svasti. jayaty amala-bālendu-koṭi-prakāśa-daṁṣṭr̥otkaṭaṁ rasātala-ja-paṅkāṅkita-skandha-deśam ut-kesaraṁ jalālulita-ghoṇāgra-mukta-prabhañjanotsārita -dhvanaj-jaladhi-madhyopalabdhorvvi kola-rūpaṁ hareḥ. tad-anu jita-balavad-ari-gaja-mastaka-galita-sita-mauktika-cchuritas satyāśrayasya bāhur jjayati jagaj-janita-bahumānaḥ.

asti mānavya-sagotrāṇāṁ hārīti-putrāṇāṁ kauśikī-saṁvarddhitānāṁ mātr̥-gaṇābhiṣiktānāṁ svāmi-mahāsena-pādānuddhyātānāṁ culutkikīnām anvaye bahu-suvarṇṇakāśvamedha-pauṇḍarīka-vājapeyādi-yāgāvabhr̥tha-snāna-pavitrī-kr̥ta-śirasāṁ manu-nr̥ga-nahuṣa-yayāti-dhundhumārāmbarīṣa-dilīpa-nābhāga-pratimaḥ śrī-raṇavikrama-dvitīya-nāmā pulakeśi-vallabha-mamahārājas. tasya putraḥ para-gaja-ghana-paṭala-pavanaḥ śrī-parākrāmāparānkhyaḥ kīrttivarmmā. tasya putraḥ praddhvasta-prabala-śatru-mahimā himācalānukārī vipula-sthairyyonnatiḥ nata-parama-sāmanta-samupacaritaś carita-tapaś-caraṇaḥ bhr̥tya-labdha-prasādaḥ sādaram ivānanya-manasā vidhātrā vinirmmito mita-hita-viśada-satya-vacanopanyāso nyāsa iva jagatyās caryyāṇāṁ prathama-yuga-manuja-pati-muni-caritaḥ vijayī vimala-gagana-gata Iva śaradīndur ūupaśamita-sakala-jagad-asukhaḥ sāhasauaika-ratir aneka-cāturddanta-saṁgrāma-janita-vraṇāṅkāṅgatayā sva-bhuja-bala-labdha-raṇavikrāmākhyaḥ suhr̥d-avanaḥ dīnāndha-kr̥paṇa-samupabhujyamāna-vibhavaḥ pūrvvāparāmbu-nāthaḥ deva-dvija-guru-śūśrūṣaṇa-paraḥ parama-bhāgavataḥ prasabhābhimr̥ṣṭānya-rāja-śrīḥ śrī-satyāśraya-pr̥thivī-vallabha-mahārājaḥ sarvvān eva rāja-sāmanta-bhogika-viṣayapati-rāṣṭrakūṭa-grāmāyuktakādīn sammānayaty

astu vo viditam asmābhiḥ moṣiṇī-pathakāntarggataḥ Asikheṭaka-grāma-pratyāsanna-goviyāṇaka-grāmaḥ sarvva-rāja-kulādeya-sahitaḥ Acāṭa-bhaṭa-prāveśya ācandrārkkārṇṇava-kṣiti-sthiti-samakālīnaḥ bali-caru-vaiśvadevāgnihotra-kr̥riyā-pañca-mahā-yajñotsarppaṇārthaṁ girinagara-vinirggata-lohanagara-vāstavyāya sāvarṇṇi-sagotra-maitrāyanṇika-vārāhaka-sabrahmacāri-dāmadīkṣitāya Udakātisarggenṇa pratipāditaḥ.

yato ’smad-vaṁśyair anyair vvāgāmi-nr̥pati-bhoga-patibhir nnala-veṇu-kadalāsāraṁ saṁsāram upalabhya Udadhi-jala-vīcī-cañcalāṁś ca viṣayāṁn avanidhara-śikhara-kaṭaka-taṭa-lasita-salila-raya-gatvarañ ca jīvitam avagamya mahā-bhūta-paramāṇu-sthāsnu ca mahat-phalaṁ śarac-candra-kiraṇa-dhavalaṁ yaśo nirūpyāyam asmad-dāyo ’numantavyaḫ paripālayitavyaś ca. yo vājñāna-timira-paṭalāvr̥ta-matir ācchindyād ācchidyamānaṁ vānumodeta sa pañcabhir mmahā-pātakais saṁyuktaḥ syād. uktañ ca bhagavatā veda-vyāsena vyāsena.

