Angul Copper-Plate of Dharmamahadevi - Paper by Priyatosh Banerjee

This copper-plate grant of Dharmamah¡ev¢ (a queen of the Bhauma dynasty of Orisss) is said to hare been originally in the possesion of Babu Shyam Sundar Garhnayak[1] of village Santri near Angul, Orissa. It was purchased for the Archaeological Section, Indian Museum, Calcutta, in March, 1926, and was briefly noticed in the Annual Report of the Archaeological Survey of India, 1925-26, p. 148. Its text was published for the time by Mr. Binayak Mishra in his book Orissa under the Bhauma Kings, p. 52ff. The present treatment is based upon a study of the original plate as well as a set of estampages prepared from it.

This copper-pl&te measures 9³/₁₆" in length[2] and 5³/₈ in breadth. To the left in the middle there is a projection with a hollowed reotangular space for the fixation of a seal. But no seal is said to have been found along with the plate.

The plate is-engraved on both sides. There are altogether 29 lines of writing, thirteen on the obverse and sixteen on the reverse. The last line cobtains only two akÀaras. Tha sverage size of a letter is between ³/₈"x ⁵/₁₆". The plate ia in a fair state of preservation. The characters belong to a variety of the Northern Alphabet of c. 10th-11th century A.D., and may be called an admixture of N¡gar¢ and proto-Bengali letters. They are same as the scripts of the other grant of Dharmamah¡dev¢, i.e. her Taltali plate,[3] and bear a marked affinity to those of the inscriptions of the Somavam¿i

kings, specially Mah¡bhavagupta I Janamejaya and Mah¡¿ivagupta I Janamejaya and mah¡¿ivagupta I Yay¡ti,[4] and (quite naturally) to those of the Ganjam ad Banpur plates of the Bhauma princess Da¸·imah¡dv¢[5] (whose reign was not separated by a

Among the initial vowels only a, i and u occur. The short i is denoted by a straight line (in fact a m¡ntr¡) with two circles below it (cf. the i of the Patna plates of Mah¡bhavagupta I Janamejaya).[6] The anusv¡ra has been shown in two ways, sometimes by a superscript circle or dot and sometimes by a circle with a vertical line below it (cf. the letter in the Kudopali plates).[7] Kh,g, th, ¿, etc., are 'round-top letters'. Th and dh have no m¡tr¡s. Kh, ´ and µc have proto-Bengali forms repreanting the last stage before the final development.

The language of the inscription is Sanskrit. Lines l-19 describing the genealogy of the kings are in verse excepting a short prose passage (containing the name of the place from where the charter was issued) in lines 3 and 4. The formal part of the grant is in prose, which again is followed by customary verses.

In respect of orthography, the following points call for remark. B and v have not been distinguished, the same sign having been used to denote both. The guttural nasal stands for anusv¡va in tad-va´¿¡d in line 7 and tad-va´¿e in line 11. Consonants following superscript r have sometimes been doubled, as for instance, in udd¡mair = mmada in line 2, sarvv=¡¿¡ in line 4, nirrmm£lam in line 6 £rjjitaÅ, in line 11, Dharmmamah¡devay¡Å in line 21, and Dharmma-gaurav¡ya 26,etc. The use of final t and n is to be found in vijayaskandh¡v¡r¡t in line 4, and k¤tav¡n in line 5.These final consonants arc not indicated by the usual sign of Visarga but by their modifed forms. Both the final letters have been made somewhat smaller in size. The sign of avagraha does not occur. Visarga has been used at random in the formal part of the grant. There are several spelling mistakes such as the use of i instead of i in ¢ndu in line 6, agan¢ and á¡nt¢kara in line 19. S has been used instead of ¿ in p£rit-¡sa in line 15. The formal part of the grant including the customary verses is full of mistakes. The words V¡ri-haspatya (B¡rhaspatya) in hne 22 and tr¢-y¡riÀaya (try-¡rÀaya) in line 23 show Prekcitic or vernaoulrtr influence.

