|
The Indian Analyst
|
|
South Indian Inscriptions |
SOCIETY no objection to marrying the princess Āvalladēvi of the Huna lineage.1 She was probably his chief queen. Her son Yaśahkarna succeeded his father on the Kalachuri throne. The Ābhiras also rose in social status and, like the Hunas, were ranked among the best Kshatriya families.2 In the social hierarchy, the Brāhmanas occupied an honoured place. They were revered for their pious life and devotion to learning, and received royal patronage in the form of grants of land. In the earlier period, their sub-castes had not been formed and their surnames based on the places of origin had not come into vogue. The only distinc-tions recognised were those of the Vēdas, śākhās and gōtras. It would be interesting to see how the Brāhmanas of the different Vēdas and śakhās were geographically distributed. Unfortunately, we do not find these details mentioned in all grants. The earliest grants included here, viz., those of the Mahārājas of Valkha, Subandhu and the Traikūtakas, mention the gōtras, but not the Vēdas and sākhās, of the Brāhmana donees.3 In later records they are generally mentioned, though some details are found lacking in a few grants. They are again conspicuous by their absence in the grants made after 1150 A.C.
In this latter period, we find modern surnames gradually coming into vogue. We find that the Bahvrichas or Rigvēdins are mentioned in very few records.4 When their sākhā is named, it is only Āśvalāyana. The Rigvēdins, though few, were fairly wide-spread. We find them named in the grants from Gujarat, Uttar Pradesh, Vindhya Pradesh, and the Chhattisgarh Division of Madhya Pradesh. The Madhyandina sakha of the White Yajurvēda was predominant everywhere. Several Brāhmanas of this sākhā received grants of land in Gujarat, Uttar Pradesh, Maharashtra and Chhattisgarh.5 The other sakha, Kanva, of this Veda is rarely mentioned. There are only four references to it in our records.6 The Brahmanas of the Black Yajurveda or the Taittirīyas were rarer still. They had their home in South India and we find them mentioned only in the records of the south. One of them, residing at Kallivana, modern Kalvan in the Nasik District, received a grant of land situated in that district.7 A few others were residing near Nagpur.8 We no doubt find a Brāhmana of the Taittiriya śākhā receiving the grant of a village in Gujarat,9 but he originally hailed from Vanavasi in the Kanara District, Bombay State. He bore a Kanarese name and had evidently gone to Gujarat at the invitation of the Chālukya prince, AvanijanāśrayaPulakēśin, who also originally came from Karnātaka. A few Sāmavedins are noticed in the grants from Gujarat, Sarayūpāra, and the Nagpur and Chhattisgarh Divisions of Madhya Pradesh.10 When their sākhā is mentioned, it is invariably Kauthuma.11 The Atharvavedins were extremely rare. They are mentioned only in one record, viz., in the Kaira plates of Dadda II-Prasantaraga, dated K. 380.12 They all belonged to the Pippalada śākhā and were residents of Bherajjikā, modern Borjai in the Broach District. They received a village in common with the __________________________ 1 No. 56, 1. 13; No. 57, 1. 13.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
