The Early History of the Deccan (Parts I–XI) v2.c13.s5: Appendix C: The Cāḷukyas of Vēmulavāḍa
The Early History of the Deccan (Parts I–XI) v2.c13.s5
- Language
- English
Appendix C: The Cāḷukyas of Vēmulavāḍa
v2.c13.s5.2
Vēmulavāḍa, also called Lēmulavāḍa, in the Karimnagar District of Hyderabad, was the capital of a dynasty of Cāḷukyas who ruled a considerable area as the feudatories of the Rāṣṭrakūṭas. Their history, which forms a luminous footnote to the records of the suzerain dynasty, is to be gathered mainly from three inscriptions and from references to it in the Kannaḍa poet Pampa’s Bhārata or Vikramārjunavijaya. Pampa was patronized by Arikesarī II of Vēmulavāḍa, and the poet identified his patron with the epic hero Arjuna and thereby contrived to interweave several incidents of contemporary history into his narrative of the epic story, besides giving a reasonably accurate account of his patron’s ancestors in the introduction to his work. The three inscriptions mentioned are: the Kollipara (Guntur District) copper plates of Arikesarī I,¹ the Vēmulavāḍa rock inscription of Arikesarī II,² and the Parbhaṇi copper plates of Arikesarī III.³
v2.c13.s5.3
¹ Ed. M. S. Sarma, Bhārati, vii, 2 (Pramodūta, Śrāvaṇ).
v2.c13.s5.4
² Ed. B. V. Krishna Rao, JAHRS, vi, 169-92, also reproducing Kollipara text.
v2.c13.s5.5
³ Ed. S. N. Joshi, JBISM, xiii, 3; text reproduced by Nathuram Premi in his Jaina Sāhitya aur itihāsa, pp. 85-92.
v2.c13.s5.6
The rock inscription and the Parbhaṇi plates trace the descent of the family from the sun; this is in keeping with the tradition that fifty-nine kings of the dynasty ruled in Ayodhyā before it came to settle in the Deccan; but it is well known that other records trace its descent from Brahmā or from the Moon.⁴ The genealogy of the line begins with Vinayāditya Yuddhamalla I in all our sources except the Kollipara plates which carry it back four more generations. The genuineness of the Kollipara plates has been suspected on rather inconclusive grounds. The entire genealogy, including the four early generations found only in the Kollipara plates, may be set out as shown opposite.
v2.c13.s5.7
⁴ DKD, p. 339.
v2.c13.s5.8
The name of Yuddhamalla (II and III) occurs as Dugdhamalla in Pampa’s work, probably owing to a scribal error. Much discussion has centred round the identity of the four predecessors of Vinayāditya Yuddhamalla I and the affiliation of the family with other branches of the Cāḷukyas. In his work called Nāḍōja Pampa, Mr. Timmappayya of Mangalore suggested the probable identity of Yuddhamalla I Vinayāditya with the homonymous ruler of the Lāṭa branch of the Cāḷukyas, the son of Jayasiṃhavarman, mentioned in the Balsar plates,⁵ and that of his four predecessors in order with Pulakeśin I, Kirtivarman I, Pulakeśin II of Bādāmi, and Jayasiṃhavarman Dharāśraya of Lāṭa, one of the sons of Pulakeśin II. Though the number of generations and some of the titles tally, there are difficulties, and after a careful discussion of the whole question Dr. Venkataramanayya has reached the conclusion that the suggested identifications cannot be accepted without more direct evidence.
v2.c13.s5.9
⁵ JBBRAS, xvi, 5.
