The Banas
THE BANAS.
BY
T. N. RAMACHANDRAN, M.A.,
Archaeological Assistant, Madras Museum.
It is indeed a matter for gratification that the name Bana or Vana,
as it is called in Tamil, is found in the inscriptions of most of the dynasties
of South India that held sway over the country from about 345 A.D. to 1500 A.D.
To pursue the history of those people who were called the Banas or the
Vanarayars is therefore a pleasant quest for any student, much more so to the historian
as while dealing with the Banas he has to deal with a race of feudatories that
served almost all the important powers of South India.
Unfortunately for these Banas, they should have started under an
evil star, for they not only began as subordinate officials in charge of the
administration of portions of the kingdom but continued almost throughout to be
just feudatories of the ruling powers and nothing more till about 1500 A.D. Now
they were the vassals of the Kadambas of Banavasi; then of the Western
Calukyas. When the Pallavas of Kanclpuram were in power they swore their
allegiance to them. So did they too to the Nolamba-Pallavas, After the decline
of they transferred their allegiance Pallava power they became the vassals of
the Colas and later on when the Pari$ya became powerful to the latter* We say
that they should have started under a bad star because, though they never
preferred to be submissive and though consequently their restlessness was often
visible in sporadic attempts to regain their independence, especially when any
one ruling power was waning, they' never gained their end. Instead, reactionary
forces set in and the Banas found themselves, after every sporadic attempt at
independence, more submissive, with the difference that instead of Master
Pallava they had Master Coja or Panclya to obey now. Like the Sambuvarayans whg
were Cola" feudatories, they indicated their subjection to the ruling
powers by employing the" names of the kings and the princes of the ruling
family as their aliases 1 . This they did so long as they were forced to retain
their subordinate character.
This feudatory family " which played an important part in the
ancient history of Southern India " claims descent from the demon Mahabali
(Mahavali) and his son Bana, whence it is called the Bana family. The Bana
crest was a bull, the banner bore the emblem of a black buck and their dram was
called References to the Banas are made in inscriptions dating from very early
times. The earliest mention is in the Talagunda inscription of the Kadamba king
Kakusthavarman (430-450 A.D.) in which it is said that Mayurasarman, the first
Kadamba king (345-370 A.D.) was helped by an ally of his called "Brhad Bana
in his fight with the Pallavas in the forests of Sri Parvata and that he levied
tribute from this "Brhad Bana" as well as from other kings 3 . It
would appear that the territory of this i( Brhad Bana" was very near ri
Parvata, i.e^ the present Srlsailam in the Kurnool district.
From the Mallohalli plates 4 we learn that the progenitor of the
Ganga line, the illustrious Konganivarman (425-450 A. D,) was "a wild fire
in consuming the stubble of the forest Bana ", while the Hastimalla plates
5 state that the Gaiiga king Kongani (Konganivarman) was "consecrated to
conquer the Bana-mandala". In the Devarhalli plates 6 it is narrated that
the a Bana-kula " was confounded by "the Nirggunda Yuvaraja Dunthi
".
The term "Brhad Bana " in the Talagunda inscription corresponds
to the Tamil term Perum-Bana of the territorial term Ptnnx-bSnappadi. It was by
the latter term that the Bana dominions were denoted. This takes us to the
question what exactly the Bana capital was and where the Bana territory was located.
