Elavaṟṟu grant of Amma II

Metadata

Current Version:  draft, 2024-09-02Z

Editor:   Dániel Balogh.

DHARMA Identifier: INSVengiCalukya00035

Hand Description:

Halantas. Final T is s full-sized stylised ta (a spiral without a headmark) plus a curling tail on top like an inverted cedilla, e.g. l7 apālayaT. It may also be smaller in size and raised, as in l37 āsīT. Final N is a simplified but full-size character somewhat resembling na without a headmark, and the curled tail, e.g. l11 sāN.

Original punctuation marks are straight verticals with a small hook or a wedge-like headmark at the top. The opening symbol is a flower comprised of a circle, four petals in the cardinal directions, and four spikes in the intercardinals, all detached from the centre.

Other palaeographic observations. Anusvāra is normally written inline at headline height. It may be separated from the preceding consonant as in l16-17 tri/ṁśataṁ, but this is not visible in my scanned facsimile. Dependent o is normally written with two separate strokes. Cursive o (marked in the text with an XML comment but not encoded) is rare, occurring in l10 kokkili (which may have been intended for kaukkili) and l52 Aho.


Additional Metadata

No metadata were provided in the table for this inscription

Edition

Seal

1śrī-tribhuvanāṁkuśa

Plates

⎘ plate 1v 1floretQuatrefoilsvasti[.] śrīmatāṁ sakala-bhuvana-sa⟨ṁ⟩stūyamāna-mānavy¿ā?⟨a⟩-sagotrāṇāṁ hā-
2rīti-putrāṇāṁ kauśikī-vara-prasāda-labdha-rājyānāṁ mātr̥-gaṇa-paripāli-
3tānāṁ svā⟨mi⟩-mahāsena-pādānudhyātānāṁ bhagavan-nārāyaṇa-pras¿a?⟨ā⟩da-
4-samāsā◯dita-vara-varāha-lā⟨ñcha⟩nekṣaṇa-kṣaṇa-vaśīkr̥tār⟦i⟧⟨⟨ā⟩⟩ti-ma-
5ṇḍalāṇā{ṁ}◯m aśvamedhāvabhr̥¿t?⟨th⟩a-snāna-pavitrīkr̥ta-vapuṣāṁ cā-
6lukyānāṁ kulam alaṁkariṣṇoḥ satyāśraya-vallabhendrasya bhrātā ku-
6bja-viṣṇuvarddhano [’]ṣṭādaśa varṣāṇi veṁgī-deśam apālayaT| tad-ātma-
⎘ plate 2r 8jo jayasiṁhas trayastriṁśataṁ| tad-anujendrarāja-nandano viṣṇuva-
9rddhano nava| tat-sūnur mm¿ā?⟨a⟩ṁgi-yuvarājaḥ paṁcaviṁśatiṁ| tat-putro
10jayasiṁ◯has trayodaśa| tad-avarajaḥ ko kkiliḥ ṣaṇ mā-
11sāN| ta◯sya jyeṣṭho bhrātā viṣṇuvarddhanas tam uccāṭya sapta-
12triṁśataṁ| ◯ tat-putro vijayāditya-bhaṭṭārako [’]ṣṭādaśa| tat-su-
13to viṣṇuvarddh¿ā?⟨a⟩naḥ ṣaṭtriṁśataṁ| tat-suto vijayāditya-narendra-mr̥ga-
14rājaś cāṣṭacatvāriṁśataṁ| tat-sutaḥ kali-⟨viṣṇu⟩varddhano [’]¡ddh!yarddha-varṣ¿ā?⟨a⟩ṁ|
⎘ plate 2v 15tat-suto guṇagā⟨ṁ⟩ka-vijayādityaś catuścatvāriṁśataṁ| tad-anu-
16ja-vikramāditya-bhūp¿ā?⟨a⟩teḥ sūnuś cālukya-bhīma-bhūpālas tri-
17ṁśataṁ| ◯ tat-putraḥ kollabigaṇḍa-vijayādityaḥ ṣa-
18ṇ māsāN⟨|⟩ ◯ tat-sūnur ammarājaḥ sapta varṣ¿a?⟨ā⟩ni| tat-sutaṁ
19vijayā◯dityaṁ b¿a?⟨ā⟩lam uccāṭya tālapo mās¿ā?⟨a⟩m ekaM⟨|⟩
20taṁ jitvā {ś}c¡a!lukya-bh¿i?⟨ī⟩ma-tanayo vikramāditya Ekādaśa mā-
21sāN| tatas tālapa-rājasya suto yuddhamallaḥ sapta varṣ¿a?⟨ā⟩-
⎘ plate 3r 22ṇi| ¿tat-putraḥ?⟨taṁ jitvā⟩ kollabigaṇḍa-vijayāditya-suto bhīma-rā-
23jo dvādaśa varṣāṇi|