v2.c13.s5.10
A word may be said on chronology before entering on the details of individual reigns. The Parbhaṇi plates are dated in the Śaka year 888 (A.D. 966), and this is the date for Arikesarī III, the last ruler of this line. Eight generations intervene Chāḷukyavaṁśa descended from the Sun Satyāśraya Raṇavikrama
v2.c13.s5.11
Prthivīpati
v2.c13.s5.12
Mahārāja
v2.c13.s5.13
Rājāditya (Prthuvikrama)
v2.c13.s5.14
Vinayāditya Yuddhamalla I (Rājāśraya)
v2.c13.s5.15
Arikesari I
v2.c13.s5.16
Narasimha I Rājāditya
v2.c13.s5.17
Bhadradeva
v2.c13.s5.18
Yuddhamalla II
v2.c13.s5.19
other sons
v2.c13.s5.20
Baddega Soladagaṇḍa
v2.c13.s5.21
other sons
v2.c13.s5.22
Yuddhamalla III
v2.c13.s5.23
Narasimha II
v2.c13.s5.24
Arikesari II
v2.c13.s5.25
Bhadradeva II
v2.c13.s5.26
Arikesari III Ś. 888, date of Parbhaṇi plates between him and Yuddhamalla I; if we allow twenty-five years on an average to a generation, it is clear that 200 years must have elapsed between the end of the reign of Yuddhamalla I and the beginning of that of Arikesarī III. If we assume that Arikesarī III had been ruling for a period of something like ten years before the date of the Parbhaṇī grant, we get to about A.D. 756 for the close of Yuddhamalla I's reign. As a matter of fact, we have the date A.D. 731 (Ś. 653) for him in the Balsar plates, probably referring to a time when he was still in his original home in the Lāṭa country.
v2.c13.s5.27
Of Yuddhamalla I we get a very exaggerated eulogy from the Kollipaṛa plates issued by his son; he is compared to Rāma in valour and described as a *viśvarāṭ* (universal emperor); he is said to have subjugated the whole world with the aid of the boar-crest obtained by the royal family as a boon from Lord Nārāyaṇa, and among the kings who bowed at his feet are counted those of Turushka, Yavana, Barbara, Kāśmīra, Kāmbhoja, Magadha, Mālava, Kaliṅga, Gaṅga, Pallava, Pāṇḍya, Kerala, and others. Such unhistorical fustian goes far to justify the doubts cast upon the genuineness of this record in general. In refreshing contrast to it, we get some definite facts about the king's activities from the later inscriptions and from Pampa. These facts are three in number: (1) he ruled the Sapādalakṣa country and his suzerainty was acknowledged by many feudatories; (2) he made artificial tanks of brick and mortar (*saudhamayīm*) in Poḍana, filled them with oil, and thus made provision, from his immense material resources, for the daily bathing of 500 elephants; (3) he captured the impregnable natural fortress of Chitrakūṭa; this last fact is mentioned only in the Vēmulavāḍa rock inscription.
v2.c13.s5.28
If, as seems probable, Vinayāditya Yuddhamalla was one of the three sons of Dharāśraya Jayasiṃhavarman of Lāṭa, these facts admit of a plausible explanation. The times were difficult and unsettled, and offered scope for talented adventurers to win distinction and accumulate fame and treasure. One of Yuddhamalla's brothers, Pulakeśin, earned the gratitude of his suzerain Chālukya Vikramāditya II by effectively foiling the attempt of the Arabs to enter the Deccan in force; Vikramāditya bestowed on him the title of *avanijanāśraya*, 'refuge for the people of the world', in recognition of his valour. Yuddhamalla found his opportunity in co-operation with Dantidurga, an energetic and ambitious youth of Rāshṭrakūṭa extraction, who planned and carried out the overthrow of Kīrttivarman II, the last Chālukya ruler of Bādāmi. Dantidurga is known to have fought battles at the Mahi, Mahānadī, and Narmadā rivers, and in the Madhyadeśa territory, before he delivered the decisive assault on the Chālukyan power. Yuddhamalla's rule in the Sapādalakṣa country and his capture of the fort of Chitor may be taken to be facets of Dantidurga's campaigns in which Yuddhamalla was the chief actor. Sapādalakṣa is most certainly Śākambharī, the modern Sāmbhar, in Eastern Rajputana, and the mention in the story of Chitor, which is on the direct line between Lāṭa and Sapādalakṣa, confirms this identification.¹ We know very little of the details of the wars of Dantidurga; but some of the mutilated verses in the Daśāvatāra cave inscription have furnished the basis for a plausible suggestion that Dantidurga took the side of a certain Deva or Devarāja against the Gurjara Pratīhāra Nāgabhaṭa I. Dantidurga's presence in Ujjain has been noticed already; he seems to have attacked Nāgabhaṭa's capital Medantapura (Merta) as he also did Śākambharī (Sāmbhar), then held by his feudatories of the Chāhumāna line; Dantidurga thus became for a time master of the entire Gurjara territory including Sapādalakṣa as well as the coastal tracts of Gujarāt.¹ It is obvious that we are concerned here not with any stable political formations, but only with the transient results of more or less successful military raids. We may thus assume that Yuddhamalla assisted Dantidurga in the capture of Chitor and the Sapādalakṣa country, and ruled there as his governor for a short while, and that the memory of this adventure—it was nothing more for either him or his collaborator—was carefully treasured by the family which afterwards treated Yuddhamalla as its *vaṃśakartā* (founder).
