Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

The Dynasties of the Kanarese Districts of the Bombay Presidency from the Earliest Historical Times to the Musalman Conquest c8.s17: Chapter VII. The Yadavas of Devagiri

The Dynasties of the Kanarese Districts of the Bombay Presidency from the Earliest Historical Times to the Musalman Conquest c8.s17

Language
English

Chapter VII. The Yadavas of Devagiri

c8.s17.2

The Yâdava kings of Dêvagiri were descended from a line of feudatory nobles, some of the members of which have already been mentioned in connection with the Râshṭrakûṭa and Western Châlukya kings. Their claim to be "Yâdavas" probably rests on nothing but their Purâṇic genealogy, which appears first in a record of A. D. 1000, and must have been devised during the preceding century. And, since their original territory was called the Sêuṇa country, and the expression "the Sêuṇa king" is actually used to denote the first king Bhillama,¹ and he is also described as rendering highly prosperous the rule of the family of "the Sêvaṇa (i.e. Sêuṇa) kings,"² they would undoubtedly be more correctly called Sêuṇas. But they were known as Yâdavas to the Musalmân historians. So, also, the Hindû Pratâparudrîya speaks of them as the Yâlava kings of Sêvaṇa, i.e. of the Sêuṇa country.³ And the name has become so thoroughly well established, that it seems both unnecessary and undesirable to now set it aside in favour of simply a more technically correct appellation.

c8.s17.3

¹ See page 504 above, note 2.

c8.s17.4

² *Epigraphia Indica*, Vol. III. p. 217.

c8.s17.5

³ *Ind. Ant.* Vol. XXI. p. 199.

c8.s17.6

The early history of the family is to be found partly in epigraphic records, and partly in the introduction to Hêmâdri's *Vrata-khaṇḍa*.⁴ The Purâṇic genealogy is perhaps given most fully by Hêmâdri. Among epigraphic records, it is found first in the Saṅgamnêr copper-plate grant of the *Mahâsâmanta* Bhillama II., dated in A. D. 1000,⁵ and finally in the Paiṭhaṇ grant of king Râmachandra, dated in A. D. 1272.⁶ And the essence of it is as follows:— In the beginning of things, there was the god Vishṇu; in connection with whom, the Yâdavas claimed to belong to the Vishṇuvaṁśa or race of Vishṇu.⁷ From the water-lily that grew from Vishṇu's navel, there sprang the god Brahman. His son was Atri. And his was Sôma, Chandra, or Indu, the Moon;⁸ whence The Yâdavas belonged also to the Sômavamśa or Lunar Race. The descent is then taken through various persons, until we come to Yadu, the founder of the Yaduvamśa, or race of Yadu, in the Lunar Race. Hêmâdri, who professes to give an absolutely complete pedigree, then proceeds to name all the descendants of Yadu in the line to which the Yâdavas of Dêvagiri belonged. The epigraphic records, however, do not aim at such completeness; and simply say that in the lineage of Yadu there was born that particular person with which each of them commences the genealogy.

c8.s17.7

⁴ Dr. Bhandarkar's *Early History of the Dekkan* (1884), Appendix C.

c8.s17.8

⁵ *Epigraphia Indica*, Vol. II. p. 212.

c8.s17.9

⁶ *Ind. Ant.* Vol. XIV. p. 314.

c8.s17.10

⁷ e. g., Bhillama II. is styled *Vishṇu-vaṁś-ôdbhava* (*Epigraphia Indica*, Vol. II. p. 219, text line 49); so also Bhillama III. (*Ind. Ant.* Vol. XVII. p. 120, text line 17), and Sêuṇadêva (id. Vol. XII. p. 126, text line 3). For later instances, in the regal line, see page 517 below, note 6.

c8.s17.11

⁸ Hêmâdri gives this part of the descent rather differently. He says that the couch of Vishṇu was the ocean of milk; and that the Moon was produced from that ocean.

c8.s17.12

Coming to historical, or supposed historical, times, Hêmâdri says that there was a king named Suâhu, who had four sons, among whom he divided the earth. This person, however, is not mentioned in any of the epigraphic records that have come to light.

c8.s17.13

According to Hêmâdri, the second son of Subâhu—(the others are not named)—was Dridhaprahâra, who received, as his portion, the "southern land," and established himself at a city named Srî-nagara. This person is mentioned in the Bassein grant of A. D. 1069,¹ which, however, says that he came from the city of Dvârâvatî, and implies that his capital was a town named Chandrâdityapura; as suggested by Pandit Bhagwanlal Indraji,² this name is very possibly intended to denote the modern Chândôr in the Nâsik District. From an extract given by the Pandit, it seems that Dridhaprahâra is mentioned in the Nâsakakalpa of Jinaprabhasûri.³

c8.s17.14

¹ Ind. Ant. Vol. XII. p. 119.

c8.s17.15

² ibid. p. 124.

c8.s17.16

³ ibid. p. 124.

c8.s17.17

According to the Vratakhanda and the Bassein grant of A. D. 1069, the son of Dridhaprahâra was Sêunachandra I., who is said to have founded a town named Sêunapura.⁴ This person is the first member of the family who is mentioned in the Sangamnêr grant of A. D. 1000, and in the Kalas-Budrûkh grant of A. D. 1025,⁵ and the former record says that he named both his territory and the people of it after himself,—a statement which will now be recognised as of importance in connection with the true appellation of his descendants. So, also, Hêmâdri says, more plainly; that, from his name, the territory was named Sêunadêśa. And this appellation of it occurs in the Paithan grant of A. D. 1272.⁶

c8.s17.18

⁴ ibid. p. 121.—Pandit Bhagwanlal Indraji rendered the verse as saying that he "founded the town of Sêunapura in the good Sindinêra." But this seems rather wanting in sense; Sindinêra itself being, not a country, but a town, the modern Sinnar in the Nâsik District. And the text appears, to me, rather intended to state that it was at Sindinêra that Sêunachandra's son was born.

c8.s17.19

⁵ id. Vol. XVII. p. 117.

c8.s17.20

⁶ id. Vol. XIV. p. 314.

c8.s17.21

The son of Sêunachandra I. was Dhâdiyappa, according to the Kalas-Budrûkh grant, and probably the Sangamnêr grant; Dhâdiyasa, according to the MS. of the Vratakhanda; and Dvâdiyappa, according to the Bassein grant of A. D. 1069: doubtless, the first of these three forms of his name is the correct one. The Bassein grant probably says¹ that he was born at Sindinêra, which, as pointed out by Pandit Bhâgwanlal Indraji, ² is the modern Sinnar, the chief town of the Sinnar tâluka in the Nâsik District.

c8.s17.22

¹ See page 512 above, note 4.

c8.s17.23

² Ind. Ant. Vol. XII, p. 124.

c8.s17.24

Dhâḍiyappa's son was Bhillama I. No historical facts are stated in connection with this person.

c8.s17.25

The son of Bhillama I. was Râja, according to the Sangamnêr, Bassein, and Kalas-Budrûkh grants, and Râjagi, according to the Vratakhaṇḍa.³ In connection with him, again, no historical facts are stated.

c8.s17.26

³ From the three copper charters, his name might quite possibly be taken as Śrîrâja. But the śrî is not repeated in any of them, as (see Gupta Inscriptions, p. 8, note 3) was customary when it was an inherent part of a name. And, in connection with this point, I think that the verse in the Vratakhaṇḍa, in which śrî is not used at all, proves that his name was simply Râja or Râjagi.

c8.s17.27

The son of Râja or Râjagi was a person whose name was Bâdagi according to Hêmâdri,—Vandiga according to the Sangamnêr grant,—and Vaddiga according to the Kalas-Budrûkh; on the analogy of the name of one of the Râshṭrakûṭa kings, the last seems to be the correct form. The Sangamnêr record states that he married Voddiyavva, daughter of a person named Dhôrappa, whom Prof. Kielhorn has proposed to identify with the Râshṭrakûṭa king Dhruva.

