Chapter XI.
The RÁsh?rakÚ?as, a.d.743–974. The RÁsh?rakÚ?a connection with GujarÁt lasted from Saka 665 to 894 (a.d.743–974) that is for 231 years. The connection includes three periods: A first of sixty-five years from Saka 665 to 730 (a.d.743–808) when the GujarÁt ruler was dependent on the main Dakhan RÁsh?rakÚ?a: a second of eighty years between Saka 730 and 810 (a.d.808–888) when the GujarÁt family was on the whole independent: and a third of eighty-six years Saka 810 to 896 (a.d.888–974) when the Dakhan RÁsh?rakÚ?as again exercised direct sway over GujarÁt.

Their Origin.Information regarding the origin of the RÁsh?rakÚ?as is imperfect. That the GujarÁt RÁsh?rakÚ?as came from the Dakhan in Saka 665 (a.d.743) is known. It is not known who the Dakhan RÁsh?rakÚ?as originally were or where or when they rose to prominence. RÁtho? the dynastic name of certain Kanauj and MÁrwÁr RÁjputs represents a later form of the word RÁsh?rakÚ?a. Again certain of the later inscriptions call the RÁsh?rakÚ?as Ra??as a word which, so far as form goes, is hardly a correct Prakrit contraction of RÁsh?rakÚ?a. The Sanskritisation of tribal names is not exact. If the name Ra??a was strange it might be pronounced Ratta, Ratha, or Raddi. This last form almost coincides with the modern KÁnarese caste name Reddi, which, so far as information goes, would place the RÁsh?rakÚ?as among the tribes of pre-Sanskrit southern origin.

Their Name.If Ra??a is the name of the dynasty kÚ?a or kÚ?a may be an attribute meaning prominent. The combination RÁsh?rakÚ?a would then mean the chiefs or leaders as opposed to the rank and file of the Ra??as. The bardic accounts of the origin of the RÁtho?s of Kanauj and MÁrwÁr vary greatly. According to a Jain account the RÁtho?s, whose name is fancifully derived from the raht or spine of Indra, are connected with the Yavans through an ancestor Yavanasva prince of PÁrlipur. The RÁtho? genealogies trace their origin to Kusa son of RÁma of the Solar Race. The bards of the
Chapter XI.
The RÁsh?rakÚ?as, a.d.743–974.
Their Name. Solar Race hold them to be descendants of Hira?ya Kasipu by a demon or daitya mother. Like the other great RÁjput families the RÁtho?s’ accounts contain no date earlier than the fifth century a.d. when (a.d.470, S. 526) NÁin PÁl is said to have conquered Kanauj slaying its monarch AjipÁl.1 The Dakhan RÁsh?rakÚ?as (whose earliest known date is also about a.d.450) call themselves of the Lunar Race and of the Yadu dynasty. Such contradictions leave only one of two origins to the tribe. They were either foreigners or southerners BrÁhmanised and included under the all-embracing term RÁjput.

Early Dynasty, a.d.450–500.Of the rise of the RÁsh?rakÚ?as no trace remains. The earliest known RÁsh?rakÚ?a copperplate is of a king Abhimanyu. This plate is not dated. Still its letters, its style of writing, and its lion seal, older than the Garu?a mark which the RÁsh?rakÚ?as assumed along with the claim of YÁdava descent, leave no doubt that this is the earliest of known RÁsh?rakÚ?a plates. Its probable date is about a.d.450. The plate traces the descent of Abhimanyu through two generations from MÁnÁn?ka. The details are:

The grant is dated from MÁnapura, perhaps MÁnÁn?ka’s city, probably an older form of MÁnyakhe?a the modern MÁlkhed the capital of the later RÁsh?rakÚ?as about sixty miles south-east of SholÁpur. These details give fair ground for holding the MÁnÁn?kas to be a family of RÁsh?rakÚ?a rulers earlier than that which appears in the usual genealogy of the later RÁsh?rakÚ?a dynasty (a.d.500–972).

The Main Dynasty, a.d.630–972.The earliest information regarding the later RÁsh?rakÚ?as is from a comparatively modern, and therefore not quite trustworthy, ChÁlukya copperplate of the eleventh century found by Mr. Wathen. This plate states that Jayasim?ha I. the earliest ChÁlukya defeated the RÁsh?rakÚ?a Indra son of K?ish?a the lord of 800 elephants. The date of this battle would be about a.d.500. If historic the reference implies that the RÁsh?rakÚ?as were then a well established dynasty. In most of their own plates the genealogy of the RÁsh?rakÚ?as begins with Govinda about a.d.680. But that Govinda was not the founder of the family is shown by Dantidurga’s Elura DasÁvatÁra inscription (about a.d.750) which gives two earlier names Dantivarmman and Indra. The founding of RÁsh?rakÚ?a power is therefore of doubtful date. Of the date of its overthrow there is no question. The overthrow came from the hand of the Western ChÁlukya Tailappa in Saka 894 (a.d.972) during the reign of the last RÁsh?rakÚ?a Kakka III. or Kakkala.

