Identification of Bhatti and Devaraja of the Jodhpur Inscription

Summary

Inscriptions are vital sources for reconstructing early Indian history, but their interpretation can be challenging, especially when names are ambiguous or variant. This article focuses on a Jodhpur inscription dated to V.S. 894 (A.D. 837) that commemorates the exploits of Pratihara rulers Siluka and Devaraja. The inscription is notable for mentioning a figure called Bhatti (or Bhandi), described as the father of Devaraja【420759176627009†L3560-L3580】. Historians have long debated the identities of Bhatti and Devaraja, and this article synthesises the arguments. Some scholars, noting that the Pratihara dynasty included a well‑known minister named Bhandi, argue that Bhatti is a scribal variant of Bhandi. Bhandi was a relative and chief minister of the powerful Pratihara king Nagabhata II; identifying Bhatti with Bhandi therefore links Devaraja to the royal family. Others contend that Bhatti could be a local chief unrelated to the Pratiharas. To address these views, the article examines the language and epithets used in the inscription. The inscription praises Siluka as a great warrior and refers to Devaraja as the son of Bhandi (or Bhatti), suggesting a familial relationship within the Pratihara line【420759176627009†L3560-L3580】. The article also compares the Jodhpur inscription with other epigraphs mentioning Devaraja and Bhandi, including those from Gwalior and Kanauj. These comparisons reveal consistent titles and genealogical markers, strengthening the case for identifying Bhatti with Bhandi. The author further discusses the historical context of the early ninth century, when the Pratiharas were consolidating power in western India amid rivalries with the Palas and the Rashtrakutas. The presence of local feudatories and branch families complicates the genealogical picture; many chiefs adopted similar titles and names. By carefully analysing epigraphic data, the article argues that Devaraja was not an independent sovereign but a subordinate prince or feudatory related to the main Pratihara lineage. The study underscores the importance of minor inscriptions in clarifying relationships among historical figures and highlights the challenges of transliteration and scribal errors in early records.