Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

The Early History of the Deccan (Parts I–XI) v1.c10: Part V. The History of the Rāṣṭrakūṭas

The Early History of the Deccan (Parts I–XI) v1.c10

Language
English

Contents

Part V. The History of the Rāṣṭrakūṭas

v1.c10.2

by DR. A. S. ALTEKAR

v1.c10.3

I. The Rāṣṭrakūṭa Dynasty: the significance of the term Rāṣṭrakūṭa and the chronology of the dynasty. II. The Rulers of the Dynasty: Dantidurga (c. A.D. 735-55); Krishna I (c. A.D. 756-72); Govinda II (c. A.D. 773-80); Dhruva Dhārāvarṣa (c. A.D. 780-93); Govinda III (c. A.D. 793-814); Śarva Amoghavarṣa I (c. A.D. 819-81); Kṛṣṇa II (c. A.D. 880-914); Indra III (c. A.D. 914-28); Amoghavarṣa II (c. A.D. 928-9); Govinda IV (c. A.D. 930-6); Amoghavarṣa III (c. A.D. 936-9); Kṛṣṇa III (c. A.D. 939-67); Khoṭṭiga (c. A.D. 967-73); and Karkka II (September, A.D. 972 to December, A.D. 973). III. The Administrative System. IV. Religion. V. The Social and Economic Condition.

v1.c10.4

THE RĀṢṬRAKŪṬA DYNASTY

v1.c10.5

THE term Rāṣṭrakūṭa, the surname of the new dynasty which supplanted the Cālukyas, has no ethnic or tribal significance. Just as in the medieval period the terms Deśmukhs and Desā'is denoted officers in charge of *deśas* or districts, so also the term Rāṣṭrakūṭas designated officers in charge of territorial divisions called *rāṣṭras*, into which kingdoms used formerly to be divided. The officer in the administrative charge of a *grāma* (village) was called a grāmakūṭa (village headman); similarly one in charge of a *rāṣṭra* was called a rāṣṭrakūṭa. Other variations of this term like rāṣṭriya in Sanskrit and raṭhika in Prākrit occur in earlier inscriptions. Both rāṣṭrakūṭas and grāmakūṭas figure among the officers exhorted not to disturb the peaceful enjoyment of the land grants given in the Deccan charters of the seventh and the eighth centuries A.D. Nay, we find them in a grant of Dantidurga himself, the founder of the Rāṣṭrakūṭa dynasty, who, himself a rāṣṭrakūṭa, is seen exhorting other rāṣṭrakūṭas not to interfere with the enjoyment of the grant given by him in A.D. 742.¹

v1.c10.6

¹ EI, xxv, 25.

v1.c10.7

The dimensions of a *rāṣṭra*, which was in charge of a rāṣṭrakūṭa, varied with the different centuries and dynasties. In the Mauryan period the rāṣṭriya was a provincial viceroy in charge of a big province like Gujarāt or Kathiāwār. During the early centuries of the Christian era, the raṭhikas and mahārathikas, corresponding to later rāṣṭrakūṭas, are seen ruling over much smaller territorial units in Mahārāṣṭra and Berar; their jurisdiction did not extend over more than two or three districts of our modern times. Sometimes they used even to be in charge of the subdivisions of a district. These officers were always subordinate to the central government; but when the latter became weak, they used to assume an independent or semi-independent status and to found small feudatory families.

v1.c10.8

During the sixth and the seventh centuries we come across several such feudatory families ruling in the different parts of the Deccan. Abhimanyu of Mānyapura in the Hoshangābād District was one such ruler; we have seen that he was ruling in the first half of the sixth century A.D. and that he had then recently assumed the surname of Rāṣṭrakūṭa. About the subsequent fortunes of his family history at present knows nothing. In the heart of the kingdom of the Cālukyas of Bādāmi there existed at this time certain feudatory Rāṣṭrakūṭa families. The Sendraka family of the southern Marāṭhā country, which was closely related to the Cālukyas, was on terms of the closest friendship with a Rāṣṭrakūṭa family ruling in its neighbourhood about the middle of the seventh century A.D.¹ The Rāṣṭrakūṭas who later ousted the Chālukyas were not, however, connected with either of these families. They originally belonged to Laṭṭalūra, modern Lātūr, a small town in the Osmanābād District of Hyderabad State. Laṭṭalūra was situated in the Canarese-speaking area and Canarese was the mother tongue of this family. Durggarāja, Govindarāja, and Svāmikarāja, who flourished from *c.* A.D. 570 to 630, were mere district officers under the early Chālukyas of Bādāmi. Nannarāja, the son of Svāmikarāja, was an able and ambitious person. He migrated to Berar, distinguished himself on the battlefield, and won feudatory status for his family in *c.* A.D. 640, probably from Pulakeśin II. He carved out for himself a small principality in Berar, of which Achalapura, the modern Elichpur, was most probably the capital. Elichpur is only 225 miles from Lātūr, the original home of the family. In the course of Indian history we often find ambitious soldiers leaving their homes and migrating to far-off provinces to seek their fortunes. Scions of the early Chālukya families left Bādāmi and went to far-off Gujarāt and Āndhradeśa in order to found new ruling families. The Senas left Karṇātak and went to distant Bengal and founded a dynasty there. Several Marāṭhā families left their homes in Mahārāṣṭra and went to distant Tanjore, Indore, and Gwalior, where they were able to carve out new kingdoms. We need not then be surprised to find Nannarāja leaving his home in the northern Karṇātak when an opportunity occurred of founding a small principality in Berar.

v1.c10.9

¹ *EI*, xxi, 289.

v1.c10.10

At the time of the rise of Dantidurga the family had domiciled itself in Mahārāṣṭra for four generations. Dantidurga had become a Mahārāṣṭrian by *c.* A.D. 750; for we find him proudly stating in his records how he had routed out the Karṇātaka armies of the Chālukya emperor Kirttivarman II.² When, however, the Karṇātak country was annexed to the Rāṣṭrakūṭa empire in *c.* A.D. 760 and the capital was shifted to Malkhed, which was situated in that province, the Rāṣṭrakūṭa emperors once more assumed the Karṇātak culture and way of life. Their sign manuals begin to appear in the Canarese script and one of them, Amoghavarsha I, wrote a work in Canarese wherein he shows his bias for the chaste Kannaḍa language then current between Muduvolal and Kupanagar.

