86 R. D. BANERJI ON 



report to Ramapala that his paternal kingdom was free of intruders. 1 Sandhyakara 

 Nandi is silent about the events which followed this raid into Varendri. It appears 

 from the second chapter of his work that the effect of Sivaraja's success in Northern 

 Bengal was only temporary, because it became necessary for Ramapala to lead another 

 and much bigger army into Northern Bengal, accompanied by his principal feudatories. 

 One particular incident in the life of Ramapala has been totally left out by his 

 biographer, which is his enmity and wars with Devaraksita of Pithi. In the com- 

 mentary of the 8th verse of the second chapter of his work Sandhyakaranandi hints 

 that Mahana, the maternal uncle of Ramapala, recovered the kingdom, as the Boar 

 incarnation had recovered the earth in former days. There is no reference to the 

 enmity which Devaraksita, the Lord of Pithi and of Sindhu, bore towards Ramapala, 

 which has become known to us from the Sarnath inscription of Kumaradevi discovered 

 by Messrs. Marshall and Konow in 1906-7. 2 It is stated there, that Mahana, the 

 King of Ahga, the venerable maternal uncle of the Kings, conquered Devaraksita 

 in war, and maintained the glory of Ramapala, which rose in splendour, because the 

 obstruction caused by his force was removed : — 



Tarn jitva yudhi Devaraksitam-adhat Sri Ramapalasya. 



Yo laksmlm nirjita-vairi-rodhanataya dedlpyamanodayam. 



verse y. s 



The defeat of Devaraksita and Mahana is also mentioned in the Ramacarita, 

 where it is said that Mathana or Mahana defeated the King of Pithi from the back of 

 the elephant Vindhyamanikya. 4 The relationship between Mathanadeva and Rama- 

 pala has been explicitly mentioned in the commentary on verse 8, Chapter II of the 

 Ramacarita, so the references about Mathanadeva in the Sarnath inscription of 

 Kumaradevi are quite clear. He is called the maternal uncle of the King because he 

 was the maternal uncle of Ramapala, and perhaps also of Surapala and Mahlpala II 

 also. Besides these, the sons of his other sisters might have been reigning in other 

 parts of the country also. The mention of the defeat of Devaraksita by Mathana or 



Mahana is significant. The Sarnath inscription of Kumara- 

 Ma^nadeva^f Magadha. devi leaves no doubt about the fact that Mathana relieved 



Ramapala by defeating Devaraksita. Evidently Devaraksita 

 of Pithi had taken the part of one of Ramapala's rival claimants to the throne or 

 invaded the Pala dominions at a time when the Pala kings were weakened by the 

 defection of Northern Bengal, and so he expected to have an easy victory. The 

 materials at our disposal are quite insufficient for the narration of details, but the 

 Sarnath inscription of Kumaradevi proves, that though Mathana had humbled 

 Devaraksita at first, he had subsequently, owing to some unknown reason, given his 

 daughter SahkaradevI in marriage to him. ; ' The probable reason is that either Deva- 

 raksita succeeded in defeating Mathana and a peace was concluded after the marriage, 

 or that SahkaradevI was given to Devaraksita in order to draw him to the party of 

 Mathana and Ramapala. Whatever may be the fact of the case, we are sure that 



J Comm. on V 50, L.C. s Annual Rep. of A.S. of India, 1907-8, p. 76. 3 Ep. I"(l. . Vol. IX, 324-26. 

 * Mem. A.S.B.. Vol. Ill, p. 38, Comm. on V S. li Epi. Ind. Vol. IX, p. 322. 



