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 1151–1200 of 1673 matching.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This inscription is dated in the 65th year of Nandibōdhuvarman (Nandippōttavarman) who belonged to the Pallava-vaṁśa. It registers a gift of pasture land by Iḍaivaḻañjāṉ Kaṇḍaṉ, one of the Nagarattār of Māmallapuram, after purchasing it from Kōṉ-Kaṇḍaṉ, son of Iḷan Paduvuṇār, the headman of Kuṉṟattūr in Āmūr-kōṭṭam. The villages of Kuṉṟattūr and Āmūr are near Mahābalipuram in the Chingleput district.
The regnal year given in this record is the highest known date for Nandivarman (II).
Language: Undetermined.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv12p0i0038.
Emmanuel Francis.
Languages: Sanskrit, Source Language (other).
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv01p0i0023.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This is a Sanskrit charter issued by Dharmamahārāja Siṁhavarman1 of the Bhāradvāja-gōtra, in his 4th year, in the month of Vaiśākha, śukla-paksha, pañchamī, registering a gift of the village Ōṁgōḍu in Karmmā-rāshṭra to the scholar Dēvaśarman, a resident of Kuṇḍūr, who belonged to the Kāśyapa-gōtra and Chhandōga-sūtra. As the same village was the object of grant in the previous charter of Vijaya-Skandavarman,2 it is possible that that donee, Gōlaśarman had probably died without issue and thus necessitated its reconferment on Dēvaśarman of the Kāśyapa-gōtra, who was probably a member of the collateral branch of the original donee’s family.
The king is stated to have been the son of Yuva-Mahārāja Vishṇugōpa, grandson of Mahārāja Skandavarman and great-grandson of Mahārāja Vīravarman.
As the characters in which the record is incised are later, i.e., of about the 7th century A.D., it has been surmised that it is a later copy of an earlier document.
Language: Undetermined.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv12p0i0003.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This inscription records the construction of a well called Mārppiḍugu1-peruṅkiṇaṟu at Teṉṉūr in Tiruveḷḷaṟai by Kambaṉ Araiyaṉ, the younger brother of Viśayanalluḻāṉ of Ālambākkam, in the 4th year of Dantivarman. The well is designed in the form of a svastikā and it is reached by a flight of steps from each of the four directions.
Published in Epigraphia Indica, Vol. XI, p. 157.
Language: Undetermined.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv12p0i0040.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: This is dated in the 5th year of Vijaya-Dantipōttaraiyar and records the construction of a tank called ‘Vāli-ēri’ by Vāli-Vaḍugaṉ alias Kalimūrkka-Iḷavaraiyaṉ, a servant of Māṟppiḍuviṉār alias Pēradi-Araiyar.
Language: Undetermined.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv12p0i0041.
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, Source Language (other), 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 records an endowment of 30 kaḻañju of gold by Vēḷāṉ Tiruveṇkāḍaḍigaḷ alias Mūvēnda-Piḍavūr-Vēḷāṉ of Piḍavūr in Piḍavūr-nāḍu for burning a perpetual lamp in the temple of Tiruchchōṟṟuttuṟai-Mahādēva. The ūrkiḻār-makkaḷ of Koḍiyālam, the brahmadēya-kiḻavargaḷ and the ūrār of the village, held themselves responsible for the maintenance of the lamp. Evidently the same gift is recorded in No. 137 of 1931 also in Sanskrit, the text of which is given below. To judge from its writing and disposition with regard to No. 138 of 1931 of the 13th year of Parāntaka I, this is possibly a record of Gaṇḍarāditya.
Languages: Sanskrit, Source Language (other), Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv13p0i0126.
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: The subjoined Sanskrit inscription is engraved on three sides of an octagonal pillar,1 which was excavated at Amarāvatī by Mr. R.Sewell and sent by Dr. Burgess to the Madras Museum. The top of the pillar and some letters of the uppermost lines of the inscription have been broken off. The inscription has hitherto remained a puzzle, as each line seems to end incomplete. Finding, that the first words of some lines were connected with the last words of the following lines, I was led to suppose that the inscription must begin from the bottom and not from the top. Curiously enough, this is really the case. If the inscription is read upwards, we find that it consists of eleven complete verses and of a prose passage, the end of which is lost through the mutilation of the pillar at the top.
The inscription opens with an invocation of Buddha and with a mythical genealogy of Pallava, the supposed founder of the Pallava dynasty.
[[genealigical table]] Brahman. Bharadvāja. Aṅgiras. Sudhāman. Droṇa. Aśvatthāman, married to the Apsaras Madani. Pallava.