v1.c10.11

² *IA*, xi, 112.

v1.c10.12

Let us revert to the history of Nannarāja. Since he was the first to win feudatory status, we may describe him as the founder of the family. He selected the eagle as the insignia of the family and his choice in this respect was respected and accepted by his successors. His rule may be presumed to have extended from *c.* A.D. 630 to 650. Nannarāja was succeeded by Dantivarman, who was either his son or his nephew. He ruled from *c.* A.D. 650 to 665. The description of his exploits given in charters issued more than eighty years later is merely conventional. We are told, for instance, how travellers used to be saddened to see beautiful paintings on the desolate walls of the deserted palaces of his enemies. As no specific enemies are mentioned, such conventional descriptions do not help us much.

v1.c10.13

Indra Pṛichchhakarāja and Govindarāja, the son and grandson of Dantivarman, ruled from *c.* A.D. 665 to 700. We know nothing of their achievements. Govinda was a Śaivite, for we are told that he bowed his head before no deity other than Śiva. Dr. R. G. Bhandarkar has identified him with Govinda, who had attacked Pulakeśin II from the north of the Bhīmā, but this view is untenable. Govinda the opponent of Pulakeśin II flourished from *c.* A.D. 610 to 630; Govinda the son of Pṛichchhakarāja ruled seventy years later.

v1.c10.14

Govinda I was succeeded by his son Karkkarāja, who ruled from *c.* A.D. 700 to 715. He was a Vaiṣṇava in his religious beliefs. Later court panegyrists tell us how the mere mention of his name would cause tears and bracelets to fall from the eyes and the wrists of the wives of his enemies; such general praise, however, does not enable us to reconstruct the history of his times. No incidents of his reign are in fact known to us in the records that we have at present.

v1.c10.15

Karkka had four sons, Indra, Dhruva,¹ Kṛiṣṇa, and Nannarāja, whose relative seniority was probably in the above order. Among these brothers Indra was the most ambitious. He ruled from *c.* A.D. 715 to 735. With the help of his brothers he extended his principality northwards, and it soon began to include the majority of the Marāṭhī-speaking districts of Madhya Pradesh. Of course he continued to be a feudatory of the contemporary Chālukya emperor Vijayāditya (A.D. 697-733), but we should remember that suzerains in ancient India did not usually object to the extension of the territory or the sphere of influence of their feudatories, if such extension was not dangerous to themselves and was done at the expense of third parties not under their own protection.

v1.c10.16

¹ That Dhruva was a son of Karkka is based upon the very probable assumption that Karkha II of the Antroli Chharoli plates issued in A.D. 757 was his great-grandson, as suggested by Dr. Bhagwanlal Indraji.

v1.c10.17

In order to understand properly the incidents in the career of Indra I it is necessary first to take a bird's-eye view of contemporary political conditions. The Chālukya empire lay to the south of the growing kingdom of Indra; its emperor Vijayāditya was his feudal lord. To the west lay the principality of the Gujarāt Chālukyas with its capital at Naosarī in the Surat District, and the kingdom of the Gurjaras with its capital at Nāndipurī or Nandod, about 28 miles north-east of Bhroach. Both these kingdoms were smaller in extent and resources than the growing kingdom of Indra. The Chālukya king Maṅgalarāja Vinayāditya was ruling at Naosarī from *c.* A.D. 700 to 732. The Gurjara king Jayabhaṭa III was on the Nāndipurī throne during almost exactly the same period (*c.* A.D. 700-35). Indra's contemporary at Valabhī was Śīlāditya V (*c.* A.D. 710-40); the districts of Kaira and Panchmahal in Northern Gujarāt were under his control.

v1.c10.18

Only one specific incident in the career of Indra I is known, and that is his wedding by the *Rākshasa* form of marriage with a Chālukya princess named Bhavanāgā at Kaira in Northern Gujarāt, after defeating her father. Unfortunately we do not know who the father of this Bhavanāgā was. Most probably he may have been the Chālukya feudatory Maṅgalarāja Vinayāditya or his younger brother Pulakeśin. The small Chālukya kingdom did not extend beyond the Tāpti, and between it and Kaira, where this incident took place, lay the Gurjara principality of Nāndipurī. Why then the marriage of Bhavanāgā should have been arranged at Kaira, which lay in the Maitraka kingdom of Valabhi, we do not know. A possible reason may be that the bridegroom elect was a Valabhi prince. Some kind of formal *Svayaṃvara* had been settled to be celebrated at Kaira in a *pandal* specially erected for the purpose. It seems that though not himself the bridegroom elect, Indra attended this *Svayaṃvara* and carried away the bride against the wishes of her father. This must have strained the relations between Maṅgalarāja, the Chālukya king of Gujarāt, and Indra, the audacious bridegroom. Hindu marriages are, however, indissoluble, and Maṅgalarāja may have soon become reconciled with his son-in-law. The occurrence of this marriage may be placed in *c.* A.D. 715.

v1.c10.19

This *Rākshasa* marriage of Indra would seem to show that by *c.* A.D. 715 he had already become powerful enough to challenge the power of the Chālukyas of Gujarāt and the Maitrakas of Valabhi. His success in this affair must have added to his prestige and reputation and implanted in his mind the seeds of greater ambition. How it enabled him to extend his kingdom northwards so as to include most of the Marāṭhī-speaking districts of Madhya Pradesh has already been shown above.

