South Indian Inscriptions

EPIGRAPHIA INDICA

varman.^[1] It thus appears extremely doubtful if there could have been any interval between the date of Nandivarman Pallavamalla^[2] and the accession of Dantivikramavarman.

There is, however, no reason to suppose that the Gaṅga-Pallavas annexed the entire dominions of the ancient Pallavas already during the reign of the first king Dantivikrama. It looks as if the expansion of the former was gradual and reached its highest point during the reign of the last king Nṛipatuṅga.^[3] We may therefore conclude that the Dantivarma-Mahâraja of the subjoined inscription, who could not be a Gaṅga-Pallava, belonged to the family of the original Pallavas of Conjeeveram, who seem to have continued in some form or other down to a very late period,^[4] and that he reigned as an independent king in a portion of the ancient Pallava dominions before they were completely occupied by the Gaṅga-Pallavas.

At Uttaramallûr in the Chingleput district are two inscriptions, one dated in the 7th year of the reign of Dantivarman,^[5] and the other in the 9th year of Dantippôttaraśar.^[6] The former records that a certain Brâhmaṇa purchased land for building a tank, and the latter registers an endowment for the removal of silt the tank called Vayiramêga-taṭâka at Uttaramallûr It is just possible that Dantivarman is only the Sanskṛit name of the Pallava king Dantippôttaraśar, and that the tank referred to in both of these inscriptions is the same. Even if this surmise should not prove correct, the fact that the earliest Uttaramallûr inscription mentioning the Vayiramêga-taṭâka belongs to time of the Pallava king Dantippôttaraśar may be taken─ at least provisionally─ to show that the tank probably came into existence during his time, and that its name was derived from Vayiramêga,^[7] one of his birudas.

If the foregoing inferences are confirmed by future researches, they would establish that the Pallava king Dantippôttaraśar (or Dantivarman) bore the title Vayiramêga. We have at present no materials to decide if this Dantippôttaraśar is identical with the Dantivarma-Mahârâja of the Triplicane inscription, though the similarity of the names and the undisputed Pallava origin of both are in favour of the identity. The Vaishṇava saint Tirumaṅgai-Âlvâr refers to a king of the Toṇḍaiyar (i.e. a Pallava king) named Vayiramêgan.^[8] Another unnamed Pallava king is mentioned by the same saint as the founder of the Triplicane temple, as I have already pointed out.^[9] In the hymn dedicated to Paramêśvara-Viṇṇagaram (i.e. the Vaikuṇṭha-Perumâḷ temple) at Conjeeveram,^[10] reference is made by the same saint to several battle fought by an unnamed Pallava king. These three Pallava kings appear to be distinct.^[11]
__________________________________________________________

^[1] Above, Vol. IV. p. 181, and Vol. V. p. 159. I think the possibility of Dantiga being the same as the Dantivarman of our inscription is not altogether excluded.
^[2] The latest known record of his reign is dated in his 50th year ; above, Vol. IV. p. 137, and Vol. V. p. 157, note 7.
^[3] This may be concluded from the fact that Nṛipatuṅga’s inscriptions are found over a larger extent of country than those of the other two ; see the Annual Report on Epigraphy for 1903-04, paragraph 13.
^[4] We hear of a queen named Mârambâvai of a certain Nandippôttaraiyan, who belonged to the Pallavatilaka family. This queen appears to have been living at the time of the early Chôḷa king Râjakêsarivarman ; Annual Report on Epigraphy for 1900-01, paragraph 10, and above, Vol. VI. p. 321. An inscription of Dantivarman, “ born in the Pallavatilaka family which rose from the Bhâradvâja gôtra,” has recently been discovered at Tiruveḷḷarai in the Trichinopoly district (No. 541 of the Government Epigraphist’s collection for 1905). Thus, along with the Gaṅga-Pallavas, the regular Pallavas seem to have continued in the Tamil country down to the Chôḷa conquest. The exact relationship which the latter bore to the original Pallavas of Conjeeveram is not known Perhaps the descendants or successors of the Dantivarma-Mahârâja of the Triplicane inscription (who bore the title Pallavakulatilaka) spoke of themselves as belonging to “ the family of Pallavatilaka ” in order to distinguish themselves from the Gaṅga-Pallavas.
^[5] No. 80of the Government Epigraphist’s collection for 1898.
^[6] No. 74 of the same collection.
^[7] This is the Tamil form of the Sanskṛit Vajramêgha.
^[8] Periyatirumoli, verse 180.
^[9] See page 290 above.
^[10] Compare South-Ind. Inscr. Vol. II. p. 344, note 3.
^[11] In verse 479 of the Periyatirumoli, the same saint refers to a Toṇḍai-mannavan, i.e. a Pallava king, who might be one of these three.