 
Chapter VIII.
The Valabhis, a.d.509–766.
Val?eh Town, 1893. Val?eh Town, 1893.The Valabhi dynasty, which succeeded the Guptas in GujarÁt and KÁthiÁvÁ?a, take their name from their capital in the east of KÁthiÁvÁ?a about twenty miles west of BhÁvnagar and about twenty-five miles north of the holy Jain hill of SatruÑjaya. The modern name of Valabhi is Val?eh. It is impossible to say whether the modern Val?eh is a corruption of Valahi the Prakrit form of the Sanskrit Valabhi or whether Valabhi is Sanskritised from a local original Val?eh. The form Valahi occurs in the writings of Jinaprabhasuri a learned Jain of the thirteenth century who describes SatruÑjaya as in the ValÁhaka province. A town in the chiefship of Val?eh now occupies the site of old Valabhi,1 whose ruins lie buried below thick layers of black earth and silt under the modern town and its neighbourhood. The only remains of old buildings are the large foundation bricks of which, except a few new houses, the whole of Val?eh is built. The absence of stone supports the theory that the buildings of old Valabhi were of brick and wood. In 1872 when the site was examined the only stone remains were a few scattered Lin?gas and a well-polished life-size granite Nandi or bull lying near a modern MahÁdeva temple. Diggers for old bricks have found copper pots and copperplates and small Buddhist relic shrines with earthen pots and clay seals of the seventh century.
The ruins of Valabhi show few signs of representing a large or important city. The want of sweet water apparently unfits the site for the capital of so large a kingdom as Valabhi. Its choice as capital was probably due to its being a harbour on the BhÁvnagar creek. Since
Chapter VIII.
The Valabhis, a.d.509–766.
Val?eh Town, 1893. the days of Valabhi’s prime the silt which thickly covers the ruins has also filled and choked the channel which once united it with the BhÁvnagar creek when the small Ghelo was probably a fair sized river. Valabhi in a.d.630In spite of the disappearance of every sign of greatness Hiuen Tsiang’s (a.d.640) details show how rich and populous Valabhi was in the early part of the seventh century. The country was about 1000 miles (6000 li) and the capital about five miles (30 li) in circumference. The soil the climate and the manners of the people were like those of MÁlava. The population was dense; the religious establishments rich. Over a hundred merchants owned a hundred lÁkhs. The rare and valuable products of distant regions were stored in great quantities. In the country were several hundred monasteries or sanghÁrÁmas with about 6000 monks. Most of them studied the Little Vehicle according to the Sammatiya school. There were several hundred temples of Devas and sectaries of many sorts. When TathÁgata or Gautama Buddha (b.c.560–480) lived he often travelled through this country. King Asoka (b.c.240) had raised monuments or stÚpas in all places where Buddha had rested. Among these were spots where the three past Buddhas sat or walked or preached. At the time of Hiuen Tsiang’s account (a.d.640) the king was of the Kshatriya caste, as all Indian rulers were. He was the nephew of SÍlÁditya of MÁlava and the son-in-law of the son of SÍlÁditya the reigning king of KanyÁkubja. His name was Dhruvapa?u (Tu-lu-h’o-po-tu). He was of a lively and hasty disposition, shallow in wisdom and statecraft. He had only recently attached himself sincerely to the faith in the three precious ones. He yearly summoned a great assembly and during seven days gave away valuable gems and choice meats. On the monks he bestowed in charity the three garments and medicaments, or their equivalents in value, and precious articles made of the seven rare and costly gems. These he gave in charity and redeemed at twice their price. He esteemed the virtuous, honoured the good, and revered the wise. Learned priests from distant regions were specially honoured. Not far from the city was a great monastery built by the Arhat ÁchÁra (’O-che-lo), where, during their travels, the Bodhisattvas Gunamati and Sthiramati (Kien-hwni) settled and composed renowned treatises.3 Valabhi Copperplates.The only historical materials regarding the Valabhi dynasty are their copperplates of which a large number have been found. That such powerful rulers as the Valabhis should leave no records on stones and no remains of religious or other buildings is probably because, with one possible exception at GopnÁth,4 up to the ninth century all temples and religious buildings in KÁthiÁvÁ?a and GujarÁt were of brick and wood.5
Chapter VIII.
The Valabhis, a.d.509–766.
Valabhi Copperplates. The Valabhi copperplates chiefly record grants to BrÁhmanical temples and Buddhist monasteries and sometimes to individuals. All are in one style two plates inscribed breadthwise on the inner side, the earliest plates being the smallest. The plates are held together by two rings passed through two holes in their horizontal upper margin. One of the rings bears on one side a seal with, as a badge of the religion of the dynasty, a well-proportioned seated Nandi or bull. Under the bull is the word Bha?Árka the name of the founder of the dynasty. Except such differences as may be traced to the lapse of time, the characters are the same in all, and at the same time differ from the character then in use in the Valabhi territory which must have been that from which DevanÁgarÍ is derived. The Valabhi plate character is adopted from that previously in use in South GujarÁt plates which was taken from the South Indian character. The use of this character suggests that either Bha?Árka or the clerks and writers of the plates came from South GujarÁt.6 The language of all the grants is Sanskrit prose. Each records the year of the grant, the name of the king making the grant, the name of the grantee, the name of the village or field granted, the name of the writer of the charter either the minister of peace and war sandhivigrahÁdhik?ita or the military head balÁdhik?ita, and sometimes the name of the dÚtaka or gift-causer generally some officer of influence or a prince and in one case a princess. The grants begin by recording they were made either ‘from Valabhi’ the capital, or ‘from the royal camp’ ‘VijayaskandhÁvÁra.’ Then follows the genealogy of the dynasty from Bha?Árka the founder to the grantor king. Each king has in every grant a series of attributes which appear to have been fixed for him once for all. Except in rare instances the grants contain nothing historical. They are filled with verbose description and figures of speech in high flown Sanskrit. As enjoined in law-books or dharmasÁstras after the genealogy of the grantor comes the name of the composer usually the minister of peace and war and after him the boundaries of the land granted. The plates conclude with the date of the grant, expressed in numerals following the letter sam? or the letters sam?va for sam?vatsara that is year. After the numerals are given the lunar month and day and the day of the week, with, at the extreme end, the sign manual svahasto mama followed by the name of the king in the genitive case that is Own hand of me so and so. The name of the era in which the date is reckoned is nowhere given.
Period Covered.So far as is known the dates extend for 240 years from 207 to 447. That the earliest known date is so late as 207 makes it probable
Chapter VIII.
The Valabhis, a.d.509–766.
Period Covered. that the Valabhis adopted an era already in use in KÁthiÁvÁ?a. No other era seems to have been in use in Valabhi. Three inscriptions have their years dated expressly in the Valabhi Sam?vat. The earliest of these in BhadrakÁli’s temple in SomnÁth PÁtan is of the time of KumÁrapÁla (a.d.1143–1174) the Solan?ki ruler of A?ahilavÁ?a. It bears date Valabhi Sam?vat 850. The second and third are in the temple of Harsata Devi at VerÁval. The second which was first mentioned by Colonel Tod, is dated Hijra 662, Vikrama Sam?vat 1320, Valabhi Sam?vat 945, and Sim?ha Sam?vat 151. The third inscription, in the same temple on the face of the pedestal of an image of K?ish?a represented as upholding the Govardhana hill, bears date Valabhi S. 927. These facts prove that an era known as the Valabhi era, which the inscriptions show began in a.d.319, was in use for about a hundred years in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. This may be accepted as the era of the Valabhi plates which extended over two centuries. Further the great authority (a.d.1030) Alberuni gives Saka 241 that is a.d.319 as the starting point both of the ‘era of Balah’ and of what he calls the GuptakÁla or the Gupta era. Beruni’s accuracy is established by a comparison of the Mandasor inscription and the NepÁl inscription of Amsuvarman which together prove the Gupta era started from a.d.319. Though its use by the powerful Valabhi dynasty caused the era to be generally known by their name in GujarÁt in certain localities the Gupta era continued in use under its original name as in the MorbÍ copperplate of JÁikadeva which bears date 588 “of the era of the Guptas.”7 Valabhi Administration, a.d.500–700.The Valabhi grants supply information regarding the leading office bearers and the revenue police and village administrators whose names generally occur in the following order: -
| (1) Áyuktaka, | | meaning appointed, apparently any superior official. | | (2) Viniyuktaka | - (3) DrÁngika, apparently an officer in charge of a town, as dranga means a town.
