________________
483
NOTES ON THE SIVASKANDAVARMAN GRANT.
"In the bazar of Kiragrâma I was shown the spot where, so late as two generations ago, stood a shop, belonging to the temple and where the two pious Banians, whom the local traditions too know as the founders of the temple, are said to have lived. This is clearly the panyasśáld mentioned in the Prasasti II, 34. Regarding the oil-mill which Manyuka and Ahuka dedicated I could not hear anything; and the god has long lost the income from the mandapiká. But there was formerly a custom-house on the frontier of the territory of Mandi which passes close to the village. On the rocky hill which rises near the village and is now occupied by the Dák bangalow, the Râne family is said to have had a fort. I do not dare to decide if these Rdnes, whose descendants are still Rajput zamindars in the parganâ of Baijnath, are identical with the Rájánakas of Ktragrama.
"But in illustration of what you have said on p. 102, vol. I, of the Epigraphia regarding the intermarriage of this Rajput family of Kiragråm with the RAjAs of Traigarta, I may mention that the Raja of Kapurthala quite lately married a girl from the house of a bitterly poor Rajput of the Gulherian Miân clan, who lives as zamindar not far from Baijnath. Though the man is so poor that his daughter, the present Rânt, used to work for wages in the tea plantations, his countrymen have not yet pardoned him that he contracted the alliance with the Raja.
"Your proposed identification of Susarmapura with Kot is fully confirmed by the local traditions.
"The temple [of Baijnath] is well preserved, and in my opinion it has not undergone such very great alterations as the earlier describers state. Thus, big statues of Gangå and Yamuna, which clearly belong to the time of the inscription, are found on the gateway pillars of the Puri, exactly as Râma describes them in the Prasasti, I. 29, and his other detailed statements regarding the building fully agree with the actualities. Only the roof seems to me modern; according to the statements of the Purohitas it was renovated about one hundred years ago by Raja Samsârchand.""
XL.-A NOTE ON THE PRAKRIT GRANT OF THE PALLAVA KING SIVASKANDAVARMAN (VOLUME I, pp. 2-10).
BY ERNST LEUMANN, PH.D., STRASSBURG.
Prakrit inscriptions always present particular difficulties. Dr. Bühler, with his usual sagacity, has removed most of those connected with Sivaskandavarman's grant, Some others of the same inscription can only be mastered when further documents of a similar type turn up. A few, however, may perhaps be dealt with now. We have
I consider the identity of the Rane family with the Rájánakas to be very probable. Rájánaka is also the parent of the title Rand.-[G. B.]
4 Cunningham, Arch. Surv. Rep., vol. V., p. 179 f.
I take this opportunity to note that Professor Kielhorn has published in the Indian Antiquary, vol. XX, pp. 114 ff, certain emendations of my readings of the two Prasastis in accordance with rubbings made by Sir A. Cunningham. The following among Professor Kielborn's proposals appear to me acceptable:-I. 6, eureshu ndetnám apareshu kurvatám; I. 29, bhaktitrutallobhamalena tena; I. 37, såstradrishtim anusritya; II. 2, ea patu vo Makádevo Brahmadya bhaktim dethitdh; and II. 9, Kritárthau. In addition, I would mention that I now translate astrijano in I. 13a by "arebers" instead of by "heroes," as astri is clearly the nominative of astrin; note 64 must be altered accordingly. 302
