Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

The Colas c11.77

The Cōḷas c11.77

Language
English

c11.77

Before this straggling notice the early Cōḷas is brought to a close, some attempt must be made to fix their age a little more precisely than has been done up to this point. One thing is clear, that these kings are anterior to the earliest time to which we are taken by the existing monuments of the historical period. Though the names of Uraiyūr and Kāvērippaṭṭinam still survive, nothing has been discovered yet in these places that furnishes even a trace of their former greatness.¹⁰⁹ We are left only with the evidence of literature and synchronisms with the history of neighbouring lands. When the suggestion was first made that Gajabāhu, the king of Ceylon, who was the contemporary of the Cēra Śenguṭṭuvan, was no other than Gajabāhu I of the *Mahāvamsa*, who ruled from A.D. 113 to 135, Dr. Hultzsch entered a caveat, saying:¹¹⁰ 'With due respect to Mr. Kumaraswami's sagacity, I am not prepared to accept this view, unless the identity of the two Gajabāhus is not only supported by the mere identity of name, but proved by internal reasons, and until the chronology of the earlier history of Ceylon has been subjected to a critical examination.' Now, the chronology of Ceylonese history has been the subject of considerable discussion, and as a result,¹¹¹ the dates of the early kings of Ceylon are as well established as can be desired. There is only one Gajabāhu in the Ceylon list before the twelfth century, and he ruled from a.d. 173 to 195.¹¹² The only question, therefore, is whether the synchronism suggested by the *Śilappadikāram* between Śeṅguṭṭuvan and Gajabāhu is to be taken into account, or whether, in view of the romantic and the supernatural elements in that poem, this synchronism must be rejected as untrustworthy. If there were no other factors to be considered, our answer to such a question must remain inconclusive. But there are several important factors which render it difficult, not to say impossible, for anyone to reject the synchronism, and with it the scheme of chronology arising from it.

Cites (2)