The Colas c20.18.1

c20.18.1

We may now turn to the literary evidence on the subject of Kulōttunga's accession. On one matter the evidence of two works is in complete accord with that of the inscriptions. Both the *Vikramāṅkadēva Carita* and the *Vikramaśoḻan-ulā*²⁹ are explicit in stating that Vīrarājēndra was succeeded by another king before Kulōttunga came to the throne; the *ulā* by its very brief reference giving no particulars whatever of his reign, and the *Carita* by directly stating that he lost his life in a rebellion that occurred within a few days of his installation³⁰, imply that he had a very short reign; this king was no doubt Parakēsari Adhirājēndra of the inscriptions. And Kulōttuṅga himself recognised the legitimacy of Adhirājēndra's position when he styled himself Rājakēsari. In some of his records, however, is found a double *praśasti* which, by combining the two forms *vīramē tuṇai-yāgavum* and *pugaḷmādu viḷaṅga*, seems to set up a claim that Kulōttuṅga should be considered the direct successor of Vīrarājēndra.³¹ And the *Kaliṅgattupraraṇi* of Jayaṅgoṇḍār, makes it a point to ignore the reign of Adhirājēndra.³² This poem is often cited in support of the notions that at his birth Kulōttuṅga was adopted by Rājēndra Cōḷadēva I into the Cōḷa family and that he was brought up in his maternal grandfather's court.³³ But there is nothing in the actual words employed by the poet to suggest either a formal ceremony of adoption or to enable us to know where the prince spent his early years.