Within the copperplate corpus of the Somavaṁśin dynasty from Orissa, consisting of about fifty land donations, the ruling king is always referred to by two distinct names to which honorific and sectarian titles are affixed. Indeed, he is called in the dated part by his personal name and in the formal part by his coronation name always associated with the coronation name of his predecessor forming a father and son couple designated as Mahābhāvagupta and Mahāśivagupta. Although this practice seems to be attested in almost all the land-donations issued by the kings of this dynasty, the coronation name doesn’t always appear in donations issued by third parties and is absent from stone inscriptions. Also noteworthy is the fact that the coronation names are totally absent from Indraratha’s records, while a detailed genealogy confirmed his legitimacy. Surprisingly, the same Indraratha is omitted in the genealogies of his successors. Is the coronation name only the result of a religious consecration ceremony ? Does it contribute to claim legitimacy? Or is it simply reserved for a filial power transfer? If this coronation name confers legitimacy, why is it not mentioned systematically? Does its use indicate a political stability and its absence the opposite? This paper will seek to determine the functions and the scope of the Somavaṁśin coronation name. It will be based on a diachronic and synchronic study of the different names used by the Somavaṃśin kings to designate themselves and those used by their contemporaries, whether suzerains, allies or enemies.