Gazetteer of the Bombay Presidency, Vol. I, Part I: History of Gujarat c7.s3: Chapter IX. The Chālukyas (A.D. 634-740)
Gazetteer of the Bombay Presidency, Vol. I, Part I: History of Gujarát c7.s3
- Language
- English
Chapter IX. The Chālukyas (A.D. 634-740)
c7.s3.1
THE CHĀLUKYAS
c7.s3.2
(A.D. 634-740.)
c7.s3.3
The Chālukyas conquered their Gujarāt provinces from the south after subduing the Konkan Mauryas of Purī either Rājapurī that is Janjira or Elephanta in Bombay harbour. The fifth century Vāda inscription of king Pulakesin I proves that this Maurya dynasty ruled in the Konkan for at least a century before they came into collision with the Chālukyas under Kīrtivarman.¹ They were finally defeated and their capital Purī taken by Chandadanda an officer of Pulakesi II. (A.D. 610-640).² The Chālukyas then pressed northwards, and an inscription at Aihole in South Bijapur records that as early as A.D. 634 the kings of Lāta, Mālava and Gurjjara submitted to the prowess of Pulakesi II. (A.D. 610-640).
c7.s3.4
The regular establishment of Chālukya power in South Gujarāt seems to have been the work of Dhārāśraya Jayasimhavarman son of Pulakesi II. and younger brother of Vikramāditya Satyāśraya (A.D. 679-689). A grant of Jayasimhavarman's son Śilāditya found in Navsāri describes Jayasimhavarman as receiving the kingdom from his brother Vikramāditya. As Jayasimhavarman is called Paramabhattāraka Mahārāja, he was practically independent. He had five sons and enjoyed a long life, ruling apparently from Navsāri. Of the five Gujarāt Chālukya copperplates noted below, three are in an era marked Sam. which is clearly different from the Śaka era (A.D. 78) used in the grants of the main Chālukyas. From the dates in the case the new era of the Gujarāt Chālukyas may be deduced as of Gujarāt origin. Grants remain of Jayasimhavarman's sons dated S. 421, 443, and 490.³ This checked by Vikramāditya's known date (A.D. 679-689) gives an initial between A.D. 249 and 259. Of the two Gujarāt eras, the Gupta-Valabhī (A.D. 319) and the Traikūṭaka (A.D. 248-9), the Gupta-Valabhī is clearly unsuitable. On the other hand the result is so closely in accord with A.D. 248-9, the Traikūṭaka epoch, as to place the correctness of the identification almost beyond question.
c7.s3.5
Jayasimhavarman must have established his power in South Gujarāt before A.D. 660-70 (T. 421), as in that year his son Śryāśraya was a grant by heir apparent. Another plate of Śryāśraya found in Surat shows that in A.D. 691-2 (T. 443) Jayasimhavarman was still ruling with Śryāśraya as heir apparent. In view of these facts the establishment of Jayasimhavarman's power in Gujarāt must be taken at about A.D. 655. The copperplates of his sons and grandson do not say whom Jayasimhavarman overthrew. Probably the defeated rulers were Gurjjaras, as about this time a Gurjjara dynasty held the Bharūch district with its capital at Nāndīpurī the modern Nāndod in the Rājpipla state about thirty-five miles east of Broach. So far
c7.s3.7
Jayasimhavarmman, A.D. 655-693
c7.s3.8
as is known the earliest of the Nanded Gurjaras was Dadda who is estimated to have flourished about A.D. 580 (T. 331). The latest is Jayabhata whose copperplate bears date A.D. 734-5 (T. 486); so that the Gurjara and Chalukya kingdoms flourished almost at the same time. It is possible that the power of the earlier Gurjara kings spread as far south as Broach and even up to Konkan limits. It was apparently checked, however, during the reign of his brother Vikramāditya, Jayasimha having pushed into South Gujarat, driving the Gurjaras north of the Tapti and compelling them to the Broach district; the Gurjaras either acknowledging Chalukya sovereignty or withstanding the Chalukyas and retaining their small territory in the Broach district by the help of the Valabhis with whom they were in alliance. In either case the Chalukya power seems to have hemmed in the Broach Gurjaras, as Jayasimhavarmman had a son Buddhavarmman ruling in Kaira. A copperplate of Buddhavarmman’s son Vijayarāja found in Kaira is granted from Vijayapura identified with Bijāpur near Navsāri, but probably some place further south, as the grant is made to Brahmans of Jambusar. Five copperplates remain of this branch of the Chalukyas, the Navsāri grant of Śryāśraya Śilāditya Yuvarāja dated A.D. 669-70 (T. 421); the Surat grant of the same Śilāditya dated A.D. 671-2 (T. 443); the Balsār grant of Vinayāditya Mangalarāja dated A.D. 731 (Saka 653) (T. 490); the Kaira grant of Vijayarāja dated Samvat 394; and the undated Nirpan grant of Nāgavarddhana Tribhuvanāśraya.
