Kakatiya dynasty
The Kakatiya dynasty was a Telugu dynasty that ruled most of eastern Deccan region in present-day India between 12th and 14th centuries. Their territory comprised much of the present day Telangana and Andhra Pradesh, and parts of eastern Karnataka, northern Tamil Nadu, and southern Odisha. Their capital was Orugallu, now known as Warangal.
Early Kakatiya rulers served as feudatories to Rashtrakutas and Western Chalukyas for more than two centuries. They assumed sovereignty under Prataparudra I in 1163 CE by suppressing other Chalukya subordinates in the Telangana region. Ganapati Deva significantly expanded Kakatiya lands during the 1230s and brought under Kakatiya control the Telugu-speaking lowland delta areas around the Godavari and Krishna rivers. Ganapati Deva was succeeded by Rudrama Devi who is one of the few queens in Indian history. Marco Polo, who visited India around 1289–1293, made note of Rudrama Devi's rule and nature in flattering terms. She successfully repelled the attacks of Yadavas of Devagiri into the Kakatiyan territory.
In 1303, Alauddin Khalji, the emperor of the Delhi Sultanate invaded the Kakatiya territory which ended up as a disaster for the Turks. But after the successful siege of Warangal in 1310, Prataparudra II was forced to pay annual tribute to Delhi. Another attack by Ulugh Khan in 1323 saw stiff resistance by the Kakatiyan army, but they were finally defeated. The demise of the Kakatiya dynasty resulted in confusion and anarchy under alien rulers for some time, before Musunuri Nayakas united the various Telugu clans and recovered Warangal from the Delhi Sultanate.
Kakatiyas unified the distinct upland and lowland cultures of Telugu lands, which brought into being a feeling of cultural affinity between those who spoke the Telugu language. Kakatiya period also saw the construction of reservoirs for irrigation in the uplands called "tanks" many of which are still used today. They were egalitarian in nature and anyone, regardless of birth, could acquire the nayaka title that denoted the warrior status. They recruited peasants into the military which resulted in a new warrior class and provided social mobility. Kakatiya era also saw the development of a distinct style of architecture that improved and innovated upon the existing modes. Most notable examples are the Thousand Pillar Temple in Hanamkonda, Ramappa Temple in Palampet, Warangal Fort, Golconda Fort and Kota Gullu in Ghanpur.
Etymology and names
Studies of the inscriptions and coinage by the historian Dineshchandra Sircar reveal that there was no contemporary standard spelling of the family name. Variants include Kakatiya, Kakatiyya, Kakita, Kakati and Kakatya. The family name was often prefixed to the name of the monarch, giving constructs such as Kakatiya-Prataparudra. Some of the monarchs also had alternate names; for example, Venkata and Venkataraya may have been alternate names of Prataparuda I, with the former appearing on a coin in the form Venkata-Kakatiya.Kakatiya inscriptions suggest that the family's name derives from the name of a place called Kakati. The Bayyaram tank inscription from the reign of Ganapati-deva states that the Kakatiya chief Venna resided at Kakati, because of which his descendants came to be known as Kakatishas. Ganapati-deva's Garavapadu charter traces the family's ancestry to Durjaya, a legendary chieftain of ancient Andhra and a descendant of Karikala Chola. According to this account, Karikala arrived at Kakati during a hunting expedition, and set up his camp there. The modern identity of Kakati is uncertain: different historians have variously attempted to identify it with modern Kakati village in Karnataka and Kanker in Chhattisgarh. Siddheshvara-Charitra, a later literary work, states that the ancestors of the Kakatiya family lived at Kandarapura. However, no other evidence supports this tradition. Later, the Kakatiya capital Orugallu was also called "Kakati-pura", as attested by some inscriptions of the dynasty.
Kumarasvami Somapithin, in his 15th-century commentary on Vidynatha's Prataparudra-Yashobhushanam or Prataparudriya states that the family was named after their tutelary goddess Kakati, a form of Durga. It is possible that the early Kakatiya chiefs resided at a place called Kakati, which had a shrine of their tutelary goddess. Although the Hindu mythological texts do not mention any such form of Durga, the worship of a goddess named Kakati is attested by several other sources. For example, Vallabharaya's Krida-bhiramamu mentions an image of Kakatamma in the Kakatiya capital Orugallu. The 16th century Shitap Khan inscription mentions the reinstallation of the image of goddess Jaganmatruka and the lotus seat of the Kakatirajya, which had been destroyed by the Turushkas. According to one theory, Kakati was originally a Jain goddess and later came to be regarded as a form of Durga.
History
Origin
According to the Garavapadu inscription and Pakhal inscription of Ganapati Deva, the Kakatiya rulers traced their ancestry to a legendary chief or ruler named Durjaya, who was a descendant of the Early Chola king Karikala. Many other ruling dynasties of Andhra also claimed descent from Durjaya. Nothing further is known about this chief.Most of the Kakatiya records do not mention the varna of the family, but the majority of the ones that do, proudly describe them as Shudra. Examples include the Bothpur and Vaddamanu inscriptions of Ganapati's general Malyala Gunda senani. The Kakatiyas also maintained marital relations with other Shudra families, such as the Kotas and the Natavadi chiefs. All this evidence indicates that the Kakatiyas were of Shudra origin.
