The Dynasties of the Kanarese Districts of the Bombay Presidency from the Earliest Historical Times to the Musalman Conquest c8.s14.72

c8.s14.72

³ I said (*Ind. Ant.* Vol. XVI. p. 19) that there is an inscription at Âlûr in the Gadag tâluka, which, if the copy (*Carn.-Désa Inscrs.* Vol. I. p. 38) is correct, speaks of Vikramâditya V. as the son of Satyâśraya. The record is that of A.D. 1010-11, of the reign of Vikramâditya V. And I find, from an ink-impression, that the copy is not correct. The word used is *magaḷ*, 'daughter,' applying to the wife of Iriva-Noḷambâdhirâja; not *magam*, 'son,' as given in the copy, applying to Vikramâditya V. But I find that the statement is certainly made in an inscription at Harihar (*P. S. and O.-C. Insérs.* No. 116; *Mysore Inscriptions*, p. 68), where the text (line 17) runs *eṇe-śaurj-ônnatan-âda Tailapan=apatyam Sattimam tam-nṛipâḷana putram vibhu-Vikramam tad-anujam samd=Ayyanam, &c.* And there is also an inscription at the temple of Śambhu-Mahâdêva at Diggâvi in the Nizâm's Dominions (*Carn.-Désa Inscrs.* Vol. I. p. 169), which seems to repeat the statement; the words, according to the transcript, are *ghana-śaurj-âgraṇi-Tûla-bhûbhuja-sutam Satyâśrayam tan-nṛipâḷana putram vibhu-Vikramam tad-anujam sand=Ayyaṇam, &c.*