« السابقةمتابعة »
Some remains of old buildings are reported to exist at this place; I have not seen it myself.
About five miles due south of Ārigom we find a small lake known as Nilnāg, situated in a valley between low spurs descending from the Pir Pantsāl Range. It appears to have been formed by an old landslip which blocked a narrow defile in the Valley. This lake does not appear ever to have enjoyed any particular sanctity. But Abū-l-Fazl by some curious misapprehension transfers to it the legends of the famous Nilanāga (at Vērnāg). He adds to them what appears like a garbled version of the story of the city submerged in the Mahāpadma or Volur lake. 1
Nāgām is adjoined on the north by the Pargana of Yech which extends to the immediate vicinity of Srinagar. Its old name is given as IKŞIKĀ by Srivara. In the centre of the tract lies an arid alluvial plateau known as Dāmodar Udar, where an ancient popular tradition surviving to the present day has localized the legend of King Damodara. The story as related by Kalhaņa, represents the king as baving built
a town on the Uủar which latter was called Dāmodara's Udar.
after him DĀMODARASŪDA. In order to bring water to it he had a great dam, called GUDDASETU, constructed by supernatural agency. Once hungry Brahmans asked the king for food, just as he was going to bathe. The king refused to comply with their request until he had taken his bath. The Brahmans thereupon cursed him so that he became a snake. Ever since the unfortunate kiug is seen by people in the form of a snake “rushing about in search of water far and wide on the Dāmodara-Sūda." He is not to be delivered from the curse until he hears the whole Rāmāyaṇa recited to him in a single day, a task which renders his release hopeless.
The modern name Dāmadar Udar is the exact equivalent of Kalhaņa's Damodara-Süda, the old Skr, term sūda meaning a place where the soil is barren.' Tbe local name Guddasetu still lives in that of the small village Guddsuth situated at the south foot of the Uďar. Just at this point the latter shows its greatest relative elevation and falls off towards the valley with a steep bank over one hundred feet high. The wall-like appearance of this bank probably suggested the story of an embankment which was to bring water to the plateau. In view of the configuration of the ground no serious attempt at irrigation by means of an aqueduct could ever have been made in this locality.
1 Compare Āin-e-Akb., ii. p. 363. It is possible that of the two Nīlanāgas which the Nilamata, 903, mentions besides the famous spring of that name, one was located in the Nāgām lake.
% Sriv, iii. 25.
The Uủar stretches in a north-westerly direction, for about six miles from the village of Vahạtõr, with a breadth varying from two to three miles. It bears only scanty crops of Indian corn in patches. Being entirely devoid of water, it is a dry and barren waste, a haunt of jackals as in the days when King Kșemagupta hunted over the 'Dāmodarāranya.' The main features of the legend regarding it are well known to popular tradition throughout Kaśmir. The inhabitants of the neighbouring villages also point to a spot on the Uủar known as Satörās Tēng, as the site of Damodara's palace. A spring called Dāmodar-Nāg in the village of Lālgām, is believed to have served for the king's ablutions.
To Yech belongs also the small village of Somarebug on the left bank of the Vitastā which according to the note of the old glossator A, marks the site of the temple of Vişņu SAMARASVĀMIN mentioned by Kalhaņa. Another old locality in Yech is probably marked by the hamlet of Halathal to which Abu-l-Fazl refers. It is not shown on the Survey map, and I have not been able to ascertain its exact position. Halathal is evidently a derivative of SĀLĀSTHALA, the name given by Kalhaņa to a locality where a fight took place in the time of King Ananta.3 Abū-l-Fazl mentions ‘Halthal' for its quivering tree. “If the smallest branch of it be shaken, the whole tree becomes tremulous."
