North Indian Inscriptions

SUPPLEMENTARY INSCRIPTIONS

of the palatal and the dental sibilants, occasionally ; sometimes doubling the consonant following r ; and lastly, a confusion between the formation of a daṇḍa with that of a pṛishṭha-mātrā or one of the components of the signs of the secondary i, almost all the same as to be found in the contemporary inscriptions. The anusvāra is throughout employed for the consonant m ; and it is often carved so lightly as to be seen only on the original. Examples of superfluous marks of punctuation are to be found in ll. 25-26 where the names of the donee and his forefathers are engraved. And finally, mahārāyāḥ in l. 4, satahattari in l. 32, and Vishaïka and yāyatē, in ll. 14 and 47, respectively, betray the influence of the local element.

The inscription refers itself to the reign of the illustrious king Naravarmadēva, who meditated on the feet of the illustrious Udayāditya who meditated on the feet of the illustrious Bhōjadēva, who in his turn, had meditated on the feet of the illustrious Sindhurāja. All these kings are mentioned in the records as endowed with the sovereign titles of Paramabhaṭṭāraka, Mahārājādhirāja and Paramēśvara. The purpose of the inscription is to record the perpectual donation of the village Mahudahā, by the subordinate prince, the mahāmaṇḍalēśvara Raṇadhavala, from his own bhukti, viz., Madhumatī-700, which was also a pratijāgaraṇaka in the Dakshiṇa-pathaka and was bounded on the west by Pāṇōṇī(lī?)-350, lying in the Pūrṇa-pathaka. The donees was the Nāyaka, Tripāṭhī Mādhala(va?)śarman, son of Tripāṭhī Vāvana (Vāmana)? and a grandson of Tripāṭhī Pavaṇāha (Pavanāha), and belonging to the Lāḍa community and migratated from the mahāsthāna Pañchaüra. His gōtra was Kauṇḍinya, with the three pravaras Kauṇḍinya, Vasishṭha and Maitrāvaruṇi, and he was a student of the Saṇī (?) śākha.

The grant was issued by Raṇadhavala from the Amarēśvara tīrtha, after bathing in the confluence of the Rēvā and the Kapilā, for the spiritual benefit of his parents and of himself. It is dated in ll. 16-18, both in words and numerical symbols, on the fifteenth tithi of the dark fortnight of Pausha in the (Vikrama) year 1148 on a solar eclipse. Below, in ll. 35-36, there is another date, when the grant was confirmed (o r re-issued ?) by Naravarman. It is Thursday, the seventh day of Chaitra of 1177, expressed both in words and numerical figures.

In view of the general practice of dating in the expired year, the European equivalent for the first of these dates would be Sunday, 25th December, 1091 A.C. ; but there was no eclipse on this day, and we have no other means to verify our calculation. The solar eclipse that occurred just before, however, fell on the 15th of the preceding Jyēshṭha, corresponding to Wednesday, 21st May of the year ; and this would seem to point out that the grant was originally made at the time of the eclipse, but was actually registered seven months later, in December.

According to the same scheme, the English equivalent for the second date would be 10th March, 1120, A.C., but the week-day on this date was Wednesday, not Thursday, as mentioned in the inscription. I am unable to explain this difference.

The Dutakas of the grant were the Purōhita, the illustrious Vāmanasvāmin and the Rājaputra Kumarapāla (Kumārapāla ?). The inscription was composed by the Akshapaṭalika (keeper of records) whose name cannot be made out, in the bhaṇḍāgāra (royal treasury), the name of which appears to have been Śrījaya (or the illustrious Jaya). The announcement of Raṇadhavala was made in the presence of officers, viz., daṇḍanāyaka, karaṇa-purusha, śayyāpāla daṇḍavarishṭha (or daṅgavarishṭha ?), niyuktipurusha, vishayika, and the people of the village.

The inscription is composed on the model of the royal charters of the Paramāra kings of Mālava, and it ends with the sign-manual of the king Naravarman, as stated above. The genealogy mentioned in it is all well known ; but the record presents a number of problems, the first of which concerns the accession of Naravarman. On the evidence of the Amērā inscription and the Dēwās grant, we have seen above that Naravarman ascended the throne in 1093-94 A.C.,^[1] but the present charter tends to show that he was actually reigning in 1090 A.C., with the paramount title of Mahārājādhirāja. From the Dēwās grant, we also know that his father Udayāditya died in 1093 A.C., and the conclusion that can apparently be drawn from the date given in the present record is that Udayāditya may have abdicated some time about 1090 A.C., of course in favour of his youngest son Jagaddēva, whom he liked most, and the latter offered it to Naravarman, some time before or about 1090 A.C. Whatever may have been the case, the record

__________________________
^[1] Above, Nos. 30-31.