SII 2.98: original edition by H. Krishna Sastri – V. TWO PALLAVA COPPER-PLATE GRANTS. No. 98. VELURPALAIYAM PLATES OF VIJAYA-NANDIVARMAN (III).

Editor: Emmanuel Francis.

Identifier: DHARMA_INSSIIv02p0i0098.

Summary: These plates were discovered in 1911 by the late Rai Bahadur V.Venkayya, M.A., in the village Vēlūrpāḷaiyam, about 7 miles north-west of Arkonam in the North Arcot district. They have since been purchased by the Government for deposit in the Madras Museum. A detailed description of the plates and their contents has appeared in the Epigraphical Report for 1911, Part II, paragraphs 5 to 12. Mr. Venkayya also, has published a valuable note on them in the Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society for 1911, pp. 521 ff. The plates are five in number and consist of eight written sides, the outer faces of the first and last being completely blank. They vary in length from 9(5/8)" to 9(3/4)", and are slightly convex on their right and left sides. The breadth of each plate is about 3(1/2)". The ring which holds the plates together is oval-shaped, and measures 7" x 6(1/4)", while the circular seal in whose massive bottom the edges of the ring are firmly fixed, is 3(1/4)" in diameter. The seal bears on a depressed surface an elongated figure of a Pallava bull in a recumbent posture facing the proper right with an ornamental lamp-stand on either side of it. The bull and the lamp-stands are placed on a straight line which is perhaps to be taken for the surface of a pedestal. Below this latter, there appear the faint traces of an expanded lotus flower. Above the bull are engraved in one row, eight symbols of which a goddess (perhaps Lakshmī), flanked by two lamp-stands occupies the centre. Another symbol which is recognisable is the svastika. The remaining four are indistinct. Above these again are the insignia of royalty, viz., two chauris mounted on handles and a parasol between them. Right round the margin of the seal is a defaced legend in Pallava-Grantha characters of which the syllables . . . . . . va-nāthasya Nan[tipa]ṉmas[ya] bhū[pa*]tēḥ [|] viśva-[vi]śva[ṁ]bharāpāla śrīḥ, are visible. The plates including ring and seal weigh 394 tolas. The inscription on the plates is engraved partly in Grantha and partly in Tamil characters. The writing discloses two different scripts, the first of which (ll. 1 to 28) is somewhat less deeply cut and slanting. The virāma or the puḷḷi in the Tamil portion of the inscription is marked almost regularly throughout, by a zigzag line resembling the final m of Grantha or by the usual dot. The grant consists of 31 Sanskṛit verses intercepted in the middle by a prose passage in Tamil from lines 47 to 63, and including at the end a short Tamil sentence in lines 68 and 69. Verses 1 and 2 are invocations addressed to the Supreme Being and to Śrīkaṇṭha (Śiva). The two next supply the legendary origin of the Pallavas from Vishṇu, down to the eponymous king Pallava, through Brahmā, Aṅgiras, Bṛihaspati, Śaṁyu, Bharadvāja, Drōṇa, and Aśvatthāman, and eulogise the family as being very powerful. From verses 5 to 8, we learn the names of some probably historical kings. One of them was Aśōkavarman in whose family was born Kāḷabhartṛi. His son was Chūtapallava; his son, Vīrakūrcha; from him came Skandaśishya; from him, Kumāravishṇu and after him, Buddhavarman. It is evident, as Professor Hultzsch has remarked, (above, p. 342), that Aśōkavarman “can scarcely be considered a historical person, but appears to be a modification of the ancient Maurya king Aśōka.” Kāḷabhartṛi is a possible synonym of Kāṇagōpa, who is mentioned in the Kāśākuḍi plates, in the group of kings that ruled after Aśōkavarman. Vīrakūrcha, the grandson of Kāḷabhartṛi (Kāṇagōpa), must be the Vīrakōrchavarman whose name occurs as that of the great grandfather (of the donor) in an odd Pallava plate published by Professor Hultzsch in the Epigraphia Indica (Vol. I, p. 397 f.) and the same as Vīravarman of the Pīkira, Māṅgaḷūr, Uruvupalli and the Chendalūr grants, all of which belong practically to the same period. Vīrakūrcha is stated to have married the daughter of a Nāga chief1 and through her, to have acquired the insignia of royalty. Their son Skandaśishya seized from king Satyasēna the ghaṭikā of the Brāhmaṇas. The reference to a ghaṭikā at this early period is very interesting. It occurs also in the Tālagunda inscription of Kakusthavarman which is ascribed by Professor Kielhorn to about the first half of the 6th century A.D.2 Skandaśishya is perhaps identical with the Pallava king of the same name, who is referred to in one of the Tirukkaṛukkuṉṟam inscriptions3, as having made a gift to the holy temple of Mūlasthāna at that village. If Skandaśishya is synonymous with Skandavarman as suggested by Mr. Venkayya in his article on the Tirukkaṛukkuṉṟam inscription, we shall have to identify him with Skandavarman II, particularly because the two generations after him supplied by the Vēlūrpāḷaiyam plates would, in this case, be the same as those found in the Chendalūr plates of Kumāravishṇu II.4 Satyasēna, the king from whom Skandaśishya seized the ghaṭikā, remains unidentified. Kumāravishṇu, the son of Skandaśishya, is next stated to have captured Kāñchī, and his son Buddhavarman to have been the conqueror of the Chōḷas. Mr. Venkayya mentions two distinct periods in early Pallava history, viz. (1) the period in which their grants are recorded in the Prākṛit language and (2) that in which the grants are in Sanskṛit.5 The first has been tentatively assigned to the beginning of the 4th century A.D. Evidently, the break suggested at the beginning of verse 5 in the Vēlūrpāḷaiyam plates with the words “Aśōkavarman and others,” included this earlier period of the Prākṛit charters, and counted within it such names as Śivaskandavarman, Vijayaskandavarman, Vijayabuddhavarman, Buddhyaṅkura and Vishṇugōpa. The Sanskṛit charters, which are to be referred probably to the 5th and the 6th centuries of the Christian era, supply the names of a number of Pallava kings who may now be arranged in order of succession, with the help of the information given in the Vēlūrpāḷaiyam plates. The capture, or rather the re-capture of Kāñchī attributed to Kumāravishṇu in these plates confirms Mr. Venkayya’s suggestion that that town was not the Pallava capital for some time during the interval between the Prākṛit period and the later Sanskṛit period. Kāḷabhartṛi (Kāṇagōpa) may have been the first of the kings of the second period which lasted down to (Kāṇagōpa) may have been the first of the kings of the second period which lasted down to Buddhavarman according to our plates, or down to his son Kumāravishṇu II according to the Chendalūr plates. The question however arises whether Kumāravishṇu (I) of the Chendalūr and the Vēlūrpāḷaiyam plates has to be identified with Yuvamahārāja Vishṇugōpavarman or to be treated as still another son of Skandaśishya (Skandavarman II). The former alternative was suggested by Mr. Venkayya together with the further supposition that Buddhavarman and Siṁhavarman II may have been brothers.6 But as the names Vishṇugōpa and Kumāravishṇu are mentioned simultaneously together among Pallava ancestors, as for instance, in the Vāyalūr pillar inscription of the time of Rājasiṁha,7 we may presume, perhaps tentatively, Kumāravishṇu I to be a third son of Skandavarman II. The following revised pedigree of the Pallava kings based on the Vēlūrpāḷaiyam plates and the Sanskṛit charters of Pīkira, Māṅgaḷūr, Uruvupalli and Chendalūr, is given provisionally, subject to the identifications and suggestions made above:— [C1]Kāḷabhartṛi (Kāṇagōpa) [C1]Chūtapallava (perhaps, a surname of Skandavarman I mentioned in the Uruvupalli grant) [C1]Vīrakūrcha (Vīrakōrchavarman or Vīravarman) [C1]Skandaśishya (Skandavarman II) [C1]Siṁhavarman I [C2]Yuvamahārāja- Vishṇugōpa or Vishṇugōpavarman [C3]Kumāravishṇu I [C1]Skandavarman III [C2]Siṁhavarman II [C3]Buddhavarman [C1]Nanḍivarman8 [C2]Kumāravishṇu II After v. 8 we are again introduced to another gap in the succession in which were included a host of kings such as Vishṇugōpa9 and others. Then appeared a king named Nandivarman I who brought under his control a powerful snake apparently called Dṛishṭivisha.10 In verse 10, Siṁhavarman, the father of Siṁhavishṇu, is introduced,—no connection being specified between himself and the Nandivarman just mentioned. Siṁhavishṇu was the conqueror of the Chōḷa country which was fertilized by the river Cauvery. What follows of the Pallava genealogy is not new. It is a repetition of the account already supplied by the Kāśākuḍi, Kūram and the Udayēndiram plates. Stone inscriptions written in the Pallava-Grantha characters commence from this period,—a fact which suggests that, with the conquest of Siṁhavishṇu, the Pallavas must have extended their dominion further south of Kāñchī into the Chōḷa country and adopted the Dravidian language generally found mixed up with Sanskṛit in the later stone inscriptions. From Siṁhavishṇu’s son Mahēndravarman I was born Narasiṁhavarman I. This King whose conquest of Vātāpi (Bādāmi) and the Western Chalukya Pulakēśin II has frequently been described, is stated in verse 11 to have defeated his enemies and to have taken from them the pillar of victory standing at Vātāpi.11 Then came Paramēśvaravarman I, an enemy of the Western Chalukya king Vikramāditya I, whom, according to the Kūram and the Udayēndiram plates, he defeated at Peruvaḷanallūr. Paramēśvara’s “son’s son” was Narasiṁhavarman II, who re-organised the ghaṭikā of the Brāhmaṇas, and built a temple for Śiva “comparable with the mountain