Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

The Dynasties of the Kanarese Districts of the Bombay Presidency from the Earliest Historical Times to the Musalman Conquest c8.s16: Chapter VI. The Hoysalas of Dorasamudra

The Dynasties of the Kanarese Districts of the Bombay Presidency from the Earliest Historical Times to the Musalman Conquest c8.s16

Language
English

Contents

Chapter VI. The Hoysalas of Dorasamudra

c8.s16.2

The Hoysalas, whose family name appears in the various forms of Poysala, Poysana, Hoysala, and Hoysana, claimed, like the Râshtrakûṭas and various other great families, to belong to the lineage of Yadu, in the Sômavamśa or Lunar Race. On the basis of this claim, they usually styled themselves Yâdava-kul-âmbara-dyumaṇi, "suns in the sky which is the family of the Yâdavas." And, in connection with Dvâravatî, Dvârâvatî, or Dvârakâ,—the modern Dvârkâ, at the western extremity of Kâṭhiâwâḍ,—which was the legendary capital of Kṛishṇa, who was an incarnation of the god Vishṇu, born in the same lineage, they assumed the hereditary title of Dvârâvatî-puravar-âdhîśvara, "supreme lord of Dvârâvatî, the best of towns." Their Purâṇic genealogy, which is presented first in a record of A. D. 1117,¹ was probably devised in the time of Vishṇuvardhana, who brought the family prominently to the front. And, in connection with it, the origin of the family name is explained as follows:² In the lineage of Yadu, there was born a certain Sala. In company with a Jain ascetic, who was versed in all the science of incantation, he was worshipping the goddess Padmâvatî of Śaśakapura, with a view to bringing her into their power, and so acquiring sovereignty for Sala.³ A tiger sprang out, threatening to interrupt and spoil the efficacy of their rites. On the appeal of the ascetic, who cried out "poy, Sala,—slay, O Sala!," Sala slew the tiger. And, from this exclamation and the slaughter of the tiger, he and his descendants acquired the name of Poysala, and the crest or banner, or both, bearing the representation of a tiger.⁴ Also,⁵ because, when the goddess conferred her boon, the season of spring was at the height of its beauty, Sala gave her the name of Vâsantikâdêvî, and continued to worship her under that appellation, by which she is mentioned in various other records as the family-goddess.¹

c8.s16.3

¹ A copper-plate grant from Bêlûr in Mysore (P. S. and O.-C. Inscrs. No. 18; Mysore Inscriptions, p. 260).

c8.s16.4

² From an inscription of about A. D. 1117 at Haḷêbîḍ in Mysore (P. S. and O.-C. Inscrs. No. 232; Mysore Inscriptions, p. 213), and an inscription of A. D. 1124 at the temple of Hariharêśvara at Harihar in Mysore (P. S. and O.-C. Inscrs. No. 123; Mysore Inscriptions, p. 30).

c8.s16.5

³ Mr. Rice says (Inscriptions in the Mysore District, Part I. Introd. p. 18) that Śaśakapura is Aṅgadi in the Mudgere tâluka, Mysore. But I have not been able to trace the statement of his grounds for this identification.

c8.s16.6

⁴ The Bêlûr record, of A. D. 1117 (note 1, above) says, in verse (text lines 12, 13), that the Hoysalas were dvipi-lâñchhanah; i.e. that they had the crest of a tiger. The Haḷêbîḍ record, of about the same date (note 2, above) says, also in verse (text line 12), that they had the śârdûla-chihna or sign of a tiger. The Gadag inscription, of A. D. 1192 (Ind. Ant. Vol. II. p. 299), says, again in verse (text lines 6, 7), that the tiger was the emblem of the dhvaja or banner.

c8.s16.7

⁵ From a passage in the Haḷêbîḍ record (P. S. and O.-C. Inscrs. No. 232, lines 12, 13) which is left unnoticed in Mr. Rice's translation.

c8.s16.8

¹ Among the full string of Hoysala titles, in the expressions Vasantikâdêvî-labdha-vara-prasâda (in the Bêlûr inscription of A.D. 1117; P. S. and O.-C. Inscrs. No. 18), and Sasakapuri-Vasantikâdêvî-labdha-vara-prasâda (in the Halêbîd inscription; id. No. 232).

c8.s16.9

Such is the myth that is presented in the records. But no attempt is made to give the lineal descent from Sala to the historical members of the family. He is, doubtless, nothing but an eponymous hero, whose existence was invented, when the pedigree was being manufactured, simply to explain a somewhat peculiar name. And the historical genealogy stands as shewn in the table on page 493 below. The town with which the historical authority of the Hoysalas was first connected, in the case of Vishnuvardhana, is Vêlâpura or Bêlûra,² which is the modern Bêlûr, the chief town of the Bêlûr tâluka in the Hassan District, Mysore.³ But in the time of Vishnuvardhana the seat of government was moved to Dôrasamudra,⁴ which is the modern Halêbîd, about ten miles east by north from Bêlûr. From the story about Sala and the Jain ascetic, from the statement that Vinayâditya owed his rise to power to a Jain teacher named Prabhâchandra, from the mention of Vishnuvardhana's wife, Sântadêvî, as a lay disciple of a Jain teacher named Prabhâchandra, and from the specification of his minister Gangarâja, and of Hulla, a minister of Narasimha I., as two out of three very special promoters of the Jain faith, it is plain that the Hoysalas were originally Jains by religion. But it is said that they were subsequently converted to the Vaishnava faith.⁵ And this is borne out by the assertion that Vîra-Ballâla II. acquired the sovereignty by the favour of the god Nârâyana or Vijaya-Nârâyana; and by the description of Polâlva, a minister of the same king and of Narasimha II., as an eminent leader among the Vaishnavas.

c8.s16.10

² The name appears also as Bêlupura; but apparently only for metrical convenience (e.g., Jour. Bo. Br. R. As. Soc. Vol. XI. p. 240, text line 21).

c8.s16.11

³ Lat. 13° 9'; long. 75° 54'.

c8.s16.12

⁴ This name occasionally appears as Dhôrasamudra, with the aspirated dh (e.g., P. S. and O.-C. Inscrs. No. 123, line 47, and No. 148, line 12; and Jour. Bo. Br. R. As. Soc. Vol. XI. p. 240, text line 21). Which form is the more correct one, depends upon whether the first component of the name represents dvâra or dhruva. It would seem that the form Dvârasamudra sometimes occurs. But I cannot quote an actual instance of it just now.

c8.s16.13

⁵ Mysore Inscriptions, p. lxxvi.

c8.s16.14

The earliest mention of Hoysalas is to be found in an inscription at Kaliyûr in the Tirumakûdlu-Narasîpur tâluka of the Mysore District,⁶ dated in the month Chaitra (March-April), falling in A. D. 1006, of the Parâbhava samvatsara, Saka-Samvat 929 (current); the record appears to mention a certain Apramêya, "lord of the Kotta mandala," an officer of the Chôla king Râjarâjadêva, and to tell us that he defeated a Hoysala minister named Nâganna, and pursued or repulsed the Hoysalas in war. But the first historical person in the family of Dôrasamudra, beyond whom the records do not carry back the pedigree, is the Mahâmandalesvara Vinayâditya, whose wife was

c8.s16.15

⁶ Inscriptions in the Mysore District, No. TN. 44; and see Introd. pp. 9, 14.

