An Inscription dated in the Reign of Emperor Muhammad Shah
Summary
The inscription, dated to the reign of Mughal Emperor Muhammad Shah (1710–1748), commemorates a funeral pillar erected for a private individual in Udayapura, Malava. It uniquely combines Vikrama (1803), Saka (1668), and the emperor’s regnal year (28), all corresponding to 1746 CE. The text reflects a Sanskritized dialect of the Khatold Dundeli language. The inscription’s translation highlights Jasavanta Raiji, a pious Vaisya, son of Caudhuri Capamta Raiji, and his lineage, including his sons Caudhuri Amanata Raiji and Caudhuri Varajora Simgha. It was inscribed by scribe Cainduvd Simghamana. Scholars note discrepancies in Dr. S.’s translations of certain verses, particularly misinterpretations of phrases related to power dynamics and lunar cycles. For instance, a verse on a friend harming the state when powerful was incorrectly rendered. Similarly, a passage about a disaffected ally overcoming an enemy’s calamities was inaccurately translated. The inscription’s linguistic features align with M. Sylvain Lévi’s observations on the interchangeable use of Sanskrit letters "sa" and "kha." Despite translation errors, the text remains significant for its multilingual dating system and historical context. Researchers caution against relying solely on existing translations due to identified inaccuracies.
Summary reviewed by a volunteer editor.
Conclusion
This inscription provides a rare synchronous dating system, combining Vikrama, Saka, and Mughal regnal timelines to pinpoint 1746 CE with remarkable precision. Its linguistic hybridity—mixing Sanskritized local idioms with Mughal administrative terminology—reveals dynamic cultural synthesis during late Mughal decline. The commemoration of a Vaisya family's private funeral pillar underscores grassroots religious patronage often overlooked in imperial narratives. By correcting Dr. S's flawed translations and highlighting the 'sa'/'kha' phonetic equivalence noted by Lévi, the analysis reinforces the text's phonological complexity and cross-cultural scriptural traditions. The inscription's undeciphered provenance and "NOT READ" status emphasize the urgency of preserving and accurately interpreting marginalized epigraphic records against the erosion of historical memory.