Book Title: Epigraphia Indica Vol 23
Author(s): Hirananda Shastri
Publisher: Archaeological Survey of India

View full book text
Previous | Next

Page 98
________________ No. 11. ] GANJAM COPPER-PLATES OF VAJRAHASTA III; SAKA-SAMVAT 991. 69 From the concluding four lines of the inscription we learn that the village mentioned in l. 47, viz., Navagrāma in (the district of) Varāhavartani was granted by the king, in the Saka year 991, on Monday, the seventh day of the first fortnight of the month of Ashādha, to Gokananāyaka, son of Bhimana-nayaka and his wife Prõlakavā, and the grandson of Mallapa-näyaka. The donee is said to be Vēsyä(tyä)-varsodbhava, i.e., descended from a courtesan. The word vēsyā is possibly a mistake for Vaisya, but I may point out that grants to courtesans, who were royal favourites, were not unknown in those days. The word paursha in the last line I am unable to explain, but it is possibly a mistake for paurusha. In that case, the royal grant was a recognition of the donee's devotion and valour extending over a long period. The date of the grant has been calculated to correspond to 9th June, 1068 A.D., taking the Saka year as current. Of the localities mentioned, the village Navagrama is to be identified with the present Naogām in Tekkali tāluk of the Ganjām District. As to Varahavartani, which must have been in the neighbourhood of Chicacole, and Kalinganagara, usually identified with Mukhalingam, I have already discussed their identification while editing the Narasingapalli plates of Hastivarman, on p. 65 above. Lastly, there is the title, 'Lord of Tri-Kalinga', applied to Vajrahasta. Tri-Kalinga is usually interpreted as the whole of Kalinga in its widest extent. Thus Prof. R. Subba Rao, on the strength of the above title of Vajrahasta, infers that he was also the paramount sovereign of Tri-Kalinga country which extended from the river Ganges in the North to the river Godāvari in the South "s. Apart from well-known historical facts which militate against this view, I may point out that it is impossible to accept this meaning of the term Tri-Kalinga, at least for the period to which the present grant belongs. A perusa) of the records of the Eastern Chālukyas throws very interesting light on this point. We learn from the Masulipatam plates of Chāluky&Bhima I (888-918 A.D.), and the Pithapuram Pillar Inscription of Malla padēva', dated Sakasamvat 1124, that the Eastern Chalukya king Vijayāditya III (844-888 A.D.) took by force the gold of the Ganga kings of Kalinga', and received elephants as tribute from the Kalinga king'. The Masulipatam plates of Amma I (918-925 A.D.) tell us that king Vijayāditya IV (918 A.D.) ruled the 'Vēngimaņdala, joined with Tri-Kalinga forest' (Trikalingg-ātavi-yuktam). Aecording to the Kolavennu grant of Chalukya-Bhima II, king Vikramāditya II (who ruled some time after 925 A.D.) ruled over Vēngi and Tri-Kalinga. Ammarāja II (945-970 A.D.) is also stated to have at first ruled over the Véngi country with Tri-Kalinga, but later left the parental throne and ruled in Kalinga for fourteen years (956-970 A.D.). Dānārņava, too, ruled in Kalinga for three years, after the loss of Vëngi'. These extracts show that in the Eastern Chālukya records of the tenth and subsequent centuries, Tri-Kalinga is distinguished from Kalinga and is obviously regarded as a place of less 1[Apparently vēsyā in the present record is an error in writing for Vaisya to which caste the Nāyakas in this part are known to have belonged. Cf. An. Rep. on Epigraphy, 1918-19, C. P. No. 5.-Ed.) + Cunningham-Anc. Geogr., p. 594. Fleet, above, Vol. III, p. 327. Recently Mr. B. C. Majumdar and Mr. B. Misra have interpreted Tri-Kalinga as denoting the three countries 'Kalinga, Kongõda, and Utkala '(Orissu in the Making, p. 187; J. B. O. R. S., Vol. XIV, p. 145). .J.A. H. R. S., Vol. VI, p. 203. . Ann. Rep. on Epigraphy, 1914, p. 84. Above, Vol. IV, p. 240. • Above, Vol. V, p. 131. 8.1. I., Vol. I, pp. 43 ff. • Arumbāka pl. of Bädapa, above, Vol. XIX, p. 137. langallu Grant, Ann. Rep. on Epigraphy, 1917, p. 132 ; also cf. 1. 7. Q., Vol. XI, p. 43.

Loading...

Page Navigation
1 ... 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436