________________
THE INDIAN ANTIQUARY
[MAY, 1911.
the town. Finally, in Saka 1392 expired, Khara, Sâļuva Tirumalairâja established himself firmly over Trichinopoly and the Tandalsimai. In the mandapa of Alagiyamanavala, he raised a platform in sandal-wood and made an ivory bed to the god. Mallidêvan puttûr is said to have been granted by a certain Annappa-Udaiyar in Rudhirôdgâri-Samvatsara corresponding to Saka 1885. And in the same year, Andappa-Udaiyar Tirumalaitandâr granted Guḍiyâlam village to the temple and Nagarasa-Uḍaiyar built the enclosure wall of the shrine of the goddess.
142
At Srirangam there is a stone inscription of Saluva Tirumalai raja dated in Saka 1385 expired, Subhanu, which may, in all probability, refer to the chief against whom Kamparâja was sent. Another record of the same ruler dated three years carlier, i.e., in Vikrama is found at Tirukkaṭṭuppalli 28 About the first of these records, Dr. Hultzsch remarks that he is identical with the Tuluva king Timma, the founder of the second dynasty of Vijayanagar, as in the Sanskrit verses at the end of the inscription the king is called Gôpa-Timma.29 The Gangaikondachôlapuram record30 of Virupaksha III dated in Saka 1405, Subhakṛit, mentions Tirumalairâja and this is perhaps the latest reference to Sâļuva Tirumalairaja. The inscriptions of the Sâluva king Tirumalai discovered in the Trichinopoly district and his final triumph in asserting his independence prove the weakness of the Vijayanagara sovereign of the day and the growing importance of the Sâluvas who in the end overthrew the Central Government,
Saluva Usurpation.
Krishaaraya Uttamanambi, the younger brother of Tirumalainâtha Uttamanambi came to manage the affairs of the temple in Saka 1409 expired Plavanga. He secured as many as 20. villages from persons like Eramañchi Timmappa-Nayaka and contributed his share of the repairs to the temple. Vira-Narasingaraya defeated Praudhadevaraya in Saka 1409, Saumya, and ruled the Vijayanagara kingdom with Kanigiris as his capital. Râmaraja, the elder brother of the conqueror and a learned scholar, obtained from him an order, to the effect that the 108 sacred places of the Vaishnavas should be under his sway. He went to Srirangam where he received the name Kandâdai Annan. At this time Kôpêrirâja, who succeeded Sâļuva Tirumalairâja in the Government of the Trichinopoly district (simai) favoured the people of Tiruvânaikkâval, gave away the temple villages to Kottai-sâmantan Sennappa-Nayaka, extracted puravari, kanikkai, pattu,. parivaṭṭam and such other taxes and caused much annoyance to the temple authorities at Srirangam. When the matter was repeatedly reported by Kandâḍai Râmânuja to Narasâ-Nâyaka, the latter came with a large army, put down Kônêriraja and took away the charge of the district from his hands. Narasa then got back to the temple those villages which it had been dispossessed of, remitted the newly imposed taxes, and removed all the grievances of the people. Some persons, being unable to bear the oppression of Kônêriraja, mounted up the gopura and put an end to their lives by falling from it. The images of these were set up on the gopura. As brother of the king and partly also on account of his good works, Kandâdai Râmânuja was treated with great respect. The number of villages got back to the temple from Sennappa-Nayaka and others was 63. Two years after, i.e., in Saka 1418, Virôdhikrit, a few of the dévadána villages were sold away to put right Rajamahendran-tiruvâéal, which had suffered considerable damage by the fall of a thunderbolt during the commotion caused by the Muhammadan invasion.
Narasa-Nayaka's action in the Trichinopoly district receives confirmation from other sources. It is well expressed in the following extract from Mr. Sewell. "The glorification attached to the name of Sangama coincides with that ascribed in a subsequent period to the then sovereign Narasa and it was probably a formula. It states that he worshipped at Râmêévaram, built a bridge over
No. 59 of the Madras Epigraphical collection for 1892. Annual Report on Epigraphy for 1892, p. 9. This place is in the Nellore district.
28 Ibid for 1897, Mr. Bewell's Lists of Antiquities, Vol. I, p 265,
