________________
MAY, 1903.)
NOTES ON INDIAN HISTORY AND GEOGRAPHY,
215
the Mahâkâta record, can mean anything except "in (the year) Siddhartha," or "in (the) Siddhartha (samvatsara)."
The actual equivalent of the date presented in the Mahakata record is quite certain. In connection with the date, there is only one point, a minor one, which is at all doubtful ; namely, whether the Siddhartha saivatsara is to be taken according to the actual mean-sign system, or according to the so-called northern lani-solar system. According to the actual mean-sign system, it ran from the 25th October, A. D. 601, to the 21st October, A. D. 602. Whereas, according to the other system, it ran, as a luni-solar year, from the 28th February, A.D. 602, to the 18th March, A. D. 603, and, as a solar year, from the 19th March, A. D. 602, to the 19th March,, A. D. 608. The point, however, is not at all material. In any of the three cases, the full-moon day of the month Vaisi kha, in the Siddhartha sanatsart, was the 12th April, A. D. 602. And, as the result of that, the reign of Mangalêsa commenced on some day from the amanta Vaisakha krishna 1, Saka Samvat 519 expired, in A. D. 597, to Vaisakha sakla 15, S.-S. 520 expired, in A. D. 598.5 References to the Bashtrakata king Krishna III. in the records of
the Rattas of Saundatti. In the epigraphic records of the period subsequent to the overthrow of the Rashtrakata dynasty of Malkhed, there are various passages which shew that, of the kings of that line, Krishna III., in particular, was well remembered in the Kanarese country, part of which formed the possessions of the Ratta princes of Saundatti. I here bring together some allusions to him, in three Ratta records, and in another record which includes a long passage referring itself to the Ratta period, which are of special interest in connection with the claim at any rate that the Ratta princes belonged to the same lineage with him, and perhaps that they were actually descended from him.
1.- At Soundatti, the head-quarters of the Parasgad taluka of the Belgaum district, there is an inscription, edited by me in the Jour. B. Br. R. As. Soc. Vol. X. p. 194 ff., wbich was drawn up and put on the stone in, or very shortly after, A. D. 1098.
Lines 1 to 4 of this record register certain grants, of which one was an allotment of sixnivartanas (of land) by « (Ratta) prince named Kanna, to provide for the charts-oblation to & certain god. This Kanna may be either Kannakaira I., between A. D. 980 and 1040, or Kannakaira II., about A. D. 1069 to 1087. And the passage thus mentioning him appears to be an afterthought, added when the rest of the record had been completed.
Theu, after a certain verse in praise of the Jain religion, the record introduces a teacher named Mullabhattaraka (line 6), belonging to the Karega gana of the sect of the holy Maiļâpatirtha, It tells us that the disciple of Mullabhattaraka was Guņakirti, and that Gupskirti's disciple was Indrakîrti. It then mentions, as & pupil? of Indrakirti, a certain Prithvirama (1. 8), whom it describes as the eldest son of Merada, and as "& worshipper of the water-lilies that were the feet of the glorious Krishnarajadova (1. 9), before whom a crowd of kings bowed down." It then, in lines 12 to 14, recites that, in the year Manmatha, when the Saka year 797 had expired, that is, in A. D. 875-76 according to either the so-called northern or the so-called southern luni-solar system of the sixtyyears cycle," by that king” (têna bhupéna) a temple of Jinêndra was founded at Sugandhavarti-(Saundatti) and was endowed with eighteen nivartanas (of land). And it repeats part of the above information, in saying, in lines 14 to 18, that, - samasta-bhuvan-esraya sriprithvsvallabha-maharajadhiraja-paramosvara-paramabhattarakam Rashtrakama-kula-tilakam brimat. Krishnarajadová-vijaya-rajyam = uttaróttar-abhivriddhi-pravardthamânant -ê-chandr-arkka-taranbaram saluttam-ire, " while the victorious reign of the asylum of the universe, the favourite of Fortune and of the Earth, the Mahardjádhiraja, Paraméscare, and Paramabhagsdraka, the ornament of the
The figures "A. D. 497 or 488" in Vol. XIX. above, p. 20, were a sufloiently obvious mistake, which was ourrooted in the list of Errata given in the same volamo.
. Compare pages 218, 219, below. * The word used here is ch nattra. In the case of Gaņaklrti and Indrakirti, it is siahya.
