the cholas within a century and a half from their pinnacle were iretrievably on the decline. their enemies had strengthened, their teritories had shrunk. many reasons could be attributed. did the decline start with the govindaraja episode? not the curse but had they alieanated a portion of their people? or because the cholas had become telugu and lost the loyalty of the tamil population? how come? surely rajaraja had not intended for sucha colapse? at rajendra's time wouldnt the people have predicted a 1000 year rule for the cholas.
1 thing could be a natural phenomenon, there is no singular dynasty across the globe to span for a long period of time. I am particularly interetested in the last good chola king Kulothunga III. He did rule for some time over a large territory. His lost war with Sundara pandya and tiggered collapse of the chola front.
I dont understand one thing, 1212 AD K-III plundered the pandya kingdom and 1216 AD - Pandya is able to strike back till chidambaram paralysing the chola reign. How did the Chola dominance fall so badly in 3 years and how did pandyas pick up in 3 yrs. Also read that pandyas and hosala kingdoms had muslim mercenaries employed by them...were these people from the kingdom or sailed from other countries?
Interesting prespective to how the world acted then and now.
-Hi And there was this guy called koperunchikan a kadava feudatory of the cholas. he got a chance and held the entire chola royal family and courtiers hostage near cuddalore for 2 years.
the rest of the south indian kings had to get the king release. koperunchikan built one of the raja gopurams of thillai. thst must have weakened the cholas too in the eyes of the public.
> > But there is more to it ... > > The intelligence of Rajaraja I & Rajendra I was missing in > Kulothunga I. >
Isn't Kulothunga I is also considered as a great king. Is Kalinga the only reason he is being called great? I remember reading in Wikipedia, that decline of the chola's were started brewing during the Kulothunga I period itself.
Yes, that is what I read too. During the fag end of the term of Kulothunga I, the Hoysala King Vishnuvardhana did invade the Chola Kingdom and caused a significant damage to the credentials of the Cholas. Probably that was only a spark. But looking at the history, it is clear that, inspite of this, the Cholas were able to hold on with authority, for atleast another 3 or 4 generations until Kulothunga III and then the actual disintegration / decline started.
Regarding, losing the patronage of the Vaishnavas after the Chidambaram incident, I would only say that it was insignificant. Looking back, the Tamizh Vaishnavas were never a dictating force in history. Yes they lacked the number to dictate anything. And moreover, it was not democracy then, but monarchy. Both these facts, indicate that there was not a big problem due to the incident, that the decline would have started.
Definitely the "comparative", I repeat, the "comparative" incompetency of the successors of RajaRaja and Rajendra were the main reasons, like in case of any other dynasty. In fact, it was recorded that even Rajendra I did not have a peaceful reign and had to involve himself in a lot of "instigated" wars, though he won all or most of them. But this was just indicative of the fact that his enemies were not some incompetent bunch of local landlords and they were a "power" by themselves who could not be discarded.
All these combined efforts of the common enemies + the "comparative incompetency" of the subsequent Chola Kings could have been the natural cause of a decline.
Regarding SundaraPandyan returning the attack on Kulonthunga III within 3 years, I dont think there was any impossibilities in it. As can be seen from the fact that Narasimhavarman I returned the attack on Pulikesi in 9 years, Sundara Pandyan did it in 3 years. The lesser number of years somewhat indicate a rapid decline in the competencies of Kulothunga III.
> > Therefore the OBSERVATION that DECLINE STARTED is not right. > About 45 years of good innings... > > His son Vikrama was maintaining the run-rate of his father.. > > Kulothunga II onwards it was tail end.. from Polity point of view.. > enna sps?
test maathiri aarambichu one day va maari, 20-20 yaa mudinchiduchu
but the abscence of the cholas inbetween madurai and malik kafur was the issue that tilted the war in maliks favour. he swept across like the wind till madurai.
that was my casual observation because during that particular period if you see our Bharat Map, Kulottunga's region was so bigger, and historians did admit that during that time his was the biggest 'hindu kingdom'. That's all. After reading about deeply in recent times, i even vouch RRC, the best among Indian Kings. ----------- dear Dhivakar,