South Indian Inscriptions

EPIGRAPHIA INDICA

family referring to the contemporary Śilāhāra ruler to whom the Mōḍhas then owed allegiance. This suspicion seems to be supported by the typical Śilāhāra title ‘supreme lord Tagarapura’ applied here to M­ōḍha Vījala apparently through oversight. It was over-looked by the officer responsible for the draft of the present charter that, while replacing the name of a Śilāhāra ruler by that of a Mōḍha chief in the passage in question, a title suiting only the former was left unmodified.^[1]

It may be argued that Mōḍha Vījala mentioned in line 7 is different from Mōḍha Vija of line 4 and that the latter was a subordinate of the former. But I do not think it possible to agree with such a view. In the first place, Vījala is phonetically the same as Vijjala which is again a mere variant of Vijja. It is a popular Kannaḍa name and is generally found in the various forms Vijjala, Vijjana, Vijjaṇa, Bijja, Bijjaṇa, Bijjala and Bijjaḷa.^[2] Secondly, the issuer of the present charter is apparently identical with the Mōḍha chief Vijjala of the Chinchani plates of Śaka 969 (1048 A.D.) edited above, in which the chief does not represent himself as a subordinate of any other ruler. Since the Śilāhāras were still a ruling power in the Northern Konkan, it is difficult to believe that the ruler of Saṁyāna, who issued the present grant, would have acknowledged allegiance to anybody other than a ruler of the Śilāhāra dynasty. There is no evidence of the emergence of a Mōḍha king in the Northern Konkan in the period in question, to whom the Mōḍha chief of Saṁyāna could have offered allegiance. Thirdly, we have to note the fact that, as will be shown below, the Mōḍha chief of Saṁyāna seems to have been ruling over a wider territory in 1053 A. D. than he was holding without reference to a master five years earlier in 1048 A. D. While the chief now claimed to have ruled over the Saṁyāna 700 division, the Śilāhāra king Chhittarāja, to whom the rulers of Saṁyāna originally owed allegiance, claimed to have held the Koṇkana 1400 country.^[3] About 1053 A. D., the Mōḍhas were thus ruling about a half of the Northern Konkan.

Lines 8-12 state that, when Maṇḍalīka Vijja-rāṇaka was ruling over the Saṁyāna-pattana 700 which was a Maṇḍala or district consisting of 4000 draṅgas and extending as far as Ākāśikā, the burden of the administration of his kingdom lay on the head of Varishṭhaka Mummuraka and that of the administration of Saṁyāna (apparently meaning the town which was the headquarters of the Mōḍha territory) on the head of Mahāṭhakkura Ḍōmbalaiya, while there were other chief officers such as the Mahāpradhāna Buddhappaiya. As we have already seen, the chief minister Mummuraka and the minister Ḍōmabalaiya are also mentioned in the Mōḍha chief’s earlier record issued in Śaka 969 (1048 A.D.).

The chief’s order in respect of the grant to be made was addressed to the following subordinates (lines 12-15) : the future princes, ministers, priests, administrative officers (amātya) and chief officials (pradhāna-niyōgika) as well as the officers in charge of the rāshṭras (territorial units), the cities and the Dhruvas, as also the people of the countryside. It was also addressed with due respect to the haṁyamana (Parsee community), the citizens, and the Mōḍha Brāhmaṇas of Śrīsthāna (i.e. modern Ṭhāṇa). The Mōḍha Brāhmaṇas mentioned here probably hailed from Śrīsthāna and were settled at Saṁyāna. Then follows in lines 16-26 a long section in prose and verse dealing with the transitoriness of life and wealth, the propriety of giving grants, etc. It is found in some Śilāhāra grants^[4] and, in a smaller form, not only in most of the Śilāhāra charters but also in the two records edited above. It also contains some of the usual imprecatory and benedictory stanzas. Lines 26 ff. state how, on the date and occasion indicated above, the Mōḍha chief made a grant after having worshipped Trailōkyachakshus (i. e. the Sun-god) and Trailōkyasvāmin (either

____________________________________________

^[1] For a similar case found in inscriptions, see JAS, Letters, Vol. XX, p. 213.
^[2] See Bomb. Gaz., Vol. I, part ii, pp. 222 ff., 468, 470.
^[3] Cf. Purī-pramukha-chaturdaśa-grāma-śatī-samanvitāṁ samasta-Rōnkaṇa-bhuvam samanuśāsati (e.g. in ZDMG, Band 90, p. 282, line 31).