Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

History of Mediaeval Hindu India (being a History of India from 600 to 1200 A.D.) v3.c34.s8: Note 2—The Elephanta Caves of Ghārāpuri.

History of Mediaeval Hindu India (being a History of India from 600 to 1200 A.D.) v3.c34.s8

Language
English

Note 2—The Elephanta Caves of Ghārāpuri.

v3.c34.s8.1

A few miles from Bombay by sea, in an island in the wide creek of Thana and Panwel are these caves with many beautiful carvings in stone and also statues. There were two stone elephants at the entrance of the principal cave which were visible from the sea and this fact gave rise to the name Elephanta caves given by the Portuguese who first saw them. The town of Purī is now in ruins, but that there was once a great town which was then the capital of Konkan, was in fact, the Bombay of the 6th to 10th century A. D. is proved by the inscriptions of the Śilāhāras which always mention "Purī Konkan, 14 hundred" as the name of the country. The island of Purī must have attracted attention in ancient days as a suitable site for a capital, being at the entrance of a large creek which is the natural harbouring place for ships trading along the coast as well as with distant Arabia. There are some Budhhist remains also in this island but most of the structures are Brahmanical, and these appear to belong to the days of the Śilāhāra rule which began probably about the 8th century A. D. The style of the architecture and the beautiful figures carved, according to Bhagvanlal Indraji, belongs to the period of the Elora carvings and therefore may be dated from the 8th to the 9th century A. D. The Rāṣṭrakūṭa king Kṛṣṇa excavated the Elora temple and it is probable that the Śilāhāras excavated these figures in imitation of their overlords the Rāṣṭrakūṭas. And Purī was the capital of these earlier Śilāhāras from the 8th to the 10th centuries. It is possible that the Āryā Dvaipāyanī (island goddess) mentioned in the Bhāgavata as visited by Balarāma in his pilgrimage refers to the statue of the goddess of Pārvatī in one of the caves in this island, and the Bhāgavata Purāṇa may be held from this reference to belong to the 10th century. The most impressive Traimurti statue carved in the principal cave is, however, the most important work of art in the Elephanta caves and it is not known to which Śilāhāra king the credit of it belongs. Purī fell into ruin in consequence of the capital being removed to Thana which is a more inland and safe harbour. An account of the Śilāhāras of Thana would not be complete without this short description of Purī and the Elephanta caves and we have consequently given this short note on them.

v3.c34.s8.2

I. LATER CHĀLUKYAS OF KALYAN.

v3.c34.s8.3

In the Deccan ruled in this sub-period the later Chālukyas who became as powerful as the earlier Chālukyas of Badāmi in the first sub-period described in our first volume or the Rāshṭrakūṭas of Malkhed in the second. Both Rāshṭrakūṭas and Chālukyas were Maratha Kshatriyas. The former were the most ancient inhabitants of the Deccan of the Aryan race. They were supplanted by the early Chālukyas and these in their turn were conquered by the Rāshṭrakūṭas. These Rāshṭrakūṭas were again conquered and supplanted by the later Chālukyas who in their Yevur inscription (I. A. VIII p. 19) have given the whole genealogy from the earlier Chālukyas down to Tailapa the conqueror of the Rāshṭrakūṭa last king Kakkala. It is sometimes doubted if the later Chālukyas are really descendants of the earlier Chālukyas; but there is no sufficient reason to deny this claim which they lay forth in their inscriptions; copying as they do the same titles and taking the same Mānavya gotra (E. I. IX p. 206). The tradition that they were lunar race Kshatriyas and ruled for 59 generations in Ayodhya, they appear to have taken from the eastern Chālukyas of Vengi; as stated in Vol. I the earlier Chālukya records do not mention these facts. However, we may believe that these statements are also true and that the Chālukyas came to the Deccan sometime about 400 A. D. Their descendant Tailapa was son of Vikramāditya and Bonthādevi daughter of Lakshmaṇa, king of Chedi. (The Tripura Haihayas seem to have usually given their daughters to the Chālukya and Rāshṭrakūṭa Maratha Kshatriya kings of the Deccan). Tailapa was probably originally a powerful feudatory under Kakkala; it is not clear where he had his sway; possibly it might have been in Badāmi itself; but Chālukya inscriptions do not mention his original capital. Seizing the opportunity of the decline of Rāshṭrakūṭa power, Tailapa defeated Kakkala and established once again the Chālukya line of kings in the Deccan. He is said to have destroyed two great warriors or generals of Kakkala on the battle-field on whom he relied and who were his associates in oppressing the people. (Yevur grant I. A. VIII p. 17). He is also said to have conquered Cholas, Andhras, Utkalas as also the Maratha feudatory chiefs of the Deccan and ruled justly and vigorously in the country of Kuntala as is expressly stated in an inscription of the family (I. A. VIII p. 18) thus "securing happiness to the people" who were probably oppressed during the misrule which usually characterises the days of the decay of a dynasty. The Chālukya country is called Kuntala in most inscriptions and Kuntala is identical with what is now called the Southern Maratha country though the present language of the people is Kanarese. Indeed the three Mahārāṣṭras of Pulakeśin (Vol. II p. 275) have already been noticed as Vidarbha, Mahārāṣṭra proper and Kuntala and these, forming together the greater Mahārāṣṭra, may again be described as Northern Maratha country the basin of the Tāpti and the Wardhā, the Central Maratha country the basin of the Godāvari and the Southern Maratha country the basin of the Kṛṣṇā river which distinguishes Kauntala (I. A. VIII p. 18); and here Mahārāṣṭra and Karṇātaka meet, the Karṇātaka proper lying beyond the Tungabhadrā and being then under the Gangas and later under the Hoyasalas.

