|
EPIGRAPHIA INDICA
which received the name of Jagattuṅga-sindhu after Jagattuṅga(-Gôvinda III.), father of Amôghavarsha I.
After Amôghavarsha I. the throne was occupied by his son Akâlavarsha(-Kṛishṇa II.),
of whom verse 13 says that his enemies abandoned the city of Khêṭaka, which, in my opinion, is
here meant to denote Mânyakhêṭa itself, the capital of the Râshṭrakûṭa princes. Two Eastern
Châlukya records[1] mention that Guṇaka-Vijayâditya III. (A.D. 844-888) “frightened the firebrand Kṛishṇa and completely burnt his city,”[2] and that “king Vallabha did honour to the
arms of Vijayâditya (III.).” It, therefore, appears that the Eastern Châlukya prince Guṇaka-Vijayâditya III. defeated the Râshṭrakûṭa king Kṛishṇa II. and was in possession of his capital
Mânyakhêṭa, and it is to the act of repulsing this Châlukya prince from Mânyakhêṭa that verse
13 of our grant refers.[3] Verse 14 states that Akâlavarsha(-Kṛishṇa II.) married the daughter
of Kôkkala, who belonged to the family of Sahasrârjuna, i.e. the Chêdi dynasty. Now, the
Bilhari inscription speaks of Kôkkalla as having erected two columns of fame, viz., Kṛishṇarâja in
the south and Bhôjadêva in the north.[4] Similarly, the Benares plates of the Chêdi prince Karṇadêva state that Kôkkalla’s hand, which granted freedom from fear, was on (the head of) Bhôja Vallabharâja, Śrî-Harsha and Saṅkaragaṇa.[5] There can hardly ba a doubt that the Kṛishṇa-
râja of the Bilhari inscription is identical with the Vallabharâja of the Benares plates, and that
both are identical with the Râshṭrakûṭa prince Akâlavarsha(-Kṛishṇa II.). And the support,
which Kôkkala lent to Akâlavarsha(-Kṛishṇa II.), was given in all likelihood at the time when
the latter was defeated, and his capital Mânyakhêṭa occupied, by the Eastern Châlukya king
Guṇaka-Vijayâditya III. The last pâda of verse 14 tells us that from the union of Akâlavarsha
(-Kṛishṇa II.) and the daughter of Kôkkala sprang Jagattuṅga, who, in verse 15 and 16, is said
to have married Lakshmî, daughter of Raṇavigraha, son of Kôkkala.[6] Verse 16 speaks of a
prince named Arjuna as having helped Jagattuṅga with his army and thus enabled him to
acquire fame. It does not seem difficult to identify this Arjuna. In verse 20, Arjuna is mentioned
as a son of Kôkkalla. Arjuna was thus a brother of Raṇavigraha, and consequently an
uncle-in-law of Jagattuṅga. And, in all likelihood, it is this Arjuna who seems to have rendered
him assistance.
Verses 17-18 relate that from this Jagattuṅga and Lakshmî king Indra (III.) was born.
Verse 19 describes a great victory achieved by this Indra. The first line of this stanza may be
thus translated :─ “The courtyard (of the temple of the god) Kâlapriya (became) uneven by
_________________
[1] Ind. Ant. Vol. XX. p. 102.
[2] [For a different explanation of this statement and its bearing, see above, Vol. IV. p. 226 f.─ E. H.]
[3] Verse 13 is also susceptible of another interpretation. Khêṭaka may be taken to denote the modern Kaira.
and the term maṇḍala to the refer to the surrounding district. If so, the verse must be understand as containing an
allusion to Kṛishṇa II.’s having supplanted the subordinate branch of the Râshṭrakûṭa dynasty, reigning at Khêṭaka.
But the word parityakta implies that Khêṭaka, before it was occupied by the enemies, was under the sway of
Kṛishṇa II., and that, when it was so occupied, he by his prowess compelled the enemies to evacuate it. But the
Râshṭrakûṭas of the subordinate branch did not occupy Khêṭaka and the surrounding district at any time during
Kṛishṇa II.’s reign, but were ruling over it long before him. Again, the word ahita as applied to these tributary
Râshṭrakûṭas does not seem to be appropriate. They are referred to as śulkika-Râshṭrakûṭas when their rebellion
against Amôghavarsha I, is mentioned (Ind. Ant. Vol. XII. p. 183, and Vol. XIV. p. 199). Again, they are spoken
of as bândhavas when their disaffection towards the Gujarât Râshṭrakûta prince Dhruva II, is alluded to (Ind.
Ant. Vol. XII. p. 184). But in no case the word ahita or its synonyms are used to denote them. For these reasons
the second interpretation does not commend itself to me as easily as the first, suggested in the text. The latter is
much more probable, because we know that Mânyakhêṭa was once occupied during Kṛishṇa II.’s life-time by the
Eastern Châlûkyas, who can, with propriety, be called his ahitas, inasmuch as they were the mortal enemies of the
Râshṭrakûṭa dynasty. [4] See above, Vol. I. p. 256, verse 17.
[5] Ibid. Vol. II. p. 306, verse 7.
[6] The true spelling of the name appears to be Kôkkalla, as attested by the records of the Chêdi dynasty. It
is spelt Kôkkala in verses 14 and 15, on account of the exigencies of the metre. The correct spelling of the name
occurs in verse 20.
|