v2.c13.s5.29
¹ N. Lakshminarayana Rao holds that the Sapādalakṣa country 'was situated not far from the Karimnagar District' (*JOR*, xviii, 41) and that it 'comprised at least the central and eastern portions of the present Hyderabad State, i.e. Nizamabad and a major portion of the Karimnagar District, though its actual extent and boundaries cannot be determined in the present state of our knowledge' (ibid., p. 42). He seeks support from a suggestion of M. Venkataramayya and from an inscription. Unfortunately, both turn out on careful scrutiny to be quite inconclusive. Venkatara-
v2.c13.s5.30
¹ *Bhāratī*, Sarvadhari—Āṣādha, pp. 179-81.
v2.c13.s5.31
Podana is easily identified with Bodhan in the Nizamabad District of Hyderabad. This is a place with ancient associations, and an inscription of A.D. 1056 mentions the construction of a temple of Viṣṇu in that town by the Rāṣṭrakūṭa Indra III. Its location, taken along with the provenance of the three inscriptions of the Vēmulavāḍa Chālukyas, leaves little room for doubt that the centre of activity of the successors of Yuddhamalla I, if not of Yuddhamalla himself, must be located in the eastern half of Hyderabad known as Telingana; and Podana may be taken to mark a stage in this progress towards the east. Certain other facts tend to confirm this view. The Kollipara plates record a grant to a Śaiva ascetic of Elēśvara to the north of the celebrated mountain Śrīśaila in the Kurnool District. The temple of Āditya mentioned in the Vēmulavāḍa inscription, and the land granted to it, both lay in Vēmulavāḍa itself; and in the Parbhaṇī plates this city is expressly described as the *rājadhānī* (capital) of Arikesarī III. It is almost certain that Vēmula-
v2.c13.s5.32
mayya says that 'Pampa and the Vēmulavāḍa inscription both agree in stating that Bodana was situated in the Sapādalakṣa country ruled over by Yuddhamalla I' (ibid., xii, 264). In fact they do nothing of the kind, as can be seen from the extracts given in *JMU*, xv, 107-8. He cites also the commentary on *Yaśastilaka* which interpretes Aśmantaka to mean Sapādalakṣanivāsin. This reference, however, only implies that this late commentator believed that Aśmantaka was also called Sapādalakṣa in his time. But is Aśmantaka the same as Aśmaka? The inscription cited by N. L. Rao really reads:
v2.c13.s5.33
*Śrīman Mahāmaṇḍalīśvaram Rājāditya-*
*arasar Kotavalam-savalakhkheya-*
*bhāgamumam Chabbi-jōyi Yippatt-ondu-*
*sāsiramumam duṣṭa-nighraha viliṣṭa-*
*pratipālanadim prati-pālisuttum*
*rājadhāni Lembulavāḍeya-nelevīḍinōl*
*sukha-saṃkadhā-vinodadim*
*rājyam-geyyuttum irddu*
(Tel. Inscriptions,
Chālukya No. 19 Lemulavāḍa,
Karimnagar Dt. Date C.V 8
A.D. 1083-4)
v2.c13.s5.34
The sapādalakṣa (Savalakkha) of the inscription had the name Kosavalam, which alters the whole case. Sapādalakṣa by itself was originally the name of Siwalik, which was later transferred to the Sāmbhar region (B.G. i (i), 157, 184).
