251

CHAPTER VIII

THE CHOIAS OP NELLORE

Origin

The Cholas of He11ore occupy an important place in

the history of Andhra Pradesh. The family gets the name as

the Cholas of Hellore because of their association with

Hellore in Hellore district. The inscriptions introduce

them with the charana-saroruha prasasti which is common to

both the Pottapi and Konidena Cholas. Like the other Telugu

Cholas, these Cholas also claim their descent from Karikala

and to have belonged to the solar race and Kasyapa gotra.

Though there is a lot of information, epigraphical and

literary, attesting to their power and importance, their

history poses certain difficulties because of the confusing

nature of the source material. The difficult nature of their

history is acknowledged by stalwarts like V.Venkayya, Alan

Butterworth and V.Venugopaul Chetty» the editors of the

Hellore District Inscriptions, and K.A.Nilakanta Sastri.

 252

F.Venkataramanayya is of the view that they isame

•j
from the Raichur and Gulbarga area. The characteristic
Kannada designations such as arasa and heggade horr^e by
them and their subordinates respectively are perhaps the
basis for his surmise.

There is a large number of inscriptions of these

rulers. For example, Ghingleput district in Tamil Nadu
itself presents over two hundred inscriptions, followed by
Hellore with about a hundred, Forth Arcot with over twenty,
Chittoor with eighteen, Cuddapah with fourteen, G-urtur with
six and Kurnool with three. To have a complete picture of
this family, a study of the inscriptions found in cutside
southern Andhra, i.e., Ghingleput and Forth Arcot districts
be
of Tamil Fadu also has to/undertaken. Reference tc these
Cholas is also found in epigraphs of their contempcraries
in other dynasties such as the imperial ChSlas, the
Kakatlyas, the Pandyas and the Hoysaias. literary works
like Tikkana’s Firvachandttara Ramgvanam and Ketana’s
Dasakumara Gharitra also throw some light on them.
 253

She Territory of tlie Hellore Cholas

Between 1160 and 1205 A.D., i.e., for nearly

forty-five years the rule of the Fell ore Telugu Cholas

was confined to three districts, namely, Fellore, Guddapah

and Chittoor. The places from where the inscriptions of

this period came reveal that their sway extended over a

compact and contiguous territory. It was confined to the

taluks of Proddatur, Siddhavatam and Rajampet in Cuddapah

district, the taluks of Rapur, Kovur, Fellore, G-udia? and

Venkatagiri in Hellore district and the taluk of Srikalahasti

in Chittoor district. Only one record of Fallasiddni,

which falls within this period, comes from Tiruppalaivanam p

in Chingleput district.

Fallasiddhi ruled from Vallurapura over Renadu 70,

Kanne 300 and other districts in 1192 A.D.^ He also

conquered Pottapi and ruled over^ it. If the inscriptions

so far noticed are of any indication, their first

territorial acquisition in the south seems to he in Ponneri

taluk of Chingleput district wherein an epigraph^ dated

1195 A.D., of Kulottunga III records a gift of money by

Nungamadevi, wife of Madhurantaka Pottapi Chola Siddharaisar,

IP 4
 254

for maintaining a lamp in the temple at the place* After

this, inscriptions of 1207 A.D., of the Fellore Telugu

Cholas have come to light in Conjeeveram, Saidapet,

Sriperumbuduru and Tiruvalluru taluks of Chingleput district

and Tiruttani taluk formerly in Chittoor district hut now

transfered to Tamil Fadu. During the same year, lavall

7
taluk; which was to the north of their kingdom, seems to
j

have been conquered. Their records start appearing in

8 9
Eandukur taluk in Prakasam district and Atmakur taluk in

Fellore district from 1210 and 1212 A.D. respectively. By

the time Manumasiddhi II came to occupy the throne, i.e.,

1248 A.D., almost the whole of the undivided Kellor?e district,

Siddhavatam, Proddatur and Rajampet taluks of Cuddapah

district, Srikalahasti and Tiruttani taluks of undivided

Chittoor district, Ponneri, Conjeeveram, Saidapet,

Sriperumbuduru, Tiruvallur and Chingleput taluks of Chingleput

district, and Cheyyar, Walajapet, Arkonam and Tiruvarmamalai

taluks of Forth Arcot district seem to have passed under their

rule. Inscriptions of the Fellore Chdlas came to light in

Markapur10 (1263 A.D.) and Podili!1 (1289 A.D.) taluks of

Prakasam district, Farasaraopet 12 (1291 A.D.) taluk of Guntur

district and Chandragiri 13 taluk of Chittoor district in

Andhra Pradesh, and Gudiyattam1^ (1252 A.D.) and Vellore1^
 255

(1267 A.D.) taluks of Forth Arcot district in Tamil Fadu

for the first time. Thus tentatively the jurisdiction of

the Telugu Cholas of Fellore extended over an area covering

the present day parts of Fellore, Prakasam, Cuddapah and

Chittoor districts in Andhra Pradesh, and Chingleput and

Forth Arcot districts in Tamil Fadu.

Capital of the Fellore Cholas

The capital of the Fellore Cholas was Fellore. It

finds mention for the first time in an epigraph of 1160 A.D.

at Dongalasani 16 in Cuddapah district. It was also known

as Felliuru, Felliyuru, Felluru, Fallauru, Fellurupattana,

>

Yikramasimhakhyanagara, Yikramasirahanagara and Yikrama-

singapura and Dhahyapuri. Fanciful explanations have been

offered of the name Fellore. For example, it is connected

with the Fell! tree (Premna latifolia) which are said to

have been in abundance in the region. According to another

version, it is connected with the lionsvkeeping watch over

17
the place. Fow there are neither Felli trees nor lions

any where near the vicinity. It is possible that the name

has a Tamil origin. Much of this area was under Tamil

18
influence from very early days from twelfth century. In
 256

Tamil Bellu~means paddy and uru means village, i.e. , a

place where paddy grew in plenty. This is the situation
today also. Dhinyapuri thus seems to he the Sanskr_t
version of Belluru. The other names indicate that it
slowly developed into a pattana, or nagara, or pura, the
last of which finds mention in many inscripticns. Wellore
19
was also known as Bilawar.

Genealogy of the Nellore Choias

As can he seen from the charts enclosed, good

number of inscriptions give the names of some generations
of the family, the first four among them being fulLer than
the others. An attempt is made here to coordinate all
these names and try to prepare a cogent genealogy ae far
as possible.

As in the case of the other Telugu Cholas this

family also claims descent from the ancient Karikala, the
supposed founder of the imperial Chola dynasty. While
Bos. 1, 2, 3, 8, 9 and 10 mention this fact, others,
especially Bo.4, do not mention it, though it is ore of
the inscriptions giving a fairly big genealogy. The
first historical personality of this family appears to
 257

be Madhurantaka Pottapi Chola who is stated to have

been born in the family of Karikala. The^ next ehi^f

to find a mention is Betta who is said to have been

born in the family of Madhurantaka Pottapi Chola. iut he

does not find mention in any other inscription. Bu~ we

cannot doubt the historicity of this person on the ground

that he is not mentioned in other inscriptions because all

of them skip some names or the other at some stage or the

other. The fourth chief we come across is Bijjana vho is

variously known as Tiluhga Vidya, Tilumga Bijja and Vijjana.

He is also stated to have been born in the family or his

predecessor without specifying any relationship. It his

family were born, according to Nos. 2 and 4, two brothers,

Siddhi and Betta. ' The latter is to be called Betta II to

distinguish him from the earlier member of the same name.

Prom here the genealogy seems to run smoothly with fhe

specification of proper relationships. No. 4 mentions

three sons for Betta, namely Dayabhima, Nallasiddhi and

Errasiddhi. No. 2 omits Nallasiddhi, while No. 3 omits

Dayabhima. It is to be noted here that in No. 1 there is

a change in the order. It mentions Dayabhima and places

Betta as his son and Errasiddhi as the son of the latter*

But we know from two other inscriptions, i.e.» No. 2 and 4

 258

that Dayabhima and Errasiddhi were brothers. Further,

in So. 1 instead of Nallasiddhi, Betta is put after >aya-

hhlma. Here either Betta is one more member of the family

or is to be identified with Nallasiddhi. At any ra~e, the

order given in this inscription is a clear mistake A

similar mistake appears to have occurred in No. 10 also.

