North Indian Inscriptions

SITUBALDI INSCRIPTION OF VIKRAMADITYA VI.

ornament of the Châlukyas, i.e. the king Vikramâditya VI. of the Western Châlukya dynasty.¹ It then mentions (in lines 4-7), as a dependent of the king Mahâsâmanta² Dhâḍîbha[ṁ]ḍaka, also called the Rêṇaka Dhâḍiadêva, who had emigrated from Latalaura, was born in the Mahârâshṭrakûṭa lineage, and was distinguished by such titles as ‘the scattcrer of hostile armies, in war a Sahasrabâhu,³ a uterine brother of others’ wives, the wrestler of all wrestlers, he who obtained favour by a boon of (the goddess) Châmuṇḍâ.’ And in ines 7-10 the inscription records that a dependent of this Dhâḍiadêva, the Daṇḍanâyaka⁴ Vâsudêva, a son of the bhaṭṭa Padmanâbha, grandson of the bhaṭṭa [Bô]papai and great-grandson of the bhaṭṭa Vîṭhapai, who belonged to the Kâṇva śâkhâ and Vatsa gôtra and had five pravaras, and who also had emigrated from Latalaura, ‘a slave to cows Brâhmaṇas’ and ardent worshipper of the god Vishṇu,⁵ who had obtained favour by a boon of (the god) Nârasiṁha (Vishṇu), gave 12 nivartanas of land, which had been purchased by him, for the grazing of cattle ; also 7 nivartanas for daily food given to cattle ; and 5 nivartanas for vâhaka (?),⁶ apparently to a temple at which the inscription was put up. The concluding line 11 sates that, whosoever appropriates the land so given, robs the gods Brahman, Vishṇu and Mahêśvara (Śiva) ; and that, who steals the cows from it, falls into hell.

......The inscription is dated, in lines 1-2, in Śaka-Saṁat 1008, on Friday, the lunar day of the bright half of Vaiśâkha of the year Prabhava. By the southern luni-solar system the year Prabhava would be Śaka-Saṁvat 1009, not 1008, expired ; but the date does not work out satisfactorily for either year, nor fpr the four surrounding years. For the third tithi of the bright half of Vaiśâkha ended,—

in Śaka-Saṁvat 1006 expired, on Thursday, 11th April, A. D. 1084 ;
“ “ “ 1007 expired, on Monday, 31st March, A. D. 1085 ;
“ “ “ 1008 expired, on Sunday, 19th April, A. D. 1086 ;
“ “ “ 1009 expired, on Thursday,⁷ 8th April, A. D. 1087 ;
“ “ “ 1010 expired, on Tuesday, 25th March, A. D. 1088 ; and Wednesday, 26th April, A. D. 1088 ;
“ “ “ 1011 expired, on Monday, 16th April, A. D. 1089 ;

......In my opinion, the day intended by the dae is really Thursday, the 8th April, A. D. 1087, and the writer made a mistake in regard to the week-day.

......The place Latalaura, which is twice mentioned in this inscription, I am unable to identify,

TEXT.⁸

1 Ôṁ⁹ svasti [||*] ¹⁰Sakanṛipa-kâl-ât¹¹-saṁvvatsar-âṁtarggata-daśaśata ya[tra] ashṭatyadhikê¹² Saku 1008 Prabhava-saṁ-
2 vatsarê Vaisâkha-su[dha]-tṛitîyâ-Sukradinês¹³ ady=êha samastabhuvanâśraya-Śrî-Pṛithvî-vallabha-ma-
__________________________________________________________________________________________

......¹ See Dr. Fleet’s Kanarese Dynasties, p. 48 ; Dr. Bhandarkar’s Early History of the Dekkan p. 64.
......² i.e. ‘the great feudatory.’
......³ i.e. Arjuna.
......⁴ i.e. ‘one who applies the rod,’ a head police-officer, etc.
......⁵ The exact sence of the word ubhayadvâda[sô]dhavalu of the text is not apparent.
......⁶ About the meaning of the word vâhaka also I am doubtful ; perhaps it denotes here the drivers or attendants of the cattle.
......⁷ On this day the third tithi of the bright half ended 16 h. 9 m. after mean sunrise.
......⁸ From an impression, supplied to me Dr. Fleet.
......⁹ Expressed by a symbol.
......¹⁰ The date would have been correctly expressed thus : Śakanṛipa-kṛl-âtîla-saṁvatsara-śatêshu daśasv=ashṭ-âdhikêshu yatr=âṅkatô= pi Śakê 1008 Prabhava-saṁvatsar-ântargata-Vaiśâkha-śuddha-tṛitiyâ-Śukradinê.
......¹¹ The aksharas lâ and ta, having been originally omitted, are engraved above the line.
......¹² This may possibly have been altered to ashṭâdhikê.
......¹³ Here and in other places below, which it is unneccssary to point out separately, the rules of saṁdhi have not been observed.