beck FE CA ee Guhilots. 181 
[V.S.] 
to be transcending the bounds Ae sober speculation. The tradi- 
tional account given by Tod traces the descent of the Rana’s 
family from Siladitya, the last has of Valabhi, who was killed 
in the Muhammadan raid. This, however, does not stand the 
test of our present epigraphic knowledge. The last king of 
Valabhi was Ape VII, and the date we have for him is 
G.E. 447! = A.D. 766, before which he cannot be supposed to 
have been killed and his capital sacked by the Muhammadans. 
On the other hand, the earliest prince of the Guhilot dynasty, 
for whom a date has been obtained, is Sila, and his date is V.E. 
703 = A.D. 646, nearly one hundred and twenty years before 
the time of the last Valabhi ruler. This Guhilot Sila again was 
five generations removed from Guhadatta, the founder.’ This 
takes Guhadatta to circa 546 A.D. Although thus the state- 
ment that the Rana’s go was descended from il ee the 
This rege the Nagars maintain, fs to be met with in no other 
caste than their own.* Now, the following extracts from the 
copper-plate inscriptions of the Valabhi princes regarding the 
grantees, who were Brahmanas of Anandapura, are worthy of 
note : 
I. Alina plates of G. me ais 
sraaue fafa naw SIN wit HRCI aaMt sas aU qi 
fraraa _fraqeargataatier ' 
u. Alina (now Royal As. Soc.’s) plates of GE. 447. 
< a 
ee ek She BS atafa yey ey ifaanta ss Raa 
_ maeforgrewntere SEY: 
1 Gupta Inecrs., p. 173. , 
2 This i nacription was originally at SAmoli in the Bhamat 
district, Udaipur State, It was first discovered and saved from des- 
truction by Pandit re OR A 5 who eit now kept it in the Ajmer 
— 
his will be seen clearly from the dynastic list, which will be 
publisied i in my aie d paper. 
i] in the Bombay Gazetteer, vol. ix, pt. i, 
PP- ea 
§ Ind. Ant., vol. vii, p. 
§ [bid., p. 85; Gupta Towa p. 173, 
