CHAPTER I HISTORICAL BACKGROUND Tte advent of tha chalukyas Into the political scena of power and supremacy witnessed a new era in tha political and cultural history of the Deccan* For two centuries l*e« from the middle of the sixth century to the middle of the eighth century* they succeeded in bringing a vast and extensive region under their sway* Previously the land was divided into small states and principalitias held by various ruling dynasties and feudal Lords who were constantly at war with each other* Among t h ^ were the Xlupas# Banas# Matiryas* Bhojas# • • OaAgas# Minor Rashtrakutas* Nalas and Kalatsurls • • • (Kalachuris)* To the Chalukyas goes the credit of unifying this land and its people under one banner# establishing a strong empire and making it one of the' ' most important dynasties of the time* Diverse views have been put forth on the circumstances that led to the rise of the Chalukyas and on their Inmedlate predecessors* The Miraj^ plates and the Yewur tablet tell us that jayaslAha, the foiinder of the Chalukya dynasty# established his kingdcxn in the Decc€ui after defeating Indra# the son of Krishna of the 2G Rashtra)cuta family* On the basis of this infozmatiOB • • Bhandarkar balieves that tho ChaluJcyas succaeded tha • — 3 Rashtrakutas • But no such achievements have been • • recorded in the charters of the early Chalukyas. This A has led some scholars to think that the stat«nent in the Kauthem and the above mentimed grants were merely a reflection of the events which occurred in the later half of the tenth century whan the HashtraJcutas were defeated hy Taila XX and the sovereignty once more passed into the hands of the Western Chalukyas (other­ wise knoim as the later chalukyas of Kalyanl). But Desai rightly opines that since there were no Rashtra>mta• # Kings known the above names# this record cannot be accepted as a historical fact^* However Sircar seems to think that the early Chalukyae may be supposed to have been the political successors of the V&atakas in the Deccan^* But the argument he proposes is unconvincing. The Undikavatika grant states that King Abhimanyu# • • • while residing at Manapura* granted the village of Undikavatika« • • to the ^iva ascetic Jatabhara• in the presence of JayasiAha# the conmander of the fort of Harivatse • Scholars having assigned the record to the sixth century# this JayasiAha was identified with jayasiAha' of the early • 6 Chalxikyaui • But this theory cannot be accepted due to 27 want of definite evidence and considering the great Influence (both claim to be Haritlputra# belcmg to Mwavya gotra and to be itforahlppers of Karttlkeya) of the Kadamba style on the documents of the early ChaltiJcyas. It is more likely that JayasiAha Z and Hanaraga h e K some military or executive office or were chieftains or feudatories under the Kadainbas of Banavasi# since the records of the early Chalukyas do not attribute any conquests or imperial titles like Prithivivallabha or Maharaja to either of th«B. This suggests that neither 9 of them enjoyed any semblance of sovereign power • The names of Pulaki&i Z's father Ranaraga# and grandfather Jayasimha are first given in the Mahakuta pillar inscription of 602 :n)is information was probably obtained from sc«ne grant of Pulake&i 1, as according to the Dharma&astras the king should *Sn:ite down thereon the names of his ancestors and of himself • ScxTte years after ascending the throne# Harivarma# 0 11A the last of the Kadamba kings in the Santivanna's line $ 4 had a confrontation on the battle-field with Krishnavarma II of the Triparvata line in which ba was defeated and had to surrender his capital Banavasi whexreby Krishnavarma II became the ruler of the Kadamba domains* During this period Pulake&i I taking advantage of the prevailing 28 conditions# proclalnwd himself as an Independent ruler and laid claim to the territories till then held by the Kadambas* He was probably a subordinate under the Kadarabas. A battle may have ensued between th«n in which Pulake&i Z emerged victorious* subsequently he built a fort at Badami as mentioned in the Badami Cliff Inscription dated ^ k a 465^^ and made it his capital^^* Later on we know that the icadaisibas ruled over a small territory as feudatories under the Chalukyas because both i^rttivarman I and Pulakeli II claim in their charters to have defeated the Kadainbas when they tried to assert their independence. A copper plate inscription of Harivarma avers that the Sendrakas were at this tiine the feudatories of the Kadambas^^. Later on the Sendrakas cmne under the influence of the Chalukyas* Moreover the territories formerly under the rule of the Kadambas were now held by the Chalukyas. It stands to reason therefore that the Chalukyas were the insnediate successors of the Kadambas (The Kadainbas held away over the present districts of Shimoga and Chitaldrug in the Mysore state# and North Kanara« fielgaum and Dharwar)^^. Badami# which was situated in the centre of the northern provinces of the Kadamba kingdom clearly