Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1 CHAPTER- 1
INTRODUCTION
A. SQURCEa
Broadly sPeald.Dg; the sources tor the study ot the
relations ot Delhi SUltanate w1 tb Ra3astban mq be classi
fied into epigraphic, Persian and non-Persian sources.
Inscriptions a
For the period under review, a large number of
1nsor1pt1ons, thro\rllng sign1t1oant light on the expansion
ot the sultans• authority 1n Ra~asthan have been found.
The inscriptions are in two main groups Persian and ArabicJ
and Sanskrit. The Persian and Arabic inscriptions number
about 140.
From fourteen Persian 1nsor1pt1ons, found at places
like Bharatpur, A3mer, ll1dwana, La4nu, Nagaur, etc., it
becomes obvious that MUslim influence extended from Bharat
pur to ~agaur in Jodhpur during the thirteenth century. The
name ot the first governor ot N agaur is known, only trom
ep1graphlc eVidence. In Marwar reglon, a number ot 1nscr1p
tlons found mostlY at places like Sada41 t Pandukha, Mandor
and tadnu, are indicative ot tbe tact that the north-eastern
parts of Marwar acknoWledged=the--'een:tral. author1 ty;. Never- -_..,..._;:_-=--. -_ - ,:__~ :... -' - ---·-- ·-
= .. = ·"" = -'""-- -
~- "-theleSSt ·the "DOUth;.oeastiin. regl~on-- appear's ~ t0 have remained
unaffected by the SUltanate• a intluenc•h
2
Again a close study of the Persian inscription so
tar available shows that regions like Ba~ana1 · J alor, ··Mander
ail<l Mewar w1 tnessed a· tall during the KhalJi periocl~ Yet
another inscription ot A.H~ 709/1310 A.D. ret erring· to SUltan
Alaud-Dl.n KhalJi and Prince Kh1zr Khan, refutes the b1 therto
believed story of Malcleo• s hold over Chi ttor. On the basis
ot this inscription,, 1 t is now established that Cbi ttor was
effectively under the control ot sultan Alaud-Dtn KhalJi up
to at least 1310 A.Dt!
The Sanskr~ t inscriptions may be considered in two
categories• The :first category comprises ot those inscriptions
which either euloaise the Sultans or their opPonents, and
thus otter some direet eVidence ot the nature of the poll ti
cal control over the area ot the find-spots. The other
category consists ot those inscriptions which contain no
direct references, favourable or hostile, to the SUltans.
SUch inscriptions are still valuable from the point or view
ot clan-geneologles, and other aspects of poll tical history. . . .
The Sanskrit inscriptions not only helP ua in knowing
the- geneology and reconstructing the history ot the various I .
Ra3P\lt clans, but also establish that regions like Mt. Abu1 '
Bh1nmal1 Kota, . Udaipur, S1rob1, Dun gar .PUr, J a1pur and
J a1 salmer e~., practicallY remained ind~p~d.• ~ ot Muslim
influence. In some of the cases, the Sanskr1 t inscriptions
3
give us new facts regarding the SUltans• mill tary . . . '
opperat1on~. · The Khal~1 attaCk on J alsalmer tor instance,
otherwise not recorded in the contemporary Persian
oh.t'onlcles, is known on the basis ot Sanskrit inscriptions.
A list ot all inscriptions which e~og1se the Sultans or
their opponmts, is given in the appendix at the end of
the tb.eai s.
Persian Sources•
The 1nscr1pt1ons, however, have more o~ corroborative
value than adding substantially to the already available
information, for which we have to depend on the contemporaey
and 'later Persian sources.
The Tajul-Maas1r or Hasan N1zam1 is a reliable and
contemporary work describing the poll tical history ot the
period 1193-1217. It has proved a good souro e tor the
closing years .of PrithV1raJa·III's re1gn 1 Hariraja•s attempt
to revive the Chauhan.; power and SUltan .I1tutm1sh•s attack
on Udaya S1mha. The work commenced·in 1200 A.D., opens with
.. the transactions of the year 1191 when Sh1habud-D1n ot Ghor
undertook to avenge the disaster he had met in the first
battle of Tara1n. The account ot this critiCal period is
carr1 ed down- to 1217 aJ. though in some~ ot i't~s copies the account is carried down to even twelve· years later, or
.4
Although poor in historical ·details, the
Talul•Me.as1,r has proved Very use.tul· With ·regard to SbihabUd•
Din and QQtbUd~Dln' s campQigns agatn'st the chtets of
Ralasthan. · About the achievements ot Aibak, Hasan H1zaJD1 . '
1ir1 tes, • ( A1bak) had taken awar every tort and stronghold
which he attacked ••. ·He had. ma4e the heads or the crown
Ra1.1. crown the top ot 1mpal.1ng posts, had sent the whole
world of idolatry to the fire of hell •••' • It is from
ta~u.l-Maas1r again th.at we ~ow about A3mer attar 1 ts
conquest as being made headquarters tor turther operations
11'1 Ra3asthan and also that Pri thv1ra~a' s son was given
Ranthambhor and allowed to rule after his accepting the
'l'u.rk1sh suzerainty. The work also turn1 shes interesting
details about the rebellions of Har1ra3a - the 41ssat1st1ed
brother of PrJ. thV1ra3a and Jatwan - the Chauhan·, Commander,
both ot whom tr1~d to revive the Chauhan:.-. power 1n .Ajmer
and 1 ts dependencies but failed. Similarly the de.ta1ls of
the conquest ot Jalor by SUltan Iltutmish are also ss.ve;n. _ '
There are clear bin ts 1n the work that during the 1n1 t1al ., • . . ' JJ.. .. ..
' ~>
Phase of conct'lest 1n Rajasthan, the Turkish conquerors did"'
not 1ntEild to follow the Policy ot direct annexation. Both
1n the ease of ~mer and J alor, the terri tortes were left
w1 th the local ruling chiefs. The Tajul.-Maas1r is not
~~inted.... The manusc~ript used in the tl1e~1s belongs to late
Professor Mohammad Hail1b. For some campa1 gns of SUltan
5
Iltutmish; however, ml:l.ot and DOwson 1s 'translatiOn ls
used.
The victories ot QUtbud-DJ.n Alb~ and h1s master
Sh1habu4-Dln are also contained 1n Tarikh-1-Fakhrud•Dtn
Mubaraksbah. ·Although written in the m1ddle ot the tittEGtb .• "' 4
century, the woJ"k proVides valuable and dated account ot ·
the early years of Turkish expansion.
One of the best and well lmo,.n histories ot the
Period is fabaqat-1-N as1r1 of M1nhajud-D1n Siraj. The work
carries the account upto the year 1260 .. the year ot 1ts
completion. The account of the pertod trom the beginning
ot the rule ot sul'tan Iltutmish up to the fifteenth rear or
the accession ot SUltan Nasirud-ntn Mahmud is based on the
author• s own ob-servations.
_ Minhaj • s history is an important source and forms the
basis for the study ot early Muslim expansion in Ra~asthan.
The author gives details about the defeat ot Pri thV1ra3:a ' .
Chauhan:. and the subs~quent b1story ot pr1n~ely state of
~mer. The Turkish conquests ot ·the places Uke Ba7ana1
Ranthambbor and Mswat are also. narrated 1n detail. Reference
is also made to a number or Iqtas held by Muizzi and Shams1 -
Millks in ~~ asllhan ~ Bein_g IJll ~);"J;h<?cl,~:a l(uell' 1 M1nha3 .
usually held. the Hindu chiefs w1 th contempt.
6
The· account left by M1nha3 1 s continued in Z1 aud-
Din Barani• s famous Tar1kh-1-F1ruzshah1. the work completed
in A.H. 758/1367 A.D. and dedicated to SUltan Firuz TUgbluq, ·~ . '
serves U' a unique source tor the period from the first year
~.~ ~fl1ban' s rule onwards. ~ M'llch o.t the work, compiled by
Barani in his old age and without notes, ls aneCdotal 1n
Character· and does not sometimes follow the cbronologlcal
sequence ot events. It, however, otters much insight into
the political history of the lthaJ.~1 and TUgbluq ·periods and
1 s much quo ted by the subsequent authors. The au tp.or did
not liVe to complete the account ot SUltan ~ruz tughluq.
B~an1·• s narration of the events of Ra~asth.an too, are very '
11m1ted and baised. H:l.s descr1Pt1on of the battles and
campaigns in Rajasthan during the Kbal~1 :Period, al.though
based on personal information, is not tree from errors. He
dismisses the account ot the ·conquest ot Chi ttor, tor example,
in 3ust one sentence. The. account ot the conquest of S1vana
and Ranthambhor ls, however, given in soi'lle details; although
no date 1 s g1 ven for any ot the events.
Among tbe bistorical. prose works and Masuavts of
.Alnir Khusrau,. the .Kbazain-ul-PUtuh has been to~4 very
useful tor SUl. tan Alaud-DJ.n• s campaigns 1n Ralasthan,
particularly the conqUest and _ annexation ot the Gubila
~~~onghold ot Cbittor and Chauhan.~ ldilgdoms ot- lantbambhor1
Chhaln ( ·orten read aa Jha1n ) , Jalor and S1waua. The vork
completed 1n A.H. 711/1311•12 A.D. contains valuable
information 'about the political developmeDts 1n Ra3asthen
4ur1n.g the first decade or the fourteenth ceil tury.
Amir Khus:rau• s information stands above others, for
the poet lUstor1an was not only contaporary w1 th the events
which he describes, but also was a participant in many
ot them.
Among the other works of Md.r Khusrau, M1ttah·ul.
PUtuh ( 690/1291 A.D. ) , Dewal Rani Khizr Khan ( a.,716/l316
A.D. ) and Tughluq Nama ( o. 720/1320 A. D. } are also usetu.l
s1nce these reter to some of the evoo ta connected 'Vi th· the
political history of Ra3astban. !he Mittah-ul-P\ltuh tor ·
instance, gives a detailed account of_ SUltan .Talalud-D.ln
Khalji' s attack on the fortress ot Chhain and Ranthambhor 1n
1291 A.D. The reference to Sahni, the commander of Rana
Hamm1ra, ls corroborated by the Chauhan:. biographies ot ·
Hammlra. There 1 s also a brief reference to the invaSion ot
Ch1 ttor and S1wana and detalled reference to Ra1 Karan, the
Obiet of Gu3arat and Dewal Rani the daughter of the Baghela
chief who was married to prince Kh1zr Khan son ot SUltan
Alaud•Din Khal~i. The '£tlg\llug ~~~ too raters brieflY' to
the bravery exbibi ted by Ghaz1 Ma11k (future Sultan Ob1yasud
ll1n ~ghluq) during lal.alud-Dln Khal31' s siege of Ranthambhor
The PU tuh-us-Sala tin of I sand. occupies a promin m t
place among the primary sources for the pol1 tical history
up to the middle ·Of the fourteenth century.. The author, who
was a contemporary of Sultan Muhammad bin 'lltghluq, wrote his
work .1D. verse, Hi~ ~amily was intimately connected W1 th the
SUl-tans s:tnoe the days or SUltan Iltutmtsh.. Although the
work 1s replete W1 th anecdotes and the author is particularly •
Pl"e~udiced against SUltan Muhammad. Tugbluq, the wor~ is
extremely useful tor several campa1 gns ot the Delhi Sultans
1n Ra3asthan during t}fe pre-Tu.ghluq period.
- , The graphic details of the capture of the fortress ot
Rantham.bhor by SUltan Al.aud-ll1n Khal31 9 as given by Isami,
tally w1 th the non•Pers1an sources. Isami even. mentions the
naJnes o.r the Muslim mutineers who took shelter W1 th Rana
Hammira at RaJl thambhor. Some useful information about the
conquest ot Siwana and OUjarat during the Khalj1. p~'rtod is
also available from. the Isam1 1 s work.
Baran1 1 s history closes at the sixty year of SUltan
Firu.z Tugbluq • s reign and the account 1 s con t1nue4 by ShaJDs
Sira3 Atif1 our next contemporary authority for the i'ugbluq
period. Atit• s work S.s equally usetu.l tor the poll tical
history ot the ~ghluq period. But there is very little. in
Atit -relating w Ra,astb.arh
!he hi.story ot the Post-Timur ·Period R~ as than is
known trom Yahya bin Ahmad bin Abdulla,tl S1rh1nd1'1 s work
7ar1kh~1-Mubarakshah1. The book Completed in 1434 occup1 es a very important Place among tbe contemporary histories of
the period part1cu+arly relating to tbe $$1yyid dynasty.
Yahy.a S1rh1nd1 1 a contempOrary ot SaiyyS.d SUltan Hubarak
Shah, has lett a detailecl account of the military activities
·ot the Saiyyid SUltans. It appears that Yabya S1rh1nd1
based his information tor the early period up to the tt.me
ot . the accession ot Sultan nruz 'lugbluq, on • various
histories'; from and after that period, be -wrote t~
• trustworthy information and personal obs..,rvatiqn • .• About
h1s own pos1 t1on and connections, however, Yahya S1rh1nd1 is
quite silm t. As the t1 tle of the work indicates, the book
"Was dedicated to Sultan Mubarak Shah. Yahya S1rhind1~ s work
is a correct and honest account and our original authority, ~
tor the post-Timur period ot th1.rty t1ve years (1400-1434.
4• D.) •
' For the Lodi per1o4, a number ot Persian sources have
been ut111zecl such as the Waq,1at-1-;Mushtagi (A.H.989/1581
A.D.), the Tarikh•i•Khan-1-Jahan, later mown as the
Makhzan-1-Afghanl, Tar1kh·1-Daud1 ( JahangS.r' s period ) ,
Tarikh-1-Sbahl C c. 1601 A.D. ) also moe as Tarikh•i
Sal.atin-1-Afaghina ( c. 1613 A.~. ) .
10
Nlamatullah' s Makh-zan-1-Atgbaa.l completed 1n A•H• !
1021/1613 A.D~ has been found. a valuable source tor
the Lodi aetiVi ties ·1n Rajasthan. It i.s trom tbis work
that we know about S1kandar Lodi' s wars W1 th the various
. Ra3PUt dynasties.
Although the Lodi rul er• s operations against the
Hindu Ra~a' s during th1s period was oont1ned to the Hindu
chi attains of the Doab and CEll tral India, 1 t g1 ves a good
deal of idea about Lodi att1 tude towards the Hindus in . general and the Tomara RajP\lts in particular. Similarly
the Tarikh-1•Sbab1, otherwise known as Tarikh·1-Selat1n-
1-Atagb1na, is the only chronicle referring to SUltan
Bahlul Lod1' s , campaign. against the Sisodia Rana ot
Mewar, 1t thUs corroborates the traditional Rajput
accounts as preserved in the fod • s Aqpalg and . ..ADJ'--,
.!!!-ties of Ra~asth~~··
Non-Persian sources•
untortunately1n most ot the cases, contanporary
non-?e~,s~an eVidence is lacking. Whatever is kno1«l. about
the Rajput side ot t~e story, 1a based on th~ works compiled
much langer after th.e aotual event,., ~LeaVing aa14e some ot
thl! contemporary Chauhaaf!. sources, all others were wr1 tten
several octur1es afterwards.
