Current Version: draft, 2025-01-30Z
Editor: Dániel Balogh.
DHARMA Identifier: INSVengiCalukya00087
Hand Description:
Halantas. Final T (e.g. line 8) resembles ta without a headmark. Final N (a fairly clear instance in l36) is probably a minuscule simplified na, raised and with a sinuous vertical tail.
Original punctuation marks are single or double vertical bars. Some, especially on the first plate, have a small triangular serif on top; others are plain, while yet others are slightly sinuous and may have a small hook toward the right at the top.
Other palaeographic observations. The script is very elegant and ornate. Anusvāra is sometimes a dot, at other times a conspicuous circle at headline height after the character to which it belongs.PS notes that dependent ā is sometimes indicated by a vertical line on top of the character (e.g. l2, l4), while dependent ī is distinguished by a dot in the centre of the circle.
No metadata were provided in the table for this inscription
⎘ plate 1v 1floretQuatrefoil (sva)sti[.] śrīmatāṁ sakala-bhuvana-saṁstū(ya)māna-(mā)navya-sa-
2(go)trā(ṇāṁ) hārīti-putrāṇāṁ kauśikī-vara-prasāda-labdha-rājyānā(ṁ)
3(m)ātr̥-gaṇa-paripālitānāṁ svāmi-mahā(se)na-pādānudhyā(tā)-
4(nāṁ) bhaga◯⟦(pādā?)⟧⟨⟨van-nā⟩⟩rāyaṇa-prasāda-samāsādita-vara-va-
5(rā)ha-(lāṁ)◯¿(c)?⟨ch⟩anekṣaṇa-kṣaṇa-vaśīkr̥tārā(t)i-maṇḍalānā{ṁ}m a-
6(śva)m(edhāvabhr̥tha-sn)āna-pavitrīkr̥ta-vapuṣā(ṁ c)āl(u)kyānāṁ kula-
7m alaṁ(ka)ri(ṣṇoḥ) satyāśraya (valla)bhendrasya bhrātā kubja-viṣṇuva-
⎘ plate 2r 8(rddha)no [’](ṣṭādaśa) varṣ(ā)ṇi veṁgī-deśam apālayaT| tad-(ā)t(m)a(jo)
9(jayasiṁha)s trayastriṁśataṁ| ta(d-a)nuja (Indra)rā(jaḥ) sa(pta dināni|)
10(ta)n-⟨n⟩anda(no vi)ṣṇuvarddhano nava| tat-sūnu(r) mma(ṁ)gi-yuvarā(ja)(ḥ?)
11pa(ṁca)vi◯ṁśatiṁ| tat-putro jaya(siṁhas tra)yo(da)śa(|)
12ta(d-a)va◯ra-jaḥ kokkiliḥ ṣaṇ māsā(N|) tasya (jyeṣṭho bhrā)-
13(tā) viṣṇuvarddhanas tam uccāṭya saptratriṁśataṁ| ta(t-pu)tro vi-
14ja(yā)ditya-bhaṭṭārako [’]ṣṭādaśa| tat-(s)uto viṣṇ(u)vard(dh)anaḥ ṣa-
⎘ plate 2v 15ṭtriṁśataṁ| tat-suto (v)i(ja)yāditya-(nare)ndra-mr̥garājaś cāṣṭa-
16catvāriṁśataṁ| (tat-su)ta(ḥ ka)li-viṣṇuvarddhano [’]ddhyarddha-varṣaṁ| ta-
17t-suto ⟨gu⟩ṇagāṁ(ka-vijayādi)tyaś catu⟨ś⟩catvāriṁśataṁ(| tad-a)nu-
18ja-yuva◯rā(ja)-v{r}ikramāditya-bhūpate⟨ḥ⟩ sūnu⟨ḥ⟩ cālukya-bhī-
19ma-bhūpā◯las triṁśataṁ|
sa sa(r)vva-
31lokāśraya-śrī-viṣṇuvarddha(na-ma)hārā(jādhirāja)-parameśva-
32raḥ para◯(ma-bha)ṭṭāra(kaḥ vela)nā(ṇḍu)-vi(ṣa)ya-(n)i(vā)sin(o)
33rāṣṭrakū◯(ṭa-pra)m(ukhān kuṭuṁbinaḥ samāhūye)t(th)am (ā)-
34jñāpa(ya)ti(|)
(śrī-mā)nya(keṭā)dhi(pa)tir
(ta)t-patnī
tasm(ai) Indapa-
45-rājākhy(ā)ya bhava(d-vi)ṣay(e) pulivaṟṟa (nā)ma g(r)āmo (mānyīkr̥)tya
46ś(ā)sanā◯r¿u?⟨ū⟩ḍho sa(r)vva-kara-par(i)hāra⟨ṁ⟩ datta (I)ti viditam a-
47stu vaḥ|◯
Asyāvadhayaḥ| p(ū)rv(v)a(ta)ḥ māva(lū?)(ru) sī-
48mā| dakṣ¿a?⟨i⟩ṇa⟨ta⟩ḥ kaṁcekavvapūṇḍi sīmā| paści(ma)taḥ (gorava?)(pū)-
49ṇḍi sīmā| Uttarataḥ velaṇṭh(ū)ru (s)īmā| (A)sy(o)pari na k(e)-
⎘ plate 5r 50nacid bā⟨dhā⟩ karttavyā[.] yaḥ ka(roti) sa paṁca-mah(ā-pāta)[ko bha-]
51vati| tathā coktaṁ vyāse(na|)
Ājñaptiḥ (ka)(ṭṭa-rā?)(jaḥ)[.] (mahākā)la-bhaṭṭa-(k)ā(vya)ṁ[.] j(āntā)cāryya-
56-likhitaṁ(floretIndistinct)