The charter was issued from Guhe¿vara-p¡¶aka.[8] Its object is to record the grant of some land in the village De¿a¸a-gr¡ma[9] called áridhara-bha¶¶a, son of Vite[10]-bha¶ and the grandson of Atihara[11]-bha¶¶a. The land granted seems to be ten m¡las, if my emendation of text on the point is correct, das(¿)a-ma(¡)la-vibh¡gaÅ[12] (in line 25-26). M¡la[13] may denotee the same measure as m¡ (a South Indian measure) which is 1/20th of a veli.[14] The donee was an emirgrant from Kol¡µca[15] and he belonged to the á¡¸·ilya-gotra with the pravaras stated as b¡rhaspatya, J¡madagnya[16] and Daivalya. The charter granting the donating the donation was executed at á¡kemb¡-gr¡ma. The donor of the grant is Dharmamah¡dev¢, Queen of á¡ntikara, A Bhauma king of Orisa. The genealogy given in the inscription is as follows:-

There was a king Unma¶¶a in whose family were born Gay¡·a and other kings. In their family there was the king Lo¸abh¡ra. His son was Kusumabh¡ra. After Kusumabh¡ra, his younger brother Lalitabh¡ra became king and he w&8 succeeded on his death by his son á¡ntikara.[17]

There are several Bhauma kings of the name of á¡ntikara. The áantikara of the present inscription is, as Misra holds, á¡ntikara III[18] (who bore the surname Lava¸abh¡rra II,[19] (a Sanskritized form of Lo¸abh¡ra) as found in Dharmamah¡dev¢'s Taltali; plate).

The present plate does not show when Dharmamah¡dev¢ ruled. But the position becomes clear from, her Taltali plate which shows that after the death of her husband (i.e. á¡ntikara III), his brother áubh¡kara IV became king. On the latter's death the throne passed successively into the hands of the female members of the family (presumably in the absence of male heirs), i.e., to (1) áubh¡kara IV's queen, Gaur¢mah¡devi, (2) her daughter, Da¸·imah¡dev¢, (3) the latter's step-mother, Vakulamah¡dev¢,[20] and lastly to (4) Dharmamah¡dev¢. Thus Dharmamah¡dev¢ is the last known ruler of the Bhauma family so far as its chronology stands up till now.

The present inscription as well as the Taltali plate of Dharmamah¡dev¢ beas no date. But the editors[21] of the Taltali plate assign her rule to the first quarter of the 9th century A.D.. followine Misra's views on the dates of the Bhauma, kings. Misra refers the dates in the Bhauma inscriptions to the HarÀa era and ascribes Da¸·imah¡dev¢ whose last known date in year 187 to A.D. 794.[22] If this view is accepted, Dharmamah¡dev¢, who is the last of the two successors of Da¸·imah¡dev¢, can no doubt be ascribed to the early part of the 9th century A.D. (as the editors of the Teltali plate have suggested). But in view of the palaeographical peculiarities of her inscriptions this appears too early a date for her. As has been stated above, the script of her inscriptions presents a striking similarity to those of the inscriptions of the Somavam¿¢ kings Mah¡bhavagupta I Janamejaya and Mah¡¿ivgupta I Yay¡ti. On a detailed examination of the palaeography of the inscriptions of the above-mentioned Somavam¿¢ kings, Fleet[23] held that they could not be possibly placed earlier than the

10th oentury A.D. On the whole, he was inclined to place them between A.D. 1000 and 1100. From palaeographical considerations D. C. Sircar assigns the first three generations of the Somavam¿¢ kings of Orissa, i.e., áivagupta, Mah¡bhavagupta I and Mah¡¿ivagupta I to c. 926-1000 A.D.[24] Even if we take the earliest limit for the date of Mah¡bhavagupta I and Mah¡¿ivagupta I we find that they cannot be placed prior to the middle of the 10th century A.D. Now, since the inscriptions of Dharmamah¡dev¢ are written a script exactly similar to those charters of the above-said Somavam¿¢ kings, she also it can lbe presumed, flourished in the same century (i,e),10th century A.D.). In fact, she being the last ruler of the Somavam¿¢ dynasty, her reign might have preceded the establishment of the; Somavam¿¢ supremacy in Orissa only by a few years. Misra's calculation of Bhauma dates with reference to the HarÀa era is still a conjecture which the palaeography of most of the inscriptions does not support. It is possible that the dates of the Bauma, inscriptions refer to an era founded by some early ruler of the Bhauma family or to some other era with its epoch later than that of the HarÀa era.

The localities, De¿a¸a-gr¡ma and á¡kemb¡-gr¡ma mentioned in the inscription, I am unable to identify.

