North Indian Inscriptions

INSCRIPTIONS OF THE PARAMARAS OF VAGADA

PĀNĀHEḌĀ STONE INSCRIPTION OF MANḌALIKA

struggle with Gujarāt has been dealt with above; and, on the evidence of the present record we may presume that Satyarāja may be taken to have participated in that contest. Satyarāja’s consort was Sahajā of the Chāhamāna family, from whom was born Limbarāja, who is stated to have been a great warrior, a great politician and a charitable person (v. 33); but as not even a specific fact in this connection is mentioned, we may take the account as merely conventional. As we have stated above, the name of this ruler is omitted in the Arthūṇā praśasti that follows immediately. Limbarāja’s younger brother was Maṇḍalīka, mentioned as Maṇḍanadēva in the Arthūṇā praśasti. Maṇḍalīka is stated to have been a king of charitable disposition and learning. and a great warrior (v. 35). The last of these epithets he well deserved as in the next verse we are told that he captured the great general, Kanha, in a battle and presented him before his overlord Jayasiṁha, along with his horse and an elephant. Of v. 36 only the first two letters Bhōja are preserved, probably showing that Maṇḍalīka may be taken to have been a contemporary of Bhōja also.

...To this laudatory account v. 40 adds that maṇḍalīka or Maṇḍanadēva built a sky-licking temple in honour of Śiva (Smarārāti), at Pāṁśulā-khēṭaka, which is evidently the village of Pānāhēḍā, where the temple stands even to this day and where the record under review was discovered. The next five verses (40-44) speak highly of the activity of building temples, whether it be of reeds, wood, earth, sun-dried or fired bricks or of precious stone. We are further told that Jayasiṁha assigned to the deity, for defraying the expenses of worship, one viṁśōpaka [1] (to be charged) on every bull (that passed by the temple) on the road and also some land, and that he also made some grants to this temple, for his own spiritual welfare. The grants consisted of some lands and a garden behind Nagna-taḍāga and (the temple)of Varuṇeśvarī, [2] together with some rice fields (lit. lands under water) as well as lands in the villages of Naṭṭāpāṭaka, Deülapāṭaka, Bhōgyapura, Pānāchhī, Maṇḍaladraha and two shares at Pāṅśulā-khēṭaka (vv. 45-53). The next verse gives a list of person who were pious and as such, were entitled to stay at that place. The next five verses (55-59) are by way of benediction and request to future generations to continue the grants.

... The name of the composer of the praśasti is lost in v. 60; and v. 61 is devoted to express that the kīrtti [3] i.e., the temple built by Maṇḍalīka may continue to stand so long as the crescent of the moon shines on the matted hair of Śambhu. This is followed by the year of the record, which we have seen above; and then we are told that the praśasti was engraved by Āsarāja, a son of Śrīdhara, who belonged to the Vālabhya kāyastha caste. He is identical with Āsarāja, who, as we shall see below, also wrote the following praśasti. Here it may be stated that the word Vālabhya probably shows that Āsarāja’s family originally belonged to Valabhī.

...When the kingdom of the branch line holding its sway over the territory of Vāgaḍa was actually founded may also be considered here. The only information that helps us to say anything in this respect is the statement of the Arthūṇā praśasti, viz., that Dambarasiṁha was a younger brother of Vairisiṁha, (v. 15), whom D.R. Bhandarkar is inclined to take Varisiṁha I of the main house of the Paramāras, [4] and in course of editing that record, L. D. Barnett shows his agreement with Bhandarkar’s opinion, stating that ‘considerations of chronology forbids us to identify him with Vairisiṁha II of Mālwā’ [5] Barnett says nothing more on this point. But we may consider the question in view of generation of the ruling princes. And since Chachcha or Kaṅka, as he also called, is known to have participated in the war of his overlord Sīyaka (II), his uncle Dhanika has to be taken as a contemporary of Sīyaka II’s father who was Vairi- siṁha (II), Whether Dhanika was identical with Dambarasiṁha or his predecessor is altogether a different point on which we have said enough, and it need not affect the conclusion drawn here.
_________________________

[1] For the meaning of this word see Ep. Ind., 1. p. 166.
[2] As Varuṇa is known to be the water-deity, the construction of a temple dedicated to his consort on the tank appears to be quite justifiable.
[3] The word Kīrtti means ‘any work of public utility’. See C. I. I., III. p. 212, n, 6. Here it means ‘the temple’.
[4] The whole discussion that follows rests with taking Vairisiṁha and Sīyaka as two kings with each of these names and does not affect our conclusion in taking one ruler with each name, as shown, in the political history of the house.
[5] H. P. D. pp. 343 and 30 respectively.

Home Page