Texts
Texts database last updated .
This interface allows you to look for texts in the DHARMA collection. The search form below can be used for filtering results. Matching is case-insensitive, does not take diacritics into account, and looks for substrings instead of terms. For instance, the query edit matches "edition" or "meditation". To look for a phrase, surround it with double quotes, as in "old javanese". Searching for strings that contain less than three characters is not possible.
Per default, all metadata fields are searched (except "lang", see below). Metadata fields are (for now): "title", "editor", "editor_id", "author", "summary", "lang", "repo", "ident". You can restrict search to a specific field by using a field prefix, as in editor:manu or title:"critical edition". Several clauses can be added successively, separated with whitespace. In this case, for a document to be considered a match, all query clauses must match. Try for instance editor:manu title:stone.
Note the use of quotation marks: the query editor:"emmanuel francis" matches all documents edited by Emmanuel Francis, but the query editor:emmanuel francis matches all documents edited by someone called Emmanuel and that also include the name Francis in any metadata field.
The "lang" field is special. If you look for a string that contains two or three letters only, as in lang:en or lang:san, it is assumed to refer to an ISO 639 language code, and an exact comparison is performed. If you look for a string longer than that, it is assumed to refer to a language name and the above-mentioned substring matching technique will be used instead. You can consult a table of languages here.
Documents 1–50 of 1802 matching.
Emmanuel Francis.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv01p0i0100.
Emmanuel Francis.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv01p0i0101.
Emmanuel Francis.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv01p0i0102.
Emmanuel Francis.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv01p0i0103.
Emmanuel Francis.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv01p0i0104.
Emmanuel Francis.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv01p0i0105.
Emmanuel Francis.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv01p0i0106.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: At this temple there are two stones with fragmentary inscriptions. One of them is dated “in the fifty-second year of Ko-Vijaya-Nandivikramavarman.”
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv01p0i0108.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: Both pillars of this aḷavukkal1 bear fragments of ancient inscriptions. That on the right pillar belongs to the time of some Ko-Parakesarivarman. It deserves to be noted that, in line 3, the syllable ṟā is written ṟā [[றா]], and not ṟā [[prereform ṟā as a single glyph]] as in modern Tamil.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv01p0i0109.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This temple contains three fragmentary inscriptions in archaic characters.
This inscription records some gift, which the assembly (sabhā) of Velūr, alias Parameśvara-maṅgalam, made to the god Ādidāsa Chaṇḍeśvara.1
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv01p0i0110.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This inscription seems to record another gift of the sabhā of Velūr. It mentions Śemmaṇpākkam (the modern Śembākkam) and Rājendra-Choḷeśvara,1 evidently the name of the temple itself.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv01p0i0111.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This inscription mentions both Rājendra-Choḷeśvara1 and Ādidāsa Chaṇḍeśvara.2 The fragment seems to begin with a description of the boundaries of some gift, in which the term Piḍāri-paṭṭi3 occurs.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv01p0i0112.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: There are three stones with almost illegible inscriptions built into the wall of this temple. Two of them contain the subjoined fragment, which may be read with the help of the nearly identical Paḍaveḍu inscription No. 81. The inscription seems to have belonged to Devarāja II. of Vijayanagara, the son of Vīra-Vijayarāya-mahārāyar. The latter is identical with Vijaya or Vīra-Vijaya, who, according to No. 153, below, was the son of Devarāja I. and the father of Devarāja II. The inscriptions of Devarāja II. which are published above (Nos. 54, 56, 79, 80 and 81) range between the current Śaka years 1348 and 1372.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv01p0i0113.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: Besides the inscription published under No. 55, above, this temple bears another much defaced inscription, which is engraved on the east wall and consists of seven lines. The date is the Vishu year, which was current after the expiration of the Śaka year 1443. According to the third and fourth lines, the inscription seems to have recorded a grant, which Tirumalai-nāyaka made to the temple of Virūpāksha-nāyaṉār at Veppambaṭṭu in Āndi-nāḍu; line 4 also mentions Paḍaivīḍu.1 The passage alluded to runs as follows:
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv01p0i0114.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This and the next inscription belong to the same king, as No. 108. The present inscription is dated “in the ninth year of Ko-Vijaya-Nandivikramavarman.”
