The Pandyan Kingdom from the Earliest Times to the Sixteenth Century c21: Additional Notes

The Pāṇḍyan Kingdom from the Earliest Times to the Sixteenth Century c21

Language: English

Additional Notes

c21.1

*Page 2, n. 1.*—See also Mr. Krishna Sastri’s observations in his Introduction to the *S.I.I.*, vol. iii, p. 1.

c21.2

*Page 8, l. 3.*—Iraṇḍāvadin edir padināṅkavadu.

*Page 18, l. 13.*—E. H. Warmington—*The Commerce Between The Roman Empire and India*—gives an excellent account of this trade and is very fully documented. See under ‘Pandyan’ in the index, and specially pp. 59-60. ‘From the very beginning of the Roman Empire the Pandya people had probably taken the leading part in encouraging the Romans to come and trade, for they had sent, as we have seen, an embassy to Augustus.’

c21.4

*Page 26, l. 24.*—*Puṟam* 15 may be compared with the following from the Vēḷvikkuḍi grant (ll. 31-2) about the same king: ‘Kol-yānai-palav-ōṭṭi-kkūḍā-mannar-kuḷan tavirtta Palyāga-Muḍukuḍumi-p Peruvaḷudi.’

c21.5

*Page 27, l. 16.*—The larger Śinnamanūr plates (ll. 100-2) seem to mention another battle at Citramuyari along with that at Talaiyālaṅānam, and they add that two enemies of the Pāṇḍyan kings lost their lives in these battles. The text is: ‘Ambor-Citramuyari-um-Talaiālam-kānattiṟ-ṟannokkam-iruvendarai-kkolai-vāḷiṟ-ṟalai-tumittu-kkuṟa-ttalaiyin-kūṭṭoḷittum’. In his introduction (*S.I.I.*, vol. iii, p. 445) to these plates, Mr. Krishna Sastri assumes: (*a*) that Citramuyari was also fought by Neḍuñjeḷiyan, and (*b*) that the two enemies who were killed were the Chola and the Chera kings.

c21.6

*Page 34, ll. 1-8.*—araṇeṟi-mudaṟṟē-yaraśinkoṟra madanāl, namarena-kkōl-kōḍādu piṟarena-kkunam koḷḷādu ñayiṟṟanna venti-ṟalāṇmaiyum tiṅgaḷanna taṇperuñjāyalum vāṇattanna vaṇmaiyu-mūṉṟu-muḍaiyai-yāki . . . nī nīḍu vāḷiya neḍundakai.

c21.7

*Pages 39-41.*—In editing the Śinnamanūr plates (*S.I.I.*, vol. iii, part iv, pp. 447-8) Mr. Krishna Sastri follows Mr. Venkayya’s arrangement of the genealogy of the Pandya kings mentioned in the Vēḷvikkuḍi and the larger Śinnamanūr plates. He admits that the first king Arikēsari of the larger Śinnamanūr plates at first appears to be the same as Arikēsari Māravarman,— No. 4 of the Vēḷvikkuḍi grant; but he feels constrained to reject this identification, and his reasons may be briefly examined. First, he holds that Arikēsari (Vēḷvikkuḍi, 4) did not fight with the Pallava king as did Arikēsari, the first king of the Śinnamanūr plates. This rests on his supposition that Vilvēli against whom Arikēsari of Vēḷvikkuḍi fought at Nelvēli was ‘perhaps a Chera’. But it should be noted that the campaigns of this king against the Kēraḷa ruler are mentioned separately in the Vēḷvikkuḍi grant, and that Nelvēli is coupled with Śankaramangai in the Śinnamanūr grant as having been fought against the Pallavas.

c21.8

Secondly, Mr. Sastri says that the battle of Śankaramangai is not mentioned among the battles fought by No. 4 Vēḷvikkuḍi, but his grandson No. 6 ‘is clearly said to have crushed the Pallava power’. Surely, the facts (a) that Śankaramangai is not mentioned in the Vēḷvikkuḍi grant at all in relation to either No. 4 or No. 6, and (b) that Nelvēli is a common factor between No. 4 of Vēḷvikkuḍi and No. 1 of Śinnamanūr suggest a conclusion very different from that of Mr. Sastri. And it is strange that he should underrate the mention of Nelvēli by name in the Vēḷvikkuḍi grant among the achievements of No. 4 and imagine that No. 6 fought at Śankaramangai because he is said to have crushed the Pallava power. It will be noticed also that, by his scheme, he has to postulate a second fight at Nelvēli ‘against the very same or a different Chera king’ for which there is no reason suggested.

