Page:Tamil studies.djvu/361

334 after A. D. 770; but the impossibility of the first has been proved in the previous pages.

The rich Agrahara referred to in the inscription should have been deserted and the shrine itself almost neglected at the time of Nammalvar, as it now is, owing to the ominous death of the builder of the temple before its completion and the unproductive rocky soil of the surrounding country. It is evident that a sufficiently long period, say at least one century and a half, should have elapsed between its creation and total abandonment; that is this shrine and Agrahara should have fallen into ruins only some time before A. D. 900. And this must have been the period of our Alvar's existence.

(9) The most important argument in favour of our theory that Satagopan was the last of all the Vaishnava Saints is furnished by the age of Nathainuni, one of his two esteemed disciples. Traditions relating to his life are conflicting and even scholars do not agree on this point. Mr. S. Krishnaswany Aiyangar seems to believe the statement of the orthodox Vaishnavas that Nathamuni was born in A.D. 582 and died in A.D. 922. He goes on to say that 'it would certainly be in keeping with the most cherished tradition of the Vaishnavas that arrangement made by the Alvar (Tirumangai Alvar, A. D. 750) for the recital of Tiruvoymoli of Nammalvar had fallen into desuetude in the days of Nathamuni and he had to revive it at Srirangam after much ado'. And, Mr. T. Rajagopa-