11
Allonl ·the Sanslt:rl t vo~ks, J qeaka' s Prl tbv1 .. 83 a
v1~aya occupies an important place. !he ltavya 1o a 1171_ 1-lf X. .... .............
oontemfJOI'aJ'f source 4ea11na vitht as 'be title indicates,
P&-1thv1ra~a•s Vlctonea. lt was certainly vritte during
'he close of twelfth century tor it 18 reterrGd to 1n the
WOI'ks of J~aratha,- a kashlllrl ~author ot about 1200 A.D.
!here are s&Yeral references to Pr1. thv1:raja' a hostile a ttl•
tude toward$ tbe 1u.J'ka and. about his mlss1on ot destroying the
ttl.c£kt.b'Sii.• · The ~ork seeras to have been completed before
1193 A. 1>. (the year ot the final defeat ot .Pri thviraja),
td.noe tb.are is no ret'erence to Pri thv1ra~a• s final defeat
c4 death at tbe hands of 3h1habud-z:tn.
A Vel"/ useful account of the Chauhan chief ot
:Ranthambt.Dr is NwaohanciJ'a Surts• !~1z;dallaka!Xa• It
was Wl"'1 tten in. the tourteeath cP.nturr, and. reoor4s the . '
aehievemtm.ts of the Cbauhans of the Ranthambbor line up to
the final defeat ot Bana H&IIID1.:ra and the annaat1on ot tbe
klft&dott.
J'1:f)m tbe dGtalls left byla.racbandra Su:r1 1 lt appears
that. lla had access to may earlier aoul"'es. lt is mostly
ws. tt8ll 1n a tc~rmal style. RtW"erthel!llss, 1 t aupplemaDts the
1nfoma.tion supplie.d by tho Musl:t.m cbron1clers in a number of
plaoas m4 also refers to the 'flaa1e.S.,\wloa of the MuslJ.m
-hol4 over Ban ttiatUbhor.
12
The account ot the Chauhan chiefs ls. contlnued 1n
another sixteenth century Sanskrit work SUrjanacharita ot . .· ' . . . -~
Ohandrasekhara. Although wr1 tten as late as Akbar's reigp,,
1 t has been found useful. as a supplementary source. . . \ . . . . '
· ~- JaYasimha suri•s Bammiramadamardana 18 another
Sanskrit work- dealing w1 th the defeat ot the toroes ot · '
Hammira M1lachchb1kara ( probably SUltan Il tutm1sh ) by
the forces ot Vlraclhavala Baghela, assisted by Uclaya Simha
Chauhan · ot' .Tai.or and his allies. Yet another work dealing
_ w1 th tb~ history or the Son1gara Chauhans ls Jlnaprabha
Surl' s Vividhat1rtbak$lpa.- The wr1 ter who was a contemporary
ot SU1 tan Muhammad Bin TUgbl.uq, 11 ves' usefUl information
about SUltan Al.au.d-Dln • s conquest of Gujarat, clurtna
the course ot which he encountered the Chauhans an4 sacked
ae'feral Son1gara strongholds like Bahadmer, sanchor and
Bh1nmal.
For the Khal~i penetration into Ra3asthant the
KbarataragachchhapattavaU ot J1napala completed 1n v.s. 3393/1337 A. D., 1s extremG11 useful. It consists ot three
Parts ot wll1ch the second and third parts are dated •.
Among the other sanskr1 t works, Puratan.QPraband.hasan
grah~ (c. v.s. 1290/1234 A.D.), Meru~ga•s 'Prab~dhao1n
tamp1 (c. v.s. 1361/1305 A·.D.) and R~asekhara• s l!tflbedha· ·
}Sosa (c. v.s. 1405/1349 A.D.} tooare usetul in supPlementing
13
our information about medieval RaJasthan •.. fhe .Puratana•
Prabandhasangraha and Praban_clhaoin tamaui refer to some of
the events of Pr1 thvira~a.• s reign. !he Pra.b·anclha\tos.a., I
· though 1 t is ma1nly a source for the h1storr of Gu.~arat, also
·de~s w1th . the oe~l?' Chauhan rulers ot Ba4ol 1 Jalor1
Sambbar end Ranthambhor. Some ot 1 ts copies also contain • !
the ceneology of' the· last two Chauhan house4. APart from
the above ment~one<t works, .SUkrtald.rtlkaUol1n1 of U4qa.
prabha SUri also contains some u'setul. material on Chaubm
ruler lJ4aya S1mha of J alor.
Ba3·asthan1 and IU.nC:U. accounts a
APart from the important sanakri. t works men tt.oned
above, a large number of Ra~asthenl and Hindi works (' mostly
·semi-historical and bardic literature ) are also ava1la.ble.
the Kan.ha4adeprabarut,ha. ( a. v.a. 1512/1456 A.D. ) of Pa4ma
nabba is a detailed biography ot ltanhadadeva, the Chauhan
chief of Ialor. Written in western Ra3asthan1 styl.e in the
middle of the fifteenth century, it tum1shes historical
as well as. traditional account ot Rao Kan.ha4adeva• s rise and
tall. The portion deaLing W1 th Kanahad.adeva• s tight w1 th
SUltan Alaud-DJ.n Khal31 is fairly accurate and deta1le4
one _and supPlements our information regardins the tall of
the- two- important Chauhan kingdoms of -~ alor and S1wana
during the Khal31 rule.
1 ~
A large number ot Hindi. and 1\&.3 ae,than1 poems dealing
w1 th the Ute ot Ilana H8JDJD1ra, the Chauhan cbiet of
Ran thambhor. are also available. Al,,thougb wr1 tten at a mu.ch
lat:::er . date and having l1m1 teet historical value, some of
these ChauPa1s1 Basoa and Chbandaa suob as Hammtrayau ot 1 ,........ . ·_'
- -= - -
Bhan4av Vyas ( c. v.s. 1~8/1481 A.D. ) , . Hammiraraso. ot
JodharaJa ( v.s. 1885), Hamtairahatha ( v.s. 1902 ) ot . Chancirasekbara, HatmDira ra Chanda ot Raj arupa ( v .s. 1798 )
and-· many others supplement our material tor the career ot
Ran a Hatnmi ra. Similarly the Pralcri taP1ngalam end Sarangadha
rapad4hati and Vidyapats.• s Purusapariksa (Sanaltr1 t) also
oontain strQT notices about Hammira.
Among the Kb.yat 11 terature, N a1ns1 Khyat occupies a
prominent Place. Wr1 tten about the m144le ot the seven.teGDth
century,. it supplies very usetul and exhaustive account ot
th.e various . Ra3:PUt clans ot medieval Ra~asthan from the
tenth to the seventeenth century. Although many dates gtven 1
by Nains1 are incorrect, its seneol.ogio&l. au4 4Jnast1c
1nformatton about al.most all the medieval ruling houses 1n
Raj as than, is very useful in supplying the m1 ss1ng gaps in '
the Persian chronicles.
Among the other bardic 11 ter~ture, reference mq also
be~ made to the -PJ:al. ptsg Khzst, .Bp1-4as Kh;rgt, ·Kvmdlban. Raso
ot Jan,. ( ·ror .the b1stol'7 ot the Q1wam ·KhaJJJ.' s of
15
Fatehpur Rajasthan), Dal.Pat Vilas ( tor the gceoloiJ of /
the Rathors ot Marwar ) , Ekal1Jt8a•Mahatmya (sanskrit) ot
Kmha Vyas ( tor the geneology of the Mewar bouse up to
Ban.a ltumbha ) , etc., all of Which furnish historical facts
a~ .~!,P~esentect in PGP'll~~ ~radi tlon.
Among the· . aeconclary works us edt . reter-.ce mq also
be Diade to ShJIIal Das' s V1r-V1nocl, *rod's .Annals 81).4 .
Ant1qu1 ties of Ra3asthan, o.H.Ojha' s Ra~putana Ita I 't!has, ' .
He04tR8.1' s Dynast1c HlstoJ7 of Northern IncU.a, B.R.Reu' s
Marwar tea I tlhas, and Dashratha Sharma• s Early Chauhan
Dynasties, Ra2astbap, thrO~fh the yes and LeCture» on
Ra3P1lt · Histoi'J' ancl CUlture.
Ra3a·sthan1 as it stands toctar, is a large state 1n
the western part. of ln<U.a... Its present naJDe,, as also the
one adopted ott1o1a1lr during Bri:tisb rule, • Ra3putana•,
became popul.$1' because a ma3or1 ty of the different _clans
1•:· Raj as than .11 teralr means Regal abode. (1ia1a Regal and . .sJthan..• abode) •·i· The t1rst reference to Ra5asthaD occurs l'i8ii 1rUicrtp-tton of v.s. 1?66/1?08 A. D. aow· in Sar4ar
- ~-tu.sewa"JOdhpur ,("oltet,~~- G.B .• - Sharm~o1-al,_L1te_1n. Me41eval Ra~as~h&n;t. P• 1, tn. 1). In loc&I Ra3astban1 iiilect the reg1on is also called Ra3wara and Raethana. tod.~ &als,: Vol.~ I, P• 1 •.
16
who nlect over 1 t 1 have Cla1me4. tor themselves the title
of fta3 PQt~a. Both tbe names are, however, ot recent orJ.gln.
an4 1 t 1s 41ftlcult to· sq by vhnt name the regt.on ,.
called bef01"e the Br1 ttah, began us1n,g these two nat~es at
the begtllrd.ng ot the D1noteenth eentury.1
. 0 RaJasthan ls s1tuate4 between 23 .a to 30.12 ct•areet
of latltucle ancl 69.30 to 78.17 lODgi.tude and occupies • a area of 3 142 12?4 ldlometarth On lts north-east are the
states ot Pan~ab an4 Haryaoa, to 1 ts east and. south-east
Uttar Praclesh an4 Madhya .Pradesh, and to 1 ts south-vest
GU~arat. The rest ot the boUD4ary on the we.stem ancl
northern s14e marches wl tb West Pakistan. This laut 1s
aa 1nternationel boundary, about 11070 ld.lometers long,
ana 1 t aeperates the Ra3aatban 41str1ct or Ganganagar,
Jike.n•r, Ja1e-.l.mer act Bai'ID8r from tbe 41str1cts ot Bhawalptu.~, KheirPt~r ad Mirpur Kbas ill Paklstan.
Before 1947 RaJasthan contained twenty-one princely
stat•s• two independent Jb1JsftPI!. (Jalirs) and the Br1 tlsb.
terri tory of Ajmex--Merwara. 3 The principal states wera _. ........ --· 1 ** • - ... ,.
1. Fi'anklJ.n Willia, M1111;!£l Memoix~s or qec>re Tbom~, P• 347 (c1t•d in G.S.a.abllot1 Jla.3f!U.tEa ~a 1.t1hft&t P• 1) •
2. ~A-9/ ... !P~ . .!b 19611 Vol. 1, part 11 (A), P• 87.
3. !he present etate ot Rajas~~an is the pro4uc.t ot a\leeesS1ve mergers ot no le•s than 19 pnn·cely states and three chtefsblps, commencilrg f'l'\lm l?-Karc·b 1948 to 1966, wltb the promulgat1Cift ot the states Beorcard.satlon Act.
17
Uda1ptir, Dungarpur, Banswara, Pratapgarb and Shahpura,
( under Guhllots, Sisodias ) J 'Bund1 Kota .and S1rob1 ( under
the Chauhan a ) ; · Karaul1 , ·.and 1 a1 salmer ( uader Yadavas ) i
4 a1 pUr and Al.war ( under Kachhwahas ) ; Jodhpur, Bikaner and ·
Kishangarh ( under Rathors ) ; Jhalawar. ( under Jhala Ra3puts) J -
Danta (under P.aramaras); Bharatpur and J)holpur (under J.ats};
and Tonk (under Muslim Chiefs) •
Most· or the Pr1ncipal1't1es mentioned· above, have
been krlovn by d1tterent names; and except ·tor Udaipur,
Bun41 Kota, S1rob1, Ja1sal.mer and .Jodhpur, most of the
other 'kingdoms were tounded at a date much later than the
period_ w1 th wb1ch we are oonoemed. some kingdoms like
Ranthambhort Jalor, N.adol etc., saw their rise and tall during
tbe period of our study, while tbe othGr states were known
by their older territorial names1 and parts ot these
1. EPigraphic and 11 terary records of early medieval Ra3astb.an, mention the following ancient nameo tor various pr1nciPal1 ties a
Mewar; MedaPat. Ad1ve.raha Temple 1nsCr1Pt1on, Allar, v. s. 1000/943 A. n., now in M.B. College, Uda1pur. ,.
Jaisalmer1 Ma4a. Ghatiyala Ins~rtpts.on ot 22114 · or1ght halt ot ~attra, v.s. 919/6tb
Ma:rch9862 A,D,, J,R,A,S. 18961 ··
PP• 517•18•
J o4hpur; Marti• Gosundi Insc:ri.ption ot 1~4 A. D. , La At§•lt•·; Vol, ~-66~~~ pa-rt 1i Ho•2; P·• 80 verse 4 and Morkana Inscription ot V.s, 1573/1516 A.D., ib&d•t Vol. XIII, PP• 214·15• ·
18
tern tor1es frequently .obansed_ hands between one or the
other powertul Ra~put clans •
. Cont4 •••
BlkanerJ
A3mer;
Bagaur;
S1roh1 f
Dun.garpurf
3 a1Pl11'1
.Alwarand BbaratpurJ
BundiJ
Jangaldesh. Obirawa Inscription of V .s. lAo/1273 A. D.· I.W• , Vol. XXVII t PP • 285-292 and Chhand Rao J a1 ts1, verse 38.
. A3 Q1Dlel"lh P1'1 thv1ra3 av13 qkavya, Can to viii~· ·
Abichhatrapura. Bl~olyan Insori pt10il · of v.s. 1228}1170 A.D. Verse, 12, .ltl.•t Vol. XXVI, pP. 90·106,. Vol.XL,
· p.as and LJl•, Vol. I, part 11, p. sao, tn. · ·
Afbudo• Achleshwara Inscription of v.s. 1342/1286 A.D. Verse 49 • .Ll.•t No. a, p •. 86 and .L1,.1 Vol. XXV
· (·April 193.1) t p. 60, l.ine 12.
Vaaad. B&ookrod In sen pt1on of 31'4 ot the dark halt ot Pausha, v.s. 1291/ 9th January, 1234 A.D., G.H.O~hat R.!l·l• t P• 2, :rn.a and Varvasa in scriP• tlon or 15~ ot bright halt ot _., V.S. 1369/lOth JUl.71 1302 A.D., ~J p •. 3, Babur Nama, tr. Beveridg·e, Vol.II 1 P• fl13 and Nainsil..&l•t Vol., 1 9 PP-. 670, 86.. . . .
Dbun.AAS~ ·WaCJ!aii;,-MUsbtaqi, 'tr. lUl:Lot and Dows()J'l, Vol. IV1 P• 522 and 111a1ns1, Hei~t Vol. It PP• la?, 293, 296 etc.
Keat. Minh~ ~!.! ~abUl, tex~., Vol•: II, PP• .gg;:-C!S, ·71.
