Broken boulder of Chiên Đàn

Editors: Salomé Pichon, Arlo Griffiths.

Identifier: DHARMA_INSCIC00064.

Language: Old Cham.

Repository: Campa (tfc-campa-epigraphy).

Version: (a2d4f44), last modified (8d5ff0e).

Edition

⟨1⟩ ⟨Fragment A⟩ <symbol> hetu śanāpa di pūrvvakāla mam̃n· ma(d)[ā urām̃] ⟨Fragment B⟩ (kā) ñu putau di nagara campa ñu paliṅyak· [naga](ra) urā(m̃) ṅan· yām̃ svon(·) hajai tral[au]ṅ[·] lumv(auv)[·] kru[vau ṅan·] sama(s)ta[vījā]ṅkura ru⟨2⟩⟨Fragment A⟩(ma)ṅ· pramāṇa (na)gara campa avista kā dhvasta nirmū⟨Fragment B⟩[la] nau <symbol> mam̃n· yām̃ po ku vijaya śrī harivarmmadeva yam̃ṅ[·] devatājanma sī purāṇa āgama daḥ viṣṇumūrtti matam̃l· paliṅyak· (śa)truma⟨3⟩⟨Fragment A⟩ṇḍala di nagara campa <symbol> mam̃n· devatāmūrtti nan· kā pa(l)⟨Fragment A⟩[i]ṅyak· kalikalaṅka avista <symbol> pakā bharuv· ra putau di nagara campa ra pajem̃ rumaḥ rājadhānī ṅan· hajai tralauṅ· svon· ṅan· sama⟨4⟩⟨Fragment A⟩stavījāṅkura kā paripūrṇṇa samū dhiluv· tra <symbol> (pa)[kā yām̃] ⟨Fragment B⟩ po ku īśāna ṅan· ya doṁ yām̃ ṅan· puṇya vukan· dadam̃n· sthāna kā vr̥ddhi mulaṅ· tra <symbol> punaḥ ra mak· nagara kmīra lac· paści⟨5⟩⟨Fragment A⟩ [17+] ⟨Fragment B⟩ (sāra) sā vandaḥ niy· avista tra <symbol> ra mak· sumrāṅ· dakṣiṇa rumaṅ· krauṅ· patam̃l· campeśvara avista nau tra <symbol> ra tmuv· lac· ⟨6⟩ ⟨Fragment C⟩ [s]u(m)rāṅ(·) uttaradiśa rumaṅ· kr(auṅ·) dā [5+] ⟨Fragment B⟩ (na)n· kā jem̃ maṇḍalīka nagara campa mam̃n· yā(m̃) po ku vijaya śrī harivarmmadeva ra vuḥ yām̃ di madhurāpura di pak· (duna)[n·] ⟨7⟩ ⟨Fragment C⟩ tra <symbol> ra pratiṣṭhā śivaliṅga di harināpura ka(ra)[ṇā] (k)[īr]tt[i] <symbol> ⟨Fragment B⟩ (pa)kā ra vuḥ kmīra yvan· si mak· nan· di yām̃ hajai tralauṅ· svon· dadam̃n· sthāna tra ra vuḥ urām̃ dinan· pajem̃ karadā yam̃ di nagara campa [ca. 3+] ⟨8⟩ ⟨Fragment C⟩ [de]śāntara ṅan· vanyāga kā ñu tam̃l· di nagara campa (sa)dāk[āla] ⟨Fragment B⟩ mam̃n· nagara campa kā paripūrṇṇa luvaiḥ nariy· dhīluv· <symbol> ma(m̃)n· yām̃ po ku vijaya śrī harivarmmadeva kā (sa)n[t]o[ṣa] [ca. 4+] ⟨9⟩ ⟨Fragment C⟩ [ca. 3+] paribhoga ṅan· puṇyadāna nityapr̥tiḥ sadā⟨Fragment B⟩(kā)la mam̃n· <symbol> <quatrefoil> <symbol>

Apparatus

⟨1⟩ <symbol> hetu śanāpa ⬦ ⊙ {1}pākuśadā {1} AVS. — ⟨1⟩ ma(d)[ā urām̃] (kā) ⬦ ma[dā] ñū AVS • There are certainly more akṣaras lost between the two fragments than Schweyer supposes. The concrete sequence of words we conjecture here, mam̃n madā urāṅ kā ñu putau, is found also in C. 30A1, l. 4. — ⟨1⟩ putau ⬦ puitau AVS. — ⟨1⟩ campa ñu ⬦ campā ñū AVS. — ⟨1⟩ [naga](ra) urā(m̃) ⬦ {3} rā AVS.

⟨1-2⟩ tral[au]ṅ[·] lumv(auv)[·] kru[vau ṅan·] sama(s)ta[vījā]ṅkura ru(ma)ṅ· ⬦ tralaṅ lumve{1} tra {7} kā {1} di AVS.

