South Indian Inscriptions

EPIGRAPHIA INDICA

“ On Monday, the nakshatra being Svâti, during the Kâlâshṭamî (tithi) of the month of Âshâḍha in the Îśvara year (which was) the 959th Śaka year,─ in the twenty-sixth year (of the reign) of the glorious Muḍigoṇḍa-Gaṅgegoṇḍa-Râjêndra-Chôḷadêva.”

The Jovian year Îśvara by the southern luni-solar system was Śaka-Saṁvat 959 as an expired year (=A.D. 1037-38). Kâl-âshṭamî is a name of the 8th tithi of the dark half. As this tithi, in the month of Âshâḍha, can under no circumstances be joined with Svâti (the 15th nakshatra), the given date cannot be correct.

As a matter of fact, the 8th tithi of the dark half of Âshâḍha of Śaka-Saṁvat 959 expired ended 17 h. 34 m. after mean sunrise of Friday, the 8th July A.D. 1037, when the nakshatras were Aśvinî and Bharaṇî (the first and second nakshatras). And the 8th tithi of the dark half cannot have been quoted erroneously instead of the 8th tithi of the bright half (on which in Âshâḍha the nakshatra may be Svâti), because in the given Śaka year the 8th tithi of the bright half of Âshâḍha ended on a Thursday (the 23rd June A.D. 1037), not on a Monday. I have calculated the date also for other months of the given year, but without any satisfactory results.

Giving up this date as hopelessly wrong, we have still to consider what data are furnished by the two preceding dates for ascertaining the time of the commencement of the reign of Râjêndra-Chôḷa I. By No. 32 the 7th July A.D. 1020 fell in the ninth year, and by No. 33 the 25th November A.D. 1033 in the twenty-second year of the king’s reign. Accordingly (approximately) the 7th July A.D. 1012 and the 25th November A.D. 1012 must have fallen in the first year ; and the reign of Râjêndra-Chôḷa I., according to the two new dates, therefore undoubtedly must have commenced some time between (approximately) the 26th November A.D. 1011 and the 7th July A.D. 1012.

I have previously (above, Vol. IV. p. 266) stated that the king’s reign commenced between the 24th October A.D. 1001 and the 23rd October A.D. 1002. That statement necessarily was based solely on the date No. 5 (ibid. p. 69), which corresponds to the 23rd October A.D. 1032, and which, according to the actual reading of the date, is of the 31st year of the reign of Râjêndra-Chôḷa I. With the new dates before me, in which the numbers of the regnal years are given in words, I feel sure that the number 31 in the date No. 5 has been put erroneously for 21, and that the 23rd October A.D. 1032 really fell in the 21st year of the king’s reign, which would agree with the new result. This result would also tend to shew that in the incorrect date No. 34 the Śaka year (959 expired), at any rate, is given correctly.

B.─ RAJADHIRAJA.
35.─ On a stone in front of the Mâri temple at Koḷagâla.^[1]

1 Srî-Râjâdhirâjadêva[r*]gg=iyâṇḍu [35]-^[2]
2 âvadu [Sa]kha-va[ri]śaṁ^[3] 975[ne]-
3 ya ^[4Vijayôśchaiva-saṁvatsara[da]
4 Jêshṭa-mâsada sukla-pakshada tra[yô*]-
5 dasî Âdityavârad=andu.

_____________________________________________________________
^[1] Mr. Rice’s Ep. Carn. Vol. IV. Hg. 114.
^[2] The two figures of the date are damaged, but cannot be read otherwise. Mr. Rice reads yâṇḍugeṁṭâvadu. From this erroneous reading he further concludes that Râjâdhirâja’s regnal years were reckoned in two different ways ; see Ep. Carn. Vol. IV. p. 13 of Introduction.
^[3] Read Śaka-varshaṁ.
^[4] This curious form is derived from certain versus memorials (Madras Journal of Literature and Science for 1881, p. 276), in which the year Vijaya is introduced by the words Vijayaś=ch=aiva. Compare the two similar terms Pramôdûta and Pramâdîcha ; South-Ind. Inscr. Vol. I. p. 109, note 2.