Indian Antiquary Vol 42

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

Page 229

AUGUST, 1913.)
KING CHANDRA OF THE PILLAR INSCRIPTION
217
KING CHANDRA OF THE MEHARAULI IRON PILLAR INSCRIPTION.
BY M, M. HARAPRASAD SHASTRI, M. A., C. I. E.; CALCUTTA. The Meharauli posthumous iron pillar inscription gives the following historical information:
Chandra, an independent ruler conquered Bengal, crossed the seven tributaries of the Indus, and brought Balkh within his sway. The southern boundaries of his dominions were washed by the waves of the southern seas. He was a worshipper of Vishņu and he erected « flag-staff in hononr of that deity.
The inscription gives no information about his capital, his parentage and his time, but as the characters in which it is incised belong to the early Gupta varioty of Indian alphabet, he may have flourished in the first century of the Gupta era
The inscription does not give his sardame. Any surname may be given to him. Baba Nagendra Nath Vagu gave him the surname Varman, and Mr. Vincent Smith, tbe surname Gupta, Mr. Vaso's paper appeared in the Proceedings of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, for 1895, pages 177 to 180, and Mr. Smith's in the J. R. A. S. for 1897, pages 1 to 18. Mr. Vasu bases his theory on the Suguniâ insoription of Chandravarman which he read from an imperfect impression as follows:
Pushkardmbudki pater Mahardja-Sri-Siddhavarmmanah putrasya Maharaja-Sre-Chandravarmanah kritih. Chakrasodminah Dásdgreņátisrishtah.
Mr. Smith bases his theory on the fact that at that period there was no great king who could conquer Bengal and Balkh at the same time, and on the fact that the inscription belongs to the north eastern variety of Gupta character. Mr. Vasu says that this Chandravarman is identical with the Chandravarman who was defeated along with other potestates of Aryavarta by Samudragupta. Mr. Smith says that that may be true, but he cannot be the Chandra of the Iron Pillar, as he is simply styled mahárdj& which means a subordinate position. Mr. Vasu says it this Chandra could conquer Bengal from the Pushkara Lake, how can he be a small king? Mr. Smith replies that Pushkarambudhi must be some place in Bengal or Assam, and not the Pushkara Lake.
I believe, I have stated the position of the two scholars on this point as far as a third person can do. But some facts have since then come to light which have strengthened the position of Mr. Vasu.
Mr. R. D. Banerji very kindly sent me a good impression of the Susunia inscription. This impression improves the reading given by Mr. Vasu in one point at least. What he reads Pushkar&nbudhipateh is really Pushkarand dhipateh. This makes a good deal of difference in its historical bearing. Pushharámbudhi may or may not be the Pashkara Lake near Ajmer. It may appear to matter-of-fact people absurd to call that small sheet of water, 7 miles from Ajmer, an ambridhi, but Sanskrit poets are capable of such exaggeration. The latter part of the compound word may lead men to think of the sea, which is close to Bengal though not to Assam. But all these speculations have been set at rest by the new reading. Pushkarana is a city which still exists. It is the second city in the Jodhpur State, and not stands on the border of the great sandy desert. In the map given by Mr. Smith in his history of the conquest of Samudragupta, vast tracts of the country round Pashkarana have been left outside these conquests. So even he admits that there were independent kings in this part of India which Samudragupta did not or could not conquer. There is nothing to prevent the supposition that Chandravarman king of Pushkarana conquered or raided the greater portion of Aryvarta and even Balkb but that Samudragupts sent him away from Aryavarta, but could not conquer his home provinces in Western India ; and I believe this is the right supposition.
Its antiquity is youched by the fact that an influential body of Brahmaps in Western India go by the name of the city.