________________
308
THE INDIAN ANTIQUARY
[DECEMBER, 1913.
the footsteps of Venkayya, who is the first to blunder in that manner in the construction of the history of the Srivaishnava Alvârs, and Achâryas.
The article is a fine specimen of working facts into preconceived theories and basing argument on ipse dixits. A wrong theory is tolerable, because, it is ever subjected to examination, while a wrong fact, if allowed to remain uncontradicted, is likely to prove mischievous in the hands of suheequent students of history, who, because this fact has remained unchallenged, would assume it to be true, and in their turn commit serious blunders. By repetition a wrong fact, even a wrong theory, acquires the statue of truth. No more glaring instance of this staternent could be quoted than the theory of the Ganga-Pallavas, which, when facts against it were placed before Prof. Haltzech, its author, was accepted by him to be in more tenable, but is still frantically hugged to the bosom by its supporters in India, i. e. by scholars like Messrs. Verkayya, Krishna Sastri and others. Trivandram.
T. A. GOPINATHA RAO.
was born in the Vaidya-kula in the town of Karavandapuram (Kalakkadu in the Tinnevelly District). He was remarkable for his sweet compositions and was also known on that account as Madhurakavi. Except in the matter of identity in the name Madhurakavi, there is nothing to prove that the Alvår, a Brahmana of Tirukkõlar, was the same as the Vaidya of Karavandapuram.
A curious dictum which finds favour with the official epigraphists of Madras is that he who mentions another must be a contemporaryof the former. The late Mr. Venkayya held that Tirumangai must be a contemporary of Nandi. varman Pallavamalla and Vayira mégan, because he praises thern as the benefactors of certain temples. Similarly, MAņikk vachaka, who mentions the name Varaguna in his work must be the latter's contemporary. If to-day someone writes the biography of another, say Mr. Vincent Smith of the life of Asoka, could he be called the contemporary of that Bauddha Emperor ?
The most egregions of all the blunders is con. tained in the stateinent : The proper names of Namma vår and Madharakavi suggest that the former must bave been the father of the latter. As Madhurakavi appears to have died at some time prior to A. D. 769-70, if Tirumangai was bis contemporary, there is every likelihood of the latter having lived in the reign of Nandivarman Pallavamalla,' (p. 217, f. n. 33). What are the proper names of the two Alvârs according to Mr. Subrahmanya Ayyar how does he claim to have identified the first as the father of the second ? Does he not know the former was a Brahman, while the latter is said to have been a person of the fourth caste? Wag not the birth of Namma vår unknown to Madhurakavi, and the latter, finding the south glowing with a divine light, traced his steps from Ayodhyâ to seek this light? If all this tradition is idle, I should object to onr friend utilising from the idle tales those portions which say that Nam. in] vår was called Karimêran, that he was a magistrate (?) of Alvár-Tirunagari, etc. Most certainly Madhurakavi, the Alvår, war not the father of Nammålvår. I would rather put it that the minister, Måran-K&ri, alias Madhura. kavi, was the father of Nammalvår, and the latter gave the name of his father to his disciple Madhurakavi, the Ålvår. In that case I am myself prepared to admit that Nammi var lived about the beginning of the 9th century of the Ohristian era. It is no wonder that Mr. Ayyar commits 80 many mistakes, because he follows only in
COINS OF AMRITA-PALA, RAJA OF BADAUN.
In my Catalogue of the coins in the Indian Museum, Calcutta, vol. I (1906), pp. 244, 249, and Plate XXVI, 6, I described certain rare silver coins of the "bull and horseman ”type under the name of Asata-pâla, and doubtfully connected them with the mintage of the kings of Ohind.
Mr. Richard Burn has proved to me that the correct reading is Amrita-pala, and that the coins were struck by the prince of that name, mentioned in the long inscription now in the Lucknow Museum, and edited by Kielhorn in Epigraphia Indica, vol. I, pp. 61-66. The inscription was found in the ruins of the south gate of the old fort of Badiun, U. P. It treats of the foundation and endowment of a temple of Siva, erected apparently at Badaun, which is called Vodmayata. The record gives the genealogy of a Rashtrakața Râjâ named Lakhanapala, the younger brother of his predecessor, Amrita-pala, who is described as having been learned, pious, and valiant. It is possible that there may have been a date at the beginning of line 23, but Kielhorn could not read the characters. The script is that of about A. D. 1200.
V. A. S.
Elsewhere I havo stated that Namm] var must have lived about A. D. 1,000, whioh my subsequent researches have shown to be wrong. I am getting & paper ready on the subject, once again dealing with th Srivaishnava ohronology in the light of these fresh facts.
