North Indian Inscriptions

THE GUPTA INSCRIPTIONS

MANDASŌR INSCRIPTION OF NARAVARMAN: KṚITA YEAR 461

Railway. How Dasōr came to be called Mandasōr has been explained variously. Perhaps the best explanation is that given to me in 1897 when I first visited Mandasōr. Then a learned Brāhmaṇa told me that originally there was also another village close by called Man and that Mandasōr thus consisted of the two place names–Man and Dasōr. Many instances are known of such composite names; e.g., Sāñchī-Kānākhēḍā. The original stone fragments are now lying at the State Museum, Gwalior.

       The larger fragment bears nine lines of writing, each containing one anushṭubh and a half or forty-eight syllables. Thus there are thirteen verses and a half on this fragment. Chisel marks are noticeable on all sides. The writing covers a space about 1' 6-½" broad by 7-¼" high. The size of the letters varies from ¼" to ¾". The characters belong to the Mālwā variety of the Western class of Gupta alphabet. This is indicated by the test letters m, s, sh and h, and also by l the right limb of which is a long vertical stroke bent towards the left. These differentiate the western from the eastern alphabet of the Gupta period. Other palaeographic peculiarities that are worth noticing are: (1) the occurrence of the long initial ī in īdṛik- in line 4, which may be compared with the short initial i found in the Allahābād and Kahāuṁ inscriptions (Nos. 1, above and 20 below) and the long ī in the Sāñchī inscription (No. 9, above); (2) the occurrence of the initial ē in ēka- in line 2; (3) the ringlet at the bottom of th instead of a crossbar in the middle, as in-manōrathē, line 4; (4) the bipartite y in –ōpachay- in line 4, which, however, is tripartite in all other cases; (5) the letter s, the left limb of which is as much a convex curve as the right; (6) a concave curve in the beginning of the left limb of p. ph and sh, as e.g., in-paryyaṅka-, line 1, -phaladaṁ, line 7, and purush⁰, line 1 ; (7) the medial ā placed lower down about the middle in the case of ā and m, as in Āśvōja- in line 3, and sasya-mālinī in line 3; (8) medial i expressed sometimes by a loop and sometimes by a curve on the left; (9) medial u expressed in three different ways, by a hook attached to the bottom turned towards the left as e.g., in-samudra-, line 1 and –pushpair=, line 3, or by a curve on the right rising up vertically to the height of the letters as e.g., in –śuklasya, line 3 and duhitur=, line 9, or, in two cases of r by a curve attached to the bottom rising up on the left and intersecting the letter about the middle, as in –chāru- line 7 and ⁰kāruṇikaḥ, line 9, but not in purushāy=, line 1. The language is Sanskrit; and, except for the opening word Siddham, the inscription is in verse. There is one mistake due to the mason’s carelessness, viȥ., sva-kulasy=atha instead of sva-kulasy=ātha in line 8; two due to the scribe’s ignorance, e.g., prāvṛik-kālē instead of prāvṛiṭ-kālē in line 2 and -viddud-dipa- instead of -vidyud-dipa- in line 6; and one, a solecism, for which apparently the composer is responsible, viȥ., the use of śrīr-, twice instead of śrī- as the first part of a compound word, as in śrīr-Mmālava-, line 1 and śrīr-mmahārāja-, line 5. ¹

       In respect of orthography, we have to notice (1) the doubling of consonants in conjunction with a preceding r, e.g., in -paryyaṅka-, line 1,=saṁvarddhita-, line 4, and so forth ; (2) the doubling of k in conjunction with a following r in Śakkrasya, line 2 and –vikkramē, line 4, but not in –vikrānta-, line 5; (3) the use of anusvāra instead of saṁdhi, in=alaṁkṛitā and paṁchamyām= in line 3, and -saṁbhāra-, line 6, but not in śaraṇaṅ=gataḥ,, line 7; and (4) the use of guttural nasal instead of anusvāra before h, in Siṅhavarmmaṇas= and =Siṅha-vikrānta, line 5.

       The inscription is of the time of a prince named Naravarman, who was a son of Siṅhavarman and son’s son of Jayavarman. It is dated, in words, when four hundred and sixty-one years had expired (verse 2), on the fifth day of the bright fortnight of Āśvina (verse 5). The era has not been specified, but the years just referred to have been named Kṛita
___________________________________________________

¹ [In these and in similar other instances the retention of visarga in śrīr is justified according to the grammatical rule a-ṅyantatvān=na su-lōpaḥ (Siddhānta Kaumudi with Bālamanōramā, 1910 Edn., p. 201). Cf. also the expression śrīr-mmahārāj-Āvarighsasya in the Crystal Intaglio Inscription (Ep. Ind., Vol. XXXVI, pp. 275 ff.) where also it has been regarded by the editor as a mistake for śrī mahārāj-, etc.—Ed.].