Indian Antiquary Vol 49

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

Page 179

SEPT., 1920 ]
MISCELLANEA
175
Let us try to ascertain the date of these princes. We learn from the Tirumalai Rock Inscription 11 of Rajendra Chola I that Mahipala I was reigning in or about A.D. 1025. The Sârnâth inscription gives a date for him in A.D. 1026.12 His son Nayapala ruled for at least 15 years (as we know from the Krish nadvârika temple inscription).18 Nayapala's son Vigrahapala III could not therefore have come to the throne before A.D. 1026+15= A.D. 1041. He ruled for at least 13 years (see the Amagâchhi Grant 14) i.e. np to at least A.D. 1054. After him came his sons Mahipala II and Sûra pâla II, and the Kaivertas Divvoka, Rudoka and
Bhima, and finally Râmapala who ruled for at least 42 years. 15 It is obvious that Ramapåla reigned towards the close of the eleventh century and early in the twelfth century. The princes Vira, Vardhana and Vije ya who helped him must have flourished about the same time.
We learn from the Naihati Grant 16 of Vall&la Sêna that his ancestors were ruling in South-west Bengal (Radha)17 long before the establishment of their paramount sovereignty by Vijayasêna'victory over the Pala king of Gauda. We know further from the Deopârâ inscription that Vijayasena was a contemporary of Nânyadeva who flourished about A.D. 1097. There can be no objection in identifying him with Vijayaraja of the Ramacharita who lived about the same time and ruled over a principality in the Gauda empire. 18 If this identification be correct, then Vira and Vardhana must be Vîraguņa of Kottavi and Vardhana of Kausâmbi. It seems reasonable to conclude that during the weak rule of the sons of Ramapala, the kinglots of the Gauda Empire who helped Rentepala to regain his throne, engaged in a struggle for supremacy 19 in which Vira, Vardhana, the rájå of Kamar Apa and the lord of Gauda bimself hecame worsted, and Vijayasêna established the supremacy of his own family.
The conqueror's authority was probably next challenged by Nânya and Raghava, the rulers of the neighbouring kingdoms of Mithilâ and Kalinga, who were also defeated and imprisoned.
MISCELLANEA. CORPORATE LIFE IN ANCIENT INDIA. point has been disoussed at some length by
I am thankful to Mr. R. Shamasastry for having Mr. Pargiter in the course of his review of my kindly reviewed my book Corporate Life in l. book along with another, dealing with the same Ancient India in the February issue of this subject but entitled Local Government in Anciens Journal and recommended it to the publio in India. Mr. Pargiter thinks that the title of my rather flattering terms. I may be permitted, book describes its scope rightly, while the other however, to offer some remarks in reply to his has assumed too ambitious a title, for the title specific objection to the title of my book, and my "Local Government" may hold good for large inference from, and translation of some Banskrit popular councils where they existed, but certainly passeges contained therein.
does not apply to all the other corporate acti. Mr. Shamasastry thinks that "Self-governing vities, social, coonomio and religious. I do not, of Institutions in Ancient India' would have been course, mean that Mr. Pargiter's opinion finally more muggestive and attractive title." This very decides the matter, but I quote his statement as
11 Ep. Ind., IX, pp. 229–332. 1 Smith, Early History of India, 1914, p. 399.
Gaudalekhaimdid, p. 116. 1 Op. cit., p. 122. Mam. ASB., V, p. 02.
Ep. Ind., XIV, pp. 156-163. 17 Pralinam Radhan-akahitachanair-bhdshayanto-wwbhduain
The identification was first suggested by Mr. N. N. Vasu. 19 The Kamauli Grant of Vaidyadeva, minister and general of Kumarapala, son and muccessor of Ramapile, refers to wars and rebellions in South Bengal and Kimaropa (106 Goudalekhamdid, p. 128 509.). Vijayasena's principality lay in South-west Bengal. Viragupa's principality aloo lay in the south d. Mem. ASB., V, p. 89).