a 
eee sili mii mailae 
1923.] Saficht Inscription of Sridharavarmman. 341 
particular portion of line 1, alleged to contain his name, 
damaged as it is, retains sufficient traces of letters which 
render the reading Jivadama quite improbable.! On the 
other hand, close inspection reveals the following reading :— 
viryy-[ar \jjita-v[ijja....1 have no doubt that the letter after 
v[tjja was ya, the entire word being vijaya or ‘ victory.’ As 
the inscription-stone has broken off from the right hand 
corner a number of letters have disappeared. It is not, how- 
ever, difficult to conclude that the portion most probably 
contained an adjunct of Sridharavarmman, something like 
h 
Indian epigraphs of this nature. The reading proposed by 
Mr. Banerji would be precluded also by another consi- 
deration, namely, the absence of roval titles. It would be 
curious that a king should be mentioned without any titles 
indicative of royal position, not even the most ordinary 
svamin or rajan.*. The former title, viz., svamin is no doubt 
used in the record, but in the compound svami-Mahasena ete. 
where it undoubtedly refers to the god Mahasena. Mr. Banerji 
takes it as an epithet of Jivadaman (op. cit., p. 231) which, 
however, is clearly a mistake. The use of svamin as a title of 
Mahasena occurs in many other records® and is nothing new 
to us. Facts being such as those stated above the reading of 
Jivadiman’s name becomes quite unwarrantable 
(2) The inscription (1. 2) is dated in the 13th regnal year 
of some king, and Mr. Banerji holds that he is no other than 
Jivadaman. This is of course a necessary outcome of his read- 
Ing Jivadiman’s name in line 1, the basis of which | have just 
examined. Apart from that there is distinct internal evidence, 
and this is mentioned by Mr. Banerji himself, pointing to the 
fact that the epigraph belongs to a quite different individual, 
the year 13 having nothing whatsoever to do with Jivadaman. 
ka Sri 
Dandanayaka or ‘general’ occurs in the prose portion in line 
2, and no other personal name intervenes between it and the 
Phrase sva-rajy-abhivriddhikare vejayike samvatsare trayodasa- 
[me]. Here sva-rajya or ‘his own reign’ can only refer to 
Sridharavarmman’s and of none else according to the custom- 


! What Mr. Banerji reads as Ji is clearly a double jj. The letter 
following it is not va, but ta, and what he reads as da and ma are remnants 
ja respectively. 
These are the titles commonly found attached to the names of 
Ksatrapa rulers of Western India. As this portion of the rec is in 
prose, there could be no possible omission of titles on the plea of metrical 
©xigencies. 
3 See, e.g., Kadamba land grants, E/., Vol. VI, p. 14,1. 2. 
