Pāmulavāka plates of Vijayāditya VII Encoding Dániel Balogh intellectual authorship of edition Dániel Balogh DHARMA Berlin DHARMA_INSVengiCalukya00107

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported Licence. To view a copy of the licence, visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ or send a letter to Creative Commons, 444 Castro Street, Suite 900, Mountain View, California, 94041, USA.

Copyright (c) 2019-2025 by Dániel Balogh.

 2019-2025 DHARMAbase

Anusvāras are small dots usually at median height after the character to which they belong. Original punctuation marks are straight verticals with a small serif at the top. Rare initial Ai occurs in line 7 and would not be distinguishable from ṣo if deprived of context. When a superscript repha is combined with a dependent ā, this often differs only very slightly or not at all from the superscript repha without ā, and has been read with the benefit of doubt unless very clearly incorrect. When a superscript repha is combined with a dependent i, the repha is occasionally added on the right of the vowel marker, but more commonly integrated into it as a slight jaggedness to the lower right portion. In this latter form it is not always clearly perceptible and has, again, been read with benefit of the doubt where expected.

The project DHARMA has received funding from the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (grant agreement no 809994).

Public URIs with the prefix bib to point to a Zotero Group Library named ERC-DHARMA whose data are open to the public.

Internal URIs using the part prefix to point to person elements in the DHARMA_IdListMembers_v01.xml file.

 Initial encoding of the file
śrī-dhāmnaḥ puruṣottamasya mahato nārāyaṇasya prabhor nnābhī-paṁkaruhād babhūva jagatas sraṣṭā svayaṁbhūs tataḥ| jajñe mānasa-sūnur atrir iti yas tasmān muner atritas somo vaṁśa-karas sudhāṁsśur uditaḥ śrīkaṁṭha-cūḍāmaṇiḥ| tasmād āsīt sudhā-sūter bbudho budha-nutas tataḥ jaātaḥ purūravā nāma cakravarttī sa-vikramaḥ|

tasmād āyur. Āyuṣo nahuṣaḥ| nahuṣād yayātiś cakravartti-vaṁśa-karttā| tataḥ prācīśaḥ. praācīśāt sainyayātiḥ. sainyayāter hayapatiḥ| hayapates sārvvabhaumaḥ. sārvvabhaumāj jayasenaḥ. jayasaenān mahābhaumaḥ. mahābhaumād aiśānakaḥ| Aiśānakāt krodhānanaḥ. krodhānanād devakiḥ|devake| ricukaḥdevaker r̥bhukaḥ. ricukādr̥bhukād r̥kṣakaḥ| rir̥kṣakān matinvaraḥ satra-yāga-yājī sarasvatī-nadī-nāthaḥ| tataḥ kārtyāyanaḥ| kārtyāyanān nīlaḥ. nīlād duṣyantaḥ. tat-sutaḥ|

