________________
148
EPIGRAPHIA INDICA.
(Vol. XI.
Compare -wirjit-, 1.33; -varjitah, 1. 55; -arthibhyah, 1. 24; parthivaih, 1. 27; manör-bhagavato, 1. 8; -tir-bhuwan, 1.30; krimir-bhatvā, 1. 71. Between m andra , i.e. a b, is inserted in tāmura., 1. 61. There are besides, several other mistakes which may be due either to the writer or to the engraver. Thus we find a for a in-prakshyalita-, 1.4; Gang, 11. 13, 26, 44; samriddhimans, 1.30; -giyaman., 1. 36; -chatta-, 1. 55; a for i in-kita, 1. 39; a for u in ācharitan, 1. 41; for a in ānu., 1. 48; gaurāvāta, 1. 64 f.; à for o in-kul-attamasya, 1. 44 ; i for i or ai in isänyő, 1. 69 ; i for i in sāśanika., 1. 71 f.;a for u in -sūdārāya, 1. 61; u for 7 in =ēkūna-, 1.34; j for ij in -ujvala., 11. 10,30; -va[jo - ljuto, 1. 22; tt for in chatta-bhatta-, 1. 55;t for tt in -chchhatra., 1. 10; -ātunga-, 1. 12; t for d in-samutbhavāyāss, 1. 37; d for t in praśchyödan., 1. 23; y for yy in nyāyena, 1. 41; $ for sin asinē, 1. 48; -fim-, 1. 54; $ūnu, 1. 59; simano, 1. 65; & for in vimsati, 1. 34; -māhēsvara-, 1. 49; -pravéső, 1. 55; -yaső-, 1.57; kāsyapa-, 1.57; säsani-, 1. 61; vamsa-, 1. 68; -sila, 11. 68, 70; isanyē, 1.69; säfanika., instead of sasanika., 1. 71 f. ; $ for sh in -visayasya, 1. 65, and so forth. Mistakes such as së for tea in prasadā sēm-(-dāt=sam-), 11. 8 f., the numerous instances wbere an anusvāra (cf. 11. 27, 39, 42, 53, 56, 72, 74) or a visarga (cf. 11. 21, 28, 51, 54) has been omitted; the omission of jo in tasy=ānu [jo], 1. 21; of r in -karishmo[r"], 1. 14 : sünu [], 1. 58; of sin sama[s], 1.21; of sa in dā[sa*]nams, 1. 73, and the many mistakes in 1. 62, are probably due to the engraver, while the long omissions in 11. 34 and 65 just as well can be due to the writer of the draft.
There are several instances of wrong or irregular sandhi: compare -dattamura, 1. 70: -nirahan sris, 1. 17; -gajānn-arthibhyah, I. 24; sah sri-, 1. 25; prasiddhah chatuh., 1. 54; -ādityata Rapadēvyah jatah, 1. 58 ; -pārvvan-ta-, 1. 61 f.
In 1. 51 several dots indicate a correction. The engraver probably had to copy & corrected draft, and has reproduced it as he found it. The original reading of the passage was probably samastāmātyapramukhajanapadāne as in the Nadagam and Madras Museum plates, or perhaps, sämantamatyapramukhajanapadan=; see the footnote to the passage.
The language is Sansksit, but the construction in 1l. 58 ff. is very loose and shows that the composer of the grant was not very well versed in the sacred tongue. With the exception of one imprecatory stanza, the body of the grant is written in prose. The introduction contains the same twelve verses as the Nadagăm and Madras Museum plates, with only one slight variation in verse 2, where our grant has mahipatiḥ while the other two read =vanipatih. In the grant itself we find the curious expression blūmichhidrapidhānanyayên=1 instead of the common bhūmichchhidranyāyēna, 1. 55. The epithet paranārisu(suduraya used of one of the donees in 1. 60 f., is also curious.
The grant was issued from Dantipura by the devout worshipper of Mahēśvara, the Paramabhattaraka Maharajadhiraja Vajra hasta (III), the overlord of the three Kalingas, and bestows some land on Irugana [alias] sri-Mänāditya Chotta and Vira-Bhüriśrava. The name of the former was perhaps not Mänāditya Chotta bat Aditya Chotta, though this reading would imply a serious grammatical slip in 1. 60. He was the son of Mānāditya or Aditya Chotta, the son of Chotta Vädayaraja and Rupadēri of the Vaidumba family, to which Vajrahasta's mother Vinayamahadevi likewise belonged. The donee Iragana Månaditya Chotta was consequently a relative of the king.
The land granted comprised the Gõrasatta district with, i.e. including thirty-five villages outside Tampavā. Its boundaries are given in 11. 65 ff. : to the east Vistirnasila, to the southeast a banyan tree sacred to Gaņēéa (Vinayaka-vata); to the south a hill with the temple of Tanku-Bhattărika, probably some form of Durga ; to the south-west the Andhārāvēņi hill; to the west Kāñchasilā on the Vamsadhārā; to the north-west Amrapathara; to the north
1 Bhumichhidr-apirang. and bhumicho hitr-ápidhana. occur in the two grants of Dandimahidėvi published by the late Prof. Kielhorn (above, Vol. VI., P. 139, text line 31 and p. 142, text line 29), who has corrected them into bhumichchhidr-abhidhana. .