A few copper-plate inscriptions of the Kakatiya family describe them as belonging to the Kshatriya varna. These inscriptions primarily document grants to Brahmans, and appear to be inspired by the genealogies of the Imperial Cholas. For example, the Motupalli inscription of Ganapati counts legendary solar dynasty kings such as Rama among the ancestors of Durjaya, the progenitor of the Kakatiya family. The Malkapuram inscription of Visvesvara Sivacharya, the preceptor of Kakatiya rulers Ganapati-deva and Rudrama-devi, also connects the Kakatiyas to the solar dynasty. The term "Kshatriya" in these panegyric records appears to signify the family's warrior-like qualities rather than their actual varna.
Relationship to the Rashtrakutas
According to an interpretation of the Mangallu and the Bayyaram inscriptions, the Kakatiyas were not just Rashtrakuta vassals, but also a branch of the Rashtrakuta family.The 956 CE Mangallu inscription was issued by the Vengi Chalukya prince Dānārnava, at the request of the Kakatiya chief Gunda IV. The inscription names Gundyana's ancestors as Gundiya-Rashtrakuta and Eriya-Rashtrakuta. This suggests that Gunda IV was a Rashtrakuta general, and not a Vengi Chalukya subordinate, as assumed by some earlier historians.
The Bayyaram tank inscription, which records the construction of the Dharma-kirti-samudra tank by Ganapati's sister Mailama, provides another genealogical list. The similarities of names mentioned in the Mangallu and Bayyaram inscriptions lists suggest that both of these refer to the same family:
| Mangallu grant inscription | Bayyaram tank inscription |
| Kakatiya family | Durjaya family |
| Venna-nripa | |
| Gundiya Rashtrakuta | Gunda I |
| Gunda II | |
| Gunda III | |
| Eriya Rashtrakuta | Erra |
| Betiya | |
| Kakartya Gundyana | Pindi-Gunda |
The significance of the suffix "Rashtrakuta" in the names of the early Kakatiya chiefs is debated. According to one theory, the suffix only implies that these chiefs were Rashtrakuta's subordinates. This theory is based on the fact that the phrase Rashtrakuta-kutumbinah appears in several Rashtrakuta-era copper-plate inscriptions, and refers to the officers and subjects of the Rashtrakuta kingdom.
According to another theory, the suffix implies that the Kakatiyas were a branch of the Rashtrakuta family because the term Rashtrakuta-kutumbinah was used for officers employed by the Rashtrakuta administration, not feudatory chiefs: the early records of the Kakatiya chiefs describe them as samantas. The Kazipet Darga inscription of Durgaraja states that his father Beta II was born in the family of Samanta Viṣṭi. Historian P.V.P. Sastry theorises that "Viṣṭi" is a corruption of Vrishni, the name of a clan from which some Rashtrakutas claimed descent. He notes that some chiefs of Rashtrakuta origin adopted the title "Viṭṭi-narayana", which means "as great as Narayana of the Vitti family. Sastry further proposes that the term "Voddi", which appears in the phrase Voddi-kula in the Mangallu inscription may be same as "Viṣṭi". Sastry also believes that the early Kakatiya chiefs followed Jainism, which was also patronized by the Rashtrakutas, thus strengthening the view that the two dynasties were connected.
The Kakatiyas seemed to have adopted the mythical bird Garuda as their royal insignia, as attested by the Ekamranatha temple inscription of Ganapati-deva, the Palampet inscription of the Kakatiya general Recharla Rudra, and Vidyanatha's Prataparudriya. The Bayyaram tank inscription calls the Kakatiya chief Beta I Garudamka-Beta, and "Garuda" here appears to refer to the family's emblem. In Hindu mythology, Garuda is the vahana of god Vishnu. The Rashtrakutas and some other dynasties of Deccan claimed descent from the Vrishni clan and had adopted Garuda as their royal insignia. According to Sastry, this corroborates the theory that the Kakatiyas were associated with the Rashtrakuta family. Sastry further speculates that the Kakatiyas may have adopted the Garuda symbol because of Jain influence: the yaksha of the Jain tirthankara Shantinatha is represented by the Garuda symbol. However, when the Kakatiyas switched their allegiance to the Chalukyas of Kalyani, they also adopted the varaha symbol used by the Chalukyas.
Based on Ganapati-deva's Garavapadu inscription, which names Karikala Chola among the family's ancestors, epigraphist C.R.K. Charlu theorised that the Kakatiyas were a branch of the Telugu Chodas. However, no other Kakatiya record mentions Karikala, and unlike the Telugu Chodas, the Kakatiyas did not claim to belong to the Kashyapa-gotra. Therefore, Sastry dismisses Charlu's theory as untenable.