________________
No. 40) NAGARI PLATES OF ANANGABHIMA III ; SAKA 1151 AND 1152
239
The same genealogy was copied in the earlier copper-plate grants of Anantavarman Chödaganga such as the Korni and Vizagapatam plates of Saka 1003 (1081-82 A.C.). There is nothing suspicious about this genealogy. But the Korni plates of Saka 1034 (1112-13 A.C.) and the Vizagapatam plates of Saka 1040 (1118-19 A.C.) give a more elaborate genealogy, the beginuing cf which is practically the same as found in the later records of the family including the grant of Anangabhima III under discussion. This later genealogy traces the origin of the family to the god Vishņu through his navel-born son Brahman, his mind-born son Atri, his eye-born son Moon, his son Budha, Budha's descendants Purüravas, ayus, Nahusha, Yayati and Turvasuand a host of apparently imaginary personages from Turvasu to Guņārnava who is the progenitor of the family according to the eaplier account but is represented here as Gunārņava II and is assigned a reign-period of 27 years. Names of a certain Kõlahala, founder of Kölāhalapura in the Gangavādi vishaya in Mysore, and his successors, some of whom are said to have migrated to Kalinga, are cleveriy inserted before the reference to Guņērnava. There is some confusion in the description of the sons of Gunārņava; but the two accounts, earlier and later, tally with each other from Vajrahasta II Aniyankabhima I, grandfather of the great Vajrahasta III (1038-68 A.C.). It is impossible to believe that Vajrahasta III made mistakes in recounting the names of his immediate predecessors and that his grandson Anantavarman Chödaganga had more reliable information about them. It has to be noticed that even the name of the father of Vajrahasta III is wrongly given in the records of his grandson. I bave therefore no doubt that whatever is new in the later genealogy and is conflicting with the earlier account is absolutely unreliable. It seems that Vajrahasta II Aniyankabhima I (also called Anantavarman like his grandson), who apparently was the issuer of the Mandasa plates of Saka 917 (995 A.C.) and the Ponduru plates of the Ganga year 500 (996-98 A.C.) and ruled in the period circa 982-1016 A C.,' was the founder of the family's greatness and that there was little authentic information about his immediate predecessors up to Guņārņava, progenitor of the family, at the disposal of the court poets of Anantavarman Chōdaganga. The genealogy from the gol Vishnu to this Gunārņava was no doubt entirely fabricated. The fabrication was, however, dependent on several factors. In the first place, its basis was the Ātrēya götra and the status of the Brāhmaṇa? claimed by the Ganga emperors. As the Pallavas belonging to the Bhirivāja gðtra claimed to have descended from the sage Bharadvāja, these Gangas forged a genealogy tracing their descent from their götrarshi Atri. The second factor seems to be a desire to claim relationship with the Gangas of Mysore, in whose tradition the city of Kõlāhalapura, mentioned in the genealogy under discussion, finds an important place. Another factor was apparently the desire to claim descent from the celebrated Chandra-vamsa or lunar dynasty of epic and Puranic fame and, unlike the case of the old Chandra-vamsi kings, from the god Vishnu himself. We know that the earlier Gangas were all Saivas, being staunch devotees of the god Šiva-Gökarņē vara worshipped at the
1J. A. H. R. S., Vol. I, pp. 40-48; Ind. Ant., Vol. XVIII, pp. 161-65. One set of the Vizaga patam plates (Ind. Ant., Vol. XVIII, pp. 172-76) tallies with these earlier records in respect of this and other early characteristics noticed below, although its date was read as Saka 1057 (1135-36 A.C.). I have doubts that, in the date of this inscription, the word kara (2) was wrongly written or read as sa(ta)ra (5) and that the date should probally he Saka 1027 (1105-06 A.C.) instead of Saka 1057 (1135-3A A.C.).
* J. A. H. R. S., Vol. I, pp. 113-24. . Ind. Ant., Vol. XVIII, pp. 105-72. . Those names were taken from the epic and Puranio traditions
C. Ray, Dynastic History of Northern India, Vol. I, pp. 451-53 below p. 240, note 2 See J. K. H. R. S., Vol. I, pp. 219-21.
* According to the Tarikh-1. Firiz Shahi by Shams-i-Siraj, which describes Sultan Firuz Shah's war with Ganga Bhanu III (circa 1352.78 A.C.), the Rils of Jajnagar (ie, the Ganga kings of Orisan) were Brahmanas (Ray, op. cit., p. 492). That the claim for the Brihmana status was not regarded seriously is siggested by the Kshatriya name-ending varman preferred by Bhanu II and Narasimha IV (J. R. A. 8. B., ..., Vol. XVII, p. 21). The Sömaramsh also claimed the Atreya götra and descent from the Moon.