v2.c13.s5.35
vāḍa became the headquarters of this branch of the Chāḷukyas at an early stage, probably under Arikesari I. It is quite likely, therefore, that a little earlier, towards the end of his career, Yuddhamalla accepted a fief in the neighbourhood of Bodhan as the reward of his services to Dantidurga, and that this territory subsequently became the base for the further achievements of the dynasty.
v2.c13.s5.36
The son of Yuddhamalla I was Arikesari I, the donor of the Kollipara plates which, however, only praise his bravery in war in general terms without mentioning any specific facts of his career; they also give his many titles and say that he was an adept in such diverse subjects of knowledge as grammar, law, elephant-lore, logic, archery, and medicine. All the other sources agree that he captured and ruled Veṅgi together with Trikaliṅga by the strength of his arm; Pampa says that this happened in the reign of Nirupama, i.e. Dhruva (A.D. 780-93), which must have included the later part of the reign of Arikesari I. Dhruva, we have seen (p. 475), attacked Viṣṇuvardhana IV of Veṅgi to punish him for his part in aiding Govinda II in the civil war which had just ended; and in this task Arikesari aided him greatly and was duly rewarded. We may assume that parts of Teliṅgaṇa definitely changed hands as a result of Arikesari’s campaign and became part of the Rāṣṭrakūṭa empire, the newly conquered territory being placed under the rule of Arikesari and his successors. It is quite probable that after this Vēmulavāḍa became the seat of their power.
v2.c13.s5.37
The next four generations after Arikesari I are dismissed in a single verse in the Vēmulavāḍa inscription, and there is a virtual blank in the history of the line for practically a whole century, even Pampa and the Parbhaṇī plates not adding much to our knowledge of the period. The kings in chronological order were Narasimha I Rājāditya, Yuddhamalla II, Baddega I, and Yuddhamalla III. Pampa says that Baddega was victorious in forty-two battles and earned the title solada-gaṇḍa, the soldier who knew no defeat; both Pampa and the Parbhaṇī plates say that he captured Bhīma, ‘of fierce strength in battle’, as one might capture a ferocious crocodile in its own element, water. The Bhīma mentioned here is doubtless Chāḷukya Bhīma I who ascended the throne of Veṅgi after the death of his uncle Guṇaga Vijayāditya III in 892/3. But we learn from Eastern Chāḷukya records that Baddega suffered defeat at least once at the hands of Guṇaga Vijayāditya who granted him peace on honourable terms.¹ Baddega’s war with Chāḷukya Bhīma I came later. The details of the battles are not forthcoming. The analogy of the crocodile employed both by Pampa and the Parbhaṇī plates has given rise to the suggestion that Bhīma was captured in the fortress in the midst of the Colair lake, the scene of many decisive battles.² But this was only an episode in the long-drawn hostilities between the Rāṣṭrakūṭas and the Eastern Chāḷukyas. Bhīma effected his escape from captivity with the aid of Kusumāyudha of the Mudugoṇḍa branch of Chāḷukyas, and immediately prepared himself to meet another Rāṣṭrakūṭa invasion.³
v2.c13.s5.38
¹ N. Venkataramanayya, *Eastern Cāḷukyas*, pp. 126-7.
v2.c13.s5.39
² *Bhārati*, ibid., pp. 389-90.
v2.c13.s5.40
³ *Eastern Cāḷukyas*, p. 139.
v2.c13.s5.41
The next great ruler of Vēmulavāḍa was Narasimha II, the son of Yuddhamalla III. As he was the father of Pampa’s patron Arikesari II, Pampa describes his exploits at some length. The Vēmulavāḍa inscription attributes to him the singlehanded conquest of the Seven Mālavas, a victory over the army of the Gurjjara-rāja, and says that he put the final seal on his fame by a victory over a group of kings on the hill in Kālapirya.¹ Pampa furnishes the important datum that the name of the Gurjara king was Mahīpala on whom Narasimha descended like a thunderbolt, compelling him to escape as best he could from his capital in a disorganized flight. Pampa also mentions a victory of Narasimha over the Lāṭas as the first of Narasimha's achievements, and adds that he had caused his horses to drink the water of the Ganges before he established his fame with his sword at Kālapriya.
