________________
No. 17.]
SVALPA-VELURA GRANT OF GANGA ANANTAVARMAN.
131
here. Although several of the Early Ganga kings are known to bear the same name Anantavarman, none of them appears to be identical with the grantor of the present charter. Unfortunately there still prevails a good deal of uncertainty with regard to the chronology of the Early Ganga kings, in spite of the fact that the number of their known records, which was already not a mean one, has during recent years been appreciably augmented by fresh discoveries. From the varied and extensive data available divergent opinions have been formed in respect of the many vexed problems connected with the history of the Gangas, which it will serve no useful purpose to repeat here. Hence a brief and relevant discussion may suffice.
It has been supposed that there were at least five collateral branches of the Early Gangas, ruling over different parts of Kalinga. Even an attempt has been made to fix the genealogy of each of them. A verse appearing in Vajrahasta's grants" has been cited in support of that. There is indeed nothing against such a supposition. In fact, there is an additional piece of evidence in its favour. We know that there were various capitals from where the Ganga records have been issued. This diversity of capitals is better explained by accepting the above view than by assuming, with Mr. T. C. Rath, that the capital was changed from time to time'.
Latterly, it has been suggested that one branch of the Early Gangas had Svētaka as its capital, whence it ruled over the surrounding territory. It may parenthetically be pointed out that Mr. M. Somasekhara Sarma asserts that the name of the city has hitherto been 'wrongly read as Světaka' but is really Schetaka'. His assertion is based on his examination of the four grants then available to him. There is no gainsaying that the forms of conjuncts sva and scha are often very similar to and hardly distinguishable from each other in those records, as is the case in many others for the matter of that. Again, the evidence of the Vishamagiri plates, as adduced by Mr. Sarma, even substantiates his alleged reading Schetaka. In spite of all that the latter does not seem to me acceptable. Considering that the names of the other Ganga capitals are purely Sanskrit ones, one would expect in the present instance also a familiar Sanskrit word as Světaka rather than a quasi-Sanskrit term like Schětaka. This in itself, I admit, is not a sufficiently cogent argument for the acceptance of the former reading, but, as we shall presently see, it is strengthened by concrete evidence. As remarked above, Mr. Sarma had only four charters for comparison, whereas we have now six or seven more issued from the self-same capital city. If the sve of Světaka is not clear enough in any of the previously known four grants, it is absolutely clear in at least three of the latter group. It will be seen that the conjuncts éva and scha there have distinct forms. We have, therefore, to treat the reading Schetaka of the Vishamagiri plates as a mistake for Světaka.
Assuming now that the kings who issued charters from Svētaka belonged to a separate branch of the Early Ganga rulers, we find that Anantavarman of the present grant is the only king of that name so far known in that line. The earliest known prince of this family is
1 See above, Vol. III, pp. 17 ff.; Vol. XXIII, pp. 56 ff, J. A. H. R. S., Vol. II, pp. 273 ff. J. A. H. R. S., Vol. III, p. 38.
Above, Vol. IV, p. 189; Vol. IX, p. 96; Vol. XXIII, p. 71. The verse runs as follows:
पूर्वं भूपतिभिर्विभज्य वसुधा या पञ्चभिः पचधा भुक्ता भूरिपराक्रमो भुजबलातामेक एव स्वयम् ।
एकीकृत्य विजित्य शबुनिवहान् श्रीवज्रहस्त च तु चत्वारिं शतमत्युदारचरितः सर्वामरणीत्समाः ॥
Ibid., Vol. XV, p. 276.
Journal of Oriental Research, Vol. XI, pp. 60 f.
Ibid., p. 59 and n. 9.
Above, Vol. XXIII, plates facing pp. 80, 262 and 287.
