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", "script", "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 51–100 of 471 matching.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This copper-plate record issued in the 6th year of Nandivarman (III) registers a gift of the village Śrīkāṭṭuppaḷḷi, to the Śiva temple built by Yajñabhaṭṭa, at the request of Chōḷa-Mahārāja Kumārāṅkuśa, for the expenses of daily worship and for a feeding house. This Chōḷa-Mahārāja and Vijayālaya, the founder of the revived Chōḷa line at Tanjore are taken to have belonged to one and the same family. This is doubtful and he should propably have belonged to the family of Rēnāṇḍu Chōḻas.1
Published in South Indian Inscriptions, Vol. II, pp. 507-510.
Language: Undetermined.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv12p0i0049.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This Sanskrit grant was issued from the royal camp at Mēnmātura, in the 5th year of the reign of the Pallava king Mahārāja Siṁhavarman, son of Yuva-Mahārāja Vishṇugōpa, grandson of Mahārāja Skandavarman and great-grandson of Mahārāja Vīravarman. It registers the grant of the village Pīkira in Muṇḍa-rāshṭra, to Vilāsaśarman of the Kāśyapa-(gōtra) and of the Taittirīya-(śākhā).
Language: Undetermined.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv12p0i0004.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This is said to be a copy of a record of Kāḍuveṭṭigaḷ Nandippōttairaiyar reengraved in the 4th year of a Chōḷa king named Parakēsarivarman who may be identified with Uttama-Chōḷa. It records a gift of 60 kaḻañju of gold for the maintenance of a perpetual lamp called Kumaramārttāṇḍa1 in the temple. The title ‘Kumaramārttāṇḍa’ has been tentatively attributed to Pallavamalla, but it may, with greater probability, be applied to Nandivarman III.
Language: Undetermined.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv12p0i0059.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This is a copper plate grant of the Pallava king Siṁhavarman, engraved in archaic characters on five plates strung together by a ring bearing a circular seal with the Pallava emblem of a couchant bull facing the proper left and another figure resembling an anchor above it. The inscription opens with an invocation to Bhagavat (Vishṇu), like the Māṅgaḷūr and Pīkira grants of the same king. The genealogy of Siṁhavarman, son of Yuva-Mahārāja Vishṇugōpa, is traced from Vīravarman, the great-grandfather. The record is dated in the 10th year of the king in the month of Śrāvaṇa, śu., pañchamī and registers a royal grant of the village Viḻavaṭṭi in Muṇḍa-rāshṭra with all the taxes due on it, to Vishṇuśarman of the Gautama-gōtra and the Chhandōga-(sūtra), for securing long life, strength of arms and victory to the king.
From this record it is learnt that the king collected taxes from metal and leather workers, cloth-dealers, rope-jugglers or dancers, Ājīvikas, water-diviners, weavers, gamblers, barbers, etc.
The grant was issued from Paddukkara which has been identified with Paḍugupāḍu in the Kovur taluk of the Nellore district. The oral order of the king regarding this gift was committed to writing by the Rahasyādhikṛita (Private Secretary) Achyuta.
The village Viḻavaṭṭi in Muṇḍa-rāshṭra has been identified with either Vavvēru where the plates were discovered, or with greater probability, with Viḍavalūru, both situated in the Kovur taluk of the Nellore district.
Language: Undetermined.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv12p0i0005.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This inscription is dated in the year opposite to the 4th of some king whose name is, however, not mentioned. It states that the sabhā of Nallimaṅgalam agreed to maintain a perpetual lamp in the temple of Mahādēva at Tiruttavattuṟai in Iḍaiyāṟṟunāḍu, from a gift of 60 kāśu made by Nandippōttaraiyar ‘who fought the battle of Teḷḷāṟu and gained victory (in it).’ Judging from palaeography, the record may be assigned to the 10th century A.D. Consequently this inscription has to be treated as a later copy of the original record which probably belonged to the time of Māṟañjaḍaiyaṉ alias Varaguṇa-Pāṇḍya I. The donor may easily be identified with Nandivarman III from the reference to Teḷḷāṟu.
Language: Undetermined.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv12p0i0060.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This copper-plate grant belongs to the reign of Dharmma-Mahārāja Vijaya-Vishṇugōpavarman (II), son of Siṁhavarman, grandson of Mahārāja Vishṇugōpavarman and great-grandson of Kandavarman(i.e., Skandavarman) and it registers the grant of the village Churā in Karmmā-rāshṭra to a Brahman named Chēsamiśarman of the Kāśyapa-gōtra and a resident of Kuṇḍūr.1 The donee was the son of Dvēdaya-Vṛiddhaśarman and the grandson of Vishṇuśarman. The record bears no regnal year and was issued on the day of Uttarāyaṇa from the royal camp at Vijaya-Palātkaṭa (i.e., Palakkaḍa).
As the Sanskrit language used in the record is faulty and as the characters in which it is engraved are slightly later than those of the Māṅgaḷūr and Pīkira grants of Siṁhavarman, it is possible that this is a later copy of an earlier document.