c21.9

Thirdly, Mr. Sastri says: ‘The title Parānkuśa, given to Arikēsari in the Tamil portion of the Śinnamanūr grant, makes it difficult to connect him with the first Arikēsari Māravarman (No. 4) of the Vēḷvikkuḍi plates’. But one may ask, how is it less difficult to connect him with No. (6)? The title Parānkuśa does not occur in the Vēḷvikkuḍi grant at all, and it may be suggested that the other title ‘Asamasaman’ which No. 4 gets in the Vēḷvikkuḍi grant makes it, if anything, easier to identify Parānkuśa with him, rather than with his grandson. And the chief name of the king Arikēsari is common to both records and has the same import as the Parānkuśa title.

c21.10

Lastly, Mr. Sastri says: ‘The fact that Parānkuśa Arikēsari’s grandson is called Rājasimha in the Śinnamanūr plates suggests the possibility of Arikēsari himself being also called Rājasimha, which title we actually find for the first time given to Tērmāran (No. 6) in the Vēḷvikkuḍi plates’. It is clearly simpler to say that the two Rājasimhas of the Śinnamanūr and Vēḷvikkuḍi grants are identical as well as the two Arikēsaris. Moreover, it is very risky to infer the titles of a king from those of his successors as is done by Mr. Sastri. Thus, none of the considerations brought forward by Mr. Sastri can be accepted as establishing Mr. Venkayya’s system of genealogy, and the reis no reason to modify the conclusions stated by me at p. 41. It may be added that on the other system, we know nothing of Nos. (8) and (9) (of Mr. Sastri’s genealogical table), the so-called Rājasimha II and Varaguṇa I respectively, as neither the Vēḷvikkuḍi nor the Śinnamanūr plates give an account of their reigns.

c21.11

Page 42, n. 1.—The Śinnamanūr grants have since been published in S.I.I., vol. iii, part iv, Cf. Mr. Krishna Sastri’s observations on the smaller Śinnamanūr plates at p. 447. He thinks that the donor of these plates was Parāntaka Neḍunjaḍayan or an immediate successor of his.

c21.12

Page 44, l. 4.—Kaṇṭaka-Śōdanai tānśeydu.

c21.13

Page 45, l. 7.—Sewell fixes the date of accession between March 22nd and November 22nd, A.D. 862 on the strength of No. 84 of 1910. See Rangachari, Inscriptions of the Madras Presidency under Trichinopoly 683.

c21.14

Page 49.—Attention may also be drawn to the expressions ‘Kali-araśan-vali-taḷara’ (l. 90) and ‘Kalippagai’ (l. 100) in the account of Parāntaka Neḍunjaḍayan’s reign in the Vēḷvikkuḍi grant. Mr. Krishna Sastri interprets these phrases as referring to the Kali age, though, elsewhere, he accepts the suggestion that the Kaḷabhras were of the Kalikula (E. I., xvii, pp. 306 n, 307–8).

c21.15

Page 50, ll. 8–10.—Taraṇi mangaiyaíppirarpāl urimai-ttiravidin nikki-ttanpāl-urimai nanganam-amaitta.

c21.16

Page 51, ll. 14–15.—Villavarum (vanai) Nelvēli-um viri-polirccangara-mangai-Pallavarum (vanaiyum) pingaṇḍa (puraṅgaṇḍa) Parāṅkuśan. The readings within brackets are those of S.I.I., vol. iii, part iv.

c21.17

Page 56, n. 2.—Mr. Krishna Sastri appears to have changed his view as he mentions Śengōḍu and Puḍankōḍu as battles won by Raṇadhīra.

c21.18

Page 61, ll. 11-12.—Vāttiya-kēya sangītangalāl maliveydiya Vangalandai-vaidyakulam.

c21.19

Page 63, l. 5.—Kunramannadōr-Kōil.

c21.20

Page 77, n. 1.—cf. Mr. Krishna Sastri’s remarks at p. 449 of S.I.I., vol. iii.

c21.21

Page 79, l. 8.—Contra. Mr. Krishna Sastri (ibid) who takes her to be a Chola princess.

c21.22

Page 80, n. 1.—Summarizing the larger Sinnamanūr plates, Mr. Krishna Sastri says of this Rājasimha that he ‘defeated the king of Tanjai (Tanjore) at Naippūr, fought a battle at Kodumbai (Kodumbālūr) the seat of one of the powerful Chola subordinates, burnt Vanji and destroyed the king of southern Tanjai (perhaps another subordinate of the Cholas) at Nāval.’ (S.I.I., vol. iii, p. 449).

c21.23

Page 82, n. 1.—Mr. Krishna Sastri (S.I.I., vol. iii, part iv, Introd., p. 10) says that the Kanyākumārī record (of Vīrarājēndra) states that Parāntaka ‘killed the Pāndya with his whole army’. But as this is contradicted by the Tiruvālangādu plates and the Mahāvamśa, the expression hatva of the Kanyākumārī record must be taken to mean ‘defeated.’

