Current Version: draft, 2024-09-02Z
Editor: Dániel Balogh.
DHARMA Identifier: INSVengiCalukya00026
Hand Description:
Halantas. Final M is derived from the shape of a classical ma with an upward extension that bends right and then up again, but is now stylised into a circle with a tail on top that bends right and then up. The circle part is much like an anusvāra. E.g. l3 °litānāM. Final N is likewise based on na, but has only a horseshoe shape at the bottom, with the upward tail bending right, up, then right again. E.g. l10 māsāN. Final T is normally formed in the same way. A clear example is l17 avarddhayaT; the two instances in line 15 look rather like a regular ta, but I assume that the vertical extension is missing here because this is the first line of a plate.
Original punctuation marks are long, straight and plain verticals. This sign is doubled after l27 ca. The one after l14-15 āharata is unclear and may in fact consist of three short verticals.
Other palaeographic observations. Anusvāra is a fairly large circle well above the headline, atop or to the right of the consonant to which it belongs, occasionally atop the next character, probably only when displaced by a descender, e.g. the first anusvāra of l10 saptatriṁśataṁ is above śa, because stra in the previous line prevents it from being closer to tri. Occasionally it is also lowered to or below headline height, e.g. l1 Ekānnaviṁśatin, where jo and vi in the previous line (themselves pushed downward by descenders further above) prevent its regular placement. Rare jha occurs (as a subscript consonant) in l26 jhaṭiti. Upadhmānīya occurs before l45 parantapaḥ. Initial Ī occurs in line 52, but in the scanned photo it cannot be made out at all.
No metadata were provided in the table for this inscription
1(śrī?)-(t)ri(bhu)(vanāṁku?)(śa)
⎘ plate 1v 1svasti[.] śrīmatāṁ sakala-bhuvana-saṁstūyamāna-mānavya-sago-
2trānāṁ hārīti-putrāṇāṁ kauśikī-vara-prasāda-labdha-rājyānāṁ mātr̥-
3-gaṇa-paripā◯litānāM svāmi-⟨⟨mahāse⟩⟩na-pādānuddhyātānāṁ bhagavan-n(ā)-
4rāyaṇa◯-pras(ā)da-samāsādita-vara-varāha-lāṁch¿ā?⟨a⟩nekṣaṇa-
5-kṣaṇa-vaśīkr̥tārāti-maṇḍalānām aśvamedhāvabhr̥¿t?⟨th⟩a-snāna-pavi-
6trīkr̥ta-vapuṣāṁ cālukyānāṁ kulam alaṁkariṣṇos satyāśraya-va-
7l(l)abhendrasya bhrātā kub(j)a-viṣṇ(u)varddhano [’]ṣṭādaśa va(rṣā)ṇi[.] tat-suto ja(ya)-
⎘ plate 2r 8siṁhas trayastriṁśataM[.] tad-anujendrarāja-nandano viṣṇuvarddha(no) nava[.] tad-(ātma)-
9jo maṁgi-yuvarājaḥ paṁcaviṁśatin[.] tat-tanujo jayasiṁhas trayodaśa[.] ta-
10d-anujaḥ kokkil¡i! ṣaṇ māsāN[.] tad-¿āgrā?⟨agra⟩jo viṣṇurājas saptatriṁśataṁ[.] (tat-ta)-
11(nu)jo vija◯yāditya Ekānnaviṁśatin[.] tat-tanujo viṣṇurā(jaṣ ṣa)ṭtriṁ-
12(śa)ta(ṁ)[.] tat-sū◯nur vvijayādityaś catvāriṁśataM[.] tat-tanayaḥ ka(li)-vi-
13(ṣṇuvarddha)no [‘]ddhyarddha-varṣaM[.] tad-apatya-mukhyaḥ yas tu
sa vijayādityaś catuśca-
17tvāriṁśata(ṁ) ve(ṁ)gī-deśam anuvarṣam avarddhayaT|
tasya vijayādityasya bhrātur vvikramākrānta-saka-
20la-bhuvana-talasya vi⟦(jayā?)⟧⟨⟨(kramā)⟩⟩ditya-bhūpater agra-tanayaḥ
sa sarvva-lokāśraya-śrī-vi⟨⟨ṣṇuvarddhana-cālukya⟩⟩-bhīma-mahārā-
28jādhirāja-parameśvaraḥ parama-māheśvaraḥ varavara-rāṣṭra{kū}-
⎘ plate 3v 29-(ni)vāsino rāṣṭrakūṭa-pramukhān kuṭumbina Ittham ājñāpayati|
yaś ca|
Api ca
ta◯(s)yai (śrī?)-mahādevyai tat-pati-(k)r̥ta-pūrvvo(pakāra-s)m(a)-
47raṇa-santuṣṭaḥ kr̥tajñatā-prakhyāpana-nimittaṁ sarvva-kara-parihāre-
48(ṇa) mogābhidhāno grāmo dattaḥ
Asyāvadhayaḥ[.] pūrvvataḥ
49(pu)liyeṟu-ṇāma nadī| Āgneyataḥ mūṇṭha-rāvula guṇṭha[.]