Language: Undetermined.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv12p0i0006.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This inscription which is engraved in the Pallava-Grantha characters of the 7th century A.D., consists of a musical treatise composed by a royal disciple of Rudrāchārya. Though the name of the king is not mentioned, the characters of the record as well as the title ‘Saṅkīrṇajāti’ assumed by the Pallava king Mahēndravarman whose inscriptions are also found in the region round Trichinopoly, have led to the attribution of this record to the same Pallava monarch, who, we know, achieved distinction in the realm of architecture, literature and drama. A little to the north of this inscription, over the Valampuri-Gaṇēśa image is engraved the word ‘parivādini-ē,’ meaning a lute with seven strings ‘only’, which indicates that the musical instrument intended for the notations used in this record was the Vīṇā.
Language: Undetermined.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv12p0i0007.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: Of the two monolithic caves, one at the foot and the other half-way up, of ‘the rock’ at Trichinopoly, the latter alone contains inscriptions, two of which, published in South Indian Inscriptions, Vol. I, pages 29 and 30, state that the cave (upper) was constructed by Guṇabhara (i.e.) Mahēndravarman I. A verse inscription (No. 9 below) engraved on the beam over the inner row of pillars here, calls the cave ‘Laḷitāṅkura-Pallavēśvara-gṛiham’ after the title ‘Laḷitāṅkura’ of this king, which also occurs in his record at Pallāvaram. His birudas are engraved in bold Pallava-Grantha and Tamil characters on all the pillars in the upper cave at Trichinopoly. The outer wall of the sanctuary in this cave seems to have contained an inscription, but only a few letters of its first line are now visible, the rest being completely damaged. The name ‘Mahēndravikrama’ is found mentioned in the inscription on the extreme left outer pillar and most of the birudas occurring here are also found in the records of this king at Pallāvaram and other rock-cut excavations of his time. Some of these titles are unintelligible and appear to be Telugu in origin. The bottom of each of the four pillars contains a biruda in the Pallava-Tamil characters, of which only two are now clear, viz. Piṇapiṇakku and Chitti[rakāra]ppuli.
It is of interest to note that the birudas are alphabetically arranged and so engraved on the front face of the pillars. The same arrangement, though followed in the Pallāvaram inscription, is not so conspicuous there as in the present record (plates I and II).
The characters employed in the present inscriptions are of an ornate nature and provide an interesting contrast with the simpler variety of letters found in the Pallāvaram record of the same king, where almost all these birudas are repeated.
A description of the cave is found in the Memoir of the Archaeological Survey of India, No. 17, pages 13-15.
Languages: Sanskrit, Tamil, Telugu, Undetermined.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv12p0i0008.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This is identical with No. 106 above.
Language: Undetermined.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv13p0i0107.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This record states that the assembly of Nālūr, a brahmadēya in Śēṟṟūr-kūṟṟam sold the (right of collecting the) market-fees of the bazaar-street (in their village) for a lump sum of 25 kāśu to the temple of Mūlasthānattu-Mahādēva at Tirumayānam. The early characters of the inscription make it attributable to the time of Āditya I.
Language: Undetermined.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv13p0i0011.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This inscription is engraved in archaic characters and has been assigned therefore to Āditya I. It records the provision made by the Perunagarattār (merchant community) of Kumaramāttāṇḍapuram in Tiraimūr-nāḍu for the renovation of the surrounding hall (tiruchchuṟṟālai) and the gōpura in a (Jaina) temple called the Milāḍuḍaiyār-paḷḷi. Kumaramārttāṇḍa seems to have been a surname of the Pallava king Nandivarman III (No. 199 of 1907).
Language: Undetermined.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv13p0i0013.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This is also probably an inscription of Gaṇḍarāditya. It registers an endowment of land by Tappildaram Pallavaraiyaṉ alias Kīḻmāttūr Paruvūr, an officer of prince Arikulakēsaridēva for offerings and worship to the deity at Tiruppaṇambūdūr which formed part of Uttamaśīli-chaturvēdimaṅgalam, a brahmadēya village on the southern bank (of the river).
Language: Undetermined.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv13p0i0177.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This inscription is identical with No. 176 above.
Language: Undetermined.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv13p0i0179.
Emmanuel Francis.
Language: Undetermined.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv13p0i0017A.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This inscription is identical with No. 177 above.
Language: Undetermined.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv13p0i0180.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This is also probably an inscription of Gaṇḍarāditya like No. 177 above, and records an agreement given by the peruṅguṟi-sabhai of Uttamaśīli-chaturvēdimaṅgalam making tax-free for a lump-amount of 10 kāśu received by them from Tappildaram-Pallavaraiyaṉ, one mā and odd of land belonging to the temple of Paramēśvara at Tiruppaṇambūdūr.
Language: Undetermined.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv13p0i0181.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This is the same inscription as No. 574 of 1908 which is published in South Indian Inscriptions, Volume III, as No. 112. pp. 248 f. The regnal year is read there as 8. (See No. 181 above).