I. Āryā
tasya maheśvara-m(ū)rtter umā-samā24nākr̥teḥ ◯ kumārābhaḥ
lokamahādevyā⟨ḥ⟩ khalu ya25s samabha◯vad ammarājākhyaḥ|

II. Āryāgīti
jalajātapatra-cā26mara-ka◯laśāṁkuśa-lakṣaṇāṁka-kara-caraṇa-ta27laḥ
lasad-ājānv-avala⟨ṁ⟩bita-bhuja-yuga-parigho girī28ndra-sānūraskaḥ|

III. Āryāgīti
yo rūpeṇa manojaṁ vibhavena ma⎘ plate 3v 29hendram ahimakaram uru-mahasā
haram ari-pura-dahanena nyak-kurvvan bhā30ti vidita-dig-avani-kī⟨r⟩ttiḥ|

sa sakala-ripu-nr̥pati-makuṭa-taṭa-ghaṭita-maṇi-
31-gaṇa-madhu◯kara-nikara-paricuṁbita-caraṇa-sarasiruha-yugalo
32[’]yuga-lo◯cana-pada-kamala-vilasad-dvire¿p?⟨ph⟩āyamāno mānonna-
33to natoddha◯ta-samasta-lokaḥ samasta-bhuvanāśraya-śrī-vijayā-
34ditya-mahār¿a?⟨ā⟩jādhir¿a?⟨ā⟩jaḥ parameśvaraḥ parama-bhaṭṭārakaḥ parama-brahmaṇyaḥ vela-
35nāṇḍu-viṣaya-nivāsino rāṣṭrak¿u?⟨ū⟩ṭa-pramukhān kuṭuṁbina⟨ḥ⟩ samāhūyettham ājñāpaya-
⎘ plate 4r 36ti|

IV. Indravajrā
vidvat-kavīndra-prabhavaṁ prasiddhaṁ
pūjyodayaṁ bhūri-guṇādhivāsaṁ
dha⟨r⟩mmiṣṭha-bhūmi37⟨r⟩ nniyama-svadhāma
pātraṁ paraṁ kāśyapa-gotram āsīT|

V. Svāgatā
tatra bhūsura-yathoci38ta-vidyā-
-ka◯rmma-ṣaṭka-vidhi-nirmmala-dehaḥ
veda-vid vidita-śāstra-sam¿u?⟨ū⟩39ho
viddama◯yya Iti viśruta-kī(r)ttiḥ|

VI. Indravajrā
bhūdeva-vamśā⟨ṁ⟩budhi-śītara¿s?⟨ś⟩mi40⟨r⟩
vvidvat-saro◯j¿a?⟨ā⟩kara-bhānu-bhānuḥ
tat-sūnur aṁbhojabhavopamāno
41vidyāmayo viddamiya(ḥ) prasiddhaḥ|

VII. Anuṣṭubh
Arundhatyā viśiṣṭasya
vasiṣṭhasyopamām a42yāT
pativratātmayā dharmma-
-patnyā yaś cānamavvayā|

VIII. Upendravajrā
kula-kramāyātam udāra-bh(ā)⎘ plate 4v 43vam
ananya-dr̥ṣṭāśruta-pūrvva-rūpaṁ
da¿v?⟨dh⟩ad dharā-dhāri dharopamānaḥ
tayos sutaḥ koramiyā44bhidhānaḥ|

IX. Gīti
śrī-lokamahādevyā samavarddhyata yo [’]smad-aṁbayā prītyā
cāturrya-nāgara45kayor āvāsa-sthānam iti manoharayoḥ|

X. Gīti
Apahasati vāgmitā vāg-vanitāṁ yatra sthi46tā mahā-catu◯re
Asujana-¿varā?⟨vārāṁ⟩ nāgaraka-jalajabhava-bahumukha-priyāṁ 47satataṁ|

XI. Āryā
U◯tpadyate prasaṁgāt sujanatayā cātma-sahajayā yasya|
48vibhavaḥ pati-prasaṁ⟨ga⟩ś citram idaṁ sādhu-vāda Iti|

XII. Āryā
rasikānām atirasikaś caturāṇām adhika49-catura Evāyaṁ
koramiya-nāmadheyo{ḥ} viduṣām atyanta-vijñ¿a?⟨ā⟩nī|

XIII. Upagīti
sevita-samasta-bhū50pati-hr̥daya⟨ḥ⟩ sthiti-bhāg guṇopapanno [’]mū¡ll!yaḥ
muktāphala-sac-caritaḥ koramiy¿ā?⟨o⟩ vastu-pu⎘ plate 5r 51ruṣa Ity upapannaṁ|

