Feedback from Advocate Ravi Rajagopalan on my book "Who killed Aditya Karikala"

I am sharing the feedback of Advocate Ravi Rajagopalan about my historical research book "Who Killed Aditya Karikala".

While expressing my sincere gratitude for his appreciation of my work, I am thrilled to know that it has resonated with him from his professional point of view. Such kind of feedback fuels my passion for research into historical conundrums of the past. Many thanks to him.

***

https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7261053259975438336/

Ravi Rajagopalan

  

2nd degree connection

Independent Practicing Advocate | Counsel, Ravi Rajagopalan Associates | Foreign Lawyer at Marsans Gitlin Baker UK

Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India 

Trivia: The Cholas did not adhere to the rule of agnatic primogeniture in their succession protocol- they adopted co-regency and selected the most accomplished, as the co-ruler from amongst the male descendants by applying the law of tanistry

I am making this post not to discuss the movie "Ponniyin Selvan" but to point out how historians wrongly applied the imperial succession rules and got the entire line of Chola Kings and their regnal years wrong. The great chroniclers and historians of the Chola history, from the last century, namely Prof Nilakanta Sastri and Sadasiva Pandarathar completely overlooked two aspects:

1.     There was no single King. There were 2 royals at the same point who ruled with equal powers, in what is called as Co-Regency.
2.     If one of them died the surviving Regent appointed another one.
3.     The selection was from the available males in the ruling clan and the person chosen was not necessarily the first born or the senior most. It was a person who in the opinion of the ruling family was most valorous and competent to preserve, protect and defend the dominion/ kingdom.

In essence the historians of the last century while putting the genealogy, the line of succession of Chola kings and their regnal years, completely overlooked these two aspects – namely one of co-regency and the other being adoption of tanistry in contrast the rule of agnatic primogeniture. So, they got the regnal years all wrong because they simply presumed that the eldest always succeeded and there was only one sovereign at any point in time.

Thus, for example Aditya Karikala who was also called as Parthivendra Varman (remember that his brother Raja Raja was Arulmozhi Varman) was an actual reigning sovereign co-regent and ruled as a King between 961-976 CE and he anointed Uttama Chola as a co-regent after his father Sundara Chola died. Popular versions and even in the film "Ponniyin Selvan", Aditya Karikala is depicted only as a Crown Prince and he died even before his father Sundara Chola, in the year 969AD.

Now this eye-popping alternate/correct version of Chola history is subject of the research and book by Dr Jayasree Saranathan who has published her findings in her book in Tamil (“ஆதித்த கரிகாலனைக் கொன்றது யார்?”) and its English translation titled “Who killed Āditya Karikāla?: The historical facts” available in print/Kindle. She has relied on solid evidence to advance her propositions.

Why this post :
From a legal perspective the supposed imperial monarchical convention followed by the Cholas which accounts for the correct assessment of the regnal years of Chola kings, the aspects of primo geniture as well as the quaint succession law of tanistry made an interesting study for me.

History certainly needs to be rewritten and lineages and succession lines redrawn. I would certainly recommend reading this book in Tamil if you can and if you cant, the English version should be the second best.

**

To get the print copy of the book in English, write to jayasreebooks@gmail.com

For Tamil version, click HERE

For Kindle version, click HERE for Tamil version.  

Click HERE for English version.