Nos. 2, 3 and 4 agree to the effect that Errasiddhi had

three sons, Manumasiddhi, Betta (i.e., Betta HI) a*d

Tammusiddhi. No. 1 omits this Betta. This Betta seems

to have had another name, i.e., Nallasiddhi. 20 No. 7

mentions only Manumasiddhi as the son of Errasiddhi No.8

skips all the names after Bi^jana and mentions Manumasiddhi

only. Similarly, No. 9 also skips all the names be-ween

Karikala and Manumasiddhi. No. 10 also mentions only one

son, i.e., Manumasiddhi for Errasiddhi. No. G ment-ons

Tirukkalattideva as the son of Manumasiddhi. This „s

confirmed by No. 7. Tikkanripati, Tikka and likkanripa

mentioned in Nos. 8, 9 and 10 respectively appear t* be the

same as this Tirukkalattideva. Since other Tikkas appear

in the sequence, this Tirukkalattideva or Tikka may be

called Tikka I. Nos. 8, 9 and 10 mention Manimasidihi as

the son of Tikka I. This Manumasiddhi is naturally

Manumasiddhi II.
 259

Ho. 10 appears to mention another son of Tikfca

whose name is, however, not given. Ho. 11 seems to carry
forward the genealogy hy two more generations. It states
that Tikka had a son (name not given) who, in turn, had a
son Fallasiddhi. Hallasiddhi * s son was Mammagandatgopala.
Ho. 14 mentions two Tirukalidevas as father and son, one of
whom we have already identified with Tikka I. It maans
that the son also was named Tirukalideva. Though this is
unusual, the inscription in question is very clear zo this
effect. It states that Tirukalideva Maharaja made grants
for the beatitude of his father ( ) and mother
( ). We may identify him with the unnamed son
mentioned in Ho. 12.

21
The above analysis is put in the tabular form as
below
 1 * * 2
Srirangam T-iruvralangad u
in s c rip tio n 22 in s c rip tio n ox
K a rik a la K a lik a la
• n •
Dayabhima M adhurantaka
(P o tta p i Choi a)
j •
P e tta «
- T ilpnga V idya

E ra sid d h i S id d h i B e tta

Manmasiddhi (by S rid e v i) Dayabhima E ra sid d h i

Tammasiddhi
(1204 A .D .)
1 )
Manmasiddhi (By S rld e v i)
r ----------B e------------
tta
Tammusiddhi
(1207-08 A. 13.)

ca
CD
r>
1
 3
Tiruppasur Tiruvorriyur
24 25
inscription inscription

Kalikala

Madhurantaka Madhurantaka
Pottapi Ghola

Siddhi Betta

ITallasiddhi
r — Erasiddhi Tilunga Bijjja

(-----
Manmasiddi Betta Tammusiddhi Siddhi Betta
(1207-08 A.D.)

Dayabhlma Nallasiddhi Srasiddhi

I----- -
Manmasiddhi Betta Tammusiddhi
(1207 A.D.)

ts*
>
CD
^— 6
 5 6 7
Conjeeveram Nandalur Con3eeveram
26
in sc r ip tio n in sc r ip tio n 27 in sc r ip tio n 28

K arikala

V ijjan a
♦

E rasiddhi

$ a lla sid d h a ra sa M annmasittarasa Manmasiddhi

J(m .Sridevi)
Peddarasar T iruklcalattideva T irukalattidevan
(1207 A .D . ) (1209 A .D .) (1230 A .D .)

ro
m
to
 9 10
U irv a c h a n o tta ra Dasakumara N andalur
Ramavanam C h a ritra 30 in s c rip tio n 31
K a rik a la K a rik a la K a rik a la
B ijja n a Manumasiddhi B ijja.(b
n au ilt in )
(in th e fam ily (m .S rld ev i)
o f)
Manmasiddhi Tikka Dayab&ima
I
T ik k a n rip a ti Manumasiddhi B etabhupa
M anum ashitipati Ira s idid h i
Ra;jendra Manmasiddha

T ik k an rip a

Unnamed Manumasiddhi
son (1259 A .D . )

CM
CD
CO
 11 12
Narasaraopet Babblepalle
32
inscription inscription 33

Tikka Tirukalideva

Tirukalideva

Fallasiddhi

Manumagandagopala
(1297 A.D.)

to
CT3
1
 265

1 Karlkala
* l (in the family)
2 MadhUsTShtafea Pottapi Chola
. (in the family)

3 Betta I
. (in the family)

4 Bijjana
. (in the family)

5 Siddhi 6 Betta II

7 Dayabhima 8 Fallssiddhi I 9 Errasiddhi

I (m.Srfdevi)
( m ,

Fallagimh§jt &
May i1amadtelsM)

Peddarasa 1® MantowasM $- I 11 Betta III 12 Tanrarasiddhi

(m.i-Sridevi
& }

or
Pattarasa Bachaladevi)

13 Ti'tolea I

14 Manumasiddhi II V lirukalideva

16 X

17 Nallasiddhi II

18 Maziuma Gandagopala

/
 266

Chronology of the Uellore Cholas

The statement of the chronology of these rulers is

beset with difficulties. On.the one hand we do not know

if all the rulers mentioned in the table ruled at ail and,

if they did, for which period. On the other hand taere is

so much of overlapping of the dates of these different chiefs

that it is impossible to arrive at a cogent chronology. For

only few of them we have inscriptions and on ~hat basis we

tried to fix the tentative chronology of each. It is

needless to say that this procedure is mostly conjectural

and, of course, in the absence of clearer evidence this is

the only alternative left.

So far as the first four members are concerned no

period can be fixed for them because each successive one is

said to have been bora in the family of the predecessor and

it is impossible to decide as to how many men were there in

between. The actual relationship starts with Siddti and

Betta II (Mbs. 5 and 6 in the table) who are said io be

brothers. We can thus fix the dates only from thie Siddhi

downwards.
 267

The earliest inscription we have for these chiefs

is dated in 1160 A.D., and it belongs to Hallasiddhi

(Ho. 8). On the basis of this we may place Siddhi, Betta

II and Dayabhxma (Hos. 5, 6 and 7) between 1050 and 1150 A.D.

The situation of overlapping dates is indeed bewildering.

Por example, Hallasiddhi*s dates go up to 1217 A.D. For

Errasiddhi (Ho. 9) we have dates from 1207 to 1227 A.D.

The dates of Errasiddhi*s son Tammusiddhi fall within the

dates of both the above chiefs and they are between 1204
and 1207 A.D. Por Manumasiddhi I (Ho. 10) there is only

one date in 1214 A.D. This sort of situation defies all

explanation unless we think that each one of them was

wielding power simultaneously and issued his own inscriptions.

However, this is highly unusual. Either there is some

mistake in the system of dating itself or we will have to

present as noted just now that each one of them issued his

own inscriptions independently even during the time of his

predecessor^ rule. In a political condition which was

highly flexible due to the mutual conflicts between the

ruling powers like the Chalukyas, the Seunas, the Kakatlyas

and the Cholas such a situation is not unlikely. We,

therefore, mention here the dates of different rulers as

found through the inscriptions.

 Fallasiddhi I 1150 - 1217 AJ)
Tammusiddhi 1204 - 1207 AJ)
Srrasiddhi 1207 - 1227 AJ)
Manumasiddhi I 1214 A .D.
Tikka I 1208 - 1246 AJ)
Manumasiddhi II 1238 - 1269 A J)
Tikka II 1265 - 1279 AJ)
Manuma Gandagopala 1272 1294 A J)

In addition to these chiefs, we come a3ross three

more names like Vljaya Gandagopala, Yira Gandagnpala and
Raja Gandagopala. The relationship between these chiefs
is also not indicated. These names are different from
the ones mentioned in the table. Thus it may be suggested
that they belonged to a separate branch of the Fellore
Telugu Oholas. It is worth noting in this context that
majority of the inscriptions of these chiefs are found in
Chingleput and Forth Arcot districts in Tamil Ifedu. They
indeed claim to be the rulers of Fellore but fchds claim
appears to be more conventional than real. As it is, the
following are the dates available for these chinfs.
 269

Yijaya Gandagopala 1249 - 1285 A.D.

Vira Gandagopala 1292 - 1301 A.D.

Raja Gandagopala 1296 - 1325 A.D.

The phenomenon of overlapping of dates is a feature of

these chiefs also. Indeed it is really baffling.

Rule of the Telugu Chblas of Nellore

The Early Chiefs

Though the names Madhurantaka Pottapi ChSla, Betta

and Bijjana, who are stated to have been born in the

family of their respective predecessors in the ascending

order, appear to be historical, no historical information

can be gathered about them. As noted above the real

genealogy with the specification of relationships starts

■with Siddhi and his brother Betta II. But no historical

information can be gathered about these two as well as the

latter’s one son Dayabhiina.

