Skip to content

Commit

Permalink
Updated some attributions, changing titles and references accordingly
Browse files Browse the repository at this point in the history
danbalogh committed Jul 12, 2024
1 parent 7a613c9 commit 44ecfe4
Showing 10 changed files with 37 additions and 32 deletions.
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion xml-provisional/DHARMA_INSVengiCalukya00017.xml
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -216,7 +216,7 @@ n="3v"/>
</app>
<app loc="27">
<lem>eṟayavarmm<orig>a I</orig>ti vikhy<unclear>ā</unclear></lem>
<note>With this unmetrical line, compare <foreign>Eṟeyamma Iti khyātaḥ</foreign> in the <ref target="DHARMA_INSVengiCalukya00083.xml">Peravali plates of Viṣṇuvardhana V</ref>, probably referring to the same person.</note>
<note>With this unmetrical line, compare <foreign>Eṟeyamma Iti khyātaḥ</foreign> in the <ref target="DHARMA_INSVengiCalukya00083.xml">Peravali plates of Viṣṇuvardhana IV</ref>, probably referring to the same person.</note>
</app>
<app loc="28">
<lem><sic>itīyasi</sic></lem>
14 changes: 6 additions & 8 deletions xml-provisional/DHARMA_INSVengiCalukya00019.xml

Large diffs are not rendered by default.

2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion xml-provisional/DHARMA_INSVengiCalukya00059.xml
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -235,7 +235,7 @@ n="20" break="no"/><unclear cert="low">lva</unclear> buggi Āṇati<unclear>|</u
<app loc="9">
<lem>reṇḍuvaṭṭi</lem>
<rdg source="bib:Ramesan1988_01">re<unclear>llu</unclear>vaṭṭi</rdg>
<note>Compare the possible village name Reṇḍubaḷḷi in the <ref target="DHARMA_INSVengiCalukya00083.xml">Peravali plates of Viṣṇuvardhana IV or V</ref>.</note>
<note>Compare the possible village name Reṇḍubaḷḷi in the <ref target="DHARMA_INSVengiCalukya00083.xml">Peravali plates of Viṣṇuvardhana IV</ref>.</note>
</app>
<app loc="9">
<lem>bhūmir</lem>
4 changes: 2 additions & 2 deletions xml-provisional/DHARMA_INSVengiCalukya00062.xml
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -390,7 +390,7 @@ n="48" break="no"/>-niv<choice><sic>a</sic><corr>ā</corr></choice>sinaḥ<suppl
</app>
<app loc="14">
<lem>ambhodhi-</lem>
<note>This word may need emendation to <foreign>ambhodhiṁ</foreign>, but if this was the composer's intent, then I do not know the quality in which Vijayāditya surpasses the ocean. In other Eastern Cālukya inscriptions, kings are said to rival the ocean in profundity (<foreign>agādhatā</foreign> in the <ref target="DHARMA_INSVengiCalukya00009.xml">Pedda-Vegi plates of Jayasiṁha I</ref> and <foreign>gambhīra-satva</foreign> in the <ref target="DHARMA_INSVengiCalukya00019.xml">Pr̥thivipallavapaṭṭana grant of Viṣṇuvardhana V</ref>) or in having great character (<foreign>mahā-satvatā</foreign> in the <ref target="DHARMA_INSVengiCalukya00023.xml">Masulipatam plates of Vijayāditya III</ref>, punningly in the case of the ocean); this latter stands right next to a claim of rivalling the earth in forbearance (<foreign>kṣamāyāḥ kṣitir</foreign>). The composer may have clumsily adopted a slightly different stanza that mentioned the ocean in such a connection, or–somewhat awkwardly–<foreign>ambhodhi</foreign> can be understood in compound with <foreign>kṣamayā</foreign> in the sense of "inexhaustable".</note>
<note>This word may need emendation to <foreign>ambhodhiṁ</foreign>, but if this was the composer's intent, then I do not know the quality in which Vijayāditya surpasses the ocean. In other Eastern Cālukya inscriptions, kings are said to rival the ocean in profundity (<foreign>agādhatā</foreign> in the <ref target="DHARMA_INSVengiCalukya00009.xml">Pedda-Vegi plates of Jayasiṁha I</ref> and <foreign>gambhīra-satva</foreign> in the <ref target="DHARMA_INSVengiCalukya00019.xml">Pr̥thivipallavapaṭṭana grant of Viṣṇuvardhana IV</ref>) or in having great character (<foreign>mahā-satvatā</foreign> in the <ref target="DHARMA_INSVengiCalukya00023.xml">Masulipatam plates of Vijayāditya III</ref>, punningly in the case of the ocean); this latter stands right next to a claim of rivalling the earth in forbearance (<foreign>kṣamāyāḥ kṣitir</foreign>). The composer may have clumsily adopted a slightly different stanza that mentioned the ocean in such a connection, or–somewhat awkwardly–<foreign>ambhodhi</foreign> can be understood in compound with <foreign>kṣamayā</foreign> in the sense of "inexhaustable".</note>
