North Indian Inscriptions

MISCELLANEOUS INSCRIPTIONS

PUJARIPALI STONE INSCRIPTION OF GOPALADEVA

moon. As Dr. Bhandarkar has already remarked, the word kīrti is probably used here with a double entendre. It signifies that Gōpāla performed some charitable act such as building a temple at the aforementioned places, most of which are holy tīrthas. Verse 41 states that Gōpāla resembled Kandarpa (the god of love) in handsome form, and Sūdraka in valour, and that riding a horse he appeared in various places like Rēvanta. In the next verse (42) Gōpāla requests all people of the maṇḍala (province), whether of his family or not, to protect the Kirti. The word kīrti here probably refers to the temple where the slab was originally placed.

Verse 43 describes the poet Nārāyaṇa, who apparently composed this inscription, as the author of the kāvya Rāmābhyudaya. The inscription was written by Dēdū and engraved by Dhanapati.

This record is not dated ; but Dr. Bhandarkar identified the king Gōpāla described in it with the Rāṇaka Gōpāla, for whom the date 840 of the Kalachuri era (1088-89 A. C.) is furnished by the Chhaprī statue inscription.¹ R.B. Hiralal accepted this identification on the ground that both Pēṇḍrā (with which he identified the village Pēḍarā mentioned in v. 40) and Pujāripāli are close to the former Kawardhā State in which the Chhaprī inscription is found. Apart from the similarity of names, however, there does not seem to be any valid reason for the identification. The palæographical evidence detailed above indicates that the present record is somewhat later than the Chhaprī inscrip tion. Besides, if we identify the two princes, we shall have to suppose that the country under the direct sway of Gōpāladēva extended from Kawardhā in the west to Sāraṅgarh in the east. He must, therefore, have ruled over a more extensive territory than even his Kalachuri overlord whose era is found used in the Chhaprī inscription of Gōpāladēva’s feudatory Lakshmaṇarāja ! More definite evidence is needed than mere identity of names to prove the identification of the two princes.

From the Shēorinārāyaṇ inscription² we learn that there was another prince named Gōpāladēva who belonged to a collateral branch of the Kalachuri family. As that inscription, which belongs to the time of his nephew Āmaṇadēva II, is dated in the Kalachuri year 919 (1167-68 A .C), Gōpāladēva must have flourished in circa 1150 A. C. This agrees with the date we have fixed above on the evidence of palæography. The fierce battle in which Gōpāladēva distinguished himself may be the same as that in which his brother Ulhaṇadēva lost his life as stated in the Shēorinārāyaṇ inscription. As shown already,³ the battle was fought with the Kalachuri king Jayasiṁha of Tripuri, whose known dates range from K. 918 to K. 928.

The reference to the Rāmābhyudaya kāvya of Nārāyṇa, the author of the present inscription, is interesting. There are at least three Sanskrit works of that known from other reference,⁴ but only one of them has been published so far. The first of these in chronological order is a play ascribed to Yaśōvarman, who is probably identical with the homonymous king of Kanauj, the patron of Bhavabhūti. It is cited in the Dhvanyālōka of Ānandavardhana⁵ (9th cen. A. C.) and the Dhvanyālōkalōchana⁶ of Abhinavagupta (11th cen. A.C). The Nāṭakalakshaṇartnakōśa Sāgaranandin⁷ also cites two verses from
____________________

¹ Above, No. 109, C.
² Above, No. 98, line 11.
³ Above, p. 520
⁴ I am obliged to Mr. P. K. Gode, Curator of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, for some of these references.
⁵ Nirṇayasāgar ed. (1911), p. 133.
⁶ Ibid., p. 148.
⁷ Ed. by Dillon, pp. 33 and 130