History of Gujarát - Gazetteer of the Bombay Presidency, Volume I, Part I.

By Author	[ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z \| Other Symbols ]
By Title	[ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z \| Other Symbols ]
By Language

Download this book: [ ASCII ]

Look for this book on Amazon

We have new books nearly every day.
If you would like a news letter once a week or once a month fill out this form and we will give you a summary of the books for that week or month by email.

Title: History of Gujarát - Gazetteer of the Bombay Presidency, Volume I, Part I.
Author: Campbell, James M.
Language: English
As this book started as an ASCII text book there are no pictures available.

*** Start of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "History of Gujarát - Gazetteer of the Bombay Presidency, Volume I, Part I." ***

scans made by the Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin. The digitized
holdings of the Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin are all
interested parties worldwide free of charge for
non-commercial use available.)

GAZETTEER
OF THE
BOMBAY PRESIDENCY

VOLUME I. PART I.

HISTORY OF GUJARÁT.

UNDER GOVERNMENT ORDERS.

BOMBAY:
PRINTED AT THE GOVERNMENT CENTRAL PRESS.
1896.

Bombay Castle, 14th February 1902.

In further recognition of the distinguished labours of Sir James
McNabb Campbell, K.C.I.E., and of the services rendered by those
who have assisted him in his work, His Excellency the Governor in
Council is pleased to order that the following extract from Government
Resolution No. 2885, dated the 11th August 1884, be republished and
printed immediately after the title page of Volume I, Part I, of the
Gazetteer, and published in every issue:

"His Excellency the Governor in Council has from time to time
expressed his entire approval of the Volumes of the Gazetteer
already published, and now learns with much satisfaction that
the remaining Statistical Accounts have been completed in
the same elaborate manner. The task now brought to a close by
Mr. Campbell has been very arduous. It has been the subject of
his untiring industry for more than ten years, in the earlier
part of which period, however, he was occasionally employed on
additional duties, including the preparation of a large number
of articles for the Imperial Gazetteer. When the work was begun,
it was not anticipated that so much time would be required for
its completion, because it was not contemplated that it would
be carried out on so extensive a scale. Its magnitude may be
estimated by the fact that the Statistical Accounts, exclusive of
the general chapters yet to be reprinted, embrace twenty-seven
Volumes containing on an average 500 pages each. Mr. Campbell
could not have sustained the unflagging zeal displayed by him
for so long a period without an intense interest in the subjects
dealt with. The result is well worthy of the labour expended,
and is a proof of the rare fitness of Mr. Campbell on the ground
both of literary ability and of power of steady application
for the important duty assigned to him. The work is a record of
historical and statistical facts and of information regarding the
country and the people as complete perhaps as ever was produced
on behalf of any Government, and cannot fail to be of the utmost
utility in the future administration of the Presidency.

"2. The thanks of Government have already been conveyed to the
various contributors, and it is only necessary now to add that
they share, according to the importance of their contributions, in
the credit which attaches to the general excellence of the work."

The whole series of Volumes is now complete, and His Excellency in
Council congratulates Sir James Campbell and all associated with him
in this successful and memorable achievement.

H. O. QUIN,
Secretary to Government,
General Department.

The earliest record of an attempt to arrange for the preparation
of Statistical Accounts of the different districts of the Bombay
Presidency is in 1843. In 1843 Government called on the Revenue
Commissioner to obtain from all the Collectors as part of their next
Annual Report the fullest available information regarding their
districts. [1] The information was specially to include their own
and their Assistants' observations on the state of the cross and
other roads not under the superintendence of a separate department,
on the passes and ferries throughout the country, on the streets in
the principal towns, and on the extension and improvement of internal
communications. As from Collectors alone could any knowledge of the
state of the district be obtained, the Collectors were desired to
include in their Annual Reports observations on every point from which
a knowledge of the actual condition of the country could be gathered
with the exception of matters purely judicial which were to be supplied
by the Judicial Branch of the Administration. Government remarked that,
as Collectors and their Assistants during a large portion of the year
moved about the district in constant and intimate communication with
all classes they possessed advantages which no other public officers
enjoyed of acquiring a full knowledge of the condition of the country,
the causes of progress or retrogradation, the good measures which
require to be fostered and extended, the evil measures which call for
abandonment, the defects in existing institutions which require to
be remedied, and the nature of the remedies to be applied. Collectors
also, it was observed, have an opportunity of judging of the effect of
British rule on the condition and character of the people, on their
caste prejudices, and on their superstitious observances. They can
trace any alteration for the better or worse in dwellings, clothing
and diet, and can observe the use of improved implements of husbandry
or other crafts, the habits of locomotion, the state of education
particularly among the higher classes whose decaying means and energy
under our most levelling system compared with that of preceding
governments will attract their attention. Finally they can learn
how far existing village institutions are effectual to their end,
and may be made available for self-government and in the management
of local taxation for local purposes.

In obedience to these orders reports were received from the Collectors
of Ahmedábád Broach Kaira Thána and Khándesh. Some of the reports,
especially that of Mr. J. D. Inverarity, contained much interesting
information. These five northern reports were practically the only
result of the Circular Letter of 1843.

The question of preparing District Statistical Manuals was not again
raised till 1870. In October 1867 the Secretary of State desired the
Bombay Government to take steps for the compilation of a Gazetteer
of the Presidency on the model of the Gazetteer prepared during that
year for the Central Provinces. The Bombay Government requested the
two Revenue Commissioners and the Director of Public Instruction to
submit a scheme for carrying into effect the orders of the Secretary
of State. In reply the officers consulted remarked that the work to be
done for the Bombay Presidency would be of a multifarious character;
that the article on the commerce of Bombay would require special
qualifications in the writer; that again special qualifications would
be required for writing accounts of the sacred cities of Násik and
Pálitána, of the caves of Ajanta and Ellora, of the histories of Sindh
Gujarát and Ahmednagar, and of the Portuguese connection with Western
India. The Committee observed that a third form of special knowledge
would be required to write accounts of Pársis Khojás and other castes
and tribes; that in short the undertaking would be one of much wider
scope and greater difficulty than the preparation of the Gazetteer
of the Central Provinces. Much thought would be required before the
general plan could be laid down, and after the plan was fixed all sorts
of questions as to arrangement and treatment of particular parts would
be sure to arise. In the Committee's opinion local revenue officers
could not as a rule find time to devote to work of this description
without neglecting their ordinary duties; but they could correct and
amplify such information as a special officer could compile from the
published and unpublished records of Government.

In January 1868 the Bombay Government decided that the general
supervision and direction of the work should be placed in the hands of
a Committee consisting of the Revenue Commissioners, the Director of
Public Instruction, and the Commissioner of Customs, and that an Editor
should be appointed with a small copying establishment to act under
the directions of the Committee. The Editor was to give his entire
time to the work and was expected to finish it in about a year. He was
to collect and arrange in alphabetical order all recorded information
regarding the towns and other places of interest in each Collectorate,
and to send printed on half margin each draft when completed to the
local officers for verification, additions, and alterations. When the
drafts were returned and corrected by the Editor, they were to be laid
before the Committee. To enable the Editor to meet such expenses as a
fair remuneration for articles contributed by qualified persons, and
also to pay for the printing of the work with small accompanying maps,
an amount not exceeding Rs. 12,000 was sanctioned for the total expense
of the Gazetteer including the payment of the Editor. At the outset
it was decided to place a portion of the sum sanctioned not exceeding
Rs. 2000, at the disposal of the Commissioner in Sindh to secure
the preparation of articles referring to Sindh. The Committee were
requested to meet at Poona in June 1868 and to report to Government on
the best mode of preparing and editing the Gazetteer and supervising
its publication. The Collectors and Political Officers were in the
meanwhile requested to ascertain what records in their possession
were likely to be useful for the preparation of a Gazetteer and what
papers in the possession of others and likely to be useful for the
purpose were obtainable within their charge. Collectors and Political
Officers were requested to send their replies direct to the Director of
Public Instruction who would collect them on behalf of the Committee.

In August 1868 the Bombay Gazetteer Committee, composed of
Messrs. A. F. Bellasis Revenue Commissioner N. D. Chairman,
Mr. W. H. Havelock Revenue Commissioner S. D. and Sir Alexander Grant,
Director of Public Instruction, submitted a report recommending the
following arrangements:

(1) That Mr. W. H. Crowe, C.S., then Acting Professor in the
Dakhan College, be appointed Editor of the Gazetteer with a monthly
remuneration of Rs. 200 out of the Rs. 12,000 sanctioned for the
expense of the Gazetteer and that he should at the same time be
attached as an Assistant to the Collector of Poona;
(2) That Mr. Crowe be allowed an establishment not exceeding
Rs. 50 a month chargeable to the grant of Rs. 12,000, and such
contingent charges as may be passed by the Committee;
(3) That Professor Kero Luxman Chhatre be requested to assist
Mr. Crowe on various questions both local and mathematical,
and that on the completion of the work a suitable honorarium be
granted to Professor Kero;
(4) That agreeably to the suggestions of Major Prescott and
Colonel Francis, Mr. Light should be directed to compile for
the different districts all information in the possession of
the Survey Department in communication with the Editor of the
Gazetteer who was to work under the Committee's orders;
(5) That the above appointments be made at present for one year
only, at the end of which from the Committee's progress report,
it would be possible to state with approximate definiteness the
further time required for the completion of the Gazetteer.

These proposals were sanctioned on the 11th September 1868. Towards
the close of 1868 Mr. (now Sir) J. B. Peile took the place of Sir
A. Grant on the Committee and Colonel Francis was added to the list of
the members. Adhering as far as possible to the arrangement followed
in the Gazetteer of the Central Provinces, which had met with the
approval of the Secretary of State, Mr. Crowe drew out the following
list of subjects which was forwarded to all Collectors Sub-Collectors
and Survey Superintendents:

I.--General Description.

(a) Latitude and Longitude.
(b) Locality.
(c) Boundaries.
(d) Aspect.
(e) Water-supply.
(f) Rivers.
(g) Mountains.
(h) Area.
(i) Altitude.

II.--Climate, Seasons.

(a) Rainfall.
(b) Health.
(c) Prevailing Diseases.

III.--Geology.

(a) Soils.
(b) Minerals.
(c) Scientific Details.

IV.--History.

V.--Administration.

(a) Judicial.
(b) Revenue.
(c) Miscellaneous.

VI.--Revenue.

(a) Imperial.
(b) Local.

VII.--Population.

(a) Census.
(b) Description of Inhabitants.
(c) Castes.

VIII.--Sub-Divisions.

(a) Names of Tálukás.
(b) Names of Towns.

IX.--Production.

(a) Agriculture.
(b) Forest.
(c) Animals.
(d) Minerals.
(e) Manufactures.

X.--Trade and Commerce.

XI.--Communications.

(a) Roads.
(b) Railways.
(c) Telegraphs.
(d) Post.

XII.--Revenue System and Land Tenures.

XVI.--Education.

(a) Schools.
(b) Instruction.

XIV.--Language.

XV.--Architectural Remains and Antiquities.

XVI.--Principal Towns and Villages.

In 1869 the draft articles prepared by Mr. Crowe were submitted to
Mr. (now Sir) W. W. Hunter of the Bengal Civil Service who expressed
his satisfaction at the progress made. The Committee adopted certain
suggestions made by Sir W. Hunter for the arrangement of the work and
for obtaining fuller district figures from the Marine, Irrigation,
Cotton, and Survey Offices. In March 1870 a further extension of one
year was accorded. The Bombay Government directed that each Collector
should choose one of his Assistants to correspond with the Editor
and obtain for him all possible information from local records. All
Heads of Offices were also desired to exert themselves zealously in
aiding the prosecution of the work. In 1871 Mr. Crowe's draft article
on the Dhárwár District was sent to Mr. Hunter for opinion who in
addition to detailed criticism on various points made the following
general remarks:

"My own conception of the work is that, in return for a couple of days'
reading, the Account should give a new Collector a comprehensive,
and, at the same time, a distinct idea of the district which he has
been sent to administer. Mere reading can never supersede practical
experience in the district administration. But a succinct and well
conceived district account is capable of antedating the acquisition of
such personal experience by many months and of both facilitating and
systematising a Collector's personal enquiries. The Compiler does not
seem to have caught the points on which a Collector would naturally
consult the Account. In order that the Editor should understand
these points it is necessary that he should have had practical
acquaintance with district administration and that he should himself
have experienced the difficulties which beset an officer on his
taking charge of a district or sub-division. The individual points
will differ according to the character of the country. For example
in deltaic districts the important question is the control of rivers;
in dry districts it is the subject of water-supply. But in all cases
a District Account besides dealing with the local specialties should
furnish an historical narration of its revenue and expenditure since
it passed under the British rule, of the sums which we have taken
from it in taxes, and of the amount which we have returned to it
in the protection of property and person and the other charges of
civil government."

Sir William Hunter laid much stress on the necessity of stating the
authority on the strength of which any statement is made and of the
propriety of avoiding anything like libels on persons or classes. In
1871 Sir W. Hunter was appointed Director General of Statistics
to the Government of India. In this capacity he was to be a central
guiding authority whose duty it was to see that each of the Provincial
Gazetteers contained the materials requisite for the comparative
statistics of the Empire. As some of the Bombay District Accounts were
incomplete and as it was thought advisable to embody in the District
Accounts the results of the general Census of 1872, it was decided, in
October 1871, that pending the completion of the census the Gazetteer
work should be suspended and that when the results of the census were
compiled and classified a special officer should be appointed for a
period of six months to revise and complete the drafts. In October
1871, pending the compilation of the census returns, Mr. Crowe was
appointed Assistant Collector at Sholápur and the Gazetteer records
were left in a room in the Poona Collector's Office. In September 1872
the whole of the Gazetteer records, including thirty-one articles on
British Districts and Native States, were stolen by two youths who
had been serving in the Collector's Office as peons. These youths
finding the Gazetteer office room unoccupied stole the papers piece
by piece for the sake of the trifling amount they fetched as waste
paper. Search resulted in the recovery in an imperfect state of seven
of the thirty-one drafts. The youths were convicted and sentenced to
a year's imprisonment in the Poona Reformatory.

In 1873 Mr. Francis Chapman then Chief Secretary to Government took
the preparation of the Gazetteer under his personal control. And in
June 1873 Mr. James M. Campbell, C.S., was appointed Compiler. An
important change introduced by Mr. Chapman was to separate from
the preparation of the series of District Manuals certain general
subjects and to arrange for the preparation of accounts of those
general subjects by specially qualified contributors. The subjects
so set apart and allotted were:

These arrangements resulted in the preparation of the following papers
each of which on receipt was printed in pamphlet form:

I. Ethnology; II. Meteorology; III. Geology; and IV. Botany.

Of these papers it has not been deemed advisable to reprint
Dr. J. Wilson's Paper on Castes as it was incomplete owing to
Dr. Wilson's death in 1875. Reprinting was also unnecessary in the case
of Mr. Blandford's Geology and of the late Mr. Chambers' Meteorology,
as the contents of these pamphlets have been embodied in works
specially devoted to the subject of those contributions. Dr. Burgess
never prepared his article on the Archæology of the Presidency,
but the materials supplied by the late Pandit Bhagvánlál Indraji
prevented the evil effect which this failure would otherwise have
caused. Dr. Bhagvánlál also ably supplied the deficiency caused
by Dr. G. Bühler's failure to contribute an article on the Early
History of Gujarát. The notices of the manufactures in the more
important industrial centres to some extent supply the blank caused
by the absence of Mr. Terry's contribution. Nothing came of the late
Mr. Gordon's Account of the Trade of the Presidency.

On the important subject of Botany besides Dr. W. Gray's original
contribution, a valuable paper On Useful Trees and Plants was prepared
by Dr. J. C. Lisboa, and a detailed account of Kaira field trees by
the late Mr. G. H. D. Wilson of the Bombay Civil Service. These three
papers together form a separate Botany Volume No. XXV.

The general contributions on History contained in Vol. I. Parts I. and
II. are among the most valuable portions of the Gazetteer. Besides the
shorter papers by Mr. L. R. Ashburner, C.S.I., on the Gujarát Mutinies
of 1857, by Mr. J. A. Baines, C.S.I., on the Maráthás in Gujarát,
by Mr. W. W. Loch, I.C.S., on the Musalmán and Marátha histories of
Khándesh and the Bombay Dakhan, and by the late Colonel E. W. West,
I.S.C., on the modern history of the Southern Marátha districts,
there are the Reverend A. K. Nairne's History of the Konkan which
is specially rich in the Portuguese period (A.D. 1500-1750), the
late Colonel J. W. Watson's Musalmáns of Gujarát with additions
by Khán Sáheb Fazl Lutfullah Farídi of Surat, and the important
original histories of the Early Dakhan by Professor Rámkrishna Gopál
Bhandárkar, C.I.E., Ph.D., and of the Southern Marátha districts by
Mr. J. F. Fleet, I.C.S., C.I.E., Ph.D. With these the early history
of Gujarát from materials supplied by the late Pandit Bhagvánlál
Indraji, Ph.D., is perhaps not unworthy to rank. The work of completing
Dr. Bhagvánlál's history was one of special difficulty. No satisfactory
result would have been obtained had it not been for the valuable
assistance received from Mr. A. M. T. Jackson, M.A., of the Indian
Civil Service.

The importance and the interest of the great subject of Population
have added several contributions to the Reverend Doctor J. Wilson's
original pamphlet of twenty-three pages. Most of these contributions
appear in different District Statistical Accounts especially Dr. John
Pollen's, I.C.S., accounts in Khándesh, Mr. Cumine's, I.C.S. in
Bijápur, Mr. K. Raghunáthji's in Thána and Poona, Assistant Surgeon
Shántárám Vináyak's in Sholápur, Mr. P. F. DeSouza's in Kánara, and the
late Ráo Bahádur Trimalrao's in Dhárwár. Except the valuable articles
contributed in the Statistical Account of Kachh by Major J. W. Wray,
Mr. Vináyakráo Náráyanand Ráo Sáheb Dalpatrám Pránjivan Khakhar, in
the Account of Káthiáwár by the late Colonel L. C. Barton, and in the
Account of Rewa Kántha by Ráo Bahádur Nandshankar Tuljáshankar the
early date at which the Gujarát Statistical Accounts were published
prevented the preparation of detailed articles on population. This
omission has now been supplied in a separate volume No. IX. The
chief contributions to this volume are Ráo Bahádur Bhimbhái
Kirpárám's Hindus, Khán Sáheb Fazl Lutfullah Farídi's Musalmáns,
and Messrs. Kharsetji N. Servai and Bamanji B. Patel's Pársis.

Besides to these general contributors the series of Statistical
Accounts owes much of their fullness and practical usefulness
to District Officers especially to the labours of the District
Compilers who in most cases were either Collectors or Assistant
Collectors. The most important contributors of this class were for
Ahmedábád Mr. F. S. P. Lely, C.S.; for Kaira Mr. G. F. Sheppard,
C.S.; for the Panch Maháls Mr. H. A. Acworth, C.S.; for Thána
Messrs. W. B. Mulock, C.S., E. J. Ebden, C.S., W. W. Loch, C.S.,
and A. Cumine, C.S.; for Kolába Mr. E. H. Moscardi, C.S.; for
Ratnágiri Mr. G. W. Vidal, C.S.; for Khándesh Mr. W. Ramsay, C.S.,
Dr. John Pollen, C.S., and Mr. A. Crawley-Boevey, C.S.; for Násik
Messrs. W. Ramsay, C.S., J. A. Baines, C.S., and H. R. Cooke, C.S.;
for Ahmednagar Mr. T. S. Hamilton, C.S.; for Poona Messrs. J. G. Moore,
C.S., John MacLeod Campbell, C.S., G. H. Johns, C.S., and A. Keyser,
C.S.; for Sátára Mr. J. W. P. Muir-Mackenzie, C.S.; for Sholápur
Mr. C. E. G. Crawford, C.S.; for Belgaum Mr. G. McCorkell, C.S.; for
Dhárwár Messrs. F. L. Charles, C.S., and J. F. Muir, C.S.; for Bijápur
Messrs. H. F. Silcock, C.S., A. Cumine, C.S., and M. H. Scott, C.S.;
and for Kánara Mr. J. Monteath, C.S., and Colonel W. Peyton. Of the
accounts of Native States, the interesting and complete Gazetteer
of Baroda is the work of Mr. F. A. H. Elliott, C.S. The chief
contributors to the other Statistical Accounts of Native States were
for Kachh Colonel L. C. Barton; for Káthiáwár Colonel J. W. Watson
and Colonel L. C. Barton; for Pálanpur Colonel J. W. Watson; for Mahi
Kántha Colonels E. W. West and P. H. LeGeyt; for Rewa Kántha Colonel
L. C. Barton and Ráo Báhádur Nandshankar Tuljáshankar; for Sávantvádi
Colonel J. F. Lester; for Jánjira Mr. G. Larcom; for Kolhápur Colonels
E. W. West and W. F. F. Waller and Ráo Bahádur Yeshvant M. Kelkar. The
names of numerous other contributors both in and out of Government
service who gave help in compiling information connected with their
districts have been shewn in the body of each District Statistical
Account. Of these the learned and most ungrudging assistance received
from Dr. J. Gerson DaCunha of Bombay requires special recognition.

The third main source of preparation was the Compiler's head-quarters
office. Through the interest which Mr. Francis Chapman took in the
Gazetteer the Compiler was able to secure the services as Assistant
of Ráo Báhádur Bhimbhái Kirpárám who was Head Accountant in the Kaira
Treasury when the Statistical Account of Kaira was under preparation
in 1874. Mr. Bhimbhái's minute knowledge of administrative detail,
his power of asking for information in the form least troublesome to
district establishments, and of checking the information received,
together with his talent for directing the work at head-quarters
formed one of the most important elements in the success of the
Gazetteer arrangements. Besides to the interest taken by Mr. Francis
Chapman the Gazetteer owed much to the advice and to the support of
Sir W. W. Hunter, who, in spite of the delay and expense which it
involved, secured the full record of the survey and other details in
which the Bombay revenue system is specially rich.

In addition to Ráo Bahádur Bhimbhái, the members of the Compiler's
office whose work entitles them almost to a place among contributors
are: Ráo Sáheb Krishnaráo Narsinh, who drafted many of the Land Revenue
and Survey Histories; the late Mr. Ganesh Bhikáji Gunjikar, B.A.,
who drafted many of the Political Histories; the late Mr. Vaikunthrám
Manmathrám Mehta, B.A., and Ráo Bahádur Itchárám Bhagvándás, B.A.,
who drafted many articles on Description, Production, Agriculture,
Capital, and Trade; Mr. K. Raghunáthji who prepared many of the
fullest caste accounts; Mr. Ratirám Durgárám, B.A., who drafted
many papers on places of interest; and Messrs. Yeshvant Nilkanth and
Mahádev G. Nádkarni who drafted many of the sections on Population,
Agriculture, Capital, and Trade.

Other officers of Government who have had an important share in the
satisfactory completion of the Gazetteer are: Mr. J. Kingsmill the
former and Mr. Frámroz Rustamji the present Superintendent of the
Government Central Press and Mr. T. E. Coleman the Head Examiner, whose
unfailing watchfulness has detected many a mistake. Mr. Waite the late
Superintendent of the Photozincographic Press and Mr. T. LeMesurier
the present Superintendent have supplied a set of most handy, clear,
and accurate maps.

A further means adopted for collecting information was the preparation
of papers on the different social, economic, and religious subjects
which had proved of interest in preparing the earliest District
Statistical Accounts. Between 1874 and 1880 forty-nine question papers
which are given as an Appendix to the General Index Volume were from
time to time printed and circulated. The answers received to these
papers added greatly to the fullness and to the local interest of
all the later Statistical Accounts.

The Statistical Accounts of the eighteen British districts and
eighty-two Native States of the Bombay Presidency, together with the
Materials towards a Statistical Account of the Town and Island of
Bombay extend over thirty-three Volumes and 17,800 pages. In addition
to these Statistical Accounts 475 articles were prepared in 1877-78
for the Imperial Gazetteer.

JAMES MACNABB CAMPBELL.

Bombay Customs House, }
29th May 1896. }

HISTORY OF GUJARÁT.

This Volume contains the Articles named below:

I.--Early History of Gujarát (B.C. 319-A.D. 1304).--From materials
prepared by the late Pandit Bhagvánlál Indraji, Ph.D., completed
with the help of A. M. T. Jackson, Esquire, M.A., of the Indian
Civil Service.
II.--History of Gujarát, Musalmán Period (A.D. 1297-1760).--Prepared
by the late Colonel J. W. Watson, Indian Staff Corps, former
Political Agent of Káthiáváda, with additions by Khán Sáheb
Fazlullah Lutfulláh Farídi of Surat.
III.--History of Gujarát, Marátha Period (A.D. 1760-1819).--By
J. A. Baines, Esquire, C.S.I., Late of Her Majesty's Bombay
Civil Service.
IV.--Disturbances in Gujarát (A.D. 1857-1859).--By L. R. Ashburner,
Esquire, C.S.I., Late of Her Majesty's Bombay Civil Service.

Appendices:

I.--The Death of Sultán Bahádur.
II.--The Hill Fort of Mándu.
III.--Bhinmál or Shrimál.
IV.--Java and Cambodia.
V.--Arab References.
VI.--Greek References.

JAMES M. CAMPBELL.

29th May 1896.

CONTENTS.

EARLY HISTORY OF GUJARÁT.

PAGE
Boundaries and Name 1-5

Ancient Divisions:

Ánartta; Suráshtra; Láta 6-7

Legends:

Ánartta the first Puránic king of Gujarát, and the Yádavas in
Dwárika 8-12

Mauryan and Greek Rule (B.C. 319-100):

The Mauryas (B.C. 319-197); The Greeks (B.C. 180-100) 13-19

The Kshatrapas (B.C. 70-A.D. 398):

The Name; Northern Kshatrapas; Western Kshatrapas; Nahapána
(A.D. 78-120); Ushavadáta (A.D. 100-120); Nahapána's Era;
Málava Era; Chashtana (A.D. 130); The Mevas or Medas; Jayadáman
(A.D. 140-143) 20-34

Rudradáman (A.D. 143-158); Sudarsana Lake; The Yaudheyas; Dámázada
or Dámájadasrí (A.D. 158-168); Jivadáman (A.D. 178); Rudrasimha
I. (A.D. 181-196); Rudrasena (A.D. 203-220); Prithivísena
(A.D. 222); Sanghadáman (A.D. 222-226); Dámasena (A.D. 226-236);
Dámájadasrí II. (A.D. 236) 35-45

Víradáman (A.D. 236-238); Yasadáman (A.D. 239); Vijayasena
(A.D. 238-249); Dámájadasrí (A.D. 250-255); Rudrasena
II. (A.D. 256-272); Visvasimha (A.D. 272-278); Bharttridáman
(A.D. 278-294); Visvasena (A.D. 294-300); Rudrasimha
(A.D. 308-311); Yasadáman (A.D. 320); Dámasiri (A.D. 320);
Rudrasena (A.D. 348-376); Simhasena; Skanda; Ísvaradatta
(A.D. 230-250); Kshatrapa Family Tree 46-54

The Traikútakas (A.D. 250-450):

Initial Date; Their Race 55-59

The Guptas (G. 90-149; A.D. 410-470):

Dynasty; The founder Gupta (A.D. 319-322 [?]); Ghatotkacha
(A.D. 322-349 [?]); Chandragupta I. (A.D. 349-369 [?]; Samudragupta
(A.D. 370-395); Chandragupta II. (A.D. 396-415); Kumáragupta
(A.D. 416-453); Skandagupta (A.D. 454-470) 60-70

Budhagupta (A.D. 485); Bhánugupta (A.D. 511); The Pushyamitras
(A.D. 455); White Huns (A.D. 450-520); Mihirakula (A.D. 512);
Yasodharman of Málwa (A.D. 533-34) 71-77

The Valabhis (A.D. 509-766):

Valeh Town (1893); Valabhi in A.D. 630; Valabhi Copperplates;
Valabhi Administration (A.D. 500-700); Territorial Divisions; Land
Assessment; Religion; Origin of the Valabhis; History 78-86

First Valabhi Grant (A.D. 526); Senápati Bhatárka (A.D. 509-520?);
the Maitrakas (A.D. 470-509); Senápati's Sons; Dhruvasena
I. (A.D. 526-535); Guhasena (A.D. 539-569); Dharasena
II. (A.D. 569-589); Síláditya I. (A.D. 594-609); Kharagraha
(A.D. 610-615); Dharasena III. (A.D. 615-620); Dhruvasena
II. (Báláditya) (A.D. 620-640); Dharasena IV. (A.D. 640-649);
Dhruvasena III. (A.D. 650-656); Kharagraha (A.D. 656-665);
Síláditya III. (A.D. 666-675); Síláditya IV. (A.D. 691); Síláditya
V. (A.D. 722); Síláditya VI. (A.D. 760); Síláditya VII. (A.D. 766);
Valabhi Family Tree; The fall of Valabhi (A.D. 750-770); The
importance of Valabhi 87-96

Valabhi and the Gehlots; The Válas of Káthiáváda; The Válas and
Káthis; Descent from Kanaksen (A.D. 150); Mewád and the Persians;
Válas 97-106

The Chálukyas (A.D. 634-740):

Jayasimhavarmman (A.D. 666-693); Sryásraya Síláditya (heir
apparent) (A.D. 669-691); Mangalarája (A.D. 698-731); Pulakesi
Janásraya (A.D. 738); Buddhavarmman (A.D. 713?); Nágavarddhana;
Chálukya Tree 107-112

The Gurjjaras (A.D. 580-808):

Copperplates; Gurjjara Tree; Dadda I. (c. 585-605 A.D.); Jayabhata
I. Vítarága (c. 605-620 A.D.); Dadda II. Prasántarága (c. 620-650
A.D.); Jayabhata II. (c. 650-675 A.D.); Dadda III. Báhusaháya
(c. 675-700 A.D.); Jayabhata III. (c. 704-734 A.D.) 113-118

The Ráshtrakútas (A.D. 743-974):

Origin; Name; Early Dynasty (A.D. 450-500); The
main Dynasty (A.D. 630-972); Ráshtrakúta Family Tree
(A.D. 630-972); Copperplates; Kakka II. (A.D. 747); Krishna
and Govinda II. (A.D. 765-795); Dhruva I. (A.D. 795); Govinda
III. (A.D. 800-808); Indra (A.D. 808-812); Karka I. (A.D. 812-821);
Dantivarmman (Heir Apparent); Govinda (A.D. 827-833); Dhruva
I. (A.D. 835-867); Akálavarsha (A.D. 867); Dhruva II. (A.D. 867);
Akálavarsha Krishna (A.D. 888); Main Line restored (A.D. 888-974);
Krishna Akálavarsha (A.D. 888-914); Indra Nityamvarsha (A.D. 914)
119-134

The Mihiras or Mers (A.D. 470-900):

History; The Chúdásamás (A.D. 900-940); The Jethvás; The Mers;
White Húnas; Jhálás 135-147

THE KINGDOM OF ANAHILAVÁDA (A.D. 720-1300).

The Chávadás (A.D. 720-956):

Pañchásar (A.D. 788); Jayasekhara (A.D. 696); Vanarája
(A.D. 720-780?); Founding of Anahilaváda (A.D. 746-765); Vanarája's
Installation; His Image; Vanarája's Successors (A.D. 780-961);
Yogarája (A.D. 806-841); Kshemarája (A.D. 841-880); Chámunda
(A.D. 880-908); Ghághada (A.D. 908-937); Chávadá Genealogy
149-155

The Chaulukyas or Solankis (A.D. 961-1242):

Authorities; The name Chaulukya; Múlarája (A.D. 961-996);
Chámunda (A.D. 997-1010); Durlabha (A.D. 1010-1022); Bhíma
I. (A.D. 1022-1064); Mahmúd's Invasion (A.D. 1024); Somanátha
(A.D. 1024) 156-169

Karna (A.D. 1064-1094); Siddharája Jayasingha (A.D. 1094-1143)
170-181

Kumárapála (A.D. 1143-1174); Ajayapála (A.D. 1174-1177); Múlarája
II. (A.D. 1177-1179); Bhíma II. (A.D. 1179-1242) 182-197

The Vághelás (A.D. 1219-1304):

Arnorája (A.D. 1170-1200); Lavanaprasáda (A.D. 1200-1233);
Víradhavala (A.D. 1233-1238); Vísaladeva (A.D. 1243-1261);
Arjunadeva (A.D. 1262-1274); Sárangadeva (A.D. 1275-1296);
Karnadeva (A.D. 1296-1304); Vághela Genealogy 198-206

MUSALMÁN PERIOD (A.D. 1297-1760).

Introduction:

Territorial Limits; Sorath; Káthiáváda; Under the Kings
(A.D. 1403-1573); Under the Mughals (A.D. 1573-1760); Condition
of Gujarát (A.D. 1297-1802) 207-228

Early Musalmán Governors (A.D. 1297-1403):

Alá-ud-dín Khilji Emperor (A.D. 1295-1315); Ulugh Khán
(A.D. 1297-1317); Ain-ul-Mulk Governor (A.D. 1318); Order
established (A.D. 1318); Muhammad Tughlak Emperor (A.D. 1325-1351);
Táj-ul-Mulk Governor (A.D. 1320); Suppression of insurrection
(A.D. 1347); Surrender of Girnár and Kachh (A.D. 1350);
Fírúz Tughlak Emperor (A.D. 1351-1388); Zafar Khán Governor
(A.D. 1371); Farhat-ul-Mulk Governor (A.D. 1376-1391); Muhammad
Tughlak II. Emperor (A.D. 1391-1393); Zafar Khán Governor
(A.D. 1391-1403) 229-233

Ahmedábád Kings (A.D. 1403-1573):

Muhammad I. (A.D. 1403-1404); Muzaffar (A.D. 1407-1419); Ahmed
I. (A.D. 1411-1441); Ahmedábád built (A.D. 1413); Defeat of the
Ídar Chief (A.D. 1414); Spread of Islám (A.D. 1414); Expedition
against Málwa (A.D. 1417); Chámpáner attacked (A.D. 1418); War
with Málwa (A.D. 1422); Defeat of the Ídar Chief (A.D. 1425);
Recovery of Máhim (A.D. 1429) and Báglán (A.D. 1431); Muhammad
II. (A.D. 1441-1452); Kutb-ud-dín (A.D. 1451-1459); War with
Málwa (A.D. 1451) Battle of Kapadvanj (A.D. 1454); War with Nágor
(A.D. 1454-1459); War with Chitor (A.D. 1455-1459) 234-242

Mahmúd I. Begada (A.D. 1459-1513); Defeat of a conspiracy
(A.D. 1459); Improvement of the soldiery (A.D. 1459-1461);
Help given to the king of the Dakhan (A.D. 1461); Expedition
against Junágadh (A.D. 1467); Capture of Girnár (A.D. 1472);
Disturbances in Chámpáner (A.D. 1472); Conquest of Kachh;
Jagat destroyed; Conspiracy (A.D. 1480); War against Chámpáner
(A.D. 1482-1484); Capture of Pávágad (A.D. 1484); The Khándesh
succession (A.D. 1508); Muzaffar II. (A.D. 1513-1526); Expedition
against Ídar (A.D. 1514); Disturbances in Málwa (A.D. 1517);
Capture of Mándu (A.D. 1518); War with Chitor (A.D. 1519);
Submission of the Rána of Chitor (A.D. 1521); Death of Muzaffar
II. (A.D. 1526) 243-252

Sikandar (A.D. 1526); Máhmúd II. (A.D. 1526); Bahádur
(A.D. 1527-1536); Portuguese intrigues (A.D. 1526); Khándesh
affairs (A.D. 1528); Turks at Diu (A.D. 1526-1530); Capture
of Mándu (A.D. 1530); Quarrel with Humáyún (A.D. 1532); Fall of
Chitor (A.D. 1535); Mughal conquest of Gujarát (A.D. 1535); The
Mughals driven out (A.D. 1536); The Portuguese at Diu (A.D. 1536);
Death of Bahádur (A.D. 1536); Muhammad II. Ásíri (A.D. 1536-1554);
His escape from control; Choosing of evil favourites; Quarrels
among the nobles; Disturbances (A.D. 1545); Death of Mahmúd
(A.D. 1554); Ahmed II. (A.D. 1554-1561); Ítimád Khán Regent;
Partition of the province; Dissensions; Sultánpur and Nandurbár
handed to Khándesh (A.D. 1560); Defeat and death of Sayad Mubárak;
Death of Imád-ul-Mulk Rúmi; Daman district ceded to the Portuguese
(A.D. 1550); Assassination of Ahmed II. (A.D. 1560); Muzaffar
III. (A.D. 1561-1572), a minor; Ítimád Khán and the Fauládis;
The Mírzás (A.D. 1571); Defeat of Ítimád Khán; Death of Changíz
Khán; Ítimád Khán and the Emperor Akbar (A.D. 1572) 252-264

Mughal Viceroys (A.D. 1573-1758).

Emperor Akbar (A.D. 1573-1605):

Capture of Broach and Surat and advance to Ahmedábád (A.D. 1573);
Mirza Ázíz first Viceroy (A.D. 1573-1575); Insurrection
quelled by Akbar (A.D. 1573); Mírza Khán second Viceroy
(A.D. 1575-1577); Survey by Rája Todar Mal; Shaháb-ud-din third
Viceroy (A.D. 1577-1583); Expedition against Junágadh; Ítimád
Khán Gujaráti fourth Viceroy (A.D. 1583-1584); Ahmedábád captured
by Muzaffar (A.D. 1583); Mírza Abdur Rahím Khán (Khán Khánán)
fifth Viceroy (A.D. 1583-1587); Defeat of Muzaffar (A.D. 1584);
Ismáíl Kuli Khán sixth Viceroy (A.D. 1587); Mírza Ázíz Kokaltásh
seventh Viceroy (A.D. 1588-1592); Refuge sought by Muzaffar in
Káthiáváda; Muzaffar attacked by the imperial army; Muzaffar's
flight to Kachh and suicide (A.D. 1591-92); Sultán Murád Baksh
eighth Viceroy (A.D. 1592-1600); Mirza Ázíz Kokaltásh ninth Viceroy
(A.D. 1600-1606) 265-273

Jahángir Emperor (A.D. 1605-1627):

Kalíj Khán tenth Viceroy (A.D. 1606); Sayad Murtaza eleventh
Viceroy (A.D. 1606-1609); Mírza Ázíz Kokaltásh twelfth Viceroy
(A.D. 1609-1611); Sack of Surat by Malik Âmbar (A.D. 1609);
Abdulláh Khán Fírúz Jang thirteenth Viceroy (A.D. 1611-1616);
Mukarrab Khán fourteenth Viceroy (A.D. 1616); Elephant-hunting in
the Panch Maháls (A.D. 1616); Prince Sháh Jehán fifteenth Viceroy
(A.D. 1618-1622); Rebellion of Sháh Jehán (A.D. 1622-23); Sháhi
Bágh built at Ahmedábád; Sultán Dáwar Baksh sixteenth Viceroy
(A.D. 1622-1624); Saif Khán seventeenth Viceroy (A.D. 1624-1627)
273-277

Sháh Jehán Emperor (A.D. 1627-1658):

Sher Khán Túar eighteenth Viceroy (A.D. 1627-1632); Famine
(A.D. 1631-1632); Islám Khán nineteenth Viceroy (A.D. 1632);
Disorder (A.D. 1632); Bákar Khán twentieth Viceroy (A.D. 1632);
Sipáhdár Khán twenty-first Viceroy (A.D. 1633); Saif Khán
twenty-second Viceroy (A.D. 1633-1635); Ázam Khán twenty-third
Viceroy (A.D. 1635-1642); The Kolis punished; The Káthis
subdued; Revolt of the Jám of Navánagar (A.D. 1640); Ísa
Tarkhán twenty-fourth Viceroy (A.D. 1642-1644); Prince Muhammad
Aurangzíb twenty-fifth Viceroy (A.D. 1644-1646); Sháistah Khán
twenty-sixth Viceroy (A.D. 1646-1648); Prince Muhammad Dárá
Shikoh twenty-seventh Viceroy (A.D. 1648-1652); Sháistah Khán
twenty-eighth Viceroy (A.D. 1652-1654); Prince Murád Bakhsh
twenty-ninth Viceroy (A.D. 1654-1657); Murád Baksh proclaimed
emperor (A.D. 1657) Kásam Khán thirtieth Viceroy (A.D. 1657-1659);
Victory of Murád and Aurangzíb; Murád confined by Aurangzíb
(A.D. 1658) 277-282

Aurangzib Emperor (A.D. 1658-1707):

Sháh Nawáz Khán Safávi thirty-first Viceroy (A.D. 1659); Rebellion
of Prince Dárá (A.D. 1659); Prince Dárá defeated (A.D. 1659);
Jasavantsingh thirty-second Viceroy (A.D. 1659-1662); Jasavantsingh
sent against Shiváji (A.D. 1662); Mahábat Khán thirty-third Viceroy
(A.D. 1662-1668); Capture of Navánagar-Islámnagar (A.D. 1664);
Surat plundered by Shiváji (A.D. 1664); Copper coinage introduced
(A.D. 1668); Khán Jehán thirty-fourth Viceroy (A.D. 1668-1671);
Sidi Yákút the Mughal Admiral (A.D. 1670); Mahárája
Jasavantsingh thirty-fifth Viceroy (A.D. 1671-1674); Muhammad
Amín Khán Umdat-ul-Mulk thirty-sixth Viceroy (A.D. 1674-1683);
Increased power of the Bábi family; Revolt of Ídar (A.D. 1679);
Mukhtár Khán thirty-seventh Viceroy (A.D. 1683-1684); Famine
(A.D. 1684); Shujáât Khán (Kártalab Khán) thirty-eighth Viceroy
(A.D. 1684-1703); Mutiny quelled by Shujáât Khán (A.D. 1689);
Revolt of Matiás and Momnás (A.D. 1691); Disturbances in
Káthiáváda (A.D. 1692) and Márwár; Durgádás Ráthod reconciled to
the Emperor (A.D. 1697); Scarcity (A.D. 1698); Prince Muhammad
Aâzam thirty-ninth Viceroy (A.D. 1703-1705); Intrigue against and
escape of Durgádás Ráthod; Surat (A.D. 1700-1703); Ibráhím Khán
fortieth Viceroy (A.D. 1705); Maráthás enter Gujarát; Battle of
Ratanpúr and defeat of the Musalmáns (A.D. 1705); Battle of the
Bába Piárah Ford and second defeat of the Musalmáns (A.D. 1705);
Koli disturbances; Prince Muhammad Bídár Bakht forty-first Viceroy
(A.D. 1705-1706); Durgádás Ráthod again in rebellion; Ibráhím
Khán forty-second Viceroy (A.D. 1706) 283-295

Fifty Years of Disorder (A.D. 1707-1757):

The Marátha advance to Ahmedábád and levy of tribute (A.D. 1707);
Bahádur Sháh I. Emperor (A.D. 1707-1712); Gházi-ud-dín forty-third
Viceroy (A.D. 1708-1710); Jahándár Sháh Emperor (A.D. 1712-13);
Ásif-ud-daulah forty-fourth Viceroy (A.D. 1712-13); Farrukhsiyar
Emperor (A.D. 1713-1719); Shahámat Khán forty-fifth Viceroy
(A.D. 1713); Dáud Khán Panni forty-sixth Viceroy (A.D. 1714-15);
Religious riots in Ahmedábád (A.D. 1714); Further riots in
Ahmedábád (A.D. 1715); Mahárája Ajítsingh forty-seventh Viceroy
(A.D. 1715-1716); Disagreement between the Viceroy and Haidar Kúli
Khán (A.D. 1715); Khán Daurán Nasrat Jang Bahádur forty-eighth
Viceroy (A.D. 1716-1719); Famine (A.D. 1719); Muhammad Sháh
Emperor (A.D. 1721-1748); Mahárája Ajítsingh forty-ninth Viceroy
(A.D. 1719-1721); Piláji Gáikwár at Songad (A.D. 1719); Decay
of imperial power (A.D. 1720); Nizám-ul-Mulk Prime Minister
of the Empire (A.D. 1721); Haidar Kúli Khán fiftieth Viceroy
(A.D. 1721-1722); Disorder in Ahmedábád (A.D. 1721); His arrival
in Gujarát (A.D. 1722); Signs of independence shown by him
and his recall (A.D. 1722); Nizám-ul-Mulk fifty-first Viceroy
(A.D. 1722); Hámid Khán Deputy Viceroy; Momín Khán Governor
of Surat (A.D. 1722); Increase of Marátha power (A.D. 1723)
295-304

Sarbuland Khán fifty-second Viceroy (A.D. 1723-1730); Shujaât
Khán appointed Deputy; Nizám-ul-Mulk and Sarbuland Khán; Sarbuland
Khán's Deputy defeated (A.D. 1724); the Maráthás engaged as Allies;
Battle of Arás; Hámid Khán defeated by Rustam Áli (A.D. 1723);
Hámid Khán joined by Maráthás against Rustam Áli; Mubáriz-ul-Mulk
sent against the Maráthás (A.D. 1725); Retreat of Hámid Khán and
the Maráthás; Ahmedábád entered by Mubáriz-ul-Mulk (A.D. 1725);
Defeat of the Maráthás at Sojitra and Kapadvanj (A.D. 1725);
Marátha expedition against Vadnagar (A.D. 1725); Tribute paid to
the Maráthás (A.D. 1726); Alliance with the Peshwa (A.D. 1727);
Baroda and Dabhoi obtained by Piláji Gáikwár (A.D. 1727); Capture
of Chámpáner by the Maráthás (A.D. 1728); Grant of tribute to the
Peshwa (A.D. 1729); Disturbance raised by Mulla Muhammad Áli at
Surat (A.D. 1729); Petlád given in farm (A.D. 1729); Athva fort
(A.D. 1730); The Viceroy in Káthiáváda and Kachh (A.D. 1730);
Riots at Ahmedábád; Mahárája Abheysingh fifty-third Viceroy
(A.D. 1730-1733); The new Viceroy resisted by Mubáriz-ul-Mulk;
Battle of Adálaj; The Mahárája defeated by Mubáriz-ul-Mulk
(A.D. 1730); Retreat of Mubáriz-ul-Mulk; Government of Abheysingh;
Momín Khán, ruler of Cambay (A.D. 1730); The Peshwa and Viceroy
against Piláji Gáikwár (A.D. 1731); The withdrawal of the Peshwa;
His opponents defeated; Abdúlláh Beg appointed Nizám's Deputy
at Broach; The death of Piláji Gáikwár procured by the Viceroy
(A.D. 1732); Baroda taken; Famine (A.D. 1732); Affairs at Surat
(A.D. 1732); Teghbeg Khán Governor of Surat 305-313

Ratansingh Bhandári Deputy Viceroy (A.D. 1733-1737); Return of
the Maráthás; Contest for the government of Gogha; Disturbance
at Víramgám (A.D. 1734); Baroda recovered by the Maráthás
(A.D. 1734); Change of governor at Víramgám; Failure of Jawán
Mard Khán in an attempt on Ídar; Rivalry of Ratansingh Bhandári
and Sohráb Khán (A.D. 1735); Battle of Dholi; Defeat and death
of Sohráb Khán (A.D. 1735); Rivalry between Ratansingh Bhandári
and Momín Khán (A.D. 1735); Marátha affairs; Dámáji Gáikwár and
Kántáji (A.D. 1735); Battle of Ánand-Mogri; Defeat of Kántáji;
The Maráthás helping Bhávsingh to expel the Víramgám Kasbátis;
The country plundered by the Gáikwár and Peshwa; Momín Khán
fifty-fourth Viceroy (A.D. 1737); Siege of Ahmedábád; Mahárája
Abheysingh fifty-fifth Viceroy (A.D. 1737); The siege of Ahmedábád
continued by Momín Khán; Defence of the city by Ratansingh
Bhandári; Ahmedábád captured by Momín Khán (A.D. 1738); Momín Khán
fifty-sixth Viceroy (A.D. 1738-1743); Prosperity of Ahmedábád
(A.D. 1738); Tribute collected by the Viceroy (A.D. 1738);
Sher Khán Bábi Deputy Governor of Sorath (A.D. 1738); Tribute
collected by the Deputy Viceroy (A.D. 1739); Capture of Bassein
by the Maráthás (A.D. 1739); Tribute expedition (A.D. 1740);
The Viceroy at Cambay (A.D. 1741); Víramgám surrendered and Pátdi
received by Bhávsingh; Siege of Broach by the Maráthás (A.D. 1741);
Battle of Dholka; Defeat of the Maráthás (A.D. 1741); Contests
between the Musalmáns and Maráthás; Disturbance at Ahmedábád
(A.D. 1742); Collection of tribute in Káthiáváda by the Viceroy;
Death of Momín Khán (A.D. 1743) 314-326

Fidá-ud-dín acting as Viceroy (A.D. 1743); The Maráthás defeated
by Muftakhir Khán; Dámáji Gáikwár's return to Gujarát; Abdúl Ázíz
Khán of Junnar Viceroy (by a forged order); Mutiny of the troops;
Petlád captured by the Maráthás; Muftakhir Khán fifty-seventh
Viceroy (A.D. 1743-1744); Jawán Mard Khán appointed Deputy; The
Maráthás in Ahmedábád; Battle of Kim Kathodra; Defeat and death
of Abdúl Ázíz Khán (A.D. 1744); Fakhr-ud-daulah fifty-eighth
Viceroy (A.D. 1744-1748); Jawán Mard Khán Bábi Deputy Viceroy;
Khanderáv Gáikwár called to Sátára; Defeat and capture of the
Viceroy by Jawán Mard Khán Bábi; Rangoji disgraced by Khanderáv
Gáikwár; Rangoji and Jawán Mard Khán opposed by Punáji Vithal
and Fakhr-ud-daulah; Siege of Kapadvanj by Fakhr-ud-daulah
(A.D. 1746); The siege raised at the approach of Holkar; Momín
Khán II. governor of Cambay (A.D. 1748); Increased strength of
Fakhr-ud-daulah's party; Dissensions among the Maráthás; Surat
affairs (A.D. 1748); Escape of Mulla Fakhr-ud-din to Bombay;
Cession of Surat revenue to the Gáikwár (A.D. 1747); Famine
(A.D. 1747); Marátha dissensions; Fall of Borsad 326-332

Mahárája Vakhatsingh fifty-ninth Viceroy (A.D. 1748); Ahmed Sháh
Emperor (A.D. 1748-1754); Spread of disorder; Surat affairs
(A.D. 1750); Sayad Achchan unpopular; Safdar Muhammad brought
back by the Dutch; Retreat of Sayad Achchan; Jawán Mard Khán
and the Peshwa (A.D. 1750); The Peshwa and Gáikwár (A.D. 1751);
Broach independent (A.D. 1752); Pándurang Pandit repulsed at
Ahmedábád (A.D. 1752); Marátha invasion; Return of Jawán Mard
Khán; Gallant defence of Ahmedábád; Surrender of Jawán Mard
Khán; Ahmedábád taken by the Maráthás (A.D. 1753); Collection of
tribute; Mughal coinage discontinued; Failure of an attempt on
Cambay (A.D. 1753); The Kolis; Cambay attacked by the Maráthás
(A.D. 1754); Alamgír II. (A.D. 1754-1759); Contest with Momín
Khán renewed (A.D. 1754); Gogha taken by Momín Khán (A.D. 1755);
Ahmedábád recovered by Momín Khán (17th October 1756); Jawán
Mard Khán allying himself with the Maráthás; Ahmedábád invested
by the Maráthás (A.D. 1756); Momín Khán helped by Ráo of Ídar
(A.D. 1757); Successful sally under Shambhurám; Negotiations
for peace; Marátha arrangements in Ahmedábád; New coins; Momín
Khán at Cambay; Expedition from Kachh against Sindh (A.D. 1758);
Tribute levied by the Maráthás; Surat affairs (A.D. 1758); The
command of Surat taken by the English (A.D. 1759); Momín Khán's
visit to Poona (A.D. 1759); Sadáshiv Rámchandra Peshwa's Viceroy
(A.D. 1760); The Maráthás in Káthiáváda (A.D. 1759); Ápa Ganesh
Viceroy (A.D. 1761); Battle of Pánipat (A.D. 1761) 332-345

Appendix I.--Death of Sultán Bahádur (A.D. 1526-1536) 347-351

Appendix II.--The Hill Fort of Mándu; Description; History; The Málwa
Sultáns (A.D. 1400-1570); The Mughals (A.D. 1570-1720); The Maráthás
(A.D. 1720-1820); Notices (A.D. 1820-1895) 352-384.

MARÁTHA PERIOD (A.D. 1760-1819).

History; Siváji's first inroad (A.D. 1664); Siváji's second
attack (A.D. 1670); Sáler taken (A.D. 1672); The Narbada crossed
(A.D. 1675); Raids by Dábháde (A.D. 1699-1713); Dábháde
(A.D. 1716); Dábháde Senápati; the Peshwa's negotiations
(A.D. 1717); Dámáji Gáikwár (A.D. 1720); Marátha tribute
(A.D. 1723); Kántáji Kadam; Marátha dissensions (A.D. 1725);
The Peshwa (A.D. 1726); Cession of tribute (A.D. 1728); Coalition
against the Peshwa (A.D. 1730); Defeat of the allies (A.D. 1731);
Assassination of Piláji Gáikwár (A.D. 1732); Baroda secured by
the Gáikwár (A.D. 1734); The Marátha Deputy Governor (A.D. 1736);
Ahmedábád riots (A.D. 1738-1741); Siege of Broach (A.D. 1741);
Rangoji prisoner at Borsad (A.D. 1742); Quarrels regarding the
Viceroyalty between Dámáji and Rághoji Bhonsle (A.D. 1743-44);
Rangoji confined in Borsad (A.D. 1745); the Gáikwár in Surat
(A.D. 1747) 385-395

Haribá attacked by Rangoji; Death of Umábái (A.D. 1748); Dámáji
deputy in Gujarát; Dámáji against Peshwa; Dámáji Gáikwár arrested
(A.D. 1751); The Peshwa and Surat; Release of Dámáji (A.D. 1752);
Capture of Ahmedábád (A.D. 1753); Raghunáthráv at Cambay; The
Peshwa's deputy at Ahmedábád; Ahmedábád captured by the Nawáb of
Cambay; Dámáji and Khanderáv Gáikwár at Ahmedábád; Surrender of
the Nawáb; Sayájiráv in Ahmedábád; Peshwa's agent Sadáshiv at
Surat; The Marátha demand of tribute from the Nawáb of Cambay;
The Nawáb at Poona; Lunáváda plundered by Khanderáv; Expedition
against Bálásinor; The estates of Jawán Mard Khán retaken
by Dámáji; The Peshwa and the English (A.D. 1761); One of the
Jádhav family Senápati; Ghorpade family again Senápati; Intrigues
of Rághoba (A.D. 1768); Death of Dámáji Gáikwár (A.D. 1768);
Disputed succession; Rághobá Peshwa (A.D. 1774); Rághoba in
Gujarát (A.D. 1775); Rághobá defeated; His arrival at Surat;
Treaty of Surat (A.D. 1775); Colonel Keating in Gujarát; Rághoba
accompanied by Colonel Keating; Rághoba in Cambay (A.D. 1775);
Govindráv Gáikwár's army; Advance of the combined forces; Defeat
of Fatesingh (A.D. 1775); Retreat of the ministerial general;
Colonel Keating at Dabhoi (A.D. 1775); Rághoba and the Gáikwárs;
Withdrawal of the British contingent; Negotiations at Poona;
Rághoba at Surat (A.D. 1776); Negotiations at Poona (A.D. 1777);
Fresh alliance with Rághoba (A.D. 1778) 396-407

The convention of Bhadgaon (A.D. 1779); Negotiation with the
Gáikwár; Escape of Rághoba from Sindia (A.D. 1779); League against
the English (A.D. 1780); Treaty with Fatesingh Gáikwár; Ahmedábád
taken by General Goddard (A.D. 1780); Operations against Sindia
and Holkar; Treaty of Sálbái (A.D. 1782); Death of Fatesingh
(A.D. 1789); Govindráv detained at Poona (A.D. 1793); Office of
Regent at Baroda taken by Govindráv; Ába Shelukar Deputy Governor
of Gujarát (A.D. 1796); Disputes between Ába and Govindráv Gáikwár;
Gujarát farmed to the Gáikwár (A.D. 1799); Ánandráv Gáikwár
(A.D. 1800); British aid to Govindráv's party; The British and
the Gáikwár (A.D. 1800); The Gáikwár's minister Rávji; Treaty
of Bassein (31st December 1802); Arabs disbanded; Malhárráv in
revolt (A.D. 1803); Contingent strengthened (A.D. 1803); Death of
Rávji (A.D. 1803); War with Sindia; The revenue collecting force;
Renewal of (Gujarát) farm (A.D. 1804); The British and the Gáikwár
(A.D. 1805); Káthiáváda tribute; State of Káthiáváda (A.D. 1807);
The revenue raid system 407-418

The Maráthás in Sorath; Securities; Bháts and Chárans (A.D. 1807);
British intervention; Financial and political settlements
(A.D. 1807); Peshwa's share in Káthiáváda; Later arrangements;
The Mahi Kántha; Supplementary treaty (A.D. 1808); Okhámandal
(A.D. 1809); Disturbances in Káthiáváda (A.D. 1811); The
Gáikwár's payment of the pecuniary loan to the British Government
(A.D. 1812); Discussions with Poona government about the old
claims on the Gáikwár's estate (A.D. 1813-14); Peshwa intrigue
in Baroda (A.D. 1814); Okhámandal ceded to the Gáikwár; British
aid at Junágadh; Treaty of Poona (A.D. 1817); Treaty with the
Gáikwár (A.D. 1817-18); Close of Marátha supremacy (A.D. 1819);
General Review 418-432

GUJARÁT DISTURBANCES (A.D. 1857-1859).

The Red Salt Scare (A.D. 1857); The passing of the Pariah dog;
Gold hoarding; Seditious native press; Maulvi Saráj-ud-din;
Apparent weakness of British rule; Administrative defects; The
Courts disliked; The Inám Commission; The army disloyal; Báiza Bái
of Gwálior; Pársi riot in Broach (June 1857); Mutiny at Mhow (July
1857); Mutiny at Ahmedábád (July 1857); Mr. Ashburner's force;
General Roberts; Rising at Amjera and in the Panch Maháls (July
1857); Mutinies at Abu and Erinpur (A.D. 1857); Disturbance at
Ahmedábád (14th September 1857); Rádhanpur disloyal; Arab outbreak
at Sunth; Disturbance in Lunáváda; Conspiracy at Dísa; Conspiracy
at Baroda; Want of combination; Marátha conspiracy; Gathering at
Partábpur and at Lodra; Partial disarming; Náikda revolt (October
1858); Tátia Topi (A.D. 1858); Tátia Topi's defeat at Chhota Udepur
(December 1858); Náikda disturbance (A.D. 1858); Wágher outbreak
(A.D. 1859); Expedition against Bet (A.D. 1859); Bet Fort taken;
Dwárka fort taken; Rising in Nagar Párkar 433-448

APPENDICES.

Bhinmál or Shrimál--Description, People, Objects of Interest,
History, Inscriptions 449-488

Java and Cambodia 489-504

Arab References 505-531

Greek References 532-547

Index 549-594

PART I.

EARLY HISTORY OF GUJARÁT.

CHAPTER I.

BOUNDARIES AND NAME.

The portion of the Bombay Presidency known as Gujarát fills the
north-east corner of the coast of Western India.

On the west is the Arabian Sea; on the north-west is the Gulf of
Cutch. To the north lie the Little Ran and the Mevád desert; to the
north-east Ábu and other outliers of the Árávali range. The east is
guarded and limited by rough forest land rugged in the north with side
spurs of the Vindhyas, more open towards the central natural highway
from Baroda to Ratlám, and southwards again rising and roughening
into the northern offshoots from the main range of the Sátpudás. The
southern limit is uncertain. History somewhat doubtfully places it at
the Tápti. Language carries Gujarát about a hundred miles further to
Balsár and Párdi where wild forest-covered hills from the north end
of the Sahyádri range stretch west almost to the sea.

The province includes two parts, Mainland Gujarát or Gurjjara-ráshtra
and Peninsular Gujarát, the Sauráshtra of ancient, the Káthiáváda of
modern history. To a total area of about 72,000 square miles Mainland
Gujarát with a length from north to south of about 280 miles and a
breadth from east to west varying from fifty to 150 miles contributes
45,000 square miles; and Peninsular Gujarát with a greatest length
from north to south of 155 miles and from east to west of 200 miles
contributes about 27,000 square miles. To a population of about
9,250,000 Mainland Gujarát contributes 6,900,000 and the Peninsula
about 2,350,000.

The richness of Mainland Gujarát the gift of the Sábarmati Mahi Narbada
and Tápti and the goodliness of much of Sauráshtra the Goodly Land
have from before the beginning of history continued to draw strangers
to Gujarát both as conquerors and as refugees.

By sea probably came some of the half-mythic Yádavas (B.C. 1500-500);
contingents of Yavanas (B.C. 300-A.D. 100) including Greeks Baktrians
Parthians and Skythians; the pursued Pársis and the pursuing Arabs
(A.D. 600-800); hordes of Sanganian pirates (A.D. 900-1200); Pársi and
Naváyat Musalmán refugees from Khulagu Khán's devastation of Persia
(A.D. 1250-1300); Portuguese and rival Turks (A.D. 1500-1600); Arab and
Persian Gulf pirates (A.D. 1600-1700); African Arab Persian and Makran
soldiers of fortune (A.D. 1500-1800); Armenian Dutch and French traders
(A.D. 1600-1750); and the British (A.D. 1750-1812). By land from
the north have come the Skythians and Huns (B.C. 200-A.D. 500), the
Gurjjaras (A.D. 400-600), the early Jádejás and Káthis (A.D. 750-900),
wave on wave of Afghan Turk Moghal and other northern Musalmáns
(A.D. 1000-1500), and the later Jádejás and Káthis (A.D. 1300-1500):
From the north-east the prehistoric Aryans till almost modern times
(A.D. 1100-1200) continued to send settlements of Northern Bráhmans;
and since the thirteenth century have come Turk Afghan and Moghal
Musalmáns: From the east have come the Mauryans (B.C. 300), the
half-Skythian Kshatrapas (B.C. 100-A.D. 300), the Guptas (A.D. 380),
the Gurjjars (A.D. 400-600), the Moghals (A.D. 1530), and the
Maráthás (A.D. 1750): And from the south the Sátakarnis (A.D. 100),
the Chálukyas and Ráshtrakútas (A.D. 650-950), occasional Musalmán
raiders (A.D. 1400-1600), the Portuguese (A.D. 1500), the Maráthás
(A.D. 1660-1760), and the British (A.D. 1780-1820).

[Gujars.] The name Gujarát is from the Prákrit Gujjara-ratta, the
Sanskrit of which is Gurjjara-ráshtra that is the country of the
Gujjaras or Gurjjaras. In Sanskrit books and inscriptions the name
of the province is written Gurjjara-mandala and Gurjjara-desa the
land of the Gurjjaras or Gúrjjaras. The Gurjjaras are a foreign
tribe who passing into India from the north-west gradually spread
as far south as Khándesh and Bombay Gujarát. The present Gujars of
the Panjáb and North-West Provinces preserve more of their foreign
traits than the Gujar settlers further to the south and east. Though
better-looking, the Panjáb Gujars in language dress and calling so
closely resemble their associates the Játs or Jats as to suggest
that the two tribes entered India about the same time. Their present
distribution shows that the Gujars spread further east and south
than the Játs. The earliest Gujar settlements seem to have been
in the Panjáb and North-West Provinces from the Indus to Mathurá
where they still differ greatly in dress and language from most
other inhabitants. From Mathurá the Gujars seem to have passed to
East Rájputána and from there by way of Kotah and Mandasor to Málwa,
where, though their original character is considerably altered, the
Gujars of Málwa still remember that their ancestors came from the Doab
between the Ganges and the Jamna. In Málwa they spread as far east
as Bhilsa and Saháranpur. From Málwa they passed south to Khándesh
and west probably by the Ratlam-Dohad route to the province of Gujarát.

Like the modern Ahirs of Káthiáváda the Gujars seem to have been a
tribe of cattle-rearers husbandmen and soldiers who accompanied some
conqueror and subsequently were pushed or spread forwards as occasion
arose or necessity compelled. In the absence of better authority the
order and locality of their settlements suggest that their introduction
into India took place during the rule of the Skythian or Kushán emperor
Kanerkes or Kanishka (A.D. 78-106) in whose time they seem to have
settled as far east as Mathurá to which the territory of Kanishka
is known to have extended. Subsequently along with the Guptas, who
rose to power about two hundred years later (A.D. 300), the Gujars
settled in East Rájputána, Málwa, and Gujarát, provinces all of which
were apparently subjugated by the Guptas. It seems probable that in
reward for their share in the Gupta conquests the leading Gujars
were allotted fiefs and territories which in the declining power
of their Gupta overlords they afterwards (A.D. 450-550) turned into
independent kingdoms.

The earliest definite reference to a kingdom of North Indian Gujars is
about A.D. 890 when the Kashmir king Sankaravarman sent an expedition
against the Gurjjara king Alakhána and defeated him. As the price of
peace Alakhána offered the country called Takkadesa. This Takkadesa
[2] appears to be the same as the Tsehkia of Hiuen Tsiang [3]
(A.D. 630-640) who puts it between the Biyás on the east and the
Indus on the west thus including nearly the whole Panjáb. The tract
surrendered by Alakhána was probably the small territory to the east of
the Chináb as the main possessions of Alakhána must have lain further
west between the Chináb and the Jehlam, where lie the town of Gujarát
and the country still called Gujar-desa the land of the Gujars. [4]

[Northern Gurjjara Kingdom.] As early as the sixth and seventh
centuries records prove the existence of two independent Gurjjara
kingdoms in Bombay Gujarát one in the north the other in the south of
the province. The Northern kingdom is mentioned by Hiuen Tsiang[Hiuen
Tsiang's Kiu-che-lo, A.D. 620.] in the seventh century under the name
Kiu-che-lo. He writes: 'Going north from the country of Valabhi 1800
li (300 miles) we come to the kingdom of Kiu-che-lo. This country is
about 5000 li in circuit, the capital, which is called Pi-lo-mo-lo,
is 30 li or so round. The produce of the soil and the manners of the
people resemble those of Sauráshtra. The king is of the Kshatriya
caste. He is just twenty years old.' [5] Hiuen Tsiang's Kiu-che-lo
is apparently Gurjjara, the capital of which Pi-lo-mo-lo is probably
Bhilmál or Bhinmál better known as Srimál. [6] Though Hiuen Tsiang
calls the king a Kshatriya he was probably a Gujar who like the later
Southern Gujars claimed to be of the Kshatriya race.

[Southern Gurjjara Kingdom, A.D. 589-735.] The Southern Gurjjara
kingdom in Gujarát, whose capital was at Nándipuri, perhaps the modern
Nándod the capital of the Rájpipla State, flourished from A.D. 589 to
A.D. 735. [7] The earlier inscriptions describe the Southern Gurjjaras
as of the Gurjjara Vansa. Later they ceased to call themselves
Gurjjaras and traced their genealogy to the Puránic king Karna.

From the fourth to the eighth century the extensive tract of Central
Gujarát between the North and South Gurjjara kingdoms was ruled by
the Valabhis. The following reasons seem to show that the Valabhi
dynasty were originally Gujars. Though it is usual for inscriptions
to give this information none of the many Valabhi copper-plates
makes any reference to the Valabhi lineage. Nor does any inscription
state to what family Senápati Bhatárka the founder of the dynasty
belonged. Hiuen Tsiang describes the Valabhi king as a Kshatriya
and as marrying with the kings of Málwa and Kanauj. The Valabhi
king described by Hiuen Tsiang is a late member of the dynasty
who ruled when the kingdom had been greatly extended and when the
old obscure tribal descent may have been forgotten and a Kshatriya
lineage invented instead. Intermarriage with Málwa and Kanauj can be
easily explained. Rájputs have never been slow to connect themselves
by marriage with powerful rulers.

The establishment of these three Gujar kingdoms implies that the
Gurjjara tribe from Northern and Central India settled in large
numbers in Gujarát. Several Gujar castes survive in Gujarát. Among
them are Gujar Vániás or traders, Gujar Sutárs or carpenters, Gujar
Sonis or goldsmiths, Gujar Kumbhárs or potters, and Gujar Saláts or
masons. All of these are Gujars who taking to different callings
have formed separate castes. The main Gujar underlayer are the
Lewás and Kadwás the two leading divisions of the important class
of Gujarát Kanbis. The word Kanbi is from the Sanskrit Kutumbin,
that is one possessing a family or a house. From ancient times the
title Kutumbin has been prefixed to the names of cultivators. [8] This
practice still obtains in parts of the North-West Provinces where the
peasant proprietors are addressed as Grihasthas or householders. As
cattle-breeding not cultivation was the original as it still is the
characteristic calling of many North Indian Gujars, those of the tribe
who settled to cultivation came to be specially known as Kutumbin
or householders. Similarly Deccan surnames show that many tribes of
wandering cattle-owners settled as householders and are now known as
Kunbis. [9] During the last twenty years the settlement as Kunbis in
Khándesh of tribes of wandering Wanjára herdsmen and grain-carriers
is an example of the change through which the Gujarát Kanbis and the
Deccan Kunbis passed in early historic times.

[Gujars.] Besides resembling them in appearance and in their skill
both as husbandmen and as cattle-breeders the division of Gujarát
Kanbis into Lewa and Kadwa seems to correspond with the division
of Málwa Gujars into Dáha and Karád, with the Lewa origin of the
East Khándesh Gujars, and with the Lawi tribe of Panjáb Gujars. The
fact that the head-quarters of the Lewa Kanbis of Gujarát is in the
central section of the province known as the Charotar and formerly
under Valabhi supports the view that the founder of Valabhi power was
the chief leader of the Gujar tribe. That nearly a fourth of the whole
Hindu population of Gujarát are Lewa and Kadwa Kanbis and that during
the sixth seventh and eighth centuries three Gujar chiefs divided
among them the sway of the entire province explain how the province
of Gujarát came to take its name from the tribe of Gujars. [10]

CHAPTER II.

ANCIENT DIVISIONS.

[Ánartta.] From ancient times the present province of Gujarát consisted
of three divisions Ánartta, Suráshtra, and Láta. Ánartta seems to
have been Northern Gujarát, as its capital was Ánandapura the modern
Vadanagara or Chief City, which is also called Ánarttapura. [11]
Both these names were in use even in the times of the Valabhi kings
(A.D. 500-770). [12] According to the popular story, in each of
the four cycles or yugas Ánandapura or Vadanagara had a different
name, Chamatkárapura in the first or Satya-yuga, Ánarttapura in the
second or Tretá-yuga, Ánandapura in the third or Dvápara-yuga, and
Vriddha-nagara or Vadanagar in the fourth or Káli-yuga. The first
name is fabulous. The city does not seem to have ever been known by
so strange a title. Of the two Ánarttapura and Ánandapura the former
is the older name, while the latter may be its proper name or perhaps
an adaptation of the older name to give the meaning City of Joy. The
fourth Vriddha-nagara meaning the old city is a Sanskritized form
of the still current Vadnagar, the Old or Great City. In the Girnár
inscription of Kshatrapa Rudradáman (A.D. 150) the mention of Ánartta
and Suráshtra as separate provinces subject to the Pahlava viceroy
of Junágadh agrees with the view that Ánartta was part of Gujarát
close to Káthiáváda. In some Puránas Ánartta appears as the name of
the whole province including Suráshtra, with its capital at the well
known shrine of Dwáriká. In other passages Dwáriká and Prabhás are
both mentioned as in Suráshtra which would seem to show that Suráshtra
was then part of Ánartta as Káthiáváda is now part of Gujarát.

[Suráshtra.] Suráshtra the land of the Sus, afterwards Sanskritized
into Sauráshtra the Goodly Land, preserves its name in Sorath the
southern part of Káthiáváda. The name appears as Suráshtra in the
Mahábhárata and Pánini's Ganapátha, in Rudradáman's (A.D. 150)
and Skandagupta's (A.D. 456) Girnár inscriptions, and in several
Valabhi copper-plates. Its Prákrit form appears as Suratha in the Násik
inscription of Gotamiputra (A.D. 150) and in later Prákrit as Suraththa
in the Tirthakalpa of Jinaprabhásuri of the thirteenth or fourteenth
century. [13] Its earliest foreign mention is perhaps Strabo's
(B.C. 50-A.D. 20) Saraostus and Pliny's (A.D. 70) Oratura. [14]
Ptolemy the great Egyptian geographer (A.D. 150) and the Greek author
of the Periplus (A.D. 240) both call it Surastrene. [15] The Chinese
pilgrim Hiuen Tsiang (A.D. 600-640) mentions Valabhi then large and
famous and Suráshtra as separate kingdoms. [16]

[Láta.] Láta is South Gujarát from the Mahi to the Tápti. The name
Láta does not appear to be Sanskrit. It has not been found in the
Mahábhárata or other old Sanskrit works, or in the cave or other
inscriptions before the third century A.D., probably because the
Puránas include in Aparánta the whole western seaboard south of
the Narbada as far as Goa. Still the name Láta is old. Ptolemy
(A.D. 150) uses the form Larike [17] apparently from the Sanskrit
Látaka. Vátsyáyana in his Káma-Sutra of the third century A.D. calls
it Láta; describes it as situated to the west of Málwa; and gives an
account of several of the customs of its people. [18] In Sanskrit
writings and inscriptions later than the third century the name
is frequently found. In the sixth century the great astronomer
Varáhamihira mentions the country of Láta, and the name also appears
as Láta in an Ajanta and in a Mandasor inscription of the fifth
century. [19] It is common in the later inscriptions (A.D. 700-1200)
of the Chálukya Gurjara and Ráshtrakúta kings [20] as well as in the
writings of Arab travellers and historians between the eighth and
twelfth centuries. [21]

The name Láta appears to be derived from some local tribe, perhaps the
Lattas, who, as r and l are commonly used for each other, may possibly
be the well known Ráshtrakútas since their great king Amoghavarsha
(A.D. 851-879) calls the name of the dynasty Ratta. Lattalura
the original city of the Rattas of Saundatti and Belgaum may have
been in Láta and may have given its name to the country and to the
dynasty. [22] In this connection it is interesting to note that the
country between Broach and Dhár in Málwa in which are the towns of
Bágh and Tánda is still called Rátha.

CHAPTER III.

LEGENDS.

[Ánartta the First Puránic King of Gujarát.] The oldest Puránic
legend regarding Gujarát appears to be that of the holy king Ánartta
son of Saryáti and grandson of Manu. Ánartta had a son named Revata,
who from his capital at Kusasthali or Dwáriká governed the country
called Ánartta. Revata had a hundred sons of whom the eldest was
named Raivata or Kakudmi. Raivata had a daughter named Revati
who was married to Baladeva of Kusasthali or Dwáriká, the elder
brother of Krishna. Regarding Revati's marriage with Baladeva the
Puránic legends tell that Raivata went with his daughter to Brahmá
in Brahma-loka to take his advice to whom he should give the girl
in marriage. When Raivata arrived Brahmá was listening to music. As
soon as the music was over Raivata asked Brahmá to find the girl a
proper bridegroom. Brahmá told Raivata that during the time he had
been waiting his kingdom had passed away, and that he had better
marry his daughter to Baladeva, born of Vishnu, who was now ruler of
Dwáriká. [23] This story suggests that Raivata son of Ánartta lost his
kingdom and fled perhaps by sea. That after some time during which the
Yádavas established themselves in the country, Raivata, called a son
of Revata but probably a descendant as his proper name is Kakudmi,
returned to his old territory and gave his daughter in marriage to
one of the reigning Yádava dynasty, the Yádavas taking the girl as
representing the dynasty that had preceded them. The story about
Brahmá and the passing of ages seems invented to explain the long
period that elapsed between the flight and the return.

[The Yádavas in Dwáriká.] The next Puránic legends relate to the
establishment of the Yádava kingdom at Dwáriká. The founder and
namegiver of the Yádava dynasty was Yadu of whose family the Puránas
give very detailed information. The family seems to have split into
several branches each taking its name from some prominent member,
the chief of them being Vrishni, Kukkura, Bhoja, Sátvata, Andhaka,
Madhu, Surasena, and Dasárha. Sátvata was thirty-seventh from Yadu and
in his branch were born Devaki and Vasudeva, the parents of the great
Yádava hero and god Krishna. It was in Krishna's time that the Yádavas
had to leave their capital Mathurá and come to Dwáriká. This was the
result of a joint invasion of Mathurá on one side by a legendary Deccan
hero Kálayavana and on the other by Jarásandha the powerful king of
Magadha or Behár, who, to avenge the death of his brother-in-law [24]
Kansa killed by Krishna in fulfilment of a prophecy, is said to have
invaded the Yádava territory eighteen times.

According to the story Kálayavana followed the fugitive Krishna and his
companions as far as Suráshtra where in a mountain cave he was burnt by
fire from the eye of the sleeping sage Muchakunda whom he had roused
believing him to be his enemy Krishna. According to the Harivansa the
fugitive Yádavas quitting Mathurá went to the Sindhu country and there
established the city of Dwáriká on a convenient site on the sea shore
making it their residence. [25] Local tradition says that the Yádavas
conquered this part of the country by defeating the demons who held it.

The leading Yádava chief in Dwáriká was Ugrasena, and Ugrasena's three
chief supporters were the families of Yadu, Bhoja, and Andhaka. As
the entire peninsula of Káthiáváda was subject to them the Yádavas
used often to make pleasure excursions and pilgrimages to Prabhás
and Girnár. Krishna and Baladeva though not yet rulers held high
positions and took part in almost all important matters. They were in
specially close alliance with their paternal aunt's sons the Pándava
brothers, kings of Hastinápura or Delhi. Of the two sets of cousins
Krishna and Arjuna were on terms of the closest intimacy. Of one of
Arjuna's visits to Káthiáváda the Mahábhárata gives the following
details: 'Arjuna after having visited other holy places arrived in
Aparánta (the western seaboard) whence he went to Prabhás. Hearing
of his arrival Krishna marched to Prabhás and gave Arjuna a hearty
welcome. From Prabhás they came together to the Raivataka hill which
Krishna had decorated and where he entertained his guest with music
and dancing. From Girnár they went to Dwáriká driving in a golden
car. The city was adorned in honour of Arjuna; the streets were
thronged with multitudes; and the members of the Vrishni, Bhoja,
and Andhaka families met to honour Krishna's guest.' [26]

Some time after, against his elder brother Baladeva's desire, Krishna
helped Arjuna to carry off Krishna's sister Subhadrá, with whom Arjuna
had fallen in love at a fair in Girnár of which the Mahábhárata gives
the following description: 'A gathering of the Yádavas chiefly the
Vrishnis and Andhakas took place near Raivataka. The hill and the
country round were rich with fine rows of fruit trees and large
mansions. There was much dancing singing and music. The princes
of the Vrishni family were in handsome carriages glistening with
gold. Hundreds and thousands of the people of Junágadh with their
families attended on foot and in vehicles of various kinds. Baladeva
with his wife Revati moved about attended by many Gandharvas. Ugrasena
was there with his thousand queens and musicians. Sámba and Pradyumna
attended in holiday attire and looked like gods. Many Yádavas and
others were also present with their wives and musicians.'

Some time after this gathering Subhadrá came to Girnár to worship and
Arjuna carried her off. Eventually Vasudeva and Baladeva consented and
the runaways were married with due ceremony. The large fair still held
in Mágh (February-March) in the west Girnár valley near the modern
temple of Bhavanáth is perhaps a relic of this great Yádava fair.

The Yádava occupation of Dwáriká was not free from trouble. When
Krishna was at Hastinápura on the occasion of the Rájasúya sacrifice
performed by Yudhishthira, Sálva king of Mrittikávatí in the country
of Saubha led an army against Dwáriká. He slew many of the Dwáriká
garrison, plundered the city and withdrew unmolested. On his return
Krishna learning of Sálva's invasion led an army against Sálva. The
chiefs met near the sea shore and in a pitched battle Sálva was
defeated and killed. [27] Family feuds brought Yádava supremacy in
Dwáriká to a disastrous end. The final family struggle is said to have
happened in the thirty-sixth year after the war of the Mahábhárata,
somewhere on the south coast of Káthiáváda near Prabhás or Somnáth
Pátan the great place of Bráhmanical pilgrimage. On the occasion
of an eclipse, in obedience to a proclamation issued by Krishna,
the Yádavas and their families went from Dwáriká to Prabhás in state
well furnished with dainties, animal food, and strong drink. One day
on the sea shore the leading Yádava chiefs heated with wine began to
dispute. They passed from words to blows. Krishna armed with an iron
rod [28] struck every one he met, not even sparing his own sons. Many
of the chiefs were killed. Baladeva fled to die in the forests and
Krishna was slain by a hunter who mistook him for a deer. When he
saw trouble was brewing Krishna had sent for Arjuna. Arjuna arrived
to find Dwáriká desolate. Soon after Arjuna's arrival Vasudeva died
and Arjuna performed the funeral ceremonies of Vasudeva Baladeva and
Krishna whose bodies he succeeded in recovering. When the funeral
rites were completed Arjuna started for Indraprastha in Upper India
with the few that were left of the Yádava families, chiefly women. On
the way in his passage through the Panchanada [29] or Panjáb a body
of Ábhíras attacked Arjuna with sticks and took several of Krishna's
wives and the widows of the Andhaka Yádava chiefs. After Arjuna left
it the deserted Dwáriká was swallowed by the sea. [30]

CHAPTER IV.

MAURYAN AND GREEK RULE

(B.C. 319-100.)

After the destruction of the Yádavas a long blank occurs in the
traditional history of Gujarát. It is probable that from its seaboard
position, for trade and other purposes, many foreigners settled in
Káthiáváda and South Gujarát; and that it is because of the foreign
element that the Hindu Dharmasástras consider Gujarát a Mlechchha
country and forbid visits to it except on pilgrimage. [31] The fact
also that Asoka (B.C. 230) the great Mauryan king and propagator of
Buddhism chose, among the Buddhist Theras sent to various parts of his
kingdom, a Yavana Thera named Dhamma-rakhito as evangelist for the
western seaboard, [32] possibly indicates a preponderating foreign
element in these parts. It is further possible that these foreign
settlers may have been rulers. In spite of these possibilities we
have no traditions between the fall of the Yádavas and the rise of
the Mauryas in B.C. 319.

Gujarát history dates from the rule of the Mauryan dynasty, the only
early Indian dynasty the record of whose rule has been preserved
in the writings of the Bráhmans, the Buddhists, and the Jains. This
fulness of reference to the Mauryas admits of easy explanation. The
Mauryas were a very powerful dynasty whose territory extended over
the greater part of India. Again under Mauryan rule Buddhism was so
actively propagated that the rulers made it their state religion,
waging bloody wars, even revolutionizing many parts of the empire to
secure its spread. Further the Mauryas were beneficent rulers and
had also honourable alliances with foreign, especially with Greek
and Egyptian, kings. These causes combined to make the Mauryans a
most powerful and well remembered dynasty.

Inscriptions give reason to believe that the supremacy of Chandragupta,
the founder of the Mauryan dynasty (B.C. 319), extended over
Gujarát. According to Rudradáman's inscription (A.D. 150) on the
great edict rock at Girnár in Káthiáváda, a lake called Sudarsana
[33] near the edict rock was originally made by Pushyagupta of the
Vaisya caste, who is described as a brother-in-law of the Mauryan
king Chandragupta. [34] The language of this inscription leaves no
doubt that Chandragupta's sway extended over Girnár as Pushyagupta
is simply called a Vaisya and a brother-in-law of king Chandragupta
and has no royal attribute, particulars which tend to show that he
was a local governor subordinate to king Chandragupta. The same
inscription [35] states that in the time of Asoka (B.C. 250) his
officer Yavanarája Tusháspa adorned the same Sudarsana lake with
conduits. This would seem to prove the continuance of Mauryan rule
in Girnár for three generations from Chandragupta to Asoka. Tusháspa
is called Yavanarája. The use of the term rája would seem to show
that, unlike Chandragupta's Vaisya governor Pushyagupta, Tusháspa
was a dignitary of high rank and noble family. That he is called
Yavanarája does not prove Tusháspa was a Greek, though for Greeks
alone Yavana is the proper term. The name Tusháspa rather suggests
a Persian origin from its close likeness in formation to Kersháshp,
a name still current among Bombay Pársis. Evidence from other sources
proves that Asoka held complete sway over Málwa, Gujarát, and the
Konkan coast. All the rock edicts of Asoka hitherto traced have
been found on the confines of his great empire. On the north-west
at Kapurdigiri and at Shabazgarhi in the Baktro-Páli character; in
the north-north-west at Kálsi, in the east at Dhauli and Jangada;
in the west at Girnár and Sopára, and in the south in Maisur all in
Maurya characters. The Girnár and Sopára edicts leave no doubt that
the Gujarát, Káthiáváda, and North Konkan seaboard was in Asoka's
possession. The fact that an inland ruler holds the coast implies
his supremacy over the intervening country. Further it is known that
Asoka was viceroy of Málwa in the time of his father and that after
his father's death he was sovereign of Málwa. The easy route from
Mandasor (better known as Dasapur) to Dohad has always secured a close
connection between Málwa and Gujarát. South Gujarát lies at the mercy
of any invader entering by Dohad and the conquest of Káthiáváda on one
side and of Upper Gujarát on the other might follow in detail. As we
know that Káthiáváda and South Gujarát as far as Sopára were held by
Asoka it is not improbable that Upper Gujarát also owned his sway. The
Maurya capital of Gujarát seems to have been Girinagara or Junágadh
in Central Káthiáváda, whose strong hill fort dominating the rich
province of Sorath and whose lofty hills a centre of worship and a
defence and retreat from invaders, combined to secure for Junágadh
its continuance as capital under the Kshatrapas (A.D. 100-380) and
their successors the Guptas (A.D. 380-460). The southern capital of
the Mauryas seems to have been Sopára near Bassein in a rich country
with a good and safe harbour for small vessels, probably in those
times the chief centre of the Konkan and South Gujarát trade.

Buddhist and Jain records agree that Asoka was succeeded, not by
his son Kunála who was blind, but by his grandsons Dasaratha and
Samprati. The Barábar hill near Gayá has caves made by Asoka and
bearing his inscriptions; and close to Barábar is the Nágárjuna hill
with caves made by Dasaratha also bearing his inscriptions. In one of
these inscriptions the remark occurs that one of the Barábar caves
was made by Dasaratha 'installed immediately after.' As the caves
in the neighbouring hill must have been well known to have been
made by Asoka this 'after' may mean after Asoka, or the 'after'
may refer solely to the sequence between Dasaratha's installation
and his excavation of the cave. In any case it is probable that
Dasaratha was Asoka's successor. Jaina records pass over Dasaratha
and say that Asoka was succeeded by his grandson Samprati the son
of Kunála. In the matter of the propagation of the Jain faith, Jain
records speak as highly of Samprati as Buddhist records speak of
Asoka. [36] Almost all old Jain temples or monuments, whose builders
are unknown, are ascribed to Samprati who is said to have built
thousands of temples as Asoka is said to have raised thousands of
stupas. In his Pátaliputra-kalpa Jinaprabhasuri the well known Jaina
Áchárya and writer gives a number of legendary and other stories
of Pátaliputra. Comparing Samprati with Asoka in respect of the
propagation of the faith in non-Áryan countries the Áchárya writes:
'In Pátaliputra flourished the great king Samprati son of Kunála lord
of Bharata with its three continents, the great Arhanta who established
viháras for Sramanas even in non-Áryan countries.' [37] It would appear
from this that after Asoka the Mauryan empire may have been divided
into two, Dasaratha ruling Eastern India, and Samprati, whom Jaina
records specially mention as king of Ujjain, ruling Western India,
where the Jain sect is specially strong. Though we have no specific
information on the point, it is probable, especially as he held Málwa,
that during the reign of Samprati Gujarát remained under Mauryan
sway. With Samprati Mauryan rule in Gujarát seems to end. In later
times (A.D. 500) traces of Mauryan chiefs appear in Málwa and in the
North Konkan. The available details will be given in another chapter.

After Samprati, whose reign ended about B.C. 197, a blank of seventeen
years occurs in Gujarát history. The next available information shows
traces of Baktrian-Greek sway over parts of Gujarát. In his description
of Surastrene or Suráshtra the author of the Periplus (A.D. 240) says:
'In this part there are preserved even to this day memorials of the
expedition of Alexander, old temples, foundations of camps, and large
wells.' [38] As Alexander did not come so far south as Káthiáváda
and as after Alexander's departure the Mauryas held Káthiáváda till
about B.C. 197, it may be suggested that the temples camps and wells
referred to by the author of the Periplus were not memorials of the
expedition of Alexander but remains of later Baktrian-Greek supremacy.

Demetrius, whom Justin calls the king of the Indians, is believed
to have reigned from B.C. 190 to B.C. 165. [39] On the authority
of Apollodorus of Artamita Strabo (B.C. 50-A.D. 20) names two
Baktrian-Greek rulers who seem to have advanced far into inland
India. He says: 'The Greeks who occasioned the revolt of Baktria (from
Syria B.C. 256) were so powerful by the fertility and advantages of the
country that they became masters of Ariana and India.... Their chiefs,
particularly Menander, conquered more nations than Alexander. Those
conquests were achieved partly by Menander and partly by Demetrius
son of Euthydemus king of the Baktrians. They got possession not only
of Pattalene but of the kingdoms of Saraostus and Sigerdis, which
constitute the remainder of the coast.' [40] Pattalene is generally
believed to be the old city of Pátál in Sindh (the modern Haidarábád),
while the subsequent mention of Saraostus and Sigerdis as kingdoms
which constitute the remainder of the coast, leaves almost no doubt
that Saraostus is Suráshtra and Sigerdis is Ságaradvípa or Cutch. The
joint mention of Menander (B.C. 126) and Demetrius (B.C. 190) may mean
that Demetrius advanced into inland India to a certain point and that
Menander passed further and took Sindh, Cutch, and Káthiáváda. The
discovery in Cutch and Káthiáváda of coins of Baktrian kings supports
the statements of Justin and Strabo. Dr. Bhagvánlál's collecting
of coins in Káthiáváda and Gujarát during nearly twenty-five years
brought to light among Baktrian-Greek coins an obolus of Eucratides
(B.C. 180-155), a few drachmæ of Menander (B.C. 126-110), many
drachmæ and copper coins of Apollodotus (B.C. 110-100), but none
of Demetrius. Eucratides was a contemporary of Demetrius. Still,
as Eucratides became king of Baktria after Demetrius, his conquests,
according to Strabo of a thousand cities to the east of the Indus,
must be later than those of Demetrius.

As his coins are found in Káthiáváda Eucratides may either have
advanced into Káthiáváda or the province may have come under his
sway as lord of the neighbouring country of Sindh. Whether or not
Eucratides conquered the province, he is the earliest Baktrian-Greek
king whose coins have been found in Káthiáváda and Gujarát. The fact
that the coins of Eucratides have been found in different parts of
Káthiáváda and at different times seems to show that they were the
currency of the province and were not merely imported either for trade
or for ornament. It is to be noticed that these coins are all of the
smallest value of the numerous coins issued by Eucratides. This may
be explained by the fact that these small coins were introduced by
Eucratides into Káthiáváda to be in keeping with the existing local
coinage. The local silver coins in use before the time of Eucratides
are very small, weighing five to seven grains, and bear the Buddhist
symbols of the Svastika, the Trident, and the Wheel. Another variety
has been found weighing about four grains with a misshapen elephant
on the obverse and something like a circle on the reverse. [41] It
was probably to replace this poor currency that Eucratides introduced
his smallest obolus of less weight but better workmanship.

The end of the reign of Eucratides is not fixed with certainty: it is
believed to be about B.C. 155. [42] For the two Baktrian-Greek kings
Menander and Apollodotus who ruled in Káthiáváda after Eucratides,
better sources of information are available. As already noticed Strabo
(A.D. 20) mentions that Menander's conquests (B.C. 120) included Cutch
and Suráshtra. [43] And the author of the Periplus (A.D. 240) writes:
'Up to the present day old drachmæ bearing the Greek inscriptions
of Apollodotus and Menander are current in Barugaza (Broach).' [44]
Menander's silver drachmæ have been found in Káthiáváda and Southern
Gujarát. [45] Though their number is small Menander's coins are
comparatively less scarce than those of the earliest Kshatrapas
Nahapána and Chashtana (A.D. 100-140). The distribution of Menander's
coins suggests he was the first Baktrian-Greek king who resided in
these parts and that the monuments of Alexander's times, camps temples
and wells, mentioned by the author of the Periplus [46] were camps of
Menander in Suráshtra. Wilson and Rochette have supposed Apollodotus
to be the son and successor of Menander, [47] while General Cunningham
believes Apollodotus to be the predecessor of Menander. [48] Inferences
from the coins of these two kings found in Gujarát and Káthiáváda
support the view that Apollodotus was the successor of Menander. The
coins of Apollodotus are found in much larger numbers than those
of Menander and the workmanship of Apollodotus' coins appears to
be of a gradually declining style. In the later coins the legend
is at times undecipherable. It appears from this that for some time
after Apollodotus until Nahapána's (A.D. 100) coins came into use,
the chief local currency was debased coins struck after the type of
the coins of Apollodotus. Their use as the type of coinage generally
happens to the coins of the last king of a dynasty. The statement by
the author of the Periplus that in his time (A.D. 240) the old drachmæ
of Apollodotus and Menander were current in Barugaza, seems to show
that these drachmæ continued to circulate in Gujarát along with the
coins of the Western Kshatrapas. The mention of Apollodotus before
Menander by the author of the Periplus may either be accidental,
or it may be due to the fact that when the author wrote fewer coins
of Menander than of Apollodotus were in circulation.

The silver coins both of Menander and Apollodotus found in Gujarát
and Káthiáváda are of only one variety, round drachmæ. The reason
that of their numerous large coins, tetradrachmæ didrachmæ and
others, drachmæ alone have been found in Gujarát is probably the
reason suggested for the introduction of the obolus of Eucratides,
namely that the existing local currency was so poor that coins of
small value could alone circulate. Still the fact that drachmæ
came into use implies some improvement in the currency, chiefly
in size. The drachmæ of both the kings are alike. The obverse of
Menander's coins has in the middle a helmeted bust of the king and
round it the Greek legend BASILEÔS SÔTÊROS MENANDROY Of the king the
Saviour Menander. On the reverse is the figure of Athene Promachos
surrounded by the Baktro-Páli legend Mahárájasa Trádátasa Menandrasa
that is Of the Great king the Saviour Menander, and a monogram. [49]
The drachmæ of Apollodotus have on the obverse a bust with bare
filleted head surrounded by the legend BASILEÔS SÔTÊROS APOLLODOTOY
Of the king the Saviour Apollodotus. Except in the legend the reverse
with two varieties of monogram [50] is the same as the reverse of the
drachmæ of Menander. The legend in Baktro-Páli character is Mahárájasa
Rájátirájasa Apaladatasa that is Of the Great king the over-king
of kings Apaladata. During his twenty-five years of coin-collecting
Dr. Bhagvánlál failed to secure a single copper coin of Menander either
in Gujarát or in Káthiáváda. Of the copper coins of Apollodotus a
deposit was found in Junágadh, many of them well preserved. [51] These
coins are of two varieties, one square the other round and large. Of
the square coin the obverse has a standing Apollo with an arrow in the
right hand and on the top and the two sides the Greek legend BASILEÔS
SÔTÊROS KAI PhILOPATOROS APOLLODOTOY that is Of the King Saviour and
Fatherlover Apollodotus. On the reverse is the tripod of Apollo with
a monogram [52] and the letter drí in Baktro-Páli on the left and the
legend in Baktro-Páli characters Mahárájasa Trádátasa Apaladatasa. The
round coin has also, on the obverse, a standing Apollo with an arrow
in the right hand; behind is the same monogram as in the square coin
and all round runs the Greek legend BASILEÔS SÔTÊROS APOLLODOTOY. On
the reverse is the tripod of Apollo with on its right and left
the letters di and u in Baktro-Páli and all round the Baktro-Páli
legend Mahárájasa Trádátasa Apaladatasa. The reason why so few copper
coins of Apollodotus have been found in Gujarát perhaps is that these
copper coins were current only in the time of Apollodotus and did not,
like his silver drachmæ, continue as the currency of the country with
the same or an imitated die. The date of the reign of Apollodotus is
not fixed. General Cunningham believes it to be B.C. 165-150, [53]
Wilson and Gardner take it to be B.C. 110-100. [54] Though no Indian
materials enable us to arrive at any final conclusion regarding this
date the fact that Apollodotus' coins continued to be issued long
after his time shows that Apollodotus was the last Baktrian-Greek
ruler of Gujarát and Káthiáváda. After Apollodotus we find no trace
of Baktrian-Greek rule, and no other certain information until the
establishment of the Kshatrapas about A.D. 100. The only fact that
breaks this blank in Gujarát history is the discovery of copper coins
of a king whose name is not known, but who calls himself Basileus
Basileon Soter Megas that is King of Kings the Great Saviour. These
coins are found in Káthiáváda and Cutch as well as in Rájputána the
North-West Provinces and the Kábul valley, a distribution which points
to a widespread Indian rule. The suggestion may be offered that this
king is one of the leaders of the Yaudheyas whose constitution is said
to have been tribal, that is the tribe was ruled by a number of small
chiefs who would not be likely to give their names on their coins. [55]

CHAPTER V.

THE KSHATRAPAS

(B.C. 70-A.D. 398.)

With the Kshatrapas (B.C. 70) begins a period of clearer light,
and, at the same time, of increased importance, since, for more than
three centuries, the Kshatrapas held sway over the greater part of
Western India. Till recently this dynasty was known to orientalists
as the Sáh dynasty a mistaken reading of the terminal of their names
which in some rulers is Simha Lion and in others, as in Rudra Sena
(A.D. 203-220) son of Rudra Simha, Sena Army. [56]

[Two Dynasties.] The sway of the rulers who affix the title Kshatrapa
to their names extended over two large parts of India, one in the
north including the territory from the Kábul valley to the confluence
of the Ganges and the Jamná; the other in the west stretching from
Ajmir in the north to the North Konkan in the south and from Málwa
in the east to the Arabian Sea in the west. The former may be called
the Northern the latter the Western Kshatrapas.

[The Name.] Besides as Kshatrapa, in the Prákrit legends of coins
and in inscriptions the title of these dynasties appears under
three forms Chhatrapa, [57] Chhatrava, [58] and Khatapa. [59] All
these forms have the same meaning namely Lord or Protector of the
warrior-race, the Sanskrit Kshatra-pa. [60] It is to be noted that
the title Kshatrapa appears nowhere as a title of any king or royal
officer within the whole range of Sanskrit literature, or indeed on any
inscription, coin, or other record of any Indian dynasty except the
Northern and the Western Kshatrapas. According to Prinsep Kshatrapa
is a Sanskritized form of Satrapa, a term familiar to the Grecian
history of ancient Persia and used for the prefect of a province
under the Persian system of government. As Prinsep further observes
Satrapa had probably the same meaning in Ariana that Kshatrapa had in
Sanskrit, the ruler feeder or patron of the kshatra or warrior class,
the chief of a warlike tribe or clan. [61] Prinsep further notes the
Persian kings were often in need of such chiefs and as they entrusted
the chiefs with the government of parts of their dominions the word
came to mean a governor. So during the anarchy which prevailed on
the Skythian overthrow of Greek rule in Baktria [62] (B.C. 160)
several chiefs of Malaya, Pallava, Ábhíra, Meda, and other predatory
tribes came from Baktria to Upper India, and each established for
himself a principality or kingdom. Subsequently these chiefs appear
to have assumed independent sovereignty. Still though they often call
themselves rájás or kings with the title Kshatrapa or Mahákshatrapa,
if any Baktrian king advanced towards their territories, they were
probably ready to acknowledge him as Overlord. Another reason for
believing these Kshatrapa chiefs to have been foreigners is that,
while the names of the founders of Kshatrapa sovereignty are foreign,
their inscriptions and coins show that soon after the establishment
of their rule they became converts to one or other form of the Hindu
religion and assumed Indian names. [63]

[Northern Kshatrapas, B.C. 70-A.D. 78.] According to inscriptions
and coins Northern Kshatrapa rule begins with king Maues about
B.C. 70 and ends with the accession of the Kushán king Kanishka about
A.D. 78. Maues probably belonged to the Saka tribe of Skythians. If
the Maues of the coins may be identified with the Moga of the Taxila
plate the date of king Patika in the Taxila plate shows that for
about seventy-five years after the death of Maues the date of his
accession continued to be the initial year of the dynasty. From their
connection with the Sakas, arriving in India during the reign of
the Saka Maues and for nearly three quarters of a century accepting
the Saka overlordship, the Kshatrapas, though as noted above their
followers were chiefly Malayas, Pallavas, Ábhíras, and Medas, appear
to have themselves come to be called Sakas and the mention of Saka
kings in Puránic and other records seems to refer to them. After
lasting for about 150 years the rule of the Northern Kshatrapas seems
to have merged in the empire of the great Kushán Kanishka (A.D. 78).

Though recently found inscriptions and coins show that the Kshatrapas
ruled over important parts of India including even a share of the
western seaboard, nothing is known regarding them from either Indian
or foreign literary sources. What little information can be gleaned
is from their own inscriptions and coins. Of the Northern Kshatrapas
this information is imperfect and disconnected. It shows that they
had probably three or four ruling branches, one in the Kábul valley,
a second at Taxila near Attak on the North-West Panjáb frontier, a
third at Behát near Saháranpur or Delhi, and a fourth at Mathurá. The
last two were perhaps subdivisions of one kingdom; but probably those
at Kábul and at Taxila were distinct dynasties. An inscription found
in Mathurá shows a connection either by marriage or by neighbourhood
between the Behát and Mathurá branches. This is a Baktro-Páli
inscription recording the gift of a stúpa by Nandasiriká daughter
of Kshatrapa Rájavula and mother of Kharaosti Yuvarája. Kharaosti is
the dynastic name of the prince, his personal name appears later in
the inscription as Talama (Ptolemy ?). From his dynastic name, whose
crude form Kharaosta or Kharaottha may be the origin of the Prakrit
Chhaharáta and the Sanskritised Kshaharáta, this Talama appears to be a
descendant of the Kshatrapa Kharaosti whose coins found at Taxila call
him Artaputa that is the son of Arta apparently the Parthian Ortus.

The same Baktro-Páli Mathurá inscription also mentions with special
respect a Kshatrapa named Patika, [64] who, with the title of Kusulaka
or Kozolon, ruled the Kábul valley with his capital first at Nagaraka
and later at Taxila.

The same inscription further mentions that the stúpa was given while
the Kshatrapa Sudása son of the Mahákshatrapa Rájavula was ruling
at Mathurá. The inference from the difference in the titles of the
father and the son seems to be that Sudása was ruling in Mathurá as
governor under his father who perhaps ruled in the neighbourhood of
Delhi where many of his coins have been found. While the coins of
Sudása have the legend in Nágarí only, Rájavula's coins are of two
varieties, one with the legend in Baktro-Páli and the other with the
legend in Nágarí, a fact tending to show that the father's territories
stretched to the far north.

Though Kharaosti is mentioned as a Yuvarája or prince heir-apparent
in the time of his maternal uncle Sudása, the inscription shows he
had four children. It is curious that while the inscription mentions
Nandasiriká as the mother of Kharaosti Yuvarája, nothing is said
about her husband. Perhaps he was dead or something had happened to
make Nandasiriká live at her father's home.

[Western Kshatrapas, A.D. 70-398.] Another inscription of Sudása found
by General Cunningham at Mathurá is in old Nágarí character. Except
that they have the distinctive and long continued Kshatrapa peculiarity
of joining ya with other letters the characters of this inscription
are of the same period as those of the inscriptions of the great
Indo-Skythian or Kushán king Kanishka. This would seem to show that
the conquest of Mathurá by Kanishka took place soon after the time
of Kshatrapa Sudása. It therefore appears probable that Nahapána,
the first Kshatrapa ruler of Gujarát and Káthiáváda, the letters of
whose inscriptions are of exactly the same Kshatrapa type as those of
Sudása, was a scion of the Kharaosti family, who, in this overthrow of
kingdoms, went westwards conquering either on his own account or as a
general sent by Kanishka. Nahapána's [65] advance seems to have lain
through East Rájputána by Mandasor [66] in West Málwa along the easy
route to Dohad as far as South Gujarát. From South Gujarát his power
spread in two directions, by sea to Káthiáváda and from near Balsár
by the Dáng passes to Násik and the Deccan, over almost the whole of
which, judging from coins and inscriptions, he supplanted as overlord
the great Ándhra kings of the Deccan. No evidence is available to show
either that East Málwa with its capital at Ujjain or that North Gujarát
formed part of his dominions. All the information we have regarding
Nahapána is from his own silver coins and from the inscriptions of
his son-in-law Ushavadáta at Násik and Kárle and of his minister Ayáma
(Sk. Áryaman) at Junnar. Nahapána's coins are comparatively rare. The
only published specimen is one obtained by Mr. Justice Newton. [67]
Four others were also obtained by Dr. Bhagvánlál from Káthiáváda
and Násik.

[Kshatrapa I. Nahapána, A.D. 78-120.] The coins of Nahapána are the
earliest specimens of Kshatrapa coins. Though the type seems to have
been adopted from the Baktrian-Greek, the design is original and is
not an imitation of any previous coinage. The type seems adopted in
idea from the drachma of Apollodotus (B.C. 110-100). On the obverse is
a bust with a Greek legend round it and on the reverse a thunderbolt
and an arrow probably as on the reverse of the coins of Apollodotus
[68] representing the distinctive weapons of Athene Promachos and
of Apollo. In addition to the Baktro-Páli legend on the Apollodotus
drachma, the reverse of Nahapána's coin has the same legend in Nágarí,
since Nágarí was the character of the country for which the coin was
struck. The dress of the bust is in the style of the over-dress of
Nahapána's time. The bust, facing the right, wears a flat grooved cap
and has the hair combed in ringlets falling half down the ear. The
neck shows the collar of the coat. The workmanship of the coins is
good. The die seems to have been renewed from time to time as the
face altered with age. Of Dr. Bhagvánlál's four coins one belongs
to Nahapána's youth, another to his old age, and the remaining two
to his intervening years. In all four specimens the Greek legend
is imperfect and unreadable. The letters of the Greek legend are of
the later period that is like the letters on the coins of the great
Skythian king Kadphises I. (B.C. 26). One of the coins shows in the
legend the six letters L L O D O-S. These may be the remains of the
name Apollodotus (B.C. 110-100). Still it is beyond doubt that the
letters are later Greek than those on the coins of Apollodotus. Until
the legend is found clear on some fresher specimen, it is not possible
to say anything further. In three of the coins the Baktro-Páli legend
on the reverse runs:

Raño Chhaharátasa Nahapánasa.

Of king Chhaharáta Nahapána.

The fourth has simply

Raño Chhaharátasa.

Of king Chhaharáta.

The old Nágarí legend is the same in all:

Raño Kshaharátasa Nahapánasa.

Of king Kshaharáta Nahapána.

The Chhaharáta of the former and the Kshaharáta of the latter are the
same, the difference in the initial letter being merely dialectical. As
mentioned above Kshaharáta is the family name of Nahapána's dynasty. It
is worthy of note that though Nahapána is not styled Kshatrapa in
any of his coins the inscriptions of Ushavadáta at Násik repeatedly
style him the Kshaharáta Kshatrapa Nahapána. [69]

[Ushavadáta, A.D. 100-120.] Ushavadáta was the son-in-law of Nahapána
being married to his daughter Dakhamitá or Dakshamitrá. Ushavadáta
bears no royal title. He simply calls himself son of Díníka and
son-in-law of Nahapána, which shows that he owed his power and rank
to his father-in-law, a position regarded as derogatory in India,
where no scion of any royal dynasty would accept or take pride in
greatness or influence obtained from a father-in-law. [70] Násik
Inscription XIV. shows that Ushavadáta was a Saka. His name, as was
first suggested by Dr. Bhau Dáji, is Prákrit for Rishabhadatta. From
the many charitable and publicly useful works mentioned in various
Násik and Kárle inscriptions, as made by him in places which apparently
formed part of Nahapána's dominions, Ushavadáta appears to have been
a high officer under Nahapána. As Nahapána seems to have had no son
Ushavadáta's position as son-in-law would be one of special power and
influence. Ushavadáta's charitable acts and works of public utility
are detailed in Násik Inscriptions X. XII. and XIV. The charitable acts
are the gift of three hundred thousand cows; of gold and of river-side
steps at the Bárnása or Banás river near Ábu in North Gujarát; of
sixteen villages to gods and Bráhmans; the feeding of hundreds of
thousands of Bráhmans every year; the giving in marriage of eight
wives to Bráhmans at Prabhás in South Káthiáváda; the bestowing of
thirty-two thousand cocoanut trees in Nanamgola or Nárgol village
on the Thána seaboard on the Charaka priesthoods of Pinditakávada,
Govardhana near Násik, Suvarnamukha, and Rámatírtha in Sorpáraga or
Sopára on the Thána coast; the giving of three hundred thousand cows
and a village at Pushkara or Pokhar near Ajmir in East Rájputána;
making gifts to Bráhmans at Chechina or Chichan near Kelva-Máhim on
the Thána coast; and the gift of trees and 70,000 kárshápanas or
2000 suvarnas to gods and Bráhmans at Dáhánu in Thána. The public
works executed by Ushavadáta include rest-houses and alms-houses
at Bharu Kachha or Broach, at Dasapura or Mandasor in North Málwa,
and gardens and wells at Govardhana and Sopára; free ferries across
the Ibá or Ambiká, the Páráda or Pár, the Damaná or Damanganga, the
Tápi or Tápti, the Karabená or Káveri, and the Dáhánuká or Dáhánu
river. Waiting-places and steps were also built on both banks of
each of these rivers. These charitable and public works of Ushavadáta
savour much of the Bráhmanic religion. The only Buddhist charities are
the gift of a cave at Násik; of 3000 kárshápanas and eight thousand
cocoanut trees for feeding and clothing monks living in the cave;
and of a village near Kárle in Poona for the support of the monks
of the main Kárle cave. Ushavadáta himself thus seems to have been
a follower of the Bráhmanical faith. The Buddhist charities were
probably made to meet the wishes of his wife whose father's religion
the Buddhist wheel and the Bodhi tree on his copper coins prove to
have been Buddhism. The large territory over which these charitable
and public works of Ushavadáta spread gives an idea of the extent of
Nahapána's rule. The gift of a village as far north as Pokhara near
Ajmir would have been proof of dominion in those parts were it not for
the fact that in the same inscription Ushavadáta mentions his success
in assisting some local Kshatriyas. It is doubtful if the northern
limits of Nahapána's dominions extended as far as Pokhar. The village
may have been given during a brief conquest, since according to Hindu
ideas no village given to Bráhmans can be resumed. The eastern boundary
would seem to have been part of Málwa and the plain lands of Khándesh
Násik and Poona; the southern boundary was somewhere about Bombay;
and the western Káthiáváda and the Arabian sea.

[Nahapána's Era.] Nahapána's exact date is hard to fix. Ushavadáta's
Násik cave Inscriptions X. and XII. give the years 41 and 42; and
an inscription of Nahapána's minister Ayáma at Junnar gives the year
46. The era is not mentioned. They are simply dated vase Sk. varshe
that is in the year. Ushavadáta's Násik Inscription XII. records in
the year 42 the gift of charities and the construction of public works
which must have taken years to complete. If at that time Ushavadáta's
age was 40 to 45, Nahapána who, as Inscription X. shows, was living at
that time, must have been some twenty years older than his son-in-law
or say about 65. The Junnar inscription of his minister Ayáma which
bears date 46 proves that Nahapána lived several years after the
making of Ushavadáta's cave. The bust on one of his coins also shows
that Nahapána attained a ripe old age.

Nahapána cannot have lived long after the year 46. His death may be
fixed about the year 50 of the era to which the three years 41, 42, and
46 belong. He was probably about 75 years old when he died. Deducting
50 from 75 we get about 25 as Nahapána's age at the beginning of the
era to which the years 41, 42, and 46 belong, a suitable age for an
able prince with good resources and good advisers to have established
a kingdom. It is therefore probable that the era marks Nahapána's
conquest of Gujarát. As said above, Nahapána was probably considered
to belong to the Saka tribe, and his son-in-law clearly calls himself
a Saka. It may therefore be supposed that the era started by Nahapána
on his conquest of Gujarát was at first simply called Varsha; that it
afterwards came to be called Sakavarsha or Sakasamvatsara; and that
finally, after various changes, to suit false current ideas, about
the eleventh or twelfth century the people of the Deccan styled it
Sáliváhana Saka mixing it with current traditions regarding the great
Sátaváhana or Saliváhana king of Paithan. If, as mentioned above,
Nahapána's conquest of Gujarát and the establishment of his era
be taken to come close after the conquest of Mathurá by Kanishka,
the Gujarát conquest and the era must come very shortly after the
beginning of Kanishka's reign, since Kanishka conquered Mathurá early
in his reign. As his Mathurá inscriptions [71] give 5 as Kanishka's
earliest date, he must have conquered Mathurá in the year 3 or 4 of his
reign. Nahapána's expedition to and conquest of Gujarát was probably
contemporary with or very closely subsequent to Kanishka's conquest of
Mathurá. So two important eras seem to begin about four years apart,
the one with Kanishka's reign in Upper India, the other with Nahapána's
reign in Western India. The difference being so small and both being
eras of foreign conquerors, a Kushán and a Saka respectively, the
two eras seem to have been subsequently confounded. Thus, according
to Dr. Burnell, the Javanese Saka era is A.D. 74, that is Kanishka's
era was introduced into Java, probably because Java has from early
times been connected with the eastern parts of India where Kanishka's
era was current. On the other hand the astrological works called
Karana use the era beginning with A.D. 78 which we have taken to
be the Western era started by Nahapána. The use of the Saka era in
Karana works dates from the time of the great Indian astronomer Varáha
Mihira (A.D. 587). As Varáha Mihira lived and wrote his great work in
Avanti or Málwa he naturally made use of the Saka era of Nahapána,
which was current in Málwa. Subsequent astronomers adopted the era
used by the master Varáha Mihira. Under their influence Nahapána's
A.D. 78 era passed into use over the whole of Northern and Central
India eclipsing Kanishka's A.D. 74 era. On these grounds it may be
accepted that the dates in the Násik inscriptions of Ushavadáta and in
Ayáma's inscription at Junnar are in the era founded by Nahapána on
his conquest of Gujarát and the West Deccan. This era was adopted by
the Western Kshatrapa successors of Nahapána and continued on their
coins for nearly three centuries. [72]

[The Málava Era, B.C. 56.] The question arises why should not the
dates on the Western Kshatrapa coins belong to the era which under
the incorrect title of the Vikrama era is now current in Gujarát and
Málwa. Several recently found Málwa inscriptions almost prove that
what is called the Vikrama era beginning with B.C. 56 was not started
by any Vikrama, but marks the institution of the tribal constitution
of the Málavas. [73] Later the era came to be called either the
era of the Málava lords [74] or Málava Kála that is the era of the
Málavas. About the ninth century just as the Saka era became connected
with the Saliváhana of Paithan, this old Málava era became connected
with the name of Vikramáditya, the great legendary king of Ujain.

It might be supposed that the Málavas who gave its name to the
Málava era were the kings of the country now called Málwa. But it
is to be noted that no reference to the present Málwa under the name
of Málavadesa occurs in any Sanskrit work or record earlier than the
second century after Christ. The original Sanskrit name of the country
was Avanti. It came to be called Málava from the time the Málava tribe
conquered it and settled in it, just as Káthiáváda and Meváda came to
be called after their Káthi and Meva or Meda conquerors. The Málavas,
also called Málayas, [75] seem like the Medas to be a foreign tribe,
which, passing through Upper India conquered and settled in Central
India during the first century before Christ. The mention in the
Mudrárákshasa [76] of a Málaya king among five Upper Indian kings
shows that in the time of the Mauryas (B.C. 300) a Málaya kingdom
existed in Upper India which after the decline of Maurya supremacy
spread to Central India. By Nahapána's time the Málavas seem to have
moved eastwards towards Jaipur, as Ushavadáta defeated them in the
neighbourhood of the Pushkar lake: but the fact that the country
round Ujain was still known to Rudradáman as Avanti, shows that the
Málavas had not yet (A.D. 150) entered the district now known as
Málava. This settlement and the change of name from Avanti to Málava
probably took place in the weakness of the Kshatrapas towards the
end of the third century A.D. When they established their sway in
Central India these Málavas or Málayas like the ancient Yaudheyas
(B.C. 100) and the Káthis till recent times (A.D. 1818) seem to have
had a democratic constitution. [77] Their political system seems to
have proved unsuited to the conditions of a settled community. To put
an end to dissensions the Málava tribe appears to have framed what the
Mandasor inscription terms a sthiti or constitution in honour of which
they began a new era. [78] It may be asked, Why may not Nahapána have
been the head of the Málavas who under the new constitution became the
first Málava sovereign and his reign-dates be those of the new Málava
era? Against this we know from a Násik inscription of Ushavadáta
[79] that Nahapána was not a Málava himself but an opponent of the
Málavas as he sent Ushavadáta to help a tribe of Kshatriyas called
Uttamabhadras whom the Málavas had attacked. Further a chronological
examination of the early ruling dynasties of Gujarát does not favour
the identification of the Kshatrapa era with the Málava era. The
available information regarding the three dynasties the Kshatrapas the
Guptas and the Valabhis, is universally admitted to prove that they
followed one another in chronological succession. The latest known
Kshatrapa date is 310. Even after this we find the name of a later
Kshatrapa king whose date is unknown but may be estimated at about
320. If we take this Kshatrapa 320 to be in the Vikrama Samvat, its
equivalent is A.D. 264. In consequence of several new discoveries the
epoch of the Gupta era has been finally settled to be A.D. 319. It is
further settled that the first Gupta conqueror of Málwa and Gujarát
was Chandragupta II. [80] the date of his conquest of Málwa being
Gupta 80 (A.D. 399). Counting the Kshatrapa dates in the Samvat era
this gives a blank of (399 - 264 = ) 135 years between the latest
Kshatrapa date and the date of Chandragupta's conquest of Gujarát to
fill which we have absolutely no historical information. On the other
hand in support of the view that the Kshatrapa era is the Saka era the
Káthiáváda coins of the Gupta king Kumáragupta son of Chandragupta
dated 100 Gupta closely resemble the coins of the latest Kshatrapa
kings, the workmanship proving that the two styles of coin are close
in point of time. Thus taking the Kshatrapa era to be the Saka era
the latest Kshatrapa date is 320 + 78 = A.D. 398, which is just the
date (A.D. 399) of Chandragupta's conquest of Málwa and Gujarát. For
these reasons, and in the absence of reasons to the contrary, it seems
proper to take the dates in Ushavadáta's and Ayáma's inscriptions as
in the era which began with Nahapána's conquest of Gujarát, namely
the Saka era whose initial date is A.D. 78.

[Kshatrapa II. Chashtana, A.D. 130.] After Nahapána's the earliest
coins found in Gujarát are those of Chashtana. Chashtana's coins are
an adaptation of Nahapána's coins. At the same time Chashtana's bust
differs from the bust in Nahapána's coins. He wears a mustache, the
cap is not grooved but plain, and the hair which reaches the neck
is longer than Nahapána's hair. In one of Chashtana's coins found
by Mr. Justice Newton, the hair seems dressed in ringlets as in the
coins of the Parthian king Phraates II. (B.C. 136-128). [81] On the
reverse instead of the thunderbolt and arrow as in Nahapána's coins,
Chashtana's coins have symbols of the sun and moon in style much like
the sun and moon symbols on the Parthian coins of Phraates II., the
moon being a crescent and the sun represented by eleven rays shooting
from a central beam. To the two on the reverse a third symbol seems to
have been added consisting of two arches resting on a straight line,
with a third arch over and between the two arches, and over the third
arch an inverted semicircle. Below these symbols stretches a waving
or serpentine line. [82]

[Chashtana's Coins, A.D. 130.] The same symbol appears on the obverse
of several very old medium-sized square copper coins found in Upper
India. These coins Dr. Bhagvánlál took to be coins of Asoka. They
have no legend on either side, and have a standing elephant on the
obverse and a rampant lion on the reverse. As these are the symbols
of Asoka, the elephant being found in his rock inscriptions and the
lion in his pillar inscriptions, Dr. Bhagvánlál held them to be coins
of Asoka. The arch symbol appears in these coins over the elephant
on the obverse and near the lion on the reverse but in neither case
with the underlying zigzag line. [83] So also a contemporary coin
bearing in the Asoka character the clear legend Vatasvaka shows the
same symbol, with in addition a robed male figure of good design
standing near the symbol saluting it with folded hands. The position
of the figure (Ariana Antiqua, Plate XV. Fig. 30) proves that the
symbol was an object of worship. In Chashtana's coins we find this
symbol between the sun and the moon, a position which suggests
that the symbol represents the mythical mountain Meru, the three
semicircular superimposed arches representing the peaks of the
mountain and the crescent a Siddha-silâ or Siddhas' seat, which
Jaina works describe as crescent-shaped and situated over Meru. The
collective idea of this symbol in the middle and the sun and moon on
either side recalls the following; sloka:

Yávadvícítarangánvahati suranadí jánhaví púrnatoyá.
Yávaccákáshamárge tapati dinakaro bháskaro lokapálah
Yávadvajrendunílasphatikamanishilá vartate merushrrimnge.
Távattvam pútrapautraih svajanaparivrito jíva shammoh prasádat.

Mayest thou by the favour of Sambhu live surrounded by sons grandsons
and relations so long as the heavenly Ganges full of water flows with
its waves, so long as the brilliant sun the protector of the universe
shines in the sky, and so long as the slab of diamond moonstone lapis
lazuli and sapphire remains on the top of Meru.

Dr. Bird's Kanheri copperplate has a verse with a similar meaning
regarding the continuance of the glory of the relic shrine of one
Pushya, so long as Meru remains and rivers and the sea flow. [84]
The meaning of showing Meru and the sun and moon is thus clear. The
underlying serpentine line apparently stands for the Jáhnaví river
or it may perhaps be a representation of the sea. [85] The object of
representing these symbols on coins may be that the coins may last as
long as the sun, the moon, mount Meru, and the Ganges or ocean. Against
this view it may be urged that the coins of the Buddhist kings of
Kuninda (A.D. 100), largely found near Saháranpur in the North-West
Provinces, show the arch symbol with the Buddhist trident over it,
the Bodhi tree with the railing by its side, and the serpentine line
under both the tree and the symbol, the apparent meaning being that the
symbol is a Buddhist shrine with the Bodhi tree and the river Niranjana
of Buddha Gaya near it. The same symbol appears as a Buddhist shrine
in Andhra coins [86] which make it larger with four rows of arches,
a tree by its side, and instead of the zigzag base line a railing. This
seems a different representation perhaps of the shrine of Mahábodhi at
Buddha Gaya. These details seem to show that popular notions regarding
the meaning of this symbol varied at different times. [87]

Such of the coins of Chashtana as have on the reverse only the sun
and the moon bear on the obverse in Baktro-Páli characters a legend
of which the four letters Raño jimo alone be made out. An illegible
Greek legend continues the Baktro-Páli legend. The legend on the
reverse is in old Nágarí character:

Rájño Kshatrapasa Ysamotikaputra(sa Cha)shtanasa.

Of the king Kshatrapa Chashtana son of Ysamotika.

The variety of Chashtana's coins which has the arch symbol on the
reverse, bears on the obverse only the Greek legend almost illegible
and on the reverse the Baktro-Páli legend ca.tanasa Chatanasa
meaning. Of Chashtana and in continuation the Nágarí legend:

Rájño Mahákshatrapasa Ysamotikaputrasa Chashtanasa.

Of the king the great Kshatrapa Chashtana son of Ysamotika.

[Chashtana's Father.] The name Zamotika is certainly not Indian but
foreign apparently a corruption of some such form as Psamotika or
Xamotika. Further the fact that Zamotika is not called Kshatrapa or by
any other title, would seem to show that he was an untitled man whose
son somehow came to authority and obtained victory over these parts
where (as his earlier coins with the sun and the moon show) he was
at first called a Kshatrapa and afterwards (as his later coins with
the third symbol show) a Mahákshatrapa or great Kshatrapa. We know
nothing of any connection between Nahapána and Chashtana. Still it
is clear that Chashtana obtained a great part of the territory over
which [Chashtana, A.D. 130.] Nahapána previously held sway. Though
Chashtana's coins and even the coins of his son and grandson bear no
date, we have reason to believe they used a nameless era, of which the
year 72 is given in the Junágadh inscription of Chashtana's grandson
Rudradáman. [89] Though we have no means of ascertaining how many
years Rudradáman had reigned before this 72 it seems probable that
the beginning of the reign was at least several years earlier. Taking
the previous period at seven years Rudradáman's succession may be
tentatively fixed at 65. Allowing twenty-five years for his father
Jayadáman and his grandfather Chashtana (as they were father and son
and the son it is supposed reigned for some years with his father [90])
Chashtana's conquest of Gujarát comes to about the year 40 which makes
Chashtana contemporary with the latter part of Nahapána's life. Now the
Tiastanes whom Ptolemy mentions as having Ozene for his capital [91]
is on all hands admitted to be Chashtana and from what Ptolemy says it
appears certain that his capital was Ujjain. Two of Chashtana's coins
occur as far north as Ajmir. As the Chashtana coins in Dr. Gerson
DaCunha's collection were found in Káthiáváda he must have ruled a
large stretch of country. The fact that in his earlier coins Chashtana
is simply called a Kshatrapa and in his latter coins a Mahákshatrapa
leads to the inference that his power was originally small. Chashtana
was probably not subordinate to Nahapána but a contemporary of Nahapána
originally when a simple Kshatrapa governing perhaps North Gujarát and
Málwa. Nor was Chashtana a member of Nahapána's family as he is nowhere
called Kshaharáta which is the name of Nahapána's family. During
the lifetime of Nahapána Chashtana's power would seem to have been
established first over Ajmir and Mewád. Perhaps Chashtana may have
been the chief of the Uttamabhadra Kshatriyas, whom, in the year 42,
Ushavadáta went to assist when they were besieged by the Málayas or
Málavas [92]; and it is possible that the Málavas being thus driven
away Chashtana may have consolidated his power, taken possession of
Málwa, and established his capital at Ujjain.

[Deccan Recovered by the Andhras, A.D. 138.] On Nahapána's death his
territory, which in the absence of a son had probably passed to his
son-in-law Ushavadáta, seems to have been wrested from him by his
Ándhra neighbours, as one of the attributes of Gautamíputra Sátakarni
is exterminator of the dynasty of Khakharáta (or Kshaharáta). That
North Konkan, South Gujarát, and Káthiáváda were taken and
incorporated with Ándhra territory appears from Gautamíputra's Násik
inscription (No. 26) where Suráshtra and Aparánta are mentioned as
parts of his dominions. These Ándhra conquests seem to have been
shortlived. Chashtana appears to have eventually taken Káthiáváda and
as much of South Gujarát as belonged to Nahapána probably as far south
as the Narbada. Mevád, Málwa, North and South Gujarát and Káthiáváda
would then be subject to him and justify the title Mahákshatrapa on
his later coins.

[The Mevas or Medas.] The bulk of Chashtana's army seems to have
consisted of the Mevas or Medas from whose early conquests and
settlements in Central Rájputána the province seems to have received
its present name Meváda. If this supposition be correct an inference
may be drawn regarding the origin of Chashtana. The Mathurá inscription
of Nandasiriká, daughter of Kshatrapa Rájavula and mother of Kharaosti
Yuvarája, mentions with respect a Mahákshatrapa Kuzulko Patika who
is called in the inscription Mevaki that is of the Meva tribe. The
inscription shows a relation between the Kharaostis (to which tribe we
have taken Kshaharáta Nahapána to belong) and Mevaki Patika perhaps
in the nature of subordinate and overlord. It proves at least that
the Kharaostis held Patika in great honour and respect.

The Taxila plate shows that Patika was governor of Taxila during
his father's lifetime. After his father's death when he became
Mahákshatrapa, Patika's capital was Nagaraka in the Jallálábád
or Kábul valley. The conquest of those parts by the great Kushán
or Indo-Skythian king Kanishka (A.D. 78) seems to have driven
Patika's immediate successors southwards to Sindh where they may have
established a kingdom. The Skythian kingdom mentioned by the author
of the Periplus as stretching in his time as far south as the mouths
of the Indus may be a relic of this kingdom. Some time after their
establishment in Sindh Patika's successors may have sent Chashtana,
either a younger member of the reigning house or a military officer,
with an army of Mevas through Umarkot and the Great Ran to Central
Rájputána, an expedition which ended in the settlement of the Mevas
and the change of the country's name to Meváda. Probably it was on
account of their previous ancestral connection that Nahapána sent
Ushavadáta to help Chashtana in Meváda when besieged by his Málava
neighbours. That Ushavadáta went to bathe and make gifts [93] at
Pushkara proves that the scene of the Uttamabhadras' siege by the
Málayas was in Meváda not far from Pushkara.

Chashtana is followed by an unbroken chain of successors all of
the dynasty of which Chashtana was the founder. As the coins of
Chashtana's successors bear dates and as each coin gives the name of
the king and of his father they supply a complete chronological list
of the Kshatrapa dynasty.

[Kshatrapa III. Jayadáman, A.D. 140-143.] Of Chashtana's son and
successor Jayadáman the coins are rare. Of three specimens found
in Káthiáváda two are of silver and one of copper. Both the silver
coins were found in Junágadh [94] but they are doubtful specimens as
the legend is not complete. Like Chashtana's coins they have a bust
on the obverse and round the bust an incomplete and undecipherable
Greek legend. The reverse has the sun and the moon and between them
the arched symbol with the zigzag under-line. All round the symbols
on the margin within a dotted line is the legend in Baktro-Páli and
Devanágarí. Only three letters raño cha ña of the Baktro-Páli legend
can be made out. Of the Nágarí legend seven letters Rájno Kshatrapasa
Ja can be made out. The remaining four letters Dr. Bhagvánlál read
Yadámasa. [95] The copper coin which is very small and square has on
the obverse in a circle a standing humped bull looking to the right
and fronting an erect trident with an axe. In style the bull is much
like the bull on the square hemidrachmæ of Apollodotus (B.C. 110-100).
Round the bull within a dotted circle is the legend in Greek. It is
unfortunate the legend is incomplete as the remaining letters which
are in the Skythian-Greek style are clearer than the letters on any
Kshatrapa coin hitherto found. The letters that are preserved are
S T R X Y. The reverse has the usual moon and sun and between them
the arched symbol without the zigzag under-line. All round within a
dotted circle is the Nágarí legend:

Rájno Kshatra(pasa) Jayadámasa.

Of the king Kshatrapa Jayadáman.

Though the name is not given in any of these coins, the fact that
Chashtana was Jayadáman's father has been determined from the genealogy
in the Gunda inscription of Rudrasimha I. the seventh Kshatrapa,
[96] in the Jasdhan inscription of Rudrasena I. the eighth Kshatrapa,
[97] and in the Junágadh cave inscription [98] of Rudradáman's son
Rudrasimha. All these inscriptions and the coins of his son Rudradáman
call Jayadáman Kshatrapa not Mahákshatrapa. This would seem to show
either that he was a Kshatrapa or governor of Káthiáváda under his
father or that his father's territory and his rank as Mahákshatrapa
suffered some reduction. [99] The extreme rarity of his coins suggests
that Jayadáman's reign was very short. It is worthy of note that while
Zamotika and Chashtana are foreign names, the names of Jayadáman and
all his successors with one exception [100] are purely Indian.

[Kshatrapa IV. Rudradáman, A.D. 143-158.] Jayadáman was succeeded
by his son Rudradáman who was probably the greatest of the Western
Kshatrapas. His beautiful silver coins, in style much like those
of Chashtana, are frequently found in Káthiáváda. On the obverse
is his bust in the same style of dress as Chashtana's and round the
bust is the Greek legend incomplete and undecipherable. The reverse
has the usual sun and moon and the arched symbol with the zigzag
under-line. The old Nágarí legend fills the whole outer circle. None
of Rudradáman's coins shows a trace of the Baktro-Páli legend. The
Nágarí legend reads:

Rájno Kshatrapasa Jayadámaputrasa Rájno Mahákshatrapasa Rudradámasa.

Of the king the great Kshatrapa Rudradáman son of the king the
Kshatrapa Jayadáman.

None of Rudradáman's copper coins have been found. Except Jayadáman
none of the Kshatrapas seem to have stamped their names on any but
silver coins. [101]

An inscription on the Girnár rock gives us more information regarding
Rudradáman than is available for any of the other Kshatrapas. The
inscription records the construction of a new dam on the Sudarsana lake
close to the inscription rock in place of a dam built in the time of
the Maurya king Chandragupta (B.C. 300) and added to in the time of
his grandson the great Asoka (B.C. 240) which had suddenly burst in a
storm. The new dam is recorded to have been made under the orders of
Suvishákha son of Kulaipa a Pahlava by tribe, who was 'appointed by
the king to protect the whole of Ánarta and Suráshtra.' Pahlava seems
to be the name of the ancient Persians and Parthians [102] and the
name Suvishákha as Dr. Bhau Dáji suggests may be a Sanskritised form
of Syávaxa. [103] One of the Kárle inscriptions gives a similar name
Sovasaka apparently a corrupt Indian form of the original Persian from
which the Sanskritised Suvishákha must have been formed. Sovasaka it
will be noted is mentioned in the Kárle inscription as an inhabitant
of Abulámá, apparently the old trade mart of Obollah at the head of
the Persian Gulf. This trade connection between the Persian Gulf and
the Western Indian seaboard must have led to the settlement from very
early times of the Pahlavas who gradually became converted to Buddhism,
and, like the Pársis their modern enterprising representatives, seem
to have advanced in trade and political influence. Subsequently the
Pahlavas attained such influence that about the fifth century a dynasty
of Pallava kings reigned in the Dekhan, Hindu in religion and name,
even tracing their origin to the great ancient sage Bháradvája. [104]

[Sudarsana Lake, A.D. 150.] The statement in Rudradáman's Sudarsana
lake inscription, that Ánarta and Suráshtra were under his Pahlava
governor, seems to show that Rudradáman's capital was not in Gujarát
or Káthiáváda. Probably like his grandfather Chashtana Rudradáman held
his capital at Ujjain. The poetic eulogies of Rudradáman appear to
contain a certain share of fact. One of the epithets 'he who himself
has earned the title Mahákshatrapa' indicates that Rudradáman had
regained the title of Mahákshatrapa which belonged to his grandfather
Chashtana but not to his father Jayadáman. Another portion of the
inscription claims for him the overlordship of Ákarávanti, [105]
Anúpa, [106] Ánarta, Suráshtra, Svabhra, [107] Maru, [108] Kachchha,
[109] Sindhu-Sauvíra, [110] Kukura, [111] Aparánta, [112] and Nisháda;
[113] that is roughly the country from Bhilsa in the east to Sindh in
the west and from about Ábu in the north to the North Konkan in the
south including the peninsulas of Cutch and Káthiáváda. The inscription
also mentions two wars waged by Rudradáman, one with the Yaudheyas
the other with Sátakarni lord of Dakshinápatha. Of the Yaudheyas the
inscription says that they had become arrogant and untractable in
consequence of their having proclaimed their assumption of the title
of Heroes among all Kshatriyas. Rudradáman is described as having
exterminated them. These Yaudheyas were known as a warlike race from
the earliest times and are mentioned as warriors by Pánini. [114]

[The Yaudheyas.] Like the Málavas these Yaudheyas appear to have had a
democratic constitution. Several round copper coins of the Yaudheyas
of about the third century A.D. have been found in various parts of
the North-West Provinces from Mathurá to Saháranpur. These coins
which are adapted from the type of Kanishka's coins [115] have on
the obverse a standing robed male figure extending the protecting
right hand of mercy. On the reverse is the figure of a standing
Kártikasvámi and round the figure the legend in Gupta characters of
about the third century:

Yaudheya Ganasya.

Of the Yaudheya tribe. [116]

That the Girnár inscription describes Rudradáman as the exterminator
of 'the Yaudheyas' and not of any king of the Yaudheyas confirms the
view that their constitution was tribal or democratic. [117]

The style of the Yaudheya coins being an adaptation of the Kanishka
type and their being found from Mathurá to Saháranpur where Kanishka
ruled is a proof that the Yaudheyas wrested from the successors of
Kanishka the greater part of the North-West Provinces. This is not
to be understood to be the Yaudheyas' first conquest in India. They
are known to be a very old tribe who after a temporary suppression
by Kanishka must have again risen to power with the decline of
Kushán rule under Kanishka's successors Huvishka (A.D. 100-123) or
Vasudeva (A.D. 123-150 ?) the latter of whom was a contemporary of
Rudradáman. [118] It is probably to this increase of Yaudheya power
that Rudradáman's inscription refers as making them arrogant and
intractable. Their forcible extermination is not to be understood
literally but in the Indian hyperbolic fashion.

The remark regarding the conquest of Sátakarni lord of Dakshinápatha
is as follows: 'He who has obtained glory because he did not destroy
Sátakarni, the lord of the Dekhan, on account of there being no
distance in relationship, though he twice really conquered him.' [119]
As Sátakarni is a dynastic name applied to several of the Ándhra
kings, the question arises Which of the Sátakarnis did Rudradáman
twice defeat? Of the two Western India kings mentioned by Ptolemy
one Tiastanes with his capital at Ozene or Ujjain [120] has been
identified with Chashtana; the other Siri Ptolemaios or Polemaios,
with his royal seat at Baithana or Paithan, [121] has been identified
with the Pulumáyi Vásishthíputra of the Násik cave inscriptions. These
statements of Ptolemy seem to imply that Chashtana and Pulumáyi
were contemporary kings reigning at Ujjain and Paithan. The evidence
of their coins also shows that if not contemporaries Chashtana and
Pulumáyi were not separated by any long interval. We know from the
Násik inscriptions and the Puránas that Pulumáyi was the successor
of Gautamíputra Sátakarni and as Gautamíputra Sátakarni is mentioned
as the exterminator of the Kshaharáta race (and the period of this
extermination has already been shown to be almost immediately after
Nahapána's death), there is no objection to the view that Chashtana,
who was the next Kshatrapa after Nahapána, and Pulumáyi, who was the
successor of Gautamíputra, were contemporaries. We have no positive
evidence to determine who was the immediate successor of Pulumáyi,
but the only king whose inscriptions are found in any number
after Pulumáyi is Gautamíputra Yajña Srí Sátakarni. His Kanheri
inscription recording gifts made in his reign and his coin found
among the relics of the Sopára stúpa built also in his reign prove
that he held the North Konkan. The Sopára coin gives the name of
the father of Yajñasrí. Unfortunately the coin is much worn. Still
the remains of the letters constituting the name are sufficient to
show they must be read caturapana Chaturapana. [122] A king named
Chaturapana is mentioned in one of the Nánághát inscriptions where
like Pulumáyi he is called Vásishthíputra and where the year 13
of his reign is referred to. [123] The letters of this inscription
are almost coeval with those in Pulumáyi's inscriptions. The facts
that he was called Vásishthíputra and that he reigned at least
thirteen years make it probable that Chaturapana was the brother and
successor of Pulumáyi. Yajñasrí would thus be the nephew and second
in succession to Pulumáyi and the contemporary of Rudradáman the
grandson of Chashtana, whom we have taken to be a contemporary of
Pulumáyi. A further proof of this is afforded by Yajñasrí's silver
coin found in the Sopára stúpa. All other Ándhra coins hitherto
found are adapted from contemporary coins of Ujjain and the Central
Provinces, the latter probably of the Sungas. But Gautamíputra Yajñasrí
Sátakarni's Sopára coin is the first silver coin struck on the type
of Kshatrapa coins; it is in fact a clear adaptation of the type of
the coins of Rudradáman himself which proves that the two kings were
contemporaries and rivals. An idea of the 'not distant relationship'
between Rudradáman and Yajñasrí Sátakarni mentioned in Rudradáman's
Girnár inscription, may be formed from a Kanheri inscription recording
a gift by a minister named Satoraka which mentions that the queen
of Vásishthíputra Sátakarni was born in the Kárdamaka dynasty and
was connected apparently on the maternal side with a Mahákshatrapa
whose name is lost. If the proper name of the lost Vásishthíputra
be Chaturapana, his son Yajñasrí Sátakarni would, through his mother
being a Mahákshatrapa's granddaughter, be a relative of Rudradáman.

Rudradáman's other epithets seem to belong to the usual stock of
Indian court epithets. He is said 'to have gained great fame by
studying to the end, by remembering understanding and applying the
great sciences such as grammar, polity, music, and logic'. Another
epithet describes him as having 'obtained numerous garlands at the
Svayamvaras of kings' daughters,' apparently meaning that he was chosen
as husband by princesses at several svayamvaras or choice-marriages
a practice which seems to have been still in vogue in Rudradáman's
time. As a test of the civilized character of his rule it may be
noted that he is described as 'he who took, and kept to the end of his
life, the vow to stop killing men except in battle.' Another epithet
tells us that the embankment was built and the lake reconstructed by
'expending a great amount of money from his own treasury, without
oppressing the people of the town and of the province by (exacting)
taxes, forced labour, acts of affection (benevolences) and the like.'

As the Kshatrapa year 60 (A.D. 138) has been taken to be the date
of close of Chashtana's reign, and as five years may be allowed
for the short reign [124] of Jayadáman, the beginning of the
reign of Rudradáman may be supposed to have been about the year 65
(A.D. 143). This Girnár inscription gives 72 as the year in which
Rudradáman was then reigning and it is fair to suppose that he
reigned probably up to 80. The conclusion is that Rudradáman ruled
from A.D. 143 to 158. [125]

[Kshatrapa V. Dámázada or Dámájadasrí, A.D. 158-168.] Rudradáman
was succeeded by his son Dámázada or Dámájadasrí regarding whom
all the information available is obtained from six coins obtained
by Dr. Bhagvánlál. [126] The workmanship of all six coins is good,
after the type of Rudradáman's coins. On the obverse is a bust in
the same style as Rudradáman's and round the bust is an illegible
Greek legend. Like Rudradáman's coins these have no dates, a proof of
their antiquity, as all later Kshatrapa coins have dates in Nágarí
numerals. The reverse has the usual sun and moon and between them
the arched symbol with the zigzag under-line. Around them in three
specimens is the following legend in old Nágarí:

Rájño Mahákshatrapasa Rudradámaputrasa [127] Rájñah Kshatrapasa
Dámáysadasa.

Of the king the Kshatrapa Dámázada [128] son of the king the Kshatrapa
Rudradáman.

The legend on the other three is:

Rájño Mahákshatrapasa Rudradámnahputrasa Rájñah Kshatrapasa
Dámájadasriyah.

Of the king the Kshatrapa Dámájadasrí son of the king the great
Kshatrapa Rudradáma.

Dámázada and Dámájadasrí seem to be two forms of the same name,
Dámázada with ysa for Z being the name first struck, and Dámájadasrí,
with the ordinary ja for Z, and with Srí added to adorn the name and
make it more euphonic, being the later form. It will be noted that,
except by his son Jivadáman, Dámázada or Dámájadasrí is not called a
Mahákshatrapa but simply a Kshatrapa. His coins are very rare. The six
mentioned are the only specimens known and are all from one find. He
may therefore be supposed to have reigned as heir-apparent during the
life-time of Rudradáman, or it is possible that he may have suffered
loss of territory and power. His reign seems to have been short and
may have terminated about 90 that is A.D. 168 or a little later.

[Kshatrapa VI. Jivadáman, A.D. 178.] Dámázada or Dámájadasrí was
succeeded by his son Jivadáman. All available information regarding
Jivadáman is from four rare coins obtained by Pandit Bhagvánlál,
which for purposes of description, he has named A, B, C, and D. [129]
Coin A bears date 100 in Nágarí numerals, the earliest date found on
Kshatrapa coins. On the obverse is a bust in the usual Kshatrapa style
with a plump young face of good workmanship. Round the bust is first
the date 100 in Nágarí numerals and after the date the Greek legend
in letters which though clear cannot be made out. In these and in all
later Kshatrapa coins merely the form of the Greek legend remains;
the letters are imitations of Greek by men who could not read the
original. On the reverse is the usual arched symbol between the sun
and the moon, the sun being twelve-rayed as in the older Kshatrapa
coins. Within the dotted circle in the margin is the following legend
in old Nágarí:

Rájño Mahákshatrapasa Dámasriyahputrasa Rájño Mahákshatrapasa
Jivadámnah.

Of the king the Kshatrapa Jivadáman son of the king the great
Kshatrapa Dámasrí.

Coin B has the bust on the obverse with a face apparently older than
the face in A. Unfortunately the die has slipped and the date has not
been struck. Most of the Greek legend is very clear but as in coin
A the result is meaningless. The letters are K I U I U Z K N S Y L
perhaps meant for Kuzulka. On the reverse are the usual three symbols,
except that the sun has seven instead of twelve rays. The legend is:

Rájño Mahákshatrapasa Dámajadasaputrasa Rájño Mahákshatrapasa
Jivadámasa.

Of the king the great Kshatrapa Jivadáman son of the king the great
Kshatrapa Dámajada.

Coin C though struck from a different die is closely like B both on
the obverse and the reverse. Neither the Greek legend nor the date
is clear, though enough remains of the lower parts of the numerals
to suggest the date 118. Coin D is in obverse closely like C. The
date 118 is clear. On the reverse the legend and the symbols have
been twice struck. The same legend occurs twice, the second striking
having obliterated the last letters of the legend which contained
the name of the king whose coin it is:

Rájño Mahákshatrapasa Dámajadasaputrasa.

Of the son of the king the great Kshatrapa Dámájada.

In these four specimens Dámasrí or Dámájada is styled Mahákshatrapa,
while in his own coins he is simply called Kshatrapa. The explanation
perhaps is that the known coins of Dámasrí or Dámajada belong to
the early part of his reign when he was subordinate to his father,
and that he afterwards gained the title of Mahákshatrapa. Some such
explanation is necessary as the distinction between the titles
Kshatrapa and Mahákshatrapa is always carefully preserved in the
earlier Kshatrapa coins. Except towards the close of the dynasty no
ruler called Kshatrapa on his own coins is ever styled Mahákshatrapa
on the coins of his son unless the father gained the more important
title during his lifetime.

The dates and the difference in the style of die used in coining
A and in coining B, C, and D are worth noting as the earliest coin
has the date 100 and C and D the third and fourth coins have 118. If
Jivadáman's reign lasted eighteen years his coins would be common
instead of very rare. But we find between 102 and 118 numerous coins
of Rudrasimha son of Rudradáman and paternal uncle of Jivadáman. These
facts and the difference between the style of A and the style of B,
C, and D which are apparently imitated from the coins of Rudrasimha
and have a face much older than the face in A, tend to show that soon
after his accession Jivadáman was deposed by his uncle Rudrasimha,
on whose death or defeat in 118, Jivadáman again rose to power.

[Kshatrapa VII. Rudrasimha I. A.D. 181-196.] Rudrasimha the seventh
Kshatrapa was the brother of Dámajadasrí. Large numbers of his coins
have been found. Of thirty obtained by Dr. Bhagvánlál, twenty have
the following clearly cut dates: 103, 106, 108, 109, 110, 112, 113,
114, 115, 116, and 118. As the earliest year is 103 and the latest 118
it is probable that Rudrasimha deposed his nephew Jivadáman shortly
after Jivadáman's accession. Rudrasimha appears to have ruled fifteen
years when power again passed to his nephew Jivadáman.

The coins of Rudrasimha are of a beautiful type of good workmanship
and with clear legends. The legend in old Nágarí character reads:

Rájño Mahákshatrapasa Rudradámaputrasa Rájño Mahákshatrapasa
Rudrasimhasa.

Of the king the great Kshatrapa Rudrasimha son of the king the great
Kshatrapa Rudradáma.

Rudrasimha had also a copper coinage of which specimens are recorded
from Málwa but not from Káthiáváda. Pandit Bhagvánlál had one specimen
from Ujjain which has a bull on the obverse with the Greek legend round
it and the date 117. The reverse seems to have held the entire legend
of which only five letters rudrasi.mhasa (Rudrasimhasa) remain. This
coin has been spoilt in cleaning.

To Rudrasimha's reign belongs the Gunda inscription carved on a stone
found at the bottom of an unused well in the village of Gunda in
Hálár in North Káthiáváda. [130] It is in six well preserved lines
of old Nágarí letters of the Kshatrapa type. The writing records
the digging and building of a well for public use on the borders of
a village named Rasopadra by the commander-in-chief Rudrabhúti an
Ábhíra son of Senápati Bápaka. The date is given both in words and
in numerals as 103, 'in the year' of the king the Kshatrapa Svámi
Rudrasimha, apparently meaning in the year 103 during the reign of
Rudrasimha. The genealogy given in the inscription is: 1 Chashtana;
2 Jayadáman; 3 Rudradáman; 4 Rudrasimha, the order of succession being
clearly defined by the text, which says that the fourth was the great
grandson of the first, the grandson of the second, and the son of
the third. It will be noted that Dámájadasrí and Jivadáman the fifth
and sixth Kshatrapas have been passed over in this genealogy probably
because the inscription did not intend to give a complete genealogy
but only to show the descent of Rudrasimha in the direct line.

[Kshatrapa VIII. Rudrasena, A.D. 203-220.] The eighth Kshatrapa
was Rudrasena, son of Rudrasimha, as is clearly mentioned in the
legends on his coins. His coins like his father's are found in large
numbers. Of forty in Dr. Bhagvánlál's collection twenty-seven bear
the following eleven [131] dates, 125, 130, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135,
136, 138, 140, 142. The coins are of the usual Kshatrapa type closely
like Rudrasimha's coins. The Nágarí legend reads:

Rájño Mahákshatrapasa Rudrasimhasa putrasa Rájño Mahákshatrapasa
Rudrasenasa.

Of the king the great Kshatrapa Rudrasena son of the king the great
Kshatrapa Rudrasimha.

Two copper coins square and smaller than the copper coins of
Rudrasimha have been found in Ujjain [132] though none are recorded
from Káthiáváda. On their obverse these copper coins have a facing
bull and on the back the usual symbols and below them the year 140,
but no legend. Their date and their Kshatrapa style show that they
are coins of Rudrasena.

Besides coins two inscriptions one at Muliyásar the other at Jasdan
give information regarding Rudrasena. The Muliyásar inscription, now
in the library at Dwárka ten miles south-west of Muliyásar, records
the erection of an upright slab by the sons of one Vánijaka. This
inscription bears date 122, the fifth of the dark half of Vaishákha
in the year 122 during the reign of Rudrasimha. [133] The Jasdan
inscription, on a stone about five miles from Jasdan, belongs to the
reign of this Kshatrapa. It is in six lines of old Kshatrapa Nágarí
characters shallow and dim with occasional engraver's mistakes, but on
the whole well-preserved. The writing records the building of a pond
by several brothers (names not given) of the Mánasasa gotra sons of
Pranáthaka and grandsons of Khara. The date is the 5th of the dark
half of Bhádrapada 'in the year' 126. [134] The genealogy is in the
following order:

Mahákshatrapa Chashtana.
Kshatrapa Jayadáman.
Mahákshatrapa Rudradáman.
Mahákshatrapa Rudrasimha.
Mahákshatrapa Rudrasena.

Each of them is called Svámi Lord and Bhadramukha Luckyfaced. [135]
As Rudrasena's reign began at least as early as 122, the second reign
of Jivadáman is narrowed to four years or even less. As the latest
date is 142 Rudrasena's reign must have lasted about twenty years.

[Kshatrapa IX. Prithivísena A.D. 222.] After Rudrasena the next
evidence on record is a coin of his son Prithivísena found near
Amreli. Its workmanship is the same as that of Rudrasena's coins. It
is dated 144 that is two years later than the last date on Rudrasena's
coins. The legend runs:

Rájño Mahákshatrapasa Rudrasenasa putrasa Rájñah Kshatrapasa
Prithivísenasa.

Of the king the Kshatrapa Prithivísena son of the king the great
Kshatrapa Rudrasena.

As this is the only known specimen of Prithivísena's coinage;
as the earliest coin of Prithivísena's uncle the tenth Kshatrapa
Sanghadáman is dated 144; and also as Prithivísena is called only
Kshatrapa he seems to have reigned for a short time perhaps as
Kshatrapa of Suráshtra or Káthiáváda and to have been ousted by his
uncle Sanghadáman.

[Kshatrapa X. Sanghadáman, A.D. 222-226.] Rudrasena was succeeded
by his brother the Mahákshatrapa Sanghadáman. His coins are very
rare. Only two specimens have been obtained, of which one was in the
Pandit's collection the other in the collection of Mr. Vajeshankar
Gavrishankar. [136] They are dated 145 and 144. The legend in both
reads:

Rájño Mahákshatrapasa Rudrasimhasa putrasa Rájño Mahákshatrapasa
Sanghadámna.

Of the king the great Kshatrapa Sanghadáman son of the king the great
Kshatrapa Rudrasimha.

These two coins seem to belong to the beginning of Sanghadáman's
reign. As the earliest coins of his successor Dámasena are dated 148
Sanghadáman's reign seems not to have lasted over four years. [137]

[Kshatrapa XI. Dámasena, A.D. 226-236.] Sanghadáman was succeeded
by his brother Dámasena, whose coins are fairly common, of good
workmanship, and clear lettering. Of twenty-three specimens eleven
have the following dates: 148, 150, 153, 155, 156, 157, 158. The
legend runs:

Rájño Mahákshatrapasa Rudrasimhasa putrasa Rájño Mahákshatrapasa
Dámasenasa.

Of the king the great Kshatrapa Dámasena son of the king the great
Kshatrapa Rudrasimha.

Dámasena seems to have reigned ten years (148-158) as coins of his
son Víradáman are found dated 158.

[Kshatrapa XII. Dámájadasrí II. A.D. 236.] Dámájadasrí the
twelfth Kshatrapa is styled son of Rudrasena probably the eighth
Kshatrapa. Dámájadasrí's coins are rare. [138] The legend runs:

Rájño Mahákshatrapasa Rudrasenaputrasa Rajñah Kshatrapas
Dámájadasriyah.

Of the king the Kshatrapa Dámájadasrí son of the king the great
Kshatrapa Rudrasena.

Five specimens, the only specimens on record, are dated 154. [139]
As 154 falls in the reign of Dámasena it seems probable that
Dámájadasrí was either a minor or a viceroy or perhaps a ruler claiming
independence, as about this time the authority of the main dynasty
seems to have been much disputed.

After Dámasena we find coins of three of his sons Víradáman Yasadáman
and Vijayasena. Víradáman's coins are dated 158 and 163, Yasadáman's
160 and 161, and Vijayasena's earliest 160. Of the three brothers
Víradáman who is styled simply Kshatrapa probably held only a part
of his father's dominions. The second brother Yasadáman, who at first
was a simple Kshatrapa, in 161 claims to be Mahákshatrapa. The third
brother Vijayasena, who as early as 160, is styled Mahákshatrapa,
probably defeated Yasadáman and secured the supreme rule.

[Kshatrapa XIII. Víradáman, A.D. 236-238.] Víradáman's coins are
fairly common. Of twenty-six in Pandit Bhagvánlál's collection,
nineteen were found with a large number of his brother Vijayasena's
coins. The legend reads:

Rájño Mahákshatrapasa Dámasenasa putrasa Rájñah Kshatrapasa
Víradámnah.

Of the king the Kshatrapa Víradáman son of the king the great
Kshatrapa Dámasena.

Of the twenty-six ten are clearly dated, six with 158 and four
with 160.

[Kshatrapa XIV. Yasadáman, A.D. 239.] Yasadáman's coins are
rare. Pandit Bhagvánlál's collection contained seven. [140] The
bust on the obverse is a good imitation of the bust on his father's
coins. Still it is of inferior workmanship, and starts the practice
which later Kshatrapas continued of copying their predecessor's
image. On only two of the seven specimens are the dates clear, 160
and 161. The legend on the coin dated 160 is:

Rájño Mahákshatrapasa Dámasenasa putrasa Rájñah
Kshatrapasa Yasadámnah.

Of the king the great Kshatrapa Yasadáman son of the king the great
Kshatrapa Dámasena.

On the coin dated 161 the legend runs:

Rájño Mahákshatrapasa Dámasenasa putrasa Rájño Mahákshatrapasa
Yasadámnah.

Of the king the great Kshatrapa Yasadáman son of the king the great
Kshatrapa Dámasena.

[Kshatrapa XV. Vijayasena, A.D. 238-249.] Vijayasena's coins are
common. As many as 167 were in the Pandit's collection. Almost all
are of good workmanship, well preserved, and clearly lettered. On
fifty-four of them the following dates can be clearly read, 160,
161, 162, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, 168, 170, and 171. This would
give Vijayasena a reign of at least eleven years from 160 to 171
(A.D. 238-249). The legend reads:

Rájño Mahákshatrapasa Dámasenaputrasa Rájño Mahákshatrapasa
Vijayasenasa.

Of the king the great Kshatrapa Vijayasena son of the king the great
Kshatrapa Dámasena.

In two good specimens of Vijayasena's coins with traces of the date
166 he is styled Kshatrapa. This the Pandit could not explain. [141]

[Kshatrapa XVI. Dámájadasrí, A.D. 250-255.] Vijayasena was succeeded
by his brother Dámájadasrí III. called Mahákshatrapa on his coins. His
coins which are comparatively uncommon are inferior in workmanship
to the coins of Vijayasena. Of seven in the Pandit's collection three
are dated 174, 175, and 176.

After Dámájadasrí come coins of Rudrasena II. son of Víradáman, the
earliest of them bearing date 178. As the latest coins of Vijayasena
are dated 171, 173 may be taken as the year of Dámájadasrí's
succession. The end of his reign falls between 176 and 178, its
probable length is about five years. The legend on his coins reads:

Rájño Mahákshatrapasa Dámasenaputrasa Rájño Mahákshatrapasa
Dádmájadasriyah.

Of the king the great Kshatrapa Dámájadasrí son of the king the great
Kshatrapa Dámasena.

[Kshatrapa XVII. Rudrasena II. A.D. 256-272.] Dámájadasrí III. was
succeeded by Rudrasena II. son of Dámájadasrí's brother Víradáman
the thirteenth Kshatrapa. Rudrasena II.'s coins like Vijayasena's
are found in great abundance. They are of inferior workmanship
and inferior silver. Of eighty-four in Dr. Bhagvánlál's collection
eleven bore the following clear dates: 178, 180, 183, 185, 186, 188,
and 190. The earliest of 178 probably belongs to the beginning of
Rudrasena's reign as the date 176 occurs on the latest coins of his
predecessor. The earliest coins of his son and successor Visvasimha
are dated 198. As Visvasimha's coins are of bad workmanship with
doubtful legend and date we may take the end of Rudrasena II.'s reign
to be somewhere between 190 and 198 or about 194. This date would give
Rudrasena a reign of about sixteen years, a length of rule supported
by the large number of his coins. The legend reads:

Rájño Kshatrapasa Víradámaputrasa Rájño Mahákshatrapasa
Rudrasenasa.

Of the king the great Kshatrapa Rudrasena son of the king the
Kshatrapa Víradáma.

[Kshatrapa XVIII. Visvasimha, A.D. 272-278.] Rudrasena was succeeded
by his son Visvasimha. In style and abundance Visvasimha's coins
are on a par with his father's. They are carelessly struck with a
bad die and in most the legend is faulty often omitting the date. Of
fifty-six in the Pandit's collection only four bear legible dates,
one with 198, two with 200, and one with 201. The date 201 must be of
the end of Visvasimha's reign as a coin of his brother Bharttridáman
is dated 200. It may therefore be held that Visvasimha reigned for
the six years ending 200 (A.D. 272-278). The legend reads:

Rájño Mahákshatrapasa Rudrasenaputrasa Rájñah Kshatrapasa
Visvasimhasa.

Of the king the Kshatrapa Visvasimha son of the king the great
Kshatrapa Rudrasena.

It is not known whether Visvasimha's loss of title was due to his
being subordinate to some overlord, or whether during his reign
the Kshatrapas suffered defeat and loss of territory. The probable
explanation seems to be that he began his reign in a subordinate
position and afterwards rose to supreme rule.

[Kshatrapa XIX. Bharttridáman, A.D. 278-294.] Visvasimha was succeeded
by his brother Bharttridáman. [142] His coins which are found in large
numbers are in style and workmanship inferior even to Visvasimha's
coins. Of forty-five in the Pandit's collection seven bear the dates
202, 207, 210, 211, and 214. As the earliest coin of his successor is
dated 218, Bharttridáman's reign seems to have lasted about fourteen
years from 202 to 216 (A.D. 278-294). Most of the coin legends style
Bharttridáman Mahákshatrapa though in a few he is simply styled
Kshatrapa. This would seem to show that like his brother Visvasimha
he began as a Kshatrapa and afterwards gained the rank and power
of Mahákshatrapa.

In Bharttridáman's earlier coins the legend reads:

Rajño Mahákshatrapasa Rudrasenaputrasa Rajñah Kshatrapasa
Bhartridámnah.

Of the king the Kshatrapa Bharttridáman son of the king the great
Kshatrapa Rudrasena.

In the later coins the legend is the same except that mahákshatrapasa
the great Kshatrapa takes the place of kshatrapasa the Kshatrapa.

[Kshatrapa XX. Visvasena, A.D. 294-300.] Bharttridáman was succeeded by
his son Visvasena the twentieth Kshatrapa. His coins are fairly common,
and of bad workmanship, the legend imperfect and carelessly struck, the
obverse rarely dated. Of twenty-five in Dr. Bhagvánlál's collection,
only three bear doubtful dates one 218 and two 222. The legend reads:

Rájño Mahákshatrapasa Bhartridáma putrasa Rájñah Kshatrapasa
Visvasenasa.

Of the king the Kshatrapa Visvasena son of the king the Mahákshatrapa
Bharttridáman.

It would seem from the lower title of Kshatrapa which we find given
to Visvasena and to most of the later Kshatrapas that from about 220
(A.D. 298) the Kshatrapa dominion lost its importance.

A hoard of coins found in 1861 near Karád on the Krishna, thirty-one
miles south of Sátára, suggests [143] that the Kshatrapas retained
the North Konkan and held a considerable share of the West Dakhan
down to the time of Visvasena (A.D. 300). The hoard includes coins
of the six following rulers: Vijayasena (A.D. 238-249), his brother
Dámájadasrí III. (A.D. 251-255), Rudrasena II. (A.D. 256-272) son of
Víradáman, Visvasimha (A.D. 272-278) son of Rudrasena, Bharttridáman
(A.D. 278-294) son of Rudrasena II., and Visvasena (A.D. 296-300)
son of Bharttridáman. It may be argued that this Karád hoard is of no
historical value being the chance importation of some Gujarát pilgrim
to the Krishna. The following considerations favour the view that
the contents of the hoard furnish evidence of the local rule of the
kings whose coins have been found at Karád. The date (A.D. 238-249)
of Vijayasena, the earliest king of the hoard, agrees well with the
spread of Gujarát power in the Dakhan as it follows the overthrow
both of the west (A.D. 180-200) and of the east (A.D. 220) Sátakarnis,
while it precedes the establishment of any later west Dakhan dynasty:
(2) All the kings whose coins occur in the hoard were Mahákshatrapas
and from the details in the Periplus (A.D. 247), the earliest,
Vijayasena, must have been a ruler of special wealth and power: (3)
That the coins cease with Visvasena (A.D. 296-300) is in accord with
the fact that Visvasena was the last of the direct line of Chashtana,
and that with or before the close of Visvasena's reign the power of
the Gujarát Kshatrapas declined. The presumption that Kshatrapa power
was at its height during the reigns of the kings whose coins have
been found at Karád is strengthened by the discovery at Amrávati
in the Berárs of a hoard of coins of the Mahákshatrapa Rudrasena
(II. ?) (A.D. 256-272) son of the Mahákshatrapa Dámájadasrí. [144]

[Kshatrapa XXI. Rudrasimha, A.D. 308-311.] Whether the end of
Chashtana's direct line was due to their conquest by some other
dynasty or to the failure of heirs is doubtful. Whatever may have been
the cause, after an interval of about seven years (A.D. 300-308)
an entirely new king appears, Rudrasimha son of Jívadáman. As
Rudrasimha's father Jívadáman is simply called Svámi he may have
been some high officer under the Kshatrapa dynasty. That Rudrasimha
is called a Kshatrapa may show that part of the Kshatrapa dominion
which had been lost during the reign of Visvasena was given to some
distant member or scion of the Kshatrapa dynasty of the name of
Rudrasimha. The occurrence of political changes is further shown by
the fact that the coins of Rudrasimha are of a better type than those
of the preceding Kshatrapas. Rudrasimha's coins are fairly common. Of
twelve in Dr. Bhagvánlál's collection five are clearly dated, three
230, one 231, and one 240. This leaves a blank of seven years between
the last date of Visvasena and the earliest date of Rudrasimha. The
legend reads:

Svámi Jívadáma putrasa Rajñah Kshatrapasa Rudrasimhasa.

Of the king the Kshatrapa Rudrasimha son of Svámi Jívadáman.

[Kshatrapa XXII. Yasadáman, A.D. 320.] Rudrasimha was succeeded by his
son Yasadáman whose coins are rather rare. Of three in Dr. Bhagvánlál's
collection two are dated 239, apparently the first year of Yasadáman's
reign as his father's latest coins are dated 240. Like his father
Yasadáman is simply called Kshatrapa. The legend reads:

Rájñah Kshatrapasa Rudrasimhaputrasa Rájñah Kshatrapasa Yasadámnah.

Of the king the Kshatrapa Yasadáman son of the king the Kshatrapa
Rudrasimha.

[Kshatrapa XXIII. Dámasiri, A.D. 320.] The coins found next after
Yasadáman's are those of Dámasiri who was probably the brother of
Yasadáman as he is mentioned as the son of Rudrasimha. The date
though not very clear is apparently 242. Only one coin of Dámasiri's
is recorded. In the style of face and in the form of letters it
differs from the coins of Yasadáman, with which except for the date
and the identity of the father's name any close connection would seem
doubtful. The legend on the coin of Dámasiri reads:

Rájño Mahákshatrapasa Rudrasimhasaputrasa Rájño Mahákshatrapasa
Dámasirisa.

Of the king the great Kshatrapa Dámasiri son of the king the great
Kshatrapa Rudrasimha.

It will be noted that in this coin both Rudrasimha and Dámasiri
are called great Kshatrapas, while in his own coin and in the coins
of his son Yasadáman, Rudrasimha is simply styled Kshatrapa. It is
possible that Dámasiri may have been more powerful than Yasadáman
and consequently taken to himself the title of Mahákshatrapa. The
application of the more important title to a father who in life had
not enjoyed the title is not an uncommon practice among the later
Kshatrapas. The rarity of Dámasiri's coins shows that his reign
was short.

After Dámasiri comes a blank of about thirty years. The next coin is
dated 270. The fact that, contrary to what might have been expected,
the coins of the later Kshatrapas are less common than those of the
earlier Kshatrapas, seems to point to some great political change
during the twenty-seven years ending 270 (A.D. 321-348).

[Kshatrapa XXIV. Rudrasena, A.D. 348-376.] The coin dated 270
belongs to Svámi Rudrasena son of Svámi Rudradáman both of whom
the legend styles Mahákshatrapas. The type of the coin dated 270 is
clearly adapted from the type of the coins of Yasadáman. Only two
of Rudrasena's coins dated 270 are recorded. But later coins of the
same Kshatrapa of a different style are found in large numbers. Of
fifty-four in the Pandit's collection, twelve have the following
dates 288, 290, 292, 293, 294, 296, and 298. The difference in the
style of the two sets of coins and the blank between 270 and 288
leave no doubt that during those years some political change took
place. Probably Rudrasena was for a time overthrown but again came to
power in 288 and maintained his position till 298. Besides calling
both himself and his father Mahákshatrapas Rudrasena adds to both
the attribute Svámi. As no coin of Rudrasena's father is recorded it
seems probable the father was not an independent ruler and that the
legend on Rudrasena's coins is a further instance of a son ennobling
his father. The legend is the same both in the earlier coins of 270
and in the later coins ranging from 288 to 298. It reads:

Rájño Mahákshatrapasa Svámi Rudradámaputrasa Rájño Mahákshatrapasa
Svámi Rudrasenasa.

Of the king the great Kshatrapa Svámi Rudrasena son of the king the
great Kshatrapa Svámi Rudradáman.

[Kshatrapa XXV. Rudrasena, A.D. 378-388.] After Rudrasena come
coins of Kshatrapa Rudrasena son of Satyasena. These coins are fairly
common. Of five in the Pandit's collection through faulty minting none
are dated. General Cunningham mentions coins of Kshatrapa Rudrasena
dated 300, 304, and 310. [145] This would seem to show that he was the
successor of Rudrasena son of Rudradáman and that his reign extended
to over 310. The legend on these coins runs:

Rájño Mahákshatrapasa Svámi Satyasenaputrasa Rájño Mahákshatrapasa
Svámi Rudrasenasa.

Of the king the great Kshatrapa Svámi Rudrasena son of the king the
great Kshatrapa Svámi Satyasena.

Of Rudrasena's father Satyasena no coin is recorded and as this
Rudrasena immediately succeeds Rudrasena IV. son of Rudradáman,
there is little doubt that Satyasena was not an actual ruler with
the great title Mahákshatrapa, but that this was an honorific title
given to the father when his son attained to sovereignty. General
Cunningham records that a coin of this Rudrasena IV. was found along
with a coin of Chandragupta II. in a stúpa at Sultánganj on the Ganges
about fifteen miles south-east of Mongir. [146]

[Kshatrapa XXVI. Simhasena.] With Rudrasena IV. the evidence from coins
comes almost to a close. Only one coin in Dr. Bhagvánlál's collection
is clearly later than Rudrasena IV. In the form of the bust and the
style of the legend on the reverse this specimen closely resembles
the coins of Rudrasena IV. Unfortunately owing to imperfect stamping
it bears no date. The legend reads:

Rájño Mahákshatrapasa Svámi Rudrasenasa Rájño Mahákshatrapasa
svasríyasya Svámi Simhasenasa.

Of the king the great Kshatrapa Svámi Simhasena, sister's son of the
king the great Kshatrapa Svámi Rudrasena.

This legend would seem to show that Rudrasena IV. left no issue and was
succeeded by his nephew Simhasena. The extreme rarity of Simhasena's
coins proves that his reign was very short.

[Kshatrapa XXVII. Skanda.] The bust and the characters in one other
coin show it to be of later date than Simhasena. Unfortunately the
legend is not clear. Something like the letters rájño kshatrapasa Rájño
Kshatrapasa may be traced in one place and something like putrasa
skanda Putrasa Skanda in another place. Dr. Bhagvánlál took this to
be a Gujarát Kshatrapa of unknown lineage from whom the Kshatrapa
dominion passed to the Guptas.

[Ísvaradatta, A.D. 230-250.] Along with the coins of the regular
Kshatrapas coins of a Kshatrapa of unknown lineage named Ísvaradatta
have been found in Káthiáváda. In general style, in the bust and
the corrupt Greek legend on the obverse, and in the form of the old
Nágarí legend on the reverse, Ísvaradatta's coins closely resemble
those of the fifteenth Kshatrapa Vijayasena (A.D. 238-249). At the
same time the text of the Nágarí legend differs from that on the
reverse of the Kshatrapa coins by omitting the name of the ruler's
father and by showing in words Ísvaradatta's date in the year of his
own reign. The legend is:

Rájño Mahákshatrapasa Ísvaradattasa varshe prathame.

In the first year of the king the great Kshatrapa Ísvaradatta.

Most of the recorded coins of Ísvaradatta have this legend. In one
specimen the legend is

Varshe dvitíye.

In the second year.

It is clear from this that Ísvaradatta's reign did not last
long. His peculiar name and his separate date leave little doubt
that he belonged to some distinct family of Kshatrapas. The general
style of his coins shows that he cannot have been a late Kshatrapa
while the fact that he is called Mahákshatrapa seems to show he was
an independent ruler. No good evidence is available for fixing his
date. As already mentioned the workmanship of his coins brings him
near to Vijayasena (A.D. 238-249). In Násik Cave X. the letters of
Inscription XV. closely correspond with the letters of the legends
on Kshatrapa coins, and probably belong to almost the same date as
the inscription of Rudradáman on the Girnár rock that is to about
A.D. 150. The absence of any record of the Ándhras except the name
of the king Madharíputa Sirisena or Sakasena (A.D. 180), makes it
probable that after Yajñasrí Gautamíputra (A.D. 150) Ándhra power
waned along the Konkan and South Gujarát seaboard. According to the
Puránas the Ábhíras succeeded to the dominion of the Ándhras. It
is therefore possible that the Ábhíra king Ísvarasena of Násik
Inscription XV. was one of the Ábhíra conquerors of the Ándhras who
took from them the West Dakhan. A migration of Ábhíras from Ptolemy's
Abiria in Upper Sindh through Sindh by sea to the Konkan and thence
to Násik is within the range of possibility. About fifty years later
king Ísvaradatta [147] who was perhaps of the same family as the
Ábhíra king of the Násik inscription seems to have conquered the
kingdom of Kshatrapa Vijayasena, adding Gujarát, Káthiáváda, and
part of the Dakhan to his other territory. In honour of this great
conquest he may have taken the title Mahákshatrapa and struck coins
in the Gujarát Kshatrapa style but in an era reckoned from the date
of his own conquest. Ísvaradatta's success was shortlived. Only two
years later (that is about A.D. 252) the Mahákshatrapa Dámájadasrí
won back the lost Kshatrapa territory. The fact that Ísvaradatta's
recorded coins belong to only two years and that the break between
the regular Kshatrapas Vijayasena and Dámájadasrí did not last more
than two or three years gives support to this explanation. [148]

The following table gives the genealogy of the Western Kshatrapas:

[The Kshatrapa Family Tree.] THE WESTERN KSHATRAPAS.

I.
Nahapána,
King, Kshaharáta, Kshatrapa
(A.D. 100-120 ?).
--------------------------------------
II.
Chashtana, son of Zamotika,
King, Mahákshatrapa
(A.D. 100-130).
|
III.
Jayadáman, King, Kshatrapa
(A.D. 130-140).
|
IV.
Rudradáman,
King, Mahákshatrapa
(A.D. 143-158 circa).
|
-----------------------------------------------+-----------------------------
| |
V. VII.
Dámázada or Dámájadasrí, Rudrasimha,
King, Kshatrapa King, Mahákshatrapa
(A.D. 168 circa). (A.D. 180-196 circa).
| |
| ------------------------------------------+-----------------
| | | |
VI. VIII. X. XI.
Jivadáman, Rudrasena, Sanghadáman, Dámasena,
King, Mahákshatrapa King, Mahákshatrapa King, Mahákshatrapa King, Mahákshatrapa
(A.D. 178, A.D. 196 circa). (A.D. 200-220 circa). (A.D. 222-226 circa). (A.D. 226-236 circa).
----------------------+------------------------- |
| | |
IX. XII. |
Prithivísena, King, Kshatrapa Dámájadasrí II. King, Kshatrapa |
(A.D. 222 circa). (A.D. 232 circa). |
|
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------
| | | |
XIII. XIV. XV. XVI.
Víradáman, Yasadáman II. Vijayasena, Dámájadasrí III.
King, Kshatrapa King, Kshatrapa King, Kshatrapa and King, Mahákshatrapa
(A.D. 236, 238 circa). (A.D. 238, 239 circa). Mahákshatrapa (A.D. 251-255 circa).
| (A.D. 238-249 circa).
XVII.
Rudrasena II.
King, Mahákshatrapa
(A.D. 256-272 circa).
|
------------+----------------------
| |
XVIII. XIX.
Visvasimha, Bharttridáman,
King, Kshatrapa King, Kshatrapa and
(A.D. 272-278 circa). Mahákshatrapa
(A.D. 278-294 circa).
|
XX.
Visvasena,
King, Kshatrapa
(A.D. 296-300 circa).
|
XXI.
Rudrasimha son of
Svámi Jívadáman,
King, Kshatrapa
(A.D. 308, 309, 318 circa).
|
-------------------------+-------------------------
| |
XXII. XXIII.
Yasadáman II. King, Kshatrapa Dámasiri, King, Mahákshatrapa
(A.D. 318 circa). (A.D. 320 circa).
---------------------------------------------------------
XXIV.
Svámi Rudrasena III.
King, Mahákshatrapa
son of king Mahákshatrapa, Svámi Rudradáma,
(A.D. 348, 366-376 circa).
---------------------------------------------------------
XXV.
Svámi Rudrasena IV.
King, Mahákshatrapa,
son of king Mahákshatrapa, Svámi Satyasena,
(A.D. 378-388 circa).
---------------------------------------------------------
XXVI.
Svámi Simhasena
King, Mahákshatrapa,
sister's son of king Mahákshatrapa
Svámi Rudrasena (XXV).
---------------------------------------------------------
XXVII.
Skanda ----?

CHAPTER VI.

THE TRAIKÚTAKAS

(A.D. 250-450.)

[Two Plates.] The materials regarding the Traikútakas, though meagre,
serve to show that they were a powerful dynasty who rose to consequence
about the time of the middle Kshatrapas (A.D. 250). All the recorded
information is in two copperplates, one the Kanheri copperplate found
by Dr. Bird in 1839, [149] the other a copperplate found at Párdi
near Balsár in 1885. [150] Both plates are dated, the Kanheri plate
'in the year two hundred and forty-five of the increasing rule of
the Traikútakas'; the Párdi plate in Samvat 207 clearly figured. The
Kanheri plate contains nothing of historical importance; the Párdi
plate gives the name of the donor as Dahrasena or Dharasena 'the
illustrious great king of the Traikútakas.' Though it does not give
any royal name the Kanheri plate expressly mentions the date as the
year 245 of the increasing rule of the Traikútakas. The Párdi plate
gives the name of the king as 'of the Traikútakas' but merely mentions
the date as Sam. 207. This date though not stated to be in the era
of the Traikútakas must be taken to be dated in the same era as the
Kanheri plate seeing that the style of the letters of both plates is
very similar.

The initial date must therefore have been started by the founder
of the dynasty and the Kanheri plate proves the dynasty must have
lasted at least 245 years. The Párdi plate is one of the earliest
copper-plate grants in India. Neither the genealogy nor even the usual
three generations including the father and grandfather are given, nor
like later plates does it contain a wealth of attributes. The king
is called 'the great king of the Traikútakas,' the performer of the
asvamedha or horse-sacrifice, a distinction bespeaking a powerful
sovereign. It may therefore be supposed that Dahrasena held South
Gujarát to the Narbadá together with part of the North Konkan and of
the Ghát and Dakhan plateau.

[Initial Date.] What then was the initial date of the Traikútakas? Ten
Gujarát copper-plates of the Gurjjaras and Chalukyas are dated in an
unknown era with Sam. followed by the date figures as in the Párdi
plate and as in Gupta inscriptions. The earliest is the fragment from
Sankhedá in the Baroda State dated Sam. 346, which would fall in the
reign of Dadda I. of Broach. [151] Next come the two Kaira grants
of the Gurjjara king Dadda Prasántarága dated Sam. 380 and Sam. 385
[152]; and the Sankhedá grant of Ranagraha dated Sam. 391 [153];
then the Kaira grant of the Chalukya king Vijayarája or Vijayavarman
dated Samvatsara 394 [154]; then the Bagumrá grant of the Sendraka
chief Nikumbhallasakti [155]; two grants from Navsári and Surat of
the Chalukya king Síláditya Sryásraya dated 421 and 443 [156]; two
the Navsári and Kávi grants of the Gurjjara king Jayabhata dated
respectively Sam. 456 and Sam. 486 [157]; and a grant of Pulakesi
dated Samvat 490. [158]

Of these the grant dated 421 speaks of Síláditya Sryásraya as
Yuvarája or heir-apparent and as the son of Jayasimhavarmman. The
plate further shows that Jayasimhavarmman was brother of Vikramáditya
and son of Pulakesi Vallabha 'the conqueror of the northern king
Harshavardhana.' The name Jayasimhavarmman does not occur in any
copperplate of the main line of the Western Chalukyas of the
Dakhan. That he is called Mahárája or great king and that his
son Síláditya is called Yuvarája or heir-apparent suggest that
Jayasimhavarmman was the founder of the Gujarát branch of the Western
Chalukyas and that his great Dakhan brother Vikramáditya was his
overlord, a relation which would explain the mention of Vikramáditya
in the genealogy of the copper-plate. Vikramáditya's reign ended in
A.D. 680 (Saka 602). [159] Supposing our grant to be dated in this last
year of Vikramáditya, Samvat 421 should correspond to Saka 602, which
gives Saka 181 or A.D. 259 as the initial date of the era in which
the plate is dated. Probably the plate was dated earlier in the reign
of Vikramáditya giving A.D. 250. In any case the era used cannot be
the Gupta era whose initial year is now finally settled to be A.D. 319.

The second grant of the same Síláditya is dated Samvat 443. In it,
both in an eulogistic verse at the beginning and in the text of
the genealogy, Vinayáditya Satyásraya Vallabha is mentioned as the
paramount sovereign which proves that by Samvat 443 Vikramáditya
had been succeeded by Vinayáditya. The reign of Vinayáditya has been
fixed as lasting from Saka 602 to Saka 618 that is from A.D. 680 to
A.D. 696-97. [160] Taking Saka 615 or A.D. 693 to correspond with
Samvat 443, the initial year of the era is A.D. 250.

The grant of Pulakesivallabha Janásraya dated Samvat 490, mentions
Mangalarasaráya as the donor's elder brother and as the son of
Jayasimhavarmman. And a Balsár grant whose donor is mentioned as
Mangalarája son of Jayasimhavarmman, apparently the same as the
Mangalarasaráya of the plate just mentioned, is dated Saka 653. [161]
Placing the elder brother about ten years before the younger we get
Samvat 480 as the date of Mangalarája, which, corresponding with Saka
653 or A.D. 730-31, gives A.D. 730 minus 480 that is A.D. 250-51 as
the initial year of the era in which Pulakesi's grant is dated. In the
Navsári plates, which record a gift by the Gurjjara king Jayabhata in
Samvat 456, Dadda II. the donor of the Kaira grants which bear date
380 and 385, is mentioned in the genealogical part at the beginning as
'protecting the lord of Valabhi who had been defeated by the great
lord the illustrious Harshadeva.' Now the great Harshadeva or Harsha
Vardhana of Kanauj whose court was visited by the Chinese pilgrim
Hiuen Tsiang between A.D. 629 and 645, reigned according to Reinaud
from A.D. 607 to about A.D. 648. Taking A.D. 250 as the initial
year of the era of the Kaira plates, Dadda II.'s dates 380 and 385,
corresponding to A.D. 630 and 635, fall in the reign of Harshavardhana.

These considerations seem to show that the initial date of the
Traikútaka era was at or about A.D. 250 which at once suggests its
identity with the Chedi or Kalachuri era. [162] The next question is,
Who were these Traikútakas. The meaning of the title seems to be kings
of Trikúta. Several references seem to point to the existence of a
city named Trikúta on the western seaboard. In describing Raghu's
triumphant progress the Rámáyana and the Raghuvamsa mention him as
having established the city of Trikúta in Aparánta on the western
seaboard. [163] Trikútakam or Trikútam, a Sanskrit name for sea
salt seems a reminiscence of the time when Trikúta was the emporium
from which Konkan salt was distributed over the Dakhan. The scanty
information regarding the territory ruled by the Traikútakas is in
agreement with the suggestion that Junnar in North Poona was the
probable site of their capital and that in the three ranges that
encircle Junnar we have the origin of the term Trikúta or Three-Peaked.

[Their Race or Tribe.] Of the race or tribe of the Traikútakas nothing
is known. The conjecture may be offered that they are a branch of the
Ábhíra kings of the Puránas, one of whom is mentioned in Inscription
XV. of Násik Cave X. which from the style of the letters belongs to
about A.D. 150 to 200. The easy connection between Násik and Balsár
by way of Peth (Peint) and the nearness in time between the Násik
inscription and the initial date of the Traikútakas support this
conjecture. The further suggestion may be offered that the founder
of the line of Traikútakas was the Ísvaradatta, who, as noted
in the Kshatrapa chapter, held the overlordship of Káthiáváda as
Mahákshatrapa, perhaps during the two years A.D. 248 and 249, a result
in close agreement with the conclusions drawn from the examination of
the above quoted Traikútaka and Chalukya copperplates. As noted in
the Kshatrapa chapter after two years' supremacy Ísvaradatta seems
to have been defeated and regular Kshatrapa rule restored about
A.D. 252 (K. 174) by Dámájadasrí son of Vijayasena. The unbroken
use of the title Mahákshatrapa, the moderate and uniform lengths of
the reigns, and the apparently unquestioned successions suggest,
what the discovery of Kshatrapa coins at Karád near Sátára in the
Dakhan and at Amrávati in the Berárs seems to imply, that during
the second half of the third century Kshatrapa rule was widespread
and firmly established. [164] The conjecture may be offered that
Rudrasena (A.D. 256-272) whose coins have been found in Amrávati in
the Berárs spread his power at the expense of the Traikútakas driving
them towards the Central Provinces where they established themselves
at Tripura and Kálanjara. [165] Further that under Bráhman influence,
just as the Gurjjaras called themselves descendants of Karna the hero
of the Mahábhárata, and the Pallavas claimed to be of the Bháradvája
stock, the Traikútakas forgot their Ábhíra origin and claimed descent
from the Haihayas. Again as the Valabhis (A.D. 480-767) adopted the
Gupta era but gave it their own name so the rulers of Tripura seem
to have continued the original Traikútaka era of A.D. 248-9 under
the name of the Chedi era. The decline of the Kshatrapas dates from
about A.D. 300 the rule of Visvasena the twentieth Kshatrapa son of
Bharttridáman. The subsequent disruption of the Kshatrapa empire was
probably the work of their old neighbours and foes the Traikútakas,
who, under the name of Haihayas, about the middle of the fifth century
(A.D. 455-6) rose to supremacy and established a branch at their old
city of Trikúta ruling the greater part of the Bombay Dakhan and
South Gujarát and probably filling the blank between A.D. 410 the
fall of the Kshatrapas and A.D. 500 the rise of the Chálukyas.

About 1887 Pandit Bhagvánlál secured nine of a hoard of 500 silver
coins found at Daman in South Gujarát. All are of one king a close
imitation of the coins of the latest Kshatrapas. On the obverse is
a bust of bad workmanship and on the reverse are the usual Kshatrapa
symbols encircled with the legend:

Mahárájendravarmaputra Parama Vaishnava Srí Mahárája Rudragana.

The devoted Vaishnava the illustrious king Rudragana son of the great
king Indravarma.

At Karád, thirty-one miles south of Sátára, Mr. Justice Newton obtained
a coin of this Rudragana, with the coins of many Kshatrapas including
Visvasimha son of Bharttridáman who ruled up to A.D. 300. This would
favour the view that Rudragana was the successful rival who wrested
the Dakhan and North Konkan from Visvasimha. The fact that during the
twenty years after Visvasimha (A.D. 300-320) none of the Kshatrapas
has the title Mahákshatrapa seems to show they ruled in Káthiáváda as
tributaries of this Rudragana and his descendants of the Traikútaka
family. The Dahrasena of the Párdi plate whose inscription date is 207,
that is A.D. 457, may be a descendant of Rudragana. The Traikútaka
kingdom would thus seem to have flourished at least till the middle
of the fifth century. Somewhat later, or at any rate after the date
of the Kanheri plate (245 = A.D. 495), it was overthrown by either
the Mauryas or the Guptas. [166]

CHAPTER VII.

THE GUPTAS

(G. 90-149; A.D. 410-470.)

After the Kshatrapas (A.D. 120-410) the powerful dynasty of the Guptas
established themselves in Gujarát. So far as the dynasty is connected
with Gujarát the Gupta tree is:

Gupta.
G.1-12(?)--A.D.319-322(?)
Petty N. W. P. Chief.
|
Ghatotkacha.
G.12-29(?)--A.D.332-349(?)
Petty N. W. P. Chief.
|
Chandragupta I.
G.29-49(?)--A.D.349-369(?)
Powerful N. W. P. Chief.
|
Samudragupta.
G.50-75(?)--A.D.370-395.
Great N. W. P. Sovereign.
|
Chandragupta II.
G.70-96--A.D.396-415.
Great Monarch conquers Málwa.
G.80 A.D.400 and Gujarát G.90 A.D.410.
|
Kumáragupta.
G.97-133--A.D.416-453.
Rules Gujarát and Káthiáváda.
|
Skandagupta.
G.133-149--A.D.454-470.
Rules Gujarát Káthiáváda and Kachch.

According to the Puránas [167] the original seat of the Guptas
was between the Ganges and the Jamna. Their first capital is
not determined. English writers usually style them the Guptas of
Kanauj. And though this title is simply due to the chance that Gupta
coins were first found at Kanauj, further discoveries show that the
chief remains of Gupta records and coins are in the territory to the
east and south-east of Kanauj. Of the race of the Guptas nothing is
known. According to the ordinances of the Smritis or Sacred Books,
[168] the terminal gupta belongs only to Vaisyas a class including
shepherds cultivators and traders. Of the first three kings, Gupta
Ghatotkacha and Chandragupta I., beyond the fact that Chandragupta
I. bore the title of Mahárájádhirája, neither descriptive titles
nor details are recorded. As the fourth king Samudragupta performed
the long-neglected horse-sacrifice he must have been Bráhmanical in
religion. And as inscriptions style Samudragupta's three successors,
Chandragupta II. Kumáragupta and Skandagupta, Parama Bhágavata,
they must have been Smárta Vaishnavas, that is devotees of Vishnu
and observers of Vedic ceremonies.

[The Founder Gupta, A.D. 319-322(?).] The founder of the dynasty is
styled Gupta. In inscriptions this name always appears as Srí-gupta
which is taken to mean protected by Srí or Lakshmí. Against this
explanation it is to be noted that in their inscriptions all Gupta's
successors, have a Srí before their names. The question therefore
arises; If Srí forms part of the name why should the name Srígupta
have had no second Srí prefixed in the usual way. Further in the
inscriptions the lineage appears as Guptavamsa that is the lineage
of the Guptas never Sríguptavamsa [169]; and whenever dates in the
era of this dynasty are given they are conjoined with the name Gupta
never with Srígupta. [170] It may therefore be taken that Gupta not
Srígupta is the correct form of the founder's name. [171]

[Ghatotkacha, A.D. 322-349(?).] Gupta the founder seems never to have
risen to be more than a petty chief. No known inscription gives him
the title Mahárájádhirája Supreme Ruler of Great Kings, which all
Gupta rulers after the founder's grandson Chandragupta assume. Again
that no coins of the founder and many coins of his successors have
been discovered makes it probable that Gupta was not a ruler of
enough importance to have a currency of his own. According to the
inscriptions Gupta was succeeded by his son Ghatotkacha a petty chief
like his father with the title of Mahárája and without coins.

[Chandragupta I. A.D. 349-369(?).] Chandragupta I. (A.D. 349-369
[?]), the son and successor of Ghatotkacha, is styled Mahárájádhirája
either because he himself became powerful, or, more probably, because
he was the father of his very powerful successor Samudragupta. Though
he may not have gained the dignity of "supreme ruler of great kings"
by his own successes Chandragupta I. rose to a higher position than
his predecessors. He was connected by marriage with the Lichchhavi
dynasty of Tirhút an alliance which must have been considered of
importance since his son Samudragupta puts the name of his mother
Kumáradeví on his coins, and always styles himself daughter's son of
Lichchhavi. [172]

[Samudragupta, A.D. 370-395.] Samudragupta was the first of his
family to strike coins. His numerous gold coins are, with a certain
additional Indian element, adopted from those of his Indo-Skythian
predecessors. The details of the royal figure on the obverse are
Indian in the neck ornaments, large earrings, and headdress; they
are Indo-Skythian in the tailed coat, long boots, and straddle. The
goddess on the reverse of some coins with a fillet and cornucopia is
an adaptation of an Indo-Skythian figure, while the lotus-holding
Ganges on an alligator and the standing Glory holding a flyflapper
on the reverse of other coins are purely Indian. [173]

[His Coins.] A noteworthy feature of Samudragupta's coins is that
one or other of almost all his epithets appears on each of his coins
with a figure of the king illustrating the epithet. Coins with the
epithet Sarvarájochchhettá Destroyer-of-all-kings have on the obverse
a standing king stretching out a banner topped by the wheel or disc
of universal supremacy. [174]

Coins [175] with the epithet Apratiratha Peerless have on the obverse a
standing king whose left hand rests on a bow and whose right hand holds
a loose-lying unaimed arrow and in front an Eagle or Garuda standard
symbolizing the unrivalled supremacy of the king, his arrow no longer
wanted, his standard waving unchallenged. On the obverse is the legend:

Apratiratharájanyakírti(r)mama vijáyate. [176]

Triumphant is the glory of me the unrivalled sovereign.

Coins with the attribute Kritánta parasu the Death-like-battle-axe have
on the obverse a royal figure grasping a battle-axe. [177] In front
of the royal figure a boy, perhaps Samudragupta's son Chandragupta,
holds a standard. Coins with the attribute Asvamedhaparákramah
Able-to-hold-a-horse-sacrifice have on the obverse a horse standing
near a sacrificial post yúpa and on the reverse a female figure with
a flyflap. [178] The legend on the obverse is imperfect and hard to
read. The late Mr. Thomas restores it:

Navajamadhah rájádhirája prithivím jiyatya.

Horse sacrifice, after conquering the earth,
the great king (performs).

Coins with the legend Lichchhaveyah, a coin abbreviation for
Lichchhavidauhitra Daughter's son of Lichchhavi (?), have on the
obverse a standing king grasping a javelin. [179] Under the javelin
hand are the letters Chandraguptah. Facing the king a female figure
with trace of the letters Kumáradeví seems to speak to him. These
figures of his mother and father are given to explain the attribute
Lichchhaveya or scion of Lichchhavi. This coin has been supposed to
belong to Chandragupta I. but the attribute Lichchhaveyah can apply
only to Samudragupta.

[His Allahábád Inscription.] A fuller source of information regarding
Samudragupta remains in his inscription on the Allahábád Pillar. [180]
Nearly eight verses of the first part are lost. The first three verses
probably described his learning as what remains of the third verse
mentions his poetic accomplishments, and line 27 says he was skilled in
poetry and music, a trait further illustrated by what are known as his
Lyrist coins where he is shown playing a lute. [181] The fourth verse
says that during his lifetime his father chose Samudragupta to rule
the earth from among others of equal birth. His father is mentioned as
pleased with him and this is followed by the description of a victory
during which several opponents are said to have submitted. The seventh
verse records the sudden destruction of the army of Achyuta Nágasena
and the punishment inflicted on a descendant of the Kota family.

Lines 19 and 20 record the conquest, or submission, of the
following South Indian monarchs, Mahendra of Kosala, Vyághrarája
of Mahá Kántára, [182] Mundarája of Kauráttá, [183] Svámidatta of
Paishtapura Mahendra-Giri and Auttura [184], Damana of Airandapallaka,
Vishnu of Káñchí, Nílarája Sápávamukta, [185] Hastivarman of Vengí,
Ugrasena of Pálaka, [186] Kubera of Daivaráshtra, and Dhanamjaya of
Kausthalapura. Line 21 gives a further list of nine kings of Áryávarta
exterminated by Samudragupta:

Rudradeva. Nágasena.
Matila. Achyuta.
Nágadatta. Nandin.
Chandravarman. Balavarmman.
Ganapatinága.

As no reference is made to the territories of these kings they may be
supposed to be well known neighbouring rulers. General Cunningham's
coins and others obtained at Mathurá, show that the fifth ruler
Ganapatinága was one of the Nága kings of Gwálior and Narwár. [187]
The inscription next mentions that Samudragupta took into his employ
the chiefs of the forest countries. Then in lines 22 and 23 follows
a list of countries whose kings gave him tribute, who obeyed his
orders, and who came to pay homage. The list includes the names of
many frontier countries and the territories of powerful contemporary
kings. The frontier kingdoms are: [188]

Samatata. Nepála.
Daváka. Karttrika.
Kámarúpa.

The Indian kingdoms are: [189]

Málava. Prárjuna.
Arjunáyana. Sanakáníka.
Yaudheya. Káka.
Mádraka. Kharaparika.
Ábhíra.

Mention is next made of kings who submitted, gave their daughters in
marriage, paid tribute, and requested the issue of the Garuda or Eagle
charter to secure them in the enjoyment of their territory. [190]
The tribal names of these kings are: [191]

Devaputra. Murunda.
Sháhi. Saimhalaka.
Sháhánusháhi. Island Kings.
Saka.

The inscribed pillar is said to have been set up by the great Captain
or Dandanáyaka named Tilabhattanáyaka.

This important inscription shows that Samudragupta's dominions
included Mathurá, Oudh, Gorakhpur, Allahábád, Benares, Behár, Tirhút,
Bengal, and part of East Rájputána. The list of Dakhan and South
Indian kingdoms does not necessarily imply that they formed part of
Samudragupta's territory. Samudragupta may have made a victorious
campaign to the far south and had the countries recorded in the order
of his line of march. The order suggests that he went from Behár,
by way of Gayá, to Kosala the country about the modern Ráipur in
the Central Provinces, and from Kosala, by Ganjam and other places
in the Northern Circars, as far as Káñchí or Conjeveram forty-six
miles south-west of Madras. Málwa is shown in the second list as a
powerful allied kingdom. It does not appear to have formed part of
Samudragupta's territory nor, unless the Sakas are the Kshatrapas,
does any mention of Gujarát occur even as an allied state.

[Chandragupta II. A.D. 396-415.] Samudragupta was succeeded by his
son Chandragupta II. whose mother was the queen Dattádeví. He was the
greatest and most powerful king of the Gupta dynasty and added largely
to the territory left by Samudragupta. His second name Vikramáditya or
the Sun of Prowess appears on his coins. Like his father Chandragupta
II. struck gold coins of various types. He was the first Gupta ruler
who spread his power over Málwa and Gujarát which he apparently took
from the Kshatrapas as he was the first Gupta to strike silver coins
and as his silver coins of both varieties the eastern and the western
are modifications of the Kshatrapa type. The expedition which conquered
Málwa seems to have passed from Allahábád by Bundelkhand to Bhilsá
and thence to Málwa. An undated inscription in the Udayagiri caves at
Vidisá (the modern Besnagar) near Bhilsa records the making of a cave
of Mahádeva by one Sába of the Kautsa gotra and the family name of
Vírasena, a poet and native of Pátaliputra who held the hereditary
office of minister of peace and war sandhivigrahika, and who is
recorded to have arrived with the king who was intent upon conquering
the whole earth. [192] A neighbouring cave bears an inscription
of a feudatory of Chandragupta who was chief of Sanakáníka. [193]
The chief's name is lost, but the names of his father Vishnudása
and of his grandfather Chhagalaga remain. The date is the eleventh
of the bright half of Áshádha Samvatsara 82 (A.D. 401). From this
Chandragupta's conquest of Vidisá may be dated about Samvatsara 80
(A.D. 399) or a little earlier.

A third inscription is on the railing of the great Sáñchi stúpa. [194]
It is dated the 4th day of Bhádrapada Samvat 93 (A.D. 412) and
records the gift of 25 dínáras and something called Ísvaravásaka
(perhaps a village or a field) to the monks of the great monastery
of Kákanádabotasrí for the daily maintenance of five bhikshus and the
burning of a lamp in the ratnagriha or shrine of the Buddhist triratna,
for the merit of the supreme king of great kings Chandragupta who
bears the popular name of Devarája or god-like. [195] The donor a
feudatory of Chandragupta named Ámrakárdava is described as having the
object of his life gratified by the favour of the feet of the supreme
ruler of great kings the illustrious Chandragupta, and as showing to
the world the hearty loyalty of a good feudatory. Ámrakárdava seems
to have been a chief of consequence as he is described as winning
the flag of glory in numerous battles. The name of his kingdom is
also recorded. Though it cannot now be made out the mention of his
kingdom makes it probable that he was a stranger come to pay homage to
Chandragupta. The reference to Chandragupta seems to imply he was the
ruler of the land while the two other inscriptions show that his rule
lasted from about 80 (A.D. 399) to at least 93 (A.D. 412). During
these years Chandragupta seems to have spread his sway to Ujjain
the capital of west Málwa, of which he is traditionally called the
ruler. From Ujjain by way of Bágh and Tánda in the province of Ráth
he seems to have entered South Gujarát and to have passed from the
Broach coast to Káthiáváda. He seems to have wrested Káthiáváda from
its Kshatrapa rulers as he is the first Gupta who struck silver coins
and as his silver coins are of the then current Kshatrapa type. On
the obverse is the royal bust with features copied from the Kshatrapa
face and on the reverse is the figure of a peacock, probably chosen
as the bearer of Kártikasvámi the god of war. Round the peacock is a
Sanskrit legend. This legend is of two varieties. In Central Indian
coins it runs:

Srí Guptakulasya Mahárájadhirája Srí Chandraguptavikramánkasya.

(Coin) of the king of kings the illustrious Chandragupta Vikramánka,
of the family of the illustrious Gupta. [196]

In the very rare Káthiáváda coins, though they are similar to the
above in style, the legend runs:

Paramabhágavata Mahárájádhirája Srí Chandragupta Vikramáditya.

The great devotee of Vishnu the supreme ruler of great kings, the
illustrious Chandragupta Vikramáditya. [197]

Several gold coins of Chandragupta show a young male figure behind
the king with his right hand laid on the king's shoulder. This
youthful figure is apparently Chandragupta's son Kumáragupta
who may have acted as Yuvarája during the conquest of Málwa. The
rareness of Chandragupta's and the commonness of Kumáragupta's
coins in Káthiáváda, together with the date 90 (A.D. 409) on some
of Kumáragupta's coins make it probable that on their conquest his
father appointed Kumáragupta viceroy of Gujarát and Káthiáváda.

As the first Gupta was a chief of no great power or influence it is
probable that though it is calculated from him the Gupta era was
established not by him but by his grandson the great Chandragupta
II. [198] This view is confirmed by the absence of dates on all
existing coins of Chandragupta's father Samudragupta. It further
seems probable that like the Málavas in B.C. 57 and the Kshatrapas
in A.D. 78 the occasion on which Chandragupta established the Gupta
era was his conquest of Málwa. The Gupta era did not remain long in
use. After the fall of Gupta power (A.D. 470) the old Málava era of
B.C. 57 was revived. The conjecture may be offered that, in spite of
the passing away of Gupta power, under his title of Vikramáditya,
the fame of the great Gupta conqueror Chandragupta II. lived on in
Málwa and that, drawing to itself tales of earlier local champions,
the name Vikramáditya came to be considered the name of the founder
of the Málava era. [199]

Working back from Gupta Samvat 80 (A.D. 400) the date of Chandragupta's
conquest of Málwa we may allot 1 to 12 (A.D. 319-332) to the founder
Gupta: 12 to 29 (A.D. 332-349) to Gupta's son Ghatotkacha: 29 to 49
(A.D. 349-369) to Ghatotkacha's son Chandragupta I.: and 50 to 75
(A.D. 370-395) to Chandragupta's powerful son Samudragupta who
probably had a long reign. As the latest known date of Chandragupta
II. is 93 (A.D. 413) and as a Bilsad inscription [200] of his successor
Kumáragupta is dated 96 (A.D. 416) the reign of Chandragupta II. may be
calculated to have lasted during the twenty years ending 95 (A.D. 415).

[Kumáragupta, A.D. 416-453.] Chandragupta II. was succeeded by
his son Kumáragupta whose mother was the queen Dhruva-Deví. On
Kumáragupta's coins three titles occur: Mahendra, Mahendra-Vikrama,
and Mahendráditya. As already noticed the circulation of Kumáragupta's
coins in Káthiáváda during his father's reign makes it probable that
on their conquest his father appointed him viceroy of Káthiáváda and
Gujarát. Kumáragupta appears to have succeeded his father about 96
(A.D. 416). An inscription at Mankuwár near Prayága shows he was ruling
as late as 129 (A.D. 449) and a coin of his dated 130 (A.D. 450) adds
at least one year to his reign. On the other hand the inscription on
the Girnár rock shows that in 137 (A.D. 457) his son Skandagupta was
king. It follows that Kumáragupta's reign ended between 130 and 137
(A.D. 450-457) or about 133 (A.D. 453).

None of Kumáragupta's four inscriptions gives any historical or other
details regarding him. [201] But the number and the wide distribution
of his coins make it probable that during his long reign he maintained
his father's dominions intact.

Large numbers of Kumáragupta's coins of gold silver and copper have
been found. The gold which are of various types are inferior in
workmanship to his father's coins. The silver and copper coins are of
two varieties, eastern and western. Both varieties have on the obverse
the royal bust in the Kshatrapa style of dress. In the western pieces
the bust is a copy of the moustached Kshatrapa face with a corrupted
version of the corrupt Greek legend used by the Kshatrapas. The
only difference between the obverses of the Western Gupta and the
Kshatrapa coins is that the date is in the Gupta instead of in the
Kshatrapa era. On the reverse is an ill formed peacock facing front
as in Chandragupta II.'s coins. The legend runs:

Paramabhágavata Maharájádhirája Srí Kumáragupta Mahendráditya.

The great Vaishnava the supreme ruler of great kings, the illustrious
Kumáragupta Mahendráditya. [202]

In Kumáragupta's eastern silver and copper coins the bust on the
obverse has no moustache nor is there any trace of the corrupt Greek
legend. The date is in front of the face in perpendicular numerals one
below the other instead of behind the head as in the Kshatrapa and
Western Kumáragupta coins. On the reverse is a well-carved peacock
facing front with tail feathers at full stretch. Round the peacock
runs the clear cut legend:

Vijitávaniravanipati Kumáragupto devam jayati.

This legend is hard to translate. It seems to mean:

Kumáragupta, lord of the earth, who had conquered the kings of
the earth, conquers the Deva.

Probably the Deva whose name suggested the antithesis between the
kings of the earth and the gods was one of the Devaputra family of
Indo-Skythian rulers. [203]

[Skandagupta, A.D. 454-470.] Kumáragupta was succeeded by his
son Skandagupta. An inscription of his on a pillar at Bhitarí near
Saidpur in Gházipur bearing no date shows that on his father's death
Skandagupta had a hard struggle to establish his power. [204] The text
runs: "By whom when he rose to fix fast again the shaken fortune of
his house, three months [205] were spent on the earth as on a bed,"
an apparent reference to flight and wanderings. A doubtful passage in
the same inscription seems to show that he was opposed by a powerful
king named Pushyamitra on whose back he is said to have set his left
foot. [206] The inscription makes a further reference to the troubles
of the family stating that on re-establishing the shaken fortune of his
house Skandagupta felt satisfied and went to see his weeping afflicted
mother. Among the enemies with whom Skandagupta had to contend the
inscription mentions a close conflict with the Húnas that is the
Ephthalites, Thetals, or White Huns. [207] Verse 3 of Skandagupta's
Girnár inscription confirms the reference to struggles stating that on
the death of his father by his own might he humbled his enemies to the
earth and established himself. As the Girnár inscription is dated 136
(A.D. 456) and as Kumáragupta's reign ended about 134, these troubles
and difficulties did not last for more than two years. The Girnár
inscription further states that on establishing his power he conquered
the earth, destroyed the arrogance of his enemies, and appointed
governors in all provinces. For Suráshtra he selected a governor
named Parnadatta and to Parnadatta's son Chakrapálita he gave a share
of the management placing him in charge of Junágadh city. During
the governorship of Parnadatta the Sudarsana lake close to Junágadh,
which had been strongly rebuilt in the time of the Kshatrapa Rudradáman
(A.D. 150), again gave way during the dark sixth of Bhádrapada of the
year 136 (A.D. 456). The streams Palásiní Sikatá, and Vilásiní [208]
burst through the dam and flowed unchecked. Repairs were begun on the
first of bright Gríshma 137 (A.D. 457) and finished in two months. The
new dam is said to have been 100 cubits long by 68 cubits broad and 7
men or about 38 feet high. The probable site of the lake is in the west
valley of the Girnár hill near what is called Bhavanátha's pass. [209]
The inscription also records the making of a temple of Vishnu in
the neighbourhood by Chakrapálita, which was probably on the site
of the modern Dámodar's Mandir in the Bhavanátha pass, whose image
is of granite and is probably as old as the Guptas. A new temple was
built in the fifteenth century during the rule of Mandalika the last
Chúdásamá ruler of Junágadh. At the time of the Musalmán conquest
(A.D. 1484) as violence was feared the images were removed and
buried. Mandalika's temple was repaired by Amarji Diván of Junágadh
(1759-1784). It was proposed to make and consecrate new images. But
certain old images of Vishnu were found in digging foundations for
the enclosure wall and were consecrated. Two of these images were
taken by Girnára Bráhmans and consecrated in the names of Baladevji
and Revatí in a neighbouring temple specially built for them. Of the
original temple the only trace is a pilaster built into the wall to
the right as one enters. The style and carving are of the Gupta period.

As almost all the Gupta coins found in Cutch are Skandagupta's and
very few are Kumáragupta's, Skandagupta seems to have added Cutch to
the provinces of Gujarát and Káthiáváda inherited from his father. In
Káthiáváda Skandagupta's coins are rare, apparently because of the
abundant currency left by his father which was so popular in Káthiáváda
that fresh Kumáragupta coins of a degraded type were issued as late
as Valabhi times.

Like his father, Skandagupta issued a gold coinage in his eastern
dominions but no trace of a gold currency appears in the west. Like
Kumáragupta's his silver coins were of two varieties, eastern
and western. The eastern coins have on the obverse a bust as in
Kumáragupta's coins and the date near the face. On the reverse is a
peacock similar to Kumáragupta's and round the peacock the legend:

Vijitávaniravanipati jayati devam Skandagupto'yam.

This king Skandagupta who having conquered the earth conquers the
Deva. [210]

Skandagupta's western coins are of three varieties, one the same as
the western coins of Kumáragupta, a second with a bull instead of
a peacock on the reverse, and a third with on the reverse an altar
with one upright and two side jets of water. Coins of the first two
varieties are found both in Gujarát and in Káthiáváda. The third
water-jet variety is peculiar to Cutch and is an entirely new feature
in the western Gupta coinage. On the reverse of all is the legend:

Paramabhágavata Mahárájadhirája Skandagupta Kramáditya.

The great Vaishnava the supreme ruler of great kings, Skandagupta
the Sun of Prowess. [211]

The beginning of Skandagupta's reign has been placed about Gupta 133
or A.D. 453: his latest known date on a coin in General Cunningham's
collection is Gupta 149 or A.D. 469. [212]

[Budhagupta, A.D. 485.] With Skandagupta the regular Gupta succession
ceases. [213] The next Gupta is Budhagupta who has a pillar inscription
[214] in a temple at Eran in the Saugor district dated 165 (A.D. 485)
and silver coins dated Samvat 174 and 180 odd (A.D. 494-500 odd). Of
Budhagupta's relation or connection with Skandagupta nothing is
known. That he belonged to the Gupta dynasty appears from his name as
well as from his silver coins which are dated in the Gupta era and
are the same in style as the eastern coins of Skandagupta. On the
obverse is the usual bust as in Skandagupta's coins with the date
(174, 180 odd) near the face. On the reverse is the usual peacock
and the legend is the same as Skandagupta's:

Devam jayati vijitávaniravanipati Srí Budhagupto.

The king the illustrious Budhagupta who has conquered the earth
conquers the Deva. [215]

Since the coins are dated Samvat 174 and 180 odd (A.D. 494 and 500 odd)
and the inscription's date is 165 (A.D. 485) the inscription may be
taken to belong to the early part of Budhagupta's reign the beginning
of which may be allotted to about 160-162 (A.D. 480-482). As this is
more than ten years later than the latest known date of Skandagupta
(G. 149 A.D. 469) either a Gupta of whom no trace remains must have
intervened or the twelve blank years must have been a time of political
change and disturbance. The absence of any trace of a gold currency
suggests that Budhagupta had less power than his predecessors. The
correctness of this argument is placed beyond doubt by the pillar
inscription opposite the shrine in the Eran temple where instead
of his predecessor's title of monarch of the whole earth Budhagupta
is styled protector of the land between the Jamna (Kálindí) and the
Narbadá implying the loss of the whole territory to the east of the
Jamna. [216] In the west the failure of Gupta power seems still more
complete. Neither in Gujarát nor in Káthiáváda has an inscription
or even a coin been found with a reference to Budhagupta or to any
other Gupta ruler later than Skandagupta (G. 149 A.D. 469). The
pillar inscription noted above which is of the year 165 (A.D. 485)
and under the rule of Budhagupta states that the pillar was a gift to
the temple by Dhanya Vishnu and his brother Mátri Vishnu who at the
time of the gift seem to have been local Bráhman governors. A second
inscription on the lower part of the neck of a huge Boar or Varáha
image in a corner shrine of the same temple records that the image
was completed on the tenth day of Phálguna in the first year of the
reign of Toramána the supreme ruler of great kings and was the gift
of the same Dhanya Vishnu whose brother Mátri Vishnu is described as
gone to heaven. [217] Since Mátri was alive in the Budhagupta and was
dead in the Toramána inscription it follows that Toramána was later
than Budhagupta. His name and his new era show that Toramána was
not a Gupta. A further proof that Toramána wrested the kingdom from
Budhagupta is that except the change of era and that the bust turns to
the left instead of to the right, Toramána's silver coins are directly
adapted from Gupta coins of the eastern type. Certain coin dates seem
at variance with the view that Toramána flourished after Budhagupta. On
several coins the date 52 is clear. As Toramána's coins are copies of
the coins of Kumáragupta and Skandagupta and as most of these coins
have a numeral for one hundred the suggestion may be offered that a
one dropped out in striking Toramána's die and that this date should
read 152 not 52. Accepting this view Toramána's date would be 152
(A.D. 472) that is immediately after the death of Skandagupta.

The Gwálior inscription [218] mentions prince Mihirakula as the son of
Toramána and a second inscription from a well in Mandasor [219] dated
Málava Samvat 589 (A.D. 533) mentions a king named Yasodharman who was
ruler of Málwa when the well was built and who in a second Mandasor
inscription [220] is mentioned as having conquered Mihirakula. This
would separate Mihirakula from his father Toramána (A.D. 471) by more
than sixty years. In explanation of this gap it may be suggested that
the [1]52 (A.D. 472) coins were struck early in Toramána's reign in
honour of his conquest of the eastern Gupta territory. A reign of
twenty years would bring Toramána to 177 (A.D. 497). The Gwálior
inscription of Mihirakula is in the fifteenth year of his reign
that is on the basis of a succession date of 177 (A.D. 497) in Gupta
192 (A.D. 512). An interval of five years would bring Yasodharman's
conquest of Mihirakula to 197 (A.D. 517). This would place the making
of the well in the twenty-first year of Mihirakula's reign.