It may, however, be noted in this connection that

an inscription from Fadendla34 in Guntur district belonging

 270

to the Yelanati chief Gonka II describes him as the

- 33 . On the basis of the date of this
subduer of Siddhi Beta.

inscription, this Siddhi and Beta can be identified

tentatively with Siddhi and Beta above. Similarly

Gonka's predecessor Rigendra Choda

36 also claims to have

defeated Siddhi Beta, i.e., Siddhi and Beta. Likewise,

- 37
the Kota chief Bhima r also is stated to have defeated

a chief Siddhi Choda who can be identified with the Siddhi

above. These references only indicate that there were

constant fights between these local chiefs with no

decisive victory on any side. The conventional descriptions

like Mrigasardula, i.e., one chief becoming a lion to

another chief, a deer, does not help us to get at the

historical facts.

The next chief Dayabhlma, the first son of Betta II,

38
is described in the Tiruvalangadu inscription as

snatching away the prosperity from the enemies without

ascribing him any expedition or victory.

Fallasiddhi

Bor ETallasiddhi, the next chief, the brother of

 271

Diyabhima^we have as many as twenty inscriptions ranging

in dates from 1160 to 1217 A.D. Most of these inscriptions

record some grant or the other and hardly there is a

reference to any political event. The earliest of his

inscriptions, namely, the trilingual inscription from

Dongalasani dated in 1160 A.D., gives him the title
1Kahchi puravaradhlsvara* and the Tiruppasur inscription

of Tamrausiddhi credits him with the conquest of Kanchl.

This Hallasiddhi came into serious conflict with the

Pottapi Chola rulers Somesvara and Mallideva. As mentioned

in an earliest context (chapter V) a battle was fought

between the opposing forces near Dongalasani near the

confluence of the Cheyyeru and Penner. According to the

Dongalasani inscription,^-0 Nallasiddhi marched against the

Pottapi Chola chiefs Somesvara and Mallideva, and met them

at Dongalasani. His general Revana Heggade killed Somesvara

and eleven other princes, defeated Mallideva, put to death

a thousand soldiers, wounded many and himself died in the

end. His brother Potana Heggade collected a large force

and won the battle. He then reported the success in the

battle''to his master Uallasiddhi®

The conquest of Pottapi seems to have brought

 I
272

Dallasiddhi into conflict with the Velanati Cholas who

were granted the territory extending from the Mahendra

mountains in Srikakulam to SrikHahasti in Chittoor

district. Gonka II invaded Pakanadu in 1160-61 A.D.,

and Kantabhupati, a subordinate of his claimed victory

over a king Siddhi who is identical with Hallasiddhi. An

inscription of 1160 A.D., from Bapatla4.1 in Guntur

district mentions that Gonka was ruling over the entire

coastal region from Wakaram to Hellore. His son and

successor Rajendra Ohoda II is stated to have appointed

his sandhivigrahi Kommana^ as governor of Pakanadu 21000

which included this region. When the imperial Cholas and

their subordinates the Velanadu Cholas were preoccupied

with their own affairs, the Fellore Cholas seem to have

reconquered their territory. However, they continued to

be the subordinates of the Cholas. This is vouchsafed by

the mention of the Chola overlords in the inscriptions of

Hallasiddhi and the availability of the Chola records in the

region.

45 in Cuddapah
An inscription from Handalur^

district dated 1202 A.D., mentions a queen named Mkkamadevi,

Another epigraph from Sahgam^ in Nellore district dated
 273

1204 A.D., mentions Hallagamaka as another queen of

Hallasiddhi. Yet another inscription from Mall am^ in the

same district dated 1205 A.D., mentions Mayilamadevi

Pattarasa, son of Madhurantaka Pottapichola alias

Hallasiddharasa. This Hallasiddharasa is obviously the

same Hallasiddhiunder discussion. Mayilamadevi Pattarasa

may suggest Pattarasa,son of Mayilamadevi. Since

Pattarasa is described as the son of Hallasiddhi,

Mayilamadevi may be considered as yet another queen of

Hallasiddhi. In that case, this inscription brings to

4.6
light the name of a son of Hallasiddhi as Pattarasa.^

Errasiddhi

Though there are ten inscriptions belonging to his

rule, they do not mention any event of historical nature.

He had three sons, namely, Manumasiddhi I, Betta III and

Tammusiddhi. The last of them was born to Sridevi.

Attended and helped by them, he had shone like Trinetra

(Siva) for a long time. He had a brother-in-law named

Siddharasa.^
 274

Manumasiddhi I

Errasiddhi was succeeded by his eldest son

Manumasiddhi I. K.A.Nilakanta Sastri says that

Manumasiddhi was another name of Hallasiddhi, 48 wiiereas

Robert Sewell is of the opinion that Hallasiddhi was

another name of Beta III9 Tikkana, the author of the

Hirvachanottara Ramavanam- , and Ketana, the author of the

Dasakumara Charitra, traced the genealogy of the family from

Manumasiddhi. They do not call Manumasiddhi even once by

mistake as Hallasiddhi. There is an epigraph^*50 dated

1209 A.D., of Kulottunga III at Handalur in Cuddapah

district. It registers a gift of lamps by Madhurantaka

Pottapi Chola Tirukkalattideva ’for the merit of his father

Manumasittarasan, and of Hallasiddharasa'. Though the

record mentions them as two different persons, K.A.

Hilakanta Sastri makes them appear as one by adding the

word ’alias’ in between the two names. 51 His

identification of Manumasiddhi and Hallasiddhi as one and

the same'person is untenable. The Government Epigraphist

identifies Manmasiddhi, the eldest brother of Tammusiddhi,

with Manmasiddhi the first historical person mentioned in

the Hirvachanottara Ramiyanam. 52
 275

Tikkana extols: the greatness of Manumasiddhi in

the Firvaehanottara Ramayanam thus

Si.Bhuri - pratapambu / vairi-madandhaxaramuna

kakhanda dlpamnga-jesi
charitambu nikhila-bhu/;jana nitya sobhana,

latakunu nalavalamuga jesi

karuna dlnanatha/Eavihandhujana diakdramulaku

jandra tapamuga jesi

kirttijalanu drilo/kTsarikaku nabhi Rama rajita

panjaramuga Jesi

A. Sundarijjanambu / dendambunaku dana nirupamana

maina / nerpukalimi
natiprasiddhi chesi / yasadrisalilsmai, barage
Manumasiddhi / dharaxl-vibhudu.

The inscriptions of the next chief, the brother of

Manumasiddhi I, are dated in 1204 A.D. But there are two
inscriptions, 53 one at Reddipalem Pantrangam and another
at Dubagunta in Eellore district dated in the 36th year of
Eulottunga-III'and S.1136 respectively. The record at the
former place registers that Sittarasan, the son of
Mattimadesam Rajarajapattai Pettarasan, presented a lamp
 276

to the temple of Panduranga at the place on "behalf of

Pachchaldevi or Bachaladevi, the consort of Madhurantaka
Pottapi Chola alias Manumasittarasan, The epigraph at
the latter place records a gift for the merit of
Mahamandalesvara Manma Siddhanadeva Choda Maharaja. He
"bore, among others, the title ’’one who took tribute from
Kanchl”. These inscriptions reveal that he lived till
1214 A.D. If he had lived till then,he and his youngest
brother must have ruled the kingdom conjointly for a
certain period of time. Manumasiddhi had another queen
Bachaladevi besides Sridevi who was the mother of Tikka I.
Tammusiddhi claims that, on the death of Manumasiddai, his
t

elder brother Betta III being given to austerities and

religious bent of mind, renounced his claim to the throne
and conferred the government on him. 54

Tammusiddhi

As noted above the dates of Tammusiddhi fall

within the dates of Ballasiddhi. While, as observed
earlier, this phenomenon of overlapping dates, which is
common to almost all the rulers of the family, cannot be
explained1 satisfactorily. An inscription from Kavali in
Nellore district dated 1207 A.D., seems to explain it by
 277

saying that even when Hallasiddhi was the ruler

(abhishikta) Tammusiddhi was ruling the kingdom by his

grace (tat katakshadeva ra.ivaro karoti).

As pointed out above Tammusiddhi got the throne to

the exclusion of his elder brother Betta III who was not

interested in ruling because of his saintly disposition of

mind. The inscription from Kavali does not mention Betta

at all and much less this explanation, one wonders if it

was a usurpation by Tammusiddhi.

Tikka I

The next ruler of the Nellore Telugu Cholas was

Tikka or Tikka I. There are about a hundred inscriptions

in all pertaining to his reign and these are spread over

Chingleput, Nellore, Cuddapah, Forth Arcot and Ohittoor

districts. In these inscriptions he is variously referred

to as Madhurantaka Pottapi Chdla Tirukkalattideva,

Tirukalatideva Choda Maharaja and the like. The name

Tirukalattideva indeed stands for Srikalahastideva which

in course of time came to be abbreviated as Tikka. He

bore the epithets, among others, Klrtinarayana,
Bhujabalavira, Mandalikadisapatta and Uraiyurpuravsradhlsvara

The last one is obviously to associate him with the

imperial Chola family.