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv01p0i0124.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This inscription is dated “in the forty-seventh year of Vijaya-Nandivikramavarman.”
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv01p0i0125.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This inscription is dated in the third (?) year of Madirai-koṇḍa Ko-Parakesarivarman.1
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv01p0i0126.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: The stone, which bears the subjoined inscription, is unfortunately very much worn. The text, as far as it can be made out, runs as follows: [[see below]]
An inscription of the same Rājendra-deva, which is dated in the ninth year and is found in a niche of the Varāhasvāmin Temple at Māmallapuram, was published by Sir Walter Elliot.1 He identified Āhavamalla with the Western Chālukya king Āhavamalla II. or Someśvara I. (about Śaka 964 to about 990), who, according to inscriptions2 and according to the Vikramāṅkacharita (sarga i, verses 90, 115, 116), fought with the Choḷas. The Rājendra-deva of the present inscription and of Sir Walter Elliot’s inscription may be identified with that Rājendra-deva of the Sūryavaṁśa, whose daughter Madhurāntakī was married to the Eastern Chalukya king Rājendra-Choḍa (Śaka 985 to 1034) according to verse 12 of the Chellūr grant (No. 39).3
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv01p0i0127.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This inscription mentions Sakalalokachakravartin Rājanārāyaṇa Śambuvarāya[ṉ]1 and seems to record a gift to Vaṛittuṇai-appaṉ.2
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv01p0i0128.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: The southern wall of this temple is covered with several Choḷa inscriptions. None of them can be made out completely, as the letters are much obliterated, and as the stones are, to all appearance, not in their original order.
This is dated “in the 11th (?) year of Ko-Rājakesarivarman, alias Chakravartin Śrī-Kulottuṅga-Śoṛa-deva.”
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv01p0i0130.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This inscription is engraved to the right of No. 130 and may have been intended for its continuation. It records a gift of land from the inhabitants of Aimbūṇḍi (the modern Ammuṇḍi)1 to their Śiva temple, which bore the name of Muppaṉaiyīśvara. The gift was made before the god Ādidāsa Chaṇḍeśvara-deva.2
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv01p0i0131.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This inscription is dated “in the 10th (?) year of Tribhuvanachakravartin Koṉeri Meṉ-koṇḍa Kulottuṅga-Śoṛa-deva.” The donor was Śeṅgeṇi-Ammaiyappa . . . . Perumāḷ, alias Vikrama-Śoṛa-Śambuvarāyaṉ.1
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv01p0i0132.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This inscription is dated during the reign of Vīra-Veṅkaṭapatirāyar and in the Śrīmukha year. This is Śaka 1556, two years before No. 107 and three years before an inscription of Veṅkaṭa II. published in the Indian Antiquary, Vol. XIII, p. 125. The inscription records that Govindappa-nāyaka caused the maṇḍapa to be built and allotted some land in Kaṛaṉipākkam for the maṇḍapa, which was to be used as a watershed and sattram.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv01p0i0133.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: At this village, there are four stones with sculptures and rough inscriptions. The sculptures are the following:—on stone No. 134, a man with a bow; on stone No. 135, an elephant and a bird; on stone No. 136, an armed man; and on stone No. 137, a man fighting with a tiger.
This and the next inscription are dated in the third and eighteenth year, respectively, of Ko-Vijaya-Narasiṁhavarman.1
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv01p0i0134.
Emmanuel Francis.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv01p0i0135.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This and the next inscription are dated in the twenty-ninth and thirty-second year, respectively, of Madirai-koṇḍa Ko-Parakesarivarman.1
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv01p0i0136.
Emmanuel Francis.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv01p0i0137.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: The inscription is a fragment, dated in some year of Rājarāja-deva.1 In the second line the word Śoṛa-koṉ, “the Choḷa king,” occurs.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv01p0i0141.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: The beginning of both lines of this inscription is buried underground. From that part, which I have copied, it appears that the inscription refers to some gift (mānya, i.e., sarvamānya). At the beginning of the second line, the word paḍaivīḍu occurs in the plural and seems to be used in the sense of “encampments.”1 The inscription ends with “the signature of Jayaṅkoṇḍa-Śoṛa-Brahmā-rāyaṉ”; the same name is borne by a villageaccountant in a Tirumalai inscription.2
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv01p0i0142.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This inscription is an incorrect duplicate of the first four lines of No. 81, above.
