________________
No. 29]
NOTE ON WADAGERI INSCRIPTION OF CHALUKYA V. S. 1
reasonable and correct to believe that Vikramaditya VI was crowned and started an era of his own on the 9th March of 1076 A.D. as assumed by Fleet and Kielhorn'. But, as we have seen, Fleet's main contention, in which he is in agreement with Kielhorn, is that, although Vikramaditya VI ruled for the last few weeks of the year Nala, that year was counted as coinciding with his first regnal year and the first year of the Chalukya Vikrama era. This is not as unreasonable as Mr. Desai thinks it to be. Mr. Desai's contention that 'the king's coronation and the formal inauguration of reign as well as the commencement of the new era must all be identical' is absolutely untenable. His other contention that 'if Somesvara ceased to reign sometime after the above date of the Nidgundi inscription in the year Nala, the next probable date for the accession of Vikramāditya would be Saka 999, Pingala Chaitra su. 1, is equally unwarranted in view of the unmistakable indication of the date of the Waḍageri inscription. Indeed Mr. Desai has not noticed that the evidence of the Waḍageri inscription in respect of the beginning of the Chalukya Vikrama era is strongly supported by the Maṭṭikōte inscription published in the Epigraphia Carnatica, Vol. VII, 1902, Shikarpur, No. 292. The date portion of this record has been read as: śrimach-ChalukyaVikrama-varshadu prathamaneya Nala-samvatsarada Pushya-ba 3 Soma-vāram Uttarayanasamkrānti-parvva-nimittadim, i.e. Chalukya Vikrama year 1, Nala, Pushya-badi 3, Monday. Although the given tithi and week-day do not tally, the inscription shows beyond doubt that the Chalukya Vikrama era started before the end of the month of Pushya in the year Nala. There is possibly no way of transferring the month of Pushya of the year Nala to the next year Pingala.
But there is evidence to show that the year Nala began to be counted as the first year of the Chalukya Vikrama era much earlier than Pushya-badi 3. The Kuruva insoription, published in the same volume of the Epigraphia Carnatica (Honnali, No. 14), refers to the reign of Tribhuvanamalladēva (Vikramaditya VI) and quotes the date as Chalukya-Vikrama-kala 1 neya Nalasamvatsarada Chaitra-suddha 5 mi Adi-väradamdu, i.e. Chalukya Vikrama year 1, Nala, Chaitra-sudi 5, Sunday (irregular). Thus it appears that, although Vikramaditya VI received his formal coronation about the end of the year Nala and Someévara II was reigning in August-September of the same year, the Chalukya Virkama era actually began to be counted from about the very beginning of the year.
195
Mr. Desai refers to the Hyderabad Museum inscription dated in the first year of the Chalukya Vikrama era, Pingala, Śravaņa full-moon day, Sunday, lunar eclipse (August 6, 1077 A.D.) and thinks that his view regarding the accession of Vikramaditya VI on Chaitra sudi 1 of the year Pingala is supported by it. But, at the same time, he himself points out that the Yövür inscription (B) quotes the same date but mentions Pingala as the second year of the Chalukya Vikrama era and that the mention of Pingala as the second year of the era is also noticed in other records. The large number of inscriptions dated in the era and suggesting Nala as its first year would also make Pingala its second year. The Hyderabad Museum inscription mentioning Pingala as the first year of the Chalukya Vikrama era therefore neither adds much to our knowledge nor does it solve the problem.
Mr. Desai divides the records dated in the Chalukya Vikrama era into four groups according as they suggest its first year to be Rakshasa (1075-76 A.D.), Nala or Anala (1076-77 A.D.), Pingala
1 Op. cit., p 10.
Op. cit., p. 9.
Loc. cit.
Ibid., pp. 11-12.
Above Vol. XII, pp. 271 ff.
Kielhorn's Southern List, Nos. 185 .
