Attili grant of Bhīma I

Editor: Dániel Balogh.

Identifier: DHARMA_INSVengiCalukya00051.

Language: Sanskrit.

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

Version: (195df1d), last modified (4b028b8).

Edition

Seal

⟨1⟩ śrī-tribhuvanāṅkuśa

Plates

⟨Page 1r⟩

⟨Page 1v⟩ ⟨1⟩ svasti⟨.⟩ śrīm¿ā?⟨a⟩tā⟨ṁ⟩ sakala-bhuvana-sa⟨ṁ⟩stūyamāna-mānavya-sagotrāṇ¿a?⟨ā⟩⟨ṁ⟩ hāriti-p¿a?⟨u⟩⟨2⟩trāṇā⟨ṁ⟩ kauśikī-vara-prasāda-labdha-rājyānāṁ mātr̥-gaṇa-paripālitānāṁ svāmi-ma(hā)⟨3⟩sena-pādānuddhyātānā(ṁ) bhagavan-nārāyaṇa-prasāda-samāsādita-vara-varāha-l(ā)⟨4⟩ñchanekṣaṇa-kṣaṇa-vaśīkr̥tārāti-maṇḍalānām aśvamedhāvabhr̥¿t?⟨th⟩a-s(n)āna-pavitr¿i?⟨ī⟩⟨5⟩kr̥ta-vapuṣā⟨ṁ⟩ cālukyānāṁ kulam ala⟨ṁ⟩kariṣṇo(ḥ) s{s}atyāśraya-vallabhe⟨6⟩ndrasya bhrātā ku¿j?⟨b⟩ja-viṣṇuvarddhano ⟨’⟩ṣṭādaśa va⟨r⟩ṣāṇi| tat-suto jayasiṁhas trayastri(ṁ)⟨7⟩śata(ṁ)⟨.⟩ tad-anujendrarāja-nandano viṣṇuvarddhano nava| tad-ātmajo ma(ṁ)gi-yuvarāja(ḥ) pa(ñca)⟨8⟩vi(ṁ)śati(ṁ)⟨.⟩ tat-tanuj(o) jayasiṁhas trayodaśa| tad-anujaḥ kokki(l)iṣ ¿v?⟨ṣ⟩aṇ māsāN| tad-a⟨9⟩graj(o) viṣṇurājo ⟨’⟩nujam uccāṭya saptatriṁśata(ṁ)| tat-tanūj(o) vijayāditya-bhaṭṭāra⟨Page 2r⟩⟨10⟩ka Ekānnaviṁśati(ṁ)| tat-tanujo viṣṇurāja(ḥ) ṣa¿s?⟨ṭ⟩triṁśata(ṁ|) tat-sūnu⟨r⟩ vvijayādityo bhī⟨11⟩ma-salki-nāmān¿ā?⟨a⟩(ṁ) tat-pakṣa-dakṣ(i)ṇa-(g)aṁga-bala(ṁ) ca ni⟨r⟩jjityāṣṭaśata-narendre(ś)va(r)ā⟨12⟩ṇā(ṁ) karttā catvāriṁśata(ṁ)| tat-tanaya(ḥ) kali-viṣṇuvarddhano ⟨’⟩ddhyarddha-varṣa(ṁ|) tat-putraḥ

I. Āryāgīti

kira⟨13⟩ṇapuram acalapuram uru nellūra-pur(aṁ) vidāhya caitat ⟨t⟩ripuraṁ

ab

martya-maheśva⟨14⟩ra-nāmn¿a?⟨ā⟩ khy(ā)ta-yaśo-rāśir ābabhau yas satata(ṁ|)

cd

Atha ca|

II. Anuṣṭubh

kāliṁ(ga-gaṁga-rū)⟨15⟩pyādi

a

kośaleśa-dvipādi ca|

b

pāṇḍya-pallava-hemādi

c

haṭhāt ⟨t⟩yāgā⟨r⟩ttham āhara⟨16⟩¿ta?⟨T⟩|

d
III. Anuṣṭubh

gaṁgān āropayad gaṁ(ga)-

a

kūṭam ma(ṁ)gi-śiro ⟨’⟩cchi(naT|)

b

kr̥ṣṇaṁ raṇe ⟨’⟩jaya(d) vaktuṁ

c

(kas sa)⟨17⟩ma(r)ttho ⟨’⟩s¿u?⟨ya⟩ sāhasā(N|)

d

sa vijayādityaś catuścatvāri(ṁ)śataṁ{(|)} veṁgī-deśam a(nu)⟨18⟩varṣam avarddhayaT| (tad-anujan)mano yuvarājasya v(ikr)¿(ā)?⟨a⟩mākrānta-sa(kala-dha)⟨Page 2v⟩⟨19⟩rā-cakrasya vikramāditya-bhūpateḥ priya-tanayaḥ|

