________________
Rasesh Jamindar
types
Is of atleast three as conjunct letter is differently engraved than the other of this inscription. The form of the two a in सिंहसेन as well as in सर्वसत्व are not homogeneous Both the of far and are similar, while those of and are also similai The angularity is almost disappeared in all the letters of this inscription excepting in third line and in first one The base line of is curved in line two The letter shows usual loop or curl instead its tripartite form.
76
Many letters of the middle portion of the inscription are much damaged and therefore it becomes difficult to draw any specific conclusion It is hardly possible to shed more light either regarding the king or date The only thing positvely can be made out is its object already mentioned above
Who was this Simhasena of the record is difficult to identify" There is one king of this name in the fifth family of the Western Kshatrapa dynasty, who was the son of a sister of Rudrasena 3rd1s fa ruled from 382 AD to 384 A.D This epigraph under review mentions सिंहसेन पुत्रस्य It means very clearly that this record was issued during the reign of a king who was a son of f According to Western Kashatrapa geneology1 Rudrasena IV was the son of f. Rudrasena ruled probably during 385-386 A.D.1"
.4
From the above discussion it seems that fa and his son
ruled in the last quarter of the fourth century A.D, while this very record was written sometime in the last quarter of the second century A.D) [S.E. 105-183 A.D. ] fat in the end of first line is very confusing. What does it mean by? Can we conjecture this phrase fat as 200 and then add 100+5 which will ultimately come to 305. As this epigraph is dated in Śaka Era then 305 is equal to 383 A D. Then this record might have been engraved during very short reign of Rudresena IV. But this cannot be considered as certainty
13 Gujaratno Rajkiya Ane' Samskrutik Itihas (Editors Parikh & Shastri), Vol 2, p, 152, Ahmedabad, 1972.
14 ibid, p 521.
15 for details see bid p 151-152.