⎘ plate 5r 50(da)kṣiṇataḥ ceṁbaṟka-narendreśvara-kṣetraM| nair¡i!⟨r̥⟩tyāṁ tai(la)-(śa?)-
51(rvva)-kṣetraM| paścimataḥ devu(la-ce)ṟuvu| vāyavyataḥ ca(rmma)-
52ṇḍ(i)-paścima◯-taṭākaM(|) Uttarataḥ peddapūṇḍi-cariya(|) Ī-
53(ś)¿(a)?⟨ā⟩na(taḥ) r(i?)◯ṇṭha-mrāṁkulu| na kenacid asyopari bādh(ā) karaṇīyā(|)
54(ta)thā ca
Asyājñapti⟨ḥ⟩ (ka)ḍeya-rāja E-
56(va)[.] (bha)ṭṭa-vāmanena (ra)citam idaM[.] koṇḍācāryye(ṇa l)i(kh)i(taM)
1-13Greetings! Satyāśraya Vallabhendra (Pulakeśin II) was eager to adorn the lineage of the majestic Cālukyas—who are of the Mānavya gotra which is praised by the entire world, who are sons of Hārīti, who attained kingship by the grace of Kauśikī’s boon,↓1 who are protected by the band of Mothers, who were deliberately appointed (to kingship) by Lord Mahāsena, to whom the realms of adversaries instantaneously submit at the [mere] sight of the superior Boar emblem they have acquired by the grace of the divine Nārāyaṇa, and whose bodies have been hallowed through washing in the purificatory ablutions (avabhr̥tha) of the Aśvamedha sacrifice. His brother Kubja Viṣṇuvardhana [reigned] for eighteen years. His son Jayasiṁha (I), for thirty-three. His younger brother Indrarāja’s son Viṣṇuvardhana (II), for nine. His son Maṅgi Yuvarāja, for twenty-five. His son Jayasiṁha (II), for thirteen. His younger brother Kokkili, for six months. His elder brother Viṣṇurāja (Viṣṇuvardhana III), for thirty-seven. His son Vijayāditya (I), for nineteen. His son Viṣṇurāja (Viṣṇuvardhana IV), for thirty-six years. His son Vijayāditya (II), for forty. His son Kali Viṣṇuvardhana (V), for a year and a half. His firstborn progeny, the one who—
16-17—that Vijayāditya (III) strengthened the land of Veṅgī year after year for forty-four [years].
19-20that Vijayāditya’s (III) brother was King (bhūpati) Vikramāditya who conquered the entire surface of the earth by his valour (vikrama). His firstborn son—
27-29that shelter of all the world (sarva-lokāśraya), His Majesty Viṣṇuvardhana Cālukya-Bhīma (I), Supreme Lord (parameśvara) of Emperors (mahārājādhirāja) and supreme devotee of Maheśvara, commands all householders (kuṭumbin)—including foremost the territorial overseers (rāṣṭrakūṭa)—who reside in Varavara district (viṣaya) as follows:
38and who—
40moreover,
46-48To that Śrī-Mahādevī, ⟨we, Cālukya-Bhīma,⟩↓4 fondly recalling the previous service done by her husband, [have] granted the village named Moga with an exemption from all taxes, in order to proclaim [our] gratitude.
48-54Its boundaries [are as follows]. To the east, the river named Puliyeṟu. To the southeast, the Mūṇṭha-Rāvula pond (guṇṭha).↓5 To the south, the field of the Ceṁbaṟka-Narendreśvara [temple]. To the southwest, the field of the Taila-Śarva [temple]. ↓6 To the west, the Devula reservoir (ceṟuvu). To the northwest, the western tank (taṭāka) of [the village] Carmaṇḍi. To the north, peddapūṇḍi-cariya. ↓7 To the northeast, riṇṭha-mrāṁkulu.↓8 Let no-one pose an obstacle (to her enjoyment of her rights) over it. Moreover,
55-56The executor (ājñapti) of this [grant] is the castellan (kaḍeya-rāja)↓9 himself. This [grant] was composed (racita) by Bhaṭṭa Vāmana. Written (likhita) by Koṇḍācārya.
