________________
128
EPIGRAPHIA INDICA.
[VOL. XIX.
The genealogy given in the record is identical with the one usually found in the grants' of Sarvanitha, and the text is also similar.
This inscription is also a charter of Mahārāja Sarvanatha which was issued from Uchchakalpa. Its object is to record that Mahārāja Sarvanatha granted the village of Vaisyavāṭaka, as an agrahara on certain conditions herein laid down, for the maintenance of the temple of Kartikeya, to two individuals named Visakhadatta and Sakti. The date is given in words and reads as the year one hundred and ninety-one, and the tenth day of the intercalary month of Ashadha (June-July). Assuming that the era used is of the Gupta reckoning, the year of the issue of the grant would correspond to 510-511 A.D. The document was written by Mahäsändhivigrahika Manoratha, the son of the Bhogika Varahadinna (Skt. Varahadatta) and the grandson of the Bhogika, the Amalya Phalgudatta, the Dukata being the Mahabaladhikrita, the Kshatriya Sivagupta. These persons are identical with those mentioned in the Khoh copper-plate inscription of Sarvanatha."
The Mahārājas of Uchchakalpa ruled over the territories lying to the east and south-east of Bundelkhand (i.e., in Baghelkhand) at the time when the Parivrajaka Mahārājas ruled over modern Bundelkhand and its vicinity. Uchchakalpa was probably the name of their capital. The inscriptions of these rulers do not help us much to know the history of their family. "These chiefs seem to have been the tributaries of the Väkäṭaka rulers of the Central Provinces and Northern Deccan.7
Till now, four copper-plate inscriptions of Mahārāja Sarvanatha have been discovered. Of these, three are dated in the years 193, 197 and 214, or A.D. 512-13, 516-17 and 533-34 respectively. No document of the successor of Sarvanatha has yet been found. The present grant is the earliest known record for this king.
Antiquarians seem to differ in regard to the era to which the dates of these inscriptions belong. Prof. Kielhorn was inclined to refer them to the Kalachuri era." R. B. Góurishankar H. Ojha is of opinion that they should be referred to the Gupta and not to the Kalachuri era, and I quite agree with him. My reason for holding this view is that the stone pillar inscription at Bhumara 10 makes it certain that Maharaja Hastin of the Parivrajaka family and Sarvanatha were contemporaries, and the date of Hastin's inscription refers to the Gupta era. 11
I am unable to identify Vaisyavaṭaka, Daṇḍapali, Gavayanagartikā and the river Kardamila mentioned in the document.
1 Corp. Ins. Ind., Vol. III, Nos. 28 and 29.
Flect's Gup. Ins., p. 126.
Ibid., p. 114.
Ind. Ant., Vol. IV, p. 103. Dr. Barnett supposes them to be the fendatorios of the Guptas, Antiquities of India, p. 47], while Dr. Fleet, of the Kalachuri kings, [Guy. Ins., p. 8 (preface)].
Fleet's Gup. Ins., Nos. 55 and 56. Barnett, Ant. of India, p. 51.
'बाकाट के राजति देवसेने गु][षिकोशी] भुवि हस्तिभोजः []
Inscriptions from the cave temples of Western India, by Dr. J. Burgess and Pt. B. Indraji, p. 89,
Ep. Ind., Vol. V, Appendix, p. 55, C. 337 and 392.
Rajputana Museum Report, 1923-24, p. 2.
10 C. I. I., Vol. III, p. 110.
11 For Dr. Floet's views on the question see Ind. Ant., Vol. XIX, p. 228. Soe Prof. G, J. Dubreuil'a remarks on the dates of inscriptions of the Uehchakalpas in the Ind. Ant., 1926, p. 103-Ed.]
2 Ibid., No. 30.
