Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Ancient History of the Deccan c5: Chapter V. The Dynasties of Western Deccan

Ancient History of the Deccan c5

Language
English

Contents

Chapter V. The Dynasties of Western Deccan

§ 1. The Âbhîras

c5.s1.1

At the end of the II century and the first half of the III century the Âbhîras were powerful in Gujarât and Kâthiâwar. An inscription (Ind. Ant. Vol X., page 157) of the Western Kshatrapas dated 181 A.D. (Ś. 103) is a donation by general (senâpati) Rudrabhûti, who was an Âbhîra and the son of general Bâhaka. In Mâlwâ, in Gujarât and in Kâthiâwar have been found silver coins of a king named Îśvaradatta. Mr. Rapson (page CXXXVI) says: "there can be little doubt then that Îśvaradatta reigned some time between A. D. 236 and A. D. 239." Besides, it seems that the power of the Western Kshatrapas began to decline at this epoch: "Already in this reign (of Vijayasêna) appear the first symptoms of a decline about the year 167 or 168 (A. D. 245-246)" (Rapson, page 137). At Nâsik (Ep. Ind. Vol. VIII., page 88) there is an inscription (No. 1137 of Lüders's list) dated in the 9th year of Mâdharîputra Îśvarasêna, an Âbhîra, son of Śivadatta. The latter is not mentioned as being a king. It would therefore appear that Îśvarasêna founded the Âbhîra dynasty.

c5.s1.2

Is this Âbhîra named Îśvarasêna the same as the king Îśvaradatta of the coins, who, towards the middle of the III century founded the Âbhîra dynasty and carved out for himself a kingdom extending over Kâthiâwar and the Nâsik region?

§ 3, The Traikûṭas

c5.s2.1

This dynasty (see Rapson, sections 42, 132, 134) reigned on the coast north of Bombay.

c5.s2.2

They have found (J. B. B. R. A. S., 1914, Vol. XXIII., pages 1 to 7) some coins that mention a certain king named Indradatta and his son Dahragaṇa, some other coins that mention a king called Indradatta and his son Dahrasêna and a few others that mention Dahragaṇa and his son Vyâghragaṇa. The Pardi plates (J. B. B. R. A. S., Vol XVI, Art. XIX; page 346) are dated in the reign of Dahrasêna and in the 207th year of the era used by the Traikûṭas.

c5.s2.3

The Surat plates (Ep. Ind., Vol XI, page 219) are dated in the reign of Vyâghrasêna in the year 241 and the plates discovered at Kaṇhêri by Mr. Bird are dated in the year 245.

c5.s2.4

It is admitted that the era used by the Traikûṭas is nothing but the Kaḷachuri or Chêdi era which begins on the 5th September 248 A.D. (Ep. Ind., Vol IX, page 129). So Dahrasêna reigned in 455-6 A.D; Vyâghrasêna in 489-90 and the Kaṇhêri plates are dated in the year 493-494 A.D. It is quite possible that this era was not founded by the Traikûṭas; it was perhaps founded by the Âbhiras.

c5.s2.5

A close examination of these documents enables us to admit that the kings whose name ends in "gaṇa" may be identified with those whose name ends in "sêna".

c5.s2.6

Thus we have the following genealogy: Indradatta

c5.s2.7

Dahrasêna (who reigned in 455 A.D.)

c5.s2.8

Vyâghrasêna (who reigned in 490 A.D.)

c5.s2.9

The Traikûṭa is mentioned by Kâlidâsa. The Vâkâṭaka Harisheṇa conquered it. The Pardi plates have been issued from the town of Âmrakâ and the Surat plates from Amruddhapura.

c5.s2.10

§ 4. The Kalachuris.

c5.s2.11

The Abhona plates (Ep. Ind., Vol VI., page 294) and Sarsavni plates (Ep. Ind., Vol. VI., page 295) give us the following genealogy: Krishnarâja

c5.s2.12

Śamkaragaṇa (who reigned in 595 A.D.)

c5.s2.13

Buddharâja (who reigned in 610 A.D.)

c5.s2.14

These kings use the special era we have already spoken of. We have a coin of Krishnarâja (Prog. Rep. Arch. Surv. West. Ind. for 1914-15, page 60).