1-13Prospérité ! Kubja Viṣṇuvardhana, frère de Satyāśraya Vallabhendra, ornement de la lignée des Calukya, illustres, du même gotra que les descendants de Manu, honorés dans l’univers entier, fils de Hāritī, qui obtinrent leur royaume grâce à l’excellente faveur de Kauśikī, protégés par la troupes des Mères, méditant aux pieds du seigneur Mahāsena, dont le cercle des ennemis fut soumis en un instant à la vue du signe illustre de l’excellent sanglier, faveur octroyée par le bienheureux Nārāyaṇa, dont les corps furent purifiés par le bain purificatoire de l’aśvamedha, [régna] pendant dix-huit années ; son fils, Jayasiṁha, pendant trente-trois [années] ; le cher fils de son frère cadet Indrarāja, Viṣṇuvardhana, pendant neuf [années] ; le fils de celui-ci, Maṁgi-Yuvarāja, pendant vingt-cinq [années] ; son fils, Jayasiṁha, pendant treize [année] ; son frère cadet, Kokkili, pendant six mois ; le frère de celui-ci, Viṣṇurāja, pendant trente-sept [années] ; son fils Vijayāditya pendant dix-neuf [années] ;↓10 le fils de celui-ci, Viṣṇurāja, pendant trente-six [années] ; son fils Vijayāditya pendant quarante [années], le fils de ce dernier, Kali-Viṣṇuvarddhana, une année et demi ; Le prince de cette lignée,
16-17Lui, Vijayāditya, fit prospérer à chaque saison le royaume de Veṅgī, pendant quarante-quatre années.
19-20le fils aîné du roi Vikramāditya, dont la vaillance avait conquis toute la surface de la terre, le frère de ce dernier Vijayāditya.
27-29Lui, refuge du monde entier, l’illustre Viṣṇuvardhana Cālukya Bhīma, roi suprême des grands rois, seigneur suprême, dévôt de Māheśvara, ordonne ceci aux chefs de familles, habitant le rāṣṭra de Varavara, rāṣṭrakūṭa en tête :
38et,
40Et,
46-48[Vijayāditya], qui éprouvait de la reconnaissance au souvenir des services rendus par l’époux de celle-ci, donne à cette Mahādevī le village nommé Moga, exempté de toute taxe, à l’occasion d’une annonce portée à la connaissance [de tous],
48-54Les limites de ce dernier [sont] : à l’est le rivage nommé Puliyeṟu, au sud-est l’étang de Muṇṭha-Rāvula, au sud le terrain de Narendreśvara, Ceṁbaṟu, au sud-ouest tout le terrain de Taila, à l’ouest Devulaceṟuva, au nord-ouest un étang à l’ouest Carmmaṇḍi, au nord Peddapūṇḍi-Cariya, au nord-est Ṟeṇṭhamrākulu. Aucune charge ne doit lui être imposée. Ainsi Vyāsa a-t-il dit :
55-56L’exécuteur de [ce don] est précisément le kaḍeyarāja. Cet [édit] a été composé par Bhaṭṭavāmana [et ] gravé par Koṇḍacārya.
Sankaranarayanan gives the metre of stanza 4 as indravaṁśā, in which case the first quarter should begin with a short syllable.
In agreement with previous editors, I assume that Vijayāditya, introduced in stanza 10 as the son of Niravadya Dhavala and grandson of Pāṇḍarāṅga,↓16 married the lady Śrī-Mahādevī (father: Yuddhamalla; paternal grandfather: Baladakayya; mother: Tailāmbā; maternal grandfather: Sarvarāja). I further assume (again in agreement with them) that the donor is the king, who rewards Vijayāditya’s widow(?) for her husband’s service. To arrive at this, we need to understand santuṣṭaḥ in line 47 as an instrumental and supply a name or pronoun to which it stands in apposition (e.g. asmābhiḥ … santuṣṭaiḥ or cālukya-bhīmena … santuṣṭena). Were this not the case, the implication would be that Vijayāditya is the donor. This alternative possibility cannot be rejected out of hand, but would first require us to understand Śrī-Mahādevī and Tailāmbā to be the same person (whose father is Sarvarāja), and second, to emend dattaḥ in line 48 to an active verb, e.g. dattavān. Neither of these are impossible, but I believe that if the donor were not the king himself, then this would be stated more explicitly in the text and the king’s consent would also be mentioned.
