The Indian Analyst
Information
Democracy Government States Neighbors Religions Organizations
The Eternal Way
Introduction The Scriptures Principles Karma The Individual The Society
Content
Latest Editorials Questions Search
 

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

TEXT[1]

No. 101; A (C 2                                    No. 102; B (C 3)
(Sanskrit)                                            (Sanskrit)

   No. 103; C (C I)

No. 104; D (C 4)

[1] From impressions supplied by the Chief Epigraphist and also from Photozincographs (Plate xxxiii) in Cunningham’s A. S. I., A. R. Vol. X. Cunningham’s number of the inscriptions is given here in brackets, where the letter C denotes Cunningham.
2 Sandhi is not observed here and below in similar cases.
3 Kielhorn read this letter as , but what he took to be the subscript (Sanskrit) appears to me only a scratch, as can be seen also above this
letter and below those that precedes and follows it. This portion is damaged and we cannot be certain about the existence of the subscript.
4 What appears as an anusvāra above is only a defect in the stone.
5 The word ‘belonging to’ is used to express the meaning of the possessive case in contemporary inscriptions; but, as Kielhorn has
rightly observed, it is redundant here since the name that precedes this word is already included in that case.

Home Page
>
>