The Dynasties of the Kanarese Districts of the Bombay Presidency from the Earliest Historical Times to the Musalman Conquest c8.s14.34.2

c8.s14.34.2

g., Ind. Ant. Vol. X. p. 252, text lines 31, 32), of the Kâdambas of Goa (e. g., Jour. Bo. Br. R. As. Soc. Vol. IX. p. 297, text line 17), of the Sindas of Yelburga (e. g., id. Vol. XI. p. 228, text line 40), of the Guttas of Guttal (e. g., P. S. and O.-C. Insers. No. 109, line 69), of the Pâṇḍyas of Noḷambavâḍi (e. g., id. No. 172, lines 32, 33), and of the Hoysaḷas of Dôrasamudra, before the time when they attained paramount sovereignty (e. g., id. No. 18, seventh side, lines 8, 9.) It will not be found always where I have used the word “ruling” in connection with these princes in the pages of this account,—for the reason that in many of the records the construction renders unnecessary the use of any such expression at all; but it occurs with sufficient frequency to show that it was the expression that would be used on any occasion on which it might be sought to define exactly their position and authority.—I have fourteen verified instances in which the same expression occurs, very exceptionally, in connection with paramount sovereigns; in the cases of Jayasiṃha II., Vikramâditya VI., Bijjaḷa, Sôvidêva, Vira-Baḷḷâḷa II., Narasimha II., and Narasimha III. (P. S. and O.-C. Insers. Nos. 155, 163, 164, 168, 171, 175, 186, 185, 147, 200, 233, 123, and 148; Mysore Inscriptions, pp. 146, 150, 163, 81, 139, 176, 169; 110, 7, 106, 217, 33, and 11; and Epigraphia Indica, Vol. III. p. 234, text line 52).