Section VIII.-SOUTHERN DISTRICTS OF KRAMARĀJYA. 120.– To the west of Yech and reaching close up to the capital,
lies the Pargaņa now called Dunts (map Districts of Dũnts,
'Doonsoo'). Its ancient name is uncertain ; Bīru, Māñchồhõm.
possibly it is intended by the name Dvāvimšati in the Lokaprakāśa's list of 'Viņayas.' In A bū-l-Fazl's table of Pargaņas Dānts (“Dūnsū ') is already counted with Kamrāz. An old locality in it is Silipõr, a large village situated circ. 74° 45' long. 34° 1' lat. (map * Shalipoor '). We may safely recognize in it the SelyAPURA of the Rājatarangiņi which is referred to as a place on the direct route from the Tõşemaidān Pass and the Kārkotadraņga to Srinagar.“
Hukhaliter (map • Haklitri ') can safely be identified, in view of the name and the evidence of an old gloss, with SOSKALETRA mentioned in the Rājatarangiņi as a place where Stūpas were erected by King Aśoka.l I have not visited the village myself and am hence unable to say whether there are any remains in the vicinity which could be attributed to Stūpas. Kalhaņa locates at S'uşkaletra the fierce battle in which King Jayāpīda recovered his kingdom.
I Compare Rājat. vi. 183.
% See note v. 25.-The ending -bug is not rare in Kaśmir village names. According to Pandit tradition, it is derived from Skr. bhoga in the sense of property granted for the usufract [of a temple].'
8 See note vii. 159 ; Āin-i-Akb., ii. p. 363. 4 See Rajat. vii. 494 note ; viii, 200.
West of Dũnts and towards the mountains of the Pir Pantsāl lies the Pargana of Biru. Its old designation BAHURŪPA is derived from the spring of that name which is situated at the present village of Biru, 74° 39' long. 34° 1' lat., and is already referred to as a Tirtha in the Nilamata. Abu-l-Fazl knows the village and spring by an intermediate form of the name, Biruwā, and mentions the miraculous power of the spring to heal leprosy.3 Close to the village of Biru is Sunepāh in which we may, with an old glossator of the Rājatarangiņi, recognize SUVARŅAPĀRÁVA, an Agrahāra of Lalitāditya.*
About four miles to the south-west of Biru we reach Khāg, a considerable place. It is undoubtedly the KuĀgi or KHĀGIKĀ mentioned by Kalhaņa as an Agrahāra both of King Khagendra and of Gopāditya.
Some miles north of Khāg an isolated spur known as Põşkar projects into the level plain from the slopes of the Pir Pantsāl Range. At its eastern foot is the Puşkaranāga, referred to aş a Tirtha in the Nilamata and several older Māhātmyas, and still the object of a regular pilgrimage. Of the route which leads down into Bīru from the Tõş!. maidān Pass, and of KĀRKOȚADRANGA, the watch station on it, we have already spoken above.
Biru and Dānts are adjoined on the north by the Pargana of Māñchhom which extends eastwards as far as the Vitastā. It is probably intended by the name of Mākṣāśrama found in a single passage of Srivara and in the Lokaprakāśa.7 The village of Ratasun, situated 74° 38' long. 34° 4' lat., is probably, as indicated by an old gloss, the
I Compare Rājat. notes i. 102 ; iv. 473; Kś. Hukholitor is the direct phonetic derivative of the Skr. form.
% See Nīlamata, 948, 1180, 1341 sq. The name Bahurūpa is given to the tract by Jonar. (Bo. ed.) 286, 840 ; Srīv. ii. 19, iii. 159 ; iv. 620, and ought to have been shown on the map.
3 Āin-i-Akb., ii. p. 363.
8 See Nīlamata, 1021, 1347. There were several other Puşkara Tirthas in Kasmir. One was connected with the Sureśvarī pilgrimage and probably situated in Phākh ; see Sarvāv. v. 56 899.
7 See Srīv, iv. 351.
ArişTOTSĀDANA of the Rājatarangiņi. From this form the modern name of the village can be derived without difficulty. A temple is said to have been erected there by a queen of Bālāditya.
