Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

The Early History of the Deccan (Parts I–XI) v2.c15.s2.t3: Gaṇapatidēva

The Early History of the Deccan (Parts I–XI) v2.c15.s2.t3

Language
English

Contents

Gaṇapatidēva

v2.c15.s2.t3.1

(A.D. 1199-1261)

v2.c15.s2.t3.2

*Gaṇapati's captivity.* The death of Mahādēva and the captivity of Gaṇapati, his son and heir to the throne, at Dēvagiri, led to the outbreak of disorders in the kingdom. The nobles rose in revolt, and the rulers of the neighbouring states invaded the country. Of the foreign invaders who appeared at this time, the names of only two, king Nāgati whose identity has otherwise not yet been established, and the Chōḷa emperor Kulōttuṅga III, are known. The latter, according to one of his inscriptions, ‘subdued the Vaḍugus (Telugus) who were fierce in war and (thus) brought Vēṅgai-maṇḍalam under his sway’.¹ Kulōttuṅga III effected his entry into Warangal by lavish bribery and gifts of gold. But Rēcherla Rudra, the commander-in-chief of the previous ruler, saved the kingdom from disintegration. ‘He forsooth cut off the head of a haughty feudatory, and set it up for public view, stuck upon the top of a lofty flag-staff, as a scarecrow to frighten the flocks of these wild beasts that are hostile kings.’² King Nāgati, threatened by the pennons fluttering from the lances of Rudra’s army, speedily took to flight. Kulōttuṅga III evidently followed his example. ‘When the fortune of the Kākati through error had set her foot among many sharp thorns, he (Rudra) himself by the might of his arm forcibly crushed and removed them and very firmly established her in security.’³ Rudra appears to have taken the reins of government into his own hands in the absence of his master; for the titles Kākatīya-rājya-bhāra-dhaurēya and Kākati-rājya-samartha⁴ associated with his name clearly show that he carried on the administration in the name of his lord and sovereign.

v2.c15.s2.t3.3

¹ Inscriptions of the Pudukkottai State, 163, 166; K. A. Nilakanta Sāstri, Colas, ii, 125, 133, 142.

v2.c15.s2.t3.4

² HAS, iii, v. 22.

v2.c15.s2.t3.5

³ Ibid. v. 24.

v2.c15.s2.t3.6

⁴ AR, 261 of 1893; SII, iv, 1117.

v2.c15.s2.t3.7

Gaṇapati was soon released from prison and sent back to rule his kingdom. Since his reign is usually reckoned as beginning in A.D. 1199, his incarceration cannot have lasted very long. The circumstances in which he was set free are not definitely known. The Sēuṇa inscriptions, no doubt, attribute his regaining of freedom to the compassion felt for him by the Yādava monarch Jaitrapāla. Sympathy and generosity may indeed have played their part, but political considerations must also have weighed with the Yādava in setting the youthful captive at liberty. He probably desired to secure himself against an attack from the east in the event of a conflict with the Hoysalas in the south. The aggressive policy of Ballāḷa II, who had already wrested from him a large part of the Northern Karṇāṭaka, must have made him apprehensive regarding the safety of his southern frontier.

v2.c15.s2.t3.8

The reign of Gaṇapati, though it began under unfavourable circumstances, was destined to become one of the most brilliant epochs in the history of the Āndhra country. Gaṇapati was an energetic monarch, and during his long reign of sixty-three years he brought under his sway by war or diplomacy almost the whole land inhabited by the Telugu-speaking peoples. The political disintegration which followed the dismemberment of the Western Chāḷukyan and Chōḷa empires rendered his task comparatively easy. The country was subjected to the authority of numerous petty chiefs engaged in constant internecine warfare for self-aggrandizement. The chiefs of Velanāḍu demand attention first. Although their power declined after the death of Chōḍa II about A.D. 1181, inscriptions at Dākshārāmam, Piṭhāpuram, and Śrīkūrmam indicate that Pṛthvīśvara’s authority over the northern portion of the maritime Āndhra country remained intact until the time of his death about A.D. 1210.¹ Some of the loyal subordinates of his family in the Divi island and its neighbourhood acknowledged his suzerainty and helped him in his wars,² though ruling their own fiefs as independent princes. A tradition preserved in the Telugu *Simhāsana-dvātriṁśika* of Gōparāju, a work composed in the early fifteenth century A.D., represents Pṛthvīśvara as ruling from his ancestral capital Tsandavōlu in the Krishna district.³ The evidence of the inscriptions, as well as literary tradition, thus bears testimony to the continuance of the rule of the Velanāṭi family over part, if not the whole, of the coastal Āndhra country. Their authority, such as it was, must have been limited by the power of numerous autonomous or semi-autonomous petty feudal states which honeycombed the country. The chiefs of Kolanu or Sarasipurī ruled over the region round the Kolair lake. The Chāgis of Guḍimeṭṭa held sway over parts of the Krishna tract in the interior, and the Nātavāḍis over the territory along the northern bank of the same river now included in the Kambhammet district of the old Hyderabad State. The Kōṭas, and the Telugu Chōḷas of Koṇidena, governed parts of the present Guṇṭur region and farther south lay the Telugu Chōḷa kingdom of Nellore, comprising the Nellore and Cuddapah districts of the Āndhra Pradesh, and the major portion of the Chingleput district of the Madras State with the cities of Nellore and Kāñchi as alternate capitals. The petty chiefs of Ēruva, a small tract of territory at the junction of the Nellore, Guntur, and Kurnool districts, acknowledged the supremacy of the Nellore Chōḷas, whilst several minor principalities flourished in the Cuddapah and Kurnool marches. And in the north-east the Gaṅgas of Kaliṅga were supreme in parts of that country. Such was the political state of the Āndhra country at the moment when Gaṇapati at length took the reins of the government into his own hands.

v2.c15.s2.t3.9

¹ EI, iv, pp. 32 ff.; SII, v, 1100; Mack. MSS. 15-6-26; *Elliot’s Collections*, p. 133, No. 55; *AR*, 370-B of 1896; SII, v, 1254.

v2.c15.s2.t3.10

² EI, iii, No. 15, v, 50, p. 87: ‘Chōḍa-Pṛthvīla-bhūparya chatur-āśā-jayāvahāḥ abhūvan-bāhu-vīryēṇa chatvārō bhaṭa-puṁgavāḥ.’

v2.c15.s2.t3.11

³ Bhārati, xxii, part i, p. 546.

