North Indian Inscriptions

THE GUPTA INSCRIPTIONS

river Palāśinī, being free from all barrier and overflowing their banks, met the sea; and it appeared as if Mount Ūrjayat stretched out its hand in the shape of this river (i.e. the Palāśinī). touching its friend, the sea. The breach made was 100 cubits in depth, sixty-eight in length and 7 purushas in height (verse 36). The breach was filled up and the embankment renewed under the orders of Chakrapālita after two months’ work in the month of Ashāḍha in Gupta year 137 (expired)=456-57 A.D. (verse 35). Here ends the first part of the inscription. This is indicated clearly by the words which occur in line 23, namely, iti Sudarśana-taṭāka-saṁskāra-graṁtha-rachanā samapta-

       The second part, lines 24 to the end, seems to have mentioned Skandagupta and Parṇadatta in verse 40-41 though their names have not been preserved owing to the peeling off of the rock. And then, in keeping with the Vaishṇava invocation with which the inscription opens, it goes on to record in verse 45 that in the hundred and thirty-eighth year (expired), “(according to the calculation) of the Gupta era,” Chakrapālita caused to be built a temple of the god Vishṇu under the name of Chakrabhṛit, ‘the bearer of discus,; on Mount Ūrjayat, and shining over the head of the town (verse 45-46). The last verse also refers to the erection apparently of another temple, similarly overlooking the town.

       As regards the localities mentioned in this inscription, Surāshṭra is modern Kāṭhiāwāḍ, the southern part of which is still known as Sōraṭh. It is an old name, being first mentioned by Kauṭalya who speaks of the Surāshṭras along with the Kambōjas and Kshatriyas as a tribal corporation (saṁgha) subsisting upon both agriculture and arms. It thus seems that Kāṭhiāwāḍ was known as Surāshṭra in the ancient period because the Surāshṭra tribe had been settled in that province. Surāshṭra has also been referred to in the Śikshā associated with the name of Pāṇini. It is the Surashtrēnē of the Periplus of the Erythraen Sea (c. 90 A.D.) and the Syrastrēnē of Ptolemy (c. 150 A.D.). The author of the Periplus says that its capital was Minagar, which Bhagwanlal Indraji identified with Junāgaḍh which was once called Maṇipura. Later on, however, he took Minagara to be a mistake for Girinagara, the old form of Girnār. The other places of interest mentioned in the inscription are the two mountains Raivataka and Ūrjayat, the river Palāśinī and the town which was connected with the lake Sudarśana. The actual name of this town has not been given, but it was Girinagara as appears from line 1 of Rudradāman’s inscription. That it was rightly called Girinagara is clear from verse 46 where we are told that it was situated about the foot of Mount Ūrjayat. Mērutuṅga’s Prabandhachintāmaṇi, while describing the animosity between the Digambara and Śvētāmbara sects of Jainism at Raivataka, speaks of Ujjayanta (=Ūrjayat) as another name of it and of Girinagara as being settled upon it. But according to the Kāṭhiāwāḍ volume of the B.G., “The ancient name of the Girnār hills is Ujjayanta or Girnar, but not Revatāchal as is sometimes supposed. Revatāchal is the name of the hill immediately over the Revata Kund. At the foot of this hill is the celebrated Asoka stone with the inscriptions of Asoka, Rudra Dāma, and Skanda Gupta; . . . . . . The Jains sometimes incorrectly apply the name Revatāchala to the Girnār.” This agrees with what we gather from the inscription which distinguishes between Raivataka and Ūrjayat and places the town (Girinagara) at the foot of Ūrjayat. This also explains why Ujjayanta came in later times to be known as the Girnār hill. This further explains why the inscription of Rudradāman mentions Girinagara as being distant (dūra) from the Sudarśana lake. That Girinagara was a town of importance may be seen from the fact that it is mentioned as the place from which hailed the Brāhmaṇa grantee of the Nausārī charter¹ issued by the Gūrjara king Jayabhaṭa III in the Kalachuri saṁvat 456. As regards the river Palāśinī, it is worthy of note that it is mentioned along with the Suvarṇasikatā in Rudradāman’s inscription as both rising from Mount Ūrjayat. The late F. Kielhorn who
________________________________________

¹ CII., Vol. IV, pp. 82 ff.