This inscription and No. 48 are written continuously, the first few words of No. 48 occupying the end of line 4 of No. 47. At the beginning of No. 47 it is stated that both inscriptions are copies of earlier stone inscriptions, and that these copies were made when the central shrine of the temple was pulled down. This is the reason why the alphabets of Nos. 47 and 48 are more developed than that of No. 46, though No. 46 records a grant by a queen of the same king as Nos. 47 and 48. In No. 47 she bears the title Vāṇamahādēvī, i.e. ‘the great queen of the Bāṇa (king).’ As the queen mentioned in No. 46, she is stated to have been the consort of the Bāṇa king Vāṇavidyādhara. She was the daughter of Pratipati-Araiyar, the son of Śivamahārāja-Perumāṉaḍigaḷ, who had the surnames Śrīnātha and Kokuṉi.In No. 48, text line 2, this word appears as Goguṉidha[r]ma, evidently a misreading of the copyist for Koṅguṇivarman. This word is a variant or a corruption of Koṅguṇi, the title of the Western Gaṅga kings,See Ep. Ind. Vol. III. p. 164, note 3. and the name Pratipati is a corruption or, more probably, a misreading of the copyist for Pṛithvīpati. Hence I would identify Pratipati, the son of Śivamahārāja, with the Western Gaṅga king Pṛithivīpati I., who was the son of ŚivamāraThis name is perhaps a corruption of Śivamārāja, the Tamil form of Śivamahārāja. and the contemporary of the Rāshṭrakūṭa king Amōghavarsha I.Above, Vol. II. p. 380 f. and of the Gaṅga-Pallava king Vijaya-Nṛipatuṅgavikramavarman.Ep. Ind. Vol. IV. p. 182. The name of the residence of Śivamahārāja was Kuṇilapura according to No. 47, and Nipuṇilapura according to No. 48. Both forms of the word are clearly misreadings of the engraver for Kuvaḷālapura, the modern Kōlār, which was the traditional capital of the Gaṅga family.See above, Vol. II. p. 380, note 7, and Ep. Ind. Vol. IV. p. 200, note 1.

The Udayēndiram plates of Vikramāditya II. mention a Bāṇa chief named Bāṇavidyādhara. This person must be distinct from the Vāṇavidyādhara of the subjoined inscription, because he stood two generations before Vikramāditya I., the contemporary of Vijaya-NandivikramavarmanSee page 90 above. and consequently of Amōghavarsha I.,See page 92 above. while Vāṇavidyādhara was the son-in-law of Pṛithivīpati I., another contemporary of Amōghavarsha I. An inscription at Gūlgānpode opens with a Sanskrit verse which attributes to the Bāṇa king Vikramāditya-Jayamēru the surname of Bāṇavidyādhara.Ind. Ant. Vol. X. p. 39, No. II. Dr. FleetI am again quoting from a manuscript which he has kindly sent to me; see above, p. 92, note 8. proposes to identify this Vikramāditya with the Vikramāditya I. of the Udayēndiram plates and with the Vāṇavidyādhara of the subjoined inscription. This identification would suit the fact that Vāṇavidyādhara's queen was the daughter of Pṛithivīpati I.