________________
34
EPIGRAPHIA INDICA
VOL. XXXII
In regard to orthography, the consonant following in a conjunot is doubled. This rule which is optional is wrongly applied even in the case of an exceptional letter sh, e.g., in Harshsha (line 10).
The language is Sanskrit and except for two verses, one at the beginning and another at the end, the composition is in prose throughout. The text is accurate excepting a few scribal errors.
The inscription commendes with the expression svasti. This is followed by a verse in the Anushtubh metre in praise of a foot of the god Hari, described as lustrous like the rising sun, and stated to have been raised to measure the earth and to crush the darkness in the form of the demon (Bali). The composer of the record has deliberately used the expression abhinav-āditya meaning the new sun' in the above description to convey through double entendre an allusion to the ruling king Abhinavāditya who issued the charter. Next are recounted the usual prakasti of the Chalukya or Chālukya house and the genealogy of the rulers belonging to it. In the genealogy are mentioned only three kings, viz., Paramējvara Satyábraya-prithivivallabha who vanquished Harshavardhana, i.e. Pula kēsin II, his son Adityavarman, and the latter's son Satyasrayaprithivivallabha ulias Abhinavāditya who issued the present charter. As in the case of Pulakēsin II, both Adityavarman and Abhinavāditya are endowed with the imperial titles Mahārājādhiraja and Paraměsvara.
King Abhinavaditya is stated to have issued an order to the concerned persons announcing the gift of the village Nelkunda, situated in the Uchohaspinga vishaya, free of all imposts to the Brāhmaṇa Kuppasarman of the Dēvarāta-Kausika götra, who was well-versed in the Vedas along with the Vēdāngas and engaged in performing the six-fold karman. The grant was made on the full-moon day of Bhadrapada in the increasingly victorious reign of the king, the specific year of the reign, however, not being mentioned. The epigraph concludes with the usual imprecatory verses.
The inscription is of great historical importance, as it not only reveals for the first time the existence of a hitherto unknown prince of the early Chalukya house of Bādāmi, but seems also to let in some new light on the dark period of its history following the defeat of Pulakēbin II at the hands of his adversary, Pallava Narasimha I. Pulakabin II vanishes from the political scene in 642 A.D. and his son Vikramaditya I emerges as a victor who re-established Chalukya supremacy in 656 A.D. About 13 years that intervened between these two events are characterised by paucity of historical information. It has been surmised that during this period a part of the Chālukya kingdom was under the occupation of the Pallavas and that although several sons of Pulakasin II aspiring for the Chālukya throne were ruling in different areas, none of them was powerful enough to drive away the enemy and assert his authority over the feudatories.
An elder son of Palakēbin II, who seems to have claimed sovereignty over the Chalukya empire during this period of Anarchy, although, in fact, his sway was apparently confined to the region of the Kurnool District, was Adityavarman. That the area under his authority might have also included parts of the adjacent Districts of Bellary and Chitradurg is indicated by the present plates. This Ādityavarman must no doubt be identical with his namesake whose
1 The Classical Age (The History and Culture of the Indian People, Vol. III), p. 241. . Ibid., p. 242. See the discussion on the geographical names below.
A tradition, apparently wrong, sooms to have grown after a lapse of conturies that Adityavarman was father of Vikramaditya, being himself not the son but grandson of Pulakekin II. According to the Kauthem grant of 1009 A.D., e.g., Adityavarman was the son of Nedamari and grandson of Pulakokin II (Ind. Ant., Vol. Xvi, p. 17). A Davanagere inscription of 1123 A.D. substitutes the name Tidamari for Nedamari (Ep. Carn., Vol. XI, Dg. 1), showing thereby the unreliable nature of the tradition (of. Bomb. Gas., Vol. I, Purt ii, p. 361, n. 2). It may. however, be noted that no such namo intervenes between Pulakokin IT and Adityavarman in the account given by the Kannada poet Ranna (982 A.D.) in his Gadayuddha (II, 8).
