|
The Indian Analyst
|
|
North Indian Inscriptions |
INSCRIPTIONS OF THE KALACHURIS OF RATANPUR GHOTIA PLATES OF PRITHVIDEVA II : YEAR 1000(?) (900) scribe Vatsarāja¹ are common to the Amōdā plates (first set) of Pṛithvīdēva II, dated K. 900. The orthography does not call for any special notice. The inscription refers itself to the reign of Pṛithvīdēva II of the Kalachuri Dynasty of Ratanpur. It purports to record the royal donation of the village Gōṭhadā in the Sāgatta (Sāmanta?) -maṇḍala on the occasion of an unspecified saṅkrānti. The donee was the Brāhmaṇa Gōpāla, the son of Rihila and grandson of Hari, who belonged to the Ālavāyana gōtra with the three pravaras, Vasishṭha, Maitrāvaruṇa and Kauṇḍinya.² The genealogy of the donor Pṛithvīdēva II is given here as in the Amōdā plates of the same king. There is nothing new in the description of him and his ancestors as all the verses are repeated from the earlier grants. The record purports to have been written by Vatsarāja, the son of Kīrtidhara, of the Vāstavya family, who owned the village Jaḍēra. Both Kīrtidhara and Vatsarāja are known from other records. The former, who is mentioned as the lord of the Jaṇḍēra village, wrote the Sarkhō plates of Ratnadēva II, while the latter was the scribe of the two sets of Amōdā plates (dated K. 900 and 905) of Pṛithvīdēva II. The present charter is said to have been incised by Chāndāka who is plainly indentical with Chāndārka, the engraver of the Amōdā plates (second set) of the same king Pṛithvīdēva II.
The present grant purports to be dated in the year 1000 on Thursday in the
bright fortnight of Bhādra[pa*]da. There is sufficient space left for cutting the tithi
in the beginning of the last line, but as in so many other cases, the lacuna has not been filled
up. The era, to which the year 1000 refers, is also not specified. It cannot evidently be the
Kalachuri era; for the date would, in that case, be about a hundred years later than those
of the aforementioned two sets of Amōdā plates of Pṛithvīdēva II himself. Nor can the
date be referred to the Vikrama or the Śaka era ; for in either case it would make Pṛithvīdēva II flourish earlier than even Ratnadēva I, his great-great-grandfather. It is clear, therefore, that there is some mistake here, as in so many other places in the present record, due
to the carelessness and ignorance of the copyist and it may be conjectured that the original
date was 900 which he wrongly copied as 1000. As the tithi has not been specified the
date does not admit of verification, but if we suppose that the plates were issued on the same
day on which the grant was made, i.e., on the occasion of a saṅkrānti, we get some basis
for calculation. Even then the date appears to be slightly irregular. With 247-48 A.C.
as the epoch of the Kalachuri era, the month Bhādrapada would fall in 1148 A.C. if the
year 900 was current, and in 1149 A.C. if it was expired. There was no doubt a saṅkrānti
(viz., Kanyā) in the bright fortnight of Bhādrapada in 1148 A.C., but it occurred 12 h. 45 m.
on Friday (Bhādrapada śu. di. 11, corresponding to the 27th August 1148 A.C.) and not
on Thursday as required. In 1149 A.C. there was no saṅkrānti in the bright fortnight
of Bhādrapada at all. Similar slight discrepancies in respect of the week-day of a saṅkrānti are not unknown from absolutely genuine records.³ Overlooking the discrepancy
of one day we may, therefore, take the date of the grant to be Friday [the 11th of ] the bright
fortnight of Bhādrapada of the current Kalachuri year 900, corresponding to the 27th
August 1148 A.C. 1 Viz., vv. 17-19, 21 and 26. All the first eleven verses occur in the same order in the Amōdā plates
(second set) of Pṛithvīdēva II also.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
