South Indian Inscriptions

EPIGRAPHIA INDICA

day of the month of Kārttika. The Tekkali plates of Dēvēndravarman1 register a grant made at the time of a lunar eclipse, but the month in which the eclipse occurred is stated only at the end where it is given as “ the 30th day of the month of Māgha.” This day according to the Pūrṇimānta system happens to be paurṇamī or the 15th day of the bright fortnight.

The localities mentioned in the grant are Saumyavana, Pratishṭhāpura, and Dāgha-pañchālī. It is of interest to note that this grant was issued from a forest-settlement,^[2] similar to Madhuvana, Tumbavana, Pusakavana (Pushyakavana), the dwelling places of some Buddhist monks and house-holders which are referred to in certain Brāhmī inscriptions from Bhilsā and Amarāvatī.^[3]

Saumya is the name of one of the forests wherein the Pāṇḍavas resided for some time during the period of their vanavāsa. It appears that this Saumyavana was either within Kaliṅga or on the borders thereof ; yet it cannot be located with certainty. In this connection it may be interesting to note that there was a town called Saumyapura^[4] from which the Kōṇḍēḍḍa grant of Dharmarājadēva of the Śailōdbhava family was issued. This town has not been indentified either. If it were the chief town of the forest colony of Saumyavana and named after it, then it may be concluded that this forest was in the direction of the ancient territory of the Śailōdbhava kings.

It may not be out of place here to point out that Raṇabhīta, the title assumed by Hastivarman, the successor of Sāmantavarman of the present grant, was actually the name of the earliest Śailōdbhava king, referred to both in the Buguḍa plates^[5] of Mādhavavarman and in the Kōṇḍēḍḍa grant of Dharmarājadēva, and that Hastivarman made a grant of some land to god Nārāyaṇa (Vishṇu), known also as Raṇabhītōdaya,^[6] who was probably consecrated by the king himself after his own name.

Pratishṭhāpura, the village granted, I am unable to identify. It is possible that it is the Sanskritised form of some dēśī name like Pērūru, the word pēru being equivalent to the Sanskrit word pratishṭhā. That there was a tendency to Sanskritise ordinary village names in early times in Kaliṅga is proved by the Bṛihatprōshṭhā grant of Umavarman.^[7]

The village of Pratishṭhāpura is said to have been situated in the district of Dāgha-pañchālī. This territorial division is not mentioned in any of the Kaliṅga grants so far discovered, through the names of some vishayas or districts ending in pañchālī occur in some of them. I know four such, namely, Kōrāsōḍaka-pañchālī,^[8] Dēvanna-pañchālī,^[9] Pushyagiri-pañchālī,^[10] and Chikhalī-pañchālī.^[11] To this may now be added Dāgha-pañchālī.^[12] Its exact location is not possible at present.

______________________________

^[1] Ind. Hist. Quart., Vol. XI, pp. 300 ff.
^[2] [The word vana in the present instance need not denote ‘ a forest ’. There are instances of place-names ending in rana, like Kāmyakavan; see above, Vol. XXIV, p. 332 and n. 7. Their counterparts in Tamil are place-names ending in kāḍu, like Tiruvālaṅgāḍu. The word vana often stands also for upavana which means ‘ garden ’. In this connection the use of the word ārāma as the place of issue of a royal charter may be compared, above, Vol. XXIII, p. 250 and n. 3, p. 251 text l. 9.─Ed.]
^[3] See Lüders’ List of Brahmi Inscriptions, Nos. 288, 291, 449, 450, and 1272.
^[4] Above, Vol. XIX, p. 269, text l. 42.
^[5] Ibid., Vol. III, pp. 41 ff.
^[6] Ibid., Vol. XXIII, p. 66, text l. 13.
^[7] Ibid., Vol. XII, pp. 4 ff. and plate.
^[8] Ibid., Vol. XXI, p. 24.
^[9] Ind. Ant., Vol. XVI. p. 134.
^[10] Above, Vol. XXVI, p. 63.
^[11] J. A. H. R. S., Vol. X, p. 165.
^[12] Vide, my article on “ Pañchavishaya of the Early Gāṅga grants of Kaliṅga ”, in the Proceedings of the Indian History Congress, Madras, 1944, pp. 220-28.