According to tradition the Bana capital was known as Panripnri,
whose other forms were Prapurt, Parvtyura, Parivai, Parvai, Parvi, Parivaipura,
Parimpun and Parigipura. Indeed the last term, Pangipura, has led the late Rai
Bahadur Venkayya to identify it with Parigi in the Hindupur Taluk of the Anantapur
District 1 . The claim of Tiruvallam in the North Arcot District for the Bana
capital, in as much as it was also known by the appellation Vdnapuram, is
easily explained by him as merely meaning that Tiruvallam was one of the
important towns, if not the capital, of the Bana territory. Long after the
Banas had ceased to rule, their scion, wherever they were, claimed to be lords
of Parivipitra and of Nandagiri, another equally important place. Nandagiri is
the present Nandidmg in the Chikballapur Taluk, Kolar District, Mysore, The
fact that most of the inscriptions of the Banas have been found in the Arcot, Kolar,
Anantapur, and Kurnool districts makes one believe that the term Perumbdnappddi
which denoted the Bana territory was applied to the large tract of territory
with Srisailum in the north, Kolar and Punganur in the west, Kalahusti in the
east and the river Palar in the south. In the north they appear to have been
the governors of the Pallava territory till the latter were driven clown by the
western Calukyas in the latter part of the 6th century A.D. And when the
Calukyas became powerful they transferred their allegiance to them. They are
often heard of as participating in petty cattleraids and skirmishes. Sometimes
they are actually seen participating in frontier wars 2 .
The Bana territory was also known as Vadugavali-mgrku, mdu^amtiyin-merku,
Va$ufwali 12000, and also in Sanskrit as Andhrdtpathahpascintato ksitih, i.e.,
" the land to the west of the Andhra road or of the country called
Andhrapatha ". Vaduga va&mlzkn, is a Tamil rendering of the Sanskrit
form used here. The Vaclugas are taken to be Kanarese by some 3 , but it is
more reasonable to take them to be the Tclugus to whom the name is more
commonly applied by the Tamils, Venkayya identifies Vadugar-merku with a
portion of the modern Ceded Districts, which alone would strictly be situated
to the west of the Andhra country 4 . Even to-day the Telugus regard the Ceded
Districts as situated to the west of the Andhra country. Venkayya's identification
is strengthened by the fact that "the Pallava dominions originally
extended into the Ceded Districts and that the Banas were also ruling some
frontier province in that part of the country during the time of the Kadamba
king Mayurasarman ". The, rise of the western Calukya power in the 7th
century acted as a check not only to the Pallava power in the Telugu country but
also to that of the local Banas who appear to have guarded the Pallava
territories there. Consequently the Banas, as Venkayya supposes, were forced
into the northern portion of the North Arcot district 1 .
The Banas
and ike Calukyas.
We have already seen that Srisailam was in the vicinity, it not
the actual seat of the territory of Brhacl Bana ", a contemporary of
Mayurasarman. And we know that grisailam is in the Kurnool district, one of the
Ceded Districts and that on its southern border lies Gooty. It was in the Gooty
province that the earliest known inscriptions, one of them dated, of the Banas
were discovered in 1920 2 . All the three inscriptions are the records of the
western Calukya king Vijayaditya Satyasraya Prthylvallabha who ruled from 696
to 733-34 A.D. The first two (nos. 333 and 343) are in archaic Kanarese while
the third (no. 359) is in archaic Telugu. These three inscriptions are from
different places in the Gooty Taluk of the Anantapur District. The first record
(no. 333) registers a grant of land made by Vikramaditya, while Banaraja was
ruling over the Turamara-Visaya. The second inscription (no. 343) records the
gilt of the village of Nadanuru and certain taxes in the country of Banaraja.
