|
EPIGRAPHIA INDICA
the stokes of the tusks of his rutting elephants.” The god Kâlapriya is the same as Mahâkâla,[1] whose temple at Ujjain is so widely known all over India. It is on the occasion of the
festival held in honour of this Kâlapriya that the three plays of the poet Bhavabhûti were
represented. It thus appears that, in his expedition of conquest in Northern India, Indra III.
halted at Ujjain to pay his homage to the god. The remaining three lines may be thus rendered :─
“ His steeds crossed the unfathomable Yamunâ which rivals the sea. He completely devastated
that hostile city of Mahôdaya, which is even to-day greatly renowned among men by the name
of Kuśasthala.” Indra III. therefore appears to have marched from Ujjain northward, crossed
the Jumna and reduced the city of Mahôdaya. The lexicon of Hêmachandra tells us that Mahôdaya and Kuśasthala are both names of Kanyakubja,[2] i.e. Kanauj, so that verse 19 represents
Indra III. to have attacked the city of Kanauj. But the complete devastation of Mahôdaya,
which Indra III. is spoken of as having brought about, is merely poetical. For, the poet’s object
appears to be to introduce a play on the words mahôdaya and kuśasthala, which in their conventional sense mean Kanauj, and in their etymological one, ‘full of high prosperity’ and ‘a spot
of kuśa grass’ respectively : Mahôdaya, i.e. Kanauj, ceased to be mahôdaya, i.e. highly prosperous, and became kuśasthala, i.e. a mere spot of kuśa grass. Hence, the complete annihilation
of the city of Mahôdaya or Kanauj alluded to in this stanza cannot be reasonably assumed to
be a historical fact. This is also seen from the consideration that, as a matter of fact, for
long after the event recorded in this verse took place, Kanauj continued to be the capital of
several princes, ruling over Northern India.[3] What Indra III. actually did beyond attacking
Mahôdaya or Kanauj, cannot be inferred from the verse itself. But we can ascertain it with
the help of other inscriptions. We shall, however, in the first place, see whether we can decide
which of the rulers of Kanauj Indra III. vanquished. The Râshṭrakûṭa records give the
dates 915 and 917 A.D. for Indra III. ; and the succession and dates of the princes, reigning
at Mahôdaya or Kanauj about this period, as determined from the Gwalior, Pehca and Sîyaḍôṇî
inscriptions, are as follows :
1. Bhôja, A.D. 862, 876 and 882.
2. Mahêndrapâla, A.D. 903 and 907.
3. Kshitipâla or Mahîpâla, A.D. 917.
4. Dêvapâla, A.D. 948.[4]
Now, as for Indra (III.) we have the dates A.D. 915 and 917[5] and for Kshitipâla or
Mahîpâla the date A.D. 917, there can hardly be a doubt that they were contemporaries.
And it is almost certain that it is this Kshitipâla whom Indra III. conquered. Let us
now find out what Indra III. did beyond obtaining a victory over Kshitipâla. A Khajurâho
___________________
[1] Jagaddhara, in his commentary on the Mâlatîmâdhava, says that Kâlapriyanâtha is tad-dêśa-bhêda, i.e. a particular deity belonging to that country. But what country Jagaddhara had in his mind, cannot be accurately
made out. Îśvarachandra Vidyâsâgara, in his edition of the Uttararâmacharita, says in a footnote that Kâlapriyanâtha is the name of a deity installed in Padmapura in Vidarbha, i.e. the native town of the poet Bhavabhûti. But
this note appears to be based on the comment of Jagaddhara just quoted, and, according to Îśvarachandra, it seems
that the expression tad-dêśaº must be understood to mean the country to which Bhavabhûti belonged. In the St. Petersburg Dictionary, however, Kâlapriyanâtha is identified with the Mahâkâla of Ujjayinî. This identification doubtless fits here excellently, but I have not been able to trace the authority which supports it.
[2] Hêmachandra’s Abhidhânachintâmaṇi, v. 273 f.
[3] The king of Mahôdaya or Kanauj, whom Indra III. defeated, has been shown further on to be Kshitipâla or
Mahîpâla. And we have actual records to show that, after this Kshitipâla, there reigned at Kanauj his successors
called Dêvapâladêva, Vijayapàladêva, Râjyapâladêva and Trilôchanapâladêva, respectively (see above, Vol. III.
p. 265 ; Ind. Ant. Vol. XVIII. p. 33 ff.). They were followed by the Gaharwaras or Râṭhôrs of Kanauj (C. Mabel
Duff’s Chronology of India, p. 285).
[4] See above, Vol. I. p. 171 f. ; C. Mabel Duff’s Chronology of India, p. 296.
[5] Dr. Fleet’s Dyn. Kan. Distr. p. 415 f.
|
