Epigraphia Indica Vol 20

Author(s): Hirananda Shastri
Publisher: Archaeological Survey of India

Page 16

No. 1.]
PRAKRIT INSCRIPTIONS FROM NAGARJUNIRONDA.
all the more plausible to assume that the Queen Rudradharabhatārikā mentioned in the inscription belonged to that illustrious house.
The pillar inscriptions acquaint us with three more noble ladies who were associated with Chămtisiri in her pious foundation. The one mentioned on the second pillar of the south side (B2) is called Adavi (!)-Chā[m]tişiri. The inscription calls her the daughter of King Siri-Chămtamūla, the sister of King Siri-Virapurisadata, and the wife of the Mahāsēnāpati Mahātalavara Mahädandanāyaka Khamda vigākhamnaka (Skt. Skandavisākha) of the house of the Dhanakas. She herself is distinguished by the title of Mahätalavari.
The other lady, who was the donor of the fourth pillar of the southern row (B 4), is called Chula-Chā[m]tisiriņikā, i.e., Chā[m]tisiriņikā the Lc8s or the Younger, the adjective chula evidently being added to distinguish her from her namesake, the foundress of the Mahāchetiya. The junior Cha[n]tisirinikā, as stated in the inscription, was a daughter of the Kulahakas and the spouse of the Mahāsēnāpati Mahātalavara Väsithīputa Khamdachalikiremmanaka of the Hiramñakas. She herself bears the title of Mahāsēnāpatini.
The fifth pillar of the western side (C5) was dedicated by a lady whose personal name is not mentioned, but who is called the wife of the Mahāsēnāpati Mahätalavara Vasithiputa Maha. kardasiri of the Pūkiyas and the mother of the Mahāsënāpati Mahātalavara Vinhusiri (Skt. Vishrusri). She is, moreover, distinguished by the title Mahātalavari. If we may assume that Mahākaṁdasiri and Kandasiri are one and the same person, it would follow that the anonymous lady of the pillar-inscription C5 was a co-wife (sapatni) of Chårtisiri.
We must now consider the two separate pillar-inscriptions G and H which, as we have noted above, must belong to a somewhat later date. The inscription G is found on one among a number of pillars, decorated with lotus-rosettes, which were found standing about two furlongs to the north-west of the Mahāchetiya. Mr. Longhurst informs me that the tops of these pillars are each provided with a mortice evidently meant to receive the beams of a wooden roof. This would well agree with our supposition that these stone columns once belonged to the verandah enclosing the central court of the vihāra. The inscribed stone shows several cracks running through the inscri. bed surface and the letters are worn owing to exposure.
The inscription records the foundation of a vihāra by Mahādēvi Bhatidevā who is called the daughter-in-law of Siri-Chă[m]tamüla, the wife (?) of Siri-Vira purisadata, and the mother of a Mahārāja, whose name appears to be Siri-Ehuvuļa-Chātamūla. The three syllables which we read-huvula-are uncertain. The same is the case with the one or two initial syllables of the word following the name Siri-Virapurisadata, so that it is doubtful what relation existed between that king and the lady Bhatidevā. The word in question, however, can be hardly anything but bhayāya. Thus it would follow that Bhatideva was the consort of the king. The last two lines of the document seem to have contained a date, but unfortunately this part of the inscription has been obliterated to such an extent that our reading must be regarded as conjectural. Evidently the vihāra was founded during the reign of Bhatidevā's son, the Mahārāja whose name is mentioned in the inscription.
The inscribed pillar of Kottampalugu is also the foundation record of a vihāra. The foundress was a Mahadevi who was the granddaughter of Siri-Cha[n]tamüla, the daughter of Siri-Virapurisadata, and the sister of Mahārāja Vāsethiputa Siri-Ehuvuļa-Chā[]tamūla. It is, moreover, stated in the inscription that she was the consort of the Mahärāja of Vanavāsa. Her personal name is somewhat indistinct but may be read as Kodabalisiri. It will be noted in the sequel that Vanavāsa, the ancient name of North Kanara, occurs also among the countries which in the chaitya-inscription F are stated to have been converted to Buddhism by the Coylonesc monks.