________________
396
THE INDIAN ANTIQUARY.
[OCTOBER, 1902.
Nanditataka, as was practically recognised by Mr. Dhruva, though not by Dr. Bhandarkar ; 14 on the west, (a village) the name of which seems to be clearly given in the lithograph as Vallsa, in accordance with Dr. Bhandarkar's reading, not as Vanića, as taken by Mr. Dhruva; and, on the north, a village (gráma) the rame of which is plainly to be read as Vavviyans or Babbiyana, instead of Vathiyaņa as given in both the published texts.16
Mr. Dhruva localised this record correctly. But he did not go into the details which are necessary in order to enable us to locate the places exactly and determine the bearing of the identification of them.16 He told us, in the first place, that Kammaņijja is the modern Kamrej.17 This is the heaul-quarters town of a subdivision of the same name in the Nausari division; it is on the south bank of the Tapti, and is to be found in the Indian Atlas sheet No. 23, S. E. (1888), in lat. 21° 17', long. 73° 2'. The identification was endorsed by Dr. Bühler, who pointed out that, in other records, the place is mentioned as Karmaneya and Kamandys, - (inore properly, Kamaniya), — and perhaps A9 Karmantapura.18 And there are not any reasons for declining to accept it.
Mr. Dhruva further identified Tenna with a village which is shewn as 'Ten' in the Atlas sheet, and in the Trigonometrical Survey sheet No. 34 (1882) of Gujarat, seven miles east-north-east from Palsânâ, the head-quarters of the Paļsâni subdivision of the Nausari division, and about thirteen miles south-east-by-south from Kamrej. This place is mentioned as Treyanna or Treyanna, in the territorial appellation of the Treganna or Treyaņņa khara, in the Bagumrå plates Of A D. 655.19 And the Bagumrå plates of A. D. 867 give another form of its name, in mentioning the village itself as Trenna, and the territorial division as the Trenná dhára.20 This latter record, it may he noted, speaks of Trenna as having been granted to a certain Brâhman by the first Dhruvarâja of Gujarat, for whom we have the date of A. D. 834-35. The explanation of its being given away ngain by the present record is, no doubt, to be found in the statement, made in the present record, that Indra III. gave away four hundred villages which had been confiscated by previous kings; this was evidertly one of them.
The other places, mentioned in the present record, are all to be found in the map3. As was recognised by Mr. Dhruva, the small village or bamlet of Varadapallika or Barada pallika has developed into the town of Bardoli, the head-quarters of the Bardoli taluks of the Eurat district, one mile on the east of Ten:' and, it may be remarked, there can be little doubt, if any, that this is the place which is mentioned as Bhadrapali in the record of A. D. 867, referred to above; but as intimated by Dr. Bühler, 21 the presentation of its name in that form must be due simply to the poet" having " tried to invent a significant Sanskrit name" for the place : he has told us that,
16 Mr. Dhruva's text gives Nandita alath, with only the mistake of a forf. Dr, Bhandarkar's text gives Nambhitatakım; and the translation gives the lake Nambhi." The lithograph is plainly not a facsimile. But we can ses at once that the first component of the double consonant, in the second syllable of the name, is , not m. The lower component does, in the lithograph, resemble bh more than d; and the akshara might be read as nibhi on the analogy of the abhd in tan-bhdvina in the last line but one. But the subscript d is formed in a very similar way in Kurundakam. three lines above. And, whether the writer fermed the d badly here, or whether it has been spoilt in preparing the lithograph, the modern name of the place makes it quito certain that nd was either written or intended.
10 We may compare the ru in saruan, in the last line but one, and contrast the th in parthivendran, in the same line.
16 Dr. Bhandarkar merely said: "The village Tenna is identified with Tons which is situated in the Navsari district" (loc. cit. p. 253).
11 Mr. Dhruva wrote the name with the long 4 in the first syllable; and it is certified in that way in the official compilation Bombay Places, and is entered in the same way in the Trigonometrical Survey sheet No. 33 (1662) of Gairat. Dr. Bühler wrote it with the short a see, for instance, Vol. XVI. above, P. 100. Fandit Baswanial Indraji seems to have taken the name as K Amléj, with l instead of r; see, for instance, Gax. Lo. Pres. Vol. I. Part I. p. 108.
18 Vol. XVI. above, p. 100. Dr. Bablor's " Kaman@ya" must be a mistako for Kamaniya, as the reference can only bo to the spurious Umêta plates, in Vol. VII, above, p. 61. 19 Vol. XVIII. above, p. 368, line 20.
20 Vol. XII. above, p. 189; and see Vol. XVI. p. 100. 21 Vol. XVI. above, p. 100, poto 5.
