Current Version: draft, 2024-09-02Z
Editor: Dániel Balogh.
DHARMA Identifier: INSVengiCalukya00028
Hand Description:
Halantas need checking against facsimile.
Original punctuation marks transliterated by the editors as | and || are adopted here; all punctuation marks need to be verified against a facsimile.
Other palaeographic observations. Anusvāra is moved to the next line in l 25 aṁkitākhila, l 27 catuścatvāriṁśad, l39 bhaṁga, l58 polakuṁgoṇḍa, l60 cāmiṟeniguṁṭṭa. Visarga is moved to the next line in l55 paścimataḥ. Consonants are doubled not only after r, but often also before y and after an anusvāra.
No metadata were provided in the table for this inscription
2svasti[.] śrīmatāṁ sakala-bhuvana-saṁstūyamāna-mānavya-sagotrānāṁ hārītī-putrāṇāṁ
kau-
3śikī-vara-prasāda-labdha-rājyānāṁ mātr̥-gaṇa-paripālitānāṁ svāmi-mahāsena-pādānudhyātā-
4nāṁ bhagavan-nārāyaṇa-prasāda-samāsādita-vara-varāha-lāñchanekṣaṇa-kṣaṇa-va-
5śīkr̥tārāti-maṇḍalānāṁ Aśvamedhāvabhr̥tha-snāna-pavitrīkr̥ta-vapuṣāṁ calukyā-
6nāṁ kulam alaṁkariṣṇ¿u?⟨o⟩ḥ| satyāśraya-vallabh⟦e⟧⟨⟨a⟩⟩sya bhrātā kubja-viṣṇuvarddhano [’]ṣṭāda-
7śa varṣāṇi| tat-putro jayasiṁha-vallabhas trayastriṁśad varṣāṇi| tad-bhrātur indrarāja-na-
8ndano vi(ṣṇu)varddhanaḥ nava varṣāṇi| tat-putro maṁgi-yuvarājaḥ paṁcaviṁśati saṁvatsarāN|
9tat-sūnur jjayasiṁhas trayodaśa saṁvatsarāN| tad-⟨d⟩vaimāturānujaḥ kokkili⟨ḥ⟩
⎘ plate 2r 10ṣaṇ māsān| tad-agrajo viṣṇurājas svānujam uccāṭy¿ā?⟨a⟩ saptatriṁśat-saṁvatsarāN[.] ta-
11t-putro vijayāditya-bhaṭṭārakaḥ AṣṭādaśābdāN| tan-nandano viṣṇuvarddhanaḥ ṣaṭtriṁśa-
12d-abdān| tat-putraḥ
sa samasta-bhuvanāśraya-śrī-vijayādityaś catuścatvāri-
28ṁśad-varṣāṇi| tad-anu savitaryy astaṁ-gate timira-paṭaleneva raṭṭa-dāyāda-bale-
29nābhivyāptaM veṁgī-maṇḍalaM tad-anuja-vikramāditya-sūnuś calukya-bhīmā-
30dhipo drohārjunāpara-nāmā sva-vikramaika-sahāya-taravāri-prabhayāvabhā-
31syādhipatir abhūt[.] kiṁ ca| dīnānātha-nagna-naṭa-gāyaka-dharmma-dhvaja-vr̥ttīnāM
pitarāv i-
32va sakheva gurur ivābhilaṣitaṁ vistīrrya kalpa-taru-pratimaś cetāṁsi dānena saṁta-
33rpya triṁśad-varṣāṇi{|} pālayitvātma-guṇaiḥ purandaram ānandayann iva tat-sakhyam
agamaT|
tat-sūnur udayāditya ivāmm¡a! rāja-mahendrāpara-nāmā ripu-timi-
39ram ārān nihatya prakr̥ti-sapatna-pakṣa-nikṣipta-sāmanta-kulya-kuṭila-mano-bha-
40ṁga-karaṁ karavālam utkr̥¿t?⟨ṣ⟩ya śakti-traya-saṁpanna-pratāpāvarjita-pitr̥-pitāmaha-
41-prakr̥ti-balaḥ prajñayā sura-guruṁ tejasā bhānumantaṁ kṣamayā kṣamām ama-
⎘ plate 4r 42ra-giriṁ vividha-budha-samāśrayatayānukurvvaN sarvva-lokāśraya-viṣṇuvarddhana-ma-
43hārājaḥ sva-rājyābhiṣeka-kr̥ta-kalyāṇaḥ siṁhāsanārūḍhaḥ kaṇḍeṟuvāḍi-viṣaya-
44-nivāsinaḥ sarvvān kuṭuṁbinas samāhūyettham ājñāpayati sma|
Asmat-kula-kallyāṇa-pa-
45raṁp¿ā?⟨a⟩rā-niyogādhikr̥ta-paṭṭavarddhinī-vaṁśāgraṇyā| kāḻakaṁpa Iti viśrute-