c5.s2.15

It seems that the reign of Śamkaragaṇa was glorious: the Abhona plates tell us that he had his capital at Ujjain and reigned over the Nâsik regions which denotes a vast empire.

c5.s2.16

The chief Nirihullaka reigned in the lower Narbadâ valley about 580 A. D., and was a feudatory (Sânkhîḍa grant; Ep. Ind., Vol. II., page 22) of Śamkaragaṇa. Nirihullaka was perhaps a descendant of Saṃgamasimha who was king of Barakuchchha in 292 i. e. 530-531 A. D. (Sunao-Kala plates).

c5.s2.17

Buddharâja probably met with great reverses: before the year A.D. 601 (Bâdâmi inscription) the king Maṅgalêśa of the Chalukya dynasty vanquished him. In 609 A.D. he reigned at Vidiśa (Bêsnagar, near Bhilsâ, Vadner plates). In 610 A.D. (Sarsavni plates) he reigned at Ânandapura (Ânand in Kaira dist.; Ep. Ind., Vol. VI., page 297) and gave orders about the Barakuchcha-vishaya.

c5.s2.18

We know (Aihole inscription) that Pulakêśin II vanquished Lâṭa, Gujarat and Mâḷwa.

c5.s2.19

CHAPTER VI.

c5.s2.20

THE DYNASTIES OF EASTERN DECCAN.

§ 1.—The Ikshvâkus

c5.s3.1

Three inscriptions (Ind, Ant., Vol XI, page 256) found (“Amarâvati and Jagayyapêta Stûpa”, Arch. Surv. Southern India, page 110) on the ruins of the stûpa at Jagayyapêta (Nandigâma Taluk, Kṛishṇa district) give the name of a king called Mâḍhari-putra Śrî Vira Purushadatta (Purisadata) of the Ikshvâkus (Ikhâkus) and are in an alphabet which seems to point to the III century of the Christan era.

c5.s3.2

What became of this dynasty later on, it is impossible to say. However, there exists a stone in Guḍḍappa dry land at Aṇaji in the Dâvaṇagere taluq of Mysore (Ep. Carn., Vol. XI, Dg, No. 161) which mentions “the family of the Kêkayas, who made intermarriages with the Ikshvâkus.”

§ 2. The Bṛihatphalāyanas

c5.s4.1

The Koṇḍamudi plates (Ep. Ind., Vol. VI., p. 315) are dated in the 10th year of king Jayavarman, of the Bṛihatphalāyanas, who reigned at Kudūra. The alphabet of these plates is extremely archaic; they are in prākṛit; besides, "the language and phraseology of the inscription are so similar to the Nāsik inscriptions of Gautamīputra Sātakarṇi and of Vāsisthīputra Puḷumāyi, that Jayavarman's date cannot have been very distant from that of those two Āndhra kings" (Ep. Ind Vol. VII, No. 31, page 315). It must however be noted that the legend on the seal is in Sanskrit. It is therefore certain that Jayavarman reigned immediately after the Sātavāhanas.

c5.s4.2

The Koṇḍamudi plates record the grant of the village of Pāṇṭūra in Kudūrahāra which is the province, as we know, of which Kudūra was the capital. Where were this province and especially this town of Kudūra situated? Koṇḍamudi, where the plates have been found, is situated in the Tenali taluq which is not far from the mouth of the Kṛishṇā. The town of Kudūra is found mentioned in an inscription at Amarāvatī (No. 1295 of Lüders's list). The country of Kuduhāra or Kudrahāra is mentioned in the plates of Nandivarman of the Sālaṅkāyana dynasty. These plates were issued from Veṅgi and have been found near the Kolleru lake (Ind. Ant., Vol V, 1876, page 175. See also Burnell, "South Indian Palægraphy, 2e Ed. page 135.) The country called Kudrahāra or Guḍrahara is referred to in many documents (see in particular: Ind. Ant., Vol XIII, page 138, line 17; Ind. Ant., Vol VII, page 191, line 12, and the Reṇḍubaḷḷi copper-plate, Rep. on Epigraphy for 1914-1915, G. O. No. 1260, Public, 25th Aug. 1915, page 8, copper-plate No. 2 of 1915) The geographical indications given by these documents [see also : Ind. Ant., Vol VIII, page 76; S. I. I. Vol I, page 47; and inscriptions Nos 539 and 544 of 1893)

c5.s4.3

show that Kudûrahâra or Guḍravâra is the country adjoining the modern town of Masulipatam (Bandar.)

