Káthiáváda Gazetteer, 275) seem to show the continuance of Maitraka
power in North Káthiáváda. This is supported by the expedition of
the Arab chief of Sandhán in Kachch (A.D. 840) against the Medhs of
Hind which ended in the capture of Mália in North Káthiáváda. Elliot,
I. 450. Hiuen Tsiang (A.D. 630) (Beal's Buddhist Records, II. 69)
describes Sauráshtra as a separate state but at the same time notes its
dependence on Valabhi. Its rulers seem to have been Mehrs. In A.D. 713
(Elliot, I. 123) Muhammad Kasim made peace with the men of Surasht,
Medhs, seafarers, and pirates.
[321] The only contemporary rulers in whose grants a reference to
Valabhi has been traced are the Gurjjaras of Broach (A.D. 580-808)
one of whom, Dadda II. (A.D. 633), is said (Ind. Ant. XIII. 79)
to have gained renown by protecting the lord of Valabhi who had been
defeated by the illustrious Srí Harshadeva (A.D. 608-649), and another
Jayabhata in A.D. 706 (Ind. Ant. V. 115) claims to have quieted with
the sword the impetuosity of the lord of Valabhi.
[322] Tod An. of Raj. I. 217: Western India, 269.
[323] Tod An. of Raj. I. 112 and Western India, 148: Rás Málá,
I. 21. It is not clear whether these passages prove that the Sesodias
or only the Válas claim an early settlement at Dhánk. In any case
(see below page 101) both clans trace their origin to Kanaksen.
[324] Tod's Western India, 51.
[325] Tod's An. of Raj. I. 230.
[326] The cherished title of the later Valabhis, Síláditya Sun of
Virtue, confirms the special sun worship at Valabhi, which the mention
of Dharapatta (A.D. 550) as a devotee of the supreme sun supports,
and which the legends of Valabhi's sun-horse and sun-fountain keep
fresh (Rás Málá, I. 14-18). So the great one-stone lingas, the most
notable trace of Valabhi city (J. R. A. S. Ser. I. Vol. XIII. 149
and XVII. 271), bear out the Valabhi copperplate claim that its
rulers were great worshippers of Siva. Similarly the Rána of Udepur,
while enjoying the title of Sun of the Hindus, prospering under the
sun banner, and specially worshipping the sun (Tod's Annals, I. 565)
is at the same time the Minister of Siva the One Ling Eklingakadiwán
(Ditto 222, Ráj. Gaz. III. 53). The blend is natural. The fierce
noon-tide sun is Mahákála the Destroyer. Like Siva the Sun is lord of
the Moon. And marshalled by Somanátha the great Soul Home the souls of
the dead pass heavenwards along the rays of the setting sun. [Compare
Sachau's Alberuni, II. 168.] It is the common sun element in Saivism
and in Vaishnavism that gives their holiness to the sunset shrines
of Somanátha and Dwárka. For (Ditto, 169) the setting sun is the
door whence men march forth into the world of existence Westwards,
heavenwards.
[327] This explanation is hardly satisfactory. The name Gehlot seems
to be Guhila-putra from Gobhila-putra an ancient Bráhman gotra,
one of the not uncommon cases of Rájputs with a Bráhman gotra. The
Rájput use of a Bráhman gotra is generally considered a technical
affiliation, a mark of respect for some Bráhman teacher. It seems
doubtful whether the practice is not a reminiscence of an ancestral
Bráhman strain. This view finds confirmation in the Aitpur inscription
(Tod's Annals, I. 802) which states that Guhadit the founder of the
Gohil tribe was of Bráhman race Vipra kula. Compare the legend (Rás
Málá, I. 13) that makes the first Síláditya of Valabhi (A.D. 590-609)
the son of a Bráhman woman. Compare (Elliot, I. 411) the Bráhman Chách
(A.D. 630-670) marrying the widow of the Sháhi king of Alor in Sindh
who is written of as a Rájput though like the later (A.D. 850-1060)
Shahiyas of Kábul (Alberuni, Sachau II. 13) the dynasty may possibly
have been Bráhmans. ((In support of a Bráhman origin is Prinsep's
conjecture (J. A. S. Bl. LXXIV. [Feb. 1838] page 93) that Divaij
the name of the first recorded king may be Dvija or Twice-born. But
Divaij for Deváditya, like Silaij for Síláditya, seems simpler
and the care with which the writer speaks of Chach as the Bráhman
almost implies that his predecessors were not Bráhmans. According to
Elliot (II. 426) the Páls of Kábul were Rájputs, perhaps Bhattias.))
The following passage from Hodgson's Essays (J. A. Soc. Bl. II. 218)
throws light on the subject: Among the Khás or Rájputs of Nepál the
sons of Bráhmans by Khás women take their fathers' gotras. Compare
Ibbetson's Panjáb Census 1881 page 236.
[328] Tod's Annals, I. 229-231.
[329] Annals, I. 229.
[330] Gladwin's Áin-i-Akbari, II. 81; Tod's Annals, I. 235 and note
*. Tod's dates are confused. The Aitpur inscription (Ditto, page 230)
gives Sakti Kumára's date A.D. 968 (S. 1024) while the authorities
which Tod accepts (Ditto, 231) give A.D. 1068 (S. 1125). That the
Moris were not driven out of Chitor as early as A.D. 728 is proved
by the Navsárí inscription which mentions the Arabs defeating the
Mauryas as late as A.D. 738-9 (Sam. 490). See above page 56.
[331] Tod Western India 268 says Siddha Rája (A.D. 1094-1143): Múla
Rája (A.D. 942-997) seems correct. See Rás Málá, I. 65.
[332] Káthiáwár Gazetteer, 672.
[333] The chronicles of Bhadrod, fifty-one miles south-west of
Bhávnagar, have (Káth. Gaz. 380) a Selait Vála as late as A.D. 1554.
[334] Káthiáwár Gazetteer, 672. Another account places the movement
south after the arrival of the Gohils A.D. 1250. According to local
traditions the Válas did not pass to Bhadrod near Mahuva till A.D. 1554
(Káth. Gaz. 380) and from Bhadrod (Káth. Gaz. 660) retired to Dholarva.
[335] Káth. Gaz. 111 and 132. According to the Áin-i-Akbari (Gladwin,
II. 60) the inhabitants of the ports of Mahua and Tulája were of the
Vála tribe.
[336] Káth. Gaz. 680.
[337] Káth. Gaz. 414.
[338] The Vála connection with the Káthis complicates their
history. Col. Watson (Káth. Gaz. 130) seems to favour the view that the
Válas were the earliest wave of Káthis who came into Káthiáváda from
Málwa apparently with the Guptas (A.D. 450) (Ditto, 671). Col. Watson
seems to have been led to this conclusion in consequence of the
existence of the petty state of Kátti in west Khándesh. But the people
of the Kátti state in west Khándesh are Bhils or Kolis. Neither the
people nor the position of the country seems to show connection with
the Káthis of Káthiáváda. Col. Watson (Káth. Gaz. 130) inclines to
hold that the Válas are an example of the rising of a lower class to
be Rájputs. That both Válas and Káthis are northerners admitted into
Hinduism may be accepted. Still it seems probable that on arrival
in Káthiáváda the Válas were the leaders of the Káthis and that it
is mainly since the fall of Valabhi that a large branch of the Válas
have sunk to be Káthis. The Káthi traditions admit the superiority of
the Válas. According to Tod (Western India, 270: Annals, I. 112-113)
the Káthis claim to be a branch or descendants of the Válas. In
Káthiáváda the Válas, the highest division of Káthis (Rás Málá,
I. 296; Káth. Gaz. 122, 123, 131, 139), admit that their founder
was a Vála Rájput who lost caste by marrying a Káthi woman. Another
tradition (Rás Málá, I. 296; Káth. Gaz. 122 note 1) records that the
Káthis flying from Sindh took refuge with the Válas and became their
followers. Col. Watson (Káth. Gaz. 130) considers the practice in
Porbandar and Navánagar of styling any lady of the Dhánk Vála family
who marries into their house Káthiáníbái the Káthi lady proves that
the Válas are Káthis. But as this name must be used with respect
it may be a trace that the Válas claim to be lords of the Káthis as
the Jetwas claim to be lords of the Mers. That the position of the
Válas and Káthis as Rájputs is doubtful in Káthiáváda and is assured
(Tod's Annals, I. 111) in Rájputána is strange. The explanation may
perhaps be that aloofness from Muhammadans is the practical test of
honour among Rájputána Hindus, and that in the troubled times between
the thirteenth and the seventeenth centuries, like the Jhálás, the
Válas and Káthis may have refused Moghal alliances, and so won the
approval of the Ránás of Mewád.
[339] Káth. Gaz. 110-129.
[340] Western India, 207; Annals, I. 112-113.
[341] It is worthy of note that Bálas and Káthiás are returned from
neighbouring Panjáb districts. Bálas from Dehra Ismail Khán (Panjáb
Census Report 1891 Part III. 310), Káthiá Rájputs from Montgomery
(Ditto, 318), and Káthiá Játs from Jhang and Dera Ismail Khán (Ditto,
143). Compare Ibbetson's (1881) Panjáb Census, I. 259, where the
Káthias are identified with the Kathaioi who fought Alexander the Great
(B.C. 325) and also with the Káthis of Káthiáváda. According to this
report (page 240) the Válas are said to have come from Málwa and are
returned in East Panjáb.
[342] Tod's Annals, I. 83 and 215; Elliot, II. 410;
Jour. B. Br. A. S. XXIII.
[343] Annals, I. 215.
[344] Kath. Gaz. 589.
[345] Brihat-Samhitá, XIV. 21. The usual explanation (compare Fleet
Ind. Ant. XXII. 180) Gold-Sakas seems meaningless.
[346] Sachau, II. 11. Among the legends are the much-applied tales
of the foot-stamped cloth and the self-sacrificing minister.
[347] Western India, 213.
[348] Tod's Annals, I. 83, 215; Western India, 270-352.
[349] Sachau, I. 208, II. 341. For the alleged descent of the Sesodiás
and Válas from Ráma of the Sun race the explanation may be offered
that the greatness of Kanishka, whose power was spread from the Ganges
to the Oxus, in accordance with the Hindu doctrine (compare Beal's
Buddhist Records, I. 99 & 152; Rás Málá, I. 320; Fryer's New Account,
190) that a conqueror's success is the fruit of transcendent merit
in a former birth, led to Kanishka being considered an incarnation
of Ráma. A connection between Kanishka and the race of the Sun would
be made easy by the intentional confusing of the names Kshatrapa and
Kshatriya and by the fact that during part at least of his life fire
and the sun were Kanishka's favourite deities.
[350] Gladwin's Áin-i-Akbari, II. 81: Tod's Annals, I. 235.
[351] The invasion of Sindh formerly (Reinaud's Fragments, 29) supposed
to be by Naushirván in person according to fuller accounts seems to
have been a raid by the ruler of Seistán (Elliot, I. 407). Still
Reinaud (Mémoire Sur l'Inde, 127) holds that in sign of vassalage
the Sindh king added a Persian type to his coins.
[352] Compare Tod's Annals, I. 235-239 and Rawlinson's Seventh
Monarchy, 576.
[353] Rawlinson Seventh Monarchy, 452 note 3.
[354] Compare Tod's Annals, I. 63; Thomas' Prinsep, I. 413;
Cunningham's Arch. Survey, VI. 201. According to their own accounts
(Rás Málá, I. 296) the Káthis learned sun-worship from the Vála of
Dhánk by whom the famous temple of the sun at Thán in Káthiáváda
was built.
[355] Válas Musalmán Játs in Lahor and Gurdaspur: Váls in Gujarát and
Gujranwálá: Váls in Mozafarnagar and Dhera Ismael Khan. Also Válahs
Hindus in Kángra. Panjáb Census of 1891, III. 162.
[356] Brihat Samhitá, V. 80.
[357] Corp. Ins. Ind. III. 140-141.
[358] The references are; Langlois' Harivamsa, I. 388-420,
II. 178. That in A.D. 247 Balkh or Báktria was free from Indian
overlordship (McCrindle's Periplus, 121), and that no more distant
tribe than the Gandháras finds a place in the Harivamsa lists combine
to make it almost certain that, at the time the Harivamsa was written,
whatever their origin may have been, the Báhlikas were settled not
in Báktria but in India.
[359] The passage from the Karna Parva or Eighth Book of the
Mahábhárata is quoted in Muir's Sanskrit Texts, II. 482, and in greater
fullness in St. Martin's Geog. Greque et Latine de l'Inde, 402-410. The
Báhikas or Bálhikas are classed with the Madras, Gandháras, Arattas,
and other Panjáb tribes. In their Bráhman families it is said the
eldest son alone is a Bráhman. The younger brothers are without
restraint Kshatriyas, Vaisyas, Sudras, even Barbers. A Bráhman
may sink to be a Barber and a barber may rise to be a Bráhman. The
Báhikas eat flesh even the flesh of the cow and drink liquor. Their
women know no restraint. They dance in public places unclad save with
garlands. In the Harivamsa (Langlois, I. 493 and II. 178, 388, 420)
the Bahlikas occur in lists of kings and peoples.
[360] Kern in Muir's Sanskrit Texts, II. 446. St. Martin (Geog. Greque
et Latine de l'Inde, 149) takes Báhika to be a contraction of
Báhlika. Reasons are given below for considering the Mahábhárata form
Báhika a confusion with the earlier tribes of that name rather than a
contraction of Báhlika or Bálhika. The form Báhika was also favoured
by the writer in the Mahábhárata because it fitted with his punning
derivation from their two fiend ancestors Vahi and Hika. St. Martin,
408.