RÁsh?rakÚ?a Family Tree, a.d.630–972.The following is the RÁsh?rakÚ?a family tree:

Copperplates.The earliest GujarÁt RÁsh?rakÚ?a grant, Kakka’s of Saka 669 (a.d.747), comes from Ántroli-ChÁroli in Surat. It is written on two plates in the Valabhi style of composition and form of letters, and, as in Valabhi grants, the date is at the end. Unlike Valabhi grants the era is the Saka era. The grant gives the following genealogy somewhat different from that of other known RÁsh?rakÚ?a grants:

Chapter XI.
The RÁsh?rakÚ?as, a.d.743–974.
Kakka II. a.d.747. Kakka II. a.d.747.The plate notices that Kakka the grantor was the son of Govinda by his wife the daughter of the illustrious NÁgavarmman. Kakka is further described by the feudatory title ‘SamadhigatapanchmahÁsabdah?’ Holder of the five great names. At the same time he is also called Paramabha??Áraka-MahÁrÁja Great Lord Great King, attributes which seem to imply a claim to independent power. The grant is dated the bright seventh of Ásvayuja, Saka 669 (a.d.747). The date is almost contemporary with the year of Dantidurga in the SÁmangad plate (a.d.753). As Dantidurga was a very powerful monarch we may identify the first Kakka of this plate with Kakka I. the grandfather of Dantidurga and thus trace from Dhruva Kakka’s son a branch of feudatory RÁsh?rakÚ?as ruling in MÁlwa or GujarÁt, whose leaders were Dhruva, his son Govinda, and Govinda’s son Kakka II. Further Dantidurga’s grant shows that he conquered Central GujarÁt between the MahÍ and the NarbadÁ2 while his Elura DasÁvatÁra inscription (a.d.750) shows that he held LÁ?a and MÁlava.3 Dantidurga’s conquest of Central GujarÁt seems to have been signalised by grants of land made by his mother in every village of the MÁtri division which is apparently the MÁtar tÁluka of the Kaira district.4 It is possible that Dantidurga gave conquered GujarÁt to his paternal cousin’s son and contemporary Kakka, the grantor of the Ántroli plate (a.d.747), as the representative of a family ruling somewhere under the overlordship of the main Dakhan RÁsh?rakÚ?as. Karka’s Baroda grant5 (a.d.812) supports this theory. Dantidurga died childless and was succeeded by his uncle K?ish?a. Of this K?ish?a the Baroda grant says that he assumed the government for the good of the family after having rooted out a member of the family who had taken to mischief-making. It seems probable that Kakka II. the grantor of the Ántroli plate is the mischief-maker and that his mischief was, on the death of Dantidurga, the attempt to secure the succession to himself. K?ish?a frustrated Kakka’s attempt and rooted him out so effectively that no trace of Kakka’s family again appears.

K?ish?a and Govinda II. a.d.765–795.From this it follows that, so far as is known, the RÁsh?rakÚ?a conquest of GujarÁt begins with Dantidurga’s conquest of LÁ?a, that is South GujarÁt between the MahÍ and the NarbadÁ, from the Gurjjara king Jayabha?a whose latest known date is a.d.736 or seventeen years before the known date of Dantidurga. The Gurjjaras probably retired to the RÁjpipla hills and further east on the confines of MÁlwa where they may have held a lingering sway.6 No GujarÁt event of importance is recorded during the reign of K?ish?a (a.d.765) or of his son Govinda II. (a.d.780) who about
Chapter XI.
The RÁsh?rakÚ?as, a.d.743–974.
K?ish?a and Govinda II. a.d.765–795. a.d.795 was superseded by his powerful younger brother Dhruva.7

Dhruva I. a.d.795.Dhruva was a mighty monarch whose conquests spread from South India as far north as AllahÁbÁd. During Dhruva’s lifetime his son Govinda probably ruled at MayÚrakhandi or Morkhanda in the NÁsik district and held the GhÁt country and the GujarÁt coast from BalsÁr northwards. Though according to a Kapadvanj grant Govinda had several brothers the RÁdhanpur (a.d.808) and Van-Dindori (a.d.808) grants of his son Govinda III. state that his father, seeing Govinda’s supernatural K?ish?a-like powers, offered him the sovereignty of the whole world. Govinda declined, saying, The Ka??hikÁ or coast tract already given to me is enough. Seeing that MayÚrakhandi or Morkhanda in NÁsik was Govinda’s capital, this Ka??hikÁ appears to be the coast from BalsÁr northwards.

Govinda III. a.d.800–808.According to GujarÁt Govinda’s (a.d.827–833) KÁvÍ grant (a.d.827), finding his power threatened by Stambha and other kings, Dhruva made the great Govinda independent during his own lifetime. This suggests that while Dhruva continued to hold the main RÁsh?rakÚ?a sovereignty in the Dakhan, he probably invested Govinda with the sovereignty of GujarÁt. This fact the KÁvÍ grant (a.d.827) being a GujarÁt grant would rightly mention while it would not find a place in the RÁdhanpur (a.d.808) and Van-Dindori (a.d.808) grants of the main RÁsh?rakÚ?as. Of the kings who opposed Govinda the chief was Stambha who may have some connection with Cambay, as, during the time of the A?ahilavÁ?a kings, Cambay came to be called Stambha-tÍrtha instead of by its old name of GambhÚtÁ. According to the grants the allied chiefs were no match for Govinda. The Gurjjara fled through fear, not returning even in dreams, and the MÁlava king submitted. Who the Gurjjara was it is hard to say. He may have belonged to some Gurjjara dynasty that rose to importance after Dantidurga’s conquest or the name may mean a ruler of the Gurjjara country. In either case some North GujarÁt ruler is meant whose conquest opened the route from Broach to MÁlwa. From MÁlwa Govinda marched to the Vindhyas where the king apparently of East MÁlwa named MÁrÁ Sarva submitted to Govinda paying tribute. From the Vindhyas Govinda returned to GujarÁt passing the rains at SrÍbhavana,8 apparently Sarbhon in the Ámod tÁluka of Broach, a favourite locality which he had ruled during his father’s lifetime. After the rains Govinda went south as far as the Tungabhadra. On starting for the south Govinda handed GujarÁt to his brother Indra with whom begins the GujarÁt branch of the RÁsh?rakÚ?as. Several plates distinctly mention that Indra was given the kingdom of the lord of LÁ?a by (his brother) Govinda. Other GujarÁt grants, apparently with intent to show that Indra won GujarÁt and did not receive it in gift, after mentioning Sarvva Amoghavarsha as the successor of Govinda (a.d.818), state that the king (apparently of GujarÁt) was Sarvva’s uncle Indra.