c8.s16.17

Keleyabbe or Keleyaladêvî. He is represented as having been born at Sasapura; i.e. the Sasakapura or Sasakapurî which is mentioned in the myth about Sala. And he is said to have owed his rise to power to service done to a Jain teacher named Sântidêva.¹ No records actually referable to his own time have come to light. But a date is furnished for him by an inscription at Sindigere in Mysore,² which, written in A. D. 1137, states that, as Mahâmaṇḍalêśvara, he ruled all the territory included between the Koṅkaṇ, the Bhadadavayal province or district, Talakâḍ, and Sâvimale; and that on Phâlguna śukla 3 of the Sarvajit saṁvatsara, apparently coupled, and, if so, by mistake, with Saka-Saṁvat 961, in his presence, his wife gave a girl named Adekavve in marriage to the Daṇḍanâyaka Mariyâne and conferred on the latter the lordship of Sindigere in the Âsandi district or province. The corresponding English date appears to be, approximately, the 20th February, A. D. 1048.³ The discrepancy between the saṁvatsara and the Saka year of course detracts somewhat from the value of the date, which must have been taken from some family archive. But the date is a perfectly possible one. The record may, therefore, be accepted, as fixing the period of Vinayâditya with sufficient closeness. And, at the time established by it, he must have been a feudatory of the then reigning Chôla king. The same record would give him the biruda of Tribhuvanamalla; but this seems to be only borrowed from the fact that that biruda did belong to Viṣṇuvardhana and his son and grandson. So, also, the description of the boundaries of the territory which, it says, Vinayâditya governed, appears to be largely borrowed from the boundaries of the territory which was first acquired in full by Viṣṇuvardhana.

c8.s16.18

¹ Inscriptions at Sravana-Belgola, No. 54.

c8.s16.19

² Mysore Inscriptions, p. 329.—The preamble refers the record to the time of the Western Châlukya king Vikramâditya. The proper context of the preamble, however is, not the immediately following passage which mentions Vinayâditya, but that part of the record which introduces his grandson Viṣṇuvardhana, who was ruling at the time when the whole record was drawn up.

c8.s16.20

³ I take the saṁvatsara to be stated correctly; and I adjust the Saka year to it by the southern luni-solar system, according to which it coincided with Saka-Saṁvat 969 expired or 970 current. By the mean-sign system, Sarvajit coincided with S.-S. 967, partly as a current and partly as an expired year. It seems, therefore, just possible that the original has not been read correctly. But, on the other hand, the habitual use of the mean-sign system had ceased before this time, in Southern India.—Another date for Vinayâditya is perhaps given by the Nirgunda inscription (Mysore Inscriptions, p. 307), which connects with the name of Viṣṇuvardhana the Anala or Nala saṁvatsara, coupled with Saka-Saṁvat 987 by mistake for 998 expired or 999 current. The date is an impossible one for Viṣṇuvardhana. But it has somewhat the appearance of a correct date for Vinayâditya, mistakenly quoted in connection with his grandson.

c8.s16.21

Ereyanga.

c8.s16.22

The son of Vinayâditya and Keleyabbe was Ereyanga, whose wife was Êchaladêvî.⁴ The Sindigere inscription of A. D. 1137 would give him the biruda of Vîra-Gaṅga; but this seems to be only borrowed from one of the birudas of Viṣṇuvardhana. No records of his time have come to light. But, he succeeded his father in the government, and was a feudatory of either Sômêśvara I., Sômêśvara II., Vinayâditya; married Keleyaladêvî. (A. D. 1048)

c8.s16.23

⁴ e. g., P. S. and O.-C. Inscrs. No. 18; Mysore Inscriptions, p. 260 (where, however, as in various other places, the translation gives the name wrongly as Achaladêvî).

c8.s16.25

Ereyanga; married Êchaladêvî.

c8.s16.26

Ballâla I.; married Padmaladêvî, Châvalidêvî, and Boppadêvî. (A. D. 1103)

c8.s16.27

Tribhuvanamalla- Bhujabalavîragaṅga- Vishṇuvardhana; married Śantaladêvî and Lakshmâdêvî. (A. D. 1117 and 1137)

c8.s16.28

Udayâditya.

c8.s16.29

Tribhuvanamalla-Bhujabalavîragaṅga- Narasimha I.; married Êchaladêvî. (A. D. 1159 and 1169)

c8.s16.30

(1) Tribhuvanamalla-Bhujabalavîragaṅga- Vîra-Ballâla II.; married Remmâdêvî, Kêtaladêvî, and Padmaladêvî. (A. D. 1173, and 1191 to about 1212)

c8.s16.31

(2) Narasimha II.; married Kâlaladêvî. (A. D. 1224 and 1234)

c8.s16.32

(3) Vîra-Sômêśvara; married Sômaladêvî, Bijjalâraṇi, and Dêvalamahâdêvî. (A. D. 1234-35 and 1253)

c8.s16.33

By Bijjalâraṇi.

c8.s16.34

(4) Vîra-Narasimha III. (A. D. 1254 and 1290)

c8.s16.35

(5) Vîra-Ballâla III. (A. D. 1310)

c8.s16.36

By Dêvalamahâdêvî.

c8.s16.37

Vîra-Râmanâtha.

c8.s16.38

Ponnambalâ.

c8.s16.39

or Vikramâditya VI., is indicated by the statement that he was "the strong staff of the arm of the Châlukya king."[1] Later records say

c8.s16.40

¹ *Inscriptions at Śravaṇa-Belgoḷa*, No. 124.

c8.s16.41

Ballâla I.

c8.s16.42

that, in a conquest of the north, he took Dhârâ, the stronghold of the lords of Mâlava, which had been made prosperous by king Bhôja;¹ and that he burnt that town, struck fear into the camp or city of the Chôlas, laid waste Chakragotta, and broke the power of Kalinga.² This is possible, if he was employed as a general by the Western Châlukya sovereign; but it is equally likely that the statement is simply an invention of poets.

c8.s16.43

¹ P. S. and O.-C. Insors. No. 18; Mysore Inscriptions, p. 260.

c8.s16.44

² Inscriptions at Sravana-Belgola, No. 138.

c8.s16.45

By his wife Êchaladêvi, Ereyanga had three sons,—Ballâla I., Vishnuvardhana, and Udayâditya. Of the eldest of them, Ballâla I., the Sindigere inscription of A. D. 1137³ tells us that he ruled at Bêlâpura, i.e. Bêlûr; that he wedded three sisters, Padmaladêvi, Châvalidêvi, and Boppadêvi, who were daughters of a second Dandanâyaka Mariyâne, and were highly accomplished in the sciences, and in singing and dancing;⁴ and that, as a marriage-gift, he conferred the lordship of Sindigere on the second Mariyâne, on Kârttika śukla 10 of the Svabhânu samvatsara, Saka-Samvat 1025 (expired), corresponding, approximately, to the 13th October, A. D. 1103. And the Gadag inscription of A. D. 1192 tells us that he overthrew a certain Jagaddêva,⁵ who may be an ancestor of, or possibly even identical with, the Sântara prince Jagaddêva of Patti-Pombuchchapura, who has been mentioned in connection with the Western Châlukya kings Perma-Jagadêkamalla II. and Taila III.

c8.s16.46

³ Mysore Inscriptions, p. 329.

c8.s16.47

⁴ Compare page 484 above.

c8.s16.48

⁵ Ind. Ant. Vol. II. p. 301.

c8.s16.49

Vishnuvardhana.