On the Vitastā some six miles below Srinagar is the small village of Malur which on the authority of Rājānaka Ratnakaộtha may be identified with MALHĀŅAPURA, a foundation of King Jayāpida. Zainokāțh, situated near marshy ground about two miles south-east of it, preserves the name of Zainu-l-'ābidin, its founder, and is mentioned as JAINAKOȚȚA by Jonarāja. 121. The Pargana of Parlspor (map Paraspoor ') which lies next
to Māñch?hõm, is one of small extent, but Paribāsapura.
contains a site of great historical interest. It has received its name from the ancient PARIHĀSAPURA, which King Lalitäditya had built as his capital. The identity of the name Par4spor and Parihāsapura is evident on phonetic grounds and was well-known to the authors of the Persian abstracts of the Rājatarangiņi. Yet curiously enough the site of Paribāsapura had remained unidentified until I visited the spot in 1892 and traced the ruins of Lalitāditya's great structures as described by Kalliana, on the plateau known as the Parspor Udar.'
This plateau rises south-east of Shad pūr, between the marshes of Panz nor on the east and those of Hārtrath on the west. Its length is about two miles from north to south, and its greatest breadth not much over a mile. On the north this plateau is separated from the higher ground of Trigām by the Badrihēl Nála which, as I have shown above, represents the old bed of the Vitastā previous to Sayya's regulation. On the other sides it is surrounded by marshes which for a great part of the year are still accessible by boats. Its general elevation is about one hundred feet.
A broad ravine which cuts into the plateau from the south, and in which the village of Divar (map ‘Diara ') nestles, divides it into two parts. On the south-western portion are the ruins of two large temples, much decayed, but still showing dimensions which considerably exceed those of the great temple of Mārtānda. On that part of the Udar which lies to the north-east and towards the Badrihēl Nāla, there is a whole series of ruined structures. Among these three great buildings attract attention. As an indication of their size it may be mentioned that the ruined mound which marks the central shrine of the northernmost building has a diameter of nearly 300 feet. Though it consists now only of a confused heap of massive blocks it still rises to a height of over 30 feet from the ground. The enclosing quadrangle which can also be traced, measures about 410 feet square. At some distance from this group of ruins there is another smaller one at the southeastern extremity of the plateau now known as Gurdan.
1 Rajat. iii, 482.
4 For a detailed account of the site of Parihāsapara and its identification, compare Note F, Rājat. iv. 194-204. The large scale map added to Note I shows the position of the several ruins in detail. 6 See § 70.
J. 1. 25
I must refer for a more detailed account of these ruins and their relative position to the Note on Parihāsapura, F, appended to my translation of the Chronicle. Here it will suffice to point out that the four great temples of Vişņu Parihāsakeśava, Muktākeśava, Mahāvarāha, Govardhanadhara as well as the Răjavihāra with its colossal image of Buddha, which Kalbaņa mentions as Lalitāditya's chief structures at Parihāsapura, must all be looked for among these ruins. Their extremely decayed condition makes an attempt at detailed identification difficult.
Still less we can hope to trace now the position of the numerous shrines, Lingas, Vihāras, etc., which are mentioned by Kalhaņa as having been erected at the king's favourite residence by his queens and court. One of the great ruins of the northern group shows features characteristic of a Vihāra and may be the Rājavihāra. Some clue is also furnished by the name Gurdan attaching to the isolated ruins above mentioned. Gurdan is the common Kaśmīrī form of the name Gorardhana, and hence points to these ruins being the remains of the temple called GOVARDHANADHARA. The state of utter destruction in which the ruins of Parihāsapura,
are now found, is easily accounted for by the History of Parihāsa.
history of the site. Parihāsapura ceased to be pura.
the royal residence already under the son of its founder. The Chronicle distinctly records of King Vajrāditya that he withdrew the various foundations which his father Lalitāditya had made there. When a century later King Avantivarman effected his great regulation of the Vitastā, the bed of the river and its junction with the Sindhu was diverted to Shādipūr, nearly three miles away from Parihāsapura. This change must have still more seriously diminished the importance of the latter. The ruinous condition into which Parihāsapura must have fallen only one and a half centuries after its foundation,
I See Räjat. iv. 207-216.