Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

The Vakataka–Gupta Age (circa 200–550 A.D.) c9.s8: 1. Andhra

The Vākāṭaka–Gupta Age (circa 200–550 A.D.) c9.s8

Language
English

Contents

1. Andhra

c9.s8.1

During the age of the Later Śātavāhanas, the heart of the Andhra country, corresponding to the districts round the mouths of the Kistna and the Godāvari appears to have had its headquarters at Dhānyakaṭaka. The city has been identified by some scholars with Bezwada, while others, with greater plausibility, have suggested its location in the present Amaravati-Dharanikota area of the Kistna District.¹ The extinction of Śātavāhana rule in the above region is usually placed towards the end of the first quarter of the third century A.D. Local feudatory families had no doubt been gaining strength as a result of the weakness of their Later Śātavāhana overlords and must have contributed largely to the latter's downfall. But the Ikshvākus of the Kistna-Guntur region possibly struck the strongest blow to the suzerain power.

c9.s8.2

¹ The Amaravati inscription of Ikshvāku Virapurusha-datta (SIE., 1937-38, No. 529) refers to the installation of two *Dharmachakras* at the eastern entrance of the *Mahāvihāra* at Dhaṃñakaḍa (Dhānyakaṭa). An Amarāvati pillar inscription of Keta II, dated A. D. 1182, mentions Śri-Dhānyakaṭaka with its temple of Śiva Amareśvara and the lofty *Chaitya* of Lord Buddha (EI., VI, 146).

The Ikshvākus

c9.s8.t1.1

The earliest known Ikshvāku king Vāsisṭhiputra Śāntamūla (Chāntamūla) I flourished about the second quarter of the third century, that is to say, immediately after the fall of the Śātavāhanas in the country round Dhānyakaṭaka. The assumption of independence by a Muslim ruler of medieval India was characterised by the issue of his own coins and by an order to insert in the *Khuṭbah* (sermon delivered after divine service on Friday) his own name instead of his overlord's. The independent status newly acquired by Indian ruling families of the early centuries of the Christian era was likewise signalised usually by the celebration of the Aśvamedha. It is, therefore, interesting to note that Śāntamūla I was the performer of a horse-sacrifice.

c9.s8.t1.2

We know little about the predecessors of Śāntamūla I. It is not impossible that the Ikṣvākus of the Andhra-deśa actually represented a branch of the celebrated Ikṣvāku dynasty of Ayodhyā which migrated to the Deccan and settled there. The Ikṣvākus of the Far South appear to have had their capital at Vijayapurī situated in the valley of the Nagarjunikonda hills.¹ No record of Śāntamūla's time has so far been discovered. Details of the political career of this king as well as the extent of his kingdom are, therefore, unknown. Śāntamūla I was a staunch Brahmanist and performed not only the Aśvamedha but also the Vājapeya and other Vedic sacrifices.² Like the Kadambas and the Cālukyas of later times, he is described as "favoured by Mahāsena (Skanda-Kārttikeya)". Śāntamūla I had at least two sisters, the first of whom was married to a feudatory chief who had the style Mahāsenāpati Mahātalavara and belonged to the Pukiya family. The king's daughter Aṭavi-Śāntiśrī was married to an official styled Mahāsenāpati Mahādaṇḍanāyaka and reported to have belonged to the noble family of the Dhanakas. The word Pukiya has been connected by some scholars with the Pungi district covering parts of southern Guntur and the adjoining region. The Hiraṇyaka family, related to the Ikṣvākus, has been similarly connected with the Hiraṇyarāṣṭra which must have included the northern and western parts of the Nellore District and the adjacent area.

c9.s8.t1.3

¹ The Ikṣvākus were probably the Śrīparvatīya Andhras of the Purāṇas. Śrīparvata was the ancient name of the Nallamalur Range.

c9.s8.t1.4

Śāntamūla I was succeeded by his son Māṭharīputra Vīrapuruṣa-datta (third quarter of the third century) who ruled at least to his twentieth regnal year. One of his queens was Rudradharabhaṭṭārikā who is described as the daughter of the Mahārāja of Ujjain.² It is not impossible that Rudradharabhaṭṭārikā was related to Rudra-sena II (c. 254-74 A.D.) or Rudra-sena I (c. 199-220 A.D.) the Śaka rulers of Western India. Virapurusha-datta gave his daughter in marriage to the Mahārāja of Vanavāsa which has been identified with modern Banavāsi in the North Kanara District of the Bombay Presidency. The son-in-law of the Ikshvāku king seems to have been no other than a ruler of the Chuṭu family supposed to have been a branch of the Sātavāhana dynasty settled in the ancient Kuntala country. Matrimonial alliances with the royal houses of Ujjain and Banavāsi no doubt strengthened the position of the Ikshvākus during the reign of Virapurusha-datta, although the credit for contracting these relations might belong actually to the king's father Mahārāja Śāntamūla I.