Kailāsa”. This is a clear reference to the building of the Kailāsanātha temple at Conjeeveram by Narasiṁhavarman II.12 The latter’s son was Paramēśvara II. The usurpation of the Pallava throne by Nandivarman II, subsequent to the death of Paramēśvara II, is clearly stated in verse 15. The distant relation that existed between the usurper Nandivarman II and Paramēśvara II is described in the Kāśākuḍi plates. Two points in the account given above are worthy of note: (1) the omission of the name Mahēndravarman II after Narasiṁhavarman I and (2) the statement that Narasiṁhavarman II was the “son’s son”13 of Paramēśvara I. The latter is probably an error, since all the three published Pallava accounts agree in saying that Narasiṁhavarman II was the son, not the grandson, of Paramēśvara I. The former, however, may be different. For although the Kūram plates call Paramēśvaravarman I, the grandson of Narasiṁhavarman I, still the doubtful way in which this relationship is expressed in the Kāśākuḍi and the Udayēndiram plates, taken together with the statement of the Vēlūrpāḷaiyam plates, makes it appear as if Mahēndravarman II and Paramēśvaravarman I were both sons of Narasiṁhavarman I, thus reducing the seven generations between Siṁhavishṇu and Paramēśvaravarman II, to six. The usurper Nandivarman II who, according to the Kāśākuḍi plates, was sixth in descent from a brother of Siṁhavishṇu could not at the time of his usurpation be a generation older than Paramēśvaravarman II whose kingdom he usurped. Indeed, as hinted in the Udayēndiram plates, he must have been much younger to justify his being called there the son of Paramēśvaravarman. Consequently it appears probable that Mahēndravarman II and Paramēśvaravarman I were actually brothers and that the succession after Narasiṁhavarman I passed on directly to the latter, the former having, perhaps, died before him. Two successions after the usurper Nandivarman (Pallavamalla) are further supplied for the first time by the Vēlūrpāḷaiyam plates. Nandivarman II’s son by Rēvā was the Pallava-Mahārāja Dantivarman (verse 18). His queen was the Kadamba princess Aggaḷanimmaṭī; from these, was born king Nandivarman III, or according to the Tamil portion of the inscription, Vijaya-Nandivarman, in the sixth year of whose reign the subjoined grant was made. No specific historical facts are mentioned in connection with these kings. Nandivarman III is stated to have “acquired the prosperity of the Pallava kingdom by the prowess of his (own) arms” (verse 20). From this we may infer that the sovereignty over the Pallava kingdom had now been keenly contested either by outsiders or by some direct descendents of the Siṁhavishṇu line. In the Chingleput, North Arcot, South Arcot and Trichinopoly districts, there have been discovered a number of stone records (more or less of the same age as the Vēlūrpāḷaiyam plates) which refer themselves to the reigns of Dantivarman, Dantivarma-Mahārāja, Dantippōttaraśar or Vijaya-Dantivikramavarman, and also of Nandivarman with similar variations in the name. Again, the Bāhūr plates14 supply the names Dantivarman, (his son) Nandivarman and (his son) Nṛipatuṅgadēva or Vijaya-Nṛipatuṅgavarman, as members of the Pallava family, among whose ancestors were Vimala, Koṅkaṇika and others. From this latter statement Professor Hultzsch concluded that the kings mentioned in the Bāhūr plates were different from the Pallavas of Kāñchī and were only “Pallava by name but Western Gaṅga by descent.” It is now, therefore, diffcult to say if the Dantivarmans and the Nandivarmans of the stone records mentioned above, are to be identified with those mentioned in the Bāhūr plates, or with those of the Vēlūrpāḷaiyam plates or with both. Mr. Venkayya is inclined to connect the names in the Bāhūr plates with those of the Vēlūrpaḷaiyam plates, and suggests that Vijaya-Nṛipatuṅgavarman of the former was apparently the son of Nandivarman III of the latter. Against this the only objection is the ancestry which, in the one case includes the clear Western Gaṅga name (or surname) Koṅkaṇika, while in the other it does not. If, however, Mr. Venkayya’s suggestion is accepted, we must presume two facts to arrive at a concurrent genealogy, and to connect the kings of stone records with those mentioned in the Vēlūrpāḷaiyam and the Bāhūr plates. The prefix kō-vijaya and the suffix vikramavarman which are invariably found appended to the names of the kings in this series must have been introduced for the first time by the usurper Nandivarman Pallavamalla, who, we know, literally won the kingdom by victory (vijaya) and by prowess (vikrama)15, and that Nṛipatuṅgavarman who was decidedly the most powerful16 of this last branch of the Pallavas, and a son of the Rāshṭrakūṭa princess Śaṅkhā, must have contracted new relations with the Western Gaṅgas to justify the insertion of one or more of the names of that dynasty among his Pallava ancestors. Even with these suppositions granted, the identification of kings mentioned in stone records with the Nandivarmans and Dantivarmans of the copper-plate grants presents peculiar difficulties. The script of the copper-plates, though of the same age with that of the stone inscriptions often differs from it,17 and the information supplied by the latter is so meagre that hardly any points of contemporaneous nature that could help us in such identification, are forthcoming. In the present state of our knowledge therefore, it may be hypothetically presumed that kings of names Nandivarman and Dantivarman with or without the prefix kō-vijaya and the suffix vikramavarman, may be taken to be one or the other of the immediate ancestors of Nṛipatuṅga-Vikramavarman; while kings described as Dantivarma-Mahārāja of the Bhāradvāja-gōtra,18 Dantivarman and Nandivarman of the Pallava-tilaka-kula,19 and Nandivarman “who conquered [his enemies] at Teḷḷāṟu,”20 have to be kept distinct. In conclusion it may be stated, by way of a resume4, that the Pallava history covers four separate periods extending from about the 4th to the 9th century A.D. with three gaps which remain yet to be filled up satisfactorily by later researches. These are (1) the period of the Prākṛit charters; (2) after a gap of a little more than a century, the period of the Sanskṛit charters; (3) after another gap (or rather two gaps) of about the same length the period of stone inscriptions when, the Siṁhavishṇu line was predominant; and (4) the last period when the Nandivarman line (developing later, into what has been called the Gaṅga-Pallava line) was powerful until it was completely crushed by the Chōḷas. A table of the kings of the Siṁhavishṇu line and of the collateral branch of Nandivarman Pallavamalla down to Nṛipatuṅgavarman of the Bāhūr plates is appended below:— [C1]Nandivarman I [C1]Siṁhavarman [C1]Siṁhavishṇu [C2]Bhīmavarman [C1]Mahēndravarman I [C2]Buddhavarman [C1]Narasiṁhavarman I [C2]Ādityavarman [C1]Mahēndravarman II [C2]Paramēśvaravarman I [C3]Gōvindavarman [C1]Narasiṁhavarman II [C2]Hiraṇya (I) [C1]Paramēśvaravarman II [C2]Mahēndravarman III [C3]Nandivarman II Pallavamalla [C1]Dantivarman or Vijaya-Dantivikramavarman (Hiraṇyavarman II)21 [C1]Nandivarman III, Vijaya-Nandivarman or Vijaya-Nandivikramavarman [C1]Nṛipatuṅgavarman or Vijaya-Nṛipatuṅgavarman The object of the Vēlūrpāḷaiyam grant was the gift of the village Śrīkaṭṭuppaḷḷi or Tirukkāṭṭuppaḷḷi to a temple of Śiva built at that village by a certain Yajñabhaṭṭa or Śaṉṉakkuṟi Yajñabhaṭṭa, surnamed Bappa-Bhaṭṭāraka,22 in the sixth year of the reign of king Nandivarman III. The request (vijñapti) was made by the Chōḷa-Mahārāja23 Kumārāṅkuśa, while the executor (ājñapti or āṇatti) was the minister Namba (in Tamil, Iraiyūr-uḍaiyāṉ-Nambaṉ) of the Agradatta family. The donee was the Mahādēva (Śiva) temple of Yajñēśvara at Tirukkāṭṭuppaḷḷi. Verse 28 informs us that the composer of the praśasti24 was the Māhēśvara Manōdhīra. Verse 31 and the Tamil sentence following it, supply the name of Pēraya, a clever carpenter of Maṉaichchēri in Kachchippēḍu (Conjeeveram), who engraved the writing on these plates. One point of great interest in the Tamil portion of the grant is the long list of exemptions (parihāra) and the written declaration (vyavasthā) with which Tirukkāṭṭuppaḷḷi was made over to the temple assembly (paraḍai, Skt. parishad). The former included items of collection whose significance is not quite clear, but which, as the inscription says, the king “could receive and enjoy.” It appears as though most of the items here mentioned were not necessarily sources of revenue to the State, as now understood, but only obligatory services which the king could enforce on the people for the benefit of the community. By the written declaration the donee was permitted to build (without any special license) mansions of burnt brick; to grow Artimissia, Andropogan Muricatum, red lilies and uḷḷi in gardens; to plant cocoanut trees in groves; to sink reservoirs and wells; to use large oil-presses; and to prohibit toddy-drawers from tapping for toddy, the cocoanut and the palmyra trees planted within the four boundaries of the village. The village Tirukkāṭṭuppaḷḷi is identical with Kāṭṭuppaḷḷi in the Poṉṉēri tāluk of the Chingleput district; Nāyaṟu-nāḍu of Puṛaṟ-kōṭṭam, in which the village is stated to have been situated, takes its name from the village Nāyar of the same tāluk, about 8(1/2) miles south-west of Kāṭṭuppaḷḷi. In the British Museum plates of the Vijayanagara king Sadāśivarāya of the 16th century A.D., Nāyattu-nāḍu (i.e., Nāyaṟu-nāḍu) is described as being a sub-division of Puḷali-kōṭaka (i.e., Puṛaṟ-kōṭṭam).25

