Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

The Colas c21: Chapter XIII. Kulōttunga I A.D. 1070-1120

The Cōḷas c21

Language
English

Chapter XIII. Kulōttunga I A.D. 1070-1120

c21.2

The accession of Kulōttunga I marks the commencement of a new era in the history of the Cōḷa empire. At the end of nearly a century of dubious subordination to the Cōḷa empire, the kingdom of Vēṅgī now became definitely a province of the empire resuscitated by its own ruler. After Kulōttunga became Cōḷa emperor, Vēṅgī was ruled successively by his sons as viceroys, and this added greatly to the strength of the Cōḷa empire by shutting the door against the intrigues of the Western Cāḷukyas in that quarter. The first Cāḷukya-Cōḷa emperor soon overcame the troubles that threatened at his accession to bring about the collapse of the empire, and after establishing himself on his new throne, he had a long reign characterised, for the best part of it, by unparalleled success and prosperity. He avoided unnecessary wars and evinced a true regard for the well-being of his subjects. The permanent results of his policy are seen in the reigns of his successors. For about a century, until we reach the time of Kulōttunga III, the empire, though not so extensive as before, still holds well together, and there is on the whole less of the chronic warfare of the age which preceded the accession of Kulōttunga. The impossible attempt to extend the empire across the Tuṅgabhadrā frontier into Raṭṭapāḍi is definitely given up by Kulōttunga I, and he even puts up with some loss of territory in the Mysore country consequent on the rise of the Hoysalas about the close of his reign. And the loss of Vēṅgī, though serious, was only temporary, as his successors recovered most of it. The wisdom of Kulōttunga's statesmanship lay in adjusting his aims to his resources, in his not forsaking the possible good in the pursuit of the impossible better, and in his preferring the well-being of his subjects to the satisfaction of his personal vanity. He ensured for his subjects a century of peace and good government.

c21.3

Kulōttunga's reign began approximately on 9 June A.D. 1070¹. As he ruled for fifty years thereafter,² he must have been a young man at accession. The asterism of his birth was Puṣya.³ The numerous inscriptions of this long reign contain several *praśastis*, each with some variant forms. In the first four years the most common *praśasti* is the one commencing *tiru manni viḷaṅga* or *vaḷara* which records the achievements of Kulōttunga (here called Rājēndra) before he came to the Cōḷa throne. These events have been discussed already in relation to the problem of his accession. The latest records containing this early *praśasti* are dated in the fourth year. The same events are also narrated in different words in another *praśasti* known so far only from one record of the sixth year at Tirukkōvalūr and commencing *pū mēl arivaiyum*.⁴ Yet another *praśasti*, briefer and of far less historical value, also occurring in these four years, is that commencing *pūmiyum tiruvum*, of which we have an expanded form in the rare introduction beginning *pū maruviya tirumaḍandaiyum*.⁵ The two most common forms of the *praśastis* of the reign are the short introduction commencing *pugaḻ-mādu viḷaṅga* which begins to appear in the fourth year⁶ and the longer one commencing *pugaḻ śūḻnda puṇari* appearing for the first time in the fifth regnal year.⁷ Of these it is the latter *praśasti* that is most helpful to the historian on account of the revisions undergone by it as the reign advances. Other *praśastis* are: *pū mēvi vaḷara* appearing in the ninth year,⁸ *pū mādu vaḷara* in the year after that,⁹ *tirumagaḷ jayamagaḷ* in the twelfth year,¹⁰ and possibly also *pū mādu puṇara* in a mutilated inscription¹¹ of which the date is lost. We must also take account of the double introduction, *vīramē tuṇai* followed by *pugaḻ mādu viḷaṅga*, which couples a *praśasti* of Vīrarājēndra with that of Kulōttunga and to which attention has been drawn already. This introduction is found as early as the fifth year in an inscription from Tribhuvani which also gives the *Tribhuvanacakravartin* title of Kulōttunga.¹² It is seen from the inscriptions of the reign now accessible to us that the titles Kulōttunga and Cakravartin were also assumed by the emperor much earlier in his reign than was once thought.

c21.4

Of the early wars fought by Kulōttunga in his youth (*iḷangōp-paruvam*), some account has been given in discussing his position between a.d. 1063 and 1070. It has been pointed out that he levied tribute from the Nāgavaṁśi ruler Dhārāvarṣa and possibly also carved out for himself a separate and independent principality in that quarter. The first few lines of the *praśasti* beginning *pugaḻ śūḻnda puṇari* refer to the same events and add that by the strength of his arm he routed an army of the king of Kuntala,¹³ and thus donned the garland of victory in the north before he turned his attention to the south. This war with the king of Kuntala, doubtless the Western Cāḷukya king, waged before 1070, was part of Kulōttunga's activity in the region of the modern Bastar state, and the circumstances that led to this conflict are the same as those recorded in some of the later inscriptions of Vīrarājēndra and in Bilhaṇa's account of Vikramāditya's *digvijaya* in so far as it relates to Vēṅgī and Cakrakūṭa. After Sōmēśvara I failed to turn up for the second encounter fixed to take place at Kūḍal-Saṅgama, Vīrarājēndra threw down a challenge to the Vallabha (Cāḷukya), proceeded to recover Vēṅgī, and after the victory of Bezwada, bestowed that kingdom once more on Vijayāditya VII. These data corroborate Bilhaṇa's statements that in his war-like career as *yuvarāja* Vikramāditya had conquered Vēṅgī and Cakrakūṭa, and was encamping on the banks of the Kṛṣṇā when the news of his father's illness and death reached him. The *Kalingattupparaṇi*¹⁴ also implies that Vikramāditya fought against Kulōttunga in the north at this time and that it was in this war that Kulōttunga earned the title Virudarājabhayankara, i.e. terror to Virudarāja or Vikramāditya. These events took place in a.d. 1067. And now it becomes clear from Kulōttunga's *praśasti* that his northern adventure might have helped Vīrarājēndra in the war against Vikramāditya. Whether this means that Kulōttunga, on his own account, repulsed Vikramāditya's attack on Cakrakūṭa, or whether we may infer further that Kulōttunga co-operated with Vīrarājēndra and was present at the battle of Bezwada, it is not easy to decide. In any case, the effective assistance of Kulōttunga in the release of Vēṅgī from the Western Cāḷukya hold shows that Kulōttunga might have been on friendly relations with Vīrarājēndra and kept up a live interest in the affairs of the Vēṅgī and Cōḻa kingdoms. That, as a result of the wars, the kingdom of Vēṅgī was restored to Vijayāditya gives us the measure of the truth of Kulōttuṅga's statement made later to his son Rājarāja that in his youth he preferred a life of war and adventure and so left the kingdom of Vēṅgī to be ruled by his uncle Vijayāditya. It is probable that this exile was not altogether voluntary and was in the first instance brought about by the ambitions of Vikramāditya and Vijayāditya.¹⁵