[361] St. Martin Geog. Greque et Latine de l'Inde, 403,
puts the probable date at B.C. 380 or about fifty years before
Alexander. St. Martin held that the passage belonged to the final
revision of the poem. Since St. Martin's time the tendency has been
to lower the date of the final revision by at least 500 years. The
fact noted by St. Martin (Ditto, page 404) that Jartika which the
Mahábhárata writer gives as another name for Báhika is a Sanskritised
form of Jat further supports the later date. It is now generally
accepted that the Jats are one of the leading tribes who about the
beginning of the Christian era passed from Central Asia into India.
[362] The name Valabhi, as we learn from the Jain historians, is
a Sanskritised form of Valahi, which can be easily traced back to
one of the many forms (Bálhíka, Bálhika, Balhika, Bahlíka, Báhlika,
Váhlíka, Vahlíka, Válhíka, Válhika, Valhika) of a tribal name which
is of common occurrence in the Epics. This name is, no doubt rightly,
traced back to the city of Balkh, and originally denoted merely the
people of Baktria. There is, however, evidence that the name also
denoted a tribe doubtless of Baktrian origin, but settled in India:
the Emperor Chandra speaks of defeating the Váhlikas after crossing the
seven mouths of the Indus: Varáha-Mihira speaks of the Válhikas along
with the people who dwell on Sindhu's banks (Br. Sam. V. 80): and,
most decisive of all, the Kásiká Vritti on Pán. VIII. iv. 9 (A.D. 650)
gives Bahlíka as the name of the people of the Sauvíra country,
which, as Alberuni tells us, corresponded to the modern Multán,
the very country to which the traditions of the modern Válas point.
If the usual derivation of the name Bálhika be accepted, ((There is a
very close parallel in the modern Panjáb, where (see Census Report of
1881) the national name Baluch has become a tribal name in the same way
as Bálhika.)) it is possible to go a step further and fix a probable
limit before which the tribe did not enter India. The name of Balkh
in the sixth century B.C. was, as we learn from Darius' inscriptions,
Bákhtri, and the Greeks also knew it as Baktra: the Avesta form is
Bakhdhi, which according to the laws of sound-change established
by Prof. Darmsteter for the Arachosian language as represented by
the modern Pushtu, would become Bahli (see Chants Populaires des
Afghans, Introd. page xxvii). This reduction of the hard aspirates
to spirants seems to have taken place about the first century A.D.:
parallel cases are the change from Parthava to Palhava, and Mithra
to Mihira. It would seem therefore that the Bahlikas did not enter
India before the first century A.D.: and if we may identify their
subduer Chandra with Chandragupta I., we should have the fourth
century A.D. as a lower limit for dating their invasion.
Unfortunately, however, these limits cannot at present be regarded as
more than plausible: for the name Balhika or Valhika appears to occur
in works that can hardly be as modern as the first century A.D. The
Atharvaveda-parisishtas might be put aside, as they show strong traces
of Greek influence and are therefore of late date: and the supposed
occurrences in Pánini belong to the commentators and to the Ganapátha
only and are of more or less uncertain age. But the name occurs, in
the form Balhika, in one hymn of the Atharvaveda itself (Book V. 22)
which there is no reason to suppose is of late date.
The lower limit is also uncertain as the identification of
Chandra of the inscription with the Gupta king is purely
conjectural.--(A. M. T. J.)
[363] Hodgson's Essays on Indian Subjects, I. 405 Note.
[364] McCrindle's Periplus, 121. Compare Rawlinson's Seventh Monarchy,
79. The absence of Indian reference to the Yuechi supports the view
that in India the Yuechi were known by some other name.
[365] According to Reinaud (Mémoire Sur l'Inde, 82 note 3) probably
the modern Kochanya or Kashania sixty or seventy miles west of
Samarkand. This is Hiuen Tsiang's (A.D. 620) Ki'uh-shwangi-ni-kia or
Kushánika. See Beal's Buddhist Records, I. 34.
[366] Etude sur la Geographie Grecque et Latine de l'Inde, 147.
[367] McCrindle's Alexander in India, 350.
[368] The suggestion is made by Mr. A. M. T. Jackson.
[369] McCrindle's Alexander, 136.
[370] McCrindle's Alexander, 252.
[371] Compare Strabo, XV. I. 8. The Oxydrakai are the descendants of
Dionysus. Again, XV. I. 24: The Malloi and the Oxydrakai who as we
have already said are fabled to be related to Dionysus.
[372] See McCrindle's Alexander, 157, 369, 378, 398. Compare St. Martin
Geog. Grecque et Latine de l'Inde, 102.
[373] Strabo, XV. I. 8 and 24, Hamilton's Translation, III. 76, 95.
[374] References to the vines of Nysa and Meros occur in Strabo, Pliny,
Quintus Curtius, Philostratus, and Justin: McCrindle's Alexander in
India, 193 note 1, 321, and 339. Strabo (Hamilton's Translation,
III. 86) refers to a vine in the country of Musikanus or Upper
Sindh. At the same time (Ditto, 108) Strabo accepts Megasthenês'
statement that in India the wild vine grows only in the hills.
[375] The Kathaioi Malloi and Oxydrakai are (Arrian in McCrindle's
Alexander, 115, 137, 140, 149) called independent in the sense
of kingless: they (Ditto, 154) sent leading men not ambassadors:
(compare also Diodorus Siculus and Plutarch, Ditto 287, 311): the
Malloi had to chose a leader (Q. Curtius, Ditto 236).
[376] Káthiáwár Gazetteer, 138.
[377] Káthiáwár Gazetteer, 137.
[378] Cutch Gazetteer, 80.
[379] Cutch Gazetteer, 81.
[380] Bom. Gaz. XIV. 372.
[381] Ind. Ant. VIII. 243.
[382] Ind. Ant. VIII. 244.
[383] J. B. B. R. A. S. XVI. 1ff.: Proceedings VIIth Oriental Congress,
210ff.
[384] See Chap. X. below.
[385] Ind. Ant. XIII. 73.
[386] Ind. Ant. XIII. 70.
[387] B. B. R. A. S. XVI. 5.
[388] For the Moris or Mauryas, described as a branch of Pramáras, who
held Chitor during the eighth century compare Tod. Jr. R. A. S. 211;
Wilson's Works, XII. 132.
[389] The text of the copperplate runs:
sharajhasíramudraroddhárini taralataratárataraváridá
[24] ritoditasaindhavakacchellarsoráshtra cávotaka
mauryagurjarádirá [jye] nihshoshadákshinátyakshitipatiji
[25] gíshayá dakshinápathapravesha
......... prathamamevanavasárikávishayaprasádhanáyágate tvarita
Plate II.
[1] turagakharamukharakhurotkhátadharinidhúlidhúsaritadigantare
kuntaprántanitántavimardyamánarabhasábhidhávito
[2] dbhatasthúlodaravivaravinirggatámtraprathutararudhiradhárámjitakavacabhíshanavapushi
svámimahá
[3] sanmánadánagrahana=krayíkritasvashirobhirabhimukhamápatitaipradamyadashanágradashtoshtaputakairane
[4] kasamarájiravivaravarikatitatahayavidhatanavishálitadhanarudhirapatalapátalitapatukrapánapaththairapi
mahá
[5] yovairalabvaparabhágaih
vipakshakshapanákshepakshiprakshipratíkshnakshuraprapraháravilúnavairishira=kamalagalanálairá
[6] havarasarabhasaromámcakamcukáccháditatanúbhiranekairapi
narendravramdavradárakairajitapurvaih vyapagatamasmáka
[7] mranamanena sváminah svashirah
pradánenádyatávadekajanmíyamityevamishopajátaparitoshánantaraprahatapatupa
[8] taharavapravrittakabanvabaddharásamandalíke samarashiráse
vijitetájikánike shoyyánuráginá shrívadatramanarem
[9] drena prasádíkritáparanámacatushtayastaddhyathá
dakshinápathasádháranacalukvikulálamkáraprithvívadatramánivarttakaniva
[10] rttayitravanijanáshrayashrípulakeshirájassarvánevátmíyán
[390] Journal B. B. R. A. S. XVI. 105.
[391] Ind. Ant. VII. 241.
[392] Ind. Ant. IX. 123.
[393] Ind. Ant. V. 109ff; Ind. Ant. VII. 61ff.; Jour. R. A. S. (N. S.),
I. 274ff.; Ind. Ant. XIII. 81-91; Jour. B. B. R. A. Soc. X. 19ff.;
Ind. Ant. XIII. 115-119. Ind. Ant. XVII. and Ep. Ind. II. 19ff.
[394] See above page 107.
[395] That Nándor or Nándod was an old and important city is proved
by the fact that Bráhmans and Vániás called Nándorás that is of
Nándor are found throughout Gujarát, Mángrol and Chorvád on the South
Káthiáváda coast have settlements of Velári betelvine cultivators who
call themselves Nandora Vániás and apparently brought the betelvine
from Nándod. Dr. Bühler, however, identifies the Nándípurí of the
grants with an old fort of the same name about two miles north of
the east gate of Broach. See Ind. Ant. VII. 62.
[396] Ind. Ant. XIII. 81, 88.
[397] Ind. Ant. XIII. 70.
[398] The fact that the Umetá and Iláo plates give their grantor
Dadda II. the title of Mahárájádhirája Supreme Lord of Great Kings,
is one of the grounds for believing them forgeries.
[399] Ep. Ind. II. 20.
[400] Ep. Ind. II. 21.
[401] Ind. Ant. VII. 162.
[402] Ep. Ind. II. 19.
[403] Ind. Ant. VII. 68, VIII. 302, XIII. 160, and XV. 187.
[404] Ind. Ant. VI. 9, VII. 70.
[405] Ind. Ant. XIII. 81-88.
[406] Ind. Ant. VII. 70.
[407] Beal's Buddhist Records, II. 266, 268.
[408] Ind. Ant. XIII. 81-88, Ep. Ind. II. 19.
[409] On these forged grants see below page 117.
[410] Ind. Ant. XIII. 70.
[411] Beal's Buddhist Records, II. 259.
[412] Ind. Ant. VIII. 237.
[413] Ind. Ant. XV. 335.
[414] Ind. Ant. V. 109, XIII. 70.
[415] B. B. R. A. S. Jl. XVI. 1ff.
[416] Ind. Ant. V. 109, XIII. 70. The earlier grant was made from
Káyávatára (Kárwán): the later one is mutilated.
[417] Before A.D. 738-9. See Chap. IX. above.
[418] Tod's Annals of Rájasthán, I. 88; II. 2.
[419] Ind. Ant. XI. 112.
[420] Bombay Arch. Sur. Separate Number, 10, 94.
[421] This verse which immediately follows the mention of Govinda's
conquests on the banks of the Mahí and the Narbadá punningly explains
the name of the Mátar táluka as meaning the Mother's táluka.
[422] Ind. Ant. XII. 156.
[423] The Khándesh Reve and Dore Gujars of Chopdá and Raver in the
east, and also over most of the west, may be a remnant of these Gujars
of Broach who at this time (A.D. 740), and perhaps again about sixty
years later, may have been forced up the Narbadá and Tápti into South
Málwa and West Khándesh. This is doubtful as their migration is said
to have taken place in the eleventh century and may have been due
to pressure from the north the effect of Mahmúd Ghaznavi's invasions
(A.D. 1000-1025).
[424] Ind. Ant. VI. 65; Jour. R. A. Soc. V. 350.
[425] Ind. Ant. VI. 65.
[426] The kingdom is not called Láta in the copperplate
but Látesvara-mandala. An unpublished Baroda grant has shástá
pratápaprathitah prithivyám sarvasya láteshvaramandalasya The ruler
famous by glory, of the whole kingdom of the king of Láta. Other
published grants record Govinda's gift of Gujarát to Indra as
taddattalateshvaramandalasya Of him (Indra) to whom the kingdom of
the lord of Láta had been given by him (Govinda). Ind. Ant. XII. 162.]
[427] Ind. Ant. XII. 160; unpublished Baroda grant. Srívallabha
appears to mean Amoghavarsha who is also called Lakshmívallabha in
an inscription at Sirur in Dhárwár (Ind. Ant. XII. 215).
[428] Several copperplates give Karka the epithet Putríyatastasya
Son-yearning.
[429] All village and boundary details have been identified by
Dr. Bühler. Ind. Ant. V. 148.
[430] Ind. Ant. XIV. 199.
[431] This donee is said to have been given the name of Jyotishika
by the illustrious Govindarája apparently the uncle and predecessor
of the granting king.
[432] Ind. Ant. XII. 179.
[433] Ind. Ant. XII. 184. The verse may be translated 'By whom before
long was occupied the province handed down from his father which had
been overrun by the forces of Vallabha and distracted by numbers of
evil-minded followers.'
[434] Ind. Ant. XII. 179.
[435] This plate was in Dr. Bhagvánlál's possession. It is
among the plates bequeathed to the British Museum. Dr. Bhandárkar
(B. B. R. A. S. Jl. XVIII. 255) mentions another unpublished grant
of S. 789 (A.D. 867) made by Dhruva's brother Dantivarmman.
