Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

History of the Pallavas of Kanchi c11: Chapter VI. The Pallava Ascendency— The Dynasty of Simhavishnu, A.D. 575-900

History of the Pallavas of Kanchi c11

Language
English

Contents

Chapter VI. The Pallava Ascendency— The Dynasty of Simhavishnu, A.D. 575-900

Introductory

c11.s1.1

FROM the beginning of the reign of Simhavishnu, also known as Simhavishnupottarayan and Avanisimha, about the last quarter of the sixth century, a new epoch begins in the history of the Pallava power. From this period onward the Pallava authority begins to penetrate much farther into the Tamil country than before. Again during this period flourished the greatest of the Śaiva and Vaishnava saints, the majority of the Ālvārs and the Nāyanmārs who by their memorable religious propagandic work handed down in their hymns, were destined to revolutionize South Indian religious thought and outlook. In another respect also, this period of Pallava history is of special importance in South Indian history. It was during this period that a beginning is believed to have been made in the Tamil land to build temples and other monuments in stone instead of in perishable material such as wood and brick. This important change in the building material was destined in the course of a few centuries to cover the whole of the Southern India with a network of temples dedicated to Śiva, Vishnu and Brahma. Above all, the active spread of Sanskrit culture and learning in the Tamil country was systematically and sedulously encouraged by the Pallava kings of this period, and recent research seems to support the view that some of the greatest poets and rhetoricians including Bhāravi and Daṇḍin the authors of *Kirātārjunīya* and *Kāvyādarśa*, flourished in this age at the Pallava court at Kañchīpuram.

c11.s1.2

*Sources of Information for this Period.*—For the earlier we had to depend almost wholly on copper-plate charters. But during this period (A. D. 575 to 900) inscriptions on stone appear to have become very popular in the Tamil country. We have therefore in addition to copper-plate grants large numbers of these stone inscriptions scattered throughout the Pallava dominions. Though some of these have been critically edited by Messrs. Hultzsch, Venkayya and others, the larger part of these still remain unedited and even unpublished. Of the stone inscriptions so far discovered nearly a hundred records are connected with the members of the Simhavishnu dynasty and bear the regnal years of these kings. They have for their object the registering of gifts of gold or land for temple services, or endowments for religious and secular learning by the kings, or other persons of distinction. These inscriptions which are for the most part very short, unlike the copper-plate records, do not furnish a genealogy. They mention usually the year of the ruling king when the inscription was put up and the gifts made. They consequently furnish little information either as regards the ancestry of the ruling sovereign or of any of his political achievements. But they give details as regards how the various gifts should be appropriated and furnish valuable glimpses into the social, economic and administrative arrangements of the times.

c11.s1.3

Apart from the inscriptions and copper-plate records dated directly in the years of the Pallava kings and discovered in the various parts of the Pallava kingdom, we have also records from the other contemporary dynasties such as those of Western Chālukyas, the early Pāṇḍyas, the Rāshṭrakūṭas, the Gangas, Kadambas, the Bānas and the Muttaraiyans. The records of this period also mention the Pallavas coming into contact with the Malavas, Kaḷabhras, Chōḷas, Kēraḷas, Siṃhaḷas, Tuḷus and the Konkaṇas; but we do not know much about the political condition of these people during this period.

c11.s1.4

Many of the inscriptions of the Pallava kings appear in temples and other monuments that they constructed during this age at Kāñchīpuram, and other places. The earliest of these are found in the cave-temples of the South Arcot, Trichinopoly and Chingleput Districts, and are dated in the reign of Mahēndravarman I. The others are found in the structural temples at the Seven Pagodas and at Kāñchīpuram, such as the Kailāsanātha temple. The rest are distributed in various villages.

c11.s1.5

Literature.—We turn from the inscriptions and monuments to the evidence furnished by literature, both religious and secular. The bulk of the religious literature embodied in the Tēvāram of Appar, Sambandar, and Sundarar and the Vaishṇava Nālāyiraprabandha belong to this period as also the Sanskrit works Mattavilāsa and perhaps Kirātārjunīya, etc. These, however, do not compare favourably with the inscriptional records as historical documents. For one thing the hymns of the saints hardly mention contemporary political or other events with exceptions such as those in the poems of Tirumaṅgai-Āḷvār. In the next place there is no secular work in Tamil belonging to this period with the exception of Nandikkalambakam. The recently-discovered Sanskrit work entitled Mattavilāsa-Prahasana, though mainly devoted to the description of the drunken revelry of a Kāpālika, incidentally throws much light upon the contemporary religious atmosphere in the city of Kāñchīpuram. Moreover the work having been composed by one of the Pallava kings Mahēndravikrama, has a special interest to the student of Pallava history. Of greater importance, as throwing light on the encouragement of Sanskrit learning under the Pallava kings of this period may be mentioned the recent discovery of Daṇḍin's Avantisundarikathāsāra by the officers of the Madras Oriental MSS. Library. This work mentions the Chāḷukya Vishṇuvardhana and the Western Gaṅga Durvinīta as having been contemporaries of Simhavishṇu, and thus establishes a valuable synchronism in South Indian history hitherto unknown. By mentioning Bhāravi and Daṇḍin as living in the Pallava court, it puts beyond all doubt that Kāñchīpuram the capital of the Pallavas was during this age a very important centre in the south for Sanskrit learning and culture. This is independently corroborated by the inscriptional evidence furnished by the Sanskrit charters.

