Single Bhimavaram plate of a late Eastern Cālukya king EpiDoc Encoding Dániel Balogh intellectual authorship of edition Dániel Balogh DHARMA Berlin DHARMA_INSVengiCalukya00076

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

Halantas. Final M is a small circle at head height, with a sinuous tail. Final N is a slightly reduced na without a headmark.

Original punctuation marks are short, straight verticals with serifs.

Other palaeographic observations.

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.

Revision through collation with new photographs Initial encoding of the file

siṁhas trayodaśa. tad-avarajaḥ kokkili ṣaṇ māsāN. tasya jyeṣṭho bhrātā viṣṇuvarddhanas tam uccāṭya saptatriṁśataM. tat-putro vijayāditya bhaṭṭaārako ṣṭādaśa. tat-suto viṣṇuvarddhanaṣ ṣaṭtriṁśataM. tat-sūnur nnarendra-mr̥garājo ṣṭacatvāriṁśataM. tat-putraḥ kali-viṇuvarddhano dhyarddha-varṣaM. tat-suto guṇakkenalla-vijayādityaś catuścatvāriṁśataM.

tad-bhrātur vvikramāditya -bhūpates samuc-camuūpateḥ vilasat-kaṇṭhikā-dāma -kaṇṭhasya tanayo nayī. dīnānāthāturāṇāṁ dvija-vara-samiter yyācakānāṁ yatīnān nānā-deśāgatānāṁ paṭu-vaṭu-naṭa-sad-gāyakānāṁ kavīnāM bandhūnām andhakānām abhilaṣita-phala-śrāṇanād rakṣaṇād yo māteva triṁśad abdān bhuvam abhunag asau cāru-cālukya-bhīmaḥ. tat-putraḥ sva-bhujāsi-khaṇḍita-ripu-kṣmābhd bāalād vāsavīṁ jitvāśāṁ viraje pratiṣṭhita-jaya-staṁbhaḥ paṭiṣṭho raṇe svarṇṇārūḍha-tulo tra bādḍham atulo dhātrī-tale kṣatriyair mmitrābhaḫ parirakṣati sma vijayādityas samārddhan dharāNM. tasyātmajaḫ praṇata-vairi-śiro-vilagna -ratna-dvirepha-paricumbita-pāda-padmaḥ meruṁ hasaṁs tulita-hāṭaka-rāśi-bhāsā varṣāṇi sapta samapād bhuvam ammarājaḥ. tat-suta vijayātyaṁbādityaṁ bālam uccāṭya līlayā. tālādhipatir ākramya māsam ekam apād bhuvaM. taṁ jitvā yudhi cālukya -bhīma-bhūmipates sutaḥ vikramāditya-bhūpo pān māsān ekādaśa kṣitiM. tatas tu tammu-rājābhīmākhya hatvā pro
kokkili kokili guṇakkenalla- guṇakainalla- The e marker is attached at the bottom left of the (clearly double) kk. Above the character, there is only the descender of ṣṭa, but no vowel marker. samuc-camuūpateḥ samramupateḥ -dāma- -dhāma- nayī naye bandhūnām panthvānām -kṣmābhd bāalād kṣmābhrutulād jitvāśāṁ viraje pratiṣṭhita-jaya-staṁbhaḥ paṭiṣṭho raṇe jitvāśāviraya pratāpādhi yāsacapadipto raṇe svarṇṇārūḍha-tulo tra svarṇna rūdatulātra dḍham atulo dhātrī-tale kṣatriyair jādamatu lokātratal akṣatriyair mmitrābha mmitrābhaṟ dharāNM varāN tasyātmajaḫ tasyātmajaṟ bhuvam ammarājaḥ bhūv ammarājaḥ tatas tu tammu-rājābhīmākhyahatvā pro tatastut amma bhīmākhyaḥ hatva pro The characters bhīmā (or perhaps just bhīma) are engraved over some previous text that is mostly illegible; rājā is an educated guess based partly on what seems to be a vertically rising ā marker (which does not belong to ma) rising from the second. The visarga, if it is not accidental damage, is definitely a subsequent insertion: the dots are much shallower and smaller than they should be (compare sutaḥ in the previous line), and they are very wide apart, above headline and below baseline. See the commentary for discussion.

His son Jayasiṁha II, for thirteen. His brother of inferior birth, Kokkili, for six months. After dethroning him, his eldest brother Viṣṇuvardhana III, for thirty-seven. His son Vijayāditya I Bhaṭṭāraka, for eighteen. His son Viṣṇuvardhana IV, for thirty-six. His son Vijayāditya II Narendramr̥garāja, for forty-eight. His son Kali-Viṣṇuvardhana V, for a year and a half. His son Guṇakainalla Vijayāditya III, for forty-four.