46na| kubja-viṣṇuvarddhanānucareṇa saṁgrāme tad-anujñayā durddharṣa-balaṁ daddara-nā-
47mānaṁ vinihatya tac-cihnāni{|} yena jagr̥hire| tat-kula-prasūta-somādityasya sūnur
a-
48neka-yuddha-labdha-pratāpaḥ pritiviyarājaḥ|
yo hi|
tasmai| sa-dvādaśa-grāmaṭiko
54goṁṭūru nāma grāmaḥ sarvva-kara-parihārīkr̥tyāsmābhir ddatta Iti| viditam a-
55stu vo [’]smābhiḥ|
Asyāvadhayaḥ| pūrvvataḥ goṁguva| dakṣiṇataḥ goṇayūru| paścimata-
56ḥ| kaluceṟuvulu| Uttarataḥ maḍapalli| eteṣām madhya-varttinaḥ kṣetra-sīmānaḥ| pūrvvataḥ|
57pātuṟāyu| Āgneyataḥ| peddakoyilamu| dakṣiṇataḥ kuṟuvapoṭi| ¡nairititaḥ!⟨nairr̥tataḥ⟩ pe-
⎘ plate 5r 58ruvāti kuṟuva| paścimataḥ| pālaguṁṭṭa paḍumaṭikaṭṭa| vāyavyataḥ| polaku-
59ṁgoṇḍa monadurgga bha¡dha!vati| Uttarataḥ maḍapallipaṟṟu| ¡Īśānataḥ!⟨Aiśānataḥ⟩ cāmiṟenigu-
60ṁṭṭa|
Asyopari na kenacid bādhā karttavyā[.] yaḥ karoti sa paṁca-mahā-pātako bhava-
61ti[.] tathā ca vyāsenoktaṁ
2-12Satyāśraya Vallabha (Pulakeśin II) was eager to adorn the lineage of the majestic Calukyas—who are of the Mānavya gotra which is praised by the entire world, who are sons of Hārītī, who attained kingship by the grace of Kauśikī’s boon, who are protected by the band of Mothers, who were deliberately appointed (to kingship) by Lord Mahāsena, to whom enemy territories 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 Vallabha (I), for thirty-three years. n’s (Indra Bhaṭṭāraka’s) son Viṣṇuvardhana (II), for nine years. His son Maṅgi Yuvarāja, for twenty-five years. His son Jayasiṁha (II), for thirteen years. His younger brother by a different mother, Kokkili, for six months. After dethroning his younger brother, his elder brother Viṣṇurāja (Viṣṇuvardhana III), for thirty-seven years. His son Vijayāditya (I) Bhaṭṭāraka, for eighteen years. His son Viṣṇuvardhana (IV), for thirty-six years. His son
27-33that shelter of the entire universe (samasta-bhuvanāśraya), His Majesty Vijayāditya (III), [reigned] for forty-four years. After him, the son of his younger brother Vikramāditya (I), King (adhipa) Calukya-Bhīma (I) who was also known as Drohārjuna, became king (adhipati), who with the gleam of his sword, the only companion to his valour, cast light on the country of Veṅgī that had been enveloped by the forces of the Rāṣṭrakūṭas (raṭṭa) and his rivals (dāyāda) as if by a shroud of darkness upon the setting of the sun. Moreover: like both parents, like a friend, like a preceptor, he showered whatever they desired on the afflicted, the helpless, the naked, the dancers (naṭa), singers (gāyaka) and religious showmen (dharma-dhvaja-vr̥tti)↓10 and gratified their hearts with his largesse like a wish-fulfilling tree. Having reigned in this manner for thirty years, he went to become Purandara’s (Indra’s) companion as if gladdening him with his virtues.
