________________
306
;
JAINTSM IN SOUTH INDIA
figures, comprised three hundred villages. One of the inscriptions from Nāgāi furnishes a genealogical account of a family of these chiefs. An inscription from Handarki takes this account two generations forward. In this genealogical account occurs the name Aicha, which appears to be a variant of Echa. But as Écha of the present epigraph is about two generations later than Aicha of the Nāgāi or Handarki inscriptions we are not well advised in identifying the two. This leads us to the surmise that Echabhūpa of our record was either a later member of the above family or belonged to a collateral branch of the same. The latter conjecture is supported by the fact that Echabhūpa is associated with the tract of Mirinte only, whereas the other members of the family figuring in the Nāgāi and Handarki records are connected with the two tracts, Aral and Mirinte. This distinction may be explained by assuming that the original family was split up subsequently and their territory also was divided.
Regarding Koppadēva who forms the subject of praise in the inscription, no details are furnished. But it is known from the following record that he was the chief of Adakki and held the responsible office of the commander of forces. We shall revert to him again while dealing with the next epigraph.
Adverting to the teacher Guņavīra Siddhāntadēva, the record is not adequately communicative in regard to the historical details, such as his lineage, spiritual ancestry, monastic headquarters, etc. The only items of information we know about him are that he was a disciple of Nömichandra Siddhāntadēva and belonged to the Vandiyūr gaņa. The Vandiyūr gaṇa is not noticed previously and is introduced for the first time by the present record. This piece of information is further amplified by another inscription in the present collection ( No.15), which again refers to this gaṇa and associates it with the Yāpanīya Samgha. From the general description of Guņavira Siddhāntadēva, the following points may be gathered about him. He was a zealous advocate and a great supporter of the Jaina doctrine. Well-versed in the system of Jaina philosophy, he successfully refuted the tenets of the rival schools. Profound in knowledge and immersed in austerities, he wielded great influence among the followers of his faith.
Although no specific date is mentioned in the record, an attempt may be made to assign an approximate date to it. From the fact that the epigraph refers itself to the reign of Vikramāditya VI, who ruled from A. D. 1076 to 1126., we may, in the first instance, fix these years as the broad limits of our inscription. But these limits can be narrowed down on the following
1 Hyderabad Archaeological Series, No. 8, p. 26. % My unpublished private collection.