c8.s16.50

Ballâla I. was followed by his younger brother, the Mahâmandalesvara Vishnuvardhana, whose name appears also in the forms of Vishnu, Bittidêva, and Bittiga,⁶ and who had the special birudas of Tribhuvanamalla and Bhujabala-Vîra-Ganga, and some others, derived from his conquests, such as Talakâdu-gonda and Kânchî-gonda, "the taker of Talakâdu and Kânchî." One of his wives was Sântaladêvi, daughter of the Piriya-pergade Mârasingayya: in the Bêlûr record of A. D. 1117, she is described as the piriy-arasi or "senior queen," and patta-mahâdêvi or "crowned queen-consort;"⁷ another record states that she was "perfect in song, music, and dancing;"⁷ she was a lay disciple of the Jain teacher Prabhâchandrasiddhântadêva; and she died on Chaitra śukla 5 of the Virôdhikrit samvatsara, Saka-Samvat 1053 (expired), corresponding, approximately, to the 6th March, A. D. 1131.⁸ Another was Lakshmâdêvi⁹ or Lakumâdêvi,¹⁰ who was the mother of Narasimha I. And the relations between them seem to have been not very comfortable: for, Sântaladêvi was styled savati-gandhahasti¹¹ and udvritta-savati-gandhavarane,¹² "a rutting

c8.s16.51

⁶ As regards the latter two forms, see page 410 above, note 1.

c8.s16.52

⁷ Inscriptions at Sravana-Belgola, No. 56.—Compare page 484 above.

c8.s16.53

⁸ Id. No. 53.

c8.s16.54

⁹ Id. No. 124.

c8.s16.55

¹⁰ P. S. and O.-C. Insers. No. 123; Mysore Inscriptions, p. 32.

c8.s16.56

¹¹ P. S. and O.-C. Insers. No. 18; Mysore Inscriptions, p. 264.

c8.s16.57

¹² Inscriptions at Sravana-Belgola, Nos. 53, 56.

c8.s16.58

elephant towards ill-mannered co-wives;” and the name was perpetuated by the Jain temple named Savati-gandhavâraṇa-Jinâlaya and Savati-gandhahasti-basadi which she built at Sravaṇa-Belgoḷa.¹ The earliest authentic date for Vishṇuvardhana is Chaitra śukla 5 of the Hêmalambin saṁvatsara, Saka-Saṁvat 1039 (expired), corresponding, approximately, to the 10th March, A. D. 1117, which is furnished by a copper-plate grant, of his own time, from Bêlûr in Mysore.² The latest is Pauṣa śukla 10, the day of the uttarâyaṇa-saṁkrânti or winter solstice, of the Piṅgala saṁvatsara, S.-S. 1060 (current), corresponding, approximately, to the 24th December, A. D. 1137, which is furnished by the Sindigere inscription also of his own time.³ The Bêlûr grant tells us that he first acquired the wealth of the Hoysala rule or dominions;⁴ that, pushing on so far as to take Taḷakâḍ,⁵ he was the first to promote the race of Yadu to the rule or dominions of the Gaṅgas; and that he burnt the capital city of the Gaṅgas. The meaning of this is, that he first brought his family into a really prominent position, by acquiring the Gaṅgavâḍi ninety-six-thousand province, which seems to have been then in the possession of the Chôḷa king, being ruled for him by feudatories, of whom three are mentioned by the names of Adiyama or Idiyama, Dâmôdara, and Narasimha or Narasimhavarman. And other records⁶ shew that this was accomplished by the agency of a Mahâ-pradhâna and Daṇḍanâyaka named Gaṅgarâja, who plainly himself belonged to the Gaṅga stock, and that the conclusive battle was fought at Taḷakâḍ. As regards the general conquests that are attributed to Vishṇuvardhana, the same record claims that in A. D. 1117 he had defeated the Paṇḍyas (evidently of Noḷambavâḍi), conquered the Tuḷu kings, destroyed the power of Jagaddêva,⁷ overthrown a prince named Narasimha (a feudatory of the Chôḷa king), subdued the Kaḷa, Chengiri,⁸ and Mala kings (apparently the chiefs of the Malepas or Malapas, who were the people of the Maleṇâḍ or the territory along the Western

c8.s16.59

¹ Inscriptions at Sravaṇa-Belgoḷa No. 56.

c8.s16.60

² P. S. and O.-C. Inscrs. No. 18; Mysore Inscriptions, p. 260;— An inscription at Nirgunda in Mysore, written about A. D. 1250 (Mysore Inscriptions, p. 307), purports to give for him a date in the month Pausha, falling in A. D. 1076, of the Anala or Nala saṁvatsara, coupled with Saka-Saṁvat 987 by mistake for 998 (expired). But this is rendered impossible by, among other considerations, the intervening date of A. D. 1103 for Ballâḷa I. And, as I have already said (page 492 above, note 3), it seems to be very possibly a true date for his grandfather, Vinayâditya, mistakenly quoted in connection with himself.

c8.s16.61

³ Mysore Inscriptions, p. 329.

c8.s16.62

⁴ i.e., probably, some limited territory in the immediate neighbourhood of Bêlûr.

c8.s16.63

⁵ Also called Taḷavaṇapura. It is on the Kâvêri, about one hundred miles southeast from Bêlûr.

c8.s16.64

⁶ Inscriptions at Sravaṇa-Belgoḷa, Nos. 45, 90, 144; Inscriptions in the Mysore District, Part I., No. M1. 31.

c8.s16.65

⁷ See page 494 above.

c8.s16.66

⁸ Mr. Rice here gives ‘Veṅgiri.’ In his Inscriptions at Sravaṇa-Belgola, he gives the same form in No. 138; but ‘Beṅgiri’ in No. 144, and in Mysore Inscriptions, p. 308. I myself adopted, from him, these two alternative forms. But looking again at the photograph of the Sinda record at Paṭṭadakal (P. S. and O.-C. Inscrs. No. 67, line 27), where, alone, the first syllable is quite distinct, I think the name must be read ‘Chengiri,’ as it was originally taken by me (Jour. Bo. Br. R. As Soc. Vol. XI. pp. 261, 270). In the earlier Kanarese characters, ch and b are sometimes very liable to confusion. But here there is a very marked difference between the ch in Chem-giri-Chêra-Chôḷa and the b in Noḷambavâḍi-Baṇavâse-Kaḍambale in the next line.

c8.s16.68.1

Ghauts), broken the power of Irumgoḷa, made Taḷavanapura (i.e. Taḷakâḍ) his own, accepted (by surrender) the Koṅkoṅa country, made Noḷambavâḍi dependent on him, accepted the town of Kôḷâlapura, uprooted Kôvatûr (this, with Kôyatûr, which occurs elsewhere, is probably a shorter form of Kôyimuttûr, i.e. ‘Coimbatore’), shaken the foundations of Tereyûr, passed over Vallûr, caused the town of Kâñchî to tremble, and punished the Malapas. A record of A. D. 1123¹ states that he had subjugated the Gaṅgavâḍi province by reducing fortresses of the three kinds,—on the plains, on hills, and surrounded by water,—at Taḷakâḍ, Nîlagiri, Koṅgu, Naṅgali, Kôḷâla, Tereyûr, Kôyatûr, Koṅgali, Uchchaṅgî, Taleyûr, Pombuchcha, Vandhâsurachauka, and Baleyapaṭṭaṇa.² A record of A. D. 1131³ claims that he was the sole preserver of the rule of Paṭṭi-Perumâḷa; that he burnt up Chakragoṭṭa; that he was like a fierce forest-fire to the territory of the Toṇḍa chieftains (i.e. the Pallavas); that he took Hânumgal; that he slew the Koṅgas; that he drove out Heñjeru; that he plundered Sâvimale; that he laid waste the ghauts; that he dragged (as captives) the Tuḷuvas; that he was a terror to Gôyindavâḍi;⁴ that he pillaged Râyarâyapura, i.e.