Chapter XI.
The RÁsh?rakÚ?as, a.d.743–974.
Indra, a.d.808–812. Indra, a.d.808–812.As Govinda III. handed GujarÁt to his brother Indra about Saka 730 (a.d.808) and as the grant of Indra’s son Karka is dated Saka 734 (a.d.812) Indra’s reign must have been short. Indra is styled the ruler of the entire kingdom of LÁ?esvara,9 the protector of the mandala of LÁ?a given to him by his lord. An important verse in an unpublished Baroda grant states that Indra chased the lord of Gurjjara who had prepared to fight, and that he honourably protected the multitude of Dakhan (Dakshi?Ápatha) feudatories (mahÁsÁmantas) whose glory was shattered by SrÍvallabha (that is Sarvva or Amoghavarsha)10 then heir-apparent of Govinda. That is, in attempting to establish himself in independent power, Indra aided certain of the RÁsh?rakÚ?a feudatories in an effort to shake off the overlordship of Amoghavarsha.

Karka I. a.d.812–821.Indra was succeeded by his son Karka I. who is also called Suvar?avarsha and PÁtÁlamalla. Karka reversed his father’s policy and loyally accepted the overlordship of the main RÁsh?rakÚ?as. Three grants of Karka’s remain, the Baroda grant dated Saka 734 (a.d.812), and two unpublished grants from NavsÁrÍ and Surat dated respectively Saka 738 (a.d.816) and Saka 743 (a.d.821). Among Doctor BhagvÁnlÁl’s collection of inscriptions bequeathed to the British Museum the Baroda grant says that Karka’s svÁmi or lord, apparently Govinda III., made use of Karka’s arm to protect the king of MÁlava against invasion by the king of Gurjjara who had become puffed up by conquering the lords of Gau?a and Vanga that is modern Bengal. This powerful Gurjjara king who conquered countries so distant as Bengal has not been identified. He must have been ruling north of the MahÍ and threatened an invasion of MÁlwa by way of Dohad. He may have been either a Valabhi king or one of the BhinmÁl Gurjjaras, who, during the decline of the Valabhis, and with the help of their allies the ChÁva?Ás of A?ahilavÁ?a whose leader at this time was Yog RÁja (a.d.806–841), may have extended their dominion as far south as the MahÍ. As the Baroda plate (a.d.812) makes no mention of Amoghavarsha-Sarvva while the NavsÁrÍ plate (a.d.816) mentions him as the next king after Govinda III. it follows that Govinda III. died and Amoghavarsha succeeded between a.d.812 and 816 (S. 734 and 738). This supports Mr. Fleet’s conclusion, on the authority of Amoghavarsha’s Sirur inscription, that he came to the throne in Saka 736 (a.d.814). At first Amoghavarsha was unable to make head against the opposition of some of his relations and feudatories, supported, as noted above, by Karka’s father Indra. He seems to have owed his
Chapter XI.
The RÁsh?rakÚ?as, a.d.743–974.
Karka I. a.d.812–821. subsequent success to his cousin Karka whom an unpublished Surat grant and two later grants (S. 757 and S. 789, a.d.835 and 867) describe as establishing Amoghavarsha in his own place after conquering by the strength of his arm arrogant tributary RÁsh?rakÚ?as who becoming firmly allied to each other had occupied provinces according to their own will.

Karka’s Baroda plates (S. 734, a.d.812) record the grant of Baroda itself called Va?apadraka in the text. Baroda is easily identified by the mention of the surrounding villages of JambuvÁvikÁ the modern JÁmbuvÁda on the east, of Ankottaka the modern ÁkotÁ on the west, and of VagghÁchchha perhaps the modern VÁghodia on the north. The writer of the grant is mentioned as the great minister of peace and war NemÁditya son of Durgabha??a, and the DÚtaka or grantor is said to be RÁjaputra that is prince Dantivarmman apparently a son of Karka. The grantee is a BrÁhman originally of Valabhi.

Karka’s NavsÁrÍ grant (S. 738, a.d.816) is made from Khe?Á and records the gift of the village of SamÍpadraka in the country lying between the MahÍ and the NarbadÁ. The grantee is a South Indian BrÁhman from BÁdÁmi in BijÁpur, a man of learning popularly known as Pa??ita VallabharÁja because he was proficient in the fourteen VidyÁs. The DÚtaka of this grant is a South Indian bha?a or military officer named the illustrious Dro?amma.

Karka’s Surat grant (S. 743, a.d.821) is made from the royal camp on the bank of the VankikÁ apparently the VÁnki creek near BalsÁr. It records the grant of a field in AmbÁpÁtaka village near NÁgasÁrika (NavsÁrÍ) to a Jain temple at NÁgarikÁ, (NavsÁrÍ). The writer of the grant is the minister of war and peace NÁrÁyana son of Durgabha??a. As this is the first grant by a GujarÁt RÁsh?rakÚ?a of lands south of the TÁpti it may be inferred that in return for his support Amoghavarsha added to Karka’s territory the portion of the North Konkan which now forms GujarÁt south of the TÁpti.

