XI - Part II
stated in the Preface, all the inscriptions published in this Part
belong to the reign of a single ruler, nameslu, the Western Chalukya
king, Tribhuvanamalladeva Vikramaditya VI.
they do not add very much to our knowledge of the
political history of the reign of this great emperor.
Nevertheless, some of them throw welcome light on a few
problems of chronology pertaining to his reign besides disclosing
some new facts about the feudatories who flourished under his
patronage. A review of these facts would, it is hoped, serve as a useful
introduction to the part now being placed before scholars.
records of Vikramaditya VI, one from Amminbhavi, Dharwar District
(No. 121) and othe other from Unachgeri, Ron taluk of the same
District (No. 122) are dated Saka 993, Virodhikrit and Saka 994,
Paridhavin. These dates
correspond to A.D. 1071-72 and 1072 respectively.
Other records of Vikramaditya VI issued independently in A.D.
1071 have also been found. On
these dates, it should be remembered, Somesvara II was still on the
throne, which he occupied till A.D. 1074.
It would thus appear that Vikramaditya VI virtually assumed
independece as early as A.D. 1071 although he did not succeed in
finally overthrowing his elder brother Somesvara till A.D. 1076.
No. 206 of the present collection coming from Sirur mentions
Tribhuvanamalla-Bhagalamahadevi, a queen of Tribhuvanamalladeva (i.e.,
Vikramaditya VI). This princess is not known from any other source.
124 from Morab dated Chalukya-Vikrama year 3 introduces the king’s
younger brother Yuvaraja Jayasimha who is given the
string of titles, Trailokyamalla Vira-Nolamba-Pallava-Permadi.
The adoption of these Nolamba titles between Saka 986 (=A.D.
1064) and Saka 990 (=A.D. 1068) for the first time by a chalukya
prince, who was none other than this Jayasimha, would indicate, that
after the Nolambas ceased to exist as a ruling power, Jayasimha was
made the viceroy of that region and held the tract of territory
which had till then been the patrimony of the Nolambas.
As fas as is known, this prince seems to have Yuvarja up
to A.D. 1082 (No. 127) when he rebelled agaist his
brotherVikramaditya VI and after this date nothing more is heard of
facts concernig Yuvaraja Mallikarjuna, son of
Vikramaditya VI, gleaned from the present collection may be set out
here. When Fleet wrote
on the history of the later Chalukyas in his Dynasties of the
Kanarese Districts he was not aware of the existence of this prince
who was the eldest of the four sons of Vikramaditya VI, the other
three being Jayakarna, Somesvara III and Tailapa.
A doubt has arisen in the minds of some scholars as to
whether Mallikarjuna and his uncle Jayasimha were both holding the
office of Yuvaraja at the same time, somewhere about A.D.
1079. The Mutgi
inscription of Vikramaditya VI published by Dr. Barnett is supposed
to lend support to this possibility.
For, this record which bears two dates, viz., Chalukya-Vikrama
year 4 (=A.D. 1079) and 35 (=A.D. 1110) mention Yuvaraha Mallikarjuna. It is know that on the earlier date Jayasimha was the Yuvaraja
because, as stated in the previous paragraph, records applying
to him the designation of Yuvaraja are found up to A.D. 1082.
However, on a careful examination of the Mutgi record, it
will be seen that the two dates cited in it relate to transactions
that took place separately on these dates and that Yuvaraja Mallikarjuna
is mentioned only in connection with the later transaction of A.D.
1110. Hence it would be
erroneous to suppose that he was already a Yuvarja in1079
A.D. when actually it
was Jayasimha who was holding this postion; in this capacity he
functioned, as stated already, till probably A.D. 1082.
It must be observed, however, that on an identical date in
A.D. 1082, i.e., Sunday, 25th December, both Jayasimah
amdn Mallikarjuna are described as Yuvaraja in two records,
one, of the latter at Aland in Hyderabad State. It israther difficult to account for this anomalous state of
affairs of two persons of the same family holding the position of Yuvaraja
on or before 25th December 1082, the earliest date
found for Mallikarjuna as Yuvarja, the news had not reached
distant parts of the kingdom like the Dharwar region.
