South Indian Inscriptions

KALACHURI OF SOUTH KOSALA

whom he called on to join in the campaign. The latter fought for his overlord whole- heartedly. The Amōdā plates of Prithvīdēva I state that like the Mandara mountain of yore, the brave Kamalarāja churned the milk-ocean which was the king of Utkala, and gave Lakshmī (royal fortune) as well as excellent elephants and horses to his lord Gāngēyadēva.¹ The description suggests that the vanquished king of Utkala had to pay a heavy tribute to Gāngēya. Some records of Gāngēya’s son Karna also refer to this campaign. They say that Gāngēya defeated the king of Utkala and made his own arm the pillar of victory on the (eastern) see-shore.

During this campaign, Gāngēyadēva and Kamalarāja must have come into conflict with the contemporary ruler of Eastern Kōsala, who was probably Mahāśivagupta-Yayāti. The latter claims in one of his grants² that he defeated the Chaidyas and devastated their country of Dāhala.³ This may have been a reprisal raid on Dāhala during the absence of Gāngēya in the campaign against the king of Orissa.

The king of Utkala, in securing whose defeat Kamalarāja played a prominent part, was probably a king of the Kara dynasty, perhaps Śubhākara II, ruling over Tōsala on the eastern seaboard of Orissa.⁴ When kamalarāja returned home after this victorious cam- paign, he was followed by Sāhilla,⁵ a military adventure who sought his fortune in Chhattis- gargh. Sāhilla conquered Vivarabhūmi, evidently for his lord Kamalarāja. As we shall see later, Sāhilla’s descendants settled down in chhattisgarh and helped the Kalachuris of Tummāna to extend the limits of their kingdom.

It was probably during the reign of Kamalarāja that the mighty Chōla Emperor Rājēndra I (1012-1044 A.C.) sent an expedition to the north under his Dandanātha (General) in 1022 A.C. The Tirumalai praśasti,⁶ which was composed in the twelfth year of Rājēndra’s reign, states that Rājēndra’s general first seized Sakkarakōttam which is plainly identical with Chakrakōtya in the Bastar state. Thereafter, he captured or destroyed some other countries and places like Madurai-mandalam and Namanaik-Kōnam and defeated and took Indraratha, the ruler of Ādinagara, prisoner. This victory led to the capture of 'the Odda-vishaya (Orissa) which was difficult of approach on account of its dense forest defence, and the good Kōśalai-nādu, where Brāhmanas assembled.’ The praśasti does not name the ruler of Kōsala. He may have been either Kamalarāja ruling over the western part, or Mahāśivagupta-Yayāti who held the eastern part of Kōsala. As Rājēndra’s general next proceeded against Dandabhukti (parts of Midnapore and Balasore Districts), it would appear that the king he defeated was the ruler of Eastern Kōsala. In any case, this Chōla invasion did not produce any lasting effect; for, we have no evidence of the Chōla occupation of any part of Kōsala in this period. Perhaps, the vanquished king of Kōsala, whoever
______________

¹See No. 76, 11. 12-13.
²J.A.S.B.,N.S.,Vol. I, pp. 4 f.
³The age of the Somavamsis of Kosala is still
undedetermined as their records are singularly lacking in historical details and bear only regnal dates. The contemporaneity of Gangeya and Mahasivagupta-yayati suggested here would, if accepted, serve as a landmark in the history of the Somavamsis.
⁴Soon after this, the Karas seem to have been overthrown by the Somavamsi Uddyotakesarin, who transferred his capital to the eastern coast and gave the kingdom of Kosala to Abhimanyu.
⁵The Rajim inscription of Jagapala dated K. 896 (1145 A.C.) states that this Sahilla was a spotless ornament of the family of the illustrious Rajamala. I have suggested that this Rajamala is identical with Rajamalladeva who had given valuable support in re-establishing the power of the Karas after the death of the ruling prince who was probably Subhakara’s father Lalitabhara. If this identification is accepted, Sahilla would be his son or possibly his grandson. This squares with the description of him given in the Rajim inscription as well as the period here assigned to him.
⁶Ep. Ind., Vol. IX, pp. 229 ff. See also J.O.R., Vol. VII, pp. 207 ff.