South Indian Inscriptions

EPIGRAPHIA INDICA

“ In the auspicious sixteenth year (of the reign) of the glorious king Vikrama-Chôḷadêva, …… in the month of Vaiśâkha, in the second fortnight, at the time known as Monday combined with an Uttarâ (nakshatra).”

The term Uttarâ of the date might denote any one of the three nakshatras Uttarâ Phalgunî, Uttarâ Ashâḍhâ, and Uttarâ Bhadrapadâ. As it occurs here in connection with the dark fortnight of Vaiśâkha, it must denote either Uttarâ Ashâḍhâ which is generally joined with the 5th tithi, or Uttarâ Bhadrapadâ which is generally joined with the 11th tithi of that dark fortnight. The calculation of the date shows that the nakshatra intended is really Uttarâshâḍhâ, and that the tithi of the date would be the 5th of the dark fortnight of Vaiśâkha.

I have previously^[1] arrived at the conclusion that the reign of Vikrama-Chôḷa commenced ‘ most probably ’ on the 18th July A.D. 1108. There remained just the possibility^[2] that it might have commenced on the 15th July A.D. 1111. If it commenced on the earlier date, the present date, of the month of Vaiśâkha of the 16th year of the king’s reign, ought to fall in A.D. 1124, in Śaka-Saṁvat 1046 expired ; and if it commenced on the later date, the present date ought to fall in A.D. 1127, in Śaka-Saṁvat 1049 expired. It so happens that the date would be quite correct for either Śaka year.

In Śaka-Saṁvat 1046 expired the 5th tithi of the dark fortnight of Vaiśâkha ended 14 h. 57 m. after mean sunrise of Monday, the 5th May A.D. 1124, when the nakshatra was Uttarâshâḍhâ, by the equal space system and according to Garga for 13 h. 8 m., and by the Brahma-siddhânta for 6 h. 34 m., after mean sunrise.

And in Śaka-Saṁvat 1049 expired the same tithi ended 19 h. 54 m. after mean sunrise of Monday, the 2nd May A.D. 1127, when the nakshatra was Uttarâshâḍhâ, by the equal space system and according to Garga for 23 h. 38 m., and by the Brahma-siddhânta for 17 h. 4 m., after mean sunrise.

There is absolutely nothing which could make us prefer one of these possible equivalents to the other, and it is only the following date, No. 42, which in my opinion definitely shown that the king’s reign commenced in A.D. 1108, and that the true equivalent of the present date therefore is Monday, the 5th May A.D. 1124.

42.─ In the Kêśavasvâmin temple at Chêbrôlu.^[3]

10 ….. śrîma[t*]-Tribh[u]-
11 vanachakravartti Vikrama-Chô-
12 ladêvara pravardda(rddha)mâna-vi-
13 jaya-râjya-saṁvatsaraṁbu-
14 lu 9 agun=ê[ṇṭi] Sa(śa)ka-[va]-
15 rushaṁbulu 1049 a-
16 gu Shla(pla)va-saṁvatsara Jêshṭa-4
17 mâsa sômagrahana(ṇa)-nimitya-
18 muna.

“ In the 9th year of the increasing reign of victory of the glorious emperor of the three worlds, Vikrama-Chôladêva, (and) in the Plava year which was the Śaka year 1049,─ on the occasion of an eclipse of the moon in the month of Jyaishṭha.”

In Saka-Saṁvat 1049 expired which was the year Plavaṅga─ not Plava, which would be Śaka-Saṁvat 1043 expired─ there was a lunar eclipse, visible in India just after sunset on the 27th May A.D. 1127, which was the full-moon day of Jyaishṭha. If the king commenced to reign on the 18th July A.D. 1108, this day would fall in the 19th, not the 9th year of his reign.

_______________________________________
^[1] See above, p. 24.
^[2] See above, Vol. IV. pp. 73 and 264.
^[3] No. 153 of the Government Epigraphist’s collection for 1897 ; see above, pp. 224, 226, and 227.
^[4] Read Jyêshṭha- or, more correctly, Jyaishṭha-.