[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Studies](https://indike.org/pramana/ins) › [General history and culture](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general) › [The Dynasties of the Kanarese Districts of the Bombay Presidency from the Earliest Historical Times to the Musalman Conquest](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882) › c8.s13 # The Dynasties of the Kanarese Districts of the Bombay Presidency from the Earliest Historical Times to the Musalman Conquest c8.s13: Chapter III. The Rashtrakutas of Malkhed The Dynasties of the Kanarese Districts of the Bombay Presidency from the Earliest Historical Times to the Musalman Conquest c8.s13 - **Language:** English ## Contents - [c8.s13.337](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.337) — 3 parts ### Chapter III. The Rashtrakutas of Malkhed ### [c8.s13.1](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.1) THE RÂṢṬRAKŪṬAS OF MALKHED. ### [c8.s13.2](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.2) So far, we have seen that, beginning, about A. D. 550, with the acquisition of the country round Bâdâmi in the Bijâpur District, by the end of the sixth century the Western Chalukyas had created a kingdom which embraced nearly the whole of the Bombay Presidency, —up to the river Kîm, certainly, and possibly up to the Mahî,—with a large extent of adjacent territory to the east and south; and that, save for a short interruption of their sovereignty by the Pallavas of Kâñchî from A. D. 642 to 655 or thereabouts, they held the supremacy over the dominions which they thus put together, until about A. D. 757. Their sway then ceased; the sovereignty being wrested from them by the Râṣṭrakūṭas. In the north, the Lâṭa country, with part of the Gurjara territory, was taken by a branch of Râṣṭrakūṭa family which had but a short career; and in which the last known name is that of Kakkarâja II.: at some point, however, north of the Narmadâ, —probably at a line which ran through the southern point of the Pañch-Mahâls District straight to the Mahî on the west and to Chhoṭâ-Udepur on the east,—the Râṣṭrakūṭas must, for the time being, have been kept back by the kings of Valabhî; for, a record of A. D. 766¹ shews that the territory which was known as the Kheṭaka \*dhâra\* or Kheṭakâhâra \*vishaya\*, the modern Kaira District, with the Cambay State and some outlying parts of the Gaikwâr's dominions,—named after Kheṭaka, the ancient form of the name of Kaira itself,—was still a portion of the Valabhî kingdom, and a record of A. D. 760² places the country round Gôdhrâ in the Pañch-Mahâls in the dominions of Śilâditya VI. of Valabhî. From the central and southern parts of their dominions, the Western Chalukyas were ejected in the first instance by Dantidurga,—the conquest being completed by his uncle Kṛiṣhṇa I.,—who belonged to a more powerful branch of the Râṣṭrakūṭa family, which eventually selected Mâlkheḍ in the Nizâm's Dominions as its capital, and retained the sovereignty till A. D. 973. The territory of the Mâlkheḍ line was at first bounded on the north, towards the coast, by the southern limit of the Lâṭa country, where the other branch of the family was then reigning. Shortly after A. D. 783-84, however, Gôvinda III. took that province from his relatives, and made it a part of his own kingdom, in charge of his brother Indrarâja; and the Mâlkheḍ dominions were thus extended up to the southern limit of the Gôdhrâ province of Valabhî. Somewhere about the end of the eighth century A. D., the Valabhî dynasty came to an end.³ And the ### [c8.s13.3](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.3) ¹ \*Gupta Inscriptions\*, p. 171. ### [c8.s13.4](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.4) ² \*Ind. Ant.\* Vol. VI. p. 16. ### [c8.s13.5](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.5) ³ The latest certain date for it is A. D. 766-67, for Śilâditya VII. But the apocryphal \*Satruñjaya-Mâhâtmya\*, which speaks (see \*Ind. Ant.\* Vol. II. p. 195) of a Śilâditya who lived in Vikrama-Saṃvat 477 and reigned till 286 (? 486), may possibly preserve a distorted reminiscence of later dates for him, or for a successor, in Valabhî-Saṃvat 477 and 486, = A. D. 796-97 and 805-806. ### [c8.s13.7](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.7) Râshṭrakûṭas probably then at once annexed all the territory to the north, as far as the Sâbarmatî: at any rate, the grants of Suvarṇavarsha-Karkarâja of A. D. 811 or 812, and of Prabhûtavarsha-Gôvindarâja of A. D. 812,¹ suffice to cover the intervening country up to the Mahî; the grant of Dhârâvarsha-Nirupama-Dhruvarâja, son of Suvarṇavarsha-Karkarâja,² shews that in A. D. 834 or 835 Kaira was a Râshṭrakûṭa town; and the grant of A. D. 909 or 910³ shews that the country round Kâpaḍwaṇaj, further to the north even than Kaira, was then a part of the dominions of Krishna II. What became of Kâṭhiâwâḍ and northern Gujarât after the end of the Valabhî period, is not yet known. The statements of some of the Arab travellers⁴ would suggest that the Râshṭrakûṭas pushed on to the frontier of Sindh. But it does not seem likely that they long retained any possessions in that direction. For, in A. D. 914 the territory on the west of the Sâbarmatî was in the possession of a king named Mahîpâla, who had a local representative, Dharaṇîvarâha, of the Châpa family, at Waḍhwâṇ in the north-east corner of Kâṭhiâwâḍ.⁵ And in A. D. 941-42⁶ Mûlarâja established the Chaulukya dynasty of Aṇhilwâḍ, to the north-west of Aḥmedâbâd, which retained the sovereignty of that part of the country for the next four centuries: the records of Krishna III. point to wars between him and Mûlarâja; and very possibly in his time the Râshṭrakûṭa frontier in that direction had to be drawn back to the Mahî, or even to the Narmadâ. The extent to which the territory acquired by the Râshṭrakûṭas from the Western Chalukyas was enlarged by them to the east and south, and the various means by which this was done, will be best gathered from the details given in the following pages; in those directions, the climax was reached in the time of Krishna III., who penetrated even to the Chingleput District, near Madras, on the east coast, and took Conjeeveram and Tanjore. ### [c8.s13.8](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.8) ¹ Page 399 below, Nos. 5, 6. ### [c8.s13.9](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.9) ² Page 404 below, No. 2. ### [c8.s13.10](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.10) ³ Page 413 below, No. 4. ### [c8.s13.11](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.11) ⁴ See page 388 below. ### [c8.s13.12](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.12) ⁵ See Ind. Ant. Vol. XII. p. 192; and, for the date, Vol. XVIII. p. 90. ### [c8.s13.13](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.13) ⁶ See id. Vol. VI. p. 213. ### [c8.s13.14](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.14) The later records of the Mâlkheḍ family represent the Râshṭrakûṭas as descendants of Yadu in the Sômavaṁśa or Lunar Race;⁷ some of them adding that they belonged to the Sâtyaki branch or clan.⁸ But this statement, which appears first in the Nausârî grants of Indra III. of A. D. 915, simply belongs to a period when all the great families of Southern India were devising Purâṇic pedigrees,⁹ and does not necessarily prove that the Râshṭrakûṭas were Âryans. And Dr. Burnell was apparently inclined to look on them as being of Drâviḍian origin: for, he gave the word râshṭra as a mythological perversion of raṭṭa; which he held to be equivalent to the Kanarese and Telugu raḍḍi or reḍḍi;¹⁰ and the latter word is explained in the dictionaries as de- ### [c8.s13.15](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.15) ⁷ Id. Vol. XII. pp. 252, 267. ### [c8.s13.16](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.16) ⁸ Jour. Bo. Br. R. As. Soc. Vol. XVIII. pp. 249, 265. ### [c8.s13.17](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.17) ⁹ See page 342 above, note 1. ### [c8.s13.18](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.18) ¹⁰ South-Indian Palæography, second edition, Introd. p. x.