,. . U•ro.o\\~ IltalJ.!lga M.ahatmaJa,, Vers.e, ~-' w·ains1,<J!.!A.•t p •. a •• __ _
PHYSIO GRAPUY
Rajasthan is divided intO two disti.nct geograph1cal
41 visions, namel7 the Great Plains lying on the west ot
the Aravall1s kn.ow. as the Western Sand7 Pla1ns and the
CentJ~al High Lands, lying .to the east of the Aravall1s.
. . . · ,_- The Aravl:lll1 ran.ge in Rafasthan which runs trom
)I ' '
north-east to south-west, thus forms the dividing line ;. .
betweEil these two divlsions. The range 1s considered to be ;·
the oldest folded range in the world. ;
The range maf · be said to have tts focal point at . . .
Mt• Ablh It extends tt)wardf!J the soutb-westem direction;.
so as to cover the districts ·or J alor and sanchor. It also
runs towards the north of Marwar end~ng near Satal.mer and
J aisalmer. From Mt. AbU again, the range tends north-east
and runs to A3mer beyond wh1eh_1ts spurs continue deep into
Mewat.,7 This constitutes the main range.1 .-
1.'. The range though not of uniform w1clth1. runs diagonally across the states from the north-east near Delhi and elttends to south-west to the Plains ot Gu3arat, tor a distance of' about 692 kilometers. WJ. thin Rajasuhan the range l"Wls . from Khetri· (J at pur) in . the north-east
. tQ Khecl Brahma (Sirobi) 1n tbe south•\fest tor a length ot about 550 kilometers. some o.t the peaks on this range are Baba1 (780 mt.) Kho (920 mt.) Raghunathgarh . (1065 Mts.) Tara.garh '(873 mts .• ) and Gurush1kar(l1727 mts.) which is the bighest. V.C.M1sra, Geography ot Ra3asthan 1
PP•, 1-2, For a description ot the Gurushikar Peak1 :see R. c. Temple, !be Travels of Pete~~M-qndYi _,.(t;qndon -lsl~ll
•• ,_ f " - • .,~ - . ---
Vol. 11~,- p,~m. ·~ For-·Ph1s1ogra-phy,--.eEf'8lso "Spate-·ana:-Leal'l!lonth1 India and Pakistan, PP• 617-621.
20
As tor the two ma1n dS. V1 sions, the Westem Sandy
Plains include Mazustha11, Bagar• Oodwar tract and Shekhawatt
tract. 'The Mai-u.stbali covers.· Marwar and includes the
41strictEJ. of B1kaner, J atsalmer, Churu, part of Western
Nagaur and parts ot Barmer and JodhpUr distr1cts'.l ·
The eastern hi gblands are slightly less sharPlY
marked than the wes'tem ·Plains. ~ey may b.roadly be sa14
to contain two sub-41vis1ons w1 th rather 1ndetel'll1nate
frontiers namely the Eastern Plains, const1 tutlng the Banas
Basin an4 Chbappan Platns; and the Platau ot South-Eastem . a
~aJaa~han, Pathar or Haraoti, which includes Kota Bundl.
1.. The area is known as the Great Desert and exteDds trom larger portion ot ·the Rann of KUtch. to the southel'l1 border of Panj 8b and. includes Jodhpur, B1kaner, and laisa1mer. The entire tract is a sanely-waste. Th1s is sub-cU. v14ed ill to several regions.. The Western most belt is covered by ·sand 4unesl next to it is the rocky barDlel'l Ja1salmer, B1kaner tract. Further east to t 11 es the 1.1 ttle Desert up to the north ot B1kaner. Then comes the semi-arid region, where 4ralnase is ProV14ed by the Lun1 river. FUrther to its north are the .salt lakes ot Jll.ctwana and S811lbhar etc •-: V .c. Misra, op.oi t •. , P• 24-, ..
~ ._.... .
a. . V • C. Misra, op .•. o1 t. t PP• 22-23.
THESIS 954.402 Ah48 Th
IIIII II II 11111111 II 111111 -- .. 1tl_p35_2 ___ ~- -- .•
IMPACT OF IfS PHYSIOGRAPHY ON fHE HIS!ORY OF RAJ AS!H.AH
21
The hills ancl the valleYs ot the Aravall1s pro'Vided
t~e .. , means ot survival not only to . some ot the tribes Uke
Bb!.ls1 anci' Mers s1noe time 1mmemorlal, 'but also macle it
·possible tor tbe local chiefs ot various pnnc1Pal1 tlea
to seek shelter.- in 1 ts rugged ravines and vall e)'s. l».ring
the early Phase ot Muslim eXpansion in Ra3asthan 1 the physi
cal features or tho region g:reatl7 helped. the local cb1ets 1n
con t1nu1ng the .struggle tor existe.nce against heavy Odds. 2
The wars of Mewatis as well as those of the Ch1e:fs
ot Mewat and Marwar, may be cited in this connection. The
successors of Bahadur Nanar, Jallu and Kaddu, along w1 th
other Mevat1 s, la1d waste their own terri tory and retained
1ndepenctence in the mountains of .Andvar bayonet tbe reach ot
1. FOr a description of Bblls, see R.C.Tem.Ple, op.ci t-., Vol •. · Il, p. 260.,
2. G.N .Sharma, Soeial History ot Medieval Ra3asthan, PP•; "d-"7. · · ·
. - 1k4J't~ . /"\ _. .: -
V, 44 (JZ.b k {I-Dk,
L7.-7lJ-5's5L
22
the royal forces.·1
!he great desert, 11kewhse, bred tribes ot wandering
herdsmen. Like the Aravall1 range, 1 t too proVided an
easy refuge to the rebel .ebi.ets. It is a matter ot common
knowledge .that .tbe region remained pract1call1: in~ependeltJ
and OWing to shoJ>tage of wa.ter2 ·and un.:.producti veness, there
were frequent shifts of population.
However, in spite of 1 ts disadvantages, the 'tact that
it lay astride the road to OUJarat and the bust sea ports
ot the western ceast of India,. Rajasthan could not easily
be allowed to rema1n out ot its control b7 the central pc)wer.
~ / 2. Koh Andwar _/')~' ol · has been 1clent1tied as·
'Indur• t mentioned .in Mn·1·A1tb!1:1; as one ot the mahal.s in Sarkar TiJara-_ Its tort is also mentioned tbere1n. (tr., Vol •. II, p. 192). The fort now 1s a ruined town :l.n Alwar State and ,lies .about. tc miles ~ast of !ljara. · Hoc11vala, studies in Indo-Muslim History, (BombaY, 1939), pp .• 405.. , \
. . ir.£Jl :V __ 'J_ ,... --- -2.. N a!nsi, ~, Vol. I, p. 3l,. / (Yv; erlt:tt1? ,3j r~ t?f/ h' ~s- lP?t-
~1/ J':jJ,;;fa7..,· Y~ <.-a~' ·(.J?€ ~1 I .(JoY i!~1i;ft:~~7- ~~ o< dJ 1
· .. ,, ' A - -~· JJ .- ·, o ~ / · ,~o (Iff ?7_;. ?7,.../. t31'Y:M:~~· 'fii9!/ ?{1?1~ ~11/ c!!-0
~ !5.. cyl_f) ~f7CJ'I.( J;(';1. c? .:r;;?;- I 1J]1- s/~y df. £:,?i~ff" ~ / FaZ11 AIA•t Vol.IUp.'1.82J Abba sarwaru, Ta~~h-1:1 Shershifi1, tr •. EL. ot and Do~son, Vol. IV, P•· 4061 R •. c.Temple, op.cit., Vol. II, p. 251.
t Thus the pr1nc1pa11t1es ot Merta, lalor and Rasaur etc.J were
sought to be kept under thelr direct occupation by the
SUltana ot Delhi, while ·the Mugbals too garrisoned these
strongholds and out PDsts.1
The Plateau, known in tbe ePigraphs as 'UPal'ma11 cor
• Uttamact:ri• , extending from Chi ttor to Be~Qn, B1Jol1yan
Mandalgarh and th~ to Haraoti end Bund1, was extremely
proctuct1ve.2 It· also contained centres ot pilgrimage and
abodes ot ascetics to the Hindu, J sins and the SUfis· allke,
thus hold1ng eel important post tion in the social and
political life of the Period. ·
. 3 This area apPears from one view to form part ot the
Great Malva Plateau, but actuallY 1 t is raised above that by
l. Abul Fazl1 A.A•t Vol., II, PP• 276-77. '
2. The prodUct! vi ty ot the area mainly depends on 1 ts
a.
drainage. The area is drained by the river Chabal and its right-bank tributaries like Kalit S1~4h1 Parwan and Parbat1 etc • The Ana Sagar a~ ~mer g1 ves rise to Luni river, which forms a s1gQif1caDt water course flowing out of the area •. , (V.:C. t(tsra, op.ci t., pp. 37, 40) • AU kinds ot f.ood•stutt were grown 1a the area• According to Maru1co1 (~tor~a-de-Mogor1
'Vol •. II, p. 425) t wherever there eXIsted wa£er lac1• 11 ties and prodUctive soil in the .mHta. ot A3mer, harvests were Plentj,.ful and so alsiliiilk and butter. For .details or the agr1cul tural ProdUce ot the regS. on see- G.N .sha.rma, op.ci t., p., 295.
'{he Cham bBl. ,rlv.er toraea "& cbound·ary between · Banswara and Dungal'p~r __ aqd Kbari ~41Y14ed~.Vd.Pllr -and tl~merihsx,~ar~~ . The~lmper1~ Gaz'!ttf!er of . Ba~putana, pp. 234, alb.
a distinct ghat or · plateau-well. This is pierced only ~ ,,,
at' two POints; Ghat1, the tamous Gbat1-Chanda of Mughal
reeords1 at the south eas·tem comer ot Mewar; and the Pass
south of ·RanthaJJlbhor, known to .l))dUl. Fazl as the Chha1n Pass,
by the Da1De ot the famous c1 ty n·ear Ran thambhor and a1 tuated '
at the southem · opUdng ot the pass. There is no similar . ..
barr1 er to the north-east, the plateau more or less sloPing . '
gradUally down to and up in a ring ot broken, isola ted rocley'
spurs, s&Perat1ng Uparmal trom the Gangetic Plains. As a
reslll t, the bills around Ranthambhor assume great strategic
importance. Ranth.ambhor by nature being a un1q_ue fortress
which must always have been' or m111 tary significance as
guarding an otherwise expOsed frontier.
To the north-west, the plateau is of course protected
by. the Araval.lis.. . The one POint where there is a gap in
t1'4s range is Ajmer, which therefore, commands the ~easiest '
Passage through the Aravall1 s. Central, 1n posi t1on, 1 t
communicated by convenient routes with all the reg1ons of
R~asthan.- It was, therefore, natural that 1 t should serve ~ .... • ir
as the headquarters and a base tor tu1•.the:r operations in . . ' .
Ra3asthan from the days ot Sultan
Period of the Mughals, when 1 t was
QU tbud.• DLn down to the
the capital ot the SUb a -of A3mer~ wb1oh included the bUlk ot• modern Rajasthan.
:, '"•., \ '
It 1s also 1nterest1ng to consider the. h1stor1cal ' .
influences or the r1 vers ot Rajasthan.. Undoubtedly, these
25
otte aerve4 to separate the terri torles of var1oua tl'S.bea
and aomet111es marked the natural boundaq between two or moro states.1 Their valleys attracted populatlonJ ancl
toea~ 11.ke kota, Banswara, Man4al etc., were established
Cm. their banks. Wbile . none of the Ra3asth8fl rivera could '~ ,.,.
bave bee important channels ot naVigation, a r1 ver like
Lun1 eould provide a aarrow corridor through the desert
and thus make convenieot l'and-rOute pOssible tor trade and
mil1 ta%7 pass ace betweca. ,AJmer arret Gu3 arat. 2
Ca .BISE OF, !Mf.!QUS CL4IS IN RAJ A§TH.AN .. OOBIB g . !Hi
PBlfi:SULfANATB P.ERIO{!
-·· .· Nothlnc clet1n1 te ls known about the origins an.4
early blstor:r ot various tr1b ea later · · known under the oae
/
1.. o.R .Sharma.. op .• ci t., p.,, 1~ •. ·
2. R. o •. Temple1 op.o1 t. t Vol. II t P• 260 •..
•
26
1 CoiiUDOD t1 tl.e of Ra3 put. The area rougbl.y compl'i sing
present area of Rajasthan. contained a number ot clans
which occupied various terri tones mostlY known attar
their geographical appe:·;llations or tribal nam.es during
the Pratbihara and post-Prathihara Pe:riod.
It aet?Aas that no single power held i.ts IWS1 over the
en tire state and 1 t was split in. to a nwober ot pr1no1pal1 ties
controlled at various times by various tribes such as
the OU.rj ara•Pratb1baras of Mandor and Kanauj, the
G\lhilas ot Chatsu arul Mewar, tbe Bhatis of J a:lsal.mer and
the ·chaubans ot N aclol, J alor and Saltambhari, etc. In order
to grasp the main outlines ot the poll tical si tuat1on 1n
Rajasthan as 1t stood on the eve of the Ghorian conquests
ot Borthem India, ~ t seems approPl'iate to· present in a
summary tor our presc t knowledge of all these various
elaus and d1flast1es.
1. Amc;>ng the important clans that first &a1nect prom1nenoe 1n Rajasthan were the Pratblharas of Maru, the Qubilas: ot Mewar, Maurtas ot Kota and Cb1 ttor, the Bhatia ot J a1 salmer, tbe Paramaras ot Abu and the Chauhan. a ot Sakambhan 1 Na4ol and J:al.or. The abrupt :rise ot tbese and other· dynasties 1n the re11on, bas led to some controversy J'egarcl1ng ~eir o:rilln• A numbo:r ot scholars like Tocl, Crooke, D.R.Bhandarkar are 1nc11ned to regard them as scythians ot Central Asia and hence foreigners, while V.A. smith asonbes some ot them to indigenous stock. Some otber scholars like c. v. Va1dya
·and G~H.03ha have tried to put all of thEm. undu tbe ltaatri.ya told. According to a recct th~rYt _ • ~~.
'warno:r olans have - inherent right tO be-re'gar4e4 aa Ksatriyas •c ~t;B~- 'JaN.'-- or birth does ~ot-monopol1z-e, -.1.!!! an4 l(arma concepts. on aaserta 1 tself and various classes t1D.4 their actual place in tbe society • •• and the law 1 t should be remembered applied as much to the Indians thGIDselves ·as to toreign settlers.' J)aahratha Sharma,R~ast~atl. !hrough th;e Ases(B1kaner,1966)Vol.I,p.l05.
27
'rhe our~ ara-Pra th1haras of ~a)e:s:t§an~ · ·
The first important clan which came in to prominence
was known as OU.r~ara-Pratblhara, 1 and 1 t established 1 tselt
uncter · Har1chan~ra~ 1n the re11on kno'WD as • Qur~aratra•3
about the second half ot the sixth century A.D.
