South Indian Inscriptions

EPIGRAPHIA INDICA

G. ºkhitâ.─ (19) AS. 14 ; but Bühler has corrected this reading to 18 in Die Ind. Inschriften und die Kunstpoesie, p. 58.─ (20) G. vasâpakhe ; AS. vasapa[khe].─ (21) G. ºpasana.

TRANSLATION.

“ Success ! From the camp of victory of the Vejayanti army, Siri-Sadakaṇi Gotamiputa, lord of Benâkaṭaka of Govadhana, commands Viṇhupâlita, the officer at Govadhana : The Ajakâlakiya field in the village of Western Kakhaḍi, previously enjoyed by Usabhadata,─ two hundred ─ 200 ─ nivartanas, ─ that our field ─ two hundred ─ 200 ─ nivartanas ─ we confer on those Tekirasi ascetics ; and to that field we grant immunity, (making it) not to be entered (by royal officers), not to be touched (by any of them), not to be dug for salt, not to interfered with by the district police, and (in short) to enjoy all kinds of immunities ; with those immunities invest it ; and this field and these immunities take care to have registered here. Verbally ordered ; written down by the officer Sivaguta ; kept by the Mahâsâmiyas. The deed was delivered in the 18th year, on the 1st day of the 2nd fortnight of the rainy season ; executed by Tâpasa.”

Vejayaṁtiye ought to be taken as a local name and as alluding to the town of Vejayantî (K. 1). Vejayanti is not identical with vijayantî, the feminine of the participle vijayat, ‘ victorious.’ The mention of the ‘ Vejayanti army ’ may have been promoted by the wish of recalling to mind the usual formula vijayaskandhâvâra in a way at once pleasant to the king and honourable for his troops, whose successes it commemorated.

I cannot discover the â which AS. and G. attach to the second k of Benâkaṭaka. This is not to be wondered at, because it seems impossible to interpret Benâkaṭakasvâmi otherwise than as a compound of the same form as Navanarasvâmi in N. 3. When svâmin is prefixed as a title, it is placed before the king’s name (sâmi Siri-Puḷumâyi, K. 14 ; N. 25 ; sâmi Siriyaña-Sâtakaṇi, N. 24), and not, as would be the case here, if Bühler and Bhagwanlal were right, before his metronymic. As to the genitive Govadhanasa, it could certainly be explained as governed implicitly by Benâkaṭaka and pointing out the district where the place is situated. It seems however much more probable that it must be construed with skandhâvârât. The sequence of words would then appear somewhat less regular ; but the presence of another genitive, senâye Vejayaṁtiye, may have caused Govadhanasa to be placed after khaṁdhâvârâ. As we know nothing about Benâkaṭaka (see the preceding inscription), its situation need not be considered here. But it is unlikely that the king, while dating his gift from his head-quarters, should not have stated the name, and, as the gift mentioned here was made by him verbally and personally, it is all but certain that he was himself present at Gôvardhana.

Bühler and Bhagwanlal understand ajakâlakiyaṁ = Sanskṛit adyakâlikam, an adjective qualifying khetaṁ, and which, determining the following Usabhadatena bhûtaṁ, would mean ‘ till to-day.’ This meaning would be excellent ; it would have the advantage of dating positively the Southern conquest of Gautamîputra, which probably brought about the dispossession of the Kshaharâta Ṛishabhadatta in favour of the invader. But from the grammatical point of view ─ without taking into account the singularity of the form adyakâlakiya = adyakâlika,─ it would really be an odd way of speaking. It is, besides, necessary that the object of the gift should be precisely stated, the more so because, if Ṛishabhadatta had laid hand on a possession in these parts, it is hardly to be believed that it would not have extended over more than one field. I, therefore, am inclined to think that Ajakâlakiya is the name of a place, whatever may be its exact etymology which I have no means to state for certain.

I have doubt that Tekirasiṇa is the equivalent of Tiraṇhukânaṁ and refers to the monks on mount Triraśmi. As to the phonetic change, I see nothing more convincing than the conjecture of Bühler, who corrects the word to Terasikânaṁ = Trairaśmikânâṁ. But it is really a desperate expedient ─ so desperate that I may be allowed to ask a question.