________________
160
EPIGRAPHIA INDICA
[VOL. XXX
was the son of Rayavallabha Mahāsēnapati and Mēdamadevi, otherwise called Mēdamāmbā. It is of course impossible to identify Mēdamadevi of the Simhachalam record with her namesake of the Bhubaneswar in scription under study. It is stated in our record that Mēdamadevi's father, whose name was Kōmi-nayaka, and her mother, whose name began with the letters nuka, were residents of Padadhväva-khanda. It is further said that, apparently to cover the expenses of the perpetual lamp, the lady purchased, in conjunction (samaväya) with a leading merchant (sadhupradhana) named Jayadeva who was resident of a locality attached to Kürmapaṭaka, from the hands of a freshthin of Dasapura, a piece of land entitled Vähiḍā at Dévadhara-grāma, and granted it in favour of the god. The name of the locality where Jayadeva lived and that of the éreshthin who resided at Dasapura are broken away and lost.
Inscription No. 2 records the grant of another perpetual lamp in favour of the same god by Achana Pradhani who was the son of Divakara and resident of a locality, the name of which is lost. Apparently to cover the expenses of the said perpetual lamp, the donor granted seven Vā (i.e. Vatis) of land in a village called Andido-gräma which was situated in the Uttara khanda (i.e. the northern sub-division) within the Kalambōra vishaya (district). There are some other details of the grant in the last three lines of the record. An expression occurring in this damaged part is chandana-samai, the meaning of which is not quite clear. Whether it may be Sanskrit chandanasamaye, i.e. chandanayātrā-samaye, and suggest that the grant was made actually on the occasion of the festival called Chandana-yatrā held in the month of Vaisakha cannot be determined. It must, however, be admitted that the said festival is now associated usually with the Vaishnava deities. This section also mentions the names of the persons, with whose cognizance the grant of the seven Vätis of land was made. The names of two of these persons may be Aditaka (probably the same as Sanskrit Adityaka) and Varahila. The concluding part of the inscription in the last line reads nd-ärka-thiti which apparently stands for the expression a-chandr-ärka-sthiti referring to the permanent nature of the grant.
The following geographical names are mentioned in the two inscriptions: (1) Padadhvavakhanda (possibly a khanda or sub-division called Padadhvava), (2) Kurmapāṭaka, (3) Devadharagrāma, (4) Dasapura, (5) Vähida-khandakshetra, (6) Kalambōra-vishaya (i.e. the district called Kalambōra), (7) Uttara-khanda (i.e. the northern sub-division of the Kalambōra district) and (8) Andido-grama. I am not sure about the identification of these localities. Kürmapäṭaka may be the same as Kurmapada mentioned in such other inscriptions of the Ganga family as the Puri plates1 of Bhanu II. The Kalambora district is also known from other records."
TEXT' Inscription No. 1
1 Svasti-Raghavadevasya pravarddhamana-[vijaya-r]....
2 sudi 10 väre Vuddha éri-Kirttiv[a]sesvaras[y]a pri(pri)taye Mēdamade[vi]...."
3 Padadhvava-kharṇḍa(nda) [s]ya cha tasya mata-pitas[y]ai [Ko]mi-nayaka-Nuka....
1 See JBRS, Vol. XXXVIII, p. 228.
See above, Vol. XXX, p. 31; IHQ, Vol. XXXI, p. 82.
From impressions preserved in the office of the Government Epigraphist for India at Ootacamund. The lost aksharas were probably intended to read: "jya-savat 13 Dhanus
Read Budhe.
Better read Krittiväsētvarasya.
7 The lost aksharas may have been: dimanaḥ punyārtham.
•Read mätä-pitribhyām.
The lacuna may be conjecturally restored as .... mbabhyam punyārtham bri-Ki°.
