________________
204
EPIGRAPHIA INDICA.
[VOL. VIII.
all doubt. The date corresponds, as shown by Professor Kielhorn, to Sunday, 3rd March
A.D. 1230.
Of the inscription No. II. only a short account was published by H. H. Wilson in the Asiatic Researches, Vol. XVI. p. 309 f. It was edited in full by Professor Abaji Vishnu Kathavate as Appendix B. to his edition of the Kirtikaumudi. It is engraved on a white slab built into a uiche in the corridor of the temple. The writing covers a space of about 2' 11" broad by 1' 10" high. The size of the letters is ". Near the beginning and at the end of 11. 1 and 2 and at the end of 11. 3 and 4 the text is mutilated, portions of the slab being either cut off or broken off. The characters are of the same type as in No. I. The initial & in ôm (1. 1) differs from the corresponding sign in Oisavala (11. 15, 17, 24) and Orásá (1. 27) by the addition of a cross-bar. The letter ba is expressed by the sign for va everywhere, except in Srimátâmahabu in 1. 27 and Arbudas in the last but one line. The writing of the last two lines, however, shows also some other peculiarities. The characters are partly larger, and generally executed with far less care, than those in the preceding portion of the inscription. As regards single letters, the divergences are especially prominent in the signs for ra and sa and medial é and ô, the latter being expressed by means of a stroke above the line six times, in bhéjáté, bhavané, pámthé, súrér, tayôh and rilôkyamáné, whereas only three instances of this mode of writing are found in the preceding 31 lines, in varské (1. 1), -dévéna (1. 26) and Gôsala (1. 13). There can be little doubt, therefore, that those two lines are a later addition, and this, as will appear later on, is fully borne out by their contents.
The inscription is in the Sanskrit language and, with the exception of one verse in 1. 30, in prose. As usual in records of this period and of this part of the country, the language is largely influenced by the vernacular idiom. Proper names generally appear in their Prakrit form, and even instead of Skt. putra we find here the abbreviation u°, which stands for Prakrit utta or, perhaps, a half-Sanskritized utra2 (11. 10-25). Also the form kumara instead of kumara in 1. 26 is due to Prâkrit influence. The single members of Dvandva compounds are frequently joined by tatha (11. 8, 9, 12, 19, 27). As regards lexicography, the following words may be mentioned: apabhára, m., 'a burden' (1. 29); ashtâhika, f., a single day of a festival lasting eight days' (11. 12, 14, 16, etc.); kalyanika, n., 'name of a certain feast' (1. 26); tathajñátiya, 'belonging to the tribe mentioned before' (11. 10 ff.); mahajana, m., a merchant, banker' (1. 10); rathiya, m., which seems to denote a certain class of officials (1. 28); varshagranthi, m., 'an anniversary' (1. 12); satka, 'belonging to' (11. 3, 7, 10); sára, f., 'care, supervision' (1. 9). In line 6 pratishthita is used in the sense of pratishthapita.
The inscription contains the official record of the erection of the temple of Nêminâtha, and regulations for the festivals connected with it and for the protection and maintenance of the building.
In lines 1-5 it is stated that 'to-day on Sunday, the third day of the dark half of the common Phalguna, in the [Vikrama] year 1287, while in prosperous Anahilapaṭaka the maharajadhiraja Bh[imadêva], the royal swan on the lotus of the Chaulukya family, who is adorned by a complete line of kings, is reigning victoriously, . . . . . while the mahamandalêsvara rájakula, the illustrious Sômasimhadeva, born in the family of the illustrious
1 List of Inscriptions of Northern India, p. 30.
This form is actually found in a Chauluk ya grant of A.D. 1207, plate i. 11. 14, 15; pl. ii. ll. 4, 5, 6. See Ind. Ant. Vol. XI. p. 338.
See below, p. 206.
Compare Ep. Ind. Vol. I. p. 279, note 46. The word occurs in this sense in the Chaulukyn grant of A.D. 1207, mentioned in note 2 above, plate ii. 1. 10. In 1. 14 of the present grant the abbreviation mahdjani" is found. Compare Marathi varshagdmtha, the anniversary of a birth-day.'
See below, p. 205, note 2.
