Epigraphia Indica Vol 33

SR No.: 032587
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: D C Sircar
Publisher: Archaeological Survey of India
Publication Year: 1959
Total Pages: 514
Language: English
Classification: Book_English
File Size: 29 MB

Page 294

No. 40) NOTE ON MANDASOR INSCRIPTION OP GAURI
207 Prof. Mirashi's contention that 'the aforecited passage from the Brihaleamhitā thus suggests that the later Aulikara kings Adityavardhana, Dravyavardhana and Vishņuvardhana (Yabōdharman) ruled from Ujjayini' therefore stands on a shaky foundation.
Prof. Mirashi's other argument in support of his theory is based on the Mandasõr inscription! of V.S. 589 belonging to the reign of Yasõdharman Vishņuvardhana. He says, " It (i.e. the Mandasör inscription of V.8. 589) tells us that the country between the Vindhya and Pariyātru (Aravali) mountains was being governed by one Nirdosha who was a Rajasthaniya appointed by Yasodharman and had his headquarters at Daśapura. This clearly indicates that Yasõdharman himself was ruling not from Daśapura but from some other place like Ujjayini." He refers us to the Corpus Inscriptionum Indicarum, Vol. III, p. 154, with the following remark : " The name of the viceroy was Nirdosha and not Daksha as shown by Kielhorn." We are sorry to note that there are not only several errors in these statements but also that the inscription does not prove Prof. Mirashi's theory at least to our satisfaction.
In the first place, the inscription does not really mention any country between the Vidhya and Pāriyātra mountains'. Verse 19 of the record actually speaks of the land bounded by the Vindhya, the Păriyātra and the Sea (Arabian Sea) apparently meaning the region lying to the west of the Vindhya and the Pāriyātra and to the east of the Arabian Sea. There is nothing in the record to show that the city of Daśapura was situated in this land. As a matter of fact, the area indicated seems to have been situated to the west of the city in question. Secondly, the person represented in the stanza as the Rajasthaniya, i.e. viceroy or governor, of the said region is not Nirdosha but his father's elder brother Abhayadatta. Verses 20-21 suggest that, on the death of Abhayadatta, the viceroyalty of the above land fell on Dharmadosha who was a son of the former's brother Döshakumbha. Thirdly, it is uncertain whether Abhayadatta was a contemporary and a viceroy of Yasõdharman Vishnuvardhana, although Dharmadosha was in office in V.8. 589 when his younger brother Nirdosha excavated a well apparently at Daśapura in the name of his deceased uncle Abhayadatta. Verse 21 of course seems to suggest that Dharmadosha was a viceroy of Yabodharman; but he may have been metioned by Nirdosha merely to indicate his own importance as the brother of an important personage like the governor of a district. Fourthly, for similar reagong, Nirdosha's mention of his relations with Abhayadatta and Dharmadosha scarcely proves that Dasapura, where he excavated the well, lay within the territory under the viceroyalty of his elder brother and paternal uncle, even if both of them were viceroys under the Aulikara king Yasodharman Vishnuvardhana. Fifthly, the inscription does not mention Dasapura as the headquarters of Abhayadatta and Dharmadosha, not to speak of Nirdosha who is not stated to have been a ruler. Sixthly, the mention of the two names together in two different stanzas shows that Daksha was the second name of Nirdosha." Seventhly, even if Yasõdharman Vishnu, vardhana had his capital at Dagapura, Abhayadatta and Dharmadosha could have acted as gover nors of the metropolitan district of the Aulikara empire with their headquarters at the capital city.
The points raised above will make it clear that the Mandasör inscription scarcely proves the location of Yasödharman's capital at Ujjayini. Prof. Mirashi's statement that all these kings (viz. Adityavardhana, Dravyavardhana and Yabodharman Vishnuvardhana) were ruling from Ujjayini' is thus an unwarranted conjecture, especially in view of the discovery of most of the Aulikara inscriptions at Dasaputa and of the fact that verse 2 of the Mandasör inscreption of Gauri
1 CII, Vol. III, pp. 150-58. . Select Inscriptions, p. 392, note 3.
. It may be noted that, when Maharaja Brahmadatta or Maharaja Jayadatta was ruling over Pundrava. rdhana-bhukti with headquarters apparently at the city of Pundravardhana, there was also the office of an Ayuktala (no doubt the governor of the district round the city) at the same city. See above, Vol. XV, pp. 136 f., pp. 188 ff.; Vol. XX, pp. 61 ff.