c8.s17.28

According to Hêmâdri, the son of Vaddiga was a person whose name was Dhâḍiyama according to the manuscripts, but whom Dr. Bhandarkar has preferred to look upon as more probably called Dhâḍiyasa. He is not mentioned in the Sangamnêr, Kalas-Budrûkh, and Bassein grants.

c8.s17.29

According to the three copper-plate records, Vaddiga was succeeded by Bhillama II., who, however, according to Hêmâdri, came next after the Dhâḍiyama mentioned just above; his precise relationship with his predecessor is not specified; the text, in each case, may mean either that he was born from Vaddiga (according to the copper-plate records) or from Dhâḍiyama (according to Hêmâdri), or, equally well, that he simply came next in order after one or other of those two persons, and not necessarily that he was the son of either of them. The Kalas-Budrûkh record tells us that his wife was Lakshmî, and that she illumined both the Yâdava and the Râshṭrakûṭa families; and the Bassein grant, speaking of her by the Prâkṛit name of Lachchhiyavva, mentions her as a daughter of a person named Jhañjha, and as belonging to the Râshṭrakûṭa lineage.⁴ The Sangamnêr grant, from the Ahmednagar District,⁵ is a record of Bhillama II. It styles

c8.s17.30

⁴ From a further expression in the same passage, tending perhaps to connect her with three kingdoms or sovereignties, Dr. Bhandarkar (Early History of Dekkan, 1884, p. 77, and note 2) considered that it was on her mother's side that she was of Râshṭrakûṭa descent, and that her father is to be identified with the prince Jhañjha of the Northern Koṅkaṇ branch of the Śilâhâra family (see chapter VIII. below). But, as the Śilâhâra Jhañjha's period was two full generations before A. D. 997, this identification is impossible; and I take Lakshmî's father to be a member of some northern offshoot of the Râshṭrakûṭa stock.—The name Jhañjha is not unique. It occurs also in one of the branches of the Maurya family, in the direction of Khândêsh (Epigraphia Indica, Vol. II, p. 222).

c8.s17.31

⁵ Epigraphia Indica, Vol. II. p. 212.

c8.s17.32

him a *Mahâsâmanta*,—mentions him as a pious worshipper of the god Bhava (Siva),—gives him the hereditary title of "supreme lord of the town of Dvârâvatî," and describes him as born in the race of Vishnu,—and records that he granted to Brâhmans a village situated just on the west of the modern Sangamnêr. The grant was made on the occasion of an eclipse of the sun on the new-moon day of the month Bhâdrapada of the Sârvarin *samvatsara*, Saka-Samvat 922 (expired). The English date would be the 2nd August, A.D. 1000, for the *pûrnimânta* Bhâdrapada, and the 31st August, for the *amânta* Bhâdrapada; but there was no eclipse on either of these days. Coupled with his feudatory title, the date shews that Bhillama II. was a vassal of the Western Châlukya king Irivabedanga-Satyâsraya.

c8.s17.33

Vêsû.

c8.s17.34

The son of Bhillama II. was Vêsû according to the Kalas-Budrûkh grant,—Vêsugi according to Hêmâdri,—and probably Vêsûka according to the Bassein grant.¹ And the latter record tells us that his wife was Nâyiladêvî or Nâyaladêvî, the daughter of a chieftain named Gôgi, who may probably be identified with Goggi, son of the Chaulukya Bârappa of the Lâta country.²

c8.s17.35

¹ Where, however, Pandit Bhagwanlal Indraji read the name as Têsûka.

c8.s17.36

² *Ind. Ant.* Vol. XII. p. 203, where the name is wrongly given as Gongi; this person was the great-grandfather of Trilôchanapâla, for whom the same record furnishes the date of A.D. 1051, and the father of Kîrtirâja, for whom another record furnishes the date of A.D. 1017-18 or 1018-19.—The expression in the printed text of the Bassein grant is *Châluky-ânvaya-maṇḍalika-tiluka*; but there must be a mistake, whether of the original or otherwise, for *Chauluky-ânvaya*, &c.—Dr. Bhandarkar (loc. cit. p. 77, and note 4) considered that these words make Gôgi or Goggi, not himself a Châlukya (Chaulukya) chieftain, but a feudatory of some member of that family, and proposed to identify him with Goggi, the brother of the Silâhâra prince Jhanjha. But, whatever the grammatical possibilities may be, the words, on the analogy of all similar expressions in epigraphic records, unavoidably stamp this Gôgi or Goggi as himself a Châlukya (Chaulukya). And further, as the Silâhâra prince Goggi stands two generations before A. D. 997 (see chapter VIII. below), his date is too early for the proposed identification.

c8.s17.37

Arjuna, and Râja.

c8.s17.38

Hêmâdri places after Vêsû a person named Arjuna, and after the latter a person named Râja. But these names are not mentioned in the copper-plate records.

c8.s17.39

Bhillama III.

c8.s17.40

The Kalas-Budrûkh and Bassein grants tell us that the son of Vêsû was Bhillama III. The former also tells us that his capital was Sindinagara, which is identical with the Sindinêra mentioned above in connection with Dhâdiyappa, *i.e.* with Sinnar in the Nâsik District. And the latter says that his wife was Hâmmâ or Avvalladêvî, daughter of Jayasimha II. and sister of Âhavamalla-Sômêsvara I. of the Western Châlukya dynasty. The Kalas-Budrûkh charter, from the Ahmadnagar District,³ is a record of Bhillama III. himself. It gives him the *biruda* of Yâdava-Nârâyana. It styles him a *Mahâsâmanta*, and describes him as born in the lineage of Vishnu. And it records that he granted the village of Kalas-Budrûkh itself to some Brâhmans. The grant was made on the occasion of an eclipse of the sun in the month Kârttika of the Krôdhana *samvatsara*, Saka-Samvat 948 (current). And the corresponding English date is the 23rd November, A. D. 1025; on which day there was an annular eclipse of the sun,

c8.s17.41

³ *Id.* Vol. XVII. p. 117.

c8.s17.42

visible in India.¹ This date, coupled with his feudatory title, shews that Bhillama III. was a vassal of the Western Châlukya king Jayasimha II.

c8.s17.43

¹ Von Oppolzer's *Canon der Finsternisse*, pp. 212, 213, and Plate 106.

c8.s17.44

According to Hêmâdri, Bhillama III. was succeeded by Vâdugi; Vâdugi, by Vêsugi; and the latter, by another Bhillama, the fourth of that name. These names, however, do not occur in the Bassein grant, which is the only epigraphic authority for the period immediately after Bhillama III.

