________________
No. 11 NOTE ON KALYANA INSCRIPTION OF SAKA 1248 D. C. SIRCAR, OOTACAMUND
(Received on 24.4.1958)
The inscription under study was originally found in the locality called Yellanagar in Ka lyana, the ancient capital of the Chalukyas and Kalachuris in the Gulbarga District of the former Hyderabad State. It is now preserved in the Husaini Bargah in the fort at Kalyana. The inscription has been twice edited, once by Mr. R. M. Joshi in the. Annual Report of the Archaeological Department of His Exalted Highness the Nizam's Dominions, 1936-37, pp. 43-45, and again by Mr. P. B. Desai in the pages of this journal, above, Vol. XXXII, pp. 165-70 and Plate. Unfortunately the writing and engraving of the inscription are both very careless and some of the letters are damaged. There are moreover numerous errors in the language. The text is thus very difficult to decipher and interpret. It is therefore no wonder that both the published transcripts of the epigraph are full of errors and consequently the text has not been properly understood. The readings of the verses in the second half of the record are particularly unsatisfactory in the published transcripts and the editors have disregarded both the metre and the sense.
The characters of the record are Nagari; but the letter kh has been written in line 30 in its early Southern form. It seems that b has been indicated by the sign for v.
The inscription is written in both prose and verse. Lines 1-14 contain a document in a few sentences in prose, and verses 1-4 in the Sardulavikridita metre in lines 14-29 record the main object of the epigraph. This part is in continuation of the prose section referred to above. There is also a fifth stanza in Anushṭubh in lines 29-30 mentioning a new fact. The last two lines of the record (lines 31-32) are damaged.
The introductory part in lines 1-8 gives the date: Saka 1248, Kshaya (called Akshaya in verse 2), Kärttika-sudi 15, Monday (November 10, 1326 A.D.), when Mahäräjädhirāja Suratana(Sultan) Mahamada (Muhammad ibn Tughluq Shah of Delhi, called Suraträna Mahimada in verse 1) was the reigning monarch, his Mahapradhana Mallika Kamadina (Malik Qivamuddin Qutlugh Khan) was the viceroy of Maharashtra-mandala and the latter's subordinate Khōja Ahamada (Khwaja Aḥmad) surnamed Jandamalantara was the Syaramallika (Persian Sair Malik, Collector of Taxes) at Kalyanapura. The office of the viceroy is indicated by saying that the Mahapradhana was conducting the affairs associated with the imperial seal (or, carrying the imperial seal, according to verse 1).
The purpose of the inscription is introduced in the following sentences. It is stated, that, during the troubled days associated with [the rebellion of] Vahavadīnnu (Bahauddin Gurshasp, son of the Sultan's father's sister), the people of Karnata discontinued the worship of the god Madhukēsvara, installed in a temple at the city of Kalyana as indicated more clearly in verse 1 below. The reason behind this discontinuation of the god's worship is not stated in the record. It may have been due to the priests and devotees of the deity having fled from the city in trouble. It is difficult to ascribe it to the desecration of the god by the Muslims as in that case the Sivalinga would have most probably been broken to pieces. The language of the record seems to suggest that the old Sivalinga was re-installed for worship which had been stopped. Obviously when
1 We are amused at Joshi's remark that the language is grammatically correct'.
If the expression punab-pratishtha, used in this connection, may be taken. to mean installation of another Sivalinga in the place of an old one, the passage avabhanga-vipadam...Sambhob in verse 1 may suggest that the old Linga called Madhukéévara had been broken and that the attempt was for its replacement by a new one. But the statement of fact in the passage anjanam baddhikritam (cf. lines 9-10) merely speaks of the stoppage of worship and not of any damage to the Linga.
(71)