</app>
<app loc="15">
<lem source="bib:Venkataramanayya1974_03">priya-<supplied reason="omitted">patnī</supplied></lem>
@@ -615,7 +615,7 @@ n="48" break="no"/>-niv<choice><sic>a</sic><corr>ā</corr></choice>sinaḥ<suppl
<p rend="stanza" n="5">The beloved <supplied reason="omitted">wife</supplied> of this King Vijayāditya <supplied reason="explanation">III</supplied> named Guṇakkenalla is a great queen of illustrious lineage, called Cellakā.</p>
<p rend="stanza" n="6-7">When upon her attainment of young womanhood he, like Kāma embodied, married this daughter of the Vallabha <supplied reason="explanation">Rāṣṭrakūṭa</supplied> king, who was like a divine damsel with her coquettish smile, King Vijayāditya <supplied reason="omitted">donated</supplied> a village in order to accumulate merit.<note>Stanza 7 consists only of one hemistich and lacks the expected finite verb “donated”. I believe this lack is a scribal omission and the composer’s original text would have included a second hemistich with that verb, along with some additional details (such as for whose merit the donation was made). NV interprets the text differently, seeing a finite verb in stanza 6 (“He married her” instead of my “When he married her”), and joins the single hemistich of stanza 7 to the following prose. Although that prose sentence does lack a subject, I find this interpretation unsatisfactory because it results in confused syntax in the metrical text, leaving the accusative <foreign>grāmaṁ</foreign> floating free without any context.</note></p>
<p n="17-18"><supplied reason="subaudible">He, Vijayāditya III</supplied> commands all householders <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>kuṭumbin</foreign></supplied>—including foremost the territorial overseers <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>rāṣṭrakūṭa</foreign></supplied>—who reside in Gudrahāra district <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>viṣaya</foreign></supplied> as follows:</p>
<p n="18-20">Let it be known that we, <supplied reason="subaudible">together</supplied> with Callakāryā,<note>The agent of giving is apparently expressed at least twice, once as <foreign>asmābhiḥ</foreign> in line 18 and once as <foreign>mayā</foreign> in line 20. This is probably a simple oversight of the drafter of the text (compare the negligent composition of the next passage about the passing on of the donation). But it is also possible that in the legalese of the period, the stock phrase <foreign>viditam astu vo ’smābhiḥ</foreign> was understood to mean “let it be known to you from us”, i.e. that <foreign>asmābhiḥ</foreign> was not perceived to be the agent of the donation, but that of the proclamation. (On this point, see especially the <ref target="DHARMA_INSVengiCalukya00019.xml">Pr̥thivipallavapaṭṭana grant of Viṣṇuvardhana V</ref>, whose Sanskrit text breaks off after these words, and the text then switches to Telugu and begins anew with <foreign>svasti</foreign>.) To complicate matters, the instrumental <foreign>callakāryayā</foreign> may also have been meant to express the agent, perhaps in apposition to <foreign>mayā</foreign>. NV in fact interprets the text to say that the donor is the wife, while I prefer to understand that the formal donor is the king, but since the grant is being made on the occasion of his marriage, his newly wed wife is mentioned as co-donor. A further detail relevant to this difference of opinion is that by NV’s interpretation of stanzas 6 and 7 (with which I disagree), there is no indication that the grant was made on the occasion of the marriage.</note> have given the village named Ciṁbuluru to Vedayyaśarman, resident of Nandiyala, of the Murggali <foreign>gotra</foreign>,<note>As NV observes, Murggali may perhaps be a corruption of the name Maudgalya.</note> grandson of Madhuvayyaśarman and son of Viṣṇuśarman.</p>