Hand description:

Languages: Sanskrit, Tamil.

Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).

Version: (97de750), last modified (e8b2acd).

Edition

⟨Page 1v⟩ ⟨1⟩ svasti śrīḥ namaśśivāya ||~nityam· vyāpi nirāmayam· paramayā bhaktyādhigamyaṁ śivam· vācāndūramaci⟨2⟩ntyamakṣayamiti prodgīyamānam· budhaiḥ [|] saṁyamyendriyavāhinīṁ yativarairyyanmṛ(gya)te santa⟨3⟩ta(m·) tejastatparamārtthasaccirataranniśreyasāyāstu va⟨ḥ⟩ ||~⟨1⟩ śarvvāṇīkucakuṁkumāṁka(śu)bhakasubha⟨4⟩gāḥ proddāmadarppāmaradveṣivrātavadhūprasādhanaparāmṛṣṭiprasaṁgocitāḥ [|] yuṣmānpāntu yu⟨5⟩gāntavahnivilasaddīprāstracakrāśriraṁ śrīkaṇṭhasya śikhaṇḍaratnaruciravyāḷāṁgadā bāha⟨6⟩vaḥ ⟨|| 2⟩ Āsīdaṁbujanābhanābhikamalā(dbra)hmā tatopyaṁgirā(sta)smāddevagurustataśśubhamatiśśaṁyu⟨7⟩stataśśāṁ(yava)ḥ [|] {s}tasmātku(m)bhasamudbhava⟨ḥ⟩ smararipo(rdrau)ṇistatoṁśaḥ kramādasmādvismayanīyakīrttira⟨8⟩khila(kṣmā)vallabhaḥ pallavaḥ ⟨|| 3⟩ vaṁśastatova⟨r⟩ttata pallavānāṁ rakṣāvidhidhvastavipalla(vā)nā(m·) [|] bhū⟨Page 2r⟩⟨9⟩bhārakhedālasapannagendrasāhāyyaniṣṇātabhujārggaḷānām· ⟨|| 4⟩ Aśokavarmmādiṣu devabhūyaṁ ga⟨10⟩te(ṣu vaṁśye)ṣvatha pārtthiveṣu [|] vaṁśasyacū¿ḷ?⟨ḍ⟩āmaṇirāvirāsīdbharttendirāyā Iva kāḷabharttā ||~⟨5⟩ ⟨11⟩ tatsutādajani cūtapallavādvīrakūrcca Iti viśrutāhvayaḥ [|] yaḥ phaṇīndrasutayā sahāgrahīdrāja⟨12⟩cihnamakhilaṁ yaśodhanaḥ ⟨|| 6⟩ Anvavāyanabhaśrandra⟨ḥ⟩ skandaśiṣyastatobhava¿t?⟨t | d⟩vijānāṁ ghaṭikāṁ rājñassatya⟨13⟩senā¿t?⟨j⟩jahāra yaḥ |⟨| 7⟩ gṛhītakāñcīnagarastatobhūtkumāraviṣṇussamareṣu ji(ṣṇu)ḥ [|] bharttā bhuvo⟨14⟩bhūdatha buddhava⟨r⟩mmā yaścoḷasainyārṇṇava¿v?⟨b⟩āḍabāgniḥ ⟨|| 8⟩ saviṣṇugope ca narendrabṛnde gate ⟨15⟩ tatojāyata nandivarmmā [|] Anugrahādyena pinākapāṇeḥ pranarttito dṛṣṭiviṣaḥ phaṇīndraḥ ⟨|| 9⟩ Atha prathitavikra⟨16⟩mo jagati siṁhavarmmāhvayānnṛpātparamadāpahādajani siṁhaviṣṇu⟨r⟩jayī{ḥ} [|] lasatkramukamaṇḍalāḥ ka¿ḷ?⟨l⟩ama⟨17⟩kānanālaṁkṛtāḥ kavīratanayāñcitāssapadi yena coḷā hṛtāḥ ⟨|| 10⟩ tadā¿n?⟨t⟩majādāvirabhūnmahendrādupe⟨Page 2v⟩⟨18⟩ndrakīrtti⟨r⟩nnarasiṁhavarmmā [|] vātāpimaddhye vijitāriva(rgga)⟨ḥ⟩ sthitañjayastambhamalam·bhayadyaḥ ⟨|| 11⟩ tataḥ paramadaddhvaṁ26⟨19⟩sī babhūva parameśvaraḥ [|] cāḷukyakṣitibhṛtsainyadhvāntadhvaṁsadivākaraḥ ⟨|| 12⟩ tatputrasūnurnnarasiṁhavarmmā pu⟨20⟩nar¿y?⟨v⟩yadhādyo ghaṭikāṁ dvijānāṁ [|] śilāmayaṁ veśma-śaśāṁkamauleḥ kailāsaka¿t?⟨l⟩pañca mahendraka⟨21⟩¿t?⟨l⟩paḥ ⟨|| 13⟩ tatsūnurbhūbhṛtāṁ (m)ānyo babhūva parameśvaraḥ [|] mānavena krameṇorvvīmaśādyaḥ kaliśāsanaḥ ⟨|| 14⟩ tada⟨22⟩nantaramanvayasya lakṣmīñcatura(mbho)nidhivāsasā sahorvvyā [|] samavāpadaśeṣapūrvva(bhū)⟨23⟩bhṛdguṇasaṁmeḷanadhāma nandivarmmā ⟨|| 15⟩ tasyāṁburāśeriva vāhinīnānnāthasya nānāguṇara(tna)⟨24⟩dhāmnaḥ [|] dhīrasya bhūbhṛdvaralabdhajanmā reveva revā mahiṣī babhūva ⟨|| 16⟩ tasyāmāvirabhū⟨t⟩trilokaparira⟨25⟩(kṣā)⟨r⟩tthaḥ kṣamānandana¿ḥ?⟨s⟩ sākṣādaṁburuhekṣaṇassvayamiha śrīdantivarmmā nṛpaḥ [|] śauryyatyāgakṛtajña⟨26⟩tādiramalo yasminguṇānāṁ gaṇaḥ pr(ā)pt(ā)nyonyasamāgamotsava Iva prāpatpra⟨ti⟩ṣṭhāñci⟨Page 3r⟩⟨27⟩rāt· ⟨|| 17⟩ prakhyātasya kada(mba)vaṁ⟨śa⟩tilakasyorvvīpaterātmajā vīrāṇāṁ prathamasyaṁ pallavamahārāja⟨28⟩sya tejasvinaḥ [|] Ākhyāmaggaḷanimmaṭīti ⟨da⟩dhatī śuddhānvavāyocitā (bha)rttustasya bhuvo ⟨29⟩ babhūva mahiṣī gaurīva jetuḥ pur¿a?⟨ā⟩m· |~ ⟨18⟩ śrīnandivarmmāṇamasūta seyaṁ sandhyeva te⟨30⟩jasvinamambikeva [|] kumāramatyadbhutaśaktiyuktaṁ yathā jayantaṁ jayinaṁ śacīva |~ ⟨19⟩ Utkhāta⟨31⟩khaḍganihatadvipakumbhamuktamuktāphalaprapāsite samarāṁgaṇe yaḥ (|) śatrū⟨32⟩nnihatya samavāpadananyala¿v?⟨bh⟩yāṁ rājyaśiśr¿a?⟨i⟩yaṁ svabhujavikramadarppaśālī |~ ⟨20⟩ U(dya)ānaṁ ma⟨33⟩dhunā guṇaiḥ kulabh¿u?⟨ū⟩va¿ḥ?⟨ś⟩ śīlena vāme¿rt?⟨k⟩ṣaṇā tyāgenārtthapatiśśrutena vinaya⟨34⟩ssūryyeṇa pa¿t?⟨d⟩mākaraḥ [|] prāleyadyutinā payodasamayāpāye nabhaḥprāṁgaṇannai⟨35⟩vaṁ (bhā)ti tathā yathā jagadidaṁ yena ¿t?⟨k⟩ṣamābandhunā ⟨| 21⟩ pṛthvīpālasya tasya pra¿dh?⟨th⟩itagu⟨Page 3v⟩⟨36⟩ṇaga(ṇo) bappabhaṭṭārakā¿g?⟨kh⟩yaśśāstre vede ca sāṁkhye prakaṭitamahimā yajña⟨37⟩bhaṭṭābhidhāna¿ś ś?⟨ḥ | ś⟩rīkaṭṭuppaḷḷināmni śrutavina⟨ya⟩dharastuṁgakailāsakalpaṁ grā⟨38⟩mebālendumauler{bh}bhavanamakṛta yadbhaktiyogapra(tī)taḥ |~ ⟨22⟩ pitābhavadyasya ⟨39⟩ viśuddhabuddhirggirāmiveśaśśivadāsanāmā [|] mātābhavadyasya guṇaissama¿ś?⟨g⟩rai⟨40⟩rggarīyasī (dre)ṇamaṇirmmahīva |~ ⟨23⟩ pitāmaho yasya viśuddhavṛttirdvijāgragaṇya⟨41⟩stamasānni¿pā?⟨ha⟩ntā [|] nidhiḥ kalānāmi(va) yajñanāmā babhūva vikhyātayaśaḥprakāśaḥ ⟨|| 24⟩ tasmai ⟨42⟩ devāya śarvvāya pūjāsatrādikarmaṇe [|] sodā¿g?⟨d⟩grāmantirukkāṭṭuppaḷḷināmāna⟨43⟩mīśvaraḥ [|]~ ⟨25⟩ vijñaptimatrākṛta coḷavaṁśacū¿ḷ?⟨ḍ⟩āmaṇirvviśrutavikramaśrīḥ [|] dhīraḥ kumā⟨44⟩rāṁkuśanāmadheyastyāgena rādheyasamaḥ kṛtajñaḥ |~ ⟨26⟩ Atrājñaptirabhūnmantrī na⟨Page 4r⟩⟨45⟩mpanāmā mahīpateḥ [|] Agradattānvayavyomaśarannīhāradīdhiti⟨ḥ⟩ |~ ⟨27⟩ vāgmanaḥ(ka)ā⟨46⟩yakarmmāṇi parārtthānyeva yasya saḥ [|]māheśvaro manodhīraḥ praśastiṁ kṛta⟨47⟩vānim(ām·) |~ ⟨28⟩

