|
The Indian Analyst
|
|
North Indian Inscriptions |
INSCRIPTIONS OF THE CHANDELLAS OF JEJAKABHUKTI valley where the Sōmavaṁśīs were ruling; and Yaśōvarman’s contemporary ruler Śivagupta (c. 950 A.C.) carried on congenial relations with the Kalachuris after his defeat by the Kalachuri king Lakshmaṇarāja II (945-970 A.C.). And this may have enraged Yaśōvarman to invade this region. It must be admitted, however, that there is no evidence in support of this view. The statement of the praśasti crediting Yaśōvarman to be ‘a scorching fire to the Gūrjaras’ would naturally suggest his enemies to have been the imperial Gurjara-Pratīhāras of Kanauj, as is generally held ;[1] but this statement would be nothing less than directly challenging the overlordship of his master Vināyakapāla whose name is mentioned below in the same record with all due honour. I am therefore inclined to agree with Dr. D. C. Sircar who takes these Gurjaras of the present inscription to be identical with the Pratīhāra dynasty represented by Harirāja who was then ruling over the Jhānsī-Gunā area and who too, like Yaśōvarman and some others, originally owed his allegiance to the imperial Gurjara-Pratīhāra power. Editing the Bhārat-Kalā-Bhavan copper-plate inscription of Harirāja, Dr. Sircar has suggested that it is this house of the Gūrjaras which is alluded to in the expression occurring in our inscription and that Harirāja claims for himself the title of Adhirāja in l. 2 and Mahārājādhirāja in l. 6 of the record goes to indicate that he openly declared independence when the imperial power was hard pressed by the Rāshṭrakūṭas.[2]
With reference to the other countries and people which are alluded to in the verse under reference, it appears to be practically impossible that Yaśōvarman actually invaded Kashmir and the kingdom of the Kurus of Khasas which were far distant from his region.[3] Equally conventional is another statement which is made in v. 30 of the record that he led his conquests up to the Himālayas in the north. The expression dig-jaya used in this verse and again in verse 39 below only reminds us of the description of conquests of kings of the ancient times. Verse 36 tells us that this king was also known as Lakshavarman.
Verse 31 of the record under study states that Yaśōvarman easily conquered the Kālañjara
mountain, the dwelling place of Śiva. The name of the enemy from whom he captured this
mountain is not mentioned ; and prima facie this enemy of the Chandēlla king would appear to
be either the Rāshṭrakūṭa king Kṛishṇa III (939-967 A.C.), whose predecessor Indra III may have
occupied it in one of his northern campaigns, or the imperial Pratīhāra ruler. The first of these
suggestions is obviously untenable, since we do not find the name of any Rāshṭrakūṭa ruler in
the long list of Yaśōvarman’s adversaries as given in v. 23 of the record. Similarly the second
view also cannot be upheld in view of the fact that not only Yaśōvarman but his son Dhaṅga also
acknowledged the suzerainty of the Gurjara-Pratīhāra king Vināyakapāla in this very record.
Bringing to our notice all these difficulties. Dr. D. C. Sircar, while editing the Bhārat Kalā
Bhavan grant of Harirāja Pratīhāra of V.S. 1040, suggested that the Chandēlla ruler seems to have
captured the fort from any of the ancestors of the Pratīhāra ruler Harirāja, who, as a feudatory
of the Gurjara-Pratīhāras of Kanauj and perhaps as belonging to the imperial family, was holding
the Jhānsī-Gunā area under him, with Kālañjar included in it.[4] We have no hesitation in accept
[1] SeeE. R. K., p. 51.
(Cited in E. H. D., p. 133, n.).
Instances may be multiplied by the well-known expressions like tulit-ārjuna-śrīḥ (C. I. I., Vol. IV, p. 282,
v. 10), and two of the instances mentioned above clearly show that Kielhorn’s translation of the expression used in the present inscription is absolutely correct and also that all the instances enumerated | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| > |
|
>
|