<p n="18-20">Let it be known that we, <supplied reason="subaudible">together</supplied> with Callakāryā,<note>The agent of giving is apparently expressed at least twice, once as <foreign>asmābhiḥ</foreign> in line 18 and once as <foreign>mayā</foreign> in line 20. This is probably a simple oversight of the drafter of the text (compare the negligent composition of the next passage about the passing on of the donation). But it is also possible that in the legalese of the period, the stock phrase <foreign>viditam astu vo ’smābhiḥ</foreign> was understood to mean “let it be known to you from us”, i.e. that <foreign>asmābhiḥ</foreign> was not perceived to be the agent of the donation, but that of the proclamation. (On this point, see especially the <ref target="DHARMA_INSVengiCalukya00019.xml">Pr̥thivipallavapaṭṭana grant of Viṣṇuvardhana IV</ref>, whose Sanskrit text breaks off after these words, and the text then switches to Telugu and begins anew with <foreign>svasti</foreign>.) To complicate matters, the instrumental <foreign>callakāryayā</foreign> may also have been meant to express the agent, perhaps in apposition to <foreign>mayā</foreign>. NV in fact interprets the text to say that the donor is the wife, while I prefer to understand that the formal donor is the king, but since the grant is being made on the occasion of his marriage, his newly wed wife is mentioned as co-donor. A further detail relevant to this difference of opinion is that by NV’s interpretation of stanzas 6 and 7 (with which I disagree), there is no indication that the grant was made on the occasion of the marriage.</note> have given the village named Ciṁbuluru to Vedayyaśarman, resident of Nandiyala, of the Murggali <foreign>gotra</foreign>,<note>As NV observes, Murggali may perhaps be a corruption of the name Maudgalya.</note> grandson of Madhuvayyaśarman and son of Viṣṇuśarman.</p>
<p n="20-25">Vedayyaśarman, in turn, <supplied reason="subaudible">has given</supplied> the entire village to Brahmins engaged in the the six duties <supplied reason="explanation">of a Brahmin</supplied>, who know all the treatises <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>śāstra</foreign></supplied> such as Mimāṁsā, who gratify the complete coterie of gods by the ceaseless offering of sacrifices, who are learned in the four Vedas, who have completely mastered the truths of all the Vedāṅgas, who take after Vaśiṣṭha, Jamadagni, Bharadvāja, Parāśara and Durvāsas, who have studied what there is to be studied, learned what there is to be learned, performed what <supplied reason="subaudible">ritual</supplied> there is to be performed. The village named Ciṁbuluru has been given, exempt from all taxes, on the occasion of an eclipse of the moon, <supplied reason="subaudible">the donation being</supplied> sanctified by <supplied reason="explanation">a libation of</supplied> water.<note>This passage is awkwardly phrased. I translate by dividing it up into two sentences, in which case a verb must be supplied for the first. If we are to understand it as a single sentence, then the donated object is specified twice, once correctly in the nominative right before the passive verb, and another time, redundantly and incorrectly in the accusative, at the beginning after the subject expressed by a nominative. The drafter of the text probably did not pause to consider such niceties, but simply took the standard text of a grant and carelessly inserted in it a new bit about the passing on of the donation. The remission of all taxes appears at the end, whereas I would expect this to be mentioned where the king’s gift is spoken of (remission of taxes being the king’s prerogative). I also find the reference to an eclipse slightly problematic. Was the grant made on the occasion of the king’s marriage or that of an eclipse? The eclipse may have happened so close to the marriage that a need was felt to avert its inauspicious influence by making a grant. But if so, the eclipse too ought to be mentioned next to the king’s gift, and not after describing the passing on of the donation. Or was there no eclipse at all, and was this word simply retained from a previous grant that an inattentive composer used as a template for the present one?</note></p>