c9.s8.t1.5

² It is interesting to note that three of Vīrapuruṣa-datta's queens were daughters of his paternal aunts. Such alliances were evidently familiar in this region even in the early period. Cf. Baudhāyana Dharma-sūtra, I. II. 1-4.

c9.s8.t1.6

Records belonging to the reign of Virapurusha-datta have been discovered at the Buddhist sites of Amaravati, Jaggayapeta and Nagarjunikonda.¹ The latest date supplied by the epigraphs is the king's twentieth regnal year. The inscriptions are, however, not official documents, but records of private donations in favour of several Buddhist establishments. Most of the Nagarjunikonda epigraphs record the benefactions of some female members of the Ikshvāku family to the Great Monastery lying near the capital city of Vijayapurī. These ladies were apparently Buddhists in faith. It is, however, unknown whether king Virapurusha-datta himself and his son were actually Buddhists. But attention in this connection may be drawn to the fact that, unlike Śāntamūla I, neither of these rulers has been described as the performer of any Brahmanical sacrifices or as favoured by the god Mahāsena. It is, therefore, not improbable that the immediate successors of Śāntamūla I were Buddhists and not staunch Brahmanists like their ancestor.

c9.s8.t1.7

¹ EI XX. 1 ff ; XXI, 60 ff.

c9.s8.t1.8

Māṭharīputra Virapurusha-datta was succeeded by his son Vāsiṣṭhiputra Ehuvula² Śāntamūla II who ruled at least up to his eleventh regnal year. The independent rule of the Ikshvākus in the heart of the Andhra country appears to have ended about the close of the third century A.D. This is suggested by the Mayidavolu charter recording an order of the Pallava crown-prince Śivaskanda-varman of Kāñchī to the provincial governor of the Andhrāpatha residing at Dhānyakaṭaka. Though there is difference of opinion amongst scholars as regards the date of Śivaskanda-varman¹ and his father during whose reign the grant was issued, it seems quite reasonable to ascribe the overthrow of the Ikshvākus and the Pallava occupation of the Kistna-Guntur region to about the end of the third century A.D. It is, however, uncertain whether Ehuvula Śāntamūla was himself ousted by the Pallavas.²

c9.s8.t1.9

² Of the two forms, Ehuvula, and Ehuvala, the former is to be preferred. Cf. the name Hamguṇavula-Devana, Suc. Sāt. p. 391.

c9.s8.t1.10

¹ Some scholars would like to assign him to the middle of the third century A. D For an examination of the question and for reasons why he should be ascribed to the first half of the fourth century, see *Suc. Sā.*, pp. 161-68.

c9.s8.t1.11

² Mahārāja Ruḷupuruṣa-datta, mentioned in an inscription at Gurzala in the Guntur District (*EI*. XXVI, 123 ff), may have been the successor of Ehuvula Śāntamūla II. The palaeography of the record as well as the name-ending *datta* seems to connect him with the royal family of the Ikshvākus, specially with Vīrapuruṣa-datta.

c9.s8.t1.12

There is evidence to show that the Ikshvāku dynasty lingered long as a local power. A record of the Kekaya family of northern Mysore belonging to the fifth century A.D. refers to matrimonial relations between the Kekaya kings and the royal sages of the Ikshvāku dynasty. These Ikshvākus are almost certainly to be identified with the descendants of Śāntamūla I. In this connection it is interesting to recall the epic instance of a matrimonial alliance between the Ikshvākus of Ayodhyā and the Kekayas of Girivraja and Nandigrāma in the Punjab. Vague reminiscences of the southern Ikshvākus may probably be traced in the late Kannada poem entitled *Dharmāmṛita* by Nayasena.

