Epigraphia Indica Vol 20

SR No.: 032574
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Hirananda Shastri
Publisher: Archaeological Survey of India
Publication Year: 1929
Total Pages: 188
Language: English
Classification: Book_English
File Size: 40 MB

Page 132

No. 12) TWO SINDA INSCRIPTIONS FROM BENACHAMATTI, SAKA 1088 & 1109. 111
who has written an excellent note on the Sinda chiefs in this journal', evidently followed Fleet in this respect; but, while editing the Sūdi inscription of the Kalachurya king Samkamadēva, he felt the incongruity of this interpretation and remarked " it seems to confuse Achugi's brother Singi I with the former's son Singhi II." Since the Ron record edited by the same scholar states clearly that Acharasa II was the son of Singa, a brother of Āchugi I, he has recognised this difference as being only a variant version of the pedigree recorded in the Sūdi inscription mentioned above. But it may be remarked that all the epigraphs, if understood properly with the aid of A, yield the same genealogy. The verse in praise of Achugi II in A runs as follows:
atan-anujätan-&vani-khyåtam bri-Simha-jatan-uddhata-ripu-samghāta-hati-niratana
enisidan=ātata-tējam pratāpadimdAcharasam (II. 13-14) meaning that his (i.e., Bammarasa's) brother was the powerful Acharass who was the son of Simha. This statement is fully borne out by the relevant portion in the Südi inscription, viz., vistarisidud-alli Singarasan-ātmajan-Achugimandalesvaram (1. 24), i.e., among them (alli) Simgarasa's son was Achugimaņdalēšvara. As Acharasa II is thus described in unmistakable terms to be the son of Simha without introducing any prince of the latter name before, excepting Achugi (I)'s brother Singa, there is no other alternative but to suppose that he was the son of this Sirga and consequently a cousin of Bammarasa I. The expression ätana tammam'must, therefore, be taken to mean his brother, i.e., the brother of Achugi I.
We know from inscriptions at Arasibidi and Katgēris that Chivunda had married three queens, namely, Dēmaladēvi, Lakshmădēvi and Siriyādēvi, of whom the last two were the daughters of the Kaļachurya King Bijjala. He begot on Dēmaladēvi, Achugi III and Permägi III and on Siriyadēvi, Vira-Vijjapa and Vira-Vikrama, the donors of inscription B. Vira-Vijjana's queen was Tripuradēvi. The portion containing the name of Vikrama's wife is unfortunately broken off.
The Sinda chiefs who played an important part in the mediaeval history of Karnataka began their political career aa feudatories of the Western Chalukyas of Kalyani during the last quarter of the 11th century A. D. The first prince of the family was Achugi I who is described in the Sūdi and Nidgundi inscriptions with the significant epithet "ademandaļika," thereby indicating that with him came into being the rule of the Sinds princes of Erambarage. From the fact that he is extolled as Vikramadityana katfid.alagu? (a sharpened sword-edge of Vikramaditya VI) and that his son Bammarasa was, according to an epigraph at Savadi, ruling Kisukādu and other provinces in the Chalukya Vikrama year 7 (A. D. 1083), the origin of the family as a ruling power may be placed in or about A. D. 1076, the year of Vikramaditya's accession to the throne. It is therefore not possible that the Mahāmandalesvara Singannadēva of a Nidgundi inscription who was governing Kisukādu-70 in A. D. 1076 under Bhuvanaikamalladēva, could be identical with the Sinda prince Simga I 26 originally suggested by Fleet 10 and still accepted by Dr. Barnett in his note referred to above. There is no evidence to show that Achugi's brother simga ruled at all whereas it can be definitely inferred from 1 Above Vol. XIV, pp. 288.
* Above Vol. XV, pp. 109. * The expression vistarisidudalli has been taken as one word and translated "In dwelling upon the excellence oto." See ibid, p. 112. But it has to be split up into two words as vistarisiduds and alli.
No. 37 of the Bombay Karnatak Collection for 1928-20. No. 151 of the same collection. No. 205 of the same colleotion for 1926-27. * No. 35 of the same collection for 1927-28 and the Sadi inscription mentioned above. * No. 2 of the same collection for 1927-28.
[bid No. 200 for 1927-28. 10 Dyn. Kan. Dist, p. 674. But he has doubted this identification in Ind. Ant., Vol. XXX, p. 200.