North Indian Inscriptions

INSCRIPTIONS OF THE PARAMARAS OF CHANDRAVATI

a hiatus, as in hy-utpala, 1. 3, of shortening or lengthening a medial vowel, as in āraṇya, 1. 3, and Pūrṇṇā-pāla, 1. 7, and of distorting words for metrical exigencies, e.g. svapāna for sōpāna, 1. 15, and jyōti-vidāṁ for jyōtir-vidāṁ, 1. 1, [1] with the same aim in view, following the adage : ‘api māshaṁ māshaṁ kuryāch=chhandō-bhaṅgaṁ na kārayēt’. For the sake of metre, rules of sandhi are also often violated, as will be noted below in the text.

... With reference to orthography, we may note the following points : (i) the reduplication of a consonant preceding or following r, as in puttra, 1. 4, attra, 1. 7, and karmma, 1. 14 : (2) the use of the dental for the palatal sibilant, e.g. in sīlēna, 1. 5 ; (3) the general use of anusvāra, though wrongly, at the end of a stich and even for n ; cf. utpaṁna, 1. 5 and ūḍhavāṁ=saḥ 1. 12 ; and (4) the wrong spellings in trubhuvana, 1. 16, siṁgha, 1. 18 and rishi, 1. 19. The dynastic name, though correctly spelt as Paramāra in 1. 7, appears as Pramāra in 1. 2, where we have pramāratā, formed on the analogy of sādhutā, janatā, etc. ; and the name of the queen who restored the temple, as we shall see below, is spelt with the lingual ṇ, as Lāhiṇi, in 11. 7, 11, 17 and 20, but with the dental nasal in 1. 22. The singular example of visarga changed to parasavarṇa in himādriś-śikharaiḥ, 1. 18, is interesting.

...The object of the inscription is to record that Lāhiṇī, the younger sister of the Paramāra king Pūrṇapāla and the dowager queen of Vigraharāja, ruling at Vaṭapura, rennovated, for her own spiritual welfare, an ancient temple of the Sun and also a stepped well, both of which were out of order, at that place. The date of the inscription, as given in words (v. 35), is the ninth day of the dark half of the month of nabha, i.e Śrāvaṇa, the moon being in (the nakshatra) Mṛigaśiras, of the year 1099 in the time of Vikramāditya. The date regularly corresponds to the 12th of August. 1042 A.C., taking the month amānta ; and, as Kielhorn observed in course of editing the inscription, this is the earliest of the dates of the Vikrama era that quotes a Jovian year and also that it is the earliest known date in which we find the expression Vikramāditya-kālē. [2]

...The inscription may be split up into three sections. The first section (vv. 1-11), after the usual maṇgala-ślōkas, gives the names of some of the kings belonging to the Paramāra house ruling over the Arbuda-maṇḍala. The next section (vv. 12-17) contains an account of the ruling house to which the husband of Lāhiṇī, who restored the temple and the stepped well, belonged ; and the third or the last section speaks about the writer and the engraver and also mentions the date, besides describing the well, etc.

...Beginning with two verses paying homage to Mahēśvara, the poet Vālmīki and the goddess of Learning, the inscription invokes the blessings of Hari. The next verse refers to the myth of the creation by Vasishṭa of the hero of the name of Paramāra who became the progenitor of a family of that name, as it is found in a number of inscriptions of the house. The first historical prince spoken of in the record is Utpalarāja, who was followed by Araṇyarāja ; and the latter’s successor was Kṛishnarāja (v. 4). Kṛishnarāja’s son was Mahi(ī)pāla from whom was born Dhandhuka (vv. 5-6), whose queen was Amṛitadēvī. Dhandhuka is said to have regained his fortune (kingdom) by his valour. This is evidently a reference to the attack of the Chalukya Bhīma I on the Kingdom of Dhandhuka, who, as we know from the Vimala temple inscription on Mount Ābū, fled to Bhōja of Dhārā, and Bhīma, having acquired the Arbuda-maṇḍala, appointed Vimala of the Prāgvāṭa family to govern the conquered territories. [3] The tone of the verse of the present inscription clearly indicates that Dhandhuka ultimately succeeded in regaining his kingdom, [4] probably with help of Bhōja who was an inveterate enemy of the Chaulukyas. Dhandhuka’s son, as the record further tells us, was Pūrṇapāla, who is described in vv. 8-10, in a conventional manner. His younger sister was Lāhiṇī, who was married to Vigraharāja, ‘the best of the kings and an incarnation of Mādhava (Kṛishṇa) himself’.
_______________________________________________

[1] In all these examples the readings are absolutely certain.
[2] Ep. Ind., Vol. IX, p.12. Kielhorn calculated the date only for Chaitrādi Śrāvaṇa, expired, but it works well for the Kārttikādi Śrāvaṇa expired also, in which the ninth tithi ended 1 h. 15 m. after mean sunrise when the said nakshatra Mṛigaśiras actually began on 2nd August, 1043 A.C. And if the sandhi of the tithi and the nakshatra was intended, this would be the Christian equivalent, also showing this inscription to be later than the preceding one.
[3] Ibid., pp. 155-56.
[4] As shown by the first half of v. 7. D. C. Ganguly, however, gives the credit of regaining the kingdom to Dhandhuka’s son Pūrṇapāla, for which we have no evidence. See H. P. D., p. 300.

Home Page