Lohaner plates of Pulakeśin II

Editor: Dániel Balogh.

Identifier: DHARMA_INSBadamiCalukya00007.

Language: Sanskrit.

Repository: Bādāmi Cālukya (tfb-badamicalukya-epigraphy).

Version: (021acb2), last modified (021acb2).

Edition

⟨Page 1r⟩

⟨Page 1v⟩ ⟨1⟩ @ svasti⟨.⟩

I. ⏑–⏑⏑⏑––⏑––⏑–⏑––⏑⏓

jayaty amala-bālendu-koṭi-prakāśa-daṁṣṭr̥otkaṭaṁ

a

rasātala-ja-paṅkāṅkita-skandha-de⟨2⟩śam ut-kesaraṁ

b

jalālulita-ghoṇāgra-mukta-prabhañjanotsārita-

c

-dhvanaj-jaladhi-ma⟨3⟩dhyopalabdhorvvi kola-rūpaṁ hareḥ,

d
II. Āryā

tad-anu jita-balavad-ari-gaja-mastaka-galita-sita-mau⟨4⟩ktika-cchuritas

ab

satyāśrayasya bāhur jjayati jagaj-janita-bahumānaḥ,

cd

asti mānavya-sago⟨5⟩trāṇāṁ hārīti-putrāṇāṁ kauśikī-saṁvarddhitānāṁ mātr̥-gaṇābhiṣiktānāṁ svāmi-mahāse⟨6⟩na-pādānuddhyātānāṁ ¿culu(tki?)kīnām? anvaye bahu-suvarṇṇakāśvamedha-pauṇḍarīka⟨7⟩-vājapeyādi-yāgāvabhr̥tha-snāna-pavitrī-kr̥ta-śirasāṁ manu-nr̥ga-nahuṣa-yayāti-dhundhumārā⟨8⟩mbarīṣa-dilīpa-nābhāga-pratimaḥ śrī-raṇavikrama-dvitīya-nāmā pulakeśi-vallabha-⟦ma⟧ ⟨9⟩ mahārājas⟨.⟩ tasya putraḥ para-gaja-ghana-paṭala-pavana⟨ḥ⟩ śrī-parākrāmāparā¿n?⟨kh⟩yaḥ kīrttivarmmā⟨.⟩ tasya putra(ḥ) ⟨Page 2r⟩ ⟨10⟩ praddhvasta-prabala-śatr(u)-mahimā himācalānukārī vipula-sthairyyonnati⟨ḥ⟩ nata-parama-sāmanta⟨11⟩-samupacaritaś carita-tapaś-caraṇa⟨ḥ⟩ bhr̥tya-labdha-prasādaḥ sādaram ivānanya-manasā vi⟨12⟩dhātrā vinirmmito mita-hita-viśada-satya-vacanopanyāso nyāsa iva jagatyās caryyāṇāṁ prathama⟨13⟩-yuga-manuja-pati-muni-carita⟨ḥ⟩ vijayī vimala-gagana-gata I⟨va⟩ śaradīndur ¿ū?⟨u⟩paśamita-sakala⟨14⟩-jagad-as(u)khaḥ sāhas¿au?⟨ai⟩ka-ratir aneka-cāturddanta-sa⟨ṁ⟩grāma-janita-vraṇāṅkāṅgatayā ⟨15⟩ sva-bhuja-bala-labdha-raṇavikrāmākhyaḥ suhr̥d-avana⟨ḥ⟩ dīnāndha-kr̥paṇa-samu⟨16⟩pabhujyamāna-vibhavaḥ pūrvvāparāmbu-nāthaḥ deva-dvija-guru-śūśrūṣaṇa-paraḥ ⟨17⟩ parama-bhāgavataḥ prasabhābhimr̥ṣṭānya-rāja-śrī⟨ḥ⟩ śrī-satyāśraya-pr̥thivī-vallabha ⟨18⟩ -mahārāja⟨ḥ⟩ sarvvān eva rāja-sāmanta-bhogika-viṣayapati-rāṣṭrakūṭa-grāmāyukta⟨Page 2v⟩⟨19⟩kādīn sammānayaty

