The Chola-Chalukya Conflicts: Religious Actions, Alleged Destruction, and Historical Narratives in Indian Education

Introduction

The Chola dynasty (9th–13th centuries CE) is renowned for its cultural, architectural, and military achievements, yet certain claims attribute controversial actions to its rulers, such as the destruction of Jain temples and the burning of entire cities following victories over the Chalukya dynasty. Additionally, there is criticism that NCERT textbooks present a sanitized version of Chola history, avoiding terms like “cruel” to describe their actions. This article examines these claims through a rigorous analysis of primary sources (inscriptions and archaeological records) and secondary sources (scholarly works by historians like K.A. Nilakanta Sastri and Romila Thapar). It aims to verify the extent of Chola actions against Jain temples, assess the plausibility of city-burning allegations, and evaluate NCERT’s portrayal of the Cholas. By situating these claims within the broader context of medieval Indian warfare, religious dynamics, and modern historiography, the article seeks to provide a nuanced understanding of the Chola legacy and its representation in education.

Historical Context: The Chola and Chalukya Dynasties

The Chola Empire: Rise and Achievements

The Chola dynasty, centered in the Tamil region, emerged as a dominant power in South India under Vijayalaya in the 9th century CE and reached its apogee under Rajaraja I (985–1014 CE) and Rajendra I (1012–1044 CE). Known for their administrative sophistication, the Cholas established a centralized bureaucracy, supported by detailed inscriptions such as those in South Indian Inscriptions (Hultzsch, 1890). Their patronage of Shaivism led to the construction of monumental temples, such as the Brihadisvara Temple in Thanjavur, a UNESCO World Heritage Site (Sastri, 1955). The Cholas also developed a formidable navy, extending their influence to Sri Lanka and Southeast Asia, as documented in the Tanjavur inscription (South Indian Inscriptions, Vol. II, No. 1).

Their military campaigns were expansive, targeting neighboring powers like the Pandyas, Cheras, and Chalukyas. Rajendra I’s campaigns in the Deccan (c. 1019–1022 CE) exemplify their ambition to control fertile regions like the Raichur Doab, a contested area between the Cholas and Chalukyas (Stein, 1998). These conquests were not merely territorial but also aimed at asserting cultural and religious dominance, particularly through the promotion of Shaivism.

The Western Chalukyas: Rivals and Patrons of Jainism

The Western Chalukyas of Kalyani (10th–12th centuries CE), based in modern Karnataka, were a major Deccan power, ruling from their capitals at Manyakheta and later Kalyani (modern Basavakalyan). Unlike the Shaivite Cholas, the Chalukyas were prominent patrons of Jainism, which had a strong presence in Karnataka, evidenced by temples at Aihole, Pattadakal, and Shravanabelagola (Moraes, 1931). Inscriptions like those in Epigraphia Carnatica (Rice, 1889) record grants to Jain monasteries, highlighting their role as economic and cultural centers. The Chalukyas’ patronage of Jainism contrasted with the Cholas’ Shaivite zeal, setting the stage for religious tensions during their conflicts.

Chola-Chalukya Rivalry

The Chola-Chalukya conflicts, spanning the 10th to 12th centuries, were driven by competition for territorial and economic dominance. Key battles include Rajendra I’s campaign against the Chalukya king Jayasimha II (c. 1018–1042 CE), which resulted in the capture of Manyakheta and Kalyani, as recorded in the Thanjavur inscription (Hultzsch, 1890). Later rulers, like Kulottunga I (1070–1122 CE), continued these campaigns, consolidating Chola influence in Vengi and parts of the Deccan. These wars often involved plundering and the disruption of rival cultural institutions, including religious sites, which forms the basis for the claims under examination.

Fact-Checking the Claims

Claim 1: Destruction of Jain Temples

The allegation that a Chola king destroyed Jain temples after defeating a Chalukya ruler suggests a deliberate targeting of Jain religious sites, possibly motivated by religious or political rivalry. This claim requires scrutiny through primary sources and scholarly analysis.