38-44His son Amma, otherwise called Rājamahendra, has dispelled from afar the darkness of enemies like a rising sun, has brandished his sword to shatter the twisted minds of his feudatories (sāmanta) and kinsmen (kulya) who had thrown in their lot with the party of his natural enemies, and has won the loyalty of the subjects and troops of his father and grandfather by his valour complete with the three powers (śakti-traya). Imitating (Br̥haspati) the preceptor of the gods in intellect, the Sun in splendour, the earth in patience and the divine mountain (Meru) in being a supporter {the abode} of diverse learned men {gods}, [he,] the shelter of all the world (sarva-lokāśraya), His Majesty Viṣṇuvardhana (VI), having received the sacrament of being anointed to his own kingship and having ascended his throne, has convoked all householders (kuṭumbin) who reside in Kaṇḍeṟuvāḍi district (viṣaya) and commanded them thus:
44-48[There was] a chieftain of the Paṭṭavardhinī family which is charged with duties by the sacred tradition of our dynasty. Widely known as Kāḻakampa, this lieutenant of Kubja Viṣṇuvardhana slew in battle by his (Viṣṇuvardhana’s) authorisation one [enemy] of indomitable forces, Daddara by name, and seized his insignia (of power). Born in his family, Somāditya had a son Pritiviyarāja, who has achieved a hero’s reputation in many a battle.
51He it is who,
53-55To him, we have granted the village named Goṁṭūru along with twelve hamlets, converted into [a holding] exempt from all taxes. Let it be known to you that by us↓15
55-60Its boundaries [are as follows]. To the east, Goṁguva. To the south, Goṇayūru. To the west, Kaluceṟuvulu. To the north, Maḍapalli. Within these are situated the [following] perimeter fields. ↓16 To the east, Pātuṟāyu. To the southeast, Peddakoyilamu. To the south, Kuṟuvapoṭi. To the southwest, Peruvāti [and] Kuṟuva. To the west, Pālaguṁṭṭa [and] Paḍumaṭikaṭṭa.↓17 To the northwest, Polakuṁgoṇḍa, Monadurgga [and] Bhadhavati. To the north, Maḍapallipaṟṟu. To the northeast, Cāmiṟeniguṁṭṭa.
60-61Let no-one pose an obstacle (to his enjoyment of his rights) over it. He who does so shall be [conjoined with] the five great sins. So too Vyāsa has said:
2-12Prospérité ! 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 Vallabha, pendant trente-trois années ; le fils de son frère Indrarāja, Viṣṇuvardhana, pendant neuf années ; le fils de celui-ci, Maṁgi Yuvarāja, pendant vingt-cinq années ; son fils, Jayasiṁha, pendant treize années ; son demi-fère cadet, Kokkili, pendant six mois ; le frère aîné de celui-ci, Viṣṇurāja, ayant chassé son cadet, pendant trente-sept années ; son fils Vijayāditya Bhaṭṭāraka pendant dix-huit années ; le fils de celui-ci, Viṣṇuvardhana, pendant trente-six années ; le fils de ce dernier,
27-33Refuge de l’univers entier, l’illustre Vijayāditya [régna] pendant quarante-quatre années. Puis, le fils de Vikramāditya, frère cadet de ce dernier, le roi Calukya Bhīma, nommé aussi Drohārjuna, fut roi, après avoir illuminé, par l’éclat de son épée, accompagnée de son seul courage, le royaume de Veṁgī, envahi par l’armée des héritiers des Raṭṭa, comme au coucher du soleil [le monde est envahi] par un voile de ténèbres. Ayant comblé les désirs des hommes malheureux, sans protection, nus,↓26 des danseurs, des chanteurs, de ceux qui tirent subsistance de la bannière du dharma,↓27 comme des parents, comme un ami, comme un père, faisant [naître] la joie dans les cœurs par ses dons comme l’arbre à vœux, après avoir régné pendant trente années, contentant Puraṁdara↓28 par ses vertus, il devint le compagnon de celui-ci.