The third inscription (no. 359), which is an important record, is assigned to
the same Vijaya- ditya Satyasraya Sri Prthvivallabha and is written in Telugu. It
refers to a fight between the governors of Turamara-Visaya belonging to
Vikramaditya Bali Indra Banaraja, son of Bali- kulatilakaNarasimhaBanadhiraja
and the lords of Pulagicheruvu. Being dated in the 23rd regnal year of
Vijayaditya it may be assigned to 719-720 A.D. In the fight referred to in this
record it appears that the rulers of the Turamara Visaya were defeated by the
chief Vikramaditya Bali Indra Banaraja, son of Narasirhha Banadhiraja, who
acted on behalf of the king, Vijayaditya. We also learn that Vinayadttya, the
father of Vijayaditya of the present record, had encamped in 692 A.D. at a
village called Citrasedu in the Toramara-Visaya 1 . Citrasedu is the modern
Chitracheclu in the Gooty Taluk and Toramara-Visaya is certainly the Turamara-Visaya
of the record under discussion. The country now covered by the Gooty Taluk
should have formed the ancient Turamara-Visaya, which about 719-20 A.D., the
date of the present record, was governed by a Bana chief, Vikramadilya Bali Indra,
in the name of the western Calukya Vijayaditya Satyasraya. The mention of a
fight with the rulers of this Visaya in the time of Vijayaditya suggests
clearly that this part of the country was invaded by enemies (probably the
Pallavas or their teuclutories from the south- easi of it) some time between 692
and 720 A.D. and temporarily occupied by them. The Bana chiefs mentioned above,
governed this territory as vassals of the western Calukya kings as shown by
other inscriptions" 2 .' And Viknuiuulilyji Bali Indra probably owed his
alias "Vikramaditya" to the fact that he was a feudatory of the
western Calukyas, the grand-father of Vijayaditya being Vikramadilya.
The Banas
and the Pallavas.
In the following century we find the Banas changing their
allegiance to the Pnlbvas and moving down from the Gooty tract to the northern
part of the modern North Areot District Most of their inscriptions of this
period arc found in the present Chittoor region. For a long time the chronology
of these Pallava feudatories was almost obscure. But toduy it is no longer
possible to complain of dearth of materials. The information given by the
Gudimallam plates of the Bana Viknimaclitya II, when combined with the information
found in other records such as the Udayendiram plates of Viknmificlilyji 111,
live Bana inscriptions (stone) fnom Gudimallam, Gulganpode stone inscriptions
and the Mudiyanur plates gives us a connected, genealogy of these Banas as
indicated in the follow- ing table;
Leaving aside the mythical personages in the Bana genealogy We get
the following historical persons who were occupying the North Arcot district
between roughly 700 to 970 A.D., most of them being feudatories of the later
Pallavas beginning with Nandivarman Pallavamalla :
1.
Nandivarman or
Jayanandivarman.
2.
Vijayaditya-Deva L
3.
Malladeva alias
Jagadekamalla.
4.
Jayameru Vikramaditya I
Banavidyadhara.
5.
Prabhumeru Vijayaditya
II.
6.
Vikramaditya II.
7.
Vijayaditya III
Pugalvippavarganda.
8.
Vijayabahu Vikramaditya
III.
Luckily we have ample materials in the shape of inscriptions regarding
the above 8 persons.
1.
Nandivarman or
Jayanandivarman Should have receiv- ed this name as being a feudatory of
Nandivarman Pallavamalla. From an inscription dated in the 62nd regnal year of
Nandivikra mavarman we learn that the Pallava king of that name had an unnamed
Mavali-Vanaraya as his feudatory 1 . Though Venkayya has identified this Pallava
with Nandivarman III, the son of Dantivarrnan 2 , it is clear, in the present
state of our knowledge of Pallava history, that the long reign extending to 65
years with which Nandivarman Pallavamalla is associated would warrant the Nandivikramavarman
of the inscription under discussion being identified with Nandivarman
Pallavamalla (714-778 A.D.).
2.
Vijayaditya-deva I was a
feudatory of Dantivarrnan, the son and successor of Nandivarman Pallavamalla as
is evident from one of the Gudimallam inscriptions 3 dated in the 49th regnal
year of Dantivarman (778-829 A.D.). In this, a Bana chief, Vijayaditya Mahavali
Vanaraya is said to be a feudatory of Dantivarrnan.
3.
Malladeva. We know of
this chief from an inscription 1 , and from the Mudiyanur plates professing to
be dated in the Saka year 261 (338 A.D.) and consequently declared spurious. If
we discard the date furnished by the latter plates there seems to be no
objection to admit its evidence. The plates say that Nandivarman was of the
Mahabali race and that he was succeeded by his son Vijayaditya deva, who was
succeeded by Malladeva who bore the titles Vadhiivallabha and Nandivarman, and resembled
the Bodhisattva "a very uncommon and ancient looking allusion". If we
admit the evidence furnished by these spurious plates we have to admit two
things, that he bore the title Vadhiivallabha and that he took on himself the
name Nandivarman to mark his subjection to the Pallava Nandivarman, who in this
case is surely Nandivarman III, (829-853 A.D.) the son of Dantivarman.
