________________
No. 16.)
SOME RASHTRAKUTA RECORDS.
169
A.D. 794 speaks of him as Vallabharaja, " the Vallabha king," or, possibly, "the king of the Vallabhas."! This designation however, as also the simpler designation Vallabha,- was, not a special biruda, but an appellation of general application. The two appellations were not restricted to the Rashtrakůţa family; and the name Vallabha does not always denote a Rashtrakûţa even in the Rashtrakūta records. And the fuller one of them, Vallabharåja, is of interest in connection with the Rashtraka tas of Malkhed chiefly because, through its Praksit forms, it explains the name, "the Balharás," by which the contemporaneous Arab travellers and geographers of the ninth and tenth centuries A.D. used to speak of those kings. The Kadaba grant, which purports to have been issued in A.D. 813, would set up for Dantidurga the biruda of Vairam@gha, by which appellation alone it mentions him ; but we cannot admit this as established, until we obtain some authentic confirmation of it from a record the nature of which is unquestionable.
Dantidurga was succeeded by his paternal uncle Krishna I. The Paithan grant of A.D. 794 introduces him as Krishnaraja, and then presents two verses which establish for him the birudas of Subhatunga and Akalavarsha. Another verse in the same record might perhaps be taken as practically speaking of him as Srivallabha: but the appellation is there divided into two words, Sriyó vallabhaḥ, which is at least a very exceptional manner of putting forward any formal epithet, title, or biruda; with that passage we have to compare the descriptions, similarly in verse, of Jagattunga II. as vallabhô víra-Lakshmy dh in the Nausâri
one of the Pals records tells us that "Gopals was the husband of Fortune as well as the lord of the Earth," or, more literally, that "Gopala was lord (pati) of the Earth who was the fellow-wife (na patns) of Fortune " (Ind. Ant. Vol. XXI p 257, and note 55). And the Chols records constantly utilise the idea : thus, an inscription of the twenty-ninth year of Rajakesarivarma-Rajadhiraja says that," while the goddess of the Earth was beaming under his fringed white parasol, the king wedded the goddess of Fortune" (South-Ind. Insors. Vol. III. p. 55); an inscription of the second year of Rajakostivarma-Rajamahendra says, from the opposite point of view, that
while the goddess of Portune was resplendent, he wedded the great goddess of the Earth, in order that she might sbide joyfully under the shade of a single parasol ” (ibid. p. 114); an inscription of the fourth year of Parakesarivarma-Rajëndradêve says that, "while the goddess of Fortune and the great goddess of the Earth became his great queens, the king raised on high his brilliant white parasol " (ibid. p. 61); and an inscription of the twelfth yeur of Parakesarivarma-Rajendrachóļa I., expanding the idea by introducing Victory as another 80-called wife, and referring sleo to his actual wedded wife, speaks of "his long life, in which the great goddess of the Karth, the goddess of Victory in battle, and the beautiful and matchless goddess of Fortune, who had become his great queens, gave him pleasure while his own illustrious queen was prospering ” (id. Vol. I. p. 99). It may be added that we have a still more figurative expansion of the general idea, by the suggestion of a city as a wife of a king, in the verse in the Aihole inscription of A.D. 634-35 which says that Pulakësin I., who was Srivallabha or favourite (in this passage, more exactly, husband) of Fortune, became also the bridegroom of the town Våtâpi purt (page 8 sbove, verse 7): so, also, & country is put forward, in the same way, in the description of the earliest Silahárs princes of the Northern Konkay as "favourite of the Kookso" and "favourite of the whole Konkan" (Ind. Ant. Vol. XIII. p. 184, text line 3, p. 186, line 2, p. 186, line 1-3; and, in another direction, we find Learning indicated, by the use of the word vallabha, as a wife of wise men (see page 187 below, note 10). Both in the biruda Přithivivallabhs and in the epithet Sriprithibdallabha, the Sanskrit records use, indifferently, either prithol or prithiol, while the Kaparece records often present the corruptions prithuvi, prithuel, frithuvi, and prithwol. No distinction serms to be involved. And, while giving in the present study, in each individual case, the form that is actually used, it seems desirable, for the sake of uniformity in indexing, eto, to adopt for general purposes the form prithirs, which, though it is strictly only a substitute for prithof, is dreidedly the more familiar word of the two and also seems to be the more common term,
i Above, Vol. III. p. 106, text line 17. As regards the alternative rendering of this app-llation by the king of the Vallabhar," the Tamil form Vallavar kón, which has been translated in that way by Dr. Holtzsch (South. Ind. Incore. Vol. III. p. 89), occurs in passage in a Chols record in which it deuotes the Western Chalukys king Åhavamalla-Sömesvars I.
See two pasages referred to on page 103 below, notes 2 and 3. See also the end of note on page 190. . See page 190 below, and note 6. . Above, Vol. IV. p. 846, after verse 3; and see p. 836. Above, Vol. III. p. 106, text lines 17 to 21.
• Lge, eit. text line 26-27.