v2.c15.s2.t3.12

*Gaṇapati and Pṛthvīśvara.* The policy which he had to follow in dealing with these states had already been marked out by his predecessors. Both Prōla II and Rudra had cherished imperial designs; they desired, as we have pointed out above, to bring under their rule not only Teliṅgāṇa but also the coastal districts, and to establish their hegemony over the whole of the Āndhra country. Though they were completely successful in reducing Teliṅgāṇa, yet their attempts to expand their dominion towards the south and the east met with failure, owing largely to the opposition of the Velanāṭi chiefs who were then ruling the maritime tracts as the nominal representatives of the Cāḷukya-Cōḷa emperors in the south. The power of the Velanāṭi chiefs, however, declined after the death of Cōḍa II about A.D. 1181, and Pṛthvīśvara, Cōḍa II's grandson, appears at that time to have exercised some sort of authority over his ancestral kingdom; but he was not strong enough to check the turbulence of the nobility or to stem the forces of disintegration. Gaṇapati seized his opportunity and invaded the coastal districts with strong forces in the year A.D. 1201, accompanied by all the subordinate chiefs whom he could muster, such as the Kōṭas, Nāṭavāḍis, and Malyālas. He first attacked Bezwada which stood on the eastern frontier of the Kākatīya kingdom. An inscription of the Nāṭavāḍi prince, Vakkaḍimalla Rudra, found in the Kanadurga-maṇṭapa at the foot of the Indrakila hill and dated A.D. 1201, indicates the presence of Nāṭavāḍi troops, and presumably also those of the Kākatīyas, in the city at that time.¹ Bezwada was soon captured, and the invaders proceeded eastwards to the island of Dīvi, near the mouth of the Kṛṣṇā, then the headquarters of the Ayya chiefs, who held sway over the fertile tracts of the delta. These Ayya chiefs did not submit without stubborn resistance. Trusting to the strong fortifications of their island fortress, they stoutly opposed the advance of the invaders but were finally obliged to surrender and to see their rich and beautiful capital plundered by the enemy. In recognition of the meritorious services rendered by the Malyāla chief Chauṇḍa, Gaṇapati conferred on him, as stated in the Koṇḍiparti inscription dated Śaka 1125 (A.D. 1203), the title of Dvīpi-luṇṭāka, or Divi-chūrakāra, that is ‘the plunderer of the island of Dvīpi or Dīvi’.² Gaṇapati, however, did not annex the conquered territory to his kingdom, for he was an astute politician, and understood that by adopting a policy of conciliation he would be able to build up his power on permanent foundations. He therefore dealt leniently with the vanquished Ayya chiefs; he not only restored their possessions but contracted marital relations with them by marrying Nārāmbā and Pērāmbā, the two daughters of Ayya Pina Cōḍi, and took their brother Jāya or Jāyapa into his service. It is not improbable that as a consequence of these victories not only Dīvi but also the whole of Velanāḍu, as is in fact stated in the Gaṇapēśvaram inscription dated A.D. 1211, fell into the hands of Gaṇapati at this time.³

v2.c15.s2.t3.13

¹ EI, vi, No. 15, p. 159.

v2.c15.s2.t3.14

² Corpus, Nos. 8 (v. 55) and 9, v. 53. Dr. P. Srinivasachar's translation (Corpus, p. 50) 'even in heaven as Cūrakāra' is absurd.

v2.c15.s2.t3.15

³ EI, iii, p. 91.

v2.c15.s2.t3.16

Although Pṛthvīśvara was regarded, at least in name, as the ruler of the coastal region, his authority, as has already been stated, was confined to a part of it. The provenance of his various inscriptions is proof that only the territory between Dākṣhārāmam in the East Godavari district to Śrīkūrmam in the Śrīkakulam district was actually under his sway. What happened in the years immediately following Gaṇapati’s conquest of Divi is not quite clear. Pṛthvīśvara probably led an expedition to recover Divi and other territories conquered by Gaṇapati, but met with disaster. In the contemporary Telugu literature and inscriptions it is said that as a young man Tikka, the Telugu Chōḷa king of Nellore, played ball with the head of Pṛthvīśvara on the field of battle.¹ Others besides Chōḍa Tikka also take credit for this achievement. Mahāmaṇḍalēśvara Ballaya Chōḷa, probably of Kammanāḍu, and the Kākatīya king Gaṇapati, both lay claim separately to the same deed. Each of these is reported to have treated the head of Pṛthvīśvara even as Tikka is said to have done, after having themselves slain him.² It is evident that Gaṇapati and the Telugu Chōḷa chiefs, Tikka and Ballaya, fought side by side against Pṛthvīśvara and killed him. How they came to join one another and make common cause against Pṛthvīśvara is not known. It is not improbable that, as stated above, he invaded the coastal Āndhra, that Gaṇapati and the two Telugu Chōḷa princes, who were either that prince’s feudatories or else his allies, opposed his advance, and that in the engagement which followed, Pṛthvīśvara was killed. With his death the power of the Velanāṭi kings came to an end and their territory passed into the hands of the Kākatīya monarch.

v2.c15.s2.t3.17

¹ Tikkana Sōmayāji, *Nirvacana-Uttara Rāmāyaṇam*, i. 32; Kētana, *Daśakumāra-caritram*, i. 16.

v2.c15.s2.t3.18

² *SII*, vi, 166; *AR* 206 of 1897, Bidar inscription of Rudrāmbā. See *Summary of Papers*, XVth Session of All India Oriental Conference, Bombay.

v2.c15.s2.t3.19

Kākatīyas in the South. Gaṇapati began to interest himself in the affairs of the southern kingdoms very early in his reign. The Chēbrōlu inscription of Jāya-sēnāpati dated Ś. 1135 (A.D. 1213) alludes to an expedition against the kings of the southern region which Gaṇapati had undertaken on an earlier occasion.³ The conquest of the southern kings and the expansion of the Kākatīya power in that direction were the direct outcome of his alliance with the Telugu Chōḷas of Nellore, who had established themselves there during the first half of the twelfth century A.D. Nalla Siddhi had become the master of a compact state comprising the modern Nellore, Cuddapah, and Chingleput districts together with the prosperous cities of Nellore or Vikramasiṃhapura and Kāñchi which served him as alternate capitals. The successors of Nalla Siddhi, taking advantage of the weakness of Rājādhirāja II, seem to have asserted their independence. Very little is known about the events of the reigns of Bēta I and Erra Siddhi who succeeded him on the throne. The latter had three sons, Manuma Siddhi I, Bēta II, and Tammu Siddhi. Of these the eldest, Manuma Siddhi I, followed him on the throne. During the reign of Manuma Siddhi I, father of Chōḍa Tikka I, Kulōttuṅga III invaded the Telugu Chōḷa kingdom in order to bring it back under his suzerainty. As the inscriptions dated in his third regnal year (A.D. 1180) are found in Kāñchi, Kālahasti, and Nandalūr,⁴ all then included in the kingdom of Nellore, the campaign against the kings of the North and the entry into the city of Kāñchī must have taken place at this time. It was obviously directed against Manuma Siddhi I, who seems to have forfeited his throne as a consequence of his defeat. The victorious Chōḷa monarch entrusted the kingdom to Manuma Siddhi’s younger brother Nalla Siddhi and returned home in triumph. Inscriptions of Nalla Siddhi ranging in date from A.D. 1187 to 1204, found scattered in various localities within the Nellore kingdom, show that he remained loyal to his suzerain.¹ Subsequently government passed into the hands of his younger brother Tammu Siddhi, who seems to have usurped the throne and held it until A.D. 1207-8. Tikka, the son of Manuma Siddhi I, who considered himself to be the rightful heir to the throne, solicited Gaṇapati’s help to regain his patrimony. As already mentioned, he joined forces with Gaṇapati who was then waging war on the Velanāṭi king Pṛthvīśvara, and helped him to slay the latter in battle. In return for this help, Gaṇapati, after reducing Velanāṇḍu to submission, marched against Nellore, and having put Tammu Siddhi and his supporters to flight,² installed Tikka on the throne of his ancestral kingdom and returned home, as stated in the Chēbrōlu inscription cited above, by way of Tāmrapuri.