Languages: Tamil, Undetermined.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv01p0i0143.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: Each line of this inscription is incomplete at the end. It is dated during the reign of Madirai-koṇḍa Ko-Parakesari[varman].1 Line 2 mentions “the holy stone-temple” (Tirukkaṟṟaḷi), i.e., the Rājasiṁhavarmeśvara Temple.2 According to lines 3 and 4, the inscription seems to have recorded an agreement made by the inhabitants of two quarters (śeri) of Kachchippeḍu (i.e., Kāñchīpuram), of which the second was called Ekavīrappāḍichcheri and the name of the first also ended in ppāḍichcheri. The term paḷḷichchandam3 occurs in line 5.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv01p0i0145.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This fragment is dated in the twelfth year of Ko-Rāja-Rājakesarivarman, “who built a jewel (-like) hall at Kāndaḷūr.” The mention of Kāndaḷūr shows, that the king has to be identified with that Rājarāja-deva, who caused the inscriptions Nos. 40, 41 and 66 to be engraved, and that he built the hall at Kāndaḷūr before his twelfth year. The inscription seems to have recorded, that the assembly (sabhā) of some village pledged themselves, to furnish a yearly supply of paddy to the temple-treasurers (Śiva-paṇḍārigaḷ) from the interest of a sum of money,1 which they had received from “the large holy stone-temple, alias Rājasiṁheśvara, at Kāñchipuram,” or to pay a fine of a quarter poṉ daily. The document is signed by [Pu]ṟambi Sūrya of Tiruviṛāpuṟam.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv01p0i0146.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: These two fragments belong to the time of Ko-Rājakesarivarman. The second is dated in his 3rd year. Each of them records an agreement made by the inhabitants of some village, who pledged themselves to furnish daily one uṛakku of oil for a nondā1 or nandā lamp in exchange for a loan of 15 kaṛañjus of gold, and is signed by Māṉatoṅgaḷ Maḷḷerumāṉ, a member of the village-assembly (kūṭṭam).
First inscription.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv01p0i0147.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This fragment, which is dated in the fifteenth year of Ko-Parakesarivarman, contains an agreement made by the inhabitants of some village, who had received a certain sum of money from “the large holy stone-temple (i.e., the Rājasiṁhavarmeśvara Temple) at Kachchippeḍu (i.e., Kāñchīpuram).” From the interest of this sum, they pledged themselves to supply ghee for a lamp at the rate of 1 uṛakku per day or 7 nāṛis and 1 uri per mensem.1 The measure to be used was a nāṛi, which was equal to a rājakesari.2 As the Choḷa kings alternately bore the surnames Rājakesarin and Parakesarin,3 it must be assumed, that this measure was called after one of the predecessors of the king, to whose reign the inscription belongs. The writer of the inscription was the village-headman Nāga Alappaḍi.4
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv01p0i0148.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: These are three fragments of what must have been a very long inscription. Its extent may be estimated from the fact, that line 1 of the first fragment corresponds to line 1 of No. 67, line 1 of the second fragment to line 5 of No. 67, and the first part of line 1 of the third fragment to the latter part of line 6 of No. 67. None of the fragments is in its original position. The first and second are built into the roof of the mahāmaṇḍapa of the Rājasiṁhavarmeśvara Shrine. The third fragment is built into the pavement of the veranda near the entrance into the mahāmaṇḍapa; some letters of each line are covered by a pillar.
