________________
No. 16.]
AN INSCRIPTION OF JAITUGI, SAKA 1188.
129
However, if the above be accepted, then we will have an hitherto unknown Silāhāra king continuing the dynasty after Sömēsvaradēva and in a sense contradicting the account of Hēmādri cited above.
The argument in favour of identifying Jaitugi with one of the kings of the same name of the Yädava dynasty would be, besides the tenor of the inscription, that the name exactly tallies with that of the Yādava ruler.
But no king of this name lived in the period to which the inscription refers itself. Secondly no Yadava ruler is known to have used the title Konkanachakravarti, though to judge from the victories of Jaitugi I, Simhana and Ramachandradēva, Könkaņ must have formed a part of the Yādava empire.?
Whatever be the dynasty to which Jaitugi of the inscription belonged, the inscription is written after the style of the inscriptions of this period, and must have been issued from a place somewhere in Konkaņ. The fact, moreover, that it was issued to record a gift to an astrologer affords further evidence of the patronage of such people in Konkaņ at that time.
Text. 1 af (TI)(HC P855 we'fia2 Araaf pul gü ve - - - q[#]3 स्तराजावलौसमलंकृत महाराजाधिरा4 ज रायपितामह' कोंकणचक्रवर्ति यो5 जैतुगिदेवरायकल्याणविजयराज्ये 6 महामात्य श्रीउदैप्रभु महासा[धि*]षिग्रही 7 माइनायक श्रीकरणी चन्दप्रभु जस8 ferate ame[t] vient fast[a*] 9 - helaif afurat 1 - - - - - -10
Unless the reading of the date is doubted. For if the date is read as Saka 1129, Māgha Vadi 9 (Ag done previously by us and which corresponds regularly to 24th January A. D. 1207) then the inscription would fall in the reign of Jaitugi I, who is known from his three inscriptions (see Bomb. Gaz., op. cit., pp. 370-373 and references cited there) to have made extensive conquests. Subhana's son Jaitugi II is out of question for he is believed to have predeceased Simhana.
? The other king of this name is found among the Paramāras of Malwa, but his dates are V. S. 1292 and 1300 (Bhandarkar's List of Inscriptions of Northern India, above, Vol. XXIII, Appendix, p. 397 and f. a. 14) thus falling outside the two probable readings of the date of the record.
• Patna Inscription of Simhana, above Vol. I, p. 343, verse 18. • This letter is defaced, cf. note 3, p. 128 above. 5 Doubtful. • This title is very common. For references see Ind. Ant., Vol. XII, pp. 150 and 230. - Reading doubtful. [The reading appears to be Dadu-N.L. R.] * Illegible.
May be pa. 10 Letturs illegible.
