The Dynasties of the Kanarese Districts of the Bombay Presidency from the Earliest Historical Times to the Musalman Conquest c8.s5.25

c8.s5.25

I agree with the Paṇḍit in reading श्री before राष्ट्रकूटन्वया and taking रायत्रय as राज्यत्रय, and, generally, in his translation of the first two and the fourth lines. But the translation of the third line, that is, the portion italicised in the above, is very objectionable. The Paṇḍit reads राज from नाज and says that the य in यदन्वया० ought to be long for the metre, but would make no sense. Now, in seeking the true solution of the difficulty here, we must bear in mind that in the fourth line the lady is spoken of as “an object of reverence to the three kingdoms.” Which are the three kingdoms? First evidently, that of Jhañjha, her father, who is spoken of in the first line; and secondly, that of the Râshṭrakûṭas from whose race she is spoken of as having sprung in the second line. Now, we must expect some allusion to the third kingdom in the third line. The third kingdom was clearly that of the Yâdavas into whose family she had been married. I, therefore, read यदन्वया० for यदन्वया० and thus the difficulty about the metre is removed, the य becoming prosodially long in consequence of the following द्व. In the same manner I think बालनाज is a mistake for बालजान The word जान the writer must have taken from his vernacular and considered it a Sanskrit word; or probably not knowing Sanskrit well, he must have formed it from the root जन् on the analogy of माद from मद, नाद from नद, मान from मन् &c. Or बालनाज may be considered as a mistake for बालजन्म, the sense being the same, viz. “birth of a child.” The compound यदन्वयाधारिता is to be dissolved as आधारितः यदन्वयः यया । आधारित being made the second member according to Pâṇini II. 2, 37. Or, the line may be read as या याता नवबालजन्मसमये यदन्वयाधारतां, the dot over ता being omitted by mistake, and याता written as जाता in consequence of the usual confusion between य and ज. The translation of the line, therefore, is “who became the upholder of the race of Yadu on the occasion of the birth of a new child,” i. e. through her child she became the upholder of the Yâdava race. In this manner the supposition of her being adopted by the Râshṭrakûṭas during the young prince’s minority becomes groundless. She must have belonged to the Râshṭrakûṭa race on her mother’s side.