History of Orissa from the Earliest Times to the British Period v1.c17: Chapter XI
History of Orissa from the Earliest Times to the British Period v1.c17
- Language
- English
Chapter XI
v1.c17.1
The kings of the Kara dynasty of Orissa were absolutely unknown to the people of India twenty years ago. During this period the labours of a number of epigraphists and the French Sinologist, M. Sylvain Levi, has enabled us to reconstruct the history and chronology of this dynasty of kings. The date of the dynasty was fixed by M. Levi's fortunate discovery of the reference to an embassy from Orissa to the Chinese Emperor Te-tsong towards the end of the 8th century : "in 795 A.D., that is, the 11th year of the period Cheng-yuan." The king who sent this embassy was called Śubhakara. It was the good fortune of the writer to come across the first inscription of king Śubhakara fourteen years ago. In this inscription, the Neulpur plate, three generations of kings of the Kara dynasty are mentioned, viz., (1) Kshemaṅkaradeva, (2) Śivakaradeva and (3) Śubhakara-deva. Since then the history of the dynasty has been much better illuminated by the fortunate discovery of two other grants, (1) the Kumuraṅga plate of Daṇḍi Mahādevī and (2) the Chaurāsī plate of Śivakaradeva. These two newly discovered inscriptions now enable us to link together the informations supplied by the two plates of Daṇḍi Mahādevī, at one time preserved in the office of the Collector of Ganjam, and the grant of Tribhuvana Mahādevī from Dhenkanal edited by Mahāmahopādhyāya Dr. Hara Prasād Śāstrī, C.I.E. These inscriptions show that there were two groups of dynasties of Kara kings ruling at different dates. The first group or dynasty is known from two inscriptions only: (1) the Neulpur plate of Śubhakara and (2) the Chaurāśī plate of Śivakara II. The remaining inscriptions of this dynasty are later in date and belong to the period of the second group.
v1.c17.2
The first group of Kara kings were decidedly Buddhist. The first king of this group, Kshemaṅkara, is called simply a lay worshipper (*Paramopāsaka*). His son, Śivakara, is, styled the devout worshipper of the Tathāgata (*Parama-Tathāgata*) and his grandson, Śubhakara, is styled the devout Buddhist (*Parama-saugata*). Śubhakara was a contemporary of the Chinese Emperor, Te-tsong, and in Chinese records he is described as one "Who had a big faith in the Sovereign Law, and who followed the practice of the Sovereign Mahāyāna." His name is given as "The fortunate monarch who does what is pure, the lion." From this M. Sylvain Levi guesses that the name of the king of Orissa was Śubhakara Keśari. In the year 795 A.D., the Chinese Emperor, Te-tsong, received an autograph manuscript containing the last section of the *Avataṃsaka*, which is the section dealing with the practice and vow of the Bodhisattva Sāmantabhadra. M. Levi, therefore, guesses that the work presented to the Chinese emperor was really the *Gaṇḍavyūha*, "of which the original is preserved among the Nepali collections." The autograph manuscript and the letter from king, Śubhakara, was entrusted to the monk, Prajñā, who was requested to translate it. The Prajñā was an inhabitant of Ki-pin or Kapiśā near Kabul, who had begun his studies in Northern India and then migrated to Nālanda, where he had resided for some time. After spending eighteen years in study, he settled down in the monastery of the king of Orissa to study Yoga philosophy. Then he went to China as the ambassador of the king of Orissa.¹ Though Śubhakara and his ancestors were Buddhists, the villages granted by him by a grant, discovered at Neulpur, was given to Brāhmaṇas. The villages of Kompāraka and Daṇḍaṅkiyoka were situated in the districts (vishaya) of Pañchāla and Vubhyudaya in Northern Tosali. The grant was issued in the 8th year of the reign of Śubhakara.² The genealogy is carried one generation further in the Chaurāśī plate of Śivakara II. This inscription is of great importance, as it supplies much interesting information. After the name of Śivakara I the word *Kara*, which appears to be the family name, is repeated, a feature which is to be found in some of the inscriptions of the second group of Kara kings. We know from this new inscription that Śivakara I married Jayāvalidevī from whom was born Śubhakara, the contemporary of the Emperor Te-tsong. From Śubhakara by his queen Mādhavadevī was born Śivakara II. The Chaurāśī plate records the grant of the village of Vuvrada situated in Southern Tosali to a number of Brāhmaṇas in the thirteenth year of the reign of the king on the 12th day of the bright half of Kārtika. Śivakara II and his father Śubhakara are given the Imperial title *Parameśvara-Mahārājādhirāja* and *Paramabhaṭṭāraka*.³ The village of Vuvrada granted by Śivakara II, was situated in the Antarudra district (vishaya)
v1.c17.3
¹ Epi. Ind., Vol. XV, pp. 363-64.
