vaṁṅ ampun· Ini sakakala, prəbu ratu pura:n pun·, ḍivas·tu ḍyiə, vdiṅaran· prəbu guru ḍevata praun· ḍivas·tu ḍyə ḍiṅaran· sri baduga maharaja, ratu haji ḍi pakvan· pajajaran· sri saṁ ratu ḍevata pun·

ya nu ñusuk· na pakvan· ḍyə Anak· rahyi ḍeva nis·kala, saṁ siḍa mok·ta ḍi gunuṁ tiga, qəñcu rahyiṁ nis·kala vas·tu kañca:na, saṁ siḍa mok·ta ka nusa laraṁ,

ya syi nu ñyin· sakakala, gugunuṅan·, ṅabalay·,, ñyin· samiḍa, ñyin· saṁ hyiṁ talaga vaR̥na mahavijaya,

ya syi pun·,,

I saka, pañca pan·ḍava ṅəmban· bumi

vaṁṅa pun· vaṁ na pun For the shape of ṅa, see ṅabalay in l. 9. pura:na purane There is a vertical stroke between r and n, which has been interpreted as panéléng by Pleyte and Hasan Djafar, but we think it is a panolong, for panéléng has a different shape in this inscription. See the panéléngs in mok·ta (ll. 5 and 6) and in ḍeva nis·kala (l. 4) — they are all different from the shape we see here in line 1. It seems that the marker in line 1 is intended to be the same as the panolong we have identified in kaca:na (l. 5). There is a horizontal stroke on top, but it could be accidental. ḍyiə, viṅaran· diya viṅaran suggests an emendation of the second word to diṅaran. We accept the emendation and add that ḍyi needs to be emended to dyə, the word we also find further on in this line and in l. 4. praun· prana Hasan Djafar's reading seems impossible to us, for there is unmistakably a sign between the n and the following ḍi, and this sign can only be a paten or punctuation. We feel compelled to emend because no word pran seems to exist in Sundanese or Javanese. praun· prana This reading seems impossible to us, for there is unmistakably a sign between the n and the following ḍi, and this sign can only be pamaéh or punctuation. Since the word pran (even if interpreted as pəran) does not seem to exist in Sundanese, we propose to emend this to pun·, as in lines 1 and 4. ñusuk· na ñusuk·na All predecessors have by their non-insertion of a space between ñusuk and na implied that na is a pronominal clitic, but it seems more convincing to take it as article na (53-60). rahyiṁ rahiyaṁ We do not see the panyecek. saṁ siḍa saṁ sida Hasan Djafar explains with a note explaining that the panyecek is present although hard to read. We are inclined to assume that it is absent. Cf. the cases of sa ratu and rahyi for saṁ ratu and rahyiṁ (= rahiyaṁ) above. mok·ta mok·ta We can not clearly see the bottom stroke expected as pamaéh, but there is a trace of a small stroke to the right and bottom of the aksara k. gunuṁ guna There can be no doubt about reading with panyuku and panyecek. See the toponym Gunuṅ Tiga in the CP as cited by Pleyte (176). qəñcu Iñ·cu nis·kala nis·kala The first consonant is very hard to read as n, but that is what is must be. ṅabalay· The first consonant is unclear. If we are to follow Hasan Djafar who reads ṅabalay, then this means that at the beginning of line 1, we also need to read ṅa. Another possibility would be to read Abalay·. Whether we read it as ṅa or A, the aksara seems slightly deviant from the other instances of the same aksaras in this inscription. talaga vaR̥na Restoration proposed by Hasan Djafar. Cf. Pleyte 172, citation from FCP.6a: ti saṁ hyiṁ talaga varna miñak· hanət· sagomboṁ Uyaḥ salave kəlek lilitan salave təktək ... From Talaga Warna: essential oil one gombong, salt 25 kəlek, waist cloth 25 təktək...; cf. also BM 1352-1355, a passage which locates Talaga Varna somewhere around Bukit Agəṅ (presumably the ancient name of present-day Gunung Gede in Bogor)

Om, pardon any errors. This is the memorial of his majesty the former king, inaugurated here with the name Prabu Guru Déwata, and also inaugurated here with the name Sri Baduga Maharaja, king of kings in Pakwan Pajajaran, Sri Sang Ratu Déwata. He is the one who demarcated Pakwan here, being the child of Rahyang Déwa Niskala, the one who vanished at Gunung Tiga; grandchild of Rahyang Niskala Wastu Kancana, the one who vanished to Nusa Larang. He, that one, produced the commemoration monument, artificial hill, cladded [it] with stone; he produced the ritual ground samiḍa; he produced the holy Color Lake. Greatly victorious was he! In the year: ‘the five Pandawas guard the earth’ i.e. in 1455 Śaka

The inscription was initially read by Friederich (442-468). Then Holle devoted a series of articles specifically to this inscription (483-488, 90-98, 187-189). He was followed by Pleyte (155-220 and Poerbatjaraka (380-418), while the most recent study is that by Hasan Djafar (1-13). Re-edited here by Aditia Gunawan & Arlo Griffiths from the EFEO estampage. In our apparatus, variant readings are cited only from Hasan Djafar's edition.

442-468 483-488 90-98 187-189 155-220 380-418 1-13