c21.5

The death of Vīrarājēndra after he had made his peace with Vikramāditya VI, the accession of Adhirājēndra, and the revolution in the Cōḻa country that was arrested for a time by Vikramāditya's intercession, but, after the retirement of Vikramāditya to the Tuṅgabhadrā, ran its full course and ended fatally for Adhirājēndra, gave Kulōttuṅga the opportunity to make himself master of the Cōḻa kingdom. The theory of a civil war between Adhirājēndra and Kulōttuṅga that has sometimes been put forward¹⁶ gets no support from the inscriptions, and appears highly improbable. There is likewise no warrant for the view that Kulōttuṅga at first gained control of a part of the Cōḻa kingdom and became master of the whole of it only at the end of four or five years of fighting,¹⁷ or that he killed many princes of the blood to clear his way to the throne.¹⁸ The inscriptions of Kulōttuṅga, however, agree with the *Kaliṅgattu-pparaṇi* in stating that his advent to the south rescued the Cōḻa country from a state of anarchy and dissolution, and restored unity and order in that land. The inscriptions say: 'In the south, he put on the pure jewelled crown by right so as to put an end to the commonness of the goddess¹⁹ of the sweet smelling lotus-flower (Lakṣmī) and the loneliness of the good earth-maiden who had the Ponni (Kāvērī) for her garment.' There is not the slightest suggestion here of any opposition encountered by Kulōttuṅga in the Cōḻa country; rather his advent is said to have been quite welcome, if not actually sought after. Writing some years later, when Kulōttuṅga had, by his wise and strong rule, secured for the people of the empire several years of continued peace and prosperity, Jayangoṇḍār draws in deeper colours his picture of the anarchy that preceded the advent of Kulōttuṅga:²⁰

c21.6

‘Brahmanical sacrifices were given up; the path of Manu was totally deserted; the six sciences were forgotten and the chanting of the Vedas ceased.

‘The castes mixed one with another in wild confusion; none keeping to their prescribed paths of duty, (the code of proper) conduct was forgotten.

‘Each sought to tyrannise the others, the temples of the gods were neglected; women lost their chastity; and fortresses fell into ruin.

‘While the darkness of Kali was thus spreading, he (Abhaya) came to the rescue of the world, like the sun rising above the roaring sea and driving away darkness.

‘He made it his duty to create afresh all the safeguards (for the people), he restored all the (old) rules and again established the earth on the proper path.

‘Amidst the roar of the four oceans and the chanting of the four Vedas, and the blessings of the three worlds, he was anointed.’

c21.7

We may recognise a substratum of fact beneath the exaggerations of this conventional picture of anarchy. Though the true course of events is obscure, and the hypothesis of religious persecution leading to a political revolution rests on vague and confused tradition, it is clear that the prospect was gloomy indeed when Kulōttunga came to rule over the Cōḻa dominion. War and rebellion had raised their heads, and the southern portions of the empire including Ceylon had proclaimed their independence. Kulōttunga devoted the first few years of his reign to deal with these troubles.

c21.8

The first enemy to be dealt with was the Western Cāḷukya Vikramāditya VI, who now found that all his efforts to extend his power to Vēṅgī had proved futile, and what was worse, that Vēṅgī became more closely united than ever to the hostile power of the Cōḻas. Vikramāditya was therefore sure to oppose Kulōttunga’s accession and lead an expedition against him. Kulōttunga lost no time in strengthening himself by fresh alliances. There was no love lost between Vikramāditya and his elder brother Sōmēśvara II, who had been compelled by Vīrarājēndra to part with some of his territory to Vikramāditya,²¹ and it was obvious that Kulōttunga could make a successful appeal to Sōmēśvara for assistance in the war against his brother; and that was what he did. Says Bilhaṇa.²²

c21.9

'After the lapse of only a few days, when the Cōḷa's son (Adhirājēndra) was slain in a rebellion of his subjects, the lord of Vēṅgī, Rājiga by name, took possession of his throne by the concurrence of fortune. This crooked-minded man suspected danger from him (Vikramāditya), and in order to create a diversion in his rear, he put himself straight with Sōmadēva, his (Vikramāditya's) natural enemy .... What has this noble-minded (Vikramāditya) done to his elder brother, that the latter should, with intent to injure him, enter into a compact with their family foe, the Cōḷa Rājiga? When the king's son (Vikramāditya) started on his expedition for the chastisement of the impolitic Rājiga, Sōmadēva pursued him quickly at the back with his entire forces ...... When the mass of the Draviḍa army drew near the liberal-handed prince (Vikramāditya), this king (Sōmēśvara) also approached, having gained at last an opportunity of injuring (him). '²³

c21.10

Vikramāditya was also very ably assisted in the campaign by a number of his allies and vassals. The Yādava king of Dēvagiri helped him as an ally.²⁴ Among the vassals present with Vikramāditya were the Hoysaḷa Eṟeyanga²⁵ and Tribhuvanamalla Pāṇḍya²⁶ besides the Kadamba Jayakēśi, already mentioned as the ally of Vikramāditya.

c21.11

According to Bilhaṇa's account, at the end of a hard contest in which the armies of Sōmēśvara and Kulōttunga engaged the forces of Vikrama, 'the Draviḍa lord fled the field and Sōmadēva entered the prison.'²⁷ Vikrama then retired to the Tungabhadrā. He intended to restore his captive brother to liberty and to the throne, but, as on the eve of the battle, Śiva interposed a second time in a dream and commanded Vikrama to assume the sovereignty himself,²⁸ and he did so. He also made his younger brother Jayasimha viceroy at Banavāse.²⁹ After some further expeditions and conquests, of which no details are forthcoming, and after once more extinguishing the valour of the Cōḷa,³⁰ he duly entered his capital Kalyāṇa.

