________________
No. 35.]
THE SMALLER LEIDEN PLATES OF KULOTTUNGA I.
271
very year. This is known from the Ranastipündi grant of Vimaladitya, the son and successor of Saktivarman, which places the coronation of that king on Thursday 10th May, A.D. 1011, and states that Saktivarman ruled for 12 years before him. Of Vimaladitya's son Rajaraja I. (of the Eastern Chalukya family), the Korumelli plates state that his coronation fell on Thursday, 16th August, A.D. 1022 and the Teki plates add that he ruled for forty-one years. His younger brother was Vijayaditya VII. And since it is said that after Rajarāja I., VishnuvardhanaVijayaditya ruled for fifteen years, the latter has been assigned to the period A.D. 1063-1077 by Dr. Fleet. There are three inscriptions at Draksharama of a certain Vishnuvardhana ranging in date from the 3rd to the 13th year and furnishing Saka equivalents which work out for the king's initial year A.D. 1061-2. These inscriptions may have to be attributed to Vijayaditya VII, as there was no other Vishnuvardhana at the time, Kulottunga being distinctly styled Saptama Vishnuvardhana. It appears that Vijayaditya VII ruled till A.D. 1077. We have three copper-plate charters of the reign of Vijayaditya which state that he succeeded to the throne on the death of his elder brother Rajaraja. There is no room to suspect that Vijayaditya's succession was disputed. Further, a consideration of the facts, that Rajaraja was crowned in A.D. 1022 and reigned for 41 years, that Vijayaditya counted his regnal years, as shown above, from A.D. 1061-2, coupled with the fact that Rajendra alias Kulottunga I., son of Rājarāja, actually assumed regal powers only from A.D. 1070, i.e., several years after the demise of his father and reigned for the long period of nearly 50 years, i.e., till A.D. 1119-20, leads to the irresistible conclusion that Rajendra must have been in his teens 60 years prior to the end of his reign; and establishes also the necessity for the succession of Vijayaditya after Räjarajas and his quiet succession to the throne of Vengi, as reported in the plates, confirm this conclusion. The dissension between Vijayaditya and Rajendra, if any, must have arisen only subsequent to the death of Rajaraja, perhaps when Rajendra came of age.
From what has been said above, it will be seen that the Eastern Chalukya dominion was subject to the rule of the successive kings Saktivarman, Vimaladitya, Rājarāja and Vijayaditya without any break from A.D. 999-1000 to A.D 1077. For aught we know, Vijayaditya was not a powerful monarch and his rule was not peaceful. Ever since the Chōla king Rājarāja I. interfered in the politics of the Eastern Chalukyas and, putting an end to the interregnum, placed Saktivarman on the throne of Vengi, that country seems to have practically become a principality subject to the authority of the Cholas; and the Chōla kings appear to have cemented their relationship with the Eastern Chalukyas by ties of marriages. The policy followed by Rajarāja I. and Rajendra-Chōla I. towards the newly acquired country of Vengi, was neglected by the latter's sons Rajadhirāja I. and Rajendradeva, but was resumed by Viraräjëndra. This is referr to in the Kanyakumari inscription in the following terms®:
"The Vengi and Kalinga countries which had come in the family of the Chōlas fr
genera
tions having been left uncared for by his (Virarajendra's) two brother and having
1 Above, Vol. XXI, p. 31. Ibid., and Vol. VI, pp. 349-51.
Ind. Ant., Vol. XIV, p. 50.
Above, Vol. VI, p. 336.
Ind. Ant., Vol. XX, p. 283.
S. I. I. (Texts), Vol. IV, Nos. 1011, 1012 and 1013.
Annual Report on Epigraphy for 1925, p. 77 and the same for 1914, p. 86.
The pretty long reign of Rajaraja for 41 years and the actual longer reign of Rajendra for 50 years after an interval of several years making up a total of more than 91 years for the reigns of father and son are worth noting.
Trav. Arch. Series, Vol. III, p. 57, v. 77.