[Bhánugupta, A.D. 511.] After Budhagupta neither inscription nor
coin shows any trace of Gupta supremacy in Málwa. An Eran inscription
[221] found in 1869 on a linga-shaped stone, with the representation
of a woman performing satí, records the death in battle of a king
Goparájá who is mentioned as the daughter's son of Sarabharája and
appears to have been the son of king Mádhava. Much of the inscription
is lost. What remains records the passing to heaven of the deceased
king in the very destructive fight with the great warrior (pravíra)
Bhánugupta brave as Pártha. The inscription is dated the seventh of
dark Bhádrapada Gupta 191 in words as well as in numerals that is
in A.D. 511. This Bhánugupta would be the successor of Budhagupta
ruling over a petty Málwa principality which lasted till nearly the
time of the great Harshavardhana the beginning of the seventh century
(A.D. 607-650), as a Devagupta of Málwa is one of Rájyavardhana's
rivals in the Sríharshacharita. While Gupta power failed in Málwa and
disappeared from Western India a fresh branch of the Guptas rose in
Magadha or Behár and under Naragupta Báláditya, perhaps the founder
of the eastern branch of the later Gupta dynasty, attained the dignity
of a gold coinage. [222]

[The Pushyamitras, A.D. 455.] [Though the history of their last years
is known only in fragments, chiefly from inscriptions and coins,
little doubt remains regarding the power which first seriously
weakened the early Guptas. The Bhitari stone pillar of Skandagupta
[223] speaks of his restoring the fortunes of his family and conquering
the Pushyamitras and also of his joining in close conflict with the
Húnas. [224] Unfortunately the Bhitari inscription is not dated. The
Junágadh inscription, which bears three dates covering the period
between A.D. 455 and 458, [225] mentions pride-broken enemies in the
country of the Mlechchhas admitting Skandagupta's victory. That the
Mlechchhas of this passage refers to the Huns is made probable by the
fact that it does not appear that the Pushyamitras were Mlechchhas
while they and the Huns are the only enemies whom Skandagupta
boasts either of defeating or of meeting in close conflict. It may
therefore be assumed that the Huns became known to Skandagupta before
A.D. 455. As according to the Chinese historians [226] the White Huns
did not cross the Oxus into Baktria before A.D. 452, the founding
of the Hun capital of Badeghis [227] may be fixed between A.D. 452
and 455. As the above quoted inscriptions indicate that the Huns
were repulsed in their first attempt to take part in Indian politics
the disturbances during the last years of Kumáragupta's reign were
probably due to some tribe other than the Huns. This tribe seems to
have been the Pushyamitras whose head-quarters would seem to have been
in Northern India. Some other enemy must have arisen in Málwa since the
terms of Parnadatta's appointment to Suráshtra in A.D. 455-6 suggest
that country had been lost to the Gupta empire and re-conquered by
Skandagupta which would naturally be the case if a rival state had
arisen in Málwa and been overthrown by that king. So far as is known
the Huns made no successful attack on the Gupta empire during the
lifetime of Skandagupta whose latest date is A.D. 468-9. It is not
certain who succeeded Skandagupta. His brother Pura(or Sthira-)gupta
ruled in or near Magadha. But it is not certain whether he was the
successor or the rival of Skandagupta. [228] That Skandagupta's
inscriptions are found in the Patna district in the east [229] and
in Káthiáváda in the west [230] suggests that during his life the
empire was not divided nor does any one of his inscriptions hint at a
partition. The probability is that Skandagupta was succeeded by his
brother Puragupta, who again was followed by his son Narasimhagupta
and his grandson Kumáragupta II. [231]

[White Huns, A.D. 450-520.] Among the northerners who with or shortly
after the Pushyamitras shared in the overthrow of Gupta power two
names, a father and a son, Toramána and Mihirakula are prominent. It
is not certain that these kings were Húnas by race. Their tribe were
almost certainly his rivals' allies whom Skandagupta's Bhitari and
Junágadh inscriptions style the one Húnas the other Mlechchhas. [232]
On one of Toramána's coins Mr. Fleet reads [233] the date 52 which he
interprets as a regnal date. This though not impossible is somewhat
unlikely. The date of Mihirakula's succession to his father is fixed
somewhere about A.D. 515. [234] In the neighbourhood of Gwálior
he reigned at least fifteen years. [235] The story of Mihirakula's
interview with Báláditya's mother and his long subsequent history [236]
indicate that when he came to the throne he was a young man probably
not more than 25. If his father reigned fifty-two years he must have
been at least 70 when he died and not less than 45 when Mihirakula was
born. As Mihirakula is known to have had at least one younger brother,
[237] it seems probable that Toramána came to the throne a good deal
later than A.D. 460 the date suggested by Mr. Fleet. [238] The date
52 on Toramána's coins must therefore refer to some event other than
his own accession. The suggestion may be offered that that event was
the establishment of the White Huns in Baktria and the founding of
their capital Badeghis, [239] which, as fixed above between A.D. 452
and 455, gives the very suitable date of A.D. 504 to 507 for the
52 of Toramána's coin. If this suggestion is correct a further
identification follows. The Chinese ambassador Sungyun (A.D. 520)
[240] describes an interview with the king of Gandhára whose family
Sungyun notices was established in power by the Ye-tha, that is the
Ephthalites or White Huns, two generations before his time. [241]
Mihirakula is known to have ruled in Gandhára [242] and Sungyun's
description of the king's pride and activity agrees well with other
records of Mihirakula's character. It seems therefore reasonable to
suppose that the warlike sovereign who treated Sungyun and the name of
his Imperial mistress with such scant courtesy was no other than the
meteor Mihirakula. If Sungyun is correct in stating that Mihirakula
was the third of his line the dynasty must have been established about
A.D. 460. Beal is in doubt whether the name Lae-lih given by Sungyun
[243] is the family name or the name of the founder. As a recently
deciphered inscription shows Toramána's family name to have been
Jaúvla [244] it seems to follow that Lae-lih, or whatever is the
correct transliteration of the Chinese characters, is the name of
the father of Toramána. Sungyun's reference to the establishment of
this dynasty suggests they were not White Huns but leaders of some
subject tribe. [245] That this tribe was settled in Baktria perhaps
as far south as Kábul before the arrival of the White Huns seems
probable. The Hindu or Persian influence notable in the tribal name
Maitraka and in the personal name Mihirakula seems unsuited to Húnas
newly come from the northern frontiers of China and proud of their
recent successes. [246] Chinese records show [247] that the tribe who
preceded the White Huns in Baktria and north-east Persia, and who about
A.D. 350-400 destroyed the power of Kitolo the last of the Kusháns,
were the Yuan-Yuan or Jouen-Jouen whom Sir H. Howorth identifies with
the Avars. [248] To this tribe it seems on the whole probable that
Lae-lih the father of Toramána belonged. [249] At the same time, though
perhaps not themselves White Huns, the details regarding Toramána
and Mihirakula so nearly cover the fifty years (A.D. 470-530) of Húna
ascendancy in North India that, as was in keeping with their position
in charge of his Indian outpost, the White Hun emperor Khushnáwaz,
while himself engaged in Central Asia and in Persia (A.D. 460-500),
[250] seems to have entrusted the conquest of India to Toramána and
his son Mihirakula. Of the progress of the mixed Yuan-Yuan and White
Hun invaders in India few details are available. Their ascendancy in
the north seems to have been too complete to allow of opposition,
and Húnas were probably closely associated with the Maitraka or
Mehara conquest of Káthiáváda (A.D. 480-520). The southern fringe of
the White Hun dominions, the present Saugor district of the Central
Provinces, seems to have been the chief theatre of war, a debateable
ground between the Guptas, Toramána, and the Málwa chiefs. To the east
of Saugor the Guptas succeeded in maintaining their power until at
least A.D. 528-9. [251] To the west of Saugor the Guptas held Eran
in A.D. 484-5. [252] About twenty years later (A.D. 505) [253] Eran
was in the hands of Toramána, and in A.D. 510-11 Bhánugupta [254]
fought and apparently won a battle at Eran.

[Mihirakula, A.D. 512.] Mihirakula's accession to the throne may
perhaps be fixed at A.D. 512. An inscription of Yasodharman, the date
of which cannot be many years on either side of A.D. 532-3, claims to
have enforced the submission of the famous Mihirakula whose power had
established itself on the tiaras of kings and who had hitherto bowed
his neck to no one but Siva. [255] In spite of this defeat Mihirakula
held Gwálior and the inaccessible fortress of the Himálayas. [256]
These dates give about A.D. 520 as the time of Mihirakula's greatest
power, a result which suggests that the Gollas, whom, about A.D. 520,
the Greek merchant Cosmas Indikopleustes heard of in the ports of
Western India as the supreme ruler of Northern India was Kulla or
Mihirakula. [257]

[Yasodharman of Málwa, A.D. 533-4.] Regarding the history of the
third destroyers of Gupta power in Málwa, inscriptions show that in
A.D. 437-8, under Kumáragupta, Bandhuvarman son of Vishnuvarman ruled
as a local king. [258] Possibly Bandhuvarman afterwards threw off
his allegiance to the Guptas and thereby caused the temporary loss
of Suráshtra towards the end of Kumáragupta's reign. Nothing further
is recorded of the rulers of Málwa until the reign of Yasodharman
in A.D. 533-4. [259] It has been supposed that one of Yasodharman's
inscriptions mentioned a king Vishnuvardhana but there can be little
doubt that both names refer to the same person. [260] The name of
Yasodharman's tribe is unknown and his crest the aulikara has not
been satisfactorily explained. [261] Mandasor [262] in Western Málwa,
where all his inscriptions have been found, must have been a centre
of Yasodharman's power. Yasodharman boasts [263] of conquering from
the Brahmaputra to mount Mahendra and from the Himálayas to the
Western Ocean. In the sixth century only one dynasty could claim
such widespread power. That dynasty is the famous family of Ujjain
to which belonged the well known Vikramáditya of the Nine Gems. It
may be conjectured not only that Yasodharman belonged to this family
but that Yasodharman was the great Vikramáditya himself. [264]

The difficult question remains by whom was the power of Mihirakula
overthrown. Yasodharman claims to have subdued Mihirakula, who,
he distinctly says, had never before been defeated. [265] On
the other hand, Hiuen Tsiang ascribes Mihirakula's overthrow to
a Báláditya of Magadha. [266] Coins prove that Báláditya [267]
was one of the titles of Narasimhagupta grandson of Kumáragupta
I. (A.D. 417-453) who probably ruled Magadha as his son's seal was
found in the Gházipur district. [268] If Hiuen Tsiang's story is
accepted a slight chronological difficulty arises in the way of this
identification. It is clear that Mihirakula's first defeat was at
the hands of Yasodharman about A.D. 530. His defeat and capture by
Báláditya must have been later. As Skandagupta's reign ended about
A.D. 470 a blank of sixty years has to be filled by the two reigns of
his brother and his nephew. [269] This, though not impossible, suggests
caution in identifying Báláditya. According to Hiuen Tsiang Báláditya
was a feudatory of Mihirakula who rebelled against him when he began to
persecute the Buddhists. Hiuen Tsiang notices that, at the intercession
of his own mother, Báláditya spared Mihirakula's life and allowed
him to retire to Kashmir. He further notices that Mihirakula and
his brother were rivals and his statement suggests that from Kashmir
Mihirakula defeated his brother and recovered Gandhára. The ascendancy
of the White Huns cannot have lasted long after Mihirakula. About
A.D. 560 the power of the White Huns was crushed between the combined
attacks of the Persians and Turks. [270]--(A.M.T.J.)]

CHAPTER VIII.

THE VALABHIS

(A.D. 509-766.)

[Valeh Town, 1893.] The Valabhi dynasty, which succeeded the Guptas
in Gujarát and Káthiáváda, take their name from their capital in the
east of Káthiáváda about twenty miles west of Bhávnagar and about
twenty-five miles north of the holy Jain hill of Satruñjaya. The
modern name of Valabhi is Valeh. It is impossible to say whether
the modern Valeh is a corruption of Valahi the Prakrit form of
the Sanskrit Valabhi or whether Valabhi is Sanskritised from a
local original Valeh. The form Valahi occurs in the writings of
Jinaprabhasuri a learned Jain of the thirteenth century who describes
Satruñjaya as in the Valáhaka province. A town in the chiefship of
Valeh now occupies the site of old Valabhi, [271] whose ruins lie
buried below thick layers of black earth and silt under the modern
town and its neighbourhood. The only remains of old buildings are the
large foundation bricks of which, except a few new houses, the whole
of Valeh is built. The absence of stone supports the theory that the
buildings of old Valabhi were of brick and wood. In 1872 when the site
was examined the only stone remains were a few scattered Lingas and
a well-polished life-size granite Nandi or bull lying near a modern
Mahádeva temple. Diggers for old bricks have found copper pots and
copperplates and small Buddhist relic shrines with earthen pots and
clay seals of the seventh century.

The ruins of Valabhi show few signs of representing a large or
important city. The want of sweet water apparently unfits the site for
the capital of so large a kingdom as Valabhi. Its choice as capital
was probably due to its being a harbour on the Bhávnagar creek. Since
the days of Valabhi's prime the silt which thickly covers the ruins
has also filled and choked the channel which once united it with the
Bhávnagar creek when the small Ghelo was probably a fair sized river.

[Valabhi in A.D. 630] In spite of the disappearance of every sign
of greatness Hiuen Tsiang's (A.D. 640) details show how rich and
populous Valabhi was in the early part of the seventh century. The
country was about 1000 miles (6000 li) and the capital about five
miles (30 li) in circumference. The soil the climate and the manners
of the people were like those of Málava. The population was dense;
the religious establishments rich. Over a hundred merchants owned
a hundred lákhs. The rare and valuable products of distant regions
were stored in great quantities. In the country were several hundred
monasteries or sanghárámas with about 6000 monks. Most of them studied
the Little Vehicle according to the Sammatiya school. There were
several hundred temples of Devas and sectaries of many sorts. When
Tathágata or Gautama Buddha (B.C. 560-480) lived he often travelled
through this country. King Asoka (B.C. 240) had raised monuments or
stúpas in all places where Buddha had rested. Among these were spots
where the three past Buddhas sat or walked or preached. At the time
of Hiuen Tsiang's account (A.D. 640) the king was of the Kshatriya
caste, as all Indian rulers were. He was the nephew of Síláditya of
Málava and the son-in-law of the son of Síláditya the reigning king
of Kanyákubja. His name was Dhruvapatu (Tu-lu-h'o-po-tu). He was of
a lively and hasty disposition, shallow in wisdom and statecraft. He
had only recently attached himself sincerely to the faith in the three
precious ones. He yearly summoned a great assembly and during seven
days gave away valuable gems and choice meats. On the monks he bestowed
in charity the three garments and medicaments, or their equivalents
in value, and precious articles made of the seven rare and costly
gems. These he gave in charity and redeemed at twice their price. He
esteemed the virtuous, honoured the good, and revered the wise. Learned
priests from distant regions were specially honoured. Not far from
the city was a great monastery built by the Arhat Áchára ('O-che-lo),
where, during their travels, the Bodhisattvas Gunamati and Sthiramati
(Kien-hwni) settled and composed renowned treatises. [272]

[Valabhi Copperplates.] The only historical materials regarding the
Valabhi dynasty are their copperplates of which a large number have
been found. That such powerful rulers as the Valabhis should leave no
records on stones and no remains of religious or other buildings is
probably because, with one possible exception at Gopnáth, [273] up to
the ninth century all temples and religious buildings in Káthiáváda
and Gujarát were of brick and wood. [274]

The Valabhi copperplates chiefly record grants to Bráhmanical temples
and Buddhist monasteries and sometimes to individuals. All are in one
style two plates inscribed breadthwise on the inner side, the earliest
plates being the smallest. The plates are held together by two rings
passed through two holes in their horizontal upper margin. One of the
rings bears on one side a seal with, as a badge of the religion of the
dynasty, a well-proportioned seated Nandi or bull. Under the bull is
the word Bhatárka the name of the founder of the dynasty. Except such
differences as may be traced to the lapse of time, the characters are
the same in all, and at the same time differ from the character then
in use in the Valabhi territory which must have been that from which
Devanágarí is derived. The Valabhi plate character is adopted from
that previously in use in South Gujarát plates which was taken from
the South Indian character. The use of this character suggests that
either Bhatárka or the clerks and writers of the plates came from South
Gujarát. [275] The language of all the grants is Sanskrit prose. Each
records the year of the grant, the name of the king making the grant,
the name of the grantee, the name of the village or field granted,
the name of the writer of the charter either the minister of peace
and war sandhivigrahádhikrita or the military head baládhikrita, and
sometimes the name of the dútaka or gift-causer generally some officer
of influence or a prince and in one case a princess. The grants begin
by recording they were made either 'from Valabhi' the capital, or
'from the royal camp' 'Vijayaskandhávára.' Then follows the genealogy
of the dynasty from Bhatárka the founder to the grantor king. Each
king has in every grant a series of attributes which appear to have
been fixed for him once for all. Except in rare instances the grants
contain nothing historical. They are filled with verbose description
and figures of speech in high flown Sanskrit. As enjoined in law-books
or dharmasástras after the genealogy of the grantor comes the name
of the composer usually the minister of peace and war and after him
the boundaries of the land granted. The plates conclude with the date
of the grant, expressed in numerals following the letter sam or the
letters samva for samvatsara that is year. After the numerals are
given the lunar month and day and the day of the week, with, at the
extreme end, the sign manual svahasto mama followed by the name of
the king in the genitive case that is Own hand of me so and so. The
name of the era in which the date is reckoned is nowhere given.

[Period Covered.] So far as is known the dates extend for 240
years from 207 to 447. That the earliest known date is so late as
207 makes it probable that the Valabhis adopted an era already
in use in Káthiáváda. No other era seems to have been in use in
Valabhi. Three inscriptions have their years dated expressly in
the Valabhi Samvat. The earliest of these in Bhadrakáli's temple
in Somnáth Pátan is of the time of Kumárapála (A.D. 1143-1174) the
Solanki ruler of Anahilaváda. It bears date Valabhi Samvat 850. The
second and third are in the temple of Harsata Devi at Verával. The
second which was first mentioned by Colonel Tod, is dated Hijra 662,
Vikrama Samvat 1320, Valabhi Samvat 945, and Simha Samvat 151. The
third inscription, in the same temple on the face of the pedestal of
an image of Krishna represented as upholding the Govardhana hill,
bears date Valabhi S. 927. These facts prove that an era known as
the Valabhi era, which the inscriptions show began in A.D. 319,
was in use for about a hundred years in the twelfth and thirteenth
centuries. This may be accepted as the era of the Valabhi plates
which extended over two centuries. Further the great authority
(A.D. 1030) Alberuni gives Saka 241 that is A.D. 319 as the starting
point both of the 'era of Balah' and of what he calls the Guptakála
or the Gupta era. Beruni's accuracy is established by a comparison
of the Mandasor inscription and the Nepál inscription of Amsuvarman
which together prove the Gupta era started from A.D. 319. Though its
use by the powerful Valabhi dynasty caused the era to be generally
known by their name in Gujarát in certain localities the Gupta era
continued in use under its original name as in the Morbí copperplate
of Jáikadeva which bears date 588 "of the era of the Guptas." [276]

[Valabhi Administration, A.D. 500-700.] The Valabhi grants supply
information regarding the leading office bearers and the revenue
police and village administrators whose names generally occur in the
following order:

(1) Áyuktaka, } meaning appointed, apparently any superior
} official.
(2) Viniyuktaka }

(3) Drángika, apparently an officer in charge of a town, as dranga
means a town.

(4) Mahattara or Senior has the derivative meaning of high in
rank. Mhátára the Maráthi for an old man is the same word. In the
Valabhi plates mahattara seems to be generally used to mean the
accredited headman of a village, recognised as headman both by the
people of the village and by the Government.

(5) Chátabhata that is bhatas or sepoys for chitas or rogues, police
mounted and on foot, represent the modern police jamádárs haváldárs
and constables. The Kumárapála Charita mentions that Chátabhatas were
sent by Siddharája to apprehend the fugitive Kumárapála. One plate
records the grant of a village 'unenterable by chátabhatas.' [277]

(6) Dhruva fixed or permanent is the hereditary officer in charge
of the records and accounts of a village, the Taláti and Kulkarni of
modern times. One of the chief duties of the Dhruva was to see that
revenue farmers did not take more than the royal share. [278] The
name is still in use in Cutch where village accountants are called
Dhru and Dhruva. Dhru is also a common surname among Nágar Bráhmans
and Modh and other Vániás in Cutch Gujarát and Káthiáváda.

(7) Adhikaranika means the chief judicial magistrate or judge of
a place.

(8) Dandapásika literally 'holding the fetters or noose of punishment,'
is used both of the head police officer and of the hangman or
executioner.

(9) Chauroddharanika the thief-catcher. Of the two Indian ways of
catching thieves, one of setting a thief to catch a thief the other
the Pagi or tracking system, the second answers well in sandy Gujarát
and Káthiáváda where the Tracker or Pagi is one of the Bárábalute or
regular village servants.

(10) Rájastháníya, the foreign secretary, the officer who had to do
with other states and kingdoms rájasthánas. Some authorities take
rájastháníya to mean viceroy.

(11) Amátya minister and sometimes councillor is generally coupled
with kumára or prince.

(12) Anutpannádánasamudgráhaka the arrear-gatherer.

(13) Saulkika the superintendent of tolls or customs.

(14) Bhogika or Bhogoddharanika the collector of the Bhoga that is the
state share of the land produce taken in kind, as a rule one-sixth. The
term bhoga is still in use in Káthiáváda for the share, usually
one-sixth, which landholders receive from their cultivating tenants.

(15) Vartmapála the roadwatch were often mounted and stationed in
thánás or small roadside sheds. [279]

(16) Pratisaraka patrols night-guards or watchmen of fields and
villages. [280]

(17) Vishayapati division-lord probably corresponded to the present
subáh.

(18) Ráshtrapati the head of a district.

(19) Grámakúta the village headman.

[Territorial Divisions.] The plates show traces of four territorial
divisions: (1) Vishaya the largest corresponding to the modern
administrative Division: (2) Áhára or Áharaní that is collectorate
(from áhára a collection) corresponding to the modern district or
zillah: (3) Pathaka, of the road, a sub-division, the place named
and its surroundings: (4) Sthalí a petty division the place without
surroundings. [281]

[Land Assessment.] The district of Kaira and the province of Káthiáváda
to which the Valabhi grants chiefly refer appear to have had separate
systems of land assessment Kaira by yield Káthiáváda by area. Under the
Káthiáváda system the measurement was by pádávarta literally the space
between one foot and the other that is the modern kadam or pace. The
pace used in measuring land seems to have differed from the ordinary
pace as most of the Káthiáváda grants mention the bhúpádávarta or land
pace. The Kaira system of assessment was by yield the unit being the
pitaka or basketful, the grants describing fields as capable of growing
so many baskets of rice or barley (or as requiring so many baskets
of seed). As the grants always specify the Kaira basket a similar
system with a different sized basket seems to have been in use in other
parts of the country. Another detail which the plates preserve is that
each field had its name called after a guardian or from some tree or
plant. Among field names are Kotilaka, Atimana-kedára, Khanda-kedára,
Gargara-kshetra, Bhíma-kshetra, Khagali-kedára, Sami-kedára.

[Religion.] The state religion of the Valabhi kings was Saivism. Every
Valabhi copperplate hitherto found bears on its seal the figure of a
bull with under it the name of Bhatárka the founder of the dynasty
who was a Saiva. Except Dhruvasena I. (A.D. 526) who is called
Paramabhágavata or the great Vaishnava and his brother and successor
Dharapatta who is styled Paramádityabhakta or the great devotee of
the sun, and Guhasena, who in his grant of Sam. 248 calls himself
Paramopásaka or the great devotee of Buddha, all the Valabhi kings
are called Parama-máhesvara the great Saiva.

The grants to Buddhist viháras or monasteries of which there
are several seem special gifts to institutions founded by female
relatives of the granting kings. Most of the grants are to Bráhmans
who though performing Vaidik ceremonies probably as at present honoured
Saivism. This Saivism seems to have been of the old Pásupata school of
Nakulísa or Lakulísa as the chief shrine of Lakulísa was at Kárávana
the modern Kárván in the Gáikwár's territory fifteen miles south
of Baroda and eight miles north-east of Miyágám railway station
a most holy place till the time of the Vághelá king Arjunadeva in
the thirteenth century. [282] The special holiness attached to the
Narbadá in Saivism and to its pebbles as lingas is probably due to
the neighbourhood of this shrine of Kárván. The followers of the
Nakulísa-Pásupata school were strict devotees of Saivism, Nakulísa
the founder being regarded as an incarnation of Siva. The date of
the foundation of this school is not yet determined. It appears to
have been between the second and the fifth century A.D. Nakulísa had
four disciples Kusika, Gárgya, Kárusha, and Maitreya founders of four
branches which spread through the length and breadth of India. Though
no special representatives of this school remain, in spite of their
nominal allegiance to Sankaráchárya the Dasanámis or Atíts are in fact
Nakulísas in their discipline doctrines and habits--applying ashes
over the whole body, planting a linga over the grave of a buried Atít,
and possessing proprietary rights over Saiva temples. The Pásupatas
were ever ready to fight for their school and often helped and served
in the armies of kings who became their disciples. Till a century ago
these unpaid followers recruited the armies of India with celibates
firm and strong in fighting. It was apparently to gain these recruits
that so many of the old rulers of India became followers of the
Pásupata school. To secure their services the rulers had to pay them
special respect. The leaders of these fighting monks were regarded
as pontiffs like the Bappa-páda or Pontiff of the later Valabhi and
other kings. Thus among the later Valabhis Síláditya IV. is called
Bávapádánudhyáta and all subsequent Síládityas Bappapádánudhyáta both
titles meaning Worshipping at the feet of Báva or Bappa.

This Báva is the popular Prakrit form of the older Prakrit or
desí Bappa meaning Father or worshipful. Bappa is the original
of the Hindustáni and Gujaráti Bává father or elder; it is also a
special term for a head Gosávi or Atít or indeed for any recluse. The
epithet Bappa-pádánudhyáta, Bowing at the feet of Bappa, occurs in the
attributes of several Nepál kings, and in the case of king Vasantasena
appears the full phrase:

Parama-daivata-bappa-bhattáraka-mahárája-Srí-pádánudhyáta.

Falling at the illustrious feet of the great Mahárája Lord Bappa.

These Nepál kings were Saivas as they are called parama-máhesvara
in the text of the inscription and like the Valabhi seals their
seals bear a bull. It follows that the term Bappa was applied both
by the Valabhis and the Nepál kings to some one, who can hardly be
the same individual, unless he was their common overlord, which
the distance between the two countries and still more the fact
that his titles are the same as the titles of the Valabhi kings
make almost impossible. In these circumstances the most probable
explanation of the Bappa or Báva of these inscriptions is that it
was applied to Shaivite pontiffs or ecclesiastical dignitaries. The
attribute Parama-daivata The Great Divine prefixed to Bappa in the
inscription of Vasantasena confirms this view. That such royal titles
as Mahárájádhirája, Paramabhattáraka, and Paramesvara are ascribed
to Bappa is in agreement with the present use of Mahárája for all
priestly Bráhmans and recluses and of Bhattáraka for Digambara Jain
priests. Though specially associated with Saivas the title bappa is
applied also to Vaishnava dignitaries. That the term bappa was in
similar use among the Buddhists appears from the title of a Valabhi
vihára Bappapádíyavihára The monastery of the worshipful Bappa that
is Of the great teacher Sthiramati by whom it was built. [283]

[Origin of the Valabhis.] The tribe or race of Bhatárka the founder
of the Valabhi dynasty is doubtful. None of the numerous Valabhi
copperplates mentions the race of the founder. The Chalukya and
Ráshtrakúta copperplates are silent regarding the Valabhi dynasty. And
it is worthy of note that the Gehlots and Gohils, who are descended
from the Valabhis, take their name not from their race but from king
Guha or Guhasena (A.D. 559-567) the fourth ruler and apparently the
first great sovereign among the Valabhis. These considerations make it
probable that Bhatárka belonged to some low or stranger tribe. Though
the evidence falls short of proof the probability seems strong that
Bhatárka belonged to the Gurjara tribe, and that it was the supremacy
of him and his descendants which gave rise to the name Gurjjara-rátra
the country of the Gurjjaras, a name used at first by outsiders
and afterwards adopted by the people of Gujarát. Except Bhatárka
and his powerful dynasty no kings occur of sufficient importance to
have given their name to the great province of Gujarát. Against their
Gurjara origin it may be urged that the Chinese traveller Hiuen Tsiang
(A.D. 640) calls the king of Valabhi a Kshatriya. Still Hiuen Tsiang's
remark was made more than a century after the establishment of the
dynasty when their rise to power and influence had made it possible
for them to ennoble themselves by calling themselves Kshatriyas
and tracing their lineage to Puránic heroes. That such ennobling
was not only possible but common is beyond question. Many so-called
Rájput families in Gujarát and Káthiáváda can be traced to low or
stranger tribes. The early kings of Nándipurí or Nándod (A.D. 450)
call themselves Gurjjaras and the later members of the same dynasty
trace their lineage to the Mahábhárata hero Karna. Again two of the
Nándod Gurjjaras Dadda II. and Jayabhata II. helped the Valabhis
under circumstances which suggest that the bond of sympathy may have
been their common origin. The present chiefs of Nándod derive their
lineage from Karna and call themselves Gohils of the same stock as
the Bhávnagar Gohils who admittedly belong to the Valabhi stock. This
supports the theory that the Gurjjaras and the Valabhis had a common
origin, and that the Gurjjaras were a branch of and tributary to the
Valabhis. This would explain how the Valabhis came to make grants in
Broach at the time when the Gurjjaras ruled there. It would further
explain that the Gurjjaras were called sámantas or feudatories because
they were under the overlordship of the Valabhis. [284]

[History.] The preceding chapter shows that except Chandragupta
(A.D. 410) Kumáragupta (A.D. 416) and Skandagupta (A.D. 456)
none of the Guptas have left any trace of supremacy in Gujarát
and Káthiáváda. Of what happened in Gujarát during the forty years
after Gupta 150 (A.D. 469), when the reign of Skandagupta came to
an end nothing is known or is likely to be discovered from Indian
sources. The blank of forty years to the founder Bhatárka (A.D. 509)
or more correctly of sixty years to Dhruvasena (A.D. 526) the first
Valabhi king probably corresponds with the ascendancy of some foreign
dynasty or tribe. All trace of this tribe has according to custom been
blotted out of the Sanskrit and other Hindu records. At the same time
it is remarkable that the fifty years ending about A.D. 525 correspond
closely with the ascendancy in north and north-west India of the great
tribe of Ephthalites or White Huns. As has been shown in the Gupta
Chapter, by A.D. 470 or 480, the White Huns seem to have been powerful
if not supreme in Upper India. In the beginning of the sixth century,
perhaps about A.D. 520, Cosmas Indikopleustes describes the north of
India and the west coast as far south as Kalliena that is Kalyán near
Bombay as under the Huns whose king was Gollas. [285] Not many years
later (A.D. 530) the Hun power in Central India suffered defeat and
about the same time a new dynasty arose in south-east Káthiáváda.

[First Valabhi Grant, A.D. 526.] The first trace of the new power,
the earliest Valabhi grant, is that of Dhruvasena in the Valabhi or
Gupta year 207 (A.D. 526). In this grant Dhruvasena is described as the
third son of the Senápati or general Bhatárka. Of Senápati Bhatárka
neither copperplate nor inscription has been found. Certain coins
which General Cunningham Arch. Surv. Rept. IX. Pl. V. has ascribed
to Bhatárka have on the obverse a bust, as on the western coins of
Kumáragupta, and on the reverse the Saiva trident, and round the
trident the somewhat doubtful legend in Gupta characters:

Rájño Mahákshatri Paramádityabhakta Srí Sarvva-bhattárakasa.

Of the king the great Kshatri, great devotee of the sun, the
illustrious Sarvva-bhattáraka.

This Sarvva seems to have been a Ráshtrakúta or Gurjjara king. His
coins were continued so long in use and were so often copied that in
the end upright strokes took the place of letters. That these coins
did not belong to the founder of the Valabhi dynasty appears not only
from the difference of name between Bhattáraka and Bhatárka but because
the coiner was a king and the founder of the Valabhis a general.

[Senápati Bhatárka, A.D. 509-520 ?] Of the kingdom which Senápati
Bhatárka overthrew the following details are given in one of his
epithets in Valabhi copperplates: 'Who obtained glory by dealing
hundreds of blows on the large and very mighty armies of the
Maitrakas, who by [The Maitrakas, A.D. 470-509.] force had subdued
their enemies.' As regards these Maitrakas it is to be noted that
the name Maitraka means Solar. The sound of the compound epithet
Maitraka-amitra that is Maitraka-enemy used in the inscription makes
it probable that the usual form Mihira or solar was rejected in favour
of Maitraka which also means solar to secure the necessary assonance
with amitra or enemy. The form Mihira solar seems a Hinduizing or
meaning-making of the northern tribal name Medh or Mehr, the Mehrs
being a tribe which at one time seem to have held sway over the
whole of Káthiáváda and which are still found in strength near the
Barda hills in the south-west of Káthiáváda. [286] The Jethvá chiefs
of Porbandar who were formerly powerful rulers are almost certainly
of the Mehr tribe. They are still called Mehr kings and the Mehrs of
Káthiáváda regard them as their leaders and at the call of their Head
are ready to fight for him. The chief of Mehr traditions describes
the fights of their founder Makaradhvaja with one Mayúradhvaja. This
tradition seems to embody the memory of an historical struggle. The
makara or fish is the tribal badge of the Mehrs and is marked on a
Morbí copperplate dated A.D. 904 (G. 585) and on the forged Dhíníki
grant of the Mehr king Jáíkádeva. On the other hand Mayúradhvaja
or peacock-bannered would be the name of the Guptas beginning with
Chandragupta who ruled in Gujarát (A.D. 396-416) and whose coins have a
peacock on the reverse. The tradition would thus be a recollection of
the struggle between the Mehrs and Guptas in which about A.D. 470 the
Guptas were defeated. The Mehrs seem to have been a northern tribe,
who, the evidence of place names seems to show, passed south through
Western Rájputána, Jaslo, Ajo, Bad, and Koml leaders of this tribe
giving their names to the settlements of Jesalmir, Ajmir, Badmer, and
Komalmer. The resemblance of name and the nearness of dates suggest
a connection between the Mehrs and the great Panjáb conqueror of the
Guptas Mihirakula (A.D. 512-540 ?). If not themselves Húnas the Mehrs
may have joined the conquering armies of the Húnas and passing south
with the Húnas may have won a settlement in Káthiáváda as the Káthis
and Jhádejás settled about 300 years later. After Senápati Bhatárka's
conquests in the south of the Peninsula the Mehrs seem to have retired
to the north of Káthiáváda.

The above account of the founder of the Valabhis accepts the received
opinion that he was the Senápati or General of the Guptas. The two
chief points in support of this view are that the Valabhis adopted
both the Gupta era and the Gupta currency. Still it is to be noted
that this adoption of a previous era and currency by no means implies
any connection with the former rulers. [287] Both the Gurjjaras
(A.D. 580) and the Chálukyas (A.D. 642) adopted the existing era of
the Traikútakas (A.D. 248-9) while as regards currency the practice
of continuing the existing type is by no means uncommon. [288] In
these circumstances, and seeing that certain of the earlier Valabhi
inscriptions refer to an overlord who can hardly have been a Gupta,
the identification of the king to whom the original Senápati owed
allegiance must be admitted to be doubtful.

All known copperplates down to those of Dharasena (A.D. 579 the
great grandson of Bhatárka) give a complete genealogy from Bhatárka
to Dharasena. Later copperplates omit all mention of any descendants
but those in the main line.

[Senápati's Sons.] Senápati Bhatárka had four sons, (1) Dharasena
(2) Dronasimha (3) Dhruvasena and (4) Dharapatta. Of Dharasena the
first son no record has been traced. His name first appears in the
copperplates of his brother Dhruvasena where like his father he is
called Senápati. Similarly of the second son Dronasimha no record
exists except in the copperplates of his brother Dhruvasena. In
these copperplates unlike his father and elder brother Dhruvasena is
called Mahárája and is mentioned as 'invested with royal authority
in person by the great lord, the lord of the wide extent of the whole
world.' This great lord or paramasvámi could not have been his father
Bhatárka. Probably he was the king to whom Bhatárka owed allegiance. It
is not clear where Dronasimha was installed king probably it was in
Káthiáváda from the south-east of which his father and elder brother
had driven back the Mehrs or Maitrakas. [289]

[Dhruvasena I. A.D. 526-535.] The third son Dhruvasena is the first
of several Valabhis of that name. Three copperplates of his remain:
The Kukad grant dated Gupta 207 (A.D. 526), [290] an unpublished
grant found in Junágadh dated Gupta 210 (A.D. 529), and the Valeh
grant dated Gupta 216 (A.D. 535). [291] One of Dhruvasena's attributes
Parama-bhattáraka-pádánudhyáta, Bowing at the feet of the great lord,
apparently applies to the same paramount sovereign who installed his
brother Dronasimha. The paramount lord can hardly be Dhruvasena's
father as his father is either called Bhatárka without the parama or
more commonly Senápati that is general. Dhruvasena's other political
attributes are Mahárája Great King or Mahásúmanta Great Chief, the
usual titles of a petty feudatory king. In the A.D. 535 plates he
has the further attributes of Mahápratíhára the great doorkeeper
or chamberlain, Mahádandanáyaka [292] the great magistrate, and
Máhákártakritika (?) or great general, titles which seem to show
he still served some overlord. It is not clear whether Dhruvasena
succeeded his brother Dronasimha or was a separate contemporary
ruler. The absence of 'falling at the feet of' or other successional
phrase and the use of the epithet 'serving at the feet of' the great
lord seem to show that his power was distinct from his brothers. In any
case Dhruvasena is the first of the family who has a clear connection
with Valabhi from which the grants of A.D. 526 and 529 are dated.

In these grants Dhruvasena's father Bhatárka and his elder brothers
are described as 'great Máhesvaras' that is followers of Siva,
while Dhruvasena himself is called Paramabhágavata the great
Vaishnava. It is worthy of note, as stated in the A.D. 535 grant,
that his niece Duddá (or Lulá?) was a Buddhist and had dedicated a
Buddhist monastery at Valabhi. The latest known date of Dhruvasena
is A.D. 535 (G. 216). Whether Dharapatta or Dharapatta's son Guhasena
succeeded is doubtful. That Dharapatta is styled Mahárája and that a
twenty-four years' gap occurs between the latest grant of Dhruvasena
and A.D. 559 the earliest grant of Guhasena favour the succession of
Dharapatta. On the other hand in the A.D. 559 grant all Guhasena's
sins are said to be cleansed by falling at the feet of, that is,
by succeeding, Dhruvasena. It is possible that Dharapatta may have
ruled for some years and Dhruvasena again risen to power.

[Guhasena, A.D. 539-569.] Of Guhasena (A.D. 539?-569) three plates
and a fragment of an inscription remain. Two of the grants are from
Valeh dated A.D. 559 and 565 (G. 240 and 246) [293]: the third is
from Bhávnagar dated A.D. 567 (G. 248). [294] The inscription is on
an earthen pot found at Valeh and dated A.D. 566 (G. 247). [295] In
all the later Valabhi plates the genealogy begins with Guhasena who
seems to have been the first great ruler of his dynasty. Guhasena is
a Sanskrit name meaning Whose army is like that of Kárttika-svámi:
his popular name was probably Guhila. It appears probable that the
Gohil and Gehlot Rájput chiefs of Káthiáváda and Rájputána, who are
believed to be descendants of the Valabhis, take their name from
Guhasena or Guha, the form Gehloti or Gehlot, Guhila-utta, being
a corruption of Guhilaputra or descendants of Guhila, a name which
occurs in old Rájput records. [296] This lends support to the view
that Guhasena was believed to be the first king of the dynasty. Like
his predecessors he is called Mahárája or great king. In one grant he
is called the great Saiva and in another the great Buddhist devotee
(paramopásaka), while he grants villages to the Buddhist monastery of
his paternal aunt's daughter Duddá. Though a Saivite Guhasena, like
most of his predecessors, tolerated and even encouraged Buddhism. His
minister of peace and war is named Skandabhata.

The beginning of Guhasena's reign is uncertain. Probably it was not
earlier than A.D. 539 (G. 220). His latest known date is A.D. 567
(G. 248) but he may have reigned two years longer.

[Dharasena II. A.D. 569-589.] About A.D. 569 (G. 250) Guhasena was
succeeded by his son Dharasena II. Five of his grants remain, three
dated A.D. 571 (G. 252), [297] the fourth dated A.D. 588 (G. 269),
[298] and the fifth dated A.D. 589 (G. 270). [299] In the first three
grants Dharasena is called Mahárája or great king; in the two later
grants is added the title Mahásámanta Great Feudatory, seeming to show
that in the latter part of his reign Dharasena had to acknowledge as
overlord some one whose power had greatly increased. [300] All his
copperplates style Dharasena II. Parama-máhesvara Great Saiva. A gap
of eighteen years occurs between A.D. 589 Dharasena's latest grant
and A.D. 607 the earliest grant of his son Síláditya.

[Síláditya I. A.D. 594-609.] Dharasena II. was succeeded by his son
Síláditya I. who is also called Dharmáditya or the sun of religion.

The Satruñjaya Máhátmya has a prophetic account of one Síláditya
who will be a propagator of religion in Vikrama Samvat 477
(A.D. 420). This Máhátmya is comparatively modern and is not worthy
of much trust. Vikrama Samvat 477 would be A.D. 420 when no Valabhi
kingdom was established and no Síláditya can have flourished. If the
date 477 has been rightly preserved, and it be taken in the Saka era
it would correspond with Gupta 237 or A.D. 556, that is thirty to
forty years before Síláditya's reign. Although no reliance can be
placed on the date still his second name Dharmáditya gives support
to his identification with the Síláditya of the Máhátmya.

His grants like many of his predecessors style Síláditya a great
devotee of Siva. Still that two of his three known grants were made
to Buddhist monks shows that he tolerated and respected Buddhism. The
writer of one of the grants is mentioned as the minister of peace
and war Chandrabhatti; the Dútaka or causer of the gift in two of
the Buddhist grants is Bhatta Ádityayasas apparently some military
officer. The third grant, to a temple of Siva, has for its Dútaka
the illustrious Kharagraha apparently the brother and successor of
the king.

Síláditya's reign probably began about A.D. 594 (G. 275). His latest
grant is dated A.D. 609 (G. 290). [301]

[Kharagraha, A.D. 610-615.] Síláditya was succeeded by his brother
Kharagraha, of whom no record has been traced. Kharagraha seems to
have been invested with sovereignty by his brother Síláditya who
probably retired from the world. Kharagraha is mentioned as a great
devotee of Siva.

[Dharasena III. A.D. 615-620.] Kharagraha was succeeded by his son
Dharasena III. of whom no record remains.

[Dhruvasena II. (Báláditya) A.D. 620-640.] Dharasena III. was succeeded
by his younger brother Dhruvasena II. also called Báláditya or the
rising sun. A grant of his is dated A.D. 629 (G. 310). [302] As
observed before, Dhruvasena is probably a Sanskritised form of the
popular but meaningless Dhruvapatta which is probably the original of
Hiuen Tsiang's T'u-lu-h'o-po-tu, as A.D. 629 the date of his grant
is about eleven years before the time when (640) Hiuen Tsiang is
calculated to have been in Málwa if not actually at Valabhi. If one of
Dhruvasena's poetic attributes is not mere hyperbole, he made conquests
and spread the power of Valabhi. On the other hand the Navsári grant of
Jayabhata III. (A.D. 706-734) the Gurjjara king of Broach states that
Dadda II. of Broach (A.D. 620-650) protected the king of Valabhi who
had been defeated by the great Srí Harshadeva (A.D. 607-648) of Kanauj.

[Dharasena IV. A.D. 640-649.] Dhruvasena II. was succeeded by
his son Dharasena IV. perhaps the most powerful and independent
of the Valabhis. A copperplate dated A.D. 649 (G. 330) styles him
Parama-bhattáraka, Mahárájádhirája, Paramesvara, Chakravartin Great
Lord, King of Kings, Great Ruler, Universal Sovereign. Dharasena
IV.'s successors continue the title of Mahárájádhirája or great ruler,
but none is called Chakravartin or universal sovereign a title which
implies numerous conquests and widespread power.

Two of Dharasena IV.'s grants remain, one dated A.D. 645 (G. 326)
the other A.D. 649 (G. 330). A grant of his father Dhruvasena dated
A.D. 634 (G. 315) and an unpublished copperplate in the possession of
the chief of Morbí belonging to his successor Dhruvasena III. dated
A.D. 651 (G. 332) prove that Dharasena's reign did not last more than
seventeen years. The well known Sanskrit poem Bhattikávya seems to
have been composed in the reign of this king as at the end of his
work the author says it was written at Valabhi protected (governed)
by the king the illustrious Dharasena. [303] The author's application
to Dharasena of the title Narendra Lord of Men is a further proof of
his great power.

[Dhruvasena III. A.D. 650-656.] Dharasena IV. was not succeeded by
his son but by Dhruvasena the son of Derabhata the son of Dharasena
IV.'s paternal grand-uncle. Derabhata appears not to have been ruler
of Valabhi itself but of some district in the south of the Valabhi
territory. His epithets describe him as like the royal sage Agastya
spreading to the south, and as the lord of the earth which has for its
two breasts the Sahya and Vindhya hills. This description may apply
to part of the province south of Kaira where the Sahyádri and Vindhya
mountains may be said to unite. In the absence of a male heir in the
direct line, Derabhata's son Dhruvasena appears to have succeeded
to the throne of Valabhi. The only known copperplate of Dhruvasena
III.'s, dated A.D. 651 (G. 332), records the grant of the village of
Pedhapadra in Vanthali, the modern Vanthali in the Navánagar State of
North Káthiáváda. A copperplate of his elder brother and successor
Kharagraha dated A.D. 656 (G. 337) shows that Dhruvasena's reign
cannot have lasted over six years.

[Kharagraha, A.D. 656-665.] The less than usually complimentary and
respectful reference to Dhruvasena III. in the attributes of Kharagraha
suggests that Kharagraha took the kingdom by force from his younger
brother as the rightful successor of his father. At all events the
succession of Kharagraha to Dhruvasena was not in the usual peaceful
manner. Kharagraha's grant dated A.D. 656 (G. 337) is written by the
Divirapati or Chief Secretary and minister of peace and war Anahilla
son of Skandabhata. [304] The Dútaka or causer of the gift was the
Pramátri or survey officer Sríná.

[Síláditya III. A.D. 666-675.] Kharagraha was succeeded by Síláditya
III. son of Kharagraha's elder brother Síláditya II. Síláditya
II. seems not to have ruled at Valabhi but like Derabhata to have been
governor of Southern Valabhi, as he is mentioned out of the order
of succession and with the title Lord of the Earth containing the
Vindhya mountain. Three grants of Síláditya III. remain, two dated
A.D. 666 (G. 346) [305] and the third dated A.D. 671 (G. 352). [306]
He is called Parama-bhattáraka Great Lord, Mahárájádhirája Chief King
among Great Kings, and Paramesvara Great Ruler. These titles continue
to be applied to all subsequent Valabhi kings. Even the name Síláditya
is repeated though each king must have had some personal name.

[Síláditya IV. A.D. 691.] Síláditya III. was succeeded by his son
Síláditya IV. of whom one grant dated A.D. 691 (G. 372) remains. The
officer who prepared the grant is mentioned as the general Divirapati
Srí Haragana the son of Bappa Bhogika. The Dútaka or gift-causer is
the prince Kharagraha, which may perhaps be the personal name of the
next king Síláditya V.

[Síláditya V. A.D. 722.] Of Síláditya V. the son and successor of
Síláditya IV. two grants dated A.D. 722 (G. 403) both from Gondal
remain. Both record grants to the same person. The writer of both
was general Gillaka son of Buddhabhatta, and the gift-causer of both
prince Síláditya.

[Síláditya VI. A.D. 760.] Of Síláditya VI. the son and successor of
the last, one grant dated A.D. 760 (G. 441) remains. The grantee is
an Atharvavedi Bráhman. The writer is Sasyagupta son of Emapatha and
the gift-causer is Gánjasáti Srí Jajjar (or Jajjir).

[Síláditya VII. A.D. 766.] Of Síláditya VII. the son and successor of
the last, who is also called Dhrúbhata (Sk. Dhruvabhata), one grant
dated A.D. 766 (G. 447) remains.

[Valabhi Family Tree.] The following is the genealogy of the Valabhi
Dynasty:

VALABHI FAMILY TREE, A.D. 509-766.

A.D. 509.
(Gupta 190?).
|
------------------------------------------
| | | |
Dharasena I. Dronasimha. Dhruvasena I. Dharapatta.
A.D. 526. |
(Gupta 207). |
Guhasena
A.D. 559, 565, 567,
(Gupta 240, 246, 248).
|
Dharasena II.
A.D. 571, 588, 589
(Gupta 252, 269, 270).
|
----------------+-----------------
| |
Síláditya I. Kharagraha I.
or Dharmáditya I. |
A.D. 605, 609 (Gupta 286, 290). |
| ----------+-----
| | |
| Dharasena III. Dhruvasena II.
Derabhata. or Báláditya,
| A.D. 629 (Gupta 310).
------------------------------- |
| | | |
Síláditya II. Kharagraha II. Dhruvasena III. Dharasena IV.
| or Dharmáditya II. A.D. 651 (Gupta 332). A.D. 645, 649,
| A.D. 656 (Gupta 337). (Gupta 326, 330).
|
Síláditya III.
A.D. 671 (Gupta 352).
|
Síláditya IV.
A.D. 691, 698
(Gupta 372 & 379).
|
Síláditya V.
A.D. 722 (Gupta 403).
|
Síláditya VI.
A.D. 760 (Gupta 441).
|
Síláditya VII.
or Dhrúbhata,
A.D. 766 (Gupta 447).

[The Fall of Valabhi, A.D. 750-770.] Of the overthrow of Valabhi
many explanations have been offered. [307] The only explanation in
agreement with the copperplate evidence that a Síláditya was ruling at
Valabhi as late as A.D. 766 (Val. Sam. 447) [308] is the Hindu account
preserved by Alberuni (A.D. 1030) [309] that soon after the Sindh
capital Mansúra was founded, say A.D. 750-770, Ranka a disaffected
subject of the era-making Valabhi, with presents of money persuaded
the Arab lord of Mansúra to send a naval expedition against the king
of Valabhi. In a night attack king Valabha was killed and his people
and town were destroyed. Alberuni adds: Men say that still in our
time such traces are left in that country as are found in places
wasted by an unexpected attack. [310] For this expedition against
Valabhi Alberuni gives no date. But as Mansúra was not founded till
A.D. 750 [311] and as the latest Valabhi copperplate is A.D. 766 the
expedition must have taken place between A.D. 750 and 770. In support
of the Hindu tradition of an expedition from Mansúra against Valabhi
between A.D. 750 and 770 it is to be noted that the Arab historians
of Sindh record that in A.D. 758 (H. 140) the Khalif Mansúr sent Amru
bin Jamal with a fleet of barks to the coast of Barada. [312] Twenty
years later A.D. 776 (H. 160) a second expedition succeeded in taking
the town, but, as sickness broke out, they had to return. The question
remains should the word, which in these extracts Elliot reads Barada,
be read Balaba. The lax rules of Arab cursive writing would cause
little difficulty in adopting the reading Balaba. [313] Further it is
hard to believe that Valabhi, though to some extent sheltered by its
distance from the coast and probably a place of less importance than
its chroniclers describe, should be unknown to the Arab raiders of the
seventh and eighth centuries and after its fall be known to Alberuni in
the eleventh century. At the same time, as during the eighth century
there was, or at least as there may have been, [314] a town Barada
on the south-west coast of Káthiáváda the identification of the raids
against Barada with the traditional expedition against Balaba though
perhaps probable cannot be considered certain. Further the statement
of the Sindh historians [315] that at this time the Sindh Arabs also
made a naval expedition against Kandahár seems in agreement with the
traditional account in Tod that after the destruction of Valabhi the
rulers retired to a fort near Cambay from which after a few years
they were driven. [316] If this fort is the Kandahár of the Sindh
writers and Gandhár on the Broach coast about twenty miles south of
Cambay, identifications which are in agreement with other passages,
the Arab and Rájput accounts would fairly agree. [317]

[The Importance of Valabhi.] The discovery of its lost site; the
natural but mistaken identification of its rulers with the famous
eighth and ninth century (A.D. 753-972) Balharas of Málkhet in the
East Dakhan; [318] the tracing to Valabhi of the Rána of Udepur in
Mewád the head of the Sesodias or Gohils the most exalted of Hindu
families [319]; and in later times the wealth of Valabhi copperplates
have combined to make the Valabhis one of the best known of Gujarát
dynasties. Except the complete genealogy, covering the 250 years
from the beginning of the sixth to the middle of the eighth century,
little is known of Valabhi or its chiefs. The origin of the city and
of its rulers, the extent of their sway, and the cause and date of
their overthrow are all uncertain. The unfitness of the site, the
want of reservoirs or other stone remains, the uncertainty when its
rulers gained an independent position, the fact that only one of them
claimed the title Chakravarti or All Ruler are hardly consistent with
any far-reaching authority. Add to this the continuance of Maitraka
or Mer power in North Káthiáváda, the separateness though perhaps
dependence of Sauráshtra even in the time of Valabhi's greatest power,
[320] the rare mention of Valabhi in contemporary Gujarát grants,
[321] and the absence of trustworthy reference in the accounts of the
Arab raids of the seventh or eighth centuries tend to raise a doubt
whether, except perhaps during the ten years ending 650, Valabhi was
ever of more than local importance.

[Valabhi and the Gehlots.] In connection with the pride of the Sesodias
or Gohils of Mewád in their Valabhi origin [322] the question who
were the Valabhis has a special interest. The text shows that Pandit
Bhagvánlál was of opinion the Valabhis were Gurjjaras. The text also
notes that the Pandit believed they reached south-east Káthiáváda
by sea from near Broach and that if they did not come to Broach from
Málwa at least the early rulers obtained (A.D. 520 and 526) investiture
from the Málwa kings. Apart from the doubtful evidence of an early
second to fifth century Bála or Valabhi three considerations weigh
against the theory that the Valabhis entered Gujarát from Málwa in
the sixth century. First their acceptance of the Gupta era and of
the Gupta currency raises the presumption that the Valabhis were
in Káthiáváda during Gupta ascendancy (A.D. 440-480): Second that
the Sesodias trace their pedigree through Valabhi to an earlier
settlement at Dhánk in south-west Káthiáváda and that the Válas of
Dhánk still hold the place of heads of the Válas of Káthiáváda: And
Third that both Sesodias and Válas trace their origin to Kanaksen
a second century North Indian immigrant into Káthiáváda combine to
raise the presumption that the Válas were in Káthiáváda before the
historical founding of Valabhi in A.D. 526 [323] and that the city
took its name from its founders the Válas or Bálas.

Whether or not the ancestors of the Gohils and Válas were settled in
Káthiáváda before the establishment of Valabhi about A.D. 526 several
considerations bear out the correctness of the Rájput traditions
and the Jain records that the Gohils or Sesodias of Mewád came from
Bála or Valabhi in Káthiáváda. Such a withdrawal from the coast,
the result of the terror of Arab raids, is in agreement with the fact
that from about the middle of the eighth century the rulers of Gujarát
established an inland capital at Anahilaváda (A.D. 746). [324] It is
further in agreement with the establishment by the Gohil refugees
of a town Balli in Mewád; with the continuance as late as A.D. 968
(S. 1024) by the Sesodia chief of the Valabhi title Síláditya or Sail
[325]; and with the peculiar Valabhi blend of Sun and Siva worship
still to be found in Udepur. [326] The question remains how far
can the half-poetic accounts of the Sesodias be reconciled with
a date for the fall of Valabhi so late as A.D. 766. The mythical
wanderings, the caveborn Guha, and his rule at Idar can be easily
spared. The name Gehlot which the Sesodias trace to the caveborn
Guha may as the Bhávnagar Gehlots hold have its origin in Guhasena
(A.D. 559-567) perhaps the first Valabhi chief of more than local
distinction. [327] Tod [328] fixes the first historical date in the
Sesodia family history at A.D. 720 or 728 the ousting of the Mori or
Maurya of Chitor by Bappa or Sail. An inscription near Chitor shows
the Mori in power in Chitor as late as A.D. 714 (S. 770). [329]
By counting back nine generations from Sakti Kumára the tenth from
Bappa whose date is A.D. 1038 Tod fixes A.D. 720-728 as the date when
the Gohils succeeded the Moris. But the sufficient average allowance
of twenty years for each reign would bring Bappa to A.D. 770 or 780
a date in agreement with a fall of Valabhi between A.D. 760 and 770,
as well as with the statement of Abul Fazl, who, writing in A.D. 1590,
says the Rána's family had been in Mewád for about 800 years. [330]

[The Válas of Káthiáváda.] The Arab accounts of the surprise-attack
and of the failure of the invaders to make a settlement agree with the
local and Rájputána traditions that a branch of the Valabhi family
continued to rule at Valeh until its conquest by Múla Rája Solankhi
in A.D. 950. [331] Though their bards favour the explanation of Vála
from the Gujaráti valvu return or the Persian válah [332] noble the
family claim to be of the old Valabhi stock. They still have the
tradition they were driven out by the Musalmáns, they still keep up
the family name of Selait or Síláditya. [333]

The local tradition regarding the settlement of the Válas in the
Balakshetra south of Valabhi is that it took place after the capture of
Valabhi by Múla Rája Solankhi (A.D. 950). [334] If, as may perhaps be
accepted, the present Válas represent the rulers of Valabhi it seems
to follow the Válas were the overlords of Balakshetra at least from
the time of the historical prosperity of Valabhi (A.D. 526-680). The
traditions of the Bábriás who held the east of Sorath show that when
they arrived (A.D. 1200-1250) the Vála Rájputs were in possession
and suggest that the lands of the Válas originally stretched as far
west as Diu. [335] That the Válas held central Káthiáváda is shown by
their possession of the old capital Vanthali nine miles south-west
of Junágadh and by (about A.D. 850) their transfer of that town to
the Chúdásamás. [336] Dhánk, about twenty-five miles north-west of
Junágadh, was apparently held by the Válas under the Jetwas when
(A.D. 800-1200?) Ghumli or Bhumli was the capital of south-west
Káthiáváda. According to Jetwa accounts the Válas were newcomers whom
the Jetwas allowed to settle at Dhánk. [337] But as the Jetwas are
not among the earliest settlers in Káthiáváda it seems more probable
that, like the Chúdásamás at Vanthali, the Jetwas found the Válas
in possession. The close connection of the Válas with the earlier
waves of Káthis is admitted. [338] Considering that the present (1881)
total of Káthiáváda Vála Rájputs is about 900 against about 9000 Vála
Káthis, the Válas, [339] since their loss of power, seem either to
have passed into unnoticeable subdivisions of other Rájput tribes or
to have fallen to the position of Káthis.

[The Válas and Káthis.] If from the first and not solely since the
fall of Valabhi the Válas have been associated with the Káthis it
seems best to suppose they held to the Káthis a position like that
of the Jetwas to their followers the Mers. According to Tod [340]
both Válas and Káthis claim the title Tata Multánka Rai Lords of
Tata and Multán. The accounts of the different sackings of Valabhi
are too confused and the traces of an earlier settlement too scanty
and doubtful to justify any attempt to carry back Valabhi and the
Válas beyond the Maitraka overthrow of Gupta power in Káthiáváda
(A.D. 470-480). The boast that Bhatárka, the reputed founder of the
house of Valabhi (A.D. 509), had obtained glory by dealing hundreds
of blows on the large and very mighty armies of the Maitrakas who
by force had subdued their enemies, together with the fact that the
Valabhis did and the Maitrakas did not adopt the Gupta era and currency
seem to show the Válas were settled in Káthiáváda at an earlier date
than the Mers and Jetwas. That is, if the identification is correct,
the Válas and Káthis were in Káthiáváda before the first wave of the
White Huns approached. It has been noticed above under Skandagupta
that the enemies, or some of the enemies, with whom, in the early
years of his reign A.D. 452-454, Skandagupta had so fierce a struggle
were still in A.D. 456 a source of anxiety and required the control
of a specially able viceroy at Junágadh. Since no trace of the Káthis
appears in Káthiáváda legends or traditions before the fifth century
the suggestion may be offered that under Vála or Bála leadership
the Káthis were among the enemies who on the death of Kumáragupta
(A.D. 454) seized the Gupta possessions in Káthiáváda. Both Válas
and Káthis would then be northerners driven south from Multán and
South Sindh by the movements of tribes displaced by the advance of
the Ephthalites or White Huns (A.D. 440-450) upon the earlier North
Indian and border settlements of the Yuan-Yuan or Avars. [341]

[Descent from Kanaksen, A.D. 150.] The Sesodia or Gohil tradition
is that the founder of the Válas was Kanaksen, who, in the second
century after Christ, from North India established his power at
Virát or Dholka in North Gujarát and at Dhánk in Káthiáváda. [342]
This tradition, which according to Tod [343] is supported by at
least ten genealogical lists derived from distinct sources, seems
a reminiscence of some connection between the early Válas and the
Kshatrapas of Junágadh with the family of the great Kushán emperor
Kanishka (A.D. 78-98). Whether this high ancestry belongs of right
to the Válas and Gohils or whether it has been won for them by their
bards nothing in the records of Káthiáváda is likely to be able to
prove. Besides by the Válas Kanaksen is claimed as an ancestor by the
Chávadás of Okhámandal as the founder of Kanakapurí and as reigning in
Krishna's throne in Dwárká. [344]. In support of the form Kanaka for
Kanishka is the doubtful Kanaka-Sakas or Kanishka-Sakas of Varáhamihira
(A.D. 580). [345] The form Kanik is also used by Alberuni [346] for the
famous Vihára or monastery at Pesháwar of whose founder Kanak Alberuni
retails many widespread legends. Tod [347] says; 'If the traditional
date (A.D. 144) of Kanaksen's arrival in Káthiáváda had been only a
little earlier it would have fitted well with Wilson's Kanishka of the
Rája Tarangini.' Information brought to light since Tod's time shows
that hardly any date could fit better than A.D. 144 for some member
of the Kushán family, possibly a grandson of the great Kanishka,
to make a settlement in Gujarát and Káthiáváda. The date agrees
closely with the revolt against Vasudeva (A.D. 123-150), the second
in succession from Kanishka, raised by the Panjáb Yaudheyas, whom the
great Gujarát Kshatrapa Rudradáman (A.D. 143-158), the introducer of
Kanishka's (A.D. 78) era into Gujarát, humbled. The tradition calls
Kanaksen Kosalaputra and brings him from Lohkot in North India. [348]
Kosala has been explained as Oudh and Lohkot as Lahore, but as Kanak
came from the north not from the north-east an original Kushána-putra
or Son of the Kushán may be the true form. Similarly Lohkot cannot be
Lahore. It may be Alberuni's Lauhavar or Lahur in the Káshmir uplands
one of the main centres of Kushán power. [349]

[Mewád and the Persians.] One further point requires notice, the
traditional connection between Valabhi and the Ránás of Mewád with the
Sassanian kings of Persia (A.D. 250-650). In support of the tradition
Abul Fazl (A.D. 1590) says the Ránás of Mewád consider themselves
descendants of the Sassanian Naushirván (A.D. 531-579) and Tod quotes
fuller details from the Persian history Maaser-al-Umra. [350] No
evidence seems to support a direct connection with Naushirván. [351]
At the same time marriage between the Valabhi chief and Maha Banu
the fugitive daughter of Yezdigerd the last Sassanian (A.D. 651)
is not impossible. [352] And the remaining suggestion that the
link may be Naushirván's son Naushizád who fled from his father in
A.D. 570 receives support in the statement of Procopius [353] that
Naushizád found shelter at Belapatan in Khuzistán perhaps Balapatan in
Gurjaristán. As these suggestions are unsupported by direct evidence,
it seems best to look for the source of the legend in the fire symbols
in use on Káthiáváda and Mewád coins. These fire symbols, though in the
main Indo-Skythian, betray from about the sixth century a more direct
Sassanian influence. The use of similar coins coupled with their common
sun worship seems sufficient to explain how the Agnikulas and other
Káthiáváda and Mewád Rájputs came to believe in some family connection
between their chiefs and the fireworshipping kings of Persia. [354]

[Válas.] Can the Vála traditions of previous northern settlements be
supported either by early Hindu inscriptions or from living traces in
the present population of Northern India? The convenient and elaborate
tribe and surname lists in the Census Report of the Panjáb, and vaguer
information from Rájputána, show traces of Bálas and Válas among the
Musalmán as well as among the Hindu population of Northern India. [355]
Among the tribes mentioned in Varáha-Mihira's sixth century (A.D. 580)
[356] lists the Váhlikas appear along with the dwellers on Sindhu's
banks. An inscription of a king Chandra, probably Chandragupta and if
so about A.D. 380-400, [357] boasts of crossing the seven mouths of
the Indus to attack the Váhlikas. These references suggest that the
Bálas or Válas are the Válhikas and that the Bálhikas of the Harivamsa
(A.D. 350-500 ?) are not as Langlois supposed people then ruling in
Balkh but people then established in India. [358] Does it follow that
the Válhikas of the inscriptions and the Bálhikas of the Harivamsa
are the Panjáb tribe referred to in the Mahábhárata as the Báhikas or
Bálhikas, a people held to scorn as keeping no Bráhman rites, their
Bráhmans degraded, their women abandoned? [359] Of the two Mahábhárata
forms Báhika and Bálhika recent scholars have preferred Bálhika with
the sense of people of Balkh or Baktria. [360] The name Bálhika might
belong to more than one of the Central Asian invaders of Northern
India during the centuries before and after Christ, whose manner of
life might be expected to strike an Áryávarta Bráhman with horror. The
date of the settlement of these northern tribes (B.C. 180-A.D. 300)
does not conflict with the comparatively modern date (A.D. 150-250)
now generally received for the final revision of the Mahábhárata. [361]
This explanation does not remove the difficulty caused by references
to Báhikas and Bálhikas [362] in Pánini and other writers earlier
than the first of the after-Alexander Skythian invasions. At the
same time as shown in the footnote there seems reason to hold that
the change from the Bákhtri of Darius (B.C. 510) and Alexander the
Great (B.C. 330) to the modern Balkh did not take place before the
first century after Christ. If this view is correct it follows that
if the form Bahlika occurs in Pánini or other earlier writers it is
a mistaken form due to some copyist's confusion with the later name
Bahlika. As used by Pánini the name Báhika applied to certain Panjáb
tribes seems a general term meaning Outsider a view which is supported
by Brian Hodgson's identification of the Mahábhárata Báhikas with
the Bahings one of the outcaste or broken tribes of Nepál. [363]
The use of Báhika in the Mahábhárata would then be due either
to the wish to identify new tribes with old or to the temptation
to use a word which had a suitable meaning in Sanskrit. If then
there is fair ground for holding that the correct form of the name
in the Mahábhárata is Bálhika and that Bálhika means men of Balkh
the question remains which of the different waves of Central Asian
invaders in the centuries before and after Christ are most likely to
have adopted or to have received the title of Baktrians. Between the
second century before and the third century after Christ two sets of
northerners might justly have claimed or have received the title of
Baktrians. These northerners are the Baktrian Greeks about B.C. 180
and the Yuechi between B.C. 20 and A.D. 300. Yavana is so favourite
a name among Indian writers that it may be accepted that whatever
other northern tribes the name Yavana includes no name but Yavana
passed into use for the Baktrian Greeks. Their long peaceful and
civilised rule (B.C. 130-A.D. 300 ?) from their capital at Balkh
entitles the Yuechi to the name Baktrians or Báhlikas. That the
Yuechi were known in India as Baktrians is proved by the writer of
the Periplus (A.D. 247), who, when Baktria was still under Yuechi
rule, speaks of the Baktrianoi as a most warlike race governed by
their own sovereign. [364] It is known that in certain cases the
Yuechi tribal names were of local origin. Kushán the name of the
leading tribe is according to some authorities a place-name. [365]
And it is established that the names of more than one of the tribes
who about B.C. 50 joined under the head of the Kusháns were taken
from the lands where they had settled. It is therefore in agreement
both with the movements and with the practice of the Yuechi, that,
on reaching India, a portion of them should be known as Báhlikas or
Bálhikas. Though the evidence falls short of proof there seems fair
reason to suggest that the present Rájput and Káthi Válas or Bálas of
Gujarát and Rájputána, through a Sanskritised Váhlika, may be traced
to some section of the Yuechi, who, as they passed south from Baktria,
between the first century before and the fourth century after Christ,
assumed or received the title of men of Balkh.

One collateral point seems to deserve notice. St. Martin [366]
says: 'The Greek historians do not show the least trace of the name
Báhlika.' Accepting Báhika, with the general sense of Outsider,
as the form used by Indian writers before the Christian era and
remembering [367] Pánini's description of the Málavas and Kshudrakas
as two Báhika tribes of the North-West the fact that Pánini lived
very shortly before or after the time of Alexander and was specially
acquainted with the Panjáb leaves little doubt that when (A.D. 326)
Alexander conquered their country the Malloi and Oxydrakai, that is the
Málavas and Kshudrakas, were known as Báhikas. Seeing that Alexander's
writers were specially interested in and acquainted with the Malloi
and Oxydrakai it is strange if St. Martin is correct in stating that
Greek writings show no trace of the name Báhika. In explanation
of this difficulty the following suggestion may be offered. [368]
As the Greeks sounded their kh (ch) as a spirant, the Indian Báhika
would strike them as almost the exact equivalent of their own word
bakchikos. More than one of Alexander's writers has curious references
to a Bacchic element in the Panjáb tribes. Arrian [369] notices that,
as Alexander's fleet passed down the Jhelum, the people lined the banks
chanting songs taught them by Dionysus and the Bacchantes. According
to Quintus Curtius [370] the name of Father Bacchus was famous among
the people to the south of the Malloi. These references are vague. But
Strabo is definite. [371] The Malloi and Oxydrakai are reported to be
the descendants of Bacchus. This passage is the more important since
Strabo's use of the writings of Aristobulus Alexander's historian and
of Onesikritos Alexander's pilot and Bráhman-interviewer gives his
details a special value. [372] It may be said Strabo explains why the
Malloi and Oxydrakai were called Bacchic and Strabo's explanation is
not in agreement with the proposed Báhika origin. The answer is that
Strabo's explanation can be proved to be in part, if not altogether,
fictitious. Strabo [373] gives two reasons why the Oxydrakai were
called Bacchic. First because the vine grew among them and second
because their kings marched forth Bakkhikôs that is after the Bacchic
manner. It is difficult to prove that in the time of Alexander the
vine did not grow in the Panjáb. Still the fact that the vines of
Nysa near Jalálábád and of the hill Meros are mentioned by several
writers and that no vines are referred to in the Greek accounts of
the Panjáb suggests that the vine theory is an after-thought. [374]
Strabo's second explanation, the Bacchic pomp of their kings, can be
more completely disproved. The evidence that neither the Malloi nor
the Oxydrakai had a king is abundant. [375] That the Greeks knew the
Malloi and Oxydrakai were called Bakkhikoi and that they did not know
why they had received that name favours the view that the explanation
lies in the Indian name Báhika. One point remains. Does any trace
of the original Báhikas or Outsiders survive? In Cutch Káthiáváda
and North Gujarát are two tribes of half settled cattle-breeders
and shepherds whose names Rahbáris as if Rahábaher and Bharváds
as if Baherváda seem like Báhika to mean Outsider. Though in other
respects both classes appear to have adopted ordinary Hindu practices
the conduct of the Bharvád women of Káthiáváda during their special
marriage seasons bears a curiously close resemblance to certain of the
details in the Mahábhárata account of the Báhika women. Colonel Barton
writes: [376] 'The great marriage festival of the Káthiáváda Bharváds
which is held once in ten or twelve years is called the Milkdrinking,
Dudhpíno, from the lavish use of milk or clarified butter. Under the
exciting influence of the butter the women become frantic singing
obscene songs breaking down hedges and spoiling the surrounding
crops.' Though the Bharváds are so long settled in Káthiáváda as to
be considered aboriginals their own tradition preserves the memory of
a former settlement in Márwár. [377] This tradition is supported by
the fact that the shrine of the family goddess of the Cutch Rabáris
is in Jodhpur, [378] and by the claim of the Cutch Bharváds that
their home is in the North-West Provinces. [379]

CHAPTER IX.

THE CHÁLUKYAS

(A.D. 634-740.)

The Chálukyas conquered their Gujarát provinces from the south after
subduing the Konkan Mauryas of Purí either Rájápurí that is Janjira
or Elephanta in Bombay harbour. The fifth century Váda inscription of
king Suketuvarmman proves that this Maurya dynasty [380] ruled in the
Konkan for at least a century before they came into collision with
the Chálukyas under Kírtivarmman. [381] They were finally defeated
and their capital Purí taken by Chandadanda an officer of Pulakesi
II. (A.D. 610-640). [382] The Chálukyas then pressed northwards,
and an inscription at Aihole in South Bijápur records that as early
as A.D. 634 the kings of Láta, Málava, and Gurjjara submitted to the
prowess of Pulakesi II. (A.D. 610-640).

[Jayasimhavarmman, A.D. 666-693.] The regular establishment of
Chálukya power in South Gujarát seems to have been the work of
Dhárásraya Jayasimhavarmman son of Pulakesi II. and younger brother of
Vikramáditya Satyásraya (A.D. 670-680). A grant of Jayasimhavarmman's
son Síláditya found in Navsárí describes Jayasimhavarmman as receiving
the kingdom from his brother Vikramáditya. As Jayasimhavarmman is
called Paramabhattáraka Great Lord, he probably was practically
independent. He had five sons and enjoyed a long life, ruling
apparently from Navsárí. Of the five Gujarát Chálukya copperplates
noted below, three are in an era marked Sam. which is clearly
different from the Saka era (A.D. 78) used in the grants of the main
Chálukyas. From the nature of the case the new era of the Gujarát
Chálukyas may be accepted as of Gujarát origin. Grants remain
of Jayasimhavarmman's sons dated S. 421, 443, and 490. [383] This
checked by Vikramáditya's known date (A.D. 670-680) gives an initial
between A.D. 249 and 259. Of the two Gujarát eras, the Gupta-Valabhi
(A.D. 319) and the Traikútaka (A.D. 248-9), the Gupta-Valabhi is
clearly unsuitable. On the other hand the result is so closely
in accord with A.D. 248-9, the Traikútaka epoch, as to place the
correctness of the identification almost beyond question.

Jayasimhavarmman must have established his power in South Gujarát
before A.D. 669-70 (T. 421), as in that year his son Sryásraya
made a grant as heir apparent. Another plate of Sryásraya found in
Surat shows that in A.D. 691-2 (T. 443) Jayasimhavarmman was still
ruling with Sryásraya as heir apparent. In view of these facts
the establishment of Jayasimhavarmman's power in Gujarát must be
taken at about A.D. 666. The copperplates of his sons and grandson
do not say whom Jayasimhavarmman overthrew. Probably the defeated
rulers were Gurjjaras, as about this time a Gurjjara dynasty held
the Broach district with its capital at Nándípurí the modern Nándod
in the Rájpipla State about thirty-five miles east of Broach. So
far as is known the earliest of the Nándod Gurjjaras was Dadda who
is estimated to have flourished about A.D. 580 (T. 331). [384] The
latest is Jayabhata whose Navsárí copperplate bears date A.D. 734-5
(T. 486) [385] so that the Gurjjara and Chálukya kingdoms flourished
almost at the same time. It is possible that the power of the earlier
Gurjjara kings spread as far south as Balsár and even up to Konkan
limits. It was apparently from them that, during the reign of his
brother Vikramáditya, Jayasimhavarmman took South Gujarát, driving
the Gurjjaras north of the Tápti and eventually confining them to
the Broach district, the Gurjjaras either acknowledging Chálukya
sovereignty or withstanding the Chálukyas and retaining their small
territory in the Broach district by the help of the Valabhis with
whom they were in alliance. [386] In either case the Chálukya power
seems to have hemmed in the Broach Gurjjaras, as Jayasimhavarmman had
a son Buddhavarmman ruling in Kaira. A copperplate of Buddhavarmman's
son Vijayarája found in Kaira is granted from Vijayapura identified
with Bijápur near Parántij, but probably some place further south, as
the grant is made to Bráhmans of Jambusar. Five copperplates remain
of this branch of the Chálukyas, the Navsárí grant of Sryásraya
Síláditya Yuvarája dated A.D. 669-70 (T. 421); the Surat grant of
the same Síláditya dated A.D. 691-2 (T. 443); the Balsár grant of
Vinayáditya Mangalarája dated A.D. 731 (Saka 653); the Navsárí grant
of Pulakesi Janásraya dated A.D. 738-9 (T. 490); the Kaira grant
of Vijayarája dated Samvatsara 394; and the undated Nirpan grant of
Nágavarddhana Tribhuvanásraya.

[Sryásraya Síláditya (Heir Apparent), A.D. 669-691.] The first
four grants mention Jayasimhavarmman as the younger brother of
Vikramáditya Satyásraya the son of Pulakesi Satyásraya the conqueror
of Harshavarddhana the lord of the North. Jayasimhavarmman's eldest
son was Sryásraya Síláditya who made his Navsárí grant in A.D. 669-70
(T. 421); the village granted being said to be in the Navasáriká
Vishaya. Sryásraya's other plate dated A.D. 691-2 (T. 443) grants a
field in the village of Osumbhalá in the Kármaneya Áhára that is the
district of Kámlej on the Tápti fifteen miles north-east of Surat. In
both grants Síláditya is called Yuvarája, which shows that his father
ruled with him from A.D. 669 to A.D. 691. Both copperplates show
that these kings treated as their overlords the main dynasty of the
southern Chálukyas as respectful mention is made in the first plate
of Vikramáditya Satyásraya and in the second of his son Vinayáditya
Satyásraya. Apparently Sryásraya died before his father as the two late
grants of Balsár and Khedá give him no place in the list of rulers.

[Mangalarája, A.D. 698-731.] Jayasimhavarmman was succeeded by his
second son Mangalarája. A plate of his found at Balsár dated A.D. 731
(Saka 653) records a grant made from Mangalapurí, probably the same as
Purí the doubtful Konkan capital of the Siláháras. [387] As his elder
brother was heir-apparent in A.D. 691-2 (T. 443), Mangalarája must
have succeeded some years later, say about A.D. 698-9 (T. 450). From
this it may be inferred that the copperplate of A.D. 731 was issued
towards the end of his reign.

[Pulakesi Janásraya, A.D. 738.] Mangalarája was succeeded by his
younger brother Pulakesi Janásraya. This is the time of Khalif Hashám
(H. 105-125, A.D. 724-743) whose Sindh governor Junaid is recorded
to have sent expeditions against Marmád, Mandal, Dalmaj (Kámlej?),
Bárus, Uzain, Máliba, Baharimad (Mevad?), Al Bailáimán (Bhinmál?),
and Juzr. Though several of these names seem to have been misread and
perhaps misspelt on account of the confusion in the original Arabic,
still Marmád, Mandal, Barus, Uzain, Máliba, and Juzr can easily be
identified with Márvád, Mandal near Viramgám, Bharuch, Ujjain, Málwa,
and Gurjjara. The defeat of one of these raids is described at length
in Pulakesi's grant of A.D. 738-9 (T. 490) which states that the Arab
army had afflicted the kingdoms of Sindhu, Kacchella, Sauráshtra,
Chávotaka, Maurya, and Gurjjara that is Sindh, Kacch, the Chávadás,
the Mauryas of Chitor, [388] and the Gurjjaras of Bhínmál. [389]
Pulakesi was at this time ruling at Navsárí. It is uncertain how much
longer this Chálukya kingdom of Navsárí continued. It was probably
overthrown about A.D. 750 by the Gujarát branch of the Ráshtrakútas
who were in possession in A.D. 757-8. [390]

[Buddhavarmman, A.D. 713 (?).] The Kaira grant dated 394 gives
in hereditary succession the names Jayasimha, Buddhavarmman, and
Vijayarája. [391] The grant is made from Vijayapura, which, as the late
Colonel West suggested, may be Bijápur near Parántij though this is
far to the north of the otherwise known Chálukya limits. The village
granted is Pariyaya in the Kásákula division. If taken as Traikútaka
the date 394 corresponds to A.D. 642-3. This is out of the question,
since Vijayarája's grand-uncle Vikramáditya flourished between A.D. 670
and 680. Professor Bhandarkar considers the plate a forgery, but there
seems no sufficient reason for doubting its genuineness. No fault
can be found with the character. It is written in the usual style
of Western Chálukya grants, and contains the names of a number of
Bráhman grantees with minute details of the fields granted a feature
most unusual in a forged grant. In the Gupta era, which equally with
the Traikútaka era may be denoted by the word Sam. and which is
more likely to be in use in North Gujarát the 394 would represent
the fairly probable A.D. 713. Jayasimha may have conquered part of
North Gujarát and sent his son Buddhavarmman to rule over it.

[Nágavarddhana.] Jayasimha appears to have had a third son
Nágavarddhana ruling in West Násik which was connected with South
Gujarát through Balsár, Párdi, and Penth. The Nirpan grant of
Nágavarddhana is undated, [392] and, though it gives a wrong genealogy,
its seal, the form of composition, the biruda or title of the king,
and the alphabet all so closely agree with the style of the Gujarát
Chálukya plates that it cannot be considered a forgery.

Not long after A.D. 740 the Chálukyas seem to have been supplanted
in South Gujarát by the Ráshtrakútas.

[Chálukya Tree.] CHÁLUKYA FAMILY TREE.

Pulakesivallabha Satyásraya,
Conqueror of Harshavarddhana, Lord of the North.
A.D. 610-640.
|
----------------+-----------------
| |
(Main Chálukyas). (Gujarát Branch).
| |
Vikramáditya Satyásraya, Jayasimhavarmman Dhárásraya,
A.D. 669-680. A.D. 669-691.
| |
Vinayáditya. |
|
--------------------------------------------------+-----------------
| | | | |
(Navsárí.) (Navsárí.) (Kaira.) (Násik.) (Navsárí.)
| | | | |
Síláditya Sryásraya Mangalarája Buddhavarmman. Nágavarddhana. Pulakesi
Yuvarája, or Vijayarája Janásraya,
T. 421 (A.D. 669-70) and Mangalarasaráya, T. 490
T. 443 (A.D. 691-2). Saka 653 G. 394
(A.D. 731-2). (A.D. 713). (A.D. 738-9).

Vijayarája's grant of the year 394 (A.D. 642-3) is the earliest
trace of Chálukya rule in Gujarát. Dr. Bhagvánlál, who believed in
its genuineness, supposes it to be dated in the Gupta era (G. 394
= A.D. 714) and infers from it the existence of Chálukya rule far
to the north of Broach. But the most cursory comparison of it with
the Khedá grants of Dadda II. (see Ind. Ant. XIII. 81ff) which are
dated (admittedly in the [so-called] Traikútaka era) 380 and 385
respectively, shows that a large number of Dadda's grantees reappear
in the Chálukya grant. The date of the Chálukya plate must therefore
be interpreted as a Traikútaka or Chedi date.

[A.D. 610-640.] This being so, it is clearly impossible to suppose that
Vijayarája's grandfather Jayasimha is that younger son of Pulakesi
II. (A.D. 610-640) who founded the Gujarát branch family. It has
been usually supposed that the Jayasimha of our grant was a younger
brother of Pulakesi II.: but this also is chronologically impossible:
for Jayasimha can hardly have been more than ten years of age in
A.D. 597-98, when his elder brother was set aside as too young
to rule. His son Buddhavarmman could hardly have been born before
A.D. 610, so that Buddhavarmman's son Vijayarája must have made his
grant at the age of twelve at latest. The true solution of the question
seems to be that given by Dr. Bhandárkar in his Early History of the
Deccan (page 42 note 7), namely that the grant is a forgery. To the
reasons advanced by him may be added the fact pointed out by Mr. Fleet
(Ind. Ant. VII. 251) that the grant is a palimpsest, the engraver
having originally commenced it "Svasti Vijayavikshepán Na." It can
hardly be doubted that Na is the first syllable of Nándípurí the
palace of the Gurjjara kings. Many of the grantees were Bráhmans of
Jambusar and subjects of Dadda II. of Broach, whose grants to them
are extant. It seems obvious that Vijayarája's grant was forged in
the interest of these persons by some one who had Gurjjara grants
before him as models, but knew very little of the forms used in the
chancery of the Chálukyas.

Setting aside this grant, the first genuine trace of Chálukya
rule in Gujarát is to be found in the grant of the Sendraka chief
Nikumbhallasakti, which bears date Sam. 406 (A.D. 654-5) and relates to
the gift to a Bráhman of the village of Balisa (Wanesa) in the Treyanna
(Ten) district. Dr. Bühler has shown (Ind. Ant. XVIII. page 265ff)
that the Sendrakas were a Kánarese family, and that Nikumbhallasakti
must have come to Gujarát as a Chálukya feudatory, though he names
no overlord. He was doubtless subordinate to the Chálukya governor
of Násik.

The next grant that requires notice is that of Nágavarddhana,
who describes himself distinctly as the son of Pulakesi's brother
Jayasimha, though Dr. Bhagvánlál believed this Jayasimha to be
Pulakesi's son. Mr. Fleet points out other difficulties connected
with this grant, but on the whole decides in favour of its
genuineness (see Ind. Ant. IX. 123). The description of Pulakesi
II. in this grant refers to his victory over Harshavarddhana, but
also describes him as having conquered the three kingdoms of Chera,
Chola, and Pándya by means of his horse of the Chitrakantha breed,
and as meditating on the feet of Sri Nágavarddhana. Now all of these
epithets, except the reference to Harshavarddhana, belong properly,
not to Pulakesi II. but to his son Vikramáditya I. The conquest of the
confederacy of Cholas, Cheras (or Keralas), and Pándyas is ascribed
to Vikramáditya in the inscriptions of his son Vinayáditya (Fleet in
Ind. Ant. X. 134): the Chitrakantha horse is named in Vikramáditya's
own grants (Ind. Ant. VI. 75 &c.) while his meditation upon the feet
of Nágavarddhana recurs in the T. 421 grant of Sryásraya Síláditya
(B. B. R. A. S. XVI. 1ff). This confusion of epithets between Pulakesi
II. and Vikramáditya makes it difficult to doubt that Nágavarddhana's
grant was composed either during or after Vikramáditya's reign, and
under the influence of that king's grants. It may be argued that
even in that case the grant may be genuine, its inconsistencies
being due merely to carelessness. This supposition the following
considerations seem too negative. Pulakesi II. was alive at the time
of Hiuen Tsiang's visit (A.D. 640), but is not likely to have reigned
very much longer. And, as Vikramáditya's reign is supposed to have
begun about A.D. 669-70, a gap remains of nearly thirty years. That
part of this period was occupied by the war with the three kings of
the south we know from Vikramáditya's own grants: but the grant of
Sryásraya Síláditya referred to above seems to show that Vikramáditya
was the successor, not of his father, but of Nágavarddhana upon whose
feet he is described as meditating. It follows that Nágavarddhana
succeeded Pulakesi and preceded Vikramáditya on the imperial throne
of the Chálukyas whereas his grant could not have been composed until
the reign of Vikramáditya.

Although the grant is not genuine, we have no reason to doubt that
it gives a correct genealogy, and that Nágavarddhana was the son
of Pulakesi's brother Jayasimha and therefore the first cousin of
Vikramáditya. The grant is in the regular Chálukya style, and the
writer, living near the Northern Chálukya capital, Násik, had better
models than the composer of Vijayarája's grant. Both grants may have
been composed about the time when the Chálukya power succumbed to
the attacks of the Ráshtrakútas (A.D. 743).--(A. M. T. J.)

CHAPTER X.

THE GURJJARAS

(A.D. 580-808.)

During Valabhi and Chálukya ascendancy a small Gurjjara kingdom
flourished in and about Broach. As has been noticed in the Valabhi
chapter the Gurjjaras were a foreign tribe who came to Gujarát from
Northern India. All the available information regarding the Broach
Gurjjaras comes from nine copperplates, [393] three of them forged, all
obtained from South Gujarát. These plates limit the regular Gurjjara
territory to the Broach district between the Mahí and the Narbadá,
though at times their power extended north to Khedá and south to the
Tápti. Like the grants of the contemporary Gujarát Chálukyas all the
genuine copperplates are dated in the Traikútaka era which begins in
A.D. 249-50. [394] The Gurjjara capital seems to have been Nándípurí
or Nándor, [395] the modern Nándod the capital of Rájpipla in Rewa
Kántha about thirty-four miles east of Broach. Two of their grants
issue Nándípurítah [396] that is 'from Nándípurí' like the Valabhítah
or 'from Valabhi' of the Valabhi copperplates, a phrase which in both
cases seems to show the place named was the capital since in other
Gurjjara grants the word vásaka or camp occurs. [397]

[Copperplates.] Though the Gurjjaras held a considerable territory
in South Gujarát their plates seem to show they were not independent
rulers. The general titles are either Samadhigata-panchamahásabada
'He who has attained the five great titles,' or Sámanta Feudatory. In
one instance Jayabhata III. who was probably a powerful ruler is
called Sámantádhipati [398] Lord of Feudatories. It is hard to say to
what suzerain these Broach Gurjjaras acknowledged fealty. Latterly
they seem to have accepted the Chálukyas on the south as their
overlords. But during the greater part of their existence they may
have been feudatories of the Valabhi dynasty, who, as mentioned above
were probably Gurjjaras who passed from Málwa to South Gujarát and
thence by sea to Valabhi leaving a branch in South Gujarát.

The facts that in A.D. 649 (Valabhi 330) a Valabhi king had a 'camp of
victory' at Broach where Ranagraha's plate [399] shows the Gurjjaras
were then ruling and that the Gurjjara king Dadda II. gave shelter
to a Valabhi king establish a close connection between Valabhi and
the Nándod Gurjjaras.

Their copperplates and seals closely resemble the plates and seals of
the Gujarát Chálukyas. The characters of all but the forged grants are
like those of Gujarát Chálukya grants and belong to the Gujarát variety
of the Southern India style. At the same time it is to be noted that
the royal signature at the end of the plates is of the northern type,
proving that the Gurjjaras were originally northerners. The language
of most of the grants is Sanskrit prose as in Valabhi plates in a
style curiously like the style of the contemporary author Bána in
his great works the Kádambarí and Harshacharita. From this it may be
inferred that Bána's style was not peculiar to himself but was the
style in general use in India at that time.

[Gurjjara Tree.] The following is the Gurjjara family tree:

A recently published grant [400] made by Nirihullaka, the chieftain of
a jungle tribe in the lower valley of the Narbadá, shows that towards
the end of the sixth century A.D. that region was occupied by wild
tribes who acknowledged the supremacy of the Chedi or Kalachuri kings:
a fact which accounts for the use of the Chedi or Traikútaka era
in South Gujarát. Nirihullaka names with respect a king Sankarana,
whom Dr. Bühler would identify with Sankaragana the father of the
Kalachuri Buddhavarmman who was defeated by Mangalísa the Chálukya
about A.D. 600. [401] Sankaragana himself must have flourished
about A.D. 580, and the Gurjjara conquest must be subsequent to this
date. Another new grant, [402] which is only a fragment and contains
no king's name, but which on the ground of date (Sam. 346 = A.D. 594-5)
and style may be safely attributed to the Gurjjara dynasty, shows that
the Gurjjaras were established in the country within a few years of
Sankaragana's probable date.

A still nearer approximation to the date of the Gurjjara conquest is
suggested by the change in the titles of Dharasena I. of Valabhi, who
in his grants of Samvat 252 [403] (A.D. 571) calls himself Mahárája,
while in his grants of 269 and 270 [404] (A.D. 588 and 589), he adds
the title of Mahásámanta, which points to subjection by some foreign
power between A.D. 571 and A.D. 588. It seems highly probable that this
power was that of the Gurjjaras of Bhínmál; and that their successes
therefore took place between A.D. 580 and 588 or about A.D. 585.

[Dadda I. C. 585-605 A.D.] The above mentioned anonymous grant of
the year 346 (A.D. 594-95) is ascribed with great probability to
Dadda I. who is known from the two Khedá grants of his grandson
Dadda II. (C. 620-650 A.D.) [405] to have "uprooted the Nága"
who must be the same as the jungle tribes ruled by Nirihullaka
and are now represented by the Náikdás of the Panch Maháls and the
Talabdas or Locals of Broach. The northern limit of Dadda's kingdom
seems to have been the Vindhya, as the grant of 380 (A.D. 628-29)
says that the lands lying around the feet of the Vindhya were for
his pleasure. At the same time it appears that part at least of
Northern Gujarát was ruled by the Mahásámanta Dharasena of Valabhi,
who in Val. 270 (A.D. 589-90) granted a village in the áhára of
Khetaka (Khedá). [406] Dadda is always spoken of as the Sámanta,
which shows that while he lived his territory remained a part of the
Gurjjara kingdom of Bhínmál. Subsequently North Gujarát fell into the
hands of the Málava kings, to whom it belonged in Hiuen Tsiang's time
(C. 640 A.D.). [407] Dadda I. is mentioned in the two Khedá grants of
his grandson as a worshipper of the sun: the fragmentary grant of 346
(A.D. 594-95) which is attributed to him gives no historical details.

[Jayabhata I. Vítarága, C. 605-620 A.D.] Dadda I. was succeeded
by his son Jayabhata I. who is mentioned in the Khedá grants as a
victorious and virtuous ruler, and appears from his title of Vítarága
the Passionless to have been a religious prince.

[Dadda II. Prasántarága, C. 620-650 A.D.] Jayabhata I. was succeeded
by his son Dadda II. who bore the title of Prasántarága the
Passion-calmed. Dadda was the donor of the two Khedá grants of 380
(A.D. 628-29) and 385 (A.D. 633-34), and a part of a grant made by
his brother Ranagraha in the year 391 (A.D. 639-40) has lately been
published. [408] Three forged grants purporting to have been issued by
him are dated respectively Saka 400 (A.D. 478), Saka 415 (A.D. 493),
and Saka 417 (A.D. 495). [409] Both of the Khedá grants relate to the
gift of the village of Siríshapadraka (Sisodra) in the Akrúresvara
(Anklesvar) vishaya to certain Bráhmans of Jambusar and Broach. In
Ranagraha's grant the name of the village is lost.

Dadda II.'s own grants describe him as having attained the five great
titles, and praise him in general terms: and both he and his brother
Ranagraha sign their grants as devout worshippers of the sun. Dadda
II. heads the genealogy in the later grant of 456 (A.D. 704-5),
[410] which states that he protected "the lord of Valabhi who had
been defeated by the great lord the illustrious Harshadeva." The event
referred to must have been some expedition of the great Harshavardhana
of Kanauj (A.D. 607-648), perhaps the campaign in which Harsha was
defeated on the Narbadá by Pulakesi II. (which took place before
A.D. 634). The protection given to the Valabhi king is perhaps referred
to in the Khedá grants in the mention of "strangers and suppliants
and people in distress." If this is the case the defeat of Valabhi
took place before A.D. 628-29, the date of the earlier of the Khedá
grants. On the other hand, the phrase quoted is by no means decisive,
and the fact that in Hiuen Tsiang's time Dhruvasena of Valabhi was
son-in-law of Harsha's son, makes it unlikely that Harsha should have
been at war with him. It follows that the expedition referred to may
have taken place in the reign of Dharasena IV. who may have been the
son of Dhruvasena by another wife than Harsha's granddaughter.

To Dadda II.'s reign belongs Hiuen Tsiang's notice of the kingdom of
Broach (C. 640 A.D.). [411] He says "all their profit is from the sea"
and describes the country as salt and barren, which is still true of
large tracts in the west and twelve hundred years ago was probably
the condition of a much larger area than at present. Hiuen Tsiang
does not say that Broach was subject to any other kingdom, but it
is clear from the fact that Dadda bore the five great titles that
he was a mere feudatory. At this period the valuable port of Broach,
from which all their profit was made, was a prize fought for by all
the neighbouring powers. With the surrounding country of Láta, Broach
submitted to Pulakesi II. (A.D. 610-640): [412] it may afterwards have
fallen to the Málava kings, to whom in Hiuen Tsiang's time (A.D. 640)
both Khedá (K'ie-ch'a) and Ánandapura (Vadnagar) belonged; later it
was subject to Valabhi, as Dharasena IV. made a grant at Broach in
V.S. 330 (A.D. 649-50). [413]

Knowledge of the later Gurjjaras is derived exclusively from two
grants of Jayabhata III. dated respectively 456 (A.D. 704-5) and
486 (A.D. 734-5). [414] The later of these two grants is imperfect,
only the last plate having been preserved. The earlier grant of 456
(A.D. 704-5) shows that during the half century following the reign
of Dadda II. the dynasty had ceased to call themselves Gurjjaras,
and had adopted a Puránic pedigree traced from king Karna, a hero of
the Bhárata war. It also shows that from Dadda III. onward the family
were Saivas instead of sun-worshippers.

[Jayabhata II. C. 650-675 A.D.] The successor of Dadda II. was his
son Jayabhata II. who is described as a warlike prince, but of whom
no historical details are recorded.

[Dadda III. Báhusaháya, C. 675-700.] Jayabhata's son, Dadda
III. Báhusaháya, is described as waging wars with the great kings
of the east and of the west (probably Málava and Valabhi). He was
the first Saiva of the family, studied Manu's works, and strictly
enforced "the duties of the varnas or castes and of the ásramas
or Bráhman stages." It was probably to him that the Gurjjaras owed
their Puránic pedigree and their recognition as true Kshatriyas. Like
his predecessors, Dadda III. was not an independent ruler. He could
claim only the five great titles, though no hint is given who was his
suzerain. His immediate superior may have been Jayasimha the Chálukya,
who received the province of Láta from his brother Vikramáditya
(c. 669-680 A.D.) [415]

[Jayabhata III. c. 704-734 A.D.] The son and successor of Dadda
III. was Jayabhata III. whose two grants of 456 (A.D. 704-5) and 486
(A.D. 734-5) [416] must belong respectively to the beginning and
the end of his reign. He attained the five great titles, and was
therefore a feudatory, probably of the Chálukyas: but his title of
Mahásámantádhipati implies that he was a chief of importance. He
is praised in vague terms, but the only historical event mentioned
in his grants is a defeat of a lord of Valabhi, noted in the grant
of 486 (A.D. 734-5). The Valabhi king referred to must be either
Síláditya IV. (A.D. 691) or Síláditya V. (A.D. 722). During the
reign of Jayabhata III. took place the great Arab invasion which was
repulsed by Pulakesi Janásraya at Navsárí. [417] Like the kingdoms
named in the grant of Pulakesi, Broach must have suffered from this
raid. It is not specially mentioned probably because it formed part
of Pulakesi's territory.

After A.D. 734-5 no further mention occurs of the Gurjjaras of
Broach. Whether the dynasty was destroyed by the Arabs or by the
Gujarát Ráshtrakútas (A.D. 750) is not known. Later references to
Gurjjaras in Ráshtrakúta times refer to the Gurjjaras of Bhínmál not to
the Gurjjaras of Broach, who, about the time of Dadda III. (C. 675-700
A.D.), ceased to call themselves Gurjjaras.

A few words must be said regarding the three grants from Iláo, Umetá,
and Bagumrá (Ind. Ant. XIII. 116, VII. 61, and XVII. 183) as their
genuineness has been assumed by Dr. Bühler in his recent paper on
the Mahábhárata, in spite of Mr. Fleet's proof (Ind. Ant. XVIII. 19)
that their dates do not work out correctly.

Dr. Bhagvánlál's (Ind. Ant. XIII. 70) chief grounds for holding that
the Umetá and Iláo grants (the Bagumrá grant was unknown to him)
were forgeries were:

(1) Their close resemblance in palæography to one another and to
the forged grant of Dharasena II. of Valabhi dated Saka 400;
(2) That though they purport to belong to the fifth century they
bear the same writer's name as the Khedá grants of the seventh
century.

Further Mr. Fleet (Ind. Ant. XIII. 116) pointed out:

(3) That the description of Dadda I. in the Iláo and Umetá
grants agrees almost literally with that of Dadda II. in the
Khedá grants, and that where it differs the Khedá grants have
the better readings.

To these arguments Dr. Bühler has replied (Ind. Ant. XVII. 183):

(1) That though there is a resemblance between these grants and
that of Dharasena II., still it does not prove more than that the
forger of Dharasena's grant had one of the other grants before him;
(2) That, as the father's name of the writer is not given in the
Khedá grants, it cannot be assumed that he was the same person
as the writer of the Iláo and Umetá grants; and
(3) That genuine grants sometimes show that a description written
for one king is afterwards applied to another, and that good or
bad readings are no test of the age of a grant.

It may be admitted that Dr. Bühler has made it probable that the
suspected grants and the grant of Dharasena were not all written by
the same hand, and also that the coincidence in the writer's name is
not of much importance in itself. But the palæographical resemblance
between Dharasena's grant on the one hand and the doubtful Gurjjara
grants on the other is so close that they must have been written at
about the same time. As to the third point, the verbal agreement
between the doubtful grants on the one hand and the Khedá grants
on the other implies the existence of a continuous tradition in the
record office of the dynasty from the end of the fifth till near the
middle of the seventh century. But the Sankhedá grant of Nirihullaka
(Ep. Ind. II. 21) shows that towards the end of the sixth century the
lower Narbadá valley was occupied by jungle tribes who acknowledged
the supremacy of the Kalachuris. Is it reasonable to suppose that
after the first Gurjjara line was thus displaced, the restorers of the
dynasty should have had any memory of the forms in which the first line
drew up their grants? At any rate, if they had, they would also have
retained their original seal, which, as the analogy of the Valabhi
plates teaches us, would bear the founder's name. But we find that
the seal of the Khedá plates bears the name "Sámanta Dadda," who
can be no other than the "Sámanta Dadda" who ruled from C. 585-605
A.D. It follows that the Gurjjaras of the seventh century themselves
traced back their history in Broach no further than A.D. 585. Again,
it has been pointed out in the text that a passage in the description
of Dadda II. (A.D. 620-650) in the Khedá grants seems to refer to his
protection of the Valabhi king, so that the description must have been
written for him and not for the fifth century Dadda as Dr. Bühler's
theory requires.

These points coupled with Mr. Fleet's proof (Ind. Ant. XVIII. 91)
that the Saka dates do not work out correctly, may perhaps be
enough to show that none of these three grants can be relied upon as
genuine.--(A. M. T. J.)

CHAPTER XI.

THE RÁSHTRAKÚTAS

(A.D. 743-974.)

The Ráshtrakúta connection with Gujarát lasted from Saka 665 to
894 (A.D. 743-974) that is for 231 years. The connection includes
three periods: A first of sixty-five years from Saka 665 to 730
(A.D. 743-808) when the Gujarát ruler was dependent on the main
Dakhan Ráshtrakúta: a second of eighty years between Saka 730 and 810
(A.D. 808-888) when the Gujarát family was on the whole independent:
and a third of eighty-six years Saka 810 to 896 (A.D. 888-974) when
the Dakhan Ráshtrakútas again exercised direct sway over Gujarát.

[Their Origin.] Information regarding the origin of the Ráshtrakútas is
imperfect. That the Gujarát Ráshtrakútas came from the Dakhan in Saka
665 (A.D. 743) is known. It is not known who the Dakhan Ráshtrakútas
originally were or where or when they rose to prominence. Ráthod
the dynastic name of certain Kanauj and Márwár Rájputs represents
a later form of the word Ráshtrakúta. Again certain of the later
inscriptions call the Ráshtrakútas Rattas a word which, so far as form
goes, is hardly a correct Prakrit contraction of Ráshtrakúta. The
Sanskritisation of tribal names is not exact. If the name Ratta was
strange it might be pronounced Ratta, Ratha, or Raddi. This last form
almost coincides with the modern Kánarese caste name Reddi, which,
so far as information goes, would place the Ráshtrakútas among the
tribes of pre-Sanskrit southern origin.

[Their Name.] If Ratta is the name of the dynasty kúta or kúda may
be an attribute meaning prominent. The combination Ráshtrakúta would
then mean the chiefs or leaders as opposed to the rank and file of the
Rattas. The bardic accounts of the origin of the Ráthods of Kanauj
and Márwár vary greatly. According to a Jain account the Ráthods,
whose name is fancifully derived from the raht or spine of Indra,
are connected with the Yavans through an ancestor Yavanasva prince
of Párlipur. The Ráthod genealogies trace their origin to Kusa son
of Ráma of the Solar Race. The bards of the Solar Race hold them to
be descendants of Hiranya Kasipu by a demon or daitya mother. Like
the other great Rájput families the Ráthods' accounts contain no date
earlier than the fifth century A.D. when (A.D. 470, S. 526) Náin Pál
is said to have conquered Kanauj slaying its monarch Ajipál. [418] The
Dakhan Ráshtrakútas (whose earliest known date is also about A.D. 450)
call themselves of the Lunar Race and of the Yadu dynasty. Such
contradictions leave only one of two origins to the tribe. They were
either foreigners or southerners Bráhmanised and included under the
all-embracing term Rájput.

[Early Dynasty, A.D. 450-500.] Of the rise of the Ráshtrakútas no
trace remains. The earliest known Ráshtrakúta copperplate is of a
king Abhimanyu. This plate is not dated. Still its letters, its style
of writing, and its lion seal, older than the Garuda mark which the
Ráshtrakútas assumed along with the claim of Yádava descent, leave
no doubt that this is the earliest of known Ráshtrakúta plates. Its
probable date is about A.D. 450. The plate traces the descent of
Abhimanyu through two generations from Mánánka. The details are:

Mánánka.
|
Devarája.
|
Bhavishya.
|
Abhimanyu.

The grant is dated from Mánapura, perhaps Mánánka's city, probably
an older form of Mányakheta the modern Málkhed the capital of the
later Ráshtrakútas about sixty miles south-east of Sholápur. These
details give fair ground for holding the Mánánkas to be a family
of Ráshtrakúta rulers earlier than that which appears in the usual
genealogy of the later Ráshtrakúta dynasty (A.D. 500-972).

[The Main Dynasty, A.D. 630-972.] The earliest information regarding
the later Ráshtrakútas is from a comparatively modern, and therefore
not quite trustworthy, Chálukya copperplate of the eleventh century
found by Mr. Wathen. This plate states that Jayasimha I. the earliest
Chálukya defeated the Ráshtrakúta Indra son of Krishna the lord of
800 elephants. The date of this battle would be about A.D. 500. If
historic the reference implies that the Ráshtrakútas were then a well
established dynasty. In most of their own plates the genealogy of the
Ráshtrakútas begins with Govinda about A.D. 680. But that Govinda
was not the founder of the family is shown by Dantidurga's Elura
Dasávatára inscription (about A.D. 750) which gives two earlier
names Dantivarmman and Indra. The founding of Ráshtrakúta power
is therefore of doubtful date. Of the date of its overthrow there
is no question. The overthrow came from the hand of the Western
Chálukya Tailappa in Saka 894 (A.D. 972) during the reign of the last
Ráshtrakúta Kakka III. or Kakkala.

[Ráshtrakúta Family Tree, A.D. 630-972.] The following is the
Ráshtrakúta family tree:

1 Dantivarmman
| (about A.D. 630).
|
2 Indra I.
| (about A.D. 655).
|
3 Govinda I.
| (about A.D. 680).
|
4 Kakka I.
or Karka I.
| (about A.D. 705).
|
----------------------------------
| | |
5 Indra II. Dhruva. 7 Krishna
(about A.D. 730). | (about A.D. 765).
| Govinda. |
6 Dantidurga, | |
Dantivarmman Kakka II. |
(Saka 675, A.D. 753). Saka 669 |
(A.D. 747). |
|
-------------------------
| |
8 Govinda II. 9 Dhruva, Dhárávarsha,
(about A.D. 780). Nirupama, Dhora,
(about A.D. 795).
|
--------------------------------------
| |
10 Govinda III. Prabhútavarsha I. Indra (founder of
Vallabhanarendra, Jagattunga Gujarát Branch).
Prithivívallabha, |
(Saka 725, 728, 729, ---------------------
A.D. 803, 806, 807). | |
| II. Karka III. Govinda
11 Amoghavarsha (Saka 734, 738, 743, Prabhútavarsha,
Sarvva, Durlabha Srívallabha; A.D. 812, 816, 821). (Saka 749,
Lakshmívallabha, | A.D. 827).
Vallabha Skanda, --------------------
(Saka 773, 799, A.D. 851, 877). | |
| Dantivarmman IV. Dhruva I.
12 Akálavarsha (?) Dhárávarsha,
Krishna II. Kannara | Nirupama,
(about A.D. 880-911). VII. Akálavarsha-Krishna (Saka 757,
| (Saka 810, A.D. 835).
Jagattunga A.D. 888). |
(did not reign.) V. Akálavarsha
| Subhatunga,
| (A.D. 867).
| |
| VI. Dhruva II.
| (Saka 789, 793,
---------------------------------- A.D. 867, 871).
| |
13 Indra III. Prithivívallabha 16 Baddiga
Rattakandarpa, Kirttináráyana |
Nityamvarsha (Saka 836, A.D. 914). ------------------------
| | | |
----------------- 17 Krishna 19 Kottiga. Nirupama.
| | (S. 867, 878 |
14 Amoghavarsha 15 Govindarája A.D. 945, 956). Kakkala
Sáhasánka or Karkarája
Suvarnavarsha. (Saka 894,
A.D. 972).

[Copperplates.] The earliest Gujarát Ráshtrakúta grant, Kakka's of Saka
669 (A.D. 747), comes from Ántroli-Chároli in Surat. It is written on
two plates in the Valabhi style of composition and form of letters,
and, as in Valabhi grants, the date is at the end. Unlike Valabhi
grants the era is the Saka era. The grant gives the following genealogy
somewhat different from that of other known Ráshtrakúta grants:

Kakka.
|
Dhruva.
|
Govinda.
|
Kakka II. (Saka 669, A.D. 747).

[Kakka II. A.D. 747.] The plate notices that Kakka the grantor was
the son of Govinda by his wife the daughter of the illustrious
Nágavarmman. Kakka is further described by the feudatory title
'Samadhigatapanchmahásabdah' Holder of the five great names. At the
same time he is also called Paramabhattáraka-Mahárája Great Lord Great
King, attributes which seem to imply a claim to independent power. The
grant is dated the bright seventh of Ásvayuja, Saka 669 (A.D. 747). The
date is almost contemporary with the year of Dantidurga in the Sámangad
plate (A.D. 753). As Dantidurga was a very powerful monarch we may
identify the first Kakka of this plate with Kakka I. the grandfather
of Dantidurga and thus trace from Dhruva Kakka's son a branch of
feudatory Ráshtrakútas ruling in Málwa or Gujarát, whose leaders
were Dhruva, his son Govinda, and Govinda's son Kakka II. Further
Dantidurga's grant shows that he conquered Central Gujarát between
the Mahí and the Narbadá [419] while his Elura Dasávatára inscription
(A.D. 750) shows that he held Láta and Málava. [420] Dantidurga's
conquest of Central Gujarát seems to have been signalised by grants
of land made by his mother in every village of the Mátri division
which is apparently the Mátar táluka of the Kaira district. [421]
It is possible that Dantidurga gave conquered Gujarát to his paternal
cousin's son and contemporary Kakka, the grantor of the Ántroli plate
(A.D. 747), as the representative of a family ruling somewhere
under the overlordship of the main Dakhan Ráshtrakútas. Karka's
Baroda grant [422] (A.D. 812) supports this theory. Dantidurga died
childless and was succeeded by his uncle Krishna. Of this Krishna the
Baroda grant says that he assumed the government for the good of the
family after having rooted out a member of the family who had taken
to mischief-making. It seems probable that Kakka II. the grantor of
the Ántroli plate is the mischief-maker and that his mischief was,
on the death of Dantidurga, the attempt to secure the succession to
himself. Krishna frustrated Kakka's attempt and rooted him out so
effectively that no trace of Kakka's family again appears.

[Krishna and Govinda II. A.D. 765-795.] From this it follows that,
so far as is known, the Ráshtrakúta conquest of Gujarát begins with
Dantidurga's conquest of Láta, that is South Gujarát between the
Mahí and the Narbadá, from the Gurjjara king Jayabhata whose latest
known date is A.D. 736 or seventeen years before the known date of
Dantidurga. The Gurjjaras probably retired to the Rájpipla hills
and further east on the confines of Málwa where they may have held a
lingering sway. [423] No Gujarát event of importance is recorded during
the reign of Krishna (A.D. 765) or of his son Govinda II. (A.D. 780)
who about A.D. 795 was superseded by his powerful younger brother
Dhruva. [424]

[Dhruva I. A.D. 795.] Dhruva was a mighty monarch whose conquests
spread from South India as far north as Allahábád. During Dhruva's
lifetime his son Govinda probably ruled at Mayúrakhandi or Morkhanda in
the Násik district and held the Ghát country and the Gujarát coast from
Balsár northwards. Though according to a Kapadvanj grant Govinda had
several brothers the Rádhanpur (A.D. 808) and Van-Dindori (A.D. 808)
grants of his son Govinda III. state that his father, seeing Govinda's
supernatural Krishna-like powers, offered him the sovereignty of the
whole world. Govinda declined, saying, The Kanthiká or coast tract
already given to me is enough. Seeing that Mayúrakhandi or Morkhanda
in Násik was Govinda's capital, this Kanthiká appears to be the coast
from Balsár northwards.

[Govinda III. A.D. 800-808.] According to Gujarát Govinda's
(A.D. 827-833) Káví grant (A.D. 827), finding his power threatened by
Stambha and other kings, Dhruva made the great Govinda independent
during his own lifetime. This suggests that while Dhruva continued
to hold the main Ráshtrakúta sovereignty in the Dakhan, he probably
invested Govinda with the sovereignty of Gujarát. This fact the Káví
grant (A.D. 827) being a Gujarát grant would rightly mention while
it would not find a place in the Rádhanpur (A.D. 808) and Van-Dindori
(A.D. 808) grants of the main Ráshtrakútas. Of the kings who opposed
Govinda the chief was Stambha who may have some connection with Cambay,
as, during the time of the Anahilaváda kings, Cambay came to be called
Stambha-tírtha instead of by its old name of Gambhútá. According
to the grants the allied chiefs were no match for Govinda. The
Gurjjara fled through fear, not returning even in dreams, and the
Málava king submitted. Who the Gurjjara was it is hard to say. He
may have belonged to some Gurjjara dynasty that rose to importance
after Dantidurga's conquest or the name may mean a ruler of the
Gurjjara country. In either case some North Gujarát ruler is meant
whose conquest opened the route from Broach to Málwa. From Málwa
Govinda marched to the Vindhyas where the king apparently of East
Málwa named Márá Sarva submitted to Govinda paying tribute. From the
Vindhyas Govinda returned to Gujarát passing the rains at Sríbhavana,
[425] apparently Sarbhon in the Ámod táluka of Broach, a favourite
locality which he had ruled during his father's lifetime. After the
rains Govinda went south as far as the Tungabhadra. On starting for
the south Govinda handed Gujarát to his brother Indra with whom begins
the Gujarát branch of the Ráshtrakútas. Several plates distinctly
mention that Indra was given the kingdom of the lord of Láta by
(his brother) Govinda. Other Gujarát grants, apparently with intent
to show that Indra won Gujarát and did not receive it in gift, after
mentioning Sarvva Amoghavarsha as the successor of Govinda (A.D. 818),
state that the king (apparently of Gujarát) was Sarvva's uncle Indra.

[Indra, A.D. 808-812.] As Govinda III. handed Gujarát to his brother
Indra about Saka 730 (A.D. 808) and as the grant of Indra's son
Karka is dated Saka 734 (A.D. 812) Indra's reign must have been
short. Indra is styled the ruler of the entire kingdom of Látesvara,
[426] the protector of the mandala of Láta given to him by his lord. An
important verse in an unpublished Baroda grant states that Indra chased
the lord of Gurjjara who had prepared to fight, and that he honourably
protected the multitude of Dakhan (Dakshinápatha) feudatories
(mahásámantas) whose glory was shattered by Srívallabha (that is
Sarvva or Amoghavarsha) [427] then heir-apparent of Govinda. That is,
in attempting to establish himself in independent power, Indra aided
certain of the Ráshtrakúta feudatories in an effort to shake off the
overlordship of Amoghavarsha.

[Karka I. A.D. 812-821.] Indra was succeeded by his son Karka I. who
is also called Suvarnavarsha and Pátálamalla. Karka reversed his
father's policy and loyally accepted the overlordship of the main
Ráshtrakútas. Three grants of Karka's remain, the Baroda grant dated
Saka 734 (A.D. 812), and two unpublished grants from Navsárí and Surat
dated respectively Saka 738 (A.D. 816) and Saka 743 (A.D. 821). Among
Doctor Bhagvánlál's collection of inscriptions bequeathed to the
British Museum the Baroda grant says that Karka's svámi or lord,
apparently Govinda III., made use of Karka's arm to protect the king
of Málava against invasion by the king of Gurjjara who had become
puffed up by conquering the lords of Gauda and Vanga that is modern
Bengal. This powerful Gurjjara king who conquered countries so distant
as Bengal has not been identified. He must have been ruling north
of the Mahí and threatened an invasion of Málwa by way of Dohad. He
may have been either a Valabhi king or one of the Bhinmál Gurjjaras,
who, during the decline of the Valabhis, and with the help of their
allies the Chávadás of Anahilaváda whose leader at this time was
Yog Rája (A.D. 806-841), may have extended their dominion as far
south as the Mahí. As the Baroda plate (A.D. 812) makes no mention
of Amoghavarsha-Sarvva while the Navsárí plate (A.D. 816) mentions
him as the next king after Govinda III. it follows that Govinda
III. died and Amoghavarsha succeeded between A.D. 812 and 816 (S. 734
and 738). This supports Mr. Fleet's conclusion, on the authority of
Amoghavarsha's Sirur inscription, that he came to the throne in Saka
736 (A.D. 814). At first Amoghavarsha was unable to make head against
the opposition of some of his relations and feudatories, supported,
as noted above, by Karka's father Indra. He seems to have owed his
subsequent success to his cousin Karka whom an unpublished Surat grant
and two later grants (S. 757 and S. 789, A.D. 835 and 867) describe
as establishing Amoghavarsha in his own place after conquering by
the strength of his arm arrogant tributary Ráshtrakútas who becoming
firmly allied to each other had occupied provinces according to their
own will.

Karka's Baroda plates (S. 734, A.D. 812) record the grant of Baroda
itself called Vadapadraka in the text. Baroda is easily identified
by the mention of the surrounding villages of Jambuváviká the modern
Jámbuváda on the east, of Ankottaka the modern Ákotá on the west,
and of Vaggháchchha perhaps the modern Vághodia on the north. The
writer of the grant is mentioned as the great minister of peace and war
Nemáditya son of Durgabhatta, and the Dútaka or grantor is said to be
Rájaputra that is prince Dantivarmman apparently a son of Karka. The
grantee is a Bráhman originally of Valabhi.

Karka's Navsárí grant (S. 738, A.D. 816) is made from Khedá and
records the gift of the village of Samípadraka in the country lying
between the Mahí and the Narbadá. The grantee is a South Indian
Bráhman from Bádámi in Bijápur, a man of learning popularly known
as Pandita Vallabharája because he was proficient in the fourteen
Vidyás. The Dútaka of this grant is a South Indian bhata or military
officer named the illustrious Dronamma.

Karka's Surat grant (S. 743, A.D. 821) is made from the royal camp on
the bank of the Vankiká apparently the Vánki creek near Balsár. It
records the grant of a field in Ambápátaka village near Nágasárika
(Navsárí) to a Jain temple at Nágariká, (Navsárí). The writer of the
grant is the minister of war and peace Náráyana son of Durgabhatta. As
this is the first grant by a Gujarát Ráshtrakúta of lands south of the
Tápti it may be inferred that in return for his support Amoghavarsha
added to Karka's territory the portion of the North Konkan which now
forms Gujarát south of the Tápti.

[Dantivarmman, Heir Apparent.] According to Karka's Baroda plate
(S. 734, A.D. 812) Karka had a son named Dantivarmman who is mentioned
as the princely Dútaka of the plate. The fact of being a Dútaka implies
that Dantivarmman was then of age. That Dantivarmman was a son of
Karka is supported by Akálavarsha's Bagumrá plate (S. 810, A.D. 888),
where, though the plate is badly composed and the grammar is faulty,
certain useful details are given regarding Dantivarmman who is clearly
mentioned as the son of Karka. Karka had another son named Dhruva,
who, according to three copperplates, succeeded to the throne. But as
Dantivarmman's son's grant is dated Saka 810 or seventy-six years later
than the Baroda plate some error seems to have crept into the genealogy
of the plate. Neither Dantivarmman nor Dhruva seems to have succeeded
their father as according to Govinda's Káví grant (A.D. 827) their
uncle Govinda succeeded his brother Karka. The explanation may be that
Dantivarmman died during his father's lifetime, and that some years
later, after a great yearning for a son, [428] probably in Karka's
old age, a second son Dhruva was born, during whose minority, after
Karka's death, Govinda appears to have temporarily occupied the throne.

[Govinda, A.D. 827-833.] This Govinda, the brother and successor of
Karka, was also called Prabhútavarsha. One plate of Govinda's Káví
grant is dated Saka 749 (A.D. 827). It gives no details regarding
Govinda. The grant is made from Broach and records the gift of a
village [429] to a temple of the Sun called Jayáditya in Kotipur near
Kápiká that is Káví thirty miles north of Broach. The writer of the
grant is Yogesvara son of Avalokita and the Dútaka or grantor was one
Bhatta Kumuda. As it contains no reference to Govinda's succession
the plate favours the view that Govinda remained in power only during
the minority of his nephew Dhruva.

[Dhruva I. A.D. 835-867.] This Dhruva, who is also called Nirupama and
Dhárávarsha, is mentioned as ruler in a Baroda grant dated Saka 757
(A.D. 835). [430] He therefore probably came to the throne either on
attaining his majority in the lifetime of his uncle and predecessor
Govinda or after Govinda's death. Dhruva's Baroda grant (S. 757,
A.D. 835) is made from a place called Sarvvamangalá near Khedá
and records the gift of a village to a Bráhman named Yoga [431] of
Badarasidhi apparently Borsad. The writer of the grant is mentioned
as the minister of peace and war, Náráyana son of Durgabhatta, and
the Dútaka or grantor is the illustrious Devarája. Dhruva seems to
have abandoned his father's position of loyal feudatory to the main
Ráshtrakútas. According to a copperplate dated Saka 832 (A.D. 910)
Vallabha that is Amoghavarsha, also called the illustrious great
Skanda, sent an army and besieged and burned the Kanthiká that is the
coast tract between Bombay and Cambay. In the course of this campaign,
according to Dhruva II.'s Bagumrá grant (S. 789, A.D. 867), [432]
Dhruva died on the field of battle covered with wounds while routing
the army of Vallabha or Amoghavarsha. This statement is supported by
a Kanheri cave inscription which shows that Amoghavarsha was still
alive in Saka 799 (A.D. 877).

[Akálavarsha, A.D. 867.] Dhruva was succeeded by his son Akálavarsha
also called Subhatunga. A verse in Dhruva II.'s Bagumrá grant (S 789,
A.D. 867) says that Akálavarsha established himself in the territory of
his father, which, after Dhruva's death in battle, had been overrun by
the army of Vallabha and had been distracted by evil-minded followers
and dependants. [433]

[Dhruva II. A.D. 867.] Akálavarsha was succeeded by his son Dhruva
II. also called Dhárávarsha and Nirupama. Of Dhruva II. two
copperplates remain the published Bagumrá grant dated Saka 789
[434] (A.D. 867) and an unpublished Baroda grant dated Saka 793
(A.D. 871). [435] Both plates record that Dhruva crushed certain
intrigues among his relatives or bandhuvarga, and established himself
firmly on the throne. Regarding the troubles at the beginning of his
reign the Bagumrá plate states that on one side Vallabha the head of
the Dakhan Ráshtrakútas was still against him; on another side Dhruva
had to face an army of Gurjjaras instigated by a member of his own
family [436]; thirdly he was opposed by certain of his relatives or
bándhaváh; and lastly he had to contend against the intrigues of
a younger brother or anuja. It further appears from Dhruva II.'s
Bagumrá plate that he checked an inroad by a Mihira king with a
powerful army. This Mihira king was probably a chief of the Káthiáváda
Mehrs who on the downfall of the Valabhis spread their power across
Gujarát. In all these troubles the Bagumrá grant notes that Dhruva
was aided by a younger brother named Govindarája. This Govindarája
is mentioned as appointed by Dhruva the Dútaka of the grant.

Dhruva II.'s Bagumrá (A.D. 867) grant was made at Bhrigu-Kachchha
or Broach after bathing in the Narbadá. It records the gift to a
Bráhman of the village of Páráhanaka, probably the village of Palsána
[437] twelve miles south-east of Bagumrá in the Balesar subdivision
of the Gáikwár's territory of Surat and Navsárí. Dhruva's Baroda
grant (A.D. 871) was also made at Broach. It is a grant to the god
Kapálesvara Mahádeva of the villages Konvalli and Nakkabhajja both
mentioned as close to the south bank of the Mahí. The facts that the
Bagumrá grant (A.D. 867) transfers a village so far south as Balesar
near Navsárí and that four years later the Baroda grant (A.D. 871)
mentions that Dhruva's territory lay between Broach and the Mahí seem
to prove that between A.D. 867 and 871 the portion of Dhruva's kingdom
south of Broach passed back into the hands of the main Ráshtrakútas.

[Akálavarsha-Krishna, A.D. 888.] The next and last known Gujarát
Ráshtrakúta king is Akálavarsha-Krishna son of Dantivarmman. A grant of
this king has been found in Bagumrá dated Saka 810 (A.D. 888). [438]
The composition of the grant is so bad and the genealogical verses
after Karka are so confused that it seems unsafe to accept any of its
details except its date which is clearly Saka 810 (A.D. 888). It seems
also improbable that the son of Dantivarmman who flourished in Saka
734 (A.D. 812) could be reigning in Saka 810 (A.D. 888) seventy-six
years later. Still the sixty-three years' reign of the contemporary
Mányakheta Ráshtrakúta Amoghavarsha (S. 736-799, A.D. 814-877) shows
that this is not impossible.

The grant which is made from Anklesvar near Broach records the gift
to two Bráhmans of the village of Kavithasádhi the modern Kosád four
miles north-east of Surat, described as situated in the Variávi (the
modern Variáv two miles north of Surat) sub-division of 116 villages
in the province of Konkan. The grant is said to have been written
by the peace and war minister the illustrious Jajjaka son of Kaluka,
the Dútaka being the head officer (mahattamasarvádhikári) the Bráhman
Ollaiyaka. [439] This grant seems to imply the recovery by the local
dynasty of some portion of the disputed area to the south of the
Tápti. This recovery must have been a passing success. After Saka 810
(A.D. 888) nothing is known of the Gujarát Ráshtrakútas. [Main Line
Restored, A.D. 888-974.] And the re-establishment of the power of the
Ráshtrakútas of Mányakheta of the main line in south Gujarát in Saka
836 (A.D. 914) is proved by two copperplates found in Navsárí which
record the grant of villages near Navsárí, in what the text calls
the Láta country, by king Indra Nityamvarsha son of Jagattunga and
grandson of Krishna Akálavarsha. [440]

That Amoghavarsha's long reign lasted till Saka 799 (A.D. 877) is
clear from the Kanheri cave inscription already referred to. His
reign can hardly have lasted much longer; about Saka 800 (A.D. 878)
may be taken to be its end.

[Krishna Akálavarsha, A.D. 888-914.] Amoghavarsha was succeeded
by his son Krishna also called Akálavarsha, both his names being
the same as those of the Gujarát Ráshtrakúta king of the same time
(A.D. 888). [441] It has been noted above that, in consequence of
the attempt of Karka's son Dhruva I. (A.D. 835-867) to establish his
independence, Amoghavarsha's relations with the Gujarát Ráshtrakútas
became extremely hostile and probably continued hostile till his death
(A.D. 877). That Amoghavarsha's son Krishna kept up the hostilities
is shown by Indra's two Navsárí plates of Saka 836 (A.D. 914)
which mention his grandfather Krishna fighting with the roaring
Gurjjara. [442] Regarding this fight the late Ráshtrakúta Kardá plate
(S. 891, A.D. 973) further says that Krishna's enemies frightened by
his exploits abandoned Khetaka, that is Khedá, with its Mandala and
its forepart that is the surrounding country. Probably this roaring
Gurjjara or king of Gujarát, was a northern ally called in by some
Ráshtrakúta of the Gujarát branch, perhaps by Krishna's namesake
the donor of the A.D. 888 Bagumrá grant. The Dakhan Krishna seems
to have triumphed over his Gujarát namesake as henceforward South
Gujarát or Láta was permanently included in the territory of the
Dakhan Ráshtrakútas. [443]

At this time (A.D. 910) a grant from Kapadvanj dated S. 832 (A.D. 910)
and published in Ep. Ind. I. 52ff. states that a mahásámanta or
noble of Krishna Akálavarsha's named Prachanda, with his dandanáyaka
Chandragupta, was in charge of a sub-division of 750 villages in the
Khedá district at Harshapura apparently Harsol near Parántij. The
grant gives the name of Prachanda's family as Bráhma-vaka (?) and
states that the family gained its fortune or Lakshmí by the prowess
of the feet of Akálavarsha, showing that the members of the family
drew their authority from Akálavarsha. The grant mentions four of
Prachanda's ancestors, all of whom have non-Gujarát Kánarese-looking
names. Though not independent rulers Prachanda's ancestors seem to have
been high Ráshtrakúta officers. The first is called Suddha-kkumbadi,
the second his son Degadi, the third Degadi's son Rájahamsa,
the fourth Rájahamsa's son Dhavalappa the father of Prachanda
and Akkuka. The plate describes Rájahamsa as bringing back to his
house its flying fortune as if he had regained lost authority. The
plate describes Dhavalappa as killing the enemy in a moment and then
giving to his lord the Mandala or kingdom which the combined enemy,
desirous of glory, had taken. This apparently refers to Akálavarsha's
enemies abandoning Khetaka with its Mandala as mentioned in the
late Ráshtrakúta Kardá plate (A.D. 973). Dhavalappa is probably
Akálavarsha's general who fought and defeated the roaring Gurjjara,
a success which may have led to Dhavalappa being placed in military
charge of Gujarát. [444] The Kapadvanj (A.D. 910) grant describes
Dhavalappa's son Prachanda with the feudatory title 'Who has obtained
the five great words.' Dr. Bhagvánlál believed Prachanda to be a
mere epithet of Akkuka, and took Chandragupta to be another name
of the same person, but the published text gives the facts as above
stated. The grantee is a Bráhman and the grant is of the village of
Vyághrása, perhaps Vágrá in Broach. [445] The plate describes Akkuka as
gaining glory fighting in the battle field. A rather unintelligible
verse follows implying that at this time the Sella-Vidyádharas,
apparently the North Konkan Siláháras (who traced their lineage from
the Vidyádharas) also helped Akálavarsha against his enemies, [446]
probably by driving them from South Gujarát. The Siláhára king at
this time would be Jhanjha (A.D. 916).

[Indra Nityamvarsha, A.D. 914.] Krishna or Akálavarsha had a son named
Jagattunga who does not appear to have come to the throne. Other plates
show that he went to Chedi the modern Bundelkhand and remained there
during his father's lifetime. By Lakshmí the daughter of the king
of Chedi, Jagattunga had a son named Indra also called Nityamvarsha
Rattakandarpa. In both of Indra's Navsárí copperplates (A.D. 914)
Indra is mentioned as Pádánudhyáta, Falling at the feet of, that is
successor of, not his father but his grandfather Akálavarsha. [447]
One historical attribute of Indra in both the plates is that "he
uprooted in a moment the Mehr," [448] apparently referring to some
contemporary Mehr king of North Káthiáváda. Both the Navsárí plates
of Saka 836 (A.D. 914) note that the grants were made under peculiar
conditions. The plates say that the donor Indra Nityamvarsha, with
his capital at Mányakheta, had come to a place named Kurundaka for
the pattabandha or investiture festival. It is curious that though
Mányakheta is mentioned as the capital the king is described as having
come to Kurundaka for the investiture. Kurundaka was apparently not
a large town as the plates mention that it was given in grant. [449]
At his investiture Indra made great gifts. He weighed himself against
gold or silver, and before leaving the scales he gave away Kurundaka
and other places, twenty and a half lákhs of dramma coins, and 400
villages previously granted but taken back by intervening kings. These
details have an air of exaggeration. At the same time gifts of coins
by lákhs are not improbable by so mighty a king as Indra and as to
the villages the bulk of them had already been alienated. The fact of
lavish grants is supported by the finding of these two plates of the
same date recording grants of two different villages made on the same
occasion, the language being the same, and also by a verse in the late
Ráshtrakúta Kardá plate (S. 894, A.D. 972) where Indra is described
as making numerous grants on copperplates and building many temples
of Siva. [450] The date of Indra's grants (S. 836, A.D. 914) is the
date of his investiture and accession. This is probable as the latest
known date of his grandfather Krishna is Saka 833 [451] (A.D. 911)
and we know that Indra's father Jagattunga did not reign. [452]
Umvará and Tenna, the villages granted in the two investiture plates,
are described as situated near Kammanijja the modern Kámlej in the
Láta province. They are probably the modern villages of Umra near
Sáyan four miles west of Kámlej, and of Tenna immediately to the west
of Bárdoli, which last is mentioned under the form Váradapallikâ as
the eastern boundary village. Dhruva II.'s Bagumrá plate (S. 789,
A.D. 867) mentions Tenna as granted by Dhruva I. to a Bráhman named
Dhoddi the father of the Nennapa who is the grantee of Dhruva II.'s
A.D. 867 Bagumrá grant, whose son Siddhabhatta is the grantee of
Indra's A.D. 914 grant. [453] The re-granting of so many villages
points to the re-establishment of the main Ráshtrakúta power and the
disappearance of the Gujarát branch of the Ráshtrakútas. [454]

Though no materials remain for fixing how long after A.D. 914 Gujarát
belonged to the Mányakheta Ráshtrakútas, they probably continued to
hold it till their destruction in Saka 894 (A.D. 972) by the Western
Chálukya king Tailappa. This is the more likely as inscriptions show
that till then the neighbours of Gujarát, the North Konkan Siláháras,
acknowledged Ráshtrakúta supremacy.

It is therefore probable that Gujarát passed to the conquering Tailappa
as part of the Ráshtrakúta kingdom. Further, as noted below in Part
II. Chapter II., it seems reasonable to suppose that about Saka
900 (A.D. 978) Tailappa entrusted Gujarát to his general Bárappa
or Dvárappa, who fought with the Solanki Múlarája of Anahilaváda
(A.D. 961-997).

[The text does not carry the question of the origin of the Ráshtrakútas
beyond the point that, about the middle of the fifth century A.D.,
two tribes bearing the closely associated names Ráthod and Ratta,
the leaders of both of which are known in Sanskrit as Ráshtrakútas,
appeared the first in Upper India the second in the Bombay Karnátak,
and that the traditions of both tribes seem to show they were
either southerners or foreigners Bráhmanised and included under the
all-embracing term Rájput. The Sanskrit form Ráshtrakúta may mean
either leaders of the Ráshtra tribe or heads of the territorial
division named ráshtra. The closely related forms Ráshtrapati
and Grámakúta occur (above page 82) in Valabhi inscriptions. And
Mr. Fleet (Kánarese Dynasties, 32) notices that Ráshtrakúta is
used in the inscriptions of many dynasties as a title equivalent to
Ráshtrapati. Such a title might readily become a family name like that
of the Sáhi Játs of the Panjáb or the Maráthi surnames Patel, Nadkarni,
and Desái. It may be noted that one of the Márwár traditions (Rájputána
Gazetteer, III. 246) connects the word Ráthod with Ráshtra country
making the original form Ráshtravara or World-blessing and referring
to an early tribal guardian Ráshtrasyena or the World-Falcon. It
is therefore possible that the origin of both forms of the name, of
Ráthod as well as of Ráshtrakúta, is the title ruler of a district. At
the same time in the case of the southern Ráshtrakútas the balance of
evidence is in support of a tribal origin of the name. The Rattas of
Saundatti in Belgaum, apparently with justice, claim descent from the
former Ráshtrakúta rulers (Belgaum Gazetteer, 355). Further that the
Ráshtrakútas considered themselves to belong to the Ratta tribe is
shown by Indra Nityamvarsha (A.D. 914) calling himself Rattakandarpa
the Love of the Rattas. The result is thus in agreement with the view
accepted in the text that Ráshtrakúta means leaders of the Ratta
tribe, the form Ráshtra being perhaps chosen because the leaders
held the position of Ráshtrakútas or District Headmen. According to
Dr. Bhandárkar (Deccan History, 9) the tribal name Ratta or Ráshtra
enters into the still more famous Dakhan tribal name Maharátha or
Mahrátta. So far as present information goes both the Rattas and the
Great Rattas are to be traced to the Rástikas mentioned in number
five of Asoka's (B.C. 245) Girnár edicts among the Aparántas or
westerners along with the Petenikas or people of Paithan about forty
miles north-east of Ahmadnagar (Kolhápur Gazetteer, 82). Whether the
Rástika of the edicts is like Petenika a purely local name and if so
why a portion of the north Dakhan should be specially known as the
country or Ráshtra are points that must remain open. [455]

The explanation that Kúta the second half of Ráshtrakúta, means
chief, has been accepted in the text. This is probably correct. At
the same time the rival theory deserves notice that the name
Ráshtrakúta is formed from two tribal names Kúta representing
the early widespread tribe allied to the Gonds known as Kottas
and Kods in the Central Provinces North Konkan and Delhi (Thána
Gazetteer, XII. Part II. 414). In support of this view it may be
noticed that Abhimanyu's fifth century Ráshtrakúta inscription
(J. Bo. Br. R. As. XVI. 92) refers to the Kottas though as enemies
not allies of the Ráshtrakútas. At the same time certain details in
Abhimanyu's grant favour an early Ráshtrakúta settlement in the Central
Provinces, the probable head-quarters of the Kottas. The grant is dated
from Mánapura and is made to Dakshina Siva of Pethapangaraka which
may be the Great Siva shrine in the Mahádev hills in Hoshangábád, as
this shrine is under the management of a petty chief of a place called
Pagára, and as Mánpur in the Vindhya hills is not far off. Against
the tribal origin of the word Kúta is to be set the fact that the
northern Rattas are also called Ráshtrakútas though any connection
between them and the Kotta tribe seems unlikely.

The question remains were the southern Rattas or Ráshtrakútas connected
with the northern Ráthods or Ráshtrakútas. If so what was the nature
of the connection and to what date does it belong. The fact that,
while the later southern Ráshtrakútas call themselves Yádavas of the
Lunar race, the northerners claim descent either from Kusa the son of
Ráma or from Hiranyakasipu would seem to prove no connection did not
Abhimanyu's fifth century grant show that in his time the southern
Ráshtrakútas had not begun to claim Yádava descent. That the Márwár
Ráthods trace their name to the ráht or spine of Indra (Tod's Annals,
II. 2), and in a closely similar fashion the Ráth or Rattu Játs of
the Sutlej (Ibbetson's 1881 Census, page 236) explain their name
as stronghanded, and the Rattas of Bijápur (Bijápur Stat. Account,
145) trace their name to the Kánarese ratta right arm, may imply no
closer connection than the common attempt to find a meaning for the
name Ratta in a suitable word of similar sound. A legend preserved
in the Rájputána Gazetteer (III. 246), but not noted by Tod, tells
how Sevji, after (A.D. 1139) the Musalmáns drove his father Jaichand
out of Kanauj (Tod's Annals, I. 88) took Khergad from the Gehlots and
went to the Karnátak. where the Ráthods had ruled before they came
to Kanauj. From the Karnátak Sevji brought the image of the Ráhtod
Ráshtrasyena which is now in the temple of Nágána in Mevád. The
account quoted in the text from Tod (Annals, I. 88) that the Ráthods
who rose to power in Márwár in the thirteenth century belonged to
a royal family who had held Kanauj since the fifth century has not
stood the test of recent inquiry. It is now known that about A.D. 470
Kanauj was in the hands of the Guptás. That about A.D. 600, according
to the contemporary Sríharshacharita it was ruled by the Maukhari
Grahavarmán who was put to death by a Málwa chief and was succeeded
by Harsha. About A.D. 750, according to the Rájátaranginí, Kanauj was
held by Yasovarmán, and, in the next century, as inscriptions prove by
the family of Bhoja. It was not till about A.D. 1050 that Kanauj was
occupied by the Gáhadavála or Gáharwála family from whom the Ráthods
of Márwár claim descent. [456] If the legendary connection of the
Márwár Ráthods with Kanauj must be dismissed can the Márwár Ráthods be
a branch of the southern Ráshtrakútas who like the Maráthás some 800
years later spread conquering northwards? Such a northern settlement of
the southern Ráshtrakútas might be a consequence of the victories of
the great Ráshtrakúta Dhruva who according to received opinions about
A.D. 790 conquered as far north as Allahábád. It is beyond question
that southerners or Karnátas were settled in North India between
the seventh and the eleventh centuries. Still the latest information
makes it improbable that Dhruva's conquests extended further north
than Gujarát. Nor has any special connection been traced between the
southern Ráshtrakútas and the middle-age settlements of southerners or
Karnátas in North India. [457] Must therefore the North Indian tribe of
Ráthods be admitted to have its origin as late as the twelfth century,
and further is the North Indian name Ráthod not tribal but derived
from the title head of a district. Several considerations make both
of these solutions unlikely if not impossible. First there is the
remarkably widespread existence of the name Ráhtor, Ratha, or Ratti,
and endless variations of these names, in almost all parts of the
Panjáb, among all castes from the Bráhman to the Baluch, among all
religions Musalmán, Sikh, Jain, and Bráhmanic. [458] No doubt the
practice of a waning tribe adopting the name of a waxing tribe has
always been common. No doubt also the fame of the name during the
last 600 years must have tempted other classes to style themselves
Ráthod. Still it is to be noted: first that (Ibbetson, page 240)
the Ráthods of the Panjáb though widespread are not numerous: and
second that the list of sub-caste-names has this merit that with
a few exceptions the holders of the sub-name are not known by it
but by some general or craft name. The evidence of these sub-caste
or tribal names seems therefore to support the view that some very
large section of the Panjáb population represent an important tribe
or nation of whom the least mixed remnant are perhaps the Ráthis or
lower class Rájputs of Kángra and Chamba (Ibbetson, pages 219 and
251) and from some connection with whom the Márwár Ráthods of the
thirteenth century may have taken their name. Among other traces of
northern Ráshtras in the middle ages may be mentioned the twelfth and
thirteenth century Ráshtrakútas of Badaun in the North-West Provinces
(Kielhorn in Epigraphia Indica, I. 61 and 63) and (A.D. 1150) in
the Kumárapála-Charitra (Tod's Western India, 182) the mention of
Ráshtra-desa near the Sawálak hills. Among earlier and more doubtful
references are the Aratrioi whom probably correctly (since at that
time A.D. 247 one main Roman trade route to Central Asia passed up
the Indus) the author of the Periplus (McCrindle, 120) places between
Abhiria or lower Sindh and Arachosia or south-east Afghanistán that
is in north Sindh or south Panjáb. Another earlier and still more
doubtful reference is Pliny's (A.D. 77) Oraturæ (Hist. Nat. VI. 23)
whom Vivien de St. Martin (Geog. Greque et Latine de l'Inde, 203)
identifies with the Ráthods. The fact that while claiming descent
from Ráma the Márwár Ráthods (Tod's Annals, II. 2 and 5) preserved
the legend that their founder was Yavanaswa from the northern city of
Paralipur supports the view that the tribe to which they belonged was
of non-Indian or Central Asian origin, and that this is the tribe of
whom traces remain in the Ráthi Rájputs of the Kángra hill country
and less purely in the widely spread Ráts, Rattas, and Rátis of the
Panjáb plains. The examples among Panjáb caste names Rora for Arora
(Ibbetson's 1881 Census, page 297), Her for Ahir (Ditto, 230-275), and
Heri for Aheri (Ditto, 310) suggest that the Panjáb Ráthors or Rattas
may be the ancient Arattas whom the Mahábhárata (Chap. VII. Verse
44. J. Bl. Soc. VI. Pt. I. 387 and Vivien de St. Martin Geog. Greque et
Latine de l'Inde, 149) ranks with Prasthalas, Madras, and Gandháras,
Panjáb and frontier tribes, whose identification with the Báhikas
(Karnaparvan, 2063ff.) raises the probability of a common Central Asian
origin. Remembering that the evidence (Kshatrapa Chapter, pages 22 and
33) favours the view that the Kshatrapa family who ruled the Panjáb
between B.C. 70 and A.D. 78 were of the same tribe as Nahápana, and
also that Sháhi is so favourite a prefix in Samudra Gupta's (A.D. 380)
list of Kushán tribes, the suggestion may be offered that Kshaharáta
is the earlier form of Sháharatta and is the tribe of foreigners
afterwards known in the Panjáb as Arattas and of which traces survive
in the present widespread tribal names Ráta, Ratta, Ratha, and Ráthor.]

CHAPTER XII.

THE MIHIRAS OR MERS.

A.D. 470-900.

That the Guptas held sway in Káthiáváda till the time of Skandagupta
(A.D. 454-470) is proved by the fact that his Sorath Viceroy is
mentioned in Skandagupta's inscription on the Girnár rock. After
Skandagupta under the next known Gupta king Budhagupta (Gupta 165-180,
A.D. 484-499) no trace remains of Gupta sovereignty in Sorath. It is
known that Budhagupta was a weak king and that the Gupta kingdom had
already entered on its decline and lost its outlying provinces. Who
held Suráshtra and Gujarát during the period of Gupta decline until
the arrival and settlement of Bhatkárka in A.D. 514 (Gupta 195) is not
determined. Still there is reason to believe that during or shortly
after the time of Budhagupta some other race or dynasty overthrew the
Gupta Viceroy of these provinces and took them from the Guptas. These
powerful conquerors seem to be the tribe of Maitrakas mentioned
in Valabhi copperplates as people who had settled in Káthiáváda and
established a mandala or kingdom. Though these Maitrakas are mentioned
in no other records from Suráshtra there seems reason to identify the
Maitrakas with the Mihiras the well-known tribe of Mhers or Mers. In
Sanskrit both mitra and mihira are names of the sun, and it would
be quite in agreement with the practise of Sanskrit writers to use
derivatives of the one for those of the other. These Mhers or Mers
are still found in Káthiáváda settled round the Barda hills while
the Porbandar chiefs who are known as Jethvás are recognized as the
head of the tribe. The name Jethvá is not a tribal but a family name,
being taken from the proper or personal name of the ancestor of the
modern chiefs. As the Porbandar chiefs are called the kings of the
Mhers they probably belong to the same tribe, though, being chiefs,
they try, like other ruling families, to rank higher than their tribe
tracing their origin from Hanúmán. Though the Jethvás appear to have
been long ashamed to acknowledge themselves to belong to the Mher
tribe the founders of minor Mher kingdoms called themselves Mher
kings. The Porbandar chiefs have a tradition tracing their dynasty
to Makaradhvaja son of Hanúmán, and there are some Puránic legends
attached to the tradition. The historical kernel of the tradition
appears to be that the Mhers or Jethvás had a makara or fish as their
flag or symbol. One of the mythical stories of Makaradhvaja is that he
fought with Mayúradhvaja. Whatever coating of fable may have overlaid
the story, it contains a grain of history. Mayúradhvaja stands for
the Guptas whose chief symbol was a peacock mayúra, and with them
Makaradhvaja that is the people with the fish-symbol that is the Mhers
had a fight. This fight is probably the historical contest in which
the Mhers fought with and overthrew the Gupta Viceroy of Káthiáváda.

The Káthiáváda Mhers are a peculiar tribe whose language dress and
appearance mark them as foreign settlers from Upper India. Like the
Málavas, Játs, Gurjjaras, and Pahlavas, the Mhers seem to have passed
through the Punjáb Sindh and North Gujarát into Káthiáváda leaving
settlements at Ajmír, Bádner, Jesalmír, Kokalmír, and Mherváda. How
and when the Mhers made these settlements and entered Káthiáváda is not
known. It may be surmised that they came with Toramána (A.D. 470-512)
who overthrew the Guptas, and advanced far to the south and west in
the train of some general of Toramána's who may perhaps have entered
Suráshtra. This is probable as the date of Toramána who overthrew
Budhagupta is almost the same as that of the Maitrakas mentioned
as the opponents and enemies of Bhatárka. In the time of Bhatárka
(A.D. 509-520?) the Mhers were firmly established in the peninsula,
otherwise they would not be mentioned in the Valabhi grants as
enemies of Bhatárka, a tribe or mandala wielding incomparable
power. As stated above in Chapter VIII. some time after the Mher
settlement and consolidation of power, Bhatárka seems to have come
as general of the fallen Guptas through Málwa and Broach by sea to
East Káthiáváda. He established himself at Valabhi and then gradually
dislodged the Mhers from Sorath until they retired slightly to the
north settling eventually at Morbi, which the Jethvás still recognize
as the earliest seat of their ancestors. At Morbi they appear to have
ruled contemporarily with the Valabhis. In support of this it is to
be noted that no known Valabhi plate records any grant of lands or
villages in Hálár, Machhukántha, or Okhámandal in North Káthiáváda. As
the northmost place mentioned in Valabhi plates is Venuthali known as
Wania's Vanthali in Hálár it may be inferred that not the Valabhis but
the Mhers ruled the north coast of Káthiáváda, probably as feudatories
or subordinates of the Valabhis. On the overthrow of Valabhi about
A.D. 770 the Mhers appear to have seized the kingdom and ruled the
whole of Káthiáváda dividing it into separate chiefships grouped under
the two main divisions of Bardái and Gohelvádia. About A.D. 860 the
Mhers made incursions into Central Gujarát. A copperplate dated Saka
789 (A.D. 847) of the Gujarát Ráshtrakúta king Dhruva describes him
as attacked by a powerful Mihira king whom he defeated. [459] At
the height of their power the Mhers seem to have established their
capital at the fort of Bhumli or Ghumli in the Bardá hills in the
centre of Káthiáváda. The traditions about Ghumli rest mainly on modern
Jethvá legends of no historical interest. The only known epigraphical
record is a copperplate of a king named Jâchikadeva found in the Morbi
district. [460] Unfortunately only the second plate remains. Still the
fish mark on the plate, the locality where it was found, and its date
leave little doubt that the plate belongs to the Makaradhvaja or Jethvá
kings. The date of the grant is 585 Gupta era the 5th Phálguna Sudi
that is A.D. 904, about 130 years after the destruction of Valabhi,
a date with which the form of the letters agrees.

A similar copperplate in which the king's name appears in the
slightly different form Jáikadeva has been found at Dhiniki in
the same neighbourhood as the first and like it bearing the fish
mark. [461] This copperplate describes the king as ruling at
Bhúmiliká or Bhúmli in Sorath and gives him the high titles of
Parama-bhattáraka-Mahárájádhirája-Paramesvara, that is Great Lord
Great King of Kings Great King, titles which imply wide extent and
independence of rule. This grant purports to be made on the occasion of
a solar eclipse on Sunday Vikrama Samvat 794 Jyeshtha constellation,
the no-moon of the second half of Kárttika. This would be A.D. 738 or
166 years before the Jáchika of the Morbí plate. Against this it is to
be noted that the letters of this plate, instead of appearing as old
as eighth century letters, look later than the letters of the tenth
century Morbí plate. As neither the day of the week, the constellation,
nor the eclipse work out correctly Dr. Bhagvánlál believed the plate
to be a forgery of the eleventh century, executed by some one who had
seen a fish-marked copperplate of Jáchika dated in the Saka era. It
should however be noted that the names of ministers and officers
which the plate contains give it an air of genuineness. Whether the
plate is or is not genuine, it is probably true that Jáikadeva was
a great independent sovereign ruling at Bhúmli. Though the names of
the other kings of the dynasty, the duration of the Bhúmli kingdom,
and the details of its history are unknown it may be noted that the
dynasty is still represented by the Porbandar chiefs. Though at present
Bhúmli is deserted several ruined temples of about the eleventh century
stand on its site. It is true no old inscriptions have been found;
it is not less true that no careful search has been made about Bhúmli.

Early in the tenth century a wave of invasion from Sindh seems to
have spread over Kacch and Káthiáváda. Among the invading tribes
were the Jádejás of Kacch and the Chúdásamás of Sorath, who like the
Bhattis of Jesalmír call themselves of the Yaduvamsa stock. Doctor
Bhagvánlál held that the Chúdásamás were originally of the Ábhíra
tribe, as their traditions attest connection with the Ábhíras and
as the description of Graharipu one of their kings by Hemachandra
in his Dvyásraya points to his being of some local tribe and not of
any ancient Rájput lineage. Further in their bardic traditions as
well as in popular stories the Chúdásamás are still commonly called
Áhera-ránás. The position of Aberia in Ptolemy (A.D. 150) seems to show
that in the second century the Ahirs were settled between Sindh and
the Panjáb. Similarly it may be suggested that Jádejá is a corruption
of Jaudhejá which in turn comes from Yaudheya (the change of y to
j being very common) who in Kshatrapa Inscriptions appear as close
neighbours of the Ahirs. After the fall of the Valabhis (A.D. 775)
the Yaudheyas seem to have established themselves in Kacch and the
Ahirs settled and made conquests in Káthiáváda. On the decline of
local rule brought about by these incursions and by the establishment
of an Ahir or Chúdásamá kingdom at Junágadh, the Jethvás seem to have
abandoned Bhúmli which is close to Junágadh and gone to Srínagar or
Kántelun near Porbandar which is considered to have been the seat of
Jethvá power before Porbandar.

A copperplate found at Haddálá on the road from Dholka to Dhandhuka
dated A.D. 917 (Saka 839) shows that there reigned at Vadhwán a
king named Dharanívaráha of the Chápa dynasty, [462] who granted a
village to one Mahesvaráchárya, an apostle of the Ámardáka Sákhá of
Saivism. Dharanívaráha and his ancestors are described as feudatory
kings, ruling by the grace of the feet of the great king of kings the
great lord the illustrious Mahípáladeva. This Mahípála would seem to
be some great king of Káthiáváda reigning in A.D. 917 over the greater
part of the province. Dr. Bhagvánlál had two coins of this king of
about that time, one a copper coin the other a silver coin. The coins
were found near Junágadh. The copper coin, about ten grains in weight,
has one side obliterated but the other side shows clearly the words
Ráná Srí Mahípála Deva. The silver coin, about fourteen grains in
weight, has on the obverse a well-executed elephant and on the reverse
the legend Ráná Srí Mahípála Deva. From the locality where the name
Mahípála appears both in coins and inscriptions, and from the fact
that the more reliable Chúdásamá lists contain similar names, it may
be assumed as probable that Mahípála was a powerful Chúdásamá ruler
of Káthiáváda in the early part of the tenth century.

After the fall of Valabhi no other reliable record remains of any
dynasty ruling over the greater part of Gujarát. The most trustworthy
and historical information is in connection with the Chávadás of
Anahilapura. Even for the Chávadás nothing is available but scant
references recorded by Jain authors in their histories of the Solankis
and Vághelás.

[The Chúdásamás, A.D. 900-940.] [The modern traditions of the Chúdásamá
clan trace their origin to the Yádava race and more immediately to the
Samma tribe of Nagar Thatha in Sindh. [463] The name of the family is
said to have been derived from Chúdáchandra the first ruler of Vanthalí
(Káthiáwár Gazetteer, 489). Traces of a different tradition are to
be found in the Tuhfat-ul-Kirám (Elliot, I. 337) which gives a list
of Chúdásamá's ancestors from Nuh (Noah), including not only Krishna
the Yádava but also Ráma of the solar line. In this pedigree the
Musalmán element is later than the others: but the attempt to combine
the solar and lunar lines is a sure sign that the Samma clan was not
of Hindu origin, and that it came under Hindu influence fairly late
though before Sindh became a Musalmán province. This being admitted it
follows that the Sammas were one of the numerous tribes that entered
India during the existence of the Turkish empire in Transoxiana
(A.D. 560-c. 750). In this connection it is noteworthy that some of
the Jáms bore such Turkish names as Tamáchi, Tughlik, and Sanjár.

The migration of the Sammas to Kacch is ascribed by the Taríkh-i-Tahiri
(A.D. 1621) to the tyranny of the Súmra chiefs. The Sammas found
Kacch in the possession of the Cháwaras, who treated them kindly,
and whom they requited by seizing the fort of Gúntrí by a stratagem
similar to that which brought about the fall of Girnár.

The date of the Chúdásamá settlement at Vanthalí is usually fixed
on traditional evidence, at about A.D. 875, but there is reason to
think that this date is rather too early. In the first place it
is worthy of notice that Chúdáchandra, the traditional eponym of
the family, is in the Tuhfat-ul-Kirám made a son of Jádam (Yádava)
and only a great-grandson of Krishna himself, a fact which suggests
that, if not entirely mythical, he was at all events a very distant
ancestor of Múlarája's opponent Grahári, and was not an actual ruler of
Vanthalí. As regards Grahári's father Visvavaráha and his grandfather
Múlarája, there is no reason to doubt that they were real persons,
although it is very questionable whether the Chúdásamás were settled
in Káthiáváda in their time. In the first place, the Morbí grant
of Jáikadeva shows that the Jethvás had not been driven southwards
before A.D. 907. Secondly Dharanívaráha's Vadhván grant proves that the
Chápa family of Bhínmál were still supreme in Káthiáváda in A.D. 914:
whereas the Taríkh-i-Tahiri's account of the Chúdásamá conquest
of Kacch implies that the Cháwaras, who must be identified with
the Chápas of Bhínmál, were losing their power when the Chúdásamás
captured Gúntrí, an event which must have preceded the settlement
at Vanthalí in Káthiáváda. Beyond the fact that Múlarája Solanki
transferred the capital to Anahilaváda in A.D. 942, we know nothing
of the events which led to the break-up of the Bhínmál empire. But
it is reasonable to suppose that between A.D. 920 and 940 the Chápas
gradually lost ground and the Chúdásamás were able first to conquer
Sindh and then to settle in Káthiáváda.--A. M. T. J.]

[Káthiáváda contains three peculiar and associated classes of Hindus,
the Mers, the Jethvás, and the Jhálás. The Mers and the Jethvás stand
to each other in the relation of vassal and lord. The Jhálás are
connected with the Jethvás by origin history and alliance. The bond
of union between the three classes is not only that they seem to be of
foreign that is of non-Hindu origin, but whether or not they belong to
the same swarm of northern invaders, that they all apparently entered
Káthiáváda either by land or sea through Sindh and Kacch. So far
as record or tradition remains the Mers and [The Jethvás.] Jethvás
reached Káthiáváda in the latter half of the fifth century after
Christ, and the Jhálás, and perhaps a second detachment of Mers and
Jethvás, some three hundred years later. [464] The three tribes differ
widely in numbers and in distribution. The ruling Jethvás are a small
group found solely in south-west Káthiáváda. [465] The Jhálás, who
are also known as Makvánas, are a much larger clan. They not only
fill north-east Káthiáváda, but from Káthiáváda, about A.D. 1500,
spread to Rájputána and have there established a second Jháláváda,
[466] where, in reward for their devotion to the Sesodia Rája of
Mewád in his struggles with the Emperor Akbar (A.D. 1580-1600), the
chief was given a daughter of the Udepur family and raised to a high
position among Rájputs. [467] The Mers are a numerous and widespread
race. They seem to be the sixth to tenth century Medhs, Meds, Mands,
or Mins of Baluchistán, South-Sindh, Kacch, and Káthiáváda. [468]
Further they seem to be the Mers of Meváda or Medapatha in Rájputána
[469] and of Mairváda in Málava, [470] and also to be the Musalmán Meos
and Minas of Northern India. [471] In Gujarát their strength is much
greater than the 30,000 or 40,000 returned as [The Mers.] Mers. One
branch of the tribe is hidden under the name Koli; another has
disappeared below the covering of Islám. [472]

Formerly except the vague contention that the Medhás, Jhetvás, and
Jhála-Makvánás were northerners of somewhat recent arrival little
evidence was available either to fix the date of their appearance in
Káthiáváda or to determine to which of the many swarms of non-Hindu
Northerners they belonged. [473] This point Dr. Bhagvánlál's remarks
in the text go far to clear. The chief step is the identification of
the Mers with the Maitrakas, the ruling power in Káthiáváda between
the decline of the Guptas about A.D. 470 and the establishment of
Valabhi rule about sixty years later. And further that they fought
at the same time against the same Hindu rulers and that both are
described as foreigners and northerners favours the identification
of the [White Húnas.] power of the Maitrakas with the North Indian
empire of the Epthalites, Yethas, or White Húnas. [474]

Though the sameness in name between the Mihiras and Mihirakula
(A.D. 508-530), the great Indian champion of the White Húnas, may
not imply sameness of tribe it points to a common sun-worship. [475]

That the Multán sun-worship was introduced under Sassanian influence
is supported by the fact (Wilson's Ariana Antiqua, 357) that the
figure of the sun on the fifth century Hindu sun coins is in the
dress of a Persian king; that the priests who performed the Multán
sun-worship were called Magas; and by the details of the dress and
ritual in the account of the introduction of sun-worship given in
the Bhavishya Purána. [476] That the Meyds or Mands had some share in
its introduction is supported by the fact that the Purána names the
third or Sudra class of the sun-worshippers Mandagas. [477] That the
Meyds were associated with the Magas is shown by the mention of the
Magas as Mihiragas. [478] The third class whom the Bhavishya Purána
associates with the introduction of sun-worship are the Mânas who
are given a place between the Magas and the Mands. The association
of the Mânas with the Mihiras or Maitrakas suggests that Mâna is
Mauna a Puránic name for the White Húnas. [479] That the Multán sun
idol of the sixth and seventh centuries was a Húna idol and Multán
the capital of a Húna dynasty seems in agreement with the paramount
position of the Rais of Alor or Rori in the sixth century. Though
their defeat by Yesodharmman of Málwa about A.D. 540 at the battle
of Karur, sixty miles east of Multán, may have ended Húna supremacy
in north and north-west India it does not follow that authority at
once forsook the Húnas. Their widespread and unchallenged dominion
in North India, the absence of record of any reverse later than the
Karur defeat, the hopelessness of any attempt to pass out of India in
the face of the combined Turk and Sassanian forces make it probable
that the Húnas and their associated tribes, adopting Hinduism and
abandoning their claim to supremacy, settled in west and north-west
India. This view finds support in the leading place which the Húnas
and Hára-Húnas, the Maitrakas or Mers, and the Gurjjaras hold in the
centuries that follow the overthrow of the White Húna empire. According
to one rendering of Cosmas [480] (A.D. 525) the chief of Orrhotha or
Sorath in common with several other coast rulers owed allegiance to
Gollas, apparently, as is suggested at page 75 of the text, to Gulla
or Mihirgulla the Indian Emperor of the White Húnas. These details
support the view that the Maitrakas, Mihiras, or Mers who in Cosmas'
time were in power in Káthiáváda, and to whose ascendancy during the
seventh and eighth centuries both the Chinese pilgrim Hiuen Tsiang
(A.D. 612-640) and the Arab historians of Sindh bear witness, were a
portion of the great White Húna invasion (A.D. 480-530). [481] In the
many recorded swarmings south from Central Asia into Persia and India
no feature is commoner than the leading of the conquered by certain
families of the conquering tribe. Chinese authorities place it beyond
doubt that when, towards the middle of the fifth century A.D., the
White Húnas crossed the Oxus they found in power a cognate tribe of
northerners whose date of settlement on the Indian frontier was less
than a century old. This preceding swarm was the Yuán-Yuán, Var-Var,
or Avár, who, about the close of the fourth century (A.D. 380), had
driven from Balkh southwards into the Kábul valley Kitolo the last
ruler of the long established Yuetchi (B.C. 50-A.D. 380). [482] It
is known that in retreating before the Yuán-Yuán a division of the
Baktrian Yuetchi, under the leadership of Kitolo's son, under the
name of the Kidáras or Little Yuetchi, established their power in
Gandhára and Pesháwar. [483] This Kidára invasion must have driven a
certain share of the people of the Kábul valley to the east of the
Indus. The invasion of the White Húnas a century later, who were
welcomed as allies by some of the Panjáb chiefs, [484] would cause
fresh movements among the frontier tribes. The welcome given to the
Húnas, and the show and dash which marked their century of ascendancy
in India and Persia, make it probable that as leaders they conducted
south as far as Káthiáváda and Málava large bodies of the earlier
northern settlers. To which of the waves of earlier northerners the
Medhs belonged is doubtful. [485] The view held by Pandit Bhagvánlál
that one branch of the Medhs entered India in the first century before
Christ among the tribes of which the great Yuechi were the chief is on
the whole in agreement with General Cunningham's argument that Medus
Hydaspes, Virgil's phrase for the Jhelum, proves that the Medhs were
then (B.C. 40) already settled on its banks. [486]

Dr. Bhagvánlál's view that the Jethvás are Medhs ennobled by long
overlordship is somewhat doubtfully shared by Colonel Watson [487]
and is not inconsistent with Tod's opinions. [488] Still though the
Hindu ruler-worship, which, as in the case of the Marátha Siváji,
explains the raising to the twice-born of leaders of successful early
and foreign tribes makes it possible that the Jethvás were originally
Mers, it seems on the whole probable that the Jethvás' claim to an
origin distinct from the Mers is well founded. The evidence recorded
by Colonel Tod and the name Jethva led the late Dr. John Wilson to
trace the Jethvás to the Játs or Jits. [489] According to the bards
the name of the Káthiáváda tribe Jethva is derived from Jetha No. 85
or No. 95 of the Porbandar list, who was probably so called because he
was born under the Jyeshtha constellation. [490] The common practice of
explaining a tribal name by inventing some name-giving chief deprives
this derivation of most of its probability. [491] In the present case
it may further be noticed that the name Jethi is borne by two of the
chiefs earlier than the Jetha referred to. [492] In the absence of
any satisfactory explanation the name Jethva suggests an origin in
Yetha the shortened Chinese form of Ye-ta-i-li-to or Ephthalite the
name of the ruling class of the White Húnas. [493] It is true that so
good an authority as Specht [494] holds that the shortened form Yetha
is peculiar to the Chinese and was never in use. But the form Tetal
or Haital, adopted by Armenian Musalmán and Byzantine historians,
[495] makes probable an Indian Yethál or Jethál if not a Yetha or
Jetha. Nor does there seem any reason why Yetha the Chinese form
of the word should not be more likely to be adopted in India than
the western and otherwise less correct form Tetal or Haithal. In
any case the irregular change from a correct Yethál to an incorrect
Yetha cannot be considered of much importance, if, as seems likely,
the change was made in order to give the word an Indian meaning. [496]
The v in Jethva would come to be added when the origin from a chief
named Jetha was accepted.

[Jhálás.] Another name for the White Húnas, or for a section of the
White Húna swarm, is preserved by Cosmas [497] in the form Juvia. This
form, if it is not a misreading for Ounia or Húna, suggests Jáuvla
the recently identified name of the tribe ennobled in India by the
great Toramána (A.D. 450-500) and his son Mihirakula (A.D. 500-540),
and of which a trace seems to remain in the Jáwla and Jháwla divisions
of Panjáb Gujjars. [498] This Jáuvla, under such a fire baptism as
would admit the holders of the name among Hindus, might be turned into
Jvála flaming and Jvála be shortened to Jhála. That Jhála was formerly
punningly connected with flame is shewn by a line from the bard Chand,
'The lord of the Ránás the powerful Jhála like a flaming fire.' [499]
That the Káthiáváda bards were either puzzled by the name Jhála or
were unwilling to admit its foreign origin is shewn by the story
preserved in the Rás Málá, [500] that the tribe got the name because
the children of Hirpál Makvána, about to be crushed by an elephant,
were snatched away jhála by their witch-mother. It has been noticed
in the text that the break in Gujarát History between A.D. 480 and
520, agreeing with the term of Húna supremacy in North India, seems
to imply a similar supremacy in Gujarát. The facts that up to the
twelfth century Húnas held a leading place in Gujarát chronicles,
[501] and that while in Rájputána and other parts of Northern India
the traces of Huns are fairly widespread in Gujarát they have almost
if not altogether disappeared, support the view that the Húna strain
in Káthiáváda is hid under the names Mera, Jethva, and Jhála. [502]

PART II.

THE KINGDOM OF ANAHILAVÁDA.

A.D. 720-1300.

CHAPTER I.

THE CHÁVADÁS

(A.D. 720-956.)

The history embodied in the preceding chapters is more or less
fragmentary, pieced together from coins, stone and copperplate
inscriptions, local traditions, and other similar sources. A history
based on such materials alone must of necessity be imperfect, leaving
blanks which it may be hoped fresh details will gradually fill.

The rise of the Anahilaváda kingdom (A.D. 720) marks a new period of
Gujarát history regarding which materials are available from formal
historical writings. [503] Though this section of Gujarát history
begins with the establishment of Anahilaváda by the Chávadás
(A.D. 720-956) the details for the earlier portions are very
imperfect being written during the time of the Chálukya or Solanki
(A.D. 957-1242) successors of the Chávadás. The chief sources
of information regarding the earlier period of Chávadá rule are
the opening chapters of the Prabandhachintámani, Vichárasreni,
Sukritasankírtana, and Ratnamálá. [504]

[Pañchásar, A.D. 788.] Before the establishment of Anahilaváda a small
Chávadá chiefship centred at Pañchásar, now a fair-sized village in
Vadhiár between Gujarát and Kacch. [505] The existence of a Chávadá
chiefship at Pañchásar is proved by the Navsárí grant dated Samvat 490
(A.D. 788-89) of the Gujarát Chálukya king Pulikesí Janásraya. This
grant in recording the triumphant progress of an army of Tájikas or
Arabs from Sindh to Navsárí and mentioning the kingdoms "afflicted"
by the Arabs, names the Chávotakas next after the kings of Kacch and
Sauráshtra. These Chávotakas can be no other than the Chávadás of
Pañchásar on the borders of Kacch. The Chávadás of Pañchásar do not
appear to have been important rulers. At the most they seem to have
held Vadhiár and part of the north coast of Káthiáváda. Whatever be
the origin of the name Chávadá, which was afterwards Sanskritised
into the highsounding Chápotkata or Strongbow, it does not seem to
be the name of any great dynasty. The name very closely resembles the
Gujaráti Chor (Prakrit Chautá or Choratá) meaning thieves or robbers;
and Jávadá, which is a further corruption of Chávadá, is the word now
in use in those parts for a thief or robber. Except the mention of
the Chávotakas in the Navsárí copperplate we do not find the Chávadás
noticed in any known cotemporary Gujarát copperplates. For this reason
it seems fair to regard them as unimportant rulers over a territory
extending from Pañchásar to Anahilaváda.

[Jayasekhara, A.D. 696.] The author of the Ratnamálá (C. 1230
A.D.) says that in A.D. 696 (S. 752) Jayasekhara the Chávadá king of
Pañchásar was attacked by the Chaulukya king Bhuvada of Kalyánakataka
in Kanyákubja or Kanoj and slain by Bhuvada in battle. Before his
death Jayasekhara, finding his affairs hopeless, sent his pregnant
wife Rupasundarí to the forest in charge of her brother Surapála,
one of his chief warriors. After Jayasekhara's death Rupasundarí
gave birth to a son named Vanarája who became the illustrious
founder of Anahilaváda. It is hard to say how much truth underlies
this tradition. In the seventh century not Chaulukya but Pála kings
flourished in Kanoj. No place of importance called Kalyánakataka is
recorded in the Kanoj territory. And though there was a southern
Chálukya kingdom with its capital at Kalyán, its establishment
at Kalyán was about the middle of the eleventh not in the seventh
century. Further the known Dakhan Chálukya lists contain no king
named Bhuvada, unless he be the great Chálukya king Vijayáditya
(A.D. 696-733) also called Bhuvanásraya, who warred in the north and
was there imprisoned but made his escape. The inference is that the
author of the Ratnamálá, knowing the Solankis originally belonged to
a city called Kalyán, and knowing that a Chálukya king named Bhuvada
had defeated the Chávadás may have called Bhuvada king of Kalyánkataka
and identified Kalyánkataka with a country so well known to Puránic
fame as Kanyákubja. This view is supported by the absence in the
Prabandhachintámani and other old records of any mention of an invasion
from Kanoj. It is possible that in A.D. 696 some king Bhuvada of the
Gujarát Chálukyas, of whom at this time branches were ruling as far
north as Kaira, [506] invaded the Chávadás under Jayasekhara. Since
traces of a Chávotaka kingdom remain, at least as late as A.D. 720,
it seems probable that the destruction of Pañchásar was caused not by
Bhuvada in A.D. 696, but in the Arab raid mentioned above whose date
falls about A.D. 720. [507] About A.D. 720 may therefore be taken
as the date of the birth of Vanarája. Merutunga the author of the
Prabandhachintámani tells how Rupasundarí was living in the forest
swinging her son in a hammock, when a Jain priest named Sílagunasúri
noticing as he passed royal marks on the boy bought him from his
mother. The story adds that a nun named Víramatí brought up the boy
whom the sádhu called Vanarája or the forest king. When eight years
old, the priest employed Vanarája to protect his place of worship
from rats. The boy's skill in shooting rats convinced the priest he
was not fit to be a sádhu but was worthy of a kingdom. He therefore
returned the boy to his mother. These details seem invented by the
Jains in their own honour. No mention of any such story occurs in
the Ratnamálá. [508]

[Vanarája, A.D. 720-780 (?).] In the forests where Vanarája passed
his youth lived his maternal uncle Surapála, one of Jayasekhara's
generals, who, after his sovereign's defeat and death, had
become an outlaw. Vanarája grew up under Surapála's charge. The
Prabandhachintámani records the following story of the origin of
Vanarája's wealth. A Kanyákubja king married Mahánaká the daughter
of a Gujarát king. To receive the proceeds of the marriage cess
which the Gujarát king had levied from his subjects, a deputation
or panchkúla came from Kanyákubja to Gujarát. The deputation made
Vanarája their leader or sellabhrit to realize the proceeds of the
cess. In six months Vanarája collected 24 lákhs of Páruttha drammas
[509] and 4000 horse, which the deputation took and started for
Kanyákubja. Vanarája waylaid and killed them, secured the money
and horses, and remained in hiding for a year. With the wealth thus
acquired Vanarája enrolled an army and established his power assuming
the title of king. [Founding of Anahilaváda, A.D. 746-765.] He fixed
the site of a capital which afterwards rose to be the great city of
Anahilapura. The story of the choice of the site is the usual story
of a hunted hare turning on the hounds showing the place to be the
special nurse of strength and courage. Vanarája is said to have asked
a Bharvád or Shepherd named Anahila son of Sákhadá to show him the
best site. Anahila agreed on condition that the city should be called
by his name. Anahila accordingly showed Vanarája the place where a
hare had attacked and chased a dog. Though much in this tradition is
fabulous the city may have been called after some local chief since
it was popularly known as Anahilaváda (Sk. Anahilaváta) that is the
place of Anahila. In the Prabandhachintámani Merutunga gives A.D. 746
(S. 802) as the date of the installation of Vanarája, while in his
Vichárasreni the same author gives A.D. 765 (S. 821 Vaisakha Sukla
2) as the date of the foundation of the city. The discrepancy may
be explained by taking A.D. 746 (S. 802) to refer to the date of
Vanarája's getting money enough to fix the site of his capital, and
A.D. 765 (S. 821) to refer to the date of his installation in the
completed Anahilaváda. Local tradition connects the date A.D. 746
(S. 802) with an image of Ganpati which is said to be as old as
the establishment of the city and to bear the date 802. But as the
letters of the inscription on the image can be made out by ordinary
readers they cannot have been inscribed at nearly so early a date as
802. A.D. 765 (S. 821), the year given in the Vichárasreni, seems the
more probable date for the installation as the Prabandhachintámani
says that Vanarája got himself installed at Anahilapura when he
was about fifty. [510] This accords with the date fixed on other
grounds. Placing Vanarája's birth at about A.D. 720 would make him 44
in A.D. 765 (S. 821) the date at which according to the Vichárasreni
he was formally installed as sovereign of Anahilaváda. Merutunga in
both his works gives the length of Vanarája's life at 109 and of his
reign at sixty years. The figure 60 seems to mark the length of his
life and not of his reign. So long a reign as sixty years is barely
possible for a sovereign who succeeded late in life, and the 109
years of his life can hardly be correct. Taking Vanarája's age at
45 when he was installed in A.D. 765 (S. 821) and allowing fifteen
years more to complete the sixty years A.D. 780 (S. 836) would be
the closing year of his reign.

[Vanarája's Installation.] The Prabandhachintámani narrates
how generously Vanarája rewarded those who had helped him in his
adversity. His installation was performed by a woman named Srí Deví
of Kákara village whom in fulfilment of an early promise Vanarája
had taken to be his sister. [511] The story regarding the promise
is that once when Vanarája had gone with his uncle on a thieving
expedition to Kákara village and had broken into the house of a
merchant he by mistake dipped his hand into a pot of curds. As to
touch curds is the same as to dine at a house as a guest, Vanarája
left the house without taking anything from it. [512] Hearing what
had happened the merchant's sister invited Vanarája as a brother to
dinner and gave him clothes. In return Vanarája promised if he ever
regained his father's kingdom he should receive his installation as
king at her hands. [513] Vanarája chose as minister a Bania named
Jámba. The story is that while Vanarája was looting with two others
he came across a merchant Jámba who had five arrows. Seeing only
three enemies, Jámba broke and threw away two of the arrows, shouting
'One for each of you.' Vanarája admiring his coolness persuaded Jámba
to join his band and found him so useful that he promised to make
him minister. From the absence of any reference to him in these and
similar tales it is probable that his uncle Surapála died before the
installing of Vanarája. Vanarája is said to have built at Anahilváda
a Jain temple of Pañchásará Párasnáth so called because the image was
brought from the old settlement of Pañchásar. Mention of this temple
continues during the Solanki and Vághelá times.

[His Image.] Vanarája is said to have placed a bowing image of himself
facing the image of Párasnáth. The figure of Vanarája is still shown
at Sidhpur and a woodcut of it is given by the late Mr. Forbes in
his Rás Málá. It is clearly the figure of a king with the umbrella of
state and a nimbus round the head and in the ears the long ornaments
called kundalas noticed by Arab travellers as characteristic of the
Balhara or Ráshtrakúta kings who were cotemporary with Vanarája. [514]
The king wears a long beard, a short waistcloth or dhoti, a waistband
or kammarband, and a shoulder garment or uparna whose ends hang down
the back. Besides the earrings he is adorned with bracelets armlets
and anklets and a large ornament hangs across the chest from the left
shoulder to the right hip. The right hand is held near the chest in
the act of granting protection: and the left hand holds something
which cannot be made out. By his side is the umbrella-bearer and five
other attendants. The statue closely resembles the lifesize figure of
a king of the Solanki period lying in the yard of a temple at Máliá
about twenty-four miles north of Somanátha Patan. At Somanátha Patan
are similar but less rich cotemporary figures of local officers
of the Solankis. Another similar figure of which only the torso
remains is the statue of Anrája the father of Vastupála in a niche
in Vastupála's temple at Girnár. The details of this figure belong
to the Solanki period.

[Vanarája's Successors, A.D. 780-961.] The lists of Vanarája's
successors vary so greatly in the names, in the order of succession,
and in the lengths of reigns, that little trust can be placed in
them. The first three agree in giving a duration of 196 years to the
Chávadá dynasty after the accession of Vanarája. The accession of the
Solanki founder Múlarája is given in the Vichárasreni at Samvat 1017
and in the Prabandhachintámani at Samvat 998 corresponding with the
original difference of nineteen years (S. 802 and 821) in the founding
of the city. This shows that though the total duration of the dynasty
was traditionally known to be 196 years the order of succession was
not known and guesses were made as to the duration of the different
reigns. Certain dates fixed by inscriptions or otherwise known to
some compilers and not known to others caused many discrepancies in
the various accounts.

[Yogarája, A.D. 806-841.] According to the calculations given above
Vanarája's reign lasted to about A.D. 780. Authorities agree that
Vanarája was succeeded by his son Yogarája. The length of Yogarája's
reign is given as thirty-five years by the Prabandhachintámani and the
Ratnamálá, and as twenty-nine by the Vichárasreni. That is according
to the Prabandhachintámani and Ratnamálá his reign closes in A.D. 841
(S. 897) and according to the Vichárasreni in A.D. 836 (S. 891). On
the whole the Prabandhachintámani date A.D. 841 (S. 897) seems the more
probable. The author of the Vichárasreni may have mistaken the 7 of the
manuscripts for a 1, the two figures in the manuscripts of that date
being closely alike. If A.D. 780 is taken as the close of Vanarája's
reign and A.D. 806 as the beginning of Yogarája's reign an interval
of twenty-six years is left. This blank, which perhaps accounts for
the improbably long reign and life assigned to Vanarája, may have been
filled by the forgotten reign of a childless elder brother of Yogarája.

Of Yogarája the Prabandhachintámani tells the following
tale. Kshemarája one of Yogarája's three sons reported that several
ships were storm-stayed at Prabhása or Somanátha. The ships had 10,000
horses, many elephants, and millions of money and treasure. Kshemarája
prayed that he might seize the treasure. Yogarája forbad him. In spite
of their father's orders the sons seized the treasure and brought it
to the king. Yogarája said nothing. And when the people asked him why
he was silent he answered: To say I approve would be a sin; to say I
do not approve would annoy you. Hitherto on account of an ancestor's
misdeeds we have been laughed at as a nation of thieves. Our name was
improving and we were rising to the rank of true kings. This act of
my sons has renewed the old stain. Yogarája would not be comforted
and mounted the funeral pyre.

[Kshemarája, A.D. 841-880.] According to the Prabandhachintámani in
A.D. 841 (S. 898) Yogarája was succeeded by his son Kshemarája. The
Vichárasreni says that Yogarája was succeeded by Ratnáditya who reigned
three years, and he by Vairisimha who reigned eleven years. Then
came Kshemarája who is mentioned as the son of Yogarája and as coming
to the throne in A.D. 849 (S. 905). The relationship of Yogarája to
Ratnáditya and Vairisimha is not given. Probably both were sons of
Yogarája as the Prabandhachintámani mentions that Yogarája had three
sons. The duration of Kshemarája's reign is given as thirty-nine
years. It is probable that the reigns of the three brothers lasted
altogether for thirty-nine years, fourteen years for the two elder
brothers and twenty-five years for Kshemarája the period mentioned by
the Prabandhachintámani. Accepting this chronology A.D. 880 (S. 936)
will be the date of the close of Kshemarája's reign.

[Chámunda, A.D. 880-908.] According to the Vichárasreni and the
Sukritasankírtana Kshemarája was succeeded by his son Chámunda. Instead
of Chámunda the Prabandhachintámani mentions Bhúyada perhaps another
name of Chámunda, as in the Prabandhachintámani the name Chámunda
does not occur. The Prabandhachintámani notes that Bhúyada reigned
twenty-nine years and built in Anahilaváda Patan the temple of
Bhúyadeshvar. The Vichárasreni gives twenty-seven years as the length
of Chámunda's reign an insignificant difference of two years. This
gives A.D. 908 (S. 964) as the close of Chámunda's reign according
to the Vichárasreni.

[Ghaghada, A.D. 908-937.] After Bhúyada the Prabandhachintámani
places Vairisimha and Ratnáditya assigning twenty-five and fifteen
years as the reigns of each. The Vichárasreni mentions as the
successor of Chámunda his son Ghaghada who is called Ráhada in the
Sukritasankírtana. Instead of Ghaghada the Prabandhachintámani gives
Sámantasimha or Lion Chieftain perhaps a title of Ghághada's. The
Vichárasreni gives Ghaghada a reign of twenty-seven years and mentions
as his successor an unnamed son who reigned nineteen years. The
Sukritasankírtana gives the name of this son as Bhúbhata. According
to these calculations the close of Ghághada's reign would be A.D. 936
(Samvat 965 + 27 = 992). Adding nineteen years for Bhúbhata's reign
brings the date of the end of the dynasty to A.D. 956 (Samvat 993 + 19
= 1012) that is five years earlier than S. 1017 the date given by the
Vichárasreni. Until some evidence to the contrary is shown Merutunga's
date A.D. 961 (S. 821 + 196 = 1017) may be taken as correct.

According to the above the Chávadá genealogy stands as follows:

[The period of Chávadá rule at Anahilaváda is likely to remain obscure
until the discovery of cotemporary inscriptions throws more light upon
it than can be gathered from the confused and contradictory legends
collected by the Solanki historians, none of whom are older than the
twelfth century. For the present a few points only can be regarded
as established:

(i) The Chávadás, Chávotakas, or Chápotkatas, are connected with
the Chápas of Bhínmál and of Vadhván and are therefore of Gurjjara
race. (Compare Ind. Ant. XVII. 192.)

(ii) They probably were never more than feudatories of the Bhínmál
kings.

(iii) Though the legend places the fall of Pañchásar in A.D. 696
and the foundation of Anahilaváda in A.D. 746, the grant of Pulakesi
Janásraya shows that a Chávadá (Chávotaka) kingdom existed in A.D. 728.

As regards the chronology of the dynasty, the explanation of the
long life of 110 years ascribed to Vanarája may be that a grandson
of the same name succeeded the founder of the family. The name
of Chámunda has, as Dr. Bühler long ago pointed out, crept in
through some error from the Solanki list. But when the same author
in two different works gives such contradictory lists and dates as
Merutunga does in his Prabandhachintámani and his Vichárasreni, it
is clearly useless to attempt to extract a consistent story from the
chroniclers.--A. M. T. J.]

CHAPTER II.

THE CHAULUKYAS OR SOLANKIS

(A.D. 961-1242)

[Authorities.] The next rulers are the Chaulukyas or Solankis
(A.D. 964-1242) whose conversion to Jainism has secured them careful
record by Jain chroniclers. The earliest writer on the Solankis,
the learned Jain priest Hemachandra (A.D. 1089-1173), in his work
called the Dvyásraya, has given a fairly full and correct account
of the dynasty up to Siddharája (A.D. 1143). The work is said to
have been begun by Hemachandra about A.D. 1160, and to have been
finished and revised by another Jain monk named Abhayatilakagani
in A.D. 1255. [515] The last chapter which is in Prakrit deals
solely with king Kumárapála. This work is a grammar rather than a
chronicle, still, though it has little reference to dates, it is a
good collection of tales and descriptions. For chronology the best
guide is the Vichárasreni which its author has taken pains to make the
chief authority in dates. The Vichárasreni was written by Merutunga
about A.D. 1314, some time after he wrote the Prabandhachintámani.

[The Name Chaulukya.] According to the Vichárasreni after the Chávadás,
in A.D. 961 (Vaishakh Suddha 1017), began the reign of Múlarája the
son of a daughter of the last Chávadá ruler. The name Chaulukya is a
Sanskritised form, through an earlier form Chálukya, of the old names
Chalkya, Chalikya, Chirîkya, Chálukya of the great Dakhan dynasty
(A.D. 552-973), made to harmonise with the Puránic-looking story
that the founder of the dynasty sprang from the palm or chuluka of
Brahma. The form Chaulukya seems to have been confined to authors
and writers. It was used by the great Dakhan poet Bilhana (c. 1050
A.D.) and by the Anahilaváda chroniclers. In Gujarát the popular
form of the word seems to have been Solaki or Solanki (a dialectic
variant of Chalukya), a name till lately used by Gujarát bards. The
sameness of name seems to show the Dakhan and Gujarát dynasties to
be branches of one stock. No materials are available to trace the
original seat of the family or to show when and whence they came to
Gujarát. The balance of probability is, as Dr. Bühler holds, that
Múlarája's ancestors came from the north. [516]

[Múlarája, A.D. 961-996.] The Sukritasankírtana says that the last
Chávadá king Bhúbhata was succeeded by his sister's son Múlarája. Of
the family or country of Múlarája's father no details are given. The
Prabandhachintámani calls Múlarája the sister's son of Sámantasimha and
gives the following details. In A.D. 930 of the family of Bhuiyada (who
destroyed Jayasekhara) were three brothers Ráji, Bija, and Dandaka,
who stopped at Anahilaváda on their way back from a pilgrimage to
Somanátha in the guise of Kárpatika or Kápdi beggars. The three
brothers attended a cavalry parade held by king Sámantasimha. An
objection taken by Ráji to some of the cavalry movements pleased
Sámantasimha, who, taking him to be the scion of some noble family,
gave him his sister Líládeví in marriage. Líládeví died pregnant
and the child, which was taken alive from its dead mother's womb was
called Múlarája, because the operation was performed when the Múla
constellation was in power. Múlarája grew into an able and popular
prince and helped to extend the kingdom of his maternal uncle. In
a fit of intoxication Sámantasimha ordered Múlarája to be placed on
the throne. He afterwards cancelled the grant. But Múlarája contended
that a king once installed could not be degraded. He collected troops
defeated and slew his uncle and succeeded to the throne in A.D. 942
(S. 998). The main facts of this tale, that Múlarája's father was one
Ráji of the Chálukya family, that his mother was a Chávadá. princess,
and that he came to the Chávadá throne by killing his maternal uncle,
appear to be true. That Múlarája's father's name was Ráji is proved by
Dr. Bühler's copperplate of Múlarája. [517] Merutunga's details that
Ráji came in disguise to Anahilaváda, took the fancy of Sámantasimha,
and received his sister in marriage seem fictions in the style common
in the bardic praises of Rájput princes. Dr. Bühler's copperplate
further disproves the story as it calls Múlarája the son of the
illustrious Ráji, the great king of kings Mahárájádhirája, a title
which would not be given to a wandering prince. Ráji appears to have
been of almost equal rank with the Chávadás. The Ratnamálá calls Ráji
fifth in descent from Bhuvada, his four predecessors being Karnáditya,
Chándráditya, Somáditya, and Bhuvanáditya. But the Ratnamálá list is on
the face of it wrong, as it gives five instead of seven or eight kings
to fill the space of over 200 years between Jayasekhara and Múlarája.

Most Jain chroniclers begin the history of Anahilaváda with Múlarája
who with the Jains is the glory of the dynasty. After taking the
small Chávadá kingdom Múlarája spread his power in all directions,
overrunning Káthiáváda and Kacch on the west, and fighting Bárappa
of Láta or South Gujarát on the south, and Vigraharája king of Ajmir
on the north. The Ajmir kings were called Sapádalaksha. Why they were
so called is not known. This much is certain that Sapádalaksha is the
Sanskrit form of the modern Sewálik. It would seem that the Choháns,
whom the Gujarát Jain chroniclers call Sapádalakshíya, must have
come to Gujarát from the Sewálik hills. After leaving the Sewálik
hills the capital was at Ajmir, which is usually said to have been
first fortified by the Chohán king Ajayapála (A.D. 1174-1177). [518]
This story seems invented by the Choháns. The name Ajmir appears to
be derived from the Mehrs who were in power in these parts between
the fifth and the eighth centuries. The Hammíramahákávya begins the
Chohán genealogy with Vásudeva (A.D. 780) and states that Vásudeva's
fourth successor Ajayapála established the hill fort of Ajmir. About
this time (A.D. 840) the Choháns seem to have made settlements in the
Ajmir country and to have harassed Gujarát. Vigraharája the tenth in
succession from Vásudeva is described as killing Múlarája and weakening
the Gurjjara country. [519] The author of the Prabandhachintámani gives
the following details. The Sapádalaksha or Ajmir king entered Gujarát
to attack Múlarája and at the same time from the south Múlarája's
territory was invaded by Bárappa a general of king Tailapa of
Telingána. [520] Unable to face both enemies Múlarája at his minister's
advice retired to Kanthádurga apparently Kanthkot in Cutch. [521]
He remained there till the Navarátra or Nine-Night festival at the
close of the rains when he expected the Sapádalaksha king would have
to return to Ajmir to worship the goddess Sákambharí when Bárappa
would be left alone. At the close of the rains the Sapádalaksha
king fixed his camp near a place called Sákambharí and bringing the
goddess Sákambharí there held the Nine-Night festival. This device
disappointed Múlarája. He sent for his sámantas or nobles and gave
them presents. He told them his plans and called on them to support
him in attacking the Sapádalaksha king. Múlarája then mounted a female
elephant with no attendant but the driver and in the evening came
suddenly to the Ajmir camp. He dismounted and holding a drawn sword
in his hand said to the doorkeeper 'What is your king doing. Go and
tell your lord that Múlarája waits at his door.' While the attendant
was on his way to give the message, Múlarája pushed him on one side
and himself went into the presence. The doorkeeper called 'Here comes
Múlarája.' Before he could be stopped Múlarája forced his way in and
took his seat on the throne. The Ajmir king in consternation asked
'Are you Múlarája?' Múlarája answered 'I would regard him as a brave
king who would meet me face to face in battle. While I was thinking
no such brave enemy exists, you have arrived. I ask no better fortune
than to fight with you. But as soon as you are come, like a bee falling
in at dinner time, Bárappa the general of king Tailapa of Telingana
has arrived to attack me. While I am punishing him you should keep
quiet and not give me a side blow.' The Ajmir king said, 'Though you
are a king, you have come here alone like a foot soldier, not caring
for your safety. I will be your ally for life.' Múlarája replied
'Say not so.' He refused the Rája's invitation to dine, and leaving
sword in hand mounted his elephant and with his nobles attacked the
camp of Bárappa. Bárappa was killed and eighteen of his elephants and
10,000 of his horses fell into Múlarája's hands. While returning with
the spoil Múlarája received news that the Sapádalaksha king had fled.

This story of the author of the Prabandhachintámani differs from
that given by the author of the Hammírakávya who describes Múlarája
as defeated and slain. The truth seems to be that the Ajmír king
defeated Múlarája and on Múlarája's submission did not press his
advantage. In these circumstances Múlarája's victory over Bárappa
seems improbable. The Dvyásraya devotes seventy-five verses (27-101)
of its sixth chapter to the contest between Bárappa and Múlarája. The
details may be thus summarised. Once when Múlarája received presents
from various Indian kings Dvárappa [522] king of Látadesa sent an
ill-omened elephant. The marks being examined by royal officers and
by prince Chámunda, they decided the elephant would bring destruction
on the king who kept him. The elephant was sent back in disgrace
and Múlarája and his son started with an army to attack Látadesa and
avenge the insult. In his march Múlarája first came to the Svabhravatí
or Sábarmatí which formed the boundary of his kingdom, frightening
the people. From the Sábarmatí he advanced to the ancient Purí [523]
where also the people became confused. The Láta king prepared for
fight, and was slain by Chámunda in single combat. Múlarája advanced
to Broach where Bárappa who was assisted by the island kings opposed
him. Chámunda overcame them and slew Bárappa. After this success
Múlarája and Chámunda returned to Anahilapura. [524]

The Dvyásraya styles Bárappa king of Látadesa; the Prabandhachintámani
calls him a general of Tailapa king of Telingána; the Sukritasankírtana
a general of the Kanyákubja king; and the Kírtikaumudí [525] a general
of the Lord of Láta.

Other evidence proves that at the time of Múlarája a Chaulukya king
named Bárappa did reign in Látadesa. The Surat grant of Kírtirája
grandson of Bárappa is dated A.D. 1018 (Saka 940). This, taking twenty
years to a king, brings Bárappa's date to A.D. 978 (Saka 900), a year
which falls in the reign of Múlarája (A.D. 961-996; S. 1027-1053). The
statement in the Prabandhachintámani that Bárappa was a general of
Tailapa seems correct. The southern form of the name Bárappa supports
the statement. And as Tailapa overthrew the Ráshtrakútas in A.D. 972
(Saka 894) he might well place a general in military charge of Láta,
and allow him practical independence. This would explain why the
Dvyásraya calls Bárappa king of Látadesa and why the Kírtikaumudí
calls him general of the Lord of Láta.

One of Múlarája's earliest wars was with Graharipu the Ábhíra
or Chúdásamá ruler of Sorath. [526] According to Múlarája's
bards, the cause of war was Graharipu's oppression of pilgrims to
Prabhása. Graharipu's capital was Vámanasthalí, the modern Vanthalí
nine miles west of Junágadh, and the fort of Durgapalli which Graharipu
is said to have established must be Junágadh itself which was not
then a capital. Graharipu is described as a cow-eating Mlechha and
a grievous tyrant. He is said to have had much influence over Lákhá
son of king Phula of Kacch and to have been helped by Turks and
other Mlechhas. When Múlarája reached the Jambumáli river, he was
met by Graharipu and his army. With Graharipu was Lákhá of Kacch,
the king of Sindh probably a Sumrá, Mewás Bhilas, and the sons of
Graharipu's wife Nílí who had been summoned from near the Bhadar
river by a message in the Yavana language. [527] With Múlarája were
the kings of Siláprastha, [528] of Márwár, of Kásí, of Arbuda or Abu,
and of Srímála or Bhínmál. Múlarája had also his own younger brother
Gangámah, his friend king Revatímitra, and Bhils. It is specially
mentioned that in this expedition Múlarája received no help from
the sons of his paternal uncles Bíja and Dandaka. The fight ended in
Graharipu being made prisoner by Múlarája, and in Lákhá being slain
with a spear. After the victory Múlarája went to Prabhása, worshipped
the linga, and returned to Anahilaváda with his army and 108 elephants.

According to the author of the Prabandhachintámani Lákhá met his death
in a different contest with Múlarája. Lákhá who is described as the
son of Phuladá, and Kámalatá daughter of Kírttirája a Parmár king,
is said to have been invincible because he was under the protection
of king Yasovarman of Málwa. He defeated Múlarája's army eleven
times. In a twelfth encounter Múlarája besieged Lákhá in Kapilakot,
slew him in single combat, and trod on his flowing beard. Enraged at
this insult to her dead son Lákhá's mother called down on Múlarája's
descendants the curse of the spider poison that is of leprosy. [529]

Mr. Forbes, apparently from bardic sources, states that on his
wife's death Ráji the father of Múlarája went to the temple of
Vishnu at Dwárká. On his return he visited the court of Lákhá
Phuláni and espoused Lákhá's sister Ráyáji by whom he had a son
named Rákháich. This marriage proved the ruin of Ráji. In a dispute
about precedence Lákhá slew Ráji and many of his Rájput followers,
his wife Ráyáji becoming a Satí. Bíja the uncle of Múlarája urged his
nephew to avenge his father's death and Múlarája was further incited
against Lákhá because Lákhá harboured Rákháich the younger son of
Ráji at his court as a rival to Múlarája.

According to the Dvyásraya, either from the rising power of his son
or from repentance for his own rough acts, after Chámunda's victory
over Bárappa Múlarája installed him as ruler and devoted himself to
religion and charity. According to the Prabandhachintámani Múlarája
built in Anahilaváda a Jain temple named Múlavasatiká. But as the
Nandi symbol on his copperplate shows that Múlarája was a devoted
Saivite, it is possible that this temple was built by some Jain guild
or community and named after the reigning chief. [530] Múlarája built
a Mahádeva temple called Múlasvámi in Anahilaváda, and, in honour of
Somanátha, he built the temple of Mulesvara at Mandali-nagara where
he went at the bidding of the god. [531] He also built at Anahilaváda
a temple of Mahádeva called Tripurushaprásáda on a site to which the
tradition attaches that seeing Múlarája daily visiting the temple of
Múlanáthadeva at Mandali, Somanátha Mahádeva being greatly pleased
promised to bring the ocean to Anahilaváda. Somanátha came, and the
ocean accompanying the god certain ponds became brackish. In honour
of these salt pools Múlarája built the Tripurushaprásáda. Looking
for some one to place in charge of this temple, Múlarája heard of an
ascetic named Kanthadi at Siddhapura on the banks of the Sarasvatí
who used to fast every other day and on the intervening day lived on
five morsels of food. Múlarája offered this sage the charge of the
temple. The sage declined saying 'Authority is the surest path to
hell.' Eventually Vayajalladeva a disciple of the sage undertook the
management on certain conditions. Múlarája passed most of his days at
the holy shrine of Siddhapura, the modern Sidhpur on the Sarasvatí
about fifteen miles north-east of Anahilaváda. At Sidhpur Múlarája
made many grants to Bráhmans. Several branches of Gujarát Bráhmans,
Audíchyas Srígaudas and Kanojias, trace their origin in Gujarát to
an invitation from Múlarája to Siddhapura and the local Puránas and
Máhátmyas confirm the story. As the term Audíchya means Northerner
Múlarája may have invited Bráhmans from some such holy place as
Kurukshetra which the Audíchyas claim as their home. From Kanyákubja
in the Madhyadesa between the Ganges and the Yamuná another equally
holy place the Kanojías may have been invited. The Srí Gaudas appear
to have come from Bengal and Tirhut. Gauda and Tirhut Bráhmans are
noted Tántriks and Mantrasástris a branch of learning for which both
the people and the rulers of Gujarát have a great fondness. Grants
of villages were made to these Bráhmans. Sidhpur was given to the
Audíchyas, Simhapura or Sihor in Káthiáváda to some other colony,
and Stambhatírtha or Cambay to the Srí Gaudas. At Siddhapura
Múlarája built the famous temple called the Rudramahálaya or the
great shrine of Rudra. According to tradition Múlarája did not
complete the Rudramahálaya and Siddharája finished it. In spite
of this tradition it does not appear that Múlarája died leaving
the great temple unfinished as a copperplate of A.D. 987 (S. 1043)
records that Múlarája made the grant after worshipping the god of the
Rudramahálaya on the occasion of a solar eclipse on the fifteenth
of the dark half of Mágha. It would seem therefore that Múlarája
built one large Rudramahálaya which Siddharája may have repaired or
enlarged. Múlarája is said while still in health to have mounted the
funeral pile, an act which some writers trace to remorse and others
to unknown political reasons. The Vichárasreni gives the length of
Múlarája's reign at thirty-five years A.D. 961-996 (S. 1017-1052);
the Prabandhachintámani begins the reign at A.D. 942 (S. 998) and ends
it at A.D. 997 (S. 1053) that is a length of fifty-five years. [532]
Of the two, thirty-five years seems the more probable, as, if the
traditional accounts are correct, Múlarája can scarcely have been a
young man when he overthrew his uncle's power.

[Chámunda, A.D. 997-1010.] Of Múlarája's son and successor
Chámunda no historical information is available. The author of
the Prabandhachintámani assigns him a reign of thirteen years. The
author of the Dvyásraya says that he had three sons Vallabha Rája,
Durlabha Rája, and Nága Rája. According to one account Chámunda
installed Vallabha in A.D. 1010 (S. 1066) and went on pilgrimage to
Benares. On his passage through Málwa Muñja the Málwa king carried
off Chámunda's umbrella and other marks of royalty. [533] Chámunda
went on to Benares in the guise of a hermit. On his return he prayed
his son to avenge the insult offered by the king of Málwa. Vallabha
started with an army but died of small-pox. The author of the
Prabandhachintámani gives Chámunda a reign of six months, while the
author of the Vichárasreni entirely drops his name and gives a reign of
fourteen years to Vallabha made up of the thirteen years of Chámunda
and the six months of Vallabha. This seems to be a mistake. It would
seem more correct, as is done in several copperplate lists, to omit
Vallabha, since he must have reigned jointly with his father and his
name is not wanted for purposes of succession. The Vichárasreni and
the Prabandhachintámani agree in ending Vallabha's reign in A.D. 1010
(S. 1066). The author of the Dvyásraya states that Chámunda greatly
lamenting the death of Vallabha installed Vallabha's younger brother
Durlabha, and himself retired to die at Suklatírtha on the Narbadá.

[Durlabha, A.D. 1010-1022.] Durlabha whom the Sukritasankírtana
also calls Jagatjhampaka or World Guardian came to the throne in
A.D. 1010 (S. 1066). The Prabandhachintámani gives the length of his
reign at eleven years and six months while the Vichárasreni makes
it twelve years closing it in A.D. 1022 (S. 1078). The author of
the Dvyásraya says that along with his brother Nága Rája, Durlabha
attended the Svayamvara or bridegroom-choosing of Durlabha Deví the
sister of Mahendra the Rája of Nadol in Márwár. The kings of Anga,
Kásí, Avantí, Chedí, Kuru, Húna, Mathurá, Vindhya, and Andhra were
also present. [534] The princess chose Durlabha and Mahendra gave his
younger sister Lakshmí to Durlabha's brother Nága Rája. The princess'
choice of Durlabha drew on him the enmity of certain of the other kings
all of whom he defeated. The brothers then returned to Anahilaváda
where Durlabha built a lake called Durlabhasarovara. The author of the
Prabandhachintámani says that Durlabha gave up the kingdom to his son
(?) Bhíma. [535] He also states that Durlabha went on pilgrimage and
was insulted on the way by Muñja king of Málwa. This seems the same
tale which the Dvyásraya tells of Chámunda. Since Muñja cannot have
been a cotemporary of Durlabha the Dvyásraya's account seems correct.

[Bhíma I. A.D. 1022-1064.] Durlabha was succeeded by his nephew Bhíma
the son of Durlabha's younger brother Nága Rája. The author of the
Dvyásraya says that Durlabha wishing to retire from the world offered
the kingdom to his nephew Bhíma; that Bhíma declined in favour of his
father Nága Rája; that Nága Rája refused; that Durlabha and Nága Rája
persuaded Bhíma to take the government; and that after installing
Bhíma the two brothers died together. Such a voluntary double death
sounds unlikely unless the result was due to the machinations of
Bhíma. The Prabandhachintámani gives Bhíma a reign of fifty-two
years from A.D. 1022 to 1074 (S. 1078-1130), while the Vichárasreni
reduces his reign to forty-two years placing its close in A.D. 1064
(S. 1120). Forty-two years would seem to be correct as another copy
of the Prabandhachintámani has 42.

Two copperplates of Bhíma are available one dated A.D. 1030 (S. 1086)
eight or nine years after he came to the throne, the other from Kacch
in A.D. 1037 (S. 1093).

Bhíma seems to have been more powerful than either of his
predecessors. According to the Dvyásraya his two chief enemies were
the kings of Sindh and of Chedí or Bundelkhand. He led a victorious
expedition against Hammuka the king of Sindh, who had conquered the
king of Sivasána and another against Karna king of Chedí who paid
tribute and submitted. The Prabandhachintámani has a verse, apparently
an old verse interpolated, which says that on the Málwa king Bhoja's
death, while sacking Dhárápuri, Karna took Bhíma as his coadjutor, and
that afterwards Bhíma's general Dámara took Karna captive and won from
him a gold mandapiká or canopy and images of Ganesa and Nílakanthesvara
Mahádeva. Bhíma is said to have presented the canopy to Somanátha.

When Bhíma was engaged against the king of Sindh, Kulachandra the
general of the Málwa king Bhoja with all the Málwa feudatories, invaded
Anahilaváda, sacked the city, and sowed shell-money at the gate where
the time-marking gong was sounded. So great was the loss that the
'sacking of Kulachandra' has passed into a proverb. Kulachandra also
took from Anahilaváda an acknowledgment of victory or jayapatra. On his
return Bhoja received Kulachandra with honour but blamed him for not
sowing salt instead of shell-money. [536] He said the shell-money is
an omen that the wealth of Málwa will flow to Gujarát. An unpublished
inscription of Bhoja's successor Udayáditya in a temple at Udepur
near Bhilsá confirms the above stating that Bhíma was conquered by
Bhoja's officers. [537]

The Solanki kings of Anahilapura being Saivites held the god Somanátha
of Prabhása in great veneration. The very ancient and holy shrine
of Prabhása has long been a place of special pilgrimage. As early as
the Yádavas of Dwárká, [538] pilgrimages to Prabhása are recorded but
the Mahábhárata makes no mention either of Somanátha or of any other
Saivite shrine. The shrine of Somanátha was probably not established
before the time of the Valabhis (A.D. 480-767). As the Valabhi kings
were most open-handed in religious gifts, it was probably through their
grants that the Somanátha temple rose to importance. The Solankis were
not behind the Valabhis in devotion to Somanátha. To save pilgrims from
oppression Múlarája fought Graharipu the Ábhíra king of Sorath. [539]
Múlarája afterwards went to Prabhása and also built temples in Gujarát
in honour of the god Somanátha. As Múlarája's successors Chámunda
and Durlabha continued firm devotees of Somanátha during their reigns
(A.D. 997-1022) the wealth of the temple must have greatly increased.

[Mahmúd's Invasion, A.D. 1024.] No Gujarát Hindu writer refers to the
destruction of the great temple soon after Bhíma's accession. [540]
But the Musalmán historians place beyond doubt that in A.D. 1024
the famous tenth raid of [Somanátha, A.D. 1024.] Mahmúd of Ghazni,
ended in the destruction and plunder of Somanátha. [541]

Of the destruction of Somanátha the earliest Musalmán account, of
Ibn Asír (A.D. 1160-1229), supplies the following details: In the
year A.D. 1024 (H. 414) Mahmúd captured several forts and cities
in Hind and he also took the idol called Somanátha. This idol was
the greatest of all the idols of Hind. At every eclipse [542] the
Hindus went on pilgrimage to the temple, and there congregated to
the number of a hundred thousand persons. According to their doctrine
of transmigration the Hindus believe that after separation from the
body the souls of men meet at Somanátha; and that the ebb and flow
of the tide is the worship paid to the best of its power by the sea
to the idol. [543] All that is most precious in India was brought to
Somanátha. The temple attendants received the most valuable presents,
and the temple was endowed with more than 10,000 villages. [544]
In the temple were amassed jewels of the most exquisite quality and
of incalculable value. The people of India have a great river called
Ganga to which they pay the highest honour and into which they cast
the bones of their great men, in the belief that the deceased will thus
secure an entrance to heaven. Though between this river and Somanátha
is a distance of about 1200 miles (200 parasangs) water was daily
brought from it to wash the idol. [545] Every day a thousand Bráhmans
performed the worship and introduced visitors. [546] The shaving of
the heads and beards of pilgrims employed three hundred barbers. [547]
Three hundred and fifty persons sang and danced at the gate of the
temple, [548] every one receiving a settled daily allowance. When
Mahmúd was gaining victories and demolishing idols in North India,
the Hindus said Somanátha is displeased with these idols. If Somanátha
had been satisfied with them no one could have destroyed or injured
them. When Mahmúd heard this he resolved on making a campaign to
destroy Somanátha, believing that when the Hindus saw their prayers
and imprecations to be false and futile they would embrace the Faith.

So he prayed to the Almighty for aid, and with 30,000 horse besides
volunteers left Ghazni on the 10th Sha'bán (H. 414, A.D. 1024). He took
the road to Multán and reached it in the middle of Ramzán. The road
from Multán to India lay through a barren desert without inhabitants
or food. Mahmúd collected provisions for the passage and loading
30,000 camels with water and corn started for Anahilaváda. After he
had crossed the desert he perceived on one side a fort full of people
in which place there were wells. [549] The leaders came to conciliate
him, but he invested the place, and God gave him victory over it,
for the hearts of the people failed them through fear. He brought
the place under the sway of Islám, killed the inhabitants, and broke
in pieces their images. His men carrying water with them marched for
Anahilaváda, where they arrived at the beginning of Zílkáda.

The Chief of Anahilaváda, called Bhím, fled hastily, and abandoning
his city went to a certain fort for safety and to prepare for
war. Mahmúd pushed on for Somanátha. On his march he came to several
forts in which were many images serving as chamberlains or heralds
of Somanátha. These Mahmúd called Shaitán or devils. He killed the
people, destroyed the fortifications, broke the idols in pieces,
and through a waterless desert marched to Somanátha. In the desert
land he met 20,000 fighting men whose chiefs would not submit. He sent
troops against them, defeated them, put them to flight, and plundered
their possessions. From the desert he marched to Dabalwárah, [550]
two days' journey from Somanátha. The people of Dabalwárah stayed
in the city believing that the word of Somanátha would drive back
the invaders. Mahmúd took the place, slew the men, plundered their
property, and marched to Somanátha.

Reaching Somanátha on a Thursday in the middle of Zílkáda Mahmúd
beheld a strong fortress built on the sea-shore, so that its walls
were washed by the waves. [551] From the walls the people jeered at
the Musalmáns. Our deity, they said, will cut off the last man of you
and destroy you all. On the morrow which was Friday the assailants
advanced to the assault. When the Hindus saw how the Muhammadans
fought they abandoned their posts and left the walls. The Musalmáns
planted their ladders and scaled the walls. From the top they raised
their war-cry, and showed the might of Islám. Still their loss was
so heavy that the issue seemed doubtful. A body of Hindus hurried
to Somanátha, cast themselves on the ground before him, and besought
him to grant them victory. Night came on and the fight was stayed.

Early next morning Mahmúd renewed the battle. His men made greater
havoc among the Hindus till they drove them from the town to the house
of their idol Somanátha. At the gate of the temple the slaughter was
dreadful. Band after band of the defenders entered the temple and
standing before Somanátha with their hands clasped round their necks
wept and passionately entreated him. Then they issued forth to fight
and fought till they were slain. The few left alive took to the sea
in boats but the Musalmáns overtook them and some were killed and
some were drowned.

The temple of Somanátha rested on fifty-six pillars of teakwood
covered with lead. [552] The idol was in a dark chamber. The height
of the idol was five cubits and its girth three cubits. This was what
appeared to the eye; two cubits were hidden in the basement. It had no
appearance of being sculptured. Mahmúd seized it, part of it he burnt,
and part he carried with him to Ghazni, where he made it a step at the
entrance of the Great Mosque. [553] The dark shrine was lighted by
exquisitely jewelled chandeliers. Near the idol was a chain of gold
200 mans in weight. To the chain bells were fastened. And when each
watch of the night was over the chain was shaken and the ringing of
the bells roused a fresh party of Bráhmans to carry on the worship. In
the treasury which was near the shrine were many idols of gold and
silver. Among the treasures were veils set with jewels, every jewel
of immense value. What was found in the temple was worth more than
two millions of dinárs. Over fifty thousand Hindus were slain. [554]

After the capture of Somanátha, Mahmúd received intelligence that
Bhím the chief of Anahilaváda had gone to the fort of Khandahat,
[555] about 240 miles (40 parasangs) from Somanátha between that
place and the desert. Mahmúd marched to Khandahat. When he came
before it he questioned some men who were hunting as to the tide. He
learned that the ford was practicable, but that if the wind blew a
little the crossing was dangerous. Mahmúd prayed to the Almighty and
entered the water. He and his forces passed safely and drove out the
enemy. From Khandahat he returned intending to proceed against Mansúra
in central Sindh, whose ruler was an apostate Muhammadan. At the news
of Mahmúd's approach the chief fled into the date forests. Mahmúd
followed, and surrounding him and his adherents, many of them were
slain, many drowned, and few escaped. Mahmúd then went to Bhátiá,
and after reducing the inhabitants to obedience, returned to Ghazni
where he arrived on the 10th Safar 417 H. (A.D. 1026).

The Rauzatu-s-safá of Mirkhand supplements these details with the
following account of Mahmúd's arrangements for holding Gujarát:
'It is related that when Sultán Mahmúd had achieved the conquest of
Somanátha he wished to fix his residence there for some years because
the country was very extensive and possessed many advantages among
them several mines which produced pure gold. Indian rubies were brought
from Sarandíp, one of the dependencies of the kingdom of Gujarát. His
ministers represented to Mahmúd that to forsake Khurásán which had
been won from his enemies after so many battles and to make Somanátha
the seat of government was very improper. At last the king made up
his mind to return and ordered some one to be appointed to hold and
carry on the administration of the country. The ministers observed
that as it was impossible for a stranger to maintain possession he
should assign the country to one of the native chiefs. The Sultán
accordingly held a council to settle the nomination, in concurrence
with such of the inhabitants as were well disposed towards him. Some
of them represented to him that amongst the ancient royal families no
house was so noble as that of the Dábshilíms of whom only one member
survived, and he had assumed the habit of a Bráhman, and was devoted
to philosophical pursuits and austerity.' [556]

That Mahmúd should have found it necessary to appoint some local
chief to keep order in Gujarát is probable. It is also probable that
he would choose some one hostile to the defeated king. It has been
suggested above that Bhíma's uncle Durlabha did not retire but was
ousted by his nephew and that the story of Vallabha and Durlabha
dying together pointed to some usurpation on the part of Bhíma. The
phrase the Dábshilíms seems to refer either to Durlabhasena or his
son. Whoever was chosen must have lost his power soon after Mahmúd's
departure. [557]

[Bhíma I. A.D. 1022-1064.] An inscription at Somanátha shows that soon
after Mahmúd was gone Bhímadeva began to build a temple of stone in
place of the former temple of brick and wood.

A few years later Bhíma was on bad terms with Dhandhuka the Paramára
chief of Ábu, and sent his general Vimala to subdue him. Dhandhuka
submitted and made over to Vimala the beautiful Chitrakûta peak of
Ábu, where, in A.D. 1032 (S. 1088), Vimala built the celebrated Jain
temples known as Vimalavasahi still one of the glories of Ábu. [558]

Bhíma had three wives Udayámatí who built a step-well at Anahilaváda,
Bukuládeví, and another. These ladies were the mothers of Karna,
Kshemarája, and Múlarája. Of the three sons Múlarája, though his
mother's name is unknown, was the eldest and the heir-apparent. Of
the kindly Múlarája the author of the Prabandhachintámani tells the
following tale: In a year of scarcity the Kutumbikas or cultivators
of Vishopaka and Dandáhi found themselves unable to pay the king his
share of the land-produce. Bhímarája sent a minister to inquire and
the minister brought before the king all the well-to-do people of the
defaulting villages. One day prince Múlarája saw these men talking
to one another in alarm. Taking pity on them he pleased the king by
his skilful riding. The king asked him to name a boon and the prince
begged that the demand on the villagers might be remitted. The boon was
granted, the ryots went home in glee, but within three days Múlarája
was dead. Next season yielded a bumper harvest, and the people came
to present the king with his share for that year as well as with the
remitted share for the previous year. Bhímdev declined to receive the
arrears. A jury appointed by the king settled that the royal share
of the produce for both years should be placed in the king's hands
for the erection of a temple called the new Tripurushaprásáda for
the spiritual welfare of prince Múlarája. [559]

Bhíma reigned forty-two years. Both the Prabandhachintámani and
the Vichárasreni mention Karna as his successor. According to the
Dvyásraya Bhíma, wishing to retire to a religious life, offered the
succession to Kshemarája. But Kshemarája also was averse from the
labour of ruling and it was settled that Karna should succeed.

Bhíma died soon after and Kshemarája retired to a holy place on the
Sarasvatí named Mundakesvara not far from Anahilaváda. Karna is said
to have granted Dahithalí a neighbouring village to Devaprasáda the
son of Kshemarája that he might attend on his father in his religious
seclusion. But as the Kumárapálacharita mentions Kshemarája being
settled at Dahithalí as a ruler not as an ascetic it seems probable
that Dahithalí was granted to Kshemarája for maintenance as villages
are still granted to the bháyás or brethren of the ruler.

[Karna, A.D. 1064-1094.] Karna who came to the throne in A.D. 1064
(S. 1120) had a more peaceful reign than his predecessors. He was able
to build charitable public works among them a temple called Karna-meru
at Anahilaváda. His only war was an expedition against Áshá Bhil,
chief of six lákhs [560] of Bhils residing at Áshápallí the modern
village of Asával near Ahmadábád. [561] Áshá was defeated and slain. In
consequence of an omen from a local goddess named Kochharva, [562]
Karna built her a temple in Asával and also built temples to Jayantí
Deví and Karnesvara Mahádeva. He made a lake called Karnaságara and
founded a city called Karnávatí which he made his capital.

Karna had three ministers Muñjála, Sántu, and Udaya. Udaya was a
Srímálí Vániá of Márwár, who had settled in Anahilaváda and who was
originally called Udá. Sántu built a Jain temple called Sántu-vasahi
and Udá built at Karnávatí a large temple called Udaya-varáha,
containing seventy-two images of Tirthankars, twenty-four past
twenty-four present and twenty-four to come. By different wives Udá
had five sons, Áhada or Asthada, Cháhada, Báhada, Ámbada, and Sollá,
of whom the last three were half brothers of the first two. [563]
Except Sollá, who continued a merchant and became very wealthy, all
the sons entered the service of the state and rose to high stations
during the reign of Kumárapála.

In late life Karna married Miyánalladeví daughter of Jayakesi son of
Subhakesi king of the Karnátaka. According to the Dvyásraya a wandering
painter showed Karna the portrait of a princess whom he described
as daughter of Jayakesi the Kadamba king [564] of Chandrapura [565]
in the Dakhan, and who he said had taken a vow to marry Karna. In
token of her wish to marry Karna the painter said the princess had
sent Karna an elephant. Karna went to see the present and found on
the elephant a beautiful princess who had come so far in the hope
of winning him for a husband. According to the Prabandhachintámani
Karna found the princess ugly and refused to marry her. On this the
princess with eight attendants determined to burn themselves on a
funeral pyre and Udayámatí Karna's mother also declared that if he
did not relent she too would be a sacrifice. Under this compulsion
Karna married the princess but refused to treat her as a wife. The
minister Muñjála, learning from a kañchukí or palace-servant that the
king loved a certain courtezan, contrived that Miyánalladeví should
take the woman's place, a device still practised by ministers of native
states. Karna fell into the snare and the queen became pregnant by him,
having secured from the hand of her husband his signet ring as a token
which could not be disclaimed. Thus in Karna's old age Miyánalladeví
became the mother of the illustrious Siddharája Jayasimha, who,
according to a local tradition quoted by Mr. Forbes, first saw the
light at Pálanpur. [566] When three years old the precocious Siddharája
climbed and sat upon the throne. This ominous event being brought to
the king's notice he consulted his astrologers who advised that from
that day Siddharája should be installed as heir-apparent.

The Gujarát chronicles do not record how or when Karna died. It appears
from a manuscript that he was reigning in A.D. 1089 (S. 1145). [567]
The Hammíramahákávya says 'The illustrious Karnadeva was killed in
battle by king Dussala of Sákambharí,' and the two appear to have been
cotemporaries. [568] The author of the Dvyásraya says that Karna died
fixing his thoughts on Vishnu, recommending to Siddharája his cousin
Devaprasáda son of Kshemarája. According to the Prabandhachintámani
Vichárasreni and Sukritasankírtana Karna died in A.D. 1094 (S. 1150).