IV. Sragdharā

śākeṣv abdeṣu yāteṣv atha ma⟨20⟩nu-vasu-saṁprāpt¿e?⟨a⟩-saṁkhyeṣu meṣe|

a

mitre caitre ca maitre śaśini śaśi-dine kr̥ṣṇa⟨21⟩pakṣa-dvitīye|

b

yugma-rkṣasyodgame ⟨’⟩dhāt sakala-jana-mude paṭṭam ā-candra-tāra(ṁ|)

c

⟨22⟩ śrīmā¡n!⟨ñ⟩ cālukya-bhīmaś catur-udadhi-lasa(n-m)ekhalelā-talasya(|)

d

Atha ca(|)

V. Svāgatā

ya⟨23⟩sya khaḍga-jala-vā⟨r⟩ddhi-nimag(n)a(ṁ|)

a

kr̥ṣ⟨ṇ⟩a-vallabha-bala⟨ṁ⟩ sa-sapat⟨n⟩a(ṁ|)

b

sa sarvva-l(okā)⟨24⟩śraya-śrī-viṣṇuvarddhana-mahārājādhirā(ja)-parame(śva)raḥ parama-brahmaṇyaḥ (cālu)⟨25⟩kya-bhīma-nāmāttili-viṣaya-nivāsino rāṣṭrakūṭa-pramukhāN kuṭu(ṁ)bina(ḥ|) ⟨26⟩ Ittham ājñāpayati

viditam astu vo ⟨’⟩smābhiḥ yā sā Apsaro¿ṣ?⟨p⟩amā thuṇḍa⟨27⟩kākhyā tasyā(ḥ) yaḥ putraḥ ⟨tuṁ⟩buru-samāno mallapākhyaḥ tat-sut(āy)¿(ā)?⟨ai⟩ (ca)lla⟨Page 3r⟩⟨28⟩(v)ākhyātasyai samasta-gāndharvva-vidyā-vedinyai Attili nāma-grāme Aiśānyā⟨29⟩n diśi sahasra-kramuka-tar¿ū?⟨u⟩-sthānaM(|?) tasm¿a?⟨i⟩nn eva grāme vāyavyān diśi pa(ṁ)⟨30⟩cāśat-khaṇḍikā-vr¿i?⟨ī⟩hi-bīj¿a?⟨ā⟩vāpa-kṣetra(ṁ) gr̥ha-sthānañ ca dattaM⟨.⟩ Asyo⟨31⟩pari na kenacid bādhā kara(ṇ)īyā⟨.⟩ karo⟨ti⟩ yas sa pañca-mahā-pātaka-saṁyu⟨32⟩to bhavati⟨.⟩ vyāsenāpy uktaM

VI. Anuṣṭubh

ṣ{ṭ}aṣṭi(ṁ) varṣa-sahasrāṇi

a

sva(r)gge modati ⟨33⟩ bhūmi-da(ḥ)

b

Ākṣept¿a?⟨ā⟩ cānumantā ca

c

tāny eva narake vaseT

d

(Ā)jñāptir a⟨34⟩sya dharmmasya kaḍeya-r¿a?⟨ā⟩jaḥ| bhaṭṭa-vāmanena racite(yaṁ) śāsana-(paddha)ti(ḥ|?) ⟨35⟩ cāmikuṟṟācāryyeṇa likhitā

⟨Page 3v⟩

Apparatus

Seal

Plates

⟨1⟩ hāriti- ⬦ hārīti- LR. — ⟨1⟩ -p¿a?⟨u⟩⟨2⟩trāṇā⟨ṁ⟩ ⬦ -pu⟨2⟩trāṇāṁ LR.

⟨6⟩ ku¿j?⟨b⟩ja- ⬦ kubja- LR • The estampage definitely shows jja, but this may merely be the result of the rubbing being incorrectly retouched.

⟨8⟩ ¿v?⟨ṣ⟩aṇ ⬦ ṣaṇ LR. — ⟨8⟩ -tanūj(o) ⬦ -tanujo LR.

⟨10⟩ Ekānna° ⬦ Ekonna° LR.

⟨11⟩ °āṣṭaśata ⬦ °āṣṭāśata LR.

⟨13⟩ -pur(aṁ) ⬦ -purā(N) LR. — ⟨13⟩ caitat ⟨t⟩ripuraṁ ⬦ caitatripura- LR.

⟨15⟩ haṭhāt ⟨t⟩yāgā⟨r⟩ttham ⬦ harātyā Ittham LR • For a parallel LR cites CP 1 of 1913-14, purportedly with the reading hemādikalātyāgārthamāharaT. I do not yet have access to that plate (the Veḍatalūru grant), but the reading in the Moga grant, with a slight emendation, is balāt tyāgārttham āharaT. I am confident of haṭhāt here. The emendation haṭhād yāgārttham cannot be excluded, but is not very likely given the parallel.

