Vemalūrpāḍu plates of Amma II

Editor: Dániel Balogh.

Identifier: DHARMA_INSVengiCalukya00047.

Hand description:

Halantas. Final T is a nearly full-sized ta with a curly tail instead of a headmark. Final N is likewise a nearly full na with an elongated stem and a tail. Final M is a fairly large circle at body level, with a curly tail. Final K (line 32) looks like a full-sized ka (well, in fact more like ra), complete with headmark, plus the curly tail.

The opening symbol is indiscernible in the estampages; Hultzsch describes it as a flower. It is presumably a floret with four petals and four spikes, as in most grants of Amma II. Original punctuation marks are straight verticals without any decoration.

Other palaeographic observations. Anusvāra is very slightly above the headline, immediately after the character to which it belongs; occasionally it is placed above the next character. The vowel marker for ā is extended downward, usually well below the baseline. The regular form of dependent ā also occurs occasionally, e.g. l16 tasyāgrajo. Dependent o is normally in the cursive form, not always clearly distinguishable from au. Occasionally, apparently for ornamentation, the tail of cursive o extends down below the baseline (l34), but its humps are symmetrical; the humps of au with a similarly extended tail are asymmetrical (l36). Dependent au occurs also in a non-cursive form, with three strokes on the top, right, and left bottom (l15, yau). Dependent e occurs, beside the regular form, as a vertical pr̥ṣṭhamātrā, essentially the mirror image of ā; the same stroke also appears in a form of dependent o (l48 maheśvaro). Upadhmānīya looks like ṟ (l8).

Languages: Sanskrit, Telugu.

Repository: Eastern Cālukya (tfb-vengicalukya-epigraphy).

Version: (d6bcc35), last modified (3468c87).

Edition

Seal

⟨1⟩ śrī-tribhuvan(āṁ)k(u)śa

Plates

⟨Page 1r⟩

⟨Page 1v⟩ ⟨1⟩ <floretIndistinct> svasti⟨.⟩ śrīmatāṁ sakala-bhuvana-saṁstūyamāna-mā¿ṇ?⟨n⟩avya-sago(tr)¿a?⟨ā⟩(ṇāṁ hārī)⟨2⟩ti-put(r)¿a?⟨ā⟩ṇā(ṁ) kauśikī-vara-prasāda-labdha-rājyānāṁ mā¡tr̥ī!⟨tr̥⟩-gaṇa-paripālitān¿a?⟨ā⟩⟨ṁ⟩ ⟨3⟩ svāmi-mahāsena-pādānud¿d?⟨dh⟩yātānāṁ ¿v?⟨bh⟩agavan-nārāyaṇa-prasāda-samāsā¿d?⟨dh⟩ita⟨4⟩-vara-varāha-lāñ¿c?⟨ch⟩anekṣaṇa-kṣaṇa-vaśīkr̥tārāti-maṇḍalānā⟨ṁ⟩ Aśva(m)e⟨5⟩dh¿a?⟨ā⟩vabhr̥tha-snāna-pavitrīk¡ri!⟨r̥⟩ta-vapuṣāṁ| cālukyānāṁ kulam alaṁ¿kraṣo?⟨kariṣṇoḥ⟩| satyā⟨6⟩śraya-vallabhendrasy¿ā?⟨a⟩ḥ| ¿bh?⟨v⟩rātā kubja-viṣṇuvarddhan¿ā?⟨o⟩ ⟨’⟩ṣṭādaśa varṣ¿a?⟨ā⟩ṇi|| ve(ṁ)gī-ma⟨7⟩ṇḍala⟨m a⟩p¿a?⟨ā⟩layaT| tad-¿a?⟨ā⟩⟨tma⟩jo jayasiṁhas trayastriṁśata¿T?⟨M⟩| tad-anujendrarāja-(nandano) ⟨Page 2r⟩ ⟨8⟩ (vi)ṣṇuva(r)ddhano nava| (tat-sūnur) mm(aṁ)gi-(yu)varā(ja)ḫ paṁcavi(ṁ)śati¡|n!⟨M| ⟩ta(t-pu)tr¿ā?⟨o⟩ jayasiṁhas trayo⟨9⟩daśa| tad-avaraja⟨ḥ⟩ kokkili¡ṣ! ṣaṇ m¿a?⟨ā⟩sāN| tasya jyeṣṭho bhrātā viṣṇuvarddhanas tam ucc(āṭ)ya saptatriṁśata(M) ⟨10⟩ varṣ¡ṣ!¿a?⟨ā⟩ṇi⟨.⟩ ⟨⟨ta⟩⟩t-(pu)tro vijayāditya-bhaṭṭ¿a?⟨ā⟩rako ⟨’⟩ṣṭādaśa| tat-suto viṣṇuvarddhana¡ṣ! ṣa¿t?⟨ṭ⟩triṁśataM|

I. Anuṣṭubh

narendra⟨11⟩-mr̥garājākhyo

a

mr̥garāja-p(a)rākramaḥ|

b

vijayādi⟨⟨tya⟩⟩-bh(ū)p¿a?⟨ā⟩laḥ

c

⟨⟨sa⟩⟩-catvāriṁśa⟦(t samā)⟧⟨⟨d a{(ṣṭhya)}⟩⟩ṣṭa⟦(bhiḥ)⟧⟨⟨kaṁ⟩⟩||

d

⟨12⟩ tat-putraḥ kali-viṣṇuvarddha¿ṇ?⟨n⟩o ⟨’⟩dhyarddha-varṣaṁ| tat-putr¿ā?⟨a⟩ḥ par¿ā?⟨a⟩c¿ā?⟨a⟩krarāmāpara-nāma⟨13⟩-dheyaḥ|

II. śārdūlavikrīdita

hatvā bhūri-no(ḍ)aṁba-rāṣṭra-nr̥patiṁ ma⟨ṁ⟩gim mahā-saṁgare

a

gaṁgān āśr¿ī?⟨i⟩ta-gaṁga⟨14⟩kūṭa-śikharān ni⟨r⟩jjitya saḍ ḍā⟨ha⟩lā-

b

dhīśaṁ saṁ¿r?⟨k⟩ilam ugra-vallabha-yutaṁ yo bhāyayitvā (ca)⟨15⟩tuś-

c

catvāriṁśata{ḥ|}m abdakāṁś ca vijayā⟨di⟩ty¿ā?⟨o⟩ rarakṣa ksịtiṁ|

d

tad-anujasya labdha-yauvarājyas(ya) ⟨16⟩ (vi)k(r)amādity(a)sya sutaś (c)āl(u)kya-bh¿i?⟨ī⟩mas triṁśataṁ| tasyāgrajo vijayāditya(ḥ) ṣa(ṇ mās)[āN.] ⟨Page 2v⟩ ⟨17⟩ (tad-a)gra-(sū)nur amma(r)ā(jas sapta) va(rṣāni)|| ta(t-sū)nu(m āk)ramya (bāla)⟨ṁ⟩ (c)¡(a)!(l)ukya-(bhīma-pi)⟨18⟩(tr̥)vya-yuddhamallasya na(nda)nas tāla-nr̥p¿e?⟨o⟩ māsam ekaṁ|

III. Sragdharā

nānā-(sā)manta-va⟨r⟩gg¿e?⟨ai⟩(r adhika-bala)⟨19⟩-(yu)tair mmatta-mātaṁga-sai¿ṇa?⟨nyai⟩r

a

hatvā taṁ tāla-rājaṁ viṣama-raṇa-m(u)khe s¿a?⟨ā⟩⟨r⟩ddham at(yu)gra-tej(āḥ)

b

⟨20⟩ (Ekā)bdaṁ samyag a⟨ṁ⟩bhonidhi-valaya-vr̥tām anvarakṣad dharitr¿i?⟨ī⟩ṁ|

c

śrīmā¡n! cālukya-bhīma-kṣi⟨21⟩(tipati)-tanay(o) vikramāditya-bhūpaḥ|

d

paścād ahamahamikayā vikram(ā)⟨22⟩(di)t(yāsta)ma(ne) ¿rka?⟨rā⟩kṣa¿rsa?⟨sā⟩ Iva praj(ā)-b¿a?⟨ā⟩dh¿ā?⟨a⟩na-parā dāyāda-rājaputrā rājy(ā)bhi⟨23⟩(lāṣiṇo) yuddhamalla-rājam¿a?⟨ā⟩rttaṇḍa¡la!-kaṇṭhik(ā)-vijayāditya-prabhr̥tayo vigr¿ā?⟨a⟩⟨24⟩(hī-bhū)t(ā) ¿(stā)?⟨Ā⟩saN⟨.⟩ vigraheṇaiva p¿ā?⟨aṁ⟩ca varṣ¿a?⟨ā⟩ṇi ga⟨tāni⟩⟨.⟩ tataḥ|

