THE VALABHIS
(A.D. 509-766.)
[Valeh Town, 1893.] The Valabhi dynasty, which succeeded the Guptas
in Gujarát and Káthiáváda, take their name from their capital in the
east of Káthiáváda 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 Valeh. It is impossible to say whether
the modern Valeh is a corruption of Valahi the Prakrit form of
the Sanskrit Valabhi or whether Valabhi is Sanskritised from a
local original Valeh. 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
Valeh now occupies the site of old Valabhi, [271] 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 Valeh 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 Lingas 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
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. 630] In 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 Dhruvapatu (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. [272]
[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, [273] up to
the ninth century all temples and religious buildings in Káthiáváda
and Gujarát were of brick and wood. [274]
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 Bhatárka 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 Bhatárka or the clerks and writers of the plates came from South
Gujarát. [275] 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 sandhivigrahádhikrita or the military head baládhikrita, 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 Bhatárka 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 samva for samvatsara 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 that the Valabhis adopted an era already
in use in Káthiáváda. No other era seems to have been in use in
Valabhi. Three inscriptions have their years dated expressly in
the Valabhi Samvat. The earliest of these in Bhadrakáli's temple
in Somnáth Pátan is of the time of Kumárapála (A.D. 1143-1174) the
Solanki ruler of Anahilaváda. It bears date Valabhi Samvat 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 Samvat 1320, Valabhi Samvat 945, and Simha Samvat 151. The
third inscription, in the same temple on the face of the pedestal of
an image of Krishna 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." [276]
[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) Chátabhata that is bhatas or sepoys for chitas or rogues, police
mounted and on foot, represent the modern police jamádárs haváldárs
and constables. The Kumárapála Charita mentions that Chátabhatas were
sent by Siddharája to apprehend the fugitive Kumárapála. One plate
records the grant of a village 'unenterable by chátabhatas.' [277]
(6) Dhruva fixed or permanent is the hereditary officer in charge
of the records and accounts of a village, the Taláti and Kulkarni 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. [278] 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 Káthiáváda.
(7) Adhikaranika means the chief judicial magistrate or judge of
a place.
(8) Dandapásika literally 'holding the fetters or noose of punishment,'
is used both of the head police officer and of the hangman or
executioner.
(9) Chauroddharanika 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 Káthiáváda 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 Bhogoddharanika 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 Káthiáváda 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. [279]
(16) Pratisaraka patrols night-guards or watchmen of fields and
villages. [280]
(17) Vishayapati division-lord probably corresponded to the present
subáh.
(18) Ráshtrapati the head of a district.
(19) Grámakúta 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 Áharaní 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. [281]
[Land Assessment.] The district of Kaira and the province of Káthiáváda
to which the Valabhi grants chiefly refer appear to have had separate
systems of land assessment Kaira by yield Káthiáváda by area. Under the
Káthiáváda 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 Káthiáváda grants mention the bhúpádávarta or land
pace. The Kaira system of assessment was by yield the unit being the
pitaka 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, Atimana-kedára, Khanda-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 Bhatárka the founder of the dynasty
who was a Saiva. Except Dhruvasena I. (A.D. 526) who is called
Paramabhágavata or the great Vaishnava and his brother and successor
Dharapatta 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. [282] The special holiness attached to the
Narbadá in Saivism and to its pebbles as lingas 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 linga 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-bhattáraka-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 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, Paramabhattáraka, and Paramesvara are ascribed
to Bappa is in agreement with the present use of Mahárája for all
priestly Bráhmans and recluses and of Bhattáraka 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. [283]
[Origin of the Valabhis.] The tribe or race of Bhatárka the founder
of the Valabhi dynasty is doubtful. None of the numerous Valabhi
copperplates mentions the race of the founder. The Chalukya and
Ráshtrakúta 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 Bhatárka belonged to some low or stranger tribe. Though
the evidence falls short of proof the probability seems strong that
Bhatárka 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 Bhatárka
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 Puránic heroes. That such ennobling
was not only possible but common is beyond question. Many so-called
Rájput families in Gujarát and Káthiáváda 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 Karna. Again two of the
Nándod Gurjjaras Dadda II. and Jayabhata II. helped the Valabhis
under circumstances which suggest that the bond of sympathy may have
been their common origin. The present chiefs of Nándod derive their
lineage from Karna 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. [284]
[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 Káthiáváda. 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 Bhatárka (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. [285] 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 Káthiáváda.
