The Indian Analyst
 

North Indian Inscriptions

 

 

Contents

Introduction

Contents

List of Plates

Additions and Corrections

Images

Introduction

Epigraphia Indica

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

SPURIOUS SUDI PLATES.


......But I believe it to be a spurious grant ; partly because of the type of the characters, and party because the date does not work out correctly. As regards the characters, lithographs of the Old-Kanarese alphabet of Western India of this period have not as yet been published ; and, accordingly, I cannot justify my objections in detail. But the characters present a decidedly later general appearance than those of the Âtakûr inscription, and of any records that I am acquainted with, belonging to within fifty years or so of the asserted date of this record. And they also seem to me to be distinctly more modern than those of the Korumelli grant of Râjarâja I., which was issued in or after A.D. 1022 (Ind. Ant. Vol. XIV. p. 48. and lithograph) They strike my eye as being perceptibly not early enough for the date to which they purport to belong. And, this being so, the fact that the details of the date do not work out correctly is decidedly a strong point against the authenticity of the record.

>

TEXT.1

First Plate.

1 Śrîr2=vvibhâti suvî(dhî)r=yyasya niravady[â] nirat[y*]ayâ tasmai namô=rhatê
2 lôka-hita-dharmm-ôpadêśịnê || Jita[ṁ*] bhagavatâ [gata*]-ghana- ga[ga]n-âbhê-
3 na Padmanâbhêna [||*] Śrîmaj-Jahnavêya3-kuḷ-â[ma]ḷa-vyôm-âva- bhâsana-bhâskaraḥ ||4
4 sva-khaḍg-aika-prahâra-khaṇḍita-maḥâ-śiḷâstaṁbha-labdha-baḷa-p a r â k r a m ô dâruṇ-â-
5 ri-gaṇa-vidâraṇ-ôpalabdha-bra(vra)ṇa-vibhûshaṇa-bhûshitaḥ K[â*]ṇvâ-
6 yana-sagôtra[ḥ*] śrîmat-Koṁguṇivarmma-dharmmamahârâjâdhirâjaḥ [||*]
7 Tat-putraḥ |5 pitur=anvâgata-guṇa-yuktô |6 vidyâ-vinaya-vihita-vṛittiḥ
8 samyak-prajâ-pâḷana-mâtr-âvi(dhi)gata-râjya-prayôjanô vidvat-kavi-kâṁ-
9 ñchana7-nikashôpaḷa-bhûtô nîti-śâstrasya vaktṛi-prayôktṛi-kuśaḷô dattaka-sû-
10 tra-vṛittêl(h)=praṇêtâ śrîman-mahâ8râjâdhirâjaḥ |(||) Ôm9 Tat- putra[h*] pitṛi-paitâ-
11 maha-guṇa-yuktô=nêka-châ(cha)tu[r]ddan[t]a-yuddh-[â*] v â p t a – c h a t u -

Second Plate ; First Side.

12 r-udadhi-saḷiḷ-âsvâdita-yaśâḥ śrîm[â*]n Harivarmma-mahâdhirâjâḥ [||*]
13 Tat-putraḥ śrimân Vishṇugôpa-mah[â*]dhirâjaḥ [||*] Ôm Tat-putraḥ
14 sva-bhuja-baḷa-parâkrama-kraya-kr[î]ta-râjyaḥ Kaliyuga-baḷa-paṅk-âva-.
15 sanna-dharmma-vṛish-ôddharaṇa-nite(tya)-sannaddhaḥ śrîmân=Mâdhava-mahâdhîrâjaḥ |(||) Ôm
16 Tat-putra[ḥ*] śrîmat-Kadaṁba-kuḷa-gagana-gabhastimâḷinaḥ |10 Kṛipa(shṇa)varmma-sa(ma)-
17 hâdhirâjasya priya-bhâginêyô vidyâ-vinaya-paripûṛit-â-
__________________________________________________________________________________________

......1 From the original plates.
......2 Metre : Ślôka (Anushṭubh).
......3 Read jâhnavîya.
......4, 5, 6, These marks of punctuation are unnecessary.
......7 Read kâûchana.
......8 Read śrîman-mâdhava-mahâº, according to the Nâgamaṅgala grant, line 11.
......9 Represented, here and throughout, by a plain symbol.
......10 This marks of punctuation is unnecessary.

 

>
>