|
The Indian Analyst
|
|
North Indian Inscriptions |
INSCRIPTIONS OF THE CHANDELLAS OF JEJAKABHUKTI FRAGMENTARY MAHŌBĀ STONE INSCRIPTION OF THE TIME OF PARAMARDIDĒV as pointed out by Mirashi. The mutilated condition of the record does not mention the name of the king, but provenance of the inscription, together with the mention of the date in the end as the year 1240, leads us to conclude that he could be no other than Paramardin, whose known years range between V. 1223 and V. 1258. It may also be rightly conjectured that the initial portion, which is now lost, must have contained an account of this king, ending with his name, and verses l-10 of the extant portion of the record may have given a eulogistic description of this very king. Though of a highly literary worth, these verses are of less historical interest. To summarise the contents of the record, we find the first verse describing the flames of the king’s glowing vigour pervading the sky, and the second refers to his digvijaya in a general way. The next verse purports to say that he was bounteous, and his struggle against Aṅga, Baṅga and Kaliṅga is referred to in the fourth verse. As his invasion of these regions is not known from any other source, this statement may be taken as a poetic panegyric. Verse 5 again refers to his conquests, in vague terms, and verse 6 states that ‘the lord of Tripurī fainted whenever he heard the songs of the valour of his arms’.1 This reference seems to indicate that the contemporary Kalachuri king, who was probably either Jayasiṁha (1163-1188 A.C.) or his son Vijayasiṁha (1188-1210 A.C.), the last known ruler belonging to the Kalachuri dynasty, submitted to Paramardin. We have seen above that Paramardin’s grandfather, Madanavarman, claims to have achieved some success against the Kalachuri Gayākarṇa (1123-1153 A.C.) ; and as since then the strength of the Kalachuris was on its wane, the statement of the present inscription about Paramardin, that he brought under submission the Kalachuri king, may have some justification, though this account cannot be verified from any other source.
The rest of the verses describe the king in a conventional manner. Thus, verse 10 means to say that he was devoted to Śiva ; and vv. 11-12 mention the main purpose of the record, viz., that during the reign of the prince described above (that is, Paramardin) was erected this lofty temple of Śiva, evidently the same where the inscribed slab may have been originally set up. The following portion of the record mentions the name of the poet who composed the praśasti, that of the sculptor who erected the temple and also that of the engraver of the praśasti. The last verse (20) wishes good to the lunar (i.e., Chandrātrēya) family, and with the date as we have discussed above, the inscription comes to a close. There is no geographical name in the existing portion of the record. Cunningham noticed three inscriptions on the pillars of a temple at Madanpur, all stating that the Chāhamāna king Pṛithvīrāja III (1178-1192 A.C.) defeated Paramardin and ravaged his kingdom in V.S. 1239.2 And the present inscription, which is dated only a year after, doubtless shows that soon after the ravage was over, the affairs in the Chandēlla kingdom were again normal. TEXT3 [Metres: Verses 1-2, 4-5, 7-9, 14 and 20 Śārdūlavikrīḍita ; vv. 3 and 15 Āryā ; vv. 6, 10, 13, 16 and 18-19 Anushṭubh ; v. 11 Vasantatilakā ; vv. 12 and 17 Śikhariṇī ]
__________________________ | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| > |
|
>
|
