Epigraphia Indica Vol 29

SR No.: 032583
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Hirananda Shastri
Publisher: Archaeological Survey of India
Publication Year: 1951
Total Pages: 432
Language: English
Classification: Book_English
File Size: 21 MB

Page 360

TWO PLATES OF TRIBHUVANAMAHADEVI FROM BAUD
213
however, appears more probable that Lönabhāra was the son of a brother of Subhākara (III). This brother had probably predeceased Subhākara (III), after whose death his nephew became the sole heir. Tribhuvanamahādēvi ruled the kingdom on behalf of her grandson who was still minor at the time of the death of Subhākara (III). This assumption alone can explain away the inconsistency of the facts stated above.
As regards the identity of Gosvamini it may be noted that she is stated in the present plates to have succeeded Subhakara (III) alias Kusumahāra (I) and made over the kingdom to her grandson Lõnabhāra on his attaining majority. In the Talcher plate of Subhākara (IV), the mother of Subhākara (III) is described as having succeeded her son and made over the kingdom to her grandson Lõnabhāra. She was also known as Tribhuvanamahādēvi. Thus both Gösvāmini and Tribhuvanamahādēvi were successors of Subhākara (III) and grandmothers of Lāņabhāra. So they cannot but be identical. Gösvāmini was probably the original name of the wife of Santikara (I) alias Gayada and mother of Subhākara (III), and Tribhuvanamahädēvi was her assumed name. This assumption is corroborated by the allusion to Gosvamini as having ruled in the past in the Dhenkanal plate of Tribhuvanamahädēvi.
I may here point out that Tribhuvanamahādēvi of the Dhenkanal plate is not the wife of śāntikara (I), as assumed by Pandit Misra, for the following reasons. For one thing, nowhere is Sāntikara (1) called Lalitahāra. As pointed out above, the name of Santikara's wife was, in all probability, Gösväminidovi. Tribhuvanamahādēvi was an assumed name as is evident from the passage : yu jagatsu Tribhuvanamahādēvxiti-vibrutā occurring in Subhākara (IV)'s Talcher plate, the same passage being employed in the present plates with reference to Prithvimahādēvi. Thus, both Gösvāminidēvi and Pţithvimahādēvi had the assumed name Tribhuvanamahādēvi. The date of the Dhenkanal plate is clearly 160, as it is represented by the letter symbols lu and chu which stand for 100 and 60 respectively. Sāntikara (I)'s wife was the first queen in the Bhauma-Kara dynasty to rule over the kingdom, and the reference to Gõsvāmini as having ruled the kingdom in the Dhenkanal plate proves that another queen had reigned prior to Tribhuvanamahädēvi of that plate; hence she must have been the wife of Santikara (I). That Gösvāmini is not a fictitious figure but the grandmother of Lõnabhāra is proved by the plates under discussion. As stated before, the inciser of the Dhenkanal plate and the plate B under discussion is the same person, Harivardhana, son of Rahasavardhana. In view of the above facts, Tribhuvanamahādēvi of the Dhenkanal plate cannot be regarded as the wife of Santikara (I). She was the wife of Sivakara (III) alias Lalitahāra. So it would be quite natural to identify Lalitahāra of the Dhenkanal plate with Sivakara (III), the younger brother of Subhākara (IV) alias Kusumahāra (II). Thus there were three queens bearing the name Tribhuvanamahādēvi. Säntikara (I)'s wife was Gösvā. minidēvi alias Tribhuvanamahādēvi (I), Subhākara (IV)'s wife Prithvimahādevi was Tribhuvanamahādēvi (II) and Sivakara (III)'s wife (original name not known) was also Tribhuvanamahadēvi (III).
After Subhākara (IV) and Sivakara (III) their wives ascended the throne under the names Tribhuvamamahädēvi. The former was ruling in the year 158 and the latter in 160. This gives credit to the assumption that, after Sivakara (III) there was a quarrel for succession. Prithvimahādēvi ascended the throne probably with the aid of her father Svabhāvatunga and, after her, Sivakara (III)'s wife became queen. Her claim was probably backed by her father Rājamalla. The hints of a state of chaos befalling the Bhauma-Kara family are there in the Dhenkanal plate (lines 9-10). Further, it is stated therein that Tribhuvanamahädēvi was approached by the ministers for her accession to the throne (line 20). These hints confirm the belief that there ensued a civil war for succession after Sivakara (III) alias Lalitahāra, and the two queens of Kusumahāra and Lalitahāra ascended the throne one after another. Then came Santikara (III) and Subhakara
1 Rehler's Tables, Pl. ix.