IV. Anuṣṭubh

yo ⟨’⟩vadh¿i?⟨ī⟩d rājamār(tt)aṇ(ḍ)an

a

te⟨25⟩(ṣā)⟨ṁ⟩ (yena rane kr̥tau)

b

(ka)ṇ(ṭh)ik(ā)-vi(ja)yād(itya)-

c

-⟨yu⟩d(dha)mal(l)¿(o)?⟨au⟩ videś¿(ā)?⟨a⟩-gau|

d
V. śārdūlavikrīdita

(A)¿(s)?⟨n⟩(ye mān)ya (ma)⟨Page 3r⟩⟨26⟩(hī-bh)r̥(t)o ⟨’⟩(p)i (bahav)o duṣṭa-prav(r̥)ttād dhatāḥ|

a

deśopadrava-kāriṇaḥ prakaṭitāḥ kālāla⟨27⟩ya⟨ṁ⟩ prāpi(tāḥ)

b

do(r)-ddaṇḍ(e)rita maṇḍalāgra-la(ta)yā yasy(o)gra-s¿a?⟨ā⟩ṁgrām¿a?⟨i⟩kā

c

¿n?⟨v⟩ājñā ta⟨28⟩t-(pa)ra-bh¿(r̥)?⟨ū⟩-n(r̥)paiś ca śiras¿o?⟨ā⟩ māleva sandhāryyate||

d
VI. śārdūlavikrīdita

nādagdh⟨v⟩ā viniva⟨r⟩tt¿i?⟨a⟩te ripu-kulaṁ kopā⟨29⟩g(ni)r ā (mū)lata(ḥ)

a

ś(u)bhraṁ yasya yaśo na lokam akhila⟨ṁ⟩ santiṣṭhate na bhramaT

b

dravy(āṁ)⟨30⟩bhodhara-r(āśi)r apy anudinaṁ santapyamāne bhr̥śaṁ

c

dāridryogratarātapena jana⟨31⟩-sa⟨t⟩-sas(ye) na no varṣati

d
VII. Anuṣṭubh

sa cālukya-bhīma-naptā(|)

a

vijayāditya-nandana⟨ḥ⟩

b

dvādaś¡(ā)⟨32⟩(dhyāt)! (sa)mās samya¡K!

c

rāja-bhīmo dharātala(ṁ)|

d
VIII. Āryā

tasya maheśvara-mū(r)tter umā-s¿ā?⟨a⟩mā⟨33⟩(nākr̥teḥ kumā)rābhaḥ

ab

l(o)kamahādevy¿a?⟨ā⟩ḥ khalu yas samabhavad ammarājākh⟨y⟩a⟨ḥ⟩

cd
IX. Sragdharā

Am⟨m⟩ādhīśas tato ⟨’⟩bh¿u?⟨ū⟩t para-bala-jayino bhīma-bhūpasya putra⟨Page 3v⟩⟨35⟩(ś)

a

(cha)trānte vallabhena prahr̥tam api punaḥ paṭ(ṭ)am ¿a?⟨ā⟩d¿a?⟨ā⟩ya dha(rttur)

b

(nnyā)⟨36⟩y(ā)y(ā)tartta-siddhe(r) vvinaya-para-¿bh?⟨b⟩r̥ha¿t?⟨d⟩-bhīma-rājasya pautro

c

¡ya(vva)!⟨yauva⟩⟨37⟩-(śrī-rā)jya-kaṇṭhābharaṇa-vilasato vikramāṁkasya napt¿a?⟨ā⟩||

d
X. Upendravajrā

para-sva-san(tya)⟨38⟩kta-mano-viśuddhaḥ

a

parāpriyān mukta-vaco-viśuddhaḥ

b

paropak¿a?⟨ā⟩r(ī) ⟨39⟩ (dvi)ja-sattamas tvam

c

iti tri-śuddho musiyā(bh)idhānaḥ

d
XI. Indravajrā

śrīman-(m)ah(ā)⟨40⟩(rāja)-padottamasya

a

śi¿ṭ?⟨ṣ⟩ṭe¿ṭ?⟨ṣ⟩ṭa-ban¿d?⟨dh⟩u-priya-darśanasya

b

devādy-r̥ṇ¿a?⟨ā⟩⟨41⟩(ni pra)timuṁcato ⟨’⟩laṁ

c

putro ⟨’⟩bhavat sat-kula-nandanasya

d
XII. Anuṣṭubh

guṇḍamayyābhidhā⟨42⟩nasya

a

(ṣa)ṭ-(k)armma-kāriṇas sadā

b

pautro bhāradvājasya

c

gotreṇāmita-(teja)⟨43⟩sa⟨ḥ⟩

d

(svāmi)nā tulay¿o?⟨ā⟩ dhr̥tasya pā⟨ṇḍa⟩rāṁgasya naptr¿a?⟨ā⟩ du(r)ggar(ā)jena (vijñā)⟨Page 4r⟩⟨44⟩pito ⟨’⟩mmar(ā)jaḥ tasm¿o?⟨ai⟩ prasanna-cittaḥ sv¿a?⟨ā⟩mi-hitāya prīt¿ī?⟨i⟩-p¿u?⟨ū⟩rv(v)an (t)ava ma⟨45⟩ntriṇe ⟨’⟩grahāran dāsy¿a?⟨ā⟩mīti prativacanam uktavāN|

XIII. Upendravajrā

sa ¡yavva!⟨yauva⟩rājyā(ṣṭa)-sam(e) ⟨’⟩bhiṣi(kt)o

a

d(v)i⟨46⟩-ṣa¿t?⟨ṭ⟩ka-(saṁ)vatsara-paṭṭa-baddhaḥ

b

mahāhav¿a?⟨e⟩ṣu prasabhan nihatya

c

ri(p)¿u?⟨ū⟩(n ane)kān prav¿a?⟨i⟩bh(ā)⟨47⟩ti nityaṁ

d

so ⟨’⟩yaṁ samadhigata-paṁca-mah¿a?⟨ā⟩-śabda⟨ḥ⟩ parama-brahmaṇya⟨ḥ⟩ parama-bhaṭṭāra⟨48⟩ka⟨ḥ⟩ parama-m¿a?⟨ā⟩heśvaro mātā-pitr̥-bhakta⟨ḥ⟩|| karmma-r¿a?⟨ā⟩¿ḻ?⟨ṣ⟩ṭra-v(ā)sino rā¿ḻ?⟨ṣ⟩ṭrakūṭa-pramu⟨49⟩khān kuṭuṁbinas sarvv¿a?⟨ā⟩n eva samāh¿u?⟨ū⟩yettham ājñāpayati⟨.⟩ viditam a⟨50⟩stu vaḥ|

XIV. Anuṣṭubh

I¿ṭ?⟨ṣ⟩ṭeśvara-pras¿a?⟨ā⟩dasya

a

sarvva-j¿i?⟨ī⟩va-dayāvataḥ

b

nitya-dharmmā¿ddha?⟨rttha⟩-k¿a?⟨ā⟩masya

c

⟨51⟩ kim ato musiyasya te|

d
XV. Anuṣṭubh

Amma-rājābhidhānā⟨r⟩th¿o?⟨au⟩

a

mātr̥-candrāv ubh¿o?⟨au⟩ smr̥t¿o?⟨au⟩

b

t(ā)v ekībh(ū)⟨52⟩ya kiṁ citraṁ

c

praj(ā)nāṁ hita-kāriṇau|

d

Aṇmaṇaṁguru n¿a?⟨ā⟩ma gr¿a?⟨ā⟩me (da)kṣiṇa-dig-bhāge ⟨53⟩ rāja-viṣayādhyakṣa-satkāra-pūrvakaṁ daśa-¿k?⟨kh⟩āri-kodrava-bīj(ā)vāpa-kṣ(e)tram ādāya⟨54⟩Aṇ(ḍ)eki nāma grām(e) Ut(t)ara-dig-(bh)āge p(ū)rvavad (d)aśa-kh(ā)ri-kodrava-b(ī)j(ā)vāpa-kṣet(r)a⟨Page 4v⟩⟨55⟩(m ād)¿(a)?⟨ā⟩(ya) ¡ye!⟨E⟩ta(sm)in gr(ā)me Abhyantarīkr̥tya kāra(ṁ)ce¡ḍ-v!⟨ḍu-v⟩¿a?⟨ā⟩stavy¿a?⟨ā⟩ya (kr)o(vi)-ku(lāya) ⟨56⟩ (bhāra)dvāja-gotrāya musiyana(ś)a(r)mmaṇe sarvva-parih¿a?⟨ā⟩rī(kr̥)tya Uttarāya¿n?⟨ṇ⟩a-(n)i(mitte) ⟨57⟩ (tum)iya-ve(ṇi)ya(pū)ṇḍ(i) nāma gr¿a?⟨ā⟩m¿(ā)?⟨a⟩(ṭ)ik¿a?⟨ā⟩-dvayam agrah¿a?⟨ā⟩raṁ pr¿a?⟨ā⟩dāT||

