Short biography of Mahendravarman I

If it is supposed that Simhavishnu’s reign came to an end by AD 600, his son I Mahendravarman I who succeeded him may be held to have ruled from AD 600 to 630. Though there is some difference of opinion regarding the initial date of his reign, it is agreed that he died in 630.

This king was perhaps the greatest among the Pallava rulers. He bore many titles like Chatrumalla, Gunabhara, Vichitrachitta, Mattavilasa, Avanibhajana, Sankirnajati, each one having a specific relation to one of his qualities or aptitudes. He bore even the uncomplimentary title of Kalahapriya. His kingdom was vast, and early in his reign it comprised the eastern Andhra and the Coramandal coasts from the Krishna in the north to the Kaviri in the south.

But after the Western Chalukyas began invading the south­eastern parts of the old Satavahana Empire the Pallava kingdom shrank very much in size, and was perhaps confined to the area between the Tirupati hills in the north and Trichniopoly in the south. This situation was possibly changed only after AD 632 when Vatapi was attacked by his son Narasimhavarman I.

Mahendravarman was a greatly gifted king and his natural inclination was to promote and participate in the elegant arts of peace but his great contemporary in the Western Chalukyan kingdom namely, Pulakesin II often interfered by invading the northern parts of the Pallava kingdom and occasionally reached the very gates of the capital thereby frustrating the peaceful intentions of the Pallava monarch.

The Pallava was possibly not equal to the Chalukya on the field of battle. The Aihole inscription of Pulakesin speaks of his successful military thrust to Kanchi and the Pallava king withdrew to within the gates of his capital.

The Kasakkudi plates of Nandivarman II Pallavamalla, however, state that Mahendravarman defeated his enemy at Pullalur in the neighbourhood of Kanchi. Both these rival claims could be true, since it is possible that the Chalukya conqueror advanced as far as Pullalur successfully but was stopped there and compelled to return.

Mahendravarman was a Jaina in the early part of his career and he was converted to Saivism later. We know from the Sanskrit play Mattavilasa Prahasanam written by the king himself that in his times several religions like Buddhism, Kalamukha and Pasupata variants of primitive Saivism, Jainism, etc., prevailed in his kingdom.

As a Jaina he was reputed to have persecuted those who belonged other religions. The Periyapuranam, a chief source of our knowledge regarding this phase of his life, mentions the Saiva saint Appar also known as Tirunavukkarasu being responsible for his conversion to Saivism.

Appar himself was a Jaina early in his life and was called Darmasena but later he was persuaded by his sister to turn to Saivism. Mahendravarman at the instance of his Jaina advisers tried to reconvert Appar to Jainism first by persuasion and then by persecution. All this ultimately resulted in his own conversion to Saivism.

Though Mahendravarman changed his religion his tendency to persecute men of religions other than his own did not change, and now he started persecuting the Jainas with the added zest of a new convert. He demolished Jaina pallis and used the building material which remained after the destruction, for building temples for Siva at a place called Gunadharichchuram.

Perhaps this is a corruption of Gunabarichchuram a name derived from one of the titles of the king. The king was converted to Saivism perhaps in c. AD 610. There is an inscription in the Trichnopoly rock which refers to this event as ‘his having turned back from hostile conduct to the worship of the Linga’. It must have been after his conversion that he started excavating the rock cut temples dedicated to Siva.

The story of his religious experience as we glean it from the Periyapuranam has no correspondence to the general tenor of his religious attitudes as seen in his own play Mattavilasa Prahasanam. He was not averse to worshipping Vishnu for he is known to have excavated a rock-cut temple to Vishnu on the banks of the Mahendravadi near Arkonam in the north Arcot district. This temple was called Mahendravishnugraham.

This shows that in the seventh century though there was sharp animosity between Hinduism and the heretical religions the different denominations within Hinduism flourished amicably side by side. It took a century or more for hostility to become pronounced in the relations between Saivism and Vaishnavism.

The Mandagappatu inscription states that he caused a temple to Brahma, Isvara and Vishnu to be excavated. In fact temples dedicated to these deities were a common feature of early times.