Dantivarmman, Heir Apparent.According to Karka’s Baroda plate (S. 734, a.d.812) Karka had a son named Dantivarmman who is mentioned as the princely DÚtaka of the plate. The fact of being a DÚtaka implies that Dantivarmman was then of age. That Dantivarmman was a son of Karka is supported by AkÁlavarsha’s BagumrÁ plate (S. 810, a.d.888), where, though the plate is badly composed and the grammar is faulty, certain useful details are given regarding Dantivarmman who is clearly mentioned as the son of Karka. Karka had another son named Dhruva, who, according to three copperplates, succeeded to the throne. But as Dantivarmman’s son’s grant is dated Saka 810 or seventy-six years later than the Baroda plate some error seems to have crept into the genealogy of the plate. Neither Dantivarmman nor Dhruva seems to have succeeded their father as according to Govinda’s KÁvÍ grant (a.d.827) their uncle Govinda succeeded his brother Karka. The explanation may be that Dantivarmman died during his father’s lifetime, and that some years later, after a great yearning for a son,11 probably in Karka’s old age, a second
Chapter XI.
The RÁsh?rakÚ?as, a.d.743–974.
Dantivarmman, Heir Apparent. son Dhruva was born, during whose minority, after Karka’s death, Govinda appears to have temporarily occupied the throne.

Govinda, a.d.827–833.This Govinda, the brother and successor of Karka, was also called PrabhÚtavarsha. One plate of Govinda’s KÁvÍ grant is dated Saka 749 (a.d.827). It gives no details regarding Govinda. The grant is made from Broach and records the gift of a village12 to a temple of the Sun called JayÁditya in Kotipur near KÁpikÁ that is KÁvÍ thirty miles north of Broach. The writer of the grant is Yogesvara son of Avalokita and the DÚtaka or grantor was one Bha??a Kumuda. As it contains no reference to Govinda’s succession the plate favours the view that Govinda remained in power only during the minority of his nephew Dhruva.

Dhruva I. a.d.835–867.This Dhruva, who is also called Nirupama and DhÁrÁvarsha, is mentioned as ruler in a Baroda grant dated Saka 757 (a.d.835).13 He therefore probably came to the throne either on attaining his majority in the lifetime of his uncle and predecessor Govinda or after Govinda’s death. Dhruva’s Baroda grant (S. 757, a.d.835) is made from a place called SarvvamangalÁ near Khe?Á and records the gift of a village to a BrÁhman named Yoga14 of Badarasidhi apparently Borsad. The writer of the grant is mentioned as the minister of peace and war, NÁrÁya?a son of Durgabha??a, and the DÚtaka or grantor is the illustrious DevarÁja. Dhruva seems to have abandoned his father’s position of loyal feudatory to the main RÁsh?rakÚ?as. According to a copperplate dated Saka 832 (a.d.910) Vallabha that is Amoghavarsha, also called the illustrious great Skanda, sent an army and besieged and burned the Ka??hikÁ that is the coast tract between Bombay and Cambay. In the course of this campaign, according to Dhruva II.’s BagumrÁ grant (S. 789, a.d.867),15 Dhruva died on the field of battle covered with wounds while routing the army of Vallabha or Amoghavarsha. This statement is supported by a Kanheri cave inscription which shows that Amoghavarsha was still alive in Saka 799 (a.d.877).

AkÁlavarsha, a.d.867.Dhruva was succeeded by his son AkÁlavarsha also called Subhatun?ga. A verse in Dhruva II.’s BagumrÁ grant (S789, a.d.867) says that AkÁlavarsha established himself in the territory of his father, which, after Dhruva’s death in battle, had been overrun by the army of Vallabha and had been distracted by evil-minded followers and dependants.16

Dhruva II. a.d.867.AkÁlavarsha was succeeded by his son Dhruva II. also called DhÁrÁvarsha and Nirupama. Of Dhruva II. two copperplates remain the published BagumrÁ grant dated Saka 78917 (a.d.867) and an
Chapter XI.
The RÁsh?rakÚ?as, a.d.743–974.
Dhruva II. a.d.867. unpublished Baroda grant dated Saka 793 (a.d.871).18 Both plates record that Dhruva crushed certain intrigues among his relatives or bandhuvarga, and established himself firmly on the throne. Regarding the troubles at the beginning of his reign the BagumrÁ plate states that on one side Vallabha the head of the Dakhan RÁsh?rakÚ?as was still against him; on another side Dhruva had to face an army of Gurjjaras instigated by a member of his own family19; thirdly he was opposed by certain of his relatives or bÁndhavÁh?; and lastly he had to contend against the intrigues of a younger brother or anuja. It further appears from Dhruva II.’s BagumrÁ plate that he checked an inroad by a Mihira king with a powerful army. This Mihira king was probably a chief of the KÁthiÁvÁ?a Mehrs who on the downfall of the Valabhis spread their power across GujarÁt. In all these troubles the BagumrÁ grant notes that Dhruva was aided by a younger brother named GovindarÁja. This GovindarÁja is mentioned as appointed by Dhruva the DÚtaka of the grant.

Dhruva II.’s BagumrÁ (a.d.867) grant was made at Bh?igu-Kachchha or Broach after bathing in the NarbadÁ. It records the gift to a BrÁhman of the village of PÁrÁhanaka, probably the village of PalsÁna20 twelve miles south-east of BagumrÁ in the Balesar subdivision of the GÁikwÁr’s territory of Surat and NavsÁrÍ. Dhruva’s Baroda grant (a.d.871) was also made at Broach. It is a grant to the god KapÁlesvara MahÁdeva of the villages Konvalli and Nakkabhajja both mentioned as close to the south bank of the MahÍ. The facts that the BagumrÁ grant (a.d.867) transfers a village so far south as Balesar near NavsÁrÍ and that four years later the Baroda grant (a.d.871) mentions that Dhruva’s territory lay between Broach and the MahÍ seem to prove that between a.d.867 and 871 the portion of Dhruva’s kingdom south of Broach passed back into the hands of the main RÁsh?rakÚ?as.