[Siddharája Jayasingha, A.D. 1094-1143.] As, at the time of his
father's death, Siddharája was a minor [569] the reins of government
must have passed into the hands of his mother Miyánalladeví. That
the succession should have been attended with struggle and intrigue
is not strange. According to the Dvyásraya Devaprasáda, the son
of Kshemarája burned himself on the funeral pile shortly after
the death of Karna, an action which was probably the result of
some intrigue regarding the succession. Another intrigue ended in
the death of Madanapála brother of Karna's mother queen Udayámatí,
at the hands of the minister Sántu, who along with Muñjála and Udá,
helped the queen-mother Miyánalladeví during the regency. Muñjála and
Sántu continued in office under Siddharája. Another minister built a
famous Jain temple named Mahárájabhuvana in Sidhpur at the time when
Siddharája built the Rudramálá. An inscription from a temple near
Bhadresar in Kacch dated A.D. 1139 (S. 1195 Áshádha Vad 10, Sunday),
in recording grants to Audíchya Bráhmans to carry on the worship in an
old temple of Udalesvara and in a new temple of Kumárapálesvara built
by Kumárapála son of the great prince Ásapála, [570] notes that Dádáka
was then minister of Siddharája. Among his generals the best known was
a chief named Jagaddeva (Jag Dev), commonly believed to be a Paramára,
many of whose feats of daring are recorded in bardic and popular
romances. [571] Though Jag Dev is generally called a Paramára nothing
of his family is on record. The author of the Prabandhachintámani
describes Jagaddeva as a thrice valiant warrior held in great respect
by Siddharája. After Siddharája's death Jagaddeva went to serve king
Permádi to whose mother's family he was related. [572] Permádi gave
him a chiefship and sent him to attack Málava.

When Siddharája attained manhood his mother prepared to go in great
state on pilgrimage to Somanátha. She went with rich offerings as
far as Báhuloda apparently the large modern village of Bholáda on
the Gujarát-Káthiáváda frontier about twenty-two miles south-west of
Dholká. At this frontier town the Anahilaváda kings levied a tax on
all pilgrims to Somanátha. Many of the pilgrims unable to pay the
tax had to return home in tears. Miyánalladeví was so saddened by
the woes of the pilgrims that she stopped her pilgrimage and returned
home. Siddharája met her on the way and asked her why she had turned
back. Miyánalladeví said, I will neither eat nor go to Somanátha
until you order the remission of the pilgrim tax. Siddharája called
the Bholáda treasurer and found that the levy yielded 72 lákhs a
year. [573] In spite of the serious sacrifice Siddharája broke the
board authorizing the levy of the tax and pouring water from his
hand into his mother's declared that the merit of the remission was
hers. The queen went to Somanátha and worshipped the god with gold
presenting an elephant and other gifts and handing over her own weight
in money.

According to the Prabandhachintámani while Miyánalladeví and
Siddharája were on pilgrimage Yasovarman king of Málwa continually
harassed the Gurjjara-Mandala. Sántu who was in charge of the kingdom
asked Yasovarman on what consideration he would retire. Yasovarman
said he would retire if Siddharája gave up to him the merit of the
pilgrimage to Somesvara. Sántu washed his feet and taking water in
his hand surrendered to Yasovarman the merit of Siddharája, on which,
according to his promise, Yasovarman retired. On his return Siddharája
asked Sántu what he meant by transferring his sovereign's merit to a
rival. Sántu said, 'If you think my giving Yasovarman your merit has
any importance I restore it to you.' [574] This curious story seems
to be a Jain fiction probably invented with the object of casting
ridicule on the Bráhmanical doctrine of merit. Yasovarman was not a
cotemporary of Siddharája. The Málwa king referred to is probably
Yasovarman's predecessor Naravarman, of whom an inscription dated
A.D. 1134 (S. 1190) is recorded. [575]

Under the name Sadharo Jesingh, Siddharája's memory is fresh in
Gujarát as its most powerful, most religious, and most charitable
ruler. Almost every old work of architectural or antiquarian interest
in Gujarát is ascribed to Siddharája. In inscriptions he is styled The
great king of kings, The great lord, The great Bhattáraka, The lord
of Avantí, The hero of the three worlds, The conqueror of Barbaraka,
The universal ruler Siddha, The illustrious Jayasimhadeva. Of these
the commonest attributes are Siddhachakravartín the Emperor of Magic
and Siddharája the Lord of Magic, titles which seem to claim for
the king divine or supernatural powers. [576] In connection with his
assumption of these titles the Kumárapálaprabandha, the Dvyásraya,
and the Prabandhachintámani tell curious tales. According to the
Dvyásraya, the king wandering by night had subdued the Bhútas, Sákinís,
and other spirits. He had also learnt many mantras or charms. From
what he saw at night he would call people in the day time and say 'You
have such a cause of uneasiness' or 'You have such a comfort.' Seeing
that he knew their secrets the people thought that the king knew the
hearts of all men and must be the avatára of some god. A second story
tells how Siddharája helped a Nága prince and princess whom he met by
night on the Sarasvatí. [577] According to a third story told in the
Kumárapálaprabandha two Yoginís or nymphs came from the Himálayas and
asked the king by what mystic powers he justified the use of the title
Siddharája. The king agreed to perform some wonders in open court
in the presence of the nymphs. With the help of a former minister,
Haripála, the king had a dagger prepared whose blade was of sugar and
its handle of iron set with jewels. When the king appeared in court
to perform the promised wonders a deputation of ambassadors from king
Permádi of Kalyánakataka [578] was announced. The deputation entered
and presented the prepared dagger as a gift from their lord. The king
kept the prepared dagger and in its stead sent all round the court
a real dagger which was greatly admired. After the real dagger had
been seen and returned the king said: I will use this dagger to show
my mystic powers, and in its place taking the false dagger ate its
sugar blade. When the blade was eaten the minister stopped the king
and said Let the Yoginís eat the handle. The king agreed and as the
Yoginís failed to eat the handle which was iron the superiority of
the king's magic was proved.

A fourth story in the Dvyásraya tells that when the king was planning
an invasion of Málwa a Yoginí came from Ujjain to Patan and said
'O Rája, if you desire great fame, come to Ujjain and humbly entreat
Kálika and other Yoginís and make friends with Yasovarman the Rája
of Ujjain.' The king contemptuously dismissed her, saying, 'If you
do not fly hence like a female crow, I will cut off your nose and
ears with this sword.'

So also the king's acts of prowess and courage were believed to
be due to magical aid. According to the common belief Siddharája
did his great acts of heroism by the help of a demon named Bábaro,
whom he is said to have subdued by riding on a corpse in a burying
ground. The story in the Prabandhachintámani is similar to that
told of the father of Harshavardhana who subdued a demon with the
help of a Yogí. It is notable that the story had passed into its
present form within a hundred years of Siddharája's death. Somesvara
in his Kírtikaumudí says, 'This moon of kings fettered the prince of
goblins Barbaraka in a burial-place, and became known among the crowd
of kings as Siddharája.' Older records show that the origin of the
story, at least of the demon's name, is historical being traceable to
one of Siddharája's copperplate attributes Barbaraka-jishnu that is
conqueror of Barbaraka. The Dvyásrayakosha represents this Barbara
as a leader of Rákshasas or Mlechhas, who troubled the Bráhmans at
Srísthala-Siddhapura. Jayasimha conquered him and spared his life at
the instance of his wife Pingaliká. Afterwards Barbara gave valuable
presents to Jayasimha and 'served him as other Rájputs.' [579]
Barbaraka seems to be the name of a tribe of non-Áryans whose modern
representatives are the Bábariás settled in South Káthiáváda in the
province still known as Bábariáváda.

A Dohad inscription of the time of Siddharája dated A.D. 1140
(S. 1196) says of his frontier wars: 'He threw into prison the lords
of Suráshtra and Málwa; he destroyed Sindhurája and other kings; he
made the kings of the north bear his commands.' The Suráshtra king
referred to is probably a ruler of the Áhír or Chúdásamá tribe whose
head-quarters were at Junágadh. According to the Prabandhachintámani
Siddharája went in person to subdue Noghan or Navaghani the Áhír
ruler of Suráshtra; he came to Vardhamánapura that is Vadhván and
from Vadhván attacked and slew Noghan. Jinaprabhasúri the author
of the Tírthakalpa says of Girnár that Jayasimha killed the king
named Khengár and made one Sajjana his viceroy in Suráshtra. So many
traditions remain regarding wars with Khengár that it seems probable
that Siddharája led separate expeditions against more than one king of
that name. According to tradition the origin of the war with Khengár
was a woman named Ránakadeví whom Khengára had married. Ránakadeví
was the daughter of a potter of Majevádi village about nine miles
north of Junágadh, so famous for her beauty that Siddharája determined
to marry her. Meanwhile she had accepted an offer from Khengár whose
subject she was and had married him. Siddharája enraged at her marriage
advanced against Khengár, took him prisoner, and annexed Sorath. That
Khengár's kingdom was annexed and Sajjana, mentioned by Jinaprabhasúri,
was appointed Viceroy is proved by a Girnár inscription dated A.D. 1120
(S. 1176).

An era called the Simha Samvatsara connected with the name of Jayasimha
and beginning with A.D. 1113-1114 (S. 1169-70), occurs in several
inscriptions found about Prabhása and South Káthiáváda. This era was
probably started in that year in honour of this conquest of Khengár
and Sorath. [580] The earliest known mention of the Simha Samvatsara
era occurs in a step-well at Mángrol called the Sodhali Váv. The
inscription is of the time of Kumárapála and mentions Sahajiga the
father of Múlaka the grantor as a member of the bodyguard of the
Chálukyas. The inscription states that Sahajiga had several sons
able to protect Sauráshtra, one of whom was Somarája who built the
temple of Sahajigesvara, in the enclosure of the Somanátha temple at
Prabhása; another was Múlaka the náyaka of Suráshtra, who is recorded
to have made grants for the worship of the god by establishing cesses
in Mangalapura or Mángrol and other places. The inscription is dated
A.D. 1146 (Monday the 13th of the dark half of Asvín Vikrama S. 1202
and Simha S. 32). This inscription supports the view that the Simha
era was established by Jayasimha, since if the era belonged to some
other local chief, no Chálukya viceroy would adopt it. The Simha era
appears to have been kept up in Gujarát so long as Anahilapura rule
lasted. The well known Verával inscription of the time of Arjunadeva
is dated Hijri 662, Vikrama S. 1320, Valabhi S. 945, Simha S. 151,
Sunday the 13th of Áshádha Vadi. This inscription shows that the
Simha era was in use for a century and a half during the sovereignty
of Anahilaváda in Suráshtra.

Regarding Sajjana Siddharája's first viceroy in Suráshtra, the
Prabandhachintámani says that finding him worthy the king appointed
Sajjana the dandádhipati of Suráshtradesa. Without consulting his
master Sajjana spent three years' revenue in building a stone temple of
Neminátha on Girnár instead of a wooden temple which he removed. In
the fourth year the king sent four officers to bring Sajjana to
Anahilaváda. The king called on Sajjana to pay the revenues of the
past three years. In reply Sajjana asked whether the king would
prefer the revenue in cash or the merit which had accrued from
spending the revenue in building the temple. Preferring the merit
the king sanctioned the spending of the revenues on the Tírtha and
Sajjana was reappointed governor of Sorath. [581] This stone temple of
Sajjana would seem to be the present temple of Neminátha, though many
alterations have been made in consequence of Muhammadan sacrilege and
a modern enclosure has been added. The inscription of Sajjana which
is dated A.D. 1120 (S. 1176) is on the inside to the right in passing
to the small south gate. It contains little but the mention of the
Sádhu who was Sajjana's constant adviser. On his return from a second
pilgrimage to Somanátha Siddharája who was encamped near Raivataka that
is Girnár expressed a wish to see Sajjana's temple. But the Bráhmans
envious of the Jains persuaded the king that as Girnár was shaped like
a ling it would be sacrilege to climb it. Siddharája respected this
objection and worshipped at the foot of the mountain. From Girnár
he went to Satruñjaya. Here too Bráhmans with drawn swords tried to
prevent the king ascending the hill. Siddharája went in disguise at
night, worshipped the Jain god Ádísvara with Ganges water, and granted
the god twelve neighbouring villages. On the hill he saw so luxuriant
a growth of the sállaki a plant dear to elephants, that he proposed
to make the hill a breeding place for elephants a second Vindhya. He
was reminded what damage wild elephants would cause to the holy place
and for this reason abandoned his plan.

Siddharája's second and greater war was with Málwa. The cotemporary
kings of Málwa were the Paramára ruler Naravarman who flourished from
A.D. 1104 to 1133 (S. 1160-1189) and his son and successor Yasovarman
who ruled up to A.D. 1143 (S. 1199) the year of Siddharája's death As
the names of both these kings occur in different accounts of this war,
and, as the war is said to have lasted twelve years, it seems that
fighting began in the time of Naravarman and that Siddharája's final
victory was gained in the time of Yasovarman in Siddharája's old age
about A.D. 1134 (S. 1190). This view is supported by the local story
that his expedition against Yasovarman was undertaken while Siddharája
was building the Sahasralinga lake and other religious works. It is not
known how the war arose but the statement of the Prabandhachintámani
that Siddharája vowed to make a scabbard of Yasovarman's skin seems to
show that Siddharája received grave provocation. Siddharája is said
to have left the building of the Sahasralinga lake to the masons and
architects and himself to have started for Málwa. The war dragged on
and there seemed little hope of victory when news reached Siddharája
that the three south gates of Dhárá could be forced. With the help
of an elephant an entrance was effected. Yasovarman was captured and
bound with six ropes, and, with his captured enemy as his banner
of victory, Siddharája returned to Anahilapura. He remembered his
vow, but being prevented from carrying it out, he took a little of
Yasovarman's skin and adding other skin to it made a scabbard. The
captured king was thenceforward kept in a cage. It was this complete
conquest and annexation of Málwa that made Siddharája assume the style
of Avantínátha 'Lord of Avantí,' which is mentioned as his biruda or
title in most of the Chaulukya copperplates. [582] Málwa henceforward
remained subject to Anahilaváda. On the return from Málwa an army of
Bhíls who tried to block the way were attacked by the minister Sántu
and put to flight.

Siddharája's next recorded war is with king Madanavarman the Chandela
king of Mahobaka the modern Mahobá in Bundelkhand. Madanavarman, of
whom General Cunningham has found numerous inscriptions dating from
A.D. 1130 to 1164 (S. 1186-1220), [583] was one of the most famous
kings of the Chandela dynasty. An inscription of one of his successors
in Kálanjar fort records that Madanavarman 'in an instant defeated
the king of Gurjjara, as Krishna in former times defeated Kamsa, [584]
a statement which agrees with the Gujarát accounts of the war between
him and Jayasimha. In this conflict the Gujarát accounts do not seem
to show that Siddharája gained any great victory; he seems to have
been contented with a money present. The Kírtikaumudí states that the
king of Mahobaka honoured Siddharája as his guest and paid a fine and
tribute by way of hospitality. The account in the Kumárapálacharita
suggests that Siddharája was compelled to come to terms and make
peace. According to the Kírtikaumudí, and this seems likely, Siddharája
went from Dhárá to Kálanjara. The account in the Prabandhachintámani
is very confused. According to the Kumárapálacharita, on Siddharája's
way back from Dhárá at his camp near Patan a bard came to the court
and said to the king that his court was as wonderful as the court of
Madanavarman. The bard said that Madanavarman was the king of the city
of Mahobaka and most clever, wise, liberal, and pleasure-loving. The
king sent a courtier to test the truth of the bard's statement. The
courtier returned after six months declaring that the bard's account
was in no way exaggerated. Hearing this Siddharája at once started
against Mahobaka and encamping within sixteen miles of the city sent
his minister to summon Madanavarman to surrender. Madanavarman who
was enjoying himself took little notice of the minister. This king,
he said, is the same who had to fight twelve years with Dhárá; if,
as is probable, since he is a kabádi or wild king, he wants money,
pay him what he wants. The money was paid. But Siddharája was so
struck with Madanavarman's indifference that he would not leave until
he had seen him. Madanavarman agreed to receive him. Siddharája went
with a large bodyguard to the royal garden which contained a palace
and enclosed pleasure-house and was guarded by troops. Only four
of Siddharája's guards were allowed to enter. With these four men
Siddharája went in, was shown the palace garden and pleasure-houses
by Madanavarman, was treated with great hospitality, and on his return
to Patan was given a guard of 120 men.

The Dvyásraya says that after his conquest of Ujjain Siddharája seized
and imprisoned the king of a neighbouring country named Sim. We have
no other information on this point.

The Dohad inscription dated A.D. 1140 mentions the destruction of
Sindhurája that is the king of Sindh and other kings. The Kírtikaumudí
also mentions the binding of the lord of Sindhu. Nothing is known
regarding the Sindh war. The Kírtikaumudí mentions that after a
war with Arnorája king of Sámbhar Siddharája gave his daughter to
Arnorája. This seems to be a mistake as the war and alliance with
Arnorája belong to Kumárapála's reign.

Siddharája, who like his ancestors was a Saiva, showed his zeal for
the faith by constructing the two grandest works in Gujarát the
Rudramahálaya at Sidhpur and the Sahasralinga lake at Patan. The
Jain chroniclers always try to show that Siddharája was favourably
inclined to Jainism. But several of his acts go against this claim
and some even show a dislike of the Jains. It is true that the Jain
sage Hemáchárya lived with the king, but the king honoured him as a
scholar rather than as a Jain. On the occasion of the pilgrimage to
Somanátha the king offered Hemáchárya a palanquin, and, as he would
not accept the offer but kept on walking, the king blamed him calling
him a learned fool with no worldly wisdom. Again on one occasion while
returning from Málwa Siddharája encamped at a place called Srínagara,
where the people had decorated their temples with banners in honour
of the king. Finding a banner floating over a Jain temple the king
asked in anger who had placed it there, as he had forbidden the use
of banners on Jain shrines and temples in Gujarát. On being told that
it was a very old shrine dating from the time of Bharata, the king
ordered that at the end of a year the banner might be replaced. This
shows the reverse of a leaning to Jainism. Similarly, according to the
Prabandhachintámani, Hemáchárya never dared to speak to the king in
favour of Jainism but used to say that all religions were good. This
statement is supported by the fact that the opening verses of all
works written by Hemáchárya in the time of Siddharája contain no
special praise of Jain deities.

So great is Siddharája's fame as a builder that almost every old work
in Gujarát is ascribed to him. Tradition gives him the credit of the
Dabhoi fort which is of the time of the Vághelá king Víradhavala,
A.D. 1220-1260. The Prabandhachintámani gives this old verse
regarding Siddharája's public works: 'No one makes a great temple
(Rudramahálaya), a great pilgrimage (to Somanátha), a great Ásthána
(darbár hall), or a great lake (Sahasralinga) such as Siddharája
made.' [585] Of these the Rudramahálaya, though very little is
left, from its size and the beauty of its carving, must have been
a magnificent work the grandest specimen of the architecture of the
Solanki period. The remains of the Sahasralinga lake at Anahilapura
show that it must have been a work of surprising size and richness
well deserving its title of mahásarah or great lake. Numerous other
public works are ascribed to Siddharája. [586]

At this period it seems that the kings of Gujarát Sámbhar and other
districts, seeing the great reputation which his literary tastes had
gained for Bhoja of Dhárá used all to keep Pandits. Certain carvings
on the pillars of a mosque at the south-west of the modern town of
Dhárá show that the building almost as it stands was the Sanskrit
school founded by Bhoja. The carvings in question are beautifully cut
Sanskrit grammar tables. Other inscriptions in praise of Naravarman
show that Bhoja's successors continued to maintain the institution. In
the floor of the mosque are many large shining slabs of black marble,
the largest as much as seven feet long, all of them covered with
inscriptions so badly mutilated that nothing can be made out of
them except that they were Sanskrit and Prakrit verses in honour of
some prince. On a rough estimate the slabs contain as many as 4000
verses. [587] According to the old saying any one who drank of the
Sarasvatí well in Dhárá became a scholar. Sarasvatí's well still exists
near the mosque. Its water is good and it is still known as Akkal-kui
or the Well of Talent. As in Dhárá so in Ajmir the Arháí-dinká
Jhopdá mosque is an old Sanskrit school, recent excavations having
brought to light slabs with entire dramas carved on them. So also the
Gujarát kings had their Pandits and their halls of learning. Srípála,
Siddharája's poet-laureate, wrote a poetical eulogium or prasasti on
the Sahasralinga lake. According to the Prabandhachintámani Siddharája
gathered numerous Pandits to examine the eulogium. As has already
been noticed Siddharája's constant companion was the great scholar
and Jain áchárya Hemachandra also called Hemáchárya, who, under the
king's patronage, wrote a treatise on grammar called Siddhahema,
and also the well-known Dvyásrayakosha which was intended to teach
both grammar and the history of the Solankis. Hemachandra came into
even greater prominence in the time of Kumárapála, when he wrote
several further works and became closely connected with the state
religion. Several stories remain of Siddharája assembling poets,
and holding literary and poetic discussions.

Record is preserved of a sabhá or assembly called by the king to
hear discussions between a Svetámbara Jaina áchárya named Bhattáraka
Devasúri and a Digambara Jaina áchárya named Kumudachandra who had come
from the Karnátak. Devasúri who was living and preaching in the Jain
temple of Arishtanemi at Karnávatí, [588] that is the modern Ahmadábád,
was there visited by Kumudachandra. Devasúri treated his visitor with
little respect telling him to go to Patan and he would follow and hold
a religious discussion or váda. Kumudachandra being a Digambara or
skyclad Jaina went naked to Patan and Siddharája honoured him because
he came from his mother's country. Siddharája asked Hemachandra to
hold a discussion with Kumudachandra and Hemachandra recommended that
Devasúri should be invited as a worthy disputant. At a discussion held
before a meeting called by the king Kumudachandra was vanquished,
probably because the first principle of his Digambara faith that no
woman can attain nirvána, was insulting to the queen-mother, and the
second that no clothes-wearing Jain can gain mukti or absorption,
was an insult to the Jain ministers. The assembly, like Bráhmanical
sabhás at the present day, appears to have declined into noise and
Siddharája had to interfere and keep order. Devasúri was complimented
by the king and taken by one Áhada with great honour to his newly
built Jaina temple. [589]

[Kumárapála, A.D. 1143-1174.] In spite of prayers to Somanátha,
of incantations, and of gifts to Bráhmans, Siddharája Jayasimha
had no son. The throne passed into the line of Tribhuvanapála
the great-grandson of Bhímadeva I. (A.D. 1074-62) who was
ruling as a feudatory of Siddharája at his ancestral appanage
of Dahithalí. Tribhuvanapála's pedigree is Bhímadeva I.; his son
Kshemarája by Bakuládeví a concubine; his son Haripála; his son
Tribhuvanapála. By his queen Kásmíradeví Tribhuvanapála had three sons
Mahípála, Kírttipála, and Kumárapála, and two daughters Premaladeví
and Devaladeví. Premaladeví was married to one of Siddharája's
nobles a cavalry general named Kánhada or Krishnadeva: Devaladeví was
married to Arnorája [590] or Anarája king of Sákambhari or Sámbhar,
the Ánalladeva of the Hammíramahákávya. Kumárapála himself was
married by his father to one Bhupáladeví. According to the Dvyásraya,
Tribhuvanapála was on good terms with Siddharája serving him and going
with him to war. The Kumárapálacharita also states that Kumárapála
used to attend the court of Siddharája. But from the time he came to
feel that he would have no son and that the bastard Kumárapála would
succeed him Siddharája became embittered against Kumárapála. According
to the Jain chronicles Siddharája was told by the god Somanátha,
by the sage Hemachandra, by the goddess Ambiká of Kodinár, [591] and
by astrologers that he would have no son and that Kumárapála would
be his successor. According to the Kumárapálacharita so bitter did
his hate grow that Siddharája planned the death of Tribhuvanapála
and his family including Kumárapála. Tribhuvanapála was murdered
but Kumárapála escaped. Grieved at this proof of the king's hatred
Kumárapála consulted his brother-in-law Krishnadeva who advised him
to leave his family at Dahithalí and go into exile promising to keep
him informed of what went on at Anahilapura. Kumárapála left in the
disguise of a jatádhári or recluse and escaped the assassins whom the
king had ordered to slay him. After some time Kumárapála returned
and in spite of his disguise was recognized by the guards. They
informed the king who invited all the ascetics in the city to a
dinner. Kumárapála came but noticing that the king recognized him in
spite of his disguise, he fled. The king sent a trusted officer with
a small force in pursuit. Kumárapála persuaded some husbandmen, the
chief of whom was Bhímasimha, to hide him in a heap of thorns. The
pursuers failing to find him returned. At night Kumárapála was let
out bleeding from the thorns, and promised the husbandmen that the
day would come when their help would be rewarded. He then shaved his
topknot or jatá and while travelling met with a lady named Devasrí of
Udambara village who pitying him took him into her chariot and gave him
food. Kumárapála promised to regard her as a sister. He then came to
Dahithalí where the royal troops had already arrived. Siddharája sent
an army which invested the village leaving Kumárapála without means
of escape. He went to a potter named Sajjana or Alinga who hid him in
the flues of his brick-kiln throwing hay over him. The troops searched
the village, failed to find Kumárapála, and retired. The potter then
helped Kumárapála from his hiding place and fed him. A former friend
named Bosari joined Kumárapála and they went away together Kumárapála
commending his family to the care of Sajjana. On the first day they
had no food. Next day Bosari went to beg and they together ate the food
given to Bosari in a monastery or math where they slept. In time they
came to Cambay where they called upon Hemáchárya and asked him their
future. Hemáchárya knew and recognized Kumárapála. Kumárapála asked
when fate would bless him. Before Hemáchárya could reply Udayana,
one of the king's ministers, came. Hemáchárya said to Udayana,
'This is Kumárapála who shall shortly be your king.' Hemáchárya
also gave Kumárapála a writing stating that he would succeed to the
throne. Kumárapála acknowledged his obligations to Hemáchárya and
promised to follow his advice. Udayana took him to his house and
gave him food and clothes. Siddharája came to know of this and sent
his soldiers who began to search. Kumárapála returned to Hemáchárya
who hid him in a cellar covering its door with manuscripts and palm
leaves. The soldiers came but failed to search under the manuscripts
and returned. Kumárapála acknowledged his obligations to Hemáchárya and
said he owed him two great debts one for telling him the day on which
he would come to the throne; the other for saving his life. Kumárapála
left Cambay at midnight, the minister Udayana supplying him with
provisions. From Cambay he went to Vatapadrapura probably Baroda,
where feeling hungry he entered the shop of a Vánia named Katuka
and asked for parched gram. The Vánia gave the gram and seeing that
Kumárapála had no money accepted his promise of future payment. From
Baroda he came to Bhrigukachh or Broach where he saw a soothsayer and
asked him his future. The soothsayer, seeing the bird kali-deví perched
on the temple flagstaff, said 'You will shortly be king.' Kumárapála
shaved his matted hair and went from Broach to Ujjain where he met
his family. But as here too the royal troops followed him he fled to
Kolhápura where he came across a Yogí who foretold his succession
to a throne and gave him two spells or mantras. From Kolhápura
Kumárapála went to Káñchí or Conjeveram and from there to the city
of Kálambapattana. [592] The king of Kálambapattana Pratápasimha
received him like an elder brother and brought him into his city,
built a temple of Sivananda Kumárapálesvara in his honour, and even
issued a coin called a Kumárapála. From Kálambapattana Kumárapála
went to Chitrakúta or Chitor and from there to Ujjain whence he took
his family to Siddhapura going on alone to Anahilapura to see his
brother-in-law Krishnadeva. According to the Vichárasreni Siddharája
died soon after in A.D. 1143 on the 3rd of Kárttika Suddha Samvat 1199.

In the dissensions that followed the king's death
Kumárapála's interests were well served by his brother-in-law
Krishnadeva. Eventually the names of three candidates, Kumárapála and
two others, were laid before the state nobles sitting in council to
determine who should be king. Of the three candidates the two others
were found wanting, and Kumárapála was chosen and installed according
to the Vichárasreni on the 4th of Márgasírsha Suddha and according
to the Kumárapálaprabandha on the 4th of Márgasírsha Vadhya. At the
time of his succession, according to the Prabandhachintámani and the
Kumárapálaprabandha, Kumárapála was about fifty years of age.

On his accession Kumárapála installed his wife Bhupáladeví his anointed
queen or pattaráni; appointed Udayana who had befriended him at Cambay
minister; Báhada or Vágbhata son of Udayana [593] chief councillor
or mahámátya; and Alinga second councillor or mahápradhána. Áhada
or Árabhatta, apparently another son of Udayana, did not acknowledge
Kumárapála and went over to Arnorája Ánáka or Ano king of Sapádalaksha
or the Sámbhar territory who is probably the same as the Ánalladeva
of the Hammíramahákávya. [594]

The potter Sajjana was rewarded with a grant of seven hundred villages
near Chitrakúta or Chitoda fort in Rájputána, and the author of
the Prabandhachintámani notices that in his time the descendants of
the potter ashamed of their origin called themselves descendants of
Sagara. Bhímasimha who hid Kumárapála in the thorns was appointed head
of the bodyguard; Devasrí made the sister's mark on the royal forehead
at the time of Kumárapála's installation and was granted the village of
Devayo; [595] and Katuka the Vániá of Baroda, who had given Kumárapála
parched gram was granted the village of Vatapadra or Baroda. Bosari
Kumárapála's chief companion was given Látamandala, which seems to
mean that he was appointed viceroy of Láta or South Gujarát.

Kanhada or Krishnadeva Kumárapála's brother-in-law and adviser
overvaluing his great services became arrogant and disobedient
insulting the king in open court. As remonstrance was of no avail
the king had Krishnadeva waylaid and beaten by a band of athletes and
taken almost dying to his wife the king's sister. From this time all
the state officers were careful to show ready obedience.

The old ministry saw that under so capable and well served a ruler
their power was gone. They accordingly planned to slay the king
and place their own nominee on the throne. The king heard of the
plot: secured the assassins: and employed them in murdering the
conspirators. According to the Prabandhachintámani, Áhada or Árabhatta
who had gone over to the Sámbhar king and was in charge of the Sámbhar
infantry, bribed the local nobles as a preliminary to a war which he
had planned against Kumárapála. He so far succeeded as to bring Ána
or Ánáka the Sámbhar king with the whole of his army to the borders
of Gujarát to fight Kumárapála. Kumárapála went to meet Ánáka. But,
in consequence of intrigues, in the battle that followed the Gujarát
army did not obey orders. Kumárapála advanced in front on an elephant,
and Báhada trying to climb on Kumárapála's elephant was thrown to the
ground and slain. Ánáka was also pierced with arrows and the Sámbhar
army was defeated and plundered of its horses. [596]

The Dvyásraya, probably by the aid of the author's imagination,
gives a fuller account of this war. One fact of importance recorded
in the Dvyásraya is that Ánáka though defeated was not slain, and, to
bring hostilities to an end, gave his daughter Jalhaná to Kumárapála
in marriage. [597] The Kumárapálacharita calls the Sámbhar king
Arnorája and says that it was Kumárapála who invaded the Sámbhar
territory. According to this account Kumárapála went to Chandrávatí
near Ábu and taking its Paramára king Vikramasimha with him marched
to Sákambhari or Sámbhar and fought Arnorája who was defeated but not
killed. Kumárapála threatened to cut out Arnorája's tongue but let
him go on condition that his people wore a headdress with a tongue on
each side. Arnorája is said to have been confined in a cage for three
days and then reinstalled as Kumárapála's feudatory. Vikramasimha of
Chandrávatí, who in the battle had sided with Arnorája, was punished
by being disgraced before the assembled seventy-two feudatories at
Anahilaváda and was sent to prison, his throne being given to his
nephew Yasodhavala. After his victory over Arnorája Kumárapála fought,
defeated, and, according to the Kírtikaumudí, beheaded Ballála king
of Málwa who had invaded Gujarát. The result of this contest seems to
have been to reduce Málwa to its former position of dependence on the
Anahilaváda kings. More than one inscription of Kumárapála's found in
the temple of Udayáditya as far north as Udayapura near Bhilsa shows
that he conquered the whole of Málwa, as the inscriptions are recorded
by one who calls himself Kumárapála's general or dandanáyaka. [598]

Another of Kumárapála's recorded victories is over Mallikárjuna
said to be king of the Konkan who we know from published lists of
the North Konkan Siláháras flourished about A.D. 1160. The author
of the Prabandhachintámani says this war arose from a bard of king
Mallikárjuna speaking of him before king Kumárapála as Rájapitámaha or
grandfather of kings. [599] Kumárapála annoyed at so arrogant a title
looked around. Ámbadá, [600] one of the sons of Udayana, divining the
king's meaning, raised his folded hands to his forehead and expressed
his readiness to fight Mallikárjuna. The king sent him with an army
which marched to the Konkan without halting. At the crossing of the
Kaláviní it was met and defeated by Mallikárjuna. Ámbadá returned in
disgrace and shrouding himself, his umbrella and his tents in crape
retreated to Anahilaváda. The king finding Ámbada though humiliated
ready to make a second venture gave him a larger and better appointed
force. With this army Ámbadá again started for the Konkan, crossed the
Kaláviní, attacked Mallikárjuna, and in a hand-to-hand fight climbed
his elephant and cut off his head. This head cased in gold with other
trophies of the war he presented to the king on his triumphant return
to Anahilapura. The king was greatly pleased and gave Ámbadá the
title of Rájapitámaha. Of this Mallikárjuna two stone inscriptions
have been found one at Chiplún dated A.D. 1156 (Saka 1078) the other
at Bassein dated A.D. 1160 (Saka 1082). If the story that Mallikárjuna
was slain is true the war must have taken place during the two years
between A.D. 1160 and 1162 (Saka 1082, 1084) which latter is the
earliest known date of Mallikárjuna's successor Aparáditya.

The Kumárapálacharita also records a war between Kumárapála and
Samara king of Suráshtra or south Káthiáváda, the Gujarát army being
commanded by Kumárapála's minister Udayana. The Prabandhachintámani
gives Sausara as the name of the Suráshtra king [601]: possibly he
was some Gohilvád Mehr chief. Udayana came with the army to Vadhwán,
and letting it advance went to Pálitána. While he was worshipping at
Pálitána, a mouse carried away the burning wick of the lamp. Reflecting
on the risk of fire in a wooden temple Udayana determined to rebuild
the temple of stone. In the fight with Sausara the Gujarát army was
defeated and Udayana was mortally wounded. [602] Before Udayana died
he told his sons that he had meant to repair the temple of Ádísvara
on Satruñjaya and the Sakuniká Vihára at Broach and also to build
steps up the west face of Girnár. His sons Báhada and Ámbadá promised
to repair the two shrines. Subsequently both shrines were restored,
Kumárapála and Hemáchárya and the council of Anahilapura attending
at the installation of Suvrittinátha in the Sakuniká Vihára. The
Girnár steps were also cut, according to more than one inscription
in A.D. 1166 (S. 1222). [603] This war and Udayana's death must
have occurred about A.D. 1149 (S. 1205) as the temple of Ádnátha
was finished in A.D. 1156-57 (S. 1211). Báhada also established near
Satruñjaya a town called Báhadapura and adorned it with a temple called
Tribhuvanapálavasati. [604] After the fight with Sausara Kumárapála
was threatened with another war by Karna [605] king of Dáhala or
Chedi. Spies informed the king of the impending invasion as he was
starting on a pilgrimage to Somanátha. Next day he was relieved from
anxiety by the news that while sleeping on an elephant at night king
Karna's necklace became entangled in the branch of a banyan tree,
and the elephant suddenly running away, the king was strangled.

The Prabandhachintámani records an expedition against Sámbhar which
was entrusted to Cháhada a younger brother of Báhada. Though Cháhada
was known to be extravagant, the king liked him, and after giving him
advice placed him in command. On reaching Sámbhar Cháhada invested the
fort of Bábránagar but did not molest the people as on that day 700
brides had to be married. [606] Next day the fort was entered, the city
was plundered, and the supremacy of Kumárapála was proclaimed. This
Bábránagar has not been identified. There appears to be some
confusion and the place may not be in Sámbhar but in Bábariáváda in
Káthiáváda. Cháhada returned triumphant to Patan. The king expressed
himself pleased but blamed Cháhada for his lavish expenditure and
conferred on him the title of Rája-gharatta the King-grinder.

Though the Gujarát chronicles give no further details an inscription
in the name of Kumárapála in a temple at Udepur near Bhilsa dated
A.D. 1166 records that on Monday, Akshaya tritiyá the 3rd of Vaisákh
Sud (S. 1222), Thakkara Cháhada granted half the village of Sangaváda
in the Rangáriká district or bhukti. Just below this inscription is
a second also bearing the name of Kumárapála. The year is lost. But
the occasion is said to be an eclipse on Thursday the 15th of Paush
Sudi when a gift was made to the god of Udayapura by Yasodhavala the
viceroy of Kumárapála. [607]

Similar inscriptions of Kumárapála's time and giving his name occur
near the ruined town of Kerádu or Kiráta-Kúpa near Bálmer in Western
Rájputána. The inscriptions show that Kumárapála had another Amátya or
minister there, and that the kings of the country round Kerádu had been
subject to Gujarát since the time of Siddharája Jayasimha. Finally
the inscription of Kumárapála found by Colonel Tod in a temple of
Brahma on the pinnacle of Chitoda fort [608] shows that his conquests
extended as far as Mewáda.

According to the Kumárapálachintámani Kumárapála married one Padmávatí
of Padmapura. The chronicler describes the city as to the west of
the Indus. Perhaps the lady belonged to Padmapura, a large town
in Kashmír. Considering his greatness as a king and conqueror the
historical record of Kumárapála is meagre and incomplete. Materials
may still come to light which will show his power to have been
surprisingly widespread.

Mr. Forbes [609] records the following Bráhmanical tradition of a
Mewáda queen of Kumárapála, which has probably been intentionally
omitted by the Jain chroniclers.

Kumárapála, says the Bráhman tradition, had wedded a Sisodaní Ráni,
a daughter of the house of Mewáda. At the time that the sword went for
her the Sisodaní heard that the Rája had made a vow that his wives
should receive initiation into the Jain religion at Hemáchárya's
convent before entering the palace. The Ráni refused to start for
Patan until she was satisfied she would not be called on to visit the
Áchárya's convent. Jayadeva Kumárapála's household bard became surety
and the queen consented to go to Anahilapura. Several days after her
arrival Hemáchárya said to the Rája 'The Sisodaní Ráni has never come
to visit me.' Kumárapála told her she must go. The Ráni refused and
fell ill, and the bard's wives went to see her. Hearing her story they
disguised her as one of themselves and brought her privately home to
their house. At night the bard dug a hole in the wall of the city,
and taking the Ráni through the hole started with her for Mewáda. When
Kumárapála became aware of the Ráni's flight he set off in pursuit
with two thousand horse. He came up with the fugitives about fifteen
miles from the fort of Idar. The bard said to the Ráni, 'If you can
enter Idar you are safe. I have two hundred horse with me. As long
as a man of us remains no one shall lay hands on you.' So saying
he turned upon his pursuers. But the Ráni's courage failed and she
slew herself in the carriage. As the fight went on and the pursuers
forced their way to the carriage, the maids cried 'Why struggle more,
the Ráni is dead.' Kumárapála and his men returned home. [610]

The Paramára chiefs of Chandrávatí near Ábu were also feudatories
of Kumárapála. It has been noted that to punish him for siding with
Arnorája of Sámbhar Kumárapála placed Vikrama Simha the Chandrávatí
chief in confinement and set Vikrama's nephew Yasodhavala on his
throne. That Kumárapála conquered the chiefs of Sámbhar and Málwa is
beyond question. Among his names is the proud title Avantí-nátha Lord
of Málwa.

The Kumárapálaprabandha gives the following limits of Kumárapála's
sway. The Turushkas or Turks on the north; the heavenly Ganges on
the east; the Vindhya mountains on the south; the Sindhu river on
the west. [611] Though in tradition Kumárapála's name does not
stand so high as a builder as the name of Siddharája Jayasimha
he carried out several important works. The chief of these was
the restoring and rebuilding of the great shrine of Somesvara or
Somanátha Patan. According to the Prabandhachintámani when Kumárapála
asked Devasúri the teacher of Hemáchárya how best to keep his name
remembered Devasúri replied: Build a new temple of Somanátha fit to
last an age or yuga, instead of the wooden one which is ruined by the
ocean billows. Kumárapála approved and appointed a building committee
or pañchakula headed by a Bráhman named Ganda Bháva Brihaspati
the state officer at Somanátha. At the instance of Hemáchárya the
king on hearing the foundations were laid vowed until the temple
was finished he would keep apart from women and would take neither
flesh nor wine. In proof of his vow he poured a handful of water over
Nílakantha Mahádeva, probably his own royal god. After two years the
temple was completed and the flag hoisted. Hemáchárya advised the
king not to break his vow until he had visited the new temple and
paid his obeisance to the god. The king agreed and went to Somanátha,
Hemáchárya preceding him on foot and promising to come to Somanátha
after visiting Satruñjaya and Girnár. On reaching Somanátha the king
was received by Ganda-Brihaspati his head local officer and by the
building committee, and was taken in state through the town. At the
steps of the temple the king bowed his head to the ground. Under the
directions of Ganda-Brihaspati he worshipped the god, made gifts of
elephants and other costly articles including his own weight in coin,
and returned to Anahilapura.

It is interesting to know that the present battered sea-shore temple
of Somanátha, whose garbhágára or shrine has been turned into a mosque
and whose spire has been shattered, is the temple of whose building
and consecration the above details are preserved. This is shown by
the style of the architecture and sculpture which is in complete
agreement with the other buildings of the time of Kumárapála. [612]

Kumárapála's temple seems to have suffered in every subsequent
Muhammadan invasion, in Alaf Khan's in A.D. 1300, in Mozaffar's in
A.D. 1390, in Mahmúd Begada's about A.D. 1490, and in Muzaffar II.'s
about A.D. 1530. Time after time no sooner had the invader passed than
the work of repair began afresh. One of the most notable restorations
was by Khengár IV. (A.D. 1279-1333) a Chúdásamá king of Junágadh who
is mentioned in two Girnár inscriptions as the repairer of Somanátha
after its desecration by Alá-ud-dín Khilji. The latest sacrilege,
including the turning of the temple into a mosque, was in the time
of the Ahmadábád king Muzaffar Sháh II. (A.D. 1511-1535). Since then
no attempt has been made to win back the god into his old home.

In the side wall near the door of the little shrine of Bhadrakáli
in Patan a broken stone inscription gives interesting details of the
temple of Somanátha. Except that the right hand corners of some of the
lines are broken, the inscription is clear and well preserved. It is
dated A.D. 1169 (Valabhi 850). It records that the temple of the god
Somesa was first of gold built by Soma; next it was of silver built
by Rávana; afterwards of wood built by Krishna; and last of stone
built by Bhímadeva. The next restoration was through Ganda-Brihaspati
under Kumárapála. Of Ganda-Brihaspati it gives these details. He was
a Kanyákubja or Kanoj Bráhman of the Pásupata school, a teacher of
the Málwa kings, and a friend of Siddharája Jayasimha. He repaired
several other temples and founded several other religious buildings
in Somanátha. He also repaired the temple of Kedáresvara in Kumaon
on learning that the Khasa king of that country had allowed it to
fall into disrepair. After the time of Kumárapála the descendants of
Ganda-Brihaspati remained in religious authority in Somanátha.

Kumárapála made many Jain benefactions. [613] He repaired the temple
of Ságala-Vasahiká at Stambha-tírtha or Cambay where Hemáchárya
received his initiation or díkshá. In honour of the lady who gave him
barley flour and curds he built a temple called the Karambaka-Vihára
in Patan. He also built in Patan a temple called the Mouse or
Mushaka-Vihára to free himself from the impurity caused by killing a
mouse while digging for treasure. At Dhandhuka Hemáchárya's birthplace
a temple called the Jholiká-Vihára or cradle temple was built. Besides
these Kumárapála is credited with building 1444 temples.

Though Kumárapála was not a learned man, his ministers were men
of learning, and he continued the practice of keeping at his court
scholars especially Sanskrit poets. Two of his leading Pandits were
Rámachandra and Udayachandra both of them Jains. Rámachandra is often
mentioned in Gujaráti literature and appears to have been a great
scholar. He was the author of a book called the Hundred Accounts or
Prabandhasata. After Udayana's death Kumárapála's chief minister was
Kapardi a man of learning skilled in Sanskrit poetry. And all through
his reign his principal adviser was Hemachandra or Hemáchárya probably
the most learned man of his time. Though Hemáchárya lived during the
reigns both of Siddharája and of Kumárapála, only under Kumárapála
did he enjoy political power as the king's companion and religious
adviser. What record remains of the early Solankis is chiefly due
to Hemachandra.

The Jain life of Hemáchárya abounds in wonders. Apart from the magic
and mystic elements the chief details are: Cháchiga a Modh Vánia
of Dhandhuka [614] in the district of Ardháshtama had by his wife
Páhiní [615] of the Chámunda gotra, a boy named Chángodeva who was
born A.D. 1089 (Kartik fullmoon Samvat 1145). A Jain priest named
Devachandra Áchárya (A.D. 1078-1170; S. 1134-1226) came from Patan
to Dhandhuka and when in Dhandhuka went to pay his obeisance at the
Modh Vasahiká. While Devachandra was seated Chángodeva came playing
with other boys and went and sat beside the áchárya. Struck with the
boy's audacity and good looks the áchárya went with the council of the
village to Cháchiga's house. Cháchiga was absent but his wife being a
Jain received the áchárya with respect. When she heard that her son
was wanted by the council, without waiting to consult her husband,
she handed the boy to the áchárya who carried him off to Karnávatí
and kept him there with the sons of the minister Udayana. Cháchiga,
disconsolate at the loss of his son, went in quest of him vowing to
eat nothing till the boy was found. He came to Karnávatí and in an
angry mood called on the áchárya to restore him his son. Udayana was
asked to interfere and at last persuaded Cháchiga to let the boy stay
with Devachandra.

In A.D. 1097, when Chángodeva was eight years old Cháchiga
celebrated his son's consecration or díkshá and gave him the name of
Somachandra. As the boy became extremely learned Devachandra changed
his name to Hemachandra the Moon of gold. In A.D. 1110 (S. 1166)
at the age of 21, his mastery of all the Sástras and Siddhántas was
rewarded by the dignity of Súri or sage. Siddharája was struck with
his conversation and honoured him as a man of learning. Hemachandra's
knowledge, wisdom and tact enabled him to adhere openly to his Jain
rules and beliefs though Siddharája's dislike of Jain practices was
so great as at times to amount to insult. After one of their quarrels
Hemáchárya kept away from the king for two or three days. Then the
king seeing his humility and his devotion to his faith repented
and apologised. The two went together to Somanátha Patan and there
Hemáchárya paid his obeisance to the linga in a way that did not
offend his own faith. During Siddharája's reign Hemáchárya wrote his
well known grammar with aphorisms or sútras and commentary or vritti
called Siddha-Hemachandra, a title compounded of the king's name and
his own. As the Bráhmans found fault with the absence of any detailed
references to the king in the work Hemachandra added one verse at
the end of each chapter in praise of the king. During Siddharája's
reign he also wrote two other works, the Haimínámamálá, "String
of Names composed by Hema(chandra)" or Abhidhánachintámani and the
Anekárthanámamálá, a Collection of words of more than one meaning. He
also began the Dvyásrayakosha [616] or Double Dictionary being both
a grammar and a history. In spite of his value to Kumárapála, in
the beginning of Kumárapála's reign Hemáchárya was not honoured as
a spiritual guide and had to remain subordinate to Bráhmans. When
Kumárapála asked him what was the most important religious work
he could perform Hemáchárya advised the restoring of the temple of
Somanátha. Still Hemáchárya so far won the king to his own faith that
till the completion of the temple he succeeded in persuading the
king to take the vow of ahimsá or non-killing which though common
to both faiths is a specially Jain observance. Seeing this mark
of his ascendancy over the king, the king's family priest and other
Bráhmans began to envy and thwart Hemáchárya. On the completion of the
temple, when the king was starting for Somanátha for the installation
ceremony, the Bráhmans told him that Hemáchárya did not mean to go
with him. Hemáchárya who had heard of the plot had already accepted
the invitation. He said being a recluse he must go on foot, and that
he also wanted to visit Girnár, and from Girnár would join the king
at Somanátha. His object was to avoid travelling in a palanquin with
the king or suffering a repetition of Siddharája's insult for not
accepting a pálkí. Soon after reaching Somanátha Kumárapála asked
after Hemáchárya. The Bráhmans spread a story that he had been
drowned, but Hemáchárya was careful to appear in the temple as the
king reached it. The king saw him, called him, and took him with him
to the temple. Some Bráhmans told the king that the Jain priest would
not pay any obeisance to Siva, but Hemáchárya saluted the god in the
following verse in which was nothing contrary to strict Jainism:
'Salutation to him, whether he be Brahma, Vishnu, Hara, or Jina,
from whom have fled desires which produce the sprouts of the seed of
worldliness.' [617] After this joint visit to Somanátha Hemachandra
gained still more ascendancy over the king, who appreciated his
calmness of mind and his forbearance. The Bráhmans tried to prevent
the growth of his influence, but in the end Hemachandra overcame
them. He induced the king to place in the sight of his Bráhmanical
family priests an image of Sántinátha Tírthankara among his family
gods. He afterwards persuaded Kumárapála publicly to adopt the Jain
faith by going to the hermitage of Hemachandra and giving numerous
presents to Jain ascetics. Finally under his influence Kumárapála put
away all Bráhmanical images from his family place of worship. Having
gone such lengths Kumárapála began to punish the Bráhmans who insulted
Hemachandra. A Bráhman named Vámarási, a Pandit at the royal court,
who composed a verse insulting Hemachandra, lost his annuity and was
reduced to beggary, but on apologising to Hemachandra the annuity was
restored. Another Bráhmanical officer named Bháva Brihaspati, who was
stationed at Somanátha, was re-called for insulting Hemachandra. But
he too on apologising to Hemachandra was restored to Somanátha. Under
Hemachandra's influence Kumárapála gave up the use of flesh and wine,
ceased to take pleasure in the chase, and by beat of drum forbade
throughout his kingdom the taking of animal life. He withdrew their
licenses from hunters, fowlers and fishermen, and forced them to adopt
other callings. To what lengths this dread of life-taking was carried
appears from an order that only filtered water was to be given to
all animals employed in the royal army. Among the stories told of the
king's zeal for life-saving is one of a Bania of Sámbhar who having
been caught killing a louse was brought in chains to Anahilaváda,
and had his property confiscated and devoted to the building at
Anahilaváda of a Louse Temple or Yúká-Vihára. According to another
story a man of Nador in Márwár was put to death by Kelhana the chief
of Nador to appease Kumárapála's wrath at hearing that the man's wife
had offered flesh to a field-god or kshetrapála. Hemachandra also
induced the king to forego the claim of the state to the property of
those who died without a son.

During Kumárapála's reign Hemachandra wrote many well known Sanskrit
and Prakrit works on literature and religion. Among these are the
Adhyátmopanishad or Yogasástra a work of 12,000 verses in twelve
chapters called Prakásas, the Trisáshthisálákápurushacharitra or lives
of sixty-three Jain saints of the Utsarpiní and Avasarpiní ages;
the Parisishtaparvan, a work of 3500 verses being the life of Jain
Sthaviras who flourished after Mahávíra; the Prákrita Sabdánusásana
or Prákrit grammar; the Dvyásraya [618] a Prakrit poem written with
the double object of teaching grammar and of giving the history
of Kumárapála; the Chhandonusásana a work of about 6000 verses on
prosody; the Lingánusásana a work on genders; the Desínámamálá in
Prakrit with a commentary a work on local and provincial words;
and the Alankárachúdámani a work on rhetoric. Hemachandra died in
A.D. 1172 (S. 1229) at the age of 84. The king greatly mourned his
loss and marked his brow with Hemachandra's ashes. Such crowds came
to share in the ashes of the pyre that the ground was hollowed into
a pit known as the Haima-Khadda or Hema's Pit.

Kumárapála lived to a great age. According to the author of the
Prabandhachintámani he was fifty when he succeeded to the throne, and
after ruling about thirty-one years died in A.D. 1174 (S. 1230). He is
said to have died of lúta a form of leprosy. Another story given by the
Kumárapálaprabandha is that Kumárapála was imprisoned by his nephew and
successor Ajayapála. The Kumárapálaprabandha gives the exact length of
Kumárapála's reign at 30 years 8 months and 27 days. If the beginning
of Kumárapála's reign is placed at the 4th Magsar Sud Samvat 1299,
the date of the close, taking the year to begin in Kártika, would be
Bhádrapada Suddha Samvat 1229. If with Gujarát almanacs the year is
taken to begin in Áshádha, the date of the close of the reign would be
Bhádrapada of Samvat 1230. It is doubtful whether either Samvat 1229 or
1230 is the correct year, as an inscription dated Samvat 1229 Vaishákha
Suddha 3rd at Udayapura near Bhilsá describes Ajayapála Kumárapála's
successor as reigning at Anahilapura. This would place Kumárapála's
death before the month of Vaishákha 1229 that is in A.D. 1173. [619]

[Ajayapála, A.D. 1174-1177.] As Kumárapála had no son he was succeeded
by Ajayapála the son of his brother Mahípála. [620] According to
the Kumárapálaprabandha Kumárapála desired to give the throne to
his daughter's son Pratápamalla, but Ajayapála raised a revolt and
got rid of Kumárapála by poison. The Jain chroniclers say nothing
of the reign of Ajayapála because he was not a follower of their
religion. The author of the Sukritasankírtana notices a small silver
canopy or pavilion shown in Ajayapála's court as a feudatory's gift
from the king of Sapádalaksha [621] or Sewálik. The author of the
Kírtikaumudí dismisses Ajayapála with the mere mention of his name,
and does not even state his relationship with Kumárapála. According to
the Prabandhachintámani Ajayapála destroyed the Jain temples built by
his uncle. He showed no favour to Ámbadá and Kumárapála's other Jain
ministers. Ajayapála seems to have been of a cruel and overbearing
temper. He appointed as his minister Kapardi because he was of the
Bráhmanical faith. [622] But considering his manners arrogant he
ordered him to be thrown into a caldron of boiling oil. On another
occasion he ordered the Jain scholar Rámachandra to sit on a red-hot
sheet of copper. One of his nobles Ámra-bhata or Ámbadá refused to
submit to the king, saying that he would pay obeisance only to Vítarája
or Tírthankara as god, to Hemachandra as guide, and to Kumárapála as
king. Ajayapála ordered the matter to be settled by a fight. Ámbadá
brought some of his followers to the drum-house near the gate, and
in the fight that followed Ámbadá was killed. In A.D. 1177 (S. 1233),
after a short reign of three years, Ajayapála was slain by a doorkeeper
named Vijjaladeva who plunged a dagger into the king's heart. [623]

[Múlarája II., A.D. 1177-1179.] Ajayapála was succeeded by his son
Múlarája II. also called Bála Múlarája as he was only a boy when
installed. His mother was Náikídeví the daughter of Paramardi,
apparently the Kádamba king Permádi or Siva Chitta who reigned
from A.D. 1147 to 1175 (S. 1203-1231). [624] The authors of
the Kírtikaumudí [625] and the Sukritasankírtana say that even
in childhood Múlarája II. dispersed the Turushka or Muhammadan
army. [626] The Prabandhachintámani states that the king's mother
fought at the Gádaráraghatta and that her victory was due to a sudden
fall of rain. Múlarája II. is said to have died in A.D. 1179 (S. 1235)
after a reign of two years.

[Bhíma II. A.D. 1179-1242.] Múlarája II. was succeeded by Bhíma II. The
relationship of the two is not clearly established. Mr. Forbes makes
Bhíma the younger brother of Ajayapála. But it appears from the
Kírtikaumudí and the Sukritasankírtana that Bhíma was the younger
brother of Múlarája. The Sukritasankírtana after concluding the
account of Múlarája, [627] calls Bhíma 'asya bandhu' 'his brother,'
and the Kírtikaumudí, after mentioning the death of Múlarája, says
that Bhíma his younger brother 'anujanmásya' became king. [628]
Múlarája we know came to the throne as a child. Of Bhíma also
the Kírtikaumudí says that he came to the throne while still in
his childhood, and this agrees with the statements that he was
the younger brother of Múlarája. Bhíma probably came to the throne
A.D. 1178 (S. 1234). There is no doubt he was reigning in A.D. 1179
(S. 1235), as an inscription in the deserted village of Kerálu near
Bálmer of Anahilaváda dated A.D. 1179 (S. 1235) states that it was
written 'in the triumphant reign of the illustrious Bhímadeva.' [629]
A further proof of his reigning in A.D. 1179 (S. 1235) and of his
being a minor at that time is given in the following passage from the
Tabakát-i-Násirí: In A.D. 1178 (Hijri 574) 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. [630] Merutunga says that Bhíma reigned from A.D. 1179
(S. 1235) for sixty-three years that is up to A.D. 1242 (S. 1298),
and this is borne out by a copperplate of Bhíma which bears date
A.D. 1240 (S. 1296 [631] Márgha Vadi 14th Sunday [632]).

Bhíma was nicknamed Bholo the Simpleton. The chroniclers of this
period mention only the Vághelás and almost pass over Bhíma. The
author of the Kírtikaumudí says 'the kingdom of the young ruler was
gradually divided among powerful ministers and provincial chiefs'; and
according to the Sukritasankírtana 'Bhíma felt great anxiety on account
of the chiefs who had forcibly eaten away portions of the kingdom.' It
appears that during the minority, when the central authority was weak,
the kingdom was divided among nobles and feudatories, and that Bhíma
proved too weak a ruler to restore the kingly power. Manuscripts and
copperplates show that Bhímadeva was ruling at Anahilaváda in S. 1247,
1251, 1261, 1263, and 1264, [633] and copperplates dated S. 1283, 1288,
1295, and 1296 have also been found. Though Bhíma in name enjoyed a
long unbroken reign the verses quoted above show that power rested
not with the king but with the nobles. It appears from an inscription
that in A.D. 1224 (S. 1280) a Chálukya noble named Jayantasimha was
supreme at Anahilaváda though he mentions Bhíma and his predecessors
with honour and respect. [634]

It was probably by aiding Bhíma against Jayantasimha that the Vághelás
rose to power. According to the chroniclers the Vághelás succeeded
in the natural course of things. According to the Sukritasankírtana
Kumárapála appeared to his grandson Bhíma and directed him to appoint
as his heir-apparent Víradhavala son of Lavanaprasáda and grandson of
Arnorája the son of Dhavala king of Bhimapalli. Next day in court,
in the presence of his nobles, when Lavanaprasáda and Víradhavala
entered the king said to Lavanaprasáda: Your father Arnorája seated
me on the throne: you should therefore uphold my power: in return I
will name your son Víradhavala my heir-apparent. [635] The author of
the Kírtikaumudí notes that Arnorája son of Dhavala, opposing the
revolution against Bhíma, cleared the kingdom of enemies, but at
the cost of his own life. The author then describes Lavanaprasáda
and Víradhavala as kings. But as he gives no account of their rise
to supremacy, it seems probable that they usurped the actual power
from Bhíma though till A.D. 1242 (S. 1295) Bhíma continued to be
nominal sovereign.

Bhíma's queen was Líládeví the daughter of a Chohán chief named
Samarasimha. [636]

CHAPTER III.

THE VÁGHELÁS

(A.D. 1219-1304).

[Arnorája, A.D. 1170-1200.] While Bhímadeva II. (A.D. 1179-1242)
struggled to maintain his authority in the north, the country between
the Sábarmatí and the Narbadá in the south as well as the districts
of Dholká and Dhandhuká in the south-west passed to the Vághelás a
branch of the Solankis sprung from Ánáka or Arnorája, the son of the
sister of Kumárapála's (A.D. 1143-1173) mother. In return for services
to Kumárapála, [637] Ánáka, with the rank of a noble or Sámanta, had
received the village of Vyághrapalli or Vághelá, the Tiger's Lair,
about ten miles south-west of Anahilaváda. It is from this village
that the dynasty takes its name of Vághela.

[Lavanaprasáda, A.D. 1200-1233.] Ánáka's son Lavanaprasáda,
who is mentioned as a minister of Bhímadeva II. (A.D. 1179-1242)
[638] held Vághelá and probably Dhavalagadha or Dholká about thirty
miles to the south-west. The Kírtikaumudí or Moonlight of Glory,
the chief cotemporary chronicle, [639] describes Lavanaprasáda as a
brave warrior, the slayer of the chief of Nadulá the modern Nándol
in Márwár. "In his well-ordered realm, except himself the robber
of the glory of hostile kings, robbers were unknown. The ruler
of Málava invading the kingdom turned back before the strength of
Lavanaprasáda. The southern king also when opposed by him gave up the
idea of war." The ruler of Málava or Málwa referred to was Sohada
or Subhatavarman. [640] The southern king was the Devagiri Yádava
Singhana II. (A.D. 1209-1247). [641]

Lavanaprasáda married Madanarájñí and by her had a son named
Víradhavala. As heir apparent Víradhavala, who was also called
Víra Vághelá or the Vághelá hero, [642] rose to such distinction
as a warrior that in the end Lavanaprasáda abdicated in his
favour. Probably to reconcile the people to his venturing to oppose
his sovereign Bhímadeva, Lavanaprasáda gave out that in a dream the
Luck of Anahilaváda appeared bewailing her home with unlighted shrines,
broken walls, and jackal-haunted streets, and called on him to come to
her rescue. [643] Though he may have gone to the length of opposing
Bhímadeva by force of arms, Lavanaprasáda was careful to rule in
his sovereign's name. Even after Lavanaprasáda's abdication, though
his famous minister Vastupála considered it advisable, Víradhavala
refused to take the supreme title. It was not until the accession
of Víradhavala's son Vísaladeva that the head of the Vághelás
took any higher title than Ránaka or chieftain. Lavanaprasáda's
religious adviser or Guru was the poet Somesvara the author of the
Kírtikaumudí and of the Vastupálacharita or Life of Vastupála, both
being biographical accounts of Vastupála. The leading supporters both
of Lavanaprasáda and of Víradhavala were their ministers the two Jain
brothers Vastupála and Tejahpála the famous temple-builders on Ábu,
Satruñjaya, and Girnár. According to one account Tejahpála remained
at court, while Vastupála went as governor to Stambhatírtha or Cambay
where he redressed wrongs and amassed wealth. [644]

One of the chief times of peril in Lavanaprasáda's reign was the
joint attack of the Devagiri Yádava Singhana or Sinhana from the
south and of four Márwár chiefs from the north. Lavanaprasáda and
his son Víradhavala in joint command marched south to meet Singhana
at Broach. While at Broach the Vághelás' position was made still more
critical by the desertion of the Godhraha or Godhrá chief to Málwa and
of the Láta or south Gujarát chief to Singhana. Still Lavanaprasáda
pressed on, attacked Singhana, and gave him so crushing a defeat, that,
though Lavanaprasáda had almost at once to turn north to meet the Málwa
army, Singhana retired without causing further trouble. [645] Somesvara
gives no reason for Singhana's withdrawal beyond the remark 'Deer do
not follow the lion's path even when the lion has left it.' The true
reason is supplied by a Manuscript called Forms of Treaties. [646]
The details of a treaty between Sinhana and Lavanaprasáda under date
Samvat 1288 (A.D. 1232) included among the Forms seem to show that the
reason why Sinhana did not advance was that Lavanaprasáda and his son
submitted and concluded an alliance. [647] In this copy of the treaty
Sinhanadeva is called the great king of kings or paramount sovereign
Mahárájádhirája, while Lavanaprasáda, Sanskritised into Lavanyáprasáda
is called a Rána and a tributary chief Mahámandalesvara. The place
where the treaty was concluded is styled "the victorious camp,"
and the date is Monday the fullmoon of Vaisákha in the year Samvat
1288 (A.D. 1232). The provisions are that, as before, each of the
belligerents should confine himself to his own territory; neither of
them should invade the possessions of the other; if a powerful enemy
attacked either of them, they should jointly oppose him; if only a
hostile general led the attack, troops should be sent against him;
and if from the country of either any noble fled into the territory of
the other taking with him anything of value he should not be allowed
harbourage and all valuables in the refugee's possession should be
restored. [648] His good fortune went with Lavanaprasáda in his attack
on the Márwár chiefs whom he forced to retire. Meanwhile Sankha [649]
who is described as the son of the ruler of Sindh but who seems to
have held territory in Broach, raised a claim to Cambay and promised
Vastupála Lavanaprasáda's governor, that, if Vastupála declared in
his favour [650], he would be continued in his government. Vastupála
rejected Sankha's overtures, met him in battle outside of Cambay, and
forced him to retire. In honour of Vastupála's victory the people of
Cambay held a great festival when Vastupála passed in state through
the city to the shrine of the goddess Ekalla Víra outside of the
town. [651]

Another of the deeds preserved in the Forms is a royal copperplate
grant by Lavanaprasáda or Lávanyaprasáda of a village, not named, for
the worship of Somanátha. Lavanaprasáda is described as the illustrious
Ránaka, [652] the great chief, the local lord or Mandalesvara,
the son of the illustrious Ránaka Ánalde born in the illustrious
pedigree of the Chaulukya dynasty. The grant is noted as executed in
the reign of Bhímadeva II. [653] while one Bhábhuya was his great
minister. Though Bhímadeva was ruling in A.D. 1232 (Samvat 1288)
Lavanaprasáda apparently had sufficient influence to make grants of
villages and otherwise to act as the real ruler of Gujarát. It was
apparently immediately after this grant (A.D. 1232?) that Lavanaprasáda
abdicated in favour of Víradhavala. [654]

[Víradhavala, A.D. 1233-1238.] Soon after his accession Víradhavala,
accompanied by his minister Tejahpála, started on an expedition against
his wife's brothers Sángana and Chamunda the rulers of Vámanasthalí or
Vanthalí near Junágadh. As in spite of their sister's advice Sángana
and Chamunda refused to pay tribute the siege was pressed. Early
in the fight the cry arose 'Víradhavala is slain.' But on his
favourite horse Uparavata, Víradhavala put himself at the head of
his troops, slew both the brothers, and gained the hoarded treasure
of Vanthalí. [655] In an expedition against the chief of Bhadresvara,
probably Bhadresar in Kacch, Víradhavala was less successful and was
forced to accept the Kacch chief's terms. The chroniclers ascribe
this reverse to three Rájput brothers who came to Víradhavala's court
and offered their services for 3,00,000 drammas (about £7500). "For
3,00,000 drammas I can raise a thousand men" said Víradhavala, and
the brothers withdrew. They went to the court of the Bhadresar chief,
stated their terms, and were engaged. The night before the battle the
brothers sent to Víradhavala saying 'Keep ready 3000 men, for through
a triple bodyguard we will force our way.' The three brothers kept
their word. They forced their way to Víradhavala, dismounted him,
carried off his favourite steed Uparavata, but since they had been
his guests they spared Víradhavala's life. [656]

Another of Víradhavala's expeditions was to East Gujarát. Ghughula,
chief of Godraha or Godhrá, plundered the caravans that passed
through his territory to the Gujarát ports. When threatened with
punishment by Víradhavala, Ghughula in derision sent his overlord
a woman's dress and a box of cosmetics. The minister Tejahpála, who
was ordered to avenge this affront, dispatched some skirmishers ahead
to raid the Godhra cattle. Ghughula attacked the raiders and drove
them back in such panic that the main body of the army was thrown
into disorder. The day was saved by the prowess of Tejahpála who
in single combat unhorsed Ghughula and made him prisoner. Ghughula
escaped the disgrace of the woman's dress and the cosmetic box with
which he was decorated by biting his tongue so that he died. The
conquest of Ghughula is said to have spread Víradhavala's power to
the borders of Maháráshtra. [657] The chroniclers relate another
success of Víradhavala's against Muizz-ud-dín apparently the famous
Muhammad Gori Sultán Muizz-ud-dín Bahramsháh, the Sultán of Delhi
(A.D. 1191-1205) [658] who led an expedition against Gujarát. The
chief of Ábu was instructed to let the Musalmán force march south
unmolested and when they were through to close the defiles against
their return. The Gujarát army met the Musalmáns and the Ábu troops
hung on their rear. The Musalmáns fled in confusion and cartloads of
heads were brought to Víradhavala in Dholká. The chronicles give the
credit of this success to Vastupála. They also credit Vastupála with
a stratagem which induced the Sultán to think well of Víradhavala
and prevented him taking steps to wipe out the disgrace of his
defeat. Hearing that the Sultán's mother, or, according to another
story, the Sultán's religious adviser, was going from Cambay to Makka
Vastupála ordered his men to attack and plunder the vessels in which
the pilgrimage was to be made. On the captain's complaint Vastupála
had the pirates arrested and the property restored. So grateful was
the owner, whether mother or guide, that Vastupála was taken to Delhi
and arranged a friendly treaty between his master and the Sultán. [659]

Their lavish expenditure on objects connected with Jain worship make
the brothers Vastupála and Tejahpála the chief heroes of the Jain
chroniclers. They say when the Musalmán trader Sayad was arrested at
Cambay his wealth was confiscated. Víradhavala claimed all but the
dust which he left to Vastupála. Much of the dust was gold dust and a
fire turned to dust more of the Sayad's gold and silver treasure. In
this way the bulk of the Sayad's wealth passed to Vastupála. This
wealth Vastupála and his brother Tejahpála went to bury in Hadálaka in
Káthiáváda. In digging they chanced to come across a great and unknown
treasure. According to the books the burden of their wealth so preyed
on the brothers that they ceased to care for food. Finding the cause
of her husband Tejahpála's anxiety Anupamá said 'Spend your wealth
on a hill top. All can see it; no one can carry it away.' According
to the chroniclers it was this advice, approved by their mother and
by Vastupála's wife Lalitádeví, that led the brothers to adorn the
summits of Ábu, Girnár, and Satruñjaya with magnificent temples.

The Satruñjaya temple which is dedicated to the twenty-third
Tírthankara Neminátha is dated A.D. 1232 (Samvat 1288) and has an
inscription by Somesvara, the author of the Kírtikaumudí telling how
it was built. The Girnár temple, also dedicated to Neminátha, bears
date A.D. 1232 (Samvat 1288). The Ábu temple, surpassing the others
and almost every building in India in the richness and delicacy of
its carving, is dedicated to Neminátha and dated A.D. 1231 (Samvat
1287). Such was the liberality of the brothers that to protect them
against the cold mountain air each of their masons had a fire near
him to warm himself and a hot dinner cooked for him at the close of
the day. The finest carvers were paid in silver equal in weight to
the dust chiselled out of their carvings. [660]

The author Somesvara describes how he twice came to the aid of his
friend Vastupála. On one occasion he saved Vastupála from a prosecution
for peculation. The second occasion was more serious. Simha the
maternal uncle of king Vísaladeva whipped the servant of a Jain
monastery. Enraged at this insult to his religion Vastupála hired
a Rájput who cut off Simha's offending hand. The crime was proved
and Vastupála was sentenced to death. But according to the Jains
the persuasions of Somesvara not only made the king set Vastupála
free, but led him to upbraid his uncle for beating the servant of
a Jain monastery. Soon after his release Vastupála was seized with
fever. Feeling the fever to be mortal he started for Satruñjaya but
died on the way. His brother Tejahpála and his son Jayantapála burned
his body on the holy hill, and over his ashes raised a shrine with the
name Svargárohanaprásáda The shrine of the ascent into Heaven. [661]

In A.D. 1238 six years after his father's withdrawal from power
Víradhavala died. One hundred and eighty-two servants passed with
their lord through the flames, and such was the devotion that Tejahpála
had to use force to prevent further sacrifices. [662]

[Vísaladeva, A.D. 1243-1261.] Of Víradhavala's two sons, Vírama Vísala
and Pratápamalla, Vastupála favoured the second and procured his
succession according to one account by forcing the old king to drink
poison and preventing by arms the return to Anahilaváda of the elder
brother Vírama who retired for help to Jábálipura (Jabalpur). Besides
with his brother's supporters Vísala had to contend with Tribhuvanapála
the representative of the Anahilaváda Solankis. Unlike his father and
his grandfather Vísala refused to acknowledge an overlord. By A.D. 1243
he was established as sovereign in Anahilaváda. A later grant A.D. 1261
(Samvat 1317) from Kadi in North Gujarát shows that Anahilaváda was
his capital and his title Mahárájádhirája King of Kings. According
to his copperplates Vísaladeva was a great warrior, the crusher of
the lord of Málwa, a hatchet at the root of the turbulence of Mewád,
a volcanic fire to dry up Singhana of Devagiri's ocean of men. [663]
Vísaladeva is further described as chosen as a husband by the daughter
of Karnáta [664] and as ruling with success and good fortune in
Anahilaváda with the illustrious Nágada as his minister. [665] The
bards praise Vísaladeva for lessening the miseries of a three years
famine, [666] and state that he built or repaired the fortifications
of Vísalanagara in East and of Darbhavatí or Dabhoi in South Gujarát.

[Arjunadeva, A.D. 1262-1274.] During Vísaladeva's reign Vághela power
was established throughout Gujarát. On Vísaladeva's death in A.D. 1261
the succession passed to Arjunadeva the son of Vísaladeva's younger
brother Pratápamalla. [667] Arjunadeva proved a worthy successor and
for thirteen years (A.D. 1262-1274; Samvat 1318-1331) maintained his
supremacy. Two stone inscriptions one from Verával dated A.D. 1264
(Samvat 1320) the other from Kacch dated A.D. 1272 (Samvat 1328)
show that his territory included both Kacch and Káthiáváda, and an
inscription of his successor Sárangadeva shows that his power passed
as far east as Mount Ábu.

The Verával inscription of A.D. 1264 (Samvat 1320), which is in the
temple of the goddess Harsutá, [668] describes Arjunadeva as the king
of kings, the emperor (chakravartin) of the illustrious Chaulukya
race, who is a thorn in the heart of the hostile king Nihsankamalla,
the supreme lord, the supreme ruler, who is adorned by a long line of
ancestral kings, who resides in the famous Anahillapátaka. The grant
allots certain income from houses and shops in Somanátha Patan to a
mosque built by Piroz a Muhammadan shipowner of Ormuz which is then
mentioned as being under the sway of Amír Rukn-ud-dín. [669] The grant
also provides for the expenses of certain religious festivals to be
celebrated by the Shiite sailors of Somanátha Patan, and lays down that
under the management of the Musalmán community of Somanátha any surplus
is to be made over to the holy districts of Makka and Madina. The grant
is written in bad Sanskrit and contains several Arabic Persian and
Gujaráti words. Its chief interest is that it is dated in four eras,
"in 662 of the Prophet Muhammad who is described as the teacher of
the sailors, who live near the holy lord of the Universe that is
Somanátha; in 1320 of the great king Vikrama; in 945 of the famous
Valabhi; and in 151 of the illustrious Simha." The date is given in
these four different eras, because the Muhammadan is the donor's era,
the Samvat the era of the country, the Valabhi of the province, and the
Simha of the locality. [670] The Kacch inscription is at the village
of Rav about sixty miles east of Bhúj. It is engraved on a memorial
slab at the corner of the courtyard wall of an old temple and bears
date A.D. 1272 (Samvat 1328). It describes Arjunadeva as the great
king of kings, the supreme ruler, the supreme lord. It mentions the
illustrious Máladeva as his chief minister and records the building
of a step-well in the village of Rav. [671]

[Sárangadeva, A.D. 1275-1296.] Arjunadeva was succeeded by his
son Sárangadeva. According to the Vichárasreni Sárangadeva
ruled for twenty-two years from A.D. 1274 to 1296 (Samvat
1331-1353). Inscriptions of the reign of Sárangadeva have been found
in Kacch and at Ábu. The Kacch inscription is on a pália or memorial
slab now at the village of Khokhar near Kanthkot which was brought
there from the holy village of Bhadresar about thirty-five miles
north-east of Mándvi. It bears date A.D. 1275 (Samvat 1332) and
describes Sárangadeva as the great king of kings, the supreme ruler,
the supreme lord ruling at Anahillapátaka with the illustrious Máladeva
as his chief minister. [672] The Ábu inscription dated A.D. 1294
(Samvat 1350) in the temple of Vastupála regulates certain dues
payable to the Jain temple and mentions Sárangadeva as sovereign of
Anahillapátaka and as having for vassal Vísaladeva ruler of the old
capital of Chandrávati about twelve miles south of Mount Ábu. [673]
A third inscription dated A.D. 1287 (Samvat 1343), originally from
Somanátha, is now at Cintra in Portugal. It records the pilgrimages and
religious benefactions of one Tripurántaka, a follower of the Nakulísá
Pásupata sect, in the reign of Sárangadeva, whose genealogy is given. A
manuscript found in Ahmadábád is described as having been finished on
Sunday the 3rd of the dark fortnight of Jyeshtha in the Samvat year
1350, in the triumphant reign of Sárangadeva the great king of kings,
while his victorious army was encamped near Ásápalli (Ahmadábád). [674]

[Karnadeva, A.D. 1296-1304.] Sárangadeva's successor Karnadeva
ruled for eight years A.D. 1296-1304 (Samvat 1352-1360). Under this
weak ruler, who was known as Ghelo or the Insane, Gujarát passed
into Musalmán hands. In A.D. 1297 Alaf Khán the brother of the
Emperor Alá-ud-dín Khilji (A.D. 1296-1317) with Nasrat Khán led an
expedition against Gujarát. They laid waste the country and occupied
Anahilaváda. Leaving his wives, children, elephants, and baggage
Karnadeva fled to Ramadeva the Yádava chief of Devagiri. [675] All his
wealth fell to his conquerors. Among the wives of Karnadeva who were
made captive was a famous beauty named Kauládeví, who was carried to
the harem of the Sultán. In the plunder of Cambay Nasrat Khán took a
merchant's slave Malik Káfur who shortly after became the Emperor's
chief favourite. From Cambay the Muhammadans passed to Káthiáváda and
destroyed the temple of Somanátha. In 1304 Alaf Khán's term of office
as governor of Gujarát was renewed. According to the Mirát-i-Ahmadí
after the renewal of his appointment, from white marble pillars taken
from many Jain temples, Alaf Khán constructed at Anahilaváda the Jáma
Masjid or general mosque.

In A.D. 1306 the Cambay slave Káfur who had already risen to be
Sultán Alá-ud-dín's chief favourite was invested with the title
of Malik Naib and placed in command of an army sent to subdue the
Dakhan. Alaf Khán, the governor of Gujarát, was ordered to help Malik
Káfur in his arrangements. At the same time Kauládeví persuaded the
Emperor to issue orders that her daughter Devaladeví should be sent
to her to Delhi. Devaladeví was then with her father the unfortunate
Karnadeva in hiding in Báglán in Násik. Malik Káfur sent a messenger
desiring Karnadeva to give up his daughter. Karnadeva refused and Alaf
Khán was ordered to lead his army to the Báglán hills and capture the
princess. While for two months he succeeded in keeping the Muhammadan
army at bay, Karnadeva received and accepted an offer for the hand of
Devaladeví from the Devagiri Yádava chief Sankaradeva. On her way to
Devagiri near Elura Devaladeví's escort was attacked by a party of
Alaf Khán's troops, and the lady seized and sent to Delhi where she
was married to prince Khizar Khán. Nothing more is known of Karnadeva
who appears to have died a fugitive.

Though the main cities and all central Gujarát passed under Musalmán
rule a branch of the Vághelás continued to hold much of the country
to the west of the Sábarmatí, while other branches maintained their
independence in the rugged land beyond Ambá Bhawání between Vírpur
on the Mahí and Posiná at the northmost verge of Gujarát. [676]

GENEALOGY OF THE VÁGHELÁS.

PART II.

MUSALMÁN GUJARÁT.

A.D. 1297-1760.

This history of Musalmán Gujarát is based on translations of the
Mirat-i-Sikandari (A.D. 1611) and of the Mirat-i-Áhmedi (A.D. 1756)
by the late Colonel J. W. Watson. Since Colonel Watson's death in
1889 the translations have been revised and the account enriched by
additions from the Persian texts of Farishtah and of the two Mirats
by Mr. Fazl Lutfulláh Farídi of Surat. A careful comparison has also
been made with other extracts in Elliot's History of India and in
Bayley's History of Gujarát.

MUSALMÁN GUJARÁT.

A.D. 1297-1760.

INTRODUCTION.

Muhammadan rule in Gujarát lasted from the conquest of the province by
the Dehli emperor Alá-ud-dín Khilji (A.D. 1295-1315), shortly before
the close of the thirteenth century A.D., to the final defeat of the
Mughal viceroy Momín Khán by the Maráthás and the loss of the city
of Áhmedábád at the end of February 1758.

This whole term of Musalmán ascendancy, stretching over slightly more
than four and a half centuries, may conveniently be divided into three
parts. The First, the rule of the early sovereigns of Dehli, lasting
a few years more than a century, or, more strictly from A.D. 1297 to
A.D. 1403; the Second, the rule of the Áhmedábád kings, a term of
nearly a century and three-quarters, from A.D. 1403 to A.D. 1573;
the Third, the rule of the Mughal Emperors, when, for little less
than two hundred years, A.D. 1573-1760, Gujarát was administered by
viceroys of the court of Dehli.

[Territorial Limits.] In the course of these 450 years the
limits of Gujarát varied greatly. In the fourteenth century the
territory nominally under the control of the Musalmán governors
of Pátan (Anahilaváda) extended southwards from Jhálor, about
fifty miles north of Mount Abu, to the neighbourhood of Bombay,
and in breadth from the line of the Málwa and Khándesh hills to
the western shores of peninsular Gujarát. [677] The earlier kings
of Áhmedábád (A.D. 1403-1450), content with establishing their
power on a firm footing, did not greatly extend the limits of their
kingdom. Afterwards, during the latter part of the fifteenth and the
beginning of the sixteenth centuries (A.D. 1450-1530), the dominions
of the Áhmedábád kings gradually spread till they included large tracts
to the east and north-east formerly in the possession of the rulers of
Khándesh and Málwa. Still later, during the years of misrule between
A.D. 1530 and A.D. 1573, the west of Khándesh and the north of the
Konkan ceased to form part of the kingdom of Gujarát. Finally, under
the arrangements introduced by the emperor Akbar in A.D. 1583, more
lands were restored to Málwa and Khándesh. With the exception of Jhálor
and Sirohi on the north, Dungarpur and Bánsváda on the north-east,
and Alirájpur on the east, since handed to Rájputána and Central India,
the limits of Gujarát remain almost as they were laid down by Akbar.

[Sorath.] Though, under the Musalmáns, peninsular Gujarát did not
bear the name of Káthiáváda, it was then, as at present, considered
part of the province of Gujarát. During the early years of Musalmán
rule, the peninsula, together with a small portion of the adjoining
mainland, was known as Sorath, a shortened form of Saurâshtra, the
name originally applied by the Hindus to a long stretch of sea-coast
between the banks of the Indus and Daman. [678] Towards the close of
the sixteenth century the official use of the word Sorath was confined
to a portion, though by much the largest part, of the peninsula. At
the same time, the name Sorath seems then, and for long after, to have
been commonly applied to the whole peninsula. For the author of the
Mirat-i-Áhmedi, writing as late as the middle of the eighteenth century
(A.D. 1756: A.H. 1170), speaks of Sorath as divided into five districts
or zilláhs, Hálár, Káthiáváda, Gohilváda, Bábriáváda, and Jetváda,
and notices that though Navánagar was considered a separate district,
its tribute was included in the revenue derived from Sorath. [679]
In another passage the same writer thus defines Sauráshtra:

Sauráshtra or Sorath comprehends the Sarkár of Sorath the Sarkár
of Islámnagar or Navánagar and the Sarkár of Kachh or Bhujnagar.
It also includes several zillahs or districts, Naiyad which they
call Jatwár, Hálár or Navánagar and its vicinity, Káthiáváda,
Gohilváda, Bábriáváda, Chorvár, Panchál, Okhágir in the
neighbourhood of Jagat otherwise called Dwárka, Prabhás Khetr or
Pátan Somnáth and its neighbourhood, Nághír also called Sálgogha,
and the Nalkántha. [680]

The present Sorath stretches no further than the limits of Junágadh,
Bántwa, and a few smaller holdings.

[Káthiáváda.] The name Káthiáváda is of recent origin. It was not
until after the establishment of Musalmán power in Gujarát that
any portion of the peninsula came to bear the name of the tribe of
Káthis. Even as late as the middle of the eighteenth century, the
name Káthiáváda was applied only to one of the sub-divisions of the
peninsula. In the disorders which prevailed during the latter part of
the eighteenth century, the Káthis made themselves conspicuous. As it
was from the hardy horsemen of this tribe that the tribute-exacting
Maráthás met with the fiercest resistance, they came to speak of the
whole peninsula as the land of the Káthis. This use was adopted by
the early British officers and has since continued.

[Under the kings, 1403-1573.] Under the Áhmedábád kings, as it still
is under British rule, Gujarát was divided politically into two main
parts; one, called the khálsah or crown domain administered directly
by the central authority; the other, on payment of tribute in service
or in money, left under the control of its former rulers. The amount
of tribute paid by the different chiefs depended, not on the value of
their territory, but on the terms granted to them when they agreed to
become feudatories of the kings of Áhmedábád. Under the Gujarát Sultáns
this tribute was occasionally collected by military expeditions headed
by the king in person and called mulkgíri or country-seizing circuits.

[States.] The internal management of the feudatory states was
unaffected by their payment of tribute. Justice was administered
and the revenue collected in the same way as under the Anahilapur
kings. The revenue consisted, as before, of a share of the crops
received in kind, supplemented by the levy of special cesses, trade,
and transit dues. The chief's share of the crops differed according
to the locality; it rarely exceeded one-third of the produce, it
rarely fell short of one-sixth. From some parts the chief's share
was realised directly from the cultivator by agents called mantris;
from other parts the collection was through superior landowners. [681]

[Districts.] The Áhmedábád kings divided the portion of their territory
which was under their direct authority into districts or sarkárs. These
districts were administered in one of two ways. They were either
assigned to nobles in support of a contingent of troops, or they were
set apart as crown domains and managed by paid officers. The officers
placed in charge of districts set apart as [Crown Lands.] crown domains
were called muktia. [682] Their chief duties were to preserve the peace
and to collect the revenue. For the maintenance of order, a body of
soldiers from the army head-quarters at Áhmedábád was detached for
service in each of these divisions, and placed under the command of
the district governor. At the same time, in addition to the presence
of this detachment of regular troops, every district contained certain
fortified outposts called thánás, varying in number according to the
character of the country and the temper of the people. These posts
were in charge of officers called thánadárs subordinate to the district
governor. They were garrisoned by bodies of local soldiery, for whose
maintenance, in addition to money payments, a small assignment of
land was set apart in the neighbourhood of the post. On the arrival
of the tribute-collecting army the governors of the districts through
which it passed were expected to join the main body with their local
contingents. At other times the district governors had little control
over the feudatory chiefs in the neighbourhood of their charge.

[Fiscal.] For fiscal purposes each district or sarkár was distributed
among a certain number of sub-divisions or parganáhs, each under a
paid official styled ámil or tahsildár. These sub-divisional officers
realised the state demand, nominally one-half of the produce, by
the help of the headmen of the villages under their charge. In the
sharehold and simple villages of North Gujarát these village headmen
were styled patels or according to Musalmán writers mukaddams and
in the simple villages of the south they were known as desáis. They
arranged for the final distribution of the total demand in joint
villages among the shareholders, and in simple villages from the
individual cultivators. [683] The sub-divisional officer presented a
statement of the accounts of the villages in his sub-division to the
district officer, whose record of the revenue of his whole district was
in turn forwarded to the head revenue officer at court. As a check on
the internal management of his charge, and especially to help him in
the work of collecting the revenue, with each district governor was
associated an accountant. Further that each of these officers might
be the greater check on the other, king Áhmed I. (A.D. 1412-1443)
enforced the rule that when the governor was chosen from among the
royal slaves the accountant should be a free man, and that when
the accountant was a slave the district governor should be chosen
from some other class. This practise was maintained till the end of
the reign of Muzaffar Sháh (A.D. 1511-1525), when, according to the
Mirat-i-Áhmedi, the army became much increased, and the ministers,
condensing the details of revenue, farmed it on contract, so that many
parts formerly yielding one rupee now produced ten, and many others
seven eight or nine, and in no place was there a less increase than
from ten to twenty per cent. Many other changes occurred at the same
time, and the spirit of innovation creeping into the administration
the wholesome system of checking the accounts was given up and mutiny
and confusion spread over Gujarát. [684]

[Assigned Lands.] The second class of directly governed districts
were the lands assigned to nobles for the maintenance of contingents
of troops. As in other parts of India, it would seem that at first
these assignments were for specified sums equal to the pay of the
contingent. When such assignments were of long standing, and were large
enough to swallow the whole revenue of a district, it was natural to
simplify the arrangement by transferring the collection of the revenue
and the whole management of the district to the military leader of
the contingent. So long as the central power was strong, precautions
were doubtless taken to prevent the holder of the grant from unduly
rackrenting his district and appropriating to himself more than the
pay of the troops, or from exercising any powers not vested in the
local governors of districts included within the crown domains. As in
other parts of India, those stipulations were probably enforced by the
appointment of certain civil officers directly from the government to
inspect the whole of the noble's proceedings, as well in managing his
troops as in administering his lands. [685] The decline of the king's
power freed the nobles from all check or control in the management
of their lands. And when, in A.D. 1536, the practice of farming was
introduced into the crown domains, it would seem to have been adopted
by the military leaders in their lands, and to have been continued
till the annexation of Gujarát by the emperor Akbar in A.D. 1573.

[Under the Mughals, A.D. 1573-1760.] It was the policy of Akbar
rather to improve the existing system than to introduce a new form of
government. After to some extent contracting the limits of Gujarát
he constituted it a province or sûbah of the empire, appointing to
its [Administration.] government an officer of the highest rank with
the title of sûbahdár or viceroy. As was the case under the Áhmedábád
kings, the province continued to be divided into territories managed by
feudatory chiefs, and [Crown Lands.] districts administered by officers
appointed either by the court of Dehli or by the local viceroy. The
head-quarters of the army remained at Áhmedábád, and detachments
were told off and placed under the orders of the officers in charge
of the directly administered divisions. These district governors, as
before, belonged to two classes, paid officers responsible for the
management of the crown domains and military leaders in possession
of lands assigned to them in pay of their contingent of troops. The
governors of the crown domains, who were now known as faujdárs or
commanders, had, in addition to the command of the regular troops,
the control of the outposts maintained within the limits of their
charge. Like their predecessors they accompanied the viceroy in his
yearly circuit for the collection of tribute.

As a check on the military governors and to help them in collecting the
revenue, the distinct class of account officers formerly established
by king Áhmed I. (A.D. 1412-1443) was again introduced. The head
of this branch of the administration was an officer, second in
rank to the viceroy alone, appointed direct from the court of Dehli
with the title of diván. Besides acting as collector-general of the
revenues of the province, this officer was also the head of its civil
administration. His title diván is generally translated minister. And
though the word minister does not express the functions of the office,
which corresponded more nearly with those of a chief secretary, it
represents with sufficient accuracy the relation in which the holder
of the office of diván generally stood to the viceroy.

[Revenue Officials.] For its revenue administration each district
or group of districts had its revenue officials called amíns who
corresponded to the collector of modern times. There were also amíns
in the customs department separate from those whose function was to
control and administer the land revenue. Beneath the amín came the
ámil [686] who carried on the actual collection of the land revenue
or customs in each district or parganáh, and below the ámil were the
fáîls, mushrifs, or kárkúns that is the revenue clerks. The ámil
corresponded to the modern mámlatdár, both terms meaning him who
carries on the amal or revenue management. In the leading ports the
ámil of the customs was called mutasaddi that is civil officer.

[Village Officers.] The ámil or mámlatdár dealt directly with the
village officials, namely with the mukaddam or headman, the patwári
or lease manager, the kánúngo or accountant, and the haváldár or
grain-yard guardian. The haváldár superintended the separation of the
government share of the produce; apportioned to the classes subject to
forced labour their respective turns of duty; and exercised a general
police superintendence by means of subordinates called pasáitás
or vartaniás. In ports under the mutasaddi was a harbour-master
or sháh-bandar.

[Desáis.] Crown sub-divisions had, in addition, the important class
called desáis. The desáis' duty appears at first to have been to
collect the salámi or tribute due by the smaller chiefs, landholders,
and vántádárs or sharers. For this, in Akbar's time, the desái received
a remuneration of 2 1/2 per cent on the sum collected. Under the
first viceroy Mírza Ázíz Kokaltásh (A.D. 1573-1575) this percentage
was reduced to one-half of its former amount, and in later times
this one-half was again reduced by one-half. Though the Muhammadan
historians give no reason for so sweeping a reduction, the cause
seems to have been the inability of the desáis to collect the tribute
without the aid of a military force. Under the new system the desái
seems merely to have kept the accounts of the tribute due, and the
records both of the amount which should be levied as tribute and of
other customary rights of the crown. In later times the desáis were to
a great extent superseded by the district accountants or majmudárs, and
many desáis, especially in south Gujarát, seem to have sunk to patels.

[Land Tax.] Up to the viceroyalty of Mírza Ísa Tarkhán
(A.D. 1642-1644), the land tax appears to have been levied from the
cultivator in a fixed sum, but he was also subject to numerous other
imposts. Land grants in wazífah carried with them an hereditary title
and special exemption from all levies except the land tax. The levy
in kind appears to have ceased before the close of Mughal rule. In
place of a levy in kind each village paid a fixed sum or jama through
the district accountant or majmudár who had taken the place of the
desái. As in many cases the jama really meant the lump sum at which
the crown villages were assessed and farmed to the chiefs and patels,
on the collapse of the empire many villages thus farmed to chiefs and
landlords were retained by them with the connivance of the majmudárs
desáis and others.

[Justice.] The administration of justice seems to have been very
complete. In each kasbah or town kázis, endowed with glebe lands in
addition to a permanent salary, adjudicated disputes among Muhammadans
according to the laws of Islám. Disputes between Muhammadans and
unbelievers, or amongst unbelievers, were decided by the department
called the sadárat, the local judge being termed a sadr. The decisions
of the local kázis and sadrs were subject to revision by the kázi or
sadr of the súbah who resided at Áhmedábád. And as a last resort the
Áhmedábád decisions were subject to appeal to the Kázi-ul-Kuzzát and
the Sadr-ûs-Sudûr at the capital.

[Fiscal.] The revenue appears to have been classed under four
main heads: 1. The Khazánah-i-Ámirah or imperial treasury which
comprehended the land tax received from the crown parganáhs or
districts, the tribute, the five per cent customs dues from infidels,
the import dues on stuffs, and the sáyer or land customs including
transit dues, slave market dues, and miscellaneous taxes. 2. The
treasury of arrears into which were paid government claims in arrear
either from the ámils or from the farmers of land revenue; takávi
advances due by the raiyats; and tribute levied by the presence of a
military force. 3. The treasury of charitable endowments. Into this
treasury was paid the 2 1/2 per cent levied as customs dues from
Muhammadans. [687] The pay of the religious classes was defrayed from
this treasury. 4. The treasury, into which the jaziah or capitation
tax levied from zimmís or infidels who acknowledged Muhammadan rule,
was paid. The proceeds were expended in charity and public works. After
the death of the emperor Farrukhsiyar (A.D. 1713-1719), this source
of revenue was abolished. The arrangements introduced by Akbar in
the end of the sixteenth century remained in force till the death of
Aurangzíb in A.D. 1707. Then trouble and perplexity daily increased,
till in A.D. 1724-25, Hamíd Khán usurped the government lands, and,
seeking to get rid of the servants and assignments, gradually obtained
possession of the records of the registry office. The keepers of the
records were scattered, and yearly revenue statements ceased to be
received from the districts. [688]

[Assigned Lands.] Akbar continued the system of assigning lands to
military leaders in payment of their contingents of troops. Immediately
after the annexation in A.D. 1573, almost the whole country was divided
among the great nobles. [689] Except that the revenues of certain
tracts were set aside for the imperial exchequer the directly governed
districts passed into the hands of military leaders who employed their
own agents to collect the revenue. During the seventeenth century
the practice of submitting a yearly record of their revenues, and
the power of the viceroy to bring them to account for misgovernment,
exercised a check on the management of the military leaders. And
during this time a yearly surplus revenue of £600,000 (Rs. 60,00,000)
from the assigned and crown lands was on an average forwarded from
Gujarát to Dehli. In the eighteenth century the decay of the viceroy's
authority was accompanied by the gradually increased power of the
military leaders in possession of assigned districts, till finally,
as in the case of the Nawábs of Broach and Surat, they openly claimed
the position of independent rulers. [690]

[Minor Offices.] Of both leading and minor officials the Mirat-i-Áhmedi
supplies the following additional details. The highest officer who
was appointed under the seal of the minister of the empire was the
provincial diván or minister. He had charge of the fiscal affairs
of the province and of the revenues of the khálsa or crown lands,
and was in some matters independent of the viceroy. Besides his
personal salary he had 150 sawárs for two provincial thánás Arjanpur
and Khambália. Under the diván the chief officers were the píshkár
diván his first assistant, who was appointed under imperial orders
by the patent of the diván, the daroghah or head of the office,
and the sharf or mushrif and tehwildár of the daftar khánáhs, who
presided over the accounts with munshis and muharrirs or secretaries
and writers. The kázis, both town and city, with the sanction of the
emperor were appointed by the chief law officer of the empire through
the chief law officer of the province. They were lodged by the state,
paid partly in cash partly in land, and kept up a certain number of
troopers. In the kázis' courts wakíls or pleaders and muftís or law
officers drew 8 as. to Re. 1 a day. Newly converted Musalmáns also
drew 8 as. a day. The city censor or muhtasib had the supervision
of morals and of weights and measures. He was paid in cash and land,
and was expected to keep up sixty troopers. The news-writer, who was
sometimes also bakhshi or military paymaster, had a large staff of
news-writers called wákiâh-nigár who worked in the district courts and
offices as well as in the city courts. He received his news-reports
every evening and embodied them in a letter which was sent to court by
camel post. A second staff of news-writers called sawáníhnigár reported
rumours. A third set were the harkárás on the viceroy's staff. Postal
chaukis or stations extended from Áhmedábád to the Ajmír frontier,
each with men and horse ready to carry the imperial post which reached
Sháh Jehánábád or Dehli in seven days. A line of posts also ran south
through Broach to the Dakhan. The faujdárs or military police, who
were sometimes commanders of a thousand and held estates, controlled
both the city and the district police. The kotwál or head of the city
night-watch was appointed by the viceroy. He had fifty troopers and
a hundred foot. In the treasury department were the amín or chief,
the dároghah, the mushrif, the treasurer, and five messengers. In the
medical department were a Yúnáni or Greek school and a Hindu physician,
two under-physicians on eight and ten annas a day, and a surgeon. The
yearly grant for food and medicine amounted to Rs. 2000. [691]

[Land Tenures.] Besides the class of vernacular terms that belong
to the administration of the province, certain technical words
connected with the tenure of land are of frequent occurrence in this
history. For each of these, in addition to the English equivalent
which as far as possible has been given in the text, some explanation
seems necessary. During the period to which this history refers,
the superior holders of the land of the province belonged to two main
classes, those whose claims dated from before the Musalmán conquest
and those whose interest in the land was based on a Musalmán grant. By
the Musalmán historians, landholders of the first class, who were
all Hindus, are called zamíndárs, while landholders of the second
class, Musalmáns as a rule, are spoken of as jágírdárs. Though the
term zamíndár was used to include the whole body of superior Hindu
landholders, in practice a marked distinction was drawn between the
almost independent chief, who still enjoyed his Hindu title of rája,
rával, ráv, or jám, and the petty claimant to a share in a government
village, who in a Hindu state would have been known as a garásiá. [692]

[Hereditary Hindu Landholders.] The larger landholders, who had
succeeded in avoiding complete subjection, were, as noticed above,
liable only for the payment of a certain fixed sum, the collection of
which by the central power in later times usually required the presence
of a military force. With regard to the settlement of the claims of the
smaller landholders of the superior class, whose estates fell within
the limits of the directly administered districts, no steps seem to
have been taken till the reign of Áhmed Sháh I. (A.D. 1411-1443). About
the year A.D. 1420 the peace of his kingdom was so broken by agrarian
disturbances, that Áhmed Sháh agreed, on condition of their paying
tribute and performing military service, to re-grant to the landholders
of the zamíndár class as hereditary possessions a one-fourth share
of their former village lands. The portion so set apart was called
vánta or share, and the remainder, retained as state land, was called
talpat. This agreement continued till, in the year A.D. 1545, during
the reign of Mahmúd Sháh II. (A.D. 1536-1553), an attempt was made
to annex these private shares to the crown. This measure caused much
discontent and disorder. It was reversed by the emperor Akbar who,
as part of the settlement of the province in A.D. 1583, restored
their one-fourth share to the landholders, and, except that the
Maráthás afterwards levied an additional quit-rent from these lands,
the arrangements then introduced have since continued in force. [693]

[Levies.] During the decay of Musalmán rule in Gujarát in the first
half of the eighteenth century, shareholders of the garásia class
in government villages, who were always ready to increase their
power by force, levied many irregular exactions from their more
peaceful neighbours, the cultivators or inferior landholders. These
levies are known as vol that is a forced contribution or pál that
is protection. All have this peculiar characteristic that they were
paid by the cultivators of crown lands to petty marauders to purchase
immunity from their attacks. They in no case partook of the nature of
dues imposed by a settled government on its own subjects. Tora garás,
more correctly toda garás, is another levy which had its origin in
eighteenth century disorder. It was usually a readymoney payment taken
from villages which, though at the time crown or khálsa, had formerly
belonged to the garásia who exacted the levy. Besides a readymoney
payment contributions in kind were sometimes exacted.

[Service Lands.] The second class of superior landholders were those
whose title was based on a Musalmán grant. Such grants were either
assignments of large tracts of land to the viceroy, district-governors,
and nobles, to support the dignity of their position and maintain
a contingent of troops, or they were allotments on a smaller scale
granted in reward for some special service. Land granted with these
objects was called jágír, and the holder of the land jágírdár. In
theory, on the death of the original grantee, such possessions were
strictly resumable; in practice they tended to become hereditary. No
regular payments were required from holders of jágírs. Only under
the name of peshkash occasional contributions were demanded. These
occasional contributions generally consisted of such presents as a
horse, an elephant, or some other article of value. They had more of
the nature of a freewill offering than of an enforced tribute. Under
the Musalmáns contributions of this kind were the only payments
exacted from proprietors of the jágírdár class. But the Maráthás,
in addition to contributions, imposed on jágírdárs a regular tribute,
similar to that paid by the representatives of the original class of
superior Hindu landholders.

Under Musalmán rule great part of Gujarát was always in the hands
of jágírdárs. So powerful were they that on two occasions under
the Áhmedábád kings, in A.D. 1554 and A.D. 1572, the leading nobles
distributed among themselves the entire area of the kingdom. [694]
Again, during the eighteenth century, when Mughal rule was on the
decline, the jágírdárs by degrees won for themselves positions of
almost complete independence. [695]

[Condition of Gujarát, A.D. 1297-1760.] The changes in the extent of
territory and in the form of administration illustrate the effect of
the government on the condition of the people during the different
periods of Musalmán rule. The following summary of the leading
characteristics of each of the main divisions of the four-and-a-half
centuries of Musalmán ascendancy may serve as an introduction to the
detailed narrative of events.

[Under the Early Viceroys, 1297-1403.] On conquering Gujarát in
A.D. 1297 the Musalmáns found the country in disorder. The last kings
of Anahilapur or Pátan, suffering under the defects of an incomplete
title, held even their crown lands with no firmness of grasp, and had
allowed the outlying territory to slip almost entirely from their
control. Several of the larger and more distant rulers had resumed
their independence. The Bhíls and Kolis of the hills, forests, and
rough river banks were in revolt. And stranger chiefs, driven south by
the Musalmán conquests in Upper India, had robbed the central power
of much territory. [696] The records of the early Musalmán governors
(A.D. 1297-1391) show suspicion on the side of the Dehli court and
disloyalty on the part of more than one viceroy, much confusion
throughout the province, and little in the way of government beyond
the exercise of military force. At the same time, in spite of wars and
rebellions, the country, in parts at least, seems to have been well
cultivated, and trade and manufactures to have been flourishing. [697]

[Under the Kings, 1403-1573.] The period of the rule of the Áhmedábád
kings (A.D. 1403-1573) contains two divisions, one lasting from
A.D. 1403 to A.D. 1530, on the whole a time of strong government and
of growing power and prosperity; the other the forty-three years from
A.D. 1530 to the conquest of the province by the emperor Akbar in
A.D. 1573, a time of disorder and misrule. In A.D. 1403 when Gujarát
separated from Dehli the new king held but a narrow strip of plain. On
the north were the independent chiefs of Sirohi and Jhálor, from whom
he occasionally levied contributions. On the east the Rája of Ídar,
another Rájput prince, was in possession of the western skirts of
the hills and forests, and the rest of that tract was held by the
mountain tribes of Bhils and Kolis. On the west the peninsula was
in the hands of nine or ten Hindu tribes, probably tributary, but by
no means obedient. [698] In the midst of so unsettled and warlike a
population, all the efforts of Muzaffar I., the founder of the dynasty,
were spent in establishing his power. It was not until the reign of his
successor Áhmed I. (A.D. 1412-1443) that steps were taken to settle the
different classes of the people in positions of permanent order. About
the year A.D. 1420 two important measures were introduced. Of these one
assigned lands for the support of the troops, and the other recognised
the rights of the superior class of Hindu landholders to a portion of
the village lands they had formerly held. The effect of these changes
was to establish order throughout the districts directly under the
authority of the crown. And though, in the territories subject to
feudatory chiefs, the presence of an armed force was still required
to give effect to the king's claims for tribute, his increasing power
and wealth made efforts at independence more hopeless, and gradually
secured the subjection of the greater number of his vassals. During the
latter part of the fifteenth and the first quarter of the sixteenth
century the power of the Áhmedábád kings was at its height. At that
time their dominions included twenty-five divisions or sarkárs. Among
nine of these namely Pátan, Áhmedábád, Sunth, Godhra, Chámpáner,
Baroda, Broach, Nándod or Rájpípla, and Surat the central plain was
distributed. In addition in the north were four divisions, Sirohi,
Jhálor, Jodhpur, and Nágor now in south-west and central Rájputána;
in the north-east two, Dúngarpur and Bánsváda, now in the extreme
south of Rájputána; in the east and south-east three, Nandurbár now in
Khándesh, Mulher or Báglán now in Násik, and Rám Nagar or Dharampur
now in Surat; in the south four, Danda-Rájapuri or Janjira, Bombay,
Bassein, and Daman now in the Konkan; in the west two, Sorath and
Navánagar now in Káthiáváda; and Kachh in the north-west. Besides
the revenues of these districts, tribute was received from the rulers
of Ahmednagar, Burhánpur, Berár, Golkonda, and Bijápur, and customs
dues from twenty-five ports on the western coast of India and from
twenty-six foreign marts, some of them in India and others in the
Persian Gulf and along the Arabian coast. [699] The total revenue from
these three sources is said in prosperous times to have amounted to a
yearly sum of £11,460,000 (Rs. 11,46,00,000). Of this total amount the
territorial revenue from the twenty-five districts yielded £5,840,000
(Rs. 5,84,00,000), or slightly more than one-half. Of the remaining
£5,620,000 (Rs. 5,62,00,000) about one-fifth part was derived from
the Dakhan tribute and the rest from customs-dues. [700]

The buildings at Áhmedábád, and the ruins of Chámpáner and Mehmúdábád,
prove how much wealth was at the command of the sovereign and his
nobles, while the accounts of travellers seem to show that the private
expenditure of the rulers was not greater than the kingdom was well
able to bear. The Portuguese traveller Duarte Barbosa, who was in
Gujarát between A.D. 1511 and A.D. 1514, found the capital Chámpáner a
great city, in a very fertile country of abundant provisions, with many
cows sheep and goats and plenty of fruit, so that it was full of all
things. [701] Áhmedábád was still larger, very rich and well supplied,
embellished with good streets and squares, with houses of stone and
cement. It was not from the interior districts of the province that
the Áhmedábád kings derived the chief part of their wealth, but from
those lying along the coast, which were enriched by manufactures and
commerce. [702] So it was that along the shores of the gulf of Cambay
and southward as far as Bombay the limit of the Gujarát kingdom,
besides many small sea-ports, Barbosa chooses out for special mention
twelve 'towns of commerce, very rich and of great trade.' Among these
was Diu, off the south coast of Káthiáváda, yielding so large a revenue
to the king as to be 'a marvel and amazement.' And chief of all Cambay,
in a goodly, fertile, and pretty country full of abundant provisions;
with rich merchants and men of great prosperity; with craftsmen and
mechanics of subtle workmanship in cotton, silk, ivory, silver, and
precious stones; the people well dressed, leading luxurious lives,
much given to pleasure and amusement. [703]

The thirty-eight years between the defeat of king Bahádur by the
emperor Humáyún in A.D. 1535 and the annexation of Gujarát by Akbar
in A.D. 1573 was a time of confusion. Abroad, the superiority of
Gujarát over the neighbouring powers was lost, and the limits of the
kingdom shrank; at home, after the attempted confiscation (A.D. 1545)
of their shares in village lands the disaffection of the superior
landowners became general, and the court, beyond the narrow limits
of the crown domains, ceased to exercise substantial control over
either its chief nobles or the more turbulent classes. In spite
of these forty years of disorder, the province retained so much of
its former prosperity, that the boast of the local historians that
in A.D. 1573 Gujarát was in every respect allowed to be the finest
country in Hindustán is supported by the details shortly afterwards
(A.D. 1590) given by Abul Fazl in the Áin-i-Akbari. The high road
from Pátan to Baroda was throughout its length of 150 miles (100 kos)
lined on both sides with mango trees; the fields were bounded with
hedges; and such was the abundance of mango and other fruit trees
that the whole country seemed a garden. The people were well housed
in dwellings with walls of brick and mortar and with tiled roofs;
many of them rode in carriages drawn by oxen; the province was famous
for its painters, carvers, inlayers, and other craftsmen. [704]

[Under the Mughals, 1573-1760.] Like the period of the rule of the
Áhmedábád kings, the period of Mughal rule contains two divisions,
a time of good government lasting from A.D. 1573 to A.D. 1700, and a
time of disorder from A.D. 1700 to A.D. 1760. Under the arrangements
introduced by the emperor Akbar in A.D. 1583, the area of the province
was considerably curtailed. Of its twenty-five districts nine were
restored to the states from which the vigour of the Áhmedábád kings
had wrested them; Jálor and Jodhpur were transferred to Rájputána;
Nágor to Ajmír; Mulher and Nandurbár to Khándesh; Bombay, Bassein, and
Daman were allowed to remain under the Portuguese; and Danda-Rájapuri
(Jinjira) was made over to the Nizámsháhi (A.D. 1490-1595) rulers of
the Dakhan Ahmednagar. Of the remaining sixteen, Sirohi, Dungarpur, and
Bánsváda now in Rájputána, Kachh, Sûnth in Rewa Kántha, and Rámnagar
(Dharampur) in Surat were, on the payment of tribute, allowed to
continue in the hands of their Hindu rulers. The ten remaining
districts were administered directly by imperial officers. But as
the revenues of the district of Surat had been separately assigned
to its revenue officer or mutasaddi, only nine districts with 184
sub-divisions or parganáhs were entered in the collections from the
viceroy of Gujarát. These nine districts were in continental Gujarát,
Pátan with seventeen sub-divisions, Áhmedábád with thirty-three,
Godhra with eleven, Chámpáner with thirteen, Baroda with four, Broach
with fourteen, and Rájpipla (Nándod) with twelve. In the peninsula were
Sorath with sixty-two and Navánagar with seventeen sub-divisions. This
lessening of area seems to have been accompanied by even more than a
corresponding reduction in the state demand. Instead of £5,840,050
(Rs. 5,84,00,500), the revenue recovered in A.D. 1571, two years
before the province was annexed, under the arrangement introduced
by the emperor Akbar, the total amount, including the receipts from
Surat and the tribute of the six feudatory districts, is returned at
£1,999,113 (Rs. 1,99,91,130) or little more than one-third part of
what was formerly collected. [705]

According to the Mirat-i-Áhmedi this revenue of £1,999,113
(Rs. 1,99,91,130) continued to be realised as late as the reign
of Muhammad Sháh (A.D. 1719-1748). But within the next twelve
years (A.D. 1748-1762) the whole revenue had fallen to £1,235,000
(Rs. 1,23,50,000). Of £1,999,113 (Rs. 1,99,91,130), the total
amount levied by Akbar on the annexation of the province, £520,501
(Rs. 52,05,010), or a little more than a quarter, were set apart for
imperial use and royal expense; £55,000 (Rs. 5,50,000) were assigned
for the support of the viceroy and the personal estates of the nobles,
and the remainder was settled for the pay of other officers of rank
and court officials. Nearly £30,000 (Rs. 3,00,000) were given away
as rewards and pensions to religious orders and establishments. [706]

Besides lightening the state demand the emperor Akbar introduced
three improvements: (1) The survey of the land; (2) The payment
of the headmen or mukaddams of government villages; and (3) The
restoration to small superior landholders of the share they formerly
enjoyed in the lands of government villages. The survey which was
entrusted to Rája Todar Mal, the revenue minister of the empire,
was completed in A.D. 1575. The operations were confined to a small
portion of the whole area of the province. Besides the six tributary
districts which were unaffected by the measure, Godhra in the east,
the western peninsula, and a large portion of the central strip of
directly governed lands were excluded, so that of the 184 sub-divisions
only 64 were surveyed. In A.D. 1575, of 7,261,849 acres (12,360,594
bighás), the whole area measured, 4,920,818 acres (8,374,498 bighás)
or about two-thirds were found to be fit for cultivation, and the
remainder was waste. In those parts of the directly governed districts
where the land was not measured the existing method of determining
the government share of the produce either by selecting a portion
of the field while the crop was still standing, or by dividing the
grain heap at harvest time, was continued. In surveyed districts the
amount paid was determined by the area and character of the land under
cultivation. Payment was made either in grain or in money, according
to the instructions issued to the revenue-collectors, 'that when it
would not prove oppressive the value of the grain should be taken
in ready money at the market price.' [707] The chief change in the
revenue management was that, instead of each year calculating the
government share from the character of the crop, an uniform demand
was fixed to run for a term of ten years.

Another important effect of this survey was to extend to cultivators in
simple villages the proprietary interest in the soil formerly enjoyed
only by the shareholders of joint villages. By this change the power
of the military nobles to make undue exactions from the cultivators in
their assigned lands was to some extent checked. It was, perhaps, also
an indirect effect of this more definite settlement of the crown demand
that the revenue agents of government and of the holders of assigned
lands, finding that the revenues could be realised without their help,
refused to allow to the heads of villages certain revenue dues which,
in return for their services, they had hitherto enjoyed. Accordingly,
in A.D. 1589-90, these heads of villages appealed to government and
Akbar decided that in assigned districts as well as in the crown
domains from the collections of government lands two-and-a-half per
cent should be set apart as a perquisite for men of this class. [708]

When the heads of villages laid their own private grievance before
government, they also brought to its notice that the Koli and Rájput
landowners, whose shares in government villages had been resumed by
the crown in A.D. 1545, had since that time continued in a state of
discontent and revolt and were then causing the ruin of the subjects
and a deficiency in the government collections. An inquiry was
instituted, and, to satisfy the claims of landowners of this class,
it was agreed that, on furnishing good security for their conduct
and receiving the government mark on their contingent of cavalry,
they should again be put in possession of a one-fourth share of the
land of government villages. While the province was managed agreeably
to these regulations, says the author of the Mirat-i-Áhmedi, its
prosperity continued to increase. [709]

Though these measures did much to check internal disorder, Gujarát, for
several years after it came under Mughal control, continued disturbed
by insurrections among the nobles, and so imperfectly protected from
the attacks of foreign enemies that between the years A.D. 1573 and
1609 each of its three richest cities, Áhmedábád Cambay and Surat, was
in turn taken and plundered. [710] During the rest of the seventeenth
century, though the country was from time to time disturbed by Koli
and Rájput risings, and towards the end of the century suffered much
from the raids of the Maráthás, the viceroys were, on the whole,
able to maintain their authority, repressing the outbreaks of the
disorderly classes, and enforcing the imperial claims for tribute on
the more independent feudatory chiefs. Throughout the greater part
of the seventeenth century the general state of the province seems
to have been prosperous. Its cities were the wonder of European
travellers. Surat, which only since the transfer of Gujarát to the
Mughal empire had risen to hold a place among its chief centres
of trade, was, in A.D. 1664, when taken by Shiváji, rich enough
to supply him with plunder in treasure and precious stones worth a
million sterling [711]; and at that time Cambay is said to have been
beyond comparison greater than Surat, and Áhmedábád much richer and
more populous than either. [712]

From the beginning of the eighteenth century disorder increased. Unable
to rely for support on the imperial court, the viceroys failed to
maintain order among the leading nobles, or to enforce their tribute
from the more powerful feudatories. And while the small Koli and
Rájput landholders, freed from the control of a strong central power,
were destroying the military posts, taking possession of the state
share of village lands, and levying dues from their more peaceful
neighbours, the burden of the Marátha tribute was year by year growing
heavier. During the last ten years of Musalmán rule so entirely did
the viceroy's authority forsake him, that, according to the author
of the Mirat-i-Áhmedi, when the great landholders refused to pay
their tribute, the viceroy had no power to enforce payment. And so
faithless had the great landowners become that the viceroy could not
pass the city gate without an escort. [713]

The above summary contains frequent references to three classes
of zamíndárs: (1) The zamíndárs of the self-governed states; (2)
The greater zamíndárs of the crown districts; and (3) The lesser
zamíndárs of the crown districts.

[Self-governed Zamíndárs.] In the case of the zamíndárs of
self-governed states the principle was military service and no
tribute. The author of the Mirat-i-Áhmedi says that finally the
zamíndárs of the self-governed states ceased to do service. In spite
of this statement it seems probable that some of this class served
almost until the complete collapse of the empire, and that tribute
was rarely levied from them by an armed force. In the Mirat-i-Áhmedi
account of the office of súbahdár or názim sûbah the following passage
occurs: When occasion arose the názims used to take with their armies
the contingents of the Ránás of Udepur Dúngarpur and Bánsváda, which
were always permanently posted outside their official residences
(in Áhmedábád). This shows that these great zamíndárs had official
residences at the capital, where probably their contingents were
posted under wakíls or agents. It therefore seems probable that their
tribute too would be paid through their representatives at the capital
and that a military force was seldom sent against them. Accordingly
notices of military expeditions in the tributary sarkárs are rare
though they were of constant occurrence in the crown districts.

[Crown Zamíndárs.] The position of the zamíndárs of the khálsa or
crown districts was very different from that of the zamíndárs of
self-governed territories. The khálsa zamíndárs had been deprived of
the greater portion of their ancestral estates which were administered
by the viceregal revenue establishment. In some instances their
capitals had been annexed. Even if not annexed the capital was the
seat of faujdár who possessed the authority and encroached daily on
the rights and privileges of the chieftain. The principal chiefs in
this position were those of Rájpípla and Ídar in Gujarát and the
Jám of Navánagar in Káthiáváda. Of the three, Rájpipla had been
deprived of his capital Nándod and of all the fertile districts,
and was reduced to a barren sovereignty over rocks, hills and Bhíls
at Rájpípla. Ídar had suffered similar treatment and the capital was
the seat of a Muhammadan faujdár. Navánagar, which had hitherto been
a tributary sarkár, was during the reign of Aurangzíb made a crown
district. But after Aurangzíb's death the Jám returned to his capital
and again resumed his tributary relations.

[Smaller Zamíndárs.] The lesser holders, including grásiás wántádárs
and others, had suffered similar deprivation of lands and were subject
to much encroachment from the government officials. Throughout the
empire widespread discontent prevailed among subordinate holders
of this description as well as among all the zamíndárs of the crown
districts, so that the successes of Shiváji in the Dakhan found ardent
sympathisers even in Gujarát. When the zamíndárs saw that this Hindu
rebel was strong enough to pillage Surat they began to hope that a
day of deliverance was near. The death of Aurangzíb (A.D. 1707) was
the signal for these restless spirits to bestir themselves. When the
Maráthás began regular inroads they were hailed as deliverers from
the yoke of the Mughal. The Rájpípla chief afforded them shelter and
a passage through his country. The encouragement to anarchy given by
some of the Rájput viceroys who were anxious to emancipate themselves
from the central control further enabled many chieftains girásiás
and others to absorb large portions of the crown domains, and even
to recover their ancient capitals. Finally disaffected Muhammadan
faujdárs succeeded in building up estates out of the possessions
of the crown and founding the families which most of the present
Muhammadan chieftains of Gujarát represent.

[Marátha Ascendancy, 1760-1802.] When the imperial power had been
usurped by the Marátha leaders, the chiefs who had just shaken off
the more powerful Mughal yoke were by no means disposed tamely to
submit to Marátha domination. Every chief resisted the levy of tribute
and Momín Khán reconquered Áhmedábád. In this struggle the Maráthás
laboured under the disadvantage of dissensions between the Peshwa and
the Gáikwár. They were also unaware of the actual extent of the old
imperial domain and were ignorant of the amount of tribute formerly
levied. They found that the faujdárs, who, in return for Marátha
aid in enabling them to absorb the crown parganáhs, had agreed to
pay tribute, now joined the zamíndárs in resisting Marátha demands,
while with few exceptions the desáis and majmudárs either openly allied
themselves with the zamíndárs or were by force or fraud deprived of
their records. [Gáikwár Saved by British Alliance, 1802.] So serious
were the obstacles to the collection of the Marátha tribute that,
had it not been for the British alliance in A.D. 1802, there seems
little doubt that the Gáikwár would have been unable to enforce
his demands in his more distant possessions. The British alliance
checked the disintegration of the Gáikwár's power, and the permanent
settlement of the tribute early in this century enabled that chief
to collect a large revenue at a comparatively trifling cost. Not
only were rebels like Malhárráo and Kánoji suppressed, but powerful
servants like Vithalráv Deváji, who without doubt would have asserted
their independence, were confirmed in their allegiance and the rich
possessions they had acquired became part of the Gáikwár's dominions.

[Power of Chiefs.] It must not be supposed that while the larger
chiefs were busy absorbing whole parganáhs the lesser chiefs were more
backward. They too annexed villages and even Mughal posts or thánáhs,
while wántádárs or sharers absorbed the talpat or state portion, and,
under the name of tora garás, [714] daring spirits imposed certain
rights over crown villages once their ancient possessions, or, under
the name of pál or vol, enforced from neighbouring villages payments
to secure immunity from pillage. Even in the Baroda district of the
thirteen Mughal posts only ten now belong to the Gáikwár, two having
been conquered by girásiás and one having fallen under Broach. In
Sauráshtra except Ránpur and Gogha and those in the Amreli district,
not a single Mughal post is in the possession either of the British
Government or of the Gáikwár. A reference to the Mughal posts in other
parts of Gujarát shows that the same result followed the collapse of
Musalmán power.

[Power of Local Chiefs.] Since the introduction of Musalmán rule in
A.D. 1297 each successive government has been subverted by the ambition
of the nobles and the disaffection of the chiefs. It was thus that
the Gujarát Sultáns rendered themselves independent of Dehli. It was
thus that the Sultán's territories became divided among the nobles,
whose dissensions reduced the province to Akbar's authority. It was
thus that the chiefs and local governors, conniving at Marátha inroads,
subverted Mughal rule. Finally it was thus that the Gáikwár lost his
hold of his possessions and was rescued from ruin solely by the power
of the British.

CHAPTER I.

EARLY MUSALMÁN GOVERNORS.

A.D. 1297-1403.

[Alá-ud-dín Khilji Emperor, 1295-1315.] Except the great expedition
of Mahmúd Ghaznawi against Somnáth in A.D. 1024 [715]; the defeat
of Muhammad Muiz-ud-dín or Shaháb-ud-dín Ghori by Bhím Dev II. of
Anahilaváda about A.D. 1178 [716]; and the avenging sack of Anahilaváda
and defeat of Bhím by Kutb-ud-dín Eibak in A.D. 1194, until the reign
of Alá-ud-dín Khilji in A.D. 1295-1315, Gujarát remained free from
Muhammadan interference. [717] [Ulugh Khán, 1297-1317.] In A.D. 1297,
Ulugh Khán, general of Alá-ud-dín and Nasrat Khán Wazír were sent
against Anahilaváda. They took the city expelling Karan Wághela,
usually called Ghelo The Mad, who took refuge at Devgadh with Rámdeva
the Yádav sovereign of the north Dakhan. [718] They next seized Khambát
(the modern Cambay), and, after appointing a local governor, returned
to Dehli. From this time Gujarát remained under Muhammadan power, and
Ulugh Khán, a man of great energy, by repeated expeditions consolidated
the conquest and established Muhammadan rule. The Kánaddeva Rása says
that he plundered Somnáth, and there is no doubt that he conquered
Jhálor (the ancient Jhálindar) from the Songarha Choháns. [719]
After Ulugh Khán had governed Gujarát for about twenty years, at the
instigation of Malik Káfur, he was recalled and put to death by the
emperor Alá-ud-dín. [720]

[Ain-ul-Mulk Governor, 1318.] Ulugh Khán's departure shook Muhammadan
power in Gujarát, and Kamál-ud-dín, whom Mubárak Khilji sent to quell
the disturbances, was slain in battle. Sedition spread till Ain-ul-Mulk
Multáni arrived with a powerful army, defeated the rebels and [Order
Established, 1318.] restored order. He was succeeded by Zafar Khán,
who after completing the subjection of the country was recalled,
and his place supplied by Hisám-ud-dín Parmár. [721] This officer,
showing treasonable intentions, was imprisoned and succeeded by Malik
Wájid-ud-dín Kuraishi, who was afterwards ennobled by the title of
Táj or Sadr-ul-Mulk. Khusraw Khán Parmár was then appointed governor,
but it is not clear whether he ever joined his appointment. The
next governor to whom reference is made is [Táj-ul-Mulk Governor,
1320.] Táj-ul-Mulk, who about A.D. 1320, was, for the second time,
chosen as governor by Sultán Ghiás-ud-dín Tughlak. He was succeeded
by Malik Mukbil, who held the titles of Khán Jahán and Náib-i-Mukhtár,
and who was appointed by [Muhammad Tughlak Emperor, 1325-1351.] Sultán
Muhammad Tughlak, A.D. 1325-1351. Subsequently the same emperor granted
the government of Gujarát to Áhmad Ayáz, Malik Mukbil continuing to
act as his deputy. Afterwards when Áhmad Ayáz, who received the title
of Khwájah Jahán, proceeded as governor to Gujarát, Malik Mukbil
acted as his minister. And about A.D. 1338, when Khwájah Jahán was
sent against the emperor's nephew Karshásp and the Rája of Kampila
[722] who had sheltered him, Malik Mukbil succeeded to the post of
governor. On one occasion between Baroda and Dabhoi Malik Mukbil,
who was escorting treasure and a caravan of merchants to Dehli, was
plundered by some bands of the Amíráni Sadah or Captains of Hundreds
freelances and freebooters, most of them New Musalmáns or Mughal
converts, and the rest Turk and Afghán adventurers. This success
emboldened these banditti and for several years they caused loss
and confusion in Gujarát. At last, about A.D. 1346, being joined by
certain Muhammadan nobles and Hindu chieftains, they broke into open
rebellion and defeated one Ázíz, who was appointed by the emperor to
march against them. [The Emperor Quells an Insurrection, 1347.] In
the following year, A.D. 1347, Muhammad Tughlak, advancing in person,
defeated the rebels, and sacked the towns of Cambay and Surat. During
the same campaign he drove the Gohil chief Mokheráji out of his
stronghold on Piram Island near Gogha on the Gulf of Cambay, and then,
landing his forces, after a stubborn conflict, defeated the Gohils,
killing Mokheráji and capturing Gogha. Afterwards Muhammad Tughlak left
for Daulatábád in the Dakhan, and in his absence the chiefs and nobles
under Malik Túghán, a leader of the Amíráni Sadah, again rebelled,
and, obtaining possession of Pátan, imprisoned Muîzz-ud-dín the
viceroy. The insurgents then plundered Cambay, and afterwards laid
siege to Broach. Muhammad Tughlak at once marched for Gujarát and
relieved Broach, Malik Túghán retreating to Cambay, whither he was
followed by Malik Yúsuf, whom the emperor sent in pursuit of him. In
the battle that ensued near Cambay, Malik Yúsuf was defeated and slain,
and all the prisoners, both of this engagement and those who had been
previously captured, were put to death by Malik Túghán. Among the
prisoners was Muîzz-ud-dín, the governor of Gujarát. Muhammad Tughlak
now marched to Cambay in person, whence Malik Túghán retreated to
Pátan, pursued by the emperor, who was forced by stress of weather
to halt at Asáwal. [723] Eventually the emperor came up with Malik
Túghán near Kadi and gained a complete victory, Malik Túghán fleeing
to Thatha in Sindh. [Subdues Girnár and Kachh, 1350.] To establish
order throughout Gujarát Muhammad Tughlak marched against Girnár,
[724] reduced the fortress, [725] and levied tribute from the chief
named Khengár. He then went to Kachh, and after subduing that country
returned to Sorath. At Gondal he contracted a fever, and before he
was entirely recovered, he advanced through Kachh into Sindh with the
view of subduing the Sumra chief of Thatha, who had sheltered Malik
Túghán. Before reaching Thatha he succumbed to the fever, and died
in the spring of A.D. 1351. Shortly before his death he appointed
Nizám-ul-Mulk to the government of Gujarát.

[Fírúz Tughlak Emperor, 1351-1388.] In A.D. 1351, Fírúz Tughlak
succeeded Muhammad Tughlak on the throne of Dehli. Shortly after
his accession the emperor marched to Sindh and sent a force against
Malik Túghán. About A.D. 1360 he again advanced to Sindh against Jám
Bábunia. From Sindh he proceeded to Gujarát, where he stayed for some
months. [Zafar Khan Governor, 1371.] Next year, on leaving for Sindh
for the third time, he bestowed the government of Gujarát on Zafar
Khán in place of Nizám-ul-Mulk. On Zafar Khán's death, in A.D. 1373
according to Farishtah and A.D. 1371 according to the Mirat-i-Áhmedi,
he was succeeded by his son Daryá Khán who appears to have governed
by a deputy named Shams-ud-dín Anwar Khán. In A.D. 1376, besides
presents of elephants horses and other valuables, one Shams-ud-dín
Dámghání offered a considerable advance on the usual collections
from Gujarát. As Daryá Khán would not agree to pay this sum he was
displaced and Shams-ud-dín Dámghání was appointed governor. Finding
himself unable to pay the stipulated amount this officer rebelled
and withheld the revenue. Fírúz Tughlak sent an army against him,
and by the aid of the chieftains and people, whom he had greatly
oppressed, Shams-ud-dín was slain. The government of the province
was then entrusted to Farhat-ul-Mulk Rásti Khán. [Farhat-ul-Mulk
Governor, 1376-1391.] In about A.D. 1388, a noble named Sikandar
Khán was sent to supersede Farhat-ul-Mulk, but was defeated and
slain by him. As the emperor Fírúz Tughlak died shortly after
no notice was taken of Farhat-ul-Mulk's conduct and in the short
reign of Fírúz's successor Ghiás-ud-dín Tughlak, no change was made
in the government of Gujarát. During the brief rule of Abu Bakr,
Farhat-ul-Mulk continued undisturbed. [Muhammad Tughlak II. Emperor,
1391-1393.] But in A.D. 1391, on the accession of Násir-ud-dín Muhammad
Tughlak II., a noble of the name of Zafar Khán was appointed governor
of Gujarát, and despatched with an army to recall or, if necessary,
expel Farhat-ul-Mulk.

This Zafar Khán was the son of Wajíh-ul-Mulk, of the Tánk tribe of
Rájputs who claim to be of Suryavansi descent and together with the
Gurjjaras appear from very early times to have inhabited the plains
of the Punjáb. Of Wajíh-ul-Mulk's rise to power at the Dehli court
the following story is told. Before he sat on the throne of Dehli,
Fírúz Tughlak, when hunting in the Punjáb, lost his way and came to a
village near Thánesar, held by chieftains of the Tánk tribe. He was
hospitably entertained by two brothers of the chief's family named
Sáháran and Sádhu, and became enamoured of their beautiful sister. When
his hosts learned who the stranger was, they gave him their sister in
marriage and followed his fortunes. Afterwards Fírúz persuading them
to embrace Islám, conferred on Saháran the title of Wajíh-ul-Mulk,
and on Sádhu the title of Shamshír Khán. Finally, in A.D. 1351, when
Fírúz Tughlak ascended the throne, he made Shamshír Khán and Zafar
Khán, the son of Wajíh-ul-Mulk, his cup-bearers, and raised them to
the rank of nobles.

[Zafar Khán Governor, 1391-1403.] In A.D. 1391, on being appointed
viceroy, Zafar Khán marched without delay for Gujarát. In passing
Nágor [726] he was met by a deputation from Cambay, complaining of
the tyranny of Rásti Khán. Consoling them, he proceeded to Pátan, the
seat of government, and thence marched against Rásti Khán. [Battle of
Jitpur; Farhat-ul-Mulk Slain, 1391.] The armies met near the village of
Khambhoi, [727] a dependency of Pátan, and Farhat-ul-Mulk Rásti Khán
was slain and his army defeated. To commemorate the victory, Zafar
Khán founded a village on the battle-field, which he named Jítpur
(the city of victory), and then, starting for Cambay, redressed the
grievances of the people.

[Zafar Khán Attacks Ídar, 1393.] Zafar Khán's first warlike expedition
was against the Ráv of Ídar, [728] who, in A.D. 1393, had refused to
pay the customary tribute, and this chief he humbled. The contemporary
histories seem to show that the previous governors had recovered
tribute from all or most of the chiefs of Gujarát except from the Ráv
of Junágadh [729] and the Rája of Rájpípla, [730] who had retained
their independence. Zafar Khán now planned an expedition against the
celebrated Hindu shrine of Somnáth, but, hearing that Ádil Khán of
Ásír-Burhánpur had invaded Sultánpur and Nandurbár, [731] he moved his
troops in that direction, and Ádil Khán retired to Ásir. [732] [Exacts
Tribute from Junágadh, 1394.] In A.D. 1394, he marched against the Ráv
of Junágadh and exacted tribute. Afterwards, proceeding to Somnáth,
he destroyed the temple, built an Assembly Mosque, introduced Islám,
left Musalmán law officers, and established a thána or post in the
city of Pátan Somnáth or Deva Pátan. He now heard that the Hindus of
Mándu [733] were oppressing the Muslims, and, accordingly, marching
thither, he beleaguered that fortress for a year, but failing to take
it contented himself with accepting the excuses of the Rája. From Mándu
he performed a pilgrimage to Ajmír. [734] Here he proceeded against
the chiefs of Sámbhar and Dandwána, and then attacking the Rájputs
of Delváda and Jháláváda, [735] he defeated them, and returned to
Pátan in A.D. 1396. About this time his son Tátár Khán, leaving his
baggage in the fort of Pánipat, [736] made an attempt on Dehli. But
Ikbál Khán took the fort of Pánipat, captured Tátár Khán's baggage,
and forced him to withdraw to Gujarát. [Lays Siege to Ídar Fort,
1397.] In A.D. 1397, with the view of reducing Ídar, Zafar Khán
besieged the fort, laying waste the neighbouring country. Before he
had taken the fort Zafar Khán received news of Timúr's conquests,
and concluding a peace with the Ídar Rája, returned to Pátan. [737]
In A.D. 1398, hearing that the Somnáth people claimed independence,
Zafar Khán led an army against them, defeated them, and [Establishes
Islám at Somnáth, 1398.] established Islám on a firm footing.

CHAPTER II.

ÁHMEDÁBÁD KINGS.

A.D. 1403-1573.

The rule of the Áhmedábád kings extends over 170 years and includes the
names of fifteen sovereigns. The period may conveniently be divided
into two parts. The first, lasting for a little more than a century
and a quarter, when, under strong rulers, Gujarát rose to consequence
among the kingdoms of Western India; the second, from A.D. 1536 to
A.D. 1573, an evil time when the sovereigns were minors and the wealth
and supremacy of Gujarát were wasted by the rivalry of its nobles.

The date on which Zafar Khán openly threw off his allegiance to
Dehli is doubtful. Farishtah says he had the Friday prayer or khutbah
repeated in his name after his successful campaign against Jháláváda
and Delváda in A.D. 1396. According to the Mirat-i-Sikandari he
maintained a nominal allegiance till A.D. 1403 when he formally
invested his son Tátár Khán with the sovereignty of Gujarát, under
the title of Násir-ud-dín Muhammad Sháh.

[Muhammad I. 1403-1404.] On ascending the throne in A.D. 1403, Muhammad
Sháh made Asáwal his capital, and, after humbling the chief of Nándod
or Nádot in Rájpipla, marched against Dehli by way of Pátan. On
his way to Pátan the king sickened and died. His body was brought
back to Pátan, and the expedition against Dehli came to nothing. It
seems probable that this is a courtly version of the tale; the fact
being that in A.D. 1403 Tátár Khán imprisoned his father at Asáwal,
and assumed the title of Muhammad Sháh, and that Tátár Khán's death
was caused by poison administered in the interest, if not at the
suggestion, of his father Zafar Khán. [738]

[Zafar Khán reigns as Muzaffar, 1407-1419.] After the death of Muhammad
Sháh, Zafar Khán asked his own younger brother Shams Khán Dandáni
to carry on the government, but he refused. Zafar Khán accordingly
sent Shams Khán Dandáni to Nágor in place of Jalál Khán Khokhar,
and in A.D. 1407-8, at Bírpur, at the request of the nobles and
chief men of the country, himself formally mounted the throne and
assumed the title of Muzaffar Sháh. At this time Álp Khán, son of
Diláwar Khán of Málwa, was rumoured to have poisoned his father
and ascended the throne with the title of Sultán Hushang Ghori. On
hearing this Muzaffar Sháh marched against Hushang and besieged him
in Dhár. [739] On reducing Dhár Muzaffar handed Hushang to the charge
of his brother Shams Khán, on whom he conferred the title of Nasrat
Khán. Hushang remained a year in confinement, and Músa Khán one of
his relations usurped his authority. On hearing this, Hushang begged
to be released, and Muzaffar Sháh not only agreed to his prayer,
but sent his grandson Áhmed Khán with an army to reinstate him. This
expedition was successful; the fortress of Mándu was taken and the
usurper Músa Khán was put to flight. Áhmed Khán returned to Gujarát
in A.D. 1409-10. Meanwhile Muzaffar advancing towards Dehli to aid
Sultán Mahmúd (A.D. 1393-1413), prevented an intended attack on that
city by Sultán Ibráhím of Jaunpur. On his return to Gujarát Muzaffar
led, or more probably despatched, an unsuccessful expedition against
Kambhkot. [740] In the following year (A.D. 1410-11), to quell a rising
among the Kolis near Asával, Muzaffar placed his grandson Áhmed Khán in
command of an army. Áhmed Khán camped outside of Pátan. He convened
an assembly of learned men and asked them whether a son was not
bound to exact retribution from his father's murderer. The assembly
stated in writing that a son was bound to exact retribution. Armed
with this decision, Áhmed suddenly entered the city, overpowered
his grandfather, and forced him to drink poison. The old Khán said:
'Why so hasty, my boy. A little patience and power would have come
to you of itself.' He advised Áhmed to kill the evil counsellors of
murder and to drink no wine. Remorse so embittered Áhmed's after-life
that he was never known to laugh.

[Ahmed I. 1411-1441.] On his grandfather's death, Áhmed succeeded with
the title of Násir-ud-dunya Wad-dín Abúl fateh Áhmed Sháh. Shortly
after Áhmed Sháh's accession, his cousin Moid-ud-dín Fírúz Khán,
governor of Baroda, allying himself with Hisám or Nizám-ul-Mulk
Bhandári and other nobles, collected an army at Nadiád in Kaira, and,
laying claim to the crown, defeated the king's followers. Jívandás,
one of the insurgents, proposed to march upon Pátan, but as the
others refused a dispute arose in which Jívandás was slain, and
the rest sought and obtained Áhmed Sháh's forgiveness. Moid-ud-dín
Fírúz Khán went to Cambay and was there joined by Masti Khán, son of
Muzaffar Sháh, who was governor of Surat: on the king's advance they
fled from Cambay to Broach, to which fort Áhmed Sháh laid siege. As
soon as the king arrived, Moid-ud-dín's army went over to the king,
and Masti Khán also submitted. After a few days Áhmed Sháh sent for and
forgave Moid-ud-dín, and returned to Asáwal victorious and triumphant.

[Builds Áhmedábád, 1413.] In the following year (A.D. 1413-14) [741]
Áhmed Sháh defeated Ása Bhíl, chief of Asáwal, and, finding the site of
that town suitable for his capital, he changed its name to Áhmedábád,
and busied himself in enlarging and fortifying the city. [742] During
this year Moid-ud-dín Fírúz Khán and Masti Khán again revolted, and,
joining the Ídar Rája, took shelter in that fortress. [Defeats the
Ídar Chief, 1414.] A force under Fateh Khán was despatched against
the rebels, and finally Fírúz Khán and the Ídar Rája were forced to
flee by way of Kherálu a town in the district of Kadi. Moid-ud-dín
now persuaded Rukn Khán governor of Modása, fifty miles north of
Áhmedábád, to join. They united their forces with those of Badri-ûlá,
Masti Khán, and Ranmal Rája of Ídar and encamped at Rangpura an Ídar
village about five miles from Modása and began to strengthen Modása and
dig a ditch round it. The Sultán camped before the fort and offered
favourable terms. The besieged bent on treachery asked the Sultán to
send Nizám-ul-Mulk the minister and certain other great nobles. The
Sultán agreed, and the besieged imprisoned the envoys. After a three
days' siege Modása fell. Badri-ûlá and Rukn Khán were slain, and Fírúz
Khán and the Rája of Ídar fled. The imprisoned nobles were released
unharmed. The Rája seeing that all hope of success was gone, made his
peace with the king by surrendering to him the elephants, horses and
other baggage of Moid-ud-dín Fírúz Khán and Masti Khán, who now fled
to Nágor, where they were sheltered by Shams Khán Dandáni. Áhmed Sháh
after levying the stipulated tribute departed. Moid-ud-dín Fírúz Khán
was afterwards slain in the war between Shams Khán and Rána Mokal of
Chitor. [Suppresses a Revolt, 1414.] In A.D. 1414-15 Uthmán Áhmed and
Sheikh Malik, in command at Pátan, and Sulaimán Afghán called Ázam
Khán, and Ísa Sálár rebelled, and wrote secretly to Sultán Hushang of
Málwa, inviting him to invade Gujarát, and promising to seat him on
the throne and expel Áhmed Sháh. They were joined in their rebellion
by Jhála Satarsálji [743] of Pátdi and other chiefs of Gujarát. Áhmed
Sháh despatched Latíf Khán and Nizám-ul-Mulk against Sheikh Malik and
his associates, while he sent Imád-ul-Mulk against Sultán Hushang,
who retired, and Imád-ul-Mulk, after plundering Málwa, returned to
Gujarát. Latíf Khán, pressing in hot pursuit of Satarsál and Sheikh
Malik, drove them to Sorath. The king returned with joyful heart
to Áhmedábád.

[Spread of Islám, 1414.] Though, with their first possession of
the country, A.D. 1297-1318, the Muhammadans had introduced their
faith from Pátan to Broach, the rest of the province long remained
unconverted. By degrees, through the efforts of the Áhmedábád kings,
the power of Islám became more directly felt in all parts of the
province. Many districts, till then all but independent, accepted
the Musalmán faith at the hands of Áhmed Sháh, and agreed to the
payment of a regular tribute. In A.D. 1414 he led an army against
the Ráv of Junágadh and defeated him. The Ráv retired to the hill
fortress of Girnár. Áhmed Sháh, though unable to capture the hill,
gained the fortified citadel of Junágadh. Finding further resistance
vain, the chief tendered his submission, and Junágadh was admitted
among the tributary states. This example was followed by the
greater number of the Sorath chiefs, who, for the time, resigned
their independence. Sayad Ábûl Khair and Sayad Kásim were left to
collect the tribute, and Áhmed Sháh returned to Áhmedábád. Next year
he marched against Sidhpur, [744] and in A.D. 1415 advanced from
Sidhpur to Dhár in Málwa. [Áhmed I. Quells a Second Revolt, 1416.] At
this time the most powerful feudatories were the Ráv of Junágadh,
the Rával of Chámpáner, [745] the Rája of Nándod, the Ráv of Ídar,
and the Rája of Jháláváda. Trimbakdás of Chámpáner, Púnja of Ídar,
Siri of Nándod, and Mandlik of Jháláváda, alarmed at the activity
of Áhmed Sháh and his zeal for Islám, instigated Sultán Hushang of
Málwa to invade Gujarát. Áhmed Sháh promptly marched to Modása, [746]
forced Sultán Hushang of Málwa to retire, and broke up the conspiracy,
reproving and pardoning the chiefs concerned. About the same time the
Sorath chiefs withheld their tribute, but the patience and unwearied
activity of the king overcame all opposition. When at Modása Áhmed
heard that, by the treachery of the son of the governor, Násír of Asír
and Gheirát or Ghazni Khán of Málwa had seized the fort of Thálner in
Sirpur in Khándesh, and, with the aid of the chief of Nándod, were
marching against Sultánpur and Nandurbár. Áhmed sent an expedition
against Nasír of Asír under Malik Mahmúd Barki or Turki. When the
Malik reached Nándod he found that Gheirat Khán had fled to Málwa and
that Nasír had retired to Thálner. The Malik advanced, besieged and
took Thálner, capturing Nasír whom Áhmed forgave and dignified with
the title of Khán. [747]

After quelling these rebellions Áhmed Sháh despatched Nizám-ul-Mulk
to punish the Rája of Mandal near Viramgám, and [Expedition against
Málwa, 1417.] himself marched to Málwa against Sultán Hushang, whom
he defeated, capturing his treasure and elephants. In A.D. 1418,
in accordance with his policy of separately engaging his enemies,
[Attacks Chámpáner, 1418.] Áhmed Sháh marched to chastise Trimbakdas
of Chámpáner, and though unable to take the fortress he laid waste
the surrounding country. In A.D. 1419 he ravaged the lands round
Sankheda [748] and built a fort there and a mosque within the fort;
he also built a wall round the town of Mángni, [749] and then marched
upon Mándu. On the way ambassadors from Sultán Hushang met him suing
for peace, and Áhmed Sháh, returning towards Chámpáner, again laid
waste the surrounding country. During the following year (A.D. 1420)
he remained in Ahmedábád bringing his own dominions into thorough
subjection by establishing fortified posts and by humbling the chiefs
and destroying their strongholds. Among other works he built the forts
of Dohad [750] on the Málwa frontier and of Jítpur in Lúnáváda. [751]
In A.D. 1421 he repaired the fort in the town of Kahreth, otherwise
called Meimún in Lúnáváda, which had been built by Ulugh Khán Sanjar
in the reign of Sultán Alá-ud-dín (A.D. 1295-1315) and changed the
name to Sultánpur. [War with Málwa, 1422.] He next advanced against
Málwa and took the fort of Mesar. After an unsuccessful siege of
Mándu he went to Ujjain. [752] From Ujjain he returned to Mándu,
and failing to capture Mándu, he marched against Sárangpur. [753]
Sultán Hushang sent ambassadors and concluded a peace. In spite of the
agreement, while Áhmed Sháh was returning to Gujarát, Sultán Hushang
made a night attack on his army and caused much havoc. Áhmed Sháh,
collecting what men he could, waited till dawn and then fell on and
defeated the Málwa troops, who were busy plundering. Sultán Hushang
took shelter in the fort of Sárangpur to which Áhmed Sháh again laid
siege. Failing to take the fort Áhmed retreated towards Gujarát,
closely followed by Sultán Hushang, who was eager to wipe out his
former defeat. On Hushang's approach, Áhmed Sháh, halting his troops,
joined battle and repulsing Hushang returned to Áhmedábád.

[Defeats the Ídar Chief, 1425.] In A.D. 1425 Áhmed Sháh led an army
against Ídar, defeating the force brought to meet him and driving their
leader to the hills. Ídar was always a troublesome neighbour to the
Áhmedábád kings and one difficult to subdue, for when his country was
threatened, the chief could retire to his hills, where he could not
easily be followed. As a permanent check on his movements, Áhmed Sháh,
in A.D. 1427, built the fort of Ahmednagar, [754] on the banks of the
Háthmati, eighteen miles south-west of Ídar. In the following year the
Ídar chief, Ráv Púnja, attacked a foraging party and carried off one of
the royal elephants. He was pursued into the hills and brought to bay
in a narrow pathway at the edge of a steep ravine. Púnja was driving
back his pursuers when the keeper of the Sultán's elephant urged his
animal against the Ráv's horse. The horse swerving lost his foothold
and rolling down the ravine destroyed himself and his rider. [755]

During the two following years Áhmed Sháh abstained from foreign
conquests, devoting himself to improving his dominions and to working
out a system of paying his troops. The method he finally adopted was
payment half in money and half in land. This arrangement attached the
men to the country, and, while keeping them dependent on the state,
enabled them to be free from debt. Further to keep his officials in
check he arranged that the treasurer should be one of the king's slaves
while the actual paymaster was a native of the particular locality. He
also appointed ámils that is sub-divisional revenue officers. After Ráv
Púnja's death Áhmed Sháh marched upon Ídar, and did not return until
Ráv Púnja's son agreed to pay an annual tribute of £300 (Rs. 3000). In
the following year, according to Farishtah (II. 369) in spite of the
young chiefs promise to pay tribute, Áhmed Sháh attacked Ídar, took the
fort, and built an assembly mosque. Fearing that their turn would come
next the chief of Jháláváda and Kánha apparently chief of Dungarpur
fled to Nasír Khán of Asír. Nasír Khán gave Kánha a letter to Áhmed
Sháh Báhmani, to whose son Alá-ud-dín Násír's daughter was married,
and having detached part of his own troops to help Kánha they plundered
and laid waste some villages of Nandurbár and Sultánpur. Sultán Áhmed
sent his eldest son Muhammad Khán with Mukarrabul Mulk and others to
meet the Dakhanis who were repulsed with considerable loss. On this
Sultán Áhmed Báhmani, under Kadr Khán Dakhani, sent his eldest son
Alá-ud-dín and his second son Khán Jehán against the Gujarátis. Kadr
Khán marched to Daulatábád and joining Nasír Khán and the Gujarát
rebels fought a great battle near the pass of Mánek Púj, six miles
south of Nándgaon in Násik. The confederates were defeated with great
slaughter. The Dakhan princes fled to Daulatábád and Kánha and Nasír
Khán to Kalanda near Chálisgaum in south Khándesh.

[Recovers Máhim, 1429;] In the same year (A.D. 1429), on the death of
Kutub Khán the Gujarát governor of the island of Máhim, now the north
part of the island of Bombay, [756] Áhmed Sháh Báhmani smarting under
his defeats, ordered Hasan Izzat, otherwise called Malik-ut-Tujjár,
to the Konkan and by the Malik's activity the North Konkan passed
to the Dakhanis. On the news of this disaster Áhmed Sháh sent his
youngest son Zafar Khán, with an army under Malik Iftikhár Khán, to
retake Máhim. A fleet, collected from Diu Gogha and Cambay sailed to
the Konkan, attacked Thána [757] by sea and land, captured it, and
regained possession of Máhim. In A.D. 1431 Áhmed Sháh advanced upon
Chámpáner, and Áhmed Sháh Bahmani, anxious to retrieve his defeat at
Máhim, marched an army into [and Báglán, 1431.] Báglán [758] and laid
it waste. This news brought Áhmed Sháh back to Nandurbár. Destroying
Nándod he passed to Tambol, a fort in Báglán which Áhmed Sháh Báhmani
was besieging, defeated the besiegers and relieved the fort. He then
went to Thána, repaired the fort, and returned to Gujarát by way of
Sultánpur and Nandurbár. In A.D. 1432, after contracting his son Fateh
Khán in marriage with the daughter of the Rái of Máhim to the north
of Bassein Áhmed Sháh marched towards Nágor, and exacted tribute and
presents from the Rával of Dúngarpur. [759] From Dúngarpur he went
to Mewár, enforcing his claims on Búndi and Kota, two Hára Rájput
states in south-east Rájputána. He then entered the Delváda country,
levelling temples and destroying the palace of Rána Mokalsingh,
the chief of Chitor. Thence he invaded Nágor in the country of the
Ráthods, who submitted to him. After this he returned to Gujarát,
and during the next few years was warring principally in Málwa, where,
according to Farishtah, his army suffered greatly from pestilence and
famine. Áhmed died in A.D. 1441 in the fifty-third year of his life and
the thirty-third of his reign and was buried in the mausoleum in the
Mánek Chauk in Áhmedábád. His after-death title is Khûdaigán-i-Maghfûr
the Forgiven Lord in token that, according to his merciful promise,
Allah the pitiful, moved by the prayer of forty believers, had spread
his forgiveness over the crime of Áhmed's youth, a crime bewailed by
a lifelong remorse.

Sultán Áhmed is still a name of power among Gujarát Musalmáns. He
is not more honoured for his bravery, skill, and success as a war
leader than for his piety and his justice. His piety showed itself in
his respect for three great religious teachers Sheikh Rukn-ud-dín the
representative of Sheikh Moín-ud-dín the great Khwájah of Ajmír, Sheikh
Áhmed Khattu who is buried at Sarkhej five miles west of Áhmedábád,
and the Bukháran Sheikh Burhán-ud-dín known as Kutbi Álam the father
of the more famous Sháh Álam. Of Áhmed's justice two instances are
recorded. Sitting in the window of his palace watching the Sábarmati
in flood Áhmed saw a large earthen jar float by. The jar was opened
and the body of a murdered man was found wrapped in a blanket. The
potters were called and one said the jar was his and had been sold
to the headman of a neighbouring village. On inquiry the headman
was proved to have murdered a grain merchant and was hanged. The
second case was the murder of a poor man by Áhmed's son-in-law. The
Kázi found the relations of the deceased willing to accept a blood
fine and when the fine was paid released the prince. Áhmed hearing
of his son-in-law's release said in the case of the rich fine is no
punishment and ordered his son-in-law to be hanged. [760]

[Muhammad II. 1441-1452.] Áhmed Sháh was succeeded by his generous
pleasure-loving son Muhammad Sháh, Ghiás-ud-dunya Wad-dín, also styled
Zarbaksh the Gold Giver. In A.D. 1445 Muhammad marched against Bír
Rái of Ídar, but on that chief agreeing to give him his daughter in
marriage, he confirmed him in the possession of his state. His next
expedition was against Kánha Rái of Dúngarpur, who took refuge in the
hills, but afterwards returned, and paying tribute, was given charge
of his country. Muhammad married Bíbi Mughli, daughter of Jám Júna
of Thatha in Sindh. She bore a son, Fateh Khán, who was afterwards
Sultán Mahmúd Begada. In A.D. 1450, Muhammad marched upon Chámpáner,
and took the lower fortress. Gangádás of Chámpáner had a strong ally
in Sultán Mahmúd Khilji, the ruler of Málwa, and on his approach
Muhammad Sháh retired to Godhra, [761] and Mahmúd Khilji continued
his march upon Gujarát at the head of 80,000 horse. Muhammad Sháh was
preparing to fly to Diu, when the nobles, disgusted at his cowardice,
caused him to be poisoned. Muhammad Sháh's after-death title is
Khûdáigán-i-Karím the Gracious Lord.

[Kutb-ud-dín, 1451-1459.] In A.D. 1451 the nobles placed Muhammad's
son Jalál Khán on the throne with the title of Kutb-ud-dín. Meanwhile
Sultán Mahmúd of Málwa had laid siege to Sultánpur. [762] Malik
Alá-ud-dín bin Sohráb Kutb-ud-dín's commander surrendered the fort,
and was sent with honour to [War with Málwa, 1451.] Málwa and appointed
governor of Mándu. Sultán Mahmúd, marching to Sársa-Pálri, summoned
Broach, then commanded by Sídi Marján on behalf of Gujarát. The Sídi
refused, and fearing delay, the Málwa Sultán after plundering Baroda
proceeded to Nadiád, whose Bráhmans astonished him by their bravery
in killing a mad elephant. Kutb-ud-dín Sháh now advancing met Sultán
Mahmúd at [Battle of Kapadvanj, 1454.] Kapadvanj, [763] where, after a
doubtful fight of some hours, he defeated Sultán Mahmúd, though during
the battle that prince was able to penetrate to Kutb-ud-dín's camp and
carry off his crown and jewelled girdle. The Mirat-i-Sikandari ascribes
Kutb-ud-dín's victory in great measure to the gallantry of certain
inhabitants of Dholka [764] called Darwáziyahs. Muzaffar Khán, who is
said to have incited the Málwa Sultán to invade Gujarát, was captured
and beheaded, and his head was hung up at the gate of Kapadvanj. On
his return from Kapadvanj Kutb-ud-dín built the magnificent Hauzi Kutb
or Kánkariya Tank about a mile to the south of Áhmedábád. According
to the Mirat-i-Sikandari (Persian Text, 50-57) this war between
Málwa and Gujarát was controlled by the spiritual power of certain
holy teachers. The war was brought on by the prayers of Sheikh Kamál
Málwi, whose shrine is in Áhmedábád behind Khudáwand Khán's mosque
near Sháh-i-Álam's tomb, who favoured Málwa. Kutb-ud-dín's cause was
aided by the blessing of Kutbi Álam who sent his son the famous Sháh
Álam time after time to persuade Kamál to be loyal to Gujarát. At last
Kamál produced a writing said to be from heaven giving the victory to
Málwa. The young Sháh Álam tore this charter to shreds, and, as no evil
befel him, Kamál saw that his spiritual power paled before Sháh Álam
and fell back dead. Sháh Álam against his will accompanied Kutb-ud-dín
some marches on his advance to Kapadvanj. Before leaving the army
Sháh Álam blessed a mean camp elephant and ordered him to destroy the
famous Málwa champion elephant known as the Butcher. He also, against
his wish for he knew the future, at the Sultán's request bound his
own sword round Kutb-ud-dín's waist. In the battle the commissariat
elephant ripped the Butcher and some years later Kutb-ud-dín by
accident gashed his knee with the saint's sword and died.

[War with Nágor, 1454-1459.] In the same year Sultán Mahmúd Khilji
attempted to conquer Nágor then held by Fírúz Khán, a cousin of the
Áhmedábád Sultán. Kutb-ud-dín Sháh despatched an army under the command
of Sayad Atáulláh, and, as it drew near Sámbhar, [765] the Málwa Sultán
retired and shortly after Fírúz Khán died. Kúmbha Rána of Chitor [766]
now began interfering in the Nágor succession on behalf of Shams Khán,
who had been dispossessed by his brother Mujáhid Khán, and expelled
Mujáhid. But as Shams Khán refused to dismantle the fortifications
of Nágor, the Chitor chief collected an army to capture Nágor, while
Shams Khán repaired to Kutb-ud-dín Sháh for aid and gave that sovereign
his daughter in marriage. Upon this Kutb-ud-dín sent Rái Anupchand
Mánek and Malik Gadái with an army to Nágor to repulse the Rána of
[War with Chitor, 1455-1459.] Chitor. In a battle near Nágor the
Gujarát troops were defeated, and the Rána after laying waste the
neighbourhood of that city, returned to Chitor. In A.D. 1455-56,
to avenge this raid, Kutb-ud-dín Sháh marched against Chitor. On
his way the Devra Rája of Sirohi [767] attended Kutb-ud-dín Sháh's
camp, praying him to restore the fortress of Ábu, [768] part of the
ancestral domain of Sirohi, which the Rána of Chitor had wrested
from his house. The king ordered one of his generals, Malik Shaâbán,
to take possession of Ábu and restore it to the Devra chieftain,
while he himself continued to advance against Kumbhalmer. Malik
Shaâbán was entangled in the defiles near Ábu, and defeated with
great slaughter, and shortly after Kutb-ud-dín Sháh, making a truce
with Chitor, retired to his own country. On his return the Málwa
sovereign proposed that they should unite against Chitor, conquer the
Rána's territories, and divide them equally between them. Kutb-ud-dín
agreed and in A.D. 1456-57 marched against the Rána by way of Ábu,
which fortress he captured and handed to the Devra Rája. [769] Next,
advancing upon Kumbhalmer, he plundered the country round, and then
turned towards Chitor. On his way to Chitor, he was met by the Rána,
and a battle was fought, after which the Rána fell back on his capital,
and was there besieged by the Gujarát army. The siege was not pressed,
and, on the Rána agreeing to pay tribute and not to harass Nágor,
Kutb-ud-dín withdrew to Gujarát, where he gave himself up to licentious
excess. Meanwhile, the Rána by ceding Mandisor [770] to Málwa, came
to terms with the Sultán of Mándu, and within three months attacked
Nágor. Kutb-ud-dín Sháh, though so overcome with drink as to be unable
to sit his horse, mustered his troops and started in a palanquin. As
soon as the Rána heard that the Gujarát army was in motion he retired,
and the king returned to Áhmedábád. In A.D. 1458, he again led an
army by way of Sirohi and Kumbhalmer against Chitor, and laid waste
the country. Soon after his return, according to one account by an
accidental sword wound, according to another account poisoned by
his wife, Kutb-ud-dín died in May A.D. 1459 after a reign of seven
years and seven days. He was brave with a sternness of nature, which,
under the influence of wine, amounted to fierceness. His after-death
title is Sultán-i-Gházi the Warrior King.

[Mahmúd I. (Begada), 1459-1513.] On the death of Kutb-ud-dín Sháh,
the nobles raised to the throne his uncle Dáúd, son of Áhmed Sháh. But
as Dáúd appointed low-born men to high offices and committed other
foolish acts, he was deposed, and in A.D. 1459 his half-brother Fateh
Khán the son of Muhammad Sháh, son of Áhmed Sháh by Bíbi Mughli a
daughter of Jám Júna of Thatha in Sindh, was seated on the throne at
the age of little more than thirteen with the title of Mahmúd Sháh.

The close connection of Fateh Khán with the saintly Sháh Álam
is a favourite topic with Gujarát historians. According to the
Mirat-i-Sikandari (Persian Text, 66-70) of his two daughters Jám
Júna intended Bíbi Mughli the more beautiful for the Saint and Bíbi
Mirghi the less comely for the Sultán. By bribing the Jám's envoys
the king secured the prettier sister. The enraged Saint was consoled
by his father who said: My son, to you will come both the cow and the
calf. After Muhammad II.'s death, fear of Kutb-ud-dín's designs against
the young Fateh Khán forced Bíbi Mughli to seek safety with her sister,
and on her sister's death she married the Saint. Kutb-ud-dín made
several attempts to seize Fateh Khán. But by the power of the Saint
when Kutb-ud-dín attempted to seize him, Fateh Khán in body as well
as in dress became a girl. According to one account Kutb-ud-dín met
his death in an attempt to carry off Fateh Khán. As he rode into the
Saint's quarter Death in the form of a mad camel met the king. The
king struck at the phantom, and his sword cleaving the air gashed
his knee. This was the Saint's sword, which against his will, for he
knew it would be the death of the king, Kutb-ud-dín forced Sháh Álam
to bind round him before the battle of Kapadvanj.

[Defeats a Conspiracy, 1459.] The death of his uncle, the late Sultán
Dáúd, who had become a religious devotee, relieved Fateh Khán of one
source of danger. Shortly after certain of the nobles including Seiful
Mulk, Kabír-ud-dín Sultáni surnamed Akd-ul-Mulk, Burhán-ul-Mulk and
Hisám-ul-Mulk represented to the Sultán that the minister Shaâbán
Imád-ul-Mulk contemplated treason and wished to set his son on the
throne. Having seized and imprisoned the minister in the Bhadra citadel
and set five hundred of their trusted retainers as guards over him,
the rebels retired to their homes. At nightfall Abdulláh, the chief
of the elephant stables, going to the young Sultán represented to him
that the nobles who had imprisoned Imád-ul-Mulk were the real traitors
and had determined to place Habíb Khán, an uncle of the Sultán's, on
the throne. The Sultán consulting his mother and some of his faithful
friends ordered Abdulláh at daybreak to equip all his elephants in
full armour and draw them up in the square before the Bhadra. He
then seated himself on the throne and in a voice of feigned anger
ordered one of the courtiers to bring out Shaâbán Imád-ul-Mulk,
that he might wreak his vengeance upon him. As these orders were
not obeyed the Sultán rose, and walking up the Bhadra called: "Bring
out Shaâbán!" The guards brought forth Imád-ul-Mulk, and the Sultán
ordered his fetters to be broken. Some of the nobles' retainers made
their submission to the Sultán, others fled and hid themselves. In
the morning, hearing what had happened, the refractory nobles marched
against the Sultán. Many advised the Sultán to cross the Sábarmati
by the postern gate and retire from the city, and, after collecting
an army, to march against the nobles. Giving no ear to these counsels
the young Sultán ordered Abdulláh to charge the advancing nobles with
his six hundred elephants. The charge dispersed the malcontents who
fled and either hid themselves in the city or betook themselves to
the country. Some were killed, some were trampled by the Sultán's
orders under the elephants' feet, and one was pardoned. [771] His
religious ardour, his love of justice, his bravery, and his wise
measures entitle Mahmúd to the highest place among the Gujarát
kings. One of the measures which the Mirat-i-Sikandari specially
notices is his continuance of land grants to the son of the holder,
and in cases where there was no male issue of half the grant to the
daughter. His firm policy of never ousting the landholder except for
proved oppression or exaction was productive of such prosperity that
the revenue increased two, three and in some cases tenfold. The roads
were safe from freebooters and trade was secure. A rule forbidding
soldiers to borrow money at interest is favourably noticed. [Improves
the Soldiery, 1459-1461.] A special officer was appointed to make
advances to needy soldiers with the power to recover from their pay
in fixed instalments. [772] Mahmúd also devoted much attention to the
culture of fruit trees. [773] In A.D. 1461, or A.D. 1462 according to
Farishtah, Nizám Sháh Báhmani (A.D. 1461-1463), king of the Dakhan,
whose country had been invaded by Sultán Mahmúd Khilji of Málwa,
applied for help to the Gujarát king. [Helps the King of the Dakhan,
1461.] Mahmúd Sháh at once started to Nizám Sháh's aid, and on his way
receiving another equally pressing letter from the Dakhan sovereign,
and being joined by the Báhmani general Khwájáh Jehán Gáwán, he
pushed on with all speed by way of Burhánpur. [774] When Sultán Mahmúd
Khilji heard of his approach, he retired to his own country by way of
Gondwána, [775] from thirst and from the attacks of the Gonds, losing
5000 to 6000 men. The king of Gujarát, after receiving the thanks of
the Dakhan sovereign, returned to his own dominions. In A.D. 1462
Sultán Mahmúd Khilji made another incursion into the Dakhan at the
head of 90,000 horse, plundering and laying waste the country as far
as Daulatábád. Again the Dakhan sovereign applied for help to Mahmúd
Sháh, and on hearing of Mahmúd's advance the Málwa Sultán retired a
second time to his own dominions. Mahmúd Sháh now wrote to the Málwa
Sultán to desist from harassing the Dakhan, threatening, in case of
refusal, to march at once upon Mándu. His next expedition was against
the pirate zamíndárs of the hill fort of Barûr and the bandar of Dûn
or Dáhánu, whose fort he took, and after imposing an annual tribute
allowed the chief to continue to hold his hundred villages. [776]

[Expedition against Junágadh, 1467.] Mahmúd Sháh next turned
his thoughts to the conquest of the mountain citadel of Girnár in
central Káthiáváda. [777] In A.D. 1467 he made an attack on the fort
of Junágadh, and receiving the submission of Ráv Mandlik, the local
ruler, returned to his capital. In the following year, hearing that
the Junágadh chief continued to visit his idol temple in state with
a golden umbrella and other ensigns of royalty, Mahmúd despatched
an army to Junágadh, and the chief sent the obnoxious umbrella to
the king, accompanied by fitting presents. In A.D. 1469 Mahmúd once
more sent an army to ravage Sorath, with the intention of finally
conquering both Junágadh and Girnár. While Mahmúd was on the march
the Ráv Mandlik suddenly joined him, and asking why the Sultán was
so bent on his destruction when he had committed no fault, agreed
to do whatever Mahmúd might command. The king replied there is no
fault like infidelity, and ordered the Ráv to embrace Islám. The
chief, now thoroughly alarmed, fled by night and made his way into
Girnár. [Capture of Girnár, 1472.] In A.D. 1472-73 after a siege of
nearly two years, forced by the failure of his stores, he quitted
the fort and handing the keys to the king, repeated after him the
Muhammadan profession of faith. Though the Ráv's life was spared
Sorath from this date became a crown possession, and was governed
by an officer appointed by the king and stationed at Junágadh. At
the close of the war Mahmúd Sháh repaired the fort Jehánpanáh, the
present outer or town wall of Junágadh, and, charmed with the beauty
of the neighbourhood, settled sayads and learned men at Junágadh and
other towns in Sorath. He induced the nobles to build houses, himself
raised a palace and made the new city his capital under the name of
Mustafábad and enforced his claims as overlord on all the neighbouring
chiefs. It is true that in the times of Áhmed Sháh these chieftains,
including even the Junágadh Ráv himself, had paid tribute. But Mahmúd
established Áhmedábád rule so firmly that the duty of collecting
the tribute was entrusted to an officer permanently settled in the
country. The author of the Mirat-i-Sikandari dilates on the dense
woods round Junágadh, full of mango, ráen, jámbu, gúlar, ámli, and
áonla [778] trees, and notes that this forest tract was inhabited by
a wild race of men called Khánts. [779]

[Disturbances in Chámpáner, 1472.] During Mahmúd Sháh's prolonged
absence from his capital, Malik Jamál-ud-dín was appointed governor
of Áhmedábád, with the title of Muháfiz Khán that is Care-taker. At
this time Jesingh, son of Gangádás the chief of Chámpáner, harassed
the country round Pávágad. The king appointed Bahá-ul-Mulk, who had
the title of Imád-ul-Mulk, to the command of Sankheda; Malik Sárang
Kiwám-ul-Mulk to the command of Godhra; and Táj Khán bin Sálár to the
command of Norkha and Dákhna on the Máhi. In consequence of these
precautions Jesingh abstained from rebellion. At this time the Ráv
Mandlik received the title of Khán Jahán, and lands were bestowed on
him, while the golden idols, which had been taken from the Junágadh
temples, were broken and distributed among the soldiers.

[Conquest of Kachh.] Mahmúd Sháh's next expedition was against
the turbulent inhabitants of the confines of Sindh. These were
Jádejás, though they are described as Rájputs of the Sumra and Sodha
tribes. [780] They appear to have readily submitted, and to have
voluntarily sent men to Junágadh to be instructed in Islám and to
settle in Gujarát. Shortly afterwards they again became troublesome,
and the king advancing into Kachh completely defeated them. About
this time a learned man, Mulla Mahmúd Samarkandi, on his way from
the Dakhan to Central Asia, complained to the king that he had been
robbed by the pirates of Jagat or Dwárka. [781] On hearing of this
outrage Mahmúd Sháh marched to [Jagat Destroyed.] Jagat, took the fort,
and destroyed the idol temples. The pirates, in the first instance,
retired to the island of Shankhodára or Bet, but from this, too, after
a stout resistance they were driven with great slaughter. The king
built a mosque at Jagat, entrusted the government to Farhat-ul-Mulk,
and himself returned to Junágadh. Before this Dwárka had never been
conquered. Bhím, the Rájá of Dwárka, was sent to Muháfiz Khán, the
governor of Áhmedábád, with orders that he was to be hewn in pieces
and a piece fastened to every gate of the city. After settling the
affairs of Sorath, the king turned his face towards Áhmedábád. On the
way hearing that a fleet of Malabár craft were annoying the Gujarát
ports, he marched to Gogha, equipped a fleet to oppose the pirates,
and stopping at Cambay returned to Áhmedábád.

[Conspiracy, 1480.] In A.D. 1480, when Mahmúd Sháh was at Junágadh,
Khudáwand Khán and others, who were weary of the king's constant
warfare, incited his eldest son Áhmed to assume royal power. But
Imád-ul-Mulk, by refusing to join, upset their plans, and on the king's
return the conspiracy was stamped out. In the previous year (A.D. 1479)
Mahmúd Sháh sent an army to ravage Chámpáner, which he was determined
to conquer. About this time, hearing that the neighbourhood was
infested with robbers, he founded the city of Mehmúdábád on the banks
of the Vátrak, about eighteen miles south of Áhmedábád. In A.D. 1482
there was a partial famine in Gujarát, and the Chámpáner country being
exempt from scarcity the commandant of Morámli or Rasúlábád, a post in
the Gáckwár's Sáonli district on the Chámpáner frontier, made several
forays across the border. In return the chief attacked the commandant
and defeated him, killing most of his men and capturing two elephants
and several horses. On hearing this Mahmúd Sháh set out for Baroda with
a powerful army. When Mahmúd reached Baroda the Rával of [War against
Chámpáner, 1482-1484.] Chámpáner, becoming alarmed, sent ambassadors
and sued for forgiveness. The king rejected his overtures, saying:
'Except the sword and the dagger no message shall pass between me and
you.' [782] The Rával made preparations for a determined resistance,
and sent messengers to summon Ghiás-ud-dín Khilji of Málwa to his
aid. To prevent this junction Mahmúd Sháh entrusted the siege to his
nobles and marched to Dohad, on which Sultán Ghiás-ud-dín withdrew
to Mándu. On his return from Dohad the Sultán began building a Jáma
Mosque at Chámpáner to show that he would not leave the place till he
had taken the hill-fort of Pávágad. After the siege had lasted more
than twenty months (April 1483-December 1484), the Musalmáns noticed
that for an hour or two in the morning most of the Rájputs were off
duty bathing and dressing. A morning assault was planned and the first
gate carried. Then Malik Ayáz Sultáni finding a practicable breach
passed through with some of his men and took the great gate. The
Rával and his Rájputs, throwing their women children and valuables
into a huge fire, rushed out in a fierce but unavailing charge. [783]

[Capture of Pávágad, 1484.] The Rával and his minister Dúngarshi fell
wounded into the conqueror's hands, and, on refusing to embrace Islám,
were put to death. The Rával's son, who was entrusted to Seif-ul-Mulk,
and instructed by him in the Muhammadan religion, afterwards, in
the reign of Muzaffar Sháh (A.D. 1523-1526), was ennobled by the
title of Nizám-ul-Mulk. On the capture of Pávágad in A.D. 1484,
Mahmúd Sháh built a wall round the town of Chámpáner, and made it
his capital under the name of Muhammadábád. Under Mahmúd's orders
the neighbourhood became stocked with mangoes, pomegranates, figs,
grapes, sugarcane, plantains, oranges, custard apples, khirnis or ráens
(Mimusops indica or hexandra), jackfruit, and cocoapalms, as well as
with roses, chrysanthemums, jasmins, champás, and sweet pandanus. A
sandal grove near Chámpáner is said to have had trees large enough to
help the Musalmán nobles to build their mansions. At the instance of
the Sultán a Khurásáni beautified one of the gardens with fountains
and cascades. A Gujaráti named Hálur learning the principle improved
on his master's design in a garden about four miles west of Chámpáner,
which in his honour still bears the name Hálol. [784]

In Mahmúd's reign an instance is mentioned of the form of compensation
known as valtar. Some merchants bringing horses and other goods for
sale from Irák and Khurásán were plundered in Sirohi limits. The king
caused them to give in writing the price of their horses and stuffs,
and paying them from his own treasury recovered the amount from the
Rája of Sirohi.

[The Khándesh Succession, 1508.] In A.D. 1494-95 Mahmúd went against
Bahádur Khán Gíláni, a vassal of the Bahmanis, who from Goa and Dábhol
[785] had so harassed the Gujarát harbours that, from the failure of
the supply of betelnut, coriander seed had to be eaten with betel
leaves. The Bahmani Sultán, fearing the consequences to himself,
marched against Bahádur Khán, and, capturing him alive, struck off
his head, and sent it to the Gujarát monarch, who returned to his
own country. In A.D. 1499-1500, hearing that Násir-ud-dín of Málwa
had killed his father Ghiás-ud-dín and seated himself on the throne,
the Sultán prepared to advance against him, but was appeased by
Násir-ud-dín's humble attitude. The next seven years passed without
any warlike expedition. In A.D. 1507, near Daman on his way to Cheul,
Mahmúd heard of the victory gained at Cheul over the Portuguese by the
Gujarát squadron under Malik Ayáz Sultáni, in concert with the Turkish
fleet. [786] In A.D. 1508 Mahmúd succeeded in placing his nephew Mirán
Muhammad Ádil Khán Fárúki on the throne of Ásir-Burhánpur. From 1508
Mahmúd remained at his capital till his death in December A.D. 1513
at the age of sixty-seven years and three months, after a reign of
fifty-four years and one month. Mahmúd was buried at Sarkhej, [787]
and received the after-death title of Khúdáigán-i-Halím or the Meek
Lord. Immediately before his death Sultán Mahmúd was informed that
Sháh Ismáil Safawi of Persia had sent him a friendly embassy headed by
Yádgár Beg Kazil-básh. As the Kazil-báshes were known to be Shíahs the
Sultán, who was a staunch Sunni, prayed that he might not be forced to
see a Shíah's face during his last days. His prayer was heard. He died
before the Persian embassy entered the city. [788] During the last
days of Sultán Mahmúd, Sayad Muhammad of Jaunpur, who claimed to be
the Mahdi or Messiah, came from Jaunpur and lodged in Tájkhán Sálár's
mosque near the Jamálpur gate of Áhmedábád. His sermons drew crowds,
and were so persuasive that he gained a large body of followers,
who believed his eloquence to be due to hál or inspiration. Mahmúd's
ministers persuaded him not to see the Jaunpur preacher.

Mahmúd Begada's court was adorned by several pious and high-minded
nobles. In life they vied with one another in generous acts; and
after death, according to the Persian poet Urfi, they left their
traces in the characters and carvings of stone walls and marble
piles. First among these nobles the Mirat-i-Sikandari (Persian Text,
132, 142) mentions Dáwar-ul-Mulk, whose god-fearing administration
made his estates so prosperous that they were coveted by princes of
the blood. As Thánadár of Amron in north Káthiáváda, he spread the
light of Islám from Morvi to Bhúj, and after his death his fame as a
spirit-ruling guardian drew hosts of sick and possessed to his shrine
near Morvi. The second was Malik Ayáz, governor of Diu, who built the
strong fortress afterwards reconstructed by the Portuguese. He also
built a tower on an under-water rock, and from the tower drew a massive
iron chain across the mouth of the harbour. A substantial bridge
over the creek, that runs through the island of Diu, was afterwards
destroyed by the Portuguese. The third was Khudáwand Khán Alím, the
founder of Alímpura a suburb to the south of Áhmedábád, adorned with
a mosque of sandstone and marble. He introduced the cultivation of
melons figs and sugarcane into Gujarát from Bijápur. The fourth was
Imád-ul-Mulk Asas who founded Ísanpur, a suburb between Sháh Álam's
suburb of Islámpur and Batwa, and planted along the road groves of
khirnis and mangoes. The fifth was Tájkhán Sálár, so loved of his
peers that after his death none of them would accept his title. The
sixth was Malik Sárang Kiwám-ul-Mulk, a Rájput by birth, the founder of
the suburb of Sárangpur and its mosque to the east of Áhmedábád. The
seventh and eighth were the Khurásáni brothers Aâzam and Moâzzam, who
built a cistern, a mosque, and a tomb between Áhmedábád and Sarkhej.

Besides Khalíl Khán, who succeeded him, Mahmúd had three sons: Muhammad
Kála, Ápá Khán, and Áhmed Khán. Kála, son of Ráni Rúp Manjhri died
during his father's lifetime as did his mother, who was buried in Mánek
Chauk in Áhmedábád in the building known as the Ráni's Hazíra. The
second son Ápá Khán was caught trespassing in a noble's harím, and
was ordered by the Sultán to be poisoned. The third son was the Áhmed
Khán whom Khudáwand Khán sought to raise to the throne during Sultán
Mahmúd's lifetime.

[Muzaffar II. 1513-1526.] Muhammad was succeeded by Khalíl Khán, the
son of Ráni Hírábái the daughter of a Rájput chieftain named Nága Rána
who lived on the bank of the Mahi. On ascending the throne, at the age
of twenty-seven, Khalíl adopted the title of Muzaffar Sháh. For some
time before his father's death, Prince Khalíl Khán had been living at
Baroda and shortly after his accession he visited that neighbourhood,
and founded a town which he named Daulatábád. In A.D. 1514 Ráv Bhím,
the son of Ráv Bhán of Ídar, [Expedition against Ídar, 1514.] defeated
Ain-ul-Mulk, governor of Pátan, who was coming to Áhmedábád to pay
his respects to the king. This officer had turned aside to punish the
Ráv for some disturbance he had created, but failing in his purpose,
was himself defeated. On the approach of Muzaffar Sháh, Ídar was
abandoned by the Ráv, who made his peace with difficulty and only
by agreeing to pay a heavy tribute. Meanwhile the king marched to
Godhra, and so to Málwa by way of Dohad, whose fort he caused to be
repaired, and soon after went on to Dhár. After a short stay in Málwa,
thinking it mean to take advantage of the distracted condition of
Mahmúd of Málwa, who was at war with his nobles, Muzaffar returned
to Muhammadábád (Chámpáner). At this time Ráimal, nephew of the late
Ráv Bhím of Ídar, expelled the Ráv's son Bhármal by the aid of his
father-in-law Rána Sánga of Chitor, and succeeded to the chieftainship
of Ídar. The king was displeased at the interference of the Rána, and
directed Nizám Khán, the governor of Ahmednagar, to expel Ráimal and
reinstate Bhármal. Nizám Khán took Ídar and gave it to Bhármal. Ráimal
betook himself to the hills where Nizám Khán incautiously pursuing and
engaging him lost many men. When the rains were over the Sultán visited
Ídar. Shortly after, Nizám Khán, the governor of Ahmednagar, fell sick
and was called to court. He left Ídar in charge of Zahír-ul-Mulk at
the head of a hundred horse. Ráimal made a sudden raid on Ídar and
killed Zahír-ul-Mulk and twenty-seven of his men. On hearing of this
reverse Sultán Muzaffar ordered Nizám Khán to destroy Bíjápur. [789]
[Disturbances in Málwa, 1517.] In A.D. 1517, the nobles of Málwa
besought Muzaffar's interference, alleging that the Hindu minister
Medáni Rái was planning to depose the Málwa Sultán, Mahmúd Khilji,
and usurp the throne. Muzaffar Sháh promised to come to their help,
and shortly after Sultán Mahmúd Khilji, escaping from the surveillance
of Medáni Rái, himself sought the aid of the Gujarát monarch. In
A.D. 1518 Muzaffar Sháh marched by Godhra into Málwa, and on his
arrival at Dhár, that town was evacuated by Medáni Rái. The Gujarát
king next besieged Mándu and Medáni Rái summoned the Chitor Rána to his
aid. [Capture of Mándu, 1518.] When the Rána had reached Sárangpur,
Muzaffar Sháh detaching a force caused the Rána to retire, while the
Gujarát soldiers exerted themselves so strenuously that they captured
Mándu, recovering the girdle which Kutb-ud-dín had lost at the battle
of Kapadvanj. This conquest virtually placed Málwa in Muzaffar's power,
but he honourably restored the kingdom to Sultán Mahmúd Khilji, and,
withdrawing to Gujarát, proceeded to Muhammadábád. In A.D. 1519, news
was received of the defeat and capture of Sultán Mahmúd Khilji by
the Rána of Chitor. Muzaffar Sháh sent a force to protect Mándu. But
the Rána, who distinguished himself by releasing the Sultán of Málwa
and keeping his son in his stead as a hostage, enjoyed continued good
fortune. Some time before these events a bhát or bard in the presence
of Nizám Khán, the governor of Ídar, boasted that the Rána of [War with
Chitor, 1519.] Chitor would never fail to help Rána Ráimal of Ídar. The
angry governor said 'Whose dog is Rána Sánga to help Ráimal while we
are here.' Nizám Khán called a dog Sánga, chained him in the fort, and
dared the Rána to carry him away. His successes enabled Sánga to answer
the challenge. In consequence of dissensions at head-quarters Nizám
Khán withdrew to Ahmednagar leaving a small garrison in Ídar. When Rána
Sánga appeared before Ídar the garrison resisted but were slain to a
man. The Rána advanced to Ahmednagar and severely defeated Nizám Khán
who withdrew to Áhmedábád, while the Rána plundered Vishálnagar. [790]
In A.D. 1521, Malik Ayáz Sultáni, the governor of [The Rána of Chitor
Submits, 1521.] Sorath, was sent with a large and carefully equipped
force to revenge this inroad. Dissensions between Malik Ayáz and the
Gujarát nobles prevented this expedition doing more than burn and
despoil both Dungarpur and Bánsváda. Muzaffar Sháh, greatly displeased
with the result, was preparing to march against Chitor, when he was
dissuaded by a submissive embassy from that chief, who sent his son
to Áhmedábád with valuable presents for the king. Shortly afterwards,
on the death of Malik Ayáz, Muzaffar Sháh confirmed his elder son Malik
Is-hák in his father's rank and possessions. Malik Is-hák remained in
Sorath which was confirmed as his jágir. In the following year the
Sultán went about his dominions strengthening his frontier posts,
especially the fort of Modása, which he rebuilt. About A.D. 1524
prince Báhádur Khán, ostensibly dissatisfied with the smallness of
his estates but really to remove himself from the jealousy of his
brother Sikandar who being appointed heir-apparent was seeking his
life, left Gujarát and withdrew to Hindustán. King Muzaffar, after
formally appointing his son Sikandar Khán his heir, [Dies, 1526.] died
at Áhmedábád in A.D. 1526, after a reign of fourteen years and nine
months. Muzaffar was buried in the shrine of Sheikh Áhmed Khattu
at Sarkhej near his father's grave. He was the most learned and one
of the most pious of the Áhmedábád Sultáns. So extreme an abstainer
was he that not only during his whole life did he eschew intoxicating
drugs and liquor but he never again rode a favourite horse because the
horse was cured by a draught of wine. He was an accomplished musician,
a finished horseman, a practised swordsman, and withal so modest and
humble in his dress and temper that observing once to a favourite
page how simple and yet graceful his own turban was the boy laughed:
'Ay, if the turbans of Mullahs and Bohoras are graceful, then is
your Majesty's.' The Sultán said 'I should have been proud to have my
turban likened to a Mullah's, why compare it with the headdress of a
schismatic Bohora.' Muzaffar was careful never to pain the feelings of
those around him. He suspected Kiwám-ul-Mulk who was in charge of his
drinking water but contented himself with breathing over the water one
of the verses of the Kurâán which make poison harmless. [791] During
his reign cultivation increased so much in Jháláváda that it became
necessary to reserve certain waste land for pasture. In 1526 the rains
held off so long that famine began to rage. The Sultán exclaimed,
'Oh Allah! If thou scourgest the country for the sins of its king
take his life and spare thy creatures.' The prayer was heard and the
soul of the guardian Sultán passed in a flood of gracious rain. [792]

[Sikandar, 1526.] After Sikandar Sháh had been in power a few months
he was murdered by Imád-ul-Mulk Khush Kadam, who seated a younger
brother of Sikandar's, named Násir Khán, on the throne with the title
of [Mahmúd II. 1526.] Mahmúd II. and governed on his behalf. The only
event of Sikandar's reign was the destruction of an army sent against
his brother Latíf Khán who was helped by Rána Bhím of Munga. [793]
The nobles deserted Imád-ul-Mulk's cause, and prince [Bahádur,
1527-1536.] Báhádur Khán, returning to Gujarát from Hindustán,
was joined by many supporters prominent among whom was Táj Khán,
proprietor of Dhandhuka. Bahádur marched at once on Chámpáner, captured
and executed Imád-ul-Mulk and poisoning Násir Khán ascended the throne
in A.D. 1527 with the title of Bahádur Sháh. His brother Latíf Khán,
aided by Rája Bhím of the Kohistan or hill land of Pál, [794] now
asserted his claim to the throne. He was defeated, and fell wounded
into the hands of the Gujarát army and died of his wounds and was
buried at Hálol. Rája Bhím was slain. As Bhím's successor Ráisingh
plundered Dohad, a large force was sent against him, commanded
by Táj Khán, who laid waste Ráisingh's country and dismantled his
forts. Soon after Bahádur Sháh visited Cambay, and found that Malik
Is-hák the governor of Sorath had, in the interests of the Portuguese,
attempted to seize Diu but had been repulsed by the Gujarát admiral
Mahmúd Áka. The Sultán entrusted Diu to Kiwám-ul-Mulk and Junágadh to
Mujáhid Khán Bhíkan and returned to Áhmedábád. In 1527 he enforced
tribute from Ídar and the neighbouring country. During one of his
numerous expeditions he went to hunt in Nándod and received the
homage of the Rája. [Portuguese Intrigues, 1526.] As the Portuguese
were endeavouring to establish themselves on the coast of Sorath,
and, if possible, to obtain Diu, the king was constantly at Cambay
Diu and Gogha to frustrate their attempts, and he now directed the
construction of the fortress of Broach. At this time Muhammad Khán,
ruler of Asír and Burhánpur, requested Bahádur's aid on behalf of
Imád-ul-Mulk, ruler of Berár. Bahádur Sháh started at once and at
Nandurbár was joined by Muhammad Khán Asíri, and thence proceeded
to Burhánpur, where he was met by Imád Sháh from Gávalgad. [Khándesh
Affairs, 1528.] After certain successes he made peace between Burhán
Nizám Sháh and Imád Sháh Gávali, and returned to Gujarát. Jám Fírúz
the ruler of Tatha in Sindh now sought refuge with Bahádur Sháh
from the oppression either of the Ghoris or of the Mughals and was
hospitably received. In A.D. 1528 Bahádur made an expedition into the
Dakhan which ended in a battle at Daulatábád. The issue of this battle
seems to have been unfavourable as hardly any reference to the campaign
remains. Next year (A.D. 1529) at the request of Jaâfar or Khizr Khán,
son of Imád Sháh Gávali, who was sent to Gujarát to solicit Bahádur's
help, he again marched for the Dakhan. As he passed through Muler
Biharji the Rája of Báglán gave him his daughter in marriage and in
return received the title of Bahr Khán. From Báglán Bahr Khán was
told off to ravage Cheul which by this time had fallen into the hands
of the Portuguese. Bahádur himself advanced to Ahmednagar, took the
fort and destroyed many of the buildings. Purandhar also was sacked
of its stores of gold. [795] From Ahmednagar Bahádur Sháh passed to
Burhánpur, and there his general Kaisar Khán gained a victory over
the united forces of Nizám Sháh, Malik Beríd, and Ain-ul-Mulk. After
having the public sermon read in his name both in Ahmednagar and in
Burhánpur Bahádur returned to Gujarát and for some time refrained
from interfering in the affairs of the Dakhan.

[Turks at Diu, 1526-1530.] Between A.D. 1526 and 1530 certain Turks
under one Mústafa came to Gujarát, traders according to one account
according to another part of a Turkish fleet expected to act against
the Portuguese. Diu was assigned them as a place of residence and the
command of the island was granted to Malik Túghán, son of Malik Ayáz,
the former governor. In A.D. 1530 the king marched to Nágor, and gave
an audience both to Prathiráj Rája of Dúngarpur and to the ambassadors
from Rána Ratansi of Chitor. The Rána's ambassadors complained
of encroachments on Chitor by Mahmúd of Málwa. Mahmúd promised to
appear before Bahádur to explain the alleged encroachments. Bahádur
waited. At last as Mahmúd failed to attend Bahádur said he would go
and meet Mahmúd. He invested Mándu and received with favour certain
deserters from Mahmúd's army. The fortress fell and Sultán Mahmúd and
his seven sons were captured. The success of the siege was due to
Bahádur's personal prowess. [Capture of Mándu, 1530.] He scaled an
almost inaccessible height and sweeping down from it with a handful
of men took the fort, a feat which for daring and dash is described
as unsurpassed in the history of Musalmán Gujarát. [796] After passing
the rainy season at Mándu Bahádur Sháh went to Burhánpur to visit his
nephew Mirán Muhammad Sháh. At Burhánpur Bahádur under the influence
of the great priest-statesman Sháh Táhir, was reconciled with Burhán
Nizám and gave him the royal canopy he had taken from Málwa. Bahádur
offered Sháh Táhir the post of minister. Sháh Táhir declined saying he
must make a pilgrimage to Makkah. He retired to Ahmednagar and there
converted Burhán Nizám Sháh to the Shíâh faith. [797] In the same year,
hearing that Mánsingji, Rája of Halvad, [798] had killed the commandant
of Dasáda Bahádur despatched Khán Khánán against him. Víramgám and
Mándal were reft from the Jhála chieftains, and ever after formed part
of the crown dominions. When Sultán Mahmúd Khilji and his sons were
being conveyed to the fortress of Chámpáner, Ráisingh, Rája of Pál,
endeavoured to rescue them. The attempt failed, and the prisoners were
put to death by their guards. In A.D. 1531, on Bahádur's return from
Burhánpur to Dhár, hearing that Silehdi the Rájput chief of Ráisin in
east Málwa kept in captivity certain Muhammadan women who had belonged
to the harím of Sultán Násir-ud-dín of Málwa, Bahádur marched against
him and forced him to surrender and embrace Islám. The chief secretly
sent to the Rána of Chitor for aid and delayed handing over Ráisin. On
learning this Bahádur despatched a force to keep Chitor in check and
pressed the siege. At his own request, Silehdi was sent to persuade
the garrison to surrender. But their reproaches stung him so sharply,
that, joining with them, and after burning their women and children,
they sallied forth sword in hand and were all slain. Ráisin fell into
Bahádur's hands, and this district together with those of Bhilsa and
Chanderi were entrusted to the government of Sultán Álam Lodhi. The
king now went to Gondwána to hunt elephants, and, after capturing many,
employed his army in reducing Gágraun and other minor fortresses. [799]
In A.D. 1532 he advanced against Chitor, but raised the siege on
receiving an enormous ransom. Shortly afterwards his troops took the
strong fort of Rantanbhur. [800] About this time on receipt of news
that the Portuguese were usurping authority the Sultán repaired to
Diu. Before he arrived the Portuguese had taken to flight, leaving
behind them an enormous gun which the Sultán ordered to be dragged
to Chámpáner.

[Quarrel with Humáyún, 1532.] Before A.D. 1532 was over Bahádur
Sháh quarrelled with Humáyún, emperor of Delhi. The original
ground of quarrel was that Bahádur Sháh had sheltered Sultán
Muhammad Zamán Mírza the grandson of a daughter of the emperor Bábar
(A.D. 1482-1530). Humáyún's anger was increased by an insolent answer
from the Gujarát king. Without considering that he had provoked a
powerful enemy, Bahádur Sháh again laid siege to Chitor, and though
he heard that Humáyún had arrived at Gwálior, he would not desist
from the siege. [Fall of Chitor, 1535.] In March 1535 Chitor fell
into the hands of the Gujarát king but near Mandasúr his army was
shortly afterwards routed by Humáyún. According to one account,
the failure of the Gujarát army was due to Bahádur and his nobles
being spell-bound by looking at a heap of salt and some cloth soaked
in indigo which were mysteriously left before Bahádur's tent by an
unknown elephant. The usual and probably true explanation is that
Rúmi Khán the Turk, head of the Gujarát artillery, betrayed Bahádur's
interest. [801] Still though Rúmi Khán's treachery may have had a share
in Bahádur's defeat it seems probable that in valour, discipline,
and tactics the Gujarát army was inferior to the Mughals. [Mughal
Conquest of Gujarát, 1535.] Bahádur Sháh, unaccustomed to defeat,
lost heart and fled to Mándu, which fortress was speedily taken by
Humáyún. From Mándu the king fled to Chámpáner, and finally took refuge
in Diu. Chámpáner fell to Humáyún, and the whole of Gujarát, except
Sorath, came under his rule. At this time Sher Sháh Súr revolted,
in Bihár and Jaunpur, and Humáyún returned to Agra to oppose him
leaving his brother Hindál Mírza in Áhmedábád, Kásam Beg in Broach,
and Yádgár Násir Mírza in Pátan. [Are Driven Out, 1536.] As soon as
Humáyún departed, the country rose against the Mughals, and his old
nobles requested the king to join them. Bahádur joined them, and,
defeating the Mughals at Kaníj near Mahmúdábád, expelled them from
Gujarát. During Humáyún's time of success Bahádur Sháh, being forced to
court the [The Portuguese at Diu, 1536.] Portuguese, had granted them
leave to erect a factory in Diu. Instead of a factory the Portuguese
built a fort. When he recovered his kingdom, Bahádur, repenting of
his alliance with the Portuguese, went to Sorath to persuade an
army of Portuguese, whom he had asked to come to his assistance,
to return to Goa. When the Portuguese arrived at Diu five or six
thousand strong the Sultán hoping to get rid of them by stratagem,
repaired to Diu and endeavoured to get the viceroy into his power. The
viceroy excused himself, and in return invited the king to visit his
ship. [Death of Bahádur, 1536.] Bahádur agreed, and on his way back
was attacked and slain, in the thirty-first year of his life and the
eleventh of his reign. According to the author of the Mirat-i-Sikandari
the reason of Bahádur's assassination was that a paper from him to
the kings of the Dakhan, inviting them to join him in an alliance
against the Portuguese, had fallen into the hands of the Portuguese
viceroy. Whatever may have been the provocation or the intention, the
result seems to show that while both sides had treacherous designs
neither party was able to carry out his original plan, and the end
was unpremeditated, hurried on by mutual suspicions. [802] Up to the
defeat of Sultán Bahádur by Humáyún, the power of Gujarát was at its
height. Cadets of noble Rájput houses, Prithiráj, the nephew of Rána
Sánga of Chitor, and Narsingh Deva the cousin of the Rája of Gwálior,
were proud to enrol themselves as the Sultán's vassals. The Rája of
Baglána readily gave Bahádur Sháh his daughter. Jám Fírúz of Tatha in
Sindh and the sons of Bahlúl Lodhi were suppliants at his court. Málwa
was a dependency of Gujarát and the Nizám Sháhis of Ahmednagar and
Nasírkhan of Burhánpur acknowledged him as overlord, while the Fárúkis
of Khándesh were dependent on Bahádur's constant help. [803]

[Muhammad II. (Ásíri), 1536.] On the death of king Bahádur in
A.D. 1536, the nobles of Gujarát invited his sister's son Muhammad Sháh
Ásíri to succeed him. Muhammad Sháh died shortly after his accession,
and the nobles conferred the crown on Mahmúd Khán, son of Latíf Khán,
brother of Bahádur Sháh, and he ascended the throne in A.D. 1536,
when only eleven years of age. The government of the country was
carried on by Darya Khán and Imád-ul-Mulk, who kept the king under
strict surveillance. Darya Khán resolved to overthrow Imád-ul-Mulk
and acquire supreme power. With this object he obtained an order from
the king, whom, on the pretence of a hunting expedition, he removed
from Áhmedábád, directing Imád-ul-Mulk to retire to his estates in
Jháláváda. Six months later, taking the Sultán with him, Darya Khán
led an army into Jháláváda, and defeating Imád-ul-Mulk in a battle at
Pátri, fifty two miles west of Áhmedábád, pursued him to Burhánpur,
and there defeated Imád-ul-Mulk's ally the ruler of Khándesh and
forced Imád-ul-Mulk to fly to Málwa. [804] After this success Darya
Khán became absorbed in pleasure, and resigned the management of the
kingdom to Álam Khán Lodhi. The king, dissembling his dissatisfaction
at the way he was treated, pretended to take no interest in affairs
of state. Álam Khán Lodhi, seeing the carelessness of Darya Khán,
began to entertain ambitious designs, and retiring to his estate of
Dhandhúka invited the king to join him. Mahmúd Sháh, believing him
to be in earnest, contrived to escape from surveillance and joined
Álam Khán. [Escapes from Control.] On discovering the king's flight,
Darya Khán raised to the throne a descendant of Áhmed Sháh by the
title of Muzaffar Sháh, and striking coin in his name set out with
an army towards Dhandhúka. Álam Khán and the king met him at Dhúr in
Dholka, and a battle was fought in which Mahmúd and Álam Khán were
defeated. The king fled to Ránpur, and thence to Páliád, while Álam
Khán fled to Sádra. Darya Khán occupied Dhandhuka; but his men,
dissatisfied at being placed in opposition to the king, rapidly
deserted, some joining Álam Khan and some Mahmúd Sháh. Soon after the
king joined Álam Khan and marched on Áhmedábád, whither Darya Khán
had preceded them. The citizens closed the gates against Darya Khán,
but he forced an entry by way of the Burhánpur wicket. Hearing of
the king's approach Darya Khán fled to Mubárak Sháh at Burhánpur,
leaving his family and treasure in the fortress of Chámpáner.

[Chooses Evil Favourites.] The king entered Áhmedábád, and soon
after captured Chámpáner. Álam Khán now obtained the recall of
Imád-ul-Mulk, who received a grant of Broach and the port of
Surat. Shortly afterwards Mahmúd Sháh began to show favour to men
of low degree, especially to one Charji, a birdcatcher, whom he
ennobled by the title of Muháfiz Khán. Charji counselled Mahmúd to
put to death Sultán Alá-ud-dín Lodhi and Shujáât Khán, two of the
principal nobles; and the king, without consulting his ministers,
caused these men to be executed. The nobles joining together besieged
Mahmúd Sháh in his palace, and demanded that Muháfiz Khán should be
surrendered to them, but the king refused to give him up. The nobles
then demanded an audience, and this the king granted, Muháfiz Khán,
though warned of his danger, being foolishly present. On entering the
royal presence Álam Khán signalled to his followers to slay Muháfiz,
and he was killed in spite of the king's remonstrances. Mahmúd then
attempted to kill himself, but was prevented and placed under guard,
and the chief nobles took it in turn to watch him. Strife soon
arose between Álam Khán and Mujáhid Khán and his brother, and the
two latter nobles contrived the king's escape and sacked the houses
of Álam Khán and his followers. Álam Khán escaped to Pethápur in
the Mahi Kántha. He then joined Darya Khán, whom he called from the
Dakhan, and obtained help in money from Imád-ul-Mulk of Surat and
from Álp Khán of Dholka. Imád-ul-Mulk wrote to the Sultán asking
forgiveness for the rebels. [Quarrels among the Nobles.] But before
the Sultán, who was mercifully disposed, could grant them pardon,
Álam Khán and Darya Khán again committed themselves by acts of open
revolt. The Sultán displeased with the part Imád-ul-Mulk had taken
in the rising summoned him to Chámpáner where, with the Sultán's
connivance, his camp was given over to pillage. The Sultán disclaimed
all knowledge of this attack and at Imád-ul-Mulk's request allowed
him to go on pilgrimage to Makkah. In A.D. 1545 as he was preparing
to start for Makkah Imád-ul-Mulk was killed. He was succeeded in
Surat by Khudáwand Khán Rúmi, who had held Surat under him, and
who, in spite of Portuguese opposition and intrigue, had five years
before completed the building of Surat Castle. [805] Meanwhile Álam
Khán and Darya Khán were driven from Gujarát and forced to take
shelter with the sovereign of Dehli. The king now appointed as his
own minister Afzal Khán, the minister of the late Bahádur Sháh,
and though Afzal Khán lived in retirement, his counsel was taken
on measures of importance. Other great nobles were Sayad Mubárak,
Fateh Khán Baloch, and Abdul Karím Khán, who received the title of
Ítimád Khán, and was so entirely in the Sultán's confidence that
he was admitted to the harem. Mahmúd now consulted Ásif Khán as to
the propriety of conquering Málwa. [Disturbances, 1545.] Ásif Khán
advised him rather to deprive the Rájput chiefs and proprietors of
their wántas or hereditary lands. The attempt to follow this advice
stirred to resistance the chief men of Ídar, Sirohi, Dúngarpur,
Bánsváda, Lúnáváda, Rájpípla, Dohad, and the banks of the Mahi. The
king strengthened his line of outposts, establishing one at Sirohi and
another at Ídar, besides fresh posts in other places. At the same time
he began to persecute the Hindus, allowing them to be killed on the
slightest pretence, branding Rájputs and Kolis, forcing them to wear
a red rag on the right sleeve, forbidding them to ride in Áhmedábád,
and punishing the celebration of Holi and Diwáli. [806] In A.D. 1554
Burhán, a servant of the king's, conceived the idea of killing him
and reigning in his stead. [Death of Mahmúd, 1554.] He accordingly
gave his master an intoxicating drug, and when he was overcome with
sleep stabbed him to the heart. Then summoning the principal nobles
in the king's name, he put to death Ásaf Khán the prime minister and
twelve others, and endeavoured to have himself accepted as Sultán. No
one aided him; even his accomplices deserted him. Imád-ul-Mulk Rúmi,
[807] Ulugh Khán, and others joined to oppose him, and when marching
against them he was cut down by Shirwán Khán. Mahmúd's persecutions had
raised such bitter hate among the Hindus, that they regarded Burhán
as a saviour, and after Burhán's death are said to have made a stone
image of him and worshipped it. [808] Mahmúd moved his capital from
Áhmedábád to Mehmudábád, eighteen miles south of Áhmedábád where he
built a palace and enclosed a deer park. At each corner of the park he
raised a palace the stone walls and ceilings of which were ornamented
with beautiful and precious gold traceries and arabesques. [809] His
strict regard for public morals led him to forbid Muhammadan women
visiting saints' tombs as the practice gave rise to irregularities. He
died at the age of twenty-eight after a reign of eighteen years.

[Ahmed II. 1554-1561.] On the death of Burhán, the nobles elected
as sovereign a descendant of the stock of Áhmed Sháh of the name
of Áhmed Khán, and proclaimed him king by the title of Áhmed Sháh
II. At the same time they agreed that, as the king was young, [Ítimád
Khán Regent.] Ítimád Khán should carry on the government and they
further divided the country among themselves, each one undertaking
to protect the frontiers and preserve the public peace. Mubárak Sháh
of Khándesh, considering this a good opportunity, preferred a claim
to the crown and marched to the frontier. An army led by the chief
Gujarát nobles and accompanied by the young king met the invaders at
the village of Ránpur Kotriá in Broach, the Gujarát army encamping
on the north bank and the Khándesh army on the south bank of the
Narbada. Násir-ul-Mulk, one of the Gujarát nobles, taking certain
of his friends into his confidence, determined to remain neutral
till the battle was over and then to fall on the exhausted troops
and possess himself of both kingdoms. Sayad Mubárak, a descendant of
the saint Sháhi Álam, who led the van of the Gujarát army, becoming
aware of Násir-ul-Mulk's design opened communications with Mubárak
Sháh of Khándesh and induced him to withdraw. [810] Násir-ul-Mulk,
who still aspired to supreme power, gaining several nobles to his
side near Baroda, surprised and defeated the forces of Ítimád Khán
and Sayad Mubárak. The Sayad withdrew to his estate of Kapadvanj and
he was joined by Ítimád Khán, while Násir-ul-Mulk, taking Sultán
Áhmed with him to Áhmedábád, assumed the entire government of the
country. After a short time he assembled an army and marched against
Sayad Mubárak and Ítimád Khán encamping at Kamand, the village now
called Od Kámod, ten miles north-east of Áhmedábád at the head of
50,000 horse. Ítimád feared to attack so strong a force. But Sayad
Mubárak, who knew of the defection of Ulugh Khán and Imád-ul-Mulk,
surprised Násir-ul-Mulk's army at night. During the confusion Ulugh
Khán and Imád-ul-Mulk, disgusted with the assumption of Násir-ul-Mulk,
deserted him and bringing the young Sultán with them joined Sayad
Mubárak and Ítimád Khán. Násir-ul-Mulk was forced to fly, and after
a short time died in the mountains of Pál. [811] Ikhtiyár-ul-Mulk,
Fateh Khán Balúch, and Hasan Khán Dakhani now set up another king, a
descendant of Áhmed, named Sháhu. A battle was fought near Mehmúdábád
in which Sháhu and his supporters were defeated and Hasan Khán Dakhani
was slain. Before the battle Fateh Khán Balúch had been induced to
forsake Sháhu, and Ikhtiyár-ul-Mulk, taking Sháhu with him, fled. The
nobles now divided Gujarát into the following shares:

[Partition of the Province.]

Áhmed Sháh for Private Áhmedábád and the Daskrohi sub-division.
Purse
Ítimád Khán and Party Kádi, Jháláváda, Pitlád, Nadiád, Bhil,
Rádhanpur, Sami, Múnjpur, Godhra, and
Sorath.
Sayad Mubárak and Party Pátan and Cambay, with its Chorási or 84
villages, Dholka, Gogha, and Dhandhúka.
Chámpáner, Sarnál, Bálásinor, and
Kapadvanj.
Imád-ul-Mulk Rúmi and Broach, Baroda, and Surat as far as the
Party Sultánpur-Nandurbár frontier.
Nobles under Ítimád Khán Modása and surrounding districts.

Of these shares Ítimád Khán bestowed the country of Sorath on Tátár
Khán Ghori; the districts of Rádhanpur, Sami, and Múnjpur on Fateh
Khán Balúch; Nadiád on Malik-ush-Shark, and some of the dependencies of
Jháláváda on Álaf Khán Habshi. Sayad Mubárak conferred the territory of
Pátan on Músa Khán and Sher Khán Fauládi, Imád-ul-Mulk Rúmi bestowed
the district of Baroda on Álaf Khán Habshi and the port of Surat on
his wife's brother Khudáwand Khán Rúmi.

[Dissensions.] About this time (A.D. 1552) Álam Khán returned, and,
through the influence of Sayad Mubárak, was allowed to remain. The
Sayad gave him and Ázam Humáyún Chámpáner, and Ítimád Khán gave
Godhra to Álp Khán Khatri, a follower of Álam Khán. Álam Khán and
Ítimád Khán shortly after expelled Álaf Khán Habshi from Jháláváda,
and he fled to Imád-ul-Mulk Rúmi at Broach, and at his intercession
Álaf Khán received the Bhil district. Álam Khán's success tempted him
to try and get rid of Ítimád Khán and govern in his stead. Ítimád
Khán, discovering his intention, made him leave the city and live
in his own house in the Asáwal suburb. Álam Khán now made overtures
to Imád-ul-Mulk Rúmi and became very friendly with him. One day Álam
Khán proposed to get rid of Ítimád Khán; but seeing that Imád-ul-Mulk
Rúmi did not take to his proposal, he next endeavoured to ruin Sayad
Mubárak. But when the Gujarát army marched against him the Sayad
made peace, and Álam Khán's intrigues being apparent, he was attacked
and compelled to fly. He now went to Berár and sought aid of Mubárak
Sháh, who marched an army towards the Gujarát frontier. The Gujarát
nobles, taking Áhmed Sháh with them, advanced to oppose him, and he
retired. Álam Khán now repaired to Sher Khán Fauládi at Pátan, and
they together seized Ítimád Khán's district of Kadi, but, through the
exertions of Ikhtiyár-ul-Mulk, Álam Khán was slain and Sher Khán forced
to retire to Pátan. Imád-ul-Mulk Rúmi and Ítimád Khán now carried
on the government, but dissension springing up between them, Ítimád
Khán fled to Mubárak Sháh in Khándesh, and induced him to lead an army
against Gujarát. The nobles, fearing this combination, made peaceful
overtures and it was eventually settled that the lands of [Sultánpur
and Nandurbár handed to Khándesh, 1560.] Sultánpur and Nandurbár should
be given to Mubárak Sháh, and that Ítimád Khán should be restored to
his former position. Since this date the districts of Sultánpur and
Nandurbár have been permanently severed from Gujarát and have formed
a part of Khándesh, to which province they now belong. Áhmed Sháh,
finding himself more strictly guarded than ever, contrived to flee
to Sayad Mubárak at Sayadpur, who, though vexed at his coming, would
not refuse him shelter. At this time Háji Khán, a Dehli noble, on his
way from Chitor to help Humáyún, passed through Gujarát with a well
equipped force, and arrived at Pátan. The Gujarát nobles, especially
Ítimád Khán and Imád-ul-Mulk Rúmi, conceiving that he came at the
Sayad's invitation, and that the flight of the king was part of the
[Defeat and Death of Sayad Mubárak.] plot, determined to crush the
Sayad ere Háji Khán could join him, and on their march to Sayadpur
meeting Sayad Mubárak near Mehmúdábád defeated him. The Sayad fell
and was buried on the field of battle. His estates were resumed,
though eventually Dholka was restored to his son Sayad Mírán.

[Death of Imád-ul-Mulk Rúmi.] The army and the two protectors
returned to Áhmedábád. Dissensions again sprang up between them, and
Imád-ul-Mulk Rúmi summoned to his aid his son Changíz Khán from Broach,
while Ítimád Khán sent for Tátár Khán Ghori from Sorath. Tátár Khán
arrived first and Ítimád Khán further strengthened by contingents
from the Fauládis of Pátan and Fateh Khán Balúch from Rádhanpur
ordered Imád-ul-Mulk Rúmi to return to his estate; and he, seeing it
would be useless for him to contend against so overwhelming a force,
retired to his possessions at Broach. Shortly after, having marched
against Surat at the request of the inhabitants who were wearied of
the tyranny of Khudáwand Khán, he was decoyed by that chief to an
entertainment and was there assassinated. His son Changíz Khán marched
against Surat to take vengeance for his father's death, and, finding
the fortress too strong for him, summoned to his aid the Portuguese,
to whom, as the price of their assistance, he [Daman District ceded
to the Portuguese, 1550.] surrendered the districts of Daman and
Sanján. [812] The Portuguese, bringing a strong fleet up the Tápti,
cut off the supplies, and Khudáwand Khán was forced to surrender, and
was slain by Changíz Khán in revenge for his father's death. Shortly
afterwards Changíz Khán quarrelled with Jhujhár Khán Habshi of Baroda
because the Habshi had installed his nephew, son of Alif Khán Habshi,
without consulting Changíz. Jhujhár and his nephew being defeated
fled to Ítimád Khán, who allotted them a grant of land. At this time
Fateh Khán Balúch, the proprietor of Rádhanpur and Sami, was Ítimád
Khán's chief supporter, and with his assistance Ítimád Khán marched
to besiege Changíz Khán in Broach. Tátár Khán Ghori and other nobles,
fearing lest Ítimád Khán should become too powerful, endeavoured to
make peace. As their efforts failed, Tátár Khán wrote to the Fauládis
to attack Fateh Khán Balúch. They did so, and Fateh Khán, after
being defeated near Rádhanpur, took refuge in the fort of Fatehkot
or Dhúlkot, which is close to the town. Ítimád Khán raised the siege
of Broach and came to Áhmedábád, where he busied himself in checking
the intrigues of king Áhmed, who was doing all in his power to become
independent. [Assassinated, 1560.] Finally, in A.D. 1560-61, at the
instigation of Wajíh-ul-Mulk and Razí-ul-Mulk Ítimád Khán caused
Áhmed II. to be assassinated. The murder took place in the house
of Wajíh-ul-Mulk. The Sultán's body was thrown on the sands of the
Sábarmati and the story circulated that the Sultán had been killed
by robbers. Áhmed's nominal reign had lasted about eight years.

[Muzaffar III. 1561-1572.] Ítimád Khán then raised to the throne a
youth, whom he styled Muzaffar Sháh III., and who, he asserted, was
a posthumous [A Minor.] son of Mahmúd Sháh, [813] and then marched
towards Pátan to take his revenge on the Fauládis for their attack on
Fateh Khán Balúch. The nobles unwilling to crush the Fauládis, fearing
lest their turn might come next, entered into secret correspondence
with them, and withdrew when battle was joined. The nobles were now
independent in their respective jágirs, in which according to the
Tabakát-i-Akbari they allowed no interference though still owning
nominal allegiance to the throne. [814] Ítimád Khán, forced to return
unsuccessful to Áhmedábád, with a view of again attacking the Fauládis,
summoned Tátár Khán Ghori from Junágadh. The nobles remained aloof,
and even Tátár Khán Ghori made excuses, which so exasperated Ítimád
Khán that he sought to slay him. Tátár Khán escaped to Sorath,
and there openly sided with the Fauládis. Sayad Mírán also left
Áhmedábád for his estate at Dholka, and joining Tátár Khán at Ránpur
they both went over to the Fauládis at Pátan. [Ítimád Khán and the
Fauládis.] Meanwhile Ítimád Khán, again collecting an army, marched
once more towards Pátan. He was met by the Fauládis near the village
of Jhotáná, about thirty miles south of Pátan, where he was defeated
and compelled to return to Áhmedábád. Sayad Mírán now intervened and
made peace. Ítimád Khán still thirsting for revenge on the Fauládis,
invited Changíz Khán, son of Imád-ul-Mulk Rúmi, to the capital, and by
courteous treatment induced him to join in another expedition against
the Fauládis. Like the other nobles Changíz Khán was lukewarm; and
as Músa Khán Fauládi died while Ítimád Khán was marching on Pátan,
Changíz Khán assigned this as a reason for not proceeding further,
averring that it was not fit to war with people in misfortune. Ítimád
Khán perforce returned to Áhmedábád.

