2025-01-23 09:32:27 by srkris
This page has not been fully proofread.
IV. VIJAYANAGAR INVASIONS OF
TONDAIMANDALAM
1. THE SAVANNA INTERREGNUM
It is believed by some scholars that it was
Venrumaņkondān I the Sambuvarāya ruler (1322-
1339) who was overcome by Kampaņa.¹ But this view
is far from correct as the earliest inscription of Kam-
pana bears only the date 1352.2 His invasion of Tondai-
mandalam could never have taken place prior to that
year. Venrumaṇkondān had a peaceful death and the
period was also calm and quiet in his territory, and
this is borne cut by the fact that his son Rājanārāyaṇa
was able to send the remains of his royal father to be
was able to send the remains of his royal father to be
consigned to the Ganges.³
1. Dr. S. K. Iyengar: South India and her Muhammadan In-
vaders: p. 15 and pp. 60-61. The epigraphical reports, too, contain the
mistake. Dr. S. K. Iyengar seems to be caught in confusion when we
read his lectures, two and six. An analysis of the points he has raised
in these two lectures regarding Kampana's defeat of the Sambuvarāyas
will show the confusion. In his second lecture he says: "We find two
rulers who assumed high titles indicating independence. Of these the
first is Sakalalöka Chakravartin Venrumankonda Sambuvarayan whose
date of accession is A.D. 1322-23 followed by Sakalaköka Chakravartin
Rājanārāyaṇa Sambuvarayan whose date of accession is 1337-38 and
whose reign extended upto 1356-57. It was apparently this later
ruler that was overcome by Prince Kumāra Kampana of Vijayanagar."
He changes his view in the sixth lecture and states an entirely new
theory: "It looks very probable that it was Sakalalökachakravartin
Venrumankondän Sambuvaraya whose date of accession is Saka 1245
(1322-23) that was overthrown by Kampana, sometime about 1347
which is the first date of his successor Sakalalökachakravartin Rajanā-
rāyaṇa Sambuvarayan." We are at a loss to understand why the
learned professor propunded such theory and how he got 1347 as
"the date of the defeat of Venrumaņkondan by Kampa.
2. Cf. A.R.E., 297 of 1919, (dated saka 1274).
3. Cf. A.R.E., 32 of 1933-34.
4
TONDAIMANDALAM
1. THE SAVANNA INTERREGNUM
It is believed by some scholars that it was
Venrumaņkondān I the Sambuvarāya ruler (1322-
1339) who was overcome by Kampaņa.¹ But this view
is far from correct as the earliest inscription of Kam-
pana bears only the date 1352.2 His invasion of Tondai-
mandalam could never have taken place prior to that
year. Venrumaṇkondān had a peaceful death and the
period was also calm and quiet in his territory, and
this is borne cut by the fact that his son Rājanārāyaṇa
was able to send the remains of his royal father to be
was able to send the remains of his royal father to be
consigned to the Ganges.³
1. Dr. S. K. Iyengar: South India and her Muhammadan In-
vaders: p. 15 and pp. 60-61. The epigraphical reports, too, contain the
mistake. Dr. S. K. Iyengar seems to be caught in confusion when we
read his lectures, two and six. An analysis of the points he has raised
in these two lectures regarding Kampana's defeat of the Sambuvarāyas
will show the confusion. In his second lecture he says: "We find two
rulers who assumed high titles indicating independence. Of these the
first is Sakalalöka Chakravartin Venrumankonda Sambuvarayan whose
date of accession is A.D. 1322-23 followed by Sakalaköka Chakravartin
Rājanārāyaṇa Sambuvarayan whose date of accession is 1337-38 and
whose reign extended upto 1356-57. It was apparently this later
ruler that was overcome by Prince Kumāra Kampana of Vijayanagar."
He changes his view in the sixth lecture and states an entirely new
theory: "It looks very probable that it was Sakalalökachakravartin
Venrumankondän Sambuvaraya whose date of accession is Saka 1245
(1322-23) that was overthrown by Kampana, sometime about 1347
which is the first date of his successor Sakalalökachakravartin Rajanā-
rāyaṇa Sambuvarayan." We are at a loss to understand why the
learned professor propunded such theory and how he got 1347 as
"the date of the defeat of Venrumaņkondan by Kampa.
2. Cf. A.R.E., 297 of 1919, (dated saka 1274).
3. Cf. A.R.E., 32 of 1933-34.
4