Govindachandra (Gahadavala dynasty)

Govindachandra
Ashva-pati Nara-pati Gaja-pati Rajatrayadhipati
Gahadavala king
Reign c. 1114–1155 CE
Predecessor Madanapala
Successor Vijayachandra
Spouse Nayanakeli-devi, Gosalla-devi, Kumara-devi, and Vasanta-devi
Issue Asphotachandra, Rajyapala and Vijayachandra
Dynasty Gahadavala
Father Madanapala
Mother Ralhadevi

Govindachandra (IAST: Govindacandra, r. c. 1114–1155 CE) was an Indian king from the Gahadavala dynasty. He ruled the Antarvedi country in present-day Uttar Pradesh, including the major cities of Kanyakubja and Varanasi.

Govindachandra was the most powerful ruler of his dynasty. As a prince, he achieved military successes against the Ghaznavids and the Palas. As a sovereign, he defeated the Kalachuris of Tripuri, and annexed some of their territories.

The "Vishnu-Hari inscription" recording the construction of a temple during Govindachandra's reign was found among the Babri mosque debris. The authenticity of this inscription is controversial. According to some historians, it proves that Govindachandra's subordinate Anayachandra constructed a temple at the site believed to be Rama's birthplace; this temple was later destroyed and replaced with the Babri mosque by Muslim conquerors. Other historians allege that the Hindu activists planted the so-called Vishnu-Hari inscription at the Babri mosque site, and that the Govindachandra mentioned in it is a different person.

Early life

Govindachandra was born to the Gahadavala monarch Madanapala. The last extant inscription from Madanapala's reign is dated 1109 CE, and the first inscription from Govindachandra's reign is dated 1114 CE. Thus, Govindachandra must have ascended the throne sometime during 1109–1114 CE.[1]

His mother was probably Ralhadevi, who seems to have died sometime before 1141 CE. A 1141 CE grant of Govindachandra mentions that it was made on the occasion of the "day of the great queen Ralhadevi".[2]

As a prince

Repulsion of Ghaznavid invasion

Diwan-i-Salman, a chronicle by the contemporary Muslim historian Salman, states that the Muslim Ghaznavid ruler Mas'ud III invaded India. According to Salman, the Ghaznavid forces captured Malhi, the ruler of Kanauj (Kanyakubja). "Malhi" is generally identified with Govindachandra's father Madanapala. It appears that the Gahadavalas lost Kanyakubja somewhere between 1104 CE and 1105 CE, and Govindachandra led a war to recover it.[3]

The inscriptions issued by Govindachandra as a prince (Maharajaputra) indicate that he managed to restore the Gahadavala power in Kanyakubja and its surrounding area by 1109 CE. A peace treaty was probably concluded between the two parties, as indicated by the 1109 CE Rahin (or Rahan) inscription. According to this epigraph, prince Govindachandra fought repeatedly against "Hammira", and made him lay aside his enmity. Hammira is the Sanskrit form of the Arabic title "Amir", which was used by the Ghaznavids.[3] According to Salman, the Ghaznavids released Malhi only after the payment of a ransom.[3]

Subsequently, a Ghaznavid general appears to have launched an unsuccessful attack on the Gahadavala kingdom. Kṛtya-Kalpataru, written by Govindachandra's courtier Lakshmidhara, states that Govindachandra killed the Hammira.[4] This incident may have happened during the reign of Madanapala, or early during the reign of Govindachandra.[5] The undated Sarnath inscription of Govindachandra's queen Kumaradevi praises him for protecting Varanasi from the "wicked" Turushkas (Turkic people, that is, the Ghaznavids).[6]

Conflict with Ramapala

Sometime before 1109 CE, the Palas of eastern India invaded the Gahadavala kingdom, probably as a retaliation for Chandradeva's earlier invasion of their kingdom. The 1109 CE Rahin inscription boasts that even as a prince, Govindachandra subdued the elephants of Gauda (the Pala kingdom). The Kṛtya-Kalpataru declares that the mere sport of Govindachandra threatened the elephants of Gauda.[7]

This war appears to have ended with a peace treaty concluded through a matrimonial alliance.[7] Govindachandra married Kumaradevi, the niece of the Pala king Ramapala, and the daughter of a Pala feudatory.[2]

As a sovereign

Govindachandra was the most powerful king of his family. The Gahadavalas became the most prominent power of northern India as a result of his military conquests and diplomatic relations.[1]