- t56
It is said of Tikka in an inscription from Kanchi^

dated 1231 A.I)., that he-acquired the kingdom in duj

succession. The inscriptions of Tikka I and his son

Manumasiddhi II as well as the literary works produced m

the latter's court give' a graphic picture of the events

that took place in Tikka's period.

1. G-angaperuru a) Victory over Priturlsvara,

inscription
57 b) Conquest of the western
, I
region in the course of his

digvi.iava and
c) Entry into Siddhavatn.

2. Conjeeveram a) Cataclysmic fire to she

inscription^58 ocean, viz., Kalyananuri,

b) Cut off the head of

Erithvlsvara,

c) Crushed the pride of the

Seuna king.
 279

3. Conjeeveram a) Victory over the Seunas.

CQ

inscription

Oguru inscription^0 a) Kanchl-trlpura-trinetra.

4.

5• Jambai a) Stabbed Vallaladevan and

61 b) Proceeded to Simbai.
inscription

6• Nandalur inscri- a) Captor of Kanchl and

62 b) Vanquisher of Somesa at
ption of his son,

Manumasiddhi Champapuri.

7. Nirvachanottara a) Played ball with the head

Ramavanam" of of Prithvlsvara while still

Tlktana^
in his youth,
b) Captured the horse of

Latum ay a when ,ie invaded

Gurumuluru,
c) Fought against his dayadis

and put them to flight,

d) Ruled over the principalities

of Sambhuraja and other

hostile rajas,
 2£0

e) Joined Kanchi and

Chedimandalam and made

Kalavapati pay him tribute,

f) Crushed the arrogance of

Karnata Somes'a and

established his own night, and

g) Set up the Chola kine; and

acquired the title Oiola-

sthapanacharya.

Dasakumara a) Cut off the head of

Chari tr a of Prithvlsvara,
Ketana^ b) Put down the pride cf the

Seuna Kataka samantae,

c) Ruled over all the Iravida

mandalikas,
d) Established the Chola on

his throne,
e) Curbed the arrogance of tie

Karnata king,
f) levied tribute on tbe Pancya,

g) Ruled over the manne chiefs

of Eruva and
h) Defeated the enemy warriors

at Amaluru.
 "3

281

All the events mentioned above can be consolidated and

arranged as far as possible in chronological order In the

following way.

1. Victory over Prithvlsvara.

2. a) Conquest of the western region in the course

of his digvijaya,fought against his dayadds and

put them to flight.

b) Ruled over the manne chiefs of Iruva.

3. Cataclysmic fire to the ocean, viz., Kalyanapuri-

victory over the Seunas -captured the horse of

Lakumaya when he invaded Gurumuluru- put down the

pride of the Seuna Kataka samartas.

4. Kanchl-tripur a-trinetrar-captor of Kan chi- joined

Kan chi and Chedimandalam.

5* ruled over the principalities of Sambhtiraja and

other hostile rajas. (

6. Made Kalavapati to pay tribute.

7. Levied tribute on the Pandya.

8. Set up the Chola king on his throne and acquired

the appellation Cholasthapanacharya.

9., Stabbed Tallaladeva-vanquished Somesa at

Champapuri - crushed the arrogance of Karnata

S5mesa and established his own might.

A detailed study of these will take us to many intricate

and as yet partly explained events of a period seething

with trouble and political confusion. They reveal Tikka s

relations with almost all the imperial powers in the sourh,

namelyi the Kakatiyas, the Yadavas of Devagiri, the Cholas,

the Hoysalas and the Pandyas. To have a clear and complete

picture we have to trace the circumstances leading to

these events.

Tikka I and Prithvlsvara

As noted above, inscriptions speak of Tikka

coming into a conflict with a Prithvlsvara.

Prithvlsvara was the grandson of the Yelanati chief

Kulottunga Rajendra Choda II. After the latter*s death

there was a war of succession in the Velanadu kingdom.

 283

Ihougli Prithvlsvara came out successful, lie could hold

sway only on a small extent of the kingdom m the

northern region, i.e., between Draksharama and Srikakulam,

Taking advantage of the unsettled conditions in the

Yelanadu kingdom, Kakatlya Ganapati occupied Yelanadu.

In order to recover his lost possessions in Yelanadu,

Prithvlsvara launched a counter-attack in about 1206 or

1207 A.D. In this war, the Fellore Chola ruler Tikka

sided with Kakatlya Ganapati and helped the latter to win a

victory, and assumed the title Prithvlsvara-sirahkanduka-

krlda-vinoda indicating his subjugating Prithvlsvara.

Inscriptions of the Kakatlyas indicate that this

victory boosted their power and slowly they were able to

establish themselves as independent monarchs. But the

Cholas under Kulottunga III claim to have thoroughly

subdued the Kakatlyas and even entered their capital Warangal,

if we rely on the opinion of K.A.Nilakanta Sastri. Por

65
example, the Pudukkottah inscriptions claim that

Kulottunga III subdued the Yadugus, i.e,, the Telugus and

entered the city of Urangai. Kilakanta Sastri thinks that

Urangai is a Tamilised form of Warangal and that the

— 66
passage refers to Kulottunga*s vanquishing the Kakatiyas.
 284

Even if this identification is accepted, the interpretation

is not corroborated by facts.

Tikka I and his Davadis

Tikka*s siding with the Kakatlya king had its

own rewards. It appears that, when Tikka was busy with

his warfares, the other members of the royal family tried

to dislodge him from his position. Tikka naturally sought

the help of Ganapati to put down these chiefs who must be

the davadis mentioned in inscriptions. This incident

seems to have been indicated by an inscription from

Ghebrolu in Guntur district which claims that Kakatlya

Ganapati put to flight the enemies of Tikka and installed

him on throne.^

As for his paschima digvijava, no specific details

are forthcoming. The western region, which has been

referred to here, must have been under smaller chiefs

belonging to the Telugu Chola stock and Tikka obviously

raided these territories in the process of expanding his

authority. The reference to his subduing the Manne chiefs

of Eruva also appears to have been a part of this western

 1

285

expedition. It is, however, difficult to identify these

chiefs and pinpoint the incident.

Tikka I and the Seunas

Inscriptions of Tikka make a pointed reference

to his victory over the SSunas and his attack on
Kalyahapura. This Incident again seems to refer to the
conflict between the Kakatlyas and the Seunas rather than
an independent venture on the part of Tikka* Tme period,
namely, the middle of the 12th eentury A.D., was a period
of continuous struggle for supremacy between the major
powers of the Deccan, viz., the Seunas, the Kakatiy&s and
the Hoysalas, all of whom rose from out of the ruins of
the Chalukya empire. The Seuna king Singhana II was now
able to establish himself in the northern parts of -the
erstwhile Chalukya empire and extended his sway as -far as
the Tungabhadra in the south. He was now trying tc make
inrods into the eastern direction where the Kakatlyas

also were engaged in consolidating their power having

already become independent after the extinction of the
Chalukya power. Haturally,therefore, the two powers came
into conflict with each other and this is referred to in
both the Kakatlya and the S§una records. It is in this
 286

context that we have to look at Tikka*s exploits with

the Seuna king who was Singhana II. As noted above, the

Hirvachanottara Ramavanam speaks of a battle of G-urumuluru

or Kurumuluru where a Seuna general lakumaya attacked

Kurumuluru but was repulsed by Tikka. Ketana* s

Dasakumara Charitra also describes Tikka as a submarine

fire. There are other inscriptions of Kakatlya G-anapati

which also claim victory for him on the Seuna king. These

references indicate that these conflicts were a continued

affair and no decisive victory appears to have been attained

by either of the party. Obviously Tikka took a prominent

role in these conflicts. The Seuna general lakumaya is

identified with Lakshmideva Dandanayaka who figures in

many inscriptions of Singhana and who is credited with many

victories in the latter's southern expeditions. 68 The

claim of the attack on Kalyanapuri was also a part of these

continued conflicts. 69* Kalyanapuri was the same as Kalyina,

the erstwhile capital of the Chalukyas which was now under

the Seuna occupation. It is, however, to be noted that

this claim is a vain boast on the part of Tikka because

no enemy army could penetrate as far north into the Seuna

kingdom as Kalyina, now a small place of that name in

Bidar district of Karnataka state, further inscriptions of

 1

287

Singhana II are found in Anantapur district and

interestingly there are two inscriptions at Yeleswaram

in Devarakonda taluk of Nalgonda district which hear an

identical date, namely, 1250 A.D., though one of them

70
belongs to Ganapati and the other to Singhana. This

speaks of the unsettled conditions m this period.

The next achievement of Tikka was his conquest of

Kane hi, overpowering the Sambuvarayas and Kadavarayas,

levying tribute from the Pandyas and supporting the Cholas.