Though Ítimád Khán had disgusted the nobles, both by causing the
assassination of Áhmed Sháh and by his enmity with the Fauládis,
as he had charge of Muzaffar Sháh and possession of the capital, the
government of the country was in his hands. [The Mírzás, 1571.] At this
time the Mírzás, [815] who were the sons of Sultán Hussain of Khurásán,
quarrelling with Jalál-ul-dín Muhammad Akbar, entered Gujarát, and
joined Changíz Khán. Changíz Khán now proposed to Sher Khán Fauládi
that they should expel Ítimád Khán and divide Gujarát between them,
the capital and the country south of the Sábarmati falling to the share
of Changíz Khán, and that to the north to Sher Khán Fauládi. Sher Khán
agreed, and Changíz Khán joining him they marched on Áhmedábád. Sayad
Mirán induced Sher Khán to stay in Kadi. But Changíz Khán refused to
listen to him, and a [They Defeat Ítimád Khán.] battle was fought
between him, Ítimád Khán, and the Sayad on the right bank of the
Khári about eight miles south of Áhmedábád. Ítimád Khán was defeated,
and fled with the king to Modása, while Changíz Khán took possession
of the capital. Sher Khán Fauládi now advanced to the Sábarmati, and,
after dividing the province as had been agreed, Sher Khán retired to
Kadi. Ítimád Khán entreated Mírán Muhammad Sháh, king of Khándesh, to
march to his aid, and Changíz Khán invited Ítimád Khán to return. He
came to Mehmudábád, where hearing that Muhammad Sháh had sustained
a defeat and retired to his own country, he took Muzaffar Sháh with
him and returned through Modása to Dungarpur. Changíz Khán remained in
Áhmedábád, and Sher Khán withdrew to Kadi. After this success all the
chief nobles of Gujarát, including the Habshis, joined Changíz Khán,
who was now at the zenith of his power, and began to think of subduing
Sher Khán Fauládi, who on his part was anxious and fearful. At this
time Bijli Khán a Habshi eunuch who was offended with Changíz Khán,
because he had resumed the grant of Cambay, persuaded Álíf Khán and
Jhujhár Khán Habshi that Changíz Khán had determined to kill them. The
Habshi Kháns, resolving to be beforehand, invited Changíz Khán, with
whom they were intimate, to play a game of chaugán or polo. [816]
Changíz agreed and when near the Farhat-ul-Mulk mosque, between the
Bhadar and the Three Gates, Álíf Khán, after making Jhujhár Khán
a signal, attracted Changíz Khán's notice to the horse on which he
was riding saying it was the best of the last batch imported from
the Persian Gulf. [Death of Changíz Khán.] As Changíz Khán turned
to look at the horse, Jhujhár Khán cut him down. The Habshis now
plundered Changíz Khán's house, while the Mírzás, mounting, went
south and took possession of Broach, Baroda, and Chámpáner. Sher
Khán advanced from Kadi, and ordered the Habshis to hand him over
Áhmedábád. While treating with him the Habshis secretly summoned
Ítimád Khán, who, returning with Muzaffar Sháh, entered the city. It
was arranged that Ítimád Khán should take the place of Changíz Khán,
and that the division of Gujarát between Changíz Khán and Sher Khán
should be maintained. Ítimád Khán found the Habshis so domineering
that he withdrew from public affairs. Afterwards Álaf Khán and Jhujhár
Khán, quarrelling over the division of Changíz Khán's property, Álaf
Khán left Áhmedábád and joined Sher Khán, who, advancing from Kadi,
laid siege to Áhmedábád. Ítimád Khán now sought aid from the Mírzás,
and Mírza Ibráhím Husain marched from Broach and harassed Sher Khán's
army with his Mughal archers.

[Ítimád Khán and the Emperor Akbar, 1572.] At the same time Ítimád
Khán turned for help to the emperor Akbar, who, glad of any pretext
for driving the Mírzás from their place of refuge in Gujarát, was
not slow in availing himself of Ítimád Khán's proposal. Early in July
1572 he started for Áhmedábád, and with his arrival in the province,
the history of Gujarát as a separate kingdom comes to an end.

CHAPTER III.

MUGHAL VICEROYS.

A.D. 1573-1758.

[Akbar Emperor, 1573-1605.] To the nobles thus fighting among
themselves, news was brought that the emperor Akbar was at
Dísa. Ibráhím Husain Mírza returned to Broach and the army of the
Fauládis dispersed. From Dísa the imperial troops advanced to Pátan and
thence to Jhotána thirty miles south of Pátan. Sultán Muzaffar, who
had separated from the Fauládis, fell into the hands of the emperor,
who granted him his life but placed him under charge of one of his
nobles named Karam Áli. [817] When the imperial army reached Kadi,
Ítimád Khán, Ikhtiyár Khán, Álaf Khán, and Jhujhár Khán met Akbar and
Sayad Hámid also was honoured with an audience at Hájipur. [818] The
emperor imprisoned Álaf Khán and Jhujhár Khán Habshi and encouraged
the other Gujarát nobles. Ikhtiyár-ul-Mulk now fled to Lunáváda, and
the emperor, fearing that others of the Gujarát nobles might follow his
example, sent Ítimád Khán to Cambay and placed him under the charge of
Shahbáz Khán Kambo. [819] From Áhmedábád Akbar advanced to Cambay. At
this time Ibráhím Mírza held Baroda, Muhammad Husain Mírza held Surat,
and Sháh Mírza held Chámpáner. On leaving Cambay to expel the Mírzas,
Akbar appointed Mírza Âzíz Kokaltásh his first viceroy of Gujarát. At
Baroda Akbar heard that Ibráhím Mírza had treacherously killed Rustam
Khán Rúmi, who was Changíz Khán's governor of Broach. The emperor
recalled the detachment he had sent against Surat, and overtaking
the Mírza at Sarnál or Thásra on the right bank of the Mahi about
twenty-three miles north-east of Nadiád, after a bloody conflict routed
him. The Mírza fled by Ahmednagar to Sirohi, and Akbar rejoined his
camp at Baroda. The emperor now sent a force under Sháh Kuli Khán to
invest the fort of Surat, and following in person pitched his camp
at Gopi Tálao, a suburb of that city. After an obstinate defence of
one month and seventeen days, the garrison under Hamzabán, a slave
of Humáyún's who had joined the Mírzás, surrendered. Hamzabán was
in treaty with the Portuguese. Under his invitation a large party of
Portuguese came to Surat during the siege, but seeing the strength of
the imperial army, represented themselves as ambassadors and besought
the honour of an interview. [820] [Akbar captures Broach and Surat,
and advances to Áhmedábád, 1573.] While at Surat the emperor received
from Bihár or Vihárji the Rája of Baglána, Sharfuddín Husain Mírza
whom the Rája had captured. [821] After the capture of Surat, the
emperor ordered the great Sulaimáni cannon which had been brought
by the Turks with the view of destroying the Portuguese forts and
left by them in Surat, to be taken to Ágra. Surat was placed in the
charge of Kalíj Khán. The emperor now advanced to Áhmedábád, where
the mother of Changíz Khán came and demanded justice on Jhujhár
Khán for having wantonly slain her son. As her complaint was just,
the emperor ordered Jhujhár Khán to be thrown under the feet of an
elephant. Muhammad Khán, son of Sher Khán Fauládi, who had fled to
the Ídar hills, now returned and took the city of Pátan, besieging
the imperial governor, Sayad Áhmed Khán Bárha, in the citadel. At
this time Mírza Muhammad Husain was at Ránpur near Dhandhúka. When
Sher Khán Fauládi, who had taken refuge in Sorath, heard of Muhammad
Khán's return to Pátan, he met Mírza Muhammad Husain, and uniting
their forces they joined Muhammad Khán at Pátan. The viceroy Mírza
Âzíz Kokaltásh with other nobles marched against them, and after a
hard-fought battle, in which several of the imperial nobles were
slain, Mírza Âzíz Kokaltásh was victorious. Sher Khán again took
refuge in Sorath, and his son fled for safety to the Ídar hills,
while the Mírza withdrew to the Khándesh frontier. As the conquest
of Gujarát was completed, Akbar returned to Agra.

From A.D. 1573, the date of its annexation as a province of the
empire, to A.D. 1758, the year of the final capture of Áhmedábád
by the Maráthás, Gujarát remained under the government of officers
appointed by the court of Dehli. Like the rule of the Áhmedábád kings,
this term of 184 years falls into two periods: the first of 134 years
from A.D. 1573 to the death of Aurangzíb in A.D. 1707, a time on the
whole of public order and strong government; the second from A.D. 1707
to A.D. 1758, fifty-one years of declining power and growing disorder.

SECTION I.--A.D. 1573-1707.

[Mirza Âzíz First Viceroy, 1573-1575.] Before leaving Gujarát
Akbar placed the charge of the province in the hands of Mírza Âzíz
Kokaltásh. [822] At the same time the emperor rewarded his supporters
by grants of land, assigning Áhmedábád with Pitlád and several other
districts to the viceroy Mírza Âzíz, Pátan to the Khán-i-Kalán Mír
Muhammad Khán, and Baroda to Nawáb Aurang Khán. Broach was given to
Kutb-ud-dín Muhammad, and Dholka Khánpur and Sami were confirmed to
Sayad Hámid and Sayad Mahmúd Bukhári. As soon as the emperor was gone
Ikhtiyár-ul-Mulk and Muhammad Khán, son of Sher Khán, who had taken
shelter in the Ídar hills, issued forth, and the viceroy marched to
Ahmednagar to hold them in check. Mírza Muhammad Husain advancing
rapidly from the Nandurbár frontier, took the fort of Broach,
and went thence to Cambay which he found abandoned by its governor
Husain Khán Karkaráh, while he himself marched to Ahmednagar and Ídar
against Ikhtiyár-ul-Mulk. The viceroy ordered Sayad Hámid Bukhári,
Nawáb Naurang Khán, and others to join Kutb-ud-dín Muhammad Khán. They
went and laid siege to Cambay, but Mírza Muhammad managed to evacuate
the town and join Ikhtiyár-ul-Mulk and Muhammad Khán. After several
unsuccessful attempts to scatter the enemy the viceroy retired to
Áhmedábád, and the rebels laid siege to the city. Kutb-ud-dín Khán,
Sayad Mírán, and others of the imperial party succeeded in entering
the city and joining the garrison. [Insurrection Quelled by Akbar,
1573.] After the siege had lasted two months, Akbar, making his
famous 600 mile (400 kos) march in nine days from Agra, arrived
before Áhmedábád, and, at once engaging the enemy, totally defeated
them with the loss of two of their leaders Mírza Muhammad Husain
and Ikhtiyár-ul-Mulk.

On the day before the battle Akbar consulting a Hazára Afghán versed
in drawing omens from sheeps' shoulder-blades, was told that victory
was certain, but that it would be won at the cost of the life of one
of his nobles. Seif Khán, brother of Zein Khán Koka, coming in prayed
that he should be chosen to receive the crown of martyrdom. At the end
of the day the only leading noble that was killed was Seif Khán. [823]

After only eleven days' stay, Akbar again entrusting the government
of Gujarát to Mírza Âzíz Koka, returned to Agra. Mírza Âzíz Koka
did not long continue viceroy. In A.D. 1575, in consequence of some
dispute with the emperor, he retired into private life. [Mírza Khán
Second Viceroy, 1575-1577.] On his resignation Akbar conferred the
post of viceroy on Mírza Khán, son of Behrám Khán, who afterwards
rose to the high rank of Khán Khánán or chief of the nobles. As
this was Mírza Khán's first service, and as he was still a youth, he
was ordered to follow the advice of the deputy viceroy, Wazír Khán,
in whose hands the administration of the province remained during
the two following years. [Survey by Rája Todar Mal.] Soon after the
insurrection of 1573 was suppressed the emperor sent Rája Todar Mal
to make a survey settlement of the province. In A.D. 1575 after the
survey was completed Wajíh-ul-Mulk Gujaráti was appointed díwán or
minister. Some historians say that in A.D. 1576 Wazír Khán relieved
Mírza Âzíz Koka as viceroy, but according to the Mirat-i-Áhmedi Mirza
Khán held office with Wazír Khán as his deputy. One Prágdás, a Hindu,
succeeded Wajíh-ul-Mulk as díwán. Troops were sent to reduce the Nándod
and Ídar districts, and the fort of Sirohi was captured by Tarsu Khán,
the military governor of Pátan. Afterwards, through the intervention
of Pahár Khán Jálori, the Sirohi Rája, at an interview with Rája Todar
Mal, presented £6000 (Rs. 12,000) and other articles and was allowed
to serve the provincial governor of Gujarát with 1500 horse. [824]

During Wazír Khán's administration Muzaffar Husain Mírza, son of
Ibráhím Husain Mírza, raised an insurrection in Gujarát. This Mírza
Muzaffar was as an infant carried to the Dakhan from Surat shortly
before its investment by Akbar. He lived peacefully till under the
influence of an ambitious retainer Mihr Ali by name, he gathered an
army of adventurers and entered Nandurbár. Wazír Khán distrusting
his troops shut himself in a fortress, and wrote to Rája Todar Mal,
who was in Pátan settling revenue affairs. The Mírza defeated the
imperial forces in Nandurbár and failing to get possession of Cambay
marched straight to Áhmedábád. On the advance of Rája Todar Mal the
Mírza fell back on Dholka. The Rája and the Khán pursuing defeated
him, and he retired to Junágadh. The Rája then withdrew, but the
Mírza again advanced and besieged him in Áhmedábád. In an attempt to
escalade the city wall Mihr Ali was killed. Muzaffar Mírza withdrew
to Khándesh and the insurrection came to an end.

[Shaháb-ud-dín Third Viceroy, 1577-1583.] In the end of A.D. 1577,
as Wazír Khán's management was not successful, the post of viceroy
was conferred upon Shaháb-ud-dín Áhmed Khán, the governor of
Málwa. Shaháb-ud-dín's first step was to create new military posts
and strengthen the old ones. At this time Fateh Khán Shirwáni,
the commander of Amín Khán Ghori's army, quarrelled with his
chief, and, coming to Shaháb-ud-dín, offered to capture the fort of
Junágadh. [Sends a Force against Junágadh.] Shaháb-ud-dín entertained
his proposal, and sent his nephew Mírza Khán and 4000 horse with
him. When the troops crossed the Sorath frontier, they were met
by envoys from Amín Khán, agreeing, in his name, to pay tribute
and surrender the country, provided he were permitted to retain
the fortress of Junágadh and were allotted a sufficient grant of
land. Mírza Khán rejected these proposals and continued his march
against Junágadh. Amín Khán made a vigorous resistance and applied
for aid to the Jám of Navánagar. At this juncture Fateh Khán died,
and Mírza Khán went and besieged Mángrúl. The Jám's minister Isá
now joined Amín Khán with 4000 horse, and he, quitting Junágadh,
marched to Mángrúl. [825] On their approach Mírza Khán retired to
the town of Kodinár [826] followed by Amín Khán. Here a pitched
battle was fought, and Mírza Khán was defeated with the loss of his
baggage. Many of his men were slain, and he himself, being wounded,
escaped with difficulty to Áhmedábád. Shaháb ud-dín, who had meanwhile
been giving his attention to revenue matters, and to the more correct
measurement of the lands of the province, was rudely recalled from
these peaceful occupations by his nephew's defeat. At the same time
news was brought of the escape of the former king, Muzaffar Khán, who,
eluding the vigilance of the imperial servants, appeared in Gujarát in
A.D. 1583. Muzaffar remained for some time in the Rájpípla country,
and thence came to one Lúna or Lúmbha Káthi, at the village of Khíri
in the district of Sardhár in Sorath.

[Ítimád Khán Gujaráti Fourth Viceroy, 1583-4.] Before he could march
against Muzaffar, Shaháb-ud-dín was recalled, and in A.D. 1583 or
1584 [827] Ítimád Khán Gujaráti was appointed viceroy. At this time
a party of 700 or 800 Mughals, called Wazír Khánis, separating from
Shaháb-ud-dín, remained behind in hope of being entertained by the new
viceroy. As Ítimád Khán declared that he was unable to take them into
his service, they went off in a body and joined Muzaffar at Khíri,
and he with them and three or four thousand Káthi horse marched at
once on Áhmedábád. On hearing this Ítimád Khán, leaving his son Sher
Khán in Áhmedábád, followed Shaháb-ud-dín to Kadi, and entreated
him to return. Shaháb-ud-dín at first affected indifference telling
Ítimád that as he had given over charge he had no more interest
in the province. After two days he consented to return if Ítimád
stated in writing that the country was on the verge of being lost
and that Ítimád being unable to hold it was obliged to relinquish
charge to Shaháb-ud-dín. Ítimád Khán made the required statement and
Shaháb-ud-dín returned with him. [828] [Muzaffar captures Áhmedábád,
1583.] Meanwhile Muzaffar Sháh reached Áhmedábád, which was weakly
defended, and in A.D. 1583, after a brief struggle, took possession of
the city. While the siege of Áhmedábád was in progress Shaháb-ud-dín
and Ítimád Khán were returning, and were within a few miles of the
city, when news of its capture reached them. They continued their
advance, but had barely arrived at Áhmedábád when Muzaffar Sháh
totally defeated them taking all their baggage. Seeing the issue of
the fight, most of their army went over to Muzaffar Sháh, and the
viceroy and Shaháb-ud-dín with a few men fled to Pátan. Kutb-ud-dín
Muhammad Khán Atkah, one of the imperial commanders, who was on the
Khándesh frontier, now advanced by forced marches to Baroda. Muzaffar
marched against him with a large army, recently strengthened by the
union of the army of Sayad Daulát ruler of Cambay. Kutb-ud-dín threw
himself into Baroda, and, in spite of the treachery of his troops,
defended the city for some time. At last, on Muzaffar's assurance
that his life should be spared Kutb-ud-dín repaired to the enemies'
camp to treat for peace. On his arrival he was treated with respect,
but next day was treacherously put to death. The fort of Broach was
also at this time traitorously surrendered to Muzaffar by the slaves
of the mother of Naurang Khán, fief-holder of the district.

[Mírza Abdúr-Rahím Khán (Khán Khánán) Fifth Viceroy 1583-1587.] On
learning of the Gujarát insurrection the emperor, at the close
of A.D. 1583, conferred the government of the province on Mírza
Abdúr-Rahím Khán, son of Behrám Khán, who had formerly (A.D. 1575)
acted as viceroy. Muzaffar, who was still at Broach, hearing of
the advance of the new viceroy with a large army, returned rapidly
to Áhmedábád, and in A.D. 1584 fought a pitched battle with Mírza
Abdúr-Rahím Khán between Sirkhej and Sháh Bhíkan's tomb. [829] In this
engagement [Defeat of Muzaffar, 1584.] Muzaffar was entirely defeated,
and fled to Cambay pursued by Mírza Abdúr-Rahím Khán. Muzaffar now
hearing that Mírza Abdúr-Rahím Khán had been joined by Naurang Khán
and other nobles with the imperial army from Málwa, quitted Cambay,
and made for his old place of shelter in Rájpípla. Finding no rest
in Rájpípla, after fighting and losing another battle in the Rájpípla
hills, he fled first to Pátan and then to Ídar, and afterwards again
repaired to Lúmbha Káthi in Khiri. In reward for these two victories,
the emperor bestowed on Mírza Abdúr-Rahím Khán the title of Khán
Khánán. Broach now submitted, and Muzaffar sought shelter with Amín
Khán Ghori at Junágadh, by whom he was allotted the waste town of
Gondal as a residence. Muzaffar made one more attempt to establish his
power. He advanced to Morvi, and thence made a raid on Rádhanpur and
plundered that town, but was soon compelled to return to Káthiáváda
and seek safety in flight. Amín Khán, seeing that his cause was
hopeless, on pretence of aiding him, induced Muzaffar to give him
about £10,000. [830] When he had obtained the money, on one pretext
or another, Amín Khán withheld the promised aid. The Khán Khánán now
marched an army into Sorath against Muzaffar. The Jám of Navánagar
and Amín Khán sent their envoys to meet the viceroy, declaring that
they had not sheltered Muzaffar, and that he was leading an outlaw's
life, entirely unaided by them. The viceroy agreed not to molest them,
on condition that they withheld aid and shelter from Muzaffar, and
himself marched against him. When he reached Upleta, about fifteen
miles north-west of the fortress of Junágadh, the viceroy heard that
Muzaffar had sought shelter in the Barda hills in the south-west corner
of the peninsula. Advancing to the hills, he halted his main force
outside of the rough country and sent skirmishing parties to examine
the hills. Muzaffar had already passed through Navánagar and across
Gujarát to Dánta in the Mahi Kántha. Here he was once more defeated by
the Parántij garrison, and a third time took refuge in Rájpípla. The
viceroy now marched on Navánagar to punish the Jám. The Jám sent in
his submission, and the viceroy taking from him, by way of fine, an
elephant and some valuable horses, returned to Áhmedábád. He next
sent a detachment against Ghazni Khán of Jhálor who had favoured
Muzaffar. Ghazni Khán submitted, and no further steps were taken
against him.

[Ismáíl Kuli Khán Sixth Viceroy, 1587.] In A.D. 1587 the Khán Khánán
was recalled and his place supplied by Ismáíl Kuli Khán. Ismáíl's
government lasted only for a few months, when he was superseded
by [Mírza Âziz Kokaltásh Seventh Viceroy, 1588-1592.] Mírza Ázíz
Kokaltásh, who was a second time appointed viceroy. In A.D. 1591,
Muzaffar again returned to Sorath. [Muzaffar seeks Refuge in
Káthiáváda.] The viceroy, hearing that he had been joined by the
Jám, the Kachh chief, and Daulat Khán Ghori the son of Amín Khán,
marched with a large army towards Sorath, and, halting at Víramgám,
sent forward a detachment under Naurang Khán, Sayad Kásim, and other
officers. Advancing as far as Morvi, [831] Naurang Khán entered
into negotiations with the Jám, who, however, refused to accede to
the demands of the imperial commander. [Is attacked by the Imperial
Army.] On this the viceroy joined Naurang Khán with the bulk of his
army, and after a short delay marched on Navánagar. On his way, at the
village of Dhokar near Navánagar, Muzaffar and the Jám opposed him,
and an obstinate battle in which the imperialists were nearly worsted,
ended in Muzaffar's defeat. The son and minister of the Jám were slain,
and Muzaffar, the Jám, and Daulat Khán who was wounded, fled to the
fortress of Junágadh. The viceroy now advanced and plundered Navánagar,
and remaining there sent Naurang Khán, Sayad Kásím, and Gújar Khán
against Junágadh. The day the army arrived before the fortress Daulat
Khán died of his wounds. Still the fortress held out, and though the
viceroy joined them the siege made little progress as the imperial
troops were in great straits for grain. The viceroy returned to
Áhmedábád, and after seven or eight months again marched against
Junágadh. The Jám, who was still a fugitive, sent envoys and promised
to aid the viceroy if his country were restored to him. The viceroy
assented on condition that, during the operations against Junágadh,
the Jám should furnish his army with grain. The Jám agreed to provide
grain, and after a siege of three months the garrison surrendered.

News was next received that Muzaffar had taken refuge at Jagat. [832]
The viceroy at once sent Naurang Khán and others with an army in
pursuit. On reaching Jagat it was found that Muzaffar had already
left for a village owned by a Rájput named Sewa Wádhel. Without
halting Naurang Khán started in pursuit, nearly surprising Muzaffar,
[Muzaffar Flies to Kachh.] who escaping on horseback with a few
followers, crossed to Kachh. Sewa Wádhel covering Muzaffar's retreat
was surprised before he could put to sea and fought gallantly with the
imperial forces till he was slain. Naurang Khán then came to Arámra,
a village belonging to Singrám Wádhel, Rája of Jagat, and after
frustrating a scheme devised by that chief to entrap a body of the
troops on board ship under pretence of pursuing Muzaffar's family,
led his men back to Junágadh. The viceroy, hearing in what direction
Muzaffar had fled, marched to Morvi, where the Jám of Navánagar
came and paid his respects. At the same time the Kachh chief, who is
called Khengár by Farishtah and in the Mirat-i-Áhmedi and Bhára in the
Mirat-i-Sikandri, sent a message that if the viceroy would refrain
from invading his country and would give him his ancestral district
of Morvi and supply him with a detachment of troops, he would point
out where Muzaffar was concealed. The Khán-i-Ázam agreed to these
terms and the chief captured Muzaffar and handed him to the force
sent to secure him. The detachment, strictly guarding the prisoner,
were marching rapidly towards Morvi, when, on reaching Dhrol, about
thirty miles east of Jámnagar, under pretence of obeying a call of
nature, Muzaffar withdrew and cut his throat with a razor, so that he
died. [Commits Suicide, 1591-92.] This happened in A.D. 1591-92. The
viceroy sent Muzaffar's head to court, and though he was now recalled
by the emperor, he delayed on pretence of wishing to humble the
Portuguese. His real object was to make a pilgrimage to Makkah,
and in A.D. 1592, after obtaining the necessary permission from the
Portuguese, he started from Verával. [833] During this viceroyalty an
imperial farmán ordered that the state share of the produce should
be one-half and the other half should be left to the cultivator and
further that from each half five per cent should be deducted for the
village headmen. All other taxes were declared illegal, and it was
provided that when lands or houses were sold, half the government
demand should be realized from the seller and half from the buyer.

[Sultán Murád Baksh Eighth Viceroy, 1592-1600.] The emperor, who
was much vexed to hear of the departure of the viceroy, appointed
prince Sultán Murád Bakhsh in his stead with as his minister Muhammad
Sádikkhán one of the great nobles. In A.D. 1593-94 Mírza Âzíz Kokaltásh
returned from his pilgrimage and repaired to court, and next year
on prince Murád Bakhsh going to the Dakhan, Súrajsingh was appointed
his deputy. In A.D. 1594-95 Bahádur, son of the late Muzaffar Sháh,
excited a rebellion, but was defeated by Súrajsingh. In A.D. 1600,
owing to the death of Sultán Murád, [Mírza Âzíz Kokaltásh Ninth
Viceroy, 1600-1606.] Mírza Âzíz Kokaltásh was a third time appointed
viceroy of Gujarát, and he sent Shams-ud-dín Husain as his deputy to
Áhmedábád. Further changes were made in A.D. 1602 when Mírza Âzíz sent
his eldest son Shádmán as deputy; his second son Khurram as governor
of Junágadh; and Sayad Báyazíd as minister. Khurram was afterwards
relieved of the charge of Sorath and Junágadh by his brother Abdulláh.

[Jehángír Emperor, 1605-1627.] In A.D. 1605 Núr-ud-dín Muhammad
Jehángír ascended the imperial throne. Shortly after his accession the
emperor published a decree remitting certain taxes, and also in cases
of robbery fixing the responsibility on the landowners of the place
where the robbery was committed. The decree also renewed Akbar's decree
forbidding soldiers billetting themselves forcibly in cultivators'
houses. Finally it directed that dispensaries and hospital wards should
be opened in all large towns. In the early days of Jehángír's reign
disturbance was caused in the neighbourhood of Áhmedábád by Bahádur
a son of Muzaffar Sháh. Jehángír despatched Patrdás Rája Vikramájit
as viceroy of Gujarát to put down the rising. The Rája's arrival at
Áhmedábád restored order. Some of the rebel officers submitting were
reinstated in their commands: the rest fled to the hills. [834] [Kalíj
Khán Tenth Viceroy, 1606.] On the Rája's return Jehángír appointed
Kalíj Khán to be viceroy of Gujarát; but Kalíj Khán never joined
his charge, allowing Mírza Âzíz Kokaltásh to act in his place. In
A.D. 1606, on the transfer of Mírza Âzíz to the Láhor viceroyalty,
[Sayad Murtaza Eleventh Viceroy, 1606-1609.] Sayad Murtaza Khán
Bukhári, who had recently been ennobled in consequence of crushing the
rebellion under Jehángír's son Khusrao, was entrusted with the charge
of Gujarát, Sayad Báyazíd being continued as minister. Sayad Murtaza,
who is said to have further ingratiated himself with the emperor by
the present of a magnificent ruby, appears to have been more of a
scholar than a governor. His only notable acts were the repair of
the fort of Kadi [835] and the populating of the Bukhára quarter of
Áhmedábád. During his tenure of power disturbances broke out, and
Rái Gopináth, son of Rája Todar Mal, with Rája Sursingh of Jodhpur,
were sent to Gujarát by way of Málwa Surat and Baroda. They overcame
and imprisoned Kalián, chief of Belpár, [836] but were defeated by
the Mándwa [837] chieftain, and withdrew to Áhmedábád. Rái Gopináth,
obtaining reinforcements, returned to Mándwa and succeeded in capturing
the chief. He then marched against the rebellious Kolis of the Kánkrej,
and took prisoner their leader, whom, on promising not to stir up
future rebellions, he afterwards restored to liberty.

The first connection of the English with Gujarát dates from Sayad
Murtaza's viceroyalty. In A.D. 1608 he allowed Captain Hawkins to
sell goods in Surat.

[Mírza Âzíz Kokaltásh Twelfth Viceroy, 1609-1611.] In A.D. 1609 the
Khán-i-Ázam Mírza Âzíz Kokaltásh was for the fourth time appointed
viceroy of Gujarát. He was allowed to remain at court and send his
son Jehángír Kúli Khán as his deputy with Mohandás Diván and Masûd
Beg Hamadáni. [838] This was the beginning of government by deputy,
a custom which in later times was so injurious to imperial interests.

[Sack of Surat by Malik Âmbar, 1609.] In 1609 Malik Âmbar, chief
minister of Nizám Sháh's court and governor of Daulatábád, invaded
Gujarát at the head of 50,000 horse, and after plundering both the
Surat and Baroda districts retired as quickly as he came. To prevent
such raids a body of 25,000 men was posted at Rámnagar [839] on the
Dakhan frontier, and remained there for four years. The details of
the contingents of this force are:

The Viceroy of Áhmedábád 4000 Men.
The Nobles of his Court 5000 Men.
The Chiefs of Sáler and Mulher (Báglán) 3000 Men.
The Son of the Kachh Chief 2500 Men.
The Chief of Navánagar 2500 Men.
The Chief of Ídar 2000 Men.
{ Now under the Hilly }
The Chief of Dúngarpúr { Tracts Agency, } 2000 Men.
{ Rájputána. }
The Chief of Bánsváda 2000 Men.
The Chief of Rámnagar (Dharampur) 1000 Men.
The Chief of Rájipípla 1000 Men.
The Chief of Áli (Álirájpur under the 300 Men.
Bhopáwar Agency)
The Chief of Mohan (a former capital of the 350 Men.
state of Chhota Udepur in the Rewa Kántha)
----------
Total 25,650 Men.

[Abdulláh Khán Fírúz Jang Thirteenth Viceroy, 1611-1616.] In A.D. 1611
Abdulláh Khán Bahádur Fírúz Jang was appointed thirteenth viceroy of
Gujarát, with Ghiás-ud-dín as his minister, under orders to proceed to
the Dakhan to avenge the recent inroad. [840] The viceroy marched to
the Dakhan but returned without effecting anything. In A.D. 1616, he
was again, in company with prince Sháh Jehán, directed to move against
Ahmednagar. This second expedition was successful. The country was
humbled, and, except Malik Ambar, most of the nobles submitted to the
emperor. During this viceroy's term of office an imperial decree was
issued forbidding nobles on the frontiers and in distant provinces to
affix their seals to any communications addressed to imperial servants.

[Mukarrab Khán Fourteenth Viceroy, 1616.] In A.D. 1616 on their
return to Dehli, Mukarrab Khán, a surgeon who had risen to notice
by curing the emperor Akbar and was ennobled by Jehángír, and
who, since A.D. 1608, had been in charge of Surat or of Cambay,
was appointed fourteenth viceroy of Gujarát, with Muhammad Safi as
his minister. [Elephant-hunting in the Panch Maháls, 1616.] In the
following year (A.D. 1617) the emperor Jehángír came to Gujarát to hunt
wild elephants in the Dohad forests. But owing to the density of the
forest only twelve were captured. Early in A.D. 1618 he visited Cambay
which he notes only vessels of small draught could reach and where he
ordered a gold and silver tanka twenty times heavier than the gold
mohar to be minted. From Cambay after a stay of ten days he went to
Áhmedábád and received the Rája of Ídar. As the climate of Áhmedábád
disagreed with him, Jehángír retired to the banks of the Mahi. [841]
Here the Jám of Navánagar came to pay homage, and presented fifty Kachh
horses, a hundred gold mohars, and a hundred rupees, and received
a dress of honour. The emperor now returned to Áhmedábád, where he
was visited by Rái Bhára of Kachh, who presented 100 Kachh horses,
100 ashrafis [842] and 2000 rupees. The Rái, who was ninety years
of age, had never paid his respects to any emperor. Jehángír, much
pleased with the greatest of Gujarát Zamíndárs, who, in spite of his
ninety years was hale and in full possession of all his senses, gave
him his own horse, a male and female elephant, a dagger, a sword with
diamond-mounted hilt, and four rings of different coloured precious
stones. As he still suffered from the climate, the emperor set out to
return to Ágra, and just at that time (A.D. 1618-19) he heard of the
birth of a grandson, afterwards the famous Abúl Muzaffar Muhiyy-ud-dín
Muhammad Aurangzíb who was born at Dohad in Gujarát. [843] In honour
of this event Sháh Jehán held a great festival at Ujjain.

[Prince Sháh Jehán Fifteenth Viceroy, 1618-1622.] Before the
emperor started for Ágra, he appointed prince Sháh Jehán fifteenth
viceroy of Gujarát in the place of Mukarrab Khán whose general
inefficiency and churlish treatment of the European traders he did
not approve. Muhammad Safi was continued as minister. As Sháh Jehán
preferred remaining at Ujjain he chose Rustam Khán as his deputy; but
the emperor, disapproving of this choice, selected Rája Vikramájit in
Rustam Khán's stead. Shortly after, [Sháh Jehán Rebels, 1622-1623.] in
A.D. 1622-23, Sháh Jehán rebelled, and in one of the battles which took
place Rája Vikramájit was killed. Sháh Jehán, during his viceroyalty,
[Builds the Sháhi Bágh at Áhmedábád.] built the Sháhi Bágh and the
royal baths in the Bhadar at Áhmedábád. After the death of Vikramájit,
his brother succeeded as deputy viceroy. While Sháh Jehán was still
in rebellion, the emperor [Sultán Dáwar Baksh Sixteenth Viceroy,
1622-1624.] appointed Sultán Dáwar Baksh the son of prince Khusrao,
sixteenth viceroy of Gujarát, Muhammad Safi being retained in
his post of minister. Sháh Jehán, who was then at Mándu in Málwa,
appointed on his part Abdulláh Khán Bahádur Fírúz Jang viceroy and
a khájahsara or eunuch of Abdulláh Khán his minister. Sultán Dáwar
Baksh, the emperor's nominee, was accompanied by Khán-i-Ázam Mírza
Âzíz Kokaltásh to instruct him in the management of affairs. Prince
Sháh Jehán had directed his minister to carry away all the treasure;
but Muhammad Safi, who appears to have been a man of great ability,
at once imprisoned the prince's partisans in Áhmedábád, and, among
others, captured the eunuch of Abdulláh Khán. When this news reached
the prince at Mándu, he sent Abdulláh Khán Bahádur with an army to
Gujarát by way of Baroda. Muhammad Safi Khán met and defeated him,
and forced him to fly and rejoin the prince at Mándu. For his gallant
conduct Muhammad Safi received the title of Saif Khán, with an increase
in his monthly pay from £70 to £300 (Rs. 700-3000) and the command
of 3000 horse. Meanwhile Sultán Dáwar Baksh, with the Khán-i-Ázam,
arrived and assumed the charge of the government, but the Khán-i-Ázam
died soon after in A.D. 1624, and was buried at Sarkhej. Sultán Dáwar
Baksh was re-called, and Khán Jehán was appointed deputy viceroy
with Yúsuf Khán as his minister. On his arrival at Áhmedábád, prince
Sháh Jehán employed Khán Jehán in his own service, and sent him as
his ambassador to the emperor. Saif Khán, who acted for him, may be
called the seventeenth viceroy, as indeed he had been the governing
spirit for the last eight or ten years. He held the post of viceroy
of Gujarát until the death of the emperor in A.D. 1627.

[Sháh Jehán Emperor, 1627-1658.] On the death of the emperor
Jehángir, his son Abul Muzaffar Shaháb-ud-dín Sháh Jehán ascended
the throne. Remembering Saif Khán's hostility he at once caused
him to be imprisoned, and [Sher Khán Túar Eighteenth Viceroy,
1627-1632.] appointed Sher Khán Túar eighteenth viceroy with Khwájah
Hayát as his minister. When the emperor was near Surat, he appointed
Mír Shams-ud-dín to be governor of Surat castle. In A.D. 1627, Sháh
Jehán on his way to Dehli visited Áhmedábád and encamped outside of the
city near the Kánkariya lake. Sher Khán was advanced to the command
of 5000 men, and received an increase of salary and other gifts. At
the same time Khán Jehán was appointed his minister, and Mîrza Ísa
Tarkhán was made viceroy of Thatta in Sindh. In A.D. 1628 Khwájah Abúl
Hasan was sent to conquer the country of Násik and Sangamner which
he ravaged, and returned after taking the fort of Chándod and levying
tribute from the chief of Báglán. In A.D. 1630, Jamál Khán Karáwal came
to the Gujarát-Khándesh frontier and captured 130 elephants in the
Sultánpur forests, seventy of which valued at a lákh of rupees were
sent to Dehli. [Famine, 1631-32.] In A.D. 1631-32 Gujarát was wasted
by the famine known as the Satiásio Kál or '87 famine. So severe was
the scarcity that according to the Bádsháh Náma, rank sold for a cake,
life was offered for a loaf, the flesh of a son was preferred to his
love. The emperor opened soup kitchens and alms-houses at Surat and
Áhmedábád and ordered Rs. 5000 to be distributed. [844]

[Islám Khán Nineteenth Viceroy, 1632.] Sher Khán was re-called in
A.D. 1632, but died ere he could be relieved by Islám Khán, the
nineteenth viceroy of Gujarát, along with whom Khwájah Jehán was
chosen minister. Islám Khán's monthly salary was £400 (Rs. 4000),
and his command was raised from 5000 to 6000. In A.D. 1632, Khwájah
Jehán went on pilgrimage to Makkah, and was succeeded as minister by
Ágha Afzal with the title of Afzal Khán. Afzal Khán was soon appointed
commander of Baroda, and Riáyat Khán succeeded him as minister. The
post of viceroy of Gujarát appears to have been granted to whichever
of the nobles of the court was in a position to make the most valuable
presents to the emperor. [Disorder, 1632.] Government became lax, the
Kolis of the Kánkrej committed excesses, and the Jám of Navánagar
withheld his tribute. [Bákar Khán Twentieth Viceroy, 1632.] At
this time Bákar Khán presented the emperor with golden and jewelled
ornaments to the value of Rs. 2,00,000 and was appointed viceroy,
Riáyat Khán being continued as minister. In A.D. 1633 [Sipáhdár Khán
Twenty-first Viceroy, 1633.] Sipáhdár Khán was appointed viceroy,
and presented the emperor with costly embroidered velvet tents with
golden posts worthy to hold the famous Takhti-Táús or Peacock Throne
which was just completed at a cost of one kror of rupees. Riáyat
Khán was continued as minister. [Saif Khán Twenty-second Viceroy,
1633-1635.] In A.D. 1635 Saif Khán was appointed twenty-second viceroy,
with Riáyat Khán as minister. During Saif Khán's tenure of power
Mírza Ísa Tarkhán received a grant [845] of the province of Sorath,
which had fallen waste through the laxity of its governors. Before he
had been in power for more than a year Saif Khán was recalled. As he
was preparing to start, he died at Áhmedábád and was buried in Sháhi
Álam's shrine to which he had added the dome over the tomb and the
mosque to the north of the enclosure.

[Ázam Khán Twenty-third Viceroy, 1635-1642.] At the end of A.D. 1635
Ázam Khán was appointed twenty-third viceroy, with Riáyat Khán
in the first instance, and afterwards with Mír Muhammad Sábir, as
minister. The men who had recently been allowed to act as viceroys
had shown themselves unfit to keep in order the rebellious chiefs and
predatory tribes of Gujarát. For this reason the emperor's choice
fell upon Ázam Khán, a man of ability, who perceived the danger of
the existing state of affairs, and saw that to restore the province
to order, firm, even severe, measures were required. When Ázam Khán
reached Sidhpur, the merchants complained bitterly of the outrages
of one Kánji, a Chúnvália Koli, who had been especially daring in
plundering merchandise and committing highway robberies. [Punishes
the Kolis,] Ázam Khán, anxious to start with a show of vigour,
before proceeding to Áhmedábád, marched against Kánji, who fled to
the village of Bhádar in the Kherálu district of Kadi, sixty miles
north-east of Áhmedábád. Ázam Khán pursued him so hotly that Kánji
surrendered, handed over his plunder, and gave security not only that
he would not again commit robberies, but that he would pay an annual
tribute of £1000 (Rs. 10,000). Ázam Khán then built two fortified
posts in the Koli country, naming one Ázamábád after himself, and the
other Khalílábád after his son. He next marched to Káthiáváda [846]
and [Subdues the Káthis.] subdued the Káthis, who were continually
ravaging the country near Dhandhúka, and to check them erected a
fortified post called Sháhpúr, on the opposite side of the river to
Chuda-Ránpur. Ágha Fázil known as Fázil Khán, who had at one time held
the post of minister, and had, in A.D. 1636, been appointed governor
of Baroda, was now selected to command the special cavalry composing
the bodyguard of prince Muhammad Aurangzíb. At the same time Sayad
Ilahdád was appointed governor of Surat fort, Ísa Tarkhán remaining
at Junágadh. In A.D. 1637, Mír Muhammad Sábir was chosen minister in
place of Riáyat Khán, and in A.D. 1638 Muîz-zul-Mulk was re-appointed
to the command of Surat fort. Shortly after Ázam Khán's daughter
was sent to Dehli, and espoused to the emperor's son Muhammad Shujá
Bahádur. In A.D. 1639, Ázam Khán, who for his love of building was
known as Udhai or the Whiteant, devoted his attention to establishing
fortified posts to check rebellion and robbery in the country of the
Kolis and the Káthis. So complete were his arrangements that people
could travel safely all over Jháláváda, Káthiáváda, Navánagar, and
Kachh.[Revolt of the Jám of Navánagar, 1640.] The Jám, who of late
years had been accustomed to do much as he pleased, resented these
arrangements, and in A.D. 1640 withheld his tribute, and set up a
mint to coin koris. [847] When Ázam Khán heard of this, he marched
with an army against Navánagar, and, on arriving about three miles
from the city, he sent the Jám a peremptory order to pay the arrears
of tribute and to close his mint, ordering him, if any disturbance
occurred in that part of the country, at once to send his son to the
viceroy to learn his will. He further ordered the Jám to dismiss to
their own countries all refugees from other parts of Gujarát. The Jám
being unable to cope with Ázam Khán, acceded to these terms; and Ázam
Khán, receiving the arrears of tribute, returned to Áhmedábád. As Ázam
Khán's stern and somewhat rough rule made him unpopular, Sayad Jálál
Bukhári whose estates were being deserted from fear of him brought
the matter to the emperor's notice.

[Ísa Tarkhán Twenty-fourth Viceroy, 1642-1644.] In consequence in
A.D. 1642 the emperor recalled Ázam Khán and appointed in his place
Mírza Ísa Tarkhán, then governor of Sorath, twenty-fourth viceroy of
Gujarát. And as it was feared that in anger at being re-called Ázam
Khán might oppress some of those who had complained against him, this
order was written by the emperor with his own hand. Thanks to Ázam
Khán's firm rule, the new viceroy found the province in good order,
and was able to devote his attention to financial reforms, among
them the introduction of the share, bhágvatái, system of levying land
revenue in kind. When Mírza Ísa Tarkhán was raised to be viceroy of
Gujarát, he appointed his son Ináyatulláh to be governor of Junágadh,
and Muiz-zul-Mulk to fill the post of minister. During the viceroyalty
of Mírza Ísa Sayad Jalál Bukhári a descendant of Saint Sháhi Álam was
appointed to the high post of Sadr-us-Sudúr or chief law officer for
the whole of India. This was a time of prosperity especially in Surat,
whose port dues which were settled on the Pádsháh Begam had risen from
two and a half to five lákhs. Mírza Ísa Tarkhán's term of power was
brief. In A.D. 1644 the emperor appointed prince Muhammad Aurangzíb to
the charge of Gujarát, Muiz-zul-Mulk being ordered by the emperor to
continue to act as his minister. An event of interest in the next year
(A.D. 1645) is the capture of seventy-three elephants in the forests
of Dohad and Chámpáner. [848]

[Prince Muhammad Aurangzíb Twenty-fifth Viceroy, 1644-1646.] Prince
Aurangzíb's rule in Gujarát was marked by religious disputes. In 1644
a quarrel between Hindus and Musalmáns ended in the prince ordering
a newly built (1638) temple of Chintáman near Saraspur, a suburb of
Áhmedábád, above a mile and a half east of the city, to be desecrated
by slaughtering a cow in it. He then turned the building into a mosque,
but the emperor ordered its restoration to the Hindus. In another
case both of the contending parties were Musalmáns, the orthodox
believers, aided by the military under the prince's orders, who was
enraged at Sayad Ráju one of his followers joining the heretics,
attacking and slaughtering the representatives of the Mahdawiyeh
sect in Áhmedábád. Sayad Ráju's spirit, under the name of Rájú
Shahíd or Rájú the martyr, is still worshipped as a disease-scaring
guardian by the Pinjárás and Mansúris and Dúdhwálas of Áhmedábád. [849]
[Sháistah Khán Twenty-sixth Viceroy, 1646-1648.] In consequence of the
part he had taken in promoting these disturbances, prince Aurangzíb
was relieved and Sháistah Khán appointed twenty-sixth viceroy of
Gujarát. In the following year Muiz-zul-Mulk, who had till then acted
as minister, was recalled, and his place supplied by Háfiz Muhammad
Násir. At the same time the governorship of Surat and Cambay was given
to Áli Akbar of Ispahán. This Áli Akbar was a Persian horse merchant
who brought to Agra seven horses of pure Arabian breed. For six of
these Sháh Jehán paid Rs. 25,000. The seventh a bay so pleased the
emperor that he paid Rs. 15,000 for it, named it the Priceless Ruby,
and considered it the gem of the imperial stud. In A.D. 1646 Áli Akbar
was assassinated by a Hindu and Muiz-zul-Mulk succeeded him as governor
of Surat and Cambay. [Prince Muhammad Dárá Shikoh Twenty-seventh
Viceroy, 1648-1652.] As Sháistah Khán failed to control the Gujarát
Kolis, in A.D. 1648 prince Muhammad Dárá Shikoh was chosen viceroy,
with Ghairat Khán as his deputy and Háfiz Muhammad Násir as minister,
while Sháistah Khán was sent to Málwa to relieve Sháh Nawáz Khán. While
Dárá Shikoh was viceroy an ambassador landed at Surat from the court of
the Turkish Sultán Muhammad IV. (A.D. 1648-1687). [850] In A.D. 1651,
Mír Yahyá was appointed minister in place of Háfiz Muhammad Násir,
and in A.D. 1652 prince Dárá was sent to Kandahár. On [Sháistah Khán
Twenty-eighth Viceroy, 1652-1654.] the transfer of the prince Sháistah
Khán became viceroy for the second time, with Mír Yahyá as minister
and Sultán Yár governor of Baroda with the title of Himmat Khán. Mírza
Ísa Tarkhán was summoned to court from his charge of Sorath and his son
Muhammad Sálih was appointed his successor. In A.D. 1653 an ill-advised
imperial order reducing the pay of the troopers, as well as of the
better class of horsemen who brought with them a certain number of
followers, created much discontent. During this year several changes
of governors were made. Muhammad Násir was sent to Surat, Himmat Khán
to Dholka, the governor of Dholka to Baroda, Kutb-ud-dín to Junágadh,
Sayad Sheikhan son-in-law of Sayad Diler Khán to Tharád under Pátan,
and Jagmál, the holder of Sánand, to Dholka. In the same year Sháistah
Khán made an expedition against the Chunvália Kolis, who, since Ázam
Khán's time (A.D. 1642), had been ravaging Víramgám, Dholka, and Kadi,
and raiding even as far as the villages round Áhmedábád.

[Prince Murád Bakhsh Twenty-ninth Viceroy, 1654-1657.] In spite of
Sháistah Khán's success in restoring order the emperor in A.D. 1654
appointed in his place prince Muhammad Murád Bakhsh twenty-ninth
viceroy of Gujarát. Diánat Khán, and immediately after him Rehmat
Khán, was appointed minister in place of Mír Yahyá. Mujáhid Khán
Jhálori relieved Mír Shams-ud-dín as governor of Pátan and Godhra
was entrusted to Sayad Hasan, son of Sayad Diler Khán, and its
revenues assigned to him. When prince Murád Bakhsh reached Jhábua
[851] on his way to Áhmedábád, the chief presented him with £1500
(Rs. 15,000) as tribute; and when he reached Áhmedábád, Kánji, the
notorious leader of the Chunvália Kolis; surrendered through Sayad
Sheikhan, and promised to remain quiet and pay a yearly tribute of
£1000 (Rs. 10,000). Dildost, son of Sarfaráz Khán, was appointed to
the charge of the post of Bíjápur under Pátan; while Sayad Sheikhan
was made governor of Sádra and Píplod, and Sayad Áli paymaster, with
the title of Radawi Khán. Many other changes were made at the same
time, the prince receiving a grant of the district of Junágadh. One
Pírjí, a Bohora, said to have been one of the richest merchants of
Surat, is noted as sending the emperor four Arab horses and prince
Murád as presenting the emperor with eighteen of the famous Gujarát
bullocks. During the viceroyalty of Dárá Shikoh sums of Rs. 1,00,000
to Rs. 2,00,000 used to be spent on articles in demand in Arabia. The
articles were sent under some trustworthy officer and the proceeds
applied to charitable purposes in the sacred cities.

[Murád proclaims himself Emperor, 1657.] At the end of A.D. 1657, on
the receipt of news that Sháh Jehán was dangerously ill prince Murád
Bakhsh proclaimed himself emperor by the title of Murawwaj-ud-dín and
ordered the reading of the Friday sermon and the striking of coin in
his own name. [852] His next step was to put to death the minister
Áli Naki, and direct his men to seize the fort of Surat then held by
his sister the Begam Sáhibah and to take possession of the property
of the Begam. He imprisoned Abdul-Latíf, son of Islám Khán, an old
servant of the empire. Dárá Shikoh representing Murád's conduct
to the emperor obtained an order to [Kásam Khán Thirtieth Viceroy,
1657-1659.] transfer him to the governorship of the Berárs. Murád
Bakhsh borrowing £55,000 (5 1/2 lákhs of rupees) from the sons of
Sántidás Jauhari, £4000 (Rs. 40,000) from Ravídás partner of Sántidás,
and £8800 (Rs. 88,000) from Sánmal and others, raised an army and
arranged to meet his brother prince Aurangzíb, and with him march
against the Mahárája Jasvatsingh of Jodhpur and Kásam Khán, whom Sháh
Jehán had appointed viceroys of Málwa and Gujarát, and had ordered
to meet at Ujjain and march against the princes. [Victory of Murád
and Aurangzíb.] Murád Bakhsh and Aurangzíb, uniting their forces
early in A.D. 1658, fought an obstinate battle with Jasvantsingh,
in which they were victorious, and entered Ujjain in triumph. From
Ujjain prince Murád Bakhsh wrote Muâtamid Khán his eunuch an order
allotting to Mánikchand £15,000 (Rs. 1,50,000) from the revenues of
Surat, £10,000 (Rs. 1,00,000) from Cambay, £10,000 (Rs. 1,00,00)
from Pitlád, £7500 (Rs. 75,000) from Dholka, £5000 (Rs. 50,000)
from Broach, £4500 (Rs. 45,000) from Víramgám, and £3000 (Rs. 30,000)
from the salt works, in all £55,000 (5 1/2 lákhs of rupees). Further
sums of £4000 (Rs. 40,000) are mentioned as due to Ravidás partner of
Sántidás, and £8800 (Rs. 88,000) to Sánmal and others. From Ujjain
the princes advanced on Agra. At Dholpúr they fought a still more
obstinate battle with the imperial forces commanded by prince Dárá
Shikoh and after a long and doubtful contest were victorious. Prince
Dárá Shikoh fled to Dehli, and the princes advanced and took possession
of Agra. After confining his father, Aurangzíb marched for Mathura,
[Aurangzíb confines Murád, 1658.] and having no further use of Murád,
he there seized and imprisoned him. From Mathura, Aurangzíb went to
Dehli from which Dará Shikoh had meanwhile retired to Láhor.

[Aurangzíb Emperor, 1658-1707.] In A.D. 1658, while his father was
still alive, Aurangzíb assumed the imperial titles and ascended the
throne. In A.D. 1659 he appointed Sháh Nawáz Khán Safávi thirty-first
viceroy of Gujarát, with Rahmat Khán as minister. [Sháh Nawáz Khán
Safávi Thirty-first Viceroy, 1659.] On this occasion Sántidás received
a decree directing that the provincial officials should settle his
accounts and Kutb-ud-dín Kheshgi was appointed to Sorath. Sháh Nawáz
Khán was the father-in-law of both Aurangzíb and Murád Bakhsh. Shortly
after his appointment, while Murád's wife was paying a visit to
her father, [Prince Dárá Rebels, 1659.] prince Dárá Shikoh leaving
Kachh, where he had been hospitably received by the Ráv, made a
sudden descent on Gujarát. The viceroy, won over by the entreaties
of his daughter who saw in the success of Dárá a hope of release for
her husband, joined the prince who entered Áhmedábád. After raising
funds from Surat and Áhmedábád he collected an army of 22,000 horse
and appointing Sayad Áhmed deputy viceroy, marched towards Ajmír,
once more to try his chance of empire. [Is Defeated, 1659.] He was
defeated and fled to Áhmedábád, where Sardár Khán, who had confined
Sayad Áhmed, closed the gates of the city in his face. The unhappy
prince retired to Kachh, but finding no support fled to Sindh, where
he was treacherously seized and handed to his brother by the chief
of Jún. [Jasvantsingh Thirty-second Viceroy, 1659-1662.] The emperor
Aurangzíb, forgiving Jasvantsingh his opposition at Ujjain, conferred
on him the government of Gujarát, and in the place of Rahmat Khán
appointed Makramat Khán to act as minister. Sardár Khán was thanked
for his loyal conduct and made governor of Broach. Praise was also
given to Sher and Ábid of the Bábi family. Presents were bestowed on
Kutb-ud-dín, governor of Sorath, and, shortly after, for his refusal to
help prince Dárá, Tamáchi chief of Kachh was rewarded. These measures
removed all signs of disaffection at the accession of Aurangzíb. A
decree was issued directing Rahmat Khán the minister to forbid the
cultivation of the bhang plant. Mohtasibs or censors were appointed
to prevent the drinking of wine or the use of intoxicating drugs and
preparations. On the formal installation of Aurangzíb in A.D. 1658-59
the Áhmedábád Kázi was ordered to read the sermon in his name. The
Kázi objected that Sháh Jehán was alive. Sheikh Abdul Wahháb, a Sunni
Bohora of Pattan, whom on account of his learning and intelligence
Aurangzíb had made Kázi of his camp, contended that the weakness and
age of Sháh Jehán made a successor necessary. The Bohora prevailed
and the sermon was read in Aurangzíb's name.

[Jasvantsinghji sent against Shiváji, 1662.] In A.D. 1662 Jasvantsingh
received orders to march to the Dakhan and join prince Muâzzam against
Shiváji the Marátha leader; and Kutb-ud-dín, governor of Sorath,
was directed to act for him in his absence. In this year Mahábat Khán
was appointed thirty-third viceroy of Gujarát, and Sardár Khán, the
governor of Broach, was sent to Ídar to suppress disturbances. [Mahábat
Khán Thirty-third Viceroy, 1662-1663.] About A.D. 1664 Ranmalji
or Satarsála Jám of Navánagar died, leaving by a Ráhthod mother
a child named Lákha whom the late chief's brother Ráisinghji with
the aid of the Ráv of Kachh and other Jádejás, set aside and himself
mounted the throne. Malik Ísa, a servant of the family, took Lákha to
Áhmedábád and invoked the aid of the viceroy. [Capture of Navánagar
(Islámnagar), 1664.] Kutb-ud-dín marching on Navánagar, defeated and
slew Ráisingh, took possession of Navánagar, and annexed the territory,
changing the name of the city into Islámnagar. Ráisingh's son, Tamáchi,
then an infant, escaped and was sheltered in Kachh. In the same year
(A.D. 1664) a Balúch personating Dárá Shikoh, was joined by many Kolis,
and disturbed the peace of the Chúnvál, now a portion of the Áhmedábád
collectorate north of Víramgám. With the aid of Sherkhán Bábi, Mahábat
Khán quelled these disturbances, and established two new military
posts, one at Gájna under Cambay and one at Belpár under Petlád.

In this year an imperial decree was received requiring the
discontinuance of the following abuses: The charging of blackmail by
executive subordinates; A tax on private individuals on their cutting
their own trees; Forced purchases by state servants; The levy by
local officers of a tax on persons starting certain crafts; The levy
of a tax on laden carts and on cattle for sale; The closing of Hindu
shops on the Jain Pachusan and at the monthly elevenths or Ekádasi;
Forced labour; The exclusive purchase of new grain by revenue officers;
The exclusive sale by officers of the vegetables and other produce
of their gardens; A tax on the slaughtering of cattle in addition
to that on their sale; Payments to the Ahmednagar Kolis to prevent
Musalmáns praying in the Ahmednagar mosque; The re-opening of certain
Hindu temples; The aggressive conduct and obscenity practised during
the Holi and Diváli holidays; The sale by Hindus of toy horses and
elephants during Musalmán holidays; The exclusive sale of rice by
certain rich Banias; The exclusive purchase by Imperial officers of
roses for the manufacture of rosewater; The mixed gatherings of men
and women at Musalmán shrines; The setting up of nezas or holy hands
and the sitting of harlots on roadsides or in markets; The charging
by revenue officers of scarcity rates; The special tax in Parántij,
Modasa, Vadnagar, Bisnápur, and Harsol on Musalmán owners of mango
trees; The levy of duty both at Surat and Áhmedábád from English and
Dutch merchants. [853]

[Shiváji Plunders Surat, 1664.] In the same year (A.D. 1664)
Shiváji made a rapid descent on Surat, then undefended by walls,
and, by plundering the city, created great alarm over the whole
province. The viceroy Mahábat Khán marched to Surat with the following
chiefs and officers: Jagmál, proprietor of Sánand; the governor of
Dholka; Shádimal, chief of Ídar; Sayad Hasan Khán, governor of Ídar;
Muhammad Ábid with 200 superior landholders of the district of Kadi;
the Rája of Dúngarpur; Sabalsingh Rája of Wadhwán and other chiefs
of Jhálávádh; Lál Kalián chief of Mándva in the Gáikwár's dominions
near Atarsumba; the chief of Elol under Ahmednagar in the Mahi Kántha
Agency; Prathiráj of Haldarvás; and the chief of Belpár. Before the
viceroy's army arrived at Surat Shiváji had carried off his plunder
to his head-quarters at Ráygad. [854] After remaining three months
at Surat levying tribute from the superior landholders, the viceroy
returned to Ahmedábád, and Ináyat Khán, the revenue collector of
Surat, built a wall round the town for its protection. About this
time Kutb-ud-dín Khán, governor of Sorath, was sent with an army
to aid the Mahárája Jasvantsingh in the Dakhan and Sardár Khán was
appointed in his place. In A.D. 1666 the Maráthás again attacked and
plundered Surat, and in the same year the deposed emperor Sháh Jehán
died. Aurangzíb attempted to induce the English to supply him with
European artillerymen and engineers. The request was evaded. [Copper
Coinage Introduced, 1668.] In this year the viceroy, Mahábat Khán,
in place of the old iron coins, introduced a copper coinage into
Gujarát. Sardár Khan, the governor of Junágadh, was put in charge of
Islámnagar (Navánagar) and 500 additional horsemen were placed under
him. Special checks by branding and inspection were introduced to
prevent nobles and others keeping less than their proper contingent
of horse. In the same year the cultivator who paid the rent was
acknowledged to be the owner of the land and a system of strengtheners
or takáwi after due security was introduced.

[Khán Jehán Thirty-fourth Viceroy, 1668-1671.] In A.D. 1668, Bahádur
Khán Khán Jehán, who had formerly been viceroy of Allahábád, was
appointed viceroy of Gujarát, with Háji Shafi Khán, and afterwards
Khwájah Muhammad Háshím, as his ministers. Khán Jehán joined his
government in A.D. 1669, and in A.D. 1670 Shiváji again plundered
Surat. In A.D. 1670 Shiváji made an attempt on Janjira, [855]
the residence and stronghold of the Sídi or Abyssinian admirals
of Bíjápur. [Sídi Yákút the Mughal Admiral, 1670.] Sídi Yákút the
commander of Janjira applied for aid to the governor of Surat. On
his offering to become a vassal of the emperor and place his fleet at
the emperor's disposal, Sídi Yákút received the title of Yákút Khán,
and a yearly subsidy of £15,000 (Rs. 1,50,000) payable from the port
of Surat. About the same time Sayad Diler Khán, who had accompanied
Mahárája Jasvantsingh to the Dakhan, was recalled by the viceroy
Khán Jehán and appointed governor of Sorath in place of Sardár Khán,
who was sent to Ídar. Sayad Haidar, in charge of the military post
of Haidarábád, about twenty-four miles south of Áhmedábád, reported
that he had put down the rebellion but recommended that a small fort
should be built. In A.D. 1670 the emperor summoned Diler Khán to
discuss Dakhan affairs, and sent him to the seat of war, replacing
him in the government of Sorath by Sardár Khán.

[Mahárája Jasvantsingh Thirty-fifth Viceroy, 1671-1674.] In A.D. 1671,
Bahádur Khán Khán Jehán was sent as viceroy to the Dakhan. He was
relieved by the Mahárája Jasvantsingh, who, as viceroy, received an
assignment of the districts of Dhandhúka and Pitlád. In A.D. 1673
through the intercession of the viceroy, Jám Tamáchi, the son of
Ráisingh, on condition of serving the viceroy and of keeping order
was restored to Navánagar, and twenty-five villages were granted to
certain dependent Jádeja Rájputs. So long as the emperor Aurangzíb
lived the city of Navánagar (Islámnagar) remained in the hands of a
Musalmán noble, the Jám residing at Khambhália, a town about thirty
miles south-west of the head-quarters of the state. In A.D. 1707,
on Aurangzíb's death, the Jám was allowed to return to Navánagar
where he built a strong fort. Similarly so long as Aurangzíb lived,
the Jám forbore to work the pearl fisheries in the Gulf of Kachh,
but afterwards again made use of this source of revenue. Early in
1674 an order issued forbidding the levy from Musalmáns of rahádari
or transit dues, of taxes on fish vegetables grass firewood and other
forest produce, on Muhammadan artisans, and many other miscellaneous
dues. The officer in charge of Morví, which was then an imperial
district, was ordered to strive to increase its population and revenue,
and the chief of Porbandar, also an imperial district, on condition of
service and of protecting the port was allowed a fourth share of its
revenue. Much discontent was caused by enforcing an imperial order
confiscating all wazífah land, that is all land held on religious
tenure by Hindus.

[Muhammad Amín Khán Umdat-ul-Mulk Thirty-sixth Viceroy,
1674-1683.] About the close of the year A.D. 1674, Mahárája
Jasvantsinghji was relieved and sent to Kábul, and Muhammad Amín Khán
Umdat-ul-Mulk, who had just been defeated at Kábul, was appointed
thirty-sixth viceroy of Gujarát, receiving an assignment of the
districts of Pátan and Víramgám. Among the military posts mentioned
in the Mirat-i-Áhmedi is that of Sádra or Sháhdarah the present
head-quarters of the Mahi Kántha Agency, also called Islámábád,
[856] which was under the command of Sayad Kamál, son of Sayad
Kámil. [Increased Power of the Bábi Family.] The Bábi family were
now rising into importance. Muhammad Muzaffar, son of Sher Khán Bábi,
was governor of Kadi, and Muhammad Mubáriz, another son of Sher Bábi,
was in charge of one of the posts under Kadi. Kamál Khán Jhálori,
who had been removed from the government of Pálanpur and replaced
by Muhammad Fateh, was now restored to his former post. About the
same time, at the representation of Mulla Hasan Gujaráti, twenty-one
villages were taken from Bijápur and Kadi and Pátan and formed into the
separate division of Visalnagar. In A.D. 1676, the fort of Junágadh was
put into repair, and Sheikh Nizám-ud-dín Áhmed, minister of Gujarát,
was sent to Málwa, and was succeeded by Muhammad Sharíf. The Kánkrej
Kolis were again rebellious, and Muhammad Amín Khán Umdat-ul-Mulk went
against them and remained four months in their country, subduing them
and enforcing tribute. In the end of A.D. 1678, the viceroy paid his
respects to the emperor at Ajmír. The emperor forbade the fining of
Musalmán officials as contrary to the Muhammadan law and directed
that if guilty of any fault they should be imprisoned or degraded
from office, but not fined. An order was also given to change the
name of the new Visalnagar district to Rasúlnagar.

At this time (A.D. 1679) the emperor was doing his utmost to crush
both the Rána of Udepur and the Ráthods of Márwár. While the emperor
was at Chitor, Bhímsing the Rána's youngest son raided into Gujarát
plundering Vadnagar Visalnagar and other towns and villages. [Revolt
of Ídar, 1679.] The chief of Ídar, thinking the opportunity favourable
for regaining his independence, expelled the Muhammadan garrison from
Ídar and established himself in his capital. Muhammad Amín Khán sent
Muhammad Bahlol Khán Shirwáni who with the help of the Kasbátis of
Parántij re-took Ídar, and the chief pursued by Bahlol Khán fled to
the hills, where he died in a cave from want of his usual dose of opium
to which he was much addicted. His body was found by a woodcutter who
brought the head to Bahlol Khán. The head was recognized by the chief's
widow, who from that day put on mourning. Muhammad Bahlol Khán was
much praised, and was appointed to the charge of Ídar, and at the same
time the minister Muhammad Sharíf was succeeded by Abdúl Latíf. [857]

To this time belongs an imperial decree imposing the jazyah or head
tax on all subjects not professing the Muhammadan faith, and another
regulating the levy from Musalmáns of the zakát or poor rate. [858]
In 1681 a severe famine led to riots in Áhmedábád. As the viceroy
Muhammad Amín was returning in state from the Íd prayers Abu Bakr an
Áhmedábád Sheikh instigated the people to throw stones and dust. The
viceroy's bodyguard attacked the mob, but owing to the viceroy's
forbearance no serious results followed. On hearing of the riot the
emperor ordered the city to be put under martial law. The more politic
viceroy contented himself by inviting Sheikh Abu Bakr and others to a
banquet. After dinner he gave a piece of a poisoned watermelon to Abu
Bakr, who died and the riot with him. In A.D. 1683 Muhammad Amín the
viceroy died. According to the Mirat-i-Áhmedi, Muhammad Amín was one
of the best of Gujarát governors. The emperor Aurangzíb used to say
'No viceroy of mine keeps order like Amín Khán.'

[Mukhtár Khán Thirty-seventh Viceroy, 1683-1684] Amín Khán was
succeeded by Mukhtár Khán as thirty-seventh viceroy, Abdul Latíf
continuing to hold the office of minister. Fresh orders were passed
forbidding import dues on merchandise, fruit, grass, firewood, and
similar produce entering Áhmedábád. In 1682 a decree was received
ordering pauper prisoners to be provided with rations and dress at
the cost of the state. In 1683 the Sábarmati rose so high that the
water reached as far as the Tín Darwázah or Triple Gateway in the
west of Áhmedábád city. In consequence of disturbances in Sorath the
viceroy called on the minister to advance funds for an expedition. The
minister refused to make advances without special orders from the
emperor. On a reference to court the minister was directed to make
advances in emergent cases. In A.D. 1684, at the request of the
inhabitants of that city Abdúr Rahmán Krori, the governor of Deva
Pátan, was removed and in his place Muhammad Sayad chose Sardár Khán
as governor of Sorath. In the following year on the death of Sardár
Khán at Thatha in Sindh, where he had gone as viceroy, he was, in
the first instance, succeeded in the government of Sorath by Sayad
Muhammad Khán. Not long after Sorath was assigned as a personal estate
to the emperor's second son prince Muhammad Ázam Sháh Bahádur and
during the prince's absence Sháhwardi Khán was sent to manage its
affairs. [Famine, 1684.] In A.D. 1684 a famine in Gujarát raised the
price of grain in Áhmedábád to such a degree that Sheikh Muhy-ud-dín,
the son of the Kázi and regulator of prices, was mobbed.

[Shujáât Khán (Kártalab Khán) Thirty-eighth Viceroy, 1684-1703.] On
the death of the viceroy in 1684 prince Muhammad Ázam Sháh was
nominated to succeed him with Kártalab Khán, governor of Sorath, as
his deputy. Before the prince took charge Kártalab Khán was raised
to the post of viceroy, and Muhammad Táhir appointed minister. In
addition to his command as viceroy of Gujarát, Kártalab Khán was
afterwards placed in charge of Jodhpur. In this rearrangement besides
his previous personal estate, the district of Petlád was assigned to
prince Muhammad Ázam Sháh, and Sher Afghan Khán, son of Sháhwardi
Khán, was appointed governor of Sorath. In A.D. 1687, Sher Afghan
Khán was relieved by Bahlol Shirwáni, but in the following year was
restored to his command. In A.D. 1689, on the news of the death of
its governor Ináyat Khán, Kártalab Khán started to settle the affairs
of Jodhpur. As soon as he left Áhmedábád, a rumour spread that a
new viceroy was coming, and the troops, with whom as well as with
the people of Gujarát Kártalab was most popular, grew mutinous. [He
Quells a Mutiny, 1689.] On hearing of this disturbance Kártalab Khán
at once returned to Áhmedábád and quelled the mutiny. His firmness
so pleased the emperor that he gave him the title of Shujaât Khán,
and placed the governor of Jodhpur under his orders. Shujaât Khán now
proceeded to Jodhpur, where Durgádás Ráthod, who had incited prince
Abkar to rebellion, and Ajítsingh, the son of Mahárája Jasvantsingh,
were causing disturbance. Finding that a strong resident governor was
required to keep the insurgents in check, Shujaât Khán appointed Kázim
Beg Muhammad Amín, a brave and resolute soldier, to be his deputy and
returned to Áhmedábád. During this viceroyalty the pay of the leader
or jamádár of a troop of fifty horse was fixed at £10 (Rs. 100); of
a do-aspah or two-horse trooper at £6 (Rs. 60); and of an ek-aspah or
one-horse trooper at £3 (Rs. 30) a month. An imperial order was also
issued directing the levy on merchandise to be taken at the place
and time of sale instead of the time and place of purchase. As this
change caused loss to the revenue the old system was again adopted. In
A.D. 1690 the minister Amánat Khán, with the title of Ítimád Khán, was
made military governor of Surat, and Sayad Muhsín was chosen minister
in his place. To prevent the peons of great officials extorting fees
and dues officials were forbidden to entertain peons without payment.

[Revolt of Matiás and Momnás, 1691.] In the following year (A.D. 1691)
an attempt on the part of the emperor to suppress a body of Musalmán
sectarians led to a somewhat serious insurrection. Sayad Sháhji was
the religious preceptor of the Matiás of Khándesh and the Momnás of
Gujarát, two classes of converted Hindus closely allied to the Khojás
of Káthiáváda, all of them being followers of Sayad Imám-ud-dín an
Ismáîliáh missionary who came to Gujarát during the reign of Mahmúd
Begada (A.D. 1459-1513). Hearing that his followers paid obeisance to
their veiled spiritual guide by kissing his toe, the emperor ordered
the guide to be sent to court to be examined before the religious
doctors. Afraid of the result of this examination, the Sayad committed
suicide and was buried at Karamtah nine miles south of Áhmedábád. The
loss of their leader so enraged his followers that, collecting from
all sides, they marched against Broach, seized the fort, and slew the
governor. The insurgents held the fort of Broach against the governor
of Baroda who was sent to punish them, and for a time successfully
resisted the efforts of his successor Nazar Áli Khán. At last, at an
unguarded spot, some of the besiegers stole over the city wall and
opening the gates admitted their companions. The Momnás were defeated
and almost all slain as they sought death either by the sword or by
drowning to merit their saint's favour in the next world.

[Disturbances in Káthiáváda, 1692.] In A.D. 1692 Shujáât Khán, during
his tribute-gathering campaign in Jháláváda and Sorath, stormed the
fort of Thán, the head-quarters of the plundering Káthis and after
destroying the fort returned to Áhmedábád. Shujáât Khán was one of
the ablest of Gujarát viceroys. He gave so much of his attention to
the management of Jodhpur, that he used to spend about six months
of every year in Márwár. He beautified Áhmedábád by building the
college and mosque still known by his name near the Lál Gate. In
A.D. 1642 two hundred cart-loads of marble were received from the
ancient buildings at Pátan and the deputy governor Safdar Khán Bábi
wrote that if a thousand cart-loads more were required they could be
supplied from the same source. At this time the emperor ordered that
Sheikh Akram-ud-dín, the local tax-collector, should levy the head tax
from the Hindus of Pálanpur and Jhálor. The viceroy deputed Muhammad
Mujáhid, son of Kamál Khán Jhálori, governor of Pálanpur to help in
collecting. [Disturbances in Márwár.] As Durgádás Ráthod was again
stirring tumults and sedition in Márwár, the viceroy went to Jodhpur,
and by confirming their estates to the chief vassals and landholders
and guaranteeing other public measures on condition of service,
persuaded them to abandon their alliance with Durgádás against whom
he sent his deputy Kázim Beg, who expelled him from Márwár. After
appointing Kunvár Muhkamsingh, governor of Mertha in Márwár, Shujáât
Khán returned to Áhmedábád. In A.D. 1693, at the request of Sher
Afghan Khán, governor of Sorath, the walls of the fort of Jagat
were restored. In this year the viceroy went to Jháláváda to exact
tribute. On his return to Áhmedábád Safdar Khán Bábi, governor of
Pátan, wrote to the viceroy, and at his request the forts of Kambhoi
and Sámprah were repaired. The viceroy now went to Jodhpúr and from
that returned to Áhmedábád. A circumstance in connection with a sum of
Rs. 7000 spent on the repairs of forts illustrates the close imperial
supervision of provincial accounts. The item having come to imperial
notice from the provincial disbursement sheets was disallowed as unfair
and ordered to be refunded under the rule that such charges were to be
met out of their incomes by the local governors and military deputy
governors. Imperial officers were also from time to time deputed
to collect from the books of the desái's statements of provincial
disbursements and receipts for periods of ten years that they might
render an independent check. In this year the emperor hearing that
Ajítsingh and Durgádás were again contemplating rebellion ordered
the viceroy to Jodhpur. Muhammad Mubáriz Bábi was at the same time
appointed deputy governor of Vadnagar, and an order was issued that
the revenue of Pátan should be paid to Shujáât Khán instead of as
formerly into the imperial treasury. In this year also Safdar Khán
Bábi, governor of Pátan, was succeeded by Mubáriz Khán Bábi. Not
long afterwards under imperial orders the viceroy directed Muhammad
Mubáriz Bábi to destroy the Vadnagar temple of Hateshwar-Mahádev the
Nágar Bráhmans' special guardian.

In A.D. 1696, Muhammad Bahlol Shírwáni, governor of Baroda, died,
and his place was supplied by Muhammad Beg Khán. During this year the
viceroy again went to Jodhpúr and remained there for some months. In
A.D. 1697 Buláki Beg the mace-bearer arrived from the imperial
court to settle disputes connected with the Navánagar succession,
and to inquire into complaints made by the inhabitants of Sorath. In
1696 an imperial circular was addressed to all officers in charge
of districts ordering them to show no respect or consideration
for royalty in their efforts to capture or kill the rebel prince
Akbar. [Durgádás Ráthod reconciled to the Emperor, 1697.] About the
same time Durgádás Ráthod, in whose charge were the son and daughter of
prince Akbar, made an application to Shujáât Khán, proposing a truce,
and saying that he wished personally to hand the children to their
grandfather. Shujaât Khán agreed and Durgádás restored Akbar's children
to the emperor. Aurangzíb finding the children able to repeat the
whole Kurâán was much pleased with Durgádás, and made peace with him,
assigning him as a personal estate the lands of Mertha in Jodhpur, and
afterwards adding to this the grant of Dhandhúka and other districts
of Gujarát. In consequence of a failure of crops the price of grain
rose so high that the government share of the produce was brought to
Áhmedábád and sold in public to the poor and needy. About this time
Muhammad Mubáriz Bábi was killed by a Koli who shot him with an arrow
while he was sacking the village of Sámprah. [859] Safdar Khán Bábi
was appointed deputy governor of Pátan in his stead.

In the same year it was reported to the emperor that the money-changers
and capitalists of Áhmedábád in making payments passed money short
of weight to poor men and in receiving charged an exchange of two to
three tankás the rupee. The Súbah and minister were ordered to stop
the currency of rupees more than two surkhs short. [860]

[Scarcity, 1698.] In A.D. 1698, on the death of Ítimád Khán, his son
Muhammad Muhsín was made minister, and he was ordered to hand the
district of Mertha to Durgádás Ráthod. Among other changes Muhammad
Muním was raised to the command of the fort of Jodhpur and Khwájáh
Abdul Hamíd was appointed minister. Owing to a second failure of rain
1698 was a year of much scarcity in Márwár and north Gujarát. The
accounts of this year notice a petition addressed to the viceroy by
a Sinor Bráhman, praying that he might not be seized as a carrier or
labourer. [861] In connection with some revenue and civil affairs,
a difference of opinion arose between Shujáât Khán and Safdar Khán
Bábi, deputy governor of Pátan. Safdar Khán resigned, and, until a
successor was appointed, Muhammad Bahlol Shírwáni was directed to
administer the Pátan district. In the same year the emperor bestowed
the government of Sorath on Muhammad Beg Khán. In A.D. 1699 Durgádás
Ráthod obtained from the emperor not only a pardon for Ajítsingh, son
of the late Mahárája Jasvantsingh, but procured him an assignment of
lands in, as well as the official charge of, the districts of Jhálor
and Sáchor in Márwár. Mujáhid Khán Jhálori, who as representing a
family of landholders dating as far back as the Gujarát Sultáns,
had held Jhálor and Sáchor, now received in their stead the lands in
Pálanpur and Dísa which his descendants still hold. In this year also
(A.D. 1699) Amánat Khán, governor of Surat, died, and the Maráthás
making a raid into the province, Shujáât Khán sent Nazar Áli Khán to
drive them out. About this time an imperial order arrived, addressed
to the provincial díwán directing him to purchase 1000 horses for
the government at the average rate of £20 (Rs. 200).

[Prince Muhammad Aâzam Thirty-ninth Viceroy, 1703-1705.] In A.D. 1700
on the death of Fírúz Khán Mewáti, deputy governor of Jodhpúr, the
viceroy appointed in his place Muhammad Záhid from Víramgám. Rája
Ajítsingh of Márwár was now ordered to repair to court, and as he
delayed, a mohsal or speed fine was imposed upon him in agreement
with Shujáât Khán's directions. About this time an order came to
Kamál Khán Jhálori for the despatch to the emperor of some of the
Pálanpur chítáhs or hunting leopards which are still in demand in other
parts of India. In the same year the manager of Dhandhúka on behalf
of Durgádás Ráthod, asked the viceroy for aid against the Káthis,
who were plundering that district. The viceroy ordered Muhammad Beg,
governor of Sorath, to march against them. At this time Shujáât Khán
despatched Nazar Áli Khán with a large force to join the imperial
camp which was then at Panhála in Kolhápur. Shujáât Khán, who had so
long and ably filled the office of viceroy in a most critical time,
died in A.D. 1703. In his place prince Muhammad Aâzam Sháh, who was
then at Dhár in Málwa, was appointed thirty-ninth viceroy of Gujarát,
as well as governor of Ajmír and Jodhpur; and until his arrival
the minister Khwájáh Abdul Hamíd Khán was ordered to administer the
province. Owing to the recall of the late governor's troops from many
of the posts disorders broke out in the Pátan districts and the Kolis
plundered the country and made the roads impassable.

On his way from the Dakhan to Áhmedábád, the chief of Jhábua, a state
now under the Bhopáwar Agency, paid his respects to the new viceroy
and presented him with a tribute of £1600 (Rs. 16,000). Among other
arrangements the prince sent to Jodhpur Jáfar Kuli, son of Kázim
Beg, as deputy governor, and appointed Durgádás Ráthod governor of
Pátan. Shortly after, on suspicion of his tampering with the Ráthod
Rájputs, an order came from the emperor to summon Durgádás to the
prince's court at Áhmedábád, and there confine him or slay him. [862]
[Intrigue against Durgádás Ráthod, 1703.] Safdar Khán Bábi, who,
in displeasure with Shujáât Khán had retired to Málwa, returned and
offered to slay or capture Durgádás, who was accordingly invited to
the prince's court at Áhmedábád. Durgádás came and pitched his camp
at the village of Báreja on the Sábarmati near Áhmedábád. On the day
Durgádás was to present himself, the prince, on pretence of a hunt,
had ordered the attendance of a strong detachment of the army. When
all was ready and Safdar Khán Bábi and his sons appeared mailed and
gauntleted the prince sent for Durgádás. As this day was an eleventh or
agiáras Durgádás had put off waiting on the prince until the fast was
over. [Durgádás Ráthod Escapes.] Growing suspicious of the number of
messengers from the prince, he burned his tents and fled. Safdar Khán
Bábi was sent in pursuit. He was overtaking Durgádás when Durgádás'
grandson praying his grandfather to make good his escape, stayed behind
with a band of followers, charged the pursuers, and after a gallant
combat, he and his Rájputs were slain. The grandson of Durgádás was
killed in a hand-to-hand fight with Salábat Khán, the son of Safdar
Khán Bábi. Emerald rings are to this day worn by youths of the Bábi
families of North Gujarát in memory of the emerald earrings which
adorned the young Rájput and were afterwards worn by Salábat as
trophies of this fight. Meanwhile Durgádás had reached Unjáh-Unáwa,
forty miles east of Pátan, and from Unjáh made his way to Pátan. From
Pátan, taking his family with him, he retired to Tharád, and from
that to Márwár, where he was afterwards joined by Ajítsingh of Márwár,
whom the emperor opposed on the ground of illegitimacy. The imperial
troops followed and took possession of Pátan, putting to death the
head of the city police.

In his old age the emperor Aurangzíb became more and more strict in
religious matters. In 1702 an imperial order forbad the making of
almanacs as contrary to the Muhammadan law. Hindus were also forbidden
to keep Muhammadan servants.

[Surat, 1700-1703.] About this time (A.D. 1700) news arrived that
the Maráthás with a force of 10,000 horse were threatening Surat
from the foot of the Kására pass and the confines of Sultánpur and
Nandurbár. The viceroy despatched a body of troops to guard Surat
against their incursions. Disputes between the government and
the Portuguese were also injuring the trade of the province. In
A.D. 1701 the viceroy received an order from Court directing him
to destroy the temple of Somnáth beyond possibility of repair. The
despatch adds that a similar order had been issued at the beginning
of Aurangzíb's reign. In A.D. 1703, at the request of the merchants
of Gujarát, with the view of inducing the Portuguese to let ships
from Surat pass unmolested and release some Musalmáns who had been
imprisoned on their way back from Makkah, orders were issued that
certain confiscated Portuguese merchandise should be restored to its
owners. An imperial order was also received to encourage the art of
brocade weaving in Áhmedábád. In A.D. 1704, Safdar Khán Bábi was
raised to be governor of Bijápur, about fifty miles north-east of
Áhmedábád. Sarandáz Khán was at the same time appointed to Sorath
instead of Muhammad Beg Khán, who was placed in charge of the lands
round Áhmedábád. As the Maráthás once more threatened Surat, Mustafa
Kuli, governor of Broach, was sent with 1000 horse to defend the city.

Certain passages in Aurangzíb's letters to prince Aâzam when
(A.D. 1703-1705) viceroy of Gujarát, show how keen and shrewd an
interest the aged emperor maintained in the government of his
viceroys. In Letter 19 he writes to prince Aâzam: To take the
government of Sorath from Fateh Jang Khán Bábi and give it to your
chamberlain's brother is to break a sound glass vessel with your own
hands. These Bábis have been time out of mind a respected race in
Gujarát and are well versed in the arts of war. There is no sense
in giving the management of Sorath to anyone but to a Bábi. Sorath
is a place which commanders of five thousand like Hasan Álikhán and
Safshikan Khán have with difficulty administered. If your officers
follow the principles laid down by the late Shujáât Khán, it will be
well. If they do not, the province of Gujarát is such that if order
is broken in one or two places, it will not soon be restored. For
the rest you are your own master. I say not, do this or do that; look
that the end is good, and do that which is easiest. In another passage
(Letter 37 to the same prince Aâzam) Aurangzíb writes: You who are a
well intentioned man, why do you not retaliate on oppressors? Over
Hájipúr Aminpúr and other posts where atrocities occur every day,
and at Kapadvanj where the Kolis rob the highways up to the posts,
you have made your chamberlain and artillery superintendent your
commandant. He entrusted his powers to his carrion-eating and
fraudulent relatives. Owing to his influence the oppressed cannot
come to you.... You ought to give the command to one of the Gujarátis
like Safdar Khán Bábi or one of the sons of Bahlúl Shírwáni who have
earned reputations during the administration of the late Shujáât Khán
and who are popular with the people. Else I tell you plainly that on
the Day of Justice we shall be caught for neglecting to punish the
oppressions of our servants.

[Ibráhím Khán Fortieth Viceroy, 1705.] In A.D. 1705, as the climate
of Gujarát did not agree with prince Aâzam, Ibráhím Khán, viceroy
of Kashmír, was appointed fortieth viceroy of Gujarát, and his son
Zabardast Khán, viceroy of Láhor, was appointed to the government of
Ajmír and Jodhpur. Prince Aâzam at once went to Burhánpur in Khándesh,
handing charge of Gujarát to the minister Abdúl Hamíd Khán until
the new viceroy should arrive. Durgádás Ráthod now asked for and
received pardon. Abdúl Hamíd Khán was ordered to restore the lands
formerly granted to Durgádás, and Durgádás was directed to act under
Abdúl Hamíd's orders. In A.D. 1705 the emperor learned that Khánji, a
successor of Kutb the high priest of the Ismáîlia Bohorás, had sent out
twelve missionaries to win people to his faith, and that his followers
had subscribed Rs. 1,14,000 to relieve those of their number who were
imprisoned. The emperor ordered that the twelve missionaries should be
secured and sent to him and appointed Sunni Mullás to preach in their
villages and bring the Bohoras' children to the Sunni form of faith.

[The Maráthás enter Gujarát.] About this time (A.D. 1705) the Maráthás,
who had long been hovering on the south-east frontiers of the province,
bursting into south Gujarát with an army 15,000 strong, under the
leadership of Dhanáji Jádhav, defeated the local forces and laid
the country waste. Abdúl Hamíd Khán, who was then in charge of the
province, ordered all governors of districts and officers in charge
of posts to collect their men and advance to Surat. Between Nazar
Áli Khán and Safdar Khán Bábi, the officers in command of this army,
an unfortunate jealousy prevailed. Not knowing where the Maráthás
were to be found, they halted on the Narbada near the Bába Piárah
ford. Here they remained for a month and a half, the leaders contenting
themselves with sending out spies to search for the enemy. At last,
hearing of the approach of the Maráthás, they sent to head-quarters
asking for artillery and other reinforcements. In reply, Abdúl Hamíd
Khán, a man of hasty temper, upbraided them for their inactivity
and for allowing so much time to pass without making their way to
Surat. [Battle of Ratanpúr. Defeat of the Musalmáns, 1705.] Orders
were accordingly at once issued for an advance, and the army next
halted at Ratanpúr in Rájpípla. Here, apparently from the jealousy
of the commanders, the different chiefs pitched their camps at some
distance from each other. Finding the enemy's forces thus scattered,
the Maráthás, under the command of Dhanáji Jádhav, lost no time in
advancing against them. First attacking the camp of Safdar Khán Bábi,
they defeated his troops, killed his son, and took prisoner the chief
himself. Only a few of his men, with his nephew Muhammad Aâzam, escaped
to the camp of Nazar Áli Khán. Next, the Maráthás attacked the army
under Muhammad Purdil Khán Shirwáni; and it also they defeated. Of
the Musalmán army those who were not slain, drowned in the Narbada,
or captured, reached Broach in miserable plight, where they were
relieved by Akbar Áli Khán. Nazar Áli Khán burned his tents and
surrendered to the Maráthás, by whom he was well treated.

[Battle of the Bába Piárah Ford. Second Defeat of the Musalmáns,
1705.] The Maráthás now heard that Abdúl Hamíd Khán was coming with
an army to oppose them. Thinking he would not risk a battle, they
went to the Bába Piárah ford, and there crossed the Narbada. That
very day Abdúl Hamíd Khán, with Muhammad Sher and Muhammad Salábat,
sons of Safdar Khán Bábi, and others came to the spot where the
Maráthás were encamped. All night long they were harassed by the
Maráthás, and next morning found the enemy ready for a general
attack. The Muhammadans, weary with watching, dispirited from the
defeats of Safdar Khán, and inferior in number to their assailants,
were repulsed and surrounded. The two sons of Safdar Khán Bábi,
and two other nobles, seeing that the day was lost, cut their way
through the enemy and escaped, Abdúl Hamíd Khán, Nazar Áli Khán,
and many others were taken prisoners. The Maráthás plundered the
Muhammadan camp, declared their right to tribute, levied sums from
the adjacent towns and villages and extorted heavy ransoms which in
the case of Abdúl Hamíd Khán was fixed at as large a sum as £30,000
(Rs. 3 lákhs). [Koli Disturbances.] The Kolis, seeing the disorganized
state of Gujarát, began ravaging the country, and plundered Baroda
for two days. At Áhmedábád Muhammad Beg Khán, who had been appointed
governor of Sorath, was recalled to defend the capital. When the news
of the defeat at Bába Piárah reached Dehli, the emperor despatched
prince Muhammad Bidár Bakht with a large army to drive out the
invaders. Before this force reached Gujarát the Maráthás had retired.

[Prince Muhammad Bídár Bakht Forty-First Viceroy, 1705-1706.] Prince
Muhammad Bídár Bakht arrived in A.D. 1705 as forty-first viceroy, and
appointed Amánat Khán governor of the ports of Surat and Cambay. News
was now received that Ajítsingh of Jodhpur and Verisálji of Rájpípla
were about to rebel, and the prince took measures to check their
plans. About this time the emperor, hearing that an attack had
been made on the Muhammadan post at Dwárka, ordered the temple to
be levelled to the ground. It seems doubtful whether this order was
carried out. Nazar Áli Khán, who had formerly enjoyed a grant of Halvad
in Jháláváda, had been driven out by Chandrasingh, chief of Vánkáner;
but, on condition of his expelling Chandrasingh, these lands were again
granted to him. Kamál Khán Jhálori, leaving under his son Fírúz Khán
at Pálanpur a body of men for the defence of his charge, advanced to
Áhmedábád to guard the city from Marátha attack. He petitioned that
according to Gujarát custom his troops should receive rations so long
as they were employed on imperial service. To this request the emperor
agreed and issued orders to the provincial minister. [Durgádás Ráthod
again in Rebellion.] Shortly after Durgádás Ráthod took advantage of
the general confusion to rejoin Ajítsingh, and an army was sent to
Tharád against them. Ajítsingh was at first forced to retire. Finally
he succeeded in defeating Kunvar Muhkamsingh, and marching on Jodhpur
recovered it from Jaâfar Kuli, son of Kázím Beg. Durgádás meanwhile had
taken shelter with the Kolis. At the head of a band of robbers, meeting
Sháh Kúli the son of Kázím Beg on his way to join his appointment
as deputy governor of Pátan, Durgádás attacked and killed him. And
soon after at Chaniár in the Chunvál, laying in wait for Maâsúm Kúli,
the governor of Víramgám, he routed his escort, Maâsum Kúli escaping
with difficulty. On condition of being appointed governor of Pátan
Safdar Khán Bábi now offered to kill or capture Durgádás. His offer
was accepted, and as from this time Durgádás is no more heard of, it
seems probable that Safdar Khán succeeded in killing him. [Ibráhím
Khán Forty-second Viceroy, 1706.] As the disturbed state of the
province seemed to require a change of government Ibráhím Khán, who
had been appointed viceroy in the previous year, was ordered to join
his post. This order he reluctantly obeyed in A.D. 1706.

SECTION II.--Fifty Years of Disorder, 1707-1757.

[The Maráthás advance to Áhmedábád and levy Tribute, 1707.] With the
death of the emperor Aurangzíb, early in A.D. 1707, the period of
strong government which had latterly from year to year been growing
weaker came to an end. As soon as Aurangzíb's death was known, the
Maráthás under Báláji Vishvanáth burst into east Gujarát, marching
by Jhábua and Godhra, where they were ineffectually opposed by
the governor Murád Baksh. From Godhra they went to and plundered
the town of Mahuda in Kaira, and proposed marching on Áhmedábád by
way of Nadiád. The viceroy prepared to resist them, and, enlisting
special troops, camped outside of the city near the Kánkariya lake. Of
the warlike population on the north bank of the Sábarmati opposite
Áhmedábád nearly eight thousand Musalmán horse and three thousand foot
together with four thousand Rájpúts and Kolis in three days gathered
at the Kánkariya camp. The viceroy was also joined by Abdúl Hádi
Pandemal the viceroy's minister, Abdúl Hamíd Khán provincial minister,
Muhammad Beg Khán, Nazar Áli Khán, Safdar Khán Bábi, and several other
deputy governors with their retinues and artillery. Though strong in
numbers the practised eye of the viceroy failed to find in the host
that firmness and unity of purpose which could alone ensure victory
over the Marátha hordes. The Maráthás did much mischief, plundering as
far as Batva, only four-and-a-half miles from the viceroy's camp. The
author of the Mirat-i-Áhmedi, whose father was an actor in these
scenes, describes the panic in the capital of Gujarát which since
its capture by Muzaffar in A.D. 1583 had been free from the horrors
of war. Crowds of scared and terror-stricken men, women and children
laden with as much of their property as they could carry were pressing
from the suburbs into the city. In the city the streets were crowded
with squatters. The cries of parents bereft of children, added to
the din and turmoil of the soldiery, was like the horror of the Day
of Resurrection. The dejected faces of the soldiers beaten in the
late engagements added to the general gloom. The viceroy, thoroughly
alarmed, concluded a treaty with Báláji, and on receiving a tribute of
£21,000 (Rs. 2,10,000) the Maráthás withdrew. Meanwhile, in the contest
between the princes for the throne of Dehli, prince Muhammad Aâzam Sháh
was defeated and slain, and prince Muhammad Muâzzam Sháh mounted the
throne with the title of Bahádur Sháh. Ibráhím Khán was confirmed in
the post of viceroy of Gujarát, but, fearing that the emperor might
be displeased at his concession of tribute to the Maráthás, he went
to Dehli to explain his conduct, and there resigned office.

[Gházi-ud-dín Forty-third Viceroy, 1708-1710.] In A.D. 1708, in
consequence of Ibráhím Khán's resignation, Gházi-ud-dín Khán Bahádur
Fírúz Jang was appointed forty-third viceroy of Gujarát. The leaning
of the new emperor towards Shíâh tenets and his order to insert
in the Friday sermon the words the lawful successor of the Prophet
after the name of 'Ali, the fourth Khalífah, besides giving general
dissatisfaction, caused a small disturbance in Áhmedábád. On the
first Friday on which the sermon was read the Túráni or Turk soldiers
publicly called on the preacher to desist on pain of death. The
preacher disregarding their threats on the next Friday was pulled
down from the pulpit by the Túránis and brained with a mace. In the
same year (A.D. 1708), hearing that the representative of Sháhi Álam
had a copy of a Kurâan written by the Imám Áli Taki son of Músa Razá
(A.D. 810-829), the emperor expressed a wish to obtain a sight of it,
and the viceroy sent it to him at Mándu in charge of Sayad Âkil and
Salábat Khán Bábi. In A.D. 1709, Shariât Khán, brother of Abdúl Hamíd
Khán, was appointed minister in place of his brother, who obtained
the office of chief Kázi. Much treasure was sent to the imperial
camp by order of the emperor. Ajítsingh of Márwár now rebelled and
recovered Jodhpur. As the emperor wished to visit Ajmír the viceroy
of Gujarát was directed to join him with his army. At this time
the pay of a horseman is said to have been £3 8s. (Rs. 34) and of
a footman 8s. (Rs. 4) a month. During his administration Fírúz Jang
introduced the practice, which his successors continued, of levying
taxes on grain piece-goods and garden produce on his own account, the
viceroy's men by degrees getting into their hands the whole power of
collecting. In A.D. 1710, when on tour exacting tribute, the viceroy
fell ill at Dánta and was brought to Áhmedábád, where he died. As
Fírúz Jang had not submitted satisfactory accounts, his property
was confiscated, and in A.D. 1711 Amánat Khán, governor of Surat,
was appointed deputy viceroy with the title of Shahámat Khán. When
Shahámat Khán was levying tribute from the Kadi and Bijápur districts,
he heard that a Marátha force had advanced to the Bába Piárah ford
on the Narbada. He at once marched to oppose them, summoning Sayad
Áhmed Gíláni, governor of Sorath, to his assistance. When he reached
Ankleshvar, the Maráthás met him, and a battle was fought in which
the Maráthás were defeated. Shahámat Khán then proceeded to Surat,
and, after providing for its safety returned to Áhmedábád. In spite
of their reverse at Ankleshvar the Maráthás from this time began to
make yearly raids into Gujarát.

[Jehándár Sháh Emperor, 1712-1713.] In A.D. 1712, the emperor died,
and was succeeded by his son Abúl Fateh Muîzz-ud-dín Jehándár Sháh,
and Ásif-ud-daulah Asad Khán Bahádur was appointed [Ásif-ud-Daulah
Forty-fourth Viceroy, 1712-13.] forty-fourth viceroy of Gujarát. As
Muhammad Beg Khán, who was then at Kharkol, was a favourite of the
new viceroy and through his interest was appointed deputy, he went to
Áhmedábád, and Shahámat Khán was transferred to Málwa as viceroy. In
the meantime Muhammad Beg Khán was appointed governor of Surat, and
Sarbuland Khán Bahádur was sent to Áhmedábád as deputy viceroy. On
his way to Gujarát, Sarbuland Khán was robbed in the Ságbára wilds to
the east of Rájpípla. On his arrival he promptly marched against the
rebellious Kolis of the Chunvál and subdued them. At the end of the
year, as Farrukhsiyar son of Ázím-us-Shán, second son of the late
emperor, was marching with a large army on the capital, Sarbuland
Khán returned to Dehli.

[Farrukhsiyar Emperor, 1713-1719.] This expedition of Farrukhsiyar
was successful. He put Jehándár Sháh to death and mounted the throne
in A.D. 1713. As he had been raised to the throne mainly by the aid
of Sayads Husain Áli and Abdullah Khán, the new emperor fell under the
power of these nobles. Husain Áli was sent against Ajítsingh of Márwár,
and concluded a treaty with that chief, whereby Ajítsingh engaged
to send his son to court and to give his daughter to the emperor in
marriage: and the marriage was solemnised in A.D. 1715. In A.D. 1714,
shortly after this treaty was concluded, Ajítsingh sent his son
Abheysingh to court, and on him in place of one Sayad Áhmed Gíláni
was conferred the post of governor of Sorath. Abheysingh remained
at court and sent his deputy Káyath Fatehsingh to Junágadh. Abdúl
Hamíd Khán was appointed revenue officer of Surat. After some time
he resigned his Surat office and went to court, where on being made
superintendent of the shrine of Sheikh Ahmed Khattu he returned to
Áhmedábád. In A.D. 1713 Muhtarim Khán was appointed to succeed him
in Surat. Early in A.D. 1714, [Shahámat Khán Forty-fifth Viceroy,
1713.] Shahámat Khán, who had been appointed forty-fifth viceroy of
Gujarát, was superseded by Dáud Khán Panni as forty-sixth viceroy. The
reckless courage of Dáud Khán Panni was renowned throughout India. His
memory survives in the tales and proverbs of the Dakhan. On giving
battle he used to show his contempt for his enemies by wearing nothing
stronger than a muslin jerkin. So stern was his discipline that
none of his Afghán soldiers dared to touch a leaf of the standing
crops where they were encamped. When at Áhmedábád he was either
engaged in scattering the Kolis or in coursing with greyhounds. He
preferred life under canvas on the Sábarmati sands to the viceregal
surroundings of the Bhadar Palace. His civil work he used to trust
to Dakhan Bráhmans and Pandits. He was much devoted to the use of
bhang. [Dáud Khán Panni Forty-sixth Viceroy, 1714-15.] Until Dáud
Khán's arrival Abdúl Hamíd Khán was appointed viceroy and took charge
of the province from Shahámat Khán. At this time, on the security of
Rája Muhkamsingh of Nágor, a sum of £5000 (Rs. 50,000) was granted to
the brother of Durgádás Ráthod. In A.D. 1714 in Áhmedábád Harírám,
the agent of Madan Gopál a successful North Indian banker, who came
to Áhmedábád as treasurer with Fírúz Jang, while celebrating the Holi
with his friends, seized a Musalmán gentleman and handled him with
great roughness. [Religious Riots in Áhmedábád, 1714.] Aggrieved
with this treatment the Musalmán complained to a preacher of much
eloquence and influence, Mulla Muhammad Áli. The preacher took the
Muslim to the Assembly Mosque and sent for Mulla Abdúl Âzíz the
chief or leading member of the Sunni Bohora community. He answered
the call with a strong party of his men, and on his way was joined by
numbers of Musalmáns both soldiers and citizens. With cries of 'Dín'
'Dín' they went to the mosque and carried off the insulted man and the
priest and the Bohora leader to the house of the Kázi Khair-ul-láh. The
Kázi closed his doors against the crowd who returned abusing him to
the Jewellers' quarter pillaging and killing as they went. They next
swarmed towards Madan Gopál's Haveli in the Jewellers' quarters. But
the Nagarsheth Kapurchand Bhansáli closed its strong gates and with
his Musalmán soldiers met the swarm with firearms. The viceroy who was
camped at the Sháhi Bágh sent soldiers and under the influence of the
leading citizens of both classes the disturbance was quelled. When
the particulars of the riots were known in the imperial camp the
Hindus, clamouring against Mulla Muhammad Áli and Sheikh Abdúl Âzíz
Gujaráti, struck business and closed their shops. The emperor ordered
mace-bearers to proceed to Gujarát and bring the Musalmán ringleaders
together with the Hindu Nagarsheth Kapurchand Bhansáli. Some Bohoras at
the imperial camp, sending advance news to Áhmedábád, the Mullah and
the Bohora Sheth and after him the Bhansáli started for the imperial
camp. On reaching the camp the Mulla, who was very impressive and
eloquent, preached a sermon in the Assembly Mosque and his fame
reaching the emperor he was called to court and asked to preach. He
and the Sheth were now able to explain their case to the emperor and
the Bhansáli was imprisoned. It is said that the Bhansáli made the
Mulla the medium of his release and that he and the Bohora returned to
Gujarát while the Mulla remained in honour at court till he died. About
the same time a great flood in the Sábarmati did much damage.

Abdúl Hamíd Khán was now chosen governor of Sorath in place of
Abheysingh, and Momín Khán was appointed from Dehli, governor of Surat,
and was at the same time placed in charge of Baroda, Broach, Dholka,
Petlád, and Nadiád. Dáud Khán the viceroy now went into Káthiáváda and
Navánagar to collect tribute, and on his return to Áhmedábád, married
the daughter of the chief of Halvad in the Jháláváda sub-division
of Káthiáváda. It is related that this lady, who was with child, on
hearing of Dáud Khán's death cut open her womb and saved the child at
the sacrifice of her own life. [863] Dáud Khán, though an excellent
soldier and strict disciplinarian failed to distinguish himself as a
civil administrator. He introduced Dakhani pandits into official posts,
who levied a fee called chithyáman from landholders and took taxes
from the holdings of Sayads and otherwise made themselves unpopular.

About this time Momín Khán, governor of Surat, arrived in Gujarát,
and placing his deputies in Petlád, Dholka, Baroda, and Nadiád, went
himself to Surat in A.D. 1715. Here he was opposed by the commandant
of the fort, Zia Khán, who was obliged to give way, his subordinate,
Sayad Kásim, being defeated by Fidá-ud-dín Khán. [Further Riots in
Áhmedábád, 1715.] At this time much ill-feeling was caused by the
plunder by Muhammadan troops of the shops of some Hindu merchants
in Áhmedábád. On this account, and for other reasons, Dáud Khán was
recalled, and Ghazni Khán Jhálori was directed to act in his place
until the arrival of a new viceroy. [Mahárája Ajítsingh Forty-seventh
Viceroy, 1715-16.] In this year, A.D. 1715, the Mahárája Ajítsingh
was appointed forty-seventh viceroy of Gujarát, and his son Kunvar
Abheysingh was appointed governor of Sorath. Ajítsingh sent Vajeráj
Bhandári to act as his deputy until his arrival, and Fatehsingh
Káyath was chosen deputy governor of Sorath. Perhaps one of the most
remarkable appointments of this time was that of Haidar Kúli Khán
to be minister as well as military commandant of Baroda, Nándod,
Arhar-Mátar in the district [864] of Kaira, and of the ports of Surat
and Cambay. Haidar Kúli chose an officer to act for him as minister,
and after appointing deputies in his different charges himself went
to Surat.

The Mahárája Ajítsingh, on reaching Áhmedábád, appointed Ghazni
Khán Jhálori governor of Pálanpur and Jawán Mard Khán Bábi governor
of Rádhanpur. [865] During this year an imperial order conferred on
Haidar Kúli Khán, Sorath and Gohilvád or south-east Káthiáváda [866]
then in charge of Fatehsingh, the viceroy's deputy. [867] On receiving
this order Haidar sent Sayad Âkil as his deputy, and that officer went
to Jambúsar, and, collecting men, set out to join his appointment. He
first camped at Loliánah, where the province of Sorath begins, and from
Loliánah marched against Pálitána and plundered the town. [Disagreement
between the Viceroy and Haidar Kúli Khán, 1715.] The viceroy, who
was by no means well disposed to Haidar Kúli Khán, sent a message
that if any injury was done in Sorath he would take vengeance on the
aggressors; and as neither Ajítsingh nor Haidar Kúli Khán was of a
very compliant temper, civil war was on the point of breaking out. By
the help of Salábat Khán Bábi, the deputy in Gohilváda, matters were
arranged, and Sayad Âkil returned from Sorath. Haidar was anxious to
send Salábat Khán as deputy to Sorath. But as Salábat demanded too
high a salary, Raza Kúli, brother of the late governor of Baroda,
was chosen. When this officer, with his brother Maâsúm Kúli, reached
Amreli Fatehsingh, the viceroy's deputy, evacuated Junágadh. After
this Haidar Kúli Khán, in company with Kázím Beg, governor of Baroda,
marched against and defeated the chief of Munjpur, now under Rádhanpur,
who had refused to pay the usual tribute. The viceroy went to Sorath
to collect the imperial revenue, and, owing to his excessive demands,
met with armed resistance from the Jám of Navánagar. Finally, the
matter of tribute was settled, and after visiting the shrine of Dwárka,
the viceroy returned to Áhmedábád.

[Khán Daurán Nasrat Jang Bahádur Forty-eighth Viceroy, 1716-1719.] In
A.D. 1716, while the viceroy was at Dwárka, in consequence of numerous
complaints against Ajítsingh and his Márwári followers, the emperor
sent Samsám-ud-daulah Khán Daurán Nasrat Jang Bahádur as forty-eighth
viceroy of Gujarát. As it was expected that Ajítsingh would not give
up his government without a contest, an army was prepared to compel
him to leave. On the arrival of the army Ajítsingh marched straight
on Áhmedábád and encamped at Sarkhej, but Nahar Khán persuaded him
to retire to Jodhpur without giving battle. In A.D. 1717, after the
departure of Ajítsingh, Haidar Kúli Khan, who had been appointed
deputy viceroy, leaving Surat set out for Áhmedábád. When Haidar
arrived at Petlád, some of the Áhmedábád nobles, among whom was
Safdar Khán Bábi, went out to meet him. A dispute arose between
one of Haidar's water carriers and a water-carrier in the army of
the Bábi, which increased to a serious affray, which from the camp
followers spread to the soldiers and officers, and the Bábi's baggage
was plundered. Safdar Khán took serious offence, and returning to
Áhmedábád collected his kinsmen and followers and marched against
Haidar Kúli Khán. In a battle fought on the following day Safdar Khán
was defeated. The other Bábis escaped to Pálanpur, and Safdar Khán,
who in the first instance had fled to Atarsumba, joined his party
at Pálanpur. Muhammad Fírúz Jhálori, governor of Pálanpur, with
the title of Ghazni Khán, afterwards succeeded in reconciling the
Bábis and Haidar Kúli Khán. [Famine, 1719.] A.D. 1719 was a year of
great famine. Abdúl Hamíd Khán, who had filled so many appointments
in Gujarát, went to court, and was made governor of Sorath. Haidar
Kúli Khán now marched against the Mahi Kolis. In the meantime news
was received of the appointment of a new viceroy, and Ghazni Khán,
governor of Pálanpur, was ordered to stay at Áhmedábád for the defence
of the city.

[Muhammad Sháh Emperor, 1721-1748.] Early in A.D. 1719, the emperor
Farrûkhsiyar was deposed and put to death by the Sayads; and a prince
named Rafíâ-ud-Daraját, a grandson of the emperor, was raised to the
throne. Rafíâ-ud-Daraját was put to death by the Sayads after a reign
of three months, and his brother Rafíâ-ud-daulah, who succeeded him,
also died after a few days' reign. The Sayads then raised to the throne
prince Raushan Akhtar with the title of Muhammad Sháh. [Mahárája
Ajítsingh Forty-ninth Viceroy, 1719-1721.] After the murder of
Farrûkhsiyar, the most powerful vassal in the neighbourhood of Delhi
was Ajítsingh of Márwár. To win him to their side the Sayads granted
him the viceroyalty of Gujarát, and Míhr Áli Khán was appointed to
act for him until his arrival, while Muhammad Bahádur Bábi, son of
Salábat Muhammad Khán Bábi, was placed in charge of the police of
the district immediately round Áhmedábád. Shortly after, through the
influence of the Mahárája Ajítsingh, Náhir Khán superseded Míhr Áli
Khán as deputy viceroy. Náhir Khán was also appointed to the charge
of Dholka Dohad and Petlád, and made superintendent of customs. About
this time the head tax was repealed, and orders were issued that its
levy in Gujarát should cease.

[Píláji Gáikwár at Songad, 1719.] In the same year, A.D. 1719, Píláji
Gáikwár marched on Surat with a large army and defeated the imperial
troops commanded by Sayad Âkil and Muhammad Panáh, the latter commander
being taken prisoner and forced to pay a heavy ransom. Píláji, finding
Gujarát an easy prey, made frequent incursions, and taking Songad in
the extreme south-east established himself there. Míhr Áli Khán, who
had been acting for Náhir Khán, marched against and subdued the Kolis,
who were committing piracy in the Mahi estuary. [Decay of Imperial
Power, 1720.] From this year Mughal rule in Gujarát was doomed. Píláji
Gáikwár was established at Songad, and in the anarchy that ensued, the
great Gujarát houses of the Bábis and Jháloris, as well as the newly
arrived Momín Khán, turned their thoughts to independence. Ajítsingh
so hated Muhammadan rule that he secretly favoured the Maráthás, and
strove to establish his own authority over such portions of Gujarát
as bordered on Márwár. In after years, Sarbuland Khán made a vigorous
attempt to reassert imperial dominion, but the seeds of dissolution
were sown and efforts at recovery were vain.

In A.D. 1720, Ajítsingh the viceroy sent Anopsingh Bhandári to Gujarát
as his deputy. In this year Nizám-ul-Mulk, viceroy of Ujjain, was
superseded by Sayad Diláwar Khán. While Diláwar Khán was yet on the
Málwa frontiers the Nizám desirous of possessing himself of the Dakhan
and its resources retired to Burhánpur pursued by Sayad Diláwar Khán,
who giving battle was killed, the Nizám retiring to Aurangábád in the
Dakhan. Álam Áli Khán, deputy viceroy of the Dakhan, was directed to
march against him, while from north Gujarát Anopsingh Bhandári was
ordered to send 10,000 horse to Surat, and Náhir Khán, the deputy
viceroy, was instructed to proceed thither in person. The Nizám and
Álam Áli Khán met near Bálápur in the Berárs and a battle was fought
in which the Nizám was successful and Álam Khán was slain. At this
time Anopsingh Bhandári committed many oppressive acts, of which the
chief was the murder of Kapurchand Bhansáli, the leading merchant of
Áhmedábád. The cause of Kapurchand's murder was that he had hired a
number of armed retainers who used to oppose the Bhandári's orders and
set free people unjustly imprisoned by him. To remove this meddler
from his way the Bhandári got him assassinated. [Nizám-ul-Mulk
Prime Minister, of the Empire, 1721.] In A.D. 1721, Nizám-ul-Mulk
was appointed prime minister of the empire, Abdúl Hamíd Khán was
recalled from Sorath, and in his stead Asad Kuli Khán, with the title
of Amir-ul-Umara, was appointed governor of Sorath and sent Muhammad
Sharíf Khán into Sorath as his deputy.

[Haidar Kúli Khán Fiftieth Viceroy, 1721-22.] In A.D. 1721, in
conjunction with Muhammad Amín and Saádat Khán, Haidar Kúli Khán
freed the emperor from the tyranny of the Sayads, and was rewarded
with the title of Muîz-ud-daulah Haidar Kúli Khán Bahádur Zafar
Jang and the viceroyalty of Gujarát. He obtained the appointment
of minister for his brother Jaâfar Kúli Khán. Maâsúm Kúli Khán was
dignified by the title of Shujáât Khán Bahádur and appointed deputy
viceroy. As soon as this change was notified, the people of Áhmedábád,
who were discontented with the rule of Anopsingh, attacked his palace,
the Bhadar, and he escaped with difficulty. [Disorder in Áhmedábád,
1721.] In consequence of the enmity between Haidar Kúli Khán and the
Márwáris, Shujáât Khán, the deputy viceroy, attacked the house of Náhir
Khán who had been Ajítsingh's minister, and forced him to pay £10,000
(Rs. 1 lákh) and leave the city. Shujáât Khán next interfered with
the lands of Safdar Khán Bábi, the deputy governor of Godhra, and his
brothers. On one of the brothers repairing to Dehli and remonstrating,
Haidar Kúli, who, above all things, was a Muhammadan and anxious to
strengthen himself with the Muhammadan nobility of Gujarát, restored
their lands to the Bábis. In consequence of this decision ill-feeling
sprung up between Shujáât Khán and the Bábis, and when Shujáât Khán
went to exact tribute he forced Muhammad Khán Bábi, governor of Kaira,
to pay a special fine of £1000 (Rs. 10,000). Shortly after one of the
viceroy's officers, Kásím Áli Khán, while employed against the Kolis
of that part of the country, was killed at Pethápur. Shujáât Khán
advanced, and revenged Kásím Áli's death by burning the town. Next, he
passed into Sorath, and after exacting tribute, crossed to Kachh. The
chief opposed him, and in the fight that followed was beaten and
forced to pay about £22,500 (Rs. 2 1/4 lákhs). [868] In A.D. 1721,
a Sayad was sent to Sorath as deputy governor in place of Muhammad
Sharíf, and Haidar Kúli was appointed governor of Kadi, the Chúnvál,
and Halvad (called Muhammadnagar), and put in charge of Tharád,
Arjanpur, Bhámnárli, Pethápur, and Kherálu in place of Vakhatsingh,
son of the Mahárája Ajítsingh.

[Leaves Dehli for Gujarát, 1722.] Early in A.D. 1722, Nizám-ul-Mulk
took up the office of prime minister of the empire, to which he had
been appointed in the previous year. Strenuous efforts were made to
embroil him with Haidar Kúli Khán, as the Nizám's austerity and craft
were a source of not less anxiety to the Dehli court than Haidar
Kúli's more daring and restless ambition. Haidar Kúli Khán, unable
to contend with the Nizám, left Dehli and retired to Gujarát. On his
way the villagers of Dabháli opposed him killing one of his chief men
named Alif Beg Khán. Haidar burned the village and put all the people
to death, a severity which caused such terror that throughout his rule
no difficulty was experienced in realizing tribute or in keeping the
roads safe. About this time, among other changes, Muhammad Bahádúr,
son of Salábat Khán Bábi, was placed in charge of Sádra and Vírpur,
with the title of Sher Khán. Shortly after his arrival the viceroy
marched against and subdued the rebellious Kolis of the Chunvál,
appointing Rustam Áli Khán his governor there. Then, returning to
Áhmedábád, he took up his residence in the Bhadra. [Shows signs of
Independence and is Recalled, 1722.] There is little doubt that at
this time Haidar Kúli aimed at bringing all Gujarát under his rule. He
seized the imperial horses which passed through Áhmedábád on their way
to Dehli, and confiscated many estates and gave them to his own men. On
his way to enforce tribute from the Dungarpúr chiefs, he levied £8000
(Rs. 80,000) from Lunáváda. Through the mediation of the Udepur Rána,
and as he agreed to pay a tribute of £10,000 (1 lákh of rupees), the
Rával of Dungarpur escaped. Haidar Kúli next proceeded to Bijápur,
north of Áhmedábád, but hearing that the emperor was displeased at
his assumption of the power of giving and changing grants of land,
he returned to Áhmedábád and restored several estates which he had
confiscated. [Nizám-ul-Mulk Fifty-first Viceroy, 1722.] The court
continued to distrust him, and at the close of A.D. 1722 appointed
Jumlat-ul-Mulk Nizám-ul-Mulk fifty-first viceroy.

Haidar Kúli Khán, finding himself no match for the Nizám, was
induced to retire quietly, and accordingly left Gujarát by way of
Dungarpur. Shujáât Khán and Rustam Áli Khán accompanied him as far
as Dungarpúr, and then returned to Áhmedábád. In the meantime the
Nizám had reached Ujjain, and thence directed Safdar Khán Bábi to
carry on the government till he should arrive, appointing at the
same time his uncle [Hámid Khán Deputy Viceroy; Momín Khán Governor
of Surat, 1722.] Hámid Khán as deputy viceroy and Fidwi Khán as
minister. Subsequently the Nizám came to Gujarát and chose officers
of his own for places of trust, the chief of whom was Momín Khán, who
was appointed governor of Surat. The Nizám then returned to Dehli,
but, after a short time, disgusted with his treatment at court,
he retired to the Dakhan, where, making Haidarábád his capital, he
gradually began to act as an independent ruler. Meanwhile in Gujarát
dissensions sprang up between Hámid Khán and other officers, but
matters were arranged without any outbreak of hostility. Tribute was
exacted from the chiefs on the banks of the Vátrak and from Modhera
an unruly Koli village was burned down, and garrisons were placed
in the Koli country. In A.D. 1723 Rustam Áli Khán and Shujáât Khán
were ordered from Dehli to march on Jodhpur, which they captured and
plundered, and then returned to Áhmedábád.

[Increase of Marátha Power, 1723.] In A.D. 1723 Piláji Gáikwár,
who had been long hovering on the frontier, marched on Surat and was
opposed by Momín Khán, whom he defeated. After levying contributions
from the surrounding country, he returned to his head-quarters at
Songad, and from this overran a considerable portion of the Surat
territory, building several forts in the Rájpípla country. At the same
time Kántáji Kadam Bánde, invading Gujarát from the side of Dohad,
began to levy fixed contributions. Though before this occasional
demands had often been made, A.D. 1723 was the first year in which
the Maráthás imposed a regular tribute on Gujarát. Momín Khán was now
appointed provincial minister, and Rustam Áli Khán succeeded him as
revenue officer of Surat, and, as the Nizám had gone to the Dakhan
without the emperor's leave, [Sarbuland Khán Fifty-second Viceroy,
1723-1730.] Mubáriz-ul-Mulk Sarbuland Khán Bahádur Diláwar Jang was
appointed fifty-second viceroy of Gujarát. [Appoints Shujáât Khán
his Deputy.] He selected Shujáât Khán as his deputy, and made other
arrangements for the government of the province. Hámid Khán, uncle and
deputy of the Nizám, prepared to oppose Shujáât Khán, but through the
intervention of Bábis Salábat Khán, Safdar Khán, and Jawán Mard Khán,
Hámid Khán evacuated the Bhadra, and withdrew to Dohad. Shujáât Khán
now went to collect tribute, leaving Ibráhím Kúli Khán at Áhmedábád,
while Rámrái was posted at Mahudha in Kaira, with orders to watch
the movements of Hámid Khán. As the viceroy was in need of money,
he farmed to one Jívan Jugal the districts of Jambúsar, Makbúlábad or
Ámod about twenty-two miles north of Broach, Dholka, and Broach. In
A.D. 1724, he came to Áhmedábád with Áli Muhammad Khán father of the
author of the Mirát-i-Áhmedi, as his private minister.

[Nizám-ul-Mulk and Sarbuland Khán.] Rustam Áli, governor of Surat,
having succeeded twice or thrice in defeating the Maráthás under
Píláji Gáikwár, now offered, in conjunction with his brother Shujáât
Khán, that if 20,000 men were placed under their orders, they would
march against the Nizám. The emperor accepted this offer, allowing
Rustam Áli to draw on the Surat treasury to the extent of £20,000
(Rs. 2 lákhs). Rustam Áli accordingly, with the aid of Áhmed Kúli his
brother's son, equipped an army. In the meantime the Nizám was not
idle. He promised to Kántáji Kadam Bánde a one-fourth share of the
revenue of Gujarát, provided he should be able, in concert with Hámid
Khán, to re-conquer the province from Mubáriz-ul-Mulk. Shujáât Khán,
who was now at Kadi, instead of following the advice of his minister
and carefully watching Hámid Khán's movements from Kapadvanj, went to
a distant part of the province. Hámid Khán seeing his opportunity,
united his forces with those of Kántáji Kadam, and marched to
Kapadvanj. [Sarbuland Khán's Deputy Defeated, 1724.] Shujáât Khán
hearing of this, advanced towards Áhmedábád and encamped at Dabhora
under Bahyal, eighteen miles east of Áhmedábád and thence proceeded
to Mota Medra, about six miles east of the capital. When he came
so near Áhmedábád, many of his soldiers went without leave into the
city to visit their families. The Maráthás attacked his rear guard,
and his men giving way took to flight. Hámid Khán seeing that Shujáât
Khán had but a small force, marched between him and the capital. A
battle was fought, in which Shujáât Khán was slain, and his two sons
Hasan Kúli and Mustafa Kúli were taken prisoners. Shujáât Khán's
head was cut off and sent to Safdar Khán Bábi, to be sent to Ibráhím
Kúli his son, who was doing duty as commandant at Áhmedábád. Hámid
Khán took up his quarters in the Sháhi Bágh, and got possession of
all Áhmedábád except the city. Hámid Khán now sent a message to the
emperor, that the Maráthás had been successful in defeating Shujáât
Khán and conquering Gujarát, but that he had defended Áhmedábád
against them. The emperor sent him a dress of honour, but after a
few days discovered that Hámid's message was false. The Maráthás now
marched through the country, collecting their chauth or one-fourth
and their sardeshmukhi or one-tenth shares of the revenue. Kántáji
went to Víramgám and besieged the town, but on the promise of one of
the chief inhabitants to raise a sum of £35,000 (Rs. 3 1/2 lákhs) the
Maráthás retired. Hámid Khán who was now independent began to bestow
lands and districts many of which remained with the grantees and were
never recovered by future governors. Ibráhím Kúli, son of Shujáât
Khán, in revenge for his father's death, determined to assassinate
Hámid Khán. The attempt failed. Hámid Khán escaped and Ibráhím Kúli
was slain.

[The Maráthás engaged as Allies.] Rustam Áli Khán, governor of Surat,
in the hope of being revenged on Hámid Khán, invited the aid of Píláji
Gáikwár, and it was agreed that they should meet on the north bank of
the Narbada. Píláji promised to aid Rustam Khán, and the allied armies,
crossing the Mahi, encamped at Aras in the plain between Anand and the
Mahi. Hámid Khán, accompanied by Mír Nathu, Muhammad Salábat Rohila,
and Kántáji Kadam, marched to oppose Rustam Khán. Hámid Khán also
entered into secret negotiations with Píláji Gáikwár, who resolved to
remain neutral and side with the conqueror. [Battle of Arás. Hámid
Khán defeated by Rustam Áli, 1723.] A battle was fought, in which,
though Piláji took no part, Hámid Khán was defeated and put to flight,
and Mír Nathu was killed. After the fight Rustam Áli remained on the
field of battle and liberated his nephews, plundering Hámid Khán's
camp. Píláji plundered Rustam Áli's camp and then moved off, while
Kántáji carried away what was left in the camp of Hámid Khán. Hámid
Khán reproached Kántáji for his inactivity; but he pleaded in excuse
that he was watching the mode of warfare amongst Muhammadans, and
promised to attack Rustam Áli shortly. [Maráthás join Hámid Khán
against Rustam Áli.] Now, as the Maráthás really desired to ruin
Rustam Áli, who was their bitter foe, they after a few days surrounded
him and cut off his supplies. Rustam Áli stood a blockade of eight
days, and then forced his way through his enemies and went to Nápád,
about fourteen miles west of the Vásad railway station in the Anand
sub-division of the Kaira district, and thence through Kalamsar to
Nápa or Nába under Petlád. The Maráthás still pursuing Rustam Áli
retired to Vasu under Petlád, ten miles east of Nadiád and about
twenty-five miles south of Áhmedábád, where he gave battle, and
by a furious charge broke the Marátha line. The Maráthás rallied,
and Rustam Áli and his men were defeated, Rustam Áli being slain and
his nephews again taken prisoners. Rustam was buried on the field of
battle and his head sent to Áhmedábád.

Hámid Khán returned to Áhmedábád with the Maráthás, who saw that
their only means of effecting a permanent footing in the province
was by supporting him. Hámid Khán then assigned a one-fourth share
of the revenue of the territory north of the Mahi to Kántáji,
and to Píláji a corresponding interest in the territory south of
the Mahi, including Surat and Baroda. After this Hámid Khán acted
tyrannically. He extorted large sums from the rich, and poisoned the
two sons of Shujáât Khán. When the news of Kántáji's and Píláji's
success reached the Dakhan, Trimbakráv Dhábáde, son of Khanderáv
Senápati, came with a large army and laid siege to Cambay. While
the siege was being pressed a quarrel among the Marátha leaders
culminated in strife and bloodshed. Trimbakráv Senápati was wounded
and the Marátha army had to disperse and retire. [869] Salábat Khán,
leaving Áhmedábád, went to Víramgám, and after some time, placing
his nephew at Víramgám, he went into Gohilváda. When the news of the
defeat and death of Rustam Áli reached Dehli, the emperor ordered
[Mubáriz-ul-Mulk sent against the Maráthás, 1725.] Mubáriz-ul-Mulk
to take a strong army and proceed in person to Gujarát and expel
Hámid Khán and the Maráthás. Mubáriz-ul-Mulk marched on Gujarát
with a large army, assisted by Mahárája Abheysingh of Jodhpur,
Chatarsingh Rája of Narwar in Bundelkhand, Gandrapsingh, and the
Mahárána of Udepur. On his arrival at Ajmír Mubáriz-ul-Mulk was
received by his private minister Áli Muhammad Khán, who afterwards
joined Jawán Mard Khán Bábi in Rádhanpur, and united their troops
with those under Mubáriz-ul-Mulk. At that time Salábat Khán was
removed from his government, and Safdar Khán Bábi died. In obedience
to the imperial order, Mubáriz-ul-Mulk marched from Ajmír and came
to the Gujarát frontier. On his approach Hámid Khán returned to
Áhmedábád. He placed Rúpsingh and Sardár Muhammad Ghorni in charge
of the city and himself withdrew to Mehmúdábád. Mubáriz-ul-Mulk now
sent Sheikh Alíyár in advance with an army against Áhmedábád. When
Sheikh Alíyár arrived before the city, Muhammad Ghorni, who was
dissatisfied with Hámid Khán for bringing in the Maráthás, persuaded
Rúpsingh to fly. [Hámid Khán and other Maráthás Retire.] In the
meantime Mubáriz-ul-Mulk with the main body of his forces reached
Sidhpur. Hámid Khán, accompanied by a detachment of Marátha horse,
now returned to Áhmedábád; but Muhammad Ghorni closed the gates,
and would not suffer him to enter the city. Mubáriz-ul-Mulk marched
to Mesána. About this time Áli Muhammad Khán, the father of the
author of the Mirat-i-Áhmedi, who was now with Mubáriz-ul-Mulk at
Mesána, advised him to conciliate the influential Muhammadan family
of Bábi. Under his advice, Salábat Muhammad Khán Bábi was appointed
governor of Víramgám, and Jawán Mard Khán governor of Pátan. Shortly
afterwards Murlidhardás, the Gujaráti minister of Hámid Khán, deserted
his master's declining cause. When Kantáji heard that Mubáriz-ul-Mulk
had arrived at Pethápur, only eighteen miles from Áhmedábád, he retired
to Mehmúdábád. [Mubáriz-ul-Mulk enters Áhmedábád, 1725.] Before the
close of A.D. 1725, Mubáriz-ul-Mulk reached Áhmedábád, where he was
well received by the officials and merchants.

Hámid Khán and Kantáji, who had by this time reached the banks of
the Mahi, were now joined by Píláji Gáikwár. The Marátha leaders,
seeing that the only way to preserve their footing in the province
was to espouse the cause of Hámid Khán, united their forces with
his, and prepared to march on Áhmedábád. Mubáriz-ul-Mulk deputed
his son Khánahzád Khán with an army to oppose them, and made several
appointments, among other changes raising Áli Muhammad Khán to the
post of minister. [Defeat of the Maráthás at Sojitra and Kapadvanj,
1725.] Khánahzád Khán met the Maráthás near Sojitra, about ten miles
north-west of Petlád, and defeated them, pursuing them as far as
the Mahi. Then, returning, he was reinforced by his brother Sháh
Nawáz Khán, and marched against the Maráthás, who were encamped at
Kapadvanj. Another battle was fought, and the Maráthás were again
defeated and pursued as far as the hills of Áli-Mohan now Chhota
Udepur in the extreme east of the province. Khánahzád Khán now
appointed Hasan-ud-dín governor of Baroda, Broach, Jambúsar, and
Makbulábád. [Marátha Expedition against Vadnagar, 1725.] Meanwhile
Antáji Bháskar, a Marátha noble, entering Gujarát from the side of
Ídar, laid siege to the town of Vadnagar, which, according to the
old Gujarát proverb, with Umreth in the Kaira district, are the two
golden feathers of the kingdom of Gujarát. Vadnagar was inhabited
by wealthy Bráhmans of the Nágar caste who prayed Mubáriz-ul-Mulk
to march to their relief; but as both his sons were in pursuit of
the other Marátha bands defeated at Kapadvanj, the viceroy had no
troops to spare from the Áhmedábád garrison. The Nágars accordingly,
seeing no prospect of help, paid a sum of £40,000 (Rs. 4 lákhs) and
Antáji Bháskar retired. Kantáji and Píláji, encouraged by this raid
of Antáji's, entered Gujarát from different quarters. Kántáji again
laid siege to Vadnagar. The Nágars, unable to pay the contribution
demanded, leaving their property fled and Kántáji in his attempts to
unearth the buried treasure burned down the town. Shortly afterwards
Umreth in the Kaira district suffered a similar fate at the hands
of Kántáji. In one of his raids Píláji Gáikwár advancing as far as
Baroda was met by Khánahzád Khán, the son of the viceroy. Distrusting
the issue of a battle Píláji fled to Cambay, and from Cambay withdrew
to Sorath. For these services the emperor raised Khánahzád Khán to
the rank of a noble, with the title Ghálib Jang. About this time Áli
Muhammad Khán was dismissed from the post of minister, and in his
stead first Muhammad Sayad Beg and afterwards Muhammad Sulaimán were
appointed. Not long afterwards Áli Muhammad Khán was again entrusted
with a command and raised to be governor of Dholka.

[Mubáriz-ul-Mulk pays the Marátha Tribute, 1726.] The Maráthás retired
to the Dakhan, but, returning in A.D. 1726, compelled Mubáriz-ul-Mulk
to confirm his predecessor's grants in their favour. The emperor
refused to acknowledge any cessions of revenue to the Maráthás; and
the viceroy, hard pressed for money, unable to obtain support from
the court and receiving little help from his impoverished districts,
was forced to impose fresh taxes on the citizens of Áhmedábád, and
at the same time to send an army to collect their tribute from the
Mahi chiefs. As part of the agreement between Mubáriz-ul-Mulk and
the Marátha chiefs Píláji was to receive a share in the revenue of
the districts south of the Mahi. But Peshwa Bájiráv Balál, to whom,
as agent of his rival Khanderáv Dábháde, Píláji was obnoxious, sent
Udáji Pavár to drive Píláji away. In this Udáji was successful, and
defeating Píláji forced him to seek the aid of Kántáji. Kántáji,
perceiving that if the Peshwa became supreme his own independence
would suffer, joined Píláji, and marching together upon Baroda they
endeavoured, but without success, to prevent the Musalmán governor
Sadr-ud-dín Khán from entering the city. About this time want of
funds forced Mubáriz-ul-Mulk to sell the greater part of the Dholka
district to different landholders.

[Alliance with the Peshwa, 1727.] In the following year, A.D. 1727,
Bájiráv Peshwa began to negotiate with Mubáriz-ul-Mulk, undertaking
that if the one-fourth and one-tenth shares in the revenue of the
province were guaranteed to him, he would protect Gujarát from other
invaders. Though he did not consent to these proposals, the viceroy
so far accepted the alliance of the Peshwa as to allow the governor
of Baroda to aid Udáji Pavár against Píláji. [Piláji Gáikwár obtains
Baroda and Dabhoi, 1727.] Piláji and Kántáji outmanoeuvred Udáji and
prevented him from effecting a junction with the governor of Baroda,
who in the end was forced to abandon both that city and the stronghold
of Dabhoi, while Udáji retired to Málwa. Píláji Gáikwár now obtained
possession of Baroda. Mubáriz-ul-Mulk, still sorely pressed for funds,
marched into Sorath to exact tribute. On reaching Víramgám, Salábat
Muhammad Khán Bábi, on behalf of the Jám of Navánagar, presented the
viceroy with £10,000 (Rs. 1 lákh), and for this service was rewarded
with the gift of an elephant. Mubáriz-ul-Mulk then marched against
Chháya, the capital of the chief of Porbandar in the south-west
of Káthiáváda. This chief, by putting to sea, hoped to escape the
payment of tribute. But on hearing that the viceroy proposed to annex
his territory and appoint an officer to govern it, he returned and
agreed to pay a tribute of £4000 (Rs. 40,000). [870] On his way back
to Áhmedábád, Mubáriz-ul-Mulk passed through Halvad in Jháláváda,
and there married the daughter of Jhála Pratápsingh, the chief
of that district, whom he accordingly exempted from the payment of
tribute. About this time the viceroy received orders from the emperor
to restore certain land which he had confiscated, and as he neglected
to obey, certain estates of his in the Panjáb were resumed. [Capture
of Chámpáner by the Maráthás, 1728.] In the meantime Krishnáji, foster
son of Kántáji, made a sudden attack upon Chámpáner and captured that
fortress, and from that time Kántáji's agents remained permanently
in Gujarát to collect his share of the tribute.

In A.D. 1728 the minister Momín Khán died, and in his place the
emperor selected Momín Khán's brother Abd-ul-Ghani Khán. About
this time Asad Áli, governor of Junágadh, also died, and on his
deathbed appointed Salábat Muhammad Khán Bábi deputy governor of
that fortress. Salábat Muhammad Khán sent his son Sher Khán Bábi
to act on his behalf. When the emperor heard of the death of Asad
Áli, he appointed Ghulám Muhy-ud-dín Khán, son of the late Asad Áli,
governor. Ghulám Muhy-ud-dín did not proceed to Junágadh but continued
Sher Khán Bábi as his deputy. Mubáriz-ul-Mulk, now perceiving that
neither Píláji nor Kántáji afforded any protection to Gujarát,
but rather pillaged it, closed with the offers of Bájiráv Peshwa,
and [Grant of Tribute to the Peshwa, 1729.] in A.D. 1729 formally
granted to him the one-fourth and one-tenth shares of the revenue of
the province. The Peshwa accordingly sent his brother Chimnájiráv to
collect the tribute. Chimnáji plundered Dholka and the country near
Chámpáner, while Mubáriz-ul-Mulk exacted tribute from the chiefs on
the banks of the Vátrak. Kántáji now entered Gujarát and prepared for
war in case Chimnáji and the viceroy should unite against him. His
movements were not interfered with, and after collecting his share of
the tribute, he retired to Sorath. The viceroy now marched against the
Kolis, and after destroying many of them together with their wives and
children, returned to Áhmedábád by way of Modasa and Ahmednagar. Ghulám
Muhy-ud-dín Khán, governor of Junágadh, who had not yet proceeded to
his command, appointed a second deputy. Through the influence of the
viceroy this appointment was not confirmed, and instead Sher Khán Bábi,
son of Salábat Muhammad Khán, was placed in charge of that fortress.

[Mulla Muhammad Áli raises a Disturbance at Surat, 1729.] In Surat
the year A.D. 1729 was marked by a severe flood in the Tápti and by a
somewhat serious local disturbance. The chief cause of the disturbance
was Mulla Muhammad Áli, a rich Musalmán trader of Surat. This man who,
as Ûmda-tut-tujjár or chief of the merchants, had already a special
rank in the city, was tempted to take advantage of the disorders
of the time to raise himself to the position of an independent
ruler. With this object he chose as his head-quarters the island of
Píram in the Gulf of Cambay, near the port of Gogha, and there spent
considerable sums in strengthening the island and tempting settlers
to place themselves under his protection. As Píram was not popular
Mulla Muhammad fixed on the village of Athva, on the left bank of
the Tápti, about twelve miles from its mouth. Here he began to build
a fort, but was ordered to desist by Sohráb Khán, the governor of
Surat, from which city the proposed stronghold was only three miles
distant. Mulla Muhammad so far from obeying, persuaded Beglar-Beg Khán
the commander of the fort of Surat to side with him. Accordingly, next
day, Beglar-Beg Khán bombarded the governor Sohráb Khán's residence,
proclaiming that his own brother Teghbeg Khán was appointed governor
of Surat. In the end Mulla Muhammad Áli induced the chief merchants
of the city to pray for the removal of Sohráb who pending receipt of
orders from the emperor was made to hand over his official residence
in the city to Teg-Beg Khán.

[Nadiád given in Farm, 1729.] In the same year, A.D. 1729, Jawán
Mard Khán Bábi was chosen governor of Petlád, Áli Muhammad Khán
was made collector of Áhmedábád, and Áli Muhammad's son, the author
of the Mirat-i-Áhmedi and his brother were appointed governor and
superintendent of the customs of that district. Áli Muhammad Khán
shortly resigned and was succeeded by Rú-ín Khán. At this time Jawán
Mard Khán Bábi, while punishing the Kolis of Bálor, probably Bhátod
about fifteen miles east of Broach, was killed by a man of that tribe,
and in revenge for his death the town of Bálor was plundered. On the
death of Jawán Mard Khán, at the request of Salábat Muhammad Khán
Bábi, his eldest son Kamál-ud-dín Khán Bábi received the districts
of Sami and Munjpur and the title of Jawán Mard Khán. At the same
time the second son, Muhammad Anwar, with the title of Safdar Khán,
was appointed to the government of Rádhanpur. The viceroy now went
to Nadiád, where Rái Kishandás, agent of Jawán Mard Khán, received
the district of Petlád in farm. From Nadiád Mubáriz-ul-Mulk went to
collect tribute from Sardársingh, the chief of Bhádarva in the Rewa
Kántha about fifteen miles north of Baroda, on the banks of the Mahi,
who, after some fighting, agreed to pay a sum of £2000 (Rs. 20,000). On
his way back to Áhmedábád the viceroy levied tribute from the chief
of Umeta, fifteen miles west of Baroda. As Rái Kishandás failed to pay
the sum agreed on for the farm of Petlád, an order was issued for his
imprisonment. To save himself from the indignity he committed suicide.

[Athva Fort, 1730.] When Kántáji returned from Sorath he camped at
Sánand, and his advanced guard carried off some of the viceroy's
elephants which were grazing there. Men were sent in pursuit, but in
vain, and the Maráthás escaped. Meanwhile, at Surat, Mulla Muhammad
Áli continued to build the fort at Athva. At last his accomplice,
Beglar-Beg Khán the commander of the Surat fort, began to perceive that
if the Athva fort were completed the Mulla would be in a position to
obstruct the trade of the port of Surat. He consequently ordered him
to stop building. In spite of this the Mulla succeeded in persuading
Sohráb Khán to allow him to go on with his fort promising in return to
get him confirmed as governor of Surat. Sohráb Khán agreed, and the
fort was completed, and Sohráb Khán was duly appointed governor. As
the fort was immediately below Surat the revenue of Surat was greatly
diminished, and Sohráb Khán, when it was too late, saw his mistake.

[The Viceroy in Káthiáváda and Kachh, 1730.] In A.D. 1730
Mubáriz-ul-Mulk went into Gohilváda in south-east Káthiáváda and
levied tribute from Bhávsingh, chief of Sihor; thence he proceeded
to Mádhupur, a town under Porbandar, and laid it waste. While engaged
at Mádhupur, Momín Khán, son-in-law of the late Momín Khán, owing to
some misunderstanding with the viceroy suddenly set out for Áhmedábád
and from Áhmedábád proceeded to Ágra. The viceroy now marched in the
direction of Kachh and refusing the offer of a yearly tribute of about
£33,000 (10,00,000 mahmúdis), advanced against Bhúj. He experienced
great difficulty in crossing the Ran, and as the Ráo had cut off all
supplies, and as at the same time news arrived of disturbances in
Áhmedábád, he was obliged, after a month and a half, to retire to
Rádhanpur. [Riots at Áhmedábád.] The author of the Mirat-i-Áhmedi
was ordered to suppress the Áhmedábád riots, which had arisen out
of the levy of some fresh taxes, and was invested with the title
of Hasan Muhammad Khán. In this year Udaikaran, Desái of Víramgám,
was murdered by a Kasbáti [871] of that town named Áli, and Salábát
Muhammad Khán Bábi, who was sent to investigate this murder, died
on his way at Páldi, a village on the right bank of the Sábarmati
opposite to Áhmedábád.

[Mahárája Abheysingh Fifty-third Viceroy, 1730-1733.] News was
now (A.D. 1730) received that Mahárája Abheysingh of Jodhpur
had been appointed viceroy and had reached Pálanpur. The friends
of order endeavoured to arrange a peaceable transfer between the
Mahárája and the late viceroy, but [Mubáriz-ul-Mulk Resists the New
Viceroy.] Mubáriz-ul-Mulk determined to try the chances of war,
and prepared for resistance. At this time Mír Ismáíl, deputy of
Ghulám Muhy-ud-dín Khán, arrived and took charge of the government
of Junágadh from Sher Khán Bábi. Mahárája Abheysingh, after making
various appointments, set out with his brother Vakhatsingh and 20,000
men to take over the government of Gujarát. When he reached Pálanpur
and saw that Mubáriz-ul-Mulk was determined on resistance, he sent
an order to Sardár Muhammad Ghorni appointing him his minister and
directing him to take possession of the city of Áhmedábád and drive
out the late viceroy. As Sardár Muhammad was not strong enough to
carry out these orders he awaited the Mahárája's arrival. When the
Mahárája reached Sidhpur he was joined by Safdar Khán Bábi and Jawán
Mard Khán Bábi from Rádhanpur. They then advanced together to Adálaj,
distant only about eight miles from the capital, their army increasing
daily. [Battle of Adálaj; the Mahárája defeated by Mubáriz-ul-Mulk,
1730.] Mubáriz-ul-Mulk was already encamped between Adálaj and the
city, and on the approach of the Mahárája a battle was fought in which
the Mahárája was defeated. Abheysingh changed his position, and another
and bloodier engagement took place, in which both sides tried to kill
the opposing commander. But as both Mubáriz-ul-Mulk and the Mahárája
fought disguised as common soldiers, neither party succeeded. At first
the Mahárája who had the advantage in position repulsed the enemy,
but Mubáriz-ul-Mulk fought so desperately in the river-bed that the
Ráthods gave way. They rallied and made one more desperate charge,
but were met, repulsed, and finally pursued as far as Sarkhej. The
Mahárája, who had not expected so determined an opposition, now sent
Momín Khán and Amarsingh to negotiate with Mubáriz-ul-Mulk, who was
still determined to resist to the uttermost. It was finally agreed
that [Mubáriz-ul-Mulk Retires.] Mubáriz-ul-Mulk should receive a
sum of £10,000 (Rs. 1 lákh) and should surrender Áhmedábád to the
Mahárája. Mubáriz-ul-Mulk accordingly quitted the city and left for
Ágra by way of Udepur.

[Government of Abheysingh.] The Mahárája entering Áhmedábád, appointed
Ratansingh Bhandári his deputy, and placed Fidá-ud-dín Khán, cousin
of Momín Khán, in charge of the city police. Shortly afterwards
Karímdád Khán Jhálori, governor of Pálanpur, who had accompanied the
Mahárája into Gujarát, died. After the death of Salábat Muhammad Khán
Bábi, his son, Sher Khán Bábi, was dismissed from the government of
Junágadh. He retired to his estate of Gogha, and when the Mahárája
arrived in Áhmedábád he paid his respects, presenting the viceroy
with an elephant and some horses. The Mahárája confirmed the lands
assigned to his father, and reported his action to the emperor. [Momín
Khán Ruler of Cambay, 1730.] Momín Khán was made ruler of Cambay, and
Fidá-ud-dín Khán, his cousin, was made governor of the lands near that
city, the revenue of which had been assigned to the Mahárája. So great
was the fear of the Maráthás, that Mustafíd Khán, the governor elect
of Surat, instead of proceeding direct by land, went to Cambay. From
Cambay he moved to Broach, and from Broach entered into negotiations
with Píláji Gáikwár, promising, if allowed to retain possession of
Surat, to pay Píláji the one-fourth share of its revenues. Píláji
agreed, but Sohráb Khán, who was still in possession of Surat, refused
to hand it over to Mustafíd Khán. In this year also Vakhatsingh,
brother of the Mahárája Abheysingh, was appointed governor of Pátan,
and sent a deputy to act for him. About the same time Mír Fakhr-ud-dín,
a follower of the late viceroy Mubáriz-ul-Mulk, leaving him secretly,
came to Áhmedábád, and in an interview with the Mahárája obtained for
himself the post of deputy governor of Junágadh. When he proceeded to
take up his appointment he was opposed by Mír Ismáíl, and was killed
in a battle fought near Amreli in central Káthiáváda. Muhammad Pahár,
son of Karímdád Khán Jhálori, was appointed governor of Pálanpur in
succession to his father, and Jawán Mard Khán was sent to Vadnagar.

[The Peshwa and Viceroy against Piláji Gáikwár, 1731.] In the following
year, A.D. 1731, Bájiráv Peshwa, entering Gujarát at the head of
an army, advanced against Baroda, then in the possession of Píláji
Gáikwár. Afterwards, at the invitation of the Mahárája, he visited
Áhmedábád and had a meeting with the viceroy in the Sháhi Bágh. At
this meeting it was agreed that Bájiráv should assist Ázmatulláh, the
governor of Baroda, in taking possession of that town and in expelling
Píláji Gáikwár. By this arrangement the viceroy hoped by playing off
the Peshwa against Píláji, to succeed in getting rid of the latter,
while the Peshwa intended that if Píláji was forced to give up Baroda,
he himself should gain possession of that city. Accordingly the Peshwa,
together with an army from the viceroy, marched on Baroda. They
had scarcely laid siege to the city when the Peshwa heard that
Nizám-ul-Mulk was advancing on Gujarát against him. [The Peshwa
Withdraws.] Abandoning all operations against Baroda, the Peshwa
withdrew, with all speed, to the Dakhan. On his way he encountered
the army of Trimbakráv Senápati, who, together with Piláji Kántáji
and Udáji Pavár, had united to resist the pretensions of the Peshwa
in Gujarát, and were also secretly leagued with the Nizám. [Defeats
his Opponents.] An engagement was fought in which the Peshwa was
victorious and Trimbakráv was slain. [872] The Peshwa at once pushed
on to the Dakhan, contriving to avoid the Nizám, though his baggage
was plundered by that chief, who had camped at Ghala Kámrej, on the
river Tápti, about ten miles above Surat.

[Abdúlláh Beg appointed the Nizám's Deputy at Broach.] During
these changes the city of Broach, which on account of the strength
of its fort the Maráthás had failed to take, was governed by
Abdúlláh Beg, an officer originally appointed to that command by
Mubáriz-ul-Mulk. Dissatisfied that the government of Gujarát should
be in the hands of Abheysingh, Abdúlláh Beg, in A.D. 1731, entered
into negotiations with the Nizám, offering to hold Broach as the
Nizám's deputy. Nizám-ul-Mulk agreed, appointed Abdúlláh his deputy,
and ennobled him with the title of Nek Álam Khán. About the same time
Vakhatsingh, brother of the viceroy, withdrew to his chiefship of Nágor
in Jodhpur, and Ázmat-ulláh went to Ágra. After his safe arrival in
the Dakhan Bájiráv Peshwa entered into an agreement with the Nizám
under the terms of which the grants of Dholka, Broach, Jambusar, and
Makbúlábád were continued to the Nizám. Momín Khán received the farm
of Petlád, and Kántáji was confirmed in the share he had acquired of
the revenues of Gujarát. In A.D. 1732 the paymaster, Amánatdár Khán,
died, and was succeeded by Ghulám Hasan Khán, who sent Mujáhid-ud-dín
Khán to act as his deputy. Through the influence of Mulla Muhammad
Ali, Sohráb Áli was now confirmed as governor of Surat, and Mustafíd
Khán was obliged to return to Áhmedábád.

Píláji Gáikwár as the agent of the deceased Khanderáv Dábháde Senápati,
as the owner of the fort of Songad, and as the ally of the Bhíls and
Kolis, was naturally a thorn in the side of the viceroy Abheysingh. The
recent acquisition of the town of Baroda and of the strong fortress of
Dabhoi had made Piláji still more formidable. [The Viceroy procures the
Death of Piláji Gáikwár, 1732;] Under these circumstances, Abheysingh,
who had long wished to recover Baroda and Dabhoi determined to
assassinate Piláji, and this was effected by a Márvádi at the holy
village of Dákor. The Maráthás slew the assassin and withdrew across
the Mahi, burning the body of Piláji at the village of Sánoli or
Sáonli, fourteen miles north of Baroda. They then evacuated the
district of Baroda, retiring to the fortress of Dabhoi. On hearing
of the death of Píláji the viceroy immediately advanced against the
Maráthás, and, [and takes Baroda.] after taking possession of Baroda,
laid siege to Dabhoi. He failed to capture this fortress, and as the
rainy season had set in and provisions were scarce, he was obliged
to retire. He then went to Baroda, and after placing Sher Khán Bábi
in charge of the city, returned to Áhmedábád. In this year, [Famine,
1732.] A.D. 1732, Gujarát was wasted by famine.

[Affairs at Surat, 1732.] Meanwhile at Surat Múlla Muhammad Ali of
Athva was again the cause of disturbance. Resisting with force the
demand of a sum of £10,000 (Rs. 1 lákh) by Sohráb Khán, the governor
of Surat, he succeeded in driving Sohráb Khán out of the city, and
the government of Surat was then usurped by [Teghbeg Khán Governor of
Surat.] Teghbeg Khán, a brother of Beglar-Beg Khán. The success of the
Múlla against Soráb Khán made him so forgetful of his position that
he arrogated to himself all the emblems of the governor's office and
wrote to the emperor asking a patent of the governorship of Surat in
the name of his son Múlla Fakhr-ud-dín. The messengers bearing these
communications were intercepted at Broach by the partisans of Teghbeg,
who determined to remove this powerful cause of anxiety. Teghbeg Khán,
inviting Muhammad Ali to an entertainment, placed him in confinement,
and after keeping him in prison for two years, in A.D. 1734 put him
to death. Teghbeg also took possession of the fort of Athva, and
plundered it. Sohráb Khán, seeing that he could not recover Surat,
went with Sayad Wali to Gogha, where his relatives lived, and from
that, proceeding to Bhávnagar settled there. When the emperor heard
what had happened, he appointed Momín Khán to Surat and Teghbeg Khán
to Cambay. Momín Khán sent Sayad Núrullah to act for him, but he was
defeated by Teghbeg Khán, who afterwards contrived, in A.D. 1733,
to be formally appointed governor of Surat with the title of Bahádur.

When Umábái, widow of Khanderáv Senápati, heard of the assassination of
Píláji Gáikwár, she determined to avenge his death. Collecting an army
and taking with her Kántáji Kadam and Dámáji Gáikwár, son of Píláji,
she marched upon Áhmedábád. As the Maráthás failed to do more than
slay a Rájput leader named Jívaráj they came to terms. In the end
it was agreed that in addition to the one-fourth and the one-tenth
shares of the revenue a sum of £8000 (Rs. 80,000) should be paid from
the Áhmedábád treasury, Jawán Mard Khán being kept as a hostage till
the payments were made. For his services on this occasion Jawán Mard
Khán was made governor of Víramgám. During this year an imperial order
appointed Khushálchand Sheth, son of Sántidás, Nagar Sheth or chief
merchant of Áhmedábád. The Maráthás plundered Rasúlábád a mile south of
Áhmedábád and its excellent library was pillaged. Umábái now marched
upon Baroda, and the governor, Sher Khán Bábi, prepared to oppose the
Maráthás. But Umábái, sending a message to Sher Khán, explained that
she had just concluded a peace with the Mahárája, and was suffered to
pass unmolested. The emperor, satisfied with the arrangements made
by the Mahárája, presented him with a dress of honour. [Ratansingh
Bhandári Deputy Viceroy, 1733-1737.] In this year the Mahárája went
to court by way of Jodhpur, and appointed Ratansingh Bhandári as his
deputy, and the author of the Mirat-i-Áhmedi as news recorder. In the
same year, A.D. 1733, Ghulám Muhy-ud-dín Khán, governor of Junágadh
died, and his son Mír Hazabr Khán was selected to fill his place.

[The Maráthás Return.] Meanwhile as the Maráthás had not received their
rights, Jádoji Dábháde, son of Umábái, returned to Gujarát. Peace
was concluded on the former basis, and Jádoji marched into Sorath
to exact tribute. In this year the Kolis of the Chúnvál and Kánkrej
committed many excesses, and a Rájput noble was robbed in the Pátan
district. In the meantime Sohráb Khán, the former governor of Surat,
who had been kindly received by Bhávsinghji the chief of Sihor,
began to raise a following and was appointed collector of arrears
in Sorath. He chose Sayad Núrullah as his deputy, and sent him to
recover the revenue for the current year.

[Contest for the government of Gogha.] On the death of Salábat
Khán Bábi, though the Mahárája had endeavoured to get Sher Khán
Bábi appointed in place of his father, Gogha had been granted
to Burhán-ul-Mulk, who chose Sohráb Khán as his deputy. At this
time Sher Khán Bábi was at Baroda, and his younger brother, though
he resisted, was compelled to leave Gogha. The deputy governor of
Sorath complained to the governor of the oppressive conduct of Sohráb
Khán. But Burhán-ul-Mulk supported Sohráb and having obtained for
himself the government of Sorath, sent Sohráb Khán as his deputy to
Junágadh. [Disturbance at Víramgám, 1734.] In A.D. 1734, Ratansingh
Bhandári, the deputy viceroy, who held in hatred Bhávsingh, son of
Udaikaran, the hereditary officer of Víramgám, persuaded Jawán-Mard
Khán to imprison him and send him to Áhmedábád. Jawan-Mard Khán went
so far as to arrest Bhávsingh, but was forced by his supporters to
release him.

[Baroda recovered by the Maráthás, 1734.] In this year Sher Khán Bábi,
governor of Baroda, went to visit his lands at Bálásinor, leaving
Muhammad Sarbáz in command at Baroda, Máhadáji Gáikwár, brother of
Píláji, who then held Jambúsar, sending to Songad to Dámáji for aid,
marched on Baroda with a strong force. The garrison made a brave
defence, and Sher Khán hearing of the attack at Bálásinor, called for
aid from Ratansingh Bhandári, the deputy viceroy, who directed Momín
Khán, the governor of Cambay, to join Sher Khán and drive back the
Maráthás. Sher Khán started at once for Baroda. But Máhadaji leaving
a sufficient force before the town pushed on with the bulk of his
army to meet Sher Khán, and, though he and his men fought bravely,
defeated him, and then returned to Baroda, Sher Khán retiring to
Bálásinor. Momín Khán, who arrived after Sher Khán's defeat, did not
deem it prudent to engage the Maráthás, and retired to Cambay. In the
meantime the garrison of Baroda, hopeless of succour, surrendered the
town, and since that day Baroda has continued to be the head-quarters
of the Gáikwár family.

[Change of Governor at Víramgám.] Since Jawán Mard Khán's capture of
Bhávsingh of Víramgám he had become much disliked. For this reason
Ratansingh Bhandári, the deputy viceroy, transferred him to Kadi
and Bijápur, and in his place appointed Sher Khán Bábi, whose father
Muhammad Salábát Khán Bábi had been a popular governor of Víramgám. At
this time Dhanrúp Bhandári, governor of Petlád, died, and the farm of
the districts of Nadiád, Arhar-Mátar, Petlád, and Mahudha was given
to Momín Khán. Mulla Muhammad Áli managed to write letters from his
confinement at Surat to the Nizám; and as that chief was now not far
from Surat, he wrote urgently to Teghbeg Khán to release him. Teghbeg
Khán put the Mulla to death, and bribing the Nizám's messenger,
gave out that he had died of joy at his release. Khushálchand, the
chief of the merchants of Áhmedábád, having had a difference with
Ratansingh, was forced to leave the city, and sought shelter at Cambay
and afterwards at Junágadh. [Jawán Mard Khán fails in an attempt
on Ídar.] Jawán Mard Khán, who was of an ambitious temperament, now
conceived the design of conquering Ídar from Anandsingh and Ráisingh,
brothers of the Mahárája Abheysingh. He accordingly marched upon Ídar,
taking with him as allies Aghráji Koli of Katosan and Koli Amra of
Elol Kánrah. In this strait Anandsingh and Ráisingh sought the aid of
Malhárráv Holkar and Ránoji Sindia, who were at this time in Málwa. The
Marátha chiefs at once marched to the help of Ídar, and Jawán Mard
Khán, disbelieving the report of Marátha aid, continued to advance
until he found himself opposed by an overwhelming force. Negotiations
were entered into, and Jawán Mard Khán agreed to pay a sum of £17,500
(Rs. 1,75,000). Of the total amount £2500 (Rs. 25,000) were paid at
once, and Zoráwar Khán, brother of Jawán Mard Khán, and Ajabsingh,
agent of Aghráji Koli, were kept as hostages until the balance
should be paid. In this year Teghbeg Khán of Surat caused a wealthy
merchant named Áhmed Chalabi to be assassinated, and confiscated his
property. He also caused a fanatic named Sayad Áli to be put to death
by certain Afgháns, as he considered that he might excite sedition.

[Rivalry of Ratansingh Bhandári and Sohráb Khán, 1735.] In the
following year (A.D. 1735) Dholka was assigned to Ratansingh Bhandári,
and through the influence of Burhán-ul-Mulk, Sohráb Khán was appointed
governor of Víramgám. Ratansingh resented this, and eventually Víramgám
was conferred on the Mahárája Abheysingh. When this order reached
Sohráb Khán, he forwarded it to Burhán-ul-Mulk, and in consequence
of Burhán-ul-Mulk's remonstrances, the arrangements were changed and
Sohráb Khán appointed governor. Upon this Sohráb Khán, leaving Sádak
Ali as his deputy in Junágadh, marched for Víramgám; while Ratansingh
Bhandári, hearing of Sohráb Khán's approach, summoned Momín Khán and
others to his assistance, and with his own army proceeded to Dholka and
plundered Koth. From Koth he advanced and pitched at Harálah, about ten
miles from Sohráb Khán's camp, and here he was joined by Momín Khán and
others whom he had summoned to support him. [Battle of Dholi. Defeat
and Death of Sohráb Khán, 1735.] After the union of these forces he
marched to Dholi, six miles from Dhandhuka, at which place Sohráb Khán
was then encamped. Ratansingh Bhandári now proposed that peace should
be concluded, and that Sohráb Khán should enjoy Víramgám until final
orders were passed by the emperor. Safdar Khán Bábi and others went to
Sohráb Khán and endeavoured to bring him to consent to these terms;
but he would not listen, and on both sides preparations were made
for battle. During the following night Ratansingh Bhandári planned
an attack on Sohráb Khán's camp. The surprise was complete. Sohráb
Khán's troops fled, and himself, mortally wounded, shortly afterwards
died. By the death of Sohráb Khán the family of Kázím Beg Khán became
extinct. He was buried at Sihor in Káthiáváda.

[Rivalry between Ratansingh Bhandári and Momín Khán, 1735.] After this
success a single horseman attacked and wounded Ratansingh Bhandári
in two places. The horseman was at once slain, but no one was able
to recognize him. Ratansingh, who in two months had recovered from
his injuries, now determined to attack Momín Khán, as that officer
in the recent struggle had taken part with Sohráb Khán. Momín Khán
hearing of Ratansingh's intentions, withdrew to Cambay. In the course
of this year, on the expiry of the period of the farm of Mahudha,
Arhar-Mátar, and Nadiád, these districts were transferred from
Momín Khán to Safdar Khán Bábi. Kaliánchand, a man of low origin,
was appointed to Víramgám in place of Sher Khán Bábi, and instead of
Sohráb Khán, Muhsin Khán Khálvi was made deputy governor of Sorath.

[Marátha Affairs.] About this time Dámáji Gáikwár, who had been
chosen by Umábái as her representative in Gujarát, appointed Rangoji
to act as his agent. [Dámáji Gáikwár and Kántáji, 1735.] Kántáji being
dissatisfied with this arrangement, in which his rights were ignored,
marched into Gujarát. Rangoji met him, and a battle was fought at
[Battle of Ánand-Mogri. Defeat of Kántáji.] Ánand-Mogri, twenty-five
miles south-east of Kaira, in which Kántáji was defeated and his son
killed. In consequence of this reverse Kántáji retired to Petlád. Momín
Khán, who with his army was drawn up near Petlád to oppose Rangoji,
was compelled to retire to Cambay, where peace was concluded on
condition that Dámáji should receive the one-fourth share of the
revenues of the country north of the Mahi. As the districts where
these battles were fought were held in farm by Safdar Khán Bábi, he
suffered much loss, and consequently retired to Rádhanpur. Rangoji
was joined by Dámáji Gáikwár, and these two leaders went together
to Dholka. While they were there, [The Maráthás help Bhávsingh to
expel the Víramgám Kasbátis.] Bhávsingh of Víramgám invited them to
that town, both on account of the annoyance he suffered from the
Márvádis and that he might take vengeance on the Kasbátis for the
murder of his father Udaikaran. He accordingly treacherously admitted
the Maráthás and slew Daulat Muhammad Tánk, brother of the murderer
of his father, and expelled the rest of the Kasbátis, while Kalián,
the Márvádi administrator, was permitted to go to Áhmedábád. Leaving
Rangoji at Víramgám, Dámáji marched into Sorath to levy tribute from
the chiefs, and after collecting a portion of his dues, returned to
the Dakhan. In the following year (A.D. 1736) Rangoji advanced as
far as Bávla near Dholka wasting the country. Ratansingh Bhandári,
the deputy viceroy, marched against him, and forced him to retire
to Víramgám. Ratansingh pursued the Maráthás to Víramgám, attacked
and defeated them capturing their baggage, but failed to prevent
them taking shelter in the town. About this time some Marátha horse
who were at Sarnál, otherwise called Thásra, joined the Kolis of
those parts, advanced with them against Kapadvanj and without any
serious resistance succeeded in capturing the town. Meanwhile though
Ratansingh had summoned Momín Khán to his aid, he delayed coming,
as he began to scheme independence at Cambay.

Ratansingh Bhandári heard that Pratápráv, brother of Dámáji, and
Deváji Tákpar were advancing on Áhmedábád with 10,000 horse. At first
he thought this a device to draw him from Víramgám, to whose walls
his mines had reached. On ascertaining from trusty spies that the
report was true, he raised the siege of Víramgám, returned rapidly
to Áhmedábád, and pushing forward to meet Pratápráv, exacted tribute
from the chiefs on the banks of the Vátrak. As Pratápráv drew near,
the governor of the Bhíl district retired before him, and he continuing
his advance, passed through Valad and Pethápur, and so by way of Chhála
reached Dholka. Here, through Muhammad Ismáíl, the governor of Dholka,
he demanded from the Bhandári his share of the revenue. Afterwards,
leaving 2000 horse in Dholka, he went to Dhandhúka. [The Gáikwár
and Peshwa Plunder the Country.] In the meantime Kántáji, who was a
follower of Bájiráv Peshwa, joining with Malhárráv Holkar, advanced
upon Ídar, and coming against Dánta, plundered that town. Some
Nágar Bráhmans of the town of Vadnagar, who were settled in Dánta,
tried to escape to the hills, but were intercepted and pillaged. The
Maráthás then proceeded to Vadnagar and plundered the town. From
Vadnagar they went as far as Pálanpur, where Pahár Khán Jhálori,
being unable to oppose them, agreed to pay a tribute of £10,000 (Rs. 1
lákh). Kántáji and Malhárráv Holkar then marched into Márwár, while
Pratápráv and Rangoji crossed over from Dhandhuka into Káthiáváda and
Gohilváda. About this time Muhammad Pahár Khán Jhálori was appointed
deputy governor of Pátan on behalf of Vakhatsingh. As no settlement
of his demands on the revenues of Dholka had yet been made, Pratápráv
returned to that town and sent Narhar Pandit to receive the tribute
due to him. Afterwards proceeding to Baroda with Rangoji they were
summoned to Sorath by Dámáji to assist him. Sher Khán Bábi, who up to
his time had been at Kaira, now came to Áhmedábád, and as the deputy
viceroy was displeased with Momín Khán's conduct when Víramgám was
besieged, he appointed Sher Khán his own deputy at Petlád, Arhar-Mátar,
and Nadiád. Afterwards on Momín Khán's remonstrance Subháchand Márvádi
was appointed to examine the accounts and receive the revenue in place
of Sher Khán. In A.D. 1737 Dámáji's brother Pratápráv, returning to
his country after exacting tribute from the chiefs of Sorath, died of
small-pox at Kánkar near Dholka. Momín Khán seeing that Sher Khán had
not yet left Kaira, collected some men and came to Petlád, while Sher
Khán went to Dehgám and awaited the departure of Rangoji. Ratansingh
Bhandári made preparations to help Sher Khán and Momín Khán returned
to Cambay.

[Momín Khán Fifty-fourth Viceroy, 1737.] At this time as the Mahárája
Abheysingh was not in favour at court, Momín Khán was appointed
fifty-fourth viceroy. As he was unable to effect anything by himself
he persuaded Jawán Mard Khán Bábi to join him by a promise of the
government of Pátan and directed him to proceed and take up that
appointment. Now the Jháloris were allies of the Ráthods, and Pahár
Khán Jhálori, then in command of Pátan, opposed Jawán Mard Khán, but
was finally obliged to vacate Pátan. Momín Khán, who had not hitherto
produced the order appointing him viceroy, now made it public and
began to act as viceroy with the title of Najm-ud-dauláh Momín Khán
Bahádur Fírúz Jang, and in A.D. 1737 sent a copy of this order to
Abdúl Husain Khán, the deputy minister, and to Mustafíd Khán, who
held the office of Kázi.

Sher Khán Bábi, wishing to remain neutral, retired to Bálásinor and
Momín Khán summoned Rangoji, who was in the neighbourhood of Cambay,
to his assistance. Rangoji agreed to aid him in expelling the Márvádis,
on condition that, if successful, he should be granted one-half of
the produce of Gujarát except the city of Áhmedábád, the lands in the
neighbourhood of the city, and the port of Cambay. This disastrous
alliance with the Maráthás gave the last blow to Mughal power in
Gujarát, which otherwise might have lingered for at least a quarter
of a century. Momín Khán lived to repent his conduct.

When Ratansingh Bhandári heard of the appointment of Momín Khán to
be viceroy he wrote to Mahárája Abheysingh for orders. Meanwhile he
sent Muhammadan officials to Cambay to persuade Momín Khán to take
no further steps until a reply should be received to the reference
Momín Khán had made to Ágra. The reply of the Mahárája was that
Ratansingh should resist Momín Khán if he could. Ratansingh prepared
to defend Áhmedábád while Momín Khán collecting an army, camped at
the Náransar lake.

From the Náransar lake where Momín Khán remained encamped for one and
a half months collecting his partisans he advanced to Sojitra, where
he was joined by Jawán Mard Khán Bábi; and proceeding together they
came to Vasu under Petlád, about twenty-six miles from Áhmedábád,
and from Vasu to Kaira, about eighteen miles from the capital. At
Kaira they encamped on the banks of the Vátrak, where, owing to the
incessant rain, they were forced to remain for about a month. When
the rain abated and the rivers were fordable, Momín Khán, moving to
Áhmedábád, encamped in front of the city on the Kánkariya tank and
[Lays Siege to Áhmedábád.] prepared for a siege. About the same time
Momín Khán's manager, Vajerám, whom he had sent to Songad to solicit
Dámáji to march in person to his assistance, arrived and informed him
that Dámáji would join him shortly. Zoráwar Khán, who had been left
at the Marátha camp as security for the payment of the tribute, was
recalled, and instead the district of Parántij was formally assigned to
the Maráthás in payment of their demands. Some of the Mahárája's guns,
which were being sent to Áhmedábád by his agents at Surat through
Cambay for facility of transit, were about this time captured by
a party of Momín Khán's men. When Ratansingh Bhandári wrote to the
Mahárája of Momín Khán's advance on Áhmedábád, the Mahárája was much
displeased, and went from the emperor's presence in anger. The nobles
fearing the consequences, recalled him, and persuaded the emperor to
re-appoint him viceroy of Gujarát.

[Momín Khán continues the Siege of Áhmedábád.] Momín Khán was secretly
enjoined to disregard the Mahárája's appointment and persevere in
expelling the Ráthods, and was assured of the emperor's approbation
of this line of conduct. He therefore continued to prosecute the
siege with vigour. In the meantime another order was received from
the imperial court, confirming the reappointment of the [Mahárája
Abheysingh Fifty-fifth Viceroy, 1737.] Mahárája and appointing
Fidá-ud-dín Khán to guard the city with 500 men, directing also that
Momín Khán should return to Cambay. It was further stated that, as
Ratansingh Bhandári had acted oppressively, some other person should be
appointed deputy to fill his place, and that in the meantime a Rájput
noble, named Abhaikaran, was to carry on the government. Shortly
before this Muhammad Bákir Khán, son of Muâtamid Khán, joined Momín
Khán from Surat, while Sádik Áli Khán and his nephew reinforced him
from Junágadh. When Momín Khán was informed of the purport of the
imperial order he agreed to return to Cambay, provided Ratansingh
Bhandári would quit the city, hand over charge to Abhaikaran, and
admit Fidá-ud-dín Khán and his men into the city.

[Defence of the City by Ratansingh Bhandári.] Ratansingh Bhandári
determined not to leave the city, and prepared to defend himself to
the last. Dámáji Gáikwár now joined Momín Khán from Songad. Momín
Khán met Dámáji at Ísanpur, three miles from Áhmedábád, and made
great show of friendship, calling him his brother. When Ratansingh
Bhandári heard of the arrangements made between Dámáji and Momín Khán,
he sent a message to Dámáji saying, 'Momín Khán has promised Rangoji
half of the revenues of Gujarát excepting the city of Áhmedábád,
the lands immediately round it, and Cambay. If you will join me, I
will give you half of everything not excepting the city nor Cambay,
and will send to your camp some of my chief landholders as security
if you agree.' Dámáji showed this to Momín Khán, and asked him what
he proposed to do. Momín Khán now perforce agreed to do the same;
but instead of Cambay offered to make over to the Maráthás the
whole district of Víramgám. Dámáji, accepting these terms, ceased to
negotiate with Ratansingh. He then went on pilgrimage to Dúdesar, and
returning in the same year, A.D. 1738, he and Rangoji began active
operations against Áhmedábád. Their bombardment did so much damage
to the city that Momín Khán repented having called them to his aid,
and foresaw that if the Maráthás once gained any portion of the city
it would be no easy matter to drive them out. Momín Khán now sent the
writer of the Mirat-i-Áhmedi to Ratansingh Bhandári, in hopes that
he might withdraw peaceably, but Ratansingh refused to listen to any
terms. After some time the Musalmáns under Kázim Áli Khán and others,
and the Maráthás under Báburáv endeavoured to take the city by storm,
but after a bloody contest were forced to retire. Next day Ratansingh,
seeing that he could not long hold the city, entered into a negotiation
with Momín Khán, and, on receiving a sum of money for his expenses,
and on being allowed to retire with the honours of war, left the city.

[Momín Khán captures Áhmedábád, 1738.] Momín Khán entered Áhmedábád. On
the capture of the city, in accordance with Momín Khán's engagement,
half of it was handed to the Maráthás. Momín Khán sent news of what
had taken place to the emperor, and appointed Fidá-ud-dín Khán his
deputy. Dámáji, who in the meantime had been to Sorath, now returned
and was met by Rangoji, who accompanied him as far as the banks of the
Mahi, whence Rangoji proceeded to Dholka. After spending a few days
at Dholka, Rangoji returned to Áhmedábád and took charge of his share
of the city, which comprised the Ráikhar, Khánjchán, and Jamálpur
quarters as far as the Astoria and Ráipur gates. The city was thus
equally divided, and the Astoria and Raipur gates were guarded by
the Maráthás. At that time the inhabitants of Áhmedábád were chiefly
Muhammadans, and the Maráthás, accustomed to extortion, attempting
to oppress them, they rose against the strangers, and after a severe
affray expelled the greater part of them from the city. Momín Khán,
though secretly pleased, affected ignorance and sent Fidá-ud-dín Khán
to reassure Rangoji. This with some difficulty he succeeded in doing
and Rangoji remained in the city. Jawán Mard Khán was sent to Pátan,
and, instead of Parántij, the district of Kherálu was granted to
Zoráwar Khán Bábi.

[Prosperity of Áhmedábád, 1738.] With the cessation of Marátha
oppression, Áhmedábád began to recover its splendour and opulence. The
emperor was much pleased with Momín Khán, and, raising his rank,
presented him with a dress of honour, a sword, and other articles
of value. [Momín Khán Fifth-sixth Viceroy, 1738-1743.] At the close
of the rainy season Momín Khán went to levy tribute from the chiefs
on the banks of the Sábarmati, and Rangoji was asked to accompany
him. They marched to Adálaj whence Fidá-ud-dín Khán, the deputy
viceroy, returned to the city accompanied by Rámáji as deputy of
Rangoji. Jawán Mard Khán and Sher Khán Bábi now joined the viceroy's
camp, and, about the same time Hathising, chief of Pethápur, paid
a visit to the viceroy and settled his tribute. From Adálaj they
advanced to Mánsa, and were met by the Mánsa chief. From Mánsa they
proceeded to Kadi, and from Kadi to Bíjápur. After Momín Khán left
the people of Áhmedábád were badly treated, and Rangoji, leaving his
brother Akoji in camp, returned to the capital, whence he marched
towards Víramgám and Sorath. Momín Khán went from Bíjápur to Ídar,
and there levied tribute from the chiefs of Mohanpur and Ranásan.

When Momín Khán arrived at Ídar, Ánandsingh and Ráisingh, brothers
of Mahárája Abheysingh, went to him and paid the tribute of Mohanpur
and Ranásan as being within the limits of the Ídar territory. The
matter was amicably settled, and the two brothers accompanied the
viceroy as far as the Ídar frontier, when Ánandsingh returned to
Ídar, and Ráisingh, at Momín Khán's request, remained with him,
Momín Khán undertaking to pay the expenses of his men. Prathiráj,
the chief of Mánsa, [The Viceroy collects Tribute, 1738.] agreed to
pay £2300 (Rs. 23,000) and the chief of Varsoda £1000 (Rs. 10,000)
as tribute. At this time Sher Muhammad Khán Bábi was appointed to
succeed Mír Dost Áli as deputy governor of Sorath. The Maráthás,
who had attempted to deprive some of the Rasúlábád and Batwa Sayads
of their land, were attacked by the Muhammadan population, and a few
men were wounded on either side. Momín Khán, receiving tribute from
various chiefs, had now reached Pálanpur, and Pahár Khán Jhálori,
the governor of that place, was introduced to the viceroy by Sher Khán
Bábi. As news was now received that Deváji Tákpar was advancing through
the Baroda districts, Momín Khán marched towards Áhmedábád, dismissing
Pahár Khán Jhálori on the Pálanpur frontier. Jawán Mard Khán Bábi,
appointing his brother Safdar Khán Bábi as his deputy at Pátan, pushed
forward in advance for Áhmedábád. Mámúr Khán, who had been chosen by
Mír Huzabr Áli as his deputy in Sorath, now arrived and complained
to Momín Khán regarding Sher Khán Bábi's appointment. Momín Khán said
that, as neither had assumed charge of their duties, they should await
final orders from the emperor. He then advanced to Hájipur, and thence
encamped on the side of the city near Bahrámpur and occupied himself
in strengthening the city defences. From that camp he proceeded to
Ísanpur four miles south of Áhmedábád on his way to levy tribute from
the Koli chiefs of the banks of the Vátrak. After this he proceeded to
Kúlej on the Vátrak and levied tribute from the Koli chiefs of that
neighbourhood. Hearing that Dámáji had left Songad, and crossing the
Mahi had gone to Arás, Momín Khán struck his camp and returned to the
city, while Dámáji going to Dholka marched from that to Sorath. Momín
Khán now permitted Sher Khán to return to his lands in Gogha, whence he
proceeded to Junágadh and took charge of the office of deputy governor.

[Sher Khán Bábi Deputy Governor of Sorath, 1738.] In A.D. 1738,
Mír Huzabr Khán, the governor of Sorath, died, and as Sher Khán
had occupied Junágadh, and taken into his employ all the troops of
Mir Dost Áli, Mámúr Khán was obliged to resign his pretensions and
return. The emperor now appointed Himmat Áli Khán, nephew of Momín
Khán, governor of Sorath, and he wrote to his uncle to choose a fitting
deputy. Momín Khán, as the Marátha incursions into Sorath increased
yearly, and as Sher Khán Bábi was a man able to hold his own with them,
suffered him to remain as deputy. When Dámáji returned to Víramgám,
after levying tribute from the chiefs of Sorath, he was obliged to
march against Kánji Koli, the chief of Chhaniár in the Chúnvál. As he
could not prevail against them he was forced to call on Momín Khán for
aid. Momín Khán sent Fidá-ud-dín Khán at the head of a well-equipped
army. On their approach the Kolis fled, and the village was burned,
and Fidá-ud-dín Khán returned to the capital. Dámáji, leaving Rangoji
as his deputy, returned to Songad. In this year, A.D. 1738, Hindustán
was invaded by the great Persian Nádir Sháh, Dehli sacked, and the
emperor made prisoner. Except that coin was struck in Nádir's name,
the collapse of Mughal power caused little change in Gujarát.

[The Deputy Viceroy collects Tribute, 1739.] In A.D. 1739 Fidá-ud-dín
Khán was sent to levy tribute from the chiefs on the banks of the
Sábarmati, and, accompanied by Jawán Mard Khán Bábi and Rája Ráisingh
of Ídar, marched to Charárah. As the village of Pánmul under Bijápur
had been assigned to the author of the Mirat-i-Áhmedi, he accompanied
Fidá-ud-dín Khán, who marched to Ahmednagar, and demanded tribute from
Jítsingh of Mohanpur and Ranásan. Jítsingh resisted and a doubtful
battle was fought. Next day Fidá-ud-dín Khán changed his position
and again attacked Jítsingh, who being defeated agreed to pay £1000
(Rs. 10,000). They then went to Ídar, where they were hospitably
received by Rája Ráising, who presented the leaders with horses. From
Ídar they proceeded to Vadnagar, which was under Jawán Mard Khán, who
also received them courteously and presented horses. The army then
marched to Visalnagar. On the arrival of the troops at Visalnagar,
Jawán Mard Khán requested Fidá-ud-dín Khán to subdue Jámáji the Koli
chief of Thara-Jámpur in the Kánkrej, who was then at Bálísana under
Pátan and who was continually plundering the country. Fidá-ud-dín
Khán marched to Bálísána, but Jámáji fled to Thara-Jámpur without
risking a battle and the Muhammadans plundered Thara-Jámpur. From
Bálísána Fidá-ud-dín marched to Kadi, and allowing Jawán Mard Khán
to return to Pátan proceeded to Áhmedábád.

At Áhmedábád disputes between Rangoji and Momín Khán regarding the
government of the city were frequent. In one serious disturbance
Momín Khán was worsted and forced to sue for peace and grant Rangoji
his half share both in the government and revenue, which, since the
affray in A.D. 1738, Momín Khán had withheld. A formal agreement
was drawn up but did not long remain in force. About this time Momín
Khán's nephew Muhammad Momín Khán Bakhshi received a patent granting
him the title of Nazar Áli Khán. The year A.D. 1739 was marked by a
disastrous flood in the Sábarmati. [Capture of Bassein by the Maráthás,
1739.] In this year also the Maráthás under Chimnáji Ápa achieved the
memorable success of taking the fort of Bassein from the Portuguese.

[Tribute Expedition, 1740.] In A.D. 1740 on his return from Sorath,
Dámáji Gáikwár took Rangoji to the Dakhan and appointed Malhárráv
Khúni his deputy at Áhmedábád. Fidá-ud-dín Khán met the new deputy
at Ísanpur and escorted him to the city. Shortly after Fidá-ud-dín
Khán and Nazar Áli Khán started to collect tribute, and Jawán Mard
Khán sent his brother Zoráwar Khán Bábi to accompany them. They
advanced against Dabhora under Bahyal eighteen miles east of Áhmedábád
in the Bhíl district and fought with the chief, who agreed to pay
tribute. Thence they went to Atarsumba, where the Kolis after a vain
attempt to carry off their cannon agreed to pay tribute. The force
then proceeded to Mándva and levied a contribution from the Mándva
chief. They next went to Kapadvanj, and passing through Bálásinor
reached Vírpur under Lunáváda. Here, from Sultánsingh, agent of
the Lunáváda chief, they received two horses and £300 (Rs. 3000) as
tribute. While at Lunáváda an order of recall came from Momín Khán,
who intimated that Malhárráv Khúni had laid up large stores of grain
and contemplated war. Fidá-ud-dín Khán at once pushed forward through
Bálásinor and Kapadvanj, advancing rapidly towards the capital. On
the way he received a second despatch from Momín Khán saying that,
as the risk of war had for the present passed, they should advance
to Petlád, where they would find Malhárráv Khúni and settle with
him about the revenue accounts. They continued their march, and in
two days reached Kaira, being joined on the way by Muhammad Kúli
Khán, who was charged with messages from Momín Khán. At Kaira they
found Muhammad Husain, nephew of Fidá-ud-dín Khán who had been sent
with a force to Mahudha. As Malhárráv Khúni was at Pinj near Kaira,
Fidá-ud-dín Khán expressed a wish to meet him, and it was agreed that
both sides should go to the Petlád district and there settle the
disputed collections. Shortly after they met and arrangements were
in progress when the Kolis of the Bhíl district rebelled and Abdúl
Husain Khán and Vajerám were sent against them. After burning two or
three villages this detachment rejoined the main body, and not long
after all returned to Áhmedábád. During A.D. 1740 Bájiráv Peshwa died.

[The Viceroy at Cambay, 1741.] In A.D. 1741 Momín Khán went to Cambay,
and while residing at Ghiáspur near that city received information that
Dámáji had again appointed Rangoji his deputy in place of Malhárráv
Khúni, and shortly after Rangoji arrived at Petlád. At this time Momín
Khán turned his attention to the falling off in the customs revenue of
Cambay and appointed Ismáil Muhammad collector of customs. As he was
anxious to clear some misunderstanding between Rangoji and himself,
Momín Khán set out to visit Rangoji and assure him of his good
wishes. At this time Bhávsingh of Víramgám, who found the Maráthás
even more troublesome than the Muhammadans, as soon as he heard of
Malhárráv's recall, suddenly attacked the fort of Víramgám and with
the aid of some Arabs and Rohillás expelled the Marátha garrison and
prepared to hold the fort on his own account. Shortly after Rangoji
demanded that a tower in Áhmedábád, which had been raised a story
by Momín Khán so as to command the residence of the Marátha deputy
at the Jamálpur gate, should be reduced to its original height. At
the same time he suggested that Momín Khán and he, uniting their
forces, should advance and expel Bhávsingh from Víramgám. Momín
Khán agreed to both proposals. The addition to the tower was pulled
down, and Momín Khán and Rangoji, marching against Víramgám, laid
siege to the town. Bhávsingh made a gallant defence, and Momín Khán,
who was not sorry to see the Maráthás in difficulties, after a time
left them and marched to Kadi and Bijápur to levy tribute. [Bhávsingh
surrenders Víramgám and receives Pátdi.] Rangoji continued the siege,
and as Bhávsingh saw that even without Momín Khán the Marátha army
was sufficient to reduce the place, he agreed to surrender Víramgám,
provided the fort of Pátdi and its dependent villages were granted to
him. Rangoji agreed, and thus the Maráthás again obtained possession
of Víramgám, while Bhávsingh acquired Pátdi, [873] a property which
his descendants hold to this day.

[Siege of Broach by the Maráthás, 1741.] When Momín Khán arrived at
Mánsa, about twenty-six miles north-west of Áhmedábád, hearing that
Dámáji had crossed the Mahi with 10,000 men, he at once returned to
the capital. Dámáji arrived at Mánsa and besieged it. The chiefs and
Kolis defended the place bravely for about a month, when it fell into
Dámáji's hands, who not only cleared the prickly-pear stockade which
surrounded it, but also burned the town. From Mánsa Dámáji marched
to Sorath. On his return he laid siege to Broach, a fort which,
from its natural strength as well as from its favourable position
on the Narbada, it had been the constant ambition both of Dámáji and
of his father Píláji to capture. On the approach of Dámáji, Nek Álam
Khán, who held the place in the interests of the Nizám, prepared to
defend the fort, and wrote to the Nizám for aid. In reply the Nizám
warned Dámáji not to attack his possessions. On receiving this letter
Dámáji raised the siege and returned to Songad. It seems probable that
concessions were made to tempt Dámáji to retire from Broach, and that
the Gáikwár's share in the Broach customs dates from this siege.

[Battle of Dholka. Defeat of the Maráthás, 1741.] In A.D. 1741 in
a battle between Káim Kúli Khán, governor of Dholka, and Rangoji's
deputy, the Maráthás were defeated. Momín Khán, at the request of
Rangoji, made peace between them. Fidá-ud-dín Khán, who had recently
been raised in rank with the title of Bahádur, starting to collect
tribute burned down the refractory Koli village of Dabhora, and placing
a post there, passed to Sátumba, Bálásinor, and Thásra. After the
battle at Dholka, the building by Rangoji of the fort of Borsad,
caused renewed fighting between the Muhammadans and Maráthás of
Dholka. At the request of Muhammad Hádi Khán, governor of Dholka,
Fidá-ud-dín Khán, passing through Mahudha to Petlád pushed forward
to help him. [Contests between the Musalmáns and Maráthás.] In
the meantime a battle was fought, in which the Maráthás under
Malhárráv attacked Muhammad Hádi Khán, and after a short contest
withdrew. Next day the Muhammadans, strengthened by the arrival of
Fidá-ud-dín Khán, besieged Sojitra. A letter was written to Rangoji,
asking the meaning of the attack, and he replied excusing himself and
attributing it to the ignorance of Malhárráv. Muhammad Hádi Khán and
the author of the Mirat-i-Áhmedi eventually met Rangoji at Borsad,
and settled that he and Fidá-ud-dín Khán should come together and
arrange matters. But Rangoji in his heart intended to fight and wrote
to his deputy Rámáji at Áhmedábád to be ready for war. Malhárráv now
joined Rangoji at Borsad. At this time many misunderstandings and
several fights between the Maráthás and the Muhammadans were appeased
by Momín Khán and Rangoji, who, in spite of the ill-feeling among
their subordinates and a certain distrust of each other's designs,
appear throughout to have maintained a warm mutual regard. Dámáji from
his stronghold at Songad was too much occupied in Dakhan politics to
give much attention to Gujarát. Rangoji, on the other hand, gained so
much influence with the Gujarát chiefs, that at one time he succeeded
in engaging Sajansingh Hazári in his service, and also induced Rája
Ráisingh of Ídar to join him. But Momín Khán detached Ráisingh from
this alliance, by placing him in charge of the post of Amaliára and
granting him the districts of Modása, Meghrej, Ahmednagar, Parántij,
and Harsol. Moreover the customary Gujarát sum at first sent daily
by Rangoji to Rája Ráisingh for the expenses of his troops had begun
to fall into arrears. Rája Ráisingh made his peace with Momín Khán
through the mediation of Nazar Áli Khán, Momín Khán's nephew, who
appears to have been one of the leading spirits of the time.

[Disturbance at Áhmedábád, 1742.] In A.D. 1742 in another fight between
the Maráthás and Muhammadans in Áhmedábád, the Muhammadans gained
a slight advantage. After this Rangoji left the city, appointing
as before Rámáji as his deputy, and joining Jagjíwan Pavár went
to Borsad, where he had built a fort. At this time one Jívandás
came with authority from the Nizám to act as collector of Dholka,
part of the lands assigned to the Nizám as a personal grant, but
failed to enforce his position. Shortly after this Rája Ánandsing
of Ídar was killed, and his brother Ráising, taking leave, went
to Ídar to settle matters. Momín Khán had his patent increased
to the personal rank of commander of 6000 with a contingent of
6000 cavalry. He received a dress of honour, a jewelled turban, a
plume, six pieces of cloth, an elephant, the order of Máhi-marátib,
[874] and the title of Najm-ud-daulah Momín Khán Bahádur Diláwar
Jang. Differences again broke out between Momín Khán and Rangoji,
and again matters were settled by a friendly meeting between the two
chiefs at Borsad, where Rangoji had taken up his residence. Momín Khán
now went to Petlád, and from that to Cambay, where he was taken ill,
but after six weeks came to Vasu, where Rangoji visited him. Here
though again unwell he went to Dholka, and shortly afterwards he and
Rangoji marched upon Limbdi, which at this time is mentioned as under
Víramgám. While before Limbdi, Rangoji was summoned by Dámáji to help
him against Bápu Náik, and at once started to his assistance. Momín
Khán now marched into Gohilváda, and proceeded by Loliána to Gogha,
then under the charge of a resident deputy of Sher Khán Bábi. Here
he received tribute from the chief of Sihor, and from that, marching
into Hálár, went against Navánagar. [The Viceroy collects Tribute in
Káthiáváda.] The Jám resisted for twenty days, and eventually, on his
agreeing to pay £5000 (Rs. 50,000) as tribute, Momín Khán returned to
Áhmedábád. During his absence in spite of stubborn resistance Nazar Áli
Khán and Vajerám had collected tribute from the Koli chiefs. Rangoji,
who had now left Dámáji, joined battle with Bápu Náik ere he crossed
the Mahi, and Bápu Náik turned back. Rangoji therefore remained at
Borsad, but hearing that Momín Khán's illness had become serious,
he went once or twice to Áhmedábád to visit him.

[Death of Momín Khán, 1743.] In A.D. 1743 Momín Khán died. His wife,
fearing lest Fidá-ud-dín Khán and Muftakhir Khán, Momín Khán's son,
would deprive her of her estate, sought the protection of Rangoji. In
the meantime [Fidá-ud-dín acts as Viceroy, 1743.] Fidá-ud-dín
Khán and Muftakhir Khán received an imperial order to carry on the
government until a new viceroy should be appointed. At this time a
man named Ánandrám, who had been disgraced by Momín Khán, went over
to Rangoji and incited him to murder Fidá-ud-dín Khán and Muftakhir
Khán. Rangoji with this intention invited them both to his house,
but his heart failed him, and shortly afterwards Fidá-ud-dín Khán
went to Cambay. Rangoji now determined at all hazards to assassinate
Muftakhir Khán. With this object he took Muftakhir Khán's associates,
Vajerám and Káim Kúli Khán, into his confidence. Muftakhir Khán
accidentally heard of his designs, and remained on his guard. As
Rangoji had failed to carry out his promise to raise Sher Khán Bábi
to the post of deputy viceroy, Sher Khán advanced to Dholka and
began plundering some Cambay villages. Rangoji, after another futile
attempt to assassinate Muftakhir Khán, sent for his deputy Rámáji,
who was then in the neighbourhood, and prepared to fight. [Muftakhir
Khán Defeats the Maráthás.] Muftakhir Khán, on his part, summoned
Fidá-ud-dín Khán from Cambay, and in a few days they succeeded in
uniting their forces. Sher Khán Bábi deserting the cause of Rangoji,
the Maráthás were worsted and Rangoji's house was besieged. Rangoji,
being hard pressed, agreed to give up Ánandrám and to surrender both
Borsad and Víramgám, Sher Khán Bábi becoming his security. In this
way Fidá-ud-dín Khán became sole master of Gujarát.

[Dámáji Gáikwár Returns to Gujarát.] Shortly after Dámáji Gáikwár
returned from Sátára and came to Cambay. In the meantime Rangoji,
who had been living with Sher Khán Bábi, his security, contrived,
with the connivance of Sher Khán, to escape together with his
family. Fidá-ud-dín Khán was so greatly enraged with Sher Khán for this
treachery, that Sher Khán leaving Áhmedábád on pretence of hunting,
escaped to Bálásinor, where his wife joined him. Fidá-ud-dín Khán put
Ánandrám to death, while Rangoji through the aid of Sher Khán Bábi's
wife, made good his escape to Borsad. Fidá-ud-dín Khán had set out to
collect tribute, when news arrived that Khanderáv Gáikwár, brother of
Dámáji, had crossed the Mahi and joining Rangoji had laid siege to
Petlád. On hearing this, Fidá-ud-dín at once returned to Áhmedábád,
and sent Valabhdás Kotwál to Khanderáv to complain of the misconduct
of Rangoji.

[Abdúl Ázíz Khán of Junnar, Viceroy (by a forged order).] After the
death of Momín Khán, Jawán Mard Khán Bábi was the greatest noble in
Gujarát. He began to aspire to power, and Fidá-ud-dín, who was not good
in the field, had thoughts of appointing him as a deputy. While matters
were in this state, and Jawán Mard Khán was already laying claim to
the revenue of the district round Áhmedábád, an order was received
appointing Abdúl Ázíz Khán the commander of Junnar, near Poona, to be
viceroy of Gujarát. This order was forged by Abdúl Ázíz Khán in Jawán
Mard Khán's interests, whom he appointed his deputy. Though Fidá-ud-dín
Khán doubted the genuineness of the order, he was not powerful enough
to remove Jawán Mard Khán, who accordingly proclaimed himself deputy
viceroy. [Mutiny of the Troops.] At this time the troops, clamorous on
account of arrears, placed both Fidá-ud-dín Khán and Muftakhir Khán
under confinement. Jawán Mard Khán assumed charge of the city and
stationed his own men on guard. While Fidá-ud-dín Khán and Muftakhir
Khán were in confinement, Khanderáv Gáikwár sent them a message that
if they would cause the fort of Petlád to be surrendered to him,
he would help them. To this they returned no answer. Fidá-ud-dín
Khán now entreated Jawán Mard Khán to interfere between him and
his troops. Jawán Mard Khán accordingly persuaded the mutineers to
release Fidá-ud-dín Khán, who eventually escaped from the city and
went to Ágra.

[Maráthás Capture Petlád.] Meanwhile Rangoji continued to press
the siege of Petlád and the commander, Ágha Muhammad Husain,
after in vain appealing for help to Jawán Mard Khán, was forced to
surrender. Rangoji demolished the fort of Petlád and marched upon
Áhmedábád. As he approached the city Jawán Mard Khán sent the writer
of the Mirat-i-Áhmedi and Ajabsingh to negotiate with Rangoji, who
demanded all his former rights and possessions.

[Muftakhir Khán Fifty-seventh Viceroy, 1743-44.] News had now reached
Dehli that a false viceroy was governing Gujarát, and accordingly
Muftakhir Khán was chosen fifty-seventh viceroy, the order explaining
that Abdúl Ázíz had never been appointed viceroy, and directing
Jawán Mard Khán to withdraw from the conduct of affairs. Muftakhir
Khán was perplexed how to act. He succeeded in persuading his troops
that he would be able to pay them their arrears, and he sent a copy
of the order to Jawán Mard Khán; and, as he dared not displace him,
[Appoints Jawán Mard Khán his Deputy.] he informed Jawán Mard Khán
that he had appointed him as his deputy, and that he himself would
shortly leave Áhmedábád. Jawán Mard Khán, so far from obeying, ordered
Muftakhir Khán's house to be surrounded. Eventually Muftakhir Khán,
leaving the city, joined Rangoji, and then retired to Cambay.

[The Maráthás in Áhmedábád.] Khanderáv Gáikwár returned, and, with the
view of enforcing his claims, uniting with Rangoji, marched to Banjar,
about five miles south of Áhmedábád. Jawán Mard Khán issuing from
the city camped near the Kánkariya lake. Narhar Pandit and Krishnáji
on behalf of the Marátha leaders were sent to Jawán Mard Khán to
demand their former rights and possessions. Jawán at first refused,
but in the end gave way and the Maráthás appointed Dádu Morár deputy
of the city. Sher Khán Bábi now returned to Bálásinor. Khanderáv and
Kánáji then went to Dholka, Rangoji to Petlád, and Khanderáv Gáikwár
to Sorath. Fidá-ud-dín Khán requested Rangoji to help Muftakhir Khán;
he replied that he was willing to help him, but had no money. Rangoji
then accompanied Fidá-ud-dín Khán to Cambay, where Muftakhir Khán
was. Negotiations were entered into, and the Kháns tried to collect
£10,000 (Rs. 1 lákh) which Rangoji asked for to enable him to make
military preparations to aid them. They raised £8000 (Rs. 80,000)
with great difficulty and admitted Rangoji's Náib to a share in the
administration. Rangoji withdrew to Borsad with the £8000 (Rs. 80,000)
under the pretext that when the remaining £2000 (Rs. 20,000) were paid
he would take action. Fidá-ud-dín Khán, annoyed at Rangoji's conduct,
went to reside at Dhowan, a village belonging to Jálam Jália Koli.

In A.D. 1744 Jawán Mard Khán, after appointing one of his brothers,
Zoráwar Khán, his deputy at Pátan, and keeping his other brother
Safdar Khán at Áhmedábád, advanced from the city to Kadi to collect
tribute. His next step was to invite Abdúl Ázíz Khán, the commander
of Junnar, near Poona, to join him in Gujarát. Abdul Ázíz accordingly
set out from Junnar, taking with him Fatehyáb Khán, commander of the
fort of Mulher in Báglán and Rustamráv Marátha. Directing his march
in the first instance to Surat he was there watched in the interests
of Dámáji Gáikwár, by Deváji Tákpar, the lieutenant of that chief,
who, seeing that on leaving Surat, Abdúl Ázíz continued to advance
to Áhmedábád, [Battle of Kím Kathodra.] pursued him to Kím Kathodra,
about fifteen miles north-west of Surat, and there attacked him. In
the engagement Deváji Tákpar, who had gained over Rustamráv Marátha,
one of the leading men in Abdúl Ázíz's army, was victorious. Abdúl
Ázíz Khán retired, but was so closely followed by the Maráthás,
that at Pánoli he was forced to leave his elephant, and, mounting a
horse, fled with all speed towards Broach. On reaching the Narbada he
failed to find any boats, and, as his pursuers were close upon him,
putting his horse at the water, [Defeat and Death of Abdúl Ázíz Khán,
1744.] he tried to swim the river; but, sticking fast in the mud,
he was overtaken and slain by the Maráthás.

[Fakhr-ud-daulah Fifty-eighth Viceroy, 1744-1748.] On hearing of the
death of Abdúl Ázíz, Jawán Mard Khán thought of joining Muftakhir
Khán. Ere he could carry this plan into effect, the emperor receiving,
it is said, a present of £20,000 (Rs. 2 lákhs) for the nomination,
appointed Fakhr-ud-daulah Fakhr-ud-dín Khán Shujáât Jang Bahádur
fifty-eighth viceroy of Gujarát. The new viceroy forwarded a blank
paper to a banker of his acquaintance named Sitárám, asking him to
enter in it the name of a fitting deputy. [Jawán Mard Khán Bábi,
Deputy Viceroy.] Sitárám filled in the name of Jawán Mard Khán, and
Fakhr-ud-daulah was proclaimed viceroy. About this time Safdar Khán
Bábi, after levying tribute from the Sábarmati chiefs, returned to
Áhmedábád, and Khanderáv Gáikwár, as he passed from Sorath to Songad,
appointed Rangoji his deputy. On being appointed deputy Rangoji sent
Krishnáji instead of Morár Náik as his deputy to Áhmedábád, and himself
proceeded to Arhar-Mátar on the Vátrak, and from that moved to Kaira to
visit Jawán Mard Khán, with whom he established friendly relations. In
the same year Áli Muhammad Khán, superintendent of customs, died, and
in his place the author of the Mirat-i-Áhmedi was appointed. In this
year, too, Pahár Khán Jhálori died, and his uncle, Muhammad Bahádur,
was appointed governor of Pálanpur in his stead.

[Khanderáv Gáikwár called to Sátára.] About this time Umábái, widow
of Khanderáv Dábháde, summoned Khanderáv Gáikwár to help her in
her attempt to lessen the power of the Peshwa. As Dámáji Gáikwár
could not be spared from the Dakhan Khanderáv was appointed his
deputy in Gujarát, and he chose one Rámchandra to represent him at
Áhmedábád. When Fakhr-ud-daulah advanced to join his appointment as
viceroy he was received at Bálásinor with much respect by Sher Khán
Bábi. Jawán Mard Khán Bábi, on the other hand, determining to resist
Fakhr-ud-daulah to the utmost of his power, summoned Gangádhar with a
body of Marátha horse from Petlád, and posting them at Ísanpur, about
ten miles south-west of the city, himself leaving the fortifications
of Áhmedábád, encamped at Asárva, about a mile and a half from the
walls. During his progress towards the capital the new viceroy was
joined by Ráisinghji of Ídar at Kapadvanj, and, advancing together,
they arrived at Bhílpur, eighteen miles east of Áhmedábád. On their
approach Jawán Mard Khán sent Safdar Khán and Gangádhar to oppose
them, and the two armies met about six miles from the capital. After
some fighting Fakhr-ud-daulah succeeded in forcing his way to the
suburb of Rájpura, and next day continuing to drive back the enemy
occupied the suburb of Bahrámpura and began the actual siege of the
city. At this point affairs took a turn. Fakhr-ud-daulah was wounded
and returned to his camp, while Jawán Mard Khán succeeded in winning
over to his side Sher Khán Bábi and Ráisinghji of Ídar, two of the
viceroy's chief supporters. The Mirat-i-Áhmedi especially notes that
Rája Ráisingh asked for money to pay his troops but Fakhr-ud-daulah,
not knowing that this rule had long been a dead letter, said that
as he held a district on service tenure, it was not proper for him
to ask for a money aid when on imperial service. [Defeat and capture
of the Viceroy by Jawán Mard Khán Bábi.] Next day Fakhr-ud-daulah was
surrounded by Safdar Khán Bábi and the Maráthás, and himself one wife
and some children were taken prisoners, while another of his wives
and his son, who had managed to escape to Sidhpur, were captured and
brought back to Áhmedábád.

[Rangoji Disgraced by Khanderáv Gáikwár.] After this Khanderáv
Gáikwár returned to Gujarát to receive his share of the spoil taken
from Fakhr-ud-daulah. Reaching Borsad, he took Rangoji with him
as far as Áhmedábád, where he met Jawán Mard Khán, and obtained
from Rangoji his share of the tribute. Khanderáv was not satisfied
with Rangoji's accounts, and appointing a fresh deputy, he attached
Rangoji's property, and before leaving Áhmedábád for Sorath, put him in
confinement at Borsad. He also confined Fakhr-ud-daulah in the Ghiáspur
outpost on the bank of the river Mahi. Meanwhile in consequence of
some misunderstanding between Jawán Mard Khán Bábi and his brother
Safdar Khán, the latter retired to Udepur, and Jawán Mard Khán went
to Visalnagar then in the hands of his brother Zoráwar Khán. From
Visalnagar, Jawán Mard Khán proceeded to Rádhanpur, and meeting his
brother Safdar Khán, they became reconciled, and returned together
to Áhmedábád. Khanderáv Gáikwár, who had in the meantime returned
from Sorath, encamping at Dholka appointed Trimbakráv Pandit as his
deputy at Áhmedábád in place of Moro Pandit. On hearing that Rangoji
had been thrown into confinement, Umábái sent for him, and he along
with Khanderáv Gáikwár repaired to the Dakhan.

[Punáji Vithal and Fakhr-ud-daulah oppose Rangoji and Jawán Mard
Khán.] Shortly afterwards Punáji Vithal, in concert with Trimbak
Pandit, being dissatisfied with Jawán Mard Khán, began to intrigue with
Fakhr-ud-daulah. In the meantime Umábái had appointed Rangoji as her
deputy, and, as he was a staunch friend of Jawán Mard Khán, he expelled
Trimbakráv from Áhmedábád, and himself collected the Marátha share of
the city revenues. Upon this Punáji Vithal sent Gangádhar and Krishnáji
with an army, and they, expelling the Muhammadan officers from the
districts from which the Maráthás levied the one-fourth share of the
revenue, took the management of them into their own hands. Rangoji now
asked Sher Khán Bábi to help him. Sher Khán agreed; but as he had not
funds to pay his troops, he delayed, and afterwards plundered Mahudha
and Nadiád. As Rangoji failed to join him, Sher Khán proceeded by
himself to Kapadvanj, and from Kapadvanj marched against the Marátha
camp, with which Fakhr-ud-daulah was then associated. On the night
after his arrival, the Maráthás made an attack on Sher Khán's camp,
in which many men on both sides were slain. Next morning the battle
was renewed, but on Sher Khán suggesting certain terms the fighting
ceased. That very night, hearing that Rangoji had reached Bálásinor,
Sher Khán stole off towards Kapadvanj. Punáji and Fakhr-ud-daulah
followed in pursuit but failed to prevent Rangoji and Sher Khán from
joining their forces.

[Siege of Kapadvanj by Fakhr-ud-daulah, 1746.] In A.D. 1746 a battle
was fought in the neighbourhood of the town of Kapadvanj in which
Sher Khán was wounded. He was forced to take shelter with Rangoji
in Kapadvanj, while Fakhr-ud-daulah, Gangádhar, and Krishnáji laid
siege to that town. At this time the Lunáváda chief asked Malhárráv
Holkar on his way back from his yearly raid into Málwa, to join him
in attacking Virpur. Holkar agreed and Virpur was plundered. Rangoji,
hearing of the arrival of Holkar, begged him to come to his aid,
and on promise of receiving a sum of £20,000 (Rs. 2 lákhs) and two
elephants, Holkar consented. [At the approach of Holkar the Siege is
raised.] Gangádhar, Krishnáji, and Fakhr-ud-daulah, hearing of the
approach of Holkar, raised the siege of Kapadvanj, and marching to
Dholka expelled the governor of that district. Shortly afterwards
on a summons from Dámáji and Khanderáv Gáikwár Rangoji retired
to Baroda. Meanwhile Fakhr-ud-daulah, Krishnáji, and Gangádhar
advanced to Jetalpur in the Daskroi sub-division of Áhmedábád and,
taking possession of it, expelled Ámbar Habshi, the deputy of Jawán
Mard Khán. Dámáji and Khanderáv Gáikwár passed from Baroda to Vasu,
where they were met by Krishnáji and Gangádhar, whom Dámáji censured
for aiding Fakhr-ud-daulah. On this occasion Dámáji bestowed the
districts of Baroda Nadiád and Borsad on his brother Khanderáv,
an action which for ever removed any ill feeling on the part of
Khanderáv. Then, proceeding to Goklej, Dámáji had an interview with
Jawán Mard Khán. From Goklej he sent Kánoji Tákpar with Fakhr-ud-daulah
to Sorath, and himself returned to Songad. As Borsad had been given
to Khanderáv, Rangoji fixed on Umreth as his residence.

In this year, A.D. 1746, Teghbeg Khán, governor of Surat, died, and was
succeeded by his brother Safdar Muhammad Khán, who, in acknowledgment
of a present of seven horses, received from the emperor the title
of Bahádur. At this time Tálib Áli Khán died, and the writer of the
Mirat-i-Áhmedi was appointed minister by the emperor. In A.D. 1747
Rangoji returned to Áhmedábád, and Jawán Mard Khán had an interview
with him a few miles from the city. Shortly after this the Kolis of
Mehmúdábád and Mahudha rebelled, but the revolt was speedily crushed
by Sháhbáz Rohilla.

[Momín Khán II. Governor of Cambay, 1748.] During this year Najm Khán,
governor of Cambay, died. Muftakhir Khán, son of Najm-ud-daulah Momín
Khán I., who had also received the title of Momín Khán, informed
the emperor of Najm Khán's death, and himself assumed the office of
governor in which in A.D. 1748 he was confirmed. On hearing of the
death of Najm Khán, on pretence of condoling with the family of the
late governor, Fidá-ud-dín Khán marched to Cambay, but as he was not
allowed to enter the town he retired. He afterwards went to Umreth and
lived with Rangoji. Kánoji Tákpar, who had gone with Fakhr-ud-daulah
into Sorath, now laid siege to and took the town of Vanthali. As it
was nearly time for the Maráthás to return to their country, Kánoji
and Fakhr-ud-daulah, retiring to Dholka, expelled Muhammad Jánbáz,
the deputy governor. Rangoji, who had at this time a dispute with
Jawán Mard Khán regarding his share of tribute, now came and joined
them, and their combined forces marched upon Sánand, where, after
plundering the town, they encamped. It was now time for Kánoji to
withdraw to the Dakhan. Rangoji and Fakhr-ud-daulah, remaining behind
to collect tribute from the neighbouring districts, marched to Ísanpur,
where they were opposed by Jawán Mard Khán. [Increased Strength of
Fakhr-ud-daulah's Party.] On this occasion both Jawán Mard Khán and
Fakhr-ud-daulah sought the alliance of Rája Ráisingh of Ídar. But,
as he offered more favourable terms, Rája Ráisingh determined to join
Fakhr-ud-daulah. Sher Khán Bábi also joined Fakhr-ud-daulah, who,
thus reinforced, laid siege to Áhmedábád. While these events were
passing at Áhmedábád, Hariba, an adopted son of Khanderáv Gáikwár,
at that time in possession of the fort of Borsad, began to plunder
Rangoji's villages under Petlád, and, attacking his deputy, defeated
and killed him. [Dissensions among the Maráthás.] On this Rangoji
withdrew from Áhmedábád, attacked and captured the fort of Borsad,
and forced Hariba to leave the country. Jawán Mard Khán now sent
for Janárdhan Pandit, Khanderáv's deputy at Nadiád, and, in place of
Rangoji's representative, appointed him to manage the Marátha share
of Áhmedábád.

[Surat Affairs, 1748.] During these years important changes had
taken place in the government of Surat. In A.D. 1734, when Mulla
Muhammad Áli, the chief of the merchants and builder of the Athva
fort, was killed in prison by Teghbeg Khán, the Nizám sent Sayad
Miththan to revenge his death. Sayad Miththan was forced to return
unsuccessful. After Teghbeg Khán's death Sayad Miththan again came to
Surat and lived there with his brother Sayad Achchan, who held the
office of paymaster. Sayad Miththan tried to get the government of
the town into his hands, but, again failing, committed suicide. His
brother Sayad Achchan then attacked and took the citadel, expelling
the commander; and for several days war was waged between him and the
governor Safdar Muhammad Khán with doubtful success. At last Sayad
Achchan called to his aid Malhárráv, the deputy at Baroda, and their
combined forces took possession of the whole city. During the sack
of the city Malhárráv was killed and the entire management of affairs
fell into the hands of Sayad Achchan. Safdar Muhammad Khán, the late
governor, though obliged to leave the city, was determined not to
give up Surat without a struggle, and raising some men opened fire on
the fort. Sayad Achchan now begged the Arab, Turk, English, Dutch and
Portuguese merchants to aid him. A deed addressed to the emperor and
the Nizám, begging that Sayad Achchan should be appointed governor,
was signed by all the merchants except by Mr. Lamb the English chief,
and though he at first refused, he was in the end persuaded by the
other merchants to sign. The merchants then assisted Sayad Achchan,
and Safdar Muhammad Khán retired to Sindh.

Meanwhile, on account of some enmity between Mulla Fakhr-ud-dín,
the son of Mulla Muhammad Áli, chief of the merchants, and Sayad
Achchan, the Mulla was thrown into prison. Mr. Lamb went to Sayad
Achchan, and remonstrating with him suggested that the Mulla should
be sent for. [Mulla Fakhr-ud-din Escapes to Bombay.] Sayad Achchan
agreed, but on the way Mr. Lamb carried off Mulla Fakhr-ud-dín to the
English factory, and afterwards sent him to Bombay in disguise. In the
meantime Kedárji Gáikwár, a cousin of Dámáji's, whom, with Malhárrav,
Sayad Achchan had asked to his help, arrived at Surat, and though
Sayad Achchan had been successful without his aid, Kedárji demanded
the £30,000 (Rs. 3 lákhs) which had been promised him. As the Sayad
was not in a position to resist Kedárji's demands, and as he had no
ready money to give him, [Cession of Surat Revenue to the Gáikwár,
1747.] he made over to him a third of the revenues of Surat until the
amount should be paid. As before this another third of the revenues
of Surat had been assigned to Háfiz Masûud Khán, the deputy of Yákut
Khán of Janjira, the emoluments of the governor of Surat were reduced
to one-third of the entire revenue and this was divided between the
Mutasaddi and Bakhshi.

[Famine, 1747.] In this year (A.D. 1747, S. 1803) there was a severe
shock of earthquake and a great famine which caused many deaths. In
the following year Jawán Mard Khán endeavoured to recapture Jetalpur,
but failed. [Marátha Dissensions.] About the same time Umábái died,
and Dámáji's brother Khanderáv, who was on good terms with Ambiká
wife of Báburáv Senápati, the guardian of Umábái's son, procured
his own appointment as deputy of his brother Dámáji in Gujarát. On
being appointed deputy Khanderáv at once marched against Rangoji to
recover Borsad, which, as above mentioned, Rangoji had taken from
Hariba. Their forces were joined by two detachments, one from Momín
Khán under the command of Ágha Muhammad Husain, the other from Jawán
Mard Khán commanded by Janárdhan Pandit. The combined army besieged
Borsad. After a five months' siege [Fall of Borsad.] Borsad was taken,
and Rangoji was imprisoned by Khanderáv. On the fall of Borsad Sher
Khán Bábi and Rája Ráisingh of Ídar, who were allies of Rangoji,
returned to Bálásinor and Ídar; Fakhr-ud-daulah was sent to Petlád
and Fidá-ud-dín Khán, leaving Umreth, took shelter with Jetha, the
chief of Atarsumba.

[Ahmed Sháh Emperor 1748-1754.] In this year the emperor Muhammad Sháh
died and was succeeded by his son Ahmed Sháh (A.D. 1748-1754). Shortly
after Ahmed's accession Mahárája Vakhatsingh, brother of Mahárája
Abheysingh, was appointed [Mahárája Vakhatsingh Fifty-ninth Viceroy,
1748.] fifty-ninth viceroy of Gujarát. When he learned what was the
state of the province, he pleaded that his presence would be more
useful in his own dominions, and never took up his appointment of
viceroy. Vakhatsingh was the last viceroy of Gujarát nominated
by the imperial court, for although by the aid of the Maráthás
Fakhr-ud-daulah was of importance in the province, he had never been
able to establish himself as viceroy. In this year also occurred the
death of Khushálchand Sheth, the chief merchant of Áhmedábád.

Khanderáv Gáikwár appointed Rághavshankar his deputy at Áhmedábád, and
Safdar Khán Bábi issued from Áhmedábád with an army to levy tribute
from the chiefs on the banks of the Sábarmati. When Fakhr-ud-daulah,
the former viceroy, heard of the appointment of Mahárája Vakhatsingh,
seeing no chance of any benefit from a longer stay in Gujarát, he
retired to Dehli. In A.D. 1748 Ásif Jáh, Nizám-ul-Mulk, died at an
advanced age, leaving six sons and a disputed succession.

[Disorder Spreads.] About the same time Bálájiráv Peshwa, who was
jealous of the power of the Gáikwár, sent a body of troops, and
freed Rangoji from the hands of Khanderáv Gáikwár. During these years
adventurers, in different parts of the country, taking advantage of
the decay of the central power, endeavoured to establish themselves
in independence. Of these attempts the most formidable was the revolt
of one of the Pátan Kasbátis who established his power so firmly in
Pátan that Jawán Mard Khán found it necessary to proceed in person to
reduce him. Shortly afterwards Jawán Mard Khán deemed it advisable to
recall his brothers Safdar Khán and Zoráwar Khán, who were then at
Únja under Pátan, and took them with him to Áhmedábád. Fidá-ud-dín
Khán who had been residing at Atarsumba now asked permission to
return to Áhmedábád, but as Jawán Mard Khán did not approve of this
suggestion, Fidá-ud-dín departed to Broach and there took up his
residence. Janárdhan Pandit marched to Kaira and the Bhíl district
to levy tribute, and Khanderáv appointed Shevakrám his deputy.

[Surat Affairs, A.D. 1750.] In the meantime at Surat, Sayad Achchan
endeavoured to consolidate his rule, and with this view tried
to expel Háfiz Masûud Habshí, and prevent him again entering the
city. But his plans failed, and he was obliged to make excuses for his
conduct. [Sayad Achchan Unpopular.] Sayad Achchan then oppressed other
influential persons, until eventually the Habshí and others joining,
attacked him in the citadel. Except Mr. Lamb, who considered himself
bound by the deed signed in A.D. 1747 in favour of Sayad Achchan,
all the merchants of Surat joined the assailants. [Safdar Muhammad
brought back by the Dutch.] Among the chief opponents of Sayad Achchan
were the Dutch, who sending ships brought back Safdar Muhammad Khán
from Thatta, and established him as governor of Surat. The English
factory was next besieged, and, though a stout resistance was made,
the guards were bribed, and the factory plundered. [Sayad Achchan
Retires.] In A.D. 1750 Sayad Achchan, surrendering the citadel to
the Habshí, withdrew first to Bombay and then to Poona, to Bálájiráv
Peshwa. Shortly afterwards, in consequence of the censure passed upon
him by the Bombay Government for his support of Sayad Achchan, Mr. Lamb
committed suicide. Wearied by these continual contests for power, the
merchants of Surat asked Rája Raghunathdás, minister to the Nizám,
to choose them a governor. Rája Raghunathdás accordingly nominated
his own nephew, Rája Harprasád, to be governor, and the writer of the
Mirat-i-Áhmedi to be his deputy. But before Rája Harprasád could join
his appointment at Surat, both he and his father were slain in battle.