The 1114 CE Pali inscription, which is the earliest extant inscription from Govindachandra's reign, states that he captured the "elephants of nine kingdoms" (nava-rajya-gaja). According to one theory, this term is a conventional literary device to announce the king's claim of being a leading monarch. Another interpretation is that it refers to Govindachandra's conquest of Kanyakubja from another ruler called Gadhipuradhipati Gopala.[1]

Successes against the Kalachuris

Govindachandra seems to have captured some territories from the Kalachuris, who were his southern neighbours. The Kalachuri king defeated by Govindachandra was probably Yashah-Karna or his successor Gaya-Karna.[8]

The Kalachuri king Yashah-Karna had granted the Karanda and Karandatalla villages to his royal perceptor (rajguru) Rudra-Shiva. A 1120 CE inscription of Govindachandra records the grant of these villages to Thakkura Vashishtha. In this inscription, Govindachandra assumed the traditional Kalachuri titles Ashva-pati Nara-pati Gaja-pati Rajatrayadhipati[9] (literally, "leader of three forces: the cavalry, the infantry and the elephant corps").[10] This imitation was presumably a way of celebrating his victory over the Kalachuris.[9] His descendants inherited these titles.[11]

Govindachandra's coins also corroborate the theory that he defeated the Kalachuris. These coins featured a seated goddess: this design had originally been introduced by the Kalachuri king Gangeya-deva. Govindachandra must have adapted this style after his victory over the Kalachuris.[8]

The identity of the Karanda and Karandatalla villages is not certain, so it is difficult to determine which part of the Kalachuri kingdom was annexed by Govindachandra.[8] A 1237 CE inscription from the reign of a Gahadavala prince named Adakkamalla was found in the Nagod State (present-day Satna district, Madhya Pradesh). Adakkamalla ruled the area even after the end of the imperial Gahadavala branch; Govindachandra might have appointed his ancestor as a governor of the newly conquered Kalachuri territory.[12] If this assumption is true, the territory annexed by Govindachandra must have been located in the region between the Yamuna and the Sone rivers.[8]

Conflict with Madanapala

Gorakhpur, Patna and Munger (map of Bihar)

Govindachandra's marriage to the Pala princess Kumaradevi had secured the eastern frontier of the Gahadavala kingdom. However, there seems to have been some kind of conflict between the two kingdoms during the 1140s. The 1124 CE Maner inscription of Govindachandra was found in the present-day Patna district. However, the Pala king Madanapala (not to be confused with Govindachandra's father) is known to have gained control of this area sometime during 1145–1147 CE. The 1146 Lar inscription of Govindachandra records the grants of villages located in present-day Gorakhpur district. However, it was issued at Mudgagiri (modern Munger), which is located to the east of Patna and Gorakhpur. Inscriptional evidence proves that Munger later came under the control of Madanapala.[13]

These evidences cannot be interpreted with certainty, but it is possible that Govindachandra invaded the Pala kingdom sometime around 1146 CE, and advanced up to Munger, where he issued the 1146 CE inscription. Madanapala repulsed this invasion, and chased the Gahadavala army up to Patna before returning to his own kingdom. Another possibility is that Madanapala invaded the Gahadavala kingdom and advanced up to Patna. Govindachandra repulsed this invasion, and advanced up to Munger in the enemy's pursuit, before turning back.[14]

An inscription of Madanapala's war-and-peace minister Bhimadeva was discovered at Rajghat in Varanasi. Based on this, D. C. Sircar theorized that the Palas may have occupied Varanasi (which was the seat of the Gahadavala power) at one time.[15]

Other possible conflicts

Claim of Dasharna conquest

Nayachandra's play Rambha-Manjari-Nataka states that Jayachandra was born on the day his father Govindachandra conquered Dasharna. This territory was a part of the Paramara kingdom of Malwa. The contemporary Paramara kings Naravarman and Yashovarman were weak rulers, and the Gahadavalas may have taken advantage of this opportunity. The Chandelas, whose territory was located between the Gahadavala and Paramara kingdoms, were friendly with Govindachandra, and may have allowed him to pass through their kingdom.[16]

However, Nayachandra's claim is not supported by any other literary or epigraphic evidence.[17] Therefore, the historical accuracy of this claim is doubtful.[18]

Second battle against the Ghaznavids

An inscription of Govindachandra's queen Kumaradevi states that he had been sent by Hara (Shiva) to protect the holy city of Varanasi from the Turushka (Turkic people, that is, the Ghaznavids). This has led to speculation that Govindachandra fought against the Ghaznavids as a sovereign as well. However, there is no record of any Ghaznavid army advancing up to Varanasi. It is possible that Bahram Shah or his son Khusrau Shah may have fought with a feudatory of Govindachandra at the kingdom's north-western border. The praise bestowed upon Govindachandra for protecting Varanasi may be a reference to his general vigilance against the potential Ghaznavid attacks.[19]

