________________
132
THE INDIAN ANTIQUARY
[JULY, 1919
MISCELLANEA. PRATIHARAS IN SOUTHERN INDIA from that the Pratiháras must have come to, and The Pratih Aras were a clan of people that formed settled in, the Konkan before that time, part of the tribe of Gujars or Gurjaras, a non-Aryan
| Regarding the Pratihara Dhôra, nothing is known people that tame to India from the north-west and of him except what has been given above. It is, settled there in about the 5th century A.D. Their however, not unlikely that he may have been in name Pratihâra is also written as Pratshåra, Pari. some way related to the Pratih&ras of Końkan. håra, Padihara, Padiyar, and Padiar; and they have been, hitherto, met with in Northern India only,
In dealing with the above inscription, Mr. Rice where, in the 8th century and later, there were has fallen into some mistakes from his not having Pratihara kings that were ruling at Mahôdaya (Ka. correctly read it. In p. 9 of his Introduotion (op. nauj) and in Bundelkhand. It is therefore some- cit.), he makes out that Dorapayya, the hugband what interesting to find from inscriptional and lite- of Pambabbe, was also known as Immadi-Dhors; rary sources that there were two Pratih ras who and in the Translation, p.1, ho further makes out lived in Southern India in the 10th century A.D.
that this Dorapayya was a "sheath-bearer" and
that "her (scil. Pambabbe's) king was giving her 1° In a pillar inscription at Kador (Epigraphia priceless treasures." These mistakes are due to Carnatica, Vol. VI. Kd. 1), there is mentioned a the fact that he read line 1 of the stanza given in Paqiara Dorapayya who had Pambabbe, the elder the inscription as parase maha -prasadado) orevakan
Immadi-Dhöran sister of the Western Ganga king Batuga II as his
oldu tann. instead of senior queen (piriy-arasi). He is, later, oalled Dhora correctly as paroise mahd-prasadadoļu Revaka-nimin a stanza which follows and is identified by Mr. l.madi Dhöranoldu tann. Rioe (ibid., Introd. p. 9) with the Dhôrappe who is The correct translation of the stanza, therefore,
is : mentioned in the Sangamner plates of the year Saka
"Whilo Revaka-nimmadi held her in great favour 922 (Ep. Ind., Vol. II, p. 215) and whom Kielhorn
and while Dhora, her lord, was giving her priceless proposed to identify with the Rashtrakta prince
things with affection... Nirupama, son of Am@ghavargha III.
" This identification seems to me to be wrong; for,
Révaka-nimmadi, mentioned herein, was the Padiara, the word used in the inscription, is, as I daughter of the RAshrakata Amoghavars...-Bad
dega III and was given in marriage by him to the have said above, but another form of Pratihara and shows unmistakably that this Dhôra belonged to Ganga Batuga I (Epi. Ind.. Vol. IV, p. 351).
She is also mentioned in the Epigraphia Carnatica, the Pratibâra family or clan. This Pratihara Dhora must have been a chief of VOL VJI, Nr. 36.
A. VENKATABUBBIAH. some importance, for, Pambabbe, the Ganga princene, was given to him in marriage and was called
SURVIVAL OF THE TERM KARORI. his senior queen. He had three sons of her, all of
Akbar in 1575-8 divided a large part of his the Jain faith, and living, apparently, in the Ganga
empire into purely artificial areas, each-yielding vadi province; and he seems to have died in A.D.
crore' or ten millions of tankas or dama, equiva. 942, predeceasing his wife by thirty years.
lent to a quarter of million of rupees. The 2° There is a commentary, known as the La
officer appointed to make the collections in such ghuv ritti, on Udbbata's Kdvydlankdrasangraha,
an area was called a Karorf, or sometimes an which, we learn from the colophon and from the
Amil. After a short time the new artificial areas opening stanzas, was written by Prathar riduraja
fell, into dist.se and arrangements were again or (se he is elsewhere styled) Pratiharénduraja. The based upon the traditional pargana areas. The concluding stanza, however,of the commentary gives designation Amil for a revenue collector was famithe name of the author as Indurája; and it informs lior almost up to our own times, but the term
liar almost us in addition, that he was a Kaun kana, i.e., en Karórt was supposed to have been disused very
Karðri wa m posed to have inhabitant of the Konkapa country on the west
soon after its introduction. coast of India). Here also, the prefix Pratihdra I have been surprised to find that it was in use attached to the name of Indurâja indicates clearly in Bengal as late as A.D. 1770. Mr. C. Stuart, to us that he belonged to the Pratihara clan.
Supervisor of Birbham, eto., in letter dated We do not know when the PratihArms came and June 8, 1770, from Burdwan, reports the result settled in the Korkan, nor do we know in what of his enquiry into the conduct of the kerori, who way they were related to the Pratih&ras of Maho- has been confined by his agent, etc. days and of Bundelkhand. But, as Indurdja's (Press List; Bengal Sectvtariat, 1769-741 section Laghioritti is believed (100 tho praat vand of the ii, vol. ii, p. 20 ; Caloutta, Bengal Becretariat Press edition) to have been composed at some time in Depot, 1918). the tenth century A.D., We can easily infer thore.
VINCENT A. Smere.
