________________
58
EPIGRAPHIA INDICA.
[VOL. XXIII.
Pithapuram in the Godavari District. The other, Dövapura, from the close resemblance in name, may be regarded as the capital of Devarashtra, but of this there is no definite evidence as yet.
Of the kings who ruled in Kalinga during the interval between the invasion of Samudragupta and the rise of the Ganga dynasty, only the names of Chandavarman, Umavarman, NandaPrabhañjanavarman, Saktivarman and Visakhavarman' were hitherto known from inscriptions. The present grant adds the names of three new kings belonging to a dynasty, viz., Gunavarman, Prabhañjanavarman and Anantavarman.
We cannot definitely postulate any relationship between this dynasty and the kings previously known, although they all probably flourished between 400 and 550 A. D. But, in view of the very little knowledge we possess of the history of Kalinga during this period, two suggestions are made below in the hope that they may be of some use for future research in this direction.
As regards the king Nanda-Prabhañjanavarman, it has been suggested by Mr. D. C. Sarkar, that the name probably signifies" Prabhañjanavarman of the Nanda family." If this view were accepted, this Prabhañjanavarman might be tentatively identified with the father of Anantavarman. It may, however, be pointed out that no other ruler of Kalinga styles himself as belonging to the Nanda family.
Some association may also be inferred between Anantavarman and Saktivarman. Both issued their plates from the victorious city of Pishtapura, and both had Varman as their nameendings. Further, Saktivarman is called "Väsishthiputra', while in the present grant, Anantavarman's father is described as moon in the Väsishtha family ".
As to the time of King Anantavarman, I have already expressed above my view that the grant is to be placed, on palæographical grounds, during the period between 450 and 550 A. D. The date, most probably a regnal year, was mentioned at the end of line 19, but unfortunately this portion is missing, as noted above.
Mr. M. Narasimham has referred King Anantavarman to the first century A. D. He bases this conclusion on the following expression in the Siripuram grant : ashţāšsakasamkhyabhya.. . mahāsvayujë savva(mva)tsarē. He interprets it as the eighth year of the Saka era, in the year of Mahāśvayuja'. He ignores, however, the fact that ashtāśćaka-sankhyabhya', obviously & mistake for samkhyēbhyah,' cannot be taken as either qualifying the word samvatsarē, or as an independent word expressing date. I believe, the word qualifies the preceding word 'brāhmanebhyah' and denotes the number of Brāhmanas to whom the grant is made. I must confess, however that I am unable to explain the word, beyond merely suggesting that it might stand for 18, 28 or 88.
In any case, whatever may be the interpretation of the word, the king Anantavarman can never be referred to the first century A. D., as the alphabet of the inscription is too late for that
1 Komarti pl. ; above, Vol. IV, pp. 144 ff.
2 Brihatproshtha grant; above, Vol. XII, pp. 4 ff. Tekkali pl.; J. A. H. R. 8., Vol. VI, pp. 63-4. King Umavarman mentioned in these two plates may be the same or different persons. • Ind. Ant., Vol. XIII, pp. 48 ff.
Ragölu pl. ; above, Vol. XII, pp. 1 ff. . Above, Vol. XXI, pp. 23 ff. • Journal of the Department of Letters (published by the Calcutta University), Vol. XXVI, p. 66, f. n. 2.
+ [It may be noted that while Prabhañjanavarman and his father Gunavarman are described as Moon in tbe Väsishtha family, i.e., belonging to the Vásishtha-gotra, Saktivarman bears the metronymic Visishthiputra, which indicates that probably the last mentioned belonged to a family different from that of the two formor rulers. -Ed.]
J.A. H. R. 8., Vol. VIII, p. 158.