TtJe Gur3ara-Prath1haras appear to have established
1. FOS' the origin ot the family from the legendry hero LaksbmaPa, see the Jodhpur 1nscnpt1on of v.s. 894/837 A.D. , (Ll.•t Vol. XVIII, PP• ·87•99 and J.ft,A.s., 1894,_ PP• 1-9), ct. J'ackson1 Bomb~ Ga.zet1i0C!':t. Vol. I, . par~ 1, APPdx• ,III D.l:t.B andarkar; 
28
their power in •Mandyapura' (Mandor), 1 'Medan taka•, 2 and
1Bh11emalla' (Bb1nmal), 3 (all. in Rajasthan) during their
rule ecten"41ng over twelve generations.
Prom the location ot th.e above places which served .
as seats ot Prath1hara power, tb.e • Gurj aratrabhumi • ot the
·. epigraphs,. i't WoUld seem, must'have included central end;
eastern RajpUtana. t.rhat 1n1 t1ally the Pra1;t4h,u-a kingdom
comprised central Ra3asthan 1s also 1nd1cated by Chinese
traveller Bleun Tsang.4
Arab•Pratbihara Oo.ntllota
"It is known from. the· aooount. of the Arab historian . 0 I. . ~ • ' .
Al B11a4uri6 that the· Arab commander JunaS.d6 (who held th~ 'J 0 ~ ·' • • I ' j ' p > ~
1. Man4yapu,ra or Mandor lying 1n latitude 28' and l.oncitude 72' (H.C.Ray1 D.litN .• I., Vol, lit P• 1083 map·No·. 6) is said to na1re een captured by sons ot Haricbandra,. .Ll.,!J Vol. XVIII; P• 96, verse l2t i•R•At.s., 1896, p-;--5~ tt.
2~ w•t, Vol• XVIII;. p. • 95, verse 121 i..Ji.A, s. , 1896, pp • 513 · tf • ·
. 3. On Yuan Chwang• s testimony (Beal I bddhigt recorsaa t( Western Wo;ld, Vol. II, P• 269). It 1s believed
at P1-1o-mo-lo (Bb1lamalla.) in Rajasthan was tbe capital ,of the Pratbiharas. ·
4. · Hleua Taantfm.entions U;ttiCl'!a-lA with its capital at ~-W-mi·l&, wbicll has been i<tant1tie4 as Clllr3aratra k1ngdom w1 tn 1 ts cap1 tal at Bblnmal. Beal. 9 l19d4bist aeae£4a, Vol~ I , p •. 16&, tn. ·
~ • • l ~ -
s. Fu.tubu~1-Bul.4an 1 tr. Murgotten, Zoundatiop ot t}\g ~fl"!J'!2 c B$&tfh. Vol." II, _P•.
- . -=-----....,....-~-----,.- ----- .. _::_ ;,. . .. ' . '
••- "Jun~a4c"was--the-'"g.enera1-ot CaliPh Basham.· (?24 to 743 A. D. ) -..
t~rri tory ot S1Dd during the reign ot ca:U.Ph Hasham) le4
b:Ls .forces against •Marmad', 'Mandal' t 1 B1alman•, and 'Jurz• , 1 I ~ . >
in ad41 tion to some other Indian pr1no1pal1 ties. Prom .,
the 1d:ent1t1cat1on ot the above mentioned places, 1 t seals
·'that. the whole ot the OUrjara kingdom was invaded sometime ,~
b et~eeri 724 and 743 A.~·.
It turther apPears that both the · Prathibara .l'UJJ.ng
houses.,, via.. the one ~der Har1chandra (of Ra~~sthQP.) and
the o.ther under N agabhatta ( ot Kanauj ) , . had to .tace the
invasion under Junaid. Whi.le the first family .vas
completel.~ defeated,. the second •.availed ot an opportunity
by 4r1 Ving away the Mlechaohhas.• ' 2 and laid the toul'd atlon ot
a new l"Ul.1ng hottse.r .
1. 'Marmad' is identified W1 th Haru-Ma4a comprising modern J a1 salmer and parts ot J oclhpur. •Mandal• is 1d&nt1tied w1 th Mandor 1n Jodhpur. • Ba.tJ.mani' w1 th Vallamandala, . and .. •Jurz• wJ.;th Gur3al:'&• I t .Q• .... Vol. It P• 126 tn.
a. SE~e Gw811or Prasaati of Bbo3a, W.•t · · " ·. · Vol•· XVIII,. pp., 107·114~, v t-se 4.. \ .. ~ . -- - -~ (' c - -.:-'\-y'l ~ '7/ 1?. //7/S?fL: g</ fY?Jjo/ . ~ <7~9'J r (Yw,.., '/ 1
!f t~Cf I~ ~-Y? .Y/~ M ~;:et;-;p)-/10-Y /I )
i.e. lagabbatta I, appeared as the image ot the olct sage (N ara,ana) in a strange manner .1n as IQUCh as,~~ havinc ·cru$hed-·the .large &rrd.es ot the powertul P!a.echchha ~g-'~ ~~ -~~<~e~~J'C)Y~r o.t vt,rtue, be· Sllone w1 tli tour arms Drllllan t on account of' gllttertng terrible weapons.
3. K.M.Munsh1, Oj)eC1t. ,. p. m.
30
The arab control over the Gu.r3 aratra kingdom,
howe\'er, ·does not s'e·em to hav'e been' ia:st1ng since the
available ep1graphs1 suggest that the later Gu.rlara
Pratbihara rulers exoercised uninterrupted control over
. the region~
From the two inscrtptio~s, so tar ava1lable about
the Prath1hara · dynasty of Rajasthan, 1 t 1s evident that
ltakkuka·, the last known ruler of the house, was alive in
v.s. 918/861 A. D •. a Further, 1 t appears that the Gurjaratra 3 '
rulers held sovereign posi t1on in the beginning but lateJ'
on served. as feudat<>ries ot tbe Kanauj branci:l of the
Prathihe.ra dynasty, 4
~!Nasthan, during Imperia;, Pratbiharas_ ot lCanauj:
' As alreadT stated the Gu.r3 ara - Pratbiharas whO
started their poll tical career,- in Rajasthan, made KanauJ
1. .LL, Vol. XVIII, p. 96. · .. . \•
Ghattrala inscription ot the above date. E.I~1 . Vol. XVIII, pp. 87-99J l.R.A.S., 1896, PP•~ 5J;:J-2l.
3. Jodhpur inscription ot N aga.bhatta, dated v.s~ 87~/ 815 ,A.D., Ll.•t Vol, IXt p, 199 ttl .. J,.ft.A.s., 1907, P• 1011. See also Bhanaarkar• s L!Jlt1 Ro.22.
\ 31
thelr aeat ot power by the secon4 halt ot the eighth century
under a new fam11r1 whose progenl tor was N agbhatta I. a
. 3 . The Gwal.ior inscription ot Bhola 1 9 crecU.tes
Nagabhatta With having crushed the armies ot a powerful
M!echobl'le, king vh1oh undoubtedly refers to atl Arab ra14
Wtder the 'Sind govemor Juna1.4.4
The two immediate S\lCce~sors of Nagabbatta I 1 Via. ' .
KakkUka or KakUstba and DeVarfda are sai4 to have 'a44e4
to the . renoWl o.f the .family' and • curbed mul t1 tude ot
kings by having destroyed their allies and caused them to
cast ott their tree movemcts. •8 S1m1larl.v Vatsara3a,
1. For the relations between the Pratbihara .taJDily of Harichandra (Ralasthan) and Nagabhatta (ltanauj) 11ee B:.N.Puri, op:.cit., PP·• as-as.
2. IJ!he Gwal1or. ,arasa;st1 .recor~s that Vat$ar~ a, the thtr4 successor ot Nagabhatta, the tounder1 was· ruling 1n Salta rear 705/783 A. D. By allowJ.ns roughly 25 years to each ruler, J.agabhatta may baYe J'1lled round about 730 A.D. See also ia.l.•t Vol. XXI, p, 197 tt,. fer a. Chauhan grant 1#hat. was made at Broa.eh1 in the .z:e1gn ot .the glorious Ifaga'Vloka 1r1 v .• s. tsl3/756 A•D• 'fhe Na.gavloka · of, the inscription .has. been 1dent1,tied 'W1 th. Nagabhatta l 1 .the rounder o.t Kanau3 family.
"' 1 ~ • •
a. W.•t Vol. XVIll, .pp,. l07"'U4, verse.4.
4. Fu:tuhu-l-,Bt\ldaa;t.~ tr. Murgotten; op.c1 t. 1. Vol. ·11. · ·. . . . .. .
~,, l.t.A• .t Vol. mi~t PP• 107•108.
32
their auocessor1 seans to bave attained an authorotat1 ve
post tion o\ter GUrl aratra, to . 3udge . trom .. the Os1a1 an.d
DaUlatP1lr2 (both in Jodhpur) 1nsor1Pt1ona.
·NagabJl..atta II, vho Callle to the throne by the close
ot the elgbth century is said to have torc1bly seized the
bill forts of the ltings ot Ao.arta, Mal.wa, Kirta, ZJ!Bihklt
Vats a and MatsYa• 3 The ~al}}te. :f'orts men t1oned in · the . .
inscription perhaps· belonged to the Arab possession· 1n ·
westem. ·India.
Bhoja I, the next important ruleto of the dJnasty
seems to have ruled over a fairly large empire 1nclud1ns
Raj_asthan where some of the small kingdoms accepted b1s
suzerainty. The a\!ai.lable inscri.Ptions 1ncJ.i.cate that
Bho~a I re-asserted bis supremacy over the Qur~ar.a-Prath1haras
1 •. J.ft.A.s., 1907, p. ~010-
a. E.I., Vol. v,, PP• 20~13.. ~,e· Pri~~v1t:a)a~jV~ alsO · ·s,ates that Cha~han Dllr~..,har~ a enjoyed Gauda (Bengal) 1 an~ that his son Guvaka vas honoured at the oourt of Nagavloka (Ll,.., Vol. II, PP• 121, 126) .• ~ This leads us to su.ppo•e that Dlrlabhara3 a en3oyed Oaud.a terri tory w1 th the . assistance ot Prath1hara ru;J.ers. Ct. V.B.M1shra1
· fbe·· GUrjara Prath1haras and their times, P• 20. '
a. .LJ..•" 'Vol~ I 1 p • 169 t~ •. ~,~d Bl'U@l~~~llr' s Liat, Bo.s'li. For 1dent1~1catlon of tliese plaCes see
,. V ~B ;M{ $hra, . 0 P•e!;t._ t , p • 25l BiN • Puri i ·oPici t. t P• 45• tn•• a-s. · ·
33
' 1 . . 2 ot RaJasthan and nb4ued the Cbhilas of Cbatau and the
Chauhans ot Sak.aJDbhart,3 wb1oh leaves 11 ttle doubt that
Bho3a' s r\lle extcclGd roughly over the entire Rajasthan.
The extms1ve emP1re ot Bh03a I is not1ce4'-by the
Arab traveller SUlt.d.man. .In bls account ot the Gur3ara
Prince be states that 1 the .king Baura (Bho3a) of Jura . '
( GllrJaratra) maintained numerous forces zd no other
lnd1an. prince baci so fine a cavalry. He was unfriendly •,' '
to the Arabs, at1ll he aclmowle_4Cecl that the king ot Arabs
was the greatest ot kings. AmOng tbe princes of India . . 4
there was no greater foe of the MUhammadan faith than he. • ......... 'p ....... . 1 J ••
1~ !he Pratbihara author1 ty which is known to have • bee acknowledae4 1n aur~ aratra during the rule ot Vatsara3a (tTeHeA•§•• l901t P• 1010) had become 1nef'fect1ve after h1m. That the author1 ty· vas again restorGd over Gur3aratra 4ur1ng the rule of Bho3a I 1s known from Dau.la,tpur (Jodhpur) record . ot V • s. 900/843 A.D, See Ll.• t Vol. V t pP ~ .. 211 · tt. an4 Blumdarkar' s, L!.,al, No.20 •.
,, ' I ~ " ' o.
2.. See BalacU.tya Gu.b1la1 s Ohatsu (~aiJJUr) inscription ('E.·I~, ·vo·l· ·XII,, PP• .. 10•17) which sqs that Guhlla princ• Haraaraj a conqu.sred the k1ngds 1n the north and presented .horses tc Bbo3a. For 14ent1tioation ot the Bho3a ot · tbis inscription Wl.th. .Bho3~ I ~t Kanauj, see Bhandarkar' s, LS.illt P. 12. . ·
3. !he Pratapgarh (Ba3putana1 now in Ajme~ ~useum_) 0
1ascript1on ot Mahendrapuadeva issued in v.s .. 1006/948 A.D. (I ~tA•;; Vol. XLVt P• 122 t ·unf;t ~ ·and .LI.•J Vol. XIV, P• ~76), s.nrorms that • A 9ba.uhan ~.Ly o~ king~. was a source ot grttJat pleasure to ~ng .Bho3adeva.• .See also Pr1thV1ra~a'!,i~!lat ·
. .,.. ' ' .. , ·- ~- ~--
P• .137, V$!'9es 30...31. · . . . , , . . . .
"• lh & ·.n., vo1. 1, PP•3-7.
It is also knovn from the te$t1mony ot the Arab
geographer Masud1 that Prathihara Mab1Pal.a·•s ld.ng4om
1nclu4e4 some parts of ·Sind. Masu41 who vi s1 ted the valley
in A.H .• 303-304/915-16 A.D. states that the Ung of
ttanau3 was one ot the kingd ot Sind.1
The vast emp1,..e ot Pratbiharas Which once touc~ed
the toot ot the HimalaYas, 2 extendecl up to Kamal 1n
Hary.ana. 3 Bengal 1n the east, 4 Bundelkhand 1n the South6
and saurashtra in the south-west, 6 began to ~reak up soon
after the first decade of "the tenth century. Many ot the
imPOrtant territories were lost as a result of the raids
by the Pal.as, 1 Rashtrak.U tas8 md the Paramara9 · ancl
Ohan.dellas •10 · aut the final blow. was g1 ven to 1 t by the
invasions of Sultan ·,' ·L Mahmud ot Ghaznin.
1,. Ee Is 12• t Vol. It PP• 21,
a. LA•t Vol. xv, PP• 105-33 •..
s. .itl.•t Vol. 1 1 PP• .186 t. 4~ See J~dhpur inscription o.t Bauka, .Ll.•t Vol. XVIII,
P• 871 Baroda copper Plate ot Kakkara3a1 IAA·• Vol. XII, P• 156. .
6. Gwalio~ fEASAIM. Of Bho~a. See .i.t,l.•t Vol-- XVIII, p, 107 t verse 1. · ··
6. L.A•t Vol. VII, p~ 259 and verse 11 ot Gwalior prasast1; .Ll.._ t Vol .• XVIII, P·• 107.. . .
7 • F~r, deta1~s see R~D.Ban~r31, lila· Pal,ai g( BenSM•· s.. F~r _detatls see .A~S.Alt~ar, the R.as\Egkp.tas rm4
~-~ UWimi&h {Pooaa,. 1934) .• · ·· . 9-. ·FO-r "Paramaru .-e·e DtiQ~ Ganguly, Hlos~torv. or ·the·
~aramara DY.n.asttt (Decca, 1933) .,
10• :ror Chandellas see N~S.Bose Histoa ot twa Cand&\last (Calcutta, 1956), and s.K.Mi tra, ja.rlx: Mers o( Xba~ll!tWt ( Calcutta• 1958) •· · · .
