The Indian Analyst
 

South Indian Inscriptions

 

 

Contents

Index

Introduction

Contents

List of Plates

Additions and Corrections

Images

Contents

Chaudhury, P.D.

Chhabra, B.ch.

DE, S. C.

Desai, P. B.

Dikshit, M. G.

Krishnan, K. G.

Desai, P. B

Krishna Rao, B. V.

Lakshminarayan Rao, N., M.A.

Mirashi, V. V.

Narasimhaswami, H. K.

Pandeya, L. P.,

Sircar, D. C.

Venkataramayya, M., M.A.,

Venkataramanayya, N., M.A.

Index-By A. N. Lahiri

Other South-Indian Inscriptions 

Volume 1

Volume 2

Volume 3

Vol. 4 - 8

Volume 9

Volume 10

Volume 11

Volume 12

Volume 13

Volume 14

Volume 15

Volume 16

Volume 17

Volume 18

Volume 19

Volume 20

Volume 22
Part 1

Volume 22
Part 2

Volume 23

Volume 24

Volume 26

Volume 27

Tiruvarur

Darasuram

Konerirajapuram

Tanjavur

Annual Reports 1935-1944

Annual Reports 1945- 1947

Corpus Inscriptionum Indicarum Volume 2, Part 2

Corpus Inscriptionum Indicarum Volume 7, Part 3

Kalachuri-Chedi Era Part 1

Kalachuri-Chedi Era Part 2

Epigraphica Indica

Epigraphia Indica Volume 3

Epigraphia
Indica Volume 4

Epigraphia Indica Volume 6

Epigraphia Indica Volume 7

Epigraphia Indica Volume 8

Epigraphia Indica Volume 27

Epigraphia Indica Volume 29

Epigraphia Indica Volume 30

Epigraphia Indica Volume 31

Epigraphia Indica Volume 32

Paramaras Volume 7, Part 2

Śilāhāras Volume 6, Part 2

Vākāṭakas Volume 5

Early Gupta Inscriptions

Archaeological Links

Archaeological-Survey of India

Pudukkottai

EPIGRAPHIA INDICA

SANTIRAGRAMA GRANT OF DANDIMAHADEVI

The charter records the grant of the village called Sāntīragrāma together with another locality called Kōmyōsaṅga, situated in the Pachhama (Paśchima) khaṇḍa within the Tamura vishaya in the Dakshiṇa-Tōsalā (i.e., ºTōsalī) country. The grant was made by the Paramamāhēśvarī (devout worshipper of Mahēśvara or Śiva) Daṇḍimahādēvī, who is endowed with imperial titles, in favour of Bhāṭṭa Mākyadēva (possibly Bhaṭṭa Māṇikyadēva), who was the son of Jālladēva and grandson of Purushōttama. The donee was an inhabitant of Dharmapāṭṭi ; but his family had originally hailed from Ṭakārī. He belonged to the Bhāradvāja gōtra, to the Āṅgirasa, Bārhaspatya and Bhāradvāja pravaras and to the Vājasanēya charaṇa and was a student of the Mādhyandina śākhā. The occasion of the grant was a solar eclipse. It was made at the request of Paramamāhēśvara Rāṇaka śrībhṛid-Apsarōdēva who was the lord of the Yamagartā maṇḍala. It seems that Apsarōdēva was a feudatory of Daṇḍimahādēvī and that the Yamagartā maṇḍala formed a part of the Bhauma-Kara dominions. We have seen that the kings of this family granted lands in northern and southern Tōsalī, the former indicating the Balasore-Cuttack region (sometimes with a part of the Midnapur District of West Bengal) and the latter including parts of the Cuttack, Puri and Ganjam Districts. Kōṅgōda about the border between the Puri and Ganjam Districts is said to have been included in Dakshiṇa-Tōsalī. The Tuṅga chiefs Gayāḍatuṅga and Vinītatuṅga, whose charters have been discovered in Talcher and Bonai, also called themselves lords of the Yamagartā maṇḍala.[1] In this connection it may also be pointed out that the Tuṅga ruler Vinītatuṅga seems to be mentioned as a feudatory of the Bhauma-Kara monarch Śivakara III, grandfather of Daṇḍimahādēvī, in both of his Talcher plates dated in the year 149.[2] An earlier ruler of the Yamagartā maṇḍala was Jayasiṁha who also used the era employed by the Bhauma-Karas in dating their records and was very probably one of their feudatories. The date of the Dhenkanal plate[3] of Jayasiṁha is read as the year 88, although the actual reading may be 128. It seems therefore that the Yamagartā maṇḍala was situated in the valley of the river Brāhmaṇī to the west and south-west of the territories of the Bhañja chiefs of Khiñjalī-maṇḍala (in the Baud-Keonjhar area) and of Khijjiṅga-kōṭṭa (in the Mayurbhanj region). It appears further that like the chiefs of Yamagarṭā, the Bhañjas also originally acknowledgedthe supremacy of the Bhauma-Karas. The Tuṅgas of Yamagartā were probably succeeded by the dynasty represented by Apsarōdēva ; but, sometime afterwards, the latter seems to have been itself ousted by rulers of the Śulkī dynasty, whose names ended with the word stambha.

>

The record contains two lists of officials to whom the royal order was addressed. Both of these are short but contain a few interesting entries. The first list mentioned in connection with the country of Dakshiṇa-Tōsalā, includes Mahāsāmanta, Rājasatka, Rājaputra, Kumārāmātya, Auparika (Uparika), Vishayapati, Tadāyuktaka, Dāṇḍapāśika and Sthānāntarika. In place of Rājasatka, other records of the queen read Antaraṅga, probably indicating the royal physician. Rājasatka may also indicate the same office. Kumārāmātya seems to be an Amātya or executive officer of the status of a prince of the royal blood. Uparika was a viceroy and Vishayapati the ruler of a district. Tadāyuktaka was probably the ruler of a subdivision of the district, appointed by the Vishayapati and not by the crown. Dāṇḍapāśika was a police officer, its corruption Daṇḍuāsi still indicating a village-watchman in Orissa. The Sthānāntarikas were probably spies. The other list of officials, possibly belonging to the territorial unit called the Pachhama (Paśchima) khaṇḍa in the Tamura vishaya, includes Mahāmahattara, Bṛihadbhōgin, Pustakapāla and Kūṭakōlasa, to whose adhikaraṇas or offices the royal order is addressed. Mahattara means the headman of a village. Bhōgin

_________________________________________________

[1] Bhandarkar, List, Nos. 1745-47.
[2] B. Misra, op. cit., pp. 40-51.
[3] Vide JBORS, Vol. II, pp. 417 ff. ; Bhandarkar, List, No. 1756.

Home Page

>
>