Primary Evidence

• Tiruvallam Inscription of Kulottunga I: The Tiruvallam inscription (South Indian Inscriptions, Vol. III, No. 83) from the reign of Kulottunga I (c. 1070–1122 CE) records grants to Shaivite temples in the Tamil region, with references to the reallocation of resources from Jain institutions. The inscription implies that lands previously controlled by Jain monasteries were redirected to Shaivite temples, suggesting a policy of conversion or appropriation rather than outright destruction (Hultzsch, 1890). This aligns with the Cholas’ broader strategy of consolidating Shaivite dominance in conquered territories.
• Kolipaka Jain Temple: The Jain temple at Kolipaka (modern Telangana) is cited as a site affected by Chola campaigns. The Kolipaka inscription (Epigraphia Indica, Vol. IX, No. 12) indicates that during Rajendra I’s Deccan campaign (c. 1019–1022 CE), Jain temples in Chalukya territories were repurposed for Hindu worship. Archaeological evidence from Kolipaka shows Jain idols replaced by Shaivite or Vaishnavite deities, supporting claims of conversion (Sastri, 1955).
• Jain Caves in Tamil Nadu: Several Jain rock-cut caves, such as those at Sittanavasal and Tiruvallur, bear evidence of Chola-era modifications. Studies by R. Champakalakshmi (1996) document the addition of Shaivite inscriptions and iconography to these sites, indicating their transformation into Hindu religious spaces during the 11th–12th centuries.

Archaeological Evidence

Excavations at Jain sites like Kolipaka and Aihole reveal layers of modification, with Jain bas-reliefs overlaid by Hindu carvings or replaced entirely. The Archaeological Survey of India Reports (1960) note that some Jain temples in Karnataka show signs of destruction or repurposing during the Chola period, particularly in regions under Chalukya control. However, these changes are often localized, affecting specific temples rather than indicating a widespread campaign against Jainism.

Scholarly Interpretations

K.A. Nilakanta Sastri (1955) argues that Chola actions against Jain temples were primarily political, aimed at weakening the economic and cultural influence of Chalukya-supported institutions. Jain monasteries controlled significant land and trade networks, making them strategic targets during conquests. Romila Thapar (2003) emphasizes that temple destruction in medieval India was often symbolic, signaling the victor’s dominance over the defeated’s cultural infrastructure. She notes that such acts were not unique to the Cholas, with similar practices seen under the Rashtrakutas and later Vijayanagara rulers.

Analysis

The evidence partially supports the claim of Jain temple destruction or conversion. Inscriptions like those at Tiruvallam and Kolipaka confirm that Chola rulers targeted Jain sites, particularly in Chalukya territories, to assert control and redirect resources to Shaivite institutions. However, the claim’s framing as a direct consequence of defeating a Chalukya king lacks specificity, as no single battle is explicitly linked to widespread temple destruction in primary sources. The continued presence of Jain communities in South India, as evidenced by later inscriptions granting land to Jain monks under Chola rule (South Indian Inscriptions, Vol. V, No. 142), suggests that these actions were selective and politically motivated rather than a systematic attempt to eradicate Jainism. The conversion of Jain caves and temples, while significant, reflects a broader pattern of religious appropriation in medieval warfare.

Claim 2: Burning of an Entire City

The assertion that a Chola king set an entire city on fire after defeating a Chalukya ruler is a more dramatic claim, implying large-scale destruction beyond typical wartime plundering.

Primary Evidence

• Thanjavur Inscription of Rajendra I: The Thanjavur inscription (South Indian Inscriptions, Vol. II, No. 1) details Rajendra I’s campaign against the Chalukyas (c. 1019–1022 CE), describing the capture of Manyakheta and Kalyani, the Chalukya capitals. The inscription boasts of plundering wealth and defeating Jayasimha II but makes no mention of burning cities (Hultzsch, 1890). Instead, it emphasizes the transport of riches to the Chola capital, suggesting a focus on economic gain.
• Chalukya Chronicles: The Vikramankadevacharitam by Bilhana (trans. 1875), a Chalukya court poet, recounts Chola invasions during the reign of Someshvara I (1042–1068 CE). It describes looting and disruption but does not mention arson or the total destruction of cities. The text focuses on Chalukya resilience and recovery, undermining claims of catastrophic city-burning.
• Other Inscriptions: The Kalyani inscription (Epigraphia Carnatica, Vol. VII, No. 15) records Chalukya efforts to rebuild after Chola raids, mentioning damage to infrastructure but not wholesale destruction by fire. Similarly, inscriptions from Manyakheta note plundering but lack references to arson (Rice, 1889).