v3.c34.s8.4

Tailapa ruled for 24 years from 973 to 997. A. D. His wars with Munja have been related in Volume II and he is said to have finally killed Munja ignominiously. We have already expressed a doubt about this story of Gujarat story-tellers; and Munja probably died on the battle-field. But the Yevur inscription and the Miraj plates refer, in our view, to the imprisoning of a great poet-king. As the Miraj record is dated 1024 A. D. and is very near the event, it may be believed that Munja was mprisoned after being made captive in war, though we may still disbelieve his being kept in a cage or made to beg from door to door and finally beheaded. This is too cruel for any Indian king and there is no hint of this in this record. (We understand the verses here differently from the way in which they are taken in the translation in I. A. XIII p. 17). When it is further stated that he conquered a king of Huṇas and kings of Marwad, Chedi and Utkala, it is probably an exaggeration. But there is nothing improbable in it if we remember that Tailapa was now the master of the whole power of the Rāshṭrakūṭas who in their palmy days had carried their arms as far north as Kanauj. There is not the least doubt that his general Bhārapa held Lāṭa and opposed and fought with Mūlarāja Solankhi who about the same time founded the northern Chālukya kingly power at Patan.

v3.c34.s8.5

Tailapa had by his queen Jākabbā, a Rāshṭrakūṭa princess, two sons Satyāśraya and Daśavarman; the former of whom succeeded him. There is nothing particular recorded of him in the Miraj and Yevur records; but the Kharepatan grant (published in B. B. R. A. S. I.) was made during his reign by a Śilāhāra prince in Southern Konkan. Now this grant discloses two or three facts which are worthy of notice here. In this grant the Śilāhāra prince Rattarāja distinctly mentions the name of Satyāśraya his overlord. But in the grant of the Śilāhāra kings of Northern Konkan no overlord is mentioned though in their earlier grants they mention the then ruling Rāshṭrakūṭa king. It seems, therefore, that Northern Konkan was not under the later Chālukyas. Secondly, the names of ministers are not mentioned in the grant as they are mentioned in the grants of the Northern Śilāhāras. Thirdly, we find the name of the grantee Brahmin with the termination Ārya but not ‘Aiya’ as in the others. It is inferrable that in Karṇāṭaka, people used the termination Ārya at least in Sanskrit.

