North Indian Inscriptions

INSCRIPTIONS OF THE PARAMARAS OF CHANDRAVATI

location of the field and also regarding the name of the person to whom it was donated; but we may presume that this grant was made probably to bhaṭṭāraka Dēvēśvara, as in the precious case above and also possibly the one mentioned in 11. 6-7.

...Dhārāvarsha referred to in the inscription was the well-known king of the name and a son of Yaśōdhavala, the Paramāra ruler of Chandrāvatī. The inscription is important, as it is the first known record of the king, indicating that he succeeded his father Yaśōdhavala some time before 1164 A.C., the year of the record, but certainly after 1150 A.C. which is the last known record of his father. [1] Like his father, he was a zealous feudatory of the Chaulukya throne and was a contemporary of Kumārapāla (1144-1172 A.C.), Ajayapāla (1172-1176 A.C.), Mūlarāja 11 (1176-1178 A.C.,) and Bhīma II (1179-1241 A.C.). None of his political relations or his warfare is disclosed by the present record; but we may take it for granted that before it was issued he may have participated in the warfares of Kumārapala and may have helped his minister Āmbaḍa in vanquishing Mallikārjuna, the Śilāhāra king of Northern Kōṅkaṇa, as mentioned in one of the Mount Ābū inscriptions. [2] Mallikārjuna’s known dates are 1157 and 1160 A.C.; [3] and it is possible that he may have sustained a defeat at the hands of Āmbaḍa in which Dhārāvarsha took an active part, before the date of the present inscription. [4]

... The combination of the titles Mahārājādhirāja and Mahāmaṇḍalēśvara, applied to Dhārāvarsha in the present inscription, appears rather curious, though it is not unknown in ancient Indian inscriptions. In the Imperial Paramāra family itself, we have the instance of Sīyaka, to whom both these titles are applied in the Harsōlā inscriptions, as seen above. The use of both these titles in the present case probably indicated the high status oenjoyed by Dharavarsha, [5] or it may be that he tried to assert independence and was subdued by his overlord Bhīma, which is not supported by an independent evidence.

...As for the localīties named in the present grant, Kāsēśvara (Kāśīśvara), 1.4, is undoubtedly Kāyadrā itself where the inscribed stone was found, as stated above. The place is locally known as Kyārā and is about 12 kms. due north of Ābū Road in the Sirōhī District. The other places mentioned respectively in lines 5 and 13 of the record, viz., Phulahalī and Vāsaṇa, have not so far been identified. The first of them appears to be the same as the modern village Phulēr, which lies about 25 kms. north-east of Kāyadrā, and these second the village Wāsā, about half this distance and situated to the east of Kāyadrā. All these places are situated close to each other, and this supports our identification of them.

TEXT [6]


________________

[1] Ep. Ind., Vol. IX, p. 149. Also see above, No. 65.
[2] Ibid., Vol. VIII, p. 211.
[3] Bomb. Gaz., Vol. I. Pt. ii, p. 19.
[4] This view is based on the reigning period of Mallikārjuna, who is taken by Dr. D C. Ganguly to have occupied the throne from 1156 to 1160 A.C. On the other hand, Dr. A S. Altekar, whose calculations too are equally conjectural, takes this king to be on the throne from c. 1155 to 1170 A.C., and in view of this, we cannot be definite on the point. See Ind. Cult., Vol. II, pp. 415-16.
[5] It cannot be ascertained whether both the titles are indeed intended or only the later, i.e., of the subordinate one. The shasṭhī-tatpurusha compound, in the sense of Mahāmaṇḍalēśvara (Dhārāvarsha) of the Mahārājādhirāja (Kumārapāla) is equally possible here.
[6] From facsimile facing p. 50 in Ind. Ant., Vol. LVI.
[ 7] Read सोमपर्व्वणि.
[8] Read कुमार-.

Home Page