________________
352
THE INDIAN ANTIQUARY.
[NOVEMBER, 1890.
his illustrious father, whom from the context I understand to be Yaśôvarmadê va, repeated (or confirmed) the above donation; and (in lines 16-18) he directs the people concerned to make over to the donee whatever may be due to him, and exhorts future rulers to protect the grant. The concluding lines (18-20) contain some of the customary benedictive and imprecatory verses.
I have already stated that the donee of this grant in all probability also is the donee of the grant B., and I have here only to draw attention to the fact that the name of the place, from which that person is stated to have emigrated, in the grant B. is written Adriyalavidavari, while it is here spelt Adrêlav[i]ddhavari.
Of the two dates given in this grant, the first does not admit of verification. As regards the second date, referring the year 1200 to the Vikrama era, I find for Sravana śnkla 15 the following possible equivalents: -
Northern V. 1200 current: the 8th August, A. D. 1142, when there was a partial lunar eclipse, not visible in India, 12 h, 17 m. Greenwich time, or, at Ujjain, 11 h, 20 m. after mean sunrise;
Northern V. 1200 expired: the 28th July, A. D. 1143, when there was a total lunar eclipse, not visible in India, 12 h, 38 m. Greenwich time, or, at Ujjain, 11 h. 41 m. after mean sunrise;
Southern V. 1200 expired: the 16th July, A. D. 1144, when there was a partial lunar eclipse, visible in India, 16 h, 44 m. Greenwich time, or, at Ujjain, 15 h. 47 m, after mean sunrise,
It appears, then, that in every one of the three possible years there was a lunar eclipse on the particular day mentioned in the date, and it is therefore impossible to ascertain the true corresponding date with absolute certainty. But since it so happens that of the three eclipses only the last was visible in India, it is highly probable that the last mentioned day, the 16th July, A. D. 1144, is the proper equivalent for the day of the renewal of the grant, and that the year mentioned in the inscription, accordingly, is the southern Vikrama year 1200, expired.
Excepting the well-known Dhara, I am here also unable to identify the localities mentioned in the inscription on the maps at my disposal,
TEXT,"
1 [Om3] svasti | Sri[r]-jayd-bhyudayaś-cha 1 Jayatis Vyomakesô-sau yaḥ sarggâya vi(bi)bha[r]tti tâm | aindavim si(ái)rasân lêkhâm jagad-vij-amkur-îkritim là [Tava]
2 [ntu] val Smarârâtéh kalyanam-anisam jatah kalpânta-samay-ôddâma-tadid-valayaping)al Paramabhat[4]Araka-mahārājidhirija-paramôávara-ár.[U]daya
3 dityadeva-pâdânadhyâta-paramabhattaraka-maharajadhiraja-para mêsvara-sri-Naravarmmadêva-pâdânud hyâta-paramabhattaraka-mah]ârâjâdhiraja -paramé[év]ara4 śri-Yabovarmmadova-pâdânudhyâta-samastaprasastôpêta-samadhigata pa me ha mahasavd(bd)-âlamkara-virâjamâna-mahuk[u]mara-sri-Lakshmiva[r]mmadevaḥ ||37 árî
5 Ma[h]advadasaka-maṇḍalê ári-Rajabaya[n]a38-bhôgê
Su[ra]sani-samva(mba)ddha
Vadaüda-grama39 | ta[th]ȧ Uthavanaka-grâmayoḥ sama
Suvar[nn]apra[8]adika-samva(mba)ddha-41
33 From Mr. Fleet's photo-lithograph; Indian Inscriptions, No. 50.
35 Metre, Bloka (Anushțubh); and of the following verse.
24 Apparently expressed by a symbol.
36 Read -fry-Uda.
37 This sign of punctuation is superfluous, Colebrooke has -Rajasana-. "Here the mere base is used, without a termination, as if the word were compounded with the following Uthavanaka-grama. The sign of punctuation after gráma is superfluous,
I am doubtful about this consonant, which in the photo-lithograph looks rather like gh. Colebrooke has in the text têptasuvararnṇa-prasádiká, and in the translation Téptá-suvarna-pråsådíká.
41 Here, and in several places below, which need not be pointed out separately, the rules of sandhi have not been observed.
—