ṣaṣṭiṁ varṣṣa-sahasrāṇi svargge tiṣṭhati bhūmidaḥ Ācchettā cānumantā ca tāny eva narake vaseT.. vindhyāṭavīṣv atoyāsu śuṣka-koṭara-vāsinaḥ kr̥ṣṇāhayo hi jāyante bhūmi-dāyaṁ haranti ye.. sva-dattāṁ para-dattāṁ vā yatnād rakṣa yudhiṣṭhira. mahīṁ mahīmatāṁ śreṣṭha dānāc chreyo ’nupālanaṁ.. bahubhir vvasudhā bhuktā rājabhis sagarādibhiḥ yasya yasya yadā bhūmais tasya tasya tadā phalaṁ.. yānīha dāridrya-bhayān narendrair ddhanāni dharmmāyatanī-kr̥tāni nirbhukta-vānta-pratimāni tāni ko nāma sādhuḥ punar ādadīta..

dvi-pañcāśadadhike śakābda-pañcake likhitaṁ tāmra-śāsanaM

-dhvanaj-jaladhi- -dhvaner jjaladhi- culutkikīnām culukitkikīnām Khare’s primary reading is culukikīnām, noting that the character he reads as ki could also be tki. It definitely looks like a ligature, with something resembling a t at regular height, and the k component is subscript. It may be tki, or possibly ṅka or kki. Khare does not comment on the weird form of the name. I suspect that this ligature may be aborted and perhaps even hammered out; I cannot tell without seeing the original, but plain culukīnām would be much closer to what we expect. pulakeśi- pulikeśi- In my scanned estampage there is no trace of an i over the l. Khare may be correct, but verifying his reading needs an autopsy. -mamahārājas -mamamahārājas The ma at the end of l8 is faint and squeezed into quite a small space. I believe this one may have been deleted already by the engraver, who at first tried to write ma here to fill up the space up to the margin, then realised it was too narrow and beat it out, starting again in the next line. -ghana-paṭala-pavanaḥ -ghana-paṭala-pavanaḥ These characters are conspicuously compressed, occupying about as much horizontal space as śrīraṇavikra above. There is no indication of a deleted earlier text here (though gha actually looks more like pha), but there must be something going on here. Also, la is a “northern” form with a short stem and a headmark; interestingly, the body is below the baseline, extending into the space below the preceding ṭa. This seems to be yet another measure to compress the text horizontally as far as possible. I see neither any trace of a visarga at the end, nor sufficient space for one. -praddhvasta -praddhvasta -śatru- If an u marker is present here, it is attached on the right-hand side of the ornamental extension of the subscript r, not at its usual place of attachment. śaradīndur ūupaśamita I fully endorse Khare's emendation (whereas PEM emends to śarad-indu-rūpa-śamita, and śaradīndu-rūpaḥ śamita is also conceivable and least invasive). Although inscribing rū instead of ru seems to be an unlikely mistake. I assume that the engraver was at least somewhat Sanskrit-literate, and he must have “emended” what he read as rupa to rūpa, without being aware of the context. -asukhaḥ -asukhaḥ The reading is clear in the facsimile with the exception of u, which is barely visible. The reason for Khare's hesitation may have been a short curving stroke within the space left around the binding hole. This is probably the top of an aborted kha: the engraver must have decided it was too close to the hole, and started the character again a bit to the right. sāhasauaika- sāhasaika- °āmbu °āmbudhi Khare's emendation is plausible, but since it is not essential, I prefer not to show it in the text. -kadalāsāraṁ -kadalosāraṁ lā has two vowel marks, both on top of the curve, both short and both bending to the right. Khare reads lo and neither emends nor comments. PEM types (and translates) dala-sāraṁ. Since lā was clearly intended, I assume the vowel mark is unusually placed and for some reason engraved twice. vaseT.. vaseT,, Neither the punctuation sign, nor a halanta T are visible in the scan. There is a long curving verticalish line in the space next to se, which I assume to be an ornamental extension of the vowel mark of the following vi. If this is so, then the halanta character and punctuation mark, if present, must be tiny. Perhaps more likely, the reading could be vase with or without a short vertical punctuation mark. vā This character is obscured by additional strokes/scratches; this may be damage, or perhaps a correction to or from something else. (Perhaps pa engraved by eyeskip and then corrected to vā?) -bhayān Khare suggests first bhiyā, second bhayān as plausible emendations. I prefer bhayān because omitting the final t of ablatives is quite a common tendency. PEM further proposes bhaye, which I find inferior. śakābda-pañcake śaktābda-pañcake Khare's editor suggests that śakābdaśata would be a better emendation. Indeed, śaka and śata were probably both intended to be present. With another alternative, śakaśatābda, eyeskip could explain the omission. Note that śakābda-śata-pañcake and likhitaṁ tāmra-śāsanam are both legitimate anuṣṭubh pādas, so it seems possible that the date was modelled on a different date that was actually versified in that metre. -śāsanaM -ṣśāsanam The unclear character is definitely not ṣā. It is a clear gā in the scan, and I assume that its cross-stroke was present in the original. It is also possible that the cross-stroke was indeed omitted, and Khare's text is a typo, where he had intended to read gā and emend to śā.