[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 Bhatárka. Of Senápati Bhatárka
neither copperplate nor inscription has been found. Certain coins
which General Cunningham Arch. Surv. Rept. IX. Pl. V. has ascribed
to Bhatárka have on the obverse a bust, as on the western coins of
Kumáragupta, and on the reverse the Saiva trident, and round the
trident the somewhat doubtful legend in Gupta characters:
Rájño Mahákshatri Paramádityabhakta Srí Sarvva-bhattárakasa.
Of the king the great Kshatri, great devotee of the sun, the
illustrious Sarvva-bhattáraka.
This Sarvva seems to have been a Ráshtrakúta 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 Bhattáraka and Bhatárka but because
the coiner was a king and the founder of the Valabhis a general.
[Senápati Bhatárka, A.D. 509-520 ?] Of the kingdom which Senápati
Bhatárka 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 Medh or Mehr, the Mehrs
being a tribe which at one time seem to have held sway over the
whole of Káthiáváda and which are still found in strength near the
Barda hills in the south-west of Káthiáváda. [286] 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
Káthiáváda 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 Húnas the Mehrs
may have joined the conquering armies of the Húnas and passing south
with the Húnas may have won a settlement in Káthiáváda as the Káthis
and Jhádejás settled about 300 years later. After Senápati Bhatárka's
conquests in the south of the Peninsula the Mehrs seem to have retired
to the north of Káthiáváda.
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. [287] Both the Gurjjaras
(A.D. 580) and the Chálukyas (A.D. 642) adopted the existing era of
the Traikútakas (A.D. 248-9) while as regards currency the practice
of continuing the existing type is by no means uncommon. [288] 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 Bhatárka) give a complete genealogy from Bhatárka
to Dharasena. Later copperplates omit all mention of any descendants
but those in the main line.
[Senápati's Sons.] Senápati Bhatárka had four sons, (1) Dharasena
(2) Dronasimha (3) Dhruvasena and (4) Dharapatta. 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 Dronasimha 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
Bhatárka. Probably he was the king to whom Bhatárka owed allegiance. It
is not clear where Dronasimha was installed king probably it was in
Káthiáváda from the south-east of which his father and elder brother
had driven back the Mehrs or Maitrakas. [289]
[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), [290] an unpublished
grant found in Junágadh dated Gupta 210 (A.D. 529), and the Valeh
grant dated Gupta 216 (A.D. 535). [291] One of Dhruvasena's attributes
Parama-bhattáraka-pádánudhyáta, Bowing at the feet of the great lord,
apparently applies to the same paramount sovereign who installed his
brother Dronasimha. The paramount lord can hardly be Dhruvasena's
father as his father is either called Bhatárka 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, Mahádandanáyaka [292] 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 Dronasimha 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 Bhatárka and his elder brothers
are described as 'great Máhesvaras' that is followers of Siva,
while Dhruvasena himself is called Paramabhágavata the great
Vaishnava. It is worthy of note, as stated in the A.D. 535 grant,
that his niece Duddá (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 Dharapatta or Dharapatta's son Guhasena
succeeded is doubtful. That Dharapatta 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 Guhasena favour the succession of
Dharapatta. 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 Dharapatta 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
Valeh dated A.D. 559 and 565 (G. 240 and 246) [293]: the third is
from Bhávnagar dated A.D. 567 (G. 248). [294] The inscription is on
an earthen pot found at Valeh and dated A.D. 566 (G. 247). [295] 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 Káthiáváda 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. [296] 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 Duddá. Though a Saivite Guhasena, like
most of his predecessors, tolerated and even encouraged Buddhism. His
minister of peace and war is named Skandabhata.
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), [297] the fourth dated A.D. 588 (G. 269),
[298] and the fifth dated A.D. 589 (G. 270). [299] 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. [300] 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 Samvat 477
(A.D. 420). This Máhátmya is comparatively modern and is not worthy
of much trust. Vikrama Samvat 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 Chandrabhatti; the Dútaka or causer of the gift in two of
the Buddhist grants is Bhatta 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). [301]
[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). [302] As
observed before, Dhruvasena is probably a Sanskritised form of the
popular but meaningless Dhruvapatta 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
Jayabhata 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-bhattáraka, 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.
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 Bhattikávya 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. [303] 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 Derabhata the son of Dharasena
IV.'s paternal grand-uncle. Derabhata 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, Derabhata'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
Pedhapadra in Vanthali, the modern Vanthali in the Navánagar State of
North Káthiáváda. 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 Skandabhata. [304] The Dútaka or causer of the gift was the
Pramátri 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 Derabhata 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) [305] and the third dated A.D. 671 (G. 352). [306]
He is called Parama-bhattáraka Great Lord, Mahárájádhirája Chief King
among Great Kings, and Paramesvara Great Ruler. These titles continue
to be applied to all 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 Haragana 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 Buddhabhatta, 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 Dhrúbhata (Sk. Dhruvabhata), 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.