v2.c13.s5.42
¹ The text of the inscription is so ambiguously worded that it is not easy to decide whether the pillar (of victory) mentioned in it is literally a stone pillar (śaile stambhe) or merely a metaphor: Kālapriye rājakadambakasya stambhe sva-śauryaṃ vililekha śaile.
v2.c13.s5.43
Once more we must turn to Rāṣṭrakūṭa history for the elucidation of these statements. The name of the Lāṭa enemy of Narasimha is not given. But Lāṭa had been brought under his sway by Rāṣṭrakūṭa Kṛṣṇa II. Evidently there was need for its reconquest by Narasimha II at the very beginning of that expedition to the north which he undertook in the service of his suzerain Indra III. This fact may be explained in one of two ways: either Lāṭa had slipped out of Rāṣṭrakūṭa control and become an independent State like Mālava (the seven Mālavas of the inscription and of Pampa); or possibly the entire region, Mālava and Lāṭa included, had passed under the suzerainty of the Pratīhāras, and the campaign against Mahīpala must then be taken to have begun with the conquest of Lāṭa. However this may be, there is no doubt that the campaign of Indra III and Narasimha II resulted in Lāṭa and Mālava being brought for a time definitely under Rāṣṭrakūṭa control (the Paramāras being installed as vassals in Mālava), and in Mahīpala's losing his kingdom and being temporarily driven into exile. The Cambay plates of Govinda IV state that Indra's elephants made the precincts (prāṅgaṇa) of Kālapriya uneven with the strokes of their tusks, that his horses crossed the Jumna ‘as deep as the ocean’, and that after his expedition, the city Mahodaya (great prosperity) became Kuśasthali (a meadow).² Pampa also mentions the waters of the Ganges and Kālapriya in the same verse. Kālapriya has generally been taken to be the same as Mahākāla of Ujjain; but this equation is not justified since Mahākāla and Kālapriya are really two very different names; and it has been rightly suggested that Kālapriya should be taken to be modern Kalpi where many other armies are known to have crossed the Jumna,³ and where we find a temple of Kālapriya existing today.⁴ Kalpi is on the direct route from the south to Kanauj, the Pratīhāra capital on the Ganges, whose destruction was the culmination of Indra's campaign, as is seen from the clever play upon the alternative names of the city (Mahodaya and Kuśasthali) in the Cambay plates; moreover, there would be no point in a great poet like Pampa making another reference to Ujjain after he had disposed of the conquest of Mālava in an earlier verse. Narasimha is seen thus to have played a leading part in securing the resounding success that attended Indra's victorious northern campaign about A.D. 916; this he did, according to the Vēmulavāḍa inscription, by gaining a decisive victory with his own troops, unaided by those of Indra, at Kalpi, where Mahīpala had taken his stand to oppose the advance of the southern army against his capital. Narasimha’s queen was Jākavve, probably a sister of Indra III and mother of Arikesarī II,¹ the patron of Pampa.
v2.c13.s5.44
² EI, vii, 26 (v. 19).
v2.c13.s5.45
³ By N. Venkataramanayya in Bhāratī, Sarvadhari, p. 398.
v2.c13.s5.46
⁴ Altekar, Rāṣṭrakūṭas, p. 102, n. 44.
v2.c13.s5.47
¹ A very plausible suggestion of Timmappayya, op. cit., p. 46.