—According to Native authorities, however (e.g., Trivikrama; see Ind. Ant. Vol. XIV. p. 14), raṭṭa is a Prâkṛit form of the Sanskrit râshṭra. ### [c8.s13.20](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.20) noting "the caste of aboriginal Telugu farmers," or as being a title annexed to the proper names of members of that caste, and also as meaning "the head man of a village." Unless, however, the Guntûr grant of Attivarman,¹ is a Râshtrakûta record, the earliest traces of the Râshtrakûtas are obtained from Central India and the more northern parts of the Bombay Presidency, where, now at all events, the Reddi caste does not seem to exist. And this fact appears rather to indicate that the full name Râshtrakûta is either the origin, or a Sanskritised form, of Rahtôr or Rahtôd; and so to connect the Râshtrakûtas with Râjputâna and the Kanauj country in the North-West Provinces, which seem to have been the original habitats of the Rahtôr clan of Râjputs. On this view, "Ratta" would be an abbreviation of "Râshtrakûta," rather than "Râshtrakûta," an amplified form of "Ratta;" and it may be noted that "Râshtrakûta" is the name that is met with in the earliest documents,—for instance, in the grant of Abhimanyu, the Multâi grant of Nandarâja, and the Sâmângad grant of Dantidurga: the cases in which the name "Ratta" appears in the records of the Râshtrakûtas, distinctively so-called, are very few; and it was specially affected only by the Ratta chieftains of Saundatti,³ who did not use the name Râshtrakûta except in metrical passages that aim at grandiloquence. It may also be remarked that the Râshtrakûtas had the hereditary title of "lord of the town of Lattalûr or Lattanûr,"⁴ indicative of the place from which they originally started: this place has never yet been identified;⁵ but, if any representative of it still exists, it may not impossibly be found in Ratanpur in the Bilâspur District, Central Provinces; and this identification would be another point in favour of the Râshtrakûtas being of northern and Âryan origin. And finally, as another possible way of accounting for the name, it may be remarked that in early times there was a class of officials named Râshtrakûta, which title seems to have designated ### [c8.s13.21](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.21) ¹ See page 334 above. ### [c8.s13.22](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.22) ² The earliest instance, in the family records, is in connection with Amôghavarsha I. (Ind. Ant. Vol. XII. p. 220).—Among the Eastern Chalukya records, it is used first in the grant of Amma I. (South-Ind. Inscr. Vol. I. p. 42). ### [c8.s13.23](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.23) ³ See chapter VIII. below. ### [c8.s13.24](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.24) ⁴ Lattalûra-pura-paramêśvara (Ind. Ant. Vol. XII. p. 220). So, also, the Ratta chieftains of Saundatti styled themselves Lattalûr- and Lattanûr-puravar-êśvara (e.g., id. Vol. XIX. pp. 165, 248).—Another form in which the name appears, is Latalaura,—doubtless by mistake for Lattalaura. It occurs in an inscription of the time of the Western Chalukya king Vikramâditya VI., dated in A. D. 1087-88, at Sîtâbaldi in the Central Provinces, which says that his feudatory, the Mahâsâmanta Dhâdibhadaka or Dhâdibhandaka, of the "great" Râshtrakûta family, had emigrated from Latalaura.—One of the records of the Ratta chieftains of Saundatti (an unpublished inscription at Hannikeri in the Belgaum District, dated in A. D. 1208-1209) styles the Râshtrakûta king Krishna III. Kandhâra-puravar-adhîśvara or "supreme lord of Kandhârapura, the best of towns." This, however, is an isolated instance; and I know of no place that can be identified with an ancient Kandhârapura or Krishnapura. The name may possibly have been invented from an imaginary Krishnapura, derived from some passage similar to that in which the Eastern Chalukya king Gunuka-Vijayâditya III. is said to have effected the burning of the city of Krishna II. (Krishna-pura-dahana; see Ind. Ant. Vol. XX. p. 102, note 26). ### [c8.s13.25](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.25) ⁵ The suggestion, indeed, has been made (Graham's Statistical Report on the Principality of Kolhapur, p. 416) that it is Athnî, the chief town of the Athnî tâluka in the Belgaum District. But this, which is only based on the mistaken reading of 'Atanpur,' is quite unsustainable. ### [c8.s13.27](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.27) the head man of a \*râshṭra\* or province," just as \*Grâmakûṭa\* designated "the head man of a village :"¹ the Râshṭrakûṭas may have been feudatory and hereditary governors of provinces, who, when they rose to sovereign power, preserved their official title as a dynastic or family name.² ### [c8.s13.28](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.28) ¹ The earliest instance of the use of the title \*Râshṭrakûṭa\* is perhaps to be found in the Gôdâvarî-grant of Pṛithivîmûla (\*Jour. Bo. Br. R. As. Soc.\* Vol. XVI. p. 119). It occurs frequently in the Eastern Chalukya records (\*e.g., Ind. Ant.\* Vol. XIII. pp. 214, 249, and Vol. XIX. p. 417). And it is found even in the Sâmângaḍ grant of Khaḍgâvalôka-Dantidurga (\*id.\* Vol. XI. p. 114). ### [c8.s13.29](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.29) ² Dr. Bhandarkar's views (\*Early History of the Dekkan\*, 1884, p. 10, and note 4, and p. 36) appear to be that the Râshṭrakûṭas were an ancient Kshatriya tribe; that they are the Riṣṭikas or Râṣṭikas (= Râshṭrakas) of the Aśôka inscriptions (see, \*e.g., Ind. Ant.\* Vol. XX. p. 248); that they are also mentioned in inscriptions as Mahârathis, or, as he writes it, Mahâraṭṭhis; that they are the ancient Marâṭhâs; and that the name Râshṭrakûṭa originated from some of the Raṭṭhi or Raṭṭha tribes forming themselves into a family or group (\*kûṭa\*). I am not prepared at present to discuss all these points. But there is certainly one detail in which he is wrong. He objects to Pandit Bhagwanlal Indraji translating \*Mahâraṭhi\* by 'great warrior' (\*e.g., Cave-Temple Inscriptions\*, pp. 24, 29, 34; Dr. Bühler has rendered it by 'feudal baron,' \*Archaeol. Surv. West. Ind.\* Vol. V. p. 64), because the feminine form \*Mahârathini\* also occurs (\*Cave-Temple Inscriptions\*, p. 27), and, he says, to translate this by 'wife, or daughter, of a great warrior' is "simply begging the question;" his opinion is that "Mahârathi appears clearly to be the name of a tribe, and is the same as our modern Marâṭhâ." But, both in former times there was, and in the present day there still is, the practice of mentioning wives of officials by feminine forms of the titles of their husbands; note, for instance, \*Daṇḍanâyakiti\* as a feminine form of \*Daṇḍanâyaka\*, in a inscription of A.D. 1108-1109 (\*Ind. Ant.\* Vol. X. p. 254), and the Kanarese \*Gauḍasâni\*, and the Marâṭhî \*Pâṭlin\* and \*Dêsâin\*, as the designations of the wives of a \*Gauḍa\*, \*Pâṭil\*, or village-headman, and of a \*Dêsâi\* or hereditary head official of a \*pargana\*: so also, among religious titles, we have \*Vihârasvâmin\*, and the feminine form \*Vihârasvâmini\* (\*Gupta Inscriptions\*, pp. 263, 280). ### [c8.s13.30](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.30) According to the Kauthêm grant of A. D. 1009, there was an early Râshṭrakûṭa king Indra, son of Krishṇa, who was conquered by Jayasiṁha I., of the family of the Western Chalukyas of Bâdâmi, about the beginning of the sixth century A. D.