This fragmentary inscription is engraved on three sides of a broken stone pillar found among the ruins of an ancient monastery situated in the Pānama Pattu of the Batticaloa District, about a mile to the south of the eighth mile-stone on the road from Potuvil to Vällavāya. The ancient name of this monastery was Rūṇu-maha-vehera; it is now known as Magul-maha-vihāra. The upper half of the pillar has been broken off and lost, resulting in the loss of large parts of the inscription. The record can be dated, on palaeographic grounds, to the fourteenth century. The extant portion of the inscription records that Rūṇu-maha-vehera, the ancient monastery at the site, was completely renovated by Vihāra-mahā-devī, the consort of the two brother kings named Parākramabāhu, after it had fallen into ruin and that she endowed it with lands for its maintenance. It seems that the inscription originally included a detailed account of the successful campaign fought by the brother kings after the Coḷa army but the inscription is mutilated just at the point where the reference to this historical event begins. The pillar was apparently set up after the demise of these kings, since the inscription tells us in the past tense that Vihāra-mahā-devī ‘was the chief consort of the two brother kings’. Since these brothers are described as ruling over Rohaṇa in another inscription found at Magul-maha-vihāra (IN03188), it seems likely that they were local princes whose authority was confined to this region, rather than paramount sovereigns of Sri Lanka.

Metadata
Inscription ID IN03189
Title Magul-maha-vihāra Fragmentary Pillar Inscription of Vihāra-mahā-devī
Alternative titles
Parent Object OB03150
Related Inscriptions
Responsibility
Author Senarath Paranavitana
Print edition recorded by
Source encoded
Digitally edited by
Edition improved by
Authority for
Metadata recorded by
Authority for metadata
Metadata improved by
Authoriy for improved
Language සිංහල
Reigning monarch
Commissioner
Topic records that Rūṇu-maha-vehera, the ancient monastery at the site, was completely renovated by Vihāra-mahā-devī, the consort of the two brother kings named Parākramabāhu, after it had fallen into ruin and that she endowed it with lands for its maintenance
Date:
Min 1300
Max 1325
Comment Basis for dating: palaeography. The inscription refers to two brother kings named Parākramabāhu. Since these brothers are described in this inscription as ruling over Rohaṇa, it seems likely that they were local princes whose authority was confined to this region, rather than paramount sovereigns of Sri Lanka. These princes do not appear to have been mentioned in any other historical sources, hence the dates of their joint reign are not known.
Hand
Letter size 3.175 cm (sides A and C) / 5.08 cm (side B)
Description The letters are, on average, 1¼ inches (3.175 cm) in size on sides A and C of the pillar and 2 inches (5.08 cm) in size on side B.
Layout
Campus:
Width 609.6
Height 152.4
Description A inscription engraved on three sides of a broken stone pillar. The upper half of the pillar has been broken off and lost, resulting in the loss of large parts of the inscription. On the surviving portion of the pillar, there are four lines on side A, twelve lines on side B and thirteen lines on side C.
Decoration An unidentifiable figure is engraved beneath the inscription on side A.
Bibliography
References In 1929, Senarath Paranavitana compiled a tentative account of the inscription, based on a defective estampage, for inclusion in the Ceylon Journal of Science, Section G, vol. ii, part II (p. 106). A few years later, he published a more detailed and accurate account of the inscription, including an edition and a translation, in Epigraphia Zeylanica 4 (1934–41): 161–169, no. 19, II.
Add to bibliography
Misc notes

The inscription states that Rūṇu-maha-vehera was originally founded by king Dāsen-käli (Dhātusena, who reigned circa 516–526). However, the chronicles do not credit Dhātusena with the establishment of this vihara. On the contrary, the Mahāvaṁsa and the Pūjāvalī attribute the foundation of Ruhuṇu-vehera, which is undoubtedly identical with the Rūṇu-maha-vehera of the present inscription, to king Dappula I, a rule of Rohaṇa who held the throne at Anurādhapura for a short period in or about 661 A.D. There is thus a discrepancy between the chronicles and the epigraph. The confusion may result from the fact that Dappula I is called ‘Dāpulusen’ in Sinhalese writings, which is obviously similar to ‘Dāsen-käli’. As the relevant passages in the chronicles predate the present inscription by about a century, they should perhaps be given more weight but, since the foundation of the monastery occurred six hundred years or more before any of these accounts was written, none of them may be considered wholly reliable.