Diplomatic relations

Govindachandra's marriage to the Pala princess Kumaradevi had led to peaceful relations between the two kingdoms for several years.[20]

Govindachandra's relations with the Chandela king Madanavarman also appear to have been friendly. The Mau inscription from Madanavarman's reign states that the king of Kashi (Varanasi) remained friendly to him. This king of Kashi can be identified with Govindachandra.[21] Although the Gahadavala records do not mention any friendship between the two kings, it is quite plausible, given that the Kalachuris of Tripuri were their common enemies.[22]

Jajjaladeva, a ruler of the Tummana Kalachuri branch, also maintained friendly relations with Govindachandra. His 1114 CE Ratanpur inscription states that he had been honoured by the king of Kanyakubja.[23]

An inscription detailing the Gahadavala genealogy from Yashovigraha to Chandradeva has been found at Gangaikonda Cholapuram in the Chola territory. It ends abruptly, so the name of its issuer is not certain, but it appears to have been issued during the reign of either Madanavarman or Govindachandra.[22] Historian H. C. Ray speculated that the Gahadavalas and the Cholas may have developed friendly relations, because they both shared the Kalachuris as a common enemy. As a result, a Gahadavala prince may have visited Gangaikonda Cholapuram and issued the inscription. The 1119 CE Set-Mahet inscription states that Govindachandra made some grants at the request of a monk from the Chola kingdom. This further corroborates the theory of friendly relations between the two kingdoms.[24]

According to Rajatarangini, the contemporary Kashmiri king Jayasimha made the rulers of Kanyakubja and other kingdoms "proud of his friendship". Shrikantha-Charita by Jayasimha's courtier Mankha states that Govindachandra sent one Suhala to attend an assembly of scholars held by the Kashmiri minister Alamkara. These evidences point to friendly diplomatic relations between the Gahadavalas and the rulers of Kashmir.[25]

Extent of the kingdom

Find spots of inscriptions from Govindachandra's reign (map of India)

A number of inscriptions from Govindachandra's reign are available. The find spots of these inscriptions and the locations mentioned in them provide an idea of the territorial extent of his kingdom.[26]

In the north-east, his kingdom was probably bounded by the Burhi Gandak River.[26] The northern boundary of his kingdom is debatable. His grandfather Chandradeva ruled a place called Indrasthaniyaka; some scholars identify it as the modern Delhi. Based on this identification, historian Roma Niyogi theorizes that Tomaras of Delhi may have served as Govindachandra's feudatories in the north-west.[17] However, P. C. Roy is critical of this theory, as no historical records establish the Gahadavala presence in Delhi. He points out that Rahin (or Rahan) village in Etawah district is the furthest point in the north-west where a Gahadavala inscription has been discovered. Therefore, he believes that Indrasthaniyaka is not same as Delhi.[27]

The Rashtrakutas of Kannauj were Govindachandra's feudatories.[28] The Yamuna River probably formed the southern boundary of his father's kingdom, and Govindachandra appears to have annexed some Kalachuri territories to the south of Yamuna.[12]

In the east, Govindachandra controlled a part of the present-day Bihar. His easternmost inscription has been found at Maner in Patna district. His 1146 CE Lar inscription mentions that it was issued from Mudgagiri (modern Munger), which is located further east. However, the Pala inscriptions in this area indicate that he lost this territory by the end of his reign.[26] Nayachandra's play Rambha-Manjari-Nataka claims that he conquered Dasharna (Malwa) in the west, but this claim is not supported by any other evidence.[17]

Family

Four queens of Govindachandra are known: Nayanakeli-devi, Gosalla-devi, Kumara-devi, and Vasanta-devi. The first two bore the title of the chief queen (patta-mahadevi), probably one after another. The 1119 Kamauli grant of Govindachandra records a gift by the chief queen Nayanakeli. The later 1151 CE Bangarmau grant records a gift by the chief queen Gosalla-devi.[29]

An undated Sarnath inscription of Kumaradevi indicates that she was a Buddhist.[29] Her father Devarakshita, a member of the Chikkora dynasty of Pithi, was a Pala vassal. Her mother Shankaradevi was a daughter of the Rashtrakuta Mathana-deva of Anga, who was also a Pala feudatory.[2] Vasantadevi was also a Mahayana Buddhist, as attested by a text called Ashta-Sahasrika-Prajna-Paramita.[29]

