________________
•
NAKKIRAR'S COMMENTARY.
147
century A.D. and that they originated a style of architecture popular enough to be imitated in the extreme south of India. On the other hand, it is well known that the Gurj&ras are not heard of in Indian History, before the middle of the fifth century A.D.'
In the course of the examination of the date of Senguttuvan, Pundit Raghava Ayyangar has shown actual reference to the probable age of Nakkīrar in a work reduced to writing in the eighth or the middle half of the eighth century. That point deserves mention here. It is admitted by all that Nakkīrar, Senguttu- Date of
Nakkirar. van and Chattanór were all contemporaries, at any rate, that they lived in the Sangam age. This Nakkīrar is the author of a commentary on Iraiyanar Kalaviyal. This commentary, instead of being written then, was merely handed down orally from preceptor to student, for nearly ten generations. This information is furnished by the author who actually wrote down thecommentary. The age of the latter is determined by his frequent mention of such titles as Arikēsari, Parāngusan and Nedumāran assumed by a Pandyan
Thus Professor Macdonen page 186) that “the Gurjaras (Journal of the Royal Asiaticare of the same stock as the Society, 1919 Vol, page 531) - Sakas and came into India with
"The date C. 200 A.C. assigned them, and on the break up of to the Silappadikaram seems to the Mauryan empire they began be valueless, because in the to rule Gujarāt, Kathiawar and companion romance mention is Mālwa where they had already made of the Gurjaras, who do settled." He further thinks that not seem to have entered India the expression Kuocarak-kutikai before C. 450 A.C."
(6 FDLG4 ms) means a rock. Commenting on this Mr. K.G. out shrine. This view, it is to be Sesha Ayyar of Trivandrum feared, has not found gonoral writes (The Quarterly Journal of acceptance the Mythic Society, Vol. X, No. 2,