A.D. 509.
(Gupta 190?).
|
------------------------------------------
| | | |
Dharasena I. Dronasimha. Dhruvasena I. Dharapatta.
A.D. 526. |
(Gupta 207). |
Guhasena
A.D. 559, 565, 567,
(Gupta 240, 246, 248).
|
Dharasena II.
A.D. 571, 588, 589
(Gupta 252, 269, 270).
|
----------------+-----------------
| |
Síláditya I. Kharagraha I.
or Dharmáditya I. |
A.D. 605, 609 (Gupta 286, 290). |
| ----------+-----
| | |
| Dharasena III. Dhruvasena II.
Derabhata. or Báláditya,
| A.D. 629 (Gupta 310).
------------------------------- |
| | | |
Síláditya II. Kharagraha II. Dhruvasena III. Dharasena IV.
| or Dharmáditya II. A.D. 651 (Gupta 332). A.D. 645, 649,
| A.D. 656 (Gupta 337). (Gupta 326, 330).
|
Síláditya III.
A.D. 671 (Gupta 352).
|
Síláditya IV.
A.D. 691, 698
(Gupta 372 & 379).
|
Síláditya V.
A.D. 722 (Gupta 403).
|
Síláditya VI.
A.D. 760 (Gupta 441).
|
Síláditya VII.
or Dhrúbhata,
A.D. 766 (Gupta 447).
[The Fall of Valabhi, A.D. 750-770.] Of the overthrow of Valabhi
many explanations have been offered. [307] 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) [308] is the Hindu account
preserved by Alberuni (A.D. 1030) [309] 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 that country as are found in places
wasted by an unexpected attack. [310] For this expedition against
Valabhi Alberuni gives no date. But as Mansúra was not founded till
A.D. 750 [311] 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. [312] 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. [313] 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, [314] a town Barada
on the south-west coast of Káthiáváda the identification of the raids
against Barada with the traditional expedition against Balaba though
perhaps probable cannot be considered certain. Further the statement
of the Sindh historians [315] 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. [316] 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. [317]
[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; [318] the tracing to Valabhi of the Rána of Udepur in
Mewád the head of the Sesodias or Gohils the most exalted of Hindu
families [319]; 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 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 Káthiáváda, the separateness though perhaps
dependence of Sauráshtra even in the time of Valabhi's greatest power,
[320] the rare mention of Valabhi in contemporary Gujarát grants,
[321] 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 Mewád in their Valabhi origin [322] 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 Káthiáváda
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 Káthiáváda 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 Káthiáváda and that the Válas of
Dhánk still hold the place of heads of the Válas of Káthiáváda: And
Third that both Sesodias and Válas trace their origin to Kanaksen
a second century North Indian immigrant into Káthiáváda combine to
raise the presumption that the Válas were in Káthiáváda before the
historical founding of Valabhi in A.D. 526 [323] 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
Káthiáváda before the establishment of Valabhi about A.D. 526 several
considerations bear out the correctness of the Rájput traditions
and the Jain records that the Gohils or Sesodias of Mewád came from
Bála or Valabhi in Káthiáváda. 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 Anahilaváda (A.D. 746). [324] It is
further in agreement with the establishment by the Gohil refugees
of a town Balli in Mewád; with the continuance as late as A.D. 968
(S. 1024) by the Sesodia chief of the Valabhi title Síláditya or Sail
[325]; and with the peculiar Valabhi blend of Sun and Siva worship
still to be found in Udepur. [326] 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. [327] Tod [328] 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). [329]
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 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 Mewád for about 800 years. [330]
[The Válas of Káthiáváda.] 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 Valeh until its conquest by Múla Rája Solankhi
in A.D. 950. [331] Though their bards favour the explanation of Vála
from the Gujaráti valvu return or the Persian válah [332] 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. [333]
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 Solankhi (A.D. 950). [334] 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. [335] That the Válas held central Káthiáváda is shown by
their possession of the old capital Vanthali nine miles south-west
of Junágadh and by (about A.D. 850) their transfer of that town to
the Chúdásamás. [336] Dhánk, about twenty-five miles north-west of
Junágadh, was apparently held by the Válas under the Jetwas when
(A.D. 800-1200?) Ghumli or Bhumli was the capital of south-west
Káthiáváda. According to Jetwa accounts the Válas were newcomers whom
the Jetwas allowed to settle at Dhánk. [337] But as the Jetwas are
not among the earliest settlers in Káthiáváda it seems more probable
that, like the Chúdásamás at Vanthali, the Jetwas found the Válas
in possession. The close connection of the Válas with the earlier
waves of Káthis is admitted. [338] Considering that the present (1881)
total of Káthiáváda Vála Rájputs is about 900 against about 9000 Vála
Káthis, the Válas, [339] 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 Tod [340]
