North Indian Inscriptions

INSCRIPTIONS OF THE PARAMARAS OF MALWA

UDAIPUR STONE INSCRIPION OF THE PARAMĀRA RULERS OF MĀLWĀ

the Sirōhī Paramāra princes held the fort of Achalagaḍh, lying about six kms. north by east (and not south as he wrote), and about 20 kms. due north of their capital Chandrāvatī [1] ; and the examples enumerated above go to support his assumption.

...In verse 8, which begins the genealogy, the inscription mentions the name Upēndrarāja, adding that he was born in the lineage of Paramāra and that “he acquired the high honour of kinghood by his prowess”. This indirectly goes to indicate that he was the first of the Paramāra kings of Mālwā. The land grants, on the other hand, mention the originator of the house to be Kṛishṇarāja ; and Dr. Hall and Cunningham have therefore taken both these names to be identical. Bühler also drew our attention to the fact that both these names are identical, and he further suggested that Upēndrarāja was probably the poetical from of the name and Kṛishṇarāja was its Prakrit equivalent to be used in every day life. [2]

...Verses 8-11 mention the names of Vairsiṁha, Siyaka, Vākpati and another (a second) Vairsiṁha, each of whom was the son of his predecessor. The description here is purely conventional, except that we learn that the last of these rulers, viz., Vairisiṁha, was also known as Vajraṭa. Indirectly it also suggests that Vākpati fixed his capital at Dhārā. Here it is worth nothing that of all these five rulers from Upēndrāraja to Vairisiṁha, the Nagpur praśasti gives only the last name, the Tilakamañjarī only that Vairisiṁha, and the Navasāhasāṁkacharita which gives the name of Upēndrarāja, omits those of Vairisiṁha (I) and Sīyaka (I). Thus the present inscription is the only record which gives a complete genealogy of the earlier Paramāra rulers of Mālwā, as already stated before.

... Verse 12 introduces Vākpati’s son Harshadēva, who is the same as Sīyaka of the Nagpur praśasti (v. 20). The N.S. Charita and the Tilakamañjarī also give him the name of Sīyaka. The present inscription here adds that this ruler defeated Khōṭṭigadēva in a battle. This is evidently a reference to Vākpati’s success over the Rāshṭrakūṭa Khōṭṭiga (971 A.C.), the details of which we have seen above, while editing the Harsōlā grants Sīyaka himself. [3] In the political history of the house we have already seen that the names of Vairisiṁha and Sīyaka appear to have been repeated here.

...The next three verse (13-15) speak of Sīyaka’s son Vākpatirāja, who is stated to have been well-versed in the Śāstras and a poet too. The N.S. Charita calls him Utpalarāja (XI, 92). In the Nagpur praśasti we have the name Muñja instead of Vākpati ; and Hall recognises first the identity of the two names. The land-grants call him Vākpati and add that he was also known as Amōghavarsha and bore the titles of Pṛithvī-vallabha and Śri-vallabha. The praise given by the present praśasti to Vākpati is not underserved, as we know from the various quotations of his verses in anthologies, works on akaṁkāras, the Prabandhachintāmaṇi and the Bhōjaprabandha, etc., though some of these may be of a doubtful nature. In the Tilakamañjarī Dhanapāla uses for him the title of sarva-vidyābdhi, [4]

...Besides his learning and talent, Vākpati is known to the praśastikāra for his military exploits also Verses 14-15 of the present record state that “his lotus-feet were coloured by the jewels on the heads of the Karnnāṭas, Lāṭas, Kēralas and Chōlas and he vanquished Yuvarāja, and slaying his general, as a victor, raised on high his sword in Tripuri.” The Kalachuri Yuvarāja of Tripuri (c. 980-990) who was Vākpati’s contemporary was a weak ruler, quite unlike his father Lakshmaṇa ; and Vākpati may have come into a clash with Yuvarāja whose kingdom lay immediately to the east of Mālwā and scored a victory over him, though of a fleeting nature. It has to be admitted here, however, that we have no evidence in support of this assertion, nor is it possible to fix the date of this clash. With reference to Vākpati’s victory over the Karṇāṭas (evidently the Chālukyas), we know that in his long struggle with his adversary Trailapa II, he had to lose his throne and life in the end ; and the claim of the praśasti that Vākpati subdued the Karṇāṭas is evidently inadmissible. It is however possible that he may have gained some succes in one of his earlier expeditions against the region and that success may have been referred to here. As regards the Lāṭas, it is possible that Vākpati may have carried a sweeping raid over the region which was then in an unsettled condition, as we know
______________

[1] See Ep. Ind., Vol. I, p. 224.
[2] Ibid., p. 225, n. 3.
[3] Nos. 1-2, above.
[4] Kāvyamālā Series, No. 85(1903), p. 6, v. 53.

Home Page