North Indian Inscriptions

INSCRIPTIONS OF THE PARAMARAS OF MALWA

and the ūrdhva-mātrās, both of which are also seen side by side as in mōha-mah-ōrrmmi- 1. 12; (9)the sign of avagraha has been employed only twice, though there are many more occasions for it, e.g., in 11. 59 and 77, to show in both the instances the elision of a ; and (10) the daṇḍa marking the punctuation or the vertical for the pṛishṭha-mātrā is occasionally engraved so close to the preceding syllable as to appear as a medial ā attached to it, as after dharmmāya, 1. 1, and madhyē, 1.59, appearing respectively as dharmmāyā and mādhya. Besides these, rules of euphony have not been occasionally observed as in madhyē’mvu ; 1. 59 ; and finally, aṁghri, 1.62, and ujjavala, 1. 74 are wrongly spelt as amhri and ujvala, respectively.

...The object of the inscription is to record the endowments of land in favour of a number of Brāhmaṇas residing at the Brāhmaṇa-settlement at Māndhātā and belonging to the various gōtras, śākhās, etc., whose families hailed from several localities. The gift was made by the Sādhanika Anayasiṁha from his residence at the fort of Maṇḍapa (Māṇḍū), for creating a rentfree holding, ‘with the prior approval’ of the illustrious Jayasiṁhadēva, lord of Dhārā, on a date which is mentioned only in words in lines 91-92, as Friday, the seventh of the bright half of Bhādrapada, of the (Vikrama) Saṁvat 1331, called here Pramāthin, when the nakshatra was Maitra, i.e., Anurādhā. The date, as calculated by Dr. Sircar, regularly corresponds to the 10th of August, 1274 A.C. [1]

...To review the contents of the record, we may split up the same in the following sections :

(a) From the beginning to the end of verse 11––maṅgala-ślōkas ;
(b)Verses 12-55––the genealogical account of the Imperial Paramāra house up to Jayavarman in whose reign the grants were made ;
(c)Verses 55-56–the genealogy of Anayasiṁhadēva and the account of his various deeds and munificences.
(d) Lines 86-134––the date and the formal portion of the grant ;
(e) Imprecatory verses and the names of the poet and the engraver.

... The inscription opens with the auspicious symbol ōṁ, followed by a sentence in prose, paying obeisance to dharma, which is said to be the crest-jewel of all the purushārthas, and after that, a verse saluting the Moon-deity, the lord of sacrifices. The next four stanzas are devoted to praise Paraśu-Rāma, (Dāśarathī) Rāma, Puradruh (Tripurāri Śiva), and the ashṭa-mūrti Śiva, respectively. Here we may note that the initial sentence is the same as of the other grant of Jayavarman. and also that the first three of the deities praised here are the same as in the preceding grant, though the way of eulogising them differs. The following five verse (5-9) introduce a new feature by describing in a practical way the locality of Ōṁkāra-Māndhātā, its presiding deity, and the Narmadā and the Kāvērī flowing by its side. Verses 10-11 invoke the blessings, respectively, of the boar-incarnation of Vishṇu and of the Pitāmaha, i.e., Brahmā ; and verse 12 states that the latter of these deities, who sprang from the naval of the former, created from his own mind the Universe, the first of his creation being the seven sages, of whom Vasishṭha was the foremost. [2] The next five verses refer to the well-known legend about the origin of the Paramāras, as we find in the Udaipur praśasti and in some other inscriptions of the house, viz., the creation by Vasishṭha of a hero whom he named Paramāra (destroyer of enemies) ; and verses 16-24 furnish the names of his descendants ; they are : Kamaṇḍaludhara, king of Dhārā (v. 16), his son Dhūmarāja (v. 17). his son Dēvasiṁhapāla (v. 19), his son Kanakasiṁha (v. 20), his son Śrīharaha (v. 20a), Jagaddēva, king of Dhārā (vv. 21-22), Sthirakāya (v. 23), and Vōśari, lord of Dhārā (v. 24). It may be noticed here that the last three of these rulers are stated merely to have occupied the throne, one after another, and no relationship existing between them is mentioned. It may also be noticed that the name of Dhūmarāja was also borne by one of the rulers belonging to the Ābū branch of the Paramāra house and that Śrīharsha and Jagaddēva are mentioned much later, though both of them are known to have flourished earlier in the house. And as none of the remaining six of the names mentioned here is so far known as belonging to the Paramāra house of Dhārā in an earlier period, they may be taken to be unhistorical and their description to be merely a creation of the poet’s mind. For all these reasons, we may agree with Dr. Sircar who states that “Imagination
_______________________________________________

[1] Sircar, op. cit., p. 140.
[2] The beginning here is almost similar to that of the Chandēlla records Nos. 98 and 114, below.

Home Page