Although the name of the king, during whose reign the inscription was engraved, is lost, the existing fragments of the first line, which agree literally with parts of the first, fifth and sixth lines of the inscription No. 67, prove, that the inscription was one of Rājendra-Choḷa-deva. As the list of his conquests reaches here only as far as “the high mountains of Navanedikkula,”1 the date must fall between the 7th and 10th years of the king. The inscription seems to have recorded some gifts of paddy, gold and money.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv01p0i0149.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This inscription is dated in the 26th year of Tribhuvanachakravartin Rājarāja-deva. According to the Poygai inscriptions (Nos. 59 to 64) this year would correspond to Śaka 1163-64. By the subjoined document, some person pledged himself, to supply daily one āṛākku1 of ghee for five lamps (saṁdhi-viḷakku) “to the lord of the holy stone-temple, alias Rājasiṁhavarmeśvara, at Kachchippeḍu,” i.e., Kāñchīpuram. The ghee had to be made over daily to those, who were in charge of the nāṛigai (measure) within the temple.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv01p0i0150.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: The original of the subjoined grant was bought for Government from the Dharmakartā of Kūram, a village near Kāñchīpuram.1 It is engraved on seven thin copper-plates, each of which measures 10(1/8) by 3(1/4) inches. As the plates are in very bad preservation, the work of deciphering them was somewhat difficult. Of the seventh plate about one half is completely lost. Next to it, the first, fifth and sixth plates have suffered most. An elliptic ring, which is about (3/8) inch thick and measures 4 by 4(3/4) inches in diameter, is passed through a hole on the left side of each plate. The seal is about 2(1/2) inches in diameter and bears a bull, which is seated on a pedestal, faces the left and is surmounted by the moon and a liṅga. Farther up, there are a few much obliterated syllables. A legend of many letters passes round the whole seal. Unfortunately it is so much worn, that I have failed to decipher it.
The language of the first 4(1/2) plates of the inscription is Sanskrit,—verse and prose; the remainder is written in Tamil. The Sanskrit portion opens with three benedictory verses, of which the two first are addressed to Śiva and the third mentions the race of the Pallavas. Then follows, as usual,2 a mythical genealogy of Pallava, the supposed founder of the Pallava race:—
[[genealogical table:]] Brahman. Aṅgiras. Bṛihaspati. Bharadvāja. Droṇa. Aśvatthāman. Pallava.
The historical part of the inscription describes three kings, viz., Parameśvaravarman, his father Mahendravarman and his grandfather Narasiṁhavarman. Of Narasiṁhavarman it says, that he “repeatedly defeated the Choḷas, Keraḷas, Kaḷabhras and Pāṇḍyas,” that he “wrote the (three) syllables of (the word) vijaya (i.e., victory), as on a plate, on Pulakeśin’s back, which was caused to be visible (i.e., whom he caused to turn his back) in the battles of Pariyaḷa, Maṇimaṅgala, Śūramāra, etc.,” and that he “destroyed (the city of) Vātāpi.” No historical information is given about Mahendravarman, who, accordingly, seems to have been an insignificant ruler. A laudatory description of the virtues and deeds of his son Parameśvaravarman fills two plates of the inscription. The only historical fact contained in this long and difficult passage is that, in a terrible battle, he “made Vikramāditya,—whose army consisted of several lakshas,—take to flight, covered only by a rag.”
The three kings who are mentioned in the Kūram grant, viz., Narasiṁhavarman, Mahendravarman and Parameśvaravarman, are identical with three Pallava kings described in Mr. Foulkes’ grant of Nandivarman Pallavamalla,3 viz., Narasiṁhavarman I., Mahendravarman II. and Parameśvaravarman I. Of Narasiṁhavarman I. the lastmentioned grant likewise states, that he “destroyed Vātāpi” and that he “frequently defeated Vallabharāja at Pariyaḷa, Maṇimaṅgala, Śūramāra, and other (places).” Here Vallabharāja corresponds to the Pulakeśin of the Kūram grant. If Mr. Foulkes’ grant further reports, that Parameśvaravarman I. “defeated the army of Vallabha in the battle of Peruvaḷanallūr,” it is evident that it alludes to the same fight as is described in the Kūram grant.
