The Indian Analyst
 

North Indian Inscriptions

 

 

Contents

Introduction

Preface

Contents

List of Maps and Plates

Abbreviations

Additions and Corrections

Images

Introduction

Political History

The Early Silaharas

The Silaharas of North Konkan

The Silaharas of South Konkan

The Silaharas of Kolhapur

Administration

Religious Condition

Social Condition

Economic Condition

Literature

Architecture and Sculpture

Texts And Translations  

Inscriptions of the Silaharas of North Konkan

Inscriptions of The Silaharas of South Konkan

Inscriptions of The Silaharas of kolhapur

APPENDIX I  

Additional Inscriptions of the Silaharas

APPENDIX II  

A contemporary Yadava Inscription

Index

Other South-Indian Inscriptions 

Volume 1

Volume 2

Volume 3

Vol. 4 - 8

Volume 9

Volume 10

Volume 11

Volume 12

Volume 13

Volume 14

Volume 15

Volume 16

Volume 17

Volume 18

Volume 19

Volume 20

Volume 22
Part 1

Volume 22
Part 2

Volume 23

Volume 24

Volume 26

Volume 27

Tiruvarur

Darasuram

Konerirajapuram

Tanjavur

Annual Reports 1935-1944

Annual Reports 1945- 1947

Corpus Inscriptionum Indicarum Volume 2, Part 2

Corpus Inscriptionum Indicarum Volume 7, Part 3

Kalachuri-Chedi Era Part 1

Kalachuri-Chedi Era Part 2

Epigraphica Indica

Epigraphia Indica Volume 3

Epigraphia
Indica Volume 4

Epigraphia Indica Volume 6

Epigraphia Indica Volume 7

Epigraphia Indica Volume 8

Epigraphia Indica Volume 27

Epigraphia Indica Volume 29

Epigraphia Indica Volume 30

Epigraphia Indica Volume 31

Epigraphia Indica Volume 32

Paramaras Volume 7, Part 2

Śilāhāras Volume 6, Part 2

Vākāṭakas Volume 5

Early Gupta Inscriptions

Archaeological Links

Archaeological-Survey of India

Pudukkottai

ADDITIONAL INSCRIPTIONS OF THE SILAHARAS

 

of Chhittarāja, but from the manner in which her name is mentioned in that record[1], she seems to be the mother of the three brothers Chhittarāja, Nāgārjuna and Mummuṇi, and the queen of Vajjaḍa II. She is evidently different from Padmairajñī mentioned in the Thaṇā plates[2] of Mummuṇi.

.. The object of the present inscription was to lay down the vyavasthā (settlement) in respect of the orchards at the villages Karadāṇḍa and Kōlapallikā in the vishaya of Pāṇāḍa, belonged to the Karahāṭaka Brāhmaṇas residing at Chipaḷūṇa[3]. Such documents were called vyavasthā-patras. The present record lays down a tax of four drammas on a hundred areca-nut trees[4] in the orchards of the aforementioned places. The cocoanut, bread-fruit (panasa), champaka and mango trees, whether in orchards or in the forests outside the villages, should be regarded as untaxable. On the other hand, the surāmaṇḍa (mahuā) trees, whether inside the orchards or outside, should be regarded as belonging to the Government. It seems that the areca-nut trees were generally subject to higher taxation, but at the instance of Queen Padmalā, the Government levied lighter taxes on these trees in the two villages out of reverence for the learned and pious Brāhmaṇas residing there. As the present inscription does not mention any land-grant, the usual benedictory and imprecatory verses do not occur therein.

..As for the localities mentioned in this inscription, Pāṇāḍa has already been identified with Poināḍ in the Kolābā District. Karahāṭa is well known as Karhāḍ in the Sātārā District, from where several learned Brāhmaṇas were invited to North Koṅkaṇ by the Śilāhāras. They may have been residing at Bhoighar at the time of the present grant. Karadāṇḍa may be identical with Dāṇḍē also known as Nāndgaon in the Muruḍ Mahāl. It lies only four miles south of Bhoighar. Kōlapallikā is probably the same as Kolamāṇḍale, just a mile north of Bhoighar. There is a village named Kolavalī, in the Ḍahāṇu tālukā, which bears greater resemblance to Kolapallikā, but it lies far away from Bhoighar.

TEXT[6]

images/221

________________________________________________

[1] No. 16, line 12.
[2] No. 14, line 55.
[3] This place is named Chipulaṇa in No. 5, line 41, and No. 6, line 39. Perhaps, the Brāhmaṇas migrated to Bhoighar after the issue of these plates, for the villages where the orchards were situated lay close to Bhoighar.
[4] The text of the present inscriptions has पूगीफलशतं प्रति द्रम्मचतुष्टयम्, which would mean a tax of four dramas, on a hundred areca-nuts. This is not likely. Perhaps, the correct reading is पूगीवृक्षशतं प्रति द्रम्मचतुष्टयम्.
[5] These trees are excepted in other records also, for their flowers yields spirituous liquor, which was a source of state revenue.
[6] This text is prepared from that recited by Pandit Natu and published by M.G. Dikshit with the help of cognate Śilāhāra records. The portion supplied from the latter is shown in rectangular brackets. Reasons for omissions or changes are explicitly stated.
[7] Metre of this and the next verse : Anushṭubh.

 

<< - 1 Page