c9.s8.t1.13

*The Bṛihatphalāyanas.*

c9.s8.t1.14

There was an old kingdom covering the present Bandar (Masulipatam) tāluk of the Kistna District and the adjoining region with its capital at a city called Pithuṇḍa (=Pṛithūda ?) lying not very far from Masulipatam.³ According to the Hathigumpha inscription, king Khāravela of Kaliṅga, who may be assigned to the second half of the first century B.C., devastated the royal city of Pithuṇḍa. About the middle of the second century A.D. the Greek geographer Ptolemy mentions "the metropolis of Pitundra" which is located in the Masulipatam area. There is hardly any doubt that the inscription of Khāravela and the Geography of Ptolemy refer to the same royal city. Towards the end of the third century A.D., a king named Jaya-varman is known to have been ruling over the above region very probably with his capital at the city of Pithuṇḍa.¹ King Jaya-varman belonged to the Bṛihatphalāyana *gotra*; but no other king of his line is as yet known.

c9.s8.t1.15

³ According to Ptolemy's *Geography* (VII. i, § 79, 93), Pitundra=Pithuṇḍa was in the land of the people called Maisōloi. The name of

c9.s8.t1.16

¹ Some scholars believe that Kadūra, the place whence the Kondamudi grant was issued, was the capital of the Bṛihatphalāyana kings. See Dubreuil, *AHD.*, pp. 84-85. For a criticism of this view, cf. *Suc. Sāt.* pp. 41-49.

c9.s8.t1.17

A copperplate charter dated in the tenth regnal year of Jaya-varman who is described as a devotee of Maheśvara (Śiva) was discovered at Kondamudi in the Tenali taluk of the Kistna district.² It was issued from the victorious camp of Kudūra to the governor of the Kudūra *āhāra* (district) in regard to a grant of land in favour of a number of Brāhmaṇas. Kudūra, which appears to have been the headquarters of the district of that name, has been identified with modern Guduru near Masulipatam. Some scholars locate it at Koduru on the sea not far from Ghantasala which is the same as Kaṇṭakaśaila or Kaṇṭakaśaula of old records and as Kantakassulos of the Greeks.

c9.s8.t1.18

² *El.* VI, 315.

c9.s8.t1.19

Unfortunately the relations of the Bṛihatphalāyanas of Pithuṇḍa with the neighbouring kingdom of the Ikshvākus and with the Pallavas of Kāñchi cannot be determined in the present state of our knowledge. It appears that the earlier kings of Pithuṇḍa accepted the suzerainty of the Later Sātavāhanas and, later, possibly also of the Ikshvākus. On the eve of the Pallava occupation of the Andhrāpatha, Jaya-varman Bṛihatphalāyana seems to have ruled for some time as an inde-

c9.s8.t1.20

this country is given as Maisōlia which is apparently identical with the first part of the name of Masulipatam. See *infra*.

c9.s8.t1.21

pendent king. The sudden rise of the Bṛhatphalāyanas may have been at the expense of the Ikṣvākus. But very soon both the dynasties appear to have been subdued by the Pallavas of Kāñchī. It is, however, impossible to be definite on this point as materials for the history of the Masulipatam region during the early centuries of the Christian era are scanty. With the rise of the Sālaṅkāyanas of Veṅgī, some of the territories originally enjoyed by the Bṛhatphalāyanas seem to have passed to them.

The Anandas

c9.s8.t2.1

Epigraphic evidence points to the existence of a royal family ruling in the Guntur district about the second half of the fourth century A.D. and parts of the fifth.¹ Only three kings of this dynasty are known from inscriptions. An epigraph in the Kapoteśvara temple at Chezarla to the west of Guntur speaks of Satsabhāmalla who was the daughter's son of king Kandara belonging to the *gotra* (lineage) of a great sage named Ānanda. In the Gorantla copperplate grant of Attivarman, the king is described as "sprung from the family of king Kandara", while the family itself is said to have "arisen from the lineage of the great sage Ānanda". The Mattepad grant of Dāmodara-varman was issued from Kandarapura (a city very probably founded by Kandara) and the king is represented as having belonged to the Ānanda *gotra*. The three kings, Kandara, Atti-varman and Dāmodara-varman should therefore be assigned to the same family which may be called the Ānanda dynasty of the Guntur region.² It should, however, be noticed that the name of Ānanda is not found in the list of *gotrarshis* in the Purāṇas and other early works. Apparently the dynasty could not boast of its relations with any acknowledged *gotrarshi* of old.

