288 V. A. Smith — Observations on some Chandel Antiquities. [No. 4, 



was at one time thrown, may be accepted as certainly being Samvat 1011, 

 but the reading of the Raja's name is still unsettled, General Cunningham 

 being in doubt whether the initial letter is Dh or Oh ; it looks quite as 

 like Sh, and is certainly different from the ordinary Kutila form of Dh. 



Not only this short inscription, but all the leading Chandel inscrip- 

 tions require to be carefully edited. Of the three great inscriptions at 

 Khajuraho one only has been piiblished at length, viz., that dated 1056 

 Samvat, now built into the wall inside the entrance of the Vis'vanath tem- 

 ple, This record was translated by Mr. Sutherland (J. A. S. B., for 1839, 

 Vol. VIII, p. 159), but with many errors, some of which have since been 

 corrected by General Cunningham. (Proc. A. S. B., for 1865 (1) p. 99.) 



The other eqiially large inscriptions, viz., that dated 1058 Samvat, 

 now built into the temple wall opposite that above mentioned, and that of 

 Raja Dhanga, dated 1011 Samvat, now built into the wall on the right 

 side of the entrance to the Chatarbhuj temple, are referred to in the 

 Archaeological Report (II, pp. 423, 426), but have never been published or 

 translated, and we understand that other inscriptions of the Chandel dynas- 

 ty, concerning which nothing has yet been made public, are in General 

 Cunningham's hands. 



The main outlines of the Chandel chronology* have been established 

 beyond dispute, but many details are still unsettled, and there is much 

 difficulty in reconciling the statements of several of the inscriptions which 

 have been given to the public in a more or less perfect form. Maisey'sf 

 inscriptions from Kalinjar were translated a long time ago, when skill in 

 deciphering inscriptions was a rarer accomplishment than it is now, and 

 both the text and translation of the records published by him seem to re- 

 quire revision by a competent scholar. 



The drying up of the Kirat Sagar at Mahoba this year has disclosed a 

 large broken Jain statue of Sumatinath with an inscription, dated " in the 

 victorious reign of S'riman Madana Varmma Samvat 1215 Pus Sudi 10." 

 (Plate XV). J 



* By a recent attempt to settle the genealogy (J. A. S. B., XLVI1, Part I, p. 74) 

 Dr. Rajendralala Mitra has added to the confusion. He reduces Samvat dates to the 

 Christian era by subtracting 55 instead of 57 as usual, and he ignores the two new 

 plates published at p. 80 of the same number of the Journal, and uses Sutherland's 

 erroneous date of 1019 in the Dhanga inscription which was long ago corrected to 

 1056. He also omits all mention of Raja. Parmal or Paramardi and of the other in- 

 scriptions of Madana Varmma, which show that the Dr.'s date of 1150 A. D. for the 

 close of Madana Varmma' s reign is much too early. 



t J. A. S. B., XVII, Part I, 171, 313 (for 1848). 



% General Cunningham (Arch. Rep. II. 448) mentions an imago of Sumatinath 

 at Mahoba, dated in 1213 Samvat. 