c7.s3.9
The first four grants mention Jayasimhavarmman as the younger brother of Vikramāditya Satyāśraya the son of Pulakesi Satyāśraya the conqueror of Harshavarddhana the lord of the North. Jayasimhavarmman’s eldest son was Śryāśraya Śilāditya who made his Navsāri grant in A.D. 669-70 (T. 421); the village granted being said to be in the Navasārikā Vishaya. Śryāśraya’s other plate dated A.D. 671-2 (T. 443) grants a field in the village of Osullaka in the Karmmānta Āhāra that is the district of Kāmlej on the Tapti ten miles north-east of Surat. In both grants Śilāditya is called Yuvarāja, which shows that his father ruled with him from A.D. 669 to 691. Both copperplates show that these kings treated as their overlords the main dynasty of the southern Chalukyas as respectful mention is made in the first plate of Vikramāditya Satyāśraya and in the second of his son Vinayāditya Satyāśraya. Apparently Śryāśraya died before his father as the two late grants of Balsār and Kaira give him no place in the list of rulers.
c7.s3.10
Jayasimhavarmman was succeeded by his second son Mangalarāja. A plate of his found at Balsār dated A.D. 731 (Saka 653) records a grant made from Mangalapuri, probably the same as Puri the doubtful Konkan capital of the Silāhāras.* As his elder brother was heir-apparent in A.D. 691-2 (T. 443), Mangalarāja must have succeeded some years later, say about A.D. 698-9 (T. 450). From this it may be inferred that the copperplate of A.D. 731 was issued towards the end of his reign.
c7.s3.11
∗ See Chap. X. below.
c7.s3.12
† Ind. Ant. XIII. 72.
c7.s3.13
‡ Ind. Ant. XIII. 70.
c7.s3.14
§ B. B. R. A. S. XVI. 3.
c7.s3.15
Mangalaraja was succeeded by his younger brother Pulakesi Janasraya. This is the time of Khalif Hasham (H. 105-125, A.D. 724-743), whose Sindhu governor Junaid is recorded to have sent expeditions against Marwad, Mandal, Dalmaj (Kamlej?), Barus, Uzain, Maliba, Bolamid (Malyad?), Al Bailaman (Bhinmal?), and Juzr. Though several of these names seem to have been misread and perhaps misspelt on account of the confusion in the original Arabic, still Marwad, Mandal, Barus, Uzain, Maliba, and Juzr can easily be identified with Marwad, Mandal near Viramgam, Bharuch, Ujjain, Malwa, and Gurjara. The defeat of one of these raids is described as occurring in Pulakesi's grant of A.D. 738-9 (P. 490) which states that the Arab army had afflicted the kingdoms of Sindhu, Kacchchha, Kathiawad, Chavotakas, Maurya, and Gurjara that is Sindh, Kacch, the Chavotakas (Mauryas of Chitor), and the Gurjaras of Bhinmal.¹
c7.s3.16
¹ The Mauryas of Chitor, described as a branch of Pramaras, who held Chitor during the eighth century. Compare Tod. Jr. R. A. S. 211; Wilson's Works, XII. 132. The text of the copper plate runs:
c7.s3.18
Pulakesi was at this time ruling at Navsari; it is uncertain how much longer this Chalukya kingdom of Navsari continued. It was probably overthrown about A.D. 750 by the Gurjara branch of the Rashtrakutas who were in possession in A.D. 757-8.
c7.s3.19
The Kaira grant dated 394 gives in hereditary succession the names of Dadda II, Jayabhata, and Vigraha. The grant is made from Vijayapura, which, as the late Colonel West suggested, may be Bhasar near Parantij though this is far to the north of the other lands known Chalukya limits. The village granted is Parijataka in the Akrureśvara division. If taken as Vikrama the date 394 corresponds to A.D. 337-8. This is out of the question, since it mentions a grant by the Vishnukundin Madhavavarman, between A.D. 620 and 680. Professor Bhandarkar considers the plate a forgery, but there is no sufficient reason for doubting its genuineness. No fault can be found with the alphabet. It is written in the usual style of Western Chalukya grants, and contains the names of a number of Brahman grantees with minute details of the field granted and the deed must be a forged grant. To the Gupta era would give the Rashtrakuta era may be denoted by the word *Sam* 394 which is more likely to be in use in North Gujarat. This would represent the early months of 713. Jayabhata must have conquered part of North Gujarat and left his son Buddharaja to rule over it.
c7.s3.20
Jayabhata seems to have had a third son, Vitaraga, ruling in West Malwa which was connected with South Gujarat through the Narbada and the Tapti. The Anjan grant of Nagavardhana is dated, and, though it gives a long genealogy, is seal, the form of composition, the *Veda* style of the long, and the alphabet all closely agree with the style of the Gurjara Chalukya plates, and cannot be considered a forgery.
c7.s3.21
The date after A.D. 710 the Gurjaras seem to have been supplanted in South Gujarat by the Rashtrakutas.