³ And the tendency has been to find corroboration of this statement in certain coins from Dêvalâṇâ in the Nâsik District, which may be allotted to the period in question, just as well as to a somewhat later date, and which give the name of an early king Krishṇa. But, as has already been pointed out,⁴ the statement in question appears first in the eleventh century A. D., after the overthrow of the Râshṭrakûṭas by the Western Châlukyas of Kalyâṇi; in the early records, there is nothing whatever to support it; and it is evidently to be accounted for simply by the fact that, after the overthrow of Kakka II. by Taila II., there survived Indra IV., grandson of Krishṇa III., by crowning whom the Western Gaṅga prince Mârasimha attempted to continue the Râshṭrakûṭa sovereignty.⁵ As regards the coins, there is nothing that compels us to allot them to any dynasty in particular; and they are probably Kalachuri coins of Krishṇarâja, the father of Saṁkaragaṇa. ### [c8.s13.31](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.31) ³ \*Ind. Ant.\* Vol. XVI. p. 17. ### [c8.s13.32](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.32) ⁴ Page 296 above. ### [c8.s13.33](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.33) ⁵ See page 342 above, and, more fully, page 424 below. ### [c8.s13.34](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.34) We have possibly a Râshṭrakûṭa king in the Gôvinda who invaded the Western Chalukya dominions during the confusion that prevailed ### [c8.s13.36](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.36) from the death of Mangalêsa to the coronation of Pulikêsin II.; and who eventually became an ally of Pulikêsin.¹ ### [c8.s13.37](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.37) ¹ Page 350 above.—Dr. Bhandarkar has suggested (Early History of the Dekhan, 1884, p. 47) that he was probably Gôvinda I. of the Râshtrakûta line of Mâlkhêd. But, even apart from the fact that there is nothing to shew that Gôvinda I. enjoyed any regal power, the date of A. D. 608, to which we must refer the Gôvinda who is mentioned in the Aihole inscription, seems altogether too early for this identification. ### [c8.s13.38](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.38) And another early Râshtrakûta king may perhaps be found in the person of Attivarman,—of the family of king Kandara, i.e. Krishna, in the lineage of the great saint Ânanda, and belonging to the posterity of the god Hiranyagarbha, i.e. Brahman,—whose existence is proved by the copper-plate grant from the Guntûr District, Madras Presidency.² ### [c8.s13.39](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.39) ² Page 334 above. ### [c8.s13.40](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.40) Abhimanyu. ### [c8.s13.41](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.41) The earliest certain mention of Râshtrakûtas, however,³ is to be found in a copper-plate grant which gives the following short genealogy:—(1) Mâna, or Mâvânka, who was "an ornament of the Râshtrakûtas;" (2) his son, Dêvarâja; (3) his son, Bhavishya, with two others whose names are not given; and (4) Bhavishya's son, Abhimanyu, who, when resident at a town named Mânapura, in the presence of a certain Jayasimha who, is described as "the chastiser of the Kotta Harivatsa," granted to a Brâhman a village named Undikavâtikâ, on behalf of the god Dakshina-Siva of Pethapangaraka. The record is not dated; but it may be allotted, on palæographic grounds, to approximately the seventh century A. D. And Mânapura may possibly be identified with the modern Mânpur in Mâlwa, about twelve miles south-west of Mhow.⁴ It is to be noted that the crest of these Râshtrakûtas, as indicated by the device on the seal of the charter, was a lion; and they must, therefore, have belonged to a branch of the Râshtrakûta stock separate from that of the Mâlkhêd family. ### [c8.s13.42](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.42) ³ Dr. Bhandarkar (Early History of the Dekhan, 1884, p. 36) was inclined to look upon the Kanheri grant as a Râshtrakûta record. But (see Ind. Ant. Vol. XV. p. 150) this is a mistake: the first word is, not strâshtrakûtânâm, giving the name of Strakûta or Strakûta, for Râshtrakûta, but ttraikûtakanâm, "of the Traikûtakas;" and (see page 294 above) the grant is in all probability a Kalachuri record. ### [c8.s13.43](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.43) ⁴ Ind. Ant. Vol. XVIII. p. 233. ### [c8.s13.44](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.44) Nandarâja. ### [c8.s13.45](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.45) And next after this comes the Mûltâi grant, from the Bêtûl District, Central Provinces,⁵ which gives the following list of names "in the Râshtrakûta lineage":—(1) Durgarâja; (2) his son, Gôvindarâja; (3) his son, Svâmikarâja; and (4) his son, Yuddhâsura-Nandarâja, who granted to a Brâhman a village named Jalaûkuhe. The grant was made on the full-moon day of the month Kârttika, Saka-Samvat 631; and the corresponding English date is, approximately, the 24th October A. D. 709, if the Saka year is applied as expired. The device on the seal of the grant is a Garuda; from which it may be inferred that these princes were of the same descent with the Râshtrakûtas of Mâlkhêd: but the exact connection is not yet known. ### [c8.s13.46](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.46) ⁵ ibid. p. 230.—Assuming that this record really belongs to the locality where it was found, it furnishes the earliest known instance of the use of Nâgarî characters in Southern India, i.e. south of the Narmadâ (see page 377 above, note 3.) ### [c8.s13.48](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.48) We come now to the Râshtrakûtas of Mâlkhêd, whose genealogy is given in the accompanying table. In their records, the kings of this line almost invariably give their dynastic or family name as Râshtra- ### [c8.s13.49](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.49) | | Dantivarman I. | | | | | | | | | | Indra I. | | First Gujarat Branch. | | | | | | | | Gôvinda I. | | Kakkarâja I. | | | | | | | | Karka, or Kakka I. | | Dhruvarâjadêva. | | | | | | | | | | | | | Indra II. | (2) Akâlavarsha-Subhatunga-Krishna I. | Gôvindarâja. | | | | | | | (1) Khadgâvalôka-Dantidurga, or Dantivarman II. (A. D. 754.) | Gôvinda II. | (3) Dhârâvarsha-Kalivallabha-Nirupama-Dhruva. | Kakkarâja II. (A. D. 757.) | | | | | | | | | Second Gujarat Branch. | | | | | | | | | (4) Prabhûtavarsha-Srîvallabha-Jagattunga-Gôvinda III.; married Gâmundabbe. (A. D. 783-84 and 814-15.) | Indrarâja. | | | | | | | | | | Suvarnavarsha-Karkarâja. (A. D. 811-12.) | Prabhûtavarsha-Gôvindarâja. (A. D. 812 and 826-27.) | | | | | | | | | Dhârâvarsha-Nirupama-Dhruvarâja. (A. D. 834-35.) | | | | | | | | | (5) Nripatunga-Mahârâjaśarva-Amôghavarsha I. (A. D. 814-15 and 877-78.) | Akâlavarsha-Subhatunga. | | | | | | | | | | Dhârâvarsha-Nirupama-Dhruvarâja. (A. D. 866-67.) | (Another son.) | Gôvindarâja. | | | | | | | | | ? Dantivarman. | | | | | | | | | | (6) Akâlavarsha-Subhatunga-Krishna II. (A. D. 888 and 911-12.) | ? Akâlavarsha-Krishnarâja. (A. D. 888.) | | | | | | | | | | Jagattunga II. | | | | | | | | | | | By Lakshmî. | By Gôvindâmbâ. | | | | | | | | | | (7) Nityavarsha-Indra III.; married Vijâmbâ. (A. D. 915 and 916-17.) | (9) Amôghavarsha-Vaddiga; married Kundakadêvî. | | | | | | | | | Amôghavarsha II. | (8) Prabhûtavarsha-Suvarnavarsha-Nripatunga-Gôvinda IV. (A. D. 918 and 933.) | (10) Akâlavarsha-Krishna III. (A. D. 940 and 956.) | Jagattunga III. | (11) Nityavarsha-Khottiga. Nirupama. (A. D. 971.) | (A daughter; married to Permânadi-Bûtuga). | | | | | | | | | (A son.) | | (12) Amôghavarsha-Nripatunga-Kakkala, or Kakka II. (A. D. 972 and 973.) | | | | | | | | | | Indra IV. Died A. D. 