35
SUltan Mabmud ot Ghazn1n a
SUltan Mahmu41 s first onslaught was directed
against the lf1ndu Sbab1 s. of Kabul and Pun3 ab.l Bhe~a. IJ 'i• ,,, ' ,,.. '
which was under • B131 Ra1' , was invaded in 1006-1007 • '
!he Rat is sa14 to have oonun1tte4 suicide at the approach· . \ - =
ot Muslim forces and his Principality was annexed to the ' ' '
Ghamav14e k1ngdom.2 Jaipala• s son .Anandpala. vas
attaCked 1n 1005-1006 during· SUltan• s invasion to Multan,
wherein· ·the Rai was driven · back~3 Anandpala and h:Ls
allies, however, were decisively defeated in 1008-l009.4
'The gates of Rindustan • , which were in An.andpala' s
possession, haVing been lost, not only sealed the tate
ot PUn~ab but of many other states also, S which feU one
atter the other, 1nclttd1ng Kanauj, the seat of the Pratb1•
hare.st in· 1018·1019 A.o.6 ·
1. Ra:t..laiPal was defeated .in 1001.1002 and he ended b1s lite on a funeral pyre.
' '
a. For details see ·Mohammad Habib, b'Ul tan' Manmud q_( ~J.a· and ·M •. N:aztm, L1 (e m4 Tlmft ot: .. S:U.U.m 11 Ud . ot .. Gbama1 cam.br1dge1 1931. . .. : :. '·'
3• Mobatnm.ad Bab1b9 'oe.-ci,t., P• 25. The govern.orsbip of· Bbera was atJs1gned to Sukhpal (Nawasa Shah) • a son ot Allandpal~ who had been converted to lsl.•• See J.pid.~, p. 2 •.
4. ibJ£•• pP. 27-aa .• , . ' .
s.. Jota.bly .Thaneshwar (~011-10~), Bus an<J. MathUJN:Lt ' ( 1018·1019) • For details see lbid. • PP• 34-41.
6~ 11!14., pp • 41-46.
..
the Pratbibara con temporary of SUltan Mahmud was
Ba.3Y&Pala. The cbiet on heartng the approaqb ot the.
Sult- is ·s81d to have fle4 across the Ganga. to Berl thua. . . 81V1ng a tree hand to tbe SW.tan•.s forces to loot and . ' ' ' .
I ,, •
~he cowarclly act ot Rajyapala is sa14 to have lecl
lllan.Y chiefs to ~oin2 under the banner ot Chandella ruler.
Vidyadbara. ~he later 1s recor4ed 1n ·the Mahoba inscr1p.
t1on as 'haVing • caused the dest~ction. ot the k1ng o't
It•yakub3,a. •3
The ,acooun t left by IbnUl As1r4 corroborates the
version of Chandella record. the chronicler states tbat
1B1da (V14yadhara) the accursed, was the greatest· ot the
l'Ul.ers of In41a 1n tl1e · terri tory and had the largest
arJD?..es an4 whose king<lom was called Kajuraha (.Kha~uraho) 1
sent lllessages to Ray ot Kanau3 named RajYaPal rebuld.ng bim
tor· h1 s tli ght and the su~render •... • Host111 t1 ea than
broke out between thEm with the result that Ba~yapal was
killed :Ln the f1 gh t. • • • • ~
.1. For details seo.Mohammad Hab1b 9 op.cit., PP• 41-46.
a. ·L 1i ,R•t Vol. II, P• 463, f'n.lt
3• •1,- & Jl•t Vol. I, PP• 2191 222. Gee also N.S.Bose1 ~H1storv ot .. the Caa4ellas1 PP• 55-60.'
4. ·Jt.gmil•I&WBWifi!§b (ed. Sulak) • Vol• IX, P• 115, t•
a. Ibid.
•
fhe next pr·ath1ha.r.a ruler whose name is spel t
in ~bnul.:"Asir &:S T.aru Ja1bal or TarU . Jaypal1 . '•
' .
(_Trilochanpala.~ also 'lay p~strate at ~he teet of Mabmud•, ' \ .' 2
when the latter attacked him in the autumn ot 1019 A.D.; '.
thus VirtuallY put1ng an end to the Prathihara empire as an
independent ent.it;.3 I - •
Cha~hans:·
~e t'all · ot the Gur3ara Prathihara empire brought
many client dynasties to the tore-front, who carved out
independent and semi-independent principalities in
Rajasthan.
One of the most prominent clans, the Chauhans
established themself in the region around Sakalllbhar14
I
1. I• ts n., Vol. li, p. 463.
2. Ibid.
3. From the Jhusi grant dated V.S. 1084/1027 A.D. and Kara inscription of v .• s. 1093/1036 A.D. 1 t appears that Trilochanpala and his ·successor Yashpala continued to hold the present district of Allahabad at least up to the date mentioned in last inscription. See l..J.•, Vol. XVIII, pp. 33..35 and ,T .B.A.§., 19271 PP• 692-95 respectiv.ely. .
4. See J'ayanaka, Pr1thV1rajavijaYa and Rajasekhara, Prabandhakosa which can cla1m acceptance' as· historical a.ccounts dealing w1 th tb.e. Chauhans, refer to Vasudeva as the fir~~ ty._storical man of_the !Jb'C..:__ __ _
··' ~~i?~:.~i!~1t· it~kr ::::::= .. 0/~.' · Xnsexi8 86. See ~sQ Ralasekhara, l..tlt•, P• 133 and B1joUY'a rock. inscription verse J.2 (1!1.., llYOl'• XXVI, P• 108). For the details of the origin and early history ot the Ohauhan.s see Dashratha Sharma, Earlx ®aYJ}.an Drnasties {Delhi, 1959). ·
38
(modern SaJnbhar}. the dynasty later on extended 1 ts area
up to J angald.esha. 1 (pres$1lt Bikaner and northern Marwar).
The earliest known ePigraph of the d7nasty dated
v.s. 1030/973 A•D• shows the Chauhan rUlers to have
aOkn~vieCiied. Prathihara overlordshlp.2 fbe Chauhans who
· t~us. at the beg1rm1ng ruled over Sakambhari in a feudatory
capacity could increase their power and territories only ..
. after the fall ot Prath:l.hara empire.
-4 3 . t th V1grahra..a Xl, one of the early rulers o e
line, l~s said . to have not only defeated the Chaulukya
Mu1araja., but even fought against the Muslims. 4 Another
ruler GoV1ndara3a Ill, earned the t1 tle ot Va1r1ghratta
1.. The ·J a1na works or 11th and later centuries designate the Chauhan as the k1ncs ot Jangalclesha.vasentv1lasa, eanto III, verses 209-32 end Sukrata - Sanid.rtg,n,h II!, verse 48 (cited 1n G •. c •. Chaudliary, Pol! tical H1story ot.~Northern Ind1 a, P-. 124:t, fr.t.4} •. ,,.,
\
a. Harsha stone InscriPtion, Ll..• t Vol·. 'ti~ PP-: 116-30~·. .
a. For his re1gn. see Harsha stone inscription, op . .-.c1t •. , tn.;s. .
4. J qanaka, .f.d• t Can to V,. verses I sur11 .. H.M..K.t p., 9 and Merutuns•• ·Prabandhao1ntaJDan , pp.~ .1ti-161 Fe~shta,. ~F., tr. Briggs, Vol. I, PP• 7t 18. Ferishta ·w ·tea ·tbat -'the ItQ" ot ,Umer ·sen~. £a .c.ont1ngen1t to.F"~oin the~leagtle orgaili.sed .. by. the shab1 ru.ler against SabUkt1gb1n ··tn 997. the statement,. howevel;', has met serioUs critiCism by the scholars:•
3 ~)
and claimed a v1c tory over Sultan Mahmud. 1
It seems that the .invasions undel' Mahmud and Ills
successors became more trequen t in Ra3 astha1 as a number
ot ep1grapb1c records refer to the ChaUhan oontl1ct with
Mu811mi.2
rl )) ~ Q- 'I ·
1. _ ey~4L-: .Tayanaka, P.v., Canto, v.P. 57; Ba3asekhara, 1!.l{. ( geneology) 1 p. l33. . For details about Sultan Mtihmud1 s invasion of ~ath; see Ibn Asir1J!.fl•U1;:1!awf1t1}&h,1 tr. Is i R•t Vol. II, PP• 4 ~ 1, and iar11Sh·1·Alti, tr. i• & g., Vol. PP• 471-77. That Sultan Mabmud returned via Mansura, 'the ruler of which place was an apostate }luhammadan•·, is known from Ibn As1r1 s version, whO is our earl1est souree mentioning the return march ot tb.e Sultan through Sind. Nizamud-Din (_fabt~ i•Qsbar1 1 text. 1 p,9) states that ParaJil DeO . . , the ruler ot GU.3arat blocked the route of Mabmu~, whereupon the latter returned Via Multan. To th1s Fer1ahta (%...[,, · text., p. 34) adds that Par&nl Deo and the RQ3a ot Ajmer w1 th others had collected a
· great army in the desert to OPPOse his return. Mahmud 4etermine4 to march direct to MUl.tan. His army suttered greatly tor want or water and b1s cavalr1 tor wat of forage but in A.H. 417/1026 A.D. he reached Ghazn1n •
•. J ·' /./, __...., ;J ~ )J,' .(:. ' . . -- ,. ... ..NJ( ~..) (JtJ:A.-/. D):,~ >/.71>,_} (.- 0~ ol_, dl /!U f!( ~ u;;, • •' ---L 'l I ,•r. .... ., ' ) • ' • -r ~~/~., 4 ..,;(f/>u~,..:J~ P.A.A--" 0/ J.J _up~ Z,~~/> r'IW....--
....,... .. ./ ...... ' v ·., .J
1/ '' • .P' .:1 ~ c..ti. __/ l__.~ . .... \;"' ' "" '
a. Am.ora3 a..i s recorded in a San.skr1 t 1nscr1 Ptlon as haVing rescued h1 s brother
, Pr1 thv1 Pala ot. N adol (dUring D\lrlabhr~ a) tr()m a 1 h!lru.sh!.a attack• .~. AP.other · sanskrit grant men t1on s ASara~ a• s brotherin•law Har1Pala to have to~ght w1 th cer~a1n ' Hamm1ta•T~ · ~ Po.r text ·of both these 1nscrJ.'pt1ons see~ Dashratha. .shal'llla •. - E.Q•-I>•iJP*c ~186- an-~ ~-199.
40
The. P.ri thVira3 avi~ aJa Kavya sta~es that Durlabbar~ a
III Chauhan lost his lite in a battle aga1nst the Matullgas,
a term used tor the Musl1ms.1
The t1 tle ot Paramabhattarka - Mab;arajs4h1r!Jll
Parames.hwara of P:r1 thv1ra3a I, indicates the growing
independent power ot the 'Sapadlaksha• Chauhans. His
struggle against the Mus-lims ·referred to by Prabandhakosa3
'was perhaPs directed against . 4 .... Masud ".III . (1099-1115),
< l ·•
one ·ot the commanders of \"· ~·
\
IJqraja, the son and successor ot Pri thviraJa I
is similarlY credited vi th haVing won a V1ctory over. the . .. " 5.' Qarj ana Matungas - quite obViously standing tor Mu·slims
-1. J~an.eka, ~·· Can~ v~_ v~s.~e ~o·_,J .. , \ - >;I(YJ/ 1~--h' -"2.-' ;(-n '~( /~ i-~1 Y(Y' I
'h~1~1/Jrlf'/1.1.h/~ hA 9'/ };/,If_ f?(llf'By: 11 Jonara3a, t!tf! comm-. tator ot Pr1 th;v1,raJ avij qa equates the term matunp w1 th the Muslim 1nvader~rom ~h~-~
th t ~ ' -JJ-- ~ -::I - 9/ v-nor ~es •_:.1 J.-11? ~ ~J//~- ,~/ f-1"/r-9'/-t l"~c ~cv . . · 7/ jJ.y ~ / "/7' ,»-"1:.// fY'/j?' ~- /., _.yrT ._f: 17 & • !hat the
term W&S applied for the Ghaznav1deS 1s knOlG from a further reference 1n the same work. (~., Can to, verse ll3) • . In the sansltri t U terary works llke D.asbkurn&rf.Ohar1 ta and Kathasar1 tasaga:ra• ~atunga has been used to denote a m~ ot lowest rank as well a• a barbarian. Sir Muniar W11Uams, Sanskrit &lgllsh D:\&~o.nau:., __ .P•, _tlQ&.,, _____ ,-~,0 =-~- _<_
a. ~-----£.M.J,Ja~,"~~< a •. o~.s .. ", .. No.- -XX).,~~p.~2. a. R~asekhara, f.t.K• ( Geneology) 1. P• 138. 4. Jqanakat. fa.!·, Canto v, verse, 113. s. I.b14.,.
41
ot Ohamin,
These conflicts are also referred to 1n the
Persian chronicles. According to M1nha3J Muhammad Bahllm
captured and fortified the town ot Nagaur and made 1t b1e
base tor · further operat1_!)ns ·agtiinst the te~r1·tor1ea of
nat1 ve ,,cbi~ts~·'
The, Ohazn.av14e operations in Rajasthan up to
N'agaur (held by Chauhans)2 must have caused serious losses
to the Chauhans. It is not 1mposs'1ble that the foundation 3 . .
ot A3mer; which is generallY ascribed to the first decade
ot twelfth . century, was due to the need of a refuge from
the Ghamav14e invasions.
Gbaznavide operations against the Chauhans continued 4 .
subsequentJ.,y.. AmoraJa (1139-4.0) is said in a fragmentary
Chauhan 2rasast1 to. have slaughtered the Turushkas near
a.
' I' I .. , 'G. 'I,. '2__, ~<~' ~U~->J't\.*-'~/>~ ~L_..i, - ..>./-""--' ~ /. ...v -'l" ,_.....-. I ... ./ I w • w f.." , _%~ j::J_..,d,~4~_.t~(:d).>l-> IJ ~I (IJ()t:,_.~~ ~.AI~~ .::!-~l)t CJ ~·i.L ~
/.; \ ___.,_,. . . / ~ .. . . V ":" d/". jJ -v 1 r- ...:::./ .JJ J ~
,;> ..,
M1nha~ t %,J!. •. , text •. , Vol. I, pp •. , 261-62,
See Prabhavaka-Char1 ta and Devasr1-Char1 ta (cited in Dashratha Sharma, i:c.a. ,. p, 40).
Both Pr1thv1ra.3av1~1 and Pratup!dhakos,! regard A.1,pr.~ a as tlie_fo~ _ e~rt ,_~er. -1,
7n at Y·f 1 $7 : 1s7 ..::r/~ -?J f" ,J 1 a/ o/ !Yo(.' // 'rhe ·earll~est-reter·ence-- · A3mer-j:so-tound in the ;eattayllJ.. _of 2alha. of, R,,.s • .,~-1170 .. (-cl-te4 ~la" -Dashratha Sharma, j.C.D.,. p,, 40,:~ tn •. 64 ).