astu vo viditam asmābhi⟨ḥ⟩ moṣiṇī-pathakāntarggata⟨ḥ⟩ Asikheṭaka-grāma⟨20⟩-pratyāsanna-goviyāṇaka-grāmaḥ sarvva-rāja-kulādeya-sahitaḥ Acāṭa-bhaṭa-prā⟨21⟩veśya ācandrārkkārṇṇava-kṣiti-sthiti-samakālīna⟨ḥ⟩ bali-caru-vaiśvadevāgnihotra-k¡r̥!⟨ri⟩⟨22⟩yā-pañca-mahā-yajñotsarppaṇārthaṁ girinagara-vinirggata-lohanagara-vāstavyāya sāva⟨23⟩rṇṇi-sagotra-maitrāya¿n?⟨ṇ⟩ika-vārāhaka-sabrahmacāri-dāmadīkṣitāya U⟨24⟩dakātisargge¿n?⟨ṇ⟩a pratipāditaḥ⟨.⟩

yato ⟨’⟩smad-va⟨ṁ⟩śyair anyair vvāgāmi-nr̥pati-bhoga-patibhir nna⟨25⟩la-veṇu-kadal(ā)sāraṁ saṁsāram upalabhya Udadhi-jala-vīc¡ī!-cañcalāṁś ca viṣayā¡ṁ!n ava⟨26⟩nidhara-śikhara-kaṭaka-taṭa-lasita-salila-raya-gatvarañ ca jīvitam avagamya mahā-bhūta ⟨27⟩ -paramāṇu-sthāsnu ca mahat-phalaṁ śarac-candra-kiraṇa-dhavalaṁ yaśo nirūpyāyam asmad-dāyo ⟨Page 3r⟩ ⟨28⟩ ⟨’⟩numantavyaḫ paripālayitavyaś ca⟨.⟩ yo vājñāna-timira-paṭalāvr̥ta-matir ācchindyād ā⟨29⟩cchidyamānaṁ vānumodeta sa pañcabhir mmahā-pātakais saṁyukta⟨ḥ⟩ syād⟨.⟩ uktañ ca bhagavatā ⟨30⟩ veda-vyāsena vyāsena(,)

III. Anuṣṭubh

ṣaṣṭiṁ varṣṣa-sahasrāṇi

a

svargge tiṣṭhati bhūmidaḥ

b

Ācchettā ⟨31⟩ cānumantā ca

c

tāny eva narake vase(T,,)

d
IV. Anuṣṭubh

vindhyāṭavīṣv atoyāsu

a

śuṣka-koṭara-vāsinaḥ

b

kr̥⟨32⟩ṣṇāhayo hi jāyante

c

bhūmi-dāyaṁ haranti ye,,

d
V. Anuṣṭubh

sva-dattāṁ para-dattāṁ (vā)

a

yatnā⟨33⟩d rakṣa yudhiṣṭhira⟨,⟩

b

mahīṁ mahīmatāṁ śreṣṭha

c

dānāc chreyo ⟨’⟩nupālanaṁ,,

d
VI. Anuṣṭubh

bahubhir vvasudhā ⟨34⟩ bhuktā

a

rājabhis sagarādibhi⟨ḥ⟩

b

yasya yasya yadā bhūm¿a?⟨i⟩s

c

tasya tasya tadā phalaṁ,,

d
VII. Upajāti

yānī⟨35⟩ha dāridrya-bhayā⟨n⟩ narendrair

a

ddhanāni dharmmāyatanī-kr̥tāni

b

nirbhukta-vānta-pratimāni tāni

c

ko ⟨36⟩ nāma sādhuḥ punar ādadīta,,

d

dvi-pañcāśadadhike ¡śakābda-pañcake! likhitaṁ tāmra-(ś)āsanaM

⟨Page 3v⟩

Apparatus

⟨2⟩ -dhvanaj-jaladhi- ⬦ -dhvaner jjaladhi- GHK.

⟨6⟩ ¿culu(tki?)kīnām? ⬦ ¿culu(ki/tki)kīnām? GHK • Khare’s primary reading is culukikīnām, noting that the character he reads as ki could also be tki. It definitely looks like a ligature, with something resembling a t at regular height, and the k component is subscript. It may be tki, or possibly ṅka or kki. Khare does not comment on the weird form of the name. I suspect that this ligature may be aborted and perhaps even hammered out; I cannot tell without seeing the original, but plain culukīnām would be much closer to what we expect.

