It is a prashasti and among other things, it praises Pulakesin II for his generosity and gifts. Date The verses 33–34 of the inscription state the date to be the year 3735 after the Bharata war, or saka samvat 556. This corresponds to 634–635 CE. Inscription The nineteen lines of the inscription has been variously translated. The translation published by Kielhorn is as follows: Significance The Aihole inscription, with its different published translations has been a source of Deccan and Indian history in the 6th and 7th-century. It is also a source of controversies and inconsistencies when the claims in the Aihole inscriptions are compared to inscriptions found outside of Badami Chalukya kingdom. According to Richard Salomon – an Indologist specializing in epigraphical records, the Aihole inscription is a useful source of simple facts such as the date of Melguti Jain temple, Ravikirti's role in building it, the fame of Kalidasa, the state of language and literature in early 7th-century. The Aihole inscription is also significant by providing a definite terminus ante quem of 634 CE for both Kalidasa and Bharavi. The Aihole inscription has been a source of literary and political history close to Ravikirti's generation (early 7th century), but given the highly rhetorical style that blends historic myth, fiction and events, one aimed to boast and flatter one's employer in general public, it need not be historically accurate. Further, states Salomon, one must expect that a court poet would "gloss over, distort, or simply ignore their patron's military defeats". The Aihole inscription must be evaluated in light of independent and reliable corroborative sources, which unfortunately are quite limited. Except for a few events, many of the claims in the Aihole inscription cannot be confirmed. The victory of Pulakesin II over king Harsha can be corroborated in the writings of Xuanzang (Hsuan Tsang), the Chinese pilgrim who visited India in the 7th-century. However, if the Chinese record is to be read in full and trusted, then the Aihole inscription is glossing over many details. The Harsha-Pulakesin II war continued, records the Chinese pilgrim, because the troops and citizens of Harsha did not submit to Pulakeshin II. The first battle was indeed won by Pulakeshin, yet shortly thereafter it was Harsha who defeated Pulakeshin II near Narmada river in 612 CE (about 20 years before the Ravikirti's inscription). If inscriptions found in central India and the Chinese record are to