South Indian Inscriptions

MISCELLANEOUS

As regards individual letters, we may notice that the initial u which occurs in uktam,1.28, is closely similar to ţ as in Vindhyāţavī-, 1.29 ; the loop of the initial ē is closed on the left, see ēsha, 1.10; the length of medial ī is denoted either by a curve curling to the left as in-pīdita-, 1.7, or by a double circle as in Hārīti-, 11.2-3 ; the curve of the medial ŗi is turned in some cases to the left, see, e.g., -pitŗi-, 1.8, -vŗiddhayē, 1.11, -sadŗiś-,11. 26-27, and in others to the right, see -kŗipaņa-, 1.8, -paţal-āvŗita-, 1.27; the stroke for the medial ē encircles the letter on the left, see-anvayē, 1.3 ; similarly the left-hand mātrā for the medial ō and the lower of the two mātrās representing medial ai also encircle their respective letters, see-dāyō-, 1.27 and Vaiśākha-, 1.11; in narēndraih, 1.32, on the other hand, the two lefthand strokes of the medial ai are placed one beyond the other; the medial ō is, in some places, shown with a loop, see sva-bāhu-balō-, 1.6, and consequently medial au is bipartite ; kh appears without a loop except in the last two lines of the record; ţ has a flat horizontal stroke at the top ; neither t nor n is looped, except in their subscript forms, see, e.g., -prasanna-, 1.1, -āgni-, 1.24,=samyukta, 1.28 and haranti, 1.30 ; the subscript th is roundish in sthity-, 1.2 and curled in –udayasthō, 1.4 ; the subscript v is distinguished from y only by its right arm not being raised to the top-line. In some cases m appears similar to sh, which has misled the engraver into incising -nimēvī for –nishēvī in 1.7. The final form of n occurs in 1. 26, and that of t in 11.28 and 29. The sign of the upadhmānīya is seen in 1.32 and the numerical symbols for 300, 90, 10, 5 and 4 in 1.34.

The language is Sanskrit. As Dr. Kielhorn has already pointed out,1 the description of the donor’s family in the first two lines of the present inscription is identical with that occurring in the beginning of the grants of the Early Kaţachchuris.2 Again, the description of Vijayarāja in 11.5-8 almost literally agrees with that of Śańkaragaņa in the Kaţachchuri grants.3 In copying the latter, the draftsman of the present inscription seems to have inadvertently omitted the expression bhūri-draviņa-viśraņan- āvāpta-dharma-kriyah after samyak-prajā-pālan-ādhigata in 1.7. In its absence the latter expression cannot be satisfactorily interpreted. In the next two expressions dīn-āndha-kŗipaņa-bhē(śa)raņ-āgata-vatsalah and yath-ābhilashita-phala-pradō he has, to some extent, altered the original adjectives. Besides, in the formal part of the grant he has drawn upon some inscription, like the Bagumrā plates, of the Sēndrakas, for the expressions in 11. 25-27 of the present record agree almost literally with those in 11. 27-29 of the Bagumrā plates.4 That the wŗiter had a very imperfect knowledge of the Sanskrit language is shown by the expression -kuvalaya-tara-yaśasah, in which, while comparing Jayasimha’s fame with a blue lotus (!), he adds the comparative affix tara to a noun and uses the wrong grammatical form –yaśasāh foryaśāh. As regards orthography, we find the consonant following r doubled in some cases, and ri used for the vowel ŗi in prithivyām, 1.5.

The inscription refers itself to the reign of Vijayaraja, the son of Buddhavarman, who was himself the son of Jayasimha of the Chalukya dynasty. The plates purport to have been issued from the king’s victorious camp at Vijayapura and to register the grant of the village Pariyaya which was situated to the east of Sandhiyara in the vishaya of Kasakula. The land, or rather the revenue of the village, was divided into 55½ pattikas5 (shares) which were distributed among 63 Brahmanas, each getting from one-half
__________

¹ Ep. Ind., Vol. VΙ, p. 296.
² Compare 11. 1-2 of the present inscription with 11. 1-3 of the Ābhōņa plates of Śañkaragaņa, above, No. 12.
³ Compare 11. 5-7 of the present record with 11. 10-13 of of the Ābhōņa plates, above, No.12.
⁴ The draftsman has, to some extent, altered the original expressions and changed their order.
⁵ Pati, pāti, and patti occur in the Hīrahadagalli grant of the Pallava king Śivaskandavarman. Būhler derived them from Sanskrit prāpti ’ produce’ or ‘income’, see Ep. Ιnd., Vol. Ι, p. 8, n. 17.