If we combine the historical information contained in both grants, it appears—1. that the Pallava king Narasiṁhavarman I. defeated Pulakeśin, alias Vallabharāja, at Pariyaḷa, Maṇimaṅgala, Śūramāra, and other places, and destroyed Vātāpi, the capital of the Western Chalukyas, and—2. that his grandson Parameśvaravarman I. defeated Vikramāditya, alias Vallabha, at Peruvaḷanallūr. As stated above (p. 11), Pulakeśin and Vikramāditya, the opponents of the two Pallava kings, must have been the Western Chalukya kings Pulikeśin II. (Śaka 532 and 556) and his son Vikramāditya I. (Śaka 592 (?) to 602 (?)), who, more indico, likewise boast of having conquered their antagonists.4 Thus, a grant of Pulikeśin II. says, that “he caused the leader of the Pallavas to hide his prowess behind the ramparts of Kāñchīpura;”5 and, in a grant of Vikramāditya I., it is said that “this lord of the earth, conquering Īśvarapotarāja (i.e., Parameśvaravarman I.), took Kāñchī, whose huge walls were insurmountable and hard to be broken, which was surrounded by a large moat that was unfathomable and hard to be crossed, and which resembled the girdle (kāñchī) of the southern region (read dakshiṇadiśaḥ).”6
Another Pallava king, viz., Nandipotavarman, is mentioned as the opponent of the Western Chalukya king Vikramāditya II. (Śaka 655 to 669) in the Vakkaleri grant, which was published by Mr. Rice.7 The table inserted on p. 11, above, shows that this Nandipotavarman must be identical with the Pallava king Nandivarman Pallavamalla, who is mentioned in Mr. Foulkes’ grant. Though digressing from my subject, I now sub- join a transcript from the facsimile and a translation of that part of the Vakkaleri grant, which describes the reign of Vikramāditya II.
⟨36⟩ sakalabhuvanasāmrājyalakṣmīsvayaṁvarābhiṣekasamayānanta⟨37⟩rasamupajātamahotsāhaḥ Ātmavaṁśajapūrvvanṛpaticchāyā⟨38⟩pahāriṇaḥ prakṛtyamitrasya pallavasya samūlonmūla⟨39⟩nāya kṛtamatiratitvarayā tuṁḍākaviṣayaṁ prāpyābhimu¿s?⟨kh⟩āgatannandipotava⟨40⟩rmmābhidhānampallavaṁ raṇamukhe saṁprahṛtya prapalā¿s?⟨y⟩ya kaṭumukhavādi⟨41⟩trasamudraghoṣābhidhānavādyaviśeṣ¿ān?⟨au⟩khaṭvā¿ṁ?⟨ṅ⟩gadhvaja⟨ṁ⟩ prabhūtaprakhyāta⟨42⟩hastivarānsvakiraṇanikaravikāsanirākṛtatimirammāṇikyarāśi⟨43⟩ñca hastekṛtya kalaśabhavanilayaharidaṁganāṁcitakāṁcīya⟨44⟩mānāṁ kāṁcīmavināśya praviśya satatapravṛttadānān¿ā?⟨a⟩nditadvi{j}ja⟨45⟩dīnānāthajano narasiṁhapotavarmmanirmmāpitaśilāmayarāja⟨46⟩siṁheśvarādidevakulasuvarṇarāśipratyarppaṇopārjitorjitapuṇyaḥ A⟨47⟩nivāritapratāpaprasarapratāpitapāṇḍyacoḷakeraḷakaḷabhrapra⟨48⟩bhṛtirājanyakaḥ kṣubhitakarimakarakarahatadalitaśuktimuktamuktāphala⟨49⟩prakaramarīcijālavilasitavelāk¿u?⟨ū⟩le ghūrṇamānārṇobhidhāne dakṣi(ṇā)⟨50⟩rṇave śaradamalaśaśadharaviśadayaśorāśimayaṁ jayastambha⟨51⟩matiṣṭhipadvikramādityasatyāśrayaśrīpṛthivīvallabhamahārājādhirā⟨52⟩japarameśvarabhaṭṭāraka(ḥ)
“Vikramāditya Satyāśraya Śrī-Pṛithivī-vallabha, the king of great kings, the supreme ruler, the lord,—to whom arose great energy immediately after the time of his anointment at the self-choice of the goddess of the sovereignty of the whole world, and who resolved to uproot completely his natural enemy, the Pallava, who had robbed of their splendour the previous kings born from his race,—reached with great speed the Tuṇḍākavishaya (i.e., the Toṇḍai-maṇḍalam8), attacked at the head of a battle and put to flight the Pallava, called Nandipotavarman, who had come to meet him, took possession of the musical instrument (called) “harsh-sounding” and of the excellent musical instrument called “roar of the sea,” of the banner (marked with Śiva’s) club, of many renowned and excellent elephants, and of a heap of rubies, which drove away darkness by the light of the multitude of their rays, and entered (the city of) Kāñchī,—which seemed to be the handsome girdle (kāñchī) of the nymph of the southern region,—without destroying it. Having made the twice-born, the distressed and the helpless rejoice by continual gifts, having acquired great merit by granting heaps of gold to (the temple) of stone (called) Rājasiṁheśvara, which Narasiṁhapotavarman had caused to be built,9 and to other temples, and having burnt by the unimpeded progress of his power the Pāṇḍya, Choḷa, Keraḷa, Kaḷabhra and other princes, he placed a pillar of victory (jayastambha), which consisted (as it were) of the mass of his fame that was as pure as the bright moon in autumn, on the Southern Ocean, which was called Ghūrṇamānārṇas (i.e., that whose waves are rolling) and whose shore glittered with the rays of the pearls, which had dropped from the shells, that were beaten and split by the trunks of the frightened elephants (of his enemies), which resembled sea-monsters.”
