________________
144
EPIGRAPHIA INDICA.
He further remarked, From the broken state of the inscription it is not clear whether Pravarasēna was a son of Vindhyasakti, or, as is probable, of a member of the Vindhyasakti family. Of his son only -sena is legible, preceded by a faintly traceable form like dra, so that the name may have been Bhadrasena, Chandrasena, Indrasena, Rudrasena, etc.' Bhagwanlal seems to have adopted the reading Rudrasena, because this name occurs soon after that of Pravarasēna Is in the Siwani and Chammak plates of the Vākāṭaka Pravarasēna II, which had been discovered before. This list was next revised by Bühler in the introductory note to his transcript of the record in A. S. W. I., Vol. IV, p. 128. Bühler thought that he could read, in the middle of line 7, the aksharas pra (or, pri)thivi which showed a name like Prithivishēņa. As Rudrasena was mentioned in the immediately preceding line he identified this prince with Prithivishēņa, the son of Rudrasena I, mentioned in the Vākāṭaka land-grants. Again, he proposed to read further on in the same line, Pravarase[nas-ta]sya putro-bhut....in place of Bhagwanlal's Pravarasenasya putro-bhut, and this Pravarasena he identified with Pravarasēna II. According to him therefore the Vākāṭaka princes mentioned in the Ajanta inscription were as follows:
Vindhyasakti,
I
(son?)
Pravarasēna I,
(son) (Ru)drasina I,
(son) Prithivabiga,
I
(son) Pravarasēna II,
(son)
(son)
[VOL. XXVI.
Devasena,
(son) Harishēna.
He also pointed out that the name of one prince, Rudrasena II was omitted after Prithivishēņa.
1 Burgess and Indraji-Inscriptions in the Cave-Temples of Western India, A. S. W. I., p. 69.
Scholars are now agreed that this Pravarasena was the son of Vindhyasakti himself; for, he is evidently identical with Pravira mentioned in the Vayu and Brahmanda Puranas as the son of Vindhyasakti. See Pargiter, Dynasties of the Kali Age, p. 50.
He was Pravarasena's grandson.