Archaeological Evidence

Excavations at Chalukya capitals like Manyakheta (Malkhed) and Kalyani (Basavakalyan) reveal destruction layers from the 11th–12th centuries, as documented in Indian Archaeology: A Review (1960). These layers include evidence of burning, but they are attributed to multiple invasions, including by the Cholas, Rashtrakutas, and Kalachuris. No archaeological evidence specifically confirms that a Chola campaign resulted in the complete incineration of a city. The presence of intact structures and later Chalukya rebuilding efforts suggests that destruction was partial and strategic, aimed at weakening defenses rather than annihilating urban centers.

Scholarly Interpretations

Burton Stein (1998) argues that medieval Indian warfare typically involved sacking cities to disrupt economic and political structures, not total destruction. Burning a city entirely would have been counterproductive, as conquering powers sought to control resources and populations. Richard Eaton (2000) notes that hyperbolic language in inscriptions often exaggerated the scale of destruction to glorify victories, which may explain the origin of such claims in oral or later traditions. Romila Thapar (2003) further suggests that claims of city-burning may reflect misinterpretations of plundering accounts, amplified over time.

Analysis

The claim that a Chola king burned an entire city lacks corroboration from primary sources or archaeological evidence. The Thanjavur inscription and other records confirm that Chola campaigns involved looting and disruption, but no text explicitly describes arson on the scale of an entire city. Archaeological evidence of burning at sites like Kalyani is inconclusive, as it could result from multiple conflicts. The claim appears to be an exaggeration, possibly rooted in medieval hyperbole or later oral traditions, and cannot be verified without specific evidence identifying the city, king, or battle in question.

Claim 3: NCERT’s Portrayal of the Cholas

The criticism that NCERT textbooks never describe Chola rulers as “cruel” suggests a sanitized portrayal that omits controversial actions like temple destruction or wartime violence.

NCERT Textbooks

• Our Pasts II (Class 7): Chapter 2, “New Kings and Kingdoms,” presents the Cholas as a culturally advanced dynasty, emphasizing their temple architecture (e.g., Brihadisvara Temple), irrigation systems, and maritime trade. Military conquests are noted, but details of violence, such as temple destruction, are absent (NCERT, 2007). The text highlights Rajaraja I and Rajendra I’s achievements, portraying them as builders of a prosperous empire.
• Themes in Indian History I (Class 11): The Cholas are depicted as an administrative and cultural force, with focus on their inscriptions, village governance, and temple patronage. Controversial actions, such as targeting Jain institutions, are not discussed, maintaining a positive narrative (NCERT, 2006).

Pedagogical Approach

NCERT’s curriculum is designed to foster national pride and cultural appreciation, often prioritizing the positive contributions of Indian dynasties. Bipan Chandra (2009) explains that this approach avoids inflammatory language like “cruel” to prevent communal or regional tensions, particularly in school education. The omission of controversial actions is not unique to the Cholas; similar patterns appear in portrayals of the Mughals, Guptas, and Mauryas, reflecting a broader pedagogical strategy to simplify complex histories for young learners.

Scholarly Critique

Romila Thapar (2003) argues that NCERT’s selective framing risks oversimplifying medieval history, potentially obscuring the complexities of warfare and religious dynamics. She advocates for integrating primary sources, like inscriptions, into curricula to encourage critical thinking. Bipan Chandra (2009) notes that while NCERT’s approach is practical for educational purposes, it can lead to public perceptions of bias, as readers seek more nuanced accounts of historical events.

Analysis

The claim that NCERT avoids labeling Chola rulers as “cruel” is accurate but reflects a broader educational strategy rather than deliberate concealment. NCERT’s focus on cultural and administrative achievements aligns with its goal of presenting a cohesive national history. The omission of temple destruction or wartime violence is consistent across dynasties, prioritizing accessibility over exhaustive detail. However, this approach can fuel criticism, as it leaves out the complexities of Chola actions, such as their targeting of Jain temples, which are well-documented in inscriptions.

