________________
285
No. 45]
MAHADA PLATES OF SOMESVARADEVAVARMAN: YEAR 23
There is considerable Telugu influence on the language, although there are grammatical errors. The 23rd regnal year of the king is given both in words (iruvai-mundum for Telugu iruvai-müḍu or iruvadi-mundu) and figures.
The details of the grant are given in lines 13-24. It was made by the king when he was standing before Lankavarttaka on the bank of the river Chitrōtpala (i.e., the Mahanadi).1
The genealogy of the donor as well as that of the donee are traced to their respective grandfathers. The donor, king Someśvaradevavarman, is described as the son of Dharalladevavarman and grandson of Sōmesvaradevavarman belonging to the Kasyapa götra. The donee of the grant is described as the Brāhmaṇa Madhusudana, who belonged to the Vatsa götra and was the son of Purushottama and grandson of Gadadhara. The object of the donation was the village of Champamalla with the five pallikas named Mahaḍā (the findspot of the present plates in old Sonepur State, still retaining its ancient name), Ataṇḍrela, Medhaka, Khadna and Kōkaṭideva. The grant is stated to have been made for obtaining the favour of the god Vaidyanatha and for the increase of longevity, health and royalty of the donor, Somesvaradevavarman, in the 23rd year of whose reign the record was issued.2
Lines 25-30 of the inscription quote some of the usual imprecatory and benedictory verses. This portion is rather abruptly followed by three verses, of which two are in the Upajati and one in the Indravajra(?) metre. These apparently form a part of an elaborate prasasti of the TeluguChoḍa family of South Kōsala. The employment of these verses, which are really uncalled for, reminds us of such records as the Guakuchi plates of king Indrapala3 of Pragjyotisha, in which the engraver is found to have felt the necessity of filling up some blank space at the end of the charter. Since the script of the last lines of the plates does not differ from that of the rest of the record, there is little doubt that they are coeval with the date of the gift. The first and second verses do not relate to the same person, for the second verse beginning, as it does, with the words yasy-anvayê, in whose leneage', referring to the person described in the first, introduces another chief who, being referred to as esha bhupatiḥ this king', could be none other than the donor of the charter, Sömesvaradevavarman. He is again described as Yaśōgaja' and as a lion to hostile kings. The third verse describes the king's sport in the river Chitrōtpalä (Mahanadi). Here the stanza, stating that when the king sported in the Chitrōtpalä, which was associated with Svarnavati (Svarnavati-gatā), seems to imply that Somesvaradevavarman had his capital at Suvarnapura, of which Svarṇavati may be a feminine form. In a verse from the Raghuvamsa (V1, 48), to which Mr. Mazumdar draws our attention in this context, precisely a parallel sense is conveyed as the mention therein of Mathura on the Kalindi implies its being the capital of the Sürasēna king. Mukunda mentioned in one of the verses no doubt refers to the god Vishnu and not to a later Raja of Puri,
1 The passage Chitrōtpalayas tīrē Lankavarttaka-sannidhau reminds one of such similar passages as Abhinava. Vārānasyam Bhagavataḥ bri-Purushottamadevasya sannidhau in records like the Nagari plates of Anangabhima III. It is not clear if there was a deity at Lankavartaka or whether the king made obeisance to the holy spot of Lankavartaka itself. The modern Lankêávari, a hillock in the bed of the Mahanadi at Sonepur, seems to have been referred to as Länkävarttaka in the inscription.
That the actual donor Sömesvaradevavarman and the king Somesvaradevavarman in whose reign the charter was issued were one and the same is apparent, although the text of the record does not explicitly say so. The fact that the donation is made for the increase of the royalty of the donor shows that it was the reigning king who was the actual donor.
Kamarupakasanavali, pp. 130 ff.
This word can be read as Yasoraja; but this does not suit the metre. The text is, however, metrically fanity even as it stands.
5 The word ahita used in the verse seems to be derived from akita.
• Mathura was the capital of the Sürasense. Bee B. C. Law, Some Mid-Indian Kshatriya Tribes, Ved. 1, p. 83
