South Indian Inscriptions

EARLY CHALUKYAS OF GUJARAT

tating on his feet. But a careful study of the record shows that while the expression denoting succession which occurs as many as three times in that record is tat-pād-ānudhyāta (meditating on his feet), that used to express Pulakāśin’s relation to his brother is tat-pāda- pankaj-ārādhan-ānudhyāta¹( meditating on the propitiation of his lotus-like feet). The difference in the two expressions is certainly striking and seems to suggest that Pulakēśin was ruling in Gujarat contemporaneously with his brother who was governing parts of North Konkan.

The Navsāri plates of Avanijanāśraya-Pulakēśin record his grant of a village in the āhāra and vishaya of Kārmanēya (modern Kamrej, 10 m. north-east of Surat). They are dated in K. 490 (740 A.C.). Their historical importance lies in the graphic account they furnish of Pulakēśin’s victory over the Tajikas or Arabs. The Arabs, we are told, had already conquered the Saindhava, Kachchhella, Saurashtra, Chāvōtaka, Maurya, Gurjara and other kings before they invaded the district of Navasārika in the course of their campaign to conquer all the kings of the Dakshinapatha. We find this description fully corroborated by the account of Muhammadan chroniclers. Of the princes named above, Saindhava is generally identified with the king of Sindh. From Futu-hu-1 Buldan² of Al Biladuri also we know that during the Khalifat of Walid I, Muhammad, son of Kasim, crossed the Sindhu and defeated and killed Dahir, the king of Sindh. Sulaimān, the successor of Walid I, called back Muhammad. Jaisingh, son of Dahir, took advantage of this opportunity to regain his territory; but when Junaid was appointed Governor of Sindh during the Khalifat of Hasham (724-743 A.C.), he again pursued a vigorous policy and defeated and killed Jaisingh.³ It appears, however, from the Ghumli plates recently discovered, that the Saindhava king defeated by the Arab army was probably Pushyadeva (circa 734-754 A.C.), the founder of the Saindhava feudatory family which ruled in North Saurashtra.⁴ Kachchella s te king of Cutch. One of the Arab raids during the governorship of Junaid was directed against Kiraj which Elliot identified with Cutch.⁵ Saurashtra was under the Maitrakas of Valabhi. Though their territory was invaded by the Arabs, they repelled the attack with the help of the Gurjara prince Jayabhata IV.⁶ Perhaps in a later raid the Arabs were more successful. The Chavotaka king was plainly of the Chapa dynasty which was ruling at Bhilmal. This can be inferred from the statement in the Brahmagupta-Siddhānta that the astronomer Brahmagupta, the Bhillamalakacharya or the teacher residing at Bhilmal, wrote the Siddhānta in the Śaka years 550 (628 A.C.) under Vyaghramukha of the Chapa dynasty.⁷ From Al Biladuri’s work also we learn that Junaid raided Bailaman which is probably identical with Bhilmal. The Maurya king was probably Dhavala who is known from the Kanaswa inscription of his friend Sivagana,⁸ dated V. 795 (738-39 A.C.). He was probably ruling over the country corresponding to modern Mewad.⁹Finally, the Gurjara king was probably
____________

¹ This expression clearly shows that pād-ānudhyāta which occurs frequently in Sanskrit inscriptions means ‘meditating on the feet of’ and not ‘blessed or favoured by the feet of’ as suggested by some scholars. See my note on the expression in Ind. Hist. Quart., Vol. XX, pp.288 ff.
² E.D.H.I., Vol. I,pp.121-22.
³ Loc.cit., p. 125.
⁴ Ep. Ind., Vol. XXVI, P. 189.
⁵ E.D.H.I.,p.391.
⁶See above, P. Iv.
⁷J.B.B.R.A.S.,Vol. XXI.
⁸ Ind. Ant., Vol. XIX, pp. 55 ff.
⁹ Dhavala is probably identical with Dhavalappadeva whose inscription dated G. 407 was found at Dabok in Mewad ( A.B.O.R.I., Vol. X, p.31,n.I).