TEXT[25]

Obverse

1 Om[26] [ II*] Svasti[27] vyasta-jal-¡bhra-vibhrama-dharoÅ[28] ¿vet-¡tapatr-otkarair=a¿v¢yauÅ[29] ¿riti-c¡-

2 mare¿[30]=ca hasita-vy¡koÀa-k¡¿-audayaiÅ[31] I udd¡mair=mmada-saurabhai¿=ca kara(I)¸¡[m][32]=[¡]ksi-

3 pta-sapta-cchad-¡modaiÅ sannihit¡m sad=aiva ¿arad-¡rambhaa-¿riyam=vi(m=bi)bhrataÅ II [1*] ár¢-Guhe¿va-

4 ra-p¡¶ak-¡v¡sita-vijayaskandh¡v¡rat [I] Sarvv-¡¿¡-parip£rit-¡dhika[33]-ruchir=yas=t¡pam=a-

5 stan=nayann[34]=¡nandam k¤tav¡n janasya sadasi[35] pr¡pta=pa[36] tiÀ¶ha¿=ciram I sad-d¤Àti-

6 pratirodhi yena ca tamo nirmm£lam=unm£litam[37] ¿r¢m¡n=¢(I)-ndur=iv=¡van¢-

7 patir=abh£d= U[nma]¶¶a-si´gh[38]-¡hvayaÅ II[2*] Tad-va´¿¡d[39]=abhavann=anindita-gu¸¡ mu-

11 Å [II][3*]Tad-va´¿e=bhavad=arjjitaÅ[41] k¤ta-vu(bu)dha-pr¢ti-[Å]prat¢t-odayo devaÅ ¿atru-vadh£-mu-

12 khendu-tara¸iÅ ¿r¢-Lo¸abh¡ro n¤paÅ I yasy=¡kramya guru-prat¡pa-¿inaÅ-

13 khinaÅ[42] p¤thv¢bh¤taÅ proddat¡[n]=d£ram yasya digantareÀu taras¡ smairam[43] prasasruÅ

Reverse

14 kar¡Å I [II] [4*] Tasy[44]=¡tmahaÅ pra¸ata-p¡rthiva-cakra-c£·¡-nirvy¡-ja-propita-para¿[45]=carit¡rtha-

15 n¡m¡ I vist¡ri-saurabha-gu¸-o[da]ya-p£rit-¡sa(¿a)s=tasm¡d=abh£t=Kusumabh¡ra[46] iti

16 kÀit¢¿aÅ[47] II [5*] Abh¤ta[48] lalitabh¡raÅ[49] kÀm¡-bharam-bh£ri-tej¡s=tad-anu tad-anujanm¡

17 vy£·ha-bhogÀndra-l¢laÅ I anayad=amalim¡nam ta(ya)d-ya¿aÅ puram[50]=uccair=api ripu-

18 rama¸¢n¡m=aµjan-onmi¿ram=a¿ru II [6*] Tasmin[51]=n¤pe divam=upeyuÀv=akhila-

19 n£jaÅ ¿¡st=¡vaner=ajan¢[52] á¡nt¢(nti)kar-¡bhidh¡naÅ I yen=oddh¤teÀv=akhila-

21 ¿r¢[53]-Ddharmmamah¡devy¡Å[54] m¡t¡-pitror=¡tmar[55]=ca puny-¡(¸y-¡)-bhiv¤ddayoÅ[56] II[57]

22 Kol¡µca-vinirgataÅ[58] á¡¸·illyasya gotr¡yaÅ[59] V¡rihaspatya[60] Ya-

23 madagn¢[61] Daivallya[62]-tr¢-y¡riÀaya[63]-pravar¡yaÅ[64] bha¶¶a Atiharas[65]-ya pra-

24 pautr¡ya[66] Vite-bha¶¶asya[67] putr¡ya ár¢dhara-bha¶¶asya[68] sam-kr¡nt¢(I) vel¡ya[69] ¿¡-

25 sanamk¤tyaÅ[70] á¡kemv(b) 0161-gr¡me t¡mra-¿¡sanaÅ[71] De¿a¸a[72]-gr¡ma-dasa-ma-

26 la-vibh¡gaÅ[73] jaratrin¢(¸) palarukaÅ[74] II Prat¢p¡ditam[75] dharmma-gaurav¡yaÅ[76]

27 Keh£v¡kha¸·aÅ[77] sya[78](sva)-dat(tt)¡m para-dat-¡nup¡neÅ[79] datt-¡nup¡lane) yo hareta[80] vasundhar¡m I sa v¢ À¶h¡-

28 y¡m k¤mir=bh£tv¡ pit¤bhiÅ saha pacyate II V(B) [81]ahun=¡tra kim=uktena samkeÀep¡d=idam=u-

[1] Misra, Orisa under the Bhauma Kings, p. 62. Besides the present One there is only one more inscription of Dharmamah¡dev¢ known to us till now. This is her Taltali plate published in I.H.Q., Vol. XXI, p. 213ff.