c21.12

As may be expected, the account of the campaign found in Cōḷa inscriptions differs in many details and in the result of the fight; the subsequent course of events shows, however, that this version is on the whole nearer the truth than the *kāvya* of Bilhaṇa.

c21.13

‘Not only did the speech (of Vikkalan)—“After this day a permanent blemish (will attach to Kulōttunga), as to the crescent (which is the origin) of (his) family”—turn out wrong, but the bow (in) the hand of Vikkalan was not (even) bent against (the enemy).³¹ Everywhere from Nangili of rocky roads—with Maṇalūr in the middle—to the Tungabhadrā, there were lying low the dead (bodies of his) furious elephants, his lost pride and (his) boasted valour. The very mountains which he ascended bent their backs, the very rivers into which (he) descended eddied and breached (the banks) in their course: (and) the very seas into which he plunged became troubled and agitated. (The Cōḷa king) seized simultaneously the two countries (*pāṇi*) called Gangamaṇḍalam and Śingaṇam, troops of furious elephants which had been irretrievably abandoned (by the enemy), crowds of women with beautiful lustrous eyes, the goddess of fame who gladly brought disgrace (on Vikkalan), and the great goddess of victory who changed to the opposite side and caused (Vikkalan) himself and his father, who were desirous of the rule over the western region, to turn their backs again and again on many days.’

c21.14

Some earlier versions of these incidents substitute the general phrase *Vēḷkulattaraśar* or *Vēḷpulattaraśu* i.e., the Cāḷukyan king or kings, for Vikkalan, and the specific place-name Aḷatti for the region from Nangili to Tungabhadrā.³²

c21.15

The earliest allusion to this war traceable in the inscriptions of the reign occurs in the words: ‘Vikkalan and Śingaṇan plunging into the western sea’, found in the *pugaḻ mādu* introduction for the first time in the seventh year.³³ The actual fight with Vikramāditya took place, therefore, some years after Kulōttunga’s reign began and not, as Bilhaṇa’s narrative implies, immediately after his accession. This is also borne out by Cāḷukya inscriptions which place these occurrences in the expired Śaka year 998, or A.D. 1076.³⁴ The interval of five or six years was doubtless employed by both sides in preparations, diplomatic and military, for the coming fight. For Vikramāditya would not acquiesce without a struggle in the permanent union of Vēṅgī and Cōḻa in the same hands, and Kulōttunga knew this very well.

c21.16

The war began with an advance of Vikramāditya into the Cōḻa territory till he encountered the Cōḻa army in the Kōlār district, whence, if the Cōḻa inscriptions may be trusted, Vikramāditya was pursued by the Cōḻa forces, through Maṇalūr,³⁵ not identified, up to the banks of the Tungabhadrā; and there was heavy fighting all along the road. In the result, the Cōḻa ruler, besides capturing much valuable booty, became master of the Gaṅgamaṇḍalam and Śiṅgaṇam. The identity of Śiṅgaṇam is doubtful; Hultzsch suggested that it means the dominions of Jayasiṁha III;³⁶ but the territory ruled over by Jayasiṁha III was Banavāse and not only is there no evidence of the present campaign having extended to that country, but Bilhaṇa says that Vikramāditya made his brother Jayasiṁha ruler of Banavāse at the end of the war with Kulōttunga, and that Jayasiṁha was still in charge of that territory some years later when he revolted against his brother and sought the assistance of Kulōttunga. It is probable, however, that before the war began, Jayasiṁha was in charge of some territory to the south and east of the Tungabhadrā. Kulōttunga's claim that, as a result of the war, he found himself in possession of a considerable part of the Mysore country is borne out by the provenance of his inscriptions, and Bilhaṇa's statement that Kulōttunga fled from the battlefield is not to be trusted. The *Kaliṅgattupparaṇi*³⁷ mentions some of the incidents of this war such as the fights at Aḻatti and Maṇalūr, and the capture of elephants in Navilai, possibly the same as Navilē-nāḍ of the Mysore inscriptions.³⁸ The *Vikramaśōḻan-ulā* states that Kulōttunga reached the western sea, and captured Koṅkaṇa and Kannaḍa countries and humbled the pride of the Mahratha king—a statement which implies that even Banavāse might have been overrun, though perhaps only for a time. The worst sufferer was Sōmēśvara II, who fell into the hands of his brother as a prisoner and thus lost his kingdom. What ultimately became of him is not known.³⁹

c21.17

Bilhaṇa says that Jayasiṁha, the newly appointed viceroy of Banavāse, contemplated treason against his brother Vikramāditya, within a year after his appointment, and that he sought the aid of Kulōttuṅga in his attempted revolt.⁴⁰ It is not necessary to pursue the story of this rebellion here; for Bilhaṇa's account makes it clear that Kulōttuṅga took little or no part in the civil war that followed. This was obviously because he had more important affairs claiming his attention. Vikramāditya, thus left free to deal with the rebellion, suppressed it without any difficulty, and, as we shall see, soon began to add to the troubles of Kulōttuṅga by establishing friendly relations with his enemies. Soon after Vijayabāhu proclaimed himself ruler of the whole of Ceylon after his expulsion of the Cōḷas from the northern half of the island, Vikramāditya sent him a friendly embassy with rich presents.⁴¹ In fact, throughout his long reign Vikramāditya was untiring in the pursuit of his design against Kulōttuṅga in all possible quarters. But Bilhaṇa's rhapsodic account of a final expedition against Kāñcī for the exercise of his hero's arms itching for a fight in the absence of suitable foes,⁴² can hardly be accepted as true.