These claims, though vague, appear to indicate that Tikka

tried to exploit the existing political situation to his

advantage. Though these claims are exaggerated, he appears

to have fairly succeeded in establishing his superiority.

The political conditions in this period, viz., the

first half of the 13th century, were highly disturbed. The

Deccan, the whole of which was once held by the Chalukyas

of Kalyaha, was now divided into three portions to be ruled

over by three families, the Seunas, the Kikatiyas and

the Hoysalas. In the further south, the GhSla power

was on the decline and the Pandyas were raising their heads.

The Hoysalas took this opportunity and extended their

influence in the Chola region by helping the latter against

 2Si

the Pandya attacks* It Is at such a situation that Tikkr

tried to assert himself and even claiming to help the

Cholas. His Conjeeveram record makes a vague claim of

subduing all the southern chiefs. Phe contemporary

ruling Chola king Eulottunga was facing the enemies on all

sides. Inside the kingdom, cheifs like the Sambuvariyas

and the Eadavarayas who were revolting, and from the sou~h

the Pandyas were pressing. It is at such a juncture tha~

Eulottunga III sought the help of the Hoysala king Ballala II

who sent his son Uarasimha to the rescue of Eulottunga. It

is quite likely that right at this time Tikka also stepped

in at the hehest of Eulottunga who was at least technically

his overlord. This explains the statement in the

inscriptions that he ruled over the principalities of

Samburaja and other hostile rulers and that he levied tribute

from Ealavapati, i.e., Eadavaraya. The timely help of

Hoysala Uarasimha saved the Chola king from the attacks of

the Pandya king Maravarman Sundara Pindya. As a mark of

this achievement the Hoysala king assumed the titles Choia-

ra.1va-prati shthapanacharya and Pindya Ca.iakesari. Having

participated in this warfare Tikka also assumed the title

Chola-sth apart ach ary a.

 289

As for Ms claim to have subdued Kanchl it l:>oks

as though it refers to his overpowering the Kadavas and

that too in association with the Hoysalas for just as

Hoysala Uarasimha bore the title Kahchi-Kanchana-Kalava-

Kulantaka indicating his subduing the Kadava and Kahckr,

the Hirvachanottara Ramavanam describes Tikka as reaching

Kahchl and levying tribute from Kalavapati, i.e., tae

Eadavarayas. His three inscriptions in a general way

speak of his capturing Kanchi.

Tikka*s conflict with Hoysala Somesvara

As seen above Tikka appears to have been in close

collaboration with Hoysala Harasimha in restoring the ChSla

power. But soon rift arose between them. This was due to
the rift between Chola Rajehdra and Hoysala Some^rara

because of the latterfs overpowering position over the

Chola on the one hand and on the other improving relationship

between the Cholas and the Pandyas. In this rift Ekka

obviously sided with the Cholas and opposed Hoysala

Somesvara. That is how we find him in an inscription from

Uandalur in Cuddapah district as the vanquisher of iCarnata

Somesa, i.e., the Hoysala king Somesvara. It is net

 29U

unlikely that he received help from the Xakatiya side

in his war with Somesvara.

The above account shows that Tikka was the most

prominent of all the Telugu Chola chiefs of Hellore * The

existing political conditions provided him an opportunity

to assert himself as a powerful ally of the Cholas and

stood by the latter when they were in real difficulty.

Tikka put down all the unruly subordinates in the Chola

kingdom and he collaborated with the Hoysalas in the

latter*s attempts in restoring the Chbla power. But

he stood by his master again and fought against even the

mighty Hoysala king when there arose a difference between

the two. One gets an impression from his numerous

inscriptions that at one time without him the Chola kingdom

would not have survived. As observed by Hilakanta Sastri

the Chola power could hold its own against its enemies due
71
to the loyalty and cooperation of the Uellore Telugu Cholas.

A fighter as he was Tikka is also known for his

patronage of letters. He is described as Kavisarvabhauma

a11*1 Abhinava Bho.ia. But we have no evidences of his concrete

 *S

291

contributions. It was during his period that poets like

Peddayamatya flourished. The latter is described as a
rare genius and an instant composer in several languages. 72
Tikka was a devotee of Taradaraja at Sahchl. He is said
to have declared his faith in this deity thus: "The person
who worships the pair of feet of the god Varadaraja is my
mother, father, great treasure, son, preceptor and
friend.1* 73 He provided for a permanent service called
(xandagonalan-sandiin the Varadaraja temple in 1231 A.D.,
after his name and cared very much for its proper conduct
by granting villages such as Mavandur, Vayalaiyarrur and
Uludamangalam.

Inscriptions of Tikka mention quite a few of his

subordinates. Some of the more prominent ones are BhimI
75 _ 7f) /
Hahidu; Senangulam, the son of Srlman Deva of
_ 77
Hellurikota; Dami Nsyakudu, son of Talara Denimija
Fayakudu; Patinayakundu; 78 Kararu Manmaramundu,
_ 79 the ruler

of Muranapura; Kodarama, 80 the ruler of Muranapura;

Tripurantaka, 81 Tikka* s minister; Mala Surapa Fahidu, 82
a servant of Mahamandalesvara Kamayadeva Maharaja of the
Mukkanti K&duvetti family; Aludidlayyadeva Maharaja83
and G-andavaram Proli Reddi.
• •
 2S2

Manumasiddhi II

Manumasiddhi* s inscriptions start occurring m

1238 A.D.,8^ itself when his father Tikka I was still in

power. Though it is possible to suggest that Manumasiddhi

was associated with the administration of the kingdom
from his very early age, as pointed out above this
overlapping of the dates is found not only here but in
connection with all the rulers of this family*

It appears that at the time Manumasiddhi came to

the throne he was confronted by two heroes Akkana and
Bayyana who appear to have been his dayadis. This inference
QC
comes from the Siddhesvara Charitra of Ease Sarvappa. 3
86
The BratSParudra Charitra also confirms this information.
This incident has been reflected in a tradition recorded
in the Mackenzie Manuscripts. 87 According to this record,
Tikkana, the court poet of Manumasiddhi^ went to Kakatiya
Ganapati and sought his help for Manumasiddhi to regain
his power. That Kakatiya Ganapati extended his help to
Manumasiddhi is clear from an inscription at Hayanlpalle
in Guntur district which states that Ganapati protected
the king of Vellore and killed his enemies Bayyana,
 293

Tikkana and others, and that he received presents of

elephants from the king of Nellore who was obviously

Manumasiddhi himself. This inscription from Nayanipalle

gives a graphic account of the positive role played by

Ganapati in ousting the hostile chiefs from Nellore and

restore the power to Manumasiddhi. 88 It is indicated in

89
an inscription from Nandalur in Guddapah district that

Manumasiddhi fought on behalf of Kakatiya Ganapati against

the king of Kalinga in a battle on the banks of the

Godavari. This gesture on Manumasiddhi*s part must have

been in return of Ganapati*s help for himself.

In a vague way the Nirvachanottara Ramavanam

of Tikkana speaks of Manumasiddhi as having achieved

victories over the kings of Dravida and Karnata countries,

and a king Tijaya. Though the Dravida and Karnata kings

can be identified with Chola Ra;jendra III and Hoysala

Somesvara, there are no specific evidences of his coming

into conflict directly or indirectly witn these rulers.

At best it can be stated that these victories alxude to

his participation in the Kakatiya wars against these

rulers. As for the king Vijaya it is not unlikely that

it was Tijaya Gandagopala who, we have suggested earlier,

belonged to another branch of the Nellore Choi as.

 294

According to Tikkana, Manumasiddhi came into

conflict with another chief called Rakkasa Ganga. The

poet describes that Manumasiddhi vanquished this chief,

wrested the royal insignia from him and bestowed it on

Gangaya Sahini. This Rakkasa Ganga was a Yaicumba chief

and Gangaya Sahini is known from other records as a

Kayastha chief in the service of Kakatiya Ganapati. It

may be surmised that Rakkasa Ganga was a powerful chief

and he had usurped the area under Gangaya Sahini* The

poet Ketana also states that on an earlier occasion

Manumasiddhi*s father Tikka also had defeated this Rakkasa

Ganga and had driven him out from the area of lower

Marayapadi. It appears that Gangaya Sahini, who was a

subordinate of Tikka formerly, had obtained this area

from him. After the death of Tikka, possibly Rakkasa Ganga

overpowered Gangaya Sahini and wrested the territory from

him. This necessitated Manumasiddhi to interfere end

restore the area to Gangaya Sahini again by subduing

Rakkasa Ganga*

The poet Tikkana also makes a pointed reference to

Manumasiddhi * s conquering a Maharashtra s am ant a Saranga.

The identification of this Saranga is indeed difficult.