v3.c34.s8.6

Satyāśraya ruled from 997 to 1008 A. D. and dying childless he was succeeded by Vikramāditya, son of his brother Daśavarman or Yaśovarman and Bhagavatī. He has left an inscription dated the year of his succession (J. B. R. A. S. IV p. 4). He ruled for a short time only and he was succeeded by his brother Jayasinha whose inscription dated 1019 A. D. has been found (I. A. V. p. 17). It mentions that he was a very sun to Bhoja lotus and that he defeated the Malwa confederacy. It may be taken for truth that Bhoja of Malwa was defeated by this king and Bhoja’s efforts to wreak vengeance on the Chālukyas of the Deccan for killing Munja were frustrated. But the story told by Gujarat chroniclers that Bhoja took drastic vengeance on Tailapa himself and killed him is absurd (as the Bombay Gazetteer itself points out), as Bhoja came to the throne after Tailapa’s death. Nor is it possible, as suggested by the Gazetteer, that the story relates to the successor of Tailapa, Vikramāditya who ruled from 1008 to 1018. His reign no doubt falls in the early years of Bhoja's rule but this fact is not mentioned in any record of these Chālukyas of the Deccan nor of the Paramāras of Malwa. We, therefore, think that it is the usual vengeance story, as imaginary as the vengeance story of Prithvīrāja killing Shihabuddin concocted in the Rāsā. Bhoja may have gained some success over these Chālukyas but in the end he was defeated by Jayasinha.

v3.c34.s8.7

But Vikramāditya must have suffered extremely from the invasion of the rising Chola king Rājarāja who is said to have devastated the whole country by his vast army consisting of nine lakhs of men and spared not even women and children. But this seems also to be a hyperbole of poets though Vikramāditya's defeat may be accepted as a fact. This hereditary fight between the Chālukyas and Cholas or rather between the Deccan and Madras continued long and Jayasinha is said to have defeated the Chola king Rājendra son of Rājarāja who had defeated Satyaśraya or his successor Vikramāditya. The Miraj grant distinctly states that after conquering the Cholas in the south and the seven Konkaṇas in the west, the king was encamped at Kolhapur in his march for conquering the north when the grant was made. The seven Konkaṇas have already been enumerated. They are not seven kings and probably they did not include Northern Konkan. This grant is dated in 1024 A.D. (946Ś) and after this Jayasinha alias Jagadekamalla seems to have ruled long and defeated even Bhoja of Malwa. Gauri-shankar surmises that he was finally killed in battle with Bhoja but this surmise may be true of the earlier king Vikramāditya (if the story of revenge is to be taken as true) and not Jayasinha. The Yevur record which was drawn up in the days of Vikramāditya makes no mention of any such sad end of Jayasinha.

v3.c34.s8.8

Jayasinha is believed to have died about 1040 and he was succeeded by his son Someśvara who was certainly a far greater monarch than any of his predecessors. His power is thus described in the Yevur grant. "The king of Malwa is anxious to find out a Mandala (territory) for refuge. The king of the Cholas betakes himself to the forest of palm trees on the seacoast. The king of Kānyakubja hides himself in a valley of the mountain (Himalaya) his mind being restless from fear of Someśvara's power." The king of Malwa may be Bhoja himself as his successor was assisted by Someśvara and the Kānyakubja king must be the effete representative of the Pratihāras vanquished by Mahmud while the Chola king may be Rājendra himself. We have got a graphic account of these events in the Vikramānkadevacharita of Bilhana, court-poet of his son Vikramāditya, which may be treated almost as a contemporary record though poetical. Therein Someśvara is represented as defeating Bhoja and occupying Dhārā, Bhoja wandering to find a place for refuge. He is also shown to have defeated Karṇa of Chedi and even killed him in battle (Vik. I verse 102-03). But this does not seem to be true. He may have extended his conquering expedition into the north as far as Kanauj and the Kanauj Pratihāra king, as in the days of Mahmud, may have fled from his capital and taken refuge in the Himalayas. Though the Yevur plate does not refer to the death of the Chola king it is said that in the battle of Koppam fought with Rājendra Chola in 1030 A. D. the latter was killed. The Yevur plate should have referred to this event but it merely states that the Chola king fled to the sea-coast. As this record was made in the days of Vikramānka, it seems strange that it does not refer to the important battle at Koppam on the Tungabhadrā wherein Rājendra was killed.

