The Dynasties of the Kanarese Districts of the Bombay Presidency from the Earliest Historical Times to the Musalman Conquest c8.s15.108

c8.s15.108

Such are the traditional accounts. There are, however, no apparent reasons for attributing, either to the Lingâyat *Purânas*, or to the Jain poem, any greater historical accuracy than other Hindû works of the same class have been found to possess. And, on the contrary, there are fair grounds for questioning the correctness of the narratives given by them. The Lingâyat and Jain accounts differ very markedly; to a far greater extent than can be accounted for on simply the supposition of a representation of true facts from different sectarian points of view. In respect of the circumstances immediately attending the deaths of Bijjala and Basava, even the Lingâyat *Purânas* are not at all in accordance with each other. The *Channabasava-Purâna* allots to these events the absurd date of A. D. 785, which is too early by close upon four centuries. Even the Jain poem appears to place them,⁴ not only twelve years before the time, in A.D. 1167, when Bijjala, still alive, abdicated in favour of his eldest son, but also even before the time, in A. D. 1156, when Bijjala established himself as king. No epigraphic mention of Basava and Channabasava has been obtained; which is peculiar, if they really held the high office that is allotted to them by tradition. And finally, in the only epigraphic record which has come to notice, containing an allusion of any kind to the revival of the Saiva faith and rites, the indication is that it was a Brâhman named Êkântada-Râmayya, to whom the movement owed its origin.