2023-02-17 20:21:57 by ambuda-bot
This page has not been fully proofread.
30
MADHURĀVIJAYAM
similar to this seem to have characterised the Vijaya-
Another inscription bears evidence to
nagar rule.
this. 16
It says that the images of Nāyanmārs in
the Tirukkāriswara temple were desecrated during
the period of confusion in the days of Savanna and
these images had to be reconsecrated in 1367 by
Kampana. All these suggest that while the Vijaya-
nagar overlordship had been accepted by Rājanārāyaṇa
by about 1352 the subjects of Rājanārāyaṇa did not
leave the conqueror in peace.
2. KAMPANA'S INVASION AND CONQUEST
Inscriptions and other sources are silent on the
circumstances leading to the second and the final in-
vasion of the Tondaimandalam region by Vijayanagar.
The 'disturbances' during Savanna's rule caused by the
people of Tondaimandalam might have suggested the
unwisdom of the overlord and his vassal ruling side
by side. The vassal was the beloved of the subjects
while the overlord was only tolerated on account of his
superior strength. To remove the danger of a possible
surprise rising against the overlord, a total destruction
of the vassal's rule might have suggested itself to the
Vijayanagar prince. Or could it be that he feared an
alliance between the Sambuvarāya and the Sultan of
Madhurai? Even if there were no basis for this doubt the
destruction of the Sambuvarāya rule in Tondaimanda-
lam might have been considered a necessary prelude to
the invasion of Madhurai; for there was no depending
on the ruler of Tondaimandalam when such a mighty
task, likely to yield the best results if completed success-
fully, was undertaken. So by way of abundant pre-
16. Cf. A.R.E., 110 of 1921.
MADHURĀVIJAYAM
similar to this seem to have characterised the Vijaya-
Another inscription bears evidence to
nagar rule.
this. 16
It says that the images of Nāyanmārs in
the Tirukkāriswara temple were desecrated during
the period of confusion in the days of Savanna and
these images had to be reconsecrated in 1367 by
Kampana. All these suggest that while the Vijaya-
nagar overlordship had been accepted by Rājanārāyaṇa
by about 1352 the subjects of Rājanārāyaṇa did not
leave the conqueror in peace.
2. KAMPANA'S INVASION AND CONQUEST
Inscriptions and other sources are silent on the
circumstances leading to the second and the final in-
vasion of the Tondaimandalam region by Vijayanagar.
The 'disturbances' during Savanna's rule caused by the
people of Tondaimandalam might have suggested the
unwisdom of the overlord and his vassal ruling side
by side. The vassal was the beloved of the subjects
while the overlord was only tolerated on account of his
superior strength. To remove the danger of a possible
surprise rising against the overlord, a total destruction
of the vassal's rule might have suggested itself to the
Vijayanagar prince. Or could it be that he feared an
alliance between the Sambuvarāya and the Sultan of
Madhurai? Even if there were no basis for this doubt the
destruction of the Sambuvarāya rule in Tondaimanda-
lam might have been considered a necessary prelude to
the invasion of Madhurai; for there was no depending
on the ruler of Tondaimandalam when such a mighty
task, likely to yield the best results if completed success-
fully, was undertaken. So by way of abundant pre-
16. Cf. A.R.E., 110 of 1921.