________________
334
EPIGRAPHIA INDICA.
[Vol. XXVI.
The identification of Indrabhattaraka with Indrarāja, the younger brother of Jayasimba, has, however, been called in question, and that perhaps rightly, for, the characters of Prithivimūla's grant appear to be earlier than those of Jayasimha's grants. Prof. Kielhorn suggested that Indrabhattāraka was identical with the Vishņukundin Indrabhattārakavarman mentioned in the Chikkulla plates and his view has since then been generally accepted. The identification of the Adhirāja Indra is however more difficult; for though there seems little doubt that he belonged to the Gänga dynasty, there were as many as three kings in that dynasty who bore the name Indravarman. Some scholars identify the Adhiraja Indra with the Gånga king Indravarman I who issured the Jirjingi plates in Gn, 39, because like the Vishņukundin Indrabhattāraka, he also is said to have won many battles wivn four-tusked elephants. The description, however, appears to be conventional; for it occurs in some grants of other dynasties also. If we identify the Adhirāja Indra with Indravarman II of the Gänga dynasty, he becomes a contemporary of the Vishņukuņdin Indrabhattārakavarman ; for the former was ruling at least from Gn. 87 to Gn. 91 (i.e., from A. D. 585 to 598) and the latter probably flourished from circa A. D. 570 to 600 as shown by me elsewhere. This synchronism also may therefore be said to be in agreement with the epoch.
2. The Kadamba chief Rånaka Dharmakhēdi, the son of Bhimakhëdi, was a feudatory of two Gänga kings, Anantavarman and his son Dēvēndravarman. His Mandasa plates which were issued during the reign of his suzerain Anantavarman are supposed to be dated $. 976 (or 967)." Another grant of his, recorded in the Simhipura (also called Santa-Bommāli) plates during the reign of Anantavarman's son Dēvēndravarman, is dated in the Ganga-Kadamba era 520.' According to the epoch fixed above, the latter date would correspond to S. 940. This date is earlier by 36 (or 27) years than the date of the Mandasa plates, instead of being later as it should be, since it belongs to the succeeding reign. This is the main reason which has led Dr. R. C. Majumdar to bring down the epoch of the Gänga era to some date between A. D. 550 and 557.
This discrepancy, I submit, is solely due to a wrong interpretation of the aforementioned date of the Mandasa plates. This date has been read as Sak-ābda-nava-sataka-sapta-rasa-mata which has been taken to denote S. 913 by Mr. G. Ramdas and S. 976 (or 967) by Dr. R. C. Majumdar. I have no doubt that the intended date is Sak-ābda-nava-sataka-saptadasa-mitē, i.e., S. 917. It may be noted that the record has been very carelessly written and engraved. The scribe has confused sa and sa in several places in it. The facsimile shows that the reading here is saptarasa (not sapta-rasa) which is evidenty a mistake for saptadaša. Perhaps the scribe was unconsciously influenced by the Prakrit of his time which had corrupted Sanskrit
Ibid., Vol. IV, p. 195. See also Jouveau-Dubreuil's Ancient History of the Deccan, p. 91. * Indravarman I was ruling in Gn. 39, Indravarman II in Gn. 87-91 and Indravarman III in Gn. 128-64.
3 See e.g., the Khamkhēd plates of Pratapabila (above, Vol. XXII, p. 95): Bagumrå plates of Nikumbhallabakti (Ind. Ant., Vol. XVIII, p. 267) and the Ellorā plates of Dantidurga (above, Vol. XXV, p. 30).
. Above, Vol. XXII, p. 21.
J. B. O. R. S., Vol. XVII, pp. 175 ff. The expression denoting the date used in this grant is read Sakabda-nana-Sataka-sapta-rasa by the editor Mr. G. Ramdas, who took sapta-rasa as denoting 7 plus 6 (rasa signifying the number six, because there are six flavours). So according to him the plates are dated $. 913. Dr. R. C. Majumdar on the other hand took the same expression to mean 76 (or rather 67 according to the saying ankasya vama gatib). According to him therefore the date of the grant is S. 976 (or rather, S. 967). See Ind. Cul., Vol. IV.
Pp. 174 ff.
• J. A. H. R. S., Vol. III, PP. 171 ff. * The Ganga-Kadambn era has been admitted by all scholars to be identical with the Ganga era. • Ind. Cul., Vol. IV, PP. 174 ff.
. It may be noted that the system of word-numerals is not met with in other Ganga reoords of the period. The numerals were then written and read as we do them now.