Language: Undetermined.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv13p0i0194.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This is very probably an inscription of Sundara-Chōḷa. It records an undertaking given by the sabhā and patipādamūlam (temple servants) of Tiruneyttāṉam, a dēvadāna in Poygai-nāḍu, to burn two perpetual lamps in the temple for an endowment of 10 śēy of land purchased with 50 kaḻañju of gold which had been presented by a certain Tennavaṉ Pirudimārāśaṉ alias Kaṭṭi Oṟṟi-ūraṉ and by Varaguṇa-Perumāṉār, the wife of Parāntaka-Iḷaṅgōvēḷār. This Iḷaṅgōvēḷār has been identified with Vikramakēsari, the Koḍumbāḷūr chief and subordinate of Parāntaka II Sundara-Chōḷa (The Cōḷas., Vol. I., p. 187 and Ep. Ind., Vol. XX., p. 53).
Language: Undetermined.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv13p0i0233.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This inscription incised in archaic characters is assignable to Āditya I. It records an undertaking given by the lay disciples of a Jaina monastery at Viḍāl alias Mādēvi-Ārāndimaṅgalam in Śiṅgapura-nāḍu, to protect and feed along with her lady pupils, Kanakavīra-Kurattiyār, a woman-ascetic and disciple of (the teacher) Guṇakīrtti-Bhaṭāra.
Language: Undetermined.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv13p0i0245.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This registers an endowment of 25 Īḻakkāśu each for two perpetual lamps in the temple of Tirukkuḍittiṭṭai-Perumāḷ at Amaninārayaṇa-chaturvēdimaṅgalam by Rājādichchi and Kuñjaramalli, the wife and daughter respectively of Śiṟiyavēḻāṉ. The chief is evidently identical with Parāntakaṉ Śiṟiyavēḷār, the commander of the Chōḷa king Parāntaka Sundara-Chōḷa.
Language: Undetermined.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv13p0i0246.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This inscription registers a grant of land as ērippaṭṭi for the upkeep of a tank at Neṟkuṉṟam in Śiṅgapura-nāḍu by a certain Nambiyamallaṉār, son of Nṛipatuṅga Maṅgalappēraraiyar. The early script of the inscription makes it assignable to Āditya I.
Language: Undetermined.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv13p0i0308.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This is identical with No. 285 of 1906 (No. 29 above).
Language: Undetermined.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv13p0i0032.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This inscription is damaged and its latter portion is lost. It seems to record an endowment of land to meet the expenses of the temple at Tiruppāṟṟuṟai by Kūttapirāṉ-Bhaṭṭa[n] of Ādaṉūr, after purchasing it for the purpose from Korōvi Śri Nārāyaṇa-Bhaṭṭaṉ of Uttamaśīli-chaturvēdimaṅgalam. Uttamaśīli is known to have been a son of Parāntaka I (M.E.R. 1907, II, 31).
Languages: Tamil, Undetermined.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv13p0i0334.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This inscription records a gift of 100 sheep for a perpetual lamp in the temple of Tiruneyttānattu-Mādēva by Kaḍambamādēvi, the wife of Vikki-Aṇṇaṉ who is stated to have received several honours and the hereditary title ‘Śembiyaṉ-Tamiḻavēḷ’ both from the Chōḷa king ‘who overran the Toṇḍai-nāḍu and was the conqueror of kings with many elephants’ and from the Chēra king Sthāṇu-Ravi. This Chōḷa king has been identified with Āditya I who is known from the Tiruvālaṅgāḍu Plates to have conquered Toṇḍaimaṇḍalam from the Pallava king Aparājita.
Language: Undetermined.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv13p0i0337.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This states that Pirāntakaṉ Iruṅgōḷar alias Śiṟiyavēḷār paid 130 Īḻakkāśu to the assembly of Amaninārāyaṇa-chaturvēdimaṅgalam for exempting from taxes, a quarter vēli and odd of land endowed by him for the midday offerings in the temple of Tiruviśalūr-Perumānaḍigal. This is also an inscription of Sundara-Chōḷa.
Language: Undetermined.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv13p0i0085.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This inscription registers an endowment of land after purchase for feeding a Vēda-Brāhmaṇa every midday in the temple at Tiruviśalūr by Pirāntakaṉ Iruṅgōḷaṉ alias Śiṟiyavēḷār of Koḍumbāḷūr, who was a general of king Parāntaka II Sundara-Chōḷa.
Language: Undetermined.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv13p0i0009.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: The subjoined Vaṭṭeḻuttu inscriptions are engraved in characters attributable to about the end of the 9th century and the beginning of the 10th century A.D. below. the images of the Jaina deities sculptured in low relief on the face of the rock. Some of them are very much wern out while three of them are legible. They record that certain images were cut by Ajjaṇandi (No. 126) and by Ariṭṭaṉēmi-Periyār, the disciple of Ashṭōpavāsi-Kaṉakavīrar (No. 122). In No. 128 this hill is called Tirukkuṇagiri and a certain ascetic named Aṉantavīra-Aḍigaḷ is stated to have made a gift of money for a lamp to the God Tirukkuṇagiri-Dēvar.