c11.s1.6

Among Tamil works of the later Pallava period we may mention Perundēvanār's *Bhārataveṇbā* believed to be composed in the ninth century. It is believed originally to have consisted of 12,000 stanzas though only about 800 so far have come down to us. The author of this work is supposed to have lived during the reign of Nandivarman III, the victor in the battle at Teḷḷāru and is also taken to be the one who edited the classical anthologies. In the invocatory verses prefixed to the *Udyōga-Parva* of the *Bhārataveṇbā* the author mentions the victory of this king at Teḷḷāru, and we may therefore infer that he was a contemporary of this king and composed his *Bhārataveṇbā* in the reign of Nandivarman III. As to his having edited the classical anthologies the identification presents great difficulties.

c11.s1.7

The only Tamil historical piece, as distinguished from religious works of which as we said, there is a large quantity that has come down to us from Pallava times, is the poetical work entitled *Nandikkalambakam*, which in a hundred and ten stanzas commemorates the martial exploits of a certain Pallava king Nandi, probably Nandivarman III. This king, as we shall see, lived in the second quarter of the ninth century. The meagreness of purely Tamil literary enterprise, if we except the *Tēvāram* and *Vaishṇava Prabandham*, probably indicate that the Pallava kings were essentially patrons of Sanskrit learning and Brahmanic culture. The bulk of Tamil literature known as the *Śangam* works preceded, as we stated above, the advent of the Pallava kings of Kāñchīpuram.

c11.s1.8

Along with these we have the impressions of the Chinese pilgrim and Master of Law—Hiuen-Tsang—regarding the city of Kāñchī about the year A.D. 640. His notes furnish a description of contemporary religious and secular life. We have already noticed the historical value of *Mahāvaṃsa* for this period of Pallava history.

c11.s1.9

The Great Pallavas, *Simhavishṇu Dynasty*. *Simhavishṇu*- varman, A.D. 575 to 600.—The Kaśakkuḍi plates¹ taken along with the Kūram,² and the Vēlūrpāḷayam³ give us the following genealogy of the Pallavas of this period:—

c11.s1.10

¹ S.I.I., vol. ii, part 3, pp. 346-53.

c11.s1.11

² Ibid., vol. i, p. 152.

c11.s1.12

³ Ibid., vol. ii, part 5, p. 508 ff.

c11.s1.13

Nandivarman

c11.s1.14

| . . . . .
| |

c11.s1.15

Simhavishnu Bhīmavarman

c11.s1.16

Mahēndravarman I Buddhavarman

c11.s1.17

Narasimhavarman I Ādityavarman

c11.s1.18

| | . . . . . Govindavarman
| | |

c11.s1.19

Mahēndravarman II Paramēśvaravarman I Hiranyavarman

c11.s1.20

Narasimhavarman II Nandivarman II

c11.s1.21

| | . . . . . Dantivarman
| | |

c11.s1.22

Paramēśvaravarman II Mahēndravarman III Nandivarman III

c11.s1.23

Nripatungavarman

c11.s1.24

Aparājita

c11.s1.25

The genealogy for this period is full, and there is not the uncertainty of the early Pallava history either about the reigns of this period, or about the order in which the kings succeeded one another as most of the documents give the above order without substantial change. It would be noticed that from the days of Simhavishnu in the third quarter of the sixth century for a period of 125 years the throne remained in the hands of the direct successors of this king. We do not know what position the members of the collateral line, of whom the Kaśakkuḍi plates mention Bhīmavarman, Buddhavarman, Ādityavarman, Govindavarman and Hiraṇya, occupied. They evidently occupied a subordinate position as the viceroys under these kings. Not until we come to the days of Paramēśvara II in the beginning of the eighth century do we find that a descendent of Bhīma, the younger brother of Simhavishṇu, effecting a change of dynasty by succeeding to the Pallava throne.