v1.c17.4
² Ibid., pp. 1-8.
v1.c17.5
³ Journal of the Bihar and Orissa Research Society, Vol. XIV, 1928, pp. 292-306.
v1.c17.6
Door-way and tympanum of arch—worship of the Sacred Tree—Ananta Gumpha—Khandagiri, Puri District
v1.c17.7
which is identified by Mr. Nārāyaṇa Tripāthī with the *pargaṇāh* of Antarodh in the Sadar Sub-Division of the Puri district of Orissa. The grant was issued from Śubhadevī-pāṭaka, which is a mistake for Śubhadeva-pāṭaka mentioned in the Neulpur plate. The special Buddhist titles of Śubhakara, his father and grandfather are not given in the Chaurāsī plate even in the case of Śubhakara.
v1.c17.8
The second group of Kara kings is known to us in detail from three grants of Daṇḍi Mahādevī and the Dhenkanal plate of Tribhuvana Mahādevī. The three grants of Daṇḍi Mahādevī supply us with more information than the plate of Tribhuvana Mahādevī. The earliest inscriptions of this dynasty were the two grants of Daṇḍi Mahādevī preserved in the office of the Collector of Ganjam and edited by the late Prof. Dr. Kielhorn. Out of these two plates the first one is dated in the year 180 of an unknown era. If this date is assigned to the unknown Gaṅga era then it was issued in 858 A. D. The Kumuraṅga plate of Daṇḍi Mahādevī is also dated. The late Mr. H. Pānday read it as 387, but it appears on the analogy of the Ganjam first plate to be 187. The Ganjam plates state that "There was a king named Unmaṭṭasiṃha (1.5), from whose family sprang Maṅgapāda (1.7) and other kings. In their family there was the king Loṇabhāra (1.9); his son was Kusumabhāra (1.13); after him ruled his younger brother Lalitabhāra (1.13); he was succeeded by his son Śāntikara (1.15), and he again by his younger brother Śubhakara (1.18). When the last of these princes died, his queen ascended the throne, and afterwards her daughter Daṇḍi Mahādevī (1.20) ruled the earth for a long time. The information supplied by the Dhenkanal plate of Tribhuvana Mahādevī is exactly similar, but in this plate the name of this first king is spelt as Lolabhāra.
v1.c17.9
From these three inscriptions we learn that one Unmaṭṭasiṃha was regarded as the remote ancestor of this line of kings. The Ganjam plates mention a king named Maṅgapāda after him. The Dhenkanal plates mention Gayāḍa and others instead of Maṅgapāda. Evidently, Prof. Kielhorn could not read the name Gayāḍa correctly.¹ In the family of Gayāḍa was born Lolabhāra or Loṇabhāra. His sons Kusumabhāra and Lalitabhāra succeeded him. Lalitabhāra’s son was Śāntikara according to the inscription of Daṇḍi Mahādevī. We learn from the Dhenkanal plates of Tribhuvana Mahādevī that she was the wife of Lalitabhāra, who is styled the Moon of the Kumuda flowers of the Kara family, mahārājādhirāja and Parameśvara. Tribhuvana mahādevī was the daughter of a southern chief named Rājamalla, who upheld the fortunes of the Kara family at the time of a great misfortune. At that time, requested by the Gosvāminī Purayidevī and the assembly of great feudatories (mahāsāmanta-chakra), Tribhuvana Mahādevī ascended the throne. We do not know whether Śāntikara was her son or not. The three grants of Daṇḍi Mahādevī carry the genealogy of the second group of Kara kings three generations further. Śāntikara, the son of Lalitabhāra, was succeeded by his son Śubhakara II and he by one of his queens who is not named. Later on Daṇḍi Mahādevī, the daughter of Śubhakara II ascended the throne. The date of the Kumuraṅga plates of Daṇḍi Mahādevī, the year 187 of an unknown era is the latest known date of this dynasty. If applied to the little known Gaṅga era it would give 965 A.D., as the latest known date for Daṇḍi Mahādevī.
v1.c17.10
¹ *Srī-mad-Gayāḍa* often looks like *Śrī-Maṅgapāda*.