v3.c34.s8.9

Someśvara is said to have founded Kalyān and made it his capital. Where the later Chālukyas had their capital till then does not seem clear; probably they held their court in Malkhed the capital of the previous rulers or in Badāmi their own ancient capital. Bilhana distinctly mentions the founding of Kalyan, a town near modern Bidar, being perhaps nearer to the Cholas the hereditary enemy. Someśvara, like most great Indian kings of this time, was a patron of poets and learned men (Yevur grant and also Bilhana, I and IV). In 1068, like other great Hindu kings of the time such as the noted Dhanga, when he fell ill with fever, he put an end to his life by drowning himself in the Tungabhadrā, reciting praises of Śiva, on Chaitra vadya 8th Sunday (Gaurishankar Ojha).

v3.c34.s8.10

While Someśvara was alive his second son Vikramāditya had distinguished himself by his wisdom and his valour; probably Someśvara's wars were waged by Vikramāditya. When Bilhaṇa describes Someśvara as taking Kanchi, he is only stating that Vikramāditya his son had really seized and plundered Kanchi. It is not possible that Kanchi was twice taken, once by the father and again by the son. Bilhaṇa describes Vikramāditya as conquering the four directions while his father was yet alive. Bilhaṇa relates that he conquered Chera, Ceylon, Gangai Konda Chola, Vengi, Gauda and even Assam. It is likely that this is an exaggeration of the court-poet, though it may be granted that Vikramāditya conquered the whole of southern India. His father died while he was making these conquests and he returned, when he heard of his death, to the capital where his elder brother Someśvara had ascended the throne. The hero made due obeisance to his elder brother and king. The relations between the two were for some time very friendly. But eventually a quarrel arose as it was bound to arise and Vikramāditya left the capital and went towards Kanchi. Someśvara sent his forces after him but they were defeated. Vikramāditya went to Banavāsi and rested there for a while; he then turned towards Goa the king of which Jayakeśin, a Maratha Kadamba, submitted to him and gave him large presents. Vikramāditya in later life gave his daughter in marriage to Jayakeśin II grandson of this Goa king (B. B. J. R. A. S. IX pp. 242, 268, 579). He then subdued the Alūpas and the Cheras and turned towards the Cholas. The Chola king made peace with him and gave him his daughter. Vikrama thus strengthened returned to the Tungabhadrā.

v3.c34.s8.11

Events, however, soon happened which eventually placed the crown of Kuntala on Vikrama's head. The Chola king died and his son Vikrama's brother-in-law was opposed by certain opponents. Vikrama marched to Kanchi, placed his new brother-in-law on the Chola throne and returned. But Rājiga a powerful feudatory again deposed him and with other refractory nobles marched against Vikrama, at the same time inciting his brother Someśvara to assail Vikrama in the rear. Vikrama thus caught between two armies successively fought with both on different dates and defeated Someśvara so completely that he was taken prisoner. He immediately marched on Kalyan and deposing Someśvara placed the crown on his own head. This event happened in 998 Ś. or 1076 A. D.; Someśvara thus reigned from 1069 to 1076.

v3.c34.s8.12

Vikramāditya was the greatest king of the later Chālukyas and he also ruled long from 1076 to 1126 A. D. He assumed the title of Tribhuvana-Malla. (As the earlier Chālukyas called themselves by some name ending in Vallabha and the Rāṣṭrakūṭas by names ending in Varsha, the later Chālukyas called themselves by names ending in Malla. The first king Tailapa assumed the name Āhavamalla, a name again taken by Someśvara I, Vikrama’s father.). Vikramāditya started an era of his own like his contemporary Gujarat Chālukya king Jayasinha. It is a strange coincidence that these contemporary kings were equally great and founded eras of their own which lasted for a time only and finally died (Fleet in I. A. XIII p. 189).

v3.c34.s8.13

Vikramāditya is said to have married Chandralekhā daughter of a Śilāhāra prince of Karahātaka and Bilhaṇa describes the svayamvara of the princess. It is probably an unhistorical description; for svayamvaras or self-choice marriages were a dead institution at this time. And where Vikrama the imperial lord of the Deccan becomes a suitor, it is impossible for the bride to marry any other prince for the other princes must all be feudatories. The princess was a lady of extraordinary beauty as it is recorded by Kalhaṇa that Harsha king of Kashmir intended to invade Karṇātaka for the possession of that princess;* this is also, we think, another poetical but unreal fancy. Vikrama as usual with kings of those days had many wives and these queens had separate villages assigned to them.

