|
EPIGRAPHIA INDICA
characters include final forms or forms with the virâma attached, of t in lines 3, 6, and 9, of l in
line 13, and of ḷ in lines 6, 9, 11, and 12. The lingual ḍ can be recognised in nâḍa, line 10,
viṭṭoḍe and oḍa, line 11, and eḍeg, line 15. The palæography does present anything calling
for special comment, as the kh does not occur, and the other test-letters, ṅ, j, b, and l, present,
naturally enough, only the later cursive forms.─ The language is Kanarese, of the archaic type ;
and there are verses in lines 15 to 19. In line 11 we have moraḍi as a variant of moraḍi, ‘ a
hill, a hillock ;’ and in line 12 we have aṅgaḷoḷ, the locative singular of aṅgaḷ or aṅgaḷu as a
variant of aṅgaḷa = aṅgaṇa, in the sense of ‘ an open space, an area.’ And we may note the use
of v, instead of the more customary m, in erpatturaṁ, line 21.─ In respect of orthography we
may note (1) the use of ri for ṛi in nripa, line 1, prithuvî, line 2, and Krishṇa, line 3 ; (2) the
use of b for v in bijayaṁ, line 4, and bîra, lines 16 and 18 ; (3) the occasional use of s for ś, for
instance, in Saka, line 1, and Sûdrakaṁ, lines 9 and 19 ; and (4) the use of ś for s, once, in
Śômyam, for Saumyam, line 1.
The principal part of the inscription is dated, without full details, in the Saumya
saṁvatsara, Śaka-Saṁvat 872 (current),[1] = A.D. 949-50. And it refers itself to the time of
the Râshṭrakȗṭa king Kannaradêva-Kṛishṇa III.,[2] and of the Western Gaṅga prince
Satyavâkya-Bûtuga II.[3] It tells us, in the first place, that Kṛishṇa III. had fought and killed
the Chôḷa king Râjâditya, otherwise called Mûvaḍi-Chôḷa,[4] at a place named Takkôla, and
was going in triumph, or, in other words, was making a state progress through his dominions.[5]
_______________________________________________________________
[1] The saṁvatsara agrees with the given Śaka year only according to the southern luni-solar system of the
cycle,─ which, however, is the proper one for the period and the part of the country with which we are concerned,─
and only by applying the Śaka year as a current year ; see Prof. Kielhorn’s references to this date, in Ind. Ant.
Vol. XXIV. p. 187, No 79, and Vol. XXV. p. 267, note 5.
[2] The following birudas of Kṛishṇa III. are mentioned in this record,─ Aṅkatriṇêtra, Âneveḍeṅga,
Vanagajamalla, and Kachchega ; see page 53 below, note 7, the Postscript on page 83, and page 55, notes 7, 8, 9,
[3] His proper name occurs in line 9, in the biruda “ the champion of Bûtuga,” which is applied to Maṇalera.
─The following birudas of Bûtuga, II. himself are mentioned in this record,─ Nanniyagaṅga, Jayaduttaraṁga,
Gaṅgagâṅgêya, and Gaṅganârâyaṇa.
[4] The word mûvaḍi means ‘ three folds three times,’ from mû, = mûru, ‘ three,’ and maḍi, ‘ bending,
folding, doubling ; fold times.’ Another form of it is mummaḍi. In the Tamil records, the biruda appears
sometimes as Mummaḍi-Chôḷa, and sometimes as Mummuḍi-Chôḷa : and Dr. Hultzsch has rendered it by “ theChôḷa king (who wears) three crowns, viz. those of the Chôḷa, Pâṇḍya and Chêra kingdoms ” (e.g., south-Ind.
Inscrs. Vol. III. p. 29), finding an indication that that is its purport in a verse at end of the Raṅganâtha
inscription which describes Sundara-Pâṇḍyadêva as building “ three golden domes by which (the temple of )
Śrîraṅga glitters as he (the king) by the (three) crowns worn at (his) coronation ” (above, Vol. III. p.17) ; and
so also Mr. V. Venkayya (Ind. Ant. Vol. XXII. p. 65, and see p. 60, note 14), where he quotes facts which
would indicate, or at least justify, the existence of a similar biruda among the Pâṇḍyas, on the same view.
There is a Tamil word muḍi, meaning ‘ a crown.’ Nevertheless, my opinion is that Mummuḍi-Chôḷa is simply
a variant of Mummaḍi-Chôḷa, and that in either form the biruda means literally “ a three-times Chôḷa.” And
I think, now, that the expressions Immaḍi-Noḷambâdhirâja, Mummaḍi-Chôḷa, and Nûrmaḍi-Taila mean, not “ the
second Noḷambâdhirâja, the third Chôḷa, the hundredth Taila,” but “ the Noḷambâdhirâja, who was twice as
great and powerful, or twice as famous, as any Noḷambâdhirâja who ever preceded him,” and so on. An
inscription of A.D. 1168 at Baḷagâmi (P. S. O. -C. Inscrs. No. 185, and see Mysore Inscrs. p. 111) describes
the temple of Dakshiṇa-Kêdârêśvara as (line 30 f.)─ Vârâṇâsigaṁv=irmmaḍi Kêdârakkaṁ nûrmmaḍi
Śrîparvvatakkaṁ sâsirmmaḍi,─ “ twice (as sacred) as even Vârâṇâsi, a hundred times (more sacred) than
even Kêdâra, a thousand times (more sacred) than even Śrîparvata.” So, also, Rêvakanimmaḍi (see page 71 below,
note 5) probably stands for Immaḍi-Rêvaka and means “ a Rêvaka twice as beautiful or accomplished as any
preceding Rêvaka.”
[5] Bijayaṁ-geyyutt-ildu. For Kittel’s Dictionary, it would appear that the word bijaya, as used in this
combination, is treated by the Native grammarians as another form of bija, biya, and as coming from the Sanskṛit
vî, vyay, ‘ to go, to move, to go apart or in different directions,’ and that bijayaṁ-gey and biyaṁ-gey are explained by them as meaning simply ‘ to walk, to go, to come.’ But, as used in the inscriptions, the expression
has plainly a more extended meaning than that ; namely, it implies the idea of ‘ going in state, going in triumph.
It is evidently a shorter form of dig-vijayaṁ-gey, for an instance of which see above, Vol. V. p. 223, note 6. And,
in view of that longer form, I think that the word bijaya is to be more correctly treated assimply a tadbhava
|
