________________
No. 20) HINDOL PLATE OF KULASTAMBHA
109 The inscription records the grant of a locality or probably several localitios situated in Sougagrāma (?) forming a part of the Gapăraśținga vishaya belonging to the Kanarddi mawala: The name or names of the locality or localities granted cannot be satisfactorily made out. The royal order regarding the grant was addressed to the Kajunaka, Rajaputra, Mahasiimanta, Kumarūmātya, Antaranya and others including the Vishayopitis and adhikirins together with their karanas (either meaning scribes or the adhikaranas, i.e., administrative offices). The grant was made in favour of the agnihotrin Bhatta Visvarūpasvāmin who was a Brāhmaṇa of the Kausika götra having the Visvāmitra, Dēvarāta and Audala pravarus and was it student of the Mädhyandina branch of the Yajurvēda. Lines 17-18 appear to mention several places, viz., Panchaśasya, Punyavřiddhi, Sarvadā. ..., Säratura and Kharandava, as boundaries of the gift land. It is interesting that the grant is said to have been made with the king's family-deity, the goddess Stambhēsvari-bhattārikā, as the pramāņa. The word prunāna is here apparently used in the sense of sākshiņi (witness) which actually occurs in the same context in some records of the family. The donee of the grant was allowed to enjoy rent from temporary tenants (cf. 8-Õparikara). The gift land is also described as 8-oddeśa which means "together with the space above the tala or ground." The sentences speaking of the grant are followed by two interesting passages in prose, one of them being benedictory and the other imprecatory. Next come four of the usual imprecatory and benedictory verses. Lines 30-31 mention the writer of the document, Bhögin Kalyāņa, and the engraver Durlabhasaka whose father's name was Āchārya. The record ends with the date already noticed above.
As indicated above, a number of copper-plate inscriptions of the Sulki family, also called variously Sülki, Saulki, Sölki, etc., have been published. The earliest of the Sulki records appears to be the Dhenkanal platel of the samadhigata-pancha-mahāśabda samasta-Mahāsāmant-ādhipati Ranastambha. This record seems to be dated in the year 103, although the first of the two numerical gymbols was read by H. P. Sastri as 30 and by D. R. Bhandarkar as 200. Considering the feudatory titles applied to the name of Ranastambha as well as the fact that the era used is no doubt the same as that used by the Bhauma-Kara kinys of Orissa, it seems that Ramastambha was A semi-independent feudatory of the Bhauma-Kara monarch Subhākara III, two of whose inscriptions are dated in the same year.?
The Talcher plate seems also to belong to the same Sulki king, although in this record he is called both Ranastambha and Kulastambha and the seal attached to the charter bears the legend Sri-Kulastambhadēva. The king Ranastambha alias Kulastambha is in this inscription endowed with both feudatory and imperial titles, as he is not only called sumudhigata-paschamahāśabda and Ränaka but also Mahārājādhirāja and paramabhattāraka. The inere issue of the Dhenkanal plate of the year 103 without specific mention of his Bhauma-Kara overlord points to Ranabhañja's importance, while the partial assumption of imperial titles in the Talcher plate seems to indicate his success in a struggle with the Bhauma-Karas. The Talcher plate also mentions Raņastambha-Kulastambha's father Kalahastambha-Vikramaditya who is represented as the son of Kanchanastambha. Both Kanchanastambha and his son Kalahastambha alias Vikramaditya appear to have been loyal vassals of the Bhauma-Karas. The Järāgrāma grant of Ranastambha also represents him as the son of Kalahastainbha and the grandson of Kanchanastambha, although H. P. Sastri wrongly read Kulastambha for Kalahastambha. This record does not apply any imperial title to the name of Ranastambha and seems to be earlier than the Talcher plate.
Bhandarkar, op. cit., No. 1697 ; J BORS., Vol. II, pp. 397 f. Cf. B. Misra, op. cit., p. 33. See B. Misra, Orinsa under the Bhauma Kinga, pp. 12-22. Cf. JOR., Vol. XVIII, PP. 49-51.
Bhandarkar, op. cit., No. 1694 ; above, Vol. XII, pp. 157 ff.; N. N. Vasu, Arch. Sur. of Mayurblanj, Vol. I. pp. 157 ff., etc. In line 2, read Sülki-vaincé which has been wrongly read as Salkiliman
Bhandarkar, op. cit., No. 1696; J BORS., Vol. 1, pp. 169 ft