c11.s1.26

No inscription or copper-plate ascribable to this king Simhavishṇu has yet been discovered. But his name is perpetuated in the historical introduction to the work already referred to wherein the author says that Bhāravi, one of his predecessors, went to his court by invitation. In the *Mattavilāsa-Prahasana*, written by his son Mahēndravarman I, he is referred to in the prologue in terms of praise.¹

c11.s1.27

¹ पल्लवकुलधरणिमण्डलकुलपर्वतस्य सर्विनयविजितसमस्तसामान्तमण्डलस्य आखण्डलमसपराक्रमश्रियः श्रीमहिमानुरूपदानविभूति परिभूत राजराजस्य श्रीसिंहविष्णुवर्मणः पुत्रः शत्रु षड्वर्गविग्रहपरः परहित परतन्त्रतया महाभूत सधर्मा महाराजोः श्रीमहेंद्र विक्रमवर्मा नाम । *Mattavilāsa, Sthāpanā*, p. 3.

c11.s1.28

As regards his achievements we read in verse 10 of the Vēlūrpāḷayam grant that his prowess was widely known on earth, that he quickly seized the country of the Cholas, embellished by the daughter of Kavēra, whose ornaments are the forests of paddy-fields, and where are found brilliant groves of arēca.² From this we may infer that this king who is called Avanisimha for the first time extended the Pallava territory as far as the delta of the Kaveri. In doing so he had to encounter the individual and united opposition of the southern powers who are referred in the Kaśākkuḍi plates,³ among the vanquished : the Kaḷabhra, Māḷava, Chola, Pāṇḍya and the Simhala proud of the strength of their arms.

c11.s1.29

² *S. I. I.*, vol. ii, part 5, p. 510.

c11.s1.30

³ *Ibid.*

c11.s1.31

That this conquest of the Tamil regions was no mere formal praise drawn from the imagination of the writer of the document is seen in the absence of reference to any similar achievement in the records of his son Mahēndravarman I, and suggest clearly that he must have inherited the region around the Kaveri as part of the ancestral dominions which he had left him. Of the earlier Pallava kings we know of only one king Buddhavarman who is said to have encountered the Cholas, and who is described in the Vēlūrpāḷayam plates as being the submarine fire to the ocean-like army of the Cholas. Whether he conquered the region watered by the Kaveri is, however, not known. We may, therefore, take it that the region was for the first time brought under the Pallavas under Simhavishnu.

c11.s1.32

Our knowledge of the Cholas, the Pāṇḍyas, the Kaḷabhras and the Māḷavas ¹ whom Simhavishnu is said to have defeated is very limited, in the present state of our knowledge.

c11.s1.33

¹ We do not know who these Māḷavas were and whether they are identical with the Māḷavas of the north. They are probably to be associated with the people of Maḷanāḍu who figure in early Tamil literature.

c11.s1.34

As regards the Kaḷabhras we find that their history is equally obscure. These people figure also among the kings conquered by the Chāḷukya king Vikramāditya and Vinayāditya. They seem to have invaded the Pāṇḍyan capital and having routed the ruling king established their rule. According to the Veḷvikudi plates the Adhirāja was ousted from power and the country occupied by the Kaḷabhras. (*Tiruvilaiyādal-Purāṇam*). Mr. Venkayya relying on the evidence of Periyapurāṇam where the Karṇāṭakas are said to have invaded and occupied Madura, proposed to identify the Kaḷabhras with the Karṇāṭakas (*Ep. Rep. for 1908*, paras 25-26). Mr. T. A. Gopinatha Rao deriving the word Kaḷabhra from Kaḷavara tries to identify the Kaḷabhras with the Muṭṭaraiyar mentioned in the Seṇ-talai Pillar inscription. (*Ep. Ind.*, 15).