⟨16⟩ ⟨’⟩jaya(d) vaktuṁ ⬦ ⟨’⟩jayac chaktuṁ LR • My reading is certain in spite of some damage to the upper right part of d, and is confirmed by the Moga grant. — ⟨16⟩ (ka)s sa⟨17⟩ma(r)ttho ⬦ kasta|⟨17⟩ma⟨r⟩ttho LR • kasta| is probably a typo in LR, since he explicitly emends samarttho, but notes nothing about this unintelligible word.

⟨17⟩ ⟨’⟩s¿u?⟨ya⟩ sāhasā(N|) ⬦ susāhasāN| LR • I emend on the basis of the Moga grant The present reading is also intelligible, but the sandhi suggests that it is a scribal mistake.

⟨20⟩ -saṁprāpt¿e?⟨a⟩-saṁkhyeṣu • LR prints -saṁprāpta-saṁkhyeṣu in his text and emends to -saṁprāpāsaṁkhyeṣu, but I believe this is a compound typo and his intent was to show the received reading and emend as I do. The character sa before khye is much smaller than other characters in the text. No further strokes are visible in the retouched estampage, but I think this is probably a correction, where saṁprāpteṣu was first engraved, and then ṣu was beaten out and corrected to saṁ, with the sa reduced in size to accommodate an anusvāra placed to the right of the consonant.

⟨21⟩ -tāra(ṁ|) ⬦ -tāra¿ḥ?⟨ṁ⟩ LR.

⟨29⟩ sahasra- ⬦ sahasraṁ LR. — ⟨29⟩ -sthānaM(|?) ⬦ -sthānaṁ LR • The final M is very close to the preceding character, and is followed by two strokes that may be the remnant of a deleted character, or a punctuation mark, or damage.

⟨32⟩ -saṁyu⟨32⟩to • There are some additional strokes below t; perhaps tko is in fact inscribed here.

Translation by Dániel Balogh

Seal

Plates

(1–12) Greetings! Satyāśraya Vallabhendra (Pulakeśin II) was eager to adorn the lineage of the majestic Caḷukyas—who are of the Mānavya gotra which is praised by the entire world, who are sons of Hāriti, who attained kingship by the grace of Kauśikī’s boon,1 who are protected by the band of Mothers, who were deliberately appointed (to kingship) by Lord Mahāsena, to whom the realms of adversaries 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 [reigned] for eighteen years. His son Jayasiṁha (I), for thirty-three. His younger brother Indrarāja’s son Viṣṇuvardhana (II), for nine. His son Maṅgi Yuvarāja, for twenty-five. His son Jayasiṁha (II), for thirteen. His younger brother Kokkili, for six months. After dethroning the younger brother, his elder brother Viṣṇurāja (Viṣṇuvardhana III), for thirty-seven. His son Vijayāditya (I) Bhaṭṭāraka, for nineteen. His son Viṣṇurāja (Viṣṇuvardhana IV), for thirty-six years. His son Vijayāditya (II), who constructed a hundred and eight Narendreśvara [temples] after defeating the one named Bhīma Salki and the force of Southern Gaṅgas that sided with him, [reigned] for forty [years]. His son Kali Viṣṇuvardhana (V), for a year and a half. His son—

I
who shone ever in a nimbus of glory by the name “Mortal Maheśvara (Śiva),” [for] having burned the three cities of Kiraṇapura, Acalapura and spacious Nellūrapura;

(14) furthermore,

II
vehemently seized, in order to donate it, the silver and other [goods] of the Kāliṅgas and the Gaṅgas, the elephants and other [goods] of the Lords of Kośala, and the gold and other [goods] of the Pāṇdyas and the Pallavas;
III
pressed the Gaṅgas up to the Gaṅga peak, struck off the head of Maṅgi, defeated Kr̥ṣṇa in battle—who would be capable of recounting his daring deeds?

(17–19) —that Vijayāditya (III) strengthened the land of Veṅgī year after year for forty-four [years]. His younger brother was the Heir Apparent Prince (bhūpati) Vikramāditya who conquered the entire circle of the earth by his valour (vikrama). His dear son,

IV
His Majesty Cālukya-Bhīma (I), upon the passing of Śaka years whose number is obtained through the Manus (14) and the Vasus (8) (i.e. Śaka 814 expired), with the Sun (mitra) in Aries (meṣa), in [the month] Caitra, with the moon in [the asterism] Maitra (i.e. Anurādhā), on a Monday, the second [day] of the dark fortnight, at the ascension of the constellation Gemini (yugma), donned to the delight of the people the eternal (ā-candra-tāra) turban of [sovereignty over] the surface of the earth whose glittering girdle is the four oceans.

