Skip to content
Browse articles

A note on sīdat sāvādya Cedi (Khajuraho Inscription)

By Sisirkumar Mitra

Vol. 30 · No. 2June - 1954pp. 189–192English

Summary

Sisir Kumar Mitra analyses the phrase “sīdat sāvādya Cedi” occurring in verse 23 of the Khajuraho inscription of the Candella ruler Yaśovarman (Vikrama Saṃvat 1011). The phrase, describing the Kalachuri (Cedi) king as “blameworthy,” has puzzled scholars. Mitra reconstructs the changing relations between the Kalachuris and the Candellas. Early Kalachuri inscriptions suggest cordial ties, and one record even celebrates the marriage of Kalachuri ruler Kokalla’s daughter to a Candella prince. However, during the tenth century the Kalachuris allied themselves with the Rāṣṭrakūṭas against northern powers, entering into a series of marital alliances with the imperial Deccan dynasty; these alliances are detailed through inscriptions and genealogies. Mitra argues that this policy alienated their northern neighbours, particularly the Candellas, who resented Rāṣṭrakūṭa incursions into the Ganga–Yamuna region. The Khajuraho inscription’s epithet therefore reflects Candella disdain for the Kalachuris’ collaboration with an enemy power. The article concludes that the phrase “sīdat sāvādya Cedi” should be understood as a deliberate political slur rather than a general moral judgement.

AI-generated summary, automatically checked against the article text.

Conclusion

Through careful comparison of Kalachuri and Candella inscriptions, the author interprets the epithet “sīdat sāvādya Cedi” as evidence of political hostility arising from Kalachuri alliances with the Rāṣṭrakūṭas. The note clarifies a long‑standing epigraphic problem and illuminates tenth‑century regional politics.

Key passages

Chosen by AI from the article's text. Each one is checked word for word against the text before it is shown.

  • “The inscriptions of the Kalacuris and the Candellas throw light on their mutual relations at different stages of their history.”
  • “Verse 28* of the inscription says that the Cedi king, whose forces were countless, was conquered by YaSovarman (samkhye-samkhya-balam vyajestha gatabhirya$-Cedirdjarn hathat).”

Works cited in this article

  1. Kha-juraho Inscription No. 1. EL, vol. 1, p. 122.
  2. Sonuriipim suriipangah Kaficukakhyzm-akunthadhih / savarnnar-vidhinoviha Cahamina-kulodbhavim/ /v. 21. EL, vol. 1. p. 126.
  3. Ibid., I4. vol. XII, 9. 250.
  4. 1.1. 21-22. &ઈ/7., p. 265.
  5. Allahabad Pillar Inscription of Samudra-gupta (Corpus Inscriptionum Indicarum, vol. 2, p. 30, meaning 'presents of daughters' to the suzerain ruler by vassal kings).

Discussed in this article

People

AI guide

Discuss this record

Ask about the article, its topics, issue context, selected passages, or reading strategy.

Start with the record

I can unpack the summary, turn it into study questions, explain a selected passage, or compare it with the other articles in this issue.

Original PDF

Inline viewer

Checking source PDF

The viewer will load here if the archive file is reachable.

Same author

More by Sisirkumar Mitra

All articles →
The Indian Historical Quarterly

Buddha and Buddhism (Review)

By Sisirkumar Mitra

Dec-60
The Indian Historical Quarterly

Candella Dhāṅga and the Muslim invasions of his time

By Sisirkumar Mitra

June - 1957
The Indian Historical Quarterly

A note on Sahaja-sukri

By Sisirkumar Mitra

March - 1955
The Indian Historical Quarterly

A Note on the Status of the Early Candella Rulers

By Sisirkumar Mitra

September - 1953