A(s)yāva⟨58⟩(dha)yaḥ⟨.⟩ (p)¿u?⟨ū⟩rvataḥ me(da)l(ko)ṇḍa⟨.⟩ dakṣiṇataḥ gaṭṭip¿u?⟨ū⟩ṇḍ¿(i)?⟨ī⟩⟨.⟩ paś(ci)mataḥ ḻ(e)ṁk(o)ṇḍa-n¿a?⟨ā⟩ma-gr¿a?⟨ā⟩ma(ḥ) ⟨59⟩ (Ut)⟨t⟩(a)rataḥ A(ṇma)(ṇaṁ)guru-n(ā)ma-gr¿a?⟨ā⟩maḥ|

kṣetra-s¿i?⟨ī⟩m(ā)n(i)⟨.⟩ p¿(u)?⟨ū⟩(r)vvataḥ muyala-k(uṭṭu)na ⟨60⟩ ś¿(ā)?⟨a⟩mī⟨.⟩ ¿(A)?⟨Ā⟩(gne)yataḥ guṇ(ṭh)a⟨.⟩ da(kṣi)¿n?⟨ṇ⟩ataḥ gu(ṇṭeti)¡(A)!⟨ya⟩ (ka)ṟ(i)ti (ve?)¡(v)!⟨m⟩(ula) (gonu?)⟨.⟩ n¿(a)?⟨ai⟩⟨61⟩¡(ri)!⟨rr̥⟩(t)¡(i)!⟨ya⟩(taḥ) (veṁca) dakṣiṇam(u)na paruv(ulu)⟨.⟩ paścimataḥ Eṭ(i)ya ka(ṟiti ca)(ṭalalu?)⟨.⟩ ⟨62⟩ (vāyav)yataḥ (kuṇṭa?)⟨.⟩ Uttara{ṁ Ura}taḥ ca(li)-gu(ṇṭha)⟨.⟩ ¿I?⟨Ī⟩ś¿a?⟨ā⟩nataḥ m(u)yyali(kuṭṭuna vella)⟨63⟩-(ṟā)y(u)(||)

(A)s(yopa)ri na kenaci¡t!⟨d⟩ bā(dhā) ka(r)ttavyā⟨.⟩ yaḥ kar(o)ti sa (paṁca-mahāpāta)⟨64⟩k(air) y(yu)¿t(k)?⟨kt⟩(o bhavati)⟨.⟩ (yaḥ p)¿(a)?⟨ā⟩(la)ya(t)i sa puṇy(o) bhava(ti|| tath)¿(a)?⟨ā⟩ (coktaṁ) rāma(bhadr)¿(a)?⟨e⟩(ṇa)

XVI. śālīnī

⟨65⟩ s¿a?⟨ā⟩m¿a?⟨ā⟩n(yo) ⟨’⟩(yan dharmma-setur n)¿(d)?⟨n⟩(r̥)pā(ṇāṁ)

a

( k)¿(a)?⟨ā⟩(l)¿(a)?⟨e⟩ (k)¿(a)?⟨ā⟩(l)¿(a)?⟨e⟩ (pālanīyo bhava)¿(t)?⟨d⟩(bhiḥ)

b

(sarvvā)⟨Page 5r⟩ ⟨66⟩ (n) etān bh¿a?⟨ā⟩vi¿(ṇ)?⟨n⟩aḥ pārtthivendr(ā)n

c

bhūyo bh¿u?⟨ū⟩(yo yā)ca(te) rāmabha(d)raḥ||

d
XVII. Vasantatilakā

mad-vaṁśa-(jā)⟨67⟩¿p?⟨ḫ⟩ par¿ā?⟨a⟩-ma(hīpa)ti-vaṁśa-jāś ca

a

pāpād apeta-ma(naso bhu)vi (bhā)vi-bhūpāḥ

b

ye⟨68⟩p¿a?⟨ā⟩layanti mama dh¿ā?⟨a⟩rmmam imaṁ samastan

c

teṣ¿a?⟨ā⟩m ayaṁ v(i)rac(i)to ⟨’⟩ṁja(li)r (eṣ)a m¿u?⟨ū⟩⟨69⟩rdhni||

d
XVIII. Anuṣṭubh

bahubhir vvasudh¿a?⟨ā⟩ dattā

a

bahu(bh)i(ś cānu)p¿a?⟨ā⟩l¿a?⟨i⟩tā

b

yasya yasya yadā bhūmis

c

ta⟨70⟩sya tasya tadā phalaṁ

d
XIX. Anuṣṭubh

sva-dattāṁ para-dattā⟨ṁ⟩ vā{ṁ}

a

yo haretā vasundharāṁ

b

ṣaṣṭi⟨71⟩-va(r)ṣa-sahasr¿a?⟨ā⟩ṇi

c

viṣ¿ṭ?⟨ṭh⟩(ā)yāṁ j(ā)yate k¡ri!⟨r̥⟩miḥ|

d
XX. Anuṣṭubh

mānyaṁ viṁśati-khārī-ko-

a

⟨72⟩drava-bījāvāpa-kṣetraṁ

b

Ājñaptir asya dharmmasya

c

kaṭakeśo yaśo-nidhiḥ||(<floretIndistinct>)

d

⟨73⟩ vaṁgipaṟu-v¿a?⟨ā⟩sta¿rvya?⟨vye⟩nātr¿a?⟨e⟩ya-gotreṇa bhaṭṭa-guṇḍena viracitaṁ kāvya(ṁ)⟨.⟩ ⟨74⟩ (ta)s(mai) bhāga-dvayan dattaṁ|| ghanava(ṭṭa)-b(īro?)j(e)na l(i)khitaḥ|| ¿s?⟨ś⟩ivam astu<floretIndistinct>

⟨Page 5v⟩

Apparatus

Seal

Plates

⟨2⟩ mā¡tr̥ī!⟨tr̥⟩- ⬦ māt¿rī?⟨r̥⟩- EH • Vowel markers for r̥ (not a subscript r) and ī are both present on t.

⟨3⟩ ¿v?⟨bh⟩agavan- ⬦ bhagavan- EH.

⟨6⟩ -vallabhendrasy¿ā?⟨a⟩ ⬦ -vallabhendrasy¿ā?⟨a⟩{ḥ} EH. — ⟨6⟩ ¿bh?⟨v⟩rātā ⬦ bhrātā EH.

⟨11⟩ -p(a)rākramaḥ ⬦ -p¿ā?⟨a⟩rākramaḥ EH • The engraver probably started adding the vowel marker for (ā), but only got to a short distance horizontally and did not turn downward. — ⟨11⟩ ⟨⟨sa⟩⟩-catvāriṁśa⟦(t samā)⟧⟨⟨d a{(ṣṭhya)}⟩⟩ṣṭa⟦(bhiḥ)⟧⟨⟨kaṁ⟩⟩ ⬦ ⟨⟨sa⟩⟩ catvāriṁśad abdhyaṣṭakaṁ EH • According to Hultzsch, the text °d abdhyaṣṭakaṁ seems to have been engraved over an erasure and may have been meant for °d aṣṭakaṁ or °d abdakān.In my view, this correction goes hand in hand with the insertion at the beginning of the pāda: the initially engraved text was almost certainly catvāriṁśat samāṣṭabhiḥ. This was corrected to sa-catvāriṁśad aṣṭakaṁ in the following steps. First, sa was added at the beginning. Then, tsa was partly hammered out (only vestiges of the subscript s are now visible) and corrected to da. Next, the engraver attempted to correct mā to ṣṭa, but accidentally engraved ṣṭhya. At this stage, he decided to skip this character, since ṣṭa was already there anyway to the right. He finally went on to correct bhiḥ to kaṁ (the left leg of bh and part of the i remain visible, along with the visarga whose upper dot has been repurposed into an anusvāra). I am quite confident about most of this reconstruction, except for the putative correction of mā to ṣṭa, where something even more complex may have been going on. It may be worth adding that the Maliyapūṇḍi grant, whose preamble is almost to the letter identical to the present one, reads catvāriṁśat samāṣṭabhiḥ at this point.