38-44Son fils, Amma, nommé aussi Rāja Mahendra, ayant détruit de loin les ennemis, tel le soleil levant [détruit de loin] les ténèbres, ayant dégaîné son cimeterre qui brise les pensées malhonnêtes de ses parents feudataires passés du côté des rivaux naturels, qui s’est acquis le peuple et l’armée↓30 qui étaient ceux de son père et de son grand-père, dont les plans, appuyés par les trois pouvoirs,↓31 égalant par son intelligence l’enseignant des dieux,↓32 par sa splendeur le soleil, par sa patience la terre et la montagne des immortels par le fait qu’il soit un refuge pour les nombreux sages, refuge de tous les hommes, le grand roi Viṣṇuvardhana, ayant organisé une cérémonie pour son couronnement, étant monté sur le trône, ayant rassemblé tous les chefs de familles habitant le viṣaya de Kaṇḍeṟuvāṭi ordonne ceci :
44-48 Le chef de la lignée de Paṭṭavarddhinī, à la tête de charges, par la succession prospère de notre lignée, connu comme Kāḻakaṁpa, qui accompagne Kubja Viṣṇuvardhana, tua au combat, avec la permission de celui-ci, le [roi] nommé Daddara dont l’armée était invincible, et s’empara des bannières de ce dernier. Le fils de Somāditya, né dans la lignée de celui-ci, [fils] dont la puissance fut obtenue dans de nombreux combats, fut Pritiviya Rāja.
53-55Nous donnons à celui-ci, le village nommé Goṁṭūru, avec douze hameaux, exemptés de toute taxe : que ceci soit connu de vous.↓33
55-60Les limites de celui-ci sont : à l’est Goṁguva, au sud Goṇayūru, à l’ouest Kaluceṟuvulu, au nord Maḍapalli. Les limites de leur territoire↓34 se trouvent au milieu de ceux-ci : à l’est Potuṟayu, au sud est Peddakoyilamu, au sud Kuṟuvapoṭi, au sud ouest Peruvātikuṟuva, à l’ouest Pālaguṁṭṭa-Paḍumaṭikaṭṭa, au nord ouest Polakuṁgoṇḍa-Monadurgga-Bhadhavati au nord Maḍapallipaṟṟu, au nord est Cāmiṟeniguṁṭṭa.
60-61Aucune charge ne doit lui être imposée, celui qui en impose [est lié] aux cinq grands crimes. Ainsi Vyāsa a dit :
According to Naṭeśa Śāstrī, the name of the findspot is transliterated Īḍeru. Hultzsch uses Eḍeru.
I have classified stanza 7 as an anuṣṭubh, but given the compound anomalies in its metre (an extra syllable in the first pāda and a vipulā template in the third), combined with indications of a fixed pattern, it may instead be an unknown ardhasama metre of 9/8 syllables per line, incorrectly inscribed (or read). The actual prosody of the lines is: --+-+---+ +-++-+-+ -+-++--- --++-+-+ By tentatively emending babhūva rājye to sa babhūva rājya-, we obtain an identical pattern in the odd lines, and the even lines are almost identical to begin with: --+-+---* *-++-+-* A badly composed anuṣṭubh is still most likely, but given that it would have been easy to avoid the hypermetry in the first line (e.g. gajebha-yuddha-kuśalas would be a na-vipulā), I believe it is not the only possibility.
