The Aravidu Dynasty of Vijayanagara, Vol. I v1.c23: Chapter XVII. The Nayakship of Madura

The Aravidu Dynasty of Vijayanagara, Vol. I v1.c23

Language: English

Chapter XVII. The Nayakship of Madura

v1.c23.1

SUMMARY.—1. Behaviour of Virappa Nayaka towards Venkata II.—2. Virappa's death. 3. Short reign of Visvappa Nayaka.—4 Accession of Krishnappa Nayaka II. Death of Ariyanatha Mudaliyar.—5. Krishnappa's piety. His war with Travancore and relations with the Pandyas.—6. His rebellion against Vijayanagara.—7. Death of Krishnappa Nayaka II. Short reign of Kasturi Rangappa Nayaka.—8. Accesion of Muttu Krishnappa Nayaka. His action in the Fishery Coast.—9 Establishment of the Dynasty of the Setupatis at Ramnad.—10. The reign of Tirumalai Udaiyan Setupati.—11. Friendly relations between Muttu Krishnappa and Venkata II.—12. His successor Muttu Virappa Nayaka.—13. War between Madura and Vijayanagara,—14. War between Madura and Tanjore.

v1.c23.2

CONTEMPORARY SOURCES.—1. Hindu inscriptions and grants.—2. *Pandyan Chronicle*, *Supplementary MSS.*, *Mrtyunjaya MSS.*, *History of the Karnataka Governors*, *Chronicle of the Acts of the Setupatis*.—3. Jesuit letters.—4. *Moncoes do Reino* (Pangim Archives).—5. Du Jarric.—6. Anquetil du Perron.—7. *Chikkadevaraya Vamsavali*.

v1.c23.3

THE southern throne was still in possession of the grandson of Visvanatha, Virappa Nayaka. After the defeat sustained by his forces in the battle of Vallaprakara at the hands of Venkata, while Viceroy of the Tamil country ¹, Virappa rendered unwilling submission to the Emperor of Vijayanagara, as several inscriptions of the first years of Venkata's reign prove. In 1586, Virappa requested and obtained from Venkata the Dalavay Agraharam plates, by which the village Ganga Varappatti with other villages around were given to a number of Brahmans. The plates say that Virappa was then ‘living gloriously’ ². An inscription of 1588 of Venkata himself at Pirammalai, Tiruppattur, Ramnad, shows that his sovereignty was at that time acknowledged in the Madura country ¹. Another inscription of the same year, at Erode, records a grant of Virappa, as Venkata's subordinate ². In 1590 Venkata, while at Kumbakonam, granted some villages in the Tinnevelly district to a Vaishnava shrine under the management of a certain Krishna Das ³; this also shows that his jurisdiction over the Madura country was unquestioned. Then in 1592 the Emperor made another grant to a temple at Tirukkurungudi, also in the Tinnevelly district ⁴. But suddenly such acknowledgements of Venkata's suzerainty over the South are no more found. What is the cause of this interruption?

v1.c23.4

¹ Cf. Ch. XIII, No. 4.

v1.c23.5

² *Ep. Ind.*, XII, p. 187, vv. 41-66 and 67-79.

v1.c23.6

¹ Sewell, I, p. 297; Rangacharya, II, p. 1189, 223.

v1.c23.7

² 13 of 1891.

v1.c23.8

³ Sewell, II, p. 3.

v1.c23.9

⁴ Ibid., I, p. 315.

v1.c23.10

Prof. Sathyanatha Aiyar says that there is no doubt about Virappa's loyalty to Venkata ⁵. But we are sure that on this occasion the former's rebellion, recorded in the *Chikkadevaraya Vamsavali*, took place. Anquetil du Perron says that before the year 1595, the Madura Nayaka refused to pay due homage to the Emperor of Vijayanagara on the ground that the latter had murdered his legitimate sovereign ⁶. This cannot be understood to refer to Virappa's first rebellion which took place about 1583. For then Venkata was merely Viceroy of the Tamil country; moreover both sources, the French traveller and the Hindu poem, state that at the time of this rebellion of the Madura Nayaka, Venkata was already seated on the jewelled throne of Vijayanagara.

v1.c23.11

⁵ Sathyanatha Aiyar, *History of the Nayaks*, p. 81.

v1.c23.12

⁶ Anquetil du Perron, l. c., p. 166. This rebellion or the following one of Krishnappa II is mentioned in the *Litterae Annuae* of the Province of Malabar, 1606-1607, Ap. C, No. XXVI.

v1.c23.13

Again, Anquetil du Perron informs us that the first manifestation of this rebellion was the refusal to pay the tribute ⁷. At once "Venkatapati Raya declared war against Virappa Nayaka of Madura", says the *Chikkadevaraya Vamsavali*, "and laid siege to the fort of Madura with a large army" ⁸. The subseqent details given by this poem are not at all trustworthy ¹. But Anquetil du Perron records the forcible submission of the Nayak before 1595 ², which means a second defeat of Virappa by the imperial army.

v1.c23.14

⁷ Ibid.

v1.c23.15

⁸ S. Krishnaswami Aiyangar, *Sources*, p. 302-3.

v1.c23.16

¹ Accorrding to this poem, "Virappa Nayaka managed to bribe the several generals of the Emperor's army. Tirumala Raya, the Emperor's nephew, was also one of those who accepted the bribe and, without continuing the siege of Madura, retired to the capital of his own viceroyalty to Seringapatam". Dr. S. Krishnaswami Aiyangar, *Sources*, p. 19 and p. 248, note; and Mr. Richards, *Salem Gazetteer*, p. 67, admit this account without further discussion. Cf. Sathyanatha Aiyar, *History of the Nayaks*, p. 17; p. 81, note 17, and p. 99, note 9, where Dr. Krishnaswami gives a similar account of the course of events. This account is quite inconsistent with the information given by Anqutil du Perron, *viz.* the submission of the Nayak, confirmed by the inscriptions of his successor Krishnappa II, early in 1595. Neither can we believe that Prince Tirumala was one of the generals of the army; for he would have been too young then for such a task. The whole passage seems to be a poet's concoction for justifying Raja Wodeyar's capture of Seringapatam. "Hearing of these events", continues the poem, "the Mysore chief Raja Wodeyar resolved to drive the traitor Tirumala Raya from his Viceroyalty". *l. c.* Now the poet speaks of this capture of Seringapatam as immediately following Tirumala's supposed treason in Madura. Fourteen years separate these two events.

