________________
334
EPIGRAPHIA INDICA
(VOL. XXXII Besides the few facts about Bhairavasimha mentioned in the above sketch, some more are also known. It seems that he was originally ruling the kingdom (or part of it) jointly with his elder brother Dhirasimba with the secondary namo Rūpanārāyana and that on his brother's death he succeeded to the throne with the name Harinārāyana, his son Rāmabhadra then assuming the name Rūpanārāyana. The reason why Raghavasimha, son of Dhirasimha, was deprived of his father's throne is unknown.
Many of the Oinvär kings patronised men of letters. Bhairavasimha was also a great patron of learning and under his patronage Ruchipati wrote his Anargharāghavasika, Váchaspati-misra his Vyavahürachintamaại, Krityamaltārņava and Mahādānanirnaya, and Vardhamān-opadhyaya his Dandavivčka. Váchaspati was his parishad or pārishada (i.e. councillor) and Vardhamana his dharmadhikarcnika or judge. Vāchaspati's Dvaitanirnaya was written at the request of Bhairavasimha's queen Jayā or Jayātmā, mother of Räjädhiraja Purushottama who seems to have ruled a part of the kingdom under his father. Misaru-misra 'wrote his Vivādachandra and Padārthachandra at the instance of the wife of Chandrasimha who was a brother (probably step-brother) of Bhairavasinha. According to the Mahädänanirnaya, Bhairavasimha excavated many tanks, gave away some towns and townships and performed a Túlāpurushadāna.
Vidyāpati's Durgäbhaktitarargini mentions Bhairavasimha as saury-āvarjita-pafcha-Gaudadharaninātha and Vardhamana's Dandavivēka describes him as Garud-ēsvara-prati sariramatipratāpah Kedararāyam-avagachchhati dāra-tulyam.. The vague claim of victory over the rulers of the Five Gaudas, which is conventional and seems to point to the independent status claimed by Bhairavasizinha, reminds us of the fact that the only other Oinvār ruler with similar claims is Sivasimha who is called Pancha-Gaud-esvara, i.e. lord of the Five Gaudas, in Vidyāpati's songs and is described in the same poet's Saivasarvasvasära as saury-āvarjitaGauda-mahipala (i.e. one who conquered the king or kings of Gauda by his prowess) and in his Purushaparikshä as one having earned fame in battles with the kings of Gauda and Gajjana. These facts appear to show that amongst the Oinvārs at least Sivasitha and Bhairavasimha aspired for independent status. Besides the Muslim rulors of Delhi, those of Jaunpur and Bengal were also each eager to spread his influence in Tirhut and the Oinvārs, who owed allegiance to Delhi, had sometimes to submit to these powers as well. But on occasions a few of them got an opportunity to assume independence temporarily as a result of quarrels amongst the said Muslim powers or of their weakness or preoccupations. It is interesting in this connection to note that, as feudatories of the Muslims, the Oinvārs were not expected to issue coins in their own names. That Bhairavasimha ruled for sometime as an independent
1 For references, 860 JASB, op. cit., pp. 426-28.
* Ibid., p. 426, noto 2; p. 427, note 4. Kēdārarāya, whom Bhairavasitha treated as his own wife (i.e. as bubordinato), may have been a general of the Muslim king of Bengal. The ruler of Tirhut probably defeated and humiliated him. The claim may be compared with the title Ripu-raja-gopi-govinda assumed by a medieval ruler of Sylhet (Hiat. Beng., Dacca University, Vol. I, p. 256).
• JBBRS, VOL. XL, p. 121, note 4 ; Thakur, op. cit., pp. 310-11. By Gajjana rulers, the successors of the representatives of the early Ghazna rulors at Delhi appear to be meant.
We have seen how Kamisvara and Bhögisvara obteined rulership from Firüz Shah Tughluq of Delhi and Kirtisimha from Ibrahim Shah (1402-36 A. D.) of Jaunpur. Khwaja Jahan (1394-99 A. D.) of Jaunpur succeeded in extending his influence in Tirhut (Camb. Hist. Ind., Vol. III, p. 251) and Husain Shah (1458-79 A, D.) crushed the semi-independent landholders of that country before 1466 A. D. (ibid., p. 256). For & short time Iliya Shih (1343-67 A, D.) of Bengal occupied Tirhut (ibid., p. 176). Some of the songs attributed to Vidy&pati speak of Muslim rulers like Gyäsadina Suratāna, Näsira Säha, Pancha-Gaudestara Raya Nasaruta Säha and Alama Säha (JBRS, Vol. XL, p.p. 107-10). Thero is considerable difference of opinion about the identification of those rulers.