c8.s16.68.2

Taḷakâḍ, so renamed after the Chôḷa king Râjarâja;⁵ and that he made the Gaṅgavâḍi ninety-six-thousand, obedient to his commands as far as Lokkiguṇḍi, which is Lakkuṇḍi near Gadag, in the Dhârwâr District.⁶ Another record⁷ claims that he acquired the whole of the Maḷe and Tuḷu countries; that Kumâranâḍu as well as Taḷakâḍ, fell into his hands on his merely making preparations to march against them; that Kâñchî obeyed his commands; that the Koṅga kings gave up their elephants to him; that he destroyed the pride of the Chôḷa, Pâṇḍya, and Kêraḷa kings, and slew the Andhra king; that, like a gale, he dispersed the clouds which were the Lâṭa and Varâṭa kings;⁸ that he was like a forest fire to the Kadamba heroes; that he was the lord of Gaṇḍagiri; and that he was like a gale to the cloud which was Jayakêśin (the second of that name in the family of the Kâḍambas of Goa): and it enumerates the provinces and districts which he had seized, as Taḷakâḍ, Koṅgu, Naṅgali, Gangayâḍi, Noḷambavâḍi, Mâsavâḍi, Huligere, Halasige, Banavâsi, and Hânumgal. Another record¹ adds, to the list of his conquests, Singamale, Rodda, Kollagiri,² Ballare, Polalu (probably Holal in the Bellâry District), Baṅkâpur (in Dhârwâr), Râjêndrapura, the Bayalu *nâḍ*, and the Belvola country, with Lokkiguṇḍi, as far as the river Kṛishṇa. And the Sindigere inscription of A. D.

c8.s16.68.3

1137³ further claims that he squeezed, as if he held it in his hand, the southern Madhurapura, and that, by means of his general, he burnt Jananâthapura, *i.e.* Mâyilaṅgai, the modern Mâliṅgi, opposite Talakâḍ, on the other side of the river.⁴ A later record, of A. D. 1159-60,⁵ states that, with the dust of his army of foot-soldiers, he made muddy the waters of the Malaprahâriṇî, which is the modern Malaprabhâ or Malparbhâ, flowing through the south of the Belgaum District and along the north of the Nawaḷgund and Rôṇ tâlukas of Dhârwâr; and that, from east to west, he acquired by his sword the whole of the territory that was bounded on the north by the Kṛishṇaveṇî, *i.e.* the Kṛishṇa, into which the Malparbhâ flows at Kapila-Saṅgam in the Bijâpur District. And another later record, of A. D. 1192,⁶ says much the same thing, in stating that he invaded all the territory from his own abode up to the Belvola country, and washed his horse in the Kṛishṇaveṇâ; and it adds that, recognising that, among all princes, the Hoysala was the most impracticable to deal with, Permâḍi, *i.e.* the Western Châlukya king Vikramâditya VI., treated Vishṇuvardhana with just the same respectful behaviour which Vishṇuvardhana displayed towards himself. When he thus carried his arms as far as the Kṛishṇa, he seems to have been in conflict, not so much with Vikramâditya VI. himself, who is recognised in the records as his paramount sovereign, as with the Sinda feudatories of the Western Châlukya king.

c8.s16.68.4

And, though he may really have penetrated as far as the Kṛishṇa, still his expedition does not seem to have been quite as successful as the records of his own family claim: for, the Sinda records maintain that, at the request or command of Vikramâditya VI., Achugi II. pursued and prevailed against the Hoysalas; and also that Permâḍi I. went to the mountain passes of the “marauder” Biṭṭiga,—besieged Dôrasamudra,—pursued him till he arrived at and took his city of Bêḷupura,—drove him on further to the mountain pass of Vâhaḍi,—and thus seized upon his royal power.⁷ Some of the successes attributed to Vishṇuvardhana are undoubtedly fictitious or hyperbolical: for instance, it is impossible,—unless he may have been employed, on distant expeditions, as a general of Vikramâditya VI.,—that he can have had anything to do with Chakragotta, in Mâlwa, and with the Lâṭa province in Gujarât; it is not likely that he ever really went as far to the east

c8.s16.69

¹ Inscriptions at Sravana-Belgoḷa, No. 56.

c8.s16.70

² Before Taḷakâḍ, the translation mentions ‘Chakragoṭṭi.’ But it seems that there must be some mistake about this: The word can hardly denote any place except Chakragoṭṭa, which, being in Mâlwa, can have had nothing to do with the subjugation of the Gaṅgavâḍi province. And (though it is true there are other omissions also) no such name appears in the very similar enumeration which is given, e.g., in No. 144 of the same series of inscriptions.

c8.s16.71

³ Inscriptions at Sravana-Belgoḷa, No. 53.—Here, and further on, I quote mostly the additions that appear from time to time in the records; omitting conquests already stated.

c8.s16.72

⁴ Located by Mr. Rice (Inscriptions at Sravana-Belgoḷa, translations, p. 158, note 3) on the south-east of the Jain village of Maleyûr, in the Châmrâjnagar tâluka in the Mysore District.

c8.s16.73

⁶ Inscriptions in the Mysore District, Part I., Introd. p. 10.

c8.s16.74

⁶ So, also, No. 144 of Inscriptions at Sravana-Belgoḷa seems to state that he extended his possessions as far as Lokkiguṇḍi.

c8.s16.75

⁷ The inscription of about A. D. 1117 at Haḷebîḍ in Mysore (P. S. and O.-C. Inscr. No. 232; Mysore Inscriptions, p. 213).

c8.s16.76

⁸ This country is also mentioned in Mysore Inscriptions, pp. 14, 20, 70, and, similarly indirect connection with Lâṭa.

c8.s16.77

¹ *Inscriptions in the Mysore District*, Part I., No. Sr. 74.

c8.s16.78

² This seems to have been a name of Kôḷhâpur (see *Ind. Ant.* Vol. XIV. p. 23, note 22). But Kôḷhâpur can hardly be the place intended here.

c8.s16.79

³ *Mysore Inscriptions*, p. 331.

c8.s16.80

⁴ *Inscriptions in the Mysore District*, Part I., Introd. p.11.

c8.s16.81

⁵ *Inscriptions at Sravana-Beḷgoḷa*, No. 138.

c8.s16.82

⁶ *Ind. Ant.* Vol. II. p. 299.

c8.s16.83

⁷ *Jour. Bo. Br. R. As. Soc.* Vol. XI. pp. 234, 244, 270.