Verse 8 gives a popular etymology of the name Pallava. Then there follow the names of seven Pallava kings:—
1. Mahendravarman, son of Pallava.
2. Siṁhavarman I., son of 1.
3. Arkavarman, son of 2.
4. Ugravarman.
6. Nandivarman, son of 5, Śrī-Siṁhavishṇu.
7. Siṁhavarman II.
The inscription contains no information about the relationship, which existed between 3 and 4, 4 and 5, 6 and 7. Neither does the genealogy agree with the lists derived by Mr. Foulkes2 and Mr. Fleet3 from other Pallava inscriptions, although similar names of kings occur in them. For these reasons great care should be taken in using the above list for historical purposes.
From the incomplete prose passage at the end of the inscription, we learn that, on his return from an expedition to the north, Siṁhavarman II. came to a place sacred to Buddha, which was called Dhānyaghaṭa (line 38) or Dhānyaghaṭaka (line 47). The lost part of the pillar must have recorded a donation, which the king made to Buddha.
Dhānyaghaṭa or Dhānyaghaṭaka is evidently identical with Dhānyakaṭa or Dhānyakaṭaka, “corn-town,” the well-known old name of Amarāvatī. The use of gha instead of ka can perhaps be explained by the Tamil habit of softening a single consonant between two vowels.4
Language: Sanskrit.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv01p0i0032.
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: Source Language (other), Tamil.
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: The subjoined five grants belong to the kings Narendra-mṛigarāja or Vijayāditya II, Amma I. or Vishṇuvardhana VI, Chālukya-Bhīma II. or Vishṇuvardhana VII, Amma II. or Vijayāditya V. and Vīra-Choḍa or Vishṇuvardhana IX. The place, which is occupied by each of these princes in the genealogy of the Eastern Chalukya dynasty, will be seen from the annexed table, for which all hitherto published Eastern Chalukya grants have been consulted, and in which numbers are prefixed to the names of those princes who really reigned, in order to mark their succession.1
The relation of the two usurpers (18) Tālapa and (21) Yuddhamalla to the direct line of the family is established by three inscriptions:—a. Tāḍapa is called the son of Vikramāditya’s brother (Ind. Ant. Vol. XIV. p. 56); b. Tāla is called the son of Yuddhamalla, who was the paternal uncle of Chālukya-Bhīma I. (Ind. Ant. Vol. XIII, p. 249, where pitṛivya has to be read for pitṛivyo); c. Bhīma II, the son of Kollabhigaṇḍa Vijayāditya, is at the same time called the son of Yuddhamalla, the son of Tālapa, i.e., he belonged to the next generation after (21) Yuddhamalla (Ind. Ant. Vol. XII, p. 92).
Three of the last kings, who are shown in the annexed table, viz., (28) Vijayāditya VI, (29) Rājarāja II. and (30) Vīra-Choḍa, are only known from the subjoined inscription No. 39.
This grant belongs to the Sir W. Elliot Collection of the British Museum, and was made over to me for publication by Dr. Burgess. It consists of five copper-plates with raised rims. Each plate measures 9 by 3 inches. The first and fifth plates are inscribed only on their inner sides, while the three middle ones bear writing on both sides. The preservation of the plates is tolerably good. They are strung on an elliptic ring, which is (1/2)" thick and 4(7/8)" by 3(1/2)" in diameter. The well-preserved circular seal, which is attached to the ring, measures 2(5/8)" in diameter. It bears the sun and the moon at the top, the legend śrītribhuvanāṁkuśa across the centre, and an expanded lotus-flower (side-view) at the bottom—all in relief on a counter-sunk surface.