v1.c23.17

² Anquetil du Perron, *l. c.*

v1.c23.18

2. In the beginning of September of the same year, 1595 Virappa Nayaka died after a reign of 22 years and several months ³. His last known inscription, dated 1594, records the building of the temple of Kadirinaga Perumal and of a tank by his agent ⁴. During his reign a *mandapa* was constructed in the Sundaresvara temple at Madura in 1582 ⁵; and he is said to have "levied tribute from every country" ⁶. His right-hand man in Government affairs, according to the Pudukkottai plates of Srivallabha and Varatungarama Pandya, was Tirumalairaja ⁷. This chief's grandfather was Rama Nayaka, and his father Timma Nayaka. He was the chief of Chintalapalli, and a great devotee of the god Sri Ranganatha of Srirangam; he was brave in war, generous, just and courteous ⁸. We have seen him opposing Venkata's army at Vallaprakara. His activity in the government of Madura was probably due to the old age of Ariyanatha Mudaliyar.

v1.c23.19

³ Mrtyunjaya MSS., Taylor, *O.H.MSS.*, II, p. 119. Cf. Sathyanatha Aiyar, *History of the Nayaks*, p. 83.

v1.c23.20

⁴ 470 of 1907.

v1.c23.21

⁵ 35 of 1908.

v1.c23.22

⁶ 470 of 1907.

v1.c23.23

⁷ *T.A.S.*, I, p. 61-2.

v1.c23.24

⁸ Ibid., p. 84, vv. 61-67.

v1.c23.25

Virappa continued his predecessor's policy with the Pandyas. About 1583, his officer Tirumalairaja obtained from Srivallabha and Varatungarama Pandya the grant of the village of Pudukkottai for a number of Brahmans ¹. The whole text of the grant shows a most intimate friendship between the Madura Nayak and the representatives of the old rulers of the Pandya country.

v1.c23.26

¹ Ibid., p. 84, vv. 68-77.

v1.c23.27

3. Periya Virappa Nayaka "had three sons, who were named respecively Visvappa Naicher, Kumara Krishnappa Naicher, and Kasturi Rangappa Naicher. Among these, Visvappa Naicher was crowned" ². Thus does the *History of the Karnataka Governors* announce the succession to the throne of Madura after the death of Virappa Nayaka. We can no longer entertain any doubt about the existence of this intermediate king between Virappa and Krishnappa II. The *Supplementary MSS.* also mention Visiappa or Visvappa as having ruled after the death of his father, and as having been succeeded by his younger brother, Kumara Krishnappa ³. His statue under the name of Visvama Nayaka may also be seen, though misplaced, among the statues of the Nayaks, in the famous Tirumala's *Pudu Mandapa* at Madura ⁴. The aforesaid *History* states that 'his brother Kumara Krishnappa Naicher was second to him in power'. This does not mean that both brothers were Kings, as Mr. Rangachari assumes ⁵. Only one, Visvappa, is said to have been crowned; while Krishnappa was, during the life of his brother, only *Chinna Dorai*, 'associated in the government'.

v1.c23.28

² Taylor, *O. H. MSS.*, II, p. 25.

v1.c23.29

³ Ibid., I, p. 205. In one of *Mrtyunjaya MSS.*, Ibid., II, p. 260, Visvappa is called the younger brother of Krishnappa II.

v1.c23.30

⁴ The inscription over the fourth of these statues is damaged and illegible; but it cannot be other than the name of Visvanatha, Periya Krishnappa's brother. Cf. Heras, *The Statues of the Nayaks of Madura*, Q. J. M. S., XV, p. 212.

v1.c23.31

⁵ Rangachari, *History of the Naik Kingdom*, *Ind. Ant*, XLV, p. 81.

v1.c23.32

Visvappa Nayaka's reign must have been short. The Tamil chronicles mentioned above do not give any date; but since Krishnappa is mentioned in the future inscriptions we may conclude that Visvappa's reign had ended. In an inscription of 1696 Kumara Krishnappa appears as ruling over Madura ¹; and in a copper-plate grant of 1597 the same Kumara Krishnappa is styled 'the Pandya King' ².

v1.c23.33

¹ 404 of 1907.

v1.c23.34

² Sewell, II, p. 19.

v1.c23.35

4. "After this", says the *History of the Karnataka Governors*, "the crown devolved on Kumara Krishnappa Naicher, and Kasturi Rangappa Naicher was his second in power" ³. Kasturi was then only 'associated in the Government.' The most notable event that occurred during the reign of Krishnappa II was the death of his minister, Ariyanatha Mudaliyar. While Krishnappa was ruling, Ariyanatha is said, in the *Mrtyunjaya MSS.*, to have 'delivered up both seal-rings to his lord and obtained the world of Siva (*i. e.* died)' ⁴. The date given by this chronicle corresponds to April 19th, 1588, which is clearly wrong, as the same MSS. place his demise in the reign of Kumara Krishnappa II. Prof. Sathyanatha Aiyar gives the year 1600 as an approximate date for Ariyanatha's end ⁵.

v1.c23.36

³ Taylor, *O. H. MSS.*, II, p. 25. Kumara Krishnappa's statue is placed in Tirumala's choultrie before the one of Visvappa, under the name of Lingama Nayaka, which seems to be another name of Kumara Krishnappa. Cf. Nelson, p. 107.

v1.c23.37

⁴ Ibid., p. 119.

v1.c23.38

⁵ Sathyanatha Aiyar, *History of the Nayaks*, p. 86.