⟨13⟩ -no(ḍ)aṁba- ⬦ -no¿d?⟨ḍ⟩aṁba- EH • Hultzsch’s emendation may be based on the known form nolamba of this name. In the parallel stanza in the Maliyapūṇḍi grant, he likewise reads d and emends to ḍ. The character here is not a good specimen of d, and I think it plausible that it was intended for ḍ. A previously unpublished parallel of the stanza in the Īnteṟu grant of Bādapa clearly spells the name with ḍ.

⟨14⟩ ni⟨r⟩jjitya ⬦ nirjjitya EH. — ⟨14⟩ saḍ ḍā⟨ha⟩lā° ⬦ saḍ-ḍā⟨ha⟩lā° EH • Hultzsch construes saḍ- in compound (indicated by his translation, though not in his Devanagari edition), while I take it as a separate word; see the note to the translation.

⟨16⟩ (vi)k(r)amādityasya ⬦ (vi)k(r)amādity¿ā?⟨a⟩sya EH • As in parākramaḥ above (l. 11), the engraver probably started adding an ā here, but the end of the subscript y barely turns to the right, and does not turn downward at all..

⟨17⟩ va(rṣāni)|| ⬦ varṣ¿a?⟨ā⟩ni| EH.

⟨19⟩ sai¿ṇa?⟨nyai⟩r ⬦ s¿aiṇa?⟨enai⟩r EH. — ⟨19⟩ hatvā ⬦ ¿h?⟨dd⟩atvā EH • I do not see the reason for Hultzsch’s emendation and believe that it is a typo in his edition. Since it is shown in a footnote together with the previous emendation, he may have intended ha here, which the typesetter mistook for dda. The Maliyapūṇḍi grant, also edited by Hultzsch and at a time previous to the present edition, includes the same stanza. There, Hultzsch reads saino hātvā and emends to senair hatvā.

⟨20⟩ (Ekā)bdaṁ ⬦ E{r}kābdaṁ EH.

⟨23⟩ °m¿a?⟨ā⟩rttaṇḍa¡la!- ⬦ °m¿a?⟨ā⟩rttaṇḍa{la}- EH • I choose not to consider the unexpected syllable a scribal mistake, since the same occurs in line 24 of the Maliyapūṇḍi grant. However, line 23-24 of the Īnteṟu grant of Bādapa has the expected mārttaṇḍa in the same sentence. — ⟨23⟩ kaṇṭhik(ā)- • The ā may be a subsequent addition, since it overlaps with part of the following character. — ⟨23⟩ -vijayāditya- ⬦ -v¿ī?⟨i⟩jayāditya- EH.

⟨26⟩ -prav(r̥)ttād dhatāḥ ⬦ -pravr̥tt¿ā?⟨o⟩ddhatāḥ EH • See the commentary for my interpretation of this stanza on the basis of parallels.

⟨27⟩ -s¿a?⟨ā⟩ṁgrām¿a?⟨i⟩kā ¿n?⟨v⟩ājñā ⬦ -saṁgrāmak¿ān?⟨asy⟩ājñā EH • See the commentary for my interpretation of this stanza on the basis of parallels.

⟨28⟩ śiras¿o?⟨ā⟩ ⬦ śiraso EH • See the commentary for my interpretation of this stanza on the basis of parallels. — ⟨28⟩ nādagdh⟨v⟩ā ⬦ nādag⟨dh⟩vā EH.

⟨30⟩ jana⟨31⟩sa⟨t⟩- ⬦ jana¿sa?⟨tā⟩- EH • The parallel locus in the Īnteṟu grant of Bādapa confirms the intuition of Venugopaul Chetty, who proposes this emendation for the parallel in line 31 of the Maliyapūṇḍi grant.

⟨31⟩ dvādaś¡(ā)⟨32⟩(dhyāt)! ⬦ dvādaś(ā)⟨32⟩¿dhy?⟨ś⟩āt EH • Hultzsch prefers to emend the verb to aśāt, the active imperfect third person of śās, though he notes that adhyāt may have been intended for the same imperfect form of adhyās. While dh is quite clear here, the reading in both parallels (line 32 of the Īnteṟu grant of Bādapa and line 32 of the Maliyapūṇḍi grant) is dvādaśāvyāt. For the latter, Hultzsch suggests the emendation dvādaśāvat. Although āvat and aśāt are both grammatically sound and metrically fitting, it is perhaps more likely that we are facing a solecism here. The composer may have intended the precative form avyāt for a past indicative, or may have meant adhyāt as a legitimate form of adhyās.

⟨34⟩ bhīma- ⬦ bh¿i?⟨ī⟩ma- EH.

⟨35⟩ dha(rttur) (nnyā)° ⬦ dhartt¿a?⟨u⟩¡r nn!⟨ḥ| n⟩yā° EH • I believe the reading rtta, printed in Hultzsch’s edition, must be a typo. In the published facsimile, the subscript u is the only part of this character that can be made out. I assume that the purpose of Hultzsch’s footnote is not to emend rtta to rttu, only to normalise the sandhi and punctuation at the end of the verse line.

⟨36⟩ ¡ya(vva)!⟨yauva⟩⟨37⟩-(śrī-rā)jya- • I second Hultzsch’s opinion that the composer must have been driven by metrical constraints to use the impossible form yauvaśrīrājya instead of śrī-yauvarājya.

⟨42⟩ bhāradvājasya • It seems that the author mentally added a svarabhakti vowel to this name, e.g. as bhāraduvājasya.

⟨43⟩ (svāmi)nā tulay¿o?⟨ā⟩ dhr̥tasya ⬦ svāminātulayo⟨d⟩dhr̥t⟨v⟩asya EH • I am not satisfied with Hultzsch’s emendation, but my own is also offered tentatively. I am not sure of its exact meaning (see note to the translation), but it seems plausible and requires much less intervention in the received text. The o of yo is written as two separate strokes, and it even seems possible that the upper stroke, being much fainter in the facsimile, has been cancelled by the engraver, correcting the character to yā. — ⟨43⟩ pā⟨ṇḍa⟩rāṁgasya naptr¿c?⟨ā⟩ • These words may have been corrected, or at least marked for correction, in the original. There seem to be two vertical lines bracketing the character pā, and quite a bit of noise surrounding the following characters up to and including ptra.

⟨44⟩ r(ā)jas • The consonant r has an extra vowel marker on the bottom left. Can it be that someone wanted to correct the following tasmo into tasmai by adding such a stroke, and accidentally put it on the wrong letter?

⟨45⟩ ¡yavva!⟨yauva⟩rājyā(ṣṭa)-sam(e) ⟨’⟩bhiṣi(kt)o • The wording yauvarājye ’ṣṭa-samo ’bhiṣiktaḥ or yauvarājyāṣṭa-samābhiṣiktaḥ would be easier and clearer here. The second of these requires only a very small emendation and is closer to the style of the next phrase, so it may have been the composer’s intent; but the text is only slightly awkward without emendation.

⟨46⟩ (saṁ)vatsara- • The character saṁ is rather wide and there is some noise before it and more after it. It is my impression that two or even three characters have been deleted here, and saṁ was inscribed in the resulting space. — ⟨46⟩ mahāhav¿a?⟨e⟩ṣu ⬦ mahāhaveṣu EH.

⟨51⟩ kim ato • Hultzsch tentatively suggests emending to śrīmato. I find that very unlikely, and believe that kim ato was employed by the composer in the sense of kim ataḥ pareṇa; see also my translation.

⟨57⟩ gr¿a?⟨ā⟩m¿(ā)?⟨a⟩(ṭ)ik¿a?⟨ā⟩- ⬦ gr¿a?⟨ā⟩mādika- EH.

⟨59⟩ muyala-k(uṭṭu)na ⬦ mu(yya)likuṭṭuna EH.

⟨60⟩ guṇ(ṭh)a ⬦ guṇṭa EH. — ⟨60⟩ (ve?)¡(v)!⟨m⟩(ula) • Hultzsch attributes the correction/normalisation of vevula (of which he prints only ve as unclear) into vemula to his consultant Krishna Sastri. The estampage looks more like navula to me. — ⟨60⟩ (gonu?) • Hultzsch prints this word as clear. The estampage looks more like koṇḍa to me.

⟨62⟩ Uttara{ṁ Ura}taḥ EH • I follow Hultzsch’s emendation here, but I wonder if Uttaraṁ should instead be understood as a noun to go with the previous statement (the northern side of a pond?). In this case there is no dittography, but tta must be supplied to correct Urataḥ into Uttarataḥ, beginning the next statement. — ⟨62⟩ -gu(ṇṭha) ⬦ -guṇṭa EH. — ⟨62⟩ (vella) • Hultzsch notes that the reading of this word comes from Krishna Sastri.

⟨63⟩ (mahāpāta)⟨64⟩k(air) ⬦ mahāpāta⟨64⟩k¿o?⟨ai⟩r EH.