[436] These may be either the Gurjjaras between Málwa and Gujarát,
or the Bhínmál Gurjjaras north of the Mahí. It is also possible that
they may be Chávadás as in this passage the term Gurjjara does not
refer to the tribe but to the country. [There seems little reason to
doubt the reference is to the Gurjjaras of Bhínmál or Srímál, probably
acting through their underlords the Chávadás of Anahilaváda whose
king in A.D. 865 was the warlike Kshem Rája (A.D. 841-866). Census
and other recent information establish almost with certainty that
the Chávadás or Chávotakas are of the Gurjjara race.]
[437] The identification is not satisfactory. Except the Bráhman
settlement of Mottaka, apparently the well known Motála Bráhman
settlement of Motá, which is mentioned as situated on the west
though it is on the north-east, none of the boundary villages can
be identified in the neighbourhood of Palsána. In spite of this the
name Palsána and its close vicinity to Bagumrá where the grant was
found make this identification probable.
[438] Ind. Ant. XIII. 65.
[439] Ind. Ant. XIII. 65-69.
[440] These were among Dr. Bhagvánlál's copperplates, and seem
to be the same as the two grants published by Dr. Bhandárkar in
B. B. R. A. S. Jl. XVIII. 253.
[441] See above page 127.
[442] The text is: udyaddídhitiratnajálajatilamvyákrishtamídagdhanuh
. kuddhenopari vairivírashirasámevam vimuktáh sharáh . dhárásáriní
sendracápavalaye yasyettha mabdágame garjjaravrúrjjarasamgaravyatikaram
jírnojanah shamsati.
[443] It will be noted that in Saka 836 (A.D. 914) Krishna's grandson
Indra re-grants 400 resumed villages many of which were perhaps
resumed at this time by Krishna.
[444] It follows that none of Dhavalappa's three ancestors had any
connection with Gujarát.
[445] Dr. Hultsch (Ep. Ind. I. 52) identifies Vyághrása with Vaghás,
north-east of Kapadvanj. Dr. Bhagvánlál's account of the grant was
based on an impression sent to him by the Mámlatdár of Kapadvanj.
[446] The text is: sella vidyádharenápi selu [helo] llálita tapáni
pániná nihatyá shatrún samadhe [re] yashasákulamalamkritam. Dr. Hultsch
takes the Sella-Vidyádhara here named to be another brother of
Prachanda and Akkuka. The verse is corrupt.
[447] The Khárepátan grant makes this clear by passing over Indra's
father Jagattunga in the genealogy and entering Indra as the grandson
and successor of Akálavarsha. Jour. B. B. R. A. Soc. 1. 217.
[448] The text has Helonmúlitameruná to chime with the poetical
allusion and figure about Indra. By Meru no doubt Mera or Mehr
is meant.
[449] Kurundaka may be the village of Kurund in the Thána zilla seven
miles north-east of Bhiwndi. It was a village given away in grant and
cannot therefore be any large town. [Kurundvád at the holy meeting
of the Krishna and Pañchgangá in the Southern Marátha Country close
to Narsoba's Vádi seems a more likely place for an investiture.]
[450] J. R. A. S. III. 94.
[451] Ind. Ant. XI. 109.
[452] See above.
[453] Though the name of the gotra Lakshamanasa and Láksháyanasa
differs slightly in the two grants, the identity of the name Nennapa
the son of Dhoddi and the father of Siddhabhatta the A.D. 914 grantee,
suggests that the original grant of the village of Tenna by Dhruva
I. (A.D. 795) had been cancelled in the interval and in A.D. 914 was
renewed by king Indra Nityamvarsha. [Dr. Bhandárkar reads the name
in Indra's Navsárí grant (A.D. 914) as Vennapa.]
[454] That in A.D. 915 the Dakhan Ráshtrakútas held Gujarát as far
north as Cambay is supported by the Arab traveller Al Masúdi who
(Prairies d'Or, I. 253-254) speaks of Cambay, when he visited it,
as a flourishing town ruled by Bania the deputy of the Balhára lord
of Mánkir. The country along the gulf of Cambay was a succession of
gardens villages fields and woods with date-palm and other groves
alive with peacocks and parrots.
[455] It seems doubtful whether the Kánarese Rattas the Belgaum
Radis and the Telugu Reddis could have been Rástikas or locals in
the north Dakhan. The widespread Reddis trace their origin (Balfour's
Encyclopædia of India, III. 350) to Rájamandri about thirty miles from
the mouth of the Godávari. A tradition of a northern origin remains
among some of the Reddis. The Tinnivelly Reddis (Madras J. Lit. and
Science, 1887-88, page 136 note 96) call themselves Audh Reddis and
assert that Oudh is the native country of their tribe. The late Sir
George Campbell (J. R. As. Soc. XXXV. Part II. 129) has recorded
the notable fact that the fine handsome Reddis of the north of the
Kánara country are like the Játs. With this personal resemblance may be
compared the Reddis' curious form of polyandry (Balfour's Encyclopædia,
III. 330) in accordance with which the wife of the child-husband
bears children to the adult males of the family, a practice which
received theories (compare Mr. Kirkpatrick in Indian Ant. VII. 86
and Dr. Muir in Ditto VI. 315) would associate with the northern
or Skythian conquerors of Upper India during the early centuries
of the Christian era. In support of a northern Ráta element later
than Asoka's Rástikas the following points may be noted. That the
Kshaharáta or Khaharáta tribe to which the great northern conqueror
Nahápana (A.D. 180) belonged should disappear from the Dakhan seems
unlikely. Karahátaka the Mahábhárata name (As. Res. XV. 47, quoted
in Wilson's Works VI. 178) for Karád on the Krishna suggests that
Nahapána's conquest included Sátára and that the name of the holy
place on the Krishna was altered to give it a resemblance to the
name of the conqueror's tribe. That, perhaps after their overthrow by
Gautamíputra-Sátakarni (A.D. 140), the Khaharátas may have established
a local centre at Kurandwád at the meeting of the Krishna and the
Pañchgangá may be the explanation why in A.D. 914, centuries after
Mányakheta or Málkhet had become their capital, the Ráshtrakúta Indra
should proceed for investiture to Kurundaka, which, though this is
doubtful, may be Kurandwád. The parallel case of the Khaharátas'
associates the Palhavas, who passed across the southern Dakhan and
by intermarriage have in the Pállas assumed the characteristics of
a southern tribe, give a probability to the existence of a northern
Khaharáta or Ráta element in the southern Ráshtrakúta and Rattas
which the facts at present available would not otherwise justify.
[456] The eleventh century Kanauj Gáhadaválas are now represented
by the Bundelas who about A.D. 1200 overthrew the Chándols in
Bundelkhand. These Gáharwáls or Bundelas trace their origin to
Benares or Kási and may, as Hoernle suggests, have been related
to the Pálas of that city who several times intermarried with the
Dakhan Ráshtrakútas. The Gáharwáls seem to have nothing to do with
the district of Garhwál (Gadwál) in the Himálayas.--(A. M. T. J.)
[457] The Vatsarája defeated by Dhruva who has hitherto been
identified with the Vatsa king of Kosambi is more likely to prove
to be a Bachrája of the Gurjjaras of Bhínmál or Srímál in north
Gujarát. Among references to southern settlements in North India
between A.D. 600 and 1000 may be noted the tradition (Wilson's Indian
Caste, II. 143) of a Dravidian strain in the Kashmir Bráhmans and
in the eleventh century also in Kashmir (Rajátaranginí, VI. 337)
the presence of a Sátaváhana dynasty bearing the same name as the
early Sátaváhanas of Paithan near Ahmadnagar. Other instances which
might seem more directly associated with the southern Ráshtrakútas
(A.D. 500-970) are the six Kárnátaka rulers of Nepál beginning with
A.D. 889 (Ind. Ant. VII. 91) and the natives of Karnátadesa in Máhmúd
Ghaznavi's army (A.D. 1000-1025) who (Sachau's Alberuni, I. 173;
II. 157) used the Karnáta alphabet. The presence of Karnáta rulers
in Nepál in the ninth and tenth centuries remains a puzzle. But
the use of the term Karnáta for Chálukyas of Kalyán in A.D. 1000
(Ep. Ind. I. 230) suggests that the Nepál chiefs were Chálukyas
rather than Ráshtrakútas: while Máhmúd Ghaznavi's Karnátas may
naturally be traced to the mercenary remains of Bárappa's army of
Kalyán Chálukyas whose general Bárappa was slain (Rás Málá, I. 51)
and his followers dispersed in north Gujarát by Múla Rája Solanki
at the close of the tenth century. The only recorded connection of
the southern Ráshtrakútas with Northern India during the middle ages
(A.D. 750-1150) are their intermarriages with the Pálas of Benares
(A.D. 850-1000) mentioned above (Page 132 Note 1), and, between
A.D. 850 and 950, with the Kalachuris of Tripura near Jabalpur
(Cunningham's Arch. Survey Report for 1891, IX. 80).
[458] The details compiled from the excellent index and tables in
the Panjáb Census yield the following leading groups: 37 sub-castes
named Ráthor, Rátor, and other close variants; 53 Rath and Rathis
and 2 Rahtas; 50 Ratas, Ratis, or other close variants. Compare Ráhti
the name of the people of Mount Abu (Rájputána Gazetteer, III. 139)
and the Raht tract in the north-west of Alvar (Ditto, 167).
[459] Ind. Ant. XII. 179.
[460] Ind. Ant. II. 257.
[461] Ind. Ant. XII. 151.
[462] The inscription calls Chápa the founder of the dynasty. The
name is old. A king Vyághrarája of the Chápa Vamsa, is mentioned
by the astronomer Brahmagupta as reigning in Saka 550 (A.D. 628)
when he wrote his book called Brahma-Gupta Siddhánta. The
entry runs "In the reign of Srí Vyághramukha of the Srí Chápa
dynasty, five hundred and fifty years after the Saka king having
elapsed." Jour. B. B. R. A. Soc. VIII. 27. For Dharanívaráha's grant
see Ind. Ant. XII. 190ff.
[463] Elliot's History, I. 266.
[464] According to the Káthiáwár Gazetteer pages 110 and 278, the
first wave reached about A.D. 650 and the second about 250 years
later. Dr. Bhagvánlál's identification of the Mers with the Maitrakas
would take back their arrival in Káthiáváda from about A.D. 650 to
about A.D. 450. The Mers were again formidable in Gujarát in the late
ninth and early tenth centuries. In A.D. 867 (see above Pages 127
and 130) the Ráshtrakúta Dhruva II, checked an inroad of a Mihira
king with a powerful army. Again in A.D. 914 the Ráshtrakúta Indra
in a moment uprooted the Mehr (Ditto).
[465] The Áin-i-Akbari (Gladwin, II. 69) notices that the sixth
division of Sauráshtra, which was almost impervious by reason of
mountains rivers and woods, was (A.D. 1580) inhabited by the tribe
Cheetore that is Jetwa.
[466] Of the Jhálás or Chalahs the Áin-i-Akbari (Gladwin, II. 64)
has: Chaláwareh (in north-east Káthiáváda) formerly independent and
inhabited by the tribe of Chálah.
[467] Tod's Annals of Rájasthán, II. 113.
[468] Elliot and Dowson, I. 114 and 519-531. It is noted in the text
that to the Arab invaders of the eighth and ninth centuries the Medhs
of Hind were the chief people of Káthiáváda both in Soráth in the
south and in Mália in the north. They were as famous by sea as by
land. According to Beláduri (A.D. 950) (Reinaud's Mémoire Sur l'Inde,
234-235) the Meyds of Sauráshtra and Kacch were sailors who lived on
the sea and sent fleets to a distance. Ibn Khurdádba (A.D. 912) and
Idrísi (A.D. 1130), probably from the excellent Aljauhari (Reinaud's
Abulfeda, lxiii. and Elliot, I. 79), have the form Mand. Elliot,
I. 14. The form Mand survives in a musical mode popular in Rájputána,
which is also called Rajewári. The Mand is like the Central Asian
Mus-ta-zad (K. S. Fazullah Lutfallah.)
[469] Indian Antiquary, VI. 191.
[470] Rájputána Gazetteer, I. 11.
[471] Rájputána Gazetteer, I. 66; North-West Province Gazetteer,
III. 265; Ibbetson's Panjáb Census page 261. Some of these
identifications are doubtful. Dr. Bhagvánlál in the text (21 Note 6
and 33) distinguishes between the Mevas or Medas whom he identifies as
northern immigrants of about the first century B.C. and the Mers. This
view is in agreement with the remark in the Rájputána Gazetteer, I. 66,
that the Mers have been suspected to be a relic of the Indo-Skythian
Meds. Again Tod (Annals of Rajasthán, I. 9) derives Meváda from madhya
(Sk.) middle, and the Mer of Merwáda from meru a hill. In support of
Tod's view it is to be noted that the forts Balmer Jesalmer Komalmer
and Ajmer, which Pandit Bhagvánlál would derive from the personal
names of Mer leaders, are all either hill forts or rocks (Annals,
I. 11, and Note †). It is, on the other hand, to be noted that no hill
forts out of this particular tract of country are called Mers, and
that the similar names Koli and Malava, which with equal probability
as Medh might be derived from Koh and Mala hill, seem to be tribal
not geographical names.