That Vikramāditya II. really entered Kāñchī and visited the Rājasiṁheśvara Temple, is proved by a much obliterated Kanarese inscription in the Kailāsanātha Temple at Kāñchīpuram. This inscription is engraved on the back of a pillar in the maṇḍapa in front of the Rājasiṁheśvara Shrine, close to the east wall of that maṇḍapa, which at a later time was erected between the front maṇḍapa and Rājasiṁheśvara. It begins with the name of “Vikramāditya Satyāśraya Śrī-Pṛithivī-vallabha, the king of great kings, the supreme ruler, the lord” and mentions the temple of Rājasiṁheśvara (rājasiṁgheśvara, line 4).
I now return to the Kūram plates. The three last of them contain the grant proper, and record in Sanskrit and Tamil, that Parameśvara (i.e., Parameśvaravarman I.) gave away the village of Parameśvara-maṅgalam,—which was evidently named after the king himself,—in twenty-five parts. Of these, three were enjoyed by two Brāhmaṇas, Anantaśivāchārya and Phullaśarman, who performed the divine rites and looked after the repairs of the Śiva temple at Kūram, which was called Vidyāvinīta-Pallava-Parameśvara, and which had been built by Vidyāvinīta-Pallava, probably a relative of the king. The fourth part was set aside for the cost of providing water and fire for the maṇḍapa at Kūram, and the fifth for reciting the Bhārata in this maṇḍapa. The remaining twenty parts were given to twenty Chaturvedins.
At the time of the grant, the village of Kūram belonged to the nāḍu (country) or, in Sanskrit, manyavāntara-rāshṭra of Nīrveḷūr, a division of Ūṟṟukkāṭṭukkoṭṭam (lines 49 and 57 f.), and the village of Parameśvaramaṅgalam belonged to the Paṉmā-nāḍu or Patmā-manyavāntara-rāshṭra, a division of Maṇayiṟkoṭṭam (lines 53 and 71). As, in numerous Tamil inscriptions, paṉma corresponds to the Sanskrit varman,—the form Paṉmānāḍu, which occurs also in No. 86, might mean the country of the Varmās, i.e., of the Pallavas, whose names end in varman, the nominative case of which is varmā. There is, however, a possibility of patmā being a mistake for, and paṉmā a Tamil form of, Padmā,10 one of the names of the goddess Lakshmī. With Maṇayiṟkoṭṭam compare Maṇaviṟkoṭṭam in No. 86 and Eyiṟkoṭṭam in No. 88. Possibly Maṇaviṟkoṭṭam is a mere corruption of Maṇayiṟkoṭṭam, and Maṇayil stands for Maṇ-eyil, “mud-fort,” which might be a fuller form of Eyil, a village in the South Arcot District, which seems to have given its name to Eyiṟkoṭṭam.11
In conclusion, an important palaeographical peculiarity of the Tamil portion of the Kūram plates has to be noted. The puḷḷi, which corresponds to the Nāgarī virāma, occurs frequently, though not regularly, in combination with seven letters of the Tamil alphabet. In the case of five of these (ṅ, m, l, ḷ, ṉ) it is represented by a short vertical stroke over the letter, as in the inscription No. 82, above.12 In the case of the two others (n and r) it has a similar shape, but is placed behind the letter and at an angle with it, in such a way that the lower part is nearer to the letter than the upper one.
