The Dynastic History of Northern India (Early Mediaeval Period) v2.c32.s1: (1) Cāhamānas of Lāṭa
The Dynastic History of Northern India (Early Mediaeval Period) v2.c32.s1
- Language
- English
(1) Cāhamānas of Lāṭa
v2.c32.s1.1
The earliest reference to the existence of Cāhamānas in Lāṭa was revealed by the discovery of the *Hansot grant of Bhartṛvaḍḍha*. It was found in the possession of a person in the town of Hansot, in the Anklesvar taluka of the Broach district, Bombay Presidency. It contains 36 lines, incised on two plates. It opens with *Oṁ Svasti*, after which comes the following: 'The Cāhamāna family, exalted with a large army, who have succeeded in adorning their territory, who are a receptacle of victory, like Meru (which is lofty with large ridges, adorned with the circle of *Siddhas*, the support of Jaya, or the sun.' Then comes the genealogy of the donor:
v2.c32.s1.3
In the Cāhamāna family
v2.c32.s1.4
Rājan Maheśvaradāma
v2.c32.s1.5
Bhīmadāma
v2.c32.s1.6
Bhartṛvaḍḍha (I)
v2.c32.s1.7
Parama-māheśvara Haradāma
v2.c32.s1.8
Dhrubhaṭadeva
v2.c32.s1.9
Parama-māheśvara-Samadhigata-pañca-mahāśabda-Mahāsāmantādhipati Bhartṛvaḍḍha (II).
v2.c32.s1.10
It is then announced that this last prince, while staying at Bhṛgukaccha (mod. Broach), granted the village of Arjunadevīgrāma in the Akrūreśvara¹ *viṣaya* to the Brāhman *Bhaṭṭa* Būṭa (?) and two others. The grant was written by the *Vālabhya*² *Bhaṭṭa* Kakka. It was issued from Bhṛgukaccha, with *Bhaṭṭa* Llalluva as its *Dūtaka*, in the *pravardhamāna-vijaya-rājya* of the illustrious Nāgāvaloka, in the (V.) year 813 (A.D. 756).³
v2.c32.s1.11
¹ Probably the present Anklesvar *taluka*; *EI*, Vol. XII, p. 201.
v2.c32.s1.12
² 'From Valabhī '?—*ibid*, p. 204.
v2.c32.s1.13
³ Edited by Sten Konow, *EI*, Vol. XII, pp. 197-204.
v2.c32.s1.14
This inscription gives us six generations of Cāhamānas who appear to have resided in the region of Broach. By assigning a period of 30 years for each generation Konow arrived at *c.* 500 A.D. as the date of Maheśvaradāma.⁴ Noticing the occurrence of names which were common to the Maitrakas of Valabhī⁵ and the occurrence of the epithet *Vālabhya* (from Valabhī ?)` before the name of the writer of the grant, he also suspected intimate contact between the two families.⁶ But the most striking feature of these princes' names is certainly the ending *-dāma* in three of them, which is likewise found in the names of several descendants of the Western Kṣatrapa Caṣṭana. In the opinion of Rapson, it may well be a Sanskritised form of a Persian word.⁷
v2.c32.s1.15
⁴ I would rather assign 25 years, and propose *c.* 600 A.D. as the date of Maheśvaradāma.
v2.c32.s1.16
⁵ Cāhamāna Dhrubhaṭa (=Dhruvabhaṭa) = Maitraka Dhruvabhaṭa Śīlāditya VII (A.D. 766).
v2.c32.s1.17
⁶ 'It is possible that Bhartṛvaddha II's sister was married to Śīlāditya VI, so that Śīlāditya VII may have worn the name of his maternal grandfather': *EI*, Vol. XII, p. 199.
v2.c32.s1.18
⁷ 'Spalaga-dama': see Rapson, *Catalogue of Indian Coins (Andhras, Kṣatrapas, etc.)*, 1908, p. cv. For a Kacchapaghāta name ending in *dāman*, see my chapter on the Kacchapaghātas, *DHNI*, Vol. II, p. 822; also fn. 5 on the same page.