c5.s4.4

Besides, there have been found at Masulipatam (Bandar Taluk) four sets of copper-plates that give information about this country;

c5.s4.5

(1) The grant of Amma II. (S. I. I., Vol I., page 47) containing an order to the people living in Guḍravâra-vishaya.

c5.s4.6

(2) The plates of Vijayâditya III. (Ind. Ant., Vol. XX, page 103, and Ep. Ind., Vol. V., page 122) granting the village of Traṇḍapâru situated in the Guḍravâra-vishaya.

c5.s4.7

(3) The plates of Bhima II. (Ind. Ant., Vol. XX, page 270, and Ep. Ind., Vol. V., page 135) granting a field in Guḍravâra-vishaya.

c5.s4.8

(4) The plates of Amma II. (Ind. Ant., Vol. VIII, page 74; and Vol. XX, p. 271; Ep. Ind., Vol. V., page 139) granting land. The last document is interesting as it shows the precise position of the land: it was situated beside the village of Pâmbaṛṛu in the Guḍravâra-vishaya and near Ghaṇṭaśâlâ; again this grant of land was made to a chief "for having improved the town of Guḍravâra"; we know that Ghaṇṭaśâlâ, which was situated in Guḍravâra-vishaya is a village in the Divi taluq situated at a distance of 10 miles from Masulipatam (Bandar) and 6 miles from the village of Kudûru.

c5.s4.9

We shall therefore conclude that the town of Kudûra, which was the capital of Jayavarman in the III century of the Christian era, is but the modern village which is 4 miles west-north-west of Masulipatam and 6 miles from the village of Gaṇṭhaśâla and is mentioned under the name of Kudûru (Z) in the list of villages of Bandar (Masulipatam) taluq (see "List of villages of the Madras Presidency," 1914, page 150). The village named Pâṇṭura in the Koṇḍamudi plates, is perhaps Panduru, a village in the Bandar (Masulipatam) taluq.

c5.s4.10

It so happens that the result we have arrived at is found to be of immense importance not only for the ancient history of the Deccan but also of Indo-China.

c5.s4.11

We know that the civilisation of Indo-China is of Indian origin and a study of the Indo-Chinese documents has proved that the civilisation of Indo-China came almost exclusively from the Deccan. The Indo-Chinese inscriptions are dated in the Śaka era and their alphabets very closely resemble those of the inscriptions in the Deccan. Such an inscription of Cambodia (see, "Journal Asiatique" VIIe série, Tome XX., No. 2, Août-Septembre 1882) dated in the Śaka year 589 "essentially agrees with those of the first Châlukyas from the sixth to the eight century." The alphabet of the most ancient inscriptions found in Annam fully resembles, as has been remarked by M. Abel Bergaine (Journal Asiatique, Janvier 1888, page 15) the alphabets of the inscriptions of the kings of Vêngî, the Pallavas and the first Kadambas. Again, certain inscriptions (for example Nos 415 and 415 bis, XXI of the collection mentioned by Mr. Bergaine) are characterised by a peculiarity which is called the "box-headed" alphabet and M. Bergaine observes that "the relations between the Champâ kingdom and those of Southern India were so frequent that the alphabet changed there in the same manner. We shall even see that a simple ornamental appendage, a deeply cut square at the head of the letters which, in India proper, seems to have been in fashion during almost the whole of the V century finds its way into our XXI inscription.

c5.s4.12

It must first be noted that this influence existed in the II century of the Christian era :

c5.s4.13

(1) The inscription of Mura-râja or Śri Mara, king of the Champâs, which is found near the village of Vo-can, in the Nhatrang valley in the province of Khah-Hoo (Journal Asitique, Janv.-Fevrier 1891, page 17) in Annam, is written in Sanskrit and in an alphabet that is identical with that of the inscription of Rudradâman at Girnar.

