The Dynastic History of Northern India (Early Mediaeval Period) v1.c16.315

Language: English

v1.c16.315.1

The identification of all these princes and their principalities is not easy. Bhīmayaśas appears to have been a successor of Chikkora Devarakṣita, the son-in-law of Mathana. It is uncertain who was the Kanauj ruler who was defeated by him. But he was possibly the Gāhaḍavāla Candradeva, who appears to have conquered Kanauj some time during the period 1073-1090 A. D. Koṭāṭavī (the forest principality of Koṭ ?) whose ruler Vīraguṇa has been described as a southern ruler, has been identified with the Koṭ-des in Sarkār Katak (in Orissa) of the *A'īn-i-Akbarī*.¹ But this seems to be improbable, for it involves the assumption that the dominions of Rāmapāla extended so far south as to include portions of Orissa. The principality mentioned next is Daṇḍa-Bhukti. This place is spoken of in the Tirumalai inscription of Rajendra Cola as between Kośala-nāḍu and Takkaṇa-lāḍam. Its king Jayasiṁha was a neighbour of the Orissa king Karṇakeśarī. Hence it must be located somewhere near the borders of Orissa, Western Bengal, and the western portion of the Central Provinces. It is therefore not unlikely that it was "the march-land between Orissa and Bengal corresponding to the modern British districts of Midnapore and Balasore."¹ But its prince Jayasiṁha is not known from any other source. Nor can we explain his relationship with Dharmapāla, who ruled the same principality in the time of Mahīpāla I.

v1.c16.315.2

The next principality is Bāla-Valabhī,² which is described by the commentator as *Devagrāma-pratibaddha*. We have already pointed out that this name occurs in the Bhuvanesvar *praśasti* of Bhaṭṭa Bhavadeva. Paṇḍit H. P. Śāstrī has identified it with "Bagḍi (Vāgaḍī), one of the five provinces into which Bengal was divided," while others locate it in the Nadia district. Though there is no evidence in support of either of these identifications, it is likely that it was the name of a district in West Bengal. It is to be noted that Bhaṭṭa Bhavadeva, who is described as *Bāla-Valabhī-bhujaṅga*, was a resident of Rāḍhā. The relationship of Vikramarāja, the ruler of this place, to Harivarmadeva, whom Bhavadeva aided with his counsel, is at present unknown. The next ruler is Lakṣmīśūra of Apara-mandāra. I have already pointed out the presence of Śūra rulers in Western Bengal.³ Though we do not exactly know what relationship, if any, this ruler had to the Śūras of Coḷa and Sena inscriptions and of Bengal tradition, he may have belonged to a branch of the same family, and in that case we should locate Apara-mandāra somewhere in Western Bengal. The next ruler,—Sūrapāla, is not otherwise known. The identification of his principality is also uncertain. It would clearly be hazardous to regard him as a kinsman of the Pālas from his name.¹ The next principality, Tailakampa, has been identified with some probability with Telkup, near Pachet, in the Manbhum district (Bihar)² by Paṇḍit H. P.

v1.c16.315.3

Sāstrī. Nothing is known about its chief Rudraśikhara.³ The next principality Ucchāla, has been identified with pargana Ujhiyal in Birbhum. But it has been rightly pointed out that if this identification is to depend only on a mere similarity of sound, there are other places in Bengal bearing like names.⁴ Its ruler, Mayagalasimha, is not known from any other source. The next principality, Dhekkarīya, has been identified by Paṇḍit H. P. Sāstrī with modern "Dhekura on the other side of the river Ajaya, near Katwa" in Burdwan district.⁵ The reasons for this equation excepting the similarity of names, are unknown to me. Its *rājā* Pratāpasiṁha is not known from any other source. Of the remaining princes and principalities we can only make some suggestions about Vijayarāja and Kauśāmbī. The latter place is evidently not to be identified with the city of the same name near Allahabad. A place nearer home bearing the same name is mentioned in the Belava grant of Bhojavarman. This is the Kauśāmbī-*aṣṭagacha-khaṇḍala* situated in *Puṇḍra-Bhukti*. Very probably the Kauśāmbī of the *Rāma-carita* commentary is to be identified with the region round about this *Khaṇḍala* in North Bengal. The evidence which led Mr. R. D. Banerji to identify this Kauśāmbī with Kuśumbā in Rajshahi district is not known to me.¹ Vijayarāja has been identified by Dr. H. C.

v1.c16.315.4

Raychaudhuri with the Sena prince Vijyasena.² Though there is at present little evidence excepting similarity of names there is no insuperable chronological difficulties in making him a contemporary of Rāmapāla (*c.* 1084-1126 A.D.), for his reign-period as we shall see later on, falls between about 1097 and 1159.³ If this identification is accepted, we must locate his principality of Nidrābala in West Bengal, for the Naihati grant of Ballālasena informs us that the princes of his family who preceded him were ornaments of the Rāḍhā country (V. 3).⁴