The Indian Analyst

North Indian Inscriptions






List of Plates

Additions And Corrections


Miscellaneous Inscriptions

Texts And Translations

Inscriptions of The Kalachuris of Sarayupara

Inscriptions of The Kalachuris of Ratanpur

Inscriptions of The Kalachuris of Raipur

Additional Inscriptions


Supplementary Inscriptions


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





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

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




THE slab of grey sand-stone, measuring 2' 1½” broad and I' 6½” high, which contains this inscription, was originally found fixed into a wall of the fort at Raipur, the head-quarters of the Raipur District in the Chhattisgarh Division of Madhya Pradesh. The inscription has been mentioned several times, first by Sir R. Jenkins in the Asiatic Researches, Vol. XV, p. 505, then by Sir A. Cunningham in this Archæological Survey of India Reports, Vol. XVII, p. 77, and finally by Dr. Kielhorn, who calculated the correct equivalent of its date in the Indian Antiquary, Vol. XIX, P. 26 and referred to it again in the Epigraphia Indica, Vol. II, p.230 in his article on the Khalāri stone inscription of Hari- brahmadēva.¹Dr. Kielhorn has also briefly noticed its contents² in the Indian Antiquary, Vol. XXII, p.83. The record is edited here for the first time from the original stone which is preserved in the Central Museum, Nagpur, and from inked estampages taken under my supervision.

The writing, which consists of 25 lines, covers a space measuring from 1' 10" to 1' 11" broad and I' 3" high. It is generally in a good state of preservation except that in lines 22-25 a few aksharas have been either damaged or completely lost owing to the breaking off of the proper right corner and of a few pieces from the bottom of the stone. The characters are Nāgarī. The size of the letters is about. 5".

The language is very corrupt Sanskrit. Except for the opening obeisance to Gaṇēśa, Sarasvatī and the poet's preceptors in 1. I, the particulars of the date, the reigning king and some other details in 11. 9-12, the introductory and concluding expressions such as Nagara-varṇanāḥ, 1. 12, Vaṁśāvaliḥ, 1. 17 and ya(i)ti praśastiḥ samāptaḥ(tā) in 1. 25, the names of the Sūtradhāra and the writer in 1. 25, and the pious wish for the welfare of the world at the end, the inscription is metrically composed throughout. The verses, except the first two, are not numbered. Their total number is 23. Attention may be called here to the use in verse 11 of the Hindi metre Gītikā which is rare in Sanskrit poetry. The first eight verses eulogising the different deities are fairly good, but owing to the ignorance and carelessness of the writer, the record contains, even in this portion, innumerable mistakes. The correct text can, however, be restored here without much difficulty. The subsequent verses, descriptive of the genealogy of the king Brahmadēva and the Nāyaka Hājirāja, are even more incorrectly written. They abound in mistakes of orthography, euphony and grammar. The record being so full of errors, the exact relationship and even the names of the persons mentioned in it are, in several cases, open to doubt; but fortunately these cases occur towards the end of the inscription and in a portion which has little historical importance. As regards orthography, it is impossible and also unnecessary to enumerate all the mistakes which will be found corrected below in the footnotes to the transcribed text; but we may note the following peculiarities:-n is used for ṇ and vice versa ; see -nivāran-aika-, 1.1 and -paṁchãṇanaḥ, 1. 2 ; b is denoted by the sign for v throughout ; sh and kh are interchanged in some places; see sushadā, 11. 6-7 and -bhūkhaṇaṁ, 1. 9 ; the final n is wrongly

1 Below, No. 108.
2 Dr. Kielhorn has summarised the contents of only the earlier part of the praśasti which gives the royal genealogy. About the later part he remarks, “ The concluding lines of the inscription (18-25) have reference to the founder of the temple, Hājirāja, and are void of interest,' Ind. Ant., Vol. XXII, p. 83.


  Home Page