⟨8⟩ pulakeśi- ⬦ pulikeśi- GHK • In my scanned estampage there is no trace of an i over the l. Khare may be correct, but verifying his reading needs an autopsy. — ⟨8⟩ -⟦ma⟧ ⟨9⟩ mahārājas ⬦ -ma⟨9⟩{ma}mahārājas GHK • The ma at the end of l8 is faint and squeezed into quite a small space. I believe this one may have been deleted already by the engraver, who at first tried to write ma here to fill up the space up to the margin, then realised it was too narrow and beat it out, starting again in the next line.

⟨9⟩ -ghana-paṭala-pavana⟨ḥ⟩ ⬦ -ghana-paṭala-pavanaḥ GHK • These characters are conspicuously compressed, occupying about as much horizontal space as śrīraṇavikra above. There is no indication of a deleted earlier text here (though gha actually looks more like pha), but there must be something going on here. Also, la is a “northern” form with a short stem and a headmark; interestingly, the body is below the baseline, extending into the space below the preceding ṭa. This seems to be yet another measure to compress the text horizontally as far as possible. I see neither any trace of a visarga at the end, nor sufficient space for one.

⟨10⟩ -praddhvasta ⬦ -pra¿d?⟨dh⟩vasta GHK. — ⟨10⟩ -śatr(u)- • If an u marker is present here, it is attached on the right-hand side of the ornamental extension of the subscript r, not at its usual place of attachment.

⟨13⟩ śaradīndur ¿ū?⟨u⟩paśamita GHK • I fully endorse Khare’s emendation (whereas PEM emends to śarad-indu-rūpa-śamita, and śaradīndu-rūpaḥ śamita is also conceivable and least invasive). Although inscribing rū instead of ru seems to be an unlikely mistake. I assume that the engraver was at least somewhat Sanskrit-literate, and he must have “emended” what he read as rupa to rūpa, without being aware of the context.

⟨14⟩ -as(u)◯khaḥ ⬦ -a(sukhaḥ) GHK • The reading is clear in the facsimile with the exception of u, which is barely visible. The reason for Khare’s hesitation may have been a short curving stroke within the space left around the binding hole. This is probably the top of an aborted kha: the engraver must have decided it was too close to the hole, and started the character again a bit to the right. — ⟨14⟩ sāhas¿au?⟨ai⟩ka- ⬦ sāhasaika- GHK.

⟨16⟩ °āmbu ⬦ °āmbu⟨dhi⟩ GHK • Khare’s emendation is plausible, but since it is not essential, I prefer not to show it in the text.

⟨25⟩ -kadal(ā)sāraṁ ⬦ -kadalosāraṁ GHK • lā has two vowel marks, both on top of the curve, both short and both bending to the right. Khare reads lo and neither emends nor comments. PEM types (and translates) dala-sāraṁ. Since lā was clearly intended, I assume the vowel mark is unusually placed and for some reason engraved twice.

⟨31⟩ vase(T,,) ⬦ vaseT,, GHK • Neither the punctuation sign, nor a halanta T are visible in the scan. There is a long curving verticalish line in the space next to se, which I assume to be an ornamental extension of the vowel mark of the following vi. If this is so, then the halanta character and punctuation mark, if present, must be tiny. Perhaps more likely, the reading could be vase with or without a short vertical punctuation mark.

⟨32⟩ (vā) • This character is obscured by additional strokes/scratches; this may be damage, or perhaps a correction to or from something else. (Perhaps pa engraved by eyeskip and then corrected to vā?)

⟨35⟩ -bhayā⟨n⟩ • Khare suggests first bhiyā, second bhayān as plausible emendations. I prefer bhayān because omitting the final t of ablatives is quite a common tendency. PEM further proposes bhaye, which I find inferior.

⟨36⟩ ¡śakābda-pañcake! ⬦ śa¿k?⟨t⟩ābda-pañcake GHK • Khare’s editor suggests that śakābdaśata would be a better emendation. Indeed, śaka and śata were probably both intended to be present. With another alternative, śakaśatābda, eyeskip could explain the omission. Note that śakābda-śata-pañcake and likhitaṁ tāmra-śāsanam are both legitimate anuṣṭubh pādas, so it seems possible that the date was modelled on a different date that was actually versified in that metre. — ⟨36⟩ -(ś)āsanaM ⬦ -¿ṣ?⟨ś⟩āsanam GHK • The unclear character is definitely not ṣā. It is a clear gā in the scan, and I assume that its cross-stroke was present in the original. It is also possible that the cross-stroke was indeed omitted, and Khare’s text is a typo, where he had intended to read gā and emend to śā.