v2.c15.s2.t3.20

³ *EI*, v, p. 149.

v2.c15.s2.t3.21

⁴ *AR*, 403 of 1919, 195 of 1892, 586 of 1907.

v2.c15.s2.t3.22

¹ NI, N, 40, 85; AR, 317 of 1929, 198 of 1892, 601 of 1907, 197 of 1894, 578 of 1907.

v2.c15.s2.t3.23

² EI, vii, pp. 123, 149.

v2.c15.s2.t3.24

Tikka, whom Gaṇapati had installed on the throne of Nellore, was indeed an able and warlike prince; but owing to the aggressions of powerful neighbours he was not infrequently hard put to it to defend his frontiers and preserve the integrity of his kingdom. It was probably for this reason that he propitiated Kulōttuṅga III by acknowledging his supremacy,³ though he had himself come to power with the help of the Kākatīya monarch by ousting his uncle, who was himself a loyal feudatory of the Chōḷa emperor. Tikka had to face, early in his reign, a Sēuṇa invasion which threatened to destroy his power; following this he lost Kāñchī and his other possessions in the Tamil country as a result of the political disorders prevailing there, though he acknowledged the supremacy of the Chōḷa king Kulōttuṅga III, and kept on friendly relations with him. The total absence of any inscriptions of his between A.D. 1215 and 1228 seems to indicate that during these years he had again been driven from the throne. Tikka, according to contemporary Telugu literature and the Telugu Chōḷa inscriptions, is said to have vanquished his enemies single-handed by his own efforts without any help from allies; defeated the Sēuṇa army in the battle fought at Kurumulūr in the Cuddapah district, and made prisoners of all their horsemen.⁴ There is reason to believe, however, that Tikka actually owed his success, at least in part, if not wholly, to the help sent to him by Gaṇapati. In an inscription of Maṭṭevāḍa in the Warangal district, dated A.D. 1228, Gaṇapati is said to have plundered a Chōḷa capital which was in all probability Kāñchī.⁵ A more explicit reference to his achievements in this direction is furnished by the Gaṇapēśvaram epigraph of Jāya-sēnāpati dated A.D. 1231, in which it is stated that Gaṇapati, having easily subdued the Chōḷa, the Kaliṅga, the Sēuṇa, the Bṛihat-Karṇāṭaka, and the Lāṭa . . . made the whole country of Velanāṇḍu his own together with Dvīpa.¹ It may be noted that all the kings mentioned here, excepting the Lāṭa, were rulers of South Indian kingdoms. Evidently Tikka had to face a combination of the kings mentioned above; and he naturally seems to have appealed to his old friend for help. It was under these circumstances that Gaṇapati proceeded to the south at the head of his army and having vanquished and driven out the associated kings he re-established Tikka at Nellore and Kāñchī. Tikka appears to have appointed on this occasion the Kāyastha Gaṅgaya Sāhini, a brother-in-law of Ambadeva I, one of Gaṇapati’s vassals, as the Governor of Upper-Pākanāḍu to strengthen his position in the interior of his kingdom. Tikka’s troubles, however, were by no means at an end. His interests clashed with those of the Hoysalas, and he was soon involved in a war with them.

v2.c15.s2.t3.25

³ NI, R, 8.

v2.c15.s2.t3.26

⁴ Nir-Utta, 1. 33; AR, 446 of 1920; ARE, 1920, ii, para. 55.

v2.c15.s2.t3.27

⁵ Corpus, 10.

v2.c15.s2.t3.28

¹ *EI*, iii, p. 91.

v2.c15.s2.t3.29

The statement of Tikkana Sōmayāji in the introduction to his *Nirvachan-Ōttara Rāmāyaṇam* that Tikka by inflicting a defeat on Karṇāṭa Sōmēśvara established his own power, and having without difficulty restored the Chōḷa to his throne, assumed his (Sōmēśvara’s) title of *Chōḷa-sthāpan-āchārya* or ‘the establisher of Chōḷa’, shows clearly that he had embarked on the war on behalf of the Chōḷa emperor Rājarāja III. The details of this war are not known, but it is clear that Tikka marched to the south at the head of his army and killed Narasimha II in battle at Jambai in A.D. 1239, defeated in the next year Narasimha’s son Sōmēśvara who had attacked him to avenge the death of his father, and assumed the title of *Chōḷa-sthāpan-āchārya*, which he bore thereafter.² We have at present no information to show whether Tikka received any help from Gaṇapati in his war on the Hoysalas. It is not, however, unlikely that Gaṇapati took part in this conflict also; for the Hoysalas, who were then in the heyday of their power, could hardly have been defeated by the unaided efforts of a minor chief like Tikka. Of this, however, there is as yet no evidence and in default of further intelligence the entire credit for the victory must be ascribed to the prowess of Tikka himself.

v2.c15.s2.t3.30

² *AR*, 439 of 1937-38; *ARE*, 1937-38, ii, para. 42; *EC*, vi, Kd, 100; *Nir-Utta*, 1, 33.

v2.c15.s2.t3.31

*Kaliṅga Expedition*. After his victory over Pṛithvīśvara, Gaṇapati naturally desired to bring the latter’s possessions in Kaliṅga under his rule. He therefore sent an army into that country to reduce it to subjection. The conquest of the coastal districts to the east of Warangal, including the powerful principality of Kolanu (Sarasī- or Kamalākarapuri) as well as that of Kaliṅga, was effected, according to the *Sivayōgasāra*, a fifteenth-century treatise on Vīra-Śaiva theology, in the course of a single campaign under the command of Indulūri Sōma Pradhāni, one of the ministers of Gaṇapati.³ The available epigraphic evidence does not lend colour to this account. The Kākatīya conquest of the coastal Āndhra and Kaliṅga appears, on the contrary, to have been effected piecemeal. Kolanu did not, as a matter of fact, come under the Kākatīya power until A.D. 1231, several years after Gaṇapati's invasion of Kaliṅga. Bhīma, the Telugu Chōḷa chief of Ēruva, who must have been a contemporary of Gaṇapati, appears to have joined the expedition; for in a verse in the Tāḷḷa-Prodduṭūru inscription of Jagatāpi Gaṅgadēva dated Ś. 1244 (A.D. 1322-3), it is stated that Bhīma conquered several places situated in Vēṅgi, Orissa, and the Bastar State in the Madhya Pradesh.¹ Bhīma was a petty chief who could scarcely have carried out all these successful raids entirely with his own resources. He must have joined, like other nobles and soldiers of fortune, the Kākatīya army, and have participated in Gaṇapati's campaigns in the districts mentioned above. Besides these, Rājanāyaka, the commander of the Rēcherlas, accompanied the expedition and distinguished himself during the campaign.²

v2.c15.s2.t3.32

³ The *Kaliṅga Saṁchika*, p. 382.

