Book Title: Epigraphia Indica Vol 30
Author(s): Hirananda Shastri
Publisher: Archaeological Survey of India

Previous | Next

Page 146
________________ No. 19) SEVEN VATTELUTTU INSCRIPTIONS FROM THE KONGU COUNTRY 97 The connotation of the word Kongu may be noted here. This term has a more limited application than the similar ones Chira, Chola, Pandya, Pallava, eto. While each of the latter conveys to our mind not only a particular country, but also a kula or race, its people and its king, the former, i.e., Kongu, means exclusively & country; it does not denote any keula or race or king. We hear of Sola-kula, Pandya-vam sa, Pallav-invaya, etc., but not of Kongu-kula. It may be noted, however, that the words Korgar and Kongar-ko are applied to the people and the king of Kongu, but that none of the later kings of the Kongu country called himself a Kongu-dēva or KongudēvsMahārāja, or of being of Kongu-kula. The difference in the connotation of the word Kongu from other similar ones pointed out above seems strongly to indicate that the country did not belong to, and was not ruled by, any particular dynasty of its own. It will be noticed in the sequel that a number of kings held sway over the Kongu country in later times and that none of them had any distinguishing epithet, surname or title, such as Mājan, Sadaiyan, Valudi and Pandyadēva of the Pāņdyas; Valavan, Sornbiyan, Rajakesari, Parakēsari and Solamahārāja of the Cholas; or Villavan, Sēramāņār and Kerala of the Chēras. Instead, we often find the rulers of Kongu (from the earliest times to the latest) calling themselves by Chēra, Choļa and Pandya names, and adopting their surnames, epithets and titles, sometimes indiscriminately. Some chiefs of the 13th century even declared themselves to be the lineal descendents of very early Chēra kings who were the first rulers of the northern part of Kongu. We have yet to discover if even those kings that were invested with the hereditary rule of the province of Kongu had at any time any distinct and distinguishing emblem of royalty. The only source of reliable information for the early history of South India beyond the ken of epigraphy is the Tamil Sangam literature. This, in respect of Kongu, is unfortunately very meagre and does not shed as much light as it does on other parts of the country. In spite of this, it may be said that it does not contradict the result that we have arrived at in our enquiry. On the other hand, it leads us to think that in early times the Kongu country was subject to the government of its own people. We find a number of references to the people of Kongu, but not a single one to the king of the land. And every foreign king that subdued the country came to be styled Kongar-ko," i.e., the king of the Kongu people. One of the Chēra kings is said to have brought under his subjection the country of the Kongar or the Kongu country (Kongar-nād-agappadutti)." Hero Kongar need not necessarily mean the people. It may as well stand for Kongu of which it is only another form. It is said of an Ay king that he used innumerable missiles and drove the Kongu people to the western ocean (Kongar-kuda-kadal-oltiya). The Choļa king Kurāppaļļit-tuñjina Killi Valavan is reported to have seen the back of the people of Kongu (Kongu-puram-perra). All these references to the Kongu people and the country, and the complete absence of mention of any Kongu sovereign by name seem strongly to suggest that the country was subject to 'people's government. In this connection it is worth noting that in speaking of the persons or kings that cot up images of Kaņpagi in their territories, the Tamil work Silappadigāram does not mention any king of Kongu by name but only Ilankosar, by which must be meant & people, not a monarch. The plural used is worth noting. Though the Kongu country seems, as shown above, to have had the people's government, in the earliest days, it is necessary to note that the northern part of it, or what is more likely tho territory that lay north of it, was subject to the rule of a king who was styled Adigạimān or Adigapor Adiyar-komāp and had his capital at Tagadür, identified with Dharmapuri in the Salem District. A division called after the village Tagadür also existed. These Adigaimans are [ Of., however, 811, Vol. V, No. 241, lines 9-10.-Ed.] . Padiruppattu, 88, 1, 19; 90, 1, 25. Ibid., 22, L. 15. • Purandad, 130. * Ibid., 373.

Loading...

Page Navigation
1 ... 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490