clear in the present state of our knowledge.
Examining the collateral lines more closely it is found that there are some gaps in the genealogy. Among the descendants of Dhanañjaya I, the immediate successor of Puṇyakumāra remains unknown. But palaeographical and historical considerations point to the probability that the four generations of kings detailed in the Mālēpāḍu stone inscription of Satyāditya[3] must have immediately followed Puṇyakumāra and hence probably belonged to his line─the historical considerations being that the set of kings ending with Puṇyakumāra bear the titles of the Pallava kings while the set ending with Satyāditya have names of Chāḷukyas of a later date, and both are found ruling over the same tract. The resemblance between Puṇyakumāra and Śaktikumāra, the names respectively of the predecessor and the son of Vikramāditya I may perhaps be taken to give some support to this arrangement, besides the more general considerations of history and palaeography. The two inscriptions found so far of Vikramāditya-Chōla-Mahārāja (inss. H and I) have to be assigned on palaeographical grounds to the second king of that name. His queen Chōlamahādēvī alias Maṁkhiporri seems to have been an important personage as she is represented in the Chilamakūru inscription of Vikramāditya II (ins. H) as ruling at Chiruṁbūru (i.e. Chilamakūru) in company with her son Uttamāditya. It is not known to which line Prithvīvallabha Vijayāditya Chōḷa of ins. K belonged. As his record is found in Rēnāḍu (at Chāmalūru, Jammalamadugu taluk, Cuddapah District) he may have belonged to the line of Dhanañjaya and ruled the Rēnāḍu tract subsequent to Satyāditya after driving out the Bāṇas who had temporarily occupied his ancestral dominions. If so, he would be the last known member of the line of Dhanañjaya. The line of kings founded by Sundarananda, which held sway from Būdili, and Kandakoṭṭa─ some members of this line are described as ruling from these places─seem to have lasted longer _________________________
[1] JAHRS. Vol. VII. p. 223.
|
> |
>
|