1-19Greetings. 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 (Indra Bhaṭṭāraka), for seven days. His son Viṣṇuvardhana (II), for nine (years). 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-Viṣṇuvardhana (V), for a year and a half. His son Vijayāditya (III) with the byname Guṇaga, for forty-four. The son of his younger brother the heir-apparent (yuvarāja) Prince (bhūpati) Vikramāditya, King (bhūpāla) Cālukya-Bhīma, for thirty.
30-34that shelter of all the world (sarva-lokāśraya), His Majesty Viṣṇuvardhana (Amma I), the Supreme Lord (parameśvara) of Emperors (mahārājādhirāja) and Supreme Sovereign (parama-bhaṭṭāraka), convokes and commands all householders (kuṭumbin)—including foremost the territorial overseers (rāṣṭrakūṭa)—who reside in Velanāṇḍu district (viṣaya) as follows:
34The overlord of majestic Mānyakeṭa—
38His wife—
44-47To that one named Indapa-rāja (II), the village named Pulivaṟṟa in your district has been given (by us), converted into a rent-free holding (mānya) with a remission of all taxes and consolidated↓11 as a (copperplate) charter. Let this be known to you.
47-51Its boundaries [are as follows]. To the east, the border is Māvalūru. To the south, the border is Kaṁcekavvapūṇḍi. To the west, the border is Goravapūṇḍi. To the north, the border is Velaṇṭhūru. Let no-one pose an obstacle (to the enjoyment of rights) over it. He who does so shall have the five great sins. So too Vyāsa has said:
55-56The executor (ājñapti) is the castellan (kaṭṭa-rāja). The poetry is Mahākāla Bhaṭṭa’s. Written (likhita) [by] Jāntācārya.
Although the spelling of the donated village’s name is Pulivaṟṟa in the text, I retain the established name of the grant in the normalised form Pulivaṟṟu.
Assigning this grant to Amma I is highly problematic. Stanza I is attested in the Kaṇḍyam plates of Dānārṇava and the Andhra Sahitya Parishad plates of Śaktivarman, but not in any earlier plates. Stanza II is very similar to one found (with some variance) in many grants of Amma II, but the name of Amma I’s mother in the present version happens to break the metre, whereas Amma II’s mother’s name fits it.↓12 This very strongly implies that the stanza was composed about Amma II and was clumsily adapted to describe Amma I. Stanza IV, too, occurs verbatim in multiple grants of Amma II and nowhere else. The deplorable quality of the verses describing the donee may also indicate that there is something fishy with this grant. The prose genealogy mentions Indrarāja as reigning for seven days (rather than only as the father of Viṣṇuvardhana II). This occurs in grants issued by Dānārṇava and his descendants,↓13 but nowhere else. The genealogy simply lists Vijayāditya II Narendramr̥garāja and his reign, whereas all known grants of Amma I that contain a full king list include a reference to Narendramr̥garāja’s 108 battles and corresponding number of temples, which is omitted from most later grants. Vijayāditya III is described here by the term guṇagāṁka, which is found in several grants of Amma II and one of Bādapa;↓14 earlier charters, conversely, either omit this epithet or use it (or its fuller form guṇakkenalla) without aṁka.