c21.24

Page 85, l. 13.—cf. Mr. Krishna Sastri’s remarks at p. 7 of his Introd. to S.I.I., vol. iii, part iv.

c21.25

Page 86, l. 19.—Kōttai alittu nanru seydu pattār.

c21.26

Page 86, l. 20.—Ul vittu-kkōyircēvakar.

c21.27

Page 88, l. 3.—Nirōdatti-kkoduttān.

c21.28

Page 88, ll. 7-8.—Mannavanadu paniyāl vadivamaiya-ppidi sūlndān.

c21.29

Page 88, l. 11.—ellaiyakattu-kkallum-kalliyum nātti.

c21.30

Page 88, ll. 24 ff.—pirammadēyamāka-kkārānmaiyum Miyāt-ciyum ulladanga sarvaparihāramāka nirōdatti kkudu-kkap-pattadu.

c21.31

Page 89, ll. 25 ff.—enru ninravan viññāppiyanjeyya nanru nanrenru muruvalittu nattānin palamaiyādal kātti nī kolkavenna nātta-rran palamaiyādal kāttinān āngappoludēy.

c21.32

Page 89, l. 32.—Nāttu.

c21.33

Page 92, ll. 7 ff.—ivvottina parīsu ney attuvippadarkku amain-du punaippattōm sirrambar patiyum pādamūlattōmum.

c21.34

Page 95, l. 26.—enniranda palliccandangalum.

c21.35

Page 98, ll. 7 ff.—(Ko)nnavil kūrvērkōn Nedumāran ten-kūdar-kōn tennan kondādum ten-Tirumāl-irunjōlaiyē.

c21.37

*Page 101, n. 1.*—*Contra* Mr. Krishna Sastri—Introduction to *S.I.I.*, vol. iii, part iv, pp. 14–17. The Madras Museum Plates are referred by Mr. Sastri to ‘the uncle and immediate predecessor of Rājarāja I’ (*S.I.I.*, vol. iii, p. 267). There is nothing in the record that goes against our view that these plates may be assigned to Rājēndra I. In fact, the mention of *adikārikaḷ Śoḷa mūvēnda-vēḷar-emberumān* in l. 14 supports our view, as this *Śoḷamūvēndavēḷār* was the commander of Rājēndra’s army (*S.I.I.*, vol. iii, part iv, introd. p. 17).

c21.38

*Page 103, n. 1.*—See also Mr. Krishna Sastri—*ibid.*, p. 15.

c21.39

*Page 105, n. 1.*—See *Annual Report Trav. Arch. Dept.*, 1920–21, p. 65 and *S.I.I.*, vol. iii, p. 469 for a defence of the traditional view of Kāṇḍaḷūr-Śālai and the fleet maintained by the Chera kings there.

c21.40

*Page 108, n. 1.*—See, however, Mr. Krishna Sastri’s introduction, p. 19, in *S.I.I.*, vol. iii, part iv, for other evidence in support of Hultzsch’s view.

c21.41

*Page 115, l. 2.*—ūriḍuvarippāḍu.

c21.42

*Page 115, l. 4.*—Kāṇi-uḍaiyār.

c21.43

*Page 116, l. 19.*—vilai ōlai śeydu nīrōḍaṭṭikkoḍuttōm.

c21.44

*Page 123, l. 20.*—Tiru-vaḷara-cceyam vaḷara tennavar-tam kuḷam vaḷara-varumaṟai nāṅavai vaḷara-vanaittuḷakanduyar nīṅa-ttenmadurā-puri-ttōṅṟi.

c21.45

*Page 124, l. 18.*—Tennavar tam Kuḷadeyvam.

c21.46

*Page 135, l. 18.*—Pāṇḍiyanai muḍittalai-koṇḍaruḷiya.

c21.47

*Page 135, l. 21.*—avan muḍimēl aḍi vaittu.

c21.48

*Page 142, l. 6.*—vanjinan-gūṟu madakaḷirivaṟnda venjina vēṅai villuḍan-oḷippa.

c21.49

*Page 144, l. 5.*—Pū maruviya tirumaḍandaiyum.

c21.50

*Page 145, l. 13.*—Śōṇāḍu Koṇḍaruḷiya; Śōṇāḍukoṇḍu muḍikoṇḍa-śōḷapurattu vīrar abhiṣēkam paṇṇiyaruḷiya; Śōṇāḍu vaḷangiyaruḷiya.

c21.51

Books.

c21.52

Aiyangar, R. Raghava (ed.) *Ahanānūṛu*, with Introduction and notes (Madras, 1920).

c21.53

Aiyangar, Dr. S. K.—*The Beginnings of South Indian History* (Madras, 1918).

c21.54

Aiyangar, Dr. S. K.—*Ancient India* (Luzac, 1911).

c21.55

” ” ” —*South India and Her Muhammadan Invaders* (Oxford Univ. Press, 1921).

