Epigraphia Indica Vol 07

Author(s): E Hultzsch
Publisher: Archaeological Survey of India

Page 40

No. 6.)
CAMBAY PLATES OF GOVINDA IV.
which received the name of Jagattunga-sindhu after Jagattunga(-Govinda III.), father of Amoghavarsha I.
After Amoghavarsha I. the throne was occupied by his son Akalavarsha-Krishna II.), of whom verse 13 says that his enemies abandoned the city of Khotaka, which, in my opinion, is here meant to denote Manyakheta itself, the capital of the Rashtrakața princes. Two Eastern Chalukya records' mention that Gunaka-Vijayaditya III. (A.D. 844-888) " frightened the firebrand Krishọg and completely burnt his city,' and that "king Vallabha did honour to the arms of Vijayaditya (III.)." It, therefore, appears that the Eastern Châlukya prince GunakaVijayaditya III. defeated the Rashtrakūta king Krishna II. and was in possession of his capital Manyakhêţa, and it is to the act of repulsing this Châlukya prince from Mânyakhêta that verse 13 of our grant refers. Verse 14 states that Akalavarsha(-Krishpa II.) married the daughter of Kokkala, who belonged to the family of Sahasrårjuna, s.e. the Chedi dynasty. Now, the Bilhari inscription speaks of Kokkalla as having erected two columns of fame, vis. Krishnaraja in the south and Bhộjadêva in the north. Similarly, the Benares plates of the Chedi prince Karnadeva state that Kókkalla's hand, which granted freedom from fear, was on the head of) Bhoja Vallabharja, Sri-Harsha and Sankaragana. There can hardly be a donbt that the Krishnaraja of the Bilhari inscription is identical with the Vallabhardja of the Benares plates, and that both are identical with the Rashtrak@ta prince Akalavarsha(-Krishna II.). And the support, which Kókkala lent to Akalavarsha(-Kfishna II.), was given in all likelihood at the time when the latter was defeated, and his capital Mânyakhêta occupied, by the Eastern Chalukya king Gupaka-Vijayaditya III. The last pida of verse 14 tells us that from the union of Akalavarsha (Krishna II.) and the daughter of Kokkala sprang Jagattunga, who, in verses 15 and 16, is said to have married Lakshmi, daughter of Raņavigraha, son of Kók kala. Verse 16 speaks of a prince named Arjuna as having helped Jagattunga with his army and thus enabled him to acquire fame. It does not seem difficult to identify this Arjuna. In verse 20, Arjuna is mentioned as a son of Kókkalla. Arjuna was thus & brother of Raņavigraha, and consequently an uncle-in-law of Jagattunga. And, in all likelihood, it is this Arjuna who seems to have rendered him assistance.
Verses 17-18 relate that from this Jagattuoga and Lakshmi king Indra (III.) was born. Verse 19 desoribes a great victory achieved by this Indra. The first line of this stanza may be thus translated :-"The courtyard (of the temple of the god) Kalapriya (became) uneven by
Ind. Ant. Vol. XX. p. 102. [Por a different explanation of this statement and its bearing, see above, Vol. IV. p. 226 f.-E.H.]
Verse 18 is also musceptible of another interpretation. Khétaks may be taken to denote the modern Kaira, and the term mandala to refer to the surrounding district. If so, the verse must be understood as containing an allusion to Krishna II.'s having supplanted the subordinate branch of the Rashtrakota dynasty, reigning at Kheaks. But the word parityakta implies that Khetaks, before it was occupied by the enemies, was under the way of Krishna II., and that, when it was so oocupied, he by his prowess compelled the enemies to evacuato it. But the Rishtakata of the subordinate branch did not occupy Kbêtaks and the surrounding district at any time during Krishna II.'s reign, but were ruling over it long before him. Again, the word alita as applied to these tributary Rashtrakat does not seem to be appropriate. They are referred to as fulkika.Rdahtrakifas when their rebellion against Amoghavarsha I. is mentioned (Ind. Ant. Vol. XII. p. 183, and Vol. XIV. p. 199). Again, they are spoken of wodndhawar when their dimaffection towards the Gujarat Rashtrakta prince Dhruva II. is alluded to (Ind. Ant, Vol. XII. p. 184). But in no cue the word ahita or its synonyms are used to denote them. For these reasons the second interpretation does not commend itself to me as easily as the first, suggested in the text. The latter is much more probable, because we know that Manyakheta was once occupied during Krishna 11.'s life-time by the Eastern Chalukyas, who can, with propriety, be called his ahitas, inasmuch as they were the mortal enemies of the Rashtrakūta dynasty. • See above, Vol. I. p. 256, verse 17.
Ibid. Vol. II. p. 306, verse 7. • The true spelling of the name appears to be Kókkalls, as attested by the records of the Chedi dynasty. It is spelt Kokkals in verses 14 and 16, on account of the exigericies of the metre. The correct spelling of the namo occurs in verse 20.