The first line of stanza 10 (śārdūlavikrīḍita) has a punctuation mark after the caesura. There is also a punctuation mark in 15b (also śārdūlavikrīḍita), but this is not at the caesura.
The sentence viditam astu vo’smābhiḥ (ll 54-55) implies that the composer of this grant understood asmābhiḥ in this formula to be the agent of informing, rather than the agent of the donation expressed in the main sentence. If this (mis)conception was widespread, that might explain why in many cases the main sentence includes mayā or another agent, or has a verb in the active, even when asmābhiḥ is present in this formula.
I think that Hultzsch’s equation of the names in the second list of boundaries to the twelve hamlets mentioned in the donation has much merit. Therefore, in the section on boundaries I follow Hultzsch’s segmentation of the text with spaces. Nonetheless, it is by no means certain that we have exactly twelve names in the second list of boundaries.
28raṭṭa-dāyāda: According to Sankaranarayanan 1973: page 99, note 1, Hultzsch first took this to mean “army of the Raṭṭa claimants”, then corrected it to “the army of (Krishna II) the heir (or son) of the Raṭṭa (i.e. Amoghavarṣa I). The reference for the latter is EI 4 227n. not traced. But based on the Masulipatnam plates of Bhīma I (probably never edited properly, CP No. 1 of 1913-14, apparently cited by several scholars), the dāyādas mean Vēmūlavāḍa Cālukyas, and this compound must be understood as Raṭṭas and (Vēmūlavāḍa Cālukya) kinsmen.
Reported in Sewell 1884: page 25, № 179. Parts cited and translated before publication by J. F. Fleet (1883: 218 and 1883: 221). First edited, possibly from the original plates, by S. M. Naṭeśa Śāstrī (1884: pages 50–55, № 1), with a translation, without facsimile. Re-edited from the original plates by E. Hultzsch (1890: pages 36–43, № 36), with a translation and possibly with estampages.↓35 Re-reported in ARIE 1956-1957: page 37, appendix A/1956–57, № 86. The present edition by Dániel Balogh is based on a collation of the above editions, but without reference to any facsimiles. In minor differences not deemed to merit an apparatus entry, Hultzsch’s readings have been given preference.
↑1. While this detail is of little ultimate importance, all previous translators construe
the plural instrumental naya-vikramaiḥ differently from the way I translate here. Fleet and Naṭeśa Śāstrī take it in apposition
to balais, so that the Gaṅga and Raṭṭa forces are ‘possessed of discipline and prowess’ (Fleet) or ‘just and powerful’ (Naṭeśa Śāstrī, who may have understood these to be allies of Vijayāditya). Hultzsch’s
interpretation is closer to mine: he translates, ‘by means of polity and valour,’ but he comments that the plural must have been used in place of the expected singular
due to the exigencies of the metre. I, in turn, see no problem with the plural at
all, but simply understand these terms as meaning concrete and countable stratagems
and acts of bravado rather than the abstract and uncountable qualities of polity and
valour.
↑2. Although kali commonly means discord and strife rather than warfare, I believe Hultzsch is right
in understanding the word in such a sense here and assuming that this clause is a
playful etymology of the king’s forename.
↑3. This sentence, stretched across three stanzas and in the original including all of
this paragraph of the translation, is awkward on several counts. I believe the intent
of the composer was what I translate here. I construe kulonnateḥ as an ablative of cause, disregarding the fact that a dative would be appropriate
for expressing purpose; and assume that the phrase naya-vid was iterated not out of poetic incompetence, but with the aim of emphasising that
it was this quality of his that elevated him to kingship.
↑4. I assume that the word guṇa is used intentionally to hint at Vijayāditya’s byname Guṇaka. Although guṇa does not normally mean “ray,” I believe the poet intended it in this sense for the
double entendre. Note also that solar allusions are also present throughout the first
part of the stanza, where he defeats his human enemies.