v1.c17.11
The foregoing summary of the events connected with the reigns of the second groups of monarchs of the Kara dynasty show that the Dhenkanal plate of Tribhuvana Mahādevī is the earliest known inscription of the second group. The late Mr. H. Pānday attempted to connect the two dynasties by identifying Kshemaṅkara of the Neulpur plate with Śāntikara of the inscriptions of Daṇḍi Mahādevī and Śubhakara with Śivakara. There are two Śivakaras in the first group of the Kara dynasty and as all other names disagree, it is not possible to identify the kings of these two groups.
v1.c17.12
Of the kings mentioned as the ancestors of Lolabhāra, neither Unmaṭṭasiṃha nor Gayāḍa are known from other inscriptions. It is absolutely impossible to identify king Gayāḍa, the ancestor of Lolabhāra, with Gayāḍa of the Tuṅga family, the descendant of Salāṇatuṅga and Jagaṭṭuṅga. Of Lolabhāra and his sons Kusumabhāra and Lalitabhāra no details are given in any of the three inscriptions of Daṇḍi Mahādevī. Tribhuvana Mahādevī was the widow of Lalitabhāra and she has left a good deal of information in a grant discovered in the Dhenkanal State. This was issued from Śubheśvara-pāṭaka, the capital of Śubhakara. The kings Unmaṭṭakesari and Gayāḍa are mentioned among the early ancestors. Then we are introduced to a chief of Southern India who had saved the Kara family when it had fallen on evil days. Tribhuvana Mahādevī was the daughter of Rājamalla and was married to Lalitabhāradeva. Evidently upon the death of her husband the queen was persuaded by the ascetic Purāyidevi and the principal feudatories to ascend the throne. Her titles are *Parama-bhaṭṭārikā-Mahārājādhirāja-Parameśvarī* and she is styled the devout worshipper of Viṣṇu.
v1.c17.13
The land granted was situated in Kośala but it is not specified in which part of that country. The village granted, Koṇṭasparā, was situated in the district of Olāśrama. The grant is dated, as it was issued according to the editor in "Samvat Lu Chu Kārttika sudi di." These numerals have not been translated by the learned editor but as the symbol *Lu* denotes the numeral for 100 in two grants of Daṇḍi Mahādevī it would be safer to assume that this symbol expresses the same value that it does in the Ganjam plate of Daṇḍi Mahādevī. The late Mr. H. Pānday transcribed this symbol as 300, but a comparison with the Ganjam plate shows that he is wrong. The symbol *Chu* may be taken to denote 30. With these dates as the basis the chronology of the second group of Kara kings may be reconstructed. The inscriptions of Daṇḍi Mahādevī do not mention Tribhuvana Mahādevī but bring forth another king named Śāntikara as the successor of Lalitabhāra. We possess two different stone inscriptions of this Śāntikara, one of which is dated. This inscription was found in a cave on the top of Dhauli hill in the Puri district of Orissa. It records a private donation in the year 93.¹ According to all inscriptions of Daṇḍi Mahādevī Śāntikara was the son and successor of Lalitabhāra and according to the Dhenkanal plate Tribhuvana Mahādevī was the latter's wife and successor, but as Śāntikara was ruling in the year 93 and Tribhuvana Mahādevī in the year 130 there cannot be any doubt about the fact that Tribhuvana Mahādevī had succeeded Śāntikara, her son or step-son, on the throne and not her husband Lalitabhāra. The disturbances mentioned in the Dhenkanal plate appears to have taken place either shortly before or after the year 93. There are no reasons to suppose that the year 93 belongs to a different era from the year 130 of the Dhenkanal plate. If these be referred to the Gaṅga era then Śāntikara was ruling in Central Orissa in 871 A. D. It may, therefore, be assumed that the disturbances caused by Śatrubhañja and Raṇabhañja I were the causes of the fall of the Kara or Kesari dynasty after the death of Lalitabhāra and that the revival of Kara power under Rājamalla caused Neṭribhañja I and his successors to retire to the South and transfer their capital from Dhṛitipura to Vañjulvaka. The two inscriptions of Śāntikara have now become the oldest records of the second group of Kara kings. The first of them was discovered inside the Gaṇeśagumphā cave on the Udaygiri hill, three miles to the west of Bhuvaneśvar, in the Puri district. It is not dated and simply mentions Bhīmata, the son of a person named Naṇṇata.¹ The second inscription of the reign of Śāntikara was found by the author in a cave close to Aśoka's rock inscription at Dhauli near Bhuvaneśvar. The only important part of this inscription is the date, the year 93. If the initial year of the so-called Gaṅga era falls in 778 A. D., then this cave was excavated in 871 A. D. Beyond this we do not know anything about Śāntikara.
