History of Mediaeval Hindu India (being a History of India from 600 to 1200 A.D.) v2.c29.s1.16

v2.c29.s1.16

In closing this subject then we will give our view of the matter in plain and simple terms. . We do not believe that Bappā was a Brahmin; he belonged to the Guhila Vamśa as stated in the Naravāhana inscription of St. 1028 or 971 A.D. which is even earlier than that of Ātapurā which contains the disputed verse. The lines of the Naravāhana inscription are important. They declare that Bappā was a king (क्षितिपतिः) who was moon to the Guhila Vamśa*. This shows that there was a line of Guhila princes at Nāgadā which was most probably a branch of the Idar family founded by a Gūhāditya belonging to the Valabhī line of kings and hence called Guhila. To this line belonged Aparājita and Śila whose inscriptions belonging to the seventh century A.D. have been found. They were kings before Bappaka who was like the moon to the stars of that family. Bappā was a great devotee of Śiva and a disciple of Hārīta a great saint and worshipper of Ekalinga and was himself a highly religious man. By his valour and fortune Bappā became eventually king of Chitore and having married many wives like all great Indian kings was the father of a numerous progeny in so much so that numerous clans numbering together several thousand descendants at this day claim descent from him. In his old age he retired to a forest and became a Śaiva Sanyāsī* (he did not go to Persia to marry Mahomedan women). In order to distinguish his descendants from the previous Guhilas, the latter were called, in the usual Rajput manner, Guhilaputras or Guhilots. It is extremely probable that Bappā was his own name as we find in an inscription a king with this name of a very early date (Ep. Ind. Vol. IX:—Bappabhattāraka pāda Bhattarasa). In short our view is that the word Mahīdeva in the Ātapurā inscription means a king and not a Brahmin.