North Indian Inscriptions

INSCRIPTIONS OF THE KALACHURIS OF RATANPUR

SHEORINARAYAN INSCRIPTION OF JAJALLADEVA II : YEAR 919

(Siva), raised a mango-grove and excavated a tank. Further, a queen named Rāmbhallā excavated a beautiful tank and grew a mango-grove in the village Pajaṇī. We next learn that Ulhaṇadēva^¹ had a son named Āmaṇdēva (11) whom the king Jājalladēva (11) loved as his own distinguished son. The record seems to end here abruptly, for the next two verses refer to the writer Kumārapāla and the sculptor Chhītūka. But strange as it might seem, they are followed by four other verses recording further benefactions. It seems, therefore, that these verses (42-45) were at first omitted by cversight and were Subsequently added at the end. Of them, the first records the donation of the village Chiḥḥnchēlī, evidently by Āmaṇadēva (11),2 the last named prince of the collateral branch Here glorified, for providing materials for the worship of the god Chandrachūḍa. The Next two verses express the donor’s hope that the gift would continue for ever and would be respected by future rulers. The last verse again records the erection of the temple of Durgā in front of the god (Chandrachūḍa) by Vikannadēva.

If the benefactions in the third section are chronologically recorded, as they seem to be, there were apparently two princes of the name Āmaṇadēva. The first of them whose benefactions are recorded in verse 36 after those of Sarvadēva was probably the latter’s successor and, therefore, identical with the prince whose name is lost at the end of 1.8. It may again be conjectured that the prince who built the temple of Chandrachūḍa and Whose glorification in as many as 17 verses is the main theme of the present inscription was Ulhaṇadēva. He seems to have died fighting bravely with Jayasiṁhadēva when the latter Invaded the kingdom of Ratanpur and as his queens followed him as Satīs, his son Āmaṇadēva (11) became an orphan. He seems, therefore, to have been treated with special affection by Jājalladēva II in grateful recognition of his father’s self-sacrifice in his cause. It may be added that Jayasiṁhadeva was 2 contemporary of Jājalladēva II, as the former’s Jabalpur plates are dated K.918, i.e., just a year before the date of the present record.

Of the Places named in this inscription, Sōṇṭhiva is modern Sōṇṭhi in the Bilaspur tahsil, 11 miles north of Akaltarā. Paṇḍartalāī may be identical with one of the several villages named pēṇḍrī or paṇḍriā; off them, the one nearest to Shēorinārāyaṇ is pēṇḍriā, 7 miles to the north-west. Parthariā still retains its name and is situated 6 miles south By east of Mungeli. Vaṇārī is the modern Banāri near Janjgir. Pajaṇī may be Pajṇī may be pāchari, 6 miles east of shēorinārāyaṇ. Finally, Chinchēlī may be identical with Chichōlā on the left bank of the Hasdō, about 32 miles north-east of Shēorinārāyaṇ.

¹ Hiralal has wrongly stared that Āmaṇadēva was the son of Gōpāladēva. Verse 39 is explicit on the point.
² D. R. Bhandarkar and following him, Hiralal take the gift as made by Kumārapāla. But The latter was only a scribe Besides, the introduction of Āmaṇadēva’s name almost at the end of the Record would be purposeless unless we suppose that it was he who made the gift of the village Chinchēlī To the god Chandrachūḍa. As shown here, verses 42-45 were probably intended to be inserated after v.39 which mentions Āmaṇadēva.
³ From the original stone.
⁴ Expressed by a symbol.
⁵ Read 5 ´श्रेयांसि.
⁶ Metre of this and the next two verses: śārdūlavīkriḍita.