<p n="25-29">Its boundaries <supplied reason="subaudible">are as follows</supplied>. To the east, the village named Daṭṭiyavaṟṟu. To the south, the village named Golavadyapūṇḍi. To the west, the village named Indulamaddavallī. To the north, the village named Keḻipūṇḍi. <supplied reason="subaudible">The donated village is</supplied> situated in between these. Let no-one pose an obstacle <supplied reason="explanation">to the enjoyment of rights</supplied> over it. He who does so shall be conjoined with the five great sins.</p>
<p rend="stanza" n="8">Many <supplied reason="explanation">kings</supplied> have granted land, and many have preserved it <supplied reason="explanation">as formerly granted</supplied>. Whosoever at any time owns the land, the fruit <seg rend="pun">reward <supplied reason="explanation">accrued of granting it</supplied></seg> belongs to him at that time.</p>
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion xml-provisional/DHARMA_INSVengiCalukya00075.xml
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -376,7 +376,7 @@ n="3v"/>
</p>
<p rend="stanza" n="14"><supplied reason="subaudible">He is</supplied> like Manu to all people, like a father to all classes of his dependants <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>bhr̥tya</foreign></supplied>, like Kāma to amorous women and <supplied reason="subaudible">like</supplied> a wish-granting tree to supplicants.
</p>
<p n="27-32">That shelter of all the world <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>sarva-lokāśraya</foreign></supplied>, the supremely pious Supreme Lord <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>parameśvara</foreign></supplied> of Emperors <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>mahārājādhirāja</foreign></supplied>, His Majesty Viṣṇuvardhana <supplied reason="explanation">Bhīma I</supplied>, who was deliberately appointed <supplied reason="explanation">as heir</supplied> by his mother and father, skilled in procedures <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>nīti</foreign></supplied> such as critical investigation <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>ānvīkṣikī</foreign></supplied>; whose power is as irresistible as <seg rend="pun">the spear</seg> of Guha <supplied reason="explanation">Skanda</supplied>; who engenders joy in those who bow <supplied reason="subaudible">to him</supplied> like Vainateya <supplied reason="explanation">Garuḍa</supplied> <seg rend="pun">who engenders joy in Vinatā</seg>; who eradicates the realms of fierce enemies with his awesome army like Yudhiṣṭhira <seg rend="pun">who does so through Bhīmasena</seg><note>This last bitextual simile is rather lame on account of the long segment <foreign>uddhr̥ta-pracaṇḍārāti-maṇḍalaḥ</foreign>, which does not seem to carry a double entendre. The <ref target="DHARMA_INSVengiCalukya00019.xml">Pr̥thivipallavapaṭṭana grant of Viṣṇuvardhana V</ref> uses <foreign>yudhiṣṭhira iva bhīmasenānvitaḥ</foreign> to the same effect. Perhaps <foreign>pracaṇḍa</foreign> and/or <foreign>pracaṇḍārāti</foreign> is meant to refer to a particular person in one of the meanings.</note>—commands all householders <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>kuṭumbin</foreign></supplied>—including foremost the territorial overseers <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>rāṣṭrakūṭa</foreign></supplied>—who reside in Pottupa district <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>viṣaya</foreign></supplied> as follows.</p>
