________________
90
EPIGRAPHIA INDICA.
[VOL. XVIIT
"bion says that the song that were born of Harichandrs and Bhadra were known as Pratibāras and were wine-drinkers. This might imply a common origin of all the Protihars roling clans, and it is not impossible that the Imperial Pratharas of Kananj also branched off from this family. The two following grounds may be urged in support of this view, althongh the question oumot be fmally settled till fresh evidence is available
(1) The common mythical tradition about the origin of the name Pratihära, both tracing it to Lakshmana, the brother and door-keeper of Rama.
(2) The community of names in the two families, such as those of Kakkuks, Nigabhata and Bhoja.
It is not easy to determine the status of the chiefs mentioned in the inscription. Their names are not preceded by titles like maharajadhiraja, parana-bhaffaraka, eto., which often accompany the names of independent and paramount sovereigns in insoriptions. But no conclusions can be based on the absence of these titles in the present instance, for we know that in some inscriptions the Imperial Pratthāras are mentioned without any of those pompons titles, which are, however, preserved in other inscriptions. Professor Bhandarkar has dealt with this point in detail and his arguments have been fully endorsed by V. A. Smith; and I believe it is impossible to avoid the conclusion, that so far at least as this period is concerned, titular formulas, in reality, are of extremely slight significance.
Our inscription applies the term .rajhi' to Bhadra, the queen of Harichandra, the first chief, and to Jajjikadevi, the queen of Nāgabhats, and the term Maharajai to Padmini the queen of Kakka. It refers to the "rajadhāni" of Nagabhata and the "räjya" of Tata, Jhota ana Bhilliditya. The sons of Harichandra are called Bhū-dharapa-kahamah'; Kakka is styled Bhupati' and Bauka is called Nrisimha. These are the only references, direot or indirect, to the royal power exercised by these chiefs. In this respect it bears a close rosemblance to the Gwalior inscription of Bhoja I published below. The latter adds no royal epithet to Nāgabhata, the first chief; calls the second and fourth kings respectively as ** Kshemabhpidita' and Kuhmdpala' while Nāgabhaţa and Bhoja I, two of the greatest kings of the dynasty are introduced without any royal epithet. Whatever might be the reasons, the close parallel between these two contemporary epigraphic recorde would preclude any conclusion regarding the subordinate rank of the chiefs of our inscription, on the basis of the absence of high sounding royal epithete.*
As we have seen before, the first chief Harichandrs must be placed at the beginning of the latter half of the 6th century A. D. This is in full accordance with the fact that the earliest reference to the Gurjaras, to which race the Pratibáras belonged, is carried back to the same period by the reference, in the Hartha-Charita, to the wars of Prabhakaravardhana against them. The province of Gurjaratri, which was named after them and mast, therefore, be looked upon as the province where they gained a firm footing and established themselves, ww under the sway of this dynasty. This is quite evident not only from the find-spots
1 ff. vent with varno.B of the Gwalior inscription of Bhöja publiebed below. (also droh. Duro. of India, 1908-04, p. 280 1.)
. J. B. Br. R. 4. 8. Vol. IXI, pp. 409-10. . J. R. 4. 8. 1909, PP. 248-249. ..C..Dr. Haornle's remarks in J.R. 4. 8. 1905, pp. 27 ff.
The above discussion shows the Insecurry of his statement that the Prasastis of the Jodhpur "Prathams give them ao berritorial title whabeoevee, not even hje". Bis other contention that the term Maharaja applied to Padan ini denote her father's rank rather than that of her husband does not commend itself to me.
.J. Bo. Bt. R. 4.... Vol. XXI, p. 41 . Ibid, pp. 414-16.