The Rulers of the Dynasty

Dantidurga

v1.c10.s1.t1.1

(c. A.D. 735-55)

v1.c10.s1.t1.2

THE precise date of the accession of Dantidurga, the founder of the Rāṣṭrakūṭa empire, is not known, but since he had already distinguished himself considerably by A.D. 742, we may safely place the beginning of his reign in A.D. 735. He was a youth of barely twenty years at the time of his accession; his uncles Kṛṣṇa, Dhruva, and Nanna were probably older than he was, but they did not oppose his succession to the throne.

v1.c10.s1.t1.3

To understand properly the career of Dantidurga, we must survey the political situation during the fourth decade of the eighth century A.D. In Gujarāt and Kāthiāwār a new development took place at this time, which seriously crippled the powers of the small states which then occupied the country. Junaid, the Arab governor of Sindh, sent about this time a number of expeditions to Kachchha, Kāthiāwār, and Gujarāt, the conflict with which seriously strained the resources of the kings of Valabhi, Nāndīpurī, and Naosarī. As the Maitraka kingdom lay right across the path of the Arab invasions, its ruler Śilāditya V had to bear the brunt of the Arab attacks. He was, however, helped by the Gurjara king Jayabhaṭa III, who proudly states in one of his grants dated A.D. 734 that he had quenched the fire of distress caused at Valabhi by the Arab invasion.¹ The Gurjaras and the Maitrakas were, however, not able to stem the tide of the Arab incursions for very long, since the Arab army had defeated them both and penetrated to Naosarī by c. A.D. 736. A sanguinary battle was fought near this place and the Gujarāt Cālukya king Pulakeśin Janāśraya defeated the invading army with great loss, though it came with the prestige of victories won against the Saindhava, Maitraka, and Gurjara kings. This victory of Pulakeśin was a memorable one and his feudal lord Vikramāditya II recognized his signal services by honouring him with four new titles, the ornament of the Cālukya family (*Cālukyakulālaṅkāra*), the lord of the earth (*Pṛthivīvallabha*), the asylum of the people (*Avanijanāśraya*), and the repeller of the unrepelled.²

v1.c10.s1.t1.4

¹ EI, xxiii, 154.

v1.c10.s1.t1.5

² Bombay Gazetteer, I, i, p. 109.

v1.c10.s1.t1.6

This successful repulsion of the Arab invasion by Pulakeśin took place sometime in A.D. 736 or 737. At this time Dantidurga had just ascended his ancestral throne. The Naosarī plates, being issued by Pulakeśin, naturally give the entire credit of the victory over the Arabs to the Cālukya ruler; but it is probable that Dantidurga, who was his eastern neighbour and co-feudatory, may have co-operated with him at the orders of his feudal lord Vikramāditya II. This is a mere conjecture at present,¹ but it receives some support from the new title *Prithivīvallabha*, which Dantidurga is seen to arrogate to himself in his Ellora plates of A.D. 742. In this record his predecessors are given the usual feudatory titles *Samadhigatapanchamahāśabda* and *Sāmantādhipati*, but Dantidurga himself takes the additional epithets of *Prithivīvallabha* and *Khaḍgāvaloka*. It seems clear that some fresh exploits must have been performed by him to justify these new titles. We have already seen above how Pulakeśin, the Gujarāt Chālukya feudatory, had been given four new titles by his feudal lord to mark his appreciation of his achievement in repelling the Arab invasion. Is it not possible then that the new titles of Dantidurga, *Prithivīvallabha* and *Khaḍgāvaloka*, may also have been conferred upon him by the same authority for meritorious services in this same connexion? Whatever may be the causes of the new titles which he then assumed, the Ellora plates of Dantidurga do now make it quite clear that he had distinguished himself on the battlefield before A.D. 742; this victory may also have resulted in some extension of the boundaries of his kingdom.

v1.c10.s1.t1.7

During the course of his career, Dantidurga is known to have defeated the rulers of Kāñchī, Kaliṅga, Śrīśaila, Kośala, Mālwā, Lāṭa, and possibly Sindhā, besides overthrowing the power of the imperial Chālukyas. It is, however, not easy to arrange these achievements chronologically: accordingly the following reconstruction of his history is still tentative.

v1.c10.s1.t1.8

It seems that Dantidurga continued to be a loyal feudatory of the Chālukyas down to the death of Vikramāditya II in A.D. 747. The Chālukya crown prince Kirttivarman had undertaken an expedition to Kāñchī in *c.* A.D. 743, in the course of which it is claimed that he once more defeated the Pallava king. Dantidurga accompanied him during this expedition with his own battalions and shared the credit of the victory.¹ On his return he took part in the attack on the king of Śrīśaila then ruling in the Kurnool District.²

v1.c10.s1.t1.9

¹ If the reading *Sandubhāpādhipam* in the Ellora Daśavatāra inscription is to be corrected to *Sindhu*, this conjecture will receive additional support.

v1.c10.s1.t1.10

² The claim made in the Rāṣṭrakūṭa records that Dantidurga had defeated the kings of Kāñchī and Śrīśaila can be accepted as true only if we assume that he had participated in the wars of his feudal lord against these kings. Even after he had openly rebelled against the Chālukyas and annexed the whole of Mahārāṣṭra by *c.* A.D. 753 the entire Karṇāṭak lay under the effective sway of Kirttivarman II, down to at least A.D. 757, when we find him encamped on the Bhīmā river. It does not seem that Dantidurga lived up to even A.D. 757. It was his successor Krishna who completed the overthrow of the Chālukyas and annexed the whole of Karṇāṭak. It was therefore impossible for Dantidurga to attack Kāñchī subsequent to his open revolt against Kirttivarman II, when his armies lay across the latter's path to Kāñchī. Hence the statement in the text that he must have accompanied the expeditionary force of Kirttivarman which marched against Kāñchī. There are numerous instances in ancient Indian history of feudatories claiming for themselves victories which they had actually won only in co-operation with their feudal lords.

v1.c10.s1.t1.11

The varied and valuable military experience which Dantidurga had acquired in the course of his expeditions in the south and north and the victories which he had won in the course of these, either alone or in co-operation with others, naturally aroused imperial ambitions in his mind. His Chālukya descent through his mother must also have served as a contributory cause of such ambitions. Soon after his return from Kāñchī in *c.* A.D. 744 he decided to launch upon a career of conquest on his own account with an eventual view to winning imperial status for his family. The death of the Chālukya emperor in A.D. 747 helped his plans, since it removed an experienced ruler from the Bādāmi throne.

v1.c10.s1.t1.12

Dantidurga was as clever at diplomacy as he was successful on the battlefield; he therefore thought out a plan of expansion which would raise minimum opposition from his feudal lord. The Karṇāṭak was the stronghold of the Chālukya power and the patrimony of Dantidurga lay in Berar and western Madhya Pradesh. He therefore decided to extend his kingdom towards the east and west so as to excite the least possible apprehension in the mind of the Chālukya emperor. The Gurjara kingdom of Nāndipurī and the Chālukya principality of Naosarī had been exhausted by the Arab invasion. Dantidurga first attacked these, defeated their kings, and annexed their territories.¹ In this venture he received valuable help from his cousin Govinda (son of Dhruva), and he allotted Southern Gujarāt to him in recognition of his services. The kingdom of Nāndipurī was incorporated in his dominions by Dantidurga; one of his charters describes how his elephants enjoyed a bath in the Mahī river of that region.