c8.s17.45

Next after Bhillama III., but without any attempt to define the exact relationship, the Bassein grant mentions Sêunachandra II.,² who by Hêmâdri is called simply Sêuna and is placed after Bhillama IV. The charter further tells us that, just as the three worlds were raised from the ocean by the god Vishnu in his incarnation as a boar, so, after the death of Bhillama, Sêunachandra II. conquered all the kings and lifted up the sovereignty, with its dignity; and the text conveys the impression that the Yâdavas underwent some deprivation of their rank and authority after the time of Bhillama III., and that their position was eventually regained by Sêunachandra II. Hêmâdri adds that he saved Paramardidêva, i.e. the Western Châlukya king Vikramâditya VI., from a coalition of his enemies, and that he established that "light or glory of the Châlukya family" in the sovereignty of Kalyâna. The Bassein charter,³ from the Thâna District, is a record of Sêunachandra II. himself. It styles him a Mahâmandalêśvara. And it registers the fact that in the month Śrâvana (July-Aug.), falling in A. D. 1069, of the Saumya samvatsara, Śaka-Samvat 991 (expired), he granted to his royal family-priest Sarvadêvâcharya, who was versed in all the Śaiva precepts, a village named Chiñchuli, which may be identified, as was done by Pandit Bhagwanlal Indraji,⁴ with the modern Chiñchôli, about ten miles south-east of Nâsik and eight miles north-west of Sinnar. Coupled with his subordinate title, the date of this record shews that Sêunachandra II. was a feudatory of the Western Châlukya king Sômêśvara II. Another record of his time is an inscription at Wâghlî in Khândêsh,⁵ dated somewhat earlier, in the month Âshâdha (June-July), in the same year, recording a grant by Sêunachandra II. himself, and others by a subordinate of his named Gôvindarâja, of the Maurya family, belonging to a long lineage which traced back its origin to the city of Valabhî in Surâshtra or Kâthiâwâd.⁶ It seems possible that Sêunachandra II. is the Sêvana whom a Gadag inscription of A. D. 1191⁷ speaks of as the first ancestor, therein mentioned, of the then reigning king Bhillama.

c8.s17.46

² In line 20 his name appears in the form of Sêunêndu; it occurs as Sêunachandra in line 26.

c8.s17.47

³ *Ind. Ant.* Vol. XII. p. 119.

c8.s17.48

⁴ *ibid.* p. 124.

c8.s17.49

⁵ *Epigraphia Indica*, Vol. II. p. 221.

c8.s17.50

⁶ See page 284 above.

c8.s17.51

⁷ *Epigraphia Indica*, Vol. III. p. 217.

c8.s17.52

The other epigraphic record, bearing on the earlier history of the family, is an inscription at Añjanêrî in the Nâsik District,⁸ which

c8.s17.53

⁸ *Ind. Ant.* Vol. XII, p. 126.

c8.s17.54

gives us the name of the Mahâsâmanta Sêunadêva.¹ It allots to him the biruda of Yâdava-Nârâyana; and it styles him "supreme lord of the town of Dvârâvatî," and describes him as born in the race of Vishnu, and as a very sun to cause to burst open the bud of the water-lily that was the Yâdava family. And it records a grant made by him in the month Jyêshtha (May-June), falling in A.D. 1142, of the Dundubhi samvatsara, coupled with Saka-Samvat 1063 by mistake for 1064 (expired).² This record contains no genealogical information. But we can hardly doubt that this person, Sêunadêva, was a descendant, or a collateral relative, of Sêunachandra II. And his date, coupled with his subordinate title, shews that he was a feudatory of the Western Châlukya king Perma-Jagadêkamalla II.

c8.s17.55

¹ His name occurs as Sêunadêva in line 4. In line 12 he is spoken of as "the great king who has the appellation of Sêuna (Sêun-âkhya mahâ-nrîpa)."

c8.s17.56

² See Ind. Ant. Vol. XX. p. 422.

c8.s17.57

Sêunadêva is not mentioned by Hêmâdri, who places the following names after that of Sêuna or Sêunachandra II. That person, he says, was succeeded by Paramadêva; and the latter, by his younger brother Simhirâja, who is said to have brought an elephant named Karpûra-tilaka from a town called Tanjâpura or Tanjîpura.³ Simhirâja was succeeded by Mallugi, who is alleged to have taken from his enemies a city named Parnakhêta, and to have captured a troop of elephants belonging to the king of Utkala, i.e. Orissa. Mallugi was succeeded by his son Amaragângêya.⁴ This person was succeeded by Gôvindarâja. The latter was succeeded by Amaramaḷḷagi, another son of Mallugi. And Amaramaḷḷagi was succeeded by Kâḷiya-Baḷḷâḷa. The succession is said to have then gone from this person to his paternal uncle Bhillama, in preference to his own sons. And the names given by Hêmâdri, immediately after this, shew that this person is the Bhillama who will be mentioned more fully just below,—the first paramount king in the family.

c8.s17.58

³ Dr. Bhandarkar suggests that the modern Tanjore is meant (loc. cit. p. 79, note 1). Tanjore is mentioned as Tanjâpurî in the spurious Sûdi grant of Bûtuga (Epigraphia Indica, Vol. III. p.183).

c8.s17.59

⁴ The Haraḷahaḷḷi grant of A.D. 1238 places a person of this name at some indefinite position among the ancestors of Mallugi (Jour. Bo. Br. R. As. Soc. Vol. XV. p. 386, text line 7).

c8.s17.60

It is rather curious that a leading discrepancy occurs at this point,—just before the introduction of Bhillama, and in connection with his parentage. Hêmâdri leads us to infer that his father was Mallugi, the son of Simhirâja; no other paternal uncle of Kâḷiya-Baḷḷâḷa being mentioned by him. And his father is distinctly named as Mallugi in an undated record of the period A.D. 1210 to 1247, at Ânawaṭṭi in Mysore,⁵ and in the Haraḷahaḷḷi grant of A.D. 1238;⁶ and it seems to be implied by the Paithan grant of A.D. 1272, which adds, that Mallugi's father was Singhaṇa,—evidently identical with Hêmâdri's Simhirâja,—who, it says, subdued the king of Karṇâṭa, punished the Pâṇḍyas, and repulsed the leader of the Gurjaras.¹ These statements seem, at first sight, fairly conclusive. Nevertheless, a record of A. D. 1191, of the time of Bhillama himself,² tells us that his father was Karṇa; it says that there was a certain Sêvaṇa; that Sêvaṇa’s son was Mallugi; that Mallugi had two sons, Amaragaṅga and Karṇa; and that Karṇa was the father of the then reigning king, Bhillama. We can hardly avoid holding, with Prof. Kielhorn, that this statement regarding the parentage of Bhillama must be accepted; for it is difficult to believe that the author of the record could be mistaken in respect of the name of the father of the sovereign whose grant he was registering. And,—though it is not easy to make them fit in with Hêmâdri’s account, unless we assume that the name of Sêvaṇa or Sêuṇa was turned into Simhirâja or Siṅghaṇa by some copyist or through some other mistake,—there is also no apparent reason why the other names, immediately preceding that of Karṇa, should be rejected. Accordingly, this record being followed in preference to the others, the table of the Yâdavas of Dêvagiri will now stand as given on page 519 below. The kings of this dynasty had, like the Hoysalas of Dôrasamudra, the hereditary title of *Dvârâvatî-pura-var-âdhîśvara*, or “supreme lord of Dvârâvatî, the best of towns,”³ with reference to Dvârâvatî, Dvârâvâtî, or Dvârakâ,—the modern Dwârkâ in Kâṭhiâwâḍ,—the city of Krishna, the incarnation of Vishnu; the *birudas*, evidently borne by all them, of Yâdava-Nârâyaṇa, “a very Nârâyaṇa (Vishnu) among the Yâdavas,”⁴ and Râya-Nârâyaṇa, “a very Nârâyaṇa among kings;”⁵ and the epithet of *Vishnu-vamś-ôdbhava*, “born in the race of Vishnu;”⁶ and they carried the *suvarṇa-Garuda-dhvaja* or banner of a golden Garuda,⁷ which device also appears, instead of a separate crest, on the seals of their charters, sometimes alone,⁸ and sometimes in conjunction with a representation of the monkey god Hanumân,⁹ which appears alone in one instance,¹⁰ and may perhaps have been their *lâñchhana* or crest.

c8.s17.61

⁵ At the temple of Kaitabhêśvara. The record stands below one of A.D. 1070, of the time of the Western Châlukya king Sômêśvara II. (Carn.-Désa Inscrs. Vol. I. p. 200; verified from an ink-impression). It does not give the name of Mallugi's father.—In the transcription, the name of Mallugi himself is written 'Veḷḷugi;' how the mistake occurred, is obvious to any one acquainted with the Kanarese characters of the period.

