Book Title: Epigraphia Indica Vol 32
Author(s): D C Sircar, B Ch Chhabra,
Publisher: Archaeological Survey of India

Previous | Next

Page 243
________________ 172 EPIGRAPHIA INDICA [VOL. XXX 11 kumāra or son of Ballāla. But he dismisses the fact, not supported as it was by any other known record, with the remark that there was probably some mistake about either the original or the transcript. Commenting on the same epigraph, Rao Bahadur R. Narasimhachar contended that Sömēsvara mentioned in the record must have called himself the king's son by courtesy ; for, Ballāļa had no son of his own by that name. He has, however, shown that the record could be attributed, undated as it is, to 1206 A.D., judging from the internal evidence of the inention of Nayakirtti's disciples in this record as in some other dated records allied with this epigraph. It may be noted that the cyclic year Akshaya corresponding to 1205-06 A.D. cited in this record as the year from which the tax exemptions alluded to in it were to take effect, falls well within the reign-period of Ballâla II (1173-1220 A.D.). It may not be unreasonable to presume that the inscription itself should have been actually engraved and set up sometime prior to Akshaya inasmuch as its object was to proclaim the grant of exemptions of specified taxes and the proclamation itself was to take offeet from the year Akshaya. This we will discuss in the sequel. The date of Narasimha II's birth, viz. Saka 1105, Subhakpit (1182 A.D.), is furnished by an epigraph from Aļesandra. The earliest record' mentioning him as administering in association with his father bears the date Saka 1128, Krodhana (=1205 A.D.). He should have been a young man about this period. To revert to the Sravaņa-Belgoļa epigraph, in the light of the categorical expression dvitiyari kumāram applied to Narasimha in the record under review, it appears thet the Sömēsvara mentioned in the former inscription was the elder son of Vira Ballāļa. The record has been attributed to 1205-06 A.D. for reasons already referred to. But the cyclic year Akshaya from which or rather froin the commencement of which (by inference) the tax-exemptions proclaimed in the record were to be effective and which corresponded to 1206 A.D. could not have been the year in which the record was set up. Allowing a reasonable time for the proclamation to be effectively made known to the public concerned, we may suppose that the inscription might have been set up some time in the year Krödhana preceding the year Akshaya. But we have seen above that Narasimha figures already in Krödhana actively in association with his father in the administrative activities of the kingdom in an inscription from Gañjigatte in Chitaldurg, which bears the date Saka 1128, Krödhana, Chaitra, paurnami, Monday, Sankramana-vyatipäta, the details corresponding to 1205 A.D., April 4, Monday, f.d.t., .47, on which day there occurred a lunar eclipse not mentioned in the reword. Whether Somēśvara was still living on this date and was also associated with his father in the administrative activities of the kingdom, we do not know. If he was dead by this date, then his Sravana-Belgoļa record must have been set up at the very commencement 1 Bomb. Gez., Vol. I, Part II, p. 502, note2.. * Loc. cit. Ep. Carn., Vol. It (rev. ed.), Int. p. 62 ; Sb. 327, 333 and 336. Ibid., Vol. IV, Ng. 32. A record from Hachchalu (ibid., Vol. IX, Kn, 67) has been ascribed to Narasimha II by Prof. Wilham Coelho in his book Hoyralarama. This damaged record refers to Kumara Narasimhghadeva as ruling over the world'. Apart from the date and the mention of a Vira-Ganga Vira-Ballāļadēva, no other details are available. It is dared in the cyclic year Nala, Jyishtha św. 10, Sunday. The Saka year is not given. Vira-Ganga ViraBalklädera dous not seem to have borne any of the epithets of the king and it is inexplicable as to why he is mentioned for his son and that tuo during his own lifetime, as the cyclic yerr Nala falling in his reign-period, corresponda to 1194 A.D. The details of the date also do not work out correctly. On the other hand, the details regularly o respond to June 4, Sunday, in the year 1276 A.D., when Narasimha III was ruling. Therefore the record may be oraigned to Xarasitaha III rather than to Narasimba II. • Ep. ('arr., Vol. XT, Cd, 23. 7 Loc cit.

Loading...

Page Navigation
1 ... 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512