(22) Furthermore,

V
The ocean whose water was his swords swallowed up, along with his rivals, the forces of Kr̥ṣṇa Vallabha.2

(23–26) that shelter of all the world (sarva-lokāśraya), His Majesty Viṣṇuvardhana, the supremely pious Supreme Lord (parameśvara) of Emperors (mahārājādhirāja), named Cālukya-Bhīma (I), commands all householders (kuṭumbin)—including foremost the territorial overseers (rāṣṭrakūṭa)—who reside in Attili district (viṣaya) as follows:

(26–32) Let it be known to you that to the [woman] known as Callavā, who knows the entire science of music (gāndharva), who is the daughter of [a man] called Mallapa who is the equal of Tumburu and who is the son of that [woman] equal to an apsaras called Thuṇḍakā, we have given an orchard of a thousand betelnut trees at the village named Attili to the northeastern direction (of the village), as well as as a field (sufficient) for sowing fifty khaṇḍikās of rice seed and a homestead plot at the same village, to the northwestern direction. Let no-one pose an obstacle [to her enjoyment of her rights] over it. He who does so shall be conjoined with the five great sins. Vyāsa too has said:

VI
A donor of land rejoices in heaven for sixty millennia, [while] a seizer (of granted land) and a condoner (of such seizure) shall reside in hell for just as many.

(33–35) The executor (ājñapti) of this ruling (dharma) is the castellan (kaḍeya-rāja). The formulation (paddhati) of this decree was composed by Bhaṭṭa Vāmana. Written (likhita) by Cāmikuṟṟācārya.

Commentary

V
Stanza 5 consists only of two pādas. As LR notes, the remaining pādas can be supplied from stanza 3 of the Vedatulūru grant of Bhīma I as follows: mr̥ṇmayan tu caturaṁga-balaṁ vā kṣipram eva vilayaṁ gatam ājau.

Bibliography

Reported in Krishna Sastri 1918, p. 13, appendices A/1917-18, № 14 with some further details at Krishna Sastri 1918, p. 131, § 4. Edited from the original by K. V. Lakshmana Rao(1922), with estampages and translation. The present edition by Dániel Balogh is based on a collation of Lakshmana Rao’s edition with his facsimiles.3

Primary

[LR] Lakshmana Rao, Komarraju Venkata. 1922. “The Telugu Academy Plates of Bhima I. Saka 814.” JBORS 8, pp. 83–98.

Secondary

Krishna Sastri, H. 1918. G.O. No. 1172, 6th September 1918. Epigraphy. Recording, with remarks, the progress report of the Assistant Archaeological Superintendent for epigraphy, Southern Circle, for the year 1917-1918. No place. Page 13, appendixes A/1917-18, item 14.

Krishna Sastri, H. 1918. G.O. No. 1172, 6th September 1918. Epigraphy. Recording, with remarks, the progress report of the Assistant Archaeological Superintendent for epigraphy, Southern Circle, for the year 1917-1918. No place. Page 131, section 4.

Notes

  1. 1. Or, alternatively, by the grace of Kauśikī’s bridegroom, i.e. Śiva. In spite of its slight awkwardness, I prefer the former interpretation because the Bādāmi Cālukyas refer to themselves as nourished (saṁvardhita) by Kauśikī.
  2. 2. If the second hemistich of this stanza was omitted by scribal oversight, then the full stanza as supplied from a parallel attestation (see the commentary) would translate, “Sunk in the ocean whose water was his swords, the {four-branched} forces of Kr̥ṣṇa Vallabha along with his rivals dissolved in battle like a {chess} army made of (unbaked) clay {sunk in the (actual) ocean}.” Lakshmana Rao interprets the text to mean “The army of Krishnavallabha who was (Bhīma’s) rival,” but sa-sapatna does not in my opinion allow this interpretation. Instead, rivals separate from Kr̥ṣṇa Vallabha must have been meant here, probably ones from his own family, usually referred to with the word dāyāda) in other Eastern Cālukya inscriptions.
  3. 3. The published estampages have been evidently doctored by hand. Lakshmana Rao’s edition differs from the facsimile in numerous trivial details (e.g. reading an anusvāra where none is visible in the estampage), which may be silent emendations by the editor or details that were not cleared up by the person who retouched the plates. My edition shows the reading of the published plates, except that I do print unclear anusvāra and visarga where one is expected and the facsimile has a space suggesting the presence of such a mark. My apparatus does not indicate differences from Lakshmana Rao’s edition that I deem to be silent emendations or obvious typographic mistakes in the latter.