c8.s17.62

⁶ Jour. Bo. Br. R. As. Soc. Vol. XV. p. 383. This record, again, does not give the name of Mallugi's father.

c8.s17.63

¹ *Ind. Ant.* Vol. XIV. p. 314.

c8.s17.64

² *Epigraphia Indica*, Vol. III. p. 217.

c8.s17.65

³ For instances in print, see *Jour. Bo. Br. R. As. Soc.* Vol. XII. p. 7, line 10, in the case of Siṅghaṇa; *ibid.* p. 34, line 13, in the case of Krishna; and *Mysore Inscriptions*, p. 46 (*P. S. and O.-C. Insers.* No. 125), in the case of Râmachandra.

c8.s17.66

⁴ Instances in print are, *Jour. Bo. Br. R. As. Soc.* Vol. XII. p. 44, text line 53, in the case of Krishna; and *Mysore Inscriptions*, p. 127 (*P. S. and O.-C. Insers.* No. 202), in the case of Râmachandra.

c8.s17.67

⁵ Instances in print are *Mysore Inscriptions*, p. 72 (*P. S. and O.-C. Insers.* No. 201) in the case of Siṅghaṇa; *Jour. Bo. Br. R. As. Soc.* Vol. XII. p. 42, text line 14, in the case of Krishna; and *Ind. Ant.* Vol. XV. p. 317, line 58, in the case of Râmachandra.

c8.s17.68

⁶ *e.g.*, *Epigraphia Indica*, Vol. III. p. 219, text line 11, in the case of Bhillama; *Jour. Bo. Br. R. As. Soc.* Vol. XII. p. 7, text line 10, in the case of Siṅghaṇa; and *ibid.* p. 35, line 13, in the case of Krishna.

c8.s17.69

⁷ *e.g.*, *Jour. Bo. Br. R. As. Soc.* Vol. X. p. 35, text line 14.

c8.s17.70

⁸ *e.g.*, *id.* Vol. XV. p. 383; *Ind. Ant.* Vol. XIV. pp. 68, 314.

c8.s17.71

⁹ *e.g.*, *id.* Vol. XII. p. 4.

c8.s17.72

¹⁰ *Ind. Ant.* Vol. VII. p. 303.

c8.s17.73

As already indicated, the names of Sêvaṇa, Mallugi, Amaragaṅga, and Karṇa, are taken from an inscription of A. D. 1191, at Gadag, of the time of Karṇa’s son Bhillama. The record states no historical facts in connection with any of them. Sêvaṇa may possibly be

c8.s17.74

The Yâdavas of Dêvagiri: Bhillama.

c8.s17.75

identical with the Sêuṇachandra II. of the Bassein and Wâghlî records, for whom we have the date of A. D. 1069.

c8.s17.76

The first paramount sovereign in this family was Karṇa's son Bhillama, who, in one of the Hoysala records, is called "the Sêuṇa King."[1] Of his time, we have three certain records. Two are stone inscriptions, at Muttagi in the Bijâpur District,[2] and at Aṇṇigere in Dhârwâr;[3] they are both dated on the occasion of the winter solstice, falling in December, A. D. 1189, of the Saumya saṁvatsara (Śaka-Saṁvat 1111 expired); and citing that saṁvatsara as the third year of his reign, they fix the Plavaṅga saṁvatsara, Ś.-S. 1110 current, = A.D. 1187-88, as his first year, and place his attainment of the sovereign power probably in A.D. 1187. The third is an inscription at Gadag in the Dhârwâr District,[4] dated on the occasion of the eclipse of the sun on Sunday, the new-moon day of the month Jyêshṭha of the Virôdhikrit saṁvatsara, Ś.-S. 1113 (expired): the corresponding English date is Sunday, 23rd June, A. D. 1191, when there was a solar eclipse, visible in India; and this is the latest reliable date that we have for Bhillama.[5] These records give him the paramount epithets and titles of *samastabhuvanâśraya*, *śrîprithivîvallabha Mahârâjâdhirâja*, *Paramêśvara*, and *Paramabhaṭṭâraka*,[6] and the style of Pratâpa-Chakravartin. Prior to A. D. 1187, he must have been a feudatory of the Western Châlukya king Sômêśvara IV., from whom, in the last year or two of his reign, — with which his own reign overlapped, — he wrested the northern and eastern portions of the Châlukya kingdom. The Aṇṇigere inscription claims that then, in December, A. D. 1189, "he had become the beloved of the goddess of sovereignty of the Karṇâṭa country, and was reigning

c8.s17.77

¹ See page 504 above, note 2.

c8.s17.78

² At the temple of Narasimha (Carn.-Dêsa Inscrs. Vol. II. p. 353; verified from an ink-impression.)

c8.s17.79

³ At the temple of Amritêśvara (ibid. p. 356; verified from an ink-impression).

c8.s17.80

⁴ At the temple of Trikûṭêśvara (Epigraphia Indica, Vol. III. p. 217; this inscription is not in the Carn.-Dêsa Inscrs.).

c8.s17.81

⁵ The Carn.-Dêsa Inscrs. includes (Vol. II, p. 361) the text of an inscription in front of the temple of Basappa at Bhairvâḍige in the Bijâpur District, which, according to the transcription, refers itself to the reign of Bhillama, and is dated on the occasion of the winter solstice, falling in December, A.D. 1191, of the same saṁvatsara, Virôdhikrit coupled with Śaka-Saṁvat 1114 (current). The date is a possible one; but not altogether probable, because that saṁvatsara was the first year of the reign of Bhillama's son and successor Jaitugi I., and the date is rather a late one in it. This record seems to be not now extant; at any rate, my men did not secure an ink-impression of it. — It also includes (ibid, p. 362) the text of an inscription in the temple of Îśvara at Dêvara-Hippargi in the Sindagi taluka of the same district, which, also, according to the transcription, refers itself to the reign of Bhillama, and is dated on the occasion of the Kanyâ-saṁkrânti, or passage of the sun into Virgo, on Monday, the eighth tithi of the dark fortnight of Bhâdrapada of the Paridhâvin saṁvatsara, Ś.-S 1115 (current). Here, the approximate English date for the tithi is Monday, 31st August, A.D. 1192; the saṁkrânti having occurred on the preceding Thursday. This falls in the second year of Jaitugi I. And I think that there must be some mistake in the transcription, either in respect of the mention of Bhillama as the reigning king, or in connection with the saṁvatsara and the Śaka year. So much of the surface of the stone has been worn away, by constant smearing and rubbing in worshipping it, that a legible ink-impression can probably not be made now. And, when I was at Dêvara-Hippargi, the date had not attracted my attention; and so I made no attempt to read it on the original stone, if it can be read there.

c8.s17.82

⁶ The last two appear first in the Gadag inscription.

c8.s17.84

over the whole kingdom." But the Gadag inscription, of June, A. D. 1191, stating that his victorious camp was then at Hêrûr, i. e., probably, Bêlûr in the Bijâpur District, about thirty miles north by east from Gadag,¹ indicates that at that time he was still engaged in a campaign in the direction of the south. And passages in the records of his grandson Singhaṇa, shew pretty plainly that, in addition to the Hoysalas and the Pâṇḍyas of Gutti in the Nolambavâḍi country, the Raṭṭas of Saundatti, the Silâhâras of Karâḍ, and the Kâdambas of Hângal and of Goa, did not recognise the sovereignty either of Bhillama or of his son, and, consequently, that a good deal of the central and western portion of the Western Châlukya kingdom remained unsubdued. Bhillama subsequently lost the southern provinces to the Hoysaḷa king Vîra-Ballâḷa II., who extended his own kingdom up to a boundary constituted by the Malparbhâ and the Kṛishṇa, from the point where the Malparbhâ joins it.² And he seems to have been killed in

c8.s17.85

¹ The original name of Bêlûr was Pêrûr, i. e. Hêrûr (see Ind. Ant. Vol. XVIII. p. 271).