The document is a grant of the parama-māheśvara Narendra-mṛigarāja, alias Vijayāditya II., the son of Vishṇuvardhana IV. and grandson of Vijayāditya I. The name of the district (vishaya), to the inhabitants of which the king addresses his order, is lost. On the occasion of a lunar eclipse (chandra-grahaṇa-nimitte2) the king gave the village of Koṟṟapaṟṟu to twenty-four brāhmaṇas. Of these, six adhered to the Hiraṇyakeśi-sūtra and eighteen to the Āpastamba-sūtra. They belonged to the following gotṛas:—Agniveśya, Kauṇḍinya, Kauśika, Gautama, Parāśara, Bhāradvāja, Vatsa, Śāṇḍilya, Saṁkṛiti and Harita. According to the colophon of the grant, “the excellent prince Nṛipa-Rudra, who was the brother of Narendra-mṛigarāja and a descendant of the Haihaya-vaṁśa (!), (was) the executor of this charity.”3
[[genealogical table:]] PEDIGREE OF THE EASTERN CHALUKYA DYNASTY. [C1]Kīrtivarman (until Śaka 489). [C1]Satyāśraya Vallabha (from Śaka 532 until at least 556).4 [C2]1. Kubja Vishṇuvardhana I. Vishamasiddhi5 (18 years; cir. Śaka 526-27 to cir. 544-45). [C1]2. Jayasiṁha I. Vallabha (33 years; cir. Śaka 544-45 to cir. 577-78).6 [C2]3. Indra Bhaṭṭāraka.7 [C1]4. Vishṇuvardhana II. (9 years; cir. Śaka 577-78 to cir. 586-87.) [C1]5. Maṅgi-yuvarāja (25 years; cir. Śaka 586-87 to cir. 611-12). [C1]6. Jayasiṁha II. (13 years; cir. Śaka 611-12 to cir. 624-25.) [C2]7. Kokkili (6 months; cir. Śaka 625). [C3]8. Vishṇuvardhana III. (37 years; cir. Śaka 625 to cir. 662.) [C1]9. Vijayāditya I. Bhaṭṭāraka (18 years; cir. Śaka 662 to cir. 680). [C1]10. Vishṇuvardhana IV. (36 years; cir. Śaka 680 to cir. 716.) [C1]11. Vijayāditya II. Narendra-mṛigarāja (48 years; cir. Śaka 716 to cir. 764).8 [C1]12. Kali Vishṇuvardhana V. (1(1/2) years; cir. Śaka 764 to cir. 765-66.) [C1]13. Guṇaga, Guṇagāṅka or Guṇakenalla Vijayāditya III. (44 years; cir. Śaka 765-66 to cir. 809-10.) [C2]Yuvarāja Vikramāditya. [C3]Yuddhamalla. [C1]14. Chālukya-Bhīma I. Drohārjuna (30 years; cir. Śaka 809-10 to cir. 839-40.) [C1]15. Kollabhigaṇḍa, Kollabigaṇḍa or Kaliyarttyaṅka Vijayāditya IV. (6 months; cir. Śaka 840.) [C1]16. Amma I. Vishṇuvardhana VI. Rājamahendra (7 years; cir. Śaka 840 to cir. 847). [C1]17. Vijayāditya.9 [C1]18. Tāha, Tāla, Tāḍapa, Tālapa or Tāḻapa (1 month; cir. Śaka 847). [C1]19. Vikramāditya (11 months or 1 year; cir. Śaka 847 to cir. 848). [C2]20. Bhīma.10 [C1]21. Yuddhamalla (7 years; cir. Śaka 848 to cir. 855).11 [C1]22. Chālukya-Bhīma II. Vishṇuvardhana VII. Gaṇḍamahendra, son of queen Meḻāmbā (12 years; cir. Śaka 855 to 867). [C1]23. Amma II. Vijayāditya V. son of queen Lokamahādevī, ascended the throne in Śaka 86712 and reigned 25 years (to cir. Śaka 892). [C1]24. Dānārṇava or Dāna-nṛipa (3 years; cir. Śaka 892 to cir. 895). [C1]25. Aftor an interregnum of 27 years,13 Śaktivarman or Chālukyachandra reigned 12 years; circa Śaka 925 to circa 937. [C2]26. Vimalāditya married Kūndavā, daughter of Rājarāja of the Sūrya-vaṁśa and younger sister of Rājendra-Choḍa (7 years; cir. Śaka 937 to 944). [C1]27. Rājarāja I. Vishṇuvardhana VIII. married Ammaṅga-devī, daughter of Rājendra-Choḍa of the Sūrya-vaṁśa, ascended the throne in Śaka 94414 and reigned 41 years (to Śaka 985). [C2]28. Vijayāditya VI. received the kingdom of Veṅgī from his nephew Rājendra-Choḍa and reigned 15 years (Śaka 985 to 1000). [C1]Rājendra-Choḍa, alias Kulottuṅga-Choḍa-deva I, Kulottuṅga-deva or Rājanārāyaṇa, Choḍa king, married Madhurāntakī, daughter of Rājendradeva of the Sūrya-vaṁśa, and reigned 49 years (Śaka 985 to 1034). [C1]Vikrama-Choḍa (15 years; Śaka 1034 to 1049). [C2]29. Rājarāja II. (1 year; Śaka 1000 to 1001.) [C3]30. Vīra-Choḍa Vishṇuvardhana IX. ascended the throne in Śaka 1001; a grant15 is dated in the 21st year of his reign (Śaka 1022). [C4]Four other sons. [C1]Kulottuṅga-Choḍa-deva II. was reigning in Śaka 1056.16
Language: Sanskrit.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv01p0i0035.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: The original of the subjoined inscription belongs to the Government Central Museum, Madras. According to Mr. Sewell,1 it “was found at the close of the year 1871 buried in the ground in a field in the village of Eḍeru near Ākiripalle in the Kistna District, 15 miles north-east of Bezvāḍa, a village belonging to the present Zamīndārī of Nūzivīḍu. The plates were presented to the Madras Museum by the then Zamīndār.” A rough transcript and paraphrase of the inscription were published by S. M. Naṭeśa Śāstrī.2 As the inscription deserves to be published more carefully owing to its bearing on a part of the history of the Eastern Chalukyas, I now edit it from the original plates, the use of which I owe to the kindness of Dr. E. Thurston, Superintendent, Government Central Museum.
