History of the Pallavas of Kanchi c10: Chapter V. Contemporary Political Powers. The Salankayanas, Kadambas, etc.

History of the Pallavas of Kanchi c10

Language: English

Chapter V. Contemporary Political Powers. The Salankayanas, Kadambas, etc.

c10.1

THE most important among the contemporary royal dynasties that ruled in the Dakhan during this period, contemporaneous with the Pallava kings of the Sanskrit charters, were the Kadambas, the Vākāṭakas, the Sālankāyanas, the Western Gangas, the Viṣṇukuṇḍins, and the chieftains of various places in the region around the mouth of the Krishna and the Godavari figuring in the Allahabad pillar inscription already noticed, one of whom was probably a Sālankāyana-Hastivarman of Vengi. It is unnecessary to give here an account of all these powers from the available records. A short account of the Sālankāyanas, the Kadambas and the Viṣṇukuṇḍins who appear to have come into close contact with the Pallavas are given here as far as the information from the records permits.

c10.2

The chronology of the Kadambas cannot be regarded as having been definitely fixed. The period of the earliest of the Kadamba kings Mayūraśarman who is described as a Brahman in the Tāḷguṇḍa pillar inscription has been fixed by scholars from internal evidence and palæographical indications as the middle of the fourth century, though Mr. Shama Sastriar in his *Mysore Archæological Reports* is inclined to carry back his period considerably earlier.¹

c10.3

¹ See the *Mys. Arch. Report* 1923.

c10.4

The Tāḷguṇḍa pillar inscription of Kakutsthavarman gives a glimpse into the circumstances leading to the establishment of the political power of this Brahman dynasty in the Dakkan. This record in graphic language describes how the first member of this dynasty Mayūraśarman, a Brahman belonging to the Mānavyasa-gotra, and a native of Sthāṇukuṇḍūr came to the city of Kāñchīpuram for completing his Vedic studies, how he had a quarrel with a Pallava horseman, and how not bearing to be told that the Brahman caste was inferior to that of the Kshatriyas he put himself at the head of a band of adventurers and attacked the Pallava sovereigns in the inaccessible forests of Śrī-Parvata. Then with the aid of the Bṛihat-Bāṇas and others he founded the Kadamba kingdom of which Banavasi was the capital. The Pallava kings had to admit his claims as a ruling power and had to effect a temporary compromise. Now we must try to find out what was the probable period of Mayūraśarman and who his Pallava contemporary was. As we have already suggested, this dismemberment of the Pallava kingdom must have followed the confusion which resulted from the invasion of Samudragupta about A.D. 340. The Kadamba Prakrit inscription of Maḷavaḷḷi¹ written as it is in Prakrit, though it does not mention the name of the king, may be taken to refer to the most ancient king of the Kadambas presumably Mayūraśarman. In regard to his Pallava contemporary only the vaguest guess can be made. As we have assigned Mayūraśarman to about A.D. 350 his Pallava contemporary must have been either Viṣṇugopa or his immediate successors Vīrakūrcha or Skaṇdavarman I.

c10.5

¹ Ind. Ant., vol. xlvi, p. 154.

