Was he the lost of the Alvars.

 

The persistent and almost accepted tradition that Tirumangai was the last of the Alvars may now be examined. We have already seen that we cannot rely on the Jayanti-Mala dates and much less on the D.S. Charitam account. The Arayirappadi deals with the life of Nammalvar, last among the saints. The implication of chronological order in the Jiyar’s narration would indeed be clear from the introductory lines to the life of Kulashekhara. 2 These lines would show that the life of Nammalvar coming as it did, next to Tirumalisai in the chronological order, was specially dealth with last on account of his particular importance among the saints. We have therefore to infer that Tirumangai Alvar was the last among them according to the Jiyar’s Chronology. Nevertheless, the possibility of the Alvar’s contemporaneity with anyone or more of the others is not precluded, and we have already referred to the specific mention of Tirumangai’s contemporaneity with Tondaradippodi Alvar in the Arayirappadi 3. It turns out thus that even the Arayirappadi evidence is not quite conclusive on the point and particularly so as it merely gives the month and the Nakshatra for the birth of these saints.

Ofter times the story of inauguration of the Tiru-Adhyayana Utsavam in Shrirangam by the Alvar is cited to support the contention. Now, all that we know about this institution in the Shrirangam temple is from later day accounts 4. The Jiyar’s narration of the life of Tirumangai makes no mention of it at all. Even these latter-day accounts do not make it clear whether Tirumangai organized the recital of Nammalvar's Tiruvaymoli only or the whole of the Nalayiram while the latter may be deemed improbable, the temple practice would seem to affirm it. What seems more probable than either is that the Utsavam for the ceremonial recital of the whole of the Nalayiram was instituted long after the lives of the Alvars by the early Acharyas of Vaishnavism, if that were so, there seem to be no particular reason to hold that Tirumangai was the last of the Alvars on the basis of the Adhyayana institution in the Shrirangam temple. At any rate, the history of the institution itself requires to be carefully investigated before we can draw chronological conclusions from it.

2. See section on Kulashekhara – P. F. N. ante.

3. Arayirappadi Ed. Shrivaishnava Grantha Mudrapaka Sabha.

4. Parakalanpadi, an obscure pamphlet, for details regarding it.

Tradition apart, there is ample evidence in the Alvar’s own work, the Periya Tirumoli on which we can proceed to determine his date. Among several passages referring to Kings and contemporary events, the most important from our point of view may be examined.

 

1. The reference to ‘Vairamegha’: —

In his ‘ten’ on Attabhuyakaram at Kanchi the Alvar makes mention of the fact that the city was full of the prowess and glory of a certain monarch called Vairamegha. The passage in question runs as follows:……. (P. Tirumoli 2.8.10)

In its most Straightforward and simple interpretation the Passage will be seen to refer to a ‘Tondaiyarkon’ besides ‘Vairamegha and it would also appear that the former wag doing Obeisance to the latter. A free rendering of the passage in English may be texted as follows: —

‘The Attabhuyakaram at Kanchi which was full of prowess and glory of Vairamegha (decked)) with the garland of the crowns of monarchs doing obeisance to him and to whom the lord of the Tondaiyar was doing obeisance’.

It needs no Pointing out that ‘Tondaiyarkon’ refers to the Pallava monarch of the time and ‘Vairmeghan’ must equally Clearly refer to another Monarch who Probably over ran Kanchi and compelled Obeisance from the former, Such a state of affairs in Pallava History when Kano was conquered and the Pallava had to submit, though for a time, to a ‘Vairamagha’ is easily seen in Dantidurga’s (Rashtrakuuta) Conquest of Kanchi in 754. A.D. on the basis of inscriptional records mantioning at once the conquest and the possession of the title by the Rashtrakuuta monarch. The Pallava monarch of the time being Nandivarman Pallava Malla, the Alvar may be Understood to be referring to a contemporary even as is implied in the words ‘Vanangum’ (doing Obeisance) in the Passage. 5

5. K. Shrinivasa Pillai – ‘Tamilar Varalaru’.

The objection to this interpretation, viz., that the Alvar who has generally sung the glories of the Pallava monarch of his time is not likely to have referred even casually to his humiliation 5 need not be taken seriously, as it would appear from the records that the contest ended honourably for Pallavamalla with his marriage to Reva the daughter of the Rashtrakuta 6

There may be just this little difficulty, however, in interpreting the passage as above. If ‘Vanangum’ in the above passage is taken as the very referring itself to ‘Tondayarkon’. then the adjectival phrase qualifying ‘Vairameghan’ would stand as ‘Ninmudimalai’. The meaning of this phrase as such would not be so clear as that of the whole phrase ‘Vanangu Ninmudimalai’.