v1.c10.s1.t1.13

¹ No successors of the Chālukya king Pulakeśin and the Gurjara king Dadda III are known. Their last known dates are 738 and 734 respectively.

v1.c10.s1.t1.14

After annexing Central Gujarāt, Dantidurga turned eastwards and invaded Mālwā. This province was under the rule of the Gurjara Pratīhāras and there was a feud going on at this time between Śiluka and Devarāja, who belonged respectively to its two branches. Taking advantage of this fact Dantidurga marched on Ujjain and brought it under his sway. He signaled his victory by celebrating the *Hiranyagarbhadāna* ritual at this place; on this occasion the Gurjara Pratīhāra king, who had been recently defeated, appeared as his door-keeper. The invasion of Mālwā was of the nature of a raid. Dantidurga did not annex it but was content merely to bring it under his sphere of influence.

v1.c10.s1.t1.15

From Mālwā Dantidurga returned to Berar and thence he marched to the Mahākośala or Chhattisgarh division of Madhya Pradesh. His Samangad plates describe how his elephants enjoyed baths both in the Mahī and in the Mahānadī. Who was the king defeated or encountered by Dantidurga in Kośala we do not know. On his way back he seems to have defeated some local rulers in Kaliṅga.

v1.c10.s1.t1.16

By the military and diplomatic activities recounted above Dantidurga had succeeded in bringing the whole of Madhya Pradesh and the Central and Southern Gujarāt under his rule or sphere of influence. With the exception of Southern Gujarāt most of the districts annexed had not belonged to the Chālukya emperor, the feudal lord of Dantidurga. When the power and resources of Dantidurga became so extensive, Kīrttivarman II could, however, no longer neglect him; a conflict between the two had become inevitable.

v1.c10.s1.t1.17

The immediate cause of the war between Dantidurga and Kīrttivarman II must have been an effort made by the latter to reinstate the Gujarāt family at Naosari. Grown confident through his numerous victories, Dantidurga refused to vacate Southern Gujarāt and declared a war against the Chālukya emperor. Where the armies of the two combatants met in conflict is not definitely known, but most probably it was somewhere in central Mahārāshtra. Dantidurga emerged as victor in the encounter; his success seems to have been due to a stratagem, for his court poet tells us that he overthrew the Karnātka army of Kīrttivarman II by a mere frown of his brow, without any effort being made or without any weapons being raised or used.

v1.c10.s1.t1.18

This victory of Dantidurga no doubt did not entirely break the Chālukya power, but it made him the master of Mahārāshtra. We find him donating a village in the Satara District in A.D. 754. Kīrttivarman, however, continued to rule the whole of the Karnātak, and in September A.D. 757 we find him encamped on the Bhīmā with his victorious army. After his initial victory Dantidurga was planning to break the Chālukya power completely by giving battle again to Kīrttivarman, but it seems that death cut short his career and the project could not be carried out. The precise date of the death of Dantidurga is not yet known, but it may be tentatively placed in A.D. 756. He was then probably not more than thirty-seven or thirty-eight; for one record says expressly that he died young, ‘probably owing to the pressing requests of the heavenly damsels’.

v1.c10.s1.t1.19

Unfortunately we have not yet got enough material to reconstruct the career of Dantidurga accurately in all its details; but such information as we possess seems to indicate that, like most of the founders of new dynasties, he was an able general, a clever diplomat, and a great administrator. He was quick to realize that the Chālukya power had been weakened by its incessant struggles with the Pallavas and by the recent invasions of the Arabs. He, however, continued to co-operate with his feudal lords as long as it was in his interest to do so. His participation in the campaign against the Pallavas and Arabs gave him valuable military experience and also made him acquainted in detail with the weak and strong points of the Chālukyas. When Vikramāditya II died, he at once began his career of conquest and expansion, but took care to see that the vested interests of the Chālukyas were not affected much at first. It was only when his resources were considerably increased by the annexation of Gujarāt and most of the districts in central and western Madhya Pradesh that he openly challenged the Chālukyas and managed to win a decisive victory over them without much loss to himself.

v1.c10.s1.t1.20

Unfortunately he did not live long enough to complete the overthrow of the Chālukyas, but there is no doubt that he had done the major part of the work. As his successors were his collateral relatives rather than his immediate descendants, his name is sometimes omitted in the dynastic genealogies of later times, which therefore naturally give the entire credit of the overthrow of the Chālukyas to his uncle Kṛṣṇa I who succeeded him. But the official charters of the same Kṛṣṇa describe in glowing terms the achievements of his predecessor Dantidurga and give him the entire credit for the annihilation of the Chālukya power, not claiming any of this credit for Kṛṣṇa himself. There can therefore be no doubt that Dantidurga was the real founder of the Rāṣṭrakūṭa empire and that Kṛṣṇa I only completed his work.

v1.c10.s1.t1.21

Dantidurga was a pious Hindu and we find him giving several villages to charitable foundations at the request of his mother. He believed also in the orthodox religious rituals and carried them out punctiliously. He loved his subjects and worked for their welfare.

v1.c10.s1.t1.22

It was only in the reign of Amoghavarṣa I (A.D. 814-80) that Mānyakheṭa, the modern Malkhed in Hyderabad State, became the capital of the Rāṣṭrakūṭa empire. What then was the earlier capital? We cannot yet answer this question satisfactorily. Achalapura or Elichpur in Berar was most probably the capital in the days of Karkka and Indra. When the whole of Mahārāṣṭra was annexed by Dantidurga, the capital may have been shifted to a more central place somewhere near modern Ellora in Hyderabad State. The most detailed eulogy of Dantidurga is engraved on the rock-wall of Cave XV (Daś-avatāra) at Ellora. His earliest copper-plate charter was issued when he was staying at this place; the grant was given after the king had taken a bath in the holy Guheśvara tīrtha of the locality. Kṛṣṇa I also selected a rock at Ellora for the excavation of the most beautiful monument left behind them by the Rāṣṭrakūṭas. Is it not then likely that during the reigns of Dantidurga and Kṛṣṇa I the Rāṣṭrakūṭa capital may have been shifted to a place in the vicinity of Ellora, which was undoubtedly more centrally situated with reference to the growing empire? Just above the Ellora plateau there are remains of a town and a tank at a place called Sooloobhunjan. I think that this may have been the Rāṣṭrakūṭa capital until as late as c. A.D. 790.