The document is engraved on five copper-plates with raised rims, which are not less than (1/4) inch thick. Each plate measures 9(1/4) by 4(1/4) inches. The first and fifth plates are inscribed only on their inner sides, while the three middle ones bear writing on both sides. The characters are extremely elegant and must have been engraved by an accomplished calligraphist. The plates are strung on a slightly elliptic ring, which is (1/2) inch thick and measures about 5 inches in diameter. The well-cut circular seal, which is attached to the ring, rests on an expanded lotus-flower and measures 3(1/4) inches in diameter. It bears, at the top, a recumbent boar, which faces the right and is surmounted by the moon and the sun, two chāmaras, an elephant-goad and a symbol which I cannot make out; across the centre, the legend śrītribhuvanāṁkuśa; and at the bottom, an expanded lotus-flower (side-view),—all in relief, on a counter-sunk surface. Both the plates and the seal are in excellent preservation.
The inscription opens with a maṅgala, and then notices in prose and in verse the ancestors of the Eastern Chalukya king Amma I. Of the kings from Kubja-Vishṇuvardhana to Vishṇuvardhana IV. nothing but the names and the length of reigns is mentioned. The next king was Vijayāditya II., who is called Narendra-mṛigarāja in other inscriptions. He fought 108 battles during 12 years with the armies of the Gaṅgas and Raṭṭas, built 108 temples of Śiva in commemoration of his victories and ruled over Veṅgī for 44 years (verses 2 to 4). As Mr. Fleet has pointed out,3 “the Gaṅgas here referred to were mahāmaṇḍaleśvaras, feudatories of the Rāshṭrakūṭas, whose inscriptions are found in the Beḷgaum and Dhārwāḍ Districts.” The Raṭṭas mentioned in the grant were the Rāshṭrakūṭas themselves. If we deduct the sum of the reigns of the Eastern Chalukya kings from Kali-Vishṇuvardhana to Chālukya-Bhīma II. from the date of the accession of Amma II.—Śaka 8674—the accession of Kali-Vishṇuvardhana and the death of his predecessor Vijayāditya II. would fall in Śaka 764. Most inscriptions assign to the latter a reign of 48 years, two inscriptions a reign of 40 years,5 and the subjoined inscription a reign of 44 years. Accordingly, his accession would fall in Śaka 716, 724 or 720. Hence the war between Vijayāditya II. and the Raṭṭas—as suggested by Mr. Fleet—may have taken place during the reigns of the two Rāshṭrakūṭa kings Govinda III. and Śarva Amoghavarsha, who ruled at least from Śaka 7266 to 737 and from 7377 till at least 8008 respectively. As, in a grant of Śaka 730,9 the lord of Veṅgī is described as the servant of Govinda III., and as in a grant of Śaka 78910 it is stated, that Amoghavarsha was worshipped by the lord of Veṅgī, it seems that each party claimed the victory over the other. The fact, that Vijayāditya II. built 108 temples of Śiva, is also alluded to in two other inscriptions, where it is said, that he founded 108 temples of Narendreśvara, i.e., temples of Śiva called after his surname Narendra.11
Nothing of importance seems to have happened during the short reign of Kali-Vishṇuvardhana. His successor Vijayāditya III., who reigned from Śaka 765-66 to 80910, “having been challenged by the lord of the Raṭṭas, conquered the unequalled Gaṅgas, cut off the head of Maṅgi in battle, frightened the fire-brand Kṛishṇa and burnt his city completely” (verse 10.) The killing of Maṅgi and the burning of the city of Kṛishṇa is also reported in another inscription.12 The Kṛishṇa, whom Vijayāditya III. defeated, is probably identical with the lord of the Raṭṭas, who challenged him, and with the Rāshṭrakūṭa king Kṛishṇa II., whose earliest known date is Śaka 825.13
After the death of Vijayāditya III., the Rāshṭrakūṭas, as noticed by Mr. Fleet, seem to have been victorious; for his nephew Chalukya-Bhīma I., alias Drohārjuna, who ruled from Śaka 809-10 to 839-40, had to reconquer “the country of Veṅgī, which had been overrun by the army of the Raṭṭa claimants” (line 28f.) The length of the reign of Vijayāditya IV., the successor of Chalukya-Bhīma I., is not mentioned in the subjoined inscription; according to other grants he ruled six months.