v2.c15.s2.t3.33

¹ Bhārati, xv, part i, pp. 143 ff.

v2.c15.s2.t3.34

² HAS, No. 3, p. 18; SII, iv, 117; AR, 261 of 1893.

v2.c15.s2.t3.35

The expedition probably set out from some base on the banks of the Gōdāvarī and having entered Kaliṅga, conquered the Māḍiyas and the Twelve Manniyas, that is, the country extending as far as the frontiers of the present Madhya Pradesh and Orissa. Tekkali was captured, and a great battle was fought at Bokkera in the Aska tāluk of the Ganjam district, in which a famous warrior who bore the title of Gōdhumaraāti was killed with all his followers.³ Another engagement took place near Udayagiri in the Peda-kimiḍi Agency; Paḍiyarāya, the ruler of the place, was put to flight, and the fort was taken.⁴ Gōdhumaraāti and Paḍiyarāya have not yet been identified. It is not unlikely that they were subordinates of the Eastern Gaṅga king, Rājarāja III, who was ruling over Kaliṅga at this time. The Kākatīya army next marched into Bastar, reduced Chakrakōṭa, and crossing the Gōdāvarī took possession of Manthena on the south bank of the river;⁵ and having thus completed the conquest of the hill tracts, the army finally returned in triumph to Dākshārāmam, where Rājanāyaka, the commander of the Rēcherla forces, endowed, as a thank-offering, a perpetual lamp in the temple of the god Bhīmēśvara, on Sunday, Vaiśākha, śu 11, Ś. 1134 (29 April, A.D. 1212).⁶

v2.c15.s2.t3.36

³ A certain Vairi-Gōdhumagharaṭṭa is mentioned in the Gaṇapēśvaram inscription as an enemy of Jāyapa (EI, iii, No. 15, v. 41); but the identity of this chief and the occasion when he was defeated by Jāyapa are unfortunately not known.

v2.c15.s2.t3.37

⁴ HAS, No. 3, p. 18.

v2.c15.s2.t3.38

⁵ Bhārati, xv, part i, pp. 143 ff.

v2.c15.s2.t3.39

⁶ SII, iv, 1117 (AR, 261 of 1893).

v2.c15.s2.t3.40

Gaṇapati's expedition against Kaliṅga was no doubt a brilliant demonstration of his military strength; but it produced no material results. No trace of the Kākatīya rule has so far been discovered to the north of Dākshārāmam. The Eastern Gaṅgas with whom Gaṇapati's army must have come into conflict during the expedition soon asserted their authority, as will be shown immediately, and shook off all traces of his expedition against them.

v2.c15.s2.t3.41

Kammanāḍu. The affairs of Kammanāḍu demanded immediate attention. Some of the chiefs in the district, most probably the Telugu Chōḷas of Koṇidena, appear to have defied Gaṇapati’s authority and begun to rule as independent princes. Ōpili Siddhi, a scion of the Pottapi branch of the Telugu Chōḷa family, was commissioned by Gaṇapati to reduce them to obedience and to bring the entire district under his sway. Ōpili Siddhi accomplished the task to the entire satisfaction of his master and obtained the governorship of the territory from him as a reward for his services.¹ The Chakranārāyaṇa princes who were ruling over Addaṅki and its neighbourhood seem to have been conquered about the same time. Though direct proof of this is lacking, the provenance of Gaṇapati’s numerous inscriptions leaves no room for doubt that this region also passed into his hands before A.D. 1217-18.²

v2.c15.s2.t3.42

¹ SII, vi, 628 (AR, 183 of 1899).

v2.c15.s2.t3.43

² NI, ii, O. 17, 45, iii, O. 139.

v2.c15.s2.t3.44

Eastern Gaṅga Incursion. Rājarāja III, who was ruling in Kaliṅga at the time of Gaṇapati’s invasion, died soon afterwards. His son Anaṅga (Aniyaṅka) Bhīma III, who succeeded him in A.D. 1211, freed his country from the Kākatīya yoke, and penetrated into Gaṇapati’s territories as far west as the frontier of Veṅgī before his 8th year (A.D. 1217). In an inscription at Dākshārāmam dated in that year he claims to have already effected the deliverance of the Trayī-vasundharā, that is, the Trikaḷiṅga country.³ Anaṅga Bhīma III was an ambitious monarch; he was not satisfied with the expulsion of the invaders from his native country but was desirous of effecting the conquest of the fertile land of Veṅgī. Circumstances do not seem to have favoured the immediate prosecution of his designs. He had therefore to bide his time, awaiting a suitable opportunity for launching an expedition against that country.

v2.c15.s2.t3.45

³ SII, iv, 1329, AR, 407 of 1893.

v2.c15.s2.t3.46

Conquest of Kolanu. It may be noted here that Veṅgī, or at least a large part of it, remained independent until A.D. 1230 under the Kolanu chiefs who had their headquarters at Kolanu or Sarasīpurī. Mahāmaṇḍalēśvara Kolani Kēśavadēva, who came to the throne in A.D. 1192, held sway over the country for thirty-six years until A.D. 1228.⁴ It was probably after the death of that chief that Aniyaṅka Bhīma III, considering that the time was now propitious for realizing his long cherished desire, resolved to attempt the subjugation of Veṅgī. The Kākatīya armies were at that time busy in the south waging war against the Hoysalas and other southern rulers on behalf of the Telugu Chōḍa Tikka of Nellore. In order to ensure the success of his enterprise, Aniyaṅka Bhīma appears to have espoused the cause of the Velanāṭi chiefs Kulōttuṅga Rājēndra Chōḍa and Goṅka, descendants of Velanāṭi Pṛthvīśvara, and to have dispatched his army to effect the final conquest of Veṅgī. Jesrājaka, the son of Khaḍgasimha, the commander-in-chief of his forces, arrived in A.D. 1230 at Dākshārāmam, where he busied himself with carrying out repairs to the temple of the god Bhīmēśvara. His arrival at Dākshārāmam was in fact the prelude to the outbreak of the war; and during the next three years he was fully engaged in accomplishing his purpose.¹

v2.c15.s2.t3.47

⁴ SII, iv, 181, AR, 531 of 1893; 167, AR, 527 of 1893; 175, AR, 529 of 1893; X. 262, AR, 723 of 1930; 268, AR, 735 of 1920; IV. 187, AR, 532 A of 1893.

v2.c15.s2.t3.48

¹ *AR*, 430, of 1893; *SII*, iv, 1252, *AR*, 357 A of 1893.

