|
The Indian Analyst
|
North Indian Inscriptions |
INSCRIPTIONS OF THE PARAMARAS OF CHANDRAVATI ROHERĀ COPPER-PLATE INSCRIPTION OF THE PARAMĀRAS OF CHANDRĀVATI divided and Gujarāt was passing in a state of anarchy. Mērutuṅga informs us that the minister Lavaṇaprasāda collected a strong army and put up a successful opposition, as a result of which Subhaṭavarman had to withdraw.[1] And viewing all these affairs, though it is not possible to say anything definitely about Dhārāvarsha’s struggle with the Mālava army, it appears most probable that the credit given to him in the present inscription concerns possibly to this struggle than to the invasion of Gujarāt by Vindhyavarman or by Arjunavarman whose known dates range from 1210 to 1215 A.C. We know that Subhaṭavarman had penetrated father in Gujarāt when he plundered and devastated not only this country but also Lāṭa, the ruler of which, Siṁha, who was a feudatory of the Chaulukya throne, had to transfer his allegiance to the Paramāra king.[2] But in the absence of any corroborative evidence the question of Dhārāvarsha’s participation in this struggle remains unsolved.
...The inscription further informs us that in the meanwhile, (taking advantage of the absence of Dhārāvarsha, who was then possibly engaged in his struggle with the Mālava army), Vikramasiṁha’s son Raṇasiṁha captured the throne (of Chandrāvatī), which had been occupied by his father (pituḥ), but Dhārāvarsha, by pleasing his overlord by means of his wisdom, devotion and valour, regained the throne due to his (the overlord’s ) favour. And to understand this incident properly, we may go back to trace the history of the rulers of Chandrāvatī. It has been stated above that all the three sons of Dhandhūka, viz., Pūrṇapāla, Dantivarman and Kṛishṇadēva, ruled over the kingdom, on after the other; and it may be presumed that Kṛishṇadēva, who was the youngest of all, may have been succeeded by his son Kākaladēva, and he by his son Vikramasiṁha. If so, Yōgarāja and Rāmadēva, respectively the son and the grandson of Dantivarman, were deprived of their right of succession and the kingdom passed on to Kākaladēva, the son of Kṛishṇadēva. But Vikramasiṁha who became treacherous in Kumārapāla’s struggle with prison by Kumārapāla, who bestowed the kingdom of Chandrāvatī on his (Vikramasiṁha’s) nephew, Yaśōdhavala.[3] who had shown his bravery and devotedness to the Chaulukya throne by killing Ballāla, as seen above. The fate of Vikramasiṁha is not known thereafter; bur it is quite natural to presume that his son Raṇasiṁha, who had been watching an opportunity, captured the throne when Yaśōdhavala’s son Dhārāvarsha was engaged in a battle with the Mālavas.This must have happened during the reign of a successor of Kumārapāla, who subsequently favoured his feudatory Dhārāvarsha by bestowing on him the kingdom, as reported by the present inscription. ... The last line of the plate states that Dhārāvarsha had a queen, but her name is Unfortunately lost. She is said to have been a daughter of the Chāhamāna Kēlhaṇa, who belonged to the Nāḍōl house and died before V.S. 1251. As we know from some other records, one of Dhārāvarsha’s queen was Sṛiṅgāradēvī,[4] ... Of the geographical names mentioned in the inscription, Arbuda (1. 3) is of course Mount Ābū. The river Parṇā where Dhārāvarsha is stated to have defeated the Mālavas (1. 15), appears to me to be identical with Pūrṇā, a stream flowing by the Paṭṭa-Nārāyaṇa temple at Girvaḍ, about 12 kms. due north-west of Ābū as we have seen while editing the inscription found at that place.[5] This river flows in the region which was then being governed by Dhārāvarsha; and if this identification is accepted,[6] we may also hold that the Mālava army had then penetrated into the region from where it was beaten back by Dhārāvarsha, and in view of this, Subhaṭavarman was then on the throne of Dhārā, as seen above. _______________________________________________________________
[1]
P.C.M., p. 154.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| > |
|
>
|