________________
124
EPIGRAPHIA INDICA.
(VOL. XII.
throne immediately after his father and also establish his claim for the Chola dominion which he eventually obtained. After Gandarāditya, his younger brother Ariñjaya was probably anointed kings with the title Parakösarivarman. Naturally, therefore, his son Parāntaka II. alias Sandara-Chola would be a Rājakesarivarman, though on the presumption of an unbroken succession from the time of Vijayalaya he would be a Parakësarivarman. Another point which may be arged in favour of the view that Sundara-Chola was a Rājakēsarivarman, is that Pirāntakan Siriyavēlār, one of his generals already noticed, figures in several records dated in the earlier years of Rājakosarivarman. An inscription from Tiruvenkadus of the time of Rajaraja I. states that Siriyavēlar died on a hattle-field in Ceylon in the 9th year of Ponmaligai= ttunjinadēvar which was an epithet of Sandara-Chola. All the inscriptions of Rājakësarivarman in which the general figures may, therefore, be assigned to Parāntaka II. alias SundaraChola anil as may naturally be expected they are dated prior to the 9th year of the king's reign. The results of the above discussion may be summed up thus :
(1) Parantaka I. died in or after A.D. 953. (2) Rājāditya's death took place in about A.D. 947-8, and consequently he did not
survive his father. (3) Gaņdarāditya probably succeeded Parāntaka I. with the title Rājakosarivar man. (4) Ariñjaya was probably the successor of Gaņdarāditya and a Parakēsarivarman. (5) Parantaka II. alias Sandara-Chola was a Räjakësarivarman.
Some facto connected with the reign of Sundara-Choļa will not be without interest to the student of Chola history.
(1) One of his queens Parantakandēvi-Ammaņār was the daughter of a Chëra king and lived until at least A.D. 1012,
(2) An earlier queen was Vānavaşmahādēvi who, to judge from her name, was also a Chēra princess. She is said to have committed suttes on the death of the king. This act on her part was considered very meritorious and princess Kundavai (probably her daughter) set up an image of the queen in the Rājarājēsvara temple at Tanjore, presented jewels and provided for daily worship.
(3) The king's general, as pointed out already, was Pirāntakan Siriyavāļār, a Kodambalar chief. He lost his life in a battle field in Ceylon in the 9th year of Sundara-Chola's reigo. The general's wife was Rájādichohi, his daughter Kunjaramalli and his son Vēlay Sundarasolag.
1 Against this view it might be urged that there was a certain Madhurintakan Gandarādittaņår who figures in some of the early records of Rajaraja I. and who might be considered as a probable son of Uttama-Cbols (SouthIv. Insore., Vol. III, p. 102). If this were so, it would prove that Uttama Chols could not have been quite young st the time of his father's death. But it may be pointed out that such a view is not tenable, because none of the Chola copper-plates or stone inscriptions which give a dynastic aceoant mentions him, and this omission makes it clear that he was not a member of the royal family.
See note 2, p. 123, above. So far no inscriptions of Arifjaya have yet been found or assigned to his time. No. 116 of the Epigraphical collection for 1896.
Ditto. • Verses 65 and 66 of the Tiruvālangada plates. • South-Ind. Insors., Vol. 11, pp. 73 and 76 and Annual Boport on Epigraphy for 1908, Part II, p. 68. + See note 3, above.
• The first two are mentioned in a record of the 17th year of Rajakesarivarman (No. 299 of the Epigraphical collection for 1908) and the last figures as donor in an inscription of Rajaraja I. at Tiruvengadu dated in the 27th yon
