Book Title: Epigraphia Indica Vol 22
Author(s): Hirananda Shastri
Publisher: Archaeological Survey of India

View full book text
Previous | Next

Page 117
________________ EPIGRAPHIA INDICA. [VOL. XXII. stated that he had already gone (munbe pondirunda 1.21), thus suggesting his previous arrival in South India, evidently as a refugee seeking shelter under the Chola and possibly also his assistance for the overthrow of Parākramabāhu. Therefore when his help was sought by the Chola king, he readily responded, so that if there was a chance he might gain the throne of Ceylon. The part played by Srivallabha, in this connection, has hitherto been considered as that of a traitor. But if it is understood that he was fighting along with his father Mänäbharana for the Singhalese throne against Parikramabāhu, it will be evident that such a charge cannot be levelled against him. In the rivalry between Vira-Pandya and Kulasēkhara for the throne of Madura, the Chola king first took up the cause of Kulasēkhara, but when the latter proved a traitor by allying himself with Parikramabāhu, he was deposed and Vira-Pandya was placed in his stead. Though the present record stops with the restoration of Vira-Pandya, now with Chēļa help, it is clear that he must also have rebelled soon after, for when Kulottunga-Chola III continued the war, be fought against Vira-Pandya and in favour of one Vikrama-Pandya whom he made the ruler of Madura. It may be pointed out here that the new facts gleaned from this inscription, viz.--that Rajā. dhiraja took up the cause of Srivallabha against that of Parākramabāhu, that the Pandya king Kulasēkhara turned a traitor to the Chola king and that Vira-Pandya was again installed on the Pandya throne through Chola help raise the following fresh issues which in the present state of our knowledge cannot be satisfactorily explained : Did the Chola king Räjädhiraja II actually send any help to Ceylon to assist Srivallabha in his struggle for sovereignty or did he only give shelter to him? Why was Vira-Pandya made the ruler of the Pandya kingdom and not Vikrama-Pandya after Kulasēkhara turned a traitor ? What was the relationship of Vikrama-Pandya to his predecessors and what were his claims to the Pandya throne ? The territorial divisions, Jayaigondasdla-mandalam (1.8), Arumolidēva-Valanādu (1.36) and Noņmali-nālu (1. 36) are already known. Palaiyan ür, the native place of Vēdavanam-Udaiyān may be identified with the village of the same name in the Tiruttaņi taluk of the Chittoor district. This village must be distinguished from Rājarājan-Palaiyapūr? (1.36) in th: Tanjore district, where 10 vēli of land was granted to this Vēdavanamudaiyān. The village Elagam 1 Seo 4. R. on Epigraphy for 1906, para. 23. * Why Kulasēkhara proved a traitor is not explained in the record. Probably he was entioed by Parikramsbahu. His revolt is referred to in the historical introduction of Kulottunga-Chola III. See 8. 1. 1., Vol. III, Pp. 206ff. • Vira-Pandya seems to have occupied the throne for a second time from about 1175-1182 A.D. Like his predecessor Kulasekhara he also fell an easy prey to the machinations of Parikramabahu and thus made himself the bitterest enemy of the Chola king kulottunga-Chola III. He made a desparate attempt along with his son to regain the Pandya throne till at last he lost his life in the battle at Nettür. Two records from Tribbuvanam in the Tanjore district (Nos. 191 and 192 of 1907) state that Kulottunga-Chola III who bore the title 'Pandyari' killed Vira-Pandya. See also A. R. on Epigraphy for 1908, para, 64, and 8. 1. 1., Vol. III, pp. 217-18. • The Chola rulers played the role of 'king makers'. Kulasekhara, Vira-Pandya, and Vikrama-Pandya were successively made rulers of the Pandya country by the Chola sovereigns. • The Tiruvalangadu plates of the Chla king Rajendra-chola I record the grant of this village to the Siva temple at Tiruvalangădu. In the Tlvdram this village is called Palaiyandr-Alangadu (...) Alang du or Tiruvalangadu near Palaiyanür. In one inscription Tiruvalangadu is said to be near Palaiyanür (8. 1. 1., Vol. III, p. 134). * This explains why the same inscription is found both at Tiruvilangadu (Chittoor district), the native place of Vedavapam-UQaiyan, and at Tirumayapam (Tanjore district) where the lands presented to him were situated.

Loading...

Page Navigation
1 ... 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408