Given the anomalies so far and given that Dānārṇava was supported by the Rāṣṭrakūṭas, it seems probable that the current grant was created in or shortly after his time, with royal approval, but set up as if it were an earlier grant issued by Amma I.↓15
The name of the composer Mahākāla Bhaṭṭa is known as that of the composer of the Vemalūrpāḍu plates of Amma II. He may or may not be identical to Bhaṭṭa Mahākāla, composer of the Cevuru plates of Amma I. The latter may or may not be identical to Mahākāla, who is said in the Drujjūru grant of Amma I to have been a general of Bhīma I, and is granted a village by Amma I. The engraver Jontācārya (apparently written as Jāntācārya on the present plates) is the engraver of no fewer than five grants of Amma II (called Jayantācārya in one of the five) as well as of the Kaṇḍyam plates of Dānārṇava and the Raṇastipūṇḍi grant of Vimalāditya. The latter may be the same person at a venerable age or a successor, perhaps a grandson of Amma II’s and Dānārṇava’s “primary” Jontācārya. The possibility that a predecessor, perhaps a grandfather, of that Jontācārya was active in the reign of Amma I cannot be excluded, but it is more parsimonious to assume that the plates are in fact the work of the “primary” Jontācārya, who signed his name even though the plates were supposed to have been engraved before his time. The composition may be that of Mahākāla Bhaṭṭa, still active at a time; or it may belong to an anonymous author, with Mahākāla Bhaṭṭa’s name featured in order to lend authenticity to the grant’s being of Amma I’s time.
Continuing the speculative line further, once Dānārṇava was established as ruler of Veṅgī after Amma II’s death, he would not have needed such subterfuge to reward someone who had helped him. The same stands for Dānārṇava’s descendants. However, Dānārṇava first occupied the throne at the time when Amma II had fled to Kaliṅga from Kr̥ṣṇa II’s wrath after having reigned for eleven years (Māṁgallu grant of Dānārṇava), i.e. around 955 CE. At this time, as the Māṁgallu grant shows, he ruled in Amma II’s name (as Vijayāditya, whereas he was Viṣṇuvardhana in his Kaṇḍyam plates issued after Amma II’s death) and had to beat around the bush explaining why he rewarded Kākatya Guṇḍyana. Backdating a grant to Amma I’s time sounds like a strategy he may well have employed at this time.
As to the identity of the donee, the question certainly needs more research. PS cites and dismisses D. C. Ganguly’s opinion that he is a son of Amoghavarṣa II, and thus a grandson of Indra III (identified with Indapa I of our grant). According to PS, Amoghavarṣa II cannot have taken shelter with Amma I after being ousted by Govinda IV, because he lost his throne only in 930 CE, while Amma I’s reign ended in 927. Instead, PS suggests, the donee is Amoghavarṣa III, for which his evidence is that Amoghavarṣa III’s mother was named Govindāmbā. However, neither Amoghavarṣa III, nor his grandfather Kr̥ṣṇa II are known to have borne the name Indapa or Indra.
Keeping in mind that according to our grant Indapa I was in fact the ruler of Mānyaketa (i.e. Mānyakheta), it is certainly tempting to identify him with Indra III. However, according to Altekar in Yazdani 1960: volume 1, page 286, Indra III was no more than thirty years old at the time of his accession in 914 CE. That he could have had a grandson who reached adulthood↓16 before the end of Amma I’s reign in 927 is unlikely. Altekar (Yazdani 1960: volume 1, page 286, note 4) adds to this that since Indra III remained in power up to 927, there would have been no reason for a grandson of his to flee to Veṅgī. Then again, if our grant was actually issued by Dānārṇava, the drafters may not have bothered too much with historical accuracy. Also, there is no need to assume that flight was involved and the present grant was given in the way of alms; more likely, it is a reward for some service rendered by the donee or one of his predecessors. Given that Dānārṇava was practically a puppet of Kr̥ṣṇa III, he may well have been allied to either Amoghavarṣa III (who was Kr̥ṣṇa III’s father) or to Amoghavarṣa II (who was Kr̥ṣṇa III’s rival’s rival, ousted by Govinda IV, who was in turn ousted by Amoghavarṣa III). As pointed out above, the male names do not fit Amoghavarṣa III, while they do permit the assumption that our Indapa I was Indra III. If this is the case, then his son (not named in the grant which does, however, imply that he was a king of the Rāṣṭrakūṭas) was either Amoghavarṣa II or an unknown brother of his, and his grandson, Indapa II of the grant, is not known from other sources.
