The Indian Analyst
 

South Indian Inscriptions

 

 

Contents

Index

Introduction

Contents

List of Plates

Additions and Corrections

Images

Contents

A. S. Altekar

P. Banerjee

Late Dr. N. K. Bhattasali

Late Dr. N. P. Chakravarti

B. CH. Chhabra

A. H. Dani

P. B. Desai

M. G. Dikshit

R. N. Gurav

S. L. Katare

V. V., Mirashi

K. V. Subrahmanya Aiyar

R. Subrahmanyam

T. N. Subramaniam and K. A. Nilakanta Sastri

M. Venkataramayya

Akshaya Keerty Vyas

D. C. Sircar

H. K. Narasimhaswami

Sant Lal Katare

Index

Appendix

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

religious establishments is not unknown in Indian epigraphy. Thus an inscription[1] in the Siṁhāchalam temple in the Visakhapatnam District records a grant made in its favour by Tallamādēvī, queen of Gaṅga Bhānu IV, when she was herself staying at Vārāṇasī-kaṭaka (Vāraṇasīkatakānuṁḍi) which is the same as Abhinava-Vārāṇasī of Sōmaladēvī’s record. The village of Uḍaiyakāmam or Udayakāma was no doubt situated in her own jāgīr in her husband’s dominions.[2] The mention of the Gaṅga king’s regnal reckoning in dating Sōmaladēvī’s record appears to be due to the fact that it was drafted at the Gaṅga capital.[3] The grant of Anaṅgabhīma III in favour of the Kāñchīpuram temple was apparently made similarly in absentia. But the partiality shown by the Gaṅga queen and her husband to a Vaishṇava shrine in the Tamil country may suggest that she was related to the Chōḷa royal house.[4] It will thus be seen from the above discussion that there is hardly any proof in favour of the suggestions that the Gaṅga king Anaṅgabhīma III was for a time stationed at Kāñchī together with his queen Sōmaladēvī and that he conquered the Tamil country as far as the Tanjore-Tiruchirappalli region in the south.[5]

The inscription under discussion mentions two villages, viz., Tarallakshmī and Sāgarapaṭīmā which were the subject of the grant made by Gōvinda, a general of the Gaṅga king Anaṅgabhīma III. The exact situation of the villages is not mentioned in the record and it is difficult to locate them.

>

TEXT[6]

1 Siddham[7] Svasti [||*] Prōddhata-hētivāhi-dhvānta-dhansi[8]-dyutijyamāna-dainya-jala- dhī(dhi)- 2 nimagna-di(dī)n-ānātha-śaraṇ-aika-taraṇēr=bhagavataḥ śrīmad-Ani[ya*]ṅkabhīma-

____________________________________________________

[1] SII, Vol. VI, No. 1067.
[2] There are other instances of similar grants. Mr. P. B. Desai draws my attention to No. 154 of SII, Vol., XI (Part ii, pp. 192ff.) which registers the gift of the village of Kanakāpura in Kundūr 500 (Dharwar District) for burning incense in the temple of Sōmanāthadēva of the Saurāshṭra vishaya (Kathiawar) by Mahāmaṇḍalēśvara Jayakēśidēva, at the time of his marriage, under the direction of his father-in-law and overlord Chālukya Vikramāditya VI (1076-1126 A.C.). As pointed out to me by Mr. P. Acharya, the Antarudra vishaya, in which the village granted by Sōmaladēvī was situated, is mentioned in the Chaurasi plate of the Bhauma-Kara king Śivakara II and has been identified with the modern Antarodha Pargana in the Sadar Subdivision of the Puri District of Orissa (Misra, Orissa under the Bhauma Kings, p. 8).
[3] There are many inscriptions in temples like those at Siṁhāchalam and Śrīkūrmam, which are big praśastis. These were apparently not composed on the spot but were carried by the donors with the intention of engraving them in the temples after having made the donations desired.
[4] It may be conjectured that Sōmaladēvī was a sister or daughter of the Chōḷa king Rājarāja III. But her name (exhibiting some Kannaḍa influence) in that case may suggest that she was born of a Kannaḍa princess.
[5] Even if it may be believed that Anaṅgabhīma III was actually present at Kāñchīpuram on the occasion of his own grant (No. 445 of 1919), it should better be explained in a different way. He might have visited the temple as a pilgrim. Such instances are not unknown in the inscriptions of South India. Mr. M. Venkataramayya draws my attention to SII, Vol. IV, No. 428, and No. 29 of 1908. The first of these two records registers a gift of land made in favour of the god at Jambukēśvaram (Tiruchirappalli District) by Jākhadēvī, queen of Rāhuta Jājaladēva, son of Bhīmadēva of the Saubhāṇa (Chauhān) kula. The other inscription is a Gāhaḍavāla record of 1110-11 A.C., which was found in the temple at Gaṅgaikoṇḍachōlapuram in the same district (ARSIE, 1908, Part II, p. 65). In the present state of our knowledge, it is impossible to believe that the Chauhāns or the Gāhaḍavālas invaded the Tamil country. The grants in question must have been made either in absentia or in the course of tours of pilgrimage.
[6] From impressions preserved in the office of the Government Epigraphist for India at Ootacamund.
[7] Expressed by symbol.
[8] Read dhvaṁsi-.

Home Page

>
>