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

>

No. 145 ; PLATE CXXXII

AJAYAGAḌH ROCK INSCRIPTION OF THE TIME OF VĪRAVARMAN

[ Vikrama ] Year 1317

THIS inscription was noticed for the first time, with a photograph and a somewhat incorrect abstract of its contents, by Sir Alexander Cunningham in his Archaeological Survey of India Reports, Vol. XXI (1883-85), p. 51 and Pl. xiii-E. Subsequently it was edited by F. Kielhorn, with a translation but without a facsimile, in the Epigraphia Indica, Vol. I (1888), pp. 325 ff. In this edition Kielhorn, who prepared the text of it from Cunningham’s rubbings placed at his disposal by Fleet, has also pointed out the errors in Cunningham’s account of it, which was based on its reading by his Simla Paṇḍit. The inscription is edited here from a fresh impression which I owe to the courtesy of the Chief Epigraphist, Archaeological Survey of India.6

___________________________
1 The syllable is omitted here either in the transcript or in the original.
2 The daṇḍa is redundant.
3 Sandhi is not performed here.
4 The use of shows that it may have been preceded by , as we find in the other grants of
5 Read .
6 His No. B-189 of 1969-70.

Home Page

>
>