________________
222
EPIGRAPHIA INDICA
[VOL. XXIX
mahādēvi in her Baud plates not only assumes both the names as well as the epithet Paramavaishnavi enjoyed by the earlier queen Tribhuvanamahādēvi alias Sindagauri but refers to the latter not as Tribhuvanamahādēvi (as in the Talcher plates of her husband and the latter's younger brother) but as Gosvamini. The foot of the stanza applying the name Sindagauri to the issuer of the Dhenkanal plate has been actually appropriated by Prithvimahädēvi in the similar verge quoted in her Baud plates. This attempt on the part of Prithvimahädēvi to pass herself as the shadow of and at the same time to distinguish herself clearly from the earlier ruling queen Tribhuvanamahādēvi, whom she represents as Gõsvāmini, is not entirely unintelligible. This may have been partly due to her eagerness for strengthening her position against the lawful claim of the sons of her husband's younger brother to the Bhauma-Kara throne. Apparently, she claimed her position on the Bhauma-Kara throne to be exactly similar to that of her earlier namesake although she felt the necessity of avoiding any confusion between the two Tribhuvanamahādēvis, It is interesting to note that Pțithvimahādēvi is silent in regard to Gõsvämini's relation with her predecessor. The facts that Tribhuvanamahādēvi of the Dhenkanal plate was induced by her feudatories to assume the burden of government by citing the instance of Gõsvāmini and that Prithvimahādēvi alias Tribhuvanamahādēvi of the Baud plates applies the name Gösvāmini to her earlier namesake (apparently to make a distinction between the two Tribhuvanamahādevis to avoid confusion) appear to suggest that the issuer of the Dhenkanal plate was called Gösvāmini II after an ancient or legendary femalo ruler of Orissa probably having nothing to do with the Bhauma-Karas. It may be pointed out that the assumption of the name Sindagauri, pointing to an association with the Sinda Nāgas, by Prithvimahādēvi alias Tribhuvanamahādēvi, who is known to have been born in a royal family other than that of the Sindas, seems to be explainable only by the suggestion that she adopted it rather arbitrarily just to pass herself as the shadow of an earlier ruling queen of the Bhauma-Kara dynasty. It seems therefore that the issuer of the Dhenkanal plate was the real and original Sinda-Gauri and that she flourished before the imitation Sinda-Gauri who issued the Baud plates.
Fourthly, Mr. De thinks that the real names of the mother of Subhākara III and the wife of Subhākara IV were respectively Gosvamini and Prithvimahadevi and that they both assumed the name Tribhuvanamahädēvi, although he cannot say what the original name of Tribhuvanamahadēvi of the Dhenkanal plate, whom he regards as the third ruling queen of that assumed name, was. We find at least two diffioulties in accepting this suggestion. The first is that, if the mother of Subhākara III assumed the name Tribhuvanamahādēvi when she ascended the throne after her son's death, she could not have possibly been mentioned by that name, as she really is, in the records of her son who preceded herself on the throne. In the second place, if Tribhuvanamahādēvi of the Dhenkanal plate was the third Bhauma-Kara ruling queen of that name, it is rather strange that she, unlike Pțithvimahādēvi, did not feel the necessity of distinguishing herself to avoid a confusion between herself and any of her two past namasakes. This no doubt looks especially dubious when she is supposed to have been immediately preceded by another ruling queen of the same name, because the possibility of confusion in such a case was greater. If her real name was Tribhuvanamahādēvi, it must be regarded as a strange coincidence that she succeeded another Tribhuvanamahādēvi. But if her real name was different, she would have hardly chosen Tribhuvanamahädövi as her coronation name, because that would lead to a confusion between herself and her predecessor on the throne. That the female rulers of the Bhauma-Kara family had no special liking for the name Tribhuvanamahādēvi is shown by the fact that none of the four later ruling queens of the dynasty (viz., Gaurimahādēvi, Dandimahädēvi, Vakulamahadevi and Dharmamahädēvi) assumed that name. If the issuer of the Dhenkanal plate flourished immediately after Prithvimahādēvi, she could have hardly called herself only by the name assumed by her predecessor without any attempt to distinguish herself.
