Annual Reports

THE CHOLAS

12. The Chōḷa kings are well represented in the collection, most of their inscriptions being found in the Trichinopoly and North Arcot distrcits. The records of the early rulers of the dynasty are comparatively meager numbering a little over a dozen in all.

Parakesarivarman.
   Of king Parakēsarivarman without any distinguishing epithet, there are a few inscriptions. No. 283 from Kāppalūr, dated in the eighth year of this king records a gift of money for feeding Brahmans in the local temple by Gaṅgap- perundēvī, the wife of Kāmaḍigaḷ, son of Mādēvar of Paṅgaḷa-nāḍu This Mādēvar is known to have been a subordinate under Pallava Kampavarman (Ep. Ind. Vol. VII, p. 193). As the writing of the inscription also closely resembles that of the records of Kampavarman found in the same place (No. 282) it may be assigned to that period. Hence it is reasonable to identify the Parakēsari of this inscription with Vijayālaya an inscription of whose reign was found at Vīra-śōlapuram in the South Arcot distrcit about 50 miles south of Kāppalūr (A. R. No. 51 of 35-36). In the genealogy of the Paṅgaḷa-nāḍu chiefs given in para. 8 of Epigraphical Report for 1930-31, Gaṅgamārttāṇḍan alias Śembiyan Pṛithvī-gaṅgaraiyar is shown as the son of Mahādēva and so Kāmaḍigaḷ of the present inscription might be supposed to be a brother of Gaṅgamārttāṇḍa.

   Another inscription of Parakēsarivarman (No. 286) from the same place is dated in his 3rd year and mentions this Gaṅgamārttāṇḍa alias Pṛithvī- gaṅgaraiyar and his son (name lost) who is said to have made a gift of lands to the temple of Śaṅkaranārāyaṇa. As this Gaṅgamārttāṇḍa figures in the 26th year of Rājakēsarivarman Āditya I) (No. 177 of 1928) the Parakēsari of the present inscription must be identified with Āditya’s son Parāntaka I. Another inscription of Parakēsari (No. 302) which comes from Poonamallee near Madras and which, from its characters may also be assigned to Parāntaka I, refers to a Vishṇu temple of Neḍuñjeli[ya*]-Viṇṇagar-Iundadēvar at Pūndanmali in Puliyūr-kōṭṭam. Neḍuñjējeliyan is the well-known Pāṇḍya king, the ‘ victor at Talaiyālaṅgāṇam’ over the Chēra and Chōḷa kings (S. I. I., Vol. III, Pt, IV, p. 455), and it is rather curious how a temple named after this early Pāṇḍya king could have sprung into existence so far north, as Poonamallee in the Chingleput distrcit. There is, however, an early Pāṇḍya record mentioning Poonda-malli (A. R. E., 43 of 1908). The present inscription is engraved on a slab which is now lying loose in the compound of the mosque of which, however, the basement consists of inscribed stones, which go to show that it must have originally formed part of a Hindu temple. No. 268 from Kāppalūr is also a record of Parakēsari, dated in his 13th year. It records a sale of land by the sabhā of Kāmappullūr to Muḍumbai Iḷaiya Attiṇḍakramavittan, a member of the āḷum-gaṇam of the place for the maintenance of a Vēdic school (Chhandōga-kiḍaippuram). As this transaction is again referred to in a record of the 6th year of Madiraikoṇḍa Rājakēsari (i.e.,) Sundara-Chōḷa (No. 270) from the sarue place, the present record has to be assigned to Parāntaka I.

   To the end of Āditya’s reign belongs a record from Kāppalūr, dated in Śaka 826 without however mentioning the ruler of the region (No. 271). It registers an endowment of land as dēvabhōga to a Vishṇu temple of the place by Nandipōśar Tāliperumān who was probably a local chieftain. The omission of the ruling king’s name in the inscription probably indicates the unsettled