Translation by Dániel Balogh

(1) Greetings!

I
Victorious is He—well endowed with tusks gleaming like the tip1 of an immaculate crescent moon, begrimed in the shoulder with mud originating from the netherworld (rasātala), mane bristling—the boar form of Hari when he has just recovered the Earth from amidst the sea ebbing away in a thunderous riptide set off by a flick of His snout in the water.
II
After Him, victorious is the arm of Satyāśraya, studded with white pearls2 that slipped from the heads of the elephants of powerful vanquished foes, which has earned great respect throughout the world.

(4–19) In the dynasty of the Culukis3 —who are of the Mānavya gotra, who are the sons of Hārīti, who were nourished by Kauśikī, who were anointed by the host of Mother Goddesses, who were deliberately appointed (to kingship) by the Lord Mahāsena, and whose heads have been hallowed through washing in the purificatory ablutions (avabhr̥tha) of sacrifices such as the Bahusuvarṇaka, the Aśvamedha, the Pauṇḍarīka and the Vājapeya4—there is a king (mahārāja) Pulikeśi Vallabha, whose second name is His Majesty Raṇavikrama (Bold in Battle), who takes after Manu, Nr̥ga, Nahuṣa, Yayāti, Dhundhumāra, Ambarīṣa, Dilīpa and Nābhāga. His son is Kīrtivarman, a gale to the shroud of clouds that are enemy elephants, whose other appellation is His Majesty Parākrama (Courage). His son—who has eradicated the greatness of powerful enemies, who imitates the Himalayas in solidity and greatness, to whom the greatest of feudatories bow in service, who has followed vows of asceticism, who finds satisfaction in his underlings, who was, it seems, reverently designed by the Creator in utter concentration [on the task], who utters words that are measured, beneficent, pure and true,5 a foundation as it were for the proper behaviour of all beings, who behaves like the royal sages6 of the First Age, triumphant, who eases the troubles of all the world like the autumnal moon in a clear sky, who delights in daring alone, whose body is marked by scars acquired in battles with many elephants,7 whereby he [too] has earned the name Raṇavikrama (Bold in Battle) by the strength of his own arms, who supports his friends, whose wealth is consumed by the destitute, the blind and the miserable, lord of the eastern and western water,8 bent on obeying gods, Brahmins and elders, supreme devotee of the Bhagavat (Viṣṇu), who has forcefully rubbed out the glory (śrī) of other kings,9 His Majesty Satyāśraya Pr̥thivīvallabha— sends his respects to each and every subordinate king (rājan), vassal (sāmanta), steward (bhogika), governor (viṣayapati), territorial overseer (rāṣṭrakūṭa), village headman (grāmāyuktaka) and so on (and informs them as follows):

(19–24) Let it be known to you that with a ceremonial pouring of water we have presented the village Goviyāṇaka in the vicinity of Asikheṭaka village in the Moṣiṇī district (pathaka) —along with all its dues payable to the royal household, (as a perpetual holding) inaccessible to armsmen (bhaṭa) and officers (cāṭa), for as long as the moon, sun, ocean and earth remain, (as an endowment) for the offering of the five great sacrifices, [viz.] the rites (kriyā) of Bali, Caru, Vaiśvadeva and Agnihotra10— to Dāmadīkṣita, who is of the Sāvarṇi gotra and a follower of the Maitrāyaṇika and Vārāhaka doctrines, and who hails from Girinagara and resides in Lohanagara.

(24–29) Hence, future kings and territorial lords (bhogapati) belonging to our dynasty or otherwise— perceiving that material existence (saṁsāra) is as insubstantial as wild cane, bamboo or plantain stem,11 understanding that the objects of senses (viṣaya) are as fickle as the waves on the water of the ocean and that life is as quick to depart as a rush of water splashing off the edge of a cliff on a mountaintop, and bearing in mind [on the other hand] that a reputation bright like the rays of the autumnal moon yields great fruit and is as permanent as the atoms of the great elements (mahābhūta), —should respect and uphold this grant of ours. But if one whose mind is enshrouded in a veil of the darkness of ignorance should seize it or condone its being seized, the five great sins shall be visited upon him. So too did the reverend Vyāsa, the redactor (vyāsa) of the Vedas speak:

III
A donor of land stays in heaven for sixty millennia, [while] a seizer (of granted land) and a condoner (of such seizure) shall reside in hell for just as many.
IV
Those who usurp a land grant will be born as black adders dwelling in dry holes in the waterless wilderness of the Vindhyas.
V
O Yudhiṣṭhira, diligently preserve land that has been donated, whether by yourself or another. O best of land-possessors, preserving [a grant] is superior to making a grant.
VI
Many kings, beginning with Sagara, have enjoyed the bountiful land. Whosoever at any time owns the land, the fruit {reward (accrued of granting it)} belongs to him at that time.
VII
Whatever assets in this world kings have turned into foundations of moral order (dharma) for fear of poverty (in the transcendent world) are like something that has been eaten and vomited—what decent man would partake of them again?

(36) [This] copper edict was written in the Śaka year five hundred and fifty-two.12

Translation into French by Estienne-Monod 2008

(1) Om ! prospérité !

I
Ses défenses brillantes la grandissent comme un croissant de jeune lune immaculée, la boue du Rasātala souille ses épaules, la crinière dressée, du milieu de l’océan elle recueille la terre, du bout de son groin, frôlant l’eau, elle libère une tempête dont l’écho remonte : victorieuse est la forme de sanglier que revêt Hari!
II
après cela, serti de perles blanches tombées de la têtes des éléphants des puissants ennemis vaincus, victorieux est le bras de Satyāśraya, qui fait naître un grand respect dans le monde !

(4–19) Il y eut, dans la descendance des Calukya, du même gotra que les descendants de Manu, fils de Hārīti, nourris par Kauśikī, consacrés par la troupe des Mères, méditant aux pieds du seigneur Mahāsena, eux dont les têtes furent lavées par le bain purificatoire de nombreux sacrifices, à commencer par le suvarṇaka,13 l’aśvamedha, le pauṇḍarīka et le vājapeya,14 un grand roi semblable à Manu, Nr̥ga, Nahūṣa, Yayāti, Dhundhumāra, Ambarīṣa, Dilīpa et Nābhāga : Pulikeśin Vallabha, portant comme second nom celui de l’illustre Raṇa Vikrama, vent qui disperse la masse des nuages que sont les éléphants ennemis, nommé aussi l’illustre Parākrāma. Il eut pour fils Kīrtivarman, dont la grandeur détruit les puissants ennemis, imitateur du mont Himālaya, qui possède une grande fermeté et noblesse, honoré par les plus grands feudataires, inclinés [devant lui], qui pratique l’ascèse, dont les serviteurs gagnent la faveur, créé par le créateur qui le dota d’un esprit sans pareil, avec respect semble-t-il, qui, proférant des paroles modérées, vertueuses, pures et sincères, est pareil à l’établissement des conduites du monde,15 qui se comporte en sage, seigneur des hommes du Premier Age, victorieux, qui paraît êtres venu du ciel, dont la beauté de lune automnale apaise toutes les souffrances de l’univers, dont le seul plaisir est l’audace, qui a gagné par la force de son bras le nom de Raṇa Vikrama, ses membres étant marqués par les callosités nées des nombreux combats au cours desquels [il a chevauché] l’Eléphant aux Quatre Défenses,16 dont l’orgueil et la puissance se marient avec la compassion envers les aveugles et les affligés, maître des océans de l’est et de l’ouest, voué à l’obéissance aux dieux, aux deux-fois nés et aux sages, excellent dévôt du Bienheureux,17 qui efface avec force la fortune des autres rois, Satyāśraya Pr̥thivī Vallabha, grand roi, s’adresse avec respect aux rois, aux feudataires, aux bhogika,18 aux chefs des viṣaya,19 aux rāṣṭrakūṭa,20 à tous les chefs de villages, etc., de même qu’à tous [les autres] :

(19–24) que ceci soit connu de vous : Nous avons fait don, après avoir versé de l’eau, dans le voisinage du village d’Asikheṭaka, inclus dans le pathaka21 de Moṣiṇī, du village de Goviyāṇaka, avec tous les revenus de la famille royale, village dont l’entrée est interdite aux troupes régulières et irrégulières, aussi longtemps que subsisteront la lune, le soleil, l’océan et la terre, pour lui permettre d’accomplir des cinq grands sacrifices, à savoir le bali, le caru, le vaiśvadeva,22 l’agnihotra,23 le kriyā,24 à Dāmādīkṣita, qui réside à Lohanagara, à l’extérieur de Girinagara, du même gotra que Sāvarṇi, qui est disciple des écoles de Maitrāyaṇika et de Vārāhaka. »

