Dr. R. Nagaswamy #6B8E23 01-Jan-2007 The dates of Periyāḻvār, Āṇḍāḷ, Thirumaṅgai and Nammḻvār are discussed in this paper. It is necessary to note before proceeding further that the chronology has undergone revision in the light of an inscription found on the bed of Vaikai river at Madurai. The record is dated in the 50th regnal year a Pāṇḍya ruler named Māran who had the title Arikesari. He is credited with the performance of 'Hiraṇyagarabha' and 'Tulābhāra'. I have identified the king with Arikesari Parānkusa Māravarman who ruled between 650-700 CE. On the basis of this record it is seen that Thiru Jñānasambandar was a contemporary of this Neḍumāran. The Pāṇḍyan chronology as revised is given below. PĀṆḌYAN GENEALOGY Kaḍungon 560-590 Māravarman Avanicūlāmaṇi 590-620 Cendan 620-650 Arikesari Parāṅkusa Māravarman 650-700 Koccadaiyan Raṇadhīran 700-730 Māravarman Rājasimhan 730-768 Parāntaka NeḍuñjaḍaiyanVaraguna I 768-815 Śrīmāra Śrīvallabha 815-862 Varaguna II 862 Among the Vaishnavite Ālvārs, Periyāḻvār refers in his verse to a Pāṇḍya Ko-Neḍumāran. M. Raghava Iyengar in his 'Age of the Āḻvār' differed from T.A.Gopinatha Rao and held that the contemporary of Periyāḻvār was Māravarman Rājasimha (730-768 CE) father of Parāntaka Neḍuñjadaiyan. Parāntaka Neḍuñjaḍaiyan was a Parama Vaiṣhṇava who erected a Viṣhṇu temple at Kanchivāy Perur. Raghava Iyengar held that Parāntaka derived his Viṣhṇu-bhakti from his father Māravarman Rājasimha and that Rājasimha should have been converted to Vaishnavism by Periyāḻvār. T. A. Gopinatha Rao in his 'History of the Srī Vaiṣhṇavas,' has suggested that Periyāḻvār was a contemporary of Srī Māra Srīvallalbha, identical with Srīvallabha Avanīpasekhara of Sittannavāsal inscription. Mr. Rao's conclusion is based on the identity of the name Srīvallabha, said to be a contemporary of Periyāḻvār according to Guruparamparā. Prof. K. A. Nilakanta Sastri held that "all that we can infer is that if this Neḍumāran is the same as the contemporary of Jñāanasambandar, this Āḻvār may also be assigned to their age and likewise his daughter Āṇḍāḷ. It seems more likely that the reference is to Śrī Māra Śrīvallabha". Śrī Māra Śrīvallabha is assigned to Circa 815¬–862. This probably influenced the learned Professor to prefer the later date. While discussing the date of Periyāḻvār two points deserve to be carefully noted. (1) The saint himself refers to a Pāṇḍya Ko-Neḍumāran as his contemporary. (2) The 'Guruparamparā' refers to a Pāṇḍya, Śrī vallabha as his contemporary. We must look for a Pāṇḍya who had both these titles. Śrī Māra, the son of Parāntaka Neḍuñjaḍaiyan is called in the larger Sinnamanur and Dalavaypuram copper plates as Śrīvallabha. Śrīvallabha seems to have been his 'abiṣhekanāma', but whether he had the title Ko-Neḍu-māra was not proved so far by any epigraph. According to Sinnamanur and Dalavaypuram plates, Srī Māra Srīvallabha, the son of Parāntaka Varaguṇa I, won significant victories at Kunnūr, Viliñjam, Kumbakonam and Ceylon. An epigraph coming from Erukkangudi, Sattur taluk. Ramnad District, published recently (S I I xiv) throws valuable light on the problem. It refers to Pāṇḍya Śrīvallabha who conquered the places from Kunnūr to Ceylon. The point of interest in this epigraph is that this Srīvallabha was also called Ko-Neḍumāran. The Erukkangudi, inscription is evidently that of Śrī Māra Śrīvallabha, the son of Parāntaka Varaguṇa, and that he had also the title Ko-Neḍumāran and that he conquered Kunnūr, Vilijñam, Kumbakonam and Ceylon. There can hardly be any doubt that Periyāḻvār was a contemporary of this Ko-Neḍumāran Srīvallabha and should have lived between 815 – 862 CE. On the other hand no epigraph has so far been found that gives either the title Srīvallabha or Ko-Neḍumāran to Rājasimha, the father of Parāntaka Neḍuñjaḍaiyan, whom Raghava Iyengar held as the contemporary of Periyāḻvār. I therefore agree with T. A. Gopinatha Rao and K. A. N. Sastri, that the contemporary of Periyāḻvār was Srī Māra Srīvallabha and that the Vaiṣhṇavite Saint flourished in the 9th century CE. The date of Periyāḻvār is now firmly established. Āṇḍāḷ the daughter of Periyāḻvār should also be assigned to the same period. Date of Thirumaṅgai Scholars have discussed the date of Thirumaṅgai Āḻvār in detail and have arrived at an acceptable date. The date of this Āḻvār can be fixed with certain amount of accuracy as he refers to his contemporary Pallava ruler Nandivarman. Thirumaṅgai also lists his conquests which are corroborated by copper plates. Thirumaṅgai sings the battle of Mannai where Nandivarman Pallavamalla is said to have defeated the Pāṇḍya. This is corroborated by a copper plate