In the same year, A.D. 1750, occurred the deaths of Rája Ráisingh
of Ídar, of Safdar Khán Bábi of Bálásinor, and of Fidá-ud-dín Khán,
who had for some time been settled at Broach. [Jawán Mard Khán
and the Peshwa, 1750.] Jawán Mard Khán, who, seeing that they were
inclined to become permanent residents in Gujarát, was always opposed
to the Gáikwár's power, now entered into negotiations with Bálájiráv
Peshwa. He chose Patel Sukhdev to collect the Marátha revenue and asked
the Peshwa to help him in expelling Dámáji's agents. The Peshwa, being
now engaged in war in the Dakhan with Salábat Jang Bahádur, son of the
late Nizám, was unable to send Jawán Mard Khán any assistance. Towards
the close of the year Jawán Mard Khán started from Áhmedábád to collect
tribute from the Sábarmati chiefs. Returning early in A.D. 1751,
at the request of Jetha Patel a subordinate of Bhávsingh Desái, he
proceeded to Banod or Vanod under Víramgám and reduced the village. Áli
Muhammad Khán, the author of the Mirat-i-Áhmedi, who about this time
was raised in rank with the title of Bahádur, states that owing to
the Marátha inroads most of the districts had passed entirely into
their possession; in others according to agreements with Jawán Mard
Khán they held a half share. Consequently in spite of new taxes, the
entire remaining income of the province was only four lákhs of rupees,
and it was impossible to maintain the military posts or control the
rebellious Kolis.

[The Peshwa and Gáikwár, 1751.] It was in this year (A.D. 1751)
that the Peshwa, decoying Dámájiráv into his power, imprisoned him
and forced him to surrender half of his rights and conquests in
Gujarát. Taking advantage of the absence of the Gáikwár and his army
in the Dakhan, Jawán Mard Khán marched into Sorath. He first visited
Gogha, and then levying tribute in Gohilváda advanced into Káthiáváda
and marched against Navánagar, and, after collecting a contribution
from the Jám, returned to Áhmedábád: In the following year (A.D. 1752),
as soon as the news reached Gujarát that the Maráthás' share in the
province had been divided between the Peshwa and Gáikwár, Momín Khán,
who was always quarrelling with the Gáikwár's agent, sending Varajlál
his steward to Bálájiráv Peshwa begged him to include Cambay in his
share and send his agent in place of the Gáikwár's agent. Bálájiráv
agreed, and from that time an agent of the Peshwa was established at
Cambay. In the same year Raghunáthráv, brother of the Peshwa, entering
Gujarát took possession of the Rewa and Mahi Kántha districts and
marched on Surat. Shiaji Dhangar was appointed in Shevakrám's place
as Dámáji's deputy, and Krishnáji came to collect the Peshwa's share.

[Broach Independent, 1752.] Up to this time the city of Broach had
remained part of the Nizám's personal estate, managed by Abdúllah Beg,
whom, with the title of Nek Álam Khán, Ásif Jáh the late Nizám-ul-Mulk
had chosen his deputy. On the death of Abdúllah Beg in A.D. 1752 the
emperor appointed his son to succeed him with the same title as his
father, while he gave to another son, named Mughal Beg, the title of
Khertalab Khán. During the contests for succession that followed upon
the death of the Nizám in A.D. 1752, no attempt was made to enforce
the Nizám's claims on the lands of Broach; and for the future, except
for the share of the revenue paid to the Maráthás, the governors of
Broach were practically independent.

The Peshwa now sent Pándurang Pandit to levy tribute from his
share of Gujarát, and that officer crossing the Mahi marched upon
Cambay. Momín Khán prepared to oppose him, but the Pandit made
friendly overtures, and eventually Momín Khán not only paid the sum
of £700 (Rs. 7000) for grass and grain for the Pandit's troops,
but also lent him four small cannon. [Pándurang Pandit Repulsed
at Áhmedábád, 1752.] Pándurang Pandit then marched upon Áhmedábád,
and encamping near the Kánkariya lake laid siege to the city which
was defended by Jawán Mard Khán. During the siege Pándurang Pandit,
sending some troops, ravaged Níkol, part of the lands of Áli Muhammad
Khán Bahádur, the author of the Mirat-i-Áhmedi. Meanwhile, as the
operations against Áhmedábád made no progress, Pándurang Pandit made
offers of peace. These Jawán Mard Khán accepted, and on receiving
from Jawán Mard Khán the present of a mare and a small sum of money
under the name of entertainment, the Marátha leader withdrew to Sorath.

[Marátha Invasion.] About this time the Peshwa released Dámáji Gáikwár
on his promise to help the Peshwa's brother Raghunáthráv, who was
shortly afterwards despatched with an army to complete the conquest of
Gujarát. Meanwhile Jawán Mard Khán's anxiety regarding the Maráthás
was for a time removed by the departure of Pándurang Pandit. And, as
the harvest season had arrived, he with his brother Zoráwar Khán Bábi,
leaving Muhammad Mubáriz Sherwáni behind as his deputy, set out from
Áhmedábád to levy tribute from the chiefs of the Sábar Kántha. Certain
well informed persons, who had heard of Raghunáthráv's preparations
for invading Gujarát, begged Jawán Mard Khán not to leave the city but
to depute his brother Zoráwar Khán Bábi to collect the tribute. Jawán
Mard Khán, not believing their reports, said that he would not go more
than from forty-five to sixty miles from the city, and that, should
the necessity of any more distant excursion arise, he would entrust it
to his brother. Jawán Mard Khán then marched from the city, levying
tribute until he arrived on the Pálanpur frontier about seventy-five
miles north of Áhmedábád. Here meeting Muhammad Bahádur Jhálori, the
governor of Pálanpur, Jawán Mard Khán was foolishly induced to join him
in plundering the fertile districts of Sirohi, till at last he was not
less than 150 miles from his head-quarters. Meanwhile Raghunáthráv,
joining Dámáji Gáikwár, entered suddenly by an unusual route into
Gujarát, and news reached Áhmedábád that the Maráthás had crossed
the Narbada. On this the townspeople sent messenger after messenger
to recall Jawán Mard Khán, and building up the gateways prepared for
defence, while the inhabitants of the suburbs, leaving their houses,
crowded with their families into the city for protection. Raghunáthráv,
hearing that Jawán Mard Khán and his army were absent from the city,
pressed on by forced marches, and crossing the river Mahi despatched
an advance corps under Vithal Sukhdev. Kosáji, proprietor of Nadiád, at
Dámáji Gáikwár's invitation also marched towards Áhmedábád, plundering
Mehmúdábád Khokhri, only three miles from the city. In the meantime
Vithal Sukhdev reached Kaira, and taking with him the chief man of
that place, Muhammad Daurán, son of Muhammad Bábi, continued his
march. He was shortly joined by Raghunáthráv, and the combined forces
now proceeded to Áhmedábád and encamped by the Kánkariya lake. Next
day Raghunáthráv moved his camp to near the tomb of Hazrat Sháh
Bhíkan, [875] on the bank of the Sábarmati to the south-west of the
city. Raghunáthráv now proceeded to invest the city, distributing his
thirty to forty thousand horse into three divisions. The operations
against the north of the city were entrusted to Dámáji Gáikwár;
those on the east to Gopál Hari; while the troops on the south and
west were under the personal command of Raghunáthráv and his officers.

[Return of Jawán Mard Khán.] After leaving Sirohi Jawán Mard Khán
had gone westwards to Tharád and Váv, so that the first messengers
failed to find him. One of the later messengers, Mándan by name,
who had not left Áhmedábád until the arrival of Raghunáthráv at the
Kánkariya lake, made his way to Váv and Tharád, and told Jawán Mard
Khán what had happened. Jawán Mard Khán set out by forced marches
for Rádhanpur, and leaving his family and the bulk of his army at
Pátan, he pushed on with 200 picked horsemen to Kadi and from that
to Áhmedábád, contriving to enter the city by night. [He enters
Áhmedábád.] The presence of Jawán Mard Khán raised the spirits of
the besieged, and the defence was conducted with ardour. In spite of
their watchfulness, a party of about 700 Maráthás under cover of night
succeeded in scaling the walls and entering the city. Ere they could
do any mischief they were discovered and driven out of the town with
much slaughter. The bulk of the besieging army, which had advanced in
hopes that this party would succeed in opening one of the city gates,
were forced to retire disappointed. Raghunáthráv now made proposals
for peace, but Jawán Mard Khán did not think it consistent with his
honour to accept them. On his refusal, the Marátha general redoubled
his efforts and sprung several mines, but owing to the thickness
of the city walls no practicable breach was effected. Jawán Mard
Khán now expelled the Marátha deputies, and [Gallant Defence of the
City.] continuing to defend the city with much gallantry contrived at
night to introduce into the town by detachments a great portion of his
army from Pátan. At length, embarrassed by want of provisions and the
clamour of his troops for pay, he extorted £5000 (Rs. 50,000) from the
official classes. As Jawán Mard was known to have an ample supply of
money of his own this untimely meanness caused great discontent. The
official classes who were the repository of all real power murmured
against his rule and openly advocated the surrender of the city, and
[Jawán Mard Khán Surrenders.] Jawán Mard Khán, much against his will,
was forced to enter into negotiations with Raghunáthráv.

Raghunáthráv was so little hopeful of taking Áhmedábád that he
had determined, should the siege last a month longer, to depart on
condition of receiving the one-fourth share of the revenue and a safe
conduct. Had Jawán Mard Khán only disbursed his own money to pay the
troops, and encouraged instead of disheartening the official class, he
need never have lost the city. At last to Raghunáthráv's relief, Jawán
Mard Khán was reduced to treat for peace through Vithal Sukhdev. It
was arranged that the Maráthás should give Jawán Mard Khán the sum
of £10,000 (Rs. 1 lákh) to pay his troops, besides presenting him
with an elephant and other articles of value. It was at the same time
agreed that the garrison should leave the city with all the honours
of war. And that, for himself and his brothers, Jawán Mard Khán
should receive, free from any Marátha claim, the districts of Pátan,
Vadnagar, Sami, Munjpur, Visalnagar, Tharád, Kherálu, and Rádhanpur
with Tervada and Bijápur. It was further agreed that one of Jawán Mard
Khán's brothers should always serve the Maráthás with 300 horse and
500 foot, the expenses of the force being paid by the Maráthás. It
was also stipulated that neither the Peshwa's army nor his deputy's,
nor that of any commander should enter Jawán Mard Khán's territory,
and that in Áhmedábád no Marátha official should put up at any of the
Khán Bahádur's mansions, new or old, or at any of those belonging to
his brothers followers or servants. Finally that the estates of other
members of the family, namely Kaira, Kasba Mátar and Bánsa Mahudha,
which belonged to Muhammad Khán, Khán Daurán, and Ábid Khán were not
to be meddled with, nor were encroachments to be allowed on the lands
of Káyam Kúli Khán or of Zoráwar Khán. This agreement was signed and
sealed by Raghunáthráv, with Dámáji Gáikwár (half sharer), Malhárráv
Holkar, Jye Ápa Sindhia, Rámchandar Vithal Sukhdev, Sakhárám Bhagvant,
and Mádhavráv Gopálráv as securities. [The Maráthás take Possession,
1753.] The treaty was then delivered to Jawán Mard Khán, and he and
his garrison, marching out with the honours of war, the Maráthás took
possession of Áhmedábád on April 2nd, 1753.

[Collect Tribute.] On leaving Áhmedábád Jawán Mard Khán retired
to Pátan. At Áhmedábád Raghunáthráv with Dámáji arranged for the
government of the city, appointing Shripatráv his deputy. He then
marched into Jháláváda to levy tribute from the Limbdi and Wadhwán
chiefs; and was so far successful that Harbhamji of Limbdi agreed
to pay an annual tribute of £4000 (Rs. 40,000). As the rainy season
was drawing near Raghunáthráv returned to Dholka, while Patel Vithal
Sukhdev forced Muhammad Bahádur, the governor of Pálanpur, to consent
to a payment of £11,500 (Rs. 1,15,000). From Dholka Raghunáthráv went
to Tárápur, about twelve miles north of Cambay, and compelled Momín
Khán to submit to an annual payment of £1000 (Rs. 10,000). At the same
time Áli Muhammad Khán Bahádur, the author of the Mirat-i-Áhmedi, was
appointed collector of customs, and his former grants were confirmed
and he was allowed to retain his villages of Sayadpur and Kûjádh close
to Áhmedábád, as well as the village of Pánmûl in Bijápur. Dámáji
Gáikwár, after levying tribute in the Vátrak Kántha, went to Kapadvanj,
which he took from Sher Khán Bábi. From Kapadvanj he passed to Nadiád
and appointed Shevakrái to collect his half share of the revenue of
Gujarát. [Mughal Coinage Ceases.] In the Áhmedábád mint, coin ceased
to be struck in the emperor's name and the suburbs of the city which
had been deserted during the siege were not again inhabited. The
Kolis commenced a system of depredation, and their outrages were so
daring that women and children were sometimes carried off and sold
as slaves. After the rains were over (A.D. 1754) Shetuji, commander
of the Áhmedábád garrison, and Shankarji, governor of Víramgám,
were sent to collect tribute from Sorath. Though the imperial power
was sunk so low, the emperor was allowed to confer the post of Kázi
of the city on Kázi Rûkn-ul-Hak Khán who arrived at Áhmedábád and
assumed office. [Failure of an Attempt on Cambay, 1753.] At the close
of the year Shripatráv, who was anxious to acquire Cambay, marched
against Momín Khán. After two doubtful battles in which the Maráthás
gained no advantage, it was agreed that Momín Khán should pay a sum
of £700 (Rs. 7000), and Shripatráv departed from Áhmedábád early in
A.D. 1754. [The Kolis.] When the Kolis heard of the ill success of
the Maráthás at Cambay, they revolted and Rághoshankar was sent to
subdue them. In an engagement near Luhára in Bahyal in His Highness
the Gáikwár's territory about eighteen miles east of Áhmedábád,
Rághoshankar scattered the Kolis, but they again collected and forced
the Maráthás to retire. At this time Shetuji and Shankarji returned
from Sorath, where they had performed the pilgrimage to Dwárka. Shetuji
was sent to the Bhíl district against the Kolis. He was unsuccessful,
and was so ashamed of his failure that he returned to the Dakhan and
Dandu Dátátri was appointed in his place.

In this year died Nek Álam Khán II. governor of Broach. He was
succeeded by his brother Khertalab Khán who expelled his nephew
Hámid Beg, son of Nek Álam Khán. Hámid Beg took refuge in Surat. At
Bálásinor a dispute arose between Sher Khán Bábi and a body of Arab
mercenaries who took possession of a hill, but in the end came to
terms. With the Peshwa's permission his deputy Bhagvantráv marched
on Cambay. But Varajlál, Momín Khán's steward, who was then at
Poona, sent word to his master, who prepared himself against any
emergency. When Bhagvantráv arrived at Cambay he showed no hostile
intentions and was well received by Momín Khán. Subsequently a
letter from Bhagvantráv to Sálim Jamádár at Áhmedábád ordering him
to march against Cambay fell into Momín Khán's hands. He at once
surrounded Bhagvantráv's house and made him prisoner. [Maráthás
Attack Cambay, 1754.] When the Peshwa heard that Bhagvantráv had been
captured, he ordered Ganesh Ápa, governor of Jambusar, as well as
the governors of Víramgám, Dhandhuka, and other places to march at
once upon Cambay. They went and besieged the town for three months,
but without success. Eventually Shripatráv, the Peshwa's deputy,
sent the author of the Mirat-i-Áhmedi to negotiate, and it was agreed
that Bhagvantráv should be released and that no alteration should be
made in the position of Momín Khán. Shortly afterwards Shripatráv was
recalled by the Peshwa and his place supplied by an officer of the
name of Rágho. About this time Khertalab Khán, governor of Broach,
died, and quarrels arose regarding the succession. Ultimately Hamid
Beg, nephew of Khertalab Khán, obtained the post, and he afterwards
received an imperial order confirming him as governor, and bestowing
on him the title of Neknám Khán Bahádur.

[Álamgir II. Emperor, 1754-1759.] At Dehli, during A.D. 1754, the
emperor Áhmed Sháh was deposed, and Âzíz-ud-dín, son of Jahándár Sháh,
was raised to the throne with the title of Álamgír II. After his
release Bhagvantráv established himself in the Cambay fort of Nápád
and not long after began to attack Momín Khán's villages. [Contest with
Momín Khán Renewed, 1754.] After several doubtful engagements peace was
concluded on Momín Khán paying £1000 (Rs. 10,000) on account of the
usual share of the Maráthás which he had withheld. This arrangement
was made through the mediation of Tukáji, the steward of Sadáshiv
Dámodar, who had come to Gujarát with an army and orders to help
Bhagvantráv. As Momín Khán had no ready money Tukáji offered himself
as security and Bhagvantráv and Tukáji withdrew to the Dakhan. Momín
Khán's soldiery now clamoured for pay. As he was not in a position
to meet their demands he sent a body of men against some villages to
the west belonging to Limbdi and plundered them, dividing the booty
among his troops. In the following year, [Momín Khán takes Gogha,
1755.] A.D. 1755, Momín Khán went to Gogha, a port which, though at
one time subordinate to Cambay, had fallen into the hands of Sher Khán
Bábi, and was now in the possession of the Peshwa's officers. Gogha
fell and leaving a garrison of 100 Arabs under Ibráhím Kúli Khán, Momín
Khán returned to Cambay, levying tribute. He then sent the bulk of his
army under the command of Muhammad Zamán Khán, son of Fidá-ud-dín Khán,
and Varajlál his own steward, to plunder and collect money in Gohilváda
and Káthiáváda. Here they remained until their arrears were paid off,
and then returned to Cambay. After this Momín Khán plundered several
Petlád villages and finally, in concert with the Kolis of Dhowan,
attacked Jambusar and carried off much booty. Momín Khán next marched
against Borsad, and was on the point of taking the fort when Sayáji,
son of Dámáji Gáikwár, who lived at Baroda, hearing of Momín Khán's
success, came rapidly with a small body of men to the relief of the
fort and surprised the besiegers. The Muhammadan troops soon recovered
from the effects of the surprise, and Sayáji fearing to engage them
with so small a force retired. On Sayáji's departure Momín Khán raised
the siege of Borsad and returned to Cambay.

[Momín Khán recovers Áhmedábád, 17th Oct. 1756.] In the year A.D. 1756
the rains were very heavy, and the walls of Áhmedábád fell in many
places. Momín Khán, hearing of this as well as of the discontent of the
inhabitants, resolved to capture the city. He sent spies to ascertain
the strength of the garrison and set about making allies of the chief
men in the province and enlisting troops. About this time Rághoji,
the Marátha deputy, was assassinated by a Rohilla. As soon as Momín
Khán heard of Rághoji's death he sent his nephew, Muhammad Zamán Khán,
with some men in advance, and afterwards himself at the close of the
year, A.D. 1756, marched from Cambay and camped on the Vátrak. From
this camp they moved to Kaira, and from Kaira to Áhmedábád. After
one or two fights in the suburbs the Muhammadans, finding their way
through the breaches in the walls, opened the gates and entered the
town. The Kolis commenced plundering, and a hand-to-hand fight ensued,
in which the Maráthás were worsted and were eventually expelled from
the city. The Kolis attempted to plunder the Dutch factory, but met
with a spirited resistance, and when Shambhúrám, a Nágar Bráhman,
one of Momín Khán's chief supporters, heard it he ordered the Kolis
to cease attacking the factory and consoled the Dutch.

[Jawán Mard Khán allies himself with the Maráthás.] In the meantime
Jawán Mard Khán, who had been invited by the Maráthás to their
assistance, set out from Pátan, and when he arrived at Pethápur
and Mánsa he heard of the capture of Áhmedábád. On reaching Kalol
he was joined by Harbhamrám, governor of Kadi. They resolved to send
Zoráwar Khán Bábi to recall Sadáshiv Dámodar, and to await his arrival
at Víramgám. Shevakrám, the Gáikwár's deputy, had taken refuge at
Dholka. Momín Khán himself now advanced, and entering Áhmedábád on the
17th October 1756, appointed Shambhúrám his deputy. Sadáshiv Dámodar
now joined Jawán Mard Khán at Víramgám, and at Jawán Mard Khán's advice
it was resolved, before taking further steps, to write to the Peshwa
for aid. Jawán Mard Khán, although he held large service estates,
charged the Maráthás £150 (Rs. 1500) a day for his troops. Jawán Mard
Khán and the Maráthás then advanced to Sánand and Jitalpur, and thence
marched towards Cambay. On their way they were met, and, after several
combats, defeated by a detachment of Momín Khán's army. Momín Khán
sent troops to overrun Kadi, but Harbhamrám, the governor of Kadi,
defeated the force, and captured their guns. When the emperor heard
of the capture of Gogha, he sent a sword as a present to Momín Khán;
and when the news of the capture of Áhmedábád reached Ágra, Momín
Khán received many compliments. Bálájiráv Peshwa on the other hand
was greatly enraged at these reverses. He at once sent off Sadáshiv
Rámchandra to Gujarát as his deputy, and Dámáji and Khanderáv Gáikwár
also accompanied him with their forces. Momín Khán refusing to give
up Áhmedábád, prepared for defence. Sadáshiv Rámchandra, Dámáji
and Khanderáv Gáikwár advanced, and, crossing the Mahi, reached
Kaira. Here they were met by Jawán Mard Khán and the rest of the
Marátha forces in Gujarát, and the combined army advancing against
the capital camped by the Kánkariya lake.

[Maráthás Invest Áhmedábád, 1756.] The Maráthás now regularly invested
the city, but Momín Khán, aided by Shambhúrám, made a vigorous
defence. Up to this time Jawán Mard Khán was receiving £150 (Rs. 1500)
daily for the pay of his own and his brother's troops. Sadáshiv
Rámchandra, considering the number of the troops too small for so
large a payment, reduced the amount and retained the men in his
own service. After a month's siege, Momín Khán's troops began to
clamour for pay, but Shambhúrám, by collecting the sum of £10,000
(Rs. 1 lákh) from the inhabitants of the town managed for the time
to appease their demands. When they again became urgent for pay,
Shambhúrám diverted their thoughts by a general sally from all the
gates at night. On this occasion many men were slain on both sides,
and many of the inhabitants deserted the town. The copper vessels of
such of the townspeople as had fled were melted and coined into money
and given to the soldiery. In this state of affairs an order arrived
from the imperial court bestowing on Momín Khán a dress of honour
and the title of Bahádur. Although the imperial power had for years
been merely a name Momín Khán asked and obtained permission from the
besiegers to leave the city and meet the bearers of the order. The
Maráthás redoubled their efforts. Still though the besiegers were
successful in intercepting supplies of grain the garrison fought
gallantly in defence of the town.

[Ráv of Ídar helps Momín Khán, 1757.] At this juncture, in
A.D. 1757, Rája Shivsingh of Ídar, son of the late Anandsingh, who
was friendly to Momín Khán, sent Sajánsingh Hazári with a force to
assist the besieged. On their way to Áhmedábád, Harbhamrám with a
body of Maráthás attacked this detachment, while Momín Khán sent to
their aid Muhammad Lál Rohilla and others, and a doubtful battle was
fought. Shortly afterwards Sadáshiv Rámchandar made an attempt on the
fort of Kálikot. The fort was successfully defended by Jamádár Núr
Muhammad, and the Maráthás were repulsed. The Maráthás endeavoured
in vain to persuade Shambhúrám to desert Momín Khán, and though the
garrison were often endangered by the faithlessness of the Kolis and
other causes, they remained staunch. Momín Khán, though frequently in
difficulties owing to want of funds to pay his soldiery, continued
to defend the town. The Maráthás next tried to seduce some of Momín
Khán's officers, but in this they also failed, and [Successful Sally
under Shambhurám.] in a sally Shambhúrám attacked the camp of Sadáshiv
Rámchandar, and burning his tents all but captured the chief himself.

[Negotiations for Peace.] When the siege was at this stage, Hassan
Kúli Khán Bahádur, viceroy of Oudh, relinquishing worldly affairs
and dividing his property among his nephews, set out to perform a
pilgrimage to Makkah. Before he started Shuja-ûd-daulah, the Nawáb of
Lucknow, requested him on his way to visit Bálájiráv, and endeavour
to come to some settlement of Áhmedábád affairs. Accordingly, adopting
the name of Sháh Núr, and assuming the dress of an ascetic, Hassan Kúli
made his way to Poona, and appearing before the Peshwa offered to make
peace at Áhmedábád. Sháh Núr with much difficulty persuaded the Peshwa
to allow Momín Khán to retain Cambay and Gogha without any Marátha
share, and to grant him a lákh of rupees for the payment of his troops,
on condition that he should surrender Áhmedábád. He obtained letters
from the Peshwa addressed to Sadáshiv Rámchandra to this effect, and
set out with them for Áhmedábád. When he arrived Sadáshiv Rámchandra
was unwilling to accede to the terms, as the Áhmedábád garrison were
reduced to great straits. Sháh Núr persuaded him at last to agree,
provided Momín Khán would surrender without delay. Accordingly Sháh
Núr entered the city and endeavoured to persuade Momín Khán. Momín
Khán demanded in addition a few Petlád villages, and to this the
Maráthás refused their consent. Sháh Núr left in disgust. Before
many days Momín Khán was forced to make overtures for peace. After
discussions with Dámáji Gáikwár, it was agreed that Momín Khán should
surrender the city, receive £10,000 (Rs. 1 lákh) to pay his soldiery,
and be allowed to retain Cambay as heretofore, that is to say that the
Peshwa should, as formerly, enjoy half the revenues. In addition to
this Momín Khán had to promise to pay the Maráthás a yearly tribute
of £1000 (Rs. 10,000) and to give up all claims on the town of Gogha
and hand over Shambhúrám to the Maráthás. It was also arranged that
the £3500 (Rs. 35,000) worth of ashrafis which he had taken through
Jamádár Sálim should be deducted from the £10,000 (Rs. 1 lákh). Momín
Khán surrendered the town on February 27th, 1758.

[Marátha Arrangements in Áhmedábád.] Sadáshiv Rámchandar and Dámáji
Gáikwár entered the city and undertook its management on behalf of
the Maráthás. Of the other chiefs who were engaged in prosecuting
the siege, Sadáshiv Dámodar returned to the Dakhan and Jawán Mard
Khán receiving some presents from Sadáshiv Rámchandar departed for
Pátan after having had a meeting with Dámáji Gáikwár at a village a
few miles from the capital. Shambhurám, the Nágar Bráhman, who had so
zealously supported Momín Khán, when he saw that further assistance
was useless, tried to escape, but was taken prisoner and sent in
chains to Baroda. Sadáshiv Rámchandar, on taking charge of the city,
had interviews with the principal officials, among whom was the author
of the Mirat-i-Áhmedi, and, receiving them graciously, confirmed most
of them in their offices. Then, after choosing Náro Pandit, brother
of Pándurang Pandit, to be his deputy in Áhmedábád, he started on an
expedition to collect tribute in Jháláváda and Sorath. [New Coins.] On
receiving the government of the city the Marátha generals ordered
new coin bearing the mark of an elephant goad to be struck in the
Áhmedábád mint. Sayájiráv Gáikwár remained in Áhmedábád on behalf of
his father Dámáji, and shortly afterwards went towards Kapadvanj to
collect tribute. Thence at his father's request he proceeded to Sorath
to arrange for the payment of the Gáikwár's share of the revenues of
that district. On his return to Cambay Momín Khán was much harassed
by his troops for arrears of pay. The timely arrival of his steward
Varajlál with the Peshwa's contribution of £10,000 (Rs. 1 lákh)
enabled him to satisfy their demands.

[Momín Khán at Cambay.] Momín Khán now began to oppress and extort
money from his own followers, and is said to have instigated the murder
of his steward Varajlál. Sadáshiv Rámchandar went from Porbandar to
Junágadh, where he was joined by Sayájiráv Gáikwár. At Junágadh Sher
Khán Bábi presented Sadáshiv Rámchandra and Siyájiráv with horses
and they spoke of the necessity of admitting a Marátha deputy into
Junágadh. Nothing was settled as the Maráthás were forced to return to
Áhmedábád. In accordance with orders from the Peshwa, Shambhurám and
his sons, who were still in confinement, were sent to Poona. Dámáji
Gáikwár was also summoned to Poona, but he did not go. In this year
Ráo Lakhpat of Kachh presented Kachh horses and Gujarát bullocks to
the emperor, and in return received the title of Mírza Rája.

[Expedition from Kachh against Sindh, 1758.] About this time the Ráo
of Kachh, who planned an expedition against Sindh, solicited aid both
from Dámáji Gáikwár and Sadáshiv Rámchandar to enable him to conquer
Thatta, and, as he agreed to pay expenses, Sadáshiv sent Ranchordás,
and Dámáji sent Shevakrám to help him. In this year also Neknám Khán,
governor of Broach, received the title of Bahádur and other honours. In
A.D. 1758, Sadáshiv Rámchandar advanced to Kaira and after settling
accounts with Dámáji's agent proceeded against Cambay. Momín Khán,
who was about to visit the Peshwa at Poona, remained to defend the
town, but was forced to pay arrears of tribute amounting to £2000
(Rs. 20,000). In this year Sher Khán Bábi died at Junágadh, and the
nobles of his court seated his son Muhammad Mahábat Khán in his place.

[The Maráthás levy Tribute.] Shortly after at the invitation of the
Peshwa, Dámáji Gáikwár went to Poona, and sent his son Sayájiráv
into Sorath. After his success at Cambay Sadáshiv Rámchandra levied
tribute from the chiefs of Umeta, and then returned. On his way
back, on account of the opposition caused by Sardár Muhammad Khán
son of Sher Khán Bábi, the chief of Bálásinor, Sadáshiv Rámchandar
besieged Bálásinor and forced the chief to pay £3000 (Rs. 30,000). Next
marching against Lunáváda, he compelled the chief Dípsingh to pay £5000
(Rs. 50,000). Sadáshiv then went to Visalnagar and so to Pálanpur,
where Muhammad Khán Bahádur Jhálori resisted him; but after a month's
siege he agreed to pay a tribute of £3500 (Rs. 35,000). Passing south
from Pálanpur, Sadáshiv went to Únja-Unáva, and from that to Katosan
where he levied £1000 (Rs. 10,000) from the chief Shuja, and then
proceeded to Limbdi.

[Surat Affairs, 1758.] During A.D. 1758 important changes took place
in Surat. In the early part of the year Sayad Muîn-ud-dín, otherwise
called Sayad Achchan, visited the Peshwa at Poona, and received from
him the appointment of governor of Surat. Sayad Achchan then set out
for his charge, and as he was aided by a body of Marátha troops under
the command of Muzaffar Khán Gárdi and had also secured the support of
Neknám Khán, the governor of Broach, he succeeded after some resistance
in expelling Áli Nawáz Khán, son of the late Safdar Muhammad Khán, and
establishing himself in the government. During the recent troubles, the
English factory had been plundered and two of their clerks murdered by
Ahmed Khán Habshi, commandant of the fort. [The English take command of
Surat, 1759.] The English therefore determined to drive out the Habshi
and themselves assume the government of the castle. With this object
men-of-war were despatched from Bombay to the help of Mr. Spencer,
the chief of the English factory, and the castle was taken in March
A.D. 1759, and Mr. Spencer appointed governor. The Peshwa appears to
have consented to this conquest. The Marátha troops aided and made a
demonstration without the city, and a Marátha man-of-war which had
been stationed at Bassein, came to assist the English. A Mr. Glass
appears to have been appointed kiledár under Governor Spencer.

[Momín Khán Visits Poona, 1759.] Shortly afterwards Momín Khán, by the
advice of Sayad Husain, an agent of the Peshwa, contracted friendship
with the English through Mr. Erskine, the chief of the English factory
at Cambay. Momín Khán then asked Mr. Erskine to obtain permission
for him to go to Poona by Bombay. Leave being granted, Momín Khán set
out for Surat, and was there received by Mr. Spencer. From Surat he
sailed for Bombay, where the governor, Mr. Bourchier, treating him
with much courtesy, informed the Peshwa of his arrival. The Peshwa
sending permission for his further advance to Poona, Momín Khán took
leave of Mr. Bourchier and proceeded to Poona.

[Sadáshiv Rámchandra Peshwa's Viceroy, 1760.] From Limbdi, to which
point his tribute tour has been traced, Sadáshiv Rámchandra advanced
against Dhrángadhra, when the chief who was at Halvad sent an army
against him. The Maráthás, informed of the chief's design, detaching a
force, attacked Halvad at night, and breaching the walls forced open
the gates. The chief retired to his palace, which was fortified,
and there defended himself, but was at last forced to surrender,
and was detained a prisoner until he should pay a sum of £12,000
(Rs. 1,20,000). The neighbouring chiefs, impressed with the fate of
Halvad, paid tribute without opposition. [The Maráthás in Káthiáváda,
1759.] Sadáshiv Rámchandra now went to Junágadh, but ere he could
commence operations against the fortress, the rainy season drew near,
and returning to Áhmedábád he prepared to depart for Poona. Sayáji
Gáikwár, who was also in Sorath collecting tribute, amongst other
places besieged Kundla, and levying from that town a tribute of £7500
(Rs. 75,000) returned to the capital. During this time Khanderáv
Gáikwár had been levying tribute from the Kolis, and after visiting
the Bhíl district went to Bijápur, Ídar, Kadi, Dholka, and Nadiád. The
chief of Halvad on paying his £12,000 (Rs. 1,20,000) was allowed
to depart, and Dípsingh of Lunáváda, who was also a prisoner, was
sent to Lunáváda and there released after paying his tribute. On
receiving the news of the capture of the Surat fort by the English
the emperor issued an order, in the name of the governor of Bombay,
confirming the command of the fort to the English instead of to the
Habshis of Janjira, appointing the Honourable East India Company
admirals of the imperial fleet, and at the same time discontinuing
the yearly payment of £2000 (Rs. 20,000) formerly made to the Habshi
on this account. When in the course of the following year, A.D. 1760,
this imperial order reached Surat, Mr. Spencer and other chief men of
the city went outside of the walls to meet and escort the bearers of
the despatch. Sadáshiv Rámchandra was appointed viceroy of Áhmedábád
on behalf of the Peshwa. Bhagvantráv now conquered Bálásinor from
Sardár Muhammad Khán Bábi, and then marching to Sorath, collected the
Peshwa's share of the tribute of that province, according to the scale
of the previous year. Sayáji Gáikwár, when Bhagvantráv had returned,
set out to Sorath to levy the Gáikwár's share of the tribute. He was
accompanied by Harbhamrám whom Dámáji Gáikwár had specially sent from
his own court to act as Kámdár to Sayáji. When Sadáshiv Rámchandra
reported to the Peshwa the conquest of Bálásinor by Bhagvantráv he
was highly pleased, and gave Bhagvantráv a dress of honour and allowed
him to keep the elephant which he had captured at Lunáváda; and passed
a patent bestowing Bálásinor upon him. Momín Khán, after making firm
promises to the Peshwa never to depart from the terms of the treaty
he had made with the Maráthás, left Poona and came to Bombay, where he
was courteously entertained by the Governor, and despatched by boat to
Surat. From Surat he passed to Cambay by land through Broach. Sayáji
Gáikwár had returned to Áhmedábád from Sorath in bad health, and his
uncle Khanderáv Gáikwár, who had been vainly endeavouring to subdue
the Kolis of Lúhára, came to Áhmedábád and took Sayáji Gáikwár to
Nadiád. In 1761 Sadáshiv Rámchandra was displaced as viceroy of Gujarát
by [Ápa Ganesh Viceroy, 1761.] Ápa Ganesh. This officer acted in a
friendly manner to Momín Khán, and marching to Cambay, he fixed the
Marátha share of the revenues of that place for that year at £8400
(Rs. 84,000), and then went to Áhmedábád by way of Dákor. Narbherám
collected this year the Gáikwár's share of the tribute of Sorath and
Sayáji Gáikwár went to Baroda. On his return to Áhmedábád at the end
of the year, Sayáji sacked and burned the Koli village of Lúhára in
Bahyal about eighteen miles east of Áhmedábád. Jawán Mard Khán now
issued from Pátan and levied small contributions from the holdings in
Vágad, as far as Anjár in Kachh. From Vágad he proceeded to Sorath,
and in concert with Muhammad Mahábat Khán of Junágadh and Muhammad
Muzáffar Khán Bábi, between whom he made peace, he levied tribute in
Sorath as far as Loliyána, and returned to Pátan.

[Pánipat, 1761.] While their power and plunderings were thus prospering
in Gujarát the crushing ruin of Pánipat (A.D. 1761) fell on the
Maráthás. Taking advantage of the confusion that followed, the Dehli
court despatched instructions to the chief Musalmán nobles of Gujarát,
directing Momín Khán, Jawán Mard Khán, and the governor of Broach
to join in driving the Maráthás out of the province. In consequence
of this despatch Sardár Muhammad Khán Bábi, defeating the Marátha
garrison, regained Bálásinor, while the governor of Broach, with the
aid of Momín Khán, succeeded in winning back Jambúsar. Ápa Ganesh,
the Peshwa's viceroy, remonstrated with Momín Khán for this breach of
faith. In reply his envoy was shown the despatch received from Dehli,
and was made the bearer of a message, that before it was too late,
it would be wisdom for the Maráthás to abandon Gujarát. Things were
in this state when Dámáji Gáikwár, wisely forgetting his quarrels with
the Peshwa, marched to the aid of Sadáshiv with a large army. Advancing
against Cambay he attacked and defeated Momín Khán, plundering one of
his villages. But the Maráthás were too weak to follow up this success,
or exact severer punishment from the Musalmán confederates. Ápa
Ganesh invited Sardár Muhammad Khán Bábi to Kaira, and on condition
of the payment of tribute, agreed to allow him to keep possession of
Bálásinor. Subsequently Dámáji's energy enabled him to enlarge the
power and possessions of the Gáikwár's house, besides acquisitions
from other chiefs, recovering the districts of Visalnagar, Kherálu,
Vadnagar, Bijápur, and Pátan from Jawán Mard Khán. After the death
of the great Dámáji, the importance of the Gáikwár's power sensibly
diminished. Had it not been for their alliance with the British,
the feeble hands of Sayájiráv I. (A.D. 1771-1778) would probably have
been the last to hold the emblem of Gáikwár rule. If in the zenith of
Gáikwár power Momín Khán could reconquer, and for so long successfully
defend Áhmedábád, what might not have been possible in its decline?

APPENDIX I.

The Death of Sultán Bahádur, A.D. 1526-1536. [876]

Colonel Briggs (Muhammadan Power in India, IV. 132) gives the following
summary of the events which led to the fatal meeting of Sultán Bahádur
and the Portuguese viceroy Nono da Cunha in the beginning of 1536-37:

When in 1529 Nono daCunha came as viceroy to India he held instructions
to make himself master of the island of Diu. In the following year a
great expedition, consisting of 400 vessels and 15,600 men, met in
Bombay and sailed to the Káthiáváda coast. After vigorous assaults
it was repulsed off Diu on the 17th February 1531. From that day
the Portuguese made ceaseless efforts to obtain a footing on the
island of Diu. In 1531 besides harrying the sea trade of Gujarát
the Portuguese sacked the towns of Tárápur, Balsár, and Surat, and,
to give colour to their pretensions, received under their protection
Chánd Khán an illegitimate brother of Bahádur. In 1532, under James
de Silveira, the Portuguese burned the south Káthiáváda ports of
Pattan-Somnáth, Mangrul, Talája, and Muzaffarábád, killing many of the
people and carrying off 4000 as slaves. Shortly after the Portuguese
took and destroyed Bassein in Thána obtaining 400 cannon and much
ammunition. They also burned Daman, Thána, and Bombay. "All this"
says the Portuguese historian "they did to straiten Diu and to oblige
the king of Gujarát to consent to their raising a fort on the island
of Diu." When Bahádur was engaged with the Mughals (A.D. 1532-1534)
the Portuguese Governor General deputed an embassy to wait on Humáyún
to endeavour to obtain from him the cession of Diu, hoping by this
action to work indirectly on the fears of Bahádur. At last in 1534
Bahádur consented to a peace by which he agreed to cede the town
of Bassein to Portugal; not to construct ships of war in his ports;
and not to combine with Turkish fleets against Portugal.

Permission was also given to the Portuguese to build in Diu. In
consideration of these terms the Portuguese agreed to furnish Bahádur
with 500 Europeans of whom fifty were men of note. According to the
Portuguese historian it was solely because of this Portuguese help that
Bahádur succeeded in driving the Mughals out of Gujarát. Bahádur's
cession of land in Diu to the Portuguese was for the purpose of
building a mercantile factory. From the moment Bahádur discovered
they had raised formidable fortifications, especially when by the
withdrawal of the Mughals he no longer had any motive for keeping on
terms with them, he resolved to wrest the fort out of the hands of the
Portuguese. On the plea of separating the natives from the Europeans,
Bahádur instructed his governor of Diu to build a wall with a rampart
capable of being mounted with guns. But as this created much dispute
and ill-will the rampart was given up. Bahádur next attempted to
seize Emanuel de Souza the captain of Diu fort. With this object he
invited DeSouza to his camp. DeSouza was warned but determined to
accept Bahádur's invitation. He went attended by only one servant,
an act of courage which Bahádur so greatly admired that he treated
him with honour and allowed him to return in safety. Bahádur next
schemed to secure DeSouza in the fort by surprise. With this end he
began to pay the Portuguese officers visits at all hours. But DeSouza
was always on his guard and Bahádur's surprise visits failed to give
him an opportunity. In 1536 DeSouza wrote to the viceroy complaining
of the bad feeling of the Gujarát Moors towards the Portuguese in
Diu and of the efforts of the king to drive them out of the fort. In
consequence of DeSouza's letter Nono daCunha the viceroy arrived at
Diu early in 1536-7. Bahádur went to visit the viceroy on board the
viceroy's ship. On his return he was attacked and leaping into the
water was killed by a blow on the head and sank.

Of the unplanned and confused circumstances in which the brave Bahádur
met his death four Musalmán and four Portuguese versions remain. The
author of the Mirat-i-Sikandari (Persian Text, 280-281) states that
the Portuguese, who offered their help to Bahádur in the days of his
defeat by the emperor Humáyún, obtained from him the grant of land
at Diu, and on this land built a fort. After the re-establishment
of his power the Sultán, who had no longer any need of their help,
kept constantly planning some means of ousting the Portuguese from
Diu. With this object Bahádur came to Diu and opened negotiations with
the Portuguese viceroy, hoping in the end to get the viceroy into his
power. The viceroy knowing that Bahádur regretted the concessions he
had made to them was too wary to place himself in Bahádur's hands. To
inspire confidence Bahádur, with five or six of his nobles all unarmed,
paid the viceroy a visit on board his ship. Suspecting foul play
from the behaviour of the Portuguese the king rose to retire, but
the Portuguese pressed upon him on all sides. He had nearly reached
his boat when one of the Portuguese struck him a blow with a sword,
killed him, and threw his body overboard.

The same author gives a second version which he says is more generally
received and is probably more accurate. According to this account the
Portuguese had come to know that Bahádur had invited the Sultáns of
the Dakhan to co-operate with him in driving the Portuguese from the
Gujarát, Konkan, and Dakhan ports. That the Portuguese viceroy had come
with 150 ships and had anchored at Diu off the chain bastion. That
Sultán Bahádur not suspecting that the Portuguese were aware of his
insincerity went in a barge to see the fleet, and when he got in the
midst of their ships, the Portuguese surrounded his barge and killed
him with lances.

According to Farishtah (II. 442, 443, Pers. Text) on the invasion
of Gujarát by the emperor Humáyún, Sultán Bahádur had asked help of
the Portuguese. When his power was re-established, Bahádur, hearing
of the arrival of between five and six thousand Portuguese at Diu,
feared they would take possession of that port. He therefore hastened
to Diu from Junágadh. The Portuguese who were aware that Humáyún had
withdrawn and that Bahádur had re-established his power, preferred to
attempt to gain Diu by stratagem rather than by force. Bahádur asked
the viceroy to visit him. The viceroy feigned sickness and Bahádur
with the object of proving his goodwill offered to visit the viceroy
on board his ship. On leaving the viceroy's ship to enter his own
barge the Portuguese suddenly moved their vessel and Bahádur fell
overboard. While in the water a Portuguese struck the king with a
lance and killed him.

Abul Fazl's account A.D. 1590 (Akbarnámah in Elliot, VI. 18) seems
more natural and in better keeping with Bahádur's impetuous vigour
and bravery than either the Gujarát or Farishtah's narratives. The
Portuguese chief was apprehensive that as the Sultán was no longer in
want of assistance he meditated treachery. So he sent to inform the
Sultán that he had come as requested, but that he was ill and unable
to go on shore, so that the interview must be deferred till he got
better. The Sultán, quitting the royal road of safety, embarked on the
12th February 1536 (3rd Ramazan H. 943) with a small escort to visit
the viceroy on board the viceroy's ship. As soon as Bahádur reached
the vessel he found the viceroy's sickness was a pretence and regretted
that he had come. He at once sought to return. But the Portuguese were
unwilling that such a prey should escape them and hoped that by keeping
him prisoner they might get more ports. The viceroy came forward and
asked the Sultán to stay a little and examine some curiosities he had
to present. The Sultán replied that the curiosities might be sent after
him and turned quickly towards his own boat. A European kázi or priest
placed himself in the Sultán's way and bade him stop. The Sultán,
in exasperation, drew his sword and cleft the priest in twain. He
then leaped into his own boat. The Portuguese vessels drew round
the Sultán's boat and a fight began. The Sultán and Rúmi Khán threw
themselves into the water. A friend among the Portuguese stretched
a hand to Rúmi Khán and saved him: the Sultán was drowned in the waves.

Of the four Portuguese versions of Bahádur's death the first appears
in Correa's (A.D. 1512-1550) Lendas Da Asia, A.D. 1497 to 1550;
the second in DeBarros' (died A.D. 1570) Decadas, A.D. 1497 to 1539;
the third in Do Couto's (died A.D. 1600 ?) continuation of DeBarros,
A.D. 1529 to 1600; and the fourth in Faria-e-Souza's (died A.D. 1650)
Portuguese Asia to A.D. 1640. A fifth reference to Bahádur's death
will be found in Castaneda's Historia which extends to A.D. 1538.

As Correa was in India from A.D. 1512 till his death in Goa in
A.D. 1550, and as his narrative which was never published till
A.D. 1856-64 has the highest reputation for accuracy of detail his
version carries special weight. According to Correa (Lendas Da Asia,
Vol. III. Chap. XCV.) during the monsoon of 1536, Nono DaCunha the
viceroy received by land a letter from Manoel deSouza the captain
of Diu fort, telling him of the discontent of the Gujarát Moors with
king Bahádur for allowing the Portuguese to build a fort at Diu. In
consequence of this information early in the fair season Nono daCunha
sailed from Goa in his own galleon accompanied by about ten small
vessels fustas and katurs under the command of Antonio deSylveira. Nono
reached Diu about the end of December. King Bahádur was glad that the
viceroy should come to Diu almost alone since it seemed to show he was
not aware of Bahádur's designs against the Portuguese. When Bahádur
arrived at Diu he sent a message to the viceroy inviting him to come
ashore to meet him as he had important business to transact. The
king's messenger found the viceroy ill in bed, and brought back a
message that the viceroy would come ashore to meet the king in the
evening. Immediately after the king's messenger left, Manoel deSouza,
the captain of Diu fort, came on board to see the viceroy. The viceroy
told Manoel to go and thank the king and to return his visit. The
king expressed his grief at the viceroy's illness and proposed to
start at once to see him. He went to his barge and rowed straight to
the viceroy's galleon. The king had with him, besides the interpreter
St. Jago, seven men and two pages one carrying a sword and the other
a bow. The captain of the fort and some other officers in their own
barges followed the king. Bahádur, who was the first to arrive, came
so speedily that the viceroy had hardly time to make preparations to
receive him. He put on heavy clothes to show he was suffering from
ague and ordered all the officers to be well armed. When Bahádur
came on board he saw the men busy with their weapons but showed no
signs that he suspected foul play. He went straight to the viceroy's
cabin. The viceroy tried to get up but Bahádur prevented him, asked
how he was, and returned at once to the deck. As Bahádur stood on the
deck the captain of the fort boarded the galleon, and, as he passed to
the cabin to see the viceroy, Bahádur laughingly upbraided him with
being behind time. Then without taking leave of the viceroy Bahádur
went to his barge. When the viceroy learned that the king had left he
told the captain to follow the king and to take him to the fort and
keep him there till the viceroy saw him. The captain rowed after the
king who was already well ahead. He called to the king asking him to
wait. The king waited. When the captain came close to the king's barge
he asked the king to come into his vessel. But the interpreter without
referring to the king replied that the captain should come into the
king's barge. DeSouza ordered his boat alongside. His barge struck
the king's barge and DeSouza who was standing on the poop tripped and
fell into the water. The rowers of the royal barge picked him out
and placed him near the king who laughed at his wet clothes. Other
Portuguese barges whose officers thought the Moors were fighting
with the captain began to gather. The first to arrive was Antonio
Cardoza. When Cardoza came up the interpreter told the king to make
for land with all speed as the Portuguese seemed to be coming to seize
and kill him. The king gave the order to make for the shore. He also
told the page to shoot the hollow arrow whose whistling noise was a
danger signal. When the Moors in the king's barge heard the whistle
they attacked Manoel deSouza, who fell dead into the sea. Then Diogo
de Mesquita, D'Almeida, and Antonio Correa forced their way on to the
king's barge. When the king saw them he unsheathed his sword and the
page shot an arrow and killed Antonio Cardoza, who fell overboard
and was drowned. D'Almeida was killed by a sword-cut from a Moor
called Tiger and Tiger was killed by Correa. At that moment Diogo de
Mesquita gave the king a slight sword-cut and the king jumped into the
sea. After the king, the interpreter and Rúmi Khán, two Moors, and all
the rowers leapt into the water. The Portuguese barges surrounded them
and the men struck at the three swimmers with lances and oars. The king
twice cried aloud 'I am Sultán Bahádur,' hoping that some one would
help him. A man who did not know that he was the king struck Bahádur
on the head with a club. The blow was fatal and Bahádur sank. The
second version is given by Barros (A.D. 1560) in his Decadas da Asia,
Vol. V. page 357 of the 1707 edition. The third version by Do Couto
(A.D. 1600) in his continuation of Barros' Decadas, and the fourth by
Faria-e-Souza (A.D. 1650) in his Portuguese Asia are in the main taken
from De Barros. The following details are from Steevens' (A.D. 1697)
translation of Faria given in Briggs' Muhammadan Power in India,
IV. 135-138.

Bahádur king of Cambay, who had recovered his kingdom solely by the
assistance of the Portuguese, now studied their ruin, and repenting
of the leave he had granted to build a fort at Diu endeavoured
to take it and to kill the commander and the garrison. Nono da
Cunha the Portuguese viceroy understood his designs and prepared to
prevent them. Emanuel deSouza who commanded at Diu was warned by a
Moor that the king would send for him by a certain Moor and kill
him. DeSouza determined to go, and, when sent for, appeared with
only one servant. Admiring DeSouza's courage the king treated him
honourably and allowed him to return in safety. The king's mother
tried to dissuade her son from plotting against DeSouza but to
no effect. To remove suspicion Bahádur began to pay the Portuguese
officers visits at unseasonable hours, but was ever received by DeSouza
on his guard. Meanwhile, on the 9th January 1536, Nono daCunha the
Portuguese viceroy set out from Goa for Diu with 300 sail. When he
put in at Cheul he found Nizám-ul-Mulk who pretended he had come to
divert his women at sea but really with designs on that place. When
Nono reached Diu the king was hunting in the mountains and Nono
apprised him of his arrival. The king sent for him by a Portuguese
apostate of the name of John de St. Jago called Firangi Khán, but
Nono daCunha pleaded illness. The king pretending great friendship
came to Diu accompanied by Emanuel deSouza, who had brought the last
message from DaCunha. At Diu the king went on board the viceroy's
ship and for a time they discoursed. The king was troubled at a page
whispering something to DaCunha, but as DaCunha took no notice his
suspicions were allayed. The message was from DeSouza, stating that
the captains whom he had summoned were awaiting orders to secure
or kill the king. DaCunha thought it strange that DeSouza had not
killed the king while he was in his power in the fort; and DeSouza
thought it strange that DaCunha did not now seize the king when he
was in his power in the ship. DaCunha directed all the officers to
escort the king to the palace and then accompany DeSouza to the fort,
where DaCunha intended to seize the king when he came to visit him. The
king on his part had resolved to seize DaCunha at a dinner to which he
had invited him and send him in a cage to the Great Turk. De Souza who
was going to invite the king to the fort after DaCunha had entered it,
came up with the king's barge and delivered his invitation through Rúmi
Khán. Rúmi Khán warned the king not to accept it. The king disregarding
this warning invited DeSouza into his barge. While stepping into the
king's barge DeSouza fell overboard, but was picked up by officers
who carried him to the king. At this time three Portuguese barges
came up and some of the officers seeing DeSouza hastily enter the
king's barge drew close to the king's barge. The king remembering
Rúmi Khán's warning ordered Emanuel deSouza to be killed. James de
Mesquita understanding the order flew at and wounded the king. An
affray followed and four Portuguese and seven of the king's men were
killed. The king tried to get away in a boat but a cannon shot killed
three of his rowers and he was stopped. He next attempted to escape
by swimming, but being in danger of drowning discovered himself by
crying for help. A Portuguese held out an oar to him; but others
struck him fatal blows, so that he sank.

The conclusion to be drawn from these four Musalmán and four
Portuguese versions is that on either side the leader hoped by some
future treachery to seize the person of the other; and that mutual
suspicion turned into a fatal affray a meeting which both parties
intended should pass peacefully and lull the other into a false and
favourable security.

APPENDIX II.

THE HILL FORT OF MÁNDU.

PART I.--DESCRIPTION.

Mándu, about twenty-three miles south of Dhár in Central India, is a
wide waving hill-top, part of the great wall of the Vindhyan range. The
hill-top is three to four miles from north to south and four to five
miles from east to west. On the north, the east, and the west, Mándu
is islanded from the main plateau of Málwa by valleys and ravines that
circle round to its southern face, which stands 1200 feet out of the
Nímár plain. The area of the hill-top is over 12,000 English acres,
and, so broken is its outline, that the encircling wall is said to have
a length of between thirty-seven and thirty-eight miles. Its height,
1950 feet above the sea, secures for the hill-top at all seasons the
boon of fresh and cool air.

About twenty miles south of Dhár the level cultivated plateau breaks
into woody glades and uplands. Two miles further the plain is cleft
by two great ravines, which from their deeper and broader southern
mouths 700 to 800 feet below the Dhár plateau, as they wind northwards,
narrow and rise, till, to the north of Mándu hill, they shallow into
a woody dip or valley about 300 yards broad and 200 feet below the
south crest of Málwa. From the south crest of the Málwa plateau,
across the tree tops of this wild valley, stand the cliffs of the
island Mándu, their crests crowned by the great Dehli gateway and its
long lofty line of flanking walls. At the foot of the sudden dip into
the valley the Âlamgír or World-Guarding Gate stands sentinel. [877]
Beyond the gateway, among wild reaches of rock and forest, a noble
causeway with high domed tombs on either hand fills the lowest dip of
the valley. From the south end of the causeway the road winds up to a
second gateway, and beyond the second gateway between side walls climbs
till at the crest of the slope it passes through the ruined but still
lofty and beautiful Dehli or northern gateway, one of the earliest
works of Diláwar Khán (A.D. 1400), the founder of Musalmán Mándu.

Close inside of the Dehli gate, on the right or west, stands the
handsome Hindola Palace. The name Hindola, which is probably the title
of the builder, is explained by the people as the Swingcot palace,
because, like the sides of the cage of a swinging cot, the walls of
the hall bulge below and narrow towards the top. Its great baronial
hall and hanging windows give the Hindola palace a special merit and
interest, and an air of lordly wealth and luxury still clings to the
tree-covered ruins which stretch west to large underground cisterns
and hot weather retreats. About a quarter of a mile south stand the
notable group of the Jaház Mehel or Ship palace on the west, and the
Tapela Mehel or Caldron palace on the south, with their rows of lofty
pointed arches below deep stone caves, their heavy windowless upper
stories, and their massive arched and domed roof chambers. These
palaces are not more handsomely built than finely set. The massive
ship-like length of the Jaház Mehel lies between two large tree-girt
ponds, and the Tapela, across a beautiful foreground of water and
ruin, looks east into the mass of tangled bush and tree which once
formed part of the 130 acres of the Lál Bágh or Royal Gardens.

The flat palace roofs command the whole 12,000 acres of Mándu hill,
north to the knolls and broken uplands beyond the great ravine-moat and
south across the waving hill-top with its miles of glades and ridges,
its scattered villages hamlets and tombs, and its gleaming groves of
mangoes, khirnis, banyans, mhowras, and pipals. In the middle distance,
out from the tree-tops, stand the lofty domes of Hoshang's tomb and
of the great Jámá mosque. Further south lies the tree-girt hollow
of the Ságar Taláv or Sea Lake, and beyond the Ságar lake a woody
plateau rises about 200 feet to the southern crest, where, clear
against the sky, stand the airy cupolas of the pavilion of Rúp Mati,
the beautiful wife of Báz Bahádur (A.D. 1551-1561), the last Sultán
of Málwa. Finally to the west, from the end of the Rúp Mati heights,
rises even higher the bare nearly isolated shoulder of Songad, the
citadel or inner fort of Mándu, the scene of the Gujarát Bahádur's
(A.D. 1531) daring and successful surprise. This fair hill-top,
beautiful from its tangled wildness and scattered ruins, is a strange
contrast to Mándu, the capital of a warlike independent dynasty. During
the palmy days of the fifteenth century, of the 12,000 acres of the
Mándu hill-top, 560 were fields, 370 were gardens, 200 were wells,
780 were lakes and ponds, 100 were bazár roads, 1500 were dwellings,
200 were rest-houses, 260 were baths, 470 were mosques, and 334 were
palaces. These allotments crowded out the wild to a narrow pittance
of 1560 acres of knolls and ridges.

From the Jaház Mehel the road winds through fields and woods, gemmed
with peafowl and droll with monkeys, among scattered palaces mosques
and tombs, some shapely some in heaps, about a mile south to the
walled enclosure of the lofty domed tomb of the establisher of Mándu's
greatness, Hoshang Sháh Ghori (A.D. 1405-1432). Though the badly-fitted
joinings of the marble slabs of the tomb walls are a notable contrast
to the finish of the later Mughal buildings, Hoshang's tomb, in
its massive simplicity and dim-lighted roughness, is a solemn and
suitable resting-place for a great Pathán warrior. Along the west of
the tomb enclosure runs a handsome flat-roofed colonnade. The pillars,
which near the base are four-sided, pass through an eight-sided and
a sixteen-sided belt into a round upper shaft. The round shaft ends
in a square under-capital, each face of which is filled by a group
of leafage in outline the same as the favourite Hindu Singh-múkh or
horned face. Over the entwined leafy horns of this moulding, stone
brackets support heavy stone beams, all Hindu in pattern. [878]
Close to the east of Hoshang's tomb is Hoshang's Jámá Masjid or
Great Mosque, built of blocks of red limestone. Hoshang's mosque is
approached from the east through a massive domed gateway and across a
quadrangle enclosed on the east north and south by wrecked colonnades
of pointed arches. The west is filled by the great pointed arches
of the mosque in fair repair. On the roof of the mosque from a thick
undergrowth of domelets rise three lofty domes. [879]

In front of the gateway of the Great Mosque, in the centre of a masonry
plinth about three feet high, stands an iron pillar about a foot in
diameter at the base and twenty feet high. Close to the east of the
gateway is the site of Mehmúd's (A.D. 1442) Tower of Victory, traces of
which remained as late as A.D. 1840. About fifty yards further east are
the ruins of a great building called the Ashrafi Mehel, said to have
been a Musalmán college. To the north-east a banner marks a temple and
the local state offices. South the road passes between the two lines
of small houses and huts that make modern Mándu. Beyond the village,
among ruins and huge swollen baobab stems, the road winds south along
a downward slope to the richly-wooded lowland, where stretches to
the west the wide coolness of the Ságar Taláv or Sea lake. Its broad
surface covering 600 acres is green with fanlike lotus leaves, reeds,
and water-grasses. Its banks are rough with brakes of tangled bush
from which, in uncramped stateliness, rise lofty mhauras, mangoes,
kirnis, and pípals. To the east round a smaller tank, whose banks are
crowned by splendid mangoes and tamarinds, stand the domes of several
handsome tombs. Of some of these domes the black masses are brightened
by belts of brilliant pale and deep-blue enamel. To the north of this
overflow-pool a long black wall is the back of the smaller Jámá or
congregation mosque, badly ruined, but of special interest, as each
of its numerous pillars shows the uninjured Hindu Singh-múkh or horned
face. By a rough piece of constructive skill the original cross corners
of the end cupolas have been worked into vaulted Musalmán domes. [880]

From the Sea Lake, about a mile across the waving richly-wooded plain,
bounded by the southern height of the plateau, the path leads to
the sacred Rewa Kund or Narbada Pool, a small shady pond lined with
rich masonry, and its west side enriched by the ruins of a handsome
Bath or Hammám Khánah. From the north-east corner of the Rewa Pool a
broad flight of easy stairs leads thirty or forty feet up the slope
on whose top stands the palace of Báz Bahádur (A.D. 1551-1561) the
last independent chief of Mándu. [881] The broad easy flight of steps
ends in a lofty arched gateway through which a roomy hall or passage
gives entrance into a courtyard with a central masonry cistern and an
enclosing double colonnade, which on the right opens into an arched
balcony overlooking the Rewa Kund and garden. Within this courtyard
is a second court enclosed on three sides by an arched gallery. The
roof of the colonnades, which are reached by flights of easy steps,
are shaded by arched pavilions topped by cupolas brightened by belts
of blue enamel.

To the south of Báz Bahádur's Palace a winding path climbs the steep
slope of the southern rim of Mándu to the massive pillared cupolas of
Rúp Mati's palace, which, clear against the sky, are the most notable
ornament of the hill-top. From a ground floor of heavy masonry walls
and arched gateways stairs lead to a flat masonry terrace. At the north
and south ends of the terrace stand massive heavy-eaved pavilions,
whose square pillars and pointed arches support lofty deep-grooved
domes. The south pavilion on the crest of the Vindhyan cliff commands
a long stretch of the south face of Mándu with its guardian wall
crowning the heights and hollows of the hill-top. Twelve hundred
feet below spreads the dim hazy Nímár plain brightened eastwards by
the gleaming coil of the Narbada. The north pavilion, through the
clear fresh air of the hill-top, looks over the entire stretch of
Mándu from the high shoulder of Songad in the extreme south-west
across rolling tree-brightened fields, past the domes, the tangled
bush, and the broad gray of the Sea Lake, to the five-domed cluster
of Hoshang's mosque and tomb, on, across a sea of green tree tops,
to the domed roof-chambers of the Jaház and Tapela palaces, through
the Dehli gateway, and, beyond the deep cleft of the northern ravine,
to the bare level and the low ranges of the Málwa plain.

From the Rewa Pool a path, along the foot of the southern height
among noble solitary mhauras and khirnis, across fields and past
small clusters of huts, guides to a flight of steps which lead down
to a deep shady rock-cut dell where a Muhammadan chamber with great
open arched front looks out across a fountained courtyard and sloping
scalloped water table to the wild western slopes of Mándu. This is
Nilkanth, where the emperor Akbar lodged in A.D. 1574, and which
Jehángír visited in A.D. 1617. [882]

From the top of the steps that lead to the dell the hill stretches
west bare and stony to the Songad or Tárápúr gateway on the narrow
neck beyond which rises the broad shoulder of Songad, the lofty
south-west limit of the Mándu hill-top. [883]

PART II.--HISTORY. [884]

[HISTORY] The history of Mándu belongs to two main sections, before
and after the overthrow by the emperor Akbar in A.D. 1563 of the
independent power of the Sultáns of Málwa.

SECTION I.--THE MÁLWA SULTÁNS, A.D. 1400-1570.

[The Málwa Sultáns, A.D. 1400-1570.] Of early Hindu Mándu, which
is said to date from A.D. 313, nothing is known. [885] Hind spire
stones are built into the Hindola palace walls; and the pillars of
the lesser Jámá mosque, about a hundred yards from the east end of
the sea or Ságar Lake, are Hindu apparently Jain. Of these local Hind
chiefs almost nothing is known except that their fort was taken and
their power brought to an end by Sultán Shams-ud-dín Altamsh about
A.D. 1234. [886] Dhár, not Mándu, was at that time the capital. It
seems doubtful whether Mándu ever enjoyed the position of a capital
till the end of the fourteenth century. In A.D. 1401, in the ruin
that followed Timúr's (A.D. 1398-1400) conquest of Northern India, a
Pathán from the country of Ghor, Diláwar Khán Ghori (A.D. 1387-1405),
at the suggestion of his son Alp Khán, assumed the white canopy
and scarlet pavilion of royalty. [887] Though Dhár was Diláwar's
head-quarters he sometimes stayed for months at a time at Mándu,
[888] strengthening the defences and adorning the hill with buildings,
as he always entertained the desire of making Mándu his capital. [889]
Three available inscriptions of Diláwar
Khán (A.D. 1387-1405) seem to show that he built an assembly mosque
near the Ship Palace, a mosque near the Dehli Gate, and a gate at
the entrance to Songadh, the south-west corner and citadel of Mándu,
afterwards known as the Tárápúr Gate.

In A.D. 1398 Alp Khán, son of Diláwar Khán, annoyed with his father
for entertaining as his overlord at Dhár Mehmúd Tughlak, the refugee
monarch of Dehli, withdrew to Mándu. He stayed in Mándu for three
years, laying, according to Farishtah, the foundation of the famous
fortress of solid masonry which was the strongest fortification in that
part of the world. [890] On his father's death in A.D. 1405 Alp Khán
took the title of Sultán Hoshang, and moved the capital to Mándu. The
rumour that Hoshang had poisoned his father gave Diláwar's brother
in arms, Muzaffar Sháh of Gujarát (A.D. 1399-1411), an excuse for an
expedition against Hoshang. [891] Hoshang was defeated at Dhár, made
prisoner, and carried to Gujarát, and Muzaffar's brother Nasrat was
appointed in his place. Nasrat failed to gain the goodwill either
of the people or of the army of Málwa; and was forced to retire
from Dhár and take refuge in Mándu. In consequence of this failure
in A.D. 1408, at Hoshang's request Muzaffar set Hoshang free after a
year's confinement, and deputed his grandson Ahmed to take Hoshang to
Málwa and establish Hoshang's power. [892] With Ahmed's help Hoshang
took Dhár and shortly after secured the fort of Mándu. Hoshang
(A.D. 1405-1431) made Mándu his capital and spread his power on
all sides except towards Gujarát. [893] Shortly after the death of
Muzaffar I. and the accession of Ahmed, when (A.D. 1414) Ahmed was
quelling the disturbances raised by his cousins, Hoshang, instead
of helping Ahmed as requested, marched towards Gujarát and created
a diversion in favour of the rebels by sending two of his nobles to
attack Broach. They were soon expelled by Ahmed Sháh. Shortly after
Hoshang marched to the help of the chief of Jháláváda in Káthiáváda,
and ravaged eastern and central Gujarát. [894] To punish Hoshang for
these acts of ingratitude, between A.D. 1418 and 1422, Ahmed twice
besieged Mándu, and though he failed to take the fort his retirement
had to be purchased, and both as regards success and fair-dealing
the honours of the campaign remained with Ahmed. [895] In A.D. 1421
Hoshang went disguised as a horse-dealer to Jájnagar (now Jájpur)
in Cuttack in Orissa. He took with him a number of cream-coloured
horses, of which he had heard the Rája was very fond. His object was
to barter these horses and other goods for the famous war elephants
of Jájnagar. An accident in the camp of the disguised merchants led
to a fight, in which the Rája was taken prisoner and Hoshang was
able to secure 150 elephants to fight the Gujarát Sultán. [896]
During Hoshang's absence at Jájnagar Ahmed pressed the siege of
Mándu so hard that the garrison would have surrendered had Hoshang
not succeeded in finding his way into the fort through the south
or Tárápur Gate. [897] For ten years after the Gujarát campaign,
by the help of his minister Malik Mughís of the Khilji family and
of his minister's son Mehmúd Khán, Málwa prospered and Hoshang's
power was extended. Hoshang enriched his capital with buildings,
among them the Great Mosque and his own tomb, both of which he left
unfinished. Hoshang's minister Malik Mughís (who received the title of
Ulugh Aâzam Humáyún Khán) appears to have built the assembly mosque
near the Ságar Lake in Hoshang's life-time, A.D. 1431. Another of
his buildings must have been a mint, as copper coins remain bearing
Hoshang's name, and Mándu Shádiábád as the place of mintage. [898]
In A.D. 1432, at Hoshangábád, on the left bank of the Narbada, about
120 miles east of Mándu, Hoshang, who was suffering from diabetes,
took greatly to heart the fall of a ruby out of his crown. He said:
A few days before the death of Fírúz Tughlak a jewel dropped from
his crown. Hoshang ordered that he should be taken to Mándu. Before
he had gone many miles the king died. His nobles carried the body to
the Madrasah or college in Shádiábád or Mándu, and buried him in the
college on the ninth day of Zil Hajjah, the twelfth month of A.H. 838 =
A.D. 1434. The year of Hoshang's death is to be found in the letters

Ah Sháh Hoshang na mund: Alas, Sháh Hoshang stayed not. [899]

On Hoshang's death his son Ghazni Khán, with the title of Sultán
Muhammad Ghori, succeeded. Malik Mughís, his father's minister,
and the minister's son Mehmúd were maintained in power. In three years

(A.D. 1433-1436), as Sultán Muhammad proved dissipated, cruel
and suspicious, Mehmúd, the minister's son, procured his death
by poison. Mehmúd Khilji then asked his father to accept the
succession, but his father declined, saying that Mehmúd was fitter
to be king. In A.D. 1436 Mehmúd was accordingly crowned with the
royal tiara of Hoshang. [900] He conferred on his father the honour
of being attended by mace-bearers carrying gold and silver sticks,
who, when the Khán mounted or went out, had, like the mace-bearers
of independent monarchs, the privilege of repeating the Bismillah
'In the name of the compassionate and merciful Alláh.' [901] He gave
his father royal honours, the white canopy and the silver quiver,
and to his title of Malik Ashraf Khán Jehán he added among others
Amír-ul-Umara and Aâzam Humáyún. [902] Mehmúd quelled a revolt among
his nobles. An outbreak of plague in the Gujarát camp relieved him
from a contest with Ahmed Sháh. [903] In A.D. 1439 Mehmúd repaired the
palace of Sultán Hoshang and opened the mosque built in commemoration
of that monarch which Farishtah describes as a splendid edifice with
208 columns. [904] About the same time Mehmúd completed Hoshang's
tomb which Hoshang had left unfinished. On the completion of this
building Hoshang's remains seem to have been moved into it from
their first resting-place in the college. In A.D. 1441 Mehmúd built
a garden with a dome and palaces [905] and a mosque at Naâlchah about
three miles north of the Dehli Gate of Mándu, a pleasing well-watered
spot where the plateau of Málwa breaks into glades and knolls. [906]
In A.D. 1443 in honour of his victory over Rána Kúmbha of Chitor,
Mehmúd built a beautiful column of victory, [907] seven storeys high,
and a college in front of the mosque of Hoshang Ghori. Facing the east
entrance to the Great Mosque stands a paved ramp crowned by a confused
ruin. As late as A.D. 1843 this ruin is described as a square marble
chamber. Each face of the chamber had three arches, the centre arch in
two of the faces being a door. Above the arches the wall was of yellow
stone faced with marble. Inside the chamber the square corners were cut
off by arches. No roof or other trace of superstructure remained. [908]
This chamber seems to be the basement of the column of victory which
was raised in A.D. 1443 by Mehmúd I. (A.D. 1432-1469) in honour of
his victory over Rána Kúmbha of Chitor. [909] Mehmúd's column has the
special interest of being, if not the original, at least the cause
of the building of Kúmbha Rána's still uninjured Victory Pillar,
which was completed in A.D. 1454 at a cost of £900,000 in honour
of his defeat of Mehmúd. [910] That the Mándu Column of Victory was
a famous work is shown by Abul Fazl's reference to it in A.D. 1590
as an eight-storeyed minaret. [911] Farishtah, about twenty years
later (A.D. 1610), calls it a beautiful Victory Pillar seven storeys
high. [912] The emperor Jehángír (A.D. 1605-1627) gives the following
account of Mehmúd's Tower of Victory [913]: "This day, the 29th of the
month Tir, corresponding to July-August of A.D. 1617, about the close
of the day, with the ladies of the palace, I went out to see the Haft
Manzar or Seven Storeys, literally Seven Prospects. This building is
one of the structures of the old rulers of Málwa, that is of Sultán
Mehmúd Khilji. It has seven storeys, and on each storey there are
four porticos, and in each portico are four windows. The height of
this tower is about 163 feet and its circumference 150 feet. From the
surface of the ground to the top of the seventh storey there are one
hundred and seventy-one steps." Sir Thomas Herbert, the traveller,
in A.D. 1626 describes it from hearsay, or at least at second-hand,
as a tower 170 steps high, supported by massive pillars and adorned
with gates and windows very observable. It was built, he adds, by
Khán Jehán, who there lies buried. [914]

Two years later (A.D. 1445) Mehmúd built at Mándu, and endowed with
the revenues of several villages a large Shifa Khánah or Hospital,
with wards and attendants for all classes and separate apartments
for maniacs. He placed in charge of it his own physician Maulána
Fazlulláh. [915] He also built a college to the east of the Jámá
mosque, of which traces remain. [916]

In A.D. 1453, though defeated, Mehmúd brought back from Gujarát the
jewelled waistbelt of Gujarát, which in a daring charge he had taken
from the tent of the Gujarát king Kutb-ud-dín Sháh. [917] In A.D. 1441
Mehmúd's father died at Mandisor. Mehmúd felt the loss so keenly that
he tore his hair like one bereft of reason. [918] After his father's
death Mehmúd made his son Ghiás-ud-dín minister, and conferred the
command of the army and the title of Aâzam Humáyún on his kinsman Táj
Khán. In A.D. 1469, after a reign of thirty-four years (A.D. 1436-1469)
of untiring energy and activity Mehmúd died. Farishtah says of him:
"His tent was his home: the field of battle his resting-place. He
was polite, brave, just, and learned. His Hindu and Musalmán subjects
were happy and friendly. He guarded his lands from invaders. He made
good his loss to any one who suffered from robbery in his dominions,
recovering the amount from the village in whose lands the robbery
had taken place, a system which worked so well that theft and robbery
became almost unknown. Finally, by a systematic effort he freed the
country from the dread of wild beasts." [919]

In A.D. 1469 Mehmúd was succeeded by his son and minister Ghiás-ud-dín,
to whose skill as a soldier much of Mehmúd's success had been due. On
his accession Ghiás-ud-dín made his son Abdul Kádir Prime Minister and
heir-apparent, and gave him the title of Násir-ud-dín. He called his
nobles, and in their presence handed his sword to Násir-ud-dín, saying:
"I have passed thirty-four years in ceaseless fighting. I now devote
my life to rest and enjoyment." [920] Ghiás-ud-dín, who never left
Mándu during the whole thirty years of his reign (A.D. 1469-1499),
is said to have completed the Jaház Mehel or Ship Palace, [921] and
the widespread buildings which surround it. It seems probable that
the Tapela Palace close to the south-east of the Ship palace and
the lake and royal gardens immediately to the north and north-east
of the Tapela palace were part of Ghiás-ud-dín's pleasure-houses
and grounds. The scale of the ruins behind the Hindola or Swingcot
palace to the north, and their connection with the out-buildings to
the west of the Jaház Mehel, suggest that they also belonged to the
palaces and women's quarters of the pleasure-loving Ghiás-ud-dín.

Of the surprising size and fantastic arrangements of Ghiás-ud-dín's
pleasure city, the true Mándu Shádiábád or Abode of Joy, curious
details have been preserved. This Abode of Pleasure was a city not
a palace. It contained 15,000 inhabitants, all of them women, none
either old or plain-featured, and each trained to some profession
or craft. Among them were the whole officers of a court, besides
courtiers, teachers, musicians, dancers, prayer-readers, embroiderers,
and followers of all crafts and callings. Whenever the king heard of
a beautiful girl he never rested till he obtained her. This city of
women had its two regiments of guards, the Archers and the Carabineers,
each 500 strong, its soldiers dressed like men in a distinguishing
uniform. The archers were beautiful young Turkí damsels, all armed
with bows and arrows: the carabineers were Abyssinian maidens, each
carrying a carbine. Attached to the palace and city was a deer park,
where the Lord of Leisure used to hunt with his favourites. Each
dweller in the city of women received her daily dole of grain and
coppers, and besides the women were many pensioners, mice, parrots
and pigeons, who also received the same dole as their owners. So
evenly just was Ghiás-ud-dín in the matter of his allowances, that
the prettiest of his favourites received the same allowance as the
roughest carabineer. [922]

The Lord of the City of Pleasure was deeply religious. Whenever
he was amusing himself two of his companions held in front of him
a cloth to remind him of his shroud. A thousand Háfizahs, that is
women who knew the Kurâán by heart, constantly repeated its holy
verses, and, under the orders of the king, whenever he changed his
raiment the Háfizahs blew on his body from head to foot with their
prayer-hallowed breath. [923] None of the five daily prayers passed
unprayed. If at any of the hours of prayer the king was asleep he
was sprinkled with water, and when water failed to arouse him, he was
dragged out of bed. Even when dragged out of bed by his servants the
king never uttered an improper or querulous word.

So keen was his sense of justice that when one of his courtiers
pretending he had purchased her, brought to him a maiden of ideal
beauty, and her relations, not knowing she had been given to the king,
came to complain, though they gladly resigned her, the king grieved
over his unconscious wrong. Besides paying compensation he mourned
long and truly, and ordered that no more inmates should be brought
to his palace. [924] So great was the king's charity that every night
below his pillow he placed a bag containing some thousand gold-mohurs,
and before evening all were distributed to the deserving. So religious
was the king that he paid 50,000 tankas for each of the four feet of
the ass of Christ. A man came bringing a fifth hoof, and one of the
courtiers said: "My Lord, an ass has four feet. I never heard that it
had five, unless perhaps the ass of Christ had five." "Who knows,"
the king replied, "it may be that this last man has told the truth,
and one of the others was wrong. See that he is paid." So sober was
the king that he would neither look upon nor hear of intoxicants
or stimulants. A potion that had cost 100,000 tankas was brought to
him. Among the 300 ingredients one was nutmeg. The king directed the
potion to be thrown into a drain. His favourite horse fell sick. The
king ordered it to have medicine, and the horse recovered. "What
medicine was given the horse?" asked the king. "The medicine ordered
by the physicians" replied his servants. Fearing that in this medicine
there might be an intoxicant, the king commanded that the horse should
be taken out of the stables and turned loose into the forest. [925]

The king's spirit of peace steeped the land, which, like its ruler,
after thirty years of fighting yearned for rest. For fourteen years
neither inward malcontent nor foreign foe broke the quiet. In A.D. 1482
Bahlol Lodi advanced from Dehli to subdue Málwa. The talk of Mándu
was Bahlol's approach, but no whisper of it passed into the charmed
City of Women. At last the son-minister forced his way into the king's
presence. At the news of pressing danger his soldier-spirit awoke in
Ghiás-ud-dín. His orders for meeting the invaders were so prompt and
well-planned that the king of Dehli paid a ransom and withdrew. A
second rest of fifteen years ended in the son-minister once more
forcing his way into the Presence. In A.D. 1500 the son presented his
father, now an aged man of eighty, with a cup of sherbet and told him
to drink. The king, whose armlet of bezoar stone had already twice
made poison harmless, drew the stone from his arm. He thanked the
Almighty for granting him, unworthy, the happiest life that had ever
fallen to the lot of man. He prayed that the sin of his death might
not be laid to his son's charge, drank the poison, and died. [926]

Ghiás-ud-dín can hardly have shut himself off so completely from
state affairs as the story-tellers make out. He seems to have been
the first of the Málwa kings who minted gold. He also introduced new
titles and ornaments, which implies an interest in his coinage. [927]
Farishtah says that Ghiás-ud-dín used to come out every day for an
hour from his harím, sit on the throne and receive the salutations
of his nobles and subjects, and give orders in all weighty matters of
state. He used to entrust all minor affairs to his ministers; but in
all grave matters he was so anxious not to shirk his responsibility as
a ruler, that he had given strict orders that all such communications
should be made to him at whatever time they came through a particular
female officer appointed to receive his orders. [928]

According to most accounts Násir-ud-dín was led to poison his
father by an attempt of his younger brother Shujáât Khán, supported
if not organised by some of Ghiás-ud-dín's favourite wives to oust
Násir-ud-dín from the succession. [929] In the struggle Násir-ud-dín
triumphed and was crowned at Mándu in A.D. 1500. [930] The new
king left Mándu to put down a revolt. On his return to Mándu he
devoted himself to debauchery and to hunting down and murdering his
brother's adherents. He subjected his mother Khurshíd Ráni to great
indignities and torture to force from her information regarding his
father's concealed treasures. [931] In a fit of drunkenness he fell
into a reservoir. He was pulled out by four of his female slaves. He
awoke with a headache, and discovering what his slaves had done put
them to death with his own hand. [932] Some time after in A.D. 1512,
he again fell into the reservoir, and there he was left till he was
dead. [933] Násir-ud-dín was fond of building. His palace at Akbarpur
in the Nímar plain about twenty miles south of Mándu was splendid
and greatly admired. [934] And at Mándu besides his sepulchre [935]
which the emperor Jehángír (A.D. 1617) mentions, [936] an inscription
shows that the palace now known by the name of Báz Bahádur was built
by Násir-ud-dín.

Násir-ud-dín was succeeded by his younger son (Mehmúd A.D. 1512-1530),
who, with the title of Mehmúd the Second, was crowned with great pomp
at Mándu. Seven hundred elephants in gold-embroidered velvet housings
adorned the procession. [937] Shortly after his accession Mehmúd
II. was driven out of Mándu by the revolt of the commandant Muhâfiz
Khán, but was restored by the skill and courage of Medáni Rái his
Rájput commander-in-chief. [938] A still more dangerous combination
by Muzaffar II. (A.D. 1511-1526) of Gujarát and Sikandar Sháh Lodi
(A.D. 1488-1516) of Dehli, was baffled by the foresight and energy of
the same Rájput general. Mehmúd, feeling that his power had passed
to the Hindus, tried to disband the Rájputs and assassinate Medáni
Rái. Failing in both attempts Mehmúd fled from Mándu to Gujarát,
where he was well received by Sultán Muzaffar (A.D. 1511-1526). [939]
They advanced together against Mándu, and in A.D. 1519, after a close
siege of several months, took the fort by assault. The Rájput garrison,
who are said to have lost 19,000 men, fought to the last, consecrating
the close of their defence by a general javar or fire-sacrifice. Sultán
Mehmúd entered Mándu close after the storming party, and while Mehmúd
established his authority in Mándu, Muzaffar withdrew to Dhár. When
order was restored Mehmúd sent this message to Muzaffar at Dhár:
"Mándu is a splendid fort. You should come and see it." "May Mándu,"
Muzaffar replied, "bring good fortune to Sultán Mehmúd. He is the
master of the fort. For the sake of the Lord I came to his help. On
Friday I will go to the fortress, and having had the sermon read in
Mehmúd's name will return." On Muzaffar's arrival in Mándu Mehmúd gave
a great entertainment; [940] and Muzaffar retired to Gujarát leaving a
force of 3000 Gujarátis to help to guard the hill. [941] Immediately
after Muzaffar's departure, as Sultán Mehmúd was anxious to recover
Chanderi and Gágraun, which still remained in the possession of Medáni
Rái and his supporters, he marched against them. Rána Sánga of Chitor
came to Medáni's aid and a great battle was fought. [942] Mehmúd's
hastiness led him to attack when his men were weary and the Rájputs
were fresh. In spite of the greatest bravery on the part of himself and
of his officers the Musalmán army was defeated, and Mehmúd, weakened
by loss of blood, was made prisoner. Rána Sánga had Mehmúd's wounds
dressed, sent him to Chitor, and on his recovery released him. [943]

[Sultán Bahádur of Gujarát, A.D. 1526-1534.] In A.D. 1526, by giving
protection to his outlawed brother Chánd Khán and to Razí-ul-Mulk, a
refugee Gujarát noble, Mehmúd brought on himself the wrath of Bahádur
Sháh of Gujarát (A.D. 1526-1536). The offended Bahádur did not act
hastily. He wrote to Mehmúd asking him to come to his camp and settle
their quarrels. He waited on the Gujarát frontier at Karji Ghát, east
of Bánswara, until at last satisfied that Mehmúd did not wish for a
peaceful settlement he advanced on Mándu. Meanwhile Mehmúd had repaired
the walls of Mándu, which soon after was invested by Bahádur. The
siege was proceeding in regular course by mines and batteries, and
the garrison, though overtaxed, were still loyal and in heart, when in
the dim light of morning Mehmúd suddenly found the Gujarát flag waving
on the battlements. According to the Mirat-i-Sikandari [944] Bahádur
annoyed by the slow progress of the siege asked his spies where was the
highest ground near Mándu. The spies said: Towards Songad-Chitor the
hill is extremely high. With a few followers the Sultán scaled Songad,
and rushing down the slope burst through the wall and took the fort
(May 20th, 1526). [945] Mehmúd surrendered. Near Dohad, on his way to
his prison at Chámpánír, an attempt was made to rescue Mehmúd, and to
prevent their escape he and some of his sons were slain and buried
on the bank of the Dohad tank. [946] Bahádur spent the rainy season
(June-October 1526) in Mándu, and Málwa was incorporated with Gujarát.

[The Emperor Humáyún, A.D. 1534-1535.] Mándu remained under Gujarát,
till in A.D. 1534, after Bahádur's defeat by Humáyún at Mandasor,
Bahádur retired to Mándu. Humáyún followed. At night 200 of Humáyún's
soldiers went to the back of the fortress, according to Farishtah
the south-west height of Songad [947] by which Bahádur had surprised
Mehmúd's garrison, scaled the walls by ladders and ropes, opened the
gate, and let others in. Mallu Khán, the commandant of the batteries,
a native of Málwa, who afterwards gained the title of Kádir Sháh,
went to Bahádur and wakened him. Bahádur rushed out with four or
five attendants. He was joined by about twenty more, and reaching
the gate at the top of the maidán, apparently the Tárápúr gate by
which Humáyún's men had entered, cut through 200 of Humáyún's troops
and went off with Mallu Khán to the fort of Songad, the citadel of
Mándu. While two of Bahádur's chiefs, Sadr Khán and Sultán Álam Lodi,
threw themselves into Songad, Bahádur himself let his horses down
the cliff by ropes and after a thousand difficulties made his way
to Chámpánír. [948] On the day after Bahádur's escape Sadr Khán and
Sultán Álam Lodi came out of Songad and surrendered to Humáyún. [949]

In the following year (A.D. 1535) the combined news of Sher Sháh's
revolt in Bengal, and of the defeat of his officers at Broach and
Cambay, forced Humáyún to retire from Gujarát. As he preferred its
climate he withdrew, not to Agra but to Mándu. [950] From Mándu, as
fortune was against him in Bengal, Humáyún went (A.D. 1535-36) to Agra.

[Local Musalmán Chiefs, A.D. 1536-1542.] On Humáyún's departure
three chiefs attempted to establish themselves at Mándu: Bhúpat Rái,
the ruler of Bíjágar, sixty miles south of Mándu; Mallu Khán or
Kádir Sháh, a former commandant of Mándu; and Mírán Muhammad Fárúki
from Burhánpur. [951] Of these three Mallu Khán was successful. In
A.D. 1536, when Humáyún fled from Sher Sháh to Persia, Mallu spread
his power from Mándu to Ujjain Sárangpúr and Rantambhor, assumed the
title of Kádir Sháh Málwi, and made Mándu his capital. Some time after
Sher Sháh, who was now supreme, wrote to Mallu Kádir Sháh ordering
him to co-operate in expelling the Mughals. Kádir Sháh resenting this
assumption of overlordship, addressed Sher Sháh as an inferior. [Sher
Sháh Súr, A.D. 1542-1545.] When Sher Sháh received Mallu's order he
folded it and placed it in the scabbard of his poniard to keep the
indignity fresh in his mind. Alláh willing, he said, we shall ask an
explanation for this in person. [952] In A.D. 1542 (H. 949) as Kádir
Sháh failed to act with Kutb Khán, who had been sent to establish Sher
Sháh's overlordship in Málwa, Sher Sháh advanced from Gwálior towards
Mándu with the object of punishing Kádir Sháh. [953] As he knew he
could not stand against Sher Sháh Kádir Sháh went to Sárangpúr to do
homage. Though on arrival Kádir Sháh was well received, his kingdom
was given to Shujáât Khán, one of Sher Sháh's chief followers, and
himself placed in Shujáât Khán's keeping. [954] Suspicious of what
might be in store for
him Kádir Sháh fled to Gujarát. Sher Sháh was so much annoyed at
Shujáât Khán's remissness in not preventing Kádir Sháh's escape that
he transferred the command at Dhár and Mándu from Shujáât Khán to
Háji Khán and Junaid Khán. Shortly after Kádir Sháh brought a force
from Gujarát and attacked Mándu. Shujáât came to Háji Khán's help and
routed Kádir Sháh under the walls of Mándu. In reward Sher Sháh made
him ruler of the whole country of Mándu. [955] Shujáât Khán established
his head-quarters at Mándu with 10,000 horse and 7000 matchlockmen.

[Salím Sháh Súr, A.D. 1545-1553.] During the reign of Sher Sháh's
successor Salím Sháh (A.D. 1545-1553), Shujáât was forced to leave
Málwa and seek shelter in Dúngarpúr. Selím pardoned Shujáât, but
divided Málwa among other nobles. Shujáât remained in Hindustán
till in A.D. 1553, on the accession of Salím's successor, Ádili,
he recovered Málwa, and in A.D. 1554, on the decay of Ádili's power,
assumed independence. [956] He died almost immediately after, and was
succeeded by his eldest son Malik Báyazíd. [957] Shujáât Khán was a
great builder. Besides his chief works at Shujáwalpúr near Ujjain,
he left many memorials in different parts of Málwa. [958] So far
none of the remains at Mándu are known to have been erected during
the rule of Shujáât Khán.

[Báz Bahádur, A.D. 1555-1570.] On the death of his father Malik
Báyazíd killed his brother Daulat Khán, and was crowned in A.D. 1555
with the title of Báz Bahádur. He attacked the Gonds, but met with so
crushing a defeat that he foreswore fighting. [959] He gave himself to
enjoyment and become famous as a musician, [960] and for his poetic
love of Rúp Mani or Rúp Mati, who according to one account was a
wise and beautiful courtezan of Saháranpur in Northern India, and
according to another was the daughter of a Nímar Rájput, the master
of the town of Dharampuri. [961] In A.D. 1560 Pír Muhammad, a general
of Akbar's, afterwards ennobled as Khán Jehán, defeated Báz Bahádur,
drove him out of Mándu, and made the hill his own head-quarters. [962]
In the following year (A.D. 1561), by the help of the Berár chief,
Pír Muhammad was slain and Báz Bahádur reinstated. On news of this
defeat (A.D. 1562) Akbar sent Abdulláh Khán Uzbak with almost unlimited
power to reconquer the province. Abdulláh was successful, but, as he
showed signs of assuming independence, Akbar moved against him and
he fled to Gujarát. [963] Akbar remained in Mándu during the greater
part of the following rains (A.D. 1563), examining with interest the
buildings erected by the Khilji kings. [964] At Mándu Akbar married
the daughter of Mírán Mubárak Khán of Khándesh. [965] When Akbar left
(August 1564) he appointed Karra Bahádur Khán governor of Mándu and
returned to Ágra. [966] In A.D. 1568 the Mírzás, Akbar's cousins,
flying from Gujarát attacked Ujjain. From Ujjain they retreated to
Mándu and failing to make any impression on the fort withdrew to
Gujarát. [967] The Mirzás' failure was due to the ability of Akbar's
general, Háji Muhammad Khán, to whom Akbar granted the province
of Mándu. [968] At the same time (A.D. 1568) the command of Mándu
hill was entrusted to Sháh Budágh Khán, who continued commandant of
the fort till his death many years later. During his command, in a
picturesque spot overlooking a well-watered ravine in the south of
Mándu, between the Ságar Lake and the Tárápur Gateway, Budágh Khán
built a pleasure-house, which he named, or rather perhaps which he
continued to call Nílkanth or Blue Throat. This lodge is interesting
from the following inscriptions, which show that the emperor Akbar
more than once rested within its walls. [969]

The inscription on the small north arch of Nílkanth, dated A.D. 1574,
runs:

(Call it not waste) to spend your life in water and earth. (i.e. in
building),
If perchance a man of mind for a moment makes your house his
lodging.

Written by Sháh Budágh Khán in the year A.H. 982-87. [970]

The inscription on the great southern arch of Nílkanth, dated
A.D. 1574, runs:

This pleasant building was completed in the reign of the great
Sultán, the most munificent and just Khákán, the Lord of the
countries of Arabia and Persia, [971] the shadow of God on the
two earths, the ruler of the sea and of the land, the exalter
of the standards of those who war on the side of God, Abul
Fatah Jalál-ud-dín Muhammad Akbar, the warrior king, may his
dominion and his kingdom be everlasting.

Written by Farídún Husein, son of Hátim-al-Wardi, in the year
A.H. 982. [972]

The inscription on the right wall of Nílkanth, dated A.D. 1591-92,
runs:

In the year A.H. 1000, when on his way to the conquest of the
Dakhan, the slaves of the Exalted Lord of the Earth, the holder
of the sky-like Throne, the shadow of Alláh (the Emperor Akbar),
passed by this place.

That time wastes your home cease, Soul, to complain, Who will
not scorn a complainer so vain.

From the story of others this wisdom derive, Ere naught of
thyself but stories survive.

The inscription on the left wall of Nílkanth, dated A.D. 1600, runs:

The (Lord of the mighty Presence) shadow of Alláh, the Emperor
Akbar, after the conquest of the Dakhan and Dándes (Khándesh)
in the year A.H. 1009 set out for Hind (Northern India).

May the name of the writer last for ever!

At dawn and at eve I have watched an owl sitting
On the lofty wall-top of Shirwán Sháh's Tomb. [973]
The owl's plaintive hooting convey'd me this warning
"Here pomp, wealth, and greatness lie dumb."

In A.D. 1573, with the rest of Málwa, Akbar handed Mándu to Muzaffar
III. the dethroned ruler of Gujarát. It seems doubtful if Muzaffar ever
visited his new territory. [974] On his second defeat in A.D. 1562 Báz
Bahádur retired to Gondwána, where he remained, his power gradually
waning, till in A.D. 1570 he paid homage to the emperor and received
the command of 2000 horse. [975] His decoration of the Rewa Pool,
of the palace close by, which though built by Násir-ud-dín Khilji
(A.D. 1500-1512) was probably repaired by Báz Bahádur, and of Rúp
Mati's pavilion on the crest of the southern ridge make Báz Bahádur one
of the chief beautifiers of Mándu. According to Farishtah (Pers. Text,
II. 538-39) in 1562, when Báz Bahádur went out to meet Akbar's
general, Adham Khán Atkah, he placed Rúp Mati and his other singers
in Sárangpúr under a party of his men with orders to kill the women
in case of a reverse. On hearing of Báz Bahádur's defeat the soldiers
hastily sabred as many of the women as they could and fled. Among the
women left for dead was Rúp Mati, who, though dangerously wounded,
was not killed. When Adham Atkah entered Sárangpúr his first care was
to enquire what had become of Rúp Mati. On hearing of her condition
he had her wound attended to by the best surgeons, promising her, as
a help to her cure, a speedy union with her beloved. On her recovery
Rúp Mati claimed the general's promise. He prevaricated and pressed
his own suit. Rúp Mati temporised. One night the impatient Turk
sent her a message asking her to come to him. Rúp Mati to gain time
invited him to her own pavilion which she said was specially adorned
to be the abode of love. Next night the Atkah went to her house in
disguise. Her women directed him to Rúp Mati's couch. Adham found
her robed and garlanded, but cold in death. Rúp Mati was buried on an
island in a lake at Ujjain, and there, according to the Áin-i-Akbari,
Báz Bahádur when he died was laid beside her. [976]

SECTION II.--MUGHALS (A.D. 1570-1720) AND MARÁTHÁS
(A.D. 1720-1820).

About A.D. 1590 Akbar's historian, the great Abul Fazl, described
Mándu as a large city whose fortress is twenty-four miles (twelve
kos) in circuit. He notices that besides in the centre of the hill
where stands an eight-storeyed minaret, the city had many monuments of
ancient magnificence, among them the tombs of the Khilji Sultáns. And
that from the dome which is over the sepulchre of Sultán Mehmúd, the
son of Hoshang (this should be the sepulchre of Hoshang built by his
successor Sultán Mehmúd) water drops in the height of summer to the
astonishment of the ignorant. But, he adds, men of understanding know
how to account for the water-drops. [977] Abul Fazl further notices
that on Mándu Hill is found a species of tamarind whose fruit is
as big as the cocoanut, the pulp of which is very white. This is
the African baobab or Adansonia digitata, known in Hindustáni as
goramli or white tamarind, whose great fruit is about the size of
a cocoanut. Its monster baobabs are still a feature of Mándu. Some
among them look old enough to have been yielding fruit 300 years
ago. Finally Abul Fazl refers to Mándu as one of twenty-eight towns
where Akbar's copper coins were struck. [978] About twenty years
later (A.D. 1610) the historian Farishtah [979] thus describes the
hill. The fort of Mándu is a work of solid masonry deemed to be one of
the strongest fortifications in that part of the world. It is built
on an insulated mountain thirty-eight miles in circumference. [980]
The place of a ditch round the fortification is supplied by a natural
ravine so deep that it seems impossible to take the fort by regular
approaches. Within the fort is abundance of water and forage, but
the area is not large enough to grow a sufficient store of grain. The
hill cannot be invested. The easiest access is from the north by the
Dehli Gate. The south road with an entrance by the Tárápúr Gate is
so steep that cavalry can with difficulty be led up. Like Abul Fazl
Farishtah notices that, except during the rains, water constantly
oozes from between the chinks in the masonry of the dome of Sultán
Hoshang's tomb. He says the natives of India attribute this dropping
to universal veneration for Sultán Hoshang, for whose death, they say,
the very stones shed tears.

Except that copper coins continued to be minted and that it was
nominally one of the four capitals of the empire, during the emperor
Akbar's reign Mándu was practically deserted. The only traces of
Akbar's presence on the hill are in two of the five inscriptions
already quoted from the Nílkanth pleasure-house, dated A.D. 1591 and
A.D. 1600.

After about fifty years of almost complete neglect the emperor
Jehángír, during a few months in A.D. 1617, enabled Mándu once more
to justify its title of Shádiábád, the Abode of Joy. Early in March
A.D. 1617, in the eleventh year of his reign, the emperor Jehángír
after spending four months in travelling the 189 miles from Ajmír by
way of Ujjain, arrived at Naâlchah on the main land close to the north
of Mándu. The emperor notices that most of the forty-six marches into
which the 189 miles were divided ended on the bank of some lake stream
or great river in green grass and woody landscape, brightened by poppy
fields. We came, he writes, enjoying the beauty of the country and
shooting, never weary, as if we were moving from one garden to another.

Of the country round Naâlchah Jehángír says: [981] What can be
written worthy of the beauty and the pleasantness of Naâlchah. The
neighbourhood is full of mango trees. The whole country is one
unbroken and restful evergreen. Owing to its beauty I remained
there three days. I granted the place to Kamál Khán, taking it from
Keshava Márú, and I changed its name to Kamálpúr. I had frequent
meetings with some of the wise men of the jogis, many of whom had
assembled here. Naâlchah is one of the best places in Málwa. It
has an extensive growth of vines, and among its mango groves and
vineyards wander streamlets of water. I arrived at a time when,
contrary to the northern climes, the vines were in blossom and fruit,
and so great was the vintage that the meanest boor could eat grapes
to his fill. The poppy was also in flower, and its fields delighted
the eye with their many-coloured beauty.

Of the emperor's entrance into Mándu the Memoirs have the following
note: On Monday the 23rd of Ispandád, the last month of the Persian
year, that is according to Sir Thomas Roe's account on the 6th of
March 1617, when one quarter of the day had passed, I mounted my
elephant, and, in good fortune and under kindly influences, made my
happy entry into the fort of Mándu. About an hour (three ghadis) later
I entered the quarters which had been prepared to receive me. During
my passage across the hill-top I scattered Rs. 1500. Before my arrival
Abdul Karím the engineer had been sent by me to repair the buildings
of the former kings of Mándu. While my fortunate standards were at
Ajmír Abdul Karím repaired such of the old Mándu buildings as were
fit to be repaired and built others anew. On the whole he had provided
quarters for me, the like of which have probably never been built in
any other place. Three lákhs of rupees were spent on these repairs
and buildings. I wish it had been possible to construct buildings like
these in all cities likely to be visited by royalty. This fortress, he
continues, stands on the top of a hill about thirty-six miles (18 kos)
in circumference. They say that before the days of Rája Bikramájit a
king was reigning over these parts whose name was Jaisingh Deva. In
his time a man went to the forest to cut grass. When he brought the
grass back he found that the blade of his sickle had turned yellow. The
grasscutter in his surprise went to Mándan, an ironsmith. Mándan knew
that the sickle was gold. He had heard that in those parts was to be
found the philosopher's stone, whose touch turns iron and copper into
gold. He told the grasscutter to lead him to the place where the sickle
had turned yellow, and there he found the philosopher's stone. The
smith presented this treasure to his king. The king amassed untold
wealth, part of which he spent in building Mándu fortress which he
completed in twelve years. At the request of the smith on most of the
stones in the walls a mark was cut in the form of an anvil. Towards
the close of his life, when king Jaisingh Deva withdrew his heart from
the world, he called many Bráhmans together on the bank of the Narbada
close to Mándu. He gave each Bráhman a share of his wealth. And to the
Bráhman in whom he had the greatest faith he gave the philosopher's
stone. Enraged at the gift of a paltry stone the Bráhman threw it
into the Narbada, and there the philosopher's stone still lies. The
emperor continues: On the 20th of Farwardín, five weeks after my
arrival (11th April 1617) in reward for his services in repairing
the buildings of Mándu, I conferred on my engineer Abdul Karím the
command of 1200 horse, with the title of Maámúr Khán.

Mándu had for the emperor the strong attraction of abundance of
game. Among numerous entries of nílgái or blue-bull shooting the
following occur: On the 4th of the first month of Farwardín (16th)
March the watchmen of the chase brought word that they had marked down
a lion near the Ságar Lake, which is a construction of the ancient
rulers of Mándu. I mounted and proceeded towards the lake. When the
lion broke cover he attacked and wounded ten or twelve of the Ahádís
[982] and other men of my retinue. In the end I brought him down
with three gun shots and saved God's creatures from his evil. On
the 22nd of the same month (April 3rd, 1617) the watchmen brought
news of a tiger. I mounted forthwith and despatched him with three
bullets. On the 7th of Ardí Bihisht (April 18th, 1617) the watchmen
brought word that they had marked down four tigers. At one in the
afternoon I started for the place with Núr Jehán Begam. Núr Jehán
asked my leave to shoot the tigers with her gun. I said "Be it
so." In a trice she killed these four tigers with six bullets. I
had never seen such shooting. To shoot from the back of an elephant
from within a closed howdah and bring down with six bullets four wild
beasts without giving them an opportunity of moving or springing is
wonderful. In acknowledgment of this capital marksmanship I ordered
a thousand ashrafis (Rs. 4500) to be scattered [983] over Núr Jehán
and granted her a pair of ruby wristlets worth a lákh of rupees. [984]

Of the mangoes of Mándu Jehángír says: In these days many mangoes have
come into my fruit stores from the Dakhan, Burhánpur, Gujarát, and
the districts of Málwa. This country is famous for its mangoes. There
are few places the mangoes of which can rival those of this country
in richness of flavour, in sweetness, in freedom from fibre, and in
size. [985]

The rains set in with unusual severity. Rain fell for forty days
continuously. With the rain were severe thunderstorms accompanied by
lightning which injured some of the old buildings. [986] His account
of the beauty of the hill in July, when clear sunshine followed the
forty days of rain, is one of the pleasantest passages in Jehángír's
Memoirs: What words of mine can describe the beauty of the grass
and of the wild flowers! They clothe each hill and dale, each slope
and plain. I know of no place so pleasant in climate and so pretty
in scenery as Mándu in the rainy season. This month of July which is
one of the months of the hot season, the sun being in Leo, one cannot
sleep within the house without a coverlet, and during the day there
is no need for a fan. What I have noticed is but a small part of the
many beauties of Mándu. Two things I have seen here which I had seen
nowhere in India. One of them is the tree of the wild plantain which
grows all over the hill top, the other is the nest of the mamolah or
wagtail. Till now no bird-catcher could tell its nest. It so happened
that in the building where I lodged we found a wagtail's nest with
two young ones.

The following additional entries in the Memoirs belong to Jehángír's
stay at Mándu. Among the presents submitted by Mahábat Khán, who
received the honour of kissing the ground at Mándu, Jehángír describes
a ruby weighing eleven miskáls. [987] He says: This ruby was brought
to Ajmír last year by a Frankish jeweller who wanted two lákhs of
rupees for it. Mahábat Khán bought it at Burhánpur for one lákh of
rupees. [988]

On the 1st of Tír, the fourth month of the Persian year (15th
May 1617), the Hindu chiefs of the neighbourhood came to pay their
respects and present their tribute. The Hindu chief of Jítpúr in the
neighbourhood of Mándu, through his evil fortune, did not come to kiss
the threshold. [989] For this reason I ordered Fidáíkhán to pillage
the Jítpúr country at the head of thirteen officers and four or five
hundred matchlockmen. On the approach of Fidáíkhán the chief fled. He
is now reported to regret his past conduct and to intend to come to
Court and make his submission. On the 9th of Yúr, the sixth month
of the Persian calendar (late July, A.D. 1617), I heard that while
raiding the lands of the chief of Jítpúr, Rúh-ul-láh, the brother of
Fidáíkhán, was slain with a lance in the village where the chief's
wives and children were in hiding. The village was burned, and the
women and daughters of the rebel chief were taken captives. [990]

The beautiful surroundings of the Ságar lake offered to the elegant
taste of Núr Jehán a fitting opportunity for honouring the Shab-i-Barát
or Night of Jubilee with special illuminations. The emperor describes
the result in these words: On the evening of Thursday the 19th of
Amardád, the fifth month of the Persian year (early July, A.D. 1617),
I went with the ladies of the palace to see the buildings and palaces
on the Ságar lake which were built by the old kings of Mándu. The
26th of Amardád (about mid-July) was the Shab-i-Barát holiday. I
ordered a jubilee or assembly of joy to be held on the occasion in
one of the palaces occupied by Núr Jehán Begam in the midst of the
big lake. The nobles and others were invited to attend this party
which was organized by the Begam, and I ordered the cup and other
intoxicants with various fruits and minced meats to be given to all
who wished them. It was a wonderful gathering. As evening set in
the lanterns and lamps gleaming along the banks of the lake made an
illumination such as never had been seen. The countless lights with
which the palaces and buildings were ablaze shining on the lake made
the whole surface of the water appear to be on fire. [991]

The Memoirs continue: On Sunday the 9th of Yúr, the sixth Persian month
(late July), I went with the ladies of the palace to the quarters of
Ásaf Khán, Núr Jehán's brother, the second son of Mirza Ghiás Beg. I
found Ásaf Khán lodged in a glen of great beauty surrounded by other
little vales and dells with waterfalls and running streamlets and green
and shady mango groves. In one of these dells were from two to three
hundred sweet pandanus or kewda trees. I passed a very happy day in
this spot and got up a wine party with some of my lords-in-waiting,
giving them bumpers of wine. [992] Two months later (early September)
Jehángír has the following entry [993] regarding a visit from his
eldest son and heir prince Khurram, afterwards the emperor Shah Jehán,
who had lately brought the war in the Dakhan to a successful close. On
the 8th of the month of Máh (H. 1026: according to Roe September 2nd,
1617), my son of exalted name obtained the good fortune of waiting
upon me in the fort of Mándu after three-quarters and one ghadi of
the day had passed, that is about half an hour after sunrise. He had
been absent fifteen months and eleven days. After he had performed
the ceremonies of kissing the ground and the kurnish or prostration, I
called him up to my bay window or jharokah. In a transport of affection
I could not restrain myself from getting up and taking him into my
arms. The more I increased the measure of affection and honours the
more humility and respect did he show. I called him near me and made
him sit by me. He submitted a thousand ashrafis (= Rs. 4500) and a
thousand rupees as a gift or nazar and the same amount as sacrifice
or nisár. As there was not time for me to inspect all his presents
he produced the elephant Sarnák, the best of the elephants of Ádil
Khán of Bijápur. He also gave me a case full of the rarest precious
stones. I ordered the military paymasters to make presents to his
nobles according to their rank. The first to come was Khán Jehán,
whom I allowed the honour of kissing my feet. For his victory over
the Rána of Chitor I had before granted to my fortunate child Kurram
the rank of a commander of 20,000 with 10,000 horse. Now for his
service in the Dakhan I made him a commander of 30,000 and 20,000
horse with the title of Sháh Jehán. I also ordered that henceforward
he should enjoy the privilege of sitting on a stool near my throne,
an honour which did not exist and is the first of its kind granted
to anyone in my family. I further granted him a special dress. To do
him honour I came down from the window and with my own hand scattered
over his head as sacrifice a trayfull of precious stones as well as
a large trayfull of gold.

Jehángír's last Mándu entry is this: On the night of Friday in the
month of Abán (October 24th, 1617) in all happiness and good fortune
I marched from Mándu and halted on the bank of the lake at Naâlchah.

Jehángír's stay at Mándu is referred to by more than one English
traveller. In March 1617, the Rev. Edward Terry, chaplain to the Right
Honourable Sir T. Roe Lord Ambassador to the Great Mughal, came to
Mándu from Burhánpur in east Khándesh. [994] Terry crossed a broad
river, the Narbada, at a great town called Anchabarpur (Akbarpur)
[995] in the Nímár plain not far south of Mándu hill. The way up,
probably by the Bhairav pass a few miles east of Mándu, seemed to Terry
exceeding long. The ascent was very difficult, taking the carriages,
apparently meaning coaches and wagons, two whole days. [996] Terry
found the hill of Mándu stuck round with fair trees that kept their
distance so, one from and below the other, that there was much delight
in beholding them from either the bottom or the top of the hill. From
one side only was the ascent not very high and steep. The top was flat
plain and spacious with vast and far-stretching woods in which were
lions tigers and other beasts of prey and many wild elephants. Terry
passed through Mándu a few days' march across a plain and level
country, apparently towards Dhár, where he met the Lord Ambassador Sir
Thomas Roe, who had summoned Terry from Surat to be his chaplain. Sir
Thomas Roe was then marching from Ajmír to Mándu with the Court of
the emperor Jehángír, whom Terry calls the Great King.

On the 3rd of March, says Roe, the Mughal was to have entered
Mándu. But all had to wait for the good hour fixed by the
astrologers. From the 6th of March, when he entered Mándu, till
the 24th of October, the emperor Jehángír, with Sir Thomas Roe in
attendance, remained at Mándu. [997] According to Roe before the Mughal
visited Mándu the hill was not much inhabited, having more ruins by
far than standing houses. [998] But the moving city that accompanied
the emperor soon overflowed the hill-top. According to Roe Jehángír's
own encampment was walled round half a mile in circuit in the form of a
fortress, with high screens or curtains of coarse stuff, somewhat like
Aras hangings, red on the outside, the inside divided into compartments
with a variety of figures. This enclosure had a handsome gateway and
the circuit was formed into various coins and bulwarks. The posts that
supported the curtains were all surmounted with brass tops. [999]
Besides the emperor's encampment were the noblemen's quarters, each
at an appointed distance from the king's tents, very handsome, some
having their tents green, others white, others of mixed colours. The
whole composed the most curious and magnificent sight Roe had ever
beheld. [1000] The hour taken by Jehángír in passing from the Dehli
Gate to his own quarters, the two English miles from Roe's lodge
which was not far from the Dehli Gate to Jehángír's palace, and other
reasons noted below make it almost certain that the Mughal's encampment
and the camps of the leading nobles were on the open slopes to the
south of the Sea Lake between Báz Bahádur's palace on the east and
Songad on the west. And that the palace at Mándu from which Jehángír
wrote was the building now known as Báz Bahádur's palace. [1001]
A few months before it reached Mándu the imperial camp had turned
the whole valley of Ajmír into a magnificent city, [1002] and a few
weeks before reaching Mándu at Thoda, about fifty miles south-east of
Ajmír, the camp formed a settlement not less in circuit than twenty
English miles, equalling in size almost any town in Europe. [1003]
In the middle of the encampment were all sorts of shops so regularly
disposed that all persons knew where to go for everything.

The demands of so great a city overtaxed the powers of the deserted
Mándu. The scarcity of water soon became so pressing that the poor
were commanded to leave and all horses and cattle were ordered off the
hill. [1004] Of the scarcity of water the English traveller Corryat,
who was then a guest of Sir Thomas Roe, writes: On the first day one
of my Lord's people, Master Herbert, brother to Sir Edward Herbert,
found a fountain which, if he had not done, he would have had to send
ten course (kos) every day for water to a river called Narbada that
falleth into the Bay of Cambye near Broach. The custom being such
that whatsoever fountain or tank is found by any great man in time of
drought he shall keep it proper to his without interruption. The day
after one of the king's Hadis (Ahádis) finding the same and striving
for it was taken by my Lord's people and bound. [1005] Corryat adds:
During the time of the great drought two Moor nobles daily sent ten
camels to the Narbada and distributed the water to the poor, which
was so dear they sold a little skin for 8 pies (one penny). [1006]

Terry notices that among the piles of buildings that held their
heads above ruin were not a few unfrequented mosques or Muhammadan
churches. Though the people who attended the king were marvellously
straitened for room to put their most excellent horses, none would
use the churches as stables, even though they were forsaken and out of
use. This abstinence seems to have been voluntary, as Roe's servants,
who were sent in advance, took possession of a fair court with walled
enclosure in which was a goodly temple and a tomb. It was the best
in the whole circuit of Mándu, the only drawback being that it was
two miles from the king's house. [1007] The air was wholesome and the
prospect was pleasant, as it was on the edge of the hill. [1008] The
emperor, perhaps referring rather to the south of the hill, which from
the elaborate building and repairs carried out in advance by Abdul
Karím seems to have been called the New City, gives a less deserted
impression of Mándu. He writes (24th March 1617): Many buildings
and relics of the old kings are still standing, for as yet decay
has not fallen upon the city. On the 24th I rode to see the royal
edifices. First I visited the Jámá Masjid built by Sultán Hoshang
Ghori. It is a very lofty building and erected entirely of hewn
stone. Although it has been standing 180 years it looks as if built
to-day. Then I visited the sepulchres of the kings and rulers of the
Khilji dynasty, among which is the sepulchre of the eternally cursed
Násir-ud-dín. [1009] Sher Sháh to show his horror of Násir-ud-dín,
the father-slayer, ordered his people to beat Násir-ud-dín's tomb
with sticks. Jehángir also kicked the grave. Then he ordered the
tomb to be opened and the remains to be taken out and burnt. Finally,
fearing the remains might pollute the eternal light, he ordered the
ashes to be thrown into the Narbada. [1010]

The pleasant outlying position of Roe's lodge proved to be open to
the objection that out of the vast wilderness wild beasts often came,
seldom returning without a sheep, a goat, or a kid. One evening a
great lion leapt over the stone wall that encompassed the yard and
snapped up the Lord Ambassador's little white neat shock, that is
as Roe explains a small Irish mastiff, which ran out barking at the
lion. Out of the ruins of the mosque and tomb Roe built a lodge, [1011]
and here he passed the rains with his "family," including besides his
secretary, chaplain, and cook twenty-three Englishmen and about sixty
native servants, and during part of the time the sturdy half-crazed
traveller Tom Coryate or Corryat. [1012] They had their flock of sheep
and goats, all necessaries belonging to the kitchen and everything else
required for bodily use including bedding and all things pertaining
thereto. [1013] Among the necessaries were tables [1014] and chairs,
since the Ambassador refused to adopt the Mughal practice of sitting
cross-legged on mats "like taylors on their shopboards." Roe's diet
was dressed by an English and an Indian cook and was served on plate
by waiters in red taffata cloaks guarded with green taffata. The
chaplain wore a long black cassock, and the Lord Ambassador wore
English habits made as light and cool as possible. [1015]

On the 12th of March, a few days after they were settled at Mándu,
came the festival of the Persian New Year. Jehángír held a great
reception seated on a throne of gold bespangled with rubies emeralds
and turquoises. The hall was adorned with pictures of the King and
Queen of England, the Princess Elizabeth, Sir Thomas Smith and others,
with beautiful Persian hangings. On one side, on a little stage, was a
couple of women singers. The king commanded that Sir T. Roe should come
up and stand beside him on the steps of the throne where stood on one
side the Persian Ambassador and on the other the old king of Kandahár
with whom Sir T. Roe ranked. The king called the Persian Ambassador
and gave him some stones and a young elephant. The Ambassador knelt and
knocked his head against the steps of the throne to thank him. [1016]
From time to time during Terry's stay at Mándu, the Mughal, with his
stout daring Persian and Tartarian horsemen and some grandees, went
out to take young wild elephants in the great woods that environed
Mándu. The elephants were caught in strong toils prepared for the
purpose and were manned and made fit for service. In these hunts the
king and his men also pursued lions and other wild beasts on horseback,
killing some of them with their bows carbines and lances. [1017]

The first of September was Jehángír's birthday. The king, says Corryat,
[1018] was forty-five years old, of middle height, corpulent, of a
seemly composition of body, and of an olive coloured skin. Roe went
to pay his respects and was conducted apparently to Báz Bahádur's
Gardens to the east of the Rewa Pool. This tangled orchard was then
a beautiful garden with a great square pond or tank set all round
with trees and flowers and in the middle of the garden a pavilion or
pleasure-house under which hung the scales in which the king was to
be weighed. [1019] The scales were of beaten gold set with many small
stones as rubies and turquoises. They were hung by chains of gold,
large and massive, but strengthened by silken ropes. The beam and
tressels from which the scales hung were covered with thin plates of
gold. All round were the nobles of the court seated on rich carpets
waiting for the king. He came laden with diamonds rubies pearls and
other precious vanities, making a great and glorious show. His swords
targets and throne were corresponding in riches and splendour. His head
neck breast and arms above the elbows and at the wrist were decked
with chains of precious stones, and every finger had two or three
rich rings. His legs were as it were fettered with chains of diamonds
and rubies as large as walnuts and amazing pearls. He got into the
scales crouching or sitting on his legs like a woman. To counterpoise
his weight bags said to contain Rs. 9000 in silver were changed
six times. After this he was weighed against bags containing gold
jewels and precious stones. Then against cloth of gold, silk stuffs,
cotton goods, spices, and all commodities. Last of all against meal,
butter, and corn. Except the silver, which was reserved for the poor,
all was said to be distributed to Baniahs (that is Bráhmans). [1020]
After he was weighed Jehángír ascended the throne and had basons of
nuts almonds and spices of all sorts given him. These the king threw
about, and his great men scrambled prostrate on their bellies. Roe
thought it not decent that he should scramble. And the king seeing
that he stood aloof reached him a bason almost full and poured the
contents into his cloak. [1021] Terry adds: The physicians noted the
king's weight and spoke flatteringly of it. Then the Mughal drank to
his nobles in his royal wine and the nobles pledged his health, The
king drank also to the Lord Ambassador, whom he always treated with
special consideration, and presented him with the cup of gold curiously
enamelled and crusted with rubies turkesses and emeralds. [1022]

Of prince Khurram's visit Roe writes: A month later (October
2nd) the proud prince Khurram, afterwards the emperor Sháh Jehán
(A.D. 1626-1657), returned from his glorious success in the Dakhan,
accompanied by all the great men, in wondrous triumph. [1023] A week
later (October 9th), hearing that the emperor was to pass near his
lodging on his way to take the air at the Narbada, in accordance with
the rule that the masters of all houses near which the king passes
must make him a present, Roe took horse to meet the king. He offered
the king an Atlas neatly bound, saying he presented the king with the
whole world. The king was pleased. In return he praised Roe's lodge,
which he had built out of the ruins of the temple and the ancient tomb,
and which was one of the best lodges in the camp. [1024] Jehángír left
Mándu on the 24th October. On the 30th when Roe started the hill was
entirely deserted. [1025]

Terry mentions only two buildings at Mándu. One was the house of the
Mughal, apparently Báz Bahádur's palace, which he describes as large
and stately, built of excellent stone, well squared and put together,
taking up a large compass of ground. He adds: We could never see how it
was contrived within, as the king's wives and women were there. [1026]
The only other building to which Terry refers, he calls "The Grot." Of
the grot, which is almost certainly the pleasure-house Nílkanth, whose
Persian inscriptions have been quoted above, Terry gives the following
details: To the Mughal's house, at a small distance from it, belonged
a very curious grot. In the building of the grot a way was made into
a firm rock which showed itself on the side of the hill canopied over
with part of that rock. It was a place that had much beauty in it by
reason of the curious workmanship bestowed on it and much pleasure
by reason of its coolness. [1027] Besides the fountain this grot has
still one of the charmingly cool and murmuring scallopped rillstones
where, as Terry says, water runs down a broad stone table with many
hollows like to scallop shells, in its passage over the hollows making
so pretty a murmur as helps to tie the senses with the bonds of sleep.

Sháh Jehán seems to have been pleased with Mándu. He returned in
A.D. 1621 and stayed at Mándu till he marched north against his
father in A.D. 1622. [1028] In March A.D. 1623, Sháh Jehán came out
of Mándu with 20,000 horse, many elephants, and powerful artillery,
intending to fight his brother Sháh Parwíz. [1029] After the failure
of this expedition Sháh Jehán retired to Mándu. [1030] At this time
(A.D. 1623) the Italian traveller Dela Valle ranks Mándu with Agra
Láhor and Ahmedábád, as the four capitals, each endowed with an
imperial palace and court. [1031] Five years later the great general
Khán Jehán Lodi besieged Mándu, but apparently without success. [1032]
Khán Jehán Lodi's siege of Mándu is interesting in connection with
a description of Mándu in Herbert's Travels. Herbert, who was in
Gujarát in A.D. 1626, says Mándu is seated at the side of a declining
hill (apparently Herbert refers to the slope from the southern crest
northwards to Ságar Lake and the Grot or Nílkanth) in which both for
ornament and defence is a castle which is strong in being encompassed
with a defensive wall of nearly five miles (probably kos that is ten
miles): the whole, he adds, heretofore had fifteen miles circuit. But
the city later built is of less time yet fresher beauty, whether you
behold the temples (in one of which are entombed four kings), palaces
or fortresses, especially that tower which is elevated 170 steps,
supported by massive pillars and adorned with gates and windows very
observable. It was built by Khán Jehán, who there lies buried. The
confusedness of these details shows that Herbert obtained them
second-hand, probably from Corryat's Master Herbert on Sir T. Roe's
staff. [1033] The new city of fresher beauty is probably a reference
to the buildings raised and repaired by Abdul Karím against Jehángír's
coming, among which the chief seems to have been the palace now known
by the name of Báz Bahádur. The tower of 170 steps is Mehmúd Khilji's
Tower of Victory, erected in A.D. 1443, the Khán Jehán being Mehmúd's
father, the great minister Khán Jehán Aâzam Humáyún.

[The Maráthás, A.D. 1720-1820.] In A.D. 1658 a Rája Shívráj was
commandant of Mándu. [1034] No reference has been traced to any
imperial visit to Mándu during Aurangzíb's reign. But that great
monarch has left an example of his watchful care in the rebuilding
of the Âlamgír or Aurangzíb Gate, which guards the approach to the
stone-crossing of the great northern ravine and bears an inscription
of A.D. 1668, the eleventh year of Âlamgír's reign. In spite of this
additional safeguard thirty years later (A.D. 1696) Mándu was taken and
the standard of Udáji Pavár was planted on the battlement. [1035]
The Maráthás soon withdrew and Málwa again passed under an
imperial governor. In A.D. 1708 the Shía-loving emperor Bahádur Sháh
I. (A.D. 1707-1712) visited Mándu, and there received from Ahmedábád
a copy of the Kurâán written by Imám Âli Taki, son of Imám Músa Raza
(A.D. 810-829), seventh in descent from Âli, the famous son-in-law
of the Prophet, the first of Musalmán mystics. In A.D. 1717 Ásaph Jáh
Nizám-ul-Mulk was appointed governor of Málwa and continued to manage
the province by deputy till A.D. 1721. In A.D. 1722 Rája Girdhar
Bahádur, a Nágar Bráhman, was made governor and remained in charge
till in A.D. 1724 he was attacked and defeated by Chimnáji Pandit
and Udáji Pavár. [1036] Rája Girdhar was succeeded by his relation
Dia Bahádur, whose successful government ended in A.D. 1732, when
through the secret help of the local chiefs Malhárráo Holkar led an
army up the Bhairav pass, a few miles east of Mándu, and at Tirellah,
between Amjera and Dhár, defeated and slew Dia Bahádur. As neither the
next governor Muhammad Khán Bangash nor his successor Rája Jai Singh
of Jaipúr were able to oust the Maráthás, their success was admitted
in A.D. 1734 by the appointment of Peshwa Bájiráo (A.D. 1720-1740)
to be governor of Málwa. On his appointment (A.D. 1734) the Peshwa
chose Anand Ráo Pavár as his deputy. Anand Ráo shortly after settled
at Dhár, and since A.D. 1734 Mándu has continued part of the territory
of the Pavárs of Dhar. [1037] In A.D. 1805 Mándu sheltered the heroic
Mína Bái during the birth-time of her son Rámchundra Ráo Pavár,
whose state was saved from the clutches of Holkar and Sindhia by the
establishment of British overlordship in A.D. 1817. [1038]

[Notices, A.D. 1820-1895.] In A.D. 1820 Sir John Malcolm [1039]
describes the hill-top as a place of religious resort occupied
by some mendicants. The holy places on the hill are the shrine of
Hoshang Ghori, whose guardian spirit still scares barrenness and
other disease fiends [1040] and the Rewa or Narbada Pool, whose
holy water, according to common belief, prevents the dreaded return
of the spirit of the Hindu whose ashes are strewn on its surface,
or, in the refined phrase of the Bráhman, enables the dead to lose
self in the ocean of being. [1041] In A.D. 1820 the Jámá Mosque,
Hoshang's tomb, and the palaces of Báz Bahádur were still fine remains,
though surrounded with jungle and fast crumbling to pieces. [1042]
In A.D. 1827 Colonel Briggs says [1043]: Perhaps no part of India so
abounds with tigers as the neighbourhood of the once famous city of
Mándu. The capital now deserted by man is overgrown by forest and
from being the seat of luxury, elegance, and wealth, it has become
the abode of wild beasts and is resorted to by the few Europeans in
that quarter for the pleasure of destroying them. Instances have been
known of tigers being so bold as to carry off troopers riding in the
ranks of their regiments. Twelve years later (A.D. 1839) Mr. Fergusson
[1044] found the hill a vast uninhabited jungle, the rank vegetation
tearing the buildings of the city to pieces and obscuring them so that
they could hardly be seen. [1045] Between A.D. 1842 and 1852 tigers are
described as prowling among the regal rooms, the half-savage marauding
Bhíl as eating his meal and feeding his cattle in the cloisters of
its sanctuaries and the insidious pípal as levelling to the earth
the magnificent remains. [1046] So favourite a tiger retreat was the
Jaház Palace that it was dangerous to venture into it unarmed. Close
to the very huts of the poor central village, near the Jámá Mosque,
cattle were frequently seized by tigers. In the south tigers came
nightly to drink at the Ságar lake. Huge bonfires had to be burnt
to prevent them attacking the houses. [1047] In A.D. 1883 Captain
Eastwick wrote: At Mándu the traveller will require some armed men,
as tigers are very numerous and dangerous. He will do well not to
have any dogs with him, as the panthers will take them even from under
his bed. [1048] If this was true of Mándu in A.D. 1883--and is not as
seems likely the repetition of an old-world tale--the last ten years
have wrought notable changes. Through the interest His Highness Sir
Anand Ráo Pavár, K.C.S.I., C.I.E., the present Mahárája of Dhár takes
in the old capital of his state, travelling in Mándu is now as safe and
easier than in many, perhaps than in most, outlying districts. A phæton
can drive across the northern ravine-moat through the three gateways
and along the hill-top, at least as far south as the Sea Lake. Large
stretches of the level are cleared and tilled, and herds of cattle
graze free from the dread of wild beasts. The leading buildings have
been saved from their ruinous tree-growth, the underwood has been
cleared, the marauding Bhíl has settled to tillage, the tiger, even
the panther, is nearly as rare as the wild elephant, and finally its
old wholesomeness has returned to the air of the hill-top.

This sketch notices only the main events and the main buildings. Even
about the main buildings much is still doubtful. Many inscriptions,
some in the puzzling interlaced Tughra character, have still to
be read. They may bring to light traces of the Mándu kings and of
the Mughal emperors, whose connection with Mándu, so far as the
buildings are concerned, is still a blank. The ruins are so many
and so widespread that weeks are wanted to ensure their complete
examination. It may be hoped that at no distant date Major Delasseau,
the Political Agent of Dhár, whose opportunities are not more special
than his knowledge, may be able to prepare a complete description of
the hill and of its many ruins and writings.

MARÁTHA HISTORY
OF
GUJARÁT:

A.D. 1760-1819.

BY
J. A. BAINES Esquire, C.S.I.,
LATE OF H.M.'s BOMBAY CIVIL SERVICE.

[Contributed in 1879.]

HISTORY OF GUJARÁT.

MARÁTHA PERIOD.

A.D. 1760-1819.

It will be evident from what has been related in the Musalmán portion
of this history that long before 1760, the Maráthás had a firm foothold
in Gujarát, and were able to dictate to the local chiefs the policy
of the Dakhan Court. Long before 1819 too, Marátha influence was on
the wane before the rising fortunes of the British. Between these two
dates however is comprised the whole or nearly the whole of the period
during which the Maráthás were virtually paramount in Gujarát. From
each of these two dates the political history took a new departure, and
on this account they serve respectively to denote the starting point
and terminus of Marátha supremacy. Most of what took place before 1760
is so interwoven with the interests and intrigues of the Muhammadan
delegates of the court of Dehli that it has been fully described in the
history of the Musalmán Period. It is however necessary, in order to
trace the growth of Marátha power, to briefly set forth in a continuous
narrative the events in which this race was principally concerned,
adding such as transpired independently of Musalmán politics. This
task is rendered easier by the very nature of Marátha policy, which
has left little to be recorded of its action in Gujarát beyond the
deeds and fortunes of its initiators and their adherents.

The connection of the Maráthás with Gujarát can be divided by the
chronicler into the following periods. First, the time of predatory
inroads from 1664 to 1743, before the leaders of these expeditions
had permanently established themselves within the province. Secondly,
what may be termed the mercenary period, when the Maráthás partly by
independent action, but far more by a course of judicious interference
in the quarrels of the Muhammadan officials and by loans of troops,
had acquired considerable territorial advantages. Towards the end
of this period, as has been already seen, their aid was usually
sufficient to ensure the success of the side which had managed to
secure it, and at last the capital itself was claimed and held by
them. Then came the time of domination, from 1760 to 1801, during
which period the Gáikwár influence was occasionally greater than
that of the Peshwa. From 1802, internal dissensions at the courts of
Poona and Baroda weakened the hold the Maráthás had on the province,
and the paramount power had to all intents and purposes passed over
to the British long before the downfall of Bájiráv Peshwa and the
final annexation of his rights and territory in 1819. Shortly after,
when the Gáikwár made over to the British the work of collecting the
tribute from Káthiáváda, Marátha supremacy came to an end.

[Siváji's First Inroad, 1664.] The first Marátha force that made its
appearance in Gujarát was led there early in 1664 by Siváji. This
leader was at the time engaged in a warfare with the Mughals, which,
however desultory, required him to keep up a much larger force than
could be supported out of the revenues of his dominions. He therefore
looked to plunder to supply the deficiency, and Surat, then the richest
town of Western India, was marked down by him as an easy prey. His
mode of attack was cautious. He first sent one Bahirji Náik to spy
out the country and report the chances of a rich booty, whilst he
himself moved a force up to Junnar on pretence of visiting some forts
in that direction recently acquired by one of his subordinates. On
receiving a favourable report from Bahirji, Siváji gave out that
he was going to perform religious ceremonies at Násik, and taking
with him 4000 picked horsemen, he marched suddenly down the Gháts and
through the Dáng jungles, and appeared before Surat. There he found an
insignificant garrison, so he rested outside the city six days whilst
his men plundered at their leisure. On hearing of the tardy approach
of a relieving force sent by the governor of Ahmedábád, Siváji beat a
retreat with all his booty to the stronghold of Ráygad. By the time the
reinforcement reached Surat, the only trace of the invaders was the
emptied coffers of the inhabitants. About the same time, or shortly
after, the fleet which Siváji had equipped at Alibág about two years
before came up to the mouth of the gulf of Cambay and carried off
one or two Mughal ships which were conveying to Makka large numbers
of pilgrims with their rich oblations. [1049]

[Siváji's Second Attack, 1670.] This insult to the Muhammadan
religion was enough to incense the bigoted Aurangzeb, apart from the
additional offences of the sack of Surat and the assumption in 1665
of royal insignia by Siváji. He therefore sent an expedition to the
Dakhan strong enough to keep the Maráthás for some time away from
Gujarát. One of Siváji's officers, however, seems to have attacked a
part of the Surat district in 1666, and to have got off safely with
his spoils. In 1670, Siváji again descended upon that city with about
15,000 men. The only serious resistance he experienced was, as before,
from the English factors. He plundered the town for three days, and
only left on receiving some information about the Mughals' movements
in the Dakhan, which made him fear lest he should be intercepted on
his way back to the country about the Gháts.

[1671.] Siváji left a claim for twelve lákhs of rupees to be paid as
a guarantee against future expeditions. It is possible, however, that
as he does not appear to have taken any immediate steps to recover
this sum, the demand was made only in accordance with Marátha policy,
which looked upon a country once overrun as tributary, and assumed
a right to exercise paramount authority over it by virtue of the
completed act of a successful invasion. In 1671 the Marátha fleet was
ordered to sail up the gulf and plunder Broach, and it is probable
that Siváji intended at the same time to levy tribute from Surat,
but the whole expedition was countermanded before the ships sailed.

The conduct of the military authorities in Gujarát with regard to this
expedition of 1670 was such as to render it highly probable that the
Mughal leaders were in complicity with the Maráthás in order to gain
the favour and support of their leader. Shortly before Siváji's arrival
there had been a large garrison in Surat, apparently kept there by the
governor, who suspected that some attempt on the town would soon be
made. This garrison was withdrawn before Siváji's attack, and almost
immediately after his departure 5000 men were sent back again. The
commanders of the Mughal army in the Dakhan were Jasvant Singh the
Ráhtor chief of Jodhpur and prince Muazzam. Jasvant Singh had been
viceroy of Gujarát from A.D. 1659 to 1662, and in A.D. 1671 shortly
after Siváji's second expedition was re-appointed to that post for
three years. He had, moreover, been accused of taking bribes from
Siváji during the operations in the Dakhan. Prince Muazzam, again,
had every reason for wishing to secure to himself so powerful an ally
as Siváji in the struggle for the imperial crown that took place,
as a rule, at every succession. Aurangzeb, reasoning from his own
experiences as a son, refused to allow a possible heir to his throne
to become powerful at court; and accordingly sent him against Siváji
with an army quite inadequate for such operations. It is therefore
not unreasonable to suppose that if there had not been some previous
understanding between Siváji and the Mughal leaders, the troops that
were known to be within easy reach of Surat would have been found
strong and numerous enough either to have repulsed him altogether or
at least to have prevented the three days' sack of the city.

[Sáler Taken, 1672.] In A.D. 1672 Siváji took some of the small forts
to the south of Surat, such as Párnera and Bagváda, now in the Párdi
sub-division of the Surat district, whilst Moro Trimal got possession
of the large fort of Sáler in Báglán, which guarded one of the most
frequented passes from the Dakhan into Gujarát. The Maráthás were
thus able to command the routes along which their expeditions could
most conveniently be despatched.

[The Narbada Crossed, 1675.] No further incursion was made till 1675,
in which year a Marátha force first crossed the Narbada. On the
resumption of hostilities between Siváji and the Mughals, Hasáji
Mohite, who had been made Senápati, with the title of Hambirráv,
marched up the North Konkan, and divided his army into two forces near
Surat. One portion plundered towards Burhánpur, the other commanded by
himself plundered the Broach district. Ten years later a successful
expedition was made against Broach itself, either preconcerted or
actually led by a younger son of Aurangzeb, who had taken refuge with
the Maráthás. Broach was plundered, and the booty safely carried off
before the local force could get near the invaders. Gujarát was now
left free from inroad for some fourteen years, probably because the
attention of the Marátha leaders was concentrated on their quarrels
in the Dakhan.

[Raids by Dábháde, 1699.] In A.D. 1699 Rám Rája appointed one of
his most trusted officers, Khanderáv Dábháde, to collect in Báglán
the chauth [1050] and sardeshmukhi imposts which had by that time
become regularly instituted. This chief, whose name was afterwards
so intimately connected with Gujarát, not only collected all
that was due to his master from the village officers in Báglán,
but also made an incursion into the Surat districts on his own
account. [1700-1704.] Between 1700 and 1704 Khanderáv attempted
two expeditions, but was foiled by the vigilance of the Mughal
authorities. [1705.] In 1705, however, he made a raid on a large
scale and got safely across the Narbada, where he defeated two
Muhammadan detachments sent against him, and got back to Sáler
with his booty. [1706-1711.] Khanderáv now kept bodies of troops
constantly hovering on the outskirts of Gujarát and along the road
to Burhánpur. He himself led several expeditions into the Ahmedábád
territory, and is said to have once got as far as Sorath in the
peninsula, where however he was repelled by the Musalmán governor. In
1711, again he was severely defeated by the Mughals near Anklesvar
in the Broach district, and had to withdraw to the borders of Khándesh.

[1713.] In 1713 some treasure was being conveyed from Surat to
Aurangábád escorted by a large force under Muhammad Tabrízí. The
party was attacked in the jungles east of Surat and the treasure
carried off. Just before this, Sarbuland Khán, the deputy viceroy,
on his way to take up his office at Ahmedábád, was attacked and robbed
in the wilds of Ságbára on the north bank of the Tápti. As Khanderáv
had a short while previous to these occurrences taken up his position
near Nándod [1051] in the Rájpipla territory, it is probably to him
or to his subordinates that these raids are to be attributed. He
managed by a system of outposts to cut off communication between
Surat and Burhánpur, except for those who had paid him a fee for
safe conduct. If this charge was evaded or resisted, he appropriated
one-fourth of the property that the traveller was conveying up country.

[Dábháde, 1716.] As the Burhánpur road was one of those most frequented
by both pilgrims and merchants, the Dehli authorities were obliged,
in 1716, to organize an expedition against Dábháde. The leader of
the force was one Zulfikar Beg, an officer inexperienced in Marátha
warfare. Dábháde found little difficulty in decoying him into a
mountainous country, and there completely defeated him with the usual
Marátha accompaniment of plunder.

[Dábháde Senápati.] Finding himself once more in the Dakhan, Khanderáv
Dábháde took the opportunity of rejoining the court at Sátára, from
which he had long been absent. He was lucky enough to arrive just as
the Senápati Manáji Morár had failed on an important expedition and
was consequently in disgrace. Rája Sháhu, pleased with Khanderáv's
recent success against the Delhi troops, divested Manáji of the title
of Senápati, and bestowed it upon the more fortunate leader.

[The Peshwa's Negotiations, 1717.] Khanderáv remained away from
Gujarát for three years, accompanying, meanwhile, Báláji Vishvanáth
the Peshwa to Dehli, where the latter was engaged in negotiations for
the confirmation of the Marátha rights to chauth and other tribute
from certain districts in the Dakhan.

It is evident that at this time there was no definite claim to tribute
from Gujarát on the part of the Marátha government; for in spite of
the intrigues of Báláji and the weakness of the court party at Delhi
no concessions were obtained with regard to it, although the Marátha
dues from other parts of the country were fully ratified. The grounds
on which Báláji demanded the tribute from Gujarát were that Sháhu would
thereby gain the right to restrain the excesses of Marátha freebooters
from the frontier and would guarantee the whole country against
irregular pillage. The argument was a curious one, considering that
the most troublesome and notorious freebooter of the whole tribe was at
the elbow of the envoy, who was so strenuously pleading for the right
to suppress him. It is probable that Báláji foresaw that Khanderáv's
newly acquired rank would take him for a time from Báglán to the court,
so that meanwhile an arrangement could be made to prevent the growth
of any powerful chief in the Gujarát direction who might interfere
with the plans of the central government. The Marátha statesman was
as anxious to ensure the subordination of distant feudatories as the
Mughals to secure the freedom of the Ghát roads to the coast.

In the redistribution of authority carried out about this time by
Báláji Vishvanáth, the responsibility of collecting the Marátha dues
[1052] from Gujarát and Báglán was assigned to Khanderáv as Senápati
or commander-in-chief; but as these dues were not yet settled, at
least as regards the country below the Gháts, Khanderáv seems to have
remained with the Peshwa in the field.

[Dámáji Gáikwár, 1720.] At the battle of Bálápur, fought against
the Nizám-ul-Mulk, one of the officers of Khanderáv, by name Dámáji
Gáikwár, so distinguished himself that the Senápati brought his conduct
prominently to the notice of Rája Sháhu. The latter promoted Dámáji to
be second in command to Khanderáv with the title of Shamsher Bahádur,
which had been formerly borne by one of the Atole family in 1692. This
is the first mention of the present ruling family of Baroda. Before
many months both Khanderáv and Dámáji died. The former was succeeded by
his son Trimbakráv, on whom his father's title was conferred. Piláji,
nephew of Dámáji, was confirmed in his uncle's honours and retired
to Gujarát. As soon as he could collect a sufficiently strong force,
he attacked the Surat district and defeated the Musalmán commander
close to the city itself. After extorting from him a handsome sum
as ransom, Piláji returned eastwards. He selected Songad, [1053] a
fort about fifty miles east of Surat, as his headquarters, and from
thence made continual excursions against the neighbouring towns. He
once attacked Surat, but although he defeated the Mughal leader,
he seems to have contented himself with contributions levied from
the adjacent country, and not to have entered the town. Piláji soon
obtained possession of some strongholds in the [1723.] Rájpipla country
between Nándod and Ságbára, which he fortified, as Khanderáv Dábháde
had formerly done. Here he resided as representative of the Senápati,
whose family had removed for a while to the Dakhan. The tribute
collected from Báglán and Gujarát was supposed to be transmitted
by Piláji to the royal treasury through the Peshwa; but there is no
record of these dues having been levied with any regularity or even
fixed at any special amount. Whilst Trimbakráv was taking an active
part in the affairs of his royal patron in the Dakhan, Piláji occupied
himself in sedulously cultivating the goodwill of the border tribes
surrounding his residence in Gujarát.

[Marátha Tribute, 1723.] The year 1723 is noteworthy as being the date
of the first imposition of the regular Marátha demand of one-fourth,
chauth, and one-tenth, sardeshmukhi, of the revenue of Gujarát. Whilst
Piláji was directing his attacks against Surat and the south of the
province another of Rája Sháhu's officers, who had been sent up towards
Málwa, entered Gujarát by the north-east, and after ravaging the
country round Dohad, [1054] settled a fixed tribute on the district.

[Kantáji Kadam.] This officer, Kantáji Kadam Bánde, was soon after
engaged by one of the parties struggling for the viceroyalty of
Ahmedábád to bring his cavalry into the province and take part in the
civil war. The leader of the opposite party, Rustam Ali, enlisted
the services of Piláji Gáikwár. The Nizám-ul-Mulk, whose influence
in the Dakhan was very great, managed to detach Piláji from Rustam
Ali's side. This was the easier, as Rustam had already defeated
Piláji more than once in attacks by the latter against Surat, of
which district Rustam was governor. There are two different accounts
[1055] of what took place when the rival forces came into action, but
both show clearly that the Marátha leaders acted on both sides with
utter disregard of their agreements and looked only to plundering the
Muhammadan camps whilst the soldiers were engaged in battle. After the
defeat of Rustam, the two Marátha chiefs joined forces and proceeded
to levy chauth, of which the Mughal deputy had granted Piláji a share
equal to that of his first ally Kantáji.

[Marátha Dissensions, 1725.] This division led to quarrels and at
last to an open rupture between the two Marátha leaders, which was
only patched up by the grant of the chauth north of the Mahi river
to Kantáji and of that to the south to Piláji. The chief ground of
quarrel seems to have been the relative position of the Gáikwár as
agent for the Senápati, who had a right to collect all dues from
Gujarát, and of Kantáji, who claimed superior rank as holding his
commission direct from Rája Sháhu. On hearing of this dispute and
the consequent partition of the Marátha tribute, Trimbakráv Dábháde
himself hastened up to Cambay with an army, but effected nothing, and
seems to have retired, leaving Piláji to look after his interests at
Ahmedábád. Both the latter, however, and Kantáji soon after withdrew
from Gujarát, but were within a short period encouraged to return by
the success of a raid made by another leader, Antáji Bháskar, on the
north-east district. They both joined Hamid Khán in his resistance
to the new viceroy, but received several checks from the Muhammadan
army, and after plundering again returned to their strongholds for
the rainy season.

[The Peshwa, 1726.] Next year they returned for the tribute and
plundered as usual. The Peshwa Bájiráv then opened for the first time
direct negotiations with the viceroy of Gujarát. The rapid increase
of the authority of the Bráhman ministers at the Rája's court in the
Dakhan had aroused the jealousy of the Marátha nobles, amongst whom
Trimbakráv Dábháde was one of the most influential. Bájiráv, being
fully aware of the fact, and having by this time acquired from the Rája
the power of acting with foreign powers independently of the throne,
determined to undermine Trimbakráv's authority in Gujarát by aiming at
the rights said to have been formally granted to him by Hamid Khán over
the country south of the Mahi. He therefore applied to the viceroy for
a confirmation of the right to levy chauth and sardeshmukhi over the
whole country, on condition that he would protect it from the inroads
of Kantáji, Piláji, and other irresponsible freebooters. The viceroy
had still some resources left at his disposal and was in hopes that
his repeated applications to Dehli for assistance would soon meet
with a favourable answer. [Cession of Tribute, 1728.] He declined
therefore to accede to Bájiráv's proposals at once, on the grounds
that the court at Dehli had repudiated the concessions made to Piláji
and Kantáji by his predecessor's deputy. As however the depredations on
the frontier caused serious injury both to the revenues and the people,
he allowed the Peshwa to send a feudatory, Udáji Pavár, chief of Dhár,
through the Mughal territories to operate against Piláji. The latter,
who was fully aware of these negotiations, persuaded Kantáji to join
him in expelling the agents of the Peshwa party, as it was clear that
if Piláji's forces were scattered the way would be open for Udáji to
attack Kantáji himself. The two then proceeded to Baroda and after a
while drove back Udáji, and occupied Baroda and Dabhoi. Here Piláji
remained, and next year Kantáji succeeded in taking Chámpáner, thus
advancing his posts nearer the centre of the province. With such
an advantage gained these two chiefs instituted raids still more
frequently than before. In these straits, and finding himself utterly
neglected by the emperor, the viceroy re-opened negotiations with the
Peshwa, who lost no time in sending his brother Chimnáji Áppa with an
army through Gujarát. Petlád and Dholka were plundered, but Kantáji was
left undisturbed, so he took this opportunity of marching to Sorath,
where he remained for some time extorting tribute. The viceroy agreed
formally to cede the sardeshmukhi of the whole revenue, land and
customs (with the exception of the port of Surat and the districts
attached to it) and the chauth of the same district, with five per
cent on the revenue from the city of Ahmedábád. Special clauses were
inserted in the grant of chauth to suit the convenience of both the
Peshwa and the viceroy. The latter stipulated that as few collectors
as possible should be kept by the Maráthás in the districts under
tribute, and that no extra demands beyond the one-fourth should be
made. He also insisted that the percentage should be calculated on
the actual collections and not on the kamál or highest sum recorded
as having been collected. [1056] The Maráthás were also to support
the imperial authority and to keep up a body of horse. The Peshwa
agreed (probably at his own request) to prevent all Marátha subjects
from joining disaffected chiefs, or other turbulent characters, thus
receiving the right to suppress Kantáji and Piláji, as well as the
Bhils and Kolis with whom the latter was on such friendly terms.

After this agreement was executed, Bájiráv made over part of the
sardeshmukhi to the Dábháde, as well as the mokâsa or three-fourths
of the svaráj as settled by Báláji Vishvanáth. The consideration as
set forth in the preamble of this agreement was the great improvement
effected by the Marátha rulers as regards the wealth and tranquillity
of the Dakhan provinces. This was inserted either to give the
transaction the appearance of having been executed on the part of
the emperor (for otherwise the viceroy had no concern in the state
of the Dakhan), or simply as an expression of gratitude on the part
of this special viceroy towards the Maráthás who had just brought
to terms the Nizám-ul-Mulk, his former rival and enemy. It is even
probable that it was merely intended, as usual with such preambles,
to veil the forced nature of the treaty.

The hostile movements of the Pratinidhi in the Southern Marátha Country
induced the Peshwa to return to the Dakhan. Kantáji returned from
Sorath to Chámpáner, plundering part of the viceroy's camp on his
way. Trimbakráv Dábháde, jealous of the interference of the Peshwa
in the affairs of Gujarát, began to intrigue with other chiefs to
overturn the power of the Bráhman ministers.

[Coalition against the Peshwa, 1730.] As soon as Nizám-ul-Mulk became
aware of this discontent on the part of Trimbakráv, of whose power
he was well informed, he proposed to assist him by an attack on
the Peshwa from the east, whilst the Maráthás operated in another
direction. Trimbakráv was successful in his overtures with Piláji
Gáikwár, the Bánde, the Pavárs, and a few other chiefs resident in
Khándesh or the north Dakhan. The troops sent by them to join his
standard soon amounted to 35,000 men, who were collected in Gujarát. He
then gave out that he was bent on rescuing the Marátha Rája from
the thraldom in which he was being kept by the Bráhmans. The Peshwa,
who had discovered the intercourse between Trimbakráv and the Nizám,
proclaimed this treason on the part of the Dábháde as a royal officer,
and stated that the malcontents were only planning the partition of the
inheritance of Shiváji between the Rája of Kolhápur and themselves. As
soon as he found the Nizám's troops were on the march, he collected
his picked men and advanced on the Dábháde in Gujarát.

[Defeat of the Allies, 1731.] The Peshwa's army was inferior in numbers
but consisted of better trained men. He closed at once with the allies
near Dabhoi, and easily defeated the undisciplined forces of the Pavárs
and Bánde. The Dábháde's army, however, had more experience of regular
warfare and made a stand. But a stray shot killed Trimbakráv as he
was endeavouring to rally the forces of his allies, and as usual in
such engagements, the loss of the leader disheartened the army. Utter
confusion ensued, in which many of the nobles fell, others ran away,
and the Peshwa, without the necessity of pushing further his advantage,
made good his retreat to the Dakhan. The Nizám, who was in pursuit,
only managed to capture some of the baggage with the rear guard as
it was crossing the Tápti near Surat. [1057]

Safe again in the Dakhan, the Peshwa at once began negotiations with
both the Nizám and the adherents of Trimbakráv Dábháde. He recognized
the rights of the former to some possessions in Gujarát independent
of the viceroy of Ahmedábád, and agreed to further his designs of
severing the Dakhan from the possessions of the emperor. He conciliated
the Dábháde family by establishing at Poona an annual distribution of
food and presents to Bráhmans such as had formerly been the practice
in the native village of Khanderáv. [1058] This institution was known
as Dakshiná.

Bájiráv acquiesced also in the general tendency amongst Maráthás of all
offices to become hereditary, and conferred the title of Senápati on
Yeshvantráv the minor son of the deceased Trimbakráv. The widow Umábái
became guardian, and Piláji Gáikwár deputy or mutálik in Gujarát. This
latter appointment seems to have been made by the Peshwa and not
by the Dábháde, for Piláji received at the same time a new title,
namely that of Sená Khás Khel or commander of the special band or
perhaps the household brigade. He was also bound on behalf of the
Senápati to respect the Peshwa's rights in Málwa and Gujarát, and to
pay half the collections from the territory he administered to the
royal treasury through the minister. A provision was also inserted
with regard to future acquisitions. This reciprocal agreement was
executed at the special command of the Marátha Rája Sháhu, who had
not yet quite abrogated his authority in favour of the Peshwa. Piláji
after these negotiations retired to Gujarát.

[Assassination of Piláji Gáikwár, 1732.] His influence amongst the
Bhils and other troublesome races dwelling in the wild parts of the
eastern frontier made Piláji an object of hatred and fear to the Mughal
viceroy, who had him assassinated by one of his adherents whilst the
latter was pretending to whisper some important and confidential
news in Piláji's ear. This event took place at Dákor in the Kaira
district. The followers of the Gáikwár slew the assassin and retired
south of the Mahi. They were driven by the Mughals out of Baroda, but
continued to hold Dabhoi. Dámáji Gáikwár, son of Piláji, was at this
time prowling round Surat watching for an opportunity of interfering
in the disturbed affairs of that town. One of the candidates for the
governorship had offered him one-fourth the revenue of the city for
his assistance, but the expedition was deferred on account of the
appointment of a rival by the emperor. Dámáji therefore was preparing
to act on his own account independently of his ally. The news of his
father's assassination, however, took him northwards. He found that
the Desái of Pádra near Baroda had stirred up the Bhils and Kolis to
revolt, in order to give the relations of Piláji a chance of striking
a blow at the murderers of their deceased leader. [1733.] Umábái
Dábháde, too, bent on the same errand, moved down the Gháts with an
army. The Maráthás were bought off, however, by the viceroy and peace
was restored for a while.

[Gáikwárs Secure Baroda, 1734.] In this year also Jádoji, a younger son
of Trimbakráv, made an expedition to collect tribute through Gujarát
as far as Sorath. Next year Mádhavráv Gáikwár, brother of Piláji,
obtained possession of Baroda during the absence of Sher Khán Bábi
the governor. Since that date this town has been the capital of the
Gáikwár family. Sindia and Holkar soon afterwards joined the chief
of Ídar against the Musalmán deputy, and extorted from the latter a
considerable sum as ransom.

[The Marátha Deputy Governor, 1736.] Umábái had recognized Dámáji
as her agent in succession to Piláji; but as she required Dámáji in
the Dakhan the latter had been obliged to leave in his turn a locum
tenens in Gujarát. There ensued quarrels between this deputy, named
Rangoji, and Kántáji Kadam which brought Dámáji back again, and after
obtaining from the Muhammadan viceroy, who had espoused the cause of
Kantáji, a grant of one-fourth the revenues of the country north of
the Mahi he went as usual to Sorath. Kantáji Kadam, who as a partisan
of the Peshwa was hostile to the Senápati, harassed the country within
reach of his frontier. Dámáji, meanwhile, had again proceeded to the
Dakhan, where Umábái was intriguing against the Peshwa and required
all the help she could obtain to further the ambitious schemes she
was devising in the name of her half-witted son. His deputy Rangoji,
by demanding a heavy price for his aid at a time when an aspirant to
the viceroyalty of Ahmedábád was in distress, managed to secure for
the Maráthás half the revenue of Gujarát with certain exceptions.

[Ahmedábád Riots, 1738.] Dámáji then moved into Gujarát again, and
on his way to join Rangoji extorted Rs. 7000 from the English at
Surat as a guarantee against plundering them. The events of this
year have been detailed in full in the history of the Musalmán
Period. After getting possession of a great part of the city of
Ahmedábád the [1739.] Maráthás, by their oppressive rule, excited
a rising amongst the Musalmán inhabitants. Similar quarrels and
subsequent reconciliations took place between 1739 and 1741, the
Musalmáns distrusting the Maráthás, yet not daring to attempt to oust
them. Dámáji, on his way back from one of his Sorath expeditions,
laid [1741.] siege to Broach, which was held by a Muhammadan officer
direct from the viceroy of the Dakhan. [1059] As the latter personage
was still regarded by the Marátha chiefs as a possible ally against
the Peshwa, Dámáji at once obeyed the request of the Nizám to raise
the siege, but probably obtained a promise of future concessions such
as he had acquired at Surat.

[1742.] Rangoji in the absence of Dámáji took up his residence in
Borsad. There he fell into several disputes with the Muhammadan
officials, in the course of one of which he was taken prisoner, but
escaped the next year (1743). Meanwhile Dámáji had joined with Rághoji
Bhonslé in attacking the Peshwa. Whilst Rághoji was preparing his army
in the east, Dámáji made a feint against Málwa, which had the desired
effect of withdrawing a large portion of the ministerial army. The
Gáikwár's troops retreated without giving battle, but to prevent any
future junction between Dámáji and the Bhonslé party in Berár, Báláji
Peshwa confirmed the Pavár family in their claims to Dhár, which had
never been acknowledged as their territory since the defection of
the Pavárs to the Dábháde party in 1731. It is worth remarking that
though the rank of Senápati had apparently been made hereditary in
the Dábháde family (for the owner of the title was quite unfit for
the command of an army), the Ghorpadé family applied at this time
to have it restored to them on the ground that it once had been held
by one of their house. The Peshwa, however, managed to secure their
alliance by a grant of land, and their claims to the chief command
of the army seem to have been waived.

[1743-44.] For the next two years the Marátha force in Gujarát under
Rangoji and Deváji Tákpar was employed by the Musalmáns in their
quarrels regarding the viceroyalty. The Marátha practice of appointing
deputies gives rise to some confusion as to the negotiations that
took place about this time between the Gáikwár's party and the rival
candidates for the office of subhedár. For instance, Umábái Dábháde had
appointed the Gáikwár family as her agents-in-chief, but the principal
members of that house were absent in the Dakhan. Dámáji Gáikwár had
appointed Rangoji, who in his turn left one Krishnáji in charge of the
Marátha share of the city of Ahmedábád. On the departure, however,
of Dámáji from Gujarát, Umábái left Rámáji as her agent. Rámáji,
who seems to have been employed previously by Dámáji, followed the
example of his predecessors and placed one Rámchandra in charge at
Ahmedábád. There does not appear to have been any direct agent of
the Peshwa in Gujarát at this time.

[1745.] On Khanderáv Gáikwár's return from the Dakhan he demanded the
accounts of the tribute from Rangoji, and not being satisfied with
this agent confined him in Borsad and appointed one Trimbakráv in his
place. Umábái caused Rangoji to be set at liberty and sent to her in
the Dakhan, after which she reappointed him her agent. He expelled
Trimbakráv from Ahmedábád, but was attacked by Krishnáji and Gangádhar,
two other late deputies. Dámáji and Khanderáv were obliged at last to
come to Gujarát and summon all these deputies to their presence. A
private arrangement was concluded under which Khanderáv was allowed
by Dámáji to keep Nadiád and Borsad as a private estate and to act as
the Gáikwár's deputy at Baroda. Rangoji was to live at Umreth when not
on active service. Gangádhar and Krishnáji were censured and forbidden
to engage in any independent alliances with the Muhammadan leaders.

[1746.] After this Dámáji sent a general named Kánoji Tákpar to
collect the Sorath tribute whilst he himself retired to Songad.

Rangoji returned to Ahmedábád, and not long after began to quarrel
with the viceroy about the Marátha share in the revenue of the city
ceded in 1728.

[The Gáikwár in Surat, 1747.] In A.D. 1747 Kedárji Gáikwár, cousin of
Dámáji, was asked by Syed Achchan, an aspirant to the governorship of
Surat, to assist him in maintaining possession of that city. Before
Kedárji could reach Surat the disputes as to the succession had been
settled by negotiations, and the aid of Marátha troops was no longer
required. Kedárji, however, finding himself in a position to dictate
terms, demanded three lákhs of rupees for the aid that he was prepared
to give, and as the Surat treasury could not afford to pay this sum in
cash, one-third of the revenues of Surat was promised to the Gáikwár.

[1748.] Rangoji meanwhile attacked Haribá, an adopted son of Khanderáv
Gáikwár, and recovered from him the town and fort of Borsad, which
had been seized during the time that Rangoji had been occupied
with his disputes in Ahmedábád. Khanderáv and Dámáji both turned
against him and captured the fort after a long siege. Rangoji was
then again imprisoned, and not released until the next year when
the Peshwa sent a body of troops into Gujarát. In 1748 Umábái,
widow of Trimbakráv Dábháde, died, leaving one Báburáv guardian of
Yeshvántráv her son. Partly through the solicitations of Khanderáv,
who had private influence with the Dábhádes, partly from the fact of
previous possession, Dámáji was confirmed as deputy of the Maráthás
in Gujarát. He there began to collect an army as quickly as possible,
in order to co-operate with Raghunáth Bhonslé against the Peshwa,
in answer to an appeal by Sakvárbái, widow of Sháhu, to support the
throne against the ministers, and to secure the succession of Sambháji
to the Sátára kingdom. The Peshwa, aware of Dámáji's ill-will towards
himself, did his best to foment disturbances in Gujarát and to extend
his own influence there so as to keep Dámáji away from the Dakhan.

[1750.] The Peshwa accordingly entered into some negotiations with
Jawán Mard Khán, then in power at Ahmedábád, but was unable to lend
substantial aid in Gujarát against Dámáji's agents, as the whole
Marátha power was required in the Dakhan to operate against the son
of the late Nizám-ul-Mulk.

[Dámáji Gáikwár Arrested, 1751.] Next year Dámáji, at the request
of Tárábái, guardian of Rám Rája, ascended the Salpi ghát with a
strong force, defeated the Peshwa's army, and advanced as far as
Sátára. From this position he was forced to retire, and whilst in
treaty with the Peshwa was treacherously seized by the latter and
put into prison. Báláji at once demanded arrears of tribute, but
Dámáji declined to agree to any payment, on the ground that he was no
independent chief but only the agent of the Senápati. He therefore
refused to bind his principal or himself on account of what was due
from his principal. Báláji then imprisoned all the members of the
Gáikwár and Dábháde family that were at that time in the Dakhan.

[The Peshwa and Surat.] The state of Surat was at this time such as
to afford a good opportunity to the Peshwa to obtain a footing there
independently of the English or of Dámáji. He had recently had dealings
with the former in the expeditions against Ángria of Kolába, and as
the merchants had found him one of the most stable and powerful rulers
of the country, they were willing to treat with him for the future
security of their buildings and goods in Surat. Taking advantage of
Dámáji's confinement, Báláji sent Raghunáthráv to Gujarát. This leader,
afterwards so well known as Rághoba, took possession of a few tálukas
in the north-east of the province, but was recalled to the Dakhan
before he could approach Surat. Jawán Mard Khán also took advantage
of Dámáji's absence to make an expedition into Sorath and Káthiáváda
where the Gáikwár family had now established themselves permanently.

[Release of Dámáji, 1752.] The news of these two expeditions made
Dámáji very eager to return to his province; and as he had full
information as to Báláji's plans with regard to Gujarát, he bribed
freely, and in order to regain his liberty consented to much harsher
terms than he would otherwise have done. He agreed to maintain an army
for defence and collection purposes in Gujarát, as well as to furnish
a contingent to the Peshwa's army in the Dakhan, and to contribute
towards the support of the Rája, now in reality a state-prisoner
dependent upon the wishes of his minister. The Gáikwár was also
to furnish the tribute due on account of the Dábháde family, whom
the Peshwa was apparently trying to oust from the administration
altogether. After deducting the necessary expenses of collection
and defence, half the surplus revenue was to be handed over to the
Peshwa. Even after acceding to all these proposals, the Gáikwár was not
at once released. The Peshwa protracted the negotiations, as he had to
contend against a factious court party in whose counsels he knew Dámáji
would play a leading part when once set at liberty. At last, however,
after agreeing to a final request that he would assist Raghunáthráv
against Surat, Dámáji was allowed to go. There was at this time one
Pándurang Pant levying tribute on behalf of the Peshwa in Cambay
and Ahmedábád. The Nawáb of Cambay, not having any reason to like or
trust his neighbour the Gáikwár, had persuaded the Peshwa at the time
the partition of the Marátha rights over Gujarát was being settled at
Poona, to take Cambay into his share of the province. The Nawáb bought
off the agent of his ally with a present of guns and cash. The ruler
of Ahmedábád also came to terms with the Maráthás, so Pándurang was
at liberty to go and see if he could find equal good fortune in Sorath.

[Capture of Ahmedábád, 1753.] Dámáji now came back with a fresh army,
which was soon reinforced by Raghunáthráv. They marched towards
Ahmedábád, and Jawán Mard Khán was too late to intercept them before
they invested the capital. He managed, however, by a bold movement
to enter the town, but after a long siege was obliged to capitulate
and march out with the honours of war. The Maráthás conferred on him
an estate in the north-west of Gujarát, which, however, was recovered
by them some time afterwards.

After taking possession of Ahmedábád in April 1753, Raghunáthráv went
to Sorath, and on his return extorted a large sum as tribute from the
Nawáb of Cambay. He left a deputy in Ahmedábád, [1754.] who marched
against the same chief again in 1754, but on this occasion he could
levy no tribute. As the Nawáb had firmly established himself and
considerably enlarged his dominions, the Peshwa's deputy marched
against him in person a second time, but was defeated and taken
prisoner. The nominee of Raghunáthráv procured his release, and the
Peshwa's deputy continued to demand [1755.] arrears of tribute for his
master till he obtained an agreement to pay at a future date. He then
retired to the Dakhan, and the Nawáb, taking advantage of the lull to
strengthen his army, captured Ahmedábád from the Marátha garrison and
established himself in the city. After a while Dámáji and Khanderáv
Gáikwár, with an agent sent direct by the Peshwa, arrived before the
town and commenced a siege. [1757.] It was not until April 1757 that
the Maráthás again entered the city. The Nawáb surrendered after the
Maráthás had fully ratified the conditions he himself had proposed.

[1758.] Sayájiráv, son of Dámáji, remained in Ahmedábád on behalf of
his father, and the Peshwa's agent Sadáshiv put in a deputy in his
turn and went himself to Surat. Here he was soon joined by Sayáji,
who had to arrange the shares of the tribute in accordance with the
partition treaty of 1751. Next year a body of Marátha troops was
sent to the aid of the Ráv of Kachh, who was engaged in an expedition
against Thatta in Sindh. Sadáshiv lent the Nawáb of Cambay some money
on the part of the Peshwa to enable him to liquidate the arrears of
pay due to his army, but a year afterwards the Marátha army appeared
at the town gates with a demand for two years' arrears of tribute in
full, amounting to Rs. 20,000. The Nawáb managed to raise this sum,
and the Maráthás moved south. Dámáji was at this time in Poona.

[1759.] The Peshwa had supported Syed Achchan of Surat with the view of
putting him under an obligation so as to secure some future advantages,
and this year lent him some troops as a bodyguard. The Nawáb of Cambay,
who was also indebted to the ministerial party, left his dominions
to pay a visit to the Peshwa at Poona. Khanderáv meanwhile plundered
Lunáváda and Ídar, whilst Sayájiráv was similarly engaged in Soráth.

[1761.] Dámáji Gáikwár accompanied the Peshwa to Delhi, and was one of
the few Marátha leaders that escaped after the defeat at Pánipat. On
his return to Gujarát he successfully opposed an expedition by the
Nawáb of Cambay against Bálásinor and re-took the estates of Jawán
Mard Khán. He also strengthened his position in Sorath and Káthiáváda
against the Peshwa's party.

[1761.] The Peshwa, being hard pressed by his rival the Nizám, began
in this year to make overtures to the East India Company's officers
in Bombay, with a view to getting the aid of European artillery
and gunners. He at first offered to give up a valuable tract of
land in Jambusar. But the English would accept no territory but the
island of Sálsette, the town of Bassein, and the small islands in the
harbour of Bombay. These the Marátha government declined to give up,
so negotiations were broken off.

[1762.] Next year Raghunáthráv, as guardian of the son of Báláji, named
Mádhavráv, who was still a minor, conferred the title of Senápati on
one of the Jádhav family who had formerly borne it. The administration
of Gujarát, however, which had always accompanied the title when held
by the Dábháde family, was left practically in the hands of Dámáji,
and no mention of any transfer of it was made at the time Jádhav was
appointed commander-in-chief. Discontented with the empty honour thus
conferred, Rámchandra, the new Senápati, joined the Nizám's party,
and on account of this defection the Peshwa, two years afterwards,
cancelled the appointment and restored the office to the Ghorpade
family, one of whose members had held it long before. This put an
end to the connection of Gujarát with the chief military dignity of
the Marátha state.

[Intrigues of Rághoba, 1768.] After Mádhavráv Báláji came of age he
had constantly to be on this guard against the plots of his uncle
Raghunáthráv, who had refused to accept the share in the government
offered him by the young Peshwa. Raghunáthráv, perhaps instigated by
his wife, had no doubt great hopes of obtaining a share in the whole
power of the administration, and suspecting Mádhavráv to be aware
of his designs, looked upon all the overtures made by the latter as
intended in some way or other to entrap him. He therefore collected an
army of some 15,000 men in Báglán and Násik, and hoping to be joined
on his way by Jánoji Bhonslé, advanced towards Poona. In his army was
Govindráv, son of Dámáji Gáikwár, with a detachment of his father's
troops. The Peshwa, without giving Jánoji time to effect a junction
with Raghunáthráv, even if he had been prepared to do so, defeated his
uncle's army at Dhorap, a fort in the Ajunta range, and carried off
Rághobá and Govindráv to Poona, where they were placed in confinement.

[Death of Dámáji Gáikwár, 1768.] Not long after this action Dámáji
died. He had brought the fortunes of the Gáikwár house to the highest
pitch they ever reached and not long after his death the family
influence began to decline. It was his personal authority alone
that was able to counteract the usual tendency of quasi-independent
Marátha states towards disintegration, especially when they are at
a distance from the central power. Khanderáv and Sayájiráv had shown
frequent signs of insubordination (as for instance in their espousal
of the cause of Rangoji) and a desire to establish themselves in an
independent position, but the sagacity of Dámáji foresaw the advantage
such a partition would give an enemy like the Peshwa, and his tact
enabled him to preserve unity in his family, at least in resistance
to what he showed them to be their common foe.

[Disputed Succession.] The quarrel for the succession that arose
on Dámáji's death was the first step towards the breaking up of the
Gáikwár's power. Dámáji had three wives. By the first he had Govindráv,
who however was born after Sayájiráv, the son by the second wife. His
sons by the third wife were Mánáji and Fatesingh. Govindráv was in
confinement at Poona near the court, and therefore in a position
to offer conditions for the confirmation of his rights without loss
of time.

In the Hindu law current amongst Maráthás, there are to be
found precedents in favour of the heirship of either Govindráv
or Sayájiráv. Some authorities support the rights of the son of
the first wife whether he be the eldest or not, others again regard
simply the age of the claimants, deciding in favour of the first born,
of whatever wife he may be the son. Rámráv Shástri, the celebrated
adviser of Mádhavráv Peshwa, is said to have expressed an opinion
in favour of the rights of Sayájiráv. Govindráv, however, was on
the spot where his influence could be used most extensively. Sayáji,
moreover, was an idiot and a puppet in the hands of his half brother
Fatesingh. Govindráv applied at once for investiture with the
title of Sená-Khás-Khel. A payment of 50 1/2 lákhs of rupees to the
Peshwa on account of arrears of tribute and a fine for his conduct
in taking part with Rághobá was a strong argument in his favour,
and when he agreed to a tribute previously demanded from his father
of Rs. 7,79,000 yearly and to maintain a peace contingent at Poona
of 3000 horse, to be increased by a thousand more in time of war,
there could be little doubt as to the legitimacy of his claim, and
he was duly invested with his father's title and estate.

[1771.] For reasons not apparent Sayáji's claims were not brought
forward till nearly two years later. Govindráv had never been
allowed to join his charge in Gujarát, so that he could exercise no
interference in that direction, and the court affairs in the Dakhan
left perhaps little time for the disposal of Sayájiráv's application,
even if it had been made. Sayáji had entrusted his interests to
Fatesingh, a man of considerable ability, who came at once to Poona to
get a reversal of the recognition of Govindráv. The Peshwa was glad to
have this opportunity of undoing so much of Dámáji's work and dividing
the Gáikwár family against itself, so using the verdict of Rám Shástri
as his weapon, he cancelled the former grant in favour of Govindráv,
and appointed Sayájiráv with Fatesingh as his mutálik or deputy. The
latter, by agreeing to pay an extra sum of 6 1/2 lákhs of rupees
annually, got permission to retain the Poona contingent of Gáikwár
horse in Gujarát, on the pretext that Govindráv would probably attack
his brothers on the earliest opportunity. Thus, whatever happened,
all went to the profit of the Peshwa's party and to the injury of
the tax-paying Gujarát ryot.

[1773.] Fatesingh retired in triumph to Baroda, and opened negotiations
with the English in Surat, as he had been endeavouring to do for a
year past without success. In January 1773, however, he succeeded in
getting an agreement from the Chief for Affairs of the British Nation
in Surat, that his share in the revenues of the town of Broach,
which had been taken by storm in 1772 by the English, should not
be affected by the change of masters. In the same year Náráyanráv
Peshwa was murdered, and Rághobá was invested by the titular king
at Sátára with the ministerial robe of honour. Govindráv Gáikwár,
still in Poona, reminded the new Peshwa of the good offices of the
Gáikwár family at Dhorap and elsewhere, and found means of getting
reinstated as Sená-Khás-Khel. In 1774 he set out for Gujarát,
and collecting a fair number of adherents on his way, he attacked
Fatesingh. [1774.] After various engagements of little importance,
the latter found himself shut into the city of Baroda, which was
invested by Govindráv in January 1775.

[Rághobá Peshwa, 1774.] In the meantime Rághobá had been driven
from power by the intrigues of Bráhmans of a different class from
that to which he belonged, headed by the afterwards well-known Nána
Phadnis. The ex-Peshwa first betook himself towards Málwa, where he
hoped to be joined or at least assisted by Holkar and Sindia. As soon
however as he got together some scattered forces he marched down the
Tápti and opened negotiations with the English through Mr. Gambier,
the chief at Surat. The Bombay Government at once demanded the cession
of Bassein, Sálsette, and the adjacent islands. Rághobá refused,
partly, in all probability, on account of the pride felt by the
Marátha soldiery in their achievements before Bassein at the time of
the great siege. He however offered valuable territory in Gujarát,
yielding a revenue of about eleven lákhs, and to pay six lákhs down
and 1 1/2 lákhs monthly for the maintenance of a European contingent
with artillery. The English at Bombay were debating whether this offer
should not be accepted when news reached them that the Portuguese were
about to organise an expedition to re-take Bassein. Negotiations with
Rághobá were hastily broken off and a small force sent to forestall
the rival Europeans. Before the end of 1774, both Thána and Versova
fort in Sálsette had been taken.

[Rághobá in Gujarát, 1775.] Rághobá now heard that Sindia and Holkar
had been bought over by the ministerial party and would not come to
his assistance. Quickly moving his force down the river he reached
Baroda in January 1775 with 10,000 horse and 400 foot. He joined
Govindráv in investing that town, but sent meanwhile an agent to
re-open the discussion of his proposals in the Bombay Council. This
agent was captured by a party of Fatesingh's horse whilst he was out
on an expedition near Párnera on behalf of Govindráv. On his release
he repaired to Surat and took steps to get a treaty of alliance signed
as soon as possible.

[Rághobá Defeated.] The ministerial army of 30,000 men under Haripant
Phadke entered Gujarát and obliged Govindráv and Rághobá to raise the
siege of Baroda and to retire towards the Mahi. Fatesingh's force then
joined Haripant. An attack on all sides was made (Feb. 17th). Rághobá,
who was in the centre, was first charged, and before Govindráv and
Khanderáv Gáikwár could come to his assistance his best officers were
wounded, some of his Arab mercenaries refused to fight as large arrears
of pay were due to them, and he was defeated on both flanks. He fled to
Cambay with only 1000 horse; whilst the two Gáikwárs and Manáji Sindia
(Phadke) led the rest of the scattered army to Kapadvanj, where it
was again set in order. The Nawáb of Cambay, fearing lest the Marátha
army should come in pursuit, shut the town gates on the fugitive
and refused to give him shelter. [Reaches Surat.] Mr. Malet, chief
of the English residents, who had been informed of the negotiations
in progress between his Government and Rághobá, contrived to get the
ex-Peshwa conveyed privately to Bhávnagar and from thence by boat to
Surat. Here he arrived on February 23rd.

[Treaty of Surat, 1775.] The stipulations of the treaty negotiated
by Narotamdás, agent of Rághobá, and the Bombay Government were:
The English to provide a force of 3000 men, of which 800 were to
be Europeans and 1700 natives, together with a due proportion of
artillery. In return for this Rághobá, still recognized as Peshwa,
was to cede in perpetuity Sálsette, Bassein and the islands, Jambusar,
and Olpád. He also made over an assignment of Rs. 75,000 out of the
revenues of Anklesvar, the remaining portion of which district,
together with Ámod, Hánsot, and Balsár was placed under British
management as security for the monthly contribution of 1 1/2 lákhs
for the support of the troops in his service. He also promised
to procure the cession of the Gáikwár's share in the revenues of
Broach. Sundry other provisions (dealing with different parts of the
Marátha dominions) were inserted, Rághobá being treated throughout as
the representative of the Marátha kingdom. This treaty was signed on
March 6th, 1775, at Surat, but on the previous day there had been a
debate in the Council at Bombay as to the propriety of continuing to
support Rághobá, as the news from Gujarát made the British authorities
doubtful whether the contingent they had already sent to Surat was
enough to ensure success.

[Colonel Keating in Gujarát.] Just before the treaty was drawn up,
at the end of February Lieut.-Colonel Keating had been despatched in
command of 350 European infantry 800 sepoys 80 European artillerymen
and 60 gun lascars with others, in all about 1500 men, ready for
active service. This force landed at Surat four days after Rághobá had
arrived from Bhávnagar. Before receiving this token of the intention
of the British to support Rághobá, the Nawáb had treated the latter
simply as a fugitive, but upon finding that the Bombay Government had
determined to make the ex-Peshwa their ally, he paid the customary
visits and offered presents as to a superior.

[Keating Sails with Rághobá for Cambay.] When the news reached Surat
that Govindráv's troops and the rest had been reorganized at Kapadvanj,
it was determined to effect a junction with them by landing Colonel
Keating's detachment at Cambay and from thence marching north.

[Rághobá in Cambay, 1775.] Considerable delay occurred in carrying out
the first part of this proposal. First of all Rághobá detained the army
at Dumas [1060] whilst he paid a visit of ceremony to the frequented
temple of Bhimpor in the neighbourhood. Then again, the convoy met
with contrary winds the whole way up the gulf, and it was not till
March 17th that the contingent landed. The Nawáb, accompanied by the
British Resident, paid a visit of ceremony and presented nazaránás
to Rághobá as a sort of atonement for his previous discourtesy and
neglect. The Maráthás, however, knowing that this change of tone was
entirely due to the presence and alliance of the Europeans, paid much
more attention to the latter than to the Muhammadans.

[Govindráv Gáikwár's Army.] The British contingent encamped at a place
called Náráyan-Sarovar, just north of the town. Here they waited
until the reinforcement from Bombay arrived, bringing the whole
force up to the complement stipulated for in the treaty. Rághobá's
army under Govindráv Gáikwár was reported to be moving southwards,
and Colonel Keating agreed to let it pass the Sábarmati river before
joining it. Meanwhile the enemy, said to number 40,000 infantry and
12,000 cavalry, marched north to intercept Govindráv. The latter,
however, by forced marches succeeded in crossing the Sábarmati
before the arrival of the ministerial army, and encamped a few miles
north-east of Cambay at a place called Darmaj or Dara. Here Colonel
Keating joined him about the middle of April.

Govindráv's army consisted of about 8000 fighting men and nearly 18,000
camp followers. These latter were chiefly Pindháris who used to attach
themselves to the camp of one of the Marátha chiefs, on condition of
surrendering to him half their plunder. Each chief had his separate
encampment, where he exercised independent authority over his own
troops, although bound to general obedience to the commander-in-chief
of the whole army. The confusion of this arrangement is described by
an eye-witness as utterly destructive of all military discipline. To
add to the cumbrousness of such an expedition, most of the Pindháris
brought their wives and children with them, the cooking pots and
plunder being carried on bullocks and ponies, of which there were
altogether nearly 200,000 attached to the troops. In every camp
there was a regular bazár where cash payment or barter passed equally
current, so that a premium was thus placed on the pilfering of small
articles by the Pindháris, whose stipulations as to plunder were
confined neither to friend nor enemy.

[Advance of the Combined Forces.] When all needful preparations had
been made, the army, accompanied by a battery of ten guns, besides
mortars and howitzers, all of which were manned by Europeans, moved
out against the enemy. The latter slowly retreated, burning the crops
and forage and destroying the water-supply on its way. On the 20th
April the first engagement took place at Usámli, resulting in the
repulse of the ministerial troops. On May 1st a similar skirmish on
the banks of the Vátrak drove the ministerialists into Kaira. From
this post they were driven after a series of slight engagements with
the army of Rághobá, which crossed the river at Mátar. Fatesingh now
received a reinforcement of 10,000 horse under Khanderáv Gáikwár, but
to counterbalance this aid, Sindia and Holkar from some unexplained
cause, connected probably with intrigues at Poona, withdrew from
further co-operation with him. Colonel Keating was unable to follow up
the advantages he had gained owing to the large proportion of cavalry
in the enemy's army. He therefore continued his march southwards,
after persuading Rághoba to spend the monsoon in Poona, where he
would be on the spot to counteract intrigues, instead of at Ahmedábád,
as had been at first proposed.

On May 8th the army reached Nadiád, after repulsing on the road two
attacks by the enemy's cavalry. This result was obtained chiefly
by means of the European light artillery. Nadiád belonged at this
time to Khanderáv Gáikwár, and to punish his defection to Fatesingh,
Rághobá inflicted a fine of 60,000 rupees on the town. The amount was
assessed on the several castes in proportion to their reputed means
of payment. The Bháts, a peculiar people of whom more hereafter,
objected to being assessed, and slaughtered each other in public:
so that the guilt of their blood might fall on the oppressor. The
Bráhmans, who also claimed exemption from all taxation, more astutely
brought two old women of their caste into the market place and there
murdered them. Having made this protest, both castes paid their
contributions. Rághobá injudiciously wasted seven days over the
collection of this fine, and in the end only levied 40,000 rupees.

[Defeat of Fatesingh, 1775.] On May 14th the march was resumed, under
the usual skirmishing onslaughts of the ministerial party. At Arás,
where Rághobá had been defeated shortly before, he was in imminent
danger of a second and still more serious discomfiture. An order
mistaken by a British company, and the want of discipline on the
part of Rághobá's cavalry nearly led to a total defeat with great
slaughter. The European infantry and artillery, however, turned
the fortunes of the day. The troops of Fatesingh were allowed to
approach in pursuit to within a few yards of the batteries, all the
guns of which then opened on them with grape, the infantry meanwhile
plying their small arms along the whole line. Fatesingh was obliged
to withdraw his diminished forces and the army of Rághobá received no
further molestations from him on its way to the Mahi. Colonel Keating
then ordered a general move to Broach, where he arrived safely on 27th
May, after a troublesome march through the robber-infested country
between the Dhádhar river and Ámod.

[The Ministerial General Retreats.] Here they remained until June
8th, when Colonel Keating was about to move south again. Luckily,
as it turned out for him, the nearest ford was impassable and he had
to march to one higher up at a place variously called Bába Piára or
Báva Pir. On his way thither he heard that Haripant, the ministerial
commander-in-chief, was halting on the north bank by the ford; he
therefore pushed on to make an attack on the rear, but owing partly to
timely information received and partly to the confusion caused by the
irrepressibility of Rághobá's cavalry, Haripant had time to withdraw
all his force except some baggage and ammunition, which, with a few
guns, he was forced in the hurry of his passage across the river to
leave behind. [Colonel Keating at Dabhoi, 1775.] Colonel Keating
then marched fourteen miles north from the ford and halted before
proceeding to Dabhoi, a town belonging to Fatesingh. The general
ignorance of tactics and want of discipline in the native army had
determined Colonel Keating not to lead his force as far as Poona,
but to spend the monsoon near Baroda.

Rághobá detached one of his generals, Amir Khán, in pursuit
of Ganeshpant, whom Hari Pant had left as his deputy in
Gujarát. Ganeshpant with a detachment of the ministerial army had
separated from Hari at the Bába Piára ford and found his way through
the wild country on the north of the Tápti towards Ahmedábád. He was
finally caught by Amir Khán.

Dabhoi was at this time in charge of a Bráhman governor, who submitted
on the approach of Rághobá's army. Colonel Keating quartered his
force in the town, but Rághobá, after exacting a levy of three
lákhs of rupees, encamped at Bhilápur on the Dhádhar, ten miles from
Dabhoi. Here he began to negotiate with Fatesingh in Baroda through
the mediation of Colonel Keating. Fatesingh was all the more ready
to come to definite terms of agreement, as he knew that Govindráv
was on the watch to recover Baroda.

[Rághobá and the Gáikwárs.] It is not certain what the terms proposed
and agreed to really were. The only record of them is a copy sent
in 1802 to the Resident at Poona by Governor Duncan. According to
this document Govindráv was to lose his pension and to occupy the
same position as before the accession of Rághobá. Khanderáv was to
revert to the situation in which he had been placed by Dámáji. The
provision of the treaty of the 6th March regarding the Gáikwár's
claims on Broach was ratified, and as a reward for the mediation of
the Bombay Government, the Gáikwár ceded to the British in perpetuity
the sub-divisions of Chikhli and Variáv near Surat and Koral on
the Narbada. Before this treaty could be concluded, Colonel Keating
received orders to withdraw his contingent into British territory
and to leave Rághobá to manage for himself. This change of policy
was due to the disapproval by the Supreme Government of the treaty of
6th March, which they alleged had been made inconsistently with the
negotiations then being carried on with the ruling powers at Poona
as well as with the authority of the Calcutta Government. The treaty
was therefore declared to be invalid and the troops in the field were
ordered by the Supreme Government to be withdrawn at once into British
garrisons. A special envoy, Colonel Upton, was sent from Bengal to
negotiate a treaty with the Ministers in accordance with the views
current in Calcutta.

[Withdrawal of the British Contingent.] As soon as the roads were
open Colonel Keating moved towards Surat, but at the solicitation of
Rághobá he disobeyed his orders so far as to encamp at Kadod, about
twenty miles east of Surat, but not in British territory. Here he
awaited the results of the overtures of Colonel Upton. This envoy
remained at Poona from the 28th December 1775 till the 1st March
1776, on which date [Negotiations at Poona.] he signed the treaty of
Purandhar, in which the office only and not the name of the Peshwa is
mentioned. By this compact the Peshwa ceded all claims on the revenue
of Broach together with land in the neighbourhood of that town to
the British. He also paid twelve lákhs of rupees in compensation for
the expenses of the war. Sálsette was to be either retained by the
English or restored in exchange for territory yielding three lákhs
of rupees annually. The cessions made by Fatesingh Gáikwár were to be
restored to him if the Peshwa's Government could prove that he had no
right to make them without due authorization from Poona. The treaty
of the 6th March was declared null and void. Rághobá was to disband
his army and take a pension. If he resisted, the English were to give
him no assistance. If he agreed to the terms proposed, he was to live
at Kopargaon [1061] on the Godávari with an ample pension. When he
received information as to the terms of the new treaty, he at once
declined to accept the pension, and, as he could not understand the
position of the Bombay Government with regard to that at Calcutta, he
proceeded to offer still more favourable terms for further assistance.

[Rághobá at Surat, 1776.] Rághobá was at Mándvi [1062] on the Tápti
when he was finally given to understand that the British could no
longer aid him. He thereupon took refuge in Surat with two hundred
followers. The rest of his army which had been ordered to disperse,
gathered round Surat, on pretence of waiting for the payment of the
arrears due to them. As their attitude was suspicious, and there were
rumours of an expedition having started from Poona under Haripant to
subdue them, the Bombay Government garrisoned Surat and Broach with
all the forces it could spare.

Colonel Upton meanwhile offered Rághobá, on behalf of the ministers,
a larger pension with liberty of residing at Benares. This also
was declined, and the ex-Peshwa fled to Bombay, where he lived on a
monthly pension allotted him by the Government.

On 20th August 1776, a despatch of the Court of Directors arrived
confirming the treaty of the 6th March 1775. At first the Bombay
Government were inclined to take this as authorizing the retention
of all the territory ceded, but on further deliberation it was
decided that as the treaty of Purandhar had been ratified by the
Supreme Government subsequent to the signing of the despatch, which
was dated 5th April 1776, it was evident that the Court of Directors
did not mean to uphold the previous engagement more than temporarily,
or until the final treaty had been concluded.

[Negotiations at Poona, 1777.] At the end of 1776, a Bombay officer
was sent in place of Colonel Upton to be a resident envoy at Poona
for the carrying out of the provisions of the treaty. Mr. Mostyn
was the person selected, and he arrived in Poona in March 1777. He
soon found that the ministers had little intention of adhering to
the treaty, so he at once took up the question that he thought it
most important to the Bombay Government to have settled, namely the
relations of the Peshwa's Court with Fatesingh Gáikwár as regards
the cessions of territory. The ministers asserted that the Gáikwárs
merely administered Gujarát on the part of the Peshwa and were entirely
dependent upon the Poona government, so that they could conclude no
agreement with foreign states except with its approbation. Fatesingh
did not deny the dependence, but evaded the question of his right to
make direct treaties and claimed the restitution of the cessions on
the ground that Raghunáthráv had failed to perform his part of the
stipulations. The point was discussed for some time, and at last the
question of dependence seems to have been let drop, for in February
1778 Fatesingh paid up the arrears of tribute, made the usual presents
to the ministers and their favourites, and was again invested with
the title of Sená-Khás-Khel.

In October a despatch from the Court of Directors reached the
Governments of Bengal and Bombay, disapproving of the treaty of
Purandhar, but ratifying it on the principle factum valet. It was
suggested, however, that in case of evasion on the part of the
ministers, a fresh treaty should be concluded with Rághobá on the
lines of that of 1775.

[Fresh Alliance with Rághobá, 1778.] In November 1778 it was rumoured
that the ministers in Poona were intriguing with the French, so the
Bombay Government took this opportunity of entering into a treaty with
Rághobá, who was still in Bombay. He confirmed the grants of 1775,
and as security for the pay of the British contingent that was to
help in placing him on the Peshwa's throne in Poona, he agreed to
assign the revenues of Balsár and the remainder of Anklesvar, as he
had done before. He stipulated, however, that his own agents should
collect the dues from these districts, and that the British should
take charge of them only in case of the full sum due not being paid
and then merely as a temporary measure.

[The Convention of Bhadgaon, 1779.] On the 22nd November 1778 the
force moved out of Bombay, and by dint of mismanagement and internal
dissension the campaign was brought to an end by the convention of the
16th January 1779. Under this agreement all possessions in Gujarát
acquired since the time of Mádhavráv Peshwa were to be restored by
the British, together with Sálsette, Uran, and other islands. Rághobá
was to be made over to Sindia's charge, and a separate treaty assigned
to Sindia the sovereignty of Broach.

[Negotiation with the Gáikwár.] The Council at Bombay disavowed the
convention and were inclined to adhere only to the clause allotting
Broach to Sindia. Mr. Hornby proposed to the Supreme Government an
alliance with Fatesingh, engaging to free him from dependence on the
Poona Government and to reconcile the disputants within the Gáikwár
family itself. After the arrival of General Goddard with reinforcements
from Bengal the Governor General approved of the alliance proposed
with Fatesingh as head of the Baroda state, but specially declined
to admit any participation or support in the family disputes. The
British were to conquer for themselves the Peshwa's share of Gujarát,
if they were able to do so.

[Rághobá Escapes from Sindia, 1779.] Rághobá, meanwhile, who had been
given over to Sindia to be conveyed to Bundelkhand, escaped with the
connivance of his custodian and fled to Broach. This was evidently a
move calculated by Sindia to bring on hostilities between Nána Phadnis,
the head of the ministerial party, and the English. General Goddard,
who was conducting the negotiations with Poona on the part both of the
Supreme Government and of the Government of Bombay, received Rághobá on
June 12th, but evaded any proposals for a direct alliance. At the end
of the rains of the same year, information was received by the English
that a coalition against them had been [League against the English,
1780.] formed by the Maráthás, the Nizám, and Hyder Ali of Mysor. The
rumour was partially confirmed by the demand by Nána Phadnis for the
cession of Sálsette and the person of Rághobá as preliminaries to any
treaty. No answer was given, but reinforcements were called for and
the overtures with Fatesingh pushed forward. This chief prevaricated
about the terms of the treaty and evidently did not like to enter
into any special engagement that might perhaps bring down upon him
the Poona army. General Goddard therefore advanced on 1st January
1780 against Dabhoi, which was garrisoned by the Peshwa's troops
from the Dakhan, whilst the English in Broach expelled the Marátha
officers from their posts and re-took possession of Anklesvar, Hánsot,
and Ámod. On January 20th Dabhoi was evacuated by the Maráthás and
occupied by General Goddard. Fatesingh now showed himself willing to
enter into the proposed treaty, and on the 26th January 1780 signed
an offensive and defensive alliance.

[Treaty with Fatesingh Gáikwár.] In the re-opening of hostilities
there was no mention of Rághobá, but the ground given was
simply the non-fulfilment on the part of the Peshwa of his treaty
engagement. Rághobá remained under English supervision in the enjoyment
of a large allowance. Dabhoi was occupied by an English civil officer
with a detachment of irregulars, and General Goddard moved towards
Ahmedábád.

By the treaty of 1780 the Peshwa was to be excluded from Gujarát. To
avoid confusion in collection, the district north of the Mahi was to
belong entirely to the share of the Gáikwár. The English were to enjoy
the whole district south of the Tápti, together with the Gáikwár share
in the revenue of Surat. In return for the support the English were
to give him in withholding tribute from the Peshwa, Fatesingh ceded
Sinor on the Narbada and the Gáikwár's villages round Broach. These
cessions, however, were not to have effect until Fatesingh was in
possession of Ahmedábád. The contingent of 3000 horse was to be still
furnished by the Gáikwár government.

[General Goddard takes Ahmedábád, 1780.] As soon as these conditions
were agreed upon, General Goddard went with his own army and the
contingent furnished by Fatesingh to Ahmedábád. After encamping before
it for five days, he took the city by storm on 15th February 1780.

[Operations against Sindia and Holkar.] Sindia and Holkar had combined
their forces against the English and were marching up Gujarát,
plundering on their way. They were opposed by General Goddard, who
marched across the Mahi early in March. The allies turned off towards
Chámpáner without risking a pitched battle on the plain. Sindia at
once opened negotiations with the view of wasting time during the fair
season. His first proposal was that Rághobá should be sent to Jhánsi,
where Sindia had allotted him an estate, and that Bájiráv, Rághobá's
son, should be appointed diván or manager of the Peshwa Mádhavráv,
who was a minor. Bájiráv himself was under age, so Sindia was, of
course, to assume temporarily the reins of government.

Goddard at once refused to force Rághobá to take any course other
than the one he should select of his own free will; for Sindia did not
appear to be aware that the English were now at war with the ministers
on their own account and not as allies of an ex-Peshwa. Negotiations
were broken off and Sindia and Holkar dislodged from place after
place without any decisive engagement being fought. General Goddard
was preparing monsoon quarters for his army, when he heard that a
division of a Marátha force which had been plundering the Konkan in
order to cut off supplies from Bombay had attacked parts of the Surat
Athávisi. He detached some troops under Lieut. Welsh and sent them
to the south, whilst he remained himself on the Narbada. Lieut. Welsh
drove back the marauders and took possession of the forts of Párnera,
Indargad, and Bagváda.

After the monsoon of 1780, General Goddard went to besiege Bassein,
leaving Major Forbes in charge of the Gujarát army. This officer posted
one body of troops at Ahmedábád for the protection of Fatesingh,
another at Surat, and a third at Broach. Two battalions of Bengal
infantry were sent to Sinor and some few men to Dabhoi.

[1781.] An attack was made by Sindia on the newly acquired district of
Sinor, but Major Forbes successfully resisted it and Sindia's position
with regard to his own dominions was now such as to prevent him from
sending more expeditions against Gujarát.

The military necessities of other parts of India were such as to
induce General Goddard to apply to Fatesingh for an increase to his
contingent, in accordance with the treaty of 1780. After some personal
communications with this Chief in Gujarát, General Goddard was able
to arrange with the Gáikwár for the defence of part of that province
and thus set free some European troops for service elsewhere.

[Treaty of Sálbai, 1782.] No further attack was made in this direction
during the continuance of the war which came to an end on 17th May
1782. The treaty of Sálbai between an envoy of the Governor General
on one side and Mahádáji Sindia as plenipotentiary for the Peshwa
and minister of Poona on the other, replaced the Marátha territory
in Gujarát exactly where it was on the outbreak of hostilities
against Rághobá in 1775. It was, however, specially stipulated that
no demand for arrears of tribute during the late hostilities should
be made against the Gáikwár, a clause that led to misunderstandings
many years later. The town of Broach was given over to Sindia in
accordance with the secret negotiation of 1779 and the votes of the
Bengal and Bombay Councils. The territory round Broach yielding a
revenue of three lákhs of rupees, ceded by the Peshwa, was likewise
returned. Rághobá was granted a pension of 25,000 rupees a month and
allowed to select his own place of residence. He went to Kopargaon
and there died a few months after the conclusion of the treaty of
Sálbai. Thus came to an end one of the chief sources of disturbance
to the Poona government. For the next six years no event of any
political importance took place in Gujarát, which province was left
almost entirely to the administration of the Gáikwár family.

[Death of Fatesingh, 1789.] In 1789, however, Fatesingh died,
leaving Sayájiráv without a guardian. Mánáji, a younger brother,
at once seized the reins of government and began the usual sort of
negotiations to secure his recognition by the Poona government. He
paid a nazarána of 3,13,000 rupees and agreed to pay up thirty-six
lákhs of rupees as arrears, though it is not clear on what account,
unless that sum had accrued since the treaty of Sálbai, or was part
of the long standing account left open by Dámáji in 1753. Mánáji,
however, was not allowed to succeed to the post of guardian without
opposition. Govindráv Gáikwár was living at Poona, and, though he had
himself little influence with the Peshwa's immediate adherents, he had
managed to secure the then powerful Sindia on his side. This chief,
since his recognition as plenipotentiary at the treaty of Sálbai,
had been gradually making good his position with the Peshwa and his
favourites as well as with the leading Marátha nobles, so as to be able
to successfully oppose Nána Phadnis when the time came for a coalition
of the outlying chiefs against the ministerial party. Govindráv offered
his son Ánandráv as husband for the daughter of Sindia, a proposal
which it is not probable that he ever intended to carry out. A grant
of three lákhs of rupees was also promised, in return for which Sindia
allowed his garrison in Broach to assist Govindráv's illegitimate son
Kánhoji to reach Baroda. Mánáji applied to the Bombay Government on
the grounds that the steps taken by Govindráv were contrary to the
provisions of the treaty of 1780. As however this treaty had been
abrogated by the later agreement at Sálbai, the Bombay Government
declined to interfere. Mánáji's agents at Poona contrived to get
Nána Phadnis to propose a compromise, to which however Govindráv,
at the instigation probably of Sindia, declined to accede. Before
any decision was reached Mánáji died.

[1793.] Nána detained Govindráv in Poona till he had agreed to hold by
former stipulations and to cede to the Peshwa the Gáikwár's share in
the districts south of the Tápti together with his share of the Surat
customs. To this the Government of Bombay demurred as an infraction
of the provision of the Sálbai treaty whereby the integrity of the
Gáikwár's possessions was assured. Nána Phadnis at once withdrew his
proposals. Govindráv at last joined his brother at Baroda on 19th
December, and took up the office of regent.

[Ába Shelukar Deputy Governor of Gujarát, 1796.] For two years
Gujarát remained quiet. In 1796 Bájiráv, son of Rághobá, succeeded to
the Peshwa's dignity and at once appointed his younger brother, ten
years of age, governor of Gujarát. In accordance with Marátha custom
a deputy was sent to take charge of the province, one Ába Shelukar,
and he too seems to have administered vicariously, for next year
(1797) we find him amongst those taken prisoners with Nána Phadnis
when that minister was treacherously seized by Daulatráv Sindia in the
Dakhan. Ába was released on promising to pay ten lákhs of rupees as
ransom. [1797.] He then joined his appointment as subhedár in order
to take measures to get together the money he required.

[Disputes between Ába and Govindráv Gáikwár.] Bájiráv Peshwa was
anxious to embroil Ába with Govindráv, whom he knew to be favourable
to Nána Phadnis and too powerful to be allowed to acquire influence
beyond the reach of head-quarter supervision. A cause of quarrel soon
arose. Daulatráv pressed Ába for part payment of the above ten lákhs,
and the latter being unable to squeeze enough out of his own territory,
forced contributions from some of the villages administered by the
Gáikwár. Govindráv at once took up arms against him and applied for aid
to the English Agent at Surat. In this city Governor Jonathan Duncan
had just assumed chief authority in accordance with an agreement
between the English and the Nawáb. Duncan was anxious to secure for
his government the land round Surat and the Gáikwár's share in the
chauth of the town and district. Govindráv, when this demand was
made, referred the Governor to Poona, knowing that under the treaty
of Sálbai the British Government had no more right to acquire a
share of the Gáikwár territory than the Poona authorities had when
they made a somewhat similar demand in 1793, which was withdrawn as
stated above. Before the reference could be made, Ába was penned up
by Govindráv's own army in Ahmedábád and forced to surrender that
city. He was kept in confinement for more than seven years.

[Gujarát farmed to the Gáikwár, 1799.] In the same year (1799) the
Peshwa, apparently without formally revoking the appointment of his
brother Chimnáji as Subhedár, gave Govindráv a farm for five years
of his whole rights in Gujarát, at the rate of five lákhs of rupees
a year. These rights included shares in the Káthiáváda and Sorath
tribute, the revenue of Petlád, Nápád, Ránpur, Dhandhuka, and Gogha,
together with rights to certain customs dues in Cambay and a share
in the revenue of the city of Ahmedábád. Govindráv unfortunately died
a month before this farm was formally made over by the Peshwa.

[Ánandráv Gáikwár, 1800.] As had happened at the death of Dámáji, so
again now, the heir Ánandráv was all but an idiot and quite incapable
of managing his affairs. The disputes as to the guardianship again
set the whole state in confusion. Kánhoji, a son of Govindráv by a
Rájputni princess of Dharampor, who had been the first agent of his
father in Baroda in 1793, had been put in prison for refusing to give
place to Govindráv when the latter at length joined him at Baroda. At
the death of Govindráv, Kánhoji managed to obtain his liberty and
to secure the ascendancy in the counsels of his weak-minded elder
brother. He assumed, in fact, the whole government. His arrogant
conduct in this new position excited the Arab guard against him and
he was again thrown into confinement. His mother Gajrábái, who was
a refugee in Surat, endeavoured to get assistance from the English
there, and at the same time made overtures to Malhár, son of Khanderáv
Gáikwár, who had formerly been one of Govindráv's bitterest opponents.

[1800.] Meanwhile the administration of the Gáikwár's affairs passed
into the hands of Rávji and Bábáji Áppa, two brothers who had been
brought to Baroda in 1793 by Govindráv himself. Rávji took charge of
the civil work, whilst Bábáji undertook the military duties, which
at that time consisted in great measure in collecting the revenue by
show of force. These two ministers, on hearing of the proceedings of
[The British aid Govindráv's Party.] Gajrábái, outbid her for the aid
of the Bombay Government. In addition to the cessions formerly offered
by Govindráv, they were willing to give up Chikhli also. Matters were
precipitated by the successes of Malháráv in the field. Rávji offered
to subsidize five European battalions, and Governor Duncan took upon
himself the responsibility of sending an auxiliary force of 1600
men under Major Walker to act with the troops of Rávji and Bábáji
north of Ahmedábád. Reinforcements were afterwards sent up, but the
campaign was not closed till April 1802, when the fort of Kadi had
been taken by storm. Malháráv surrendered and a residence in Nadiád
was assigned him with a liberal pension out of the revenues of that
sub-division. The fort of Sankheda, which had been held by Ganpatráv
Gáikwár for his cousin Malháráv, was soon after this reduced and the
country for a time pacified.

[The British and the Gáikwár, 1800.] In March Rávji had an interview
at Cambay with Governor Duncan, which was followed on June 6th by a
definite treaty, of which the groundwork had been previously sketched
in anticipation of the reduction of the revolted Gáikwárs. Two
thousand men, besides artillery, were to be subsidized and a jáidád
or assignment for their payment was made on the revenue of Dholka and
the part of Nadiád not assigned to Malhárráv. Chikhli was given to the
British in reward for their aid in storming Kadi, and Residents were
to be appointed reciprocally. A large sum of money was borrowed by
Rávji, partly from Bombay partly from Baroda bankers, to pay off the
arrears due to about 7000 Arab mercenaries, who had usurped a great
deal of objectionable influence in civil affairs at the Gáikwár's
capital. Major Walker was appointed Resident and proceeded to Baroda
on 8th June.

[The Gáikwár's Minister Rávji.] On the same day was signed a secret
compact assuring Rávji of the support of the British Government
and awarding him a village out of the territory ceded by the treaty
of June 6th. It was deemed advisable by the British Government to
have at the Baroda court some leading personage who might, in the
present state of the relations between Bombay and Poona, further
the designs of the former government in preventing a recurrence of
the coalition of Marátha powers. Rávji was sure of his reward if he
served British interests, whilst in case of the reorganization of
a Marátha confederacy the state he was administering would probably
play but a very subordinate part in subsequent events.

[Treaty of Bassein, 31st Dec. 1802.] The treaty of June 6th was
disapproved by the Court of Directors as being in direct contravention
of the treaty of Sálbai. Before, however, any orders had been issued
by the Home authorities to restore to the Gáikwár the territory he
had ceded, the Peshwa, out of regard for whom the treaty had been
disavowed, was a fugitive before the army of Holkar, and by December
had ratified these very concessions at the treaty of Bassein. By
this treaty the Peshwa virtually placed his independence in the
hands of the British. He ceded his share of Surat, thus giving them
sole control over that district. In payment of the subsidiary force
required he handed over territory in Gujarát, the revenue of which
amounted to 12,28,000 rupees, and finally he constituted the British
Government arbiter in the disputes between his government and that
of Baroda. The grants made by the Gáikwár for the support of the
subsidiary force amounted in 1802 to 7,80,000 rupees.

[Arabs Disbanded.] Major Walker attempted to negotiate with the Arab
guard, but the greater part of them flew to arms and released Kánhoji
Gáikwár. The latter then tried to collect an army near Baroda, and
succeeded in obtaining possession of the person of Ánandráv the titular
ruler. The British force then took Baroda by storm, after which most
of the Arabs submitted, except a few who joined Kánhoji. The rest took
the arrears due to them and left the country. Kánhoji was not subdued
till February 1803. [Malhárráv in Revolt, 1803.] Malhárráv meanwhile
had broken out in rebellion in Káthiáváda and was plundering the
Marátha possessions there. Bábáji Áppáji and a young officer named
Vithal Deváji (or Divánji) led the operations against him; and to
the latter belongs the honour of having captured this troublesome
member of the ruling family. The estate of Nadiád, which had been
assigned to Madhavráo by Govindráv, was resumed by Rávji Áppáji
and made over in its entirety to the British Government. A treaty,
supplementary to that of 1802, was drawn up guaranteeing this cession
as well as the inám or free gift of the fort and district of Kaira,
"out of gratitude for the support given in the recent troubles to the
Gáikwár's honour and for assistance in securing the good of the State."

[Contingent Strengthened, 1803.] Very soon after this agreement Rávji
applied for an addition to the subsidiary force, in payment of which
he assigned Mátar Mahudha and the customs of Kim-Kathodra, a station
about seventeen miles north of Surat. His reason for strengthening the
subsidiary force appears to have been that owing to the reduction of
the Arabs, his own force was not enough to guard even the frontier,
and that a great part of that duty fell on the European contingent,
which was numerically insufficient for service on so extended a
scale. [Death of Rávji, 1803.] This was the last public act of note
on the part of Rávji Áppa, who died in July 1803, after adopting one
Sitárám to succeed to his estate.

[War with Sindia.] Whilst these arrangements were being carried
out at Baroda, Bájiráv Peshwa, chafing at the dependence to which
his straits of the previous winter had reduced him with regard to
the English, was actively propagating dissension between Sindia and
the Calcutta Government. Not long after, the war that had been some
time imminent broke out, and a contingent of 7352 men from Gujarát
was ordered to the field. In August or September Broach and Pávágad
[1063] both fell to the British.

[The Revenue Collecting Force.] Under the treaty of Sirjé Anjangaon
in December 1803, both Pávágad and Dohad were restored to Sindia,
but Broach remained British. By this means one of the rising Marátha
powers was extruded from the centre to the outlying portion of
the province. The employment of all the British contingent against
Sindia's possessions in Gujarát precluded Major Walker from furnishing
any portion of the army that was annually sent to collect the tribute
in Káthiáváda. Rávji Áppáji had expressly stipulated that some part
of the contingent might be so used when it could be spared from
its main duties. The Supreme Government agreed to the proposal when
made by Governor Duncan, on the grounds of the advantage both to the
Gáikwár and the tributaries of employing on this disagreeable duty
a strong and well-disciplined force. Already some of the tributaries
had made overtures to Major Walker with a view to obtaining British
protection against powerful neighbours. Governor Duncan was in
favour of accepting the duty of protection and also of helping
the Gáikwár's commander in his expeditions through the peninsula
on these grounds. Firstly, the officer in command could exercise a
certain supervision over the collections in which the British as part
assignees had a direct interest. Secondly, a way could thus be opened
for the acquisition of a port on the coast from which the intrigues,
supposed to be carried on by agents from the Isle of France, could
be watched and counteracted. From such a point, too, the views of
the Bombay Government as regards Kachh could be promoted. Thirdly,
the commandant could take steps to improve the system of forcible
collections, and towards abolishing the barbarous features of this
rude method of levying tribute. He could also, perhaps, suggest some
system by which the advantages of all three parties concerned would
be better secured than by reliance on the uncertainty of temporary
expeditions. The fourth and last reason given savours strongly of the
Marátha policy of the time, of which the leading maxim was Divide et
impera. It was represented that Bábáji, who had successfully collected
the tribute during 1802-03 and whose subordinate and companion Vithal
Deváji was a person of similar energy and capability, might possibly
acquire too great influence if left in a quasi-independent command
at such a distance from the Court. It was politic, then, to join with
the force under his command a strong foreign body, thus dividing both
the power and the responsibility. The war with Sindia caused these
proposals to fall into abeyance for some time.

[Renewal of Farm, 1804.] Meanwhile the Resident at Poona was doing his
best to secure for the Gáikwár a further lease for ten years of the
farm of the Peshwa's dominions in Gujarát, so that the inconveniences
of dual government might be avoided. In October 1804 a ten years'
farm was granted in the name of Bhagvantráv Gáikwár at an annual rate
of 4 1/2 lákhs of rupees.

[The British and the Gáikwár, 1805.] This grant led to the
consolidation of all previous engagements into a single treaty, which
was signed in April 1805. Previous agreements were confirmed and the
whole brought into consonance with the treaty of Bassein. Districts
yielding 11,70,000 rupees per annum were made over for the support
of the subsidiary force, and arrangements were also made for the
repayment of the cash loan advanced by the British Government in 1802,
when the liquidation of the arrears due to the Arabs was a matter of
urgent political necessity. The British contingent was to be available
in part for service in Káthiáváda, whenever the British Government
thought such an employment of it advisable.

Finally, the British Government was constituted arbiter in all
disputes of the Gáikwár, not alone with foreign powers, but also in the
adjustment of his financial transactions with the Peshwa his paramount
power. These transactions, which ranged back from the capture of
Dámáji in 1751, had never been the subject of a formal investigation,
and were by this time complicated by the numerous engagements with
third parties into which both governments had been obliged to enter
at their various moments of distress. Bájiráv, who was apparently
intriguing for a Marátha coalition against his new protectors, was
careful not to bring before the notice of the chiefs, whose esteem
he wished to gain, a provision which exhibited him as in any way
dependent upon the arbitration of a foreign power. He therefore
granted the farm for ten years to the Gáikwár, as much by way of
remanding for a time the proposed inquiries and settlement of their
respective claims as for the purpose of diverting the attention of the
British to the administration of this new appanage, whilst leaving him
free scope for his intrigues in the Dakhan. He used, moreover, every
pretext to defer the consideration of the Gáikwár question until he
could make use of his claims to further his own designs. His success
in preventing a discussion of these transactions is apparent by the
fact that in the financial statement of the Gáikwár's affairs made by
Colonel Walker in 1804, no mention of the Poona demand is to be found.

No important event took place during the next year or two. Bábáji
relinquished the command of the force in Káthiáváda in favour
of Vithalráv Deváji, whilst he himself took part in the civil
administration at Baroda. The Resident, too, seems to have been
likewise engaged in internal matters and in securing the country
against an invasion by Kánhoji, now a fugitive at the court of Holkar.

[1807.] In 1807 the Resident made over Ába Shelukar, late Sar Subhedár
of the Peshwa, to the British Government, by whom he could be prevented
from engaging in fresh conspiracies. After this Colonel Walker was at
last enabled to leave Baroda in order to assist in the settlement of
the Káthiáváda tribute question, an object he had long had in view,
but which the necessity for his continuous presence at the Gáikwár's
capital had hitherto prevented him from undertaking.

[Káthiáváda Tribute.] The changes with regard to the collection of the
tribute from the chiefs of Káthiáváda that were carried out in 1807
deserve a special description. Firstly, they placed the relations of
the tributary to the paramount power on quite a new basis. Secondly,
by them the British influence over both parties concerned was much
increased and the connection between the governments of Bombay and
Baroda drawn closer. Thirdly, they were subsequently, as will be seen
hereafter, the subject of much discussion and delay in the settlement
of the questions at issue between the Peshwa and the Gáikwár. And
lastly, their effect was most beneficial to both the chiefs and their
subjects in removing the uncertainty that had hitherto pervaded the
whole revenue administration of Káthiáváda.

Before entering on the details of the settlement itself, some
description is necessary of the social and political state of the
peninsula at the time the changes were introduced.

[State of Káthiáváda, 1807.] The greater part of the population of
Káthiáváda consisted of two classes, chiefs and cultivators, called
Bhumiás and ryots. The power of the chief ranged from the headship of
a single village up to absolute jurisdiction over several score. The
ryots were usually tenants long resident in the province. The chiefs
were in almost every case foreigners, invaders from the north and
north-east; Muhammadan adventurers from the court of Ahmedábád;
Káthis animated by the love of plunder and cattle-lifting; and
Miánás and Vághelás who had settled on the coast on account of the
facilities it afforded for their favourite pursuits of wrecking
and piracy. More numerous than any others were the Rájputs, driven
south by the disturbed state of their native kingdoms or by the
restless spirit of military adventure to be found in a class where
one profession alone is honourable. There is a certain uniformity
in the building up of all these chieftainships. A powerful leader,
with a sufficient band of followers, oppressed his weaker neighbours
till they were glad to come to terms and place themselves under his
protection, so as both to escape themselves and to take their chance
of sharing in the plunder of others. It frequently happened in the
growth of one of these states that the bháyád or relations of the
chief (who are sure to be numerous in a polygamous society) were
influential enough to assume, in their turn, a partial independence
and to claim recognition as a separate state. As a rule, however,
they continued to unite with the head of the family against external
foes, and only disagreed as to domestic administration. It is also
noticeable that though so addicted to the profession of arms, the
Rájputs cannot be called a military race; they possess few of the
true military virtues; hence the slowness of their advance, and
their failure in competition with perhaps less courageous though
more compact and pliable races. In Káthiáváda fortified strongholds,
formidable enough to an army moving rapidly without siege trains,
arose in all directions, and even villages were surrounded by a high
mud wall as a protection against cattle-lifters.

The groundwork of these states being itself so unstable, their
relations with each other were conducted on no principle but the
law of the stronger. General distrust reigned throughout. Each chief
well knew that his neighbours had won their position as he had won
his own by the gradual absorption of the weaker, and that they were
ready enough whenever opportunity offered to subject his dominions
to the same process. The administration of his territory consisted
merely in levying, within certain limits sanctioned by long usage,
as much revenue as would suffice to maintain himself and his forces
in their position with regard to the surrounding states. When a
foreign enemy appeared there was no co-operation amongst the local
chiefs in resistance. It was a point of honour not to yield except
to a superior force. Each chief, therefore, resisted the demands
made upon him until he considered that he had done enough to satisfy
the family conscience and then, agreeing to the terms proposed, he
allowed the wave of extortion to pass on and deluge the domains of his
neighbour. It should be remembered that the peninsula had never been
subjugated, though overrun times innumerable. The evil of invasion was
thus transitory. To a chief the mere payment of tribute tended in no
wise to derogate from his independence. In his capacity of military
freebooter he acknowledged the principle as just. His country had been
won by the sword and was retained by the sword and not by acquiescence
in the payment of tribute, so that if he could avoid this extortion
he was justified in doing so. If he weakened his state in resisting
foreigners, he knew that his neighbours would certainly take advantage
of the favourable juncture and annex his territory. It was his policy
therefore, after resistance up to a certain point, to succumb.

[The Revenue Raid System.] Owing to this local peculiarity and to
the general want of union in the province, both the Mughals and
Maráthás found it advantageous to follow a system of successive
expeditions rather than to incur the expense of permanently occupying
the peninsula with an army which would necessarily have to be a large
one. There is every reason to believe that in adopting the raid system
the Musalmáns were only pursuing the practice of their predecessors,
who used to take tribute from Jodhpur to Dwárka.

Some of the subhedárs of Ahmedábád divided their tributary district
into three circuits of collection and personally undertook the charge
of one each year. This was the mulakgiri land-raiding system. Besides
this chief expedition, there was the smaller one of the Bábi of
Junágadh and the still more minute operations of the Rával of Bhávnagar
against some of his weaker neighbours. The great Ahmedábád expedition
had long been an annual grievance and was conducted with some show
of system and under special rules called the Raj-ul-Mulak. Three
of these rules are of importance, and seem to have been generally
acquiesced in before the great incursions of Bábáji and Vithalráv
at the beginning of the nineteenth century. The first was that the
paramount power (by which was meant the foreign government which was
strong enough to enforce tribute from all the chiefs) had authority
to interfere in cases of dismemberment, or in proceedings tending
to the depreciation of the revenue or to the dismemberment of any
tributary state. It was again an acknowledged rule that whilst the
mulakgiri expedition of the paramount power was in motion no other
army should be in the field throughout the whole province. The third
provision was not so well established, but it appears to have been
understood that the tribute from each state should be regulated by
some standard of former date. In practice, however, the measure of
the Marátha demand was simply the power to enforce payment.