- (4) Mahattara or Senior has the derivative meaning of high in rank. MhÁtÁra the MarÁthi for an old man is the same word. In the Valabhi plates mahattara seems to be generally used to mean the accredited headman of a village, recognised as headman both by the people of the village and by the Government.
- (5) ChÁ?abha?a that is bha?as or sepoys for chitas or rogues, police mounted and on foot, represent the modern police jamÁdÁrs havÁldÁrs and constables. The KumÁrapÁla Charita mentions that ChÁ?abha?as were sent by SiddharÁja to apprehend the fugitive KumÁrapÁla. One plate records the grant of a village ‘unenterable by chÁ?abha?as.’8
- (6) Dhruva fixed or permanent is the hereditary officer in charge of the records and accounts of a village, the TalÁti and Kulkarni
Chapter VIII.
The Valabhis, a.d.509–766.
Valabhi Administration, a.d.500–700. of modern times. One of the chief duties of the Dhruva was to see that revenue farmers did not take more than the royal share.9 The name is still in use in Cutch where village accountants are called Dhru and Dhruva. Dhru is also a common surname among NÁgar BrÁhmans and Modh and other VÁniÁs in Cutch GujarÁt and KÁthiÁvÁ?a. - (7) Adhikara?ika means the chief judicial magistrate or judge of a place.
- (8) Da??apÁsika literally ‘holding the fetters or noose of punishment,’ is used both of the head police officer and of the hangman or executioner.
- (9) Chauroddhara?ika the thief-catcher. Of the two Indian ways of catching thieves, one of setting a thief to catch a thief the other the Pagi or tracking system, the second answers well in sandy GujarÁt and KÁthiÁvÁ?a where the Tracker or Pagi is one of the BÁrÁbalute or regular village servants.
- (10) RÁjasthÁnÍya, the foreign secretary, the officer who had to do with other states and kingdoms rÁjasthÁnas. Some authorities take rÁjasthÁnÍya to mean viceroy.
- (11) AmÁtya minister and sometimes councillor is generally coupled with kumÁra or prince.
- (12) AnutpannÁdÁnasamudgrÁhaka the arrear-gatherer.
- (13) Saulkika the superintendent of tolls or customs.
- (14) Bhogika or Bhogoddhara?ika the collector of the Bhoga that is the state share of the land produce taken in kind, as a rule one-sixth. The term bhoga is still in use in KÁthiÁvÁ?a for the share, usually one-sixth, which landholders receive from their cultivating tenants.
- (15) VartmapÁla the roadwatch were often mounted and stationed in thÁnÁs or small roadside sheds.10
- (16) Pratisaraka patrols night-guards or watchmen of fields and villages.11
- (17) Vishayapati division-lord probably corresponded to the present subÁh.
- (18) RÁsh?rapati the head of a district.
- (19) GrÁmakÚ?a the village headman.
Territorial Divisions.The plates show traces of four territorial divisions: (1) Vishaya the largest corresponding to the modern administrative Division: (2) ÁhÁra or Áhara?Í that is collectorate (from ÁhÁra a collection) corresponding to the modern district or zillah: (3) Pathaka, of the road, a sub-division, the place named and its surroundings: (4) SthalÍ a petty division the place without surroundings.12 Land Assessment.The district of Kaira and the province of KÁthiÁvÁ?a to which the Valabhi grants chiefly refer appear to have had separate systems
Chapter VIII.
The Valabhis, a.d.509–766.
Land Assessment. of land assessment Kaira by yield KÁthiÁvÁ?a by area. Under the KÁthiÁvÁ?a system the measurement was by pÁdÁvarta literally the space between one foot and the other that is the modern kadam or pace. The pace used in measuring land seems to have differed from the ordinary pace as most of the KÁthiÁvÁ?a grants mention the bhÚpÁdÁvarta or land pace. The Kaira system of assessment was by yield the unit being the pi?aka or basketful, the grants describing fields as capable of growing so many baskets of rice or barley (or as requiring so many baskets of seed). As the grants always specify the Kaira basket a similar system with a different sized basket seems to have been in use in other parts of the country. Another detail which the plates preserve is that each field had its name called after a guardian or from some tree or plant. Among field names are Kotilaka, Atima?a-kedÁra, Kha?da-kedÁra, Gargara-kshetra, BhÍma-kshetra, Khagali-kedÁra, Sami-kedÁra. Religion.The state religion of the Valabhi kings was Saivism. Every Valabhi copperplate hitherto found bears on its seal the figure of a bull with under it the name of Bha?Árka the founder of the dynasty who was a Saiva. Except Dhruvasena I. (a.d.526) who is called ParamabhÁgavata or the great Vaish?ava and his brother and successor Dharapa??a who is styled ParamÁdityabhakta or the great devotee of the sun, and Guhasena, who in his grant of Sam?. 248 calls himself ParamopÁsaka or the great devotee of Buddha, all the Valabhi kings are called Parama-mÁhesvara the great Saiva. The grants to Buddhist vihÁras or monasteries of which there are several seem special gifts to institutions founded by female relatives of the granting kings. Most of the grants are to BrÁhmans who though performing Vaidik ceremonies probably as at present honoured Saivism. This Saivism seems to have been of the old PÁsupata school of NakulÍsa or LakulÍsa as the chief shrine of LakulÍsa was at KÁrÁvana the modern KÁrvÁn in the GÁikwÁr’s territory fifteen miles south of Baroda and eight miles north-east of MiyÁgÁm railway station a most holy place till the time of the VÁghelÁ king Arjunadeva in the thirteenth century.13 The special
Chapter VIII.
The Valabhis, a.d.509–766.
Religion. holiness attached to the NarbadÁ in Saivism and to its pebbles as lin?gas is probably due to the neighbourhood of this shrine of KÁrvÁn. The followers of the NakulÍsa-PÁsupata school were strict devotees of Saivism, NakulÍsa the founder being regarded as an incarnation of Siva. The date of the foundation of this school is not yet determined. It appears to have been between the second and the fifth century a.d. NakulÍsa had four disciples Kusika, GÁrgya, KÁrusha, and Maitreya founders of four branches which spread through the length and breadth of India. Though no special representatives of this school remain, in spite of their nominal allegiance to SankarÁchÁrya the DasanÁmis or AtÍts are in fact NakulÍsas in their discipline doctrines and habits—applying ashes over the whole body, planting a lin?ga over the grave of a buried AtÍt, and possessing proprietary rights over Saiva temples. The PÁsupatas were ever ready to fight for their school and often helped and served in the armies of kings who became their disciples. Till a century ago these unpaid followers recruited the armies of India with celibates firm and strong in fighting. It was apparently to gain these recruits that so many of the old rulers of India became followers of the PÁsupata school. To secure their services the rulers had to pay them special respect. The leaders of these fighting monks were regarded as pontiffs like the Bappa-pÁda or Pontiff of the later Valabhi and other kings. Thus among the later Valabhis SÍlÁditya IV. is called BÁvapÁdÁnudhyÁta and all subsequent SÍlÁdityas BappapÁdÁnudhyÁta both titles meaning Worshipping at the feet of BÁva or Bappa. This BÁva is the popular Prakrit form of the older Prakrit or desÍ Bappa meaning Father or worshipful. Bappa is the original of the HindustÁni and GujarÁti BÁvÁ father or elder; it is also a special term for a head GosÁvi or AtÍt or indeed for any recluse. The epithet Bappa-pÁdÁnudhyÁta, Bowing at the feet of Bappa, occurs in the attributes of several NepÁl kings, and in the case of king Vasantasena appears the full phrase: Parama-daivata-bappa-bha??Áraka-mahÁrÁja-SrÍ-pÁdÁnudhyÁta. Falling at the illustrious feet of the great MahÁrÁja Lord Bappa. These NepÁl kings were Saivas as they are called parama-mÁhesvara in the text of the inscription and like the Valabhi seals their seals bear a bull. It follows that the term Bappa was applied both by the Valabhis and the NepÁl kings to some one, who can hardly be the same individual, unless he was their
Chapter VIII.
