158 
ANCIENT GEOGRAPHY OF KASHMIR. [Extra No. 2, 
That the ancient designation of the hill was Gopadri is shown 
beyond all doubt by an interesting passage of Kalhana’s Chronicle. It 
relates how the troops of the pretender Bhiksacara when thrown back 
from the city which they had endeavoured to enter after crossing the 
Mahasarit, i.e., from the south-east, took refuge on the ‘ Gopa hill’ or 
Gopadri. 1 There they were besieged by the royal troops until a diversion 
made by Bhik§ficara enable them to retreat to the higher hills in the 
east by the low neck which connects these with the Takht-i Sulaiman. 
Kalhana in the First Book of his Chronicle informs us that King 
Gopaditya built a shrine of S'iva Jyesthesvara on the Gopadri. 2 It is 
difficult not to connect this notice in some way with the extant temple 
which occupies so prominent a position on the summit of the hill. Gene¬ 
ral Cunningham, it is true, on the strength of an alleged tradition had 
proposed to identify this temple with the Jyestharudra shrine which 
Kalhana mentions as a foundation of Jalauka, Asoka’s son, in the 
ancient STiuagari. 3 But Prof. Biihler has already shown that there is 
no genuine tradition regarding the temple among the S'linagar 
Brahmans. 4 
It is certain that the superstructures of the present temple belong 
to a late period. 6 But the massive and high base on which this 
temple is raised, and certain parts of the structure are no (loubt of a far 
earlier date. These may well have formed part of a building which 
in Kalhana’s time,—rightly or wrongly, we have no means to judge,— 
was looked upon as a shrine of Jyesthesvara erected by King Gopaditya. 
There is no other ancient ruin ou the hill. Nor would the configuration 
of the latter have admitted at any other point but the summit, of the 
construction of a shrine of any dimensions. It is of interest to note 
that the tradition of Abu-l-Fazl’s time distinctly attributed the temple 
standing on ‘ Solomon’s hill ’ to the time of Gopaditya. 6 
Koh, S. of the Gumal Pass. The derivation from Samdhimat, referred to by Prof. 
Buhler, Report, p. 17, is not supported by any evidence whatever and unknown 
even to the most modern Mahatmyas. 
1 See Rajat. viii. 1104-10 note. That the Taklit-i-Sulaiman was called by its 
ancient name Gopadri, had been surmised already by Pt. Govind Kaul at the time 
of Prof. Biihler’s visit; see Report, p. 17. But the decisive evidence of this passage 
was not known to him. 
2 See i. 341 and note. 
a Rajat. i. 124 ; Anc. Geogr., p. 95 ; also above, § 90. 
* See Report, p. 17. 
6 See the remarks of Fergusson, History of Indian Archit., p. 282, against Gen. 
Cunningham’s and Major Cole’s assumptions who represented the extant temple as 
one of the earliest buildings in Kasmlr. 
6 Ain-UAkb., ii. p. 383. 
