South Indian Inscriptions

INSCRIPTIONS OF THE MAIN BRANCH

is quite plain. The only decoration it seems to have had was in the form of a scroll on its door frame, two fragments of which are lying in front of it. The door seems to have been 4’ 4” in breadth and about 4’ in height. The lintel has, in a recess in the middle, a small image of two-armed Gaṇapati, measuring 6” in breadth and 8½” in height. ‘The roof of the sanctum is formed of intersecting squares and has a pyramidal shape cut up exteriorly into gradually diminishing steps. Temples of this type can be seen in the adjoining villages of Pānōri and Ārmōri¹. There is a large image of Gaṇapati placed in the cell, but it seems to be of a later age. The temple was originally dedicated to Śiva. The liṅga has now disappeared, but from the socket in an old argha lying nearby, it seems to have been a large one, about 13” in diameter. Such liṅgas are found round about Mansar near Rāmṭēk, which was undoubtedly an ancient holy place dating back at least to the time of the Vākātakas. There is a broken image of Nandī lying in front of the present temple. Though the present structure cannot date back to the fourth century A.C., to which period the inscription can be referred, it undoubtedly marks an ancient site and may have been erected when the original temple fell into ruins.

...The inscription is not dated. The name of the king’s family which occurred in the beginning of the fourth line has, unfortunately, been lost ; but on the evidence of palaeography Cunningham conjecturally assigned the record to Rudrasēna I, though according to the notions then prevalent, he called him a king of Kailakila Yavanas, and placed him in 170 A.C.² Though this date cannot now be accepted, Cunningham’s attribution of the present record to the Vākāṭaka king Rudrasēna I seems to be correct. There were two kings of this name in the dynasty of the Vākāṭakas, viz., Rudrasēna I, who was the grandson and successor of Pravarasēna I, and Rudrasēna II, the grandson of the former and son-in law of Chandragupta II-Vikramāditya. Of these, the former was a Śaiva, being a fervent devotee of Svāmi-Mahābhairava,³ while the latter, probably owing to the influence of his wife Prabhavatīguptā, was a worshipper of Chakrapāṇī (Vishṇu)⁴. As the present inscription evidently records the building of a Śiva temple, it may be ascribed to Rudrasēna I. This is also confirmed by the palaeographic evidence detailed above⁵.

... The importance of the present inscription lies in this that it is the earliest record of the Vākāṭakas discovered so far, and is, besides, the only lithic record of that royal family. Its situation shows that Rudrasēna I ruled south of the Narmadā and renders doubtful the identification of Rudradēva, who is mentioned in the Allāhābād stone pillar inscription as one of the kings of Āryāvarta, with Rudrasēna I of the Vākāṭaka dynasty.

... There remains now the question-Why was the inscription inscribed breadthwise and commenced at the narrow end of the slab? As is well-known, there was a revival of Hinduism and Sanskrit learning in the age of the Vākāṭakas. They themselves performed animal sacrifices, and could have therefore had no regard for Aśōka’s precepts of ahiṁsā. When therefore Rudrāsēna I built a temple of his favourite deity and wanted to put up an inscription of his own to record it, he could have felt no scruples in chiselling off some part of the earlier inscription to make room for his record. The stone was probably placed
_________________

¹ C.A.S.R., Vol. VII, pp. 125-26.
² Ibid., Vol I, p. 29.
³ See the adjective अत्यन्तस्वामिमहाभैरवभक्‍तस्य applied to him in the copper-plates of Pravarasēna II.
⁴ See his adjective भगवतश्‍चक्रपाणे[]प्रसादोपजितश्रोसमुदयस्य in the copper-plates of his son Pravarasēna II.
⁵ Note especially the unlooped n in line 6. This letter has a looped form in all other Vākāṭaka inscriptions.