from the Udayendram plates, of Nandi in which his general Udayacandra is praised for his victory over the 'Pāṇḍyasena' at Mannaik-kuḍi-grāma. ('Maṇṇaik-kuḍi-grāme Pāṇḍyasenām jitavān'.) Udayendram plate was issued in 752 CE ( 21st regnal year) by Nandi II . The Pāṇḍya ruler who opposed Nandi was Māravarman Rājasimha. Thirumaṅgai also refers to the battle of Karuvūr in which the Pallava is said to have won. A new evidence has come to light regarding the battle of Karuvūr which has not yet received due attention. The Dalavaypuram plates mention that Parāntaka Varaguna, defeated the Pallava at Karuvūr. This gets indirect confirmation from another source. The Sīvaramangalam plates refers to Pāṇḍya Parāntaka's fight with Atiya, at Pugaḻiyūr and Ayirūr on the northern bank of the river Kaveri. These places are situated near Karur. The same charter also states, that Parāntaka Varaguna defeated the Pallava and Keralan, who came to help the Atiya. Evidently the battle of Pugaliyur was followed upto Karuvūr where an indescive battle was fought. Both the Pallava and the Pāṇḍya claim victory at Karuvūr. Whatever the result of the war might be, one thing is certain, that Thirumaṅgai who sings this battle, was a contemporary of Nandivarman Pallavamalla (730-795) and Parāntaka Neḍuñjadaiyan(768-815). (Nandivarman Pallava has fought with two Pāṇḍyas, Māravarman Rajasimha and his son Parāntaka Neḍuñjaḍaiyan) Thirumaṅgai was a contemporary of two Pāṇḍya rulers Rājasimha I and Neḍunjaḍaiyan is thus attested. On the Pallava side, he was a contemporary of Nandivarman Pallavamalla. (731–796) It must be mentioned that this Vaishnava Āḻvār, sings in one of his verse, Vairamegha who is generally identified with Dantivarma Pallava, the son of Nandivarman from 795 to 840 in the first half of 9th century CE. Thirumaṅgai is therefore taken to be a contemporary of Danti as well. As such we may assign Thirumaṅgai to the reign of Nandivarman. Thirumaṅgai's date may be taken as 730–800 CE. Date of Nammāḻvār Almost, the same period may be assigned to Saṭagopan reverentially called Nammāḻvār. Nammāḻvār signs Varagunamangai, and Srīvaramangalam, both places established by Parāntaka Neḍuñjaḍaiyan(768-815). Madhurakavi Āḻvār was a desciple of Nammāḻvār. A Madhurakavi occurs as a minister of Parāntaka I during the early years of his reign, as seen from the Anaimalai epigraph. Madhura Kavi was dead at the time of Anaimalai inscription. As such Nammāḻvār's end could be placed in the middle of 8th cent. His date of birth would be circa 750 CE. Nammāḻvār had two other names which are significant. He was called Parāṅkusan and Māran. In all probability the names Parāṅkusa and Māran were derived after Arikesari Parankusa Māravarman of the Vaigai bed-epigraph who was a powerful ruler (650-700). Vaishnavite tradition makes Thirumaṅgai and Nammāḻvār contemporaries. Our studies also seem to point to the same direction as both of them lived in the later half of 8th cent. While the 'Guruparampara', makes Periyāḻvār, also a contemporary of Thirumaṅgai and Nammāḻvār, our studies show that Periyāḻvār lived about 40 -50 years later in the 9th century A.D. The Vaigai bed inscription of Cendan Māran has opened up new avenues of enquiry relaating to the chronology of the early Pāṇḍyas and the history of Vaishnavism in South India. As a result of the above study the following are our conclusions:– 1) Thirumaṅgai was a contemporary of Rājasimha and his son Neḍuñjaḍaiyan of the Pāṇḍyas and Nandivarman Pallavamalla and his son Dantivarman Pallava and may be assigned between 730 and 800. 2) Nammāḻvār's date would be about 750 to 785 A.D. 3) Mdhura Kavi Āḻvār is to be assigned to around 760? 4) Periyāḻvār was a contemporary of Srī Māra Srīvallabha and his date would be Circa 800–870. 5) Āṇḍāḷ is to be assigned to the second half of the 9th century. 6) The impact of the Alvars poems are so great on the true devotees that they do not consider them as Human beings but as incarnations of various aspects of Godhood and as such will give very remote antiquity. The following traditional account given in Sri Vaishnava net sums up sensibly their approach and is rightly addressed to the devout and not to historians. “The Alvars are twelve in number. Eleven of them have sung of God and one, Madhurakavi, of his spiritual preceptor, Nammalvar. The chronological order in which they appeared, as accepted by the Rāmanuja school of Vaishnavam, is still a matter of controversy and historical research. Tradition places them roughly between 4200 and 2700 B.C. Historical, linguistic and literary research however, assigns to them a period from the fifth or the sixth to the ninth century A.D.”