________________
No. 24.]
SIHAWA STONE INSCRIPTION OF KARNARAJA.
183
princes, assumed the title of a paramount sovereign. Combining the information from the other two Kakaira inscriptions of these Sômavamsi kings we get the following genealogical tree :
Simharaja.
Vyåghrarâja or Vågbaraja.
Vôpadova.
Krishọa !
Somaraja-deva.
Ranakêsarin
Karparaja
-Bhopalla-devi, 1192 A.D.
Jaitaraja.
Pamparaja-deva -Lakshmi-dévi, 1216 A.D.
Somachandra
Vôpadeva (Prince).
Bhånadeva,
1320 A.D. It would appear that Vopadeva had four sons, but the probability is that he had only three, the doubtfal Krishna of the Kanker prasasti being probably identical with Karpa of our inscription. Evidently the three brothers were all ruling chiefs, who appear to have divided the state between them and selected their residences in different places, though always keeping in touch with the ancestral capital at KAkaira and recognising one amongst themselves as over-lord. Karna seems to have had a predilection for a site near the older capital, viz., Sih&wd, and was probably living in Dhanorå, now in the Bastar State, at a distance of about 28 miles from Sihawa. In this village my friend Rai Bahadur Panda Baijnath, B.A., Administrator of the Bastar State, has recently discovered ancient remains, there being about 20 tanks and 25 mounds, one of which be excavated and found in it a huge siva linga with beautifal carvinge. Dhanorâ is enclosed by hills on three sides, and is a likely place selected by Raja for his residence. There is a local tradition that a Raja Karna ruled there, although the people of that place do not even now know of the existence of any inscription mentioning his name. Sómaršja and his son Pamparâja favoured Padi-pattana, which I cannot identify. It was possibly somewhere towards Dhamtari side. Raņakesarid was issueless, as our inscription informs us, and he was probably wholly dependent on his brother Karparâja, as we find the latter building a temple in his name to perpetuate his memory- a thing which he would perhaps have done himself had he been his uwn master. If he was ruling as a chief subordinate to his brother, we have no information as to
Above, pp. 123 and 11., and 166 and L.