[2] This bage is including the projection.

[3] Cf. the facsimile of the inscription published in I.H.Q., Vol. XXI, facing p. 218.

[4] Ep. Ind. Vol. III, p. 323ff; Vol. IV, p. 255ff; Vol. XXIII, p. 248ff; I.H.Q., Vol. xx, p. 76ff, p. 237ff.

[5] Ep. Ind., Vol. VI, p. 133ff; J.B.O.R.S., Vol. V, p. 564ff.

[6] Ep. Ind., Vol. VI, p. 342;

[7] Ibid., Vol. IV, p. 255

[8] Misra seeks to identify it with Godhane¿vara P¡¶a¸¡ forming a part of the town of jaipur, district Cuttack, Orisa (Orisa under the Bhauma Kings, pp. 87-89; J.B.O.R.S., Vol. XVI, p. 75).

[9] Misra reads De¿al¡-gr¡ma. What has been read by Misra as l is clearly ¸ as the letter is without a m¡tr¡. Again there is no stroke for medial ¡.

[10] Misra reads Nite-bha¶¶a.

[11] Misra reads Ërttihara.

[12] The actual reading in the plate is dasa-mala-vibh¡gaÅ. Misra reads das(¿)- ama¿=ca tri-bh¡gaÅ which yield no satisfactory sense.

[13] The word m¡la occurs severall times in the inscription of Gay¡·atu´gadeva (J.AS.B.,1909, p. 348ff.).

[14] Ep.Ind., Vol. VII,p. 143, note.

[15] Kol¡µca, written also as Kro·aµja, seems to have an important seat of the Brahmanical community in the mediaeval period. It finds mention in the genealogical works of Bengal, King Ëdi¿£ra is said to have brought to Bengal five Br¡hma¸as from Kol¡µca. The location of Kol¡µca is a matter jof controversy. J.C.Ghosh seeks to identify it with Kularcya or Kularca in the Bogra district, Bengal. See History of bengal, Vol. I, pp. 20, 579-80, 625ff.; Indian Culture, Vol. II, p. 358.

[16] B¡haspatya and J¡madangnya as pravara names do not fit with the gotra name á¡¸·ilya. The pravaras of the Br¡hma¸as of the á¡¸·ilya, Asita and Devala. B¡rhaspatya is a pravara of the Br¡hma¸as of the Bharadv¡ja-gotra and J¡madagnya of those of the Vasta-or S¡var¸a-gotra. It may be pointed out here that the donee of Dharmamah¡dev¢ Taltali-plate was also a Br¡hma¸a of the á¡¸·ilya-gotra with the pravaras correctly stated as S¡¸·ilya, Asita and Devala. Unfortunately the editores of the Taltali plate have wrongly understood the text on the point, '-------'and corrected it as --------meaning thus ' Devala-pravara includd in á¡¸·ilya-gotra' (I.H.Q., Vol. XXI, p. 220 and 222).

[17] This genealogy (till á¡ntikara) is the same as that found in Dharmamah¡dev¢'s Taltali plate, and Da¸·imah¡dev¢'s Ganjam and banpur grants (I.H.Q., VOL. Xxi, PP. 217-18; Ep. Ind., Vol. VI, p. 133ff.; J.B.O.R.S., VOL. V, P. 564ff.).

[18] Misra, Orissa under the Bhauma Kings, pp. 68-71.

[19] The Bhauma inscriptions show that the surnames Lalitah¡ra (or ^obh¡ra) Kusumah¡ra (or ^obh¡ra) and Lo¸ah¡ra (or ^obh¡ra) were adopted alternatively by the kings of the family since the time of á¡ntikara I (I.H.Q., VOL. Xxi, P. 214).

[20] No inscription of Vakulamah¡dev¢ has been found as yet. Her name as a queen of áubh¡kara IV is revealed for the first time in the Taltali plate (I.H.Q., Vol. XXI, pp. 215ff.).

[21] I.H.Q., Vol. XXI, p. 214

[22] Misra, Orissa Under the Bhauma Kings, p. 72ff.

[23] Ep. Ind., Vol. III, pp. 328-34.

[24] Ep. Ind., Vol. XX, p. 81.

[25] From the original as well as impressions

[26] Denoted by a symbol

[27] Metre of verses 1-4: á¡rd£lavikr¢·ita.

