The Colas c23.59

c23.59

There was a third power at this time in South India which seems to have interfered to redress the balance in favour of the Cōḷas. This was the power of the Hoysaḷas which had been growing steadily for a century since the time when Viṣṇuvardhana started the policy of expansion and put an end to Cōḷa power over a great part of the Mysore country. By the time of Māṟavarman Sundara Pāṇḍya's invasion of the Cōḷa country, the reign of Ballāḷa II was drawing to a close. Among his queens is mentioned a princess, Cōḷa-mahādēvi, probably of Tamil Cōḷa origin, and it is likely that the Cōḷa ruler turned to Ballāḷa for help in his trouble. At any rate, there is a Hoysaḷa inscription which clearly implies that when Ballāḷa was still living, his son Vīra Narasimha marched against Śrīraṅgam in the South.¹¹² The date of this inscription presents some difficulties; but it corresponds in all probability to 12 September, A.D. 1217.¹¹³ Another inscription describes Ballāḷa himself as the establisher of the Cōḷa kingdom and the lion to the Pāṇḍya-elephant (*Cōḷarājyapratiṣṭhācāryam*, *Pāṇḍya gaja-kēsari*), calls his son Narasimha *Cōḷakulaikarakṣa Magadhorvīpāla-nirmūlaka* (the sole protector of the Cōḷa line, uprooter of the Magadha King, *i.e.* the Bāṇa ruler of Magadaimaṇḍalam), and implies that Ballāḷa II must have assumed his titles before the beginning of A.D. 1218.¹¹⁴ An inscription from Gōvindanahaḷḷi describes with great force the valour of Narasimha in the campaigns he undertook for the restoration of the Cōḷa. A still later grant from Bēlūr (Ś. 1184) states that he rescued the Cōḷa hidden behind the dust, viz., the crowd of his enemies, and earned for himself the titles *Cōḷasthāpana* and *Pāṇḍyakhaṇḍana*.¹¹⁵ It can be seen from the names of Narasimha's enemies that this campaign is different from the one recorded in the Tiruvēndipuram inscription of Rājarāja III’s reign, and is perhaps the earlier one with which we are here concerned. And though the Kannaḍa *campū*, the *Jagannāthavijaya* identifies the Cōḷa king protected by Ballāḷa II with Rājarāja (*rājarāja-pratiṣṭhānirattam*),¹¹⁶ this does not necessarily mean that Kulōttunga III was no more at the time; for the Pāṇḍyan invasion and the Cōḷa restoration alike fall within the short period of the joint-rule of Kulōttunga and Rājarāja (1216-18); Rājarāja who had a long reign before him was the real beneficiary of the Hoysaḷa intervention, and this must be the reason for his name being chosen by the Kannaḍa poet. On the other hand, Sundara Pāṇḍya’s inscriptions mention Kulōttunga III where they specify the name of the Cōḷa monarch, and this is equally intelligible; for there was glory in having defeated a glorious monarch who had fought many wars with success, and no point in mentioning a young prince who had just been made heir-apparent and of whom little was yet known. It is thus clear that the Hoysaḷa intercession on behalf of the Cōḷa must have had something to do with the generosity of Sundara Pāṇḍya towards his vanquished enemy.