⟨66⟩ bh¿a?⟨ā⟩vi¿(ṇ)?⟨n⟩aḥ ⬦ bh¿a?⟨ā⟩vin¿ā?⟨a⟩ḥ EH.

⟨73⟩ ātr¿a?⟨e⟩ya- ⬦ ātreya- EH. — ⟨73⟩ kāvya(ṁ) ⬦ kāvya⟨M⟩ EH.

Translation by Dániel Balogh

Seal

Plates

(1–11) Greetings. Satyāśraya Vallabhendra (Pulakeśin II) was eager to adorn the lineage of the majestic Cālukyas—who are of the Mānavya gotra which is praised by the entire world, who are sons of Hārīti, who attained kingship by the grace of Kauśikī’s boon, who are protected by the band of Mothers, who were deliberately appointed (to kingship) by Lord Mahāsena, to whom enemy territories instantaneously submit at the [mere] sight of the superior Boar emblem they have acquired by the grace of the divine Nārāyaṇa, and whose bodies have been hallowed through washing in the purificatory ablutions (avabhr̥tha) of the Aśvamedha sacrifice. His brother Kubja Viṣṇuvardhana protected (pāl-) the country of Veṅgī for eighteen years. His son Jayasiṁha (I), for thirty-three. His younger brother Indrarāja’s (Indra Bhaṭṭāraka’s) son Viṣṇuvardhana (II), for nine. His son Maṅgi Yuvarāja, for twenty-five. His son Jayasiṁha (II), for thirteen. His [brother] of inferior birth, Kokkili, for six months. After dethroning him, his eldest brother Viṣṇuvardhana (III), for thirty-seven years. His son Vijayāditya (I) Bhaṭṭāraka, for eighteen. His son Viṣṇuvardhana (IV), for thirty-six.

I
King (bhūpāla) Vijayāditya (II) who was called Narendramr̥garāja and who had the courage of a lion (mr̥garāja), [reigned] for eight [years] and forty.1

(12–13) His son Kali-Viṣṇuvardhana (V), for a year and a half. His son, also called Paracakrarāma,

II
Having killed in pitched battle Maṅgi, the king of the populous2 Nodamba country, having summarily defeated3 the Gaṅgas ensconced on the top of Gaṅgakūṭa, and having intimidated Saṁkila, the lord of Ḍāhala together with the vicious Vallabha, he protected (rakṣ-) the earth as Vijayāditya (III) for forty-four years.

(15–18) The son of his younger brother—Vikramāditya, who had attained the rank of heir-apparent (yauvarājya)—[this son] Cālukya-Bhīma [reigned] for thirty [years]. His elder-born [son]4 Vijayāditya (IV) for six months. His firstborn son Ammarāja (I), for seven years. After assaulting his underage son, King (nr̥pa) Tāla—the son of Yuddhamalla, the paternal uncle of Cālukya-Bhīma—for one month.

III
Thanks to his excessively fierce valour, His Majesty King (bhūpa) Vikramāditya (II)—the son of King (kṣitipati) Cālukya-Bhīma—slew at the front line of rugged battle that King (rājan) Tāla together with groups of diverse underlords (sāmanta) who possessed a superior force and an army of raging elephants, and then soundly protected (rakṣ-) the earth—wrapped in her girdle of oceans—for one year.

(21–24) Then, upon the demise of the Sun of Valour (Vikramāditya), collateral (dāyāda) princes (rājaputra)—such as Yuddhamalla, Rājamārtaṇḍa and Vijayāditya of the Locket (kaṇṭhikā)—materialised like demons (rākṣasa) {upon the setting of the sun}, yearning for kingship out of egomania and bent on oppressing the subjects. Five years passed in nothing but strife. Then—

IV
he who slew Rājamārtaṇḍa among these (pretenders) and who through battle banished Vijayāditya of the Locket and Yuddhamalla to a foreign country—
V
the scimitar (graceful) like a frond, wielded by his arms like iron bars, has also dispatched to the abode of Death many other kings (who were otherwise) respectable (but), being struck by depravity, were blatantly wrecking the country; and his command, even when it relates to vicious battle, is borne on the head like a wreath even by kings of other lands—5
VI
the fire of [his] anger would never cease unless it has burned the enemy’s family to the root; whose bright reputation would never stand still unless it has ranged all over the world; the cloudbank of his wealth would never fail to rain on the good crop that is the populace, though it be seared day after day by the inexorable sunblaze of poverty—
VII
he, the grandson of Cālukya-Bhīma and son of Vijayāditya (IV), King (rājan) Bhīma (II), soundly ruled6 the surface of the earth for twelve years.
VIII
To him (Bhīma II), who was [like] Maheśvara in form, a [son] named Ammarāja (II), who verily resembled Kumāra, was born from none other than (his queen) Lokamahādevī, who was like Umā in appearance.
IX
Then7 there appeared the overlord (adhīśa) Amma, taking over the turban (i.e. rulership) of the earth even though it had been assailed by Vallabha at the edge of his parasol (i.e. domain).8 [He is] the son of King (bhūpa) Bhīma (II) who defeated enemy armies; the grandson9 of the great King (rājan) Bhīma (I) who was a paragon of decency (vinaya) and who legitimately came to prevail through ordinance (r̥ta);10 and descendant (naptr̥)11 of Vikramāṅka (Vikramāditya I), who was resplendent with the neck ornament of the majestic status of Heir Apparent (yauvarājya).
X
You, who are named Musiya, are a most excellent Brahmin pure three times over: pure in your mind that is devoid of [longing for] the property of others, pure in your speech that is free of what is unkind to others, and [pure in action, being] a benefactor to others.
XI
[He, Musiya, is] the son of a scion of a virtuous family,12 who was the most excellent of those who had the exalted rank of mahārāja,13 whom learned men, friends and relatives were [always] pleased to see, and who duly fulfilled his debts to the gods and so on.
XII
[He, Musiya, is] the grandson of one named Guṇḍamayya, a Bhāradvāja by gotra, [a man] of immeasurable brilliance who perpetually performed the six duties.

(43–45) Ammarāja, when he was petitioned [to this effect] by Durgarāja, the great-grandson14 of Pāṇḍarāṁga whom his overlord (svāmin) had weighed in the balance, gladly replied to him (Durgarāja): “I shall be pleased to grant a rent-free holding (agrahāra) to this minister of yours (i.e. to Musiya), as he is dedicated to his master’s (i.e. Durgarāja’s) cause.”15

XIII
He (Amma II) was anointed as Heir Apparent in his eighth year16 and donned the [royal] turban at [the age of] twice six years. Having overpowered and defeated numerous enemies in great battles, he shines eternally.

(47–50) He, [Amma II] who has deserved the five great sounds17, the supremely pious Supreme Sovereign (parama-bhaṭṭāraka) and supreme devotee of Maheśvara, devoted to his mother and father, convokes all householders (kuṭumbin)—including foremost the territorial overseers (rāṣṭrakūṭa)—who reside in Karmarāṣṭra district (viṣaya), and commands them as follows. Let [this] be known to you:

XIV
18To one who has the favour of his beloved lord;19 to one who is compassionate to all living beings; to one who always [pursues] dharma, artha and kāma;20—in short:21 to your Musiya.22
XV
The meanings of the two terms amma and rājan are known to be “mother” and “moon.” When the two come together, why should it be strange that they do what is beneficial for subjects {their offspring}?

(52–57) Having sectioned off a field (sufficient) for sowing ten khārīs of kodrava seed in the southern direction of the village named Aṇmaṇaṁguru after paying [due] respect to the royal territorial overseers; having sectioned off a field likewise (sufficient) for sowing ten khārīs of kodrava seed in the northern direction of the village named Aṇḍeki; and having incorporated (the resulting plot) into this [latter] village; on the occasion of the winter solstice he (Amma II) has given the two hamlets named Tumiya and Veṇiyapūṇḍi, with all exemptions, as a rent-free holding (agrahāra) to Musiyanaśarman of the Krovi family and the Bhāradvāja gotra, a resident of Kāraṁceḍu.23

(57–59) Its boundaries [are as follows]. To the east, Medalkoṇḍa. To the south, Gattipūṇḍi. To the west, the village named Ḻeṁkoṇḍa. To the north, the village named Aṇmaṇaṁguru.

(59–63) The boundaries of the field [are as follows]. To the east, a śamī tree at the triple boundary juncture.24 To the southeast, a pond. To the south, a gonu tree with neem trees on the bank of the Guṇṭeṟu (river). To the southwest, the salt marshes25 on the southern side of the lake. To the west, … (caṭalalu) on the bank of the river. To the northwest, a pond. To the north, the Cali pond. To the northeast, a white stone at the junction of boundaries.