XIV. Upendravajrā
Anāgata-jñ¿a?⟨ā⟩na-vivekinī dhīr
anindya-cāritra-parā hi ceṣṭā
A-śeṣa-bho52gopanata¡m! manaś ca
Aho mahat koramiyasya puṇyaṁ|

tasmai koramiya-nāmne suvarṇṇa-
53-bhāṇḍāgāra-śrīkaraṇa-mukhyāya Elavaṟṟu nāma grāmas sarvva-kara-parihāreṇāgrahārī-
54kr̥tyodaka-pū◯(rvva)m uttarāyaṇa-nimitte [’]smābhir ddatta Iti viditam astu vaḥ|

Asyāvadhayaḥ[.]
55pū◯(rvva)taḥ goma◯ḍuvu sīmā| Āgneyataḥ ḍagguṁbaṟti sīmā| dakṣiṇataḥ Iṇṭhūri sīmā| nairr̥-
56ti-paścimābhyāṁ preṁpaṟti sīmā| vāyavyataḥ tuṟimiṇḍi sīmā| Uttareśānābhyāṁ Amutunūri sīmā⟨|⟩
57Asyopari na kenacid bādhā karttavyā[.] yaḥ karoti sa paṁca-mahā-pātako bhavati| tathoktaṁ vyāsena|

XV. Anuṣṭubh
bahu 58bhir vvasudhā dattā
bahubhiś cānupālitā
yasya yasya yadā bhūmis
tasya tasya tadā phalaṁ|

XVI. Anuṣṭubh
sva-da⎘ plate 5v 59ttāṁ para-dattāṁ vā
yo hareta vasundharāṁ
ṣaṣṭi-varṣa-sahasrāṇi
viṣ¿ṭ?⟨ṭh⟩āyā⟨ṁ⟩ j¿a?⟨ā⟩yate kr̥miḥ|


60Ājñaptiḥ kaṭaka-rājaḥ[.] potanabhaṭṭa-kāvyaṁ[.] jontācāryya-likhitaṁ|

Apparatus

Seal

Plates

1 -tribhuvanāṁkuśa-tribhuvanāṅkuśa JFF • My scanned facsimile of the seal is not clear, but the spelling seems to be with anusvāra, as usual in related plates.

Plates

15 guṇagā⟨ṁ⟩ka-guṇagāṁka- JFF
16–17 tri/ṁśataṁ • I accept Fleet’s reading here, but the anusvāra is not visible in the scanned estampage and may have been omitted.
17 kollabigaṇḍa-kollabhigaṇḍa- JFF • Definitely a typo or oversight in Fleet’s edition; the estampage clearly has b.
22 ¿tat-putraḥ?⟨taṁ jitvā⟩ • Fleet accepts the received reading without emendation and in his translation notes that ‘in Bhīma being here called also the son of Yuddhamalla II, we have another instance of the custom referred to by me in Dynasties of the Kanarese Districts, p. 48, note 1.’ (not traced). I cannot accept this and feel certain that this is a blunder of the engraver. The wording at this locus is taṁ jitvā in the Ārumbāka grant of Bādapa and the Vandram plates of Amma II. Interestingly, the exact same mistake occurs in line 19 of the Pāmulavāka plates of Amma II.22 kollabigaṇḍa-kollabhigaṇḍa- JFF • Definitely a typo or oversight in Fleet’s edition; the estampage clearly has b.
32–33 mānonna/to natoddha◯tamānonna/t¿o?⟨ā⟩natoddhata- JFF • In spite of his emendation, I do not find Fleet’s interpretation of this stretch as a compound convincing (see note to the translation). In my opinion the anuprāsa of the syllables nato is deliberate. Compare mānonnato natoddhatas in the Tāṇḍikoṇḍa grant of Amma II and mānonnatoddhataḥ in the Vandram plates of Amma II. Neither of these include ānata, and both, in my opinion, are different corruptions of the phrase that is correctly preserved here. Hultzsch, in his edition of the Vandram plates, expresses the same opinion.
34 -mahār¿a?⟨ā⟩jādhir¿a?⟨ā⟩jaḥ-mahārājādhir¿a?⟨ā⟩jaḥ JFF
36 dha⟨r⟩mmiṣṭha-dharmmiṣṭha- JFF
38–39 -sam¿u?⟨ū⟩ /ho JFF • I accept Fleet’s reading since together with the emendation it does not seem to be an oversight. However, the facsimile seems to have the expected ū.
39 viśruta-virśuta- JFF • Definitely a typo in Fleet’s edition.39–40 śītara¿s?⟨ś⟩mi/⟨r⟩śītaraśmi/⟨r⟩ JFF
41 viddamiya(ḥ)viddamiya- JFF41 vasiṣṭha°vaśiṣṭha° JFF41 dharā-dhāri dharopamānaḥ • See the note to the translation of this stanza for a possible improvement of the reading.
45 vāgmitāvagmitā JFF • Typo in Fleet’s edition.
46 -¿varā?⟨vārāṁ⟩-¿varā?⟨dhārā⟩ JFF • I am not confident in my own emendation but find it more likely than that proposed by Fleet. The text as received is unmetrical (lacking a mora in the second foot), but as emended (either as Fleet does or as I do), the prosody is still unusual in that the caesura is after the first short syllable of the fourth foot, rather than after the third foot (a vipulā or "old āryā"). See also the note to the translation.
48 -prasaṁ⟨ga⟩ś-pra¿s?⟨ś⟩aṁ⟨śya⟩ś JFF • In Fleet’s emendation, śya is clearly a typo; his intent must have been sya. I am far from certain of my own emendation and interpretation, but I prefer my less invasive emendation to Fleet’s, and disagree with his interpretation (for which see the note to the translation).An autopsy of the original or a good facsimile may be useful here.
50 -hr̥daya⟨ḥ⟩-hr̥daya- JFF • I emend tentatively. I am thoroughly dissatisfied with Fleet’s interpretation but quite uncertain of my own; see the note to the translation. Nothing of this stanza on page 4 verso is legible in my scans, but the presence of an original visarga seems possible.50 vastu- • Nothing of this stanza on page 4 verso is legible in my scans, but I wonder if the reading is in fact vāstu-. See the note to the translation.
54 -pū◯(rvva)m-pū¿vvā?⟨rvva⟩m JFF • The marker attached to vv does look like ā (of the form that starts toward the right and bends downward), but was probably intended as an alternative repha, since the descender of khyā above does not permit a regular repha here, and the stroke in question is curved in a way reminiscent of a repha.
55 pū◯(rvva)taḥpū¿vvā?⟨rvva⟩taḥ JFF • The marker here is even more like ā than in the previous instance (lacking the curve present in that one), but again, the descender of tyo above fully occupies the space over vv, so I prefer to see it as an unusually written repha.
59 °yate kr̥miḥ| • These characters seem to be quite awkwardly executed and affected by some noise. They may be a correction, or it may simply be that the edge of the plate is damaged without anything else being visible in the estampage.