£all• (W. Q.), 1909•l0t P•(~,;~
42
~mer. 1 !his 1s con timed by Pnthv1r~av13ara ltavya. ~·
The .occupation ot Delhi and Hans1 from the 'fomaras3 . •'
by B1saldeva brought the Chauhana into a direct conflict
w1 th the · Muslims - A struggle tor ~JUPremacy over northern ,o • •
Xn&a that 1s, partly supported by epigraphic and U terary I t • ;
evidence, 4 now ensued.
A Chauhan 1nscr1pt1on dated 1167 ·from Hans16
reeords the strengthening of Hans1 and appo1ntment ot
)) ' £? 4;,-r \-- - ~:::· - ~ LJ_C' ~ '1 r;- /17) -<' 1¥ I W-7 . -- 7 (; ('{/ ~ 7 rv -(.... o< a?. e>( rv I o/ -7 ~77c7 .:; ~ _c· . ·~ - _p )) J
. -?- ~/..7/~.hr~ ~~- ~-;
For full text of the above 1nscr1ptlon see Dashratha Sharma, ij.C,Jl., PP• 180-~l.
2. Jqanalta, l!rJ.., Canto VI, shalokas 1·27.
.43
Kelhana aa .. 1ts Governor, by Prl.thv1ra3a II. Tbls , not
only suggests. the continuation ot host1lit1es between
the Chauhans and the ~uslims (who had by now held control
over Pan3ab) but also the growing power of the Cbauhans
1n an uoea closely ad~oining Panjab, the seat. ot Muslim '
.Power.
fhe Chauhan cla1ms. ot victory over the Gbaznav14e
rulers, . however• . even during the weak rulers Uke Khusrau
$hah · and Khu.srau Malik, seems only to be • vague and
·conven.t1onalf: ed despite their growing power, the
Cbauhans · 414 not take a real ottens1ve to put an ad to
Ohamav14e rule in the Panjab ... a task later accompUshed
by Mui zzwt-Dln Muhammad ot Ghor in 1186.
The Chauhans ot Nadol.:
A branch ·ot · the sapadlaksha ( Sambhar) Chauhan a
establ11b.ed 1tselt ·at Naclol ( Jodhpur ) by the last
q11arter ot the tel'lth century under 1 ts leader, Rawal
L .. ha or Laksham81h 1 the dynasty gr.ac:tuallY ;Qcrease4 in
power and one ot the members of. the Une, · AnabS.la 1s
said to have defeated ChaulUkya Bhima 1 ( l-022-64) , captured •I -J • '
S$kambhar1, killed the general ot Parallla Bhoja ( 1011-55) and
1. Pu~atan.aprabanclhasangraha, text. • p. 102J
~a;:silr\lt:.ta ::x:~tol0;ia~~. P;.~~~· at s:d Mancto·r tragmmtal"y· 1nsor1pt1on, l1ne 5 1 tor men t1on of Lakha' s naJDe. · ·
1 defeated the army ot the powerful TU.rusbkas.
The reference to 'lUrusbka possibly indicates
either Alhana• s encounter w1 th some local Muslim ·chief ot
Sind or most probably SU1 tan Mabmud during the latter' a
attao~ ot· SOJDn~th, (10~5) • . Since ~alaprasad, the ,successor
ot Anaht.la was a con temporary o.t Chaul:uk.ya ruler Bb111ta I
of OU3arat ( whose last date is v.s. 1120/1063 A.D. >t · '
Anabila possiblY .lived 'before this d~te and most probably
in the first quarter ot the eleventh century when SUltan
Mahmud invaded Somnath.
This dS.sP187 ot power was, however, tempora17 and
the small princiPality of Naclol could-.not stand in the W87 ("::'/ .
ot the, other powerful dynasties like 'the Chauhans ot
Sambbar1 Paraaaras and Chaulukyas, the last ot who11.
obtained etrectlve sway over Nadol. Inscriptions sh~w
tbe Cbauhans of Nadol as having acceptecl Chaulukya . ' . 2
overl.or4sb1p at least up to v.s. 1288. ·
K.elhana ( :Il~-92 ) , an important ruler ot Nadol
11ne, who 1n1 t1allY shared power w1 th his father Al.hana,
subsequ.ently acqu1rad much strength. APart trom ~s other
exploits, the sunciha hill 1nsor1pt1on credits bim wJ. th
. 2. The Hadol 1nscr1pt1on of this date mentions the v.t.ctorious retgn or Chaul.Uky'a Kumarapala when Kelhana was ruling at Nadol- .Ll.•t Vol. XI, PP• 103-104.
.,
ha'lin.g destroyed the . power ot ZJ&msNtas and to have
errected a goldaa gatewq.1
Kelhana•a tight With the lUJ:Uabka klng (14ent1t1ed I
w1 th Sul ts Mld.zzu4-D1n ot Ohor) 1 probably as a Chaulukya
feudatory is &lso· corroborated .by PrithV1:ra3a~387a Ka\fya.2
The Chauhan s or J alor:
Another sub-division of the Chauhans established
1 tselt at J alor which had previously been ·ruled over by ' . 3
a dynasty ot Puamara chiefs. K1rt1paJ.a, the founder
ot this line was the youngest son ot Alhana (V,s. 1221•
. 1250) •· A1 tbough he was gran ted 12 Villages 4 as early as . 8
v.s. 1218 ancl shared the aovemm~t ot Nadol, but he
1 • .Ll.•t Vol •. :tXt p, 69, ~/i-~-f~-J_.'-"vt¥.7oi4 'Y::j-<-~r/YY~-2 •. J ayan.aka, .fa.!.• , . Call to x, p •. SO • For further
details about lihe history 'Ot Nadol Chauhans, see Dasbratha Sharma, J.C.D., pp. 120-141.
a... An inscription ot v.s. ·1174/1118 A •. D. tound from 'Topkhana• at J alor .records the names ot the six Paramara chiefs. (Da.shratha Sharma, E. C,,D. , P• 145) • According to N a1ns1 also Paramara Kun tapala was ruling over J alor and . Viranarayana over S1wana at the time ot ita ca.pture. by Kirt~ala• Na1ns1,. LK.., Vol.It P• 203. // ·-.\ - ~ - 3T ~ · , . f\'-'/ ~ "~' ~ 6:<'-.f··'\ e<sJft;/ S cp / fV( .Y!llii/{" t,-,t:r /(_,,J~·rr Y//}f'
" . ~--~ r-~J\:.· ;JI_ ~;v; ~ \i ~o//,(' ·~ ._. ·-IJ... -?/(;~ / ..!:J~ ~ /. • ~I g/v r-, cl' /' ¥19 q/2: 1,1'./'..._fJ!/ I £"'£V o/? » \ J'J.-,- . \) ~..2 . '-' '/(}'
4. .w,. 1 Vol. IX. , w.r.,, 68 'tr .:; . . tr IX Jilt'?/ \ /r? ·-y__, 1
6, l,b1(\., Vol, XVII t p,, 208. and Vol .• > IX, p, 77 •. ,• : y •
sought b1s fortune temPQ:rarily.in Mewar. 1 Hls conflict
w1 th his contemporary SUJ. tan Mu1zzu4-D1n of Obor, woUld be
dealt elsewhere.
Guh1las ot Mewara
- a a The Ouhilots or1g1nally belonging to Gur3aratra,
settled in Ra3asthan and founded an independent ruling
house 1n Mewar as early as the first quarter ot the eighth
century und~r Bappa Raw~. 4
. In the beginning, the Gubilas remained feudatories
ot the Mauryas ot Obi ttor, Qlr3ara Prath1haras or Kanau3 1
1• G.H.03ha, :QeR•l•t P• 35; Ba1ns1t lf.tl.•t Vol.lt P• 781' Kumbhalgadh Prasast1, .lrl.•t Vol. m, P:. 349.
a. • Gehlot• .is a oorru.ptton or SanskrJ. t word Gubilaputra. For a record of 1278 A.D. from dh!tiOr· recording 'S1mha• as a GuhilaPlltra, see l.d..., p. ?6 .• For details about the origin of Gubilots see also M.t .. Mathur, M,ewa:r in Pt:e-Mu~ 1D.d1.at unpublished thesis, R~asthan 1vers1 ty, aaiPur, 1962), pp .• 1-1s.
a. The earliest member of tb1s tamtly_viz Ollb.1la flourished in the 6th OEI'ltury A.D. See Attpur 1nsor1pt1on (v.s. 1034). For the earliest record ot Oub1last see L,A., Vol. XXXIX, PP• 186-91.
4. A gold coin ot this ruler 1.n41cates Qub1las to be SUi'yavamsis. See Ha&r1, .P.!!'!ch~1 Patr1,ka, Vol. I, part 111, (v .• s. 1977·), pp. 241-85• BaPPa 1 s crecU. ted w1 th having defeated lla3a Maa of Mori clan and captured the tortress ot Cb1 ttor in about v .s. 791/734 A. D.
Chaulukyas ot Anahilwara, Param.aras of MSlwa and Chauharis
of ·Sambhar. Any attempt on the ·part of· the ·Guhilas · tO
assert their independence was frustrated by these powerful
lti~gdoms. 1
.. Nothing 1~portant 1s known about the princes ot
this line Prec~ding Samanta ·Simh.~ ( .li?.l-1202 ) and it
seems that _ QhauJ.Ukya K~~rapala held ~he terri tory of . . . . . . 2
Mewar in v.s.· 1209/1152 ·A.D. and that 1 ts chief's c·ontinued ~ . . . . "- . -~ . .. . . . ,. - . . . . - . . .
. . to rule there· at least up to 1206 A •. D •
.. At .t~e cl~se Qf th(! ~ttelft~ .~entury,_ the history of
~e:war. t.o9~ .. a. new ~rn.: ,A ~houih S~anta .S.tmha is. c;re41 ted
w1 th . ~,vic tory . ()Ver ~olank.1 ~ler A3 ayapalf;L .. (V ~ s. 123]/ . "
~~74 4,.D.}, he was in turn defeated by Kiri tipala the founder ' . . . . . . 3 o.~ Ialor. b~aneh ~r, the Chauhans . and the latter occupied
Mewar .sometime~ 'between 1175 and 1179. ·
1. For references .to. Mewar being. subjugated by the~e· ol.·an~ ~ee G•·;C.:Ch~udh~ft Poll tieat- Historz of !olilthem Il1d1a, · (:Amrltsar; ·1§63), P• 171 and· i,c.-}lay,· D.HeN,;I•t •Vo~~: I'+; P•. 1162 •.
2.- An.insor1Pt1on--c;>t:_v.s. ).207/llfO.A~;o~ trom Chittor reco~cls Kumarap~a_·t;;o have gii'_'ted. a Vil:lage to the local temple (.Ll.•, Vo~ •. IX1: P:e, l?)'• The Mangrol ~nscription of v .• s. 1202/1146 A.D. menti-ons Maluka ot -Gu.hila falll1l:y as· Kum·araPala1 s vassal. See i.tl.•, PP• 158·60•
a. The Ahad (Udaipur)· inscription of v.s. · 1263/1206 :A.D. whi~e g1Vins th~ :geneology ot ~aujarat chiefs from Mularaja to Bh1ma II records th-e grant of Ahad •to a Bra.hinin·. G.H •. Ojha, Q.R.l.t · PP• 48-49, fn.2.
that area. 'rbey bore imperial t1 tles, 1 in tro4\loe4 their
own era2 asserted thelr supremacy over the Pratb1bara
ohl ets ot Mandor. 3
c One of the Bhat1 ob1ets named .lataal is· sald to
have m+sratect trom· Locll'ava to the present site of lai.salmer
1n v.s •. 1212/1165 A.n.4
there are .no instances to show that the Bhatl '
chiefs CaDle into contl.ict w1 th the groWing Muslim power
in the north before the close of the thirteenth century.
~he Bhati chief V1~qara~a w~ose dates range trom Bali<A
s~vat 841 to 652/1165 A.D. 5 seems to be no otber
a. The.1n1t1al Bhat1kf samvat falls in v.s. 680/623 A.D. The earliest 1nscr pt1on of this era is ot Bhat1ka samvat 634/V. s. 1214/1167 A· D. See Dashratha Shanna (ed.) Rajasthan th~u~~ .th~ ,.As;~s, (B1kaner91966), Vol. It. p. 280e . .
See Dauka. (Jodhpur) inscriPtion, supra, fll. 4.
4. N a1ns1 1 li.&X•, Vol•.' .Il, text. t )• 3.2& . . , # 7~ ; If!,? of/•\ 17-l;vti. q'~ i"-~!k-9'/.( -!(~ <""7(o//V <t';Tf'Y
, .Y)~I?J . .:r/~tf'lt~..(<p 4 I;/ .)} ".!:.l,l / JJ
It 1 s however 1 dl tf"ioul t to agree w1 tb the elate of the foundation ot Ja1salmer as given 1n the bardic accounts• The subsequeflt events ahqw that the foundation of J a1 salmer was laid only atter. the defe$t of Bho3a during Sul~an Muhammad ot Ghor•s ·invasion or- Gtt3ara:t in 1178 A.D.· · , · . .
-- •• .•. ~ • ., • • .r; •\ • •
s... For text ot the inscriPtions see Dasbratha Sha1111la (ed.,) Ra~asthan Through the Ages, Vol. I, P• 286.,_ tn.,. 1 and 3 ..
50
than V13atara3a n1oknallle4 'Lan~a', 1 who ls sa1d to have
married OhaulUk7a S1dhra~a J ats1mha;• s daughter.8 'the regal titles born by the chief· and his other •chivalrous
· aets•. narrated· in the bard1c aocot~nts eamed h1m
the tile ot • the pOrtal of the ~orth' •3 1 a1s1mha
S1dhra3a is known to have lived up to v.s. 1200/1143 A.D.
lf the marriage actuallY took place when Vi~qara~a was ' .
young, we may sat~y assume his asoendency to the throne
well before Bhatilta sam vat 641/1166 A • .D. 1 the first
known · date in his inscriptions. Again the t1 tle borne
by him in th1s inscription also suggests that he may hav.e
occup1e4 the throne at least some rears ·before the date
ot the 1nscr1pt1on. 4
That Vi~qreJa, or more probably .. his successor
Bho3a6 had to tace a Ghor1an raid is indicated by the
-bardio aocoun t preserved by N atnsi• ' .
the Bhati-Muslim conflict probably took place • during the· course ot SUltan Mulzzud-Dln' s invasion ot
' p )' ' . ' ) . '1J .1. ;?-(J;jd /.'?J/ 'l/~1¢'. /11/<..!J"/./ / •.
Nat·ns1, L,K,, Vol. II, (JS,O•li•l•>t P• 33. If/) )) /J, \ )) - _J) ~ ....l )]
B.-~'? off(/.:>!/~ "? ""( ~/(.l--'/ ~{/U/1;/.__J(Y/ / 1,.b14·
s. '3~ /l;-#;-- ns_ jJ.;;; 1 " 1914., P• 32.