AkÁlavarsha-K?ish?a, a.d.888.The next and last known GujarÁt RÁsh?rakÚ?a king is AkÁlavarsha-K?ish?a son of Dantivarmman. A grant of this king has been found in BagumrÁ dated Saka 810 (a.d.888).21 The composition of the grant is so bad and the genealogical verses after Karka are so confused that it seems unsafe to accept any of
Chapter XI.
The RÁsh?rakÚ?as, a.d.743–974.
AkÁlavarsha-K?ish?a, a.d.888. its details except its date which is clearly Saka 810 (a.d.888). It seems also improbable that the son of Dantivarmman who flourished in Saka 734 (a.d.812) could be reigning in Saka 810 (a.d.888) seventy-six years later. Still the sixty-three years’ reign of the contemporary MÁnyakhe?a RÁsh?rakÚ?a Amoghavarsha (S. 736–799, a.d.814–877) shows that this is not impossible.

The grant which is made from Anklesvar near Broach records the gift to two BrÁhmans of the village of Kavi?hasÁdhi the modern KosÁd four miles north-east of Surat, described as situated in the VariÁvi (the modern VariÁv two miles north of Surat) sub-division of 116 villages in the province of Konkan. The grant is said to have been written by the peace and war minister the illustrious Jajjaka son of Kaluka, the DÚtaka being the head officer (mahattamasarvÁdhikÁri) the BrÁhman Ollaiyaka.22 This grant seems to imply the recovery by the local dynasty of some portion of the disputed area to the south of the TÁpti. This recovery must have been a passing success. After Saka 810 (a.d.888) nothing is known of the GujarÁt RÁsh?rakÚ?as. Main Line Restored, a.d.888–974.And the re-establishment of the power of the RÁsh?rakÚ?as of MÁnyakhe?a of the main line in south GujarÁt in Saka 836 (a.d.914) is proved by two copperplates found in NavsÁrÍ which record the grant of villages near NavsÁrÍ, in what the text calls the LÁ?a country, by king Indra Nityam?varsha son of Jagattun?ga and grandson of K?ish?a AkÁlavarsha.23

That Amoghavarsha’s long reign lasted till Saka 799 (a.d.877) is clear from the Kanheri cave inscription already referred to. His reign can hardly have lasted much longer; about Saka 800 (a.d.878) may be taken to be its end.

K?ish?a AkÁlavarsha, a.d.888–914.Amoghavarsha was succeeded by his son K?ish?a also called AkÁlavarsha, both his names being the same as those of the GujarÁt RÁsh?rakÚ?a king of the same time (a.d.888).24 It has been noted above that, in consequence of the attempt of Karka’s son Dhruva I. (a.d.835–867) to establish his independence, Amoghavarsha’s relations with the GujarÁt RÁsh?rakÚ?as became extremely hostile and probably continued hostile till his death (a.d.877). That Amoghavarsha’s son K?ish?a kept up the hostilities is shown by Indra’s two NavsÁrÍ plates of Saka 836 (a.d.914) which mention his grandfather K?ish?a fighting with the roaring Gurjjara.25 Regarding this fight the late RÁsh?rakÚ?a KardÁ plate (S. 891, a.d.973) further says that K?ish?a’s enemies frightened by his exploits abandoned Khe?aka, that is Khe?Á, with its Ma??ala and its forepart that is the surrounding country. Probably this roaring Gurjjara or king of GujarÁt, was a northern ally called in by some RÁsh?rakÚ?a of the
Chapter XI.
The RÁsh?rakÚ?as, a.d.743–974.
K?ish?a AkÁlavarsha, a.d.888–914. GujarÁt branch, perhaps by K?ish?a’s namesake the donor of the a.d.888 BagumrÁ grant. The Dakhan K?ish?a seems to have triumphed over his GujarÁt namesake as henceforward South GujarÁt or LÁ?a was permanently included in the territory of the Dakhan RÁsh?rakÚ?as.26

At this time (a.d.910) a grant from Kapadvanj dated S. 832 (a.d.910) and published in Ep. Ind. I. 52ff. states that a mahÁsÁmanta or noble of K?ish?a AkÁlavarsha’s named Pracha??a, with his da??anÁyaka Chandragupta, was in charge of a sub-division of 750 villages in the Khe?Á district at Harshapura apparently Harsol near ParÁntij. The grant gives the name of Pracha??a’s family as BrÁhma-vaka (?) and states that the family gained its fortune or LakshmÍ by the prowess of the feet of AkÁlavarsha, showing that the members of the family drew their authority from AkÁlavarsha. The grant mentions four of Pracha??a’s ancestors, all of whom have non-GujarÁt KÁnarese-looking names. Though not independent rulers Pracha??a’s ancestors seem to have been high RÁsh?rakÚ?a officers. The first is called Suddha-kkumba?i, the second his son Dega?i, the third Dega?i’s son RÁjaham?sa, the fourth RÁjaham?sa’s son Dhavalappa the father of Pracha??a and Akkuka. The plate describes RÁjaham?sa as bringing back to his house its flying fortune as if he had regained lost authority. The plate describes Dhavalappa as killing the enemy in a moment and then giving to his lord the Ma??ala or kingdom which the combined enemy, desirous of glory, had taken. This apparently refers to AkÁlavarsha’s enemies abandoning Khe?aka with its Ma??ala as mentioned in the late RÁsh?rakÚ?a KardÁ plate (a.d.973). Dhavalappa is probably AkÁlavarsha’s general who fought and defeated the roaring Gurjjara, a success which may have led to Dhavalappa being placed in military charge of GujarÁt.27 The Kapadvanj (a.d.910) grant describes Dhavalappa’s son Pracha??a with the feudatory title ‘Who has obtained the five great words.’ Dr. BhagvÁnlÁl believed Pracha??a to be a mere epithet of Akkuka, and took Chandragupta to be another name of the same person, but the published text gives the facts as above stated. The grantee is a BrÁhman and the grant is of the village of VyÁghrÁsa, perhaps VÁgrÁ in Broach.28 The plate describes Akkuka as gaining glory fighting in the battle field. A rather unintelligible verse follows implying that at this time the Sella-VidyÁdharas, apparently the North Konkan SilÁhÁras (who traced their lineage from the VidyÁdharas) also helped AkÁlavarsha against his enemies,29 probably by driving them from South GujarÁt. The SilÁhÁra king at this time would be Jhanjha (a.d.916).