v1.c23.39

We read in the *Mrtyunjaya MSS.* that Ariyanatha Mudaliyar "held the united offices of minister and generalissimo during four reigns, or thirty-eight years and nine months" ⁶. I feel sure that the power and efficiency of Ariyanatha in the Government of Madura have been hitherto exaggerated. Mr. Rangachari describes him as the real sovereign of the southern country ⁷. Such a mistake comes probably from Ariyanatha's account in the *Mrtyunjaya MSS.* That document is a panegyric on this minister very far from the truth, as we have already remarked a little above. The story of his appointment as Emperor of Vijayanagara by the dying sovereign Rama Raya on the battlefield of Raksas-Tagdi, and of the subsequent undertakings of Ariyanatha, is evidently false. Such a document is not at all trustworthy when praising its hero, specially as there is absolutely no evidence of his dominating influence. Moreover the silence of the inscriptions about him, specially in the reign of Virappa Nayaka (who is described by Mr. Rangachari as a puppet in the minister's hands) is worth considering while writing the history of Madura. I am however far from denying the general influence of Ariyanatha throughout the Pandya country as the prime minister of four successive Nayaks. His architectonic works are still an enduring proof of his efficiency in his post. The Mrtyunjaya MSS., say that he ‘constructed thousand-pillared choultries in Madura, Tinnevelly and other places’¹. His equestrian statue at the entrance of the thousand-pillared mandapa of the famous temple at Madura is the most evident proof of Ariyanatha's power, under the first Nayak of Madura.

v1.c23.40

⁶ Taylor, *o. c.*, II, p. 119.

v1.c23.41

⁷ Rangachari, *o. c.*, *Ind. Ant.*, XLV, p. 91.

v1.c23.42

¹ Taylor, o.c., II, p. 111.

v1.c23.43

5. Krishnappa Nayaka II is said, in the Vellangudi plates of Venkata II, to have been a very pious monarch: “He gave to the god Rangapati a *kavacha* studded with precious stones, a similarly bejewelled *ushnisha*, yellow silk garments, neck-laces, crown, earrings, waist-zones, and presented him further with villages and gardens, and made arrangements for the celebration of car festivals and the daily services. He set up a number of lights in the presence of the god Sundara Nayaka; made arrangements for bathing the image of the god in milk and for the car festival...He performed the ceremony of weighing himself against gold...he founded *agraharas* for Brahmans and protected them; he paid the Brahmans enough money to enable them thereby to redeem their lands situated in the countries of other kings, which were mortgaged for the purposes of paying taxes”².

v1.c23.44

² *Ep. Ind.*, XVI, p. 320.

v1.c23.45

Fr. Pimenta, who knew him personally, gives another proof of his piety. "Hee daily sits in judgment," says he, "a Bramene standing by, which ever and anone whinet out the name of the Idoll Aranganassa (Ranganatha); and when one is weary another succeedeth and continueth that exclamation, though hee sits six houres " 1.

v1.c23.46

In the same Vellangudi plates, and again in the Padmaneri grant of Venkata II, he is called 'the conqueror or taker of the army of Panchar Tiruvadi' 2. Fr. Pimenta, the Jesuit Visitor who, in the year 1596, passed through Travancore, relates that the king of Travancore had "certified to us that the king of Madura was coming against him with seventy thousand armed men and many elephants " 3. Three years later, in 1599, when the Archbishop of Goa, Frey Aleixo de Menczes, was in Malabar, he could not meet the king of Travancore, who "was at the frontier of his kingdom, defending it against the attacks of the Nayque of Madura (the Madura Nayak)" 4. The same account states a little later that this war was made towards the South of the Travancore kingdom 5. We do not know the result of this war, which was probably due to the refusal of the Travancore king to pay the tribute; but we deduce that the Madura Nayak was victorious, from the fact that Fr. Barradas, writing from Cochin on December 12th, 1616, says that the king of Travancore is under the Nayak of Madura 6.

v1.c23.47

The relations between the Pandyas and the ruling family of Madura continued most friendly. The Pandya prince Abhirama Ativirarama, had a chief named Ayyakarappa, son of Peddappa and grandson of Nagama Nayaka, who bore the title of Kanchipuradhisa, being probably a nephew of Visvanatha Nayaka. At his request the aforesaid Pandya granted two villages, Muvaraṅkondram and Sattaleri, naming them Peddappanayaksamudram, to sixty-nine Brahmans, on October 2nd, 1593 ¹. Some years later the same Pandya, at the request of Ramakrishnappa Nayaka who was ‘sitting on the lion throne of Vallabha Narendra,’ granted the village of Nadikkudi, under the name of Ativiraramapura, to a number of Brahmans ². Ativirarama acknowledged the sovereignty of Venkata II, as an inscription of the year 1595, recording a grant of a piece of land to three private persons, proves ³.

v1.c23.48

¹ From Fr. N. Pimenta to Fr. C. Aquaviva, Purchas, X, p. 219.

v1.c23.49

² Vellangudi plates of Venkata II, Ep. Ind., XVI, p. 320; Padmaneri grant of Venkata II, Ibid., p. 227, vv. 67-77.

v1.c23.50

³ From Fr. N. Pimenta to Fr. C. Aquaviva, Purchas, X, p. 206. Cf. Du Jarric, I, p. 627.

v1.c23.51

⁴ Gouvea, Jornada do Arcebispo de Goa, p. 37.

v1.c23.52

⁵ Ibid., p. 95 back.

v1.c23.53

⁶ Sewell, p. 230.

v1.c23.54

¹ *Catalogue of Copper-Plate Grants in the Government Museum, Madras*, p. 33.

v1.c23.55

² Dalavay Agraharam plates of Ativirarama Pandya, *T. A. S.*, I, p. 134; Sewell, II, p. 31.

