North Indian Inscriptions

SPURIOUS SUDI PLATES.

deep ; and so the letters do not show through on the reverse sides of the plates. The interiors of them shew, as usual, marks of the working of the engraver’s tool, almost throughout. It seems unnecessary to lithograph the whole record ; but, as a specimen, I give pates i., iii. b., and iv. a and b.— Except for the use of a few Kanarese forms and words, especially in lines 77, 78, the language is Sanskṛit. In addition to two of the customary benedictive and imprecatory verses in lines 80 to 82, there are verses in lines 48 to 64 and 83, 84.— The orthography presents nothing calling for remark.

......The inscription purports to be a record of that Western Gaṅga prince Bûtuga, who, according to the Âtakûr inscription (Epigraphia Indica, Vol. II. p.167), slew the Chôḷa king Râjâditya, in the war between the latter and the Râshṭrakûṭa king Kṛishṇa III., in or just before A.D. 949-50. And the object of it is to record a grant of land, which he is supposed to have made, to a Jain temple which his wife Dîvaḷâmbâ had founded at Sûṇḍî, i.e. Sûḍi. The record, however, is spurious.

......The date on which the grant purports to have been made, is Sunday, the eighth tithi of the bright fortnight of the month Kârttika of the Vikârin saṁvatsara, Śaka-Saṁvat 860 expired. The datails, however, do not work out correctly. By the mean-sign system of the cycle, by which alone Vikârin can be connected with the given year, the saṁvatsara commenced on the 19th November, A.D.937, in Śaka-Saṁvat 860 current, and ended on the 15th November, A.D 938, in Śaka-Saṁvat 861 current (860 expired). During this period, the month Kârttika fell in A.D. 938 ; and the given tithi ended in Thursday, 4th October, A.D. 938, at about 49 ghaṭîs, 45 palas,= 19hrs. 54 min., after mean sunrise (for Bombay). By the southern luni-solar system, Vikârin coincided with Śaka-Saṁvat 861 expired or 862 current : but, even if it be assumed that the record contains a mistake in respect of the year, no better result can be obtained ; for, in Śaka-Saṁvat 862 currrent the given tithi began on Tuesday, 22nd October, A.D. 939, at about 30 gh. 25 p.,= 12 hrs. 10 min.

......This grant belongs to a series of spurious records of a family or dynasty the member of which may, for the sake of convenience, be appropriately called the Western Gaṅgas, or the Gaṅgas of Gaṅgavâḍi,─ a province which lay principally in what is now the Mysore territory. These records have been mistakenly accepted by Mr. Rice as genuine. And it is most unfortunate that this has happened ; for the supposed facts and dates that are stated in them, permeate and vitiate almost everything that he has written in connection with the period to which they purport to belong. I have before now indicated the true nature of these records, and some of the reasons for stamping them as spurious.¹ Mr. Rice, however, has remained unconvinced. And I take this opportunity of stating the case more fully, and in a manner which was not possible when I wrote about it twelve years ago,— in the hope of being able to convert him at last, and with the object of at any rate preventing others, who may be working at the ancient history of India without reading the original documents for themselves, from falling into the same errors, and from being misled by such of his published statements as are based on these records.

......Excluding the presnts grant, which I shall notice again further on, we have now nine of these spurious records, in print more or less, as follows :—

......(1) The Tanjore grant of Arivarman, i.e. Harivarman, dated in the Prabhava saṁvatsara, Śaka-Saṁvat 169 expired, with details falling in A.D. 248 ; published by myself, Ind. Ant. Vol. VIII. p. 212, with a lithograph.

......(2) The Harihar grant of an unnamed son of Vishṇugôpa,─ who is, I suppose intended to be Mâdhava II.,─ dated in the Şâdhâraṇa saṁvatsara, Śaka-Saṁvat 272 (expired),
__________________________________________________________________________________________

......¹ See, e.g., Ind. Ant. Vol. XII. p. 111.— My present remarks, of course, entirely supersede all that I have previously written on this subject.