c11.s1.35

Kaḷabhras cannot be Karṇāṭakas obviously, as the Chāḷukyas themselves must have ruled over Karṇāṭaka and therefore over the Karṇāṭakas. Kaḷabhras must, therefore, be people different from the groups known to us otherwise. There was a people occupying the Pallava territory—the northern part in particular—whose name has hitherto been read as Kaḷvar in the Saṅgam works. They had a chief by name Pulli with headquarters at Veṅgaḍam (Tirupati). It is these people that are called Kaḷabhras in a Sanskritized form. Kaḷvar later Kaḷḷar in Tamil are called Kaḷamāḷ in Sanskrit. This seems to indicate a form Kaḷavar in Tamil which would become Kaḷabharu in Kaṇṇaḍa, Sanskritized into Kaḷabhra. I am assured by Pandit Mahamahopadhyaya Svāminātha Aiyar that the reading of the MSS. is Kaḷavar and not Kaḷvar. It is the irruption of these people into the south through the advance of the Pallava dynasty that brought about a great revolution in the Tamil country. The Māḷavas are a similar ethnic group with almost similar habits. They also occupied the territory on the northern and western border of the Tamil land. Their chiefs took the Tamil title Maḷavaraiyan which has become Maḷavarāyan which is still a common name in the Tamil country of Kaḷḷar families, Simhavishnu’s religious leanings were towards Vaishnavism which his very name suggests. It should, however, be remembered that the Pallava kings of Kāñchīpuram were some of them devoted to Śiva and some to Vishnu as the names of the Pallava kings indicate. Thus for instance, while there are names like Vishnugōpa and Kumāravishnu which suggest that the kings who bore such names were devoted to Vishnu, it is a fact that their sons and grandsons bear names like Skandavarman and Paramēśvaravarman which indicate their devotion to Śiva while names like Buddhavarman possibly indicate the Buddhistic leanings of this Pallava sovereign. But in the case of Simhavishnu the Udayēndiram plates ¹ of Nandivarman II clearly call him *Bhaktyārādita-Vishnu-Simha-Vishnu* in terms which leave no possibility of escape from regarding him as a Vaishnava.² None of the temples that this sovereign might have constructed for Hindu gods has been discovered as yet, though Prof. Jouveau-Dubreuil puts forward the suggestion that the Śiyyamangalam cave temple which contains an inscription of Avanibhājana, identified by Hultzsch with Mahēndravarman I, might have been excavated by Simhavishnu. ‘It may not be impossible,’ says he, ‘that the Śiyyamangalam temple which contains the images of the lion and the inscription of King Avanibhājana belongs to the days of king Simhavishnu (called Avanisimha in the Kaśākkuḍi plates). It is not impossible, in fact, that the *birudas* such as *Śatrumalla*, *Lalitānkura*, *Avanibhājana* were borne also by Mahēndra and by his father Simhavishnu.’ ³

c11.s1.36

¹ *S.I.I.*, vol. ii, p. 74, ll. 11-12.

c11.s1.37

² *Early History of Vaishnavism in South India*, p. 95.

c11.s1.38

³ *Pall. Ant.*, vol. i, p. 40.

c11.s1.39

It is a remarkable fact that no inscription dated in the reign of this sovereign has come down to us although from the later copper-plates and stone inscriptions as well as the recently discovered manuscript *Avantisundarikathāsāra* we may be sure that Simhavishnu actually ruled as a king for a

c11.s1.40

The Tamil Malavar changes into Mālavas by falseanalogy in Sanskrit, Malavaraiyan becoming Mālavarāyan even in Tamil at a later period. *Ed.*

c11.s1.41

period of time. His name moreover figures in the two records which indicate that his kingdom comprised at least the regions where these records are found. Maṇali, a village near Tiruvoṛṛiyūr (not far from Madras), was called in ancient times Simhavishṇu-Chaturvēdimangalam. Similarly, No. 265 of 1907 calls Kanjanūr in Kumbhakonam Taluk, Simhavishṇu-Chaturvēdimangalam which shows that it must have been so named during the reign of this king. The region from Maṇali to Kanjanūr where this sovereign should have reigned probably constituted the kingdom. It is possible that the discovery of fresh inscriptions will throw new light on the matter.

c11.s1.42

A Relief of Simhavishṇu.—One of the most interesting discoveries of the Epigraphy Department in recent years has been the identification of royal sculptures at the Ādivarāhasvāmi temple at Mahābalipuram.¹ These reliefs relate to two kings cut in bas-relief in the Varāha cave in the village of Mahābalipuram and were noticed as early as 1913,² by Mr. Krishna Sastri in his report although no identification had been then attempted by him. This was due to the failure to notice the inscriptional label that is put over the bas-reliefs which have now been copied and read. From these it is now clear that the representations are those of Simhavishṇupōtaraya and Mahēndravarman I. These kings are here represented with their queens in an attitude of adoration. The Archæological Superintendent's Report for 1922–23 says on page 94, ‘No. 661 of 1922, is engraved on the portal of the north niche in the Varāha cave, and consists of the name Śrī Simmaviṇṇu-Potādhirājan in the Pallava-Grantha characters. The niche below this inscription contains the seated figure of a king with a high crown (*kiriṭa*), and chest and ear ornaments flanked on either side by a standing female figure representing, by their crowns, his queens . . . No. 662 of 1922 cut on the top of the corresponding niche on the south side of the main cave, and opposite to the image of Simhavishnu referred to above, consists only of the name Śrī-Mahēndra-potādhirāja. The niche contains the standing image of a king distinguished by his crown and ornaments. His half-raised hand points towards the shrine of the God evidently—whither he appears to be leading the nearer queen by her right hand. The above two inscriptions serve as labels to show whom the images represent. . . .’

