North Indian Inscriptions

INSCRIPTIONS OF THE PARAMARAS OF CHANDRAVATI

enumerated the names of the contributors, along with those of their fathers and their gōtras, with the specifications of the shares of their donations for the work, both in numerical figures and words (as per table in the end). It may be noted here that in four instances (Nos. 1-2, 5-6, 13-14 and 16-17) we have two brothers in each case, and the name of one of the donees is mentioned with those of his (more than one) sons (11. 5-9). Lines 10-12 give four verses (4-7) extolling this work of public utility and also showing some admonitions.

...Verses 8-9 tell us that the record was composed by Amv(b)āditya Vyāsa, the son of the Upādhyāya Mādhava of the Kāśyapa gōtra, through the grace of Sarasvatī, [1] Line 14 records that the well was placed at the disposal of (made over to) the public and that nobody should worry about any break happening in it, as it was constructed with dressed stones. And here the inscription closes, with the mention of the names of four persons who engraved it (also possibly excavated the well). These names are Dhārēśvara, Dēüa, Dēvaü and Lahaṁpa

... Pūrṇapāla, during whose reign the well is stated to have been constructed, is spoken of here as holding his sway over the Arbuda-maṇḍala, i.e., the territory round about Ābū, as he is also mentioned in the Vasantagaḍh inscription which is edited here just above. In that record too he is stated to have been the son of Dhandhuka. The findspots of both these inscriptions are in the same locality and quite close to Ābū ; and therefore we may safely conclude that Pūrṇapāla mentioned in both these records is one and the same ruler. But the years mentioned in both of them are very close to each other, that of the Vasantagaḍh inscription being (V.) S. 1099 and that of the present inscription being (V.)S. 1102, indicating a difference of only about three years. Thus the records are not helpful for determining the period of the reign of the king; and it may also be observed that there is no other evidence to throw light on the problem. But there is a clue to help us here. From an inscription at Ābū, dated in 1031 A.C., we know that Pūrṇapāla’s father Dhandhuka was deprived of his kingdom by the Chaulukya Bhīma some time before that year and that he was helped by his overlord Bhōjadēva in regaining his throne. [2] In view of this evidence Pūrṇapāla appears to have been old enough by the time of the present inscription, and if so, he may be taken to have closed his reign not long before 1064 A. C., about one hundred years before the earliest known date of his fourth lineal descendent Dhārāvarsha. [3] Thus, taking Dhandhuka’s reign period ending some time about 1040 A.C., it may be suggested that Pūrṇapāla may have occupied the throne from c. 1040 to 1060 A.C. But this view is not final, as it is not corroborated by any evidence.

... The present inscription calls Pūrṇapāla a Mahārājādhirāja. This epithet leads us to assume that he was ruling over the Arbuda territory of Gujarāt, as an Imperial ruler, or, possibly, that Bhōjadēva, who was constantly being employed in his protracted warfare with the Chaulukyas, may have given him an opportunity to throw off the Imperial yoke and declare independence. His position, however, was a very pitiable one; for during the days of the protracted warfare between the Paramāras of Mālwā and the Chaulukyas of Gujarāt, whatever course he might adopt he was sure to offend one of his two powerful neighbours. Whether in his last days he was compelled to change his allegiance to the Chaulukya king is not known. But here we have also to bear in mind that the record endowing him with the Imperial title is, after all, sectarian and not a royal document.

... The geographical names mentioned in the inscription are Bhuṇḍipadra (11. 1. and 3) and Arbuda (1. 3). The first of these is Bhāḍūṇḍ, as seen above, and the second is the Mount Ābū, after which the region under the sway of this feudatory house of the Paramāra rulers was known as Arbuda-maṇḍala.
_________________________________________________________

[1] It is interesting to note that in the vicinity of the well there is a temple dedicated to Sarasvatī.
[2] See the preceding inscription. Also see Ep. Ind., Vol, IX, p. 148.
[3] No. 67, below.

Home Page