The Dynastic History of Northern India (Early Mediaeval Period) v2.c29.s2.111

Language: English

v2.c29.s2.111.1

This inscription shows that Gāṅgeya had already succeeded his father as king of Ḍāhala before 1038 A.D., and that at that date his dominions had extended in the north to within 50 miles from Allahabad. An earlier date of his reign is supplied by the *Kitābul-Hind* of Bīrūnī, composed about 1030 A.D.,² which mentions *Dahāla* with its capital *Tīaurī* as one of the countries of India. At the time of the composition of this work the ruler of that country was *Gangeya*, no doubt the Gāṅgeyadeva of the Piawan rock-inscription. In the records of his successors Gāṅgeya is given credit for extensive conquests. Thus the Goharwa plates of Lakṣmī-Karṇa tell us that Gāṅgeya imprisoned the king of Kīra and defeated the rulers of Aṅga, Kuntala, and Utkala.³ The Khairha and the Jubbulpore grants of Yaśaḥ-Karṇa inform us that he became famous under the name Vikramāditya.⁴ The same two grants in a rather obscure verse seem to refer to Gāṅgeya's victory over the king of Kuntala.

v2.c29.s2.111.2

It has been translated as follows: "The crest-jewel of crowned heads, he became famous under the name Vikramāditya, wishing to run away from whom with dishevelled hair (the king of Kuntala) who was deprived of his country came to possess it again."¹ According to Hiralal, 'the eulogist evidently seems to convey that Gāṅgeyadeva was so noble that he restored the Kuntala country to its king who was defeated and was running away with dishevelled hair?'² A Candella inscription from Mahoba tells us that 'when Gāṅgeyadeva who had conquered the world (*jita-viśva*) perceived before him (this) terrible one (Vijayapāla)... the lotus of his heart closed the knot of pride in battle.'³ It is difficult to separate *praśasti* from facts in these claims. But the fact that he is given the credit of having conquered the world in an enemy's record is highly significant. I have already indicated elsewhere that the reign of Vijayapāla probably represented a rather inglorious period of Candella history.⁴ The Piawan rock-inscription, as well as the statement in the Kalacuri records that Gāṅgeya took up his residence at the feet of the holy fig-tree at Prayāga,⁵ shows the extension of his power up to the Ganges in the north. It suggests also the possibility that the whole of the Baghelkhund Agency had passed into his possession.

v2.c29.s2.111.3

Our inference is further supported by the statement of Baihaqi, who tells us that when Aḥmad Niyāl-tigīn, the general of the Yamīnī king Mas'ūd I (*c.* 1030-40 A.D.), invaded 'Banāras,' (*c.* 1034 A.D.) that city 'belonged to the territory of Gang' (واليت گنگ). It is possible that this *Gang* is to be identified with the Kalacuri king Gāṅgeya.⁶ At this time the Gurjara-Pratīhāras had practically disappeared as an effective power in the Ganges-Jumna valley. The death of Vidyādhara had also probably caused a decline of Candella influence in the *Doab*. Under the circumstances it was not impossible for a daring ruler to advance from his base at Allahabad up the Jumna valley into Kangra, and capture a petty Kīra prince ruling in that area. In the east the Aṅga king at this time was probably the Pāla ruler Mahīpāla I; and an attempt to advance down the Ganges valley from Allahabad may have brought Gāṅgeya into conflict with him also. This would receive confirmation from the colophon of a Nepal MS. of the *Rāmāyaṇa* if we could accept the identification of the *Gauḍadhvaja* Gāṅgeyadeva mentioned in it with the Tripurī ruler of that name. The colophon runs as follows: *Saṁvat* 1076 (A.D.

v2.c29.s2.111.4

1019) *Āṣāḍha vadi* 4, *Mahārājādhirāja puṇyāvaloka Somavaṁśodbhava Gauḍa-dhvaja Śrīmad-Gāṅgeyadeva-bhujyamāna-Tīrabhuktau Kalyāṇa-vijaya-rājye*.¹ Similarly it is not impossible that he may have attacked the rulers of Orissa from some base in the Bilaspur district by following the downward course of the Mahanadi.² In his hostility to the kings of the Kanarese districts (Kuntala) he was carrying on the policy laid down by his predecessor Yuvarāja II. The defeated Kuntala king was most probably Vikramāditya V Tribhuvanamalla (*c.* 1009-1011 A.D.), the grandson of Taila II. The only recorded instance of the defeat of Gāṅgeyadeva is probably found in the statement of the *Pārijātamañjarī* of Madana which tells us that (the Paramāra king) Bhoja (*c.* 1010-55 A.D.) "had his desires speedily fulfilled for a long time at the festive defeat of Gāṅgeya" (*Gāṅgeya-bhaṅg-otsava*).³ Hultzsch rightly identified this prince with the Tripurī Kalacuri Gāṅgeya.