c5.s4.14

(2) Ptolemy gives the names of the towns situated on the coast of Annam that were not simply Indian but were also Sanskrit (Journal Asiatique-Rapport Annuel; Juillet-Août 1888, page 70).

c5.s4.15

We thus arrive at the following very important conclusion : "The Indo-Chinese civilisation did not come from every place in India, but, from a port of the Deccan whence the travellers embarked for Indo-China".

c5.s4.16

Where was this port situated? That is the important problem we are now going to solve. This port was existing at the time of Ptolemy, and is found mentioned by this geographer. In fact, this is how Ptolemy describes the east coast of the Deccan (see Ind. Ant., Vol. XIII., page 332) : "Mouth of the river Khabéros—Khabéris—Sabouras—Podoukê—Melangê—Mouth of the river Tyna—Kottis—Manarpha—Mouth of the river Maisôlus—Kontakossyla, a mart—Koddura—Allosyngê—The point of departure for ships bound for Khrysê—Paloura—Naingaina—Katikardama— Kannagara—Mouth of the river Madana''.

c5.s4.17

We see that, in the II century, Ptolemy has said that the ships that wanted to go to the country of gold (Khrysê) i. e. the Indo-Chinese peninsula (Burma, Malacca, Cambodia, Annam) started from a fixed point (locus unde solvunt in Chrysen navigantes). Till now there was complete uncertainty in regard to the geographical position of this port. There was no doubt at all that ''Khabéris-emporium'' designated the town of Kâv'ripatnam; in fact, Ptolemy has mentioned above the ''mouth of the river Khabéros'' which is undoubtedly the Kâvêri. But between this town and the Ganges not a single place mentioned by Ptolemy could be identified with some amount of certainty. Many authors have put forth hypotheses but without any great success. Colonel Yule thought that the river Maisôlus was no other than the Krishnâ, because not far from its mouth there is the modern town of Masulipatam; but this reason was not very convincing. In the theory of Colonel Yule the town that Ptolemy calls Koddura was identified with Gûdûru, near Masulipatam. This identification was regarded with the greatest scepticism, for they replied to Colonel Yule that :

c5.s4.18

(1) The word Koddura does not fully resemble the word Gûdûru.

c5.s4.19

(2) There is nothing to prove that the village of Gûdûru existed at the time of Ptolemy and has preserved the same name for 18 centuries.

c5.s4.20

It is no more the same thing to-day. In compiling the ancient history of the Deccan and in studying the Koṇḍamudi plates, we have made the following important discoveries: (1) That the modern town named Gûdûru by Colonel Yule was once called Kudûra (2) that Kudûra existed at the time of Ptolemy. So we can now think of identifynig the Koddura of Ptolemy with the Kudûra of Koṇḍamudi plates.

c5.s4.21

Our knowledge of ancient Deccan enables us to make another new identification. Between Gûdûru and the mouth of the Kṛṣṇâ, there is the town of Ghaṇṭaśàlà, where Mr. Alexandre Rea (South Indian Bouddhist Antiquities—Madras 1894, page 32) has discovered the remains of a Stûpa which date from the beginning of the Christian era; so, Ghaṇṭaśàlà existed at the time of Ptolemy; and exactly at the required spot, on the sea side, between Koddura and the mouth of the river, Ptolemy places the mart of Kontakossyla.

c5.s4.22

We have thus solved an important problem, we have been able to identify certain places named by Ptolemy in a part of the Deccan coast; and the place whence ships departed for Indo-China is found near Koddura, a little more to the north on the coast, i. e. not far from the mouth of the Godâvârî.

c5.s4.23

We shall therefore conclude that the port of departure for vessels bound for Khrysê, during the time of Ptolemy, was situated near the mouth of the Godâvârî and that it was from there that the civilisation of India starteed to go over to Burma, Java, Cambodia and Annam.