(63–64) Let no-one pose an obstacle (to his enjoyment of his rights) over it. He who does so, shall be conjoined with the five great sins. He who protects it shall be meritorious. So too has Rāmabhadra said,

XVI
“Each in your own time, you shall respect this bulwark of legality that is universally applicable to kings!”—[thus] Rāmabhadra begs all these future rulers over and over again.
XVII
Hereby I offer my respectful obeisance (añjali) to [all] future kings on earth, born [both] in my lineage and different royal lineages, who with minds averted from sin observe this provision (dharma) of mine in its integrity.
XVIII
Many (kings) have granted land, and many have preserved it (as formerly granted). Whosoever at any time owns the land, the fruit {reward (accrued of granting it)} belongs to him at that time.
XIX
He who would seize land, whether given by himself or by another, shall be born as a worm in faeces for sixty thousand years.
XX
The holding (mānya) is a field (sufficient) for sowing twenty khārīs of kodrava seed. The executor (ājñapti) of this provision (dharma) is the castellan (kaṭakeśvara), a storehouse of glory.26

(73–74) The poetry has been composed by Bhaṭṭa Guṇḍa of the Ātreya gotra, a resident of Vaṁgipaṟu. Two shares (of the donated field) have been given to him. Written (likhita) by Ghanavaṭṭa Bīroja.27 Let it be well.

Translation into French by Estienne-Monod 2008

Seal

Plates

(1–11) Prospérité ! Kubja Viṣṇuvardhana, frère de Satyāśraya Vallabhendra, qui orne la dynastie des Cālukya, illustres, du même gotra que les descendants de Manu, loués dans l’univers entier, fils de Hārīti, ayant reçu leur royaume par l’excellente faveur de Kauśikī, protégés par les Mères réunies, méditant aux pieds du seigneur Mahāsena, eux dont les cercles ennemis ont été soumis en un instant à la vue du signe de l’excellent sanglier, faveur octroyée par le bienheureux Nārāyaṇa, eux dont les corps ont été purifiés grâce aux bains consécutifs au sacrifice du cheval, a protégé le maṇḍala de Veṅgī pendant dix huit années. Son fils Jayasiṁha pendant trente-trois ans ; Le fils d’Indrarāja, frère cadet de ce dernier, Viṣṇuvardhana, pendant neuf ans ; Le fils de celui-ci, Maṁgi, le prince héritier, pendant vingt-cinq ans ; Son fils Jayasiṁha pendant treize ans ; Le frère cadet de ce dernier, Kokkili, pendant six mois ; Son frère aîné, Viṣṇuvardhana, après l’avoir chassé, pendant trente-sept ans ; Le fils de celui-ci, Vijayāditya, l’illustre seigneur, pendant dix-huit ans ; Son fils Viṣṇuvardhana pendant trente-six ans ;

I
Le fils de ce dernier, nommé Narendra Mr̥garāja, qui avait le courage du lion, le roi Vijayāditya pendant quarante-huit ans ;

(12–13) Son fils Kali-Viṣṇuvardhana pendant un an et demi ; Son fils, dont l’autre nom est Paracakrarāma,

II
qui a tué dans la gande bataille Maṁgi, le roi du puissant Noḍambarāṣṭra, qui a vaincu les Gaṅga réfugiés au sommet du Gaṅgakūta, qui a terrifié Saṅkila, roi des vertueux Dāhala, qui s’était allié au puissant Vallabha, Vijayāditya28 a protégé la terre pendant quarante-quatre ans ;

(15–18) le fils du roi Vikramāditya, frère cadet de ce dernier,29 qui avait reçu les droits du prince héritier, Cālukya Bhīma a protégé la terre pendant trente ans ; Son fils aîné, Vijayāditya30 pendant six mois ; Son fils aîné, Ammarāja, pendant sept ans ; Après avoir attaqué le fils de celui-ci,31 alors qu’il était enfant, le fils de Yuddhamalla, oncle du côté parternel de Cālukya Bhīma, le roi Tāla a protégé la terre pendant un mois.

III
Après avoir tué le roi Tāla, à la tête d’une bataille difficile, d’une très puissante énergie avec ses armées d’éléphants furieux, avec la foule de ses divers vassaux, accompagnés de forces immenses, le fils du souverain Cālukya Bhīma, l’illustre roi Vikramāditya a protégé, avec justice, la terre entourée du cercle des océans pendant un an.

(21–24) Ensuite, convaincus de leur supériorité, lorsque Vikramāditya s’éteignit, occupés à opprimer leurs sujets, comme des Rākṣasa opprimant les créatures au coucher du soleil, les princes prétendant au trône, aspirant à la conquête du pouvoir, Yuddhamalla, Rājamārtaṇḍa et Kaṇṭhikā Vijayāditya en tête, se firent la guerre. Cinq années de guerre passèrent32 puis,

IV
celui qui, parmi ces derniers, tua Rājamārtaṇḍa, qui contraignit à l’exil, lors d’un combat, Kaṇṭhikā Vijayāditya et Yuddhamalla,
V
qui précipita au royaume de la mort nombre d’autres hommes, qui, bien qu’ils fussent de respectables souverains, s’enorgueillissaient de leur conduite criminelle et se révélaient source de calamité pour le pays, de la lame de son cimeterre, mû par son bras puissant, lui, le combattant puissant, dont les ordres sont portés, telle une guirlande pour leur tête, par les rois de la terre dévoués à cette tâche,
VI
dont le feu de la colère ne s’éteint pas sans avoir consumé totalement l’armée ennemie, dont la gloire resplendissante ne s’arrête pas sans parcourir l’univers entier, la masse immense des nuages de sa richesse ne manque pas de se déverser jour après jour, sur ces blés que sont les hommes cruellement tourmentés par la très intense brûlure de la pauvreté.
VII
Ce petit-fils de Cālukya Bhīma, fils de Vijayāditya, Le roi Bhīma a gouverné avec justice la terre pendant douze années entières.
VIII
De ce dernier, manifestation de Maheśvara, et de Lokamahādevī, qui avait revêtu l’aspect d’Umā, pareil à Kumāra, naquit le nommé Ammarāja.
IX
Naquit ensuite de celle-ci, Ammarāja, fils du roi Bhīma, vainqueur des armées ennemies, qui, ayant repris la couronne que Vallabha avait tentée de lui arracher, porta celle-ci à l’extrémité de son parasol, qui, par son sens de la justice, parvint à faire triompher l’ordre, descendant de Vikramāṅka, petit-fils du roi Bhīma, adonné à une conduite vertueuse qui obtint comme il se doit un succès véritable, qui faisait briller le kaṇṭha,33 illustre marque du prince héritier.
X
Pur par son esprit, éloigné de la convoitise du bien d’autrui, pur par ses paroles qui sont éloignées de tout propos désobligeant à l’égard d’autrui Serviable envers autrui, tu es le meilleur des brahmanes, tu es trois fois pur, toi qui portes le nom de Musiya.
XI
Il fut le fils du meilleur de ceux qui portèrent le titre illustre de Grand Roi, lui dont la vue charmait les hommes instruits, ses amis, ses proches, lui qui s’acquittait suffisamment de ses dettes envers les dieux et les autres, qui fut un sujet de joie pour sa vertueuse lignée.
XII
Le petit-fils du dénommé Guṇḍamayya, qui accomplit toujours les six devoirs brahmaniques, Descendant de Bhāradvāja par son gotra, doué d’une incommensurable énergie.

(43–45) Quand le seigneur Durgarāja, descendant de Pāṇḍarāṁga,34 aux incomparables vertus guerrières, lui en fit la requête, Ammarāja, dont le cœur était plein de bienveillance envers cet homme dévoué au bien de son maître, répondit : « c’est de tout cœur que je donnerai un agrahāra à ton ministre. »

XIII
Lui qui a reçu l’onction du prince héritier à l’âge de huit ans, qui a revêtu le turban royal âgé de deux fois six années, Lui qui a détruit avec force une multitude d’ennemis dans les grandes batailles resplendit éternellement.

(47–50) Celui-ci qui a étudié les cinq grands sons,35 d’une extrême piété, très grand seigneur, très grand adorateur de Maheśvara, dévoué à sa mère et à son père, ayant convoqué tous les chefs de familles du Karmarāṣṭra, les raṣṭrakūṭa en tête, ordonne ceci : qu’il soit connu de vous que :

XIV
A lui, qui désire la faveur de son seigneur, qui éprouve de la compassion pour tous les êtres, éternellement amoureux du dharma et de l’artha, à l’illustre Musiya,36
XV
Le sens des noms « Amma » et « rāja », l’un et l’autre sont connus pour désigner respectivement « la mère » et « la lune » S’ils sont unis, qu’y a-t-il de merveilleux à ce que l’un et l’autre fassent le bonheur des sujets ?