Translation by Dániel Balogh

Seal

Plates

1-23Greetings. 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, 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 protected (pāl-) the country of Veṅgī for eighteen years. His son Jayasiṁha (I), for thirty-three. His younger brother Indrarāja’s (Indra Bhaṭṭāraka’s) son Viṣṇuvardhana (II), for nine. His son Maṅgi Yuvarāja, for twenty-five. His son Jayasiṁha (II), for thirteen. His [brother] of inferior birth, Kokkili, for six months. After dethroning him, his eldest brother Viṣṇuvardhana (III), for thirty-seven. His son Vijayāditya (I) Bhaṭṭāraka, for eighteen. His son Viṣṇuvardhana (IV), for thirty-six. His son Vijayāditya (II) Narendramr̥garāja, for eight and forty. His son Kali-⟨Viṣṇu⟩vardhana (V), for a year and a half. His son Vijayāditya (III) with the byname Guṇaga, for forty-four. The son of his younger brother Prince (bhūpati) Vikramāditya, King (bhūpāla) Cālukya-Bhīma, for thirty. His son Kollabigaṇḍa Vijayāditya (IV), for six months. His son Ammarāja (I), for seven years. After dethroning his son the child Vijayāditya (V), Tālapa, for one month. After defeating him, Cālukya-Bhīma’s son Vikramāditya (II), for eleven months. Then, King (rājan) Tālapa’s son Yuddhamalla, for seven years. After defeating him,↓1 Kollabigaṇḍa Vijayāditya’s son Bhīmarāja (II), for twelve years.

I.
To him (Bhīma II), who was [like] Maheśvara in form, a [son] named Ammarāja (II), who resembled Kumāra, was born from none other than (his queen) Lokamahādevī, who was like Umā in appearance.

II.
The palms of his hands and the soles of his feet are marked with the omens of the conch,↓2 the parasol, the chowrie, the jar and the elephant goad. His two playfully moving arms are like iron bars and extend to his knees. His chest is like a cliff of a majestic mountain.

III.
Surmounting the Mind-Born (Kāma) in physical beauty, the great Indra in opulence, the sun in widespread splendour and Hara (Śiva) in the burning of enemy fortresses, he shines with a reputation that is known in [all] quarters of the earth.

30-36The pair of lotuses, which are his feet, are kissed all around by swarms of bees, which are the clusters of jewels fitted to the surfaces of the crowns of all enemy kings, [while] he himself plays the part of a bee flitting at the lotus that is the foot of the [god] with an odd number of eyes (Śiva). He rises high with pride [while] puffed-up people all bow down. That shelter of the entire universe (samasta-bhuvanāśraya), His Majesty Vijayāditya (Amma II) the supremely pious Supreme Lord (parameśvara), Emperor (mahārājādhirāja) and Supreme Sovereign (parama-bhaṭṭāraka), convokes and commands the householders (kuṭumbin)—including foremost the territorial overseers (rāṣṭrakūṭa)—who reside in Velanāṇḍu district (viṣaya) as follows:

IV.
There was [once] the renowned and most worthy Kāśyapa gotra, which originated from an outstanding sage and seer and was itself a source of venerable men, an abode of copious virtues, a territory of the most pious men, and the very home of religious observance (niyama).

