________________
EPIGRAPHIA INDICA.
[VOL. XXII.
gölth (Crangapore) and that the kings of the sea (kadal-aroitar) waited on him. Here must be Doted one other event, which seems to have taken place in the king's 14th year of reign (A.D. 998) and which seems to have furnished the king with the grandiloquent epithet tomelil valor uliyu ella yöndum tolustaga vilangum yande Seliyaraiattēdu-kol meaning that " in the very year of his growing prosperity when he became the object of adoration in all quarters, he took away the splendour of the Seliyas (i.e., the Pandyas)". This event was eonsidered to be of much prime importance that it was ever afterwards inseparably associated with his title and name in all his later inscriptions and the epithet bodily removed to the end of the introduction giving place to the mention of later additional conquests before it. It is not unlikely that the king himself was engaged in the fight against the Pandyas and secured such unqualified success which gave him the permanent epithet while the additional conquests effected by the army were inserted before the phrase Hindiral venri tandär-kondu.' An exact parallel to this may be found in the epithet Sopadu kondu Mudikondasolapurattu virbhishekam panniy-aruliya, which was similarly associated with the name of Märavarman Sundars-Pandya I., and taken to the end of his introduction giving his later conquests an earlier place. The Sapür inscription adds that the Chola sovereign destroyed Madura, i.e., the capital of the Pandyas and places that event before the conquests of Kollam, Kolladēsam and Cranganore. Speaking of the Pandya conquest the Tiruvālangadu grant says that when Rajaraja I. set out to conquer the South, the moon as if to afford protection to the Pandya king born in his family, became the white parasol of the invader; and records also that Amarabhujanga was seized. The last item of conquest mentioned in the Leiden plates is ffamandalam, i.e., the province of Ceylon. This was affected with the help of the army. Pero haps Rājarāja himselt did not go to Ceylon. As the event is mentioned for the first time in the historical introduction of the 16th year, it has to be placed in A.D. 1001. Quite in agreement with the stone inscriptions that it was the highly victorious army which effected the conquest of this item also, the Tiruvālangādu grant registers the event in these words :-" This terrible General of that (king Arunmolivarian) crossed the ocean by ships and burnt the Lord of Lanka (Ceylon) ”.
Since no additional conquests are recorded in Rajaraja's inscriptions from the 16th to the 20th years and since the Annexation of Rattapādi 7 lakhs is noticed in the inscriptions of the
1st year and after, it seems that the invasion against the Western Chālukya country took place in some part of the 21st tegnal year of the king (A.D. 1008). As the Leiden plates are also dated in the 21st year and 92nd day and as they do not mention Rattapädi 71 lakhs, it is evident that. the conquest w&s effected in the latter part of A.D. 1005, after the date of this grant, i.e., after the 92nd day of the 21st year of reign. The greatness of Rājarāja I. as a conqueror is evident from the fact that he was able to bring under subjection not only the rulers of almost all the provinces of South India but also the king of Ceylon. It would thus appear that Rājarăja I. was the greatest Sovereign of the day, greater than any of his predecessors and had a high claim for imperial honours. However much the valour of this king and the conditions that were prevailing in the various
Madras.Epigraphical Report for 1912, Part II, pars. 29. * The 16th year inscriptions of Rajaraja I., add llam to the list of conquests effeoted with the help of the army and this is inserted before tindiral and the epithet takneliltaken after it. In the records of the 21st year and later, another conquest effected with the help of the areny, viz., that of the Western Chalukys country or Rattapadi 77 lakhs, is mentioned. We find it also similarly entered after Ilam and the opithet of the king taken to the end of the introduction.
See above, Vol. VI, p. 302.
Madras Epigraphical Report for 1912, Part II, para. 22. . 8. I. I., Vol. III, p. 421, vy. 77-78. • Ibid., v. 80. Madras Rpigraphical Report for 1802, par. 6.
