|
EPIGRAPHIA INDICA
detail by a much abler antiquarian than myself.[1] I shall, therefore, be as brief as possible.
The first of the appellations mentioned of Gôvinda IV. is Nitya-Kandarpa, which he is said
to have received because he outshone the god of love. In accordance with this, verse 21 speaks
of him as a prince, “the beauty of whose form excelled that of the god of love.” His father
Indra III. also bore the appellation Raṭṭa-Kandarpadêva,[2] from which it may be inferred
that the Râshṭrakûṭa kings had some of their birudas ending in Kandarpa. The second of these
appellations id Châṇakya-Chaturmukha or ‘(the god) Brahman (in regard to the art) of
Châṇakya,’ i.e. civil polity. What this phrase signifies is that, just as the Vêdas emanated
from the god Brahman, so civil polity originated from Gôvinda IV. His third appellation is Vikrânta-Nârâyaṇa. This reminds us of the epithets Vîra-Nârâyaṇa and Kîrti-Nârâyaṇa, borne respectively by Amôghavarsha I. and Indra III.,[3] and points to the conclusion that some
of the Râshṭrakûṭa birudas ended in Nârâyaṇa. The last appellation of Gôvinda IV. referred
to in the preamble is Nṛipati-Trinêtra, which corresponds to Mahârâja-Śarva,[4] mentioned by
the Gujarât Râsṭrakûṭa records with reference to Amôghavarsha I. The titles of Gôvinda IV.,
occurring in the formal part of the inscription, are too general to require any special notice.
As regards the places mentioned in the grant, Kêvañja, the village granted, is the Kimôj or Kîmaj of the present day, Kâvikâ the well-known Kâvî, and Sîhukagrâma the modern
Sîgâm or Śîgâm. The names of these villages occur in the “ Inscriptions from Kâvî”[5] by
Dr. Bühler, under the slightly altered forms of Kêmajju, Kâpikâ and Sîhugrâma. It
deserves to be noticed that Kâvikâ is in our inscription called a mahâsthâna, i.e. a holy place.
This indicates that Kâvikâ or Kâvî was not formerly noted as a mere sacred place of the Jainas,
as it is now, but was a centre of Brâhmaṇism, and that its sanctity goes back to the beginning
of the tenth century A.D. It is also interesting to note that Kêvañja, the village granted, is
said in our plates to be situated in the Khêṭaka district of the Lâṭa déśa. This implies that the
province of Lâṭa included the city of Khê¬ṭaka or Kaira, and also a small portion of territory to
its north, as may naturally be presumed. The view of Dr. Bühler and Pandit Bhagwanlal
Indraji[6] that Lâṭa corresponds to the country between the Mahî and the Koṅkaṇ or the Taptî
is, therefore, not tenable, and that held by Dr. Hultzsch[7] that it extended as far north as the
Shêri (Shêḍhi) is correct.
TEXT.[8]
First Plate.
___________
[1] Above, Vol. VI. pp. 160-198.
[2] J. Bo. Br. R. A. S. Vol. XVIII. pp. 259 and 263.
[3] Ibid. pp. 258 f. and 262 f.
[4] In J. Bo. Br. R. A. S. Vol. XX. p. 146, I understood the expression to mean ‘the illustrious great king
Śarva ;’ but now I think that with Dr. Fleet it must be translated ‘a very Śarva (Śiva) among Mahârâjas or great
kings’ (above, Vol. VI. p. 174 and note 7 ; Dyn. Kan. Distr. p. 401 and note 4).
[5] Ind. Ant. Vol. V. pp. 112, 114, 145 and 147.
[6] Ind. Ant. Vol. V. p. 145 ; History of Gujarât, in the Gazetteer of the Bombay Presidency, Vol. I.
Part I. p.
[7] Ind. Ant. Vol. XIV. P. 198.
[8] From the original plates.
[9] Expressed by a symbol.
[10] Metre : Slôka (Anushṭubh) ; and of the next verse. This verse, which occurs in almost all the Râshṭrakûṭa
records, is, however, not to be found in the Sâṅglî plates.
[11] Read  :.
[12] Metre : Śârdûlavikrîḍita ; and of the next verse. Both these verses do not occur in the Sâṅglî plates.
|