Language: Undetermined.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv14p1i0123.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: The subjoined Vaṭṭeḻuttu inscriptions are engraved in characters attributable to about the end of the 9th century and the beginning of the 10th century A.D. below. the images of the Jaina deities sculptured in low relief on the face of the rock. Some of them are very much wern out while three of them are legible. They record that certain images were cut by Ajjaṇandi (No. 126) and by Ariṭṭaṉēmi-Periyār, the disciple of Ashṭōpavāsi-Kaṉakavīrar (No. 122). In No. 128 this hill is called Tirukkuṇagiri and a certain ascetic named Aṉantavīra-Aḍigaḷ is stated to have made a gift of money for a lamp to the God Tirukkuṇagiri-Dēvar.
Language: Undetermined.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv14p1i0124.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This epigraph dated in the 12th year of Sundara-Chōḷapāṇḍya registers an agreement given by aganāḻigai-śivabrāhmaṇas of the temples Chōḷēndrasiṁha-Īśvaram and Śrī-Kayilāyamuḍaiyār-Śrīkōyil to burn a lamp in the latter temple in return for the interest on an amount of 36 kāśu, which was required to be contributed by them towards the construction of the tiruchchuṟṟumāḍam in the temple, and which was paid on their behalf in a lump sum by a certain Śrīkaṇṭha-Dāmōdarabhaṭṭaṉ of Perumaru[dūr] residing in this village.
Language: Undetermined.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv14p1i0143.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: On the right side of the south gōpura of the Viṭṭhalasvāmin temple.
Achyutarāya. 1539-40 A.D.
Language: Undetermined.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv17p0i0001.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: On the north wall of the first prākāra (called the Mukkōṭi-ēkādaśi-pradakshiṇa) in the Veṅkaṭeśa-perumāḷ temple.
Yādavarāya Vīra Narasiṅgadēva.
Language: Undetermined.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv17p0i0771.
Emmanuel Francis.
Language: Undetermined.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv22p0i0001.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: On the 30th April 1891, Professor Julien Vinson, of Paris, was good enough to send me a reprint1 of his paper Spécimen de Paléographie Tamoule, which contains an analysis of, and extracts from, the subjoined copper-plate inscription. The original plates had been discovered in 1879 at Kaśākūḍi, 4 kilometres from Kāraikkāl (Karikal),2 by M. Jules de la Fon, of Pondicherry. Professor Vinson's paper, which is based on a tracing prepared by M. de la Fon, convinced me of the importance of the inscription and induced me to apply through Government to His Excellency the Governor of the French Settlements in India for a loan of the original plates. This request was most graciously and promptly complied with. After I had transcribed the plates and prepared impressions of them, they were returned to their present owner.
The Kaśākūḍi copper-plates, eleven in number, are strung on a ring. On this is soldered the royal seal, with the figure of a bull which faces the left and is surmounted by a liṅga. The bull was the crest of the Pallavas,3 while their banner bore the figure of Śiva's club (khaṭvāṅga).4 The Grantha and Tamil characters of the inscription resemble those of the Kūram plates (Vol. I, No. 151). The major portion of the inscription is in the Sanskrit language (lines 1 to 104). The particulars of the grant are repeated, with considerable additions, in the Tamil language (ll. 104 to 133). The concluding portion of the inscription is again in Sanskrit (ll. 133 to 138), with a short parenthetical note in Tamil (l. 137).
The immediate object of the inscription is to record the grant of a village, made in the 22nd year of the reign (ll. 80 and 105) of the Pallava king Nandivarman (verses 27 and 30, and l. 79). As in other Pallava copper-plate inscriptions, the grant proper is preceded by a panegyrical account of the king's ancestors, which adds a large number of new details to our knowledge of the Pallava history. After nine benedictory verses, the author names the following mythical ancestors of the Pallava dynasty:—
Brahmā (v. 10). Aṅgiras (11). Bṛihaspati (12). Śaṁyu (13). Bharadvāja (14). Drōṇa (15). Aśvatthāman (16). Pallava (17). Aśōkavarman (19).
This last king can scarcely be considered a historical person, but appears to be a modification of the ancient Maurya king Aśōka. Then follows a passage in prose, which informs us that, after this Aśōkavarman, there ruled a number of other Pallava kings, viz., [S]kandavarman, Kal[i]ndavarman, Kāṇagōpa, Vishṇugōpa, Vīrakū[r]cha, Vīrasiṁha, Siṁhavarman, Vishṇusiṁha and others (l. 48 f.). Some of these names actually occur in the inscriptions of that ancient branch of the Pallavas, whose grants are dated from Palakkada, Daśanapura and Kāñchīpura, viz., Skandavarman, Siṁhavarman, Vishṇugōpavarman,5 and Vīrakōrchavarman.6 The Amarāvatī pillar-inscription (Vol. I, No. 32) mentions two kings named Siṁhavarman. But the order in which these names are enumerated, is completely different in each of the three available sources for the history of the early Pallavas, viz., the Amarāvatī pillar, the early copper-inscriptions, and the prose introduction of the Kaśākūḍi plates. For this reason, and on account of the summary manner in which the early kings are referred to by the author of the Kaśākūḍi inscription, it is a mistake to derive a regular pedigree from the latter, as was done by Professor Vinson (l.c., p. 453); and it must be rather concluded that, at the time of Nandivarman, nothing was known of the predecessors of Siṁhavishṇu, but the names of some of them, and that the order of their succession, and their relation to each other and to the subsequent line of Siṁhavishṇu, were then entirely forgotten.
