________________
284
EPIGRAPHIA INDICA.
[Vol. XXV.
of the Madras Museum plates, Nanda-Prabhañjanavarman of the Chicacole plates and VišākhaVarman of the Köröshandā plates.
All of these potentates, with the exception of Visakhavarman, call themselves 'kings of Kalinga' (Kalingādhipati). It is probable that these kings rose into prominence in the period following the withdrawal of the arms of Samudragupta from the south. After him the Guptas never actively interested themselves in South Indian politics, thus affording ample opportunity for these chiefs, as they originally were, to raise their heads and assume regal distinctions. Naturally, as some of them were living contemporaneously with others, they fought vehemently among themselves for control of the territory now covered by the districts of Gõdāvari and Vizagapatem. Their objective, at least that of some of them, was perhaps the Orissa littoral, pushing through the districts of Ganjām and Puri right up to the outskirts of Balasore and beyond that the important port of Tamralipti on the Bay of Bengal. This was the period which coincided with the gradual rise to power of the Eastern Gangas under the capable leadership of Indravarman. It is not yet possible, in the absence of more substantial details of historical value, to make out the relation, if there were any, in which all these early kings' stood to one another. While some of them like Saktivarman, Umavarman and Visakhavarman may have flourished" before the time of Indravarman, it is probable that others like Anantavarman and Nanda
1 Ibid., No. 24.
. Ind. Ant., Vol. XIII, pp. 48 ff. Here we may in passing be permitted to dwell a little on the significance of the prefix 'Nanda' coming before the name of this king. Dr. D. C. Sircar's suggestion (Journ. Dept. of Letters, Calcutta University, Vol. XXVI, p. 66, f. n. 2) that it denotes " Prabhatijanavarman of the Nanda family " seems to be somewhat speculative as it is without a parallel in the early history of Kalinga. A simpler and more reasonable explanation would be that Nanda' is here used as an honorific adjective (qualifying Prabhañjanavarman) in the sense of one who plenses everybody'. In fact, another variant of the same word, Nandaka', has the significant meaning of one who gladdens one's family' (cf. V. S. Apte, The Practical Sanskrit- English Dictionary, 2nd ed., Bombay, 1912, p. 535). The names of some of the early Pallava kinge like Siva-Skandavarman, Vijaya-Skandavarman, eto., could be cited (as suggested by Dr. Sircar in Successors of the Salavahanas in Lower Deccan, pp. 166-67) as parallel instances of such honorific prefixes being in common use in South India from an early time.
* Above, Vol. XXI, pp. 23 ff.
. Mr. G. Ramdas, however, advances (above, Vol. XXI, p. 24) two plausible ronsons in support of his supponition that Visakhavarman was a Kalinga king. These are (1) Korisódaka-Pafchali, mentioned in the Koroshandi plates, "formed part of the Kalinga Country", and (2) Sripura from which the Köröshanda plates were issued may be identified with Siripuram (Vizagapatam district) which is close to the ancient district of Varkhavartant of Kalinga. Mr. G. V. Srinivasa Rao, on the other hand, suggests (above, Vol. XXIV, p. 49) that Srpura of the Koroshandā plates may rather be the Siripuram, a village near Chicacole, the find-spot of the inscription of another king of Kalinga (Kalingadhipati), viz., Anantavarman.
A most convincing and significant evidence of this having been the actual state of things is afforded by the Srungavarapukota plates of Anantavarman (above, Vol. XXIII, pp. 56 ff.), 'Lord of Kalinga ', whose grand. father, Gunavarman, is called Lord of Dēvarashtra' (identified with modern Yella manchili taluk of the Vizagapatam district) and who himself issued his grant from Pishtapura (identified generally with modern Pithapuram in the Godavarl district). Both of these countries constituted two distinct kingdoms in the time of Samudragupta.
• About this time the Balasore district seems to have been in the hands of a group of chiefs, of obscure antecedents and relation, who called themselves with one exception) maharaja. Four inscribed copper-plates purporting to belong to their rule have recently been published by the late lamented Mr. N. G. Majumdar (above, Vol. XXII, pp. 197 ff.). Incidentally, there is one more (rather imperfectly studied) inscription belonging to one of these chiefs which escaped the notice of Mr. Majumdar. This latter record I hope shortly to deal with in this journal.
"This of course is more in the nature of a conjecture as we have no more a basis than that of the indefinite evidence of palmography of the records concerned. It seems rather distressing that some of these 'kings' did not think it worthwhile to put on record the names of their fathers.
