Gaṇadeva

Pedestal of a Hari-Hara image found in the garden of a house called Tyāgaltole, close to the western gate of Paśupatināth, in Ganchanani, Deopātan. Saṃvat 489.

Inscription engraved on the pedestal of a Hari-Hara image found in the garden of a house called Tyāgaltole, close to the western gate of Paśupatināth, in Ganchanani, Deopātan, Kathmandu. Saṃvat 489.

Slab of stone found in the village of Kisipidi. Saṃvat 482. The inscription is the same as in IN02022 (Chowkitar Stone Inscription), IN02023 (Balambu Inscription of Luk-Mahadev) , IN02024 (Kulanchetole Stele Inscription) differing only from IN02022 and IN02023 in the name of the locality. Here and in IN02024 the place is called śītāṭikātale kicapriciṅgrāma.

Regmi (1983a:42) writes about these inscriptions: “As it appears the stones are scattered in different villages, which are situated in close proximity to one another in a larger locality called sītāṭikātale (valley). Perhaps the area now covered by the villages of Thankot, Satungal, Kisipidi, Balambu and Chowkitar with the river Balkhu flowing from the northern side below the hills, the river itself forming a bed outsmarting the hilly bases, was known as sītaṭīkā and because it was an expansive belt the name tala was given to it.

We know that the Chowkitar inscription was addressed to the inhabitants of Tegvalagrāma. But two others are not known fully because of the first letter missing. However, the Kisipidi inscription gives a very meaningful name, Kichaprinchinggrama but the names appearing in the Satungal and Balambu stones do not provide a clue to their past names judged from the nature of the present names.”

Slab of stone found in the Kulānchetole section of the village of Kisipidi. Saṃvat 482.

Slab of stone inscribed with the same text as in IN02022, IN02023 and IN02025,  found in the Kulānchetole section of the village of Kisipidi. Saṃvat 482. The text of the inscription is the same as in IN02022 (Chowkitar Stone Inscription of Gaṇadeva and Bhaumagupta), IN02023 (Balambu Inscription of Luk-Mahadev) , IN02025 (Kisipidi Stone Inscription 2) differing only from IN02022 and IN02023 in the name of the locality. Here and in IN02025 the place is called śītāṭikātale kicapriciṅgrāma.

Regmi (1983a:42) writes about these inscriptions: “As it appears the stones are scattered in different villages, which are situated in close proximity to one another in a larger locality called sītāṭikātale (valley). Perhaps the area now covered by the villages of Thankot, Satungal, Kisipidi, Balambu and Chowkitar with the river Balkhu flowing from the northern side below the hills, the river itself forming a bed outsmarting the hilly bases, was known as sītaṭīkā and because it was an expansive belt the name tala was given to it.

We know that the Chowkitar inscription was addressed to the inhabitants of Tegvalagrāma. But two others are not known fully because of the first letter missing. However, the Kisipidi inscription gives a very meaningful name, Kichaprinchinggrama but the names appearing in the Satungal and Balambu stones do not provide a clue to their past names judged from the nature of the present names.”

Slab of stone found in a ditch next to Luk Mahādev, north to the village of Balambū, Thānkot. Saṃvat 482.

Inscription  carved on a slab of stone found in a ditch next to Luk Mahādev, north to the village of Balambū. Saṃvat 482. The exact text of this inscription is also found in other three inscriptions from the same date: the Chowkitar stone inscription of Ganadeva and Bhaumagupta (IN02022), the Kulāchetole Stele Inscription (IN02024) and the Kisipidi Inscription Stone Inscription 2 (IN02025), differing only from IN02024 and IN02025 in the name of the locality. Here and in IN02022 the place is called śītāṭikātale tegvalgrāma.

Regmi (1983a:42) writes about these inscriptions: “As it appears the stones are scattered in different villages, which are situated in close proximity to one another in a larger locality called sītāṭikātale (valley). Perhaps the area now covered by the villages of Thankot, Satungal, Kisipidi, Balambu and Chowkitar with the river Balkhu flowing from the northern side below the hills, the river itself forming a bed outsmarting the hilly bases, was known as sītaṭīkā and because it was an expansive belt the name tala was given to it.

We know that the Chowkitar inscription was addressed to the inhabitants of Tegvalagrāma. But two others are not known fully because of the first letter missing. However, the Kisipidi inscription gives a very meaningful name, Kichaprinchinggrama but the names appearing in the Satungal and Balambu stones do not provide a clue to their past names judged from the nature of the present names.”

Slab of stone found in the Chowkitar village, Thānkot. Saṃvat 482.

Inscription carved on a slab of stone found in the Chowkitar village, Thānkot. Saṃvat 482. Gnoli reports (1956: 26) that the exact text of this inscription is also found in other three inscriptions from the same date: the Balambu Inscription of Luk Mahādev (IN02023), the Kulāchetole Stele Inscription (IN02024) and the Kisipidi Stone Inscription 2 (IN02025). The only difference lies in the place names: here and in IN02023 the place is called śītāṭikātale tegvalgrāma, in IN02024 and IN02025 the name of the place is śītāṭikātale kicapriṅgrāma. Regmi (1983a:42) writes about these inscriptions: “As it appears the stones are scattered in different villages, which are situated in close proximity to one another in a larger locality called sītāṭikātale (valley). Perhaps the area now covered by the villages of Thankot, Satungal, Kisipidi, Balambu and Chowkitar with the river Balkhu flowing from the northern side below the hills, the river itself forming a bed outsmarting the hilly bases, was known as sītaṭīkā and because it was an expansive belt the name tala was given to it.

We know that the Chowkitar inscription was addressed to the inhabitants of Tegvalagrāma. But two others are not known fully because of the first letter missing. However, the Kisipidi inscription gives a very meaningful name, Kichaprinchinggrama but the names appearing in the Satungal and Balambu stones do not provide a clue to their past names judged from the nature of the present names.”