c21.18

While Kulōttuṅga was settling his affairs in the south, the kingdom of Vēṅgī in the north was invaded by Yaśaḥkarṇadēva, the Haihaya ruler of Tripurī. In his inscriptions, dating from A.D. 1072-3, this king claims to have easily overcome the strong ruler of the Andhra country and to have propitiated Bhagavān Bhīmēśvara of Drākṣārāma with presents of many costly jewels.⁴³ The Andhra ruler mentioned was no doubt Vijayāditya VII. Yaśaḥkarṇa's inroad does not seem to have had any consequences, military or political, worth mentioning. And there is no proof that it was in any manner connected with the designs of the Western Cāḷukyas or of Vijayāditya VII, as has sometimes been assumed.⁴⁴

c21.19

At the close of his war with Vikramāditya VI, Kulōttuṅga turned his attention to the south. The Pāṇḍya country was never reconciled to the imposition of Cōḷa overlordship, and its rulers had always been a source of trouble to the most powerful Cōḷa emperors. The period of confusion that followed the death of Vīrarājēndra, the popular rebellion against his successor Adhirājēndra, and the hard struggle forced on Kulōttunga in the early years of his reign by the policy of Vikramāditya VI, provided a golden opportunity to the kingdoms of the south to reassert their independence. The administrative arrangements made by the Cōḷas in these lands went to pieces, and the native rulers of the countries began to rule in their own right as their inscriptions show.⁴⁵ The most sustained efforts of Kulōttunga resulted in the reconquest of the Pāṇḍya and Kēraḷa countries between the seventh and eleventh years of his reign, but Ceylon permanently disappeared from the Cōḷa empire. Some account may be given of the establishment of Ceylonese independence before the story of the reconquest of the south is taken up.

c21.20

We have seen that before the accession of Vīrarājēndra, the Sinhalese prince Kitti freed Rohaṇa of enemies and, in 1058, assumed the title Vijayabāhu in his seventeenth year of age.⁴⁶ Cōḷa rule was thereafter mostly confined to the northern part of the island known as Rājaraṭṭha. The latest Cōḷa inscription found at Polonnaruwa is dated A.D. 1070, the third and last year of the reign of Adhirājēndra. The disappearance of Cōḷa power from Rājaraṭṭha is clearly narrated in the *Mahāvaṁsa*. The chronicle does not give exact dates for all the transactions recorded; but it says definitely that Vijayabāhu I entered Anurādhapura in the fifteenth year of his Rohaṇa rule and thirty-third of his life, in A.D. 1073 and that two years later, there took place his coronation as ruler of all Ceylon.⁴⁷ This is in perfect accord with what we know otherwise of the first five years of Kulōttunga's reign and with the absence of any Cōḷa inscription of Kulōttunga's reign in Ceylon. The *Mahāvaṁsa* says⁴⁸ that the successful efforts of Vijayabāhu to liberate Ceylon from the Cōḷas began in the twelfth year of his reign, A.D. 1070. He took up his abode in the fortress on the Paluṭṭha mountain, round which 'a terrible fight between the two armies took place'. The Damiḷa army was put to fight, and in the pursuit that followed, the Cōḷa general was captured and decapitated. Then Vijayabāhu occupied Pulatthinagara without any further resistance from the Tamils. But soon a larger Cōḷa army came from the mainland, and there ensued another 'fiery battle' near Anurādhapura; victory was with the Cōḷa army, and Vijayabāhu was compelled to fortify himself at Vātagiri, Vakirigala, in the Kegalla district.⁴⁹ The Cōḻas now stirred up rebellion against Vijayabāhu in the rear, but the king of Ceylon successfully stamped it out, and forced the leader of the revolt to seek refuge with the Cōḻas. Vijayabāhu then proceeded 'to Tambalagāma where he erected a new stronghold,' and taking up his residence in Mahānāgakula on the lower Walawē Gaṅgā, he made fresh preparations for the Cōḻa war. He despatched two armies to attack the position of the Cōḻas from two sides: one by the coast highroad against Polonnāruwa, and the other to the west of the mountain system against Anurādhapura. The king himself advanced by Mahaveligaṅgā. Polonnāruwa fell after severe fighting, and 'when the ruler of the Cōḻas heard of this destruction of his army, he thought: the Sīhalas are (too) strong, and sent out no further army.' Anurādhapura was captured by the other section of the Ceylonese army which pushed forward to Mahātittha. Vijayabāhu, 'the best of kings, greatly rejoicing, advanced in the fifteenth year (of his reign) to the greatly longed for, the best (town of) Anurādhapura'. His coronation as ruler of Laṅkā was delayed by a rebellion, and took place in his eighteenth year, A.D. 1076-7. Polonnāruwa now lost its Cōḻa title and was styled Vijayarājapura.⁵⁰ Vijayabāhu married Līlāvatī, daughter of Jagatīpāla of Kanauj, whose queen had escaped from captivity in the Cōḻa country, and also Trilōkasundari of the Kalinga royal race, while his sister Mittā espoused a Pāṇḍyan prince, who became the grandfather of Parākramabāhu the Great. 'The king restored the Buddhist religion, renewing the priestly succession from Rāmañña (Pegu), and caused a temple for the tooth relic to be built at the capital by his general Nuvaragiri'.⁵¹ The inscriptions of Kulōttunga are silent on the loss of Ceylon.

c21.21

The declaration of independence by Ceylon did not involve so great a subtraction from the plenitude of Cōḻa power as the revolt of the southern kingdoms on the mainland. The Cōḻa empire had nothing to fear from the independence of Ceylon if only it kept its power on the mainland unimpaired. The case of the Pāṇḍyan kingdom was different. If the Cōḻa king failed to reduce it to subjection, it was sure to become a menace to the very existence of the Cōḻa power. Kulōttunga knew this, and the moment he found himself free from the Cāḷukya war, he bent all his energies towards the suppression of revolts in the Pāṇḍya and Kēraḷa countries.

c21.22

Records of the fifth year of the reign contain a vague statement that the head of the Pāṇḍya king lay on the ground pecked by kites; later inscriptions say that this was outside the beautiful city of Kulōttunga.⁵² It is clear that these statements are not meant to be taken literally, and that they are no more historical than the exaggerated phrases of conventional praise that precede them in the inscriptions. For a more business-like account of the southern campaign, we must turn to the additional matter that begins to appear in the *pugaḻ śūḻnda puṇari* introduction from the eleventh year,⁵³ and to some other inscriptions of the reign.