c8.s16.84

as Vallûr and Kânchî; his biruda of "taker of Kânchî" is doubtless based upon nothing but the local defeat of the Chôla feudatories Adiyama or Idiyama, Narasimha, and Dâmôdara; and it is not probable that he held, for any appreciable length of time, any of the possessions of the Kâdambas of Goa, or even of the Hângal branch of that family. But there appear no reasons for refusing to accept the successes that are claimed for him in the Gangavâdi province, and in connection with places which can be identified and located in that neighbourhood. The only title connected with his name is that of Mahâmandalesvara; and his feudatory position, first under Vikramâditya VI. and then under Sômêsvara III., is made clear, not only by this, but also by the description of him, in the Sindigere inscription of A. D. 1137, as Chalukya-mani-mandâlika-chûdâmani or "crest-jewel among the feudatory chieftains of the jewel of the Châlukyas,"—by the use, in the same record, of the feudal expression tat-pâdapadm-ôpajîvin, "subsisting like a bee on the water-lilies which are the feet (of the paramount sovereign),"—and by the formal preambles of the same record and of one of the Sravana-Belgola inscriptions,¹ which distinctly mention Vikramâditya VI. as the paramount sovereign. At the same time, the terms which were used in speaking of his rule indicate plainly, not only that, like the Silâhâras of the Konkan and of Karâd, the Rattas of Saundatti, the Kâdambas of Hângal and of Goa, the Sindas of Yelburga, and the Guttas of Guttal, the Hoysalas belonged to the class of the more powerful Mahâmandalesvaras who enjoyed a certain amount of independence and exercised much freedom of action, but also that Vishnuvardhana himself aimed at, and probably even enjoyed, still greater power than was conceded to his peers; for, while most of his records shew simply the use of the technical expression of intermediate rank and authority, belonging properly to him and to the princes of the other families mentioned above,² a few of them disclose the fact that, even though he did not assume any higher title than that of Mahâmandalesvara, he occasionally described his authority by the technical expression of paramount sovereignty.³ The records usually describe him as ruling over the Gangavâdi ninety-six-thousand province,⁴ the boundaries of which seem to be defined by the Belûr record of A. D. 1117, which says that then, at Vêlâpura, after having established the Hoysala power by marching to Talakâd and burning the capital city of the Gangas and acquiring their

c8.s16.85

¹ op. cit., No. 144. This record is not dated.—The preamble of the Sindigere record, which is actually dated after the end of the reign of Vikramâditya VI., furnishes another instance of the imaginary continuation of his reign (see page 447 above, note 4).

c8.s16.86

² viz., sukha-samkathâ-vinôdadim râjyam-geyu (see page 428 above, note 4); or, as it sometimes occurs in his case, sukha-samkathâ-vinôdadim prithvirâjyam-geyu (e.g., Inscriptions in the Mysore District, Part I., No. Md. 29).

c8.s16.87

³ viz., vijaya-râjyam uttar-ôttar-âbhivriddhi-pravardhamânam â-chandr-ârka-târam baram saluttam-ire (see page 428 above, note 4); for instance, Inscriptions at Sravana-Belgola, Nos. 45, 53, 56, and Inscriptions in the Mysore District, Part I., No. Ml. 31.

c8.s16.88

⁴ e.g., Mysore Inscriptions, p. 308; Inscriptions at Sravana-Belgola, No. 144.

c8.s16.89

possessions, he was ruling all the territory included between the lower ghaut of Nangali on the east, Kongu, Chêra, and Anamale on the south, the Bârakanûr pass through the ghauts to the Konkan on the west, and Sâvimale on the north.¹ And a record of A. D. 1127² states that he was then ruling that province at Yâdavapura, which, Mr. Rice says, is the modern Mêlukôte, in Mysore.³ But a record of A. D. 1132⁴ claims that he was then ruling, at Dôrasamudra, over the Gangavâdi ninety-six-thousand, the Nolambavâdi thirty-two-thousand, the Banavâsi twelve-thousand, and the Hânumgal five-hundred. And the Sindigere inscription of A. D. 1137 states that then, at Dôrasamudra, he was still ruling the Nolambavâdi and Banavâsi provinces, in addition to the Gangavâdi territory. And one of the Sinda records⁵ incidentally enumerates the countries, over which he had ruled, as Chengiri, Chêra, Chôla, Malaya, Male, the seven Tulus, Kolla, Pallava, Kongu, Nolambavâdi, Banavâsi, Kadambale, and Hayve. A most valuable servant to him appears to have been the Mahâpradhâna and Dandanâyaka or Hiriya-Dandanâyaka Gangarâja, of the Ganga family, already mentioned as the person through whose agency he acquired the Gangavâdi province.⁶ This officer is mentioned as one of three special promoters of the Jain religion,—the other two being Râya, a minister of the Western Ganga king Râchamalla, and Hulla, a minister of Vishnuvardhana's son Narasimha I.⁷ And we are also told that he restored the ruined Jain temples of the Gangavâdi province,⁸ which had possibly been laid waste at the time when the Chôlas invaded the Belvola country, and destroyed the Jain temples there, in the reign of the Western Châlukya king Sômêsvara I. He is constantly mentioned in terms which describe him as the chief support of Vishnuvardhana's rule.⁹ It was he, in securing the ancient possessions of the Gangas for Vishnuvardhana, by ousting the Tigulas or Tamil people who then held them,—i. e. the imported followers of the Chôla invaders,—defeated Adiyama or Idiyama, a feudatory of the Chôla, who, when encamped at Talakâd, refused to give up quietly the territory which the Chôla king had entrusted to him.¹⁰ It was he, again, who actually put to flight Dâmôdara and Narasimhavarman, and all the other feudatories of the Chôla above the ghauts, and thus made the country subject to the sole authority of Vishnuvardhana; in recognition of which, the latter gave him the district or town of Gôvindavâdi and the village of Tippûr.¹ And he appears to have on one occasion, in or just before A.D. 1118, led a successful night attack against the forces of Vikramâditya VI. himself, when they were encamped, under the command of twelve feudal chiefs, at a place named Kannegâl; in recognition of which Vishnuvardhana presented him with the village of Parama, on the north-east of Sravana-Belgola.²

c8.s16.90

¹ See pages 298, 299, above, and page 299, note 1.

c8.s16.91

² Inscriptions in the Mysore District, Part I., No. My. 16.

c8.s16.92

³ ibid. No. Md. 29.

c8.s16.93

⁴ Jour. Bo. Br. R. As. Soc., Vol. XI. p. 259.

c8.s16.94

⁵ He seems to be the Mahâmandalesvara Gangarasa, who is mentioned in the Nirgunda record (Mysore Inscriptions, p. 302) as governing the Arabala seventy.—Mr. Rice says (Inscriptions at Sravana-Belgola, Introd. p. 23) that a record at Halebid shews that he died in A. D. 1133.

c8.s16.95

⁶ Inscriptions at Sravana-Belgola, No. 137.

c8.s16.96

⁷ id. Nos. 47, 59, 90.

c8.s16.97

⁸ e. g., id. Nos. 43, 44, 47, 90.

c8.s16.98

⁹ id. No. 90; Inscriptions in the Mysore District, Part I., No. Ml. 31.

c8.s16.99

¹ See the records referred to in the preceding note; also see page 496 above, and note 4.

c8.s16.100

² Inscriptions at Sravana-Belgola, No. 45.

c8.s16.101

The next name on the list is that of Udayâditya, the younger brother of Vishnuvardhana. He is, however, only mentioned as one of the sons of Ereyanga.³ No historical facts are stated in connection with him. And it seems altogether unlikely that he had any part in the government of the Hoysala territory.

c8.s16.102

³ e. g., in the Bêlûr grant (P. S. and O.-C. Inscrs. No. 18; Mysore Inscriptions p. 260); in the Halêbîd inscription (P. S. and O.-C. Inscrs. No. 232: Mysore Inscriptions, p. 213); and in the Sindigere inscription (Mysore Inscriptions, p. 329).