Āryyā| gaṁgoā-yuamunā-tiīre ya@@@ d avicchi{ṁ}nnaṁ nikhāya yūpān kramaśaḥ| SR emends unnecessarily to nidhāya kr̥tvā tadh!thāśvamedhān nāma mahā-karmma-bharata I ti yo +’labhata{ḥ} SR tadāśvamedhān tato bharatād bhūmanyuḥ| bhūmanyos suhotraḥ. suhotrād dhastī. hasti no virocanaḥ| vi[+ro]canād ajamīlaḥ. Ajamīlā{|}t saṁvaraṇaḥ| saṁvaraṇasya tapana-su tāyās tapa{na}tyāś ca sudhanvā| sudhanvanaḥ{|} parikṣiT. parikṣito bhīmasenaḥ. bhīmasenāt pradīpanaḥ. pradīpanā¿ś c?⟨c ch⟩aṁtanuḥ. śaṁtanor vvicitravīryyaḥ| vvicitra vīryyāt pāṇḍu-rājaḥ| Āryyā| upagīti putrās tasya ca dharmmaja-bhīmārjjuna-nakula -sahadevāḥ paṁcendriyavaT paṁca syur vviṣaya-grāhiṇas tatra| vr̥ttaṁ| śārdūlavikrīḍita yenādaāhi viji tya k!khāṇḍavam atho gāṇḍīvinā vajriṇaḥ!ṁ yuddhe pāśupatāstram aṁdhaka-ripoś cālābhi dai tyān bahūn indrārddhāsanam adhyarohi jayinā| yat kālikeyādikān hatvā svairam akāri P1020132 vaṁśa-vipina-(c)chedaḥ kurūṇāṁ vibhoḥ| tato +’rjjunād abhimanyuḥ| [+Abhima]nyoḥ parikṣiT| parikṣito SR: -vipinaś chedaḥ janamejayaḥ| janamejayāt kṣemukaḥ. kṣemukān naravāhanaḥ| naravāhanā[ś c!c ch]atānīkaḥ. śatānīkād udayaṇ!naḥ| tataḥ paraṁ tat-prabhr̥ti¿s?⟨ṣ⟩v avicchinna-santāneṣv ayodhyā-siṁhāsanāsī neṣv ekānna-ṣaṣṭi-cakrava(r)ttiṣu gateṣu tad-vaṁśyo vijayādityo [AC?bhī/PCnā]ma rājaā vi jigīṣayā dakṣiṇāpathaṁ gatvā trilocana-pallavam adhikṣipya daiva-durīhā!a yā lokāntaram a(ga)maT| tasmin saṁkule purohitena sārddham antarvvatnī tasya mahādevī muḍivemu nāmāgrahāraṁ upagamya tad-vāstavyena viṣṇubhaṭṭa-somayājinā duhi t[ta!r̥]-nirvviśeṣam abhirakṣitā satī nandana+ṁ viṣṇuvarddhanan nāma prasūya| tasya ca kumārakasya maā navya-sagotra-hārīti-putra-dvipakṣa-gotra-kramocitāni karmmāṇi kārayitvā tam avarddhaya T. sa ca mātrā vidita-vr̥ttāntas san nirggatya calukya-girau nandāṁ bhagavatīṁ gaurīm ārādhya ku P1020126 māra-nārāyaṇa-mātr̥-gaṇān saṁtt!tarppya śvetātapatraika-śaṁkha-paṁca-mahāśabda-pā li-kaetana-pratiḍ!ḍhakkā-varāha-lāṁc!chana-piṁc!cha-kunta-siṁhāsana-makara-toraṇa-kanaka-da ṇḍa-gaṁgā-yamunādīni sva-kula-kramāgatāni [+ni]kṣiptānīva tat-sāṁb!mrājya-cihnāni sa mādāya kaḍaṁba-gaṁgādi-bhūmipān nirjitya setu-narmmadā-madhyaṁ sārddha-sapta-lakṣā!aṁ dakṣiṇāpathaṁ pālayām āsa| ślokaṁ| anuṣṭubh tasyāsīd vijayādityo viṣṇuvi!a rddhana-bhūpateḥ pallavānvaya-jātāyā mahādevyāś ca nandanaḥ| tat-sutaḥ po lakeśi-vallabhaḥ| tat-putraḥ kī(r)ttivarmmā. tasya tanayaḥ| svasti. śrīmatāṁ sakala-bhuva na-saṁstūyamāna-mānavya-sagotrāṇāṁ hārīti-putrāṇāṁ kauśikī-vara-prasāda-labdha -rājyānāṁ mātr̥-gaṇa-paripālitānā+ṁ svaāmi-[ADD BELOW WITH ÷ MARK ABOVE ma]hāsena-pādānudhyātānāṁ bhagavan-nārā yaṇa-prasāda-samāsaādita-vara-vā!arāha-lāṁc!chanekṣaṇa-kṣaṇa-vaśīkr̥tārāti-maṇḍa P1020121 lānām aśvamedhāvabhr̥t!tha-snāna-pavitrī[ADD BELOWkr̥]ta-vapuṣāṁ cālukyānāṁ kulam alaṁka [+ri]ṣṇos satyāśraya-vallabhendrasya bhrātā kubja-viṣṇuvarddhano +’ṣṭādaśa varṣāṇi veṁgi-deśam a pālayaT| tad-ātmajo jayasiṁgh!ha-vallabhaḥ trayastriṁśataṁ| tad-anujendrarājas sa pta dināni| tat-suto viṣṇuvarddhano v!nava| tat-sū[+nu]r mmaṁgi-yuvarājaḥ paṁcavi+ṁśatiṁ| tat-putro jayasiṁgh!ha-vallabhas trayodaśa| tad-avarajaḥ kokkiliṣ v!ṣan!ṇ māsāN| tasya jyeṣṭho bhrātā viṣṇuvarddhanas tam uccāṭya saptatriṁśataṁ| tat-putro vijayāditya-bhaṭṭaā rako +’ṣṭaādaśa| ta[d-a!t-ta]nujo viṣṇuvarddhanaṣ (ṣ)a[+ṭ]triṁśataṁ| tat-sūnur vvijayāditya-narendra-mr̥garāja ś cāṣṭacatvāriṁśataṁ| tat-sutaḥ kali-viṣṇuvarddhano +’rddhyarddha-varṣaṁ| tat-suto guṇaga-vijayādityaś catu ścatvāriṁśataṁ| tad-bhrātur vvikramāditya-bhūpates tanayaś cālukya-bhīmas triṁśataṁ| tat-sutaḥ koll!!ebigaṇḍa-vijayādityaḥ ṣaṇ māsāN. tat-sūnur ammarājas sapta varṣāṇi| tat-sutaṁ vija P1020158 yādityaṁ bālam uccāṭya tāḍapo māsam ekaṁ| taṁ jitvā yudhi cālukya-bhīma-tana SR at end of 50: tamna em tana; probably intended for taṁna, reading a dot (which I deem to be random) as an anusvāra yo vikramāditya Ekādaśa māsāN| tat-tāḍapa-rāja-suto yuddhamalla{ḥ}s sapta varṣāṇi indravajrā taṁ Yuddhamalla+ṁ pa{ṁ}rihr̥tya deśāt piṣṭvetareṣām api śātravān!