↑5. Fleet and Hultzsch understand saṁcodita as “challenged” (to battle), which the language does not exclude. I follow Nilakanta
Sastri and Venkataramanayya Yazdani 1960: volume 2, page 478 in the understanding of the events alluded to here, which is based on records not
yet known to Fleet and Hultzsch.
↑6. Naṭeśa Śāstrī’s translation skips over this phrase, while Fleet understands aryaman to mean “bosom friend.” This is lexically possible and would be another instance
of the conventional claim that the king’s sword was his only comrade, as in khaḍga-sahāyo in stanza 2. However, this meaning of aryaman seems to be restricted to Vedic texts, and I therefore agree with Hultzsch in understanding
this word, the name of an Āditya, as synonymous to āditya and thus meaning “sun” and alluding to the name Vijayāditya. In support of this interpretation,
aryaman unequivocally means “sun” in stanza 12 of the Moga grant of Bhīma I.
↑7. I follow Fleet and Hultzsch’s interpretation of this phrase because a comparison to
Śiva is appopriate in the wider context of burning a city. However, aṁgaja is only attested in lexicons in the sense of Kāma, and the immediate context is simply
martial prowess. I therefore think there is a chance the composer had something else
in mind. To wit, aṁgaja may mean Karṇa who, though he was not in fact born in Aṅga, became the lord of that
country in the Mahābhārata, and thus aṁgaja-vairi may be Arjuna.
↑8. This is another phrase that is hard to interpret, especially as regards the meaning
of aṁkita and its relation to the rest of the compound. Naṭeśa Śāstrī’s translation is too
vague here. Fleet renders the compound as ‘who was possessed of great and excellent prowess acquired by (his) notorious and perfect strength’, and Hultzsch as ‘who had gained great and excellent might by his strength, which impressed its mark
on the universe,’ noting that uru-sad-vikrama is an allusion to Viṣṇu Trivikrama. I find neither “notorious and perfect” nor “impressed
its mark on the universe” to be satisfactory translations of aṁkita+akhila and opt for yet another interpretation, but cannot claim that this must be what the
composer had in mind.
↑9. Kr̥ṣṇa is Kr̥ṣṇa II of the Rāṣṭrakūṭas, and we can now be quite certain that Saṁkila
is the Cedi king Śaṅkaragaṇa, though earlier translations either omitted this word
or translated it as “firebrand,” a meaning that is attested in lexicons alone and
that in my opinion is unlikely to be used figuratively in this Sanskrit sentence even
though the English phrase “the fire-brand Kr̥ṣṇa” sounds quite flippant. Incidentally,
the fact that this is a name explains the dual in the fourth pāda; see the apparatus on bhītārttau in line 26. Also compare saṁkilam ugra-vallabha-yutaṁ, showing beyond doudt that Saṁkilam and the Vallabha are two separate persons, in
stanza 3 of the Maliyapūṇḍi grant of Amma II.
↑10. I am not confident in the interpretaion of this term. Hultzsch’s neutral translation
‘those who gained their livelihood by (carrying) the banner of virtue’ does not really reveal who these people may have been. I believe that Naṭeśa Śāstrī’s
‘religious beggars,’ offered without explanation, is closer to the mark. Even closer, dharma-dhvaja may be synonymous to yama-paṭa and these people may have been wandering showmen who exhibited and explained scroll
paintings showing scenes of hell. Finally, dharma-dhvaja is actually attested in the sense of an impostor or hypocrite. It is thus possible
that this passage is to some degree critical of Bhīma, claiming that he showered gifts
on riffraff such as dancers, singers and charlatans. But a similar list of recipients
of charity in verse 11 of the Ārumbāka grant of Bādapa is unambiguously positive, so I find this last option unlikely.
↑11. This stanza is provisionally translated and may need revision depending on the correct
reading of several words in it. See the apparatus entries on line 34.
↑12. Hultzsch suggests that the “intrinsic enemies” (ari-vargaṁ nijam) are probably the ṣaḍvarga of psychological enemies. This is definitely possible, but enemies external to the
mind, and internal only to the kingdom, i.e. rival claimants to the throne, seem more
likely to me.