Mahendravarman is noted for a new style of architecture. The Mandagappattu inscription mentioned above speaks of the construction of that temple without the use of brick, timber, metal or mortar. This means that he ordered the excavation of a monolithic rock cut temple He gave up the older practice of constructing temples using brick, mortar and timber only.

The older temples particularly those built in the Sangam age used material other than stone and so perished either by fire or by floods or by man’s negligence. Realizing that the use of perishable material led to the decay of temples, Mahendravarman advocated the use of stone instead, for this purpose. It is generally made out that Mahendravarman was the pioneer in this art of excavating rock-cut temples.

But at the same time we come across similar structures in Pattadakkal and in Vatapi in the Western Chalukyan kingdom. It is risky to be categorical about the precise authorship of this style of temple building. It is, however, in this context that Mahendravarman calls himself Vichitrachitta i.e., ‘the man with new fangled ideas’.

This might mean that the rock-cut temple architecture developed in the Pallava country independently and without being inspired by the Chalukyan example. Temples of the Mahendravarman style of architecture are generally found in the Tondaimandalam though a few are to be found elsewhere also. The rock-cut temples at Vallam, Mandagappattu, Dalvanur and Mahendravadi as well as Mamandur and also the few at Mamallapuram are to be found in the Tondaimandalam.

Mahendravarman’s interest in fine arts was perhaps unparalleled among Tamil rulers. He was a patron of painting. It is believed that he either wrote or encouraged a competent scholar to write a grammar of painting called Dakshinachitra and he bore the title Chitrakarappuli. It is usual to ascribe the paintings found on the ceilings of a rock-cut temple at Sittannavasal in the Pudukkottai region to the genius of this king.

This is a fresco representing a tank covered with lotuses and we have a number of figures of dancing girls in the painting. Whether this king was connected with this effort, would, however, depend upon whether the Pudukkottai region formed part of the Pallavan kingdom. If it did not the patronage must be ascribed to the contemporary Pandyan king.

Even if it be so there would be no harm in supposing that Mahendravarman’s examples further north generally influenced the tradition of art all over the Tamil country. There is clear proof of Pallava interest in the art of painting in the very early temples in Mamallapuram and Kanchi, particularly the Kailasanatha temple in the capital. The temple in Vellarai gives evidence of ample painting on the ceiling; and the art, even as it is, is indicative of excellence.

Mahendravarman is also credited with patronage of music and even the creation of a musical system. At Kudumiyamalai, also in the Pudukkottai region, an inscription containing certain musical tabular statements was discovered. It was caused to be engraved by an unnamed king said to be a disciple of one Rudracharya who is credited with the composition of a series of musical notes for the benefit of his students.

It is possible that the king referred to here was Mahendravarman I. This inscription is attributed to that king usually on paleographical grounds. Allied to this inscription but of less importance is the Tirumayam epigraph which is but a fragment revealing a few terms of ancient Tamilian music. In this context it may be remembered that this Pallava king bore the title Sankirnajati which was perhaps a musical mode with which he was somehow associated.

Whatever our doubts about Mahendravarman’s association with the traditions of painting and music of these times, it is undoubtedly true that he was an accomplished man of letters. He is known to have written two plays, (1) Mattavilasa Prahasanam and (2) Bhagavatajjukiyam both of them in Sanskrit and belonging to the Prahasana type of Sanskrit play. The former clearly mentions the royal playwright by name as its author. The king is frank enough to admit in the play that the courts in his government were not above corruption.

Mahendravarman I was interested not only in the building of the temples but also in secular engineering structures. He built many towns called Mahendramangalam or Mahendravadi and he dug a tank at Mamandur called Chitramegha Tatakam. It was clearly in his period that the tempo of the Bhakti movement in the Tamil country increased.

Both the Vaishnavite and the Saivite phases of this remarkable movement took definite shape in his time. With Appar started serious Saiva Bhakti movement and only the three first Alvars had passed before his time.

It may be said that Mahendravarman heralded an entirely new era in the history of the Tamils, and founded many traditions which lasted till the days of Vijayanagar Imperialism. His successors while being perhaps more competent than he in warlike deeds, could do no more than to continue or to alter to improve and to embellish the architectural tradition set by him.