|
The Indian Analyst
|
North Indian Inscriptions |
INSCRIPTIONS OF THE PARAMARAS OF BHINMAL KIRĀḌŪ STONE INSCRIPTION OF SOMEŚVARA A.C., [1] Kṛishṇarāja’s son was Sōchchharāja (v. 14) and the latter’s son was Udayarāja, who is here said to have extended his kingdom up to that of the Chōlas, Gauḍas and Karṇāṭas and also in the northwestern part of Mālava (vv. 15-17). The extent of his kingdom up to the boundaries of the first three provinces evidently seems to be a poetic panegery; and his conquest of a part of Mālwā appears to be a reference to his participation in Jaysiṁha Siddharāja’s (1096-1145 A.C. ) expedition over that region. Udayarāja’s son’s name is again lost in the latter half of v. 17, but he is undoubtedly Sōmēśvara, [2] as mentioned again in vv. 20 and 25 below, which also refer to him and up to which the same account continues. Due to the favour of Jayasiṁha Siddharāja, as we are told here. Sōmēśvara obtained Sindhurājapura and also regained his hereditary possession of Kirāṭakūpa and Śivakūpa [3] (?) and uplifted his kingdom under the king Kumārapāla in the (Vikrama) year 1205 or 1148 A.C. (vv. 19-22). ...The following four verses again describe Sōmēśvara in glorious terms, telling us that he vanquished king Jajjaka and captured from him the forts of Taṇukōṭṭa and Navasara, along with Āḍhuyā [4] (?), and fined him seventeen hundred horses, besides some other possessions of his; and pleasing the Chaulukya king in various ways, he again established Jajjaka in the latter’s own kingdom.
... Who was this Jajjaka who met this treatment at the hands of Sōmēśvara is not known; however, a conjecture may be hazarded in this respect , in view of the political situation prevailing in the times which were far from peaceful and gave rise to sudden revolts. We know that the Nāḍōl Chāhamāna Āsarāja acknowledged Chaulukya supremacy under jayasiṁha Siddharāja and we also know that he helped the Chaulukya ruler in his war against the Paramāra Naravarman. [5] Āsarāja’s second son Ālhaṇadēva, who was a warlike ruler, actively helped Kumārapāla in suppressing a revolt in Saurāshṭra and in recognition of his services, obtained Kirāṭakūpa, i.e., Kirāḍū. [6] We have a record of Ālhaṇa, dated in V.S. 1205 (1152 A.C.) and found at Kirāḍū itself, testifying to his ruler over the region around. [7] What was the fate of Sōmēśvara who was then ruling over Kirāṭakūpa as his own patrimony is difficult to say, and the only possible assumption that can be made is that like some of his predecessors on the throne, e.g., Kṛishṇa- rāja and the latter’s father Dhandhuka, he too may have revolted against his overlord Kumārapāla and consequently, when again subdued, may have suffered the loss of the region of Kirāḍū, which the Chaulukya king bestowed upon Ālhaṇadēva, as seen above; and the latter may have appointed his governor over that region. And of we guess this governor to be the same as Jajjaka, it would be quite natural for Sōmēśvara to take advantage of the disturbed political situation to struggle with him for his ancestral dominions; and in the battle that ensued, he also snatched from Jajjaka some other regions around the forts referred to in v. 25, as we have already seen, and after pleasing Kumārapāla, as we learn from the inscription, he returned these regions to Jajjaka, retaining his own patrimony of Kirāḍū. This line of thought can well explain why Sōmēśvara had to reconquer the Kirāḍū region in the year of the present inscription, i.e., in 1152 A.C., as seen above, and why he had to regain the pleasure of his overlord Kumārapāla again (bahuśaḥ). But this is all a mere conjecture, unsupported by any evidence. ...The last verse of the inscription (27) states that the praśasti was composed, by the order of the king who was evidently Sōmēśvara, by Narasiṁha, and that it was written by Yaśōdēva and was engraved by Yaśōdhara. And with the mention of the date, as seen above, the record comes to a close.
...Of the geographical names mentioned in the inscription, Arbuda (v. 3) is the Mount
Ābū, as often noted; and Chōla, Gauḍa, Karṇāṭa and Mālava (v. 16) are all too well known
[1] The reference here is probably to the incident when he fell captive into the hands of the Chaulukya Bhīmadēva and succeeded in obtaining his release through the efforts of the Nāḍōl Chāhamāna king
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| > |
|
>
|