v1.c10.s1.t1.23

In the reign of Govinda III the capital seems to have been shifted to a new place named Mayūrakhiṇḍi from which five of his charters are seen to be issued. The identification of this place is, however, a matter of uncertainty. We are much tempted to make it the same as the modern fort of Morkhand in the Nāsik District; but at this time Nāsik was the seat of a provincial viceroyalty, where Dhruva, the younger brother of Govinda II, was ruling before he rebelled against his brother. Morkhand, which is close to Nāsik, is thus not likely to have been the imperial capital. It has been recently suggested that Markaṇḍi on the Waingaṅgā, about 50 miles south-east of Chanda, should be identified with Mayūrakhiṇḍi.¹ There is an obvious phonetic resemblance between the two names; there are also some medieval relics at Markaṇḍi. But the place is almost on the north-eastern border of the Rāṣṭrakūṭa empire and could not have proved a convenient situation for the capital. It is also possible that Laṭṭalūra, the original home of the Rāṣṭrakūṭa family, or Paiṭhan, the old Sātavāhana capital, may have been capitals at some time. As it is, we have to admit that we cannot at present satisfactorily solve the question of the site of the pre-Malkhed capital of the Rāṣṭrakūṭas; the matter will only be cleared up by further discoveries or field explorations.

v1.c10.s1.t1.24

¹ EI, xxiii, 12-13.

Kṛṣṇa I

v1.c10.s1.t2.1

(c. A.D. 756-72)

v1.c10.s1.t2.2

Kṛṣṇa I probably succeeded his nephew Dantidurga in A.D. 756. The latter died relatively young without leaving any issue behind. Kṛṣṇa I had probably co-operated with his ambitious nephew in founding the Rāṣṭrakūṭa power; Dantidurga therefore may have arranged that his uncle should succeed him. At the time of accession Kṛṣṇa took the titles of *Subhatuṅga* (conspicuous in good fortune) and *Akālavarṣa* (rainer of desires and favours even when unexpected).

v1.c10.s1.t2.3

Soon after his accession Kṛṣṇa had to deal with the conflicting ambitions of a relative in order to ensure the prosperity of his house. This relative was most probably his grand-nephew Karkka II, who was ruling in Southern Gujarāt and had begun to assume imperial titles as early as A.D. 757.² Kṛṣṇa defeated him without any difficulty and appointed his own officers to administer Gujarāt under his direct supervision.

v1.c10.s1.t2.4

² JBRAS, xvi, 106 ff. Probably Rāhappa was another name of Karkka. At one time it was believed that the vicious relative ousted by Kṛṣṇa was Dantidurga himself. This view is utterly untenable; for copper-plate charters issued under Kṛṣṇa's orders describe Dantidurga in the most exaggerated terms of glorification and pay the highest compliments to his achievements. EI, xiii, 275; xiv, 121.

v1.c10.s1.t2.5

Kṛṣṇa had a number of other brothers and cousins who co-operated loyally with him and were rewarded with suitably responsible posts. His younger brother Nanna Guṇāvaloka was put in charge of the Aurangābād District; when he died he was succeeded there by his son Śaṅkaragaṇa, who ruled as a feudatory of Kṛṣṇa's son Dhruva. Māṇāvaloka Ratnavarṣa Vijayāditya, another cousin of his, was serving as a responsible officer in the imperial army during its campaigns against Veṅgi.

v1.c10.s1.t2.6

Soon after putting down the revolt of Karkka, Kṛṣṇa proceeded to complete the overthrow of the Cālukya emperor Kīrttivarman II. Taking advantage of the death of Dantidurga and the revolt of Karkka, the Cālukyan king had reorganized his forces and advanced northwards through the Sholapur District to meet the expected invasion by Krishna. We find him encamped with his ‘victorious’ army somewhere on the bank of the Bhīmā in September, A.D. 757.¹ Soon after this date Krishna succeeded in inflicting a crushing defeat on Kīrttivarman, who seems to have died together with his sons in this sanguinary battle. The Chālukya power was once for all completely overthrown. The statement in the Rāshṭrakūṭa records that ‘Krishna churned out and obtained the Goddess of Royal Glory from the ocean of the Chālukya army’ is confirmed by the admission in the records of the later Chālukyas that the glory of the Chālukya family set with Kīrttivarman.² As a result of this decisive battle, the whole of the northern Karṇāṭak passed under the sway of the Rāshṭrakūṭas and their claim to the imperial dignity and status was universally recognized in the Deccan from *c.* A.D. 760.

v1.c10.s1.t2.7

¹ *IA*, viii, 26.

v1.c10.s1.t2.8

² Ibid. 12.

v1.c10.s1.t2.9

After spending a few years in consolidating his gains, Krishna made his position in Mahārāshṭra and the Karṇāṭak secure by conquering and annexing Koṅkaṇ. The province was entrusted for its administration to Saṇaphulla, who became the founder of the feudatory Śilāhāra family, which continued to be very loyal and devoted to the Rāshṭrakūṭas down to and even after their downfall in A.D. 973.

v1.c10.s1.t2.10

Krishna was an ambitious ruler and the mastery of the old Chālukya kingdom did not satisfy him. He was in search of more territory to conquer and eventually decided to effect further expansion southwards by attacking Gaṅgavāḍi (roughly equal to the modern Mysore), which was then under the sway of its old ruler Śrīpurusha. The Rāshṭrakūṭa invasion met with stiff opposition, for the Gaṅgas fought hard and made heavy sacrifices to preserve their independence. Even scholars like Śrīrevaman exchanged their pens for swords and died fighting for their king and country. Prince Siyagall, one of the younger sons of Śrīpurusha, was in charge of the defences of the kingdom. He won a few preliminary victories, but was eventually overwhelmed by Krishna, who marched to and occupied the Gaṅga capital, Mānyapura, i.e. Manne in the Bangalore District. As a thanksgiving for his brilliant success, Krishna established a number of charitable foundations from the wealth of the enemy capital; a copper-plate set recording one of these grants has been discovered.

