The Dynastic History of Northern India (Early Mediaeval Period) v2.c34.s2: (2) Guhila-putras of Chatsu
The Dynastic History of Northern India (Early Mediaeval Period) v2.c34.s2
- Language
- English
(2) Guhila-putras of Chatsu
v2.c34.s2.1
The existence of this branch of the Guhilas is mainly known from the Chatsu stone-inscription of Bālāditya,⁴ which was discovered about 26 miles south of the City of Jaipur in Rajputana. Another record of one of the earlier members of the family, was found at Dabok, in the Jahazpur district of Udaipur. It has therefore been concluded that the principality of this line probably extended from Dabok in Udaipur in the south to Chatsu in Jaipur on the north. Bhandarkar suggested that their capital was probably at Dhavagarta, modern Dhod in Jahazpur district. But he himself quotes a tradition which may indicate that it was further north, at Chatsu.⁵ The tank where the inscription was found is even now known as *Gholerāv-talāv*, or the tank of the Guhila-rāja.
v2.c34.s2.2
⁴ EI, Vol. XII, pp. 10-17.
v2.c34.s2.3
⁵ Rāṇā choḍe Cāṭsū, jo cāy so le ('The Rāṇā has forsaken Cāṭsū; whoever wants it may take it').
v2.c34.s2.4
The founder of this line was Bhartṛpaṭṭa, who is stated in the Chatsu inscription to have flourished in the Guhila family. He is also said to have been like Rāma (*i. e.*, Paraśu-Rāma) endowed with priestly and martial qualities. I have already commented upon the true meaning of this statement. The *praśastikāra* apparently wanted to say that though Bhartṛpaṭṭa¹ was a Brāhman, he adopted the life and profession of a Kṣatriya. I have approximately calculated his date as *c.* 625 A. D., and have ventured to guess that he was an earlier immigrant from the principality established by the Brāhman Guhila of Ānandapura. Nothing is definitely known about his next three successors,¹ his son Īśānabhaṭa, his grandson Upendrabhaṭa, and his great-grandson Guhila I. Guhila's son was Dhaṇika, who, as I have elsewhere said, is probably identical with Dhaṇika of the Dabok stone-inscription dated in Gupta Saṁvat 407² (*c.* 725 A.D.). The inscription is dated in the victorious reign of the *Pb.-M.-P.*-Dhavalappadeva, who has with some probability been identified with the Maurya prince Dhavala of the Kansuvam inscription dated in V. S. 795 (A.D. 738). Ojha however demurs to this identification, and regards the question of the family of Dhavalappa as still open.³ Nothing is known about the next two successors of Dhaṇika, *viz.*, his son Āuka and grandson Kṛṣṇarāja. Kṛṣṇa's son Śaṅkaragaṇa is stated to have conquered Bhaṭa, the *Gauḍa-kṣitipati*, and made a present of the latter's kingdom to his overlord (*prabhu*). Saṅkaragaṇa’s son by his queen Yajjā, Harṣarāja, succeeded him. This prince is called a *dvija*, which, as Bhandarkar points out, usually denotes a Brāhman in the inscriptions of the period. He is also stated to have conquered kings in the north and presented horses to Bhoja. This Bhoja has been identified with the Pratīhāra emperor of Kanauj of that name who ruled about 836-90 A.D. ; if so, the *prabhu* of Harṣarāja’s father was possibly Nāgabhaṭa II (*c.* 815-33 A.D.), the grandfather of Bhoja, or his son Rāmabhadra. But who could be the Gauḍa king who was defeated by Saṅkaragaṇa? Bhandarkar’s suggestion that *Bhaṭa* may be the Pāla ruler Sūrapāla seems to be wrong. I am inclined to regard *Bhaṭa* rather as a *biruda* or an epithet of Dharmapāla (*c.* 769-815 A.D.), who was a contemporary and rival of Nāgabhaṭa II,¹ the predecessor of Bhoja I.
v2.c34.s2.5
¹ Ojha would identify him with the 11th prince of the same name in the Medapāṭa line; *see HR*, II, pp. 420 ff. I have tried to show that this is improbable; *see ante*, *DHNI*, Vol. II, p. 1167, fn. 8.
v2.c34.s2.6
² *ASI, WC*, 1906, p. 61. The date was read by Bhandarkar as 807. He changed it to 407 in *EI*, Vol. XII, pp. 11-12. But Ojha has proposed to read the date as 207, which he refers to the Harṣa era (V. S. 870=A.D. 813); *see HR*, II, pp. 421, fn. 1; *see also* *DHNI*, Vol. II, *ante*, p. 1155, fn. 8.
v2.c34.s2.7
³ *HR*, II, p. 421, fn. 1.
v2.c34.s2.8
¹ See *DHNI*, Vol. I, p. 287.
v2.c34.s2.9
Harṣarāja was succeeded by Guhila II, his son by the queen Sillā. Guhila married Rajjhā, a daughter of the Paramāra Vallabharāja (V. 24). I am unable to identify this prince. The Chatsu inscription tells us that Guhila II created the impression that he was Guhila I come to life again to destroy his foes (V. 22). We are further told (V. 23) that with excellent horses he vanquished the *Gauḍādhinātha* and levied tribute upon the princes of the east (*prācya*). I am inclined to identify this lord of Gauḍa with Devapāla (*c.* 815-54). If this is accepted, we must conclude that the expedition of Guhila II was undertaken in the interest of his overlord, who was still probably Bhoja I (*c.* 836-90 A.D.). It seems likely that the small silver coins bearing the legend *Srī-Guhila* or *Guhila-Śrī* which were dug up in Agra in 1869² really belonged to this prince.
v2.c34.s2.10
² *ASR*, Vol. IV, p. 95; see also *ante*, *DHNI*, Vol. II, p. 1163.
v2.c34.s2.11
Guhila II's son was Bhaṭṭa. He is stated to have led an expedition of conquest against the kings of the south (V. 26).
v2.c34.s2.12
He married Purāsā, the daughter of one Vīruka, and had by her a son named Bālāditya, also known as a Bālārka and Bālabhānu, who succeeded him. The *Chatsu stone-inscription* emanates from this prince. It is incised on a slab of black stone built into the side wall of the steps leading down into a great tank, at the bottom of which it was originally found. The tank is situated at Chatsu, the principal town of a *tahsil* of the same name in the Jaipur State, about 26 miles south of Jaipur. The record contains 27 lines of writing in the northern type of alphabet of about the 10th century A.D. It opens with *Oṁ namaḥ* and two verses addressed to the goddess Sarasvatī and Murāri (Viṣṇu). Next follows the genealogy of the *Guhila-vaṁsa*, from Bhartṛpaṭṭa to Bālāditya. This latter married Raṭṭavā, the daughter of the Cāhamāna king Śivarāja, and had by her three sons, Vallabharāja, Vigraharāja and Devarāja. The object of the inscription is to record the erection of a temple of Murāri (Viṣṇu), by Bālāditya, in memory of Raṭṭavā, who had died. The *praśasti* was composed by the *Karaṇika* Bhānu, a Vaiṣṇava, and engraved by the *Sūtradhāra* Bhāila.¹
v2.c34.s2.13
¹ Edited by D. R. Bhandarkar, *EI*, Vol. XII, pp. 10-17.
v2.c34.s2.14
Nothing more is known about Bālāditya or any of his descendants. It may be that their principality was gradually swallowed up by the growing power of the Cāhamānas of Śākambharī.