c9.s8.t2.2

¹ There is difference of opinion amongst scholars as regards the chronology of the Ānanda kings. Gopalachari assigns them to the sixth and seventh centuries A. D. He believes that the Chezarla inscription palaeographically resembles the records of the Pallava king Mahendra-varman I (c. 600-30 A. D.). See *EHAC*, p. 185. Rama Rao (*JAHC*, I, 11) places the Ānandas in the period 375-500 A. D.

c9.s8.t2.3

² Some recent writers prefer the dynastic name Ānandagotra to Ānanda, but apparently they forget the fact that the word *gotra* means family and that kings of the Sālaṅkāyana *gotra* represent themselves in their official records simply as Sālaṅkāyana. Attention in this connection may also be drawn to such dynastic names as Ikṣvāku which is after an illustrious early member

c9.s8.t2.4

Of the three kings of the Ānanda family, Kandara who seems to have founded the city of Kandarapura is evidently the earliest. There is, however, difference of opinion amongst scholars as regards the relative chronological position between Atti-varman and Dāmodara-varman. It is interesting to note that Dāmodara-varman is described in his own record as *hiranyagarbha-odbhava-odbhava*, i.e., one whose father was a performer of the *mahādāna* (great gift) ceremony known as the Hiranyagarbha. Atti-varman's record, on the other hand, represents him as a *hiranyagarbha-prasava*, i.e., performer of the Hiranyagarbha. Dāmodara-varman may have, therefore, been actually a son of Atti-varman. According to some scholars, however, the former was not a successor but a predecessor of the latter.¹

c9.s8.t2.5

¹ Gopalachari believes that Dāmodara-varman flourished about a century before Atti-varman (*op. cit.* p. 194). Rama kao places Kandara and his grandson in 375-400 A. D., Dāmodara-varman in 435-460 A. D and Atti-varman in 480-500 A. D.

c9.s8.t2.6

*Kandara*, like *Kanthara*, *Kandhāra*, *Kanhara*, *Kanhāra* and *Kannara*, is a Prākṛitic corruption of the Sanskrit name *Kṛiṣhṇa* influenced by words like *Skandha* (Prākṛit *Kandhara*). The Prākṛitic names of Kandara and Atti-varman and especially the fact that the names of a large number of Brāhmaṇa donees of the Mattepad grant of Dāmodara-varman are given in their Prākṛit forms would suggest the ascription of these kings to a period not much later than the middle of the fourth century A.D. when Prākṛit was ousted by Sanskrit from the field of South Indian epigraphy.

c9.s8.t2.7

of the family. Expressions like "the Bṛihatphalāyana *gotra* kings", "the Ānanda *gotra* kings", etc., can therefore hardly be entertained. *Cf.* V. S. Ramachandramurty, *JAHRS* XI, 43 ff; Rama Rao, *op. cit.* Gopalachari is inclined to style the family as "Kandara" (*op. cit.* p. 185). Apparently however king Kandara himself cannot be described as belonging to "the Kandara family". Of course Kandara's descendants may be designated by that style.

c9.s8.t2.8

The Chezarla inscription¹ represents king Kandara as lord of the Kṛṣṇaveṇṇā (i.e., Kistna), of the hill called Trikūṭa and the city called Kandarapura and of two *janapadas* or provinces. It has been suggested that the Trikūṭaparvata of the Chezarla record is the same as the Trikūṭamalaya mentioned in a Viṣṇukuṇḍin inscription and is no other than present Kotappakonda near Kāvūr.² Of the two provinces under Kandara's rule one seems to have been the district round Kandarapura which has not been satisfactorily identified.³ The banner of king Kandara is said to have borne the representation of a *golāṅgula* (a species of monkey). As the banner and crest of a royal family are sometimes found to be the same, it is not impossible that the defaced seals of the Gorantla and Mattepad grants actually bear the figure of a *golāṅgula*. Prince Satsabhāmalla was the daughter's son of Kandara and probably belonged to a viceregal line. Kandara appears to have been called Pṛthivīyuvarāṭ and is possibly also credited with victory in some battles at Dhānyakaṭaka. This seems to suggest that about the middle of the 4th century Kandara and his feudatories drove out the Pallavas from Dhānyakaṭaka which is known to have been the early Pallava headquarters in the Andhrāpatha.

