Indian Antiquary Vol 40

Author(s): Richard Carnac Temple, Devadatta Ramkrishna Bhandarkar
Publisher: Swati Publications

Page 41

JANUARY, 1911.)
FOREIGN ELEMENTS IN THE HINDU POPULATION.
95
I dare sny obe noteworthy feature has attracted your attention; viz., that whilo Sarmans' (e.g., Mitra, Gupta, Datta and others) have taken the place of surnames in Bengál, amongst the Nagars the Sarmans are oaly historical heritages, not in use now for generations past, and for surnames the Nagars have separate ava tankas. This also will indicate, in a way, that Sarmans' at one time indicated more than a family. Thus the Bengal Kayasthas reduced their Sarmans' to the position of surnames (just as the Scotch clan-names are now family names, that is surnames). whereas we Nagars dropped the Sarmans' for all practical purposes, keeping them only as ornamental mementos of a social state long gone by, just like the gotra, and adopted the avatarkas for the surnames. Even the avatamkas would have disappeared from practice, in fact they were not in daily use, till the University practice requiring surnames gave occasion for their revival, though of course the surnames were not as defunct as the Sarmans.' ” With regard to the presence of Sarman in the list of the thirteen. Sarmans,' Mr. Divatia says as follows: "I think the terminal Sarman was claimed (as their peculiar Sarman') by such of the Någars as had no real clanindicating Sarman,' either because, having had one, it had long been forgotten or dropped, or because they did not descend from any definitive clan. An exact parallel of this process is at present found in the case of the surname amongst us Nâgars. There are a certain number of families who possess no real surname at all, and, therefore, they have given themselves Mehta as, their surname; and, as all Nigars know, Mehta is a term applied to Någars in a general way, thug :-Mehta Nandsaukar, Mehta Bapúbbài, and so forth. This was the practice in addressing Någars in writing, now gone out of use, except in business account books."
I have proved elsewhere, conclusively I hope, that the Guhilots were originally Nagar Bråbmaņas. To this tribe belongs the celebrated Udaipur dynasty, looked upon as the purest Rajpat family in the whole of Rajputânâ. I have also shown there that the Guilots have been styled Brahma-Kshatri in one inscription and also in one bardia chronicle. The Sena Kings of Bengal bore the same caste name. Mr. R. Narasimhachar of Bangalore has kindly drawn my attention to at least three such instances in the south. Thus Sravan-Belgola, No. 109, of about 983 A.D. says that Chamundaraya, the celebrated Jaina minister of the Ganga king, Rachamalla, belonged to the Brahma-Kshatra family. The same fact is mentioned in the Chamundar dya-purdna (978 A D.) also. Udayâditya, a Ganga chief, of the eleventh century is described as of Brahmakshatra-vir-anvaya". Sirigirinatha Odeyar, governor of Araga, under Devaraya II. of Vijayanagar, was a Brahina-Kshatra. We have thus no less thaa five royal families that have been designated Brahma-Kshatri. The question here arises, what can be the meaning of this composite name, Brahma-Kshatri? I havo elsewhere suggested that Brahms-Kshatris denote families which were Brahmaras first, but afterwards exchanged their priestly for martial pursuits and were fused into the Kshatriya class. I still maintain that this is at least one explanation. It is supported by the very nature of the compound Brahma-Kshatra, which has to be dissolved as ddau Brahmanah paschat Kshatrah, i. e., those who were Brahmanas first and became Ksbatriy as afterwards. The legends of the Chhipa caste in Marwar, to which allusion has been made elsewhere, also show that they came to be called Brabma-Kshatris only after they gave up their Brahmanbood for their new profession. But a second explanation is not impossible at least in some cases. It may be asserted that some families became Brahma-Kshatris by intermarriages between the Brahmana and Kshatriya classes, We know that Harichandra, the progenitor of the feudatory Pratihâra family, was a Brahmana, and had two wives, one a Brahmana, and the other a Kshatriya woman. Offspringe from the first were styled Pratibära
T Jour. Beng. As. Soc., for 1909, p. 167 f. * Ep. Carnat., Vol. VII., Shikarpar; Nos. 109, 110 and 130. • Ibid., Vol. VIII., Tirthaballa ; No. 23; here the phrase Brahma-Kshatriya is uued