|
The Indian Analyst
|
|
South Indian Inscriptions |
EPIGRAPHIA INDICA But Kulōttuṅga was succeeded on the Chōḷa throne by Vikrama-chōḷa and not by this Parāntaka. If the statement is the Piṭhāpuram pillar inscription of Mallapadēva that Vikrama-chōḷa was ruing over Vēṅgī up to the time of his departure for the south to ascend the Chōḷa throne is to be accepted, then we have to identify this Parāntaka with Vikrama-chōḷa. The meykkīrtti of Parāntaka contains identical expressions and appears more or less the same as the earlier portion of the meykkīrtti beginning with the words, Pūmādu puṇara, etc., of Vikrama-chōḷa.[1] This may also be cited in support of the above presumption.[2] But there are difficulties in accepting this identification. The meykkīrtti beginning with the words Pūmādu puṇara appears in the inscriptions of Vikrama-chōḷa even in the second year of his reign[3] (thus practically from its commencement) and it contains a reference to his Kaliṅga expedition which took place in the reign of his father Kulōttuṅga I, when he (Vikrama-chōḷa) was only a child.[4] But the meykkīrtti of Parāntaka of which we have the version brought up to the 9th year of his reign does not contain any reference to this Kaliṅga war. Moreover it is purely a eulogistic one of the more or less conventional type containing no reference to any event of importance. There is also no evidence, epigraphical or literary, that the title of Parāntaka was borne by Vikrama-chōḷa, though we know of this other titles like Tyāgasamudra. Vikrama-chōḷa counts his regnal years from the date of his accession to the Chōḷa throne which took place on or about the 29th June, 1118 A.D.[5] But we have seen above that Parāntaka counted his regnal years from some date in Śaka 1033 or 1111-12 A. D. and that such a reckoning was continued by him up to 1119-20 A.D., the date of the two records now under publication, i.e. even beyond the initial date of 1118 A.D. claimed for Vikrama-chōḷa.
Again according to the Piṭhāpuram pillar inscription[6] of Mallapadēva, Vikrama-chōḷa must have left his Vēṅgī viceroyalty and come over to the south before the date of his accession to the Chōḷa throne in 1118 A.D. But Parāntaka appears to have continued in Vēṅgī even after that date. An inscription[7] from Drākshārāma registers a gift to the temple of Parāntakēśvara built there, and perhaps also points to the presence of Parāntaka there in the 49th year, 333rd day of the reign of Kulōttuṅga I, i.e. on or about the 7th May, 1119 A.D. We have therefore to account for two persons, Vikrama-chōḷa and Parāntaka, both claiming to the Parakēsarivarmans and ruling as co-regents along with their father Kulōttuṅga I during the last two years of the latter’s reign. This position is anomalous in Chōḷa history and has to be explained. It cannot be said that Kulōttuṅga I chose and anointed both of them as heirs-apparent. The Vijayavāḍa inscription[8] referred to above clearly points out that Parāntaka was chosen as heir-apparent and entrusted with the governance of the Vēṅgī country, nearly seven years prior to the date claimed for the accession of Vikrama-chōḷa to the Chōḷa throne. Parāntaka’s position, not only as successor-designate but also as ruler de facto was recognised both in the Telugu country of Vēṅgī and in the Tamil area of the Chōḷa dominion proper. On the south wall of the Kōdaṇḍarāma temple at Madhurāntakam in the Chingleput District of the Madras State, there is a Tamil inscription[9] dated in the 7th regnal year of a Parānta[ka]dēva ______________________________________________
[1] SII, Vol. III, No. 80 ; Vol. VII, No. 832.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
