Indian Antiquary Vol 26

SR No.: 032518
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Richard Carnac Temple
Publisher: Swati Publications
Publication Year: 1984
Total Pages: 360
Language: English
Classification: Book_English
File Size: 15 MB

Page 35

FEBRUARY, 1897.] THREE DATES OF THE HARSHA ERA.
Friday, the 15th January A. D. 824,13 which is just about the time to which the inscription would be assigned on paleographical grounds, and that we know of no other era of which the year 218 would fall in the 9th century A. D. And as regards the second point, the latest Indian1s date with numerical symbols, from an inscription dated according to one of the wellknown eras, hitherto was that of the Bengal As. Soc.'s plate of Vinayakapala of [Harsha-] Samvat 188 A. D. 793-94. It is a curious, but rather significant fact, that that date of Vinayakapala's plate is the only other known date which, like the date of the present inscription, contains the word samvutsrô.
Text.16
A.-1 Om [*] Gôllâ17 Sâbila-pû(pu)trasya |
2 Samvatsról 200 10 8 Magha-budi1o 10 [1] 3 Sri-Hanumantam Gollakaḥ pranamati [*] B.-1 Sahilasya20 sutaḥ śrîmân-Hanuman31-Pa2 van-âtmaja [m] 133 [a] karôd-dharmmam-a3 lôkya Gôllâkô23 prakṛitam Harim [11]
31
C.
Pañjaur inscription of [Harsha-]Samvat 563.
In Archeol. Surv. of India, Vol. XIV., Plate xxii, 3, Sir A. Cunningham has published a photozincograph of an inscription in four lines, which he discovered at Pañjaur (Panjor, Pañchapura), an old town about 70 miles north of Thaneswar, and 80 miles north by east of Peheva Pehoa), in the Pañjab; and ibid. p. 72 he has given, without any comment, a transcript of the text, in which the date of the inscription is read as 'samvat 56.. Jeth Sudi 9 wár Sukre.' Although I possess an excellent impression of this inscription, kindly given to me by Dr. Flee t I am not prepared, owing to the damaged state of the second and third lines, to publish the full text, which, indeed, with the exception of the date, does not seem to me to be of any importance. The language of the inscription is Sanskrit, greatly influenced by the Prakrit of the writer. The characters look like a mixture of the ordinary Nagari and the Sâradâ characters; they in some respects resemble those of the Chambâ plate of Sômavarmadêva and Asatadêva, and still
13 The same 10th tithi of the bright half of the same month Mighs of the [Harsha] year 155 of the date of the Dighwa-Dubauli plate of Mahendrapala, which admits of verification, corresponds to the 20th January A. D. 761.
14 The only later date, hitherto published, of an inscription in which the Harsha era is employed, is that of the Peheva (Pehoa) inscription of the reign of Bhojadeva of Kanauj, of the year 276 (given in words and numerul figures): Ep. Ind. Vol. I. p. 186. I take this opportunity of stating that the Pilácht-chaturdas, which is mentioned in the Peheva inscription (see ibid. p. 188, note 25), is the 14th tithi of the dark half of the amânta Chaitra (or pirimanta Vaisikha), and that it is so called because bathing in the Ganges near Siva on a Tuesday during this tithi is believed to remove trouble from Pisachas.
1 In Nepal we have an inscription of [Gupta-]Samvat 535 A. D. 854-55, in the date of which numerical symbols are used (ante, Vol. IX. p. 168, Plate), and even one of the Newâr year 259 A. D. 1138-39 (Prof. Bendall's Journey, p. 81, Plate).
18 From Sir A. Cunningham's rubbings.
17 This is used in the sense of the Genitive case; judging from the list of names, given in Ep. Ind. Vol. IV. p. 171, the proper form to employ would have been Gillakasya.
13 Read savitvatsaral, and see my introductory remarks.
The rubbings have clearly sudi, not sudi, which is the reading of the photozincograph.
20 Metre: Sloka (Anushṭubh).
1 The writer apparently meant to say irimantath Hanumantan.
The photozincograph, instead of m and the sign of punctuation, has here an akshara which looks somewhat like śri and was so read by Sir A. Cunningham; but I have no doubt that the sign in the rubbings is a final form of m, followed by the sign of punctuation.
23 If the following prakritai, which is quite clear in the rubbings, is correct, Gollak must be altered to Akah; but I do not understand the exact meaning of the word prikritam, nor do I see how the words pråkritam Harim are to be construed with what precedes.
24 See Archeol. Surv. of India, Vol. XIV. Plate i.