1892.] W. Hoey —Set Mahet. 57 
The building marked C was also exposed. It seems to have been 
a private house. 
The building H is decidedly Hindu. I have almost completely 
opened the mound and I have found that the three cells or shrines cor¬ 
respond remarkably with those in J 2, and they seem to have been built 
on the outline of older ones of the same shape, which I found when I 
opened the mound. I consider the temple which stood here to be the 
reconstruction, or restoration, of the original Hindu shrine and to be 
one of the oldest buildings in Mahet. If the portion of the Chinese 
pilgrim’s narrative which speaks of the rival temples of Hindu and 
Buddhist’s priests can be held to refer to any buildings within the 
city, it may be that this is the temple of the heretics, of which it is 
said that it was overshadowed by a Buddhist fane. There are mounds 
near, in one of which a rival Buddhist fane may yet be discovered. 
S. is the settlement boundary-pillar and lies in the centre of a space 
where several roads seem to have met. One passed up close by II to 
Somnath. 
V. Buddhist Stone-inscription. 
The inscription consists of 18 lines (inclusive of the date), and these 
lines comprise 17 slokas in various metres. 
I sent two rubbings of the inscription to Mr. Fleet, who submitted 
them to Professor Kielhorn, whose reading and translation have been 
published in the Indian Antiquary . I regret that, at the time when I 
forwarded these rubbings, I was under the impression that I had 
established the spelling of the words to be Set Mahet, and this led me 
to accept an erroneous derivation which Professor Kielhorn published. 
I have since satisfied myself that there is no sufficient reason to suppose 
that t should be written instead of t in the name, although the ac¬ 
curacy of Set instead of Sahet cannot be doubtful. 
I had considerable misgiving as to the rendering of some expressions 
by Professor Kielhorn, and I have therefore obtained a reading and 
translation with notes from two competent Sanscrit scholars, Kunwar 
Jawala Prasad of the Statutory Civil Service, and Pandit Murlidhar of 
Maudlia. The result is a very materially improved and more lucid in¬ 
terpretation, which I readily accept, as it harmonizes with the Buddhist 
character of the record. 
The gist of the inscription is that a Solar King, named Mandhata, 
built a fortified city called Javrisha, in which dwelt many Srivastav 
Kayasths. A head of one of these families, named Vilvashva, had a sou 
called Janaka, who became prime minister to Gopala, the sovereign of 
Kaunauj, and married Jijja. The issue of this marriage was six sons. 
8 