The records of prime Mallikarjua discovered so far, including
those in this collection (Nos. 139, 162) range from A.D. 1082 to
may also be drawn here to the titles Malava-bala-balahaka-samiranam
(No. 139) and Visala-raya-kuvara-javadandam (No. 162),
borne by him. Evidently
the Visalaraya referred to here is to be identified with
prince Visala of the Jalor branch of the Parmara dynastysince he was
the only prince of that name who was flourishing in this incription
is dated in this period. It
is well-known that Vikramditya VI conducted one or more campaigns
against Malwa which was at this period ruled bythe Paramaras.
notimpssible that the two epithets of Yuvaraja Mallikarjuna
refer to this conflict with the rulers of Malwa and that this prince
also took part in one of them and that Visaladeva of the Jalor
family was his adversary. From
the availabel records of the Paramara family no information is,
however, forthcoming regarding Visaladeva’s conflict with the
Chalukyas. The Mutgi inscription referred to above, describes the chief Vikramadityadeva,
lord of Varchamanapura, as the son-in-law of Mallikarjuna.
Dr. Barnett has suggested that Vardhamanapura wa
probably to be identified Wadhwan in Kathia war.
A more likely place would be Waddaman in the Mabbubnagar
District of the Hyderabad State; this area was not far from Kalyna,
the capital of the Chalukyas, and must have formed the core of their
kingdom whereas Wadhwan in Kathiawar rather too far away from Mutgi,
the centre of the chief’s activities.
In all likelihood this was also the Vardhamananagari which
the Kakatiya ruler Rudradeva is stated to have burnt.
A record of Mallikarjuna, now preserved in the Bijapur
Museum, contains certain verses which bear close resemblance in
purport, diction and style to those found in the Kannada work Pampa-Ramaayana
of Nagachandra alias Abhinava-pampa.
On account of this similarity it has been conjectured
that this poet flourished during the reign of Vikramaditya VI.
It is not unlikely that the poet was the protégé of Yuvaraja
of the records (Nos. 128, 160, 177 and 211) edited here mention the Kadamba
chief Guvaladeva, the feudatory of Vikramaditya, and
range in date from A.D. 1082 to 1125.
This Kadamba prince is to be idntified with Guvaladeva, the
elder of the two sons of Jayakesin I mentioned in the
Narendra Inscription of the time of Vikramaditya VI and Jayakesin
II, dated Saka 1047, Visvavasu (=A.D. 1125).
The earliest date for this prince, known so far, is Chalukya
Vikrama year 3, Siddharthin (A.D. 1079) furnished by an inscription
in the Prince of Wales Museum, Bombay.
No. 177 and 211 of the present collection, both coming from
Mugad, dharwar taluk, givem him the surname of Tribhuvanamalla and
described as the son of Jayakesin in a recently discovered
copper-plate grant of this very prince bearing the date Saka 1028,
Vyaya (A.D. 1107). It
can now be affirmed that this latter was identical with Guvaladeva,
son of Jayakesing I. The
date of the Mugad record (No. 177) of Tribhuvanamalla Guvaladeva which
corresponds to A.D. 1125, December 25, is also of particular
significance, for the above-mentioned record from Narendra, of
Jayakesin II, son of Vijayaditya, te younger brother of this
Guvaladeva, contains details of date which regularly correspond to
A.D. 1125, August 28, i.e., about 4 months earlier than the
Mugad record. This
raises the question as to whether the accession of Jayakesin II,
took place even while his uncle was alive and whether his father
Vijayaditya did not rule at all. The records of the family discovered so fat do not state
explicitly that Vijayaditya ruled.
This fact combined with the existence of Jayakesin’s
records of A.D. 1104, 1119, 1122 and 1125 might show that
Vijayaditya pre-deceased his elder brother, that Jayakesin was
nominated the latter’s successor even during the uncle’s
lifetime and that they, uncle and nephew, probably ruled jointly for
a long time. An
epigraph from Amminbhavi (No. 121), dated Saka 993, Virodhikrit, i.e.,
A.D. 1071-2, says that Mahamandalesvara Jayakesin,
apparently on the Kadamba family of Goa, was ruling over Palasige
and Konkana. This
appears to be the latest date for this prince, i.e.,
Jayakesin I, the other dates known for him being A.D. 1052 and 1059
provided by the Gudikatti inscription of Somesvara I and the Panjim
plates of Jayakesin.
