|
South Indian Inscriptions |
EPIGRAPHIA INDICA Out of the 13 stanzas of the eulogy, verse 1 contains the adoration to a deity. Verses 2-4 describe the ruling king and his family, verses 5-6 an officer or a subordinate of the king and his family, and verses 7-9 the hero of the eulogy and his family. The remaining stanzas deals with the object of the praśasti, which, as already indicated above, is to record the construction of a step-well. The inscription begins with the Siddham symbol followed by a symbol for the praṇava. Next comes the passage namaḥ Śivāya which is followed by verse 1 in which the protection of the god Varuṇa is invoked. The invocation to Varuṇa, god of the waters, suits the occasion as the subject of the composition is essentially the excavation of a step-well and we have other instances of the kind in inscriptions recording the construction of wells.[1] Verse 2 introduces the hero named Chāhmāna, the mythical progenitor of the Chāhamāna family of Rajputs, as born of Virōchana, i.e. the sun-god. This interpretation of the word virōchana, which means both ‘the sun’ and ‘fire’, is suggested by the fact that the Pṛithvīrājavijaya composed by Jayānaka in the last decade of the twelfth century as well as Nayachandra-sūri’s Hammīramahākāvya, composed a century later, represents the eponymous Chāhamāna as sprung from the Sūrya-maṇḍala, while the tradition of the progenitors of the Paramāra, Pratihāra, Chaulukya and Chāhamāna families being born from the sacrificial fire-pit of the sage Vasishṭha on Mount Abu was unknown even as late as the fourteenth century.[2] It seems that the damaged second half of verse 2 referred to the Chāhamāna family as originated from the eponymous hero Chāhamāna mentioned in its first half. This is suggested by the first half of verse 3 which introduces the birth of king Vigraharājadēva (i.e. Vigraharāja IV or Vīsala) with the word iha no doubt meaning ‘in this family’, and another word which seems to be kramāt (i.e. in the regular course of succession), the name of the family being apparently indicated previously.
The extant part of verse 3 suggests that Vigraharāja IV left his throne for his brother’s son Pṛithvībhaṭa (i.e. Pṛithvīrāja II) after having ruled the earth (i.e. the Chāhamāna kingdom with its capital at Śākambharī) for a long time. It is interesting to note that the inscription passes over Aparaº or Amaragāṅgēya, son and successor of Vigraharāja IV.[3] This was probably because Aparaº or Amaragāṅgēya was overthrown after a short rule by Pṛithvīrāja II whose successors were reluctant to recognise the former’s ruled and were eager to represent Pṛithvīrāja II as the direct successor of Vigraharāja IV. An inscription from Dhod is reported to contain a reference to the success of Pṛithvīrāja II against the king of Śākamabharī, who seems to have been none other than Aparaº or Amaragāṅgēya.[4] Verse 4 states that a later king of the family, named Pṛithvīrāja (i.e. Pṛithvīrāja III), succeeded another king whose name was ….. ra. This damaged name was no doubt Sōmēśvara who was the father and predecessor of Pṛithvīrāja III and the uncle and successor of Pṛithvīrāja II. The next two stanzas (verses 5-6) speak of a Brāhmaṇa family belonging to the Kauśika gōtra and hailing from a flourishing agrahāra called Atiśākha. Verse 6 mentions Yaśōrāja who seems to have been the son of Khamadēva or ….. khamadēva of this family. The real significance of the introduction of this family is not clear ; but it seems that Yaśōrāja was a subordinate or an officer of the Chāhmāna king and that the locality where the step-well was excavated (i.e. probably the village of Bārlā near Ajmer where the inscription was found) lay within the territory or fief under him. ________________________________________________
[1] Cf. Mandasor inscription (V.S. 1321) in the Gwalior Museum (A.R. Ep., 1953-54, No. 147 of App. B);
Mandor inscription of V.S. 742 (ibid., 1956-57, No. 504 of App. B ; Administrative Report of the Archaeological
Department of Jodhpur, 1934, p. 5), etc.
|
|