v1.c10.s1.t2.11

Krishna did not annex the entire Gaṅgavāḍi. He permitted Śrīpurusha to rule as a feudatory over a smaller kingdom and returned home in A.D. 769. Soon after this date he installed his eldest son Govinda as the heir-apparent.

v1.c10.s1.t2.12

The crown prince signalized the assumption of his office by launching an invasion of the kingdom of Veṅgi. A war between the Chālukyas of Veṅgi and the Rāshṭrakūṭas had by this time become inevitable. The Veṅgi rulers were a branch of the Chālukyas of Badāmi, who had been supplanted by the Rāshṭrakūṭas. They were therefore anxious to avenge the overthrow of the Badāmi house. Kṛiṣhṇa also felt that his empire could not be regarded as firmly established until the Chāḷukyas of Veṅgi should be convinced that they could not defeat him. A war between the two powers broke out in *c.* A.D. 768. The Rāṣhṭrakūṭa forces were led by the crown prince Govinda, who was a great cavalry leader. They were completely successful in overwhelming the Chāḷukya forces; ‘the Great Boar (the emblem on the Chāḷukya banner) ran like a deer’, says a Rāṣhṭrakūṭa court poet. In June, A.D. 769, the Rāṣhṭrakūṭa army was encamped at the confluence of the Kṛiṣhṇā and the Musī about a hundred miles south-east of Hyderabad. Veṅgi, the Chāḷukya capital, was only a hundred miles away from this place, and the crown prince could have easily occupied it. But the Chāḷukya king Viṣhṇuvardhana IV capitulated and conciliated the victor by surrendering some territory and paying an indemnity. Later on this treaty was cemented by a marriage alliance when Śīlabhaṭṭārikā, a daughter of Viṣhṇuvardhana, was married to Prince Dhruva, a younger brother of the Rāṣhṭrakūṭa crown prince. As a result of this victory the whole of the modern Hyderabad State passed under the Rāṣhṭrakūṭa sway with the exception of the small territory lying to the east of an imaginary line joining Chanda to the confluence of the Kṛiṣhṇā and the Musī.

v1.c10.s1.t2.13

Kṛiṣhṇa died in *c.* A.D. 773 after a reign of about fifteen years. He was an able ruler and a skilful general and more than doubled the kingdom he had inherited by annexing the major parts of the modern states of Mysore and Hyderabad. By inflicting signal defeats on the Gaṅgas and the Chāḷukyas, he secured for his house a dominating position over the whole of the Deccan, a position which no power to the south of the Vindhyas could think of challenging. He thus paved the way for his successors to participate in the politics of Northern India also, and thus to secure a position of dominance for his house over the whole of the Indian sub-continent.

v1.c10.s1.t2.14

Kṛiṣhṇa was great not only as a conqueror but also as a builder. He was a devout Hindu and spent money not only in charity to Brāhmans but also in building grand and beautiful temples. The magnificent rock-cut monolithic temple at Ellora, which has been justly described as a unique monument, was excavated by his orders at a lavish cost. When the construction of the temple was complete, he personally attended its consecration ceremony and gave costly ornaments for the image and extensive endowments to the temple establishment. Though now known as Kailāsa, originally it was named after its builder Kṛiṣhṇa and known as Kṛiṣhṇeśvara or Kaṇṇeśvara temple. The architectural and sculptural beauties and peculiarities of the temple are described in detail in Chapter XI, dealing with the Fine Arts; we may, however, include here some account of how the temple appeared to contemporaries. The architect of the temple, says a poet of the time, was struck with astonishment when he saw the beauty and grandeur of the completed monument and exclaimed, ‘Oh, how was it that I built it?’ The poet further had no doubt that the gods, seeing the temple from their celestial planes, were under the impression that it was a self-evolved structure which had arisen spontaneously; how could man-made sculpture and architecture possess such superhuman beauty? Every visitor to Ellora confirms this compliment paid by a contemporary poet to the master architect of the temple. His humility and self-effacement, however, were so great that he has not left as much as his mere name inscribed anywhere on the temple walls.

Govinda II

v1.c10.s1.t3.1

(c. A.D. 773-80)

v1.c10.s1.t3.2

Krishna was succeeded by his eldest son Govinda in c. A.D. 773. At the time of his accession he assumed the titles of *Prabhūtavarsha* (profuse rainer of favours and blessings) and *Vikramāvaloka* or *Pratāpāvaloka* (one whose look inspires courage).

v1.c10.s1.t3.3

Govinda's achievements in the war against Veṅgi have already been described. During his short reign he once relieved Govardhana in the Nāsik District and later defeated a king named Pārijāta. But why Govardhana had to be relieved, and who King Pārijāta was and where he was ruling, are not yet known.

v1.c10.s1.t3.4

The greater part of the short reign of Govinda was spent in a struggle for the throne which soon arose between him and his younger brother Dhruva. The latter was ruling as a loyal governor in Nāsik and the Khāndesh at the beginning of his brother's reign. But very soon Govinda abandoned himself to a life of ease and pleasure, entrusting the whole administration to the charge of Dhruva. Dhruva was able and ambitious and was not content to be a mere *de facto* ruler. He aspired to become a *de jure* emperor also and began to issue charters in his own name and to win over the feudatories to his side. This procedure soon aroused the suspicions of Govinda; he threw off his lethargy, removed Dhruva from the headship of the administration, and took the reigns of government into his own hands. For a time Dhruva submitted to the authority of his brother, but soon began to intrigue in an effort to oust him. Govinda tried to strengthen his position by entering into alliances with the rulers of Gaṅgawāḍi, Kāñchī, Veṅgi, and Mālwā, offering them monetary and territorial compensations in return for their promised help against Dhruva. This was a fatal mistake on his part; his alliance with the sworn enemies of his house alienated his ministers who went over to his younger brother and supplied the prince with a good excuse for open rebellion. Pleading that the Rāshṭrakūṭa house was in danger of defeat by its traditional enemies, he engaged in conflict with his brother, not so much to gain the throne for himself as to retain it in the Rāshṭrakūṭa family.