[472] The tales cited in the Rás Málá (I. 103) prove that most of the
Kolis between Gujarát and Káthiáváda are Mairs. That till the middle
of the tenth century the south-east of Káthiáváda was held by Medhs
(Káth. Gazetteer, 672) supports the view that the Kolis, whom about
A.D. 1190 (Tod's Western India, I. 265) the Gohils drove out of the
island of Piram, were Medhs, and this is in agreement with Idrísi
(A.D. 1130 Elliot, I. 83) who calls both Piram and the Medhs by the
name Mand. Similarly some of the Koli clans of Kacch (Gazetteer, 70)
seem to be descended from the Medhs. And according to Mr. Dalpatram
Khakkar three subdivisions of Brahmo-Kshatris, of which the best
known are the Mansura Mers and the Pipalia Mers, maintain the surname
Mair or Mer. (Cutch Gazetteer, 52 note 2.) Mera or Mehra is a common
surname among Sindhi Baluchis. Many of the best Musalmán captains and
pilots from Káthiáváda, Kacch, and the Makrán coast still have Mer
as a surname. Mehr is also a favourite name among both Khojáhs and
Memans, the two special classes of Káthiáváda converts to Islám. The
Khojáhs explain the name as meaning Meher Ali the friend of Ali;
the Memans also explain Mer as Meher or friend. But as among Memans
Mer is a common name for women as well as for men the word can hardly
mean friend. The phrase Merbaí or Lady Mer applied to Meman mothers
seems to have its origin in the Rájput practice of calling the wife
by the name of her caste or tribe as Káthiáníbaí, Meraníbaí. In the
case both of the Khojáhs and the Memans the name Mer seems to be the
old tribal name continued because it yielded itself to the uses of
Islám. Mehr, Mihr, and Mahar are also used as titles of respect. The
Khánt Kolis of Girnár, apparently a mixture of the Maitrakas of the
text and of a local hill tribe, still (Káthiáwár Gazetteer, 142)
honour their leaders with the name Mer explaining the title by the
Gujaráti mer the main bead in a rosary. Similarly in Málwa a Gurjjara
title is Mihr (Rájputána Gazetteer, I. 80) and in the Panjáb Máhar
(Gazetteer of Panjáb, Gujrát, 50-51). And in Kacch the headman among
the Bharwáds, who according to some accounts are Gurjjarás, is called
Mir (Cutch Gazetteer, 81). Similarly among the Rabáris of Kacch the
name of the holy she-camel is Máta Meri. (Ditto, 80.) All these terms
of respect are probably connected with Mihira, Sun.
[473] Compare Tod (Western India, 420): Though enrolled among the
thirty-six royal races we may assert the Jethvás have become Hindus
only from locality and circumstance. Of the Jhálás Tod says (Rajasthán,
I. 113): As the Jhálás are neither Solar Lunar nor Agnikula they must
be strangers. Again (Western India, 414): The Jhálá Makvánás are a
branch of Húnas. Of the name Makvána (Káthiáwár Gazetteer, 111; Rás
Málá, I. 297) two explanations may be offered, either that the word
comes from Mák the dewy tracts in Central Kacch (Cutch Gazetteer,
75 note 2) where (Káthiáwár Gazetteer, 420) the Jhálás stopped when
the Mers and Jethvás passed south, or that Makvána represents Mauna
a Puránic name for the Húnas (Wilson's Works, IV. 207). Tod's and
Wilford's (Asiatic Researches, IX. 287) suggestion that Makvána
is Maháhuna is perhaps not phonetically possible. At the same time
that the Makvánás are a comparatively recent tribe of northerners is
supported by the ascendancy in the fourteenth century in the Himálayas
of Makvánis (Hodgson's Essays, I. 397; Government of India Selections
XLVII. 54 and 119) who used the Indo-Skythian title Sáh (Ditto). With
the Nepal Makvánis may be compared the Makpons or army-men the caste of
the chief of Baltistán or Little Tibet. Vigne's Kashmir, II. 258, 439.
[474] The evidence in support of the statement that the Maitrakas
and Húnas fought at the same time against the same Hindu rulers is
given in the text. One of the most important passages is in the grant
of Dhruvasena III. (Epig. Ind. I. 89 [A.D. 653-4]) the reference to
Bhatárka the founder of Valabhi (A.D. 509-520) meeting in battle the
matchless armies of the Maitrakas.
[475] Mr. Fleet (Epigraphia Indica, III. 327 and note 12) would
identify Mihirakula's tribe with the Maitrakas. More recent evidence
shows that his and his father Toramána's tribe was the Jáuvlas. That
the White Húnas or other associated tribes were sun-worshippers
appears from a reference in one of Mihirakula's inscriptions (Corpus
Inscriptionum Indicarum, III. 161) to the building of a specially fine
temple of the sun; and from the fact that in Kashmír Mihirakula founded
a city Mihirapura and a temple to Mihireshwar. (Darmsteter in Journal
Asiatique, X. 70: Fleet in Indian Antiquary, XV. 242-252.) Mihirakula's
(A.D. 508-530) sun-worship may have been the continuance of the Kushán
(A.D. 50-150) worship of Mithro or Helios (Wilson's Ariana Antiqua,
357). At the same time the fact that Mihirakula uses the more modern
form Mihir makes it probable (Compare Rawlinson's Seventh Monarchy,
284) that Mihirakula's sun-worship was more directly the result of the
spread of sun-worship in Central Asia under the fiercely propagandist
Sassanians Varahan V. or Behram Gor (A.D. 420-440), and his successors
Izdigerd II. (A.D. 440-457), and Perozes (A.D. 457-483). The extent to
which Zoroastrian influence pervaded the White Húnas is shown by the
Persian name not only of Mihirakula but of Kushnawaz (A.D. 470-490)
the great emperor of the White Húnas the overthrower of Perozes. That
this Indian sun-worship, which, at latest, from the seventh to the
tenth century made Multán so famous was not of local origin is shown
by the absence of reference to sun-worship in Multán in the accounts
of Alexander the Great. Its foreign origin is further shown by the
fact that in the time of Beruni (A.D. 1020 Sachau's Edition, I. 119)
the priests were called Maghas and the image of the sun was clad in a
northern dress falling to the ankles. It is remarkable as illustrating
the Hindu readiness to adopt priests of conquering tribes into the
ranks of Bráhmans that the surname Magha survives (Cutch Gazetteer,
52 note 2) among Shrimáli Bráhmans. These Maghas are said to have
married Bhoja or Rájput girls and to have become the Bráhman Bhojaks
of Dwárka. Even the Mands who had Saka wives, whose descendants were
named Mandagas, obtained a share in the temple ceremonies. Reinaud's
Mémoire Sur l'Inde, 393.
[476] Wilson's Vishnu Purána Preface XXXIX. in Reinaud's Mémoire Sur
l'Inde, 391. Details are given in Wilson's Works, X. 381-385.
[477] Reinaud's Mémoire Sur l'Inde, 393; Wilson's Works, X. 382.
[478] The name Mehiraga is explained in the Bhavishya Purána as derived
from their ancestress a daughter of the sage Rigu or Rijvahva of the
race named Mihira (Reinaud's Mémoire Sur l'Inde, 393; Wilson's Works,
X. 382). The name Mihiraga suggests that the spread of sun-worship
in the Panjáb and Sindh, of which the sun-worship in Multán Sindh
Káthiáváda and Mewád and the fire-worshipping Rájput and Sindh coins of
the fifth and sixth centuries are evidence, was helped by the spread of
Sassanian influence into Baluchistán Kacch-Gandevi and other parts of
western Sindh, through Sakastene the modern western Seistan near the
lake Helmund. This Sakastene or land of the Sakas received its name
from the settlement in it of one of the earlier waves of the Yuechi
in the second or first century before Christ. The name explains the
statement in the Bhavishya Purána that sun-worship was introduced
by Magas into Multán from Sakadvipa the land of the Sakas. In this
connection it is interesting to note that Darmsteter (Zend Avesta,
xxxiv.) holds that the Zend Avesta was probably completed during the
reign of Sháhpur II. (A.D. 309-379): that (lxxxix.) Zend was a language
of eastern Persia an earlier form of Pashtu; and that (lxxxiv.) western
Seistan and the Helmund river was the holy land of the Avesta the
birth-place of Zoroaster and the scene of king Vishtasp's triumphs. A
memory of the spread of this western or Sassanian influence remains in
the reference in the Mujmalu-T-Tawárikh in Elliot, I. 107-109, to the
fire temples established in Kandabil (Gandevi) and Buddha (Mansura) by
Mahra a general of Bahman that is of Varahran V. (A.D. 420-440). It
seems probable that Mahra is Mehr the family name or the title
(Rawlinson's Sassanian Monarchy, 224 note 4 and 312) of the great
Mihran family of Persian nobles. The general in question may be the
Mehr-Narses the minister of Varahran's son and successor Izdigerd
II. (A.D. 440-457), who enforced Zoroastrianism in Armenia (Rawlinson,
Ditto 305-308). Mehr's success may be the origin of the Indian stories
of Varahran's visit to Málwa. It may further be the explanation of the
traces of fire temples and towers of silence noted by Pottinger (1810)
in Baluchistán (Travels, 126-127) about sixty miles west of Khelat.
[479] Wilson's Works, IX. 207.
[480] Compare Priaulx's Embassies, 222.
[481] The White Húnas overran Bakhtria and the country of the Yuechi
between A.D. 450 and 460. About a hundred years later they were crushed
between the advancing Turks and the Sassanian Chosroes I. or Naushirván
(A.D. 537-590). Rawlinson's Sassanian Monarchy, 420; Specht in Journal
Asiatique (1883) Tom II. 349-350. The Húnas supremacy in North India
did not last beyond A.D. 530 or 540. The overthrow of their supremacy
perhaps dates from A.D. 540 the battle of Karur about sixty miles east
of Multán, their conqueror being Yasodharmman of Málwa the second of
the three great Vikramádityas of Málwa. Of the Húnas' position among
Hindu castes Colonel Tod says: The Húnas are one of the Skyths who
have got a place among the thirty-six races of India. They probably
came along with the Káthi, Bála, and Makvána of Sauráshtra. Tod's
Annals of Rajasthán, I. 110.
[482] Specht in Journal Asiatique (1883), II. 348.
[483] Specht in Journal Asiatique (1883), II. 349.
[484] Compare above Chapter VII. page 73 note 3.
[485] Dr. Bhagvánlál (Text, 33) traces one set of Medhs to the
Mevas the tribe of Ysamotika the father of the Kshatrapa Chashtana
(A.D. 130). He holds these Mevas entered India (21) with the Malayas,
Palhavas, and Ábhíras about B.C. 150(?) At the same time he seems to
have considered those early Mevas different from the fifth and sixth
century Mihiras and from the seventh and eighth century Medhs.
[486] Arch. Report for 1863-64, II. 52. In support of this
Cunningham cites Ptolemy's (A.D. 150) Euthymedia that is Sagala,
sixty miles north-west of Lahor, and the Media of Peutinger's
Tables (A.D. 400). This Euthymedia is a corruption of the original
Euthydemia the name given to Sagala by Demetrios (B.C. 190) the great
Græco-Baktrian in honour of his father Euthydemos (Compare Text page
16 and McCrindle's Ptolemy, 124). Of the cause of this change of
name, which may be only a clerical error, two different explanations
have been offered. Tod (An. of Rajn. I. 233) would make the new form
Yuthi-media the Middle Yuchi. Cunningham (Arch. Surv. Rep. II. 53)
would attribute it to the southward migration towards Sindh about
B.C. 50 of the Kushán-pressed horde which under Moas or Mogha came
from Little Tibet and entered the Panjáb either by way of Kashmír or
down the Swát valley. According to General Cunningham (Ditto, 53)
the followers of this Moas were Mandrueni called after the Mandrus
river south of the Oxus. The two forms Medh and Mand are due to the
cerebral which explains the Minnagaras of Ptolemy and the Periplus;
Masudi's (A.D. 915) Mind and Ibn Khurdádbha's (died A.D. 912) and
Idrísi's (perhaps from Aljauhari) Mand (Elliot, I. 14 and 79, Reinaud's
Abulfeda, lxiii.); the present associated Mers and Mins in Rájputána
(Ditto, 53); and perhaps the Musalmán Meos and Minas of the Panjáb
(Ibbetson's Census, 261).
[487] The Jethvás are closely allied to the Medhs (Káth. Gaz. 138);
they entered Káthiáváda along with the Medhs (Ditto, 278).
[488] The passages are somewhat contradictory. Tod (Western India,
413) says: Jethvás marry with Káthis, Ahirs, and Mers. In the
Káthiáwár Gazetteer (page 110) Colonel Barton seems to admit the
Jethvás' claim to be of distinct origin from the Mers. In another
passage he says (page 138): The Mers claim to be Jethvás: this the
Jethvás deny. So also Colonel Watson in one passage (page 621) seems
to favour a distinct origin while in another (page 279) he says: It
seems probable the Jethvás are merely the ruling family Rájkula of the
Mers and that they are all of one tribe. Two points seem clear. The
Jethvás are admitted to rank among Káthiáváda Rájputs and they formerly
married with the Mers. The further question whether the Jethvás were
originally of a distinct and higher tribe remains undetermined.
[489] Bombay Administration Report for 1873. Colonel Tod made the
same suggestion: Western India, 256. Compare Pottinger's (Travels in
Baluchistán, 81) identification of the Jeths of Kacch-Gandevi north
of Khelat with Játs or Jits.
[490] Tod's Western India, 413.
[491] Compare Bühler in Epigraphia Indica, I. 294. Like the Chálukyas
and other tribes the Jethvás trace the name Jethva to a name-giving
chief. Of the Jethvás Tod says (Annals of Rajasthán, I. 114): The
Jethvás have all the appearance of Skythian descent. As they make
no pretension to belong to any of the old Indian races they may be a
branch of Skythians. In his Western India (page 412), though confused
by his identification of Sánkha-dwára with Sakotra instead of with
Bet-Dwárka (compare Káth. Gaz. 619), Tod still holds to a northern
origin of the Jethvás.
