________________
206
EPIGRAPHIA INDICA
[VOL. XXXIII
Ujjayini and that one of these records mentions an early Aulikara king as having his capital at Dasapura, while, on the other hand, there is absolutely no evidence to show that the Aulikarasearlier or later--had anything to do with Ujjayini.
Verse 2 of the fragmentary Mandasor inscription of Gauri reads as follows:
Jitvā ripu-balan sandkhe(khye) ramyari pura[**] das-adi. [l*]
....(na]ra-uyāgghtë narendr-Adityavarddhane || In my opinion, the damaged akshara at the end of the first half of this stanza is certainly kan while the word lost at the beginning of its second half, as I have suggested, may be restored as pälayati or prasāsati. The above restoration is supported by the style of epigraphic records including the Mandasör inscription of Bandhuvarman (verse 29) referred to above. There can be little doubt that the stanza represents Adityavardhana, probably an Aulikara, as the ruler of Dasapura ; that is to say that he had his capital at Dasapura. Prof. Mirashi, it is interesting to note, admits that the name Dasapura appears in the verse quoted above) in a fragmentary form', that Adityavardhana is said to have done something to a town whose name contained the word data (probably Dabapura)', that as the name of Adityavardhana is used in the locative case, the intended meaning seems to be that he was ruling at the time', and that the kings Adityevardhana and YasodharmanVishnuvardhana' were connected in some way or other with Dasapura (Mandasõr)'. In spite of all these admissions, however, he, strangely enough, comes to the conclusion that the said stanta gives no clear indication as regards Adityavardhana's relations with Dasapura. But, if it is admitted that the name of Dasapura occurs in the verse in the accusative along with that of Adityavardhana in the nominative absolute, I do not see how Prof. Mirashi can easily escape, without resorting to unwarranted conjectures, from the natural conclusion that the king was ruling at the city in question.
It will be seen that, while in our opinion verse 2 of the fragmentary Mandasõr inscription of Gauri apparently speaks of Daśapura as the capital of Adityavardhana, it offers no indication on the point to Prof. Mirashi. It is, therefore, natural to expect that he has stronger grounds to show that Ujjayinī, and not Dasapura, was the capital of Adityavardhana as well as of Dravyavardhana and Yasödharman Vishņuvardhana, all the three kings probably belonging to the same family. Unfortunately the two points Prof. Mirashi has raised as evidence in support of his theory do not appear to be convincing at all as both of them are based on misunderstanding.
The first point raised by Prof. Mirashi in this connection is based on the mention of Maharājādhiraja Dravyavardhana as an Avantika or Avantika-nripa, i.e. 'the king of Avanti', in the following stanza of Varahamihira's Brihatsaṁhitā, to which reference has been made :
Bhāradvāja-matan drishtvā yach=cha fri-Dravyavardhanah
Avantikah präha nsipo mahārājādhirājaka) || Prof. Mirashi takes the name Avanti occurring in the expression Avantika, to indicate the city of Ujjayini. But unfortunately he forgets that Avanti was primarily the name of a people or their country (identical with West Malwa) and only secondarily the name of the chief city of the said people or country. Of course it is well-known that, during certain periods of the history of the Avanti country, Ujjayini was its chief city. The expression Avantika thus means both the lord of the Avanti people or country' and 'the lord of the city of Avanti (identified with Ujjayini)'. One has to note that the Paramāra kings like Bhõja are called 'king of Avanti's even though they had their capital at Dhārā and not at Ujjayini. It will, therefore, be seen that the epitbet Avantika applied to Dravyavardhana does not prove that his capital was at Ujjayini and not at Dasapura.
1 I do not find any justification for Prof. Mirashi's remark, "The metre appears defective."
See Pargiter, Markandeya Purāna, trans., p. 344, note; Apte, Sans.-Eng. Dict., App. III, s.v. Avanti. ot. Avanti-bhupala in Monier-Williams' Sans.-Eng. Dich., B.v. Avanti.
