The Indian Analyst
 

South Indian Inscriptions

 

 

Contents

Index

Introduction

Contents

List of Plates

Additions and Corrections

Images

Contents

A. S. Altekar

P. Banerjee

Late Dr. N. K. Bhattasali

Late Dr. N. P. Chakravarti

B. CH. Chhabra

A. H. Dani

P. B. Desai

M. G. Dikshit

R. N. Gurav

S. L. Katare

V. V., Mirashi

K. V. Subrahmanya Aiyar

R. Subrahmanyam

T. N. Subramaniam and K. A. Nilakanta Sastri

M. Venkataramayya

Akshaya Keerty Vyas

D. C. Sircar

H. K. Narasimhaswami

Sant Lal Katare

Index

Appendix

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

EPIGRAPHIA INDICA

As indicated above, the writing on the reverse of the plaque should also have to be assigned to the same age. The language of both the records is Sanskrit. The date, quoted in line 1 of the inscription on the obverse, reads : Sã 67 Dhausha-di[n]ē . . no doubt standing for Saṁvat 67 Pausha-dinē … The record was therefore incised on a day of the solar month of Pausha (i.e., Dhanus) in the 67th year of some era. Considering the provenance of the plaque and the date of the epigraph suggested by its palaeography it is possible to think that the era to which the year has to be referred is none other than the Lakshmaṇasēna-saṁvat or La-Saṁ prevalent in Mithilā (North Bihār). There is difference of opinion in regard to the epoch of this era ; but it has been said that “the initial year of the era, as reckoned at different times and places, varied between 1108 and 1120 A.D.”[1] The date of the record under study, viz., year 67, thus appears to fall in the period 1175-87 A.D.

Both the lines of writing, impressed on the reverse of the plaque by means of a sealing, read śrī-Suhmakasya, the passage being followed by a double daṇḍa and a symbol. The sealing, used in imprinting the lines, therefore belonged to a person named Suhmaka. It is clear that the same sealing was employed twice. The reason for this may be that the letters of the lower line, originally impressed, did not all of them come out quite clearly. In the first line, which shows some letters more clearly, the fourth akshara, viz., ka, looks almost like . But this may be due to a defect in the sealing.

t>

The inscription on the obverse of the plaque consists of four or probably five lines of writing, of which the first, giving the date of the record, has been quoted and discussed above. The object of the inscription appears to be that three persons named Śādhi, Ēchi and Āka made a gift of a lotus at the feet of Kēśavā at Nagalḍāmaka. The third akshara of the name read as Kēśavā is damaged ; but the reading seems to be fairly certain. Kēśavā appears to have been the name of a god or goddess worshipped at a place called Nagalḍāmaka. Whether the name is a mistake for Kēśava, meaning Vishṇu, cannot be determined. Traces of an akshara below the concluding letters of line 4 suggest the existence of a fifth line in the original record probably containing the word iti indicating the end of the document. It seems that Suhmaka was the chief priest of the temple of the deity in question or a royal official whose seal was believed to impart the required authenticity to the deed of gift.

The fact that the offering of a lotus in favour of a deity was regarded as important enough to be recorded in an inscription, albeit on a terracotta plaque, appears to suggest that the flower was not an ordinary one. It was probably a lotus made of gold or silver.[2] The inscription points to the custom of using clay plaques or tablets as writing material side by side with other objects such as copper plates. Terracotta plaques, which were not as durable as copper plates but were much cheaper and more easily procurable, were probably used to record minor donations poorer people.

I have no idea about the location of the place called Nagalḍāmaka ; but it might have been situated somewhere in the Teghra Police Station in the northern part of the Monghyr District.

TEXT[3]

Reverse

1 śrī-Suhmakasya ||[4]
2 śrī-Suhmakasya ||[4]

________________________________________________

[1] History of Bengal, Vol. I (Dacca University), pp. 233-38 ; cf. JBRS, Vol. XXXVII, Parts 3-4, pp. 10-13.
[2] Flowers made of gold have been discovered at such ancient sites as Salihundam (Srikakulam Dist., Andhra) in the course of excavations (cf. Indian Archeology 1953-54, p. 11). For silver flowers, cf. SII. Vol. IV, No. 1019.
[3] From the original.
[4] There is a symbol after the double daṇḍa.

Home Page