4•_ Su.p~a, P•· -XLIX, tn • 6.
s. Na1n.s1, 1.1,.; Vole II, · p •• 33,
/
51
·Qu.~arat 1n 1178 A• D., when the 1nva41rig forces were defeated
by the oomb1ned forces under Ohaulukya prince Mulara3a and
h1s· teuda~r1es. 1 t.nle field ot this battle was Gadrara-a .
ghatta or Kashahl"ada, located near the toot ot Mt. Abu. It
1s possible that the Sultan may have sacked. Lodrava • the
then . caP1 'tal ot Bhatis ~ dUring the course ot his march
to OU3 uat. The assumptton tinds supPort from the bar<d.o
accounts preserved 1n I atnsi Khyat. 3
It is state4 that the Sultan during the course
ot his march encamped at a place one mile outside Lodrava ' . ' . ' '. 4 ' . .
at the 1nv1 taticn ot J a1sel 1 ( the brother ot V13qra3a,
who possibly ,took Muslim assistance 1n a bid to lq his
own· claims· to the seat ot Lod.rava ) • The sultan on hearing
the lfar cri' ot the Bhat1 chief attacked end k1lled him <
and sacked Lodrava. 6 After this victory. the oh1ettatnsb1P '
of the toWn. was entrusted to Rawal J' a1 sal. 6
1. For details of thts battle see Minhaj, .LA.et Vol.I, pp. 451·52; Kl:radtf .stone 1nscr1pt1on ot Bb1ma II 1 .Ll.•t P• '12 and Nizamud-Din, LA•, ~r·. ·Vol. I; p.as.
2. .Ll.•t Vol. XVI,. P• :273 I Meru.tunga, Prabandhac1ntaman11 P• 97, 154 and A.K.M~umdar, Chaulukyas ot Gu3arat1. PP• 131-33 •. 11~/(Y!-1/E_ J,fq!lf'J ~>17 t ~9~~~;;; ~) ('/J .J~ J. ·-· \)
./'
5 •) . t t..J
Rao Jalsal,, after coming to powert' transtered his
seat fJ'Olll Lodrava to the present site ot Jalsalmer and mad•
1 t his oap1 tal.. The event probably took place after v.s. 1234 l.e., atter the sack of Lodrava by Sultan Mu~zzucl~D1n' s
forces. fhe Lodrava seat ot the Bhatls thus came to an
end W1 th the death or Rawal Bho3a ( nephew ·or J at sal ) 1 at
·the hands. ot the Muslims and the subsequdlt foundation of'
Jaisalmer.
It ma~ be pointed out that the first literary 2 reference. to Jalsalmer occurs 1n v.s. 1214/1178 A.D. , which
ls synchronous w1 th the above events. file sack of Lodrava
and seeking of a more ,eater place, may have been tbe motives
of laisal in shifting his capital _from Lo4rava to Jaisalmer.
Since tbe dates of V13qra3a are t1xed on the basis of
epigraphic ev1dence3 and the known tact that he was . . ·4
succeeded by Bho3a h1s nephew, 1t is c11tf1cult to accept
the earlier date of the foundation of J aisalmer given bf
N ain s~ (A~ De 1155) • '•:
Rao J,a1aal was succeeded by a Une ot Bba·tt rulers,
1. N at.nsl, L£., Vol •. II, p. 35.;
2. Kharatarabr1hidagurvaval1, P• 34.
~. SUpra, · P• '49, tn. s•
4.. Na1asl,. i.d'i¥.t Vol.: II, p •. 35.: ..
inclucU.ng Sa11 vahana I, l Kelhana, a 1\awal Ohacb1 g4eva,3
Karan. Singh, 4 I rd. tra S1mha, Rawal Laltham•u•'lt Rawal
PU.npa1a and Rawal J eth Singh, who cont1D.U,eci to hold the
principality till the close of the thirteenth cctury~6
_No Muslim 1.nvas1on is recorded, and no Arabic or Pers1Sil t.J . .. ' - . . . ,,
.1nscr1pt1on found ia the Bhat1 pr1nc1pal1t1J and it seEms
that the region was Practically devoid ot MusU.m intlucce
up to the 'beginning ot Khal31 rule.
OTHER MINOR DlNASfl:ES Ill RATl).STli@!
Rasbtrakutas ot Hast1kund1:
OD.e ot the branches ot Rashtrakutas settled .tn
Hast1.lwnd1 (JodhPilr) anti came ·to be known as the RashtrakUtas
1• Na1no1 1 1..1.., Vol. II, p,
2. AocorcU.ns tO an. unconfirmed stateman t 1 ltelhana slew one Kbizr Kha.11 Bloch when the latter crossed M1hran .
· (Indus). and invaded Bhat1 Princ1pal1 tJ• !od, jpnalg, Vol. II, P• 1208.
a. Na1ns1, 1...£•• Vol. II, P•
4. His .last lmo'Wn. date is v.s •. l340/l.280 A.D. See Iplaratarabrih1daervavl,1; P• 34. Karan Singh :l.s said to have scountere4 one Muzaffar Ithan when the latter. demanded the daughter of .a Brahmin_ Bbumtl• The.latter, unwilling to comply,. sought the help CiFBbati chief who attacked and killed. the Khan. (Tod., Annalts, Vol.II, p, 1.210). N.o Muslim. governor of thi.s name,~ bow...eBr_,_
, k:no...wn_to have been at-N-agaur at tri1s time. An 1nacr1p.. ---'-----':;'t1on ~a ted lind Juma.f:U • A·H~ 666/l?th i'eb,, 1 1267 A• D.
gives ·the ·name of., Bal.ban and one M~k-Mal.Ukish•aharq, Sa1tu4-Daula-t Wad•Din Ahmad• See 1,1.A.,Aell•t 1958•69, P• 64,
s. Nains1, l•i•t Vol. II, pp, 39•43.
. . ... 1 of Hast1kund1. A stone 1nsor1 Ption . .trom 'fillage
B13aP\lr (Bali district in Joclhpu.r) W1 thin the pr1ncl~a11 ty
ot rulers of this line consists of tvo records d$te4
v.s. 996/949 A. D. and v.s. 1051/997 A.D. respectt.vely.
Paramaras of Banswaral
Apart from Malwa, 3 a branch of the Paramaraa
ruled over the pr1nc1Pali.ty of Btmsvara 1n the later halt
ot the eleventh century A.D. '.Chis 1s attested to by two
inso:tipt1ons found from Arthuna. dated V. s. ll09/10S3 A. D.
and 1189/1102 A.D.4
P&raJ'Ilaras of Chan4ravat1 es& .Aim•
rw"o other branches of Paransaras are lmown to have
established themselves in at least three regi.ons in Ra~a-. . ' . .
s~han, namely Banswara, Chan4ravati/Abu and K1radu (Jodhpur).
1. ':!//..;#? ~jbL ;z_ o< (YJ d!<J·/ o< 'n?c, .:~ l(l -e;~~?~ .JC<f 1 tr 4-~ -- .,, /• • /\ ""- (_J. C. I
.Ll.•.t Vol. x, P• 23. verse 3 (i.e. V14ya4hara was a Rashtrakuta·klng. '
2. Pt., Ram Kal"'Ulf •B13apur 1nscr1pt1on of Devela of Hast1kund1 , .Ll..•, Vol. x. , pp. 17·24•
Tbe Par8Jiaras bad tha1r or1 gtnal seat at Malwa. Under Bbo3a (1010-55) the clynasty claimed· an S.mpo:rtant rank. After b1s 4eathl however, 1 ts rulers ve:re reduoe4 to an lnsl&n tican t s,;atus of Hatu»gparas. In the nrst quarter of tbe l3tb. · Ofillt\!ln':•L D•va_pal.a .. rul.ed over.Mal.wa. an4,_exc.teH1ae4 hi a · autho·n-ty 1n the region·· ex ten.~!' I .. tx-om ~-~~:t.•a, to~arou.oh-. .. ·-·ror\tetai:llt lee·u;w.~Di11.-KdlavAJ. ·· K~a~ PP •. 6-6. ·
4. .Ll.• ~ Vol~ IXt PP• 10-16; A•R·~•M.,, 1915, P• 2
55
... " '
From the Vasantgarh stone 1nsor1Ption we know
that a Paramara branch ruled over the pr1nc1pal1 ty ot
Chandravat1 and AbU in the midctle of the elevEIJ.th century~l
fhe Paramaras ot tb1 s ltne, hOwever, held the terri to17 • to J " ~
of Chsn4ravat1 and Abu, as feudatories of the Chaulukya
k1ng4 ot Gu.Jarat •
. Dharavarsha of this 11ne (1163-1219 ) ls knOWA to
. have been the Mepc}le§hwa£a.2 ot no less than tour Chaul.Ukya
k1llgs from Kumarapala to, Bhima I I ( 1144-1241).
fhe. Paramaras ot Kiradu.
A trafJllmtary 1nscr1Ption dated v.s. 1218/1161 A.D.,
from Kiradu (.Jodhpur}, after tracing the ox-1g1n .of Paramaraa
from a sacrit1c1 al tire-pit on Mt. Abu, refers to a chatn of
_l'Ulers among whom was a powerful king named S1ndhura3a, ' . . 3 ruling over ~Marumandala'. the rulers or this branch were
possibly scions ot the Abu line. The Paramaraa of K1ra4u
1. Ll.•J Vol• IX,, PP• 10·16. See also Jhalodl (S1rob1) temPJ.e 1nscl'1Pt1on dated v.s. l.265t Arbuda J1ana Lekha
>
Sandoh.~, part 1 v,. p. lOSS. Mt. Abu 11lscr1ption dated V.s, 1287/1230 A,D •.. I•I• 1 V<;»~ .•. VIII, PP• 20<>-204, 208-19 and Ray, Q•!ii.N•I•t Vol. II, P• 9l3.
2. See colophon of Jlnetadbamakatha. •. aamasena Katha (Singh! J a1na ·· Or an tha Mala, r;o •. XVIII) • P• 109 and Arasana (Sirohl) dated v.s. 1276/1219 A.D. 1nscr1p. ~onJ A,rbuda~J.a1na .Lekha Sandoha1 part 1vt 1fo,311t p. 108~
---=-~-=..,.. .
3, P.C.Nab.&J;'t J.L.§,, Vol. I, pp~ 261-m.
56
too like those ot Abu, acted as feudatories ot the
CbaUluJtya rul.ers.l
Mother inscription from .Kir.adU 4at;e4 v.s. 1209/llSB A. D., records 5 adol Chauhan · Alban a as a
feu4f1tol7 ot the ChaUl.UkJa Kum.arapala. 2 fid.s may show
that e1 ther. the· ·chaubans temperaril'' ousted 'the Parailaraa
from K:tradU in the mld<U.e ot the twelfth. cen'tury, or they
held· the place wh1cb. was afterwards gtven over to the
Paramaras in U61 A. D.
. .
. ro. sum up, three impOrtant Raj put · olana Viz, the . . .
Cbaulukyaa, Chauhan~ end Paramaraa, shared· the ditterEDt
Pr1ncipa11t1es of Ra~asthan at the olose or ·the twelfth
oerrtury. 'lhese clans. however, tailed to otter a un1 teet
front against the external invasions during the two
centuries p:receeding the final conqUest of Northam Xnd1a
t>y the 'rUrks.
Partly dUe to their in ter.nal r1 valrles and partly
due to their sub•41v1s1ons, theY considerably weakened
tbeS.r ·strength and the three con temporar1 es of Muhammad
ot Ohor .. Prithvirala III, Mularaaa II, and Bh1ma II, an4
the Paramaras DevaPala and Dharavarsha (ot Mal.wa ancl Abu
57
reapeot1vely) 1nd1V14Ually t\lrned out to be too weak to
w1tbatan4 the Oborian invasions.
Dt THE llAJPUf Ru.t.ING ORDIR
·i
Most of the ruling. dynasties ln. R•jasthan.1 whiCh
later came to be designated • Raj puts•, seem in tact to '
have. formed out ot an assimilation or various tribes, each
of ~h~m clatmed a c11 rt eren t ori gi11 but bad gr.adually merged
in to the ruling class.
It may be pointed out that the.tem 'Rajput• in
the SEilSe we use 1 t today, is not found in any or the
sources before the fifteenth century. !hut to the term
• Hlndu' , the most oommon term used in case ot many ot
these clans by the Persian chroniclers was .Bu an4
Rana1 etc.
At the time of Turkish invasions, many of the well
known 'Raj pu t• clps or later times had come to be ~
reoop.1sed. as belonging to the •Kshatr1Ya' caste. It is
interesting to note that some ot the clans bad begun to
58
connect themselves WJ. th the sun, Moon, Fire and sea etc.1,
in a b14 tO prove their h1gh martiaJ. status.
Very 11 ttle 1 s known about the system of pol1 tle al.
organisation of these proto - 'Bajput• clans. What one I .
can dimly discem is the emergence ot distinct categories
ot' aUtonomous or 8CIIl1-autonomous teudal Chiefs under· the . ' . \ '
r83a~ . or rulers, going under names 'such as Rajaputra,
· rana1ta• rauta, 1!hakk.ura. etc.
Ra3aputrat
The term ~~~putr~ ·or Ra3P\lt tound 1n the euoly
medieval r~or4s from Ra3asthan and elsewhere, meant the
son ot a ra3 a, used e1 tber 1n · the 11 teral scse ot prtnco
or as 8n honorot1c.2 xn the latter case, the ~~aeutr'\
wa! a king ·of vassal, t-tho was supposed to render certain
For details see Daahra~ba Sharma, JS.C,D,, P• 246. Referan~e may be made to the Rasntraktltas who now 4escr1be4 them as Ya~vas of Lunar family, thourgh the1r earlier records had nothing to say about th1s. (A.s •. Altekar, RashtrakUtas and thelr times, PP• 1~16) •. , the Prath1haras became RaghUvamsis and d.esoribed. themselves as Lakshmana• s desc6Ddants in an 1QaCl'1Pt1on of Bho3a I. ( Dashratha ·aharma1• E. c. D. t p. 245 in ) • The Paramaras . similarly adoptea a myth from the Raavana. (Dashratha Sbarma, •on gin ot tbe Paramaras• t RajAsthan Bharat11 Vol~ .III t part 11 1 P• 28) •.
·A Chauhan gran :t of 1176 · r~ords the two sons ot K1rt1pal.a, ~ R~japutra.L!AkbmattJala aD.4 Raaetra . Abhaypala! (..Ll.•t Vol •. ~~•· ~P.• __ l-'!'5)"··. For.ret.er-er1-ce
~ 1so Rajapu·tra-"'111- ··oupta. ,.records ot tbe 6th century and· Gabadvala records ot 12th century, see D.i.d.. t Vol. XII1 p. 142 and l.t.A•, VOl. XIV; P• 102aii<I Vol• XVIII, P• 136.
(
services to the state, 1n retum tor land granted or
assigned to hlm.l
The term Ra~aputr~ therefore, during the Per1o4
ot our study, was not t~e nam.e ~t a o~s~ such as we
. ' understand' to clay; and .there are n'o instart'ces to show 1t
the 41ffe~ent ~r.l..bes ~.egarcled eae~ other as any thing ' ' '
other than ~ust Kshatriya clans •.
Apar~ trom Rajaputra, early medieval inscriptions
txoom Rajasthan .state that such 1an4 grants were also made
to the u~Jper urban as well as rural class 1n Rajasthan.