4.
Jayameru VikramGditya I
Banctvidyadhara. This chief, who was also a Pallava feudatory, entered,
however, into a matri- monial alliance with the Gangas. He married Kunclavvai, the
daughter of Pratipati-Araiyar, i. e., of the Ganga king Prthvipati I*, who was
a contemporary of the Rastrakuta king Amoghavarsa I and of the Pandya king Varagunas.
There are three inscriptions speaking of his connection with the Pallavas,
thereby corroborating the evidence with regard to his date furnished by the
Ganga alliance alluded to above. If the Ganga alliance indicated that this'Bana
should be assigned to the third quarter of the ninth century the inscriptions
speaking of his connection with the Pallavas prove this point. Of the three
inscriptions, two are of Nandivarman III and the third of Nrpatunga. The first
which is dated in the I/th regnal year of Nandivikramavarman< speaks of a
Vikrama- ditya Mavah Vanaraya as a feudatory of the Pallava king. The ve S
ffheSameB ^ chief and is dated in the 23rd identilied with yea of Nrpg ( "
ITT j '' & * on and suc cessor of HI and speaks of a Vanavidyadhara
MahabaliVanaraya, who can be identified with this Bana chief*. This .nscription
contains the usual prasasti attendant on almost every Bana inscription, viz.,
sakalajagat-trayabhivanditci-surasuradhisa- ParamShara-pratihGrikrta-Mahabahkuldtibhava,
from which we learn that Mahabali, the progenitor of the Bana race was made
door-keeper by Paramesvara (Siva). It also contains the reference lo the Bana
territory by the term Vadugavaljyin-merkn.
5.
Prabhumeru Vijayaditya
II. He is referred to in an inscription 2 as the son of Vanavidyadhara and his
queen Maha-devi-Adigal alias Maraka-madigal. This inscription being dated in
Saka 820 (898 A.D.) and containing no reference to the Pallavas proves that by
Saka 820 the Banas had no masters and that our Vijayaditya was not a Pallava
feudatory but an independent king. Fortunately for him he lived at a time when
the Pallava power had almost waned. To denote his independence his records are
dated in Saka years. One, as we have seen was dated in Saka 820. Another is
dated Saka 827 (90S A.D.) and is a record of a Bana called Vijayaditya Vanaraya
who is identical with Vijayaditya II. A few inscriptions discovered in the Punganur
Zamindari of the North Arcot District make mention of
Mahavali--Banarasa-Vikramaditya-Banakandarpa-Jayameru, Mahavali-Vanarasa-Banavidyadhara,
and Mahavali-Vanarasa- Fyayffldajifl-VIracuiamani-Prabhunieru. The third Bana
in the list can be identified with Prabhumeru Vijayaditya II, while the first
two are identical with Vijayaditya II's father, Jayameru Vikramaditya I
Banavidyadhara. From these inscriptions we also learn that Vijayaditya II had
the title < vlraculatnani '. One of these inscriptions speaks of a battle
fought at Soremati, to capture which Vijayaditya II, or more probably his
father allied with the Vaidumba king Ganda Trinetra and opposed on behalf of
the Permanadi (I.e., the western Ganga king) the Nolamba king (Vira-Mahendra?),
and Racamalla and Mayindadi*. A Bana bearing the title " mracUlaviani"
and therefore identical with Vijayaditya II, is said to have repelled a raid
made on Koyatur ,-.,Laddigam in the Punganur Zamindari, by Kaduvatti-Mutta- rasa,
a general of a Nolamba (Vlra-Mahendra?). The fight with Kaduvatti-Muttarasa is
attested to by one of the Gulganpode ins- criptions, in which it is stated that
" by order of Prabhumeru, a hero fought against the Kaduvatti force"
1. The title Prabhumeru in this inscription removes all doubts on the point and
proves that the raid on Koyatur was indeed made in the reign of Vijayaditya II.