The Valabhis, a.d.509–766.
Religion. common overlord, which the distance between the two countries and still more the fact that his titles are the same as the titles of the Valabhi kings make almost impossible. In these circumstances the most probable explanation of the Bappa or BÁva of these inscriptions is that it was applied to Shaivite pontiffs or ecclesiastical dignitaries. The attribute Parama-daivata The Great Divine prefixed to Bappa in the inscription of Vasantasena confirms this view. That such royal titles as MahÁrÁjÁdhirÁja, Paramabha??Áraka, and Paramesvara are ascribed to Bappa is in agreement with the present use of MahÁrÁja for all priestly BrÁhmans and recluses and of Bha??Áraka for Digambara Jain priests. Though specially associated with Saivas the title bappa is applied also to Vaishnava dignitaries. That the term bappa was in similar use among the Buddhists appears from the title of a Valabhi vihÁra BappapÁdÍyavihÁra The monastery of the worshipful Bappa that is Of the great teacher Sthiramati by whom it was built.14 Origin of the Valabhis.The tribe or race of Bha?Árka the founder of the Valabhi dynasty is doubtful. None of the numerous Valabhi copperplates mentions the race of the founder. The Chalukya and RÁsh?rakÚ?a copperplates are silent regarding the Valabhi dynasty. And it is worthy of note that the Gehlots and Gohils, who are descended from the Valabhis, take their name not from their race but from king Guha or Guhasena (a.d.559–567) the fourth ruler and apparently the first great sovereign among the Valabhis. These considerations make it probable that Bha?Árka belonged to some low or stranger tribe. Though the evidence falls short of proof the probability seems strong that Bha?Árka belonged to the Gurjara tribe, and that it was the supremacy of him and his descendants which gave rise to the name Gurjjara-rÁtra the country of the Gurjjaras, a name used at first by outsiders and afterwards adopted by the people of GujarÁt. Except Bha?Árka and his powerful dynasty no kings occur of sufficient importance to have given their name to the great province of GujarÁt. Against their Gurjara origin it may be urged that the Chinese traveller Hiuen Tsiang (a.d.640) calls the king of Valabhi a Kshatriya. Still Hiuen Tsiang’s remark was made more than a century after the establishment of the dynasty when their rise to power and influence had made it possible for them to ennoble themselves by calling themselves Kshatriyas and tracing their lineage to PurÁ?ic heroes. That such ennobling was not only possible but common is beyond question. Many so-called RÁjput families in GujarÁt and KÁthiÁvÁ?a can be traced to low or stranger tribes. The early kings of NÁndipurÍ or NÁndod (a.d.450) call themselves Gurjjaras and the later members of the same dynasty trace their lineage to the MahÁbhÁrata hero Kar?a. Again two of the NÁndod Gurjjaras Dadda II. and Jayabha?a II. helped the Valabhis under circumstances which suggest that the bond of sympathy
Chapter VIII.
The Valabhis, a.d.509–766.
Origin of the Valabhis. may have been their common origin. The present chiefs of NÁndod derive their lineage from Kar?a and call themselves Gohils of the same stock as the BhÁvnagar Gohils who admittedly belong to the Valabhi stock. This supports the theory that the Gurjjaras and the Valabhis had a common origin, and that the Gurjjaras were a branch of and tributary to the Valabhis. This would explain how the Valabhis came to make grants in Broach at the time when the Gurjjaras ruled there. It would further explain that the Gurjjaras were called sÁmantas or feudatories because they were under the overlordship of the Valabhis.15 History.The preceding chapter shows that except Chandragupta (a.d.410) KumÁragupta (a.d.416) and Skandagupta (a.d.456) none of the Guptas have left any trace of supremacy in GujarÁt and KÁthiÁvÁ?a. Of what happened in GujarÁt during the forty years after Gupta 150 (a.d.469), when the reign of Skandagupta came to an end nothing is known or is likely to be discovered from Indian sources. The blank of forty years to the founder Bha?Árka (a.d.509) or more correctly of sixty years to Dhruvasena (a.d.526) the first Valabhi king probably corresponds with the ascendancy of some foreign dynasty or tribe. All trace of this tribe has according to custom been blotted out of the Sanskrit and other Hindu records. At the same time it is remarkable that the fifty years ending about a.d.525 correspond closely with the ascendancy in north and north-west India of the great tribe of Ephthalites or White Huns. As has been shown in the Gupta Chapter, by a.d.470 or 480, the White Huns seem to have been powerful if not supreme in Upper India. In the beginning of the sixth century, perhaps about a.d.520, Cosmas Indikopleustes describes the north of India and the west coast as far south as Kalliena that is KalyÁn near Bombay as under the Huns whose king was Gollas.16 Not many years later (a.d.530) the Hun power in Central India suffered defeat and about the same time a new dynasty arose in south-east KÁthiÁvÁ?a. First Valabhi Grant, a.d.526.The first trace of the new power, the earliest Valabhi grant, is that of Dhruvasena in the Valabhi or Gupta year 207 (a.d.526). In this grant Dhruvasena is described as the third son of the SenÁpati or general Bha?Árka. Of SenÁpati Bha?Árka neither copperplate nor inscription has been found. Certain coins which General Cunningham Arch. Surv. Rept. IX. Pl. V. has ascribed to Bha?Árka have on the obverse a bust, as on the western coins of
Chapter VIII.
The Valabhis, a.d.509–766.
First Valabhi Grant, a.d.526. KumÁragupta, and on the reverse the Saiva trident, and round the trident the somewhat doubtful legend in Gupta characters: RÁjÑo MahÁkshatri ParamÁdityabhakta SrÍ Sarvva-bha??Árakasa. Of the king the great Kshatri, great devotee of the sun, the illustrious Sarvva-bha??Áraka. This Sarvva seems to have been a RÁsh?rakÚ?a or Gurjjara king. His coins were continued so long in use and were so often copied that in the end upright strokes took the place of letters. That these coins did not belong to the founder of the Valabhi dynasty appears not only from the difference of name between Bha??Áraka and Bha?Árka but because the coiner was a king and the founder of the Valabhis a general. SenÁpati Bha?Árka, a.d.509–520?Of the kingdom which SenÁpati Bha?Árka overthrew the following details are given in one of his epithets in Valabhi copperplates: ‘Who obtained glory by dealing hundreds of blows on the large and very mighty armies of the Maitrakas, who by The Maitrakas, a.d.470–509.force had subdued their enemies.’ As regards these Maitrakas it is to be noted that the name Maitraka means Solar. The sound of the compound epithet Maitraka-amitra that is Maitraka-enemy used in the inscription makes it probable that the usual form Mihira or solar was rejected in favour of Maitraka which also means solar to secure the necessary assonance with amitra or enemy. The form Mihira solar seems a Hinduizing or meaning-making of the northern tribal name Me?h or Mehr, the Mehrs being a tribe which at one time seem to have held sway over the whole of KÁthiÁvÁ?a and which are still found in strength near the Barda hills in the south-west of KÁthiÁvÁ?a.17 The JethvÁ chiefs of Porbandar who were formerly powerful rulers are almost certainly of the Mehr tribe. They are still called Mehr kings and the Mehrs of KÁthiÁvÁ?a regard them as their leaders and at the call of their Head are ready to fight for him. The chief of Mehr traditions describes the fights of their founder Makaradhvaja with one MayÚradhvaja. This tradition seems to embody the memory of an historical struggle. The makara or fish is the tribal badge of the Mehrs and is marked on a MorbÍ copperplate dated a.d.904 (G. 585) and on the forged DhÍnÍki grant of the Mehr king JÁÍkÁdeva. On the other hand MayÚradhvaja or peacock-bannered would be the name of the Guptas beginning with Chandragupta who ruled in GujarÁt (a.d.396–416) and whose coins have a peacock on the reverse. The tradition would thus be a recollection of the struggle between the Mehrs and Guptas in which about a.d.470 the Guptas were defeated. The Mehrs seem to have been a northern tribe, who, the evidence of place names seems to show, passed south through Western RÁjputÁna, Jaslo, Ajo, Bad, and Koml leaders of this tribe giving their names to the settlements of Jesalmir, Ajmir, Badmer, and Komalmer. The resemblance of name and the nearness of dates suggest a connection between the Mehrs and the great PanjÁb conqueror of the Guptas Mihirakula (a.d.512–540?). If not themselves
Chapter VIII.