c8.s16.103

Vishnuvardhana, then, was followed by his son, the Mahâmandaleśvara Narasimha I., whose name appears also in the forms of Nrisimha and Nârasimha. He, again, had the special birudas of Tribhuvanamalla and Bhujabala-Vîra-Ganga; and he was also styled Pratâpa-Hoysala. His wife, from whom Vîra-Ballâla II. was born, was Echaladêvî.⁴ That he actually succeeded, as Mahâmandaleśvara, to the government of the Hoysala territory, is shewn by one of the Sravana-Belgola records, which states that he ruled over the dakshina-mahî-mandala or "territory or province of the southern land,"⁵ — meaning probably all the country to the south of the Wardâ and of the Tungabhadrâ after the confluence of the Wardâ with it.⁶ Dates for him in A. D. 1127 and 1135, during his father's lifetime, are furnished for him by inscriptions at Tippûr and Bannûr.⁷ But the earliest date for him as Mahâmandaleśvara is contained in one of the Sravana-Belgola records,⁸

c8.s16.104

⁴ P. S. and O.-C. Inscrs. No. 18; Mysore Inscriptions, p. 266 (where the name is wrongly given as Achaladêvî): also Inscriptions at Sravana-Belgola, No. 138, and Ind. Ant. Vol. II. p. 302.

c8.s16.105

⁵ Inscriptions at Sravana-Belgola, No. 137, the first part.

c8.s16.106

⁶ An inscription at Heggere in Mysore (Mysore Inscriptions, p. 328) seems to indicate that he was entrusted with some share of the government during his father's lifetime. But the value of this record is doubtful. Amongst the persons with whose aid, it says, he governed, there is mentioned, his own mother, the celebrated Sâtavve (sic); but his own mother was Lakshmâdevî (see page 494 above). And the date is very questionable. If it is really the eighteenth year of the Châlukya-Vikrama-varsha, = A. D. 1093-94, it falls before the time of even Ballâla I. While, if it is the seventy-eighth year, = A. D. 1153-54, (in Kanarese, a damaged 'seven' may easily be misread as 'one'),—it falls twenty-two years after the death of Sântavve (see page 494 above).

c8.s16.107

⁷ Inscriptions in the Mysore District, Part I., Nos. My. 16, TN. 129.

c8.s16.108

⁸ op. cit. No. 138. Mr. Rice has found another date for him, in A. D. 1171, from Inscriptions at Sravana-Belgola, No. 81 (see the Introd. p. 54). But the Narasimha

c8.s16.109

and is in the month Pausha, falling in December, A. D. 1159, of the Pramâlin samvatsara, Saka-Samvat 1081 (expired). A later date for him, probably in the month Vaisâkha (April-May), falling in A. D. 1169, of Saka-Samvat 1091 (expired) is furnished by an inscription at Sattûru.¹ The earlier of these dates falls in the period when the possession of the Western Châlukya kingdom was in dispute between Taila III. and Bijjala; and it is very likely that the Hoysala prince was then practically independent: the later date falls in the reign of Bijjala's son Sôvidêva. He is said to have carried his standards as far north as the peaks of Dêvagiri,² which is possible, if he was employed as a general, under one of the Western Châlukya or the Kalachurya kings, against the then growing power of the Yâdavas of Sênnadêsa; but the statement remains to be verified. And he is described as "as the taker of Talakâd, Kongu, Nangali, Nolambavâdi, Banavâsi, and Hanumgal;"³ this, however, plainly rests entirely upon the successes of his father, as the records indicate nothing necessitating a fresh reduction of those places by Narasimha himself.⁴ An important officer under him was the Mahâpradhâna, Sarvâdhikârin, Hirîya-Bhandâri, and Dandandyaka, Hulla, Hullapa or Hullamayya,⁵ who has been already mentioned⁶ as one of three special promoters of the Jain religion. Another record mentions the Mahâpradhâna, Sarvâdhikârin, and Sénâdhipati, the Danda-nayaka Lakmaya, with the date of A. D. 1169.

c8.s16.110

¹ Inscriptions in the Mysore District, Part I., No. Nj. 175.

c8.s16.111

² Mysore Inscriptions, p. 308.

c8.s16.112

³ Inscriptions at Sravana-Belgola, No. 137.

c8.s16.113

⁴ This description was also assumed by Vira-Ballâla II.,—mostly, if not entirely, on the same grounds.

c8.s16.114

⁵ Inscriptions at Sravana-Belgola, Nos. 40, 80, 137, 138.

c8.s16.115

⁶ Page 491 above.

c8.s16.116

Narasimha I. was followed by his son Ballâla II., more usually called Vîra-Ballâla, who at first was a Mahâmandalésvara like his ancestors, but afterwards established himself as an independent king. He, again, had the special birudas of Tribhuvanamalla and Bhujabala-Vîra-Ganga. And from the commencement of his career he was called Pratâpa-Hoysala and Yâdava-Nârâyana. An inscription at Kaulûr, near Koppal in the Nizâm's Dominions,⁷ mentions, as his piriy-arasi or senior wife, a certain Remmâdêvî, who, partly because of her name, and partly because the record speaks of the Mâsavâdi district, in which Kaulûr was situated, as her own (native) district, probably belonged to the family of the Pemmâdi or Hemmâlidêva, prince of Mâsavâdi, who is mentioned in a Sravana-Belgola inscription of A. D. 1181, and in the Hirê-Wadawatti inscription of A.D. 1218 which is noticed at the end of this account of Vîra-Ballâla II.:⁸ it records that, in the month

c8.s16.117

⁷ Part of the record at the temple of Hariharésvara (Carn.-Désa Inscrs. Vol. II, p. 199; the transcript gives the name of Vira-Ballâla's wife as Rêmâdêvî; I take the correct form, Remmâdêvî, from the Hirê-Wadawatti inscription).

c8.s16.118

⁸ Page 506 below, note 2.

c8.s16.119

mentioned there is styled Pratâpa-Chakravartin. Therefore, he must be Narasimha II.; and the Khara samvatsara, which is quoted, must be Saka-Samvat 1154 current, = A.D. 1231-32.

c8.s16.120.1

Vaisâkha (April-May), falling in A. D. 1179, of the Vikârin samvatsara (Saka-Samvat 1102 current), and Remmâdêvî joined in making a grant of land at Kaulûr, in the Mâsavâdi district, to the temple in which the record stands; and, the samvatsara being cited as the fourth year of the Kalachurya king Sankama, it shews that Sankama was the recognised sovereign of Vîra-Ballâla, whom it styles Mahâmandalêsvara. And an inscription of A. D. 1203, at Alawandi, in the same neighbourhood,¹ mentions another piriy-arasi, also styled patta-mahâdêvî, named Kêtaladêvî, who made an allotment to a local god, out of the hejjunka-tax of the Mâsavâdi district, and thus seems to have been some connection of the other wife, Remmâdêvî; and, perhaps a son, born from her, named Billayya. But the son who succeeded him, Narasimha II., was born from a wife named Padmaladêvî.² The earliest date for Vîra-Ballâla II. is supplied by an inscription at Bujagauḍana-pura in Mysore,³ which mentions him as a Mahâmandalêsvara, ruling at Dôrasamudra in the month Chaitra (March-April), falling in A.D. 1173, of the Vijaya samvatsara, coupled with Saka-Samvat 1094 by mistake for 1095 (expired). And one of the Sravana-Belgola inscriptions⁴ mentions him as a Mahâmandalêsvara ruling the dakshina-mandala or "southern territory," with a date in the month Pausha, falling in December, A. D. 1181, of the Plava samvatsara, S.-S. 1104 (current).

