North Indian Inscriptions

INSCRIPTIONS OF THE CHANDELLAS OF JEJAKABHUKTI

less the Chandēlla prince Trailōkyavarman¹ ; and this view is also accepted by Kielhorn while editing the grant.² Here we follow these scholars in regarding both the names identical, and in view of this, it would appear that this ruler evidently extended his sway around the Rēwā region at the cost of the Kalachuri ruler Vijayasiṁha (1188-1210 A.C.), and, in consequence of it, he adopted the titles of aśvapati and gajapati which were borne by the former. Here we may also note that this particular portion of the present inscription agrees very closely with the corresponding portion of the Kalachuri Vijayasiṁha’s grants ; and the writers of the present gram, who possessed only a smattering of Sanskrit, as seen above, copied this portion from some Kalachuri charters where these titles appear.³

In ll. 10-14 of the document it is stated that during the reign of the aforementioned king. i.e., Trailōkyamalla, who had then encamped at Dhōvahaṭṭa included in the pattalā of Dhanavāhi, and on the date mentioned above, the Śaiva ascetic Śāntaśiva of the Vatsa gōtra, who was a son of the Bhaṭṭāraka, the holy Rājaguru Vimalaśiva, and who had attained the lordship of the Śaiva ascetics through the practice of self-restraint, observances, study of the sacred texts and meditation and who was the foremost among the learned and had mastered all lores,⁴ had placed, by way of mortgage, the village Alaurā, with all its dues, i.e., all the rights of collecting taxes to the Rāṇaka, the illustrious Dharēka, the son of Sēvarāja, who was, in his turn, the son of the Ṭhakkura Rāsala. The taxes are not specifically mentioned in the record, nor the amount of money taken as loan ; but the expression yāvad = ādīyatē (in l. 18) tends to indicate that the village was to be kept on pledge till all the dues were realised.

Vimalaśiva of the present inscription appears to be no doubt identical with the homonymous sage mentioned as the religious preceptor of the Kalachuri king Jayasiṁha (1163-1188 A.C.), the father of Vijayasiṁha, two of whose inscriptions we have, one dated in 1164-65 A.C. and the other in 1174 A.C. ;⁵ and though we have nothing on record in this respect, it is not unlikely that the sage may have received the village as a donation from the king who was, like the other Kalachuri kings, a devoted Śaiva.

We are further informed in ll. 15-19 that the deed was actually executed by Nādaśiva, a younger son of Vimalaśiva, with the authority of Śāntaśiva. Line 20 contains the names of eight persons as witnesses of the deed. In the end it is stated that the record was drawn jointly by two Paṇḍitas whose names were Viśvēśvara and Gaṅgādhara, and also that it was engraved by Sīrūka.

The record also names, in ll. 8-9, some officers who were then present, on duty. They are :— (1) the Mahāmahattaka, Mantrin and Māṇḍalika Malayavarman ; (2) the Sāndhivigrahika (minister of Peace and War), the Ṭhakkura Haripāla ; (3) the Koṭṭapāla (guardian of the fort) Vāhaḍa (Chāhaḍa ?) ; and (4) the arthalēkhin⁶ (keeper of accounts), the illustrious Chandraśrēsṭhin. Of these personages, Nos. 1 and 2 have been identified with their namesakes mentioned in the Rēwā stone inscription of Vijayasiṁha, and No. 3 may have been the same as Vāhaḍavarman, the son of Sallakshaṇavarman, the feudatory chief of Kakrēḍi, figuring in a record from Rēwā.⁷

The mention of the name of Malayasiṁha in the present inscription deserves more than a passing notice. He is no doubt the same officer who had defeated a ruler of the name of Sallakshaṇa, in a battle fought at Karkarēḍī, modern Kakrēḍi, lying 45 kms. north of Rēwā, and forced him to acknowledge the suzerainty of Vijayasiṁha (1188-1210 A.C.), who was the last Kalachuri ruler, as we know from the Rēwā stone inscription of Vijayasiṁha, dated in the Kalachuri year 944, which corresponds to 1193 A.C.⁸ Another inscription of the same king, the
___________________________
¹ A. S. I. R., Vol. XXI. p. 147.
² Ind. Ant., Vol XVII, pp. 230-31.
³ This particular title which was originally assumed by the Kalachuri Karṇa was used not only by his descendants but by several other kings of other dynasties. See C. I. I., Vol. IV, p; c.
⁴ In l. 17 below, he is also stated to have been proficient in wielding arms as in the Śāstras, reminding us of Śastraṁ dvijātibhir = grāhyam = āpatkālēhy = upasthitē.
⁵ C. I. I., Vol. IV. Nos. 63 and 64, respectively, in ll.22 and 17.
⁶ This terms is rendered by Chakravarti in the sense of ‘writer of deeds’ and by Mirashi, as ‘Secretary’. But we take the word artha to denote accounts.
⁷ For all these identifications, see C. I. I., Vol. IV, p. 370 and n. 6. Also see n. in the text below where we have shown that the name may also be read as Chāhaḍa.
⁸ C. I. I., Vol. IV, p. 348, and text, v. 24.