330 On a Land-Grant of Mahendrapdla Deva of Kanauj. [No. 3 



of the Sun Maharaja S'ri R&mabhadra Deva, whose son and successor 

 born of S'ri Madappa Devi, was the devout follower of Bhagavat 

 Maharaja S'ri Bhoja Deva. His son and successor, born of S'ri Chan- 

 dra-bhattarika" Devi, was the devout follower of Bhagavati Maharaja 

 S'ri Mahendrapala Deva who, when in S'ravasti, thus proclaimed to the 

 assembled crowd of the inhabitants and neighbours of the village of 

 Pamayaka of the subdivision (visaya) of Valayika in the district 

 (Mandala) of S'ravasti. The aforesaid village with all its produce, ex- 

 clusive of what has been already alienated as shares to divinities of the 

 place, has been this day bestowed by me, for the promotion of my 

 parents' virtue, after performance of ablution on the occasion of a con- 

 junction of the sun with the aquarius, and to last for the period of the 

 duration of the sun, the moon and the earth, upon Bhatta Padmesvara 



of Savarna Gotra, a Brahmachdri of the Kauthuma ? Sakha of the 



Sama Veda. Knowing this, you should abide by it, and the neighbours, 

 mindful of this order, should leave unmolested all the rights and pri- 

 vileges (of the donee). (This is written) for the permanency of the 

 Edict of his auspicious Majesty. Done on the 7th of the waxing moon 

 jn the month of Magna, Samvat 389. 



P. S. — 1 avail myself of this opportunity to acknowledge the cor- 

 rectness of General Cunningham's last emendation of my reading of 

 the Pehewa inscription. The name of Bhoja's father in that record is 

 Ramabhadra, as pointed out by the General, and not E&machandra as 

 originally read by me. The great similarity between bJia and clia in 

 the mediseval Nagari and the commonness of the name Ramachandra 

 led me into error. 



The deduction, however, of the first Bhoja of that inscription being 

 the same with the Bhoja of Gwalior is still open to question. To prove 

 the identity the General has been put to the necessity of allowing 

 twenty-five years to each of the eigirt princes of the time of Deva- 

 sakti, when our antiquarians are all unanimously of opinion that the 

 average period of an Indian reign has never been above eighteen 

 years. The learned General himself, who holds the highest rank as an 

 authority in all matters connected with Indian Archaeology, has re- 

 peatedly in his former papers adopted the same average, and I do not 

 see any reason to depart from it in the present instance. Had the 

 Bhoja of Gwalior been acknowledged in any record as the son of 



