Annals and Antiquities of Rajasthan, or the Central and Western Rajput States of India v1.c12.37

v1.c12.37

One of the most valuable parts of *The Annals* is the chapter describing the popular religion of Mewār, the festival and rites in honour of Gauri, the Mother goddess. There are also many incidental notices of cults and superstitions scattered through the work. A race of warriors like the Rājputs naturally favours the worship of Siva who, as the successor of Rudra, the Vedic storm-god, was originally a terror-inspiring deity, a side of his character only imperfectly veiled by his euphemistic title of Siva, ‘the blessed or auspicious One.’ In his phallic manifestation his chief shrine is at Eklingji, ‘the single or notable phallus,’ about fourteen miles north of Udaipur city. The Rānas hold the office of priest-kings, Dīwāns or prime-ministers of the god. Their association with this deity has been explained by an inscription recently found in the temple of Nātha, ‘the Lord,’ now used as a storeroom of the Eklingji temple.¹ The inscription, dated A.D. 971, is in form of a dedication to Lakulīsa, a form of Siva represented as bearing a club, and refers to the Saiva sect known as Lakulīsa-Pāsapatas. It records the name of a king named Srī-Bappaka, ‘the moon among the princes of the Guhila dynasty,’ who reigned at a place called Nāgahvada, identified with Nāgda, an ancient town several times mentioned in *The Annals*, the ruins of which exist at the foot of the hill on which the temple of Eklingji stands. Srī-Bappaka is certainly Bāpa or Bappa, the traditional founder of the Mewār dynasty, which had at that time its capital at Nāgda. From this inscription it is clear that the Eklingji temple was in existence before A.D. 971, and, as Mr. Bhandarkar remarks, “it shows that the old tradition about Nāgendra and Bappa Rāwal’s infancy given by Tod had some historical foundation, and it is intelligible how the Rānas of Udaipur could have come to have such an intimate connexion with the temple as that of high priests, in which capacity they still officiate.” This office vested in them is a good example of one of those dynasties of priest-kings of which Sir James Frazer has given an elaborate account.²