Instead they are generally shown as one combined list, even in instances in which the correct family tree with two lines of rulers is also included.
If the king list in Pillai is compared to the lists in A History of South India then it is easy to see how Pillai's order holds up, even with two simultaneous lines of kings, but this is something that is easy to miss.
This individual was called 'ko', or 'kon', or 'kadumko' (meaning 'great king'), and these kings were generally known by their titles, which were based on personal peculiarity, a singular habit, or an important achievement.
A consensus has been established by Stephen Barr between multiple sources of information on the early Chera kings (called the Barr List here for reasons of simplicity).
As well as the problem of showing two lines of kings who ruled simultaneously, it seems possible that some of the differences among the several lists found online may be due to the many aliases that these kings often had (whether contemporaneously or later).
Vedic influence seemed to have been minimal before the advent of Brahmanism.
The Cheras had no particular religion - even the caste system was absent from their society - but ancestral worship was popular.
An early king that does precede these, however, probably did exist - Vanavaramban of circa 430 BC.
This is assumed because the early Chera leaders called themselves the Vanavar, or 'celestials' and it was common among Hindu dynasties to be called after the name of their founders (with just the same practice to be found in Germanic dynasties of post-Roman Europe).
Their core territory was in Kerala, while the later rise of the Pallavas pushed them out of Tamil Nadu.
However, they did establish a capital at Vanchi, which was known by the Romans as Muzris after an active sea-borne trade sprang up between the two powers.
Where sons are shown here, they may in fact be grandsons, or even further removed.