There followed the king, who issued the grant, Amma I., alias Rājamahendra or Vishṇuvardhana VI. He, “having drawn his sword, which broke the dishonest hearts of his feudatory relatives, who had joined the party of his natural adversaries, won the affection of the subjects and of the army of his father (Vijayāditya IV.)” and of his grandfather (Chalukya-Bhīma I.)” (line 39 ff.) The natural adversaries of Amma I. were probably the Rāshṭrakūṭas under Prabhūtavarsha III., whose inscription is dated in Śaka 842.14
The grant proper, which takes up the remainder of the inscription, is an order, which Amma I. addressed to the inhabitants of the Kaṇḍeṟuvāḍi-vishaya, and by which he granted the village of Goṇṭūru15 together with twelve hamlets to Bhaṇḍanāditya, alias Kuntāditya, one of his military officers. The donee belonged to the Paṭṭavardhinīvaṁśa. His ancestor Kāḻakampa had been in the service of Kubja-Vishṇuvardhana, the first of the Eastern Chalukya kings, and had killed a certain Daddara in battle. Bhaṇḍanāditya himself had already served the donor’s father, who is here called Vijayāditya-Kaliyarttyaṅka. The second part of this name corresponds to the Kollabhigaṇḍa or Kollabigaṇḍa of other inscriptions. The grant closes with the enumeration of the four boundaries of the village granted and of the names of the twelve hamlets included in it, and with two of the customary imprecatory verses.
Language: Sanskrit.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv01p0i0036.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: The original of the subjoined inscription was kindly placed at my disposal by R. Sewell, Esq., then Acting Collector of the Kistna District, and was, at his desire, made over to the Central Museum, Madras, for safe custody. It was discovered recently, while digging a mound near the temple at Kolavennu, Bezvāḍa Tālluqa. The document consists of three copper-plates with raised rims. Each plate measures 9 1/4 by 4 5/8 inches. The first and third plates are inscribed only on their inner sides, while the second one bears writing on both sides. The writing on the third plate breaks off in the description of the boundaries of the granted village. As there is no trace of any letters after the words: yasyāvadhayaḥ pūrvataḥ, “the boundaries of which (are), to the east,” it seems that the document was left incomplete, perhaps because the necessary details of the surroundings of the village were not to hand, when the edict was issued. The plates are strung on a ring, which is 1/2 inch thick and 5 inches in diameter. The circular seal, which is attached to the ring, rests on an expanded lotus-flower and measures 2 1/4 inches in diameter. It bears at the top a standing boar, which faces the right, with the sun and the moon over it, a chaurī and an elephant-goad on its left and a chaurī on its right; the centre of the seal is occupied by the legend śrītribhuvanāṁkuśa and its bottom by a lotus-flower with eight petals (bird’s-eye view),—all in relief on a counter-sunk surface. Both the inscription and the seal are in fairly good preservation.
The inscription opens with a maṅgala, which mentions the lotus-flower that rises from Vishṇu’s navel,1 and then gives the usual vaṁśāvali of the Eastern Chalukyas from Kubja-Vishṇu to Vikramāditya, the younger son of Chālukya-Bhīma I. The ensuing reign of Yuddhamalla, the son of Tāḻapa, is left out. This omission is probably due to the fact, that Chālukya-Bhīma II. considered his predecessor, whom he conquered, as an usurper and ignored him purposely. The grant consists of an order addressed by Chālukya-Bhīma II. alias Vishṇuvardhana VII. to the inhabitants of the Kaṇḍeṟuvāṭivishaya2 and issued at the request of a vassal of the king, the Pānara prince Vājjaya. On the occasion of a winter-solstice (uttarāyaṇa),3 Bhīma II. gave the village of Koḍhatalli as an agrahāra to Kommaṇa, who know the kramapāṭha (kramavid) and adhered to the Āpastamba-sūtra. The donce was the son of Deṇiya, who know the kramapāṭha (kramaka), and of Kandamavvā, and the grandson of Revaśarman, an inhabitant of Ābharadvasukālmādi.
