South Indian Inscriptions

EPIGRAPHIA INDICA

late for his grandfather^[1] who has been identified^[2] with Varaguṇa (I) of the Larger Śinnamanūr grant^[3] and Jaṭila-Parāntaka Nēḍuñjaḍaiyan of the Vēḷvikkuḍi plates^[4] and for whom the Ānaimalai records offer the date Kali 3871 (expired)=A. D. 770.

With regard to the date of our record, the first thing to be borne in mind is that the Śaka year quoted, viz. 792, was expired (pōndana). Thus Varaguṇa’s eighth regnal year is coupled with Śaka 793 current (between March 870 A.D. and March 871 A. D.). He therefore ascended the throne sometime between March 862 and March 864 A.D. and not exactly between March 862 A.D. and March 863 A.D. as has generally been believed.^[5] The view assigning the king’s accession to 861-62 A. D. overlooks the expression pōndana.^[6] Secondly, the eighth regnal year of the record should better be taken as current rather than expired. For the first regnal year of a king is likely to be counted from the first day of his accession and not from the date of the expiry of the first year.^[7] But those who regard the Śaka year 792 of our record as current and at the same time the regnal year 8 as expired predate the king’s accession by two years.^[8] Our record seems to necessitate a reconsideration of the dates suggested for the records from Tiruveḷḷarai,^[9] Lālguḍi^[10] and Javantināthapuram,^[11] all of which are dated in the 4+9th regnal year of Varaguṇa who has been identified with Varaguṇa I by some but with Varaguṇa II by others.

TEXT^[12]

1 Śakara=yāṇḍu elu-nūrru=ttoṇṇūrr=iraṇḍu
2 pōndana Varaguṇarku yāṇḍu eṭṭu Guṇāvīra-kku-
3 ravaḍigaḷ-māṇākka[r] Kālattu Śāntivīrak-
4 kuravar Tiruvayirai Pōriśva(Pārśva)-pa(bha)ṭāraraiyum=iyak-
5 ki-avvaigaḷaiyum pudukki iraṇḍukku=muṭ-
6 ṭā=vaviyum=ōr=aḍigaḷukku śōrāga^[13] amaitta po-
7 n ai-nnūrr=aindu kāṇam^[14] [||*]

_________________________________________________

^[1] Above, Vol. VIII, p. 319.
^[2] Sastri, The Pāṇḍyan Kingdom, pp. 39-44. The identification seems to be corroborated by the Perumbūḷḷi inscription of Varaguṇa II (above, p. 271).
^[3] SII., Vol. III, pp. 451 ff.
^[5] A. R. Ep., 1906, paragraph 25 ; above, Vol. VIII, p. 319 ; Vol. IX, p. 88. The actual date of the King’s accession, however, cannot be determined without further evidence.
^[6] Above Vol. XXVIII, p. 39. Our record does not presuppose ‘ that the quoted Śaka year 792 was the current year ’ (above, Vol. XI, p. 253) not does it give room for the doubt that it ‘ may be either current or expired ’ (QJMS, Vol. XLIII, p. 132).
^[7] Cf. JOR, Vol. IX, p. 217.
^[8] Above, Vol. XI, p. 253 ; QJMS, Vol. XLIII, p. 132.
^[9] Two dates have been suggested. The one is the 22nd November 874 A. D. (above, Vol. XI, p. 253 ; Vol. XXVIII, p. 38.) ; but it is doubtful (cf. QJMS, Vol. XLII, p. 127 ; Vol. XLIII, p. 138). The other date viz. 7th November, 824 A. D., has been suggested by ascribing the record to Varaguṇa I (above, Vol. XX, p. 51). This also seems to require a reconsideration if we assign the Ānaimalai inscription to that king.
^[10] The proposed date is the 6th December, 875 A. D. (loc. cit. ; above, Vol. XXVIII, p. 42) by taking the regnal year as expired.
^[11] The date suggested is the 5th December, 875 A.D. (above, Vol. XXVIII, p. 39).
^[12] From impressions.
^[13] Read śorum=āga.
^[14]I am indebted to Mr. K. G. Krishnan for some valuable suggestions in the preparation of this article.