c8.s16.120.2

To the earlier period of his career belongs also the statement in the Nirgunda inscription, that, as Mahâmandalêsvara, he ruled over the Gangavâḍi ninety-six-thousand at Dôrasamudra.⁵ Within the next ten years, however, he accomplished a very great change in his position. From his Gadag inscription of A. D. 1192,⁶ and from another record of his time, dated in A. D. 1202, at Aṇṇigere,⁷ we learn that, pushing on to the north of the Dhârwâr District, he defeated Brahma, the general of the Western Châlukya king Sômêsvara IV., Bhillama, the Yâdava king of Dêvagiri, and a certain Jaitrasimha, who may perhaps be, as was originally thought, Jaitugi I., the son of Bhillama, but seems now more likely to be a minister of Bhillama who is mentioned as Jaitasimha in a record at Gadag of A. D. 1191;¹ and that thus, according to the claim that is made for him in these records, by the favour of the god Nârâyaṇa he acquired the supremacy over the Kuntala country, and the universal sovereignty of the Western Châlukyas. This must have happened soon after June, A. D. 1191, when, as the record of that date at Gadag² shews, the country in that neighbourhood was in Bhillama's possession.

c8.s16.120.3

He then, as is shewn by his own Gadag inscription and subsequent records, assumed the paramount epithets and titles of *samastabhuvanâśraya*, *śrîprithivîvallabha*, *Mahârâjâdhirâja*, *Paramêśvara*, and *Paramabhaṭṭâraka*, and the style of *Pratâpa-Chakravartin*, *Bhujabala-Chakravartin*, *Bhujabalapratâpa-Chakravartin*, *Hoysaḷa-Chakravartin*, *Bhujabalapratâpa-Hoysaḷa-Chakravartin*, and *Yâdava-Chakravartin*.³ And he established a reckoning of his own, running from the first year of his reign as paramount sovereign, which, the records shew, was the Virôdhikrit *samvatsara*, *Śaka-Samvat* 1114 current, = A. D. 1191-92.⁴ This position he maintained; and it was enjoyed also, though with a more limited extent of territory, by his successors. But he certainly did not acquire the whole of the Kuntala country, and the entire possessions that had belonged to the Western Châlukyas: the northern boundary of the Hoysaḷa kingdom, thus established, was evidently the Malparbhâ river, and the Krishṇa from the point where the Malparbhâ joins it: for, the records of Vîra-Baḷḷâḷa, in that neighbourhood, are found at Aṇṇigere in the Nawaḷgund tâluka, Narêgal in the Rôṇ tâluka, and Baḷagânûr, Gadag, Muḷgund, Mêyuṇḍi, and Nâgâvi, in the Gadag tâluka, of the Dhârwâr District, and nowhere on the north of the rivers mentioned;

c8.s16.120.4

while, on the north of those rivers, inscriptions of the Dêvagiri-Yâdava kings Bhillama and Jaitugi I., the dates of which fall during the reign of Vîra-Baḷḷâḷa II., exist, or were extant some fifty years ago, at Bhairwâḍgi and Managôḷi in the Bâgewâḍi tâluka, and Hippargi in the Sindagi tâluka, of the Bijâpur District, and at

c8.s16.121

¹ At the temple of Îsvara (Carn.-Dêsa Insers. Vol. II. p. 297).—According to the transcripts, there is no doubt as to the identity of the husband of Remmâdêvî and Kêtaladêvî; the Alawandi inscription specifies him as Vîra-Ballâla; and the Kaulûr inscription does the same, and further makes the matter quite clear by styling him Dvârâvati-puravar-âdhisvara and Yâdava-Nârâyana.

c8.s16.122

² The Harihar inscription, of A. D. 1224, noticed more fully in connection with Narasimha II.—One of the inscriptions at Sravana-Belgola (No. 128) seems to mention a kumâra or son named Sômêsvara. But there is nothing in support of this in any other known record. And there is probably some mistake about either the original or the transcript.

c8.s16.123

³ Inscriptions in the Mysore District, Part I., No. My. 58.

c8.s16.124

⁴ Inscriptions at Sravana-Belgola, No. 124.

c8.s16.125

⁵ Mysore Inscriptions, p. 308.—In addition to the inscriptions quoted in the text above, other records, belonging to the earlier part of his career, are—Inscriptions in the Mysore District, Part I., No. My. 18, at Hemmanhalli, dated in A. D. 1175; No. Md. 44, at Âtakûr, dated in A. D. 1177; No. TN. 106, at Tumbala, dated in A. D. 1180; No. TN. 4, at Talakâḍ, dated in the same year (wrongly suggested by Mr. Rice to be dated in A. D. 1300, and to belong to Vîra-Ballâla III.); and No. Ml. 83 at Changavâḍi, dated in A.D. 1184.

c8.s16.126

⁶ Ind. Ant. Vol. II. p. 299; and see page 464 above, note 4, for the correction regarding Brahma.

c8.s16.127

⁷ At the temple of Amritêsvara (Carn.-Dêsa Insers. Vol. II. p. 301).

c8.s16.128

¹ *Epigraphia Indica*, Vol. III. p. 217.

c8.s16.129

² See the preceding note.

c8.s16.130

³ Some of the later records, however, in Mysore, describe him, even after this time, as simply a *Mahâmaṇḍalêśvara*; e.g., *Inscriptions at Sravana-Beḷgoḷa*, No. 130, dated in A.D. 1195, and *Inscriptions in the Mysore District*, Part I., No. NJ. 71, at Motta, dated in A. D. 1192 (wrongly suggested by Mr. Rice to be dated in A. D. 1312, and to belong to Vira-Baḷḷâḷa III.), and No. TN. 31, at Taḍi-Mâḷingi, dated in A. D. 1195-96.

c8.s16.131

⁴ The following instances are in accordance with this:—(1) In an inscription at the temple of Gachchina-Basappa at Aṇṇigere in the Dhârwâr District (*Carn.-Désa Inscrs.* Vol. II. p. 289; verified from an ink-impression), the Piṅgaḷa *samvatsara* (*Śaka-Samvat* 1120 current) is cited as his seventh year; the month is Mârgaśîrsha. (2) In the inscription, mentioned above, at the temple of Amṛitêśvara at Aṇṇigere (*ibid.* p. 301; verified from an ink-impression), the Dundubhi *samvatsara* (*Ś.-S.* 1126 current) is cited as his twelfth year; the month is Jyêshṭha. (3) In an inscription at Baḷagânve in Mysore (P. S. and O.-C. *Insers.* No. 197; *Mysore Inscriptions*, p. 137), the Krôdhana *samvatsara* (*Ś.-S.* 1128 current) is cited as his fifteenth year; the month is Chaitra. (4) In another inscription at Baḷagânve (P. S. and O.-C. *Insers.* No. 198; *Mysore Inscriptions*, p. 137), the Prabhava *samvatsara* (*Ś.-S.* 1130 current) is cited as his seventeenth year; the month is Kârttika. And (5) in an inscription at the temple of Mahâbalêśvara at Nâgâvi in the Dhârwâr District (*Carn.-Désa Insers.* Vol. II. p. 334), the Prajâpati *samvatsara* (*Ś.-S.* 1134 current) is cited as his twenty-first year; the month is Kârttika.—I expect that the majority of his dates will be found to be in accordance with the above. But two instances to the contrary are known to me. In an inscription

