|
The Indian Analyst
|
|
South Indian Inscriptions |
EPIGRAPHIA INDICA TELUGU CHOLA RECORDS FROM ANANTAPUR AND CUDDAPAH and his son Siṁhavishṇu, the earliest known members of the Chōla family, bore the names of their Pallava contemporaries, Nandivarman and Siṁhavishṇu who were ruling in the 6th century A.D. and of whom they were evidently feudatories. Accordingly, Nandivarman-Chōla must be taken to have been ruling in c. 550 A.D. and this date affords a workable basis for the calculation of the dates of his successors and it is found that the results so obtained accord well with the facts of contemporary history. Thus we find the Telugu Chōla Mahēndravikrama I Chōlamahārāja, the grandson of Nandivarman, adopting the name of the Pallava Mahēndra I of whom he was evidently a contemporary. The available records of Chōla Mahēndravikrama I, bearing evidence of his activities, enable us to state that he was in close connection with both the Pallava monarchs, Siṁhavishṇu and Mahēndra I. That he was also associated with Siṁhavishṇu may be accepted for a fact for, as recorded in the Mālēpāḍu plates of his son Puṇyakumāra, he gets the title ‘ Lord of Chēra, Chōḷa and Pāṇḍya countries ’ which Siṁhavishṇu of the Pallavas is said to have conquered[1]. It is probable that the Chōla took part in the campaigns of the Pallava in the southern regions.
Similarly, Guṇamudita and Puṇyakumāra bear some of the surnames of Pallava Mahēndra I indicating that they were all contemporaries. The name Guṇamudita is, doubtless, modelled on that of Guṇabhara, a surname of the Pallava king. Again, the epithets Marunrapiḍugu (or Mārpiḍugu), Madanavilāsa and Madamudituṇḍu of Puṇyakumāra can be traced to similar titles, Pagāppiḍugu and Mattavilāsa of the Pallava king. If he is treated as a contemporary of Mahēndra I, Pallava, whose latest date has been placed at A.D. 630, the year in which his son Narasiṁhavarman I is known to have come to the throne[2], his date would fall about A.D. 625[3] and this date is also arrived at by calculating the generations from Nandivarman-Chōla (c. 550 A.D.). Confirmation of the above dating is afforded by the inscriptions of Puṇyakumāra[4]. Of this king three inscriptions have been edited above (viz., inss. E, F and G) of which the second (ins. F) viz., the Tippalūr inscription, bears a striking palaeographical resemblance to the Vallam rock inscription of Mahēndra I, Pallava, on the basis of which it might be stated that Puṇyakumāra and Mahēndra could not have been removed from each other in date by more than a generation. Another factor supporting the above scheme of chronology is that these dates can also be obtained by working independently from other starting points, of which, the Madras Museum plates of Śrīkaṇṭha is one. Professor Kielhorn who compared the palaeography of these plates with those of the Masulipatam plates of Vijayāditya III (A.D. 854-897) was of the opinion that they may be assigned to the same period.[5] It is found that nearly the same date for Śrīkaṇṭha is arrived at by counting the generations from the time of Puṇyakumāra. _________________________
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| > |
|
>
|