c21.23

An undated Sanskrit inscription from Cidambaram⁵⁴ states that Kulōttunga overcame five Pāṇḍya kings, set fire to the fortress of Kōṭṭāṟu (like Arjuna burning the Khāṇḍava forest), subdued the numerous forces of the Kēraḷas, and erected a pillar of victory on the sea-coast; thus it was that he reduced to obedience (*savidhikam akarot*) the rebellious group of vassal kings. The more detailed account given by the Tamil inscriptions is as follows:⁵⁵

c21.24

‘Having resolved in his mind to conquer the Pāṇḍimaṇḍalam together with great fame, he despatched his great army,—which possessed excellent horses resembling the waves of the sea, war-elephants resembling ships, and infantry resembling water,—as though the Northern ocean was overflowing the Southern ocean. He completely destroyed the forest which the five Pāṇḍyas had entered as refuge when they fled cowering with fear, from the field of battle. He subdued their country, drove them into hot jungles in hills where woodmen roamed about, and planted pillars of victory in every direction. He seized the pearl fisheries, the Podiyil mountain where the three kinds of Tamil flourished, the Śaiyya mountain in the heart of which were found furious rutting elephants, and Kanni, and fixed the boundaries of the Southern (Pāṇḍya) country. While all the *Śāvērs* in the Western hill-country ascended to the unique heaven (attained by warriors who fell

c21.25

fighting), he was pleased to bestow on his commanders, who were mounted on horses, settlements on every road, including one at Kōṭṭāṟu, to strike terror into his enemies.' The *Vikramaśōḻan-ulā*⁵⁶ describes Kulōttunga as the king with the army which routed the carp of the enemy (Pāṇḍya), destroyed the bow (emblem of the Cēra) and twice destroyed the fleet at Śālai. The *Kalingattupparaṇi* confirms these accounts:⁵⁷

c21.26

'Have you not heard of the destruction that overtook the five Pāṇḍyas when his army was despatched against them? Has it not reached your ears that the Cēras turned their backs when the (Cōḷa) army marched to the fight? Was it not with the army that Viḻiñam on the sea was destroyed, and Śālai captured?'

c21.27

These accounts of the conquest of the Pāṇḍyas and Cēras, the fights at Kōṭṭāṟu, Viḻiñam and Śālai are substantially true; the *Kulōttunga-śōḻan Piḷḷaittamiḻ* mentions also a battle of Śemponmāri (Ramnad Dt.).⁵⁸ The decimation of the ranks of *S̄āvērs*, veteran soldiers who had banished from their hearts all fear of death and who formed a considerable section of the forces of the Pāṇḍyas⁵⁹ and the Cēras, must have been the result of very hard fighting. The identity of the five Pāṇḍyas conquered by Kulōttunga remains obscure;⁶⁰ even Jaṭāvarman Śrīvallabha was not one of them, but seems to have begun his rule sometime after Kulōttunga's conquest and settlement of the southern country. Kulōttunga was evidently not in a position to restore the Cōḷa administrative arrangements introduced into the Pāṇḍya country by Rājarāja, I, and he hit upon the device of establishing military colonies (*nilaip-paḍai*) along the important routes of communication in the Pāṇḍya and Kēraḷa territory. Except for the presence of these military outposts, the symbols of Cōḷa overlordship, the attempt to change place-names to commemorate Cōḷa titles,⁶¹ and the collection of an annual tribute from the subordinate rulers of these districts, there was no attempt on the part of Kulōttunga to interfere with their internal administration. The numerous inscriptions of the Pāṇḍyan kings of this period betray few signs of their political subjection to the Cōḷas, and the inscriptions of Kulōttunga and his successors are not found in such numbers in this area as in the territories under their direct rule.⁶²

c21.28

About fifteen years after this reconquest and settlement of the southern country there seems to have been another revolt in which Vēṇāḍ took the lead. This fact is to be inferred from the considerable number of inscriptions which describe the services of Naralōkavīra, the earliest date occurring in these inscriptions being the twenty-eighth year of the reign of Kulōttunga.⁶³ The interval between the close of the first Pāṇḍyan war of the reign and the first mention of Naralōkavīra in its inscriptions, and the frequent mention of Kālingarāya, one of the titles of Naralōkavīra, in the inscriptions of Jaṭāvarman Śrīvallabha, render it likely that the southern campaign in which this commander distinguished himself, was different from the war in the early years of the reign.⁶⁴ The enemies dealt with and the places which formed the centres of conflict were naturally more or less the same as in the earlier war; the result was also the same.

c21.29

The success of Vijayabāhu in establishing the independence of Ceylon by putting an end to Cōḷa power in the island rankled in the mind of Kulōttunga who was waiting for a favourable opportunity to renew the war with the Ceylonese ruler.⁶⁵ The Tamil population in Ceylon was quite considerable, and Tamil mercenaries formed a large part of the Sinhalese army at this time.⁶⁶ This was the natural result of the recent change of rulers brought about by Vijayabāhu in the northern half of the island. But as the Tamils were loyal to the memory of the Cōḷa rule, still fresh in their minds, Kulōttunga found favourable conditions for furthering his designs against the Ceylonese ruler in secret. The following account, given by the *Mahāvaṃsa*, of the occurrences about A.D. 1088 sheds a lurid light on the policy of Kulōttunga:⁶⁷

c21.30

'Envoys sent by the Kaṇṇāṭa Monarch and by the Cōḷa King came hither with rich presents. They sought out the Monarch. He was greatly pleased thereat and after rendering both embassies what was their due, he sent at first with the Kaṇṇāṭa messengers his own envoys to Kaṇṇāṭa with choice gifts. But the Cōḷas maimed the noses and ears of the Sīhala messengers horribly when they entered their country. Thus disfigured they returned hither and told the King everything that had been

c21.31

done to them by the Cōḷa King. In flaming fury Vijayabāhu in the midst of all his courtiers had the Damiḷa envoys summoned and gave them the following message for the Cōḷa king. "Beyond ear-shot, on a lonely island in the midst of the ocean shall a trial of the strength of our arms take place in single combat, or, after arming the whole forces of thy kingdom and of not appear, the King dismissed his envoys, returned to Pulatthinagara and resided there a considerable time.'

