The Indian Analyst

South Indian Inscriptions







List of Plates





The Discovery of the Vakatakas

Vakataka Chronology

The Home of The Vakatakas

Early Rulers

The Main Branch

The Vatsagulma Branch





Architecture, Sculpture and Painting

Texts And Translations  

Inscriptions of The Main Branch

Inscriptions of The Feudatories of The Main Branch

Inscriptions of The Vatsagulma Branch

Inscriptions of The Ministers And Feudatories of The Vatsagulma Branch


Other South-Indian Inscriptions 

Volume 1

Volume 2

Volume 3

Vol. 4 - 8

Volume 9

Volume 10

Volume 11

Volume 12

Volume 13

Volume 14

Volume 15

Volume 16

Volume 17

Volume 18

Volume 19

Volume 20

Volume 22
Part 1

Volume 22
Part 2

Volume 23

Volume 24

Volume 26

Volume 27





Annual Reports 1935-1944

Annual Reports 1945- 1947

Corpus Inscriptionum Indicarum Volume 2, Part 2

Corpus Inscriptionum Indicarum Volume 7, Part 3

Kalachuri-Chedi Era Part 1

Kalachuri-Chedi Era Part 2

Epigraphica Indica

Epigraphia Indica Volume 3

Indica Volume 4

Epigraphia Indica Volume 6

Epigraphia Indica Volume 7

Epigraphia Indica Volume 8

Epigraphia Indica Volume 27

Epigraphia Indica Volume 29

Epigraphia Indica Volume 30

Epigraphia Indica Volume 31

Epigraphia Indica Volume 32

Paramaras Volume 7, Part 2

Śilāhāras Volume 6, Part 2

Vākāṭakas Volume 5

Early Gupta Inscriptions

Archaeological Links

Archaeological-Survey of India




... One of Kālidāsa’s works, the lovely lyric Mēghadūta, may be regarded as a Kāvya of Vidarbha, since it was probably composed during the great poet’s sojourn at the Vākāṭaka court. The subject matter of the kāvya is the message which a yaksha, exiled from Alakā because of dereliction of duty, sends by a cloud-messenger to his beloved at the approach of the rainy season. The yaksha gives a graphic description of the places, mountains and rivers on the route of the cloud from Rāmagiri, where he was staying to his home in Alakā. As I have shown elsewhere,1 this Rāmagiri is undoubtedly modern Rāmṭēk, 28 miles from Nāgpur, which has maintained its reputation as a holy place to this day. Several grants of the Vākāṭakas were made at the temple of Rāmchandra, called Rāmagiri-svāmin,2 on that hill. As Rāmagiri was only about three miles from the then Vākāṭaka capital Nandivardhana, Kālidāsa must have visited it many times. It was evidently at this place that the theme of the Mēghadūta suggested itself to him. This kāvya composed in Vidarbha has evoked unstinted praise from all critics. “It is difficult to praise too highly,” says Keith, “ either the brilliance of the description of the cloud’s progress or the pathos of the picture of the wife, sorrowful and alone. Indian criticism has ranked it highest among Kālidāsa’s poems for brevity of expression, richness of content and power to elicit sentiment, and the praise is not undeserved.”3

... As stated before, the inscriptions of the Vākāṭaka kings are in prose, but those of their ministers and feudatories are either wholly or partly in verse. They are composed in a lucid style and are, in many places, embellished with figures of word and sense.4 Some of their verses would be good illustrations of the Vaidarbhī style.

... Prakrit poetry also received a fresh impetus during the enlightened regime of the Vākāṭaka kings. These kings were not only patrons of learned men, but also authors of excellent Prakrit kāvyas and subhāshitas. Of these the earliest is Sarvasēna, the founder of the Vatsagulma branch, who composed the Prakrit kāvya Harivijaya. Sarvasēna had indeed long been known as the author of this Prakrit kāvya from the references to him in the works of Ānanda- vardhana, Hēmachandra and other rhetoricians, but that he was a king because known only from a mutilated verse5 in the fragmentary Avantisundrīkathā, to which I drew attention recently. History knows of only one king of this name, viz., he who founded the Vatsagulma branch of the Vākāṭaka dynasty. He must therefore have been the author of this kavya.

... TheHarivijaya is not now extant, but we can form a fair idea about its theme, nature, etc. from the quotations and references in the works of later rhetoricians. In the Dhvanyālōka Ānandavardhana states that Sarvasēna had altered the original story and introduced some imaginary incidents in it in order to make it suitable for the delineation of the intended sentiment.6 Ānadavardhana does not state what the story was, but here his commentator Abhinavagupta comes to our help. He states that the Harivijaya had for its theme the removal of the Pārijāta tree from heaven, which was done by Kṛishṇa for the appeasement of his wife (evidently Satyabhāmā).7 Elsewhere Ānandavardhana cites a Prakrit verse from the Harivijaya, which shows that the work was written in the Māhārāshṭrī dialect.8

1 S.I., Vol. I, pp. 12 f.
2 No. 8, line 1.
3 Keith, History of Sanskrit Literature, p. 86.
4 See Nos. 25, 26 and 27. It was the use of yamakas in the inscription in cave XVI at Ajaṇṭā that enabled me to restore that mutilated name of Sarvasēna in line 6.
5 Cf. राज्ञा श्रीसवंसेनेन .   .   .   .   .  . |   .   .   .   .   .  विजयं हरेः॥ Avantisundarīkatha, p. 2.
6 As the kāvya has not come down to us, it is not possible to specify the incidents added by Sarvasēna, but one of them may have been the sending of Sātyaki as a nisṛishṭārtha-dūta to Indra. See below, p. lv.
7 See Dhvanyālōka (Nirṇayasāgar ed.), p. 148.
8 Ibid., p. 127.

<< - 1 Page