South Indian Inscriptions

EPIGRAPHIA INDICA

Beṇṇeyûr. This is probably the Beṇṇûr at which there is an inscription of A.D. 1538, ibid., Cm. 127. I cannot find it in the maps.

Maltavûra. This is probably a village which is not shewn in the Atlas sheet, but is entered as ‘ Mattavara,’ somewhere close on the south of Chikmagaḷûr but without an indication of its actual site, in the map of the Kaḍûr district in Mysore, revised edition, Vol. II. p. 367.

Urpavaḷḷi. This must be the Uppahaḷḷi at which there are inscriptions of A.D. 959 (? 958) and later dates Ep. Carn. Vol. VI., Cm. 38 to 43. I cannot find it in maps. Regarding the proper attribution of one of these records, Cm. 42, and the question of its actual date in A.D. 959 or 958, see page 56 below and note 1. According to the published reading, another of them, Cm. 38, is dated (see the Kanarese text, p. 171) in the Paridhâvin saṁvatsara coupled with Vikragâlaṁ 1070, which (see the transliterated text, p. 103, the translation, p. 38, and Introd. p. 15) is supposed to mean Vikrama-kâlaṁ 1070, giving the Vikrama year 1070 (current), which was the Paridhâvin saṁvatsara, = A. D. 1012-13. But anything of that kind would of course stamp the record as a spurious one.

Indavûra. This must be the ‘ Indavara ’ of the Atlas sheet, two miles west-by-north from Chikmagaḷûr, and, I suppose, the ‘ Indâvâra ’ at which there are inscriptions, Ep. Carn. Vol. VI., Cm. 30 to 36. Its name is given as Indâvâra above the Kanarese text of Cm. 30 ; but the record itself given it as Indavara according to the transliterated text, and as Indapara according to the Kanarese text, line 10. The inscription Cm. 36, of A.D. 1292, gives it according to the transliterated text as Indaûra, but according to the Kanarese text as Indavûra, in line 9, and according to both the texts as Indavura in line 10. The Uppahaḷḷi inscription Cm. 38, which purports or is supposed to be dated in A.D. 1012-13, appears to give the name as Indayûra.

* * * * * *

The record is certainly a Western Gaṅga record. This is established partly by the locality to which it belongs ; partly by the emblem of the elephant at the top of the stone ; and partly by the personal name Râchamalla, and the epithet Nîtimârga, of the reigning prince, and by his titles, Koṅguṇivarman, lord of Kuvaḷâla, and lord of Nandagiri. For the rest, the interest of it centres in the question of the period in which we are to place it.

Mr. Rice originally, in 1884 (Ind. Ant. Vol. XIII. p. 188 b), brought this Chikmagaḷûr inscription to notice as being “ dated in the 6th year after Mâdhava Mahârâjadhirâja had enfeoffed Râcha-Malla ; ” which explanation of it would have the effect of placing it, according to the fictitious Western Gaṅga pedigree and chronology, before at any rate A.D. 466, and perhaps before A.D. 248 (see my Table in Vol. III. above, p. 161). Subsequently, however, in 1886 (Coorg Inscrs. p. 5), having apparently recognised meanwhile that it does not really mention a Mahârâjâdhirâja Mâdhava, he referred it to a Nîtimârga-Râchamalla who, according to his views, was ruling from A.D. 902 to 909. And in his last treatment of it, in 1901 (Ep. Carn. Vol. VI. Introd. p. 8), endorsing that view with only the alteration that the record should be placed in or about A.D. 899, he has grouped it along with the following other records :─

(1) An inscription at Gañjigere in the Kaḍûr district, Ep. Carn. Vol. VI., Cm. 133. This record is dated, without any mention of the Śaka year, in the first (year of the) rule of a Nîtimârga whose personal name is not mentioned in it.

(2) An inscription at Hirê-Bâsûr in the Kaḍûr district, Ep. Carn. Vol. VI., Kd. 141. This record refers itself to the time of a Nîtimârga whose personal name is not mentioned in it. It contained a date in the month Chaitra of a Śaka year which Mr. Rice has assumed to be the year 822 (current), with the result of A.D. 899 (loc. cit. Introd. p. 8, and translations, p. 26). But all that remains extant of the passage containing the date is . . . . . . nûra i[r]ppatt-