If, however, the phrase ‘Ninmudimalai’ itself can convey adequate meaning independently then the passage can easily refer to the conquest and suggest the contemporaneity of the Alvar with Nandivarman Pallavamalla.

We now turn to the other interpretation which would see a reference to only one monarch in the passage namely ‘Tondaiyarkon’ 7 The rendering of the lines would then be such as would take the whole phrase ‘Vananguninmudimalai Vairameghan’ to be in apposition with ‘Tondaiyarkon’ suggesting the meaning of the entire passage in some such way as the following.

‘The Attabhuyakarm at Kanchi full of the prowess and glory of Vairamegha, the lord of the Tondaiyar ("decked) with the garland of the crowns of monarchs doing obeisance to him.’ 6.

7. Ibid. K. G. Shankara also holds this view. J.O.R.S. 1927).

Now the question arises – who is this Pallava Vairamegha referred to by the Alvar?

It has been suggested that it could have been Pallava Malla himself and that he could have very well borne the title either independently as his forefathers possessed the titles like ‘Chitramegha’, ‘Mahamegha’, and ‘Shrimegha’ or in honour of his father-in-law the Rashtrakuta Dantidurga 8 While the latter suggestion is clearly ingenious, the former must be deemed baseless as we hear of no inscriptional record giving this title to Nandivarman. Besides, it seems quite absurd to maintain that the same title was borne by the Rashtrakuta monarch, his son-in-law, his grand-son and others, after him in a series.

Pandit M. Raghava Ayyangar would further argue the title ‘Vairamegha’ for Nandivarman on the basis of the close correspondence between the phrase ‘Vanangu minmudi-malai Vairameghan and the Sanskrit phrase ‘Pranatavanipati Makuta-malikalidha – caranaravinda referring to him in inscriptions. He would even presume that the Alvar merely translated the Sanskrit phrase referring to him. 9 It must, however, be clear from similar expressions referring to the glory of kings in general in inscriptions and literature, that the phrase, either in Sanskrit or in Tamil, is conventionally used to denote the might of any monarch. 10 In other words, while the Sanskritism of the phrase ‘Vananguninmudimalai’ might be granted, there seems to be no reason to make it refer to Nandivarman particularly.

On the other hand, it is clear, that the earliest Pallava who bore that title was Dantivarman, son and successor of Nandivarman Pallavamalla. 11 It is but natural that he acquired the title by discent from his maternal grand-father Dantidurga Rashtrakuta- We may then conclude from the manner of Tirumoli reference as implied in the term ‘Sulnda’ in the present tense that the Alvar was a contemporary of Dantivarman Pallava.”

We have so far seen that the passage may be differently interpreted the contemporaneity of the Alvar either with Pallavamalla or his son Dantivarman.

8. M. R. Ayyangarr Al. Kala Nilai P. 102.

9. Ibid. p. 103.

10. See the opening verse of the ‘ten’ on ‘Parameshwara Vinnagaram’ Nalayiram.

11. S.I.I. Vol. 6 No. 355 p. 167.

12. M.R. Ayyangar has shown that it is in the present tense contra see K.G. Shankara J. O. R. S. 1927.

 

2. The reference to the rout of the northern power: —

Verse of the Periya Tirumoli containing as it does a definitely clear contemporary reference will seem to clinch the issue further. There is a clear allusion in it to a battle in which the ‘Tennan’ and a northern king were routed by the warriors of Nangur. From the context, it is clear that the Alvar is referring to a Pallava victory over the Pandya and a northern power; for ‘Tennan’ in the Alvar’s works cannot but mean the Pandya king. It is equally clear from history that the northern power could have been no other than the Chalukyas, the agelong enemies of the Pal lavas who often coalesced with the Tamil powers against Pallava dominion. It follows then that the battle in which the warriors of Nangur are celebrated to have worsted the Pandya and the Chalukya must have been one of the episodes in the long series of the Pallava – Chalukya wars: the Nangur warriors must have fought in the ranks of the Pallava monarch.

