South Indian Inscriptions

EPIGRAPHIA INDICA

worth nothing.1─ As regards orthography, the only points that present themselves are (1) the use of ri for ṛi in the word srishṭi, lines 12 and 33, though everywhere else the vowel seems to be used correctly ; and (2) the occasional omission to double a consonant after r, in the second jayati, line ^[1], in Gûrjarâṁś, line 6, in ârthaṁ, line 25, in brahma-svaṁ, line 31, and in nṛipâṇâṁ, line 34.

The inscription refers itself to the reign of the Râshṭrakûṭa king Amôghavarsha I., who was on the throne from A.D. 814 or 815 to A.D. 877 or 878. It mentions him by also the birudas of Atiśayadhavala, Lakshmîvallabhêndra,^[2] and Nṛipatuṅga. His proper name is not yet known. But, from the way in which his sovereignty is likened to the sovereignty of the god Vishṇu, and from the attribution to him, in that passage, of the biruda Lakshmîvallabhêndra or “ chief among the husbands or favourites of Lakshmî or Fortune,” and of the epithet surâsuramardana or “ subduer of gods and demons,” which would hardly be appropriate in any ordinary description of a king, it seems likely that his name either was Nârâyaṇa or Vishṇu, or else was a name beginning with the word Vishṇu. It mentions an officer of his, named Dêvaṇṇayya, who,─ residing at Annigere,^[3] which is the modern Aṇṇigere

__________________________________________________________
^[1] The following other instances, the dates of which are known or can be fixed approximately, may usefully be put together here, from genuine records, and from others for questioning which there are no primâ-facie grounds. Vâraṇaśivaduḷ ; Ind. Ant. Vol. XIX. p. 145, line 13 ; at Baḷagâmi ; of the period A.D. 680 to 696 : and, in line 15 of the same record, elpattaruḷaṁ, in which we have the copulative or emphatic ending aṁ after the uḷ. Tiṁgaḷuḷ, pûrṇṇamâsaduḷ, vishupaduḷ, gâṇaduḷ, and Vâraṇâsiyuḷ ; Ind. Ant. Vol. VIII. p. 285, lines 2 to 5 ; at Aihoḷe ; A.D. 708. Ûruḷ and okkaluḷ ; Ep. Carn. Vol. III., My. 55 ; at Varuṇa : A.D. 765 to 805. Okkaluḷ again ; Ep. Carn. Vol. IV., Hg. 93 ; at Maṭakere ; about A.D. 783. Ma(?mâ)vindilaruḷ and nâyakaruḷ ; Ind. Ant. Vol. X. p. 39, No. 2, lines 6, 8 ; at Gûlgânpode ; A.D. 850 to 900, or somewhere thereabouts. Pathaduḷ, besaduḷ, and kôṭeyuḷ ; Ep. Carn. Vol. III., Nj ; at Husukûru ; A.D. 870-71. Nâḍinuḷ ; Ep. Carn. Vol. IV., Hg. 103 ; at Kaṭṭemanuganahaḷḷi ; A.D. 870-71 to about A.D. 908. Nâḍuḷ ; Ep. Carn. Vol. III., Nj. 134 ; at Nandigunda ; A.D. 1021 ; and further on in this record we seem to have a very exceptional locative, baḍagalalu or baḍagalaḷ.─ We can now recognise uḷḷe, as a development of the uḷ-ending, in Maṅgaluḷḷe, “ at (the village of) Maṅgal,” in Ind. Ant. Vol. X. p. 103, line 8 ; at Mahâkûṭa ; A.D. 696 to 733-34. And we have the same ending presented in saṅghaduḷḷe and Kalvappinuḷḷe, in Inscr. at Śrav.-Beḷ. Nos. 31, 34 ; date not yet fixed.
^[2] See page 106 below, note 2.

>

^[3] This name occurs in line 22 of the text. In other ancient records, as far as they have come under my notice, it is always written with the lingual ṇṇ,─ Aṇṇigere, and the vowel is sometimes marked long,─ Aṇṇîgere. A half-Sanskṛitised form, in which taṭâka is substituted for kere, occurs in a verse in a record of not long after A.D. 1176 (Inscrs. at Śrav.-Beḷ. No. 42) : the transcription gives there, also, the lingual ṇṇ ; and the metre marks the vowel as short,─ Aṇṇitaṭâka. Whatever may be the explanation of the use of the dental nn in the present record and in the Sirûr inscription, we may take it as tolerably certain that the more correct form of the name was always that with the lingual ṇṇ. The vowel, no doubt, was liable to be used either short or long.─ As regards the etymology, the first component of the name may be a proper name ; or it may be a variant of aṇṇe (1), ‘ excellence, purity,’ or of aṇṇe (3),= âṇi (3), which occurs in âṇikallu, ‘ a hailstone,’ and (see, particularly under âli, 1) may perhaps mean ‘ water, cloud, or rain ;’ or it may quite possibly stand for haṇṇi, ‘ the sunflower,’ which we have in the name Haṇṇikeri (see further on in this note), on the analogy of ôgu for hôgu (above, Vol. V. p. 262). With the dental nn, there does not seem to be any word anni ; and the words anne (1), (2), and (3), do not give any suitable meaning.─ As regards the modern form, the compilation Bombay Places and Common Official Words, issued in 1878, certifies it as ‘ Aṇṇîgêri,’ with the lingual ṇṇ and the long î : but I feel tolerably certain that, in giving gêri,=kêri, ‘ a street,’ instead of gere,=kere, ‘ a tank,’ it does not even represent any correct modern custom outside official circles ; for, to the best of my remembrance, the inhabitants of the town always pronounce the name as Aṇṇigere. The Indian Atlas sheet No. 41 (1852) has ‘ Anigeeree,’ which rather suggests that the writer was thinking of giri, ‘ a hill.’ The Map of the Dhârwâr Collectorate (1874) has ‘ Annehgeree,’ which suggests that the person who then took down the name, heard, correctly, gere. The Postal Directory of the Bombay Circle (1879) has ‘ Annigeri.’ And the Dhârwâr volume (1884) of the Gazetteer of the Bombay Presidency uses that same form ; e.g. pp. 389, 440, 650, 651.─ In connection with the official certification of the modern name as ‘ Aṇṇîgêri,’ I may add ththe following remarks, which will be of use in respect of some other names also. In the Kanarese districts of the Bombay Presidency, there is a constant tendency to substitute i for the final e of nominal bases and verbal roots,- for instance, mane, ‘ a house,’ will just as often, if not more frequently, be written mani, and kare, ‘ to call,’ often becomes kari, for conjugational purposes ; also, the old character r has passed out of use altogether ; and the mark which distinguishes the long î, ê, and ô, is rarely, if ever, used in writing. The result is that a nondescript word keri is