suggests that the Kadambas lost the northern part of their kingdom to the dwlvikyas^^* 29 W« have two grants of Harlvaxmen» Both are from HalsX and mentlcm the place name Palafiika (Halsl}« From the geographical position of Badami we can affinn that when this town was occupied by th« ChaluJcyas# their capitals Palalika or Halsi and Triparvata were also probably lost to the Chalukyas* Howover# it can be concluded that they were not strangers to the southern part o£ the country* Most probably they were ^in­ ordinate s xinder the then ruling dynasty and later on carved out a kingdom for themselves* Origin The Origin of the Chal\i)^as is lost in obscurity* The name of the family in inscriptions is given as chalkya^®# Chalikya or chalikya^®# CaluJcya^®, CJialuJcya^^* Later forms were chaluJcya• 22 * ChauluJcya 23 , Chalulcya 24 and Chalukya• 25 •' An inscription frcxn NagarJunakonda 2fi of the third century A«D« mentions a Xhamda Chaliki Ramman&Ha# who was an Z}cshva]cu subordinate* He was a Mahasenapati and Mahatalavara* ' He is described as Vasitlilputa and belonging to the Hiramnaicas* An attempt was ittade to relate the Chalu}cya8 to the Ikshvakus and to ascriba their origin to Andhra 27 * But this theory has been refuted on the grotinds that whereas the Chalukyas were ttoritlputras of the Manavya gotra, this official was Vasishtiputra (Vasitl^puta)mm of the Hiranyakas (HiraAnakas) 28 • o"0 Several other theories regarding their origin have been put forth* They have also bean Identified with Gurjara0^^« But this was also discarded as untenable^^* Rao# Desai and Rangaswami^^ have attributed the origin o£ Clmlukyas to KamataHa the basis of the names and titles of the kings like Kattiarasa# Pulike&i,Bittarasa#/ • • Ef^yya# Ainbera, Madanangasraya, etc* which are Kannada words and the use of Kannada language in their inscriptions and literature* This is not a sound reasoning as it is conanonly known that when a region was conquered# the conqueror normally adopted the local langxiage for the convenience of his new subjects and hance taking up Kannada titles# names and language was not very unusual* Lastly we have the reference to the Chalukya axmy as Karnataka-bala• in the records of the Rashtrakutasmm ^ 32 . • * Yazdani sums it up with "Whether this official was a Chaliki or not# there is now little room for doubt that the Chalukyas# like the chutus and t ^ Kadambas to whoa they bear many rasemblances# and like the Rashtrakutas# were an indigenous clan which rose to importance in the service of the later satavahanasand their successors* They belonged to the Karnataka country# sosnetitaes called also by the name Kuntala# and their mother tongue was Kannada" 33 * 31 liatar Inscriptions and literature give us accounts of the origin of this family. The kautham grant of Vikramaditya V dated 1009 states that fifty-nine kings of the Chalukya lineage reigned at the city of Ayodhya. After that« sixteen kings ruled over Dakshinapatha« Then followed a period of tcmrx>rary eclipse of their power which was eventually restored by Jayasi^ha Z« The Kalyan inscription of A.D« 1025-26 traces the descent of the family from god Brahman through Manu# Mwavya# Harita^ Penchafeikhi l&riti to Chalukya^^* Some inscriptions of Vikramaditya VI give their ancestors as the Soma (Moon) created from the eye of Atri# son of Bralvnaii^^* The Handarlkc inscription instead starts from Kiranyagarbha •> # Brahman b o m in the lotus onierging frt»a Visnu's navel to • • Manu# Mandavya# (cf« Manavya of other records), riariti P^chafeikha in whose chultxka (chaltika or chuluka means a *water»pot* or 'hand hollowed to hold water') the Chalukyas were bom. This is followed by a Chalxikya king Vishnuvardhana • Vijayaditya who dislodged his enemies fr«a their territories and was succeeded by fifty-nine kings# the first being Satya&raya of Ayodhya. Then came Jayasi^ha and his sixteen successors in the Deccan who were succeeded by Rattas or Raahtrakutaa^*^. m the grant . • • • of Vishnuvardhana Raja X of the sastem Chalukya# the genealogy starts with Ood Brahma— 38 and proceeds through 32 several successive descendants Including Atri# Soma (Moon) and Udayana among the fifty-nine kings from Ayodlv** Vijayaditya# a descendant from this family came to the south# with a view to conquer the country but lost his life in battle with Trilochana * Pallava» His queen# who was in the family way# escaped and took shelter at the agrahara of Mudiv®nu# the residence of one Vishnubhatta somayajin* There she gave birth to • son named Vishnuvardhana in honour of Vishnubhatta • • • somayajin* This prince# worshipped the goddess Nanda- Gaurl or Nandi Bhagavatl^ Kumara (Karttikeya)# Narayana • and saptamatrikas# on the chalukyagiri (probably an imaginary hill)* He defeated the Pallavas and married a daughter of the Pallava king* Ha assumed the royal 39 — insignia of the Chalukya family and established its rule in the seven and half lakh country of Dakshinapatha • lying between the Naxmada and the setu (Rama*s bridge) in the south.