Epigraphia Indica Vol 27

SR No.: 032581
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Hirananda Shastri
Publisher: Archaeological Survey of India
Publication Year: 1947
Total Pages: 490
Language: English
Classification: Book_English
File Size: 27 MB

Page 82

No. 10 ] CHEVURU PLATES OF EASTERN CHALUKYA AMMA I
. As to the localities mentioned in the record, the Gudravåra vishaya figures in a number of inscriptions. In certain cases its name is spelt differently. It has been identified with Gūdūru, near Masulipatam, as well as with Gudivada, the headquarters of the tālāk of that name in the Kistna District. The latter identification is more probable. The donated village of Umikili and the boundary village of Düdrupāka are evidently identical with Unikili and Rudrapaka ; both of which are included in the Kaikalür tālük of the Kistna District. The Kaikalar tālük map shows Rudrapaka to be situated, as the inscription has it, to the south of Unikili. The distance between the two is about a mile and a half.
I am indebted to Mr. N. Laksminarayan Rao for the explanation of the Telugu portion is well as for some useful suggestions in connection with this essay.
TEXT
First Plate
1 Svasti (il*) Srimatāṁ sakala-bhuvana-samstūyamāna-Mänavya-sagotrāņām 2 Häriti-putrānām Kausiki-vara prasada-labdha-rajyānār mätsi-gana-pari3 pälitänām svāmi-Mahāsēna-pād-anudhyātānām bhagavan-Virāyaņa4 prasada-samāsādita-vara-varaha -länchhan-ēkshana kshana-vasikțit-a. 5 rāti-mandalánām-asvamēdh-avabhritha-snāna-pavitrikrita-vapu6 sbarn Chälukyänăm kulam-alamkarishnõh Satyäsraya-Vallabhöndrasya' kula tila 7 kayamana-sv-asi-dhära-namita-ripu-nfipati-makuta-tata-ghatita-mani-mayu8 kha-pumja-pimjarita-păda-padma-yugalasya Chālukya-Bhima-bhūpālasya pautrah 9 s-asi-sannahana-sva-tanu-tula-tulita-bhūri-bhara-bhisura-homa-rasi(si)-naha
Second Plate; First Side
10 dana-višësh-ädyi(ậhyi)krita-vipra-kula-kalpavrikshasya Samastabhuvanāśra11 ya-Vijayadityasya putraḥAmma-mahipatir=Ggandaragando Rājamahē12 ndra iti vikhyātahi dāyāda-timir-õdyad-dinakara-kiraņāyamāna-bhāsur-à13 si-sanāthiksitata10-dakshiņa-bhā(bā)hus=sa Sahlrvvalokāśraya-sri-Vishnuva14 rddhana-mahärājādhiraja-paramēsvara-paramabhattārakah para mama15 heśvarah Gudravāra-vishaya-niväsino rashtrakūta-pramukhăn=kutu
G. Jouveau-Dubreuil, Ancient History of the Deccan, p. 87; above, Vol. VI. p. 316 : Vol. XXIII. $9, n.: p. 92, n. 3: J.A. H. R. S., Vol. V, p. 25; etc., where different spellings of the name will be seen.
* Above, Vol. IV, p. 34. It may be pointed out that formerly Kaiknlür was not a separate talak, but was a part of the Gudivāda tālik. Thus Chevūru and the other villages now included in the Kaikalar tiläk were formerly in the Gudivada lülük.
* From the original plates and inked estampages.
. The dot seen over the syllable sê is superfluous. It does not stand for an anusvåra which in this inscription usually appears to the right of the letter concerned, as may be compared in l. 1 where it occurs thrice.
The superfluous dot between va and rå in the word varaha is due to a flaw in the plate.
• A short downward stroke is seen attached to the middle of the letter lu on its right side, which is unnecessary. The proper form of this letter may be seen below in 1. 8.
See below p. 47, n. 1. . Here sandhi has not been observed.
A superfluous mark like that of an ordinary anuarára is seen over this sa. 10 This ta is redundant; read krita-dakshina. 11. This ea is redundant; reads=sarova. Or we may even justify the presence of the additional ea by reading na parvon. treating that a As a demonstrative pronoun, menning here that well-known'.