The Indian Analyst
 

North Indian Inscriptions

 

 

Contents

Index

Introduction

Contents

List of Plates

Images

EDITION AND TEXTS

Inscriptions of the Chandellas of Jejakabhukti

An Inscription of the Dynasty of Vijayapala

Inscriptions of the Yajvapalas of Narwar

Supplementary-Inscriptions

Index

Other South-Indian Inscriptions 

Volume 1

Volume 2

Volume 3

Vol. 4 - 8

Volume 9

Volume 10

Volume 11

Volume 12

Volume 13

Volume 14

Volume 15

Volume 16

Volume 17

Volume 18

Volume 19

Volume 20

Volume 22
Part 1

Volume 22
Part 2

Volume 23

Volume 24

Volume 26

Volume 27

Tiruvarur

Darasuram

Konerirajapuram

Tanjavur

Annual Reports 1935-1944

Annual Reports 1945- 1947

Corpus Inscriptionum Indicarum Volume 2, Part 2

Corpus Inscriptionum Indicarum Volume 7, Part 3

Kalachuri-Chedi Era Part 1

Kalachuri-Chedi Era Part 2

Epigraphica Indica

Epigraphia Indica Volume 3

Epigraphia
Indica Volume 4

Epigraphia Indica Volume 6

Epigraphia Indica Volume 7

Epigraphia Indica Volume 8

Epigraphia Indica Volume 27

Epigraphia Indica Volume 29

Epigraphia Indica Volume 30

Epigraphia Indica Volume 31

Epigraphia Indica Volume 32

Paramaras Volume 7, Part 2

Śilāhāras Volume 6, Part 2

Vākāṭakas Volume 5

Early Gupta Inscriptions

Archaeological Links

Archaeological-Survey of India

Pudukkottai

INSCRIPTIONS OF THE CHANDELLAS OF JEJAKABHUKTI

December, 1173 A.C1. The charter was written, by the order of the king, by Pṛithvīdhara, who belonged to the Vāstavya family and who was the writer of legal documents (v. 3) ; and it was engraved by the skilful artisan (vijñānin) Pālhaṇa who also engraved some other inscriptions, as already seen.2

The inscription opens with the well-known verse which eulogises the royal family of the Chandrātrēyas (Chandēllas) : and thereafter it refers to the two of the earliest members of the house, viz., Jayaśakti and Vijayaśakti. This is followed by the genealogy of the house, introducing the names of Pṛithvīvarman, this successor Madanavarman and the latter’s successor Paramardin, all mentioned in the usual was as Paramabhaṭṭāraka, Mahārājādhirāja, Paramēśvara, and mentioning the last of these rulers also to have been a devout worshipper of Mahēśvara and the supreme lord of Kālañjara (ll. 3-6). This portion, which is copied verbatim from the earliest grants of the king, does not add to our historical knowledge. Line 8 begins the formal portion of the record, which is of course different from that of the earlier grants, and which announces to the people assembled at the village Dhanaura, in the territorial division of Erachha, the donation made by the king Paramardin, while staying at Gahilū. The details of the land are mentioned in ll. 11 ff., viz., that it measured (as much as it could be cultivated by) five halas and sown by 3 and 3/4 drāṇas of seed.3 The former of these phases indicates the dimensions of the land granted and the latter the quantity of seed required for sowing it. To this gift was also added another plot measuring 52 hastas4 on either side, i.e., length and breadth. Each of the vāpas was designed to measure a prastha,5 and the measurements of the land are again stated to be 10 by 6, i.e., 60 vāpas. The boundaries of the donated land are also mentioned, viz., it was bounded on the east by the nāpita-nālā,6 on the south by a nālā, on the west by the embankment of the Bhatahaḍa tank, and on the north by a Brāhmaṇa’s land and a tank-embankment.

>

The donee was the illustrious Paṇḍita Ratana (Ratna or Śrīratna), the son of Dvivēdin Vīlhē, the grandson of Ṭhakkura Chhīdula and the great grandson of Ṭhakkura Yaśaḥpāla, belonging to the Vājasanēya śākhā and his gōtra was Sāṅkṛitya with the three pravaras Sāṅkṛitya, Aṅgirasa and Gaurīvṛitta.7 He had emigrated from the bhaṭṭāgrahāra known as Phōḍiva.

The conditions of the grant, which are the same as we generally find in the other grants made by the Chandēlla kings, are stated in ll. 24-30. This portion is followed by an imprecatory verse and then we have the sign-manual of the king Paramardidēva in l. 31. After this there is a verse, which is identical with that of the Sēmrā and Ichchhāvar grants, stating the name of the person who wrote the grant ; and then we have the name of the engraver, as seen above. Thus the inscription comes to a close.

As for the localities mentioned here, Ērachha (l. 8) has been identified with the well-known Erich on the Bētwā, which gave its name to the surrounding region. The place is about 60 miles (96 kms.) north-northwest, and at present included in the Hamīrpur District of Uttar Pradesh. Dhanaura (l. 8), according to Hiralal, represented the modern Dhanaurā, about 18 kms. from Erich. And Gahilū (l. 15) is apparently the same as Gahuli, about 16 kms. north of Dhanaurā. Phōḍiva, the locality from which the donee is stated to have emigrated (l. 19), cannot be identified for want of details. Hiralal has rightly remarked, “As the grant refers to pieces of land and not to the whole village, the boundaries are described by local nālās, ponds and fields, which it is now fruitless to trace.”

__________________________
1 Ep. Ind., op. cit, p. 10.
2 See Hiralal’s article, p. 10. Pṛithvīdhara also composed grants Nos. 126 and 129.
3 Drōṇa is a measure of capacity, which varied from time to time, as we know its dictionary meaning stating it to be equal to an āḍhaka and also to four āḍhakas.
4 Hasta is a measure of length equal to about 18” or 45∙7 cms.
5 For the meaning of vāpa, see No. 118, above. Prastha is a measure of capacity equal to 32 palas or 2048 māshas.
6 The text reads nāpitasatka, i.e., belonging to a nāpita. Whether this word has to be taken here as meaning ‘a barber’, as actually done by Hiralal, is doubtful.
7 This gōtra is generally known as Saṅkṛiti and the pravaras as Āṅgirasa, Sāṅkṛitya and Gaurīvīta.

Home Page

>
>