v2.c15.s2.t3.49

Gaṇapati did not remain indifferent to the aggressive activities of the Kaliṅga king. As soon as he had installed Tikka in Kāñchī in A.D. 1228, he recalled his army from the south and concerted measures for the expulsion of the Kaliṅgas from Vēṅgī and for bringing that country under his control. He dispatched an army under Indulūri Sōma Pradhāni, and Eruva Bhīma, Kālapa Nāyaka, and Malyāla Hēmādri Reḍḍi who seem to have accompanied him, rendered him valuable assistance. A study of the find-sites of the Kākatīya inscriptions shows that the process of the conquest began as early as A.D. 1231. An epigraph of Gaṇapati engraved on a pillar in the temple of Pālīśvara at Iragavaram in the West Godavari district and dated A.D. 1231 shows that Kolanu was conquered by him in that year.² Velanāṭi Goṅka, who suffered a defeat at the hands of Malyāla Hēmādri Reḍḍi, took to flight.³ Kulōttuṅga Rājēndra Chōḍa appears to have surrendered at discretion; for Kālapa Nāyaka, who, according to an inscription dated A.D. 1254, was appointed governor of Vēṅgī, claims to have been the saviour of Kulōttuṅga Rājēndra Chōḍa.⁴ What happened after this is not known. The death of Anaṅga Bhīma III during the course of that year, or early in the next, led perhaps to the suspension of hostilities.

v2.c15.s2.t3.50

² This inscription which has been copied by Mr. M. Somaśekhara Sarma remains yet to be published.

v2.c15.s2.t3.51

³ *SII*, iv, 1333, *AR*, 283 of 1905.

v2.c15.s2.t3.52

⁴ *SII*, vi, 602, *AR*, 160 of 1899. *Kulōttuṅga-Rājēndra-Chōḍa-nistāraka*.

v2.c15.s2.t3.53

The Eastern Gaṅga attacks on the Kākatīya dominions did not, however, cease with Anaṅga Bhīma’s death; for his son and successor, Narasimha I, who ascended the throne in A.D. 1238, followed his father’s aggressive policy. In the *Vallabhābhyudayam*, a late Telugu rendering of the Sanskrit *Śrīkākula-Māhātmyam*, the *sthala-purāṇam* of Śrīkākulam in the Krishna district, it is stated that Narasimha sent a military expedition against Kāñchī under the command of his foster brother, Daṇḍanāyaka Anantapāla, and that the latter halted at Śrīkākolanu during his march to erect a temple to the god Telugu Vallabha (Āndhra Viṣṇu), and thence proceeded to Kāñchī, where after defeating his enemies and exacting tribute from them he set up a pillar of victory describing his exploits and then returned home in triumph.⁵ No record of Anantapāla has so far been discovered; therefore, the information furnished by the *sthala-purāṇam* cannot be verified at present.

v2.c15.s2.t3.54

⁵ Madras University, Āndhra Granthamāla, No. 8, pp. 63-65, 83-84.

v2.c15.s2.t3.55

Gaṇapati, who had been preoccupied with the affairs of the western Āndhra country at the time of Narasimha’s invasion, having settled these to his satisfaction, sent his army across the Gōdāvarī, and attacked the Eastern Gaṅga territories on the northern side of that river. Not much is known about this invasion, since the information available on the subject is extremely scanty. The Nandalūr inscription of Manuma Siddhi II dated A.D. 1257-8 merely alludes to it. It is stated therein that Manuma Siddhi II, desirous of acquiring the friendship of Gaṇapati, joined him with his forces on the banks of the Gōdāvarī where he fought a great battle with the Kaliṅgas and forced them to retreat into their own country.¹ It must have been on this occasion that Paḍikamu Boppadēva of the Chāḷukyan family, who was at that time paṭṭa-sāhiṇi and sakalasēnādhipati in the service of Gaṇapatidēva, slew in battle on the Gōdāvarī Goṇṭūri Nāgadēva,² a prince whose estate lay on the banks of the Kṛṣṇā. Inscriptions show that the Goṇṭūri chiefs Nāgadēva and Nārāyaṇadēva were ruling somewhere in the neighbourhood of Bezwada at the time of Narasimha’s invasion.³ They probably joined him and made common cause with him against Gaṇapati; but they must have shared his defeat and probably lost their possessions in consequence. As a result of this victory the Kākatīya power remained undisturbed in the Gōdāvarī valley until the end of Gaṇapati’s reign.

v2.c15.s2.t3.56

¹ *AR*, 580 of 1907. Yaḥ-sāhayyam vidhitsuh Gaṇapati-nṛpatēḥ svēchchhayā saṃgarāgrē Gōdāvaryām sariti nṛpatiḥ dharma-yashtyā nivritya Kaliṅgam syān Kaliṅgān-abhimukham-akarōd-ēka-vīraiḥ-tadānīm

v2.c15.s2.t3.57

² *SII*, x, 398; *AR*, 194 of 1905.

v2.c15.s2.t3.58

³ *SII*, iv, 715, 755, 763.

v2.c15.s2.t3.59.1

Gaṇapati’s Southern Expedition. The state of affairs in the south underwent a sudden change with the death of Tikka in A.D. 1248. The kingdom of Nellore was plunged into anarchy. Gaṇapati was soon called upon to intervene and to restore peace and order. On the death of Tikka the succession to the throne of Nellore was in dispute. The principal claimants were Tikka’s son Manuma Siddhi II and a certain Vijaya or Vijaya-Gaṇḍagōpāla, a prince whose relationship with the Nellore branch of the Telugu Chōḷa royal family is uncertain. On the death of Tikka, Vijaya seized the Chingleput and North Arcot districts then included in the kingdom of Nellore, leaving only the northern parts of it, comprising the present Nellore and Cuddapah districts, in the possession of his rival. To strengthen his position he then entered into an alliance with the kings of Drāviḍa and Karṇāṭaka. The former was no doubt the Chōḷa monarch, Rājarāja III or his co-regent Rājēndra III, who had been recognized as heir apparent to the Chōḷa throne in A.D. 1246 and had since then been virtual ruler of all the Chōḷa dominions. The Karṇāṭaka was certainly Vīra Sōmēśvara (A.D. 1234-5-60). Though he was assisted in the administration of his Karṇāṭaka and Tamil possessions by his two sons Narasimha III and Vīra Rāmanātha respectively, he yet wielded supreme power over his entire kingdom until the very end of his reign.

v2.c15.s2.t3.59.2

Sōmēśvara must have welcomed the proferred alliance with Vijaya-Gaṇḍagōpāla, since it gave him an opportunity to re-establish his hegemony over Conjeevaram and its neighbourhood. Having thus strengthened himself, Vijaya-Gaṇḍagōpāla appears to have made an attempt to extend his authority northwards into the Nellore district.¹ At the same time a rebellion, headed by Padihāris Bayyana and Tikkana, broke out in Nellore against Manuma Siddhi II, who was, as a consequence, driven from his capital.² Takkarasa Gaṅga, better known by his title Rakkasa Gaṅga, a scion of the Kalukaḍa branch of the Vaidumba family, attacked Manuma Siddhi’s territory in the Cuddapah district and having defeated Gaṅgaya Sāhiṇi, the commander of Manuma’s forces, and ousted him from his governorship, annexed his territories.³ Manuma Siddhi II thus became, as a consequence of a combination of circumstances which he could not control, a king without a kingdom; he therefore appealed to Gaṇapati for help. In his loyal minister, the famous Telugu poet, Tikkana, he had an able advocate. Tikkana’s fame as the greatest Telugu poet of the age had already spread to the most remote corners of the Āndhra country. When, therefore, he visited Warangal, he was warmly received by Gaṇapati, who on hearing the errand on which the poet came, readily agreed to help his master Manuma Siddhi and sent a powerful army under his general Sāmanta Bhōja to the south to implement his promise.