puḻaṟkoṭṭattu nāyaṟunāṭṭuttirukkāṭṭuppaḷḷippañcavaram ĀIrakkā⟨48⟩ṭi Itu kovicaiya nan=tivarmmaṟku yāṇṭu Āṟāvatu coḻamahārājar viṇṇappattā⟨49⟩l Iraiyūr Uṭaiyāṉ nampaṉāṇattiyākattirukkāṭṭuppaḷḷiccaṉṉa⟨50⟩kkuṟi yajñabhaṭṭa(r)eṭuppitta yajñeśvarattu mahādevarkku nāṭṭu nīṅkalā⟨51⟩y Uṭpuravāy tevardāṉamākap peṟṟataṟkup peṟṟa parihāram nāṭāṭciyum ⟨52⟩ Ūrāṭciyum puravupoṉṉum tirumukkāṇamum vaṭṭināḻiyum putāḻiyum taṭṭu⟨53⟩kāyamum Īḻampūṭciyum Iṭaippūṭciyum maṉṟupāṭum{t} tarakum taṟikkū(ṟ)ai⟨Page 4v⟩⟨54⟩yum kūlamum nallāvum nallerutum nallāṭum nāṭukāvalum Ūṭupokkum ⟨55⟩ kallāṇakkāṇamum kucakkāṇamum pāṟaikkāṇam paṭṭiṉaceriyum maṟṟumivvū⟨56⟩r¿ai?⟨e⟩ll¿ai?⟨e⟩ U⟨ḷ⟩ḷakappaṭṭatu kottoṭṭuṇṇappālatellām Ev(vak)aippaṭṭa⟨57⟩tum kok(k)oḷḷappeṟāte Ivyajñeśvarattu mahādeva¿reyi?⟨rēy⟩ koḷḷappe⟨58⟩ṟṟataṟkuppeṟṟa vyavasthai[|] cuṭṭoṭṭāl māṭamāḷikai Eṭukkappeṟuvatā⟨59⟩kavum tamaṉakamum Iruveliyum ceṅkaḻunīrum Uḷḷiyum naṭappeṟuvatākavum kāvute⟨60⟩ṅkiṭappeṟuvatākavum turavukiṇaṟiḻittappeṟuvatākavum peruñcekkiṭappeṟu⟨61⟩vatākavum Ivvūrellai U⟨ḷ⟩ḷiṭṭa teṅkum paṉaiyum Ivarkaḷ maṉamiṉṟi Īḻavareṟap⟨62⟩peṟātārākavum Ivvakaippaṭṭa vyavasthaiyiṉ¿ū?⟨ō⟩ṭu yajñeśvarattu mahādevark⟨Page 5r⟩⟨63⟩kuttevatāṉamāy sarvvaparihāramāka paraṭatti ceṉṟatu |~

sukṛtamidamajasraṁ ra¿t?⟨k⟩ṣate⟨64⟩ti ¿t?⟨k⟩ṣitīśāssakalanṛpatiketussoyamāgāmino vaḥ [|] haracaraṇasaro(jo)⟨65⟩ttaṁsacihnena mūrddhnā mukuḷitakara(pa)¿t?⟨d⟩mo vandate nandivarmmā |~ ⟨29⟩ sarvvānetānbhāvinaḥ ⟨66⟩ pā(rtthi)vendrānbhūyo bhūyaḥ prārtthayatyeṣa rāmaḥ [|] sāmānyoyandharmmasetu⟨r⟩nnṛpāṇāṁ kā⟨67⟩lekāle p(ā)lanīyo bhav¿an?⟨īd⟩bh¿i?⟨a⟩ḥ (|)~ ⟨30⟩ karakauśalakṛtayaśasā ciṟṟayaputre⟨68⟩ṇa patrasaṁghoyam· [|] likhita¿ṁ?⟨ḥ⟩ perayanāmnā sthapatikulavyomacandreṇa (|)~ ⟨31⟩

kaccip⟨69⟩peṭṭaimmaṉaiccerikkāṣṭhakārimakaṉ perayaṉ Eḻuttu |~

Apparatus

⟨3⟩ °(śu)bhaka° • The three letters (śu)bhaka, which were evidently written by mistake, are to be cancelled.

⟨15⟩ pranarttito • Read praṇātato.

⟨23⟩ °saṁmeḷana° • Read ºsemalana°.

⟨31⟩ °prapāsite • Read ºprahasite.

Translation

Hail! Prosperty! Adoration to Śiva !

(Verse 1.) May that effulgence which is the existence absolute, which is sung by the wise to be eternal, universal, infallible, accessible (only) to highest devotion, benevolent, beyond the reach of words and thoughts, and endless and which, the best of sages ever strive to attain by putting a restraint upon the currents of (their) sense-perceptions,—grant you permanent bliss !

