________________
122 EPIGRAPHIA INDICA
[VOL. XXX sněhā and on=ēva (line 3), oshēkah (line 6), sto. In some of the cases, the sign looks like a prishthamātrā while in some it is a firð-mätra ; of. also the form of medial ai in sy-aisha (line 10), eto.
The language of the record is Sanskrit. With the exception of the introductory benediction, Siddham, and two sentences in prose at the end, the document, which is a onlogy, is entirely written in verse. Among orthographical peculiarities of the record, attention may be drawn to some of the numerous errors of spelling. Besides the use of singha for simha (line 1), and for ambu (line 1),
māṁ for män (line 5), wjvala for ujjvala (lines 6, 12), etc., which are often noticed in epigraphic literature, we have in the record under discussion many cases of the confusion between riand ri(cf. drishti in line 2, adri in line 13, etc.) as well as of the reduplication of the nasal sounds (cf. bhri bhamnga in line 2, manndala in line 6, etc.). Moreover it has to bo pointed out that the author's style is weak as his knowledge of the Sanskrit language and skill in handling the metres were both very poor. The defects of the composition will be clear from the corrections inserted in the transcript of the inscription and the notes on the text; but some points may be briefly discussed here. In a number of cases, the author has employed sāpeksha-samāsa not only unnecesarily but even quite wrongly. He has often taken the syllable preceding a conjunct as short and used the word yasa for yasas and probably also vaksha for vakshas and vapusha for vapus. Passages like tēn=ēshah basio (correctly tën-aisha sabio), yat-pünyam iha (correctly yat-punyam-iha), eto., in verse 12 show how the author was struggling with his metre and was ready to sacrifice grammar to it. The poverty of the author's style is demonstrated by the fact that he could have easily avoided a clash between his grammar and metre by writing instead, say, tèn=ayan sabio, yat-punyam tv-tha, etc. There are numerous cases of similar attempts of a desperate and ludicrous nature to save the metre at the cost of grammar, although in a few places the metre has been sacrificed for the sake of grammar.
The date of the inscription is given in the last stanza (verse 13) as the tenth titki of the bright half of the month of Māgha in the expired year 500 plus 40 plus 7 (i.e. 547), no doubt of the Vikrams Samvat. The date falls in January 491 A.D.
The inscription begins with the word siddham and two stanzas (verses 1-2) in praise of the Devi (i.e. the goddess par ercellence, the Mother-goddess) desoribed as the consort of Hara (i.e. Siva). The second of the two stanzas refers to the Ardhanārīśvara conception. In verse 3, the poet says that, after having bowed down to the goddess, he is willing to describe the glory of a family of Kshatriya rulers belonging to the Māņavāyapt-kula (probably Mänavāyani"). The name of the kula, Mänavāyani or Mänavāyani, appears to refer to the götra claimed by the family. The word Beems to be derived from the name of Manu through the expressions Mānava and Mänavāyana. The name reminds us of the similar götra called Mänavya which is often found to have been claimed by royal families probably of non-Aryan extraction. When a family did not find an opportunity of claiming any of the recognized gotras, it was indeed easy for it to declare its descent from Manu Svāyambhuva, the mythical progenitor of human beings. It may be pointed out here that Pandit G. H. Ojha, who succeeded in reading only kul-odbhava-van ga(vamsa)-gaurāḥ out of the passage Māņavāyani-kul-odbhava-van sa(vansa)-yuurāḥ, explained the above passage of the third verse of the inscription as indicating the existence of a clan of Kshatriyas (Rājputs), called Gaura.' We find it difficult to agree with this view. It seems that the expression vanta-gaura merely means & person who purified his family by virtuous acts or was himself illustrious owing to his birth in the family in question.
Such cases remind us of Mallinātha's remarks on the Raghuvarhla, XIX, 23 : atra nib-antasy=&pi dati-babdasya chhando-bhanga-bhayād-dhrasvatvan kritan "api masham mashat kurydch-chhando-bhangan tyajēd=giram" ity=upadébat.
. Cf. Succarors of the Satavahanas, p. 222; Bomb. Gas., VOL I, part ii, pp. 278, 337, etc.
Op. cit., pp. 1443-44. Ojha also wrongly read Gauril in verso 11 (line 14) of the record as Gaural and took it to be the dynastie appellation of Yasagupta (Yalogupta) described in verses 7-8 (lines 8-10). This view was partly due to Ojha's inability to make out even a word of verses 9-10 and portion of verse 11.
