________________
No. 18)
MUDGAPADRA GRANT OF YUVARAJA SRYASRAYA SILADITYA
119
of the inscription under study suggests that, while Mangalaraja was appointed vioeroy in 669-70 A.D., his brother Sryābraya Srliditya and probably also Jayasinha, father of Sryasraya Staditya and Mangalaraja, began to rule as' viceroys from an earlier date. It seems also to suggest that the father and his two sons were viceroye over different parts of Gujarat and that the sons were not ruling on behalf of their father. The real significance of the title Yuvarāja enjoyed by Sryāśraya Silāditya cannot be determined. It may have been conferred on him by his overlord.
The Nausāri platest of Avanījanāśraya Pulakēsirāja dated in the Kalachuri year 490=738-39 A.D. (actually Kärttika-sudi 15 of 738 A.D.) assign the imperial title Paramabhattaraka not only to Pulakēbirāja but also to his brother and predecessor Mangalarāja and their father Jayasimha even though Pulakësin is stated to have received certain titles from king Srivallabha, i.e. his overlord. the Chalukya emperor of Bādāmi. This suggests that the Gujarat Chālukyas were semi-independent before the Chalukya house of Bādāmi was overthrown by the Rashtrakūtas. Even the Manor plates of 691-92 A.D., which refer to the twentyfirst year of Mangalarāja's rule as indicated above, apply the title Prithvivallabha to Mangalarāja. The Nausäri plates of Pulakēsirāja may be regarded as representing him as the successor of Mangalarāja and the latter as the successor of Jayasimha and this has been taken to indicate that Sīlāditya, not mentioned in the record, predeceased his father. It may be supposed that on Silāditya's death his chiefdom passed on to his father Jayasimha and that Jayasimha's chiefdom passed on his death to Mangalaraja who was succeeded by Pulakēsiraja. But, since there were other vice-regal rulers in the region in qustion, it is difficult to be sure on these points. The Nausāri plates, however, merely give the relation between Jayasimha and Mangalaraja and between Mangalarāja and Pulakësiraja and do not really specify the regular order of succession. But since the relation between Mangalarāja and Pulakëdirāja was not the regular one of father and son, its mention may suggest that Pulakësirāja considered bimself the successor of his brother. The statement of the relationship between Jayasimha and Mangalarāja may, however, be only casual without any such bearing.
The inscription under study begins with the Siddham symbol and the auspicious word svasti. These are followed in lines 1-2 by the well-known stanza Jayaty=āvishkritam, etc., in adoration of the boar incarnation of Vishņu, which is found at the beginning of most of the records of the Chālukya house of Bādāmi. The word svasti occurs again after the said stanza indicating the beginning of the document proper. Then king Pulakēbi-vallabha(Pulakēkin II) of the Chalikya (Chalukya) family (of Bādāmij is introduced (lines 2-5). As in the other records of the family, the Chalukyas are described as meditating on (or, favoured by) the feet of the god Svāmi-Mahásēna (i.e., Skanda-Kärttikėya), as installed to power by the [Divine) Mothers, as belonging to the Mänavya götra and as having been Häriti-putras. King Pulakēbin II is also described as one whose body was purified by the avabhritha bath taken in connection with such sacrifices as the Bahusuvarnaka, Afvamëdha, Paundarika and Vāja pēya. This can be regarded as a genuine claim only if it may be believed that he took part in these sacrifices which were actually performed by his grandfather Pulakësin I. But the known facts of Chalukya history show that Pulakökin II was too young at the time of his father's death about 597 A.D. while the Afvamēdha and some of the other sacrifices had been celebrated by his grandfather before 543 A.D. Thus the claim in our inscription could scarcely have been genuine.
Pulakēsin's son Vikramaditya Satyasraya Prithivivallabha is next introduced in lines 5-7 of our record as devoted to his parents and to the illustrious Nägavarman. This Nägavarman
1 CII, Vol. IV, pp. 137 ff. * Cf. CII, Vol. IV, pp.li.lxvi. • The Classical Age, pp. 231 ff.