982.) | | | | ### [c8.s13.50](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.50) the \*Goths\*, the \*Vandals\*, the \*Suevi\*, the \*Burgundians\*, the \*Alani\*, the \*Huns\*, the \*Franks\*, the \*Saxons\*, the \*Thuringians\*, the \*Rugians\*, and the \*Heruli\*. The names of these tribes are familiar to the reader, but their origin, their migrations, and their settlements are involved in the deepest obscurity. The most probable opinion is that they were all of German or Scythian extraction, and that they had been driven from their native seats by the pressure of the Huns, a formidable nation of Tartars, who had crossed the Volga and the Tanais, and were advancing with rapid strides towards the frontiers of the Roman empire. ### [c8.s13.51](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.51) The first of these nations that crossed the Danube was the \*Goths\*. They were divided into two great branches, the \*Visigoths\* or Western Goths, and the \*Ostrogoths\* or Eastern Goths. The Visigoths, under the conduct of Fritigern, implored the protection of the emperor Valens, and were permitted to settle in the province of Thrace. But the perfidy of the Roman governors, and the insolence of the Roman soldiers, soon provoked them to rebellion. They defeated the imperial armies, and Valens himself perished in the battle of Hadrianople. ### [c8.s13.52](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.52) The death of Valens was followed by the accession of Theodosius, who, by his wisdom and valour, restored the discipline of the Roman legions, and compelled the Goths to accept a peace, which was rather a truce than a permanent settlement. The Goths, however, remained in the heart of the empire, and their presence was a constant source of danger and alarm. They were no longer the rude barbarians who had first crossed the Danube; they had learned the arts of war and the policy of the Romans, and they were ready to take advantage of any opportunity to assert their independence. ### [c8.s13.53](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.53) The reign of Theodosius was the last period of the glory of the Roman empire. After his death, the empire was divided between his two sons, Arcadius and Honorius. Arcadius reigned in the East, and Honorius in the West. The division was fatal to the interests of the state. The two brothers were weak and indolent, and they were governed by their ministers and favourites. The Goths, under the command of Alaric, took advantage of the weakness of the government, and invaded Italy. They besieged and took Rome, and the eternal city, which had for so many centuries been the mistress of the world, was plundered by the barbarians. ### [c8.s13.54](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.54) The fall of Rome was a shock to the whole civilized world. It was the end of an era, and the beginning of a new and darker age. The Goths, after the death of Alaric, retired from Italy, and settled in Gaul and Spain, where they founded kingdoms which were destined to last for several centuries. The Vandals, under the command of Genseric, crossed into Africa, and established a powerful kingdom, which for a time threatened the security of the Mediterranean. The Franks, under the command of Clovis, conquered Gaul, and laid the foundations of the French monarchy. The Saxons, under the command of Hengist and Horsa, invaded Britain, and established the kingdoms of the Heptarchy. ### [c8.s13.55](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.55) kûṭa; in fact, except in the biruda Raṭṭa-Kandarpa; applied to Gôvinda IV. and Khoṭṭiga,¹ the only citable instances in their own records, in which the form Raṭṭa is used, are in the Sirûr inscription, where Amôghavarsha I. is described as "born in the Raṭṭa vamśa or race;"² in the Nausârî grants of Indra III., of A. D. 915, which speak of Amôghavarsha I. as "raising again the glory of the Raṭṭas, which had been drowned in the Chalukya ocean;"³ and in the Dêôlî grant, which places an eponymous person named Raṭṭa⁴ at the head of the genealogy, and uses the same word in one or two other places. They had the pâlidhvaja-banner, and also the ókakétu or (?) bird-ensign, the Garuḍa-lâñchhana or crest of Garuḍa, the servant and carrier of Vishṇu, and the hereditary title of "supreme lord of the town of Lattalûra;" they were heralded in public by the musical instrument called ṭivili;⁵ from a verse which stands at the beginning of some of the records,⁶ they seem to have worshipped both Vishṇu and Śiva as family-gods; the images or emblems of the rivers Gaṅgâ and Yamunâ appear to have been among their insignia,⁷ having been probably acquired by them, with the pâlidhvaja-banner, from the Western Chalukyas of Bâdâmi, who had obtained them by conquering some king of Northern India; and their kingdom came to be known as Raṭṭapâṭi, "the country of the Raṭṭas," and as "the Raṭṭapâḍi seven-and-a-half-lâkh country."⁸ As regards the Garuḍa-crest, which ought to appear on the seals of all their copper-plate charters,—as is now shewn by the better preserved seal of the Paithan grant of Gôvinda III., of A. D. 794,⁹ it is met with there, and on the seals of the Sâmângad grant of Dantidurga of A. D. 754, the Kanarese grant of Gôvinda III. of A. D. 804, the Waṇi grant of the same king of A. D. 807, and the Barôda grant of Suvarṇavarsha-Karkarâja of Gujarât, of A. D. 811 or 812;¹⁰ but the seal of the Kardâ grant of Kakka II., of A. D. 972, bears, instead, an elaborate representative of the god Śiva.¹¹ ### [c8.s13.56](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.56) ¹ Ind. Ant. Vol. XII. p. 249, 256. ### [c8.s13.57](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.57) ² ibid. p. 220. ### [c8.s13.58](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.58) ³ Jour. Bo. Br. R. As. Soc. Vol. XVIII. p. 266. ### [c8.s13.59](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.59) ⁴ ibid. pp. 249, 251. ### [c8.s13.60](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.60) ⁵ Ind. Ant. Vol. XII. pp. 219, 220.—The word ṭivili appears in records of the Raṭṭa chieftains of Saundatti in the forms of trivale, trivali, and trivali.—As regards musical instruments in general, see page 327 above, note 7. ### [c8.s13.61](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.61) ⁶ e. g., id. Vol. XI. p. 113; Vol. XII. p. 219. ### [c8.s13.62](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.62) ⁷ See page 338 above, and note 7. ### [c8.s13.63](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.63) ⁸ See page 341 above, and note 2. ### [c8.s13.64](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.64) ⁹ Epigraphia Indica, Vol. III. p. 103, and plate. ### [c8.s13.65](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.65) ¹⁰ Ind. Ant. Vol. XI. pp. 108, 125, 156, and Vol. XII. p. 156, and the plate given with each. ### [c8.s13.66](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.66) ¹¹ id. Vol. XII. p. 263, and plate. ### [c8.s13.67](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.67) From about the middle of the ninth century A. D., we have a variety of interesting contemporaneous references to the kings of this dynasty, under the name of Balharâs, and to their capital, under the name of Mânkîr, in the writings of the early Arab travellers and geographers,—the merchant Sulaimân (A. D. 851), Abû Zaid (shortly before A. D. 916), Ibn-Khurdâdba (died A. D. 912), Al Mas'ûdî (wrote A. D. 932-933, and died A. D. 956), Al Istakhrî (wrote ### [c8.s13.69](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.69) about A. D. 951); and Ibn Hauḳal (between A. D. 943 and 968).