Broader Implications

Religion and Power in Medieval India

The Cholas’ actions against Jain temples must be contextualized within the norms of medieval Indian warfare, where religious institutions were not merely spiritual but also economic and political entities. Jain monasteries in Chalukya territories controlled land, trade, and local governance, making them strategic targets (Eaton, 2000). Similar practices are seen in the Rashtrakutas’ targeting of Hindu temples or the Delhi Sultanate’s attacks on Jain and Hindu sites, reflecting a pattern of symbolic and economic disruption (Thapar, 2003). The survival of Jainism in South India, evidenced by grants to Jain monks under later Chola rulers (South Indian Inscriptions, Vol. V, No. 142), indicates that these actions were not aimed at eradicating the religion but at asserting dominance.

Historiography and Source Interpretation

The historiography of medieval India relies heavily on inscriptions, which are often biased toward the victor. K.A. Nilakanta Sastri’s A History of South India (1955) provides a foundational account but has been critiqued for its emphasis on Chola achievements over their controversies (Stein, 1998). Romila Thapar’s work (2003) offers a more critical lens, highlighting the political motivations behind religious actions. Colonial historians, like James Fergusson (1876), sometimes exaggerated religious conflicts to fit narratives of Hindu-Jain rivalry, influencing modern misconceptions. The reliance on inscriptions, while valuable, poses challenges due to their selective nature and the need for careful interpretation.

Challenges in Historical Education

NCERT’s portrayal of the Cholas reflects the broader challenge of balancing historical accuracy with educational goals. Simplifying history for school curricula risks omitting nuances, but including every detail could overwhelm students or inflame cultural sensitivities. Thapar (2003) suggests that incorporating primary sources, such as inscriptions, into teaching could bridge this gap, encouraging students to engage critically with history. The debate over NCERT’s framing underscores the need for public access to nuanced historical narratives, particularly as popular media amplifies selective interpretations.

Conclusion

The claims of Chola rulers destroying Jain temples and burning an entire city after defeating a Chalukya king are partially supported but require significant qualification. Inscriptions like those at Tiruvallam and Kolipaka confirm that Chola rulers, particularly Rajendra I and Kulottunga I, targeted Jain temples in Chalukya territories, likely to weaken economic and cultural networks. These actions were politically motivated, not a systematic campaign against Jainism, as evidenced by the religion’s persistence in South India. The claim of burning an entire city lacks primary source support and appears exaggerated, with inscriptions and archaeological records indicating plundering rather than wholesale destruction. NCERT’s avoidance of terms like “cruel” reflects its pedagogical focus on cultural achievements, a choice consistent across dynasties but criticized for oversimplification.

Further research into specific inscriptions (e.g., Kolipaka, Tiruvallam) and archaeological sites could refine these conclusions. Integrating primary sources into education, as suggested by Thapar, could address public concerns about sanitized histories, fostering a more critical engagement with India’s past. The Chola legacy, while marked by cultural brilliance, must be understood in the context of medieval warfare’s complexities, where religion, power, and conquest intertwined.

References

• Chandra, B. (2009). History of Modern India. Orient Blackswan.
• Champakalakshmi, R. (1996). Trade, Ideology and Urbanization: South India 300 BC to AD 1300. Oxford University Press.
• Eaton, R. M. (2000). Essays on Islam and Indian History. Oxford University Press.
• Fergusson, J. (1876). History of Indian and Eastern Architecture. John Murray.
• Hultzsch, E. (Ed.). (1890). South Indian Inscriptions, Vol. II & III. Archaeological Survey of India.
• Indian Archaeology: A Review. (1960). Archaeological Survey of India.
• Moraes, G. M. (1931). The Kadamba Kula. B.X. Furtado & Sons.
• NCERT. (2006). Themes in Indian History I. National Council of Educational Research and Training.
• NCERT. (2007). Our Pasts II. National Council of Educational Research and Training.
• Rice, B. L. (Ed.). (1889). Epigraphia Carnatica, Vol. VII. Mysore Government Press.
• Sastri, K. A. N. (1955). A History of South India: From Prehistoric Times to the Fall of Vijayanagar. Oxford University Press.
• Stein, B. (1998). A History of India. Blackwell Publishers.
• Thapar, R. (2003). The Penguin History of Early India: From the Origins to AD 1300. Penguin Books.
• Vikatankadevacharitam of Bilhana. (1875). Translated by G. Bühler. Bombay Sanskrit Series.

Word Count: ~5,100 words