Epigraphia Indica Vol 15

Author(s): Sten Konow, F W Thomas
Publisher: Archaeological Survey of India

Page 13

EPIGRAPHIA INDICA.
[Vol. XV.
Carelessly incised and are fall of mistakes. The plate was prepared by welding several thin sheets of copper together. In the course of time two of them have become separated, and this has destroyed the first few letters and syllables of lines 15-17 on the frst side. I was informed that the plate was pat into fire by the local goldsmith, in order to clean it, and the corrosive action has destroyed several letters on the first side and has made the last half of the lines on the first side less intelligible. With the exception of these damaged parts, the writing on the plate is in a fairly good state of preservation.
The letters vary from " to " in size, and on the whole the work hus been neatly done by the mason. The characters belong to the 8th century A.D., and we find many forms which are later than those used in the Ganjam grant of Sasanka. Ya is bipartite throughout. The difference between ha and bha is very slight. Sa still retains the old Kushana form. On these grounds it appears that the inscription can be assigned to the latter half of the 8th century A.D. This remark will apply only to the first twenty-nine lines of the record, which are carefully and neatly incised. The remaining fifteen lines are very carelessly written and full of mistakes. This is an example of Káyaatha-nagari. Many later forms found in this portion indicate that this is ourrent hand of the period, showing the forms used by scribes, while the script used in the first twenty-nine lines is the epigraphical script. We find the later form of fa in fata, 1. 30, from which the central oross-bar has disappeared. Another intermediate form of the palatal bibilant is to be found in fanka (1. 31) and again in dyuht=chala (1. 33). The later Nagari or Bengali form of U is to be found in uktafischa (1. 31). The form of a in abhad in 1. 1 is much later than that of a in akshēpta (1. 32). Some peculiar forms are to be found in the epigraphic script used in this plate, ..g. Nri (P) and pha of Nrigatāpha (1.2), the form of u in guna (1.4). The doubling of consonants with the superscript and subscript r is optional, and the sign of avagraha is nowhere used, The language of the grant is Sanskrit, for the most part correct. The majority of grammatical mistakes are to be found in 11. 30-34.
The record refers to the reign of & prince named Subhakara-dēva, who is entitled Maharaja, indicating that he did not claim Imperial dignity, who meditated on the feet of his father and mother, who was a devout worshipper of the Sagata, i.e. Buddha (parama-saugata). He had obtained birth from the king (nara-pati) Sivakara-dēva, who was a devout worshipper of the Tathāgata (parama-tathāgato), who was the son of Kshēmankara-dēva, also called Nfi(P)gatāpha, a devout worshipper (paramõpăsaka). The grant was issued from the royal residence or camp at Subhadova-pataka, on the 23rd day of Margadirsha, in the 8th year of the king's reign, and it records the grant of two villages named Parvata-droni-Komparska and Dançankiyöka, in the vishayas of Panchala and Vubhyudays in Northern Tobali, which is evidently the Bhukti, to the hundred Brähmung named in detail by the same grant. The officers mentioned in the graut are: mahāsāmenta, mahāraja, rajaputra, antarariga, kumar(amatya), uparika, vishaya-pati, tādāyuktaka, dandapafika and sthānantarika. The two villages were combined under a new designation Salona-puradhivisa.
In the first line the kings mentioned in the grant are said to have been descended from the family of the Earth (bhaum-ānvayād). Most probably they also claimed descent from Neraka, like the early kings of Kámardpa. This is supported by the fact that the first king has a sorname which has a distinctly non-Aryan sound, e.g. Nri(?)gatapha. Three kings of this dynasty are mentioned :
Kshēmaṁ kara-dova
- or Nrigatāpha Sivakara-déra
Subbakar dova