Languages: Sanskrit, Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv01p0i0151.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This is a highly damaged record of Vijaya-Kampavikramavarman dated in his 9th year. It registers a gift of 30 kaḻañju of gold by Amarnidi alias Pallavadiyaraiyar of Kañjanūr in Indaḷūr-nāḍu which was a subdivision of Śōḻa-nāḍu and another gift of a similar amount by a person whose name is lost, for burning two perpetual lamps in the temple at Tiruvoṟṟiyūr. It may be noted that Kañjanūr which may be identified with the village of the same name in the Kumbakonam taluk of the Tanjore district is not herein called Siṁhavishṇu-chaturvēdimaṅgalam, as is done in a record from Tiruviḍaimarudūr.1
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv12p0i0100.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This inscription, dated in the 11th year of Vijaya-Kampavarman, registers a sale of the ērikkāḍi-right by the assembly of Kīḻppūdūr in Kāliyūr-kōṭṭam to Mādēvaṉār, son of Perumbāṇaṉ Śakkaḍi-Araiyar in return for the gold received from him. One kāḍi of paddy was ordered to be levied as ērikkāḍi (tank duty) on each paṭṭi of cultivated land, including those given to physicians as vaidya-bhōga.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv12p0i0102.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: The date of this record of Vijaya-Kampavarman is not clear. It might be 11, 13 or 16. The inscription records an agreement made by the assembly (ūr) of Vaikkāṭṭūr to provide offerings to the god Mahādēva at Tiruvoṟṟiyūr, on the day of saṅkrānti, for the interest on 27 kaḻañju of gold received by them from Pūdi Aṟindigai, wife of Viḍēlviḍugu [Iḷaṅkōvē]ḷār of Koḍumbāḷūr1 in Kō-nāḍu. The chiefs of Koḍumbāḷūr (in the Pudukkottai state) figure largely in inscriptions as subordinates of the Chōḷas, but their connection with the Pallavas is not so well known. A chief of this family is also mentioned in a mutilated record from Kīḻūr,2 dated in the 11th year of Vijaya-Nandivikramavarman, where the donor is stated to be the wife of Śāttaṉ Maṟavaṉ and the daughter of Vikrama-Pūdi who is probably identical with Viḍēlviḍugu Iḷaṅkō-Adiaraiyaṉ mentioned in the same record.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv12p0i0103.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: The subjoined record is dated in the 17th year of Vijaya-Kampavarman and in registers a gift of 736 kaḻañju of gold to the assembly of Chiṟṟambalam in Kāvadippākkam alias Avaṉinārāyaṇa-chaturvēdimaṅgalam for feeding a person daily, by a lady called Nampirāṭṭi, the elder sister of one Tiruvānaṅgamudi.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv12p0i0104.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: The construction of a temple of Nirañjanēśvarattu-Mahādēva at Tiruvoṟṟiyūr by a certain Nirañjanaguravar of the place and the gift of 20,000 kuḻi of land by purchase from the assembly of Maṇali for its upkeep, are recorded in this inscription of Vijaya-Kampavarman dated in the 19th year. The document was drawn up by Rudrappōttar Kumāra-Kāḷan, the madhyastha of the village. The communities Mandirattār and Kombaṟuttār are mentioned in ll. 29-30.
The inscription is stated to have been engraved by Tiruvoṟṟiyūr-Āchāryaṉ alias Paramēśvaran, son of Śāmuṇḍāchārya.
The puḷḷis are marked in the inscription.
Languages: Sanskrit, Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv12p0i0105.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This inscription of Kampavarman, dated in the 20th year, is engraved above the figure of a person holding his severed head by the tuft in his left hand, while the right hand grasps a sword (Plate VI). It registers a gift of land made by the ūrār of Tiruvāṉmūr to Paṭṭai-Pōttaṉ for the pious act of Okkoṇḍanāgaṉ Okkatīndaṉ Paṭṭai-Pōttaṉ, probably his father, in cutting off flesh from nine parts of his body and finally his head as an offering to the goddess Bhaṭārī, i.e., Durgā.