Reported in ARIE 1923-1924: page 10, appendix A/1923–24, № 3 with description at ARIE 1923-1924: page 93, §3. Edited from inked impressions by C. A. Padmanabha Sastry (1975-1976) with facsimiles but without translation. The present edition by Dániel Balogh is based on a collation of Padmanabha Sastry’s edition with his facsimiles.
↑1. Vijayāditya IV’s ascension of a balance scale is also mentioned in close proximity
to his erection of a victory pillar in Viraja in stanza 32 of the Diggubaṟṟu grant of Bhīma II.
↑2. See the commentary about the attribution of these plates.
↑3. Or: a queen of the Pallava house.
↑4. Or, “of the famous and great Raṭṭa dynasty.”
↑5. The term vīrāvatāra may also refer to the deity Vīrabhadra.
↑6. The stanza is metrically problematic, probably because there are several mistakes
in its text. See the apparatus to line 37. PS takes Raṭṭiya to be the personal name
of this son. This is not very plausible on the basis of the syntax, but would be acceptable
with the emendation nr̥patir. I prefer to see it simply as the dynastic name, though indeed, in this case the
son remains nameless.
↑7. The reference is to Kāma (Anaṅga) reincarnated as the son of Kr̥ṣṇa (Upendra) and Rukmiṇī (equated to Lakṣmī).
↑8. See the apparatus to lines 41 and 42 for grammatical problems with this stanza. The
meaning is clear in despite.
↑9. Or the meaning applied to Indapa may be that he was famous throughout India (Bhārata),
as understood by PS.
↑10. PS seems to understand that the second hemistich likens Indapa to Dharmarāja. The
emendations he proposes are noted in the apparatus to line 43, but even with these
(in my opinion incorrect) emendations, the meaning he desires does not obtain.
↑11. The expression śāsanārūḍha is not familiar to me. It is interpretable in the context as meaning “consolidated
as” or “raised to the status of” a copperplate charter, but I wonder if siṁhāsanārūḍha was rather intended (though the case ending would also need to be different in that
case).
↑12. Incidentally, the mother’s name is recorded as Pallava Mahādevī. The Velaṁbaṟṟu grant of Amma I records Amma I’s mother’s name as Lokamahādevī, which is also Amma II’s mother’s
name. The Velaṁbaṟṟu grant may belong to Amma II (omitting several kings from the
genealogy); or, if both Ammas had mothers named Lokamahādevī, then the present Pallava
Mahādevī may be a family name rather than a personal one. However, if Amma I’s mother
was really called Lokamahādevī, there would have been no reason for the composer of
the present grant to change the name to Pallava and thereby ruin the metre.
↑13. The Māṁgallu grant of Dānārṇava, the Raṇastipūṇḍi grant of Vimalāditya; in garbled text, the Korumelli grant of Rājarāja I; in garbled and probably corrected text, the Kalidiṇḍi grant of Rājarāja I.
↑14.
the Elavaṟṟu, Paḷaṁkalūru, Pāṁbaṟṟu and Tāṇḍikoṇḍa grants and the Vandram plates of Amma II, and the Ārumbāka grant of Bādapa.
↑15. In spite of the stanzas adopted from descriptions of Amma II, the ostensible issuer
cannot be Amma II, since stanza III uses Amma I’s epithet Gaṇḍaragaṇḍa, and lines
30-31 give his styles Sarvalokāśraya Viṣṇuvardhana.
↑16. The grant describes him as a skilled general, which is hardly applicable to an infant
or a young boy.