c9.s8.t2.9

¹ *SII.* VI, No. 594. For a different interpretation of this record, see Rama Rao, *op. cit.* p. 5, cf. *Sur. Sār.* p. 396 ff.

c9.s8.t2.10

² Krishna Rao, *EDA.* p. 430.

c9.s8.t2.11

³ Rama Rao identifies Kandarapura with Kanteru in the Guntur *tāluk* (*op. cit.* p. 12). Somasekhara Sarma believes that the village of Chebrōlu in the Bapatla taluk of the Guntur Dist., which is famous for the temple of Skanda, might have been known after that god as Skandapura, Kandapura and Kandarapura. He further identifies Chebrōlu, called Chembrōlu or Tāmbra-pura in local inscriptions, with Tāmbrāpa of the Early Pallava charters. See *J. Mad. Un. XII*, 154.

c9.s8.t2.12

It appears from the Gorantla Inscription⁴ that Atti-varman and possibly also his predecessors were devotees of Śiva. The locality called Vakeśvara where the temple of the family deity once stood has, however, not been identified. We have possibly to look to Chezarla which is famous for the temple of Kapoteśvara. In that case, Kandarapura, capital of the Ananda kings, was probably not very far from Chezarla.

c9.s8.t2.13

⁴ *IA.* IX, 102 ff.

c9.s8.t2.14

Dāmodara-varman was certainly a Buddhist.¹ The Kapoteśvara temple at Chezarla has been supposed by scholars to have been a structural *Chaitya* Hall, originally Buddhist, but later converted to Hindu usage.² It is usually ascribed to the fourth century A.D. which date probably connects it with the kings of the Ananda dynasty.

c9.s8.t2.15

¹ Cf. Mattepad Grant, *EI.* XVIII, 327 ff.

c9.s8.t2.16

² Cf. Coomaraswamy, *HIIA.* p. 77.

c9.s8.t2.17

The end of the Ānandas is wrapped in obscurity. They were possibly subdued by the Śālaṅkāyanas, though both the dynasties appear to have been originally responsible for overpowering the Pallavas in the heart of the Andhra country. It is also possible to suggest that the decline of the Ānandas was brought about by their constant struggle with the Pallavas.³

c9.s8.t2.18

³ Cf. Ramachandramurty, *JAHRS.* XI, 43-50 ; cf. also Sircar, *Ibid.* pp. 129-30.

The Śālaṅkāyanas

c9.s8.t3.1

According to Ptolemy's *Geography*,⁴ assigned by scholars to the middle of the second century A. D., a people called the Salakenoi lived to the north of the Maisōloi who apparently belonged to the Masulipatam region. The word Salakenoi appears to be a Greek corruption of the Indian name Śālaṅkāyana.⁵ It is again not improbable that Benagouron, the premier city of the Salakenoi according to Ptolemy, is a copyist's mistake for Bengauron, i.e., Veṅgapura = Veṅgipura which is known to have been the capital of the Śālaṅkāyana Mahārājas. All the Śālaṅkāyana charters, so far discovered, were issued from Veṅgi or Veṅgipura and a Śālaṅkāyana king is actually mentioned in the Allahabad pillar inscription of Samudra-gupta as *Vaingyaka*, indicating no doubt "the lord of Veṅgi." The city of Veṅgi has been located at the site of the modern village of Peddavegi near Ellore in the Godāvarī district.

c9.s8.t3.2

⁴ VII, i, 79.