90
At Raguluppalapadu in Prakasam district there is a*
 295

inscription of this period which mentions a Sarangadhara

of the Chakranirayana family as ruling over the erstwhile
Guntur region. It has "been suggested that this chief was
the adversary of Manumasiddhi named by Tikkana. Though the
suggestion is not impossible, it does not explain the
Maharashtra region associated with this Saranga. The
only other possibility is that it may refer to a chief
in the northern part of the Seuna kingdom which covers
the present day Maharashtra. But we do not know any
chief of this name in that region.

About thirty-two ballads ascribed to very late

period and known as KatamarSju Kathalu, Yadavaraju Kathalu,
Yadava Bharatamu and Yadu Sastramu eulogise Katamaraju,
who is supposed to have belonged to the Yadava family,
from the time of his grandfather. These ballads are
popular in Darsi, Kanigiri, Kandukur and Udayagiri areas
of Prakasam and Guntur districts. According to them,
Katamaraju, the ruler of Donakonda, came into conflict
with the Nellore Telugu Chola ruler called lallasiddhi.
As the story goes, this Katamaraju seems to have been
more interested in grazing cattle. When he was at
Srisailam, there was a severe famine and he was forced to
leave that place in search of pasturage. He went to the
Fellore Telugu Chola kingdom with his cattle. There he

came to an agreement with the ruler called Eallasiddhi.

He agreed to pay the grazing tax (pullari) and also give

away the bull oalves bora during his stay in the He 11ore

kingdom. After somejtime, famine spread to this area also

where Katamaraju was grazing his cattle. The cattle

strayed into the lands cultivated by farmers. The latter

went and reported the matter to the ruler who not only

forbade Katamaraju from grazing the crops but also advised

the farmers to protect their crops. Katamarsqu and his

followers, in order to protect their cattle, also hunted

and killed the wild beasts in the nearby forests, thereby

affecting the interests of the Boyas. Yet another incideist,

which is said to have been responsible for aggravating the

situation, was the killing of a parrot belonging to

Kundamadevi of the Hellore Telugu Chola ruling family.

She incited the Boyas to kill Katamaraju * s cattle under

the pretext of hunting animals found in forests. It

resulted in a heavy loss to Katamaraju.

When Katamara^u stopped the payment ol gracing

tax, the ruler sent a Bhattu named Rayasringivali as

ambassador to collect taxes. He returned empty handed

 297

and-conveyed the reply given by Katamaraju. This led -co

a fierce war between the two sides, each claiming victory

for his side. The battle was fought at Erragaddapac-u.

The participants on the side of the Fellore Telugu Choi as

were Errasiddhi, Papasiddhi, Gandagopala, Kasturiraju,

Undavalli Yirigopu, Gutti Bhlma, and TirnsmSla Tippayya.

The opponents were Kariyavularaju, Bhattavulanna,

Aitamaraju, Munumayya, Saehakulla nayudu, Pochayya and

Katamaraju. There was yet another person whose name is

handed down to posterity as having distinguished himself

in this war. He was Ehadga Tikkana or Rana Tikkana and

he fought on the side of the Fellore Telugu Cholas. His

father Siddhana was the prime minister of ChSda Tikxa,

and his brother Bhaskara, besides being a minister, was

also a commander of the latter. A story current about

Ehadga Tikkana is that he was defeated in the battle by

Katamaraju and driven back. When he returned home, his

wife and mother arranged his bath in a secluded pla*e with

turmeric and all that were needed for bathing by wonen.

Peeling humiliated and disgraced, Ehadga Tikkana marched

again to the battle-field with a huge army and wrought

havoc in the enemy*s ranks. Ehadga Tikkana was a Brahmana-

by caste, and killing a Brihmano^/as considered a sin. So,
 298

Katamara;Ju was in a fix not knowing what-toe do. ©ten

Brahma Rudrayya, a Saivite Brahman4/;who was in the service
of Katamaraju, volunteered to fight with Khadga Tikkana.
They fought with great courage and valour, and both
i
perished in it. It is said that Khadga Tikkana died near
Pattaporavi.
/

This story, more or less in the same form has beer

narrated in an inscription from Gundlapalem in the preseirt
Prakasam district. The date of the record here is Saka
1170, Kalayukfl. Similarly, the event is mentioned in the

Local Records. Here this battle is said to have been

fought in the year ChitraThhanu. There has been
considerable controversy regarding the date of this war
because of the incomplete and irregular dates. The
inscription adds to the confusion by stating -hat Katama-
ra^u died in the battle in the 3965 year of Kaliyuga which
by normal standards is equated with 864 A.D. Different
scholars ascribe different dates 91 ranging from the 12th
to the 17th century A.D. Thus the whole story as narrated
in the Kathas assumes the touch of a legend with many
later interpolations. But since it appears to have had
some historicity since it is mentioned in the G-undlapalen
inscription of the 13th century A.D., we can conclude that
 209

this was a major clash between Manumasiddhi and Katamaraju

which assumed the form of a legendary story in the hands

92
of the later bards.

Practically Manumasiddhi was the last cf the

Telugu Chola rulers who ruled with a fairly irdepehdent

status, though he acknowledged the suzerainty of the

Cholas. The accession of Jatavarman Sundara Pandya I in

1251 A.D., changed the face of the political condition in

South India. He overpowered the Cholas and their Hoysala

allies, and established a vast Pandya empire m the south.

The Telugu Cholas who were the traditional subordinates

of the Cholas naturally came under the attack of the

Pindyas. Inscriptions indicate that Kopperuhjinga, the

Kadava chief under Sundara Pandya, took the lead in the

expeditions of Sundara Pandya, and hie inscriptions

spread over in Chittoor, Cuddapah, Kumool and East

Godavari districts indicate that practically the major

portions of Andhra were overrun by the Pandya army.

Jatavarman Sundara Pandya* s inscriptions at Chidambaram

claim victory over Vira Gandagdpala which was another name

of Manumasiddhi and Ganapati, i.e., the KakatXya king

Ganapati. These inscriptions also claim that as a mark

 30D

of this victory, Sundara Pandya celebrated his virabhlsnescg,

at Nellore. This significant victory over the Telugu
Cholas was achieved through a battle fought at Mudugur.
Mudugur is identified with Muttukur, a sea-side village
east of Nellore. But Mudugur can be identified with
Muttukur in Cuddapah district as expeditions of the major
dynasties in the past passed through this district. This
is confirmed by the presence of Jatavarman Sundara Pindya'a

inscriptions in this district.

Manumasiddhi II is the best remembered of the

Fellore Telugu Cholas. His memory is cherished so much
not on account of his achievements as a warrior and kingr
but to the patronage he extended to the Telugu men of
letters. He takes rank with the Eastern Chalukya ruler
Rajaraja Narendra and the Yijayanagara ruler Erishnadeva-
raya as a patron of Telugu writers. Tikkana, the greatest
of the Telugu poets, lived in his court. He was not only
a poet-laureate but also a minister of Manumasiddhi. He
served him loyally and faithfully, and stood by him as a
tower of strength in weal and woe. His journey to WarangaJL
to seek Kakatlya Ganapati's help for restoring the kingdom

to his master speaks a lot of his high sense of devotion

to his master. The relationship that existed between them.
was not merely tliat of a patron and a protege, and a
master and a servant^but of equals, They were attracted
to each other by bonds of mutual affection and friendship.
Manumasiddhi addressed Tikkana affectionately as mama
(uncle), and the latter reciprocated it by treating him

as his nephew. Disillusioned by the misfortunes such as

the death of Manumasiddhi in the battle of Muttukur,,
Tikkana retired from public life and took to spiritual
and literary activities. He performed a sacrifice and
became a Somayaji. It denotes the change of his outlook
on life. Inscriptions of Manumasiddhi II mention quite
a few subordinate chiefs. 'The more important of them are
Mahamandalesvara Potayadeva Choda Maharaja? Mahamandaleqvara
Alladu Sudhadeva MaJharaju, grandson of Podakanuri Siddirigu;
Siddhamadeva Yijayadeva; Madusudanadeva Maharaja, grandson
of Anduluri Vijayadittadeva of the Mukkanti Kaduvetti
race; and Yira Narasinga Yadavaraya.

Tikka II

The history of the Hellore Telugu Chola kingdom

after the battle of Muttukur is obscure. Tikka II or
Irumadi Tirukalattideva, the son of Tikka I, came to
power in 1265 A.D. A record of this date at
 302

94
Tondamanad in Chittoor district registers the construction

of a sluice of a tank at the place by him. He is

9*5
represented by another inscription at Krishnapatnam m
Hellore district. It is dated in his 2nd regnal year and
S. 1201 (1279 A.D.). It is obvious from this that his

accession to the throne must have taken place in 1278 A.D.

The assumption of the title Tribhuvanachakravarti, the use

of his own regnal years in the inscriptions and the

absence of the mention of any overlord indicate that he

was ruling as an independent chief.