⟨2⟩ campa ⬦ campā AVS. — ⟨2⟩ kā dhvasta ⬦ (kāvvasta) AVS. — ⟨2⟩ nau <symbol> mam̃n· ⬦ nau măn AVS. — ⟨2⟩ po ⬦ pŏ AVS • The cases of po in this inscription are all plain, without any added diacritic in the original, so there is no need for any diacritic in the transliteration either. — ⟨2⟩ yam̃ṅ[·] ⬦ yā(ṅ) n AVS. — ⟨2⟩ campa <symbol> ⬦ campā | AVS.

⟨3⟩ pakā ⬦ (ṅ)a kā AVS. — ⟨3⟩ campa ⬦ campā AVS. — ⟨3⟩ svon· ṅan· ⬦ svon nan AVS.

⟨3-4⟩ samastavījāṅkura ⬦ sta (vajustta) AVS.

⟨4⟩ (pa)[kā yām̃] ⬦ (sa) {2} (yāṅ) AVS. — ⟨4⟩ ya ⬦ yă AVS • The estampage is a bit deceptive here, for the stone clearly shows that the akṣara does not bear the anusvāra-candra sign. — ⟨4⟩ puṇya ⬦ pūṇya AVS • The estampage is a bit deceptive here, for the stone clearly shows that the vowel is short. — ⟨4⟩ vukan· ⬦ (sukan) AVS. — ⟨4⟩ mulaṅ· ⬦ mulan AVS. — ⟨4⟩ punaḥ ra mak· ⬦ punaḥ mak AVS. — ⟨4⟩ kmīra ⬦ kmira AVS. — ⟨4⟩ lac· paści- ⬦ {2} paśyi AVS.

⟨5⟩ (sāra) sāvandaḥ ⬦ saranda AVS. — ⟨5⟩ sumrāṅ· dakṣiṇa rumaṅ· krauṅ· ⬦ (sumrāṅ dukyaṇarumaj) rā krauṅ AVS • Schweyer has misread the leftward extension of the r in krauṅ· as rā. — ⟨5⟩ tmuv· lac· ⬦ tmuv la {2} AVS.

⟨6⟩ [s]u(m)rāṅ(·) uttaradiśa rumaṅ· ⬦ {2} krāṅ uttarad śarumaṅ AVS. — ⟨6⟩ kr(auṅ·) dā [5+](na)n· kā ⬦ krauṅ ṅa{n} {7}n kā AVS. — ⟨6⟩ maṇḍalīka ⬦ maṇdalika AVS. — ⟨6⟩ campa ⬦ campā AVS. — ⟨6⟩ di pak· (duna)[n·] ⬦ di para(.)ra AVS.

⟨7⟩ ka(ra)[ṇā](k)[īr]tt[i] ⬦ tara{4}tta AVS • The expression karaṇā kīrtti is found in several other inscriptions (C. 30A1, l. 23; C. 75, l. 3; C. 120, face B, l. 6) and can clearly be reconstituted from the parts of akṣaras that remain here. — ⟨7⟩ (pa)kā ⬦ sa kā AVS. — ⟨7⟩ kmīra ⬦ kmira AVS. — ⟨7⟩ yvan· ⬦ yvăn AVS. — ⟨7⟩ si ⬦ sei AVS • There is no anusvāra-candra above the akṣara in question to justify Schweyer’s reading. — ⟨7⟩ tralauṅ· ⬦ tralaṅ AVS. — ⟨7⟩ tra ra vuḥ ⬦ tra | vuḥ AVS. — ⟨7⟩ dinan· ⬦ nan AVS. — ⟨7⟩ karadā yam̃ ⬦ karadāya AVS. — ⟨7⟩ campa [ca. 4+] ⬦ campā AVS.

⟨8⟩ [de]śāntara ṅan· vanyāga kā ñu ⬦ {1} śāntaḥ ṅan· vadyāg(.)ata kāñu AVS. — ⟨8⟩ campa ⬦ campā AVS. — ⟨8⟩ (sa)dāk[āla] ⬦ nan (dāka) {2} AVS. — ⟨8⟩ campa ⬦ campā AVS. — ⟨8⟩ luvaiḥ nariy· dhīluv· <symbol> mam̃n· ⬦ luvai{1} niy (maluva) măn AVS.

⟨8-9⟩ kā (sa)n[t]o[ṣa][ca. 4+][ca. 3+] paribhoga ⬦ kā ra {5+3} pari(.)ośa Schweyer AVS • Cf. C. 94, face B, ll. 1–2: yāṅ po ku vijaya śrī harivarmmadeva kā santoṣa nirākula dauk aṅguy rājaparibhoga. The passage can very likely be restored on the basis of the elements in this parallel passage, but the present inscription seems to have had a slightly shorter formula, since the lacunae cannot have offered space for all of the akṣaras seen between santoṣa and paribhoga in C. 94.