c9.s8.t3.3

⁵ *PHAI.* p. 419 n

c9.s8.t3.4

Some of the Śālaṅkāyana charters mention the names of the reigning monarchs without any reference to their predecessors. The position of these rulers in the genealogy is therefore difficult to determine. They are Deva-varman of the Ellore grant,¹ Nandi-varman of the Kanteru grant (No. 1)² and Skanda-varman of the Kanteru grant (No. 2).³ The Kollair grant⁴ is, however, issued by a king named Nandi-varman who is called the eldest son of king Chaṇḍa-varman, while, in the Peddavegi grant,⁵ apparently the same ruler is represented as Nandi-varman II who is not only called the eldest son of Chaṇḍa-varman but also the grandson of Nandi-varman I and the great-grandson of Hasti-varman. We do not know if Nandi-varman of the Kanteru grant (No. 1) has to be identified with Nandi-varman II of the Kollair and Peddavegi grants. But the identification is not improbable in view of the facts that all the three epigraphs belong to the same epoch according to the evidence of palaeography and that unlike the other members of the family the reigning monarch is described as a *parama-bhāgavata*, i.e., devotee of Lord Viṣṇu, in all the grants. The exact relation of Deva-varman of the Ellore grant and Skanda-varman of the Kanteru grant (No. 2) with any of the other four kings cannot be determined in the present state of our knowledge. The Ellore grant is, however, written in Prākṛit, while all other records of the family are couched in Sanskrit. It is therefore evident that Deva-varman ruled earlier than both Nandi-varman II and Skanda-varman, as Prākṛit was ousted by Sanskrit from the epigraphy of the Lower Deccan about the middle of the fourth century A.D. In case it is conjectured that there was no break in the succession from Hasti-varman to Nandi-varman II it has to be assumed that Deva-varman ruled earlier than Hasti-varman⁶ and Skanda-varman after Nandivarman II. It must, however, be admitted that palaeography does not suggest a long interval of time between the rule of Deva-varman and that of Nandi-varman II and Skanda-varman.¹

c9.s8.t3.5

¹ *EI.* IX, 56 ff.

c9.s8.t3.6

² *JAHRS.* V, 21.

c9.s8.t3.7

³ Ibid.

c9.s8.t3.8

⁴ *IA.* V, 176.

c9.s8.t3.9

⁵ *JAHRS.* I, 92.

c9.s8.t3.10

⁶ Some scholars believe that Deva-varman was a successor, possibly a son, of Hasti-varman ; cf. *Suc. Sāt.* p. 73 n.

c9.s8.t3.11

¹ For the supposed existence of a prince named Buddha-varman in the Sālaṅkāyana dynasty, cf. Sircar, IHQ. 1933, p. 208 ff; Suc. Sāt. pp. 63-68. Skanda-varman is usually supposed to have been a younger brother of Nandivarman II.

c9.s8.t3.12

Besides the evidence of palaeography, there is an interesting reference that helps us in determining the epoch to which the Sālaṅkāyana kings, known from inscriptions, belonged. Hardly any doubt can be entertained as to the identity of Sālaṅkāyana Hasti-varman, great-grand-father of Nandi-varman II of the Peddavegi grant, with the king Hasti-varman of Veṅgī who was defeated by Samudra-gupta according to the Allahabad pillar inscription. The southern expedition of Samudra-gupta is usually ascribed to the middle of the fourth century A. D. to which epoch Sālaṅkāyana Hasti-varman has also to be assigned.

c9.s8.t3.13

Lord Chitraratha-svāmin was the family deity of the Sālaṅkāyana Mahārājas. It is interesting to note that in 1902 a mound was shown by the villagers to Hultzsch on his visit to Peddavegi as the site of the ancient temple of Chitraratha-svāmin.² The word *chitraratha* means the sun; the family deity of the Sālaṅkāyanas may therefore have been the sun-god. But the personal faith of individual Sālaṅkāyana monarchs is known to have been in some cases Śaivism and in others Vaiṣṇavism.

c9.s8.t3.14

² EI. IX, 51.

c9.s8.t3.15

The seals attached to the Sālaṅkāyana charters bear the figure of a bull which seems to have been the crest of this family of rulers. The word *śālaṅkāyana* indicates Nandin, the bull of Śiva. It is therefore not improbable that the crest of the Sālaṅkāyana kings was connected with the name of their family. *Sālaṅkāyana* has been rightly taken to be the name of the *gotra* to which the family belonged, although the kings are simply called *Śālaṅkāyana* instead of the usual epigraphic style *Śālaṅkāyana-sagotra*.

c9.s8.t3.16

The Ellore grant of the *parama-māheśvara* Mahārāja Deva-varman was issued in the thirteenth year of the king's reign. Deva-varman is described in the grant as a performer of the Aśvamedha sacrifice. This possibly suggests that he established the greatness of his family after having defeated some enemies who might have been no other than the Pallava conquerors of the Andhrāpatha.

c9.s8.t3.17

The known dates of Nandi-varman II (first half of the fifth century), are his seventh and tenth regnal years. He, therefore, ruled at least for more than nine years.

c9.s8.t3.18

The end of the Śālaṅkāyanas, like that of the other royal families of the region, is shrouded in darkness. It is, however, very probable that towards the close of the fifth century A.D. they were overpowered by the Viṣṇukuṇḍins whose history will be treated in the next volume.

Cites (11)