Three sons of Govindachandra are known: Asphota-chandra, Rajya-pala and Vijaya-chandra. Asphotachandra bore the title Yuvaraja (heir apparent), as attested by 1134 CE inscription. Rajyapala bore the title Maharajaputra (prince), as attested by the 1143 CE Gagaha inscription and the 1146 CE Varanasi inscription. But the actual successor of Govindachandra was Vijayachandra, whose first inscription is dated 1168 CE. It is not known why Vijayachandra ascended the throne when Asphotachandra was the yuvaraja. It is possible that the other two princes died during Govindachandra's lifetime, or that Vijayachandra defeated them in a war of succession, but there is no concrete evidence for either of these hypotheses.[30]

The last extant inscription of Govindachandra is dated 1154 CE, and the earliest available inscription of his successor Vijayachandra is dated 1168 CE. Such a long gap is unusual for the dynasty, and may indicate troubled times arising out of an external invasion or a war of succession after Govindachandra's death.[31]

Cultural activities

According to the Gahadavala inscriptions, Govindachandra appreciated and patronized different branches of learning (as indicated by his title Vividha-vidya-vichara-vachaspati).[2] Govindachandra's courtier Lakshmidhara composed Kṛtya-Kalpataru at the king's request. Lakshmidhara was a scholar, a warrior and a diplomat.[25]

Coinage

A coin of Govindachandra

Nearly 1,000 gold coins of Govindachandra have been discovered, besides some silver and copper coins.[32] A hoard of 800 of his gold coins was discovered near Nanpara in 1887, during railway construction work.[33][34][35] The coins are made of impure gold, and contain a large mixture of silver.[36] Most of the other coins have been discovered at various parts of present-day Uttar Pradesh and Bihar.[32]

Govindachandra's coins feature a seated goddess. Originally used by the Kalachuris of Tripuri, this style was probably adapted by Govindachandra to celebrate his victory over the Kalachuris. One side of the coins features the king's name ("Shrimad-Govindachandra-deva") in three lines, usually followed by a trishula. The other side features a four-armed seated goddess, identified with Lakshmi.[37]

After defeating Govindachandra's grandson Jayachandra, Muhammad of Ghor also adapted this style, and issued coins featuring the seated goddess.[38]

Inscriptions

The following inscriptions issued by Govindachandra, or issued by others during his reign, have been discovered:[39]

