________________
132 EPIGRAPHIA INDICA
(VOL. XXXIII son of Taila II. A record from Lakkundi clearly suggests that this prince was known as handmalla. The inscription thus offers evidence in support of the statement of Ranna that Satyakraya assisted his father in his military affairs."
As indicated above, the record refers to a time when Mahāmandalēsvara Ahavamalla proceeded against Utpala in the course of his northern dig-vijaya after he had put down his adversaries in the south. This indicates that Taila II had to face troubles in the south. The moment the Răshtrakūtas were defeated by him, the feudatories of the former declared their independence. Ganga Mārasimha wert so far as to enport the Rachție kūța prince Irdra IV in the latter's claim for the throne. It is well known, however, that Taila II succeeded in subduing them. But he had to face the Cholas who were the hereditary enemics of the Chāļukyas as they had been of the Rāshtrakūtas previously. The contemporary Chöļa king Rājarāja I conquered Gangavādi, Nolanıbavādi and Tadigaippādi, taking opportunity of the chaos that existed for some time after the disappearance of the Rāshtrakūtas. Taila II took action in repulsing the Choļa advance as is evidenced by an inscription found at Kögali in the Hadegalli Taluk of the Bellary District, according to which king Ahavamalla (i.e. Taila II) was ruling from Rodda (identified with Rodam in the Anantapur District) after baving defeated the Cholas and seized 150 elephants from the enemy, on Friday, the 23rd December 992 A.D. It is quite possible that, after the battle referred to in this record, Taila II appointed his own son as the governor of that territory.
Three years later, in 995 A.D., our record shows that Satyásraya moved from the place and proceeded against Utpala in the north. This Utpala may be identified with Paramāra Muñja. The fact that Satyastaya proceeded against Utpala, i.e., Paramāra Vākpati Muñja, is known for the first time from our record. The date of Muñja's death has been placed between V.8. 1050 (993-94 A.D.), when Anitagati compiled his Subhāshitaratnasandoha during Muñja's reign, and 997 A.D. when Taila II died. Our record minimises this gap. If by February 995 A.D., Satyābraya was on his way against Utpala, the latter's death must have taken place after that date.
'It is difficult to say whether Satyasraya was directly responsible for the capture of Muñja which led to the latter's death. Mahāsāmanta Bhillama claims in his Sangamner copper-plate grant,' dated 1000 A.D., that he crushed the military force of the great king Muñja and made the goddess of fortune observe the vow of a chaste woman in the house of the illustrious RaņarangaBhima. He might have helped Satyasraya, whose identification with Ranaranga-Bhima is suggested by Ranna's Gadāyuddha, very considerably in the latter's battle against Utpala referred to in our record.
Bhimayya, it is seen from our record, was ruling over Banavāsi. Several inscriptions from Yasale speak of Kadamba Chattayyadēva governing over Banavāsi in 993 A.D. Bhimayya must "have begun to govern the division some time after that date. Nāgārjjuna, who is said to have been a Nalgāmunda, may perhaps be identified with his namesake who is stated in an inscription from Hirechavuţi in the Shimoga District 10 to have been a Närggåvundu.
1811, Vol. XI, Part I, No. 52. . Gadāyuddha, Afvāsa 2, verse 47. : K. A. Nilakanta Sastri, The Clus, 2nd ed., pp. 174-75.
811, Vol. IX, Part 1, No. 76. . Cf. Ganguly, History of the Paramāra Dynasty, p. 47. • Ray, DANI, Vol. II, pp. 857-58. * Above, Vol. II, pp. 212 ff.
• For the names Bhimn, Sahasa-Bhima, Raņayasa-sri-Rama-Bhima, etc., applied to Satyasiaya, of. Aévase 1, verses 22, 52-53, 64, Alvīga 2, verses 3, 47.
4. R. Ep., 1939-40, B. K. Nos. 90, 91 and 92. 10 En. Carn. Vol. VIII, Sd, 234,