It is worthy of remark that about the beginning of this century the
resistance to the collection of tribute was stronger towards the west
than in the east and south of the province. In the Mahi Kántha the
lawlessness of the Koli chiefs, who had established themselves in the
ravines and on the hills, necessitated the employment of a military
force for collections. In the neighbourhood of Bijápur and Kadi, the
chiefs would not pay tribute except under the compulsion of a siege
or raid, but the mulakgiri system only reached its full development
west of Dholka.

From these explanatory remarks the system and practice of the Maráthás
can be clearly understood.

[The Maráthás in Sorath.] The Maráthás found their way to Sorath very
early in their Gujarát career. The first raid probably took place
about 1711, when the Muhammadans were occupied near Ahmedábád. After
this incursions were frequent, and under Dámáji Gáikwár became, as
has been seen above, annual. This leader did more. He took to wife a
daughter of the Gohil chief of the small state of Láthi in east central
Káthiáváda, whose dowry in land gave him the standpoint he sought in
the heart of the peninsula. He managed also to secure his position
in what are known as the Amreli Maháls, probably under the force of
circumstances similar to those which caused the weaker Rájputs to
gravitate towards the stronger of their own tribe. His expedition
through the peninsula, generally as near the time of harvest as
possible, was made regularly every year as soon as he had amassed a
sufficient number of troops on the mainland to admit of a force being
detached for mulakgiri. The object of these inroads was plunder, not
conquest; the leaders would readily have entered into negotiations for
the payment of the tribute had the chieftains been disposed to treat
otherwise than after defeat. The expenses of such an army were heavy,
and the more so as the time during which it would be in the field was
quite indefinite, and dependent entirely upon the amount of resistance
offered. In more than one instance the Marátha leaders, who usually
had no artillery for a siege, were obliged to regularly beleaguer a
town. Early in this century the town of Mália successfully defended
itself against a remarkably well equipped force under Bábáji, and the
Junágadh state was usually avoided by the Maráthás as much as possible
on account of the time it would take to reduce its army to terms.

It is not on record that the mulakgiri force habitually devastated
the country over which it passed, or caused much greater hardships
to the ryots than are inseparable from the passage of an army in
the field. There are, however, well authenticated stories of the
depredations and damage committed during these expeditions. A village
is said to have been deserted by order of the bhumia in order that
the timber of its houses might furnish fuel for the Marátha army on
its march. Tortures were doubtless inflicted on men supposed to be
well off, who were suspected to have hidden their property. A Marátha
army was usually, if not always, ill disciplined, as is proved by
the testimony of Mr. Forbes, an eye witness of the campaigns of
1775. [1064] From the same writer it is learned what an immense
proportion the camp followers bore to the actual combatants. If
this were the case in a real campaign against a formidable and
active enemy, it is likely that the irresponsible element was still
larger in an expedition like this of mulakgiri, where the enemy was
insignificant and the country at the mercy of the invaders. It is
probable therefore that the troops have been credited with misconduct
that should in point of fact be attributed to these Pindháris. In
after years, when the expeditions were conducted systematically,
villages on the line of march were always allowed the alternative of
entertaining a pioneer or two as a sort of guarantee. If no bandhári
of this sort were accepted, the army occupied the place. In many cases
the demands for supplies made by these pioneers were so exorbitant
that the villagers preferred to compound in turn with them also for
their absence. Another method by which a chieftain might avoid the
necessity of the army's passing through his territories was by sending
to the commander of the expedition an envoy empowered to treat for
the amount of tribute and to execute a provisional guarantee for
its future liquidation. This deed was destroyed on the subsequent
confirmation by the chief himself of the agreement for the sum fixed.

[Securities.] This habit of taking securities in all engagements was
so prevalent in all parts of the province, and played so prominent
a part in the financial administration of the Gáikwár's home and
tributary domains, that its main features are worth describing.

It is a well known characteristic of Hindu dealings that no transaction
is carried on by two parties alone if a third can possibly be dragged
in. This practice no doubt originated in the former insecure state
of society when no man considered himself safe in person or property
from government on the one hand and his neighbour on the other. With
classes like Kolis and predatory Rájputs, the feeling is intelligible
enough, and from these it spread into other branches of the society. To
such a pitch was distrust carried in the early part of the nineteenth
century, that the Gáikwár himself could find no one to enter into a
contract with him without the guarantee of one of his own subjects. The
consequences of this practice and the power it threw into the hands of
the Arab mercenaries, who were the principal securities for the public
debts, are matters that touch the history of the Baroda State rather
than that of the province. The chiefs in their dealings employed a
special sort of security which owed its validity not to political
consideration like that of the Arab Jamádárs but entirely to its
religious and traditional character.

[Bháts and Chárans, 1807.] A society of the military type like the
Rájput has a tendency towards caste and privilege. Without a leader
the warlike instincts of the tribe would not carry them beyond petty
robberies; whilst with a leader they can achieve greater exploits
of valour and destruction. The successful chief then is idolized,
and after a certain stage the privileges of the chieftainship become
hereditary. Once this system is established, the celebration of
ancestors follows, and when circumstances are favourable to the
perpetuation of the hereditary position, the genealogy of the chief
is a matter of the highest importance, and the person entrusted
with the record of this is vested with peculiar sanctity. It is the
genealogist's duty to enter in the record, not only the direct line
but the names of the more distant relations of the chief by whom he
is retained, and also to be the continual chanter of the glorious
deeds of their common ancestors. He is therefore a referee of the
highest authority in questions of pedigree or of the partition of
inheritance. An injury to his person might entail the loss of the
pedigree of the ruling family (especially as many of the bards kept no
written record) and thus produce a misfortune which would be felt by
the whole tribe. The chief, being a warrior, must take his chance in
the field with the rest, but the person of the genealogist was sacred
and inviolable. Amongst the Rájputs the greatest reverence was paid to
purity of pedigree, and each principal family had its Bhát to record
births and deaths amongst its members and to stimulate pride in their
lineage by the recital of the wars and exploits of their ancestors.

These Bháts necessarily multiplied beyond the number of the families
that could entertain them, so that many took to banking and some
to cultivation. Surrounded as they were by the social system of
the Hindus, it was not long before they became differentiated into
a distinct caste, and the inviolability of their persons, formerly
due only to respect for the pedigree, was now extended to the whole
tribe, even though a large proportion of it performed none of the
duties of genealogists. Similar to the Bháts in many respects,
notably in that of sacredness of person, were the Chárans, numerous
in Káthiáváda, where they had founded villages and lived as ordinary
cultivators. This tribe also claimed divine origin like the race
whose annals they had the privilege of recording. It is said that
Rája Todar Mal, the celebrated minister of the Dehli empire, was the
first to introduce the practice of taking these Bháts as securities
for the Rájputs. The assertion is possibly true, but rests merely on
tradition, and after ages usually find some great man as a sponsor for
all such innovations. It is clear however that for many years before
1807 no dealings of Kolis or Rájputs with the state or with each other
took place without the security of a Bhát being taken. This practice
seems to have been as prevalent on the mainland as in the peninsula,
the Kolis having doubtless borrowed it from their Rájput neighbours
after the Bháts had become a separate caste.

Under this system the Bháts acquired considerable wealth, as they
usually demanded a percentage on the amount for which they became
security. There are instances in which they presumed upon the strength
of their engagements and sacred character to bully or dictate to
their employer. Such was the case of the Rával of Bhávnagar in 1808,
which is also interesting in another way, as showing how the spirit
of industry and commerce tends to sap the old observances which have
their roots in superstition. This chief engaged in trade, fostered
merchants, and increased his revenue. When his security, a Bhát,
got troublesome and interfering, he applied to the power to whom he
paid tribute to have the old security bond cancelled and a fresh one
taken on his own personal responsibility. In doing this he seems to
have been prompted by nothing but his appreciation of the modern code
of commercial honour.

To return to the mulakgiri. The tribute for which preliminary security
had been taken seems to have fluctuated from year to year, but always
with reference to a fixed standard. It was one of the Marátha rules
never to recede from a former demand lest they should be thereby
setting up a precedent for future years. They preferred to secure
a year or two's arrears at the full rate to the payment of all the
arrears due at a reduced rate.

In spite of this fiction of a settled jama or tribute, the Maráthás,
when they had a sufficient force at their back, invariably demanded
a larger sum, the excess being called khará-ját or extra distinct
from the actual tribute. This ingenious plan of increasing the
collections originated, it is said, with Shivrám Gárdi, and was
carried out scrupulously by both Bábáji and Vithalráv in their
tours. In fact during the last few years of the old system Vithalráv
had so good a force with him that the extra demand formed a large
proportion of the whole tribute collected and had been paid only
under strong protest. [British Intervention.] The British had not
long been established in Ránpur, Gogha, and Dhandhuka before a few
petty chiefs of Gohilvád and Sorath applied to the Resident at Baroda
for protection against the mulakgiri of the Nawáb of Junágadh and the
Rával of Bhávnagar, offering to cede the sovereignty of their states
to the British on condition that certain rights and privileges were
preserved to the chiefs and their families. The conditions they named
were not such as were likely to meet with the approval of the British
Government, and do not seem to have received much consideration. The
proposals had, however, the effect of drawing the attention of the
Bombay Government towards the state of Káthiáváda, and permission
to aid the mulakgiri of the Gáikwár by detaching a few companies of
British troops was accorded by the Supreme Government. The outbreak
of hostilities with Sindia led to the whole question as to the
best means of collecting the tribute being for a time deferred. The
internal disputes of some of the more turbulent states, a few years
afterwards, gave the Resident an opportunity of sending an envoy to
one or two courts to see how matters stood, and to open a way for
a settlement in conjunction with the Gáikwár. Affairs at Baroda, as
mentioned above (page 416), detained the Resident there till 1807,
in which year he joined Vithalráv's army with a British contingent,
at a place in the Morvi state.

[Settlement of 1807.] Before treating directly with the chiefs a
circular was sent round to all of them both by the Gáikwár's agent and
by Colonel Walker the Resident, containing the basis of the proposals
with regard to the tribute about to be submitted to them. The position
of the British Government throughout this negotiation is not clearly
defined. Vithalráv in his circular mentions indeed that a British force
was with his own, but urges the chiefs to come to a settlement entirely
with the government he represented. Colonel Walker's note was longer,
more explicit, and conciliatory, but at the same time assumes a tone
of protection and superiority. The replies of the chiefs were various,
and, as a rule, seem to show that they regarded the British Government
as the chief mover in these negotiations. They were probably aware
of the position in which the engagements of the Gáikwár had placed
him with reference to the British, and for some years had had the
latter as their neighbours in the east of the peninsula. They were
therefore not able at once to take in the whole scope of the action
of the British Government in the tribute question.

Many seemed to take the note as a preliminary to a mulakgiri on the
part of the East India Company. The Rája of Mália, who had just been
causing disturbances in the dominions of all his neighbours, had
repulsed Bábáji and permitted the self-immolation of a Bhát rather
than fulfil an engagement, openly proposed a joint expedition across
the Ran to plunder Kachh and Sindh. From the inquiries made by the
Resident and from information gathered from the Gáikwár's accounts,
it was anticipated that separate engagements need only be entered into
with the twenty-nine chiefs to whom the circular invitation had been
issued, provided that the rights and interests of subordinate members
of the Bháyád were clearly defined in the agreement. When, however,
these rights came to be investigated in the light of the peculiar rules
of Rájput inheritance, it was found that no less than one hundred and
fifty-three persons had a claim to settle independently of each other
for their tribute. This greatly prolonged the settlement, but at last
the agreements were all framed on one principle. The amount settled
was determined by a close scrutiny of the collections of past years,
and Colonel Walker found it advisable to make great reductions in the
item of extras or kharáját, for which the later Gáekwár collectors
had such predilection. The engagements were of the following nature.

[Settlement of 1807. Financial.] First, the chief bound himself his
heirs and successors to pay at Baroda each year the tribute fixed
in perpetuity in 1807. He also procured a counter security for this
payment who engaged himself in this capacity for ten years. The
Honourable Company's government had then to become security on the
part of the Gáikwár for the fixity of the tribute demanded. This
participation of the British in the engagement was insisted upon by
the chiefs, and in all probability Colonel Walker was not averse from
admitting it. Having thus arranged for the payment of the tribute and
guaranteed the amount to be demanded, it was proposed to take measures
to prevent internal quarrels between the chiefs themselves. The
object of a fixed settlement was simply to remove the necessity for
overrunning the country from time to time with an irregular army and
to protect the chiefs against extortion. It was found that if the army
of the paramount power were removed, all means of keeping order in
the province would be lost, and the internecine feuds of the chiefs
would soon destroy the good effects of the permanent settlement
by materially altering the then existing position of the weaker
feudatories and rendering them unable to pay the tribute. It was
also the wish of the British Government to bring about such a state
of things in Káthiáváda that the presence of an army to control the
chiefs would be wholly uncalled-for and that the chiefs themselves
would co-operate to keep order and maintain the permanent settlement.

[Political.] A second agreement therefore was called for from each
signatory state of the nature of a security for good and peaceful
conduct. The counter security to this was usually that of another
chief. This bond was perpetual. On the execution of both these
engagements the chief received a parvána or guarantee that the Gáikwár
government would not take from him more than the tribute agreed upon,
and to this deed the countersignature of the Resident on behalf of
the British Government was affixed. This guarantee, like the promise
of the chief himself, was apparently given in perpetuity. It will be
noted that the amount of tribute was fixed permanently, but that it was
considered advisable to renew the security every ten years. It is also
remarkable that, except in the failzámin or bond for good behaviour,
the name of the Peshwa's government, the rights of which over the
tribute had only been temporarily alienated, does not appear. The
total amount of the tribute thus settled was Rs. 9,79,882.

By means of these engagements the relations of the tributaries to
their paramount power were made a matter of contract, instead of as
heretofore a series of uncertain and arbitrary exactions dependent
upon the respective means of coercion and resistance.

[Peshwa's Share in Káthiáváda.] Seven years of the lease granted to
the Gáikwár in 1804 by the Peshwa still remained unexpired and during
at least six of these the arrangements that had been made about the
Káthiáváda tribute do not seem to have been officially communicated to
the Peshwa's government. It was not until 1815, when the Resident at
Poona was trying to procure the renewal of the lease for the Gáikwár,
that an account of the settlement was drawn up in a draft agreement
which the Resident submitted to Bájiráv. In this draft the curious
mistake was made of mentioning the settlement instead of only the
security bond as decennial. The Peshwa, whose policy was to protract
negotiations, submitted in his turn a second draft which he said he
was willing to sign. In this he seized at once on the supposition
that the tribute was fixed only for ten years and stipulated for
an increase at the expiration of that period. He also demanded
that certain extra collections should be refunded by the Gáikwár,
and assumed the British Government to have become security for the
tribute owed by the chiefs to his own government.

It was evident that no accord would be reached on the lines of either
of these draft agreements as they stood. Before others were prepared,
Gangádhar Shástri had been murdered and the treaty of June 1817 was
a completed act, leaving further negotiations unnecessary.

[Later Arrangements.] Meanwhile the tribute since the expiry of
the farm of 1804 had been collected by a joint British and Gáikwár
expedition, for it was found that partly from their own disputes
and partly owing to the instigation of the agents of Bájiráv, the
chiefs were little disposed to act up to the engagements of 1807,
either with respect to tribute or good conduct. The Peshwa, whose
interference in the affairs of the peninsula had been constantly
discouraged, declined to trouble himself to collect the tribute,
the responsibility of which he asserted rested entirely upon the
British and Gáikwár governments. He subsequently ceded the tribute
to the British Government on account of military expenses. After his
fall in 1819 his territories, including the rights in Gujarát, fell
to the British Government, and in 1820 the Gáikwár arranged that the
whole of the Káthiáváda tribute, except that due from the districts
directly subordinate to Baroda, should be collected by the agency of
the British.

[The Mahi Kántha.] Turning to the events on the mainland, we find that
soon after Colonel Walker's return from the Káthiáváda expedition,
he introduced the Káthiáváda tribute system into the Mahi Kántha,
in spite of the opposition of Sitárám Rávji and the anti-English
party in the Darbár.

[Supplementary Treaty, 1808.] The territory ceded for the payment
of the British contingent in 1805 was found to yield less revenue
than had been anticipated, so in 1808 a treaty supplementary to
the consolidating one of 1805 was drawn up, allotting additional
assignments amounting to about 1,76,168 rupees to the British. This
revenue was derived partly from alienated villages in Nadiád, Mahudha,
Dholka, Mátar, and near the Ranjar Ghát. The ghásdána or tribute of
Bhávnagar was also made over by this agreement. With regard to this
latter acquisition, it is to be noticed that the agreement is drawn up
in the name of the Honourable Company alone, and not in that of the
British Government on account of Ánandráv Gáikwár. It also differs
from other engagements of a similar nature in containing a provision
against the contingency of future irregular demands being made by the
Peshwa's army. The reason for this distinction is evidently that the
Bhávnagar contribution was not part of the Káthiáváda revenue farmed to
the Gáikwár by Bájiráv, and was thus not divisible on the expiration
of the lease. The right to this tribute rested with the British by
virtue of the previous cession of Gogha, of which sub-division the
fifty nine villages of the Bhávnagar Bháyád formed part.

[Okhámandal, 1809.] Next year the Okhámandal chiefs, who had not come
under the settlement of 1807, were driven to engage not to continue
their piratical depredations along the coast, and to admit one Sundarji
Shivji as Resident on behalf of the British Government. The Gáikwár
government then, too, seems to have become their counter security,
an arrangement which led to misunderstandings a short while afterwards.

[Disturbances in Káthiáváda, 1811.] In 1811, some disturbances in
Navánagar and Junágadh and symptoms of discontent in Okhámandal took
the Resident from Baroda into the peninsula with part of the British
contingent.

The Jám of Navánagar had got involved in pecuniary transactions with
the Ráv of Kachh, and the British Government had mediated with a
view of arranging for the repayment by gradual instalments. The Jám,
however, repudiated all the engagements of 1807 both as regards the
debt and the tribute, ejected the Gáikwár's agent from his dominions,
and prepared for war. He also began to incite the neighbouring
chiefs to join in sweeping out the paramount power from the whole of
Káthiáváda. It was not till after a considerable show of force that he
laid down his arms and came to terms. Captain Carnac, the Resident,
got him to submit the Kachh claims to the arbitration of the English
Government, and after fixing them at Rs. 4,33,830, Captain Carnac
made an arrangement similar to that originally intended.

There remained the question of a disputed succession in
Junágadh. Bahádur Khán, son of a slave girl, was put forward in
opposition to a younger aspirant, Salábat Khán, reputed to be the
son of a lady of the Rádhanpur house. The Baroda government with the
concurrence of the Resident had admitted the claims of the latter. On
a report, however, by the Assistant Resident in Káthiáváda, Captain
Carnac was induced to alter his opinion and to support Bahádur Khán,
on the grounds that Salábat Khán was a spurious child, and that Bahádur
was ready to make concessions of value to the Gáikwár government. The
Bombay Council, however, disavowed all countenance of the claims of
Bahádur Khán, and the matter was let drop.

[1812.] In the year 1812 the Gáikwár had paid off the pecuniary
loan borrowed in 1803 from the British Government, but there still
remained the debts for which that government had become bhandári or
security in place of the ejected jamádârs of the Arab force. These
claims could not be paid off for at least two years longer, so that
for that period the Resident was ordered to maintain the same close
supervision of Baroda affairs as heretofore.

[1813-14.] The next two years were spent chiefly in discussions
with the Poona government about the old claims by the Peshwa on the
Gáikwár's estate. There is no doubt that at the time of his death,
Dámáji had not paid up nearly all that he had bound himself in 1753
to pay. On the other hand there had been at least six intermediate
compacts between the Peshwa and various members of the Gáikwár
family. Amongst others was that of 1768 fixing the arrears of the
previous three years, that of 1778 and of 1781, by the tenth clause of
which Fatehsingh was excused payment of arrears for the time during
which he was engaged in hostilities against Rághobá. Then came the
agreement with Govindráv in 1797, to which a sort of debit and credit
account is appended.

[Peshwa Intrigue in Baroda, 1814.] The Peshwa had been content, for
reasons that have been shown above, to let these claims lie dormant
during the currency of the ten years' farm. But, as the question
of the renewal of this agreement became imminent, he gradually
opened more frequent communications with the Baroda council, using
these claims as a pretext for sounding the disposition of the chief
officials and ascertaining their feelings especially towards the
British Government. When the negotiations for the settlement of
these claims were fairly set on foot, he used every possible means to
protract them till he had finally decided what he should do in 1814,
when the Ahmedábád farm expired.

It was easy for Bájiráv to discover who were the malcontents at the
Baroda Court. Sitárám, the adopted son of Rávji Áppáji, having been
found both incompetent and untrustworthy in the management of affairs,
had been practically removed from any post of influence in the council,
and was moreover chafing at the refusal of the British Government
to recognize him in the same way as they had done his father. He had
also been superseded as Suba of Káthiáváda by Vithalráv Deváji. Under
these circumstances, and finding that he had the support of a large
number of the older court party against the authority of the Resident
and of his native agent, he either himself opened communications
with Bájiráv or readily listened to the counsels sent to him direct
from Poona. Before long, agents were sent to the Peshwa's Court by
Takhtbái, wife of Ánandráv, with instructions, it is supposed, to
thwart all the proposals and designs of Gangádhar Shástri, who had been
recently sent as envoy by the Gáikwár council of administration. The
chief obstacle to the settlement of the Peshwa's claims was the
counter-demand made by the Baroda government on account of Broach,
which had been disposed of without the Gáikwár's consent, and also
on account of the damage caused by the inroads of Ába Shelukar,
when accredited agent of Bájiráv in Gujarát.

There is no need to detail here the events that took place in Poona
during these negotiations. On the expiration of the farm in 1814,
Bájiráv appointed Trimbakji Dengle Sarsuba of Ahmedábád. The latter,
however, did not leave Poona, where his presence was indispensable to
his master, but sent agents with instructions rather of a political
than of a fiscal nature. He himself undertook the task of disposing
of Gangádhar Shástri, whom he caused to be assassinated at Pandharpur
in July 1815.

Meanwhile the Jám of Navánagar had died leaving a disputed
succession. The chief's Khavás or family slaves, instigated probably
by agents from Ahmedábád, began to usurp the government, and the
whole question was submitted by the Darbár to the Peshwa as being
lord paramount. The Ahmedábád commander sent a body of two hundred
cavalry to Navánagar, but before they could arrive, the Khavás' revolt
had been quelled by a British force detached from the contingent. They
therefore dispersed through the province inciting discontent and revolt
amongst the Játs and Káthis. In Kaira they instigated a tribe of Kolis
to attack the British lines by night. Sitárám Rávji's adherents also
collected a force at Dhár, a state well-known for lending itself for
such purposes, and kept the frontier in confusion. Severe measures at
Poona and Baroda soon put an end to this state of things, and at last
Trimbakji Dengle was surrendered to the British Government to answer
for his share in the murder of Gangádhar Shástri. The discussion of
the Gáikwár's debts, however, was carried on all through the year
at Poona, whilst Bájiráv was maturing his then vacillating plans for
extirpating the British from the west of India.

[Okhámandal ceded to the Gáikwár.] In 1816 the chiefs of Okhámandal
again betook themselves to piracy. Their territory was occupied by
a British force. It will be remembered that in 1809 the Gáikwár's
government had become counter security for these chiefs, but owing
to the distance of the district from a military post, the Baroda
authorities found themselves unable to spare troops enough to put a
check on the misconduct of their tributaries. In A.D. 1816, at the time
of occupation, the Bombay Government informed the Baroda administration
that they had no wish to permanently establish themselves at so distant
a spot, which contained, moreover, a much frequented shrine of Hindu
worship, and that they were willing to put the Gáikwár in possession
if he would engage to keep up a sufficient force in the district to
protect the neighbouring ports and shores from the pirates and wreckers
that infested the island of Dwárká and the adjoining mainland. The
Bombay Government made a point of asserting on this occasion, in
opposition apparently to some proposal by the Baroda Darbár, that
they could not admit that the mere fact of having become security
or counter-security gave any preferential right to the possession of
the country. Finally, the Gáikwár government agreed to the condition
proposed, and the district was made over to them.

[British Aid at Junágadh.] In the same year (A.D. 1816) British aid was
invoked by the Nawáb of Junágadh who was oppressed by a too powerful
minister, backed by the Arab mercenaries. After a settlement of this
dispute had been satisfactorily brought about, the Nawáb, in gratitude,
waived his rights to tribute over the territories recently ceded to the
British in the peninsula, where his family had formerly great influence
and considerable property. The escape of Trimbakji Dengle from Thána,
and the subsequent attempts of the Peshwa to prevent the re-capture
of his favourite and to re-unite the Marátha confederacy, led to the
execution of a fresh treaty on June 13th, 1817, in accordance with
the orders of the Supreme Government.

[Treaty of Poona, 1817.] It was intended to bind the Peshwa in such
a way that he could never again enjoy the ascendancy amongst the
Marátha chiefs to which he aspired. The Resident at Poona took this
opportunity of also putting an end to the discussions about the mutual
claims on each other by the Poona and Baroda governments. The Peshwa
agreed to abandon all claims on any territory in possession of the
Gáikwár and to accept an annual payment of four lákhs of rupees in
satisfaction of all previous debts. The farm of Gujarát was made
perpetual to the Gáikwár on the payment of four and a half lákhs
annually, but the Káthiáváda tribute was made over to the British
Government in liquidation of military expenses. The latter Government,
by this treaty, also entered into possession of the Peshwa's revenue in
Gujarát, except that of Ulpád, which had been assigned to a favourite
officer. All the Peshwa's rights north of the Narbada were also ceded.

[Treaty with the Gáikwár, 1817-18.] These conditions necessitated a
readjustment of the agreements with the Gáikwár. On November 1817,
a definitive treaty, afterwards supplemented by one of November 1818,
was executed between the Baroda and British Governments. The force
furnished by the former state was found inefficient and the employment
of a larger body of British troops was therefore necessary. To pay
for these the Gáikwár ceded his share in the fort of Ahmedábád and the
districts immediately surrounding that city. [1065] He also made over
some districts near Surat, and the town of Umreth in Kaira with the
whole of the rights acquired by the perpetual farm of Ahmedábád. The
British remitted the mughlái or dues taken by the Nawábs of Surat on
the Gáikwár's possessions near that city. Okhámandal having now been
pacified, was also given up to the Gáikwár, but revolted four months
afterwards and was not again subdued for a considerable time.

[1819.] At the final settlement of the dominions of the late Peshwa
in 1819, the whole of his rights in Gujarát passed in sovereignty
to the British, who remitted the four lákhs due from the Gáikwár in
composition of arrears claimed by Bájiráv. [1820.] The next year a
special inquiry was made into the respective shares of the Peshwa and
Baroda governments in the Káthiáváda tribute and in the extra allowance
levied by the Gáikwár called ghás-dána allowance. In the course of
this inquiry so many abuses of power and instances of extortion on
the part of the Gáikwár's officers were brought to light, that the
Bombay Government on these grounds, and on account also of the general
deterioration in the province since the Gáikwár's troops were stationed
there, prevailed upon Sayájiráv, who had now succeeded to the throne,
to let the duty of collection be undertaken and superintended by a
British officer stationed in Káthiáváda, who should, however, employ
the Gáikwár's troops on occasions of necessity. A similar arrangement
was made with regard to the Mahi Kántha, where the effects of the
settlement of 1811 had been much weakened by the disorderly conduct
of the Gáikwár's troops stationed there. The administration of nearly
the whole of the province passed into the hands of the British and
the period of Marátha ascendancy came to an end.

[General Review.] It remains to review generally the nature and
characteristics of the Marátha connection with Gujarát, the chief
events in which have been chronicled above. The most prominent feature
has already been indicated at the beginning of this section and is
apparent throughout the whole narrative. It is, in fact, the small
space in history occupied during this period by the people, compared
with the share appropriated to the actions of the government and
its delegates. The reasons for this are as easily seen as the fact
itself. From first to last the Marátha interests in Gujarát were,
except at one or two special junctures, simply pecuniary ones. In
comparison with other countries within reach of Marátha arms, Gujarát
has always had a very large proportion of inhabitants engaged in
commerce and manufacturing industries. It was the object of Siváji
to get as much booty as he could and carry it away then and there;
hence the commercial classes and manufacturers presented the most
favourable opportunities for pillage, and the agriculturists were at
first only mulcted in forage and provisions. Rapidity of action was
another of Siváji's aims, so not only were his visits short and their
effects transitory, but all his booty consisted of property that could
be carried away by his horsemen. No women or followers accompanied
his expeditions, no prisoners were made excepting the few who could
afford to pay a heavy ransom. Torture was resorted to only when the
captive was suspected of having concealed his treasure. Cows women
and cultivators were, according to Siváji's system, exempted from
capture. Assignments on revenue were seldom made by him for fear
of weakening his own authority. Subsequently the Marátha demands
became more regular and assumed the form of a certain proportion
of the revenue. The sar-deshmukhi and chauth were supposed to be
calculated on the standard assessment so as to avoid subsequent claims
as tribute or over-collection. In reality, however, they consisted of
a fixed share in actual collections together with whatever extras the
officer in charge could manage to extort, and which were, of course,
kept undefined in any agreement. The expeditions, too, moved more
leisurely and in greater force. The passes and roads in their rear were
protected by their own comrades, so that the booty could be brought
to the Dakhan in carts, and more bulky property therefore was removed
than in former times. The times, too, when the demands were likely
to be made were known to the headmen of the district and village,
so that the cultivators could be pressed beforehand to furnish their
share of the contributions. The extortion by this means passed from
the commercial classes down to the agriculturists, the latter having
also the burden of supporting a larger and more cumbrous army for a
longer period.

When the power of the Dábháde and his deputy the Gáikwár was fairly
established, a regular system of administration was introduced. It
will be remembered that by the treaty of 1729 as few Marátha officers
were to be employed as possible beyond those necessary to collect
the Dábháde's share of the revenue. In consequence, however, of
the internal struggles of the Muhammadan chiefs, this minimum quota
grew to be a large establishment, with the usual accompaniment of
alienations and assignments for the support of the officers and their
religious institutions which the weakness of the central power had
allowed to become customary. The Dábháde himself was non-resident and
his deputy usually being too valuable an assistant to be spared from
the arena of Dakhan politics, the collection was left to sub-deputies
and their subordinates, who in turn delegated a great part of their
duties to village officers and even to strangers. The Dábhádes, who
were throughout more interested in the Dakhan than in Gujarát, had,
no doubt, an idea of raising up a power in the latter province in
opposition to the administration of the Peshwa, which was conducted
purely by Bráhman agency. It was soon evident, however, that all that
could be done politically with Gujarát was to make it a treasury for
the support of schemes that had to be carried out in the Dakhan.

The fertility of the soil and the facilities the country afforded
for commerce and manufactures both tended to make it unlikely to
become a field for recruiting. The inhabitants of the towns had
fixed and lucrative occupations; the cultivators were mostly of
a class which on account of the fertility of their land neither
Muhammadan nor Marátha had been able to impoverish. The Maráthás
had still to seek for soldiers in the rugged and barren country on
the Gháts and in the Konkan, where the people could only look for a
hand-to-mouth existence if they remained at home. The warlike tribes
of Gujarát were, as has been already seen, too proud by birth and
position to engage themselves to fight for any but their own race and
interest. The aboriginal races were not likely to prove effective
allies even if they had been willing to move from their own woods
and fortresses. None of the Marátha governors of Gujarát seem to have
consistently attempted to weld the various interests subordinate to
them into a cohesion and unity that they might have made politically
useful against the Poona influence. All that they endeavoured to do
was to draw from their charge as much revenue as possible and to keep
out interlopers. To the taxpayer the result was the same, whether
his district was invaded by Kantáji or Piláji. If one anticipated
the other in carrying off the harvest, the ryot still had to pay the
latter for ejecting the intruder. The only resistance to be feared
by the Maráthás was that, not of the cultivators, but of their own
race or of the Rájput Girásiás. These latter were treated in all
districts as mere robbers, probably because the class which bears
that name near Rájpipla, where the Maráthás first came in contact
with it subsists usually on blackmail. In the north, however, the
Girásiás were landowners of great influence and fixed residence, not
likely to be conciliated by the knowledge that the invaders of their
country classed them along with Bhils and Kolis as mehvásis or outlaws.

In order to relieve the chief officials of direct responsibility for
the revenue, the Gáikwár towards the last quarter of the eighteenth
century if not before, introduced the system of letting out each
revenue sub-division in farm for from one to five years at a fixed
annual rate. The farmer was as often as not an absentee, but the
supervision and administration were never entrusted to any one but a
Marátha Bráhman. The revenue for the year was settled by an inspection
of the accounts of previous years and the crops of each village. The
amount was taken in kind, but the actual distribution of the whole
on individual cultivators was left to the headman, who was in most
cases made responsible for the assessment imposed on his village.

The frequent passages of hostile armies and other causes had left
much culturable land a desert. In order to restore the population and
induce colonists to settle and cultivate in such spots, leases on
favourable terms were granted to desáis, who administered the land
as they pleased, and were directly responsible to the head revenue
authority of the sub-division for the annual rent. The patels and other
village officials also made use of their position with reference to
the foreign supervisors in appropriating large tracts of waste land
to their own uses. The kamávísdár or farmer for the time being was
interested only in recouping himself for the amount he had agreed
to pay the Marátha government, together with a margin for bribes
paid to underlings at head-quarters for good offices with regard
to the farm. He was ready, therefore, to make use of any agency in
collecting his revenue that he found effective, and which saved the
cost of a personal establishment. In many parts of the country there
were hereditary village headmen accustomed to the duty of extorting
money from unwilling ryots. In other places, such for instance as
Dholka, it had been customary for certain Muhammadans called Kasbátis,
to become responsible for the revenue of certain villages in return
for a discount on the jama or amount collected (manoti). These
manotidárs were found so useful by the Marátha officials that they
gradually acquired an hereditary position and claimed proprietary
rights in the villages for which they had been formerly mere agents
for collection. They also acted as desáis or colonists, and succeeded
in getting their leases of certain tracts renewed long after they
had ceased to actively improve the land, which had in fact been all
brought under regular cultivation.

Such was the agency employed in administering the revenue. The
kamávísdár was also the dispenser of justice both civil and
criminal. As his object was to make money and not to improve the
condition of his charge, his punishments consisted chiefly in fines,
and most offences could be paid for. No record of trials was kept
except a memorandum of the amount passed at each decision to the
credit of the farmer. In civil suits sometimes one-fourth of the
amount in dispute was assigned as costs and appropriated by the
court. The Girásiás in their own territory exercised somewhat similar
jurisdiction, but grave crimes with violence were apparently left
to the party injured or his relations to decide after the manner
of the offence. Arbitration, too, was a frequent mode of deciding
differences of both civil and criminal nature, but the kamávísdár or
girásiá usually managed that the State should not be a loser by such
a method of settlement.

The whole system indicates clearly enough the slight hold the Maráthás
had on the province and their desire to make the most out of it
for the furtherance of court intrigues or political ends above the
Gháts. There is nothing to show that they contemplated a permanent
colonization of the country until the British Government undertook
the task of dividing the Marátha nation by the establishment of a
powerful and independent court at Baroda.

The home of the Maráthás was always the Dakhan, and for many
years after they had effected a lodgment in Gujarát, their army
regularly returned for the rainy season to the country from whence
they originally came. Their leaders were encouraged to be as much as
possible near the court by the Dábháde, or the regent on the one side
and by the Peshwa on the other: the former on account of their weight
with the army and the Marátha chiefs, the latter in order that their
influence in a distant dependency might not grow beyond what prudence
recommended or might be counteracted if its tendency to increase became
manifest. For similar reasons no force was allowed to be maintained in
Gujarát sufficient to consolidate the Marátha acquisitions there into
a manageable whole. Dámáji Gáikwár, had he lived, would undoubtedly
have done much towards this end by means of his personal influence;
but, as it happened, the thin crust of Marátha domination rapidly
disappeared before it either was assimilated into the system of the
province or hardened over it. A military occupation of a large and
civilised district at a distance from the mother-country, and prevented
by the jealousy of the central authority and the short-sightedness
of those in charge of its exploitation, from either conforming itself
to the elements it found already established, or absorbing the vital
forces of the government it dispossessed, a system without the breath
of life, without elasticity, without the capacity of self-direction,
imposed bodily upon a foreign people, without even the care of
preparing a foundation, such seems to have been the Marátha government,
containing within itself all that was necessary to ensure a precarious,
but while it lasted, an oppressive existence.

GUJARÁT DISTURBANCES,

1857-1859.

BY L. R. ASHBURNER Esq., C.S.I.,
LATE OF H.M.'s BOMBAY CIVIL SERVICE.

[CONTRIBUTED May 1880.]

GUJARÁT DISTURBANCES,

1857-1859.

[The Red Salt Scare, 1857.] Very soon after the outbreak of the
mutinies in the North-West of India in May 1857, an uneasy feeling
began to prevail in the Bombay Presidency, especially in Gujarát. The
story of the greased cartridges had been industriously repeated and
found credulous listeners in every village. A similar incident occurred
in Gujarát. A consignment of salt from the Ran of Kachh having been
carried in bags which had previously held red ochre (sindur) had
become discoloured. This was observed at Sádra in the Mahi Kántha as
the salt was in transit to Rájputána, and a report was at once spread
that the salt had been defiled with cow's blood. It was believed in
Ahmedábád and throughout Gujarát that this was a device of the British
Government to destroy the caste of the people as a preliminary to
their forcible conversion to Christianity.

[The Passing of the Pariah Dog.] About the time that the cakes or
chapátis were being circulated throughout the North-West of India,
a common pariah dog was passed from village to village in the Panch
Maháls and eastern Gujarát. It was never ascertained who first set
the dog in motion, but it came from the Central India frontier with
a basket of food which was given to the village dogs, and a similar
supply with the dog was forwarded to the next village. When pestilence
or other calamity threatens an Indian village, it is the custom to
take a goat or a buffalo to the boundary and drive it into the lands
of the adjoining village, in the hope that it will avert evil from
the community. A similar belief prevailed among the Jews. There is
no reason to suppose that this movement of the dog in Gujarát was
a signal of revolt or had any deeper political significance than a
vague feeling that troublous times were approaching. Still it was by
many regarded as an evil omen and created considerable alarm. [1066]

[Gold Hoarding.] Although Gujarát was apparently tranquil in the hot
season of 1857, those who were most familiar with native opinion were
aware of the existence of very serious discontent, and indications
of the storm which lowered on the horizon were not wanting. When
disturbances are impending natives invariably convert their savings
into gold, because gold is more portable and more easily concealed
than silver. A sudden and unusual demand for gold in the markets,
especially by the native troops, had been observed. This fall of the
political barometer should never be disregarded. It indicates the
approach of a storm with great certainty.

[Seditious Native Press.] The native press, which had been merely
disloyal, now assumed an attitude of decided hostility. Every paper
contained the most exaggerated accounts of the massacre of Europeans
in the North-West Provinces, and absurd rumours were circulated of
the approach of a combined Russian and Persian army, which, it was
said, had reached Attok and would shortly invade Hindustán. It is
much to be regretted that the measures which were found necessary in
1880 for the suppression of seditious publications were not enforced
in 1857. Had this been done much evil would have been averted. The
native mind would not have become familiar with the spectacle of
the British Government held up to the execration and contempt of its
subjects and the vilest motives attributed to every public measure.

[Maulvi Saráj-ud-din.] The native press was not the only source of
sedition. The fall of the British Government was openly predicted
in every masjid, and in Ahmedábád a Maulvi named Saráj-ud-din
became especially prominent by preaching a jehád in the Jáma Masjid
to audiences of native officers and savárs of the Gujarát Horse
and troops from the Ahmedábád cantonment. The Maulvi was expelled
from Ahmedábád and found his way to Baroda, where he was afterwards
arrested; but the impunity he so long enjoyed brought great discredit
upon Government, for it was very naturally supposed that a government
which tamely submitted to be publicly reviled was too weak to resent
the indignity. Oriental races are so accustomed to violent measures
that they seldom appreciate moderation or forbearance. The generation
that had known and suffered from the anarchy of the Peshwa had passed
away. The seditious language of the native press and the masjid was
addressed to a population too ignorant to understand the latent power
of the British Government.

[Apparent Weakness of British Rule.] In 1857 the immense continent
of Hindustán was governed by what appeared to the people to be a
few Englishmen unsupported by troops, for they knew that the native
army was not to be depended on, and the European troops were so few
that they were only seen in the larger military cantonments. It must
have seemed an easy task to dispose of such a handful of men, and it
probably never occurred to those who took part in the insurrection
that the overthrow of the British Government would involve more
serious operations than the capture or murder of the Europeans who
governed the country so easily. They could not perceive that England
would never submit to a defeat, and that the handful of men who ruled
India were supported by the whole power of the nation. The plotters
had no very definite ideas for the future. The Musalmáns regarded
the subversion of a government of Káfirs as a triumph of Islám,
and both Muslims and Hindus looked forward to a period of anarchy
during which they might indulge that appetite for plunder which had
been restrained for so many years. The descendants of the feudal
aristocracy of the Peshwa are an ignorant and improvident race deeply
involved in debt. They could not fail to see that under the operation
of our laws their estates were rapidly passing into the possession
of the more intelligent mercantile classes, and they hoped to recover
their position in the revolution that was about to ensue.

[Administrative Defects.] A great change had taken place in the
character of the administration. The civilians of the school of Duncan,
Malcolm, and Mountstuart Elphinstone, though not deeply learned in the
law, were accomplished earnest men, sufficiently acquainted with the
unalterable principles of right and wrong to administer substantial
justice to a simple people who had not yet learnt the art of lying. The
people asked for justice rather than law. They were satisfied with
the justice they obtained from the able and upright men who ruled
this country during the first half of this century. The writings and
official reports of the officers of that period indicate a knowledge
of native customs and feelings and a sympathy with the people that
is unknown in the present day, for knowledge and sympathy cannot be
acquired except by a long and familiar residence amongst the people
which is now becoming every year more impossible. When the overland
route rendered communication with England more easy and frequent,
a reaction set in against patriarchal administration. Concubinage
with native women, which had been common, was now declared vulgar,
if not immoral; and the relations between Europeans and Natives soon
became less cordial than they had been during the early period of
British rule. About this time a considerable immigration of lawyers
appeared in India. [The Courts Disliked.] These briefless gentlemen,
envious of the official monopoly of the Civil Service, raised an outcry
that justice was being administered by men who had not acquired that
knowledge of law which the formality of eating a certain number of
dinners at the Temple was supposed to guarantee. They worked the press
so industriously to this cry, that in the course of a few years they
had succeeded in impressing their views on the Court of Directors
in London and on the less intelligent members of the Civil Service
in India.

Unfortunately the Sadar Court was then presided over by a succession
of feeble old gentlemen who had not sufficient force of character
to resist this selfish agitation, and by way of refuting the charge
of ignorance of law devoted themselves to the study of those petty
technicalities which have so often brought the administration of
justice into contempt, and which the progress of law reform has
not even now removed from the law of England. In 1827, Mountstuart
Elphinstone had enacted a Civil and Criminal Code which was still the
substantive law of the land. It was simple and admirably suited to the
people, but justice was administered according to the spirit rather
than the letter of the law. A district officer would have incurred
severe censure if his decisions were found to be inequitable, however
they might have been supported by the letter of the law. The national
character for even-handed justice had made the English name respected
throughout India and far across the steppes of Central Asia. But
the demoralizing example of the Sadar Adálat soon extended to the
lower grades of the service. The Civil Service was afflicted with the
foolishness which, we are told, precedes ruin. Its members diligently
searched their law-books for precedents and cases, and rejoiced
exceedingly if they could show their knowledge of law by reversing
the decision of a lower Court on some long-forgotten ruling of the
Courts of Westminster. The first effect of this evil was to fill the
courts with corrupt and unprincipled vakils who perverted the course of
justice by perjury, forgery, and fraud of every description. Litigation
increased enormously, no cause was too rotten, no claim too fraudulent
to deprive it of the chance of success. The grossest injustice was
committed in the name of the law, and though the Civil Service was
above all suspicion of corruption, the evil could hardly have been
greater if the Judges had been corrupt. This state of affairs gave
rise to great discontent, for the administration of justice fell
almost entirely into the hands of the vakils. When men quarrelled
they no longer said, "I'll beat or I'll kill you," but "I'll pay a
vakil Rs. 50 to ruin you," and too often this was no mere idle threat.

[The Inám Commission.] The operations of the Inám Commission and
of the Survey Department were also a fruitful cause of alarm and
discontent. Many of the estates of the more influential Jághírdárs had
been acquired by fraud or violence during the period of anarchy which
preceded the fall of the Peshwa. The Patels and Deshmukhs had also
appropriated large areas of lands and had made grants of villages to
temples and assignments of revenue to Bráhmans, religious mendicants,
and dancing girls. The Peshwa had never recognized these alienations
as any limitation of his rights, for he farmed his revenues, and so
long as a large sum was paid into his treasury by the farmers it was
immaterial to him how much land was alienated. But when the Survey
Department revealed the fact that nearly a fourth part of the fertile
province of Gujarát was unauthorizedly enjoyed by these parasites;
and that in other districts the proportion of alienations was nearly
equally large, a due regard for the public interests demanded that
there should be an investigation into the title on which the lands were
held rent-free. It became the duty of the Inám Commission to make this
inquiry, and though a very small portion of land was resumed or rather
assessed to the land revenue and the rules for the continuation of
cash allowances were extremely liberal, they could hardly be expected
to give satisfaction to those who had so long enjoyed immunity from
any share of the public burdens. The Bráhmans and the priesthood of
every sect deeply resented the scrutiny of the Inám Commission and
excited an intensely fanatical spirit by representing the inquiry as
a sacrilegious attack on their religious endowments and a departure
from the principle of neutrality and toleration which had been the
policy of Government from a very early period.

[The Army Disloyal.] Notwithstanding all these elements of danger
there would probably have been no revolt if the army had remained
loyal. Fortunately the Bombay army was composed of a great variety of
races, Musalmáns of the Shia and Sunni sects, Maráthás of the Dakhan
and Konkan, Parváris, Pardeshis, and a few Jews and Christians. Little
community of sentiment could exist, in so heterogeneous a force,
and to this circumstance we may trace the failure of each mutinous
outbreak in the regiments of the Bombay army. Many of its regiments
had, however, recruited extensively in the North-West Provinces
which were then the centre of the political cyclone, and it was soon
discovered that seditious overtures were being made to them not only
by their brethren in the regiments which had already mutinied, but by
discontented persons of higher rank. [Báiza Bái of Gwálior.] The most
important of these was a clever woman known as the Báiza Bái. She was
the daughter of a Dakhan Sardár named Sirji Ráo Ghátke, and had been
married in early life to His Highness Dowlat Ráo Sindia the Mahárája
of Gwálior. On his death she had been allowed to adopt Jankoji Ráo as
heir to the gádi, and during his minority she had been appointed by
the British Government Regent of the Gwálior state. In this position
the Bái had accumulated great wealth. She had deposited £370,000
(37 lákhs of rupees) for safe custody in the treasury at Benares,
and it was known that she had other resources at Gwálior. Her avarice
and ambition were insatiable. She sent emissaries to all the Marátha
chiefs and Thákors in Western India calling on them to take up arms
and restore the empire of Shiváji. She appealed to the troops, urging
them to emulate the deeds of their comrades in the Bengal army who
had already nearly exterminated the Europeans in the North-West,
and warned them that if they did not now strike in defence of their
religion they would shortly be converted to Christianity and made to
drink the blood of the sacred cow.

[Pársi Riot in Broach, June 1857.] In May and June 1857 our troops
were fighting before Delhi, only just holding their own, and making
little impression on the walls of the city which were strongly held
by the mutinous regiments. Gujarát was still tranquil. It is true
there had been a riot in Broach originating in a long-standing feud
between the Pársis and Musalmáns of that town, but it had no political
significance and had been promptly suppressed. The ringleaders were
arrested, tried, and sentenced to be hanged for the murder of a
Pársi, but there is no reason to suppose that this disturbance had
any immediate connection with the outbreak in the North-West. It
was probably only a coincidence, but the violence of the rioters
was no doubt encouraged by the weakness of our position in Gujarát,
and the exaggerated rumours which reached them of the massacre of
our countrymen.

[Mutiny at Mhow, July 1857.] On July 1st, 1857, the 23rd Bengal Native
Infantry and the 1st Bengal Cavalry stationed at Mhow mutinied and
murdered Colonel Platt, Captain Fagan, Captain Harris, and a number
of European subordinates of the Telegraph Department. The troops
of His Highness Holkar fraternized with the mutineers, attacked the
Residency, and after a desultory fight drove out Colonel Durand the
Resident, who took refuge in Bhopál with the surviving Europeans
of Indor. Information of the mutiny at Mhow soon reached Ahmedábád,
and treasonable negotiations were at once opened for a simultaneous
rising of the Gujarát Horse and of the troops in the cantonment; but
they could not agree to combined operations. The Maráthás hoped for
the restoration of the dynasty of the Peshwa, while the Pardeshis
looked towards Dehli where their brethren were already in arms,
without any very definite comprehension of what they were fighting
for, but with some vague idea that they would establish a Musalmán
Ráj on the throne of the Great Mughal.

[Mutiny at Ahmedábád, July 1857.] On July 9th, 1857, seven savárs
of the Gujarát Horse raised a green flag in their regimental lines
in Ahmedábád and attempted to seize the quarter guard in which
the ammunition was stored; but the guard made some slight show of
resistance, and finding the regiment did not join them the mutineers
left the lines in the direction of Sarkhej. They were followed by the
Adjutant, Lieutenant Pym, with twelve savárs, and Captain Taylor,
the commandant, joined them soon after with three men of the Koli
Corps, whom he had met on the Dholka road. The savárs were overtaken
near the village of Tájpor, and having taken up a strong position
between three survey boundary-marks opened fire on their officers
and the Kolis, the savárs standing aloof. After many shots had
been exchanged without result, Captain Taylor advanced to parley,
and while endeavouring to reason with his men was shot through the
body. The Kolis now re-opened fire and having shot two of the savárs
the rest laid down their arms. They were tried under Act XIV. of 1857
and hanged. The savárs who followed Lieutenant Pym passively declined
to act against their comrades, and if the Kolis had not been present
the mutineers would have escaped. Captain Taylor's wound was severe;
the bullet passed through his body, but he eventually recovered. The
execution of the savárs had a good effect on the troops, but it became
evident that a serious struggle was impending, and Lord Elphinstone,
who was then at the head of the Bombay Government, took all the
precautions that were possible under the circumstances.

[Mr. Ashburner's Force.] Mr. Ashburner, Assistant Magistrate
of Kaira, was ordered to raise a force of 200 Foot and 30 Horse
for the protection of his districts, and Husain Khán Battangi, a
Musalmán gentleman of Ahmedábád, was authorized to enlist 2000 of
the dangerous classes. It was not expected that this Ahmedábád force
would add to our fighting strength, but the employment of the rabble
of Ahmedábád on good pay kept them out of mischief till the crisis was
passed. Mr. Ashburner's small force was composed of Rájputs, Makránis,
and Kolis. They were a very useful body of men and were afterwards
drafted into the Kaira Police of which they formed the nucleus. It
was this force that suppressed the rising of the Thákors on the Mahi,
which will be described below.

[Genl. Roberts.] General Roberts, a very able soldier, commanded the
Northern Division at this time. He fully realized the critical position
of affairs in Gujarát. He was aware that the troops were on the verge
of mutiny, that the Thákors were sharpening their swords and enlisting
men, and that no relief could be expected till after the rains. But he
was not the man to despond or to shirk the responsibility now thrown
upon him. He proved equal to the occasion and met each emergency as
it arose with the calm determination of a brave man.

[Rising at Amjera.] When the troops at Mhow mutinied, the Rája of
Amjera took up arms and attacked Captain Hutchinson the Political
Agent of Bhopáwar. He fled and was sheltered by the Rája of Jábwa. At
the same time (July 1857) the Musalmán Kanungus or accountants and
Zamíndárs of the [And in the Panch Maháls, July 1857.] Panch Maháls
revolted, laid siege to the fort of Dohad, and threatened the Kaira
district. Captain Buckle, the Political Agent, Rewa Kántha, marched
from Baroda with two guns under Captain Sheppee, R. A., and two
companies of the 8th Regiment Native Infantry, to relieve Dohad,
while Major Andrews, with a wing of the 7th Regiment, two guns
under Captain Saulez, R. A., and 100 Sabres of the Gujarát Horse,
marched on Thásra to support Mr. Ashburner and act generally under
his orders. On the approach of Captain Buckle's force the insurgents
abandoned the siege, and Captain Hutchinson soon after re-established
his authority in Bhopáwar by the aid of the Málwa Bhil Corps which
remained loyal. He arrested the Rája of Amjera and hanged him.

[Mutinies at Abu and Erinpur, 1857.] On the 5th August the Jodhpur
Legion stationed at Abu mutinied. They made a feeble attack on the
barracks of H. M. 33rd Regiment and Captain Hall's bungalow, into
which they fired a volley of musketry, but were repulsed, leaving one
of their men on the ground badly wounded. The fog was so dense that it
was impossible to use firearms effectively. Mr. Lawrence of the Civil
Service was the only person wounded. A party of the 17th Bombay Native
Infantry who were on duty at Ábu, were suspected of complicity with
the Jodhpur Legion and were disarmed. The head-quarters of the Legion
mutinied at Erinpur on the same day as the attack at Ábu; they made
the Adjutant, Lieutenant Conolly, prisoner and plundered the treasury.

[Disturbance at Ahmedábád, 14th Sept. 1857.] An incident occurred early
in September which had an important influence on events. The two Native
regiments quartered at Ahmedábád were the 2nd Regiment of Grenadiers
and the 7th Native Infantry. The Grenadiers were chiefly Pardeshis
from Oudh, while the majority of the 7th Regiment were Maráthás. As
is often the case, an enmity sprang up between the two regiments. One
night Captain Muter of the 2nd Grenadiers was visiting the guards
as officer of the day. On approaching the quarter guard of the 7th
Regiment, the sentry demanded the password which Captain Muter could
not give. The sentry very properly refused to let him pass. Captain
Muter returned to his lines, called out a party of Grenadiers, and made
the sentry a prisoner. Next morning General Roberts put Captain Muter
under arrest and released the sentry. This incident intensified the
ill-feeling between the two regiments, and prevented their combination
when the Grenadiers mutinied a few days later. It had been arranged
that the two Native Regiments and the Golandauz artillery should
mutiny at the same time, but there was mutual distrust between them,
and the Native officers of the artillery had stipulated that they
should make a show of resistance in order to let it appear that they
had been overpowered by a superior force. About midnight on the 14th
September 1857 the Grenadiers turned out and fell in on their parade
ground armed and loaded. The guns were also brought out and loaded on
their own parade ground. A Native officer of the Grenadiers was sent
with a party to take possession of the guns in accordance with the
preconcerted agreement, but the Subhedár of the Artillery threatened
to fire on them, and the Native officer expecting that the guns
would be given up without resistance, thought he had been betrayed,
and retreated with his party, who threw away their arms as they ran
across the parade ground. The Grenadiers were under arms on the parade
waiting for the guns, when seeing the disorder in which the party was
retreating from the Artillery lines, they also were seized with a panic
and broke up in confusion. Then for the first time the Native officers
reported to Colonel Grimes that there had been a slight disturbance
in the lines. The mere accident that the Native officer detached
to take the guns had not been informed of the show of resistance he
was to expect from the Artillery, probably averted the massacre of
every European in Gujarát. Twenty-one loaded muskets were found on
the parade ground, and though the whole regiment was guilty it was
decided to try the owners of those muskets by court martial. They
were sentenced to death. As it was doubtful if the Native troops would
permit the execution it was considered prudent to await the arrival of
the 89th Regiment under Colonel Ferryman and Captain Hatch's battery
of Artillery. They had been landed at Gogha during the monsoon with
great difficulty, and were compelled to make a wide detour to the
north owing to the flooded state of the country. On their arrival
the executions were carried out; five of the mutineers were blown
from guns, three were shot with musketry, and the rest were hanged
in the presence of the whole of the troops. They met their death with
a gentlemanly calmness which won the respect of all who were present.

[Rádhanpur Disloyal.] The example thus made, together with the presence
of the European troops in Gujarát, restored our prestige and gave us
time to attend to affairs on our frontier. The whole country was in
a very disturbed state. On the fall of Delhi on September 28th, 1857,
a treasonable correspondence was found between the Nawáb of Rádhanpur
in Gujarát and the Emperor of Delhi, which deeply implicated the
Nawáb. He and his ministers had forwarded nazránás of gold mohars to
Delhi and asked for orders from the Emperor, offering to attack the
British cantonments at Disa and Ahmedábád. The Nawáb had been on the
most friendly terms with Captain Black the Political Agent, and had
been considered perfectly loyal. Preparations were made to depose him
for this treacherous conduct. We were then so strong in Gujarát that
his estate could have been seized without the least difficulty, but he
was considered too contemptible an enemy and his treason was pardoned.

[Arab Outbreak at Sunth.] Lieutenant Alban, with a party of Gujarát
Horse, was now sent to settle affairs in Sunth, a petty state in the
Rewa Kántha. Mustapha Khán, at the head of a turbulent body of Arabs,
had made the Rája a prisoner in his own palace with a view to extort
arrears of pay and other claims. Lieutenant Alban's orders were to
disarm the Arabs. After some negotiations Mustapha Khán waited on
Lieutenant Alban. He was attended by the whole of his armed followers
with the matches of their matchlocks alight, thinking no doubt to
intimidate Lieutenant Alban. On entering the tent Lieutenant Alban
disarmed him, but imprudently placed his sword on the table. While
they were conversing Mustapha Khán seized his sword and Lieutenant
Alban immediately shot him with a revolver. The Arabs who crowded
round the tent now opened fire on Alban and his men, but they were
soon overpowered. Mustapha Khán, four Arabs, and one savár of the
Gujarát Horse were killed.

[Disturbance in Lunáváda.] Lieutenant Alban, with a party of the 7th
Native Infantry under Lieutenant Cunningham then proceeded to Páli. A
few months before one Surajmal, a claimant of the Lúnáváda gádi, had
attacked the Rája of Lúnáváda, but was repulsed with severe loss and
had since been harboured in the village of Páli. On the approach of
Alban's force, it was attacked by Surajmal's Rájputs and the village
was accordingly burnt. Order was then restored in the Panch Maháls,
and it was not again disturbed till Tátia Topi entered the Maháls.

[Conspiracy at Disa.] In October 1857 a conspiracy was discovered
between the Thákor of Samda near Disa and some Native officers of the
2nd Cavalry and 12th Regiment Native Infantry to attack and plunder
the camp at Disa and to murder the officers; but the evidence was
not very clear, and before the trial could take place the amnesty had
been published under which the suspected men were released. The peace
of Northern Gujarát was much disturbed at this time by the Thákor of
Rova, who plundered the Pálanpur and Sirohi villages at the head of
500 men, and the Thákor of Mandeta was also in arms but was held in
check by a detachment of the 89th Regiment and a squadron of cavalry at
Ahmednagar near Ídar. [1067] [Conspiracy at Baroda.] The two Thákors
were acting in concert with some influential conspirators at Baroda
of whom Malhár Ráo Gáikwár alias Dáda Sáheb was the chief. It was
this man who afterwards became Gáikwár of Baroda and was deposed for
the attempt to murder Colonel Phayre by poison.

[Want of Combination.] It is very remarkable that the sepoy war
did not produce one man who showed any capacity for command. Every
native regiment was in a state of mutiny and a large proportion of
the civil population was ripe for revolt. If only one honest man had
been found who could have secured the confidence and support of his
fellow-countrymen, the fertile province of Gujarát would have been
at his mercy; but amongst natives conflicting interests and mutual
distrust make combination most difficult. In India a conspirator's
first impulse is to betray his associates lest they should anticipate
him. The failure of every mutinous outbreak in Gujarát was due to this
moral defect. This trait may be traced throughout the history of the
war and should be studied by those who advocate the independence of
India, and the capacity of the native for self-government. It is an
apt illustration of native inability to organize combined operations
that the most formidable conspiracy for the subversion of our power
should have been delayed till October 1857. By this time the arrival
of Her Majesty's 89th Regiment and a battery of European artillery at
Ahmedábád had rendered a successful revolt impossible. The mutinies
of the Gujarát Horse and Grenadiers had been promptly suppressed and
severely punished. The termination of the monsoon had opened the ports
and reinforcements were daily expected. Had the outbreak occurred
simultaneously with the mutiny of the Gujarát Horse, the Artillery,
and the Second Grenadiers, Gujarát must have been lost for a time
and every European would have been murdered.

[Marátha Conspiracy.] For many years Govindráo alias Bápu Gáikwár,
a half brother of His Highness the Gáikwár, had resided near the
Sháhibág at Ahmedábád. He had been deported from Baroda for intriguing
against his brother and had been treated as a political refugee. This
man with Malhárráo, another brother of His Highness the Gáikwár, Bháu
Sáheb Pawár, and a Sardár who called himself the Bhonsla Rája, also
related to His Highness by marriage, conceived the design to murder the
Europeans in Baroda Ahmedábád and Kaira and establish a government in
the name of the Rája of Sátára. To Bápu Gáikwár was entrusted the task
of tampering with the troops in Ahmedábád, and frequent meetings of
the Native officers were held at his house every night. The Bhonsla
Rája, with a man named Jhaveri Nálchand, was deputed to the Kaira
district to secure the aid of the Thákors of Umeta, Bhádarva, Kera,
and Dáima, and of the Patels of Ánand and Partábpur.

[Marátha Conspiracy.] These landholders assured Bápu of their support
and the Thákor of Umeta mounted some iron guns and put his fort in a
state of defence. An agent named Maganlál was sent into the Gáikwár's
Kadi Pargana, where he enlisted a body of 2000 foot and 150 horse,
which he encamped near the village of Lodra. The followers of the
Kaira Thákors assembled in the strong country on the banks of the
Mahi near the village of Partábpur with a detachment and advanced to
the Chauk Taláv within five miles of Baroda. The massacre at Baroda
was fixed for the night of October 16th. The native troops in Baroda
had been tampered with and had promised in the event of their being
called out that they would fire blank ammunition only.

[Gathering at Partábpur,] The Thákors had been encamped at Partábpur
for several days, but owing partly to the sympathy of the people and
partly to the terror which they inspired, no report was made to any
British officers till the 15th October, when Mr. Ashburner, who was
encamped at Thásra, marched to attack them with his new levies and a
party of the Kaira police. There was, as usual, disunion in the ranks
of the insurgents; they had no leaders they could depend upon, and
they dispersed on hearing of the approach of Ashburner's force without
firing a shot. Ninety-nine men who had taken refuge in the ravines
of the Mahi were captured and a commission under Act XIV. of 1857 was
issued to Mr. Ashburner and Captain Buckle, the Political Agent in the
Rewa Kántha, to try them. Ten of the ringleaders were found guilty of
treason and blown from guns at Kanvári, nine were transported for life,
and the remainder were pardoned. The turbulent villages of Partábpur
and Angar in Kaira were destroyed and the inhabitants removed to more
accessible ground in the open country. Their strong position in the
ravines of the Mahi river had on several occasions enabled the people
of Partábpur and Angar to set Government at defiance, and this was
considered a favourable opportunity of making an example of them and
breaking up their stronghold.

[And at Lodra.] In the meantime information of the gathering at Lodra
had reached Major Agar, the Superintendent of Police, Ahmedábád. He
marched to attack them with the Koli Corps and a squadron of the
Gujarát Horse. Maganlál fled to the north after a slight skirmish in
which two men were killed and four wounded, and was captured a few days
afterwards by the Thándár of Sammu with eleven followers. They were
tried by General Roberts and Mr. Hadow, the Collector of Ahmedábád,
under Act XIV. of 1857. Three of them were blown from guns at Waizápur,
three were hanged, and the rest were transported for life.

It is much to be regretted that Malhárráo Gáikwár and the Bhonsla Rája
were allowed to escape punishment. There was very clear evidence of the
guilt of the Bhonsla Rája, but His Highness the Gáikwár interceded for
him, and Sir Richmond Shakespeare, the Resident, weakly consented that
his life should be spared on condition that he should be imprisoned
for life at Baroda, a sentence which, it is hardly necessary to say,
was never carried out.

[Partial Disarming.] On the suppression of this abortive insurrection
it was determined to disarm Gujarát, and in January 1858 strong
detachments of the 72nd Highlanders and of Her Majesty's 86th Regiment
with the 8th Regiment Native Infantry, two guns under Captain Conybere,
and a squadron of Gujarát Horse were placed at the disposal of
Mr. Ashburner to carry out this measure. His Highness the Gáikwár
had consented to a simultaneous disarmament of his country, but he
evaded the performance of his promise. In the Kaira district and in the
Jambusar táluka of Broach the disarmament was very strictly enforced;
every male adult of the fighting classes was required to produce an
arm of some kind. The town of Ahmedábád was relieved of 20,000 arms
in the first two days, but the Highlanders and 86th Regiment were
required for operations in Rájputána, and after their departure from
Gujarát it was deemed prudent to postpone this very unpopular measure.

[Náikda Revolt, Oct. 1858.] After these events Gujarát remained
tranquil for nearly a year till, in October 1858, the Náikda Bhils of
Nárukot revolted under Rupa and Keval Náiks, and a few months later
Tátia Topi's scattered force being hard-pressed by Colonel Park's
column, plundered several villages of the Panch Maháls during its
rapid march through that district.

[Tátia Topi, 1858.] In 1858, after his defeat at Gwálior, at the
close of the mutinies in Northern India, Tátia Topi moved rapidly
towards the Dakhan. The chiefs of Jamkhandi and Nárgund had been in
treasonable correspondence with the rebel chiefs in the North-West
and had invoked their aid. It is more than probable that if Tátia
Topi had entered the Dakhan in force, there would have been a general
insurrection of the Marátha population. Tátia's march to the Dakhan
soon assumed the character of a flight. He was closely pressed by two
columns under Generals Somerset and Mitchell, and a very compact and
enterprizing little field force commanded by Colonel Park. Colonel
Park's own regiment, the 72nd Highlanders, many of the men mounted on
camels, formed the main fighting power of this force. His indefatigable
energy in the pursuit of the enemy allowed them no rest, and eventually
brought them to bay at Chhota Udepur. Fearing to face the open country
of Berár with such an uncompromising enemy in pursuit, Tátia recrossed
the Narbada at Chikalda and marched towards Baroda. He had, by means
of an agent named Ganpatráo, for some time been in communication with
the Bháu Sáheb Pavár, a brother-in-law of His Highness the Gáikwár, and
had been led to expect aid from the Baroda Sardárs and the Thákors of
the Kaira and Rewa Kántha districts. Immediately it became known that
Tátia had crossed the Narbada, troops were put in motion from Kaira,
Ahmedábád, and Disa for the protection of the eastern frontier of
Gujarát. Captain Thatcher, who had succeeded to the command of the
irregular levies raised by Mr. Ashburner in Kaira, was ordered to
hold Sankheda with the irregulars and two of the Gáikwár's guns. He
was afterwards reinforced by Captain Collier's detachment of the 7th
Regiment N. I., which fell back from Chhota Udepur on the approach
of the enemy.

[Tátia Topi's Defeat at Chhota Udepur, Dec. 1858.] Tátia Topi at
this time commanded a formidable force composed of fragments of many
mutinous Bengal regiments. He had also been joined by a mixed rabble
of Villáyatis, Rohillás, and Rájputs, who followed his fortune in
hopes of plunder. Ferozsha Nawáb of Kamona and a Marátha Sardár who
was known as the Ráo Sáheb, held subordinate commands. Each fighting
man was followed by one or more ponies laden with plunder which greatly
impeded their movements. It was chiefly owing to this that Colonel Park
was enabled to overtake the rebels and to force them into action. On
reaching Chhota Udepur the troops of the Rája fraternised with the
enemy, and Captain Collier having evacuated the town, Tátia Topi was
allowed to occupy it without opposition. He had intended to halt at
Chhota Udepur to recruit his men and to develop his intrigues with
the Baroda Sardárs, but Park gave him no respite. On the 1st December
1858, he fell upon Tátia's rebel force and defeated it with great
slaughter, his own loss being trifling. After this defeat there was
great confusion in the ranks of the insurgents. Tátia Topi abandoned
his army and did not rejoin it till it had reached the forest lands
of Párona. Discipline which had always been lax, was now entirely
thrown aside. The muster roll of one of Tátia's cavalry regiments was
picked up and showed that out of a strength of 300 sabres only sixteen
were present for duty. The rebel force separated into two bodies,
one doubled back and plundered Park's baggage which had fallen far to
the rear, the other under Ferozsha entered the Panch Maháls and looted
Báriya, Jhálod, Limbdi, and other villages; Godhra being covered by
Muter's force was not attacked. Park's force was so disabled by the
plunder of its baggage and by long continued forced marches, that it
was compelled to halt at Chhota Udepur, but General Somerset took up
the pursuit and rapidly drove Tátia from the Panch Maháls. He fled
in the direction of Salumba. The Thákor of that place was in arms,
and Tátia no doubt expected support from him, but the Thákor was
too cautious to join what was then evidently a hopeless cause. On
reaching Nargad on the 20th February 1859, Ferozsha made overtures
of surrender, and a week later 300 cavalry and a mixed force of
1500 men under Zahur Ali and the Maulvi Vazir Khán laid down their
arms to General Mitchell. They were admitted to the benefit of the
amnesty. The remnant of Tátia's force fled to the north-east.

[Náikda Disturbance, 1858.] In October 1858, instigated by the
intrigues of the Bháu Sáheb Pavár, the Sankheda Náikdás, a very wild
forest tribe, took up arms under Rupa and Keval Náiks, and after having
plundered the outpost, thána, at Nárukot, attacked a detachment of
the 8th Regiment N. I. under Captain Bates at Jámbughoda. They were
repulsed with considerable loss after a desultory fight during the
greater part of two days. On the arrest of Ganpatráo, the Bháu Sáheb's
agent, this troublesome insurrection would probably have collapsed,
but the Naikdás were joined by a number of Villáyatis, matchlock-men,
the fragments of Tátia's broken force, who encouraged them to hold
out. They occupied the very strong country between Chámpáner and
Nárukot, and kept up a harassing warfare, plundering the villages as
far north as Godhra.

A field force commanded by the Political Agent of the Rewa Kántha,
Colonel Wallace, was employed against the Náikdás during the cold
weather of 1858, and in one of the frequent skirmishes with the
insurgents Captain Hayward of the 17th Regiment N. I. was severely
wounded by a matchlock bullet on the 28th January 1859. The only
success obtained by the Náikdás was the surprise of Hassan Ali's
company of Hussein Khán's levy. The Subhedár had been ordered to
protect the labourers who were employed in opening the pass near the
village of Sivrájpur, but the duty was very distasteful to him, and his
son deserted with twenty-four men on the march to Sivrájpur. They were
suddenly attacked by a mixed force of Makránis and Náikdás. Seven men
including the Subhedár were killed and eleven wounded without any loss
to the enemy. The Subhedár neglected to protect his camp by the most
ordinary precautions and his men appear to have behaved badly. They
fled without firing a shot directly they were attacked. But little
progress had been made in pacifying the Náikdás till Captain Richard
Bonner was employed to raise and organize a corps composed chiefly of
Bhils with their head-quarters at Dohad in the Panch Maháls. Captain
Bonner's untiring energy and moral influence soon reduced the Náikdás
to submission. Rupa Náik laid down his arms and accepted the amnesty
of the 10th March 1859, and Keval Náik followed his example soon after.

[Wágher Outbreak, 1859.] In July 1859 the Wághers of Okhámandal,
a mahál in Káthiáváda belonging to His Highness the Gáikwár,
suddenly seized and plundered Dwárka, Barvála, and Bet. They were
led by a Wágher chief named Toda Manik, who alleged that he had been
compelled to take up arms by the oppression of the Gáikwár's kámdárs;
but it is probable that he was encouraged to throw off allegiance
by the weakness of the Baroda administration and the belief that he
would have to deal with the troops of the Darbár only. He soon found
he was in error. Major Christie with 200 sabres of the Gujarát Horse
and a wing of the 17th Regiment Native Infantry from Rájkot marched to
Mandána on the Ran to cut off the communication between Okhámandal and
the Káthiáváda peninsula. The cantonment of Rájkot was reinforced from
Ahmedábád by six guns of Aytoun's battery, a wing of the 33rd Regiment
and a detachment of the 14th Regiment Native Infantry under Captain
Hall, and a naval and military force was at the same time prepared in
Bombay for the recovery of Bet and Dwárka as soon as the close of the
monsoon should render naval operations on the western coast possible.

[Expedition against Bet, 1859.] On the 29th September 1859, the
following force embarked in the transports South Ramillies and
Empress of India, towed by Her Majesty's steam-ships Zenobia and
Victoria, and followed by the frigate Firoz, the gunboat Clyde,
and the schooner Constance:

Her Majesty's 28th Regiment 500 Men.
Her Majesty's 6th Regiment Native Infantry 600 Men.
Marine Battalion 200 Men.
Royal Artillery 60 Men.
Sappers and Miners 90 Men.

The expedition was under the command of Colonel Donovan of Her
Majesty's 28th Regiment, but it was intended that on arrival at
Bet, Colonel Scobie should command the combined naval and military
force. Colonel Scobie marched from Rájkot early in October with the
wings of Her Majesty's 33rd Regiment and 17th Native Infantry, the
12th Light Field Battery and detachments of the 14th Native Infantry
and Gujarát Horse. Had Colonel Donovan waited for this force he
might have effectually invested the fort of Bet, which is situated
on an island, and exterminated the rebels; but he was too anxious
to distinguish himself before he could be relieved of command. He
arrived off Bet on the 4th October 1859, and at sunrise that morning
the steam-ships Firoz, Zenobia, Clyde, and Constance took up their
positions off the fort of Bet and opened fire with shot and shell
at 950 yards. The fort replied feebly with a few small guns. Shells
effectually scorched the fort and temples occupied by the enemy, but
the shot made little impression on the wall which was here thirty feet
thick. The bombardment continued throughout the day and at intervals
during the night. Next morning Dewa Chabasni, the Wágher chief in
command of the fort, opened negotiations for surrender, but he would
not consent to the unconditional surrender which was demanded, and
after an interval of half an hour the artillery fire was resumed and
preparations were made to disembark the troops. They landed under
a heavy musketry fire from the fort and adjacent buildings, and an
attempt was made to escalade. The ladders were placed against the wall
but the storming party of Her Majesty's 28th Regiment and 6th Regiment
Native Infantry were repulsed with heavy loss. Captain McCormack of
Her Majesty's 28th Regiment, Ensign Willaume of the 6th Regiment,
and ten European soldiers were killed; and Captain Glasspoole,
Lieutenant Grant of the 6th Native Infantry, and thirty-seven men of
the 28th Regiment were wounded, many of them severely. One sepoy of
the Marine Battalion was killed and five wounded.

[Bet Fort Taken.] During the night which succeeded this disastrous
attack the Wághers evacuated the fort. They reached the mainland,
taking with them their women the children and the plunder of the
temple, but Dewa Chabasni, the Wágher chief, had been killed the
previous day. Considering the large and well-equipped force at Colonel
Donovan's disposal and the facilities which the insular position of
Bet afforded to a blockading force, the escape of the Wághers almost
with impunity, encumbered with women and plunder, did not enhance
Colonel Donovan's military reputation. Captain D. Nasmyth, R. E.,
Field Engineer of the Okhámandal Force, was directed to destroy the
fort of Bet and carried out his instructions most effectually. Some
of the Hindu temples nearest the walls were severely shaken by
the explosion of the mines, and a great outcry was raised of the
desecration of the temples; but if Hindus will convert their temples
into fortified enclosures, they must take the consequence when they
are occupied by the enemies of the British Government.

Lieutenant Charles Goodfellow, R. E., greatly distinguished himself on
this occasion. He earned the Victoria Cross by carrying off a wounded
man of Her Majesty's 28th Regiment under a very heavy fire. Treasure
valued at 3 1/2 lákhs of rupees was taken on board the Firoz for safe
custody. It was eventually restored to the Pujáris of the temples,
but most of the temples had been carefully plundered by the Wághers
before the entry of the British force.

[Dwárka Fort Taken.] Many of the fugitives from Bet took refuge in
Dwárka, and Colonel Donovan's force having re-embarked proceeded to
Dwárka to await the arrival of Colonel Scobie's small brigade. Scobie's
force did not reach Dwárka till October 20th. The Naval Brigade under
Lieutenant Sedley with sixteen officers and 110 men had already landed
under very heavy matchlock fire, and thrown up a slight breastwork
of loose stone within 150 yards of the walls. A field piece from the
Zenobia and afterwards a thirty-two pounder were placed in position in
this work. The successful result of the siege was mainly due to the
determined bravery of this small naval force. They repulsed repeated
sorties from the fort and inflicted severe losses on the enemy. As
soon as the stores and ammunition could be landed, Colonel Donovan
took up a position to the north-east of the fort, Colonel Scobie to
the south-east, and Captain Hall occupied an intermediate position
with detachments of Her Majesty's 33rd Regiment, the 14th Native
Infantry, and Gujarát Horse under Lieutenant Pym. The garrison made
several determined attempts to break through Captain Hall's position,
but they were on each occasion driven back with loss.

The first battery opened fire on the northern face of the fort on
October 28th, while the Zenobia and the Firoz poured a well-directed
fire of shells on the houses and temples which sheltered the enemy
towards the sea. The shells did immense execution and relieved the
attack on the Naval Brigade which continued to hold its position
with the greatest gallantry though several times surrounded by the
enemy. On the night of the 31st October the garrison evacuated the
fort and cut its way through a picket of Her Majesty's 28th Regiment,
wounding Ensign Hunter and four men. A detachment under Colonel
Christie followed the fugitives next morning and overtook them near
Vasatri. A skirmish ensued, but they escaped without much loss and
took refuge in the Barda hill. They continued to disturb the peace
of Káthiáváda for several years. In one of the desultory skirmishes
which followed, Lieutenants LaTouche and Hebbert were killed.

[Rising in Nagar Párkar.] While these events were in progress,
Karranji Hati the Rána of Nagar Párkar on the Sindh frontier of
Gujarát, took up arms at the head of a band of Sodhás, plundered
the treasury and telegraph office at Nagar Párkar, and released the
prisoners in the jail. Colonel Evans commanded the field force which
was employed against him for many months without any very definite
results. The country is a desert and the Sodhás avoided a collision
with the troops. The Rána eventually submitted and peace was restored.

APPENDIX III.

BHINMÁL.

[Description.] Bhinmál, [1068] North Latitude 24° 42' East Longitude
72° 4', the historical Shrimál, the capital of the Gurjjaras from
about the sixth to the ninth century, lies about fifty miles west of
Ábu hill. The site of the city is in a wide plain about fifteen miles
west of the last outlier of the Ábu range. To the east, between the
hills and Bhinmál, except a few widely-separated village sites, the
plain is chiefly a grazing ground with brakes of thorn and cassia
bushes overtopped by standards of the camel-loved pilu Salvadora
persica. To the south, the west, and the north the plain is smooth and
bare passing westwards into sand. From the level of the plain stand
out a few isolated blocks of hill, 500 to 800 feet high, of which
one peak, about a mile west of the city, is crowned by the shrine
of Chámunda the Srí or Luck of Bhinmál. From a distance the present
Bhinmál shows few traces of being the site of an ancient capital. Its
1500 houses cover the gentle slope of an artificial mound, the level
of their roofs broken by the spires of four Jain temples and by the
ruined state office at the south end of the mound. Closer at hand
the number and size of the old stone-stripped tank and fortification
mounds and the large areas honeycombed by diggers for bricks show that
the site of the present Bhinmál was once the centre of a great and
widespread city. Of its fortifications, which, as late as A.D. 1611,
the English merchant Nicholas Ufflet, in a journey from Jhálor to
Ahmedábád, describes as enclosing a circuit of thirty-six miles
(24 kos) containing many fine tanks going to ruin, almost no trace
remains. [1069] The names of some of the old gates are remembered,
Surya in the north-east, Srí Lakshmí in the south-east, Sanchor in the
west, and Jhálor in the north. Sites are pointed out as old gateways
five to six miles to the east and south-east of the present town, and,
though their distance and isolation make it hard to believe that these
ruined mounds were more than outworks, Ufflet's testimony seems to
establish the correctness of the local memory. [1070] Besides these
outlying gateways traces remain round the foot of the present Bhinmál
mound of a smaller and later wall. To the east and south the line of
fortification has been so cleared of masonry and is so confused with
the lines of tank banks, which perhaps were worked into the scheme
of defence, that all accurate local knowledge of their position has
passed. The Gujarát gate in the south of the town though ruined
is well marked. From the Gujarát gateway a line of mounds may be
traced south and then west to the ruins of Pipalduara perhaps the
western gateway. The wall seems then to have turned east crossing the
watercourse and passing inside that is along the east bank of the
watercourse north to the south-west corner of the Jaikop or Yaksha
lake. From this corner it ran east along the south bank of Jaikop to
the Jhálor or north gate which still remains in fair preservation its
pointed arch showing it to be of Musalmán or late (17th-18th century)
Ráhtor construction. From the Jhálor gate the foundations of the wall
may be traced east to the Kanaksen or Karáda tank. The area to the
east of the town from the Karáda tank to the Gujarát gate has been so
quarried for brick to build the present Bhinmál that no sign remains
of a line of fortifications running from the Karáda tank in the east
to the Gujarát gate in the south.

The site of the present town the probable centre of the old city, is a
mound stretching for about three-quarters of a mile north and south and
swelling twenty to thirty feet out of the plain. On almost all sides
its outskirts are protected by well made thorn fences enclosing either
garden land or the pens and folds of Rabáris and Bhíls. The streets
are narrow and winding. The dwellings are of three classes, the flat
mud-roofed houses of the Mahájans or traders and of the better-to-do
Bráhmans and craftsmen with canopied doors and fronts plastered with
white clay: Second the tiled sloping-roofed sheds of the bulk of
the craftsmen and gardeners and of the better-off Rabáris and Bhíls:
and Third the thatched bee-hive huts of the bulk of the Rabáris and
Bhíls and of some of the poorer craftsmen and husbandmen. Especially
to the north-west and west the houses are skirted by a broad belt of
garden land. In other parts patches of watered crops are separated
by the bare banks of old tanks or by stretches of plain covered with
thorn and cassia bushes or roughened by the heaps of old buildings
honeycombed by shafts sunk by searchers for bricks. Besides the four
spired temples to Párasnáth the only outstanding building is the old
kacheri or state office a mass of ruins which tops the steep south
end of the city mound.

[People.] Of the 1400 inhabited houses of Bhinmál the details are:
Mahájans 475, chiefly Oswál Vánis of many subdivisions; Shrimáli
Bráhmans, 200; Shevaks 35, Maga Bráhmans worshippers of the sun
and priests to Oswáls; Sonárs, 30; Bándháras or Calico-printers,
35; Kásáras or Brass-smiths 4, Ghánchis or Oilpressers, 30; Mális or
Gardeners, 25; Káthias or Woodworkers, 12; Bháts 120 including 80 Gunas
or Grain-carriers, and 40 Rájbhats or Bráhm Bháts, Genealogists [1071];
Kumbhárs or Potters, 12; Musalmán Potters, 4; Rehbáris or Herdsmen,
70 [1072]; Shádhs Beggars, 10; Shámia Aliks Beggars, 10; Kotwál and
Panjára Musalmáns, 15; Lohárs or Blacksmiths, 3; Darjis or Tailors,
12; Nais or Barbers, 7; Bhumiás that is Solanki Jágirdárs, 15 [1073];
Kavás Bhumiás servants, 12; Játs Cultivators, 2; Deshantris or Saturday
Oilbeggars, 1; Achárayas or Funeral Bráhmans, 1; Dholis Drumbeaters,
12; Pátrias or Professionals that is Dancing Girls, 30 [1074];
Turki Vohorás that is Memons, 2; Vishayati Musalmán Padlock-makers,
1; Rangrez or Dyers, 2; Mochis or Shoemakers, 30; Karias or Salávats
that is Masons, 6; Churigars Musalmán Ivory bangle-makers, 2; Jatiyas
[1075] or Tanners, 17; Khátiks or Butchers working as tanners, 1;
Sargaras, Bhíl messengers, 1; Bhíls, 120; Tirgars or Arrowmakers,
5; Gorádas priests to Bombias leather-workers, 2; Bombias literally
Weavers now Leather-workers, 40; Wághria Castrator, 1; Mirásis Musalmán
Drummers, 8; Mehtars or Sweepers, 1.

[Objects. In the Town.] Inside of the town the objects of interest
are few. The four temples of Párasnáth are either modern or altered
by modern repairs. A rest-house to the south of a temple of Barági
or Varáha the Boar in the east of the town has white marble pillars
with inscriptions of the eleventh and thirteenth centuries which show
that the pillars have been brought from the ruined temple of the
sun or Jag Svámi Lord of the World on the mound about eighty yards
east of the south or modern Gujarát gate. In the west of the town,
close to the wall of the enclosure of the old Mahálakshmi temple, is
a portion of a white marble pillar with an inscription dated S. 1342
(A.D. 1286) which apparently has been brought from the same ruined
sun temple. In the kacheri ruins at the south end of the mound the
only object of interest is a small shrine to Máta with two snakes
supporting her seat and above in modern characters the words Nágáne
the kuldevi or tribe guardian of the Ráhtors.

[Surroundings.] The chief object of interest at Bhinmál is the ruined
temple of the Sun on a mound close to the south of the town. Of this
temple and its inscriptions details are given below. About fifty
yards west of the Sun temple are the remains of a gateway known
as the Gujarát gateway. This modern name and the presence near
it of blocks of the white quartz-marble of the Sun temple make it
probable that the gateway is not older than Musalmán or eighteenth
century Ráhtor times. Close to the west of the gate is Khári Báva
the Salt Well an old step and water-bag well with many old stones
mixed with brick work. About a hundred yards south of the Gujarát
gate, in a brick-walled enclosure about sixteen yards by eight and
nine feet high topped by a shield parapet, is the shrine of Mahádeva
Naulákheshwar. An inscription dated S. 1800 (A.D. 1744) states that
the enclosure marks the site of an old temple to Naulákheshwar. About
fifty yards east of the Naulákheshwar shrine is a large brick enclosure
about seventy-five yards square with walls about twelve feet high and
a pointed-arched gateway in the Moslim wave-edged style. On entering,
to the left, is a plinth with a large Hanumán and further to the
left in domed shrines are a Ganpati and a Máta. A few paces south is
Brahma's Pool or Brahmakhund with steep steps on the west and north,
a rough stone and brick wall to the east, and a circular well to the
south. The pool walls and steps have been repaired by stones taken
from Hindu temples or from former decorations of the pool on some of
which are old figures of Matás in good repair. The story is that Som,
according to one account the builder of the Sun temple according
to another account a restorer of Shrimál, wandering in search of a
cure for leprosy, came to the south gate of Shrimál. Som's dog which
was suffering from mange disappeared and soon after appeared sound
and clean. The king traced the dog's footmarks to the Brahmakhund,
bathed in it, and was cured. As a thank-offering he surrounded the
pool with masonry walls. To the south of the pool, to the right, are
an underground ling sacred to Patáleshwar the lord of the Under World
and south of the ling a small domed shrine of Chandi Devi. To the left,
at the east side of a small brick enclosure is a snake-canopied ling
known as Chandeshwar hung about with strings of rudráksh Elæocarpus
ganitrus beads. [1076] In front of Chandeshwar's shrine is a small
inscribed stone with at its top a cow and calf recording a land grant
to Shrimáli Bráhmans. About forty yards north-east of the Brahmakhund
a large straggling heap of brick and earth, now known as Lakshamíthala
or Lakshmí's settlement, is said to be the site of a temple to Lakshmí
built, according to the local legend, by a Bráhman to whom in return
for his devotedness Lakshmí had given great wealth. The hollow to the
south-east is known as the Khandália pool. About fifty yards south-east
at the end of a small enclosure is a shrine and cistern of Jageshwar,
said to be called after a certain Jag who in return for the gift
of a son built the temple. Several old carved and dressed stones
are built into the walls of this temple. About seventy-five yards
further south-east a large area rough with heaps of brick is said to
be the site of an old Vidhya-Sála or Sanskrit College. This college
is mentioned in the local Mahátmya as a famous place of learning
the resort of scholars from distant lands. [1077] The local account
states that as the Bhils grew too powerful the Bráhmans were unable
to live in the college and retired to Dholka in north Gujarát.

The slope and skirts of the town beyond the thorn-fenced enclosures
of Bhils and Rabáris lie in heaps honeycombed with holes hollowed
by searchers for bricks. Beyond this fringe of fenced enclosures
from a half to a whole mile from the city are the bare white banks
of pools and tanks some for size worthy to be called lakes. Of
these, working from the south northwards, the three chief are the
Nimbáli or Narmukhsarovar, the Goni or Gayakund, and the Talbi or
Trambaksarovar. The Nimbáli tank, about 300 yards south-east of the
college site, is a large area opening eastwards whence it draws
its supply of water and enclosed with high bare banks scattered
with bricks along the south-west and north. The lake is said to be
named Nimbáli after a Váni to whom Mahádeva granted a son and for
whom Mahádeva formed the hollow of the lake by ploughing it with his
thunderbolt. About half a mile north-east of Nimbáli a horseshoe bank
fifteen to thirty feet high, except to the open east, is the remains
of the Goni lake. Lines of stone along the foot of the north-west and
north-east banks shew that portions at least of these sides were once
lined with masonry. A trace of steps remains at a place known as the
Gau Ghát or Cowgate. The lake is said to have been named Goni after a
Bráhman whose parents being eaten by a Rákshas went to hell. For their
benefit Goni devoted his life to the worship of Vishnu and built a
temple and lake. In reward Vishnu gave to the water of the lake the
merit or cleansing virtue of the water of Gáya. In the foreground
a row of small chatris or pavilions marks the burying ground of the
Mahajan or high Hindu community of Bhinmál. Behind the pavilions are
the bare banks of the Talbi lake. At the west end is the Bombáro well
and near the south-west is the shrine of Trímbakeshvar Mahádev. This
lake is said to have been made in connection with a great sacrifice
or yag, that is yajna, held by Bráhmans to induce or to compel the
god Trimbakeshwar to slay the demon Tripurásur. Beginning close
to the south of Talbi lake and stretching north-west towards the
city is the Karádá Sarovar or Karádá lake said to have been built
by Kanaksen or Kanishka the great founder of the Skythian era
(A.D. 78). On the western bank of the lake stands an open air ling
of Karaiteshwar. [1078] At the south end of the Karádá lake, which
stretches close to the fenced enclosures round the city, are the
remains of a modern bastion and of a wall which runs north-west to
the Jhálor gate. Beyond the site of the bastion is an enclosure and
shrine of Maheshwar Mahádev. To the north and north-west of the Karait
sea lie four large tanks. Of these the most eastern, about 300 yards
north-west of Karádá, is Brahmasarovar a large area fed from the north
and with high broken banks. Next, about 500 yards north-west, lies the
far-stretching Vánkund or Forest Pool open to the north-east. About
800 yards west is Gautam's tank which holds water throughout the
year. The banks of brick and kankar form nearly a complete circle
except at the feeding channels in the east and south. In the centre of
the lake is an islet on which are the white-stone foundations (18' ×
12') of Gautam's hermitage. On the bank above the east feeding-channel
is an image of Hanumán and on the east side of the southern channel at
the foot of the bank is a white inscribed stone with letters so worn
that nothing but the date S. 1106 (A.D. 1049) has been made out. Of
the balls of kankar or nodular limestone which are piled into the
bank of the tank those which are pierced with holes are lucky and are
kept to guard wooden partitions against the attacks of insects. The
last and westmost of the north row of tanks is the Jaikop properly
Jakshkop that is the Yaksha's Pool about 600 yards south-west of
the Gautam tank and close to the north-west of the town. [1079]
This tank holds water throughout the year and supplies most of the
town's demand. Along the south bank of the Jaikop, where are tombs,
a shrine to Bhairav and a ruined mosque, the line of the later city
walls used to run. At the south-east corner of the tank are three
square masonry plinths each with a headstone carved with the figure of
a man or woman. One of the plinths which is adorned with a pillared
canopy has a stone carved with a man on horseback and a standing
woman in memory of a Tehsildar of Bhinmál of recent date (S. 1869;
A.D. 1812) whose wife became Sati. About 200 yards south-east is
a row of white pália or memorial slabs of which the third from the
south end of the row is dated S. 1245 (A.D. 1186). On the south-east
bank is the shrine of Nimghoria Bhairav at which Shrávaks as well
as other Hindus worship. In the centre of the shrine is a leaning
pillar about five feet high with four fronts, Hanumán on the east,
a standing Snake on the south, a Sakti on the west, and Bhairav
on the north. To the south of the pillar, about a foot out of the
ground rises a five-faced ling or pillar-home of the god one facing
each quarter of the heaven and one uncarved facing the sky. Close to
a well within the circuit of the lake near the south-east corner is
a stone inscribed with letters which are too worn to be read. At the
east end of the north bank under a pilu Salvadora persica tree is a
massive seated figure still worshipped and still dignified though the
features have been broken off, and the left lower arm and leg and both
feet have disappeared. This is believed to be the image of the Yaksha
king who made the tank. Details are given Below pages 456-458. To the
west of the seated statue are the marks of the foundations of a temple,
shrine hall and outer hall, which is believed to have originally been
the shrine of Yaksh. About a hundred yards west, under a pillared
canopy of white quartz, are two Musalmán graves in honour of Ghazni
Khán and Hamál Khán who were killed about 400 years ago at Jhálor
fighting for Shrimál. In obedience to their dying request their Bháts
brought the champions' bodies to Yaksh's tank. The white quartz, the
shape of the pillars, and an inscription on one of them dated S. 1333
(A.D. 1276), go to show that the stones have been brought from the
Sun temple to the south of the town. To the north of the canopy is a
large step-well the Dadeli Well separated into an outer and an inner
section by a row of Hindu pillars supporting flat architraves. Some of
the stones have figures of goddesses and in a niche is an old goddess'
image. The upper part of the well and the parapet are of recent brick
work. On a low mound about 150 yards to the north is the shrine of
Nilkanth Máhádev, with, about a hundred paces to the south-east,
a fine old step-well. The lake was fed from the south-west corner
where is a silt trap built of stones in many cases taken from old
temples and carved with the chaitya or horse-shoe ornament. Some of
the stones have apparently been brought from the great white quartz
Sun temple. Several of them have a few letters of the fourteenth
century character apparently the names of masons or carvers. Some of
the blocks are of a rich red sandstone which is said to be found only
in the Rupe quarries eight miles south of Bhinmál.

On the right, about half a mile south of the south-west corner of
the Jaikop lake, is a ruined heap hid among trees called the Pipal
Duára or Gateway perhaps the remains of the western Gateway which
may have formed part of the later line of fortifications which can
be traced running south along the inner bank of the Jaikop feeding
channel. About a mile south of the Pipal Duára are the bare banks of
the large lake Bansarovar the Desert Sea. To the north-west north and
north-east its great earthen banks remain stripped of their masonry
gradually sloping to the west and south the direction of its supply
of water. The island in the centre is Lakhára. This lake was made by
Gauri or Párvati when she came from Sunda hill to slay the female
demon Uttamiyár. When Párvati killed the demon she piled over her
body Shri's hill which she had brought with her to form a burial
mound. At the same time Párvati scooped the tank, and crowned Shri's
hill with a tower-like temple. This hill, where lives the Srí or Luck
of Shrimál, rises 500 feet out of the plain about a mile west of the
town. It is approached from the south by a flight of unhewn stones
roughly laid as steps. The hill-top is smoothed into a level pavement
of brick and cement. The pavement is supported on the east side by
a lofty bastion-like wall. It is surrounded by a parapet about two
feet high. On the platform two shrines face eastwards. To the left
or south is the main temple of Lakshmí and to the right or north the
smaller shrine of Sunda Máta. The main shrine has a porch with pillars
and shield frieze of white quartz limestone apparently spoils of the
great Sun Temple. Three or four bells hang from the roof of the porch
and some loose white stones apparently also from the Sun temple are
scattered about. In the west wall of the main shrine facing east is
the image of the Guardian of Bhinmál covered with red paint and gold
leaf. The only trace of ornament on the outside of Lakshmí's shrine
is in the north-face portion of a belt of the horse-shoe or chaitya
pattern and a disc perhaps the disc of the Sun. The smaller shrine
of Sunda Máta to the right or north is square and flat-roofed. The
ceiling is partly made of carved stones apparently prepared for,
perhaps formerly the centre slabs of domes. The door posts and lintels
are of white quartz marble. On the right door post are two short
inscriptions of A.D. 1612 and 1664 (S. 1669 and 1691). A second
pillar bears the date A.D. 1543 (S. 1600). The roof is supported
by four square central pillars which with eight wall pilasters form
four shallow domes with lotus carved roof-stones from some other or
some older temple. In a recess in the west wall, surmounted with a
stone carved in the chaitya or horse-shoe pattern, is the Trident or
Trisula of Sunda Máta the only object of worship.

From the hill-top the mound of Bhinmál hardly seems to stand out of
the general level. The mound seems hidden in trees. Only in the south
gleam the white pillars of the Sun Temple and to the north rise the
high mound of the old offices, and still further north the spires
of the four temples of Párasnáth. Beyond the town to the south and
west spread green gardens fenced with dry thorn hedges. Outside of
the garden enclosures to the south-east south and south-west run the
lofty bare banks of dry lakes confused in places with the lines of old
fortifications. To the north-west and north shine the waters of the
Jaikop and Gautam tanks. Westwards the plain, dark with thorn brake
and green with acacias, stretches to the horizon. On other sides the
sea-like level of the plain is broken by groups of hills the Borta
range along the north and north-east and to the east the handsomer
Ratanágar, Thur, and Ram Sen rising southwards to the lofty clear-cut
ranges of Dodala and Sunda.

Only two objects of interest in Bhinmál require special description,
the massive broken statue of the Jaksha or Yaksha on the north bank of
the Jaikop lake, and the temple to Jagsvámi the Sun at the south-east
entrance to the city.

[Jaikop.] On the north bank of the Jaikop or Yaksha Lake, [1080]
leaning against the stem of a pilu or jál Salvadora persica tree,
is a massive stone about 4' high by 2' 6'' broad and 1' thick. The
block is carved with considerable skill into the seated figure of
a king. The figure is greatly damaged by the blows of a mace. The
nose and mouth are broken off, half of the right hand and the whole
of the left hand and leg are gone and the feet and almost the whole
of the seat or throne have disappeared. The figure is seated on a
narrow lion-supported throne or sinhásan the right hand resting on
the right knee and holding a round ball of stone about six inches in
diameter. The left foot was drawn back like the right foot and the
left hand apparently lay on the left knee, but, as no trace remains
except the fracture on the side of the stone the position of the left
hand and of the left leg is uncertain. The head is massive. The hair
falls about two feet from the crown of the head in four long lines of
curls on to the shoulders, and, over the curls, or what seems more
likely the curled wig, is a diadem or mukut with a central spike
and two upright side ornaments connected by two round bands. The
face is broken flat. It seems to have been clean shaved or at least
beardless. A heavy ring hangs from each ear. A stiff collar-like
band encircles the neck and strings of beads or plates hang on the
chest too worn to be distinguished. On both arms are upper armlets,
a centre lion-face still showing clear on the left armlet. On the
right hand is a bracelet composed of two outer bands and a central
row of beads. A light belt encircles the waist. Lower down are the
kandora or hip girdle and the kopul or dhotar knot. [1081] In spite
of its featureless face and its broken hands and feet the figure has
considerable dignity. The head is well set and the curls and diadem
are an effective ornament. The chest and the full rounded belly are
carved with skill. The main fault in proportion, the overshortened
lower arm and leg and the narrowness of the throne, are due to the
want of depth in the stone. The chief details of interest are the
figure's head-dress and the ball of stone in its right hand. The
head-dress seems to be a wig with a row of crisp round curls across
the brow and four lines of long curls hanging down to the shoulders
and crisp curls on the top of the head. The mukut or diadem has three
upright faces, a front face over the nose and side faces over the
ears joined together by two rounded bands. At first sight the stone
ball in the right hand seems a cocoanut which the king might hold in
dedicating the lake. Examination shows on the left side of the ball an
outstanding semicircle very like a human ear. Also that above the ear
are three rolls as if turban folds. And that the right ear may be hid
either by the end of the turban drawn under the chin or by the fingers
of the half-closed hand. That the front of the ball has been wilfully
smashed further supports the view that it was its human features that
drew upon it the Muslim mace. The local Bráhmans contend that the ball
is either a round sweetmeat or a handful of mud held in the right hand
of the king during the dedication service. But Tappa a Bráhm-Bhát,
a man of curiously correct information, was urgent that the stone
ball is a human head. Tappa gives the following tale to explain why
the king should hold a human head in his hand. An evil spirit called
Satka had been wasting the Bráhmans by carrying off the head of each
bridegroom so soon as a wedding ceremony was completed. The king vowed
that by the help of his goddess Chamunda he would put a stop to this
evil. The marriage of a hundred Bráhman couples was arranged for one
night. The king sat by. So long as the king remained awake the demon
dared not appear. When the hundredth marriage was being performed
the king gave way to sleep. Satka dashed in and carried off the last
bridegroom's head. The girl-bride awoke the king and said I will curse
you. You watched for the others, for me you did not watch. The king
said to his Luck Chamunda, What shall I do. Chamunda said Ride after
Satka. The king rode after Satka. He overtook her fourteen miles out
of Shrimál and killed her. But before her death Satka had eaten the
bridegroom's head. What is to be done the king asked Chamunda. Trust me
said his guardian. The king rode back to Shrimál. As he was entering
the city the goddess pointed out to him a gardener or Máli and said
off with his head. The king obeyed. The goddess caught the falling
head, stuck it to the bridegroom's neck, and the bridegroom came to
life. Thus, ends the tale, the local Bráhmans are known as Shrimális
that is men with gardeners' heads. This meaning-making pun and the
likeness of the stone-ball to a human head may be the origin of this
story. On the other hand the story may be older than the image and
may be the reason why the king is shown holding a human head in his
hand. On the whole it seems likely that the story was made to explain
the image and that the image is a Bhairav holding the head of a human
sacrifice and acting as gatekeeper or guardian of some Buddhist or
Sun-worshipping temple. [1082] The appearance of the figure, its
massive well-proportioned and dignified pose, and the long wiglike
curls, like the bag wig on the figure of Chánd on the south-west or
marriage compartment of the great Elephanta Cave, make it probable
that this statue is the oldest relic of Shrimál, belonging like
the Elephanta wigged figures to the sixth or early seventh century
the probable date of the founding or refounding of the city by the
Gurjjarás. [1083] According to the local story the image stands about
twenty paces east of the temple where it was originally enshrined
and worshipped. The lie of the ground and traces of foundations seem
to show about fifty paces west of the present image the sites of an
entrance porch, a central hall or mandap, and a western shrine. The
surface of what seemed the site of the shrine was dug about two feet
deep on the chance that the base of the throne might still be in
site. Nothing was found but loose brickwork. Mutilated as he is the
Yaksha is still worshipped. His high day is the A'shad (July-August)
fullmoon when as rain-mediator between them and Indra the villagers
lay in front of him gugri that is wheat boiled in water and milk,
butter, flour, molasses, and sugar.

[Sun Temple.] The second and main object of interest is the ruined Sun
temple in the south of the town on a brick mound about eighty yards
east of the remains of the Gujarát gateway. The brick mound which is
crowned by the white marble pillars and the massive laterite ruins
of the temple of Jagsvámi Lord of the World has been so dug into that
its true form and size cannot be determined. The size of many of the
bricks 1' 16'' × 1' × 3'' suggests that the mound is older even than
the massive laterite masonry of the shrine. And that here as at Multán
about the sixth century during the supremacy of the sun-worshipping
White Húnas a temple of the Sun was raised on the ruins of a Buddhist
temple or relic mound. Still except the doubtful evidence of the size
of the bricks nothing has been found to support the theory that the
Sun temple stands on an earlier Buddhist ruin. The apparent present
dimensions of the mound are 42' broad 60' long and 20' high. Of the
temple the north side and north-west corner are fairly complete. The
east entrance to the hall, the south pillars of the hall, and with them
the hall dome and the outer wall of the temple round the south and west
of the shrine have disappeared. A confused heap of bricks on the top of
the shrine and of the entrance from the hall to the shrine is all that
is left of the spire and upper buildings. The materials used are of
three kinds. The pillars of the hall are of a white quartzlike marble;
the masonry of the shrine walls and of the passage round the north of
the shrine is of a reddish yellow laterite, and the interior of the
spire and apparently some other roof buildings are of brick. Beginning
from the original east entrance the ground has been cut away so close
to the temple and so many of the pillars have fallen that almost no
trace of the entrance is left. The first masonry, entering from the
east, are the two eastern pillars of the hall dome and to the north of
this central pair the pillar that supported the north-eastern corner
of the dome. Except the lowest rim, on the east side, all trace of the
dome and of the roof over the dome are gone. The centre of the hall
is open to the sky. The south side is even more ruined than the east
side. The whole outer wall has fallen and been removed. The south-east
corner the two south pillars of the dome and the south-west corner
pillars are gone. The north side is better preserved. The masonry
that rounds off the corners from which the dome sprung remains and
along the rim of the north face runs a belt of finely carved female
figures. The north-east corner pillar, the two north pillars of the
dome, and the north-west corner pillar all remain. Outside of the
pillars runs a passage about four feet broad and eleven feet high,
and, beyond the passage, stands the north wall of the temple with
an outstanding deep-eaved window balcony with white marble seats and
backs and massive pillars whose six feet shafts are in three sections
square eightsided and round and on whose double-disc capitals rest
brackets which support a shallow cross-cornered dome. At its west end
the north passage is ornamented with a rich gokla or recess 3 1/2 broad
with side pillars 3 1/4 feet high. On the west side of the dome the
central pair of dome pillars and as has been noticed the north corner
pillar remain. About three feet west of the west pair of dome pillars
a second pair support the domed entrance to the shrine. The richly
carved side pillars, a goddess with fly-flap bearers, and the lintel
of the shrine door remain but the bare square chamber of the shrine is
open to the sky. To the south of the shrine the entire basis of the
south side of the spire, the outer circling or pradakshana passage
and the outer wall of the temple have disappeared. The north side is
much less ruinous. There remain the massive blocks of yellow and red
trap which formed the basis of the spire built in horizontal bands
of deep-cut cushions, and in the centre of the north wall a niche
with outstanding pillared frame, the circling passage with walls of
plain trap and roof of single slabs laid across and the outer wall of
the temple with bracket capitaled pillars and a central deep-eaved
and pillared hanging window of white marble. The circling passage
and the outer wall of the temple end at the north-west corner. Of
the western outer wall all trace is gone. The pillars of the temple
are massive and handsome with pleasantly broken outline, a pedestal,
a square, an eightsided band, a sixteensided band, a round belt, a
narrow band of horned faces, the capital a pair of discs, and above
the discs outstanding brackets each ending in a crouching four-armed
male or female human figure upholding the roof. The six central dome
pillars resemble the rest except that instead of the sixteensided
band the inner face is carved into an urn from whose mouth overhang
rich leafy festoons and which stand on a roll of cloth or a ring of
cane such as women set between the head and the waterpot. [1084] On
the roof piles of bricks show that besides the spire some building
rose over the central dome and eastern entrance but of its structure
nothing can now be traced.

[History.] According to a local legend this temple of the Sun was built
by Yayati the son of king Nahush [1085] of the Chandravansi or Moon
stock. Yayati came to Shrimál accompanied by his two queens Sharmistha
and Devyani, and began to perform severe austerities at one of the
places sacred to Surya the Sun. Surya was so pleased by the fervour
of Yayati's devotion that he appeared before him and asked Yayati to
name a boon. Yayati said May I with god-like vision see thee in thy
true form. The Sun granted this wish and told Yayati to name a second
boon. Yayati said I am weary of ruling and of the pleasures of life. My
one wish is that for the good of Shrimálpur you may be present here in
your true form. The Sun agreed. An image was set up in the Sun's true
form (apparently meaning in a human form) and a Hariya Bráhman was
set over it. [1086] The God said Call me Jagat-Svámi the Lord of the
World for I am its only protector. According to a local Bráhman account
the original image of the Sun was of wood and is still preserved in
Lakshmí's temple at Pátan in North Gujarát. [1087] Another account
makes the builder of the temple Shripunj or Jagsom. According to one
legend Jagsom's true name was Kanak who came from Kashmír. According
to the Bráhm Bhát Tappa Jagsom was a king of Kashmír of the Jamáwal
tribe who established himself in Bhinmál about 500 years before
Kumárapála. As Kumárapála's date is A.D. 1186, Jagsom's date would be
A.D. 680. According to the common local story Jagsom was tormented
by the presence of a live snake in his belly. When Jagsom halted at
the south gate of Bhinmál in the course of a pilgrimage from Káshmír
to Dwárka, he fell asleep and the snake came out at his mouth. At the
same time a snake issued from a hole close to the city gate and said
to the king's belly snake 'You should depart and cease to afflict
the king.' 'There is a fine treasure in your hole' said the belly
snake. 'How would you like to leave it? Why then ask me to leave
my home?' The gate snake said 'If any servant of the king is near
let him hearken. If some leaves of the kir Capparis aphylla tree are
plucked and mixed with the flowers of a creeper that grows under it and
boiled and given to the king the snake inside him will be killed.' 'If
any servant of the king is near' retorted the king's snake 'let him
hearken. If boiling oil is poured down the hole of the gate-snake
the snake will perish and great treasure will be found.' A clever
Kayasth of the king's retinue was near and took notes. He found the
kir tree and the creeper growing under it: he prepared the medicine
and gave it to the king. The writhing of the snake caused the king
so much agony that he ordered the Kayasth to be killed. Presently the
king became sick and the dead snake was thrown up through the king's
mouth. The king mourned for the dead Kayasth. So clever a man, he said,
must have made other good notes. They examined the Kayasth's note
book, poured the boiling oil down the hole, killed the gate-snake,
and found the treasure. To appease the Kayasths and the two snakes
lákhs were spent in feeding Bráhmans. With the rest a magnificent
temple was built to the Sun and an image duly enshrined. Nine upper
stories were afterwards added by Vishvakarma.

[Legends.] The legends of Bhinmál are collected in the Shrimál
Mahátmya of the Skanda Purána a work supposed to be about 400 years
old. According to the Mahátmya the city has been known by a different
name in each of the chief cycles or Yugs. In the Satyayug it was
Shrimál, in the Tretayug Ratanmál, in the Dwáparyug Pushpamal,
and in the Káliyug Bhinmál. In the Satyayug Shrimál or Shrinagar
had 84 Chandis; 336 Kshetrapáls; 27 Varáhas; 101 Suryás; 51 Mátás;
21 Brehispatis; 300 to 11,000 Lingas; 88,000 Rushis; 999 Wells and
Tanks; and 3 3/4 krors of tirthas or holy places. At first the plain
of Bhinmál was sea and Bhraghurishi called on Surya and the sun dried
the water and made it land. Then Braghu started a hermitage and the
saints Kashyáp, Atri, Baradwaj, Gautam, Jámdagni, Vishvamitra, and
Vashista came from Ábu to interview Braghu. Gautam was pleased with
the land to the north of Braghu's hermitage and prayed Trimbakeshwar
that the place might combine the holiness of all holy places and
that he and his wife Ahilya might live there in happiness. The God
granted the sage's prayer. A lake was formed and in the centre an
island was raised on which Gautam built his hermitage the foundations
of which may still be seen. The channel which feeds Gautam's lake
from the north-east was cut by an ascetic Bráhman named Yajanasila
and in the channel a stone is set with writing none of which but
the date S. 1117 (A.D. 1060) is legible. Some years after Gautam had
settled at Shrimál a daughter named Lakshmí was born in the house of
the sage Braghu. When the girl came of age Braghu consulted Naradji
about a husband. When Naradji saw Lakshmí, he said; This girl can be
the wife of no one but of Vishnu. Naradji went to Vishnu and said
that in consequence of the curse of Durvasarashi Lakshmí could not
be born anywhere except in Braghu's house and that Vishnu ought to
marry her. Vishnu agreed. After the marriage the bride and bridegroom
bathed together in the holy Trimbak pond about half a mile east of
Gautam's island. The holy water cleared the veil of forgetfulness and
Lakshmí remembered her former life. The devtas or guardians came to
worship her. They asked her what she would wish. Lakshmí replied;
May the country be decked with the houses of Bráhmans as the sky
is decked with their carriers the stars. Bhagwán that is Vishnu,
pleased with this wish, sent messengers to fetch Bráhmans and called
Vishvakarma the divine architect to build a town. Vishvakarma built
the town. He received golden bangles and a garland of gold lotus
flowers and the promise that his work would meet with the praise of
men and that his descendants would rule the art of building. This
town said the Gods has been decked as it were with the garlands or
mála of Srí or Lakshmí. So it shall be called Shrimála. When the
houses were ready Bráhmans began to gather from all parts. [1088]
When the Bráhmans were gathered Lakshmí asked Vishnu to which among
the Bráhmans worship was first due. The Bráhmans agreed that Gautam's
claim was the highest. The Bráhmans from Sindh objected and withdrew
in anger. Then Vishnu and Lakshmí made presents of clothes, money
and jewels to the Bráhmans, and they, because they had settled in
the town of Shrimál, came to be known as Shrimáli Bráhmans.

The angry Sindh Bráhmans in their own country worshipped the Sea. And
at their request Samudra sent the demon Sarika to ruin Shrimál. Sarika
carried off the marriageable Bráhman girls. And the Bráhmans finding
no one to protect them withdrew to Ábu. Shrimál became waste and the
dwellings ruins. [1089] When Shrimál had long lain waste a king named
Shripunj, according to one account suffering from worms, according to
another account stricken with leprosy, came to the Brahmakund to the
south of the city and was cleansed. [1090] Thankful at heart Shripunj
collected Bráhmans and restored Shrimála and at the Brahmakund built a
temple of Chandish Mahádev. When they heard that the Shrimál Bráhmans
had returned to their old city and were prospering the Bráhmans
of Sindh once more sent Sarika to carry away their marriageable
daughters. One girl as she was being haled away called on her house
goddess and Sarika was spell-bound to the spot. King Shripunj came up
and was about to slay Sarika with an arrow when Sarika said Do not kill
me. Make some provision for my food and I will henceforth guard your
Bráhmans. The king asked her what she required. Sarika said Let your
Bráhmans at their weddings give a dinner in my honour and let them
also marry their daughters in unwashed clothes. If they follow these
two rules I will protect them. The king agreed and gave Sarika leave to
go. Sarika could not move. While the king wondered the home-goddess of
the maiden appeared and told the king she had stopped the fiend. Truly
said the king you are the rightful guardian. But Sarika is not ill
disposed let her go. On this Sarika fled to Sindh. And in her honour
the people both of Shrimál and of Jodhpur still marry their daughters
in unwashed clothes. [1091] The Bráhman girls whom Sarika had carried
off had been placed in charge of the snake Kankal lord of the under
world. The Bráhmans found this out and Kankal agreed to restore the
girls if the Bráhmans would worship snakes or nágs at the beginning of
their shrádh or after-death ceremonies. Since that time the Shrimális
set up the image of a Nág when they perform death rites. Other legends
relating to the building of the Jagsvámi or Sun temple, to the temple
of Chandish Mahádev near the Brahmakund, [1092] and to the making of
the Jaikop lake are given above. The dates preserved by local tradition
are S. 222 (A.D. 166) the building of the first temple of the Sun;
S. 265 (A.D. 209) a destructive attack on the city; S. 494 (A.D. 438)
a second sack by a Rákshasa; S. 700 (A.D. 644) a re-building; S. 900
(A.D. 844) a third destruction; S. 955 (A.D. 899) a new restoration
followed by a period of prosperity which lasted till the beginning
of the fourteenth century.

[Caste Legends.] That Shrimál was once the capital of the Gurjjaras
seems to explain the local saying that Jagatsen the son of the
builder of the Sun temple gave Shrimál to Gujarát Bráhmans where
Gujarát is a natural alteration of the forgotten Gurjjaras or Gurjjara
Bráhmans. That Shrimál was once a centre of population is shown by the
Shrimáli subdivisions of the Bráhman and Váni castes who are widely
scattered over north Gujarát and Káthiáváda. Most Shrimáli Vánis are
Shrávaks. It seems probable that their history closely resembles the
history of the Osvál Shrávaks or Jains who take their name from the
ancient city of Osia about fifteen miles south of Jodhpur to which they
still go to pay vows. The bulk of these Osvál Vánis, who are Jains
by religion, were Solanki Rájputs before their change of faith which
according to Jain records took place about A.D. 743 (S. 800). [1093]
The present Bhinmál bards claim the Osváls as originally people of
Shrimál. Lakshmí they say when she was being married to Vishnu at
Shrimál looked into her bosom and the Jariya goldsmiths came forth:
she looked north and the Oswáls appeared, east and from her look were
born the Porwáls. [1094] From her lucky necklace of flowers sprang the
Shrimáli Bráhmans. According to other accounts the Shrimáli Bráhmans
and Vánis were of Kashmír origin of the Jamawála caste and were brought
to south Márwár by Jag Som by which name apparently Kanaksen that is
the Kushán or Kshatrapa (A.D. 78-250) dynasty is meant. They say that
in S. 759 (A.D. 703) Bugra an Arab laid the country waste and that
from fear of him the Shrimáli Bráhmans and Vánis fled south. Another
account giving the date A.D. 744 (S. 800) says the assailants were
Songara Rájputs. The Shrimális were brought back to Bhinmál by Abhai
Singh Ráhtor when viceroy of Gujarát in A.D. 1694 (S. 1750).

The memory of the Gurjjaras, who they say are descended from Garab
Rishi, lingers among the Bháts or bards of Shrimál. They say the
Gurjjaras moved from Shrimál to Pushkar about ten miles north-west
of Ajmír and there dug the great lake. They are aware that Gurjjaras
have a very sacred burning ground at Pushkar or Pokarn and also that
the Sávitrí or wife of Brahma at Pokarn was a Gurjjara maiden.

But as the leading Gurjjarás have dropped their tribe name in
becoming Kshatriyás or Rájputs the bards naturally do not know of
the Gurjjaras as a ruling race. The ordinary Gurjjara they say is
the same as the Rehbári; the Bad or High Gujjars to whom Krishna
belonged are Rájputs. The bards further say that the Sompuras who
live near Poshkar (Pokarn north of Ajmír) and are the best builders
who alone know the names of all ornamental patterns are of Gurjjara
descent and of Shrimál origin. They do not admit that the Chávadás
were Gurjjarás. In their opinion Chávadás are the same as Bhárods
and came north into Márwár from Dánta in Jháláváda in north-east
Káthiáváda. The Choháns they say came from Sámbhar to Ajmír, from
Ajmír to Delhi, from Delhi to Nágor north of Jodhpur, from Nágor to
Jodhpur, from Jodhpur to Bhadgaon thirty miles south of Bhinmál, and
from Bhadgaon to Sirohi. According to a local Jaghirdár of the Devra
caste the Choháns' original seat was at Jhálor forty miles north of
Shrimál. They say that in the eighteenth century the Solankis came
north from Pátan in north Gujarát to Hiyu in Pálanpur where they have
still a settlement, and that from Hiyu they went to Bhinmál.

In connection with the Sun temple and the traces of sun worship among
the Jains, whose gurus or religious guides have a sun face which they
say was given them by the Rána of Chitor, the existence in Bhinmál
of so many (thirty-five) houses of Shevaks is interesting. These
Shevaks are the religious dependents of the Oswál Shrávaks. They
are strange highnosed hatchet-faced men with long lank hair and long
beards and whiskers. They were originally Magha Bráhmans and still are
Vaishnavas worshipping the sun. They know that their story is told in
the Námagranth of the Surya Purána. The Bhinmál Shevaks know of sixteen
branches or sákas but remember the names of ten only: Aboti, Bhinmála,
Devira, Hirgota, Kuwara, Lalár, Mahtariya, Mundiara, Saparwála, and
Shánda. The story of these Maghás in the Surya and Bhavishya Puránas,
how they were brought by Garuda from the land of the Sakas and were
fire and sun worshippers, gives these Shevaks a special interest. The
Devalás are believed to have come from Kashmír with Jog Svámi who
is said to have been a Yaksh of the Rákshas division of Parihár
Rájputs. The other division of Parihárs were girásias of Ábu who in
virtue of the fire baptism of the Agnikund became Kshatriyás. The
Devalás are supposed to get their name because they built Jag Som's
temple at Bhinmál. The Devra Rájputs whose head is the Sirohi chief
and who according to the bards are of Chohán descent, came at the
same time and marry with the Devalás. With this origin from Kanaksen
it is natural to associate the Devras and Devalás with the Devaputras
of the Samudragupta (A.D. 370-395) inscription. Of Húna or of Javla,
the tribe name of the great Húna conquerors Toramána and Mihirakula
(A.D. 450-530), few signs have been traced. The Jaghirdár of Devala
knows the name Húna. They are a Rákshasa people he says. He mentions
Honots or Sonots who may be a trace of Húnas, and Húnáls in Káthiáváda
and a Huni subdivision among the Kunbis of Márwár. Jávla he does not
know as a caste name.

[History.] The historical interest of Shrimál centres in the fact that
it was long the capital of the main branch of the great northern race
of Gurjjaras. It is well known that many mentions of the Gurjjaras
and their country in inscriptions and historical works refer to
the Chaulukya or Solanki kingdom of Anahilaváda (A.D. 961-1242)
or to its successor the Vághelá principality (A.D. 1219-1304). But
the name Gurjjara occurs also in many documents older than the tenth
century and has been most variously and inconsistently explained. Some
take the name to denote the Chávadás of Anahilaváda (A.D. 746-942),
some the Gurjjaras of Broach (A.D. 580-808) and some, among them
Dr. Bhagvánlál Indraji, even the Valabhis (A.D. 509-766), but not
one of these identifications can be made to apply to all cases. As
regards the Valabhis even if they were of Gurjjara origin they are not
known to have at any time called themselves Gurjjaras or to have been
known by that name to their neighbours. The identification with the
Gurjjaras of Broach is at first sight more plausible, as they admitted
their Gurjjara origin as late as the middle of the seventh century,
but there are strong reasons against the identification of the Broach
branch as the leading family of Gurjjaras. Pulakesi II. in his Aihole
inscription of A.D. 634 (S. 556) [1095] claims to have subdued by his
prowess the Látas Málavas and Gurjjaras, which shows that the land
of the Gurjjaras was distinct from Láta, the province in which Broach
stood. Similarly Hiuen Tsiang (c. 640 A.D.) speaks of the kingdom of
Broach by the name of the city and not as Gurjjara or the Gurjjara
country. In the following century the historians of the Arab raids
[1096] notice Barus (Broach) separately from Jurz or Gurjjara, and the
Chálukya grant of 490 that is of A.D. 738-739 mentions the Gurjjaras
after the Chávotakas (Chávadás) and the Mauryas (of Chitor) as the
last of the kingdoms attacked by the Arab army. Later instances occur
of a distinction between Láta and Gurjjara, but it seems unnecessary
to quote them as the Gurjjara kingdom of Broach probably did not
survive the Ráshtrakúta conquest of south Gujarát (A.D. 750-760).

The evidence that the name Gurjjara was not confined to the Chávadás
is not less abundant. It will not be disputed that references of
earlier date than the foundation of Anahilaváda (A.D. 746) cannot
apply to the Chávadá kingdom, and further we find the Chálukya grant
of A.D. 738-739 expressly distinguishing between the Chávadás and the
Gurjjaras and calling the former by their tribal name Chávotaka. It
might be supposed that as the power of the Chávadás increased, they
became known as the rulers of the Gurjjara country; and it must be
admitted that some of the references to Gurjjaras in the Ráshtrakúta
grants are vague enough to apply to the Chávadás. Still, if it can
be shown that others of these references cannot possibly apply to the
Chávadás, and if we assume, as we must, that the name of Gurjjara was
used with the slightest consistency, it will follow that the ninth
and tenth century references to the Gurjjaras do not apply to the
Chávadá kingdom of Anahilaváda.

The Van-Dindori and Rádhanpur plates of the great Ráshtrakúta
Govinda III. [1097] state that Govinda's father Dhruva (C. 780-800
A.D.) "quickly caused Vatsarája, intoxicated with the goddess of the
sovereignty of Gauda that he had acquired with ease, to enter upon the
path of misfortune in the centre of Maru" and took away from him the
two umbrellas of Gauda. A comparison of this statement with that in
the Baroda grant of Karka II. [1098] which is dated A.D. 812-813, to
the effect that Karka made his arm "the door-bar of the country of the
lord of the Gurjjaras, who had become evilly inflamed by conquering
the lord of Gauda and the lord of Vanga" makes it highly probable
that Vatsarája was king of the Gurjjaras at the end of the eighth
century. As no such name occurs in the Chávadá lists, it follows that
the Gurjjaras referred to in the inscriptions of about A.D. 800 were
not Chávadás.

It is also possible to show that more than a century later the Chávadás
were distinct from the Gurjjaras. The Kánarese poet Pampa, writing
in A.D. 941, [1099] states that the father of his patron Arikesari
vanquished Mahipála king of the Gurjjaras, who may be identified with
the Mahipála who is named as overlord in the grant of Dharanívaráha
of Wadhwán, [1100] dated A.D. 914. As no Mahipála occurs in the
Chávadá lists, the Gurjjara kingdom must be sought elsewhere than
at Anahilaváda. Since the Gurjjaras of the eighth and ninth century
inscriptions cannot be identified either with the Valabhis, the Broach
Gurjjaras, or the Anahilaváda Chávadás, they must represent some other
family of rulers. A suitable dynasty seems to be supplied by Hiuen
Tsiang's kingdom of Kiu-che-lo or Gurjjara, the capital of which he
calls Pi-lo-mo-lo. [1101] The French translators took Pi-lo-mo-lo to be
Bálmer in Rájputána. But Dr. Bühler following the late Colonel Watson,
identifies it, no doubt rightly, with Bhinmál or Bhilmál. [1102]

A short sketch of the history of the Gurjjaras, so far as it can
be pieced together from contemporary sources, may help to show the
probability of these identifications. The Gurjjaras apparently entered
India in the fifth century A.D. The earliest notice of them occurs in
the Srí Harshacharita, a work of the early seventh century, in which
during the early years of the seventh century Prabhákaravardhana
the father of Srí Harsha of Magadha (A.D. 606-641) is said to have
conquered the king of Gandhára, the Húnas, the king of Sindh, the
Gurjjaras, the Látas, and the king of Málava. [1103] The date of their
settlement at Bhinmál is unknown, but as their king was recognised as
a Kshatriya in Hiuen Tsiang's time (c. 640 A.D.) it probably was not
later than A.D. 550. Towards the end of the sixth century (c. 585)
they seem to have conquered northern Gujarát and Broach and to have
forced the Valabhis (A.D. 509-766) to acknowledge their supremacy. (See
above page 465.) They took very kindly to Indian culture, for in
A.D. 628 the astronomer Brahmagupta wrote his Siddhánta at Bhinmál
under king Vyághramukha, who, he states, belonged to the Srí Chápa
dynasty. [1104] This valuable statement not only gives the name of
the Gurjjara royal house but at the same time proves the Gurjjara
origin of the Chápotkatas or Chávotakas, that is the Chávadás of later
times. This Vyághramukha is probably the same as the Gurjjara king whom
in his inscription of S. 556 (A.D. 634) Pulakesi II. claims to have
subdued. [1105] A few years later (c. 640 A.D.) Hiuen Tsiang describes
the king (probably Vyághramukha's successor) as a devout Buddhist and
just twenty years of age. The country was populous and wealthy, but
Buddhists were few and unbelievers many. The Gurjjaras did not long
retain their southern conquests. In Hiuen Tsiang's time both Kaira
(Kie-cha) and Vadnagar (Ánandapura) belonged to Málava, while the
Broach chiefs probably submitted to the Chálukyas. No further reference
to the Bhinmál kingdom has been traced until after the Arab conquest
of Sindh when (A.D. 724-750) the Khalifa's governor Junaid sent his
plundering bands into all the neighbouring countries and attacked
among other places Márwád (Márwár), Maliba (Málwa), Barus (Broach),
Uzain (Ujjain), Al Bailamán (Bhilmál ?), and Jurz (Gurjjara). [1106]
As noticed above the contemporary Chálukya plate of A.D. 738-9 also
mentions Gurjjara as one of the kingdoms attacked. After these
events the Arabs seem to have confined themselves to raiding the
coast towns of Káthiáváda without attacking inland states such as
Bhinmál. Immediately after the Arab raids ceased the Gurjjaras had to
meet a new enemy the Ráshtrakútas who after supplanting the Chálukyas
in the Dakhan turned their attention northwards. Dantidurga in his
Samangad grant of A.D. 753-4 [1107] speaks of ploughing the banks of
the Mahí and the Revá (Narbada), and in his Elura inscription [1108]
of conquering among other countries Málava Láta and Tanka. [1109]
A few years later (A.D. 757-58) a branch of the main Ráshtrakúta line
established its independence in Láta in the person of Kakka.

The next notice of the Gurjjaras occurs in the Rádhanpur and
Van-Dindori grants of Govinda III. [1110] who states that his father
Dhruva (c. 780-800 A.D.) caused "Vatsarája, intoxicated with the
goddess of the sovereignty of Gauda that he had acquired with ease,
to enter upon the path of misfortune in the centre of Maru" and
took from him the two white umbrellas of Gauda. As already stated,
a comparison with the Baroda grant of Karka II. [1111] shows that
this Vatsarája was a Gurjjara king and that he had made extensive
conquests in Upper India as far east as Bengal. Now it is notable
that the genealogies of two of the most important Agnikula races,
the Paramáras and the Chauháns, go back to this very time (c. 800
A.D.) [1112]. Taking this fact in connection with the prevalence of
the surnames Pavár and Chaván among Gujars in such remote provinces
as the Panjáb and Khándesh, it seems obvious that these two tribes
and therefore also the two other Agnikula races, the Parihárs and
Solankis are, if not of Gurjjara origin, at all events members of
the great horde of northern invaders whom the Gurjjaras led. The
agreement between this theory and the Agnikula legends of Ábu need
only be pointed out to be admitted. The origin of the modern Rájput
races has always been one of the puzzles of Indian history. This
suggestion seems to offer at least a partial solution.

The Rádhanpur grant (A.D. 807-8) further states that when the
Gurjjara saw Govinda III. approaching, he fled in fear to some unknown
hiding-place. This probably means no more than that Vatsarája did not
oppose Govinda in his march to the Vindhyas. The next reference is in
the Baroda grant of Karka II. of Gujarát who boasts that his father
Indra (c. 810 A.D.) alone caused the leader of the Gurjjara lords to
flee. Karka adds that he himself, for the purpose of protecting Málava,
"who had been struck down," made his arm the door-bar of the country
of Gurjjaresvara, who "had become evilly inflamed" by the conquest
of Gauda and Vanga. [1113] It is difficult to avoid supposing that we
have here a reference to the Paramára conquest of Málwa and that Karka
checked the southward march of the victorious army. For some years no
further mention has been traced of the Gurjjaras. But in A.D. 851 the
Arab merchant Sulaiman states [1114] that the king of Juzr was one of
the kings "around" the Balhára, that is the Ráshtrakúta, and that he
was very hostile to the Musalmáns, which is not surprising, considering
how his kingdom was exposed to the Arab raids from Sindh. Dhruva
III. of Broach, in his Bagumrá grant of A.D. 867 [1115] speaks of
"the host of the powerful Gurjjaras" as one of the dangerous enemies
he had to fear. About A.D. 890 a Gurjjara chief named Alakhána ceded
Takkadesa in the Panjáb to Sankaravarmman of Kashmir. [1116] But as
Alakhána was a vassal of Lalliya, the Sáhi of Ohind near Swát, this
event did not affect the Bhínmál empire. To about A.D. 900 belongs the
notice of the Ráshtrakúta Krishna II. in the Deoli and Navsári grants
[1117] where he is stated to have frightened the Gurjjaras, destroyed
the pride of Láta, and deprived the coast people of sleep. His fights
with the Gurjjaras are compared to the storms of the rainy season,
implying that while the relations of the two empires continued hostile,
neither was able to gain any decisive advantage over the other. To
this same period belongs Ibn Khurdádba's (A.D. 912) statement [1118]
that the king of Juzr was the fourth in rank of the kings of India and
that the Tátariya dirhams were used in his country. In connection
with the latter point it is worth noting that the pattávali of
the Upakesagaccha [1119] gives a story which distinctly connects
the origin of the Gadhia coinage with Bhínmál. [1120] The grant of
Dharanívaráha, the Chápa chief of Vadhván, dated A.D. 914 [1121]
gives us the name of his overlord Mahipála, who, as already pointed
out, must be identified with the Mahipála who was defeated by the
Karnátak king Narasimha. [1122] The fact that Vadhván was a Chápa
dependency implies that Anahilaváda was one also. We may in fact
conclude that throughout the Chávadá period Anahilaváda was a mere
feudatory of Bhínmál, a fact which would account for the obscurities
and contradictions of Chávadá history.

The Deoli grant of the Ráshtrakúta Krishna III. which is dated A.D. 940
[1123] describes the king's victories in the south as causing the
hope of Kálanjara and Chitrakúta to drop away from the heart of
the Gurjjara. At this time Kalinjar belonged to the Kalachuris of
Central India and Chitrakúta or Chitod to the Gehlots of Mewád and
the phrase used by Krishna implies that the Gurjjara chief had his
eye on these two famous fortresses and had perhaps already besieged
them unsuccessfully. In either case this notice is evidence of the
great and far-reaching power of the Gurjjaras. Masudi (A.D. 915)
notices that the king of Juzr was frequently at war with the Balhara
(Ráshtrakúta) and that he had a large army and many horses and camels.

A Chandel stone inscription from Khajuráho describes Yasovarmman and
Lakshavarmman as successful in war against Gaudas, Khasas, Kosalas,
Kásmíras, Maithilas, Málavas, Chedis, Kurus, and Gurjjaras. [1124] And
soon after about A.D. 953 during the reign of Bhímasena a migration of
18,000 Gurjjaras from Bhínmál is recorded. [1125] The memory of this
movement remains in the traditions of the Gujars of Khándesh into which
they passed with their carts in large numbers by way of Málwa. [1126]
An important result of this abandonment of Bhínmál was the transfer
of overlordship from Bhínmál to Anahilaváda whose first Chálukya or
Solanki king Múlarája (A.D. 961-996) is, about A.D. 990, described
as being accompanied by the chief of Bhinmál as a subordinate ally in
his war with Graharipu (see above page 451). The Gurjjara or Bhinmál
empire seems to have broken into several sections of which the three
leading portions were the Chauháns of Sámbhar, the Paramáras of Málwa,
and the Solankis of Anahilaváda.

The inscriptions which follow throw a certain amount of light on
the history of Bhinmál during and after the Solanki period. The
two earliest in date (Nos. 1 and 2) which are probably of the
tenth century, give no historical details. Nos. 3 and 4 show that
between A.D. 1057 and 1067 Bhinmál was ruled by the Mahárájádhirája
Krishnarája of the Paramára race. This is a valuable confirmation
of Rájput tradition, according to which [1127] the Paramára Rája of
Ábu was followed by the prince of Srímála, when he aided Múlarája
against Graharipu (c. 990 A.D.) and the Paramáras remained paramount
in this region until the beginning of the thirteenth century. [1128]
The title of Mahárájádhirája meant much less at this period than
it meant before the Valabhi kings had cheapened it. Still it shows
that Krishnarája's rank was considerably higher than that of a mere
feudatory chieftain. Inscription No. 3 gives the names of Krishnarája's
father Dhamdhuka and of his grandfather Devarája. The first of these
two names occurs in the main line of Ábu as the successor of Dhúmarája
the first Paramára sovereign. [1129] According to Rájput tradition
the Paramáras were at one time supreme in Marásthalí and held all
the nine castles of the Waste. But in the historical period their
chief possessions in Márwád lay about Ábu and Chandrávati, though we
have a glimpse of another branch maintaining itself at Kerálu near
Bádmer. [1130] The Paramára chiefs of Ábu are constantly referred to in
the Solanki annals, and during the golden age of the Solanki monarchy
(A.D. 1094-1174) they were the vassals of that power, and their Bhinmál
branch, if it was ever a distinct chiefship, probably followed the
fortunes of the main line, though the Bhinmál inscriptions give us
no facts for this long period. The next item of information is given
by Inscription 5, which is dated in the Samvat year 1239 (A.D. 1183)
in the reign of the Maháraul Srí Jayatasíha-deva. This name is of
special interest, as it can hardly be doubted that we have here to do
with that "Jaitsí Parmár" of Ábu whose daughter's beauty caused the
fatal feud between "Bhíma Solanki" of Anahilaváda and Prithiráj Chohán
of Delhi. [1131] The title of Mahâraul is to be noted as indicating
the decline of the family from the great days of Krishnarája.

Towards the end of the thirteenth century the old world was falling
to pieces, and the Paramáras lost one after another nearly all
their ancient possessions to the Choháns of Nádol. Bhinmál must have
fallen about A.D. 1200 or a few years before, for Inscription No. 6
is dated Samvat 1262 (A.D. 1206) in the reign of the Mahárájádhirája
Srí Udayasimhadêva, who, as we learn from Inscription 12, was the son
of the Maháraul Srí Samarasimhadeva, of the Chohán race. The sudden
rise of the son to greatness is implied in the difference of title
and it may be inferred that Udayasimha himself was the conqueror of
Bhinmál, though the capture of Ábu is ascribed by Forbes to a chief
named Lúniga. [1132]

Inscriptions Nos. 6 to 8 being dated in the reign of Udayasimha, show
that he lived to at least the year A.D. 1249 and therefore reigned
at least forty-three years. He is also referred to in the Inscription
No. 10, dated A.D. 1274, but in a way that does not necessarily imply
that he was still alive, as the record only speaks of an endowment
for his spiritual benefit, made by a person who was perhaps an old
retainer. His name also occurs in the genealogy in No. 12. His reign
was apparently a prosperous one but no historical facts beyond those
already noted are known about him.

Inscription No. 12 shows that Udayasimha had a son named Váhadhasimha,
who, as he is given no royal title, probably died before his
father. Udayasimha's successor, or at all events the next king in
whose reign grants are dated, was Cáciga, who is given the title of
Maháraul in Inscriptions 11 (A.D. 1277) and 12 (A.D. 1278). [1133]
His relationship to Udayasimha does not clearly appear, but he
was probably either an elder brother or an uncle of the Cámunda
for whose benefit the gift recorded in Inscription 12 was made and
who seems to be a grandson of Udayasimha. Cáciga appears to be the
Mahámandalesvara Cáciga of Inscription 15 in the Bháunagar State
Collection (Bháu. Prá. I. list page 5) which is stated to bear the
date Samvat 1332 (A.D. 1276) and to be engraved on a pillar in the
temple of Pársvanátha at Ratanpur near Jodhpúr. It is clear that
he was tributary to some greater power though it is not easy to say
who his suzerain was. At this period Márwár was in a state of chaos
under the increasing pressure of the Ráthods. Only five years after
Cáciga's last date (A.D. 1278) we meet with the name of a new ruler,
the Maháraul Srí Sámvatasimha. He is mentioned in Inscriptions 13
(A.D. 1283) 14 (A.D. 1286) and 15 (A.D. 1289) and also in 44 of the
Bháunagar Collection (A.D. 1296 Bháu. Prá. I. list page 13) from a Jain
temple at Juná. He is not stated to have belonged to the same family
as the previous rulers, but he bears the family title of Maháraul, and
it may be inferred with probability that he was a son of Cáciga. He
reigned for at least thirteen years (A.D. 1283-1296). It must have
been about A.D. 1300 or a little later, that the Choháns were deprived
of Bhinmál by the Ráthods and the line of Udayasimha died out. [1134]

[Inscriptions.] The Jagsvámi temple has the honour of supplying
fifteen of eighteen unmodern inscriptions found at Bhinmál. Of the
fifteen inscriptions belonging to Jagsvámi's temple nine are in place
and six have been removed to other buildings. Of the six which have
been moved five are in Báráji's rest-house in the east and one is in
the enclosure of Mahálakshámí's temple in the south of the town. Of
the three remaining inscriptions of one (No. 3) the date S. 1106
(A.D. 1043) is alone legible. Of the letters on the two others, one in
the bed and the other on the north bank of the Jaikop lake, no portion
can be read. Arranged according to date the sixteen inscriptions of
which any portion has been read come in the following order:

I.--(S. 950-1050; A.D. 900-1000. No. 1 of Plan.) On the left hand
side of the eastern face of the broken architrave of the porch of the
shrine of Jagsvâmi. The letters show the inscription to be of about
the tenth century:

Srî Jagasvâmidêvasya vâsare

on the day of Srî Jagasvâmi. [1135]

II.--(S. 950-1050; A.D. 900-1000. No. 2 of Plan.) On the south
face of the eightsided section of the northern pillar of the shrine
porch in the temple of Jagsvâmi. Wrongly described in Bhâvanagara
prâcînasodhasangraha I. under No. 46 of the State Collection, as
referring to a man called Vasumdhara and dated Vi. S. 1330. As the
letters show, the inscription is of about the tenth century. It
consists of a single complete verse:

1. Vasumdharî-kâri-
2. tâu dvâu stambhâv ê-
3. -tâu manôharâu
4. svapituh Santaka-
5. sârthê satatam
6. punyavriddhayê ||

These two lovely pillars Vasumdharî had made for her father
Santaka's sake for increase of merit for ever.

III.--(S. 1106; A.D. 1049. Not on Plan.) On the east side of the
southern water channel into Gautama's lake three-quarters of a mile
north of the town. Except the date nothing can be deciphered.

IV.--(S. 1117; A.D. 1060. Not on Plan.) On the lower part of a pillar
in the dharmasálá east of the temple of Bârâji on the east of the
town. Prose:

1. Om Namah sûryâya | yasyôdayâstasamayêsuramakutanispri-

2. shta-carana-kamalô s pi | kurutê s jalim Trinetrah sa jayati
dhâmnâ nidhi

3. Sûryah | Samvat 1117 (A.D. 1057) Mâgha Sudi 6 Ravâu Srî Srîmâle
Paramâravams

4. dbhavo Mahârâjâdhîrâjâ Srî Krishnarâjah Srî Dhamdhukasutah Srîmad
Dêvarâ-

5. -ja-pauttrah tasmin kshitîsê vijayini |
vartamâna-varsha-vârika-Dharkuta-

6. jâti-Kirinâdityô Jêla-sutô Dêda-Harir Mâdhava-sutô Dhamdha-nâkô Dha-

7. ranacanda-sutas tathâ Thâkhâta-jâti Dharanâdityah Sarvadêva-sutah
| amî-

8. bhiscaturbhis tathâ Vânyêna Dharkuta-jâtyâ Dhamdhakêna Jêlasutêna
nija-ku-

9. -la-mandanêna dêva-guru-vrâhmana-susrûshâ-parêna
Ravi-carana-yuga-dhyânâ-

10. -vishtena samsârasyânityatâm(n)irîkshya râjâno râjaputrâmsca
vrâhmanân (ma-)

11. -hâjana-paurâmsca tathâ lokân Saura-dharmê pravarttâyya dravyâni
me ... (ni)

12. -tya-tejo-nidheh Srî Jagatsvâmi-dêvasya deva-bhavana-jîrnoddhâ ...

13. (kâ)râpitam bhavanasyopari svarnna-kalasam vrâhmanena
para-(ma-dhâ-)

14. -rmmikena Jêjâkêna nija-dravyena kâritam iti || Sam 1

15. Jyeshtha Su di 8 somê râtrâu ghatikâ 3 pala 25 asmin la-

16. (g)nê sarvakarma nishpâdya kalasam dhvajam ca dayapitam iti ||

17. (Ta)thâ purâtanavrittêna pari devasyâsya Râjñâ Srî Krishnarâjêna
Srî-

18. ... (pu-)rîya-mandalê grâmam prativao drâ. 20 Sacaliyâ-grâmê
kshêtram êkam

19. ...... trâyâ râjabhôgât tu drôna ...... sati kâ ..

20. ... || Râmasî Pômarapi kâ ...... prativao drâ. 1 ......

21. .... vijñapya camdanena kârâpitam iti || Tathâ âlav ....

22. ... ya pra da ... likhitam kada ..........

23. ............. kâya .....

Translation.

1-3. Om! Reverence to the Sun! Victorious is that sun, the storehouse
of brightness, at whose rising and setting the three-eyed (Siva),
even though (his own) lotus feet are touched by the diadems of the
gods, folds his hands (in adoration).

3-5. On Sunday the 6th of the light half of Mâgha, the year 1113, at
holy Srîmâla the Mahârâjâdhirâja Srî Krishnarâja son of Srî Dhamdhuka
and grandson of the glorious Devarâja, of the Paramâra race--in his
victorious reign.

6-7. Kirinâditya, Jêla's son, of the Dharkuta family, (being
office-holder) in his turn for the current year, Dada Hari son of
Mâdhava, Dhamdhanaka son of Dharanacanda and Dharanâditya son of
Sarvadeva of the Thâkhâta race.

8-12. By these four and by the Vânî (?) Dhamdhaka son of Jêla of
the Dharkuta race, the ornament of his family, strict in obedience
to the gods, to his teachers and to Brâhmanas, and full of devotion
to the feet of Ravi (the Sun), observing the perishableness of this
world, and urging kings Kshatriyas Brâhmanas merchants and townsfolk
to worship the sun, repairs were done to the temple of the god Srî
Jagatsvâmi, the everlasting store of light.

13. The kalasa of gold above the temple the very righteous Brâhmana
Jêjâka had made at his own charges. In the year 1....

15. on Monday the 8th of the light half of Jyêshtha, in the 25th pala
of the 3rd ghatikâ of night--at this moment

16. all the work being finished the kalasa and banner were set up (?)

17. and after the ancient manner by the king Srî Krishnarâja .... of
this complaint ....

18. a village in the Srî .... purîya district, yearly 20 drammas. In
Sacaliyâ village a field

19. .... But from the king's share (of the crop) a drôna ....

20. ............... yearly 1 dramma .......

21. .... by order was caused to be made by Camdana || and ...

22. ......... written ..........

23. ...... kâya.

V.--(S. 1123; A.D. 1066. No. 3 of Plan.) On the north face of the upper
square section of the more northerly of the two pillars that support
the eastern side of the dome of the temple of Jagsvâmi. Entirely
in prose:

1. Om. Samvat 1123, Jyêshtha Vadi 12 Sanâu || adyêha Srî Srîmâlê
Mahârâjâdhirâja-Srî Krishnarà-

2. ja-râjyê Dêvasrîcandîsa-Mahâdêva-dharmâdhikâra-cêtakaparama
Pâsupatâcârya-Srî Jâvalasyê ... | Sauva-

3. -rnika Jasanâsâ | Srêshthi Camdanâ Kiranâdityâ Sîharâ
varttamâna-varsha-vârika-Joga-candra .....

4. Gugâ navâi .... lôkê ca êka .. matîbhûtvâ
........... .......... Srîmâlîya Vrâ-

5. hmana Vâhatêna ......... Srî Camdîsa ............ ...... drammâ ....

6-13. Badly damaged: only a few letters legible here and there.

Translation.

1-2. Ôm! On Saturday the 12th of the dark half of Jyêshtha Samvat
1123--on this day at holy Srîmâla, in the reign of the Mahârâjâdhirâja
Srí Krishnarâja--of Srî Jâvala, the servant of the offices of religion
to the god Srî Camdîsa Mahâdêva, the supreme teacher of the Pâsupatas
...

3. The goldsmith Jasanâsâ, the seth Camdanâ, Kiranâditya, Sîharâ,
Jogacamdra the office-holder in turn for the current year

4-5. Gugâ ... and in the world ... being of one mind ... ... by Vâhata
the Srîmâlî Brâhmana ... Srî Camdîsa ... drammas ...

VI.--(S. 1239; A.D. 1183. No. 4 of Plan.) On the upper face of the
eightsided section of the fallen pillar on the south side of the dome
of the temple of Jagsvâmi. Entirely in prose:

1. Sam. 1239 Âsvina Vadi 10 Vudhê
2. Adyêha Srî Srîmâle Mahârâja-
3. -putra Srî Jayatasîha-dêva-râjyê ||
4. Guhilo Pramahidâsuta-trao arava-
5. sâka Vahiyana Vâlâka-dêvâya
6. drava dra. 1 tathâ bhâryâ Mâlhanadê-
7. dî krita dra. 1 yê kêpi pa ati bhava
8. mti teshâm pratidrao vi 1 labhyâ yahko(s)
9. pi catra-pâlô bhavati tena varshân(u-)
10. -varsha(m) dinê dêvâya dâtavyam ||

Translation.

1. In the year 1239 (1183 A.D.) on Wednesday the tenth of the dark
half of Âsvina

2-3. On this day here in holy Srîmâla in the reign of his majesty
Srî Jayatasîha the Mahâraul.

4-6. Aravasâka Vahiyana the Guhila, the Trao, [1136] son of Pramahidâ
(gave) to Vâlâka-dêva one dramma in cash.

6-7. And (his) wife Mâlhana-dêdî (dêvî) (gave) one dramma. Whosoever
are , by them for each dramma one vi is to be received. Whosoever

9. is the ruler by him every

10. year on the day it is to be given to the god.

VII.--(S. 1262; A.D. 1206. No. 5 of Plan.) On the upper face of the
lower square section of the fallen pillar which is one of the pair
of three dome pillars. Prose:

1. o || Om. Namah Suryâyah || Yasyodayâstasamayê sura-makuta-nispri-

2. shta-carana-kamalopi kurutê mjali(m) trinêtra(h) sajayati dhâmnâm
niddhi(h) sûryah ||

3. Samvat 1262 varshê adyêha Srî Srîmâle Mahârâjâdhirâja Srî Uda-

4. -yasîmha-dêva-kalyâna-vijaya-râjyê mahao
Âsvapasî-prabhriti-pamca-kula-

5. pratipattâu || Kâyastha-jâtîya-Vâlamyânvayê mahao Yasôpâlasrêyô
rthamvê (cê?)-

6. -taka-Vîlhâkêna Srî Jayasvâmi-dêvîya-bhâmdâgârê kshêpita dra. 40
catvari(m).

7. Sat Âsvina mâsê yâtr(ôtsavê?) Âsvina sudi 13 ... 1 Âgni câyê.

8. Mâlâyâ, pushpamû dra. 4 aguru dra ...

9. -dra. 4 pramadâ kulasya dra. 1 êvam dra. 12 dvâdasa-drammâ
âcamdrârkam prativarsham dêvêna kârâpa

10. nîyâ || tathâ srêyârtham Madrakêna(?) dêva bhâmdâgârê kshipita
dra. 15 pamcadasa drammâ Mâgha-

11. -vadi 6 dinê balinibamdhê(?) gôdhûma sê 2 pâkâ ghrita palî 9
naivêdya 32 amga-

12. -bhôgô prativarshamâcamdrârkam yâvat dêvêna karanîyah ... dinê
Âhadasvâ-

13. -mi-suhâlam/ Bhadrasvâmi-suhâlam/ Acamdrârkavat âpanîya(m)
likhitam pâ° Bâmdhavada su(tê)-

14. -na Câmdapasâkêna hînâksharam adhikâksharam pramânam ||

Translation.

1-2. Om. Reverence to the Sun! Victorious is that sun, the storehouse
of brightness, at whose rising and setting the three-eyed (Siva) folds
his hands (in adoration), even though his lotus feet are touched by
the diadems of the gods.

3-5. In the Samvat year 1262 (1206 A.D.), on this day here in holy
Srîmâla, in the prosperous and victorious reign of his majesty the
Mahârâjâdhirâja Srî Udayasîmha in the term of office of the panch
(consisting of) Âsvapasî &c.

5-7. For the (spiritual) benefit of Yasôpâla in the Vâlamya family of
the Kâyastha caste, dra. 40, forty drammas were deposited by Vîlhâka
the Vetaka (or Cêtaka) in the treasury of the god Srî Jayasvâmi.

7. At the yâtrâ festival in the month of Âsvina, on the 13th of the
light half of Âsvina ... | , at the building of the fire-(altar).

8. ... for flowers for the garland dra. 4, aloewood dra....

9. 4 drammas, for the band of singing women one dramma: thus dra. 12,
twelve drammas (in all) are to be applied yearly by the god so long
as sun and moon endure.

10. So also the dra. 15, fifteen drammas deposited in the treasury
of the god by Madraka(?) for (spiritual) benefit.

11-12. On the sixth of the dark half of Mâgha in the fixed ritual of
the bali, wheat one ser, ... ghi nine palîs, the naivêdya ... 32,
the angabhôga is to be performed yearly by the god so long as sun
and moon endure.

12-13. On the ... day the suhâla of Âhadasvâmi and the suhâla of
Bhadrasvâmi is to be given so long as sun and moon endure.

13-14. Written by the pâ° Camdapasâka son of Bâmdhavada. [1137] The
letter less or the letter more ... of authority.

VIII.--(S. 1274; A.D. 1218. Not in Plan.) In Bârâji's rest-house on
the west face of the third right hand pillar. Prose:

1. Samvat 1274 varshê Bhâdrapada sudi 9 Sukrê dyêha Srî-Srîmâ-
2. -lê Mahârâjâdhirâja Srî Udaya-simha-dêva-kalyâna-vijaya-râjyê Sa°.
3. Dêpâlaprabhriti-pamcakula pratipattâu....
4. ..... Srî Udayasîha ...... Srîdêva Jagasvâmi-naivêdyê ..
5. ..... dina .. nityadêya lô 2 dvân.
6. }
7. } Illegible.
8. }

Translation.

1. In the Samvat year 1274 (1218 A.D.) on Friday the 9th of the bright
half of Bhâdrapada--on this day here in holy Srîmâla,

2. in the prosperous and victorious reign of his majesty the
Mahârâjâdhirâja Srî Udayasimha, in

3. the term of office of the panch (consisting of) Sa° Dêpâla and
others .....

4. ... Srî Udayasîha ..... in the naivedya of Srîdêva Jagasvâmi....

5. ..... day ... to be given regularly 2 two lô° (?).

IX.--(S. 1305; A.D. 1249. Not in Plan.) On the south face of the
fifth right pillar on the right hand of Bârâji's rest-house. Prose:

1. Ôm Namah Sûryâyah || yasyodayâstasa-
2. -mayê Sura-makuta-nisprishta-carana-
3. -kamalo pi kurutê mjalim Trinetra sa
4. jayati dhâmnâ(m) nidhi(h) Suryah || Sam. 1305 va-
5. -rshê adyêha Srî Srîmâlê Mahârâjâdhirâjasrî (Uda-)
6. -ya-siha-dêva-kalyâna-vijaya-râjyê maha° Gaja(si-)
7. -ha-prabhriti pamca(kula-pratipattâu) ..... nadêvî ...
8. vâha ... Srî Jagasvâmidêvîyabhândâgâre kshêpita dra. 50 pamcâ
(saddrammâ â-)
9. -Svina-yâtrâyâm Âsvina sudi (4) dinê divasa-bali ..
10. ................................ (gô-)
11. -dhûma sê 2 .. ghrita ka 8 ........... muga pâ 2 ghrita ka 2.
12. }
13. }
14. } Illegible.
15. }

Translation.

1-4. Ôm. Reverence to the Sun! Victorious is that sun, the storehouse
of brightness, at whose rising and setting the three-eyed (Siva)
folds his hands (in adoration), even though his feet are touched by
the diadems of the gods.

4-7. In the year Sam. 1305 (1249 A.D.), on this day here in holy
Srîmâla in the prosperous and victorious reign of his majesty the
Mahârâjâdhirâja Srî Udayasiha, in the term of office of the panch
(consisting of) Maha° Gajasiha and others ...... nadêvî.

8. Vâha ... dra. 50 fifty drammas deposited in the treasury of the
god Srî Jagasvâmi.

9. At the Âsvina festival on the 4th day of the light half of Âsvina
the day's bali.

10. ..........

11. Wheat sers 2 .. ghî karshas (8) ..... mung pâ 2, ghî
karshas 2.

12-15. Illegible.

X.--(S. 1320; A.D. 1264. No. 6 of Plan.) On the east face of the
lower square section of the more northerly of the east pair of dome
pillars of Jagsvâmi's temple. First thirteen lines in verse, the rest
in prose. No. 49 of the Bhâunagar State Collection (Bhâu. Prâ. I.)

1. Ôm namo Vighnarâjâya namo devâya bhâsvate | namo nanta-sva-

2. rûpâya Harayê Cakrapânayê || namah SivâyaSomâya namah para-

3. ma-Vrahmanê | Iti pamcanamaskârâh sarvapâpapranâ-sakâh || sarva-mam-

4. gala-mamgalyâh sarva-saukhya-pradâyakâh | sarvârtha-siddhi-sampannâh
sam-

5. -tu mê hridi sarvadâ || Iti jantur japan nityam nityam âsrayatê
sukham | ta-

6. -smâd asmin japê punyê ratir astu sadaiva mê || Iti
dhyânaikanishthâtmâ-

7. Kâyastho naigamânvayê | Rishir âsît purâ Sadhunamdano namdanah
satâin ||

8. Srikrishna-Krishna-Govinda-pranidhâna-parâyanah | Pautras tasyâjani
Srîmâ-

9. -n Sadhdhalo Valanâmgajah || Sadaiva
datta-mishtânna-toshitâneka-vâdavah |

10. Ahâra-prasaro yasya pânih padmâlayâlayah || paropakâra-vratinâm
vaishna

11. vadharmasêvinâm || yêna janmâtmanascakrê sâdhuvâda-vibhûshitam ||
tatah parama-

12. -dharmmâtmâ sadâ visadamânasah || dêvîdatta-varah Srîmân Subhato
bhût tadamgabhûh |

13. Câgneyas tasya Kêdâra-pukah Kânhado bhavat | Mahâdêvasuto yasya
bhrârau Râ-

14. -ma. Âsalô || Têna Srîkêdâraputraka Kânhadêna svasrêyasê Sam
1320 va-

15. -rshê Mâgha Su di 9 navamîdinê prativarasham balinimittam Srî
Jayasvâmi-dê-

16. vîya-bhândâgârê kshêpita dra. 50 pamcâsan drammâh || bali-nibamdhê
godhûma sê 1 1/2

17. ghrita ka 6 naivêdyê mâ 1/2 muga mâ 3/4 ghrita ka 1/2 Âbôtî dra
1/4 + 2

18. Vyâsa lô 2 pushpakumkumâguru-mûlyê dra. 2 patra-pûga-mû dra |
pramadâkula

19. dra. 1 Êvam prativarsham dêvakîyabhândâgârât shad drammâ vyayê
dêvêna kârâ

20. pyam || Iyam prasastir Maha° Subhatêna bhanitâ |
Dhruva-Nâgvala-suta-Dêdâ-

21. -kêna likhitâ || sûtra° Gôgâ Suta-Bhîmasîhênôtkîrnâ || ka || ka ||

Translation.

1. "Om. Reverence to the lord of obstacles (Ganesa), reverence to
the brilliant god (the Sun), reverence to him of everlasting nature,

2. To Hari, wielder of the discus. Reverence to Siva (and) to Sôma,
reverence

3-5. to the highest Brahma. May these five reverences which destroy
all sin, the most auspicious of all auspicious (sayings), which
grant all happiness, attended with the accomplishment of all objects,
be ever in my heart."

5-6. The creature that constantly murmurs (these words) resorts to
everlasting happiness. Therefore may I for ever take pleasure in this
holy murmur.

6-7. There was formerly in the Naigama family a Kâyastha, Rishi son
of Sadhu, the delight of the good, whose mind was solely intent upon
(the above) meditation.

7-9. (He was) devoted to meditation on (the names) Srí Krishna,
Krishna, and Govinda. To him was born a grandson, the glorious
Sadhdhala son of Valana, who constantly satisfied numerous Brâhmanas
with gifts of sweet food,

10. whose hand was not stretched out to steal, who was the home of
Lakshmî for the followers of the Vaishnava religion, who are vowed
to doing good to others,

11-12. who adorned his life with the discussions of saints. From him
there was the glorious Subhata, the very righteous, whose mind was
ever clear, and to whom Dêvî granted a boon. Born of his body

13-14. was Câgneya. His (grandson) was Kânhâda son of Kêdâra or
Mahâdêva and his (Kânhada's) two brothers were Râma and Âsala.

14-16. By this Kânhada, son of Kêdâra for his own benefit, fifty
drammas dra. 50, were deposited in the treasury of Srî Jayasvâmidêva
for a yearly bali, on the ninth (9) of the light half of Mâgha,
in the Samvat year 1320 (1264 A.D.)

16-18. In the Bali endowment wheat 1 1/2 seers, ghî 6 karshas, in the
naivêdya 1 measure, mung 3/4 measure, ghî 1/2 karsha, Âbôti (?) 1/4
dramma + 2, Bhata lô (?), for the price of flowers turmeric and aloe
wood one dramma, for the price of leaves and betelnut one dramma,
for the band of singing women one dramma.

19. So let six drammas be expended every year by the god from his
treasury.

20-21. This prasasti was spoken (composed) by the Maha-(ttara
?) Subhata. It was written by Dêdâka, son of Nâgvala the Dhruva. It
is engraved by the carpenter Bhîmasêna son of Gôgâ.

XI.--(S. 1330; A.D. 1264. No. 7 of Plan.) On the south face of
the lower square section of the western side of the north pair
of dome pillars. First 11 1/2 lines and lines 21 22 and half of
23 in verse, the rest in prose. No. 47 of the Bhâunagar State
Collection. (Bhâu. Prâ. I. list page 14):

1. Namah Srî Vighnarâjâya namo dêvâya bhâsvatê namo ...

2. Paramâna(m) dadâyinê cakrapânayê | Kâyastha-vámsa prasavah purâsît.

3. Srî Sâdha-nâmâ purushah purânah | Rishi ....

4. }
5. } Damaged and illegible.
6. }

7. ....... dharmârtha ... vigâha-

8. -mânô ânamdakârah ....... janishta sû

9. nuh Subhata ............ saubhâgya-sampal-lalitâ- 10. -bhidhânâ |
trivarga-sâram tanaya-svarûpam ........ sajjanâgryam Râjâdhi.

11. Râjôdaya-siha-deva-nihsreyasê Srî Subhatêna têna | dêvasya kosê....

12. ..... mkshêpitam ..... || Tênaiva Maha° Subhatêna-sva srê-

13. -yasê Samvat 1330 varshê Âsvina su di 4 caturthîdinê divasa bali-

14. -pûjâ-prêkshanîyakârtha(m) dêva Srî Jayasvâmi-bhândâgârê
dra. 50 pam-

15. -câsan drammâ nikshêpitâh || Tathâ Srîkaranê Maha°
Gajasîhaprabhriti-

16. -pamcakulam upârâdhayita(-yati) | Balidinê varshanibamdhê kârâpita
dra. 4 catu-

17. -ro drammâh prativarsham svîya pastalâ bhâvya ... pamcakulêna
dâtâvyâh

18. Vali-nivamdhê gôdhûma sê 2 ghrita ka 8 muga mâ | côshâm mâ 1/2
ghrita ka 1/2 vyâ-

19. -sa-nirvâpa I Abôtî nirvâpa I Kumkumâguru dra. 2 pushpa dra. 2
patrapûga dra. 2.

20. Pramadâkula dra. 2 êvam êtat prativarsham âcamdrârkkam dêvêna
kârâpyam ||

21. Srîsatya-ratna-pura-lâta-hradâdhikârî, Srîmâladesavahikâdhikri |

22. -to dhurînah | vyâsêna candaharinâ vidushâm varêna yo dhyâpitah
sa vi-

23. -dadhê Subhatah prasastim || Dhru° Dêdâkêna likhitâ sûtra°
Gôshasîhê-

24. -na utkirnâ || la ||

Translation.

1-2. Reverence to the Lord of Obstacles (Ganesa). Reverence to the
shining god. Reverence ... to (Vishnu) the holder of the discus who
bestows supreme happiness.

2-3. There was formerly an ancient man named Srî Sâdha born of the
Kâyastha race. Rishi ......

4-6. Illegible.

7-9. .... for righteousness .... entering ..... giving pleasure
.... there was born a son Subhata--

9-10. ... (a wife) Lalitâ by name, rich in excellence ... the
summing-up of the three objects of human effort (religious merit,
wealth, and pleasure) in the form of a son ... the chief of the
virtuous--

11. By that Srî Subhata for the spiritual benefit of the king of kings
his majesty Udayasîha in the treasury of the god ... deposited ......

12-15. By that same Maha° Subhata for his own (spiritual) benefit
in the Samvat year 1330 (1274 A.D.) on the fourth day of the bright
half of Âsvina, for the day's bali, worship and darsana dra. 50,
fifty drammas were deposited in the treasury of the god Srî Jayasvâmi.

15-17. And he serves (propitiates ?) the pamca consisting of Maha°
Gajasîha and the rest at Srî Karana. On the bali day the four (4)
drammas given for the bali endowment are to be paid every year by
the pamca from their own....

18-20. In the bali endowment wheat sê 2, ghî ka(rshas) 8, mung one
measure, côsha 1/2 measure, ghî ka(rsha) 1/2, the Bhat's dole 1,
the Abôtî's dole 1, turmeric and aloewood dra. 2, flowers dra. 2,
leaves and betelnut dra. 2, the band of singing women dra. 2: so is
this to be given yearly by the god so long as sun and moon endure.

21-23. Subhata, the officer of Srî Satyapura Ratnapura and Lâta-hrada,
the chief set over the vahikas of the Srîmâla country, who was taught
by Canda Hari the purânic, best of the learned, composed the prasasti.

24. Written by Dêdâka the Dhruva and engraved by Gôshasîha the
carpenter.

XII--(S. 1333; A.D. 1277. Not in Plan.) On the north bank of Jaikop
lake on a fallen pillar to the west of Ghazni Khán's tomb. Lines
1-4 and half of line 5 and lines 18-22 (and perhaps 23 and 24) in
verse, the rest in prose. No. 52 of the Bhâunagar State Collection
(Bhâu. Prâ. I. list pages 15-16):

1. Yah purâtra mahâsthânê Srîmâlê susamâgatah | sa deva(h) Srî

2. Mahâvîra ........ bhayatrâtâ (?) prajñâ

3. Yam saranam gatáh | tasya Vîrajinêmdrasya prajârtham sasanam navam
|| 2 Pâ-

4. -râpaddha-mahâgacchê punya-punya-svabhâvinâ( ?) Srî
pûrnacamdra-sûri-

5. nâ prasâdâl likhyatê yathâ || svasti Samvat 1333 varshê || Âsvi-

6. -na su di 14 Sômê | adyêha Srî Srîmâlê Mahârâjakula Srî Ca (?)

7. -ciga-dêva-kalyâna-vijayi-râjyê tanniyukta-maha° Gajasîha-

8. -prabhriti-pamcakula-pratipattâu Srî Srimâla-dêsa-vahikâdhikritêna

9. Naigamânvaya-kâyastha-mahattama-Subhatêna tathâ(ve?) cêtaka
Karmasîhê-

10. -na svaârêyasê Âsvinamâsîya-yâtrâ-mahôtsavê Âsvina Su di 14 ca-

11. -turdasî-dinê Srî Mahâvîradêvâya prativarsham
pamcôpacâra-pûjânimi-

12. -ttam Srîkaranîyapamcakulam
sêlahatha-dâsî-narapâla-varakti-pûrvasambô-

13. -dhya-talapa-dêhala-sahadî-pada-ma ... hala-sahadî

14. da 5 saptavisôpakôpê pamcadrammâ samâ sêlahathâbhâvyê âtha

15. drâ°. ma dra. 8 ashtâu dramma: || ubhayam saptavisôpakôpêna
trayôdasa dra-

16. -mmâ âcamdrârkkam dêvadâyê kârâpitâh || varttamâna-pamca-kulêna va-

17. -rttamâna-sêlahathêna dêvadâyê kritam idam svasrêyasê pâlanîyam ||

18. Yasmân pamcakulô sarvô mantavyam iti sarvadâ | tasya tasya
tadâ srêyo

19. Yasya yasya yadâ padam || || Srîsatya-ratna-pura-Lâta-hradâdhikârî
Srî-

20. -mâla-dêsa-vahikâdhikrito dhurînah | vyâsêna Candaharinâ
vidushâm va-

21. -rêna yodhyâpitah sa vidadhê Subhatah prasastim || tha || Iyam
Gôgânujâtê- 22. (-na) sûtradhârêna dhîmatâ | utkirnâ Bhîmasîhêna
sâsanâkshara-mâlikâ |

23. .. sanam idam mathapatimahendragoshtika Âcamdrapratipattâu ||
tha ||

24. .. vasasamaya ..... (li) khitam têna dhîmatâ | yo vâcayati punyâ-

25. ... sata ........ tî || tha || ma(m)gala-sadâsrîh || sivamastu
samp.

Translation.

1. The god Srî Mahâvîra who formerly came in(to) this great town
Srîmâla ..... in whom the wise protected from fear take refuge--a
new ordinance is written as follows for the people's sake through
the favour of that Vîra, chief of the Jinas by Srî Pûrnacandra Sûri,
whose nature is most holy.

5-9. Good luck! In the Samvat year 1333 (1277 A.D.), on Monday the
14th of the light half of Âsvina--on this day here in holy Srîmâla
in the prosperous and victorious reign of his majesty Srî Câciga
the Mahâraul, in the term of office of the panch (consisting of)
Mahao Gajasîha and others, appointed by him.

9-11. By Subhata the leading Kâyastha, of the Naigama family, the
officer in authority over the Vahikas of the Srîmâla country, and by
Karmasîha the Cêtaka (servant) (or vêtaka), for their own (spiritual)
benefit, at the great festival of the jatrâ of the month of Âsvina
on the fourteenth day 14 of the light half of Âsvina, for the worship
(consisting of) the five services yearly to the god Srî Mahâvîra.

12-15. [These four lines seem to be made up chiefly of Prâkrit words
which I am unable to translate. They specify two sums, one of 5 and
the other of 8 drammas.]

15-17. Both, with the twenty-seventh upakopa (?), the 13 drammas
have been given in religious endowment. This which has been made
as a religious endowment is to be maintained by the pamca and by
the Sêlahatha (?) officiating (from time to time) for their own
(spiritual) benefit.

18-19. Because every pamca is always to be honoured, the benefit
(of maintaining the endowment) belongs to whomsoever at any time
(holds) the office.

19-22. Subhata, the officer of Srîsatyapura Ratnapura and Lâtahrada,
the chief set over the vahikas of the Srîmâla country, who was
taught by Candahari the purânik, the best of the learned, composed
the prasasti. The series of letters of this grant was engraved by
the wise carpenter Bhîmasîha the son of Gôga.

23-25. This grant was written by that wise one ... at the time ..... in
the term of office of the Abbot Mahêndra and the committeeman Âcamdra
(?) .. who causes to speak .. .... Good luck! Bliss for ever! May it
be auspicious ... Finis.

XIII.--(S. 1334; A.D. 1278. No. 8 in Plan.) On the north face of
the lower square section of the eastern of the north pair of dome
pillars. All in prose:

1. Om namah Sûryâyah || yasyôdayâstasamayê
suramukuta-nisprîshta-carana-

2. kamalo pi kurutê mjalim trinêtra
sajayati dhâmnâ(m) nidhi(h) sûryah || | Samvat 1334.

3. Varshê Âsvina va di 8 adyêha Srî Srîmâlê
Mahârâjakula-Srî-Câciga-Kalyâna-vija-

4. -ya-râjyê tanníyukta-mahao
... (si)ha-prabhriti-pamcakula-pratipattâu | êvam kâlê pravarttamânê

5. Câhumânânvayê Mahârâja(ku)la Srî Samarasihâtmaja-Mahârâjâdhirâja-Srî
Udaya ||

6. Sihadêvâmgaja-Srî Vâhadhasiha ......... Sri
Câmunda-râja-deva-srêyasê mahao

7. Dêdâkêna ...... Srî Jagasvâmidêvîya bhândâgâre ... bali .......

8. ... dra. 100 satam drammâ nikshêpitâ Âsvina-yâtrâyâ(m) Âsvina vadi
8 ashtamî-dinê divasa-bali ta-

9. -thâ amgabhôga ... prêkshanika ..... Srîdêvîya-bhâmdâgârât
kârâpanîya | bali-nibamdhê

10. gôdhûma sê 3 ghrita ka 1 (naivêdyê) ..... côshâ(m) mâ 2, muga sê
1/4, ghrita ka 1/2 vyâsanirvâpa 1 Âbôtî.

11. -nirvâpa 1 kumkumâguru-mûly(ê) dra. 2 tathâ pushphamûlyê dra. 2
(?) tathâ patrapûga-mûlyê dra. 2 pramadâkulê mûlyê dra. 2 ê-

12. -vam êtat Vyâsa-Âbôtika-srêshti-goshtika- ... kula-pramadâkula
prabhritinâm varsham varsham prati â-

13. camdrârka-yâvat tathâ ...... îtî kârâpanîya srî-dêvêna kârâpanîya |
pari kênâpi na karanî-

14. -yâ | likhitam dhruo Nâgula-suta-Dêdâkêna ...... hînâksharam
adhikâksharam vâ sarvam pramâna-

15. -miti || mamgalam sadâ srîh || (sûtradhâréna ?) Nânâ-suta Dêpâla
Sam 33 varshê Caitra va di 15 ...... saha.

16. Manasihêna (?) ..... ||

Translation.

1-2. Ôm. Reverence to the Sun! Victorious is that sun, the storehouse
of brightness, at whose rising and setting the three-eyed (Siva),
even though (his own) lotus feet are touched by the diadems of the
gods, folds his hands (in adoration).

3-4. In the Samvat year 1334 (1278 A.D.) on the 8th of the dark half
of Âsvina--on this day here in holy Srîmâla in the prosperous and
victorious reign of his majesty the Mahâraul Srî Câciga, in the term
of office of the pamca (consisting of) the Mahao .... Sîha and the
rest, appointed by him--at this time

5-6. for the (spiritual) benefit of his majesty Srî Câmunda-râja
.... (son of) Srî-Vâhadhasiha the son of his majesty Srî Udayasiha
the Mahârâjâdhirâja, (who was) the son of his majesty the Mahâraul
Srî Samarasiha in the Câhumâna race

7. By the Mahao Dêdâka .... in the treasury of the god Srî Jagasvâmi
.... bali ...

8. dra. 100, one hundred drammas, were deposited. At the Âsvina yâtrâ
the day's bali on the eighth 8 of the dark half of Âsvina

9. and the amgabhoga .. darsana, .. to be expended from the treasury
of the god. In the endowment of the bali

10-11. Wheat sê. 3: ghi ka(rshas) 1: in the naivêdya .. Côsha measures
2, munga sê. 3/4, ghi ka(rsha) 1/2, the Bhat's dole 1, the Âbôtî's
dole 1, for buying turmeric and aloe wood dra. 2, and for buying
flowers dra. 2 (?), and for buying leaves and betel dra. 2, for the
band of singing women dra. 2.

12-13. Thus this for the Bhat's, Âbôtîs, Committeemen, ..., band
of singing women &c. every year so long as sun and moon (endure) is
so .... to be expended, is to be expended by the god. Interruption
(?) is to be made by no one.

14. Written by Dêdâka son of Nâgula the dhruva .... the letter less
or the letter more--all is of (no?) authority.

15. Good luck! Bliss for ever. By the carpenter Dêpâla son of Nânâ,
on the 15th of the dark half of Çaitra in the year 33 ...

16. By Manasiha (?) ....

XIV.--(S. 1339; A.D. 1283. Not on Plan.) In Báráji's rest-house on the
south face of the first right pillar. Prose. No. 51 of the Bhâunagar
State Collection (Bhâu. Prâ. I. list page 5):

1. Ôm namah Sûryâyah || yasyôdayâstasamayê
sura-mukuta-nisprishta-carana-

2. -kamalô pi | kurutê mjalim trinètra sa jayati dhâmnâm nidhih
sûryah || samva

3. t. 1339 varshê Âsvina Su di | sanâv adyêha Srî Srîmâlê Mahârâja
kula-Srîsâmva-

4. -tasîha-dêva-kalyâna-vîjaya-râjyê tanniyukta-mahâ° sîha
prabhriti-pamcakula-

5. pratipattau Srî Jâvâlipurât atrâyâta-Guhilò -Ru-

6. -drapâla-suta-sâha° Sahajapâlêna âtmasrêyasê pitrimâtrisrêyasê
bali-pujâ-

7. amga bhôga pratyam(gam) Srî Jayasvâmi-dêvâya Sûryadêvâya bhâmdâgârê
(k)shêpita dra. 20 vim

8. sati drammâ || Svîya-Jâyakâsarahi Rudrâmârga-samîpe Kathara-pânâ-

9. âbhidhâna-kshêtra | êka pradattah | dêvâya dinê pûjâ nimi(t)
am Sâha° Saha-

10. -ja-pâla-bhâryâ âtma-srêyasê mâtâ-pitrôsrêyasê bhamdâgâre
(k)shêpita-

11. dra. 10 dasa-drammâ .......................... drammâ Asvi-

12. -na-yâtràyâm Âsvina-su-di | dinê divasa-bali-pujâ bhâmdâgârât
Srîdêvê-

13. -na kâràpanîyâ | vali-nivamdhê gôdhuma sê 2 ghrita ka 8 naivêdyê
côshâ(m) pâ 2 mu-

14. -ga ghrita ka 1/2 amgabhôgê patra-puga

15. pratyam(gam) dra. | Vyâsanirvâpa ....... pôtî-nirvâpa |
pramadâ-kula dra. 2 êtat samrva Srîdêvîya......... 16. kosa dra
.............. pramadâkulêna ........... âcamdrâ-kâlam yâva

17. -t. ......... nirvâpanîyam || karâpanîyam. .......... nâgula-sutêna
maha° Dê-

18. -dâkêna .............. | Guhilô Sâha° Rudrapâla-suta-sôdha°
Harisîhê na (Srîdê-)

19. -vîya-sthitaka dra. 4 Sahajapâla-suta-sâ sthita-

20. -ka dra 4. ...................

21-23. Illegible.

Translation.

3-5. On Saturday the first of the light half of Âsvina in the year 1339
(1283 A.D.) on this day here in holy Srîmâla, in the prosperous and
victorious reign of his majesty the Mahâraul Srî Sâmvatasîha, in the
term of office of the pamca (consisting of) the maha° ........ sîha
and the rest, appointed by him.

5-8. Dra. 20, twenty drammas, were deposited in the treasury for the
sun-god Srî Jagasvâmi by Sâha° Sahajapâla son of Rudrapâla the Guhila,
who came here from Srî Jâvâlipura, for every part of the bali, the
worship, and the amgabhoga, for his own (spiritual) benefit and for
the benefit of his father and mother.

8-9. ........ near the Rudrâ road 1 one field was given called
Kathara-pânâ

9-11. To the god on ......... day for worship, the wife of Sâha°
Sahajapâla for her own benefit and for the benefit of her father and
mother. .......... deposited dra. 10, ten drammas. ..............

11-12. Drammas in the Âsvina Yâtrâ on the first day of the light
half of Âsvina are to be expended by the god from the treasury (for)
the day's bali, worship. ...........

13-17. In the bali endowment wheat sê 2. .... ghi ka(rshas) 8: in the
nâivêdya côsha pâ 2 mung ..... ghi ka(rsha) 1/2: in the amgabhôga for
every part of the leaves and betel dra. 1, the Bhat's dole .........,
(the Âb)ôtî's dole 1, the band of singing women dra. 2; all this
the god's treasury dra. .............. by the band of singing women
................. so long as sun and moon endure ................. is
to be doled out, is to be expended.

17-20. By the Maha° Dêdâka son of Nâgula .............. By Sôdha°
Harisîha son of Sâha° Rudrapâla the Guhila, four sthitaka drammas
of the god ............. By Sâ ................ son of Sahajapâla
......... sthitaka drammas 4. ..........................

21-23. Illegible.

XV.--(S. 1342; A.D. 1286. Not in Plan.) In the ground close to the
wall on the right in entering the enclosure of old Mahâlakshmí's
temple. Prose. No. 50 of the Bhâunagar State Collection
(Bhâu. Prâ. I. page 15.)

1. Ôm. Namah Sûryâyah || Yasyôdayâstasamayê sura-ma-

2. -kuta-nisprishta-carana kamalô pi kurutê mjalim trinêtra saja-

3. -yati dhâmnâm nidhih sûryah || Samvat 1342 (1286 A.D.) Âsvina vadi
10 Ra-

4. -vâvadyêha Srî Srîmâlê Mahârâjakula Srî Sâmvatasîha dê-

5. -va-kalyâna-vijaya-râjyê tanniyukta-maha° Pândyâ-prabhriti-pamca-

6. -kula pratipattâu | Sâsanâksharâni praya(c)chati yathâ | Râthôda-

7. -jâtîya-Ûtisvatîha-pâutra Vâgasasuta Sîla° Alhanasîhê-

8. -na âtmîya-mâtâ-pitrô srêyasê svasrêyasê Srî Jagasvâmi-dê-

9. -vâya Âsvinê yâtrâyâm dasamîdinê divasa-bali-pûja prê-

10. -kshanîkâdi amga-bhôga-nimi(t)tam sêlahathâbhâvya-

11. -t Srî kârâpita âcamdrârkayâvat pradatta dra. 4 1/2.

12. Srîdêvîya-kôtadî.

13. Âcamdrârkam yah kôpi Sêlahathô bhavati têna varsham varsham
prati pâ-

14. -lanîyam ca | vahubhir vasudhâ bhuktâ râjabhi Sagarâdibhi yasya

15. yasya yadâ bhûmî tasya tasya tadâ phalam || 1 Asvina vadi 10 va-

16. -li-nibamdhê gôdhûma sê ghrita ka 12 naivêdyê côsham pâ 4.

17. mugâm mâ 1 ghrita ka 1/2 Vyâsanirvâpa 1 Abôtînirvâpa 1 kumkuma

18. kastûrî-pratyam(gam) dra. 4 pushpa-pratyam(gam) dra. 4
pramadâkula-pratyam(gam) dra. 4 patra-pû-

19. ga-pratyam(gam) dra. 4 êtat sarvam varsham 2 prati Srîdêvîya
bhâmdâgârât

20. Varttâpakai kârâpanîyam || mamgalam sadâsrîh || likhitam Dhruva

21. Nâgula-suta-dhru° Dêdâkêna Utkîrnnâ sûtra° Bhîmasîhêna ||.

Translation.

1-3. Ôm. Reverence to the Sun! Victorious is that sun, the storehouse
of brightness, at whose rising and setting the three-eyed (Siva),
even though (his own) lotus feet are touched by the diadems of the
gods, folds his hands (in adoration).

3-6. Samvat 1342 on Sunday the 10th of the dark half of Âsvina,
on this day here in holy Srîmâla, in the prosperous and victorious
reign of his majesty the Maharâul Srî Sâmvatasîha-dêva, in the term
of office of the pamca (consisting of) Maha° Pândyâ and the rest,
appointed by him, he sets forth the writing of the grant as follows.

6-11. By Sîla° Alhanasîha son of Vâgasa and grandson of Ûtisvâtîha of
the Râthôda race, for the benefit of his own mother and father and for
his own benefit, 4 1/2 drammas (were) given to the god Srî Jagasvâmi,
for the day's bali, the worship, the darsana &c., and the amgabhôga
on the 10th day at the Âsvina yâtrâ .... so long as sun and moon
(endure). ...

12-14. The god's treasure house ..... whosoever is Sêlahatha, by him
every year it is to be maintained also.

14-15. The earth has been enjoyed by many kings, beginning with
Sagara. Whosesoever the earth is at any time, his is also the fruit
thereof.

15-16. In the endowment of the bali for the 10th of the dark half of
Âsvina wheat sê ... ghi ka[rshas) 12: in the naivêdya côsha pâ 4.

17-19. Mung mâ 1, ghi ka 1/2, the Bhat's dole 1, the Âbôtî's dole 1,
for turmeric and musk each dra. 4, for flowers each dra. 4, for the
band of singing women each dra. 4, for leaves and betel each dra. 4.

19-21. All this is to be expended yearly from the god's
treasury.... Good luck! Bliss for ever. Written by Dhru° Dêdâka son
of Dhruva Nâgula. Engraved by Bhîmasîha the carpenter.

XVI.--(S. 1345; A.D. 1289. No. 9 of Plan.) On the south face of the
lower square section of the north-east corner pillar of the dome. The
first thirteen lines are in verse, the rest in prose. No. 48 of the
Bhâunagar State Collection (Bhâu. Prâ. I. list page 14):

1. Svargâpavargasukhadam paramâtmarûpam dhrisayamti yam sukritinô
hridi sa-

2. -rvadâiva tasmâi namaj-janahitâya surâsurêmdra
samstûyamâna-caritâya

3. namah Sivâya || 1 Slâghyah satâm sukritî sakritî manushyôs mânyô
maha-

4. -ttama-gunâi Subhatah sa êva | yascâ jagattrayagurum
girijâdhinâtham devam

5. namasyati natô nudinam mahêsa || 2 Sômô si nâtha
natimattara-kâiravê-

6. -shu punya-Prabhâsa-sarasi sthitim âsritêshu | tasmâ ... mahâbdhi-

7. -tîrê Srî Sômanâtha iti siddhigatam smarâmi || 3 Punyaih
Prabhâsasasi-bhûsha-

8. -na-Kardamâla-pâpa-pramôcana-runârtti-vimôcanâdyaih | êtâih Ka-

9. -pardi-krita-sat-tithibhih pradhânais tîrthâir alam kritam idam
hridayam mamâstu ||

10. 4 Êtasya punya-payasô jaladhês tathâsya Sârasvata-nivahasyata.

11. Da° || Ôm namah Sûryâyah Jaj(j)yôti prasarati tarâm lôka
krityâya ni-

12. -tyam | yannâmôktam sakalakalusham yâti páram payodhê | sarvasyâtmâ
sugati-

13. -surathô -dhvâmta-mâtamga-simgha | drishta-sûryô nava(bha)
si bhagavân sarvasyântyamka-

14. -rôti || Samvat 1345 varshê Mâgha Vadi 2 Sôme dyêha Srî 2 mâlê
mahârâja-

15. -kula-Srî Sâmvata-simgha-dêva-kalyâna-vijaya-râjyê
tanniyukta-maha° châmhâ-

16. -prabhriti-pamcakula-pratipatâu êvamkâle pravarttamâne
Srî-Jâvâlipuravâstavya-

17. Puskaranisthânîya-yajur-vêda pâthakâya | Padamalasyagô- trâya |
Vrâhma° na-

18. -vaghana-vamsotpannâdhyava°
Vâlhâpâutra | Jyôti° Mâdhava-pratidâuhitrâ Jyô°

19. Tilaka-dâuhitra-So[d].hala-putra-mâtu-Pûnala-suta | Vrâhma°
Vâgada samsârasyâ

20. Asâratâm jñâtvà | Srî Jagasvâmina | Srîsûryasya mûrttô prâsâdê
sâuvarnnaka-

21. -lasârôpita | jâtasradha dêvam sampûjya
samasta-dêva-lôka-Vrahma-lôka-pra-

22. -tyaksham | Vamsadvayôdharana-samaksham | Âtmanasca Âcamdrârkayâvat
sûrya-prasâda-prâ-

23. -pta-tyartham | prativarsham | pûjâm Srî Jagasvâmi-dêva-bhâmdâgârê
nikshipita | râukma-vî

24. sana-prî-dra. 200 dvâu Satâni Amîshâm drammânâm vyâjapadât
Âsvina-yâtrâyâm Asvi-

25. -na vadi || dinê divasa-vali kâyôvali nivamdhê gôdhûma sê 4 pakvê
ghrita ||

26. ka 16 nâivêdyê côshâm mâ 1 muga mâ 1 1/2 ghrita ka | vîdakê patra
8 pûga 2 amga-

27. -bhôga-pratya° dra. 4 pushpha pratya° dra. 6 patrapûga-pratya°
dra. 4 vyâsa-nirvâpa-Âbôtî-nirvâ-

28. -pa-nivamdhê côshâm sê 1/4 muga pâ 3 ghrita ka 1 dakshinâ lô 2
pramadâkula dra. 4 êta-

29. -t sarvam prativarsham âcamdrârka-yávat Srîdevasya bhâmdâgârât
vêcanîyam kârâpa-

30. -nîyam ca | subham bhavatu sarvadâ | Jyoti° Sûguda-sutêna
Camdrâdityêna samaksham li-

31. -khitam Kava° Nâgula sutêna Dêdâkêna utkîrnnâ Sûtra°
Nânâ-suta-Dêpâlê-

32. -na || mamgalam sadâ Srîh.

Translation.

1-3. Reverence to that Siva! the benefactor of those who bow to him,
whose actions are praised by the leaders of gods and demons, who
gives the happiness of heaven and of salvation, whose form is the
supreme soul, whom the wise ever lay hold upon in (their) heart.

3-5. Oh Mahêsa, whosoever bowing daily does reverence to the god
who is guru of the three worlds, the lord of the mountain's daughter
(Pârvatî), that man is worthy of praise from the righteous, fortunate,
wise, to be honoured for most excellent virtues, a true hero.

5-7. Oh Lord thou art the moon among the bending lotuses that have
found their place in the holy pool of Prabhâsa: therefore I make
mention (of thee) famous by the name of Sômanâtha on the seashore ....

7-9. May this heart of mine be adorned by these holy chief tîrthas,
Prabhâsa, the moon's ornament, the Lotus (pool), the Release from Sin,
the Release from Debt and Suffering &c., whose lucky days have been
fixed by Kapardi (Siva).

10. Of this pool of pure water and .... of Sarasvatî. .....

11. Da° Om! Reverence to the Sun, whose light ever reaches far for
the work of mankind, at the mention of whose name all sin goes beyond
the ocean: the soul of all, whose path and whose car are good, a lion
to the trumpeting elephants (of darkness): When the Lord Sun is seen
in the sky, he makes the last (?) .. of all.

14-16. On Monday the second of the dark half of Mâgha in the Samvat
year 1345 (1289 A.D.), on this day here in holy Srîmâla, in the
prosperous and victorious reign of his majesty the Mahâraul Srî
Sâmvata Simgha, in the term of office of the pamca (consisting of)
the Maha° Châmhâ and the rest, appointed by him.

16-21. At this time to (read by) Vâgada the Brâhmana son of Sôdhala and
grandson of Adhyava° Vâlhâ, of the Navaghana family, of the Padamala
gôtra, student of the Yajurvêda, of the town of Puskarini and living in
Srî Jâvâlipura, son of his mother Pûnala, and daughter's son of Tilaka
the Jôshî, and granddaughter's son of Mâdhava the Jôshî--recognizing
the impermanence of this world, a golden kalasa was set up on the
palace ... of the Sun Jagasvâmi.

21-24. (By him) worshipping the god in faith, before the world of
the gods and the world of Brahma, for the purpose (?) of saving
his ancestors in both lines, and himself, to gain the favour of the
Sun so long as sun and moon (endure), (for) worship every year, 200
Vîsalaprî drammas in gold were deposited in the treasury of the god
Srî Jagasvâmi.

24-28. Out of the interest of these drammas, in the endowment of the
day's bali and the kâyôvali on the 11th of the dark half of Âsvina
at the Âsvina festival, wheat sê 4, ghî ka(rshas) 16: in the Nâivêdya
côsha measure 1, mung pâ. 1 1/2, ghî ka(rsha) 1, for pânsupârî leaves
8, betel 2: for the Amgabhôga severally dra. 4, for flowers severally
dra. 6, for leaves and betel severally dra. 4: in the endowment of
the Bhat's dole and the Abôtî's dole, côsha sê. 1/4, mung pâ. 3,
ghî ka(rsha) 1, dakshinâ lô 2, the band of singing women dra. 4.

29-32. All this is to be separated and expended from the treasury of
the god every year so long as sun and moon (endure). May it always be
auspicious. Written by Dêdâka son of Kava° Nâgula for Camdrâditya son
of Jyoti° Sûgada. Engraved by Dêpâla son of Nânâ the carpenter. Good
luck! Bliss for ever!

APPENDIX IV.

JAVA AND CAMBODIA.

[Java.] An incident redeems the early history of Gujarát from
provincial narrowness and raises its ruling tribes to a place among
the greater conquerors and colonisers. This incident is the tradition
that during the sixth and seventh centuries fleets from the coasts of
Sindh and Gujarát formed settlements in Java and in Cambodia. The Java
legend is that about A.D. 603 Hindus led by Bhruvijáya Savelachála the
son of Kasamachitra or Bálya Achá king of Kujrát or Gujarát settled
on the west coast of the island. [1138] The details of the settlement
recorded by Sir Stamford Raffles [1139] are that Kasamachitra, ruler
of Gujarát, the tenth in descent from Arjun, was warned of the coming
destruction of his kingdom. He accordingly started his son Bhruvijáya
Savelachála with 5000 followers, among whom were cultivators artisans
warriors physicians and writers, in six large and a hundred small
vessels for Java. After a voyage of four months the fleet touched
at an island they took to be Java. Finding their mistake the pilots
put to sea and finally reached Matarem in the island of Java. The
prince built the town of Mendang Kumulan. He sent to his father for
more men. A reinforcement of 2000 arrived among them carvers in stone
and in brass. An extensive commerce sprang up with Gujarát and other
countries. The bay of Matarem was filled with stranger vessels and
temples were built both at the capital, afterwards known as Brambanum,
and, during the reign of Bhruvijáya's grandson Ardivijáya that is about
A.D. 660, at Boro Buddor in Kedu. [1140] The remark that an ancestor
of the immigrant prince had changed the name of his kingdom to Gujarát
is held by Lassen to prove that the tradition is modern. Instead of
telling against the truth of the tradition this note is a strong
argument in its favour. One of the earliest mentions of the name
Gujarát for south Márwár is Hiuen Tsiang's (A.D. 630) Kiu-che-lo or
Gurjjara. As when Hiuen Tsiang wrote the Gurjjara chief of Bhinmál,
fifty miles west of Ábu, already ranked as a Kshatriya his family
had probably been for some time established perhaps as far back as
A.D. 490 a date by which the Mihira or Gurjjara conquest of Valabhi and
north Gujarát was completed. [1141] The details of the help received
from Gujarát after the prince's arrival show that the parent state
had weathered the storm which threatened to destroy it. This agrees
with the position of the Bhinmál Gurjjaras at the opening of the
seventh century, when, in spite of their defeat by Prabhákaravardhana
(A.D. 600-606) the father of Srí Harsha (A.D. 606-641) of Magadha,
they maintained their power at Broach and at Valabhi as well as at
Bhinmál. [1142] The close relations between the Gurjjaras and the
great seafaring Mihiras or Meds make it likely that the captains and
pilots who guided the fleets to Java belonged to the Med tribe. Perhaps
it was in their honour that the new Java capital received the name
Mendan, as, at a later period it was called Brambanum or the town of
Bráhmans. The fact that the Gurjjaras of Broach were sun-worshippers
not Buddhists causes no difficulty since the Bhilmál Gurjjaras whom
Hiuen Tsiang visited in A.D. 630 were Buddhists and since at Valabhi
Buddhism Shaivism and sun-worship seem to have secured the equal
patronage of the state.

Besides of Gujarát and its king the traditions of both Java and
Cambodia contain references to Hastinagara or Hastinapura, to Taxila,
and to Rumadesa. [1143] With regard to these names and also with regard
to Gandhára and to Cambodia, all of which places are in the north-west
of India, the question arises whether the occurrence of these names
implies an historical connection with Kábul Pesháwar and the west
Panjáb or whether they are mere local applications and assumptions
by foreign settlers and converts of names known in the Bráhman and
Buddhist writings of India. [1144] That elaborate applications of
names mentioned in the Mahábhárata to places in Java have been made
in the Java version of the Mahábhárata is shown by Raffles. [1145]
Still it is to be noticed that the places mentioned above, Kamboja or
Kábul, Gandhára or Pesháwar, Taxila or the west Panjáb, and Rumadesa
apparently the south Panjáb are not, like Ayodhya the capital of
Siam or like Intha-patha-puri that is Indraprastha or Dehli the
later capital of Cambodia, [1146] the names of places which either by
their special fame or by their geographical position would naturally
be chosen as their original home by settlers or converts in Java and
Cambodia. Fair ground can therefore be claimed for the presumption that
the leading position given to Kamboja, Gandhára, Taxila, and Rumadesa
in Javan and Cambodian legends and place-names is a trace of an actual
and direct historical connection between the north-west of India
and the Malay Archipelago. This presumption gains probability by the
argument from the architectural remains of the three countries which in
certain peculiar features show so marked a resemblance both in design
and in detail as in the judgment of Mr. Fergusson to establish a strong
and direct connection. [1147] A third argument in favour of a Gujarát
strain in Java are the traditions of settlements and expeditions by
the rulers of Málwa which are still current in south Márwár. [1148]
Further a proverb still well known both in Márwár and in Gujarát runs:

Je jae Jáve te kadi nahi áve
Áve to sáth pidhi baithke kháve.

Who to Java roam ne'er come home.
If they return, through seven lives
Seated at ease their wealth survives. [1149]

Once more the connection with Gujarát is supported by the detail in
the Java account which makes Laut Mira the starting point for the
colonising fleet. This Sir S. Raffles supposed to be the Red Sea but
the Mihiras' or Meds' sea may be suggested as it seems to correspond
to the somewhat doubtful Arab name Baharimad (sea of the Meds ?) for
a town in western India sacked by Junaid. Against this evidence two
considerations have been urged [1150]: (a) The great length of the
voyage from Gujarát to Java compared with the passage to Java from
the east coast of India; (b) That no people in India have known enough
of navigation to send a fleet fit to make a conquest. As regards the
length of the voyage it is to be remembered that though Sumatra is
more favourably placed for being colonised from Bengal Orissa and
the mouths of the Godávari and Krishna, in the case either of Java
or of Cambodia the distance from the Sindh and Káthiáváda ports is
not much greater and the navigation is in some respects both safer
and simpler than from the coasts of Orissa and Bengal. In reply to
the second objection that no class of Hindus have shown sufficient
skill and enterprise at sea to justify the belief that they could
transport armies of settlers from Gujarát to Java, the answer is
that the assumption is erroneous. Though the bulk of Hindus have at
all times been averse from a seafaring life yet there are notable
exceptions. During the last two thousand years the record of the
Gujarát coast shows a genius for seafaring fit to ensure the successful
planting of north-west India in the Malay Archipelago. [1151]

That the Hindu settlement of Sumatra was almost entirely from the east
coast of India and that Bengal Orissa and Masulipatam had a large share
in colonising both Java and Cambodia cannot be doubted. [1152] Reasons
have been given in support of the settlement in Java of large bodies of
men from the north-west coasts of India and evidence has been offered
to show that the objections taken to such a migration have little
practical force. It remains to consider the time and the conditions of
the Gujarát conquest and settlement of Java and Cambodia. The Javan
date S. 525 that is A.D. 603 may be accepted as marking some central
event in a process which continued for at least half a century before
and after the beginning of the seventh century. Reasons have been given
for holding that neither the commercial nor the political ascendancy of
Rome makes it probable that to Rome the Rúm of the legends refers. The
notable Roman element in the architecture of Java and Cambodia may
suggest that the memory of great Roman builders kept for Rome a place
in the local legends. But the Roman element seems not to have come
direct into the buildings of Java or Cambodia; as at Amrávati at the
Krishna mouth, the classic characteristics came by way of the Panjáb
(Táhia) only, in the case of Java, not by the personal taste and study
of a prince, but as an incident of conquest and settlement. [1153] Who
then was the ruler of Rúm near Taxila, who led a great settlement of
Hindus from the Panjáb to Java. Names in appearance like Rome, occur
in north-west India. None are of enough importance to explain the
prince's title. [1154] There remains the word raum or rum applied to
salt land in the south Panjáb, in Márwár, and in north Sindh. [1155]
The great battle of Kárur, about sixty miles south-east of Multán,
in which apparently about A.D. 530 Yasodharmman of Málwa defeated the
famous White Húna conqueror Mihirakula (A.D. 500-550) is described
as fought in the land of Rúm. [1156] This great White Húna defeat is
apparently the origin of the legend of the prince of Rúm who retired
by sea to Java. At the time of the battle of Kárur the south Panjáb,
together with the north of Sindh, was under the Sáharáis of Aror in
north Sindh, whose coins show them to have been not only White Húnas,
but of the same Jávla family which the great conquerors Toramána and
Mihirakula adorned. So close a connection with Mihirakula makes it
probable that the chief in charge of the north of the Aror dominions
shared in the defeat and disgrace of Kárur. Seeing that the power of
the Sáharáis of Aror spread as far south as the Káthiáváda ports of
Somnáth and Diu, and probably also of Diul at the Indus mouth, if the
defeated chief of the south Panjáb was unable or unwilling to remain
as a vassal to his conqueror, no serious difficulty would stand in
the way of his passage to the seaboard of Aror or of his finding in
Diu and other Sindh and Gujarát ports sufficient transport to convey
him and his followers by sea to Java. [1157] This then may be the
chief whom the Cambodian story names Phra Tong or Thom apparently
Great Lord that is Mahárája. [1158]

The success of the Javan enterprise would tempt others to follow
especially as during the latter half of the sixth and almost
the whole of the seventh centuries, the state of North India
favoured migration. Their defeats by Sassanians and Turks between
A.D. 550 and 600 would close to the White Húnas the way of retreat
northwards by either the Indus or the Kábul valleys. If hard pressed
the alternative was a retreat to Kashmir or an advance south or
east to the sea. When, in the early years of the seventh century
(A.D. 600-606), Prabhákaravardhana the father of Srí Harsha of Magadha
(A.D. 610-642) defeated the king of Gandhára, the Húnas, the king of
Sindh, the Gurjjaras, the Látas, and the king of Malava, [1159] and
when, about twenty years later, further defeats were inflicted by Srí
Harsha himself numbers of refugees would gather to the Gujarát ports
eager to escape further attack and to share the prosperity of Java. It
is worthy of note that the details of Prabhákaravardhana's conquests
explain how Gandhára and Láta are both mentioned in the Java legends;
how northerners from the Panjáb were able to pass to the coast; how
the Márwár stories give the king of Málwa a share in the migrations;
how the fleets may have started from any Sindh or Gujarát port; and
how with emigrants may have sailed artists and sculptors acquainted
both with the monasteries and stupas of the Kábul valley and Pesháwar
and with the carvings of the Ajanta caves. During the second half of
the seventh century the advance of the Turks from the north and of the
Arabs both by sea (A.D. 637) and through Persia (A.D. 650-660); [1160]
the conquering progress of a Chinese army from Magadha to Bamian in
A.D. 645-650 [1161]; the overthrow (A.D. 642) of the Buddhist Sáharáis
by their usurping Bráhmanist minister Chach and his persecution of
the Jats must have resulted in a fairly constant movement of northern
Indians southwards from the ports of Sindh and Gujarát. [1162] In the
leading migrations though fear may have moved the followers, enterprise
and tidings of Java's prosperity would stir the leaders. The same
longing that tempted Alexander to put to sea from the Indus mouth;
Trajan (A.D. 116) from the mouth of the Tigris; and Mahmúd of Ghazni
from Somnáth must have drawn Saka Húna and Gurjjara chiefs to lead
their men south to the land of rubies and of gold. [1163]

Of the appearance and condition of the Hindus who settled in Java
during the seventh and eighth centuries the Arab travellers Sulaimán
A.D. 850 and Masúdi A.D. 915 have left the following details. The
people near the volcanoes have white skins pierced ears and shaved
heads: their religion is both Bráhmanic and Buddhist; their trade is
in the costliest articles camphor aloes cloves and sandalwood. [1164]

CAMBODIA.

[Cambodia.] The close connection between Java and Cambodia, the
alternate supremacy of Cambodia in Java and of Java in Cambodia,
the likelihood of settlers passing from Java to Cambodia explain, to
a considerable extent, why the traditions and the buildings of Java
and Cambodia should point to a common origin in north-west India. The
question remains: Do the people and buildings of Cambodia contain a
distinct north Hindu element which worked its way south and east not
by sea but by land across the Himálayas and Tibet and down the valley
of the Yang-tse-kiang to Yunnan and Angkor. Whether the name Cambodia
[1165] proves an actual race or historical connection with Kamboja
or the Kábul valley is a point on which authorities disagree. Sir
H. Yule held that the connection was purely literary and that as
in the case of Inthapatha-puri or Indraprastha (Dehli) the later
capital of Cambodia and of Ayodhya or Oudh the capital of Assam no
connection existed beyond the application to a new settlement of
ancient worshipful Indian place-names. The objection to applying this
rule to Cambodia is that except to immigrants from the Kábul valley
the name is of too distant and also of too scanty a reputation to
be chosen in preference to places in the nearer and holier lands of
Tirhut and Magadha. For this reason, and because the view is supported
by the notable connection between the two styles of architecture,
it seems advisable to accept Mr. Fergusson's decision that the name
Cambodia was given to a portion of Cochin-China by immigrants from
Kamboja that is from the Kábul valley. Traces remain of more than one
migration from India to Indo-China. The earliest is the mythic account
of the conversion of Indo-China to Buddhism before the time of Asoka
(B.C. 240). A migration in the first century A.D. of Yavanas or Sakas,
from Tamluk or Ratnávate on the Hugli, is in agreement with the large
number of Indian place-names recorded by Ptolemy (A.D. 160). [1166]
Of this migration Hiuen Tsiang's name Yavana (Yen-mo-na) for Cambodia
may be a trace. [1167] A Saka invasion further explains Pausanias'
(A.D. 170) name Sakæa for Cochin-China and his description of the
people as Skythians mixed with Indians. [1168] During the fifth and
sixth centuries a fresh migration seems to have set in. Cambodia
was divided into shore and inland and the name Cambose applied
to both. [1169] Chinese records notice an embassy from the king
of Cambodia in A.D. 617. [1170] Among the deciphered Cambodian
inscriptions a considerable share belong to a Bráhmanic dynasty whose
local initial date is in the early years of the seventh century,
[1171] and one of whose kings Somasarmman (A.D. 610) is recorded
to have held daily Mahábhárata readings in the temples. [1172] Of a
fresh wave of Buddhists, who seem to have belonged to the northern
branch, the earliest deciphered inscription is A.D. 953 (S. 875)
that is about 350 years later. [1173] Meanwhile, though, so far as
information goes, the new capital of Angkor on the north bank of lake
Tale Sap about 200 miles up the Mekong river was not founded till
A.D. 1078 (S. 1000), [1174] the neighbourhood of the holy lake was
already sacred and the series of temples of which the Nakhonwat or
Nága's Shrine [1175] is one of the latest and finest examples, was
begun at least as early as A.D. 825 (S. 750), and Nakhonwat itself
seems to have been completed and was being embellished in A.D. 950
(S. 875). [1176] During the ninth and tenth centuries by conquest
and otherwise considerable interchange took place between Java and
Cambodia. [1177] As many of the inscriptions are written in two
Indian characters a northern and a southern [1178] two migrations
by sea seem to have taken place one from the Orissa and Masulipatam
coasts and the other, with the same legend of the prince of Rúm land,
from the ports of Sindh and Gujarát. [1179] The question remains
how far there is trace of such a distinct migration as would explain
the close resemblance noted by Fergusson between the architecture of
Kashmir and Cambodia as well as the northern element which Fergusson
recognises in the religion and art of Cambodia. [1180] The people
by whom this Panjáb and Kashmir influence may have been introduced
from the north are the people who still call themselves Khmers to
whose skill as builders the magnificence of Cambodian temples lakes
and bridges is apparently due. [1181] Of these people, who, by the
beginning of the eleventh century had already given their name to the
whole of Cambodia, Alberuni (A.D. 1031) says: The Kumairs are whitish
of short stature and Turk-like build. They follow the religion of
the Hindus and have the practice of piercing their ears. [1182] It
will be noticed that so far as information is available the apparent
holiness of the neighbourhood of Angkor had lasted for at least 250
years before A.D. 1078 when it was chosen as a capital. This point is
in agreement with Mr. Fergusson's view that the details of Nakhonwat
and other temples of that series show that the builders came neither
by sea nor down the Ganges valley but by way of Kashmir and the back
of the Himálayas. [1183] Though the evidence is incomplete and to
some extent speculative the following considerations suggest a route
and a medium through which the Roman and Greek elements in the early
(A.D. 100-500) architecture of the Kábul valley and Pesháwar may have
been carried inland to Cambodia. It may perhaps be accepted that
the Ephthalites or White Húnas and a share of the Kedarites, that
is of the later Little Yuechi from Gandhára the Pesháwar country,
retreated to Kashmir before the father of Srí Harsha (A.D. 590-606)
and afterwards (A.D. 606-642) before Srí Harsha himself. [1184]
Further it seems fair to assume that from Kashmir they moved into
Tibet and were the western Turks by whose aid in the second half of
the seventh century Srongbtsan or Srongdzan-gambo (A.D. 640-698),
the founder of Tibetan power and civilization, overran the Tarim
valley and western China. [1185] During the first years of the
eighth century (A.D. 703) a revolt in Nepal and the country of the
Bráhmans was crushed by Srongdzan's successor Donsrong, [1186] and the
supremacy of Tibet was so firmly established in Bengal that, for over
200 years, the Bay of Bengal was known as the sea of Tibet. [1187]
In A.D. 709 a Chinese advance across the Pamirs is said to have been
checked by the great Arab soldier Kotieba the comrade of Muhammad
Kasim of Sindh. [1188] But according to Chinese records this reverse
was wiped out in A.D. 713 by the defeat of the joint Arab and Tibet
armies. [1189] In the following years, aided by disorders in China,
Tibet conquered east to Hosi on the upper Hoangho and in A.D. 729
ceased to acknowledge the overlordship of China. Though about A.D. 750
he was for a time crippled by China's allies the Shado Turks the chief
of Tibet spread his power so far down the Yangtsekiang valley that
in A.D. 787 the emperor of China, the king of Yunnan to the east of
Burma, certain Indian chiefs, and the Arabs joined in a treaty against
Tibet. As under the great Thisrong (A.D. 803-845) and his successor
Thi-tsong-ti (A.D. 878-901) the power of Tibet increased it seems
probable that during the ninth century they overran and settled in
Yunnan. [1190] That among the Tibetans who passed south-east into
Yunnan were Kedarites and White Húnas is supported by the fact that
about A.D. 1290, according both to Marco Polo and to Rashid-ud-din,
the common name of Yunnan was Kárájang whose capital was Yachi and
whose people spoke a special language. [1191] The name Kárájang was
Mongol meaning Black People and was used to distinguish the mass of
the inhabitants from certain fair tribes who were known as Chaganjang
or Whites. That the ruler of Kárájang was of Hindu origin is shown
by his title Mahara or Mahárája. That the Hindu element came from the
Kábul valley is shown by its Hindu name of Kandhár that is Gandhára or
Pesháwar, a name still in use as Gandálarit (Gandhára-rashtra) the
Burmese for Yunnan. [1192] The strange confusion which Rashid-ud-din
makes between the surroundings of Yunnan and of Pesháwar is perhaps
due to the fact that in his time the connection between the two places
was still known and admitted. [1193] A further trace of stranger
whites like the Chaganjang of Yunnan occurs south-east in the Anin
or Honli whose name suggests the Húnas and whose fondness for silver
ornaments at once distinguishes them from their neighbours and connects
them with India. [1194] Even though these traces may be accepted
as confirming a possible migration of Húnas and Kedaras to Yunnan
and Anin a considerable gap remains between Anin and Angkor. Three
local Cambodian considerations go some way to fill this gap. The
first is that unlike the Siamese and Cochin Chinese the Khmers are
a strong well made race with very little trace of the Mongoloid,
with a language devoid of the intonations of other Indo-Chinese
dialects, and with the hair worn cropped except the top-knot. The
second point is that the Khmers claim a northern origin; and the
third that important architectural remains similar to Nakhonwat are
found within Siam limits about sixty miles north of Angkor. [1195]
One further point has to be considered: How far is an origin from
White Húnas and Kedáras in agreement with the Nága phase of Cambodian
worship. Hiuen Tsiang's details of the Tarim Oxus and Swát valleys
contain nothing so remarkable as the apparent increase of Dragon
worship. In those countries dragons are rarely mentioned by Fa Hian
in A.D. 400: dragons seem to have had somewhat more importance in
the eyes of Sung-Yun in A.D. 520; and to Hiuen Tsiang, the champion
of the Maháyána or Broadway, dragons are everywhere explaining all
misfortunes earthquakes storms and diseases. Buddhism may be the state
religion but the secret of luck lies in pleasing the Dragon. [1196]

This apparent increased importance of dragon or Nága worship in
north-west India during the fifth and sixth centuries may have
been due partly to the decline of the earlier Buddhism partly to
the genial wonder-loving temper of Hiuen Tsiang. Still so marked an
increase makes it probable that with some of the great fifth and sixth
century conquerors of Baktria Kábul and the Panjáb, of whom a trace
may remain in the snake-worshipping Nágas and Takkas of the Kamaon
and Garhwal hills, the Dragon was the chief object of worship. Temple
remains show that the seventh and eighth century rulers of Kashmir,
with a knowledge of classic architecture probably brought from beyond
the Indus, were Nága worshippers. [1197] The fact that the ninth
century revision of religion in Tibet came mainly from Kashmir and
that among the eighteen chief gods of the reformed faith the great
Serpent had a place favours the view that through Tibet passed the
scheme and the classic details of the Kashmir Nága temples which in
greater wealth and splendour are repeated in the Nakhonwat of Angkor
in Cambodia. [1198] It is true that the dedication of the great temple
to Nága worship before the Siamese priests filled it with statues of
Buddha is questioned both by Lieut. Garnier and by Sir H. Yule. [1199]
In spite of this objection and though some of the series have been
Buddhist from the first, it is difficult to refuse acceptance to
Mr. Fergusson's conclusions that in the great Nákhon, all traces
of Buddhism are additions. The local conditions and the worshipful
Tale Sap lake favour this conclusion. What holier dragon site can be
imagined than the great lake Tale Sap, 100 miles by 30, joined to
the river Mekong by a huge natural channel which of itself empties
the lake in the dry season and refills it during the rains giving a
water harvest of fish as well as a land harvest of grain. What more
typical work of the dragon as guardian water lord. Again not far off
between Angkor and Yunnán was the head-quarters of the dragon as the
unsquared fiend. In Carrajan ten days west of the city of Yachi Marco
Polo (A.D. 1290) found a land of snakes and great serpents ten paces in
length with very great heads, eyes bigger than a loaf of bread, mouths
garnished with pointed teeth able to swallow a man whole, two fore-legs
with claws for feet and bodies equal in bulk to a great cask. He adds:
'These serpents devour the cubs of lions and bears without the sire and
dam being able to prevent it. Indeed if they catch the big ones they
devour them too: no one can make any resistance. Every man and beast
stands in fear and trembling of them.' Even in these fiend dragons
was the sacramental guardian element. The gall from their inside
healed the bite of a mad dog, delivered a woman in hard labour, and
cured itch or it might be worse. Moreover, he concludes, the flesh
of these serpents is excellent eating and toothsome. [1200]

APPENDIX V.

ARAB REFERENCES. [1201]

[Arab References, A.D. 851-1350.] The earliest Arab reference to
Gujarát is by the merchant Sulaimán [1202] A.D. 851 (A.H. 237). Other
Arab accounts follow up to A.D. 1263, a period of over four
centuries. Sulaimán describes Jurz or Gujarát as bordering on the
kingdom of the Balhára (A.D. 743-974) and as forming a tongue of land,
rich in horses and camels and said to have "mines of gold and silver,
exchanges being carried on by means of these metals in dust."

Al Biláduri [1203] (A.D. 892) states that the first Islámic expedition
to India was the one despatched against Táná [1204] (Thána) by Usmán,
son of Al-Ási the Thakafi, who in the fifteenth year of the Hijrah
(A.D. 636) was appointed governor of Bahrein and Umán (the Persian
Gulf) by the second Khalífah Umar, the son of Khattáb. On the return
of the expedition, in reply to his governor's despatch, the Khalífah
Umar is said to have written: [1205] "Oh brother of Thakíf, thou
hast placed the worm in the wood, but by Alláh, had any of my men
been slain, I would have taken an equal number from thy tribe." In
spite of this threat Usmán's brother Hakam, who was deputed by the
governor to the charge of Bahrein, despatched a force to Bárúz [1206]
(Broach). Al Biláduri does not record the result of this expedition,
but mentions a more successful one to Debal at the mouth of the Indus
sent by Hakam under the command of his brother Mughaira. On the death
of his uncle Al-Hajjáj (A.D. 714; H. 95) Muhammad the son of Kásim
the Arab conqueror of Sindh, is said to have made peace with the
inhabitants of Surast or Káthiávád with whom he states the people of
Bátia [1207] that is Bet to the north of Dwárka were then at war. Al
Biláduri describes the Bátia men as Meds seafarers and pirates. In
the reign of Hishám (A.D. 724) Junnaid, son of Abdur Rahmán Al Murri,
who was appointed to the frontier of Sindh is stated to have conquered
Jurz (Gujarát) and Bárús (Broach). [1208] A more permanent result
followed a great expedition from Mansúrah in Sindh. This result was
the overthrow, from which it never recovered, of the great seaport
and capital of Vala or Valabhi. [1209] Al Biláduri's next mention
[1210] of Gujarát is in connection with the conquest of Sindán in
Kachh and the founding there of a Jámá mosque by Fazl, son of Mahán
in the reign of the Abbási Khalífah Al Mámún (A.D. 813-833) the son
of the famous Hárún-ur-Rashíd. After Fazl's death his son Muhammad
sailed with sixty vessels against the Meds of Hind, captured Máli
[1211] apparently Mália in north Káthiávád after a great slaughter
of the Meds and returned to Sindán.

