________________
EPIGRAPHIA INDICA.
[Vol. X
77.- In the Saumyanāthasvāmin temple at Nandalur,
2 Svasti śri (11) Ko-Chchadavarmmar=ana Tribhavanachchakrava[r]ttigal sri-Sundara
Påndyadavaku yandı 17Avad-ana Nanda(pa)-samvatsarattu Mina-navarru pū[rvval
pakshattu pañohamiyam Sani-kkilamaiyum porra Roh[iņi). 3 ni!.
"In the (cyclie) year Nandana, which was the 17th year of the reign) of king JaţAvarman alias the emperor of the three worlds, the glorious Bundara-Pāņdyadēva,on the day of Rohini, which corresponded to a Saturday and to the fifth tithi of the first fortnight of the month of Mina."
As in the last case, this year must be either 1232-33 or 1292-93 A.D. For the first it is irregular, for though the nakshatra is correct, the 5th tithi in question fell that year on a Thursday,
For the second, the date is perfectly regular. In A, D. 1292-93 the 5th titki of the first fortnight of luni-solar Chaitra fell on Saturday, the 20th day of solar Mina, which corresponded with March 14th, A.D. 1293. This 5th tithi ended 14 h. 18 m. after sunrise. The nakshatra was Rohipi throughout the tithi by all the systems.
The corresponding date is therefore Saturday, March 14, 1293 A.D., and the inscription belongs to the reign of Jatavarman Sandara-Pandya II. It was four days earlier than the last inscription. It fires the king's accession on or after March 15, A.D. 1276.
78.- In the Rajasimhēsvara temple at Sinnamapur.' 1 Svasti eri [6] Kor=Cbaďapagmar=āņa Tribhuvanachcha(kra) vattiga! sri-Sundara
[På]adiyadavaka [y]a du 7vada Magara-[D]ayatru parva-pakshattu mūpfân-di
[ya]diyum Veļļi-kki[la]maiyum perra Mrigasirisha (firsha)ttu nåļ.
" In the 7th year of the reign) of king Jaţăvarman alias the emperor of the three worlds, the glorious Sundara-Pāņdyadēva,-on the day of Mrigasirsha, which corresponded to a Friday and to the third solar day of the first fortnight of the month of Makara."
This date is irregalar, for the reign of either of the two known Jaţăvarman SandaraPandyas. I have tried the years 1256, 1257, 1258, 1281, 1282, 1283, which might possibly coincide with, or approximate to, the 7th regnal year of either of those kings, without success. Some element of the inscription appears to be wrong, either in the original or in the copy 3
The exact date of Jaţăvarman Sandara-Pandya II.'s accession is still doubtful, and must for the present remain so. The following avalysis, however, may be found usefal. To the list published by Kielhorn in Vol. IX. p. 228 of dates previously examined I now add four more, vis. Nos. 74, 75, 76, 77, above. The tested dates of J. Sundara II, are now fourteen in number.
of these K. 264 must be discarded. The wording of the date is "intrinsically wrong." K. 53 is doubtful because the regnal year is not clear in the injured original. It appears to be either " 11th" or " 19th." Working for a possible 19th year, Professor Kielhorn found the date regular for November 10th, A.D. 1294, but is not fully convinced that this conclusion is correct. I find myself equally unconviuced, because that date seems too late for this king
No.594 of the Madroa Epigraphical collection for 1907. * No. 434 of the same collection.
. Mr. Venksyys has examined the original with reference to my remarks and states that there is no doubt about the date. I have again gone through my calculations and can only confirm the remarks made in the text; the original is at fault. Indeed in 500 years I find no date for wbich the Riven details are satisfactory.
• "K" stands for the dates published by the late Professor Kielhorn,
