Epigraphia Indica Vol 25

SR No.: 032579
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Sten Konow, F W Thomas
Publisher: Archaeological Survey of India
Publication Year: 1939
Total Pages: 448
Language: English
Classification: Book_English
File Size: 23 MB

Page 52

No. 6.) AMBASAMUDRAM INSCRIPTION OF SOLANRALAIKONDA VIRA-PANDYA. 37
As stated already, a solar eclipse occurred in the month of Mithuna in the 12th year of Vira-Pandya. In the period from A.D. 930 to 970, the only three years in which a solar eclipse occurred in Mithuna were
(1) A.D. 950, June 18 (Mithuna 26), Tuesday, (2) A.D. 959, June 9 (Mithuna 17), Thursday, and
(3) A.D. 960, May 28 (Mithuna 5), Monday. If the week-day on which the eclipse occurred or the nakshatra which was current on that day had been specified in the present record, it would have been possible to verify the exact date referred to; but in their absence we shall bave to select a plausible equivalent, only by a process of elimination.
If we suppose that A.D. 950 was the 12th year of Vira-Pandya's reign, it would give A.D. 957 as his final year, and as this will have corresponded to the 2nd year of Aditya, the Cbõla king's date of accession would be A.D. 956. This would yield the inconsistent results that Aditya killed him in A.D. 957, and that his predecessor Sundara-Chöļa defeated him in A.D. 963; so this date of accession for Aditya is not possible. Similarly, A.D. 960 which would yield A.D. 967 as the 20th year of Vira-Pāndya and the 2nd year of Aditya and A.D. 966 as Aditya's date of accession, may have also to be discarded, because in that case Aditya's reign which extended to the 5th year would overlap into the reign of his successor Uttama-Chöļa (accession A.D. 969-70), which is not possible, since, as stated already, Aditya II should have passed away before Uttama Chola could have succeeded him. On the other hand, if we take A.D. 959 as the 12th year of Vira-Pāņdya, his 20th year and Aditya's 2nd year would have corresponded to A.D. 966, giving A.D. 964-59 as Aditya's initial year. This date would satisfy the presumption that his fight with ViraPandya could have happened in about A.D. 966, which would be only a year later than the defeat of the Pandya ruler at Sundara-Chola's hands in about A.D. 964 before the 7th year of the latter's reign, and that a five-year rule for Aditya II could also be accounted for between A.D. 965 and 969. These results may be tabulated thus :Vira-Pāņdya's Vira-Pandya's 20th year Aditya's
Vira-Pandya's 12th year. = Aditya's 2nd year. accession.
accession.
966
950
957 956
938 959 966 965
947 960 967
948 Of these three dates, No. 2 may therefore be considered as the best suited for the record under review, and it would yield A. D. 947 to 966 as the period of reign of Vira-Pāņdya. His position in the Pandyan genealogy may be taken to be between Räjasimha', wbo was defeated by Parantaka I before A.D. 922, and Amarabhujanga', whom Rājarāja claims to have conquered.
The Pandya king himself claims to have taken the head of a Cboļa, as evidenced by the title Solan-ralai-konda assumed by him from the 6th year onwards (i.e., fron. A.D. 953-54). Who
1 As there is only one record of the 15+5th year, it has been inferred that he died in the beginning of that regnal year.
* Three records of Aditya II from Udaiyārgudi in the South Arcot District furnish astronomical details which would approximately take the date of his accession to the end of A.D. 963. This point requires further examinstion in the light of future discoveries.
Udsyêndiram plates of Prithivipati II (8. I.I., Vol. II, p. 387).
*8.1.1., Vol. III, p. 387, where he is taken to be a Pandya king. We have no means of determining this at present.
No. 163 of the Madras Epigraphical collection for 1894.