129, dated Chalukya-Vikrama year 7, Dundubhi (i.e., 1083
A.D.) mentions a
certain Bhulokamalla Permadi, son of Achugi.
Though these names are common in the house of Sindas, on the
date quoted in the inscription, however there wa no chief of the
name of Permadi among the chiefs of this family,
It is therefore not certain whetehr these belonged to this
lineage at all though the territory over which they held sway is
usually associated with the Sindas.
Further, the identity of Bhulokamma, as whosepadaradhaka Permadi
of the present record describeds himself, is not easy to establish.
If the date of the inscription has been recorded correctly,
it may be surmised that this title was also borne by Vikramaditya
VI. None of
the predecessors of this monarch had the biruda of
Bhulokamall and the only known Bhulokamalla of this dynasty was the
son and successor of Vikramaditya VI, who came to the throne much
later than the date of the inscription under review.
An inscription (No. 155) mentioning the Sinda chiefs Achugi
II and his son Permadi born of Mahadevi confronts us with
a chronological difficulty. The
record bears the date Saka 1028, Tarana, i.e., A.D.
1104-5. On this
date it would be impossible for Permadi to have been old enough to
be able to transact any business as recorded in th inscription since
the earliest known date even of his father is A.D. 1113.
Consequently in the introduction to this inscription on page
195 below, it has been stated that the date cited in the record is
not admissible for the Sinda chief, Permadi.
A careful examination, however, of this record would show
that the apparent inconsistency between the contents and the date of
the record can be explained. It may be assumed, as in many cases, that while the original
gift registered in the inscription was made on the date cited, the
record itself was actually engraved and set up much later, perhaps
in the time of Sinda Permadi. The
text of the record does not militate against this possibility.
family of local chiefs describing themselves as of the Sagar-anvaya
and Manaleranvaya figures in a record from Gadag, the date of
which is lost (No. 201). Three
generations of this family are mentioned here, viz., Indrakesin
(I), his son Marasimha and the latter’s son Indrakesin
(II). This last
named chief is stated to be a subordinate Bombay, names three
persons of this same family, viz., Jayakesin (I), his
son Indrakesin and his son Jayakesin.
The record which is dated Saka 982 (=A.D. 1060) in
the reign of Somesvara I says that Mahasamanta Indrakesiyarasa
made a grant of land. Another
inscription at Kuyibal, also of the reign of this king (Trailokyamalla),
dated Saka 980 (==A.D. 1058) mentions Indrakesiyarasa of the
Manalera family as administreing Purigere-300.
Apparently, the Indrakesiyarasa of this record and Indrakesin
(I), father of Marasimha of the Gadag record cited above, are to be
considered as identcial. The
reason is this: Indrakesin
I most probably flourished in the reign of Somesvara I (like the
Indrakesiyarasa of the Prince of Wales Museum inscription) since his
grandson bearing the same name was a subordinate of Vikramaditya VI
according to the present Gadag record.
If so, Indrakesin (I) must be supposed to have had two sons,
Marasimha and Jayakesin (II) or in the alternative Jayakesin (II)
and Marasimha are to be regarded as one and the same.
The same three chiefs mentioned in the Prince of Wales Museum
record appear in another inscription at Shiggaon belonging to the
reign of Tribhuvanamalla Vikramaditya VI.
The date of the record is lost, but what is made clear by the
inscription is that Jayakesin II was actually the feudatory of
Vikramaditya VI. This
is also borne out by the Hulgur inscription of Vikramaditya VI,
dated Saka 999 (=A.D. 1077) which tells us that Jayakesiyarasa was a
subordinate of that king and therefore this chief may be identified
with jayakesin II. Thus
it would appear that both Indrakesin II of the Gadag record and his
uncle or father (?) Jayakesin II were feudatories of Vikramaditya VI
and that the latter was already a grown-up youth in 1060 A.D.
in the reign of Somesvara I as evidenced by the Prince of
Wales Museum inscription of the time of his father.
