Indian Antiquary Vol 62

Author(s): Richard Carnac Temple, Charles E A W Oldham, S Krishnaswami Aiyangar, Devadatta Ramkrishna Bhandarka
Publisher: Swati Publications

Page 215

NOVEMBER, 1933]
FURTHER LIGHT ON RAMAGUPTA
203
(3) The gåtha in the Candakausika speaks of Mahipala's hostility to the Karnatas. We know that Mahîpåla I of Kanauj was obliged to leave his capital when it was devastated by the Râstrakûta king Indra III.13 Mahipala afterwards regained his throne with the help of a Candella king, who was either Harsa or his son, Yasovarman. Aryakşemiśvar has evidently composed or incorporated the gatha in his play to please his royal patron, who must have been smarting under his humiliating defeat. The Karnatas mentioned in that gåtha are evidently the Kanarese Rastrakûtas of Malkhed, who were again assisted by his Kanarese foudatory, Arikosarin Calukya, as stated by the Kanarese poet Pampa.
We have thus soon that Kartikeya whose exploits are described in the verse from Rajašekhara's Kavyanimárned was Mahipala I of Kanauj. But did this king ever bring any part of the Himalayan territory under his sway? Professor R. D. Banerjee considered him incapable of any conquest.1" It is no doubt true that Mahipala's power declined towards the end of his reign, owing probably to the conquests of Yuvarâjadeva I of Tripuri and Yasovarman Candella. But we have no evidence to suppose that he made no conquests. On the other hand the Khajuraho inscription 15 of Yasovarman states that Mahipala had secured the image of Vaikuntha from a Såhi king of Kâbul and the Panjab on the strength of his army of horses and elephants. Rajasekhara speaks of several wars of Mahijala in the following verse in the Pracandlapandava :
नमितमुरलमौलि: पाकलो मेकलानां रणकलितकलिग केलिन्ट् केरलेन्दोः।
- अजनि जितकुलूत : कुन्तलानां कुठारो हठहतरमठश्रीः श्रीमहीपालदेवः॥ One of these wars was against the king of Kulûta. Kulûta was a kingdom on the right bank of the Sutlej, south-east of Kashmir and north-east of Jalandhara,16 . One of these conquests may have been described in the verse in the Kavyamimářsd.
The next question that presents itself in connection with that verse is, how far is the version of the incident about Dhruvaswamini given in that verse historical ? Professor Altekar is of opinion that the author of that verse took some liberty with history in describing it in that way. We may readily agree with him when he says that dattvă in that verse should be taken to mean dātum anumatya, for Dhruvaswamini was never actually handed over to the enemy. Ramagupta only consented to do it as stated in the Deví-Candragupta. The author of that verse had to compress so much matter into four lines that he may have taken that liberty. His purpose was to bring out a contrast between the glorious success of Mahi. pala and the ignominious failure of Ramagupta, and it was immaterial whether the queen was actually handed over to the enemy or whether that calamity was averted. But in other respects the verse may be taken to state the version of the incident as it was traditionally known at the time. It would lose all its point if the incident about Dhruvaswamini and the conquest of Mahîpåla had occurred in different places the former at the capital of Råma. gupta in the plains, and the latter in the Himalayan hills. Besides, the context in which that verse occurs in the Kavyamimanså shows that it was based on tradition (kathottha). Like Båna, Rajasekhara also had historical sense. It is unlikely that he would cite a verse to illustrate how a present incident should be described by putting it in relation to a past event known from tradition, if the tradition had been materially changed or distorted in that verse.
After all, have we got incontrovertible evidence to prove that the version of the incident given in the Kavyamímarnsá is incorrect? It states that Ramagupta went on an adventurous
13 The Cambay Plates of Govinda IV, E.I., VII, pp. 26-47. 14 JBORS., vol. XIV, p. 519. 18 कैलासागोटनाथ : सुहृदिति च ततः कीरराज : प्रपेदे, साहिस्तस्मादवाप द्विषतुरगबलेनानु हेरम्बपाल:। तत्सूनोदेवपालात्तमय
हयपते : प्राप्य निन्ये प्रतिष्ठां वैकुण्ठं कुण्ठितारि: क्षितिधरतिलक : श्रीयशोवर्मराज: 16 Cf. Cunningham, Ancient Geography of India, p. 162.