Language: Sanskrit.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv01p0i0037.
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: Like the preceding inscription, this one was received from Mr. R. Sewell, who found it lying in the Huzūr Treasury attached to the Collector’s Office, Masulipatam, and was made over to the Madras Museum. The document consists of three copper-plates with raised rims. Each plate measures 7 3/4 by 3 3/4 inches. The first and third plates are inscribed only on their inner sides, while the second one bears writing on both sides. They are all much worn, and of the third plate one entire half is lost. The plates are strung on a ring, which is 3/8 inch thick and 5 inches in diameter. The circular seal, which is attached to the ring, rests on an expanded lotus-flower and measures 2 7/8 inches in diameter. It is much corroded, but still shows distinct traces of a standing boar, which faces the right, at the top, of the legend śrītribhuvanāṁkuśa across the centre, and of a lotus-flower with eight petals [bird’s-eye view] at the bottom—all in relief on a counter-sunk surface.
The document opens with the usual vaṁśāvali of the Eastern Chalukyas from Kubja-Vishṇuvardhana. The donor is Amma-rāja II. alias Vijayāditya V. (who began to reign in Śaka 867). The king addresses his order to the inhabitants of the Gudravāra-vishaya, which must be identical with the Gudrāvāra- or Gudrahāra-vishaya of other inscriptions.1 The donee, whose name is lost, was the family priest (kulabrāhmaṇa) of the king and belonged to the Kauṇḍilya-gotra (sic). The object granted seems to have been a field, which had formerly belonged to the donee (etadīya-prāktana-kshetra), but had been taken away from him (vilupta) and was probably restored to him by the present document. The other details of the grant are lost.
Language: Sanskrit.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv01p0i0038.
Emmanuel Francis.
Summary: The original of the subjoined grant belongs to the Sir W. Elliot Collection in the British Museum and was lent to me for publication by Dr. Burgess. It had been previously in the possession of the karaṇam of Chellūr, a village in the Cocanada: Tālluqa of the Godāvarī District: The grant consists of five copper-plates with raised rims. Each plate measures 5 3/4 by 10 1/4 inches. The first plate bears writing only on its inner side, while the remaining ones are inscribed on both sides. The preservation of the plates is fairly good; the fifth only is somewhat damaged. The ring, which bears the seal, has been cut. It is 5/8 inch thick and 6 1/4 inches in diameter. The well-preserved seal measures 2 5/8 inches in diameter. It rests on an expanded lotus-flower and bears in relief on a counter-sunk surface the legend śrītribhuvanāṁkuśa. Over the latter, it contains a boar, which faces the right and is surrounded by two lamp stands, two chāmaras, the sun and the moon, an elephant-goad and a conch. Below the legend, there is a drum (?), an expanded lotus-flower (bird’s-eye view), an emblem resembling what Mr. Fleet supposes to be a makara-toraṇa,1 and a svastika.
Abstracts of the present inscription have already been published by Sir W. Elliot.2 It is the latest known document of the Eastern Chalukya a dynasty and possesses considerable interest, as it contains valuable details about the connection between the Eastern Chalukyas and the Choḷas and thus settles the dates of several kings of the last-mentioned dynasty.
The vaṁśāvali of the inscription consists of four parts:—
I. (Lines 1-16.) A genealogy of the lunar race down to Udayana, commencing with whom fifty-nine emperors are supposed to have reigned at Ayodhyā.
II. (Lines 16-28.) An account of five Early Chalukya kings, viz.:—
[[genealogical table]] Vijayāditya I., killed in a battle with Trilochana-Pallava. Vishṇuvardhana, married to a Pallava princess. Vijayāditya II. Pulakeśi-Vallabha. Kīrtivarman.
III. (Lines 28-46.) The usual succession of the Eastern Chalukyas of Veṅgī from Kubja-Vishṇuvardhana to Vimalāditya.
IV. (Lines 46-78.) An account of the later Eastern Chalukyas during their connection with the Choḷas, viz.:—
[[genealogical table]] [C1]Vimalāditya. [C1]Rājarāja I. [C2]Vijayāditya. [C1]Rājendra-Choḍa, alias Kulottuṅga-deva or Rājanārāyaṇa. [C1]Two sons, of whom one was Rājarāja II. [C2]Vīra-Choḍa, alias Vishṇuvardhana. [C3]Four other sons.