v2.c32.s1.19
The identification of Nāgāvaloka with Nāgabhaṭa I of the Gurjara-Pratīhāra family is now generally accepted. The existence of a Gurjara ruling family in the Broach region till *c.*
v2.c32.s1.20
706-36 A.D.¹ seems to indicate that Bhartṛvaḍḍha II may have succeeded Jayabhaṭa III, the last representative of that family, as the viceroy of Lāṭa. Bhartṛvaḍḍha's predecessors, however, may have been settled, as Konow suggests, in Broach for a long time previously.² But the fact that they are assigned only vague praise in the grant of their successor, combined with the absence of any titles of even feudatory rank, indicates that their position as rulers of Gujarat was not very conspicuous.
v2.c32.s1.21
¹ *BG*, Vol. I, Part I, p. 177:
v2.c32.s1.22
² *EI*, Vol. XII, pp. 198 ff.
v2.c32.s1.23
For about five centuries nothing is heard of the Cāhamānas in Gujarat. The *Hammīra-mada-mardana* of Jayasiṁha³ reveals the presence of the *Mahāmaṇḍaleśvara* Saṁgrāmarāja, also known as Saṁgrāmasiṁha, who was a contemporary of the Vāghelā Vīradhavala (*c.* 1233-43 A.D.). He is said to have been the son of Sindhurāja and nephew of Siṁha, lord of Lāṭa-deśa. The drama represents him as in alliance with the Devagiri Yādava Siṁhaṇa (*c.* 1210-47 A.D.) and the Mālava Paramāra Devapāla (*c.* 1218-36 A.D.) against the Dholka chieftain. The allied invasion however, failed, largely owing to the activity of the spies of Vastupāla, the able minister of Vīradhavala. The alliance was dissolved and Saṁgrāmarāja was forced into an alliance with Vīradhavala. The *Vasanta-vilāsa* of Bālacandra also contains⁴ an account of the hostilities between Vīradhavala and the princes of Lāṭa. It relates that Stambhatīrtha (mod. Cambay) was conquered by the Dholka chiefs from the king of Lāṭa: The latter, according to this authority, was of Cāhamāna lineage, and named Saṅkhu. On one occasion he started from Bhṛgukaccha to attack Stambhatīrtha with a cavalry force. But in the battle which followed Saṅkhu was defeated and compelled to retire to Broach. As the father of Saṅkhu was named Sindhurāja, he is almost certainly identical with the Saṁgrāmarāja of the *Hammīra-mada-mardana*. Jayasiṁha says of Saṅkhu that his 'left foot was adorned with the figures of 12 *Maṇḍalādhipatis* on golden *dāmas*, '¹ and he defeated the Yādava king Siṁhaṇa on the Narbada.
v2.c32.s1.24
³ *GOS*, No. X, 1920.
v2.c32.s1.25
⁴ *GOS*, No. VII, 1917.
v2.c32.s1.26
¹ *GOS*, No. X, V. 28.
v2.c32.s1.27
From these statements it is clear that Broach was the centre of the Cāhamāna principality. Being situated on the frontiers of the Caulukyas, the Yādavas, and the Paramāras, it was in a difficult position. Though Bālacandra calls Saṅkhu a *bhūpati* or king, it is doubtful whether they at any time really enjoyed sovereign power. Jayasiṁha more appropriately calls him a *Mahāmaṇḍaleśvara*. It is likely that, though possessing considerable power and prestige, these princes were always compelled to acknowledge, at least tacitly, the sovereignty of their stronger neighbours. The dominance of the great kingdoms of Gujarat, Malwa and the Deccan during the period *c.* 750-1175 must have kept them in insignificance. It was only after the decline or downfall of the states towards the end of the 12th and the beginning of the 13th century that they were given opportunities to rise in importance.
v2.c32.s1.28
As to the relationship of the family of Bhartṛvaddha and Saṅkhu nothing is at present definitely known. But as Broach was the base of power of both the families, it may be conjectured that they were connected by blood.
Linked texts (2)
- Hammīramadamardana — Jayasiṃhasūri (dramatist), Sanskrit
- Vasantavilāsa (phāgu) — Gujarati