v2.c15.s2.t3.59.3

The outstanding events of the campaign are briefly described in an undated epigraph at Nāyanipalli in the Guntur district. The Kākatīya army set out, according to this record, on an expedition charged with the conquest of the southern countries.⁴ It reduced Nellore to ashes, played a game of ball with the heads of all its opponents who had joined the Padihāris Bayyana and Tikkana, and having entered Draviḷa-maṇḍala captured Kulōttuṅga Rājēndra Chōḍa and received a gift of elephants from the king of Nellore. The Kulōttuṅga Rājēndra Chōḍa referred to in this inscription is believed by some to have been identical with the Chōḷa king, Rājēndra Chōḷa III, and if so, he must have been a different person from the prince of the same name whom Malyāla Hemādri Reḍḍi defeated in Kaliṅga in A.D. 1237.⁵ However this may be, it must have been during the course of this expedition that Manuma Siddhi II defeated at Prāyēṟu, i.e. Palaiyāṟu in the Tanjore district, the combined armies of the kings of Drāviḍa and Karṇāṭaka and of Vijaya-Gaṇḍagōpala.⁶ Although Tikkana claims entire credit for this victory for his master, the part played by the Kākatīya army cannot justly be overlooked. If it was Rājēndra Chōḷa III who was taken prisoner by Gaṇapati, as contended by some, it is more likely that he fell into the hands of the enemy after his defeat at Palaiyāṟu than at any other time or place.

v2.c15.s2.t3.59.4

The enemy’s forces having been shattered on the battlefield of Palaiyāṟu, Sāmanta Bhōja turned back, and marching towards Kāñchī captured that city without difficulty.

v2.c15.s2.t3.60

¹ NI, iii, Sl, 8.

v2.c15.s2.t3.61

² AR, 769 of 1922.

v2.c15.s2.t3.62

³ Tikkana, Nir-Uttara, 1, 41.

v2.c15.s2.t3.63

⁴ AR, 769 of 1922.

v2.c15.s2.t3.64

⁵ SII, iv, 1333; AR, 411 of 1893.

v2.c15.s2.t3.65

⁶ Tikkana, Nir-Utta, 1, 39.

v2.c15.s2.t3.66

Gaṇapati in Western Andhra. The victory obtained in the battle of Palaiyāṟu and the capture of Kāñchī by Sāmanta Bhōja in A.D. 1250 do not seem to have produced any permanent results, since the provenance of Vijaya-Gaṇḍagōpāla’s inscriptions leaves no room for doubt that he soon recovered his hold over Kāñchī and its neighbourhood, and continued to rule there until A.D. 1282.¹ What enabled him to regain his authority without difficulty was doubtless the preoccupation of Manuma Siddhi II and Gaṇapati with the affairs of the Western Telugu country. Rakkasa Gaṅga had, as may be remembered, defeated Gaṅgaya Sāhiṇi, the Kāyastha chief, whom Chōḍa Tikka had appointed as the commander of his forces in Upper-Pākanāḍu, and had seized the territory under his rule. He was supported in this enterprise by the Telugu Chōḍa chief of Jagatāpi-Gutti (the modern Gutti in the Anantapur district), who, as a consequence, assumed the title of Gaṇḍapeṇḍēra-Gaṅgaya-Sāhiṇi-sarvasva-bandikāra or ‘the plunderer of the entire property of Gaṇḍapeṇḍēra Gaṅgaya Sāhiṇi.’² Manuma Siddhi and Gaṇapati, after their victorious campaign in the Tamil country, marched against him by way of Kāḷahasti in the Chittoor district and attacked him there. In the war that followed Rakkasa Gaṅga was worsted and had to surrender the territories which he had wrested from Gaṅgaya Sāhiṇi. Though Tikkana attributes the credit for the victory to the prowess of his master, Manuma Siddhi, the evidence of the inscriptions clearly shows that it was not achieved without the Kākatīya support. Gaṅgaya Sāhiṇi, after his defeat at the hands of Rakkasa Gaṅga and his consequent loss of territory, joined the service of Gaṇapati, who conferred on him the high office of bāhattara-niyōg-ādhipati, or ‘the superintendent of seventy-two niyōgas’ at his court.³ In an inscription at Tripurāntakam, dated A.D. 1254, he claims to have vanquished Rakkasa Gaṅga and put him to flight.⁴ Gaṇḍapeṇḍēra Jannigadēva, a nephew of Gaṅgaya Sāhiṇi, and a feudatory of Gaṇapatidēva and subsequently of Rudrāmbā, evidently assisted his uncle in the campaign against Rakkasa Gaṅga; for in a record dated a few years later in A.D. 1264 he is said to have pursued the latter after his defeat.⁵ It follows from this that Gaṇapati had lent support to Manuma Siddhi II and Gaṅgaya Sāhiṇi to overthrow the power of the Vaidumba chief. His victory no doubt resulted in the reconquest of the territory seized by the Vaidumba; but Manuma Siddhi, to whom it had originally belonged, did not get it back again; he had to surrender it to Gaṇapati, who conferred it on Gaṅgaya Sāhiṇi, apparently with Manuma’s consent, as a family estate, a transaction which is euphemistically described by Tikkana in his Nirvachan-Ōttara-Rāmāyaṇam as a gift gracefully bestowed by his master on the Kāyastha chief to demonstrate his affectionate regard for his faithful dependant.⁶

v2.c15.s2.t3.67

¹ AR, 137 of 1916.

v2.c15.s2.t3.68

² Bhārati, vol. xv, part i, p. 157.

v2.c15.s2.t3.69

³ SII, x, 332; AR, 283 of 1905.

v2.c15.s2.t3.70

⁴ Ibid., 343; AR, 231 of 1905.

v2.c15.s2.t3.71

⁵ Ibid., 402; AR, 550 of 1909.

v2.c15.s2.t3.72

⁶ Nir-Utta, 1, 41.

v2.c15.s2.t3.73

*Ganapati and the Sēuṇas.* The relations between Gaṇapati and his western neighbours the Sēuṇas appear to have been on the whole peaceful. The Gaṇapēśvaram epigraph does indeed refer to the Sēuṇa king as one of the enemies conquered by him;¹ but the circumstances in which he came into conflict with the Sēuṇas are completely unknown. Very probably Gaṇapati lent support to his friend Chōḍa Tikka of Nellore to ward off the Sēuṇa attack on his dominions. However that may be, there is reason to believe that subsequent to the battle of Kurumalūr the relations between the two kingdoms underwent a change for the better, and that they even joined together to resist the attacks of the Pāṇḍyas. Among the enemies conquered by Jaṭāvarman Sundara Pāṇḍya I, a king bearing the name Kshēma or Kshēmāsura is mentioned in connexion with the Sēuṇas.² The identity of this king has been a matter of considerable doubt. It has however been suggested on the strength of the phrase *Gaṇapati-kshēmāsura*, occurring in a fragmentary record on a temple at Tirupati, that he was none other than the Kākatīya monarch of that name.³ Accepting for the moment the soundness of this identification, it may be suggested that Gaṇapati and the Sēuṇa king joined forces and attempted to check the expansion of the Pāṇḍyan power in the early years of the reign of Jaṭāvarman Sundara Pāṇḍya I. This is not at all unlikely, since a few years later, in A.D. 1263, when the Pāṇḍya king advanced on Nellore, he found arrayed against him the Telugu Chōḍa, the Kākatīya, and the Ārya (i.e. Sēuṇa) forces on the battlefield of Muttukūr.⁴

v2.c15.s2.t3.74

¹ EI, III, No. 15, v. 34, p. 87.

