________________
AUGUST, 1927]
THE DATE OF BHASKARA RAVIVARMAN.
143
Mr. Daniel says, and I agree, that the data of the Perunna inscription are satisfied by both 526 and 1060 A.D. But, as to the data of the Tirunelli plates, he says that, between 1 and 1400 A.D., only 571 and 666 A.D. satisfy them, and that therefore Bhâskara Ravivarman cannot be placed so late as the tenth or eleventh century A.D. He notices the suggestion of the late Mr. L. D. Swamikannu Pillai that A.D. 1116 is a likely date for the Tirunelli plates, but dismisses it as a mistake and even claims that Mr. Swamikannu Pillai himself agreed with him, shortly before his death. If Mr. Swamikannu Pillai had done so, I believe it must be due to his ignorance of the prevalence in ancient times of the Malabar rule that, if the sankrama of a solar month (the point of time at which the sun passes from one solar sign to another) occurs after eighteen ghatikas (one ghatika two-fifths of an hour) from sunrise, the next day should be the first of that month. Mr. Daniel has himself pointed out that this usage was prevalent as early as circa 1200 A.D. and that Mr. Swamikannu Pillai was not aware of it, when he suggested 1155 A.D. as a suitable date for the Perunna inscription. For myself, I contend that 1st March 1116 A.D., satisfies the data of the Tirunelli plates in all respects. The Mina sankrama of that year fell on 24 ghatikâs after sunrise of the 22nd February. The 1st Mîna therefore, according to 'Malabar usage, was the 23rd February, and, as 1116 A.D. was a leap year, the 8th Mîna fell on 1st March. It was a Wednesday, and the nakshatra Uttara Phalguni ended on that day shortly after daybreak, allowing for an error of one ghatik at the most. Uttara Phalguni was therefore most probably the nakshatra of that day, and the geocentric longitude of Jupiter was 196°. It was thus in 16° of Tulâ rási. The 1st March 1116 A.D. therefore completely satisfies the astronomical data of the Tirunelli plates, and there is no need to assume, without evidence, the existence of an earlier Śri Vallabhan Kodai of Venâd, or to take Bhaskara Ravivarman back to the sixth century A.D. We can therefore safely conclude that the 43rd year of Bhaskara Ravivarman was 1116 A.D., and that he ruled from 1073 to at least 1131 A.D.
It is agreed on all hands, with the single exception of Mr. Joseph for reasons which he has not revealed, that the Perunna inscription and the Tirunelli plates could not be removed from each other by any long interval, though of course it is not necessary that they should belong to the same king or that the interval should be exactly 45 years. It is therefore almost certain that, of the two astronomically suitable dates for the Perunna inscription 526 and 1060 A.D., the latter is more probable, if we place the accession of Bhaskara Ravivarman in 1073 A.D. The 14th year of an unnamed king was therefore 1060 A.D., and, as this is only thirteen years before Bhaskara Ravivarman's accession, the unnamed king was most probably Bhaskara's immediate predecessor.
Now there is evidence to show that Indukodaivarman was the immediate predecessor of Bhaskara Ravivarman. One Perumanaikkottattu Kesavan Sankaran is known to have been the contemporary of both Indukodaivarman and Bhaskara Ravivarman (Trav. Arch. Ser., vol. 3, pp. 173, 181). But Velliyampalli Polan Sattan and Panritturutti Kannan Polan are known to have been the contemporaries of Indukodaivarman (ibid., vol. 3, pp. 165-168), while Velliyampalli Sattan Kumaran and Panṛitturutti Polan Kumaran, who were evidently their immediate successors, are known to have been the contemporaries of Bhaskara Ravivarman (ibid., vol. 2, pp. 49, 53). It is therefore almost certain that Indukodaivarman was the immediate predecessor of Bhaskara Ravivarman, and, as he is known to have ruled for at least sixteen years, while the interval between the Perunna inscription and the accession of Bhaskara Ravivarman was only thirteen years, he must almost certainly be identical with the unnamed king of the Perunna inscription. As his fourteenth year was 1060 A.D., his accession must be placed in 1046 A.D.
The result, therefore, of this brief inquiry is that we are now able definitely to place Indukodaivarman in 1046 to 1073 A.D., and Bhaskara Ravivarman in 1073 to at least 1131 A.D.