c8.s17.86

² See pages 503, 504, above.

c8.s17.87

the decisive battle between the Yâdavas and the Hoysalas, which was fought in the neighbourhood of Soratûr and Lakkundi near Gadag,¹ and is to be placed at some time in the latter half of A. D. 1191. In addition to mentioning his acquisition of the sovereignty of Kalyâṇa, i. e. of the Western Châlukyas, and his successful opposition, at first, to the Hoysala king, Hêmâdri seems to say² that Bhillama captured a town called Srîvardhana from a king named Amsala,—that he vanquished in battle the king of Pratyandaka,—and that he put to death the ruler, named Vajrin, of Mangalavêshṭaka, which place Dr. Bhandarkar has identified, doubtless correctly, with Mangalavêdhêm, between the Sholâpur and Bijâpur Districts. And Hêmâdri also says that he founded the city of Dêvagiri in the Sêuṇa country,³ which is the modern Daulatâbâd, near Aurangâbâd, in the Nizâm's Dominions.⁴ The truth of this assertion about the founding of Dêvagiri is quite possible: but the earliest epigraphic reference to the city is in a record of A. D. 1210, in which it is mentioned as the capital at which Bhillama's grandson Singhaṇa was reigning; and the Muttagi inscription of December, A. D. 1189, says that Bhillama was then reigning at a place named Teneyalage.⁵ The same record incidentally describes him as a wrestler against the Mâlavas, and a goad to the elephants that were the Gurjaras. And a record of his grandson's time, belonging to A. D. 1222, claims that he defeated the Lâtas, as well as the Gurjaras and the Karṇâṭa king.⁶ The Muttagi inscription, of A. D. 1189, mentions, as officials of his, the Mahâpradhâna, Bahattara-niyôg-âdhipati, Paṭṭasahanâdhipati, and Sênâpati Peyiya-Sâhaṇi; and a certain Malleya-Sâhaṇi, who joined with the former in making the grant that is registered in the record. The Aṇṇigere inscription, of the same date, mentions, as a feudatory, the Mahâmaṇḍalêśvara Bâchaṇa or Bâchidêva, apparently also called Bhâskara, who was governing the Belvola district, of which, it says, Aṇṇigere was the royal city or chief town. And the Gadag inscription, of June, A. D. 1191, mentions a Mantrin or counsellor named Jaitasimha, at whose request Bhillama granted the village of Hiriya-Handigôl, in the Belvola three-hundred, to the temple of the god Trikûṭêśvara at Gadag: this person is probably the Jaitasimha, "the right arm, as it were, of Bhillama," by destroying whom, the Hoysala inscription of A. D. 1192 at Gadag says, Vîra-Ballâḷa II. acquired the lordship of the country of Kuntala.⁷ Another record of this period mentions the Mahâmaṇḍalêśvara Vîra-Vikramâditya II., of the Guṭṭa family, as ruling the Banavâsi province, towards the end of A. D. 1191, at his own capital of Guṭṭavol: this record does not refer to any paramount sovereign; and the Gutta prince may have acknowledged either Bhillama or his son Jaitugi I., or the Hoysala king Vîra-Ballâḷa II., as his master, or he may have been practically independent, pending the issue of the contest between the Yâdavas of Dêvagiri and the Hoysalas for the southern provinces.

c8.s17.88

¹ See page 504 above.

c8.s17.89

² Dr. Bhandarkar's Early History of the Dekkan (1884), p. 81, and Appendix C.

c8.s17.90

³ id., p. 117, verse 19.

c8.s17.91

⁴ Lat. 19° 57'; long. 75° 18"; Indian Atlas, Sheet No. 88,—'Dowlutabad.'

c8.s17.92

⁵ I cannot identify this place. It is probably to be looked for somewhere in the Nizâm's Dominions.

c8.s17.93

⁶ Epigraphia Indica, Vol. I, p. 344.

c8.s17.94

⁷ Ind. Ant., Vol. II, p. 303; and see page 502 above.

c8.s17.95

Bhillama was succeeded in the sovereignty, probably in the latter half of A.D. 1191, by his son Jaitugi I., also called Jaitapâḷa and Jaitrapâḷa.¹ Of his time, we have three certain records, which mention him as the reigning king.² One is a stone inscription at Bijâpur,³ dated in the month Pausha, on a *tithi* falling in December, A. D. 1196, of the Anala or Nala *saṁvatsara* (Saka-Saṁvat 1118 expired); it cites the *saṁvatsara* as the sixth year of his reign, and thus fixes the Virôdhikrit *saṁvatsara*, S.-S. 1114 current, = A. D. 1191-92, as his first year. Another is an undated stone inscription at Mana-gôḷi in the same district.⁴ And the third is a stone inscription at Dêûr in the same district;⁵ it was dated; but the date seems to be now illegible. The Bijâpur and Dêûr records style him *Pratâpa-Chakravartin*; and the Mana-gôḷi record gives him the paramount epithets of *samastabhuvanâśraya* and *śrîprithivîvallabha*.⁶ The Bijâpur record mentions an officer of his, the *Mahâpradhâna* and *Sênâpati*, the *Daṇḍanâyaka* Saṁkara, who then, in A. D. 1196, was governing the Tardavâḍi thousand. The Dêvara-Hippargi inscription, which may or may not belong to his time,⁷ gives the name of a *Mahâmaṇḍalêśvara* Goṇamarâsa, who had preceded Saṁkara in the charge of that district and was governing it in A. D. 1192. An inscription of his son's time, written about A. D. 1222, mentions, two brothers, Sôidêva and Hêmâḍidêva, of the Nikumbha family, who in A. D. 1207 were governing a district containing sixteen hundred villages in the neighbourhood of Pâṭṇa in Khândêsh,⁸ and must have been feudatories of Jaitugi I.; and it also tells us that Jaitugi appointed Lakshmîdhara, son of the well-known astronomer Bhâskarâchârya, to the post of chief *paṇḍit* in his service. And a later record of his son's time, of A.D. 1240,⁹ mentions a *Mahâpradhâna* and *Bâhattara-niyôg-âdhipati* named Pârisa-seṭṭi, — then holding, under Siṅghaṇa, the office of *Sarvâdhikârin* or general manager of the

c8.s17.96

¹ His name appears as Jaitugi in his Mana-gôḷi and Dêûr records; as Jaitapâḷa in his Bijâpur record; and as Jaitrapâḷa in a later record of about A.D. 1222 (*Epigraphia Indica*, Vol. I. p. 338), and in the *praśasti* of Hêmâdri's *Vratakhaṇḍa*.

c8.s17.97

² To his time belong also the Kalhoḷi inscription of A. D. 1204 (*Jour. Bo. Br. R. As. Soc.*, Vol. X. p. 220), and the Bhôj copper-plate grant of A. D. 1208 (*Ind. Ant.*, Vol. XIX. p. 242). But they do not mention him or any paramount sovereign.

c8.s17.98

³ On a pillar in the southern gateway of the citadel (*Carn.-Désa Incsrs.*, Vol. II. p. 369; verified from an ink-impression).

c8.s17.99

⁴ At the temple of Hanumanta (*ibid.*, p. 370; verified from an ink-impression).

c8.s17.100

⁵ At the temple of Râmaliṅga (*ibid.*, p. 373; verified from an ink-impression).

c8.s17.101

⁶ His name is not actually extant in this part of the record; but it must be his name that stood here.

c8.s17.102

⁷ See page 518 above, note 5.