v3.c34.s8.14

Jayasinha younger brother of Vikrama who had been appointed ruler of Banavāsi rebelled and advanced against him with a large force. He was, however, defeated and eventually taken prisoner. Bilhaṇa represents Vikrama as pardoning him. Vikrama’s long rule was practically undisturbed but a confederacy of kings of the south led by the Hoyasala king Viṣṇu-Vardhana assisted by Goa Kadambas and others invaded his kingdom and devastated it upto the Kṛṣṇā (I. A.

v3.c34.s8.15

∗ कर्णाटभर्तुः पर्मीढेः सुन्दरीं चन्द्रलाभियाम् । आलेख्यलिखितां वीक्ष्य सोऽभूत्पुष्पायुधाहतः ॥ स विटोद्देशितो बीतत्रपश्वके समान्तरे । प्रतिज्ञां चन्द्रलाभास्यै पर्मादेश्व विलोदने ॥ राजत. ७-११२४॥

v3.c34.s8.16

II p. 300 and B. B. R. A. S. XI p. 244). A chieftain Āchagi of the Sinda family was sent against it and it was signally defeated. The king himself had to fight with Chola and there also he gained success. Āchagi is said to have conquered many kings including those of Gujarat and Malwa but these may be taken to be unimportant operations.

v3.c34.s8.17

Generally speaking the reign of Vikrama was a happy period for the Deccan. He founded a new town named Vikramapura. That literature flourished under him and that his government was law-regulated may be known from the single fact that his minister Vijñāneśvara wrote his famous commentary, the Mitāksharā, on the Yājnavalkya Smriti which is recognised as the leading Hindu law treatise all over India except Bengal and which is respected even by the lawyers and law-courts of British India. It seems that law was studied in India in all the great Hindu states of this time; for besides the Mitāksharā, we find that Aparāditya Śilāhāra king of Thana himself wrote a learned commentary on Yājnavalkya Smriti a little after this and at Kanauj Lakshmidhara wrote Vyavahārakalpataru under the patronage of Govindachandra. The three verses at the end of each section of the Mitāksharā praise to the skies the rare combination of the three great items the most beautiful city Kalyan, the most learned pandit viz. Vijñāneśvara and the most powerful monarch Vikrama "ruling from the Himalayas to Rameshwar and from the eastern to the western ocean".

v3.c34.s8.18

Vikramānka was succeeded in A. D. 1126 (25 or 27) by his son Someśvara III who was as great a monarch as his father but who was greater than he in one respect, being a learned man himself. His work Mānasollāsa or Abhilashitārtha-Chintāmani is a compendium of many sciences, politics, military art, horse and elephant rearing, poetry, dialectics, music, astronomy; in short all sciences which lead to the happiness of man. In astronomy he gave the Dhruvānkas (constants to be added) for calculations of planets for Friday the first of Chaitra Śaka 1051, which shows that the work was composed in the fifth year of his reign. Coming after a long reign he must be taken to have been a grown-up man when he came to the throne and he naturally ruled for 11 years only.

v3.c34.s8.19

Someśvara was succeeded by his son Jagadekamalla in 1138 and he was succeeded by his brother Tailapa II in 1150 A.D. The power of the Chālukya line now declined and Tailapa's commander-in-chief Vijjala, a Kalachūri, rebelled against him. Vijjala was assisted by a feudatory king of Kolhapur named Vijayārka and also a Kākatīya king of independent Telin-gaṇa. Tailapa was taken prisoner but liberated. After a few years during which he was almost held a prisoner in Kalyan, he left the capital and retired to Annigeri in Dharwad district where he ruled for a time over a limited extent of territory, while Vijjala usurped the Chālukya power and ruled at Kalyan. In 1162 A. D. he again attacked Tailapa II driving him south-wards to Banavāsi, and declared his independence. Of this Kalachūri usurpation we will speak separately.

