________________
200
EPIGRAPHIA INDICA.
[VOL. XXIII.
Gupta era, but as pointed out by Prof. D. R. Bhandarkar, the palmography of the record is not in favour of this assumption. The latter has accordingly suggested that the year 283 should be referred to the Kalachuri era. According to this view, with which I entirely agree, the Pațiäkellä plate should be placed twenty-three years after the present record.
The Pațiäkellă plate records & grant of land in Dakshina-Tõsali by Mahārāja Sivarāja. In line 3 of the plate occurs a passage containing the name of the immediate overlord of Sivaraja, which has been read by Banerji as Paramamahësvara-bri-Sagguyayyanë säsati. This he translated as, "when the great worshipper of Mahēsvara (Siva), the illustrious Sagguyayyana . . . . was ruling". In an editorial note on Banerji's article Dr. Sten Konow observed, "I am unable to see Sagguyayyane, but I cannot suggest a satisfactory reading; I think I see Sambhuyayye-n." The plate which is now deposited in the Indian Museum, Calcutta, was subsequently re-examined by Banerji, but he found himself unable to accept Konow's emended version. Recently I had occasion to examine the record very closely in connection with my study of the Sõro plates, when I found that neither of the two readings could be accepted. The actual text in the Patiäkella plate is Paramamäheśvara-sri-Sambhuyakasyranusāsati, i.e.," during the rule of the illustrious Sambhuyasas, the great devotee of Mahēsvara". There is no doubt that this Sambhuyabas, who also belonged to the Mudgala family, is identical with Mahārāja Sam. bhuyaśas of the Sörő plate. The expression Paramadevat-adhidaivata and Paramabhatřāraka used in reference to him in line 4 of the Pațiäkella plate shows that Sambhuyasas held the position of a paramount ruler. It should be noted that he has only the epithet Paramamähèsvara prefixed to his name in this grant, while in the Soro plate he is described as a Mahārāja. It is difficult to say what position he precisely held in the year 260 when the latter record was issued. It is likely that he enjoyed & sort of independent status. The combined evidence of the Sõro and Patiakellä plates shows that King Sambhuyasas ruled over the whole of Tõsali. The expression Paramadaivata-va(ba)ppa-pādānudhyāta, i.e., meditating on the feet of his father who was (to him) like a great divinity,' used in reference to him in line 5 of the Soro plate may be compared with similar phrases occurring in the land grants of the kings of Kalinga, e.g., the Komarti plates of Chandavarman' which describe him as bappabhagfāraka-pădabhaktah.
Mahārāja Bhänudatta of Plate D, who calls himself also Mahāpratihāra, must have been a Vassal chief like Sivarāja of the Pațiākellä plate. That he was under some Paramabhattāruka, i.e., & sovereign ruler, follows from lines 8-9 and 13 of Plate D, although we do not know who this ruler was. Of a somewhat lower rank was Somadatta, the donor of Plates B and C, who is styled Mahabalādhikrita, Antaranga and Mahasāndhivigrahika. His overlord, who likewise remains unknown, is referred to as Paramadaival-ādhidaivata or Paramadaivata, and Paramabhattāraka. Neither Bhānudatta nor Somadatta is known from any other sources. There could not be a difference of more than & generation between these two persons, as the donees Dhruvamitrasvāmin and Ārungasvāmin of Plate C issued by Sömadatta were evidently identical with the donees of the same names mentioned in Plate D of Bhanudatta.
As is well known, Tosali is first mentioned in Asöka's Rock Edicts at Dhauli near Bhuvanē vara in Puri District which itselt must have been comprised in that province. From several copper plates from Orissa it appears that the province was divided into two sections, namely,
1 Above, Vol. IX, p. 287.
Bhandarkar, List of Inscriptions of Northern India, p. 160 (No. 1203) and n. 2. History of Orissa, Vol. I, 1930, p. 118. • For similar expressions used in other records soe Fleet, C. 1. 1., Vol. III, pp. 186-187, note, Above, Vol. IV, p. 144.
