________________
No. 40-NOTE ON MANDASOR INSCRIPTION OF GAURI D. C. SIRCAR, OOTACAMUND
(Received on 11. 7. 1958)
The fragmentary inscription of a ruler named Gauri belonging to the Manavayani family was discovered at Mandasor in Madhya Pradesh while another record of the same ruler, dated V.8. 547 (491 A.D.), was found in a temple in the vicinity of Chhoti Sadri near Neemuch about 32 miles from Mandasōr. Both the records were edited by me above, Vol. XXX, pp. 120-32, with Plates. A king named Adityavardhana is mentioned about the beginning of the Mandasōr epigraph of Gauri, apparently as ruling from Dasapura (Mandasor). The Chhoti Sadri inscription does not mention this ruler. One of the several possibilities suggested by me regarding Adityavardhana's identification was that he may have been Gauri's overlord and a later member of the Aulikara family of Dasapura.
In an interesting paper entitled "New Light on the Ancient History of Malwa ", which has appeared in the Indian Historical Quarterly, Vol. XXXIII, No. 4, December 1957, pp. 314-20, Prof. V. V. Mirashi has tried to show that king Adityavardhana mentioned in the Mandasōr inscription of his feudatory Gauri whose known date is V.S. 547 (491 A.D.) and king Dravyavardhana mentioned in the Brihatsamhita (LXXXVI, 2) of Varāḥamihira who flourished in the sixth century A.D. were later members of the Aulikara ruling family of Western Malwa just as king Yasodharman Vishnuvardhana, one of whose Mandasōr inscriptions is dated V.S. 589 (532 A.D.), and that all these three Aulikara kings had their capital not at Dasapura (modern Mandasōr) but at Ujjayini. As regards the second of the two suggestions, Prof. Mirashi observes," Dr. Sircar seems to think that Dasapura was the capital of Adityavardhana... There is no basis for this conjecture." I am afraid, Prof. Mirahsi has not been successful in proving his point.
We have two pillars of the nature of jaya-stambhas raised by Yasodharman Vishnuvardhana at Dasapura (Mandasor) and it is generally believed that he was ruling from the said city. This is quite possible since the early kings of the Aulikara family very probably had their capital at Dasapura where most of their lithic records have been found. The suggestion is supported by one of the Mandasōr inscriptions of this family, which clearly states that, in V.S. 493 (436 A.D.), Aulikara Bandhuvarman was the ruler of Dasapura while the Gupta monarch Kumaragupta was ruling over the earth'. This shows that the Aulikara king Bandhuvarman, who was a feudatory of Kumaragupta and flourished in the second quarter of the fifth century, had his capital at Dasapura. But Prof. Mirashi says, "The pillars commemorate the memorable victory which Yasodharman obtained over the Hūņa king Mihirakula. The battle appears to have been fought at Dasapura, about 75 miles north by west of Ujjayini. Hence the memorable pillars were erected at Dasapura, the site of the battle, and not at Ujjayini, the capital of Yasodharman." The theory, however, does not appear to be quite convincing in view of the facts that most of the stone inscriptions of the Aulikara kings, as indicated above, have been found at Dasapura and none at all at
1 Cf. ibid., p. xi.
CII, Vol. III, pp. 142 ff.
Cf. Raychaudhuri, PHAI, 1938, p. 504.
See Bhandarkar's List, Nos. 3, 6-7 ; above, Vol. XXVII, pp. 12 ff. For early Aulikara records found elsewhers (not far away from Mandasōr), cf. Bhandarkar's List, No. 4; above, Vol. XXVI, pp. 130 ff. The two inscriptions of Yasodharman Vishnuvardhana, a later member of the family, were both found at Mandasor (Bhandarkar's List, Nos. 9, 1870).
CII, Vol. III, pp. 79 ff. Cf. Kumaragupte prithivim prasasati in verse 23 and Bandhuvarmmary=udarē samyaksphilam Dabapuram idam palayaty-unnat-ämse in verse 29.
(205)
