________________
No. 38) MUDASA PLATE OF THE TIME OF PARAMARA BHOJA, V. S. 1067
193
The date of the charter is quoted in lines 1-2, both in words and in figures, as Sunday, the first of the bright half of the month of Jyāshtha in the year 1067 (of the V. S. which was Kärttikādi). This date corresponds regularly to the 6th May, 1011 A.D.
The inscription begins with a Siddham symbol followed by the date discussed above. Then it introduces (lines 2-6) the räjya of the illustrious Paramabhattāraka. Mahäräjäthirāja Paramesvara Bhöjadēva who meditated on the feet of (or, was favoured by) P. M. P. Sindhurajadēva. King Sindhurāja is similarly stated to have succeeded P. M. P. Vākpatirājadēva who is likewise described as the successor of P. M. P. Siyakadēva. It is difficult to say whether the expression Bhojadàva-rājyë used in the text means ' during the sovereignty of Bhöjadēva' or 'in the kingdom of Bhõjadēva ', since both interpretations would suit the context. But the word rājya is generally used in the sense of sovereignty ' in such contexts in epigraphic records. Lines 6-7 introduce a subordinate ruler named Vatsarāja who was apparently ruling over Mohadavāsaka or the Arddhāshtama mandala in it and is described as bhõlkūramahārājaputra. In the signature of the ruler copied in line 20, his name is written as Vachchharāja. There is no doubt that Māhadavāsaka mentioned in our inscription is identical with the Möhadavāsaka vishaya known from the Harsölä platest of Paramāra Siyaka, dated V. S. 1005.
The expression bhötkāramahärājaputra may be a mistake for bhoktri-mahārajaputra. In that case, Vatsarāja is called Mahārājaputra probably because he was an as yet unknown son of the Paramāra king Bhöja, although the possibility of Vatsaraja having been the son of some other ruling chief is not precluded. The word bhoktri would suggest that Mohadavāsaka or a part of it lay within the fief under Vatsarāja's possession. This interpretation is quite probable in view of the passage Kethanadēva-rājyē varttamānah(nē) sri-Kirttipāladeva-puttrai[/*] Sinā nava-bhāktā(ktri)-rājaputra-Lasha(kshma)napālha(la)-rājaputtra-Attr-A)bhayapāla(laih) occurring in a record of the Chahamānas of Nadūla. Otherwise the passage bhötkāramahārājaputra would have to be taken to mean that Paramāra Bhõja's feudatory Vatsarāja ruling over the whole or a part of the Möhadavāsaka district was the son of a chief named Bhötkāra-mahārāja. But this is less likely.
Lines 7 ff. record the grant of two hala measures of land in Sayanapata-grāma made by Vatsarāja probably in favour of a Brāhmana named Derdda who is described as Vallstakiva and Chāturjätakiya. Sayanapata-gräma was situated in Arddhashtamamandala lying within the Mohadavāsaka district, mentioned above. Lines 11-12 give the Brāhmara's name as Deddāka who seems to be further described as belonging to a family pertaining to the Upārasya götra and hailing from Harshapura and as the son of Göpāditya. The Upānasya götra is not found in early Indian literature and it is difficult to determine whether it is a mistake for Aupamanyava. The expression Vallotakiya in the Brāhmaṇa's description suggests that he was either the inhabitant of a locality called Vallotaka or belonged to a com munity of Brāhmanas known as Vallōtaka. The same word also occurs in line 13 as an epithet of certain other Brāhmaṇas. The epithet Châturjātakiya (lines 7 and 12) applied to the donee apparently means a member of the Chaturjātaka of the Cintra prasasti,' which was no doubt an administrative board of four like the Chauthia of Rajasthan (cf. Panchakula or Panchayat which was a similar board of five administrators).
The language of the grant portion of the record discussed above is defective and may also indicate that it was the Brāhmaņa Dērda or Dēddaka who was the donor of the grant and that Vatsaraja merely ratified the transaction. If such was the case, the donee was the son of Göpäditya ; but his personal name is not mentioned.
1 Above, Vol. XIX, pp. 236 ff. and Plates.
* Abovo, Vol. XI, p. 49, text lines 3-5; cf. ibid., p.5, text lines 2-3, where the same princes are described as Saninamaka-thokta.
. Cf. abovo, Vol. I, pp. 721 ff.; A. K. Majumdar, Chaulukyas of Gujarat, pp. 250-81.