v1.c10.s1.t3.5

By his vicious life Govinda had already alienated the sympathies of his subjects and feudatories; and the promised help from Kāñchī and Veṅgi, Ujjayini (Ujjain) and Talkad, could not but take a long time to reach him.

v1.c10.s1.t3.6

Dhruva dealt Govinda a decisive blow before the armies of his allies could effect a junction with his own. Govinda seems to have died in the battle and Dhruva was then easily able to repel the forces of his brother's allies before they could enter his kingdom. Some of them also must have been lukewarm in their promised support.¹ Dhruva thus became the undisputed master of the Rāṣṭrakūṭa throne by *c.* A.D. 780.²

v1.c10.s1.t3.7

¹ This must have been the case with Viṣṇuvardhana, the ruler of Veṅgi; Dhruva, the opponent of Govinda, was his son-in-law, and he must have agreed to help Govinda simply because this prince was his feudal lord.

v1.c10.s1.t3.8

² If we assume that the Dhulia plates of Dhruva issued in 778 are spurious, we shall have to assume that Dhruva succeeded in ousting his brother as early as A.D. 775, the date of his Pimperi grant. This is the view of Dr. D. R. Bhandarkar: see *EI*, xxiii, 102 ff. Why this view is untenable is shown by the present writer, ibid., pp. 177-81.

Dhruva Dhārāvarṣa

v1.c10.s1.t4.1

(*c.* A.D. 780-93)

v1.c10.s1.t4.2

After overthrowing his elder brother Govinda, Dhruva ascended the throne in *c.* 780 and assumed the titles of *Dhārāvarṣa* (profuse rainer of blessings and favours) and *Nirupama* (the Incomparable). Later on he also became known as *Kalivallabha*, the Favourite of Warriors, on account of his memorable victories. Śīlabhaṭṭārikā, a daughter of Viṣṇuvardhana IV of Veṅgi, was his crowned queen.

v1.c10.s1.t4.3

As a natural consequence of the war of succession, the feudatories of the empire had become lukewarm in their allegiance to the imperial power. Dhruva therefore had to spend a few months in compelling them to acknowledge his sovereignty. He then proceeded to punish kings of Gaṅgawāḍi and Mālwā who had espoused his brother's cause during the war of succession.

v1.c10.s1.t4.4

He dealt his first blow against Gaṅgawāḍi (Mysore), which was still being ruled by Śrīpuruṣa Muttarasa, who had been routed on the battlefield by his father about twelve years earlier. The Gaṅga king had, however, now grown very old and the administration was in the charge of the crown prince Śivamāra. This prince was more a scholar than a soldier; logic, grammar, and dramaturgy interested him more than battles and problems of strategy. He is said to have written a book on war-elephants, but its authorship did not avail him much when the elephant phalanx of the Rāṣṭrakūṭas invaded his kingdom. Probably he won some local victories at first, for Gaṅga records claim that he defeated the Vallabha forces, consisting of the Rāṣṭrakūṭas, the Cālukyas, and the Haihayas. He, however, was no match for Dhruva, who was a better general and commanded much greater resources. Śivamāra was soon not only defeated but also taken prisoner,³ and Dhruva annexed the whole of Gaṅgawāḍī and appointed his son Stambha Raṇāvaloka as its Viceroy.

v1.c10.s1.t4.5

³ The Gaṅga prince captured in *c.* 781 was released by Govinda III in *c.* 794. His name was undoubtedly Śivamāra. But since his father was ruling down to *c.* 788, we must assume that the Gaṅga prince described as taken prisoner was not the Gaṅga king but the Gaṅga crown prince.

v1.c10.s1.t4.6

The victorious Rāṣṭrakūṭa army then marched against the Pallava king Dantivarman, who also had offended Dhruva by espousing his brother's cause. ‘Being hemmed in by the real ocean on one side and by the ocean of the Rāṣṭrakūṭa forces on the other’, says a Rāṣṭrakūṭa poet, ‘the Pallava king got frightened and surrendered a number of elephants.’¹ As the capture of Kāñchī is not claimed, it seems that Dhruva was content with the victories won on the frontiers of the Pallava kingdom and agreed to retire when an indemnity in the form of war-elephants was offered. The Rāṣṭrakūṭa armies returned to their base after this successful southern expedition in *c.* A.D. 782. They included a contingent from Veṅgi, sent by its king Viṣṇuvardhana IV, who was Dhruva's father-in-law.

v1.c10.s1.t4.7

¹ Radhanpur plates, *EI*, vi, 243.

v1.c10.s1.t4.8

The victories related above made Dhruva the unchallenged Lord of the Deccan, but he was not satisfied with this achievement. He wanted to have a dominant voice in the politics of Northern India as well. It was no easy thing for a southern power to do so; since the days of the Sātavāhanas, no Deccan power had succeeded in annexing any portion of Northern India.

v1.c10.s1.t4.9

A general comprehension of the political condition in the north is necessary in order to understand the successive events in the northern campaigns of Dhruva. At this time the Gurjara-Pratīhāra king Vatsarāja was ruling over Rajputana and Mālwā and had offended Dhruva by supporting his brother's cause. In Bengal Dharmapāla had succeeded in founding a strong state. Kanauj, however, still enjoyed the prestige of being the imperial capital of Northern India, though its ruler Indrāyudha was a weakling. In *c.* A.D. 784 Vatsarāja marched on Kanauj and defeated Indrāyudha, but permitted him to rule as a titular emperor.² This aroused the jealousy of Dharmapāla, who was Vatsarāja's rival and aimed at securing for himself the hegemony over Northern India. He decided to champion the cause of Chakrāyudha, probably a brother or other relative of Indrāyudha, and marched against him and his protector Vatsarāja. In the battle that ensued the Bengal army was defeated, and in the hurry of retreat Dharmapāla had to leave behind on the battlefield his two white imperial umbrellas. These fell into the hands of Vatsarāja, who carried them away as a trophy to be displayed at the head of his army. Dharmapāla, however, was not daunted by his defeat; he soon rallied his forces and decided to make a second bid for the hegemony of the north. At the moment when Dhruva decided to intervene in the politics of Northern India in *c.* 786, the army of Dharmapāla was heading towards the Doab and Vatsarāja was once more going out to meet it.

