________________
66 कहाऊँ स्तम्भ एवं क्षेत्रीय पुरातत्व की खोज year one hundred and forty-one having passed away, and the month of Jaishțhya arriving,”' &c.
It might be said that as the words bhukti and bhukta in the two inscriptions of King Hastin* are connected with the word rájya, the same should be inferred in the case of the Kuháon record. But the circumstances under which the words occur are not the same, nor even similar. In the Kuháon moument the śánte stands as a participle distinct by itself, whereas in the Hastin records bhukti and bhukta are members of compound terms of which rájya forms only a subordinate member; and as participle adjectives they further qualify the word samvatsara the counterpart of the Kuháon varsha and not rájya, and therefore they rather support my inference than oppose it. Gupta-nripa-rájya-bhuktau and Gupta-nripa-rájyabhukte simply mean “during the dominancy of the Gupta kings;" for according to the usually received interpretation bhoga, when referring to years, implies its currency. Hastin evidently was a vassl of the Guptas and he satisfied himself with the title of Mahárájá, whereas the Guptas always claimed to be mahárájádhiraja and therefore there is no inconsistency in his avowing the supremacy. Mr. Fergusson may take exception to this, as in his scheme of Indian chronology he accpets the title Mahárája to be synonymous with emperor, and those who bore it to have been independent sovereigns; but with scores of Mahárajás who bow to the supremacy of our gracious sovereign Queen Victoria, and many of whom are not better than mere zamīndars, none who is familiar with the history of India and of the ultra regal titles of the innumerable potentates who owned allegiance to the Pándus, will be disposed to follows his lead.
Jain Education International
For.Personal & Private Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