c8.s17.103

⁸ *Epigraphia Indica*, Vol. I. p. 338. — As regards the date which it furnishes for Sôidêva and his brother, wrongly coupling the Prabhava *saṁvatsara* with *Saka-Saṁvat* 1128 instead of with 1129 (expired), see *Ind. Ant.*, Vol. XX. p. 432.

c8.s17.104

⁹ At a temple of the Rishis at Hagaritige in the Nizâm's Dominions (*Carn.-Désa Incsrs.*, Vol. II; p. 437).

c8.s17.105

Hagarattage three-hundred,—who, it says, had done something, probably by quelling local opposition, to effect the development of the sovereignty of Jaitugi I. The Pâthna record, of about A. D. 1222, and some later records, claim that Jaitugi I. defeated the Andhras. Hêmâdri says that, in the battle-field, he "performed a human sacrifice by immolating a victim in the shape of the fierce Rudra, the lord of the Tailangas,"¹ i. e. the king of the Andhra, Trikalinga, or Têluṅga country; this person must be the Kâkatîya king Rudradêva, for whom the Anamkond inscription² furnishes the date of A. D. 1163. And the Paithan grant of A. D. 1272, mentioning the same matter, in the statement that he slew the king of Trikalinga and seized the whole of his kingdom, adds that he took Ganapati out of prison and made him lord of his country;³ this person, Ganapati, is Rudradêva's nephew, for whom we have the later date of A. D. 1250-51.⁴

c8.s17.106

¹ Early History of the Dekkan (1884), p. 82.

c8.s17.107

² Ind. Ant. Vol. XI. p. 9.

c8.s17.108

³ id. Vol. XIV. p. 314; and see Vol. XXI. p. 198.

c8.s17.109

⁴ id. Vol. XXI. p. 197.

c8.s17.110

Singhana.

c8.s17.111

Jaitugi I. was succeeded, probably in A. D. 1210, by his son Singhana, whose name appears also as Simha, Simhala, and Simhana. Of his reign, some fifty records are now known.⁵ The earliest of them, at Ingali in the Nizâm's Dominions,⁶ is dated in the month Âśvina (Sept.-Oct.), falling in A. D. 1210, of the Pramôdûta samvatsara, Saka-Samvat 1132 (expired); and the latest is the Kadakol inscription, from the Dhârwâr District,⁷ dated in the month Mârgaśira (Nov.-Dec.), falling in A. D. 1246, of the Parâbhava samvatsara (S.-S. 1169 current), which is quoted as the thirty-seventh year of his reign. This latter record indicates the Pramôdûta samvatsara, S.-S. 1133 current, = A. D. 1210-11, as his first regnal year; and, taken in connection with the actual date of the Ingali inscription, this would place the commencement of his reign in A. D. 1210, on or before Âśvina śukla 13, corresponding, approximately, to the 3rd October.⁸ His records are found at various places in the Khândêsh, Bîjâpur, Belgaum, and Dhârwâr Districts, from Bahâl and Pâtna on the north to Raṭṭehalli in the extreme south,—at Kôlhâpur, and in its neighbourhood,—at Ambâ, Chikka-Muddanûr, Gobbûr, Hagaritige, and Ingali, in the Nizâm's Dominions,—and at Ânawaṭṭi, Balagâmve, Kuppatûr, and Yalawâl, in Mysore; and it is thus plain that he eventually established his sway over the whole of the Western Châlukya kingdom. They give him the full paramount epithets and titles, including *Paramabhaṭṭâraka*,¹ and they style him *Pratâpa-Chakravartin*, and occasionally *Prauḍhapratâpa-Chakravartin*,² and Bhujabala-*pratâpa-Chakravartin*,³ and perhaps also *Yâdava-Chakravartin*. The Ingali inscription of October, A. D. 1210, says that he was reigning at Dêvagiri, and so also the Manôli inscription of A. D. 1216; the Khêdrâpur inscription of A. D. 1213 speaks of Dêvagiri as the place where he was established; and an inscription of A. D. 1216-17, at Yalawâl in Mysore,⁴ states that the same town headed a list of eighty-four fortresses. And the records mention, as feudatories and officials,—the *Mahâpradhâna* Nârâyaṇa-Lakshmidêva, who was the *Daṇḍanâyaka* for the *dakshiṇa-mahâ*, or southern part of the kingdom and was governing "many districts," and the *Mahâmaṇḍalêśvara* Vîra-Bijjarasa, son of Ânegadêva, with the hereditary title of "supreme lord of Mâhishmatî, the best of towns,"—both with the date of October, A. D. 1210; a member of the Jimûtavâhana lineage and the Khachara race, named Mallidêva; the *Mahâpradhâna*, *Sarvâdhikârin*, and *Mahâparamaviśvâsin* or most confidential agent Mâyi-, dêvapaṇḍita, under whom, in A. D. 1215, a certain Hemmeyanâyaka was *Śuṅkâdhikârin* of the Banavâsi province, and who was himself governing the Halasige twelve-thousand in A. D. 1226; the *Mahâmaṇḍalêśvara* Ballâladêva, of the Mâsavâḍi country, with the date of A. D. 1218;⁵ the *Daṇḍanâyaka* and *Sarvâdhikârin* Jagadala-Purushôttama, who appears to have been governing the Toragale six-thousand, and his younger brother, the *Daṇḍanâyaka* Jôgadêva, with the date of A. D. 1222; the *Daṇḍanâyaka* Vîchaṇa, Bichâ, Bichidêva, or Bichirâya, who was the viceroy for the southern

c8.s17.112

⁵ For some of his own records which have been published with the texts, see Jour. Bo. Br. R. As. Soc. Vol. XII. p. 7 (at Khêdrâpur; of A. D. 1213); Epigraphia Indica, Vol. III. p. 110 (at Bahâl; of A. D. 1222); id. Vol. I. p. 338 (at Pâthna; of about the same year); Jour. Bo. Br. R. As. Soc. Vol. XII. p. 11, and Archæol. Surv. West. Ind. Vol. II. p. 233, and Vol. III. p. 116 (at Manôli; of the same year); Jour. Bo. Br. R. As. Soc. Vol. XV. p. 383 (from Haralahalli; of A. D. 1238); and Ind. Ant. Vol. XII. p. 100 (at Kadakol; of A. D. 1216). For other edited inscriptions of his time which do not mention him, see Jour. Bo. Br. R. As. Soc. Vol. X. p. 240 (at Nêsargi; of A. D. 1218), and p. 260 (at Saundatti; of A. D. 1228).

c8.s17.113

⁶ An inscription at the temple of Mûlappayya (Carn.-Désa Insers. Vol. II. p. 377).

c8.s17.114

⁷ Ind. Ant. Vol. XII. p. 100.

c8.s17.115

⁸ There appear to be seventeen other records which agree in indicating the Pramôdûta samvatsara as the first year of his reign; viz., inscriptions at Kurtakôti (Carn.-Désa Insers. Vol. I. p. 655; below an undated record of the Western Châlukya king Vikramâditya VI.), Kuppatûr (id. Vol. II. pp. 387, 414), Ablûr (ibid. p. 388), Chikka-Kerûr (p. 390), Mulgund (pp. 396, 397), Kallukeri (pp. 398, 413), Sangûr (p. 411), Gobbûr (p. 412), Tilawalli (p. 415), Hagaritige (p. 437), Sâtenhalli (p. 440), Yalawâl (p. 443), Hosahalli (p. 444), and Kaulûr (p. 447): but I have not been able to verify them. The months of the records which agree, or appear to agree, with this result, run all through the year, from Chaitra to Phâlguna. Differing from it, there is an inscrip-

c8.s17.116

¹ If the transcription of the Ingali inscription is correct, that record gives him the biruda of Tribhuvanamalla. But I have not met with it anywhere else; and I therefore look on it as doubtful.

