North Indian Inscriptions

INSCRIPTIONS OF THE PARAMARAS OF MALWA

PIPLIANAGAR COPPER-PLATE INSCRIPTION OF ARJUNAVARMAN

and his son Arjunavarman (v. 16). The description is all poetic, offering little of historical significance, as we shall presently see. Following this, the record has three verses, all in the same anushṭubh metre and devoted to the description of Arjunavarman ; the first of these speaks of his success over Jayasiṁha and the second of his learning and efficiency in music. After this is mentioned the formal portion of the record with the date which we have discussed above.

... The donee of the grant was Purōhita Gōvindaśarman of the Kāśyapa gōtra, a student of the Vājasanēya śākhā with the three pravaras, Kāśyapa, Avatsāra and Naidhruva, who had hailed from a place known as Muktāvasu. He was a son of Paṇḍita Jaitrasiṁha, grandson of Paṇḍita Sōmadēva and great-grandson of Avasāvika(Avasthin ?) Dēlaṇama (Dēlhaṇa?). [1] Further we are told that the donation was to last as long as the moon, the Sun, the oceans and the earth endure ; then, with three imprecatory and predicative stanzas (vv. 21-23) and repeating the date in figures only and with the mention of the name of rājaguru Madana who composed it at the instance of the mahā-paṇḍita Bilhaṇa, the record comes to a close.

... Verse 11 of the present record tells us that Yaśōvarman had a son named Ajayavarman (tasmād=Ajayavarm=ābhūt) ; this expression is reproduced in the following two inscriptions of the king and in the Māndhātā grant of Devapāla and Jayavarman [2] ; whereas in the other set of records which are all in prose, [3] the name of Yaśōvarman’s son appears as Jayavarman ; and this led Kielhorn to hold that Yaśōvarman had two sons with the names of Jayavarman and Ajayavarman who were two different persons. [4] But when we consider that there is not even a single inscription which mentions both these names and also that there are two different sets of records-all those which are in prose invariably give the name to be Jayavarman and all those which are in poetry give it as Ajayavarman, the identity of both these persons is established beyond doubt, and it also follows that in the latter of these sets the name Jayavarman is changed to Ajayavarman only to suit the metre. [5]

...The expression Gurjarōchchhēda-nirbandhī applied to Vindhyavarman in verse 12 has a reference to his success in liberating the Paramāra kingdom which had suffered a disastrous plight at the hands of the Chaulukyas since the days of Yaśōvarman whose kingdom had been captured by Jayasiṁha Siddharāja, as seen above. [6] Vindhyavarman’s contemporary king of Gujarāt was Mūlarāja II (c.1176-78), who was followed by Bhīma II, whose inscriptions range from 1178 to 1239 A.C., and thus who too was a contemporary of Arjunavarman. Bhīma’s kingdom was almost in an unsteady condition because of internal disorder and foreign invasions. The incursions of the Yādava Bhillama and his son Jaitugi from the south and the raids of the Chāhamāna Kēlhaṇa and the Muslims under Qutb-ud-dīn from the north had weakened the forces of Gujarāt, and, as we know., one Jayasiṁha had usurped the throne for himself. And the Jayasiṁha mentioned in verse 17 of the present inscription may safely be taken to be this usurper who was a contemporary of Arjunavarman, with whom it was natural for him to come to a clash when both these kingdoms were on enemical terms. The details of the strife are not known, but the statement recorded in the present inscription tends to indicate the success of Arjunavarman over Jayasiṁha.

...The localities mentioned in the inscription are Maṇḍapa-durga, Śakapura, which was a pratijāgaraṇaka (parganā), and the villages Piḍiviḍi, and Muktāvasu, The first of these is evidently the fort of Māṇḍū (District Dhār, M.P.), about 35 kms. south of Dhār, by metalled road. It will therefore be reasonable to look for the situation of Śakapura, as near Māṇḍū as possible. There is a place known as Salkanpur (N. 75o 22’ Long ; E. 22o 31’ Lat.), about 16 kilometres straight north of Māṇḍū, and it is possible to identify this place with the Śakapura of the inscription. Piḍiviḍi, the donated village may possibly be represented by the
___________________________________________________

[1] Here Wilkinson’s reading seems to be doubtful.
[2] See Nos. 48-49. 51 and 57.
[3] See Nos. 39, 45 and 46.
[4] For details, see Ind. Ant., Vol. XIX, p. 384.
[5] It may also be noted here that even though the name is mentioned here as Ajayavarman, I take it for the sake of metrical exigencies ; and in the third foot, the expression Jayaśrī appears to indicate that the same ruler was also known by the name Jayavarman.
[6] See No. 38. above. Also see p. 131 .

Home Page