c10.6

Of the successors of Mayūraśarman, Kangavarman and Bhagīratha attributable to the second half of the fifth century A. D., probably carried on hostile operations against the Pallava kings of the period. Of the others it appears that Raghu, Kakutsthavarman, Śāntivarman and his two sons Mṛigēśavarman and Mandhātrivarman ruled during the sixth century A.D. and were evidently contemporaneous with Vīravarman, Skandavarman II, Simhavarman, and Skandavarman III of the Pallavas. The southern conquest of Prithvīsena, the Vākāṭaka king, who, according to the Ajanta inscription² is described as having defeated the Kuntalas, i.e. the Kadamba king, probably took place about the period, A.D. 350-360 and the Kadamba king must have been Kangavarman who is described in inscriptions as having been engaged in ‘lofty exploits and in terrible wars.’ Of the others we know that Kakutstha, who is ascribable to the first quarter of the fifth century, was the donor of the Tālgunda inscription. The marriage of Narēndrasēna, the grandson of Prabhāvati Gupta with the daughter of the king of Kuntala named Ajjhitabhaṭṭārika is probably to be attributed as Prof. Jouveau-Dubreuil suggests to Kakutstha's reign. Thus it turns out that Kakutsthavarman's boast, in the Tālgunda inscription, that he gave his daughter to Guptas and other kings would be correct if the Gupta-Vākāṭaka king, Narēndrasēna, was the son-in-law of this king. According to our arrangement of Pallava chronology he must have been a contemporary of Simhavarman II and it was probably during this period that the installation of the Western Ganga kings Ayyavarman and Mādhavavarman must have taken place. Of Śāntivarman who succeeded Kakutsthavarman on the Kadamba throne very little is known. Of his sons Mṛigēśavarman and Mandhātrivarman who together ruled for the rest of the fifth century we have some records. According to the Halsi plates dated in the eighth year of his reign Mṛigēśa uprooted the Gangas and was a very fire of destruction to the Pallavas.¹ We learn from another record² that his queen was called Prabhāvatī who was born in the Kaikeya family. Almost contemporaneous with the reigns of Śāntivarman, Mṛigēśavarman and Mandhātrivarman, A.D. 450-500, the younger branch of the Kadamba family Kṛiṣṇavarman I, the son of Kakutstha and the elder brother of Śāntivarman with Prince Dēvavarman as Yuvamahārāja ruled at Triparvata. Soon after the death of Mandhātrivarman the throne of the Kadambas passed to Ravivarman who, according to the Halsi plates, is said to have acquired regal power by the strength and prowess of his own arm which means that there was some trouble in his succession and that he had to fight for the throne. According to another record,¹ he is said to have slain Viṣṇuvarman, presumably a collateral cousin and descendant of Kṛṣṇavarman, and uprooted Caṇḍadaṇḍa of Kāñchī. Records dated in the fifth year of Ravivarman, and the thirty-fifth year have been discovered. He was followed by Harivarman at Vaijayanti till about A.D. 550 when the rise of Pulakēśin I probably put an end to, or obscured, his power. The subsequent history of the Kadambas does not concern us here. Kṛṣṇavarman, his son Ajavarman, Bhogivarman and Viṣṇuvarman are known to have ruled as kings from recent records. That the Kadambas continued to be powerful as late as the end of the eighth century is seen from the mention in the Vēlūrpāḷayam plates² that the Pallava king Dantivarman married Aggalanimmati, ‘the daughter of the celebrated king and a crest-jewel of the Kadamba family.’³

c10.7

² Cave No, 16, Arch. Sur. W. Ind.., vol. 4, p. 53 ff,

c10.8

¹ Halsi plates, *Ind. Ant.*, vol vi, p. 24.

c10.9

² *Mys. Arch. Rep. for 1910-11*, p. 35.

c10.10

¹ *Ind. Ant.*, vol. vi, p. 30.

c10.11

² *S.I.I.*, vol. ii, part v, p. 511.

c10.12

³ *Ibid.*, verse 18.

c10.13

Sālankāyanas, *circa A.D. 350 to 500*.—Almost contemporaneously with the Pallava kings of the Sanskrit charters, may be placed the Sālankāyana dynasty. The word Sālankāyana appears originally to have been the name of a Vedic Rishi. There are nearly five grants for this dynasty that are available to us. If Hastivarman of Vengi, who figures among the adversaries of Samudragupta in the Allahabad inscription, was a Sālankāyana (identified by Vincent Smith as a Pallava) he may be regarded as the earliest member of this family known hitherto. The Ellore Prakrit⁴ plate the alphabets of which closely resemble the Pikīra, Mangalūr and Uruvapalli plates, are dated in the thirteenth year of Māhārāja-Vijayadēvavarman, and were issued from Vengipuram. These plates describe Vijayadēvavarman as the performer of the *Aśvamedha* the fervent Māhēśvara and the devotee at the feet of the Holy Chiṭrarathasvāmī. The grant is addressed to the villagers of Ellora which may be identified with the modern town of Ellore.

c10.14

⁴ *Ep. Ind.*, vol. ix, p. 56.