Greetings!

Victorious is He—well endowed with tusks gleaming like the tipThe simile is based on the resemblance of a tusk to the curved tip of the crescent moon. However, the alternative meaning “like a million immaculate crescent moons” did surely not escape the composer and would in my opinion have been the first interpretation occurring to an audience to the stanza – to be replaced subsequently in an aha! moment with the less straightforward, but in the context far more apt alternative sense. of an immaculate crescent moon, begrimed in the shoulder with mud originating from the netherworld rasātala, mane bristling—the boar form of Hari when he has just recovered the Earth from amidst the sea ebbing away in a thunderous riptide set off by a flick of His snout in the water.

After Him, victorious is the arm of Satyāśraya, studded with white pearlsPearls inside the skulls of elephants (here depicted as scattering while the heroic king butchers enemy elephants) are a common poetic convention, but it does seem to have a core of truth. Apparently, very old elephants can indeed have tiny, rounded pieces of ivory in the cavities at the root of their tusks, and these are valued as talismans. that slipped from the heads of the elephants of powerful vanquished foes, which has earned great respect throughout the world.

In the dynasty of the CulukisSee also the apparatus entry for this word in line 6. —who are of the Mānavya gotra, who are the sons of Hārīti, who were nourished by Kauśikī, who were anointed by the host of Mother Goddesses, who were deliberately appointed to kingship by the Lord Mahāsena, and whose heads have been hallowed through washing in the purificatory ablutions avabhr̥tha of sacrifices such as the Bahusuvarṇaka, the Aśvamedha, the Pauṇḍarīka and the VājapeyaSee the note in PEM’s translation for references on these sacrifices.—there is a king mahārāja Pulikeśi Vallabha, whose second name is His Majesty Raṇavikrama Bold in Battle, who takes after Manu, Nr̥ga, Nahuṣa, Yayāti, Dhundhumāra, Ambarīṣa, Dilīpa and Nābhāga. His son is Kīrtivarman, a gale to the shroud of clouds that are enemy elephants, whose other appellation is His Majesty Parākrama Courage. His son—who has eradicated the greatness of powerful enemies, who imitates the Himalayas in solidity and greatness, to whom the greatest of feudatories bow in service, who has followed vows of asceticism, who finds satisfaction in his underlings, who was, it seems, reverently designed by the Creator in utter concentration on the task, who utters words that are measured, beneficent, pure and true,Or, assuming amita instead of mita, “words that are immeasurably beneficient, pure and true.” a foundation as it were for the proper behaviour of all beings, who behaves like the royal sagesOr, “kings and sages.” But I take manujapati-muni as equivalent to rājarṣi. of the First Age, triumphant, who eases the troubles of all the world like the autumnal moon in a clear sky, who delights in daring alone, whose body is marked by scars acquired in battles with many elephants,I take cāturdanta to mean a descendant or relative of the four-tusked one, i.e. Airāvata. whereby he too has earned the name Raṇavikrama Bold in Battle by the strength of his own arms, who supports his friends, whose wealth is consumed by the destitute, the blind and the miserable, lord of the eastern and western water,Or, emending to ambudhi, “ocean.” bent on obeying gods, Brahmins and elders, supreme devotee of the Bhagavat Viṣṇu, who has forcefully rubbed out the glory śrī of other kings,Is there a suggestion of sexual rape here? I find the word abhimr̥ṣṭa unusual and feel that it may (also) mean “who has forcefully rubbed up against the Śrīs of other kings.” His Majesty Satyāśraya Pr̥thivīvallabha— sends his respects to each and every subordinate king rājan, vassal sāmanta, steward bhogika, governor viṣayapati, territorial overseer rāṣṭrakūṭa, village headman grāmāyuktaka and so on and informs them as follows:

Let it be known to you that with a ceremonial pouring of water we have presented the village Goviyāṇaka in the vicinity of Asikheṭaka village in the Moṣiṇī district pathaka —along with all its dues payable to the royal household, as a perpetual holding inaccessible to armsmen bhaṭa and officers cāṭa, for as long as the moon, sun, ocean and earth remain, as an endowment for the offering of the five great sacrifices, viz. the rites kriyā of Bali, Caru, Vaiśvadeva and AgnihotraAs I interpret the text, only four rites are explicitly named. According to Sircar s.v., the pañcamahāyajña comprises bali, caru, vaiśvadeva, agnihotra and atithi. PEM interprets kriyā to mean a particular fifth sacrifice, noting that according to the editor it is equivalent to kratu. (I could not find such a statement in Khare’s article.) See also PEM’s notes for references on these sacrifices.— to Dāmadīkṣita, who is of the Sāvarṇi gotra and a follower of the Maitrāyaṇika and Vārāhaka doctrines, and who hails from Girinagara and resides in Lohanagara.

Hence, future kings and territorial lords bhogapati belonging to our dynasty or otherwise— perceiving that material existence saṁsāra is as insubstantial as wild cane, bamboo or plantain stem,The reason these plants are named here may be that all have stems that are either hollow or herbaceous. Alternatively, what makes them appropriate may be that they, like the body, perish after flowering; compare 252.9ab, yathā ca veṇuḥ kadalī nalo vā phalanty abhāvāya na bhūtaye ’’tmanaḥ. understanding that the objects of senses viṣaya are as fickle as the waves on the water of the ocean and that life is as quick to depart as a rush of water splashing off the edge of a cliff on a mountaintop, and bearing in mind on the other hand that a reputation bright like the rays of the autumnal moon yields great fruit and is as permanent as the atoms of the great elements mahābhūta, —should respect and uphold this grant of ours. But if one whose mind is enshrouded in a veil of the darkness of ignorance should seize it or condone its being seized, the five great sins shall be visited upon him. So too did the reverend Vyāsa, the redactor vyāsa of the Vedas speak:

A donor of land stays in heaven for sixty millennia, while a seizer of granted land and a condoner of such seizure shall reside in hell for just as many.

Those who usurp a land grant will be born as black adders dwelling in dry holes in the waterless wilderness of the Vindhyas.

O Yudhiṣṭhira, diligently preserve land that has been donated, whether by yourself or another. O best of land-possessors, preserving a grant is superior to making a grant.

Many kings, beginning with Sagara, have enjoyed the bountiful land. Whosoever at any time owns the land, the fruit reward accrued of granting it belongs to him at that time.

Whatever assets in this world kings have turned into foundations of moral order dharma for fear of poverty in the transcendent world are like something that has been eaten and vomited—what decent man would partake of them again?

This copper edict was written in the Śaka year five hundred and fifty-two.The text actually inscribed lacks a word for “hundred” but one was definitely intended. See also the apparatus entry for the date.

Om ! prospérité !

Ses défenses brillantes la grandissent comme un croissant de jeune lune immaculée, la boue du Rasātala souille ses épaules, la crinière dressée, du milieu de l’océan elle recueille la terre, du bout de son groin, frôlant l’eau, elle libère une tempête dont l’écho remonte : victorieuse est la forme de sanglier que revêt Hari!

après cela, serti de perles blanches tombées de la têtes des éléphants des puissants ennemis vaincus, victorieux est le bras de Satyāśraya, qui fait naître un grand respect dans le monde !

