Epigraphia Indica Vol 25

Author(s): Sten Konow, F W Thomas
Publisher: Archaeological Survey of India

Page 15

EPIGRAPHIA INDICA.
[Vol. XXV.
Vijayasinha in V. S. 1253 (A.D. 1195), the date of the record, and the second, the Rewah inscription of Malayasimha' dated K. 944 (A.D. 1192-93). Verse 24 of the latter record seems to show that already before K. 944, Salakshana had tried to throw off the yoke of subordination of these rulers, probably by joining hands with the Chandēllas, an attempt in which he was not appa. rently successful. I have noticed elsewhere a damaged inscription of the reign of Vijayasimha, the date on which seems to read (Chēdi year) 962. Unfortunately the provenance of this record, which was issued from Tripuri, is not known. But as it is now deposited in the Rewah Treasury, it is likely that it did not come from a place far from the Rewah town. If that is so, it is clear that the Kalachuris were still holding sway in this part of Bāghelkhand in K. 962. The record under consideration, however, shows that in K. 963, i.e., only & year later, their territory contiguous to the Rewah town had passed under the Chandēllas.
In the inscription of Vijayasimha of K. 962 referred to above, we find the name of one Mandalika Malayasimha mentioned among the officers of this ruler. The Rewah inscription of K. 944 also mentions a Samanta Malayasimha who was responsible for the excavation of a tank and also for the setting up of the record in the reign of the very same Kalachuri ruler. Now there is nothing against our taking Malayasimha mentioned in these two records as identical. It is quite likely that Malayasimha, whose ancestors were connected with the Kalacburi rulers as officers for several generations, was himself appointed an officer by Vijayasimha sometime between K. 944 and K. 962. But what is surprising is that the record under consideration also not only mentions Malayasir ha bearing the titles Mahāmahattaka and Mandalika but in addition calls him a mantrin or minister of the ruling king, viz., Trailökyamalla. As this inscription is later than the inscription of K. 962 by one year only, there is little doubt that Malayasimha mentioned in all the three inscriptions is one and the same person. If this view is correct, then we have to admit that one of the chief officers of Vijayasimha not only transferred his allegiance to the conquering ruler but was also appointed a minister under him. It is reasonable to assume that he had to accept the Chandēlla suzerainty to save himself and his estate. We have a parallel instance in the history of the chiefs of Karkarēời. We know from his Rewah plate that in V. S. 1253 Salakshanavarman was still a feudatory of the Kalachuri Vijayasimha. But in the Rewah plates of Harirāja (V. S. 1298) and his son Kumāra pāla (V. S. 1297) we find these chiefs owing allegiance to the Chandēlla ruler Trailökyavarman. But what is puzzling in the present record is the appointment of Malayasimha as a minister by the Chandēlla ruler. It may be that he helped the latter in his cause in some way or other or it may be that on account of his experience in local administration his services were utilized in the newly conquered territory on his accepting the Chandēlla supremacy.
In conclusion it would not be out of place to say a few words about the Saiva teachers mentioned in the record. As I have already pointed out. Vimalasiva mentioned in the record is no other than the Räjaguru Vimalasiva of the Jubbulpore Kotwali Plates of Jayasimhadēva of K. 918. Though the name is not found elsewhere it is probable that he belonged to the line of the ascetics of the Mattamayūra clan who were held in great reverence by the Kalachuri rulers of Tripuri. We know from the present record that Vimalasiva had two sons, the elder being Santasiva and the younger Nādasiva. The epithets applied to the latter two teachers show that they, like their father, were also held in high estimation. Säntabiva is said to be the incarnation of the
1 Ind. Ant., Vol. XVII, pp. 228 ff. • See An. Rep. A. 8. 1., 1935-36, pp. 84-90. . Above, Vol. XXI, pp. 93 f.
* Above, Vol. XIX, pp. 296 ft. • An. Rep. A. 8. I., 1935-36, p. 9).