v2.c15.s2.t3.75

² SII, iv, 625. Kshēmais-samam Sēuṇaiḥ.

v2.c15.s2.t3.76

³ TTDI, i, No. 53.

v2.c15.s2.t3.77

⁴ AR, 361 of 1913.

v2.c15.s2.t3.78

*Ganapati and the Pāṇḍyas.* Gaṇapati’s alliance with the Telugu Chōḍa kings of Nellore involved him in a war with the Pāṇḍyas of Madura, who, under the able leadership of the famous Jaṭāvarman Sundara Pāṇḍya I, subjugated between A.D. 1251 and 1257 the whole of Southern India and established their hegemony over it. As the Telugu Chōḍa rulers of Nellore owed allegiance, even though only nominally, to the Chōḍa emperor, the Pāṇḍyas who had overthrown his authority considered that as his political successors they ought to bring the Telugu Chōḍa dominions also under their sway. Of the two Telugu Chōḍa chiefs who succeeded Tikka, his son, Manuma Siddhi II, known also as Vīra-Gaṇḍagōpāla, held the northern or Telugu districts, whilst Vijaya-Gaṇḍagōpāla ruled over the southern or Tamil districts. The latter by reason of the proximity of his territory to the Pāṇḍyan kingdom, and also on account of his alliance with the redoubtable Kāḍava chief, Kōpperuñjiṅga, naturally became the object of their first attack. The steps taken by Vijaya-Gaṇḍagōpāla to protect his dominion from the Pāṇḍyan invasion are not known. He ultimately had to submit to the superior military strength of the Pāṇḍyas and acknowledge their supremacy. An inscription at Kāñchī of Jaṭāvarman Vira Pāṇḍya, dated A.D. 1260, shows that the Pāṇḍyas had by that time overcome his opposition and entered his capital.¹ They next turned their attention to Nellore; but the conquest of that place was not so easily effected, since the attempt to reduce it involved them in a war with the northern powers, especially the Kākatīyas, with whom Vira-Gaṇḍagōpāla, otherwise known as Manuma Siddhi II, was in alliance. Apprehending the danger of an imminent Pāṇḍyan attack on his territories, he appealed to the Kākatīya, the Sēuṇa, and the Bāṇa rulers for help. To weaken the forces of the enemy by means of a diversion, the Pāṇḍyas sent an expedition, consisting mostly of feudatory forces, into the Kākatīya kingdom. The inscriptions of Rājēndra Chōḷa III, Kōpperuñjiṅga, and Vijaya-Gaṇḍagōpāla, who had been reduced to vassalage by the Pāṇḍyas, found at Tripurāntakam, in the heart of the Kākatīya kingdom, clearly indicate that these chieftains took part in the expedition.² Kōpperuñjiṅga, who is believed to have led the advance guard of the Pāṇḍyan army, penetrated as far as Dākshārāmam in the East Gōdāvarī district, with the object probably of establishing contact with the king of Kaliṅga, the enemy of the Kākatīya monarch;³ but he suffered a defeat at the hands of Gaṇapati and was compelled to acknowledge his suzerainty.⁴ It was obviously after this defeat that Kōpperuñjiṅga, on the occasion of his paying homage to Gaṇapati, was honoured by him with the decoration of vira-pāda-mudra or the anklet of the heroes.⁵ Rājēndra Chōḷa III and Vijaya-Gaṇḍagōpāla, who probably suffered a defeat in an encounter with the Kākatīya nobles headed by the Kāyastha chief Jannigadēva, retreated hastily towards their dominions. That was apparently the reason why Vikrama Pāṇḍya relinquished the idea of invading the Kākatīya kingdom, though he attributes it to his unwillingness to attack Gaṇapati who had two carps (the Pāṇḍyan emblems) on his face and a woman who was ruling over it with a man's name.⁶

v2.c15.s2.t3.79

¹ AR, 483 of 1919.

v2.c15.s2.t3.80

² AR, 201, 197, 198, and 272 of 1905.

v2.c15.s2.t3.81

³ SII, xii, 247; AR, 198 of 1905.

v2.c15.s2.t3.82

⁴ Ibid.

v2.c15.s2.t3.83

⁵ TTDI, i, 19.

v2.c15.s2.t3.84

⁶ AR, 365 of 1913.

v2.c15.s2.t3.85

While the expedition under Kōpperuñjiṅga was still in progress in the north, the main Pāṇḍyan army led by at least three of their kings, Jaṭāvarman Sundara Pāṇḍya I, Bhuvanaikavīra Vikrama Pāṇḍya, and Jaṭāvarman Vira Pāṇḍya, advanced along the coast towards Nellore. They swept away all opposition and reached Muttukūr, a village situated near the sea at a distance of thirteen miles to the east of the city. In a fierce engagement which took place here in A.D. 1263 Vira-Gaṇḍagōpāla was killed and his allies sustained a crushing defeat and retreated towards Pērāru (the Kṛishṇā). The Kākatīya and Sēuṇa forces appear to have suffered terribly during the course of their retreat; their dead bodies, according to the contemporary Pāṇḍyan records, lay strewn over the country as far as the banks of the Pērāru, and the Bāṇa sought safety in the jungle.¹ As a result of this victory the Telugu Chōḷa kingdom of Nellore was annexed to the Pāṇḍyan empire, though its administration was entrusted to the brothers of Vira-Gaṇḍagōpāla, who apparently were compelled to rule it as the vassals of the Pāṇḍyas.² In honour of his victory, Jaṭāvarman Sundara Pāṇḍya celebrated *virābhiṣhēka*, or the anointment, as a conquering hero, both at Nellore and at Kāñchī, these being the two alternate capitals of the kingdom of Nellore,³ and struck a coin bearing the Pāṇḍyan emblem of two fishes separated by a sceptre with the legend *Sundara Pāṇḍya* in Tamil on the reverse and the Kākatīya Boar facing right below the symbols of the Sun and the Crescent Moon on the obverse.⁴

v2.c15.s2.t3.86

¹ *AR*, 332, 340, 354, 361, and 365 of 1915.

v2.c15.s2.t3.87

² K. A. N. Sastri, *The Pāṇḍyan Kingdom*, p. 168.

v2.c15.s2.t3.88

³ *ARE*, 1914, part ii, para. 18; *SII*, iv, no. 865.

