The Indian Analyst
 

North Indian Inscriptions

 

 

Contents

Introduction

Contents

List of Plates

Addenda Et Corrigenda

Images

EDITION AND TEXTS

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

Tiruvarur

Darasuram

Konerirajapuram

Tanjavur

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

Epigraphia
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

Pudukkottai

INSCRIPTIONS OF THE PARAMARAS OF MALWA

information supplied by the present inscription is that Jayasiṁhadēva was the successor of Bhōjadēva, without specifying the relationship between the two rulers.

...In every particular, the way of the description in the present record is as be found in the grants of Bhōjadēva, edited above ; and the arrangement of its contents is also similar, viz. in mentioning the name of the village granted, an address to its inhabitants and royal officials, the motive of the grant, the name of the donee and finally, the usual exhortations to the succeeding rulers and the date. But, as seen above, it does not specify the relationship existing between these two rulers. The name of Jayasiṁha is not known from any other inscription of the house-not even from the Udaipur and Nagpur praśastis which give an almost complete list of kings ruling at Dhārā up to the time when they were engraved. [1] On the other hand, Bhōjadēva is generally taken to have been succeeded by Udayāditya who is now definitely known to be his brother. But the present record, which mentions Jayasiṁha as the immediate successor of Bhōjadēva and the evidence of which cannot be doubted for any reason, definitely shows that Jayasiṁha must be placed between Bhōjadēva and Udayāditya and thus between 1047 and 1080 A.C. which are respectively the latest and the earliest known years of these two rulers.

...In view of the information furnished by the present inscription, we may also hold that it was Jayasiṁha who put an end to the troubles befalling on the Paramāra kingdom on account of the simultaneous attack of the Kalachuri Karṇa (c. 1041-1072 A.C.) and the Chaulukya Bhīma I (1022-1064 A.C.), when Bhōjadēva is known to have died. [2] Jayasiṁha, for whom it was difficult to resist the combined attack of two mighty foes, solicited the aid of the powerful Chālukya king Sōmēśvara I (1043-1068 A.C.) on this occasion. Sōmēśvara sent his son Vikramāditya VI to help Jayasiṁha and the former turned back the invaders and secured the throne for the latter, breaking the confederacy. karṇa’s invasion of Mālava which is graphically described in the Nagpur museum stone inscription and which was reverted by Udayāditya, [3] was thus, in fact, his second attack some fifteen years later. That Karṇa undertook two invasions –the first when Bhōja died and the second, about fifteen years later when Udayāditya saved the country, is well shown by Dr. V.V. Mirashi while editing the Ḍōṅgargāon inscription dated Śaka 1934 or 1112 A.C. [4]

>

...As for the localities mentioned in the inscription, Amarēśvara (1. 14) is undoubtedly the holy place of pilgrimage retaining its name even today and situated in the close proximity of Māndhātā. The place has been referred to also in some other grants of the Paramāras. As for the maṇḍala of Pūrṇapathaka, D.C. Ganguly has suggested that province bounded by the Pūrṇā river which is a tributary of the Tāptī ; [5] but as far as I think, all the places mentioned in this inscription must be sought in the same locality, whereas the provinces bounded by the Pūrṇā which is a southern tributary of Tāptī is away from Amarēśvara ; therefore I am inclined to take Pūrṇapathaka as probably represented by the modern Poonāsā, a big village straight about 30 kms. south-east of Amarēśvara. Maktulā, in which the gift-village was situated (1.6) is perhaps identical with the place now known as Mathēlā and situated about 12 kms. south of Māndhātā. The village Bhīma (1. 7) appears to have been represented by the modern Bhīmpurā, a little distance east of Godurpur and on the south bank of the Narmadā.

TEXT [6]
[Metres: Verses 1, 2, 4, 5 Anushtubh(Ślōka); vv.3, 7 Vasantatilakā ; v. 6 Indravajrā ; v.8 śālinī ; v. 9 Pushpitāgrā].

First Plate

1श्र्पों [7] [॥*]जयति व्योमकेशोसौ यस्सर्ग्गाय वि(बि)भर्त्ति तां(ताम्‌) । ऎन्दवीं सि(शि)रसा लेखांजगद्वी(द्वी)जां-
______________________________________

[1] In op. cit. Kielhorn drew our attention to Lassen’s Indische Alterthumskunde, Vol. III, pp. 855 and 1168-69, for the king Jayachandra or Jayānanda, who is reported to have ruled after Bhōjadēva. Nothing can be definitely said in this respect.
[2]See Ep. Ind., Vol. XXIV, pp. 101 ff. and also Mērutuṅga’s Prabandhachintāmaṇi , trans. by Tawney, pp. 74 ff.
[3] See below, No. 33, V. 32.
[4] Ep. Ind., Vol. XXVI, p. 179.
[5] H.P.D.,p. 124.
[6] From facsimiles facing p. 50 in Ep. Ind., Vol. III.
[7] Denoted by a symbol.

>
>