North Indian Inscriptions

INSCRIPTIONS OF THE PARAMARAS OF MALWA

...SEHORE COPPER-PLATE INSCRIPTION OF ARJUNAVARMANHE

expired (pūrṇimānta), which corresponds to Monday, 22nd April, 1213 A.C., when there was a total eclipse of the Sun, visible in India. [1] The grant consists of a village of the name of Ubhuvōsaha, appertaining to Sāvaїrisolē [2] . The conditions, with all the detailes of the grant, are the same as of the previous grant, and the donee too is the same Purōhita Gōvindaśarman as of the first grant recorded here and the details about whom (i.e., his lineage and learning, etc.) are given in the preceding grant.

...The concluding portion of the record repeats the date and year in figures. It does not contain any imprecatory verse as the previous one from which the initial and the concluding portions are copied. In the end the record tells us that it was composed by the Rājaguru Madana, at the instance of the Mahā-sāndhi-vigrahika Paṇḍita Bilhaṇa, both these persons being the same as connected with the preceding inscription. After this, the sign-manual of the king Arjunavarman is engraved, followed by the statement that the inscription was engraved by Paṇḍita Bāpyadēva.

... Of the geographical names figuring in the inscription, the town of Mahākālapura is Ujjain, as has been indicated above. Sōmavatītīrtha seems to be a holy place on the Siprā which flows by Ujjain. No indication is available as to the identification of Ubhuvōsaha and Sāvaīrisōlē [3] . Bhṛigukachchha is, of course, Broach.

TEXT [4]
*......*......*......*......*

*......*......*.....*.....*

>

_______________________

[1] See Ind. Ant., Vol. XIX, p. 175 No 114. Thus, the aforementioned date, which must of course be taken earlier, regularly corresponds to 11th June, 1211 A.C. (for the same Vikrama year), for the Kārttikādi V. expired and the month beginning with the full moon.
[2] An additional word uttarāyaṇō also occurs here. I am unable to explain it. See n. on the corresponding portion of the text, below.
[3] D. C. Ganguly’s identification of this place with Savda, a town in the Khandesh District (H.P.D., p. 202) is not convincing.
[4] As transcribed by F. E. Hall in Journ. of Am. Ori Soc., Vol. VII, pp. 52 f. Hall’s transcript is not line by line, but I have retained the lines of his transcript.
[5] The preliminary portion, which is practically identical with that of the preceding grant, as Hall says, was omitted by him in his transcript and thus it cannot be given here, as the original too is now missing.
[6] The meaning of this expression is rather indistinct. uttarāyaṇō as a name of a village is rather curious and equally curious is the name Ubhuvōsaha. Probably the expressions appear to denote some two villages and if so. the use of saha may be justified. Sāvaїri appears to be the name of the leading village, as can be guessed by the use of the word sambaddha. It is. however, not known if the word sōlē is to be taken here in its local use denoting sixteen, as actually taken by some, for which see H. P. D., p. 201.
[7][Supply संविदितं here.
[8] Read vigrahaḥ . . . . pradattaḥ. The first of these words which means ‘body’, appears to have been used here in the sense of an image to be installed in a vāsa (temple) to be constructed on the spot. Hall translated this expression as “a ground plot for a temple of daṇḍādhipati” ; but cf. Barnett who says that vigraha here means a section or block and vāsa means a house. Thus the gift consisted apparently of a block of buildings which belonged to (the office called) daṇḍādhipati. Also see D. H. N. I., Vol. II. p. 896, n. 2.
[9] Insert च after this word.
[10] Sandhi is again violated here.
[11] The punctuation mark is redundant.

Home Page