History of the Pallavas of Kanchi c13.23

c13.23

There arise, however, many difficulties in accepting this view and regarding that the Hiraṇyavarman of the Taṇḍantōṭṭam plates is the same as Dantivarman, the son of Nandivarman Pallavamalla. For one thing there is no evidence that Dantivarman had the surname Hiranyavarman as is supposed by Mr. Krishna Sastri. In the second place Ekadhira, a surname that occurs in the Tandantottam plates for Nandivarman II, also occurs in the Kasakkudi plates of the same king thus proving that the donor of this grant was the same as the grant of Kasakkudi. The palæography of these plates (Tandantottam) is according to scholars much too archaic to be assigned to the middle of the ninth century A.D. and really belongs to the middle of the eighth century,¹ and are akin to the Kasakkudi plates. The objection to the high regnal year usually given for Nandivarman II by the epigraphists cannot be considered valid any longer as he is known to have succeeded to the throne in his twelfth year² and as we have inscriptions and copper-plates of this sovereign dated in the forty-seventh, fiftieth, fifty-second, sixty-first, sixty-second and sixty-fifth years of his reign. Again the Tandantottam plates describe Nandivarman II as a devout worshipper of Vishnu, and this is in perfect accordance with all facts known about him and we cannot therefore imagine that he was also a devout worshipper of Siva as the donor of the Velurpalayam plates is said to have been. It is therefore very probable that Hiranyavarman mentioned in the Tandantottam as well as in the Korrangudi plates, dated in the sixty-first regnal year of Nandivarman II is identical with Hiranyavarman I, the father of Nandivarman II. Whether Hiranyavarma Maharaja was an independent ruler of Kanchi as hinted in the Korrangudi plates and whether he ruled for a long time, cannot be ascertained in the present state of our knowledge. It looks very probable that during Paramesvaravarman II's reign he wielded considerable power and was possibly placed in charge of a part of the Pallava dominions. The death of this ruler gave him an opportunity to install his son who was very young at the time of his accession as a ruler of Conjeevaram, and who reigned for an exceptionally long period as seen from inscriptions dated in the sixty-fifth year of his reign.³