|
The Indian Analyst
|
|
South Indian Inscriptions |
EPIGRAPHIA INDICA
7 sina vanru Āḷu[Bā ?]
J. Veludurti Inscription of Uttamaditya-Cholamaharaja. This record[1] is engraved on the three sides of a stone in front of this Chennakēśavasvāmin temple at Veludurti, Kamalāpuram taluk, adjacent to the inscription of Erikal-Muturāju Puṇyakumāra, edited above (Ins. E). On palaeographical grounds the record may be referred to about the same date as the Mālēpāḍu stone inscription of Satyāditya[2] and may be assigned to the second quarter of the 8th century A. D. The writing is more cursive than ornamental and the engraving has not been done in a uniform manner. The same letter is written in different styles. Thus the forms of b in lines 17 and 22 differ from each other. The latter b is of the same form as the b in line 13 of the Mālēpāḍu stone inscription of Satyāditya. Attention may be drawn to l subscript (l. 15), ṇ (l. 18), r (l. 12), which appear to be in a transition stage from the earlier square type to the later cursive form. The record reveals a few orthographical peculiarities and contains some archaic Telugu words. It is interesting to note that in the kunrugu (l. 26) which is made up of two words kunru and agu the initial vowel of the latter word is dropped instead of the final vowel of the former as is obtaining in similar sandhis of u and a at present. A similar instance has been noted in ins. D. above (l. 7).
The word chakshi in l. 20 meaning ‘ witness ’ (sākshi) may have been pronounced popularly as chākshi and then contracted into chakshi. Koṭṭali (l. 30) may be taken to mean ‘ engraver ’. In the proper name, Vēṇa Vōjanru (ll. 18-20) the suffix -vōjanru occurs in combination with many proper names in Telugu inscriptions of a later period. The word vōja (vōju) seems to signify an artisan or one who is skilled in the use of tools. It is probably derived from the Sanskrit ōjas meaning ‘ skill in the use of weapons ’ or alternately from upādhyāya (Skt.) through its Prākṛit forms, Uvajjha, Ojha, etc. In the latter case vōja should be taken to mean teacher. The record is issued in the reign of king Uttamāditya Chōla-Mahārāja and registers the gift of a pannavīsa by a certain Immaḍi Ītō (or Ratō) to Chēdiśarmmā, a Brāhmaṇa of Kōsiya, i.e., of the Kauśika-gōtra. The Inscription is stated to have been composed (vrāsiri) by Erama, the Brāhmaṇa (pāra) of Kachēru and engraved (koṭṭe) by the koṭṭali, Kuṇandāḷuvānru. The witnesses to the deed were Eyarikallu-kulagaṭṭuḍu (i.e., kulagaṭṭuḍu of Ēyariakallu, possibly same as Erigallu) and Vendaraṁbuḷu Vēṇa Vōjunru, i.e., Vēṇa, the vōju of the place called Vendaraṁbuḷu. The king of the present inscription, Uttamāditya Chōla Mahārāja, can be identified with Uttamāditya, evidently the son of Vikramāditya II, who figures as Sāmanta in the Chilamakūru inscription of Vikramāditya II (ins. H) wherein it is stated that in company with (his mother) Chōlamahādēvī, he was ruling at Chiruṁbūru (modern Chilmakuru). He seems to have succeeded his father, and the present inscription was issued when he was ruling the earth (prithivīrājyaṁchēya). Thus, of Vikramāditya’s two sons, Uttamāditya I and Satyāditya, Uttamāditya was probably the elder as he is found associated with the queen (his mother) and holding the office of Sāmanta while his father was reigning and later on succeeded him. Regarding Satyāditya it is _________________________
[1] From impressions secured by M. V. R. and from those secured later by the Epigraphy Department. A. R.
No. 297 of 1937-38.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| > |
|
>
|
