History of Mediaeval Hindu India (being a History of India from 600 to 1200 A.D.) v2.c28.s1.37

v2.c28.s1.37

Certain coins have been found in Northern India on which is read the legend Sri Vāsudeva Vahman in Nāgarī characters and in Pehlvi “Takkān, Jabulistān and Sapardalakshān.” First Dr. D. R. Bhandarkar to suit his purpose reads Vahman as Chāhman “because the characters of the letters v and ch in old days were so close to each other that one might be easily mistaken for the other.” “And Chāhman, it need scarcely be said, stands for Chāhamāna (ma lenghtened into mā) so that Vāsudeva of these coins is a Chāhamāna and since Vāsudeva is mentioned in Prithvīrāja Vijaya as the founder of the Chāhamāna family of Śākambarī, that founder must be the same as the Chāhman of these Sassanian coins.” “Rājaśekhara’s Prabandha-kośa also gives one Vāsudeva as the founder of the Chāhamāna family for whom he gives the date 608 V. E.” This date is a serious difficulty in establishing the identity of these two Vāsudevas. But Dr. D. R. Bhandarkar is not at a loss. He naively observes that the kośa gives a date which is rather early and the proper date to be assigned appears to be 627 A. D. concluded from the type of coins which are an exact copy of the coins of Parveiz Khuśru. So Dr. D. R. Bhandarkar cannot only change letters but also dates to suit his theory, but what is still more strange is that he can change the race also at his sweet will. Cunningham held that Vāsudeva of the coins was a Hūṇa and Prof. Rapson thinks that he was a Sussanian (from the legend of the coins as also from their type). But Dr. D. R. Bhandarkar thinks that he was a *Khazar* why he alone knows. It is sufficient to place this whole argument before the reader in detail to enable him to come to the conclusion that Dr. D. R. Bhandarkar has failed signally in showing that the Chāhamānas were Gujars.