________________
172
EPIGRAPHIA INDICA.
(VOL. VI.
kind of a suggestion as to why the succession passed to the younger brother. And the conclusion at which we arrive from the authoritative early records, is, that Dhruva set himself ap as king immediately on the death of Kțishna I., and that Govinda II. had not any real part at all in the succession. The Kadaba grant, which purports to have been issued in A.D. 813, would set up for Govinda II. the biruda of Prabhůtavarsha. But we do not accept this, until we find it in some unquestionable record. And the only secondary appellation that is as yet established for him, is that of Vallabha; it is supplied by the Paithan grant, which, in the first verse that mentions him, says that he was Govindaraja who had the akhya or name of Vallabha, and, in the other passage, uses that name to denote him.
The successor, then, of Krishņa I. was his younger son Dhruva. The Paithan grant of A.D. 794, of his son and successor Govind: III., mentions him, in the verses, by the name of Dhruvaraja and the biruda of Nirupama;" and the formal preamble of the prose part of it further establishes for him the biruda of Dhårdvarsha, because, using a certain technical expression of very constant occurrence, it describes Govinda III. as meditating on the feet of the Paramabhatfaraka, Maharajadhiraja, and Paramétvara Dhårdvarshadêva. A verse in the Wapi grant of A.D. 807 gives his proper name in the Prakrit form of Dhora, though a subsequent verse in the same record gives it in the anal Sanskrit form of Dhruva ;7 and an intermediate verse in the same record further establishes for him the biruda of Kalivallabha. In the Pattadakal inscription of his time, he is designated Dhåråvarsha and Kaliballaha,
- the latter being the Pråkpit form of Kalivallabha. And the Naregal inscription gives Dôra, as another variety of the Pråkrit form of his proper name.10 Another important biruda of his, Śrivallabha, will be brought forward farther on. A verse in the Sångli grant of A.D. 933
We have similar flight of fancy, or at any rate an unquestionably erroneous statement, in the assertion made in the sildhåra Bhadana grant of A.D. 997, that Amôghavarsha II. reigned for a year; see page 176 below.
The other Rashtra kåta records which deal with this part of the genealogy and succession, treat Govioda II. as follows. The Rad banpur grant of A.D. 807 follows the draft of the Want grant, and refers to bim, in the same way, only as the unnamed elder brother whom Dhruvs superseded (Ind. Ant. Vol. VI. p. 69, verse 5). The Haroda grant of A.D. 811 or 812 PARSO bin over without any allusion of any kind (Ind. Aut. Vol. XII. pp. 162, 163); and so does tbe Kapadwap grant of A.D. 909 or 910 (Ep. Ind. Vol. I. p. 56); and so also, do even the Nausart granta of A.D. 916 (Jour. Bo. Br. R. As. Soc. Vol. XVIII. p. 266), which aim At presenting the whole line from Dantidurga to lodra III., with the first rudimentary introduction of Puranic preface. The Nauri grant of A.D. 817 (Jour. Bo. Br. R. 41. Soc. Vol. XX. pp. 144, 145, verses 18, 19), and the Kavi grant of A.D. 826 or 827 (Ind. Ant. Vol. V. pp. 149, 150, verses 18, 19), and the Baroda grant of A.D. 834 or 835 (id. Vol. XIV. p. 201, verses 2, 3), and the Bagumrl grant of A.D. 266 or 867 (id. Vol. XII. p. 187, verses 15, 16), and the Baguna grant, of doubtful authenticity, of A.1). 888 (id. Vol. XIII. p. 67, verses 9, 10), repeat the two verses which introduce the two brothers in the Paithan grant, but do not include the subsequent matter stated in that record about them. The Singli grant of A.D. 933 mentions Govinda II. between his father Krishna I. and bis younger brother Nirupama-(Dhruva), but does not make any assertion that he reigned (Ind. Ant. Vol. XII. p. 252). The Kurbad grant of A.D. 959 follows the draft of the Deolt grant of A.D. 910, and so repeats the statement that sensual pleasures made him careless of the kingdom, oto. (above, Vol. IV. p. 287, verse 11). And the Karda grant of A.D. 973 mentions bin between his father and his younger brotber, but does not revive the statement that is made in the Dooli and Karbad grants, and does not say anything elne tending to suggest that he reigned (Ind. Ant. Vol. XII. p. 267). Above, Vol. IV. p. 842, line 40.
Above, Vol. III. p. 107, text lines 29, 85, 87. Ibid. p. 108, text lines 42, 43. It seems that the biruda was actually written there, carelessly, as DbArAvatsadeva. If any doubt abould be entertained as to what was really intended, reference may be made to the corresponding passages in the Want and Radhanpur grants, both of wbich, it may be added, give tbe biruda with the ending deva, just as the Paithan record does.
Ind. Ant. Vol. XI. p. 157, text line 6.
Loo, cit. text line 26. When this passage was translated, and, before it, the same psange in the Radhanpur crant (Ind. Ant. Vol. VI. p. 70, verse 17), tbe fuct that the word is here a proper name was not recognised, and it was rendered, with the following ina, by "already."
Ibid. text line 14. Regarding the meaning of this biruda, which had evidently been misunderstood both by Dr. Bühler and by myself, nee page 108 above, note 9.
Ind. Ant. Vol. XI. p. 125, text lines 1, 2. » Page 168 above, text line 1.