Il y eut, dans la descendance des Calukya, du même gotra que les descendants de Manu, fils de Hārīti, nourris par Kauśikī, consacrés par la troupe des Mères, méditant aux pieds du seigneur Mahāsena, eux dont les têtes furent lavées par le bain purificatoire de nombreux sacrifices, à commencer par le suvarṇaka,Ce terme désigne sans doute une donation d’or émise par le roi. Il est mentionné sous la variante bahusuvarṇa aussi in insc. nos 8 et 9. Kane ne le répertorie pas dans les mahādāna. l’aśvamedha, le pauṇḍarīka et le vājapeya,Sur ces sacrifices cf. P.V. Kane, 1974, II, part. II : le vājapeya, p. 1206-7 : Āp. XVIII. 1.4 ; l’aśvamedha, p. 1228-39 : Śat. Br. XIII. 1-5, Tai. Br. III. 8-9 ; le pauṇḍarīka, p. 839 : Śat. Br. X. Sacrifices mentionnés aussi in insc. nos 8 (pour les vājapeya et pauṇḍarīka), 20 (pour le pauṇḍarīka). L’aśvamedha est mentionné dans presque toutes les insc. du corpus. un grand roi semblable à Manu, Nr̥ga, Nahūṣa, Yayāti, Dhundhumāra, Ambarīṣa, Dilīpa et Nābhāga : Pulikeśin Vallabha, portant comme second nom celui de l’illustre Raṇa Vikrama, vent qui disperse la masse des nuages que sont les éléphants ennemis, nommé aussi l’illustre Parākrāma. Il eut pour fils Kīrtivarman, dont la grandeur détruit les puissants ennemis, imitateur du mont Himālaya, qui possède une grande fermeté et noblesse, honoré par les plus grands feudataires, inclinés devant lui, qui pratique l’ascèse, dont les serviteurs gagnent la faveur, créé par le créateur qui le dota d’un esprit sans pareil, avec respect semble-t-il, qui, proférant des paroles modérées, vertueuses, pures et sincères, est pareil à l’établissement des conduites du monde,Le roi est comparé à Manu, créé par Brahmā, premier ordonnateur de la société humaine. qui se comporte en sage, seigneur des hommes du Premier Age, victorieux, qui paraît êtres venu du ciel, dont la beauté de lune automnale apaise toutes les souffrances de l’univers, dont le seul plaisir est l’audace, qui a gagné par la force de son bras le nom de Raṇa Vikrama, ses membres étant marqués par les callosités nées des nombreux combats au cours desquels il a chevauché l’Eléphant aux Quatre Défenses,Airāvata. dont l’orgueil et la puissance se marient avec la compassion envers les aveugles et les affligés, maître des océans de l’est et de l’ouest, voué à l’obéissance aux dieux, aux deux-fois nés et aux sages, excellent dévôt du Bienheureux,Bouddha. [DB: why?] qui efface avec force la fortune des autres rois, Satyāśraya Pr̥thivī Vallabha, grand roi, s’adresse avec respect aux rois, aux feudataires, aux bhogika,chefs de district. aux chefs des viṣaya,chefs de circonscriptions. aux rāṣṭrakūṭa,chefs de plusieurs villages. à tous les chefs de villages, etc., de même qu’à tous les autres :

que ceci soit connu de vous : Nous avons fait don, après avoir versé de l’eau, dans le voisinage du village d’Asikheṭaka, inclus dans le pathakagroupe de villages. de Moṣiṇī, du village de Goviyāṇaka, avec tous les revenus de la famille royale, village dont l’entrée est interdite aux troupes régulières et irrégulières, aussi longtemps que subsisteront la lune, le soleil, l’océan et la terre, pour lui permettre d’accomplir des cinq grands sacrifices, à savoir le bali, le caru, le vaiśvadeva,Sur ces sacrifices, cf. insc. n°2. Le bali, le caru et le vaiśvadeva sont aussi mentionnés in insc. nos 2 et 10. l’agnihotra,Sur l’agnihotra, sacrifice védique consistant en une offrande de lait bouilli, cf. Gaut. III 20 et P.V. Kane, 1974, II, part. II, p. 998-1001. Sacrifice mentionné aussi in insc. n° 10. le kriyā,Selon l’éditeur, sans doute équivalent du kratu. Seule occurrence de ce terme dans notre corpus. Sur le kratu, cf. Ait. Br. ŚBr. xi, Āśv Śr. &c., références données in Monier-Williams. à Dāmādīkṣita, qui réside à Lohanagara, à l’extérieur de Girinagara, du même gotra que Sāvarṇi, qui est disciple des écoles de Maitrāyaṇika et de Vārāhaka. »