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 Káthiáváda
(A.D. 470-480). The boast that Bhatárka, 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 Káthiáváda at an earlier date
than the Mers and Jetwas. That is, if the identification is correct,
the Válas and Káthis were in Káthiáváda 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 Junágadh. Since no trace of the Káthis
appears in Káthiáváda 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 Káthiáváda. Both Válas
and Káthis would then be northerners driven south from Multán and
South 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. [341]
[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 Káthiáváda. [342]
This tradition, which according to Tod [343] 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 Junágadh 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 Káthiáváda is likely to be able to
prove. Besides by the Válas Kanaksen is claimed as an ancestor by the
Chávadás of Okhámandal as the founder of Kanakapurí and as reigning in
Krishna's throne in Dwárká. [344]. In support of the form Kanaka for
Kanishka is the doubtful Kanaka-Sakas or Kanishka-Sakas of Varáhamihira
(A.D. 580). [345] The form Kanik is also used by Alberuni [346] for the
famous Vihára or monastery at Pesháwar of whose founder Kanak Alberuni
retails many widespread legends. Tod [347] says; 'If the traditional
date (A.D. 144) of Kanaksen's arrival in Káthiáváda 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 Káthiáváda. 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. [348]
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. [349]
[Mewád and the Persians.] One further point requires notice, the
traditional connection between Valabhi and the Ránás of Mewád with the
Sassanian kings of Persia (A.D. 250-650). In support of the tradition
Abul Fazl (A.D. 1590) says the Ránás of Mewád consider themselves
descendants of the Sassanian Naushirván (A.D. 531-579) and Tod quotes
fuller details from the Persian history Maaser-al-Umra. [350] No
evidence seems to support a direct connection with Naushirván. [351]
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. [352] 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 Procopius [353] 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 Káthiáváda and Mewád 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
Káthiáváda and Mewád Rájputs came to believe in some family connection
between their chiefs and the fireworshipping kings of Persia. [354]
[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. [355]
Among the tribes mentioned in Varáha-Mihira's sixth century (A.D. 580)
[356] 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, [357] 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 Harivamsa
(A.D. 350-500 ?) are not as Langlois supposed people then ruling in
Balkh but people then established in India. [358] Does it follow that
the Válhikas of the inscriptions and the Bálhikas of the Harivamsa
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? [359] Of the two Mahábhárata
forms Báhika and Bálhika recent scholars have preferred Bálhika with
the sense of people of Balkh or Baktria. [360] 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. [361]
This explanation does not remove the difficulty caused by references
to Báhikas and Bálhikas [362] in Pánini 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
if the form Bahlika occurs in Pánini or other earlier writers it is
a mistaken form due to some copyist's confusion with the later name
Bahlika. As used by Pánini 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. [363]
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. [364] 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. [365]
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. Martin [366]
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
remembering [367] Pánini's description of the Málavas and Kshudrakas
as two Báhika tribes of the North-West the fact that Pánini 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. [368]
As the Greeks sounded their kh (ch) as a spirant, the Indian Báhika
would strike them as almost the exact equivalent of their own word
bakchikos. More than one of Alexander's writers has curious references
to a Bacchic element in the Panjáb tribes. Arrian [369] 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 Curtius [370] the name of Father Bacchus was famous among
the people to the south of the Malloi. These references are vague. But
Strabo is definite. [371] 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. [372] 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. Strabo [373] gives two reasons why the Oxydrakai 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. [374]
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. [375] 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 Káthiáváda
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 Káthiáváda 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: [376] 'The great marriage festival of the Káthiáváda 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 Káthiáváda as to
be considered aboriginals their own tradition preserves the memory of
a former settlement in Márwár. [377] This tradition is supported by
the fact that the shrine of the family goddess of the Cutch Rabáris
is in Jodhpur, [378] and by the claim of the Cutch Bharváds that
their home is in the North-West Provinces. [379]