The dissension between Muhammad and his brother Mahán, who in
Muhammad's absence had usurped his authority at Sindán, re-established
the power of the Hindus. The Hindus however, adds Al Biláduri,
spared the assembly mosque in which for long the Musalmáns used
to offer their Friday prayers. [1212] Ibni Khurdádbah (A.D. 912;
H. 300) erroneously enumerates Bárúh and Sindán (Broach and Sindán)
as cities of Sindh. [1213] The king of Juzr he describes as the
fourth Indian sovereign. According to Al Masúdi [1214] (A.D. 915)
the country of the Balháras or Ráshtrakútas (A.D. 743-974), which is
also called the country of Kumkar (Konkan), is open on one side to
the attacks of the king of Juzr (Gujarát) a prince owning many horses
and camels and troops who does not think any king on earth equal to
him except the king of Bábal (Babylon). He prides himself and holds
himself high above all other kings and owns many elephants, but hates
Musalmáns. His country is on a tongue of land, and there are gold and
silver mines in it, in which trade is carried on. Al Istakhri [1215]
(H. 340; A.D. 951) gives an itinerary in which he shows the distance
between Mansúrah and Kámhal [1216] (Anhilwára) to be eight days'
journey; from Kámhal to Kambáya (Cambay) four days; from Kambáya to
the sea about two farasangs that is between seven and eight miles
[1217]; from Kambáya to Surabáya [1218] perhaps Surabára the Surat
river mouth which is half a farasang (between 1 1/2 and two miles)
from the sea, about four days. He places five days between Surabáya
(Surat) and Sindán (St. John near Daman) and a like distance between
Sindán and Saimúr (Chewal or Cheul) thirty miles south of Bombay. Ibni
Haukal [1219] (H. 366; A.D. 976) enumerates [1220] (Fámhal) [1221]
(Anhilwára), Kambáya (Cambay), Surbáráh (Surat), Sindán (Daman), and
Saimúr (Cheul) as cities of Al Hind (India), as opposed to As Sindh
or the Indus valley. From Kambáya to Saimúr, he writes, is the land
of the Balhára, which is in the possession of several kings. [1222]
Ibni Haukal describes the land between Kámhal (Anhilwára) and Kambáya
(Cambay), and Bánia three days' journey from Mansúrah as desert, [1223]
and between Kambáya and Saimúr as thickly covered with villages. Al
Bírúni, [1224] in his famous Indica about A.D. 1030-31 writes: From
Kanauj, travelling south-west you come to Ási, a distance of eighteen
farsakhs [1225] that is of seventy two miles; to Sahiva 17 farsakhs
or sixty-eight miles; to Chandra 18 farsakhs or seventy-two miles;
to Rajauri fifteen farsakhs or sixty miles; and to Nárána (near
Jaipur) the former capital of Gujarát, 18 farsakhs or seventy-two
miles. Nárána he adds was destroyed and the capital transferred to
another town on the frontier. From Nárána at a distance of 60 farsakhs
or 240 miles south-west lies Anhilwára, and thence to Somnáth on the
sea is fifty farsakhs or 200 miles. From Anhilwára, passing south
is Lárdes with its capitals Bihruch (Broach) and Rahánjur [1226]
(Rándir) forty-two farsakhs (168 miles). These he states are on
the shore of the sea to the east of Tána (the modern Thána). [1227]
After describing the coast of Makrán till it reaches Debal [1228]
(Karáchi or Thatta) Abu Rihán comes to the coast of Kachh [1229]
and Somnáth, the population of which he calls the Bawárij because,
he says, they commit their piratical depredations in boats called
Baira. [1230] He gives the distance [1231] between Debal (Karáchi or
Thatta) and Kachh the country that yields mukl (gum or myrrh) [1232]
and bádrúd (balm) as six farsakhs (24 miles); to Somnáth (from Debal)
fourteen (56 miles); to Kambáya thirty (120 miles); to Asáwal the
site of Ahmedábád (from Cambay) two days' journey; to Bahrúj (Broach)
(from Debal) [1233] thirty, to Sindán or St. John (from Debal) fifty;
to Subára (Sopára) from Sindán six [1234]; to Tána (from Sopára)
five. Rashíd-ud-dín in his translation (A.D. 1310) of Al Bírúni
(A.D. 970-1031) states [1235] that beyond Gujarát are Konkan and
Tána. He calls Tánah the chief town of the Konkans and mentions the
forest of the Dángs as the habitat of the sharva an animal resembling
the buffalo, but larger than a rhinoceros, with a small trunk and two
big horns with which it attacks and destroys the elephant. Al Idrísi,
[1236] writing about the end of the eleventh century but with tenth
century materials, places [1237] in the seventh section of the second
climate, the Gujarát towns of Mámhal (Anhilwára), Kambáya (Cambay),
Subára (apparently Surabára or Surat), Sindán [1238] (Sanján in
Thána), and Saimúr (Chewal or Cheul). He adds, probably quoting from
Al Jauhari (A.D. 950), that Nahrwára is governed by a great prince who
bears the title of Balhára who owns the whole country from Nahrwára to
Saimúr. He ranks the king of Juzr fourth among Indian potentates. The
country from Debal to Kambáya (Karáchi to Cambay) he describes [1239]
as "nothing but a marine strand without habitations and almost without
water, and impassable for travellers." [1240] The situation of Mámhal
(Anhilwára) he gives as between Sindh and Hind. He notices the Meds
as Mánds [1241] grazing their flocks to within a short distance of
Mámhal (Anhilwára). He speaks of Mámhal, Kambáya, Subára (probably
Surabára or Surat), Sindán, and Saimúr as countries of Hind (India)
touching upon Sindh. [1242] He describes Mámhal as a frontier town,
numbered by some among the cities of Sindh, and he classifies Aubkin,
Mánd, Kulámmali (Quilon), [1243] and Sindán (Sandhán in Kachh)
as maritime islands. Among the numerous towns of India are Mámhal
(Anhilwára), [1244] Kambáya (Cambay), Subára, Asáwal (Ahmedábád),
Janáwal (Chunvál), Sindán, Saimúr, Jandur [1245] (Rándir), Sandur
(apparently a repetition of Rándir), and Rumála (perhaps the south
Panjáb). [1246] He speaks of Kalbata, Augasht, Nahrwára (Anhilwára),
and Lahawar (Lahori Bandar) as in the desert [1247] of Kambáya. Of the
three Subára (Surabára or Surat), Sindán (the Thána Sanján), and Saimúr
(Cheul), he says Saimúr alone belongs to the Balhára, whose kingdom,
he adds, is large, well-peopled, commercial, and fertile. Near Subára
(apparently Surabára) he locates small islands which he styles Bára
where, he adds, cocoanuts and the costus grow. [1248] East of Sindán,
due to a confusion between Sandhán in Kachh and Sanján in Thána,
he places another island bearing the same name as the port and
under the same government as the mainland, highly cultivated and
producing the cocoa palm the bamboo and the cane. Five miles by sea
from Kulámmali lies another island called Máli, an elevated plateau,
but not hilly, and covered with vegetation. The mention of the pepper
vine suggests that Al Idrísi has wandered to the Malabár Coast. In the
eighth section of the second clime Al Idrísi places Bárúh (Broach),
Sandápúr (apparently Goa), Tána (Thána), Kandárina (Gandhár, north
of Broach), Jirbátan a town mentioned by Al Idrísi as the nearest in
a voyage from Ceylon to the continent of India on that continent. It
is described as a populous town on a river supplying rice and grain
to Ceylon, [1249] Kalkáyan, Luluwa, Kanja, and Samandirún, and in the
interior Dulaka (Dholka), Janwál (Chunvál or Viramgám), and Nahrwár
(Anhilwára). [1250] Opposite the sea-port of Bárúh (Broach), Al
Idrísi places an island called Mullán, producing large quantities of
pepper. Al Idrísi describes the port of Bárúh (Broach) as accessible
to ships from China and Sindh. The distance from Bárúh to Saimúr
he puts at two days journey, and that between Bárúh and Nahrwára
(Anhilwára) at eight days through a flat country travelled over in
wheeled carriages drawn by oxen, which he adds furnished the only
mode for the conveyance also of merchandise. He locates the towns
of Dulaka and Hanawal or Janáwal (Chunwál or Jháláwár) with Asáwal
(Ahmedábád) between Bárúh and Nahrwára. He represents all three of
these towns to be centres of a considerable trade, and among their
products mentions the bamboo and the cocoanut. From Bárúh to Sandábúr
(that is, Goa), a commercial town with fine houses and rich bazárs
situated on a great gulf where ships cast anchor, the distance along
the coast given by Al Idrísi is four days. Al Kazwíni [1251] writing
about the middle of the thirteenth century A.D. 1263-1275, but mainly
from information of the tenth century notes Saimúr (Cheul) "a city of
Hind near the confines of Sindh" with its handsome people of Turkish
extraction worshippers of fire having their own fire-temples. Al
Kazwíni (A.D. 1230) dwells at length on the wonders of Somnáth and its
temple. He calls it a celebrated city of India situated on the shore
of the sea and washed by its waves. Among its wonders is Somnáth,
an idol hung in space resting on nothing. In Somnáth he says Hindus
assemble by the ten thousand at lunar eclipses, believing that the
souls of men meet there after separation from the body and that at
the will of the idol they are re-born into other animals. The two
centuries since its destruction by the idol-breaker of Ghaznah had
restored Somnáth to its ancient prosperity. He concludes his account
of Somnáth by telling how Mahmúd ascertained that the chief idol was
of iron and its canopy a loadstone and how by removing one of the
walls the idol fell to the ground.

[Rivers.] Regarding the rivers and streams of Gujarát the Arab writers
are almost completely silent. The first reference to rivers is in
Al Masúdi (A.D. 944) who in an oddly puzzled passage says: [1252]
"On the Lárwi Sea (Cambay and Cheul) great rivers run from the south
whilst all the rivers of the world except the Nile of the Egypt, the
Mehrán (Indus) of Sindh, and a few others flow from the north." Al
Bírúni A.D. 970-1030) states that between the drainage areas of
the Sarsut and the Ganges is the valley of the river Narmaza [1253]
which comes from the eastern mountains and flows south-west till it
falls into the sea near Bahrúch about 180 miles (60 yojanas) east of
Somnáth. Another river the Sarsut (Sarasvatí) he rightly describes
as falling into the sea an arrowshot to the east of Somnáth. [1254]
He further mentions the Tábi (Tápti) from the Vindu or Vindhya hills
and the Támbra Barani or copper-coloured, apparently also the Tápti,
as coming from Málwa. In addition he refers to the Máhindri or Máhi
and the Sarusa apparently Sarasvatí perhaps meant for the Sábarmati. Al
Idrísi (A.D. 1100) is the only other Arab writer who names any of the
Gujarát rivers. As usual he is confused, describing Dulka (Dholka)
as standing on the bank of a river flowing into the sea which forms
an estuary or gulf on the east of which stands the town of Bárúh
(Broach). [1255]

The Arab writers record the following details of twenty-two leading
towns:

[Towns. Anahalváda.] Anahalváda (Ámhal, Fámhal, Kámhal, Kámuhul,
Mámhul, Nahlwára, Nahrwála). Al Istakhri (H. 340; A.D. 951) mentions
Ámhal Fámhal and Kámhal, Ibni Haukal (A.D. 976) Fámhal Kámhal and
Kámuhal, and Al Idrísi (end of the eleventh century) Mámhul. That these
are perversions of one name and that this town stood on the border of
'Hind' or Gujarát (in contradistinction to Sindh) the position given to
each by the Arab geographers [1256] places beyond question. Al Istakhri
(A.D. 951) alone calls the place by the name of Ámhal which he mentions
[1257] as one of the chief cities of 'Hind.' Later he gives the name
of Fámhal to a place forming the northern border of "Hind", as all
beyond it as far as Makrán belongs to Sindh. Again a little later
[1258] he describes Kámhal as a town eight days from Mansúrah and four
days from Kambáya, thus making Kámhal the first Gujarát town on the
road from Mansúrah about seventy miles north of Haidarábád in Sindh to
Gujarát. Ibni Haukal (A.D. 968-976) in his Ashkál-ul-Bilád gives Fámhal
in his text and Kámhal in his map [1259] and again while referring
[1260] to the desert between Makrán and Fámhal as the home of the
Meds, he styles it Kámhal. Once more he refers to Fámhal as a strong
and great city, containing a Jámá or Assembly Mosque; a little later
[1261] he calls it Kámuhul and places it eight days from Mansúrah
and four from Kambáya. He afterwards contradicts himself by making
Mansúrah two days' journey from 'Kámuhul,' but this is an obvious
error. [1262] Al Bírúni (A.D. 970-1039) notices Anhilwára and does
not recognize any other form. [1263] Al Idrísi (end of the eleventh
century) adopts no form but Mámhal referring to it as one of the towns
of the second climate [1264] on the confines of a desert between
Sindh and "Hind" (India or Gujarát) the home of the sheep-grazing
and horse and camel-breeding Meds, [1265] as a place numbered by some
among the cities of Hind (Gujarát) by others as one of the cities of
Sindh situated at the extremity of the desert which stretches between
Kambáya, Debal, and Bánia. [1266] Again he describes Mámhal as a town
of moderate importance on the route "from Sindh to India," a place of
little trade, producing small quantities of fruit but numerous flocks,
nine days from Mansúrah through Bánia and five from Kambáya. [1267] Al
Idrísi (quoting from tenth century materials) also notices Nahrwára as
eight days' journey from Bárúh (Broach) across a flat country a place
governed by a prince having the title of the Balhára, a prince with
numerous troops and elephants, a place frequented by large numbers
of Musalmáns who go there on business. [1268] It is remarkable that
though Vanarája (A.D. 720-780?) founded Anhilwára as early as about
A.D. 750 no Arab geographer refers to the capital under any of the
many forms into which its name was twisted before Al Istakhri in
A.D. 951. At first Anhilwára may have been a small place but before
the tenth century it ought to have been large enough to attract the
notice of Ibni Khurdádbah (A.D. 912) and Al Masúdi (A.D. 915). In
the eleventh century the Musalmán historians of Mahmúd's reign are
profuse in their references to Anhilwára. According to Farishtah
[1269] after the capture of Anhilwára and the destruction of Somnáth
(H. 414; A.D. 1025) Mahmúd was anxious to make Anhilwára his capital
especially as it had mines of gold and as Singaldip (Ceylon) rich
in rubies was one of its dependencies. Mahmúd was dissuaded from the
project by his ministers. [1270] But two mosques in the town of Pattan
remain to show Mahmúd's fondness for the city. The next Muhammadan
reference to Anhilwára is by Núr-ud-dín Muhammad Úfi, who lived in
the reign of Shams-ud-dín Altamsh (A.D. 1211). [1271] In his Romance
of History Úfi refers to Anhilwára as the capital of that Jai Ráj,
who on receiving the complaint of a poor Musalmán preacher of Cambay,
whose mosque the Hindus instigated the fire-worshippers of the place
to destroy, left the capital alone on a fleet dromedary and returning
after personal enquiry at Cambay summoned the complainant and ordered
the chief men of the infidels to be punished and the Musalmán mosque
to be rebuilt at their expense. [1272]

The Jámi-ûl-Hikáyát of Muhammad Úfi alludes [1273] to the defeat of
Sultán Shaháb-ud-dín or Muhammad bin Sám, usually styled Muhammad
Ghori, at the hands of Múlarája II. of Anahilaváda in A.D. 1178. And
the Tájul Maásir [1274] describes how in A.D. 1297 the Musalmáns under
Kutb-ud-dín Aibak retrieved the honour of their arms by the defeat of
Karan and his flight from Anhilwára. This account refers to Gujarát as
"a country full of rivers and a separate region of the world." It
also notices that Sultán Násir-ud-dín Kabáchah (A.D. 1246-1266)
deputed his general Kháskhán from Debal to attack Nahrwála and
that Kháskhán brought back many captives and much spoil. After the
conquest of Gujarát, in A.D. 1300 Sultán Alá-ud-dín Khilji despatched
Ulughkhán (that is the Great Khán commonly styled Alfkhán) to destroy
the idol-temple of Somnáth. This was done and the largest idol was
sent to Alá-ud-dín. [1275]

[Chief Towns. Asáwal.] Asáwal. Abú Rihán Al Bírúni is the first
(A.D. 970-1039) of Arab geographers to mention Asáwal the site
of Ahmedábád which he correctly places two days journey from
Cambay. [1276] The next notice is along with Khábirún (probably Kávi
on the left mouth of the Máhi) and near Hanáwal or Janáwal, apparently
Chunvál or Viramgám, by Al Idrísi (end of the eleventh century) as
a town, populous, commercial, rich, industrious, and productive of
useful articles. [1277] He likens Asáwal "both in size and condition"
to Dhulaka both being places of good trade. [1278] In the early
fourteenth century (A.D. 1325) Ziá-ud-dín Barni refers to Asáwal
as the place where Sultán Muhammad Tughlak (A.D. 1325-1351) had to
pass a month in the height of the rains owing to the evil condition
to which his horses were reduced in marching and countermarching
in pursuit of the rebel Tághi. In the beginning of the fifteenth
century (A.D. 1403-4) the Tárikh-i-Mubárak Sháhi notices Asáwal as
the place where Tátárkhán the son of Zafarkhán had basely seized and
confined his own father. [1279] The Mirát-i-Sikandari also speaks
[1280] of Asáwal (A.D. 1403) but with the more courtly remark that
it was the place where Zafarkhán the grandfather of Sultán Ahmad the
founder of Ahmedábád, retired into private life after placing his
son Tátárkhán on the throne. [1281] The Mirát-i-Sikandari states that
[Ahmedábád.] the city of Ahmedábád was built [1282] in the immediate
vicinity of Asáwal. The present village of Asarwa is, under a slightly
changed name, probably what remains of the old town.

[Barda.] Barda. See Valabhi.

[Capital and Port Towns. Broach.] Broach (Báhrúj, Bárúh, Bárús)
is one of the places first attacked by the Muslim Arabs. In the
fifteenth year of the Hijrah (A.D. 636) the Khalífah Umar appointed
Usmán son of Abdul Ási to Bahrein. Usmán sent Hakam to Bahrein and
Hakam despatched a float to Báráúz (or Broach). [1283] Al Biláduri
(A.D. 892-93) speaks of Junnaid the son of Abdur Rahmán Al Murri on
his appointment to the frontier of Sindh in the Khiláfat of Hishám bin
Abdal Malik (A.D. 724-743) sending an expedition by land against Bárús
(Broach) ... and overrunning Jurz [1284] (Gujarát). Ibni Khurdádbah
(A.D. 912) enumerates Bárúh among the countries of Sindh. [1285] Broach
is next noticed [1286] by Al Bírúni (A.D. 970-1039) as standing near
the estuary of the river Narbada, as 120 miles (30 parasangs) from
Debal, and as being with Rahanjur (Ránder) the capital of Lárdes. In
describing the coasts of the Persian Gulf and the Indian Ocean Al
Masúdi (A.D. 915-944) speaks of Broach as Barús adding from which
come the famous lance shafts called Bárúsi. [1287] Al Idrísi (A.D.
1100) mentions [1288] Bárúh as a large town well-built of brick and
plaster, the inhabitants rich, engaged in trade and ready to enter
upon speculations and distant expeditions, a port for vessels coming
from China and Sindh, being two days' journey from Saimúr (Cheul) and
eight days from Nahrwára Anhilwára Pattan. In the fourteenth century
(A.D. 1325) Broach is described as in the flames of the insurrection
caused by the foreign amírs or nobles of the hot-tempered and impolitic
Muhammad bin Tughlak (A.D. 1325-1351) who visited it in person to
quell their revolt. Ziá-ud-dín Barni the famous annalist of his reign
and the author of the Tárikh-i-Fírúz Sháhi speaks of his deputation
to Broach by Malik Kabír the future Sultán Fírúz Sháh with a letter
to the Sultán. [1289]

[Port or Coast Towns. Cambay.] Cambay (Kambáya, Kambáyat, Kambáyah,
Khambáit.) According to Al Istakhri (A.D. 951) Kambáya formed the north
boundary of the land of the Balháras. [1290] Al Istakhri describes
it as four days from Kámhal (Anhilwára) sixteen miles (4 farsangs)
from the sea and four days from Surabáya probably Surabára or the
mouth of the Tápti a term which is still in use. [1291] Al Masúdi
(A.D. 915) in speaking [1292] of the ebb and flow of the ocean mentions
Kambáya. He notices that Kambáya was famous in Baghdád, as it still
is famous in Gujarát, for its shoes. These shoes, he says, were made
in Kambáya and the towns about it like Sindán (Sanján in Thána) and
Sufáráh (Supára). He notices that when he visited Kambáya in H. 303
(A.D. 913-14) the city was ruled by a Bráhman of the name of Bánia,
on behalf of the Balhára, lord of Mánkir (Málkhet). He states that this
Bánia was kind to and held friendly discussions with stranger Musalmáns
and people of other faiths. He gives a pleasing picture of Cambay,
on a gulf far broader than the estuaries of the Nile, the Euphrates,
or the Tigris whose shores were covered with villages, estates, and
gardens wooded and stocked with palm and date groves full of peacocks
parrots and other Indian birds. Between Kambáya and the sea from which
this gulf branches was two days' journey. When, says Al Masúdi, the
waters ebb from the gulf stretches of sands come to view. One day I saw
a dog on one of these desert-like stretches of sand. The tide began to
pour up the gulf and the dog hearing it ran for his life to the shore,
but the rush was too rapid. The waters overtook and drowned him. Al
Masúdi speaks of an emerald known as the Makkan emerald being carried
from Kambáya by Aden to Makkah where it found a market. [1293] Ibni
Haukal (A.D. 968-996) names Kambáya among the cities of Hind. [1294]
In his time there were Jámá or assembly mosques in Kambáya, where
the precepts of Islám were openly taught. Among the productions of
Kambáya he gives mangoes cocoanuts lemons and rice in great plenty
and some honey but no date trees. [1295] He makes Kambáya four miles
(one farasang) from the sea and four (that is four days' journey)
from Subára apparently Surabára that is Surat. The distance to Kámuhul
or Anhilwára by some mistake is shown as four farsangs instead of
four days' journey. [1296] Al Bírúni (A.D. 970-1031) places Kambáya
within the large country of Gujarát (120 miles) [1297] (30 farsakh)
from Debal (Karáchi). He says the men of Kambáya receive tribute from
the chiefs of the island of Kís or Kísh (probably Kich-Makrán). [1298]
Al Idrísi (A.D. 1100) places Kambáya with other Gujarát cities in the
second climate. [1299] He says it is a pretty and well known naval
station, second among the towns of Gujarát. [1300] It stands at the
end of a bay three miles from the sea where vessels can enter and
cast anchor. It is well supplied with water and has a fine fortress
built by the Government to prevent the inroads of the pirates of
Kísh (Makrán). From Kambáya to the island of Aubkin (Píram) is two
and a half days' sail and from Aubkin to Debal (or Karáchi) two days
more. The country is fertile in wheat and rice and its mountains yield
the bamboo. Its inhabitants are idolators. In his Tazjiyat-ul-Amsár,
Abdullah Wassáf [1301] in A.D. 1300 (H. 699) writes: "Gujarát which
is commonly called Kambáyat contains 70,000 villages and towns all
populous and the people abounding in wealth and luxuries. In the
course of the four seasons seventy different species of beautiful
flowers bloom. The purity of the air is so great that the picture of
an animal drawn with the pen is lifelike. Many plants and herbs grow
wild. Even in winter the ground is full of tulips (poppies). The air
is healthy, the climate a perpetual spring. The moisture of the dew
of itself suffices for the cold season crops. Then comes the summer
harvest which is dependent on the rain. The vineyards bring forth
blue grapes twice a year."

The trade in horses from the Persian isles and coast and from Katíf,
Láhsa, Bahrein, and Hurmuz was so great that during the reign of Atábak
Abu Bakr [1302] (A.D. 1154-1189) 10,000 horses worth 2,20,000 dínárs
[1303] (Rs. 1,10,00,000) were imported into Cambay and the ports
of Malabár. These enormous sums were not paid out of the government
treasuries but from the endowments of Hindu temples and from taxes
on the courtezans attached to them. The same author mentions the
conquest [1304] of Gujarát and the plunder of Kambáyat by Malik
Muîzz-ud-dín (called by Farishtah Alf and by Barni Ulugh meaning the
great Khán.) The Táríkh-i-Fírúz Sháhi states that Nasrat Khán and
not Ulugh Khán took and plundered Cambay and notices that in Cambay
Nasrat Khán purchased Káfúr Hazár Dínári (the thousand Dínár Káfur),
the future favourite minister and famous general of Alá-ud-dín. About
fifty years later the hot-headed Muhammad bin Tughlak (A.D. 1325-1351)
was in Cambay quelling an insurrection and collecting the arrears of
Cambay revenue. [1305]

[Cheul.] Cheul (Saimúr). Al Masúdi (A.D. 943) is the first Arab
geographer to mention Saimúr. [1306] He says: On the coast as in
Saimúr Subára and Tána the Láriyyah language is spoken. In describing
Saimúr Al Masúdi states [1307] that at the time of his visit (H. 304;
A.D. 914) the ruler on behalf of the Balhára was Jhánjha (this is the
fifth Siláhára A.D. 916). Nearly ten thousand Musalmáns were settled
in Saimúr including some (called Bayásirah) born in the land of Arab
parents and others from Síráf and Persian Gulf, Basrah, Baghdád, and
other towns. A certain Músa bin Is-hák was appointed Raís or ruler
[1308] by the Balhára or Valabhi, that is the reigning Ráshtrakúta
Indra Nityamvarsha to adjudicate Muhammadan disputes according to
Musalmán law and customs. He describes [1309] at length the ceremony
of self-destruction by a Besar [1310] youth (a Hindu by religion)
to gain a better state in his future life, his scalping himself and
putting fire on his head, his cutting out a piece of his heart and
sending it to a friend as a souvenir.

Al Istakhri (A.D. 951) mentions Saimúr as one of the cities of Hind,
makes it the southern end of the Balhára kingdom with Kambáya as the
northern, [1311] and places it at a distance of five days from Sindán
(the Thána Sanján) and fifteen days from Sarandíb or Ceylon. [1312]
Ibni Haukal (A.D. 968) notices Saimúr as one of the cities of Hind
known to him and mentions the sea of Fárs (or the Indian Ocean)
as stretching from Saimúr on the east to Tíz or Makrán. [1313] He
states [1314] that the country between Saimúr and Támhal (Anhilawára)
belongs to Hind. He makes [1315] the distance between Subára (probably
Surabára or Swát), Sindán, and Saimúr five days each and between Saimúr
and Sarandib (Ceylon) fifteen days. Al Bírúni (A.D. 1020) says: [1316]
"Then you enter the land of Lárán in which is Saimúr also called Jaimúr
or Chaimúr." Al Idrísi (end of the eleventh century) mentions Saimúr
as one of the towns of the second climate. [1317] He describes it as
large and well-built, five days from Sindán and among its products
notes cocoanut trees in abundance, henna (Lawsonia inermis), and on its
mountains many aromatic plants. [1318] His remark that Saimúr formed
a part of the vast, fertile, well-peopled and commercial kingdom of
the Balháras must be taken from the work of Al-Jauhari (A.D. 950).

Al Kazwíni (A.D. 1236) quoting Misâar bin Muhalhil (A.D. 942)
describes Saimúr as one of the cities of Hind near the confines
of Sind, [1319] whose people born of Turkish and Indian parents
are very beautiful. It was a flourishing trade centre with a mixed
population of Jews, Fireworshippers, Christians, and Musalmáns. [1320]
The merchandise of the Turks (probably of the Indo-Afghán frontier)
was conveyed thither and the best of aloes were exported and called
Saimúri after its name. The temple of Saimúr was on an eminence
with idols of turquoise and baidjadak or ruby. In the city were many
mosques churches synagogues and fire-temples.

[Chief Towns. Dholka.] Dholka (Dúlaka). Al Idrísi (end of the
eleventh century) places Dúlaka and another town he calls Hanáwal
that is Chunwal or Junawal perhaps Jháláwár between Bárúh (Broach)
and Nahrwára. He describes Dúlaka as on the banks of a river (the
Sábarmati) which flows into the sea, which forms an estuary or gulf
on the west (east) of which stands the town of Bárúh. Both these
towns, he adds, stand at the foot of a chain of mountains which lie
to the north and which are called Undaran apparently Vindhya. The kana
(bamboo) grows here as well as a few cocoanut trees. [1321]

[Goa.] Goa. See Sindábur.

[Gondal.] Gondal (Kondal). Ziá-ud-dín Barni in his Tárikh-i-Fíruz
Sháhi states [1322] that Sultán Muhammad Tughlak spent (A.D. 1349)
his third rainy season in Gujarát in Kondal (Gondal). Here the Sultán
assembled his forces before starting on his fatal march to Sindh.

[Capitals. Kachh.] Kachh. Al Bírúni (A.D. 970-1031) is the only Arab
writer who refers to Kachh. He calls Kachh [1323] with Somnáth the
head-quarters of the country of the Bawárij or Medh pirates. Speaking
of the Indus he notices [1324] that one of its branches which reaches
the borders of Kachh is known as Sind Ságar. In a third passage he
refers [1325] to Kachh as the land of the mukl or balsamodendron
and of bádrúd or bezoar. It was twenty-four miles (6 farsangs)
from Debal (Karáchi). According to the Táríkh-i-Maâsúmi [1326] when
(A.D. 1069) the sovereignty of Sindh passed from the descendants
of Mahmúd of Ghazni to the Sumras, Singhar, the grandson of Sumra
(A.D. 1069) [1327] extended his sway from Kachh to Nasarpúr [1328]
near Sindh Haidarábád and Khafíf the son of Singhar consolidated his
power and made Kachh a Sumra dependency. [1329] Dúda the grandson of
Khafíf quelled a threatened Sumra rising by proceeding to Kachh and
chastising the Sammas. [1330] On the fall of the Sumras the Chauras
became masters of Kachh from whose hands the country passed to those
of the Sammas. Ground down under the iron sway of the Sumras a number
of Sammas fled from Sindh and entered Kachh where they were kindly
received by the Chauras who gave them land to cultivate. After
acquainting themselves with the country and the resources of its
rulers the Samma immigrants who seem to have increased in numbers and
strengthened themselves by union, obtained possession by stratagem but
not without heroism of the chief fortress of Kachh. [1331] This fort
now in ruins was the fort of Gúntrí. [1332] The Tárikh-i-Táhiri states
that up to the time the history was written (A.D. 1621) [1333] the
country was in the possession of the Sammas, both the Ráis Bhára and
Jám Sihta of great and little Kachh in his time being of Samma descent.

[Kaira.] Kaira (Karra). One mention of Karra apparently Kaira or Khedá
occurs in Ziá-ud-dín Barni's [1334] account of Muhammad Tughlak's
(A.D. 1325) pursuit of his rebellious Gujarát noble Tághi. He speaks
of Muhammad's detention for a month at Asáwal during the rains and
his overtaking and dispersing Tághi's forces at Karra. From Karra the
rebels fled in disorder to Nahrwára (Anhilwára). Several of Tághi's
supporters sought and were refused shelter by the Rána of Mándal that
is Pátri near Viramgám.

[Chief Towns. Kábirún.] Kábirún. Al Idrísi (end of the eleventh
century) mentions Kábirún and Asáwal as towns of the same 'section'
both of them populous, commercial, rich, and producing useful
articles. He adds that at the time he wrote the Musalmáns had made
their way into the greater portion of these countries and conquered
them. Kábirún like the Akabarou of the Periplus (A.D. 240) is perhaps
a town on the Káveri river in south Gujarát.

[Kambay.] Kambay. See Cambay.

[Kanauj.] Kanauj. Al Masúdi [1335] (A.D. 956) is the first Arab
traveller who gives an account of Kanauj. He says: [1336] The kingdom
of the Baûúra king of Kanauj extends about a hundred and twenty square
parasangs of Sindh, each parasang being equal to eight miles of this
country. This king has four armies according to the four quarters
of the world. Each of them numbers 700,000 or 900,000. The army of
the north wars against the prince of Multán and with his Musalmán
subjects on the frontier. The army of the south fights against
the Balhára king of Mánkír. The other two armies march to meet
enemies in every direction. Ibni Haukal (A.D. 968-976) says [1337]
that from the sea of Fárs to the country of Kanauj is three months
journey. Rashíd-ud-dín from Al Bírúni (A.D. 970-1039) places [1338]
Kanauj south of the Himálayas and states [1339] that the Jamna falls
into the Ganga below Kanauj which is situated on the west of the river
(Ganga). The chief portion of Hind included in the "second climate"
is called the central land or Madhya Desh. He adds that the Persians
call it Kanauj. It was the capital of the great, haughty, and proud
despots of India. He praises the former magnificence of Kanauj,
which he says being now deserted by its ruler has fallen into neglect
and ruin, and the city of Bári, three days' journey from Kanauj on
the eastern side of the Ganges being now the capital. Kanauj was
celebrated for its descendants of the Pándavas as Máhura (Mathra)
is on account of Bás Dev (Krishna). Al Idrísi, end of the eleventh
century, speaks [1340] of Kanauj in connection with a river port
town of the name of Samandár "a large town, commercial and rich,
where there are large profits to be made and which is dependent"
on the rule of the Kanauj king. Samandár, he says, stands on a river
coming from Kashmír. To the north of Samandár at seven days is, he
says, the city of Inner Kashmír under the rule of Kanauj. The Chách
Námah (an Arabic history of great antiquity written before A.D. 753,
translated into Persian in the time of Sultán Násir-ud-dín Kabáchah)
(A.D. 1216) says [1341] that when Chách A.D. 631-670) advanced against
Akham Lohána of Brahmanábád that the Lohána wrote to ask the help of
"the king of Hindustán," that is Kanauj, at that time Satbán son of
Rásal, but that Akham died before his answer came.

[Kol.] Kol. Ibni Khurdádbah (A.D. 912) has Kol seventy-two miles (18
farsakhs) from Sanján in Kachh. [1342] And the Táj-ul-Mâásir [1343]
relates how in A.D. 1194 Kutb-ud-dín advanced to Kol and took the fort.

[Málkhet.] Málkhet (Mánkír). Al Masúdi (A.D. 943) is the first Arab
writer to mention Mánkír that is Mányákheta now Málkhet about sixty
miles south-east of Sholápúr. In relating the extinction of the great
Brahma-born dynasty of India Al Masúdi states [1344] that at the time
the city of Mánkír, the great centre of India, submitted to the kings
called the Balháras who in his time were still ruling at Mánkír. [1345]

Al Masúdi correctly describes the position of Málkhet as eighty
Sindh or eight-mile farsakhs that is six hundred and forty miles
from the sea in a mountainous country. Again he notices that the
language spoken in Mánkír was Kiriya, [1346] called from Karah or
Kanara the district where it was spoken. The current coin was the
Tártariyeh dirham (each weighing a dirham and a half) [1347] on which
was impressed the date of the ruler's reign. He describes the country
of the Balháras as stretching from the Kamkar (or Konkan) in the south
or south-west north to the frontiers of the king of Juzr (Gujarát),
"a monarch rich in men horses and camels." Al Istakhri (A.D. 951)
describes Mánkír as the dwelling of the wide-ruling Balhára. Ibni
Haukal (A.D. 968-976) repeats almost to the letter the information
given by Al Istakhri. The destruction of Málkhet (Mánya Kheta) by
the western Chálukya king Tailappa in A.D. 972 explains why none of
the writers after Ibni Haukal mentions Mánkír.

[Mándal.] Mándal. Ibni Khurdádbah (A.D. 912) enumerates Mándal
(in Viramgám) with Rúmla, [1348] Kuli, and Bárúh as countries
of Sindh. During the Khiláfat of Hishám the son of Abdul Malik
(A.D. 724-743) Junnaid son of Abdur Rahman-al-Murri was appointed to
the frontier of Sindh. According to Al Biláduri (A.D. 892) Junnaid
sent his officers to Mándal, [1349] Dahnaj perhaps Kamlej, and Báhrús
(Broach).

[Nárána.] Nárána. In his Indica Al Bírúni (A.D. 970-1031) notices
Nárána near Jaipur as the ancient capital of Gujarát. He says that
its correct name is Bazánah but that "it is known to our people (the
Arabs) as Náráin." He places it eighty miles (20 farsakhs) south-west
of Kanauj, and adds that when it was destroyed the inhabitants
removed to and founded another city. [1350] Abú Rihán makes Nárána
the starting point of three itineraries to the south the south-west
and the west. Al Bírúni's details suffice to place this centre in the
neighbourhood of the modern Jaipúr and to identify it with Náráyan
the capital of Bairat of Matsya which according to Farishtah [1351]
Mahmúd of Ghazni took in A.D. 1022 (H. 412).

[Ránder.] Ránder (Ráhanjir or Rahanjúr). Al Bírúni (A.D. 1031) gives
[1352] Ráhanjúr and Báhrúj (Broach) as the capitals of Lar Desh or
south Gujarát. Elliot (Note 3. I. 61) writes the word Damanhúr or
Dahanhúr but the reading given by Sachau in his Arabic text of Al
Bírúni (page 100 chapter 18) is plainly Rahanjúr and the place
intended is without doubt Ránder on the right bank of the Tápti
opposite Surat. In his list of Indian towns Al Idrísi (end of the
eleventh century) seems to refer [1353] to it under the forms Jandúr
and Sandúr.

[Sanján.] Sanján (Sindán). The two Sanjáns, one in Kachh the other
in Thána, complicate the references to Sindán. Sindán in Kachh was
one of the earliest gains of Islám in India. Al Biláduri [1354]
(A.D. 892) speaks of Fazl, the son of Máhán, in the reign of the
greatest of the Abbási Khalífáhs Al-Mámún (A.D. 813-833), taking
Sindán and sending Al Mámún the rare present of "an elephant and
the longest and largest sáj or turban or teak spar ever seen." Fazl
built an assembly mosque that was spared by the Hindus on their
recapture of the town. Ibni Khurdádbah (A.D. 912) includes this
Kachh Sindán with Broach and other places in Gujarát among the
cities of Sindh. In his itinerary starting from Bakkar, he places
Sindán seventy-two miles [1355] (18 farsakhs) from Kol. Al Masúdi
(A.D. 915-944) states that Indian emeralds from (the Kachh) Sindán
and the neighbourhood of Kambáyat (Cambay) approached those of the
first water in the intensity of their green and in brilliance. As
they found a market in Makkah they were called Makkan emeralds. [1356]
Al Istakhri (A.D. 951) under cities of Hind places the Konkan Sindán
five days from Surabáya (Surabára or Surat) and as many from Saimúr
[1357] (Chewal). Ibni Haukal (A.D. 968) mentions (the Kachh) Sindán
among the cities of Hind, which have a large Musalmán population and
a Jámá Masjid [1358] or assembly mosque. Al Bírúni (A.D. 970-1031)
[1359] in his itinerary from Debal in Sindh places the Kokan 200 miles
(50 farsakhs) from that port and between Broach and Supára. At the
end of the eleventh century probably the Kachh Sindán was a large
commercial town rich both in exports and imports with an intelligent
and warlike, industrious, and rich population. Al Idrísi gives the
situation of the Konkan Sindán as a mile and a half from the sea and
five days from Saimúr (Cheval). [1360] Apparently Abul Fida [1361]
(A.D. 1324) confused Sindán with Sindábúr or Goa which Ibni Batúta
(A.D. 1340) rightly describes as an island. [1362]

[Port or Coast Towns. Sindábúr or Sindápúr.] Sindábúr or Sindápúr. Al
Masúdi (A.D. 943) places Sindápúr he writes it Sindábúra or Goa in
the country of the Bughara (Balhára) in India. [1363] Al Bírúni
(A.D. 1021) places Sindápúr or Sindábúr that is Goa as the first
of coast towns in Malabár the next being Fáknúr. [1364] Al Idrísi
(end of the eleventh century) describes Sindábúr as a commercial town
with fine buildings and rich bazaars in a great gulf where ships cast
anchor, four days along the coast [1365] from Thána.

[Somnáth.] Somnáth. Al Bírúni (A.D. 970-1031) is the first of the Arab
writers to notice Somnáth. He calls Somnáth and Kachh the capital of
the Bawárij pirates who commit their depredations in boats called
baira. [1366] He places Somnáth (14 farsakhs) fifty-six miles from
Debal or Karáchi 200 miles (50 farsakhs) from Anhilwára and 180 miles
(60 yojánas) from Broach. He notes that the river Sarsút falls into
the sea an arrow-shot from the town. He speaks of Somnáth as an
important place of Hindu worship and as a centre of pilgrimage from
all parts of India. He tells of votaries and pilgrims performing
the last stage of their journey crawling on their sides or on their
ankles, never touching the sacred ground with the soles of their feet,
even progressing on their heads. [1367] Al Bírúni gives [1368] the
legendary origin of the Somnáth idol: how the moon loved the daughters
of Prajápati; how his surpassing love for one of them the fair Rohini
kindled the jealousy of her slighted sisters; how their angry sire
punished the partiality of the moon by pronouncing a curse which caused
the pallor of leprosy to overspread his face; how the penitent moon
sued for forgiveness to the saint and how the saint unable to recall
his curse showed him the way of salvation by the worship of the Lingam;
how he set up and called the Moon-Lord a stone which [1369] for ages
had lain on the sea shore less than three miles to the west of the
mouth of the Sarasvatí, and to the east of the site of the golden
castle of Bárwi (Verával) the residence of Básúdeo and near the scene
of his death and of the destruction of his people the Yádavas. The
waxing and the waning of the moon caused the flood that hid the Lingam
and the ebb that showed it and proved that the Moon was its servant
who bathed it regularly. Al Bírúni notices [1370] that in his time
the castellated walls and other fortifications round the temple were
not more than a hundred years old. Al Bírúni represents the upper part
of the Lingam as hung with massive and bejewelled gold chains. These
chains together with the upper half of the idol were, he observes,
carried away by the Emir [1371] Mahmúd to Ghazna, where a part of
the idol was used to form one of the steps of the Assembly Mosque and
the other part was left to lie with Chakra Swám, the Thánesar idol,
in the maidán or hippodrome of Mahmúd's capital. Somnáth, says Al
Bírúni, [1372] was the greatest of the Lingams worshipped in India
where in the countries to the south-west of Sindh the worship of
these emblems abounds. A jar of Ganges water and a basket of Kashmir
flowers were brought daily to Somnáth. Its worshippers believed the
stone to possess the power of curing all diseases, and the mariners
and the wanderers over the deep between Sofálá and China addressed
their prayers to it as their patron deity. [1373] Ibni Asír [1374]
(A.D. 1121) gives a detailed account of the temple of Somnáth and its
ancient grandeur. He says Somnáth was the greatest of all the idols of
Hind. Pilgrims by the hundred thousand met at the temple especially
at the times of eclipses and believed that the ebb and flow of the
tide was the homage paid by the sea to the god. Everything of the most
precious was brought to Somnáth and the temple was endowed with more
than 10,000 villages. Jewels of incalculable value were stored in the
temple and to wash the idol water from the sacred stream of the Ganga
was brought every day over a distance of two hundred farsangs (1200
miles). A thousand Bráhmans were on duty every day in the temple,
three hundred and fifty singers and dancers performed before the
image, and three hundred barbers shaved the pilgrims who intended to
pay their devotions at the shrine. Every one of these servants had a
settled allowance. The temple of Somnáth was built upon fifty pillars
of teakwood covered with lead. The idol, which did not appear to be
sculptured, [1375] stood three cubits out of the ground and had a girth
of three cubits. The idol was by itself in a dark chamber lighted by
most exquisitely jewelled chandeliers. Near the idol was a chain of
gold to which bells were hung weighing 200 mans. The chain was shaken
at certain intervals during the night that the bells might rouse fresh
parties of worshipping Bráhmans. The treasury containing many gold and
silver idols, with doors hung with curtains set with valuable jewels,
was near the chamber of the idol. The worth of what was found in the
temple exceeded two millions of dínárs (Rs. 1,00,00,000). According
to Ibni Asír Mahmúd reached Somnáth on a Thursday in the middle of
Zilkaáda H. 414 (A.D. December 1023). On the approach of Mahmúd
Bhím the ruler of Anhilvád fled abandoning his capital and took
refuge in a fort to prepare for war. From Anhilvád Mahmúd started
for Somnáth taking several forts with images which, Ibni Asír says,
were the heralds or chamberlains of Somnáth. Resuming his march he
crossed a desert with little water. Here he was encountered by an
army of 20,000 fighting men under chiefs who had determined not to
submit to the invader. These forces were defeated and put to flight
by a detachment sent against them by Mahmúd. Mahmúd himself marched
to Dabalwárah a place said by Ibni Asír to be two days journey from
Somnáth. When he reached Somnáth Mahmúd beheld a strong fortress whose
base was washed by the waves of the sea. The assault began on the
next day Friday. During nearly two days of hard fighting the invaders
seemed doomed to defeat. On the third the Musalmáns drove the Hindus
from the town to the temple. A terrible carnage took place at the
temple-gate. Those of the defenders that survived took themselves
to the sea in boats but were overtaken and some slain and the rest
drowned. [1376]

[Supára.] Supára (Subárá, Sufára, or Surbáráh.)--The references to
Subárá are doubtful as some seem to belong to Surabára the Tápti
mouth and others to Sopára six miles north of Bassein. The first
Arab reference to Subára belongs to Sopára. Al Masúdi's (A.D. 915)
[1377] reference is that in Saimúr (Cheval), Subára (Sopára), and
Tána (Thána) the people speak the Láriyáh language, so called from
the sea which washes the coast. On this coast Al Istakhri (A.D. 951)
[1378] refers to Subára that is apparently to Surabára or Surat a
city of Hind, four days from Kambáyah (Cambay). [1379]

Ibni Haukal (A.D. 968-976) mentions [1380] Surbárah apparently the
Tápti mouth or Surat as one of the cities of Hind four farsakhs,
correctly days, from Kambáyah and two miles (half farsakh) from
the sea. From Surbára to Sindán, perhaps the Kachh Sanján, he makes
ten days. Al Bírúni (A.D. 970-1031) makes Subára perhaps the Thána
Sopára six days' journey from Debal [1381] (perhaps Diu). Al Idrísi
(A.D. 1100) mentions Subára apparently Sopára as a town in the second
climate, a mile and a half from the sea and five days (an excessive
allowance) from Sindán. It was a populous busy town, one of the
entrepôts of India and a pearl fishery. Near Subára he places Bára,
a small island with a growth of cactus and cocoanut trees. [1382]

[Surábára.] Surábára. See Supára.

[Capitals. Thána.] Thána (Tána).--That Thána was known to the Arabs in
pre-Islám times is shown by one of the first Musalmán expeditions to
the coast of India being directed against it. As early as the reign
of the second Khalifah Umar Ibnal Khattáb (A.D. 634-643; H. 13-23)
mention is made [1383] of Usmán, Umar's governor of Umán (the Persian
Gulf) and Bahrein, sending a successful expedition against Thána. Al
Masúdi (A.D. 943) refers to Thána on the shore of the Lárwi sea or
Indian Ocean, as one of the coast towns in which the Lárwi language is
spoken. [1384] Al Bírúni (A.D. 970-1031) gives [1385] the distance from
Mahrat Desh (the Marátha country) to the Konkan "with its capital Tána
on the sea-shore" as 100 miles (25 farsakhs) and locates the Lár Desh
(south Gujarát) capitals of Báhrûj and Rahanjur (Broach and Ránder)
to the east of Thána. He places Thána with Somnáth Konkan and Kambáya
in Gujarát and notices that from Thána the Lár country begins. Al
Idrísi (end of the eleventh century) describes [1386] Thána as a
pretty town upon a great gulf where vessels anchor and from where
they set sail. He gives the distance from Sindábur (or Goa) to Thána
as four days' sail. From the neighbourhood of Thána he says the kana
or bamboo and the tabáshír or bamboo pith are transported to the east
and west. [1387]

[Vála or Valabhi.] Baráda (Porbandar).--Of the Arab attacks on the
great sea-port Vala or Valabhi, twenty miles west of Bhávnagar,
during the eighth and ninth centuries details are given Above pages
94-96. The manner of writing the name of the city attacked leaves it
doubtful whether Balaba that is Valabhi or Baráda near Porbandar is
meant. But the importance of the town destroyed and the agreement in
dates with other accounts leaves little doubt that the reference is
to Valabhi. [1388]

In the fourth year of his reign about A.D. 758 the Khalífah
Jaâfar-al-Mansúr [1389] (A.D. 754-775) the second ruler of the house
of Abbás appointed Hishám governor of Sindh. Hishám despatched a
fleet to the coast of Barádah, which may generally be read Balabha,
under the command of Amru bin Jamál Taghlabi. Tabari (A.D. 838-932)
and Ibni Asír (A.D. 1160-1232) [1390] state that another expedition
was sent to this coast in A.H. 160 (A.D. 776) in which though the
Arabs succeeded in taking the town, disease thinned the ranks of the
party stationed to garrison the port, a thousand of them died, and the
remaining troops while returning to their country were shipwrecked
on the coast of Persia. This he adds deterred Al Mahdi [1391]
(A.D. 775-785) the succeeding Khalífah from extending the eastern
limits of his empire. Besides against Balaba the Sindhi Arabs sent a
fleet against Kandhár apparently, though somewhat doubtfully, [1392]
the town of that name to the north of Broach where they destroyed
a temple or budd and built a mosque. Al Bírúni [1393] (A.D. 1030)
writing of the Valabhi era describes the city of Balabah as nearly
thirty jauzhans (yojanas) that is ninety miles to the south of
Anhilvára. In another passage [1394] he describes how the Bánia
Ránka sued for and obtained the aid of an Arab fleet from the Arab
lord of Mansúrah (built A.D. 750) for the destruction of Balaba. A
land grant by a Valabhi chief remains as late as A.D. 766. For this
reason and as the invaders of that expedition fled panic-struck by
sickness Valabhi seems to have continued as a place of consequence
if the expedition of A.D. 830 against Bala king of the east refers
to the final attack on Valabhi an identification which is supported
by a Jain authority which places the final overthrow of Valabhi at
888 Samvat that is A.D. 830. [1395]

[Kings.] Of the rulers of Gujarát between A.D. 850 and A.D. 1250
the only dynasty which impressed the Arabs was the Balháras of
Málkhet or Mányakheta (A.D. 630-972) sixty miles south-east of
Sholápúr. From about A.D. 736 to about A.D. 978, at first through
a more or less independent local branch and afterwards (A.D. 914)
direct the Ráshtrakútas continued overlords of most of Gujarát. The
Arabs knew the Ráshtrakútas by their title Vallabha or Beloved in
the case of Govind III. (A.D. 803-814), Prithivívallabha, Beloved
by the Earth, and of his successor the long beloved Amoghavarsha
Vallabhaskanda, the Beloved of Siva. Al Masúdi (A.D. 915-944) said:
Bálárái is a name which he who follows takes. So entirely did the
Arabs believe in the overlordship of the Ráshtrakútas in Gujarát
that Al Idrísi (A.D. 1100, but probably quoting Al Jauhari A.D. 950)
describes Nehrwalla as the capital of the Balarás. Until Dr. Bhandárkar
discovered its origin in Vallabha, the ease with which meanings could
be tortured out of the word and in Gujarát its apparent connection
with the Valabhi kings (A.D. 509-770) made the word Balarái a cause
of matchless confusion. [1396]
The merchant Sulaimán (A.D. 851) ranks the Balhára, the lord of Mánkír,
as the fourth of the great rulers of the world. Every prince in
India even in his own land paid him homage. He was the owner of many
elephants and of great wealth. He refrained from wine and paid his
troops and servants regularly. Their favour to Arabs was famous. Abu
Zaid (A.D. 913) says that though the Indian kings acknowledge the
supremacy of no one, yet the Balháras or Ráshtrakútas by virtue of
the title Balhára are kings of kings. Ibni Khurdádbah (A.D. 912)
describes the Balháras as the greatest of Indian kings being as
the name imports the king of kings. Al Masúdi (A.D. 915) described
Balhára as a dynastic name which he who followed took. Though he
introduces two other potentates the king of Jurz and the Baûra or
Parmár king of Kanauj fighting with each other and with the Balhára
he makes the Balhára, the lord of the Mánkír or the great centre,
the greatest king of India [1397] to whom the kings of India bow
in their prayers and whose emissaries they honour. He notices that
the Balhára favours and honours Musalmáns and allows them to have
mosques and assembly mosques. When Al Masúdi was in Cambay the town
was ruled by Bánia, the deputy of the Balhára. Al Istakhri (A.D. 951)
describes the land from Kambáyah to Saimúr (Cheul) as the land of
the Balhára of Mánkír. In the Konkan were many Musalmáns over whom
the Balhára appointed no one but a Musalmán to rule. Ibni Haukal
(A.D. 970) describes the Balhára as holding sway over a land in which
are several Indian kings. [1398] Al Idrísi (A.D. 1100 but quoting
Al Jauhari A.D. 950) agrees with Ibni Khurdádbah that Balhára is a
title meaning King of Kings. He says the title is hereditary in this
country, where when a king ascends the throne he takes the name of
his predecessor and transmits it to his heirs. [1399]

[Condition.] That the Arabs found the Ráshtrakútas kind and liberal
rulers there is ample evidence. In their territories property was
secure, [1400] theft or robbery was unknown, commerce was encouraged,
foreigners were treated with consideration and respect. The Arabs
especially were honoured not only with a marked and delicate regard,
but magistrates from among themselves were appointed to adjudicate
their disputes according to the Musalmán law.

[The Gurjjaras.] The ruler next in importance to the Balhára was the
Jurz that is the Gurjjara king. It is remarkable, though natural,
that the Arabs should preserve the true name of the rulers of
Anhilváda which the three tribe or dynastic names Chápa or Chaura
(A.D. 720-956), Solanki or Cáulukya (A.D. 961-1242), and Vághela
(A.D. 1240-1290) should so long have concealed. Sulaimán (A.D. 851)
notices that the Jurz king hated Musalmáns while the Balhára king loved
Musalmáns. He may not have known what excellent reasons the Gurjjaras
had for hating the Arab raiders from sea and from Sindh. Nor would it
strike him that the main reason why the Balhára fostered the Moslem
was the hope of Arab help in his struggles with the Gurjjaras.

[Jurz.] According to the merchant Sulaimán [1401] (A.D. 851) the
kingdom next after the Balhára's was that of Jurz the Gurjjara king
whose territories "consisted of a tongue of land." The king of Jurz
maintained a large force: his cavalry was the best in India. He was
unfriendly to the Arabs. His territories were very rich and abounded
in horses and camels. In his realms exchanges were carried on in
silver and gold dust of which metals mines were said to be worked.

The king of Jurz was at war with the Balháras as well as with the
neighbouring kingdom of Táfak or the Panjáb. The details given under
Bhínmál page 468 show that Sulaimán's tongue of land, by which he
apparently meant either Káthiávád or Gujarát was an imperfect idea of
the extent of Gurjjara rule. At the beginning of the tenth century
A.D. 916 Sulaimán's editor Abu Zaid describes Kanauj as a large
country forming the empire of Jurz, [1402] a description which the
Gurjjara Vatsarája's success in Bengal about a century before shows
not to be impossible. Ibni Khurdádbah (A.D. 912) ranks the king of
Juzr as fourth in importance among Indian kings. According to him
"the Tátariya dirhams were in use in the Juzr kingdom." Al Masúdi
(A.D. 943) speaks of the Konkan country of the Balhára as on one
side exposed to the attacks of the king of Juzr a monarch rich in
men horses and camels. He speaks of the Juzr kingdom bordering
on Táfán apparently the Panjáb and Táfán as bounded by Rahma
[1403] apparently Burma and Sumátra. Ibni Haukal (A.D. 968-976)
notices that several kingdoms existed, including the domain of the
Siláháras of the north Konkan within the land of the Balhára between
Kambáyah and Saimúr. [1404] Al Bírúni (A.D. 970-1031) uses not Juzr,
but Gujarát. [1405] Beyond that is to the south of Gujarát he places
Konkan and Tána. In Al Bírúni's time Náráyan near Jaipúr, the former
capital of Gujarát, had been taken and the inhabitants removed to a
town on the frontier. [1406] Al Idrísi (end of the eleventh century
really from tenth century materials) ranks the king of Juzr as the
fourth and the king of Sáfán or Táfán as the second in greatness to
the Balhára. [1407] In another passage in a list of titular sovereigns
Al Idrísi enters the names of Sáfir (Táfán) Hazr (Jazr-Juzr) and Dumi
(Rahmi). [1408] By the side of Juzr was Táfak (doubtfully the Panjáb)
a small state producing the whitest and most beautiful women in India;
the king having few soldiers; living at peace with his neighbours and
like the Balháras highly esteeming the Arabs. [1409] Ibni Khurdádbah
(A.D. 912) calls Tában the king next in eminence to the Balhára. [1410]
Al Masúdi (A.D. 943) calls Táfak the ruler of a mountainous country
like Kashmír [1411] with small forces living on friendly terms with
neighbouring sovereigns and well disposed to the Moslims. [1412] Al
Idrísi (end of eleventh century but materials of the tenth century)
notices Sáfán (Táfán) as the principality that ranks next to the
Konkan that is to the Ráshtrakútas.

[Rahma or Ruhmi.] Rahma or Ruhmi, according to the merchant Sulaimán
(A.D. 851) borders the land of the Balháras, the Juzr, and Táfán. The
king who was not much respected was at war with both the Juzr and
the Balhára. He had the most numerous army in India and a following
of 50,000 elephants when he took the field. Sulaimán notices a cotton
fabric made in Rahma, so delicate that a dress of it could pass through
a signet-ring. The medium of exchange was cowries Cypræa moneta shell
money. The country produced gold silver and aloes and the whisk of the
sámara or yák Bos poëphagus the bushy-tailed ox. Ibni Khurdádbah [1413]
(A.D. 912) places Rahmi as the sixth kingdom. He apparently identified
it with Al Rahmi or north Sumátra as he notes that between it and the
other kingdoms communication is kept up by ships. He notices that the
ruler had five thousand elephants and that cotton cloth and aloes
probably the well-known Kumári or Cambodian aloes, were the staple
produce. Al Masúdi (A.D. 943) after stating that former accounts of
Rahma's [1414] elephants, troops and horses were probably exaggerated,
adds that the kingdom of Rahma extends both along the sea and the
continent and that it is bounded by an inland state called Káman
(probably Kámarup that is Assam). He describes the inhabitants as
fair and handsome and notices that both men and women had their ears
pierced. This description of the people still more the extension of
the country both along the sea and along the continent suggests that
Masúdi's Al Rahmi is a combination of Burma which by dropping the B
he has mixed with Al Rahma. Lane identifies Rahmi [1415] with Sumátra
on the authority of an Account of India and China by two Muhammadan
Travellers of the Ninth Century. This identification is supported by
Al Masúdi's [1416] mention of Rámi as one of the islands of the Java
group, the kingdom of the Indian Mihráj. The absence of reference to
Bengal in these accounts agrees with the view that during the ninth
century Bengal was under Tibet.

[Products.] In the middle of the ninth century mines of gold and
silver are said to be worked in Gujarát. [1417] Abu Zaid (A.D. 916)
represents pearls as in great demand. The Tártáriyah, or according
to Al Masúdi the Táhiriyah dínárs of Sindh, fluctuating [1418] in
price from one and a half to three and a fraction of the Baghdád
dínárs, were the current coin in the Gujarát ports. Emeralds also
were imported from Egypt mounted as seals. [1419]

Ibni Khurdádbah [1420] (A.D. 912) mentions teakwood and the bamboo
as products of Sindán that is the Konkan Sanjan. [1421] Al Masúdi
(A.D. 943) notes that at the great fair of Multán the people of
Sindh and Hind offered Kumar that is Cambodian aloe-wood of the purest
quality worth twenty dínárs a man. [1422] Among other articles of trade
he mentions an inferior emerald exported from Cambay and Saimúr to
Makkah, [1423] the lance shafts of Broach, [1424] the shoes of Cambay,
[1425] and the white and handsome maidens of Táfán [1426] who were in
great demand in Arab countries. Ibni Haukal (A.D. 968-976) states that
the country comprising Fámhal, Sindán, Saimúr, and Kambáyah produced
mangoes cocoanuts lemons and rice in abundance. That honey could be
had in great quantities, but no date palms were to be found. [1427]

Al Bírúni (A.D. 1031) notices that its import of horses from Mekran
and the islands of the Persian Gulf was a leading portion of Cambay
trade. [1428] According to Al Idrísi (A.D. 1100) the people of Mámhal
[1429] (Anhilwára) had many horses and camels. [1430] One of the
peculiarities of the Nahrwála country was that all journeys were
made and all merchandise was carried in bullock waggons. Kambáyah
was rich in wheat and rice and its mountains yielded the Indian
kaná or bamboo. At Subára [1431] (Sopára) they fished for pearls
and Bára a small island close to Subára produced the cocoanut and
the costus. Sindán according to Al Idrísi produced the cocoa palm,
the ratan, and the bamboo. Saimúr had many cocoa palms, much henna
(Lawsonia inermis), and a number of aromatic plants. [1432] The hills
of Thána yielded the bamboo and tabáshír [1433] or bamboo pith. From
Saimúr according to Al Kazwíni (A.D. 1236, but from tenth century
materials) came aloes. Rashíd-ud-dín (A.D. 1310) states that in
Kambáyah, Somnáth, Kankan, and Tána the vines yield twice a year and
such is the strength of the soil that cotton-plants grow like willow
or plane trees and yield produce for ten years. He refers to the betel
leaf, to which he and other Arab writers and physicians ascribe strange
virtues as the produce of the whole country of Malabár. The exports
from the Gujarát coasts are said to be sugar (the staple product of
Málwa), bádrúd that is bezoar, and haldi that is turmeric. [1434]

According to Ibni Haukal (A.D. 170) from Kambáya to Saimúr the villages
lay close to one another and much land was under cultivation. [1435]
At the end [1436] of the eleventh century trade was brisk merchandise
from every country finding its way to the ports of Gujarát whose
local products were in turn exported all over the east. [1437]
The Ráshtrakúta dominion was vast, well-peopled, commercial, and
fertile. [1438] The people lived mostly on a vegetable diet, rice
peas beans haricots and lentils being their daily food. [1439] Al
Idrísi speaks of certain Hindus eating animals whose deaths had been
caused by falls or by being gored, [1440] but Al Masúdi states that the
higher classes who wore the "baldric like yellow thread" (the Janoi)
abstained from flesh. According to Ibni Haukal (A.D. 968-970) the
ordinary dress of the kings of Hind was trousers and a tunic. [1441]
He also notices that between Kambáyah and Saimúr the Muslims and
infidels wear the same cool fine muslin dress and let their beards
grow in the same fashion. [1442] During the tenth century on high
days the Balhára wore a crown of gold and a dress of rich stuff. The
attendant women were richly clad, wearing rings of gold and silver
upon their feet and hands and having their hair in curls. [1443]
At the close of the Hindu period (A.D. 1300) Rashíd-ud-dín describes
Gujarát as a flourishing country with no less than 80,000 villages and
hamlets the people happy the soil rich growing in the four seasons
seventy varieties of flowers. Two harvests repaid the husbandman,
the earlier crop refreshed by the dew of the cold season the late
crop enriched by a certain rainfall. [1444]

[Review.] In their intercourse with Western India nothing struck the
Arabs more than the toleration shown to their religion both by chief
and peoples. This was specially marked in the Ráshtrakúta towns where
besides free use of mosques and Jámá mosques Musalmán magistrates or
kázis were appointed to settle disputes among Musalmáns according to
their own laws. [1445] Toleration was not peculiar to the Balháras. Al
Bírúni records [1446] that in the ninth century (A.D. 581), when the
Hindus recovered Sindán (Sanján in Kachh) they spared the assembly
mosque where long after the Faithful congregated on Fridays praying
for their Khalífah without hindrance. In the Balhára country so
strongly did the people believe in the power of Islám or which is
perhaps more likely so courteous were they that they said that our
king enjoys a long life and long reign is solely due to the favour
shown by him to the Musalmáns. So far as the merchant Sulaimán saw
in the ninth century the chief religion in Gujarát was Buddhism. He
notices that the principles of the religion of China were brought from
India and that the Chinese ascribe to the Indians the introduction
of Buddhas into their country. Of religious beliefs metempsychoses
or re-birth and of religious practices widow-burning or satti and
self-torture seem to have struck him most. [1447] As a rule the dead
were burned. [1448] Sulaimán represents the people of Gujarát as steady
abstemious and sober abstaining from wine as well as from vinegar,
'not' he adds 'from religious motives but from their disdain of
it.' Among their sovereigns the desire of conquest was seldom the
cause of war. [1449] Abu Zaid (A.D. 916) describes the Bráhmans as
Hindus devoted to religion and science. Among Bráhmans were poets
who lived at kings' courts, astronomers, philosophers, diviners, and
drawers of omens from the flight of crows. [1450] He adds: So sure
are the people that after death they shall return to life upon the
earth, that when a person grows old "he begs some one of his family
to throw him into the fire or to drown him." [1451] In Abu Zaid's
time (A.D. 916) the Hindus did not seclude their women. Even the
wives of the kings used to mix freely with men and attend courts and
places of public resort unveiled. [1452] According to Ibni Khurdádbah
(A.D. 912) India has forty-two religious sects "part of whom believe
in God and his Prophet (on whom be peace) and part who deny his
mission." [1453] Ibni Khurdádbah (A.D. 912) describes the Hindus as
divided into seven classes. Of these the first are Thákarias [1454]
or Thákurs men of high caste from whom kings are chosen and to whom
men of the other classes render homage, the second are the Baráhmas
[1455] who abstain from wine and fermented liquors; the third are the
Katariya or Kshatrias who drink not more than three cups of wine;
the fourth are the Sudaria or Shudras husbandmen by profession;
the fifth are the Baisura or Vaish artificers and domestics; the
sixth Sandalias or Chandala menials; and the seventh the 'Lahúd,'
whose women adorn themselves and whose men are fond of amusements
and games of skill. Both among the people and the kings of Gujarát
[1456] wine was "unlawful and lawful" that is it was not used though
no religious rule forbade its use. According to Al Masúdi (A.D. 943)
a general opinion prevailed that India was the earliest home of order
and wisdom. The Indians chose as their king the great Bráhma who ruled
them for 366 years. His descendants retain the name of Bráhman and are
honoured as the most illustrious caste. They abstain from the flesh of
animals. [1457] Hindu kings cannot succeed before the age of forty nor
do they appear in public except on certain occasions for the conduct
of state affairs. Royalty and all the high offices of state [1458]
are limited to the descendants of one family. The Hindus strongly
disapprove of the use of wine both in themselves and in others not
from any religious objection but on account of its intoxicating and
reason-clouding qualities. [1459] Al Bírúni (A.D. 970-1031) quoted
by Rashíd-ud-dín (A.D. 1310) states that the people of Gujarát are
idolators and notices the great penance-pilgrimages to Somnáth details
of which have already been given. [1460] Al Idrísi (end of the eleventh
century) closely follows Ibni Khurdádbah's (A.D. 912) division of the
people of India. The chief exception is that he represents [1461]
the second class, the Bráhmans, as wearing the skins of tigers and
going about staff in hand collecting crowds and from morn till eve
proclaiming to their hearers the glory and power of God. He makes
out that the Kastariás or Kshatriyas are able to drink three ratl
(a ratl being one pound troy) of wine and are allowed to marry
Bráhman women. The Sabdaliya or Chandal women, he says, are noted
for beauty. Of the forty-two sects he enumerates worshippers of
trees and adorers of serpents, which they keep in stables and feed
as well as they can, deeming it to be a meritorious work. He says
that the inhabitants of Kambáya are Buddhists (idolators) [1462] and
that the Balhára also worships the idol Buddha. [1463] The Indians,
says Al Idrísi [1464] (end of the eleventh century) are naturally
inclined to justice and in their actions never depart from it. Their
reputation for good faith, honesty, and fidelity to their engagements
brings strangers flocking to their country and aids its prosperity. In
illustration of the peaceable disposition of the Hindus, he quotes
the ancient practice of duhái or conjuring in the name of the king,
a rite which is still in vogue in some native states. When a man has
a rightful claim he draws a circle on the ground and asks his debtor
to step into the circle in the name of the king. The debtor never
fails to step in nor does he ever leave the circle without paying his
debts. Al Idrísi describes the people of Nahrwára as having so high
a respect for oxen that when an ox dies they bury it. "When enfeebled
by age or if unable to work they provide their oxen with food without
exacting any return." [1465]

APPENDIX VI.

WESTERN INDIA AS KNOWN TO THE GREEKS AND ROMANS. [1466]

Hêrodotos and Hekataios, the earliest Greek writers who make mention
of India, give no information in regard to Western India in particular.

[Ktêsias.] Ktêsias (c. 400 B.C.) learnt in Persia that a race of
Pygmies lived in India in the neighbourhood of the silver mines,
which Lassen places near Udaipur (Mewar). From the description of
these Pygmies (Phôtios. Bibl. LXXII. 11-12) it is evident that they
represent the Bhíls. Ktêsias also mentions (Phôtios. Bibl. LXXII. 8)
that there is a place in an uninhabited region fifteen days from
Mount Sardous, where they venerate the sun and moon and where for
thirty-five days in each year the sun remits his heat for the comfort
of his worshippers. This place must apparently have been somewhere
in Mârwâr, and perhaps Mount Âbu is the place referred to.

[Alexander.] Alexander (B.C. 326-25) did not reach Gujarát, and his
companions have nothing to tell of this part of the country. It is
otherwise with

[Megasthenês.] Megasthenês (c. 300 B.C.) who resided with Candragupta
as the ambassador of Seleukos Nikator and wrote an account of
India in four books, of which considerable fragments are preserved,
chiefly by Strabo, Pliny, and Arrian. His general account of the
manners of the Indians relates chiefly to those of northern India,
of whom he had personal knowledge. But he also gave a geographical
description of India, for Arrian informs us (Ind. VII) that he gave
the total number of Indian tribes as 118, and Pliny (VI. 17ff) does
in fact enumerate about 90, to whom may be added some seven or eight
more mentioned by Arrian. It is true that Pliny does not distinctly
state that he takes his geographical details from Megasthenês, and
that he quotes Seneca as having written a book on India. But Seneca
also (Pliny, VI. 17) gave the number of the tribes as 118 in which
he must have followed Megasthenês. Further, Pliny says (ibid.) that
accounts of the military forces of each nation were given by writers
such as Megasthenês and Dionysius who stayed with Indian kings: and
as he does not mention Dionysius in his list of authorities for his
Book VI., it follows that it was from Megasthenês that he drew his
accounts of the forces of the Gangaridæ, Modogalinga, Andaræ, Prasi,
Megallæ, Asmagi, Oratæ, Suarataratæ, Automula, Charmæ, and Pandæ
(VI. 19), names which, as will be shown below, betray a knowledge of
all parts of India. It is a fair inference that the remaining names
mentioned by Pliny were taken by him from Megasthenês, perhaps through
the medium of Seneca's work. The corruption of Pliny's text and the
fact that Megasthenês learnt the tribal names in their Prakrit forms,
make it extremely difficult to identify many of the races referred to.

That part of Pliny's account of India which may with some certainty
be traced back to Megasthenês begins with a statement of the stages
of the royal road from the Hypasis (Biás) to Palibothra (Patna)
(Nat. Hist. VI. 17). The next chapter gives an account of the Ganges
and its tributaries and mentions the Gangaridæ of Kalinga with
their capital Pertalis as the most distant nation on its banks. In
the 19th chapter, after an account of the forces of the Gangaridæ,
Pliny gives a list of thirteen tribes, of which the only ones that can
be said to be satisfactorily identified are Modogalinga (the three
Calingas: Caldwell Drav. Gr.), Molindæ (compare Mount Mâlindya of
Varâha Mihira Br. S. XIV.), and Thalutæ (McCrindle reads Taluctæ and
identifies with the Tâmraliptakas of Tamluk on the lower Ganges). He
next mentions the Andaræ (Andhras of Telingana) with thirty cities
100,000 foot 2000 horse and 1000 elephants. He then digresses to
speak of the Dardæ (Dards of the Upper Indus) as rich in gold and
the Setæ (of Mêwâr, Lassen) in silver, and next introduces the
Prasi (Prâcyas) of Palibothra (Pâtaliputra) as the most famous and
powerful of all the tribes, having 600,000 foot 30,000 horse and 8000
elephants. Inland from these he names the Monædes (Munda of Singbhúm)
and Suari (Savaras of Central India) among whom is Mount Maleus
(Mahendra Male?). Then after some account of the Iomanes (Yamunâ)
running between Methora (Mathurâ) and Chrysobora (McCrindle reads
Carisobora, Arrian Ind. VIII. Kleisobora = Krishnapura?) he turns to
the Indus, of some of whose nineteen tributaries he gives some account
in chapter 20. He then digresses to give an account of the coast of
India, starting from the mouth of the Ganges, whence to Point Calingon
(Point Godâvari) and the city of Dandaguda (Cunningham's Râja Mahendri,
but more probably the Dhanakataka or Dhenukâkata of the Western cave
inscriptions) he reckons 625 miles. The distance thence to Tropina
(Tirupanatara near Kochin according to Burgess) is 1225 miles. Next
at a distance of 750 miles is the cape of Perimula, where is the most
famous mart of India. Further on in the same chapter is mentioned a
city named Automula on the sea shore among the Arabastræ (or Salabastræ
and Oratæ, McCrindle) a noble mart where five rivers together flow
into the sea. There can hardly be a doubt that the two places are
the same, the two names being taken from different authorities,
and that the place meant is Chemula or Cheul (Ptolemy's Simulla)
the five rivers being those that flow into Bombay Harbour northward
of Cheul. The distance from Perimula to the Island of Patala in the
Indus is 620 miles. Pliny next enumerates as hill tribes between the
Indus and Jamna, shut in a ring of mountains and deserts for a space
of 625 miles, the Cæsi (the Kekioi of Arr. Ind. IV. and Kêkayas of
the Purânas, about the head waters of the Sutlej), the Cetriboni of
the woods (... Vana?), the Megallæ (Mêkalas) with 500 elephants and
unknown numbers of horse and foot, the Chrysei (Karûsha) Parasangæ
(Pârasava, corrupted by the likeness of its first three syllables
to the word parasanga, the Asmagi (Asmaka of Varâha Mihira) with
30,000 foot 300 elephants and 800 horse. These are shut in by the
Indus and surrounded by a circle of mountains and deserts for 625
miles. Next come the Dari and Suræ and then deserts again for 187
miles. Whether these are or are not correctly identified with the
Dhars and Saurs of Sindh, they must be placed somewhere to the north
of the Ran. Below them come five kingless tribes living in the hills
along the sea-coast--the Maltecoræ, Singhæ, Marohæ, Rarungæ, and
Moruni--none of whom are satisfactorily identified, but who may be
placed in Kachh. Next follow the Nareæ, enclosed by Mount Capitalia
(Âbu) the highest mountain in India, on the other side of which are
mines of gold and silver. The identification of Capitalia with Âbu is
probable enough, but the name given to the mountain must be connected
with the Kapishthala of the Purânas, who have given their name to
one of the recensions of the Yajur Veda, though Kaithal, their modern
representative, lies far away from Âbu in the Karnâl district of the
Panjâb, and Arrian places his kambistholoi (Ind. IV) about the head
waters of the Hydraôtês (Râvî). After Capitalia and the Nareæ come the
Oratæ with but ten elephants but numerous infantry. These must be the
Aparântakas of the inscriptions and purânas, Megasthenês having learnt
the name in a Prâkrit form (Avarâta, Orâta). The name of the next
tribe, who have no elephants but horse and foot only, is commonly read
Suarataratæ (Nobbe) but the preferable reading is Varetatæ (McCrindle)
which when corrected to Varelatæ represents Varalatta, the sixth
of the seven Konkans in the purânic lists (Wilson As. Res. XV. 47),
which occupied the centre of the Thána district and the country of
the wild tribe of the Varlîs. Next are the Odonbæores, whose name is
connected with the udumbara Ficus glomerata tree, and who are not the
Audumbari Sâlvas of Pânini (IV. i. 173) but must be placed in Southern
Thána. Next come the Arabastræ Oratæ (so read for Arabastræ Thorace
of Nobbe, and Salabastræ Horatæ of McCrindle) or Arabastra division
of the Oratæ or Konkanîs. Arabastra may be connected with the Ârava
of Varâha-Mihira's South-Western Division (Br. S. XIV. 17) where
they are mentioned along with Barbara (the seventh or northernmost
Konkan). This tribe had a fine city in a marsh infested by crocodiles
and also the great mart of Automula (Cheul) at the confluence of five
rivers, and the king had 1600 elephants 150,000 foot and 5000 horse,
and must therefore have held a large part of the Dakhan as well as
of the sea coast. Next to this kingdom is that of the Charmæ, whose
forces are small, and next to them the Pandæ (Pândya of Travancor)
with 300 cities 150,000 foot and 500 elephants. Next follows a list
of thirteen tribes, some of which St. Martin has identified with
modern Râjput tribes about the Indus, because the last name of the
thirteen is Orostræ, "who reach to the island of Patala," and may
be confidently identified with the Saurâshtra of Kâthiâvâda. We must
however assume that Megasthenês after naming the tribes of the west
coast enumerates the inland tribes of the Dakhan until he arrives at
the point from which he started. But the only identification that seems
plausible is that of the Derangæ with the Telingas or Telugus. Next
to the Orostræ follows a list of tribes on the east of the Indus
from south to north--the Mathoæ (compare Mânthava, a Bâhîka town
Pân. IV. ii. 117), Bolingæ (Bhâulingi, a Sâlva tribe Pân. IV. i. 173),
Gallitalutæ (perhaps a corruption of Tâilakhali, another Sâlva tribe,
ib.), Dimuri, Megari, Ardabæ, Mesæ (Matsya of Jaipur?), Abi, Suri,
(v. 1. Abhis Uri), Silæ, and then deserts for 250 miles. Next come
three more tribes and then again deserts, then four or five (according
to the reading) more tribes, and the Asini whose capital is Bucephala
(Jalâlpur) (Cunningham Anc. Geog. 177). Megasthenês then gives two
mountain tribes and ten beyond the Indus including the Orsi (Urasâ)
Taxilæ (Takshasilâ) and Peucolitæ (people of Pushkâlavatî). Of the
work of Dêïmachos, who went on an embassy to Allitrochadês (Bindusâra)
son of Candragupta, nothing is known except that it was in two books
and was reckoned the most untrustworthy of all accounts of India
(Strabo, II. i. 9).

[Ptolemy II.] Ptolemy II. Philadelphos (died 247 B.C.) interested
himself in the trade with India and opened a caravan road from
Koptos on the Nile to Berenikê on the Red Sea (Strabo, XVII. i. 45)
and for centuries the Indian trade resorted either to this port or
to the neighbouring Myos Hormos. He also sent to India (apparently
to Asoka) an envoy named Dionysius, who is said by Pliny (VI. 17)
to have written an account of things Indian of which no certain
fragments appear to remain. But we know from the fragments of
[Agatharkhides.] Agatharkhides (born c. 250 A.D.) who wrote in old age
an account of the Red Sea of which we have considerable extracts in
Diodôros (III. 12-48) and Phôtios (Müller's Geogr. Gr. Min. I. 111ff),
states that in his time the Indian trade with Potana (Patala) was in
the hands of the Sabæans of Yemen. (Müller, I. 191.) In fact it was
not until the voyages of Eudoxos (see below) that any direct trade
sprang up between India and Egypt. The mention of Patala as the mart
resorted to by the Arabs shows that we are still in Pliny's first
period (see below).

[The Baktrian Greeks.] The Baktrian Greeks extended their power into
India after the fall of the Mâurya empire (c. 180 B.C.) their leader
being Dêmêtrios son of Euthydêmos, whose conquests are referred to
by Justin (XLI. 6) and Strabo (XI. ii. 1). But the most extensive
conquests to the east and south were made by Menandros (c. 110
B.C.) who advanced to the Jumna and conquered the whole coast from
Pattalênê (lower Sindh) to the kingdoms of Saraostos (Surâshtra) and
Sigertis (Pliny's Sigerus?) (Strabo, XI. ii. 1). These statements of
Strabo are confirmed by the author of the Periplus (c. 250 A.D.) who
says that in his time drakhmai with Greek inscriptions of Menandros and
Apollodotos were still current at Barygaza (Per. 47). Apollodotos is
now generally thought to have been the successor of Menandros (C. 100
B.C.) (Brit. Museum Cat. of Bactrian Coins page xxxiii.). Plutarch
(Reip. Ger. Princ.) tells us that Menandros' rule was so mild, that on
his death his towns disputed the possession of his ashes and finally
divided them.

[Eudoxos of Cyzicus.] Eudoxos of Cyzicus (c. 117 B.C.) made in company
with others two very successful voyages to India, in the first of which
the company were guided by an Indian who had been shipwrecked on the
Egyptian coast. Strabo (II. iii. 4), in quoting the story of his doings
from Poseidônios, lays more stress upon his attempt to circumnavigate
Africa than upon these two Indian voyages, but they are of very great
importance as the beginnings of the direct trade with India.

[Eratosthenês.] The Geographers down to Ptolemy drew their knowledge
of India almost entirely from the works of Megasthenês and of the
companions of Alexander. Among them Eratosthenês (c. 275-194 B.C.),
the founder of scientific geography, deserves mention as having first
given wide currency to the notion that the width of India from west to
east was greater than its length from north to south, an error which
lies at the root of Ptolemy's distortion of the map. Eratosthenês'
critic Hipparkhos (c. 130 B.C.) on this point followed the more correct
account of Megasthenês, and is otherwise notable as the first to make
use of astronomy for the determination of the geographical position
of places.

[Strabo.] Strabo (c. 63 B.C.-23 A.D.) drew his knowledge of India,
like his predecessors, chiefly from Megasthenês and from Alexander's
followers, but adds (XV. i. 72) on the authority of Nikolaos of
Damascus (tutor to the children of Antony and Cleopatra, and envoy of
Herod) (an account of three Indian envoys from a certain king Pôros to
Augustus (ob. A.D. 14), who brought presents consisting of an armless
man, snakes, a huge turtle and a large partridge, with a letter in
Greek written on parchment offering free passage and traffic through
his dominions to the emperor's subjects. With these envoys came a
certain Zarmanokhêgas (Sramanâcârya, Lassen) from Bargosê (Broach, the
earliest mention of the name) who afterwards burnt himself at Athens,
"according to the ancestral custom of the Indians." The fact that
the embassy came from Broach and passed through Antioch shows that
they took the route by the Persian Gulf, which long remained one of
the chief lines of trade (Per. chap. 36). If the embassy was not a
purely commercial speculation on the part of merchants of Broach, it
is hard to see how king Pôros, who had 600 under-kings, can be other
than the Indo-Skythian Kozolakadaphes, who held Pôros' old kingdom
as well as much other territory in North-West India. This if correct
would show that as early as the beginning of our era the Indo-Skythian
power reached as far south as Broach. The fact that the embassy took
the Persian Gulf route and that their object was to open commercial
relations with the Roman empire seems to show that at this period
there was no direct trade between Broach and the Egyptian ports of the
Red Sea. Strabo however mentions that in his time Arabian and Indian
wares were carried on camels from Myos Hormos (near Râs Abu Somer)
on the Red Sea to Koptos on the Nile (XVII. i. 45 and XVI. iv. 24)
and dilates upon the increase of the Indian trade since the days of the
Ptolemies when not so many as twenty ships dared pass through the Red
Sea "to peer out of the Straits," whereas in his time whole fleets of
as many as 120 vessels voyaged to India and the headlands of Ethiopia
from Myos Hormos (II. v. 12 and XV. i. 13). It would seem that we have
here to do with Pliny's second period of Indian trade, when Sigerus
(probably Janjira) was the goal of the Egyptian shipmasters (see
below). Strabo learnt these particulars during his stay in Egypt with
Aelius Gallus, but they were unknown to his contemporary Diodôros who
drew his account of India entirely from Megasthenês (Diod. II. 31-42)
and had no knowledge of the East beyond the stories told by Jamboulos
a person of uncertain date of an island in the Indian Archipelago
(Bali, according to Lassen) (Diod. II. 57-60). Pomponius Mela (A.D. 43)
also had no recent information as regards India.

[Pliny.] Pliny (A.D. 23-79) who published his Natural History in
A.D. 77 gives a fairly full account of India, chiefly drawn from
Megasthenês (see above). He also gives two valuable pieces of
contemporary information:

(i) An account of Ceylon (Taprobanê) to which a freedman of Annius
Plocamus, farmer of the Red Sea tribute, was carried by stress of
weather in the reign of Claudius (A.D. 41-54). On his return the king
sent to the emperor four envoys, headed by one Rachias (VI. 22).

(ii) An account of the voyage from Alexandria to India by a course
which had only lately been made known (VI. 23). Pliny divides the
history of navigation from the time of Nearchus to his own age into
three periods:

(a) the period of sailing from Syagrus (Râs Fartak) in Arabia to Patalê
(Indus delta) by the south-west wind called Hippalus, 1332 miles;

(b) the period of sailing from Syagrus (Râs Fartak) to Sigerus
(Ptol. Milizêgyris, Peripl. Melizeigara, probably Janjíra, and perhaps
the same as Strabo's Sigertis);

(c) the modern period, when traffic went on from Alexandria to Koptos
up the Nile, and thence by camels across the desert to Berenice
(in Foul Bay), 257 miles. Thence the merchants start in the middle of
summer before the rising of the dogstar and in thirty days reach Okelis
(Ghalla) or Cane (Hisn Ghorab), the former port being most frequented
by the Indian trade. From Okelis it is a forty days' voyage to Muziris
(Muyyiri, Kranganur) which is dangerous on account of the neighbouring
pirates of Nitrias (Mangalor) and inconvenient by reason of the
distance of the roads from the shore. Another better port is Becare
(Kallada, Yule) belonging to the tribe Neacyndon (Ptol. Melkynda,
Peripl. Nelkynda) of the kingdom of Pandion (Pândya) whose capital
is Modura (Madura). Here pepper is brought in canoes from Cottonara
(Kadattanâdu). The ships return to the Red Sea in December or January.

It is clear that the modern improvement in navigation on which Pliny
lays so much stress consisted, not in making use of the monsoon wind,
but in striking straight across the Indian ocean to the Malabar
coast. The fact that the ships which took this course carried a
guard of archers in Pliny's time, but not in that of the Periplus,
is another indication that the direct route to Malabar was new and
unfamiliar in the first century A.D. The name Hippalus given to the
monsoon wind will be discussed below in dealing with the Periplus.

[Dionysios Periégétés.] Dionysios Periégétés who has lately been
proved to have written under Hadrian (A.D. 117-138) (Christ's
Griech. Litteratur Gesch., page 507) gives a very superficial
description of India but has a valuable notice of the Southern
Skythians who live along the river Indus to the east of the Gedrôsoi
(I. 1087-88).

[Klaudios Ptolemaios.] Klaudios Ptolemaios of Alexandria lived
according to Suidas under Marcus Aurelius Antoninus (A.D. 161-180). He
compiled his account of India as part of a geographical description
of the then known world, and drew much of his materials from
Marinos of Tyre, whose work is lost, but who must have written about
A.D. 130. Ptolemy (or Marinos before him) had a very wide knowledge
of India, drawn partly from the relations of shipmasters and traders
and partly from Indian lists similar to those of the Purânas but drawn
up in Prâkrit. He seems to have made little if any use of Megasthenês
and the companions of Alexander. But his map of India is distorted by
the erroneous idea, which he took from Eratosthenês, that the width
of India from west to east greatly exceeded its length from north to
south. Ptolemy begins his description of India with the first chapter
of his seventh book, which deals with India within the Ganges. He
gives first the names of rivers, countries, towns, and capes along
the whole coast of India from the westernmost mouth of the Indus to
the easternmost mouth of the Ganges. He next mentions in detail the
mountains and the rivers with their tributaries, and then proceeds to
enumerate the various nations of India and the cities belonging to
each, beginning with the north-west and working southwards: and he
finally gives a list of the islands lying off the coast. In dealing
with his account of western India it will be convenient to notice
together the cities of each nation which he mentions separately under
the heads of coast and inland towns.

He gives the name of Indo-Skythia to the whole country on both sides of
the lower course of the Indus from its junction with the Koa (Kábul
river), and gives its three divisions as Patalênê (lower Sindh)
Abiria (read Sabiria, that is Sauvîra or upper Sindh and Multân)
and Surastrênê (Surâshtra or Kâthiâvâda). We have seen that Dionysios
knew the southern Skythians of the Indus, and we shall meet with them
again in the Periplus (chapter 38ff).

He enumerates seven mouths of the Indus, but the river is so constantly
changing its course that it is hopeless to expect to identify all the
names given by him (Sagapa, Sinthôn, Khariphron, Sapara, Sabalaessa,
and Lônibare) with the existing channels. Only it may be noted that
Sinthôn preserves the Indian name of the river (Sindhu) and that the
easternmost mouth (Lônibare) probably represents both the present
Korî or Launî and the Lûnî river of Mârwâr, a fact which goes some
way to explain why Ptolemy had no idea of the existence of Kachh,
though he knows the Ran as the gulf of Kanthi. Hence he misplaces
Surastrênê (Surâshtra or Kâthiâvâda) in the Indus delta instead of
south of the Ran. Ptolemy enumerates a group of five towns in the
north-western part of Indo-Skythia (Kohat, Bannu, and Dera Ismail
Khân) of which Cunningham (Anc. Geog. pages 84ff) has identified
Banagara with Bannu, and Andrapana with Daraban, while the sites of
Artoarta, Sabana, and Kodrana are unknown. Ptolemy next gives a list
of twelve towns along the western bank of the Indus to the sea. Of
these Embolima has been identified by Cunningham (Anc. Geog. page
52) with Amb sixty miles above Attok, and Pasipêda is identified by
St. Martin with the Besmaid of the Arab geographers and placed near
Mithankot at the junction of the Chenab with the Indus. Sousikana,
which comes next in the list to Pasipêda, is generally thought to be
a corruption of Mousikanos, and is placed by the latest authority
(General Haig, The Indus Delta Country, page 130) in Bahâwalpur,
though Cunningham (Anc. Geog. page 257) puts it at Alor, which is
somewhat more in accordance with Ptolemy's distances. Kôlaka the
most southerly town of the list, cannot well be the Krôkala of Arrian
(Karâchi) as McCrindle supposes, for Ptolemy puts it nearly a degree
north of the western mouth of the Indus.

The two great towns of the delta which Ptolemy next mentions,
are placed by General Haig, Patala at a point thirty-five miles
south-east of Haidarâbâd (op. cit. page 19) and Barbarei near Shâh
Bandar (op. cit. page 31). Barbarei is mentioned again in the Periplus
(chapter 38) under the name of Barbarikon. Ptolemy gives the names of
nine towns on the left bank of the Indus from the confluence to the
sea, but very few of them can be satisfactorily identified. Panasa
can only be Osanpur (St. Martin) on Fluellen's principles. Boudaia
must represent the Budhîya of the Arabs, though it is on the wrong
side of the river (see Haig, op. cit. page 57ff). Naagramma may with
Yule be placed at Naushahro. Kamigara cannot be Aror (McCrindle),
if that place represents Sousikana. Binagara is commonly thought to
be a corrupt reading of Minnagara (compare Periplus chapter 38). Haig
(op. cit. page 32 note 47) refers to the Tuhfatu'l Kirâm as mentioning
a Minnagar in pargana Shâhdâdpur (north-east of Haidarâbâd). Parabali,
Sydros, and Epitausa have not been identified, but must be looked
for either in Haidarâbâd or in Thar and Pârkar. Xoana may with Yule
be identified with Siwana in the bend of the Lûnî and gives another
indication that Ptolemy confounded the Lûnî with the eastern mouth
of the Indus.

On the coast of Surastrênê (Kâthiâvâda) Ptolemy mentions, first, the
island of Barakê (Dvârakâ Bêt): then the city Bardaxêma which must
be Porbandar (Yule), in front of the Barada hills: then the village
of Surastra, which perhaps represents Verâval, though it is placed
too far north. Surastra cannot well be Junâgad (Lassen) which is not
on the coast and in Ptolemy's time was not a village, but a city,
though it is certainly strange that Ptolemy does not anywhere mention
it. Further south Ptolemy places the mart of Monoglôsson (Mangrol). The
eastern boundary of the coast of Indo-Skythia seems to have been the
mouth of the Môphis (Mahî). Ptolemy's account of Indo-Skythia may be
completed by mentioning the list of places, which he puts to the east
of the Indus (i. e. the Lûnî) and at some distance from it.

These are: Xodrakê, which has not been identified, but which must be
placed somewhere in Mewâr, perhaps at the old city of Pûr, seventy-two
miles north-east of Udaipur, or possibly at the old city of Ahar,
two miles from Udaipur itself (Tod's Râjasthân, I. 677-78).

Sarbana, which is marked in Ptolemy's map at the head-waters of the
Mahî in the Apokopa mountains (Aravallis), must be identified with
Sarwan about ten miles north-west of Ratlâm. There is also a place
called Sarwanio close to Nimach, which Ptolemy may have confused
with Sarwan.

Auxoamis, which St. Martin identifies with Sûmî, and Yule with Ajmir,
but neither place suits the distance and direction from Sarwan. If
Ptolemy, as above suggested, confused Sarwan and Sarwanio, Auxoamis
may be Ahar near Udaipur, Pûr being then Xodrakê: otherwise Auxoamis
may be Ídar. The question can only be settled by more exact knowledge
of the age of Ahar and of Ídar. Orbadarou may provisionally with Yule
be placed at Âbu.

Asinda must be looked for near Sidhpur, though it cannot with
St. Martin be identified with that place. Perhaps Vadnagar (formerly
Ânandapura and a very old town) may be its modern representative.

Theophila may be Devaliya (Yule) or Thân (Burgess) in north-east
Kâthiâvâda.

Astakapra is admitted to be Hastakavapra or Hâthab near Bhâvnagar
(Bühler).

Larikê is described by Ptolemy next after Indo-Skythia on his
way down the West Coast. The northern limit of its coast was the
mouth of the river Môphis (Mahî). Its name is the Lâta of purânas
and inscriptions. Ptolemy mentions as on its coast the village of
Pakidarê, which may be a misreading for Kâpidarê and represent Kâvî
(Kâpikâ of inscriptions) a holy place just south of the Mahî. Next
comes Cape Maleô, which Ptolemy both in his text and in his map
includes in Larikê, though there is no prominent headland in a suitable
position on the east side of the Gulf of Cambay. As he puts it 2 1/4
degrees west of Broach, it may probably be identified with Gopnâth
Point in Kâthiâvâda on the other side of the gulf (the Pâpikê of
the Periplus), his name for it surviving in the neighbouring shoals
known as the Malai banks. It is in agreement with this that Ptolemy
puts the mouth of the river Namados (Narmadâ) to the north of Cape
Maleô. South of the river is Kamanê which may be identified with the
Kamanijja or Karmanêya of inscriptions, that is with Kamlej on the
Taptî above Surat. It has been supposed to be the Kammôni of the
Periplus (chapter 43), which was the village opposite to the reef
called Hêrônê on the right (east) of the gulf of Barygaza: but it is
perhaps best to separate the two and to identify Kammôni with Kim,
north of Olpâd. The next town mentioned is Nousaripa, which should
probably be read Nousarika, being the Navasârikâ of inscriptions and
the modern Nausârî. The most southerly town of Larikê is Poulipoula,
which has been identified with Phulpâdâ or old Surat, but is too far
south. Bilimora is perhaps the most likely position for it, though the
names do not correspond (unless Pouli is the Dravidian Puli or poli =
a tiger, afterwards replaced by Bili = a cat). Ptolemy begins his list
of the inland cities of Larikê with Agrinagara, which may with Yule
be identified with Âgar, thirty-five miles north-east of Ujjain, and
the Âkara of inscriptions. The next town is Siripalla, which has not
been identified, but should be looked for about thirty miles to the
south-east of Agar, not far from Shâhjahânpur. The modern name would
probably be Shirol. Bammogoura must be identified, not with Pawangad
(Yule), but with Hiuen Tsiang's "city of the Brâhmans" (Beal, Si-yu-ki,
II. 262), 200 li (about 33 miles) to the north-west of the capital
of Mâlava in his time. The distance and direction bring us nearly to
Jaora. Sazantion and Zerogerei have not been satisfactorily identified
but may provisionally be placed at Ratlâm and Badnawar respectively, or
Zêrogerei may be Dhâr as Yule suggested. Ozênê the capital of Tiastanês
is Ujjain the capital of the Kshatrapa Cashtana who reigned c. 130
A.D. His kingdom included Western Mâlwâ, West Khándesh, and the whole
of Gujarát south of the Mahî. His grandson Rudradâman (A.D. 150) tells
us in his Girnâr inscription (I. A. VII. 259) that his own kingdom
included also Mârwâr Sindh and the lower Panjâb. Next to Ujjain Ptolemy
mentions Minnagara, which must have been somewhere near Mânpur. Then
we come to Tiatoura or Chândor (Yule) on the ridge which separates
Khándesh from the valley of the Godâvari, and finally on that river
itself Nasika the modern Nâsik. It is very doubtful whether Nâsik
at any time formed part of the dominions of Cashtana, since we know
from the inscriptions in the Nâsik caves that the Kshatrapas were
driven out of that part of the country by Gautamîputra Sâtakarni,
the father of Ptolemy's contemporary Pulumâyi. Ptolemy probably found
Nâsik mentioned in one of his lists as on a road leading from Ujjain
southwards and he concluded that they belonged to the same kingdom.

Ariakê of the Sadinoi included the coast of the Konkan as far south
as Baltipatna (near Mahâd) and the Deccan between the Godâvari and
the Krishna. The name occurs in Varâha Mihira's Brihat Samhitâ XIV. in
the form Âryaka. The tribal name Sadinoi is less easy to explain. The
suggested connection with the word Sâdhana as meaning an agent (Lassen)
and its application to the Kshatrapas of Gujarát, are not tenable. The
only authority for this meaning of Sâdhana is Wilson's Sanskrit
Dictionary, and at this time it is certain that Ariakê belonged,
not to the Kshatrapas of Gujarát, but to the Sâtakarnis of Paithan on
the Godâvari. Bhândârkar's identification of the Sadinoi with Varâha
Mihira's Sântikas seems also somewhat unsatisfactory. Ptolemy's name
may possibly be a corruption of Sâtakarni or Sâtavâhana. The coast
towns of this region were Soupara (Supârâ near Bassein), south of
which Ptolemy places the river Goaris (Vaitaranî), Dounga (perhaps
Dugád ten miles north of Bhiwndi) south of which is the Bênda river
(Bhiwndî Creek), Simylla, a mart and a cape, the Automula and Perimula
of Pliny and the modern Cheul (Chemula); Milizêgyris an island, the
same as the Melizêigara of the Periplus and (probably) as the Sigerus
of Pliny and the modern Janjîra; Hippokoura, either Ghodegâon or Kudâ
(Yule) in Kolâbâ district; Baltipatna, probably the Palaipatmai of
the Periplus and the same as Pâl near Mahâd.

The inland dominions of the Sadinoi were much more extensive than
their coast line. Ptolemy gives two lists of cities, one of those
lying to the west (i. e. north) of the Bênda, whose course in the
Deccan represents the Bhîmâ river, and the other of those between the
Bênda and the Pseudostomos (here the Mâlprabhâ and Krishna or possibly
the Tungabhadra with its tributaries). The most easterly towns in the
first list, Malippala and Sarisabis, are not satisfactorily identified,
but must be looked for in the Nizâm's country to the south-east of
Haidarâbâd. Next comes Tagara mentioned in the Periplus (chapter
51) as ten days east from Paithan, and therefore about the latitude
of Kulbarga, with which it is identified by Yule. The distance and
direction make its identification with Deogir (Wilford and others),
Junnar (Bhagwanlâl), or Kolhâpur (Fleet) impossible. The best
suggestion hitherto made is that it is Dârur or Dhârur (Bhândârkar),
but Dârur in the Bhîr district is too far north, so Dhârur fifty
miles west of Haidarâbâd must be taken as the most likely site. Next
to Tagara Ptolemy mentions Baithana, which is the Paithana of the
Periplus and the modern Paithan on the Godâvari. It is called by
our author the capital of Siroptolemaios, who is the Srî-Pulumâyi
of the Nâsik cave inscriptions. Next to Baithana comes Deopali,
which may safely be identified with the modern Deoli in the suburbs
of Ahmadnagar. Gamaliba, the next stage, must be placed somewhere on
the line between Ahmednagar and Junnar, which latter ancient town is
to be identified with Ptolemy's Omênogara, although this name is not
easy to explain.

The second list of towns in Ariakê begins with Nagarouris (Nagarapurî)
which probably represents Poona which even then must have been a
place of importance, being at the head of the great road down the
Bhorghat. Tabasô (compare Varâha Mihira's Tâpasâsrâmâh and Ptolemy's
own Tabasoi) may be the holy city of Pandharpur. Indê has retained
its ancient name (Indî in the north of the Bîjâpur district). Next
follows Tiripangalida (Tîkota in the Kurundwâd State ?) and then
Hippokoura, the capital of Baleokuros. Dr. Bhândârkar has identified
this king with the Vilivâyakûra of coins found in the Kolhápur
state. His capital may possibly be Hippargi in the Sindgi taluka of
the Bîjâpur district. Soubouttou, the next town on Ptolemy's list,
is not identifiable, but the name which follows, Sirimalaga, must be
Sirnâl in the Bîjâpur taluka of the same district.

Kalligeris may be identified not with Kanhagiri (McCrindle) but with
Galgali at the crossing of the Krishna, and Modogoulla is not Mûdgal
(McCrindle) but Mudhol on the Ghâtprabhâ. Petirgala should probably
read Penengala, and would then represent the old town of Panangala
or Hongal in the Dhârvâd district. The last name on the list is
Banaouasei, which is Vanavâsî, about ten miles from Sirsi in Kanara,
a very old town where a separate branch of the Sâtakarnis once ruled.

The Pirate Coast is the next division of Western India described by
Ptolemy, who mentions five sea-ports but only two inland cities. It is
clear that the pirates were hemmed in on the land side by the dominions
of the Sâtakarnis, and that they held but little territory above the
ghâts, though their capital Mousopallê was in that region. The places
on the coast from north to south were Mandagara, the Mandagara of
the Periplus (chapter 53) which has been satisfactorily identified
with Mandangad to the south of the Bânkot creek.

Byzantion, which, as Dr. Bhândârkar first pointed out, is the
Vaijayantî of inscriptions may be placed either at Chiplun or at
Dábhol at the mouth of the Vâsishthî river. Chiplun is the only
town of great antiquity in this part of the Konkan, and if it is not
Vaijayantî Ptolemy has passed over it altogether. The similarity of
the names has suggested the identification of Byzantion with Jaygad
(Bhândârkar) or Vijayadrug (Vincent), but both these places are
comparatively modern. There are indeed no very ancient towns in the
Konkan between Sangamêshvar and the Sâvantvâdi border.

Khersonêsos is generally admitted to be the peninsula of Goa.

Armagara is placed a little to the north of the river Nanagouna and
may be represented by Cape Ramas in Portuguese territory.

The river Nanagouna here is generally supposed to be the Kâlînadî,
though in its upper course it seems to represent the Taptî, and a
confusion with the Nânâ pass led Ptolemy to bring it into connection
with the rivers Goaris and Bênda (Campbell).

Nitra, the southernmost mart on the pirate coast, is the Nitrias of
Pliny, and has been satisfactorily identified by Yule with Mangalor
on the Nêtravatî.

The inland cities of the Pirates are Olokhoira and Mousopallê the
capital, both of which must be sought for in the rugged country about
the sources of the Krishna and may provisionally be identified with the
ancient towns of Karâd and Karvîr (Kolhápur) respectively. To complete
Ptolemy's account of this coast it is only necessary to mention the
islands of Heptanêsia (Burnt Islands ?) Trikadiba and Peperinê. We
are not here concerned with his account of the rest of India.

[Bardesanês.] Bardesanês met at Babylon certain envoys sent from
India to the emperor Antoninus Pius (A.D. 154-181) and received from
Damadamis and Sandanês, who were of their number, accounts of the
customs of the Brâhmans and of a rock temple containing a statue of
Siva in the Ardhanârî form. Lassen (III. 62 and 348) connects Sandanês
with the Sadinoi and places the temple in Western India, but neither of
these conclusions is necessary. The object of the embassy is unknown.

[Periplus.] The Periplus of the Erythrean Sea, formerly though wrongly
attributed to Arrian (150 A.D.), is an account of the Egyptian trade
with East Africa and India, written by a merchant of Alexandria for
the use of his fellows. It is preserved in a single manuscript which
in some places is very corrupt. The age of this work has been much
disputed: the chief views as to this matter are,

(i) that the Periplus was written before Pliny and made
use of by him (Vincent, Schwanbeck, and Glaser). The
arguments of Vincent and Schwanbeck are refuted by Müller
(Geogr. Gr. Min. I. xcviii.) Glaser's case is (Ausland 1891,
page 45) that the Malikhas of the Periplus is Malchos III. of
Nabathæa (A.D. 49-71), that the Periplus knows Meroê as capital
of Ethiopia, while at the time of Nero's expedition to East
Africa (A.D. 68), it had almost vanished, and lastly that the
author of the Periplus is Basilis or Basilês, whom Pliny names
as an authority for his Book VI. It may be replied that Malikhas
is the title Malik and may have been applied to any Arab Sheikh
(Reinaud): that the Periplus does not with certainty mention
Meroê at all: and that Basilis whether or not a contemporary of
Ptolemy Philadelphos was at any rate earlier than Agatharkhidês
(c. 200 B.C.), who quotes him (Geog. Gr. Min. I. 156);
(ii) that the Periplus was written at the same time as Pliny's
work, but neither used the other (Salmasius). This view is
refuted by Müller (op. cit. page 155);
(iii) that the Periplus was written after 161 A.D. (Dodwell);
Müller has shown (ibid.) that Dodwell's arguments are
inconclusive;
(iv) the received view that the Periplus was written between
A.D. 80 and A.D. 89 (Müller);
(v) that the Periplus was written about the middle of the third
century (Reinaud Mém. de l'Ac. des Inscr. XXIV. Pt. ii.
translated in I. A. VIII. pages 330ff).

The only choice lies between the view of Müller and that of
Reinaud. Müller argues for a date between A.D. 80 and A.D. 89, because
the Periplus knows no more than Pliny of India beyond the Ganges,
whereas Ptolemy's knowledge is much greater: because the Periplus calls
Ceylon Palaisimoundou, which is to Ptolemy (VII. iv. 1) an old name:
because the Nabathæan kingdom, which was destroyed A.D. 105, was still
in existence at the time of the Periplus: because the Periplus account
of Hippalos shows it to be later than Pliny: and because the Periplus
mentions king Zôskalês, who must be the Za Hakalê of the Abyssinian
lists who reigned A.D. 77-89. It may be replied that the Periplus is
not a geography of Eastern Asia, but a guide book for traders with
certain ports only: that Ptolemy must have found in his lists three
names for Ceylon, Taprobanê, Palaisimoundou, and Salikê, and that
he has wrongly separated Palai from Simoundou, taking it to mean
"formerly" and therefore entered Simoundou as the old and Salikê as
the modern name, [1467] whereas all three names were in use together:
that the Nabathæan king Malikhas was simply the Sheikh of the tribe
(Reinaud), and points to no definite date: that the Periplus' account
of Hippalos is certainly later than Pliny: and that the Zôskalês of
the Periplus is the Za Sâgal or Za Asgal of the Abyssinian lists,
who reigned A.D. 246-47 (Reinaud).

It follows that Reinaud's date for the Periplus (A.D. 250) is the only
one consistent with the facts and especially with the Indian facts. As
will appear below, the growth of the Hippalos legend since Pliny's
time, the rival Parthians in Sindh, the mention of Mambaros and the
supplanting of Ozênê by Minnagara as his capital since Ptolemy's time,
the independence of Baktria, and the notices of Saraganês and Sandanês,
are all points strongly in favour of Reinaud's date.

In the time of the Periplus the ships carrying on the Indian trade
started from Myos Hormos (near Ras Abu Somer) or Berenikê (in Foul Bay)
and sailed down the Red Sea to Mouza (Musa twenty-five miles north
of Mokhâ), and thence to the watering place Okêlis (Ghalla) at the
Straits. They then followed the Arabian coast as far as Kanê (Hisn
Ghurâb in Hadramaut) passing on the way Eudaimôn Arabia (Aden) once
a great mart for Indian traders, but lately destroyed by king Elisar
(Müller's conjecture for KAISAR of the MS.) From Kanê the routes to
India diverge, some ships sailing to the Indus and on to Barygaza,
and others direct to the ports of Limyrikê (Malabár Coast). There
was also another route to Limyrikê, starting from Arômata (Cape
Guardafui). In all three voyages the ships made use of the monsoon,
starting from Egypt in July. The monsoon was called Hippalos, according
to the Periplus (chapter 57), after the navigator who first discovered
the direct course across the sea, and it has been inferred from Pliny's
words (VI. 23) that this pilot lived in the middle of the first century
A.D. But Pliny's own account shows that, as we should expect, the
progress from a coasting to a direct voyage was a gradual one, with
several intermediate stages, in all of which the monsoon was more or
less made use of. There was therefore no reason for naming the wind
from the pilot who merely made the last step. Further though Pliny
knows Hippalus as the local name of the monsoon wind in the eastern
seas, he says nothing of its having been the name of the inventor of
the direct course. The inference seems to be that Hippalos the pilot
is the child of a seaman's yarn arising out of the local name of the
monsoon wind, and that his presence in the Periplus and not in Pliny
shows that the former writer is much later than the latter.

The merchant bound for Skythia (Sindh) before he reaches land, which
lies low to the northward, meets the white water from the river Sinthos
(Indus) and water snakes (chapter 38). The river has seven mouths,
small and marshy all but the middle one, on which is the port of
Barbarikon (Shâhbandar, Haig, page 31) whence the merchants' wares
are carried up by river to the capital Minnagar (near Shâhdâdpur,
Haig, page 32), which is ruled by Parthians who constantly expel
one another (chapter 39). These contending Parthians must have been
the remnant of the Karên Pahlavs who joined with the Kushâns to
attack Ardeshir Pâpakân (Journ. As. [1866] VII. 134). The imports
are clothing, flowered cottons, topazes, coral, storax, frankincense,
glass vessels, silver plate, specie, and wine: and the exports costus
(spice), bdellium (gum), yellow dye, spikenard, emeralds, sapphires,
furs from Tibet, cottons, silk thread, and indigo. The list of
imports shows that the people of Skythia were a civilised race and
by no means wild nomads.

The Periplus next (chapter 40) gives an accurate account of the Ran
(Eirinon) which in those days was probably below sea level (Haig, page
22, Burnes' Travels into Bokhara, III. 309ff), and was already divided
into the Great and the Little. Both were marshy shallows even out of
sight of land and therefore dangerous to navigators. The Ran was then
as now bounded to south and west by seven islands, and the headland
Barakê (Dvârakâ) a place of special danger of whose neighbourhood
ships were warned by meeting with great black water-snakes.

The next chapter (41) describes the gulf of Barygaza (gulf of Cambay)
and the adjoining land, but the passage has been much mangled
by the copyist of our only MS. and more still by the guesses of
editors. According to the simplest correction (hêrostês' Ariakêschôra)
our author says that next after Barakê (Dvârakâ) follows the gulf
of Barygaza and the country towards Ariakê, being the beginning of
the kingdom of Mambaros and of all India. Mambaros may possibly be a
corruption of Makhatrapos or some similar Greek form of Mahâkshatrapa,
the title of the so-called "Sâh Kings" who ruled here at this period
(A.D. 250). According to the reading of the MS. the author goes on
to say that "the inland part of this country bordering on the Ibêria
(read Sabiria = Sauvîra) district of Skythia is called ... (the
name, perhaps Maru, has dropped out of the text), and the sea-coast
Syrastrênê (Surâshtra)." The country abounded then as now in cattle,
corn, rice, cotton and coarse cotton cloth, and the people were tall
and dark. The capital of the country was Minnagara whence much cotton
was brought down to Barygaza. This Minnagara is perhaps the city
of that name placed by Ptolemy near Mânpur in the Vindhyas, but it
has with more probability been identified with Junâgad (Bhagvânlâl)
which was once called Manipura (Kath. Gaz. 487). Our author states
that in this part of the country were to be found old temples, ruined
camps and large wells, relics (he says) of Alexander's march, but
more probably the work of Menandros and Apollodotos. This statement
certainly points to Kâthiâvâda rather than to Mânpur. The voyage
along this coast from Barbarikon to the headland of Pâpikê (Gopnâth)
near Astakapra (Hâthab) and opposite to Barygaza (Broach) was one of
3000 stadia = 300 miles, which is roughly correct. The next chapter
(42) describes the northern part of the gulf of Cambay as 300 stadia
wide and running northward to the river Maïs (Mahî). Ships bound
for Barygaza steer first northward past the island Baiônes (Peram)
and then eastward towards the mouth of the Namnadios (Narmadâ) the
river of Broach. The navigation (chapter 43) is difficult by reason
of rocks and shoals such as Hêrônê (perhaps named from some wreck)
opposite the village of Kammôni (Kim) on the eastern shore and by
reason of the current on the western near Pâpikê (perhaps a sailor's
name meaning Unlucky). Hence the government sends out fishermen in long
boats called Trappaga or Kotumba (Kotia) to meet the ships (chapter 44)
and pilot them into Barygaza, 300 stadia up the river, by towing and
taking advantage of the tides. In this connection our author gives
a graphic description of the Bore in the Narbadâ (chapter 45) and of
the dangers to which strange ships are exposed thereby (chapter 46).

Inland from Barygaza (that is, from the whole kingdom, which, as
we have seen, bordered on Sauvîra or Multân) lay (chapter 47) the
Aratrioi (Arattas of the Mahâbhârata and Purânas, who lived in the
Panjâb), the Arakhôsioi (people of eastern Afghanistan), Gandaraioi
(Gandhâra of N.-W. Panjâb), Proklais (near Peshâwar), and beyond
them the Baktrianoi (of Balkh) a most warlike race, governed by their
own independent sovereigns. These last are probably the Kushâns who,
when the Parthian empire fell to pieces in the second quarter of the
third century, joined the Karên Pahlavs in attacking Ardeshir. It was
from these parts, says our author, that Alexander marched into India
as far as the Ganges--an interesting glimpse of the growth of the
Alexander legend since the days of Arrian (A.D. 150). Our author found
old drakhmai of Menandros and Apollodotos still current in Barygaza.

Eastward in the same kingdom (chapter 48) is the city of Ozênê;
which was formerly the capital, whence onyxes, porcelain, muslins,
and cottons are brought to Barygaza. From the country beyond Proklais
came costus, bdellium, and spikenard of three kinds, the Kattybourine,
the Patropapigic, and the Kabalitic (this last from Kábul).

We learn incidentally that besides the regular Egyptian trade
Barygaza had commercial relations with Mouza in Arabia (chapter 21)
with the East African coast (chapter 14) and with Apologos (Obollah)
at the head of the Persian Gulf and with Omana on its eastern shore
(chapter 36). The imports of Barygaza were wine, bronze, tin and lead,
coral and gold stone (topaz ?), cloth of all sorts, variegated sashes
(like the horrible Berlin wool comforters of modern days), storax,
sweet clover, white glass, gum sandarac, stibium for the eyes, and
gold and silver coin, and unguents. Besides, there were imported for
the king costly silver plate, musical instruments (musical boxes are
still favoured by Indian royalty), handsome girls for the harem (these
are the famous Yavanî handmaids of the Indian drama), high-class wine,
apparel and choice unguents, a list which shows that these monarchs
lived in considerable luxury. The exports of Barygaza were spikenard,
costus, bdellium, ivory, onyxes, porcelain, box-thorn, cottons,
silk, silk thread, long pepper (chillies), and other wares from the
coast ports.

From Barygaza our author rightly says (chapter 50) that the
coast trends southward and the country is called Dakhinabadês
(Dakshinâpatha): much of the inland country is waste and infested
by wild beasts, while populous tribes inhabit other regions as far
as the Ganges. The chief towns in Dakhinabadês (chapter 51) are
Paithana (Paithan) twenty days journey south of Barygaza and Tagara
(Dhârur) a very large city ten days east of Paithana. From Paithana
come onyxes, and from Tagara cottons muslins and other local wares
from the (east) coast.

The smaller ports south of Barygaza are Akabarou (perhaps the Khabirun
of Mahomedan writers and the modern Kâvêrî the river of Nâusâri)
Souppara (Supârâ near Bassein) and Kalliena, which was made a mart by
the elder Saraganês, but much injured when Sandanês became its master,
for from his time Greek vessels visiting the port are sent under
guard to Barygaza. This interesting statement is one of the clearest
indications of the date of the Periplus. As Bhândârkar has shown,
the elder Saraganês implies also a younger, who can be no other than
Yajñasrî Sâtakarni (A.D. 140), and the Periplus must be later than
his time. The Sandanês of the text must have been a ruler of Gujarát
and may be identified with the Kshatrapa Sanghadâman (A.D. 224).

South of Kalliena (chapter 53) were Sêmylla (Chaul) Mandagora
(Mandangad) Palaipatmai (Pâl near Mahâd) Melizeigara (probably
Janjîra) and Byzantion (Chiplun). The words which follow probably
give another name of Byzantion "which was formerly also called
Turannosboas," the name Toparon being a misunderstanding (Müller,
Geogr. Gr. Min. I. 296). South of this are the islands of Sêsekreienai
(Burnt Islands), Aigidioí (Angediva), Kaineitai (Island of St. George)
near the Khersonêsos (Goa), and Leukê (Laccadives ?) all pirate
haunts. Next comes Limyrikê (the Tamil country) the first marts
of which are Naoura (Cannanor or Tellichery, rather than Honávar,
which is too far north) and Tyndis (Kadalundi near Bepur) and south
of these Muziris (Kranganur) and Nelkynda (Kallada). Tyndis and
Muziris were subject to Kêprobotras (Keralaputra that is the Cera
king) and Nelkynda to Pandion (the Pândya king of Madura). Muziris
was a very prosperous mart trading with Ariakê (North Konkan) as
well as Egypt. Nelkynda was up a river 120 stadia from the sea,
ships taking in cargo at the village of Bekarê at the mouth of the
river. Our author gives an interesting account of the trade at these
ports and further south as well as on the east coast, but we are not
concerned with this part of his work.

[Markianos.] Markianos of Hîrakleia about the year 400 A.D. is the
leading geographer of the period following Ptolemy, but his work
consisted chiefly in corrections of Ptolemy's distances taken from an
obscure geographer named Prôtagoras. He adds no new facts to Ptolemy's
account of western India.

[Stephanos.] Stephanos of Byzantium wrote about 450 A.D. (or at
any rate later than Markianos, whom he quotes) a huge geographical
dictionary of which we have an epitome by one Hermolaos. The Indian
names he gives are chiefly taken from Hekataios, Arrianos, and
especially from a poem called Bassarika on the exploits of Dionysos,
by a certain Dionysos. But his geography is far from accurate: he
calls Barakê (Dvârakâ) an island, and Barygaza (Broach) a city,
of Gedrôsia. Among the cities he names are Argantê (quoted from
Hekataios), Barygaza (Broach), Boukephala (Jalâlpur), Byzantion
(Chiplun), Gêreia, Gorgippia, Darsania famous for woven cloths,
Dionysopolis (Nysa ?), Kathia (Multân ?), Kaspapyros and Kaspeiros
(Kasmîr), Margana, Massaka (in Swât), Nysa, Palimbothra (Pâtaliputra),
Panaioura near the Indus, Patala (thirty-five miles south-east of
Haidarâbâd, Sindh), Rhodoê, Rhôganê, Rhôn in Gandarikê, Saneia,
Sesindion, Sinda on the great gulf (perhaps Ptolemy's Asinda,
Vadnagar), Sôlimna, and Taxila. He also names a number of tribes,
of whom none but the Orbitai (Makrân) the Pandai (Pândya) Bôlingæ
(Bhâulingi Sâlvas) and possibly the Salangoi (Sâlankâyana) belong to
the western coast.

[Kosmas.] Kosmas Indikopleustes, shipman and monk, who wrote his
Topographia Christiana between A.D. 530 and 550, is the last of the
ancient writers who shows independent knowledge of India. He says that
Sindu (Sindh), is where India begins, the Indus being the boundary
between it and Persia. The chief ports of India are Sindu (Debal),
which exports musk and nard: Orrhotha (Surâshtra that is Verâval)
which had a king of its own: Kalliana (Kalyân) a great port exporting
brass, and sîsam (blackwood) logs and cloth having a king of its own
and a community of Christians under a Persian bishop: Sibor which
also had a king of its own and therefore cannot be Supârâ, which is
too close to Kalliana, but must be Goa, the Sindabur of the Arabs:
Parti, Mangaruth (Mangalor), Salopatana, Nalopatana, and Pudopatana
which are the five marts of Malê the pepper country (Malabâr), where
also there are many Christians. Five days' sail south of Malê lay
Sielediba or Taprobanê (Ceylon), divided into two kingdoms in one
of which is found the hyacinth-stone. The island has many temples,
and a church of Persian Christians, and is much resorted to by ships
from India Persia and Ethiopia dealing in silk, aloewood, cloves,
sandalwood, &c. On the east coast of India is Marallo (Morava opposite
Ceylon) whence conch-shells are exported: Then Kaber (Kaveripatam or
Pegu. Yule's Cathay Introd. page clxxviii.) which exports Alabandinum;
further on is the clove country and furthest of all Tzinista (China)
which produces the silk. In India further up the country, that is
further north, are the White Ounoi or Hûnas who have a king named
Gollas (Mihirakula of inscriptions) who goes forth to war with 1000
elephants and many horsemen and tyrannises over India, exacting tribute
from the people. His army is said to be so vast as once to have drunk
dry the ditch surrounding a besieged city and marched in dryshod.

In his book XI. Kosmas gives some account of the wild beasts of India,
but this part of his work does not require notice here.

This is the last glimpse we get of India before the Arabs cut off the
old line of communication with the Empire by the conquest of Egypt
(A.D. 641-2).

NOTES

[1] Secretary's Letter 4223 to the Revenue Commissioner dated 30th
December 1843. Revenue Volume 1854 of 1843.

[2] Rája Tarangini (Calc. Edition), V. 150, 155; Cunningham's
Archæological Survey, II. 8. An earlier but vaguer reference occurs
about the end of the sixth century in Bána's Sríharshacharita, p. 274,
quoted in Ep. Ind. I. 67ff, where Prabhákaravardhana of Thánesar the
father of the great Sri Harsha is said to have waged war with several
races of whom the Gurjjaras are one.

[3] Beal's Buddhist Records of the Western World, I. 165 note 1.

[4] Cunningham's Archæological Survey, II. 71.

[5] Beal's Buddhist Records, II. 270.

[6] This identification was first made by the late Col. J. W. Watson,
I.S.C. Ind. Ant. VI. 63. Bhinmál or Bhilmál also called Srímál,
is an old town about fifty miles west of Abu, north latitude 25°
4' east longitude 71° 14'. General Cunningham (Ancient Geography
of India, 313) and Professor Beal (Buddhist Records, II. 270)
identify Pi-lo-mo-lo with Bálmer or Bádamera (north latitude 71° 10'
east longitude 20° 0') in the Jodhpur State of West Rájputána. This
identification is unsatisfactory. Bálmer is a small town on the slope
of a hill in an arid tract with no vestige of antiquity. Hiuen Tsiang
notes that the produce of the soil and the manners of the people of
Pi-lo-mo-lo resemble those of Suráshtra. This description is unsuited
to so arid a tract as surrounds Bálmer; it would apply well to the
fertile neighbourhood of Bhilmál or Bhinmál. Since it is closely
associated with Juzr that is Gurjjara the Al Bailáiman of the Arabs
(A.D. 750, Elliot's History, I. 442) may be Bhilmál. A Jain writer
(Ind. Ant. XIX. 233) mentions Bhilmál as the seat of king Bhímasena and
as connected with the origin of the Gadhia coinage. The date Bhinmál
in a M.S. of A.D. 906 (Ditto, page 35) suggests it was then a seat
of learning under the Gurjjaras. The prince of Srímál is mentioned
(Rás Málá, I. 58) as accompanying Múla Rájá Solankhi (A.D. 942-997)
in an expedition against Sorath. Al Biruni (A.D. 1030, Sachau's Edn.,
I. 153, 267) refers to Bhillamála between Multán and Anhilaváda. As
late as A.D. 1611 Nicholas Ufflet, an English traveller from Agra to
Ahmadádád (Kerr's Voyages, VIII. 301) notices "Beelmahl as having
an ancient wall 24 kos (36 miles) round with many fine tanks going
to ruin." The important sub-divisions of upper class Gujarát Hindus
who take their name from it show Srímál to have been a great centre
of population.

[7] Indian Antiquary, XIII. 70-81. Bühler (Ind. Ant. VII. 62)
identifies Nandipuri with a suburb of Broach.

[8] Bombay Gazetteer, Násik, page 604. Bombay Arch. Survey Sep. Number
X. 38.

[9] Among Deccan Kunbi surnames are Jádhav, Chuhán, Nikumbha, Parmár,
Selár, Solké. Cf. Bombay Gazetteer, XXIV. 65 note 2, 414.

[10] Though the identification of the Valabhis as Gurjjaras may not
be certain, in inscriptions noted below both the Chávadás and the
Solankis are called Gurjjara kings. The Gurjjara origin of either or
of both these dynasties may be questioned. The name Gurjjara kings may
imply no more than that they ruled the Gurjjara country. At the same
time it was under the Chávadás that Gujarát got its name. Though to
Al Biruni (A.D. 1020) Gujarát still meant part of Rájputána, between
A.D. 750 and 950 the name Gurjjaras' land passed as far south as the
territory connected with Anhilváda and Vadnagara that is probably as
far as the Mahi. As a Rástrakuta copperplate of A.D. 888 (S. 810)
(Ind. Ant. XIII. 69) brings the Konkan as far north as Variáv on
the Tápti the extension of the name Gujarát to Láta south of the
Mahi seems to have taken place under Musalmán rule. This southern
application is still somewhat incomplete. Even now the people of
Surat both Hindus and Musalmáns when they visit Pattan (Anhilváda)
and Ahmadabad speak of going to Gujarát, and the Ahmadábád section
of the Nágar Bráhmans still call their Surat caste-brethren by the
name of Kunkanás that is of the Konkan.

[11] See Nagarakhanda (Junágadh Edition), 13, 32, 35, 185, 289,
332, 542.

[12] The Alina grants (Indian Antiquary, VII. 73, 77) dated Valabhi
330 and 337 (A.D. 649-656), are both to the same donee who in the
A.D. 649 grant is described as originally of Ánarttapura and in the
A.D. 656 grant as originally of Ánandapura.

[13] Girnára-Kalpa, Atthi Surathta vesaé Ujjinto náma pavvao rammo. In
the Suraththa district is a lovely mountain named Ujjinto (Girnár).

[14] Hamilton and Falconer's Strabo, II. 252-253; Pliny's Natural
History, VI. 20.

[15] Bertius' Ptolemy, VII. 1; McCrindle's Periplus, 113. The Periplus
details regarding Indo-Skythia, Surastrene, and Ujjain are in agreement
with the late date (A.D. 247) which Reinaud (Indian Antiquary of
Dec. 1879 pp. 330-338) and Burnell (S. Ind. Pal. 47 note 3) assign
to its author.

[16] Hiuen Tsiang's Valabhi kingdom was probably the same as the
modern Gohilváda, which Jinaprabhásuri in his Satruñjaya-kalpa calls
the Valláka-Visaa.

[17] Bertius' Ptolemy, VII. 1.

[18] Vátsyáyana Sutra, Chap. II.

[19] Arch. Sur. of Western India, IV. 127. The Mandasor inscription
(A.D. 437-38) mentions silk weavers from Látavishaya. Fleet's
Corpus Ins. Ind. III. 80. The writer (Ditto, 84) describes Láta as
green-hilled, pleasing with choice flower-burdened trees, with temples
viháras and assembly halls of the gods.

[20] Ind. Ant. XIII. 157, 158, 163, 180, 188, 196, 199, 204.

[21] Elliot's History, I. 378.

[22] Compare Lassen in Ind. Ant. XIV. 325.

[23] The Vishnu Purána (Ansa iv. Chap. i. Verse 19 to Chap. ii. Verse
2) gives the longest account of the legend. The Bhágavata Purána
(Skanda ix. Chap. iii. Verse 16-36) gives almost the same account. The
Matsya Purána (Chap. xii. Verse 22-24) dismisses the story in two
verses. See also Harivansa, X.

[24] Compare Mahábh. II. 13, 594ff. Jarásandha's sisters Asti and
Prápti were married to Kansa.

[25] Harivansa, XXXV.-CXII.

[26] Mahábhárata Ádiparva, chaps. 218-221.

[27] Mahábhárata Vanaparva, Chap. xiv.-xxii. Skanda x. Mrittikávatí the
capital of Sálva cannot be identified. The name of the country sounds
like Svabhra in Rudradáman's Girnár inscription, which is apparently
part of Charotar or South Ahmadabad. A trace of the old word perhaps
remains in the river Sábhramati the modern Sábarmati. The fact that
Sálva passed from Mrittikávatí along the sea shore would seem to
show that part of the seaboard south of the Mahi was included in
Sálva's territory. Dr. Bühler (Ind. Ant. VII. 263) described Pandit
Bhagvánlál's reading of Svabhra as a bold conjecture. A further
examination of the original convinced the Pandit that Svabhra was
the right reading.

[28] The following is the legend of Krishna's iron flail. Certain
Yádava youths hoping to raise a laugh at the expense of Visvámitra and
other sages who had come to Dwáriká presented to them Sámba Krishna's
son dressed as a woman big with child. The lads asked the sages to
foretell to what the woman would give birth. The sages replied:
'The woman will give birth to an iron rod which will destroy the
Yádava race.' Obedient to the sage's prophecy Sámba produced an iron
rod. To avoid the ill effects of the prophecy king Ugrasena had the
rod ground to powder and cast the powder into the sea. The powder
grew into the grass called eraka Typha elephantina. It was this grass
which Krishna plucked in his rage and which in his hands turned into
an iron flail. This eraka grass grows freely near the mouth of the
Hiranya river of Prabhás.

[29] This suggests that as in early times the Great Ran was hard to
cross the way from Káthiáváda to Indraprastha or Delhi was by Kachch
and Sindh and from Sindh by Multán and the Lower Panjáb. According
to the Bhágavata Purána Krishna took the same route when he first
came from Indraprastha to Dwáriká. On the other hand these details
may support the view that the head-quarters of the historic Krishna
were in the Panjáb.

[30] So far as is known neither Gujarát nor Káthiáváda contains any
record older than the Girnár rock inscription of about B.C. 240: The
Great Kshatrapa Rudra Dáman's (A.D. 139) inscription on the same rock
has a reference to the Maurya Rája Chandragupta about B.C. 300. No
local sign of Krishna or of his Yádavas remains.

In the Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, XX. XXI. and
XXII. Mr. Hewitt has recently attempted to trace the history of
Western India back to B.C. 3000 perhaps to as early as B.C. 6000. The
evidence which makes so far-reaching a past probable is the discovery
of Indian indigo and muslin in Egyptian tombs of about B.C. 1700
(J. R. A. S. XX. 206); and the proof that a trade in teak and
in Sindhu or Indian muslins existed between Western India and
the Euphrates mouth as far back as B.C. 3000 or even B.C. 4000
(J. R. A. S. XX. 336, 337 and XXI. 204). According to Mr. Hewitt
the evidence of the Hindu calendar carries the historical past of
India into still remoter ages. The moon mansions and certain other
details of the Hindu calendar seem to point to the Euphrates valley
as the home of Hindu lunar astronomy. As in the Euphrates valley
inscriptions of the Semitic king Sargon of Sippara prove that in
B.C. 3750 moon-worship was already antiquated (J. R. A. S. XXI. 325),
and as the precession of the equinoxes points to about B.C. 4700 as the
date of the introduction of the sun zodiac (Sayce's Hibbert Lectures,
398) the system of lunar mansions and months, if it came from the
Euphrates valley, must have reached India before B.C. 4700. The
trade records of the black-headed perhaps Dravidian-speaking
Sumris of the Euphrates mouth prove so close relations with the
peninsula of Sinai and Egypt as to make a similar connection with
Western India probable as far back as B.C. 6000. (Compare Sayce's
Hibbert Lectures, 33: J. R. A. S. XXI. 326.) Of the races of whose
presence in Gujarát and the neighbourhood Mr. Hewitt finds traces
the earliest is the same black-headed moon-worshipping Sumri
(Ditto). Next from Susiana in south-east Persia, the possessors
of a lunar-solar calendar and therefore not later than B.C. 4700
(J. R. A. S. XXI. 325, 327, 330), the trading Sus or Saus, in Hindu
books known as Suvarnas, entered India by way of Baluchistán and
settled at Pátala in South Sindh. (J. R. A. S. XXI. 209.) With
or soon after the Sus came from the north the cattle-herding
sun-worshipping Sakas (J. R. A. S. XXII. 332). The Sus and Sakas
passed south and together settled in Suráshtra and West Gujarát. At a
date which partly from evidence connected with the early Vedic hymns
(J. R. A. S. XXII. 466) partly from the early Babylonian use of the
Sanskrit Sindhu for India (J. R. A. S. XXI. 309), Mr. Hewitt holds
cannot be later than B.C. 3000 northern Áryas entered Gujarát and
mixing with the Sus and Sakas as ascetics traders and soldiers carried
the use of Sanskrit southwards. (J. R. A. S. XX. 343.) Of other races
who held sway in Gujarát the earliest, perhaps about B.C. 2000 since
their power was shattered by Parasuráma long before Mahábhárata times
(J. R. A. S. XXI. 209-266), were the snake-worshipping perhaps Accadian
(Ditto, 265) Haihayas now represented by the Gonds and the Haihayas'
vassals the Vaidarbhas (Ditto, 209) a connection which is supported by
trustworthy Central Indian Uraon or Gond tradition that they once held
Gujarát (Elliott's Races, N. W. P., I. 154). Next to the Haihayas
and like them earlier than the Mahábhárata (say B.C. 1500-2000)
Mr. Hewitt would place the widespread un-Aryan Bhárats or Bhárgavs
(J. R. A. S. XXI. 279-282, 286) the conquerors of the Haihayas (Ditto,
288). In early Mahábhárata times (say between B.C. 1000 and 800, Ditto
197 and 209) the Bhárats were overcome by the very mixed race of the
Bhojas and of Krishna's followers the Vrishnis (Ditto, 270). Perhaps
about the same time the chariot-driving Gandharvas of Cutch (Ditto,
273) joined the Sus and Sakas, together passed east to Kosala beyond
Benares, and were there established in strength at the time of
Gautama Buddha (B.C. 530) (Ditto). To the later Mahábhárata times,
perhaps about B.C. 400 (Ditto, 197-271), Mr. Hewitt would assign the
entrance into Gujarát of the Ábhíras or Ahirs whom he identifies with
the northern or Skythian Abárs. Mr. Hewitt finds the following places
in Gujarát associated with those early races. Pátála in South Sindh
he (J. R. A. S. XXI. 209) considers the head-quarters of the Sus and
Sakas. Another Su capital Prágjyotisha which is generally allotted to
Bengal he would (XXI. 206) identify with Broach. With the Vaidarbhas
the vassals of the Haihayas he associates Surparika, that is Sopára
near Bassein, which he identifies (Ditto, 206) with the modern Surat
on the Tapti. He connects (Ditto, 266) the Baroda river Visvámitra
and Vaidurga the hill Pávágad with the same tribe. He finds a trace
of the Bhárats in Baroda and in Bharati an old name of the river
Mahi (Ditto, 286) and of the same race under their name Bhárgav in
Broach (Ditto, 289). The traditional connection of the Bhojas with
Dwárka is well established. Finally Kárpásika a Mahábhárata name
for the shore of the Gulf of Cambay (Ditto, 209) may be connected
with Kárván on the Narbada about twenty miles above Broach one of
the holiest Shaiv places in India. Though objection may be taken to
certain of Mr. Hewitt's identifications of Gujarát places, and also
to the extreme antiquity he would assign to the trade between India
and the west and to the introduction of the system of lunar mansions,
his comparison of sacred Hindu books with the calendar and ritual of
early Babylonia is of much interest.

[31] Mahábhárata Anusásanaparvan 2158-9 mentions Látas among Kshatriya
tribes who have become outcastes from seeing no Bráhmans. Again,
Chap. VII. 72. ib. couples (J. Bl. As. Soc. VI. (1) 387) thievish
Báhikas and robber Suráshtras. Compare Vishnu Purána, II. 37,
where the Yavanas are placed to the west of Bháratavarsha and also
J. R. A. S. (N. S.) IV. 468; and Brockhaus' Prabodha Chandrodaya,
87. The sloka referred to in the text runs: He who goes to Anga,
Vanga, Kalinga, Sauráshtra, or Magadha unless it be for a pilgrimage
deserves to go through a fresh purification.

[32] Turnour's Maháwanso, 71.

[33] Bombay Branch Royal Asiatic Society Journal, 1891, page 47.

[34] It is interesting to note that Chandragupta married a Vaisya
lady. Similarly while at Sánchi on his way to Ujjain Asoka married
Deví, the daughter of a Setthi, Turnour's Maháwanso, 76; Cunningham's
Bhilsa Topes, 95.

[35] Probably from some mistake of the graver's the text of the
inscription ashokasy te yavanarájena yields no meaning. Some word
for governor or officer is apparently meant.

[36] Hemachandra's Parisishta Parva. Merutunga's Vichárasreni.

[37] The text is 'Kunálasûnustrikhandabharatádhipah Paramárhanto
Anáryadeseshvapi Pravarttitasramana-vihárah Samprati Mahárája
Sohábhavat' meaning 'He was the great king Samprati son of Kunála,
sovereign of India of three continents, the great saint who had
started monasteries for Jain priests even in non-Aryan countries.'

[38] McCrindle's Periplus, 115. The author of the Periplus calls the
capital of Surastrene Minnagara. Pandit Bhagvánlál believed Minnagara
to be a miswriting of Girinagara the form used for Girnár both in
Rudradáman's (A.D. 150) rock inscription at Girnár (Fleet's Corpus
Ins. Ind. III. 57) and by Varáha-Mihira (A.D. 570) (Brihat-Samhitá,
XIV. 11). The mention of a Minagara in Ptolemy inland from Sorath and
Monoglossum or Mangrul suggests that either Girnár or Junágadh was
also known as Minnagara either after the Mins or after Men that is
Menander. At the same time it is possible that Ptolemy's Agrinagara
though much out of place may be Girinagara and that Ptolemy's Minagara
in the direction of Ujjain may be Mandasor.

[39] Justin's date is probably about A.D. 250. His work is a summary
of the History of Trogus Pompeius about A.D. 1. Watson's Justin, 277;
Wilson's Ariana Antiqua, 231.

[40] Hamilton and Falconer's Strabo, II. 252-253.

[41] These small local coins which were found in Hálár Gondal were
presented to the Bombay Asiatic Society by the Political Agent of
Káthiáwár and are in the Society's cabinet. Dr. Bhagvánlál found the
two elephant coins in Junágadh.

[42] Wilson's Ariana Antiqua, 266. Gardner's British Museum Catalogue,
26, brings Eucratides to after B.C. 162.

[43] See above page 15.

[44] McCrindle's Periplus, 121.

[45] The Bombay Asiatic Society possesses some specimens of these
coins of bad workmanship found near Broach with the legend incorrect,
probably struck by some local governor of Menander. Two were also
found in Junágadh.

[46] McCrindle's Periplus, 115.

[47] Numismatic Chronicle (New Series), X. 80; Wilson's Ariana
Antiqua, 288.

[48] Numismatic Chronicle (New Series), X, 80.

[49] Wilson's Ariana Antiqua, Plate XXII. Number 41. Gardner's British
Museum Catalogue, Plate XI. Number 8.

[50] Wilson's Ariana Antiqua, Plate XXII. Number 66, shows one variety
of this monogram.

[51] These coins are said to have been found in 1882 by a cultivator
in an earthen pot. Two of them were taken for Pandit Bhagvánlál and
one for Mr. Vajeshankar Gaurishankar Naib Diván of Bhávnagar. The
rest disappeared.

[52] Ariana Antiqua, Plate XXII. Number 47.

[53] Numismatic Chronicle (New Series), X. 86.

[54] Ariana Antiqua, 288; Gardner and Poole's Catalogue of Indian
Coins, xxxiii.

[55] Wilson (Ariana Antiqua, 332-334) identifies the coins marked
Basileus Basileon Soter Megas with a king or dynasty of Indian
extraction who reigned between Azes and Kadphises (B.C. 50-25),
chiefly in the Panjáb. Gardner (British Museum Catalogue, 47) says:
The Nameless king is probably cotemporary with Abdagases (A.D. 30-50):
he may have been a member of the Kadphises dynasty. Cunningham (Ancient
Geography, 245) places the coins of the tribal Yaudheyas in the first
century A.D. The remark of Prinsep (Jour. Bengal Soc. VI. 2, 973) that
in the Behat group of Buddhist coins some with Baktro-Páli legends have
the name Yaudheya in the margin seems to support the suggestion in the
text. But the marked difference between the Stag coins of the Yaudheyas
(Thomas' Prinsep, I. Plate V.) and the Nameless king's coins (Gardner,
Plate XIV. 1-6) tells strongly against the proposed identification. Of
the Yaudheyas details are given below.

[56] Journal Bengal Asiatic Society (1835), 684; (1837), 351; (1838),
346; Thomas' Prinsep's Indian Antiquities, I. 425-435, II. 84-93;
Thomas in Journal Royal Asiatic Society (Old Series), XII. 1-72;
Wilson's Ariana Antiqua, 405-413; Journal B. B. R. A. S. VI. 377,
VII. 392; Burgess' Archæological Report of Káthiáwár and Kachh, 18-72;
Journal B. B. R. A. S. XII. (Proceedings), XXIII.; Indian Antiquary,
VI. 43, X. 221-227.

The dynasty of the Kshatrapas or Mahákshatrapas of Sauráshtra
was known to Prinsep (J. R. A. S. Bl. VII.-1. (1837),
351) to Thomas (J. R. A. S. F. S. XII. 1-78), and to Newton
(Jl. B. B. R. A. S. IX. 1-19) as the Sah or Sâh kings. More recently,
from the fact that the names of some of them end in Sena or army, the
Kshatrapas have been called the Sena kings. The origin of the title
Sah is the ending siha, that is simha lion, which belongs to the names
of several of the kings. Síha has been read either sáh or sena because
of the practice of omitting from the die vowels which would fall on or
above the top line of the legend and also of omitting the short vowel
i with the following anusvára. Sáh is therefore a true reading of the
writing on certain of the coins. That the form Sáh on these coins is
not the correct form has been ascertained from stone inscriptions in
which freedom from crowding makes possible the complete cutting of the
above-line marks. In stone inscriptions the ending is síha lion. See
Fleet's Corpus Inscriptionum Indicarum, III. 36 note 1. Mr. Fleet
(Ditto) seems to suggest that with the proof of the incorrectness of
the reading Sáh the evidence that the Kshatrapas were of Indo-Skythian
origin ceases. This does not seem to follow. In addition to the
Parthian title Kshatrapa, their northern coinage, and the use of the
Saka (A.D. 78) era, now accepted as the accession of the great Kushán
Kanishka, the evidence in the text shows that the line of Káthiáváda
Kshatrapas starts from the foreigner Chashtana (A.D. 130) whose
predecessor Nahápana (A.D. 120) and his Saka son-in-law Ushavadatta
are noted in Násik inscriptions (Násik Gazetteer, 538 and 621) as
leaders of Sakas, Palhavas, and Yavanas. Further as the limits of
Ptolemy's (A.D. 150) Indo-Skythia (McCrindle, 136) agree very closely
with the limits of the dominions of the then ruling Mahákshatrapa
Rudradáman (A.D. 150) it follows that Ptolemy or his informer believed
Rudradáman to be an Indo-Skythian. There therefore seems no reasonable
doubt that the Kshatrapas were foreigners. According to Cunningham
(Num. Chron. VIII. 231) they were Sakas who entered Gujarát from
Sindh. The fact that the Kushán era (A.D. 78) was not adopted by
the first two of the Western Kshatrapas, Chashtana and Jayadáman,
supports the view that they belonged to a wave of northerners earlier
than the Kushán wave.

[57] The Taxila plate in Journal R. A. S. (New Series), IV. 487;
the Baktro-Páli on Nahapána's coins also gives the form Chhatrapa.

[58] Chhatrava appears in an unpublished Kshatrapa inscription from
Mathurá formerly (1888) in Pandit Bhagvánlál's possession.

[59] Khatapa appears in the inscription of Nahapána's minister at
Junnar (Bombay Gazetteer, XVIII. Pt. III. 167) and in some coins of
the Northern Kshatrapa kings Pagamasha, Rájavula, and Sudása found near
Mathurá. Prinsep's Indian Antiquities, II. Pl. XLIV. Figs. 12, 20, 21.

[60] Kshatrampâtîti Kshatrapah.

[61] Thomas' Prinsep, II. 63 and 64.

[62] Malaya or Malava, Pallava, Ábhíra, Meva or Meda, and Mihira
or Mehr appear to be the leading warlike tribes who came to India
under these chiefs. These tribes formed the Kshatras whose lords or
Kshatrapas these chiefs were.

[63] The explanation of the word Kshatrapa started by Prinsep and
accepted by Pandit Bhagvánlál is of doubtful accuracy. The title is
well known in Greek literature in the form satrapês, and in the form
Kshatrapávan occurs twice (B.C. 520) in connection with the governors
of Baktria and Arachosia in the great Behistan inscription of Darius
(Rawlinson's Herodotus, I. 329; Spiegel's Altpersische Keilinschriften,
24-26). The meaning of Kshatrapávan in old Persian is not "protector
of the Kshatra race" but "protector of the kingdom," for the word
kshatram occurs in the inscriptions of the Achæmenidæ with the meaning
of "kingship" or "kingdom" (Spiegel, Altpersische Keilinschriften,
215). As is well known Satrap was the official title of the ruler
of a Persian province. That the name continued in use with the same
meaning under the Greek kings of Baktria (B.C. 250-100) is known from
Strabo, who says (XI. 11) "the Greeks who held Baktria divided it
into satrapies (satrapeias) of which Aspionus and Touriva were taken
from Eukratides (B.C. 180) by the Parthians." It is to be presumed
that the Baktro-Grecians introduced the same arrangement into the
provinces which they conquered in India. The earliest occurrence of the
title in its Indian form is on the coins of a Rajabula or Ranjabola
(Gardner, B. M. Cat. 67), who in his Greek legend makes use of the
title "King of kings," and in his Indian legend calls himself "The
unconquered Chhatrapa." His adoption for the reverse of his coins
of the Athene Promachos type of Menander and Apollodotus Philopator
connects Rajabula in time with those kings (B.C. 126-100) and we know
from an inscription (Cunningham Arch. Rep. XX. 48) that he reigned at
Mathurá. He was probably a provincial governor who became independent
about B.C. 100 when the Greek kingdom broke up. The above facts go to
show that Kshatrapa was originally a Persian title which was adopted
by the Greeks and continued in use among their successors: that it
originally denoted a provincial governor; but that, when the Greek
kingdom broke up and their provincial chiefs became independent, it
continued in use as a royal title. That after the Christian era, even
in Parthia, the title Satrapes does not necessarily imply subjection to
a suzerain is proved by the use of the phrase satrapês tôn satrapôn
Satrap of Satraps, with the sense of King of Kings in Gotarzes'
Behistan inscription of A.D. 50. See Rawlinson's Sixth Monarchy,
88 n. 2 and 260 n. 1.--(A. M. T. J.)

The Pandit's identification of the Malavas or Malayas with a northern
or Skythian tribe is in agreement with Alberuni (A.D. 1015), who,
on the authority of the Báj Purána (Sachau's Text, chap. 29 page
150-155) groups as northern tribes the Pallavas, Sakas, Mallas, and
Gurjars. In spite of this authority it seems better to identify the
Mallas, Malavas, or Malayas with Alexander the Great's (B.C. 325)
Malloi of Multán (compare McCrindle's Alexander's Invasion of India,
Note P). At the same time (Rockhill's Life of Buddha, 132, 133, 137)
the importance of the Mallas in Vaisáli (between Patná and Tirhút)
during the lifetime of Sakya Muni (B.C. 580) favours the view that
several distinct tribes have borne the same or nearly the same name.

[64] Patika was apparently the son of the Liako Kujulako of the Taxila
plate. Dowson in Jour. R. A. S. New Series. IV. 497 mistranslates
the inscription and fails to make out the name Patika.

[65] Compare Specht. Jour. Asiatique. 1883. t. II. 325. According
to Chinese writers about A.D. 20 Yen-kao-tchin-tai or Kadphises
II. conquered India (Thientchou) and there established generals who
governed in the name of the Yuechi.

[66] Pandit Bhagvánlál found two of his copper coins at Mandasor
in 1884.

[67] This is a bad specimen with the legend dim and worn.

[68] Some coins of Apollodotus have on the reverse Apollo with his
arrow; others have Athene Promachos with the thunderbolt.

[69] Bom. Gaz. XVI. 571ff.

[70] A well known Sanskrit saying is shvashurakhyátodhamádhama:
A man known through his father-in-law is the vilest of the vile.

[71] Cunningham's Arch. Sur. III. Plate 13. Inscriptions 2 and 3.

[72] The author's only reason for supposing that two eras began between
A.D. 70 and 80 seems to be the fact that the Javanese Saka era begins
A.D. 74, while the Indian Saka era begins A.D. 78. It appears, however,
from Lassen's Ind. Alt. II. 1040 note 1, that the Javanese Saka era
begins either in A.D. 74 or in A.D. 78. The author's own authority,
Dr. Burnell (S. Ind. Pal. 72) while saying that the Javanese Saka era
dates from A.D. 74, gives A.D. 80 as the epoch of the Saka era of the
neighbouring island of Bali, thus supporting Raffle's explanation
(Java, II. 68) that the difference is due to the introduction
into Java of the Muhammadan mode of reckoning during the past 300
years. The Javanese epoch of A.D. 74 cannot therefore be treated
as an authority for assuming a genuine Indian era with this initial
date. The era of Kanishka was used continuously down to its year 281
(Fergusson Hist. of Ind. Architecture, 740) and after that date we have
numerous instances of the use of the Sakanripakála or Sakakála down
to the familiar Saka of the present day. It seems much more likely
that the parent of the modern Saka era was that of Kanishka, which
remained in use for nearly three centuries, than that of Nahapána,
who so far as we know left no son, and whose era (if he founded one)
probably expired when the Kshaharáta power was destroyed by the
Ándhrabhrityas in the first half of the second century A.D. We must
therefore assume A.D. 78 to be the epoch of Kanishka's era. There
remains the question whether Nahapána dates by Kanishka's era,
or uses his own regnal years. There is nothing improbable in the
latter supposition, and we are not forced to suppose that Nahapána
was a feudatory of the Kushán kings. It has been shown above that the
use of the title Kshatrapa does not necessarily imply a relation of
inferiority. On the other hand (pace Oldenburg in Ind. Ant. X. 213)
the later Kshatrapas certainly seem to have used Kanishka's era: and
Nahapána and the Kushán dynasty seem to have been of the same race:
for Heraus, who was certainly a Kushán, apparently calls himself Saka
on his coins (Gardner B. M. Cat. xlvii.); and it is highly probable
that Nahapána, like his son-in-law Ushavadáta, was a Saka. Further,
the fact that Nahapána does not call himself Mahárája but Rája goes
to show that he was not a paramount sovereign.--(A. M. T. J.)

[73] Jour. B. B. R. A. S. XVI. 378; Ind. Ant. XV. 198, 201, XIII. 126;
Arch. Sur. X. 33.

[74] Cunningham's Arch. Sur. XIII. 162. Cf. Kielhorn in
Ind. Ant. XIX. 20ff.

[75] Cunningham's Arch. Sur. X. 33-34. Numerous Western India
inscriptions prove that ya and va are often intermixed in Prákrit.

[76] Vide Telang's Mudrárákshasa, 204. Mr. Telang gives several
readings the best of which mean either the king of the Málaya country
or the king of the Málaya tribe.

[77] Macmurdo (1818) notices the democratic constitution of the
Káthis. Trans. Bom. Lit. Soc. I. 274.

[78] Compare Fleet's Corpus Ins. Ind. III. 87, 152, 158 from the
(supremacy of) the tribal constitution of the Málavas. Prof. Kielhorn
has however shown that the words of the inscription do not necessarily
mean this. Ind. Ant. XIX. 56.

[79] Inscription 10 lines 3-4. Bom. Gaz. XVI. 572.

[80] Details are given below under the Guptas.

[81] Burgess' Archæological Report of Káthiáwár and Cutch, 55;
Numismata Orientalia, I. Pl. II. Fig. 8.

[82] The meaning of this symbol has not yet been made out. It is
very old. We first find it on the punched coins of Málwa and Gujarát
(regarded as the oldest coinage in India) without the serpentine line
below, which seems to show that this line does not form part of the
original symbol and has a distinct meaning.

[83] Compare Wilson's Ariana Antiqua, Plate XV. Fig. 26-27.

[84] Cave Temple Inscriptions, Bombay Archæological Survey, Extra
Number (1881), 58.

[85] Ariana Antiqua, Plate XV. Fig. 29. Some imaginary animals are
shown under the serpentine line.

[86] Jour. B. B. R. A. Soc. XIII. 303.

[87] The variations noted in the text seem examples of the law that
the later religion reads its own new meaning into early luck signs.

[88] This letter ysa in both is curiously formed and never used
in Sanskrit. But it is clear and can be read without any doubt as
ysa. Pandit Bhagvánlál thought that it was probably meant to stand
as a new-coined letter to represent the Greek Z which has nothing
corresponding to it in Sanskrit. The same curiously formed letter
appears in the third syllable in the coin of the fourth Kshatrapa
king Dámajadasri.

[89] The text of the inscription is rúdradámno varshe that is in
the year of Rudradáman. That this phrase means 'in the reign of' is
shown by the Gunda inscription of Rudradáman's son Rudrasimha, which
has rúdrasimhasya varshe tryuttarashate that is in the hundred and
third year of Rudrasimha. Clearly a regnal year cannot be meant as no
reign could last over 103 years. So with the year 72 in Rudradáman's
inscription. The same style of writing appears in the inscriptions at
Mathurá of Huvishka and Vasudeva which say 'year ---- of Huvishka'
and 'year ---- of Vasudeva' though it is known that the era is of
Kanishka. In all these cases what is meant is 'the dynastic or era
year ---- in the reign of ----'.

[90] See below page 34.

[91] McCrindle's Ptolemy, 155.

[92] See above page 29.

[93] See above page 25.

[94] Of these coins Dr. Bhagvánlál kept one in his own collection. He
sent the other to General Cunningham. The Pandit found the copper
coin in Amreli in 1863 and gave it to Dr. Bhau Dáji.

[95] Except that the ja is much clearer the Nágarí legend in the
silver coin obtained for General Cunningham is equally bad, and the
Baktro-Páli legend is wanting.

[96] Ind. Ant. X. 157.

[97] Journal B. B. R. A. Soc. VIII. 234-5 and Ind. Ant. XII. 32ff.

[98] Dr. Burgess' Archæological Report of Káthiáwár and Cutch, 140.

[99] The explanation of the reduction of Jayadáman's rank is probably
to be found in the Násik Inscription (No. 26) of Gautamíputra Sátakarni
who claims to have conquered Suráshtra, Kukura (in Rájputána), Anúpa,
Vidarbha (Berár), Ákara, and Avanti (Ujain). (A. M. T. J.)

[100] See below page 39.

[101] Several small mixed metal coins weighing from 3 to 10 grains
with on the obverse an elephant in some and a bull in others and on
the reverse the usual arched Kshatrapa symbol have been found in Málwa
and Káthiáváda. The symbols show them to be of the lowest Kshatrapa
currency. Several of them bear dates from which it is possible as
in the case of Rudrasimha's and Rudrasena's coins to infer to what
Kshatrapa they belonged. Lead coins have also been found at Amreli
in Káthiáváda. They are square and have a bull on the obverse and on
the reverse the usual arched Kshatrapa symbol with underneath it the
date 184.

[102] Compare however Weber, Hist. of Indian Lit. 187-8.

[103] Jour. B. B. R. A. S. VII. 114.

[104] Ind. Ant. II. 156; V. 50, 154 &c.

[105] Ákarávanti that is Ákara and Avanti are two names which
are always found together. Cf. Gotamíputra's Násik inscription
(No. 26). Avanti is well known as being the name of the part of Málwa
which contains Ujjain. Ákara is probably the modern province of Bhilsa
whose capital was Vidisa the modern deserted city of Besnagar. Instead
of Ákarávanti Brihatsamhitá mentions Ákaravenávantaka of which the
third name Vená Pandit Bhagvánlál took to be the country about the
Sagara zilla containing the old town of Eran, near which still flows a
river called Vená. The adjectives east and west are used respectively
as referring to Ákara which is East Málwa and Avanti which is West
Málwa. Compare Indian Antiquary, VII. 259; Bombay Gazetteer, XVI. 631.

[106] Anúpa is a common noun literally meaning well-watered. The
absence of the term nîvrit or 'country' which is in general superadded
to it shows that Anúpa is here used as a proper noun, meaning the
Anúpa country. Dr. Bhagvánlál was unable to identify Anúpa. He took
it to be the name of some well-watered tract near Gujarát.

[107] See above page 10 note 1. The greater part of North Gujarát
was probably included in Svabhra.

[108] Maru is the well known name of Márwár.

[109] Kachchha is the flourishing state still known by the name
of Cutch.

[110] Sindhu Sauvíra like Ákarávanti are two names usually found
together. Sindhu is the modern Sind and Sauvíra may have been part of
Upper Sind, the capital of which is mentioned as Dáttámitrî. Alberuni
(I. 300) defines Sauvíra as including Multán and Jahráwár.

[111] Nothing is known about Kukura and it cannot be identified. It
was probably part of East Rájputána.

[112] Aparánta meaning the Western End is the western seaboard from
the Mahi in the north to Goa in the south. Ind. Ant. VII. 259. The
portion of Aparánta actually subject to Rudradáman must have been
the country between the Mahi and the Damanganga as at this time the
North Konkan was subject to the Ándhras.

[113] Nisháda cannot be identified. As the term Nisháda is generally
used to mean Bhils and other wild tribes, its mention with Aparánta
suggests the wild country that includes Bánsda, Dharampur, and
north-east Thána.

[114] Grammar, V. iii. 117.

[115] Compare Gardner and Poole's Catalogue, Pl. XXVI. Fig. 2 &c.

[116] Another variety of their brass coins was found at Behat
near Saháranpur. Compare Thomas' Prinsep's Indian Antiquities,
I. Pl. IV. Figs. 11B 12B and Pl. XIX. Figs. 5, 6, 9. General
Cunningham, in his recent work on The Coins of Ancient India, 75ff,
describes three chief types, the Behat coins being the earliest
and belonging to the first century B.C., the second type which is
that described above is assigned to about A.D. 300, and the third
type, with a six-headed figure on the obverse, is placed a little
later. General Cunningham's identification of the Yaudheyas with the
Johiya Rájputs of the lower Sutlej, seems certain, Rudradáman would
then have "uprooted" them when he acquired the province of Sauvíra.

[117] Mr. Fleet notices a later inscription of a Mahárája Mahásenápati
"who has been set over" the 'Yaudheya gana or tribe' in the fort of
Byána in Bharatpur. Ind. Ant. XIV. 8, Corp. Insc. Ind. III. 251ff. The
Yaudheyas are also named among the tribes which submitted to
Samudragupta. See Corp. Insc. Ind. III. 8.

[118] Huvishka's latest inscription bears date 45 that is A.D. 123
(Cunningham's Arch. Sur. III. Pl. XV. Number 8).

[119] Ind. Ant. VII. 262.

[120] McCrindle's Ptolemy, 152.

[121] McCrindle's Ptolemy, 175.

[122] Jour. B. B. R. A. Soc. XV. 306.

[123] Jour. B. B. R. A. Soc. XV. 313, 314. See also Ind. Ant. XII 272,
where Bühler suggests that the queen was a daughter of Rudradáman,
and traces the syllables Rudradá ... in the Kanheri inscription.

[124] See above page 34.

[125] It seems doubtful whether the Pandit's estimate of fifteen years
might not with advantage be increased. As his father's reign was so
short Rudradáman probably succeeded when still young. The abundance of
his coins points to a long reign and the scarcity of the coins both
of his son Dámázada and of his grandson Jívadáman imply that neither
of his successors reigned more than a few years. Jivadáman's earliest
date is A.D. 178 (S. 100). If five years are allowed to Jivadáman's
father the end of Rudradáman's reign would be A.D. 173 (S. 95) that
is a reign of thirty years, no excessive term for a king who began
to rule at a comparatively early age.--(A. M. T. J.)

[126] Two specimens of his coins were obtained by Mr. Vajeshankar
Gavrishankar Náib Díwán of Bhávnagar, from Káthiáváda, one of which
he presented to the Pandit and lent the other for the purpose of
description. The legend in both was legible but doubtful. A recent
find in Káthiáváda supplied four new specimens, two of them very good.

[127] Apparently a mistake for rudradámnah putrasa.

[128] As in the case of Zamotika the father of Chashtana, the variation
ysa for ja proves that at first ysa and afterwards ja was used to
represent the Greek Z.

[129] The oldest of the four was found by the Pandit for Dr. Bhau Dáji
in Amreli. A fair copy of it is given in a plate which accompanied
Mr. Justice Newton's paper in Jour. B. B. R. A. S. IX. page 1ff. Plate
I. Fig. 6. Mr. Newton read the father's name in the legend Dámasrí,
but it is Dámájadasrí, the die having missed the letters ja and da
though space is left for them. This is coin A of the description. Of
the remaining three, B was lent to the Pandit from his collection by
Mr. Vajeshankar Gavrishankar. C and D were in the Pandit's collection.

[130] This inscription which has now been placed for safe custody in
the temple of Dwárkánáth in Jámnagar, has been published by Dr. Bühler
in Ind. Ant. X. 157-158, from a transcript by Áchárya Vallabji
Haridatta. Dr. Bhagvánlál held that the date is 103 tryuttarasate
not 102 dvyuttarasate as read by Dr. Bühler; that the name of the
father of the donor is Bápaka and not Báhaka; and that the name of
the nakshatra or constellation is Rohiní not Sravana.

[131] Several coins have the same date.

[132] One is in the collection of the B. B. R. A. Society, the other
belonged to the Pandit.

[133] An unpublished inscription found in 1865 by Mr. Bhagvánlál
Sampatrám.

[134] The top of the third numeral is broken. It may be 7 but is more
likely to be 6.

[135] The Jasdan inscription has been published by Dr. Bháu Dáji,
J. B. R. A. S. VIII. 234ff, and by Dr. Hoernle, Ind. Ant. XII. 32ff.

[136] Five have recently been identified in the collection of
Dr. Gerson daCunha.

[137] His name, the fact that he regained the title Mahákshatrapa,
and his date about A.D. 225 suggest that Sanghadáman (A.D. 222-226)
may be the Sandanes whom the Periplus (McCrindle, 128) describes as
taking the regular mart Kalyán near Bombay from Saraganes, that is
the Dakhan Sátakarnis, and, to prevent it again becoming a place of
trade, forbidding all Greek ships to visit Kalyán, and sending under
a guard to Broach any Greek ships that even by accident entered its
port. The following reasons seem conclusive against identifying
Sanghadáman with Sandanes: (1) The abbreviation from Sanghadáman
to Sandanes seems excessive in the case of the name of a well known
ruler who lived within thirty years of the probable time (A.D. 247)
when the writer of the Periplus visited Gujarát and the Konkan:
(2) The date of Sanghadáman (A.D. 222-226) is twenty to thirty years
too early for the probable collection of the Periplus details: (3)
Apart from the date of the Periplus the apparent distinction in the
writer's mind between Sandanes' capture of Kalyán and his own time
implies a longer lapse than suits a reign of only four years.

In favour of the Sandanes of the Periplus being a dynastic not
a personal name is its close correspondence both in form and in
geographical position with Ptolemy's (A.D. 150) Sadaneis, who gave
their name, Ariake Sadinôn or the Sadins' Aria, to the North Konkan,
and, according to McCrindle (Ptolemy, 39) in the time of Ptolemy
ruled the prosperous trading communities that occupied the sea coast
to about Semulla or Chaul. The details in the present text show that
some few years before Ptolemy wrote the conquests of Rudradáman had
brought the North Konkan under the Gujarát Kshatrapas. Similarly
shortly before the probable date of the Periplus (A.D. 247) the
fact that Sanghadáman and his successors Dámasena (A.D. 226-236)
and Vijayasena (A.D. 238-249) all used the title Mahákshatrapa makes
their possession of the North Konkan probable. The available details
of the Káthiáváda Kshatrapas therefore confirm the view that the
Sadans of Ptolemy and the Sandanes of the Periplus are the Gujarát
Kshatrapas. The question remains how did the Greeks come to know the
Kshatrapas by the name of Sadan or Sandan. The answer seems to be the
word Sadan or Sandan is the Sanskrit Sádhana which according to Lassen
(McCrindle's Ptolemy, 40) and Williams' Sanskrit Dictionary may mean
agent or representative and may therefore be an accurate rendering
of Kshatrapa in the sense of Viceroy. Wilford (As. Res. IX. 76, 198)
notices that Sanskrit writers give the early English in India the
title Sádhan Engrez. This Wilford would translate Lord but it seems
rather meant for a rendering of the word Factor. Prof. Bhandárkar
(Bom. Gaz. XIII. 418 note 1) notices a tribe mentioned by the
geographer Varáhamihira (A.D. 580) as Sántikas and associated with
the Aparántakas or people of the west coast. He shows how according to
the rules of letter changes the Sanskrit Sántika would in Prákrit be
Sándino. In his opinion it was this form Sandino which was familiar
to Greek merchants and sailors. Prof. Bhandárkar holds that when
(A.D. 100-110) the Kshatrapa Nahapána displaced the Sátaváhanas or
Ándhrabhrityas the Sántikas or Sandino became independent in the North
Konkan and took Kalyán. To make their independence secure against
the Kshatrapas they forbad intercourse between their own territory
and the Dakhan and sent foreign ships to Barygaza. Against this
explanation it is to be urged; (1) That Násik and Junnar inscriptions
show Nahapána supreme in the North Konkan at least up to A.D. 120;
(2) That according to the Periplus the action taken by the Sandans
or Sadans was not against the Kshatrapas but against the Sátakarnis;
(3) That the action was not taken in the time of Nahapána but at a
later time, later not only than the first Gautamíputra the conqueror
of Nahapána or his son-in-law Ushavadáta (A.D. 138), but later than
the second Gautamíputra, who was defeated by the Káthiáváda Kshatrapa
Rudradáman some time before A.D. 150; (4) That if the Sántikas were
solely a North Konkan tribe they would neither wish nor be able to
send foreign ships to Broach. The action described in the Periplus of
refusing to let Greek ships enter Kalyán and of sending all such ships
to Broach was the action of a Gujarát conqueror of Kalyán determined to
make foreign trade centre in his own chief emporium Broach. The only
possible lord of Gujarát either in the second or third century who
can have adopted such a policy was the Kshatrapa of Ujjain in Málwa
and of Minnagara or Junágadh in Káthiáváda, the same ruler, who, to
encourage foreign vessels to visit Broach had (McCrindle's Periplus,
118, 119) stationed native fishermen with well-manned long boats off
the south Káthiáváda coast to meet ships and pilot them through the
tidal and other dangers up the Narbada to Broach. It follows that
the Sandanes of the Periplus and Ptolemy's North Konkan Sádans are
the Gujarát Mahákshatrapas. The correctness of this identification
of Sadan with the Sanskrit Sádhan and the explanation of Sádhan as a
translation of Kshatrapa or representative receive confirmation from
the fact that the account of Kálakáchárya in the Bharaheswara Vrítti
(J. B. B. R. A. S. IX. 141-142), late in date (A.D. 1000-1100) but
with notable details of the Saka or Sáhi invaders, calls the Saka king
Sádhana-Simha. If on this evidence it may be held that the Kshatrapas
were known as Sádhanas, it seems to follow that Sántika the form
used by Varáhamihira (A.D. 505-587) is a conscious and intentional
Sanskritizing of Sádan whose correct form and origin had passed out
of knowledge, a result which would suggest conscious or artificial
Sanskritizing as the explanation of the forms of many Puránic tribal
and place names. A further important result of this inquiry is to show
that the received date of A.D. 70 for the Periplus cannot stand. Now
that the Kanishka era A.D. 78 is admitted to be the era used by the
Kshatrapas both in the Dakhan and in Gujarát it follows that a writer
who knows the elder and the younger Sátakarnis cannot be earlier than
A.D. 150 and from the manner in which he refers to them must almost
certainly be considerably later. This conclusion supports the date
A.D. 247 which on other weighty grounds the French scholar Reinaud
(Ind. Ant. Dec. 1879. pp. 330, 338) has assigned to the Periplus.

[138] The Pandit's coin was obtained by him in 1863
from Amreli in Káthiáváda. A copy of it is given by
Mr. Justice Newton who calls Sanghadáman son of Rudrasimha
(Jour. B. B. R. A. S. IX. Pl. I. Fig. 7). The other specimen is
better preserved.

[139] One of these coins was lent to the Pandit by Mr. Vajeshankar
Gavrishankar.

[140] One specimen in the collection of Mr. Vajeshankar bears date 158.

[141] One of them was lent by Mr. Vajeshankar Gavrishankar.

[142] This name has generally been read Atridáman.

[143] Jour. B. B. R. A. S. VII. 16.

[144] See below Chapter VI. page 57.

[145] Cunningham's Arch. Sur. X. 127; XV. 29-30.

[146] This coin of Rudrasena may have been taken so far from Gujarát
by the Gujarát monk in whose honour the stúpa was built.

[147] Ísvaradatta's name ends in datta as does also that of Sivadatta
the father of king Ísvarasena of the Násik inscription.

[148] Dr. Bhagvánlál's suggestion that Vijayasena (A.D. 238-249)
was defeated by the Ábhír or Ahír king Ísvaradatta who entered
Gujarát from the North Konkan seems open to question. First as
regards the suggestion that Vijayasena was the Kshatrapa whose
power Ísvaradatta overthrew it is to be noticed that though the two
coinless years (A.D. 249-251) between the last coin of Vijayasena
and the earliest coin of Dámájadasrí agree with the recorded length
of Ísvaradatta's supremacy the absence of coins is not in itself
proof of a reverse or loss of Kshatrapa power between the reigns
of Vijayasena and Dámájadasrí. It is true the Pandit considers that
Ísvaradatta's coins closely resemble those of Vijayasena. At the same
time he also (Násik Stat. Acct. 624) thought them very similar to
Víradáman's (A.D. 236-238) coins. Víradáman's date so immediately
precedes Vijayasena's that in many respects their coins must be
closely alike. It is to be noted that A.D. 230-235 the time of rival
Kshatrapas among whom Víradáman was one (especially the time between
A.D. 236 and 238 during which none of the rivals assumed the title
Mahákshatrapa) was suitable to (perhaps was the result of) a successful
invasion by Ísvaradatta, and that this same invasion may have been
the cause of the transfer of the capital, noted in the Periplus
(A.D. 247) as having taken place some years before, from Ozene or
Ujjain to Minnagara or Junágadh (McCrindle, 114, 122). On the other
hand the fact that Vijayasena regained the title of Mahákshatrapa
and handed it to his successor Dámájadasrí III. would seem to shew
that no reverse or humiliation occurred during the coinless years
(A.D. 249-251) between their reigns, a supposition which is supported
by the flourishing state of the kingdom at the time of the Periplus
(A.D. 247) and also by the evidence that both the above Kshatrapas
ruled near Karád in Sátára. At the same time if the difference between
Víradáman's and Vijayasena's coins is sufficient to make it unlikely
that Ísvaradatta's can be copies of Víradáman's it seems possible
that the year of Ísvaradatta's overlordship may be the year A.D. 244
(K. 166) in which Vijayasena's coins bear the title Kshatrapa, and
that the assumption of this lower title in the middle of a reign,
which with this exception throughout claims the title Mahákshatrapa,
may be due to the temporary necessity of acknowledging the supremacy of
Ísvaradatta. With reference to the Pandit's suggestion that Ísvaradatta
was an Ábhíra the fact noted above of a trace of Kshatrapa rule at
Karád thirty-one miles south of Sátára together with the fact that
they held Aparánta or the Konkan makes it probable that they reached
Karád by Chiplún and the Kumbhárli pass. That the Kshatrapas entered
the Dakhan by so southerly a route instead of by some one of the more
central Thána passes, seems to imply the presence of some hostile
power in Násik and Khándesh. This after the close of the second
century A.D. could hardly have been the Ándhras or Sátakarnis. It
may therefore be presumed to have been the Ándhras' successors the
Ábhíras. As regards the third suggestion that Kshatrapa Gujarát was
overrun from the North Konkan it is to be noted that the evidence of
connection between Ísvarasena of the Násik inscription (Cave X. No. 15)
and Ísvaradatta of the coins is limited to a probable nearness in
time and a somewhat slight similarity in name. On the other hand
no inscription or other record points to Ábhíra ascendancy in the
North Konkan or South Gujarát. The presence of an Ábhíra power in
the North Konkan seems inconsistent with Kshatrapa rule at Kalyán and
Karád in the second half of the third century. The position allotted
to Aberia in the Periplus (McCrindle, 113) inland from Surastrene,
apparently in the neighbourhood of Thar and Párkar; the finding of
Ísvaradatta's coins in Káthiáváda (Násik Gazetteer, XIII. 624);
and (perhaps between A.D. 230 and 240) the transfer westwards of
the head-quarters of the Kshatrapa kingdom seem all to point to the
east rather than to the south, as the side from which Ísvaradatta
invaded Gujarát. At the same time the reference during the reign of
Rudrasimha I. (A.D. 181) to the Ábhíra Rudrabhúti who like his father
was Senápati or Commander-in-Chief suggests that Ísvaradatta may
have been not a foreigner but a revolted general. This supposition,
his assumption of the title Mahákshatrapa, and the finding of his
coins only in Káthiáváda to a certain extent confirm.

[149] Cave Temple Inscriptions, Bom. Arch. Sur. Sep. Number XI. page
57ff.

[150] J. B. B. R. A. S. XVI. 346.

[151] Epigraphia Indica, II. 19.

[152] Ind. Ant. XIII. 81ff.

[153] Ep. Ind. II. 20.

[154] Ind. Ant. VII. 248ff. Dr. Bhandárkar (Early Hist. of the Deccan,
42 note 7) has given reasons for believing this grant to be a forgery.

[155] Ind. Ant. XVIII. 265ff.

[156] J. B. B. R. A. S. XVI. 1ff.; Trans. Vienna Or. Congress, 210ff.

[157] Ind. Ant. XIII. 70ff. and V. 109ff.

[158] Trans. Vienna Or. Congress, 210ff.

[159] Fleet's Kánarese Dynasties, 27.

[160] Fleet's Kánarese Dynasties, 27.

[161] Ind. Ant. XIV. 75 and Jour. B. B. R. A. S. XVI. 1ff.

[162] Mr. Fleet (Corp. Ins. Ind. III. 9) and Sir A. Cunningham
(Arch. Sur. IX. 77) agree in fixing A.D. 250 as the initial date
of the Chedi era. Prof. Kielhorn has worked out the available
dates and finds that the first year of the era corresponds to
A.D. 249-50. Ind. Ant. XVII. 215.

[163] Válmíki's Rámáyana, Ganpat Krishnaji's Edition: Raghuvamsa,
IV. 59.

[164] For details see above page 48.

[165] Tripura four miles west of Jabalpur; Kálanjara 140 miles north
of Jabalpur.

[166] That the era used by the Gurjjaras and Chalukyas of Gujarát
was the Chedi era may be regarded as certain since the discovery of
the Sankhedá grant of Nirihullaka (Ep. Ind. II. 21), who speaks of a
certain Sankarana as his overlord. Palæographically this grant belongs
to the sixth century, and Dr. Bühler has suggested that Sankarana is
the Chedi Sankaragana whose son Buddharája was defeated by Mangalísa
some time before A.D. 602 (Ind. Ant. XIX. 16). If this is accepted,
the grant shows that the Chedis or Kalachuris were in power in the
Narbadá valley during the sixth century, which explains the prevalence
of their era in South Gujarát. Chedi rule in the Narbadá valley must
have come to an end about A.D. 580 when Dadda I. established himself at
Broach. It being established that the Kalachuris once ruled in South
Gujarát, there is no great difficulty in the way of identifying the
Traikútakas with them. The two known Traikútaka grants are dated
in the third century of their era, and belong palæographically
to the fifth century A.D. Their era, therefore, like that of the
Kalachuris, begins in the third century A.D.: and it is simpler to
suppose that the two eras were the same than that two different eras,
whose initial points were only a few years apart, were in use in the
same district. Now that the Saka and the Vikrama eras are known to
have had different names at different times, the change in the name
of the era offers no special difficulty. This identification would
carry back Kalachuri rule in South Gujarát to at least A.D. 456-6,
the date of the Párdi grant: and it is worth noting that Varáhamihira
(Br. Samh. XIV. 20) places the Haihayas or Kalachuris in the west
along with the Aparántakas or Konkanis.

Though the name Traikútaka means of Trikúta, the authorities quoted
by Dr. Bhagvánlál do not establish the existence of a city called
Trikúta. They only vouch for a mountain of that name somewhere in the
Western Gháts, and there is no evidence of any special connection
with Junnar. Further, the word Trikútakam seems to mean rock-salt,
not sea-salt, so that there is here no special connection with the
Western coast. Wherever Trikúta may have been, there seems no need
to reject the tradition that connects the rise of the Kalachuris with
their capture of Kálanjara (Cunningham's Arch. Surv. IX. 77ff), as it
is more likely that they advanced from the East down the Narbadá than
that their original seats were on the West Coast, as the Western Indian
inscriptions of the third and fourth centuries contain no reference
either to Traikútakas or to Junnar or other western city as Trikúta.

With reference to the third suggestion that the Traikútakas twice
overthrew the Kshatrapas, under Ísvaradatta in A.D. 248 and under
Rudragana in A.D. 310-320, it is to be noted that there is no evidence
to show that Ísvaradatta was either an Ábhíra or a Traikútaka and that
the identification of his date with A.D. 248-250 seems less probable
than with either A.D. 244 or A.D. 236. (Compare above Footnote page
53). Even if Ísvaradatta's supremacy coincided with A.D. 250 the
initial date of the Traikútaka era, it seems improbable that a king
who reigned only two years and left no successor should have had any
connection with the establishment of an era which is not found in use
till two centuries later. As regards Rudragana it may be admitted that
he belonged to the race or family who weakened Kshatrapa power early
in the fourth century A.D. At the same time there seems no reason to
suppose that Rudragana was a Traikútaka or a Kalachuri except the
fact that his name, like that of Sankaragana, is a compound of the
word gana and a name of Siva; while the irregular posthumous use of
the title Mahákshatrapa among the latest (23rd to 26th) Kshatrapas
favours the view that they remained independent till their overthrow
by the Guptas about A.D. 410. The conclusion seems to be that the
Traikútaka and the Kalachuri eras are the same namely A.D. 248-9:
that this era was introduced into Gujarát by the Traikútakas who
were connected with the Haihayas; and that the introduction of the
era into Gujarát did not take place before the middle of the fifth
century A.D.--(A. M. T. J.)

[167] Váyu Purána, Wilson's Works, IX. 219n.

[168] Vishnu Purána, III. Chapter 10 Verse 9: Burnell's Manu,
20. Mr. Fleet (Corp. Ins. Ind. III. Ins. 11 note 1) quotes an instance
of a Bráhman named Brahmagupta.

[169] Fleet's Corp. Ins. Ind. III. Ins. 53 line 7.

[170] Compare Skandagupta's Junágadh Inscription line 15,
Ind. Ant. XIV.; Cunningham's Arch. Sur. X. 113; Fleet's
Corp. Ins. Ind. III. Ins. 59.

[171] Compare Mr. Fleet's note in Corp. Ins. Ind. III. Ins. 8.

[172] Fleet's Corp. Ins. Ind. III. 135. Mr. Fleet believes that
the Lichchhavi family concerned was that of Nepál, and that they
were the real founders of the era used by the Guptas. Dr. Bühler
(Vienna Or. Journal, V. Pt. 3) holds that Chandragupta married into
the Lichchhavi family of Pátaliputra, and became king of that country
in right of his wife. The coins which bear the name of Kumáradeví
are by Mr. Smith (J. R. A. S. (N. S.) XXI. 63) and others assigned
to Chandragupta I., reading the reverse legend Lichchhavayah The
Lichchhavis in place of Dr. Bhagvánlál's Lichchhaveyah Daughter's
son of Lichchhavi. On the Kácha coins see below page 62 note 2.

The Lichchhavis claim to be sprung from the solar dynasty. Manu
(Burnell's Manu, 308) describes them as descended from a degraded
Kshatriya. Beal (R. A. S. N. S. XIV. 39) would identify them with an
early wave of the Yuechi or Kusháns; Smith (J. R. A. S. XX. 55 n. 2)
and Hewitt (J. R. A. S. XX. 355-366) take them to be a Kolarian or
local tribe. The fame of the Lichchhavis of Vaísáli or Passalæ between
Patna and Tirhút goes back to the time of Gautama Buddha (B.C. 480) in
whose funeral rites the Lichchhavis and their neighbours and associates
the Mallas took a prominent share (Rockhill's Life of Buddha, 62-63,
145, 203. Compare Legge's Fa Hien, 71-76; Beal's Buddhist Records,
II. 67, 70, 73, 77 and 81 note). According to Buddhist writings the
first king of Thibet (A.D. 50) who was elected by the chiefs of the
South Thibet tribes was a Lichchhavi the son of Prasenadjit of Kosala
(Rockhill's Life of Buddha, 208). Between the seventh and ninth
centuries (A.D. 635-854) a family of Lichchhavis was ruling in Nepal
(Fleet's Corp. Ins. Ind. III. 134). The earliest historical member of
the Nepál family is Jayadeva I. whose date is supposed to be about
A.D. 330 to 355. Mr. Fleet (Ditto, 135) suggests that Jayadeva's
reign began earlier and may be the epoch from which the Gupta era of
A.D. 318-319 is taken. He holds (Ditto, 136) that in all probability
the so-called Gupta era is a Lichchhavi era.

[173] The figure of the Ganges standing on an alligator with a stalked
lotus in her left hand on the reverse of the gold coins of Samudragupta
the fourth king of the dynasty may be taken to be the Sri or Luck of
the Guptas. Compare Smith's Gupta Coinage, J. Beng. A. S. LIII. Plate
I. Fig. 10. J. R. A. S. (N. S.) XXI. Pl. I. 2.

[174] The presence of the two letters ka ca that is ka cha on the
obverse under the arm of the royal figure, has led the late Mr. Thomas,
General Cunningham, and Mr. Smith to suppose that the coins belonged
to Ghatotkacha, the last two letters of the name being the same. This
identification seems improbable. Ghatotkacha was never powerful enough
to have a currency of his own. Sarvarájochchhettá the attribute on
the reverse is one of Samudragupta's epithets, while the figure
of the king on the obverse grasping the standard with the disc,
illustrating the attribute of universal sovereignty, can refer to
none other than Samudragupta the first very powerful king of the
dynasty. Perhaps the Kacha or Kácha on these coins is a pet or child
name of Samudragupta. Mr. Rapson (Numismatic Chron. 3rd Ser. XI. 48ff)
has recently suggested that the Kácha coins belong to an elder brother
and predecessor of Samudragupta. But it seems unlikely that a ruler who
could justly claim the title Destroyer-of-all-kings should be passed
over in silence in the genealogy. Further, as is remarked above, the
title Sarvarájochchhettá belongs in the inscriptions to Samudragupta
alone: and the fact that in his lifetime Samudragupta's father chose
him as successor is against his exclusion from the throne even for
a time.

[175] Smith's Gupta Coinage in J. R. A. S. (N. S.) XXI. Pl. I. 10.

[176] Compare Wilson's Ariana Antiqua, Pl. XVIII. Fig. 8, which has
the same legend with me for mama.

[177] Smith J. R. A. S. (N. S.) XXI. Pl. I. 11, 12.

[178] Smith J. R. A. S. (N. S.) XXI. Pl. I. 4.

[179] Smith J. R. A. S. (N. S.) XXI. Pl. I. Mr. Smith reads
Lichchhavayah (the Lichchhavis) and assigns this type to Chandragupta
I.

[180] Corpus Ins. Ind. III. 1.

[181] Smith J. R. A. S. (N. S.) XXI. Pl. I. 5, 6.

[182] Apparently South Kosala, the country about Raipur and
Chhattísgarh.

[183] Fleet reads Mantarája of Kerala.

[184] Fleet divides the words differently and translates "Mahendra
of Pishtapura, Svámidatta of Kottura on the hill."

[185] Fleet reads "Nílarája of Avamukta."

[186] Fleet reads Palakka or Pálakka.

[187] Arch. Surv. II. 310; J. B. A. S. 1865. 115-121.

[188] Samatata is the Ganges delta: Daváka may, as Mr. Fleet suggests,
be Dacca: for Karttrika Mr. Fleet reads Kartripura, otherwise Cuttack
might be intended.

[189] For the Málavas see above page 24. The Arjunáyanas can hardly
be the Kalachuris as Mr. Fleet (C. I. I. III. 10) has suggested, as
Varáha Mihira (Br. S. XIV. 25) places the Arjunáyanas in the north near
Trigarta, and General Cunningham's coin (Coins of Ancient India, 90)
points to the same region. The Yaudheyas lived on the lower Sutlej:
see above page 36. The Mádrakas lived north-east of the Yaudheyas
between the Chenáb and the Sutlej (Cunningham Anc. Geog. 185). The
Ábhíras must be those on the south-east border of Sindh. The Prárjunas
do not appear to be identifiable. A Sanakáníka Mahárája is mentioned
(C. I. I. III. 3) as dedicating an offering at Udayagiri near Bhilsá,
but we have no clue to the situation of his government. The name of
his grandfather, Chhagalaga, has a Turkí look. Káka may be Kákúpur
near Bithúr (Cunningham Anc. Geog. 386). Kharaparika has not been
identified.--(A. M. T. J.)

[190] Mr. Fleet translates "(giving) Garuda-tokens, (surrendering)
the enjoyment of their own territories."

[191] The first three names Devaputra, Sháhi, and Sháhánusháhi,
belong to the Kushán dynasty of Kanishka (A.D. 78). Sháhánusháhi is
the oldest, as it appears on the coins from Kanishka downwards in
the form Sháhanáno Sháho (Stein in Babylonian and Oriental Record,
I. 163). It represents the old Persian title Sháhansháh or king of
kings. Sháhi, answering to the simple Sháh, appears to be first used
alone by Vásudeva (A.D. 128-176). The title of Devaputra occurs first
in the inscriptions of Kanishka. In the present inscription all three
titles seem to denote divisions of the Kushán empire in India. The
title of Sháhi was continued by the Turks (A.D. 600?-900) and Bráhmans
(A.D. 900-1000) of Kábul (Alberuni, II. 10) and by the Sháhis (Elliot,
I. 138) of Alor in Sindh (A.D. 490?-631). Unless it refers to the
last remnants of the Gujarát Mahákshatrapas the word Saka seems to
be used in a vague sense in reference to the non-Indian tribes of the
North-West frontier. The Murundas may be identified with the Murundas
of the Native dictionaries, and hence with the people of Lampáka or
Lamghán twenty miles north-west of Jalálábád. It is notable that in the
fifth century A.D. Jayanátha, Mahárája of Uchchakalpa (not identified)
married a Murundadeví (Corp. Ins. Ind. III. 128, 131, 136).

The mention of the king of Simhala and the Island Kings rounds off
the geographical picture. Possibly after the Chinese fashion presents
from these countries may have been magnified into tribute. Or Simhala
may here stand, not for Ceylon, but for one of the many Simhapuras
known to Indian geography. Sihor in Káthiáváda, an old capital,
may possibly be the place referred to. The Island Kings would then
be the chiefs of Cutch and Káthiáváda.--(A. M. T. J.)

[192] Corp. Ins. Ind. III. Ins. 6.

[193] Corp. Ins. Ind. III. Ins. 3.

[194] Corp. Ins. Ind. III. Ins. 5.

[195] Mr. Fleet (Corp. Ins. Ind. III. Ins. 33) prefers to take Devarája
to be the name of Chandragupta's minister.

[196] J. R. A. S. (N. S.) XXI. 120.

[197] J. R. A. S. (N. S.) XXI. 121.

[198] Mr. Fleet (Corp. Ins. Ind. III. Introd. 130ff) argues that
the era was borrowed from Nepal after Chandragupta I. married his
Lichchhavi queen. Dr. Bühler thinks there is no evidence of this,
and that the era was started by the Guptas themselves (Vienna
Or. Jl. V. Pt. 3).

[199] The further suggestion may be offered that if as seems probable
Dr. Bhagvánlál is correct in considering Chandragupta II. to be the
founder of the Gupta era this high honour was due not to his conquest
of Málwa but to some success against the Indo-Skythians or Sakas
of the Punjáb. The little more than nominal suzerainty claimed over
the Devputras, Sháhis, and Sháhánusháhis in Chandragupta's father's
inscription shows that when he came to the throne Chandragupta found
the Saka power practically unbroken. The absence of reference to
conquests is no more complete in the case of the Panjáb than it is in
the case of Gujarát or of Káthiáváda which Chandragupta is known to
have added to his dominions. In Káthiáváda, though not in Gujarát,
the evidence from coins is stronger than in the Panjáb. Still
the discovery of Chandragupta's coins (J. R. A. S. XXI. 5 note 1)
raises the presumption of conquests as far north and west as Pánipat
and as Ludhiána (in the heart of the Panjáb). Chandragupta's name
Devarája may, as Pandit Bhagvánlál suggests, be taken from the Saka
title Devaputra. Further, the use of the name Vikramáditya and of
the honorific Srí is in striking agreement with Beruni's statement
(Sachau, II. 6) that the conqueror of the Sakas was named Vikramáditya
and that to the conqueror's name was added the title Srí. Mr. Fleet
(Corp. Ins. Ind. III. 37 note 2) holds it not improbable that either
Chandragupta I. or II. defeated the Indo-Skythians. The fact that
Chandragupta I. was not a ruler of sufficient importance to issue
coins and that even after his son Samudragupta's victories the Sakas
remained practically independent make it almost certain that if any
subjection of the Sakas to the Guptas took place it happened during
the reign of Chandragupta II.

[200] Corp. Ins. Ind. III. Ins. 10.

[201] Corp. Ins. Ind. III. Ins. 8, 9, 10 and 11.

[202] J. R. A. S. (N. S.) XXI. 123.

[203] J. R. A. S. (N. S.) XXI. 126. That Kumáragupta's two successors,
Skandagupta and Budhagupta, use the same phrase devam jayati makes
the explanation in the text doubtful. As Mr. Smith (Ditto) suggests
devam is probably a mistake for devo, meaning His Majesty. The
legend would then run; Kumaraguptadeva lord of the earth ... is
triumphant. Dr. Bhagvánlál would have preferred devo (see page 70
note 2) but could not neglect the anusrára.--(A. M. T. J.)

[204] Corp. Ins. Ind. III. Ins. 13.

[205] Mr. Fleet (Corp. Ins. Ind. III. 53, 55) reads "nítá triyámá"
and translates "a (whole) night was spent." Dr. Bhagvánlál read
"nítás trimásáh."

[206] Mr. Fleet finds that Pushyamitra is the name of a tribe not
of a king. No. VI. of Dr. Bühler's Jain inscriptions from Mathurá
(Ep. Ind. I. 378ff) mentions a Pushyamitriya-kula of the Váranagana,
which is also referred to in Bhadrabáhu's Kalpa-sútra (Jacobi's
Edition, 80), but is there referred to the Chárana-gana, no doubt
a misreading for the Várana of the inscription. Dr. Bühler points
out that Varana is the old name of Bulandshahr in the North-West
Provinces, so that it is there that we must look for the power that
first weakened the Guptas.--(A. M. T. J.)

[207] See V. de St. Martin's Essay, Les Huns Blancs; Specht in Journal
Asiatique Oct.-Dec. 1883 and below page 74.

[208] In Rudradáman's inscription the Palásiní is mentioned, and
also the Suvarnasikatás "and the other rivers," In Skandagupta's
inscription Mr. Fleet translates Sikatávilásiní as an adjective
agreeing with Palásiní.

[209] Remains of the dam were discovered in 1890 by Khán Bahádúr
Ardesir Jamsetji Special Diván of Junágadh. The site is somewhat
nearer Junágadh than Dr. Bhagvánlál supposed. Details are given in
Jour. B. B. R. A. S. XVIII. Number 48 page 47.

[210] The reading devo is to be preferred but the anusvára is clear
both on these coins and on the coins of his father. For these coins
see J. R. A. S. (N. S.) XXI. Pl. IV. 4.

[211] J. R. A. S. (N. S.) XXI. Pl. IV. 697.

[212] The known dates of Skandagupta are 136 and 137 on his Girnár
inscription, 141 in his pillar inscription at Kahaon in Gorakhpur,
and 146 in his Indor-Khera copperplate. The coin dates given by
General Cunningham are 144, 145, and 149.

[213] But see below page 73.

[214] Dr. Bhagvánlál examined and copied the original of this
inscription. It has since been published as Number 19 in Mr. Fleet's
Corp. Ins. Ind. III.

[215] J. R. A. S. (N. S.) XXI. 134.

[216] It is now known that the main Gupta line continued to rule in
Magadha. See page 73 below.

[217] Published by Mr. Fleet Corp. Ins. Ind. III. Ins. 36.

[218] Fleet Corp. Ins. Ind. III. Ins. 37.

[219] Fleet Corp. Ins. Ind. III. Ins. 35.

[220] Fleet Corp. Ins. Ind. III. Ins. 33.

[221] Fleet Corp. Ins. Ind. III. Ins. 20.

[222] On Naragupta see below page 77, and for his coins
J. R. A. S. (N. S.) XXI. note Pl. III. 11.

[223] Fleet's Corp. Ins. Ind. III. Ins. 13 lines 10 and 15.

[224] The Pushyamitras seem to have been a long established tribe
like the Yaudheyas (above page 37). During the reign of Kanishka
(A.D. 78-93) Pushyamitras were settled in the neighbourhood of
Bulandshahr and at that time had already given their name to a
Jain sect.

The sense of the inscription is somewhat doubtful. Mr. Fleet
(Corp. Ins. Ind. III. page 62) translates: Whose fame, moreover, even
(his) enemies in the countries of the Mlechchhas ... having their
pride broken down to the very root announce with the words 'Verily
the victory has been achieved by him.' Prof. Peterson understands
the meaning to be that Skandagupta's Indian enemies were forced to
retire beyond the borders of India among friendly Mlechchhas and in a
foreign land admit that the renewal of their conflict with Skandagupta
was beyond hope. The retreat of Skandagupta's Indian enemies to
the Mlechchhas suggests the Mlechchhas are the Húnas that is the
White Huns who were already in power on the Indian border, whom the
enemies had previously in vain brought as allies into India to help
them against Skandagupta. This gives exactness to the expression used
in Skandagupta's Bhitari inscription (Corp. Ins. Ind. III. Number 13
page 56) that he joined in close conflict with the Húnas ... among
enemies, as if in this conflict the Húnas were the allies of enemies
rather than the enemies themselves. For the introduction into India of
foreign allies, compare in B.C. 327 (McCrindle's Alexander in India,
412) the king of Taxila, 34 miles north-west of Ráwalpindi, sending
an embassy to Baktria to secure Alexander as an ally against Porus
of the Gujarát country. And (Ditto, 409) a few years later (B.C. 310)
the North Indian Malayaketu allying himself with Yavanas in his attack
on Pátaliputra or Patna.

[225] Fleet's Corp. Ins. Ind. III. Ins. 14 line 4.

[226] T'oungtien quoted by Specht in Journal Asiatique for
Oct.-Dec. 1883.

[227] Badeghis is the modern Badhyr the upper plateau between the Merv
and the Herat rivers. The probable site of the capital of the White
Huns is a little north of Herat. See Marco Polo's Itineraries No. I.;
Yule's Marco Polo, I. xxxii.

[228] See the Ghazipur Seal. Smith & Hoernle,
J. A. S. Ben. LVIII. 84ff. and Fleet Ind. Ant. XIX. 224ff.

[229] Bihar Ins. Fleet's Corp. Ins. Ind. III. Ins. 12.

[230] Junágadh Inscrip. Fleet's Corp. Ins. Ind. III. Ins. 14.

[231] See note 1 above.

[232] See above notes 1 and 2.

[233] Ind. Ant. XVIII. 225.

[234] Fleet's Corp. Ins. Ind. III. Introdn. 12.

[235] Fleet's Corp. Ins. Ind. Ins. 37 line 4.

[236] Beal's Buddhist Records, I. 169-172 and Rájataranginí, I. 289-326
quoted by Fleet in Ind. Ant. XV. 247-249.

[237] Beale's Hiuen Tsiang, I. 169-171. As Mr. Fleet suggests
the younger brother is possibly the Chandra referred to in
Corp. Ins. Ind. III. Ins. 32 line 5 and Introd. 12 and 140 note 1.

[238] Ind. Ant. XIII. 230 and Corp. Ins. Ind. III. Introdn. 12.

[239] Specht in Journal Asiatique for Oct.-Dec. 1883. Histoire des Wei.

[240] Beal's Buddhist Records, I. c.-cii.

[241] Beal's Buddhist Records, I. xcix.-c.

[242] Beal's Buddhist Records, I. 171. Hiuen Tsiang's statement (Ditto)
that Mihirakula conquered Gandhára after his capture by Báláditya may
refer to a reconquest from his brother, perhaps the Chandra referred
to in note 10 on page 74.

[243] Beal's Buddhist Records (I. c.) suggests that Lae-lih is the
founder's name: in his note 50 he seems to regard Lae-lih as the
family name.

[244] Bühler. Ep. Ind. I. 238. Dr. Bühler hesitates to identify the
Toramána of this inscription with Mihirakula's father.

[245] Beal's Buddhist Records, I. xcix.-c. This is the kingdom which
the Ye-tha destroyed and afterwards set up Lae-lih to be king over
the country.

[246] Maitraka is a Sanskritised form of Mihira and this again
is perhaps an adaptation of the widespread and well-known
Western Indian tribal name Mer or Med. Compare Fleet's
Corp. Ins. Ind. III. 326-327. It is to be remembered that the
name of the emperor then (A.D. 450-500) ruling the White Huns was
Khushnáwaz, a Persian name, the Happy Cherisher.... The emperor's
Persian name, Mihirakula's reported (Darmsteter Jl. Asiatique,
X. 70 n. 3) introduction of Magi into Kashmir, and the inaptness of
Mihirakula as a personal name give weight to Mr. Fleet's suggestion
(Ind. Ant. XV. 245-252) that Mihirakula is pure Persian. The true
form may then be Mihiragula, that is Sun Rose, a name which the
personal beauty of the prince may have gained him. 'I have heard
of my son's wisdom and beauty and wish once to see his face' said
the fate-reading mother of king Báláditya (Beal's Buddhist Records,
I. 169) when the captive Mihirakula was led before her his young head
for very shame shrouded in his cloak.

[247] Specht in Jour. Asiatique 1883 II. 335 and 348.

[248] J. R. A. S. XXI. 721. According to other accounts
(Ency. Brit. IX. Ed. Art. Turk. page 658) a portion of the Jouen-Jouen
remained in Eastern Asia, where, till A.D. 552, they were the masters
of the Tuhkiu or Turks, who then overthrew their masters and about
ten years later (A.D. 560) crushed the power of the White Huns.

[249] The name Jouen-Jouen seems to agree with Toramána's surname
Jaúvla and with the Juvia whom Cosmas Indikopleustes (A.D. 520-535)
places to the north-east of Persia. Priaulx's Indian Travels, 220.

[250] Rawlinson's Seventh Monarchy, 311-349.

[251] Fleet's Corp. Ins. Ind. III. Ins. 25 line 1.

[252] Fleet's Corp. Ins. Ind. III. Ins. 19 line 2.

[253] Fleet's Corp. Ins. Ind. III. Ins 36.

[254] Fleet's Corp. Ins. Ind. III. Ins. 20.

[255] Fleet's Corp. Ins. Ind. III. Ins. 33.

[256] Fleet's Corp. Ins. Ind. III. and Ind. Ant. XVIII. 219.

[257] Priaulx's Indian Travels, 222. Compare Yule's Cathay, I. clxx.;
Mignes' Patr. Gr. 88 page 450. For the use of Kula for Mihirakula,
the second half for the whole, compare Fleet's Corp. Ins. Ind. III. 8
note. As regards the change from Kula to Gollas it is to be noted
that certain of Mihirakula's own coins (Ind. Ant. XV 249) have the
form Gula not Kula, and that this agrees with the suggestion (page
75 note 6) that the true form of the name is the Persian Mihiragula
Rose of the Sun. Of this Gollas, who, like Mihirakula, was the type
of conqueror round whom legends gather, Cosmas says (Priaulx, 223):
Besides a great force of cavalry Gollas could bring into the field
2000 elephants. So large were his armies that once when besieging an
inland town defended by a water-fosse his men horses and elephants
drank the water and marched in dry-shod.

[258] Fleet's Corp. Ins. Ind. III. Ins. 18.

[259] Fleet's Corp. Ins. Ind. III. Ins. 33-35.

[260] Fleet's Corp. Ins. Ind. III. Ins. 35 line 5.

[261] Fleet's Corp. Ins. Ind. III. 151 note 4.

[262] N. Lat. 24° 3'; E. Long. 75° 8'.

[263] Fleet's Corp. Ins. Ind. III. Ins. 33 line 5.

[264] This has already been suggested by Genl. Cunningham,
Num. Chron. (3rd Ser.), VIII. 41. Dr. Hoernle
(J. B. A. S. LVIII. 100ff) has identified Yasodharman with
Vikramáditya's son Síláditya Pratápasila.

[265] Fleet's Corp. Ins. Ind. III. Ins. 33 line 6.

[266] Beal's Buddhist Records, I. 169.

[267] Hoernle in J. B. A. S. LVIII. 97.

[268] See Smith and Hoernle J. B. A. S. LVIII. 84; and Fleet
Ind. Ant. XIX. 224.

[269] Hoernle makes light of this difficulty: J. B. A. S. LVIII. 97.

[270] Rawlinson's Seventh Monarchy, 420, 422.

[271] Mr. Vajeshankar Gavrishankar, Náib Diván of Bhávnagar, has made
a collection of articles found in Valabhi. The collection includes
clay seals of four varieties and of about the seventh century with the
Buddhist formula Ye Dhárma hetu Prabhavá: a small earthen tope with
the same formula imprinted on its base with a seal; beads and ring
stones nangs of several varieties of akik or carnelian and sphatik or
coral some finished others half finished showing that as in modern
Cambay the polishing of carnelians was a leading industry in early
Valabhi. One circular figure of the size of a half rupee carved in
black stone has engraved upon it the letters ma ro in characters of
about the second century. [The ma and ra are of the old style and
the side and upper strokes, that is the káno and mátra of ro are
horizontal.] A royal seal found by Colonel Watson in Valeh bears
on it an imperfect inscription of four lines in characters as old
as Dhruvasena I. (A.D. 526). This seal contains the names of three
generations of kings, two of which the grandfather and grandson
read Ahivarmman and Pushyána all three being called Mahárája or
great king. The dynastic name is lost. The names on these moveable
objects need not belong to Valabhi history. Still that seals of the
second and fifth centuries have been discovered in Valabhi shows the
place was in existence before the founding of the historical Valabhi
kingdom. A further proof of the age of the city is the mention of
it in the Kathásarit-ságara a comparatively modern work but of very
old materials. To this evidence of age, with much hesitation, may be
added Balai Ptolemy's name for Gopnáth point which suggests that as
early as the second century Valeh or Baleh (compare Alberuni's era
of Balah) was known by its present name. Badly minted coins of the
Gupta ruler Kumáragupta (A.D. 417-453) are so common as to suggest
that they were the currency of Valabhi.

[272] As suggested by Dr. Bühler (Ind. Ant. VI. 10), this is probably
the Vihára called Srí Bappapádiyavihára which is described as having
been constructed by Áchárya Bhadanta Sthiramati who is mentioned as
the grantee in a copperplate of Dharasena II. bearing date Gupta
269 (A.D. 588). The Sthiramati mentioned with titles of religious
veneration in the copperplate is probably the same as that referred
to by Hiuen Tsiang. (Ditto).

[273] Burgess' Káthiáwár and Kutch, 187.

[274] Stories on record about two temples one at Satruñjaya the other
at Somanátha support this view. As regards the Satruñjaya temple the
tradition is that while the minister of Kumárapála (A.D. 1143-1174)
of Anahilaváda was on a visit to Satruñjaya to worship and meditate
in the temple of Ádinátha, the wick of the lamp in the shrine was
removed by mice and set on fire and almost destroyed the temple which
was wholly of wood. The minister seeing the danger of wooden buildings
determined to erect a stone edifice (Kumárapála Charita). The story
about Somanátha is given in an inscription of the time of Kumárapála
in the temple of Bhadrakáli which shows that before the stone temple
was built by Bhímadeva I. (A.D. 1022-1072) the structure was of
wood which was traditionally believed to be as old as the time of
Krishna. Compare the Bhadrakáli inscription at Somanátha.

[275] The correctness of this inference seems open to question. The
descent of the Valabhi plate character seems traceable from its
natural local source the Skandagupta (A.D. 450) and the Rudradáman
(A.D. 150) Girnár Inscriptions.--(A. M. T. J.)

[276] The era has been exhaustively discussed by Mr. Fleet in
Corp. Ins. Ind. III. Introduction.

[277] Nepaul Inscriptions. The phrase acháta-bhata is not
uncommon. Mr. Fleet (Corp. Ins. Ind. III. page 98 note 2) explains
acháta-bhata-pravesya as "not to be entered either by regular (bhata)
or by irregular (cháta) troops."

[278] Bühler in Ind. Ant. V. 205.

[279] Ind. Ant. VII. 68.

[280] Ind. Ant. VII. 68.

[281] Of the different territorial divisions the following
examples occur: Of Vishaya or main division Svabhágapuravishaye
and Súryapuravishaye: of Áhára or collectorate Khetaka-áhára the
Kaira district and Hastavapra-áhára or Hastavapráharaní the Háthab
district near Bhávnagar: of Pathaka or sub-division Nagar-panthaka
Porbandar-panthaka (Pársis still talk of Navsári panthaka): of Sthali
or petty division Vatasthalí, Lonápadrakasthalí, and others.

[282] Kárván seems to have suffered great desecration at the hands
of the Musalmáns. All round the village chiefly under pipal trees,
images and pieces of sculpture and large lingas lie scattered. To
the north and east of the village on the banks of a large built pond
called Kásíkunda are numerous sculptures and lingas. Partly embedded
in the ground a pillar in style of about the eleventh century has a
writing over it of latter times. The inscription contains the name of
the place Sanskritised as Káyávarohana, and mentions an ascetic named
Vírabahadrarási who remained mute for twelve years. Near the pillar,
at the steps leading to the water, is a carved doorway of about the
tenth or eleventh century with some well-proportioned figures. The
left doorpost has at the top a figure of Siva, below the Siva a
figure of Súrya, below the Súrya a male and female, and under them
attendants or ganas of Siva. The right doorpost has at the top a
figure of Vishnu seated on Garuda, below the seated Vishnu a standing
Vishnu with four hands, and below that two sitting male and female
figures, the male with hands folded in worship the female holding a
purse. These figures probably represent a married pair who paid for
this gateway. Further below are figures of ganas of Siva. In 1884 in
repairing the south bank of the pond a number of carved stones were
brought from the north of the town. About half a mile north-west of
the town on the bank of a dry brook, is a temple of Chámundá Deví of
about the tenth century. It contains a mutilated life-size image of
Chámundá. Facing the temple lie mutilated figures of the seven Mátrikás
and of Bhairava, probably the remains of a separate altar facing the
temple with the mátri-mandala or Mother-Meeting upon it. The village
has a large modern temple of Siva called Naklesvara, on the site of
some old temple and mostly built of old carved temple stones. In the
temple close by are a number of old images of the sun and the boar
incarnation of Vishnu all of about the tenth or eleventh century. The
name Naklesvara would seem to have been derived from Nakulisa the
founder of the Pásupata sect and the temple may originally have had
an image of Nakulisa himself or a linga representing Nakulísa. Close
to the west of the village near a small dry reservoir called the
Kunda of Rájarájesvara lies a well-preserved black stone seated
figure of Chanda one of the most respected of Siva's attendants,
without whose worship all worship of Siva is imperfect, and to whom
all that remains after making oblations to Siva is offered. A number
of other sculptures lie on the bank of the pond. About a mile to the
south of Kárván is a village called Lingthali the place of lingas.

[283] Compare Beal Buddhist Records, II. 268 note 76 and
Ind. Ant. VI. 9. The meaning and reference of the title Bappa have
been much discussed. The question is treated at length by Mr. Fleet
(Corp. Ins. Ind. III. 186 note 1) with the result that the title is
applied not to a religious teacher but to the father and predecessor
of the king who makes the grant. According to Mr. Fleet bappa would
be used in reference to a father, báva in reference to an uncle.

[284] Whether the Valabhis were or were not Gurjjaras the following
facts favour the view that they entered Gujarát from Málwa. It has
been shown (Fleet Ind. Ant. XX. 376) that while the Guptas used the
so-called Northern year beginning with Chaitra, the Valabhi year
began with Kártika (see Ind. Ant. XX. 376). And further Kielhorn
in his examination of questions connected with the Vikrama era
(Ind. Ant. XIX. and XX.) has given reasons for believing that the
original Vikrama year began with Kártika and took its rise in Málwa. It
seems therefore that when they settled in Gujarát, while they adopted
the Gupta era the Valabhis still adhered to the old arrangement of
the year to which they had been accustomed in their home in Málwa. The
arrangement of the year entered into every detail of their lives, and
was therefore much more difficult to change than the starting point of
their era, which was important only for official acts.--(A. M. T. J.)

[285] Montfauçon's Edition in Priaulx's Indian Travels, 222-223. It
seems doubtful if Cosmas meant that Gollas' overlordship spread as
far south as Kalyán. Compare Migne's Patrologiæ Cursus, lxxxviii. 466;
Yule's Cathay, I. clxx.

[286] The Mehrs seem to have remained in power also in north-east
Káthiáváda till the thirteenth century. Mokheráji Gohil the famous
chief of Piram was the son of a daughter of Dhan Mehr or Mair of
Dhanduka, Rás Mála, I. 316.

[287] All the silver and copper coins found in Valabhi and in the
neighbouring town of Sihor are poor imitations of Kumáragupta's
(A.D. 417-453) and of Skandagupta's (A.D. 454-470) coins, smaller
lighter and of bad almost rude workmanship. The only traces
of an independent currency are two copper coins of Dharasena,
apparently Dharasena IV., the most powerful of the dynasty who was
called Chakravartin or Emperor. The question of the Gupta-Valabhi
coins is discussed in Jour. Royal As. Socy. for Jan. 1893 pages
133-143. Dr. Bühler (page 138) holds the view put forward in this
note of Dr. Bhagvánlál's namely that the coins are Valabhi copies
of Gupta currency. Mr. Smith (Ditto, 142-143) thinks they should be
considered the coins of the kings whose names they bear.

[288] The three types of coins still current at Ujjain, Bhilsa, and
Gwálior in the territories of His Highness Sindhia are imitations of
the previous local Muhammadan coinage.

[289] As the date of Dronasimha's investiture is about A.D. 520
it is necessary to consider what kings at this period claimed the
title of supreme lord and could boast of ruling the whole earth. The
rulers of this period whom we know of are Mihirakula, Yasodharman
Vishnuvardhana, the descendants of Kumáragupta's son Puragupta, and
the Gupta chiefs of Eastern Málwa. Neither Toramána nor Mihirakula
appears to have borne the paramount title of Paramesvara though the
former is called Mahárájádhirája in the Eran inscription and Avanipati
or Lord of the Earth (= simply king) on his coins: in the Gwálior
inscription Mihirakula is simply called Lord of the Earth. He was a
powerful prince but he could hardly claim to be ruler of "the whole
circumference of the earth." He therefore cannot be the installer of
Dronasimha. Taking next the Guptas of Magadha we find on the Bhitári
seal the title of Mahárájádhirája given to each of them, but there
is considerable reason to believe that their power had long since
shrunk to Magadha and Eastern Málwa, and if Hiuen Tsiang's Báláditya
is Narasimhagupta, he must have been about A.D. 520 a feudatory
of Mihirakula, and could not be spoken of as supreme lord, nor as
ruler of the whole earth. The Guptas of Málwa have even less claim
to these titles, as Bhánugupta was a mere Mahárája, and all that
is known of him is that he won a battle at Eran in Eastern Málwa
in A.D. 510-11. Last of all comes Vishnuvardhana or Yasodharman
of Mandasor. In one of the Mandasor inscriptions he has the titles
of Rájádhirája and Paramesvara (A.D. 532-33); in another he boasts
of having carried his conquests from the Lauhitya (Brahmaputra) to
the western ocean and from the Himálaya to mount Mahendra. It seems
obvious that Yasodharman is the Paramasvámi of the Valabhi plate,
and that the reference to the western ocean relates to Bhatárka's
successes against the Maitrakas.--(A.M.T.J.)

[290] Ind. Ant. V. 204.

[291] Ind. Ant. IV. 104.

[292] In a commentary on the Kalpasútra Dandanáyaka is described as
meaning Tantrapâla that is head of a district.

[293] Ind. Ant. VII. 66; IV. 174.

[294] Ind. Ant. V. 206.

[295] Ind. Ant. XIV. 75.

[296] Kumárápála-Charita, Abu Inscriptions.

[297] Ind. Ant. VIII. 302, VII. 68, XIII. 160.

[298] Ind. Ant. VI. 9.

[299] Ind. Ant. VII. 90.

[300] This change of title was probably connected with the increase of
Gurjara power, which resulted in the founding of the Gurjara kingdom
of Broach about A.D. 580. See Chapter X. below.

[301] Ind. Ant. XI. 306.

[302] Ind. Ant. VI. 13.

[303] Kávyamidam rachitam mayá Valabhyám, Srí Dharasena-narendra
pálitáyám.

[304] Ind. Ant. VII. 76.

[305] Journ. Beng. A. S. IV. and an unpublished grant in the museum
of the B. B. R. A. Soc.

[306] Ind. Ant. XI. 305.

[307] Since his authorities mention the destroyers of Valabhi under
the vague term mlechchhas or barbarians and since the era in which they
date the overthrow may be either the Vikrama B.C. 57, the Saka A.D. 78,
or the Valabhi A.D. 319, Tod is forced to offer many suggestions. His
proposed dates are A.D. 244 Vik. Sam. 300 (Western India, 269),
A.D. 424 Val. Sam. 105 (Ditto, 51 and 214), A.D. 524 Val. Sam. 205
(Annals of Rájasthán, I. 83 and 217-220), and A.D. 619 Val. Sam. 300
(Western India, 352). Tod identifies the barbarian destroyers of
Valabhi either with the descendants of the second century Parthians,
or with the White Huns Getes or Káthis, or with a mixture of these
who in the beginning of the sixth century supplanted the Parthians
(An. of Ráj. I. 83 and 217-220; Western India, 214, 352). Elliot
(History, I. 408) accepting Tod's date A.D. 524 refers the overthrow
to Skythian barbarians from Sindh. Elphinstone, also accepting
A.D. 524 as an approximate date, suggested (History, 3rd Edition,
212) as the destroyer the Sassanian Naushirván or Chosroes the Great
(A.D. 531-579) citing in support of a Sassanian inroad Malcolm's
Persia, I. 141 and Pottinger's Travels, 386. Forbes (Rás Málá,
I. 22) notes that the Jain accounts give the date of the overthrow
Vik. Sam. 375 that is A.D. 319 apparently in confusion with the epoch
of the Gupta era which the Valabhi kings adopted. ((Similarly S. 205
the date given by some of Col. Tod's authorities (An. of Ráj. I. 82
and 217-220) represents A.D. 524 the practical establishment of the
Valabhi dynasty. The mistake of ascribing an era to the overthrow not
to the founding of a state occurs (compare Sachau's Alberuni, II. 6)
in the case both of the Vikrama era B.C. 57 and of the Sáliváhana era
A.D. 78. In both these cases the error was intentional. It was devised
with the aim of hiding the supremacy of foreigners in early Hindu
history. So also, according to Alberuni's information (Sachau, II. 7)
the Guptakála A.D. 319 marks the ceasing not the beginning of the
wicked and powerful Guptas. This device is not confined to India. His
Mede informant told Herodotus (B.C. 450 Rawlinson's Herodotus, I. 407)
that B.C. 708 was the founding of the Median monarchy. The date really
marked the overthrow of the Medes by the Assyrian Sargon.)) Forbes
says (Ditto, 24): If the destroyers had not been called mlechchhas I
might have supposed them to be the Dakhan Chálukyas. Genl. Cunningham
(Anc. Geog. 318) holds that the date of the destruction was A.D. 658
and the destroyer the Ráshtrakúta Rája Govind who restored the ancient
family of Sauráshtra. Thomas (Prinsep's Useful Tables, 158) fixes the
destruction of Valabhi at A.D. 745 (S. 802). In the Káthiáwár Gazetteer
Col. Watson in one passage (page 671) says the destroyers may have been
the early Muhammadans who retired as quickly as they came. In another
passage (page 274), accepting Mr. Burgess' (Arch. Sur. Rep. IV. 75)
Gupta era of A.D. 195 and an overthrow date of A.D. 642, and citing
a Wadhwán couplet telling how Ebhal Valabhi withstood the Iranians,
Col. Watson suggests the destroyers may have been Iranians. If the
Pársis came in A.D. 642 they must have come not as raiders but as
refugees. If they could they would not have destroyed Valabhi. If
the Pársis destroyed Valabhi where next did they flee to.

[308] Tod (An. of Ráj. I. 231) notices what is perhaps a reminiscence
of this date (A.D. 766). It is the story that Bappa, who according to
Mewád tradition is the founder of Gehlot power at Chitor, abandoned
his country for Irán in A.D. 764 (S. 820). It seems probable that
this Bappa or Saila is not the founder of Gehlot power at Chitor,
but, according to the Valabhi use of Bappa, is the founder's father
and that this retreat to Irán refers to his being carried captive to
Mansúra on the fall either of Valabhi or of Gandhár.

[309] Reinaud's Fragments, 143 note 1; Mémoire Sur l'Inde, 105;
Sachau's Alberuni, I. 193. The treachery of the magician Ranka is the
same cause as that assigned by Forbes (Rás Málá, I. 12-18) from Jain
sources. The local legend (Ditto, 18) points the inevitable Tower
of Siloam moral, a moral which (compare Rás Málá, I. 18) is probably
at the root of the antique tale of Lot and the Cities of the Plain,
that men whose city was so completely destroyed must have been sinners
beyond others. Dr. Nicholson (J. R. A. S. Ser. I. Vol. XIII. page 153)
in 1851 thought the site of Valabhi bore many traces of destruction
by water.