c8.s17.117

² e. g., *Jour. Bo. Br. R. As. Soc.* Vol. XV. p. 388, text line 55.

c8.s17.118

³ e. g., *Ind. Ant.* Vol. XLI. p. 100, text line 1-2.

c8.s17.119

⁴ Near a temple of Îśvara outside the village (Carn.-Désa Inscrs. Vol. II. p. 459).

c8.s17.120

⁵ See page 506 above, note 2.

c8.s17.121

tion at the temple of Kalamêśvara at Guḍigere, within the limits of the Dhârwâr District, which (I quote from an ink-impression) mentions the *Îśvara saṃvatsara* (Śaka-Saṃvat 1140 current), with a date in the month *Śrâvaṇa* (July-Aug.), as his seventh year. And this would make the *Prajâpati saṃvatsara*, S.-S. 1134 current, = A. D. 1211-12, his first year. I have come across two altogether anomalous instances (I quote them from ink-impressions). The inscription at the temple of Sômêśvara at Hirê-Waḍawaṭṭi near Lakshmêshwar (see page 506 above, note 2), and an inscription at the temple of Gôpâlasvâmin at Chikka-Muddanûr in the Nizâm's Dominions, both quote the Bahudhânya *saṃvatsara*, S.-S. 1141 current, = A. D. 1218-19, as his nineteenth, instead of his ninth year; the month is Vaiśâkha in the former record, and Jyêshṭha in the latter. This difference of ten years seems altogether unexplainable, except on the supposition of pure mistake: and, how such a mistake should occur in the first decade of his reign, itself seems impossible to understand; unless, indeed, the reckoning runs in these two cases from an appointment of Siṅghaṇa as *Yuvarâja*.

c8.s17.122

part of the kingdom,—a subordinate of his; the Dandanâyaka Chikkadêva, and the Mahâmandalêśvara Jôyidêva II, of the Gutta family, with the date of A.D. 1238; a minister named Râmadêva or Râmarâja, with the date of A.D. 1240, apparently in charge of the territory in the neighbourhood of Ambâ near Aurangâbâd; the Mahâpradhâna and Bahattara-niyôg-adhipati Pârisaśeṭṭi, who in the same year was Sarvâdhikârin of the Hagaraṭṭage three-hundred; the Mahâmandalêśvara Lakshmîpâladêvarasa, who in A.D. 1241 was governing the Nâgarakhaṇḍa district; and the Mahâpradhâna and Bahattara-niyôg-adhipati, the Sênâpati Bâchirâja, who, in May-June, A.D. 1247, was in charge of all the Karṇâṭaka provinces; and was stationed at Pulikanagara, i.e. Lakshmêshwar. An inscription of A.D. 1213 at Gadag, coupled with the statement in the Paithan grant that he overthrew "Ballâḷa," shews that, even before the end of the reign of Vîra-Ballâḷa II, Siṅghaṇa succeeded in wresting back from the Hoysaḷas some of the territory that lay south of the Malparbhâ and the Krishṇa. And a record of A.D. 1215 at Baḷagâmve shews still greater success, in the same direction, within the next two years. Meanwhile, the Banavâsi province was still held by the Gutta Mahâmaṇḍalêśvara Vîra-Vikramâditya II., whom a record of A.D. 1213 mentions as then ruling that territory at his capital of Guttavolal, and who may, as on a previous occasion, have been practically independent, pending the issue of the contest between Siṅghaṇa and the Hoysaḷas. The Khêdrâpur inscription of A.D. 1213, and one of A.D. 1218-19 at Kôlhâpur, shew that Siṅghaṇa very speedily subjugated the Śilâhâra territory also,—subduing Bhôja II., the last member of the Karâḍ branch of that family.¹ And the subjugation of the central, western, and south-western portions of what had been the Western Ghâlukya dominions, was effected by the Dandanâyaka Vichaṇa, his viceroy for the southern part of the kingdom,—who reduced the Raṭṭas of Saundatti, and the Kâdambas of the Koṅkaṇ, i.e. of Goa;² this officer was also employed, more to the south and south-east, against the Hoysaḷas, and the Pâṇḍyas of Gutti, in the Noḷambavâḍi province, which is now the chief town of the Anantapur District, Madras Presidency;³ and he claims to have carried his invasion so far as to set up a pillar of victory in the neighbourhood of the river Kâvêrî.⁴ The references to Siṅghaṇa’s success against the Hoysaḷas, whose dynasty was the principal rival of his own, are naturally rather numerous. Other passages describe him as a goad to the elephants that were the Gurjaras, a wrestler against the Mâlavas, an uprooter of the water-lily that was the head of the Têluṅga king, and, subsequently, an estab-

c8.s17.123

¹ An inscription at the temple of Îśvara at Tiḷawaḷḷi in the Dhârwâr District (Carn. Dêsa Inscrs. Vol. II. p. 416, and P. S. and O.-C. Inscrs. No. 112, lines 10, 11) speaks of Siṅghaṇa as Paṇḍla-nilaya-prabala-Bhôja-bhûpâla-vyâla-vidrâvaṇa-vihangardja, "a very king of the birds (Garuda) in putting to flight the serpent, the mighty Bhôja whose habitation was Paṇḍla."—There are references to the overthrow of Bhôja, in several other records; and it seems to have been regarded as an achievement of rather special importance.

c8.s17.124

² Jour. Bo. Br. R. As. Soc. Vol. XV. p. 385.

c8.s17.125

³ Lat. 15°6'; long. 77°41'; Indian Atlas, sheet No. 58, "Gooty."

c8.s17.126

⁴ Jour. Bo. Br. R. As. Soc. Vol. XV. p. 385.

c8.s17.127

lisher of the Têluṅga king,¹ as destroying the elephants of Jâjalla-dêva,² as defeating the kings of Mathurâ and Kâśî, and the Hammîras, *i.e.* the Musalmâns,—as conquering the Gaula and Chôḷa kings,—and as overthrowing the Andhra king, and Kakkalla,³ and the lord of Bhambhâgiri, and Arjuna.⁴ Hêmâdri, referring to his success against the Mâlavas, in the statement that with his troops of horses he besieged or obstructed the ruler of the Dhârâ territory, adds the name of Lakshmîdhara, "the lion of Bhaṅgûrika," to the list of kings defeated by him. And one of the records claims, hyperbolically, that he enforced obedience to his commands from the kings of Mâlava, Chêra, Chôḷa, and Magadha, the Gurjaras and the Pâṇḍyas, the people of Lâḷa (*i.e.* Lâṭa) and Nêpâl, the Turashkas (*i.e.* the Musalmâns), the Barbarigas, the Kêralas, and the Pallavas, and the rulers of Aṅga, Veṅgî, Pâñchâḷa, Kaliṅga, and Sind; and thus reigned over the whole of India. As regards his alleged achievements in the north, it is a fact that he did invade the Gurjara country, or Gujarât, on more than one occasion.⁵ One expedition appears to have been led by a Brâhmaṇ general named Khôlêśvara. This was in the time of Lavaṇaprasâda, and his son Vîradhavala, Râṇas of Ḍhôḷkâ, of the Vâghêlâ branch of the Chaulukya family of Aṇhilwâḍ, when the nominal king was Bhîmadêva II.⁶ On this occasion, Siṅghaṇa's forces crossed the Taptî, and penetrating as far as the Mahî, overran and ravaged all the territory round Broach. And this campaign ended in a treaty of alliance⁷ between Siṅghaṇa and Lavaṇaprasâda, which was concluded in April or May A.D. 1231 or 1232. Another expedition was led by Khôlêśvara's son Râmadêva or Râmarâja, in the time of Vîsaladêva, son of Vîradhavala, while he was still Râṇâ of Ḍhôḷkâ, and before he appropriated the sovereignty of Aṇhilwâḍ.⁸ This seems to have been about A.D. 1237-38. Râmadêva himself was slain in battle, on the banks of the Narmadâ. And, as Vîsaladêva claims to have, on some occasion, defeated Siṅghaṇa's army,⁹ perhaps this expedition then turned back, unsuccessful. The Pâṭṇa inscription, written about A.D. 1222, furnishes some interesting literary information.¹⁰ It mentions the well-known

c8.s17.128

¹ On the other hand, the Têluṅga king himself, Gaṇapati,—for whom we have the date of A.D. 1250,—claims to have defeated Siṅghaṇa (*Ind. Ant.* Vol. XXI, p. 197).

