________________
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.