(V. 2.) May (they) always protect you, the arms of Śrīkaṇṭha (i.e. Śiva), which are lovely by bearing on them the marks of saffron from the breasts of Śarvāṇī (i.e. Pārvatī), which delight themselves in the work of removing the ornaments (from the body) of the wives of the highly conceited hoards of the enemies of gods,27 which (hold) a number of weapons that shine with the brilliance of the fire at the end of the world and wear armlets of serpents radiant with gems in (their) crests !

(V. 3.) From the lotus-(like) navel of the lotus-navelled (Vishṇu), was (produced) Brahmā; from him (was born) Aṅgiras; from him, the preceptor of the gods (Bṛihaspati); from him, the good-natured Śaṁyu; from him Śāṁyava (i.e. Bharadvāja); from him the pitcher-born (Drōṇa); from him Drauṇi (i.e. Aśvatthāman), who is of the essence of (Śiva), the enemy of Cupid; and from him in (the same) order (came) Pallava, the lord of the whole earth, whose fame was bewildering.

(V. 4.) Thence, came into existence the race of the Pallavas, who by the law of protection (which they adopted) removed (even) the slightest distress (of their subjects); and whose bar-like arms were skilled in rendering assistance to the lord of serpents who was fatigued by the labour of (carrying on his head) the burden of the earth.

(V. 5.) After kings, such as Aśōkavarman (and others), born in that family, had attained god-hood (i.e. died), was born Kāḷabhartṛi, the head-jewel of (his) family, like (Vishṇu) the husband of Indirā (i.e. Lakshmī).

(V. 6.) From his son Chūtapallava, was produced Vīrakūrcha, of celebrated name, who simultaneously with (the hand of) the daughter of the chief of serpents grasped also the complete insignia of royalty and became famous.

(V. 7.) From him came Skandaśishya, the moon in the sky of (his) family, who seized from king Satyasēna the ghaṭikā of the twice-born (i.e. Brāhmaṇas).

(V. 8.) From him came Kumāravishṇu who captured the city of Kāñchī and was victorious in battles. Then became king, Buddhavarman, the submarine fire to the ocean-like army of the Chōḷas.

(V. 9.) And after a host of kings including Vishṇugōpa had passed away, was born Nandivarman, who with the favour of (the god) Pinākapāṇi (Śiva) caused to dance a powerful snake whose poison was in (its) eyes (Dṛishṭivisha).

(V. 10.) Then from the king named Śiṁhavarman, who wiped off the pride of (his) enemies, was born the victorious Siṁhavishṇu whose prowess was widely known on earth. He quickly seized the country of the Chōḷas, embellished by the daughter of Kavīra (i.e. the river Kāvērī), whose ornaments are the forests of paddy (fields) and where (are found) brilliant groves of areca (palms).

(V. 11.) From his son Mahēndra was born Narasiṁhavarman (I), famous (like) Upēndra (i.e. Vishṇu), who, defeating the host of (his) enemies, took (from them) the pillar of victory standing in the centre of (the town of) Vātāpi.

(V. 12.) From him came Paramēśvara (I) who crushed the conceit of (his) enemies, (and was) a sun in destroying the darkness which was the army of the Chāḷukya king.

(V. 13.) His son’s son (was) Narasiṁhavarman (II) who, equal to Mahēndra, once again organised the ghaṭikā of the twice-born (i.e. Brāhmaṇas) and built of stone a house for the moon-crested (Śiva) which was comparable with the (mountain) Kailāsa.

(V. 14.) His son who was respected by kings, was Paramēśvara (II). This chastiser of the dark age (Kali) governed the earth according to the rules laid down by Manu.

(V. 15.) After him, Nandivarman, the repository of the aggregate (good) qualities of all ancient kings, got possession of the prosperity of the family together with the earth whose garments are the four oceans.

(V. 16.) Of this heroic lord of battalions (or, of rivers), and the home of many virtues (or, of gems), as of the ocean, the chief queen was Rēvā who, like (the river) Rēvā, had (her) birth from a great king (or, from a high mountain).

(V. 17.) To her was born on this (earth) the glorious king Dantivarman, a manifestation of the lotus-eyed (Vishṇu) himself, who was the delight of the earth, whose (sole) object (of life) was the protection of the three worlds and in whom the group of pure qualities such as prowess, charity and gratitude attained eminence, as it were, after a long time (enjoying) the pleasure of each other’s company.

(V. 18.) Just as Gaurī (was the wife) of the conqueror of the (three) cities (i.e. Śiva), the suitable chief queen of that lord of the earth, the foremost of heroes, the powerful Pallava-Mahārāja, was (she) of a spotless race, who bore the name Aggaḷanimmaṭī (and was) the daughter of the celebrated king—a crest-jewel of the Kadamba family.

(V. 19.) As the (morning) twilight (gives birth to) the resplendent one (i.e. the sun); as Ambikā (i.e. Pārvatī), (to the god) Kumāra (Skanda) possessed of the marvellous (weapon) Śakti (or, of strength); as Śachī, to the victorious Jayanta; so did this (Aggaḷanimmaṭī) give birth to (the glorious) Nandivarman.

(V. 20.) This (Nandivarman) puffed up with the prowess of his arms, acquired the prosperity of the (Pallava) kingdom, not easy for others to obtain, by killing (his) enemies on the battle-field which was laughing (as it were) with pearls dropping from the frontal globes of elephants slain by (his) unsheathed sword.

(V. 21.) Never shone so (thoroughly) a garden with (the advent of) spring, nor men of high birth with (good) qualities, nor women with morality, nor a millionaire with charity, nor humility with knowledge, nor a lotus-tank with the sun, nor the expanse of the sky with the moon at the end of the rainy season, as (the people of) this earth (shone), with that king.

(V. 22.) (A subject) of that king who was learned, modest and of established virtues, who was named Yajñabhaṭṭa and surnamed Bappa-Bhaṭṭāraka, was widely famous (for his knowledge) in the Śāstra, the Vēda and the Sāṅkhya and was celebrated for (his) persistent devotion to (Śiva), built in the village named Śrīkaṭṭuppaḷḷi a temple for Śiva similar to the high Kailāsa (mountain).

(V. 23.) His (viz. Yajñabhaṭṭa’s) father was named Śivadāsa, who like the lord (of the goddess) of speech (i.e. Brahmā) was possessed of pure intelligence. His mother was [Drē]ṇamaṇi who like the (goddess) earth was great for the exhuberance of her (good) qualities.28

(V. 24.) His grandfather was named Yajña who, like the repository of the kalās (i.e. the moon), is the abode of sciences (kalā),29 has spotless character30 (as the moon, a white disc), is the best of the twice-born (dvija), the expeller of ignorance (as the moon, of darkness) and shines with wide-spread fame.

(V. 25.) To that god Śarva (Śiva), the king granted the village called Tirukkāṭṭuppaḷḷi for (maintaining) the services (connected with) worship, feeding, etc.

(V. 26.) The heroic head-jewel of the Chōḷa race named Kumārāṅkuśa, the glory of whose prowess was well-known, whose liberality was equal to that of Rādhēya (i.e. Karṇa) and whose conduct was upright, made the (necessary) request (vijñapti) for (securing) this (grant).

(V. 27.) The executor (ājñapti) here, was the king’s minister named Namba, the autumnal moon in the firmament of the Agradatta family.

(V. 28.) The Māhēśvara Manōdhīra, the act of whose words, thoughts and body were (all) for the benefit of others, composed this praśasti.

(Lines 47 to 63.) Whereas in the sixth year of Kōvijaya-Nandivarman, at the request (made by) Chōḷa-Mahārāja and the āṇatti of Iraiyūr-uḍaiyāṉ Nambaṉ, this (village) Tirukkāṭṭuppaḷḷi of pañchavaram āyirakkāḍi31, in Nāyaṟu-nāḍu, (a sub-division) of Puṛaṟ-kōṭṭam, (is) excluded from the district (nāṭṭu-nīṅgal) (and) has been assigned as an uṭpuravu dēvadāna in favour of (the god) Mahādēva of (the temple of) Yajñēśvara built by Śaṉṉakkuṟi Yajñabhaṭṭa at Tirukkāṭṭuppaḷḷi, the immunities (parihāra) secured (therefor) viz. nāḍāṭchi, ūrāṭchi, puravu-poṉ, tirumukkāṇam,32 vaṭṭi-nāṛi, pudāṛi, taṭṭukāyam, īṛam-pūṭchi, iḍai-ppūṭchi, maṉṟupāḍu, brokerage, tax on looms, kūlam, good cow, good bull, good sheep, watch-fee of the district, ūḍupōkku, taxes on marriages, potters and quarries, paṭṭina-śēri and all other (income) of any kind which the king could receive and enjoy within the boundary of this village, shall not (henceforth) be collected by the king but by this Mahādēva of (the temple of) Yajñēśvara only. The (following) written declaration (vyavasthā) is (also) granted (for the guidance of the donee): Mansions of burnt tiles (bricks ?) may be built (without special permission); artimissia (damanagam), andropogan muricatum (iruvēli), red-lilies (śeṅgaṛunīr) and uḷḷi may be grown (in gardens ?); cocoanut (trees) may be planted in groves; reservoirs and wells may be sunk; large oil-presses may be used and the toddy-drawers (īṛavars) may not climb, without the consent of this (i.e. the Mahādēva of Yajnēśvara), the cocoanut and the palmyra (trees) planted within the boundaries of (this village). With the written declaration thus defined (the village) was placed in the (hands of the) assembly (paraḍatti,) as a dēvadāna, with all immunities, to the (god) Mahādēva of the Yajñēśvara (temple).