V.
In that (lineage) was [born a man] of famous reputation by the name Viddamayya, whose body was pure thanks to learning befitting gods-on-earth (Brahmins) and to the performance of the six duties (of a Brahmin), a knower of the Veda educated in the aggregate of treatises (śāstra).

VI.
His son, a cool-rayed [moon] to the ocean that is the lineage of gods-on-earth (Brahmins) and a ray of the sun to the stand of lotuses that are the learned, was comparable to (Brahmā) born of the lotus. Being saturated with knowledge (vidyāmaya), he was known as Viddamiya.

VII.
With his lawful wife Cānamavvā↓3 of faithful nature, he became comparable to (the sage) Vasiṣṭha who was made all the more distinctive by (his wife) Arundhatī.

VIII.
Their son, named Koramiya, was like the earth (in forbearance). He was endowed with a magnificent nature that came to him as his family inheritance, and a beauty of form never seen or heard of before, which was a support to the earth.↓4

IX.
Being an abode of delightful quick wit and sophistication, he was lovingly nurtured by our (Amma II’s) mother, Her Majesty Lokamahādevī.

X.
The eloquence that resides in this extremely witty man ever ridicules that ¿harlot? of reprobates: that Lady Speech who is the mistress of ¿the socialites Jalajabhava and Bahumukha?. ↓5

XI.
How strange it is that [such] acclaim should [have to] be occasioned by his lord for one whose prodigy has come into being thanks to [natural] incidence and his own inborn good nature!↓6

XII.
This one named Koramiya is indeed the supreme connoisseur among connoisseurs, the wittiest among the witty, and surpassingly knowledgeable among scholars.

XIII.
It can be established that Koramiya is a worthy (vastu) man {the Domicile-Man (vastu-puruṣa)}, for he attends on the hearts of all kings {whose centre is worshipped by all kings}, he enjoys a [prominent] station (sthiti) {who possesses stability (sthiti)}, he is endowed with virtues (guṇa) {who is fashioned with [measuring] strings (guṇa)}, invaluable (amūlya) {who belongs to the foundation (mūlya)}, and his virtuous conduct (sac-carita) is [as brilliant] as a pearl (muktāphala) {and who is duly honoured (sac-carita) with pearls (muktā) and fruits (phala)}.↓7

XIV.
Hey, great {lowly (amahat)} is the virtue of Koramiya, for [his] intellect can discern knowledge of the future {does not discern knowledge he has obtained}, his conduct is dedicated to blameless action {adverse to blameless action}, and his mind is not inclined toward consuming leftovers (śeṣa) {bent on all sensual enjoyments}.↓8

52-54To that one named Koramiya, the head official (mukhya) of the treasury of gold and the chancellery, (śrīkaraṇa)↓9 we have given on the occasion of the winter solstice the village named Elavaṟṟu, converted into a rent-free holding (agrahāra) by a remission of all taxes, [the donation being] sanctified by (a libation of) water. Let this be known to you.

54-57Its boundaries [are as follows]. To the east, the border is Gomaḍuvu. To the southeast, the border of Ḍagguṁbaṟṟu. To the south, the border of Iṇṭhūru. To the southwest and west, the border of Preṁpaṟṟu. To the northwest, the border of Tuṟimiṇḍu. To the north and northeast, the border of Amutunūru. Let no-one pose an obstacle (to his enjoyment of his rights) over it. He who does so shall have the five great sins. Vyāsa spoke thus,

XV.
Many (kings) have granted land, and many have preserved it (as formerly granted). Whosoever at any time owns the land, the fruit {reward} (accrued of granting it) belongs to him at that time.

XVI.
He who would seize land, whether given by himself or by another, shall be born as a worm in faeces for sixty thousand years.

60The executor (ājñapti) is the castellan (kaṭaka-rāja). The poetry is Potana Bhaṭṭa’s. Written (likhita) [by] Jontācārya.

