The reconstitution of the history of Cau·ad¡napura is not an easy task because of scanty documentation. Although the surrounding region abounds in inscriptions and monuments, the establishment of historical facts gets hin-dered due to the rehabilitation of the village and recent repairs or re-arrangements made in the temple complex. There are eight inscriptions in the temple and graffitti, the latest being in 1565. áivadevavijaya, a k¡vya probably written in the 19th century or even later by a certain áar¢f Kavi, of good poetical quality, but of no historical value, and a few documents in the archives of a recent ma¶ha, dealing only with the history of the ma¶ha are the only sources which come in handy to the historians.
Muktit¢rtha (line 45) is met with right from the first inscription. The second inscription states that in the year 1191 an ascetic named Muktaj¢yar was at this place and was performing the p£j¡ of Muktin¡tha. During this time the god came to be known as Mukte¿a (l. 67):
In V¢r¡gamottara (IV.374) there is a reference to a place called Muktinilaya:
“O Gauri (listen), the river Tu´gabhadr¡ steals away the sins of man-kind; on its bank is Muktinilaya “abode of Mukti” revered by Brahman and ViÀ¸u.”
Taking into account the epigraphical evidences, it may not be wrong to think that the ¡gama makes here an allusion to the temple of Mukte¿vara on the bank of Tu´gabhadr¡.
When Muktaj¢yar left this mundane world to enjoy the pleasures of the world of áiva, a áaiva saint named áivadeva residing at ár¢parvata (ár¢¿ailam in Ëndhra), under the orders of Lord áiva, entered MuktikÀetra in 1225 A.D. and occupied the pontifical seat. Having led a long, pious life he was united with Mukte¿vara at a date between 1265 and 1288. At the latter date a record calls the deity Siddha¿ivadeva, commemorating the name of the saint. As his influence grew, the place came also to be known as áivadeva pura. From the date of 1262, in the inscriptions, the names of MuktikÀetra and áivadevapura begin to occur simultaneously.
It has been told that in its earlier days Gope was the name of Cau·ad¡napura. Whether it was “Gope” or “G°pe” is not known. “Cave, grotto” is the meaning of the former word, whereas the meaning of the latter is doubtful. The reading of the inscription No. II gives an idea that Gope was located somewhere in between the present villages of Cau·ad¡napura and Honnatti. So it is not wrong to say that Cau·ad¡napura is not the exact location of the ancient Gope.
According to the áivadevavijayak¡vya, the place was donated to Cau·ayya, a great devotee of áiva, by áivadeva pleased with his devotion; hence the name Cau·ayyad¡napura (dvit¢ya ¡¿v¡sa verse 109 ff., p. 54). This Cau·ayya belonged to the community of boatmen (ambiga). There is no document to give historical credit to this story. Cau·ad¡napura is the name in common use in modern times.

Today, Guttala is a small village in H¡v®ri t¡l£k but it played an important role in the early years of 12th century. Guttas were the rulers of Guttala. The first inscription to mention Gutta and D¡sa is the one which hails from the Ga½ag®¿vara temple at Ga½agan¡th and is dated 1080 A.D. (S.I.I. XVIII, No. 88). D¡sa was in the service of Cenna, a subordinate of Vikram¡ditya VI. In the same inscription a stray reference to Gutta occurs in l. 52.
A record speaking of Guttas and the family of D¡sa in more details is an undated inscription from Mukte¿vara temple at Cau·ad¡napura (No. I; S.I.I. XVIII, No. 112). While crediting the Guttas with the patronage of the temple at this place, it says that G°vindarasa was governing the region of Banav¡side¿a. Fleet has assigned the date of this inscription of Cau·ad¡napura to 1115 on the basis of other epigraphical statements that G°vindarasa administering Banav¡sid®¿a between 1110 and 1120 when king Vikram¡ditya VI adorned the C¡½ukya throne. Some modern historians fully agree with him. However there are other inscriptions dated right from 1101 A.D. which mention the name of the same G°vindarasa as governor of the same Banav¡sid®¿a, while king Vikram¡ditya VI was on the throne. It is probable that the king might have created the principality of Guttava½al and put the Guttas in charge of its protection, perhaps after the events recorded in an inscription dated 1104 A.D (S.I.I. IX, pt. i No. 169).
There is some confusion with regard to the origin of the Gutta family. The name appears to be a Kanna·isation of “Gupta”, because the descendants of this family say that they belong to Gupta dynasty. At the same time, in the same inscription of Cau·ad¡napura No. 1 there is an allusion to the legendary king Vikram¡ditya who ruled from Ujjayin¢, who was blessed by the Goddess K¡l¢ and was familiar with ghosts and goblins. This confusion is due to the lapse of time and distance. Guptas were in the north and ruled from P¡¶aliputra from fifth to seventh centuries. The most powerful king of this dynasty was Candragupta Vikram¡ditya. For their namesake, confusion was created between the legendary king Vikram¡ditya devotee of God Mah¡k¡la and King Candragupta Vikram¡ditya of Gupta dynasty.

From an inscription dated 1124 we gather that the Gutta chieftains had control over the Be¸¸ev£ru 12, Be½ahuge 70 and Honnavarti 12 seignories. It also confirms the fact that the Guttas were descendants of Guptas of Central India (S.I.I. XVIII, No. 124). The Cau·ad¡napura inscription, being the first to be issued by the Guttas, there is some confusion about their descent, whereas there is no room for such doubts in the inscriptions of Hara½aha½½i and other places dated 1105 and after. This fact makes it clear that Cau·ad¡napura inscription was issued prior to 1105 A.D.
M¡gutta according to Cau·ad¡napura inscription, was the founder of the family. To him was born Gutta, a “tilaka” on the forehead of the family of Guttas. Like a jewel amongst the kings, his son Mallid®va was shining like a moon on the eastern ocean. J°ma I was the younger brother of Mallid®va. Vikram¡ditya I was the son of Mallid®va. J°yid®va or Jomma II and Gutta II were the two sons born to Vikram¡ditya I. With his queen Padmalad®vi Gutta II begot one son V¢ra Vikram¡ditya II and a daughter Vijayamah¡d®vi. Pa¶¶amah¡d®vi and S°valad®vi were two queens of Vikram¡ditya II. His sister Vijayamah¡devi was married to Si´gid®va of S¡ntali-ma¸·ala or Satta½ige which is identical with modern S¡t®naha½½i. Vikram¡ditya II had three children namely Gutta III, J°yi or Jomma III, Vikram¡ditya III and a daughter called Tu½uvalad®vi. She was married to Ball¡½a son of Si´gid®va of SaÆta½imaÆ·ala. Vikram¡ditya IV, Gutta IV, Hiriyad®va and Joyid®va IV were the four progenies of Vikram¡ditya III. After Vikram¡ditya V son of J°yid®va IV the name of Guttas is heard no longer. Nothing is known as to what happened to the family.
Close matrimonial alliances of Guttas with the vassal Ja¶¡ C°½a family, with the chieftains of Ra¶¶iha½½i and S¡t®naha½½i are revealed from epigraphs. S°valad®vi, wife of Vikram¡ditya II, was the daughter of Vijayap¡¸·ya of the Ra¶¶iha½½i royal family. La½iy¡d®vi, one of the princesses of Guttas was married to a Ra¶¶iha½½i chieftain. The influence of these happy alliances is reflected in the art and architecture of these regions. The temples at Ra¶¶ihalli, Cau·ad¡napura, S¡t®naha½½i and Hara½aha½½i make one unit. Probably one common architectural treatise or ¡gama must have been followed for the construction of these monuments.