North Indian Inscriptions

LITERARY HISTORY

showing how it rested itself. The sentence has therefore to be translated differently and somewhat as follows: “(Where) fame exerted itself with journey over the whole world caused by the restoration of many fallen kingdoms and overthrown royal families.”

       Though it is not possible to agree with Bühler in the interpretation of the sentence quoted above, he is quite right in remarking that the closing part of most of the long-compound attributives in lines 17-24 “comes now and then as a surprise and deviates very much from the usual track”, pointing to the individuality of the style. Thus in line 20, while setting forth his conquests in Dakshiṇāptha, his description ends with the words sarvva-Dakshiṇāpatharāja-grahaṇa-mōksh-ānugraha-janita-pratāp-ōnmiśra-mahā-bhāgyasya. Similarly, his account of Samudragupta’s exploits in North India in line 21 closes with anēk-Āryyāvartta-rāja-prasabh-ōddharaṇ-ōdvṛitta-prabhāva-mahataḥ.Further, in lines 22-23, Harishēṇa describes the stern control which his master exercised over the tributary chieftains and tribes, in the words sarva-kara-dān-ājñākaraṇa-praṇām-āgamana-paritōshita-prachaṇḍa-śāsanasya. This is followed by a sentence detailing the different measures with which the independent princes on the frontier of the Gupta empire prevented him from invading their dominions.

>

The sentence ends with ādy-upāya-sēvā-kṛita-bāhu-vīryya-prasara-dharaṇi-bandhasya. This expression, like prasabh-ōddharaṇ- ōdvṛitta-prabhāva-mahataḥ cited above is unique and peculiar to Harishēṇa. And just because it is out of the ordinary run, all the previous translators were led astray. Thus, Bühler renders it as follows: “the mighty bravery of his arm which held the whole earth in bondage, received homage from etc.” The most important word in this sentence is dharaṇi-bandha, which here obviously means “an earthen embankment.” The prowess of his arm (bāhu-vīryya) is compared to a prasara, ‘flow of water.’ This onrush of his prowess continued to be unimpeded like a a terrific flood. And the neighbouring independent kings, who dreaded his invasion of their territories, were naturally anxious to construct some barriers, i.e., earthen embankments (dharaṇi-bandha), which could arrest the further onrush of his prowess. And these barriers were of various kinds and correspond to the various measures which they adopted as Harishēṇa tells us. There are many other phrases which mark Harishēṇa’s individuality not only in diction and phraseology but also in conception. In fact, the whole prose passage bristles with instances of it. It is impossible here to notice them all. We shall notice two or three only. One such is Dhanada-Varuṇ-Ēndr-Āntaka-samasya. Bühler says that this comparison occurs frequently in the epics and is used in later times by almost every classical poet. I have not, however, met with any passage in the epics, where any ruler is compared to these four Regents of the Quarters, combined either in one phrase or in one verse. The only poet who indulges in this comparison is Kālidāsa who, in Canto IX, verse 24 of the Raghuvaṁśa, likens Daśaratha to Yama-Kubēra- Jalēśvara-Vajriṇām. The author of the Naishadhīya-charita, however, expresses the same idea but in the general terms: Dig-īśa-vṛind-āṁśa-vibhūtiḥ. This comparison of a king with the Regents of the Quarters must have originated as early as the time of Chandragupta, the founder of the Maurya dynasty , as it is Kauṭalya who first seems to have used it in his Arthaśāstra.¹ But in the Gupta period they were not satisfied with this comparison of a king merely with the Regents of the Quarters and went so far as to identify him with Supreme God Himself.² The rising up of this bold conception of kingship is traceable even in Harishēṇa’s praśasti in the phraseology (in line 28) lōka-samaya-kkriy-ānuvidhāna-mātra-mānushasya lōka-dhāmnō dēvasya, “(who is) a human being in that he performs the rites and conventions of the world, (otherwise) God whose residence is the world.” This conception which has here been expressed in many words was afterwards crystallised into the phrase Parama-daivata, ‘Supreme
_______________________________________________

¹ D. R. Bhandarkar’s Some Aspects of Ancient Hindu Polity (Manindra Chandra Nandy Lectures, 1925), pp. 141 and ff.
² Ibid., pp. 163-64.