v1.c10.s1.t4.10

² The Marāṭhās and the English followed exactly the same policy a thousand years later, when they conquered the imperial Delhi and got possession of Shāh ‘Ālam.

v1.c10.s1.t4.11

Dhruva planned his northern expedition carefully. He collected a strong force on the Narmadā and put his energetic and youthful sons Govinda and Indra in charge of its different sections. As Vatsarāja was away in the Doab, he could cross the Narmadā and occupy Mālwā without much opposition. He then proceeded towards Kanauj to meet the main forces of Vatsarāja, and encountered them probably near Jhānsi. In the battle that ensued the Deccan army inflicted a crushing defeat on the Rajput forces of Vatsarāja, and the latter fled in great haste to take shelter in the deserts of Rajputana. The booty that fell in the hands of the conqueror included the two white imperial umbrellas of Dharmapāla, which Vatsarāja had captured from him on a previous occasion.

v1.c10.s1.t4.12

Flushed with this sensational victory, Dhruva proceeded to attack Dharmapāla, whose armies were already in the vicinity of the Doab. It was essential to defeat him also, for otherwise the overthrow of Vatsarāja would have only facilitated the imperial plans of Dharmapāla. And he was the sole important king remaining to be defeated by the Rāshṭrakūṭa armies.¹

v1.c10.s1.t4.13

¹ Dharmapāla's queen Raṇṇādevī was a Rāshṭrakūṭa princess, and so it was at one time believed that Dhruva intervened in Northern India to help Dharmapāla against Vatsarāja. The Sanjan plates now show clearly that Dhruva fought both with Vatsarāja and Dharmapāla. The Rāshṭrakūṭa king Parabala, the father of Raṇṇādevī, was not related to Dhruva.

v1.c10.s1.t4.14

Dhruva therefore boldly marched against Dharmapāla and succeeded in inflicting a severe defeat on him, probably somewhere in or near the Doab, in c. A.D. 787. The Rāshṭrakūṭa records claim that the Gauḍa ruler fled in confusion, once more leaving behind him on the battlefield his white imperial umbrellas. The victorious army must have been encamped on the banks of the holy Ganges and the Jumna for some time, and as a memento of this achievement the Ganges and the Jumna began to figure henceforward on the Rāshṭrakūṭa imperial banner.

v1.c10.s1.t4.15

Dhruva did not press his victories further by marching on the imperial city of Kanauj with the view of capturing it or putting his own nominee on its throne. He was getting old and was far away from his base; so he decided to return home without caring to advance either farther east or north-west. As a result of this expedition, Dhruva obtained considerable booty, though the boundaries of his empire were not much extended. The military prestige of the Rāshṭrakūṭas became very high; there was no power in the country which remained to be defeated. The Gaṅga crown prince was in a Rāshṭrakūṭa prison; the Pallava king could save himself only by surrendering war-elephants; Vatsarāja had fled into the deserts of Rajputana, and Dharmapāla had to beat a precipitate retreat. The Arab power was on the decline in Sindh at this time, and no longer in a position to send any disturbing expeditions to the south. The king of Veṅgi was an ally and father-in-law of Dhruva. His position was thus unchallenged in the whole of India, and he could well afford to sheath his sword during the concluding four or five years of his reign.

v1.c10.s1.t4.16

His main concern in the evening of his life was to settle the problem of succession. He had four sons, Karkka, Stambha, Govinda, and Indra. Of these the first seems to have predeceased his father. Among the rest Stambha was the eldest and therefore the natural claimant for the throne. But the old emperor was better impressed by the skill, capacity, and generalship of Stambha's younger brother Govinda and nominated him as his successor, thinking no doubt that the fortunes of the Rāṣṭrakūṭa empire would be in abler hands if he should be selected in preference to his elder brother Stambha. The latter was offered as compensation for his supersession the viceroyalty of Gaṅgawāḍi with a practically independent status. The youngest son Indra, who was deeply attached to his brother Govinda, was marked out for the governorship of Gujarāt and Mālwā. After making these arrangements, the old king celebrated formally with great pomp, sometime in 791 or 792, the installation of Govinda as crown prince, no doubt hoping thus to avoid a war of succession after his death.¹ He died soon after this event, sometime in the latter half of A.D. 793.

v1.c10.s1.t4.17

¹ Some charters, e.g. the Surat plates of Karkka, suggest that the old emperor actually abdicated in favour of the crown prince, probably with a view to making still further unlikely any war of succession. Govinda's own charters, however, show that he dissuaded his father from doing so.

v1.c10.s1.t4.18

Dhruva was undoubtedly one of the ablest rulers of India. During his short rule of thirteen years the Rāṣṭrakūṭas achieved a prestige and glory never attained by them previously. By defeating the Gaṅgas and the Pallavas he pushed the southern boundary of the empire to the Kāveri, and became a real overlord of the Deccan. Not content with this achievement he decided to dominate Northern India also. For the first time since the period of the Sātavāhanas, after a lapse of more than 800 years, a Deccan army marched under him into Northern India, penetrated to the heart of the Doab, and signally defeated each of the two rival aspirants for the overlordship of Northern India. At the time of his death in A.D. 793 there was no state in the whole of India which could challenge the Rāṣṭrakūṭa power. Dhruva's deposition of his elder brother Govinda is no doubt a blot on his career and character; but if the latter was really vicious and incapable, which seems to have been the case, there was more than ample political reason for the technically unjustifiable action reluctantly taken by him.

Govinda III

v1.c10.s1.t5.1

(c. A.D. 793–814)

v1.c10.s1.t5.2

Sometime in the first half of A.D. 793, Govinda ascended the throne and assumed the titles of *Prabhūtavarṣa* (profuse rainer of blessings and favours) and *Jaguṭṭuṅga* (most pre-eminent in the world). Later on he was also known as *Janavallabha* (people's favourite), *Kirttinārāyaṇa* (famous as the god Nārāyaṇa) and *Tribhuvanadhavala* (most glorious in the three worlds). Gāmundabbe figures as his queen in A.D. 804; whether he had others also we do not know.

First 84 of 360 passages. Read on

Linked texts (20)