Chapter XI.
The RÁsh?rakÚ?as, a.d.743–974.
Indra Nityam?varsha, a.d.914. Indra Nityam?varsha, a.d.914.K?ish?a or AkÁlavarsha had a son named Jagattun?ga who does not appear to have come to the throne. Other plates show that he went to Chedi the modern Bundelkhand and remained there during his father’s lifetime. By LakshmÍ the daughter of the king of Chedi, Jagattun?ga had a son named Indra also called Nityam?varsha Ra??akandarpa. In both of Indra’s NavsÁrÍ copperplates (a.d.914) Indra is mentioned as PÁdÁnudhyÁta, Falling at the feet of, that is successor of, not his father but his grandfather AkÁlavarsha.30 One historical attribute of Indra in both the plates is that “he uprooted in a moment the Mehr,”31 apparently referring to some contemporary Mehr king of North KÁthiÁvÁ?a. Both the NavsÁrÍ plates of Saka 836 (a.d.914) note that the grants were made under peculiar conditions. The plates say that the donor Indra Nityam?varsha, with his capital at MÁnyakheta, had come to a place named Kuru??aka for the pa??abandha or investiture festival. It is curious that though MÁnyakhe?a is mentioned as the capital the king is described as having come to Kuru??aka for the investiture. Kuru??aka was apparently not a large town as the plates mention that it was given in grant.32 At his investiture Indra made great gifts. He weighed himself against gold or silver, and before leaving the scales he gave away Kuru??aka and other places, twenty and a half lÁkhs of dramma coins, and 400 villages previously granted but taken back by intervening kings. These details have an air of exaggeration. At the same time gifts of coins by lÁkhs are not improbable by so mighty a king as Indra and as to the villages the bulk of them had already been alienated. The fact of lavish grants is supported by the finding of these two plates of the same date recording grants of two different villages made on the same occasion, the language being the same, and also by a verse in the late RÁsh?rakÚ?a KardÁ plate (S. 894, a.d.972) where Indra is described as making numerous grants on copperplates and building many temples of Siva.33 The date of Indra’s grants (S. 836, a.d.914) is the date of his investiture and accession. This is probable as the latest known date of his grandfather K?ish?a is Saka 83334 (a.d.911) and we know that Indra’s father Jagattun?ga did not reign.35 UmvarÁ and Tenna, the villages granted in the two investiture plates, are described as situated near Kamma?ijja the modern KÁmlej in the LÁ?a province. They are probably the modern villages of Umra near SÁyan four miles west of KÁmlej, and of Tenna immediately to the west of BÁrdoli, which last is mentioned under the form VÁra?apallik as the eastern boundary village. Dhruva II.’s BagumrÁ plate (S. 789, a.d.867) mentions Tenna as granted
Chapter XI.
The RÁsh?rakÚ?as, a.d.743–974.
Indra Nityam?varsha, a.d.914. by Dhruva I. to a BrÁhman named Dhoddi the father of the Nennapa who is the grantee of Dhruva II.’s a.d.867 BagumrÁ grant, whose son Siddhabha??a is the grantee of Indra’s a.d.914 grant.36 The re-granting of so many villages points to the re-establishment of the main RÁsh?rakÚ?a power and the disappearance of the GujarÁt branch of the RÁsh?rakÚ?as.37

Though no materials remain for fixing how long after a.d.914 GujarÁt belonged to the MÁnyakhe?a RÁsh?rakÚ?as, they probably continued to hold it till their destruction in Saka 894 (a.d.972) by the Western ChÁlukya king Tailappa. This is the more likely as inscriptions show that till then the neighbours of GujarÁt, the North Konkan SilÁhÁras, acknowledged RÁsh?rakÚ?a supremacy.

It is therefore probable that GujarÁt passed to the conquering Tailappa as part of the RÁsh?rakÚ?a kingdom. Further, as noted below in Part II. Chapter II., it seems reasonable to suppose that about Saka 900 (a.d.978) Tailappa entrusted GujarÁt to his general BÁrappa or DvÁrappa, who fought with the Solan?ki MÚlarÁja of A?ahilavÁ?a (a.d.961–997).