v1.c23.56

³ 615 of 1915. The above-mentioned account of the travels of Archbishop Menezes through Malabar gives some interesting details about this Pandya King and his dealings with the Christians. He is called by Fr. Gouvea Punhati Perumal, but must be identified with Ativirarama, the then ruling Pandya, because of the following words of the same author: “Oqual Rey foy antigamente senhor do Pande (Pandya), mas co guerras que teue com o Naique de Manduree, veyo a estas serras, & na falda dellas comprou muitas serras (terras?) ao Rey de Tecacutes (?) aonde agora mora, posto que inda lhe obedecem algus pouos no Pande”. It happened at this time that a tribe called of the *Malleas*, who were under his dominion, wished to become Christians. They requested an *olla* from the Pandya King, securing them from molestation on account of their conversion. The *olla* was duly obtained through the influence of an old Christian who ‘was the chairman of his council’. This *olla* caused great excitement among the courtiers and Brahmans of the Pandya sovereign. They told him that the neighbouring kings were ready to wage war with him, if the *olla* were not cancelled; and the king of Turugure (a palaiyakaran) would also cause damage to the Pandya King’s territory, by diverting the course of a river that was the source of much fertility to it. The mother of the Pandya sovereign was the first to try this *olla* revoked; but the King always replied that ‘he would never revoke

v1.c23.57

6. In the beginning of his reign Krishnappa II appears as faithful feudatory of Venkata II. In 1597 Venkatapati, at the request of Krishnappa Nayaka, who is styled ‘King Krishna, the Pandya King’, issued a grant of the two villages Marudangudi and Karupuram in the Madura district to several Vaishnava Brahmans ¹. In 1598 Krishnappa obtained from Venkata, who is acknowledged the paramount sovereign and original donor, the village of Padmaneri, surnamed Tirumalambapuram, for a number of Brahmans, most of whom were well versed in the Vedas ². In this grant of Venkata, Kumara Krishnappa is called 'Lord of the southern Ocean' ³. In the same year the Emperor, again at the request of Krishnappa, granted as an agrahara to a large number of Brahmans and Brahman ladies, the village of Vellangudi with five others around it ⁴. But in the year 1599 Krishnappa II again withheld the payment of tribute; and Venkata himself had to march against him. "Hee (Venkata)", says Fr Pimenta, "was now embroiled in warre with the Naichus of Madure" ⁵.

v1.c23.58

¹ Sewell, II, p. 19; Rangacharya, II, p. 1002, 91.

v1.c23.59

² Ep. Ind., XVI, p. 288-9, and p. 297, vv. 45-57.

v1.c23.60

³ Ibid., p. 297, vv. 67-77.

v1.c23.61

⁴ Ibid., p. 320-1, and p. 302.

v1.c23.62

⁵ From Fr. N. Pimenta, to Fr. C. Aquaviva, Purchas, X, p. 210.

v1.c23.63

Fr. Du Jarric gives some more information about this war. From his narrative, it is certain that Venkata himself took the supreme command of his army against the Nayak of Madura. Probably one of his generals was Matta Ananta, who is said in the Sidhout inscription of 1605 to have 'led the campaign against the king of Madura' ⁶. Krishnappa, seeing himself unable to fight against the imperial army, agreed to an un-

v1.c23.64

⁶ M. E. R., 1916, para 75. S. Krishnaswami Aiyangar, Sources, p. 248-9, translates this passage as follows: "He protected the flying armies of the Madura chief from destruction." This version is inconsistent with the loyalty of this chief.

v1.c23.65

what he had once promised to Archbishop Menezes ⁷. As a matter of fact, some subjects of the Pandya King, called Mouros (Muhammadans) by Gouvea, proceeded to the court of the king of the Tecankutes (sic), and finally succeeded in inducing this chief to threaten Punhati Perumal. A letter of the former against Perumal is mentioned by Gouvea, but no action between them is recorded. Most likely the Pandya sovereign apologized, and the false accusations of his subjects were unmasked. Gouvea relates that the Christian church of the Malleas was finally completed in spite of great difficulties. Gouvea, Iornada do Arcebispo de Goa, p. 82 back.

v1.c23.66

conditional submission to Venkata. He was on this occasion made to pay something more than the usual annual tribute, *viz.* twelve millions of gold coins; for to the ordinary tribute was added a war indemnity ¹.

v1.c23.67

¹ Du Jarric, I, p. 685-6.

v1.c23.68

7. After a short reign, Krishnappa Nayaka II died between May and June of 1601, according to the *Mrityunjaya MSS.* ². Muhammad Sharif Hanafi, who was at this time travelling through southern India, informs us that a few days after his arrival at Madura, "the ruler died and went to the lowest hell. This chief," he continues, "had 700 wives, and they all threw themselves at the same time into the fire" ³. An inscription of 1600 at Sermadevi seems to be the last one of his reign; it mentions Murti Settiyar, an agent of Krishnappa Nayaka ⁴. He had been seriously ill in the beginning of his reign, about the end of 1597. After his recovery he retired to a country house, in a delightful place far from the crowds of the city, ostensibly for the sake of health ⁵. But Fr. Pimenta, who passed through Madura a little after Krishnappa's retirement, gives another reason: "The Naichus of Madure is very superstitious, and resigned his Palace to his Idol Chichanada upon the authority of a Priest who said the Idol by night had bidden him tell the King that he or I must dwell in this house" ⁶.

v1.c23.69

² Taylor, *O. H. MSS.*, II, p. 119: Cf. Sathyanatha Aiyar, o. c., p. 87.

v1.c23.70

³ *Majalisu-s Salatin*, Elliot, VII, p. 139. The author does not give the date of his visit to Madura. Anyhow we know that the work was compiled in his old age in 1628. Now in his journey to Madura he was accompanied by his father. Hence he could not be then more than 35 years of age. Now supposing that he was about 60 when his book was compiled, he was about 33 when Krishnappa Nayaka II died. We therefore conclude that this Krishnappa Nayaka was the ruler referred to by Sharif Hanafi.

v1.c23.71

⁴ 717 of 1916.

v1.c23.72

⁵ Du Jarric, I, p. 649.

v1.c23.73

⁶ From Fr. N. Pimenta to Fr. C. Aquaviva, Purchas, X, p. 219.

v1.c23.74

Krishnappa II had a son; but according to the *Pandyan Chronicle* he had died before his father ⁷. There was also a son of the eldest brother, Visvappa ¹; but since he was a child ², or perhaps, a young man, his uncle ‘Kasturi Rangappa Naicher was crowned’ ³. Thus does the *History of the Karnataka Governors* announce the successor to the throne of Madura after the death of Krishnappa II. Both the *Pandyan Chronicle* ⁴ and the *Supplementary MSS.*, support this ⁵; and no confirmation was needed from Kasturi’s statue, which stands in Tirumala’s choultrie at Madura immediately before the one of Mutu Krishnappa.

v1.c23.75

⁷ Taylor, o. c., I, p. 38.

