________________
THE INDIAN ANTIQUARY
[OCTOBER, 1912.
If we identify the Chôla king of Divyasûricharita with Adhirêjêndradeva, we can easily reconstruct from this story the real history of Adhirajendra's death. In his Ancient India, Mr. Krishnaswami Aiyangar identifies the Chôla opponent of Râmânuja with Kulôttungachôla I, otherwise called Rajendrachôla II. But according to Guruparamparaprabhava, the Tirunârâyanapura temple was built in the cyclic year Bahudhânya, Thursday, the 14th day of Makaramâsa with Pushya-nakshatra, but the Saka year corresponding to this is stated to have been subsequent to Saka 1012,60 Hence it must have been either Saka 1020 or A. D. 1098. 1098 was the 28th regnal year of Kulôttungachôla I, alias Rajendrachôla II. Diryasûricharita states that the temple of Tiranarayanapuram or Mêlkota was built after the death of Krimikantha. If we identify Krimikantha with Kulôttunga the temple must have been built after 1119, the latest known date of Kulôttunga 1.70 The year Bahudhânya subsequent to A. D. 1119 is 1158. But Râmânuja, the founder of Tirunârâyanapuram temple, died in Saka 1059 or A. D. 1137,71 Therefore Kulôttunga cannot be Krimikantha. If Krimikantha or the Chôla king of Divyasûricharita is identical with Adhirâjêndra there is no difficulty. Moreover the expressions tadvamsakshaya karanaya and Chiléiánvayavasudhadhi patyamudram | adyádám in Divyasûricharita clearly state that a family ended with the royal opponent of Râmânuja. Kulôtt unga I is the founder of the new Chalukya-Chôla dynasty whose descendants ruled the Tamil country for more than five generations.73 This fact supports the identification of Krimikantha with Adhirajêndrachōladêva with whom the original Chôla family ended.
224
In Mysore Archaelogical Survey Report for 1907-8, the account of Râmânuja's visit to Tiranarayanapuram is stated to have been due to wrongly identifying Yâdavapura (Tonnur) with Tiranarayanapura, which is Yadavagiri; the date of erection of Tirunârayanapuram temple was interpreted to be that of Râmânuja's visit to Tondanûr or Tonnur, where Râmânuja met Vishnuvardhana, or Vitthala, and, according to Guruparamy araprabhava, converted him.' It is further written in the Report: "Either there must be some mistake about the date or we must suppose that Vishnuvardhana had also taken up his residence at Tonnur when his brother Ballâla I was on the throne" for "the year Bahudhânys, corresponding to A. D. 1099, does not fall within the reign of Vishnuvardhana."74 But Divy asûricharita clearly states that Râmânuja visited Srinarayanapura or Tirunârâyanapura and built the temple of Selvappillai or Sampadâtmaja. No mention is made of Vishnuvardhana's conversion in Topdan ûr in this work which, being contemporary evidence,75 is more authoritative than Guruparamparaprabhava and Rámânujûryadivyacharita. The two latter works often quote from Divyasûricharita. We cannot take, therefore, Vishnuvardhana's conversion by Râmânuja at Tonnur as a fact; but if his conversion is a fact, we shall have, then, to identify the former with a Vitthala who was ruling the district of Tirupati many years before Râmânuja's visit to Tirunarayanapuram, and who was seemingly converted by Râmânuja during his visit to Tirupati. The following verse of Divyasûricharita may be quoted in this connection:
प्राप्य श्रीपुरमुरेन्द्रलमूलालंकार पदनत विद्वलेन्द्र भूपात् ।
- लब्ध्वा सावकरमतिष्ठिपच्च तत्र
प्रख्यातांस्त्रिगुणशतं स्वशिष्य मुख्यान् ॥ D. S. C. XVIII, 22.
Ancient India, p. 150.
See Guruparamparaprabhava (Brie-Vaishnava-Grantha-Mudrapaka-Sabhi edition), p. 349.
Te South Ind. Ins., Vol. III., p. 131.
12 See pedigree of the Cholas in Ancient India.
14 Mysore A. 8. Report for 1907-8, pp. 9 and 10.
Guruparamparaprabhava, r 38
13 Guru paramparaprabhava, p. 340.
18 See Divyasaricharita, canto XVII, v. 87.