Date of issue (CE) Find spot Issued at Issued by Purpose
25 December 1104 Etawah district: Bashai (Basahi) Asatika on Yamuna Govindachandra (as a prince) Village grant
24 October 1105 Varanasi district: Kamauli Vishnupura on Ganga Govindachandra (as a prince) Village grant
1114 Gorakhpur district: Pali Varanasi Govindachandra Land grant
15 October 1114 Varanasi district: Kamauli Varanasi Govindachandra Village grant
11 January 1115 Varanasi district: Varanasi (Near Bhadaini temple) Varanasi Govindachandra House grant
3 March 1116 Etawah district: Bashai (or Basahi) Unknown Govindachandra Village grant
7 April 1116 Varanasi district: Kamauli Varanasi Govindachandra Village grant
29 August 1117 Varanasi district: Kamauli Varanasi Govindachandra Village grant
28 January 1119 Varanasi district: Kamauli Varanasi Govindachandra Village grant
11 May 1119 Varanasi district: Kamauli Varanasi Queen Nayanakelidevi Village grant
October 1118 – 1119 Varanasi district: Kamauli Varanasi Govindachandra Village grant
1119–1120 Shravasti district: Set-Mahet Unknown Vidyadhara, a subject of Govindachandra's feudatory Madana Establishment of a Buddhist sangha
1119–1120 Siwan district: Don Buzurg Mamdalia on Ganga Govindachandra Village grant
1120 Unknown Unknown Govindachandra Village grant
1120 Kanpur Nagar district: Chhatarpur Varanasi Govindachandra Village grant
21 July 1122 Varanasi district: Kamauli Varanasi: Kapala-Mochana Ghatta Govindachandra Village grant
9 September 1124 Unknown Unknown Ralhana-Devi Village grant
1124 Patna district: Maner Kanyakubja Govindachandra Village grant
1126 Varanasi district: Kamauli Unknown place on Ganga Govindachandra Village grant
1127 Unknown Ishapratishthana on Ganga Govindachandra Village grant
1127 Varanasi district: Kamauli Varanasi Govindachandra Village grant
1127 Pratapgarh district: Tala Prayaga Govindachandra Village grant
1128 Varanasi district: Varanasi Varanasi Govindachandra Village grant
1128–29 Shravasti district: Set-Mahet Varanasi Govindachandra Village grants to Buddhist monks
1129 Unknown (from Raja of Itaunja) Varanasi Govindachandra Village grant
16 November 1130 Varanasi district: Varanasi (Near Bhadaini temple) Varanasi Govindachandra Village grant
21 November 1130 Sitapur district: Raiwan Varanasi (Adikeshava Ghatta) Govindachandra Village grant
6 November 1131 Fatehpur district: Ren Varanasi (Adikeshava Ghatta) Govindachandra Village grant
29 April 1132 Gorakhpur district: Pali Varanasi (Svapnashvara Ghatta) Ralhana-Devi Land grant
5 August 1133 Varanasi district: Kamauli Govindavatika Govindachandra Village grant
30 March 1134 Varanasi district: Varanasi Varanasi Asphotachandra (prince) Village grant
28 August 1134 Varanasi district: Kamauli Varanasi (Avimukta-Kshetra Ghatta) Vatsaraja of Shingara family (feudatory) Village grant
1139 Varanasi district: Kamauli Varanasi Govindachandra Village grant during lunar eclipse
1140 Varanasi district: Varanasi (Rajghat) Varanasi (Adikeshava Ghatta) Govindachandra Village grant
23 February 1141 Varanasi district: Kamauli Varanasi (Vedeshvara Ghatta) Govindachandra Village grant
23 February 1141 Varanasi district: Kamauli Varanasi (Avimukta-Kshetra Ghatta) Govindachandra Village grant
27 February 1141 Gorakhpur district: Gagaha Gumjhada-grama on Triveni river Rajyapala-deva (prince) Estate grant
16 July 1144 Varanasi district: Kamauli Varanasi Govindachandra Village grant
19 April 1143 Jaunpur district: Machhali Shahar Varanasi Govindachandra Village grant
14 April 1146 Deoria district: Lar Mudgagiri Govindachandra Village grant
25 December 1146 Varanasi district: Varanasi (Near Bhadaini temple) Rajyapalapura on Ganga Rajyapala-deva (prince) Village grant
25 December 1150 Varanasi district: Varanasi (Near Bhadaini temple) Varanasi: Koti-tirtha Govindachandra Village grant
6 November 1150 Unnao district: Bangarmau Varanasi: Lolarka temple Gosaladevi (queen) Village grant
1151 Azamgarh district: Hathia-Dah (near Deogaon) Unknown Bellana Thakura (officer of Queen Gosaladevi) Excavation of a tank
10 August 1154 Varanasi district: Kamauli Varanasi Govindachandra Village grant
Undated Varanasi district: Sarnath Unknown Kumaradevi (queen) Restoration of a Buddhist shrine

Babri mosque inscription

In 1992, a group of Hindu activists demolished the Babri mosque at Ayodhya. They had long claimed that the Muslim rulers had constructed it after destroying a temple marking the birthplace of the Hindu deity Rama (an incarnation of Vishnu). An inscription referring to the reign of Govindachandra was reportedly discovered from the debris of the mosque.[40] This inscription, referred to as the "Vishnu-Hari inscription", records the construction of a temple by Govindachandra's subordinate Anayachandra.[41] Its date portion is missing, and its authenticity has been a matter of controversy.[40]

The Vishnu-Hari inscription contains 20 lines with several Sanskrit language verses. It is written in Nagari script, inscribed on a 1.10 m x 0.56 m sandstone.[42] It is said to have been embedded in the lower portion of a wall of the demolished mosque.[43] The verse 5 of the inscription states that it was placed at the birthplace of a hero, and the verse 22 records the construction of a Vishnu-Hari temple by Govindachandra's subordinate Anayachandra.[44]

Those who believe that a temple existed at Babri mosque site consider the inscription as an evidence of their claim. Others have claimed that the inscription was planted at Ayodhya by Hindu activists.[45]

Summary of the verses

The following is a verse-by-verse summary of the inscription according to a translation done by the Sanskrit scholars Govind Jha and Bhavanath Jha, based on the readings of K. V. Ramesh and T. P. Verma.[46]

Identification with Treta Ka Thakur inscription

According to some scholars such as Irfan Habib, the Vishnu-Hari inscription was brought to Ayodhya from the Lucknown State Museum, and planted at the Babri mosque site. This theory states that the Vishnu-Hari inscription is actually the Treta Ka Thakur inscription, which was found by Alois Anton Führer in 19th century.[57]

