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



[Vikvama] Year IIXX
[Vikvama] Year II

...THIS inscription was discovered in 1936 by the late Dr. A.S. Altekar, in course of his tour of archaeological explorations in the former Kōṭā State, now integrated with Rājasthān. The circumstances leading to the discovery of it are narrated by him in the following words :

...“When Dr. Mathuralal, the State Historian, Kotah, and myself visited Shergaḍh in February 1936 in the course of our tour of archaeological explorations undertaken at the instance of the Kotah Government, we came across several Jain, Hindu, and Buddhist inscriptions, both in the new and in the old fort, ranging from the 8th to the 13th century A.D. It is clear that during this period the citizens of this flourishing city followed these three faiths………..”

... Dr. Altekar also edited the record in the Epigraphia Indica, Vol. XXIII (for 1935-36), pp. 131 ff.; but his edition of it is not accompanied by an illustration. The inscription is edited here from an excellent impression which I owe to the Chief-Epigraphist of the Archaeological Survey of India.[1]

...The stone bearing this inscription is imbedded into the front wall of the local Lakshmī. Nārāyaṇa temple in the old fort at Śhērgaḍh,[2] a dilapidated town in the Atrū tehsīl of the Kōṭā District in South-East Rājasthān. The record consists of 24 lines of writing which covers a space measuring 51.5 cms. broad by 64 cms. high, but its concluding portion which may have consisted of two lines, as can be judged from a comparison with that of the Paramāra records and as we shall also see below, is either lost or imbedded in the wall in which it is now built. Owing to the loss of a part of the stone on the top and also on the proper left cornor thereof, the record has also suffered in the first 12 lines, the first of which shows two breaks, the one on the left, about 11.5 cms. long, and the other on the right, 13 cms. long ; and ,moreover, the general length of the lines, which is 46.5 cms. in the third, gradually decreases to 41 cms. in lines 6-8 and again begins to increase till the 13 th line is complete. Thus the concluding portion of 11. 3.12 has lost a few aksharas in various degrees in each of them, though some of them may be supplied from the context. The extant portion of the record, which was neatly written and carefully incised on the smooth surface of the slab, is in a good state of preservation. The average size of the letters, excluding the mātrās and flourishes above, is 1.5 cms.

...The script used is Nāgarī very similar to that of the Jhālrāpāṭan inscription of the time of Udayādityadēva. The only peculiarities worth noting are that the letter ṅ continues to appear without a dot, as in piṅgala-, 1. 3, and dh without a horn on its left limb, as in vasudhā-, 1. 11 ; t is often cut as n, cf. chaitra and chaturdaśyāṁ, both in 1. 10, and the conjunct ṇṇ as ll in -arṇṇava, 1. 14 ; th as a subscript is laid flat on its side in –sthita-, 1.9 ; and finally, bh is incised so as to resemble ru, e.g., in –bhāga-bhōga-, 11. 16 and 18.

...The language is Sanskrit, and the record contains the usual orthographical peculiarities of (a) the use of the sign for v to denote b also ; (b) the reduplication of a class-consonant followiing r ; (c) putting the dental for the palatal sibilant occasionally ; (d) the medial dipthongs are represented both by the ūrdhva- and the pṛishṭha-mātrās, and finally (e) the local element in writing anya as aṇya in 11. 19 and 22. The most glaring mistake of grammar is the wrong compound in mātṛi-pirtrōḥ for mātā-pitrōḥ in 1. 16.

...After the usual Oṁ svasti , which is followed by the mention of victory and prosperity and two stanzas respectively in honour of Vyōmakēśa (Śiva) and his matted hair, as we generally find to begin a Paramāra land grant, the inscription records the pedigree of the donor in 11. 3.6 introducing the Paramabhaṭṭāraka, Mahārājādhirāja and Paramēśvara , the illustrious Vākpatirājadēva, his successor, the P.M.P., the illustrious Sindhurājadēva, his successor, the P.M.P., the

[1] It is his No. B-427 of 1952-53.
[2] The place is about 20 kms. south-west of the station Atrū on the Kōṭā-Bīnā line of the Central Railway and about 145 kms. due south-east of Kōṭā. It is on the Parwan, a feeder of the Kālīsindh, which is a tributary of the Chambal. The ancient name of the place is Kōśavardana. For a description of its archaeological remains, see Ep. Ind., Vol. XXIII, p.131, and ibid., Vol. XXXI, p. 31