(V. 29.) O ! Future rulers of earth ! He, Nandivarman, the banner among all kings, with (his) lotus-like hands folded, bows down to you with (his) head which is marked by the headjewel (viz.) the lotus-feet of Hara (Śiva) (and requests you) to protect this good deed always !

(V. 30.) Thus does Rāma request again and again, all the present and future lords of the earth: “This bridge of (religious) charity is common to (all) kings; you must (therefore) protect (it) at all times.”

(V. 31.) This set of (copper-)sheets was engraved by the moon in the sky of the family of carpenters, named Pēraya, the son of Śiṟṟaya, who has won (his) reputation for skill in workman-ship.

(LI. 68 and 69.) The writing of Pērayaṉ son of the carpenter (kāshṭhakārin) of Maṉaichchēri in Kachchippēḍu.

Commentary

TEXT [[of Vēlūrpāḷaiyam plates]]. From the original plates and a set of ink-impressions.

POSTSCRIPT.

On pages 180 and 181 of the Epigraphia Indica, Vol. IV., Professor Hultzsch gives an extract of a set of five copper-plates of Vijaya-Nṛipatuṅgavarman which were discovered at Bāhūr near Pondicherry by M.J. de la Fon. The originals are not available but appear to be in the possession of some person at Paris. A transcript of the inscription prepared by a Tamil Paṇḍit was supplied by the discoverer to Professor Hultzsch some year ago. It is in many places defective. Still as the information conveyed appears to be important for the study of the collateral branch of the Pallava family, known as Gaṅga-Pallavas, I append below the Sanskṛit and Tamil texts as transcribed by the Paṇḍit.

It may be added by way of supplementing Professor Hultzsch’s remarks that in V. 16 reference is made to a victory gained by a Pāṇḍya king with the help of Nṛipatuṅga. It is not stated who this Pāṇḍya was or where he fought the battle in which Nṛipatuṅga could have helped him. The Ambāsamudram inscription of Varaguṇa-Mahārāja (Ep. Ind., Vol. IX, pp. 84 to 94) states that that king advanced as far north as Araiśūr on the Pennar in Toṇḍai-maṇḍalam. Mr. Venkayya distinguishes this Varaguṇa-Mahārāja from his grandson Varaguṇavarman who fought the battle of Śrīpurambiyam with Pṛithivīpati I and his ally Aparājitavarman, the last of the Gaṅga-Pallava kings (Madras Epigraphical Report for 1906-7, Part II, paragraph 21). It is not definitely known what relation existed between this Aparājita and Nṛipatuṅgavarman of the Bāhūr plates. Anyhow Varaguṇa-Mahārāja who flourished two generations before Varaguṇavarman, about the beginning of the 9th century A.D., and who pushed his campaign in the north up to the bank of the river Pennar cannot be far distant in time from Nṛipatuṅgavarman. Consequently, the Pāṇḍya referred to in V. 16 of the Bāhūr plates may probably be Varaguṇa-Mahārāja. The enemy against whom Nṛipatuṅga fought to help his friend Varaguṇa-Mahārāja was very likely a king of the Siṁhavishṇu line who was ruling simultaneously with Nṛipatuṅga in some portion of the Toṇḍai-maṇḍalam.33

The object of the grant was the donation of the three villages Cheṭṭuppākkam Viḷāṅgāṭṭaṅkaḍuvaṉūr and Iṟaippuṇaichchēri to the vidyāsthāna (V. 23) at Bāhugrāma (i.e., Bāhūr) (V. 25), by a member of the Baśāli family and a descendant of the Kuru race (V. 18). This chief was the minister of Tuṅgavarman (i.e. Nṛipatuṅga) (V. 28) who issued the necessary order for the grant of the villages (V. 21). The college (vidyāsthāna) at Bāhūr consisted of 14 gaṇas34 and was controlled by the learned men of that village, being organised and maintained by them “as the Ganges (Mandākinī) descending from the sky with all the fury of its rushing waves is borne by the god Śiva on one of his matted locks” (Vv. 24 and 25). The composer of the praśasti was Dāśaya (V. 30). The Tamil portion of the grant refers to the 8th year of Vijaya-Nṛipatuṅgavarman and states that at the request of Baśāli-Pērarayaṉ and the āṇatti (ājñapti) of Viḍōlaiviḍugu (i.e., Viḍēlviḍugu) Kāḍupaṭṭi-Tamiṛappēraraiyaṉ,35 the grant of the three villages already mentioned was announced to the residents of Bāhūr-nāḍu, a sub-division of Aruvā-nāḍu, on its eastern side. As usual, the villages were granted after excluding previous donations and expropriating former owners, for the sole benefit of the vidyāsthāna at Bāhūr. The order was communicated to the assembly of Bāhūr-nāḍu (nāṭṭār)36 who on receiving it, obeyed it placing the order on their heads, circumambulated the village, planted stones and milk bush and drew up the necessary document (aṟaiy-ōlai).

Among the boundaries described occur the names Teṉmalippākkam, Nelvāyēppākkam, Uṟattūr, Māmbākkam, Neriñjikkuṟumbu and Śiṟimāṉpātti. The land comprised within the described boundaries of the three villages was given away to the members of the vidyāsthāna for the advancement of learning, after including these in Bāhūr and giving them the same exemptions (parihāra) and written declarations (vyavasthā) as in the case of Bāhūr. The goldsmith (suvarṇakṛit) Nṛipatuṅga, a jewel of the Uditōdita family and a faithful servant of the Pallavas, wrote the grant (V. 32). The Tamil passage at the end of the inscription states that this goldsmith’s father was Mādēvipperudaṭṭāṉ, son of Uditōdaya-Perudaṭṭāṉ, a native of Kachchippēḍu (Conjeeveram).

Of the villages mentioned, Bāhūr is the only place that can be identified. It is the head-quarters of a commune in the French territory and was the site of a battle between the French and the English troops in A.D. 1752.

TEXT [[of Bāhūr plates]]. From the transcript prepared by a Tamil Pandit.

svasti śrīḥ [||]

diśatu va⟨ḥ⟩ śriyamaṁbujalocanastridaśamaulinisṛṣṭapadāṁbujaḥ [|]

sakalalokabhayaṁkararākṣasapraśamaheturajo madhusūdanaḥ [|| 1]

śrībhartuśśayanaparasya netre yatteja⟨ḥ⟩ sthitilayasūtihetuḥ [|]37

tannābherajani samastabījamabjamātmayonistato[’*]bhavat [|| 2]

Aṁgirāstata Utpanno lokanāthāccaturmukhāt [|]

bṛhaspatistato mantrī śakrasya valabhedinaḥ [|| 3]

tataśśaṁyustato jajñe bharadvājasamāhvayaḥ [|]

tato droṇo maheṣvāsassamare śakravikramaḥ [|| 4]

tato droṇānmahābāhussarvāyudhaviśāradaḥ [|]

Aśvatthāmā kilāṁśena saṁbabhūva pinākinaḥ [|| 5]

Aśvatthāmnastato rājā pallavākhyo babhūva ha [|]

rarakṣa navakhaṇḍasthān· bhūpatīn· sakṛṣīvalān· [|| 6]

vimalakoṁkaṇikādi tadanvayādajani bṛndamaripramadānataṁ [|]

nihitaśāsanamanyanṛpeṣvapi priyatamaṁ jayaghoṣamanārataṁ [|| 7]

bhutkvā bhuvaṁ svavīryeṇa catussāgaramekhalāṁ [|]

tatassvargaṁ vimānena gateṣu vimalādiṣu [|| 8]

Asīt·

purandarasamo rājā dṛḍhabhaktirmuradviṣi [|]

¿t?⟨d⟩antivarmā mahābāhuḥ kṣmāpālamakuṭīnataḥ [|| 9]

dharmmeṇa pālanā¿t·?⟨d⟩bhūmiṁ kalāvapi yuge nṛpaḥ [|]

varṣaṇādapi dānasya parjanya Iva nirbabhau [|| 10]