The Treta Ka Thakur inscription is mentioned as "Inscription No XLIV" in Führer's 1899 book The Sharqi Architecture of Jaunpur (1899). It was discovered in the ruins of the Treta Ka Thakur mosque in Ayodhya. Führer describes it as a 20-line sandstone inscription, broken off at both the ends, and also fragmented into two parts at the middle. According to his book, it was dated 1184 CE (1241 VS), and was issued during the reign of Jayachandra (a grandson of Govindachandra). Führer mentions that the inscription praises Jayachandra for building a Vishnu temple. According to Führer, the sandstone slab containing the inscription originally belonged to the Vishnu temple, and was later used for building the Treta Ka Thakur mosque commissioned by the Mughal emperor Aurangzeb.[58] (The term Treta Ka Thakur literally means "the lord of Treta Yuga", that is, Rama.[59]) Führer's book states that inscription was kept at the Faizabad Local Museum.[58] The inscription was never published in the Epigraphia Indica or any other text.[59]

Führer's Treta Ka Thakur inscription is said to have been transferred from Faizabad to the Lucknow Museum, where it was marked as Inscription No. 53.4.[59] The 1950-54 Annual Report of the Lucknow Museum describes Inscription No. 53.4 as a 20-line sandstone inscription measuring 2'4" x 10.5".[60] According to the Museum records, the inscription was obtained from Faizabad in 1953. The Lucknow Museum register dates the inscription No. 53.4 to the 10th century, while Führer's inscription was dated 1184 CE. According to the Lucknow Museum officials, the registry entries were based "general nature of the inscription", not on its actual reading. This explains the discrepancy in the dates.[61]

After the mosque's demolition, allegations arose that the Vishnu-Hari inscription was actually Führer's inscription: it had been brought to Ayodhya from the Lucknow Museum, where it had been replaced with another inscription. In 1994, Varanasi-based scholar Jahnavi Shekhar Roy visited the Lucknow State Museum, and made a copy of the purported Inscription No. 53.4 kept there. He concluded that it was not the inscription described in Führer's 1899 book. He wrote that the Inscription No. 53.4 at Lucknow did not mention a temple or the king Jayachandra. Its two ends were not missing, unlike Führer's inscription, which is described as "broken off at either end". Roy also described the Inscription No. 53.4 as containing only 10 lines.[62]

In 2003, scholar Pushpa Prasad wrote an article describing the Lucknow Museum's Inscription No. 53.4 in Proceedings Of The Indian History Congress, 2003. Citing palaeographic grounds, she claimed that its two fragments originate from two different epigraphs: the top one records a Gahadavala land grant, and the bottom one mentions a Chandela invocation to a deity.[60] According to her, the handwritings on two fragments are from two different scribes. Moreover, the letters in the upper fragment are smaller in size, compared to the letters on the upper fragment.[63]

Based on the articles by Roy and Prasad, a section of scholars alleged that the inscription now marked as No. 53.4 in Lucknow museum is not Führer's Treta Ka Thakur inscription. According to Irfan Habib (2007), Führer's inscription was stolen from Lucknow Museum, and planted as the Vishnu-Hari inscription in the Babri mosque debris. Fuhrer's inscription was dated 1184 CE, which means that it would have been issued during the reign of Govindachandra's grandson Jayachandra. Habib alleged that the Hindu activists deliberately damaged the date portion of the inscription to hide this fact. He points out that the inscriptions of Govindachandra mention grandiloquent royal titles such as Ashva-pati Nara-pati Gaja-pati. But this particular inscription does not mention any such title for Govindachandra. Therefore, he concludes that the "Govindachandra" mentioned in this inscription was not the Gahadavala monarch, but a "weak Gahadavala princeling" of the same name, who was a contemporary of Jayachandra.[57] Habib theorizes that Ayodhya came under the control of the imperial Gahadavalas, sometime after 1184 CE, during Jayachandra's reign.[64]

Habib further claims that the inscription does not mention Rama at all in context of the temple: it begins with an invocation to Shiva. Based on this, he concludes that the temple mentioned in the inscription was a Shiva temple.[64]

Identification as an independent inscription

Kunal Kishore (2016) criticizes Habib's theory, and concludes that the Vishnu-Hari inscription is different from Führer's Treta Ka Thakur inscription. According to him, the Lucknow Museum Inscritpion No. 53.4 is indeed Führer's inscription.[45]

