South Indian Inscriptions - Inscriptions collected during the year 1908-09 @ whatisindia.com

Contents
Introduction
Preface
Contents
List of Maps and Plates
Abbreviations
Additions and Corrections
Images
Introduction
Political History
The Early Silaharas
The Silaharas of North Konkan
The Silaharas of South Konkan
The Silaharas of Kolhapur
Administration
Religious Condition
Social Condition
Economic Condition
Literature
Architecture and Sculpture
Texts And Translations
Inscriptions of the Silaharas of North Konkan
Inscriptions of The Silaharas of South Konkan
Inscriptions of The Silaharas of kolhapur
APPENDIX I
Additional Inscriptions of the Silaharas
APPENDIX II
A contemporary Yadava Inscription
Index
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 SILAHARAS OF NORTH KONKAN

night of Māgha. As no week-day or nakshatra can be read now, the date does not admit of verification, but the cyclic year corresponding to the Śaka year 1125 was Rudhirōdgārī as stated. The tithi corresponds to the 18th January A.D. 1204.[1]

..Theobject of the inscription is to record some gift (perhaps of a vāṭika[2] ) at the Mānḍavalī tīrtha in the presence of the god Lakshmīnārāyaṇa installed by the Mahāmātya Lakshmīdhara of the aforementioned Śilāhāra king[3]. The donor was one Sōma Ṭhākura. The gift was obviously intended to be utilised for the service of that god.

..There is only one place-name mentioned in the present inscription, viz. Māṇḍavalī, which is plainly identical with Māṇdavī, where the present inscribed stone was found.

Text[4]

images/148

TRANSLATION

.. Success! In the year 1125, the (cyclic) year Rudhirōdgārī, on the 15th tithi of the bright fortnight of Māgha, during the reign of the illustrious King Kēśidēva adorned with all royal titles—this day, here, in the presence of the divine Lakshmīnārāyaṇa installed by the Mahāmātya, the illustrious Lakshmīdhara, Sōma Ṭhākura has donated . . . .12 at the holy place of Māṇḍavāli.
________________

[1] Dikshit and, following him, Tulpule give the Christian date corresponding to the tithi mentioned here as 29th January A.D. 1203, but that date is the equivalent of Śaka 1125 current. Śaka dates cited in inscriptions are generally expired ones. Besides, the cyclic year correspohding to Śaka 1125 current would be Dundubhi, not Rudhirōdgārī as stated here.
[2] Note the feminine gender of pradattā, line 7.
[3] Dikshit understands the inscription as meaning that Sōma Ṭhākura made some gift in the presence of Lakshmīrāyaṇa, who was a devotee of Rāma and was appointed by the Mahāmātya Lakshmīdhara. This is incorrect. Lakshminārāyaṇa is evidently the name of a god installed by the Mahāmātya Lakshmīdhara and named after himself. Tulpule has correctly understood the sense of the present inscription.
[4] From the facsimile plate XX in P.M.K.L.
[5] Expressed by a symbol.
[6] Read संवत्सरे.
[7] Read शुद्ध.
[8] The aksharas here have become very indistinct, but the reading gives above is very likely.
[9] Dikshit and Tulpule read प्रतिष्ठित. The aksharas have become indistinct, but the context requires the reading given above.
[10] Dikshit reads रामभक्तो, and Tulpule श्रीयुक्त. The aksharas भ and तो are clear and the sense requires the reading given above.
[11 Dikshit and Tulpule read हेर्णि.
[12] The object of the gift was probably a vāṭikā (orchard). In fact, the akshara ṭi of vāṭikā can be seen faintly before pradatā in the plate.

<< - 232 Page

Page 234 - >>

Home Page