________________
DATES OF PANDYA KINGS.
133
No. 12.]
are not satisfactory; still I thought it advisable to state what they are since they may be useful either for further consideration of historical questions involved by the inscriptions or for deciding the uselessness of the dates as being altogether wrong.
Nos. 90-94 enable us to fix the commencement of Jaṭavarman Vira-Pandya's reign, which has approximately been placed in 1310 A.D. by Mr. Krishna Sastri (Annual Report on Epigraphy for 1908-09, Part II, § 27). Four of these inscriptions quote, besides the details usually given in them, the corresponding solar day; thereby, as stated by Prof. Kielhorn (above, Vol. VI. p. 301), we can find the precise equivalent, though the year is not stated in any era, the regnal year only being given. For, as a given solar day may be coupled with any of the thirty tithis and of the seven week-days, a given combination of these three items will, on the average, occur only once in 7x 30=210 years, and the chance will be still rarer if the nakshatra is mentioned, as is usually the case. In No. 89 the tithi is not given, but the combination of the remaining three items is such as will recur only once in about 150 years.
In order to solve the problems to which such dates give occasion, I have developed my tables (above, Vol. I) in detail for several centuries, and with their help the task became an easy one. These developed Tables will be published in book form in the Encyclopædia for IndoAryan Research. I shall there explain the method of solving the problem in question.
I now proceed to discuss the results of my examination of the dates in Nos. 90-94. They may be summarised as follows:
Jaṭavarman Vira-Pandya (September 29, December 1, A.D. 1295).
No. 90. 6th year: 28th September 1302.
No. 91. 22nd year: 3rd May 1318.
No. 92. 44th year: 2nd December 1339.
No. 93. 43 (Cor. 46)th year: 2nd August 1339.
No. 94. 46th year: 16th June 1342.
Nos. 90-92 show that the king must have commenced to reign between the 29th September and the 1st December 1295. With this date for the commencement of the reign No. 94 agrees if we read the regnal year as 46, as we may, since the second figure of 4[9] put in brackets in the transcript, may also be read 6 as stated in the note. In No. 93, the regnal year cannot be 46, since No. 92 is dated in the same year of our era. The date, 2nd August, shows that the 46th has wrongly been given instead of the 43rd.
year
According to No. 89 Tribhuvanachakravartin Kulasekhara seems to have begun reigning in 1379-80 A.D. I should, however, not place too much reliance on this result, before it has been corroborated by more inscriptions of the same king. For, if in our inscription the wrong nakshatra had been quoted, as is rather frequently the case in these records, the calculated equivalent would of course be also intrinsically wrong.
No. 84 fixes the beginning of the reign of a Tribhuvanachakravartin Sundara-Pāṇḍya in A.D. 1237-38.
MARAVARMAN SUNDARA-PANDYA I. (A.D. 1216-35). 81.-In the Tiruttalisvara temple at Tirupputtür.1 16 Svast[i] śri [... ..éri-ko-Mārupa [n]mar-apa Tiribu [va]nachchakkravattigal Souda valangiy-aruliya ri-Sundara-Paedi
2 yadevaku yanda 20 vadun(din) edirim-kodu [Ka]opi-nyagru apara-[pakabat][u] Viya[la]-kkilamaiyu[m] shashṭhiyum perra Püsattu pāļ.
1 No. 129 of the Madras Epigraphical collection for 1908.
