________________
12
EPIGRAPHIA INDICA.
[VOL. XII.
738.1 Dhanika was succeeded by his son Auka, and the latter by his son Krishnaraja (vs. 12-13). Krishnaraja's son was Samkaragana, who conquered Bhața, king of the Gauda country, and made a present of this kingdom to his overlord (vs. 14-16). Can this 'Bhata be Strapala of the Påla dynasty, who, according to Cunningham, was a son of Devapāla, and according to Mr. V. A. Smith, the same as Vigrahapala I.? Samkaragana's queen was Yajja who was a devotee of Siva (v. 17), and from her he had a son named Harsharaja (v. 18), who is called a dvija, which, in inscriptions of this period, so far as my knowledge goes, denotes a Brahmana only. He conquered kings in the north, and presented horses to Bhoja, who, I think, must be Bhōja I. (A.D. 843-882) of the imperial Pratihara dynasty (v. 19). He married a princess named Sillä (v. 20), and had from her a son called Guhila (v. 21). Verse 22 says that he produced the impression that he was Guhila I., come to life again to destroy his foes, and the next verse informs us that with excellent horses from the sea-coast he vanquished the Gauda king and levied tribute from princes in the east. He married Rajjha, daughter of the Pramāra Vallabharaja (v. 24). Their son was Bhatta (v. 25), who led an expedition of conquest against kings of the south, (v. 26) and married Purasa, daughter of one Viruka (v. 27). The issue of their marriage was Baladitya, Bālārka or Balabhanu (v. 28). Verses 29-32 bestow nothing but conventional praise on him. Verse 33 tells us that he married Raṭṭava, daughter of the Chahamana king Sivaraja, who is eulogised in the verse following. From her Baladitya had three sons, vis. Vallabharaja, Vigraharaja, and Devaraja (v. 35). In commemoration of Raṭṭava who had died, Baladitya, we are informed, erected a temple to Murari, whose site probably is occupied by the temple of Raghunatha, where the inscription was found when I visited Chatsu (v. 36). Verse 37 expresses a wish for the permanence of the temple. The next verse states that the prasasti was composed by one Bhanu, son of Chhitta, a Karanika by caste, and a Vaishnava by religion. The prasasti was engraved by the sutradhara Bhaila, son of Rajuka. This is followed by the word Samvat without, however, the actual specification of the date. But though no date is given, there can be little doubt that it is to be assigned to the tenth century.
The family, to which Baladitya belonged, is called in verse 6, as we have seen, Guhilasya vamsa; in other words he was a Guhilot. So far we have only known one Gubilot dynasty, vis, that reigning sometimes at Nagahrada (Nagdā), sometimes at Aghaṭapura (Ahad), and sometimes at Chitrakuṭa (Chitor). This is the celebrated dynasty to which the Rānas of Mewar claim to belong. But it now appears that there was another Guhilot family ruling over a territory extending from Chats in Jaipur to Dabok in Udaipur. The capital of this dynasty is not known. Probably it was Dhavagarta, i.e. Dhod in the Jahajpur district, Mewar. Reminiscences of this family are still existent at Chatsit. The local traditions have still preserved the couplet
Rana chhode Chaṭsü jō chay sō lē
"The Rana has forsaken Chatsu Whoever wants may take it."
This shows that Chatsu had at one time been held by the Guhilots. Again, the tank where the inscription stone was found, is called Golerav talav. Goleräv obviously is a corruption of Guhilaraja, and the name shows that the tank was originally constructed by a prince of this dynasty called Guhilaraja. This may be either Guhila I. or Guhila II.
Prog. Rep. Archaeol. Sure. Ind. West. Circle for 1906, p. 61, Here the date read by me was 807 bat on referring to the impressions I find that it is almost certainly 407
Ind. Anty, Vol. XXXVIII, pp. 233 .