¹ The general purport of these accounts is, that the princes of India did not recognise the supremacy of any one sovereign,—each being his own master; still, the Balharâ,—whose appellation is explained as meaning “king of kings,” and as being, not a proper name, but a dynastic title, similar to the Khosru of the Persians,—was recognised as the greatest king in India, and homage was paid to him by all the other princes. Both the Balharâ kings, and their subjects, are described as extremely partial to Musalmâns; and Ibn Haukal and Al Istakhrî say that Musalmân governors of cities were employed by them. The same two writers appear to describe the Balharâ kingdom as extending from Kambâya to Saimûr; as, however, these two cities were on the confines of Sind, the statement must be intended to give only a northern limit and extent. Sulaimân, on the other hand, says that the kingdom commenced on the sea-side, at the Konkan country; but he does not tell us how far across India it extended. The country is called ‘Kamkar;’ but the origin of this appellation is not apparent.² The capital is called Mâlkheḍ, which represents the real name fairly closely; and Al Mas’ûdî specifies it as eighty Sindi \*parasangs\* from the sea: here, however, there must be some mistake; for, the given distance denotes six hundred and forty miles, which, on the latitude of Mâlkheḍ, carries us more than quite across India; and Mâlkheḍ is as near as possible only two hundred and ninety miles almost due east of Ratnâgiri. According to Al Mas’ûdî, the language of the kingdom was called ‘Kîriya,’ and took its name from a place named ‘Kîra:’ Dr. Bühler, however, has pointed out that, with a very slight change of the diacritical points, we may read ‘Kanara,’ \*i.e.\* ‘Kannaḍa;’ and the vernacular of the country round Mâlkheḍ was, of course, Kanarese. ### [c8.s13.70](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.70) ¹ Sir H. M. Elliot’s \*History of India\*, edited by Prof. Dowson, Vol. I, pp. 3-40; apparently, the chapter on the Arab geographers is mainly Prof. Dowson’s work (editor’s preface, pp. xi., xii.).—The Balharâs were identified by Prof. Dowson with the kings of Valabhî (\*id.\* p. 354). It seems that Dr. Bhau Daji first identified them with the Râshtrakûṭas; and this identification, which cannot be questioned, has been endorsed by Dr. Bühler in 1877 (\*Ind. Ant.\* Vol. VI., p. 64), and by Dr. Bhandarkar in 1884 (\*Early History of the Dekkan\*, p. 56). It is Dr. Bhandarkar, however, who explained the true origin of the word Balharâ; viz., in the Sanskrit \*vallabha-râja\*, through the Prâkrit \*ballaha-râya\*.—In later times, the Arabs used the word Balharâ to denote the Chaulukyas of Aṇhilwâḍ (\*e.g.\*, Al Idrisi, towards the end of the eleventh century A.D.; \*loc. cit.\*, pp. 85, 86, 87). ### [c8.s13.71](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.71) ² \*e.g.\*, \*loc. cit.\*, p. 25. ### [c8.s13.72](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.72) Dantivarman I., and Indra I. ### [c8.s13.73](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.73) The first two names, of Dantivarman I. and Indra I., are taken from an inscription at the Daśâvatâra temple at Ellôrâ, near Auraṅgâbâd in the Nizâm’s Dominions,³ which, omitting some intermediate names after Dantidurga, carries the genealogy on as far as Amôghavarsha I., but was then left unfinished. It furnishes, however, no historical information in respect of them; and none of the other records carry the genealogy back beyond Gôvinda I. ### [c8.s13.74](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.74) ³ \*Cave-Temple Inscriptions\*, p. 92; and \*Archaeol. Surv. West. Ind.\* Vol. V. p. 87. ### [c8.s13.75](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.75) Gôvinda I., and Karka or Kakka I. ### [c8.s13.76](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.76) Regarding Gôvinda I., again, and his son, whose name appears sometimes as Kakka and sometimes as Karka, we have no information beyond the mention of their names. No historical facts are recorded in respect of them; and it does not seem at all likely that either of them enjoyed any regal power.¹ ### [c8.s13.77](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.77) ¹ For a remark in connection with Gôvinda I., see page 386 above, note 1. ### [c8.s13.78](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.78) And in connection with Indra II., all that we are told is, that his wife, whose name is not given, was the daughter of a Chalukya father and of a mother who belonged to the Sômavamśa or 'Lunar Race.'² It is a justifiable inference from this, that up to his time the Râshtrakûtas had not come into hostile contact with the Western Chalukyas, or made any attempt to dispossess them. ### [c8.s13.79](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.79) ² Ind. Ant. Vol. XI. p. 114. ### [c8.s13.80](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.80) The first king in the dynasty, and the real founder of it, was Dantidurga, "he whose fortress is (his) elephant," for whom we have a date in January, A.D. 754.³ His name appears, in one passage, in the form of Dantivarman, "he whose armour is his elephant."⁴ He had the biruda of Khadgâvalôka, meaning probably "he whose glances are as keen as the edge of a sword,"⁵ and the epithet of prithivivallabha; in one of the later records he is spoken of as king Vallabha or the vallabha-king;⁶ and he used the titles of Mahârâjâdhirâja, Paramêśvara, and Paramabhattâraka. His own record says that his elephants rent asunder the banks of the rivers Mahî, Mahânadî, and Rêvâ (the Narmadâ),—that he acquired the supreme sovereignty by conquering Vallabha, i.e. the Western Chalukya king Kîrtivarman II.,—and that, with but a small force, he quickly overcame the boundless Karnâtaka army, i.e. the Western Chalukya troops, which had been expert in defeating the lord of Kâñchî, the Chôlas and the Pândyas, and Harsha and Vajrata. And the date of it shews that he and his connections had dispossessed Kîrtivarman II. of all except the southern provinces of the Chalukya dominions, before A.D. 754; a copper-plate grant from the Surat District, however,⁷ indicates that, in the north, the Lâta country was taken, not by Dantidurga, but by some member of a separate independent branch of his family, of which the representative in A.D. 757 was Kakkarâja II. The Ellôrâ inscription, mentioning the conquest of Vallabha, adds that Dantidurga completed the acquisition of sovereignty by subjugating the ruler of (?) Sandhubhûpa, the lord of Kâñchî, the rulers of Kalinga and Kôsala, the lord of Srîsaila country, i.e. the Karnûl territory, the (?) Sêshas,⁸ and the kings of Mâlava, Lâta, and Tanka. He seems to have ultimately made himself unpopular, and to have been deposed in favour of his uncle Krishna I. ### [c8.s13.81](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.81) ³ Among the points in support of the position that Dantidurga was the first king in the Mâlkhed line, the fact may be specially adduced, that his grant does not mention him as meditating on the feet of a predecessor, whereas the formal grants of the later members of the family do so in respect of them. ### [c8.s13.82](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.82) ⁴ Ind. Ant. Vol. XI. p. 111. ### [c8.s13.83](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.83) ⁵ The Kadab grant, which purports to be dated in A.D. 813, would speak of him by the biruda of Vairamêgha, "the cloud of enmity" (Ind. Ant. Vol. XVII. p. 17). As regards the authenticity of this record, however, see page 399 below, note 7. And the biruda is not supported by any other document. ### [c8.s13.84](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.84) ⁶ Ind. Ant. Vol. XII. p. 187. ### [c8.s13.85](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.85) ⁷ See page 392 below. ### [c8.s13.86](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.86) ⁸ Perhaps a Nâga tribe. ### [c8.s13.88](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.88) Of the time of Dantidurga, we have only one record,—a copper-plate grant, obtained at Sâmângad in the Kolhâpur State,¹ which records that he made a grant to a Brâhman on the seventh tithi, called ratha-saptamî, in the month Mâgha, Saka-Samvat 675 expired.