________________
94
EPIGAPIA INDICA,
[VOL. XVIIT.
but his son Vatsarāja purened his policy with signal success and wrested the empire from the family of Harichandra.
All these successive changes in the fortone of the dynasty are reflected in our inscription. According to our scheme of chronology Chanduka was on the throne when the Arab invasion took place. It becomes therefore a significant fact that whereas he is passed over with mere conventional praises, tribute is paid to the prowess and heroism of his successor Siluka. Then, again, the two successors of Siluka are said to bave taken to religious life and not a single act of martial glory is attributed to any of them. This was apparently the time when their rivals gradually established themselves in the position of recognised suzerainty over the entire confederate clans which was so long enjoyed by them. The subsequent kings of the line of Hari. chandra retained possession of their own kingdom, although they lost their supreme position, and gradually seem to have reconciled themselves to their new situation. Kakka, the great grandson of Siluka appears to have accompanied the new suzerain power in its wars of conquest. For we are told in verse 24 that he fought with the Gaudas at Mudgagiri or Monghyr. Apparently he fought as a feudatory of Nāgabhata II one of whose known dates is 815 A.D., and who is said in the Gwalior inscription of Bhoja (below) to have defeated the king of Vanga.
There was, however, a temporary revival of the Pratihara power in the middle of the pinth century A.D. The Daulatpnrå copper plate of Bhoja, dated in the year 843 A.D., records the grant of a piece of land situated in Gurjaratră, but the Ghatiyaļā inscription of Kakkuka refers to the province as being held by that king. As this inscription is dated in 861 A.D. Bhoja must have lost this province between these dates. In fact a close study of the Daulatpurā plate seems to indicate that the province was held by Vatsaraja and Nagabhata but lost by Ramabhadra and regained by Bhoja before 843 A.D. For it speaks of the original grant by the first, its continuation by the second and renewal by the fourth king, leading to the evident conclusion that there was a break in the possession of the territory during the reign of the third. This view entirely agrees with what we know of the rival Pratīhāra dynasty; for Nagabhata II was crushed by the Rashtrakāta king Govinda III and Råmabhadra's reign was an inglorious one. The difficulty of the rivals must have presented the requisite opportunity to the Jodhpur Pratihāras to regain the power that they had lost. Thus whereas the two successors of Siluka are described as practising austerities--an unmistakable indication of their political and military inanity-Kakka, the third king after Siluka is described as a great fighter and his queen consort is called a mahārājñi. Their son Bauka was also a great hero and his military exploits are described at great length in our inscription. According to the Ghatiyāļå inscriptions Kakkuka also ruled over a vast dominion. Nothing is at present known about his successors but it is likely that with the revival of the Imperial Pratshiras under Bhoja during the latter part of Bhoja's reign, their territory was finally annexed by the latter.
A few words may be said regarding the geographical names contained in the inscription. Mandavya-pura and Mēdantaka-pura (1. 7) most probably denote the cities of Mandor and Merta. Line Il contains the names of Stravaņi and Valla-dēša, two provinces, close to each other. As Šiluka is said in the same line to have been Vallamandala-palaka', Valla must denote the region over which these Pratihāra chiefs ruled. As Siluka is also said in verse 18 to have fixed the boundary between Stravaņi and Valla, the former would appear to have denoted a neighbouring kingdom. Stravaņi is probably the same as Tamani of the Ghatiyala inscription of Pratihara Báuka as the latter occurs along with Valla in a list of contiguous countries. The locality of this Stravani or Tamani has not been established so far. It seems to me, however, that it is to be identified with the kingdom of Taban referred to by the Arab geographers of the ninth century A.D. A comparison of the various refereucne to this kingdom
