South Indian Inscriptions

EPIGRAPHIA INDICA

27.─In the Iḷamiśvara temple at Târamaṅgalam.^[1]

1 Svasti śrî [||*] Kôr=Chaḍapanmar=âna Tiribuvanachchakkaravattigaḷ śrî-Śundara- Pâṇḍiyadêvarku yâṇḍu padinâlâvadukk=edirâvadu Ṛishabha-nâyarru [pû] . . …………[Tiṅ]gaṭ-kilamaiyum perra Pûśattu nâḷ.

“ (In the year) opposite to the fourteenth year (of the reign) of king Jaṭâvarman alias the emperor of the three worlds, the glorious Sundara-Pâṇḍyadêva,─ on the day of Pushya, which corresponded to a Monday,…[of the first fortnight] of the month of Ṛishabha.”

Judging by the dates Nos. 25 and 26, this date, which is of the year opposite to the 14th, i.e. of the 15th year, of the king’s reign, would in the first instance be expected to fall in A.D. 1290. Though the number of the tithi is broken away or illegible, the fact that on the tithi in question during the month of Ṛishabha the nakshatra was Pushya, permits us to conjecture that the tithi was approximately the fifth tithi of the bright half of the month Jyaishṭha, of perhaps the seventh tithi of the bright half of the month Vaiśâkha. Now the year A.D. 1290 does contain a day which satisfies all the requirements of the date, and which I therefore take to be its proper equivalent. It is Monday, the 15th May A.D. 1290, which was the 20th day of the month of Ṛishabha, and on which [the 5th tithi] of the bright half (of the month Jyaishṭha) ended 4 h. 24 m., and the nakshatra was Pushya by the equal space system and according to Garga for 0 h. 39 m., after mean sunrise (and somewhat longer after true sunrise).

If this date were one of the reign of Jaṭâvarman Sundara-Pâṇḍya I., it would be expected to fall in A.D. 1265 or 1266. In A.D. 1265 the month of Ṛishabha contained no Monday on which the nakshtra was Pushya. In A.D. 1266, during the month of Ṛishabha, the nakshatra was Pushya from 5 h. 16 m. after mean sunrise of Monday, the 10th May ; but the 10th May A.D. 1266 would have belonged to the 16th, not the 15th, year of the reign of Jaṭâvarman Sundara-Pâṇḍya I.

The difficulty presented by the five dates Nos. 23-27 is this that, while according to the three dates Nos. 25-27 the reign of Jaṭâvarman Sundara-P:âṇḍya II. would have commenced between approximately the 13th September A.D. 1275 and the 15th May A.D. 1276, by the two dates Nos. 23 and 24, which are both of the 13th year, it could not have commenced before approximately the 6th August A.D. 1276. I can reconcile this discrepancy only by the assumption that in the dates Nos. 23 and 24 the 13th year has been wrongly quoted instead of ‘ the year opposite to the 13th,’ i.e. the 14th year, an assumption which would make the king’s reign commence between (approximately) the 13th September A.D. 1275 and the 15th May A.D. 1276, as suggested by the dates Nos. 25-27.

G.─MARAVARMAN KULASEKHARA II.

28.─In the Nellaiyappar temple at Tînnevelly.^[2]

1 …… Śrî-kô M[â]rapanmar=âna [Tr]ibhuvanachchakravattigaḷ śrî- Kulaśêgaradêvarkku yâṇḍu eṭṭâvadu Vṛiśchika-nâyarru=ppadinêlân=
2 [diyadiyu]m [apara]-cha(pa)kshatta(ttu) navamiyum [Śa]n[i]-kkilamaiyum pe[r]ra Uttirattu nâḷ.

“ In the eighth year (of the reign) of the glorious king Mâravarman alias the emperor of the three worlds, the glorious Kulaśêkharadêva,─ on the day of Uttara-Phalgunî, which corresponded to a Saturday, and to the ninth tithi of the second fortnight, and to the seventeenth solar day of the month of Vṛiśchika.”

__________________________________
^[1] No. 23 of the Government Epigraphist’s collection for 1900.
^[2] No. 122 of the Government Epigraphist’s collection for 1894.