v1.c23.76

¹ Mrtyunjaya MSS., Taylor, o.c., II, p. 260; Kuniyur plates of Venkata III, *Ep. Ind.*, III, p. 239. The *Pandyan Chronicle* does not state whose son he was. The *History of the Karnataka Governors*, Taylor, o.c., II, p. 25, and the *Supplementary MSS.*, Ibid., I, p. 206, make him son of Krishnappa Nayaka II. The first opinion seems however the most founded.

v1.c23.77

² *Supplementary MSS.*, Taylor, o.c., I, p. 206; *History of the Karnataka Governors*, Ibid., II, p. 25.

v1.c23.78

³ *History of the Karnataka Governors*, l. c.

v1.c23.79

⁴ Taylor, o. c., I, p. 38.

v1.c23.80

⁵ Ibid., p. 206.

v1.c23.81

We cannot say how long Kasturi’s reign lasted. Both the *Supplementary MSS.*, ⁶ and the *History of the Karnataka Governors* ⁷ affirm that he reigned seven years; but then there would be no room for Mutu Krishnappa, his nephew, who died in 1608. Hence we prefer to admit the authority of the *Pandyan Chronicle*, which also gives more details about his end. According to it “Kasturi Rangappa, after having been crowned, died eight days afterwards...on the opposite bank (of the river Vygai), where he was residing” ⁸.

v1.c23.82

⁶ Ibid.

v1.c23.83

⁷ Ibid., II, p. 25.

v1.c23.84

⁸ Ibid., I, p. 38.

v1.c23.85

8. After Kasturi’s death Mutu Krishnappa Nayaka, son of Visvappa Nayaka, ascended the Pandya throne ⁹. One of the first things intended by the new King of Madura in 1603-4 was to oppress with new taxes the Paravas of the Fishery Coast. During the reign of Krishnappa Nayaka II these poor Christians had been tyranically treated by two Palaiyakarans of the neighbourhood. One is styled in the Jesuit sources ‘King of Tuticorin’. The Paravas of the neighbourhood also used to pay him an annual tribute. But when this chief demanded from the poor folk of Tuticorin a heavier sum, the latter refused to pay it. The petty king could not brook such a flagrant breach of obedience. He marched his army against Tuticorin, entered it by surprise, sacked the whole town, robbed the College of the Jesuits and destroyed the altars and images of their Church. The Father who was then in the College, and whose name is not given, was captured by the soldiers of the so-called king and carried to their capital, where he was kept in captivity till a ransom of four thousand cruzados was paid by the Paravas. Now these much-vexed people demanded from the Palaiyakaran some sort of amends for the injuries done both to them and to the Catholic Church. But the chief was rather inclined not to trouble himself as far as this satisfaction was concerned. On seeing this the Paravas of Tuticorin abandoned their city, and proceeded in a body to the little island called ‘of the Kings,’ a league from the sea-shore, where they settled. Later on fortifications were built round the island, by the license of the Viceroy Ayres de Saldanha¹. Naturally the escape of the Paravas from the continent was not a welcome news to the covetous Nayak of Madura. But another event, that followed soon after still more infuriated the Madura sovereign.

v1.c23.86

⁹ *Pandyan Chronicle*, Ibid., *History of the Karnataka Governors*, Ibid., II, p. 25; *Supplementary MSS.*, Ibid., I, p. 206.

v1.c23.87

¹ Guerreiro, *Relacam Annal...no ano de 606. & 607*, p. 607. Cf. Besse, *La Mission du Madure*, p. 409-10.

v1.c23.88

The Palaiyakaran of Vigiabadi (Vijayapati), named Ariya Perumal, was likewise heavily oppressing the Paravas that inhabited the tract between Cape Comorin and Manapadu. Once he besieged the village of Obari and took all its inhabitants prisoners to his capital. The Paravas could not stand such a humiliation. They secretly resolved to attack Vijayapati by night, in order to take revenge on the extortions of their tyrants. Early in October, 1602, the chiefs and promoters of the expedition, with 300 young men well equipped, (who were not yet cognizant of the purpose of the enterprise), embarked at Manapadu on six boats. A tremendous storm dispersed the boats before they reached their destination, and at the break of day only two of them had arrived at the shores of Vijayapati. The garrison of the town was sleeping. Ariya Perumal himself and his nobles, who had held a festivity till the small hours in the morning, were also in a sound sleep. The brave Paravas crossed the ditch and entered the town without opposition and pitilessly slew all they came accross. On hearing of the attack Ariya Perumal left his palace and hid himself in one of the houses of the town. There he was finally found. It seems he begged to be brought alive as a prisoner to the presence of the missionary at Manapadu; but his request was not granted, and he was barbarously slain. His head was cut off and brought to Manapadu as a glorious trophy of that campaign. The Jesuit letter which affords this information states that not even one of the Parava heroes was wounded on that occasion¹.

v1.c23.89

¹ Besse, o. c., 404-7.

v1.c23.90

Muttu Krishnappa Nayaka could not leave such a crime unpunished. An extraordinary heavy tribute of 200,000 cruzados was exacted from the poor Paravas the same year. To obtain it he despatched a body of 5,000 infantry with a number of cavalry and elephantry, under a captain. This detachment went straight to Tuticorin, which had been abandoned some months before. The captain then sent for one of the Jesuits who were in the island called of the kings. The Jesuit actually came, but replied that the Paravas could not pay such a large sum of money. On hearing this the captain gave orders that one of the neighbouring villages should be attacked. They did so, but at the same time the Portuguese captain of the island of Manar, who was then in the island of the kings with two galliots full of soldiers, proceeded with them to the sea-shore of Tuticorin and began an attack on the Hindu temple built near the city. All the priests and devotees of that shrine then ran to the Telugu captain begging for mercy, lest their temple should be destroyed. Shortly after pourparleurs were opened between the Jesuit missionery and the captain of the Nayak, which ended in the latter's retreat to Madura with his soldiers².