Ainsi, les rois de notre lignée, ou les autres souverains et gouverneurs de bhoga à venir, ayant compris que le cycle des existences qui a la solidité d’un pétal de roseau, et que les objets des sens sont aussi instables que les vagues de l’océan,Même idée in insc. n°10. ayant perçu que la vie est périssable comme le torrent surgissant, depuis le sommet, le flanc pentu, ayant saisi que la gloire, ce grand fruit, splendide rayon de lune automnal, est aussi permanent qu’un atome par rapport aux éléments, doivent approuver et défendre ce don qui vient de nous. Que celui qui, l’esprit obscurci par le voile ténébreux de l’ignorance, transgresse cet édit, ou approuve qu’il soit transgressé, soit lié aux cinq grands crimes, le bienheureux Vyāsa qui a exposé les Veda, l’a dit.

Le donateur de la terre séjourne soixante mille ans dans le ciel, Celui qui la prend et qui le permet demeure aussi longtemps en enfer !

Habitant des grottes arides dans les forêts sans eau du Vindhya, ceux qui s’emparent d’une donation de terre renaissent comme serpents noirs.

Qu’elle soit donnée par toi ou par un autre, ô Yudhiṣṭhira, protège avec force cette terre ! ô meilleur des possesseurs de la terre, la préservation est plus grande que le don.

Beaucoup de rois ont joui de la terre, à commencer par Sagara, celui qui possède la terre en possède le fruit.

Les richesses qu’en ce monde des rois, par crainte de la pauvreté, ont transformées en réceptacles du dharma, pareilles à la nourriture mangée puis régurgitée, quel homme de bien les reprendrait ?

Cet édit de cuivre a été gravé en 552 de l’ère śaka.

These plates were discussed prior to their publication by Khare (), particularly as regards their implications on the history of the war between Harṣa and Polekeśi(e.g. 601-603).

Stanza 1 is a samacatuṣpadī of 17 syllables (atyaṣṭi), with the quarters following this prosodic pattern: - + - - - + + - + + - + - + + - = (ja sa ra ra ya la ga). Khare admits to not knowing this metre and remarks on its similarity to pr̥thvī (also 17 syllables, - + - - - + - + : - - - + - + + - = with the first 6 and last 7 syllables having the same scansion). The metre is not in Apte’s appendix. Note compound straddling cd pāda boundary in a long metre. (Reminds me of v7 in the Allahabad pillar of Samudragupta, where the same thing happens in pr̥thvī, and the topic is also a torrent of water - I think both are quite deliberate enjambements.)

Khare supplies r after -onnati but I prefer to supply a visarga in spite of standard sandhi requirements; if an r had been intended, then the following n would have been doubled.

Likewise, in l11 Khare emends to caraṇo, l13 to carito, l15 to avano. I feel vindicated by the clear -nāthaḥ deva in l16.

As above, I prefer to insert visargas instead of restoring standard sandhi. Khare emends to asmābhir moṣiṇī and -antarggato ‘sikheṭaka.

Most of plate 3(recto) is faint in the facsimile, or at least in the scan; many characters are completely indistinct. I follow Khare's readings here. Of these, the following may be problematic: l30, ḫ pa (nothing of this character is discernible, and this is the only ḫ in the text, compare sādhuḥ punar in l36); l31, vaseT,, (noted in the apparatus); l32, vā (noted in apparatus); l35, rddhanāni (perhaps rddānāni?); l35, nirbhukta (looks like just nibhukta).

Edited by Ganesh Hari Khare () with estampages but without translation. Khare had also edited the inscription earlier, published in Marathi in “Sources of the Medieval History of the Deccan” vol. I. p. 1ff. Not traced; not sure if the entire book is in Marathi or only parts of it. It was apparently published in 3 vols in Pune, 1930 to 1949; the Marathi title may be दक्खनच्या मध्यकालीन इतिहासाची साधने. The present edition by Dániel Balogh is based on a collation of Khare's edition with the published facsimile.