On the Identification of Sonacala and Arunacala in the Skandapurana
Summary
The third and fourth cantos of the first book (MaheSvarakhandam) of the Skandapurana focus entirely on the mahimya (glorification) of Arupicala, but the text shows confusion between Arupicala and Sonacala. The Purana conflates descriptions of the two hills, their features, and surrounding areas, such as attributing characteristics of one hill to the other (e.g., verses 1, 3, 9, 3 and 1, 4, 4, 27–20). For instance, a tirtha (sacred site) of Sonacala is described in one verse (1, 3, 6, 121), while the next verse (1, 3, 6, 122) claims Arupicala is worshipped there. Despite the confusion, the text preserves geographical details, suggesting two distinct hills. The Skandanadi river, linked to Skanda/Karttikeya, is identified with the Kumiradhira in the Madras Presidency, flowing through Coorg, Bellary, and Northern Arcot. This river’s association with Skanda’s exploits aligns with Venkatidcala and the Madras region. The Kumbhanadi, connected to Agastya, is inferred to originate near Agastyapuri (Tinnevelly district), flowing northward west of Arupicala. The text debates whether Sonacala and Arupicala refer to the same hill, but the described boundaries (verses 1, 3, 6, 125–127) imply two separate hills. Sonacala’s association with
AI-assisted summary, not yet checked. Consult the original PDF before citing.
Conclusion
This study clarifies the previously confused identification of Sonacala and Arunacala in the Skandapurana, demonstrating that the text preserves genuine geographical records despite mixing their descriptions. By analyzing verses 1,3,6,70 and 1,4,4,27-20, the research establishes that Sonacala and Arunacala are distinct hills with unique features, boundaries, and associated rivers like the Skandanadi (Kumiradhira) and Kumbhanadi. The Skandanadi's connection to Skanda/Karttikeya and its association with the Madras Presidency's Venkatadri region, along with the Kumbhanadi's likely origin near Agastyakiita in Tinnevelly, provides concrete geographical anchors. The findings resolve long-standing ambiguities, affirming the Purana's value as a historical document while highlighting the need for careful interpretation of its intertwined narratives. This conclusion advances scholarly understanding of the text's spatial references and mythological-geographical intersections.