South Indian Inscriptions

EPIGRAPHIA INDICA

early Gaṅga charters, has observed that the preamble recorded in the later charters of early Gaṅga kings grew lengthier than that in the early ones. Subsequent to 91 G. E. new phrases and clauses denoting their regal glory were added to the preamble and this process of development of phraseology, he surmised, grew round three fundamental factors, namely, (1) the capital city of the early Gaṅgas, (2) their tutelary deity Gōkarṇasvāmin and (3) their own valour and glory. The principal seat of the Gaṅgas attained the dignity of a vāsaka (cf. Kaliṅganagara-vāsakāt, Dantapura-vāsakāt, etc.) and the patron deity of the Gaṅgas, Lord Gōkarṇasvāmin, is described as the sole architect of the whole world, the lord of the movable and immovable creation, who has been firmly established on the holy summit of the Mahēndra mountain.

Of the records so far published, the Chicacole plates of Indravarman dated 128 G.E. are perhaps the earliest to mention Kaliṅganagara as a vāsaka. Basing on this Mr. Sarma has surmise that subsequent to 91 G. E. the new phrases were added to the praśasti.^[1] The present Andhavaram plates of Indravarman though dated later than the Chicacole plates referred to above, record curiously the some praśasti as given in the earlier records dated 87 and 91 G. E. In fact it is identical with the praśasti found in the Narsiṅgapalli plates of Hastivarman : G. E. 79.^[2] But for the difference in the name of the donee, the village granted and the date, the text of our inscription is practically identical with that of Indravarman’s grant dated 91 G. E. In particular the imprecatory verse recorded in lines 21 and 22 is peculiar to these two records.

These plates furnish us with a new Gaṅga name─Lōkārṇava. Who is this Lōkārṇava at whose command the charter is said to have been written ? There is no clue in the plates to ascertain this point. We know of Eastern Gaṅga names like Kāmārṇava, Raṇārṇava, Dānārṇava and Guṇārṇava, but not Lōkārṇava. Though by its suffix aṛnava it sounds like an Eastern Gaṅga name, no king with that name has been met with so far in the Eastern Gaṅga genealogy.^[3]

As noted above, this grant of Indravarman is dated in the augmenting years of Tumburuvaṁśa (Tumburu-vaṁśa-rājya-saṁvatsarāṇām). In all the grants of the early Eastern Gaṅgas so far discovered the years were stated to be merely the ‘augmenting years’ (pravardhamāna-saṁvat-sarāḥ) presumably of the succession of the Eastern Gaṅga kings. From the time of Indravarman I and Sāmantavarman the phraseology adopted in quoting the date of the early Eastern Gaṅga kings who ruled from Kaliṅganagara remained the same (pravardhamāna-vijayarājya-saṁvatsarāḥ) till the time of Anantavarman of 304 G. E. when for the first time the Gaṅga Era is specifically mentioned as Gāṅgēya-vaṁśa-pravardhamāna-vijayarājya-saṁvatsarāḥ. Since no records between 254 and 304 G. E. have come to light the actual date of commencement of this particular phraseology in the early Gaṅga charters could not be ascertained. Basing on the phraseology supplied by the plates of Ananthavarman, all the earlier grants so far discovered, though no specific reference to the Gāṅgēya-vaṁśa was made in them, have been presumed to have been dated in the Gaṅga era. Now the Andhavaram grant raises a doubt as to the correctness of the above presumption. Indravarman of this charter, as is evident from the praśasti, was no doubt a Gaṅga king. Since he dates his charter in the augmenting year of the Tumburu-vaṁśa, it seems probable that he was a subordinates of a king of that dynasty. Who are these Tumburus ? Were some of the Early Gaṅgas subordinates to this dynasty ? No information is forthcoming regardin this Tumburu-vaṁśa except a stray reference to the tribe of Tumburus in the Harivaṁśa^[4], wherein they are mentioned along with Tushāras, as inhabitants of the Vindhyan forests. If the Andhavaram plates are to be taken as genuine, the above questions are to be solved by future researches. Still, since the

_________________________________________________

^[1] Ibid., p. 20.
^[2] Above, Vol. XXIII, pp. 62 ff. and plate.
^[3] [Probably it is a biruda of Indravarman,─ Ed.]
^[4] Harivaṁśa-purāṇa, canto V, v. 20 : Yē ch=ānyē Vindhya-nilayās=Tushārās=Tuṁburās=tathā | adharma ruchayō yē cha viddhi tān=Vēnasaṁbhavān ||