North Indian Inscriptions

INSCRIPTIONS OF THE PARAMARAS OF CHANDRAVATI

holding that Sīgāradēvī of the present inscription is evidently identical with Śṛiṇgāradēvī, the chief queen (paṭṭa-rāṇī) of Dhārāvarsha, as we know from the three inscriptions at Ajhārī, Jhālōḍī, and Rōhēḍā, [1] and thus she was the mother of Sōmasiṁha. But the same scholar also takes the above expression to mean that she was connected with the work of the creation of the image. This, however, appears to be less plausible; rather, on the other hand, from the use of the word kālē at the end of the expression, I am inclined to hold that the queen appears to be in charge of administration during the minority of her son, Sōmasiṁha. This inference however, needs some support to the accepted. [2]

...Of the geographical names mentioned in the inscription, Chandrāvatī is, of course, the capital of the junior branch of the Paramāras ; and Dhāṇatā is evidently identical with Dhāntā where the inscription was found.

TEXT [3]

No. 78 ; PLATE LXXX
NĀṆĀ STONE INSCRIPTION OF THE TIME OF SŌMASIṀHA
[Vikrama] Year 1290

... THE stone bearing this inscription is stuck up into the ground near the doorway of the hall of the temple of Nīlakaṇṭha Mahādēva at Nāṇā, a village in the Bālī tehsīl of the Pālī District in Rājasthān. [11] D.R. Bhandarkar, who first saw the inscribed stone in his visit to that place in 1907-8, was informed that it was originally found in the vicinity of the shine. He briefly noticed the contents of the record in the Progress Report of the Western Circle of the Archaeological Survey of India, for the same year (i.e., 1907-8), on p. 49, with the remark that “the inscription is highly weather-worn, but, a little care and patience, the important portion of it can be read with certainty”. The inscription is edited here for the first time from my own transcript based on impressions, prepared for me by the Superintending Archaeologist of the Western Circle. It is needless to say that the transcript is bound to be fragmentary, as the
_____________________________________________

[1] Nos. 70, 73 and 78, respectively.
[2] The first of the two inscriptions mentions the name as Sīgāradēvī, and adds that she was the chief queen of the Chāhamāna king Kēlhaṇa of Nāḍōl.
[3] From facsimile facing page 211 in Ep. Ind., Vol. XXXVII.
[4] Expressed by a symbol which is partly visible.
[5] Read साघ.
[6] The daṇḍas are superflous.
[7] Three two aksharas cannot be made out. The first of them appears to be bh (?) The first letter of the name is perhaps सीं on the original.
[8] The reading of the bracketed letters is conjectural, from the traces left.
[9] Incorrect for कारिता,as we find also in many other inscriptions of the time.
[10] The intended reading is perhaps प्रतिष्‍ठा for प्रतिष्‍ठापिता. All the letters in the line that follows are partially visible.
[11] For the situation of the place, see above. No. 69.

Home Page