Manuma Gandagopala

The next ruler, whose inscriptions we come across,

was Manuma Gandagopala. There is no information about his

father Hallasiddhi II. We hear of Manuma Gandagopala for

' the first time in 1272 A.D., in an inscription of

- 96
Ambadeva, the Klyastha subordinate of the Kakatiya

rulers, at Tripurantakam in Prakasam district. The latter

claims to have established Manuma Gandagopala at Vikrama-

simhapura, i.e., Hellore. The next we hear of him is in

1284 A.D., which is stated to be the third year of his

97 98
reign. He is mentioned in another inscription as a

subordinate of Kakatiya Prataparudra, the date of which is

 303

given differently as 1291 A.D., and 1296 A.D., by

V.Rangacharya and the Government Epigraphibt respectively.

Robert Sewell says that he was either Manumasiddhi II

or his grandson Manumasiddhi III, the son of Rallasiddhi.

Of the two dates, the former appears to be the more

probable.

Manuma Gandagopala bore the title Prithvlsvara-sirah-

kanduka-krldavinoda. the title which is borne by Tikka I.

It is likely that Manuma Gandagopala inherited this title.

He also had the titles Uraiyurpuravaradhisyara and

Jag ad obb agand a.

Manuma Gandagopala1s reign witnessed an attack

of the Kakatlyas under Adidamu Mallu^ who is stated to

be the right hand man of the Sakai a Senadhipati Somaya^ula

Rudradeva. He opposed the Kakatlya army but was killed in

the encounter. Adidamu Mallu assumed the title Manuma-

Gandagopala-sirah-khandana. Manuma Gandagopala is the

last known chief of the felugu Gholas. His period was

followed by the invasions of Ala-ud-Din Khil^i and his

general Malik Kafur in which all the southern kingdoms

including that of the lelugu Cholas were swept away.

 304

Vilava Gandagopala

While discussing the genealogy and chronology we

have noticed the existence of three chiefs with the names

ending with Gandagopala such as Vijaya Gandagopala, Vira

Gandagopala and Raja Gandagopala. Since these chiefs

could not he fitted into the known genealogies we suggested

that they belonged to a branch of the Telugu Cholas of

Nellore. We have also noticed that no specific relation­

ships between these chiefs can be established. On the

basis of the inscriptions of these ehiefs a short account

of them is given below.

Of these three chiefs, Vijaya Gandagopala comes

first in the chronological order though, of course, there

is overlapping of dates with the next chiefs. As observed

earlier this is an explicable phenomenon.

It has been seen that the southern part of the

Fellore kingdom was under Vijaya Gandagopala and his

successors. His period is represented by a remarkably

large number of epigraphs. There are one hundred and

fifty-five records spread over seven districts. The

largest number (108) comes from Chingleput district.

Chingleput was followed "by Forth Arcot (19), Fell ore (13),
Ohittoor (12), Cuddapah (1), Kurnool (1) and Tanjore (1).
In these records he was referred to as Yi Jay a Gandagopala,
Tribhuvanachakravartin Yijaya Gandagopala, Tribhuvana-
chakravartin Sri Vijaya Gandagopala, Madhurantaka Pottapi
Chela Yijaya Gandagopala, Madhurantaka Pottapi Chola alias
Yijaya Gan<iag6pala, Ananta Vijaya Gandagopala and

Mahamandalesvara Vijaya Gandagopala. Of these names, the

second is the most commonly mentioned. Vijaya Gandagopala
is being confused with Manumasiddhi II. for instance,
Robert Sewell equates Manumasiddhi with Vijaya Gandagopalal0^

Hultzsch is of the view that Gandagopala was the proper

name and Vijaya was only an adjective meaning
101
’victorious*. But this view is not correct because we
have at least three Gandagopalas who were distinguished
by the appellation Yijaya, Yira and Riga. Only five
inscriptions of his are dated in the Saka era, that is,
1185, 1187 (three inscriptions) and 1207. The first of
these is said to correspond to KudhirSdgacin and the
second to the 15th and 16th regnal years of his. Only two
records help to arrive at his initial year as 1250 A.D.
Of the one hundred and fifty-five records belonging to
his period, there are hardly two in Telugu. His
(

inscriptions in Fellore district, with the exception of two,

are from Gudur and Sulurpet taluks. The other two are

from Nellore and Atmakur taluks. The latter is dated

1285 A.D. His records in Hellore district are dated in

his 2, 7, 11, 19, 21, 23, 24 and 27 regnal years indicating

that the southern taluks of the district were under his

control almost from the "beginning of his reign.

Quite a large number of subordinates figure in

his inscriptions. The more prominent of them are

Rajendrasola Mummudi Yaidumba Mahirajan Pemmadideva;

, _ / __ /
Alagiya Pallavan Edirilisola Sambuvaraya of the Sengeni

family; Madusudanadeva, son of Mahamandalesvara

Tripurantakadeva of the Pallava lineage; Nallasittarasar,

son of Bhlmarasar of Tyagasamudrappattai; Kannudaipperumal

'_ —
Sambuvaraya; __ _
Rajaraja /
Sambuvarayar, Yalittunai Apparasar,

son of Sindamarasar of Tyagasamudrappattai; Srlkaryam

_ / _ — f
Pallavarayar; Sambuvarayar Yirasolan; Nallasiddarasa of

the Pallava family; Rajagambhlra Sambuvaraya; Nulottunga-

sola dambuvarayan; Salukki Narayanan Alluvlramarasan;

Gundur Singapperumal alias Abhinava Bhatta Bina of

Yelichcheri; Nayanar Nalla Nayanar, son of PanchanadIvaha

Nilagangaraiyar; and Semban Kudaiyan Soran Avaiyandai of

Tirukachchur.
 His latest year, according to inscriptions, is

1285 A.D. But Ms reign is taken to the 42nd year, i.e.,

1291-92 A.D., on the basis of the cyclic year Khara

mentioned in a copperplate record.

Vira G-andagopala

• The successor of Vijaya G-andagopala was Vira

G-andagopala. His relationship with the former is, however,

not known. His inscriptions are dated between 1292 and

1301 A.D., and most of them are in Chingleput district.

Raja G-andagopala

The next chief of this branch was Raja G-andag5pala,

for whom also we have dates between 1296 and 1325 AJ).

He figures for the first time in an inscription of 1296 A.D.

which is said to be his 6th regnal year. 102 Though there

are many inscriptions for this chief, they do not mention

any specific political event. The latest year giver for

hiin is the 35th which is equated with 1325 A.D. This takes

him to the post-Kakatiya period when the country was in

the grip of Muslim occupation.

 308

Raga Gandagopala styled himself as the lord of the

city of Yikramasimhapura. Neither his antecedents nor the

circumstances in which he came to power are known. An

103
inscription of 1297 A.D., from Narasaraopet states

that one Manuma Gandagopala raided the territory of Raja

Gandagopala. He also claims to have destroyed the Seuna

and Dravida armies. The reference to the attack on the

Seunas appear to he the same as the one led by the

Kakatlya general Gona Ganns Reddi who went as far as

Raichur into the Seuna kingdom and built a fort there.

The Dravida army is identical with that of the Pandyas.

The beginning of the 14th century witnessed a

series of invasions on the south by the Sultans of Delhi.

Kakatiya Prataparudra could successfully withstand these
onslaughts till 1309 A.D."*^ and, in next year, when any

more resistance became impossible, he sued for peace and

paid tribute to them. Taking advantage of his preoccupation

with these things, the vassals of the Kakatlya kingdom

including Raja Gandagopala declared their independence.

In 1310 A.D. there was a civil war in the Pandya kingdom

between Sundara Pandya and Yira Pandya, the two sons of

Maravarman Kulasekhara, for the throne. The Pandya

105
kingdom was invaded in 1311 A.D. by Malik Kafur at the
 309

instance of the Delhi Sultan Ala-ud-Din Khilji. Ravivarman

Kulasekhara of Kerala rebelled against Sundara Pandya and

drove him out of his kingdom. Sundara Pandya sought the

help of Ala-ud-Din Khilji who, besides despatching some

force under Sundara Pandya, sought the assistance of

Prataparudra. This came in handy for Prataparudra to

re-establish his hold on Fellore and other areas. The

Kakatiya army set out under the command of Prataparudra

assisted by Muppidi Hayaka and his son Pedda Rudra, Devari

Kayadu, Recherla Bradacha and other generals. They

defeated Raja Gandagopala and put him to flight.

Hellore was conferred on Muppidi Fayaka who styled nimself

as the lord of Yikramasimhapura. The conquest of Fellore

by Prataparudra took place in about 1315 A.D. An epigraph

106
of 1318 A.D., at Komarapudi in Fellore district registers

the assignment of the services of two persons for maintain­

ing a perpetual lamp for the success of Muppidi Fayaka's

arms.

