Epigraphia Indica Vol 33

SR No.: 032587
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: D C Sircar
Publisher: Archaeological Survey of India
Publication Year: 1959
Total Pages: 514
Language: English
Classification: Book_English
File Size: 29 MB

Page 122

EPIGRAPHIA INDICA
[VOL. XXX III
fanious battle of Takkõlam by Ganga Būtuga in the year 949 A.D., that is to say, within a few months after the issue of the record under discussion, which seems to have been engraved soon after the battle of Ipili. The battle of Ipili must have been fought at a place to the north of the Ganga territory, possibly in the present District of Anantapur. It is thus possible that the modern Ippēru in the Anantapur Taluk was known in early times as Ipili. There is no reason to believe that Rājāditya was at this time camping anywhere near Anantapur. On the other hand, we learn from inscriptions that he was stationed with a huge army for a number of years at Tirunāmanallur in Tirumunaippādinādu, situated in the present District of South Arcot, obviously with a view to protecting the kingdom from the Gangas.
Following in the footsteps of his enterprising father Aditya I, the Chola king Parantaka I extended his dominions upto Neilore. But the death of Ganga Pfithvipati II, his strongest ally in the north, started a series of troubles from which the Chola kingdom suffered throughout Parantaka's reign. The foremost among the difficulties was created by the usurpation of the Ganga throne by Būtuga of the main Ganga line. As a result of this, Parāntaka not only lost his hold on the Gangas but had to count them among his enemies. The Vaidumbas, Bānas and NolambaPallavas were no doubt already in the enemy's camp. But the Ganges were the nearest among Paräntaka's enemies and their king Bütuga was closely related to the powerful Răshtrakūta monarch Krishna 11I. It is therefore no wonder that Räjāditya was given the task of safeguarding the north-eastern boundaries of the kingdom against the Gangas. It is also apparent from this that Rājāditya could not have been in the Nolamba-Pallava kingdom unmindful of the more powerful neighbour, Ganga Būtuga, who had no reason to be friendly with the expanding power of the Chõļas.
Who then was this Gajānkuba-choļa, if he was not of the family of the imperial Chõlas ? It is not possible to say anything definite regarding his identity without further light on the subject. But a suggestion may be offered.
The name Gajānkusa seems to indicate that this Chola chief belonged to the family of the Telugu-Chödas, probably of the Rēnāndu branch. In the Velurpalaiyam plates of the Pallava king Nandivarman III, mention is made of Chōļa-mahārāja Kumaränkuba. It has been said that this Kumaränkusa belonged to the family of the Renandu Cholas.? Balliyachõla. the Telugu-Chöda chief of Renāndu,who flourished in the ninth century, also enjoyed the title Kumara. ikusa, and this seems to strengthen the suggestion that Kumarīnkusa of'. Pallava Nandivarman's epigraph belonged to the family of the Rênandu (hödas. If this is accepted, we may further conclude that names ending in ankuka were popular in the family of the Chödas of Rēnându. On this basis, Gajānkuša-chõļa may be said to have belonged to the same family. The attack on him led by Nolazba Diliparasa and the army of Krishna Ill seems to have been part of the Rashtrakūta offensive against the Imperial Chöļas.
1 K. A. Nilukanta Sastri, The Colas, lut ed. pp. 187-58
• There was an intervening stretch of Ganga territory between the kingdom of the Cholas and that of the Kolambe-l'allavan At the battle was fought further in the mouth, probably the Gangas and not the NolambaPallavas would have beon involved in the conflict.
This village is situated to the north-east of Cholasamudram and was within the territory of the Renandu Cholas. It may be that the invading army hurriedly retreated after an indecisive encounter and that, on reaching Modokasira within the Nolamba-Pallava kingdom, a hero stone commemorating the death of Ponnayya was erectod.
Nilakauta Sastri, op. cit., pp. 154-58.
No doubt the descendants of Prithvipati II continued to be loyal to Parintaka I and his successors. But with the bulk of the territory, which Prithvipati II had been ruling, now under the control of Batuga of the main Ganga line, their power declined and they counted for nothing in the long period of trouble during which the very foundations of the newly built Chola empiro were so rudely shaken.
• SI1, Vol. II. pp. 507-10.
Ibid., Vol. XII, p. 20. • Journ. Ind. Hist., Vol. XV. p. 258.