________________
322
EPIGRAPHIA INDICA.
[VOL. IX
Sankaradêvî, the mother of Govindachandra's queen Kumaradêvi. It therefore seems probable that Vigrahapala's accession should be placed about A.D. 1050, and Râmapâla's reign in the last part of the eleventh century. Mabana, Sankaradêvî's father, would then be a contemporary of both of them. The Ramacharita, which calls him Mathana or Mahana, states that he was a Rashtrakuta, and the maternal uncle of Râmapâla. It therefore becomes probable that Vigrahapala married a Rashtrakâța princess in addition to the daughter of the Chêdi king Karpa who was, according to the Ramacharita, given to him after the war alluded to above. Mahana was Ramapala's right hand, and was of great assistance in the war against Bhima. Among the feudatories of the Påla king in that war, the Rámacharita mentions Viraguna, the raja of Pithi who is described as the lord of the south. Dêvarakshita of Pithi is also mentioned, but not as a feudatory. He must be identical with the Dêvarakshita of our inscription, and it becomes probable that the Pithi ruler Viraguna had originally stood on Râmapâla's side, while Dêvarakshita later on rose against him. He hailed from Pithi or Pithikâ, which according to the Ramacharita was situated in the south. Now pithi or pithika is synonymous with pitha, and it is therefore possible that Pithi is identical with Pithapuram. We know that a branch of the Eastern Chalukyas reigned in Pithapuram in the second half of the twelfth century, and that the town had already been conquered by Pulikêsin II. No historical information is forthcoming about the earlier Chalukys princes of the Pithapuram branch. The real history of the family only seems to begin with Vijayâditya III., whose coronation took place A.D. 1158. It should also be noted that the genealogy given in the Pithapuram inscriptions hardly can be correct. Mr. Sewell bas drawn my attention to the fact that only four generations are enumerated between Bêta, who reigned in A.D. 925, and Vijayâditya III., who was crowned in A.D. 1158.
Before this branch became established in Pithapuram, the place was one of the strongholds of the Vêngi province of the Eastern Chalukyas. In the last part of the 11th century, the reigning king was Kulôttunga Chôḍadêva, who first was ruler in Vêngi but who in A.D. 1070 was anointed to the Chôda kingdom. Vêngi was then ruled by viceroys, first by his uncle Vijayaditya VII. then by his sons Rajaraja (1077-78) and Vira Choda (from 1078). Mr. Venkayya suggests that this latter viceroy may be identical with the Viraguna of the Ramapalacharita. Dêvarakshita was then probably a general under the viceroy of Vêngî. He is said to have surpassed even the glory of Gajapati. As this epithet is used by some of the Eastern Gangas, it is possible that it here refers to Anantavarman Chôḍaganga. The Kalingattu Paran describes an expedition undertaken by Kulôttunga I. against this king, and Davarakshita may have played a role in it. We do not know anything about the Chhikkora family, to which Dêvarakshita belonged.
The marriage of Dêvarakshita's daughter to king Govindachandra 'perhaps accounts for the relationship between the Chôlas and the Gâhaḍavâlas commented on by Mr. Venkayya in his Annual Report for 1907-08, para. 58 and ff. An incomplete Gâhaḍavâla inscription has recently been found immediately after a record of Kulôttangadôva of A.D. 1110-11, in Gangaikondacholapuram, which it is tempting to bring into connexion with Govindachandra's marriage. Mr. Venkayya carries the acquaintance of the Gâhadavalas with the Chola kings farther back to the expedition of Rajendra Chola towards the kings on the banks of the Ganges, mentioned in the Tiruvâlangâḍu plates, and it seems very probable that this expedition led to the establishment of friendly relations with the north. Among the princes conquered by Râjêndra Chola was Dharmapala of Daṇḍabhukti, and the lord of Dandabhukti figures amongst the feudatory kings who, according to the Ramapalacharita, assisted Ramapâla in his war against Bhima.
1 Compare the forms Pithapura and Pithapurt, above, Vol. IV. p. 37, 357. Note 4. See Hultzsch, above, Vol. IV. p. 223.
Ind. Ant. Vol. XIX. p. 329 ff,