c8.s17.129

² Evidently mentioned as Jajjala by Hêmâdri.

c8.s17.130

³ Doubtless identical with the Kakkalla of Hêmâdri.

c8.s17.131

⁴ Doubtless Arjunadêva, king of Aṇhilwâḍ, of the Vâghêlâ branch of the Chaulukya family. His date, as king, was A.D. 1261-62 to 1274-75 (*Ind. Ant.* Vol. VI. p. 213). But he may have held a command under his father Vîsaladêva (A.D. 1243-44 to 1261-62), and so have been contemporaneous with Siṅghaṇa.

c8.s17.132

⁵ From the Ambâ inscription (*Archæol. Surv. West. Ind.* Vol. III, p. 85); and from Sômadêva's *Kîrtikaumudî*, and the *Lêkhapañchâśikâ*, as quoted by Dr. Bhandarkar (*Early History of the Dekkan*, 1884, pp. 83-85).

c8.s17.133

⁶ The date of Bhîmadêva II. was A.D. 1178 to 1241-42 (*Ind. Ant.* Vol. VI. p. 213). Lavaṇaprasâda, at first his faudatory, established his own independence just before A.D. 1219-20 (*ibid.* p. 190). Vîradhavala's period was A.D. 1219-20 to about 1238-39.

c8.s17.134

⁷ Quoted in the *Lêkhapañchâśikâ*.

c8.s17.135

⁸ Vîsaladêva's date as Râṇâ was about A.D. 1238-39 to 1243-44; and as king, from A.D. 1243-44 to 1261-62 (*Ind. Ant.* Vol. VI. p. 213).

c8.s17.136

⁹ *Ind. Ant.* Vol. VI. pp. 191, 212.—The record says also that Vîsaladêva married a daughter of the king of the Karṇâṭa. Whether Siṅghaṇa is intended, or the Hoysaḷa king, is not clear.

c8.s17.137

¹⁰ *Epigraphia Indica*, Vol. I. p. 338.—The record is also of linguistic interest, being written partly in Sanskrit and partly in some old variety of Marâṭhî.

c8.s17.138

Jaitugi II.

c8.s17.139

Krishna.

c8.s17.140

astronomer Bhâskarâchârya, and his father Mahêśvara.¹ It tells us that Bhâskarâchârya's son Lakshmîdhara was made chief paṇḍit by Jaitugi I.; and that Lakshmîdhara's son Changadêva was the chief astrologer of Siṅghaṇa. And it records that Changadêva founded a college for the study of the Siddhântaśirômaṇi and other works, written by his grandfather and other unnamed relations.

c8.s17.141

¹ Mahêśvara is also mentioned in the Bahâḷ inscription of A.D. 1222 (Epigraphia Indica, Vol. III. p. 110), with a great-grandson named Anantadêva.

c8.s17.142

Siṅghaṇa's son was Jaitugi II., who seems to have died in his father's lifetime. He certainly did not reign. And no historical facts are stated in connection with him.

c8.s17.143

Siṅghaṇa was succeeded, probably early in A.D. 1247, by his grandson Krishna, whose name appears also in the Prâkṛit forms of Kaṇhaṭa, Kaṇhâra, Kandhara, and Kandhâra.² The Bêhaṭṭi grant, from the Dhârwâr District,³ dated on the new-moon day of the month Chaitra (March-April), falling in A.D. 1253, of the Pramâdin saṁvatsara, Saka-Saṁvat 1175, wrongly described as current instead of expired, says that that day fell in his seventh year; and this indicates the Plavaṅga saṁvatsara, S.-S. 1170 current, = A.D. 1247-48, as his first year. On the other hand, an inscription at Hulgûr, in the same district,⁴ represents the full-moon day of Phâlguna (Feb.-March), falling in A.D. 1255, of the Ânanda saṁvatsara (S.-S. 1177 current), as being in his ninth year; and this would point to the Parâbhava saṁvatsara, S.-S. 1169 current, = A.D. 1246-47, as his first year. But at any rate the whole of the Parâbhava saṁvatsara did not belong to his reign; for it is cited, with a date in November-December, A.D. 1246, as the thirty-seventh year of Siṅghaṇa.⁵ And possibly the explanation is that Krishna succeeded nearly at the end of that saṁvatsara, in the first three months of A.D. 1247; and that, consequently, the Plavaṅga saṁvatsara was more usually reckoned as the first year of his reign. In addition to the Bêhaṭṭi and Hulgûr records, others have been obtained at Beṇḍigeri,⁶ Chikka-Bâgewâḍi,⁷ Mamdâpur, and Manôḷi,⁸ in the Belgaum District, and at Chaudadâmpur, Gadag, Hûvina-Sigaḷḷi, Kallukeri, and Nâgâvi, in Dhârwâr. And, coupled with the statements in the Maṇôḷi and Bêhaṭṭi records that he reigned and held his court at Dêvagiri, the localities suffice to shew that he kept together the kingdom to which he had succeeded. The earliest of the records is the Chikka-Bâgewâḍi grant, dated in the month Âshâḍha (June-July), falling in A.D. 1249, of the Saumya saṁvatsara, Saka-Saṁvat 1171 expired; the latest is an inscription at Chaudadâmpur,¹ dated in Chaitra (March-April), falling in A.D. 1259, of the Siddhârthin samvatsara (S.-S. 1182 current). The Bêhatti grant gives him all the paramount epithets and titles, except samastabhuvanâśraya; and the records shew generally that he was styled, successively, Pratâpa-Chakravartin, Bhujabalapratâpa-Chakravartin, and Bhujabulapraudhapratâpa-Chakravartin. They mention, as officials, an Amâtya or minister and Sarvadêśâdhikârin named Malla or Mallisetti, an elder brother of the Vichaya who has been mentioned in connection with Singhana, who, in A.D. 1249, when residing at Mudgal in the Nizâm's Dominions, granted the village called Santeya-Bâgevâdi, i.e. the modern Hirê-Bâgewâdi in the Huvvalli or Mugutkhân-Hubli twelve in the Kuhundi country, which was one of the provinces subject to him, and in the same year granted the village of Tâmbrapuri in the Vênugrâma or Belgaum country; the Râyarâjaguru or royal preceptor Sômêśvaradêva, with the date of A.D. 1251; and Mallisetti's son, the Mahâmâtya and Mahâpradhâna Chaundisetti or Chaundarâja, who obtained the Chikka-Bâgewâdi and Bendigeri charters which register the above two grants, and who himself in A.D. 1253 visited Kukkanûr in the Nizâm's Dominions, in the course of a victorious progress through the country, and granted that town, the chief town of a circle of thirty villages in the Belvola country. They contain vague expressions which claim successes for Krishna against the Mâlavas, the Gurjaras, and the Chôlas, and in the Konkan; they say that he destroyed Tripura, which seems to be the modern Têwar near Jabalpur, the capital of the Kalachuris of Central India; and they call him, like Singhana, "an establisher of the Têlunga king:" but otherwise they do not disclose any historical facts.

First 141 of 198 passages. Read on

Linked texts (23)