|
The Indian Analyst
|
|
North Indian Inscriptions |
INSCRIPTIONS OF THE CHANDELLAS OF JEJAKABHUKTI CHARKHĀRĪ COPPER PLATE INSCRIPTION OF HAMMĪRAVARMAN ravarman, the first person named here being Paramardin, who was succeeded by Trailōkyavarman, be by Vīravarman, and he again by Hammīravarman. The names of the three predecessors of Hammīravarman are known to us from the Charkhārī grant of Vīravarman, of V.S. 1311;1 but curiously enough, we note here the omission of the name of Bhōjavarman who was the immediate predecessor of Hammīravarman, as we know from the two inscriptions from Ajaygaḍh, one of which bears the date V.S. 1345 or 1288 A.C.2 and was incised only a year prior to the present record. And the only reason that can be inferred for this deliberate omission, as it would appear, is that Bhōjavarman may have been either an elder brother of Hammīravarman,3 and thus being a collateral, his name was omitted, or he was a rival, the definite relationship being unknown from any other record discovered so far. Attention may also be drawn to the titles attached here to all the names of the predecessors of Hammīravarman and to those attached to his own name. Each one of his predecessors is called the most worshipful (parama-bhaṭṭāraka), the supreme king Mahārājas and the supreme lord. The two aksharas following the last of the titles were read as sāhi by Hiralal, who remarked that “the title Sāhi against the names of all these kings indicates the growing Muhammadan influence”.4 But in the text below I have pointed out that the reading in all these cases appears more likely to be –tyadi, i.e., ityadi, the vowel i being changed to the medial ē along with the previous a and attached to the previous letter, by guṇa-sandhi. No Indian ruler who is proud of his own heritage and his hereditary titles would of his own accord like to attach a Mohammedan title to himself or to his predecessors’ names. I am also unable to agree with Hiralal in his observation that in his own case Hammīravarman ‘has left the grandilosque title of the Mahārājādhirāja Paramēśvara, which he duly attached to his predecessors; and inferring therefrom ‘that he was fully conscious of his reduced position’;5 since the expression rāj¬-āvalītray-ōpēta in l. 7 would point to the same, i.e., the two great titles stated to have been left by Hammīravarman in his own case.
This is the only known grant of Hammīravarman, the last known ruler of the Chandēlla house and issued in the same year V.S. 1346 which is also the known year of his predecessor Bhōjavarman,6 indicating that Hammīravarman’s accession took place in the same year. This ruler also seems to have retained his hold over the fort of Kālañjara when this grant was issued.7 This hold continued for about twenty years, i.e. up to 1309 A.C. when we find the neighbouring region under the sway of the Mohammedans, as we are informed by a Satī record found in the Damōh District and mentioning the name of (the Sultān) Alauddin as the reigning king.8 Of the geographical places mentioned in the inscription, Kālañjara (l. 7) is evidently the same as modern fort of the name occurring in the several grants of the Chandēllas, as we have often seen. The other places I am unable to identify. TEXT9 [ Metre: Verses 1-5 Anushṭubh ].
____________________________ | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| > |
|
>
|
