________________
No. 18.]
TWO INSCRIPTIONS OF RAJASIMHA-NARASIMHAVARMAN II.
103
No. 18.-TWO INSCRIPTIONS OF THE PALLAVA KING RAJASIMHA-NARA
SIMHAVARMAN II.
By V. RANGACHARTA, M.A.
A.-THE MAHĀBALIPURAM INSCRIPTION. This record is engraved on the plinths of two platforms in the western side of the second courtyard of the Shore Temple at Mahabalipuram (Māmallapuram), and was discovered by the Archeological Department in 1912. The platforms have been surmined to be either the balipithas of the two main shrines of that terople or the supports of their missing flagstaffs. One of the three Chola inscriptions of the Shore Temple, discovered in 1887, calls the god of the temple the Lord of Tirukkadalmallai.' Another calls the temple itself Jalasayana, while the third mentions the shrines of Kshatriya-simba-Pallavēsvara-dova, Rājasimha-Pallavēśvara-dova and Pallikondaruliya-dova. Rao Saheb Krishna Sastri believes that the two platforms, above mentioned, and tho monolithic dhvajastambha in the sea are the probable remnants of the three shrines referred to in the last of the Chola epigraphs. The discovery of the inscription on the platforms is important for the fact that it throws light on the identity of the king who bailt these shrines, a question about which nothing definite has been known. It is true that the names Räjasimha and Kshatriyasimha, after which two of the deities were named, indicated & Pallava origin to the temple; but no direct or contemporary evidence had been available to prove it. The present inscription supplies it.
The inscription is written in the Pallava-Grantha character and consists of a single line running round the plinthe. It is much damaged. The existing portion comprises six Sanskrit verses in the Arya, Vasantatilaka and the Anushtubh metres, besides the attributes [Bhaya]rahitaḥ and Bahunayaḥ after the first verse and the title éri-Udayachandraḥ after the second verse, which are in prose. They contain the names, surnames and titles of a Pallava king who, as will be shown presently, has to be identified with Narasim haverman II. The first verse, which is wanting in the last three syllables, gives the king the epithets of Apratima, Avapibhüshana, Akalanka, Dharaņichandra, Arimardana, Atulabala and Kulatilaka. The second verre gives him, among others, the titles of Atyantakāma, Aparajita, Chandrārdhase
1 Seo my Topographical List of Inserns., Vol. I, pp. 327-329. The local inscriptions heroin noted (Cg. 60-8L 1.) do not include those taken from the Mack. Mes., which are 31 in number. Of the thirty-six included in the list twenty (Cg. 58-74 & 77-79) bave been edited by Dr. Haltzsch in 8. 1. I., Vol. I, pp. 1-16 and Ep. Ind., Vol. X, pp. 1-11. Two inserns. (Cg. 75 and 76) discovered by the late Mr. Venkayya in 1907 are edited in Ep. Ind., Vol. X, p. 8, under Nos. 18 and 19. All these belong to the Pallava kings from Mahendravarman I onward. Of the remaining nine epigraphs five belong to the Chola kinga Rajaraja I, Rājēndradēva, Vira-Rájöndra and Knlöttunga-Chola I ; the details of two (Cg. 53 and 54) are not available ; aud one (Cg. 56) is dated in the reign of the Vijayanagara emperor Achyutaräys. The inscription which is edited above, forms No. 566 in that year's official list of epigraphs and Cg. 80 in my Topographical List.
These are No. 1, 2 & 3 of 1887 and Cg. 50-53 in the Topographicul List. They have been edited by the late Dr. Hultzsch in 8. I. I., Vol. I, ander Nog. 42, 40 and 41 rospectively.
+ Madr. Epigr. Rep., 1913, p. 88, para. 8. The Rao Saheb surmises that god Talabayann whom Tiramangri. Alvir refers to was Vishu and the Suivite god, Kshatriyasimha-Pallavēsvara " who is directly facing the sea and being even washed by it, appears to have received tbe Dame Jalasa yana"-the ono being on land, and the other on water. It seems to me that Jalasnyana is a later pauranic variant of Talisayan and that both the terms can refer to Vishnu Palļikondaraliyadēva alone, as Siva is not in the ia yang postare. Moreover, Talafayana is only A sorter form of Kadalmallaittalafayans and, as such, need not be taken as a term of contrast to jalafayana.
It may be pointeil out that the analysis given in this paragraph is not based on the plato given in the Kadr. Epigr. Rep., 1913 (p. 88), but a rovind one kindly prepared by the Government Epigrajulist for the present olition. A comparison of the two plates will show that the order of the verses is changed.