v1.c17.14
¹ This is the inscription mentioned by the late Mr. H. Pānday but it has not appeared in Epigraphia Indica, Vol. XV. It will be published in a subsequent volume. *Ibid.*, Vol. V, 1919, p. 569.
v1.c17.15
¹ Epi. Ind., Vol. XIII, p. 167, no. XVII.
v1.c17.16
The Dhenkanal plate of Tribhuvana Mahādevī proves that she came to the throne after Śāntikara. In the period which followed the death of her husband, Lalitabhāra, and his son, Śāntikara, there were disturbances which were quelled by her father Rājamalla. In the Dhenkanal plate this chief is simply called "The mark on the forehead of the Southern region." The only kings of this name known to us are the Western Chālukya king Vikramāditya I¹ and the three Western Gaṅga chiefs of that name. Out of these three, Rāchamalla or Rājamalla I is too early. The king referred to may be Rājamalla II whose Narasapur plates were issued in S. 824-902 A. D.² These identifications depend upon the probabilities of the Karas using the so-called Gaṅga era and that era having started from 778 A. D.
v1.c17.17
¹ Epi. Ind., Vol. VII, App. p. 5, note 4.
v1.c17.18
² Ibid., Vol. VIII, App. II, p. 3; Epi. Carn., Vol. X, p. 25, no. 90.
v1.c17.19
The object of the inscription on the Dhenkanal plates was to record the grant of the village of Koṇṭasparā to Bhaṭṭa Jagaddhara for the purpose of bringing down rain (Vṛiṣṭi-kāma-nimittāya).³
v1.c17.20
³ Journal of the Bihar & Orissa Research Society, Vol. II, 1916, pp. 419-27.
v1.c17.21
The three inscriptions of Daṇḍi Mahādevī prove that the statements of the Dhenkanal plates of Tribhuvana Mahādevī that "the Kara family were known only to fame", and "who finding the earth with all her Kara kings dead and gone" are incorrect. Tribhuvana Mahādevī was succeeded by Śubhakara II, the younger brother of Śāntikara. There cannot be any doubt about the fact that this Śubhakara was quite different from Śubhakara, the contemporary of the Chinese Emperor Te-tsong, and the son of Śivakara I, and the grandson of Kshemaṅkara. All inscriptions of Daṇḍi Mahādevī agree in stating that Śubhakara was succeeded first of all by his queen, whose name, according to certain scholars, was Gaurī. Then Śubhakara’s daughter, Daṇḍi, ascended the throne. Out of the three grants of Daṇḍi Mahādevī, two only are dated. The earliest date is to be found in the first Ganjam plate of the year 180 which may be equivalent to 958 A. D. By this plate the great queen granted the village of Villagrāma situated in the Eastern Division of the Barada-khaṇḍa district (vishaya) of the Koṅgoda Maṇḍala. The Pūrva-khaṇḍa of the Koṅgoda maṇḍala is still known by that name in the Ganjam district of the Madras Presidency. The grant was issued on the 5th day of the dark half of the month of Mārgaśīrsha of the year 180.¹
v1.c17.22
¹ Epi. Ind., Vol. VI, pp. 133-40.
v1.c17.23
The second Ganjam plate of Daṇḍi Mahādevī is undated. It contains the important information that the Koṅda maṇḍala was situated in Southern Kośala. By this plate the queen granted the village of Garasambhā in the district of Arttani on the occasion of the Uttarāyaṇa.² The third and the most recently discovered inscription of Daṇḍi Mahādevī is the Kumuraṅga plate of the year 187. By this inscription the queen granted the village of Kāntaśaranagari in the district of Khiḍiṅgabhāra of the Kuṅgada Maṇḍala in Southern Tosala, on the 13th day of the bright half of Jyaishṭha of the year 187.³ The Kumuraṅga plate informs us that the Kuṅgada or the Koṅgoda maṇḍala was situated in Southern Tosala, whereas the second Ganjam plate states that it was situated in Southern Kośala, and, therefore, it is apparent that in Orissa Tosala and Kośala were equivalents. The dated inscriptions of Daṇḍi Mahādevī prove that the queen was reigning from 958 to 965 A. D., if the dates can be referred to the Gaṅga era. We do not know what happened to the Kara family after Daṇḍi Mahādevī. Evidently the Bhañjas regained power and were able to regain Northern Khiñjali under or in the time of Neṭribhañja II, the son of Vidyādharabhañja.
v1.c17.24
² Ibid., pp. 140-42.
v1.c17.25
³ Journal of the Bihar & Orissa Research Society, pp. 564-81.