↑13. I interpret and translate the last quarter of the stanza tentatively and on the basis
of my conjecture for the text. See the apparatus on line 47 for possible readings.
Hultzsch sees three separate compounds where I see a single long one, and translates
‘who longed for (another) kingdom, and who had obtained glory, went to Indra, in order
to conquer one equal half (of Indra’s throne).’ I prefer to avoid supplying so much, but Hultzsch’s interpretation cannot be ruled
out, and may be preferable if his reading is correct.
↑14. The simile is obscure and complicated by a problematic reading. Given the text’s awkwardness,
a double entendre was probably intended by the poet. I follow Hultzsch in assuming
that Añjana was conceived as the name of Yama’s elephant, though as he observes, this
is normally the name of Varuṇa’s elephant. It also seems that one of the bitextual
words applies to Bhaṇḍanāditya on the primary level, but to the elephant, rather than
Yama, on the secondary one. It is also conceivable that ujjvala-gaṇḍāṅkaṁ, when applied to Bhaṇḍanāditya, means “possessing the illustrious epithet Gaṇḍa.”
↑15. This sentence is incomplete and should normally appear at the beginning of the current
passage. Given that the text of that passage also includes the agent asmābhiḥ, the presence of this fragment here may be a simple copyist’s mistake, but see also
the commentary.
↑16. The interpretation of this sentence and the segmentation of the following list is
not quite certain. I believe that the places in the first list indicated boundaries
outside the donated land, while the names in this list are fields or villages surrounding
the core settlement Goṁṭūru. These are specifically declared to be included in the
donated tract, and are probably identical to the twelve hamlets mentioned above. See
also the commentary.
↑17. According to Naṭeśa Śāstrī, pālaguṁṭṭa-paḍumaṭikaṭṭa means ‘The western bund of the tank of pālaguṁṭṭa.’
↑18. Ce passage apparaît dans le pāda a de la strophe 3.
↑19. Hultzsh suggère que la désinence de nayavikramaiḥ est due à des nécessités métriques.
Mais à cette place du mètre la quantité est indifférente. Ce pluriel peut aussi suggérer
qu’il s’agit d’un composé bahuvrīhi qualifiant gaṁgga-ratta-balais, même si la syntaxe
exige davantage un duel. Nous suivons cette hypothèse.
↑20. Il s’agit du roi Kaliyarttyaṁka dont le nom complet apparaît dans la strophe 13. Le
double « l » est dû à la semi voyelle « y » : kallyādiḥ.
↑21. Glose du biruda Kaliyarttyaṁka.
↑22. Allusion aux composants de la royauté, prakr̥ti, dans lesquels figure l’armée, bala. (Arthaṣāstra, 6,1,1)
↑23. Kāma
↑24. synonyme du biruda vikramāditya.
↑25. Il est aussi question de ce personnage dans les insc. nos 32, str.5 ; 35, str.2 ;
41.
↑26. allusions aux jaïns digambara.
↑27. id est : les moines et ascètes errants.
↑28. Indra.
↑29. Les trois pouvoirs constitutifs de la royauté : utsāha, prabhū, mantri [Arthaśāstra, 6, 2, 33]. Expression similaire plus bas : śakti-traya-saṁpanna°.
↑30. Allusion aux composants de la royauté, prakr̥ti, dans lesquels figure l’armée, bala.
[Arthaṣāstra, 6,1,1] Cf. strophe 9 de cette inscription.
↑31. Arthaśāstra 6, 2, 33. Cf. note supra.
↑32. Br̥haspati.
↑33. Cette formule apparaît d’habitude au début de l’énonciation de la donation. Le second
asmābhiḥ est une faute induite par l’entraînement de la séquence usuelle viditam astu vo’smābhiḥ.
↑34. des hameaux.
↑35. PEM lists this edition as containing a facsimile, but my scan of SII 1 has no plates
at all.