Translation into French by Estienne-Monod 2008

Seal

Plates

1-23Prospérité ! Le roi Kubja Viṣṇuvardhana, frère de Satyāśraya Vallabhendra, qui orne la dynastie des Cālukya, illustres, du même gotra que les descendants de Manu, loués dans l’univers entier, fils de Hārīti, ayant reçu leur royaume par l’excellente faveur de Kauśikī, protégés par les Mères réunies, méditant aux pieds du seigneur Mahāsena, eux dont les cercles des ennemis ont été soumis en un instant à la vue du signe de l’excellent sanglier, faveur octroyée par le bienheureux Nārāyaṇa, eux dont les corps ont été purifiés grâce aux bains consécutifs au sacrifice du cheval, a protégé la contrée de Veṅgī pendant dix huit années. Son fils Jayasiṁha pendant trente-trois ans ; Le fils d’Indrarāja, frère cadet de ce dernier, Viṣṇuvardhana, pendant neuf ans ; Le fils de celui-ci, Maṁgi, le prince héritier, pendant vingt-cinq ans ; Son fils Jayasiṁha pendant treize ans ; Le frère cadet de ce dernier, Kokkili, pendant six mois ; Son frère aîné Viṣṇuvardhana, après l’avoir chassé, pendant trente-sept ans ; Le fils de celui-ci, Vijayāditya, l’illustre seigneur, pendant dix-huit ans ; Son fils Viṣṇuvardhana pendant trente-six ans ; Le fils de celui-ci, Vijayāditya Narendra Mr̥garāja, pendant quarante-huit ans ; Son fils Kali Viṣṇuvardhana pendant un an et demi ; Le fils de ce dernier, Gunagāṁka Vijayāditya, pendant quarante-quatre ans ; Le fils du frère cadet de celui-ci, du roi Vikramāditya, le roi Cālukya Bhīma pendant trente ans ; Son fils Kollabhigaṇḍa Vijayāditya pendant six mois ; Son fils Ammarāja pendant sept ans ; Après avoir chassé le fils de ce dernier, Vijayāditya, alorsqu’il était enfant, Tālapa a protégé la terre pendant un mois ; après avoir vaincu celui-ci, le fils de Cālukya Bhīma, Vikramāditya a protégé la terre pendant onze mois ; puis le fils du roi Tālapa, Yuddhamalla, pendant sept ans ; Son fils,↓10 le fils de Kollabhigaṇḍa Vijayāditya, le roi Bhīma pendant douze ans ;

I.
de ce dernier, manifestation de Maheśvara, et de Lokamahādevī, dont l’aspect était semblable à celui d’Umā, pareil à Kumāra, naquit le nommé Ammarāja.

II.
Les paumes de ses mains et les plantes de ses pieds portent les marques du lotus, du parasol, du panache, de la coupe et du croc à éléphant. Les barres d’acier de ses deux bras charmants se déploient jusqu’à ses genoux, son torse est pareil au plateau du Roi des Montagnes.

III.
Humiliant par sa beauté Manoja, par sa puissance le grand Indra, le soleil par son vaste éclat, Et Hara par le fait de brûler les forteresses ennemies,↓11 il resplendit, sa gloire répandue aux quatre points cardinaux et sur la terre.

30-36Celui dont les deux pieds sont des lotus baisés par les essaims d’abeilles que sont les multiples gemmes serties sur l’orbe des diadèmes de tous les souverains ennemis, qui adoptait l’attitude d’une abeille fôlatrant sur les lotus que sont les pieds du dieu aux yeux en nombre impair, exalté par son orgueil et devant lequel tous les hommes arrogants s’inclinaient, refuge de l’univers entier, l’illustre Vijayāditya, souverain suprême des grands rois, premier seigneur, illustre seigneur, très pieux, ayant convoqué tous les chefs de familles de la circonscription de Velanāṇḍu, les rāṣṭrakūṭa en tête, ordonne ceci :

IV.
Existait la famille des Kāśyapa, source d’excellents poètes et d’hommes savants, renommée, dont la prospérité méritait la vénération, siège de nombreuses vertus, demeure d’hommes très vertueux, séjour propre des austérités.

V.
Là naquit celui dont le corps était immaculé grâce à l’observance des six préceptes et grâce aux connaisances qui conviennent aux brahmanes, qui connaissait les Veda et qui possèdait la connaissance de l’ensemble des traités, le nommé Viddamaya, dont la renommée était répandue.

VI.
Lune pour l’océan de la lignée des brahmanes, soleil dont les rayons éclairaient les massifs de lotus qu’étaient les hommes savants,↓12 son fils fut semblable à Aṁbhojabhava,↓13 absorbé dans la connaissance, célèbre comme Viddamaya.

VII.
Il devint semblable à Vaśiṣtḥa, surpassé par Arundhatī, grâce à Ānamavvā, fidèle à son époux, femme vertueuse.

VIII, IX.
Son fils, dont le nom était Koramiya, son successeur légitime, généreux, dont la beauté n’avait été observée sur aucun autre et ni ouie auparavant, lui qui portait la terre, semblable à la terre, fut élevé par l’illustre Lokamahādevī, notre chère Mère, appelée « séjour d’une amabilité et d’une courtoisie charmantes ».