v1.c17.26
The discovery of M. Sylvain Levi leaves no doubt about the fact that the first group of Kara kings bore the title of Keśarī. The inscriptions of the second group of Kara kings prove that one of their ancestors was called Unmaṭṭakeśarī, but the title is not applied to any king of the second group. We do not know whether these later Kara kings had other birudas or not, but kings with the name Keśarī are to be met with in some inscriptions of Orissa and records of other countries. At least three inscriptions are known of a king named Uddyotakeśarī. The earliest inscription of the reign of this prince was discovered in a ruined cave assigned to the mythical Lalāṭendukeśarī of the native tradition of Orissa, on Khaṇḍagiri, three miles from Bhuvaneśvara in the Puri district. According to this inscription in the 5th year of the reign of Uddyotakeśarī the old temples and well on the Kumāra hill were repaired.¹
v1.c17.27
¹ *Epi. Ind., Vol. XIII, p. 166, no. XVI.*
v1.c17.28
In the Hāthigumphā inscription of king Khāravela of Kaliṅga we have seen that Udayagiri is called the Kumārī [Figure: Rani Nur Gumpha—General View Left Portion of the Central Wing, Udaygiri, Puri district]
v1.c17.29
hill. From the inscription in Lalāṭendu-keśarī's cave we learn that Khaṇḍagiri was called the Kumāra hill. The ancient names of Khaṇḍagiri and Udayagiri were, therefore, Kumāra and Kumārī. In the Navamuni cave on the same hill there is another pilgrim's record belonging to the reign of Udyotakeśarī. It states that in the year 18 of the reign of Udyotakeśarī the Āchārya Kulachandra's disciple, Śubhachandra came to this shrine.¹ Another inscription, discovered somewhere in Bhuvaneśvara, but now missing, was incised in the 18th year of the reign of Udyotakeśarī, Lord of the three Kaliṅgas. From the published texts the late Dr. Kielhorn compiled the following summary of this inscription: "Janamejaya of the lunar race, his son Dīrgharava, and his son Apavāra who died childless; after him, Vichītravīrya (another son of Janamejaya), his son Abhimanyu, his son Caṇḍīhāra, and his son Udyotakeśarin, whose mother was Kolāvatī of the solar race."² Beyond this we do not know anything of Udyotakeśarī. If his ancestor, Janamejaya, is the same as Mahābhavagupta of the Soma-vaṁśī dynasty of Mahākośala, then, inspite of his affix Keśarī he cannot be taken to be a descendant of the Kara dynasty.
v1.c17.30
¹ *Epi. Ind.*, Vol. XIII, pp. 165-6, no. XIV.
v1.c17.31
² *Ibid.*, Vol. V. App. p. 90, no. 668; *Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal*, Vol. VII, 1838, pp. 558 ff. pl. XXIV.
v1.c17.32
A king of Orissa with the affix Keśarī continued to rule over some part of Orissa till the middle of the 11th century A. D. Among the feudatories who combined to recover Northern Bengal for the Pāla king, Rāmapāla, is mentioned Jayasiṁha of Daṇḍabhukti, who is said to have uprooted king Karṇakeśarī of Utkala. The campaign for the restoration of Rāmapāla to Northern Bengal cannot have taken place later than 1060 A. D., and therefore, Jayasiṁha's defeat of Karṇakesarī must have taken place some time earlier. Uddyotakesarī is called "the Lord of Trikaliṅga" in the lost Bhuvanesvara inscription but in the *Rāmacharita* of Sandhyākaranandīn Karṇakesarī is styled the Lord of Utkala, ¹ evidently because by that time the rest of the three Kaliṅgas had been conquered by the Eastern Gaṅga king, Vajrahasta, who ascended the throne in 1038 A. D.² In 1078 A. D., Anantavarman Choḍagaṅga made an end of all minor dynasties, including, perhaps, Karṇakesarī who was ruling over Northern Orissa, adjoining Daṇḍabhukti or the modern district of Midnapore, as the last representative of his dynasty. We do not know whether Karṇakesarī belonged to the Kara dynasty or the lunar dynasty of Uddyotakesarī.
v1.c17.33
¹ *Memoirs of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, Vol. III, p. 36; Rāmacharita, II. 5, commentary.*
v1.c17.34
² *Epi. Ind., Vol. VIII, App. I, p. 17, list no. 22.*
Linked texts (5)
- 大方廣佛華嚴經 — Classical Chinese
- Gaṇḍavyūhasūtra — Sanskrit
- Rāmacarita — Gauḍa Abhinanda, Sanskrit
- Dhauli
- Khandagiri