c8.s16.132

Bijâpur itself. That Bhillama had held, as was only to be expected, the country south of the Malparbhâ and the Kṛishṇa, as well as the northern provinces, is shewn by an inscription of A. D. 1189, the third year of his reign, at Aṇṇigere, and by his Gadag inscription of June, A. D. 1191. Vîra-Ballâḷa must have been, nominally at least, then a feudatory of Bhillama. But his defeat of the Western Châlukya general Brahma must have taken before that date. And it was doubtless that success that put him in a position to measure his strength against that of Bhillama himself. The final decisive battle between the Hoysalas and the Yâdavas, which must be placed soon after June, A. D. 1191, is located in the neighbourhood of Gadag by the Aṇṇigere inscription of A. D. 1202, which, describing Vîra-Ballâḷa as "a submarine fire in the ocean, which was the army of Bhillama," tells us that, though Bhillama held himself to be unconquerable on account of his great array of elephants and horses and foot-soldiers, Vîra-Ballâḷa pursued him from Soraṭûr (twelve miles south of Gadag) to Lokkiguṇḍi (Lakkuṇḍi, six miles east of Gadag), and there destroyed his forces. The record seems also to state that Bhillama himself was killed on this occasion; and, as the Virôdhikrit saṁvatsara, A. D. 1191-92, was the first year of the reign of Jaitugi I. on the north of the boundary line, as well as of Vîra-Ballâḷa on the south of it, it appears not unlikely that such was really the case. A reference to the same battle is made in a Harihar inscription of A. D. 1224, of the time of Narasimha II.,¹ which claims that the army of the Sêuṇa king,² consisting of two hundred thousand men with twelve thousand cavalry, was pursued by Vîra-Ballâḷa from Soraṭûr to the banks of the Kṛishṇaveṇî, and was there destroyed. This latter record adds that, in the same campaign, when, after the pursuit, he had halted and reformed his forces, Vîra-Ballâḷa II. reduced all the forts between Soraṭûr, Erambarage (Yelburga, in the Nizâm's Dominions), Kuru-gôḍ (near Bellâry), Gutti (about fifty miles east of Bellâry), Bellittage (possibly ‘Belatti’ or ‘Belhuttee,’ near Lakshmêshwar, close to which is the hill-fort of Srîmantgad), Raṭṭapaḷḷi (Raṭṭêhaḷḷi, in the Kôḍ tâluka), and "the proud" Virâṭana-kôṭe (Hâṅgal). And an inspection of the map will shew that the possession of these strongholds made his power

c8.s16.133

¹ At the temple of the god Hariharêśvara (P. S. and O.-C. Inscrs. No. 128; Mysore Inscriptions, p. 30).

c8.s16.134

² The name in the original is Sêuṇa; not Sêmana, as in Mr. Rice's translation. And, in view of the facts that the Yâdavas of Dêvagiri come from the Sêuṇadêśa country, and that, in the Gadag inscription of A. D. 1191, Bhillama is described as rendering highly prosperous the rule of the family of the Sêuṇa, i. e. Sêuṇa, kings (Epigraphia Indica, Vol. III. p. 217), there can now be no doubt that the expressions Sêuṇa-sainya and Sêuṇa-nṛipa-bala indicate the forces, not of an individual named Sêuṇa, but of "the Sêuṇa king," i. e. of Bhillama.

c8.s16.135

at the temple of Veṅkaṭaramaṇa at Mêyuṇḍi in the Dharwâr District (Carn.-Désa Inscrs. Vol. II. p. 284), the Anala or Nala saṁvatsara (S.-S. 1119 current) is cited, not as his sixth year as given in the transcript (to make it accord with the other dates), but, as I find from the ink-impression, as his fifth year; the month is Vaiśâkha. And, in another of the Baḷagâmve records (P. S. and O.-C. Inscrs. No. 195; Mysore Inscriptions, p. 162), the Dundubhi saṁvatsara (S.-S. 1125 current; really his twelfth year) is cited as his eleventh year; the month is Chaitra. These two instances require the Paridhâvin saṁvatsara, S.-S. 1115 current, as his first year.

c8.s16.136

secure over all the southern part, north of Mysore itself, of the dominions which had passed from the Kalachuryas to the last Western Châlukya king Sômêśvara IV., and from the latter to Bhillama of Dêvagiri. When the Gadag inscription of A. D. 1192 was written, Vîra-Ballâḷa’s *vijaya-skandhâvâra* or victorious camp was still at Lakkuṇḍi. And a Baḷagâmve inscription, dated slightly later in the same year,¹ speaks of that same town as the *nelevîḍu* or capital, at which, having accomplished his victories in the north, he was then reigning. It was probably early in A. D. 1193 that he started on the tour in the course of which the forts in question were reduced. A record of A. D. 1195² mentions him as then reigning at Erambarageyakuppa; evidently in the course of this campaign. And the campaign was doubtless brought to an end in the month Âśvina (Sept.-Oct.) falling in A. D. 1196, of the Anala *saṃvatsara*, (Śaka-Saṃvat 1119 current), when, encamped at the Ânekere tank at Hângal, he laid siege to the latter town.³ Another record, of his own time, states that he held the umbrella of southern sovereignty through the favour of the god Vijaya-Nârâyaṇa; that he took Uchchhaṅgi; and that, when the Pâṇḍya (of Noḷambavâḍi, where Uchchhaṅgi was situated) threw himself on his mercy, he restored him his kingdom:⁴ and, coupling this with a statement in one of the Śravaṇa-Beḷgoḷa records,⁵ it would seem that, during his absence on the campaign mentioned above, one of the Pâṇḍya chieftains of the Noḷambavâḍi province, named Kâmadêva, rebelled, and had to be forcibly reduced to submission. But, with this exception, his reign appears to have been free from internal troubles. Some of the recods, indeed, describe him as “the taker of Taḷakâḍ, Koṅgu, Naṅgali, Noḷambavâḍi, Banavâsi, and Hânumgal,” — to which list others add Gaṅgavâḍi, Lokkiguṇḍi, Kummaṭa, and Erambarage; but it is plain that, as in the case of Narasimha I., this is derived mostly from the achievements of Viṣṇuvardhana. The records mention, as his feudatories and officials,—the *Mahâpradhâna*, *Sarvâdhikârin*, and *Daṇḍanâyaka* Biṭṭimayya, with the date of A. D. 1175; the *Mahâpradhâna* and *Daṇḍanâyaka* Gaḍada-Siṅgayya, with the date of A. D. 1184; the *Mahâpradhâna*, *Sarvâdhikârin*, and *Daṇḍanâyaka* Ereyappa or Eraga, who in December, A. D. 1192, was in charge of the Banavâsi twelve-thousand and the Sântalige thousand; the *Mahâpradhâna*, *Sarvâdhikârin*, and Hiriya-Bhaṇḍâri Hullayya, who had also held office under Narasimha I.; the *Mahâpradhâna*, *Sarvâdhikârin*, and *Paramaviśvâsin*, or most confidential agent, the *Daṇḍanâyaka* Armatvaḷa, of Kûrûr, who is described as ruling⁶ over the Târuṇâḍ, Hadinâḍ, and Kunaḍ districts, at Sâtarûr, in A. D. 1195;

First 138 of 183 passages. Read on

Linked texts (10)