________________
EPIGRAPHIA INDICA.
[Vol. XXV.
No. 322/23. Püvinkilatti. 13+13th year, Karkataka 25, ba. 10, Tuesday, Kārttigais A.D. 1215, July 21, Tuesday. The tithi ba. 10 commenced at :97 of the day and the Nakshatra Kärttigai ended at 86 of day.
The Large Tiruppūvaņam plates. Pūvinkilatti. 13+12th year, Dhanus 4, ba. 11, Saturday, Svāti. Saturday, 29th November, A.D. 1214. (Kielhorn's Southern List, No. 890.)
In the above, it will be noted (i) that the particulars of date furnished in the Palalamadandai collection do not work out correctly for Jaţăvarman Kulasēkhara I whose reign commenced in A.D. 1190, (ii) that the two dated inscriptions of Pütalaranitai group examined so far work out correctly for Jatīvarman Kulasēkhara II who began his reign in A.D. 1237, and are incorrect for Kulasēkhara I whose accession fell in A.D. 1190, and (ii) that all the dated inscriptions in the Püvinkilatti group have correct equivalents for the king with the initial year 1190. Apparently under the belief that the three different introductions belonged to one king, i.e., Jatāvarman Kulasēkhara I, the Epigraphist informed the calculator that the introduction of No. 370 (Pütalavanitai) is that of Jatavarman Kulasēkhara I. Having considered this information also, the late Swamikannu Pillai noted that the day of the solar month-which is a characteristic indicationpoints only to the later reign, i.e., Jațăvarman Kulasēkhara II of A.D. 1237. Thus, the evidence of the astronomical details leaves no doubt as to the introduction Pütalavanitai being one of Jatavarman Kulasēkhara II, and is positively against the earlier king whose accession fell in A.D. 1190 and who had the introduction Püvinkilatti. The late Swamikannu Pillai's calculations and our finding that the records of Jaţăvarman Kulasekhara with the introduction Pütalavanitai belong to a later reign is still further supported by two other inscriptions as we shall presently show. In the latter part of a Putalavanitai record of Tenkarai whose text is given in the SouthIndian Inscriptions, Volume V, No. 301, are given the details 2nd year, Tula, ba. 6, Thursday, Mrigaśīrshā. For Jaţăvarman Kulasēkhara I, whose accession took place between 8th April and 29th November, A.D. 1190, we cannot find a suitable date answering to these details in A.D. 1191 or 1192 which were respectively the current and expired 2nd year of his reign. But for Jațāvarman Kulaśēkhara II, whose reign commenced between 24th July and 16th December, A.D. 1237, and whose 2nd year fell in A.D. 1238, the details work out correctly. In A.D. 1238, Tulā, ba. 6 ended at .90 and Nakshatra Mpigaśīrshā at,35 of day on Thursday, September 30. Like the two records calculated by Swamikannu Pillai, this one also proves that the introduction Pūtalavanitai belongs to Jatāvarman Kulasēkhara II and not to the first of that name. The other inscription which supports our finding is part of a triple record with Pütalavanitai introduction and is dated in the 3+7th year of reign and mentions Vikrama-Choļa. VikramaChõļa figuring herein could be no other than the Kongu Chola prince, who, a few years later, ascended the throne in A.D. 1255. That princes of other dynasties who were related to the Pandyas were staying with and serving the Pandya kings before the time of their own accession is amply borne out by some of the inscriptions noticed in this paper.
It remains now to determine to which other Jațāvarman Kulasēkhara the introduction Pütalamadandai belonged. An inscription from Tirupputtür in the Ramnad District of Tribhuvanachakravartin Kulaśēkharadeva without the title Māravarman or Jaţăvarman, is dated in the year opposite the fourth and furnishes astronomical details-Karkataka 27, Rõhiņi, Satur. day. This date was calculated by the late Swamikannu Pillai and found to agree correctly with A.D. 1166, 23rd July, Saturday. From the method of dating of the record alone, it may be said that it is one belonging to the reign of Jaţăvarman Kulasekhara with Putalamadandai introduction for, as had been observed by me already, the inscriptions of his reign had that characteristic
Nos. 672 to 674 of the Madras Epigraphical Collection for 1916. * Indian Ephemeris, Part II of Vol. I, pp. 87-88.