v3.c34.s8.20

When the Kalachūri power declined, Vijjala being assassinated, the Lingāyat sect rising in rebellion against him, Some-śvara, a son of Tailapa II, regained the Chālukya kingdom and established himself at Annigeri in 1182 A. D. with the assistance of a loyal feudatory named Brahmā (I. A. II). The Yādavas of Devagiri and the Yādavas of Dvāra-Samudra were, however, rising to power and they attacked Brahmā. Vira-Ballāla of the Hoyasala line defeated Brahmā and the Western Chālukya power was finally supplanted by the Yādavas. Nothing is heard about Someśvara after Śaka 1111 or 1189 A. D.

v3.c34.s8.21

Minor branches of the Chālukyas must have ruled in several places in Mahārāshtra and one such ruled in the Konkan, where a grant has been found of a Chālukya king come from Kalyan. And Maratha families of the name of Chālke are still found in the Ratnagiri district. The Dubal family of Karhad, however, though Chālukya, belongs to the Northern Chālukya clan with the Bhāradvāja gotra as stated already in Vol. II.

v3.c34.s8.22

The later Chālukyas have left so many inscriptions and these have been known from so early a date (Walter Elliot of Madras Civil Service presented to the Royal Asiatic Society of London copies of 595 inscriptions of the kings of Southern India in 1835, J. R. A. S. IV), that their history has been well told by many an able scholar since long; notably by Sir Dr. R. G. Bhandarkar and Dr. Fleet. And in the above summary we have closely followed the account given by the former in his Early History of the Deccan; we have added only a few remarks of our own and some interesting new facts. It is really impossible to study all the inscriptions which Kielhorn has given in his Southern Inscriptions list under the later Chālukyas of Kalyan, as even these are so many as 175 from No. 140 to No. 315. But we think that the history of the later Chālukyas has long been well traced out by scholars and there are very few points in dispute regarding them except perhaps the question whether they were Maratha or Karnātak kings, a distinction without a difference.

v3.c34.s8.23

GENEALOGY OF THE LATER CHĀLUKYAS OF KALYAN.

v3.c34.s8.24

(Bhandarkar in Bombay Gazetteer Vol. I Part II and Kielhorn's genealogies E. I. VIII)

v3.c34.s8.25

I Tailapa Nūrmadi Āhavamalla Raṇarāga (973-997 A. D.) Insc. Ś 895, 902, 4, 11, 19

v3.c34.s8.26

II Satyāśraya (997-1008 A. D.) Insc. 924, 30. Daśavarman (Vaśovarman)

v3.c34.s8.27

III Vikramāditya I Tribhuvanamalla (1009-1018 A. D.) Insc. Ś 930 IV Jayasimha Jagadekmalla (1018-1040 A. D.) Insc. Ś 940, 41, 44, 46, 50, 55, 57 & 62

v3.c34.s8.28

V Someśvara I Āhavamalla (1040-1068 A. D.)

v3.c34.s8.29

VI Someśvara II Bhuvanaikamalla (1068-1076 A. D.) Insc. Ś 993, 96, 77. VII Vikarmāditya II Tribhuvanamalla (1076-1125 A. D.) Insc. Ś 999, 1001, 4, 6, 8, 9, 13, 15, 17, 18, 20 &o.

v3.c34.s8.30

VIII Someśvara III (1126-1138 A. D.)* Insc. Ś 1051, 52

v3.c34.s8.31

IX Jagadekamalla Pratāpachandra (1138-1150 A. D.) Insc. Ś 1161, 64, 66, 69, 73 X Tailapa II Nūrmadi* Trailokyamalla (1150-1182 A. D.) Insc. Ś 1076, 77

v3.c34.s8.32

XI Someśvara IV Tribhuvanamalla (1182-1187 A. D.) Insc. Ś 1106, 1111.

v3.c34.s8.33

∗ Kielhorn mentions here the brother of Vikramāditya Jayasimha and his son Vishṇuvardhana Vijayāditya and also a son of his own Jayakarṇa who ruled subordinately from 1087 to 1127 A. D. and died before his father.

Linked texts (8)