c11.s1.43

¹ These reliefs and the inscriptions at the Ādivarāha temple have been studied by Rao Bahadur H. Krishna Sastri in a recent *Memoir* issued by the Archæological Survey of India.

c11.s1.44

² The figures in the interior of this temple are first mentioned in one of the Mackenzie MSS. accounts and in *The Cave Temples of India* by Fergusson and Burgess (1890) although no identification is attempted,

c11.s1.45

One explanation of the presence of the image of Simhavishnuvarman in the Ādhivarāha temple at Mahābalipuram may be that the monolith was excavated by him. If this is so it shows that some of the monuments of the Seven-Pagodas are as old as the days of Simhavishnu. This would throw new light on the real age of the monuments of the Seven-Pagodas.¹

c11.s1.46

¹ Hultzsch Insc. of Seven-Pagodas, Ep. Ind., vol. x, p. 1.

c11.s1.47

Mahēndravarman I. A.D. 600 to 630.—Mahēndravarman, known also as Mahēndravikrama, and by surnames such as Mattavilāsa, Guṇabhara, etc., came to the throne after Simhavishnu about the beginning of the seventh century. His reign is memorable in many respects. In the first place he is believed to have given for the first time a real start to excavating temples out of solid stone. In the second place his reign synchronized with the religious activity of Appar, and the literary efforts of Bhāravi in the field of Sanskrit letters. From a purely administrative point of view his government provided the quiet atmosphere for the peaceful pursuit of avocations to his subjects hitherto tormented by wars. From a military point of view his rule witnessed the beginnings of the Pallava-Chālukya and Pallava-Pāṇḍya conflicts which were destined to be continued by his successors for over a century and a half. Considerable impetus was given to productions in the fields of drama, music, painting and other arts.

c11.s1.48

MAHENDRAVARMAN AND HIS QUEENS

c11.s1.49

The most powerful contemporary of Mahēndravarman I and his son Narasimhavarman I was Pulakēśin II. The actual causes of the conflict between the Chālukyas and the Pallava kings lie buried in obscurity. Among the wild guesses made in this direction the most ingenious is that of Mr. Rice who considers that their (Chālukya) name bears a suggestive resemblance to Seleukia, and that they should be probably associated with Seleucidae¹ in which case the Pallava-Chālukya conflict would only be a natural sequel to their original warfare on the banks of the Tigris.

c11.s1.50

¹ Mys. Gaz., vol. i; also Mys. and Coorg from Ins., p. 62.

c11.s1.51

It was about the beginning of the seventh century that Pulakēśin II made himself Master of Vengi which till then was under the Pallavas, and established his brother Kubja-Vishnuvardhana as his viceroy. His descendants afterwards became independent making him founder of the Eastern Chālukya dynasty. It was in the course of his southern wars that Pulakēśin came into conflict with the Pallavas at Kāñchīpuram. The Aihole inscription ² which enumerates his exploits says of his encounter with the Pallavas that ‘he caused the splendour of the Lord of the Pallavas who had opposed the rise of his power to be obscured by the dust of his army and to vanish behind the walls of Kāñchīpuram.’ This important reference would suggest a defeat and retreat on the part of Mahēndravarman I before his Chālukyan adversary, but we learn however from the Kaśākkuḍi plates ³ that Mahēndravarman I gained a victory at Puḷḷalūr which has been identified by Dr. Hultzsch with Puḷḷalūr (Polilore in early British period of Indian history and now Pallūr) in the Conjeevaram taluk in the Chingleput District. This was the scene of two other battles between the English and the French in the British period. It is not stated who the enemies of the Pallavas in this victory were. But it is extremely likely that they were no other than the Chālukyas who in a later record described the Pallavas as their ‘natural enemies.’

c11.s1.52

² Ep. Ind., vol. vi, p. 11.

c11.s1.53

³ S.I.I., vol. ii, part, 3, p. 343.

c11.s1.54

*Religion.*—According to tradition Mahēndravarman I was originally a Jain and was given to persecuting the votaries of other religious denominations. In the *Periyapurāṇam* account his conversion to Śaivism was brought about by Appar otherwise known as Tirunāvukkaraśu. Appar was one of those who is believed to have been thus persecuted, but his wonderfully miraculous powers, especially the manner in which he escaped the tortures to which he was subjected by the Jains, moved the Pallava king to embrace the Śaivism of Appar.