ṇāṁ kṣmām ammarājānuja-rā ja-bhīmo bhīmas samā dvādaśa rakṣati sma| anuṣṭubh ti!at-sūnur vvinatārātir ammarājo nr̥pāgraṇīḥ paṁcaviṁśati varṣāṇi veṁgī-bhuvam apālayaT| gīti dvaimāturo 3’mma-nr̥pater ddā na-nr̥po rāja-bhīma-nr̥pa-tanayaḥ vidyā-kalāpa-caturaḥ ca[+tu]ranta-dharām a caturaḥ SR bhaturaḥ em. caturaḥ ca[+tu]ranta-dharām SE carantadarām pāt samās tisraḥ| anuṣṭubh Anu dānārnn!ṇṇavād āsī+d daiva-duśceṣṭayā tataḥ saptaviṁśati varṣā ṇi veṁg!!i-mahir anāyi!akā| indravajrā Atrāntare dāna-narendra-sūnuḥ śrī-śaktivarmmā sura-rāṭ-sadharmmaā yaś śauryya-śaktyā vinihatya śatrūn sa dvādaśābdān samarakṣad urvvīM| upendravajrā tasyānujanmā [+ji]ta-śa trur urvvīṁ SR taśa/tr̥rurvvīṁ em. talasa, can’t interpret saṁvatsarān pālayati sma sapta nirasta-sapta-vyasanaḥ pratāpī bhūpā P1020162 graṇ(īr) mmummadi-bhīma-bhūpaḥ| anuṣṭubh tasya mummadi-bhīmasya sutaḥ kr̥ta-matir mmahā|!N| rājarājāhvayo rājā SR: rājād, with a footnote number without an accompanying note dvaādaśābdān dhā!arām apāT| āryāgīti taṁ rājarāja{ṁ}-d!nr̥patiṁ nirddhāṭya bhuvaḥ prasahya vijayādityaḥ| vimalāditya-+tanūjaḥ [ADD BELOW WITH OBELOS MARK ABOVEta]sya dvaimāturo +’grahīd ya!o rājyaṁ vimalāditya-+tanūjaḥ tasya … yo rājyaṁ My emendation results in a metrically correct 32-mora hemistich, making the stanza an āryāgīti. SR’s footnote suggests reading the inserted ta after vimalāditya (instead of supplying another ta there), so his emended text is vimalāditya-tanūjasya dvaimāturo, which is prosodically inappropriate. He further emends grahīd ya rājyaṁ to grahīd rājyaṁ. Suppressing yo in combination with my earlier emendation would result in a prosodically correct 30-mora line (and thus the rare but attested vallarī metre), but I find that emendation too invasive, since it involves reading a single akṣara, drā, instead of two inscribed akṣaras, dyo rā. I am thus confident that my emendations reflect the composer’s intent. In addition to that noted in the edition, there are two further signs of possible scribal correction here. First, the top of the subscript y in tya is extended to the right, which may be a subsequent correction to tyā. (Although the ā marker would be expected to bend downward, as for instance in l64 nyā, the absence of the downward component could be explained here by the proximity of the already engraved following character.) If this is indeed scribal correction and not just a slip of the chisel, then one redactor had probably wanted vimalādityānuja rather than vimalāditya-tanūja here. This, however, would be a correction to make things worse, since on the one hand no younger brother of Vimalāditya is known, and on the other hand it would render the text unmetrical. Second, there is a slightly sinuous horizontal line below the left-hand side of nū (this was apparently misinterpreted by SR as part of an ī marker on rkka in the next line). It is possible that this is a second kākapada signifying that the interlinear ta should be inserted here as well as at the point where it is engraved, although it is below the locus and is not crossed by a vertical stroke. Alternatively, it may be a mark of secondary correction intended to cancel the earlier correction of tya to tyā. sragdharā śrīmān śake samaughe dr̥g-iṣu-nidhi-mite