§ 3. The Śālaṅkāyanas

c5.s5.1

This dynasty had Veṅgipura for its capital, and had a special cult for the god Chitrarathaswâmin. The remains of a temple dedicated to this deity are found at Pedda-vêgi near Ellore. As copper-plates connected with this dynasty and this country have been found in the environs of this town, I think we may admit the identity of Veṅgipura with Pedda-vêgi. The plates of king Vijaya-Dêvavarman (Ep. Ind. Vol. IX., No. 7, page 56) are in Prâkṛit but contain two sanskṛit verses. This king is said to be the ‘performer of horse sacrifices.’

c5.s5.2

Another set of plates found near lake Kolleru (Ind. Ant. Vol. V., 1876, No. XVIII, page 175) is in Sanskrit and is probably not so ancient. It mentions Chaṇḍavarman and his son Vijaya-Nandivarman. The Śālaṅkāyanas ruled at this epoch over the same country of Kuḍuhâra which formerly was the native land of the Bṛihatphalâyanas.

c5.s5.3

And J. F. Fleet says (Ind. Ant. Vol. V., 1876, page 175): “In Sir W. Elliot’s fac-similes I have another copper-plate inscription of Vijaya-Nandivarmâ and his Yuvamahârâja whose name seems to be Vijaya-Tuṅgavarma or Vijaya Buddhavarmâ . . . . . the language, even, is doubtful but seems to be prâkṛit.........” This name is probably Buddhavarmâ, for, in the margin there is the character “dha” ”.

c5.s5.4

It is probable that these kings : Dêvavarman, Chaṇḍavarman, his son Nandivarman and perhaps also the problematical Buddhavarman, have reigned between 350 and 450 A. D. It appears in fact that these kings came after the invasion of Samudra-Gupta; and it is again probable that their kingdom was conquered in the fifth century by the Viṣṇukuṇḍins with the help of the Vâkâṭakas.

c5.s5.5

§ 4. The Viṣṇukuṇḍins.

c5.s5.6

The Râmatīrtham (Ep. Ind. Vol. XI., page 134) and the Chikkulla plates (Ep. Ind. Vol. IV., page 193) give us genealogy No. I; and the Pulimbūru grant (Report on Epigraphy for 1913-14; G. O. No. 920, Public, 4th Aug. 1914, page 102) gives us genealogy No. II:

c5.s5.7

| No I. | Mādhavavarman I. \| Vikramēndravarman I. \| Indrabhaṭṭārakavarman \| Vikramēndravarman II, Vikramahēndra |
| No II. | Govindavarman \| Mādhavavarman (II). |

c5.s5.8

I am of opinion that Vikramahēndra may be identified with Vikramēndravarman II. In fact, I have remarked that in several documents the information regarding the grand-father or other ancestors of the reigning king has been sometimes altered. It is probable that the real name of the grandfather of Mādhava II was Vikramēndravarman II.

c5.s5.9

It seems that the capital of the kingdom was Lendulūra which is probably the present village of Dendulūru, in the Ellore taluq near the ancient city of Veṅgi.

c5.s5.10

The tutelary deity of the dynasty is the "Holy Lord of Śrī Parvata," Śrī Sailam in the Karnul District. This God was the favourite deity of Prabhāvatī, widow of Rudrasēna II. and mother of Pravarasēna II, the Vākāṭaka king. On the other hand, Mādhavavarman I., the first Viṣṇukuṇḍin king had married a Vākāṭaka princess and we have said already, that very probably, in the middle of the V century, the Vākāṭakas uprooted the ancient Śālaṅkāyana dynasty of Veṅgi and placed on the throne their relation Mādhavavarman I. This king, in fact, is reported to have performed numerous sacrifices, 11 of them being horse sacrifices which are emblems of victory. Besides that, the eulogies of this king resemble those found in the Vākāṭaka copper-plates of Pravarasēna I.

c5.s5.11

The king Vikramēndravarman I. had no other merit than that of birth. He was the ornament of two families, the Viṣṇukuṇḍins and the Vākāṭakas. His reign was probably short.