The Valabhis, a.d.509–766.
The Maitrakas, a.d.470–509. HÚ?as the Mehrs may have joined the conquering armies of the HÚ?as and passing south with the HÚ?as may have won a settlement in KÁthiÁvÁ?a as the KÁthis and JhÁdejÁs settled about 300 years later. After SenÁpati Bha?Árka’s conquests in the south of the Peninsula the Mehrs seem to have retired to the north of KÁthiÁvÁ?a. The above account of the founder of the Valabhis accepts the received opinion that he was the SenÁpati or General of the Guptas. The two chief points in support of this view are that the Valabhis adopted both the Gupta era and the Gupta currency. Still it is to be noted that this adoption of a previous era and currency by no means implies any connection with the former rulers.18 Both the Gurjjaras (a.d.580) and the ChÁlukyas (a.d.642) adopted the existing era of the TraikÚ?akas (a.d.248–9) while as regards currency the practice of continuing the existing type is by no means uncommon.19 In these circumstances, and seeing that certain of the earlier Valabhi inscriptions refer to an overlord who can hardly have been a Gupta, the identification of the king to whom the original SenÁpati owed allegiance must be admitted to be doubtful. All known copperplates down to those of Dharasena (a.d.579 the great grandson of Bha?Árka) give a complete genealogy from Bha?Árka to Dharasena. Later copperplates omit all mention of any descendants but those in the main line. SenÁpati’s Sons.SenÁpati Bha?Árka had four sons, (1) Dharasena (2) Dro?asim?ha (3) Dhruvasena and (4) Dharapa??a. Of Dharasena the first son no record has been traced. His name first appears in the copperplates of his brother Dhruvasena where like his father he is called SenÁpati. Similarly of the second son Dro?asim?ha no record exists except in the copperplates of his brother Dhruvasena. In these copperplates unlike his father and elder brother Dhruvasena is called MahÁrÁja and is mentioned as ‘invested with royal authority in person by the great lord, the lord of the wide extent of the whole world.’ This great lord or paramasvÁmi could not have been his father Bha?Árka. Probably he was the king to whom Bha?Árka owed allegiance. It is not clear where Dro?asim?ha was installed king probably it was in KÁthiÁvÁ?a from the south-east of which his father and elder brother had driven back the Mehrs or Maitrakas.20
Chapter VIII.
The Valabhis, a.d.509–766.
Dhruvasena I. a.d.526–535. Dhruvasena I. a.d.526–535.The third son Dhruvasena is the first of several Valabhis of that name. Three copperplates of his remain: The Kukad grant dated Gupta 207 (a.d.526),21 an unpublished grant found in JunÁga?h dated Gupta 210 (a.d.529), and the Val?eh grant dated Gupta 216 (a.d.535).22 One of Dhruvasena’s attributes Parama-bha??Áraka-pÁdÁnudhyÁta, Bowing at the feet of the great lord, apparently applies to the same paramount sovereign who installed his brother Dro?asim?ha. The paramount lord can hardly be Dhruvasena’s father as his father is either called Bha?Árka without the parama or more commonly SenÁpati that is general. Dhruvasena’s other political attributes are MahÁrÁja Great King or MahÁsÚmanta Great Chief, the usual titles of a petty feudatory king. In the a.d.535 plates he has the further attributes of MahÁpratÍhÁra the great doorkeeper or chamberlain, MahÁda??anÁyaka23 the great magistrate, and MÁhÁkÁrtakritika (?) or great general, titles which seem to show he still served some overlord. It is not clear whether Dhruvasena succeeded his brother Dro?asim?ha or was a separate contemporary ruler. The absence of ‘falling at the feet of’ or other successional phrase and the use of the epithet ‘serving at the feet of’ the great lord seem to show that his power was distinct from his brothers. In any case Dhruvasena is the first of the family who has a clear connection with Valabhi from which the grants of a.d.526 and 529 are dated.
In these grants Dhruvasena’s father Bha?Árka and his elder brothers are described as ‘great MÁhesvaras’ that is followers of Siva, while Dhruvasena himself is called ParamabhÁgavata the great Vaish?ava. It is worthy of note, as stated in the a.d.535 grant, that his niece Du??Á (or LulÁ?) was a Buddhist and had dedicated a Buddhist monastery at Valabhi. The latest known date of Dhruvasena is a.d.535 (G. 216). Whether Dharapa??a or Dharapa??a’s son Guhasena succeeded is doubtful. That Dharapa??a is styled MahÁrÁja and that a twenty-four years’ gap occurs between the latest grant of Dhruvasena and a.d.559 the earliest grant of
Chapter VIII.
The Valabhis, a.d.509–766.
Dhruvasena I. a.d.526–535. Guhasena favour the succession of Dharapa??a. On the other hand in the a.d.559 grant all Guhasena’s sins are said to be cleansed by falling at the feet of, that is, by succeeding, Dhruvasena. It is possible that Dharapa??a may have ruled for some years and Dhruvasena again risen to power. Guhasena, a.d.539–569.Of Guhasena (a.d.539?–569) three plates and a fragment of an inscription remain. Two of the grants are from Val?eh dated a.d.559 and 565 (G. 240 and 246)24: the third is from BhÁvnagar dated a.d.567 (G. 248).25 The inscription is on an earthen pot found at Val?eh and dated a.d.566 (G. 247).26 In all the later Valabhi plates the genealogy begins with Guhasena who seems to have been the first great ruler of his dynasty. Guhasena is a Sanskrit name meaning Whose army is like that of KÁrttika-svÁmi: his popular name was probably Guhila. It appears probable that the Gohil and Gehlot RÁjput chiefs of KÁthiÁvÁ?a and RÁjputÁna, who are believed to be descendants of the Valabhis, take their name from Guhasena or Guha, the form Gehloti or Gehlot, Guhila-utta, being a corruption of Guhilaputra or descendants of Guhila, a name which occurs in old RÁjput records.27 This lends support to the view that Guhasena was believed to be the first king of the dynasty. Like his predecessors he is called MahÁrÁja or great king. In one grant he is called the great Saiva and in another the great Buddhist devotee (paramopÁsaka), while he grants villages to the Buddhist monastery of his paternal aunt’s daughter Du??Á. Though a Saivite Guhasena, like most of his predecessors, tolerated and even encouraged Buddhism. His minister of peace and war is named Skandabha?a. The beginning of Guhasena’s reign is uncertain. Probably it was not earlier than a.d.539 (G. 220). His latest known date is a.d.567 (G. 248) but he may have reigned two years longer. Dharasena II. a.d.569–589.About a.d.569 (G. 250) Guhasena was succeeded by his son Dharasena II. Five of his grants remain, three dated a.d.571 (G. 252),28 the fourth dated a.d.588 (G. 269),29 and the fifth dated a.d.589 (G. 270).30 In the first three grants Dharasena is called MahÁrÁja or great king; in the two later grants is added the title MahÁsÁmanta Great Feudatory, seeming to show that in the latter part of his reign Dharasena had to acknowledge as overlord some one whose power had greatly increased.31 All his copperplates style Dharasena II. Parama-mÁhesvara Great Saiva. A gap of eighteen years occurs between a.d.589 Dharasena’s latest grant and a.d.607 the earliest grant of his son SÍlÁditya. SÍlÁditya I. a.d.594–609.Dharasena II. was succeeded by his son SÍlÁditya I. who is also called DharmÁditya or the sun of religion. The SatruÑjaya MÁhÁtmya has a prophetic account of one SÍlÁditya who will be a propagator of religion in Vikrama Sam?vat
Chapter VIII.
