revival of the ancient Saivaite faith was due. The exploits of Rāmayya are placed shortly before A.D. 1162, in which year Bijjala is said to have completed his usurpation of the sovereignty by assuming the paramount titles. Rāmayya was thus a contemporary of Basava, but the Ablūr inscription makes no mention of the latter.
This fresh evidence does not appear to run counter to the commonly accepted story of the origin of the Lingāyats. It confirms the theory that the religion of Siva received a great impetus at this period, but there is nothing in the inscription ascribing to Rāmayya the position of a reformer of Saivaite doctrines. He appears as the champion of Siva against the rival creeds, not as the Saivaite Luther who is attacking the priestly mysticism of the Saivaite divines; and, as Dr. Fleet points out, there is nothing improbable in the mention of several persons as helping on the same movement. Both Rāmayya and Basava are, however, represented in these inscriptions as being the chief of Saivaite Brāhmans, and there is no mention of any schism such as the Protestant revolt which is associated with the name of Luther. It is possible, therefore, that the establishment of the Lingāyat sect may have been brought about by the followers of these two great men — a fact that is hinted at in Lingāyat tradition by the very name of Channabasava, which means Basava the beautiful, because, according to the Channabasava Purāna, he was more beautiful in many respects than Basava, who is represented as receiving instruction from his superior nephew in important points connected with their faith. The two inscriptions and numerous others, which have been deciphered by the same authority, are of the greatest value from a historical point of view, and paint in bold