c5.s5.12

On the contrary, Indrabhaṭṭārakavarman had a long reign as the Rāmatirtham plates are dated in the 37th year of his reign; besides, during this reign, there was a terrible attack made by a king, who probably reigned in Kaliṅga, who was also called "Indra" and who seems to have been the head of a coalition of kings. These plates tell us that Indrabhaṭṭārakavarman "encountered in hundred thousands of battles numerous four-tusked elephants (chaturdanta)"; we know that God Indra is mounted on the elephant of the East which has four tusks. That statement is wholly confirmed by copper plates written in a similar alphabet which have been found in the Gōdaveri District. They are those of Pṛthivimūla (J. B. B. R. A. S., Vol. XVI., page 116). From lines 17-20, we learn an alliance was entered into by several chiefs to uproot by force Indrabhaṭṭāraka whose élephant Kumuda (the elephant of the S. W. quarter) was struck down by Indrādhirāja mounted on his own elephant Supratika (the elephant of N. E. quarter). So there were two Indras present: Indrādhirāja, king of the northeast, that is, of Kaliṅga along the coast of Orissa, and Indrabhaṭṭāraka, the Viṣṇukuṇḍin who reigned in the southwest, that is to say in Vēṅgi. Now, it seems that it was the king of the Viṣṇukuṇḍins that was the victor. In fact the same Rāmatirtham plates commemorate the grant made by Indra of a village situated in the Pḷaki-rāṣṭra. This province is mentioned in the Timmapuram plates (Ep. Ind. Vol. IX., page 317) under the name of Paḷaki-vishaya. And we know that this same province of Paḷaki-vishaya contained the village of Cherúpúra, which is nothing but Chipurupalli in the Vizagapatam District (Ind. Ant. Vol. XX., pages 15 and 16). Since the Viṣṇukuṇḍin Indra was the master of Vizagapatam District after his war with the king of Orissa, it is certain that he was the victor. We have said that there was a coalition of many kings against Indrabhaṭṭāraka. Among them perhaps was Hariṣēna the Vākāṭaka;

c5.s5.13

in fact, the Ajaṇṭā inscription says that Harishēṇa vanquished the king of the Āndhra country. This word shows the country between the Gōdāvarī and the Kṛṣṇa, that is to say, the kingdom of the Viṣṇukuṇḍins.

c5.s5.14

The son of Indrabhaṭṭāraka was Vikramēndravarman II. It is certain that this king reigned on the banks of the Kṛṣṇa as the Chikkulla plates mention the village of Rēgoṇram to the S. E. of Rāvirēva on the bank of the Kṛṣṇabeṇṇā; and Rāvirēva has been identified by Mr. Sewell with Raveralah 80°10'E and 16°50'N):

c5.s5.15

The son of Vikramēndravarman II. (Vikramahēndra) was Gōvindavarman and his grandson Mādhavavarman II (Janāśrāya). The last of them "crossed the river Gōdāvari with the desire to conquer the eastern region". This event probably took place shortly before the invasion of Pulakēśin II. who put an end to the dynasty of Viṣṇukuṇḍins and annexed the kingdom of Vēṅgi.

c5.s5.16

In my work "The Pallavas" (chapter III., page 34), I have attributed the caves of Uṇḍavalli, Sittanagaram, Bezwāda, Mogalrājapuram to the Viṣṇukuṇḍins. I shall not speak of it once again.

c5.s5.17

The seal of the Chikkula plates (Ep. Ind. Vol IV., plate facing the page 244) resembles that of the Rāmatīrtham plates: an advancing lion with its fore-paw raised, mouth wide open and the tail swung over the back so as to end in a loop (G. O. No. 538; Rep. on Epi. 28th July 1909). The lion was then the crest of the Viṣṇukuṇḍins. It is to be remarked that the Kadambas have the same crest which proves the family relationship that existed between the Kadambas and the Viṣṇukuṇḍins. We find the image of a vase sculptured on the pillars at Uṇḍavalli and Mogalrājapuram, and the image of a lion at Uṇḍavalli. Coins bearing the image of a lion on the obverse and the image of a vase on the reverse have also been found. (see for instance, in Mr. Vincent A. Smith's, "Early History of India," the plate concerning the Indian coins in the British Museum: coin No. 16, from Elliot, "Coins of Southern India" Pl., II, 49). These coins have been attributed to the Pallavas. In 1917, in my work "The Pallavas" (Chapter III, page 34), I have attributed these coins to the Viṣṇukuṇḍins.