(24–29) Ainsi, les rois de notre lignée, ou les autres souverains et gouverneurs de bhoga à venir, ayant compris que le cycle des existences qui a la solidité d’un pétal de roseau, et que les objets des sens sont aussi instables que les vagues de l’océan,25 ayant perçu que la vie est périssable comme le torrent surgissant, depuis le sommet, le flanc pentu, ayant saisi que la gloire, ce grand fruit, splendide rayon de lune automnal, est aussi permanent qu’un atome par rapport aux éléments, doivent approuver et défendre ce don qui vient de nous. Que celui qui, l’esprit obscurci par le voile ténébreux de l’ignorance, transgresse [cet édit], ou approuve qu’il soit transgressé, soit lié aux cinq grands crimes, le bienheureux Vyāsa qui a exposé les Veda, l’a dit.

III
Le donateur de la terre séjourne soixante mille ans dans le ciel, Celui qui la prend et qui le permet demeure aussi longtemps en enfer !
IV
Habitant des grottes arides dans les forêts sans eau du Vindhya, ceux qui s’emparent d’une donation de terre renaissent comme serpents noirs.
V
Qu’elle soit donnée par toi ou par un autre, ô Yudhiṣṭhira, protège avec force cette terre ! ô meilleur des possesseurs de la terre, la préservation est plus grande que le don.
VI
Beaucoup de rois ont joui de la terre, à commencer par Sagara, celui qui possède la terre en possède le fruit.
VII
Les richesses qu’en ce monde des rois, par crainte de la pauvreté, ont transformées en réceptacles du dharma, pareilles à [la nourriture] mangée puis régurgitée, quel homme de bien les reprendrait ?
XXXVI
Cet édit de cuivre a été gravé en 552 de l’ère śaka.

Commentary

These plates were discussed prior to their publication by Khare ([1956] 1947-1948), particularly as regards their implications on the history of the war between Harṣa and Polekeśi(e.g. Chattopadhyaya 1939, pp. 601–603).

Stanza 1 is a samacatuṣpadī of 17 syllables (atyaṣṭi), with the quarters following this prosodic pattern: - + - - - + + - + + - + - + + - = (ja sa ra ra ya la ga). Khare admits to not knowing this metre and remarks on its similarity to pr̥thvī (also 17 syllables, - + - - - + - + : - - - + - + + - = with the first 6 and last 7 syllables having the same scansion). The metre is not in Apte’s appendix. Note compound straddling cd pāda boundary in a long metre. (Reminds me of v7 in the Allahabad pillar of Samudragupta, where the same thing happens in pr̥thvī, and the topic is also a torrent of water - I think both are quite deliberate enjambements.)

(10) Khare supplies r after -onnati but I prefer to supply a visarga in spite of standard sandhi requirements; if an r had been intended, then the following n would have been doubled.

(11) Likewise, in l11 Khare emends to caraṇo, l13 to carito, l15 to avano. I feel vindicated by the clear -nāthaḥ deva in l16.

(19) As above, I prefer to insert visargas instead of restoring standard sandhi. Khare emends to asmābhir moṣiṇī and -antarggato ‘sikheṭaka.

Most of plate 3(recto) is faint in the facsimile, or at least in the scan; many characters are completely indistinct. I follow Khare’s readings here. Of these, the following may be problematic: l30, ḫ pa (nothing of this character is discernible, and this is the only ḫ in the text, compare sādhuḥ punar in l36); l31, vaseT,, (noted in the apparatus); l32, vā (noted in apparatus); l35, rddhanāni (perhaps rddānāni?); l35, nirbhukta (looks like just nibhukta).

Bibliography

Edited by Ganesh Hari Khare ([1956] 1947-1948) with estampages but without translation. Khare had also edited the inscription earlier, published in Marathi in “Sources of the Medieval History of the Deccan” vol. I. p. 1ff. 26 The present edition by Dániel Balogh is based on a collation of Khare’s edition with the published facsimile.

Primary

[GHK] Khare, Ganesh Hari. [1956] 1947-1948. “Lohaner plates of Chalukya Pulikesin II: Saka 552.” EI 27, pp. 37–41.