c21.56

Aiyangar, Dr. S. K. *Maṇimēkalai in its Historical Setting* (Luzac, 1928).

c21.57

Aiyangar, M. Srinivasa. *Tamil Studies* (Madras, 1914).

c21.58

Aiyar, Pandit A. Gopala. *Nandikkalambakam* (Madura, 1927).

c21.59

Aiyar, A. Narayanaswami. *Naṟṟiṇai* (Madras).

c21.60

Aiyar, K. V. S. *Historical Sketches of Ancient Dekhan* (Madras, 1917).

c21.61

Aiyar, R. Satyanatha. *The Nayaks of Madura* (Oxford University Press, 1924).

c21.62

Aiyar, Pandit V. Swaminatha (ed.).— *Paṭṭuppāṭṭu* (Madras, 1889). *Puṟanānūṛu*, Second Edition (Madras, 1923). *Śilappadikāram*, Second Edition (Madras, 1920). *Tiruvilaiyāḍal Purāṇam* of Perumbarṟappuliyūr Nambi. Second Edition (Madras, 1927).

c21.63

Bhandarkar, D. R. *Asoka* (Calcutta, 1925).

c21.64

Bhandarkar, R. G. *Early History of the Dekkan* (Bombay, 1884).

c21.65

” *Vaiṣṇavism, Śaivism and Minor Religious Systems* (Strasburg, 1913).

c21.66

Caldwell, Rev. R. *Tinnevelly* (Madras, 1881).

c21.67

” *A Comparative Grammar of the Dravidian Languages.* (Revised) (London, 1913).

c21.68

*Cambridge History of India*, vol. iii (Cambridge, 1928).

c21.69

Damodaram Pillai (ed.). *Iṟaiyaṉārapporuḷ* (Madras, 1899).

c21.70

Dubreuil, G. J. *The Pallavas* (English Transl.) (Pondicherry, 1917).

c21.71

Eliot, Sir C. *Hinduism and Buddhism*. 3 vols. (Arnold, 1921).

c21.72

Elliot, Sir W. *Coins of Southern India* (Trübner, 1886).

c21.73

Elliot and Dowson. *The History of India as told by its own Historians*, vol. iii (Trübner, 1871).

c21.74

BIBLIOGRAPHY

c21.75

Gangādēvī. *Madhurāvijayam* (ed.). Harihara Sastri and Srinivasa Sastri (Trivandram, 1916).

c21.76

Geiger. *Mahāvaṃśa* (Eng. Tr.) (Pali Text Society, 1912).

c21.77

Gopalan, R. *The Pallavas of Kāñchī* (Madras University, 1929).

c21.78

Gopinatha Rao. *History of Śrī Vaiṣṇavas* (Madras, 1923).

c21.79

Heras, Rev. H. *The Araviḍu Dynasty of Vijayanagar*, vol. I (Madras, 1927).

c21.80

Kanakasabhai, V. *The Tamils Eighteen Hundred Years Ago* (Madras, 1904).

c21.81

Kaye, G. R. *Hindu Astronomy* (Memoir No. 18 of the A.S.I.) (Calcutta).

c21.82

*Kuṟuntogai* (Vellore).

c21.83

Navalar, Arumuga (ed.). *Periyapurāṇam* (Madras, 1917).

c21.84

Nelson. *A Manual of the Madura Country* (Madras).

c21.85

Ragozin. *Vedic India* (Unwin, 1895).

c21.86

Seshagiri Sastri. *Tamil Literature* (Madras, 1904).

c21.87

Sewell. *Lists of Antiquities, etc.*, Madras, A.S.S.I., vols. I and II (Madras, 1882, 1884).

c21.88

Slater, G. *The Dravidian Element in Indian Culture* (Benn, London, 1924).

c21.89

Smith, V. A. *Early History of India*. Fourth Edition (Oxford, 1924).

c21.90

,, *Oxford History of India*. Second Edition (Oxford, 1923).

c21.91

Swamikkannu Pillai, L. D. *An Indian Ephemeris* (Madras).

c21.92

Tufnell, R. H. C. *Hints to Coin-collectors in Southern India* (Madras, 1889).

c21.93

Turnour and Wijesinha. *The Mahāvaṃśa* (Colombo, 1889).

c21.94

Warmington, E. H. *The Commerce Between the Roman Empire and India* (Cambridge, 1928).

c21.95

Yule and Cordier. *The Book of Ser Marco Polo*. 3 vols. (Murray, 1921).

Linked texts (4)

Puṟanāṉūṟu — Kapilar & Auvaiyār (Caṅkam), Tamil
Vēḷvikkuṭi grant, time of Neṭuñcaṭaiyaṉ, year 3 — Tamil
Mahāvaṃsa — Pāli
South Indian Inscriptions