52 R. D. BANERJI ON 



The defeat inflicted upon the Gurjaras by the Rastrakuta Emperor had a very last- 

 ing effect. Govinda III made his nephew, the Mahasamantadhipati Karkaraja II 

 of the Gujarat Branch of the Rastrakuta family, a door-bar for the country of the 

 Gurjaras, which we learn from the verse of the Baroda grant of Karkaraja quoted 

 above. Besides the unpublished grant of Amoghavarsa I, we have further evidence 

 of the defeat of a Gurjara king by Govinda III. In the Radhanpur grant of 

 Govinda III it is stated that the Gurjara king fled on hearing of the approach 

 of Govinda III, as the rainy season flies away on the approach of autumn; — 



Sarndhay = a§n Siilmukham sva-samayam va(ba)nasanasy = opari prap'.am vard- 

 dhita-vam{bam)dhujlva-vibhavam padm-abhivrddhy-anvitam. 



Sannaksatram = itdiksya yam Sarad-rtum parjanyavad = Gurj aro nastah kv= api 

 bhayat = tatha na samaram svapne = pi pa$yed = yatha. — verse 15. ' 



The dream of having a capital at Kanauj , which had impelled more than one 

 Gurjara King to invade Northern India, was over. The Mahasimanta became such 

 an efficient door-bar that the Gurjaras were confined to the desert tracts of Rajputana 

 for more than two generations. Dharmmapala and Cakrayudha were left in undis- 

 puted possession of their territories. Further mention of this triangular struggle 

 between the Palas, Gurjaras and the Rastrakutas is to be found in two inscriptions 

 of Mahendrapala, edited by the late Dr. Kielhorn just before his death. In these 

 grants it is stated that Vahukadhavala, a feudatory of the Gurjara Emperor Mahen- 

 drapala, but a Calukya by descent, defeated a king named Dharmma. Now as 

 Vahukadhavala was the third in ascent from Balavarman, the contemporary of 

 Mahendrapala, it is probable that he was a contemporary of Nagabhata II, who, as 

 we have seen above, was the contemporary of Dharmmapala of Bengal. So it now 

 appears to be certain that the king Dharmma defeated by Vahukadhavala was no 

 other than Dharmmapala of Bengal, who was fighting for his lost prestige in Northern 

 India. In his article on the Una grant of Mahendrapala, Dr. Kielhorn says that as 

 Balavarman was a contemporary of Mahendrapala and lived in 893 a.d., so his 

 grandfather Vahukadhavala must be the contemporary of Bhoja I.* But this is 

 hardly possible as king Dharmmapala must have preceded Bhoja I to some extent at 

 any rate. As Balavarman, as well as his son , Avanivarman II, were the contemporaries 

 of Mahendrapala so it becomes certain that Balavarman was advanced in age when 

 Mahendrapala came to the throne. So Balavarman himself must be taken to be the 

 contemporary of the Emperor Bhoja I. Consequently Avanivarman I becomes the 

 contemporary of Ramabhadra and Vahukadhavala of Nagabhata II. This statement 

 is amply supported by the fact that Nagabhata II had a long war with Dharmmapala 

 of Bengal. Vahukadhavala is also said in Mahendrapala 's grants to have defeated 

 the Karnnata Army. As Dr. Kielhorn has suggested, the Karrmatas mentioned are 

 really Rastrakutas. Most probably Vahukadhavala defeated some portion of the 

 Rastrakuta forces during the Northern Indian campaign of Govinda III. 



We know from the Nilgund inscription of Amoghavarsa I, that some time during 



l Epi. Ind. Vol. VI, p. 244. 2 Epi. Ind., Vol. IX, p. 3. 



