________________
JANUARY, 1885.] A NOTE ON THE EARLY KADAMBA INSCRIPTIONS.
prâni-himsa-lakshanamum-appa yâgamain nirvvarttisi narakakke vôgi Sagara-kulam=imtu niḥśêsham keṭṭudu.
"Unable to see through the tricks of Mahakala, Sagara performed a sacrifice, which is described in the wicked Atharvana-vêda, and which has for its characteristic the killing of various animals, and went to hell; his whole race was thus destroyed."
This will convince the reader that no Jaina could attribute to his father, with any thing like a feeling of pride, the performance of horse-sacrifices. And yet this is precisely what Dévavarman does in respect of his father, Krishnavarman. This inconsistency on the part of Dêvavarman can only be accounted for by supposing that Krishnavarman had been a follower of Brahmanism in his earlier years, and that he embraced Jainism only in the latter part of his life. His popularity with the people rested on the performance of horsesacrifices. This important incident in his life could not, of course, be omitted in the grant. Besides it is quite possible that any inconsistency in respect of this point would entirely escape Dévavarman's notice, as his family had been only recently converted to Jainism.
The second point is the following:-Kâkusthavarman issued his grant "in the 80th year of his victory." This is the literal rendering of the expression," sva-vaijayiké asititamé samvatsaré. Applied literally, these words would mean that Kakustha himself won the victory. But, if we suppose that he was only 15 when he gained the victory, he would of course be 95 years old, and still a Yuvaraja, too, according to the inscription,-at the time of issuing the grant; and his father would then be more than 112 years old, at the lowest computation. This can hardly be accepted as possible. Nor, again, as he describes himself as Yuvaraja at the time of making the grant, can we suppose that he was crowned when an infant, and that the victory was achieved for him by his generals. The expression is plainly not to be interpreted in this way at all; and we must understand it as referring to a victory won,
sante, Vol. VI. p. 23.
The correction of su into eya is not expedient, as it would make Krishnavarmå at once "a jewel among chieftains" and "lord of the sole umbrella."
The epithet BhujagAndr-Anvaya-Sendr-avanindra is also applied to the Nagajas.-ante, Vol. VII. p. 106,
13
not by Kâkusthavarman, but by one of his ancestors.
Now in Dêvavarman's grant, 11. 4 and 5, we read :
[] Sâmanta-râjavišêsha-ratnasu (sya) Nagajânâkramya-day-ânubhûtasya sarad-amala
[] nabhasy-udita-sasi-sadris-aikâtapatrasya .. śri-Krishnavarmmaṇaḥ.
This is Mr. Fleet's reading, which I adopt as the most correct one. In the interpretation of the fourth line, however, I beg to differ from him. The words in this line may be better separated thus:-Samanta-rájavisésharatna-su-Nágaján=ákramya
đây-nubhutasya. And the two lines may be better translated thus: "Of the prosperous Krishnavarman, who possessed the sole umbrella resembling the moon that has risen in the cloudless sky of autumu, and who enjoyed the heritage, after having conquered the good Nâgajas, who were jewels among excellent feudatory kings."
This conquest of the Nagajas or Nâgas must be the one that is alluded to in the expression sva-vaijayiké asititamé samvatsaré in Kakustha's grant. And the result is that Kâkusthavarman and his descendants were subsequent to Krishnavarman and Dêvavarman,-but also that not more than about thirty years can have intervened between Krishnavarman's victory and Kâkusthavarman's grant, and consequently that Kakusthavarman must have been either of the same generation with, or only very slightly subsequent to, Dévavarman.
race.
In ancient times the Nâgas were a powerful Their sway was by no means confined to the Karnataka. They were the terror of the people of Kasmir. Thus we read in the Rája. tarangini I. 179:मण्डले विप्लुताचारे विच्छिन्नबलिकर्मभिः । नागैर्जनक्षयश्वक्रे प्रभूतहिमवर्षिभिः ॥
After their subjugation by Krishnavarman, the Någa kings evidently continued to rule as feudatories of the Kadambas. For, many years later we find Bhânusakti' acknowledging the suzereignty of Harivarman, When the confederacy of the Kadambas was destroyed
For other notices of the Nagas, who are treated as playing a very important part in the early history of KAmir, see Rajateramgint I. 28ff., 89, 111, 185, and 203ff.-J.F.F.
ante, Vol. VI, p. 31.
