CHAPTER V. 



The Decline of the Pal as. 



After the death of Vigrahapala III, his eldest son Mahlpala II ascended the 



throne of his ancestors. According to the author of Ramaearita, untoward things 



began to happen in this reign. 1 He did not act according to the advice of his 



ministers and was not well disposed towards his remaining brothers Surapala and 



Ramapala. He was told by the people that Ramapala was an 

 Accession of Mahipala II, -i 1 -n ■ n 1 j j • • a. ^ 



imprisonment of the Princes able Prmce > as wel1 as a popular and vigorous administrator, 



Ramapala and Surapala. and that he would kill him and take away his kingdom. So, 

 Bengal° n "* ; ° T ^ ^y * ow cunnin g> ne tried to kill him, and at last succeeded in 



confining him in a prison. 1 It appears that Mahipala's 

 younger brother Surapala was sent to prison at the same time as his youngest brother 

 Ramapala: — Aparena bhrattra Swapalena saha kastagaram karagrham mahattava- 

 nam raksanam yatra:' This Surapala was older than Ramapala, because the author 

 of the Ramaearita states, that Ramapala 's son succeeded to the throne, though Sura- 

 pala was Ramapala' s elder. 4 The brothers were reduced to very great straits while 

 in prison. s The author adds in another place that both brothers were sent to prison 

 because Mahipala had apprehensions of being dethroned by them. 6 About this time 

 Divvoka, a former servant, by cunning, took away a part of Ramapala's paternal 

 kingdom Varendri. 1 Mahlpala went to fight against the confederate rebels with the 



small force at his command and fell in battle. This hap- 



^ea^rMahTalrn 1 ' P ened while Ramapala was in prison.? 8 Elsewhere it is 



specified that the Kaivartta King killed Mahlpala." After 

 Mahipala's death Ramapala seems to have been set free, but driven out of the country, 

 as the author of Ramaearita states, that Ramapala became careless of his body and 

 mind, because he was kept out of his kingdom." 1 Nothing is known about the period 

 following the death of Mahipala II up to the accession of Ramapala. Surapala II 

 seems to have been recognized by the adherents of the Pala Princes as the successor 

 of Mahipala II, as he is mentioned by name in the Manahali grant of Madanapaladeva. 



The importance of this grant lies in the fact that it does not 



Accession of Surapala II, • { { k[ f ^ p -j dynasty f rom Qopala I to 



ignored by Sandhyakara & _ & & . 



Nandi but recorded in the Madanapala. Thus it might have omitted the names of 



Manahali grant of Madana- Gop51a m and Kumarapala, because these two Princes are 



pcLLcl. 



not ascendants of Madanapala and such names are usually 

 omitted in the genealogical part of a copperplate grant. If Surapala II had not 

 actually reigned his name would have surely been omitted from this grant. For a 



] Comm, on V 31, p. 29, Mem. A.S.B., Vol. III. * Comm. on V 37, SC. L.C, p. 31. 



S Comm. on V 33, L.C p. 29. * Comm. on V 28, L.C, p. 28. 8 Comm on V 35, L.C, p. 28. 



8 Comm. on V 36, L.C, p. 36. ^ Comm. on V 38, L.C, p. 31. 3 Comm. on V 31, L.C, p. 29. 



9 Comm. on V 29, L.C, p. 28. 10 Comm. on V 41, L.C, p. 32. 