c21.32

The tortuous policy of Kulōttunga, however, failed completely. The Vēḷaikkāra rebellion was suppressed and the mercenaries bound themselves to serve the king loyally thereafter and the chief Buddhist shrine of Polonnaruwa⁶⁸ was placed under their protection. Kulōttunga apparently made his peace with Vijayabāhu, for one of his daughters, Śuttamalliyār, married Vīrapperumāl, a Sinhalese prince of the Pāṇḍyan party in Ceylon, and made a gift of a 'perpetual' lamp to an Īśvara temple in the reign of Jayabāhu I, the successor of Vijayabāhu.⁶⁹

c21.33

From the Song annals of China we learn that an embassy from Chulien (Cōḷa) reached the Chinese court in the year 1077 and that the king of Chulien at the time was called Ti-hua-kia-lo. It is possible that these syllables disguise the name of Dēva Kulō (ttunga). Indeed Dēva-kala and Divākara, it has been said,⁷⁰ are the only possible restorations, and Dēva-kula or -kulō is impossible. But considering that the name is that of the Cōḷa king ruling in 1077, the suggestion that it is Kulōttunga's name that has been thus distorted does not seem far-fetched. This 'embassy' was clearly a trading venture and seems to have ended very profitably for the Tamils. For the seventy-two men who formed the embassy 'were given 81,800 strings of copper cash, i.e., about as many dollars, in return for the articles of tribute comprising glassware, camphor, brocates (called Kimhwa in the Chinese text), rhinoceros horns, ivory, incense, rose-water, putchuck, asafoetida, borax, cloves, etc.'⁷¹ Turning now to Kaḍāram, there is indeed a stray reference in the *Kalingattupparaṇi* to Kulōttunga's destruction of Kaḍāram on the wide ocean,⁷² and his inscriptions speak of costly tributes from foreign islands. But the references are vague and we should not lose sight of the literary convention by which a poet may attribute to one ruler all the achievements of his predecessors on the throne. That Kulōttunga was in touch with the empire of Śrī Vijaya becomes clear from other evidence, particularly the smaller Leyden grant. The suggestion has been made that Kulōttunga spent part of the period 1063 to 1070 in Śrī Vijaya restoring order and maintaining the Cōḷa power in that quarter.⁷³

c21.34

Two facts have been cited in support of this view: Kulōttunga restored peace in the Eastern lands in his youth, like Viṣṇu gently raising the Earth from the waters of the ocean; secondly the names of the high official who visited China as envoy from Śrī Vijaya in 1067 and of the Cōḷa emperor who sent the embassy to China (noted above) ten years later are the same, Ti-hua-kia-lo—Dēvakala, probably a part of Dēva Kulō (ttunga). The first is obviously the result of a misunderstanding of a Tamil phrase.⁷⁴ It is very surprising that if Kulōttunga had such a romantic career across the seas before taking possession of the Cōḷa throne we should not get more specific information about it in the numerous records of the reign. One inscription⁷⁵ indeed says that a beautiful stone was shown to Kulōttunga by the king of Kāmbhōja as a curio (*kātci*). When did he do so? Did Kulōttunga visit Kāmbhōja, the Khmer kingdom?

c21.35

Scholars have been puzzled by a statement in the Chinese annals (preserved in the pages of Ma Tuan-lin) that the Cōḷa Kingdom was subject to Śrī Vijaya in A.D. 1068-77. In recording an embassy from Pagan in 1106, Ma Tuan-lin says in effect: “The Emperor at first gave order to receive them and treat them as they treated the envoys of Tchou-lien (Cōḷa); but the President of the Council of Rites presented the following observations: “the Cōḷa is subject to San-fo-ts’i; this is why in the years *hi-ning* (1068-1077), we were content to write to the King of this Kingdom on strong paper with an envelope of plain stuff. The King of Pou-kan (Pagan), on the contrary is sovereign of a great kingdom of the Fan....””⁷⁶ From this interesting passage we gather that the ambassadors of San-fo-ts’i (Śrī Vijaya) had some time in 1068-1077 claimed in the Chinese court that the Cōḷa kingdom was subject to them and that they were entitled to a higher rank than the representatives of the Cōḷa ruler, and that this order of priority was cited as a precedent in 1106 to justify the ranking of Cōḷa envoys below those from Pagan. To appraise these statements at their proper value, one must recall the difficulties that would most naturally be experienced by envoys from the Tamil country in making their position and that of their ruler properly understood in distant China. We may notice that much earlier than 1068, the embassies sent to China by Rājarāja I and Rājēndra I experienced similar difficulties and were ranked much below their proper place.⁷⁷ The gaucherie of the Tamil envoys, the ignorance of Chinese officialdom of the true state of politics in remote countries, and perhaps, the readiness of the ambassadors of Śrī Vijaya to indulge in unjust misrepresentations relating to Cōḻa must have combined to bring about the situation recorded by Ma Tuan-lin. There is not the slightest ground, however, to believe that either in 1068 or in 1106 the Cōḻa Kingdom became the vassal of Śrī Vijaya. All the other evidence on the relations between the two kingdoms is opposed to this assumption.⁷⁸

c21.36

Vīrarājēndra, as we have seen, claims to have sent an expedition to Kaḍāram (Śrī Vijaya) in A.D. 1068 and to have conquered that country on behalf of one of its rulers who sought his protection and to have established him on the throne. This seems not improbable, and might have resulted in a vague recognition of the suzerainty of the Cōḻa power by the new ruler. However that may be, the king of Śrī Vijaya sent an embassy to Kulōttunga I about 1090 and requested him to issue a copper-plate grant containing the names of the villages granted by the Cōḻa kings as *paḷḷic-candam* to the two *vihāras* built by the king of Kaḍāram at Śōḻa-kulavalli-paṭṭiṇam, evidently another name for Negapatam. In the smaller Leyden grant,⁷⁹ for it is by this name that Kulōttunga's grant made on this occasion is generally known, the two *vihāras* are called Rājēndra-sōḻap-perumbaḷḷi and Rājarājap-perumbaḷḷi;⁸⁰ the latter having also the alternative name Śrī Śailēndra-Cūḍāmaṇivarma-Vihāra,⁸¹ showing its indentity with the *vihāra* mentioned in the Larger Leyden grant of the reign of Rājarāja I. The embassy from Kaḍāram comprised two envoys (*dūtas*) Rājavidyādhara Śrī Sāmanta and Abhimānōttunga Sāmanta, who petitioned the King (*viṇṇappam śeyya*) for the issue of the grant, while he was seated on his throne Kālingarāyan in the coronation-hall (*tirumañjana śālai*)⁸² inside the palace at Āyirattaḷi *alias* Āhavamallakula-Kālapuram. And the longer *praśasti* of Kulōttuṅga's inscriptions mentions the fact that at the gate of his palace stood rows of elephants showering jewels sent as tribute from the island kingdoms of the wide ocean.⁸³ Another proof of the continued friendly relations between the two kingdoms in this period comes from Sumatra. It is a fragmentary Tamil inscription dated 1010

