SANDHYAKARA NANDI. 
authoritative commentary on theMimamsa Sutras. 1 He says that the word Raja meant 
a Ksatriya engaged under government or in the army in Aryavartta, but in the 
Andhra country, others so engaged would be called a Raja. So gradually Raja 
and Ksatriya became synonymous, and so, many powerful invaders have been 
included in the meaning of the term Ksatriya. Under the circumstances it is 
no wonder that Palas when they had ruled for two or three generations should be 
regarded as Ksatriyas. But still Simhagiri in his Vyasa Purana imbedded in the 
Vallalacarita after recounting all the Ksatriyas in India in the 12th century, speaks 
of the Palas as the worst of Ksatriyas. 
Dharmapala is the second king of the Pala dynasty. It is not known when 
he began to reign and when his reign came to an end, 
Date of Dharmapala. , . . , , , /T . _. _ 
but it is known that the Khalimpur grant (J.A.S.B., 
1894, p. 39 et seq . ; and Nachrichten , Gottingen, 1903, p. 308) was made in the 32nd 
year of his reign, so he must have reigned at least 32 years or longer. But the ques- 
tion is, when did he reign ? In Vigrahapala’s Bhagalpur grant ( Ind . Ant., vol. xv, 
p. 304) there is a statement that he conquered Indra of Kanauj, but at the request 
of old Brahmins of Pancala he conferred the crown of Kanauj on Cakrayudha. So 
Cakrayudha was his contemporary. In a Gwaliar inscription {Nachrichten, Gottingen, 
1905, P- 300), while giving a history of the wars of Nagabhata, a Parihara king, it is 
stated that Nagabhata humbled Cakrayudha who was a dependant. It has been 
already said that Cakrayudha was a dependant of Dharmapala, so Nagabhata and 
Dharmapala belong to the same time. And we know from another inscription that 
Nagabhata was ruling in the year 815 A.D. ( Epi . Ind., vol. ix, p. 198). 
In an inscription not yet published, but extracts from which have been given by 
S. Bhandarkar in the Journal of the Bombay Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society. 
1906 (J.B.B.R.A.S., No. lxi, p. 116), are described the military operations of 
Govinda the third, the Rastrakuta king of Manyakheta. He led a victorious army 
from the south to the foot of the Himalayas. Dharma and Cakrayudha submitted to 
him, but he had to fight with Nagabhata. So all these four kings were contemporaries. 
Govinda’s certain dates range from 794 to 813, and his son’s dates range from 817 
to 877 A.D. Indra whom Dharma replaced was reigning in 783 A.D. (Kielhorn’s 
Uist of Southern Inscriptions, Epi. Ind., vol. viii). So the order of events is this. 
Indra reigning in 783 A.D , Indra replaced by Cakrayudha, Cakrayudha defeated by 
Nagabhata, Nagabhata defeated by Govinda. All these events must have taken place 
between 783 and 816 A.D. So Dharma’ s conquest of Kanauj must be placed 
somewhere between 783 and 816. 
But the Rastrakuta prince, Parabala, whose daughter Dharmapala married, con- 
structed a temple atPathari in 861 A.D. (Epi Ind., vol. ix, p. 248). This would appear 
rather inconsistent. But Parabala must have been a very old man when he 
constructed the temple, for young princes are not fond of such religious works. And it 
can be proved that Parabala and his father lived long. 
1 Bib]. Ind. edition, Adhyaya II, Pada II, 
