Published in
(a) The reading Tirumala Rāghuvarāya in 11. 8-9 appears to be more correctly Tirumala Rāutarāya.
(b) The Editors have made a mistake here in making two different inscriptions of Nos. 20 and 21. Actually No. 21 is the beginning and, No. 20 the end, of one and the same record.
(c) The date of this record correctly read is
(d) For
(e) Again the Editors have made the mistake of treating Nos. 30 and 31 as two different inscriptions whereas they form only one record.
Digital edition of SII 4.651-658 by