Kishore obtained a photograph of the inscription from the Lucknow museum, and published it in his 2016 book. This photograph shows that the Inscription No. 53 contains 20 lines, thus invalidating Jahnavi Shekhar Roy's claim that it contains only 10 lines.[62] Kishore further claims that the ends of the inscription appear to be broken, just like Führer's inscription.[65]

Kishore also criticizes Pushpa Prasad's conclusions about Inscription No. 53.4 as "full of fancies and fictions".[60] He disagrees with her contention that the handwritings on the two fragments look different.[63] According to him, the topmost letters in the upper fragment are the smallest, and their size gradually increases towards the bottom of the upper fragment. The size increases further in the lower fragment. Kishore concludes that the engraver probably started with small letters, but then realized that the remaining space was more than sufficient, and therefore, gradually enlarged the letters. He further points out that several other historical inscriptions also feature variations in letter size, presenting the Prayaga prashasti of Samudragupta as an example.[63] Kishore further notes that four letters broken in the upper fragment continue in the lower fragment, which clearly indicates that the two fragments belong to the same inscription. The surviving text appears to be Sanskrit verse written in the shardulavikridita metre.[66] The surviving text, as deciphered by Bhavanath Jha, is unintelligible because the sentences are not complete.[67] The extant words in each verse form only one-fourth of a typical shardulavikridita metre verse. Based on this, Kishore theorizes that the portion containing these two fragments formed the left part of a four-times larger inscription. The surviving text does not offer any evidence to show that the upper portion describes a land grant, or that the lower part describes invocation to a deity, thus invalidating Prasad's claim.[66]

Kishore notes that the Lucknow Museum has no record of any other pre-1953 inscription transferred from the now-defunct Faizabad Museum.[65] According to him, around 40% of the content from the first four lines of Inscription No. 53 appears to have been deliberately removed by a saw or a chisel. This part probably mentioned the date of the inscription (1241 VS), as mentioned in Führer's 1899 book. Since the surviving text does not mention Jayachandra or the construction of a temple, Kishore theorizes that Führer may have dated it to Jayachandra's reign on the basis of its date, and because it appears to praise a king. Similarly, Führer probably assumed that it records the construction of a temple, because it was found at the ruined Treta Ka Thakur mosque, which is said to have been constructed over the ruins of a temple.[61]

According to Kishore, Irfan Habib misleadingly translates the line Govindachandra-kshitipāla-rājya-sthariryāya in Verse 22 as "for the stability of Govindachandra's kingdom". This translation omits the word kshitpala, which means "the protector (ruler) of the earth". In addition, the Verse 19 describes Govindachandra as dharaṇīndra ("the master of the world"). These royal epithets indicate Govindachandra could not have been a "weak Gahadavala princeling", as claimed by Habib. According to Kishore, this Govindachandra was indeed the Gahadavala monarch.[68] Kishore also notes that Ayodhya has been mentioned in the inscriptions of the Gahdavala monarchs before Jayachandra, including the dynasty's founder Chandradeva as well as in the other inscriptions of Govindachandra. Thus, Habib's theory that Ayodhya came under Jayachandra's control after 1184 CE is inaccurate.[64]

According to Kishore, the Apratima-Vikrama mentioned in verse 5 is none other than Rama. He notes that some other texts mention synonymous epithets (such as Amita-vikrama, Aprameya-Parakrama, and Vikrama-vare) for Rama and Vishnu.[48] He further claims that the temple built by Anayachandra was a Rama temple. According to him, it has been called the "Vishnu-Hari" temple in verse 21 for alliteration: "Vishnu" alliterates with the preceding word Vyuhai, while "Hari" alliterates with the succeeding word Hiranya. Kishore mentions that several texts composed around the 10th century mention Rama as Vishnu and Hari, presenting the Agastya Samhita as an example.[50]

Thus, Kishore concludes that Anayachandra built a temple at the birthplace of Rama in Ayodhya, when he was governing the Saketa region as a feudatory of Govindachandra. Ayushchandra succeeded Anayachandra as the governor of Saketa, and constructed several other structures.[50] M. G. S. Narayanan also considers the Vishnu-Hari inscription as "clear evidence" that a temple was built at the site of Babri mosque during the reign of Govindachandra.[69]