[492] Nos. 6 and 82 of Colonel Watson's List, Káthiáwár Gazetteer,
621. The Pandit's evidence in the text ascribes to the somewhat
doubtful Jáikadeva a date of A.D. 738 (Vikram 794); to Jáchikadeva
a date of about A.D. 904 (Gupta 585); and to the Ghúmli ruins a
probable eleventh century. Tod (Western India, 417) traces the
Jethvás further back putting the founding of Ghúmli or Bhúmli at
about A.D. 692 (S. 749) the date of a settlement between the Tuars
of Delhi and the Jethvás (Ditto, 411). Col. Watson (Káth. Gaz. 278)
gives either A.D. 650 or A.D. 900.
[493] The form Yetha is used by the Chinese pilgrim Sung-yun
A.D. 519. Beal's Buddhist Records, I. xc.
[494] Journal Asiatique (1883), II. 319.
[495] Journal Asiatique (1883), II. 314.
[496] Compare for the chief's name Jetha, Colonel Watson Káth. Gaz. 622
in the Jyeshtha Nakshatra.
[497] Priaulx's Embassies, 220; Migne's Patrologiæ Cursus Vol. 88
page 98.
[498] Census of 1891. III. 116. A reference to the Jhauvlas is given
above page 75 note 4. General Cunningham (Ninth Oriental Congress,
I. 228-244) traces the tribe of Jhauvla ruling in Sindh, Zabulistan
or Ghazni, and Makran from the sixth to the eighth and ninth centuries.
[499] Tod's Western India, 194 Note [++]. Tod adds: Chand abounds
in such jeu-de-mot on the names of tribes.
[500] Rás Málá, I. 302: Káthiáwár Gazetteer, 111.
[501] Tod's Annals of Rajasthán, I. 111.
[502] Among references to Húnas may be noted: In the Váyu Purána
(Sachau's Alberuni, I. 300) in the west between Karnaprávarna and
Darva; in the Vishnu Purána Húnas between the Saindhavas and the
Sálvás (Wilson's Works, VII. 133 and 134 Note †); in the eighth century
Ungutsi lord of the Húnas who helped Chitor (Tod's Annals, II. 457); in
the Khichi bard Mogji, traditions of many powerful Húna kings in India
(Tod's Annals, I. 111 Note †) among them the Húna chief of Barolli
(Ditto, II. 705); and Rája Húna of the Pramára race who was lord of
the Pathár or plateau of Central India (Ditto, II. 457). In the Middle
Ages the Húnas were considered Kshatriyas and Kshatriyas married
Húna wives (Wilson's Works, VII. 134 Note †). Of existing traces in
the Panjáb may be noted Hon and Hona Rájputs and Gujjars, Hona Jats,
Hon Labánas, Hon Lohárs, Honi Mális, Hon Mochis, Húna Barbers, and
Haun Rabáris (Panjáb Census. 1891. III. pages 116, 139, 227, 233,
246, 265, 276, 305, 315). The only traces Colonel Tod succeeded in
finding in Gujarát were a few Húna huts at a village opposite Umetha
on the gulf of Cambay, a second small colony near Somanátha, and a
few houses at Trisauli five miles from Baroda. (Western India, 247,
323.) Since 1825 these traces have disappeared.
[503] The following manuscript histories have been used in
preparing Part II. Hemachandra's Dvyásrayakávya, Merutunga's
Prabandhachintámani, Merutunga's Vichárasreni, Jinaprabhasúri's
Tírthakalpa, Jinamandanopádhyáya's Kumárapálaprabandha, Krishna-rishi's
Kumárapálacharita, Krishnabhatta's Ratnamálá, Somesvara's Kírtikaumudí,
Arisinha's Sukritasankírtana, Rájasekhara's Chaturvinsatiprabandha,
Vastupálacharita, and published and unpublished inscriptions from
Gujarát and Káthiáváda.
[504] The Prabandhachintámani is a short historical compilation;
the Vichárasreni, though a mere list of kings, is more reliable;
the Ratnamálá is a poetic history with good descriptions and many
fables taken from the Prabandhachintámani; the Sukritasankírtana is
a short work largely borrowed from the Vichárasreni.
[505] This is apparently Vriddhi Áhára or the Vriddhi Collectorate,
probably called after some village or town of that name.
[506] See above page 108.
[507] See above page 109.
[508] In the Satyapurakalpa of his Tírthákalpa, Jinaprabhasúri tells
an almost identical story of another king.
[509] This name often recurs in Jain works. These would seem to be
Kshatrapa coins as Gadhaiya coins are simply called drammas.
[510] The text is "Pañchásatavarshadesyah."
[511] Probably Kákrej famous for its bullocks.
[512] Stories of thieves refraining from plundering houses where they
have accidentally laid their hands on salt or millet are common.
[513] The making of the installation mark on the forehead is the
privilege of the king's sister who gives a blessing and receives a
present of villages.
[514] Elliot and Dowson, I. 11.
[515] Ind. Ant. IV. 71-72 and VI. 180.
[516] Ind. Ant. VI. 180ff. The suggestion may be offered that the
Kanyákubja which is mentioned as the seat of Múlarája's ancestors,
is Karnakubja, an old name of Junágadh. Compare Burgess' Káthiáwár
and Kutch, 156.
[517] Ind. Ant. VI. 191ff.
[518] Kirtane's Hammíramahákávya, I.
[519] The Choháns of Ajmir were also known as the rulers of Sákambharí,
the Sámbhar lake in Rájputána on the borders of Jaipur and Jodhpur. The
corrected edition of the Harsha inscription published by Prof. Kielhorn
in Epigraphia Indica II. 116ff. shows that their first historical
king was Gúvaka, who reigned some time in the first half of the
ninth century (c. 820 A.D.) The Choháns are still very numerous in
the neighbourhood of the Sewálik hills, especially in the districts
of Ambálá and Karnál. Compare Ibbetson's Panjáb Census for 1881.
[520] It appears from the grant of Saka 972 published by Mr. Dhruva
in Ind. Ant. XII. 196 and from the Surat grant of Kírttirája dated
Saka 940, that this Bárappa was the founder of a dynasty who ruled
Láta or South Gujarát as under-kings of the Dakhan Chálukyas until at
least A.D. 1050. Bárappa was, as his name shows, a Southerner from the
Kánarese country, but his descendants spell the family name Chaulukya
in the same way as the dynasty of Anahilaváda.
[521] Dr. Bühler (Ind. Ant. XII. 123) sees a reference to this
retirement in Múlarája's grant of Samvat 1043.
[522] Apparently a Sanskrit form of Bárappa.
[523] Broach according to the commentator.
[524] The Sukritasankírtana mentions this defeat of Bárappa
who is said to be a general of the Kanyákubja or Kanoj king. The
Prabandhachintámani (Múlarájaprabandha) also mentions the invasion
and slaughter of Bárappa; but there is no reference to it in the
grant of Bárappa's descendant Trilochanapála (Ind. Ant. XII. 196ff.)
[525] Canto II. Verse 3.
[526] As Mr. Forbes rightly observed Graharipu the Planet-seizer is
a made-up title based on the resemblance of the planet-seizer's name
Ráhu to Rá the title of the Chúdásamás of Junágadh. The personal name
of the chief is not given and the list of the Junágadh Chúdásamás is
too incomplete to allow of identification.
[527] The mention of her name and of the language in which she wrote
suggest something remarkable in the race and position of queen Nílí.
[528] Perhaps Sithá in Jhálávád.
[529] The same account appears in the Kumárapálacharita.
[530] Compare the Lakshmí-Vihára Jain temple in Jesalmir built by
the Jain Sangha and called after the reigning king Lakshmana.
[531] Dr. Bühler's copperplate of Múlarája records a grant to this
temple, said to be of Múlanáthadeva in Mandali in the Vardhi zilla,
apparently the modern Mándal near Pañchásar in the Vadhiár province
near Jhinjhuváda. The grant is in Samvat 1043 and is dated from
Anahilapura though the actual gift was made at Srísthala or Sidhpur
after bathing in the Sarasvatí and worshipping the god of the
Rudramahálaya. The grant is of the village of Kamboika, the modern
Kamboi near Modhera. Ind. Ant. VI. 192-193. The grant is said to have
been written by a Káyastha named Káñchana and ends with the words
"of the illustrious Múlarája."
[532] The difference between 1052 and 1053 is probably only a few
months.
[533] The fight with Muñja must have taken place about A.D. 1011
(S. 1067). As Chámunda started just after installing Vallabha the
beginning of the reign must be before A.D. 997 as Tailapa who fought
with Muñja died in that year. This is proved by a manuscript dated
A.D. 994 (S. 1050) which gives the reigning king as Muñja. That Bhoja
Muñja's successor was ruling in A.D. 1014 (S. 1070) makes it probable
that Muñja's reign extended to A.D. 1011 (S. 1067).
[534] This Svayamvara and the list of attendant and rival kings seem
imaginary. The Nadol chiefship was not important enough to draw kings
from the countries named.
[535] The text has son but Bhíma was Durlabha's nephew not his son.
[536] By sowing cowries Kulachandra may have meant to show the
cheapness of Anahilaváda. Bhoja's meaning was that as shells are money,
to sow shells was to sow Málwa wealth in Gujarát. If Kulachandra had
sown salt all would have melted, and no trace been left. [This seems a
symbolic later-stage explanation. The sense seems to be shell-sowing
keeps the Anahilaváda guardians in place since guardians can live in
shells: salt-sowing scares the guardian spirits and makes the site
of the city a haunt of demons. Bhoja saw that thanks to his general
the Luck of Anahilaváda would remain safe in the shells.]
[537] The Prabandhachintámani tells other stories of the relations
between Bhíma and Bhoja. Once when Gujarát was suffering from famine
Bhíma heard that Bhoja was coming with a force against Gujarát. Alarmed
at the news Bhíma asked Dámara his minister of peace and war to prevent
Bhoja coming. Dámara went to Málwa, amused the king by witty stories,
and while a play was being acted in court degrading and joking other
kings, something was said regarding Tailapa of Telingana. On this
Damara reminded the king that the head of his grandfather Muñja
was fixed at Tailap's door. Bhoja grew excited and started with an
army against Telingana. Hearing that Bhíma had come against him as
far as Bhímapura (?) Bhoja asked Dámara to prevent Bhíma advancing
further. Dámara stopped Bhíma by taking him an elephant as a present
from Bhoja. The Prabandhachintámani gives numerous other stories
showing that at times the relations between Bhoja and Bhíma were
friendly.
[538] See above page 9.
[539] See above page 160.
[540] With this silence compare the absence (Reinaud's Mémoire Sur
l'Inde, 67) of any reference either in Sanskrit or in Buddhist books
to the victories, even to the name, of Alexander the Great. Also in
modern times the ignoring of British rule in the many inscriptions
of Jain repairers of temples on Satruñjaya hill who belong to British
territory. The only foreign reference is by one merchant of Daman who
acknowledges the protection of the Phirangi játi Puratakála Pátasahi
the king of the Firangis of Portugal. Bühler in Epigraphia Indica,
II. 36.
[541] Elliot and Dowson, II. 468ff. Sir H. M. Elliot gives extracts
for this expedition from the Tárikh-i-Alfi, Tabakát-i-Akbari,
Tabakát-i-Násiri, and Rauzatu-s-safá.
[542] Since the earliest times Hindus have held eclipse days
sacred. According to the Mahábhárata the Yádavas of Dwárká came to
Somanátha for an eclipse fair. Great fairs are still held at Somanátha
on the Kártika and Chaitra (December and April) fullmoons.
[543] This old Indian idea is expressed in a verse in an inscription
in Somanátha Pátan itself.
[544] Ten thousand must be taken vaguely.
[545] Compare Sachau's Alberuni, II. 104. Every day they
brought Somanátha a jug of Ganges water and a basket of Kashmir
flowers. Somanátha they believed cured every inveterate sickness and
healed every desperate and incurable disease. The reason why Somanátha
became so famous was that it was a harbour for those who went to and
fro from Sofala in Zanzibar to China. It is still the practice to
carry Ganges water to bathe distant gods.
[546] These must be the local Sompura Bráhmans who still number more
than five hundred souls in Somanátha Patan.
[547] Shaving is the first rite performed by pilgrims.
[548] Dancers are now chiefly found in the temples of Southern India.
[549] Mahmúd seems to have crossed the desert from Multán and
Baháwalpur to Bikánír and thence to Ajmír.
[550] Apparently Delváda near Uná. Mahmúd's route seems to have been
from Anahilaváda to Modhera and Mándal, thence by the Little Ran
near Pátri and Bajána, and thence by Jhálávád Gohelvád and Bábriavád
to Delvádá.
[551] The waves still beat against the walls of the ruined fort
of Somanátha.
[552] This shows that the temple was a building of brick and
wood. According to Alberuni (Sachau, II. 105) the temple was built
about a hundred years before Mahmúd's invasion. An inscription at Patan
states that Bhímadeva I. (A.D. 1022-1072) rebuilt the Somanátha temple
of stone. In Dr. Bhagvánlál's opinion the first dynasty in Gujarát
to make stone buildings were the Solankis. Before them buildings and
temples were of wood and brick.
[553] Of the fate of the great Linga Alberuni (Sachau, II. 103) writes:
Prince Mahmúd ordered the upper part to be broken. The rest with all
its coverings and trappings of gold jewels and embroidered garments he
transported to Ghazni. Part of it together with the brass Chakravarti
or Vishnu of Thánesvar has been thrown into the hippodrome of the town:
part lies before the mosque for people to rub their feet on.