2 Vijayaditya II appears to have ruled till 910 A.D. An inscription from
Manigatta-Gollarahalli 3 attests to a Bana called Bejeyicta (Vijayaditya)
Banarasa, who is none other than Vijayaditya II, ruling in Saka S' : l (909
A.D,). The next year, however, Saka 832 (910 A.D.) witnesses his death as is
proved by an inscription in Tamil found on a hero-stone from Cendattur recording
the death of Mavali-Vanarayar alias Kudiparitandikka- manar, whom I identify
with our Bana, in a cattleraid at Cendattur 4 .
The Banas
and the Colas.
6. Vikramaditya. How long he ruled; it is not easy to ascertain.
But it was during his reign that the Banas lost the little independence that
they had got in the reign of Jayameru Vikramaditya I. The Cola Vira-Narayana
Parantaka I (907-952 3 A.D.) is said to have suddenly "uprooted by force
two lords of the Bana kings " 5 . Though we are in the dark as to who the
two Banas were that were uprooted and whether they were uprooted simultaneously
or in succession, we learn from other sources that the Coja Parantaka I
conquered the Bana kingdom (probably only a part of it) and made it over to his
Ganga feudatory Prthivlpati II Hastimalla in or before A.D. 915-16 6 , and that
the recipient was called Sembiyan Mavalivanarayan, i.e., "the Maha- valivanaraja
(who was a feudatory) of the Cola king'' 7 .
2. I have said here very little of the connection between the Banas
and the Nolambas as my friend, Mr. M. S. Sarma, who has much specialised
knowledge on this point, will shortly be publishing an article on this,
7, Vijayadilya III Pugalvippavarganda.Ths title Pugal- wippavarganda
that he bore was also borne by a brother-in-law of the Cola prince Rajaditya,
son of Parantaka I, who was killed in the battle of TakkSlam in 949 A.D.
byButuga, the western Gangsi feudatory of the Rastrakuta king Krsna III. This
Bana appears to have been a contemporary of Rajaditya, Gandaraditya and
Arinjaya, the sons of Parantaka I. We hear of a daughter of Arinjaya and sister
of Rajakesarivarman Sundara Cola Parantaka II (950-966 A.D.) being given in
marriage to a Bana king. 1
8. Vijaytihahit Vikramftditya III. According to the Udayendiram
plates this chief was a friend of Krsna-raja. Dr. Hultzseh has identified the
Krsna-raja with the Rastraktita king Krsna 111 (about A. I). 950) oi whom we
know from other sources thai he made extensive invasions of the south. The reason
for the Bana chief calling himself the "dear friend of Krsna '
(Krsnttnija-pnyah] is not far to seek. We know already that the Cola Parantaka I
gave a part of the Bana kingdom to his Ganga feudatory Prthivipati II, who was
also the recipient of the titles " Sembiyan Mavalivanarayan " and
"Ban-fulhiruja n ^t the hands of his kind lord. This Banadhiraja was therefore
a temporary usurper and a predecessor of our Banu chief. He was indeed the Cola
king's candidate for the Bana throne, while Vijayabalui Vikramaditya 111, the
legitimate ruler ol the liana throne, was the protege of the Rastrakuta king. 2
It has been supposed that the history of the Banas came almost' to
an abrupt end with the conquest of the Pcrumb&nap* piidi by Farautaka 1 and
its transference to the Gangsi Prthivi- p 4 iti 11 ItaslimuUa iu about 915-6 A,
IX This was however not the case for we learn that soon after 915-6 A. D, the
Banas seem to have, moved further south,, crossed the river Palar which was till
UHMI the soulhcrn boundary of the Perumbayappadi and acttk'd clown on the*
bunks of the river South Pennar (Pinilkinl) calling the 1 ww colony
V&nakdppadi or Vana^appadi* Vijaya- hkhu Vikramaditya 111 appears to have
ruled till about 969 A.D. In uii inscription of th Coja Atlitya II Karikala
(966-970 A, D.) a certain Vfiyakovaraiyar Virapannuar is referred to, who is ostensibly
idcnlical with Vikramaditya III 4 .
