Kalki would have consulted KAN Sastri & Pandarathar atleast on chozha History ..
But such finer details as Papanasam inscriptions etc., I doubt whether he was aware..
In post independence era, Hindu temples, which were in ruins were renovated much by the Nagarathar community.. some such role-model should have backdrop while he characterised Sembian madevi..
This also should have motivated him narrate the details on Sambandar, Sundarar, Appar and Azhwars !
While Parthiban Kanavu was told when India was struggling for its Freedom, PS might have been set to retain the rich culture we got back from our Glorious past !
that way he succeeded.. because WE ARE HERE ASSEMBLED atleast looking at these for preservation..
Sorry, i am missing something here. During sembian madevi time amarabujanga the pandya was kept as workship - i cant b've it. Many kings took titles and titles of various gods - why cant we look at it as a image of a god and not the king. I just cant understand why sembian madevi / uttama would consecrate the statue of pandya king. This is more revolting than Udayar novel's portrayal of Sembian madevi
Just saw, mails crossed. Yes, i am in line with your view. But i think venkat's mail leads towards sembian madevi and uttama - ties with amarabujanga aka pandya. that i dont think can be true.
will search in ssi and ei
rgds / vj ==================
Dear Vj
IT IS THE GOOD OLD MILLION DOLLAR QUESTION !
Whether UTHAMA had any hand in Aditha Karikalan's assassination?
Whether his Mother did support him atleast indirectly ?
Writer Venkat will always be on the lookout for such clue.. so only I added the tail piece re the Big Temple !
We have disucssed much on this already several times..
Scholars have been HOLDING that such nexus did not exist...
i am not trying to find a missing link in history. just some clue to why kalki made amarabhujanga( palaiya mathuranthaka thevar) grow as the son of sembian madevi.
i also dont beleive the pandyas were deadly enemies of the cholas during the period- atleast not to the level portrayed.that is after veerapandyas death.
rrc had a pandya queen or atleast the name meenavan madevi suggests so.
> i also dont beleive the pandyas were deadly enemies of the cholas > during the period- atleast not to the level portrayed.that is after > veerapandyas death. > > rrc had a pandya queen or atleast the name meenavan madevi suggests > so. > regards > venketesh >
Dear Venkatesh
ok, i will take your side now:
It is a puzzle as to why uttama had a relatively trouble free reign - no major battle references, great temple building etc. maybe the pandyas were recouping as well.
Now, taking against your:
But once RRC came to power, the hostilities did raise again. Kalki himself wrote in the end that RRC went after the pandyas and finally vanquished them.
Did RRC pursue the lankan battle - for the pandya diadem with repeated incursions deep into lanka while he must have faced great threats from his northern border?
The pandya haram / diadem was a cherished relic, for rajendra to have mentioned its retrival among his great achievements to figure in his meikeerthi - he lists even the kerela sengathir malai after the pandia diadem.
just a thought - what was the cause for aditya to take such a gory step of beheading veerapandiya and exhibit on a pole outside tanjore. its a very cruel act and some grave act of veerapandiya should have caused this. in this we should see that veerapandiya himself took the title chola thalai konda - however you look at it, where thalai konda means defeated or literally took the head, he did defeat a chola king. who was this king. in this context would a direct descendant ( ok - descendant) of such a person be dietified in so short a time. i doubt it
Reposting an earlier interesting post on this subject, maybe we
Dear All,
Few Interesting topics for discussion
Reg. Pandiyas
Veerapandian s/o Rajasimha pandiyan (946-966AD) carried few titles " Cholan thalai konda ko veera pandiyan" , "Chozhandagan". He created a village named chozhandaga chathurvedi mangalam ( chozhavandhan)(6th Aatchiyaandu), but we dont have any clue to find which chola king is reffered here. Though Neelakanda shastri's interpretation is different for "THALAI KONDA" ,the defeat of a chola king by Veera Pandiya is confirmed. The possibe chola kings at that time could be : 1. Rasaadhithyan 1- was killed by the arrow of Boodhugan2(Kanga king) & he is known as "AANAI MEL THUNJIYA DEVAR"(949AD). 2. Paranthagan1- Has died after his elder son, so could be inbetween 953- 955AD. 3. Kandaradhityan- Died in 957AD which also falls in the reign of VeeraPandiya, he is known as "MERKEZHUNDARULIYA DEVAR" we dont know the exact meaning of this title. 4. Arinjayan- Ruled for 1yr ie 957-958AD and supposed to have died in a war.He is known as "ATRURTHUNJIYA DEVAR" also falls in the same period. I feel the possibility of the chola king defeated by VeeraPandiya could be Paranthagan 1 since this happened in the sixth year of his reign. I presume Aadithya karikalan(Poodhivikramakesari, Parthivendra Varman also claims) should have severed Veera Pandiya's head in retaliation for the above act. Aadhitya karikalan has a title called 'VEERAPANDIYAN THALAI KONDA KO PARAKESARI VARMAN'. " Cholan thalai konda ko veera pandiyan" Was killed by 'VEERAPANDIYAN THALAI KONDA KO PARAKESARI VARMAN'. Please post your comments. Reg. Vandhyathevan "A Part of the modern North Arcot district lying round about Brahmadesam was under the jurisdiction of Vallavarayar Vandhiyathever, the chief of the Samantas as he is called and husband of Rajaraja's elder sister Kundavai. Two other wives of this person are mentioned, Indaladevi and Mandaragauravanar Kundadeviyar who, despite the second part of her name appears to have been different from Paranthakan Kundavai Pirattiyar.The chola princess said to have been residing at the palace at Pazhayaru in the 4th & 5th yrs of the reign. A Nadu came to be called 'Vallavaraiyar Nadu'after this chief of the samantas and part of it lay in the modern Salem district." Note- Page 226, THE COLAS by K.A.Neelakanta Shastri.
