Indian Antiquary Vol 09

Author(s): Jas Burgess
Publisher: Swati Publications

Page 51

FEBRUARY, 1880.]
A SILARA COPPER PLATE GRANT.
41
The next prince in the line is Mummaņi, earliest we have among the grants that record deas he is called in the plate before us. In the An- tails about the period to which they belong. The barnath inscription which records & grant made next prince in our series is Anantapala or by a king of the Silara dynasty the king Anantadêve, the grantor in the plate before us. calls himself Mâm våņi." It is not, I think, The civil strife, which is referred to in the verses a very bold proceeding to identify that Mâm- devoted to him, is one about which no other innåņi with our Mummoņi. The dates are formation is at present accessible, unless, indeed, not against the identification, and perhaps Màm- it was the beginning of that conflict which is v Âņi was the real name of the king, which referred to in a boast made in the grant published was altered for the sake of the metre into the in the Transactions of the Bombay Literary more smooth and euphonious one which we find Society. With reference to that grant, Pandit in the plate before us. If this identification is BhagvânlAl says:-"The Vijayarkade va of correct, Dr. Bühler's suggestion, that the cor this branch is described as having re-established rect name of this prince is Våņi, appears to the sovereignty of the dethroned kings of the be untenable.
province of Sthana ka and Goa. This shows There are one or two other points also, of some that he restored the lost power of the two branches importance, which our plate enables us to deter of his dynasty, viz., the first at Țhân , and the mine finally. Pandit Bhagvanlal, in his remarks second at Goa." The original fully bears this on the Ambarnath Inscription, had suggested that out. Vijayarka, however, appears to have Mâm vâņi was probably the son or successor reigned about the Saka year 1065. The oocurof Chhittar å ja. When that suggestion rences, therefore, to which reference is made was made, the materials for deciding the point in our plate cannot have been those in which were very far from being full. Our plate, how-| Vijayarka took part. But it is not imposever, now settles the question, in a way that, sible that, although Ananta pala boasts of equally with Pandit Bhagvånlal's suggestion; having rid the country of his foes, who appear accounts for the facts on which that suggestion to have been some of his own kinsmenwas based. Pardit Bhagvânlal, in the paper dáydda—there may have been a renewal of referred to, argaed from the identity of names the disturbances after the Šaka year 1016, reof one of the officers mentioned in the Ambar- sulting in that misfortune to the Thåņa Silaras náth Inscription and in Dr. Bühler's plate, from which Vijayarka rescued them. But, on that Mâm våņi was probably a son or suc- the other hand, we cannot, in the present state cessor of Chhittarája. A similar argu- of our materials, come to any conclusion on these ment may be used in support of our identifica- questions.
n of Mummani and Mâm vâni. For the Of the period between Anantap å la and First Lord of the Treasury, if wo may so call A paradity, the last prince mentioned in him, in M âm và gi’s time-Mahader ayyao our series, we know at present very little.
-continues to hold the same office, at the time of Pandit Bhagvânlal in 1877 thought, that the our plate also, a circumstance strongly indicative gap between M 8 m và piraj e and Apark - of a close chronological propinquity between ditya in the genealogy of the first branch, Mam viņi and Anantap ála. It is also | might be accounted for by the destruction of the to be noted here, that the high offices of state, sovereign power above alluded to." We have mentioned in our plate as having been held by seen, however, that the gap is not so large a one Mahadevayya and the others, appear to have been as the Pandit supposed. Our plate brings oor enjoyed by these “southerners" for a very information down to the Saka year 2016. Apaconsiderable period. For we see some ayyas rådity & appears to have reigned in the mentioned as far back as in the grant of Arike. Saka year 1109. How long before that year his Bari in the Asiatic Researches, which is the reign had commenced it is not yet possible to 03 J. B. B. R. A. 8., vol. XII., p. 882.
70 J. B. B. R. 4. 8. vol. XIII. p. 17. Compare also « J. B. B. R. A. 8., vol. XII., extra No., P. 52.
extra No. to vol. XII., P. 52 (Dr. Bahler), 65 J. B. B. R. A.S., vol. XII., p. 832.
* The suggestion of Prof. Wilson (J. R. 4.8. vol. II. p. 897) 46 J. B. B. R. A.S., vol. XII., p. 880.
repeated by Mr. Naime (Konkan p. 7), and by Dr. DaDanha ! As. Res. vol. I. pp. 861, 864, 887.
(J. B. B. R. A. 8. vol. XII. p. 64) is now entirely negatived 65 Vol. IJI. p. 490.
by the information given by Dr. Böbler. * J. B. B. K. A. 8., vol. XIII., p. 17.