(52–57) Après avoir rendu les honneurs à l’administrateur de la circonscription, ayant pris un champ où l’on sème des graines de kodrava37 pour dix khāri,38 dans la partie sud du village nommé Aṇmaṇaṁguru, ayant pris de même un champ où l’on sème des graines de kodrava pour dix khāri, dans la partie nord du village nommé Aṇḍeki, ayant inclus ces deux champs dans ce village, il a donné à Musiyanaśarman, résidant à Kāraṁcedu, de la lignée de Krovi, du gotra de Bharadvāja, exemptés de toute taxe, à l’occasion du solstice d’hiver, en qualité d’agrāhara, les deux villages nommés Tumiyaveṇiyapūṇḍi.

(57–59) Ses limites sont : à l’est Medalkoṇḍa, au sud Gaṭṭipūṇḍi, à l’ouest le village nommé ḻeṁkoṇḍa, au nord le village nommé Aṇmaṇaṁguru.

(59–63) Les limites de ces champs sont : à l’est un arbre śamī, au point de jonction des trois limites, au sud-est un étang, au sud un arbre gonu et un arbre vemula sur le rivage de l’étang, au sud-ouest des marécages, au sud du lac, à l’ouest Ca[talalu*]39 sur le rivage de la rivière, au nord-ouest un étang, au nord l’étang Cali, au nord-est une pierre blanche au point de jonction des trois limites.

(63–64) Aucune charge ne doit lui être imposée, celui qui en impose est lié aux cinq grands crimes. Celui qui protège cette terre acquiert des mérites. De même Rāmabhadra a dit ceci :

XVI
Ce pont du dharma commun aux rois doit toujours être protégé par vous, Rāmabhadra demande ceci à tous les princes des rois à venir, encore et encore.
XVII
Qu’ils soient de ma lignée et de la lignée d’autres rois, c’est pour les souverains à venir sur terre qui, l’esprit éloigné du mal, préserveront cette mienne action pieuse40 dans son intégrité, que j’ai fait cette añjali sur ma tête !
XVIII
Beaucoup ont donné une terre, beaucoup l’ont protégée, celui qui possède la terre en possède le fruit.
XIX
Qu’elle soit donnée par lui ou par un autre, celui qui prend une terre renaît ver de terre dans des excréments pendant soixante mille ans.
XX
Ce champ dans lequel il faut semer vingt khari de graines de kodrava41 constitue une tenure.42 L’exécuteur de cette donation43 est le kaṭakeśa, trésor de gloire.

(73–74) Le poème a été composé par Bhaṭṭaguṇḍa, du gotra d’Atreya, résidant à Vaṁgipaṟu. [Nous] donnons à celui-ci deux parts.44 Gravure de Ghanavaṭṭabīroja. Bénédiction !

Commentary

The name Nodaṁba in stanza 2 must have a short o for the metre to be correct. The same stanza has two enjambements, including one from the first hemistich to the second.

XX
I am not sure verse 20 was intended as a full stanza. It may be that the horrendously unmetrical text of the first two lines was in fact meant for prose, which happens to be sixteen syllables long and is followed by just one hemistich.
V
As of September 2021, I have come across three specimens of this verse, as stanza 6 of the Maliyapūṇḍi grant of Amma II (hereafter: M), stanza 5 of the Vemalūrpāḍu plates of Amma II (hereafter: V), and stanza 5 of the Īnteṟu grant of Bādapa (hereafter: Ī). The variation between these specimens is minor and none are fully intelligble. My reconstruction of the stanza as intended by the composer runs as follows: anye mānya-mahībhr̥to ’pi bahavo duṣṭa-pravr̥ttād dhatāḥ| deśopadrava-kāriṇaḥ prakaṭitāḥ kālālayaṁ prāpitāḥ| dor-ddaṇḍerita-maṇḍalāgra-latayā yasyogra-sāṁgrāmikā| vājñā tat-para-bhū-nr̥paiś ca śirasā māleva sandhāryyate||
  • pravr̥ttāddhatāḥ is the received reading identical in all three, including the lack of sandhi (complemented with a punctuation mark in V). Butterworth and Venugopaul Chetty, the first editors of M (hereafter: BVC), accept this reading, while Hultzsch (hereafter: H) emends it to pravr̥ttoddhatāḥ.
  • kālālayaṁ appears without a recognisable anusvāra in M and V, and the text is intelligible that way. However, the anusvāra is clearly present in Ī, yielding a better text, so I assume that it has been lost or accidentally omitted in the other two records.
  • sāṁgrāmikā vājñā is not attested as such; the variants are M saṁgrāmakāvājñā; V saṁgrāmakānājñā; Ī sāṁgrāmikanājñā. BVC emend to saṁgrāmakasyājñā in their edition of M, which H tentatively endorses in his re-edition of M and his edition of V. I find this too heavy-handed and believe that the composer may have used vā in the sense of eva (or, essentially, as a hiatus filler). However, the original intent may also have been the better attested sāṁgrāmikā nājñā, in which case n must be a hiatus filler (cf. BHSG §4.65).
  • para-bhū-nr̥paiś is also not attested; M and V read parabhr̥nr̥paiś, while Ī has parabhr̥nnr̥paiś. BVC and H both emend bhr̥ to bhū. While para-bhr̥t is a legitimate word for which Ī appears to supply confirmation, I cannot make sense of it in the context. Conversely, engraving bhr̥ instead of bhū is a very straightforward scribal mistake, and bhr̥n may be the result of the scribe’s attempt to make sense of the unintelligible bhr̥.
  • For śirasā, M and V read śiraso. The text is intelligible that way (and H does not emend it in his editions), but I agree with BVC that śirasā (to be construed with sandhāryyate) is more elegant, and this reading is confirmed by Ī.
I thus prefer to interpret the stanza as indicated in my translation. However, depending on the choice of readings, a number of slightly different alternative interpretations may be possible. If pravr̥ttoddhatāḥ is preferred in pāda a, then the other kings are “formidable and obdurate in their depravity, blatantly wrecking the country.” Reading saṁgrāma-kāv in pāda c, the text might mean that “his command (given) on the field of vicious battle is borne on the head,” but this relies on the rather laborious use of ku in the sense of bhūmi. The phrase tat-para-bhū-nr̥paiś could be construed as tatpara-bhū-nr̥paiś, “kings of the land (i.e. subordinates) intent (on obedience),” but the contrast with kings of other lands is poetically more effective.

Bibliography

Noticed in Krishna Sastri 1910, p. 15, appendices A/1909-1910, № 4. Edited from inked impressions by E. Hultzsch (1925–1926), with facsimiles and translation.45 The present edition by Dániel Balogh is based on a collation of Hultzsch’s edition with his estampages.

Primary

[EH] Hultzsch, Eugen Julius Theodor. 1925–1926. “Vemalurpadu Plates of Ammaraja II.” EI 18, pp. 226–235.

