________________
242
EPIGRAPHIA INDICA.
[VOL. XVIII.
again, was the family deity of at least one branch of the Silāhūra race. It is possible that Amõghavarsha made a gift of his finger as bali to Mahalakshmi of Kolhāpur to avert some calamity which threatened his kingdom. Verse 48 compares him to a Gupta king in point of generosity and decides in favour of the former. The Gupta prince was no doubt traditionally handed down as a donor, but he had stigmatized his career by killing his own brother, seizing the latter's kingdom and queen, and wresting heavy sums from her. Amoghavarsha, on the other hand, panted neither for kingdom nor for self, and freely gave them away several times. The latter point reminds us of the Prasnoltararatnamalika, the Digambara Jaina copies of which inform us that the work was composed by Amõghavarsha “after he had abdicated the throne in consequence of the growth of the ascetic spirit in him."! And it is quite possible that the figure of a royal ascetic found in & natural caverna at Bādāmi may represent this Amõghavarsha. But this was nothing more than a surmise, as the other copies of the work omitted all mention of the Rashtrakūta sovereign. But our plates now clearly show that Amõghavarsha abdicated his throne, not once but more than once, before Saka 793 (=A.D. 871), the date of the charter, when, however, he was carrying on his kingly duties. This shows that a king could In ancient times temporarily resign his sovereignty and enjoy the life of a hermit or ascetic. But who was the Gupta prince who was noted for his liberality up till the 9th century and who sinks into insignificance by comparison with Amõghavarsha ? The Gathā-saptašati of Hāla who is ascribed to the beginning of the sixth century and the Vāsaiadattā of Subandhu who has been placed in the same century but at its close, for the first time speak of a king called Vikramaditya renowned for his generosity. And it has been suspected that this Vikramāditya is either Chandra. gupta II or Skandagupta, both of the Imperial Gupta dynasty. Of the former, there is no record to lead us even to surmise that he ousted his brother and usurped the throne. In the case of Skandagupta, however, the Bhitari Pillar Inscription says that when his father (Kumāragupta I) died, the sovereignty of the family was tottering but that he put down his enemies and thereafter went to see his mother just as Krishna did Dēvaki. The reference to Krishna and Dēvaki indicates that this was a family feud and that his enemies in the present case were his kinsmen.& We also further know that Skandagupta had a brother named Ghatotkachagupta who was in charge of the Eran district when Kumāragupta I was alive. A seal of Ghatotkachagupta was also found in Basärh (ancient Vaisāli), which was the seat of the Yuvarāja during the Gupta rule. It appears probable that there was a fratricidal war between Ghatotkachagupta and Skandagupta in which the former was killed and the throne seized by the latter. It may not, therefore, be unreasonable to hold that Skandagupta-Vikramaditya was the Gupta king alluded to in our charter for comparison to Amõghavarsha,
The village granted, as we have seen, is Tharivallika which is said to be situated in the Twenty-four-village Gệoup of Samjána. The boundaries of the village are specified as follows:-To the east is the river Kalluvi, which falls into the sea ; to the south, the village of Uppalahatthaka; to the west, Nandagrāma; and to the north, the village of Dhannavallika. All these localities can be identified and are to be found in the northern part of the Thänā District of the Bombay Presidency. Samjāna is, of course, Sañjān, the original refuge
*R. G. Bhandarkar's Early His. Dek. (Bomb. Gast., Vol. I, Pt. II, p. 201). Prog. Rep. Arch. Surv., Ind., West Circle, for 1909-10, p. 42.
This Ascription is problematical for the age of Häls or of the Saptafati is still an open question. See, Sir George Grierson's note on Prakrit in the Encyclopædia Britannica (XI ed.), Vol. XXII, p. 253, Dr. Sten Konow's Essay on Rajasekhara in his edition of the Karpuramanjari, p. 193, Mr. A. C. Woolner's Introduction to Prakrit, p. 73, and Keith's Sanskrit Drama, p. 74. So the proposed identification of the Vikramaditya of this anthology would require further demonstration.Ed.]
Bhandarkar Com. Vol., p. 189. [His Bhitari Inscription would show that they were rather the Savage Hans.--Ed.]
• Ind. Ant., 1920, pp. 114-5. [In this connection we should not lose sight of the fact pointed out by Mr. Carde (loc. cit.) that the word expressing relationship of Ghatotkachagupta with Kamaragupta I is now not forthcoming in the document referred to.-Ed.]