v2.c15.s2.t3.89

⁴ *PIHC*, 1938, p. 42.

v2.c15.s2.t3.90

Inter-State Relations. Gaṇapati is credited in some of his inscriptions with victory over the kings of several other countries. The Chēbrōlu inscription of Jāyapa, for instance, states that the Madra king, the Pāñchāla, the Vidēha king, the Hammīra, the Hūṇa, and the king of Kāśī were suppliants at his door.⁵ Similarly it is stated in the Pākhāl inscription that his heralds at each assembly announce before him the names of the Lord of Kāśī, the Kaliṅga, the Śaka monarch, the Ruler of Kēraḷa, ‘the (King) of Tummāṇa, the Hūṇa King, the Prince of the Kurus, the Lord of Arimarda, the Ruler of the Māgadhas, the Nēpāla, the Chōḷa Monarchs’ and present them to him.⁶ Gaṇapati’s relations with the rulers of the Kaliṅga and Chōḷa countries have already been noticed. Of the other kingdoms, Madra, Pāñchāla, Vidēha, Kāśī, Magadha, Kuru, and Nēpāla were situated in the north; and all of them, excepting probably the last, disappeared long before the time of Gaṇapati; for the whole of Northern India was at the time under the rule of the Muslim Sulṭāns of Delhi. The Śaka rule which had been confined to Western India in ancient times was destroyed by the Gupta emperor Chandragupta II Vikramāditya in the latter half of the fourth century A.D., and the Hūṇas were overwhelmed by Yaśōvarman and Narasimha Gupta Bālāditya early in the next. Neither the Śakas nor the Hūṇas are known to have ruled subsequently in any part of India. The inclusion of the kings of these countries among the princes who came to pay homage to Gaṇapati must, therefore, be attributed to a literary convention popular with the *praśasti* writers of the period and it may be dismissed without serious consideration. Tummāṇa was situated in the Madhya Pradesh adjoining Teliṅgāṇa, and Kēraḷa in the extreme south on the west coast. Arimarda has been identified with Pegu on the Burmese coast; it is not unlikely that Gaṇapati may have had intercourse, friendly or otherwise, with rulers of these countries. Of the Hammīras, who also figure in the Sēuṇa inscriptions as the opponents of Siṅghaṇa, nothing is known, although they had been identified by some, but on very inadequate grounds, with the Muslims.¹

v2.c15.s2.t3.91

⁵ *EI*, v, p. 149.

v2.c15.s2.t3.92

⁶ *HAS*, o. 4, p. 10.

v2.c15.s2.t3.93

¹ Fleet: DKD, Bombay Gazetteer, vol. i, part ii, p. 525.

v2.c15.s2.t3.94

*Achievements of Gaṇapati.* Gaṇapati was the most powerful of the Kākatīya sovereigns. During his long reign of sixty-three years, he met with few reverses, except during the Pāṇḍyan invasion in A.D. 1263, though he was continuously engaged in warfare. At the time of his accession, the Āndhra country was in a state of complete political disorganization. The power of the Chālukya-Chōḷas and the Chālukyas of Kalyāṇi had finally disappeared, leaving behind a congeries of feudal states, small and great, engaged in a confused scramble for supremacy. He set before himself the task of restoring the political unity of the country and succeeded in a large measure in accomplishing his object.

v2.c15.s2.t3.95

Gaṇapati was a good administrator; he concerted measures for improving trade and industries in general, especially agriculture. The petty chiefs ruling in the region round Mōṭupalli had been scaring away the foreign merchants, who had been accustomed to frequent that harbour, by levying heavy duties on imports and exports and confiscating articles of merchandise which had been cast ashore. He put an end to these exactions; and by granting special concessions to the merchants who came to trade in the port and taking measures to ensure the safety of their lives and property he attracted them into his dominions. In consequence of this policy the economic prosperity of the country rapidly increased, whilst towns and cities became rich as trade and industry grew and prospered.

v2.c15.s2.t3.96

An important event in the civil administration of the country was the change of the capital from Anumakoṇḍa to Warangal. The foundations of the new capital were laid, as we have mentioned above, by Gaṇapati's uncle Rudradēva in the last years of his reign. Gaṇapati continued his work, and built two forts one within the other, constructed respectively of stone and of mud. The new fort, if we can rely on tradition, was provided with seventy-five bastions, each of which was guarded by a *nāyaka* in the service of the king.

v2.c15.s2.t3.97

*Gaṇapati's family.* Gaṇapati had no male issue; but he had two daughters, the elder called Rudrāmbā or Rudramadēvi and the younger named Gaṇapāmbā or Gaṇapamadēvi. The former was given in marriage to a prince of the Eastern Chālukyan lineage caled Virabhadra, and the latter to Bēta of the Kōṭa family. Gaṇapati chose his elder daughter, Rudrāmbā, as the heir apparent; and regarding her as a son, named her Rudradēva and in A.D. 1260 or a little earlier made her his co-regent.

v2.c15.s2.t3.98

*Gaṇapati's Vassals, Generals, and Ministers.* Gaṇapati was assisted in his wars and in the administration of the kingdom by a large number of feudatories, generals, ministers, and officials. All of them, to whichever category they belonged, had to serve in the army, since the public services were organized on a military basis. It is not possible, therefore, to make any distinction between civil and military properly so called because no such distinction existed at the time. The feudatories may be divided broadly into two classes, old and new. The Rēcherlas and the Malyālas were the oldest of the Kākatiya feudatories. Their fortunes, as we noted above, were linked up with those of the Kākatiya monarchs almost from the very beginning. Rudra, the head of the Rēcherla family, played an important part in the affairs of the Kākatiya kingdom in the opening years of Gaṇapati’s reign and indeed saved it from destruction. When, on the death of Kākati Rudra and his brother Mahādēva in the wars with the Sēuṇas, and the imprisonment of Gaṇapati at Dēvagiri, the nobles rose in revolt and warriors from beyond the frontiers swept the country, Rudra stood firmly loyal and took upon himself the task of preserving the integrity of the kingdom. He drove out the foreign invaders, put down the nobles with a stern hand, and governed the land until the return of his young master from captivity at Dēvagiri.¹ Rājanāyaka, the commander of his forces, followed the Kākatiya army to Kaliṅga when, after the death of the Velanāṭi king Pṛthvīśvara, Gaṇapati invaded that country in A.D. 1212, and rendered distinguished service on several fields of battle.² Though several other members of the Rēcherla family are mentioned in the inscriptions they do not demand any special notice, since they do not seem to have had any considerable share in the affairs of the State. Of the chiefs of the Malyāla family, Chauṇḍa, the son of Kāṭa, the conqueror of Kōṭa, deserves particular mention, for he took a leading part in the early wars of Gaṇapati with the Velanāṭi ruler Pṛthvīśvara. The appellations *dvipi-luṇṭaka* and *divi-cūrakāra* which are associated with his name in the inscriptions clearly prove that he took an active part in the overthrow of the Ayya family and the subjugation of Divi which was situated on the shore of the estuary of the river Kṛṣṇā.³

First 101 of 130 passages. Read on

Linked texts (11)