c10.15

Another grant¹ of the Sālankāyanas written in Sanskrit and therefore considered to be posterior to the Prakrit charter already mentioned, records that Vijayanandivarman son of Chandavarman issued it in the eighth year of his reign from the city of Vengipura. As regards the popular identification of Vengi with the Pedda Vengi² it must be pointed out that, as there are no less than four places bearing the name of Vengi in the Northern Circars alone, it is possible that the usual identification should not be regarded as final on the matter.

c10.16

¹ Ind. Ant., vol. v, p. 175 and plate.

c10.17

² Mad. Jour. of Lit. and Sc., vol. xi, p. 392.

c10.18

Recently two more copper-plates ³ have been discovered by the late Mr. K. V. Lakshmana Rao which, along with the other records, give nearly six generations of the dynasty :—

c10.19

³ Viz. Col. Mag., October, 1922.

c10.20

The following is the order of succession adopted by Mr. Lakshmana Rao :—

c10.21

C. 350. Hastivarman of Vengi

c10.22

375. Vijayadēvavarman

c10.23

400. Vijayanandivarman

c10.24

425. Buddhavarma

c10.25

450. Chandavarma

c10.26

475. Vijayanandivarman

c10.27

500. Vijayaskandavarman

c10.28

The first of the newly-discovered Kāntēru plates records a grant of Vijayaskandavarman, who is there described as meditating on the feet of the holy Chitrarathasvāmi and as belonging to the family of Sālankāyanas, to one Śivarāya in a village called Chinnapura in the Kudrahāravishaya in the fifth year of the king's reign on the full moon day in the month of Vaiśāka.

c10.29

The second registers a gift to one Svāmichandra a piece of land in the village of Kuruvāda by Mahārāja Śrī Nandivarman.

c10.30

A word may be said about the religious leaning of these kings and their relation with the Pallava kings. As regards the first we can only say that the peculiar cult of the Sālankāyanas who called themselves *Bhagavat-Chitrarathasvāmi-Pādānudyāta* may have reference to their tutelary deity, the God of Chitraratha. This term probably refers to the worship by the Sālankāyanas of the Sun-god, and the representation of the figure of the sun in some of the charters issued by these sovereigns, lends some support to this view.

c10.31

As regards the other point, namely, the relation of the Sālankāyanas with the Pallavas the following points may be noted. To begin with, there is a close resemblance between the names of the members of the two dynasties such as Skandavarma, Buddhavarma and Nandivarma which also occur in the Pallava copper-plates. The figure of the seated bull which frequently finds a place in the seals of the Pallava charters also figures in the Sālankāyana charters. Finally the fact that for more than six generations the Pallavas and the Sālankāyanas are never known to have come into conflict even once is a significant one, and probably indicates that the Sālankāyanas were on friendly terms with the Pallavas and continued to rule independently along with them in amity. This probably indicates that the two families were in some manner, hitherto unknown, related to one another. It is just possible that the Pallavas and the Sālankāyanas had a common ancestry as Sālankāyana is a Gotra belonging to the Bhāradvāja-clan. The Sālankāyanas appear to have exercised political power from about A.D. 340 to about A.D. 480, when the rise of Vishnukundins, and the ascendency of the Vākāṭakas put an end to the political power of these people who are no more heard of in South Indian history.

c10.32

*The Vishnukundins, circa A.D. 450 to 550.*—The origin and significance of the term Vishnukundin like that of other dynastic names is buried in obscurity. The conjecture has been put forward that their name is connected with Viṇukoṇḍa in the Krishna District, which appears to have been the cradle of their power. The first Vishṇukuṇḍin king Mādhavarman I appears to have owed his throne to his marriage with a princess of the Vākāṭakas, though the Chikkula plates ¹ which mention the fact do not specify whose daughter the princess was.

c10.33

¹ *Ep. Ind.*, vol. iv, p. 193 ff.

