|
EPIGRAPHIA INDICA
7 trakûṭa-giridu[r]gga-sthân=ba[d*]dhvâ Kâñch-îśân=atha sa Kîrttinârâyaṇô
jâtaḥ[1] [||*] Ari[2]-nṛipati-makuṭa-ghaṭṭi-
8 ta-charaṇas=sakala-bhuvana-vandita-śauryyaḥ Vaṁg-Âṁga-Magadha-Mâḷava-Veṁg-
îśê(śai)r=archchitô=Tiśayadhava[ḷaḥ] [||*]
9 Ôm Svasti Śrî[3] Samadhigatapañchamahâśabda-mahârâjâdhirâja-paramêśvara-bhaṭṭâraka
chatur-udadhi-
10 valaya-valayu(yi)ta[4]-sakala-dharâtala-prâtirâjy[5]-ânêka-maṇḍalikarkkaḷâ kaṭaka-kaṭi-
sûtra-ku-
11 ṇḍala-kêyûra-hârâ[bha]raṇ-âḷaṁkṛita-gaṇika-sâhasra[6]-châmar-ândhakâr- â d h ô – d i r y y a -
Viryyamâna[7]-śvi(śvê)-
12 t-âtapatra-traya-kaḷaha-kâhaḷa[8]-śaṁkha-pâḷidhvaj-ôru[9]kêtu-patâk-âchchhâdita- d i g a n t a r -
ella sri(sṛi)shṭi-
13 sênâpati puravara-taḷavargga-daṇḍanâyaka-sâmant-âdy-ânêka[10]-vishay a – v i n â m [n]-[11]
ôttu[ṅ]ga-[ki]-
14 rîṭa-makuṭa-ghṛishṭa-pâdâravinda-yugma nirjjita-v[ai]ri ripu-nivaha-Kâla-daṇḍa dushṭa-
mada-bha[ṁ]janan[12]=a-
15 môgha-Râmaṁ para-chakra-pañchânanaṁ sur-âsura-marddanaṁ vairi-bhaya-[ka]raṁ
badd[e]-ma[nô]haraṁ a[bh]imâna-
16 man[d]iraṁ Raṭṭa-vaṁś-ôdbhava[ṁ] Garuḍa-lâñcha(ñchha)naṁ[13] ṭiv[i]ḷi-
Pareghôshaṇa[ṁ Lattalûra-p]u[ra]-paramêśvara[ṁ] śrîmat
_______________________________________________________
[1] Sirûr, line 5, has jigati, which was then corrected into jagati.
[2] Metre ; the first twp pâdas are Âryâ, and the last two are Udgîti ; or we may say, the verse is an Âryâ, in
the last pâda of which the metre of an Udgîti has been followed.
[3] Sirûr, line 6, omits the Ôm and the Śrî.
[4] Sirûr, line 7, also has yuta.─ Prof. Kielhorn has given me, from the Daśakumâracharita, the quotation
ratnâkara-vêlâ-mêkhalâ-valayita-dharaṇî, which suggests that the original source of the draft used in this record
had chatur-udadhi-vêlâ-valayita, etc. Compare, in some respects, lines 1, 2 of the Bêgûr record (page 48 above).
[5] Sirûr, line 8, also has prâtirâjy.
[6] Read gaṇikâ-sahasra.
[7] Sirûr, line 9, has ândhakâra-vâdiyya-vîyya-mâna. The words vîrya, ‘ bravery, or heroism,’ and mâna,
‘ pride,’ seem altogether inappropriate in this passage. And I can only suggest that the intended reading was
ândhakâra-dêdîpyamâna, or else that there may have been meant dôdhûyamâna, “ being waved to and fro like
fans,” which we have in line 47 of the Kaḍaba grant (above, Vol. IV. p. 342), applied, however, to chaurîs, not to
white umbrellas.
[8] Sirûr, line 9, omits this word, kâhaḷa.
[9] The reading is quite distinct here. And it can be recognised, now, that in Sirûr, line 7, the writer or engraver
first formed, instead of ru, the k of kêtu, and then, before attaching the ê, corrected the k into r, and then added
the u. This disposes of the ôkakêtu, the “ banner of a bird, or bird-ensign,” which I thought was indicated by
the Sirûr inscription.
[10] Sirûr, line 10, has the same reading, âdy-ânêka. In each record, the reading is quite distinct. Âdy-anêka
would be more in accordance with custom. But the use of âdya instead of âdi in such a combination, though
somewhat unusual, is hardly to be treated as a mistake.
[11] In Sirûr, line 10-11, the reading is very clear,─ vishaya-vinâmn-ôttuṅga, except that the vi of vinâmn is
rather intermediate between vi and dhi. And the reading is equally certain here, though the subscript n of
vinâmn is a good deal damaged. We might accept vinâmna as a mistake for the usual Sanskṛit word vinamra,
‘ bent down,’ etc., or for a word vinamna which might be justified by the use of namna by Kanarese authors as an
equivalent of namra, ‘ bowing, bent,’ etc. (see Kittel’s Kannaḍa-English Dictionary, under namna and namnîkṛita ; and I think that I have met with either namna, nâman, vinamna, or vinâmna in Kanarese records, though
I cannot at present find the passages). But, as has been pointed out to me by Prof. Kielhorn, no such word
would give any suitable meaning here, and what is needed after âdy-ânêka is some expression meaning ‘ chief or
ruler of a district.’ I am inclined to think, therefore, that what was really intended was vishay-âdhinâth-ôttuṅga.
[12] From this point, the present record,─ and the Sirûr inscription also,─ pays more attention to the case-ending of the nominatives in a, which are disregarded altogether in the preceding part of this passage. Sirûr,
line 11-12, has here a reading which indicates that there was intended there bhañjanan amôgha, without saṁbhi.
[13] Sirûr, line 13, has the same mistake, ñcha for ñchha.
|