[The text does not carry the question of the origin of the RÁsh?rakÚ?as beyond the point that, about the middle of the fifth century a.d., two tribes bearing the closely associated names RÁtho? and Ra??a, the leaders of both of which are known in Sanskrit as RÁsh?rakÚ?as, appeared the first in Upper India the second in the Bombay Kar?Á?ak, and that the traditions of both tribes seem to show they were either southerners or foreigners BrÁhmanised and included under the all-embracing term RÁjput. The Sanskrit form RÁsh?rakÚ?a may mean either leaders of the RÁsh?ra tribe or heads of the territorial division named rÁshtra. The closely related forms RÁsh?rapati and GrÁmakÚ?a occur (above page 82) in Valabhi inscriptions. And Mr. Fleet (KÁnarese Dynasties, 32) notices that RÁsh?rakÚ?a is used in the inscriptions of many dynasties as a title equivalent to RÁsh?rapati. Such a title might readily become a family name like that of the SÁhi JÁts of the PanjÁb or the MarÁthi surnames Patel, Nadkarni, and DesÁi. It may be noted that one of the MÁrwÁr traditions (RÁjputÁna Gazetteer, III. 246) connects the word RÁtho? with RÁsh?ra country making the original form RÁsh?ravara or World-blessing and referring to an early tribal guardian RÁsh?rasyena or the World-Falcon. It is therefore possible that the origin of both forms of the name, of RÁtho? as well as of RÁsh?rakÚ?a, is the title ruler of a district. At the same time in the case of the southern RÁsh?rakÚ?as the balance of evidence is in support of a tribal origin of the name. The Ra??as of Saundatti in Belgaum, apparently with justice, claim descent from the former RÁsh?rakÚ?a rulers (Belgaum Gazetteer, 355). Further that the RÁsh?rakÚ?as considered themselves to belong to the Ra??a tribe is shown by Indra Nityam?varsha (a.d.914)
Chapter XI.
The RÁsh?rakÚ?as, a.d.743–974. calling himself Ra??akandarpa the Love of the Ra??as. The result is thus in agreement with the view accepted in the text that RÁsh?rakÚ?a means leaders of the Ra??a tribe, the form RÁsh?ra being perhaps chosen because the leaders held the position of RÁsh?rakÚ?as or District Headmen. According to Dr. BhandÁrkar (Deccan History, 9) the tribal name Ra??a or RÁsh?ra enters into the still more famous Dakhan tribal name MaharÁtha or MahrÁtta. So far as present information goes both the Ra??as and the Great Ra??as are to be traced to the RÁstikas mentioned in number five of Asoka’s (b.c.245) GirnÁr edicts among the AparÁntas or westerners along with the Pete?ikas or people of Paithan about forty miles north-east of Ahmadnagar (KolhÁpur Gazetteer, 82). Whether the RÁstika of the edicts is like Pete?ika a purely local name and if so why a portion of the north Dakhan should be specially known as the country or RÁsh?ra are points that must remain open.38

The explanation that KÚ?a the second half of RÁsh?rakÚ?a, means chief, has been accepted in the text. This is probably correct. At the same time the rival theory deserves notice that the name RÁsh?rakÚ?a is formed from two tribal names KÚ?a representing the early widespread tribe allied to the Gonds known as Ko??as and Ko?s in the Central Provinces North Konkan and Delhi (ThÁna Gazetteer, XII. Part II. 414). In support of this view it may be noticed that Abhimanyu’s fifth century RÁsh?rakÚ?a inscription (J. Bo. Br. R. As. XVI. 92) refers to the Ko??as though as enemies not allies of the RÁsh?rakÚ?as. At the same time certain details in Abhimanyu’s grant favour an early RÁsh?rakÚ?a settlement in the Central Provinces, the probable head-quarters of the Ko??as. The grant is dated from MÁnapura and is made to Dakshi?a Siva of Pe?hapan?garaka which may be the Great Siva shrine in the MahÁdev hills in HoshangÁbÁd, as this shrine is under the management of a petty chief of a place called PagÁra, and as MÁnpur in the Vindhya hills is not far off. Against the tribal origin of the word KÚ?a is to be set the fact that the northern Ra??as are also called RÁsh?rakÚ?as though any connection between them and the Ko??a tribe seems unlikely.

