________________
No. 41.]
SRIRANGAM INSCRIPTION OF ACHYUTARAYA: SAKA 1461.
287
of its contents and the light it throws on contemporary political and social life. We may infer from it that this poetess Tirumalāmba was identical with Oduva Tirumalaidēvi-Ammap-avarga! (Võduva Tirumalammanavaru), who, originally a 'Reader' (Oduva) at the royal court, subsequently rose to the position of a co-queen (rājamahishi) herself. It may also be noted that she was one of the galaxy of poetesses, royal and otherwise, who attained to literary fame under the patronage of the Vijayanagara kings.
The fervent hope expressed in this inscription by Tirumalambã that the performance of dānas and the engraving of the commemorative verses in holy places would ensure for Verkatādri's descendants the rule of the kingdom as sārvabhaumas, implies that doubts had probably begun to be entertained even at this time, as to whether the prince would be allowed to peacefully succeed his father, if such a contingency arose. The danger that threatened his regal hopes came from two quarters. Towards the end of Achyuta's reign, his ambitious brothersin-law Salakam Pedda-Tirumalarāja and China-Tirumalarāja had usurped much power into their hands and, in the event of the king's death, were even prepared to wrest the kingdom from their helpless nephew, by fair means or foul. Then there was also the party of nobles led by Aliya-Ramariya, the son-in-law of the late king Krishnarāya. This astuto general, by espousing the cause of Sadāsivaraya on the plea of his being the son of an elder brother of Achyuta, schemed to overthrow the power of the Salakam brothers and concentrate it in his own hands. This tussle for power must have already attained definite shape and proportions at the time of the present record in A. D. 1539, for the co-queen to have voiced her devout prayer. It is, however, unfortunate that the cupidity of the younger uncle China-Tirumalarāja proved stronger than the prayer, for he is believed to have strangled his royal nephew in A. D. 1543, when the latter was on the throne only for a few months.'
As regards the two verses quoted in this epigraph which are couched in the Sārdūlavikridita metre, it may be mentioned that more than a dozen copies of them exist in the different scripts of the kingdom, Tamil, Telugu, Kannada, Grantha and Nagari, and in several places, so far apart as Annigere in the Bombay Presidency and Srirangam in the Madras Presidency; but in none of them is there the additional information furnished by the Srirangam copy. While the Sanskrit verses glorify only the gift of Anandanidhi made by the king in Saka 1461, the Tamil portion refers to the performance of a tulābhāra on the same day. This was also probably celebrated in the
1 The information it gives about Narasa's military achievements is particularly useful. : This is the spelling adopted in the Kannada version of No. 9 of 1904.
See Sources of Vijayanagar History, p. 170, f.n. and also p. 11 of Introduction, Varadambikaparinayachampa.
Gangādēvi, the authoreas of the Madhurāvijayam and the wife of Prince Kampana, was a notable example. There was another named Möbanāngi, who wrote the Marichi parinayam.
For a discussion on these points, ride Dr. N. Venkataramanayya's Studies in the History of the Third Vijayanagara Dynasty, pp. 76 el sej.
Brigg's Firishta, III, p. 83 as quoted in Studies in the History of the Third Vijayanayara dynasty, p. 79. The Mahisiranara pativijayam and copper plate records simply state that after a short reign Venkatadri died. (Mys. Archl. Rept. for 1907, p. 14 and above, vol. IV, p. 14.)
* No. 597 of 1929-30 from Handidi (South Kanara), dated in Subhakrit, mentions that Venkatādriraya was ruling at Vijayanagara.
• Hampi (Nos. 27, 28, 39 and 40 of 1889, and No. 1 of 1904); Anantabayanagudi (Nos. 894 and 685 of 1922); Kamalāpur (Nos. 17 and 20 of 1904); Harihar (Dāvanagere 24); Nirgunda (Holalkere 123); Gadag (B. K. Nos. 7 and 14 of 1926-27); Annigere (B. K. No. 186 of 1928-29).
