The Pandyan Kingdom from the Earliest Times to the Sixteenth Century c21.8

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.