The first and second parts of the vaṁśāvali need not be treated in detail, as the first is entirely mythical, and Mr. Fleet considers the second to be “a mere farrago of vague tradition and Purāṇik myths, of no authority, based on the undoubted facts that the Chalukyas did come originally from the north, and did find the Pallavas in possession of some of the territories afterwards acquired by themselves, and on a tradition of the later Kādambas that the founder of their family was named Trilochana or Trinetra.”3
The third part of the vaṁśāvali agrees with Mr. Fleet’s grants of Rājarāja I. and of Kulottuṅga-Choḍa-deva II.4 Just as in the grant of Rājarāja I. a reign of 3 years is allotted to Dānārṇava, who is here also called Dāna-nṛipa, and an interregnum of 27 years is stated to have taken place after him. There follow the reigns of his sons Śaktivarman (12 years) and Vimalāditya (7 years). No mention is made of the Choḷa princess Kūndavā, whom the latter married according to the grant of Rājarāja I.
We now turn to the fourth part of the vaṁśāvali. The son of Vimalāditya, Rājarāja, who ruled for 41 years (line 47), married Ammaṅga-devī, the daughter of a Rājendra-Choḍa of the solar race (verse 7). Their son Rājendra-Choḍa (verse 8), Kulottuṅga-deva (verse 11) or Rājanārāyaṇa (verse 12) at first ascended the throne of Veṅgī (verse 9), conquered Kerala, Pāṇḍya, Kuṇtala and other countries (verse 10), and was anointed to the Choḍa kingdom (verse 11). He married Madhurāntakī, the daughter of a Rājendra-deva of the solar race (verse 12) and had by her seven sons (verse 13). When he rose to the Choḍa kingdom, he had given the kingdom of Veṅgī to his paternal uncle Vijayāditya (verse 14), who died after a reign of fifteen years (verse 15). Then he gave Veṅgī to his son Rājarāja (verses 13 and 16) and, when the latter had returned after one year’s reign (verse 17), to Rājarāja’s younger brother Vīra-Choḍa (verse 18), who was crowned at Jaganātha-nagarī5 (verse 20) in Śaka 1001 (verse 21). As the difference between this date and Śaka 944, the date of the accession of Rājarāja I. according to Mr. Fleet’s grant, is equal to the sum of the intervening reigns of Rājarāja I., Vijayāditya VI. and Rājarāja II. (41+15+1=57), it follows that Rājendra-Choḍa must have appointed Vijayāditya VI. viceroy of Veṅgī in the very year of his accession. The present grant of Vīra-Choḍa is dated in the 21st year of his reign, i.e., Śaka 1022, or 12 years before the death of his father Rājendra-Choḍa and before the accession of his elder brother Vikrama-Choḍa.
The chief importance of the Chellūr plates consists in the light, which they throw on a portion of the history of the Choḷa dynasty. The large Leyden grant and some of the Tamil inscriptions contained in the present volume mention three Western Chālukya kings, who were the antagonists of three Choḷa kings:—
1. According to the large Leyden grant, Rājarāja-deva (see Nos. 40, 41 and 66, below) conquered Satyāśraya. This was probably the Western Chālukya king Satyāśraya II. (Śaka 919 to about 930.) Consequently, Rājarāja-deva may be identified with that Rājarāja of the Sūryavaṁśa, whose daughter Kūndavā was married to the Eastern Chalukya king Vimalāditya (Śaka 937 (?) to 944). With this agrees the Koṅgu Chronicle, which places Rājarāja’s reign about Śaka 926.
2. According to Nos. 67 and 68, below, Rājendra-Choḷa-deva conquered Jayasiṁha. This was the Western Chālukya king Jayasiṁha III. (about Śaka 940 to about 964), who, in one of his inscriptions, calls himself “the lion to the elephant Rājendra-Choḷa” (see the introduction to No. 37). Consequently, Rājendra-Choḷa-deva must be identified with that Rājendra-Choḍa of the Sūryavaṁśa, whose daughter Ammaṅga-devī was married to the Eastern Chalukya king Rājarāja I. (Śaka 944 to 985), and who may be the same as that Rājendra-Choḍa, whose younger sister Kūndavā was married to Vimalāditya (Śaka 937 (?) to 944). If the last identification is correct, Rājendra-Choḷa-deva would have been the son of Rājarāja-deva.
3. According to the fragmentary inscription No. 127, below, and according to an inscription at Māmallapuram, Rājendra-deva conquered Āhavamalla. This was probably the Western Chālukya king Āhavamalla II. or Someśvara I. (about Śaka 964 to about 990), who, according to inscriptions and according to the Vikramāṅkacharita, fought with the Choḷas. Consequently, Rājendra-deva may be identified with that Rājendra-deva of the Sūryavaṁśa, whose daughter Madhurāntakī was married to the Eastern Chalukya king Rājendra-Choḍa or Kulottuṅga-Choḍa-deva I. (Śaka 985 to 1034.) The inscriptions do not inform us, in what manner Rājendra-deva was related to his predecessor Rājendra-Choḷa-deva.