c7.s3.22
HISTORICAL FAMILY TREE
c7.s3.23
Dadda's grant of the year 391 (A.D. 641-2) is the earliest trace of Chalukya rule in Gujarat. Dr. Bhagvanlal, who believed in its genuineness, supposes it to be dated in the Kalachuri era (391 + 248 = A.D. 639) and infers from it the existence of Chalukya rule far to the north of Broach. But the most cursory comparison of it with the Kheda grants of Dadda II. (Ind. Ant. XIII. 81f) which are dated (admittedly in the so-called) Traikutaka era, 380 and 385 respectively, shows that a large number of Dadda's phrases appear in the Chalukya grant. The date of the Chalukya plate must therefore be interpreted as a Traikutaka or Chedi date.
c7.s3.24
This being so, it is clearly impossible to suppose that Vijayaraja's grandfather Jayasraya was that younger son of Pulakesi II. (A.D. 610-640) who founded the Gujarat branch family. It is also usually supposed that the Jayasraya of our grant was a younger brother of Pulakesi II.; but it is also chronologically impossible for Jayasraya can hardly have been more than ten years of age in A.D. 597-98, when his older brother was set aside as heir to the throne. His son Buddhavarman could hardly have been born before A.D. 610, so that Buddhavarman's son Vijayaraja must have made his grant at the age of twelve, at latest. The true solution of the question seems to be that given by Dr. Bhandarkar in his Early History of the Deccan (page 42 note 3), namely that the grant is a forgery. To the reasons advanced by him may be added the fact pointed out by Mr. Fleet (Ind. Ant. VII. 241) that the grant is a palimpsest, the engraver having originally attempted "Svasti Vijayavikramah Na." It can hardly be doubted that Na is the first syllable of Nandipuri the palace of the Gurjara kings. Many of the grantees were Brahmans of Nandipuri and subjects of Dadda II. of Broach, whose grants to them are extant. It seems obvious that Vijayaraja's grant was forged in the interest of these persons by some one who had Gurjara grants before him as models, but knew very little of the true state in the chancery of the Chalukyas.
c7.s3.25
Passing over this grant, the first genuine trace of Chalukya rule in Gujarat is to be found in the grant of the Sendraka chief Nikumbhallashakti, which bears date 655, (A.D. 706-7) and relates to the gift to a Brahman of the village of Ballisa (Wansda) in the Navasari (Tral) district. Mr. Bühler has shown (Ind. Ant. XVIII. 265f) that the Sendrakas were a Kanarese family, and that Nikumbhallashakti must have come to Gujarat as a Chalukya feudatory, though he names no overlord. He was probably subordinate to the Chalukya governor of Nasik.
c7.s3.26
The next grant that requires notice is that of Nagaravardhana, who describes himself as a son of Pulakesi's brother Jayasraya, though Dr. Bhagvanlal believes him to be a grandson of Pulakesi's son. Mr. Fleet points out other difficulties connected with this grant, yet on the whole decides in favour of its genuineness (see Ind. Ant. IX. 123).
c7.s3.27
The description of Pulakesi II. in this grant refers to his victory over Harshavardhana, and describes him as having conquered the three kingdoms of Chera, Chola, and Pandya by means of his horse of the Chitrakuta breed, and as meditating on the feet of Nagaravardhana. Now all of these epithets, except the reference to the war with Harsha, belong properly, not to Pulakesi II. but to his son Vikramaditya I. The conquest of the confederacy of Cholas, Cheras (or Keralas), and Pandyas is ascribed to Vikramaditya in the inscriptions of his son Vinayaditya (Fleet in Ind. Ant. X. 164); the Chitrakuta horse is named in Vikramaditya's own grants (Ind. Ant. VI. 75 &c.) while the meditation on the feet of Nagaravardhana recurs in the T. 421 grant of Sryasraya Shiladitya (Id. B. B. A. S. XVI. 16). This confusion of epithets between Pulakesi II. and Vikramaditya makes it difficult to doubt that Nagaravardhana's grant was composed at the end of or after Vikramaditya's reign, and under the influence of that king's history. It may be argued that even in that case the grant may be genuine, its inaccuracies being due merely to carelessness. This supposition the following considerations go to negative. Pulakesi II. was alive at the time of Hiuen Tsang's visit (A.D. 640), and is not likely to have reigned very much longer. And, as Vikramaditya I. is supposed to have begun about A.D. 669-70, a gap remains of nearly thirty years. That part of this period was occupied by the war with the three kings the south we know from Vikramaditya's own grants; but the grant of Pulakesi's family referred to above seems to show that Vikramaditya was the successor, not to his father, but of Nagavardhana upon whose feud he is described as meditating. It follows that Vijayaditya succeeded Pulakesi and preceded Vikramaditya in the imperial throne of the Chalukyas, whereas his grant could not have been composed in the reign of the Chalukyas.
c7.s3.28
Although the grant is not genuine, we have no reason to doubt that it gives a correct genealogy, and that Nagavardhana was the son of Pulakesi's brother Jayasraya, and therefore the first cousin of Vikramaditya. The grant is in the regular Chalukya style, and the writer, who was one of Northern Chalukya capital, Nasik, had better models than the writer of Jayasraya's grant. Both grants may have been composed about the same time of Chalukya power succumbed to the attacks of the Rashtrakutas (A.D. 753).—*IA. XI. 1. 34.*