Notes

  1. 1. The simile is based on the resemblance of a tusk to the curved tip of the crescent moon. However, the alternative meaning “like a million immaculate crescent moons” did surely not escape the composer and would in my opinion have been the first interpretation occurring to an audience to the stanza – to be replaced subsequently in an aha! moment with the less straightforward, but in the context far more apt alternative sense.
  2. 2. Pearls inside the skulls of elephants (here depicted as scattering while the heroic king butchers enemy elephants) are a common poetic convention, but it does seem to have a core of truth. Apparently, very old elephants can indeed have tiny, rounded pieces of ivory in the cavities at the root of their tusks, and these are valued as talismans.
  3. 3. See also the apparatus entry for this word in line 6.
  4. 4. See the note in PEM’s translation for references on these sacrifices.
  5. 5. Or, assuming amita instead of mita, “words that are immeasurably beneficient, pure and true.”
  6. 6. Or, “kings and sages.” But I take manujapati-muni as equivalent to rājarṣi.
  7. 7. I take cāturdanta to mean a descendant or relative of the four-tusked one, i.e. Airāvata.
  8. 8. Or, emending to ambudhi, “ocean.”
  9. 9. Is there a suggestion of sexual rape here? I find the word abhimr̥ṣṭa unusual and feel that it may (also) mean “who has forcefully rubbed up against the Śrīs of other kings.”
  10. 10. As I interpret the text, only four rites are explicitly named. According to Sircar Sircar 1966, the pañcamahāyajña comprises bali, caru, vaiśvadeva, agnihotra and atithi. PEM interprets kriyā to mean a particular fifth sacrifice, noting that according to the editor it is equivalent to kratu. (I could not find such a statement in Khare’s article.) See also PEM’s notes for references on these sacrifices.
  11. 11. The reason these plants are named here may be that all have stems that are either hollow or herbaceous. Alternatively, what makes them appropriate may be that they, like the body, perish after flowering; compare Mahābhārata Āraṇyakaparvan 252.9ab, yathā ca veṇuḥ kadalī nalo vā phalanty abhāvāya na bhūtaye ’’tmanaḥ.
  12. 12. The text actually inscribed lacks a word for “hundred” but one was definitely intended. See also the apparatus entry for the date.
  13. 13. Ce terme désigne sans doute une donation d’or émise par le roi. Il est mentionné sous la variante bahusuvarṇa aussi in insc. nos 8 et 9. Kane ne le répertorie pas dans les mahādāna.
  14. 14. Sur ces sacrifices cf. P.V. Kane, 1974, II, part. II : le vājapeya, p. 1206-7 : Āp. XVIII. 1.4 ; l’aśvamedha, p. 1228-39 : Śat. Br. XIII. 1-5, Tai. Br. III. 8-9 ; le pauṇḍarīka, p. 839 : Śat. Br. X. Sacrifices mentionnés aussi in insc. nos 8 (pour les vājapeya et pauṇḍarīka), 20 (pour le pauṇḍarīka). L’aśvamedha est mentionné dans presque toutes les insc. du corpus.
  15. 15. Le roi est comparé à Manu, créé par Brahmā, premier ordonnateur de la société humaine.
  16. 16. Airāvata.
  17. 17. Bouddha. [DB: why?]
  18. 18. chefs de district.
  19. 19. chefs de circonscriptions.
  20. 20. chefs de plusieurs villages.
  21. 21. groupe de villages.
  22. 22. Sur ces sacrifices, cf. insc. n°2. Le bali, le caru et le vaiśvadeva sont aussi mentionnés in insc. nos 2 et 10.
  23. 23. Sur l’agnihotra, sacrifice védique consistant en une offrande de lait bouilli, cf. Gaut. III 20 et P.V. Kane, 1974, II, part. II, p. 998-1001. Sacrifice mentionné aussi in insc. n° 10.
  24. 24. Selon l’éditeur, sans doute équivalent du kratu. Seule occurrence de ce terme dans notre corpus. Sur le kratu, cf. Ait. Br. ŚBr. xi, Āśv Śr. &c., références données in Monier-Williams.
  25. 25. Même idée in insc. n°10.
  26. 26. Not traced; not sure if the entire book is in Marathi or only parts of it. It was apparently published in 3 vols in Pune, 1930 to 1949; the Marathi title may be दक्खनच्या मध्यकालीन इतिहासाची साधने.