________________
272
EPIGRAPHIA INDICA.
[VOL. XXII.
been encroached upon by powerful enemies, the glorious king Vallabha-Vallabha, i.e., Virarājēndra, conquered these highly powerful foes, leaving only those that were frightened, and ruled over the country."
From the inscriptions of Virarajendra we further learn that he conferred the country of Vengi on Vijayaditya and protected him. If these facts are borne in mind, it will be easy to see why, when Vikramaditya VI invaded the Eastern Chalukya dominion, Virarājēndra marched against him and his brother and defeated them in many a battle in the Vengi country. Even subsequently Vijayaditya's position in the Vengi country was not secure for it is said that the Eastern Ganga king Rājarāja I., the refuge of the distressed, made Vijayaditya, when he was about to sink in the ocean of troubles caused by the Cholas, to enjoy prosperity by the support which he afforded him.1
Speaking of the support given by Virarajendra to Vijayaditya, Dr. Hultzsch correctly suggested that the relations between uncle and nephew, i.e., Kulottunga and Vijayaditya were not so entirely amicable as the panegyrical account of the Chellur grant would make us believe, but that Kulottunga tried to oust his uncle. This suggestion gains ground by the explicit statement of the plates that the troubles of Vijayaditya were caused by the Cholas who, during the reign of the Eastern Ganga king Rājarāja (A.D, 1070-78), were ruled by none other than Kulottunga I.
From the facts noticed above, it will be plain that Vijayaditya actually reigned over the Vengi country from A.D. 1063 to A.D. 1077, his cause being supported by the Chōla king Virarājēndra in the earlier years and by the Eastern Ganga king Rājarāja in later days. It is also certain that the disturbances in Vengi during the rule of Vijayaditya were on the one hand caused by the invasion of the Western Chalukya Vikramaditya VI and on the other by the attempt of Kulottunga to oust him.
We shall now see if Kulottunga had any position in the Chōla country which he eventually succeeded in getting. The Tamil poem Kalingattupparani indeed states that the queen of Gangaikonda-Chōla, i.e., Rajendra-Chōla I., taking up the child of her daughter and observing the marks on his body, exclaimed that he was fit to be her son and to protect the Solar race. From this a theory of adoption of Kulottunga by the queen of Rajendra-Chōla I. had been started. That this theory has no foundation whatsoever on facts but had been newly invented to give a locus standi to Kulottunga after he had actually obtained the Chōla throne, will be evident from the sequel. Even the panegyrists that wrote the accounts of the copper-plates issued during his reign, in referring to the accession of Vijayaditya which took place already in A.D. 1061-2, speak as if Kulottunga had a claim in the Chōla dominions, when they say that Kulottunga being desirous of the Chōla kingdom, suffered his uncle Vijayaditya to become the ruler of Vengi, himself holding a second rank in the kingdom, viz., that of the yuvaraja or the heir-apparentship. That this is a garbled version of facts will be evident to anyone. We fail to see how the acceptance of the overlordship of Vengi would have interfered with his right, if any, of the Chōla dominion. On the other hand, had he been made the ruler of Vengi in the first instance, he would have been in a better position subsequently to push his claim for the Chōla throne.
That there was no need for adoption by the queen of Rajendra-Chōla I. of her daughter's son is clear from the facts that Rajendra-Chōla I. had several sons. The Tiruvalangāḍu plates say that this king appointed his son Chōla-Pandya to protect the Pandya and Kerala countries. The Kanyakumari inscription adds that "like unto a sacrifice having three fires, there were born
1 Ind. Ant., Vol. XVIII, p. 171.
2 Annual Report on Epigraphy for 1892, p. 5.
Canto X, vv. 3 to 6.
48. I. I., Vol. I, pp. 59-60.
8 I. I., Vol. III, p. 423, vv. 93 and 99.