The Valabhis, a.d.509–766.
SÍlÁditya I. a.d.590–609. 477 (a.d.420). This MÁhÁtmya is comparatively modern and is not worthy of much trust. Vikrama Sam?vat 477 would be a.d.420 when no Valabhi kingdom was established and no SÍlÁditya can have flourished. If the date 477 has been rightly preserved, and it be taken in the Saka era it would correspond with Gupta 237 or a.d.556, that is thirty to forty years before SÍlÁditya’s reign. Although no reliance can be placed on the date still his second name DharmÁditya gives support to his identification with the SÍlÁditya of the MÁhÁtmya. His grants like many of his predecessors style SÍlÁditya a great devotee of Siva. Still that two of his three known grants were made to Buddhist monks shows that he tolerated and respected Buddhism. The writer of one of the grants is mentioned as the minister of peace and war Chandrabha??i; the DÚtaka or causer of the gift in two of the Buddhist grants is Bha??a Ádityayasas apparently some military officer. The third grant, to a temple of Siva, has for its DÚtaka the illustrious Kharagraha apparently the brother and successor of the king. SÍlÁditya’s reign probably began about a.d.594 (G. 275). His latest grant is dated a.d.609 (G. 290).32 Kharagraha, a.d.610–615.SÍlÁditya was succeeded by his brother Kharagraha, of whom no record has been traced. Kharagraha seems to have been invested with sovereignty by his brother SÍlÁditya who probably retired from the world. Kharagraha is mentioned as a great devotee of Siva. Dharasena III. a.d.615–620.Kharagraha was succeeded by his son Dharasena III. of whom no record remains. Dhruvasena II. (BÁlÁditya) a.d.620–640.Dharasena III. was succeeded by his younger brother Dhruvasena II. also called BÁlÁditya or the rising sun. A grant of his is dated a.d.629 (G. 310).33 As observed before, Dhruvasena is probably a Sanskritised form of the popular but meaningless Dhruvapa??a which is probably the original of Hiuen Tsiang’s T’u-lu-h’o-po-tu, as a.d.629 the date of his grant is about eleven years before the time when (640) Hiuen Tsiang is calculated to have been in MÁlwa if not actually at Valabhi. If one of Dhruvasena’s poetic attributes is not mere hyperbole, he made conquests and spread the power of Valabhi. On the other hand the NavsÁri grant of Jayabha?a III. (a.d.706–734) the Gurjjara king of Broach states that Dadda II. of Broach (a.d.620–650) protected the king of Valabhi who had been defeated by the great SrÍ Harshadeva (a.d.607–648) of Kanauj. Dharasena IV. a.d.640–649.Dhruvasena II. was succeeded by his son Dharasena IV. perhaps the most powerful and independent of the Valabhis. A copperplate dated a.d.649 (G. 330) styles him Parama-bha??Áraka, MahÁrÁjÁdhirÁja, Paramesvara, Chakravartin Great Lord, King of Kings, Great Ruler, Universal Sovereign. Dharasena IV.’s successors continue the title of MahÁrÁjÁdhirÁja or great ruler, but none is called Chakravartin or universal sovereign a title which implies numerous conquests and widespread power.
Chapter VIII.
The Valabhis, a.d.509–766.
Dharasena IV. a.d.640–649. Two of Dharasena IV.’s grants remain, one dated a.d.645 (G. 326) the other a.d.649 (G. 330). A grant of his father Dhruvasena dated a.d.634 (G. 315) and an unpublished copperplate in the possession of the chief of MorbÍ belonging to his successor Dhruvasena III. dated a.d.651 (G. 332) prove that Dharasena’s reign did not last more than seventeen years. The well known Sanskrit poem Bha??ikÁvya seems to have been composed in the reign of this king as at the end of his work the author says it was written at Valabhi protected (governed) by the king the illustrious Dharasena.34 The author’s application to Dharasena of the title Narendra Lord of Men is a further proof of his great power.
Dhruvasena III. a.d.650–656.Dharasena IV. was not succeeded by his son but by Dhruvasena the son of Derabha?a the son of Dharasena IV.’s paternal grand-uncle. Derabha?a appears not to have been ruler of Valabhi itself but of some district in the south of the Valabhi territory. His epithets describe him as like the royal sage Agastya spreading to the south, and as the lord of the earth which has for its two breasts the Sahya and Vindhya hills. This description may apply to part of the province south of Kaira where the SahyÁdri and Vindhya mountains may be said to unite. In the absence of a male heir in the direct line, Derabha?a’s son Dhruvasena appears to have succeeded to the throne of Valabhi. The only known copperplate of Dhruvasena III.’s, dated a.d.651 (G. 332), records the grant of the village of Pe?hapadra in Vanthali, the modern Vanthali in the NavÁnagar State of North KÁthiÁvÁ?a. A copperplate of his elder brother and successor Kharagraha dated a.d.656 (G. 337) shows that Dhruvasena’s reign cannot have lasted over six years. Kharagraha, a.d.656–665.The less than usually complimentary and respectful reference to Dhruvasena III. in the attributes of Kharagraha suggests that Kharagraha took the kingdom by force from his younger brother as the rightful successor of his father. At all events the succession of Kharagraha to Dhruvasena was not in the usual peaceful manner. Kharagraha’s grant dated a.d.656 (G. 337) is written by the Divirapati or Chief Secretary and minister of peace and war Anahilla son of Skandabha?a.35 The DÚtaka or causer of the gift was the PramÁt?i or survey officer SrÍnÁ. SÍlÁditya III. a.d.666–675.Kharagraha was succeeded by SÍlÁditya III. son of Kharagraha’s elder brother SÍlÁditya II. SÍlÁditya II. seems not to have ruled at Valabhi but like Derabha?a to have been governor of Southern Valabhi, as he is mentioned out of the order of succession and with the title Lord of the Earth containing the Vindhya mountain. Three grants of SÍlÁditya III. remain, two dated a.d.666 (G. 346)36 and the third dated a.d.671 (G. 352).37 He is called Parama-bha??Áraka Great Lord, MahÁrÁjÁdhirÁja Chief King among Great Kings, and Paramesvara Great Ruler. These titles continue to be applied to all
Chapter VIII.
The Valabhis, a.d.509–766.
SÍlÁditya IV. a.d.691. subsequent Valabhi kings. Even the name SÍlÁditya is repeated though each king must have had some personal name. SÍlÁditya IV. a.d.691.SÍlÁditya III. was succeeded by his son SÍlÁditya IV. of whom one grant dated a.d.691 (G. 372) remains. The officer who prepared the grant is mentioned as the general Divirapati SrÍ Haraga?a the son of Bappa Bhogika. The DÚtaka or gift-causer is the prince Kharagraha, which may perhaps be the personal name of the next king SÍlÁditya V. SÍlÁditya V. a.d.722.Of SÍlÁditya V. the son and successor of SÍlÁditya IV. two grants dated a.d.722 (G. 403) both from Gondal remain. Both record grants to the same person. The writer of both was general Gillaka son of Buddhabha??a, and the gift-causer of both prince SÍlÁditya. SÍlÁditya VI. a.d.760.Of SÍlÁditya VI. the son and successor of the last, one grant dated a.d.760 (G. 441) remains. The grantee is an Atharvavedi BrÁhman. The writer is Sasyagupta son of Emapatha and the gift-causer is GÁnjasÁti SrÍ Jajjar (or Jajjir). SÍlÁditya VII. a.d.766.Of SÍlÁditya VII. the son and successor of the last, who is also called DhrÚbha?a (Sk. Dhruvabha?a), one grant dated a.d.766 (G. 447) remains. Valabhi Family Tree.The following is the genealogy of the Valabhi Dynasty: VALABHI FAMILY TREE,
a.d.509–766.
Chapter VIII.
The Valabhis, a.d.509–766.