With verse 20 we enter on historical ground. The list of kings from Siṁhavishṇu to the immediate predecessor of Nandivarman agrees with the Udayēndiram plates of Nandivarman Pallavamalla (No. 74). Siṁhavishṇu appears to have borne the surname Avanisiṁha, and is stated to have defeated the Malaya, Kaḷabhra, Mālava, Chōḷa, Pāṇḍya, Siṁhaḷa and Kēraḷa kings.
His successor Mahēndravarman I. “annihilated his chief enemies at Puḷḷalūra” (v. 21). The ‘chief enemies’ were probably the Chalukyas, who, in their turn, considered the Pallavas their ‘natural enemies.’7 As Puḷḷalūr is the name of a village in the Conjeeveram tālluqa,8 it appears that the Chalukya army had made an inroad into the Pallava dominions, before it was repulsed by Mahēndravarman I.
His son Narasiṁhavarman I. is reported to have conquered Laṅkā, i.e., Ceylon, and to have captured Vātāpi,9 the capital of the Western Chalukyas. The Kūram and Udayēndiram plates supply the name of the conquered Chalukya king, Pulakēśin or Vallabharāja, i.e., Pulikēśin II.10 The conquest of Ceylon to which the Kaśākūḍi plates refer, is confirmed from an unexpected source. From the 47th chapter of the Mahāvaṁsa11 we learn that the Singhalese prince Māṇavamma lived at the court of king Narasīha of India and helped him to crush his enemy, king Vallabha. The grateful Narasīha supplied Māṇavamma twice with an army to invade Ceylon. The second attack was successful. Māṇavamma occupied Ceylon, over which he is supposed to have ruled from A.D. 691 to 726. As both the Pallava inscriptions and the Mahāvaṁsa mention the war with Vallabha and the conquest of Ceylon, the identity of Narasīha and Narasiṁhavarman I. can hardly be doubted. As, however, the latest date of Pulikēśin II. is A.D. 642,12 the accession of Māṇavamma must have taken place about half a century before A.D. 691.13
No details are given about the reign of Narasiṁhavarman's son Mahēndravarman II. The latter was succeeded by his son Paramēśvarapōtavarman I. who, as we know from the Kūram and Udayēndiram plates, defeated the Western Chalukya king Vikramāditya I. at Peruvaḷanallūr. The Kaśākūḍi plates do not contain any historical information about him, nor about his son Narasiṁhavarman II. and his grandson Paramēśvarapōtavarman II.
According to the Udayēndiram plates, the next king, Nandivarman, was the son of Paramēśvaravarman II. The Kaśākūḍi plates contain an entirely different account of Nandivarman's parentage. In line 72, he professes to be “engaged in ruling the kingdom of Paramēśvarapōtarāja;” and in verse 27, he is said to be ruling, at the time of the inscription, the kingdom of Paramēśvarapōtavarman II., i.e., to have succeeded or supplanted the latter on the throne, and to have been “chosen by the subjects.” This plebiscite may have taken place after the death of the legitimate king; or, more probably, Nandivarman may have been an usurper who ousted and destroyed him and his family. At any rate, he was a remote kinsman of his predecessor. For, he was the son of Hiraṇya (verses 9 and 30) by Rōhiṇī and belonged to the branch (varga) of Bhīma (verse 30). According to verse 28, this branch of Bhīma took its origin from Bhīmavarman, who was the younger brother of Siṁhavishṇu. The names of three princes who intervened between Bhīmavarman and Hiraṇya, are recorded in the same verse. The name Hiraṇyavarma-Mahārāja occurs several times in a much obliterated inscription of the Vaikuṇṭha-Perumāḷ temple at Kānchīpuram. At the beginning of this inscription, Paramēśvarappōttaraiyar of the Pallava-vaṁśa is mentioned as deceased (svargastha). It is therefore not improbable that the inscription recorded the accession of Hiraṇyavarman or of his son Nandivarman after the death of Paramēśvarapōtavarman II. The latter may have been the founder of the Vaikuṇṭha-Perumāḷ temple, which is called Paramēśvara-Vishṇugṛiha, i.e., ‘the Vishṇu temple of Paramēśvara,’ in another inscription of the Vaikuṇṭha-Perumāḷ temple.14 With the addition of the new branch, the list of the later Pallavas stands as follows:—
Unnamed ancestor.[C1]1. Siṁhavishṇu. [C1]2. Mahēndravarman I. [C2]Bhīmavarman. [C1]3. Narasiṁhavarman I. [C2]Buddhavarman. [C1]4. Mahēndravarman II. [C2]Ādityavarman. [C1]5. Paramēśvarapōtavarman or Paramēśvaravarman I. [C2]Gōvindavarman. [C1]6. Narasiṁhavarman II. [C2]Hiraṇya. [C1]7. Paramēśvarapōtavarman or Paramēśvaravarman II. [C2]8. Nandivarman.