[28] Read dharaiÅ

[29] The Banpur plate of Da¸dimah¡dev¢ reads a¿v¢ya.

[30] Read c¡marai¿.

[31] Read k¡¿-odayaiÅ.

[32] According to Misra the plate reads kari¸¡m kÀipta

[33] Misra reads parip£ra¸-¡dhika.

[34] Misra reads nayan-¡nadam.

[35] Misra reads mandasi and corrects it as manasi. But the correct reading is sadasi which is the reading of Dharmamah¡dev¢'s Taltali plate. But it should be noted that manasi (which ocurs in Da¸·imah¡dev¢'s grants) suits the context better semantically.

[36] Read pra.

[37] Misra reads unmilitam.

[38] Reads simh.

[39] Reads vam¿¡d.

[40] Read v¤tt¡Å.

[41] Read ^ovam¿e=bhavad=£^o.

[42] Read ¿ikhinaÅ.

[43] Read svairam

[44] Metre: Vasantatilak¡.

[45] Read padas^o

[46] Misra reads Phu(Ku)sumah¡ra.

[47] The stroke for i is not visiblein the plate.

[48] Metre: M¡lin¢. Misra wrongly calls it Vasantatilak¡.

[49] Misra reads Lalitah¡raÅ.

[50] Read p£ram^o.

[51] Metre: Vasantatilak¡.

[52] Read ajani.

[53] The word ¿r¢ occurs twice in the original but Misra reads only one. Dharmamah¡dev¢ is described here simply as ¿r¢-¿r¢-harmamah¡dev¢ without any royal epithets such as parama-m¡he¿var¢, parama-bha¶¶¡rik¡, mah¡r¡j¡dhir¡ja. Etc., which are found used before her name in the Taltali plate (I.H.Q., Vol. XXI, p. 213ff.). The genealogy again, stops short with á¡ntikara III, her husband, whose achievements prince. Does it show that this charter was issued by Dharmamah¡dev¢ some time after her husband's death and before her accession to the throne?

[54] Read Dharmmamah¡devy¡Å.

[55] Read ¡tmana¿=ca. Misra's emendation ¡tman¡m is faulty.

[56] Read v¤ddhaye.

[57] The sign of punctuation seems to be superfluous

[58] Read vinirgat¡ya.

[59] Read S¡¸·ilya-sagotr¡ya.

[60] It is intended for B¡rhaspatya

[61] Read Jamadagni.

[62] Read Daivalya

[63] According to Misra the original reading is tri-y¡rirÀa. But the plate actually reads tr¢-y¡riÀaya (intended for try=¡rÀeya).

[64] Read pravar¡ya.

[65] Misra reads Ërttihara

[66] Read pautr¡ya.

[67] Misra reads Nite-bha¶¶¡ya.

[68] Read bha¶¶¿ya

[69] Read val¡y¡m

[70] Read ¿¡san¢k¤tya. Misra's emendation as ¿¡sanamk¤tya is faultly.

[71] Read ¿¡sanam. Misra retains the actual reading without correction.

[72] Misra reads De¿al¡.

[73] Read da¿a-m¡la⁰. Misra reads das(¿)ama¿=ca tribh¡gah. Mr. K.C.Panigrahi, M.A., Revendhaw College, Cuttack, Cuttak, informs me that there is in Orissa a land measure called m¡¸a which is equivalent to about ³/₅ of an acre. Is it possible that the word m¡la is a scribe's mistake for m¡¸a, as there little difference between l and ¸ in the inscription? Through the word m¡¸a suits the context well, I am not sure if it (which appears to be a modern Oriya word) was also in use in its present sense in mediaeval days.

[74] The whole expression seems to be a vernacular one. It is intended for akaratvena p¡lan¢yaÅ? The actual reading may also be karatri¸¢ya laruka[Å] as Misra suggests.

[75] Read pratip¡ditam.

[76] Read visarga is superfluous. Misra reads gaurav¡t.

[77] Its meaning is not clear to me.

[78] Metre: AnuÀ¶ubh.

[79] Read para-datt¡m v¡ to suit the meaning. The engraver has made a mess here by putting two portions of two different stanzas. If we keep the reading pare-datt-¡nup¡lane, the previous p¡da should be sva-d¡n¡t phalam=¡nantyam. But as there is no scope for reading phalam=¡nantyam, and as the next p¡da begins with yo hareta we can safely presume that what the engraver wanted to put or shouls have engraved was sva-datt¡m para-datt¡m v¡.

[80] Misra reads haret.

[81] Metre: AnuÀ¶ubh.