0^4 SANSCRIT INSCRIPTIONS 



celebrated teacher and Yati, Hemachandra, in which the epithet Mulardy- 

 ■diwayaja^ born in the race of Mula, is ascribed to Kumara Pala. Major Tod 

 seems to consider Chamunda as the founder; but, in either case, we may look 

 upon it as satisfactorily established, that the Chaulukrja dynasty of Guzerat, 

 commenced in the end of the tenth century. 



The inscription No. I. in which the list is given, furnishes no record of 

 the transactions of these princes, and we are indebted to Abulfazl, to Colonel 

 Wilford, and Major Tod, for almost all we know of them. According to the 

 former, MtTLA Raja was the grandson of Samant Sinh, by his daughter, whom 

 he had given in marriage to Sri Dhundhuka Chaulukya, a descendant of 

 the Rajas of Delhi. Mula Raja obtained the crown by conspiring against the 

 life of his grandfather. 



All the authorities concur in the deposure of Chamunda, by Mahmud. 

 The Persian writers state, that he was succeeded by a prince of a different 

 family, which is at variance with the Hindu accounts. Colonel Wilford consi- 

 ders Vallabha to be their Dehsalim, who was a member of the former royal 

 family. The inscription leaves it uncertain, what degree of relationship sub- 

 sisted been Chamunda and his successor, as the term Asmdt, from him, may 

 imply either genealogical or chronological descent : the epithet. Lord of the 

 Shore, (Tatinipati) is remarkable. According to Colonel Wilford, who follows 

 the Mohammedan writers, Chamunda was deposed in a. d. 1025, or fourteen 

 years later than the date given by Major Tod. 



DuRLABHA, according to Major Tod, abdicated the throne, but Abulfazl 

 refers this abdication to Kumara PXla. In place of the Kaladeva of the 

 inscription, Col. Wilford has a Visala, or Kerna Deva, who he considers to 

 be the prince mentioned on the Ldt of Firoz Shah, A. R. VII. but this seems to 

 be quite unfounded. The Visala Deva, of the Dehli inscription, is the son of 



1 