karkki!a-ge karkkaśāṁśau SR karkige * karkīśaṁ sau śuddhātmā śuddha-paṁcamy-aditi -suta-dine sūryya-bhe śauryya-śālī| SR paṁcamyāditisuta dinersūryyābhe SR’s paraphrase of the date: Saka 952 (a.D. 1030) on Sunday, Kārtika Suddha paṁchami (fifth tithi in Nov.), in Kanyalagna. Could he be right about Kārtika? I think it’s impossible, it’s the sun in Cancer, so perhaps Bhādrapada? kanya-lagne +’ti-[AC¿nya?PCdha]nyae śaśi-kula-tilako rā ja-maārttaṇḍa-sūnur vveṁgī-sā[ṁb!!m]rājya-paṭṭaṁ sma vahati vijayāditya-bhūpaḥ pratā pī| praharṣiṇī – – – : ⏑ ⏑ ⏑ ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏑ – ⏓ putrīyann api śaraṇā[tti!rtthi]naṁ jighāṁsuM SR: jighāṁsur jñātiryyan!jñātrīyan bhaṭa-vibh!budhāṁś ca sat-kr̥!riyā bhiḥ| SR: jñātiryyān check, what is the correct formation? jñātr̥̄yan? jñātrīyan? MW lists mātrīya- (but not jñātrīya-) mātkr̥yan!mātrīyan para-yuvatīr ajihma-vr̥ttir SR: mātkrayan yyo dhātrīm avati n{d}r̥po yathā sva-dharmmaM| SR: yodhā trīmavatin drupo SR’s paraphrase: He treated the refugees as his sons, relatives and servants with discipline, the wise with care and regard, other females as mothers, etc. The relevant sūtra is Aṣṭādhyāyī 3.1.10, on the use of the affix kyac (3.1.8) in denoting behaviour in the sense of comparability to something. upajāti vilaṁghaya yantī himavantam uccair umerāṁga(~M) dviṣatī vicitraM| umeśvarāṁgam umetarāṁgam umendirāṁgam gaurīti siddhāpi vibhāti kīrttiś cālukya[ACrā PCbhī]ma SR also AC rā PC bhī, but could possibly be the other way around; none of the strokes have been visibly erased. I assume that the limb of bha was attached to the left side of an already inscribed ra, so that the left side of the original ra now forms the slightly misshapen stem of bha. kṣitipasya yasya| sa śrī-sarvva-lokāśraya-śrī-viṣṇuvarddhana-mahārājo rājādhirājaḥ śrī-vijayāditya-devo rāṣṭrakūṭa-pramukhān kuṭi!!uṁbinas sarvvān sam[AC?va PCā]hūya samasta-pradhā SR is probably right to assume that mva has been corrected to mā; if so, then the body of the subscript v has been joined to the subsequently added ā marker to become its ornamental extension. Alternatively, the originally inscribed character may perhaps have been mya. P1020168 na-samakṣam ittham ā[+jñā]payati| upajāti nihatya vairi-kṣitipān ar!śeṣāN śvīkārayān[svīkārayan?] bhūpatinā dhara!i trīṁ kucamma-rājena nijeśvareṇa SR wants to emend to śrī-camma-rājena labdha-prasādo bhavati sma tasmāta!T| SR: bharata/śca śrī-cāme-rājasya bhart(u) ś ca kāmāṁbikāyāś ca pati-vratāyāḥ yo bhīma-bhūp[ACo PCa]s tanayo +’janiṣṭa| SR reads the o as present, but it is much fainter than surrounding strokes and has probably been beaten out. tasmai dīnā(r)tt!thi-dvija -bandhu-budha-surabhūruhāyamānāya| nā[ADD BELOWga]-kula-bhūṣan!ṇāya| meghagiri-nātha-melpa-kandarppa malaya-bhāskarāya| sama!upārjjita-dharmma-karmmaṇe bra!r̥haspati-kalpāmātya-śrīya pa-cāmena-bennaya-budh!ddhi-pau[rṣa!ruṣa]-samupā(r)jjita-rājya-mahimne{ṁ}| kr̥ta-kleśī!a-ni SR: bannaya. should this be emended to bennāya? or something at the beginning, and then naya in cpd with the following? mitte koṁpoloṁgu nāma grāmo dvādaśa-grāmaś ca śāsanīkr̥tya dhārā-pū rvvakaṁ mayā datta Iti viditam astu vaḥ| Asyopari na kenacid bādhā kartta vyā. yaḥ karoti sa paṁca-mahāpātako bhavati. anuṣṭubh bahubhir vvasudhā dattā bahubhiś cānupā litā yasya yasya yadā bhūmis tasya tasya tadā phalaṁ| sva-dattāṁ para-dattāṁ vā yo hare tua vasundharāṁ ṣaṣṭi-varṣa-saharāṇi viṣṭhāyāṁ jāaāyate kri!!r̥miḥ| Asya dvitī[ADD BELOWya]-varṣa-varddha ne dattasyā!a śaāsanasya Ājñaptiḥ kaṭakādhīśaḥ. ś(ā)sana-lek!khakaś ca gokācāryyaḥ floretComplex