c11.s1.55

This event which may have taken place in the middle of his reign marks an important epoch in the history of Śaivism. There is probably an allusion to this event in the king's life in the Trichinopoly rock inscription¹ which refers to him as having turned back from hostile conduct to the worship of the *linga* (emblem of Śiva). We have at present no means of ascertaining the exact circumstances connected with this event. It happened presumably sufficiently early in his reign as the number of Śiva rock-cut temples excavated by him are numerous and must have taken many years to come into existence. All these cave-temples as they are styled have a peculiarity in shape and have been discovered at Vallam (Chingleput), Mahēndravāḍi (North Arcot District), Daḷavānūr (South Arcot District), Śiyyamangalam and Pallāvaram. He probably originated the habit of inscribing the surnames of the reigning monarchs in the pillars and walls of the various temples that he built. Among the surnames that this king assumed may be mentioned those of Guṇabhara, Puruṣōttama, Satyasanda, Avanibhājana, Saṅkīrṇajāti, Vichitrachitta, Narēndra, Cheṭṭhakāri, Aluptakāma, Kalahapriyaḥ, Lalitāṅkura, Śatrumalla, etc. Of these the *biruda* Cheṭṭhakāri, if it is really an equivalent with Chaitya-kāri, would indicate the temple-building propensities of the king. This probably has reference to the rock-cut temples of Mahēndravarman I, all over the Tamil country. The Telugu *birudas* such as Nilvilonayambu, Pasarambu, Ventulavittu, etc., occurring in these inscriptions have been taken to indicate the Telugu origin of Mahendravarman’s style. It must not be imagined that this sovereign’s zeal for Saivism blunted his sympathy for other religions, a feature of his character in pre-Saiva days. Though he may have professed his devotion to Siva he caused to be cut out in rock a Vishnu temple called Mahendravishnugrha¹ on the banks of Mahendra-Tataka in Mahendravadi. This inscription records in Pallava-Grantha that Gunabhara caused to be cut out of rock the temple of Mahendravishnugrha in Mahendrapura. This place has been identified by Dr. Hultzsch with Mahendravadi, near Arkonam. This catholicity was due to the general tendency of the age when Vishnu and Siva had not begun to have their separate followers and were placed in the same temple without distinction as we find in the monuments of the Pallavas at the Seven-Pagodas and elsewhere. The Mandagappattu inscription of this king for instance records the fact King Vichitrachitta caused to be constructed a temple to Brahma, Isvara and Vishnu without the use bricks, timber, metal and mortar. In other words it was a monolithic rock-temple that was excavated.²

c11.s1.56

¹ S.I.I., vol. i, No. 33, p. 29.

c11.s1.57

¹ *Ep. Ind.*, vol iv, p. 152f.

c11.s1.58

² T. A. G. Rao. *Ibid.*, vol. xvii, p. 14. This short record is of importance inasmuch as it records that before the time of Vichitrachitta bricks, timber, metal and mortar were the common temple-building materials. This falsifies the notion that structural temples were non-existent before the seventh century A.D. in South India, a view based on the absence of the remains of any previous to this period. This statement in the Mandagappattu inscription warrants the conclusion that such temples were in existence before.

c11.s1.59

*The Mahendra Style.*—The principles of the style of architecture adopted and popularized by Mahendravarman I have been studied in full by Prof. Jouveau-Dubreuil in his *Pallava Antiquities* and by Mr. A. H. Longhurst of the Archaeological Department. According to the former scholar the monuments of Mahendravarman’s period discovered hitherto are caves excavated in rocks. The pillars are formed of two cubical parts separated by a prismatic part. . . . These caves are all of them situated in Toṇḍamaṇḍalam and Tamil land, and are distinguished by (1) Sanctuaries destitute of Śōmaskanda image, (2) Circular *lingams*, (3) Dvārapālas of a peculiar posture, (4) Double-arched Tiruvātchi (*prabhā toraṇas*), (5) Cubical pillars. All of them are, besides subterranean *maṇḍapas*. The Archæological Report for 1918-19, Section 26, says: ‘A very characteristic feature about the temples in this style is the type of pillar found in them. These are about two feet square in section and seven feet in height. The upper and lower portions are cubical while the middle portion of shaft has the angles levelled off which makes the middle third octagonal in section. Sometimes the cubical portions are decorated with a conventional lotus flower design similar to the lotus medallions appearing on the stone rails of the Amarāvati stūpa. The capitals of the pillars are simple corbels or brackets supporting the architrave above. . . . Each pillar has a corresponding side pilaster.’

