Ancient Indian Colonies in the Far East (Vol. I: Champa; Vol. II: Suvarnadvipa) v1.c9.s72: No. 83. An Thuan Stelae Inscription of Jaya Indravarman IV

Ancient Indian Colonies in the Far East (Vol. I: Champā; Vol. II: Suvarṇadvīpa) v1.c9.s72

Language: English

No. 83. An Thuan Stelae Inscription of Jaya Indravarman IV

v1.c9.s72.2

The Sanskrit portion of the inscription was edited by M. Bergaigne (Corpus No. XXXIII, p. 286) and the Cham portion by Aymonier (J. A. 1891 [1] pp. 45-46).

The inscription is engraved on the two faces of a stelae found at An Thuan in the district of Binh Dinh. In addition to syllable om there are two lines in Sanskrit on one face and three lines in Cham on the other face. The Sanskrit portion contains a verse in Indravajrā. The text shows already the beginning of the effect of barbarian influence on Sanskrit.

v1.c9.s72.4

The Sanskrit portion contains an invocation to Śiva. The Cham portion refers to the gifts of slaves and goods made by king Śrī Jaya Indravarmadeva of Grāmapura to the goddess of the kingdom (pu Nagara).

v1.c9.s72.5

ओम्

v1.c9.s72.6

स्वस्ति स्वभावप्रविभूति भूपो स्वस्ति प्रभावप्रतिमे शिवोमे स्वस्ति प्रजा¹ से² अवतान्तु ये ते स्वस्तिष्टदाशा³नृभिराश्रिते वः ॥

v1.c9.s72.7

TRANSLATION.

v1.c9.s72.8

Hail! magnificent is the king by nature! Hail! powerful are the images of Śiva and Umā; Hail! all my subjects and slaves, may you be protected by Śiva and Umā, whose protection is ever sought by mankind.

v1.c9.s72.9

No. 84.

v1.c9.s72.10

Myson Pillar Inscription dated 1125 Ś.

v1.c9.s72.11

The inscription was edited by M. Finot (B. E. F., Vol. IV, p. 970, No. XXIV, B., C.). It was engraved on two faces of the same pillar which contains No. 81, and contains 38 lines of writing besides the invocation. The language is Cham.

v1.c9.s72.12

The inscription consists of two parts. The first refers to king Sūryavarman, and the second to a yuvarāja named Managaha on Dhanapati. But the two parts are written consecutively and form one single narrative, viz., the fight against Cambodge. The object of the inscription is to record the installation of an image of Śiva by the yuvarāja in śaka 1125 (=1203 A. D.).

v1.c9.s72.13

1. Read ‘प्रजा’.
2. Read ‘मे’.
3. Read ‘दाशा’.

v1.c9.s72.14

Salutation to Śiva.

v1.c9.s72.15

There is a king, Śrī Sūryavarmadeva, prince Śrī Vidyānandana, of Tumprauk-vijaya. The king practised the Mahāyāna dharma following the instructions of true knowledge. In his early youth, in the śaka year denoted by ‘sea-sky-moon-moon’ i. e. 1104, he went to Cambodge. The king of Cambodge, seeing him possessed of all the 33 marks, received him favourably and taught him, like a prince, all the various branches of knowledge, and instructed him in various branches of military science. During his stay at Cambodge, a dependent town of Cambodge called Malyaṅ, inhabited by a multitude of bad men, revolted against the king of Cambodge. The latter seeing the prince well versed in arms, ordered him to lead the Cambodian troops and take the town of Malyaṅ. He did all that the king of Cambodge desired. The latter, pleased at his valour, conferred on him the dignity of yuvarāja, and gave him all the pleasures and the good things which could be found in the kingdom of Cambodge.

v1.c9.s72.16

In śaka ‘two moon-moon-moon’ (1112) the king Śrī Jaya Indravarmadeva on Vatuv made war against the king of Cambodge. The latter sent the prince at the head of Cambodian troops in order to take Vijaya and defeat the king Jaya Indravarman on Vatuv. He captured the king and had him conducted to Cambodge by the Cambodian troops. He proclaimed Sūrya Jayavarmadeva prince In, brother-in-law of the king of Cambodge, as king of the city of Vijaya. Then he returned and reigned at Rājapura in Panrāṅ. During his reign at Rājapura a number of pirates revolted against him. He fought with them, drove them back and defeated them all.

v1.c9.s72.17

Śrī Sūryavarman, prince In, who had been proclaimed king in the kingdom of Vijaya, was driven away by prince Rasupati and returned to Cambodge. The prince Rasupati reigned in the kingdom of Vijaya under the name of Śrī Jaya Indravarmadeva.

v1.c9.s72.18

In śaka ‘sea-moon-moon-moon’ i. e. 1114, the king of Cambodge sent the Cambodian generals with Śrī Jaya Indravarman on Vatuv. He met the prince at Rājapura. The prince led the Cambodian troops with Jaya Indravarman; he took Vijaya, defeated and killed Jaya Indravarman cei Rasupati and ruled over Vijaya. The same year Jaya Indravarman on Vatuv fled from the Cambodgians and went to Amarāvatī. He revolted and raised troops in different districts at Amarāvatī, Ulik, Vvyar, Jriy and Traik. He went to take Vijaya. The prince led the troops and pursued (?) Jaya Indravarman on Vatuv as far as Yān Bharuv-Vijaya; he gave him battle, vanquished him, compelled him to fall back on Traik, and there captured him and put him to death. Henceforth the prince ruled without opposition.

v1.c9.s72.19

In śaka ‘five-moon-moon-moon’ i. e. 1115, the Cambodgians……………the dwellings, took seven……………took eight…………… The prince fought with the Cambodgians and vanquished them.

v1.c9.s72.20

In śaka ‘six-moon-moon-moon’ i. e. 1116, the king of Cambodge sent a large number of Cambodian generals, with all sorts of arms. They came to fight with the prince. The latter fought at Jai Ramya-Vijaya and vanquished the generals of the Cambodian army…………… After having fought with them, the prince marched to Amarāvatī. He re-erected all the houses; he constructed the house called Śrī Heruka-harmya; he made a kośa of gold; he gave to Śrīśanabhadreśvara a ṣaṇmukha (six-faces) weighing 510 thei; he gave a golden suvarṇa weighing 5 thil; he gave a kanāp of Simhapura to Śrīśanabhadreśvara for the sake of acquiring merit both in this world and in the other.

v1.c9.s72.21

I, yuvarāja, of illustrious birth, called Managaḥna oṅ Dhanapati, I . . . . . rule (?) over Champā, and I am glorious. I have re-consecrated Śiva, who is Śrīśana, and I worship him piously. I have given him riches and the slaves in śaka 1125 (the expression ‘bhūtaḥ pakṣa 66 ka yaḥ’ is unintelligible; bhūta-pakṣa denotes 25 and I therefore take the date as 1125; 66 is probably a misreading for 11. M. Finot takes the date doubtfully as 1166).