Other forms of the name Nandivarman are Nandipōtarāja (l. 90) and simply Nandin (l. 88). The form Nandipōtavarman occurs in the Vakkalēri plates,15 which refer to the defeat of the Pallava king by the Western Chalukya king Vikramāditya II., and the form Nandippōttaraiyar in an inscription of his 18th year in the Ulagaḷanda-Perumāḷ temple at Kāñchīpuram.16 He bore the sovereign titles Mahārāja and Rājādhirāja-paramēśvara and the birudas Kshatriyamalla, Pallavamalla (l. 78), and Śrīdhara (verse 29). According to verse 30, he was a devotee of Vishṇu. At the request of his prime-minister (l. 89), Brahmaśrīrāja (l. 91) or Brahmayuvarāja (ll. 103 and 106), the king gave the village of Koḍukoḷḷi (ll. 99, 105 f.) to the Brāhmaṇa Jyēshṭhapāda-Sōmayājin (l. 93) or (in Tamil) Śēṭṭiṟeṅga-Sōmayājin (l. 108 f.), who belonged to the Bharadvāja (l. 94) or Bhāradvāja (l. 108) gōtra, followed the Chhandōgasūtra (ll. 94 and 108), and resided at Pūniya (l. 95) or Pūni (l. 108), a village in the Toṇḍāka-rāshṭra (l. 95). The village of Koḍukoḷḷi, on becoming a brahmadēya, received the new name Ēkadhīramaṅgalam (l. 100). It belonged to Ūṟṟukkāṭṭu-kōṭṭam (l. 105) or (in Sanskrit) Undivanakōshṭhaka (l. 98), a subdivision of Toṇḍāka-rāshṭra, and was bounded in the east and south by Pālaiyūr, in the west by Maṇaṟpākkam and Koḷḷipākkam, and in the north by Veḷimānallūr (ll. 98 f. and 111 ff.). Connected with the gift of the village was the right to dig channels from the Śēyāṟu or (in Sanskrit) Dūrasarit, the Veḥkā or Vēgavatī, and the tank of Tīraiyaṉ or Tīralaya (ll. 101 f. and 115 ff.).
Of these geographical names, the following can be identified. Toṇḍāka-rāshṭra is,—like Toṇḍīra-maṇḍala, Tuṇḍīra-maṇḍala and Tuṇḍāka-vishaya,17—a Sanskritised form of the Tamil term Toṇḍai-maṇḍalam. One of the 24 ancient divisions (kōṭṭam) of the latter was Ūṟṟukkāṭṭu-kōṭṭam, which owed its name to Ūṟṟukkāḍu, a village in the present Conjeeveram tālluqa.18 This kōṭṭam was divided into four subdivisions (nāḍu), one of which was Pālaiyūr-nāḍu.19 The head-village of this subdivision, Pālaiyūr, appears to be identical with the village of Pālaiyūr, which formed the south-eastern boundary of the granted village, and perhaps with the modern Pālūr at the north-western extremity of the Chingleput tālluqa.20 The western boundary of the granted village, Maṇaṟpākkam, would then be represented by the modern Mēlamaṇappākkam.21 For the granted village, Koḍukoḷḷi, itself and for the two remaining villages which formed its boundaries, no equivalents are found on the maps at my disposal. The village at which the donee resided, Pūni, may be the modern Pūṇḍi, which belongs to the Conjeeveram tālluqa,22 but is in close proximity of Pālūr and Mēlamaṇappākkam in the Chingleput tālluqa. The proposed identification of these three villages is made more probable by the reference, made in the Kaśākūḍi plates, to two rivers near which the granted village of Koḍukoḷḷi was situated. Of these, the Vēgavatī or Veḥkā passes Conjeeveram and falls into the Pālāṟu near Villivalam.23 The Śēyāṟu forms the southern boundary of the modern Conjeeveram tālluqa and joins the Pālāṟu opposite Mēlamaṇappākkam, which I have identified with Maṇaṟpākkam, the western boundary of Koḍukoḷḷi.
The executor (ājñapti) of the grant was Ghōraśarman (ll. 103 and 106), and the author of the Sanskrit portion, which, as in the Kūram plates (l. 89) and the Udayēndiram plates (ll. 101 and 105), is called a praśasti or eulogy, was a certain Trivikrama (verse 31). To the Sanskrit portion is affixed a Tamil endorsement (l. 104 f.), which directs the inhabitants of Ūṟṟukkāṭṭu-kōṭṭam to execute the order of the king. The subsequent Tamil passage (l. 105 ff.) records that, on receipt of the royal order, the representatives of Ūṟṟukkāṭṭu-kōṭṭam marked the boundaries of the granted village under the guidance of their headman, and formally assigned all rights to the donee. Another Tamil sentence (l. 132 f.) states that the grant was executed in the presence of the local authorities (?), the ministers and the secretaries.
