North Indian Inscriptions

INSCRIPTIONS OF THE CHANDELLAS OF JEJAKABHUKTI

KĀLAÑJAR STONE INSCRIPTION OF PARAMARDIDĒVA

it.¹ And since then it has also suffered highly not only due to the effects of weather but also from human inclemencies.²

The average size of the letters is l.5 cms. in the first half, and in the remaining portion thereof it is gradually reduced till the letters in the last line are about 1 cms. high. The characters are of the Nāgarī alphabet of the 13th century to which the inscription belongs. They are symmetrically formed but are not deeply engraved, as can be judged from the impression showing most of the letters indistinct. As regards individual letters, attention may be drawn to the distinct form of ch, e.g., in Chandra and chūḍā. l. 1 ; to the horn of dh, which is sometimes oblique, as in dhṛita, but often curved, as in vidhura, both in l. 1; to the forms of ṇ and p, as in praguṇa, l. 1; and to the slightly different forms of bh, as in Śaṁbhu- and bhūshā, both in l. 3.

The language is Sanskrit; and except for a short sentence paying obeisance to Śiva in the beginning and the date with the words maṅgalaṁ mahāśrīḥ in the end, the record is metrically composed. There are 19 verses followed by some which are fragmentary and cannot be counted; they are not numbered. As regards orthography, attention may be drawn to the few ordinary points, e.g., the use of the sign of v to denote b as well; the occasional use of the dental for the palatal sibilant; the indiscriminate use of the sign of anusvāra, para-savarṇa, etc., the use of both the pṛishṭha- and the ūrdhva-mātrās, and finally, the doubling of a consonant following r.

The inscription is a praśasti, as stated in a verse in the end, and was composed by the king Paramardin, who is well known to us as the Chandēlla king who bore this name. The composition, which is in a highly flourished kāvya style and abounds in figures using long compounded expressions, speaks highly of his poetic talent. It was written on the stone and also incised by the wise Padma, superior to all artists and the favourite of the valiant king Paramardin, the grandson of an eminent artist whose name is not mentioned, and the son of Anṛiṇa, in com- pany with his younger brother Dēūka.³ The inscription is dated in figures only, on Monday, the 10th of the bright half of Kārttika of the (Vikrama) year 1258. The corresponding Christian date has been calculated by Kielhorn to be the 8th October, 1201 A.C., taking the year expired,⁴ Northern Vikrama. It is regular.

The inscription may be divided into two parts, the first of which contains the eulogy of Śiva and Pārvatī, which is its main purpose, as stated above. This portion is devoid of any historical interest.

The first five stanzas of the second part which begins with line 25, are devoted to the description of Paramardin himself, in general terms. It is stated here that he was the greatest of all the kings and the sole ruler (adhinātha) of Daśārṇa, and that he subdued his foes by his valour. By his liberality he won the esteem of his subjects. He also sought pleasure in company of women and his glory excelled that of the Divine jewel and the wish-granting cow.

The next verse states that Paramardin himself composed the eulogy owing to his spontaneous devotion to the feet of Purāri, i.e., Śiva. This account is again followed by a verse making general remarks about the poem, by way of instructions to the reader. The next verse mentions the names of the writer and the engraver, as seen above; it is followed by a verse expressing that the eulogy may be everlasting. And finally, the last line of the inscription mentions the date, as we have discussed above, and with the words maṅgalaṁ mahāśrīḥ, the praśasti comes to a close.

The inscription under review provides the latest known date of Paramardin. It is worthy of note that in it the king claims for himself the title of Daśārṇādhinātha, i.e., the supreme lord of Daśārṇa; and it also indicates that he effectively administered the entire dominions inherited from his grand-father Madanavarman, despite the reverses caused by the Chāhamāna ruler Pṛith-
______________________________
¹ J.A.S.B., ibid., p. 193, n. 90.
² For example, in the shifting from place to place, for, whereas Maisey found the stone learning against a pillar opposite the entrance of the Cave, Cunningham found it inside the temple ; and the technical assistant of the office of the Chief Epigraphist, who visited the place in March, 1972, reports that it is “kept near the door of the sanctum of the same temple”. In these attempts it is quite natural for this massive stone to suffer.
³ Here I do not agree with Maisey in translating the expression ālikhya svayam-ullilēkha as “composed and inscribed the praise of the husband of Girijā (p. 317). As we learn above, it was composed by Paramardin himself.
⁴ Ind. Ant., Vol. XIX, p. 354, No. 152, which also gives some details.