sudhā-sūter bbudho sudhāṁsūśo bhbbudho I assume that bhu in SR's edition is a typo and that his intended emendation was sudhāṁśor, but this is unmetrical and does not correspond to other attestations of this stanza. cakravartti-vaṁśa-karttā Other attestations of this stanza read cakravarttī vaṁśa-karttā, which may have been intended here too, but the text is intelligible and appropriate as received. °t sainyayātiḥ °t syinyayati The problematic character read here as tsyai has been corrected rather awkwardly, and it is not evident which strokes are earlier and which later. SR's reading was probably meant to be °t syainyayāti. In fact the character, as received, best matches the shape expected for tsyo, but I am willing to believe that the corrector's intent had been tsai. The pre-correction character may have been tsya, tsyā, tsye, tsyo, tsu or tsū.

The editor Subba Rao did not provide a complete and correct reading of Vijayāditya IV’s coronation date in these plates. B. V. Krishna Rao (84) provided an improved reading and equated it to Thursday, 9 July, 1030 CE. A more convincing calculation was made by K. G. Shankar at the request of N. Venkataramanayya (614). According to this, the equivalent date is Sunday, 27 June 1031 CE. This results in the correct weekday in addition to the Sun being in Cancer and the correct /tithi/ at sunrise. According to Shankar as cited by Venkataramanayya, the /kanyā lagna/ lasted from 10 to 12 AM on that day. At this time, the /nakṣatra/ was Uttara-Phālgunī, while later on (with the same /tithi/ still current) it was Pūrva-Phālgunī. The presiding deities of these /nakṣatra/s are Bhaga and Aryaman respectively. Since both are Ādityas, /sūryya-bhe/ (if not an inconsequential word meaning ‘sunlit’) might conceivably refer to either.

Not reported in ARIE. Edited with estampages and a summary of the contents by R. Subba Rao (). The present edition by Dániel Balogh is based on photographs taken by myself at the Rallabandi Subba Rao Archaeological Museum (Rajahmundry) in February 2023, collated with Subba Rao's estampages and edition. The numerous typographic mistakes and confused diacritics in the printed edition are not shown in the apparatus here.

84 614