c21.37

Śaka (a.d. 1088) from Loboe Toewa, and mentioning the name of a celebrated mercantile corporation of South India, the Tiśaiyāyirattu-Aiññūṟṟuvar,⁸⁴ a name which, from analogous forms in the Cōḷa inscriptions of the period, is best understood as ‘the Five Hundred of the thousand (districts) in the (Four) quarters.’ While there is little evidence of the political power of the Cōḷas having extended to the islands of the Malay archipelago in this period, trade relations and culture contacts established in an earlier age seem to have been actively maintained in the reign of Kulōttunga, and perhaps also under his successors.

c21.38

In the north, Kulōttunga left the administration of the Vēṅgī kingdom in the hands of Vijayāditya VII until his death. The relations between them, never very happy, seem to have continued strained even after Kulōttunga’s accession to the Cōḷa throne. There are Eastern Gaṅga inscriptions which, as already noted, show that the Gaṅga king Rājarāja took up the cause of Vijayādita VII with Kulōttunga and secured for him a peaceful time towards the end of his life and career as ruler of Vēṅgī. After the death of Vijayāditya at the end of fifteen years of his reign in Vēṅgī, Kulōttunga appointed his son, Rājarāja Mummaḍi Cōḍa, as Viceroy, and he was anointed as Viceroy most probably on July 27 a.d. 1076.⁸⁵ He, however, preferred living under the same roof as his parents to the enjoyment of a distant viceroyalty, and relinquished his office at the end of a year. His younger brother, Vīra Cōḍa, was then chosen Viceroy and continued to rule in Vēṅgī for a period of six years from the date of his coronation in Śaka 1001 (a.d. 1078-9).⁸⁶ From 1084 to 1089 another son of Kulōttunga, by name Rājarāja Cōḍagaṅga, was the Viceroy. This is clear from the Ṭēki plates of this ruler, dated in the seventeenth year, obviously of Kulōttunga. The Piṭhāpuram plates of Vīra Cōḍa⁸⁷ also state that Vīra Cōḍa was recalled from Vēṅgī by his father who desired ‘to see the growing beauty of his youthful countenance’, and that he was sent again to the north at the end of five years though his father’s ‘eyes had not attained satiety’. But these plates do not state what happened at Vēṅgī during the five years that Vīra Cōḍa spent with his father, and the Cellūr plates of Vīra Cōḍa make no reference either to the break in his Viceroyalty or to Cōḍaganga. Hultzsch says⁸⁸ that this total silence of the Cellūr plates and the omission of Cōḍaganga's name from the Piṭhāpuram plates may lead us to suppose that Cōḍaganga had discredited himself with his father and had been on bad terms with his brother. The fact that Cōḍaganga, though apparently the eldest son of Kulōttunga,⁸⁹ was not appointed Viceroy until a comparatively late stage lends colour to the supposition. In any event, Vīra Cōḍa's second term as Viceroy of Vēṅgī seems to have commenced about A.D. 1088-89 and lasted till at least 1092-93. As Viceroy of Vēṅgī, Vīra Cōḍa was assisted by a Velanāṇṭi prince Vedura II, a nephew of Gonka I, in a battle against an unnamed Pāṇḍya king, and Vīra Cōḍa conferred on Vedura the doab country, Sindhu-yugmāntaradēśa, identified by Hultzsch, with the land between the Kṛṣṇā and Gōdāvari.⁹⁰ Soon after, Kulōttunga likewise favoured other princes of the same line. Vīra Cōḍa was succeeded by Vikramacōḷa who apparently ruled in Vēṅgī till he was chosen heir-apparent to the Cōḷa throne in A.D. 1118.

c21.39

⁸⁸ [not present on page]

c21.40

⁸⁹ [not present on page]

c21.41

⁹⁰ [not present on page]

c21.42

We hear little of happenings in Vēṅgī and further north till we reach the period of Vikramacōḷa's office. In his inscriptions dated after his accession to the Cōḷa throne, there occurs a brief description of his Viceroyalty of Vēṅgī. It is this:

c21.43

'While yet a child,⁹¹ (he) bore the cruel weapons (of war), so that at Kuḷam the Telinga Vīman ascended the mountains as refuge, and so that hot fire consumed the land of Kalinga; he thus stayed joyfully in the Vēṅgai-Maṇḍalam and was pleased to subdue the northern region.'

c21.44

⁹¹ [not present on page]

c21.45

The inscriptions of Kulōttunga himself contain accounts of two Cōḷa invasions of Kalingam, one of which is, no doubt, the subject of the celebrated *Paraṇi* of Jayangoṇḍār.⁹² The first invasion of Kalingam is mentioned in inscriptions of the twenty-sixth year,⁹³ and from the brevity with which the subjection of Kalingam is mentioned on this occasion, we may conclude that this was the war in which Vikramacōḷa distinguished himself as a young man. The second and later invasion of Kalinga is mentioned in the inscriptions of the forty-second and subsequent years;⁹⁴ this is the invasion which gave the occasion for the *Paraṇi*, and apparently Vikramacōḷa had no part in it.

