|
The Indian Analyst
|
|
South Indian Inscriptions |
EPIGRAPHIA INDICA The association of the Kākatīya and the Muslim forces in the war against the Pāṇḍya Kingdom to restore Sundara-pāṇḍya to his ancestral throne points also in the same direction. Wassāf, it may be remembered, refers to the fight of Sundara-pāṇḍya to Delhi. ‘ Sundara Pandi, trembling and alarmed ’, says he, ‘ fled from his native country and took refuge under the protection of ‘Alā-ud-dīn of Delhi,’[1] Although no information is available from Muslim sources as to what happened afterwards, one of the inscriptions at Tirukkaḷar in the Mannargudi Taluk of the Tanjore District, dated in the 25th regnal year of Jaṭāvarman Śrīvallabha (1316 A.D.), alludes to the arrival of the Muhammadan forces in support of Sundara-pāṇḍya. It is stated that sometime before the date of the inscription, Rājarāja Sundara-pāṇḍya came with the Tulukkar, when a certain chief called Okkūruḍaiyan died together with his brothers and followers obviously in a fight against them.[2] The Tulukkar were not the only supporters of Sundara-pāṇḍya. A large Kākatīya force under Pratāparudra’s famous general Muppiḍi-nāyaka was at the same time operating on his behalf in the Tamil country.
An inscription at Vṛiddhāchalam in the South Arcot District dated in 13+1st year of Tribhuvanachakravartin Kōnērinmaikoṇḍān Sundara-pāṇḍyadēva (1315 A.D.) registers the assignment of income from lands in some villages for conducting a service named after Muppiḍi-nāyaka, the ruler of Vikramasiṁhapaṭṭaṇa (Nellore) and one of the ministers of Kākatīya Pratāparudradēva, in the temple of the god Vṛiddhagirīśvara.[3] From this it is evident that Muppiḍi-nāyaka, the minister of Kākatīya Pratāparudradēva, was an ally of Sundara-pāṇḍya who caused the service to be instituted in the temple to honour him. Though the cause of Muppiḍi’s presence in the Pāṇḍyan territory is not disclosed in the record, the Śrīraṅgam epigraph of Dēvari-nāyaḍu, dated 1317 A.D. leaves no room for doubt that the Kākatīya armies came there to restore Sundara-pāṇḍya to his ancestral throne.[4] If Rājarāja Sundara-pāṇḍya of the Tirukkalar record is the same as Sundara-pāṇḍya of the inscription from Vṛiddhāchalam cited above, it may be surmised that the Muhammadan and Kākatīya forces were both fighting in the Pāṇḍyan kingdom in and around 1315 A.D., and that they were both allies of Sundara-pāṇḍya. It is not unreasonable to believe that the Kākatīya monarch sent his armies to the south at the instance of Sultān ‘ Alā-ud-din Khaljī to support the contingent of Muhammadan forces sent thither by the latter to restore Sundara-pāṇḍya to his kingdom. Therefore, it is not possible to accept without reserve the statement in the Vilasa grant and some other later records that Pratāparudra was invariably victorious over the Muslim armies on all occasions excepting the last. Next, the present inscription throws some new light on the circumstances in which Pratāparudra met with his death. According to Shams-i-Shirāj‘ Afīf, the Rāi of Tiling, whom Sultān Muhammad sent to Delhi, died upon the road.[5] The correctness of the statement has, however, been questioned. On the authority of inscriptions, it has been said that Pratāparudra did not die on his way to Delhi ; he was not only rescued and freed by some Nāyakas from captivity; but continued to rule his kingdom for some years after that. An inscription at Santamāgalūru in the Narasaraopet Taluk of the Guntur District dated 1326 A.D. mentions Pratāparudra as the ruler of the kingdom, and registers a gift for his merit by Kolani Rudradēva, one of his mahāpradhānis. This furnishes, as pointed out by H. Krishna Sastri, a date ‘ four years later than the latest date given for Pratāparudra.’[6] Coupled with the evidence of this record, ___________________________________________________
[1] Elliot, History of India, Vol. III. p. 54.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