c10.34

The only class of evidence available to us to write an account of the Vishṇukuṇḍins is the inscriptional one. About four records have been discovered. These include the Rāmatīrtham, Chikkula and Pulimboru grants all of which were discovered only in comparatively recent years. The first two of these have been critically edited in the volumes of *Epigraphia Indica*. According to these records, Mādhava I was succeeded on the throne by his son Vikramēndravarman I, then by Indrabhaṭṭārakavarman and Vikramēndravarman II. The last mentioned record takes the line still further and mentions the names of Vikramēndra, Govindavarman, and Madhavavarman II. Practically nothing is known of the first two sovereigns—Madhava I and Vikramēndravarman I. The Rāmatīrtham plates ² help us to know that Indrabhaṭṭārakavarman must have ruled at least for a period of thirty-seven years as these plates were recorded in that year. This document consists of three copper-plates from Rāmatīrtham written in Sanskrit prose, and record the fact that Indravarman granted to a certain Brahman the village of Peruvāḍaka in Plaki-Rāshṭra (l. 6). The record also mentions that Mādhavarman performed eleven horse-sacrifices, and hundreds of other sacrifices. Then after mentioning that Vikramēndra was an ornament of both the families, the Vākāṭakas and the Vishṇukuṇḍins, the record states the important fact that Indravarman encountered ‘ in hundred-thousands of battles numerous four-tusked elephants ’ (l. 5) a probable allusion to the fact that this king spent the major part of his reign in fighting with his enemies.³

c10.35

² *Ibid.*

c10.36

³ According to Prof. Jouveau-Dubreuil there was a coalition of kings who attacked this sovereign which probably included Harisēna, the Vākāṭaka. Cf. *Ancient History of Deccan*, p. 91.

c10.37

The last of the Vishṇukuṇḍins, known as Mādhava II, is credited with the achievement of having crossed the Godavari evidently with a view to extend his dominions. Unfortunately the Western Chālukyas under Pulakēsin had grown powerful in this reign, and the advance of the Vishṇukuṇḍin power was not only stopped but their dominion appears to have been annexed to that of the Chālukyas.

c10.38

According to M. Jouveau-Dubreuil the rock-cut monuments of Undavalli, Sittanagaram, Bezwada, and Mogulrazapuram were the work of the Vishṇukuṇḍins.¹ There is, however, considerable difference of opinion on this matter.

c10.39

¹ Pallavas, p. 33.

c10.40

Before concluding the account of the Vishṇukuṇḍins, their relationship with the Pallava dynasty may be alluded to. At present this theory of the Pallava-Vishṇukuṇḍin relationship rests almost entirely on the mere resemblance of names of the two dynasties and is open to suspicion. Dr. Jouveau-Dubreuil noticing for the first time the resemblance of the names of the Vishṇukuṇḍin king Vikramēndra and Mahēndravikrama, the Pallava king, was led to postulate an unrecorded marriage relation between the daughter of Vikramēndra I and Simhavishṇuvarman whose son through this Vishṇukuṇḍin alliance was named according to the usual Hindu custom after the name of the grandfather on the mother's side as Mahēndravikrama.² According to the same authority the rock-cut temples excavated by Mahēndravarman I, in the various parts of the Tamil country, coupled with the mention of the name of the king Mahēndravikrama in the Trichinopoly cave inscription lend considerable support to this relationship of Vishṇukuṇḍins and the Pallavas. But at present this theory rests purely on the resemblance of names and is unsupported by any piece of positive evidence, literary or other, discovered so far. In none of the published inscriptions is it so much as alluded to that Simhavishnu, the father of Mahendravarman and the founder of the line of the great Pallavas of Kanchi, entered into a matrimonial alliance with the Vishnukundins; nor is the mere resemblance of the names¹ alone sufficient for postulating such a relationship as this. Nor is the resemblance between Vikramendra and Mahendravikrama quite so close. Finally there is no clear evidence that the style of Mahendravarman cave temples were borrowed from Vishnukundin examples on the banks of the Krishna. The origin of the Undavalli caves and the actual kings who excavated them cannot be considered as finally settled, and not until this is done is it possible to assert that the art of Mahendravarman was derived from it. Mr. Sewell thought that these caves were the work of the Chalukyas.² Mr. Krishna Sastriyar was struck with their resemblance with the caves of Orissa and would take them to the Andhra period.³ The genealogy of the Vishnukundins so far known may be represented as follows:—

c10.41

² This is far too fanciful to build such a theory on. Mahēndravikrama means possessed of the valour of Mahēndra. Vikramēndra means an Indra in valour. They may amount to the same in point of sense ultimately; but they are different names and differently formed. The two terms are not without substantial difference of meaning to the Sanskritist. Ed.

Linked texts (1)

Kanchipuram