c21.46

⁹² [not present on page]

c21.47

⁹³ [not present on page]

c21.48

The first Kalinga War seems to have been brought about by Kalinga aggression against Vēṅgī, and to have resulted in the annexation of the southern part of the Kalinga country to the Cōḷa Empire. The chief of Kolanu, modern Ellore near the Colair lake, was evidently in league with the ruler of Kalinga, and Vikramacōḷa had to fight on two fronts simultaneously. A vassal of the Cōḷa Emperor from the distant south, the Pāṇḍya King Parāntaka, took part in this war and assisted Vikramacōḷa. The inscriptions of Parāntaka Pāṇḍya,⁹⁵ like those of Vikramacōḷa, state that Kuḷam of the Telunga Bhīma was captured and that Southern Kalingam was subdued. Bhīma was a very common name in the family; it was borne by many rulers of Kolanu, Sarōnāthas, from the time of Rājarāja I Cōḷa to at least the middle of the twelfth century a.d.⁹⁶ No details are forthcoming of this first war against Kalinga. The campaign seems to have been undertaken for the suppression of local revolts rather than for the conquest of fresh territory. Southern Kalinga was apparently the territory between the Gōdāvari and the Mahēndra mountain,⁹⁷ and this territory was already part of the Vēṅgī province some years before the war of Vikramacōḷa.⁹⁸ Possibly, the subordinate rulers whose territories were included in the Viceroyalty of Vēṅgī conspired together and rose in rebellion when the young prince Vikramacōḷa was appointed to the charge of the province. The revolt was unsuccessful, and the entire province was restored to subjection. A Tamil inscription of Kulōttunga at Simhācalam dated Śaka 1021 (a.d. 1098-9),⁹⁹ and several others at Drākṣārāma and other places attest the successful restoration of authority.

c21.49

The later invasion which took place about a.d. 1110 is described in some detail in the inscriptions of Kulōttunga and at greater length in the *Kaliṅgattu-pparaṇi*. According to the inscriptions,¹⁰⁰ the Cōḷa army crossed the Vēṅgī territory, destroyed the elephant corps that was sent by the enemy to oppose its march, spread fire across the enemy country of Kalingam, killed in the fight many powerful leaders of the Kalinga army whose heads rolled on the battle-field, pecked by kites, and in the end subdued the Seven Kalingas. The account in the *Kalingattup-parani* may be summarised as follows.¹⁰¹ When the emperor sat in darbar in his palace at Kāñcī, the *tiru-mandira-ōlai* announced to his master the arrival of subject kings who had brought the annual tribute, and were waiting outside. The vassals were then permitted to enter and exhibit their presents. At the end, the emperor enquired if there were any who had defaulted, and was informed that the king of North Kalinga had done so twice. The emperor forthwith issued the command that an expedition should be sent against Kalinga to storm the hillforts of Kalinga and bring its ruler as a prisoner of war. The valiant Pallava chieftain, Karuṇākara Toṇḍaimān, lord of Vaṇḍai, offered to carry out the emperor’s orders and was accepted. The expeditionary force led by Karuṇākara soon started from Kāñcī. It crossed the Pālār and the Ponmukhari rivers and reached the Peṇṇār; among the other streams crossed by it before reaching Kalingam were the Maṇṇāṟu, the Kṛṣṇā, the Gōdāvari, the Pampā and the Gōtami. The Cōḷa army began to spread destruction as it entered Kalinga, and the suffering inhabitants fled to their king and reported to him what they had seen and suffered. Anantavarman, who had known no defeat before, made light of the whole business, as it was only Kulōttunga’s army, not the emperor himself, that was advancing; one of his ministers, Engarāya, remonstrated with him and spoke of the great achievements that already stood to the credit of the Cōḷa army. Nothing daunted, Anantavarman prepared for the fight. The battle that ensued ended in a complete victory for the Cōḷa forces and Anantavarman sought his safety in flight. After a futile search for him, the victorious Cōḷa army returned home with vast booty.

c21.50

The invasion of North Kalinga, called the Seven Kalingas, and the part of Karuṇākara in it are thus well attested by the inscriptions and the poem. Only the poem gives the immediate cause of the war, namely the default on the part of the Kalinga king in the payment of the annual tribute. This king, Anantavarman Cōḍaganga, was the grandson of Vīrarājēndra by his daughter Rājasundarī. Dynastic connections, however, seldom availed to stop the course of political ambition, and it would seem that Kulōttunga was the aggressor on this occasion. It is hard to believe that throughout the long and, apparently, prosperous reign of Anantavarman, the kingdom of Kalinga was a vassal state remitting a fixed tribute annually to the Cōḷa court. It may be noted that an inscription from Drākṣārāma¹⁰² dated Śaka 1003 in the reign of Viṣṇuvardhana (Kulōttunga?) records a gift by the wife of a Pradhāni of the Tri-Kalingādhipati Rājarājadēva. If this is a reference to the father of Anantavarman, it would follow that Kalinga was such a vassal state at least for a time. The real cause of the war, however, is obscure; and the darbar held by Kulōttunga at Kāñcīpuram in the historic palace of the Cōḷas in that city¹⁰³ and the report of Anantavarman's default made to the emperor by his secretary, may be, not history, but only a literary setting for the grand military enterprise described in the poem. It is clear that the expedition of Karuṇākara led to no permanent results. There is no evidence of a Cōḷa occupation of Northern Kalinga.¹⁰⁴ It may also be noted that a Kōṭa chief Bhīma is said, in an inscription of a.d. 1108,¹⁰⁵ to have assisted the Cōḷa in subduing the Kalinga country. This may be a reference to his part in the first or the second war.

c21.51

¹⁰² 198 of 1893.

c21.52

¹⁰³ *Kalingattu-p-paraṇi*, xi, 7-10.

c21.53

¹⁰⁴ Subba Rao takes a different view, *JAHRS.*, vii, p. 64.

c21.54

¹⁰⁵ 256 of 1892 (EI., vi. p. 159.)

c21.55

The Empire of Kulōttunga still retained its greatest extent in his forty-fifth regnal year or thereabouts. Barring the loss of Ceylon, the troubles and risings in the first years of the reign had not resulted in any serious loss of territory. The boundary between the Western Cāḷukya and Cōḷa dominions was what it had always been, a shifting frontier in the neighbourhood of the Tungabhadrā, whose exact position at any particular time is to be determined by the provenance of contemporary inscriptions. The presence of Kulōttunga's inscriptions in Nandalūr (Cuddapah) called Kulōttunga-śōḷa-Caturvēdimangalam, and in Tripurāntakam (Karnūl),¹⁰⁶ as also in the Mysore country up to the forty-fifth year¹⁰⁷ proves that the rule of Kulōttunga was successfully maintained in these quarters. The hold over Vēṅgī was quite firm and had rendered possible a successful invasion of the territory of its northern neighbour, Kalinga.

First 54 of 258 passages. Read on

Linked texts (32)