v1.c23.91

² Ibid., p. 407-8. The Jesuit letters mentioned two other

v1.c23.92

These facts show how strange was the situation of these poor folks of the Fishery Coast. Oppressed with taxes and depredations by their natural lords, they had to be protected by a foreign people, whose sovereign in Europe took great interest in their welfare. When that monarch was informed of this new exaction, he wrote to his Viceroy as follows: "Manoel de Cunha, father of the Christians of the Fishery Coast, I recommend you to help those Christians as much as possible, and to employ all possible means to hinder the said Naique from making such extortions any more" 1.

v1.c23.93

This information, referring to the control of the Nayak of Madura over the Fishery Coast, is confirmed both by the fact that Muttu Krishnappa's son, Muttu Virappa, made a gift of land to the Bhagavati temple at Cape Comorin in 1606 2, and by Fr.A. Laerzio's letter of November 20th, 1609, describing the Paravas as tributaries of the Madura Nayak and the latter as the ally of the Portuguese 3.

v1.c23.94

9. Muttu Krishnappa is said to have been the founder of the Setupatis of Ramnad in the Marava country. According to the *Pandyamandala Cholamandala Tondamandala Rajakal* the Marava people were originally a colony of fishermen from Ceylon, who settled at Rameswaram as well as on the opposite coast 4. In the early times, when the Chakravartins flourished, seven persons from among the inhabitants of the Ramnad coast were

v1.c23.95

irruptions of the Badagas into the Fishery Coast, in 1603 and 1604. Cf. Besse, o. c., p. 409-10 and 411. A new vexation of Muttu Krishnappa Nayaka is recorded in the Jesuit letters of 1607, on the occasion of the shipwreck of a Portuguese boat near the island of the kings. Cf. Guerreiro, o. c., p. 109-10; Besse, o. c., p. 412-5.

v1.c23.96

¹ From King Phillip III to the Viceroy Martim Affonso de Castro, Lisbon, February 26th, 1605, Ap. B, No. VIII.

v1.c23.97

² Cf. Nagam Aiya, *The Travancore State*, I, p. 302.

v1.c23.98

³ Bertrand, *La Mission du Madure*, II, p. 2. Cf. Guerreiro, o. c., p. 107-8.

v1.c23.99

⁴ Wilson, *The Mackenzie Collection*, p. 207. The poem adds that they were settled there by Rama after the conquest of Lanka, to guard the temple and protect the pilgrims; this cannot be admitted by history until proved.

v1.c23.100

appointed to be its guardians ¹. They had been under the Pandya kings; but at the time of the Muhammadan invasion they attained their independence ², and several famous princes had since ruled over the Marava nation. Udaiyan Setupati in 1434 built the outer surrounding walls of the western gopuras of the Rameswaram temple; and about 1540 Tirumalai Setupati erected the southern half of the second prakara of the same temple, finished by his son Raghunatha Tirumalai Setupati ³. Their main task was to watch over the causeway leading to Rameswaram and to protect the pilgrims. But after the conquest of the South by Visvanatha Nayaka the Setupatis had lost their old authority, and were mingled with the other palaiyakarans of the South. Muttu Krishnappa gave that house a considerable strip of land in the Marava country; and this is the reason why he is considered the founder of that dynasty. This is how it happened.

v1.c23.101

¹ Chronicle of the Acts of the Setupatis, Taylor, O. H. MSS., II, Ap., p. 49.

v1.c23.102

² Cf. Ch. VI, No. 3.

v1.c23.103

³ Burgess, p. 57. Cf. Sewell, II, p. 227.

v1.c23.104

The History of the Karnataka Governors relates that the chief guru of Muttu Krishnappa, who was invested with the title of Kartarkal or lord, went once on a pilgrimage to Rameswaram. Udiyan Sethopathi (Udaiyan Setupati), a descendant of the old Setupatis ⁴, whose task was to protect the pilgrims going to Rameswaram, was then living in the village of Pugalur. "He escorted the chief guru safely to Ramiseram (Rameswaram), without allowing him to suffer any insult or molestation on the way; and in like manner he also safely conducted him back again to Madura. Being greatly pleased with this attention, the chief guru introduced him as a skilful guide and safeguard on the road to Sethu". Consequently the chief was then presented by the Nayak with a number of villages, along with an honorary robe and various ornaments. On returning to Pugalur he built a fort there; and assembling some forces, subdued all the turbulent country around and reduced them to his own sovereignty. He collected a considerable sum of money from taxes levied upon the newly-subdued people, and brought it over to the Madura Nayak. Muttu Krishnappa was greatly pleased with such activity, and accordingly "gave him an unrestricted grant to subdue additional people; instructed him to see to the forest-lands, which yielded no revenue, that these be cleared and cultivated; and wrote letters to the people commanding their submission to his Viceroy." Udaiyan Sethupati went back to his country, and without delay took possession of a greater tract of land, and divided the revenue into two parts, of which he kept one for himself and sent the other to the Madura king. Then Muttu Krishnappa sent for him and invested him with the title of Setupati, or chief of Setu, "bestowing on him elephants and horses, with vestments and ornaments; and also gave him some banners or ensigns of dignity; and in Madura had him consecrated to his viceroyalty, by the sprinkling of the water of the Ganges"¹. This ceremony took place, according to the *Chronicle of the Acts of the Setupatis*, in A. D. 1606².

v1.c23.105

⁴ His father, or perhaps one of his relations, was one Muthuviraja Raghunatha Setupati, who in 1604 settled a dispute between two parties in the Ramnad country. 11 of 1911; Burgess, p. 62-3. Cf. Rangacharya, II, p. 1170,105.

v1.c23.106

¹ Taylor, o. c., II, p. 27-9.

v1.c23.107

² Ibid., Ap., p. 49.

v1.c23.108

10. The *History of the Karnataka Governors* tells us that "Udiyan Sethopathi built a mud fort at Ramanathapuram (Ramnad), and ruled after the fashion of a king"³. And "the other six persons, who were also guardians, were included in his government and, together with all the inhabitants, yielded their consent"⁴.

v1.c23.109

³ Ibid., p. 29.

v1.c23.110

⁴ Ibid., Ap., p. 49.