² The record is connected, in a general way, with the part of the country in which it was obtained, by the fact that the grantee was a resident of Karaḥâṭaka, which is the modern Karâḍ or Karhâḍ, the chief town of the tâluka of the same name in the Sâtârâ District. But a more specific indication is afforded by the fact that, in the description of the boundaries of the village or villages which formed the subject of the grant, mention is made of a village named Aitavaḍe as defining the northern limit. This seems plainly to be Aitavaḍe-Khurd,³ seven miles south of Pêṭh, the chief town of the Wâlwa tâluka, Sâtârâ District. Accepting this identification, we may take the long word, read as Karaṇḍivadêjaphitaḍêulavaḍâ, which contains the name of the subject of the grant, as giving a combination of the names of two villages, Karañjavaḍê and Dêvaḍê, which are just to the south of Aitavaḍê-Khurd. And it may further be added, that the record places a village named Pâragâon on the south of the subject of the grant, and the map shews a Pârgaon just to the south by west of Karañjavaḍê and Dêvaḍê; it is separated from them by the river Wârṇâ; but the river may possibly have run somewhat differently in ancient times; and this may account for it not being mentioned among the boundaries. ### [c8.s13.89](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.89) ¹ Ind. Ant. Vol. XI. p. 108. ### [c8.s13.90](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.90) ² This is the earliest known epigraphic record in which the date (given here both in words and in figures) is expressed by ordinary figures arranged according to the decimal system of notation. But the Sânkhêḍâ grant of the (Kalachuri or Chêdi) year 346 (expired), = A.D. 595-96 (see page 313 above, note 4), furnishes a very exceptional instance, of earlier date, of the use of the decimal system in connection with numerical symbols. From this point onwards, it is to be understood, unless anything to the contrary is expressly stated, that all the dates are expressed either by decimal figures pure and simple, or in words. This record further furnishes one of the earliest known instances of the use of Nâgarî characters in Southern India (see page 377 above, note 3, and page 386, note 5.) ### [c8.s13.91](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.91) ³ The ‘Ucetowreh (4)’ of the Indian Atlas, sheet No. 40. ### [c8.s13.92](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.92) Krishna I. ### [c8.s13.93](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.93) Dantidurga was succeeded by his uncle Krishna I.; who had the birudas of Akâlavarsha, “the untimely rainer,”⁴ and Subhatunga, “prominent or conspicuous in good fortune.” Some of the records mention him by the epithet of vallabha,⁵ and others of them might be interpreted as giving him the biruda of Srîvallabha;⁶ but, in the latter case, the word is broken up in a manner that is not customary when it is really intended as a formal attribute.⁷ A later record says that he succeeded because Dantidurga died without issue,⁸ and another ### [c8.s13.94](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.94) ⁴ e. g., Ind. Ant. Vol. XI. p. 160. ### [c8.s13.95](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.95) ⁵ e. g., id. Vol. XIV. p. 201. ### [c8.s13.96](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.96) ⁶ Also, the Kaḍab grant would give his name in the form of Kannêśvara; and would allot to him the biruda Akâlavarsha (Ind. Ant. Vol. II. p. 17). But, at the best, Kannêśvara is a mistake for Kannâra; and as regards the general question of this record, see page 399 below, note 7. ### [c8.s13.97](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.97) ⁷ Ind. Ant. Vol. XII. p. 287. ### [c8.s13.99](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.99) says that he succeeded on the death of Dantidurga¹ but the record that approximates most closely to his own time, and therefore is more probably correct, states that he uprooted his relative (Dantidurga), who had resorted to evil ways, and appropriated the kingdom to himself, for the benefit of his family;² and there are indications elsewhere in support of this. He completed the establishment of the Rāshṭrakūṭa supremacy by finally overthrowing Kīrtivarman II.: thus, the Waṇī grant of A. D. 807 says that he "quickly tore away the goddess of fortune from the Chalukya family, which was hard to be overcome by others;³ and the Barōda grant of A. D. 811 or 812 says that he "transformed into a deer, i. e. put to flight, the great boar, the crest of the Chalukyas, which was seized with an itching for battle, and which, kindled with the warmth of bravery, attacked him;⁴ this event must be placed after A. D. 757, which is the latest date that we have for Kīrtivarman II. Also, other records describe him as extending his sovereignty by conquering a certain Rāhapa, Rāhappa, or Rāhapya,⁵ whose identity has not yet been made quite clear, but whose high position and power are indicated by the statement that, by conquering him, Kṛishṇa I. attained supreme sovereignty, resplendent by numerous pālidhvaja-banners. And one of his achievements was to have constructed in the hill at Elāpura, i. e. at Veṛūḷ, Yeṛūḷ, Yeṛuḷa, Eḷūrā, or Ellōrā, in the Nizām's Dominions, an elaborate temple of Śiva which is to be identified with the so-called Kailāsa temple.⁶ ### [c8.s13.100](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.100) ¹ \*Ind. Ant.\* Vol. XII. p. 187. ### [c8.s13.101](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.101) ² \*ibid.\* p. 162. ### [c8.s13.102](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.102) ³ \*id.\* Vol. XI. p. 160. ### [c8.s13.103](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.103) ⁴ \*id.\* Vol. XII. p. 162. ### [c8.s13.104](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.104) ⁵ \*ibid.\* p. 187; and Vol. XIII. p. 67. ### [c8.s13.105](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.105) ⁶ The place is to be found under the name Ellōrā, in the \*Indian Atlas\*, sheet No. 38, in lat. 20° 2', long. 75° 14'. It is the chief town of the Ellōrā pargaṇā in the Aurangābād tāluka. To the local inhabitants, it is known only as Veṛūḷ and Yeṛūḷ, sometimes pronounced Yeṛuḷa; and the name is entered as Veṛūḷ in the Survey map of the village. It would be interesting to ascertain how the name Ellōrā, which is undoubtedly more correct, has been preserved; but at present I can only say that this, or Eḷūrā, is the form in which the name is known among Musalmāns. It is Dr. Bhandarkar who, through being able to quote an unsuspected meaning of the word Kīrtana, pointed out the correct translation of the passage that describes the construction of the temple for Kṛishṇa I., and indicated the identity of the shrine (\*Ind. Ant.\* Vol. XII. p. 228, and \*Early History of the Dekkan\*, 1884, p. 48): And, that he is right, cannot be doubted by anyone who has seen the Kailāsa temple, which is of considerable size, most elaborate in its design and details, carved out of the solid rock, and with verandahs and chambers in the rock surrounding it, on three sides (see Dr. Burgess' \*Rock Temples of Elura or Verul\*, pp. 41-55; also the photograph given by him as the frontispiece of \*Archæol. Surv. West. Ind.\* Vol. V.). As regards the identity of the name Elāpura with that of the village where the Ellōrā caves are, I do not agree with Dr. Bhandarkar in respect of his view that the modern name is derived from the Sanskrit Elāpura. The place is undoubtedly the one which is mentioned as Veḷūra in Varāhamihira's \*Brihat-Saṃhitā\*, xiv. 14 (see \*Ind. Ant.