[554] The next paragraph relating to Mahmúd's return will be found
on page 249 of the same volume of Sir H. Elliott's work.
[555] Khandahat which must have been on the coast has not been
identified. The description suggests some coast island in the gulf
of Kacch. By the Girnár route forty parasangs that is 240 miles would
reach the Kacch coast. Kanthkot in Vágad in east Kacch suits well in
sound and is known to have been a favourite resort of the Solankis. But
the ebb and flow of the tide close to it are difficult to explain. The
identification with Kanthkot is favoured by Dr. Bühler. Colonel Watson
(Káthiáwár Gazetteer, 80) prefers Gándhvi on the Káthiáváda coast a
few miles north-east of Miáni. M. Reinaud and Dr. Weil suggest Gandhár
in Broach on the left bank of the mouth of the Dhádhar river. Sir
H. Elliot (I. 445 and II. 473) prefers Khandadár at the north-west
angle of Káthiáváda.
[556] According to Ferishta (Bombay Persian Ed. I. 57, Briggs'
Translation, I. 74) Mahmúd stayed and meant to make his capital at
Anahilaváda not at Somanátha. That Mahmúd did stay at Anahilaváda the
Martyr's Mound and the Ghazni Mosque in Patan are evidence. Still the
mound was probably raised and the mosque may at least have been begun
in honour of the capture of Anahilaváda on the journey south. Traces
of a second mosque which is said to have had a tablet recording Mahmúd
of Ghazni as the builder have recently (1878) been found at Munjpur
about twenty-five miles south-east of Rádhanpur.
[557] Briggs' Ferishta, I. 75. This account of the Dábshilíms
reads more like a tradition than an historical record. It is to
be noted that the authors both of the Áin-i-Akbari (A.D. 1583)
and of the Mirat-i-Ahmadí (A.D. 1762) give Chámunda as king at the
time of Mahmúd's invasion. Their statements cannot weigh against Ibn
Asír's account. Compare Dr. Bühler's remarks in Ind. Ant. VI. 184. Of
Mahmúd's return to Ghazni (A.D. 1026) the Tabakát-i-Akbari says: 'When
Mahmúd resolved to return from Somanátha he learned that Parama Dev,
one of the greatest Rájás of Hindustán, was preparing to intercept
him. The Sultán, not deeming it advisable to contend with this chief,
went towards Multán through Sindh. In this journey his men suffered
much in some places from scarcity of water in others from want of
forage. After enduring great difficulties he arrived at Ghazni in
A.D. 1029 (H. 417).' This Parama Dev would seem to be the Parmára
king of Ábu who could well block the Ajmir-Gujarát route. The route
taken by Mahmúd must have passed by Mansúra near Bráhmanábád, Bhátia,
and Multán. It must have been in the crossing of the great desert that
he suffered so severely from scarcity of water and forage. Ferishta
(Briggs, I. 75) says that many of Mahmúd's troops died raging mad
from the intolerable heat and thirst. The historian Muhammad Ufi
(A.D. 1200) alleges (Elliot, II. 192) that two Hindus disguised as
countrymen offered themselves as guides and led the army three days'
march out of the right course, where they were saved only by Mahmúd's
miraculous discovery of a pool of sweet water. [This tale of the
self-sacrificing Bráhman or priest and the miraculous find of water has
gathered round Mahmúd as the latest of myth centres. It is Herodotus'
(Book III. 154-158) old Zopyrus tale (Rawlinson's Seventh Monarchy,
318); it is revived in honour of the Great Kushán Kanishka, A.D. 78
(Beruni in Elliot, II. 11), of the Sassanian Firoz A.D. 457-483
(Rawlinson's Seventh Monarchy, 318), and of a certain king of
Zábulistán or Ghazni of uncertain date (Elliot II. 170). Similarly the
puzzling Dabshilím tale seems to be peculiar neither to Gujarát nor to
Mahmúd of Ghazni. It seems a repetition of the tale of Dabshilím the
man of the royal race, who, according to the Panchatantra or Fables
of Pilpai, was chosen successor of Porus after Alexander the Great's
Viceroy had been driven out. [Compare Reinaud's Mémoire Sur l'Inde,
127-128.] The Tabakát-i-Násirí (A.D. 1227) adds (Elliot, II. 475)
that the guide devoted his life for the sake of Somanátha and this
account is adopted by Ferishta, Briggs' Translation, I. 78.
[558] Vasahiis Prákrit for Vasati that is residence. The word is used
to mean a group of temples.
[559] Several later mentions of a Tripurushaprásáda show there was
only one building of that name. The statement that the great Múlarája
I. built a Tripurushaprásáda seems a mistake, due to a confusion with
prince Múlarája.
[560] Meaning a large number of Bhils of whom Áshá was the head.
[561] Forbes' Rás Málá (New Ed.), 79.
[562] Probably a Bhíl goddess. The name does not sound Sanskrit.
[563] In one passage the Prabandhachintámani calls these princes
half-brothers of Udaya. Further details show that they were
half-brothers of one another and sons of Udaya.
[564] This Jayakesi is Jayakesi I. son of Shashthadeva (Suchakesi)
the third of the Goa Kádambas. Jayakesi's recorded date A.D. 1052
(S. 974) fits well with the time of Karna (Fleet's Kánarese Dynasties,
91). The Prabandhachintámani tells the following story of the death
of Jayakesi. Jayakesi had a favourite parrot whom he one day asked
to come out of his cage and dine with him. The parrot said: The cat
sitting near you will kill me. The king seeing no cat replied: If any
cat kills you I too will die. The parrot left his cage, ate with the
king, and was killed by the cat. Jayakesi made ready his funeral pyre,
and, in spite of his minister's prayers, taking the dead parrot in
his hand laid himself on the funeral pyre and was burned.
[565] Chandrapura is probably Chandávar near Gokarn in North Kánara.
[566] Rás Málá (New Edition), 83.
[567] Kielhorn's Report on Sanskrit Manuscripts for 1881 page 22.
[568] Dussala was sixth in descent from Vigraharája the enemy of
Múlarája from whom Karna was fifth in descent.
[569] The date of his installation is given by the author of the
Vichárasreni as Vikrama S. 1150.
[570] Ásapála and Kumárapála appear to be local chiefs.
[571] Compare Forbes' Rás Málá, I. 118-153.
[572] Goa Kádámba inscriptions say that Jagaddeva was the cousin of the
Goa Kádamba king Vijayárka the nephew of Miyánalladeví and call him by
courtesy the younger brother of Vijayárka's son Jayakesi II. He would
seem to have been held in esteem by Vijayárka and his son Jayakesi,
to have then gone for some time to Siddharája, and after leaving
Siddharája to have transferred his services to Permádi. His being
called Paramára may be due to his connection with Permádi. Fleet's
Kánarese Dynasties, 91.
[573] Seventy-two a favourite number with Indian authors.
[574] Prabandhachintámani and Kumárapálacharita.
[575] Dr. Kielhorn's Report on Sanskrit Manuscripts for 1881 page 22.
[576] The Kumárapálacharita says that the title was assumed on the
conquest of Barbaraka. The verse is:
siddho barbarakashvásya siddharájastatobhavat
that is, by him the demon Barbaraka was vanquished, therefore he
became Siddharája The Lord of Magical Power.
[577] Ind. Ant. IV. 265.
[578] This Permádi may be the Goa Kádamba chief Permádi Sivachitta
(A.D. 1147-1175), who was heir-apparent in the time of Siddharája,
or the Sinda chief Permádi who was a cotemporary of Siddharája and
flourished in A.D. 1144.
[579] Ind. Ant. IV. 2. Regarding Barbaraka Doctor Bühler remarks in
Ind. Ant. VI. 167: 'The Varvarakas are one of the non-Aryan tribes
which are settled in great numbers in North Gujarát, Koli, Bhíl,
or Mer.' Siddharája's contests with the Barbarakas seem to refer
to what Tod (Western India, 173 and 195) describes as the inroads
of mountaineers and foresters on the plains of Gujarát during the
eleventh and twelfth centuries. To attempt to identify Bhut Barbar
or Varvar is hazardous. The name Barbar is of great age and is
spread from India to Morocco. Wilson (Works, VII. 176) says: The
analogy between Barbaras and barbarians is not in sound only. In
all Sanskrit authorities Barbaras are classed with borderers and
foreigners and nations not Hindu. According to Sir Henry Rawlinson
(Ferrier's Caravan Journeys, 223 note) tribes of Berbers are found
all over the east. Of the age of the word Canon Rawlinson (Herodotus,
IV. 252) writes: Barbar seems to be the local name for the early race
of Accad. In India Ptolemy (A.D. 150; McCrindle's Edn. 146) has a town
Barbarei on the Indus and the Periplus (A.D. 247; McCrindle's Ed. 108)
has a trade-centre Barbarikon on the middle mouth of the Indus. Among
Indian writings, in the Ramáyana (Hall in Wilson's Works, VII. 176
Note *) the Barbaras appear between the Tukháras and the Kambojas in
the north: in the Mahábhárata (Muir's Sanskrit Texts, I. 481-2) in one
list Var-varas are entered between Sávaras and Sakas and in another
list (Wilson's Works, VII. 176) Barbaras come between Kiratas and
Siddhas. Finally (As. Res. XV. 47 footnote) Barbara is the northmost
of the Seven Konkanas. The names Barbarei in Ptolemy and Barbarikon
in the Periplus look like some local place-name, perhaps Bambhara,
altered to a Greek form. The Hindu tribe names, from the sameness
in sound as well as from their position on the north-west border of
India, suggest the Mongol tribe Juán-Juán or Var-Var, known to the
western nations as Avars, who drove the Little Yuechi out of Balkh
in the second half of the fourth century, and, for about a hundred
years, ruled to the north and perhaps also to the south of the Hindu
Kush. (Specht in Journal Asiatique 1883. II. 390-410; Howorth in
Jour. R. A. S. XXI. 721-810.) It seems probable that some of these
Var-Vars passed south either before or along with the White Húnas
(A.D. 450-550). Var, under its Mongol plural form Avarti (Howorth,
Ditto 722), closely resembles Avartiya one of the two main divisions of
the Káthis of Kacch (Mr. Erskine's List in J. Bom. Geo. Soc. II. 59-60
for Aug. 1838). That among the forty-seven clans included under the
Avartiyas four (Nos. 30, 35, 42, and 43) are Babariyas, suggests that
the Káthis received additions from the Var-Vars at different times
and places. Dr. Bühler (Ind. Ant. VI. 186) thinks that the Babaro
or Barbar or Var-Var who gave trouble to Siddharája represent some
early local non-Aryan tribe. The fact that they are called Rákshasas
and Mlecchas and that they stopped the ceremonies at Sidhpur north
of Anahilaváda seems rather to point to a foreign invasion from the
north than to a local uprising of hill tribes. Though no Musalmán
invasion of Gujarát during the reign of Siddharája is recorded a
Jesalmir legend (Forbes' Rás Málá, I. 175) tells how Lanja Bijirao
the Bhatti prince who married Siddharája's daughter was hailed by
his mother-in-law as the bulwark of Anahilaváda against the power of
the king who grows too strong. This king may be Báhalim the Indian
viceroy of the Ghaznavid Bahrám Sháh (A.D. 1116-1157). Báhalim
(Elliot, II. 279; Briggs' Ferista, I. 151) collected an army of
Arabs, Persians, Afgháns, and Khiljis, repaired the fort of Nágor
in the province of Sewálik, and committed great devastations in the
territories of the independent Indian rulers. He threw off allegiance
to Ghazni and advancing to meet Bahrám Sháh near Multán was defeated
and slain. Except that they were northerners and that Báhalim's is
the only known invasion from the north during Siddharája's reign
nothing has been found connecting Barbar and Báhalim. At the same
time that the Barbar or Var-Var of the Gujarát writers may have been
non-Hindu mercenaries from the north-west frontier whom Siddharája
admitted as Hindu subjects is made not unlikely by two incidents
preserved by the Muhammadan historians. The Tárikh-i-Soráth (Bayley's
Gujarát, 35 Note *) tells how in A.D. 1178 from the defeated army
of Shaháb-ud-din Ghori the Turkish Afghán and Moghal women were
distributed the higher class to high caste and the commoner to low
caste Hindus. Similarly how the better class of male captives were
admitted among Chakával and Wadhál Rájputs and the lower among Khánts,
Kolis, Bábrias, and Mers. Again about thirty years later (A.D. 1210)
when his Turk mercenaries, who were not converted to Islám, revolted
against Shams-ud-dín Altamsh they seized Delhi and built Hindu temples
(Elliot, II. 237-239). These cases seem to make it likely that among
Báhalim's mercenaries were some un-Islamised North Indian Var-Vars and
that they were admitted into Hinduism by Siddharája and as the story
states served him as other Rájputs. Some of the new-comers as noted
above seem to have merged into the Káthis. Others founded or joined
the Bábariás who give their name to Bábariáváda a small division in the
south of Káthiáváda. Though the tribe is now small the 72 divisions of
the Bábariás show that they were once important. One of their leading
divisions preserves the early form Var (Káthiáwár Gazetteer, 132-133)
and supports their separate northern origin, which is forgotten in
the local stories that they are descended from Jethvás and Ahirs and
have a Bráhman element in their ancestry. (Tod's Western India, 413;
Káthiáwár Gazetteer, 132-123.) Of the Var-Vars in their old seats a
somewhat doubtful trace remains in the Barbaris a tribe of Hazáráhs
near Herat (Bellew in Imp. and As. Quar. Review Oct. 1891 page 328)
and in the Panjáb (Ibbetson's Census, 538) Bhábras a class of Panjáb
Jains.