Ātmano bandiyuktān· tān· yamālayadidṛkṣayā [|]

pā¿dh?⟨th⟩eyamiva kṛtvārīn· khaṇḍāni vi(sa)sarja yaḥ [|| 11]

nandivarmā mahābāhussañjāto ¿t?⟨d⟩antivarmmaṇaḥ [|]

samare vijitā bhūmirasahāyena yena saḥ [|| 12]

Āsī¿t·?⟨d⟩ ¿ś?⟨ch⟩a⟨ṁ⟩khāhvayā devī tanvaṁgī nandivarmaṇaḥ [|]

rāṣṭrakūṭa(ku)le jātā lakṣmīriva muradviṣaḥ [|| 13]

kṣamāvatī dharitrīva mā(tṛ)vajjagataḥ priyā [|]

babhau śaṁkhāhvayā devī rājña⟨ḥ⟩ śrīriva rūpiṇī [|| 14]

tasyāṁ babhūva matikāntikalādimatyāṁ mānyaḥ kulena guṇavān· bhuvanatrayeśaḥ [|]

Utpadyamānatapanādhipatulyatejā jiṣṇuḥ kalāvān· samare nṛpatuṁgadevaḥ [|| 15]38

yatprasādājjitā senā pāṇḍyena samare purā [|]

pārericit39sarājyaśrīrdadāha ripusaṁhatiṁ [|| 16]

nṛpatuṁga Iti khyāto bālopi bhuvaneśvaraḥ [|]

khyāto na kevalaṁ bhūmāvamuṣminnapi rāmavat· [|| 17]

tasyopakārasaṁyukto rājñaḥ kurukulo¿t?⟨d⟩bhavaḥ [|]

baśālivaṁśamārttāṇḍaḥ prajānāṁ śaraṇe rataḥ [|| 18]

śaśivattilako loke gāṁbhīryādessamudravat· [|]

sūryavadrakṣaṇāllokān· lokānāṁ nilayo nṛpaḥ [|| 19]

tasmāttasyocitannāmni tulyatā bhāti devavat· [|]

Āthava sutarānnāma pratyakṣatvādviśāṁpateḥ [|| 20]

grātra yaṁ svarāṣṭre saḥ kuruvaṁśavivarddhanaḥ [|]

vijñāpya nṛpatuṁgeśāllabdhamājñaptipūrvaka¿ḥ?⟨ṁ⟩ [|| 21]

ceṭuppākkaṁ phalādhāraṁ grāmamekamathāparaṁ [|]

grāmaṁ40 vidyādviḷāṁgādirephāntapadanāmakaṁ [|| 22]

tasmādi ṟaippuṇaiccērīnt¿ri?⟨ṛ⟩tīyyaṁ sarvasaMpadaM [|]

Evaṁ grāmatrayaṁ labdhvā vidyāsthānāya dattavān· [|| 23]

mandākinīṁ samāyāntīmūrmivaṁśasamākulāṁ [|]

saṁbabhāra yathā devo dhūrjaṭirjaṭayaikayā [|| 24]

vidyānadī tathāgāthā caturdaśagaṇākulā [|]

bāhugrāmajuṣāṁ sthānaṁ vyāpya yasmādvyavasthitā [|| 25]

tatsthānamevaṁ viduṣāṁ vidyāsthānaṁ pracakṣate [|]

tebhyo datvā sa bhūpālo grāmānājñaptipūrvakān· [|| 26]

hastisañcārisīmāntānātmānaṁ bahumanyate [|]

yuktān· sarvaparīhārairākaratvena rakṣitān· [|| 27]

Ājñābhīrurddharmmaśīlastrailokyeśvarapūjitaḥ [|]

mantrī bṛhaspatiprakhyaḥ rājña⟨ḥ⟩ śrītuṁgavarmmaṇaḥ [|| 28]

Āgāminaḥ prajāpālān yācate kurunandanaḥ [|]

dharmmasya tasya sāmānyāt· pālanīya Iti svayaṁ [|| 29]

dāsa⟨ḥ⟩ sthānasya vidyāyāḥ bāhugrāmajuṣāmayaṁ [|]

kṛtavān· śāstratatvajñaḥ praśastindāśayassvataḥ [|| 30]

kovicaiya nirupatoṅkavarumaṟku yāṇṭu Eṭṭāvatu bacālipperarayaṉ viṇṇappattāl viṭōlaiviṭuku kāṭupaṭṭittamiḻapperarayaṉ Āṇattiyāka Aruvānāṭṭukkiḻvaḻi vākūrnāṭṭu nāṭṭār kāṇka ⟨||⟩ tannāṭṭu ceṭṭuppākkamum viḷāṅkāṭṭaṅkaṭuvaṉūrum Iṟaippuṇaicceriyumāka immūṉṟūrum paḻayavaṟamum piramateyamum nīkki muṉpeṟṟārai māṟṟi yāṇṭu Eṭṭāvatu pākūr vittiyāstāṉattārkku vittiyāṉupokamākappaṇittom ⟨||⟩ tāṅkaḷum paṭākai naṭantu kalluṅkaḷḷiyum nāṭṭi Aṟaiyolai ceytu viṭutakaveṉṟu nāṭṭārkkuttirumukam viṭa nāṭṭār tirumukaṅkaṇṭu toḻutu talaikku vaittu paṭākai naṭantu kalluṅkaḷḷiyum nāṭṭi Aṟaiyōlai ceytu nāṭṭārviṭutta Aṟaiyōlaippaṭi nilattukkellai ⟨||⟩ viḷāṅkāṭṭaṅkaṭuvaṉūrkkum ceṭṭuppākkattukkumāka Iraṇṭūrukkum kīḻpāṟkellai kāṭṭu Ellai Oṉṟum teṉmalipākkattu yellaiyiṉ meṟkum teṉpāṟkellai teṉmalipākkattellai Oṉṟum nelvāyēppākkattellai Oṉṟum uṟattūrellaikku vaṭakkum melpāṟkellai māmpākkattellai Oṉṟum Ivviḷāṅkāṭṭaṅkaṭuvaṉūr(p)pāṟ piramateyamāyiṉa Aṟupatu ceṟuvukkukkiḻakkum vaṭapāṟkellai vākūrellaiyiṉṟeṟkum ⟨||⟩ Iṟaippuṇaiccerikkellai kiḻpāṟkellai nattamuḷḷiṭṭa kāṭṭukku meṟkum teṉpāṟkellai neriñcikkuṟumpiṉ Ellaiyiṉ vaṭakkum melpāṟkellai vākūrellaiyiṉ kiḻakkum vaṭapāṟkellai ciṟimāṉpātti Ellaiyiṉ ṟeṟkumāka Ivvicaitta perunāṉkellaikaḷilumakappaṭṭa nilaṉ nirnilaṉum puñceyum Ūrum Ūrirukkaiyum maṉaiyum maṉaippaṭappum māṭuṅkaṉṟumēypāḻum kuḷamum kōṭṭakaramum kiṭaṅkum kēṇiyum kāṭuṅkaḷarum Ōṭaiyum Uṭaippum Uḷḷiṭṭu nīrpūci neṭumparamapeṟintu Uṭumpōṭi Āmaitavaḻntatellām Uṇṇilaṉoḻiviṉṟi vākūr vittiyāstāṉattārkku vittiyāṉupokamāy pākūrōṭē Ēṟṟi vākūrpeṟṟa parikāramum vyavastaiyum peṟṟu carvaparikāramāy pirammateyamāy piracitti41 ceṉṟatu ⟨||⟩

puṇyaṁ samaṁ kṛtavatāṁ parirakṣatāñcet· tadrakṣateti nṛpatirnnṛpatuṁgavarmmā [|]

Āgāminaḥ kṣitipatīn· praṇamatyajasraṁ mūrdhnā mukundacaraṇāṁbujaśekhareṇa [|| 31]

Uditoditakulatilakaḥ suvarṇakṛtsarvaśāstraniṣṇātaḥ [|]

Alikhannṛpatuṁgākhyaḥ pallavakulamūlabhṛtyotra [|| 32]

kaccippeṭṭukkiḻppaicārattu Utitotayapperutaṭṭāṉ makaṉ mātevipperutaṭṭāṉ makaṉ nirupatoṅkaṉ Eḻuttu ⟨||⟩

Bibliography

Digital edition of SII 2.98 by Krishna Sastri 1916 converted to DHARMA conventions by Emmanuel Francis.

See also revised edition by Emmanuel Francis (INSPallava00121).

Primary

[SII] Krishna Sastri, H. 1916. South-Indian inscriptions. Volume II, Part V: Pallava copper-plate grants from Velurpalayam and Tandantottam. Including title page, preface, table of contents, list of plates, addenda and corrigenda, introduction and index of Volume II. South Indian Inscriptions 2.5. Madras: Government Press. Pages 501–517, item 98.

