184 Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal. [June, 1909. 
ultimately prove itself to be the correct one, especially as the cor- 
rect reading is sapatna and not the meaningless sampanna as has 
been conclusively shown by the learned professor. No reasonable 
doubt need, therefore, be entertained as to Bhatarka and 
consequently the Valabhi princes being Maitrakas. And we 
have already seen that the Nagar Brahmanas of their copper- 
plates have been styled Mitras. It is difficult to avoid the con- 
clusion that Maitraka and Mitra denote one and the same tribe, 
just as we know that the Solankis of Gujarat have been called 
by one and the same poet once Chaulukyas and at another time 
Chulukyas.! We thus see that the Valabhi princes and the 
Nagar Brahmanas originally belonged to one ethnic stock ; and 
we need not, therefore, wonder that tradition connected the 
Mewar with the Valabhi family. We shall now proceed a 
step further. Dr. Bhagwanlal Indraji makes the following re- 
marks regarding the Maitraka tribe: ‘‘ Though these Maitrakas 
are mentioned in no other records from Surashtra there seems 
reason to identify the Maitrakas with the Mihiras the well-known 
tribe of Mehrs or Mers. In Sanskrit both mitra and mihira are 
names of the sun, and it wculd be quite in agreement with the 
practice of Sanskrit writers to use derivatives of the one for those 
of the other.’’ Itis, I believe, i ible to di tf this view, 
harasena and Dronasimha. This places Bhatarka circa 
and 5 
were, like the Giirjaras, a tribe allied with the Hanas, and en- 
tered India with them. Further, it is worthy of note that the 
Gijaras in Marwar at any rate accost each other and also address 
1 Somegvara, the court-poet and pri kis” i 
' priest of the Solankis’ (Vaghelds) 
aks of them as Chaulukyas in the Kirtikawmudi, and as Chulukeyas in 
e alow in Tejapaéla’s temple at Dilvadé, on Mount Aba. 
Ind. Ant., vol. v, p. 205, 5 Gupta Insers,, pp. 89 and 152, 
