________________
No. 23.)
HANSOT PLATES OF THE CHAHAMANA BHARTRIVADDHA.
201
Western Rājpntinā and well agrees with the fact that Nägävaloka was the overlord of the Chūhamānas of Broach. Similarly the Rashtrakūta Mahārājadhiraja Dhruvarāja is stated to have defeated Vatsarāja "in the centre of Maru." We have also seen that Någabhata I. is in the Gwalior inscription stated to have defeated the Baluchas. What is meant is probably the Musalmān attacks on Western Rājputānå in the eighth century. Everything tends to show that the late Mr. Jackson was right in supposing that these rulers were Gurjaras, and that their head quarters were at Srimă la, the present Bhinmal.
If we now turn to the faroily of the grantee of the Hansdt plates, it will be seen that the first of his ancestors mentioned in the grant is designated as rājan, which does not imply that he was a ruling prince. Only conventional praise is bestowed on the four next generations. We are told, it is true, in the usual way that other kings bowed down to them, but there are no attributes which show that they were kings. Then follows Dhräbhatadēva, of whom we hear that he conquered the territories of all his adversaries and made the whole world resplendent with his fame. His son, the issuer of the grant registered in the Hangot plates, is the first in the family who is expressly designated as a feudatory ruler. Now assuming that he held sway over Broach, it is in itself little likely that his ancestors should have ruled over that part of India, because we find the Gurjaras in power down to A.D. 736. It is of interest to notes how the Gurjaras of Broach, who were originally worshippers of the Sun, became Saivas from the reiga of Dadda III., who lived at the end of the seventh century. His son Jayabhata III., whose copperplate grants are dated A.D. 706 and 735, is the last of these rulers who is known to us. He is said to have obtained the five great sounds and to have been a Mahäsämantadhipati, in other words he uses exactly the same titles as Bhartsivaddha II. It seems nataral to infer that the line of Gurjara feudatories in Broach became extinct with Jayabhata III., and that he was an oceeded as ruler by the prince Bhartsivaddha, who was a Chahamāna, and who owed allegiance to the Gurjaras of Bhintaal, as had probably also been the case with his predecessors of the Broach dynasty of Gurjaras.
The grant was issued from Bhộigukachchha, which cannot be anything else than & semilearned Sanskrit form of the name Bharukachchha, the present Broach. The same form also occurs in the Bagumrå plates of Dhruvarāja II. of Saka 7896 and elsewhere. The grant records the gift of the village Arjunadēvigrāma in the Akrürēsvara vishaya. Akrārēsvara is the present Anklesvar talaka in the Broach District, but I am not able to identify Arjunadēvigrāma. It has already been mentioned that the names of the donees have been tampered with. That portion of the inscription cannot therefore be read with certainty. The donees seem to be the Brahmana Bhatta-Būta (?), the son of Tävi, residing in Saujñapadra (?), the Brāhmana Jaba (P), the son of Charamaśarman (?) and a resident of Vara mēvi (?) and the Brahmana Bhatalla, the son of Bhatta-Vå . ., residing in Saujñapadra (?). I cannot identify Saujña. padra and Varamovi and the reading of the names themselves is not certain. The writer of the grant was Bhatta-Kakka (?), the son of Bhatta-Vatsuva, and is called a Valabhya, 1.s., he hailed from Valabhi. This fact adds some probability to the suggestion hazarded above that there may have been some connexion between Bhartpivaddha's family and the Maitrakas of Valabhi.
1 See the discussion of this matter by the late Mr. Jackson, Bombay Gazetteer, Vol. I, Part I, p. 466, wbere the authorities are quoted.
. Ibidem, p. 467. * Cf. Jackson, loc. cit., pp. 113 ff. • Ind. Ant., Vol. XIII, pp. 77 f.
Ibidem, Vol. XII, p. 181.
