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 358

No. 2 D. C. SIROAR, OOTACAMUND
(Received on 1.2.1958) Prof. V. V. Mirashi has offered above, pp. 251 ff., his views on the reading and interpretation of verse 7 of the Sēnakapāt inscription with reference to his theories that no portion of the Marathispeaking area formed a part of the dominions of the Panduvamsis of Kõsala and that the Bhandak inscription was brought to the Nagpur Museum not from Bhandak in the Chanda District but from Arang in the Raipur District. We do not think that he has succeeded in proving the point to the satisfaction of scholars.
He suggests the reading Vindhya-dhurddhri(dur-ddha)ratvan and Varadā-tata(or kata)-Phanihatām in the stanza which was read by us as follows :
Yo Vindhya-dhürddhri(rddha)ratvan Varadā-tata-parihatām(tum) cha samprāpya |
saprāptavān=1 ha Yaśobhāndāgār-akhyayā khyātim (tim) || Both his readings and emendations appear to us doubtful and unacceptable. But his arguments in favour of the suggestions are more dubious. He thinks that Dēvarakbuita, whose exploite are described in the stanza, performed two feats according to its first half as indicated by the word cha therein, viz., irresistibility like the Vindhyas and the extermination of the Phanin or Näga king of the Varadå valley, and that the said two achievements led to his celebrity as Yasobhāndāgāra,
the store house of fame'. Not only are Prof. Mirashi's reading, emendation and interpretation of Vindhya-durddharatvan and Varadā-tata-Phani-hatām farfetched and unsatisfactory, his objections against our interpretation of the stanza appear to be based on misunderstanding. We understood the stanza as follows: Yah Varadā-tata-parihatan Vindhya-dhūr-dharatuan sarpräpua. iha Yasobhāndāgār-ākhyaya khyātir cha sampraptavan in which cha does not offer any difficulty at all. There is also no difficulty if his achievement recorded in the first half of the verse is regarded as the cause of Dēvarakshita's celebrity as the store-house of fame', since the implication is that he conquered the Vindhyan region as far as the banks of the Varada on behalf of his master who made him the governor of that newly annexed territory and conferred on him the title of Yasobhandagara. We do not find any difficulty if, according to verse 8 of the record, Dēvarakshita received from his master a few.other vishayas either for governing or as fiefs, although the vishayas referred to in these stanzas Inay have been actually comprised in the Vindhyan tract mentioned in verse 7. In any case, even according to Prof. Mirashi's suggestion, Dēvarakshita, a general of the Panduvamsi king Nanna, became famous after having killed a Nāga king of the Varadă valley. He therefore, admits Pinduvamsi association with the valley of the Varadā. But in his opinion, Dēvarakshita merely raided the country upto the banks of the Varadā and this fact does not prove that the Panduvamsis were ruling over the region ground Chandā. That the reference is only to & raid and not to the occupation of the Varadā valley by the Pāņduvamsi general is, however, purely a matter of opinion. Even if, therefore, Prof. Mira hai's doubtful reading, emendation and interpretation of verso 7 of the Saua kapăt inscription are accepted, they do not prove that the Varadā valley lay outside the dominions of the Panduvamáls.
In this connection, Prof. Mirashi has offered a number of suggestions such as that the Vākātakas were in occupation of the Chándā region in the beginning of the fifth century, that Süryagbõsha
( 256 )