Epigraphia Indica Vol 09

SR No.: 032563
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: E Hultzsch, Sten Konow
Publisher: Archaeological Survey of India
Publication Year: 1907
Total Pages: 498
Language: English
Classification: Book_English
File Size: 28 MB

Page 346

No. 36.)
BALAGHAT PLATES OF PRITHI VISHENA II
269
could of course have been affixed or prefixed to a document only when it was finished, and it is missing here because our grant was not completed. The engraver apparently acted just as a writer or copyist of the grant would have done.
After Pravarasina II. our inscription in lines 26-35 mentions his son, the Mahinija Narendrasena, and after him his son - born from the queen (mahil 'di) Ajjhita-bhattârika, a daughter of the lord of Kuntala - the Jahirija Prithivishēņa (II.), devout worshipper of Bhagavat (Vishnu).' Narendrasena, 'from confidence in the excellent qualities previously acquired by him, took away (or appropriated) the family's fortune; his commands were honoured by the lords of Kosala, Mékala and Malava, and he held in check enemies bowed down by his prowess. Prithivishêna II. is described as being a receptacle of splendour anl forbearance, who raised (his) sunken family. The name Prithivish insya, in line 35. is followed by cuchanit,
at his command '; but of the king's order only the words 'all superiutondents' are given ly these plates.
In the Vakitaka stone inscription published in Arriol. Surrey of India, Vol. IV. p. 124 ff., the verses 10 and 11, which would hare given the names of the successors of Pravarasena II., are unfortunately mach mutilated. The name of Pravarasena's son and saccessor, 'who, having obtained the kingdom when eight years of age, ruled well," has anite disappeared, and the son of that unknown king according to the published text wa, Dévasena. As has been stated above, according to our grant Pravarasena's son Narendrasena took aw:y the kingdom (probably from an elder brother), married a daughter of the king of Kuntala, and was succeeded by his son Prithivishêņa II. The stone in cription in verse 8 records the defeat of a lord of Kuntala by aparently Prithivishtna I., and in verse 18 speaks of Kuntala, Avanti, Kalinga, Kósale, Trikūta, Laţa, Andhra . . . (as having been subjected by one of the later Vákata ka). According to the present inscription Narendrasena had his command honoured (or obeyed) by the lords of Kosala, Mekala and Málava. The first and last of these three countries are well known. The situation of Mékala (according to the Topographical List of the Bribatsatılità in Inl. Ant. Vol. XXII. p. 185, a mountain or a people) is indicated by the fact that the river Narmadà is called Mikala-kanyi, the daughter of Mekala, and that that river springs from the hill Amara kaptak (in Long. 81° 48' and Lat. 22° 40') in the ancient Chódi country.3
Here and in the cognate plates the Våkåtaka kings have the title mahárája followed by the word fri prefixed to their names, and before the title there stands in each case the genitive Vakatakúncim ; e.g. Våketakuinam mahiiraja=sri-Pravarasenasya. Such passages have been hitherto translated as if the genitive Viikitakúnim were governed by the title mahurija : the illustrious Pravarasena, the great king of the Vâkâtakas,' or 'the Maharaja of the Vakatakas, the illustrious Pravarasốna.' The matter is not of great importance, but it may be as well to state that from the grammarion's point of view such a construction would be objectionable. In my opinion, the genitive must be taken to qualify, not the title mahirija, but the whole phrase maharaja-sri-Pravarasena, and more especially the word Pracarusina, the chief component of the pbrase, so that the meaning would be the Mahiruja, the illustrious Pravarasens of the V&katakas,' i.e.of the family of the V&katakas." I have already had occasion to point out that we similarly have the genitive Maitrakánum in the Valabhî plates, where there is no title by which this genitive could be governed; Vishnukundinám above, Vol. IV. p. 193, 1. 2; and
1 The name Ajjhitad&of we also find in the Kâritalai plates of the Maharaja Jayantha; Gupta Insor. p. 118.
The reading of the original text is not absolutely certain here.
• Compare Archaol. Survey of India, Vol. XVII., Plate L, and the verso cited by Dr. Bhandarkar above, Vol. IV. p. 280.
The same rena k applies to th genitive Bhdrafindndm in line 10 of the inscription.