________________
DECEMBER, 1887.) MOUNT ABU INSCRIPTION OF SAMARASIMHA.
345
MOUNT ABU STONE INSCRIPTION OF SAMARASIMHA.
[VIKRAMA]-SAMVAT 1342.
BY PROFESSOR F. KIELHORN, C.I.E.; GÖTTINGEN. THIS inscription, which I edit from a rubbing from the rubbing.--The writing covers &
1 sent to me by Mr. Fleet, who obtained it space of about 3' brond by 2 7 high; and from Kaviraj SyAmal Das, was first brought the size of the letters is about #".-The to public notice in 1828, when in a paper characters are Devanagart, of the kind found entitled Sanskrit Inscriptions at Åbû,' and in Jain MSS. from Gujarat of the 13th or 14th published in the Asiatic Researches, Vol. XVI. century. They were written by Subhachandra, p. 284 ff., H. H. Wilson gave a kind of transla- and engraved by Karmasimha (verse 62). --The tion of it (ib. p. 292-298), from an evidently language is Sanskrit ; and, except for the very inaccurate copy of the original Sansksit opening Ori on namah Sivdya, the word kisicha text presented, together with a large number of in line 4, and the date at the end, the other inscriptions from Åbo, to the Asiatic inscription is in verse throughout. The verses, Society of Bengal by Captain Speirs, Political the number of which is 62, were composed, Agent at Sirohi. Afterwards, in 1860, the as is stated in verse 60, by the Nagar Brahman inscription has been again referred to in the Vedaśarman of Chitrakata, the Chitor of Journal American Oriental Society, Vol. VI. pp. the maps, who reports that he also had com518 and 519, by F. E. Hall, in his notes on a posed the qulogies in the famous temple of Chedi inscription of [Chodi-Samvat 907 (re- Chakrasvâmin (Vishnu) at Bkalinga. The published in the Archæol. Survey of Western versification is excellent; but, as regards the India, No. 10, p. 107), which gives the contents, the poem, from a literary point of view, names of several princes mentioned in this is a poor one, and hardly repays the labour of inscription. From A copy of the original, translation. The author, knowing next to supplied by Sir Henry Lawrence, Dr. Hall, in nothing of the princes whom it is his duty to the notes alluded to, made known, not quiteenlogize, has recourse to the usual phrases, which correctly, the original text of four and a half mean very little, and to well-known plays on verses of the inscription, with an English certain expressions; and he more than once translation of the same verses. And finally, in repeats himself. The language is fluent and, 1886, the inscription has been edited in full, with one or two exceptions, correct.-In respect with a Hindt translation, by Kaviraj Syâmal of orthography, I may notice the employment Dås, member of the state council of Mêwad of the sign for kcha instead of the sign for and accompanied by an English translation sha, and vice versá, in sarvvanhkakhah, line 7, prepared from the Hindi version by Munshi for saruvarnkashah; maytisha, line 11, for Ram Prasad, in the Journal As. Soc. of Bengal, mayúkha; makhí, line 24, for mashi; lilésha, Vol. LV. Part I. pp. 48, 57, and 32. The line 31, for lilékha; milankak ha, line 32, for Hindt version was, I understand, made from a malaukasha; the use of the palatal for the Gujarati MS., and gives fairly the general sense dental sibilant, and vice versa, in sitimanam, of the original. The published Sanskrit text line 3, for sitimanam; sachivah, line 13, for contains a number of minor mistakes, to which sachivah; fish&cha, line 16, for rishicha; and it is unnecessary to draw attention here in detail. the non-observance of the rules of sandhi
According to the information furnished by in nihpratyáha, line 11, for nishpratyúha ; Kaviraj Syåmal Dâs (loc. cit. p. 18), the duhkarash, line 44, for dushkarash, and comin inscription, which contains 48 lines, exists in a tapasyati, line 43, for asmithsetapasyati. The monastery adjoining the temple of Achalêśvara signs for ba and va are clearly distinguished ; (Siva) near Achalgadh on Mount Abu. but in line 20 we have bibhramath wrongly Its preservation appears to be perfect; and for vibhraman. there are only three or four aksharas, specified. The inscription refers itself to the reign below, which cannot be made out with certainty of the prince Samara, or samarasimha, of
* Near Udayapur (Oodoypar); Tod's Rajasthan, Vol. I. p. 329; Journal, As. Soc. Bombay, Vol. IX. p. XVI.
