Epigraphia Indica Vol 26

SR No.: 032580
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Hirananda Shastri
Publisher: Archaeological Survey of India
Publication Year: 1945
Total Pages: 448
Language: English
Classification: Book_English
File Size: 24 MB

Page 264

No. 27.]
SIX SAINDHAVA COPPER-PLATE GRANTS FROM GHUMLI.
209
doubt a man of about 40 at the time of his accession, but even this circumstance does not render the marriage of a daughter or a sister of his with Rānaka possible.
If Rānaka, the donor of our charter is not the same as Rāņaka, the father of Jāika I, as suggested by the genealogy in Charter F, with whom then are we to identify him? The answer to this question is supplied by the data in Charter A. That charter was issued by Jāika as regent, when Agguka, the son of his half-brother Krishnarāja, was ruling as a minor. Rāņaka, the grantor of our plate, was a son of this Agguka. It would be seen that the names of his father and grandfather were Agguka and Ranaka respectively, as was the case with the grantor of our plate. A glance at the genealogical and chronological table given on p. 196 shows that the approximate time of the rule of this Rāņaka was A.D. 859 to 879. It was thus possible for him to marry Kshēmēbvari who was presumably a daughter of the Chapa king Kshēmurja, since the latter is known to have ruled from c. 841 to 880 A.D.
As against the view here proposed, it is possible to argue that it requires us to suppose that the Saindhava kingdom, which was already very small, was divided into as many as three branches during the latter part of the 9th century A.D. Known facts about divisions and subdivisions of kingdoms in India would show that there was nothing very unusual in it. The testimony of Charter F would further show that our hypothesis is almost inevitable ; for II. 5 and 6 of that charter show that during the latter half of the 9th century the Saindhava family tree had a number of branches (sākha-sanchaya). We should not therefore be surprised if the data available at present showed that there were three branches ruling simultaneously at that time.
It is interesting to note that the claim to the overlordship of western Saurashtra has not been advanced in this charter on behalf of the grantor, as has been done in the remaining charters of this set. This was probably due to the fact that after the usurpation of Jāika I, the branch of Krishnarāja, though representing the senior line, was reduced to a humble status and did not wield much power and influence. To judge from the present charter, it would appear that it could not command the services of good poets and engravers also. The literary scholars of the day seem to have preferred the patronage of Jāika and his descendants, who had become the leading members of the Saindhava family.
The present charter is not dated, but since the grantor was a son of Agguka II, who was & minor in 513 G. E., we may presume that it may have been issued in c. 550 G. E. If the grant was in memory of a departed queen of the donor, as seems to be the case, then its date may probably be about a decade later. The present charter was thus very probably granted in the same decade in which Charter D, dated 555 G. E., was issued.
The charter records the donation of the village Bhëtālikā situated in the district of Pachchhatri. The name of the donee does not occur in the first plate, which alone has been so far recovered. The concluding four lines of the first plate contain a part of the record, which described its object. Besides being incomplete, this portion is rather obscure, and so we cannot get a definite idea on the subject. If the emendations suggested by me in the text are correct, the record would seem to sanction a grant for the purpose of erecting a temple in memory of queen Kshēmēsvari, who appears to have married the donor in a svayamvara. Or, it may be that the grant was made at the request of queen Kshēmēśvari; this alternative, however, appears to me as less probable.
As observed already, Kshēmokvari was very probably a daughter of king Kshēmarāja of the Chåpa dynasty, who was a western neighbour of king Rāņaka and ruling almost contemporaneously with him. M. M. Shastri has advanced & curious suggestion in this connection; he thinks that Kshēmēśvari may have been a queen of Chāpa king Kshēmēsvara of Anahilapattana, living