The Indian Analyst

North Indian Inscriptions






List of Plates

Addenda Et Corrigenda



Inscriptions of the Paramaras of Malwa

Inscriptions of the paramaras of chandravati

Inscriptions of the paramaras of Vagada

Inscriptions of the Paramaras of Bhinmal

An Inscription of the Paramaras of Jalor

Other South-Indian Inscriptions 

Volume 1

Volume 2

Volume 3

Vol. 4 - 8

Volume 9

Volume 10

Volume 11

Volume 12

Volume 13

Volume 14

Volume 15

Volume 16

Volume 17

Volume 18

Volume 19

Volume 20

Volume 22
Part 1

Volume 22
Part 2

Volume 23

Volume 24

Volume 26

Volume 27





Annual Reports 1935-1944

Annual Reports 1945- 1947

Corpus Inscriptionum Indicarum Volume 2, Part 2

Corpus Inscriptionum Indicarum Volume 7, Part 3

Kalachuri-Chedi Era Part 1

Kalachuri-Chedi Era Part 2

Epigraphica Indica

Epigraphia Indica Volume 3

Indica Volume 4

Epigraphia Indica Volume 6

Epigraphia Indica Volume 7

Epigraphia Indica Volume 8

Epigraphia Indica Volume 27

Epigraphia Indica Volume 29

Epigraphia Indica Volume 30

Epigraphia Indica Volume 31

Epigraphia Indica Volume 32

Paramaras Volume 7, Part 2

Śilāhāras Volume 6, Part 2

Vākāṭakas Volume 5

Early Gupta Inscriptions

Archaeological Links

Archaeological-Survey of India





...THE plates bearing this inscription were found near Kālvaṇ in the north-west part of the Nasik District of the Bombay State, some time in the first quarter of the present century, and the record was briefly noticed in the Annual Report of the Archaeological Survey of india, for 1921-22, pages 118-19. It was edited by the late R. D. Banerji, then the Superintendent of the Western Circle of the Survey, in the Epigraphia Indica, Volume XIX (for 1927-28), pp. 69 ff., with his reading of the text thereof, in Roman Characters (pp. 71.73), translation (pp. 73-75) and facsimiles (Plate No. 8) between pages 72-73. The story of the discovery of the plates is interesting and is quoted here in Banerji’s own words :

... ‘’It (the record) was brought to the notice of Mr.A.H.A. Simcox, I.C.S., then Collector of the Nāsik District, by Mr. Gajanan Gopal Joshi, a teacher at a school at Kālvaṇ, who also read portions of the inscription. In the first instance, only the first two plates were recovered from a Bhīl, but on a reward being announced the third plate was also found at the same place. The plates were purchased for the Prince of Wales Museum, Bombay, through Mr. A.H.A. Simcox, I.C.S., who spared no pains to obtain them for that institution.’’ [5] The inscription is edited here from inked impressions supplied to me by the Chief Epigraphist.

...It is a set of three plates of copper, each measuring 25.40 cms. by. 14.60 cms., with their edges fashioned somewhat thicker than the inscribed surface, to protect the writing, which is in a fair state of preservation. A few letters here and there are slightly damaged by rust, but it is possible to restore them. The interiors of most of the letters show marks of the working of the engraver’s tool. In the middle of the lower part of the first plate and the upper part of the rest two there is a hole of the diaṁeter of about 1 cm., for a ring to hold them together ; but the ring, with any seal that may have been attached to it, is not now forthcoming. The weight of the plates is not known.

...The first and the third plate are inscribed on the inner side only and the second on both the sides. The writing on each side covers a space of 23.5 cms. broad and 12.5 cms. high. The size of the letters varies from .5 to 1 cm.

...The characters are Dēvanāgarī of the eleventh century and bear a general resemblance to those of the Bāṅswāḍā and Bēṭmā plates, dealt with above, making it probable that the inscriptiontion is of about the same time. But the technical process is rather crude and slovenliness is frequently apparent. The inscription teems with errors of engraving ; strokes or limbs of letters

[1] Read कृष्णसर्पा म्रभिजायन्ते. Sandhi is wrongly observed here for metrical exigencies. Also read भूमिहत्तरिः in the last pādā.
[2] This letter should be long. The word वालभ्य appears to be connected with वलभी. It may also be interesting to note that the sign for bh used here varies from that of the same letter in the name of the composer in the following line. For the two forms of this letter, see my remarks above in the palaeographical section of this article.
[3] To be restored to शोभिक (?).
[4] The last quarter of this verse is merely a pāda-pūrti. The construction too is wrong.
[5] Epi. Ind., Vol. XIX, p. 69.