Such being the allusion in the passage, we may now proceed to ascertain the date of the probable encounter referred to by the Alvar. Pandit M. Raghava Ayyangar has suggested that it must refer to the victory of Parameshvara Varman Pallava over the Chalukya Vikramaditya-I in the battle of Peruvalanallur in the Cola country. He would infer the Pandya alliance with the northern power on the presumption that Vikramaditya should have marched down to south and encamped at Uragapura only with the aid of the southern power He would further point out that the final battle having taken place in Peruvalanallur in the Chola Country, the warriors of Nangur would very well be inferred to have taken part in it. 13

13 M. R. Ayyangar * Al. Kalanilai pp. 111-119.

An examination of the availably record will show that the above is a misreading of the course of events leading to the memorable battle. The history of the previous Chalukya campaigns has revealed that the invading army first directed its attack on Kanchi. The Pallava forces usually met the invading force not far away from the capital and the issue was decided in and around the fortified walls of Kanchi first. There is no valid ground to think that Vikramaditya-I made a departure either in the route he took or in the method he adopted in his southern campaign. The Gadwal plates do point to the encampment at Uragapura 14 But the inferrence from this need not necessarily be that Vikramaditya advanced south through the Kongu country with Pandya assistance. He would as well come first to Kanci and lead his victorious army down south as far as Uragapura. in fact, this is what we get from the Gadwal plates. It mentions unequivocally the initial conquest of Kanci, and this 1s corroborated by the Kurnool plates of Vikramaditya-l", and the Sorab grant of Vinayaditya. 16 Having assumed that Vikramaditya came direct to Uragapura and encamped there and that subsequently he was met and beaten at Peruvalanallar, the Pandit has forced to his credit the evidence of Gadval Plate regarding the conquest of Kanchi. 17 That there is absolutely no need to do so has been shown by Rev. Heras in his Studies in Pallava History.” (Page 42-43) He has pointed out how the conquest of Kanchi was the first phase of Vikramaditya 's expedition, which, having begun victoriously enabled him to run through the Pallava territory and advance as far south as Uragapura and encamp there. While the Chalukya army was resting on its glory, Parameshvara Varman seems to have rallied round his forces, attacked the invader at Peruvalanallur and put him to an ignomenious flight. 18

14. Ep. In. Vol. 10. p 100.

15. J.B.B. R.A.S Vol. 16. P: 226

16. 1. A. 19 pp. 151-152

17. MR. Ayyangar ING Kalanilai-116. He cites Dr. Hultzch in support of his conclusion. (Ibid. F.N.2)

18. Heras. ‘Studies in Pallava History’ pp 42-47

We have seen that the southern march of the invader and the encampment at Uragapura after the fall of Kanchi could have been possible for the victorious army without any aid from the Tamil princes. At any rate, there seems to be no evidence from the records of any Tamil Power having actually supported Vikramaditya in this campaign. We are thus unable to see any clear reference to the defeat of a ‘Tennan’ or Pandya in this campaign.

Such an active alliance of the Pandya to the invading Chalukya is clearly pointed out by the records referring to Vikramaditya-II’s invasion of Kanchi during the reign of Nandivarman Pallavamalla cir 735 A D. (Heras) 19 From the Kendur and the Vakkaleri Plates of KIrtivarman-11 20, the Udayendran Plates and other Cola records 21 we see that Nandi was defeated and forced to flee from post to pillar in the Cola country pursued by the Chalukyan heir-apparent till he finally took refuge behind the walls of Nandipura.

19. Heras. ‘Studies in Pallava History’ Pages 42-47.

20. Ep. Ind. Vol. 9.

21. S. I. I. Vol. 2 p. 371.

We are also able to gather from the Chola records that all this was rendered possibly by the confused state of affairs in the early part of Pallavamalla’s reign wherein Citramaya aided by the Tamil powers attacked Nandi. It is just possible that Vikramaditya, having conquered Kanchi would have allied himself with Chitramaya also. We know how finally Udayachandra, the faithful General of the Pallava raised the siege of Nandipura and defeated his enemies and established him on the throne. The hostility shown by the Tamil powers to the Pallava in all these campaigns would enable us to infer that the reference to the rout of the Pandya along with the Chalukya in the passage might well be to these campaigns in the reign of Nandivarman Pallavamalla”. And as the manner of the reference to the warriors of Nangur who took part in these campaigns shows contemporaneity unmistakably, we will not be far wrong in assigning Tirumangai Alvar to the latter half of the 8th century A.D.

22. One view of the date of Nandivarman Pallava Malla and his successors is that it has to be reconsidered in the light of the possible date A.D. 728-29 to 730-31 arrived at for Parameshwara-Il, on the basis of inscriptions. See Art. on ‘The Date of Pallava Parameshvara-IP by N. Lakshminarayan Rao – Journal of Indian Hist. Vol. 13 Pt. 3 1952 pp. 287-292.