The Dynasties of the Kanarese Districts of the Bombay Presidency from the Earliest Historical Times to the Musalman Conquest c8.s12.412

c8.s12.412

that the Bhîma who was seized by Baddiga might be "the Châlukya" who is mentioned in the Anamkoṇḍ inscription of the Kâkatya king Rudradêva; but the real date of that record is A. D. 1162-63 (Ind. Ant. Vol. XI. p. 9); and there is nothing in it to indicate that the Bhîma who is spoken of in it, was a Chalukya at all. In connection with Baddiga, he drew attention to the supposed existence of a ruler of Kâñchî of that name in A. D. 804, and to the occurrence of the name in the Râshtrakûṭa dynasty: but the real name of the ruler of Kâñchî was Dantiga (Ind. Ant. Vol. XI. p. 126); and the Baddiga in question is Amôghavarsha-Vaddiga, just before A. D. 945. He proposed to identify Gojjiga with the Râshtrakûṭa king Kottiga or Khottiga; but Khottiga's date was A. D. 971-72. Vijayâditya, he said, might be the last of the Chalukyas during the supremacy of the Râshtrakûṭas, and the predecessor of Taila II.; but here the real name is Vikramâditya IV.—Mr. Rice's suggested identifications tended to indicate that Pampa's account was put together from such disconnected sources, as to be practically altogether fictitious; and he thus led me to view the genealogy with a suspicion which I do not now attach to it. I am convinced that much real history might be brought to light, by examining the praśastis or introductions of the early Kanarese authors, especially among the Jains.