References

  1. 1 2 3 Roma Niyogi 1959, p. 65.
  2. 1 2 3 4 Roma Niyogi 1959, p. 87.
  3. 1 2 3 Roma Niyogi 1959, p. 57.
  4. ↑ Roma Niyogi 1959, p. 60.
  5. ↑ Roma Niyogi 1959, p. 61.
  6. ↑ Roma Niyogi 1959, pp. 61–62.
  7. 1 2 Roma Niyogi 1959, p. 63.
  8. 1 2 3 4 Roma Niyogi 1959, p. 75.
  9. 1 2 Roma Niyogi 1959, p. 74.
  10. ↑ D. C. Sircar 1966, p. 35.
  11. ↑ Roma Niyogi 1959, p. 102.
  12. 1 2 Roma Niyogi 1959, p. 67.
  13. ↑ Roma Niyogi 1959, pp. 72–73.
  14. ↑ Roma Niyogi 1959, p. 73.
  15. ↑ D. C. Sircar 1985, p. 59.
  16. ↑ Roma Niyogi 1959, pp. 75–76.
  17. 1 2 3 Roma Niyogi 1959, p. 68.
  18. ↑ Roma Niyogi 1959, p. 76.
  19. ↑ Roma Niyogi 1959, pp. 77–79.
  20. ↑ Roma Niyogi 1959, p. 79.
  21. ↑ R. K. Dikshit 1976, pp. 132–133.
  22. 1 2 Roma Niyogi 1959, p. 81.
  23. ↑ Roma Niyogi 1959, pp. 79–80.
  24. ↑ Roma Niyogi 1959, p. 82.
  25. 1 2 Roma Niyogi 1959, p. 84.
  26. 1 2 3 Roma Niyogi 1959, p. 66.
  27. ↑ P. C. Roy 1980, p. 99.
  28. ↑ Roma Niyogi 1959, p. 85.
  29. 1 2 3 Roma Niyogi 1959, p. 88.
  30. ↑ Roma Niyogi 1959, pp. 88–89.
  31. ↑ Roma Niyogi 1959, p. 91.
  32. 1 2 P. C. Roy 1980, pp. 75–76.
  33. ↑ V. A. Smith 1906, p. 257.
  34. ↑ Rama Shankar Tripathi 1964, p. 314.
  35. ↑ P. C. Roy 1980, p. 75.
  36. ↑ V. A. Smith 1888, pp. 220–221.
  37. ↑ Roma Niyogi 1959, p. 86.
  38. ↑ P. C. Roy 1980, p. 76.
  39. ↑ Roma Niyogi 1959, pp. 247–260.
  40. 1 2 Kunal Kishore 2016, pp. 312-313.
  41. ↑ Kunal Kishore 2016, p. 300.
  42. ↑ Kunal Kishore 2016, pp. 301-302.
  43. ↑ Kunal Kishore 2016, pp. 300-301.
  44. ↑ Kunal Kishore 2016, pp. 318-328.
  45. 1 2 Kunal Kishore 2016, pp. 313-315.
  46. 1 2 Kunal Kishore 2016, p. 316.
  47. ↑ Kunal Kishore 2016, p. 317.
  48. 1 2 3 Kunal Kishore 2016, p. 318.
  49. ↑ Kunal Kishore 2016, pp. 321-326.
  50. 1 2 3 Kunal Kishore 2016, p. 328.
  51. ↑ Kunal Kishore 2016, pp. 326-327.
  52. ↑ Kunal Kishore 2016, p. 327.
  53. ↑ Kunal Kishore 2016, pp. 327-328.
  54. ↑ Kunal Kishore 2016, pp. 328-329.
  55. 1 2 Kunal Kishore 2016, p. 329.
  56. ↑ Kunal Kishore 2016, p. 330-331.
  57. 1 2 Kunal Kishore 2016, p. 313.
  58. 1 2 Kunal Kishore 2016, p. 303.
  59. 1 2 3 Kunal Kishore 2016, p. 304.
  60. 1 2 3 Kunal Kishore 2016, p. 307.
  61. 1 2 Kunal Kishore 2016, p. 310.
  62. 1 2 Kunal Kishore 2016, p. 305.
  63. 1 2 3 Kunal Kishore 2016, p. 309.
  64. 1 2 3 Kunal Kishore 2016, p. 315.
  65. 1 2 Kunal Kishore 2016, p. 311.
  66. 1 2 Kunal Kishore 2016, pp. 309-310.
  67. ↑ Kunal Kishore 2016, pp. 311-312.
  68. ↑ Kunal Kishore 2016, pp. 313-314.
  69. ↑ M. G. S. Narayanan 2014.

Bibliography

This article is issued from Wikipedia - version of the 11/15/2016. The text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share Alike but additional terms may apply for the media files.