v2.c13.s5.48
Arikesarī II was, according to Pampa, cradled in Indra’s arms—a reference at once to Indra III and to the king of the gods, calculated to pave the way for the identification of Arikesarī with Arjuna, the epic hero who was the son of Indra. Arikesarī married Indra’s daughter Rēvakanirmaḍi, according to the Vēmulavāḍa inscription. The Parbhaṇī plates, however, say that Lokāmbikā, also of the Rāṣṭrakūṭa family, was the name of Arikesarī’s queen. It is not clear whether Lokāmbikā was a title of Rēvakanirmaḍi or of a second queen. Both the Vēmulavāḍa inscription and Pampa indulge in much high-flown praise of Arikesarī, and so too do the Parbhaṇī plates. Without stopping to reproduce these vaguely resounding eulogies, we may summarize the historical data as follows: (1) Arikesarī gave protection to a Cāḷukya Bijja (Vijayāditya) who sought his protection against the anger of Govindarāja, who was his *sakala-cakravarti*, i.e. most probably the suzerain of both Bijja and Arikesarī; (2) when Arikesarī sheltered Vijayāditya, Govinda sent many *sāmantas* against him; Arikesarī defeated all of these and thus became *sāmanta-cūḍāmaṇi*; (3) he then fought against Govinda himself and defeated him, bestowing the empire on Baddega who had come to him for aid; lastly (4) with only one elephant he overthrew Bappuva, the younger brother of Kakkala, when Bappuva attacked him with a host of these beasts.
v2.c13.s5.49
The most satisfactory explanation of all these statements can be offered again by a reference to Rāṣṭrakūṭa history and the relations between the Rāṣṭrakūṭas and the Eastern Cāḷukyas.² Govinda IV had deposed his elder brother Amoghavarṣa II and seized the Rāṣṭrakūṭa throne in A.D. 930, an act which set some of his courtiers against him. The dissenting nobles found support within the royal family from Govinda’s paternal uncle Baddega and Baddega’s more ambitious son Kṛṣṇa III. Govinda banished them and they fled to the Cedi court in Tripurī because Baddega’s queen was a Cedi princess, a daughter of Yuvarājdeva I. From there they seem to have carried on their intrigues against Govinda who on his part evidently did little to retrieve his popularity with his subjects. Arikesarī II of Vēmulavāḍa, although the brother-in-law of Govinda, seems to have joined his enemies and espoused the cause of Baddega. Another powerful feudatory prince who acted in the same way was the Gaṅga Būtuga, who visited Baddega in Tripurī and married his daughter, hoping, with his aid, in due course to carry out his designs on his ancestral throne as against his elder brother, the ruling Gaṅga prince Rājamalla III. Meanwhile, in another direction, Govinda’s policy, at first apparently successful, eventually landed him in inextricable difficulties. It was a period of confusion and disputed succession in Veṅgi from the close of Indra III’s reign. Soon after his accession, Govinda had supported Yuddhamalla II against his rivals, and virtually converted Veṅgi into a Rāṣṭrakūṭa province, all real power passing into the hands of the Rāṣṭrakūṭa officials. This was resented by Cāḷukya Bhīma II of the elder branch who got into touch with the anti-Govinda party and was supported by them either openly or in secret. When Cāḷukya Bhīma II began a war of independence, Govinda sent an army under his loyal nobles to put down the rebellion. But before this army could win through to success, another rebellion threatened its rear as Bijja or Vijayāditya of the Mudugoṇḍa branch of Cāḷukyas, who was ruling the territory adjoining the Vēmulavāḍa principality in the south, rose also. When Govinda sent yet another army against him, he appealed to Arikesarī for aid, which was readily granted, and Govinda's forces were defeated. Baddega, who was watching these developments from Tripurī, was then sent for, and was perhaps proclaimed king at Vēmulavāḍa, and Govinda's reign came to an abrupt end, Baddega Amoghavarṣa III and Cāḷukya Bhīma II both entering on the rule of their respective kingdoms in the years A.D. 934-5.
v2.c13.s5.50
² *Eastern Cāḷukyas*, pp. 165-77.
v2.c13.s5.51
The last of the achievements attributed to Arikesarī, the overthrow of Bappuva, is not easy to explain so satisfactorily. He may be the same as the Bappuka who, together with Dantiga, opposed Amoghavarṣa III and was slain as a result by Kṛṣṇa III.¹
v2.c13.s5.52
¹ Ibid., p. 178, n. 1.