⟨9⟩ nityapr̥tiḥ ⬦ nītya sr̥tiḥ AVS • Understand nityaprītiḥ. — ⟨9⟩ mam̃n· <symbol><quatrefoil><symbol> • Schweyer notes an illegible syllable before the quatrefoil. But we think it is more likely that the text ends with mam̃n·, after which follows a complex of (non-akṣara) terminal symbols. This appears to the case also at the end of C. 210, face D, although the reading there is not clear either. On C. 119, face B, the text ends with sadākāla mam̃n· niś(c)aya ||, but we certainly cannot have a full word like niścaya after mam̃n· here.

Translation by Griffiths et al. 2012

(1–2) Because of a curse in the past, for that reason there was a man who became king in the Campā country, who robbed the country, the people and the gods of the citadel of Tralauṅ Svon, the cows, the buffaloes. And all seeds and sprouts, from all the provinces of the Campā country, then went to radical annihilation.

(2–3) After that Y.P.K. the victorious Śrī Harivarmadeva, who is of divine birth — namely, [according to] the Purāṇas and Āgamas, an incarnation of Viṣṇu —, succeeded in expelling the coalition of enemies in the Campā country. Thereupon that divine incarnation went on to destroy all faults of the Kali (age).

(3–4) Only then (pakā bharuv) he was king in the land of Campā. He built an abode as capital and [he rebuilt?] the citadel of Tralauṅ Svon. And then all seeds and sprouts also (tra) became prosperous as before.

(4) Then my lord the god Īśāna and all the other gods and religious foundations (puṇya), of various places, also prospered again (?, mulaṅ).

(4–7) In turn he took the lac land of the Khmers country in the west ... all of this one part too. He took all of Southern direction from the river to Campeśvara too. He met (?) lac the northern direction, from the river ... then became vassals of the land of Campā. After that my lord his victorious majesty Śrī Harivarmadeva also offered to the gods of Madhurāpura in those four [directions]. He installed a liṅga of Śiva at Harināpura to make fame.

(7–8) Then he offered those Khmers and Viets whom he had captured to the gods of the citadel of Tralauṅ Svon [and those] of various [other] shrines too. He ordered these men to make subject to the taxes of the Campā country ... foreigners and the traders who arrive in the Campā country, always.

(8–9) So the Campā country became even more prosperous than before. Then my lord his victorious majesty Śrī Harivarmadeva became satisfied ... (royal) property and meritorious gifts, permanent pleasure, always!

Commentary

This theme of a curse (śanāpa) is expressed also in other inscriptions. Cf. e.g. C. 89, face B, l. 16: ... hetu śanāpana ... Other expressions that seem noteworthy in the present inscription are also shared with that text. See e.g. C. 89, face B, l. 20: ra vuḥ urāṅ ṅan lumvau kruvāv ṅan samasta upakaraṇa panūjā devatā dinan. We also find noteworthy parallels in C. 94. See face A, l. 19: rā pajeṅ .... śvan tralauṅ ṅan samastavījāṅkura... The word śatrumaṇḍala, found here in lines 2–3, is also seen in C. 94, face A, ll. 1 and 12 and C. 89, face B, l. 8; it may further be compared with mandala śatruḥ in C. 19, l. 9.

The sequence svon hajai tralauṅ in our inscription seems to be an error for hajai tralauṅ svon: cf. lines 3 and 7, as well as C. 95, face B, ll. 17–18. On the word purāṇa in connection with what seems to have been a different king Harivarman than the one of the present inscription, cf. C. 100 B, l. 12: etena purāṇārthena lakṣaṇenaitad gamyate śrī jaya harivarmmadevo yaṁ sa uroja eveti || and stanza XVII: śivānandanaśabdasya dr̥ṣṭenārthādriṇā kṣitau urojo lokavācyo yaḥ purāṇārthena lakṣaṇī ||.

Bibliography

Primary

[AVS] Schweyer, Anne-Valérie. 2009. “Les royaumes du pays cam dans la seconde moitié du XIe siècle.” Péninsule 59, pp. 17–48. Pages 41–45.

[CIC] Griffiths, Arlo, Amandine Lepoutre, William Aelred Southworth and Thành Phần. 2012. Văn khắc Chămpa tại Bảo tàng Điêu khắc Chăm - Đà Nẵng / The inscriptions of Campā at the museum of Cham sculpture in Đà Nẵng. Ho Chi Minh City; Hanoi: VNUHCM Publishing House and Center for Vietnamese and Southeast Asian Studies University of Social Sciences and Humanities Vietnam National University Hồ Chí Minh City; École française d’Extrême-Orient. [URL]. Pages 219–224.

Secondary

Majumdar, Ramesh Chandra. 1927. Ancient Indian colonies in the Far East, Vol. I: Champa. Punjab Oriental (Sanskrit) Series 16. Lahore: The Punjab Sanskrit Book Depot. [URL]. Book III, page 195, item 77.

Golzio, Karl-Heinz. 2004. Inscriptions of Campā: Based on the editions and translations of Abel Bergaigne, Étienne Aymonier, Louis Finot, Édouard Huber and other French scholars and of the work of R. C. Majumdar; newly presented, with minor corrections of texts and translations, together with calculations of given dates. Aachen: Shaker Verlag. Pages 163–164.