South Indian Inscriptions

EPIGRAPHIA INDICA

the date of the fall of Warangal, there need be no doubt that he is identical with Kāpaya-nāyaka, Prōla’s brother mentioned in the grant under review. Fortunately for us, the Prōlavaram grant furnishes a short pedigree of three generations of the Musunūri chiefs born in the fourth caste. Pōta, the earliest known member of the family, had four sons, namely, Pōcha, Dēva, Kāma and Rāja. The first three brothers had two sons each, namely, Prōla and Erapōta, Kāpa and Mummaḍīśa, and Immaḍīśa and Dēva respectively ; and Rāja, the last son of Pōta, had only one son by name Anavōta, otherwise known as Toyyēṭi Anavōta, or Anavōta of Toyyēru. From this it becomes clear that Prōla and Erapōta were the only sons of Pōcha, and that Kāpa and others were, strictly speaking, Prōlaya-nāyaka’s cousins (that is, his paternal uncles’ sons and not his own brothers). Even the Prōlavaram grant does not furnish any information about Kāpaya-nāyaka’s grandfather Pōta and his father and uncles, except giving the pedigree. Probably these members of the Musunūri family were ordinary Nāyakas of no great importance and played no part in the momentous history of the period during and after the reign of the last Kākatīya emperor, Pratāparudra. Prōla and his brothers, especially Kāpaya-nāyaka, seem to have been the only members of the family that came to limelight during the period of the Muslim occupation of the Āndhra country immediately after the fall of Warangal by their deeds of valour, and untiring efforts to unite and inspire the people of the country and liberate it from the Muslim yoke. Except Kāpaya-nāyaka none of the other cousins of Prōlaya finds mention either in the grant under review or in the Prōlavaram grant of Kāpaya-nāyaka. Probably they were young and achieved nothing worthy of note during that troublous period, or it may be that some of them lost their lives during those days of anarchy, and the oppressive and autocratic rule of the Mussalmans. It is, however, certain that Kāpaya-nāyaka was the right hand man of Prōlaya-nāyaka, whom he actively supported and co-operated with in every way in waging war on the Mussalmans and expelling them from the Āndhra country.

There is another record, the Kaluvachēru grant of Anitalli,^[1] dated in Śaka 1345, (1423 A.D.), that should be taken into account here for a better understanding of the political conditions of the country immediately after the fall of Warangal, even though it is separated in time by nearly a century from the grant under review. It is stated in the introductory portion of the Kaluvachēru grant that after Pratāparudra of the Kākatīya dynasty, the lord of Triliṅga (Telugu country), had gone to heaven by his own will, the whole land was occupied by the Muslims (Yavanamayī jātā) ; Prōlaya-nāyaka then raised the country that was enveloped in the womb of the Yavanas (Yavan-ōdara-stha) just like Varāha, the boar incarnation of Vishṇu, who raised the land submerged under water. After Prōlaya-nāyaka went as a guest to heaven at the command of Viśvēśvara, the same grant further says, Kāpaya-nāyaka who was equal in splendor to the sun, ruled his kingdom, and that he whose feet were served by the seventyfive Nāyakas, protected the earth by the grace of Viśvēśvara. King Kāpa is said to have regranted to Brāhmaṇas, the agrahāras taken over by the Turushkas, besides granting them some afresh. After the death of Kāpa, all the Nāyakas subordinate to him are said to have gone to their towns and protected their respective countries.

Prōlaya-nāyaka and Kāpaya mentioned thus in the introductory portion of the Kaluvachēru grant are, no doubt, respectively identical with the donors of the grant under review and the Prōlavaram grant, although their family name Musunūri does not find mention in the latter. The Kaluvachēru grant further makes it clear that after rescuing the Āndhra country from the Muslim yoke, Prōla and after him Kāpa ruled it one after the other and that the seventy-five Nāyakas,

_____________________________________________

^[1] J. Tel. Ac., Vol. II, pp. 93-112 ; Bhārati, Vol. XXI, Part I, pp. 553-57, Part II, pp. 61-73.