<p n="27-32">That shelter of all the world <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>sarva-lokāśraya</foreign></supplied>, the supremely pious Supreme Lord <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>parameśvara</foreign></supplied> of Emperors <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>mahārājādhirāja</foreign></supplied>, His Majesty Viṣṇuvardhana <supplied reason="explanation">Bhīma I</supplied>, who was deliberately appointed <supplied reason="explanation">as heir</supplied> by his mother and father, skilled in procedures <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>nīti</foreign></supplied> such as critical investigation <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>ānvīkṣikī</foreign></supplied>; whose power is as irresistible as <seg rend="pun">the spear</seg> of Guha <supplied reason="explanation">Skanda</supplied>; who engenders joy in those who bow <supplied reason="subaudible">to him</supplied> like Vainateya <supplied reason="explanation">Garuḍa</supplied> <seg rend="pun">who engenders joy in Vinatā</seg>; who eradicates the realms of fierce enemies with his awesome army like Yudhiṣṭhira <seg rend="pun">who does so through Bhīmasena</seg><note>This last bitextual simile is rather lame on account of the long segment <foreign>uddhr̥ta-pracaṇḍārāti-maṇḍalaḥ</foreign>, which does not seem to carry a double entendre. The <ref target="DHARMA_INSVengiCalukya00019.xml">Pr̥thivipallavapaṭṭana grant of Viṣṇuvardhana IV</ref> uses <foreign>yudhiṣṭhira iva bhīmasenānvitaḥ</foreign> to the same effect. Perhaps <foreign>pracaṇḍa</foreign> and/or <foreign>pracaṇḍārāti</foreign> is meant to refer to a particular person in one of the meanings.</note>—commands all householders <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>kuṭumbin</foreign></supplied>—including foremost the territorial overseers <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>rāṣṭrakūṭa</foreign></supplied>—who reside in Pottupa district <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>viṣaya</foreign></supplied> as follows.</p>
<p n="32-37">Let it be known to you that to the one named <seg cert="low">Ḻaṁgāthikaśvara</seg>, of the Kauṇḍinya <foreign>gotra</foreign> and the Vājasaneya school, grandson of Sabbiśarman and son of Vīthiśarman, on the occasion of <supplied reason="subaudible">his having been</supplied> a help to our sword, we have given, <supplied reason="subaudible">the donation being</supplied> sanctified by <supplied reason="explanation">a libation of</supplied> water and converted into a rent-free holding <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>agrahāra</foreign></supplied> by a remission of all taxes, the village named Pañcapāka along with <supplied reason="subaudible">its</supplied> twelve hamlets, as well as the hamlet Koppani, the hill of <supplied reason="subaudible">the village</supplied> Potūru, the hamlet Vallani and <supplied reason="subaudible" cert="low">the village</supplied> Podaṟupāka.</p>
<p n="37-42">The boundaries of these <supplied reason="subaudible">are as follows</supplied>.<note>The Telugu phrases in the boundary description are translated very tentatively, with the aid of Jens Thomas.</note> To the east, the eastern extremity of the hill of <supplied reason="subaudible">the village</supplied> Potūru. To the southeast, the <seg cert="low">way shelter</seg> <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>paṁdri</foreign></supplied> named Sattavu and <seg cert="low">the scree of the hill</seg> <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>mroḍlāni garugu</foreign></supplied>. To the south, the old road coming from the vicinity of Kanaṟuvat toward Ummeṁggi. To the southwest too, that same road. To the west, the Nijjhara river between the hamlets of Ummeṁggi and Koppani. To the northwest, the border is none other than the border of Śarkarakutti. To the north, the Paṁpā river. To the northeast, the border is none other than the border of <gap reason="ellipsis"/> <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>cīkulūri vāka</foreign></supplied>.</p>
<p n="42-44">Let no-one pose an obstacle over this ruling <supplied reason="explanation"><foreign>dharma</foreign></supplied>. He who does so shall go to hell, conjoined with the five great sins. So too has the reverend Vyāsa said.</p>
Loading

0 comments on commit 44ecfe4

Please sign in to comment.