\* Vol. XXII, p. 193); as Vallūra (i. e. Veḷūra) in the inscription in the Buddhist vihāra, known as the Ghaṭōtkacha-cave, near Gulwāḍā in the neighbourhood of Ajaṇṭā (\*Archæol. Surv. West. Ind.\* Vol. IV. pp. 139, 140); and as Valūraka, or probably more correctly Vallūraka (for Veḷūraka), in a Buddhist inscription at the chaitya-cave at Kārle (\*Cave-Temple Inscriptions\*, p. 33); I differ from the translation given there, and take the record to mean that the village of Karajika was granted to some members of the community of the ascetics "whose permanent abode was in the cave-temples at Vallūraka," and who had come to pass the rainy season at, Kārle). These two records are much older than the Rāshṭrakūṭa. ### [c8.s13.106](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.106) Kakkarâja I., Dhruvarâjadêva, Gôvindarâja, and Kakkarâja II., of Gujarat. ### [c8.s13.107](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.107) this reign that the feudatory nobles of the Silâhâra family were first brought to the front, by Krishna I. entrusting Sanaphulla, the founder of the southern Konkan branch, with the government of a territory lying between the ocean and the Sahyâdri mountains, i.e. the Western Ghauts.¹ ### [c8.s13.108](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.108) ¹ See chapter VIII. below. ### [c8.s13.109](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.109) We have no records that distinctly refer themselves to the reign of Krishna I. But it is to his time, probably, that we must allot a copper-plate grant from the Surat District,² which gives the earliest indication of branches of the Râshtrakûta family in Gujarât. This record mentions—(1) a Râshtrakûta prince named Kakkarâja I.; (2) his son, Dhruvarâjadêva; (3) his son, Gôvindarâja, whose wife was a daughter of Nâgavarman; and (4) his son, the Mahârâjâdhirâja, Paramêśvara, and Paramabhattâraka Kakkarâja II.,—described also as a parama-mahêśvara, or most devout worshipper of the god Mahêśvara (Siva),—who granted to a Brâhman a village named Sthâvarapallikâ in the Kâsakûla vishaya. The grant was made at the autumnal equinox, on the seventh tithi in the bright fortnight of the month Âśvayuja, Saka-Samvat 679 (expired), and the corresponding English date is the 24th September, A. D. 757.³ It has already been noted that, the Kâsakûla or Kâsakûla vishaya was evidently the country on the northern bank of the Tapti.⁴ And Pandit Bhagwanlal Indraji pointed out that Sthâvarapallikâ is the modern Chhârôli itself, where the plates were obtained. Both the names and the device of a Garuda on the seal, tend to indicate that the persons who are mentioned in this record were of the same branch with the Râshtrakûtas of Mâlkhêd. But the place in the genealogy to which they may be referred, is not apparent.⁵ And the record is chiefly of interest in shewing that, contemporaneously with Dantidurga and Krishna I., there was another Râshtrakûta paramount sovereign in the more northern part of the country. It seems possible that Kakkarâja II. is the Râhapa, Râlappa, or Râhapya, by the defeat of whom Krishna I. extended his ### [c8.s13.110](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.110) ² Jour. Bo. Br. As. Soc. Vol. XVI. p. 105. ### [c8.s13.111](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.111) ³ Ind. Ant. Vol. XVIII. p. 55.—This record gives the first authentic instance (see also ibid, p. 91) of the use of the Saka era in Gujarât, in a date the details of which can be tested by calculation. It also gives a rather exceptionally late instance of the use of numerical symbols, in expressing the date. ### [c8.s13.112](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.112) ⁴ Page 359 above. ### [c8.s13.113](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.113) ⁵ In editing the record, Pandit Bhagwanlal Indraji suggested that Kakka or Karkâ I. may have had, besides Indra II. and Krishna I., another son named Dhruvarâjadêva. ### [c8.s13.114](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.114) period. They, and the passage in the Brihat-Samhitâ, give the ancient vernacular name of the place. The form Elûrâ or Ellôrâ is naturally derived from it. And Elâpura is, in my opinion, only a Sânskritised form of the latter. Verûl-is, I suppose, a corruption of Vellûr, chiefly by metathesis; and Yerulâ, of Verûl.—There may, quite possibly, be a reference to Ellôrâ, and to the number of the cave-temples there, in the expression dvâtrimśad-vêlâpura, which occurs in the Buddhist inscription of A.D. 1095 at Dambal (Ind. Ant. Vol. X. p. 186, line 29), and in other inscriptions (not Buddhist) in the Kanarese country.—Dr. Bühler (Archæol. Surv. West. Ind. Vol. V. p. 89) has suggested that Elâpura may possibly have been on the hill above the Elûrâ caves, on which, beyond the modern town of Rôzah, are the remains of an old Hindû city. The Musalmân town of Rôzah itself seemed to me to have been largely constructed from Hindû remains. But I think there is no necessity for locating, Vellûra, Vellûraka, or Elâpura, otherwise than where the present village of Verûl is. ### [c8.s13.115](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.115) kingdom. And, as Chhârôlî is in the Lâṭa country it may be taken for certain that he was one of the lords of Lâṭa, whose territory was subsequently given, as a feudatory province, by Gôvinda III. to his younger brother Indrarâja of Gujarât. The intermediate history of the Lâṭa country has not yet been worked out. But there appears to be, in the records of the brothers Karkarâja and Gôvindarâja, sons of the same Indrarâja, a reference to descendants of Kakkarâja II., who may have continued to hold the province for another thirty years or so, until they were dispossessed by Gôvinda III. ### [c8.s13.116](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.116) Krishna I. left two sons, Gôvinda II. and Dhruva. As regards the elder of them, to whose name some of the records attach the epithet vallabha,¹ the most probable conclusion is that he did not succeed to the throne. Dr. Bühler, indeed, has held the opinion that he did reign, but not for long, being dethroned by his younger brother; Dhruva.² And the statement in the Dêôli grant of A. D. 940, that "sensual pleasures made him careless of the kingdom, and, entrusting fully the universal sovereignty to his younger brother, he allowed his position as sovereign to become loose," might perhaps be quoted in support of this view. But the earlier records distinctly say that Dhruva attained the sovereignty "by jumping over his elder brother,"³ which points plainly to an act of complete supersession; and, in support of this view, it is to be noted that some of the subsequent records pass Gôvinda II. over quite unnoticed. That he made an attempt to secure the succession, is, indeed, shewn by the statement in the Paithan grant, of A. D. 796, that he called to his assistance the hostile kings of Mâlava, Kâñchî, and Veṅgî, and of the Gaṅga country. This, however, seems to only emphasise the real fact that is disclosed by the pointed expression used in respect of Dhruva.⁴ ### [c8.s13.117](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.117) ¹ The Kaḍab grant would give him the biruda of Prabhûtavarsha. As regards this record, however, see page 399 below, note 7. ### [c8.s13.118](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.118) ² Ind. Ant. Vol. VI. p. 62. ### [c8.s13.119](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.119) ³ Jêshṭh-ôllaṅghana; ibid. p. 69. ### [c8.s13.120](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.120) ⁴ As regards an extraneous passage which has been taken as meaning that he did reign, and was on the throne in A. D. 783-84, see page 395 below, note 1. ### [c8.s13.121](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.121) Krishna I., then, was succeeded by his younger son Dhruva, "the constant or immovable one," whose name appears also in the Prâkṛit form of Dhôra. He had the birudas of Dhârâvarsha, "the heavy rainer," Kalivallabha, "the favourite of the Kali age," which appears in his Paṭṭadakal inscription in the Prâkṛit form of Kaliballaha, and Nirupama, "the unequalled one," and the epithet of śrîprithivivallabha; and he used the titles of Mahârâjâdhirâja, Paramêśvara, and Bhaṭṭâra.