|
The Indian Analyst
|
North Indian Inscriptions |
INSCRIPTIONS OF THE SILAHARAS OF KOLHAPUR
1113 Saka years had elapsed and the cyclic year Virōdhakṛit was current. The king was then encamped at the fort of Padmanala. ..The date of the grant can be completely verified. The cyclic year corresponding to the expired Śaka year 1113 was Virodhakṛit according to the southern luni-solar system. the fourth tithi of the bright fortnight of Āshāḍha ended 17 h. 45 m. on Thursday, the 27th June A.D. 1191. The Dakshiṇāyana or Karkaṭaka Saṅkrānti occurred 3 h. 50 m. after mean sunrise that day. The date is thus perfectly regular. .. As for the geographical names occurring the present grant, Padmanāla is, of course, the old name of the fort of Panhāḷā (elsewhere called Pranālaka) [1]. Kaśēli still retains its ancient name. It is bounded on the west by the ocean as stated here. Aṭṭavira, the chief place of the territorial division in which it was included, is now represented by Āḍivare, which lies about two miles to the south. No place corresponding to Ambēvarika can, however, be traced in the neighbourhood. Sthānaka and Gōvā are well-known.
.. As stated before, the second inscription is in Marathi, and is incised on the outer side of the third plate. It consists of sixteen lines, of which the first eight lines are almost completely obliterated [2]. The subsequent lines purport to record that during the reign of Haripāladēva of the Śilāhāra family two Māṇḍalikas Rāmaḍa and Jakhaṇa renovated the temple of Kanakāditya and made an unspecified grant to one Bhāgavata Mādhavabhaṭa on Wednes day, the 8th tithi of the dark fortnight of Bhādrapada, on the occasion of Kanyā Saṅkrānti, in the Śaka year 1201, when the cyclic year current was Pramāthin. This date is slightly irregular. The cyclic for Śaka 1201 was, no doubt, Pramāthin, but the specified tithi ended on Thursday (31st August 1279), not Wednesday as required. The discrepancy can be reconciled by supposing that the grant was made on Wednesday when the tithi was current, but the Kanyā Saṅkrānti had occurred one day earlier, on the 29th August A.D. 1279, and cannot, in any way, be connected with the tithi. So the date is irregular. besides, no Śilāhāra king named Haripāladēva was then reigning either in North or South Koṅkaṇ. There was, indeed, a king named Haripāladēva in the Śilāhāra family of North Koṅkaṇ, but he flourished more than 125 years before as his last known date is Śaka 1076 [3]. So this grant is spurious. It seems that at the time of the renovation of the temple in A.D. 1279, this Marathi record was engraved. All branches of the Śilāhāras had by then passed into oblivion, but from the Sanskrit record, which being written in Nāgarī, was not illegible, people knew that a Śilāhāra family was ruling over Kaśeli in former times. The name of Haripāladēva also may have been in popular memory at the time. So he was supposed to be reigning when the temple was renovated. As the inscription is evidently spurious, it is not included in the present work.
..TEXT [4]
[1] Above, No. 59, line 6.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| > |
|
>
|