X.
L’éloquence, qui réside en cet homme très intelligent, rit de la désirable Vāc, tranchant les hommes mauvais, toujours chère aux hommes courtois, à Jalabhava↓14 et à Bahumukha.↓15

XI.
« A son contact, naît, du fait de la bonté qui l’accompagne depuis sa naissance, une puissance qui mérite les louanges du maître : cela est merveille ! » Telles sont les paroles des gens de bien.

XII.
Celui précisément qui porte le nom de Koramiya, le plus raffiné des hommes raffinés, le plus courtois des hommes courtois, est tout à fait le plus savant des hommes savants.

XIII.
Il est établi que celui qui a en partage une place dans le cœur des rois est objet de révérence, doué de vertus que l’on ne saurait acheter à prix d’argent, dont les actions sont des perles, Koramiya, réellement un homme.

XIV.
Son intelligence discerne la connaissance de l’avenir, ses actes se soucient uniquement d’une conduite irréprochable, son esprit cherche à gagner tout ce qui réjouit, ah ! grand est le mérite auspicieux de Koramiya !

52-54Qu’il soit connu de vous que : Nous donnons à celui-ci, dont le nom est Koramiya, le chef du département de l’or, le village nommé Elavaṟṟu, exempté de toute taxe, en qualité d’agrahāra, après avoir fait une libation d’eau, à l’occasion du solstice d’hiver.

54-57 Les limites de ce village sont : à l’est la limite est Gomaḍuvu, au sud-est la limite est ḍagguṁbaṟti, au sud la limite est Iṇṭhūri, au sud-ouest et à l’ouest la limite est Preṁpaṟti, au nord la limite est Tuṟimiṇḍi, au nord-est la limite est Amutunūri. Aucune charge ne doit lui être imposée, celui qui en impose est lié aux cinq grands crimes. Vyāsa a dit ceci :

XV.
Beaucoup ont donné une terre, beaucoup l’ont protégée, celui qui possède la terre en possède le fruit.

XVI.
Qu’elle soit donnée par lui ou par un autre, celui qui prend une terre renaît ver de terre dans les excréments pendant soixante mille ans.

60 L’exécuteur est le kaṭakarāja. Le poème est de Potanabhaṭṭa. Il a été gravé par Jontācārya.

Commentary

The grant includes some recycled plates. The writing on these has been beaten out quite effectively, but Fleet reports a few intelligible sequences of characters that can be read in the original, albeit invisible in the estampages. Traces of a grant written in earlier characters, parallel to the lines of the present grant, can be found on 1 verso and both sides of plate 3. A different grant, in characters of the same period as the present one and written across the lines of the present grant, can be found on both sides of plate 2. The lines of this have been truncated as the earlier plate was cut to its present size. Plates 4 and 5 are not palimpsests, and there is no earlier writing on 1 recto.

Stanza 1 is almost identical to a prose passage in lines 15-16 of the Ārumbāka grant of Bādapa. It thus seems likely that this text, in verse form, was already used in grants of Amma I, from which it must have been adopted (inaccurately) here and (accurately) in that grant of Amma II. Or, could Bādapa’s clerks have been using a grant of Amma II as a model, given that both refer to the king as Vijayāditya?

Bibliography

Edited from the original by Fleet (1883), with a translation and with facsimiles. The present edition by Dániel Balogh is based on a collation of Fleet’s edition with his published facsimiles.↓16

Primary

Fleet, John Faithfull. 1883. “Sanskrit and Old Canarese Inscriptions: No. CXXVI.” IA 12: 91–95.
[siglum JFF]