v1.c23.111

One of the first measures of the new Raja of Ramnad, as he is called in some inscriptions, was to make a gift of five villages to the temple of Ramanatha and Parvatavardhani at Rameswaram for worship and offerings, on November 20th, 1606⁵. Then in a copper-plate, dated July 8th, 1607, Dalavay Setupati Kattadeva records another gift of eight villages near Pamban to the same temple for the regular performance of the puja and of offerings ¹. Some days after, on the 17th of the same month, he gave a plot of land in the island of Rameswaram to a servant of the Ramanathaswami’s temple ². Then in the year 1607, he made a gift of lands to the people ‘of the five countries’ who served as priests and cooks in the Rameswaram temple ³. These grants prove the care of the newly-appointed Setupati for the performance of the Hindu rites on that famous spot, of which he had been nominated the guardian.

v1.c23.112

⁵ *Catalogue of Copper-Plate Grants in the Government Museum, Madras*, p. 37.

v1.c23.113

¹ Ibid., p. 37; Sewell, II, p. 50; Burgess, p. 60-8.

v1.c23.114

² Catalogue, p. 38. Cf. Burgess, p. 75-8.

v1.c23.115

³ Burgess, p. 65-6; Rangacharya, II, p. 1170, 110.

v1.c23.116

An inscription of his of the following year 1608 at Rameswaram gives the list of his titles, which will appear again in some grants of his successors. Tirumalai Udaiyan Setupati is there styled “the lord of the city of Tevai; the responsible agent for the protection of the Setu embankment; the responsible agent for the charities of Ramanathaswami, who is actively engaged in worshipping Siva; the chief of all other kings; the destroyer of the army of the Ariyaraya, who cuts into a thousand pieces and three thousand pieces those failing in the correctness of their language; who conquers all the country that he sees and never gives back a country once conquered; the punisher of Muvaraya, the lord of the valorous and the fertile country, the protector of the Brahmans studying the Vedas; who has put down the pride and prosperity of the valorous and inimical Yavana kings” ⁴.

v1.c23.117

⁴ Sewell, II, p. 6, Burgess, p. 65-66.

v1.c23.118

During his time, in 1608 according to an inscription at Rameswaram, the temple of Ramalingesvara was built ⁵; and it was at this time too that the sage Ramanatha, as other inscriptions testify, repaired the main temple at Rameswaram ⁶ and constructed the Kotitirtha mandapa in the same temple ⁷.

v1.c23.119

⁵ 102 of 1903.

v1.c23.120

⁶ Burgess, p, 59; Rangacharya, II, p. 1168, 78.

v1.c23.121

⁷ 100 of 1900. The same Ramanatha had built in 1598 the Adal-mandapa in front of the central shrine of the Ramalingesvara temple at Rameswaram. 99 of 1903.

v1.c23.122

11. The relations between Muttu Krishnappa and the Emperor seem to have been of mutual friendship and understanding. A grant of Venkata II of the year 1601, to the Bhasyakata shrine in the Madanagopal temple of Madura, proves these relations to have been such from the beginning of his reign ¹. Then an inscription of 1606 at Villapuram, outside the dominions of Madura, records a gift of a garden as a reward to Muttu Krishnappa Nayaka ². Finally a coin which probably belongs to Muttu Krishnappa, is a proof of the same. It bears on the obverse a standing figure of Vishnu with a fish the symbol of the Pandya kingdom—on his right; and on the reverse this inscription: ‘Venkatapa’ ³.

v1.c23.123

¹ 35 of 1908.

v1.c23.124

² 326 of 1917.

v1.c23.125

³ Hultzsch, *Coins of the Kings of Vijayanagara*, *Ind. Ant.*, XX, p. 308, No. 37. Cf. *Ind. Ant.*, XLV, p. 104, and Brown, *The Coins of India*, p. 64.

v1.c23.126

Moreover in September, 1604, Venkata II received in audience a special envoy of the Nayak of Madura, as a Jesuit letter of the year 1906 tells us ⁴. And in 1608, the last year of Muttu Krishnappa's reign, another of his embassies reached Venkata's court. Fr. Coutinho, who was himself present at the public audience, gives in one of his letters a detailed account of the ceremony: “A very few days ago”, he wrote on October 11th, 1608, “the Naiques of Tangior and Madura sent their tribute consisting of 500 thousand *cruzados* and many sorts of presents to the King. In order to receive these (things), (the King) dressed himself as on the days of great celebration, with many ornaments of gold and precious stones. The one he bore on his chest was valued at a hundred thousand *cruzados*. We were present at this ceremony by a special privilege and permission of the King” ⁵.

v1.c23.127

⁴ *Litterae Annuae* of the Province of Malabar, 1604-1606, Ap. C, No XII.

v1.c23.128

⁵ From Fr. B. Coutinho to Fr. C. Aquaviva, Vellore, October 11th, 1608. Ap. C, No. XXIII. It may be seen from this how groundless is the statement of Sewell, p. 220: “The Nayaks of Madura and Tanjore became independent in 1602.”

v1.c23.129

XV. Muttu Krishnappa Nayaka and Muttu Virappa Nayaka. Pudu Mandapa, Malura.

v1.c23.130

12. Muttu Krishnappa must have died either at the end of this year or in the beginning of the following year 1609; for there is an inscription of the first half of this year recording a gift of money to celebrate certain festivals for the merit of Muttu Virappa Nayaka, his successor 1. This was the eldest of the three sons of Muttu Krishnappa; the other two, according to the *History of the Karnataka Governors*, were named Tirumali Naicker (who was destined to become famous in the history of southern India) and Kumara Muttu-Naicher 2. Of these three Muttu Virappa succeeded his father 3.

v1.c23.131

Following the wise policy of his father, the new Madura ruler continued on good terms with Venkata II during the first years of his reign. An inscription in Madura belonging to the year 1609 records that Venkatapatidevaraya, at the request of Muttu Virappa Nayaka, made a gift of the village of Nagenalluru, surnamed Mudduviramahipalasamudra, on the northern bank of the Kaveri river, to Brahmans. The Nayak divided the village into 82 shares and distributed them to several learned Brahmans on November 13th 4.