The subjoined table will show at a glance all supposed synchronisms:—
[[genealogical table]] [C1]Western Chālukyas. [C2]Choḷas (Sūryavaṁśa). [C3]Eastern Chalukyas (Somavaṁśa). 1. Satyāśraya II. fought with Rājarāja-deva, who was the father-in-law of Vimalāditya [C1](Śaka 919 to about 930.) [C2](about Śaka 926.) [C3](Śaka 937 (?) to 944). 2. Jayasiṁha III. fought with Rājendra-Choḷa-deva, who was the father-in-law of Rājarāja I. [C1](about Śaka 940 to about 964.) [C2](Śaka 944 to 985.) 3. Āhavamalla II. fought with Rājendra-deva, who was the father-in-law of Rājendra-Choḍa or (about Śaka 964 to about 990.) [C2]Kulottuṅga-Choḍa-deva I. (Śaka 985 to 1034.)
In order to prevent its re-occurrence, I conclude with alluding to the in all previous pedigrees of the Choḷas. This was the confounding of the two Choḷa kings Rājarāja and Rājendra-Choḷa with their Eastern Chalukya grandsons, who seem to have received their names from those of their maternal grandfathers. In reality the Eastern Chalukya king Rājarāja I. ruled only over Veṅgī. His son Rājendra-Choḍa or Kulottuṅga-Choḍa-deva I., though at first king of Veṅgī, seems to have inherited the Choḷa kingdom from his father-in-law, the Choḷa king Rājendra-deva, in Śaka 985.
After the vaṁśāvali, the subjoined inscription contains the grant itself. It is an order, which was addressed by the paramamāheśvara Vīra-Choḍa-deva (line 79), alias Vishṇuvardhana (line 78) to the inhabitants of the Guddavāṭi-vishaya6 (line 80). In the 21st year of his reign (line 113) the king gave a village of the above-mentioned district, whose name is indistinct, but seems to have been Kolāṟu7 (line 103), to a temple of Vishṇu at the agrahāra of Chellūru.8 This Vishṇu temple had been founded (verse 36) by the king’s senāpati (verse 30) Meḍamārya (verse 27), alias Guṇaratnabhūshaṇa (verse 29), who had also constructed a pond at the same village of Chellūru (verse 34) and founded two sattras at Drākshārāma9 and Pīṭhapurī10 (verse 33). He was the son of Potana of the Mudgalagotra (verse 24), who had received from Rājarāja11 the somewhat lengthy title of Rājarāja-brahma-mahārāja (verse 25), by Kannamāmbā (verse 26). The edict ends with the statement, that its executors (ājñapti) were the five ministers (pañcha pradhānāḥ), and with the names of the composer and the writer.
Language: Sanskrit.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv01p0i0039.
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: These two records engraved in early Grantha and Vaṭṭeḻuttu characters belong to Māṟañjaḍaiyaṉ who is also called Parāntaka. They are important because the Kali year 3871 is also quoted for this king, thus furnishing a valuable chronological land mark for early Pāṇḍya history. The rock-cut temple of Narasiṁha was begun by Māṟaṉ-Kāri alias Muvēndamaggalappēraraiyaṉ, a vaidya of Karavandapura alias Kaḷakkuḍi and an Uttaramantrin (minister) of the Pāṇḍya king,1 but as he died subsequently, the work was completed by his brother Māṟaṉ-Eyiṉaṉ alias Pāṇḍimaṅgala-Viśaiyaraiyaṉ who succeeded him in the office of minister, who added the mukhamaṇḍapa and had the consecration ceremony performed. As the person first mentioned had also the title Madhurakavi, it has been tentatively assumed that he had some connection with the Vaishṇava Āḻvār named Kāri Māṟaṉ alias Nammāḷvār, the author of the Tiruvāymoḻi. Karavandapuram has been identified with Ukkiraṉkōṭṭai in the Tirunelveli taluk of the district of the same name, in the inscriptions copied from which, the village is called Kaḷakkuḍi and Kaḷandai.2
Languages: Sanskrit, Source Language (other), Tamil.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv14p1i0001-0002.
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, Source Language (other), Tamil.
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, Source Language (other), Tamil.
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_INSSIIv04p0i0001.
Emmanuel Francis.
Language: Undetermined.
Repository: South Indian Inscriptions (Original Edition) (south-indian-inscriptions).
DHARMA_INSSIIv04p0i0024.