|
The Indian Analyst
|
South Indian Inscriptions |
EPIGRAPHIA INDICA such symbols therefore would seem to have been longer in practical use than in other parts of the country. As regards the individual signs employed in this inscription, the symbol for 100 is something between lva and lu, just as the symbol for 200 in the Bâmanghâtî plate is lû ; and that for 80 is nearly identical in both plates. The exact form of the symbol─ if it be intended as such─ for the number of the tithi of the date I have not been able to trace else-where, and I am very doubtful whether I have correctly taken it to denote ‘ 5.’[1] ─ Excepting the description of the boundaries in lines 42 and 43, where some local dialect appears to be used, the language of the inscription is Sanskṛit. The first part of the grant up to line 22, which gives the genealogy of Daṇḍîmahâdêvî, is in verse, but includes a short prose passage in line 3. The formal part of the grant, from line 22 to the end, is in prose, except that in lines 36-39 it contains some benedictive and imprecatory verses or fragments of verses─ here, as in some cognate inscriptions, given very corruptly─ as well as a verse which records the name of the composer of the praśasti, i.e. as I take it, of the genealogical account. In respect of orthography the only general remarks called for are, that the letter b throughout is denoted by the sign for v, and that the writer of the second side (like some Telugu writers) has found some difficulty is distinguishing between the vowels i and i. The second side of the grant, as I have intimated already, has been written so carelessly that it would be impossible here to point out all orthographical mistakes. On the first side it may suffice to call attention to the use of the akshara tsa instead of chchha in the word saptatsada (for saptachchhada) in line 2, which finds its counterpart in the common saṁvachchhaa (for saṁvatsara).─ I regret that in the formal part of the grant there are several words or phrases regarding the exact reading and interpretation of which I am uncertain. They are the words transcribed by pa[vâ]ka-, l. 27, gôku[ṭa]-, l. 29, =lêkhari-pravêsanâs[t]iyâ, l. 31, and [pû?]ṇâ[kô], l.39. I also am unable to interpret the greater part of lines 42 and 43, which, as stated already, are not in Sanskṛit.
The inscription is one of the Paramabhaṭṭârikâ Mahârâjâdhirâja-Paramêśvarî Daṇḍîmahâdêvî (l, 24), whose ancestors are enumerated in verses 2-9. There was a king named Ummaṭṭasiṁha (l. 5), from whose family sprang Maṅgapâḍa (l. 7) and other kings. In their family there was the king Lôṇabhâra (l. 9) ; his son was Kusumabhâra (l. 13) ; after him ruled his younger brother Lalitabhâra (l. 13) ; he was succeeded by his son Śântikara (l. 15), and he again by his younger brother Śubhâkara (l. 18). When the last of these princes died, his queen[2] ascended the throne, and afterwards her daughter Daṇḍîmahâdêvî (l. 20) ‘ ruled the earth for a long time.’ This queen, a devout worshipper of Mahêśvara (Śiva), from ‘ the camp of victory ’─ appropriately compared in verse 1 with the commencement of autumn (the season of war) ─ at Guhêśvarapâṭaka (l. 3), issues the following order to the present and future functionaries in the Kôṅgôda-maṇḍala (l. 24), viz. the Mahâsâmantas, Mahârâjas, Râjaputras, Antaraṅgas, Kumârâmâtyas, Uparikas, Vishayapatis, Tadâyuktakas, Dâṇḍapâśikas, Sthânântarikas[3] and others who enjoy the royal favour, those belonging to the regular and irregular troops and (royal) favourites ;[4] and to the people, headed by the . . .[5] Sâmantas and Sâmavâjins,[6] who dwell in the eastern division of the Varaḍâkhaṇḍa-vishaya (l. 26) :─ “ Be it know to you ! For the increase of the religious merit of our parent, ourselves and all beings, we have, on the occasion of a saṁkrânti (l. 34), by means of a copper-charter _______________________________________________________ | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| > |
|
>
|