North Indian Inscriptions

INSCRIPTIONS OF THE CHANDELLAS OF JEJAKABHUKTI

(1) the sign of v is used all through to denote b, except in udbabhūvuḥ and bibhartti in ll. 10 and 24, respectively, and in babhūva, which occurs as many as six times in ll. 10, 13, 14, 16, 20 and 22 and 24 ; (2) the dental sibilant is often employed in place of the palatal, and there are a few instances of vice versa, e.g., in –sāstra-śara-, l. 11, showing both the instances ; (3) a class- consonant is often doubled after r, as in darppa, l. 4, but not in visarpi, l. 6 ; (4) pṛishṭha-mātrās are generally used except in a few cases as in Dēvadhara- and -sachivō-, both in l. 22 ; (5) the sign of anusvāra is wrongly used instead of the final m at the end of a stich in ll. 5, 8, 10 and 15, though we have instances of the correct use of the consonant m also ; (6) the anusvāra is changed to the dental nasal before a sibilant as in vanśa, l. 2 and payānsi, l. 9, but not in -avataṁsa, l. 2 ; and lastly, (7) the word ujjvala appearing twice in ll. 14 and 18 is spelt with a single j. The word vibhaṅgi in l. 12, as also noted by Kielhorn, is used in the sense of bhaṅgi.

The proper object of the inscription is to record the construction of a temple of Vishṇu, and one of Śiva, by Sallakshaṇa, the Minister of the king Paramardin of the Chandrātrēya (Chandēlla) family, and also that the latter of these temples was completed by Sallakshaṇa’s son, Purushōttama, who succeeded him as the Minister. The poet who composed the record was Dēvadhara, and it was written by Dharmadhara, both of whom were sons of Gadādhara, the king’s Minister for Peace and War, and it was engraved by Mahārāja, the son of Sōmarāja. The details about all these persons are noted below.

The inscription is a praśasti, a laudatory account, as stated in v. 31 in it, and falls into three parts. The first part, which comprises vv. 1-13, contains the genealogical account of the Chandrātrēya (Chandēlla) kings. After a short sentence paying obeisance to the venerable Vāsudēva¹ and followed by two verses invoking the blessings respectively of Śauri and Rathāṅga- pāṇi or Chakrapāṇi, both being the epithets of Vishṇu (the second of the verse being lost in its latter half), the inscription proceeds in vv. 3-4 to refer to the origin of the race, the first two letters of which are again lost, but from the third and the fourth of them, viz., trēya, which are extant, it can be known to be the family of the Chandrātrēyas. Verse 5 introduces Madanavarman, the lord of the earth, as a brave prince who, by extirpation of the armies of the hostile kings resembled Indra who cut off the wings of the mountains with his thunderbolt and who also killed the demon Bala. The enemies of this prince are not mentioned here by name, but this verse may have a reference to the Kalachuris on the one hand and the Chaulukyas and the Paramāras on the other, all of whom were vanquished by him, as we have seen while dealing with the Kālañjara and Mau stone inscriptions of the time of this ruler.²

The next two verses describe Madanavarman’s war-like activities in a conventional manner, and vv. 8-9 state that his son Yaśōvarman, an ornament among great rulers, caused joy to the people. Yaśōvarman’s son, as we are informed in v. 10, was a powerful prince of the name of Paramardin, “whose foot-stool was pale-red with the luster of crest-jewels of kings bowing down (before him)”. Verses 11-12 are again devoted to eulogise Paramardin, the latter of these verses also describing his digvijaya in a conventional manner, as the Mahōbā stone inscription.

This part contains no new historical material, excepting that it introduces the name of Yaśōvarman, as the son and successor of Madanavarman and the father of Paramardidēva. That this prince actually ruled is not known from any other source; and unless this information is corroborated by any other record, we hesitate to accept it as a historical fact.³ Verse 8, which describes him, does not give him any regnal title, as to both his father and his son.

___________________________
¹ This appears to be rather curious as the inscription refers to the completion of a temple of Śiva, as to be shown below.
² See Nos. 120 and 125, respectively.
³ Different views are prevalent on this point. Dr. H. C. Ray suggests that Yaśōvarman had a very short reign and the present inscription hints at the untimely end of his career which may have been due to some dynastic troubles (D. H. N. I., Vol. II, pp. 712 ff). S. K. Mitra holds that Yaśōvarman died shortly after his accession, howsoever short a time it might have been (E. R. K., p. 118); and Dr. D. C. Sircar is inclined to the view that the epithet Mahēśvara-śirōmaṇi (the crest-jewel of the great rulers), of the present inscription (v. 8) is justified even if Yaśōvarman was the ruler of a district under his father. But it is significant that Yaśōvarman’s name appears in none of the charters issued by his own son Paramardin, as also observed by Dr. Sircar (Ep. Ind., Vol. XXXII, p. 118, n. l), nor also in the Ajayagaḍh inscription of Vīravarman (No. 145), which gives an exhaustive list of the rulers from Kīrtivarman to Vīravarman, his name should have been overlooked. It may be noted here that the name of this prince is omitted also in the account of ministers in the present record.