c11.s1.60

*Pallava Painting.*—A vestige of Pallava painting has also been discovered in recent times in the Pudukkotta State, at Śittannavāśal. The style of the rock-cut temple at Śittannavāśal is identical with that of Māmandūr cave built by Mahēndravarman I. This cave temple seems to have been at one time fully painted but the painting on the upper part of the edifice is alone visible now, namely, the painting on the ceiling, the capitals and the upper parts of the pillars. ‘The principal subject that is preserved is a grand fresco which adorns the whole extent of the ceiling and the verandah. This fresco represents a tank covered with lotuses. In the midst of the flowers are found fishes, geese, buffaloes, elephants and three men who surely are Jains holding lotuses in their hands. Their pose, their colouring and the sweetness of their countenance are indeed charming. . . . Therefore the decoration of the capitals of the pillars in the facade is well preserved. It consists of lotuses whose blooming stems intertwine with elegance. The two pillars in the passage are adorned with the figures of dancing girls.¹ It is presumable, as Jouveau-Dubreuil suggests that the art of dancing was encouraged by Mahēndravarman I who probably wrote a treatise on the subject. The Māmanḍūr inscription² of this king alludes to the work *Dakshinachitra* probably a treatise on painting and other works on music composed by him.

c11.s1.61

¹ This subject is treated by N. C. Mehta in his ‘Studies in Indian Painting’ where four of the fresco paintings of this temple have been reproduced. Mr. Mehta, however, doubts that the temple is a Jain one. *Studies in Indian Painting*, pp. 11-12.

c11.s1.62

² Q. J.M.S., vol. xiii, p. 572.

The Musical Inscription at Pudukkotta

c11.s2.1

To this period is also ascribed the musical inscription at Kuḍumiyāmalai³ in the State of Pudukkotta. The *Epigraphy Report for 1906* says that the inscription was engraved at the instance of an unnamed king who was a disciple of a certain Rudrāchārya who composed the *svaras* for the benefit of the pupils. Relying on the panegyric given in the Māmanḍūr record, and the reference to Vālmīki of the *svaras* and *varṇas* of music therein detailed, and to the *Mattavilāsa-Prahasana*, as also the close resemblance between the Kuḍumiyāmalai inscription and the Mahēndravarman inscription at Trichinopoly, scholars⁴ have concluded that Mahēndravarman I was an accomplished musician and that the Kuḍumiyāmalai musical inscription was engraved at his order.

c11.s2.2

³ No. 354 of 1904.

c11.s2.3

⁴ G. Jouveau-Dubreuil, *Pallavas*, p. 23.

Mahēndravarman I as an Author

c11.s3.1

In the previous paragraphs it was mentioned that the Pallava court in the days of Simhavishnu was a centre of Sanskrit culture. The occurrence of the name of the work⁵ *Mattavilāsa-Prahasana* in the Māmanḍūr inscription indicates that there was in existence at the time, a work bearing that name. No one knew of this work until the Oriental MSS. Department of the Travancore State discovered this work some years ago. It has now been published as one of the Travancore Sanskrit Series by Mahamahopadyaya Pandit T. Ganapati Sastri. This work is of great value in enabling us to know the nature of religious and secular life led by people during the days of Mahendravarman I, in the first quarter of the seventh century.

c11.s3.2

⁵ The work was probably modelled on another early *Prahasana Bhagavadajjukam* recently published and which is attributed to Bodhayana. The name of this prahasana also occurs in the Māmanḍūr inscription of Mahēndravarman I in the line preceding the one where *Mattavilāsa* is mentioned. (See *I.H.Q.*, vol. i, p. 263, Note 3.)

c11.s3.3

The Contents of this Work.—The work describes the drunken revelry of a Kāpālika with a female-companion, his falling out with a hypocritical Śākyabikhshu, believing him to have stolen his Kapāla (alms-bowl) which had been carried away by a dog, his having recourse to a degenerate Pāśupata for the settlement of the dispute and finally the recovery of the Kapāla from a mad man. We have already seen that the titles *Mattavilāsa*, *Avanibhājana*, *Śatrumalla* and *Guṇabhara* were borne by Mahendravarman I and occur in various inscriptions. Of these the title *Śatrumalla* is mentioned in the concluding lines of the play; and that of *Avanibhājana* is referred to in the fourth *pāda* of the *maṅgala śloka* . . . and *Guṇabhara* and *Mattavilāsa* are also found in the words of *Naṭī* in the *sthāpana*. The virtues of the king are eulogized in the opening portion of this work.¹

c11.s3.4

¹ प्रज्ञादानदयानुभावधृतयः कान्तिः कलाकौशलं सत्यं शौर्यसमायता विनय इत्येवम्प्रकारागुणाः । अप्राप्तस्थितयः समेत्य शरणं याता यमेकं कलौ कल्पान्ते जगदादिमादिपुरुषं सर्गप्रभेदा इव ॥ *Mattavilāsa*, p. 3. T. Sans. Ser., No. LV.