His brother Prince bhūpati Vikramāditya, the good general of the army whose neck was garlanded with the flashing locket of the heir-apparent, had a judicious son:

He, the dear Cālukya-Bhīma—who was like a mother to the destitute, the helpless and the sick, to the congregation of excellent Brahmins, to supplicants, to ascetics, as well as to clever Brahmin pupils vaṭu, actors, good singers and poets arriving from various lands, because he presented them with the objects of their desires and protected them—ruled bhuj- the earth for thirty years.

His son—who with the sword held in his arm crushed enemy rulers; who, having forcibly conquered the eastern vāsavī region, established a victory pillar in Viraja; the craftiest one in battle who ascended a balance scale with gold; who is surely incomparable to any other kṣatriyas on the surface of this earth—protected rakṣ- the earth for half a year as Vijayāditya IV, Kollabigaṇḍa, brilliant as the sun mitra.Vijayāditya IV's ascension of a balance scale is also mentioned in close proximity to his erection of a victory pillar in Viraja in stanza 32 of the Diggubaṟṟu grant of Bhīma II. Nonetheless, the battle may be connected here only to the pillar, and the ascension balance scale may be an unrelated event.

His son—the lotus of whose feet was kissed all over by bees that were the jewels dangling from the heads of prostrate enemies, and who mocked Mount Meru with the brilliance of a heap of gold that was on a par with MeruOr perhaps: with the brilliance of the heap of gold that had been weighed (in the balance against him).—protected pā- the earth for seven years as Ammarāja I.

After assaulting and effortlessly dethroning his son the child Vijayāditya V, Lord adhipati Tāla protected pā- the earth for one month.

After defeating him in battle, King bhūmipati Cālukya-Bhīma’s son, King bhūpa Vikramāditya II, protected the earth for eleven months.

Then the one named Tammu-Bhīma, having defeated See the commentary.

A single plate, an inner (probably the second) plate of a set, discovered in Bhimavaram, West Godavari District, “several years” before 1945.

Subba Rao is certain that the last line of the extant text mentions Bhīma III (the son of Amma I) as the killer of Vikramāditya II. Neither the text as received, nor the text SR prints in his edition can with any stretch mean what SR translates, viz. After killing him, Amma’s son, Bhīma (III) ruled. A Bhīma is, however, definitely mentioned here. The only other Eastern Cālukya grant that allegedly refers to Bhīma III is the Diggubaṟṟu grant of Bhīma II, where Fleet made an in my opinion unnecessary emendation. Without this emendation, the text refers to Bhīma II and there is no indication of a son of Amma named Bhīma.

A fully preserved parallel to this partial stanza has now come to light in the Kōḻūru grant of Bhīma II. Although this does not clear all difficulties, it on the one hand establishes beyond doubt that the correct reading is tammu-bhīma (so there is no Amma and nothing resembling “son” here), and on the other hand makes it clear that Tammu-Bhīma is not credited with the killing of Vikramāditya II. Depending on the correct case ending of this name, Tammu-Bhīma may refer to Bhīma II (most likely, in my opinion), to Yuddhamalla II himself, or to someone (perhaps Vikramāditya II) whom Yuddhamalla defeated. I intend to discuss the existence of Bhīma III separately.

All stanzas extant in the present text are relatively rare in the corpus. The only other grants that include all six are the Andhra Sahitya Parishad plates of Śaktivarman and the Kaṇḍyam plates of Dānārṇava. The Nāgiyapūṇḍi grant of Amma II and the Incomplete Masulipatam plates of Amma II contain our stanzas I and II; the the Paḷaṁkalūru grant of Amma II contains only stanza VI, the Kōḻūru grant of Bhīma II only stanza VII, and the Pāṁbaṟṟu grant of Amma II contains only stanza V. In my opinion this is a fairly strong indication that the present grant is not earlier than Amma II. The phrase tad-avarajaḥ kokkiliḥ also implies this, since it only occurs in the grants of Amma II, Dānārṇava, Bādapa, Vimalāditya and Śaktivarman; in earlier grants, Kokkili is always described as dvaimāturānuja or simply anuja. Amma II’s grants, Vijayāditya III’s cognomen occurs in the form Guṇaga (if at all). The form Guṇakkenalla (and variants) are used in the grants of Vijayāditya III himself, Amma I, Bhīma II (who also uses Guṇaga and Guṇaka), Tāḻa II and Dānārṇava. Another possible indication is that, as mentioned above, the complete set of stanzas does not occur in any known grant of Amma. On the basis of the circumstantial evidence combined with the plate’s palaeography and its layout, I believe it is most likely from a grant of Amma II, but it may also belong to Bhīma II, Dānārṇava, or one of the latter’s successors.

Reported and edited from the original, with facsimiles and abbreviated translation by R. Subba Rao (). The present edition by Dániel Balogh is based on photographs taken by Balogh at the Rallabandi Subba Rao Archaeological Museum, Rajahmundry in February 2023, collated with Subba Rao's edition. Minor typographic mistakes and oversights in his edition are not shown in the apparatus here.