________________
250 EPIGRAPHIA INDICA
(Vol. XXXII the date of the fall of Warangal, there need be no doubt that he is identioal with Kapaya-nayaka, Pröla's brother mentioned in the grant under review. Fortunately for us, the Prõlavaram grant furnishes a short pedigree of three generations of the Mueunūri chiefs born in the fourth caste. Pota, the earliest known member of the family, had four sons, namely, Pocha, Déva, Käma and Räja. The first three brothers had two sons each, namely, Prola and Erapota, Käpa and Mummadise, and Immadisa and Dēva respectively; and Räja, the last son of Pöta, had only one Bon by name Anavõta, otherwise known as Toyyēti Anavõta, or Anavõte of Toyyēru. From this it becomes clear that Prola and Eçapõta were the only sons of Pöcha, and that Kāpa and others were, strictly speaking, Prölaya-nāyaka's cousins (that is, his paternal uncles' sons and not his own brothers). Even the Prolavaram grant does not furnish any information about Kapayanäyaka's grandfather Põta and his father and uncles, except giving the pedigree. Probably these members of the Musunūri family were ordinary Nāyakas of no great importance and played no part in the momentous history of the period during and after the reign of the last Kakatiya omperor, Pratāparudra. Prola and his brothers, especially Kāpaya-nāyaka, seem to have been the only members of the family that came to limelight during the period of the Muslim occupation of the Andhra country immediately after the fall of Warangal by their deeds of valour, and untiring efforts to unite and inspire the people of the country and liberate it from the Muslim yoke. Except Käpaya-nāyaka none of the other cousins of Prõlaya finds mention either in the grant under review or in the Prola varom grant of Kāpaya-nāyaka. Probably they were young and achieved nothing worthy of note during that troublous period, or it may be that some of them lost their lives during those days of anarchy, and the oppressive and autocratic rule of the Mussalmans. It is, however, certain that Käpaya-nayaka was the right hand man of Prölaya-näyaka, whom he actively supported and co-operated with in every way in waging war on the Mussalmans and expelling them from the Andhra country.
There is another record, the Kaluvachēgu grant of Anitalli, dated in Saka 1345, (1423 A.D.), that should be taken into account here for a better understanding of the political conditions of the country immediately after the fall of Warangal, even though it is separated in time by nearly a century from the grant under review. It is stated in the introductory portion of the Kalavacbēru grant that after Pratāparudra of the Kakatiya dynasty, the lord of Trilinga (Telugu country), had gone to heaven by his own will, the whole land was occupied by the Muslims (Yatanamayi jätā); Prölaya-nāyaka then raised the country that was enveloped in the womb of the Yavanas (Yavan-dara-stha) just like Varaha, the boar incarnation of Vishnu, who raised the land submerged under water. After Prolaya-nayaka went as a guest to heaven at the command of Visvēsvara, the same grant further says, Kāpaya-nayaka who was equal in splendour to the sun, ruled his kingdom, and that he whose feet were served by the seventyfive Näyakas, protected the earth by the grace of Visvēsvara. King Kāpa is said to have regranted to Brāhmaṇas, the agrahāras taken over by the Turushkas, besides granting them some afresh. After the death pf Kipa, all the Näyakas subordinate to him are said to have gone to their towns and proteoted their respective countries.
Prolaya-nayaks and Kapaya mentioned thus in the introductory portion of the Kaluvachēru grant are, no doubt, respectively identical with the donors of the grant under review and the Prolavaram grant, although their family name Musunuri does not find mention in the latter. The Kaluvachēru grant further makes it clear that after rescuing the Andhra country from the Muslim yoke, Prola and after him Käpa ruled it one after the other and that the severity-five Nāyakas,
13. Tel. Ac., Vol. II, pp. 93-112; Bharati, Vol. XXI, Part I, pp. 663-67, Part II, pp. 61.78.