The province of Vanagappadi appears to have come into existence as
such prior to 949 A.D. 1 and the Rastrakuta Krsna III (about 950 A,D.) appears
to have given it to a Vaidumba feudatory of his. Another leudatory of Krsna
III, the Ganga Prthvi-Gangaraiyar (who was different and later than the Prthivlpati
who was a contemporary of the Cola Parantaka I) was an ally of the Banas as is
evident from his espousing the daughter of a Vanakovaraiyar. It is not clear
why the Bana territory should have been apportioned to the Vaidumba by Krsna
III, " the dear friend " of Vikramaditya III or why a Ganga should
espouse a Bana lady unless it be that the protege of the Cola Parantaka I was
the person defeated by Krsna III and his territory (L e., a part of the kingdom
that was given to him by Parantaka I) was the province handed over to the Vai- dumba
feudatory of Krsna III. The Bana lady that was espoused by the Ganga should
then be of the main legitimate line, to which Vikramaditya III belonged and
whom Krsna III was bent on restoring to his legitimate throne. Krsna 111 should
have helped Vikramaditya III along with the Ganga feudatory against the Cola
protege and the result was a grateful matrimonial alliance between the Bana and
the Ganga. We have no doubt that Vikramaditya III was almost a feudatory of
Krsna 111 just like the Vaidumba, the Ganga and other feudatories of the
latter. And Krsna, the mighty invader of the south as he was, appears to have
united these minor powers by marriage tics and the like so that they can help
him against the imperial power of the south, the Cola.
The subsequent history of the Banas under the Colas is meagre and
almost fragmentary, With the advent of Rajaraja I (985-1014 A.D.) they appear
to have become feudatories of the Colas. Though a Bana called Vana raj a
Alagamaiyan is mentioned in an inscription of Parthivendravarman from"
Tirumfil- puram it is not clear if he had become a feudatory of the
latler" who preceded Rajaraja I by perhaps a few years. 2 But of their subjection
to Rajaraja I we have proof, lor in an inscription from Jambai in the South
Arcol district a Bana with the usuii Bana titles and named Maravan
Narasiriihavarman alias Rajaraja-Vana-Kovaraiyar is mentioned as a feudatory of
Rajaraja. The fact that the Bana here has adopted the name of Rajaraja as his
alias, in accordance with the Bana custom, proves our point. About this Bana we
have it that he built a tank at Nerkunram (Vayiramega Caturvedimangalam).
In the time of Rajendra Cola I (1012-1044 A.D.), the son and
successor of Rajaraja I, we find that the Bana territory (Vanagappadi or
Vadagarai- Vanagappadi) was called Madhurantaka-valanadu. This is strictly in
accordance with the Cola custom of naming places under their subjection with
their own names and titles. And in the time of Kulottunga I (1070- 1120 A. U.)
it was called Rajendra-valanadu 1 . Kulottunga did not stop there. He named his
throne at MudigondaSolapuram Vanadhirajan 2 . The Banas appear to have taken
service under the Colas. Thus for instance Kulottunga I counted among his
officers a Vanarajan, and his son Vikrama-Cola (1118-1135 A.D.) had two, a
Mahabali-Vanaraya and a Viru-darajabhayaiikara-Vanakovaraiyan. 3 Kulotlunga III
(1178-1216 A.D.) had a Bana feudatory who was called Rajarajadevan Ponparappinan
Vanakovaraiyan of Arkalur, who is however different from his namesake who was a
feudatory of K6-Perun~ jifigadeva (1243 A.D.), for the latter, though also a
Ponparappina- Vanakovaraiyar has been identified by Venkayya with Maga-ciesan
Vanakulottaman and Viramagadan Rajarajadevan Ponparappinan Magadaipperumal
mentioned in inscriptions from the South Arcot district and Kudimiyamalai in
the Pudukottah state. The fact that he bears the alias Rajarajadevan shows his
subjection to the Cola, for we know that Kulottunga ; s son was Rajaraja III.