The question remains were the southern Ra??as or RÁsh?rakÚ?as connected with the northern RÁtho?s or RÁsh?rakÚ?as. If so what was the nature of the connection and to what date does it belong. The fact that, while the later southern RÁsh?rakÚ?as
Chapter XI.
The RÁsh?rakÚ?as, a.d.743–974. call themselves YÁdavas of the Lunar race, the northerners claim descent either from Kusa the son of RÁma or from Hira?yakasipu would seem to prove no connection did not Abhimanyu’s fifth century grant show that in his time the southern RÁsh?rakÚ?as had not begun to claim YÁdava descent. That the MÁrwÁr RÁtho?s trace their name to the rÁht or spine of Indra (Tod’s Annals, II. 2), and in a closely similar fashion the RÁth or Rattu JÁts of the Sutlej (Ibbetson’s 1881 Census, page 236) explain their name as stronghanded, and the Ra??as of BijÁpur (BijÁpur Stat. Account, 145) trace their name to the KÁnarese ra??a right arm, may imply no closer connection than the common attempt to find a meaning for the name Ra??a in a suitable word of similar sound. A legend preserved in the RÁjputÁna Gazetteer (III. 246), but not noted by Tod, tells how Sevji, after (a.d.1139) the MusalmÁns drove his father Jaichand out of Kanauj (Tod’s Annals, I. 88) took Khergad from the Gehlots and went to the Kar?Á?ak. where the RÁtho?s had ruled before they came to Kanauj. From the Kar?Á?ak Sevji brought the image of the RÁhto? RÁsh?rasyena which is now in the temple of NÁgÁna in MevÁ?. The account quoted in the text from Tod (Annals, I. 88) that the RÁtho?s who rose to power in MÁrwÁr in the thirteenth century belonged to a royal family who had held Kanauj since the fifth century has not stood the test of recent inquiry. It is now known that about a.d.470 Kanauj was in the hands of the GuptÁs. That about a.d.600, according to the contemporary SrÍharshacharita it was ruled by the Maukhari GrahavarmÁn who was put to death by a MÁlwa chief and was succeeded by Harsha. About a.d.750, according to the RÁjÁtaran?ginÍ, Kanauj was held by YasovarmÁn, and, in the next century, as inscriptions prove by the family of Bhoja. It was not till about a.d.1050 that Kanauj was occupied by the GÁhadavÁla or GÁharwÁla family from whom the RÁtho?s of MÁrwÁr claim descent.39 If the legendary connection of the MÁrwÁr RÁtho?s with Kanauj must be dismissed can the MÁrwÁr RÁtho?s be a branch of the southern RÁsh?rakÚ?as who like the MarÁthÁs some 800 years later spread conquering northwards? Such a northern settlement of the southern RÁsh?rakÚ?as might be a consequence of the victories of the great RÁsh?rakÚ?a Dhruva who according to received opinions about a.d.790 conquered as far north as AllahÁbÁd. It is beyond question that southerners or Kar?Á?as were settled in North India between the seventh and the eleventh centuries. Still the latest information makes it improbable that Dhruva’s conquests extended further north than GujarÁt. Nor has any special connection been traced between the southern RÁsh?rakÚ?as and the middle-age settlements of southerners or Kar?Á?as in North India.40 Must therefore the North Indian tribe of RÁtho?s be admitted to have its origin
Chapter XI.
The RÁsh?rakÚ?as, a.d.743–974. as late as the twelfth century, and further is the North Indian name RÁtho? not tribal but derived from the title head of a district. Several considerations make both of these solutions unlikely if not impossible. First there is the remarkably widespread existence of the name RÁhtor, Ratha, or Ratti, and endless variations of these names, in almost all parts of the PanjÁb, among all castes from the BrÁhman to the Baluch, among all religions MusalmÁn, Sikh, Jain, and BrÁhmanic.41 No doubt the practice of a waning tribe adopting the name of a waxing tribe has always been common. No doubt also the fame of the name during the last 600 years must have tempted other classes to style themselves RÁtho?. Still it is to be noted: first that (Ibbetson, page 240) the RÁtho?s of the PanjÁb though widespread are not numerous: and second that the list of sub-caste-names has this merit that with a few exceptions the holders of the sub-name are not known by it but by some general or craft name. The evidence of these sub-caste or tribal names seems therefore to support the view that some very large section of the PanjÁb population represent an important tribe or nation of whom the least mixed remnant are perhaps the RÁthis or lower class RÁjputs of KÁngra and Chamba (Ibbetson, pages 219 and 251) and from some connection with whom the MÁrwÁr RÁtho?s of the thirteenth century may have taken their name. Among other traces of northern RÁsh?ras in the middle ages may be mentioned the twelfth and thirteenth century RÁsh?rakÚ?as of Badaun in the North-West Provinces (Kielhorn in Epigraphia Indica, I. 61 and 63) and (a.d.1150) in the KumÁrapÁla-Charitra (Tod’s Western India, 182) the mention of RÁsh?ra-desa near the SawÁlak hills. Among earlier and more doubtful references are the Aratrioi whom probably correctly (since at that time a.d.247 one main Roman trade route to Central Asia passed up the Indus) the author of the Periplus (McCrindle, 120) places between Abhiria or lower Sindh and Arachosia or south-east AfghanistÁn that is in north Sindh or south PanjÁb. Another earlier and still more doubtful reference is Pliny’s (a.d.77) OraturÆ (Hist. Nat. VI. 23) whom Vivien de St. Martin (Geog. Greque et Latine de l’Inde, 203) identifies with the RÁtho?s. The fact that while claiming descent from RÁma the MÁrwÁr RÁtho?s (Tod’s Annals, II. 2 and 5) preserved the legend that their founder was Yavanaswa from the northern city of Paralipur supports the view that the tribe to which they belonged was of non-Indian or Central Asian origin, and that this is the tribe of whom traces remain in the RÁthi RÁjputs of the KÁngra hill country and less purely in the widely spread RÁts, Rattas, and RÁtis of the PanjÁb plains. The examples among PanjÁb caste names Rora for Arora (Ibbetson’s 1881 Census, page 297), Her for Ahir (Ditto, 230–275), and Heri for Aheri (Ditto, 310) suggest that the PanjÁb RÁthors or Ra??as may be the ancient Ara??as whom the MahÁbhÁrata (Chap. VII. Verse 44. J. Bl. Soc. VI. Pt. I. 387 and Vivien de St. Martin Geog. Greque et Latine de l’Inde, 149) ranks with Prasthalas, Madras, and GandhÁras, PanjÁb and frontier tribes, whose identification with the BÁhikas (Kar?aparvan, 2063ff.) raises the probability of a common Central Asian origin. Remembering that the evidence (Kshatrapa Chapter, pages 22 and 33) favours the view that the Kshatrapa family who ruled the PanjÁb between b.c.70 and a.d.78 were of the same tribe as NahÁpana, and also that ShÁhi is so favourite a prefix in Samudra Gupta’s (a.d.380) list of KushÁn tribes, the suggestion may be offered that KshaharÁta is the earlier form of ShÁhara??a and is the tribe of foreigners afterwards known in the PanjÁb as Ara??as and of which traces survive in the present widespread tribal names RÁta, Ratta, Ratha, and RÁthor.]