[580] Abhayatilaka Gani who revised and completed the Dvyásraya in
Vikrama S. 1312 (A.D. 1256) says, in his twentieth Sarga, that a
new era was started by Kumárapála. This would seem to refer to the
Simha era.
[581] The Kumárapálacharita states that Sajjana died before the
temple was finished, and that the temple was completed by his son
Parasuráma. After the temple was finished Siddharája is said to have
come to Somanátha and asked Parasuráma for the revenues of Sorath. But
on seeing the temple on Girnár he was greatly pleased, and on finding
that it was called Karna-vihára after his father he sanctioned the
outlay on the temple.
[582] Ind. Ant. VI. 194ff. Dr. Bühler (Ditto) takes Avantínátha to mean
Siddharája's opponent the king of Málwa and not Siddharája himself.
[583] Archæological Survey Report, XXI. 86.
[584] Jour. B. A. Soc. (1848), 319.
[585] The original verse is mahálayo maháyátrá mahásthánam mahásarah
yatkritam siddharájena kriyate tanna kenacit .
[586] These, as quoted by Ráo Sáheb Mahípatrám Rúprám in his Sadhara
Jesangh, are, the erection of charitable feeding-houses every yojana
or four miles, of Dabhoi fort, of a kunda or reservoir at Kapadvanj,
of the Málavya lake at Dholká, of small temples, of the Rudramahálaya,
of the Ráni's step-well, of the Sahasralinga lake, of reservoirs
at Sihor, of the fort of Sáelá, of the Dasasahasra or ten thousand
temples, of the Muna lake at Viramgám, of the gadhs or forts of
Dadharapur, Vadhwán Anantapur and Chubári, of the Sardhár lake, of
the gadhs of Jhinjhuváda, Virpur, Bhádula, Vásingapura, and Thán,
of the palaces of Kandola and Sihi Jagapura, of the reservoirs of
Dedádrá and Kírtti-stambha and of Jitpur-Anantpura. It is doubtful
how many of these were actually Siddharája's works.
[587] One of the best preserved slabs was sent by Sir John Malcolm
when Resident of Málwa to the Museum of the B. B. R. A. S., where it
still lies. It has verses in twelfth century Prakrit in honour of a
king, but nothing historical can be made out of it.
[588] See above page 170.
[589] Devasúri was born in S. 1134 (A.D. 1078), took díkshá in S. 1152
(A.D. 1096), became a Súri in S. 1174 (A.D. 1118), and died on a
Thursday in the dark half of Srávana S. 1226 (A.D. 1170). His famous
disciple Hemachandra was born on the fullmoon of Kártika S. 1145
(A.D. 1089), became an ascetic in S. 1150 (A.D. 1094), and died in
S. 1229 (A.D. 1173).
[590] The Prákrit local name was Âno, of which the Sanskritised
forms would appear to be Arno, Arnava, Ánáka, and Ánalla as given in
the Hammíramahákávya. The genealogy of these kings of Sákambhari or
Sámbhar is not settled. The Nadol copperplate dated Samvat 1218 gives
the name of its royal grantor as Alan and of Alan's father as Máharaja
(Tod's Rajasthán, I. 804), the latter apparently a mistake for Anarája
which is the name given in the Dvyásraya. Alan's date being V. 1218,
the date of his father Ána would fit in well with the early part of
Kumárapála's reign. The order of the two names Álhana and Ánalla in the
Hammíramahákávya would seem to be mistaken and ought to be reversed.
[591] Kodinár is a town in Gáikwár territory in South Káthiáváda. This
temple of Ambiká is noticed as a place of Jain pilgrimage by the sage
Jinaprabhasúri in his Tírthakalpa and was a well-known Jain shrine
during the Anahilaváda period.
[592] The Kumárapálaprabandha has Kelambapattana and Kolambapattana
probably Kolam or Quilon.
[593] The Kumárapálaprabandha says that Udayana was appointed minister
and Vágbhata general. Sollá the youngest son of Udayana did not take
part in politics.
[594] Kirtane's Hammíramahákávya, 13.
[595] Dhavalakka or Dholka according to the Kumárapálaprabandha.
[596] According to the Kumárapálacharita Kumárapála's sister who was
married to Ána having heard her husband speak slightingly of the
kings of Gujarát took offence, resented the language, and bandied
words with her husband who beat her. She came to her brother and
incited him to make an expedition against her husband.
[597] The Dvyásraya does not say that Kumárapála's sister was married
to Ána.
[598] This was a common title of the Siláhára kings. Compare Bombay
Gazetteer, XIII. 437 note 1.
[599] Ámbadá is his proper name. It is found Sanskritised into
Ámrabhata and Ambaka.
[600] This is the Káverí river which flows through Chikhli and
Balsár. The name in the text is very like Karabená the name of the
same river in the Násik cave inscriptions (Bom. Gaz. XVI. 571) Kaláviní
and Karabená being Sanskritised forms of the original Káveri. Perhaps
the Káveri is the Akabarou of the Periplus (A.D. 247).
[601] Sausara or Sásar seems the original form from which Samara was
Sanskritised. Sásar corresponds with the Mehr name Cháchar.
[602] The Kumárapálacharita says that Samara was defeated and his
son placed on the throne.
[603] The translation of the inscription runs: Steps made by the
venerable Ámbaka, Samvat 1222. According to the Kumárapálaprabandha
the steps were built at a cost of a lákh of drammas a dramma being
of the value of about 5 annas. According to the Prabandhachintámani
an earthquake occurred when the king was at Girnár on his way
to Somanátha. The old ascent of Girnár was from the north called
Chhatrasilá that is the umbrella or overhanging rocks. Hemáchárya said
if two persons went up together the Chhatrasilá rocks would fall and
crush them. So the king ordered Ámrabhata to build steps on the west
or Junágadh face at a cost of 63 lákhs of drammas.
[604] The site of Báhadapura seems to be the ruins close to the east
of Pálitána where large quantities of conch shell bangles and pieces
of brick and tile have been found.
[605] This would appear to be the Kalachuri king Gayá Karna whose
inscription is dated 902 of the Chedi era that is A.D. 1152. As
the earliest known inscription of Gayá Karna's son Narasimhadeva is
dated A.D. 1157 (Chedi 907) the death of Gayá Karna falls between
A.D. 1152 and 1157 in the reign of Kumárapála and the story of his
being accidentally strangled may be true.
[606] So many marriages on one day points to the people being either
Kadva Kunbis or Bharváds among whom the custom of holding all marriages
on the same day still prevails.
[607] The text of the inscription is:
(1) ... paushasudígurau adyoha shrímadan-
(2) hilapátake [samasta] rájávalíbirájitaparamabhattárakamahá-
(3) [rájádhirájanirjita]
sákambharíbhúpálashrímadavantináthashrímatku
(4) [márapála] ... niyuktamahámátyashríjasodhava--
(5) la shríkaranádau samastamudrávyápáránparipanthayatítyevam
(6) kále [pravartamáne mahárájá] dhirájashríkumárapáladevena vija
(7) ..... shrímadudayapuro .. rocakánvaye mahárája--
(8) putra ..... mahárájaputravasantapála evam ana
(9) ..... likhitá yátrá . adya somagrahanaparvani
(10) ... layavane samáhritatírthodake snátvá jagadgu
(11) ... sukhapunyajayavriddhaye udayapurakári
(12) ...... kárápita devashrí ........
Lines broken below.
[608] Annals of Rájasthán, I. 803.
[609] Rás Málá (New Edition), 154.
[610] Rás Málá (New Edition), 154.
[611] The text is:
yah kauberímá turushkamaindrímá tridivápagám
yámyámá vindhyamá sindhum pashcamám yo hásádhayat
[612] It is also interesting, if there is a foundation of fact to
the tale, that this is the temple visited by the Persian poet Saádi
(A.D. 1200-1230) when he saw the ivory idol of Somanátha whose arms
were raised by a hidden priest pulling a cord. According to Saádi on
pretence of conversion he was admitted behind the shrine, discovered
the cord-puller, threw him into a well, and fled. Compare Journal
Royal Asiatic Society Bengal VII.-2 pages 885-886. That Saádi ever
visited Somanátha is doubtful. No ivory human image can ever have
been the chief object of worship at Somanátha.
[613] From the Prabandhachintámani and the Kumárapálacharita.
[614] The head-quarters of the Dhandhuka sub-division sixty miles
south-west of Ahmadábád.
[615] Another reading is Láhiní.
[616] Prabandhachintámani.
[617]
bhavavíjánkurajananá rágádyáh kshayamupágatá yasya .
brahmá vá vishnurvá haro jino vá namastasmai .
yatra tatra samaye yathá tathá yosi sosyabhidhayá yayá tayá .
vítadoshakalushah sa cedbhaváneka eva bhagavannamostu te .
[618] samvat 1229 vaishákhashudi 3 some adyeha shrímadanahillapashthake
samastarajávalívirájitamahárájádhirájaparameshvara
ajayapáladevakalyánavijayarájye tatpádapadmopajívini
mahámátyashrísomeshvare shríkaranádau.
[619] Regarding the remarkable story that not long before their
deaths both Hemáchárya and Kumárapála inclined towards if they did
not become converts to Islám (Tod's Western India, 184) no fresh
information has been obtained. Another curious saying of Tod's
(Ditto, 182) also remains doubtful. Kumárapála expelled the tribe
of Lár from his kingdom. That this tribe of Lár can have had to do
either with Láta or South Gujarát or with the caste of Lád Vánis
seems unlikely. The alternative is Pársis from Lar on the Persian
Gulf whom Tod (Annals of Rajasthán, I. 235) notices as sending an
expedition from Laristhán to Gujarát. In this connection it is worthy
of note that Lár remained the seat of a Gueber prince till A.D. 1600
the time of Shah Abas (D'Herbelot Bib. Or. II. 477). A repetition of
the Pársi riots (Cambay Gazetteer, VI. 215) may have been the cause
of their expulsion from Gujarát.
[620] See the Dvyásraya. A Patan inscription lying at Verával also
calls Ajayapála the brother's son of Kumárapála.
[621] It is stated in a grant of Bhíma II. dated S. 1283, that
Ajayadeva, as he is there called, made the Sapádalaksha or Sámbhar
king tributary. Ind. Ant. VI. 199ff.
[622] The Udayapura inscription mentions Somesvara as the minister
of Ajayapála in Samvat 1229 (A.D. 1173). See above page 193.
[623] The abuse of Ajayapála is explained if Tod's statement (Western
India, 191) that he became a Musalmán is correct.
[624] Fleet's Kánarese Dynasties, 93.
[625] Chapter II. Verse 57.
[626] We know much less about this event than its importance deserves,
for with the exception of a raid made in A.D. 1197 by one of the Ghori
generals this victory secured Gujarát from any serious Muhammadan
attack for more than a century. We learn from various grants made
by Bhímadeva II. (Ind. Ant VI. 195, 198, 200, 201) that Múlarája's
regular epithet in the Vamsávalí was "He who overcame in battle the
ruler of the Garjjanakas, who are hard to defeat": and Dr. Bühler
has pointed out (Ditto, 201) that Garjjanaka is a Sanskritising of
the name Ghaznavi. As a matter of fact, however, the leader of the
Musalmán army was Muhammad of Ghor, and the battle took place in
A.D. 1178 (H. 574). One of the two Muhammadan writers who mentions
the invasion (Muhammad 'Ufi, who wrote at Delhi about A.D. 1211)
says that Muhammad was at first defeated, but invaded the country
a second time two years later "and punished the people for their
previous misconduct." But this is only mentioned incidentally as part
of an anecdote of Muhammad's equity, and there is some confusion
with Muhammad's victory in the second battle of Náráyan (in Jaipur
territory) in A.D. 1192, as a better, though slightly later authority,
Minháj-us-Siráj, speaks of no second expedition to Gujarát led by
Muhammad himself. Minháj-us-Siráj's account of the defeat is as follows
(Elliott, II. 294): He (Muhammad) conducted his army by way of Uch and
Multán towards Nahrwálá. The Ráí of Nahrwálá, Bhímdeo, was a minor,
but he had a large army and many elephants. In the day of battle the
Muhammadans were defeated and the Sultán was compelled to retreat. This
happened in the year 574 H. (1178 A.D.)". Further on we read (Elliott,
II. 300): "In 593 H. (1197 A.D.) he (Muhammad's general Kutb-ud-dín)
went towards Nahrwálá, defeated Ráí Bhímdeo, and took revenge on the
part of the Sultán." As no conquest of the country is spoken of,
this expedition was evidently a mere raid. The only inaccuracy in
the account is the mention of Bhíma instead of Múlarája as the king
who defeated the first invasion.--(A. M. T. J.)
[627] Sarga II. Verse 47.
[628] Sarga II. Verse 60.
[629] The Vichárasreni also gives S. 1235 as the beginning of his
reign.
[630] Elliot's History of India, II. 294. This event properly belongs
to the reign of Múlarája. See above page 195 note 5.
[631] Ind. Ant. VI. 207.
[632] Chapter II. Verse 61.
[633] Kielhorn's and Peterson's Reports on Sanskrit Manuscripts.
[634] Ind. Ant. VI. 197.