[310] Lassen (Ind. Alt. III. 533) puts aside Alberuni's Arab expedition
from Mansúra as without historical support and inadmissible. Lassen
held that Valabhi flourished long after its alleged destruction from
Mansúra. Lassen's statement (see Ind. Alt. III. 533) is based on the
mistaken idea that as the Valabhis were the Balharas the Balharas'
capital Mánkir must be Valabhi. So far as is known, except Alberuni
himself (see below) none of the Arab geographers of the ninth, tenth
or eleventh centuries mentions Valabhi. It is true that according
to Lassen (Ind. Alt. 536) Masudi A.D. 915, Istakhri A.D. 951,
and Ibn Háukal A.D. 976 all attest the existence of Valabhi up to
their own time. This remark is due either to the mistake regarding
Malkhet or to the identification of Bálwi or Balzi in Sindh (Elliot's
History, I. 27-34) with Valabhi. The only known Musalmán reference to
Valabhi later than A.D. 750 is Alberuni's statement (Sachau, II. 7)
that the Valabhi of the era is 30 yojanas or 200 miles south of
Anahilaváda. That after its overthrow Valabhi remained, as it still
continues, a local town has been shown in the text. Such an after-life
is in no way inconsistent with its destruction as a leading capital
in A.D. 767.

[311] According to Alberuni (Sachau, I. 21) Al Mansúra, which was
close to Bráhmanábád about 47 miles north-east of Haidarábád (Elliot's
Musalmán Historians, I. 372-374) was built by the great Muhammad Kásim
about A.D. 713. Apparently Alberuni wrote Muhammad Kásim by mistake
for his grandson Amru Muhammad (Elliot, I. 372 note 1 and 442-3),
who built the city a little before A.D. 750. Reinaud (Fragments,
210) makes Amru the son of Muhammad Kásim. Masudi (A.D. 915) gives
the same date (A.D. 750), but (Elliot, I. 24) makes the builder
the Ummayide governor Mansúr bin Jamhur. Idrísi (A.D. 1137 Elliot,
I. 78) says Mansúra was built and named in honour of the Khalif Abu
Jáfar-al-Mansur. If so its building would be later than A.D. 754. On
such a point Idrísi's authority carries little weight.

[312] Elliot, I. 244.

[313] That the word read Barada by Elliot is in the lax pointless
shikasta writing is shown by the different proposed readings (Elliot,
I. 444 note 1) Nárand, Barand, and Barid. So far as the original
goes Balaba is probably as likely a rendering as Barada. Reinaud
(Fragments, 212) says he cannot restore the name.

[314] Though, except as applied to the Porbandar range of hills, the
name Barada is almost unknown, and though Ghumli not Barada was the
early (eighth-twelfth century) capital of Porbandar some place named
Barada seems to have existed on the Porbandar coast. As early as the
second century A.D., Ptolemy (McCrindle, 37) has a town Barda-xema
on the coast west of the village Kome (probably the road or kom) of
Sauráshtra; and St. Martin (Geographie Grecque et Latine de l'Inde,
203) identifies Pliny's (A.D. 77) Varetatæ next the Odomberæ or people
of Kachh with the Varadas according to Hemachandra (A.D. 1150) a class
of foreigners or mlechchhas. A somewhat tempting identification of
Barada is with Beruni's Bárwi (Sachau, I. 208) or Baraoua (Reinaud's
Fragments, 121) 84 miles (14 parasangs) west of Somanátha. But an
examination of Beruni's text shows that Bárwi is not the name of a
place but of a product of Kachh the bára or bezoar stone.

[315] Elliot, I. 445.

[316] Compare Tod (Annals, I. 83 and 217). Gajni or Gayni another
capital whence the last prince Síláditya was expelled by Parthian
invaders in the sixth century.

[317] Compare Reinaud (Fragments, 212 note 4) who identifies it with
the Áin-i-Akbari Kandahár that is Gandhár in Broach. The identification
is doubtful. Tod (Annals, I. 217) names the fort Gajni or Gayni and
there was a fort Gajni close to Cambay. Elliot (I. 445) would identify
the Arab Kandahár with Khandadár in north-west Káthiáváda.

Even after A.D. 770 Valabhi seems to have been attacked by the
Arabs. Dr. Bhagvánlál notices that two Jain dates for the destruction
of the city 826 and 886 are in the Vira era and that this means
not the Mahávira era of B.C. 526 but the Vikram era of B.C. 57. The
corresponding dates are therefore A.D. 769 and 829. Evidence in support
of the A.D. 769 and 770 defeat is given in the text. On behalf of
Dr. Bhagvánlál's second date A.D. 829 it is remarkable that in or
about A.D. 830 (Elliot, I. 447) Músa the Arab governor of Sindh
captured Bála the ruler of As Sharqi. As there seems no reason to
identify this As Sharqi with the Sindh lake of As Sharqi mentioned
in a raid in A.D. 750 (Elliot, I. 441: J. R. A. S. (1893) page 76)
the phrase would mean Bála king of the east. The Arab record of the
defeat of Bála would thus be in close agreement with the Jain date
for the latest foreign attack on Valabhi.

[318] The identification of the Balharas of the Arab writers with the
Chálukyas (A.D. 500-753) and Ráshtrakútas (A.D. 753-972) of Málkhet
in the East Dakhan has been accepted. The vagueness of the early
(A.D. 850-900) Arab geographers still more the inaccuracy of Idrísi
(A.D. 1137) in placing the Balharas capital in Gujarát (Elliot, I. 87)
suggested a connection between Balhara and Valabhi. The suitableness
of this identification was increased by the use among Rájput writers
of the title Balakarai for the Valabhi chief (Tod An. of Ráj. I. 83)
and the absence among either the Chálukyas (A.D. 500-753) or the
Ráshtrakútas (A.D. 753-972) of Málkhet of any title resembling
Balhara. Prof. Bhandárkar's (Deccan History, 56-57) discovery that
several of the early Chálukyas and Ráshtrakútas had the personal name
Vallabha Beloved settled the question and established the accuracy
of all Masudi's (A.D. 915) statements (Elliot, I. 19-21) regarding
the Balhara who ruled the Kamkar, that is Kamrakara or Karnátak
(Sachau's Beruni, I. 202; II. 318) and had their Kánarese (Kiriya)
capital at Mankir (Málkhet) 640 miles from the coast.

[319] After their withdrawal from Valabhi to Mewád the Válas took the
name of Gehlot (see below page 98), then of Aharya from a temporary
capital near Udepur (Tod's An. of Ráj. I. 215), next of Sesodia in the
west of Mewád (Tod's An. of Raj. I. 216; Western India, 57). Since 1568
the Rána's head-quarters have been at Udepur. Ráj. Gaz. III. 18. After
the establishment of their power in Chitor (A.D. 780), a branch of the
Gehlot or Gohil family withdrew to Kheir in south-west Márwár. These
driven south by the Ráthods in the end of the twelfth century are
the Gohils of Piram, Bhávnagar, and Rájpipla in Káthiáváda and
Gujarát. Tod's Annals of Ráj. I. 114, 228.

[320] The somewhat doubtful Jáikadeva plates (above page 87 and
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.

[695] According to the European travellers in India during the
seventeenth century, provincial governors, and probably to some extent
all large holders of service lands, employed various methods for adding
to the profits which the assigned lands were meant to yield them. Of
these devices two seem to have been specially common, the practice
of supporting a body of horse smaller than the number agreed for,
and the practice of purveyance that is of levying supplies without
payment. Sir Thomas Roe, from A.D. 1615 to 1618 English ambassador
at the court of the emperor Jehángír, gives the following details
of these irregular practices: 'The Pátan (that is Patna in Bengal)
viceroy's government was estimated at 5000 horse, the yearly pay
of each trooper being £20 (Rs. 200), of which he kept only 1500,
being allowed the surplus as dead pay. On one occasion this governor
wished to present me with 100 loaves of the finest sugar, as white
as snow, each loaf weighing fifty pounds. On my declining, he said,
'You refuse these loaves, thinking I am poor; but being made in my
government the sugar costs me nothing, as it comes to me gratis.' Sir
Thomas Roe in Kerr's Voyages, IX. 282-284. The same writer, the best
qualified of the English travellers of that time to form a correct
opinion, thus describes the administration of the Musalmán governors of
the seventeenth century: 'They practise every kind of tyranny against
the natives under their jurisdiction, oppressing them with continual
exactions, and are exceedingly averse from any way being opened by
which the king may be informed of their infamous proceedings. They
grind the people under their government to extract money from them,
often hanging men up by the heels to make them confess that they are
rich, or to ransom themselves from faults merely imputed with a view
to fleece them.' Sir Thomas Roe in Kerr's Voyages, IX. 338.

[696] Of these settlements the principal was that of the Ráthod chief
who in the thirteenth century established himself at Ídar, now one
of the states of the Mahi Kántha. In the thirteenth century also,
Gohils from the north and Sodha Parmárs and Káthis from Sindh entered
Gujarát. Rás Mála, II. 269.

[697] Gujarát of about the year A.D. 1300 is thus described: 'The
air of Gujarát is healthy, and the earth picturesque; the vineyards
bring forth blue grapes twice a year, and the strength of the soil
is such that the cotton plants spread their branches like willow and
plane trees, and yield produce for several years successively. Besides
Cambay, the most celebrated of the cities of Hind in population and
wealth, there are 70,000 towns and villages, all populous, and the
people abounding in wealth and luxuries.' Elliot's History of India,
III. 31, 32, and 43. Marco Polo, about A.D. 1292, says: 'In Gujarát
there grows much pepper and ginger and indigo. They have also a great
deal of cotton. Their cotton trees are of very great size, growing
full six paces high, and attaining to an age of twenty years.' Yule's
Edition, II. 328. The cotton referred to was probably the variety known
as devkapás Gossypium religiosum or peruvianum, which grows from ten
to fifteen feet high, and bears for several years. Royle, 149-150.

[698] Elphinstone's History, 762.

[699] Bird's History of Gujarát, 110, 129, and 130.

[700] The passage from the Mirat-i-Áhmedi, Bird 109, is: 'A sum of 25
lákhs of húns and one kror of ibráhíms, that were two parts greater,
being altogether nearly equal to 5 krors and 62 lákhs of rupees, was
collected from the Dakhan tribute and the customs of the European
and Arab ports.' The word hún, from an old Karnátak word for gold,
is the Musalmán name for the coin known among Hindus as varáha or
the wild-boar coin, and among the Portuguese as the pagoda or temple
coin. Prinsep Ind. Ant. Thomas' Ed. II. U. T. 18. The old specimens of
this coin weigh either 60 grains the máda or half pagoda, or 120 grains
the hún or full pagoda. Thomas, Chron. Pat. Ks. II. 224, note. The
star pagoda, in which English accounts at Madras were formerly kept,
weighs 52·56 grains, and was commonly valued at 8s. or Rs. 4 (Prinsep
as above). At this rate in the present sum the 25 lákhs of húns would
equal one kror (100 lákhs) of rupees. The ibráhími, 'two parts greater
than the hún,' would seem to be a gold coin, perhaps a variety of the
Persian ashrafi (worth about 9s. English. Marsden, N. O. 455). Taking
the two parts of a hún as fánams or sixteenths, this would give the
ibráhími a value of Rs. 4 1/4, and make a total customs revenue of
425 lákhs of rupees. This statement of the revenues of the kingdom
is, according to the author of the Mirat-i-Áhmedi, taken from such
times as the power of the Gujarát kings continued to increase. The
total revenue of the twenty-five districts (£5,840,000) is the amount
recovered in the year A.D. 1571. But the receipts under the head of
Tribute must have been compiled from accounts of earlier years. For,
as will be seen below, the neighbouring kings ceased to pay tribute
after the end of the reign of Bahádur (A.D. 1536). Similarly the
customs revenues entered as received from Daman and other places must
have been taken from the accounts of some year previous to A.D. 1560.

[701] The remains at Chámpáner in the British district of the Panch
Maháls are well known. Of Mehmúdábád, the town of that name in the
district of Kaira, eighteen miles south of Áhmedábád, a few ruins only
are left. In A.D. 1590 this city is said to have contained many grand
edifices surrounded with a wall eleven miles (7 kos) square with at
every 3/4 mile (1/2 kos) a pleasure house, and an enclosure for deer
and other game. (Áin-i-Akbari: Gladwin, II. 64.) The Mirat-i-Áhmedi
makes no special reference to the sovereign's share of the revenue. The
greater part of the £5,620,000 derived from tribute and customs would
probably go to the king, besides the lands specially set apart as
crown domains, which in A.D. 1571 were returned as yielding a yearly
revenue of £900,000 (900,000,000 tankás). This would bring the total
income of the crown to a little more than 6 1/2 millions sterling.

[702] So Sikandar Lodi emperor of Dehli, A.D. 1488-1517, is reported
to have said: 'The magnificence of the kings of Dehli rests on wheat
and barley; the magnificence of the kings of Gujarát rests on coral
and pearls.' Bird, 132.

[703] The twelve Gujarát ports mentioned by Barbosa are: On the south
coast of the peninsula, two: Patenixi (Pátan-Somnáth, now Verával),
very rich and of great trade; Surati-Mangalor (Mangrul), a town
of commerce, and Diu. On the shores of the gulf of Cambay four:
Gogari (Gogha), a large town; Barbesy (Broach); Guandári or Gandar
(Gandhár), a very good town; and Cambay. On the western coast five:
Ravel (Ránder), a rich place; Surat, a city of very great trade; Denvy
(Gandevi), a place of great trade; Baxay (Bassein), a good seaport
in which much goods are exchanged; and Tanamayambu (Thána-Máhim), a
town of great Moorish mosques, but of little trade. (Stanley's Barbosa,
59-68). The only one of these ports whose identification seems doubtful
is Ravel, described by Barbosa (page 67) as a pretty town of the Moors
on a good river, twenty leagues south of Gandhár. This agrees with the
position of Ránder on the Tápti, nearly opposite Surat, which appears
in Al Bírúni (A.D. 1030) as Ráhanur one of the capitals of south
Gujarát and is mentioned under the name Ránir, both in the Áin-i-Akbari
(A.D. 1590) and in the Mirat-i-Áhmedi for the year A.D. 1571, as a
place of trade, 'in ancient times a great city.' In his description
of the wealth of Cambay, Barbosa is supported by the other European
travellers of the fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries. According
to Nicolo de Conti (A.D. 1420-1444), the town, including its suburbs,
was twelve miles in circuit abounding in spikenard, lac, indigo,
myrobalans, and silk. Athanasius Nikotin (A.D. 1468-1474) found it
a manufacturing place for every sort of goods as long gowns damasks
and blankets; and Varthema (A.D. 1503-1508) says it abounds in grain
and very good fruits, supplying Africa Arabia and India with silk and
cotton stuffs; 'it is impossible to describe its excellence.' Barbosa's
account of Áhmedábád is borne out by the statement in the Áin-i-Akbari
(Gladwin, II. 63) that the whole number of the suburbs (purás) of
the city was 360, and in the Mirat-i-Áhmedi, that it once contained
380 suburbs each of considerable size, containing good buildings and
markets filled with everything valuable and rare, so that each was
almost a city. Bird, 311.

[704] Gladwin's Áin-i-Akbari, II. 62-63. Compare Terry (Voyage, 80,
131) in 1615: Gujarát a very goodly large and exceeding rich province
with, besides its most spacious populous and rich capital Áhmedábád,
four fair cities Cambay Baroda Broach and Surat with great trade to the
Red Sea, Achin, and other places. At the same time (Ditto, 179-180)
though the villages stood very thick, the houses were generally very
poor and base, all set close together some with earthen walls and
flat roofs, most of them cottages miserably poor little and base set
up with sticks rather than timber.

[705] The decrease in the Mughal collections from Gujarát compared
with the revenues of the Áhmedábád kings may have been due to
Akbar's moderation. It may also have been due to a decline in
prosperity. Compare Roe's (1617) account of Toda about fifty miles
south-east of Ajmír. It was the best and most populous country Roe
had seen in India. The district was level with fertile soil abounding
in corn cotton and cattle and the villages were so numerous and
near together as hardly to exceed a kos from each other. The town
was the best built Roe had seen in India tiled two-storied houses
good enough for decent shopkeepers. It had been the residence of a
Rájput Rája before the conquests of Akbar Sháh and stood at the foot
of a good and strong rock about which were many excellent works of
hewn stone, well cut, with many tanks arched over with well-turned
vaults and large and deep descents to them. Near it was a beautiful
grove two miles long and a quarter of a mile broad all planted with
mangoes tamarinds and other fruit trees, divided by shady walks and
interspersed with little temples and idol altars with many fountains
wells and summer houses of carved stone curiously arched so that a
poor banished Englishman might have been content to dwell there. This
observation may serve universally for the whole country that ruin and
devastation operate everywhere. For since the property of all has
become vested in the king no person takes care of anything so that
in every place the spoil and devastations of war appear and nowhere
is anything repaired. Roe in Kerr's Voyages, IX. 320-321.

[706] Bird's History of Gujarát. Another detailed statement of the
revenue of Gujarát given in the Mirat-i-Áhmedi, apparently for the
time when the author wrote (A.D. 1760) gives: Revenue from crown
lands £2,107,518; tribute-paying divisions or sarkárs £12,700;
Mahí Kántha tribute £178,741; Vátrak Kántha tribute £159,768; and
Sábar Kántha tribute £121,151; in all £2,579,878: adding to this
£20,000 for Kachh, £40,000 for Dungarpur, and £5000 for Sirohi,
gives a grand total of £2,644,878. According to a statement given
by Bird in a note at page 108 of his History, the revenue of Gujarát
under Jehángir (A.D. 1605-1627) averaged £1,250,000; under Aurangzíb
(A.D. 1658-1707) £1,519,622; and under Muhammad Sháh (A.D. 1719-1748)
£1,218,360. In this passage the revenue under the emperor Akbar
(A.D. 1556-1605) is given at £66,845. This total is taken from
Gladwin's Áin-i-Akbari. But at vol. II. page 73 of that work there
would seem to be some miscalculation; for while the total number of
dáms (1/40th of a rupee) is 43,68,02,301, the conversion into rupees
is Rs. 10,96,123 instead of Rs. 1,09,20,057 1/2. The corresponding
returns given by Mr. Thomas (Rev. of the Mog. Emp. page 52) are under
Akbar, A.D. 1594, £1,092,412; under Sháh Jahán, A.D. 1648, £1,325,000;
and under Aurangzíb, A.D. 1658 £2,173,220, A.D. 1663-1666 £1,339,500,
A.D. 1697 £2,330,500, and A.D. 1707 £1,519,623. The varieties in
the currency employed in different parts of the accounts cause some
confusion in calculating the Gujarát revenue. Under the Áhmedábád
kings the accounts were kept in tánkás or 1/100 of rupees, while under
the Mughals dáms or 1/45th of a rupee took the place of tánkás. The
revenues from Surat Baroda Broach and other districts south of the Máhi
were returned in changízis, a coin varying in value from something
over 2/3rds of a rupee to slightly less than 1/2; the revenues from
Rádhanpur and Morvi were entered in mahmúdis, a coin nearly identical
in value with the changízi, while, as noticed above, the tribute and
customs dues are returned in a gold currency, the tribute in huns of
about 8s. (Rs. 4) and the customs in ibráhímís of 9s. (Rs. 4 1/2).

[707] Áin-i-Akbari (Gladwin), I. 305. The Áin-i-Akbari mentions four
ways of calculating the state share in an unsurveyed field: (1) to
measure the land with the crops standing and make an estimate; (2)
to reap the crops, collect the grain in barns, and divide it according
to agreement; (3) to divide the field as soon as the seed is sown; and
(4) to gather the grain into heaps on the field and divide it there.

[708] The men to whom this 2 1/2 per cent was granted are referred
to in the Mirat-i-Áhmedi as desáis. Whatever doubt may attach to
the precise meaning of the term desái it seems clear that it was
as village headmen that the desáis petitioned for and received this
grant. These desáis were the heads of villages with whom, as noticed
above, the government agent for collecting the revenue dealt, and who,
agreeing for the whole village contribution, themselves carried out the
details of allotment and collection from the individual cultivators. In
the sharehold villages north of the Narbada, the headman who would
be entitled to this 2 1/2 per cent was the representative of the
body of village shareholders. South of the Narbada, in villages
originally colonised by officers of the state, the representatives of
these officers would enjoy the 2 1/2 per cent. In south Gujarát the
desáis or heads of villages also acted as district hereditary revenue
officers; but it was not as district hereditary revenue officers,
but as heads of villages, that they received from Akbar this 2 1/2
per cent assignment. In north Gujarát there were desáis who were only
district revenue officers. These men would seem to have received no
part of Akbar's grant in 1589-90, for as late as A.D. 1706 the emperor
Aurangzíb, having occasion to make inquiries into the position of
the desáis, found that hitherto they had been supported by cesses and
illegal exactions, and ordered that a stop should be put to all such
exactions, and a fixed assignment of 2 1/2 per cent on the revenues of
the villages under their charge should be allowed them. It does not
appear whether the Surat desáis succeeded in obtaining Aurangzíb's
grant of 2 1/2 per cent as district revenue officers in addition to
Akbar's (A.D. 1589) assignment of 2 1/2 per cent as heads of villages.

[709] Bird's History of Gujarát, 409.

[710] Áhmedábád (A.D. 1583) by Muzaffar Sháh the last king of Gujarát;
Cambay (A.D. 1573) by Muhammad Husain Mirza; and Surat (A.D. 1609)
by Malik Ambar the famous general of the king of Amednagar. In such
unsettled times it is not surprising that the European travellers of
the late sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries, between Áhmedábád
and Cambay found native merchants marching in large weekly caravans
which rested at night within a space barricaded by carts. (Kerr,
IX. 127 and 201.) The English merchants, on their way from one
factory to another, were accompanied by an escort, and, in spite of
their guard, were on more than one occasion attacked by large bands
of Rájputs. (Kerr, IX. 127, 187, 201, 203.) As regards the state
of the different parts of the province, Nicholas Ufflet, who went
from Agra to Surat about 1610, describes the north, from Jhálor to
Áhmedábád, as throughout the whole way a sandy and woody country,
full of thievish beastly men, and savage beasts such as lions and
tigers; from Áhmedábád to Cambay the road was through sands and woods
much infested by thieves; from Cambay to Broach it was a woody and
dangerous journey; but from Broach to Surat the country was goodly,
fertile, and full of villages, abounding in wild date trees. (Kerr,
VIII. 303.) Passing from the mouth of the Tápti to Surat Mr. Copland
(24th Dec. 1613) was delighted to see at the same time the goodliest
spring and harvest he had ever seen. 'Often of two adjoining fields,
one was as green as a fine meadow, and the other waving yellow
like gold and ready to be cut down, and all along the roads were
many goodly villages.' (Kerr, IX. 119.) At that time the state of
north-east Gujarát was very different. Terry, 1617 (Voyage, 404),
describes the passage of nineteen days from Mándu near Dhár to
Áhmedábád as short journeys in a wilderness where a way had to be cut
and made even and the great space required for the Mughal's camp rid
and made plain by grubbing up trees and bushes. And between Cambay
and Áhmedábád De la Valle, A.D. 1623 (Travels, Hakluyt Ed. I. 92),
resolved to go with the káfila since the insecurity of the ways did
not allow him to go alone. Still at that time Gujarát as a whole (see
above page 220 note 2) was an exceeding rich province, a description
which twenty years later (1638) is borne out by Mandelslo (Travels,
French Edition, 56): No province in India is more fertile; none
yields more fruit or victuals. With the boast of the author of the
Mirat-i-Áhmedi (A.D. 1756) that Gujarát was the richest province in
India compare Kháfi Khan's (A.D. 1719) remark (Elliot, VII. 530):
This rich province which no other province in India can equal.

[711] Orme's Historical Fragments, 12.

[712] The following are some of the notices of Áhmedábád and Cambay
by the European travellers of the seventeenth century: Cambay,
1598, trade so great that if he had not seen it he would not have
believed it possible (Cæsar Frederick); 1623, indifferent large with
sufficiently spacious suburbs and a great concourse of vessels (De
la Valle, Hakluyt Edition, I. 66-67); 1638, beyond comparison larger
than Surat (Mandelslo, 101-108); 1663-1671, twice as big as Surat
(Baldæus in Churchill, III. 506). Áhmedábád, 1598, a very great city
and populous (Cæsar Frederick); 1623, competently large with great
suburbs, a goodly and great city, with large fair and straight but
sadly dusty streets (De la Valle, Hakluyt Edition, I. 95); 1627,
large and beautiful with many broad and comely streets, a rich and
uniform bazár, and shops redundant with gums perfumes spices silks
cottons and calicoes (Herbert's Travels, 3rd Edition, 66); 1638,
great manufactures, satin and velvet, silk and cotton (Mandelslo,
80); 1695, the greatest city in India, nothing inferior to Venice
for rich silks and gold stuffs (Gemelli Careri in Churchill, IV. 188).

[713] Bird, 411.

[714] The usual explanation of toda garás is the word toda meaning
the beam-end above each house door. The sense being that it was a levy
exacted from every house in the village. A more likely derivation is
toda a heap or money-bag with the sense of a ready-money levy. Toda
differed from vol in being exacted from the garás or land once the
property of the levier's ancestors.

[715] Somnáth (north latitude 20° 55'; east longitude 70° 23'), the
temple of Mahádev 'Lord of the Moon,' near the southern extremity of
the peninsula of Káthiáváda.

[716] Anahilaváda (north latitude 23° 48'; east longitude 72° 2'),
Nehrwála or Pátan, on the south bank of the Sarasvatí river, sixty-five
miles north-east of Ahmedábád, was from A.D. 746 to A.D. 1298 the
capital of the Rájput dynasties of Gujarát. As a result of Muhammad
Ghori's defeat the Tárikh-i-Sorath (Burgess, 112-113) states that the
Turkish Afghán and Mughal prisoners, according to the rule of the
Kuraan (XXIV. 25) were distributed, the wicked women to the wicked
men and the good women to the good men. Of the male prisoners the
better class after having their heads shaved were enrolled among the
Chakáwal and Wádhel tribes of Rájputs. The lower class were allotted
to the Kolis, Khánts, Bábriás, and Mers. All were allowed to keep their
wedding and funeral ceremonies and to remain aloof from other classes.

[717] The Mirat-i-Áhmedi gives an account of an expedition by
one Alifkhán a noble of Sultán Sanjar's against Anahilaváda in
A.D. 1257. He is said to have built the large stone mosque without the
city. Alifkhán returned unsuccessful, but not without levying tribute.

[718] Devgadh near Daulatabad in the Dakhan, about ten miles north-west
of Aurangábád (north latitude 19° 57'; east longitude 75° 18'). The
Mirat-i-Áhmedi has Devgadh Chandah, which is in the Central Provinces.

[719] Jhálor (north latitude 25° 23'; east longitude 72° 40') in the
Rájput state of Jodhpur, seventy miles south-west by south from the
city of Jodhpur.

[720] Bayley (Gujarát, 39 note) shows strong ground for holding that,
though Gujarát was conquered by Ulugh Khán a brother of Alá-ud-dín,
its first governor was not Ulugh Khán but Álp Khán a brother-in-law
of Alá-ud-dín. According to this account Ulugh Khán died in A.D. 1299
and Álp Khán at Malik Káfúr's instigation was killed in A.D. 1315. Ziá
Barni (Elliot, III. 169) supports this account.

[721] According to Ziá Barni (Elliot, III. 218) Hisám-ud-dín was
the mother's brother, according to others he was the brother of Hasan
afterwards Khusraw Khán Parmár the favourite of Mubárak Sháh. On coming
to Gujarát Hisám-ud-dín collected his Parmár kindred and revolted, but
the nobles joining against him seized him and sent him to Dehli. To
their disgust Mubárak in his infatuation for Hisám-ud-dín's nephew
or brother, after slapping Hisám-ud-dín on the face set him at liberty.

[722] In the Karnátak, probably on the Tungabhadra near
Vijayánagar. Briggs' Muhammadan Power in India, I. 418 and 428. Briggs
speaks of two Kampilás one on the Ganges and the other on the
Tungabhadra near Bijánagar.

[723] Asáwal (north latitude 23° 0'; east longitude 72° 36'), a town
of some size, afterwards, A.D. 1413, made the capital of the Musalmán
kings of Gujarát and called Áhmedábád.

[724] Girnár (north latitude 21° 30'; east longitude 70° 42'), in
the Sorath sub-division of the peninsula of Káthiáváda.

[725] Both the Mirat-i-Áhmedi and the Táríkh-i-Fírúz Sháhi say that
the fortress was taken. The Úparkot or citadel of Junágadh, in the
plain about two miles west of Mount Girnár, is probably meant.

[726] Nágor (north latitude 27° 10'; east longitude 73° 50'), in the
Ráthod state of Jodhpur, eighty miles north-east of Jodhpur city.

[727] The Tabakát-i-Akbari has Khánpur or Kánpur. The place is Khambhoi
about twenty miles west of Pátan.

[728] Ídar is the principal state of the Mahi Kántha. The town of
Ídar is in north latitude 23° 50' and east longitude 73° 3'.

[729] Junágadh in the Sorath sub-division of Káthiáváda. This is
Briggs' Rái of Jehrend. Junágadh was formerly called Jirangad, both
names meaning ancient fortress.

[730] Rájpípla is in the Rewa Kántha division of Gujarát.

[731] Sultánpur and Nandurbár now form part of the British district
of Khándesh.

[732] Ásir, now Ásírgad (north latitude 21° 26'; east longitude 76°
26'), beyond the north-eastern frontier of Khándesh.

[733] Mándu (north latitude 22° 20'; east longitude 75° 27'), one
of the most famous forts in India, the capital of the Pathán dynasty
of Málwa, A.D. 1404-1561, stands on the crest of the Vindhyas about
twenty-five miles south of Dhár. During a considerable part of the
fifteenth century Mándu was either directly or indirectly under
Gujarát. An account of Mándu is given in the Appendix.

[734] Ajmír (north latitude 26° 29'; east longitude 74° 43'), the
chief town of the district of the same name to which Sámbhar and
Dandwána belong.

[735] Delváda and Jháláváda are somewhat difficult. The context
suggests either Jhálor in Márwár or Jháláváda in the extreme south-east
of Rájputána south of Kotah. The combination Delváda and Jháláváda
seems to favour Káthiáváda since there is a Delváda in the south of
the peninsula near Diu and a Jháláváda in the north-east. But the
Delváda of the text can hardly be near Diu. It apparently is Delváda
near Eklingji about twenty miles north of Udepur. The account of Áhmed
Sháh's expedition to the same place in A.D. 1431 (below page 239)
confirms this identification.

[736] Pánipat (north latitude 29° 23'; east longitude 77° 2'),
seventy-eight miles north of Dehli.

[737] Farishtah (II. 355) calls the Ídar chief Ranbal.

[738] Compare Farishtah, II. 355-356. After his death Muhammad was
known as Khudáigán-i-Shahíd, Our Lord the Martyr, according to the
custom of the Sultáns of Dehli, all of whom had three names, their
family name, their throne name, and their after-death name whose
letters contain the date of the monarch's decease. Thus the emperor
Akbar's after-death title is Ársh Áshiáni, The Holder of the Heavenly
Throne; the emperor Jehángír's is Jannat Makáni, The Dweller in Heaven;
the emperor Sháh Jehán's is Firdaus Makáni, He Whose Home is Paradise;
and the emperor Aurangzíb's is Khuld Makáni, The Occupier of the
Eternal Residence. Similarly the after-death title of Muzaffar Sháh,
Tátár Khán's father, is Khûdáigán-i-Kabir, The Great Lord.

[739] Dhár (north latitude 22° 35'; east longitude 75° 20'), the
capital of the state of Dhár thirty-three miles west of Mhow in
Central India.

[740] The Tabakát-i-Akbari has Kanthkot a dependency of Kachh. This
is probably correct.

[741] The date is doubtful: Farishtah (II. 630) gives A.D. 1412,
the Áin-i-Akbari (Blochman's Edition, I. 507) A.D. 1411.

[742] Four Áhmeds who had never missed the afternoon prayer helped
to build Áhmedábád: Saint Sheikh Áhmed Khattu, Sultán Áhmed, Sheikh
Áhmed, and Mulla Áhmed. Compare Bombay Gazetteer, IV. 249 note 5.

[743] Called in the Tabakát-i-Akbari the Rája of Mandal.

[744] Sidhpur (north latitude 23° 50'; east longitude 72° 20'),
on the Sarasvatí, fifty-eight miles north of Áhmedábád.

[745] Chámpáner (north latitude 22° 30'; east longitude 73° 30') in
the British district of the Panch Maháls, from A.D. 1483 to A.D. 1560
the chief city of Gujarát, now in ruins.

[746] Modása (north latitude 23° 27'; east longitude 73° 21'), fifty
miles north-east of Áhmedábád.

[747] Mirat-i-Sikandari Persian Text, 34, 35; Farishtah, II. 363, 364.

[748] Sankheda is on the left bank of the Or river about twenty miles
south-east of Baroda.

[749] Mángni Mákani or Mánki, famous for its witches, eight
miles east of Sankheda. Mr. J. Pollen, I.C.S., LL.D. Compare
Bom. Gov. Rec. N. S. XXIII. 98.

[750] Dohad (north latitude 22° 50'; east longitude 74° 15'),
seventy-seven miles north-east of Baroda, now the chief town of the
sub-division of the same name in the British district of the Panch
Máháls. Mr. J. Pollen, I.C.S., LL.D.

[751] Jítpur about twelve miles north-east of Bálásinor.

[752] Ujjain (north latitude 23° 10'; east longitude 75° 47'), at
different times the capital of Málwa.

[753] Sárangpur about fifty miles north-east of Ujjain.

[754] Ahmednagar (north latitude 23° 34'; east longitude 73° 1')
in the native state of Ídar.

[755] Mirat-i-Sikandari Persian Text, 43.

[756] There are two Máhims on the North Konkan coast, one about
twenty-two miles north of Bassein (north latitude 19° 40'; east
longitude 72° 47'), and the other in the northern extremity of the
island of Bombay (north latitude 19° 2'; east longitude 72° 54'). The
southern Máhim, to which Farishtah (II. 370-371) is careful to apply
the term jaziráh or island, is the town referred to in the text. The
northern Máhim, now known as Kelva Máhim, was, as is noted in the text,
the head-quarters of a Hindu chief.

[757] Thána (north latitude 19° 11'; east longitude 73° 6'), the
head-quarters of the British district of that name, about twenty-four
miles north-by-east of Bombay, was from the tenth to the sixteenth
century A.D. the chief city in the Northern Konkan.

[758] Báglán, now called Satána, is the northern sub-division of
the British district of Násik. In A.D. 1590 the chief commanded
8000 cavalry and 5000 infantry. The country was famous for
fruit. Áin-i-Akbari (Gladwin), II. 73. The chief, a Ráthod, was
converted to Islám by Aurangzíb (A.D. 1656-1707).

[759] Dúngarpur (north latitude 23° 50'; east longitude 73° 50')
in Rájputána, 150 miles north-west of Mhow.

[760] Mirat-i-Sikandari Persian Text, 45, 46.

[761] Godhra (north latitude 22° 45'; east longitude 73° 36'), the
chief town of the sub-division of that name in the British district
of the Panch Maháls. The Mirat-i-Sikandari (Persian Text, 49) gives,
probably rightly, Kothra a village of Sáunli or Savli about twenty
miles north of Baroda.

[762] Sultánpur (north latitude 21° 43'; east longitude 74° 40'),
in the north of the Sháháda sub-division of the British district of
Khándesh, till A.D. 1804 a place of consequence and the head-quarters
of a large district.

[763] Kapadvanj (north latitude 23° 2'; east longitude 73° 9'), the
chief town of the sub-division of that name in the British district
of Kaira.

[764] Dholka (north latitude 22° 42'; east longitude 72° 25'), the
chief town of the sub-division of that name in the British district
of Áhmedábád.

[765] Sámbhar (north latitude 26° 53'; east longitude 75° 13'), a town
in the province of Ajmír, about fifty-one miles north-north-east from
the city of Ajmír.

[766] Chitor (north latitude 24° 52'; east longitude 74° 4'), for
several centuries before A.D. 1567 the capital of the principality
of Udepur.

[767] Sirohi (north latitude 24° 59'; east longitude 72° 56'), the
capital of the principality of the same name in the province of Ajmír.

[768] Ábu (north latitude 24° 45'; east longitude 72° 49') in the
state of Sirohi.

[769] The Rája is called Krishna Kishan or Kánh Devra. Ábu is still
held by the Sirohi Devrás.

[770] Mandisor (north latitude 24° 4'; east longitude 75° 9'), the
chief town of a district of the same name in the province of Málwa.

[771] Persian Text, Mirat-i-Sikandari, 75-76.

[772] The Portuguese merchant and traveller Barbosa (A.D. 1511-1514)
gives the following details of Mahmúd Begada's cavalry: The Moors and
Gentiles of this kingdom are bold riders, mounted on horses bred in the
country, for it has a wonderful quantity. They ride on small saddles
and use whips. Their arms are very thick round shields edged with silk;
each man has two swords, a dagger, and a Turkish bow with very good
arrows. Some of them carry maces, and many of them coats-of-mail,
and others tunics quilted with cotton. The horses have housings and
steel headpieces, and so they fight very well and are light in their
movements. The Moorish horsemen are white and of many countries,
Turks and Mamelukes, military slaves from Georgia Circassia and
Mingrelia, Arabs Persians Khorásánis Turkomans, men from the great
kingdom of Dehli, and others born in the country itself. Their pay is
good, and they receive it regularly. They are well dressed with very
rich stuffs of gold silk cotton and goat's wool, and all wear caps
on their heads, and their clothes long, such as morisco shirts and
drawers, and leggings to the knee of good thick leather worked with
gold knots and embroidery, and their swords richly ornamented with
gold and silver are borne in their girdles or in the hands of their
pages. Their women are very white and pretty: also very richly decked
out. They live well and spend much money. Stanley's Barbosa, 55-56.

[773] Mahmúd's favourite trees were the mango ámbo Mangifera indica,
ráen Mimusops hexandra, jámbu Eugenia jambolana, gúlar Ficus glomerata,
tamarind ámli Tamarindus indica, and the shrubby phyllanthus áonla
Emblica officinalis.

[774] Burhánpur (north latitude 21° 18'; east longitude 76° 20'),
under the Musalmáns the capital of Khándesh, now within the limits
of the Berárs.

[775] Gondwána, a large hilly tract lying between north latitude 19°
50' and 24° 30' and east longitude 77° 38' and 87° 20'.

[776] The Mirat-i-Sikandari (Persian Text, page 89) gives the hill fort
of Bárudar. The Persian r may be a miswritten g and the d a mistake
for w that is Baguwar or Baguwarah. The seaport Dûn may be Dungri
hill six miles from the coast. But Dûn for Dáhánu a well-known port
in north Thána is perhaps more likely. Farishtah (Briggs, IV. 51)
gives Bavur for Baru and Dura for Dûn. Compare Tabakát-i-Akbari in
Bayley's Gujarát, page 178 note 2.

[777] Girnár the diadem of Káthiáváda. See above page 231 note 2.

[778] Mangifera indica, Mimusops hexandra, Eugenia jambolana, Ficus
glomerata, Tamarindus indica, and Emblica officinalis.

[779] Khánts are still found chiefly in Soráth. See Bombay Gazetteer,
VIII. 142.

[780] The Tabakát-i-Akbari says they were Játs. Sir H. Elliot
(History of India, I. 496) represents the Sumrás to be Agnikula
Rájputs of the Parmára stock. The Jádejás had been ruling in Kachh
since A.D. 1350-1365.

[781] Dwárka (north latitude 22° 15'; east longitude 69°), on the
north-western shore of Káthiáváda, famous for its temple of Krishna.

[782] The Tabakát-i-Akbari has 'To-morrow the sword of adamant shall
answer your message.'

[783] Farishtah, II. 396-397.

[784] Mirat-i-Sikandari, 112-114.

[785] Dábhol (north latitude 17° 34'; east longitude 73° 16'), on the
north bank of the river Váshishti (called Halewacko and Kalewacko by
the early navigators. See Badger's Varthema, page 114 note 1) in the
British district of Ratnágiri. About this time, according to Athanasius
Nikitin (A.D. 1468-1474), Dábhol was the great meeting place for all
nations living along the coast of India and Ethiopia. In A.D. 1501 it
was taken by the Portuguese. Between A.D. 1626 and 1630 an English
factory was established here, but by the end of the century trade
had left Dábhol and has never returned.

[786] Cheul, now Revdanda (north latitude 18° 33'; east longitude 72°
59'), from about A.D. 1500 to 1650 a place of much trade.

[787] Mahmúd Begada greatly impressed travellers, whose strange tales
of him made the king well-known in Europe. Varthema (1503-1508)
thus describes his manner of living: 'The king has constantly
20,000 horsemen. In the morning when he rises there come to his
palace 50 elephants, on each of which a man sits astride, and
the said elephants do reverence to the king, and, except this,
they have nothing else to do. When the king eats, fifty or sixty
kinds of instruments, drums trumpets flageolets and fifes play,
and the elephants again do him reverence. As for the king himself,
his mustachios under his nose are so long that he ties them over
his head as a woman would tie her tresses, and he has a white beard
that reaches to his girdle. As to his food, every day he eats poison
(Hudibras' Prince whose 'daily food was asp and basilisk and toad'),
not that he fills his stomach with it, but he eats a certain quantity,
so that when he wishes to destroy any great person he makes him come
before him stripped and naked, and then eats certain fruits which are
called chofole (jáiphal, nutmeg), like a muscatel nut. He also eats
certain leaves called tamboli (pán or betel leaf; like the leaves of
a sour orange, and with these he eats lime of oyster shells. When
he has chewed this well he spurts it out on the person he wishes
to kill, and so in the space of half an hour the victim falls to
the ground dead. The Sultán has also three or four thousand women,
and every night that he sleeps with one, she is found dead in the
morning.' Barbosa (A.D. 1511) goes further (Stanley's Trans. 57),
saying that so soaked was the king with poison that if a fly settled
on his hand it swelled and immediately fell dead. This was the result
of his early training. For, on Varthema's companion asking how it
was that the king could eat poison in this manner, certain merchants,
who were older than the Sultán, answered that his father had fed him
upon poison from his childhood. (Badger's Varthema, 110.) Of the
origin of Mahmúd's surname Begada two explanations are given: (1)
'From his mustachios being large and twisted like a bullock's horn,
such a bullock being called Begado; (2) that the word comes from
the Gujaráti be, two, and gad, a fort, the people giving him this
title in honour of his capture of Junágadh (A.D. 1472) and Chámpáner
(A.D. 1484).' (Bird's History of Gujarát, 202; Mirat-i-Ahmedi Persian
Text, 74.) Varthema's account of the poison-eating is probably
an exaggeration of the Sultán's habit of opium-eating to which
from his infancy he was addicted. The Mirat-i-Sikandari (Persian
Text, 751) speaks of the great physical power of Mahmúd and of his
wonderful appetite. Mahmúd's daily food weighed forty sers the ser
being 15 bahlulis a little over half a pound. He used to eat about
three pounds (5 sers) of parched gram to dessert. For breakfast,
after his morning prayer, Mahmúd used to consume a cupfull of pure
Makkah honey with a second cupfull of clarified butter and fifty
small plantains called sohan kelas. At night they set by his bed two
plates of sambúsás or minced mutton sausages. In the morning Mahmúd
seeing the empty plates used to give thanks: 'Oh Allah,' he said,
'hadst thou not given this unworthy slave rule over Gujarát, who
could have filled his stomach.' His virile powers were as unusual as
his appetite. The only woman who could bear his embraces unharmed
was a powerful Abyssinian girl who was his great favourite. Of the
wealth and weapons kept in store the Mirat-i-Sikandari gives the
following details regarding the great expedition against Junágadh
(Persian Text, 94): The Sultán ordered the treasurer to send with
the army gold coins worth five krors, 1700 Egyptian Allemand Moorish
and Khurásáni swords with gold handles weighing 2 1/2 to 3 pounds
(4-5 sers), 1700 daggers and poignards with gold handles weighing
1 to 1 1/2 pounds (2-3 sers), and 2000 Arab and Turki horses with
gold-embroidered housings. All this treasure of coin and weapons the
Sultán spent in presents to his army (Ditto, 94-95).

[788] Ferishtah, II. 404. The Mirat-i-Sikandari (Persian Text, 148,
149) calls the Persian ambassador Ibráhím Khán.

[789] Farishtah, II. 408.

[790] Mirat-i-Sikandari, 166-167; Farishtah, II. 411.

[791] The verse supposed to possess the highest virtue against poison
is the last verse of Chap. cvi. of the Kurâán.... Serve the Lord of
this House who supplieth them with food against hunger and maketh
them free from fear.

[792] Mirat-i-Sikandari (Pers. Manuscript), 174, 175, 194.

[793] Both the Mirat-i-Sikandari (287) and Farishtah (II. 419) place
Munga in Nandurbár-Sultánpur. The further reference to Rána Bhím of
Pál seems to apply to the same man as the Rána Bhím of Munga. Munga
may then be Mohangad that is Chhota Udepur.

[794] Mirat-i-Sikandari Persian Text, 225-226: Farishtah,
II. 425-428. The Gujarát Musalmán historians give a somewhat vague
application to the word Pál which means a bank or step downwards to the
plain. In the Mirat-i-Áhmedi (Páhlanpur Edition, page 168) Pálvaráh,
whose climate is proverbially bad, includes Godhra Ali Mohan and
Rájpípla that is the rough eastern fringe of the plain land of Gujarát
from the Mahi to the Tapti. As the Rája of Nándod or Rájpípla was the
leading chief south of Ídar Colonel Watson took references to the Rája
of Pál to apply to the Rája of Rájpípla. An examination of the passages
in which the name Pál occurs seems to show that the hill country to
the east rather than to the south of Pávágad or Chámpáner is meant. In
A.D. 1527 Latíf Khán the rival of Bahádur Sháh after joining the Rája
Bhím in his kohistan or highlands of Pál when wounded is taken into
Hálol. The same passage contains a reference to the Rája of Nándod
as some one distinct from the Rája of Pál. In A.D. 1531 Ráisingh of
Pál tried to rescue Mahmúd Khilji on his way from Mándu in Málwa to
Chámpáner. In A.D. 1551 Násir Khán fled to Chámpáner and died in the
Pál hills. These references seem to agree in allotting Pál to the
hills of Bária and of Mohan or Chhota Udepur. This identification
is in accord with the local use of Pál. Mr. Pollen, I.C.S., LL.D.,
Political Agent, Rewa Kántha, writes (8th Jan. 1895): Bhíls Kolis and
traders all apply the word Pál to the Bária Pál which besides Bária
takes in Sanjeli and the Navánagar-Saliát uplands in Godhra.

[795] Purandhar about twenty miles south by east of Poona, one of
the greatest of Dakhan hill forts.

[796] Mirat-i-Sikandari, 238, 239; Farishtah, II. 430. According to
the Mirat-i-Sikandari (239) the Sultán enquired on which side was the
loftiest height. They told him that in the direction of Songad-Chitauri
the hill was extremely high. These details show that the cliff scaled
by Bahádur was in the extreme south-west of Mándu where a high nearly
isolated point stretches out from the main plateau. For details see
Appendix II. Mándu.

[797] Mirat-i-Sikandari, 241-242; Farishtah, II. 432.

[798] Halvad is a former capital of the chief of Dhrángadhra in
Káthiáváda.

[799] Gágraun in Central India about seventy miles north-east of
Ujjain.

[800] Rantanbhúr about seventy-five miles south by east of Jaipur.

[801] Mirat-i-Sikandari Persian Text, 266, 268; Farishtah, II. 439.

[802] A detailed account of the death of Sultán Bahádur is given in
the Appendix.

[803] Mirat-i-Sikandari Persian Text, 233. Compare Farishtah, II. 427.

[804] Mirat-i-Sikandari, Persian Text, 292.

[805] A poet of the time, Mulla Muhammad of Astarábád, enshrined the
date H. 947 (A.D. 1540) in the words:

SADD BUWAD BAR SÍNAH-O-JÁNAI FIRANGÍ ÍN BINÁI. May this fabric press
like a pillar on the breast and the life of the Frank.

Farishtah, II. 447. The letter values that make 947 are: S = 60, d =
4, b = 2, w = 6, d = 4, b = 2, r = 200, s = 60, y = 10, n = 50, h =
5, w = 6, j = 3, a = 1, n = 50, f = 80, r = 200, n = 50, g = 20, y =
10, a = 1, y = 10, n = 50, b = 2, n = 50, a = 1, y = 10. Total 947.

[806] Mirat-i-Sikandari, Persian Text, 326-27.

[807] This Imád-ul-Mulk is different from the Imád-ul-Mulk mentioned
above (page 258) as receiving a grant of Broach and Surat. The
latter had before this retired to Surat, and was killed there in
A.D. 1545. (Bird, 266.) Imád-ul-Mulk II. who attacked Burhán, was
originally called Malik Arslán (Bird, 272). He is also called the
leader of the Turks and Rúmi. This Imád-ul-Mulk Rúmi, who was the
father of Changíz Khán, was ultimately killed in A.D. 1560 at Surat
by his own son-in-law Khudáwand or Ikhtiyár Khán.

[808] Mirat-i-Sikandari, Persian Text, 326-27.

[809] This seems to be the palace referred to in the Tabakát-i-Akbari
(Sir Henry Elliot's History of India, V. 369): After his second
settlement of Gujarát (A.D. 1573, H. 981) Akbar left Áhmedábád for
Mehmudábád and rested in the lofty and fine palace of Sultán Mahmúd
of Gujarát.

[810] Mirat-i-Sikandari, Persian Text, 332.

[811] For Pál compare note 2 page 253.

[812] The fort of Daman was taken by the Portuguese in A.D. 1530, and,
according to Portuguese accounts (Faria y Souza in Kerr's Voyages,
VI. 413) the country round was annexed by them in 1558. According
to a statement in Bird's History, 128, the districts surrendered by
Changíz Khán contained 700 towns (villages) yielding a yearly revenue
of £430,000 (Rs. 43,00,000). Sanján, since known as St. John's Head
(north latitude 20° 13'; east longitude 72° 47'), between Daman and
Bassein, seems to be one of the two Sindáns, the other being in Kachh,
mentioned by the ninth to twelfth century Arab geographers. According
to Idrísi (Jaubert's Edition, 172) the mainland Sindán was a great
town with a large import and export trade and well peopled with
rich warlike and industrious inhabitants. Idrísi's (Elliot, I. 85)
notice of an island of the same name to the east is perhaps a confused
reference to the Kachh Sindán which is generally supposed to be the
Sindán of the Arab geographers. In A.D. 842, Sindán then a city of
some size, is mentioned by Al-Biláduri (Reinaud's Fragments, 216-217)
as having been taken by a Musalmán slave Fazl son of Máhán. This Fazl
is related to have sent an elephant from Sindán to the Khalífah Al
Maamún the Abbási (A.D. 813-833) and to have built an Assembly Mosque
at Sindán. (Al-Biláduri in Elliot, I. 129.)

[813] According to Abul Fazl (Akbarnáma, III. 404; Elliot, V. 730)
Muzaffar was a base-born boy of the name of Nathu.

[814] Tabakát-i-Akbari in Elliot's India, V. 339 note 2.

[815] These Mírzás were the great grandsons of a Muhammad Sultán Mírza,
the ruler of Khurásán, who, on being driven out of his dominions,
sought refuge in India. This prince and his family on the ground of
their common descent from Taimûr, were entertained first by Bábar
(A.D. 1526-1531), and afterwards by Humáyún (A.D. 1531-1556). Before
this quarrel Akbar had treated the Mírzás with great honour. Elliot's
History, VI. 122.

[816] The modern game of polo. Lane in his translation of the Thousand
and One Nights (I. 76, 1883 Edition) calls it the golf-stick, but the
nature of the game described there does not in any way differ from
polo. Chaugán is the Persian and As-súlján-wal-kurah the Arabic name
for the game.

[817] The emperor Akbar took Muzaffar Sháh with him to Agra, and
settled on him the districts of Sárangpur and Ujjain in Málwa with a
revenue of Rs. 20,00,000 (50 lákhs of tankás) (Elliot, V. 353). When
Mun'im Khán Khán Khánán was going to Bengal, the emperor made
Muzaffar over to him. Mun'im Khán gave his daughter Sháhzádah Khánam
in marriage to Muzaffar, but shortly afterwards having reason to
suspect him imprisoned him, whence Muzaffar finding an opportunity
fled to Gujarát in A.D. 1581 (H. 989) according to Farishtah (II. 460),
1583 according to the Mirat-i-Sikandari.

[818] Both the Tabakát-i-Akbari (Elliot, V. 342) and Farishtah
(I. 491) name four other nobles Mír Abu Turáb, Sayad Áhmed Bhukhári,
Malik Ashraf, and Wajíh-ul-Mulk. The Sayad Áhmed of these two writers
is a misprint for the Sayad Hámid of the text.

[819] Mirat-i-Sikandari, 415; Tabakát-i-Akbari in Elliot, V. 343.

[820] These details of the Surat expedition are taken from the
Tabakát-i-Akbari in Elliot, V. 343-346 and Abúl Fazl's Akbar-námah
in Elliot, VI. 42.

[821] The emperor Jehángír in his Diary (Tuzuk-i-Jehángíri, Persian
Text, Sir Sayad Ahmed's Edition, page 196) says that Biharji or Viharji
was the hereditary title of the chiefs of Báglán. The personal name
of the Baglán Bihárji of his time was Partáp.

[822] According to the Áin-i-Akbari (Blochmann, I. 325) the province
of Gujarát over which the Kokaltásh was placed did not pass further
south than the river Mahi.

[823] Tuzuki Jehángíri or Jehángír's Memoirs, Pers. Text, Sayad Áhmed
Khán's Edition page 20. For Akbar's march compare Tabakát-i-Akbari
in Elliot, V. 365 and Blochman's Áin-i-Akbari, I. 325 and note. The
Mirat-i-Áhmedi (Pers. Text, 131) records these further details:
When starting from his last camp Akbar began to mount his horse on
the day of the battle that took place near Áhmedábád. The royal steed
unable to bear the weight of the hero laden with the spirit of victory
sat down. Rája Bhagwándás Kachwáhah ran up to the rather embarrassed
emperor and offered him his congratulations saying: This, your Majesty,
is the surest sign of victory. There are also two further signs: the
wind blows from our back and the kites and vultures accompany our host.

[824] Tabakát-i-Akbari in Elliot, V. 405.

[825] Mángrúl (north latitude 21° 8'; east longitude 70° 10'), a
seaport on the south coast of Káthiáváda, about twenty miles west
of Somnáth. This town, which is supposed to be the Monoglossum
emporium of Ptolemy (A.D. 150) (see Bird, 115), is spelt Mánglúr
by the Muhammadan historians. Barbosa (A.D. 1511-1514), under the
name of Surati-mangaler, calls it a 'very good port where many
ships from Malabár touch for horses, wheat, rice, cotton goods,
and vegetables.' In A.D. 1531 the city was taken by the Portuguese
general Sylveira with a vast booty and a great number of prisoners
(Churchill's Travels, III. 529). It is incidentally mentioned in
the Áin-i-Akbari (A.D. 1590). In A.D. 1638 Mandelslo describes it
as famous for its linen cloth, and in A.D. 1700 it is mentioned by
Hamilton (New Account, I. 136) as a place of trade.

[826] This has been rendered by Bird, 353, 'the mountain of Dínár,'
as if Koh Dínár.

[827] H. 992 (1584 A.D.) according to the Tabakát-i-Akbari (Elliot,
V. 428).

[828] Mirat-i-Sikandari, 422. Compare Blochman's Áin-i-Akbari, I. 386.

[829] Mirat-i-Sikandari, 426: Farishtah, I. 503; Elliot, V. 434. In
honour of this victory the Khán Khánán built, on the site of the
battle, a palace and garden enclosing all with a high wall. This which
he named Jítpur the City of Victory was one of the chief ornaments
of Áhmedábád. In November 1613 the English merchant Wittington writes
(Kerr's Voyages, IX. 127): A kos from Sarkhej is a pleasant house with
a large garden all round on the banks of the river which Chon-Chin-Naw
(Khán Khánán) built in honour of a great victory over the last king of
Gujarát. No person inhabits the house. Two years later (1615) another
English merchant Dodsworth (Kerr, IX. 203) describes the field of
Victory as strongly walled all round with brick about 1 1/2 miles in
circuit all planted with fruit trees and delightfully watered having a
costly house called by a name signifying Victory in which Khán Khánán
for some time resided. In 1618, the emperor Jehángír (Memoirs Persian
Text, 210-213) on his way to Sarkhej visited the Khán-i-Khánán's Bághi
Fateh or Garden of Victory which he had built at a cost of two lákhs
of rupees ornamenting the garden with buildings and surrounding it
with a wall. The natives he notices call it Fateh-Wádi. In 1626 the
English traveller Herbert (Travels, 66) writes: Two miles nearer
Áhmedábád than Sirkhej are the curious gardens and palace of Khán
Khánán where he defeated the last of the Cambay kings and in memory
built a stately house and spacious gardens the view whereof worthily
attracts the traveller. Mandelslo writing in 1638 is still louder in
praise of Tschietbág the Garden of Victory. It is the largest and most
beautiful garden in all India because of its splendid buildings and
abundance of fine fruits. Its site is one of the pleasantest in the
world on the border of a great tank having on the water side many
pavilions and a high wall on the side of Áhmedábád. The lodge and
the caravanserai are worthy of the prince who built them. The garden
has many fruit trees oranges, citrons, pomegranates, dates, almonds,
mulberries, tamarinds, mangoes, and cocoanuts so closely planted that
all walking in the garden is under most pleasing shade (Mandelslo's
Travels, French Ed. 111-112). When (A.D. 1750) the Mirat-i-Áhmedi
was written several of the buildings and the remains of the summer
house were still to be seen (Bird's History of Gujarát, 375). A few
traces of the buildings known as Fateh Bádi or Victory Garden remains
1879). (Áhmedábád Gazetteer, 292.)

[830] Two lákhs of mahmúdis. The mahmúdi varied in value from about
one-third to one-half of a rupee. See Introduction page 222 note 2.

[831] Morvi (north latitude 29° 48'; east longitude 70° 50'), a town
in Káthiáváda, about twenty-one miles south of Kachh.

[832] Jagat (north latitude 22° 15'; east longitude 69° 1'), the site
of the temple of Dwárka, at the western extremity of the peninsula
of Káthiáváda.

[833] Verával (north latitude 20° 55'; east longitude 70° 21'),
on the south-west coast of Káthiáváda. On the south-east point of
Verával bay stood the city of Dev or Mungi Pátan and within its walls
the temple of Somanátha.

[834] Jehángír's Memoirs, Persian Text, 23; Blochman's Áin-i-Akbari,
I. 470. Bahádur died about A.D. 1614: Jehángír's Memoirs, 134.

[835] Now belonging to His Highness the Gáikwár about twenty-seven
miles north-west of Áhmedábád.

[836] Belpár, belonging to the Thákor of Umeta in the Rewa Kántha.

[837] This Mándwa is probably the Mándwa under His Highness the Gáikwár
in his district of Atarsumba, but it may be Mándwa on the Narbada in
the Rewa Kántha. Atarsumba is about ten miles west of Kapadvanj in
the British district of Kaira.

[838] Jehángír's Memoirs, Persian Text, 75.

[839] Now belonging to the Rája of Dharampur, east of the British
district of Surat.

[840] In this year (A.D. 1611) the English East India Company sent
vessels to trade with Surat. The Portuguese made an armed resistance,
but were defeated. The Mughal commander, who was not sorry to see
the Portuguese beaten, gave the English a warm reception, and in
A.D. 1612-13 a factory was opened in Surat by the English, and in
A.D. 1614 a fleet was kept in the Tápti under Captain Downton to
protect the factory. In A.D. 1615, Sir Thomas Roe came as ambassador to
the emperor Jehángír, and obtained permission to establish factories,
not only at Surat but also at Broach, Cambay and Gogha. The factory at
Gogha seems to have been established in A.D. 1613. The emperor Jehángír
notes in his memoirs (Persian Text, 105) that Mukarrab Khán, viceroy
from A.D. 1616-1618, regardless of cost had bought from the English
at Gogha a turkey, a lemur and other curiosities. On his return from
Jehángír's camp at Áhmedábád in January 1618 Roe obtained valuable
concessions from the viceroy. The governor of Surat was to lend ships
to the English, the resident English might carry arms, build a house,
practise their religion, and settle their disputes. Kerr's Voyages,
IX. 253. The Dutch closely followed the English at Surat and were
established there in A.D. 1618.

[841] At first Jehángír, who reached Áhmedábád in the hot weather
(March A.D. 1618), contented himself with abusing its sandy streets,
calling the city the 'abode of dust' gardábád. After an attack of fever
his dislike grew stronger, and he was uncertain whether the 'home
of the simoom' samumistán, the 'place of sickness' bímáristán, the
'thorn brake' zakumdár, or 'hell' jahánnamábád, was its most fitting
name. Even the last title did not satisfy his dislike. In derision
he adds the verse, 'Oh essence of all goodnesses by what name shall
I call thee.' Elliot's History of India, VI. 358; Jehángír's Memoirs
Persian Text, 231. Of the old buildings of Áhmedábád, the emperor
(Memoirs, Persian Text, 208-210) speaks of the Kánkariya tank and
its island garden and of the royal palaces in the Bhadar as having
nearly gone to ruin within the last fifty years. He notes that his
Bakhshi had repaired the Kánkariya tank and that the viceroy Mukarrab
Khán had partly restored the Bhadar palaces against his arrival. The
emperor was disappointed with the capital. After the accounts he had
heard it seemed rather poor with its narrow streets, its shops with
ignoble fronts, and its dust, though to greet the emperor as he came
on elephant-back scattering gold the city and its population had put
on their holiday dress. The emperor speaks (Memoirs, Persian Text page
211) of having met some of the great men of Gujarát. Chief among these
was Sayad Muhammad Bukhári the representative of Sháhi Álam and the
sons of Sháh Wajíh-ud-dín of Áhmedábád. They came as far as Cambay
to meet the emperor. After his arrival in the capital Jehángír with
great kindness informally visited the house and garden of Sikandar
Gujaráti the author of the Mirat-i-Sikandari, to pick some of the
author's famous figs off the trees. Jehángír speaks of the historian
as a man of a refined literary style well versed in all matters of
Gujarát history, who six or seven years since had entered his (the
imperial) service (Memoirs, 207-211). On the occasion of celebrating
Sháh Jehán's twenty-seventh birthday at Áhmedábád Jehángír records
having granted the territory from Mándu to Cambay as the estate of his
son Sháh Jehán (Prince Khurram). Memoirs, Persian Text, 210-211. Before
leaving Gujarát the emperor ordered the expulsion of the Sevadas or
Jain priests, because of a prophecy unfavourable to him made by Mán
Sing Sewda (Memoirs, Persian Text, 217).

[842] This was probably the gold ashrafi or seraph of which
Hawkins (1609-1611) says, 'Serraffins Ekberi, which be ten rupees
a-piece.' Thomas Chron. Pat. Kings of Dehli, 425.

[843] The peaked masonry tomb over Aurangzíb's after-birth with its
mosque, enclosure, and intact endowment is one of the curiosities
of Dohad. In a letter to his eldest son Muhammad Muâzzam then
(A.D. 1704) viceroy of Gujarát the aged Aurangzíb writes: My son of
exalted rank, the town of Dohad, one of the dependencies of Gujarát,
is the birth-place of this sinner. Please to consider a regard for
the inhabitants of that town incumbent on you, and continue in office
its decrepid old Faujdár. In regard to that old man listen not to the
whisperings of those suffering from the disease of self-interest:
"Verily they have a sickness in their hearts and Allah addeth to
their ailments." (Letters of the Emperor Aurangzíb: Persian Text,
Cawnpur Edition, Letter 31.)

[844] Elliot, VII. 24.

[845] The words used in the text is tuyúl. In meaning it does not
differ from jágir.

[846] This is one of the first mentions in history of peninsular
Gujarát as Káthiáváda, or as anything other than Sorath or
Sauráshtra. The district referred to was probably united to the
eastern possessions of the Kháchar Káthis and Panchál.

[847] The author of the Mirat-i-Áhmedi says that in his time,
A.D. 1746-1762, these Navánagar koris were current even in Áhmedábád,
two koris and two-thirds being equal to one imperial rupee. They
were also called jámis. The Mirat-i-Áhmedi (Persian Text, 225)
calls them mahmúdis. The legend on the reverse was the name of the
Gujarát Sultán Muzaffar and on the obverse in Gujaráti the name of the
Jám. Usually two mahmúdis and sometimes three went to the imperial
rupee. The author says that in Áhmedábád up to his day (A.D. 1756)
the account for ghi clarified butter was made in mahmúdis. When the
order for melting the mahmúdis was passed a mint was established at
Junágadh but was afterwards closed to suit the merchants from Diu
and other parts who transmitted their specie to Áhmedábád.

[848] The traveller Mandelslo, who was in Áhmedábád in 1638,
says: No prince in Europe has so fine a court as the governor of
Gujarát. Of none are the public appearances so magnificent. He never
goes out without a great number of gentlemen and guards on foot and
horse. Before him march many elephants with housings of brocade and
velvet, standards, drums, trumpets, and cymbals. In his palace he is
served like a king and suffers no one to appear before him unless he
has asked an audience. (Travels, French Edition, 151.) Of the general
system of government be says: The viceroy is absolute. It is true he
summons leading lords of the country to deliberate on judgments and
important matters. But they are called to ascertain their views not
to adopt them. On the one hand the king often changes his governors
that they may not grow overpowerful. On the other hand the governors
knowing they may be recalled at any time take immense sums from the
rich merchants especially from the merchants of Áhmedábád against whom
false charges are brought with the view of forcing them to pay. As
the governor is both civil and criminal judge if the merchants did not
temper his greed they would be ruined beyond remedy. (Ditto, 150.) The
frequent changes of viceroys in Gujarát is explained by Terry, 1615-17
(Voyage to East Indies, 364): To prevent them from becoming popular
the king usually removes his viceroys after one year sending them to
a new government remote from the old one. Terry adds a curious note:
When the king sends any one to a place of government they never cut
their hair till they return into his presence as if they desired not to
appear beautiful except in the king's sight. As soon as he sees them
the king bids them cut their hair (Ditto, 365). It does not seem to
have been cheating to keep up fewer horse than the number named. Terry
(Voyage to East Indies, 391) says: He who hath the pay of five or six
thousand must always have one thousand or more in readiness according
to the king's need of them, and so in proportion all the rest.

[849] Mirat-i-Áhmedi Persian Text, II. 46-47. Pinjárás are cotton
teasers, Mansúris are Pinjárás who worship Mansúr a tenth century
(3rd century Hijrah) saint.

[850] Mirat-i-Áhmedi Persian Text, 237.

[851] Jhábua, now under the Bhopáwar Agency.

[852] Mirat-i-Áhmedi Persian Text, 249.

[853] Mirat-i-Áhmedi, Persian Text, 274, 279.

[854] Ráygad (north latitude 18° 14'; east longitude 73° 30'),
the name given in A.D. 1662 to Rairi, a hill fortress in the Mahád
sub-division of the Kolába collectorate. Shiváji took the place and
made it his capital in A.D. 1662.

[855] Janjira (north latitude 17° 59' to 18° 32') that is Jazírah the
Island, on the western coast, about forty-four miles south of Bombay.

[856] Another post of Islámábád was at Punádra in the parganah of
Ázamábád on the Wátrak about twenty-one miles east-south-east of
Áhmedábád. Ázamábád was built by Ázam Khán during his viceroyalty
(A.D. 1635-1642) and at his request by permission of the emperor
Sháh Jehán was erected into a parganah. For the pay of the garrison
twelve villages were attached from the neighbouring parganahs of
Bahyal and Kapadvanj.

[857] The Mirat-i-Áhmedi (Persian Text, 311) adds that Bahlol's
following of Kasbátis was so poorly equipped that he had to mount
many of them, for whom he could not find horses, on bullocks. The
sense of security in the mind of the Ídar chief bred by contempt at
the sight of this motley crowd was the chief cause of Bahlol's success.

[858] The zakát or purification is the tax required by law to be given
annually to the poor. It is levied on camels, oxen, buffaloes, sheep,
goats, horses, asses, mules, and gold or silver whether in money
or ornaments or vessels. The tax is not levied on any one who owns
less than a minimum of five camels, thirty oxen, forty-five sheep,
five horses, two hundred dirhems or twenty dinárs. The proportion
to income is generally one-fortieth; the amount may be paid either
in kind or in money. Compare Stanley Lane Poole's Arabian Society in
the Middle Ages, 14.

[859] This Sámprah according to the Mirat-i-Áhmedi, Persian Text,
II. 127, was a small police post or thána in Parganah Bahyal,
twenty miles north-east of Áhmedábád. It is now in the Gáekwár's
territory. Bahyal was under Pátan, so in the text the place is
described as under Pátan.

[860] The surkh or little black-dotted red seed of the
Abrus precatorius is called ghúngchi in Hindi and cock's-eye,
chashmi-i-khurús, in Persian. As a weight the seed is known as
a rati 96 going to the tola. It is used in weighing precious
stones. Blochmann's Áin-i-Akbari, I. 16 note 1 and Mirat-i-Áhmedi
Persian Text, 366.

[861] Sinor in Baroda territory on the right bank of the Narbada
about thirty miles south of Baroda.

[862] Mirat-i-Áhmedi, Persian Text, 372.

[863] Mirat-i-Áhmedi, Persian Text, 427-434.

[864] Arhar-Mátar is according to the Mirat-i-Áhmedi (Persian Text,
II. 126) the present Kaira sub-division of Mátar. The Mirat-i-Áhmedi
places it twenty miles south-west of Áhmedábád. It is four miles
south-west of Kaira.

[865] In the beginning of Ajítsingh's administration the Sacrifice
Íd of the Musalmáns very nearly ended in a riot. An overzealous
police officer belonging to the Kálúpúr section of Áhmedábád,
hoping to please the Hindu viceroy, by force deprived some of the
Sunni Bohorás of that quarter of a cow which they had purchased for
the sacrifice. The Bohorás in a mass appealed to the Kázi who not
succeeding in his representation to the viceroy was obliged to allay
the popular excitement by publicly sacrificing a cow after the Íd
prayers. Mirat-i-Áhmedi Royal Asiatic Society MS., I. 567-568.

[866] This is the first known mention of Gohilváda, the Gohils country,
as a separate district.

[867] During the governorship of Haidar Kúli at Surat the
Mirat-i-Áhmedi (Royal Asiatic Society MS., I. 567-568) notices the
death of Mulla Abdul Ghafúr the founder of the wealthy family of
the Mullás of Surat. Haidar Kúli confiscated Abdul Ghafúr's property
representing to the emperor that the Mulla died issueless. But the
Mulla's son Abdúl Hye proceeding to Dehli not only obtained from the
emperor an order of restitution of property but the title of chief
of merchants, Umda-tut-Tujjár, and an elephant.

[868] The sum is 6,75,000 mahmúdis. Like the changízi (see above page
222 note 2) the mahmúdi seems to have varied in value from one-third
to one-half of a rupee.

[869] See note 1 page 312. The author of the Mirat-i-Áhmedi (Persian
Text Royal Asiatic Society's Library Edition, I. 658) says Trimbakráv
was slain. This seems an oversight as in another passage (Ditto,
738-739, see below page 312) he states that Trimbakráv was killed in
1731. The latter statement is in agreement with Grant Duff (History
of the Maráthás, I. 364).

[870] The amount was 1,25,000 mahmúdis.

[871] Kasbátis are the descendants of the Musalmán garrisons of some
towns of north Gujarát. The Kasbátis of Víramgám were originally
Tánk Rájputs.

[872] See note on page 306.

[873] Pátdi (north latitude 23° 10'; east longitude 71° 44'),
at the south-east angle of the Ran of Cutch, fifty-two miles west
of Áhmedábád.

[874] The Máhi-marátib was a banner having the likeness of a fish at
its top.

[875] Of the death at the age of nine years of this son of Saint
Sháh-i-Álam the Mirat-i-Áhmedi (Printed Persian Text, II. 26) gives
the following details: Malik Seif-ud-dín, the daughter's son of Sultán
Áhmed I., had a son who he believed was born to him by the prayer of
Saint Sháh-i-Álam. This boy who was about nine years old died. Malik
Seif-ud-dín ran to Sháh-i-Álam, who used then to live at Asáwal,
two or three miles east of Áhmedábád, and in a transport of grief and
rage said to the Saint: 'Is this the way you deceive people? Surely
you obtained me the gift of that boy to live and not to die? This I
suppose is how you will keep your promise of mediating for our sinful
souls before Alláh also?' The Saint could give no reply and retired
to his inner apartments. The stricken father went to the Saint's son
Sháh Bhíkan, who, going in to his father, entreated him to restore
the Malik's boy to life. The Saint asked his son 'Are you prepared
to die for the boy?' Sháh Bhíkan said 'I am ready.' The Saint, going
into an inner room, spread his skirts before Alláh crying 'Rájanji,'
a pet name by which the Saint used to address Alláh, meaning Dear
King or Lord, 'Rájanji, here is a goat for a goat; take thou this
one and return the other.' Lamentations in the Saint's harem showed
that half of the prayer was granted and the Malik on returning to
his house found the other half fulfilled.

[876] See above page 256. The Portuguese details have been obtained
through the kindness of Dr. Gerson DaCunha.

[877] The following Persian verses are carved on the Âlamgír gateway:

In the time of Álamgír Aurangzíb (A.D. 1658-1707), the ruler of
the World,
This gate resembling the skies in altitude was built anew.
In the year A.H. 1079 (A.D. 1668) the work of renewal was begun
and completed
By the endeavour of the exalted Khán Muhammad Beg Khán.
From the accession of this Emperor of the World Aurangzíb.
This was the eleventh year by way of writing and history.

[878] Mr. Fergusson (Indian Architecture, page 543) says: "The pillars
appear to have been taken from a Jain building." But the refinement
on the square capital of each pillar of the Hindu Singh-múkh or
horned face into a group of leaves of the same outline shows that
the pillars were specially carved for use in a Muslim building. The
porch on the north side of the tomb enclosure is described (Ditto,
page 543) as composed of pillars avowedly re-erected from a Jain
building. This note of Mr. Fergusson's must have gone astray, as
the north porch of Hoshang's tomb enclosure is in the plain massive
pointed arch and square-shafted style of the tomb and of the great
mosque. Mr. Fergusson's note apparently belongs to the second and
smaller Jámá Masjid, about a hundred yards east of the Sea or Sagár
lake, the pillars of whose colonnade and porch are still enlivened
by rows of the lucky face of the Hindu old horny.

[879] Hoshang's great mosque has the following much damaged Persian
inscription:

The mosque of exalted construction, the temple of heavenly
altitude,
Whose every thick pillar is a copy of the (pillars of the) Sacred
Temple (the Temple of Makkah).
On account of the greatness of its dignity, like the pigeons of
the Temple of Makkah,
Sacred angels of high degree are always engaged in hovering
around it,
The result of the events born of the merciless revolution of
the skies.
When the sun of his life came as far as the balcony (i. e. was
ready to set).
Áazam Humáyún (that is Malik Mughi's) said ...
The administration of the country, the construction of buildings,
and the driving back of enemies
Are things which I leave you (the son of Áazam Humáyún) as parting
advice with great earnestness.
The personification of the kindness of Providence, the Sultán
Alá-ud-dín (Mehmúd I. A.D. 1436-1469), who is
The outcome of the refulgence of the Faith, and the satisfier of
the wants of the people,
In the year A.H. 858. (A.D. 1454),
In the words of the above parting advice, finished the construction
of this building.

[880] This Jámá Mosque has the following Persian inscription dated
H. 835 (A.D. 1431):

With good omens, at a happy time, and in a lucky and well-started
year,
On the 4th of the month of Alláh (Ramazán) on the great day
of Friday,
In the year 835 and six months from the Hijrah (A.D. 1431)
Counted according to the revolution of the moon in the Arabian
manner,
This Islamic mosque was founded in this world,
The top of whose dome rubs its head against the green canopy
of Heaven.
The construction of this high mosque was due to
Mughís-ud-dín-wad-dunya (Malik Mughís), the father of Mehmúd
I. of Málwa (A.D. 1436-1469), the redresser of temporal and
spiritual wrongs.
Ulugh (brave), Áazam (great), Humáyún (august), the Khán of the
seven climes and the nine countries.
By the hands of his enterprise this so great mosque was founded,
That some call it the House of Peace, others style it the Kaábah.
This good building was completed on the last of the month of
Shawwál (A.H. 835, A.D. 1431).
May the merit of this good act be inserted in the scroll of the
Khán's actions!
In this centre may the praises of the sermon read (in the name)
of Mehmúd Sháh
Be everlasting, so long as mountains stand on the earth and stars
in the firmament.

[881] The following Persian inscription carved on the entrance
arch shows that though it may have been repaired by Báz Bahádur,
the building of the palace was fifty years earlier (H. 914, A.D. 1508):

"In the time of the Sultán of Nations, the most just and great,
and the most knowing and munificent Khákán Násir Sháh Khilji
(A.D. 1500-1512). Written by Yúsuf, the year (H. 914) (A.D. 1508)."

[882] Translations of its two much-admired Persian inscriptions are
given below pages 370-371.

[883] On the Tárápúr gateway a Persian inscription of the reign of the
emperor Akbar (A.D. 1556-1605) states that the royal road that passed
through this gateway was repaired by Táhir Muhammad Hasan Imád-ud-dín.

[884] The Persian references and extracts in this section are
contributed by Khán Sáheb Fazl-ul-láh Lutfulláh Farídi of Surat.

[885] Sir John Malcolm in Eastwick's Handbook of the Panjáb, 119. This
reference has not been traced. Farishtah (Elliot, VI. 563) says Mándu
was built by Anand Dev of the Bais tribe, who was a contemporary of
Khusrao Parwíz the Sassanian (A.D. 591-621).

[886] The date is uncertain. Compare Elphinstone's History, 323;
Briggs' Farishtah, I. 210-211; Tabakát-i-Násiri in Elliot, II. 328. The
conquest of Mándu in A.D. 1227 is not Mándu in Málwa as Elphinstone
and Briggs supposed, but Mandúr in the Siwálik Hills. See Elliot,
Vol. II. page 325 Note 1. The Persian text of Farishtah (I. 115),
though by mistake calling it Mándu (not Mándu), notes that it was the
Mandu in the Siwálik hills. The poetical date-script also terms it
Biládi-Siwálik or the Siwálik countries. The date of the conquest of
the Siwálik Mándu by Altamsh is given by Farishtah (Ditto) as A.H. 624
(A.D. 1226). The conquest of Málwa by Altamsh, the taking by him of
Bhilsah and Ujjain, and the destruction of the temple of Maha Káli
and of the statue or image of Bikramájit are given as occurring in
A.H. 631 (A.D. 1233). The Mirat-i-Sikandari (Persian Text, 13) notices
an expedition made in A.D. 1395 by Zafar Khán (Muzaffar I. of Gujarát)
against a Hindu chief of Mándu, who, it was reported, was oppressing
the Musalmáns. A siege of more than twelve months failed to capture
the fort.

[887] Briggs' Farishtah, IV. 170.

[888] Briggs' Farishtah, IV. 168. According to the Wákiat-i-Mushtáki
(Elliot, IV. 553) Diláwar Khán, or as the writer calls him Amín
Sháh, through the good offices of a merchant whom he had refrained
from plundering obtained the grant of Mándu, which was entirely
desolate. The king sent a robe and a horse, and Amín gave up walking
and took to riding. He made his friends ride, enlisted horsemen, and
promoted the cultivation of the country (Elliot, IV. 552). Farishtah
(Pers. Text, II. 460-61) states that when Sultán Muhammad, the son of
Fírúz Tughlak, made Khwájah Sarwar his chief minister with the title
of Khwájah Jehán, and gave Zafar Khán the viceroyalty of Gujarát
and Khizr Khán that of Multán, he sent Diláwar Khán to be governor
of Málwa. In another passage Farishtah (II. 461) states that one
of Diláwar's grandfathers, Sultán Shaháb-ud-dín, came from Ghor and
took service in the court of the Dehli Sultáns. His son rose to be
an Amír, and his grandson Diláwar Khán, in the time of Sultán Fírúz,
became a leading nobleman, and in the reign of Muhammad, son of Fírúz,
obtained Málwa in fief. When the power of the Tughlaks went to ruin
Diláwar assumed the royal emblems of the umbrella and the red-tent.

[889] Diláwar Khán Ghori, whose original name was Husein, was one
of the grandsons of Sultán Shaháb-ud-dín Muhammad bin Sám. He was
one of the nobles of Muhammad, the son of Fírúz Tughlak, who after
the death of that monarch, settled in and asserted his power over
Málwa. (Pers. Text Faristah, II. 460). The emperor Jehángír (who calls
him Âmíd Sháh Ghori) attributes to him the construction of the fort
of Dhár. He says (Memoirs Pers. Text, 201-202): Dhár is one of the
oldest cities of India. Rája Bhoj, one of the famous ancient Hindu
kings, lived in this city. From his time up to this a thousand years
have passed. Dhár was also the capital of the Muhammadan rulers of
Málwa. When Sultán Muhammad Tughlak (A.D. 1325) was on his way to
the conquest of the Dakhan he built a cut-stone fort on a raised
site. Its outline is very elegant and beautiful, but the space
inside is empty of buildings. Âmíd Sháh Ghori, known as Diláwar
Khán, who in the days of Sultán Muhammad the son of Sultán Fírúz,
king of Dehli, gained the independent rule of Málwa, built outside
this fort an assembly mosque, which has in front of it fixed in the
ground a four-cornered iron column about four feet round. When Sultán
Bahádur of Gujarát took Málwa (A.D. 1530-31) he wished to carry this
column to Gujarát. In digging it up the pillar fell and broke in two,
one piece measuring twenty-two feet the other thirteen feet. As it
was lying here uncared-for, I (Jehángír) ordered the big piece to
be carried to Ágra to be put up in the courtyard of the shrine of
him whose abode is the heavenly throne (Akbar), to be utilised as
a lamp post. The mosque has two gates. In front of the arch of one
gate they have fixed a stone tablet engraved with a prose passage to
the effect that Âhmíd Sháh Ghori in the year H. 808 (A.D. 1405) laid
the foundation of this mosque. On the other arch they have written
a poetic inscription of which the following verses are a part:

The liege lord of the world.
The star of the sphere of glory.
The stay of the people.
The sun of the zenith of perfection.
The bulwark of the law of the Prophet, Ámíd Sháh Dáúd.
The possessor of amiable qualities, the pride of Ghor.
Diláwar Khán, the helper and defender of the Prophet's faith.
The chosen instrument of the exalted Lord, who in the city of
Dhár constructed the assembly mosque
In a happy and auspicious moment on a day of lucky omen.
Of the date 808 years have passed (A.D. 1405)
When this fabric of Hope was completed.

[890] Briggs' Farishtah, IV. 169.

[891] When fellow-nobles in the court of the Tughlak Sultán, Zafar
Khán (Sultán Muzaffar of Gujarát) and Diláwar Khán bound themselves
under an oath to be brothers in arms. Farishtah, Pers. Text II. 462.

[892] Briggs' Farishtah, IV. 173; Elphinstone's History, 678.

[893] Though their temples were turned into mosques the Jains
continued to prosper under the Ghoris. At Deogarh in Lalitpura in
Jhánsi in the North-West Provinces an inscription of Samvat 1481,
that is of A.D. 1424, records the dedication of two Jaina images
by a Jain priest named Holi during the reign of Sháh Alambhaka of
Mandapapura, that is of Sháh Alp Khán of Mándu that is Sultán Hoshang
Ghori. Archæological Survey of India, New Series, II. 120.

[894] Farishtah, Pers. Text II. 464-65.

[895] Briggs' Farishtah, IV. 176, 178, 180, 181, 183.

[896] Farishtah, Pers. Text II. 466-67.

[897] Briggs' Farishtah, IV. 180. In connection with the Tárápúr Gate
Farishtah says (Pers. Text, II. 468): The fort of Mándu is built on
the top of a mountain, and the line of its fortification is about
twenty-eight miles in length. In place of a moat it is surrounded
by a deep chasm, so that it is impossible to use missiles against
it. Within the fort water and provisions are abundant and it includes
land enough to grow grain for the garrison. The extent of its walls
makes it impossible for an army to invest it. Most of the villages near
it are too small to furnish supplies to a besieging force. The south
or Tárápúr gate is exceedingly difficult of access. A horseman can
hardly approach it. From whichever side the fort may be attempted, most
difficult heights have to be scaled. The long distances and intervening
hills prevent the watchers of the besieging force communicating with
each other. The gate on the side of Delhi is of easier access than
the other gates.

[898] It follows that Farishtah (Briggs, IV. 196) is mistaken in
stating that Hoshang's son Muhammad gave Mándu the name of Shádiábád,
the Abode of Joy.

[899] Farishtah, Pers. Text II. 472-475. It seems to follow that
from the first the monument to Hoshang in Hoshangábád was an empty
tomb. Compare Briggs' Farishtah, IV. 180-190.

[900] The following more detailed, but also more confused, story is
told in the Wákiat-i-Mushtáki (Elliot, IV. 552-54): A man named Mehmúd,
son of Mughís Khilji, came to Hoshang and entered his service. He
was a treacherous man, who secretly aspired to the throne. He became
minister, and gave his daughter in marriage to the king. [Farishtah,
Pers. Text, II. 474, says: "Malik Mughís gave his daughter (Mehmúd's
sister) in marriage, not to Hoshang, but to Hoshang's son Muhammad
Shah."] His father Malik Mughís, coming to know of his son's ambitious
designs, informed the king of them. Hereupon Mehmúd feigned illness,
and to deceive the king's physicians shut himself in a dark room and
drank the blood of a newly killed goat. When the physicians came
Mehmúd rose hastily, threw up the blood into a basin, and tossing
back his head rolled on the floor as if in pain. The physicians
called for a light. When they saw that what Mehmúd had spat up was
blood they were satisfied of his sickness, and told the king that
Mehmúd had not long to live. The king refrained from killing a dying
man. This strange story seems to be an embellishment of a passage
in Farishtah (Pers. Text, II. 477). When Khán Jehán, that is Malik
Mughís the father of Mehmúd, was ordered by Sultán Muhammad to take
the field against the Rájput rebels of Nádoti (Hároti?) many of the
old nobles of Málwa went with him. In their absence the party hostile
to the Khiljis represented to Sultán Muhammad that Mehmúd Khilji was
plotting his death. On hearing that the Sultán was enraged against him
Mehmúd secluded himself from the Court on pretence of illness. At the
same time he worked secretly and bribed Sultán Muhammad's cup-bearer
to poison his master. On the death of Sultán Muhammad the party of
nobles opposed to Mehmúd, concealing the fact of Muhammad's death,
sent word that Muhammad had ordered him immediately to the palace,
as he wanted to send him on an embassy to Gujarát. Mehmúd, who knew
that the Sultán was dead, returned word to the nobles that he had
vowed a life-long seclusion as the sweeper of the shrine of his patron
Sultán Hoshang, but that if the nobles came to him and convinced him
that the good of his country depended on his going to Gujarát he was
ready to go and see Sultán Muhammad. The nobles were caught in their
own trap. They went to Mehmúd and were secured and imprisoned by him.

[901] Farishtah, Pers. Text, II. 480.

[902] Briggs' Farishtah, IV. 196. These titles mean: The Chief of
Nobles, the Great, the August.

[903] It is related that one of the pious men in the camp of Sultán
Ahmed of Gujarát had a warning dream, in which the Prophet (on whom
be peace) appeared to him and said: "The calamity of (spirit of)
pestilence is coming down from the skies. Tell Sultán Ahmed to
leave this country." This warning was told to Sultán Ahmed, but
he disregarded it, and within three days pestilence raged in his
camp. Farishtah Pers. Text, II. 484.

[904] Briggs' Farishtah, IV. 205, gives 230 minarets and 360
arches. This must have been an addition in the Text used by
Briggs. These details do not apply to the building. The Persian text
of Farishtah, II. 485, mentions 208 columns or pillars (duyast o
hasht ustuwánah). No reference is made either to minarets or to arches.

[905] Farishtah, Pers. Text II. 487.

[906] Briggs' Farishtah, IV. 207. Malcolm's Central India, I. 32. In
A.D. 1817 Sir John Malcolm (Central India, I. 32 Note) fitted up one
of Mehmúd's palaces as a hot-weather residence.

[907] Of the siege of Kumbhalmer a curious incident is recorded by
Farishtah (Pers. Text, II. 485). He says that a temple outside the
town destroyed by Mehmúd had a marble idol in the form of a goat. The
Sultán ordered the idol to be ground into lime and sold to the Rájputs
as betel-leaf lime, so that the Hindus might eat their god. The idol
was perhaps a ram, not a goat. The temple would then have been a
Sun-temple and the ram, the carrier or váhana of the Sun, would have
occupied in the porch a position similar to that held by the bull in
a Mahádeva temple.

[908] Ruins of Mándu, 13.

[909] In the end of A.H. 846 (A.D. 1442) Mehmúd built a seven-storeyed
tower and a college opposite the Jámá Mosque of Hoshang Sháh. Briggs'
Farishtah, IV. 210; Persian Text, II. 488.

[910] Compare Briggs' Farishtah, IV 323.

[911] Gladwin's Áin-i-Akbari, II. 41.

[912] Briggs' Farishtah, IV. 210; Farishtah, Persian Text II. 488.

[913] Memoirs of the emperor Jehángír (Pers. Text) Sir Sayad Áhmed's
Edition, page 188, eleventh year of Jehángír, A.D. 1617.

[914] Herbert's Khán Jehan is doubtless Mehmúd's father the minister
Malik Mughís, Khán Jehán Aâzam Humáyún. It cannot be Khán Jehán Pir
Muhammad, Akbar's general, who after only a few months' residence was
slain in Mándu in A.D. 1561; nor can it be Jehángír's great Afghán
general, Khán Jehán Lodi (A.D. 1600-1630), as he was not in Mándu until
A.D. 1628, that is more than a year after Herbert left India. Compare
Herbert's Travels, 107-118; Elliot, VI. 249-323, VII. 7, 8, and 21;
and Blochman's Áin-i-Akbari, 503-506.

[915] Briggs' Farishtah, IV. 214.

[916] Ruins of Mándu, 13. Farishtah has three mentions of colleges. One
(Pers. Text, II. 475) as the place where the body of Hoshang was
carried, probably that prayers might be said over it. In another
passage in the reign of Mehmúd I. (Pers. Text, II. 480) he states
that Mehmúd built colleges in his territories which became the envy
of Shíráz and Samarkand. In a third passage he mentions a college
(page 488) near the Victory Tower.

[917] Briggs' Farishtah, IV. 217. A different but almost
incredible account of the capture of the royal belt is given in
the Mirat-i-Sikandari, Pers. Text, 159: When Sultán Kutb-ud-dín,
son of Sultán Muhammad, defeated Sultán Mehmúd Khilji at the battle
of Kapadvanj, there was such a slaughter as could not be exceeded. By
chance, in the heat of the fray, which resembled the Day of Judgment,
the wardrobe-keeper of Sultán Kutb-ud-dín, in whose charge was
the jewelled belt, was by the restiveness of his horse carried
into the ranks of the enemy. The animal there became so violent
that the wardrobe-keeper fell off and was captured by the enemy,
and the jewelled belt was taken from him and given to Sultán Mehmúd
of Málwa. The author adds: This jewelled waistband was in the Málwa
treasury at the time the fortress of Mándu was taken by the strength
of the arm of Sultán Muzaffar (A.D. 1531). Sultán Mehmúd sent this
belt together with a fitting sword and horse to Sultán Muzaffar by
the hands of his son.

[918] Briggs' Farishtah, IV. 209.

[919] Briggs' Farishtah, IV. 234-235: Pers. Text, II. 503.

[920] Briggs' Farishtah, IV. 236.

[921] Ruins of Mándu, 6.

[922] Farishtah Pers. Text, II. 504-505.

[923] Farishtah Pers. Text, II. 505.

[924] Farishtah Pers. Text, II. 507.

[925] Wákiat-i-Mushtáki in Elliot, IV. 554-556. Probably these are
stock tales. The Gujarát historians give Muzaffar and Muhammad the
Gold-giver (A.D. 1441-1451) credit for the horse scrupulosity. See
Mirat-i-Sikandari Pers. Text, 178.

[926] Briggs' Farishtah, IV. 236-239; Wákiat-i-Jehángíri in Elliot,
VI. 349-350; Wákiat-i-Mushtáki in Elliot, IV. 554-55; Malcolm's
Central India, I. 35-36. The Mirat-i-Sikandari (Pers. Text, 160) has
the following notice of Ghiás-ud-dín: The Sultáns of Mándu had reached
such a pitch of luxury and ease that it is impossible to imagine aught
exceeding it. Among them Sultán Ghiás-ud-dín was so famous for his
luxurious habits, that at present (A.D. 1611) if any one exceeds in
luxury and pleasure, they say he is a second Ghiás-ud-dín. The orders
of the Sultán were that no event of a painful nature or one in which
there was any touch of sadness should be related to him. They say that
during his entire reign news of a sad nature was only twice conveyed
to him: once when his son-in-law died and once when his daughter
was brought before him clothed in white. On this occasion the Sultán
is related to have simply said: "Perhaps her husband is dead." This
he said because the custom of the people of India is that when the
husband of a woman dies she gives up wearing coloured clothes. The
second occasion was when the army of Sultán Bahlol Lodi plundered
several of the districts of Chanderi. Though it was necessary to
report this to the Sultán, his ministers were unable to communicate
it to him. They therefore asked a band of actors (bhánds) to assume
the dress of Afgháns, and mentioning the districts to represent them
as being pillaged and laid waste. Sultán Ghiás-ud-dín exclaimed in
surprise: "But is the governor of Chanderi dead that he does not
avenge upon the Afgháns the ruin of his country!"

[927] Compare Catalogue of Indian Coins, The Mahomedan States, pages
LIV. LV. and 118-121.

[928] Farishtah Pers. Text, II. 507.

[929] Farishtah (Pers. Text, II. 508) detailing how Násir-ud-dín came
to power, says: There was a difference between Násir-ud-dín and his
brother Alá-ud-dín. The mother of these princes, Khurshíd Ráni, who
was the daughter of the Hindu chief of Báglána, had taken Alá-ud-dín
the younger brother's side. After killing his father Násir-ud-dín
ordered his mother to be dragged out of the harím and Alá-ud-dín and
his children to be slaughtered like lambs.

[930] Briggs' Farishtah, IV. 238-239. Farishtah holds that
Násir-ud-dín's murder of his father is not proved. He adds (Pers. Text,
II. 515) that Násir-ud-dín was at Dhár where he had gone to quell the
rebellion of the nobles when the news of Ghiás-ud-dín's death reached
him. He argues that as a parricide cannot flourish more than a year
after his father's murder, and as Násir-ud-dín ruled for years after
that event, he could not have killed his father.

[931] Farishtah Pers. Text, II. 516.

[932] Briggs' Farishtah, IV. 243. The emperor Jehángír (Memoirs
Pers. Text, 181) says that Násir-ud-dín had a disease which made him
feel so hot that he used to sit for hours in water.

[933] Wákiat-i-Jehángíri in Elliot, VI. 350. Farishtah (Pers. Text,
II. 517-18) says that Násir-ud-dín died of a burning-fever he had
contracted by hard drinking and other evil habits, that he showed keen
penitence before his death, and bequeathed his kingdom to his third
son Mehmúd. The emperor Jehángír (Memoirs Pers. Text, 181) confirms
the account of the Wákiat as to the manner of Násir-ud-dín's death.

[934] Briggs' Farishtah, IV. 243.

[935] The emperor Jehángír thus describes (Memoirs Pers. Text, 181)
his visit to Násir-ud-dín's grave. It is related that when during his
reign Sher Khán Afghán Súr (A.D. 1540-1555) visited Násir-ud-dín's
grave he ordered his attendants to flagellate the parricide's tomb:
When I visited the sepulchre I kicked his grave and ordered those
with me to do the same. Not satisfied with this I ordered his bones
to be dug out and burned and the ashes to be thrown into the Narbada.

[936] Wákiat-i-Jehángíri in Elliot, VI. 350. The emperor Jehángír
(Memoirs Pers. Text, 202) refers to the well-known bridge and
water-palace about three miles north of Ujjain as the work of
Násir-ud-dín. He says: On Sunday I reached Saádulpur near Ujjain. In
this village is a river house with a bridge on which are alcoves both
built by Násir-ud-dín Khilji (A.D. 1500-1512). Though the bridge is
not specially praiseworthy the water-courses and cisterns connected
with it have a certain merit.

[937] Briggs' Farishtah, IV. 246.

[938] Briggs' Farishtah, IV. 247-249. Malcolm's (Central India, I. 38)
writes the Rájput's name Maderay. The Mirat-i-Sikandari (Persian Text,
149-155), gives the form Medáni Rai, the Lord of the Battlefield,
a title which the author says (page 149) Mehmúd conferred on the
Rájput in acknowledgment of his prowess.

[939] The Mirat-i-Sikandari (Pers. Text, 154) gives the following
details of Mehmúd's flight: Sultán Mehmúd, on pretence of hunting
left Mándu and remained hunting for several days. The Hindus, whom
Medáni Rái had placed on guard over him, slept after the fatigue
of the chase. Only some of the more trusted guards remained. Among
them was a Rájput named Krishna, a Málwa zamíndár who was attached to
the Sultán. Mehmúd said to Krishna: "Can you find me two horses and
show me the way to Gujarát that I may get aid from Sultán Muzaffar to
punish these rascals? If you can, do so at once, and, Alláh willing,
you shall be handsomely rewarded." Krishna brought two horses from
the Sultán's stables. Mehmúd rode on one and seated his dearest of
wives, Ráni Kannya Kuar, on the other. Krishna marched in front. In
half the night and one day they reached the Gujarát frontier.

[940] Tárikh-i-Sher Sháhi in Elliot, IV. 386. The Mirat-i-Sikandari
(Pers. Text, 160) gives the following details of the banquet: Sultán
Mehmúd showed great hospitality and humility. After the banquet as he
led the Sultán over the palaces, they came to a mansion in the centre
of which was a four-cornered building like the Kaâbah, carved and
gilded, and round it were many apartments. When Sultán Muzaffar placed
his foot within the threshold of that building the thousand beauties
of Sultán Mehmúd's harím, magnificently apparelled and jewelled, all at
once opened the doors of their chambers and burst into view like húris
and fairies. When Muzaffar's eyes fell on their charms he bowed his
head and said: "To see other than one's own harím is sinful." Sultán
Mehmúd replied: "These are mine, and therefore yours, seeing that I
am the slave purchased by your Majesty's kindness." Muzaffar said:
"They are more suitable for you. May you have joy in them. Let them
retire." At a signal from Sultán Mehmúd the ladies vanished.

[941] Briggs' Farishtah, IV. 250-262.

[942] Farishtah Pers. Text. II. 527. According to the Mirat-i-Sikandari
(Pers. Text, 161) Mehmúd marched against Gágraun first, and slew
Hemkaran, a partisan of Medáni Rái, in a hand-to-hand fight. On this
the Rána and Medáni Rái joined their forces against Mehmúd.

[943] Briggs' Farishtah, IV. 262-263.

[944] Persian Edition, 239.

[945] Briggs' Farishtah, IV. 267-68. Sultán Bahádur apparently
surprised the party in charge of the Tárápúr or Southern Gate.

[946] Briggs' Farishtah, IV. 269; Mirat-i-Áhmedi, Persian Text, I. 76.

[947] Briggs' Farishtah, II. 77.

[948] Abul Fazl's Akbar Námah in Elliot, VI. 14; Briggs' Farishtah,
II. 77.

[949] Abul Fazl's Akbar Námah in Elliot, V. 192.

[950] Abul Fazl's Akbar Námah in Elliot, VI. 15; Briggs' Farishtah,
II. 80-81.

[951] Abul Fazl's Akbar Námah in Elliot, VI. 18. According to
Farishtah (Pers. Text, II. 532) Mallu, the son of Mallu, was a
native of Málwa and a Khilji slave noble. Mallu received his title
of Kádir Sháh from Sultán Mehmúd III. of Gujarát (A.D. 1536-1544)
at the recommendation of his minister Imád-ul-Mulk who was a great
friend of Mallu. Mirat-i-Sikandari, Persian Text, 298.

[952] Farishtah Pers. Text, II. 532.

[953] Tárikh-i-Sher Sháh in Elliot, IV. 391; Briggs' Farishtah,
IV. 271-72.

[954] Farishtah (Pers. Text, 533-34) refers to the following
circumstance as the cause of Kádir Sháh's suspicion. On his way to
Sher Sháh's darbár at Ujjain Kádir saw some Mughal prisoners in chains
making a road. One of the prisoners seeing him began to sing:

Mará mí bín darín ahwál o fikrí khíshtan mí kun!

In this plight thou seest me to-day,
Thine own turn is not far away.

When Kádir Sháh escaped, Sher Sháh on hearing of his flight exclaimed:

Bá má chi kard dídí
Mallû Ghulám-i-gídí.

Thus he treats us with scorn,
Mallu the slave base born.

To this one of Sher Sháh's men replied:

Kaul-i-Rasúl bar hakk
Lá khaira fil abídi.

The words of the Prophet are true,
No good can a slave ever do.

[955] Tárikh-i-Sher Sháhi in Elliot, IV. 397.

[956] Tárikh-i-Alfi in Elliott, V. 168; Elphinstone's India, 402-403.

[957] Tárikh-i-Alfi in Elliot, V. 168.

[958] Briggs' Farishtah, IV. 276.

[959] When Báz Bahádur attacked the Gonds their chief was dead, and
his widow, Ráni Durgávati, was ruling in his place. The Ráni led the
Gonds against the invaders, and hemming them in one of the passes,
inflicted on them such a defeat that Báz Bahádur fled from the field
leaving his baggage and camp in her hands. Farishtah Pers. Text,
II. 538.

[960] According to Farishtah (Pers. Text, II. 538) Báz Bahádur was
already an adept in music.

[961] Malcolm's Central India, I. 39; Ruins of Mándu, 30.

[962] Briggs' Farishtah, II. 210.

[963] Blochman's Áin-i-Akbari, 321.

[964] Briggs' Farishtah, IV. 211.

[965] Briggs' Farishtah, IV. 216.

[966] Tabakát-i-Akbari in Elliot, V. 291.

[967] Tabakát-i-Akbari in Elliot, V. 330-31.

[968] Blochman's Áin-i-Akbari, 375.

[969] The emperor Jehángír thus describes (Memoirs Pers. Text, 372)
a visit to this building: On the third day of Amardád (July 1617)
with the palace ladies I set out to see Nílkanth, which is one of
the pleasantest places in Mándu fort. Sháh Budágh Khán, who was one
of the trusted nobles of my august father, built this very pleasing
and joy-giving lodge during the time he held this province in fief
(A.D. 1572-1577). I remained at Nílkanth till about an hour after
nightfall and then returned to my state quarters.

[970] An officer who distinguished himself under Humáyún, one of
Akbar's commanders of Three Thousand, long governor of Mándu, where
he died. Blochman's Áin-i-Akbari, 372.

[971] When opposed to Ârab the word Âjam signifies all countries
except Arabia, and in a narrow sense, Persia. The meaning of the word
Âjam is dumbness, the Arabs so glorying in the richness of their own
tongue as to hold all other countries and nations dumb.

[972] The stones on which this inscription is carved have been wrongly
arranged by some restorer. Those with the latter portion of the
inscription come first and those with the beginning come last. Múnshi
Abdur Rahím of Dhár.

[973] The maternal uncle of Naushírwán (A.D. 586-635) the Sassanian,
Shirwán Sháh was ruler of a district on Mount Caucasus. Al Masúdi,
Arabic Text Prairies d'Or, II. 4, and Rauzat-us-Safa, Persian Text,
I. 259.

[974] Blochman's Áin-i-Akbari, 353.

[975] Briggs' Farishtah, IV. 279.

[976] Blochman's Áin-i-Akbari, 429.

[977] Gladwin's Áin-i-Akbari, II. 41.

[978] Blochman's Áin-i-Akbari, 31.

[979] Briggs' Farishtah, IV. 169, 181, 190.

[980] Nineteen kos, taking the kos to be two miles.

[981] The emperor Jehángír's Memoirs, Pers. Text, Sir Sayad Áhmed's
Edition, 178-203.

[982] Literally single-men. The Ahadís were a corps of men who stood
immediately under the emperor's orders. Blochman's Áin-i-Akbari,
20 note 1.

[983] This scattering of gold silver or copper coin, called in Arabic
and Persian nisár, is a common form of offering. The influence of the
evil eye or other baneful influence is believed to be transferred from
the person over whom the coin is scattered to the coin and through
the coin to him who takes it.

[984] This feat of Núr Jehán's drew from one of the Court poets
the couplet:

Núr Jehán gar chih ba súrat zanast
Dar safi Mardán zani sher afkanast.

Núr Jehán the tiger-slayer's woman
Ranks with men as the tiger-slaying woman.

Sherafkan, that is tiger-slayer, was the title of Núr Jehán's first
husband Ali-Kuli Istajlu.

[985] Tuzuk-i-Jehángíri Pers. Text, 187.

[986] Tuzuk-i-Jehángíri Pers. Text, 189.

[987] The miskál which was used in weighing gold was equal in weight
to ninety-six barleycorns. Blochman's Áin-i-Akbari, 36.

[988] Tuzuk-i-Jehángíri Pers. Text, 195.

[989] Tuzuk-i-Jehángíri Pers. Text, 195.

[990] Tuzuk-i-Jehángíri Pers. Text, 192-194.

[991] Tuzuk-i-Jehángíri Pers. Text, 190.

[992] Tuzuk-i-Jehángíri Pers. Text, 192.

[993] Tuzuk-i-Jehángíri Pers. Text, 194-5.

[994] A Voyage to East India, 181. Terry gives April 1616, but Roe
seems correct in saying March 1617. Compare Wákiat-i-Jehángíri in
Elliot, VI. 351.

[995] Akbarpur lies between Dharampuri and Waisar. Malcolm's Central
India, I. 84 note.

[996] Carriages may have the old meaning of things carried, that
is baggage. The time taken favours the view that wagons or carts
were forced up the hill. For the early seventeenth century use of
carriages in its modern sense compare Terry (Voyage, 161). Of our
wagons drawn with oxen ... and other carriages we made a ring every
night; also Dodsworth (1614), who describes a band of Rájputs near
Baroda cutting off two of his carriages (Kerr's Voyages, IX. 203);
and Roe (1616), who journeyed from Ajmír to Mándu with twenty camels
four carts and two coaches (Kerr, IX. 308). Terry's carriages seem to
be Roe's coaches, to which Dela Valle (A.D. 1623) Hakluyt's Edition,
(I. 21) refers as much like the Indian chariots described by Strabo
(B.C. 50) covered with crimson silk fringed with yellow about the
roof and the curtains. Compare Idrísi (A.D. 1100-1150), but probably
from Al Istakhiri, A.D. 960: Elliot, I. 87). In all Nahrwala or north
Gujarát the only mode of carrying either passengers or goods is in
chariots drawn by oxen with harness and traces under the control
of a driver. When in 1616 Jehángír left Ajmír for Mándu the English
carriage presented to him by the English ambassador Sir Thomas Roe
was allotted to the Sultánah Núr Jehán Begam. It was driven by an
English coachman. Jehángír followed in the coach his own men had made
in imitation of the English coach. Corryat (1615, Crudities III.,
Letters from India, unpaged) calls the English chariot a gallant
coach of 150 pounds price.

[997] Kerr's Voyages, IX. 335; Wákiat-i-Jehángíri in Elliot, VI. 377.

[998] Roe writing from Ajmír in the previous year (29th August 1616)
describes Mándu as a castle on a hill, where there is no town and no
buildings. Kerr, IX. 267.

[999] Roe in Kerr's Travels, IX. 313.

[1000] Roe in Kerr's Travels, IX. 314.

[1001] Compare Wákiat-i-Jehángíri in Elliot, VI. 377.

[1002] Roe in Kerr's Travels, IX. 314.

[1003] Roe in Kerr's Travels, IX. 321.

[1004] Roe in Kerr's Travels, IX. 335.

[1005] Corryat's Crudities, III. Extracts (unpaged). This Master
Herbert was Thomas, brother of Sir Edward Herbert, the first Lord
Herbert. It seems probable that this Thomas supplied his cousin Sir
Thomas Herbert who was travelling in India and Persia in A.D. 1627
with his account of Mándu. See below pages 381-382.

[1006] Corryat's Crudities, III. Extracts (unpaged).

[1007] Terry's Voyage, 183; Roe in Kerr, IX. 335.

[1008] Roe in Kerr, IX. 335.

[1009] Wákiat-i-Jehángíri in Elliot, VI. 349.

[1010] Wákiat-i-Jehángiri in Elliot, VI. 350.

[1011] Terry's Voyage, 228.

[1012] Terry's Voyage, 69.

[1013] Terry's Voyage, 183.

[1014] Terry's Voyage, 186, 198.

[1015] Terry's Voyage, 198, 205.

[1016] Roe in Kerr's Voyages, IX. 337; Pinkerton's Voyages, VIII. 35.

[1017] Terry's Voyage, 403.

[1018] Corryat's Crudities, III. Letter 2. Extracts unpaged.

[1019] Roe in Kerr's Voyages, IX. 343.

[1020] Roe in Kerr's Travels, IX. 340-343.

[1021] Roe in Kerr's Travels, IX. 344.

[1022] Terry's Voyage, 377. Terry's details seem not to agree with
Roe's who states (Kerr's Voyages, IX. 344 and Pinkerton's Voyages,
VIII. 37): I was invited to the drinking, but desired to be excused
because there was no avoiding drinking, and their liquors are so hot
that they burn out a man's very bowels. Perhaps the invitation Roe
declined was to a private drinking party after the public weighing
was over.

[1023] Roe in Kerr's Voyage, IX. 347; Elphinstone's History, 494. Kerr
(IX. 347) gives September 2 but October 2 is right. Compare Pinkerton's
Voyages, VIII. 39.

[1024] Ruins of Mándu, 57. As the emperor must have passed out by the
Dehli Gate, and as Roe's lodge was two miles from Báz Bahádur's palace,
the lodge cannot have been far from the Dehli Gate. It is disappointing
that, of his many genial gossipy entries Jehángír does not devote
one to Roe. The only reference to Roe's visit is the indirect entry
(Wa'kiat-i-Jehángíri in Elliot, VI. 347) that Jehángír gave one of his
nobles a coach, apparently a copy of the English coach, with which,
to Jehángír's delight, Roe had presented him.

[1025] Roe in Kerr's Voyages, IX. 353.

[1026] Terry's Voyage, 180.

[1027] Terry's Voyage, 181.

[1028] Wákiat-i-Jehángíri in Elliot, VI. 383.

[1029] Wákiat-i-Jehángíri in Elliot, VI. 387.

[1030] Elphinstone's History, 496-97. Compare Dela Valle (Hakluyt
Edition, I. 177) writing in A.D. 1622, Sultán Khurram after his defeat
by Jehángír retired to Mándu.

[1031] Dela Valle's Travels, Hakluyt Edition, I. 97.

[1032] Elphinstone's History, 507.

[1033] Herbert's Travels, 84. Corryat's Master Herbert was as already
noticed named like the traveller Thomas. The two Thomases were
distant relations, both being fourth in descent from Sir Richard
Herbert of Colebroke, who lived about the middle of the fifteenth
century. A further connection between the two families is the copy
of complimentary verses "To my cousin Sir Thomas Herbert," signed
Ch. Herbert, in the 1634 and 1665 editions of Herbert's Travels, which
are naturally, though somewhat doubtfully, ascribed to Charles Herbert,
a brother of our Master Thomas. It is therefore probable that after his
return to England Sir Thomas Herbert obtained the Mándu details from
Master Thomas who was himself a writer, the author of several poems
and pamphlets. Corryat's tale how, during the water-famine at Mándu,
Master Herbert annexed a spring or cistern, and then bound a servant
of the Great King who attempted to share in its use, shows admirable
courage and resolution on the part of Master Thomas, then a youth
of twenty years. The details of Thomas in his brother Lord Herbert's
autobiography give additional interest to the hero of Corryat's tale of
a Tank. Master Thomas was born in. A.D. 1597. In 1610, when a page to
Sir Edward Cecil and a boy of thirteen, in the German War especially
in the siege of Juliers fifteen miles north-east of Aix-la-Chapelle,
Master Thomas showed such forwardness as no man in that great army
surpassed. On his voyage to India in 1617, in a fight with a great
Portuguese carrack, Captain Joseph, in command of Herbert's ship Globe,
was killed. Thomas took Joseph's place, forced the carrack aground,
and so riddled her with shot that she never floated again. To his
brother's visit to India Lord Herbert refers as a year spent with the
merchants who went from Surat to the Great Mughal. After his return
to England Master Thomas distinguished himself at Algiers, capturing
a vessel worth £1800. In 1622, when Master Thomas was in command of
one of the ships sent to fetch Prince Charles (afterwards King Charles
I.) from Spain, during the return voyage certain Low Countrymen and
Dunkirkers, that is Dutch and Spanish vessels, offended the Prince's
dignity by fighting in his presence without his leave. The Prince
ordered the fighting ships to be separated; whereupon Master Thomas,
with some other ships got betwixt the fighters on either side, and
shot so long that both Low Countrymen and Dunkirkers were glad to
desist. Afterwards at divers times Thomas fought with great courage
and success with divers men in single fight, sometimes hurting and
disarming his adversary, sometimes driving him away. The end of Master
Thomas was sad. Finding his proofs of himself undervalued he retired
into a private and melancholy life, and after living in this sullen
humour for many years, he died about 1642 and was buried in London
in St. Martin's near Charing Cross.

[1034] Khafi Khán in Elliot, VII. 218.

[1035] Malcolm's Central India, I. 64.

[1036] Malcolm's Central India, I. 78.

[1037] Malcolm's Central India, I. 100.

[1038] Malcolm's Central India, I. 106.

[1039] Central India, II. 503.

[1040] Ruins of Mándu, 43: March 1852 page 34.

[1041] Ruins of Mándu, 43: March 1852 page 34.

[1042] Malcolm's Central India, II. 503.

[1043] Briggs' Farishtah, IV. 235 note *.

[1044] Indian Architecture, 541.

[1045] Ruins of Mándu, 9.

[1046] Ruins of Mándu, 9.

[1047] Ruins of Mándu, 13, 25, 35. Some of these extracts seem to
belong to a Bombay Subaltern, who was at Mándu about A.D. 1842,
and some to Captain Claudius Harris, who visited the hill in April
1852. Compare Ruins of Mándu, 34.

[1048] Murray's Handbook of the Panjáb, 118.

[1049] Surat was known as Báb-ul-makkah or the Gate of Makka on account
of its being the starting place of the ships annually conveying the
Muhammadan pilgrims of India to the shrine of their Prophet.

[1050] Sardeshmukhi or ten per cent on the revenue. The chauth was
nominally one-fourth, but both these claims were fluctuating in their
proportions to the total revenue.

[1051] Now the capital of the Rája of Rájpipla.

[1052] Chauth and Sardeshmukhi as settled in 1699.

[1053] On the western skirts of the Dáng forests.

[1054] Now in the British districts of the Panch Maháls.

[1055] The Muhammadan account is given in the Musalmán portion of
this history. Grant Duff's description differs considerably.

[1056] The Marátha practice was to base their demands on the standard
or tankha assessment (which was seldom if ever collected), so that
by this means they evaded all possibility of claims against them
for over-collections.

[1057] At Gala about twelve miles above Surat in the territory of
the Gáikwár.

[1058] Tálegaon in the north-west of Poona, now a station on the
railway to Bombay.

[1059] Broach was constituted part of the Nizám's personal estate on
his resigning the viceroyalty in 1722.

[1060] At the mouth of the Tápti, now belonging to the little
Muhammadan state of Sachin.

[1061] Now in the Ahmednagar district.

[1062] In the Surat district some thirty miles east of the city.

[1063] A celebrated hill fort south of Chámpáner in the Panch Maháls
district.

[1064] Oriental Memoirs.

[1065] Known as Daskroi.

[1066] The rite of passing cakes from village to village or of passing
a dog from village to village is in such complete accord with magical
and religious rites practised all over India that it seems hardly
possible to accept either as meaningless or as accidental the passing
of cakes and of a dog from one part of the country to another on the
brink of the Mutinies. Knowing how suitable such a rite is to the
state of feeling as well as to the phase of belief prevalent among
the plotters of rebellion in Northern India it seems difficult to
suppose that the passing of the cakes and the passing of the dog were
not both sacramental; that is designed to spread over the country
a spirit which had by religious or magical rites been housed in the
dog and in the cakes. The cake-spirit, like the sugar-spirit of the
Thags, was doubtless Káli, the fierce longing for unbridled cruelty,
which worked on the partaker of the Thag sugar with such power that he
entered with zest and without remorse on any scheme however cowardly
and cruel. Like the Thags those who ate the Mutiny cakes would by
partaking become of one spirit, the spirit of the indwelling Káli,
and, in that spirit would be ready to support and to take part in
any scheme of blood which the leaders of Mutiny might devise and
start. Similarly by religious rites the Central India dog, possibly
the dog of Báiza Bái of Gwálior (See Text page 437), had been made
the home of some fierce war-spirit, apparently of the dog-formed
Khandoba the Marátha Sword God and Dog of War. The inspired dog and
the inspired dogs-meat were passed through the land in the confidence
that through them the spirit of unrest would pervade every village of
Gujarát. Since the Mutinies, by the magic of letters, Káli has passed
from the wafer into the leaflet, and the paid political propagandist
has taken the place of Khandoba's pariah dog.

The correctness of the view suggested above is supported if not
established by certain passages in Kaye's Sepoy War, I. 632-642. Chuni
says; 'The circulating of cakes was supposed to foretell disturbance
and to imply an invitation to the people to unite for some secret
purpose.' According to the king of Delhi's physician (page 636) some
charm attached to the cakes. The people thought they were made by
some adept in the secret arts to keep unpolluted the religion of the
country. Another authority (page 637) says; 'The first circulation
of the cakes was on the authority of a pandit who said the people
would rise in rebellion if cakes were sent round and that the person
in whose name the cakes were sent would rule India.' The secret
comes out in Sitárám Báwá's evidence (pages 646-648); 'The cakes in
question were a charm or jádu which originated with Dása Báwa the
guru or teacher of Nána Sáheb. Dása told Nána Sáheb he would make a
charm and as far as the magic cakes should be carried so far should
the people be on his side. He then took lotusseed-dough called makána
and made an idol of it. He reduced the idol to very small pills and
having made an immense number of cakes he put a pillet in each and
said that as far as the cakes were carried so far would the people
determine to throw off the Company's yoke.' With this making of a
cake as a sacramental home of Durga or Káli compare the Buddhist of
Tibet offering in a human skull to the Máháráni or Queen, that is to
Durga or Káli, a sacramental cake made of black-goat's fat, wine,
dough, and butter. (Waddell's Buddhism in Tibet, 365.). As to the
effect of sharing in Durga's mutiny cakes compare the statement of the
Thag Faringia (Sleeman's Ramaseeana, page 216); The sugar sacrament,
gur-tapávani, changes our nature. Let a man once taste the sacramental
sugar and he will remain a Thag however skilful a craftsman, however
well-to-do. The Urdu proverb says Tapauni-ki-dhaunika gur jisne kháyá
wuh waisá huá Who eats the sugar of the sacramental Vase as he is
so he remains. The Thags are tools in the hand of the god they have
eaten. (Compare Ramaseeana, 76.)--J. M. C.

[1067] Rova in the south-east corner of Sirohi: Mandeta in Ídar in
the Máhi Kántha. P. FitzGerald Esq. Political Agent Máhi Kántha.

[1068] The translations of the inscriptions and the bulk of the history
are the work of Mr. A. M. T. Jackson of the Indian Civil Service.

[1069] Finch in Kerr's Voyages, VIII. 301. Thirty years later the
traveller Tavernier (Ball's Edition, II. 87) has: Bargant (Wangam in
Jodhpur ?) to Bimál 15 kos: Bimál to Modra 15 kos. Of Jhálor Ufflet
has left the following description. Jhálor is a castle on the top of
a steep mountain three kos in ascent by a fair stone causeway broad
enough for two men. At the end of the first kos is a gate and a place
of guard where the causeway is enclosed on both sides with walls. At
the end of the second kos is a double gate strongly fortified; and
at the third kos is the castle which is entered by three successive
gates. The first is very strongly plated with iron, the second not
so strong with places above for throwing down melted lead or boiling
oil, and the third is thickly beset with iron spikes. Between each
of these gates are spacious places of arms and at the inner gate is a
strong portcullis. A bowshot within the castle is a splendid pagoda,
built by the founders of the castle and ancestors of Ghazni (Gidney)
Khán who were Gentiles. He turned Muhammadan and deprived his elder
brother of this castle by the following stratagem. Having invited him
and his women to a banquet which his brother requited by a similar
entertainment he substituted chosen soldiers well armed instead of
women, sending them two and two in a dhuli or litter who getting in
by this device gained possession of the gates and held the place for
the Great Mughal to whom it now (A.D. 1611) appertains being one of
the strongest situated forts in the world. About half a kos within
the gate is a goodly square tank cut out of the solid rock said to
be fifty fathoms deep and full of excellent water. Quoted by Finch
in Kerr's Voyages, VIII. 300-301.

[1070] The names of these gateways are Surajpul about six miles (4
kos) east of Bhinmál near Khánpur at the site of a temple of Mahádev;
Sávidár about six miles (4 kos) to the south near a temple of Hanumán;
Dharanidhar near Vandar about six miles (4 kos) west of Bhinmál at the
site of a large well; Kishánbivao about six miles (4 kos) to the north
near Nartan at the site of a large well and stones. Rattan Lal Pandit.

[1071] The Shrimáli Bráhm-Bháts are of the following subdivisions:
Dhondaleshvar, Hár, Hera, Loh, Poeshsha, Pitalia, and Varing. They
say Shrimál is their original home.

[1072] The local explanation of Reh-bári is liver out of the way. Their
subdivisions are; Ál, Barod, Bougaro, Dagalla, Gansor, Gongala,
Kalotra, Karamtha, Nangu, Panna, Pramára, Roj. All are strong dark
full-bearded men.

[1073] The importance of Bhinmál as a centre of population is shown
not only by the Shrimáli Bráhmans and Vánis who are spread all over
Gujarát, but by the Porwárs a class of Vánis now unrepresented in
their native town who are said to take their name from a suburb of
Bhinmál. Oswáls, almost all of whom are Shrávaks or followers of the
Jain religion, have practically spread from Bhinmál. The origin of the
name Osvál is (Trans. Roy. As. Soc. III. 337) from Osi the Mother or
Luck of Osianagar an ancient town and still a place of pilgrimage about
eighteen miles north of Jodhpur. The Oswáls were originally Rájputs of
several classes including Pawárs but mainly Solankis and so apparently
(Tod's Western India, 209) of Gurjjara origin. Equally of Gurjjara
origin are the Shrimáli Vánis who hold a specially high place among
Western Indian Jains. The care taken by the Jains to secure foreign
conquerors within their fold is notable. The Tirthankar is a Rája
who by piety and other virtues attained moksha or absorption. The
fifty-four worshipfuls uttamapurushas, the twenty-four tirthankars,
the twelve chakravartis, the nine báladevas, and the nine vásudevas
are Rájás, most of them great conquerors (Trans. Royal Asiatic
Society. III. 338-341). The local story is that the Solankis were
called to help the people of Shrimál to resist the Songara Rájputs of
Jhálor who took Bhinmál about A.D. 1290. Before that the Shrimális and
Solankis were enemies. This tradition of hostility is interesting as
it may go back to A.D. 740 when Múlarája Solanki transferred the seat
of power from Bhinmál to Anahilaváda Pátan. (See Below page 469.) A
class who trace to Bhinmál are the Pitals or Kalbis of Márwár (Márwár
Castes, 41). They claim descent from Rájput men and Bráhman women. In
support of the tradition the women still keep separate neither eating
with nor using the same vessels as their husbands.

[1074] These dancing girls hold land. They are said to have been
brought by the Songara Rájputs, who according to the local account
retreating from Alá-ud-dín Khilji (A.D. 1290) took Bhinmál from the
Shrimáli Bráhmans.

[1075] The Jatiyas all Hindus of the three subdivisions Baletta,
Sunkaria, and Talvaria came from Mándu near Dhár in Central India. The
name is locally derived from jatukarta a skin.

[1076] According to a local story there was a hermitage of Jangams
near the temple of Jagamdeva the Sun-God and a hermitage of Bharatis
near Chandeshvar's shrine. In a fight between the rival ascetics
many were slain and the knowledge where their treasure was stored
passed away. When repairs were made in A.D. 1814 (S. 1870) the Bharati
hermitage was cleared. Two large earthen pots were found one of which
still stands at the door of Chandeshvar's temple. These pots contained
the treasure of the Bharatis. In A.D. 1814 nothing but white dust was
found. Most of the dust was thrown away till a Jain ascetic came and
examined the white dust. The ascetic called for an iron rod, heated
the rod, sprinkled it with the white dust, and the iron became gold.

[1077] According to Alberuni (A.D. 1030) the Brahmasiddhánta was
composed by Brahmagupta the son of Jishnu from the town of Bhillamála
between Multán and Anhilwára. Sachau's Translation, I. 153. Another
light of the college was the Sanskrit poet Magha, the son of Srímálí
parents, who is said to have lived in the time of Bhoj Rája of Ujjain
(A.D. 1010-1040). Márwár Castes, 68.

[1078] The local account explains the origin of the name Kanak which
also means gold by the story of a Bhil who was drowned on the waxing
fifth of Bhádarwa. The Bhil's wife who was with him failing to drown
herself prepared a funeral pyre. Mahádeva pleased with the woman's
devotion restored her husband to life and made his body shine like
gold. As a thankoffering the Bhil enlarged the tank and built a shrine
to Kirait Mahádeva.

[1079] The local explanation of the name Yaksha's Pool is that Rávana
went to Abaka the city of the great Yaksha Kuvera god of wealth and
stole Pushpak Kuvera's vimán or carrier. Kuvera in sorrow asked his
father what he should do to recover his carrier. The father said
Worship in Shrimál. Kuvera came to Shrimál and worshipped Brahma who
appeared to him and said: When Rámchandra destroys Ravana he will
bring back Pushpak.

[1080] No local tradition throws light on the reason why this figure
is called a Yaksha. The holding a head in his hand suggests that
he may have been a guardian Bhairav in some Buddhist temple and so
remembered as a guardian or Yaksha. Or he may have been supposed to
be a statue of the builder of the temple and so have been called a
Yaksha since that word was used for a race of skilful architects and
craftsmen. Troyer's Rajatarangíní, I. 369. In the Vrijji temples in
Tirhut which Buddhist accounts make older than Buddhism the objects of
worship were ancestral spirits who were called Yakshas. If the Buddhist
legends of Saka settlements in Tirhut during Gautama's lifetime
(A.D. 540) have any historical value these Vrijjis were Sakas. As
(J. As. Ser. VI. Tom. II. page 310) Yaka is a Mongol form of Saka the
ancestral guardians would be Sakas. Compare in Eastern Siberia the
Turki tribe called Yakuts by the Russians and Sokhas by themselves,
Ency. Brit. XXIV. 725. This would explain why the mythic Yaksha was
a guardian, a builder, and a white horseman. It would explain why
the name Yaksha was given to the Baktrian Greeks who built stupas
and conquered India for Asoka (J. As. Ser. VII. Vol. VI. page 170;
Heeley in Indian Antiquary, IV. 101). It further explains how the name
came to be applied to the Yuechi or Kusháns who like the Yavanas were
guardians white horsemen and builders. In Sindh and Kachh the word
Yaksha seems to belong to the white Syrian horsemen who formed the
strength of Muhammad Kásim's army, A.D. 712. (Tod's Western India,
197; Reinaud's Fragments, 191; Briggs' Farishtah, IV. 404-409).

[1081] The measurements are: Height 4'; head round the brow to
behind the ear the back of the head not being cut free, 2' 6'';
height of head-dress, 8''; length of face, 10''; length of ringlets
or wig curls from the crown of the head, 2'; breadth of face, 9'';
across the shoulders, 2' 3''; throat to waistband, 1'; waistband
to loose hip-belt or kandora, 1' 3''; right shoulder to elbow, 1';
elbow to wrist, 9''; head in the right hand 5'' high 7'' across top;
hip to broken knee, 1'; knee to ankle, 1' 5''; foot broken off. Left
shoulder to broken upper arm, 8''; left leg broken off leaving a
fracture which shows it was drawn back like the right leg.

[1082] The Jains call the guardian figures at Sánchi
Bhairavas. Massey's Sánchi, pages 7 and 25. Bhairava is revered as a
guardian by the Buddhists of Nepál and Tibet. Compare Burgess' Bauddha
Rock Temples, page 96. A connection between Bhairav and the Sun is
shown by the practice among Ajmir Gujar women of wearing round the
neck a medal of Bhairava before marriage and of the Sun after marriage.

[1083] The Egyptians Romans and Parthians are the three chief
wig-wearers. Some of the Parthian kings (B.C. 250-A.D. 240) had
elaborate hair like peruques and frizzled beards. In Trajan's time
(A.D. 133), fashions changed so quickly that Roman statues were
hairless and provided with wigs. Gobineau Histoire Des Perses,
II. 530. Compare Wagner's Manners, 69. The number of wigs in the
Elephanta sculptures, probably of the sixth or early seventh century,
is notable. In the panel of Siva and Párvati in Kailas are several
figures with curly wigs. Burgess' Elephanta, page 33; in the marriage
panel one figure has his hair curled like a barrister's wig, Ditto
31; in the Ardhanarishwara compartment Garuda and two other figures
have wigs, Ditto 22; the dwarf demon on which one of the guardians
of the Trimurti leans has a wig, Ditto 14-15; finally in the west
wing wigged figures uphold the throne, Ditto 47. Gandharvas in the
Bráhmanic Rávan cave at Elura probably of the seventh century have
curly wigs: Fergusson and Burgess, 435. Wigged images also occur in
some of the Elura Buddhist caves of the sixth or seventh centuries:
Ditto, 370-371. In Ajanta caves I. II. and XXXIV. of the sixth and
seventh centuries are cherubs and grotesques with large wigs. Among
the Bágh carvings and paintings of the sixth or seventh century
are a king with baggy hair if not a wig and small human heads with
full wigs: MS. Notes. Finally at the Chandi Sewa temple in Java
of about the seventh century the janitor and other figures have
large full-bottomed wigs curled all over. Indian Ant. for Aug. 1876,
240-241. On the other hand except the curly haired or Astrakan-capped
music boys in Sánchi no trace of wigs seems to occur in the Bhilsa
Sánchi or Bhárut sculptures between the third century after and the
third century before the Christian era. Compare Cunningham's Bharut
and Bhilsa; Massey's Sánchi; Fergusson's Tree and Serpent Worship.

[1084] The ten feet of the pillars are thus divided: pedestal 2',
square block 2', eightsided belt 18'', sixteensided belt 18'', round
band 2', horned face belt 6'', double disc capital 6''.

[1085] This according to another account is Násik town.

[1086] Hariya Bráhman is said to mean a descendant of Hariyaji,
a well known Bráhman of Shrimál, so rich that he gave every member
of his caste a present of brass vessels.

[1087] This tradition seems correct. In the temple of Lakshmí near
the Tripolia or Triple gateway in Pátan are two standing images of
chámpa Michelia champaca wood one a man the other a woman black and
dressed. The male image which is about three feet high and thirteen
inches across the shoulders is of the Sun Jagat Shám that is Jagat
Svámi the World Lord: the female image, about 2' 6'' high and 9''
across the shoulders is Ranadevi or Randel the Sun's wife. Neither
image has any writing. They are believed to be about 1000 years old
and to have been secretly brought from Bhinmál by Shrimál Bráhmans
about A.D. 1400. Ráo Bahádur Himatlál Dharajlál. Compare (Rájputána
Gazetteer, II. 282) in the temple of Bálárikh at Bálmer about a
hundred miles south-west of Jodhpur a wooden image of the sun.

[1088] The details are: From Kausika 500, from the Ganges 10,000,
from Gaya 500, from Kálinjar 700, from Mahendra 300, from Kundad 1000,
from Veni 500, from Surpárak 808, from Gokarn 1000, from Godávari
108, from Prabhás 122, from the hill Ujjayan or Girnár 115, from the
Narbada 110, from Gometi 79, and from Nandivardhan 1000.

[1089] According to one account (Márwár Castes, 61) these Sindh
Bráhmans are represented by the present Pushkar Bráhmans. In proof the
Pushkars are said to worship Sarika as Untadevi riding on a camel. This
must be a mistake. The Pushkars are almost certainly Gujars.

[1090] Details are given above under Objects. The local legends
confuse Shripunj and Jagsom. It seems probable that Jagsom was not the
name of a king but is a contraction of Jagatsvámi the title of the
Sun. This Shripunj, or at least the restorer or founder of Shrimál,
is also called Kanak, who according to some accounts came from the
east and according to others came from Kashmír. Kanak is said also to
have founded a town Kankávati near the site of the present village of
Chhakla about eleven miles (7 kos) east of Bhinmál. This recollection
of Kanak or Kanaksen is perhaps a trace of the possession of Márwár
and north Gujarát by the generals or successors of the great Kushán
or Saka emperor Kanak or Kanishka the founder of the Saka era of
A.D. 78. According to the local Bháts this Kanak was of the Janghrabal
caste and the Pradiya branch. This caste is said still to hold 300
villages in Kashmír. According to local accounts the Shrimáli Bráhmans,
and the Dewala and Devra Rájputs all came from Kashmir with Kanak. Tod
(Western India, 213) notices that the Annals of Mewar all trace to
Kanaksen of the Sun race whose invasion is put at A.D. 100. As the
Shrimális and most of the present Rájput chiefs are of the Gujar stock
which entered India about A.D. 450 this tracing to Kanishka is a case
of the Hindu law that the conqueror assimilates the traditions of
the conquered that with the tradition he may bind to his own family
the Srí or Luck of his predecessors.

[1091] According to a local tradition the people in despair at the
ravages of Sarika turned for help to Devi. The goddess said: Kill
buffaloes, eat their flesh, and wear their hides and Sarika will
not touch you. The people obeyed and were saved. Since then a dough
buffalo has taken the place of the flesh buffalo and unwashed cloth of
the bleeding hide. Another version sounds like a reminiscence of the
Tartar origin of Krishna. The goddess Khamangiri persuaded the Lord
Krishna to celebrate his marriage clad in the raw hide of a cow. In
the present era unwashed cloth has taken the place of leather. MS. Note
from Mr. Ratan Lall Pandit.

[1092] The tradition recorded by Tod (Western India, 209) that the
Gurjjaras are descended from the Solankis of Anahilaváda, taken with
the evidence noted in the section on History that the Chávadás or
Chápas and the Parihárs are also Gurjjaras makes it probable that
the Choháns are of the same origin and therefore that the whole of
the Agnikulas were northern conquerors who adopting Hinduism were
given a place among Rájputs or Kshatriyás.

[1093] Epigraphia Indica, II. 40-41.

[1094] According to Katta, a Bráhma-Bhát of remarkable intelligence,
the Osváls include Rájputs of a large number of tribes, Aadas, Bhátis,
Boránas, Buruds, Chováns, Gehlots, Gohils, Jádavs, Makvánás, Mohils,
Parmárs, Ráhtors, Shálas, Tilars. They are said to have been converted
to the Jain religion in Osianagara in Samvat Bia Varsh 22 that is in
A.D. 165.

[1095] Indian Antiquary, VIII. 237.

[1096] Elliot, I. 432.

[1097] Indian Antiquary, XI. 156 and VI. 59.

[1098] Indian Antiquary, XII. 156.

[1099] Jour. R. A. S. XIV. 19ff.

[1100] Indian Antiquary, XII. 190 and XVIII. 91.

[1101] Beal's Buddhist Records, II. 270.

[1102] Indian Antiquary, VI. 63. That the name Bhilmál should have
come into use while the Gurjjaras were still in the height of their
power is strange. The explanation may perhaps be that Bhilmál may
mean the Gurjjara's town the name Bhil or bowman being given to
the Gurjjaras on account of their skill as archers. So Chápa the
original name of the Chávadás is Sanskritised into Chapotkatas the
strong bowmen. So also, perhaps, the Chápa or Chaura who gave its
name to Chápanir or Chámpaner was according to the local story a
Bhil. Several tribes of Mewár Bhils are well enough made to suggest
that in their case Bhil may mean Gurjjara. This is specially the case
with the Lauriyah Bhils of Nerwer, the finest of the race, whose name
further suggests an origin in the Gurjjara division of Lor. Compare
Malcolm's Trans. Bombay As. Soc. I. 71.

[1103] The Madhuban Grant: Epigraphia Indica, I. 67.

[1104] Reinaud, Mémoire Sur L'Inde, 337, in quoting this reference
through Alberuni (A.D. 1031) writes Pohlmal between Multán and
Anhalwara.

[1105] Indian Antiquary, VIII. 237.

[1106] Elliot, I. 440-41.

[1107] Indian Antiquary, XI. 109.

[1108] Arch. Surv. West. India, X. 91.

[1109] Tanka may be the northern half of the Broach District. Traces
of the name seem to remain in the two Tankáriás, one Sitpore Tankária
in north Broach and the other in Ámod. The name seems also to survive
in the better known Tankári the port of Jambusar on the Dhádhar. This
Tankári is the second port in the district of Broach and was formerly
the emporium for the trade with Málwa. Bombay Gazetteer, II. 413-569.

[1110] Indian Antiquary, VI. 59 and XI. 156.

[1111] Indian Antiquary, XII. 156.

[1112] See the Udaipur prasasti in Ep. Ind. I. and the Harsha
Inscription in ditto.

[1113] See the Baroda grant of A.D. 812-13. Indian Antiquary, XII. 156.

[1114] Elliot, I. 4.

[1115] Indian Antiquary, XII. 179.

[1116] Rajatarangíní, 149.

[1117] B. B. R. A. Soc. Jourl. XVIII. 239.

[1118] Elliot, I. 13.

[1119] Indian Antiquary, XIX. 233.

[1120] According to Cunningham (Ancient Geography, 313) the coins
called Tâtariya dirhams stretch from the fifth and sixth to the
eleventh century. They are frequently found in Kábul probably of the
ninth century. In the tenth century Ibn Haukal (A.D. 977) found them
current in Gandhára and the Panjáb where the Boar coin has since ousted
them. They are rare in Central India east of the Arávali range. They
are not uncommon in Rájputána or Gujarát and were once so plentiful
in Sindh, that in A.D. 725 the Sindh treasury had eighteen million
Tatariya dirhams. (See Dowson in Elliot's History, I. 3.) They are
the rude silver pieces generally known as Indo-Sassanian because they
combine Indian letters with Sassanian types. A worn fire temple is
the supposed Ass-head which has given rise to the name Gadiya Paisa
or Ass money.

[1121] Indian Antiquary, XII. 190 and XVIII. 91.

[1122] Jour. R. A. S. XIV. 19.

[1123] B. B. R. A. S. Jourl. XVIII. 239.

[1124] Kielhorn in Epig. Indica, I. 122.

[1125] Hoernle in Ind. Antiq. XIX. 233.

[1126] Details given in Khándesh Gazetteer, XII. 39.

[1127] Râs Mâlâ, 44.

[1128] Râs Mâlâ, 210ff.

[1129] Râs Mâlâ, 211.

[1130] Srí Bháunagar Prá. I. No. 30 of the list of Sanskrit
Inscriptions dated Sam. 1218.

[1131] Srí Râs Mâlâ, 161ff.

[1132] Râs Mâlâ, 211.

[1133] Inscriptions 9 and 10 are not dated in any king's reign.

[1134] Compare Tod's Rajasthán, I.

[1135] Read Srî Jagatsvâmi.

[1136] Evidently the name of his office, but the abbreviation is
not intelligible.

[1137] i.e. "Errors excepted."

[1138] Sir Stamford Raffles' Java, II. 83. From Java Hindus passed
to near Banjar Massin in Borneo probably the most eastern of
Hindu settlements (Jour. R. A. Soc. IV. 185). Temples of superior
workmanship with Hindu figures also occur at Waahoo 400 miles from the
coast. Dalton's Diaks of Borneo Jour. Asiatique (N. S.) VII. 153. An
instance may be quoted from the extreme west of Hindu influence. In
1873 an Indian architect was found building a palace at Gondar in
Abyssinia. Keith Johnson's Africa, 269.

[1139] Raffles' Java, II. 65-85. Compare Lassen's Indische
Alterthumskunde, II. 10, 40; IV. 460.

[1140] Raffles' Java, II. 87.

[1141] Compare Tod's Annals of Rájasthán (Third Reprint), I. 87. The
thirty-nine Chohán successions, working back from about A.D. 1200
with an average reign of eighteen years, lead to A.D. 498.

[1142] Compare Note on Bhinmál page 467.

[1143] According to Cunningham (Ancient Geography, 43 and Beal's
Buddhist Records, I. 109 note 92) the site of Hastinagara or the eight
cities is on the Swát river eighteen miles north of Pesháwar. In Vedic
and early Mahábhárata times Hastinapura was the capital of Gandhára
(Hewitt Jour. Roy. As. Soc. XXI. 217). In the seventh century it
was called Pushkalávatí. (Beal's Buddhist Records, I. 109.) Taxila,
the capital of the country east of the Indus, was situated about forty
miles east of Attok at Sháhderi near Kálaka-sarai (Cunningham's Ancient
Geography, 105). According to Cunningham (Ditto 109), Taxila continued
a great city from the time of Alexander till the fifth century after
Christ. It was then laid waste apparently by the great White Húna
conqueror Mihirakula (A.D. 500-550). A hundred years later when Hiuen
Tsiang visited it the country was under Kashmir, the royal family were
extinct, and the nobles were struggling for power (Beal's Buddhist
Records, I. 136). Rumadesa. References to Rumadesa occur in the
traditions of Siam and Cambodia as well as in those of Java. Fleets of
Rúm are also noted in the traditions of Bengal and Orissa as attacking
the coast (Fergusson's Architecture, III. 640). Coupling the mention
of Rúm with the tradition that the Cambodian temples were the work
of Alexander the Great Colonel Yule (Ency. Brit. Article Cambodia)
takes Rúm in its Musalmán sense of Greece or Asia Minor. The variety
of references suggested to Fergusson (Architecture, III. 640) that
these exploits are a vague memory of Roman commerce in the Bay of
Bengal. But the Roman rule was that no fleet should pass east of
Ceylon (Reinaud Jour. As. Ser. VI. Tom. I. page 322). This rule may
occasionally have been departed from as in A.D. 166 when the emperor
Marcus Aurelius sent an ambassador by sea to China. Still it seems
unlikely that Roman commerce in the Bay of Bengal was ever active
enough to gain a place as settler and coloniser in the traditions of
Java and Cambodia. It was with the west not with the east of India
that the relations of Rome were close and important. From the time of
Mark Antony to the time of Justinian, that is from about B.C. 30 to
A.D. 550, their political importance as allies against the Parthians
and Sassanians and their commercial importance as controllers of
one of the main trade routes between the east and the west made the
friendship of the Kusháns or Sakas who held the Indus valley and
Baktria a matter of the highest importance to Rome. How close was the
friendship is shown in A.D. 60 by the Roman General Corbulo escorting
the Hyrkanian ambassadors up the Indus and through the territories
of the Kusháns or Indo-Skythians on their return from their embassy
to Rome. (Compare Rawlinson's Parthia, 271.) The close connection is
shown by the accurate details of the Indus valley and Baktria recorded
by Ptolemy (A.D. 166) and about a hundred years later (A.D. 247)
by the author of the Periplus and by the special value of the gifts
which the Periplus notices were set apart for the rulers of Sindh. One
result of this long continued alliance was the gaining by the Kushán
and other rulers of Pesháwar and the Panjáb of a knowledge of Roman
coinage astronomy and architecture. Certain Afghán or Baktrian coins
bear the word Roma apparently the name of some Afghán city. In spite of
this there seems no reason to suppose that Rome attempted to overlord
the north-west of India still less that any local ruler was permitted
to make use of the great name of Rome. It seems possible that certain
notices of the fleets of Rúm in the Bay of Bengal refer to the fleets
of the Arab Al-Rami that is Lambri or north-west Sumatra apparently
the Romania of the Chaldean breviary of the Malabár Coast. (Yule's
Cathay, I. lxxxix. note and Marco Polo, II. 243.)

[1144] Compare Fergusson's Architecture, III. 640; Yule in
Ency. Brit. Cambodia.

[1145] Java, I. 411. Compare Fergusson's Architecture, III. 640.

[1146] See Yule in Jour. Roy. As. Soc. (N. S.), I. 356; Fergusson's
Architecture, III. 631.

[1147] Of the Java remains Mr. Fergusson writes (Architecture,
III. 644-648): The style and character of the sculptures of the
great temple of Boro Buddor are nearly identical with those of the
later caves of Ajanta, on the Western Gháts, and in Sálsette. The
resemblance in style is almost equally close with the buildings of
Takht-i-Bahi in Gandhára (Ditto, 647). Again (page 637) he says: The
Hindu immigrants into Java came from the west coast of India. They came
from the valley of the Indus not from the valley of the Ganges. Once
more, in describing No. XXVI. of the Ajanta caves Messrs. Fergusson
and Burgess (Rock-cut Temples, 345 note 1) write: The execution of
these figures is so nearly the same as in the Boro Buddor temple in
Java that both must have been the work of the same artists during the
latter half of the seventh century or somewhat later. The Buddhists
were not in Java in the fifth century. They must have begun to go soon
after since there is a considerable local element in the Boro Buddor.

[1148] Traditions of expeditions by sea to Java remain in Márwár. In
April 1895 a bard at Bhinmál related how Bhojrája of Ujjain in anger
with his son Chandrabau drove him away. The son went to a Gujarát
or Káthiáváda port obtained ships and sailed to Java. He took with
him as his Bráhman the son of a Magh Pandit. A second tale tells how
Vikram the redresser of evils in a dream saw a Javanese woman weeping,
because by an enemy's curse her son had been turned into stone. Vikram
sailed to Java found the woman and removed the curse. According to
a third legend Chandrawán the grandson of Vir Pramár saw a beautiful
woman in a dream. He travelled everywhere in search of her. At last
a Rishi told him the girl lived in Java. He started by sea and after
many dangers and wonders found the dream-girl in Java. The people
of Bhinmál are familiar with the Gujaráti proverb referred to below;
Who goes to Java comes not back. MS. Notes, March 1895.

[1149] Another version is:

Je jáe Jáve te phari na áve
Jo phari áve to parya parya kháve
Etalu dhan láve.

Who go to Java stay for aye.
If they return they feast and play
Such stores of wealth their risks repay.

[1150] Compare Crawford (A.D. 1820) in As. Res. XIII. 157 and Lassen
Ind. Alt. II. 1046.

[1151] The following details summarise the available evidence of
Gujarát Hindu enterprise by sea. According to the Greek writers,
though it is difficult to accept their statements as free from
exaggeration, when, in B.C. 325, Alexander passed down the Indus
the river showed no trace of any trade by sea. If at that time sea
trade at the mouth of the Indus was so scanty as to escape notice it
seems fair to suppose that Alexander's ship-building and fleet gave
a start to deep-sea sailing which the constant succession of strong
and vigorous northern tribes which entered and ruled Western India
during the centuries before and after the Christian era continued to
develope. ((Alexander built his own boats on the Indus. (McCrindle's
Alexander, 77.) He carried (pages 93 and 131) these boats to the
Hydaspes: on the Jhelum (134 note 1) where he found some country boats
he built a flotilla of gallies with thirty oars: he made dockyards
(pages 156-157): his crews were Phoenikians, Cyprians, Karians,
and Egyptians.)) According to Vincent (Periplus, I. 25, 35, 254)
in the time of Agatharcides (B.C. 200) the ports of Arabia and Ceylon
were entirely in the hands of the people of Gujarát. During the second
century after Christ, when, under the great Rudradáman (A.D. 143-158),
the Sinh or Kshatrapa dynasty of Káthiáváda was at the height of its
power, Indians of Tientço, that is Sindhu, brought presents by sea
to China (Journal Royal Asiatic Society for January 1896 page 9). In
A.D. 166 (perhaps the same as the preceding) the Roman emperor Marcus
Aurelius sent by sea to China ambassadors with ivory rhinoceros' horn
and other articles apparently the produce of Western India (DeGuignes'
Huns, I. [Part I.] 32). In the third century A.D. 247 the Periplus
(McCrindle, 17, 52, 64, 96, 109) notices large Hindu ships in the
east African Arab and Persian ports and Hindu settlements on the
north coast of Sokotra. About a century later occurs the doubtful
reference (Wilford in Asiatic Researches, IX. 224) to the Diveni or
pirates of Diu who had to send hostages to Constantine the Great
(A.D. 320-340) one of whom was Theophilus afterwards a Christian
bishop. Though it seems probable that the Kshatrapas (A.D. 70-400)
ruled by sea as well as by land fresh seafaring energy seems to have
marked the arrival on the Sindh and Káthiávád coasts of the Juan-Juan
or Avars (A.D. 390-450) and of the White Húnas (A.D. 450-550). During
the fifth and sixth centuries the ports of Sindh and Gujarát appear
among the chief centres of naval enterprise in the east. How the
sea ruled the religion of the newcomers is shown by the fame which
gathered round the new or revised gods Siva the Poseidon of Somnáth
and Krishna the Apollo or St. Nicholas of Dwárka. (Compare Tod's
Annals of Rájasthán, I. 525.) In the fifth century (Yule's Cathay,
I. lxxviii.) according to Hamza of Ispahán, at Hira near Kufa on the
Euphrates the ships of India and China were constantly moored. In the
early sixth century (A.D. 518-519) a Persian ambassador went by sea to
China (Ditto, I. lxxiv.) About the same time (A.D. 526) Cosmas (Ditto,
I. clxxviii.) describes Sindhu or Debal and Orhota that is Soratha or
Verával as leading places of trade with Ceylon. In the sixth century,
apparently driven out by the White Húnas and the Mihiras, the Jats
from the Indus and Kachh occupied the islands in the Bahrein gulf,
and perhaps manned the fleet with which about A.D. 570 Naushiraván the
great Sassanian (A.D. 531-574) is said to have invaded the lower Indus
and perhaps Ceylon. ((Reinaud's Mémoire Sur L'Inde, 125. The statement
that Naushiraván received Karáchi from the king of Seringdip (Elliot's
History, I. 407: Tabari, II. 221) throws doubt on this expedition to
Ceylon. At the close of the sixth century Karáchi or Diul Sindhi cannot
have been in the gift of the king of Ceylon. It was in the possession
of the Sáharái kings of Aror in Upper Sindh perhaps of Sháhi Tegin
Devaja shortened to Shahindev. (Compare Cunningham Oriental Congress,
I. 242.) According to Garrez (J. As. Ser. VI. Tom. XIII. 182 note
2) this Serendip is Surandeb that is Syria and Antioch places which
Naushiraván is known to have taken. Several other references that seem
to imply a close connection between Gujarát and Ceylon are equally
doubtful. In the Mahábhárata (A.D. 100-300?) the Sinhalas bring
vaidúryas (rubies?) elephants' housings and heaps of pearls. The
meaning of Sainhalaka in Samudragupta's inscription (A.D. 395)
Early Gujarát History page 64 and note 5 is uncertain. Neither
Mihirakula's (A.D. 530) nor Lalitáditya's (A.D. 700) conquest of
Ceylon can be historical. In A.D. 1005 when Abul Fatha the Carmatian
ruler of Multán was attacked by Máhmud of Ghazni he retired to
Ceylon. (Reinaud's Mémoire, 225). When Somnáth was taken (A.D. 1025)
the people embarked for Ceylon (Ditto, 270).)) About the same time
(Fergusson Architecture, III. 612) Amrávati at the Krishna mouth was
superseded as the port for the Golden Chersonese by the direct voyage
from Gujarát and the west coast of India. In A.D. 630 Hiuen Tsiang
(Beal's Buddhist Records, II. 269) describes the people of Suráshtra
as deriving their livelihood from the sea, engaging in commerce,
and exchanging commodities. He further notices that in the chief
cities of Persia Hindus were settled enjoying the full practice of
their religion (Reinaud's Abulfeda, ccclxxxv.) That the Jat not the
Arab was the moving spirit in the early (A.D. 637-770) Muhammadan
sea raids against the Gujarát and Konkan coasts is made probable
by the fact that these seafaring ventures began not in Arabia but
in the Jat-settled shores of the Persian Gulf, that for more than
fifty years the Arab heads of the state forbad them, and that in the
Mediterranean where they had no Jat element the Arab was powerless
at sea. (Compare Elliot, I. 416, 417.) That during the seventh and
eighth centuries when the chief migrations by sea from Gujarát to
Java and Cambodia seem to have taken place, Chinese fleets visited
Diu (Yule's Cathay, lxxix.), and that in A.D. 759 Arabs and Persians
besieged Canton and pillaged the storehouses going and returning by
sea (DeGuignes' Huns, I. [Pt. II.] 503) suggest that the Jats were
pilots as well as pirates. ((Compare at a later period (A.D. 1342)
Ibn Batuta's great ship sailing from Kandahár (Gandhár north of
Broach) to China with its guard of Abyssinians as a defence against
pirates. Reinaud's Abulfeda, cdxxv.)) On the Sindh Kachh and Gujarát
coasts besides the Jats several of the new-come northern tribes showed
notable energy at sea. It is to be remembered that as detailed in the
Statistical Account of Thána (Bombay Gazetteer, XIII. Part II. 433)
this remarkable outburst of sea enterprise may have been due not only
to the vigour of the new-come northerners but to the fact that some
of them, perhaps the famous iron-working Turks (A.D. 580-680), brought
with them the knowledge of the magnet, and that the local Bráhman, with
religious skill and secrecy, shaped the bar into a divine fish-machine
or machiyantra, which, floating in a basin of oil, he consulted in
some private quarter of the ship and when the stars were hid guided
the pilot in what direction to steer. Among new seafaring classes
were, on the Makrán and Sindh coasts the Bodhas Kerks and Meds and
along the shores of Kachh and Káthiáváda the closely connected Meds
and Gurjjaras. In the seventh and eighth centuries the Gurjjaras,
chiefly of the Chápa or Chávadá clan, both in Dwárka and Somnáth
and also inland, rose to power, a change which, as already noticed,
may explain the efforts of the Jats to settle along the Persian Gulf
and the Red Sea. About A.D. 740 the Chápas or Chávadás, who had for a
century and a half been in command in Dwárka and Somnáth, established
themselves at Anahilaváda Pattan. According to their tradition king
Vanarája (A.D. 720-780) and his successor Yogarája (A.D. 806-841)
made great efforts to put down piracy. Yogarája's sons plundered some
Bengal or Bot ships which stress of weather forced into Verával. The
king said 'My sons with labour we were raising ourselves to be Chávadás
of princely rank; your greed throws us back on our old nickname of
Choras or thieves.' Yogarája refused to be comforted and mounted
the funeral pyre. Dr. Bhagvánlál's History, 154. This tale seems
to be a parable. Yogarája's efforts to put down piracy seem to have
driven large bodies of Jats from the Gujarát coasts. In A.D. 834-35,
according to Ibn Alathyr (A.D. 834), a fleet manned by Djaths or Jats
made a descent on the Tigris. The whole strength of the Khiláfat had
to be set in motion to stop them. Those who fell into the hands of
the Moslems were sent to Anararbe on the borders of the Greek empire
(Renaud's Fragments, 201-2). As in the legend, the Chávadá king's sons,
that is the Chauras Mers and Gurjjaras, proved not less dangerous
pirates than the Jats whom they had driven out. ((As an example of the
readiness with which an inland race of northerners conquer seamanship
compare the Franks of the Pontus who about A.D. 279 passed in a few
years from the Pontus to the Mediterranean ports and leaving behind
them Malta the limit of Greek voyages sailed through Gibraltar to the
Baltic. Gibbon, I. 404-405.)) About fifty years later, in A.D. 892,
Al-Biláduri describes as pirates who scoured the seas the Meds and the
people of Sauráshtra that is Devpatan or Somnáth who were Choras or
Gurjjaras. ((Reinaud's Mémoire Sur L'Inde, 200. The traders of Chorwár,
that is of the old Chaura or Chápa country near Virával and Mangrul,
are now known in Bombay as Chápadias. The received explanation of
Chápadia is the roofed men it is said in derisive allusion to their
large and heavy headdress. But as the Porbandar headdress is neither
specially large nor ungraceful the common explanation can be hardly
more than a pun. This suggests that the name Chápadia is a trace
of the early Chápa tribe of Gurjjaras who also gave their name to
Chápanir. Tod's (Western India, 250, 256) description of the Chauras
race with traditions of having come from the Red Sea and as a nautical
Arabia is the result of taking for Sokotra Sankodwára that is Bet to
the north of Dwárka.)) Biláduri (Reinaud Sur L'Inde, 169) further
notices that the Jats and other Indians had formed the same type
of settlement in Persia which the Persians and Arabs had formed in
India. During the ninth and tenth centuries the Gujarát kingdom which
had been established in Java was at the height of its power. (Ditto,
Abulfeda, ccclxxxviii.) Early in the tenth century (A.D. 915-930)
Masudi (Yule's Marco Polo, II. 344; Elliot, I. 65) describes Sokotra
as a noted haunt of the Indian corsairs called Bawárij which chase Arab
ships bound for India and China. The merchant fleets of the early tenth
century were not Arab alone. The Chauras of Anahilaváda sent fleets
to Bhot and Chin (Rás Mála, I. 11). Nor were Mers and Chauras the
only pirates. Towards the end of the tenth century (A.D. 980) Grahári
the Chúdásamá, known in story as Graharipu the Ahir of Sorath and
Girnár, so passed and repassed the ocean that no one was safe (Ditto,
I. 11). In the eleventh century (A.D. 1021) Alberuni (Sachau, II. 104)
notes that the Bawárij, who take their name from their boats called
behra or bira, were Meds a seafaring people of Kachh and of Somnáth
a great place of call for merchants trading between Sofala in east
Africa and China. About the same time (A.D. 1025) when they despaired
of withstanding Máhmud of Ghazni the defenders of Somnáth prepared to
escape by sea, ((According to Abulfeda A.D. 1334 (Reinaud's Abulfeda,
cccxlix.) some of the besieged fled to Ceylon. Farishtah (Briggs'
Muhammadan Powers, I. 75) records that after the fall of Somnáth Máhmud
intended to fit out a fleet to conquer Ceylon and Pegu. According to
Bird (Mirát-i-Ahmedi, 146) Ceylon or Sirandip remained a dependency of
Somnáth till A.D. 1290 when the king Vijayabáhu became independent.))
and after his victory Máhmud is said to have planned an expedition
by sea to conquer Ceylon (Tod's Rajasthán, I. 108). In the twelfth
century Idrísi (A.D. 1135) notices that Tatariya dirhams, that is
the Gupta (A.D. 319-500) and White Húna (A.D. 500-580) coinage
of Sindh and Gujarát, were in use both in Madagascar and in the
Malaya islands (Reinaud's Mémoires, 236), and that the merchants
of Java could understand the people of Madagascar (Ditto, Abulfeda,
cdxxii). ((The common element in the two languages may have been the
result of Gujarát settlements in Madagascar as well as in Java and
Cambodia. This is however doubtful as the common element may be either
Arabic or Polynesian.)) With the decline of the power of Anahilaváda
(A.D. 1250-1300) its fleet ceased to keep order at sea. In A.D. 1290
Marco Polo (Yule's Ed. II. 325, 328, 341) found the people of Gujarát
the most desperate pirates in existence. More than a hundred corsair
vessels went forth every year taking their wives and children with
them and staying out the whole summer. They joined in fleets of twenty
to thirty and made a sea cordon five or six miles apart. Sokotra
was infested by multitudes of Hindu pirates who encamped there and
put up their plunder to sale. Ibn Batuta (in Elliot, I. 344-345)
fifty years later makes the same complaint. Musalmán ascendancy had
driven Rájput chiefs to the coast and turned them into pirates. The
most notable addition was the Gohils who under Mokheráji Gohil, from
his castle on Piram island, ruled the sea till his power was broken
by Muhammad Tughlak in A.D. 1345 (Rás Mála, I. 318). Before their
overthrow by the Muhammadans what large vessels the Rájput sailors
of Gujarát managed is shown by Friar Oderic, who about A.D. 1321
(Stevenson in Kerr's Voyages, XVIII. 324) crossed the Indian ocean
in a ship that carried 700 people. How far the Rájputs went is shown
by the mention in A.D. 1270 (Yule's Cathay, 57 in Howorth's Mongols,
I. 247) of ships sailing between Sumena or Somnáth and China. Till
the arrival of the Portuguese (A.D. 1500-1508) the Ahmedábád Sultáns
maintained their position as lords of the sea. ((When in A.D. 1535 he
secured Bahádur's splendid jewelled belt Humáyún said These are the
trappings of the lord of the sea. Bayley's Gujarát, 386.)) In the
fifteenth century Java appears in the state list of foreign bandars
which paid tribute (Bird's Gujarát, 131), the tribute probably being a
cess or ship tax paid by Gujarát traders with Java in return for the
protection of the royal navy. ((Compare in Bombay Public Diary 10,
pages 197-207 of 1736-37, the revenue headings Surat and Cambay with
entries of two per cent on all goods imported and exported from either
of these places by traders under the Honourable Company's protection.))
In east Africa, in A.D. 1498 (J. As. Soc. of Bengal, V. 784) Vasco da
Gama found sailors from Cambay and other parts of India who guided
themselves by the help of the stars in the north and south and had
nautical instruments of their own. In A.D. 1510 Albuquerque found
a strong Hindu element in Java and Malacca. Sumatra was ruled by
Parameshwara a Hindu whose son by a Chinese mother was called Rájput
(Commentaries, II. 63; III. 73-79). After the rule of the sea had
passed to the European, Gujarát Hindus continued to show marked courage
and skill as merchants seamen and pirates. In the seventeenth century
the French traveller Mandelslo (A.D. 1638, Travels 101, 108) found
Achin in north Sumatra a great centre of trade with Gujarát. During
the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries the Sanganians or Sangar
Rájputs of Mándvi in Kachh and of Navánagar in north Káthiáváda were
much dreaded. In A.D. 1750 Grose describes the small cruisers of the
Sanganians troubling boats going to the Persian Gulf, though they
seldom attacked large ships. Between A.D. 1803 and 1808 (Low's Indian
Navy, I. 274) pirates from Bet established themselves in the ruined
temple at Somnáth. In 1820, when the English took Bet and Dwárka
from the Wághels, among the pirates besides Wághels were Badhels
a branch of Ráhtors, Bhattis, Khárwás, Lohánás, Makwánás, Ráhtors,
and Wagharis. A trace of the Chauras remained in the neighbouring
chief of Aramra. ((These Badhels seem to be Hamilton's (A.D. 1720)
Warels of Chance (New Account, I. 141). This Chance is Chách near Diu
apparently the place from which the Bhátiás get their Bombay name
of Cháchiás. Towards the close of the eighteenth century Bhátiás
from Chách seem to have formed a pirate settlement near Dáhánu
on the Thána coast. Major Price (Memoirs of a Field Officer, 322)
notes (A.D. 1792 June) the cautionary speed with which in travelling
from Surat to Bombay by land they passed Dáhánu through the Chánsiáh
jungle the district of a piratical community of that name.)) Nor had
the old love of seafaring deserted the Káthiáváda chiefs. In the
beginning of the present century (A.D. 1825) Tod (Western India,
452; compare Rás Mála, I. 245) tells how with Biji Singh of Bhávnagar
his port was his grand hobby and shipbuilding his chief interest and
pleasure; also how Ráo Ghor of Kachh (A.D. 1760-1778) built equipped
and manned a ship at Mándvi which without European or other outside
assistance safely made the voyage to England and back to the Malabár
Coast where arriving during the south-west monsoon the vessel seems
to have been wrecked. ((According to Sir. A. Burnes (Jl. Bombay
Geog. Soc. VI. (1835) 27, 28) the special skill of the people of
Kachh in navigation and ship-building was due to a young Rájput
of Kachh. Rámsingh Málani, who about a century earlier had gone to
Holland and learned those arts. See Bombay Gazetteer, V. 116 note 2.))

[1152] Crawford (A.D. 1820) held that all Hindu influence in Java came
from Kalinga or north-east Madras. Fergusson (Ind. Arch. 103, Ed. 1876)
says: The splendid remains at Amrávati show that from the mouths of
the Krishna and Godávari the Buddhist of north and north-west India
colonised Pegu, Cambodia, and eventually the Island of Java. Compare
Tavernier (A.D. 1666: Ball's Translation, I. 174.) Masulipatam is the
only place in the Bay of Bengal from which vessels sail eastwards
for Bengal, Arrakan, Pegu, Siam, Sumatra, Cochin China, and the
Manillas and west to Hormuz, Makha, and Madagascar. Inscriptions
(Indian Antiquary, V. 314; VI. 356) bear out the correctness of the
connection between the Kalinga coast and Java which Java legends have
preserved. As explained in Dr. Bhandarkar's interesting article on
the eastern passage of the Sakas (Jour. B. B. R. A. S. XVII.) certain
inscriptions also show a Magadhi element which may have reached
Java from Sumatra and Sumatra from the coast either of Bengal or of
Orissa. Later information tends to increase the east and south Indian
share. Compare Notices et Extraits des Manuscripts de la Bibliotheque
Nationale Vol. XXVII. (Partie II) 2 Fasicule page 350.

[1153] Compare Hiuen Tsiang in Beal's Buddhist Records, II. 222 note
102. Táhia may be Tochara that is Baktria, but the Panjáb seems more
likely. Compare Beal's Life of Hiuen Tsiang, 136 note 2.

[1154] Idrísi A.D. 1135 (Elliot, I. 92) has a Romala a middling town
on the borders of the desert between Multán and Seistán. Cunningham
(Ancient Geog. 252) has a Romaka Bazaar near where the Nára the old
Indus enters the Ran of Kachh.

[1155] Cunningham's Num. Chron. 3rd Ser. VIII. 241. The Mahábhárata
Romakas (Wilson's Works, VII. 176: Cunningham's Anc. Geog. 187)
may have taken their name from one of these salt stretches. Ibn
Khurdádbah (A.D. 912) mentions Rumála (Elliot, I. 14, 87, 92, 93)
as one of the countries of Sindh. In connection with the town Romala
Al Idrísi A.D. 1153 (Elliot, I. 74, 93) has a district three days'
journey from Kalbata.

[1156] Cunningham's Numismatic Chronicle 3rd Ser. VIII. 236. The
date of Kárur is uncertain. Fergusson (Arch. III. 746) puts it
at A.D. 544. It was apparently earlier as in an inscription of
A.D. 532 Yasodharmman king of Málwa claims to hold lands which were
never held by either Guptas or Húnas. Cunningham Num. Chron. 3rd
Ser. VIII. 236. Compare History Text, 76, 77.

[1157] Jour. As. Soc. Bl. VII. (Plate I.) 298; Burnes' Bokhára,
III. 76; Elliot's History, I. 405. Diu which is specially mentioned
as a Sáharái port was during the seventh and eighth centuries a place
of call for China ships. Yule's Cathay, I. lxxix.

[1158] Phra like the Panjáb Porus of the embassy to Augustus in
B.C. 30 (though this Porus may be so called merely because he ruled
the lands of Alexander's Porus) may seem to be the favourite Parthian
name Phraates. But no instance of the name Phraates is noted among
White Húna chiefs and the use of Phra as in Phra Bot or Lord Buddha
seems ground for holding that the Phra Thong of the Cambodia legend
means Great Lord.

[1159] Epigraphia Indica, I. 67.

[1160] In A.D. 637 raiders attacked Thána from Oman and Broach and
Sindh from Bahrein. Reinaud's Mémoire Sur L'Inde, 170, 176.

[1161] The passage of a Chinese army from Magadha to the Gandhára river
about A.D. 650 seems beyond question. The emperor sent an ambassador
Ouang-h-wuentse to Srí Harsha. Before Ouang-h-wuentse arrived Srí
Harsha was dead (died A.D. 642), and his place taken by an usurping
minister (Se-na-fu-ti) Alana-chun. The usurper drove off the envoy,
who retired to Tibet then under the great Songbtsan. With help from
Tibet and from the Rája of Nepál Ouang returned, defeated Alana,
and pursued him to the Gandhára river (Khien-to-wei). The passage
was forced, the army captured, the king queen and king's sons were
led prisoners to China, and 580 cities surrendered, the magistrates
proclaimed the victory in the temple of the ancients and the emperor
raised Ouang to the rank of Tch'ao-sau-ta-fore. Journal Asiatique
Ser. IV. Tom. X. pages 81-121. The translator thinks the whole
war was in the east of India and that the mention of the Gandhára
river is a mistake. The correctness of this view is doubtful. It
is to be remembered that this was a time of the widest spread of
Chinese power. They held Balk and probably Bamian. Yule's Cathay,
I. lxviii. Compare Julien in Jour. As. Soc. Ser. IV. Tom. X. 289-291.

[1162] Regarding these disturbances see Beal's Life of Hiuen Tsiang,
155; Max Müller's India, 286. The Arab writers (A.D. 713) notice to
what a degraded state Chach had reduced the Jats. In comparing the
relative importance of the western and eastern Indian strains in Java
it is to be remembered that the western element has been overlaid by a
late Bengal and Kalinga layer of fugitives from the Tibetan conquest
of Bengal in the eighth century, the Babu with the Gurkha at his
heels, and during the ninth and later centuries by bands of Buddhists
withdrawing from a land where their religion was no longer honoured.

[1163] In A.D. 116 after the capture of Babylon and Ctesiphon Hadrian
sailed down the Tigris and the Persian Gulf, embarked on the waters
of the South Sea, made inquiries about India and regretted he was
too old to get there. Rawlinson's Ancient Monarchies, VI. 313.

[1164] Reinaud's Abulfeda, cccxc.

[1165] The origin of the name Kámboja seems to be Kámbojápura an
old name of Kábul preserved almost in its present form in Ptolemy's
(A.D. 160) Kaboura. The word is doubtfully connected with the
Achæmenian Kambyses (B.C. 529-521) the Kambujiya of the Behistun
inscription. In the fifth of the Asoka edicts (B.C. 240) Kámboja
holds the middle distance between Gandhára or Pesháwar and Yona
or Baktria. According to Yáska, whose uncertain date varies from
B.C. 500 to B.C. 200, the Kambojas spoke Sanskrit (Muir's Sanskrit
Texts, II. 355 note 145). In the last battle of the Mahábhárata,
A.D. 100 to 300 (Jl. Roy. As. Soc. [1842] VII. 139-140), apparently
from near Bamian the Kambojas ranked as Mlechchhas with Sakas Daradas
and Húnas. One account (Fergusson, III. 665) places the original site
of the Kambojas in the country round Taxila east of the Indus. This
is probably incorrect. A trace of the Kambojas in their original seat
seems to remain in the Kaumojas of the Hindu Kush.

[1166] See Hunter's Orissa, I. 310.

[1167] Yavana to the south-west of Siam. Beal's Life of Hiuen Tsiang,
xxxii.

[1168] Quoted in Bunbury's Ancient Geography, II. 659. Bunbury suggests
that Pausanias may have gained his information from Marcus Aurelius'
(A.D. 166) ambassador to China.

[1169] Jour. Bengal Soc. VII. (I.) 317.

[1170] Remusat Nouveaux Melanges Asiatiques, I. 77 in Jour. Asiatique
Series, VI. Tom. XIX. page 199 note 1; Fergusson's Architecture,
III. 678.

[1171] Barth in Journal Asiatique Ser. VI. Tom. XIX. page 150.

[1172] Barth in Journal Asiatique, X. 57.

[1173] Barth in Jour. As. Ser. VI. Tom. XIX. page 190; Journal Royal
Asiatic Society, XIV. (1882) cii.

[1174] Barth in Journal Asiatique Ser. VI. Tom. XIX. pages 181, 186.

[1175] Mr. Fergusson (Architecture page 666) and Colonel Yule
(Ency. Brit. Cambodia) accept the local Buddhist rendering of Nakhonwat
as the City Settlement. Against this it is to be noted (Ditto ditto)
that nagara city corrupts locally into Angkor. Nagara therefore
can hardly also be the origin of the local Nakhon. Farther as the
local Buddhists claim the temple for Buddha they were bound to find
in Nakhon some source other than its original meaning of Snake. The
change finds a close parallel in the Nága that is snake or Skythian
now Nágara or city Bráhman of Gujarát.

[1176] Barth in Journal Asiatique Ser. VI. Tom. XIX. 190.

[1177] Yule's Marco Polo, II. 108; Reinaud's Abulfeda, cdxvi.

[1178] Barth in Journal Asiatique Ser. VI. Tom. XIX. 174.

[1179] Mr. Fergusson at first suggested the fourth century as
the period of migration to Cambodia. He afterwards came to the
conclusion that the settlers must have been much the same as the
Gujarát conquerors of Java. Architecture, III. 665-678.

[1180] Fergusson, Architecture, 665. Compare Tree and Serpent Worship,
49, 50. The people of Cambodia seem Indian serpent worshippers:
they seem to have come from Taxila.

[1181] The name Khmer has been adopted as the technical term for
the early literature and arts of the peninsula. Compare Barth
J. As. Ser. VI. Tom. XIX. 193; Renan in ditto page 75 note 3 and
Ser. VII. Tom. VIII. page 68; Yule in Encyclopædia Britannica
Art. Cambodia. The resemblance of Cambodian and Kábul valley work
recalls the praise by Chinese writers of the Han (B.C. 206-A.D. 24) and
Wei (A.D. 386-556) dynasties of the craftsmen of Kipin, that is Kophene
or Kamboja the Kábul valley, whose skill was not less remarkable in
sculpturing and chiselling stone than in working gold silver copper
and tin into vases and other articles. Specht in Journal Asiatique,
II. (1883), 333 and note 3. A ninth century inscription mentions the
architect Achyuta son of Ráma of Kámboja. Epigraphia Indica, I. 243.

[1182] Reinaud's Abulfeda, cdxxi.; Sachau's Alberuni, I. 210.

[1183] Fergusson's Architecture, III. 666.

[1184] For the joint Kedarite-Ephthalite rule in Kashmir see
Cunningham's Ninth Oriental Congress, I. 231-2. The sameness of names,
if not an identity of rulers, shows how close was the union between
the Ephthalites and the Kedarites. The coins preserve one difference
depicting the Yuechi or Kedarite ruler with bushy and the White Húna
or Ephthalite ruler with cropped hair.

[1185] About A.D. 700 Urumtsi Kashgar Khoten and Kuche in the Tarim
valley became Tibetan for a few years. Parker's Thousand Years of
the Tartars, 243. In A.D. 691 the western Turks who for some years
had been declining and divided were broken by the great eastern Turk
conqueror Mercho. The following passage from Masúdi (Prairies D'Or,
I. 289) supports the establishment of White Húna or Mihira power in
Tibet. The sons of Amúr (a general phrase for Turks) mixed with the
people of India. They founded a kingdom in Tibet the capital of which
they called Med.

[1186] Encyclopædia Britannica Articles Tibet and Turkestan.

[1187] Both Ibn Haukal and Al Istakhri (A.D. 950) call the Bay of
Bengal the sea of Tibet. Compare Reinaud's Abulfeda, ccclviii.;
Encyclopædia Britannica Article Tibet page 345.

[1188] Yule's Cathay, I. lxxxi.

[1189] Ency. Brit. China, 646.

[1190] Thisrong besides spreading the power of Tibet (he was important
enough to join with Mámún the son of the great Harun-ar-Rashid
(A.D. 788-809) in a league against the Hindus) brought many learned
Hindus into Tibet, had Sanskrit books translated, settled Lamaism,
and built many temples. It is remarkable that (so far as inscriptions
are read) the series of Nakhonwat temples was begun during Thisrong's
reign (A.D. 803-845).

[1191] Yule's Marco Polo, II. 39-42; J. R. A. Soc. I. 355.

[1192] Yule Jour. R. A. Soc. (N. S.) I. 356.

[1193] Compare Yule in Jour. R. A. S. (N. S.) I. 355. Kandahár in
south-west Afghanistán is another example of the Kedarite or Little
Yuechi fondness for giving to their colonies the name of their
parent country.

[1194] Compare Yule's Marco Polo, II. 82-84.

[1195] Yule in Ency. Brit. Art. Cambodia, 724, 725, 726.

[1196] Fa Hian (A.D. 400) about fifty miles north-west of Kanauj found
a dragon chapel (Beal's Buddhist Records, I. 40) of which a white-eared
dragon was the patron. The dragon, he notes, gives seasonable showers
and keeps off all plagues and calamities. At the end of the rains
the dragon turns into a little white-eared serpent and the priests
feed him. At the deserted Kapilavastu in Tirhut Fa Hian was shown a
tank and in it a dragon who, he says, constantly guards and protects
a tower to Buddha and worships there night and morning (Ditto, I. 50).

Sung-Yun (A.D. 519) notices (Beal's Buddhist Records, I. 69) in Swát
(Udyána) a tank and a temple with fifty priests called the temple
of the Nága Rája because the Nága supplies it with funds. In another
passage (Ditto, 92) he notices that in a narrow land on the border of
Posse (Fars) a dragon had taken his residence and was stopping the
rain and piling the snow. Hiuen Tsiang (Ditto, I. 20) notes that in
Kucha, north of the Tarim river east of the Bolor mountains, the Shen
horses are half dragon horses and the Shen men half dragon men. In
Aksu, 150 miles west of Kucha, fierce dragons molest travellers with
storms of flying sand and gravel (Ditto, 25); the hot lake or Johai,
100 miles north-east of Aksu, is jointly inhabited by dragons and fish;
scaly monsters rise to the surface and travellers pray to them (Ditto,
26). An Arhat (page 63) prays that he may become a Nágarája. He becomes
a Nágarája, kills the real Nágarája, takes his palace, attaches the
Nágas to him, and raises winds and tempests; Kanishka comes against him
and the Arhat takes the form of a Bráhman and knocks down Kanishka's
towers. A great merit-flame bursts from Kanishka's shoulders and
the Bráhman Nágarája apologises. His evil and passionate spirit,
the fruit of evil deeds in a former birth, had made the Arhat pray
to be a Nágarája. If clouds gathered the monks knew that the Nágarája
meant mischief. The convent gong was beaten and the Nágarája pacified
(or scared) Ditto, 64-66. Nágas were powerful brutes, cloud-riding
wind-driving water-walking brutes, still only brutes. The account
of the Nága or dragon of Jelalábád (in Kambojia) is excellent. In
Buddha's time the dragon had been Buddha's milkman. He lost his temper,
laid flowers at the Dragon's cave, prayed he might become a dragon,
and leaped over the cliff. He laid the country waste and did so much
harm that Tathágata (or Buddha) converted him. The Nága asked Buddha
to take his cave. Buddha said No. I will leave my shadow. If you get
angry look at my shadow and it will quiet you (Ditto, 94). Another
typical dragon is Apalála of the Swát river (Ditto, 68). In the time
of Kasyapa Buddha Apalála was a weaver of spells named Gangi. Gangi's
spells kept the dragons quiet and saved the crops. But the people were
thankless and paid no tithes. May I be born a dragon, cursed Gangi,
poisonous and ruinous. He was born the dragon of the Swát valley,
Apalála, who belched forth a salt stream and burned the crops. The
ruin of the fair and pious valley of Swát reached Sakya's (Buddha's)
ears. He passed to Mangala and beat the mountain side with Indra's
mace. Apalála came forth was lectured and converted. He agreed to do no
more mischief on condition that once in twelve years he might ruin the
crops. (Ditto, 122.) In a lake about seven miles west of Takshasilá,
a spot dear to the exiled Kambojan, lived Elápatra the Nágarája,
a Bhikshu or ascetic who in a former life had destroyed a tree. When
the crops wanted rain or fair weather, the Shamans or medicine-men led
the people to pray at Elápatra's tank (page 137). In Kashmir, perhaps
the place of halt of the Kambojan in his conquests eastwards, in old
times the country was a dragon lake. ((Kashmir has still a trace of
Gandhára. Compare (Ency. Brit. Art. Kashmir page 13: The races of
Kashmir are Gandháras, Khasás, and Daradas.))) Madhyantika drove
out the waters but left one small part as a house for the Nága king
(I. 150). What sense have these tales? In a hilly land where the people
live in valleys the river is at once the most whimsical and the most
dangerous force. Few seasons pass in which the river does not either
damage with its floods or with its failure and at times glaciers
and landslips stop the entire flow and the valley is ruined. So
great and so strange an evil as the complete drying of a river must
be the result of some one's will, of some one's temper. The Dragon
is angry he wants a sacrifice. Again the river ponds into a lake,
the lake tops the earth bank and rushes in a flood wasting as only a
dragon can waste. For generations after so awful a proof of power all
doubts regarding dragons are dead. (Compare Drew's Cashmere and Jummoo,
414-421.) In India the Chinese dragon turns into a cobra. In China the
cobra is unknown: in India than the cobra no power is more dreaded. How
can the mighty unwieldy dragon be the little silent cobra. How not? Can
the dragon be worshipful if he is unable to change his shape. To the
spirit not to the form is worship due. Again the worshipped dragon
becomes the guardian. The great earth Bodhisattva transforms himself
into a Nágarája and dwells in lake Anavatapta whose flow of cool
water enriches the world (Buddhist Records, II. 11). In a fane in
Swát Buddha takes the form of a dragon and the people live on him
(125). A pestilence wasted Swát. Buddha becomes the serpent Suma,
all who taste his flesh are healed of the plague (126). A Nága maiden,
who for her sins has been born in serpent shape and lives in a pool,
loves Buddha who was then a Sakya chief. Buddha's merit regains for
the girl her lost human form. He goes into the pool slays the girl's
snake-kin and marries her. Not even by marriage with the Sakya is
her serpent spirit driven out of the maiden. At night from her head
issues a nine-crested Nága. Sakya strikes off the nine crests and
ever since that blow the royal family has suffered from headaches
(132). This last tale shows how Buddhism works on the coarser and
fiercer tribes who accept its teaching. The converts rise to be men
though a snake-head may peep out to show that not all of the old leaven
is dead. In other stories Buddha as the sacramental snake shows the
moral advance in Buddhism from fiend to guardian worship. The rest
of the tales illustrate the corresponding intellectual progress from
force worship to man, that is mind, worship. The water force sometimes
kindly and enriching sometimes fierce and wasting becomes a Bodhisattva
always kindly though his goodwill may have to give way to the rage of
evil powers. So Bráhmanism turns Náráyana the sea into Siva or Somnáth
the sea ruler. In this as in other phases religion passes from the
worship of the forces of Nature to which in his beginnings man has
to bow to the worship of Man or conscious Mind whose growth in skill
and in knowledge has made him the Lord of the forces. These higher
ideals are to a great extent a veneer. The Buddhist evangelist may dry
the lake; he is careful to leave a pool for the Nágarája. In times
of trouble among the fierce struggles of pioneers and settlers the
spirit of Buddha withdraws and leaves the empty shrine to the earlier
and the more immortal spirit of Force, the Nágarája who has lived on
in the pool which for the sake of peace Buddha refrained from drying.

[1197] Mr. Fergusson (Architecture, 219) places the Káshmir temples
between A.D. 600 and 1200 and allots Mártand the greatest to about
A.D. 750. The classical element, he says, cannot be mistaken. The
shafts are fluted Grecian Doric probably taken from the Gandhára
monasteries of the fourth and fifth centuries. Fergusson was satisfied
(Ditto, 289) that the religion of the builders of the Káshmir temples
was Nága worship. In Cambodia the Bráhman remains were like those of
Java (Ditto, 667). But the connection between the Nakhonwat series
and the Káshmir temples was unmistakeable (Ditto, 297, 665). Nága
worship was the object of both (Ditto, 677-679). Imperfect information
forced Fergusson to date the Nakhonwat not earlier than the thirteenth
century (Ditto, 660, 679). The evidence of the inscriptions which
(J. As. Ser. VI. Tom. XIX. page 190) brings back the date of this the
latest of a long series of temples to the ninth and tenth centuries
adds greatly to the probability of some direct connection between the
builders of the Mártand shrine in Káshmir and of the great Nakhonwat
temple at Angkor.

[1198] Ency. Brit. Art. Tibet, 344.

[1199] Ency. Brit. Art. Cambodia.

[1200] Yule's Marco Polo, II. 45, 47.

[1201] Contributed by Khán Sáheb Fazlulláh Lutfulláh Farídi of Surat.

[1202] This account which is in two parts is named
Silsilát-ut-Tawáríkh, that is the Chain of History. The first part was
written in A.D. 851-52 by Sulaimán and has the advantage of being the
work of a traveller who himself knew the countries he describes. The
second part was written by Abu Zeid-al-Hasan of Siráf on the Persian
Gulf about sixty years after Sulaimán's account. Though Abu Zeid
never visited India, he made it his business to read and question
travellers who had been in India. Abul Hasan-el-Masúdi (A.D. 915-943)
who met him at Basrah is said to have imparted to and derived much
information from Abu Zeid. Sir Henry Elliot's History of India, I. 2.

[1203] Ahmed bin Yahyâ, surnamed Abu Jaâfar and called Biláduri
or Bilázuri from his addiction to the electuary of the Malacca
bean (bilázur) or anacardium, lived about the middle of the ninth
century of the Christian era at the court of Al-Mutawakkil the Abbási,
as an instructor to one of the royal princes. He died A.H. 279
(A.D. 892-93). His work is styled the Futúh-ul-Buldán The Conquest of
Countries. He did not visit Sindh, but was in personal communication
with men who had travelled far and wide.

[1204] Sir Henry Elliot's History of India, I. 115-116.

[1205] The reason of Umar's dislike for India is described by Al Masúdi
(Murúj Arabic Text, Cairo Edition, III. 166-171), to have originated
from the description of the country by a philosopher to whom Umar had
referred on the first spread of Islám in his reign. The philosopher
said: India is a distant and remote land peopled by rebellious
infidels. Immediately after the battle of Kadesiah (A.D. 636) when
sending out Utbah, his first governor to the newly-founded camp-town
of Basrah Umar is reported to have said: I am sending thee to the
land of Al-Hind (India) as governor. Remember it is a field of the
fields of the enemy. The third Khalífah Usmán (A.D. 643-655) ordered
his governor of Irák to depute a special officer to visit India and
wait upon the Khalífah to report his opinion of that country. His
report of India was not encouraging. He said: Its water is scarce,
its fruits are poor, and its robbers bold. If the troops sent there
are few they will be slain; if many they will starve. (Al-Biláduri
in Elliot, I. 116.)

[1206] Sir H. Elliot's History of India, I. 116.

[1207] Sir H. Elliot (Hist. of India) transliterates this as Básia. But
neither Básea nor his other supposition (Note 4 Ditto) Budha seem to
have any sense. The original is probably Bátiah, a form in which other
Arab historians and geographers also allude to Baet, the residence
of the notorious Bawárij who are referred to a little farther on as
seafarers and pirates. Ditto, I. 123.

[1208] This important expedition extended to Ujjain. Details Above
page 109 and also under Bhínmál. Raids by sea from Sindh were repeated
in A.D. 758, 760, 755, and perhaps A.D. 830. Reinaud's Fragments,
212. See Above Bhagvánlál's Early History page 96 note 3.

[1209] Details Above pages 94-96.

[1210] Sir Henry Elliot's History of India, I. 129.

[1211] Sir Henry Elliot (History of India, I. 129) calls it Kállari
though (Ditto note 3) he says the text has Máli.

[1212] Sir H. Elliot's History of India, I. 129.

[1213] Ibni Khurdádbah a Musalmán of Magian descent as his name
signifies, died H. 300 (A.D. 912). He held high office under the
Abbási Khalífahs at Baghdád (Elliot's History of India, I. 13).

[1214] Abul Hasan Al Masudi, a native of Baghdád, who visited India
about A.D. 915 and wrote his "Meadows of Gold" (Murúj-uz-zahab)
about A.D. 950-51 and died A.D. 956 in Egypt. (Sir Henry Elliot's
History of India, I. 23-25.)

[1215] Abu Is-hák Al Istakhri, a native (as his cognomen signifies)
of Persepolis who flourished about the middle of the tenth century
and wrote his Book of Climes (Kitábul Akálím) about A.H. 340
(A.D. 951). Elliot's History of India, I. 26.

[1216] See Appendix A. Volume I. Sir Henry Elliot's History of India.

[1217] Elliot's History of India, 394, where Sir Henry Elliot
calculates a parsang or farsang (Arabic farsakh) to be 3 1/2 miles. Al
Bírúni, however, counts four kroh or miles to a farsakh. Sachau's Al
Bírúni Arabic Text, chapter 18 page 97.

[1218] Sir Henry Elliot (History of India, I. 403) locates Surabáya
somewhere near Surat. The mouth of the Tápti is still known in Surat
as the Bára.

[1219] Ibni Haukal (Muhammad Abul Kásim) a native of Baghdád, left
that city in H. 331 (A.D. 943), returned to it H. 358 (A.D. 968),
and finished his work about H. 366 (A.D. 976). Sir Henry Elliot's
History of India, I. 31.

[1220] Elliot, I. 34.

[1221] Sir Henry Elliot (History of India, I. 363) correctly takes
Fámhal to be a misreading for Anhal that is Anhilwára. Al Bírúni
(A.D. 970-1039) uses the name Anhilwára without any Arab peculiarity
of transliteration or pronunciation. Sachau's Arabic Text, 100. Al
Idrísi (end of the eleventh century) styles Anhilwára "Nahrwára"
(Elliot, I. 84) an equally well known name.

[1222] Sir Henry Elliot's History of India, I. 34.

[1223] M. Gildemeister's Latin translation of Ibni Haukal's
Ashkál-ul-Bilád (Sir Henry Elliot's History of India, I. 39).

[1224] Abu Rihán Al Bírúni was a native of Balkh in Central
Asia. He accompanied Mahmúd of Ghazni to India in his expeditions
and acquired an accurate knowledge of Sanskrit. His acquaintance
with this language and Greek and his love of enquiry and research
together with his fairness and impartiality, make his Indica a most
valuable contribution to our information on India in the end of the
tenth and beginning of the eleventh centuries. He finished his work
after the death of his patron in A.D. 1030-31. See Sachau's Preface
to the Arabic Text of the Indica, ix.

[1225] Al Bírúni makes his farsakh of four miles. Sachau's Arabic
Text, 97.

[1226] Sir Henry Elliot's translation and transliteration of Rahanjúr
(History of India, I. 61) are, be it said with all respect to the
memory of that great scholar, inaccurate. He cannot make anything of
the word (note 3) while in the Arabic Text of Sachau (page 100) the
first letter is a plain r and not d. From the context also the ancient
town of Rándir seems to be meant. It is plainly written Rahanjúr and
is very likely the copyist's mistake for the very similar form
Ráhandúr.

[1227] Sachau's Arabic Text of Al Bírúni, 98 and Sir Henry Elliot's
History of India, I. 61.

[1228] Elphinstone's History of India, Book V. Chapter I. 263 Note 25
(John Murray's 1849 Edition) on the authority of Captain MacMurdo
and Captain Alexander Burnes inclines to the opinion that Debal was
somewhere near the site of the modern Karáchi.

[1229] Sir Henry Elliot's History of India, I. 65. Sachau's Text of
Al Bírúni, chapter 18 page 102.

[1230] Al Biláduri uses the word Barija for a strong built war
vessel. Sir Henry Elliot derives the word from the Arabic and gives
an interesting note on the subject in his Appendix I. 539. The word
is still used in Hindustáni as beda (by'dA) to signify a boat or bark.

[1231] Sachau's Arabic Text, 102.

[1232] According to Richardson (Arabic Dictionary voce myrrh) though
rendered gum by all translators. According to the Makhzan the word
mukl (Urdu gughal) is Balsamodendron and Bádrud the corruption
of Báruz (Urdu biroza) is balsam or bezoar.

[1233] Sachau's Arabic Text page 99 chapter 18.

[1234] After giving the distances in days or journeys the Text (page
102 Sachau's Text of Al Bírúni) does not particularise the distances
of the places that follow in journeys or farsakhs.

[1235] Elliot's History of India, I. 67.

[1236] Abu Abdallah Muhammad Al Idrísi, a native of Ceuta in Morocco
and descended from the royal family of the Idrísis of that country,
settled at the court of Roger II. of Sicily, where and at whose
desire he wrote his book The Nuzhat-ul-Mushták or The Seeker's
Delight. Elliot's History of India, I: 74. Almost all Al Idrísi's
special information regarding Sindh and Western India is from
Al-Jauhari governor of Khurásán (A.D. 892-999), whose knowledge of
Sindh and the Indus valley is unusually complete and accurate. Compare
Reinaud's Abulfeda, lxiii.

[1237] Sir Henry Elliot's History of India, I. 77.

[1238] Bombay Gazetteer, II. 69.

[1239] Elliot's History of India, I. 76.

[1240] Elliot's History of India, I. 79.

[1241] Elliot's History of India, I. 79.

[1242] Elliot's History of India, I. 84.

[1243] The details of Kulámmali given by Al Kazwíni (A.D. 1263-1275)
seem to show it is Quilon on the Malabár Coast. When a ruler died
his successor was always chosen from China.

[1244] Elliot (I. 363-364) on the authority of Al Istakhri thinks that
all the names Ámhal, Fámhal, Kámhal, and Mámhal are faulty readings
of Anhal (Anhil)wára owing to irregularity in the position or absence
of diacritical points.

[1245] This is probably Ránder, a very natural Arab
corruption. Instance Al Bírúni's Ranjhur. See page 507 note 11 and
page 520.

[1246] Rumála is mentioned at pages 14, 87, 92 and 93 volume I. of
Elliot. It is first mentioned (page 14) by Ibni Khurdádbah (A.D. 912)
as one of the countries of Sindh. It is next mentioned by Al Idrísi
(end of the eleventh century according to Elliot, I. 74) as one of the
places of the eighth section describing the coast of India, but is
mentioned along with Nahrwára, Kandhár, and Kalbata (?). At page 92
(Ditto) the same writer (Idrísi) says that Kalbata and Rumála are on
the borders of the desert which separates Multán from Sijistán. Again
at page 93 (Ditto) Idrísi gives the distance between Kalbata and
Rumála as a distance of three days.

[1247] Elliot's History of India, I. 84.

[1248] Sir H. Elliot's History of India, I. 85.

[1249] Elliot, I. 90-93.

[1250] Elliot's History of India, I. 89.

[1251] Zakariah Ibni Muhammad Al Kazwíni, a native of Kazwín (Kasbin)
in Persia, wrote his Ásár-ul-Bilád or "Signs or Monuments of Countries"
about A.H. 661 (A.D. 1263) compiling it chiefly from the writings of
Al Istakhri (A.D. 951) and Ibni Haukal (A.D. 976). He also frequently
quotes Misâr bin Muhalhil, a traveller who (A.D. 942) visited India
and China. Sir Henry Elliot's History of India, I. 94.

[1252] Barbier De Meynard's Text of Al Masúdi's Les Prairies D'Or,
I. 382.

[1253] Sir Henry Elliot misreads Tamraz for Al Bírúni's Arabic form
of Narmaza. He says: It comes from the city of Tamraz and the eastern
hills; it has a south-easterly course till it falls into the sea
near Báhruch about 60 yojanas to the east of Somnáth. The literal
translation of the text of Al Bírúni (see Sachau's Al Bírúni's India,
130) is that given above: It is hard to believe that the accurate Al
Bírúni while in one place (see Sachau's Text, 99) giving the name of
the Narbada faultlessly, should in another place fall into the error of
tracing it from Tirmiz a city of Central Asia. A comparison of Elliot's
version with the text sets the difficulty at rest. Compare Sir Henry
Elliot's History of India, I. 49 and note 3 ditto and Sachau's Arabic
Text of Al Bírúni, 180 chapter 25.

[1254] Compare Sachau's Al Bírúni with Sir Henry Elliot, I. 49,
who is silent as to the distance.

[1255] See Ahmedábád Gazetteer, IV. 338; also Elliot's History of
India, I. 356-357.

[1256] See Appendix Elliot's History of India, I. 363.

[1257] Al Istakhri in Elliot (History of India), I. 27.

[1258] Al Istakhri in Elliot (History of India), I. 30.

[1259] Ibni Haukal in Elliot (History of India), I. 32-34.

[1260] Ibni Haukal in Elliot (History of India), I. 34-38.

[1261] Ibni Haukal in Elliot (History of India), I. 39.

[1262] Ibni Haukal in Elliot (History of India), I. 40.

[1263] Al Bírúni in Elliot (History of India), I. 61.

[1264] Al Idrísi in Elliot (History of India), I. 77.

[1265] Al Idrísi in Elliot (History of India), I. 79.

[1266] Bánia seems to be a copyist's error for Bazána or Náráyana. The
distances agree and the fact that to this day the neighbourhood of
Jaipur is noted for its flocks of sheep bears additional testimony
to the correctness of the supposition.

[1267] Al Idrísi in Elliot's History of India, I. 84.

[1268] Al Idrísi in Elliot's History of India, I. 9. The Balháras or
Ráshtrakútas lost their power in A.D. 974. The only explanation of
Idrísi's (A.D. 1100) Balháras at Anhilwára is that Idrísi is quoting
from Al Bírúni A.D. 950.

[1269] Farishtah Persian Text Lithographed Bombay Edition, I. 57.

[1270] Farishtah Persian Text Lithographed Bombay Edition, IV. 48. The
Rauzat-us-Safa states that it was at Somnáth the Ghaznavide wanted to
fix his capital (IV. 42 Persian Text, Lakhnau Edition). Anahilaváda
seems more likely.

[1271] Sir Henry Elliot's History of India, II. 155.

[1272] The Jámi-ûl-Hikáyát in Elliot (History of India), II. 162.

[1273] Elliot's History of India, II. 200.

[1274] Elliot's History of India, II. 229-30.

[1275] Sir Henry Elliot's History of India, III. 74.

[1276] Sachau's Text, 102.

[1277] Al Idrísi in Elliot (History of India), I. 87.

[1278] Al Idrísi in Elliot (History of India), I. 88.

[1279] Elliot's History of India, III. 260.

[1280] Bayley's Gujarát, 81.

[1281] Elliot's History of India, IV. 39; History of Gujarát, 81.

[1282] Bayley's Gujarát, 90.

[1283] Al Biláduri (A.D. 892) in Elliot's History of India, I. 116.

[1284] Al Biláduri (A.D. 892) in Elliot's History of India,
I. 126. Details of this far-stretching affliction of Sindh, Kachh,
the Chávadás, Chitor, Bhínmál, and Ujjain are given above, History 109.

[1285] Ibni Khurdádbah in Elliot (History of India), I. 14.

[1286] Al Bírúni in Elliot (History of India, I. 49-66), and Sachau's
Arabic Text, 100.

[1287] Barbier DeMeynard's Arabic Text of Les Prairies D'Or, I. 239.

[1288] Al Idrísi in Elliot (History of India), I. 87.

[1289] Elliot's History of India, III. 256-260.

[1290] Al Istakhri in Elliot (History of India), I. 27.

[1291] Al Istakhri in Elliot (History of India), I. 30.

[1292] Prairies D'Or (Barbier DeMeynard's Arabic Text), I. 253-54.

[1293] Prairies D'Or (Arabic Text), III. 47.

[1294] Ibni Haukal in Elliot (History of India), I. 34.

[1295] Ibni Haukal in Elliot (History of India), I. 38.

[1296] Ibni Haukal in Elliot (History of India), I. 39.

[1297] Rashíd-ud-dín from Al Bírúni in Elliot's History of India,
I. 66 and Sachau's Arabic Text, chapter 18 pages 99-102.

[1298] Sir Henry Elliot's History of India, I. 67.

[1299] Sir Henry Elliot's History of India, I. 77.

[1300] Sir Henry Elliot's History of India, I. 84.

[1301] Tazjiyat-ul-Amsar in Elliot, III. 32.

[1302] Saâdi's patron mentioned by him in his Garden of Roses.

[1303] The word dínár is from the Latin denarius (a silver coin
worth 10 oz. of brass) through the Greek dênarion. It is a Kuráanic
word, the ancient Arabic equivalent being mithkál. The dínár sequin
or ducat varied in value in different times. In Abu Haúfah's (the
greatest of the four Sunni Jurisconsults') time (A.D. 749) its value
ranged from 10 to 12 dirhams. Then from 20 to 25 dirhams or drachmas.
As a weight it represented a drachma and a half. Though generally
fluctuating, its value may be assessed at 9s. or 10 francs to half
a sovereign. For an elaborate article on the Dínár see Yule's Cathay,
II. 439; Burton's Alf Leilah, I. 32. The word Dirham is used in
Arabic in the sense of "silver" (vulg. siller) the Greek drachmê
and the drachuma of Plautus. This silver piece was 9 3/4d. and as
a weight 66 1/2 grains. Sir Henry Elliot does not speak more at
length of the dínár and the dirham than to say (History of India,
I. 461) that they were introduced in Sindh in the reign of Abdul
Malik (A.D. 685) and Elliot, VII. 31) that the dínár was a Rúm and
the dirham a Persian coin. The value of the dínár in modern Indian
currency may be said to be Rs. 5 and that of the dirham nearly annas 4.

[1304] Wassáf gives the date of this event as A.D. 1298, but the
Tárikh-i-Alái of Amír Khusrao places it at A.D. 1300. See Elliot's
History of India, III. 43 and 74.

[1305] Elliot's History of India, III. 256-57.

[1306] Al Masúdi in Elliot (History of India), I. 24.

[1307] Prairies D'Or, II. 85.

[1308] He was called a Hairam or Hairamah in the language of the
country. Al Masúdi's Murúj Arabic Text Cairo Edition, II. 56.

[1309] Al Masúdi's Murúj Arabic Text Cairo Edition, II. 56-57.

[1310] One born in India of an Arab father and an Indian mother
probably from the Gujaráti word Ádh-besra meaning mixed blood. This
seems the origin of the Bais Rájput. The performer in the case in the
text was a Hindu. Al Masúdi (Murúj Arabic Text II. 57 Cairo Edition)
says that the singular of Bayásirah is Besar.

[1311] Al Istakhri in Elliot (History of India), I. 27.

[1312] Al Istakhri in Elliot (History of India), I. 30.

[1313] Ibni Haukal in Elliot (History of India), I. 33-34.

[1314] Ibni Haukal in Elliot (History of India), I. 38.

[1315] Ibni Haukal in Elliot (History of India), I. 38.

[1316] Al Bírúni Sachau's Arabic Text, 102; Elliot's History of India,
I. 39, 66.

[1317] Al Idrísi in Elliot (History of India), I. 77.

[1318] Al Idrísi in Elliot (History of India), I. 77, 85.

[1319] Al Kazwíni in Elliot (History of India), I. 97.

[1320] Though Al Kazwíni wrote in the thirteenth century, he derives
his information of India from Misâar bin Muhalhil, who visited India
about A.D. 942. Elliot (History of India), I. 94.

[1321] Al Idrísi in Elliot (History of India), I. 87.

[1322] Tárikh-i-Fírúz Sháhi by Ziá Barni (Elliot's History of India),
III. 264-65.

[1323] Rashíd-ud-dín (A.D. 1310) from Al Birúni in Elliot's History
of India, I. 65.

[1324] Rashíd-ud-dín (A.D. 1310) from Al Birúni in Elliot's History
of India, I. 49.

[1325] Rashíd-ud-dín (A.D. 1310) from Al Birúni in Elliot's History
of India, I. 66.

[1326] Written A.D. 1600 (Elliot, I. 213).

[1327] Táríkh-i-Maâsumi in Elliot, I. 16.

[1328] Tuhfat-ul-Kirám in Elliot, I. 344.

[1329] Táríkh-i-Maâsumi in Elliot, I. 217.

[1330] Tárikh-i-Maâsumi in Elliot, I. 218.

[1331] Tárikh-i-Táhiri (Elliot's History of India), I. 267-68.

[1332] Journal Asiatic Society of Bengal for February 1838, 102.

[1333] Sir Henry Elliot's History of India, I. 268.

[1334] Tárikh-i-Fírúz Sháhi in Elliot, II. 260.

[1335] In his Arabic Text of the Murúj (Prairies D'Or, Cairo Edition)
Al Masúdi writes the name of the Kanauj king as Farwarah. (If the F
stands for P and the w for m, as is quite possible in Arab writing,
then this can be Parmárah the Arab plural for Parmár.) At volume
I. page 240 the word Farwarah is twice used. Once: "And the king
of Kanauj, of the kings of Sindh (India) is Farwarah." Again at the
same page (240): "And Farwarah he who is king of Kanauj is opposed to
Balhara." Then at page 241: Farwarah is again used in the beginning
of the account quoted by Elliot in I. 23.

[1336] Elliot's History of India, I. 23. In the Cairo Edition of the
Arabic Text of Al Masúdi's Murúj (Prairies D'Or) vol. I. page 241 is
the original of this account.

[1337] Elliot's History of India, I. 33.

[1338] Elliot's History of India. I. 45.

[1339] Elliot's History of India, I. 49.

[1340] Elliot, I. 90.

[1341] Elliot's History of India, I. 147.

[1342] Sir Henry Elliot's History of India, I. 15.

[1343] Táj-ul-Mâásir in Sir Henry Elliot's History of India,
II. 222. 'After staying some time at Dehli he (Kutb-ud-dín) marched
in A.D. 1194 (H. 590) towards Kol and Banâras passing the Jumna which
from its exceeding purity resembled a mirror.' It would seem to place
Kol near Banâras.

[1344] Al Masúdi's Prairies D'Or (Arabic Text), I. 168.

[1345] Al Masúdi in Elliot (History of India), I. 19, 20, 21 and
Prairies D'Or, I. 178.

[1346] Al Masúdi Arabic Text Prairies D'Or, (I. 381); Al Masúdi in
Elliot (History of India), I. 24.

[1347] That is an Arab dirhem and a half. Al Istakhri in Elliot
(History of India), I. 27. These Tártariyya dirhems are mentioned
by almost all Arab writers. Al Idrísi says they were current
in Mansúrah in Sindh and in the Malay archipelago. See Elliot,
I. 3 note 4. According to Sulaimán (A.D. 851) the Tártariya dirham
weighed "a dirham and a half of the coinage of the king." Elliot,
I. 3. Al Masúdi (Prairies D'Or, I. 382) calls these "Tátiriyyah"
dirhams, giving them the same weight as that given by Sulaimán to
the Tártariyah dirhams. Ibni Haukal calls it the Titari dirhem and
makes its weight equal to "a dirham and a third" (Elliot, I. 85).

[1348] Kumlah is rauma salt land. There is a Rúm near Kárur about
sixty miles south-east of Multán. Al Idrísi (A.D. 1135) has a Rumálah
three days from Kalbata the salt range. Elliot, I. 92.

[1349] Probably Okhámandal. See Appendix vol. I. page 390 Elliot's
History of India.

[1350] Sachau's Arabic Text of Al Bírúni's Indica, 99.

[1351] Persian Text Bombay Edition of 1832, I. 53.

[1352] Sachau's Arabic Text of Al Bírúni, 100.

[1353] Elliot's History of India, I. 84.

[1354] Al Biláduri in Elliot (History of India), I. 129. The word
sáj in the Arabic text means besides a teak-spar (which seems to be
an improbable present to be sent to a Khalifáh), a large black or
green turban or sash.

[1355] Ibni Khurdádbha in Elliot (History of India), I. 14 and 15.

[1356] De Meynard's Arabic Text of Les Prairies D'Or, III. 47-48.

[1357] Al Istakhri in Elliot (History of India), I. 27 and 30.

[1358] Ibni Haukal in Elliot (History of India), I. 34 and 38.

[1359] Al Bírúni in Elliot, I. 66.

[1360] Al Idrísi in Elliot, I. 77-85.

[1361] Sir Henry Elliot's History of India, I. 403 Appendix.

[1362] Lee's Ibni Batuta, 166.

[1363] Al Masúdi in Elliot (History of India), I. 21.

[1364] Rashid-ud-dín from Al Bírúni in Elliot, I. 68.

[1365] Al Idrísi in Elliot, I. 89.

[1366] Sir Henry Elliot's History of India, I. 65; Sachau's Arabic
Text of Al Bírúni, 102.

[1367] Elliot's History of India, I. 67.

[1368] Sachau's Text of Al Bírúni, 252.

[1369] Sachau's Arabic Text, 253.

[1370] Sachau's Arabic Text, 253 chapter 58.

[1371] It appears that at the time of his expedition to Somnáth Mahmúd
had not adopted the title of Sultán.

[1372] Sachau's Arabic Text, 253 chapter 58.

[1373] Sachau's Text, 253 chapter 58.

[1374] The Táríkh-i-Kámil. Ibni Asír (A.D. 1160-1232) is a voluminous
and reliable historian. Ibni Khallikán, the author of the famous
biographical dictionary, knew and respected Asír always alluding to
him as "our Sheikh." See Elliot, II. 245.

[1375] From the term 'sculptured' it would seem the idol was of
stone. It is curious how Ibni Asír states a little further that a
part of the idol was "burned by Mehmúd." See Elliot, II. 471. The
Tárikh-i-Alfi says (Elliot, II. 471) that the idol was cut of solid
stone. It however represents it as hollow and containing jewels, in
repeating the somewhat hackneyed words of Mahmúd when breaking the
idol regardless of the handsome offer of the Bráhmans, and finding
it full of jewels.

[1376] The Rauzat-us-Safa (Lithgd. Edition, IV. 48) speaks of Mahmúd's
project of making Somnáth his capital and not Anhilwára as stated
by Farishtah (I. 57, Original Persian Text). The Rauzát-us-Safa
says that when Mahmúd had conquered Somnáth he wished to fix his
residence there for some years as the country was very large and
had a great many advantages including mines of pure gold and rubies
brought from Sarandíb or Ceylon which he represents as a dependency
of Gujarát. At last he yielded to his minister's advice and agreed
to return to Khurásán.

[1377] Prairies D'Or (DeMeynard's Arabic Text, I. 381); also Al Masúdi
in Elliot (History of India. I. 24).

[1378] Al Istakhri in Elliot (History of India), I. 27.

[1379] Al Istakhri in Elliot (History of India), I. 30.

[1380] Ibni Haukal in Elliot (History of India), I. 34, 39.

[1381] Thus in Sachau's Arabic Text page 102, but Elliot (I. 66)
spells the word Sufára in his translation. It might have assumed
that form in coming from the Arabic through Rashíd-ud-dín's Persian
version from which Sir Henry Elliot derives his account.

[1382] Al Idrísi in Elliot (History of India), I. 77 and 85.

[1383] Al Bilázuri in Elliot, I. 116.

[1384] Barbier DeMeynard's Text of Masúdi's Prairies D'Or, I. 330
and 381.

[1385] Sachau's Arabic Text of Al Bírúni, chapters 18, 99, 102 and
Elliot's History of India, I. 60-61, 66-67.

[1386] Al Idrísi in Elliot, 1-89.

[1387] Al Idrísi says the real tabáshír is extracted from the root of
the reed called sharki. Sarki is Gujaráti for reed. It is generally
applied to the reeds growing on river banks used by the poor for
thatching their cottages. Tabáshír is a drug obtained from the pith
of the bamboo and prescribed by Indian physicians as a cooling drink
good for fever.

[1388] The name Barádah in Arabic orthography bears a close
resemblance to Barâbah, Bárlabah, Barlabah, all three being the forms
or nearly the forms in which the word Walabah or Walabi would be
written by an Arab, supposing the diacritical points to be, as they
often are, omitted. Besides as Barádah the word has been read and
miswritten Nárand or Bárand and Bárad or Barid. In the shikastah or
broken hand Nárand or Bárand would closely resemble Bárlabah or
Báradah. Al Bilázuri in Elliot's History of India I. 127, writes
the word Nárand or Bárand. Sir Henry Elliot (History, I. 444) reads
the word Barada and would identify the place with the Barda hills
inland from Porbandar in south-west Káthiávád. The objection to this
is that the word used by the Arab writers was the name of a town as
well as of a coast tract, while the name of Barda is applied solely
to a range of hills. On the other hand Balaba the coast and town
meets all requirements.

[1389] Reigned A.D. 754-775.

[1390] Sir Henry Elliot's History of India, II. 246 and Frag. Arabes 3,
120, 212; Weil's Geschichte der Chalifen, II. 115.

[1391] Sir Henry Elliot's History of India, I. 444.

[1392] Sir Henry Elliot (History of India, I. 445) identifies Kandhár
with Kandadár in north-west Káthiávád.

[1393] Sachau's Original Text, 205.

[1394] Sachau's Original Text, 17-94.

[1395] Details above in Dr. Bhagvánlál's History, 96 note 3.

[1396] Elliot's History of India, I. 7.

[1397] Elliot's History of India, I. 22, 24, 25.

[1398] Elliot's History of India, I. 34.

[1399] Elliot's History of India, I. 86.

[1400] Al Masúdi Les Prairies D'Or, II. chapter 18 page 85.

[1401] Giving an account of the diviners and jugglers of India Abu
Zaid says: These observations are especially applicable to Kanauj,
a large country forming the empire of Jurz. Abu Zaid in Elliot's
History of India, I. 10. References given in the History of Bhínmál
show that the Gurjjara power spread not only to Kanauj but to Bengal.

[1402] Ibni Khurdádbah in Elliot's History of India, I. 13.

[1403] Al Masúdi in Elliot (History of India), I. 25.

[1404] Ibni Haukal in Elliot (History of India), I. 34.

[1405] Al Bírúni in Elliot (History of India), I. 67.

[1406] Al Bírúni in Elliot (History of India), I. 59.

[1407] Al Idrísi in Elliot (History of India), I. 76.

[1408] Al Idrísi in Elliot (History of India), I. 86.

[1409] The merchant Sulaimán (851 A.D.) in Elliot's History of India,
I. 5.

[1410] Ibni Khurdádbah in Elliot (History of India), I. 13.

[1411] Al Masúdi in Elliot (History of India), I. 23.

[1412] Al Masúdi in Elliot (History of India), I. 25.

[1413] Ibni Khurdádbah in Elliot's History of India, I. 14.

[1414] Al Masúdi in History of India by Sir Henry Elliot, I. 25.

[1415] Lane's Notes on his Translation of the Alf Leilah, III. 80.

[1416] Al Masúdi's Murúj (Arabic Text Cairo Edition, I. 221).

[1417] The merchant Sulaimán (Elliot's History of India), I. 4 and 5.

[1418] See page 519 note 8.

[1419] Sir Henry Elliot's History of India, I. 11.

[1420] Ibni Khurdádbah in Elliot's History of India, I. 14.

[1421] Ibni Khurdádbah in Elliot's History of India, I. 15.

[1422] Al Masúdi (Elliot's History of India), I. 23.

[1423] Barbier De Meynard's Arabic Text of Les Prairies D'Or,
III. 47-48.

[1424] Barbier De Meynard's Arabic Text of Les Prairies D'Or, I. 239.

[1425] Barbier De Meynard's Arabic Text of Les Prairies D'Or, I. 253.

[1426] Barbier De Meynard's Arabic Text of Les Prairies D'Or, I. 384.

[1427] Ibni Haukal (Ashkál-ul-Bilád) and Elliot's History of India,
I. 39.

[1428] Elliot's History of India, III. 33.

[1429] Mámhal is by some numbered among the cities of India. Al Idrísi
in Elliot, I. 84.

[1430] Al Idrísi in Elliot, I. 79.

[1431] Al Idrísi in Elliot, I. 85.

[1432] Al Idrísi in Elliot's History of India, I. 85.

[1433] Al Idrísi in Elliot's History of India, I. 85.

[1434] Rashíd-ud-dín in Elliot's History of India, I. 67-68.

[1435] Ibni Haukal (A.D. 968) in Elliot, I. 39.

[1436] Al Idrísi (A.D. 968) in Elliot, I. 84 and 87.

[1437] Al Idrísi speaking of Cambay in Elliot's History of India,
I. 84.

[1438] Al Idrísi in Elliot, I. 85.

[1439] Al Idrísi in Elliot, I. 88.

[1440] Al Masúdi in Elliot's History of India, I. 9.

[1441] Ibni Haukal in Elliot, I. 35.

[1442] Ibni Haukal in Elliot, I. 39.

[1443] Al Idrísi in Elliot's History of India, I. 88.

[1444] Rashíd-ud-dín (A.D. 1310) in Elliot's History of India,
I. 67. The passage seems to be a quotation from Al Bírúni (A.D. 1031).

[1445] Ibni Haukal in Elliot's History of India, I. 34-38, also Al
Kazwíni, I. 97.

[1446] Sir Henry Elliot's History of India, I. 29.

[1447] The merchant Sulaimán in Elliot's History of India, I. 7.

[1448] The merchant Sulaimán in Elliot's History of India, I. 6.

[1449] The merchant Sulaimán in Elliot's History of India, I. 7.

[1450] Abu Zaid in Elliot's History of India, I. 10.

[1451] Abu Zaid in Elliot's History of India, I. 9-10.

[1452] Abu Zaid in Elliot's History of India, I. 11.

[1453] Ibni Khurdádbah in Elliot, I. 17.

[1454] See Elliot, I. 76, where Al Idrísi calls the first class
'Sákariá' the word being a transliteration of the Arabic Thákariyah
or Thákurs.

[1455] The Arabic plural of the word Barahman.

[1456] Ibni Khurdádbah in Elliot's History of India, I. 13-17.

[1457] Text Les Prairies D'Or, I. 149-154 and Elliot's History of
India, I. 19.

[1458] Arabic Text Les Prairies D'Or, I. 149-154, and Elliot's History
of India, I. 20.

[1459] Al Masúdi's Prairies D'Or, I. 169, and Elliot's History of
India, I. 20.

[1460] Rashíd-ud-dín from Al Bírúni in Elliot's History of India,
I. 67-68.

[1461] Al Idrísi in Elliot (History of India), I. 76.

[1462] Al Idrísi in Elliot (History of India), I. 85.

[1463] Al Idrísi in Elliot (History of India), I. 87.

[1464] Sir Henry Elliot's History of India, I. 88.

[1465] Al Idrísi in Elliot (History of India), I. 88.

[1466] Contributed by Mr. A. M. T. Jackson, M.A., I.C.S.

[1467] We learn from Pliny (VI. 22) that Palaisimoundou was the name
of a town and a river in Ceylon, whence the name was extended to the
whole island.

*** End of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "History of Gujarát - Gazetteer of the Bombay Presidency, Volume I, Part I." ***

Home