v2.c13.s5.53
In the portion of the Vēmulavāḍa inscription recording the grant, besides the many picturesque titles of Arikesarī II which are applied again to his grandson Arikesarī III in the Parbhaṇī plates, we get the name of his *mahāsāndhivigrahi* Guṇakarasa, of Nāgamārya, the *satrādhipāla* (superintendent of feeding houses) of King Baddega (Amoghavarṣa III) and of Nāgamārya's son Peddaṇārya, the *tantrapāla* of King Guṇākara (i.e. Arikesarī II). At Peddaṇārya's request, 100 *nivartanas* of arable land were given by Arikesarī II on the occasion of the *uttarāyaṇa saṃkrānti* for a *satra* for the feeding of persons who came to worship at the Āditya shrine built by him, and another field of eight *nivartanas* for a fresh water tank (*pānīya-bhūmi-kṣetram*). The enumeration of the witnesses to the gifts recorded is also of some interest to the curious, since the list includes in order the four temples of Vēmulavāḍa, three Śaiva teachers (*vyākhyāni-bhaṭṭārakas*) whose names are Mallikārjuna, Vyaktaliṅgi, and Vidyārāśi, and lastly nine *śreṣṭhis* headed by Candraśreṣṭhi. The field which was thus bestowed was subject to a *siddhāya* (money tax) of twelve *drammas*.
v2.c13.s5.54
Of the reigns of the next two rulers who end the line, Bhadradeva II and Arikesarī III, no political events are mentioned in the Parbhaṇī plates, which record a grant by Arikesarī III to the Jaina temple built in Vēmulavāḍa by his father Baddega, and known by the name Śubhadhāma-jinālaya, for repairs and the maintenance of worship. In the grant Arikesarī III is described as the feudatory of Akālavarṣa Kṛṣṇarājadeva (III). But the name of the donee makes the grant a document of the highest value; it is that of the celebrated Jaina polyhistor Somadevasūri, the author of the *Yaśodhara-carita* and of the *Syādvādopaniṣad* and other works, highly respected by many princes in the land who did honour to themselves by honouring him. We know from his oft-quoted colophon to the *Yaśastilaka-campū* that he composed that work in the Śaka year 881 (A.D. 959), i.e. seven years before the date of the Parbhaṇī plates, when Kṛṣṇa III was still residing in his camp at Mēlpāḍi, after his campaigns in the south, and his feudatory Badyaga, the eldest son of Arikesarī II, was ruling at a place called Gaṅgadhārā characterized as overflowing with wealth. Somadeva's spiritual ancestry is explained thus in the Parbhaṇī plates. In the Gauḍa-saṅgha there was a famous scholar by name Yaśodeva; he was a *muni* (sage) who by his *tapas* (austerities) had established contact with the Śāsanadevatas. His pupil was Nemideva, an expert in Jaina doctrine and 'an axe to the pride' of the disputants of rival faiths. Nemideva had many pupils of great excellence, of whom the most famous was Śrī Somadeva, the abode of learning, the seat of fame, whose beauty was matched by his high character. In the colophon to his *Nitivākyāmṛta*, probably written after the date of the Parbhaṇi plates, Somadeva calls himself, among other things, the beloved pupil (*priyaśiṣya*) of Śrī Nemidevabhagavān. His affinity with the Gauḍa-saṅgha has been traced in his references to Dharmāvaloka,¹ a ruler of Rāṣṭrakūṭa extraction in Bodh Gayā, in the tenth century A.D. Pampa and Somadeva, both Jains, two of the greatest names in medieval Indian literature, also shed their lustre on the court of the Chālukyas of Vēmulavāḍa.
v2.c13.s5.55
¹ By Dr. V. Raghavan, *New IA*, vi, 3 June 1943, pp. 68–9.
Linked texts (6)
- Vikramārjunavijaya — Pampa, Kannada
- Epigraphia Indica
- Kâlpi
- Nītivākyāmṛta — Somadevasūri, Sanskrit
- Yaśastilaka — Somadevasūri, Sanskrit
- Jasaharacariu — Puṣpadanta, Apabhraṃśa