North Indian Inscriptions

MISCELLANEOUS INSCRIPTIONS

SHEORINARAYAN STATUE INSCRIPTION : YEAR 898

and the date as well as the name of the composer in the last line , the whole inscription is metrically composed. The verses, of which there are three, are all numbered. The ortholography does not call for any remark except that the sign of v is everywhere used for b aad j is employed for y in drashjaṁ in 1.4.

The object of the inscription is to record that the statue is of a warrior named Saṅgrāmasīṁha, the son of Bālasiṁha and Āmaṇadēvī. The praise which is here lavished on him is wholly conventional and has no historical importance.

The interest of the inscription lies in its date which is here clearly specified as belonging to the Kalachurī era. Sir R. Jenkins first published the date as Samvat 898 Ashwin Shudh Saptami. Sir A Cunningham, in his A. S. I. R., Vol. IX, gave it as “in the the Kulachuri Samvat in the year 898, Aswin sudi Some’ on p. 86 and at “898 Aswina sudi 7 Monday’ on p. III. Subsequently, in his A. S. I. R., Vol. XVII, plate xx, be published a photozincograph of only a part of it which reads Kalachuriḥ Samvatsarē 898. He again referred to it in his Indian Eras, p. 61, where he remarked : ‘ A fresh examination has shown the date to it Atvina in. di.2 (and not Āivina su, di, 7).’ Dr Kielhorn at first accepted this last statement September 1146 A. C., on which day the second tithi of the bright fortnight of Āśvina ended 21 h. 54 m. after mean sunrise. As he was then of opinion that the Kalachuri year was Bhōdrapadādi and the era commenced in 249 A. C., he concluded that the year 898 of this date was a current year.¹ Subsequently, in his article on the era in the Festgruss as Rath he confirmed the aforementioned reading from a facsimile and gave the same corresponding date as before, but as he had then come to the conclusion that the Kalachuri era commenced on Āśvina śu. di. I in 248 A. C. he took the year of the date as expired. Dr. D. R. Bhandarkar next stated, in his notice of the inscription in P. R. A. S. W. I. for 1903-4, P. 53, that the inscription was dated ‘898 Kalachuri era, Monday, the 7th of the. bright half of Āśvina.’ From a photograph of the inscription supplied by him, Kieclhorn also finally read the date as Kalachuri-samvatsarē 898 Asvina-sudi 7 Sōma-dinē and stated That it regularly corresponded, for the current Kalachuri year 898, to Monday, the 24th September 1145 A.C., when the seventh tithi of the bright fortnight of Āśvina ended 20 h. 57 m. after mean sunrise.² This date seemed to confirm Kielhorn’s opinion that the Kalachuri year began in Āśvina ; for it showed that the month of Āśvina fell, in any case, in the beginning of that year. The subsequent discovery of some dates of the era such as those of the Amōdā plates of Pṛithvīdēva 11³ and the Jabalpur plates of Jayasiṁha⁴, which show that the Kalachuri year began in some month later than Āśvina, has, however, rendered the accuracy of the reading of the date of the present inscription open to question. From an excellent inked estampage supplied by Dr. Chhabra, I find that the tithi originally incised was 2, but the lower part of the figure has now become indistinct, thus making it appear like 7. The correct reading - of the date, therefore, is Kalachuri-samvatsarē || 898 || Asvini sudi 2 Sōma-dinē. The date, Monday, the 2nd tithi of the bright fortnight of Āśvina, regularly corresponds, for the current Kārttikādi Kalachuri year 898, to Monday, the 9th September 1146 A.C.
_____________

¹ Ind. Ant., Vol. XVII, p. 216.
² Ep. Ind., Vol. IX, P. 130.
³ Above, No. 94.
⁴ Above, No. 63.