|
The Indian Analyst
|
|
North Indian Inscriptions |
INSCRIPTIONS OF THE CHANDELLAS OF JEJAKABHUKTI GWĀLIOR STONE INSCRIPTION OF MAHĪPĀLA subhaga, both in l. 3. The left limb of bh sometimes ends in a long tail ; see gabhīratā, l. 23, Y is occasionally ornamental and sometimes it cannot be distinguished from p ; cf. yad-ātmanā, l. 1 and rachitēyam, l. 40 respectively. The letter r is formed at least in three different ways, viz., by a vertical to which a horizontal stroke is attached at the left, with a loop, and with a wedge, as respectively to be seen in Purushōttama, vara and vismaya-kāri, all in l. 17. And lastly, the subscript form of this letter is represented either by its full form, with the preceding letter half drawn, as in chakrirē, l. 6, or by a serif attached to the lowest extremity of its superscript, as in sahasra-, l. 5. The loops representing the sign of visarga have a triangular notch between them. The language of the inscription is Sanskrit ; and with the exception of the introductory Oṁ ōṁ namaḥ Padmanāthāya and the expressions showing the date in l. 40, the entire inscription is in verse. The total number of verses is 112 ; they are not numbered. The language is correct and fluent, containing elegant and florid expressions as in the best Kāvya style using figures of speech like upamā, rūpaka, ślēsha, sandēha, apahnuti, vyatirēka and also parisaṅkhyā which is of rare occurrence.1
In respect of orthography, we have to note (1) the use of the sign for v to indicate b as well, except in s(ś)aury-ābdhinā, l. 5 where it is correctly used, but also in bapah, l. 1 where it is wrong ; (2) putting the dental for the palatal sibilant in a large number of instances as in -aṁsu, l. 8 but the use of aṁśu also to be seen in l. 29 ; on the other hand, the use of the palatal for the dental sibilant, e.g., in śāśan-ōdita, l. 34. Here it may be pointed out that the word śaśvat occurring three times in the inscription is spelt as sasvat twice in ll. 12 and 25 but as śasvat in l. 19 ; (3) the reduplication of a consonant, more often, following r and occasionally, also preceding it ; see, e.g., gīrvvāṇa-manttr = iva, l. 41 ; (4) writing ch frequently as chh, see vānchchhaḥ, l. 22 ; (5) the use of the jihvāmūlīya instead of the lingual sibilant in four instances all of which occur in l. 36 ; (6) the general tendency to put the parasavarṇa which is sometimes so strong that the final m is wrongly used in instances like tvam = viśuddha, l. 25 and in combining the expressions tvam and kō =si as tvamko = si, which though grammatically correct, gives an idea of clumsiness, in ll. 20 and 25 : (7) the change of a final m occasionally to an anusvāra at the end of a stich, e.g., in l. 37 ; and (8) a few instances of putting the daṇḍa so close to the preceding letter as to appear as a medial ā attached to it, as after bhagavān in l. 3. Some of the lines have the kāka-pada sign as the end. The inscription refers itself to the reign of Mahīpāla who belonged to the Kachchhapaghāta dynasty of Gwālior. The object of it is to record the completion of the temple of Padmanātha, begun by his cousin Padmapāla and the grants made by the king in honour of the deity installed therein and in favour of some Brāhmaṇas. The date of the record is expressed in l. 40, in words, to be the expired Vikrama year 1149, and it is repeated in figures in the same line, as the current year 1150, the day being the fifth of the dark half of Āśvina. The date does not admit of verification, though it is one of the few dates mentioning both the current and the expired era. The year corresponds to 1092 A.C., taken as Northern. The inscription falls into three parts, the first of which (vv. 5-33) gives an account of the king Mahīpāla and his ancestors, the second (vv. 34-67) glorifies him in bardic expressions, and the third (vv. 68-103) records the construction of the temple and the establishment of a Brāhmaṇa colony in its vicinity and the endowments made to them. Opening with a short sentence paying obeisance to Padmanātha and after four maṅgalaślōkas in praise of Aniruddha, Hari and Ushā’s husband installed in the temple, in 26 verses
it describes the genealogy of the Kachchhapaghāta (kachchhapāri, as mentioned in verse 5-7)
family to which Mahīpāla, who completed the temple belonged. Here we are told that the
originator of the house was Lakshmaṇa (v. 5). His son was Vajradāman who by honest means
put down the valour of the ruler of Gādhinagar (Kānyakubja) and performed tulā-dāna a
number of times (vv. 6-7). He was succeeded by Maṅgalarāja, who was a Śaiva (v. 8), and the | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| > |
|
>
|