c5.s5.18

§ 5. The Kings of Kalinga.

c5.s5.19

We have six documents that give us information about the kings of Kalinga. We have said that, about A. D. 340, Samudra-Gupta met on the coast of Orissa with Maṇṭarāja, king of Korāla, Svāmidatta of Koṭṭūra, Damana of Eraṇḍapali and Mahendra of Piṣṭāpura. The last of them had probably the title of king of Kalinga : we shall see, in fact, that Śaktivarman ( Ragolu plates ) who also reigned at Piṣṭāpura had this title. The six documents we have mentioned being all in Sanskrit are probably posterior to the year 400 A. D. On the other hand the coast of Orissa was conquered by Pulakēśin II ( Aihole inscription ) about 609 A. D. and was probably shared between the Eastern Chālukyas in the south and the Eastern Gaṅgas in the north. The dates of the 6 documents in question are therefore between 400 and 600 A. D.

c5.s5.20

Unfortunately, it is impossible to establish a chronology of the kings of Kalinga whose names we know. Therefore we shall now proceed to enumerate those documents without any ascertained chronological order.

c5.s5.21

a) The Ragolu plates ( Ep. Ind. Vol XII, page 2 ) mention Vāsiṣṭhīputra Śaktivarman, king of Kalinga who reigned at Piṣṭāpura. It is said that this sovereign "adorns the Māgadha family," which goes to show that this prince was related to the Guptas and reigned towards the middle of the V century when the Guptas and the Vākāṭakas dominated the Deccan.

c5.s5.22

b) The Gōdāvarī copper plates ( J. B. B. R. A. S. Vol XVI, page 116 ) had been studied when we gave the history of Indrabhaṭṭāraka of the Viṣṇukuṇḍin dynasty : the king Pṛthivimula who was the donor of the Gōdāvari plates was the son of Śri-Prabhākara and reigned in the city of Kândâḷi. He was the vassal of another more powerful king named Indra who was the son of Mitavarman, reigned at Maṇalkudi and had for his war-elephent Supratika (the elephent of the N. E. quarter). The document says that this king was the victor in the struggle against the king Indrabhaṭṭāraka. But we have said that this is not probable and that, on the contrary, the Viṣṇukuṇḍin king seems to have aennxed the districts of Gôdâvari and Vizagapatam and driven away the kings of Kalinga to the north. In fact, the capital of the kings of Kalinga which was Piṣṭâpuram at the times of Mahêndra and Vâsiṣṭhiputra Śaktivarman seems to have been transferred further north to Sârapalli and Simhapura after the Viṣṇukuṇḍins captured Piṣṭâpuram. This event probably took place in the first quarter of the VI Century.

c5.s5.23

c) The Chikakole plates (Ind. Ant. Vol. XIII., page 48) of Nandaprabhañjavarman issued from Sârapalli and

c5.s5.24

d) the Kômarti plates (Ep. Ind. Vol. IV., page 143) of Chandavarman issued from Simhapuram, have many points of resemblance; the phraseology of both these documents is almost the same; the seals bear the word "Pitṛbhaktah"; Nandaprabhañjana and Chandavarman are both of them called kings of Kalinga; and lastly, Simhapura, the capital of Chandavarman may be identified with Singupuram, a village neâr Chikakole where the plates of Nandaprabhañjana were discovered.

c5.s5.25

e) The Brihatprôṣṭha grant of Umâvarman, lord of Kalinga, issued from Simhapura (Ep. Ind., Vol. XII., page 4) surely belongs to the same group as the plates of Chikakole and Kômarti. It is impossible to say in what chronological order, Umâvarman, Nandaprabhañjana and Chandavarman reigned. Their epoch is also uncertain; they might possibly have reigned between 525 and 609 A. D.

c5.s5.26

f) Lastly, we have to mention the Sarabhavaram plates (Ep. Ind., Vol. XIII., page 104) for, this village where they were discovered is in the Gôdâvarî district and it is probably here that the Lord of Chikûra, whose name is not mentioned and who perhaps lived in the VI century, reigned. He was probably not a "king of Kalinga" but only a simple feudatory.

Linked texts (21)