Secondary


Notes

↑1. I translate the text as suggested in the apparatus to line 22.
↑2. Alternatively, jalaja may mean a fish or perhaps a lotus. This latter is how Fleet translates this word, but he misconstrues the compound, analysing it as jalajāta-patra and apparently does not perceive that this must be some variant of a list of the five lakṣaṇas of a cakravartin.
↑3. Fleet sees the name as Anamavvā, noting that it may also be Ānamavvā. He does not consider Cānamavvā an option, but since Cānamāmbā is an attested name (of a different person) in the Kāṭlapaṟṟu grant of Vijayāditya III, I prefer this.
↑4. This is the best I can make of the text, which I find rather awkward. Fleet translates along similar lines, except that he seems to construe the compound with -rūpam as qualifying -bhāvam, which I find unlikely since bhāva is masculine, but with the adjective dhārā-dhāri we need -rūpam to be neuter. The text may have a better sense that escapes both Fleet and me, but it is well within the range of possibility that the composer was carried away from sense by his effort to produce the sound effect of the third pāda. Could the correct reading be, or should it be emended to, dadhad dharā-vāridharopamānaḥ, implying that Koramiya is comparable to the earth (in forbearance) and to a raincloud (in selfless distribution of riches)?
↑5. I am not entirely confident in my interpretation of this stanza, partly because of an engraving error and partly because of the opacity of the phrase nāgaraka-jalajabhava-bahumukha-priyāṁ. Fleet emends the error differently (see the apparatus to line 46) and translates, ‘The eloquence which abides in him, the most clever one (and) which is (like) the sharp edge of a sword to wicked people, always laughs to scorn the woman Vāc who is dear to polished people and to Jalajabhava and to Bahumukha,’ noting that Jalajabhava is Brahmā (born in a lotus) and Bahumukha may be Viṣṇu (as Sahasrānana). I find Fleet’s emendation unlikely, because while dhārā does mean “edge,” there is no sword in the context here. I also do not think Koramiya would be praised for scorning the goddess of speech who is dear to gods, nor do I see how Viṣṇu would fit that picture. It is marginally possible that the poet’s intent was to say that Koramiya’s eloquence “scorns,” i.e. surpasses the real speech goddess, and that Bahumukha is a further qualification of Brahmā, who does fit the picture. But what is in my opinion more likely is that Jalajabhava and Bahumukha are living contemporary poets and/or courtiers whom Amma II finds disagreeable, e.g. for criticising him or praising his rivals. The image in this stanza would thus be that although these men do have a gift with words, it is only a courtesanly (vāra) Lady Speech who favours them, while Koramiya’s genuine gift is turned to ridiculing them.
↑6. Here too, Fleet emends and interprets the text differently. He translates, ‘Good people say how wonderful it is that, through his innate excellence, there is produced a power that is worthy to be praised by (his) lord.’ His emendation, though more invasive than mine (see the apparatus to line 48), is not implausible and his translation is also possible. However, I feel that the terms citram and sādhu-vāda are more likely to have been used in their common specialised senses (viz., “strange” and “congratulation, acclaim”) than in the blander senses of “wonderful” and “speech of good people.” Given this intuition, I believe the intent of the composer was to say that acclaim should come as a matter of course to such an eminent person, and it is indeed strange that his king should need to commission his laudation.
↑7. Once again, I disagree with Fleet, who ignores the bitextuality of the stanza, possibly because he was unaware of the concept of the vāstu-puruṣa. I make a small emendation in the first hemistich (see the apparatus to line 50) which Fleet does not make. He translates, ‘It is well established that Koramiya is essentially a man, (since) he enjoys the abiding condition of preserving the hearts of all kings, (and since) he is not to be purchased for any value, (and since) he is possessed of excellent achievements that are like pearls.’ I do not think the composer would have gone to the trouble of writing a stanza just to say that the donee is “essentially a man”, and Fleet’s rendering of what he (without my emendation) sees as a long compound into “enjoys the abiding condition of preserving the hearts of all kings” does not make much sense. If, however, we read the stanza in two different ways, once as applied to the donee and once to a vāstu-puruṣa, we end up with a much more pregnant—and in fact rather brilliant, not to mention historically interesting—piece of text. Some of my translations as applied to the Domicile Man may be off: I am not sure whether kings worship the centre of one (perhaps they rather reside or abide there?), and I do not know of an explicit role played by pearls and fruit in the worship of a vāstu-puruṣa. The stanza merits further investigation and comparison with other sources on the vāstu-puruṣa.
↑8. Yet again, Fleet translates the stanza at face value. However, the most straightforward interpretation of the last statement is indeed as Fleet translates it, ‘his mind is inclined to all kinds of enjoyment’, but I fail to see how this could support a claim for great virtue (much less, as Fleet puts it, religious merit). Given this, I feel we must search for alternative interpretations of all the statements, which would make their purport the opposite. While the text aho mahat easily allows the reading aho’mahat, I do not find it easy to arrive at a negative meaning for the first two statements and a positive one for the third. Nonetheless, with a bit of a stretch such meanings can be found, and I am quite confident that the composer had something much like this in mind. That said, the positive meanings are more natural in all quarters except the one about enjoyments, whereas one would rather expect a “laudation by abuse” to work the other way round and yield the positive meaning only after careful scrutiny.
↑9. Or, as Fleet takes it, the records office of the treasury of gold.
↑10. Assimilation erronée de Yuddhamalla et de Kollabhigaṇḍa-Vijayāditya. Il faut peut-être y voir une tentative de légitimation de Yuddhamalla, qui appartient à une branche usurpatrice de la famille. Nous savons en effet par l’inscription de Tāṇḍikoṇḍa que ce dernier est le cousin germain de Kollabhigaṇḍa-Vijayāditya.
↑11. Śleṣa, autre traduction possible : « par le fait de brûler son ennemi, Pura ».
↑12. Analogon : le roi est pour les savants ce que le soleil est pour les lotus.
↑13. Brahma, né dans un lotus.
↑14. Brahma
↑15. Viṣṇu
↑16. All my scans of IA12 are quite poor. Though Fleet says the plates are in perfect preservation, my scans of 3r and 4v are illegible in many places (where I simply adopt Fleet’s reading), and the other plates far from perfect. Checking a printed Indian Antiquary 12 may help.