The Fall of Valabhi, a.d.750–770. The Fall of Valabhi, a.d.750–770.Of the overthrow of Valabhi many explanations have been offered.38 The only explanation in agreement with the copperplate evidence that a SÍlÁditya was ruling at Valabhi as late as a.d.766 (Val. Sam?. 447)40 is the Hindu account preserved by Alberuni (a.d.1030)41 that soon after the Sindh capital MansÚra was founded, say a.d.750–770, Ranka a disaffected subject of the era-making Valabhi, with presents of money persuaded the Arab lord of MansÚra to send a naval expedition against the king of Valabhi. In a night attack king Valabha was killed and his people and town were destroyed. Alberuni adds: Men say that still in our time such traces are left in
Chapter VIII.
The Valabhis, a.d.509–766.
The Fall of Valabhi, a.d.750–770. that country as are found in places wasted by an unexpected attack.42 For this expedition against Valabhi Alberuni gives no date. But as MansÚra was not founded till a.d.75043 and as the latest Valabhi copperplate is a.d.766 the expedition must have taken place between a.d.750 and 770. In support of the Hindu tradition of an expedition from MansÚra against Valabhi between a.d.750 and 770 it is to be noted that the Arab historians of Sindh record that in a.d.758 (H. 140) the Khalif MansÚr sent Amru bin Jamal with a fleet of barks to the coast of Barada.44 Twenty years later a.d.776 (H. 160) a second expedition succeeded in taking the town, but, as sickness broke out, they had to return. The question remains should the word, which in these extracts Elliot reads Barada, be read Balaba. The lax rules of Arab cursive writing would cause little difficulty in adopting the reading Balaba.45 Further it is hard to believe that Valabhi, though to some extent sheltered by its distance from the coast and probably a place of less importance than its chroniclers describe, should be unknown to the Arab raiders of the seventh and eighth centuries and after its fall be known to Alberuni in the eleventh century. At the same time, as during the eighth century there was, or at least as there may have been,46 a town Barada on the south-west coast of KÁthiÁvÁ?a the identification
Chapter VIII.
The Valabhis, a.d.509–766.
The Fall of Valabhi, a.d.750–770. of the raids against Barada with the traditional expedition against Balaba though perhaps probable cannot be considered certain. Further the statement of the Sindh historians47 that at this time the Sindh Arabs also made a naval expedition against KandahÁr seems in agreement with the traditional account in Tod that after the destruction of Valabhi the rulers retired to a fort near Cambay from which after a few years they were driven.48 If this fort is the KandahÁr of the Sindh writers and GandhÁr on the Broach coast about twenty miles south of Cambay, identifications which are in agreement with other passages, the Arab and RÁjput accounts would fairly agree.49
The Importance of Valabhi.The discovery of its lost site; the natural but mistaken identification of its rulers with the famous eighth and ninth century (a.d.753–972) Balharas of MÁlkhet in the East Dakhan;50 the tracing to Valabhi of the RÁna of Udepur in MewÁ? the head of the Sesodias or Gohils the most exalted of Hindu families51; and in later times the wealth of Valabhi copperplates have combined to make the Valabhis one of the best known of GujarÁt dynasties. Except the complete genealogy, covering the 250 years from the beginning of the sixth to the middle of the eighth century, little is known of Valabhi or its chiefs. The
Chapter VIII.
The Valabhis, a.d.509–766.
The Importance of Valabhi, a.d.750–770. origin of the city and of its rulers, the extent of their sway, and the cause and date of their overthrow are all uncertain. The unfitness of the site, the want of reservoirs or other stone remains, the uncertainty when its rulers gained an independent position, the fact that only one of them claimed the title Chakravarti or All Ruler are hardly consistent with any far-reaching authority. Add to this the continuance of Maitraka or Mer power in North KÁthiÁvÁ?a, the separateness though perhaps dependence of SaurÁsh?ra even in the time of Valabhi’s greatest power,52 the rare mention of Valabhi in contemporary GujarÁt grants,53 and the absence of trustworthy reference in the accounts of the Arab raids of the seventh or eighth centuries tend to raise a doubt whether, except perhaps during the ten years ending 650, Valabhi was ever of more than local importance. Valabhi and the Gehlots.In connection with the pride of the Sesodias or Gohils of MewÁ? in their Valabhi origin54 the question who were the Valabhis has a special interest. The text shows that Pandit BhagvÁnlÁl was of opinion the Valabhis were Gurjjaras. The text also notes that the Pandit believed they reached south-east KÁthiÁvÁ?a by sea from near Broach and that if they did not come to Broach from MÁlwa at least the early rulers obtained (a.d.520 and 526) investiture from the MÁlwa kings. Apart from the doubtful evidence of an early second to fifth century BÁla or Valabhi three considerations weigh against the theory that the Valabhis entered GujarÁt from MÁlwa in the sixth century. First their acceptance of the Gupta era and of the Gupta currency raises the presumption that the Valabhis were in KÁthiÁvÁ?a during Gupta ascendancy (a.d.440–480): Second that the Sesodias trace their pedigree through Valabhi to an earlier settlement at DhÁnk in south-west KÁthiÁvÁ?a and that the VÁlas of DhÁnk still hold the place of heads of the VÁlas of KÁthiÁvÁ?a: And Third that both Sesodias and VÁlas trace their origin to Kanaksen a second century North Indian immigrant into KÁthiÁvÁ?a combine to raise the presumption that the VÁlas were in KÁthiÁvÁ?a before the historical founding of Valabhi in a.d.52655 and that the city took its name from its founders the VÁlas or BÁlas. Whether or not the ancestors of the Gohils and VÁlas were settled in KÁthiÁvÁ?a before the establishment of Valabhi about a.d.526
Chapter VIII.
The Valabhis, a.d.509–766.
Valabhi and the Gehlots. several considerations bear out the correctness of the RÁjput traditions and the Jain records that the Gohils or Sesodias of MewÁ? came from BÁla or Valabhi in KÁthiÁvÁ?a. Such a withdrawal from the coast, the result of the terror of Arab raids, is in agreement with the fact that from about the middle of the eighth century the rulers of GujarÁt established an inland capital at A?ahilavÁ?a (a.d.746).56 It is further in agreement with the establishment by the Gohil refugees of a town Balli in MewÁ?; with the continuance as late as a.d.968 (S. 1024) by the Sesodia chief of the Valabhi title SÍlÁditya or Sail57; and with the peculiar Valabhi blend of Sun and Siva worship still to be found in Udepur.58 The question remains how far can the half-poetic accounts of the Sesodias be reconciled with a date for the fall of Valabhi so late as a.d.766. The mythical wanderings, the caveborn Guha, and his rule at Idar can be easily spared. The name Gehlot which the Sesodias trace to the caveborn Guha may as the BhÁvnagar Gehlots hold have its origin in Guhasena (a.d.559–567) perhaps the first Valabhi chief of more than local distinction.59 Tod61 fixes the first historical date in the Sesodia family history at a.d.720 or 728 the ousting of the Mori or Maurya of Chitor by Bappa or Sail. An inscription near Chitor shows the Mori in power in Chitor as late as a.d.714 (S. 770).62 By counting back nine generations from Sakti KumÁra the tenth from Bappa whose date is a.d.1038 Tod fixes a.d.720–728 as the date when the Gohils succeeded the Moris. But
Chapter VIII.
The Valabhis, a.d.509–766.