c11.s3.5

Light thrown on Contemporary Life by the Work.—This little play is full of interest to the student of religious history as it affords valuable material regarding the extinct Kāpālika faith, and the vices of the Śākyabikhshus and the views regarding the teachings of the Buddha held by the followers of other religions, such as the Kāpālikas. ‘From the *Mattavilāsa-Prahasana* it becomes clear that to a Kāpālika, the Kapāla is as essential as is a sacred thread to a Brāhmaṇa. If he loses it he should provide himself with another in a stated time. He should cover his body with ashes and make himself hideous, and drink liquor from skull of a human being. . . . One of his articles of faith is that the effect always resembles, to a certain extent, the cause; therefore, from the practice of austerities in this life one cannot obtain bliss in another life since austerities and bliss are of opposite nature. The Kāpālikas carried in addition to the Kapāla, a cow's horn both for blowing during their worship and drinking from. The people of this faith associated freely with women-Kāpālikas. . . . The opinions held by the particular Kāpālika, Bhaṭya-Soma of our play, regarding the Śākyabhikshus are that the Śākyabhikshus indulged freely in animal food and fattened themselves pecuniarily by being the managers of several vihāras, and led a comfortable life, against all the rules of their order: they covered themselves only to conceal their foibles. Their teacher Buddha, did nothing more than steal his doctrines from the Vedānta and the Mahābhārata of the Brahmans, and compiled therefrom his doctrines.¹ The mention of Buddhas, Bikshus, Kāpālikas and Pāśupatas, in his burlesque by Mahēndravarman I as among the inhabitants of Kāñchīpuram bear out the surmise that Buddhism flourished there till at least the seventh century A.D., and that the statement of Hiuen-Tsang regarding the existence in Kāñchīpura of a large number of vihāras² finds support in this work of Mahēndravarman.

c11.s3.6

¹ M.C.C. Mag., vol. 34, p. 413.

c11.s3.7

² Beal's Rec., vol. ii, p. 229.

c11.s3.8

The reign of Mahēndravarman I synchronized with the period of decay of Buddhist and Jain religions at Kāñchīpuram and the Tamil land. The Śaiva saints Appar, and Tirugñāna-Sambandar were actually engaged in propagating the Śaiva faith. According to the testimony of these saints, as represented in their references to the Śākyas, we have to infer that the Buddhists and Jains of this period were in a degenerate position then. They are mentioned in the same strain also in several verses in the Vaishṇava work Nalāyiraprabhandam.³

c11.s3.9

³ புலையறமாகின்ற புத்தர்சமணமெல்லாம் கலையறக்கற்றமாந்தர் காண்பரோ, கேட்பரோதாம். Tirumālai, v. 7. வெள்ளியார் போதியார் என்றிவர் ஓதுகின்ற கள்ளநூல். P. T. vol. ix, p. 7, v. 8. அறியாச்மணரய்த்தர் பவுத்தர் சிறியார் சிவப்பட்டர். Nān. Tiru, v. 6.

c11.s3.10

The reign of Mahēndravarman I is believed to have been the period of the Vaishṇava saint Tirumaliśai and therefore also that of the first three Āḷvārs by certain scholars. Mr. M. Srinivasa Aiyangar¹ in his *Tamil Studies* expresses the view that the Guṇabhara mentioned in the *Nānmugan-Tiruvandādi* is a reference to Mahēndravarman I, and concludes, on this basis alone, that he was his contemporary. But a careful examination of the context and meaning of this stanza² shows that the Guṇabhara of the Āḷvār cannot be interpreted as alluding to any mortal man.

c11.s3.11

¹ *Tamil Studies*, pp. 305-6.

c11.s3.12

² காப்பு மறந்தறியேன் கண்ணனே யென்றிருப்பன் ஆப்புஅங் கொழியவும் பல்லுயிர்க்கும்—ஆக்கை கொடுத்தளித்த கோனே! குணப்பரனே! உன்னை விடத்தணியார் மெய்தெளிந்தாராம். (St. 93, *Nān. Tiru.*)

c11.s3.13

² See also *Early Hist. of Vaishnavism in South India*, p. 54.

Linked texts (12)