|
The Indian Analyst
|
North Indian Inscriptions |
INSCRIPTIONS OF THE PARAMARAS OF BHINMAL ... The inscription is a praśasti, a laudatory account of the Pramāra house to which Somēśvara, in whose reign it was put up, belonged, and also to commemorate one of his heroic deeds, as we shall presently see. [1] The date of the record, as given in words in 11. 21-22, was Thursday, the first of the bright half of the month of Āśvina of the Vikrama era 1218, which, as calculated by D.R. Bhandarkar, corresponds to 21st September, 1161 A.C. [2] ...The inscription opens with a small sentence in prose, paying obeisance to Sarvajña(Omniscient). and it is followed by two verses in honour of Śambhu, the Supreme god. The next verse relates the myth of the origin of the Paramāras from the fire-altar of the sage Vasishṭha on Mount Ābū, as we have seen so often; it also introduces Sindhurāja, a king of Maru-maṇḍala, This prince has been identified by D.S. Ganguly with the homonymous ruler of Mālava and the younger brother of Vākpati-Muñja, the latter of whom, as presumed by the same scholar, appointed Sindhurāja’s son Dūsala, to govern the Bhimmāl-Kirāḍū area. [3] But we have nothing to vouchsafe this conjecture, except similarity in the two names; and what is more, this identification also involves chronological difficulties, as rightly shown by some scholars. [4] Verses 5-7 introduce Dūsala (or Ūsala ?), whose description, as to be seen from the portion that is preserved, is all conventional; but it is most unfortunate that the very portion which appears to show his relaconventional; but it is most unfortunate that the they portion which he is introduced here, he may be taken to have been a son of Sindhurāja. ... Verse 8 uses the expression -dharaṇī-dhara, in a compound; but it is easy to guess that here we find the name of Dharaṇīvarāha who was the next ruler, [5] and the extant portion of v. 9 mentions two names, i.e., of Surarāja and Dēvarāja. The portion mentioning their relationship with their predecessors is entirely lost, but there can be no doubt that Dēvarāja is the homonymous prince who issued the Rōpī plates V.S. 1059. [6] The general trend of describing Dēvarāja in v. 11 is that he pleased one Durlabharāja, about whom nothing is specifically mentioned; and Dr. D.C. Ganguly is perhaps correct in proposing the identification of this Durlabharāja with the younger brother of Vigraharāja who ruled over the province of Śākambharī in the latter part of the tenth century A.C. Bur the possibility of the identification of this prince with Durlabharāja, the son of Chaulukya Chāmuṇḍarāja who was also a contemporary of Dēvarāja who issued his Rōpī plates in 1002 A.C., [7] cannot be gainsaid when we know Durlabharāja to be on the throne from about 1010 to 1022 A.C. And unless more material on this point is forthcoming, the view held by Ganguly cannot be said to be conclusive.
...Following this account, a name is again missing in v. 12 of the inscription; and it is possible that the lost name may have been of Dhandhuka, who, according to the Bhinmāl inscription of
Kṛishṇarāja, was the father of this prince and the son of Dēvarāja.
[8] Next, we have the mention
of Kṛishṇarāja, who is described as Mahā-śabda-vibhūshitaḥ, which means to say that he bore the epithet of Mahārāja, or like his father and grandfather, that of Mahārājādhirāja, and title
attached to his name in the inscription found at the same place and issued in 1060 and 1066
[1] It is possible that the temple was so known after the name of the king. The discovery of the inscribed in slab in a Śiva temple is also quite in consonant with the fact that praśastis were generally inscribed in a part of a temple also.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| > |
|
>
|