208
THE INDIAN ANTIQUARY.
Many a-K he ta-Pura.” Now if Kä kala Deva Raja, belonging to a different branch of the same Yadava family, reigned concurrently with Amogh a V a r s h a (the 6th of the lists), as Prof. Wilson supposes, they could not have had the same city for their capital. Besides, in the Karda inscription there is nothing that would
justify the theory that the list of fourteen princes forms two branches of the Yadava family reigning concurrently with each other. The mention of the Chedi family of the Yadavas shows that the Mânya Kheta princes intermarried with the former.
Then, since Prof. Wilson made these remarks,
the date of Gov in d a Rāja, the third of the
above lists, has been discovered to be Saka 730 (A. D. 808) from a copper-plate grant found in the Nāsik district.” Now if Kākala Rāja Deva was contemporary with A kāla Var sha, the seventh of the above lists, then the
age of that Akāla Varsh a must be, the same as that of Kāk a la Rāja, viz., Saka 894, and the date of G ov in d a Rāja being
Šaka 730, leaves an interval of 164 years and three princes; and even allowing ten years, the portions of the reigns of Govinda Rāja and Akāla Varsha, included, we have still an average of 48 years for the reign of each of the inter vening princes, which is far too much. Lastly :—If two branches of the Yādavas had reigned concurrently, the Khārepātan inscrip tion would surely have contained some allusion to this, whereas the list on it is essentially the same as that contained in the Kardā plate, It seems clear therefore
[July 5, 1872.
Akāla Varsha. But if we identify Akāla Varsha with the 7th of the lists, the difference between
him and Govinda Rāja, whose date is given as
Saka 730, would be 134 years, a period that is too long for five princes. The Amogh a Varsha of this inscription is identical with No. 11 and Krishna Raja with No. 12 of the Karda plate. The date of Krishna Rāja Deva being then Šaka 867, and that of Kākala Raja, Saka 894, there is only a difference of 27 years, which is not too long for three princes. The objections to this identification are—1st, that the Kardà plate makes Krish na Rāja (the twelfth) not the son, but a brother, of his pre decessor Amogh a Varsha, whereas this in scription describes him as his son; and 2ndly, that the Khārepātan plate does not mention Krishna Rāja as Amogha Varsha's successor, but gives two princes, Govinda Rāja and Baddiga, as in tervening between them. The first objection can only be met by sup posing that the Kardà plate is not quite accurate in giving Krish n a Deva as the brother of Amogh a Varsha. This is not very extraordi nary, seeing that the genealogies of kings have often-times been at the mercy of the memory of Sanskrit writers.
As for the discrepancy between this inscrip tion and the Khārepātan plate, it is possible that Bad diga, the predecessor, according to the latter, of Krishna Rāja, might have borne the title of Amogha Varsha. For Baddiga is only the name of the king, not his title. And as No. 11 in the Karda plate is put down as
that the fourteen
Amogha Varsha, i.e., by the title, not by the
princes belonged to the same Yādava family
name of the King, it is possible that No. 11 of the Karda plate was the same as No. 11 of th Khārepātan one.f
that reigned at Mān ya-Kh et a, and that Kä kala Rāja, the fourteenth of the lists, and the grantor of the Kardà copper-plate grant,
-
W a r s h a the seventh,
The testimony of the Karda plate on the score of some Amogha Varsha being the predecessor of Krishna Deva is more trustworthy than the
Now there can be no doubt that the Krish na Dev a of the present inscription corresponds
discredit thrown on that fact by the list of the Khārepātan plate, first because the latter list was
with No. 12 of the Kardā plate. Krishna Rāja's title is A k à la War sha, and at first sight,
recorded in Saka 930 (A.D. 1008), or about 40 years after the reign of Kākala Raja, and sixty six years after the date of the present inscription;
did not live at the same time with A kala
Amogha Warsha the 6th and Akāla Varsha the 7th of the lists would seem to claim identifica
tion with the two princes of this inscription. The claim would also seem to be strengthened by the fact that both the Kardā and the Khāre pätan platesagree with it in describing Amogh a Warsha (the 6th of the lists) as the father of
- At Wan-Daidori, and published in No. X of the Asiatic
Society's Journal.
and secondly, because it occurs in a document relating to a dynasty subordinate to the Chālukyas, who were antagonistic to, and had
subverted the authority of the Manyakheta princes.
The Krishna Rāja Deva of this inscription
- The arrangement
on page 207 indicates another way of co-ordinating the lists.-ED,