Notes

  1. 1. The account of the Pallava connection with a Nāga princess, here attributed to Vīrakūrcha, is already mentioned of the progenitor Aśvatthāman himself, in the Rāyakōṭa plates of Skandaśishya-Vikramavarman (Ep. Ind., Vol. V, p. 52). A similar story of the early Chōḷa king Kiḷḷi having taken to wife a Nāga princess, is related in the Perumbāṇāṟṟuppaḍai. The mythical account given in the Mahābhārata, of the epic hero Arjuna marrying a Nāga queen, combined with what is stated of the Nāga connections in inscriptions and literature, confirms the accepted belief, that the Nāgas were the original indigenous rulers of Southern India and that they were subdued in course of time by foreign invaders from the North, eventually losing their individuality by intermarriages with them.
  2. 2. Ep. Ind., Vol. VIII, p. 26. According to the Kāñchī inscription of Vikramāditya II, Conjeeveram continued to be the seat of a ghaṭikā in the beginning of the 8th century A.D. (ibid., Vol. III, p. 360, note 4). The hill at Sholinghur in the North Arcot district is known as Ghaṭikāchala, perhaps on account of its having also been the seat of a ghaṭikā.
  3. 3. Ibid. Vol., III, p. 277 f.
  4. 4. Ibid., Vol. VIII, p. 233 f.
  5. 5. Archaeological Survey Report for 1906-7, pp. 217—43.
  6. 6. Ind. Ant., Vol. XXXVII, p. 284, foot-note 48.
  7. 7. Madras Epigraphical Report for 1909, Part II, paragraph 17.
  8. 8. The names Nandivarman, Skandavarman III, and Siṁhavarman I are taken from a grant published by Professor Kielhorn (Ep. Ind., Vol. III, pp. 142 ff.) and suspected by him to be a spurious document.
  9. 9. A Pallava copper-plate grant from the Guntur district recently examined, belongs to the time of a certain Vishṇugōpavarman II whose father was Siṁhavarman, a son of Vishṇugōpavarman I and grandson of Kandavarman. I have assigned this to the period subsequent to Kumāravishṇu II of the Chendalūr plates (Madras Epigraphical Report for 1914, p. 82).
  10. 10. The influence of the Nāgas who, as already suggested, must have been the original rulers of Southern India apparently continued down to the time of Nandivarman of about the 6th century A.D. In later times the Sindas of Yelburga (Dr. Fleet’s Dynasties of the Kanarese districts, p. 572) and the Chhindas of Bastar traced their origin to the serpents (nāga).
  11. 11. It is not unlikely that this pillar of victory had been set up there by one of the ancestors of Narasiṁhavarman himself. The fragmentary rock inscription at Bādāmi published by Dr. Fleet (Ind. Ant., Vol. IX, p. 99f.) refers to Vātāpi, [Narasiṁ]havishṇu and to a pillar of victory (jayastambha). Dr. Fleet is of opinion that Bādāmi (Vātāpi) “was originally the Western India stronghold of the Pallavas and that it was from them that the Chalukyas wrested it. It is probable that Vātāpi was temporarily recovered by the Pallavas from the Western Chalukyas after the reign of Pulakēśin II”.
  12. 12. Recorded in an inscription round the central shrine of the temple; above, Vol. I, No. 24.
  13. 13. The actual word putra-sūnu though used, very peculiarly, in place of the more common pautra, leaves no doubt that the composer could not have intended any other term of relationship.
  14. 14. See Postscript.
  15. 15. Vijaya and vikrama as prefixes and suffixes of Pallava names occur in much earlier records e.g. in names like Vijaya-Buddhavarman, Vijaya-Īśvaravarman and Mahēndravikramavarman; but here they do not signify any distinct branch of kings.
  16. 16. Ep. Ind., Vol. VIII, p. 293 and foot-note 3.
  17. 17. See the remarks of Professor Hultzsch on the alphabet of the Rāyakōṭa plates in Ep. Ind., Vol. V, p. 49.
  18. 18. See below, p. 513, footnote 1.
  19. 19. Ep. Ind., Vol. XI, p. 157.
  20. 20. This was the hero of the Tamil work Nandikkalambagam; Ind. Ant., Vol. XXXVII, p. 171.
  21. 21. See below, p. 518.
  22. 22. This surname occurs in early Sanskṛit charters of the Pallavas and has been translated “lordfather”. Perhaps the term was one of high respect applied to spiritual preceptors, and it is not unlikely that Yajñabhaṭṭa stood in this relation to king Nandivarman III. The spiritual preceptor of Nandivarman Pallavamalla is also called Bappa-Bhaṭṭāraka in the Kāśākuḍi plates (text, 1. 78).
  23. 23. The Chōḷas at this period must have been occupying a subordinate position. Neither literature nor inscriptions afford any clue to the identification of this Chōḷa-Mahārāja Kumārāṅkuśa, who was evidently a feudatory of king Nandivarman III. The name Kumārāṅkuśa-Gāvuṇḍa occurs among the signatories in a record of Parāntaka I (No. 457 of the Madras Epigraphical collection for 1911).
  24. 24. Strangely enough this series of the latest Pallava grants have all been registered as praśasti; see above, p. 345.
  25. 25. Ep. Ind, Vol. IV., p. 8f.
  26. 26. The anusvāra stands at the beginning of the next line.
  27. 27. This is an elegant expression for saying that the enemies of gods (i.e., the demons) were destroyed by Śiva. It is usual with Hindu women to remove their ornaments and to give up their toilet after the death of their husbands.
  28. 28. A pun on the words guṇa and garīyasī is intended. The earth has all the guṇas such as form, taste, etc. and is also heavy.
  29. 29. For a correct understanding of the sense, the phrase nidhiḥ kalānām has to be repeated twice.
  30. 30. Viśuddha-vṛittaḥ would have been more apt.
  31. 31. I.e. whose yield under the head pañchavaram, was one thousand kāḍi of paddy. Pañchavaram may be a mistake for pañchavāram ‘the five vārams or income in grain’; cp. the terms mēl-vāram, kuḍi-vāram, etc., which are still in use. See also Ep. Ind., Vol. V., p. 138, foot-note 7.
  32. 32. This term corresponds to tirumugakkāṇam of the Taṇḍantōṭṭam plates; see below, page 531, note 2. The following other terms, viz., vaṭṭi-nāṛi, pudāṛi, taṭṭukāyam, īṛam-pūṭchi and iḍai-ppūṭchi also occur in the Taṇḍantōṭṭam plates.
  33. 33. Dantivarma-Mahārāja of the Bhāradvāja-gōtra mentioned in the Triplicane inscription is supposed to have been the first of a line of kings who “spoke of themselves as belonging to the family of Pallava-tilaka in order to distinguish themselves from the Gaṅga-Pallavas” (Ep. Ind., Vol. VIII., pp. 290-6). Nandippōttaraiyaṉ was another king of the same family whose queen Māṟambāvai figures as the donor in two inscriptions at Tiruchcheṉṉampūṇḍi, Tanjore district, which are dated in the 18th and 22nd years of the reign of Nṛipatuṅga (Nos. 303 and 300 of the Madras Epigraphical collection for 1901). This subordinate position of Māṟambāvai suggests evidently either the defeat or the death of her husband at the hands of Nṛipatuṅga. Consequently, Nandippōttaraiyaṉ of the Pallava-tilaka family must have been the enemy against whom Varaguṇa-Mahārāja and Nṛipatuṅga jointly fought.
  34. 34. The Paṇḍit who supplied the transcript of the grant remarks that the 14 guṇas were the fourteen divisions of learning and consisted of—the Vēdas (4), the aṅgas (6), Mīmāṁsā (1), Nyāya (1), Purāṇa (1) and the Dharmaśāstra (1).
  35. 35. See below Vol. III, p. 92.
  36. 36. See Madras Epigraphical Report for 1913, Part II, paragraph 23.
  37. 37. The metre is faulty. The three first feet are Praharshiṇī with a long and a short missing. The last foot is Anushṭubh.
  38. 38. The last foot of this Vasantatilaka verse is faulty.
  39. 39. In the word pārericit must be found the reference to the place where the enemy was defeated by Nṛipatuṅga. Literally translated, it means ‘on the other bank of Arichit.’ I am not able to identify (the river ?) Arichit.
  40. 40. In the Tamil portion this village is called Viḷāṅgāṭṭaṅkaḍuvaṉūr. I cannot explain how this full name could be got out of the Sanskṛit verse.
  41. 41. This word was perhaps paraṭatti in the original as in the Vēlūrpāḷaiyam plates, text, l. 63.