________________
196
EPIGRAPHIA INDICA.
[VOL. XVII.
ruling over the same district. There is thus no doubt that Pratāpa-Dēvarăya is identical with Brigiri and this fact has been pointed out by Mr. Venkayya in his Annual Report on Epigraphy for 1906 (p 82). It may be added that the name Praudhapratāpa-Devaraya was already assumed by Dēvarāya J.1 A stone inscription of this second son under the name ŚrgirinathaUdayar, dated in Saka 1348, has also been discovered.
In the face of the inscriptional evidence furnished in a number of genuine copper-plate grants and stone records referred to above, we do not attach any value to conclusions differing from recorded facts as have been arrived at by the late Mr. T. A. Gopinatha Rao in editing the Srisailam plates, where he has vainly attempted to show that there was but one son of Vijayabhupati, by name Dövarżya. He has advanced no valid grounds for disproving the identity of Srigiri with Praudhapratāpa-Dēvariya, the second son of Vijayabhāpati.
The first two sons of Vijayabhapati being known by the name Déva riya, it is but natural to mistake the sons of one of the Devarayas for those of the other. But the fact mentioned in our inscription, vis, that Viräpåksha was the son of the second son of Vijayabhū pati, whom we have pointed out above to have borne the full name gajavõttai-kandaruliya Prandhapratāpa Pratapa Dévariya, is of importance as it conclusively controverts the commonly accepted view, vis. that Mallikarjuna and Virüpåksha were the sons of Dåvaraya II, the first son of Vijayabhāpati. In this connection, we may point out that two unpublished stone inscriptions furnish definite information. They come from Kundaņis in the Salem District and Conjeeveram* in the Chingleput District and state that Mallikarjuna and Virupaksha were the sons of Gajavēttai-kandaruliya Praudha-pratāpa-Dēvarāya-Mahārāyr. Here the mention of the epithet Praudhapratāpa makes it certain that the king referred to is the younger son of Vijayabhäpati. Another stone inscription of Viräpåksha, dated in the cyclic year Sárvari, calls him the son of Gajavēţtai-Pratápa-Devarăya. It may be noted that while the mother of Viräpåksha was Siddhaladëvi, the mother of Mallikarjuna was Ponnaladevi, who must have been two different queens of Praudhapratāpa. Děvariya, the second son of Vijayabhupati.
Our record is dated in Saka 1389, expressed by the word nav-āshta-guna-bha, Sarvajit, Kårttiga month, bright fortnight, Utthana-dvádasi. According to Dewan Bahadur L. D. Swamikkannu Pillai's 'Ephemeris,' this date corresponds to Monday, 9th November, A.D. 1467. It may be noted that the stone inscriptions of this king range in date from Saka 1387,6 Vyaya to Saka 14077 from which it would appear that he ruled for at least ten years. But the latter date is very doubtful as the record is damaged.
The generals and officers of this king made known to us from inscriptions are Vittharasa, Odeya, Saluva-Tirumalariya, Siļuva-Narasimha, 10 and Singappa-(or Singapa-) Dandan,yaka.11 Of these. Vittharasa-Odeya was in charge of Barakäru and Mangalore which he was governing from Saka 1387 to 1398. Tirumalaraya was in charge of Trichinopoly and Såļava-Narasimha developed into a usurper in later years. Two stono records of Viräpåksha in particular are
1 No. 188 of the Madras Epigraphical Collection for 1889, * No. 68 of the ss.ne collection for 1909 • No. 208
ditto
1911. • No. 89
ditto
1890. No. 661
ditto
1904. . Nos. 180 and 168 of 1901. * No. 898 of 1909. • Nou. 80 and 168 of the Madras Epigraphical Collection for 1901. • Köyilo Jugu maken mention of this chief-we Ind. Ant., Vol. XL, p. 141. 10 See aite 6, below. 11 N3.28 and 168 of the Madras Epigraphical Colleetion for 2001,