Though there is an epigraph at Tiruppalaivanam 107

in Chingleput district referring to Raja Gandagopala1s

thirty-fifth regnal year, his rule can be said to have

ended in 1315 A.D., itself.

 310

REFERENCES

1. JOR, XXV, p. 51.

2. ARSIE, No. 317 of 1928-29.

3. Ibid., No. 483 of 1906.

4. Ibid., Nos. 9-12 of 1939-40.

5. Ibid., No. 317 of 1928-29.

6. Ibid., Nos. 456 of 1919, 104 of 1892, 407 of 1896,

and 182 of 1943-44, and ME, 395 of 1958-59.

7. .VR, II, p. 1108, No. 441.

8. Ibid., p. 1086, No. 300.

9. Ibid., No. 18.

10. ARSIE, No. 272.of 1905.

11. VR, II, p. 1132, No. 632.

12. ARSIE, No. 204 of 1899.

13. Ibid., No. 711 of 1904.

14. VR, I, p. 73, No. 333.

15. ARSIE, No. 179 of 1939-40.

16. Ibid., Nos. 9-12 of 1939-40.

17. JAHRS, XXV, pp. 125-126.

18. II, XXXVII, p. 200.

19. Nilalcanta Sastri, K.A., A History of South India,

P. 222. ^
 311

20. ARSIE, Ho. 578 of 1907.

21. Earlier scholars like ¥. ¥enkayya (ARSIE for 1899-
1900; p. 18), H.Luders (El, ¥11, Ho. 17,
p. 122), Robert Sewell (HISI, p. 396), and
M.Somasekhara Sarma (Madras Government
Oriental Series Ho. XCI, Katamara,ju Katha,
pithika, p. XXVII) have given the genealogy

of this family. On the one hand these

genealogies do not agree with each other
fully nor does the one given by us agree in
toto with either or all of them. But our table
is based on the above analysis.

22. ARIB, Ho. 367 of 1953-54.

23. El, ¥11, Ho. 17.
24. Ibid.
25. Ibid., Ho. 21.
26. ARSIE, Ho. 456 of 1919.
27. Ibid., Ho. 582 of 1907.
28. Ibid., Ho. 446 of 1919.
29. Hir.Ram, Prathamasvasa. verses 29, 31 and 36.
30. Das. Cha., Pithika. verses 13, 15 and 17.
31. ARSIE, Ho. 580 of 1907.
32. SII, I¥, Ho. 661.
 312

33. 'ARSIE, No. 407 of 1915.

34. SII, 17, No. 675.

35. Venkataramayya, M., identifies him with Maha-

mandalesvara Chiddana Chola Maharaja

and Beta with Doraya Beta ruling in the

Palnadu region (JOR,XVII-III, p. 135, SII,'

IX-I, No. 207 and ARSIS, No. 596 of 1906),

Government Epigraphist with Siddhi, son

of Tilunga Bijjana (ARSIS for 1992-33,

part II, p® 63 and para 18) and M. Rama

Rao with Beta I, the ancestor of the

Nellore Telugu Cholas (JAHRS, V-II, p. 68).

However, this name indicates two names,

i.e., Siddhi and Beta and not o»e person

as presumed by these scholars.

36. JAHRS. V, p. 68.

37. JOR, XVII, part III, p. 135.

 313

38. El, VII, No. 17, v. 15.

39. Ibid., No. 17-B, line 35.
4-0. 1RSI1, Nos. 9-12 of 1939-40.
41. Ibid., No. 219 of 1897.
42. SII, VI, Nos. 181 and 184.
43. Ibid., No. 601 of 1907.
44. ARIE, No. 11 of 1955-56.
45. VR, II, No. 228, p. 1076.

46. An Inscription from Kanchi also refers to a

Peddarasa as tbe son of Madhurantaka
Pottapi Ohola Nallasiddarasa (ARSIE,
No. 456 of 1919). He appears to be

the same as this Pattarasa.

47. VR, II, No. 210, p. 1075.

48. Nilakanta Sastri, K.A., The Colas, p. 388.
49. Sewell, Robert, The Historical Inscriptions of
Southern India, p. 395.
50. ARSIE. No. 582 of 1907.
 1

314

51. Nilakanta Sastri, K.A., op. cit., p. 399.

52. ARSIE for 1899-1900, page 17, para 46.
53. VR, II, p. 1077, No. 237 and EDI, II, p. 708, K. 13.
in

El, VII, pp. 121 and 122.

•

55. VR, II, p. 1108, No. 441.

56. ARSIE for 1920, part II, p. 117, para 55.
57. Ibid., No. 16 of 1939-40.
00
in

Ibid., No. 446 of 1919 and ARSIE for 1S20 , part II,
.

page 117 and para 55.

59. SII, IV, No. 849.
60. ARSIE, No. 71 of 1939-40.
61. Ibid., No. 439 of 1937-38.
62. Ibid., No. 580 of 1907 and part II, page 71, para 74
63. Nir. Ram., canto I, verses 32 to 54.
64 * Das. Cha.. Pithika. 0. 3.
65. Nilakanta Sastri, K.A., The Colas, p. 386 •
66. Ibid., p. 391.
67. BI, V, pp. 142 ff.
68. Ritti, S.H., The Seunas, p. 127.
VO
0

The argument that Kalyana was now under the Hoysalas

\

by Y.Gr.Reddi, a research studem of Nagpur

and 7. Yasodadevi (JAHRS, XXX, pp. 67 and
68) is not correct as there are other

evidences to show that it was under the

Seunas during this period.
70-. Ritti, S.H., op. cit., p. 127.

71. S. Krishnaswami Aiyangar is of the opinion that

at one stage Chola Rajendra III fought

with likka I (South India and ler Muhammadan

Invaders# p. 40). But there is no clear

evidence to this effect.

72. Andhra Kavitarangini# IV, p* 213.

73* ARSIE for 1899-1900, part II, p. 20 and para 49.

74. Ibid., No. 434 of 1919.

75. Ibid., No. 49 of 1939-40®

76. VR^ II, p. 1086, No. 300.

77. Ibid.L p. 1144, No. 694.

780 Ibid., pp. 1107 and 1108, No. 440.

79. , Ibid., p. 1109, No. 447.

80. Ibid., No, 449.

81. ARSIE, No. 34 of 1893.

82. Ibid., No. 71 of 1939-40.

83. VR, II, p. 1150, No. 740.

84. EDI, III, p. 1393, U. 48.

85. Sarvappa, Ease, Siddhesvara Charitra, pp. 116 and 118.

86. Ekamranatha, Prataparudra Oharitra, p. 37.

 316

Mahal ingam, T.V., Mac. Mss., Summaries of the

Historical Manuscripts in the Mackenzie
Collections, Ms. Ho. 97.
SII, X, p. 196, Wo. 376.
Yazdani, G., (Ed). The Early History of the Deccan,
parts VII-XI, p0 609, fn. 1.
WDI, III, Ongole 89.
The date of -the battle is given differently by
scholars. C.P. Brown gives it as 1159 A.D.,
Hari Adiseshuvu as 1170 A.D., V. Yasodadevi
as 1259 A.B., Devarapalli Venkatakrishna
Reddi as 1282 A.D., and T.V.Subba Rao as
1294 A.D. (Subba Rao, T.Y., Katamara.lu

Xathalu, Yol. I, pages CIY, VIII and

_LXIX, JAHRS, XXIII, p. 13, Subba Rao, T.Y.,
op. cit., pages XCYI and p. CVIII.5

The authorship of these ballads are ascribed to

Gangula Pina Yellayya, Madduleti Xavi,
Mallaya, Kankabandi Ghattayya, Xatteboyina
Marayya Xavi, Kadirimangalam Yenkatadri,
Jarugupalle Chennayya and Srinadha.

U, XXI, pages 121 and 343.

94. ARSIE, No. 233 of 1903.

95. YR, II, p. 1073, Wo. 196.

96. Ibid., p. 932, No. 261.

97. NjDI, II, pp. 794-797, No. 31.

98; VR, I, p. 777, No. 275 and ARSIE, No. 204 of 1899.

99. Parabrahma Sastry, P.Y., She Kakatiyas, p. 130.

100. Sewell, Roberts, $he Historical Inscriptions of

*
Southern India, p. 396.

101. ARSIS for 1915-16, part II, Para 81.

102. YR, II, p. 1123, No. 543.

103. SII, IY, No. 661. ■

104. Parabrahma Sastry, P.Y., Ihe Kakatiyas, p. 132.

105. Ibid., p« 133.

106. ARIE, No. 23 of 1954-55.

107. ARSIE, No. 364 of 1928-29.