As regards the Bana feudatory of Ko-PeniSjiftgadeva, we have
inscriptions of his in the South Arcot district and the Pudukottah state. His
title Magadesan or Magadaipperumal has come for some discussion at the hands of
Dr. Hultzsch and Venkayya. Both connect the Magadai-mandalam referred to in one
of the inscriptions of the above chief 4 with the Makara or Magara kingdom that
the Hoysala Narasimha II is said to have conquered. While Dr. Hultzsch locates
the Magara in the Coimbatore or Salem district, Venkayya places it between
South Arcot and Trichinopoly districts. His remarks are as follows: "At
Tittagudi on the border between the districts of Trichinopoly and South Arcot
has been found an epigraph of Magadesan Ponparappina Vanakovadaraiyar recording
the gift of a village in Magadai-mandalam. Three other records from the same village
show that the district of Magadai should have been close to the village, if it
was not actually included in it. It would not be an altogether wild conjecture
to suppose that Mahara, Makara and Magara of the Hoysala inscriptions is
identical with the Magadai-mandalam ruled over by the Vanakovaraiyar mentioned
. If this identification be true, it would indicate the movement of the Banas
further south as far as the Pudukkottai state. The chief of this province who
was evidently a feudatory of the rebel Perunjinga had to be overcome before the
latter could be attacked by the Hoysala generals commissioned to liberate the
Cola king Rajaraja III from captivity." 1 When the Banas become
feudatories of K6-Perunjinga, their action only means that they show their
usual spirit of restlessness already alluded to and make a bid for independence
by making common cause with the rebel chief against the Cola Rajaraja III,
especially when the Cola power was waning.
The Banas
and the Pan'dyas
When Cola power fell in about 1250 A.D. and the Pandyas came to
rule the land, the Banas found again to their dismay that they had now Master
Pandya instead of Master Cola, for we learn from Pandya inscriptions that the
Banas had become now Pandya feudatories. 2
Most of them held office under the Pandya sovereigns in the 13th
and the 14th centuries A.D. From a few inscriptions of Jatavarman Sundara
Pandya (ace. A.D. 1251 A.D.) from Chidambaram 3 we learn that he
"inflicted a severe defeat on the Telungas at Mudugur, slaughtering them
and their allies, the Aryas, right up to the bank of the Peraru and driving the
Bana chief into the forest" 4 . Mr. Nilakanta Sastri lakes this campaign
of Sundara Pandya to have taken place some time before 1260 A.D., the enemy
against whom the campaign was primarily directed being Gandagopala, a
Telugu-Coda ruler, who was perhaps helped by the Kakatlya king Ganapati and the
Bana chieftain who is said to have been "driven into the forest." Who
this Bana chief was is not clear.
There are references in the records of Kulasekhara (ace. A.D. 1268)
and his contemporary Vira Pandya to a number of chieftains with names ending in
Vanadirayan or Mavali Vanadirayan, who were in charge of the administration of
portions of the Pandya kingdom. In later times these chieftains took advantage
of the rivalry among the Pandyan princes and the consequent weakness of the
central government to bid for freedom and to " restrict the actual rule of
the later Pandyas to the Tinnevelly district." So Ion gas they were under
the Pandya subjection they seem to have been employing the names of the ruling
kings and the princes as their aliases. This becomes also apparent from the fact
that their Pandya suzerains referred to them in terms evin- cing paternal
interest like pillai, makkal etc.