v1.c23.132

13. But suddenly these mutual relations appear to have been broken. No more inscriptions are found showing the names of the Emperor and his Nayak together; the latter does not acknowledge his overlord any more. Early in 1610 a gift of land of his to the temple at Ambasamudram, Tinnevelly 5, and an exemption from taxes of the Mudaliyar servants of the Sokkanatasvami temple at Madura¹ are both recorded, without mentioning Venkata. The same policy is followed in the inscriptions of the following years. In 1612 a gift was made in Tinnevelly for the merit of Muttu Virappa Nayakkar²; in 1613 an inscription in honour of the same Muttu Virappa was carved in the greatest gopura of the Perumal temple at Madura³; in neither of these does the name of the Emperor of Vijayanagara appear.

v1.c23.133

¹ 87 of 1905.

v1.c23.134

² Taylor, o.c., II, p. 29. I do not know why Prof. Sathyanatha Aiyar, *History of the Nayaks*, p. 97, does not accept the existence of this third son of Muttu Krishnappa. The *Mrtyunjaya MSS.*, Taylor, II, p. 260, and the *Supplementary MSS.*, Ibid., I, p. 206, do not mention him because they only give the list of the Madura kings. The same must be said of the Kuniyur plates of Venkata III. *Ep. Ind.*, III, p. 239. Silence in this case is not a good proof, when other sources mention Muttu Krishnappa's third son.

v1.c23.135

³ *Supplementary MSS.*, Taylor, I, p. 206; *Mrtyunjaya MSS.*, Ibid., p. 260; *History of the Karnataka Governors*, Ibid., II, p. 29.

v1.c23.136

⁴ 9, Ap. A of 1906; *Catalogue of Copper-Plate Grants in the Government Museum, Madras*, p. 55; Rangacharya, II, p. 1003, 95.

v1.c23.137

⁵ 122 of 1907.

v1.c23.138

¹ Burgess, p. 109-10.

v1.c23.139

² 123 of 1907.

v1.c23.140

³ Sewell, I, p. 293.

v1.c23.141

Fr. A. Proenza, writing from Trichinopoly to Fr. General, G. Nickel, in 1659, said: "Tirumala Nayaka, who rules now, walking in the footsteps of his father resolved to free himself"⁴. We have seen that Tirumala's father always remained loyal to the Emperor. Beyond doubt Proenza took Tirumala's predecessor as his father; and this means, that Muttu Virappa Nayaka also 'resolved to free himself'. Fr. Vico, writing from Madura in 1611, says that the Nayak was not punctual in paying the tribute; often would he postpone the payment; sometimes he even refused it with insolence. "In that case", continues the Jesuit, "the Bisnagar (the Emperor) comes or sends one of his generals at the head of a hundred men, to make them pay all the arrears with interest"⁵.

v1.c23.142

⁴ From Fr. A. Proenza to Fr. G. Nickel, Trichinopoly, 1659, Bertrand, La Mission du Madure, III, p. 42.

v1.c23.143

⁵ From Fr. A. Vico to Fr. A. Laerzio, Madura, August 30th, 1911, Bertrand, o. c., II, p, 134.

v1.c23.144

One of these rebellions took place in the beginning of 1610. Very likely Venkata did not lead the army which marched against the rebel Nayak. At this time he is described by both the Jesuit and the Portuguese sources as a very old, and a valetudinarian. Matla Ananta or Venkatapati Nayaningaru might have held the supreme command: the latter, in an inscription of 1612-3, is 'called the conqueror of the territory called Panchapandya' i.e. the kingdom of Madura⁶. The result of this fight was the same as on the previous occasions: Muttu Virappa was defeated by the army of Venkata, and compelled to pay a heavier tribute, summing up the arrears and the war indemnity. Fr. Roberto de Nobili, writing from Madura on December 12th, 1610, to Fr. Laerzio, says as follows: "A certain notable Pandara said to one of my Christians these last days that the coming of the King of Bisnaga was the destruction of the Naiche, just as my stay in this country was the destruction of the Pandaras" ¹. The saying referred to in this letter proves evidently both that the war was over at the end of the same year, and that its result was satisfactory to the Vijayanagara Emperor. The same is meant by Fr. Vico's letter, which says that the poor people had to pay for the fault of the prince: "all the country is laid waste and people are plundered or massacred" ².

v1.c23.145

⁶ Butterworth, I, p. 246.

v1.c23.146

¹ From Fr. R. de Nobili to Fr. A. Laerzio, Madura, December 12th, 1610, Ap. C, No XXXI.

v1.c23.147

² From Fr. A. Vico to Fr. A. Laerzio, Madura, August, 1611, Bertrand, La Mission du Madure, II, p. 124.

v1.c23.148

After this war, the control of Venkata over Madura appears again through the inscriptions of the following years. There is one dated 1611 on a rock in the Matribhutesvara temple at Trichinopoly, which records a gift of Venkata for the merit of Virappa Nayaka ³. Then another inscription of Venkata of 1613 registers that a certain Venkatadari Bhattar set up at Vellangudi, in the country directly ruled by Muttu Virappa, the images of Krishna and Kamesvari and granted land for their worship ⁴.

v1.c23.149

³ 134 of 1905.

v1.c23.150

⁴ 452 of 1916.

v1.c23.151

14. Shortly after the war with Venkata, Muttu Virappa was engaged in another war. Fr. Laerzio, writing from Cochin on December 25th, 1611, says that he was going on his usual visit to all the houses of his Province. On the 22nd of September he was in the College at St. Thome; but he was prevented from proceeding to Madura on account of the war between the Nayak of Madura and the Nayak of Negapatam ⁵. It was usual among the Jesuits to call Nayak of Negapatam the Nayak of Tanjore¹. Nothing is hitherto known either about the cause or the result of this war between Madura and Tanjore. Did it break out because the Tanjore Nayak had given his aid to the Emperor the year before, while going to subdue the rebel Muttu Virappa? We shall see that this feud between the two houses, that came to a head and burst in Venkata's reign, continued unabated till the extinction of one of them; and that very soon, just after the death of the Emperor, the Madura and Tanjore Nayaks again came to blows.

v1.c23.152

⁵ From Fr. A. Laerzio to Fr. C. Aquaviva, Cochin, Decembe 25th, 1611, Ap. C, No. XXXIII. Cf. Bertrand, La Mission du Madure, II, p. 108.

v1.c23.153

¹ Du Jarric I, p. 633.