________________
160
EPIGRAPHIA INDICA.
(VOL. XXII
The letters on the first plate were not deeply engraved and have been somewhat damaged by rust. There are also depressions on its inscribed surface in some places. Still there is no uncertainty in its reading.
The characters are Dēvanāgari as in the other plates of the Kalachuri kings of Ratanpur and call for few remarks. The form for i is made up of two curves with a looped or a hooked end turned in opposite directions and placed one below the other (cf. iti in II. 9 and 16, iha in l. 20, imdörr, 1. 25, etc.); e has the form of a triangle with the base turned upwards (cf. évaṁ, 1. 30); the medial u is shown in two ways: (1) generally with a curve attached to the foot of the vertical stroke and turned to the left (cf. purushaḥ, 1.2, etc.) and (2) occasionally with a curve turned downwards and attached to the middle of the vertical stroke (cf. sruti, 1. 19). The medial e and 7 are shown in some cases by means of a prishthamātrā (cf. tad-anvaye and putro in l. 2); both the mātrās for medial ai and au are occasionally placed above the line (cf. =tasmai, 1. 25 and chandr-ārkkau, l. 27); in other cases one of them appears as a prishthamātrā (cf. sarvv-ādāyaih, 1. 25 and-sākshinau, 1. 27). Va and ba are not generally distinguished, e.g., vandhūn for bandhūn in 1. 8; in the case of the grammatical form babhüva (11.7, 21) and the conjunct bdh (of labdho in l. 17), however, ba is denoted by the sign for ma without its left hand loop'; the letters pa and ya are not properly distinguished in some cases (cf. tasya, 1. 21 and visarppati, 1. 30); 80 also cha and va (cf. ch=aiva, 1. 34). As regards orthography we might note that the dental sa is used for the palatal éa in such cases as -santoshit-3sam (for santoshit-éśam), l. 4, satrūn for satrün, 1. 11, and vice versá also, though rarely, as in sahasrēna for sahasrēna, 1.33; ya is used for ja in Vāyapēya, 1. 33, and possibly in Yanvavat-, 1. 18. The class nasal is occasionally used for anustāra as in -amva(ba)rasya, 1. 2; the consonant following is only in a few cases reduplicated (cf. Kārttaviryah, 11. 2-3, -tarkka-, 1. 17, etc.). The following orthographical mistakes may also be noted : kāṁnta for kānta, 1. 13 and tatvajno for tattvajño, 1. 23.
These plates were granted by Ratnadēva II., a Kalachuri king of Ratanpur in Chhattisgarh. The first eleven verses give his genealogy as in other plates of his dynasty. From Kärtavirya were descended the Haihayas. In their family was born Kókkala who had eighteen sons. The eldest of them became the ruler of Tripuri. He made his brothers lords of mandalas. In the family of a younger brother of these was born Kalingarāja who had a son named Kamalarāja. His son was Ratnarāja (I.) who married Nonallā. Their son was Pfithvidēva (I.) who had a son named Jäjalladöva (I.) by Rājalladēvi. Jājalladēva's son was Ratna
In the Amoda plates of Jajalladéva II. (above, Vol. XIX, pp. 209 ff.) and those of Prithvidēva II, (Ind. His. Quart., Vol. I, pp. 405 ff.) ba in such cases is shown by a letter closely resembling pa.
*This expression, which ocours in most of the charters of the kings of Ratanpur, seems to show that Kali. ngarāja was a remote descendant (and not a grandson) of Kokkals. The Ratanpur Inscription of Jäjalladēva II. (1114 A. D.) also distinctly says 'The family of a younger son of these produced in course of time (kramena) Kalingaraja'. If so, this Kokkals must be taken to be Kõkkala I. This view is corroborated by some inscriptions of the main dynasty at Tripuri. The Benares copper-plate inscription of Karna (1042 A. D.) describes ip Präkfit verse that Prasiddhadhavala, the son of Kõkkala I., took Páli to provide for the future great descendants of the family. The Bilhari stone inscription says that Mugdhatunga (who is identical with Prasiddhadhavala). the son of Kókkala I., took the country of Páli from the lord of Kosala. Pāli is probably the name of the country round the modern village Pali, 11 miles north of Ratanpur, where there are ruins of exquisitely carved temples (See Archological Survey Report for 1922-23, p. 51). It seems that these descendants of Kókkala I had their capital at Tummans. They seem to have lost the country in course of time. The Ratanpur inscription of Jajalladeva (1114 A. D.) says that Kalingarija selected Tummana as his capital is the place had previously been selected for the purpose by his ancestors.
It must, however, be noted that the description of Kokkela, given in the Amodi plates of Prithvidēva 1. (1079 A. D.), if historically true, would apply only to Kokkala II. as pointed out by Dr. N. P. Chakravarti (above, Vol. XXI, p. 161).
