South Indian Inscriptions

EPIGRAPHIA INDICA

NANDURU PLATES OF VELANANTI RAJENDRA-CHODA : SAKA 1091

enemies, and ruled a kingdom which he acquired by the strength of his arm. There is no agreement, however, between the Drākshārāma inscription and the present record with regard to the order of the five sons of Paṇḍa I. The former record mentions Malla V as the second and Gaṇḍa II as the fourth son, while the latter makes their position vice versa. This small discrepancy may be ignored. Of the five sons of Paṇḍa I, Goṅka I was the most distinguished and is also described as the vaṁśakartā. The Drākshārāma inscription calls him a great hero. He was a trusted vassal of the emperor, Kulōttuṅga-Chōḷa I. The Piṭhāpuram inscription (v. 27) states of prince Goṅka I that he was the most distinguished of his brothers and that he ruled the Andhra-maṇḍala as a vassal of Kulōttuṅga-Chōḷa I. The present record, too, corroborates that account by stating that Goṅka I having pleased that emperor by his services on the battlefields and by destroying hosts of his enemies, obtained as reward from him, the rulership of the province known as Shaṭsahasrāvanī, ‘ the Six Thousand District ’ on the southern bank of the river Kṛishṇā (v. 46). Goṅka I was appointed Samasta-sēnādhipati by Kulōttuṅga-Chōḷa I according to a stone inscription at Chēbrōlu^[1] in Guntur District, dated Friday, the 12th February, 1077 A.C.

Rājēndra-Chōḍa I called merely Chōḍa in the present record, son of Velanāṇṭi Goṅkarāja I and Sabbāṁbikā, was the next illustrious prince of the family. Though the present plates do not mention much about him the Piṭhāpuram inscription on the other hand states that he was adopted as his own son by the Chāḷukya-Chōḷa emperor, Kulōttuṅga-Chōḷa I, who furnished him with emblems befitting his own sons and made him the ruler of the kingdom of Vēṅgimaṇḍala-sixteen-thousand (vv. 35-36). The reason for the Chōḷa king’s adoption of a price of the Chaturthakula, apparently a well grown up person, himself being a full-blooded kshatriya emperor, would seem to lie imbedded in the history of that troublous period. Perhaps Kulōttuṅga-Chōḷa I had no grown up son at that juncture to take up the burden of ruling the disturbed kingdom of Vēṅgi, apparently in succession to Vīra-Chōḍa. This event would seem to have taken place in 1094 A.C., immediately before the expedition against Kaliṅga was undertaken. And it would appear that within a short time Rājēndra-Chōḍa had brought the Kaliṅga war to a successful close. In the words of the Piṭhāpuram inscription prince Chōḍa “ resembled the terrible Bhīma in uprooting crowds of hostile kings (v. 36).” While the Kaliṅgattupparaṇi makes the Pallava chief, Karuṇākara Toṇḍaimān, the sole hero of the Kaliṅga war, the inscriptions of the Andhra country on the other hand reveal altogether a different story. There are reasons to believe that the supreme command of the imperial forces was assumed by Rājēndra-Chōḍa himself. All the inscriptions of the Andhra country which refer to the war with Kaliṅga unmistakably bear testimony to this fact.^[2] The stone inscription at Drākshārāma^[3] of the vassal chief Pallavarāja surnamed Tiruvaraṅga, gives a vivid account of the Kaliṅga war. It states that Pallavarāja who bore the secondary name Paṇḍuvarāja had obtained prosperity by his devotion to the feet of king Rājēndra-Chōḍa who rewarded him with the insignia of royalty and made him a vassal king. The inscription states that Pallavarāja^[4] who is also called Chōḍachandra, having reduced to ashes the whole of Kaliṅga, subdued the Gaṅga king in battle, and having destroyed Dēvēndravarman and others together with their vast armies

_________________________________________________

^[1] SII, Vol. VI, No. 109. There seems to be a slight error in the date. There was no eclipse of the moon on the full-moon day of Māgha, Śaka 988, when Goṅka I is stated to have made a grant to the temple of Mūlasthānadēva at Chēbrōlu. If, however, we assume that Phālguna was intended and that the scribe by mistake engraved Māgha for Phālguna, the date would be regular.
^[2] SII, Vol. IV, No.662 (vv.8-9), Vol. X, No. 107, Vol. IV, No. 1153, Vol. X, No. 64.
^[3] SII, Vol. IV, No. 1239. This has been published with notes and translation. See above, Vol. XXII, pp. 138 ff. In my opinion Mr. K. V. Subrahmanya Aiyer has not properly interpreted the inscription. He has made many doubtful identifications.
^[4] Mr. Subrahmanya Aiyer thinks that this Pallavarāja was the same as the hero of Jayaṁgoṇḍār’s Kaliṅgattuparaṇi. The identification is improper. There might have been several Pallavarājas in the Chōḷa army. Moreover Jayaṁgoṇḍār’s hero does not bear any of the names, Tiruvaraṅga, Paṇḍuvarāja or Chōḍachandra.