|
The Indian Analyst
|
South Indian Inscriptions |
EPIGRAPHIA INDICA NOTE ON TWO PLATES OF TRIBHUVANAMAHADEVI FROM BAUD Fifthly, the Baud plates of Pṛithvīmahādevī alias Tribhuvanamahādevī give the genealogy of the Bhauma-Kara family in which the long line of rulers from Unmaṭṭasiṁha (the second king of the dynasty) down to the ruling queen herself are named and, in the description of the earlier ruling queen Tribhuvanamahādēvī alias Gōsvāminī, they actually quote one stanza and a half from the Talcher plate of her husband Śubhākara IV. The Dhenkanal plate on the other hand mentions only Unmaṭṭakēsarin and Gayāḍa I (the second and fifth rulers of the family) in the reference to the past monarchs of the Bhauma-Kara dynasty and gives the impression quite clearly that the issuer of the charter has to be placed in the earlier part of the genealogical tree. This no doubt goes in favour of the identification of the issuer of the Dhenkanal plate with the mother and successor of Śubhākara III who was the great-grandson of Unmaṭṭakēsarin (ºsiṁha) and the son and successor of Gayāḍa alias Śāntikara I. If the Dhenkanal plate was issued in the year 160, that is to say, shortly after the reign of Pṛithvīmahādēvī of the Baud plates, it is difficult to explain why the description of the Bhauma-Kara genealogy quoted in it does not resemble in any way the same as found in the Baud plates of the year 158 as well as the Talcher plates of the years 145 and 149. As already indicated above, the fact that the issuer of the Dhenkanal plate does not mention Pṛithvīmahādēvī, who was her immediate predecessor according to Mr. De, but states that the queen was induced to ascend the throne by citing the instance of an earlier female ruler named Gōsvāminī is inexplicable and renders Mr. De’s suggestion unconvincing.
One of Mr. De’s arguments in favour of assigning the Dhenkanal plate to the year 160 seems to be that it was engraved by the brazier Harivardhana, son of Rahasavardhana, while the two Talcher plates of the year 149 were engraved by the brazier Rahasavardhana, son of Rāmavardhana, and one of the Baud plates of the year 158 by Harivardhana, son of Rahasavardhana. His identification of Harivardhana, engraver of the Baud plates of the year 158, with Harivardhana who engraved the Dhenkanal plate appears to support his contention assigning the latter record to the year 160. But considering the difficulties in ascribing the Dhenkanal plate to such a late date, which have been detailed above, as well as the fact that several records of the Bhauma-Kara dynasty mention the Vardhana family of braziers and the very name Harivardhana occurring in the Chaurasi plate assigned to the year 73,[1] it does not appear improbable that the engraver of the Dhenkanal plate was an ancestor of his namesake who engraved one set of the Baud plates.[2] It may be noted here that the circumstances leading to the accession of Tribhuvanamahādēvī I, surnamed Sindagaurī and Gōsvāminī (II), as given in the records of the years 145, 149 and 158, which have been discussed above, are not clearly described in the Dhenkanal plate. The Talcher plate of the year 145, as we have seen, says that Tribhuvanamahādēvī ascended the Bhauma-Kara throne after the death of her son Śubhākara III but abdicated in favour of her grandson as soon as the latter passed over his minority. This gives the impression that the queen ruled for a short period during the minority of her grandson, although, in ancient India, minority was never a bar to one’s accession to the throne.[3] On this point the Baud plates, which are silent on the relation between Gōsvāminī (Tribhuvanamahādēvī I) and her predecessor Kusumahāra (Śubhākara III), add that Śubhākara III died without leaving any heir. It seems therefore that Śāntikara II, sur- _________________________________________________
[1] Misra, op. cit., pp. 8-9. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| > |
|
>
|