⁵ He imprisoned a Gaṅga king, took elephants from a Pallava king, whom he compelled to bow down before him; and drove Vatsarâja, who had seized the kingdom of Gauḍa (in Bengal), into the deserts of Maru (Mârwâr), and despoiled him of the two white umbrellas of sovereignty which he had taken from the king of Gauḍa: this person is Vatsarâja, king of Ujjain, for whom we have, just after ### [c8.s13.122](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.122) ⁵ See page 368 above, and note 1. In the Sanskrit records of his son and successor, Paramabhaṭṭâraka is substituted. ### [c8.s13.124](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.124) Dhruva's time, the date of A. D. 783-84, when he was contemporaneous with Dhruva's son Gôvinda III., probably he had then re-established himself at Ujjain. His successor's records shew that Dhruva invested Gôvinda III. with the kanthikâ or necklet that was indicative of appointment as Yuvarâja; and they also imply that he contemplated abdicating in Gôvinda's favour, but was dissuaded from doing so. ### [c8.s13.125](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.125) Of the time of Dhruva, we have only one published record,—the stone inscription at the temple of Lôkêśvara-(Virûpâksha) at Paṭṭadakal, in the Bijâpur District, which mentions grants that were made to the temple by the harlot Bâḍipoddi or Bâlipoddi; the record is not dated.³ ### [c8.s13.126](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.126) ³ I have also a record of his time, again without date, from Narêgal in the Hangal tâluka, Dhârwâr District, which mentions a feudatory of his, named Marakka, who was governing the Banavasi twelve thousand. ### [c8.s13.127](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.127) Gôvinda III. ### [c8.s13.128](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.128) Dhruva was succeeded by his son, Gôvinda III., who, as we have just seen, was invested with the office and authority of Yuvarâja during his father's reign; a later record says that he was specially selected for the succession, from among several brothers, on account of his superior virtues; and this seems to imply that he was not the eldest son; but it is convenient, in the genealogical table, to enter him as senior at any rate to Indra-râja of Gujarât, though, as no distinct assertion either way is made in any of the records as yet available, the latter may very possibly have been really the elder. His special birudas were Prabhûtavarsha; "the abundant rainer;" Srivallabha, "the favourite of Fortune," which appears in the Prâkrit form of Srivallabha in a Kanarese record at Lakhmêshwar;⁵ and Jagattunga, "prominent in the world;" but he was also known as Janavallabha, "the favourite of people,"⁶ and as Kîrti-Nârâyaṇa, "a very Nârâyaṇa (Vishṇu) in respect of fame;"⁷ and he may perhaps be mentioned, by another biruda, as Parabala, the father of Raṇṇadêvî who was the wife of a king of Bengal named Dharmapâla.⁸ His own records couple with his name the epithets of prithivivallabha, śrîprithivivallabha, śrivallabhanarêndra, and śrivallabhanarêndradêva, and the titles of Mahârâjâdhirâja, Paramêśvara, Bhaṭâra, and Paramabhaṭṭâraka. And his Kanarese record of A. D. 804 gives his name in the Prâkrit form of Gôyinda, and tells us that his mahâdêvî, or queen-consort, was Gâmuṇḍabbe.⁹ Until recently, the earliest absolutely certain date for him was A. D. 804, furnished by that record. But the Paithan grant, which has come to notice lately, gives an earlier date, in A. D. 794. And he is further carried back to A. D. 783-84 by a passage in the Jain Harivaṃśa of Jinasêna, which, mentioning him as Srivallabha, tells us that he was reigning over the south, or the Dekkan, in Saka-Saṃvat ### [c8.s13.129](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.129) ¹ See page 395 below. ### [c8.s13.130](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.130) ² Ind. Ant. Vol. XI. p. 124. ### [c8.s13.131](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.131) ⁴ Epigraphia Indica, Vol. I. p. 56.—On the subject of selection, see page 361 above, and note 3. ### [c8.s13.132](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.132) ⁵ Ind. Ant. Vol. XI. p. 156.—In the case of the Western Chalukyas of Bâdâmi, this word was a generic epithet. From now onwards, however, it seems to have been used as a biruda, rather than an epithet. ### [c8.s13.133](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.133) ⁶ id. Vol. V. p. 147, verse 23; and Vol. XIII. p. 67, verse 13. ### [c8.s13.134](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.134) ⁷ id. Vol. XII. p. 218, line 5. ### [c8.s13.135](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.135) ⁸ id. Vol. XXI. p. 254. ### [c8.s13.136](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.136) ⁹ id. Vol. XI. p. 127. ### [c8.s13.137](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13.137) 705 (expired), and that his contemporaries were—in the north, a certain Indrāyudha, son of a king named Krishna; in the east, Vatsarāja, king of Avanti (Ujjain), who is evidently identical with the Vatsarāja whom Dhruva drove into the deserts of Mārwāḍ; and in the west, Varāha, who was ruling over the country of the Sauryas. In the other direction, the latest certain recorded date that we have for him is A. D. 812, given in the Torkhēḍē grant. But there is no reason to suppose that he ceased to reign before A. D. 814 or 815, in one of which years commenced the reign of his son, Amōghavarsha I.² _First 128 of 397 passages. [Read on](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13)_ ## Linked texts (14) - [Bṛhatsaṃhitā](https://indike.org/pramana/in.astro.samhita.rsi.brhatsamhita.14.14) — Varāhamihira, Sanskrit - [Brahmapurāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/in.purana.brahma) — Vyāsa, Sanskrit - [Vikramārjunavijaya](https://indike.org/pramana/in.lit.mahabharata.pampabharata) — Pampa, Kannada - [Vākyapadīya](https://indike.org/pramana/in.vedanga.vyakarana.darsana.vakyapadiya) — Bhartṛhari (grammarian), Sanskrit - [Āptamīmāṃsā](https://indike.org/pramana/in.jaina.anuyoga.phil.aptamimamsa) — Samantabhadra, Sanskrit - [Laghīyastraya](https://indike.org/pramana/in.jaina.anuyoga.phil.laghiyastraya) — Akalaṅka, Sanskrit - [Harivaṃśa](https://indike.org/pramana/in.lit.mahabharata.harivamsa) — Vyāsa, Sanskrit - [Uttarapurāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/in.jaina.anuyoga.epic.mahapurana.uttarapurana) — Guṇabhadra, Sanskrit - [Mahāpurāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/in.jaina.anuyoga.epic.mahapurana) — Jinasena (II) & Guṇabhadra, Sanskrit - [Parīkṣāmukha](https://indike.org/pramana/in.jaina.post.parikshamukha) — Māṇikyanandin, Sanskrit - [Ratnamālā](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.sanskrit.tantra.kriya.ratnamala) — Sanskrit - [Prameyakamalamārtaṇḍa (Jinmati Mata, Lala Mussaddilal Jain Charitable Trust Delhi)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.jaina.post.parikshamukha!prameyakamalamartanda*jinmati) — Sanskrit - [Pārśvābhyudaya](https://indike.org/pramana/in.jaina.post.kavya.parsvabhyudaya) — Jinasena (II), Sanskrit - [Ātmānuśāsana](https://indike.org/pramana/in.jaina.anuyoga.moral.atmanusasana) — Guṇabhadra, Sanskrit --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.fleet-1882.c8.s13) · Pramāṇa