________________
PARLA-KIMEDI GRANT OF INDRAVARMAN.
APRIL, 1887.J
Indravarman of all three grants is one and the same person. Another point in the same direction is that the Indravarman of the present grant had the second name or biruda of Rajasimha (1. 20), which is not mentioned in the Chicacole grants. And it may also be noted that the present grant was written by a certain Vinayachandra; whereas the grant of the year 128 was engraved by Aditya, the son of a Vinayachandra, who seems likely to be the same person; and this tends to shew that, in the interval of thirty-seven years, one generation of subordinates, at any rate, had passed away. But an apparently more conclusive point still is that, though the other epithets and the general style of the charters correspond more or less closely, the Indravar man of the Chicacole grants is simply mentioned as belonging to the family of the Gangas; thus (ante, Vol. XIII. p. 121, 1. 4) Gáng-úmala-kula-tilakaḥ, " the ornament of the spotless family of the Gangas ;" and (id. p. 123, 1.7f.)prathita-vipul-ámala-Gang-ánvay-ámbarasakala-barach-chhasankaḥ, "the full autumnmoon of the sky which is the famous and great and spotless lineage of the Gângas." Whereas, the Indravarman of the present gránt is called the establisher of the family of the Gangas; thus (line 5) Gáng-ámala-kula-pratishthah, "he who has (effected) the establishment of the spotless family of the Gângas." The four points, taken together, seem to prove that the Indravarman of the present grant was an ancestor,-probably the grandfather, of the Indravarman of the two Chicacole grants.
As regards the era in which the dates of this inscription and of the two Chicacole grants is recorded, I can do little more than repeat what I have already said; viz. that it is evidently the Gangêya era, specifically mentioned under that name,-but apparently only in connection with a conventional date,-in a grant of the Mahárája Dêvêndravarman, and another of the Maharaja Satyavarman, both of which are dated in the fifty-first year of the era. I have also a grant of Dêvêndravarman, which is dated, genuinely, in the two The hundred and fifty-fourth year of the era. epoch of the era still remains to be determined.
ante, Vol. XIII. pp. 120, 278f.
Jour. Bo. Br. R. As. Soc. Vol. XVI. p. 114ff.
133
But, in pnblishing the Chicacole grants, I wrote "It is possible that the Maharaja Indravarman of this grant [of the year 128] is identical with the Adhiraja Indra, who is mentioned, in the Gôdâvarî grant of the Raja Prithivimala,' as combining with other chiefs and overthrowing a certain Indrabhattaraka. This Indrabhattaraka must be the Eastern Chalukya of that name; the younger brother of Jayasimha I. (Saka 549 to 579 or 582), and the father of Vishnuvardhana II. (Saka 579 to 586, or Saka 582 to 591)." This is the period to which all the threo grants, issued in the name of Indravarman, may be allotted on palæographical grounds,
as far as such evidence can be applied. As I have previously intimated, the clue to the date may perhaps be found in the record, in line 10 f. of the grant of the year 128, of an eclipse of the moon on the full-moon day of the month Margasira (November-December). The Saka years that I have quoted above, represent A.D. 627 to 670. But, owing to the possibility of the Indravarman who is connected with the history of Indrabhattaraka, being the grantor of the present charter of 91,-not of the charters of 128 and 146,-tho later limit of Saka-Samvat 591, as regards the second Indravarman, may have to be brought down fifty-five years later, to Saka-Samvat 646 or A. D. 724-25. Taking the extremo limits of A.D. 627 to 725, and allowing a margin of a few years on either side, the lunar eclipse mentioned in the grant of the year 128 may be any one of the following:"30th November
20th 9th
39
1st December
19th November
;;
10th 1st December
10th November
22nd
11th
2nd December
22nd November 2nd,,
3rd December 12th November
Cunningham's Indian Eras, p. 210 f.
39
.A.D. 624
625
626
643
644
653
662
672
690
691
708
709
719
727
737