my personal experience with kalvettus have been very lucrative.
one on rajendra building a pallipadai for his step mother and one on the shining stone set in chidambaram roof by king of kanauj led to full length novels.
i am trying to probe the mind behind kalki in relation to kalvettus.
veerapandian thalai konda kalvettu leads to an important scenario then udayarkudi leads naming the villians
a lot from copper plates is quoted in verbatim by kalki. aniruddar even hears alwarkadiyan tell him about the land that the cholas gave him. alo aniruddars anscestors list came from the plates i guess.
in that sequence i thought sendan amudhan/ amarabhujangan switch which is the one real deviation kalki took from actual history could also be because of that sembian madevi kalvettu?
Beautiful thread. Looks something like the History channel putting forth all the possible postulates in their documentary :)
All your arguments are valid. Just thinking laterally, Venkat always used to say that Kalki was influenced by Dumas and other authors. Also, if we look at the mindset of people in the 50's, most of the movies, atleast till the 70's have a lot of scenarios where the kids get exchanged as soon as born. So is it something to do with the time period when Kalki wrote the story?
Its always fascinating in those times to have the child grow in some other family,later realize who the actual parents were and 'subam'. PS, atleast SA is concerned, has a similar story line.
kalki did not use the same words but it kindled in him a twist in the storyline he was writing. amara bujanga was a sworn enemy of the cholas , later killed by RRC.wont it be stunning to assume a link between him and the cholas. its a winning lottery ticket for a novelist.
(even if amarabhujanga here meant a god, the co incidence of the name must have set kalki' creativity ablaze.)
SPS was this amarabujanga kalvettu done during the days of uthama or rrc for sembian madevi outlived uthama by 16 years.
venketesh
figures..... > > It is possible that KAKLI SHOULD HAVE FOUND IT DIFFICULT TO IGNORE > SEMBIAYAN MADEVI THIRUVAYIRUDHITHA UTHAMA .... and characterised > SENDHAN AMUDHAN .. (Uthaman .. becoming Amudhan as you used to explain) > > And if the ARE related to Papanasam mentioned of Amarabujangar also... > well .. this would have kindled a spark in him ! > > Also recall KAN Sastri's views on Aditha Karikalan's murder... (He > does NOT absolve Uthama's involvement) .... > > EUREKA !! That is the Writer in You ! > > regards / sps >
> > Line 17 ... .... thirupadhiyam > Line 18.... paaduvar iruvarkku nila mezhu > Line 19 ... maavaraiyum AMARA PUJANGA > Line 20 ... THEVARKKU thiruvamudhu > Line 21 ... Arisi iru nazhikku nilam irandu > Line 22 ... Maakkani araikkaniyum ... "
Dear sps sir,
ok some more questions:
1. If and a big if at that ,if this amarabujanga is the pandya - he was very much alive when he was worshipped. am i right. since after rrc came, he is said to have vanquished him.
2. If so when did the practise of worshipping living people,let alone kings start. Even though kings have claimed lineage from gods and god king concept has been there, i think its the case of RRC where we come across the first time that a living person's image is consecrated and worshipped in the big temple.
3. another doubt - tirumurai kanda cholan - the legend is RRC made the bronzes of the shivaite trio, held a festival in their honor and brought them infront of the closed secret room - so that the thillai 3000 had no choice but to open. If so, is he the first one to make bronzes of nayanars?, meaning did he start the worship of the saints or alteast the practise of casting them in bronze
Really I have not into the Historical details of Veerapandya..
But I vaguely remember, Amarapujangar - was his Father's name also - among others !
Kalki talks of Veerapandiayan's son - and rightly he would have named him after Father's too ! We have to know whether any other Amarapujangar King existed prior to that in their dynasty.
And this Amarapujangar was DEITY ! installed during Uthama's / Sembianmadevi's period .. and RRC followed that grant...
It was JUST STIRRING .. which even Annual Report DID as early in 1926 - which I brought out to all your attention !
Re Bronzes of Nayanmars prior to RRC - I can check with others and revert...
" Thirupathiyam " figures since Pandya (Nandhivarman) inscriptions .. according to Dr. Kudavoil Balu Sir.
We can get more details on this.
anbudan / sps
> > 3. another doubt - tirumurai kanda cholan - the legend is RRC made the > bronzes of the shivaite trio, held a festival in their honor and > brought them infront of the closed secret room - so that the thillai > 3000 had no choice but to open. If so, is he the first one to make > bronzes of nayanars?, meaning did he start the worship of the saints > or alteast the practise of casting them in bronze > > rgds > vj >