From the records of Jatavarman Sundara Pandya (ace. 1251 A.D.) we
get the name of a Bana feudatory called Parakrama Pandya Mabeli Vanadhiraya
alias Pavanangakara. 1 He was also called Makkanayanar. Another Bana chieftain
of the name Vikrama Pandya Mahabali Vanaraya-Nayanar has been assigned to this
period." 2 Jatavarman Vira Pandya (ace. 1253 A.D.) had in his service a
Mabeli- Vanarayar whom he calls Pillai Kula- sekhara. The term Kulasekhara, as
we have seen, was a mark of subjection of the Bana to the Pandya ruler, while
the term Pillai was a mark of almost parental interest that the said Pandya ruler
had for his subordinate officer. The term Kulasekhara associated with the name
of this Bana leads one to identify this Bana with a Pillai Mabali- Vanarayar,
who was serving Maravarman Kulasekhara (ace. A.D. 1268) as the latter's
governor of the province of Konadu, which formed part of the present Pudukkottah
state. Another Bana officer of both Sundara Pandya and Maravarman Kulasekhara
was entrusted with the province of Keralasinga-Valanadu, which has been
identified with a portion of the present' Ramnad district, and this Bana
appears to have enjoyed the governorship of this province from about 1251 A, D.
to 1292 A.D.
When, in the second half of the 14th century the Pandya power had
waned and the Pandyas themselves were forced to loose Madura and had to content
themselves with their southern- most possessions in the Tinnevelly district, we
find the Banas asserting themselves. It appears that Kampana, the Vijayanagara viceroy,
was assisted by the Banaraya chieftains in his final conquest of Madura, the
Pandya capital, " and these quandom feudatories of the Pandya kings
doubtless had an interest in thus restricting the range of Pandya power/' It
appears that these Buna chieftains had an easy time under the Vijayanagara monarchs
and had vast opportunities to rise to prominence.
It has not been possible to identify the Bana that is said to be
the auihor of Trivikrama-vrtti, a Prakrt grammar, though we have got the
information that he claims himself to be a descendant of the Bana family and
had the name Trivikrama- deva, whence the name of the work. But this much is
clear, that he was a Bana chieftain of the 15th century. 1
Two Bana chieftains, one named Sundara Tol Mahaviliva- nadirayar,
and the other Muttarasa Tirumalai Mahavilivanadi- rayar were first noted by
Sewell, who remarks that they were rulers of Madura in the period 1451-1499 A.D.
2 The subsequently discovered inscriptions at Srivillipuitur in the Tinnevelly district
record that these two Banas " obtained possession 'of the Pandya throne in
1453 and 1476 " and that they were popularly known as Mahavali Vanadhiraja
". 3
From a few inscriptions from different places in the Madura district
4 we get some detail about two Banas that were powerful in the country in the
16th century A.D. The earlier of the two was one Mahabali-Vanadharaya-Nayaka.
The other that followed him was Sundarattol-Udaiyar Mavali-Vanadarayar also
known as Sundarattoludaiya Mahabali-Vanadarayar or more simply Mavall Vanadarayar.
He bears the qualification irandakalam edutta- i. e., " who revived the
past. " This epithet is test explained by Venkayya as suggesting that the
said Bana was responsible for the reK'stablislimenl of the Pfindya kingdom, and
it would appear us though he is eautioning us not to rely too much on this
expression when he follows his translation of the expression with the following
remarks:
11 This may be taken to show that he took some part in the attempt
made by the contemporaneous Pandya princes Sri- vallablia and Kulasekhara to
set up a show of Pandya
We have thus seen that the study of the history of the Banas has
been the* Mtuly of ' the movement of a tribe from one part of Southern India,
to another."
I A*t>/\ It \vas I'emarked on page 302 ante (lines 19 and 20) thai
all tlu,* three ineriptions, Nos, 333, 343 and 359 of 1920 brlonj,; tt*
\'ajayacli{ya Satyasraya Sri Prthvlvallabha (A.D. li^!>-7,vl',) Though, in
No. 343 the name Vijayaditya does not (H'tMir. The aseriplinn of this record to
die same king is based up