[635] The text is dattvásmai doshyate yuvarájyam rájyam ciram kuru.
[636] The text is cáhú rána that is cáhumána ránaka. The term Ránaka
would show him to be a Chohán chief.
[637] Ánáka survived Kumárapála and served also under Bhímadeva
II. Seeing the kingdom of his weak sovereign divided among his
ministers and chiefs Ánáka strove till his death to re-establish the
central authority of the Solanki dynasty. Káthavate's Kírtikaumudí,
xiii.
[638] Rás Málá (New Edition), 200.
[639] Kírtikaumudí, Bombay Sanskrit Series Number XXV.
[640] Ind. Ant. VI. 188 footnote. According to Merutunga a cotemporary
chronicler an epigram of Bhíma's minister turned back Subhatavarman.
[641] Ind. Ant. VI. 188.
[642] According to one story Madanarájñí left her husband's house
taking Víradhavala with her, and went to live with Deva Rája Pattakíla
the husband of her deceased sister. On growing up Víradhavala returned
to his father's house. Rás Málá (New Edition), 201.
[643] Dr. Bühler in Ind. Ant. VI. 189.
[644] According to the Kírtikaumudí, Káthavate's Ed. XIV. note 1,
under Vastupála low people ceased to earn money by base means;
the wicked turned pale; the righteous prospered. All honestly and
securely plied their calling. Vastupála put down piracy, and, by
building platforms, stopped the mingling of castes in milk shops. He
repaired old buildings, planted trees, sank wells, laid out parks,
and rebuilt the city. All castes and creeds he treated alike.
[645] Káthavate's Kírtikaumudí, xv.
[646] The use of the date Monday the fullmoon of Vaisakha, Samvat 1288
(A.D. 1232) in the second part of the Forms seems to shew that the
work was written in A.D. 1232.
[647] Though the object is to give the form of a treaty of
alliance, the author could not have used the names Sinhana and
Lavanaprasáda unless such a treaty had been actually concluded between
them. Apparently Sinhana's invasion of Gujarát took place but a short
time before the book of treaties was compiled. Bhandárkar's Search
for Sanskrit Manuscripts (1882-83), 40-41.
[648] Bhandárkar's Search for Sanskrit Manuscripts (1882-83), 40.
[649] According to other accounts Sankha, a Broach chieftain, took up
the cause of a certain Sayad or Musalmán merchant with whom Vastupála
had quarrelled. In the fight Lunapála a Gola, one of Vastupála's chief
supporters, was slain and in his honour Vastupála raised a shrine to
the Lord Lunapála. Rás Málá (New Edition), 201-202.
[650] Káthavate's Kírtikaumudí, xv.-xvi.
[651] Káthavate's Kírtikaumudí, xv.-xvi.
[652] The modern Gujaráti Ráná.
[653] Bhímadeva's name is preceded by the names of his ten Chaulukya
predecessors in the usual order. The attributes of each are given as
in published Chaulukya copperplates. Ind. Ant. VI. 180-213.
[654] Bhandárkar's Search for Sanskrit Manuscripts (1882-83), 39.
[655] Káthavate's Kírtikaumudí, xxiii.
[656] Káthavate's Kírtikaumudí, xxiii.
[657] Káthavate's Kírtikaumudí, xxiii.-xxiv.
[658] Elliot and Dowson, II. 209.
[659] Káthavate's Kírtikaumudí, xxiv.-xxv.
[660] Káthavate's Kírtikaumudí, xx.; J. B. R. A. S. XVIII. Number
XLVIII. 28. The Jain writers delight in describing the magnificence
of the pilgrimages which Vastupála conducted to the holy places. The
details are 4500 carts, 700 palanquins, 1800 camels, 2900 writers,
12,100 white-robed and 1100 naked or sky-clad Jains, 1450 singers,
and 3300 bards. Káthavate's Kírtikaumudí, xvi.
[661] Káthavate's Kírtikaumudí, xviii.-xix.
[662] Rás Málá, 202.
[663] Ind. Ant. VI. 191. The word for Mewád is Medapáta the Med or
Mher land.
[664] The Karnáta king would probably be Somesvara (A.D. 1252)
or his son Narasimha III. (A.D. 1254) of the Hoysala Ballálas of
Dvárasamudra. Fleet's Kánarese Dynasties, 64, 69.
[665] These details are mentioned in a grant of land in Mándal in
Ahmadábád to Bráhmans to fill a drinking fountain, repair temples,
and supply offerings. Ind. Ant. VI. 210-213.
[666] Rás Málá (New Ed.), 212. A Jaina Pattávali or succession list of
High-priests notices that the famine lasted for three years from Samvat
1315 (A.D. 1259). The text may be translated as follows: Vikrama Samvat
1315, three years' famine the king (being) Vísaladeva. Bhandarkar's
Search for Sanskrit Manuscripts for 1883-84, 15, 323.
[667] See Ep. Ind. I.
[668] The inscription was first noticed by Colonel Tod: Rajasthán,
I. 705: Western India, 506.
[669] This is not Sultán Rukn-ud-dín of the slave kings, who ruled
from A.D. 1234 to A.D. 1235. Elliot and Dowson, II.
[670] All four dates tally. The middle of A.D. 1264 (Samvat 1320) falls
in Hijra 662. As the Valabhi era begins in A.D. 318-319 and the Simha
era in A.D. 1113, 945 of Valabhi and 151 of Simha tally with A.D. 1264.
[671] Bombay Government Selections CLII. New Series, 71.
[672] From an unpublished copy in the possession of Ráo Sáheb Dalpatram
Pranjiwan Khakhar, late Educational Inspector, Kacch. Only the upper
six lines of the inscription are preserved.
[673] Asiatic Researches, XVI. 311; Rás Málá, 213.
[674] Professor Bhandarkar's Report for 1883-84, 17-18.
[675] The bardic story is that king Karna had two Nágar Bráhman
ministers Mádhava and Kesava. He slew Kesava and took Mádhava's
wife from her husband. In revenge Mádhava went to Delhi and brought
the Muhammadans. After the Muhammadan conquest Mádhava presented
Alá-ud-dín with 360 horses. In return Mádhava was appointed civil
minister with Alaf Khán as military governor commanding a lákh of
horsemen, 1500 elephants, 20,000 foot soldiers, and having with him
forty-five officers entitled to use kettledrums. Rás Málá, 214.
[676] Rás Málá, 222. The Jhálás were firmly fixed in the plains
between the Lesser Ran of Kacch and the Gulf of Cambay. The Koli
branches of these clans with other tribes of pure or of adulterated
aboriginal descent, spread over the Chunvál near Viramgám and appeared
in many remote and inaccessible tracts of hill or forest. On the east,
under the protection of a line of Rájput princes, the banner of the
goddess Káli floated from the hill of Pávágad; while in the west
the descendants of Khengár held their famous fortress of Junágadh
from within its walls controlling much of the peninsula over which
they had maintained undisputed sway. Chiefs of Junágadh origin were
scattered over the rest of the peninsula among whom were the Gohils
of Gogo and Piram, and of the sea-washed province which from them
derived its name of Gohilvád.
[677] The first notice of the exercise of sovereignty by the Musalmán
rulers of Gujarát over lands further south than the neighbourhood of
Surat is in A.D. 1428, when king Áhmed I. (A.D. 1412-1443) contested
with the Dakhan sovereign the possession of Máhim (north latitude 19°
40'; east longitude 72° 47'). As no record remains of a Musalmán
conquest of the coast as far south as Danda Rájapuri or Janjira,
about fifty miles south of Bombay, it seems probable that the North
Konkan fell to the Musalmáns in A.D. 1297 as part of the recognised
territories of the lords of Anahilapura (Pátan). Rás Málá, I. 350. One
earlier reference may be noted. In A.D. 1422 among the leading men
slain in the battle of Sárangpur, about fifty miles north-east of
Ujjain in Central India, was Sávant chief of Danda Rájapuri that is
Janjíra. Mirat-i-Sikandari (Persian Text), 40, and Farishtah (Persian
Text), II. 468.
[678] The details of Akbar's settlement in A.D. 1583 show Sorath
with sixty-three subdivisions and Navánagar (Islámnagar) with
seventeen. Similarly in the Áin-i-Akbari (A.D. 1590) Sorath with its
nine divisions includes the whole peninsula except Jháláváda in the
north, which was then part of Áhmedábád. Gladwin, II. 64 and 66-71.
[679] Bird's History of Gujarát, 418.
[680] Naiyad is the present Naiyadkántha about ten miles south-west of
Rádhanpur containing Jatvár and Várahi in the west near the Ran and
spreading east to Sami and Munjpur thirty to forty miles south-west
of Pátan. Hálár is in the north-west of the peninsula; Káthiáváda in
the centre; Gohilváda in the south-east; Bábriáváda south-west of
Gohilváda; Chorár or Chorvár north-west of Virával; Panchál in the
north-east centre; Okhágir or Okhámandal in the extreme west. Nalkántha
is the hollow between Káthiáváda and the mainland. Besides these names
the author of the Mirat-i-Áhmedi gives one more district in Sorath
and others in Gujarát. The name he gives in Sorath is Nágher or Nághír
which he says is also called Sálgogah. Sálgogah is apparently Siálbet
and its neighbourhood, as Kodinár, Mádhúpúr, Chingaria, and Pata in
south Káthiáváda are still locally known as Nagher, a tract famous
for its fruitfulness. The Mirat-i-Áhmedi contains the following
additional local names: For Kadi thirty-five miles north-west
of Áhmedábád, Dandái; for Dholka twenty-five miles south-west of
Áhmedábád, Práth-Nagri; for Cambay, Támbánagri; for Víramgám forty
miles north-west of Áhmedábád, Jháláwár; for Múnjpur twenty-two
miles south-east of Rádhanpur and some of the country between it and
Patan, Párpas; for the tract ten miles south-east of Rádhanpur to
the neighbourhood of Pátan, Kakrez; for the town of Rádhanpur in the
Pálanpur Political Superintendency and its neighbourhood, Vágadh; for
the town of Pálanpur and its neighbourhood up to Dísa and Dántiváda,
Dhándár; for Bálásinor forty-two miles east of Áhmedábád with a part
of Kapadvanj in the Kaira district, Masálwada; for Baroda, Párkher;
for the subdivision of Jambúsar in the Broach district fifteen miles
north-west of Broach city, Kánam; for Alimohan that is Chhota Udepur
and the rough lands east of Godhra, Pálwára.
[681] Rás Mála, I. 241.
[682] Maktaa and iktáa, the district administered by a muktia,
come from the Arabic root kataá, he cut, in allusion to the public
revenue or the lands cut and apportioned for the pay of the officers
and their establishments.
[683] Further particulars regarding these village headmen are given
below.
[684] Bird's History of Gujarát, 192; Mirat-i-Sikandari, Persian
Text, 44.
[685] Elphinstone's History, 76.
[686] In Márwár and in the north and north-east this official was
styled tahsíldár and in the Dakhan kamávísdár.
[687] Zakát, literally purification or cleansing, is the name of a tax
levied from Muslims for charitable purposes or religious uses. In the
endowments-treasury the customs dues from Muslims at 2 1/2 per cent
(the technical 1 in 40) as contrasted with the five per cent levied
from infidels (the technical 2 in 40) were entered. Hence in these
accounts zakát corresponds with customs dues, and is divisible into
two kinds khushki zakát or land customs and tari zakát or sea customs.
[688] Bird's History of Gujarát, 93. Though under the Mughal viceroys
the state demand was at first realized in grain, at the last the
custom was to assess each sub-division, and probably each village, at a
fixed sum or jama. The total amount for the sub-division was collected
by an officer called majmudár, literally keeper of collections, the
village headmen, patels or mukaddams, being responsible each for his
own village.
[689] Bird's History of Gujarát, 325.
[690] Bird's History of Gujarát, 341.
[691] Mirat-i-Áhmedi Persian Text page 115.
[692] The title rája is applicable to the head of a family only. The
payment of tribute to the Mughals or Maráthás does not affect the
right to use this title. Rána and ráv seem to be of the same dignity
as rája. Rával is of lower rank. The sons of rájás, ránás, rávs, and
rávals are called kuvars and their sons thákurs. The younger sons of
thákurs became bhumiás that is landowners or garásiás, that is owners
of garás or a mouthful. Jám is the title of the chiefs of the Jádeja
tribe both of the elder branch in Kachh and of the younger branch in
Navánagar, or Little Kachh in Káthiáváda. Rás Málá, II. 277.
[693] Under the Maráthás the title zamíndár was bestowed on the
farmers of the land revenue, and this practice was adopted by the
earlier English writers on Gujarát. In consequence of this change
small landholders of the superior class, in directly administered
districts, came again to be called by their original Hindu name of
garásia. Mr. Elphinstone (History, 79 and note 13) includes under the
term zamíndár: (1) half-subdued chieftains, (2) independent governors
of districts, and (3) farmers of revenue. He also notices that until
Aurangzíb's time such chiefs as enjoyed some degree of independence
were alone called zamíndárs. But in Colonel Walker's time, A.D. 1805,
at least in Gujarát (Bombay Government Selections, XXXIX. 25) the
term zamíndár included desáis, majmudárs (district accountants),
patels, and talátis (village clerks).
[694] Details of A.D. 1571 given in the Mirat-i-Áhmedi show that
the chief nobles were bound to furnish cavalry contingents varying
from 4000 to 25,000 horse, and held lands estimated to yield yearly
revenues of £160,000 to £1,620,000. Bird's Gujarát, 109-127.