Unlike the previous editors, I believe that the problematic stanza 13 (for which see the apparatus to line 45) in fact mentions their marriage explicitly. In this way, the description of Śrī-Mahādevī in the accusative in stanzas 8-9 is picked up by the accusative yāṁ in stanza 13, and the introduction of Vijayāditya in stanzas 10-12 is a parenthetical excursus.
Previous editors are probably correct to assume that Vijayāditya has died and that the grant is being made to his widow. This is implied by the fact that the recipient is the lady, but nowhere in the text is Vijayāditya’s death explicitly mentioned (unless the damaged and tentatively restored part of stanza 13 say this instead of what I restore in the edition). Moreover, the remark ājñaptiḥ kaḍeya-rāja eva (if eva is correctly read) may in fact imply that the executor is the very kaḍeya-rāja Vijayāditya who has been described in the text. The present-tense description of Vijayāditya may imply the same. The possibility should remain open.
Reported in ARIE 1960-1961: page 38, appendix A/1960–61, № 2 with discussion at ibid.: 14. Edited (from photos, impressions and the original) by S. Sankaranarayanan (1973: pages 95–104, № 2), with photographs of the plates and seal (no translation). Also edited by N. Venkataramanayya (1974) with photo of the seal and inked rubbings of the plates (no translation). The present edition by Dániel Balogh is based on a collation of the previous editions and the visual aids published with them. Both editions contain plenty of typographic mistakes; only significant ones are shown in the apparatus here and others are silently assumed to have been correctly read by the original editors.
↑1. Or, alternatively, by the grace of Kauśikī’s bridegroom, i.e. Śiva. In spite of its
slight awkwardness, I prefer the former interpretation because the Bādāmi Cālukyas
refer to themselves as nourished (saṁvardhita) by Kauśikī.
↑2. The word kṣitā or kṣita is not known from other sources, but must mean hips or buttocks here.
↑3. The reading of this stanza is problematic and may be incorrect in one or more spots.
My tentative understanding of its meaning differs significantly from that of previous
editors. See the apparatus to line 45 and the commentary.
↑4. See the commentary for my understanding of this elliptical passage.
↑5. Venkataramanayya, who reads muṇṭha-rāvula-guṭṭa, translates, ‘the hill with three(?) pipal trees’
↑6. My translation is based on Sankaranarayanan’s reading, but see the apparatus to line
50 for my doubts concerning this.
↑7. According to Sankaranarayanan, this means a precipice or valley belonging to Peddapūṇḍi
village. Venkataramanayya elaborates this to ‘a hollow between hills in which stood the village’.
↑8. According to Sankaranarayanan, who reads reṇṭha-mrākulu, this means ‘some two trees (?)’. Venkataramanayya’s gloss of the term is ‘soap-nut trees’.
↑9. The term kaḍeya-rāja, equivalent to kaḍa-eṟeya and kaṭaka-rāja, is normally understood to mean a chief officer of the royal camp (cf. Fleet 1902–1903: 183–185 and Sircar 1966: s.v. kaṭaka–rāja). However, as it seems to denote a very high hereditary office in the Cālukyan court,
I believe it had in this case no direct association with any army camps.
↑10. Toutes les autres inscriptions de notre corpus attestent une durée de règne de 18
années.
↑11. Il est aussi question de ce personnage dans les insc. nos 32, str.5 ; 37, str. 10,
41.
↑12. Le nom Aditya désigne à la fois le dieu et son oncle Vijayāditya qui lui a légué le
royaume.
↑13. La strophe 7 poursuit peut-être la comparaison diagrammatique entre la lignée divine
śivaïte et la lignée du héros. La relation bimba-pratibimba est fondée sur l’analogie entre la relation filiale de Tailāṁbā et Sarvarāja et celle
d’Umā et Himālaya. La comparaison de Baladakayya à Śaṁbhu incite à penser que cette
figure se poursuit sur la strophe 7 : la relation conjugale de ce dernier et Tailāṁbā
correspondant à celle de Śiva et Umā. Mais le composé sūkara-lāṁchanaḥ, « porteur de la marque du sanglier », dans le pāda d, ne peut désigner que Viṣṇu,
lui aussi qualifié souvent de « Śaṁbhu ». Cette expression est une allusion au sceau
des Cālukya de Veṅgī.
↑14. Br̥haspati.
↑15. Il manque cinq syllabes. On attend, après l’énumération des trois buts, l’évocation
du quatrième but, mokṣa. Le fait que le roi fasse un don de village à Mahādevī corrobore
l’hypothèse que ce personnage soit mort.
↑16. This genealogy is confirmed in lines 44-45 of the Maliyapūṇḍi grant of Amma II.