Indian Antiquary Vol 47

Author(s): Richard Carnac Temple, Devadatta Ramkrishna Bhandarkar
Publisher: Swati Publications

Page 310

290
THE INDIAN ANTIQUARY
[ DECEMBER, 1918
Smêsvara II was succeeded by his brother Vikramaditya VI who forcibly deposed Sômêkvara and had himself anointed on the throne. It is difficult to determine in which year this event took place. For, on the one hand, we have seen from the Kadarôli inscription that Sômêsvara II was the reigning king on 24th January, 1076. On the .other hand, an inscription at Hulêgundi (EC. XI, CA. 82 ; p. 32) records that, when the reign of the Maharajadhiraja Paramêtvara Paramabha!!áraka Tribhuvanamalla-deva was ever increasing in prosperity, the Mahasamanta Mangiy-Echayya who was a dweller at the lotus-feet of the Mahârâjâdhiraja Paramésvara Trajlôkyamalla-Noļamba-Pallava-Permmânadi Jayasimha-dêva (i.e. of prince Jayasitha III), and who was ruling the Sulgallu seventy, made a grant of lands to some temples on the occasion of uttarayana-sankranti on Monday, the eighth day of the dark fortnight of Pushya in the year Saka 995, Pramâdîcha. And, similarly, an insoription at Hûvinahalagalli (No. 127 of 1913) records that the king Tribhuvanamalla, while he was encamped at Govindavadi, made the grant of a village to a temple on the occasion of vyatipai: on Friday, the eighth day of the dark fortnight of Phålguna in the year Saka 993, Sadhâraņa. The dates of these two inscriptions correspond quite regularly to Monday, 23rd December, A.D. 1073 and Friday, 25th February, A.D. 1071; and they show that in 1071 and 1073 it was Vikramaditya VI and not his brother Sômêsvara Bhuvanaikamalla who was recognised as sovereign ruler in the Kogali five-hundred and the Kadambalige one-tbousand province (of which the Súlgallu seventy was a subdivision).
The overlapping dates of these epigraphs go to show that Vikramaditya VI made himself independent of Somēśvara II and assumed sovereign titles at some time before December, 1073 or February, 1071, that he and Sômêsvara were both ruling as emperors for some time, and that ultimately Sômêsvara was dispossessed of his sovereignty at some time after 25th December, 1074 (KLISI. No. 177) or 23rd January, 1076 (KLISI. No. 178). The inscriptions thus confirm the account given by Bilhana in his Vikramankadevacharita (cantos IV. V. VI) that Somôśvara II was a weak and tyrannical ruler who oppressed, and alienated the affections of, his subjects, that he meditated evil towards his brother Vikramaditya, and that Vikramaditya, learning of this, left the capital with his brother Jayasimha and a large force, defeated the army sent against him by Sômêsvara, and eventually deposed him and had himself crowned as emperor.
On p. 83ff. of my book (SSDI), I have discussed the question of the starting point of the Châlukya - Vikrama era which was founded by Vikramaditya after he had himself anointed as emperor. I have there shown that the majority of the dates recorded in that era favour the view that the era began in the year AD. 1076.17 And I am accordingly disposed to think that the correct equivalent of the date recorded in the Wadagêri 18 inscription is Thursday. 11th February, 1076, and that Vikramaditya was anointed as emperor on that day or shortly before that day. As he had assumed imperial titles at some time before December, 1073 (or February, 1071), as we saw above, there is thus an interval of two (four) years and some months between that event and his ancintment on the throne.
(To be continued.)
17 I may here add that since I wrote those pages I have examined nearly & hundred more dates recorded in that era and that the great majority of these dates, too, have confirmed me in the view expressed above.
16 For a discussion of the equivalents of this date, see VSSDI., p. 84.