NEW INSCRIPTIONAL EVIDENCE for the HISTORY of the AULIKARAS of MANDASOR the Town of Mandasor (Ancient Dagapura), Headquarters Of
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
RICHARD SALOMON NEW INSCRIPTIONAL EVIDENCE FOR THE HISTORY OF THE AULIKARAS OF MANDASOR I. INTRODUCTION1 The town of Mandasor (ancient Dagapura), headquarters of the district of the same name in the western Malwa region of Madhya Pradesh, is well known from literature (e.g. Meghad~ta 50) as a center of culture in ancient times. Its importance is confirmed by the discovery of many inscriptions, particularly from the Gupta period, (see 'List of Inscriptions Cited') in and around the town, which prove that it was a major provincial outpost of the Gupta empire and later on the capital of an important if apparently short- lived independent kingdom under the Aulikara kings. Further epigraphical discoveries in recent years in and near Mandasor provide important new data about the complex history of this region. Particularly important is the Risthal inscription 2 (ins. 17), which has already been published twice, by K. V. Ramesh and S. P. Tewari with text and English translation in 1983 (see Bibliography; hereafter cited as RT) and by V. V. Mirashi, with text and summary but no translation, in 1984a (hereafter M). Its historical significance has also been discussed by Sircar in a brief note (Sircar 1984a), and some textual comments were proposed by Agrawal (1986a). This inscription was immediately recognized as a document of considerable importance for the history of western India in the early 6th century A.D. Especially when examined in connection with other new epigraphical discoveries, notably the Safijeli copper plates of the time of Toram~.a (Mehta and Thakkar, 1978; ins. 13) and the Mandasor inscription of Kumhravarman (Mirashi 1982, Sircar 1984b; ins. 22), the Risthal inscription clarifies the role of the Aulikara kings in the history of Malwa in the fifth and sixth centuries, as well as increasing our under- standing of the history and interrelationships of the contemporary dynasties of the Huns and Guptas. The new information it provides also suggests (as discussed below in Part IV) some significant methodological lessons concerning the use of epigraphical materials for the reconstruction of ancient Indian history. While the importance of the Risthal inscription has been duly recognized by the previous editors, its historical ramifications have not yet been fully worked out by them. Likewise their readings and interpretations can be lndo-lranian Journal 32 (1989), 1--36. 1989 by Kluwer Academic Publishers. 2 RICHARD SALOMON improved upon in certain respects. Most of the incorrect readings in RT were corrected by M, who has, however, also introduced some other wrong readings. The translation by RT is likewise subject to revision in several places, as also are some of the interpretations offered by M in the introduc- tory section of his article. I have therefore presented here a new reading, translation, and historical analysis of the Risthal inscription. The reading is based on the plates accompanying RT, M, and Agrawal (1986a), all of which were evidently prepared from different estampages. The estampage reproduced in RT is not reliable, as many of the vowel diacritics are unclear or wholly invisible. M's and Agrawal's plates are generally much more reliable, although in a few places the readings are clearer in RT. (Specific cases are noted in the text notes below.) Thus by comparing all three estampages, nearly all of the letters can be read with reasonable certainty. In the text presented below, letters whose readings are unclear but probable are indicated in parentheses. Letters which are conjecturally restored in damaged portions, as well as punctuation marks and verse Fig. 1. Risthal Inscription of the Time of Prakfi~adharman. .