262. 262 HISTORY OF SANSKRIT POETICS

262 HISTORY OF SANSKRIT POETICS

the same year in E. I. vol. XVIII p. 320, Mandhata plate of जयसिंद of धारा dated संवस् 1112, the plate dated संवद् 1079 in I. H. Q. vol. 8 pp. 305-315 and the Ujjain plate dated samvat 1078, I. A. 6 p. 53 speak of Sindhurāja as succeeding Vakpatiraja with the usual titles of परममट्टारक-महाराजाधिराज- war. Bhoja suffered from a long illness and died in the midst of wars with Bhima, king of Gujarat and Kalacuri -Karna, king of Tripuri (प्रबन्धचिम्तामषि; Tawney's tr. p. 4). The aagida (II. 16-18) narrates Bhoja's defeat by king Bhima and the Vadnagar prasasti of ATTuTa (1151 A.D.) in E. I. vol. I. p. 293 at p. 297 speaks of Dharā being devastated by the cavalry of Bhima. This unhappy state of arr is referred to in the Nagpur Prasasti (E. I. vol. II. pp. 180-191 verse 32). Vide Dr. Ganguly's 'History of the Paramara dynasty' pp. 82-122 for Bhoja and J. I. H. vol. VI. pp. 79-87 for the chronology of the Paramaras of Malva (Mr. Diskalkar). Bhoja was one of the most illustrious kings of ancient and medieval India. He was justly famed as a great patron of poets and literature, as a great builder of temples and as a literary man of no mean achievements. His has been a name to conjure with. The Udepur prasasti of the kings of Malva (E. I. vol. I. p. 222 at p. 235 very finely hits off Bhoja's achievements in a single verse 'साधितं विहितं द्तं ज्ञातं तघन्न केनचित्। किमन्यत्कविराजस्य श्रीभोजस्य प्रशस्यते ।' (he achieved, he laid down, he donated and knew what was not (achieved &c.) by anyone else; what further encomium can be passed on the glorious Bhoja, the poet-king (or prince of poets) ? The aao quoted above speaks of him as कविबान्धव. The सर. कएठा. II. verse 239 (on कारिका 99) contains a reference to भोज himself 'जयजयजय श्रीमन्मोज प्रभाति विभावरी वदवदवद श्रव्यं). विदुननिदं स्वधीयते। मृणुशुरुशण स्वद्स्सूयोडनु रज्यति मरडलं नहिनदिनहि दमामातंएड: वगोन विरज्यते॥.' Bhoja is credited with having composed 84 works on almost all sciences of medieval India by Ajada quoted by Dr. Raghavan in note 2 on p. 5. Dr. Raghavan appears to treat with ridicule those who hold that these works cannot all be the compositions of Bhoja and that several of them must have been composed by those whom Bhoja patronized (pp. 5-6 of Raghavan's vol. I). The analogy of Prof. Keith whom Dr. Raghavan cites has no application and carries no conviction. Prof, Keith was a university Professor not burdened with