The rituals connected with human sacrifice offered to the goddess Durgā are described in the Kālikā-Purāṇa, Chapter 70.
The modern Mallām or an ancient suburb of it was known as Tiruvāṉmūr in inscriptions.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv12p0i0106.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: It is stated in this record of Vijaya-Kampavarman, dated in the 20th year, that a member of the āḷum-gaṇattār of Kāvadippākkam in Paḍuvūr-kōṭṭam made a gift of 11 kaḻañju of gold for supplying, from the interest on this amount, water to the temple of Tiruppondaip-Perumānaḍigaḷ at Rājamalla-chaturvēdimaṅgalam. This village may be identified with Brahmadēśam itself where the present inscription is found. Since we find an inscription of the Gaṅga king Rājamalla, the grandson of Śrīpurusha at Vaḷḷimalai1 not very far from Brahmadēśam, Rājamalla-chaturvēdimaṅgalam, may have been called so after this Gaṅga king. It may be mentioned that in the region surrounding Brahmadēśam there are villages called Srīpurushamaṅgalam2 and Raṇavikrama chaturvēdimaṅgalam3 which must have been named after the Gaṅga kings Śrīpurusha and Raṇavikrama, the grandfather and father respectively of Rājamalla. The name of the god at Brahmadēśam viz., Tiruppondai-Perumānaḍigaḷ is uncommon in the Tamil country and it is probably to be traced to some Gaṅga or Western Chāḷukya4 princess.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv12p0i0107.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This is dated in the 25th year of Vijaya-Kampavarman and registers the agreement made by the tirunāmakkiḻavar of Uḻaichchēri in Ūṟṟukkāḍu to burn three lamps and to provide offerings (to the god) for the money and land received by them from Pūśāli Vāmaṉaṉ a resident of the village. The name of the temple is not mentioned in the record, but from the reference made in it to the māhēśvaras, it seems to have been dedicated to Śiva.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv12p0i0108.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This is a damaged and incomplete record of Kampavikra[mavarman] dated in the 25th year. It registers an agreement made by the sabhā of Āṉiyūr to burn a perpetual lamp before the god Vambaṅkāṭṭu-Mahādēva for the interest on 40 kaḻañju of gold received by them from Periya Śrīdhara-Kramavittaṉ of Arivilimaṅgalam, a member of the āḷum-gaṇa, evidently of Āṉūr.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv12p0i0109.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This inscription records that in the 26th year of Vijaya-Kamapavarman, Jayavallavaṉ (Jayavallabha), a merchant of Kuḷattūr in Teṉṉāṟṟūr-nāḍu, a subdivision of Palkuṉṟak-kōṭṭam purchased land from the ūrār of the village and presented it as ērippaṭṭi for the maintenance of a tank, evidently at Maḍam.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv12p0i0110.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This record is dated in the [3]2nd year of Vijaya-Kampavarman, which is the latest known date for the king. It registers a sale of some land (?) by the ūrār of Kāvīḍu to a certain Kāḍandai Nakkaṉ Śaḍaiyaṉ, a resident of that village, probably for some charity, the details of which are not clear.
Kāvīḍu may be identified with the village of the same name in the Wandiwash taluk.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv12p0i0111.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This inscription records the death of a hero named Todupatti Mātiragaṉ (probably a mahout),1 on the day when the village (i.e. Olakkūr) was destroyed in the confusion caused by Kampapperumāḷ with his elephants. A figure of this hero advancing with a drawn sword in his right hand is also represented on the stone.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv12p0i0112.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This inscription, which is highly damaged, seems to record a gift made for providing offerings to the god Tiruvagattīśvara[muḍaiya-Mahādēva], by the assembly of Poygainallūr in Dāmaṟ-kōṭṭam, in the 2nd year of Vayiramēgavarman.
The surname Vayiramēgaṉ1 is applied to Dantivarman in the Triplicane inscription.2 As the characters of the present and the following inscription belong to a later period than Dantivarman, the king figuring in these two records was probably different. A certain chieftain named Vayiramēgaṉ alias Vāṇakōvaraiyar figures in two inscriptions from Tiruvoṟṟiyūr,3 with whom Vayiramēgavarman of the present record may be identified.
Language: Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv12p0i0113.