Side‑light on the history of the Kalacuris of Tummāna

Summary

Sukumar Sen examines the Kalacuri branch of Tummana (modern Tuman in Chhattisgarh), which descended from the imperial Kalacuris of Tripuri. After Sankaragaṇa I of Tripuri conquered Pāṭī from Kosala in the late ninth century, he installed one of his brothers as governor; the territory was lost during Yūvarāja I’s misfortunes but recovered around 1000 CE by Kalingarāja, who founded a line at Tummana. Sen notes that from the reign of Ratnarāja I onward the dynasty followed a repeating sequence of royal names—Ratna, Pṛthvī and Jājalla. At least three cycles of these names are observed, suggesting a deliberate pattern meant to maintain dynastic legitimacy. In the second cycle, however, an anomaly occurs: Prithvīdeva II’s younger son Jājalladeva II succeeded to the throne while his elder brother Jagaddeva was alive. Previous scholars had speculated that Jagaddeva was away fighting the Eastern Gāṅgas; Sen argues instead that Prithvīdeva deliberately designated his younger son as heir, perhaps because he was born of the favourite queen, while Jagaddeva was a step‑brother. Drawing a parallel with the Mewar tradition where the Kanthikā (heir’s thread) was tied around a younger son’s neck, Sen suggests that Jājalladeva’s naming at birth indicated succession. He posits that factional rivalry forced Jagaddeva into exile and that Jājalladeva’s accession around 1155 CE marked the beginning of a new cycle. The article emphasises that interpreting the pattern of repeated royal names is crucial for reconstructing Kalacuri chronology. By highlighting this succession anomaly, Sen sheds light on intrafamilial politics and the agency of queens in determining heirs. The study thus contributes to understanding how name cycles served as instruments of dynastic continuity and how deviations from them reveal underlying conflicts.