The view of ascendancy of the Pandyas and Cholas rested on an imperfect study of certain inscriptions. But those inscriptions are often nothing more than bombast, and such of them, as for instance the Trivandrum Museum inscription, unfold a different story from what is generally accepted. It shows that, instead of the king of Travancore being defeated by Nedumchadayan, the latter was obliged to save himself by a timely flight from the outskirts of Vilinjam to his own territories, the Travancoreans pursuing him and laying siege to his own fort at Karaikkotta. The story of the Chola conquest of Travancore is equally untenable. What the historians did was to work down from the nebulous phrase Kanthalursalai kalamarutharuliya which finds a prominent place in the Chola inscriptions. The phrase took such possession of the historical imagination and lent itself to such a variety of interpretations that no proper attempt appears to have been made to understand its sense and the limits of its application. On a close examination of the evidence it appears that the theory of victories over Travancore based on it must be abandoned.
Writers on South Indian history often misunderstand proper names, particularly the names of places. There are instances in which confusion of ideas is patent. When mention is found made in Chola inscriptions of victories won in Malanadu or Kerala, they are often interpreted to be successes over Travancore while, in fact, they refer to military successes over the kings who ruled at Thiruvanchikkulam in the later periods. Nor can the reference in epigraphic records to victories in places like Vilinjam and Kottar be interpreted to be victories over Travancore. At the time in which the events are said to have happened there places lay without and beyond Travancore. They were originally in the possession of the Ay kings from whom they passed into the hands of the Pandyas and Cholas. It was only in the 12th century A.D that those places were added to this state.