The Indian Analyst
 

South Indian Inscriptions

 

 

Contents

Index

Introduction

Contents

Additions and Corrections

Images

Contents

Rev. J.E. Abbott

R.G. Bhandarkar

Prof. G. Buhler

W. Cartellieri

J.F. Fleet

E. Hultzsch

Prof. Kielhorn

Prof. Kielhorn, and
H. Krishna Sastri

H. Luders

G.V. Ramamurti

J. Ramayya

Vajeshankar G. Ojha, and
TH. Von Schtscherbatskoi

V. Venkayya

E.W. West

Index

List of Plates

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

Two alphabets are employed in the grant, viz. Malayâḷam and Vaṭṭeluttu. The Vaṭṭeluttu characters of the inscription appear to exhibit a comparatively modern stage in the development of that alphabet. There seem to have been two local varieties of Vaṭṭeluttu. One of them is represented by the Tamil portion of the Madras Museum plates of Jaṭilavarman[1] and the small stone inscription which I have published from a photograph along with those plates.[2] To the second class belong the Tirunelli plates of Bhâskara Ravivarman[3] and the Cochin plates of the same king.[4] The Kôṭṭayam plates of Sthâṇu Ravi[5] contain both of these two varieties of the Vaṭṭeluttu character. The last two sides resemble the Madras Museum plates of Jaṭilavarman, while the preceding portion exhibits closer resemblance to the Cochin plates. The last two sides were probably written originally in the same alphabet as the rest ; but subsequently the original writing was erased and what we now find on them was engraved. A few letters of the original writing are still visible here and there on these two sides. In the latter class, i.e. that to which the Cochin plate belong, the characters are more rounded than in the former, for example a, â, ñ, ṇ, t, n and r. If we could ascertain why the last two sides of the Kôṭṭayam plates of Sthâṇu Ravi are engraved in a slightly different character from the rest, we should be able to say if the two varieties of the Vaṭṭeluttu alphabet coexisted or not. There is, however, very little doubt that the Vaṭṭeluttu portion of the subjoined inscription exhibits a very late stage of development of the second variety. One Vaṭṭeluttu letter has not yet been found in any other inscription. This is the ê of Êrânâḍu (l. 20), in which the length is expressed by adding an additional curve to the left loop of the short letter.

t>

As stated before, the second of the two different alphabets which are employed in the present inscription, is Malayâḷam. A large number of words, some of which are of Sanskṛit origin, are written in this alphabet. In Tamil inscriptions as well as in other Vaṭṭeluttu records, it is generally the words of Sanskṛit origin that are written in Grantha. But in the subjoined inscription many Tamil words also are engraved in the Malayâḷam alphabet. The following is a list of all the words written in this character :─

Lines 1 and 2. From Hari of line 1 to yi of âdiy=âyi in line 2.
L. 3. śrî-Vîra-Raghava-śakravatti.
L. 3 f. tiruv-irâchyam chellaº.
L. 5. haṇi of Rôhaṇi,
L. 7. pe of the first peru ; of peru the r is Tamil, and the u added to it is Malayâḷam.
L. 9. pañcha-vâdyamum śaṁkhum pagal-viḷakkum, and aintôḷamum.
L. 11. aiṁ-kammâḷareyum aḍima kuḍuttôm.
L. 12. Iravikorttanukku, and ṇḍa of koṇḍ=aḷannu.
L. 14 śakkarayôº, kasturiyôº, viḷakkeṇṇayôḍu, and iḍayil.
L. 16. viśêshâl.
L. 18. Iravikorttanukku.
L. 18 f. of pêr=âga and ºga=kkuḍuttôº.
L. 20 f chandr-âdikshyakº, and nâḷekku kuḍuttôm.
L. 22. Nambi Chaḍeya, kaiy=eº, and ºttu.
___________________________________________________

[1] Ind. Ant. Vol. XXII. p. 70.
[2] ibid. p. 67.
[3] ibid. Vol. XX. p. 290.
[4] Above, Vol. III. Plate opposite p. 72.
[5] A transcript and translation of this inscription were published by Dr. Gundert in the Madras Journal. Vol. XIII. Part I. pp. 123 to 135. It is probable that the name of the king in whose reign this grant was issued, is not Sthâṇu Ravi Gupta as made out by Dr. Gundert, but only Sthâṇu Ravi. Similar name would be Kôdai Ravi, which occurs among the signatories of the Cochin plates, and Bhâskara Ravi, the name of the king who issued those plates. The original reads Kô=Ttâṇu-Irarikkuttan. We have to analyse the compound Iravikkuttan not as Iravi and Kuttan (i.e. Gupta), but as Iravikku (the dative of Iravi) and tan, the genitive of the personal pronoun. This explanation of the name receives some support from the fact that in many other inscriptions the date is preceded by the dative case of the name of the king in whose reign the grant is made. Besides, according to Tamil usage, the k would not be doubled if Kuttan the tadbhava or the Sanskṛit Gupta, was the word that followed Iravi.

Home Page