Valabhi and the Gehlots. the sufficient average allowance of twenty years for each reign would bring Bappa to a.d.770 or 780 a date in agreement with a fall of Valabhi between a.d.760 and 770, as well as with the statement of Abul Fazl, who, writing in a.d.1590, says the RÁna’s family had been in MewÁ? for about 800 years.63 The VÁlas of KÁthiÁvÁ?a.The Arab accounts of the surprise-attack and of the failure of the invaders to make a settlement agree with the local and RÁjputÁna traditions that a branch of the Valabhi family continued to rule at Val?eh until its conquest by MÚla RÁja Sola?khi in a.d.950.64 Though their bards favour the explanation of VÁla from the GujarÁti valvu return or the Persian vÁlah65 noble the family claim to be of the old Valabhi stock. They still have the tradition they were driven out by the MusalmÁns, they still keep up the family name of Selait or SÍlÁditya.66 The local tradition regarding the settlement of the VÁlas in the Balakshetra south of Valabhi is that it took place after the capture of Valabhi by MÚla RÁja Sola?khi (a.d.950).67 If, as may perhaps be accepted, the present VÁlas represent the rulers of Valabhi it seems to follow the VÁlas were the overlords of Balakshetra at least from the time of the historical prosperity of Valabhi (a.d.526–680). The traditions of the BÁbriÁs who held the east of Sorath show that when they arrived (a.d.1200–1250) the VÁla RÁjputs were in possession and suggest that the lands of the VÁlas originally stretched as far west as Diu.68 That the VÁlas held central KÁthiÁvÁ?a is shown by their possession of the old capital Vanthali nine miles south-west of JunÁga?h and by (about a.d.850) their transfer of that town to the ChÚ?ÁsamÁs.69 DhÁnk, about twenty-five miles north-west of JunÁga?h, was apparently held by the VÁlas under the Jetwas when (a.d.800–1200?) Ghumli or Bhumli was the capital of south-west KÁthiÁvÁ?a. According to Jetwa accounts the VÁlas were newcomers whom the Jetwas allowed to settle at DhÁnk.70 But as the Jetwas are not among the earliest settlers in KÁthiÁvÁ?a it seems more probable that, like the ChÚ?ÁsamÁs at Vanthali, the Jetwas found the VÁlas in possession. The close connection of the VÁlas with the earlier waves of KÁthis is admitted.71 Considering that the present
Chapter VIII.
The Valabhis, a.d.509–766.
The VÁlas of KÁthiÁvÁ?a. (1881) total of KÁthiÁvÁ?a VÁla RÁjputs is about 900 against about 9000 VÁla KÁthis, the VÁlas,72 since their loss of power, seem either to have passed into unnoticeable subdivisions of other RÁjput tribes or to have fallen to the position of KÁthis. The VÁlas and KÁthis.If from the first and not solely since the fall of Valabhi the VÁlas have been associated with the KÁthis it seems best to suppose they held to the KÁthis a position like that of the Jetwas to their followers the Mers. According to Tod73 both VÁlas and KÁthis claim the title Tata MultÁnka Rai Lords of Tata and MultÁn. The accounts of the different sackings of Valabhi are too confused and the traces of an earlier settlement too scanty and doubtful to justify any attempt to carry back Valabhi and the VÁlas beyond the Maitraka overthrow of Gupta power in KÁthiÁvÁ?a (a.d.470–480). The boast that Bha?Árka, the reputed founder of the house of Valabhi (a.d.509), had obtained glory by dealing hundreds of blows on the large and very mighty armies of the Maitrakas who by force had subdued their enemies, together with the fact that the Valabhis did and the Maitrakas did not adopt the Gupta era and currency seem to show the VÁlas were settled in KÁthiÁvÁ?a at an earlier date than the Mers and Jetwas. That is, if the identification is correct, the VÁlas and KÁthis were in KÁthiÁvÁ?a before the first wave of the White Huns approached. It has been noticed above under Skandagupta that the enemies, or some of the enemies, with whom, in the early years of his reign a.d.452–454, Skandagupta had so fierce a struggle were still in a.d.456 a source of anxiety and required the control of a specially able viceroy at JunÁga?h. Since no trace of the KÁthis appears in KÁthiÁvÁ?a legends or traditions before the fifth century the suggestion may be offered that under VÁla or BÁla leadership the KÁthis were among the enemies who on the death of KumÁragupta (a.d.454) seized the Gupta possessions in KÁthiÁvÁ?a. Both VÁlas and KÁthis would then be northerners driven south from MultÁn and South
Chapter VIII.
The Valabhis, a.d.509–766.
The VÁlas and KÁthis. Sindh by the movements of tribes displaced by the advance of the Ephthalites or White Huns (a.d.440–450) upon the earlier North Indian and border settlements of the Yuan-Yuan or Avars.74 Descent from Kanaksen, a.d.150.The Sesodia or Gohil tradition is that the founder of the VÁlas was Kanaksen, who, in the second century after Christ, from North India established his power at VirÁt or Dholka in North GujarÁt and at DhÁnk in KÁthiÁvÁ?a.75 This tradition, which according to Tod76 is supported by at least ten genealogical lists derived from distinct sources, seems a reminiscence of some connection between the early VÁlas and the Kshatrapas of JunÁga?h with the family of the great KushÁn emperor Kanishka (a.d.78–98). Whether this high ancestry belongs of right to the VÁlas and Gohils or whether it has been won for them by their bards nothing in the records of KÁthiÁvÁ?a is likely to be able to prove. Besides by the VÁlas Kanaksen is claimed as an ancestor by the ChÁva?Ás of OkhÁmandal as the founder of KanakapurÍ and as reigning in K?ish?a’s throne in DwÁrkÁ.77. In support of the form Kanaka for Kanishka is the doubtful Kanaka-Sakas or Kanishka-Sakas of VarÁhamihira (a.d.580).78 The form Kanik is also used by Alberuni79 for the famous VihÁra or monastery at PeshÁwar of whose founder Kanak Alberuni retails many widespread legends. Tod80 says; ‘If the traditional date (a.d.144) of Kanaksen’s arrival in KÁthiÁvÁ?a had been only a little earlier it would have fitted well with Wilson’s Kanishka of the RÁja Tarangini.’ Information brought to light since Tod’s time shows that hardly any date could fit better than a.d.144 for some member of the KushÁn family, possibly a grandson of the great Kanishka, to make a settlement in GujarÁt and KÁthiÁvÁ?a. The date agrees closely with the revolt against Vasudeva (a.d.123–150), the second in succession from Kanishka, raised by the PanjÁb Yaudheyas, whom the great GujarÁt Kshatrapa RudradÁman (a.d.143–158), the introducer of Kanishka’s (a.d.78) era into GujarÁt, humbled. The tradition calls Kanaksen Kosalaputra and brings him from Lohkot in North India.81 Kosala has been explained as Oudh and Lohkot as Lahore, but as Kanak came from the north not from the north-east an original KushÁna-putra or Son of the KushÁn may be the true form. Similarly Lohkot cannot be Lahore. It may be Alberuni’s Lauhavar or Lahur in the KÁshmir uplands one of the main centres of KushÁn power.82
Chapter VIII.
The Valabhis, a.d.509–766.
MewÁ? and the Persians. MewÁ? and the Persians.One further point requires notice, the traditional connection between Valabhi and the RÁnÁs of MewÁ? with the Sassanian kings of Persia (a.d.250–650). In support of the tradition Abul Fazl (a.d.1590) says the RÁnÁs of MewÁ? consider themselves descendants of the Sassanian NaushirvÁn (a.d.531–579) and Tod quotes fuller details from the Persian history Maaser-al-Umra.83 No evidence seems to support a direct connection with NaushirvÁn.84 At the same time marriage between the Valabhi chief and Maha Banu the fugitive daughter of Yezdigerd the last Sassanian (a.d.651) is not impossible.85 And the remaining suggestion that the link may be NaushirvÁn’s son NaushizÁd who fled from his father in a.d.570 receives support in the statement of Procopius86 that NaushizÁd found shelter at Belapatan in KhuzistÁn perhaps Balapatan in GurjaristÁn. As these suggestions are unsupported by direct evidence, it seems best to look for the source of the legend in the fire symbols in use on KÁthiÁvÁ?a and MewÁ? coins. These fire symbols, though in the main Indo-Skythian, betray from about the sixth century a more direct Sassanian influence. The use of similar coins coupled with their common sun worship seems sufficient to explain how the Agnikulas and other KÁthiÁvÁ?a and MewÁ? RÁjputs came to believe in some family connection between their chiefs and the fireworshipping kings of Persia.87
VÁlas.Can the VÁla traditions of previous northern settlements be supported either by early Hindu inscriptions or from living traces in the present population of Northern India? The convenient and elaborate tribe and surname lists in the Census Report of the PanjÁb, and vaguer information from RÁjputÁna, show traces of BÁlas and VÁlas among the MusalmÁn as well as among the Hindu population of Northern India.88 Among the tribes mentioned in VarÁha-Mihira’s sixth century (a.d.580)89 lists the VÁhlikas appear along with the dwellers on Sindhu’s banks. An inscription of a king Chandra, probably Chandragupta and if so about a.d.380–400,90 boasts of crossing the seven mouths of the Indus to attack the VÁhlikas. These references suggest that the BÁlas or VÁlas are the VÁlhikas and that the BÁlhikas of the Harivam?sa (a.d.350–500?) are not as Langlois supposed people then ruling
Chapter VIII.
