The Indian Analyst
 

North Indian Inscriptions

 

 

Contents

Introduction

Contents

Preface

List of Plates

Abbreviations

Additions and Corrections

Images

Introduction

Political History

Administration

Social History

Religious History

Literary History

Gupta Era

Krita Era

Texts and Translations

The Gupta 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

THE GUPTA INSCRIPTIONS

of the day of the month or fortnight. It is an inscription of solar worship; and the object of it is to record a perpetual endowment, by a Brāhmaṇa named Dēvavishṇu, for the purpose of maintaining a lamp in a temple of the Sun at Indrapura or Indrāpurā i.e., the modern Indōr. This mention of the place, under its ancient name, connects the record satisfactorily with the locality in which the plate was found. The temple was built by the two merchants of Indrapura, Achalavarman and Bhṛikuṇṭhasiṁha, Kshatriya or Khatri1 by caste and the amount of the endowment was invested at Indrapura in a guild of oil-men of which Jīvanta was the head (pravara). The guild was to make a uniform and perpetual supply of oil for lamp, whrever it was stationed, whether at Indrapura or at some other town whither it might emigrate.

TEXT2

[Metres: verse 1 Śārdūlavikrīḍita and verse 2 Indravajrā]

1 Siddham [|| *] Yaṁ vipra vidhivat=prabhuddha-manasō dhyān-aika-tānā3-stuvaḥ4 yasy=āntaṁ tridaś-āsurā na vividur=nn=ōrdhvaṁ na tirya-
2 g-gatiḥ5 [|*] yaṁ lōkō bahu-rōga-vēga-vivaśaḥ saṁśritya chētō-labhaḥ pāyād=vaḥ sa jagat-pithāna6-puṭabhid-raśmy-ā-
3 karō bhāsakaraḥ || [1*] Paramabhaṭṭāraka-mahārājādhirāja-śrī-Skandaguptasy= ābhivarddhamāna-vijaya-rājyasaṁvvatsara-śatē7 shach8-chatvā-
4 [ri*]nśad-uttarantamē Phālguna-māsē tat-p[ā*]daparigṛihītasya vishayapati- Śarvvanāgasy=Āntarvvēdyām bhōg-ābhivṛiddhayē vartta-
5 mānē ch=Ēndrāpuraka9-Padmā-chāturvvidya-sāmānya-brāhmaṇa-Dēvavish- ṇur=Ddēva-putrō Haritrāta-pauttraḥ Ḍuḍika-prapauttraḥ satat-āgnihō-
_
>
______________________________________________________

1 It is worthy of note that there was a tribe called Kshatriya or Kshattri which is mentioned both by foreign writers and in Sanskrit literature. Thus Arrian, who has left us an account of Alexander’s invasion of India, informs us that when this Macedonian emperor was encamped at the confluence of the Chēnāb and the Indus, he received deputies and presents from Xathroi (Khathroi), an independent tribe of Indians (McCrindle’s Ancient India, its invasion by Alexander the Great, p. 156). As has been pointed out by K. P. Jayaswal (Hindu Polity, pt. I, p. 60), the same tribe appears to have been mentioned by Kauṭilya (XI. line 4) along with the Kāmbōjas and Surāshṭras as the Saṁghas subsisting both upon agriculture and arms. They have apparently been referred to as Kshatriyas by Ptolemy (Ind. Ant., Vol. XIII, p. 360). Similarly, they seem to have been referred to in the phrase Khatiya- dapamāna-madanasa occurring in the Nasik cave praśasti of Gautamīputra Sātakarṇi (Ep. Ind., Vol. VIII, p. 60, line 5). Again, they appear to be the Kshattri described in the Manusmṛiti (X, 12-13, 16, 19, 26 and 49) and the Kshatriyas of later inscriptions, such, e.g., as the Lāḍṇū inscription (Ep. Ind., Vol. XII, pp. 23 ff.) of Sādhāraṇa who and his ancestors are spoken of as Kshatriyas of the Kāśyapa gōtra or the six grants of the Gāhaḍavāla king Jayachchandradēva of Kanauj (Ind. Ant., Vol. XVIII, pp. 136-42) which speak of one and the same grantee, viȥ., Rājyavardhana, a Kshatriya and of the Vatsa gōtra. They doubtless represent the modern Khatrī caste which pursues business and is spread over the Panjab, U.P., Rājaputānā, Central India, Gujarāt and even some parts of Mahārāshṭra (R. E. Enthoven’s Tribes and Castes of Bombay, Vol. II, pp. 205 and ff.).
2 From the original plate.
3 Read –tāna-.
4 “The form stu”, says Fleet, “is rather unusual; the customary form being stut. But Bühler has given me the analogous instance of āyata-stu, which is mentioned by Kātyāyana in his comments on Pāṇini, iii. 2, 76. The meaning of āyatastu is not given the Mahābhāshya; but Monier Williams explains it by ‘panegyrist.’” The note is all right except the reference to Pāṇini which should be iii. 2, 178.
5 Read –gatim.
6 Read –pidhāna-.
7 See p. 246 above, note 1. But, after the cleaning of the plate, Gen. Cunningham (CASIR., Vol. XII, p. 40) could see a faint trace of the vowel ē of rājyē. According to him, it should thus read rājyē samvatsara-śatē.
8 Read shaṭ-.
9 As corrected by Jagan Nath (JUPHS., Vol. XIII, p. 99; and Proc. Ind. Hist. Cong., 1940, p. 59). Fleet reads Chandrāpuraka.

>
>