Notes

  1. 1. See the last apparatus entry to line 11 for my reconstruction of the pre- and post-correction text in this verse, concerning the length of Narendramr̥garāja’s reign.
  2. 2. I construe bhūri- in compound with nodaṁba-rāṣṭra, as Hultzsch does in the Maliyapūṇḍi grant, and understand it to mean “large/populous/plentiful/mighty.” It is also possible to construe bhūri as an adverb, as translated by Butterworth and Venugopaul Chetty for that inscription, in which case Vijayāditya III defeated Maṅgi summarily or repeatedly. With this latter interpretation, saḍ must be construed in compound to the following word; cf. the next note.
  3. 3. I construe saḍ as an adverb with nirjjitya. Hultzsch construes it in compound with the following word, translating, “the excellent Ḍāhala”. Both interpretations are plausible grammatically, and the choice matters little ultimately, but I feel that while an enemy country may be described as bhūri (cf. the previous note) to emphasise the king’s prowess even more, the adjective sat would not be used for the country of a defeated enemy.
  4. 4. The word agraja, literally “fore-born,” is established in the sense of elder brother, yet Vijayāditya IV was the son of Cālukya-Bhīma. The word may have been used by the composer in an unconventional sense here (compare agra-sūnur in the next item and a possible use of agra-janman in line 32 of the Kalucuṁbaṟṟu grant of Amma II). More probably, °āgraja may be a mistake for °ātmaja.
  5. 5. See the commentary about the problems with the reading and interpretation of this stanza.
  6. 6. I translate the expected meaning, but the word adhyāt is problematic; see the apparatus to line 31.
  7. 7. Or, as translated by Hultzsch, “from her,” i.e. from Lokamahādevī.
  8. 8. Hultzsch associates this statement about the turban and parasol with Bhīma I, which does not seem likely from the syntax. He translates, “who seized and wore again at the top (?) of (his) parasol the diadem although it had been struck at by Vallabha”. I believe that my metaphorical interpretation of chatra was the composer’s intent.
  9. 9. As Hultzsch points out, Amma II was in fact the great-grandson of Bhīma I. The composer may have used pautra in the generalised sense of “paternal descendant,” but such usage is not normal.
  10. 10. Hultzsch translates this phrase as “who duly attained success by righteousness.” I think the intent of the composer was more explicit, expressing that Bhīma I was predestined to seize the crown, and did so by rightful means. Hultzsch further proposes an alternative interpretation, namely that he “duly attained (the surname) R̥tasiddhi”, which does not seem likely.
  11. 11. Hultzsch translates naptr̥, most often meaning “grandson” in classical language, as “great-grandson” here, assuming that the composer skipped a generation of the ancestry here, and citing a parallel for such a use of naptr̥. I prefer to take it in the wider sense of “descendant,” since Amma II was the great-great-grandson of Vikramāditya I.
  12. 12. Musiya’s father does not seem to be named, unless his name is punningly hidden in one of his epithets; he may, for example, have been called Nandana. There is also a slight possibility that the father was Guṇḍamayya, named in the next stanza; in this case it is Musiya’s grandfather who is not named.
  13. 13. If I (in agreement with Hultzsch) interpret this phrase correctly, then Musiya’s father had the title mahārāja. This may have been a religious title, or it may have been conferred on him on account of being a minister, presumably to Pāṇḍarāṅga. I think it is also possible, that the composer had meant to say that his mahārāja (probably Pāṇḍarāṅga) had conferred “the highest rank” (that of minister) on this person. This meaning, however, cannot be obtained in a straightforward manner from the compound.
  14. 14. The Maliyapūṇḍi grant of Amma II tells us that Durgarāja was the son of Vijayāditya, son of Niravadya Dhavala, son of Pāṇḍarāṅga, so naptr̥ must mean great-grandson here.
  15. 15. Hultzsch’s interpretation of this passage differs on several counts from mine. Apart from some insignigicant details, the main difference hinges on my emendation tulayā dhr̥tasya. Hultzsch emends differently (see the apparatus to line 43) and translates, “whose fighting-power had been unequalled.” I find his emendation too heavy-handed, and the resulting text less than likely. If my conjecture tulayā dhr̥tasya is correct, I am still not certain of the precise meaning. It may refer in particular to a tulābhāra ceremony in which Pāṇḍarāṅga’s overlord (probably Bhīma I) awarded to Pāṇḍarāṅga the equivalent of his body weight in gold or another precious substance; or it may be meant in a more generic metaphoric sense, i.e. that this overlord had assayed the qualities of Pāṇḍarāṅga (and found them superior). This latter interpretation may be equivalent to the idea of (catur-)upadhā-(vi)śuddha used for ministers in some grants of the Eastern Cālukyas (Śrīpūṇḍi grant of Tāḻa II, Diggubaṟṟu grant of Bhīma II). Additionally, stanza 20 of the Ciṁbuluru plates of Vijayāditya III unambiguously say that Pāṇdarāṅga was weighed against gold by his lord, which confirms my conjecture here and rules out the second interpretation.
  16. 16. This is quite certainly the meaning intended by the composer, but the text is somewhat awkward (see the apparatus to line 45), and may also mean that he was anointed (as king) in the eighth year of his heir-apparent status. Given the next line’s explicit mention of his crowning at the age of 12, this was probably not the meaning the composer had in mind.
  17. 17. The expression pañca-mahāśabda probably refers to being honoured by the sound of five musical instruments, but may also mean five titles beginning with “great”. See Fleet 1888, pp. 296–298, n. 9 for a discussion. Hultzsch points out that this title is restricted to feudatory chiefs, and therefore opines that the person described here is Durgarāja. The list of epithets is indeed not a typical one for Eastern Cālukya rulers and includes neither the name of Amma nor his biruda Vijayāditya. However, the introduction of the sentence, so ’yam, should definitely mean that the present subject is the same as that of the preceding stanza, and I do not think Durgarāja would have been called a parama-bhaṭṭāraka. As to the crux of Hultzsch’s argument, the words pañca-mahāśabda are mentioned as dynastic paraphernalia in the legendary genealogy of the Eastern Cālukyas (e.g. the Raṇastipūṇḍi grant of Vimalāditya, line 22;), and also appear in some earlier grants (applied to the king in the Paḷḷivāḍa grant of Viṣṇuvardhana II, line 11; applied to the dynasty as a whole in line 7 of the Ceruvu Mādhavaram plates of Kali Viṣṇuvardhana V). Nevertheless, the structure of the grant is inconsistent, and the concept may have been that Durgarāja addresses the interested parties here.
  18. 18. This stanza and the next one are apparently out of context, interrupting the progression of the text from “let it be known to you” to the details of the grant beginning in line 52.
  19. 19. Or, as Hultzsch translates, “who desires the favour of (his) lord.”
  20. 20. Or, perhaps, “who always desires morality (dharma) and pragmaticism (artha).”
  21. 21. See the apparatus to line 51. I choose not to emend the text here and understand it to mean “why go into any further detail?”
  22. 22. I understand musiyasya te to mean your, i.e. Durgarāja’s Musiya. It could also be construed as “to you, Musiya,” but I think Amma is more likely to be addressing his immediate underling, just as he does in lines 44-45, tava mantriṇe.
  23. 23. I agree with Hultzsch that the de facto donor implied here is probably Amma II himself, not Durgarāja. I assume that the two hamlets mentioned at the end of the executive section are the administrative divisions incorporating two fields mentioned at the beginning, and thus that one of the hamlets (presumably Tumiya) formerly belonged to the village of Aṇmaṇaṁguru. For “hamlets” I rely on a slight emendation of the text (see the apparatus to line 57) where Hultzsch emends differently. I consider the reading obtained by his emendation to be inferior, and he himself struggles with interpreting it.
  24. 24. I translate the Telugu on the basis of Hultzsch’s translation and a smattering of Telugu words gleaned from other Eastern Cālukya inscriptions.
  25. 25. Hultzsch notes that he assumes paruvulu to be the plural of para, salt marsh.
  26. 26. Or perhaps “the castellan Yaśonidhi.” I agree with Hultzsch that yaśo-nidhi is more likely to be a description than a proper name, and that there is a fair chance that the castellan is Durgarāja himself.
  27. 27. According to Hultzsch’s note, Bīroja corresponds to Sanskrit Vīropādhyāya.
  28. 28. Corr. à Guṇagāṁka.
  29. 29. Frère de Guṇagāṁka.
  30. 30. Corr. à Kollabhigaṇḍa.
  31. 31. Corr. à Vijayāditya V.
  32. 32. Cette époque correspond dans les autres inscriptions au règne de Yuddhamalla qui dura sept ans. Il y a donc un décalage de deux ans dans la chronologie de cette praśasti.
  33. 33. Ce mot est sans doute un équivalent de kaṇṭhika , S.I.I. , p 49, note 1. : « collier porté comme emblème du yuvarāja, prince héritier ».
  34. 34. correct. pour Pārāṁga.
  35. 35. Selon J. F. Fleet, ce titre est réservé aux vassaux du roi, cf. E. P. XII, p. 255, note 2. , il s’agirait donc dans ce passage de Durgarāja et non d’Ammarāja, comme le remarque E. Hultzsch in E. P. 18, p 234, note 4.
  36. 36. Il y a manifestement ici une rupture de construction, le donataire est indiqué au génitif alors qu’il sera au datif dans la phrase suivante, datif du bénéficiaire dépendant du verbe prādāt.
  37. 37. Paspalum scrobiculatum, sorte de millet.
  38. 38. Mesure à grains, quantité équivalente à 9,55 tonnes (d’après les tables de conversion in Renou-Filliozat, 1985, vol. II, appendices p. 758, mesures et poids).
  39. 39. Nous ignorons le sens de ce mot.
  40. 40. Traduction du mot dharma, qui prend ici le sens d’ « action pieuse » et par extension de « don ».
  41. 41. soit 19, 11 tonnes de kodrava.
  42. 42. le mot mānya désigne une terre exemptée de taxe. Cf. D. C. Sircar, 1966, p. 199.
  43. 43. Traduction du mot dharma, cf. note supra.
  44. 44. Des revenus de la donation.
  45. 45. The translation does not include the first 33 lines, which are by and large identical to the first 34 lines of the Maliyapūṇḍi grant.