The Valabhis, a.d.509–766.
VÁlas. in Balkh but people then established in India.91 Does it follow that the VÁlhikas of the inscriptions and the BÁlhikas of the Harivam?sa are the PanjÁb tribe referred to in the MahÁbhÁrata as the BÁhikas or BÁlhikas, a people held to scorn as keeping no BrÁhman rites, their BrÁhmans degraded, their women abandoned?92 Of the two MahÁbhÁrata forms BÁhika and BÁlhika recent scholars have preferred BÁlhika with the sense of people of Balkh or Baktria.93 The name BÁlhika might belong to more than one of the Central Asian invaders of Northern India during the centuries before and after Christ, whose manner of life might be expected to strike an ÁryÁvarta BrÁhman with horror. The date of the settlement of these northern tribes (b.c.180–a.d.300) does not conflict with the comparatively modern date (a.d.150–250) now generally received for the final revision of the MahÁbhÁrata.94 This explanation does not remove the difficulty caused by references to BÁhikas and BÁlhikas95 in PÁ?ini and other writers earlier than the first of the after-Alexander Skythian invasions. At the same time as shown in the footnote there seems reason to hold that the change from the BÁkhtri of Darius (b.c.510) and Alexander the Great (b.c.330) to the modern Balkh did not take place before the first century after Christ. If this view is correct it follows that
Chapter VIII.
The Valabhis, a.d.509–766.
VÁlas. if the form Bahlika occurs in PÁ?ini or other earlier writers it is a mistaken form due to some copyist’s confusion with the later name Bahlika. As used by PÁ?ini the name BÁhika applied to certain PanjÁb tribes seems a general term meaning Outsider a view which is supported by Brian Hodgson’s identification of the MahÁbhÁrata BÁhikas with the Bahings one of the outcaste or broken tribes of NepÁl.97 The use of BÁhika in the MahÁbhÁrata would then be due either to the wish to identify new tribes with old or to the temptation to use a word which had a suitable meaning in Sanskrit. If then there is fair ground for holding that the correct form of the name in the MahÁbhÁrata is BÁlhika and that BÁlhika means men of Balkh the question remains which of the different waves of Central Asian invaders in the centuries before and after Christ are most likely to have adopted or to have received the title of Baktrians. Between the second century before and the third century after Christ two sets of northerners might justly have claimed or have received the title of Baktrians. These northerners are the Baktrian Greeks about b.c.180 and the Yuechi between b.c.20 and a.d.300. Yavana is so favourite a name among Indian writers that it may be accepted that whatever other northern tribes the name Yavana includes no name but Yavana passed into use for the Baktrian Greeks. Their long peaceful and civilised rule (b.c.130–a.d.300?) from their capital at Balkh entitles the Yuechi to the name Baktrians or BÁhlikas. That the Yuechi were known in India as Baktrians is proved by the writer of the Periplus (a.d.247), who, when Baktria was still under Yuechi rule, speaks of the Baktrianoi as a most warlike race governed by their own sovereign.98 It is known that in certain cases the Yuechi tribal names were of local origin. KushÁn the name of the leading tribe is according to some authorities a place-name.99
Chapter VIII.
The Valabhis, a.d.509–766.
VÁlas. And it is established that the names of more than one of the tribes who about b.c.50 joined under the head of the KushÁns were taken from the lands where they had settled. It is therefore in agreement both with the movements and with the practice of the Yuechi, that, on reaching India, a portion of them should be known as BÁhlikas or BÁlhikas. Though the evidence falls short of proof there seems fair reason to suggest that the present RÁjput and KÁthi VÁlas or BÁlas of GujarÁt and RÁjputÁna, through a Sanskritised VÁhlika, may be traced to some section of the Yuechi, who, as they passed south from Baktria, between the first century before and the fourth century after Christ, assumed or received the title of men of Balkh. One collateral point seems to deserve notice. St. Martin100 says: ‘The Greek historians do not show the least trace of the name BÁhlika.’ Accepting BÁhika, with the general sense of Outsider, as the form used by Indian writers before the Christian era and remembering101 PÁ?ini’s description of the MÁlavas and Kshudrakas as two BÁhika tribes of the North-West the fact that PÁ?ini lived very shortly before or after the time of Alexander and was specially acquainted with the PanjÁb leaves little doubt that when (a.d.326) Alexander conquered their country the Malloi and Oxydrakai, that is the MÁlavas and Kshudrakas, were known as BÁhikas. Seeing that Alexander’s writers were specially interested in and acquainted with the Malloi and Oxydrakai it is strange if St. Martin is correct in stating that Greek writings show no trace of the name BÁhika. In explanation of this difficulty the following suggestion may be offered.102 As the Greeks sounded their kh (?) as a spirant, the Indian BÁhika would strike them as almost the exact equivalent of their own word a??????. More than one of Alexander’s writers has curious references to a Bacchic element in the PanjÁb tribes. Arrian103 notices that, as Alexander’s fleet passed down the Jhelum, the people lined the banks chanting songs taught them by Dionysus and the Bacchantes. According to Quintus Curtius104 the name of Father Bacchus was famous among the people to the south of the Malloi. These references are vague. But Strabo is definite.105 The Malloi and Oxydrakai are reported to be the descendants of Bacchus. This passage is the more important since Strabo’s use of the writings of Aristobulus Alexander’s historian and of Onesikritos Alexander’s pilot and BrÁhman-interviewer gives his details a special value.106 It may be said Strabo explains why the Malloi and Oxydrakai were called Bacchic and Strabo’s explanation is not in agreement with the proposed BÁhika origin. The answer is that Strabo’s explanation can be proved to be in part, if not altogether, fictitious. Strabo107 gives two reasons why the Oxydrakai
Chapter VIII.
The Valabhis, a.d.509–766.
VÁlas. were called Bacchic. First because the vine grew among them and second because their kings marched forth BakkhikÔs that is after the Bacchic manner. It is difficult to prove that in the time of Alexander the vine did not grow in the PanjÁb. Still the fact that the vines of Nysa near JalÁlÁbÁd and of the hill Meros are mentioned by several writers and that no vines are referred to in the Greek accounts of the PanjÁb suggests that the vine theory is an after-thought.108 Strabo’s second explanation, the Bacchic pomp of their kings, can be more completely disproved. The evidence that neither the Malloi nor the Oxydrakai had a king is abundant.109 That the Greeks knew the Malloi and Oxydrakai were called Bakkhikoi and that they did not know why they had received that name favours the view that the explanation lies in the Indian name BÁhika. One point remains. Does any trace of the original BÁhikas or Outsiders survive? In Cutch KÁthiÁvÁ?a and North GujarÁt are two tribes of half settled cattle-breeders and shepherds whose names RahbÁris as if RahÁbaher and BharvÁds as if BahervÁda seem like BÁhika to mean Outsider. Though in other respects both classes appear to have adopted ordinary Hindu practices the conduct of the BharvÁd women of KÁthiÁvÁ?a during their special marriage seasons bears a curiously close resemblance to certain of the details in the MahÁbhÁrata account of the BÁhika women. Colonel Barton writes:110 ‘The great marriage festival of the KÁthiÁvÁ?a BharvÁds which is held once in ten or twelve years is called the Milkdrinking, DudhpÍno, from the lavish use of milk or clarified butter. Under the exciting influence of the butter the women become frantic singing obscene songs breaking down hedges and spoiling the surrounding crops.’ Though the BharvÁds are so long settled in KÁthiÁvÁ?a as to be considered aboriginals their own tradition preserves the memory of a former settlement in MÁrwÁr.111 This tradition is supported by the fact that the shrine of the family goddess of the Cutch RabÁris is in Jodhpur,112 and by the claim of the Cutch BharvÁds that their home is in the North-West Provinces.113
|