Then follow, in Sanskrit, three imprecatory verses (l. 133 ff.) and the statement that the document was written by His Majesty's great treasurer (l. 136). The inscription ends with a docket in Tamil (l. 137) and a few auspicious Sanskrit words.
Languages: Sanskrit, Tamil, Undetermined.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv02p0i0073.
DHARMA team.
Summary: Taṇḍantōṭṭam (i.e. Tandantōttam, No. 134 of the Madras Survey map of the Kumbakonam taluk) is a village 6 miles east of Kumbakōṇam in the Tanjore district of the Madras Presidency. The existence of the plates was brought to the notice of the late Rai Bahadur V.Venkayya, M.A., by Mr. Narayanaswami Aiyar, Sub-Inspector of Police, Madras City. It is stated that they “were found with many other idols, while digging a foundation in the premises of a Śiva temple in the village of Thandanthottam, Kumbakonam taluk of Tanjore district, about 100 years ago. No one knew what it is and how they happened to be there.”
The plates are 14 in number, each measuring about 11(1/4)" by 3(3/4)". When they were produced before Mr. Venkayya the plates were strung on a ring which did not appear to have been previously cut.1 The ring is somewhat oval with diameters measuring 6(1/2)" and 7(3/4)". Its ends are secured at the bottom of a circular seal 3" in diameter. The seal bears in relief a couchant Pallava bull facing the proper right. Along the margin of the seal is a Grantha legend which is illegible. The ring on which the plates are strung was cut by me with the permission of Mr. Narayanaswami Aiyar in order to change out the plates and prepare ink-impressions.
The two sides of the first plate, the first side of the second plate and the first five lines of its second side are in Sanskṛit verse, engraved in the Grantha alphabet and the rest, in the Tamil language and characters. The inscription must originally have consisted of many more plates, two or three of which at least are missing at the beginning. These would have supplied a genealogy of the Pallava kings similar to that of the Vēlūrpāḷaiyam plates of Vijaya-Nandivarman published above. The concluding words of some of the plates in the middle do not fit in with the opening words of the succeeding plates. Consequently, it is presumed that a few plates2 of the grant portion are also lost. This presumption is confirmed by the fact that while the number of the donees according to the Sanskṛit portion has to be 308, the number actually registered is only 244, even including those whose names seem to have been added subsequently in comparatively later characters, or at least in a different hand.
The first plate of the preserved portion begins by referring to a king who conquered the South and stating that a certain Hiraṇyavarman was born “again” for the “welfare of the worlds” (jagatām hitāya V. 1). His son was Nandivarman who perhaps held the biruda Ēkadhīra3. The next six verses are taken up with the praise of Nandivarman. Two historical facts referred to in this part of the inscription are interesting. One of them is that Nandivarman took away from the Gaṅga king a neck-ornament which contained in it the gem called Ugrōdaya (V. 6). The name of this Gaṅga king, however, is not furnished. The other is that Nandivarman was the owner of an elephant named Paṭṭavardhana (V. 7). With the permission of the king, a certain Dayāmukha caused a village to be granted to 308 Brāhmaṇas and called it Dayāmukhamaṅgala after his own name (V. 9). The executor (ājñapti) of the grant was evidently the very same person Dayāmukha entitled Kumāra, who is stated to have been the king's treasurer (V. 10). The composer of the eulogy (praśasti) was Paramēśvara Uttarakāraṇika son of Param-Ōttarakāraṇika (V. 14).
The Tamil portion is dated in the 58th year of Kōvijaya-Nandivikramavarman and registers a gift of land (converted into a village4) lying to the west of Taṇḍattōṭṭam (i.e. Taṇḍantōṭṭam) in Teṉkarai-Naṟaiyūr-nāḍu, a district of the Chōḷa country, to a number of Brāhmaṇas of Nalgūr5.
To judge from the high regnal year, the Taṇḍattōṭṭam plates must belong to the reign of that Pallava king Vijaya-Nandivikramavarman whose Tiruvallam rock inscription is dated in his 62nd year i.e. 4 years later than our plates6. At the same time the alphabet of the plates and the name of the king lead us to infer that the Vijaya-Nandivikramavarman who issued these plates may be identical with Vijaya-Nandivarman III, the donor of the Vēlūrpāḷaiyam plates. If the inscription were preserved in full, this question would not have been left to surmise and conjecture. The father of Vijaya-Nandivikramavarman is here stated to have been Hiraṇyavarman; while, the father of Vijaya-Nandivarman, according to the Vēlūrpāḷaiyam plates, was Dantivarman. If the proposed identity of Vijaya-Nandivikramavarman with Vijaya-Nandivarman is accepted, the apparent discrepancy in the name of the father could be explained. The statement that Hiraṇyavarman “was born again,” evidently indicates a second king of that name and we may suppose that Dantivarman, the father of Vijaya-Nandivikramavarman, was also called Hiraṇyavarman like his grandfather Hiraṇyavarman I the father of Nandivarman Pallavamalla. If the foregoing surmises are confirmed by future researches, the Taṇḍantōṭṭam grant would be 52 years later than the Vēlūrpāḷaiyam plates of the same king.