The Hulgur inscription of the reign of Jayasimha, dated Saka
960 (=1038 A.D.) mentions a Jayakesin of the same Manalers family
and one of his predecessors is called Irivabedanga marasingadeva.
It is not improbably that this Jayakesin and Jayakesin
(I) of the Prince of Wales Museum inscription and the Shiggaon
record are identical. Manalera,
after whom this family is named, is evidently not different from the
homonymous chief who, we learn from the Ataur inscription, was an
officer under the Ganga prince Butuga, a feudatory of Rashtrakuta
Kirshna III. Another
chief Manalera-Gadiga is stated to have been the nalgavunda
of Purigere in an undated record at Shiggaon of amoghavarsha who
may be identified with Amoghavarasha IV or Kakka, since the
characters of the record are difinitely assignable to the 10th
century A.D. This
Manalera-Gadiga may be regarded as an almost immediate descendant of
Manalera of the Atakur inscription of Amoghavarsha (IV).
It is notworthy that all the members of the family who came
after him were connected with the division of Purigere of which
Gadiga was the navalgunda. The
foregoing discussion would enable us to draw up a tentative
genealogy these chies as follows:- Click
here to Table
Abhinava-Pampa mentioned in the Paragraph on Yuvaraja Mallikarjuna
above, poets whose names occur in the records published below may be
noticed here. One of
them was Nagadeva of Pombolal (Hombal near Gadag) who
composed the Kurtakoti inscription of A.D. 1082 (No. 127).
Apparently it is this same poet who composed another record
of A.D. 1087 (No. 134) found at the place.
His compostition,l though of the conventional type, is
described as ak-Srilalata-mani-maya-pattam was another
poet who claims the authorship of a inscription at Soratur of
A.D. 1091 (No. 137). A
Poet called Chandrabhatta-Kavi is stated to have composed the
inscription of A.D. 1099 at Jitavynacgugu (No. 146).
It may not be wrong to suggest that he might be identical
with Chandrabhatta who corrected the composition of the poet
Rajavallabha, the writer of the Hottur inscription of the time of
Trailokyamalla Ahavamalla (i.e., Somesvara I), dated Saka 988 (=A.D.
was yet another to who is ascribed an inscription (No. 177) at
Mugad of A.D. 1125. As
in the case of many other authors of inscription poems, the literary
works, if any of these poets have not come to light.
a few words may be said on some points of general interest gathered
from the inscriptions of this
collection. One of them relates to the minting of coins during the
12th century A.D. This
record which comes from Sudi (No. 153) states that Uttavoja
described as the goldsmith (akkasale) of Tribhuvanamalla ade
a gift to the temple of Kammatesvara at Sudi.
The details pertaining to the gift reveal that gold coins
were struck by this goldsmith at Sudi with a die bearing a royal
seal. This Uttavoja was
evidently the royal minst-master at Sudi who was in charge of the
die (kammatad-ani) containing the royal seal (undige)
for striking coins. The
god Kammatesvara of the record no doubt takes his name after the kammata,
i.e., the mint, at
Sudi. We know of a coin
called Lokki-gadyana from many inscriptions (e.g., No. 136)
and we may not be wrong if we connect this coin with the town
Lokkigundi (modern Lakkundi near Gadag) where it was probably
struck. It is common
knowledge that the names of towns where the coins were minted find a
place on the coins along with other legends and symbols.
They are generally indicated by the initial letter of the
place name, if not by the entire name.
The relation of pana to a gadyana in value is
ascertainable from a record at Nidugundi (No. 189).
This inscription, while giving a list of several donations in
gold, specifies each donation in terms of gadya and pana and
recokons the total endowent as 6 gadyanas.
When the details mkentioned in terms of the two coins are
added up they work out to 5 gadyanas and 10 panas.
The total sum being stated to be 6 gadyas, it
becomes clear that 10 panas make one gadya (5 gadyas
+ 10 panas = 6 gadyas).
Incidentally this very record gives an idea of the rate of
interest (vriddhi) obtaining at the time.
It is laid down that the rate was two panas on one pon
per year, and at this rate 12 panas were to be realized
and utilized for Vedaparayana and pavitrarohana of the
god Kesavaditya of the place. Accordingly,
a pon meant a gadya or gadyana.