________________
No. 9.]
SAMOLI INSCRIPTION OF THE TIME OF SILADITYA.
97
Ll. 58ff. The witnesses for this (transaction) are: Atikari (Adhikari) Kamta-seṭṭi, Chata Bikra-seṭṭi, Samani Samkara-setti Raja-setti, Bagge-setti's nephew Kesana, Mūlūra Beļile, Birumāļa Dugga and Baṁḍāri Birusāmņi. With the consent of all these, Samkayi-Sēnahōva of Mangalur wrote this. Prosperity and good fortune to this charity deed!
Ll. 62ff. Imprecatory verses.
Ll. 65ff. Any one who violates this charity, if he is a Jaina, shall incur the sin of breaking the images of Gummaṭanatha of Belagula, Chandranatha of Kopana and Nemisvara of Ujjantagiri and other Jaina idols; if a Saiva, he shall incur the sin of breaking a crore of lingas at Parvata, Gokarna etc.; if a Vaishnava, he shall incur the sin of breaking a crore of images of Vishnu in (holy) places like Tirumale. May there be prosperity to the Jina-sasana (doctrine). Fortune !
No. 9. SAMOLI INSCRIPTION OF THE TIME OF SILADITYA ; [VIKRAMA-SAMVAT] 703.
BY R. R. HALDER, RAJPUTANA MUSEUM, AJMER.
This short inscription was found at Sämōli in the district of Bhōmat in Mewar and is now preserved in the Rajputana Museum at Ajmēr. Prof. D. R. Bhandarkar has already noticed it,1 It consists of twelve well-engraved lines of writing, covering a space of about 9" x 10". The stone being slightly broken at the lower right corner, a portion of the inscription is missing. A few letters here and there are also indistinct. The average size of the letters is about ". On account of its importance as the earliest inscription of the Guhila family of Mewar, a detailed notice of it is given below.
The characters belong to the northern class of alphabets of the acute-angled type. They are almost similar to those of the Udaipur inscription of Aparajita of V. S. 718 (A. C. 661) though the matras of the vowels a, i, i, u and i have different forms. The language is incorrect Sanskrit and the inscription is written very carelessly. As a result, the metres employed do not always stand scanning, and the meaning is also not quite clear in a few places. As regards orthography, the following points may be noted:-n is used for n in ripinām (1. 4), and n for n in jananamndi(1.5) and -vāsiņyā (1.9); the anusvāra is used for m in -sambadham (1.8) and is redundant in japānamndi- (1.5) and uptäditamm-aranya- (1.7); the visarga is omitted in Hare (1. 2), -narapati (1. 5) etc., while it is redundant in -bhayaḥ (1. 2), mahataraḥ (1. 10) and janivah (1.4) etc.; sandhi is not observed in jīvanaṁ ägara (1. 6), agata ashṭādasa- (1.7) and other places, while it is wrongly used in -nivaham mavalokya (1. 3). Other mistakes and irregularities are pointed out in the text and the footnotes thereto.
The contents of the inscription may be summed up as follows:-After the invocation of the goddess Chandika (11. 1-4), the epigraph praises Éiladitya as the conqueror of his foes (11. 4-5). Ll. 5-7 record that a Mahajana (community) headed by Je[nta*]ka who had migrated from Vatanagara, started an āgara (? Skt akara, a mine) in Aranyakūpagiri which became a source of livelihood for the people. In the next two lines it is said that the Mahatara (Mahattara) Jentaka, at the command of the Mahajana, founded at the place a temple (devakula) of Aranyavāsini (Durga), which was noted for its eighteen vaitālikas (bards), hailing from different parts of the country and was always crowded with rich and wealthy people. The sense of the last two lines
1 PRAS., W.C., 1908-09, p. 48 and Ind. Ant., Vol. XXXIX, p. 189. Above, Vol. IV, pp. 29ff.