The donees whose enumeration occupies more than eleven plates of the inscription number 244. They belong to various gōtras and sūtras. To judge from their titles (such as Chaturvēdin, Trivēdin, Sōmayājin, Vasantayājin, Shaḍaṅgavid, Bhaṭṭa, Kramavid, Sarvakratuyājin, Daśapurīya7, Agnichit, and Vājapēyin) most of them must have been learned men as stated in verse 9. The largest number of shares assigned to a single individual is 12 and such a recipient was Attōṇa-Shaḍaṅgavi-Sōmayājin (No. 109) whose gōtra and sūtra are lost on one of the missing plates. The composer of the inscription, viz., Uttarakāraṇika alias Ayyaṉ Paramēśvara of the Rathītara-gōtra and Paviṛiya-sūtra (No. 128) received two shares. Among the other donees, Tiruvaḍigaḷ (evidently the name of the local Vishṇu temple or of the Śaiva devotees, as stated on page (41) of the introduction) got 5 shares while Mahādēva (the Śiva temple) was assigned 2 shares. One share was allotted to the reciter of the Bhārata; and the three arbitrators (madhyastha) got one share each. A share was assigned for “pouring water” and for “lighting fire” in the hall (ambalam). Perhaps this was the hall where the village assembly used to meet. Apparently the Bhārata was also recited in this same hall. The donees seem to have belonged to different parts of the country. The names of their native villages indicate that a pretty large number of them must have been originally residents of the Telugu country. Taṇukkil, Kārambichchēḍu, Iṛakkandoṟu, Iruṅgaṇḍi, Nambūr, Karañjai8, Piṇukkippaṟu9, Vēlpaṟu, Poppaṟu, Vaṅgippaṟu, Aṭṭambaṟu, Muḍipaṟu (or Muḍapaṟu), Virippaṟu, Arasappaṟu, Karippaṟu, Nūttilāppaṟu and Ponnambaṟu are apparently names of villages which were probably situated in the Telugu country. Kumiṛūr, Kāṭṭukkuṟi, Maṇaṟkāl, Mandiram, Paṟiyalūr, Pāḍagam, Pāṟkuḷam, Aṅgārai, Kaḷattūr, Veṇṇainallūr, Perumbūdūr, Kāynīrkuḷam, Īykkāṭṭukkōyil, Śiṟupaṛuvūr, Puliyūr (in Miṛalai-nāḍu), Aruvāgūr and Taramanallūr (in Aruvā-nāḍu)10 are distinctly Tamil names. The donees whose native villages may be presumed to have been situated in the Telugu country need not necessarily have immigrated into the Chōḷa country at the time of the grant. They might have been settled there sometime before. In any case it is clear that there was a large colony of Telugu Brāhmaṇas in the heart of the Chōḷa country during the first half of the 9th century A.D. The Telugu birudas of the Pallava king Mahēndravarman found in the Trichinopoly cave inscription,11 testify to the influence of the Telugu people in the Chōḷa country already in the 7th century A.D. It is worthy of note that a large number of the village names are now held as titles by some well-known Śrī-Vaishṇava families—Dvēdaikōmapuram (Vēdagōmapura), Vaṅgippaṟu (Vaṅgippura), Uruppiṭṭūr (Uruppuṭṭūr), Kārambichchēḍu (Kārambichchēṭṭu), Śrīmalai (Tirumalai), Pattaṅgi, Vīravaḷḷi (Vīravalli), Muḍumbe, Taṇukkil, Kumāṇḍūr, Puttūr, Śēṭṭalūr and Kuṇḍūr being some. Maṇaṟkāl has evidently lent its name to one of the later Vaishṇava āchāryas of the 12th century, named Maṇakkāl-Nambi.
Languages: Sanskrit, Tamil, Undetermined.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv02p0i0099.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: No king or date. (9th cent. A.D.)
Language: Undetermined.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv36p0i0001.
Emmanuel Francis.
Language: Undetermined.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv04p0i0106.
Emmanuel Francis.
Language: Undetermined.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv04p0i0107.
Emmanuel Francis.
Language: Undetermined.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv04p0i0108.
Emmanuel Francis.
Language: Undetermined.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv04p0i0109-0113.
Emmanuel Francis.
Language: Undetermined.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv04p0i0010.
Emmanuel Francis.
Language: Undetermined.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv04p0i0011-0012.
Emmanuel Francis.
Language: Undetermined.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv04p0i0114.
Emmanuel Francis.
Language: Undetermined.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv04p0i0115.
Emmanuel Francis.
Language: Undetermined.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv04p0i0116.
Emmanuel Francis.
Language: Undetermined.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv04p0i0117.
Emmanuel Francis.
Language: Undetermined.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv04p0i0118.
Emmanuel Francis.
Language: Undetermined.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv04p0i0119.
Emmanuel Francis.
Language: Undetermined.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv04p0i0120.
Emmanuel Francis.
Language: Undetermined.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv04p0i0121-0122.
Emmanuel Francis.
Language: Undetermined.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv04p0i0123.