s 



» 



1917.] Bardic and Histl. Survey of Baj-putana. 213 



Whatever the exact meaning of the above inscription, its 

 chief value lies in the evidence it furnishes that the temple of 

 SusanI was built previous to the year Sam vat 1229. This is 

 also borne out by the devalis standing by the side of the temple, 

 and described below. But the temple must have undergone 

 important repairs in the Sam vat Century 1500, as shown by 

 another inscription, which is set up in the wall partition connect- 

 ing the left side of the doorway with the pillar immediately 

 in front. This inscription is on a slab of black marble, and 

 consists of seventeen lines, covering a space 7§" high by 12 

 broad. The only orthographical particular worth noticing in the 

 inscription, is that e and o are indicated by a rrmtrd placed before 

 the aksara, after the archaic manner. The inscription consist- 

 of two parts : the first in Sanskrit verses, six in all, and the 

 other in Sanskrit prose mixed with names in Bhasa. The first 

 part opens with a homage to the kuladevl SnsanI, then follow 

 three verses in which SusanI is praised as the universal deit\ 

 and the fount of all happiness to the Surana-zwrasa and her 

 blessings are invoked (II. 1-6). The next verse mentions a 

 m Bhurir Dharma Suri as having converted to Jainism the 

 gotradevi of the Suvana-vamm (11.6-8). The fifth verse is not 



completely clear, but refers to the sanghesa Siva Raja a> 

 having performed a pilgrimage, and having become the support 

 of the Marudhara, i.e. Marwar country (11. 8-10). The sixth and 

 last verse contains a praise of Siva Raja's son Hema Raja, 

 and the statement that it was he who caused to be made 

 that shining temple of the gotradevi, similar to a chariot of the 

 gods, with the beautiful lofty spire." The second part of the 

 inscription contains the date [Vikmma] Sammt 1573, the day 

 o/ the full moon of Jyaistha. Friday, and the information that 

 the sanghesa Cahara, the son of Puja, the son of Hema Raja, 

 the son of Siva Raja, the son of Gosala. of the SnianS-mm&i, 

 together with a number of relatives of his. whose names are 

 all given, caused the consecration (pratistha) of the image m 

 the repaired temple (?) to be performed by srl Nandi Vardhana 

 Suri, the successor of srl Padmananda Suri. 



Considering that Cahara must have been in his old age in 



■ : 



Samvat 1573, for by that time his brother (?) Patama De and 

 his cousin Slha Mala bad already had grandsons in the persons 

 of Devi Dasa and Mokala, we can approximately n x the date 

 of Hema R a j a in the beginning of the Samvat Century loOO. 

 As regards the nature of the repairs which he caused to be 

 made in the temple, it would seem-as is also borne out by the 

 inscription itself— that they principally consisted in the re- 



h as the prefix **, meaning sangheSa or sahghapati. Possibly q | is wrong* 

 bitten for ^ in which case Patama De would be the name of 

 <*hara> s wife and Devi Dasa would be a grandson of Cahara himself. 



