762 Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal. (December, 1911. 
to the Conquerors as they could. The boy king was just 
eighteen years old at the time of the death of his father, and 
at this tender age he was called upon to face an enemy whose 
record showed hardly any reverses, and who had at that time 
the resources of the kingdoms of Kanauj and Delhi at his 
command, as they had looted both treasuries. The statements 
of the Muhammadan historians make it clear that Sultan 
Shihab-ud-din occupied the country to the south of the Jin 
or Yamuna and a considerable part of the Antarvedi or 
Ganges-Jumna Doab. We have decisive proof of the fact that 
Kanauj was not taken or thoroughly occupied at this time. But 
of this we shall have to speak later on. The second important 
fact brought to light by the Machlishahr grant is that the son 
of Jayacandra did not lose his throne within a short time but 
continued to wield sufficient power so as to be able to grant a 
village in perpetuity to a man six years after his father’s death. 
The date of the Machlishahr grant is given both in words and 
in figures :— 
Keto 20 Soe ae ihe Chie tri-pamcasat-adhika-dvadasa-sata- 
samvatsare pausa-masi paurnimayam ravi-dine anke-pi samvata 
1253 pausa sudi 15 ravaw........ 
: The above extract is quoted from Pandit Hirananda 
astri’s article on the Machlishahr grant.! When I examin 
the grant at Lucknow I read the date as 1257 instead of 1253. 
| SDR ate Bas te oy o's tri-pamcasat = adhika-dvadasa-sata- 
samvatsare pausa-masi paurnimayam ravi-dine ankepi samvala 
1257 pausa sudi 15 ravidine............ 
_ Thus, we have two different dates in one inscription, 
which is by no means extraordinary. large number of 