This class bas been referred in ditterct chronicles and
insc~i Ptions of the pre•SUl tanate and sultan ate period as
Rai, . Rana, Rawat, !haltUr1 Musaddam, Khot, samanta aid
Obaud.hun etc.
lla.1 and Ranalta or Ranaa
The term Ra1 and aanaka or Rana has bee used tor -· .
a powertu,l. Hindu ch1et by the Persian chronicles ot the
thirteenth century. LateJ- on the term came to be applied
to a tributory chief Who enjoyed internal autonomy ad
was ob11te4 to PaY a fixed tribute to the central authority.
1. .Ll.., Vol,~· XI, No.4 and· Vol •. XVIII,. p •.. 83. Ub.4er samar Sliiha Chauhal'la (S/o K1rt1pala)h1a 'maternal uncle RatfP11tr,&; •Jo~ala• actecl as a Rauacb1ntika, 1.~. a iii! ster or t. ·general administra- ·· r-~- {-bisbr.atha
··~Sharma, s.g.-z~.,, P• 202). However, the teno was appUed 1n case of a 'lowest ranking fief' • holder 1n the Chaulukya ep1 graphs~ See Ram Saran Shal'Dla, l.oum.U. ot EConomic, and social His~rl ot t~e ot;t~t, Vo1.IX, pp. 8&:98~.
60
Jlanoka has been. used in the early me41eval 1nscr1pt1ons
and afterwards 1n the thirteenth century Sanskrit works
and Persian c.hron1<;1ea.
The Lekhapad4hat1, a twelfth ·century Sanskrit text,
clet1n1ng the obligations ot a fief - holder in -early
medieval .' Qu~arat' and Marwar, reproduces three characters.
According to the first the .king . could grant a B•H•t a
country (desha) probably meaning "a '!Fdftla.l
In the second charter, .the Rp8ka undertook to
accept the charter issued by MabaDlat)"a and to pay all dues
to the. gran tea. Lastly, the Bar1Mi sub-1nteu4e4 a, Villase ·
to ~.aj~putr~ who was required to collect the revenue, to
tumiah 100 foot-soldiers and ao cavalry tor the semoe
of the BIDMI at.bis head-quarters besides maintaining
law ~d order in. the f1et.2
fbis sort of sub ... infeudatlon preva1le4 widely ·,.,
during the Prathlhara :ru.le wb1cb extended over Rajasthan,
0\t~arat and Maharaabtra. The beneficiary was e1ven the
right to oulttvate his b.Utloe or to get 1 t cultivated,
to en loy 1 t or - to get 1 t cloyed, to undertake 1 ts
1~ L$khapad4ha t1 t ( e4. ) c. D~ Dalal etC. t G.O • s. * Ro.~,- XlX, __ (1\ia~Q<la, 1925), p. ? • _
2. <£b14. ' . ~
61
oult1vat1on or to get 1 t 4one. 1
!he text ot the LekhaPadc1hat1 thUs indicates a
feudal poli t; 1n the twelfth and tbe thirteenth centuries
1n Gu2arat and Ma.rwar, most of which was under the Chaubau
dominions. Fr011 the contracts giveD 1n the Lekhapad4hat1 1
it would. be seen that. the k1ng or his mab$1atTa granted
fiefs to the Rgng)ty wbo could sub-int~d it to the
R&J apu. tras •.
It would seem from the third. or the above mentioned
chart in the Lekhapaddhat1 that the J.!a3aPllt~~ could not
onl1 grant land but also increase taxes eto. It ls,
· however, not clear whether or not the k1ng intervened
1n · case ot · a dispUte between the llf:JD,Bka an4 his •asal,
Jtajaputra.s Again 1 t ·is tU.ft.Lcult to say how wide the
area was tb.at was entrusted to each category ot these
vassals~3
1-,. .Ll.•·t Vol.· IX, mo., I, plate A-11 191 plate B-1 1 63. Ct; R.S.Shanu1, Inclian Feudalism., p .. 118,. tn., 4 •. ' . '
a, R •. S.Shartna, Indian Fey.dal.i&h. PP•'· 201-202.
a. The ptwt1aAr.l (tr.~ B.K.;Sarkar, Vol.lt PP• 366-66 and 81-82) defines a S~FIC!, as. a ggvernt,n.• ot 100 villages.. Whatever IQ.gt bG the s1ae of the areas ass1.~ed to th_ese~ '\fa'!_!~~s,""JI9!l:§LBan~as and !!fdl6•1h·
- ~- - ~ ·Wifllt ~enJoyed· pracucu ownership o_ ~S!-~' ,~all"~ __ ~" -~~ ~ __ _ "~•xeeuted reli-gious~ gran-ts· "wt"th~ ·the ~.Pi rrii1 silon. ot the1 r over-lords. See R.S.Sharmat oe,,c1£•'t P•r 191.
62
It would thus be seen that the term Ran&ka was
uaed to 1nd1cate.a sabordinate ruler or a viceroy who
oonctttcted business of · the state. Tb1s was a popUlar
feudatory t1 tle 1n rnecUeval Ba3asthan. It seems to have '
· · been derived from R,a.3ank&: ot early medieval copper grants •o< - ~ • -
of northern In<l1a. In these records, ~3anka has bee . placed after Ra~an who was a teudatorr but ot higher
rank. Rarely haVe Ra3anltas and Ranaltas been d1at1nguishe4. 1
Ball ta/Rawat a
the term if.wat or iftttta was generally applied to ·
~3aetra• .in early Chauhan, Gabadvalla and Chaul.ukya
reCorda. 2 It may tbus be an earlY vernacular from ot \
the Sanskrit RajaPiltra and possiblY 1ncl1.cates a d1st1nct
rank in early medieval Ra3asthan.a
1. D.C.Sirkar, Indian EPigraphy ( 0e~.' 1?6.r) ,· pp. 342-43.
2. · A .Ga~adv~la pillar inscriPtion elated v.s. 12&/119? A. :0. t makes the .POS11i!on of Bana and ija;\1 olear. The '1nsor1'pt1on records the erection ot a Pillar by ;paut1 Al'lanada, in the reign ot ftan.&ka V13aykama. See CUilningh~, A•§•l•t Vol. XI;· PP• 128·130. ct. Roma N1yog1, tne Gaha4Vallas ( ~~- ;, !7.) APpdX•, 84! p. 260, No. 75. · ·
3. D.c.sirkar, o~.c1t•t PP• 343-44- It has been ·suggested that the term1:s a corrupt trom ot ll~1z:ac~~a • one deprl'ved or ·a royal au1;hor1 ty (i,b14~>;, For-O the use. ot the -term D§u»a-tn Pers.1an -~I-ks •.. ~~e_B~art1_,~~•t
~ "t~~tJLt -PP•~l82"~Sl3 ·and- Amtr-Khusrau, ~ibl'l:lg, ffiiit . text, P• 93. For 41st1not1on between .llfAa and ftAUbt see l•,A1 S.B., 1911, PP• 763-65 and RomaHro81, OP•,Ci t. t APP4x• B, P• 260 9• N' o. 75 411.
Although the te~ has been mostly applied in cases
ot the Chauhan and ChaulUkya Raj aput~a~t wbo were the
· ao1ons ot respeCt1 ve royal tamil1es9 1 t also came to be
applied to Brabmana., Kshatriya and Stqastha.s ot Bun4el-
khand and u. P,., the latter of. vhom were mostlY unre+ated
to the ruling bouses.1 -
-Cha.ndella inscripts.ons show that the Raytag were
granted laad tor m111tary services, which was also a most
important obligation of their counter• Part - the Raaaeutra. 2
Another term used SJftonymously w1 th Rauta was
.~hakkUra. The t1 tle was used in med1 eval reeor.ds from the
eighth to the thirteenth century. 'fhe Bautu and Tha1tkUraa
thus 414 not possess a princely status and were poss1bl7 . en.t1 tled as. such only When they had fallen down from some
royal status.
Epigraphic eVidence suggests that some Brabmana and
Kshatr:Lya families who were related to royal. families
and could not succeed to the throne due to some reasons
and were thus place in a SUbordin,.te pOsition were
a titled 3 as such.
1~ -.Ram saran ·Sharma, ln<D. AD F!!Qsi&\2t a, pP • 193-94.
2. i,bJ.:cS; .•
3• Upa4hyay1 Soci,o-:rel1&1ous History of Northern India, PP•, 52-'53. · ' · • ·
feudatory continued to be in use in the Persian works
until early in the th1rtemtb oentury.1 ,
Many early mecU.eval inscli.Pt1ons notablY troa
Central IncUa, record the grant of villages by different
ld.nga to Rautas ~and 1:hakktlra•.2 ·· · ·
It may, howevet-, be noted that the title ot l}auta 3
and Thakkura was applied botb. to men o! a Brahmana and
Kshatr1Ya4 castes. Wbile the former sot· land grants tor
performing certain religious acts, the latter were reel•
. p1ents of landgrants and other gifts by virtue presumably . 5
ot the chivalrous deeds, or in expectation of mart1al serVices
l~ See 'lar1kh·1·Fakhrud-R1n, Mubaraksbah, text., P• 33. ..-- l I '-• ..
. ' OJ#/ :J U!/' .:J ut:JJJ ., .. ,.;:_, · p .. · ~ ._, ~..cc r • It was vri tten 1n 3.206 A. D. and thUs 1 t mar· suggest the con tlnuation ot the term and the time ot Turkish invasions ot India. The grants ot the Gahadvalla rulers also mmt1on faalSkUti at the close of the twelfth century. See *:aba4valla grants of v.s. 1207/1151 A.D. and v.s.
1245/1189 A. D. .Roma N1yog1, o P• cit. t APP4x• B. 1 Nos. 76 and ?8.
a. .Ll.•t Vol. xx,_ p, l33p CUD.n1ngham1 A.S.I., Vol. XXI, P• .49; .L.A• t vole XVIII, ·pp. l38-39l .Ll.•t Vol. IVt PP• ll~J ~~ V~l. XV, PP• 7-13.
65
Aga1n a Rau ta could e1 ther b.e a Ksha tr1ya or a
Brabmana. 1 In such cases, the t1 tle was perhaps aPplied
to 41st1npish a Brabmana or KsbatriY&t ltho once held·.,or
sh~eci power from an ordinary Brahmana or Ksbatr1ya.
However, the exact interpretation of the tLtlet whether
it was used as a surname or as a desiSDat1on by the
Brahmanas and the Kshatr1Yas alike, is still uncertain. 2
The early medieval reeords, mostly trom. central
India, 3 suggests that the t1 tle ot thak;k.Ura was given to
those Braham.an.s, who were primarily engaged in the worship
of some de1 ty • It would be equallY interesting to note
that there is a set ot inscriPtions which suggest that ·' while a Brahm.ana bore the title ot a Jj.auta, his father and
grandfather were Thakku.ras.4
It 1 s possible that in the early Period the
ancestors or the Brahmana 119u to once functioned as
priests. While the grandsons rose to the post tion ot a
1. Upadhyq1 Soc1o-Rel1g1ous History ot Northern India, PP• I 52~§.· ' · · ' •
2.. lb,j.d~ t I)· 53.
a. W.•t Vol. IV, P• 1311 Vol. VI.I, p~ 100; Vol. XIII, P• 217 and Vol. XIX, P• 294.
4 •... ~!he ·Rewa-recor4,or lB.th o-enturr• i;•Ait Vol. ·xviii · · -·· PP ,~~ -~~~4 ·"·_jnO lbe.~~ Qa.ba4Y.al~a .sr•:t'"' ot ~~ll7~7.,~o.l!.ec.or.d&
~ .. ·~ ·tnat (V13atchandra) granted the village ot 00dant1 to Routa Bajya4harmavarman s/o Mf\bamataka thf&kk»ra Vi3a¥dhara. Ja.l.• t Vol. IV t P• 112.
66
fief-holder, due to property g1tts to that fam1ly, 1 It
is also possible, of course, that the B~abmana tamilJ
· was part of the aristocracYt' and the grandson had simply
been g1 vc a t1 tle wbich was cUtter en t . from the t1 tle
conferred on the cran4ta~~er and father.
The t1 tle of 'l'ha\tk'qra continued to be used t1ll the
end or the Gahadhvalla dynasty. 2 In many cases, while
the author ot a grant was a tb&kkUra, the recipient of that
grant was also a Thakkura.3
Sam an ta and Mandaleshwaral
The term §~mantA4also probably meant a feudatory. . 6
S1milarl~ Mandaleshwara, lltOstlY used in Sanskrit in scrip.
tions meant the ruler of a Km4ala - a district of a
See Govinaachandra•s KamaU11 1197. A. D;.: .Ll.• t Vol. X. t PP • J,A1 Stil!,t l9llt P• 757.
' I ' '
a. .L1,.,:· Vol •. Xi PP~ 93-100.
grant or v.s. 1253/ 93-100 and
4. t.A·, Vol, v., P• .114 and L,"OoPal; • Samanta -· Its var)'1ng sign1:t1cance in Ancient Ind1a, i.tB·A·fi~., .1963, P• 481 fhe use of the term Samanil continued 1n the .sanskrit inscription up to :the ·close ot the 13th century and even .later., GUhila samanta S1mha in Mt. Abu· ins-
, crtpti·on o.f v ... s. ~~/12~6 4.-Q.c 1:s .reoorded to have 'depnved'-'otlie §amAAt-1\s ··ot all ·their belongings-~'" -See btle:,-~vo3:r XVI ;o~P•.~349.
s. See 'Bhandarkar''s ~t Nos., 241 l33t. 141, 265 etc,
6 7 .
kiagdcm. Both the terms were thus applied as a 4es1&na•
tion by some feudatories pOssibly of a lower category
than Raufil and '.rbakkuu.
Muqa44am and Khu1a
W1 th the advent · ot the Muslims in India, many
t1 tles like Mu'laddam, Khut and Chaudh.uri e~., began to
~be aPPlied to 1 0c aJ. t euda tori es. I
Muqad4am1 is an Arabic word meaning the first man,
i.e. chief or lea<U.ng man. In the Mugbal Period and
sUbsequently it has meant a v1llage headtnan whose obiet
function was the collection and assessment ot ·the revenue . . ~ .
as an agct ~f the government. :aut 1n the SUltanate Period,
1n addition tO tbis m.eanin11 it was also used simply to
designate a (H1nclu) chief or blgb otttcer of a Ra~a.a
cs• aoeorcU.ng to morelan4,3 was a Hindu obiet
sub~ eot to the SUltan. It is, however, doubtful whether
be can be so called,· because his du.ty seems to have been
only collection ot rev~ue and rem1 tting 1 t to· the local
~/ ..P'.,.. \\ .
1. ( JY t. leader, Col.ona1.·1 See F.Steillgass, .Arabic lh§l:ish Dtcttonarz:, P•· 10401 Baran11
=· ~ J:::i;;s.~·-~~!i-~~~.,. Jt:()l·~,+-·~=P•;. 3,~ •. ::,. c ·-
--a. -- --- ~ot·;~,.• -u•·e~1-u-·A1fd:r--KhU11r-aur ~··- -"tex.t,,:t. ·ptt;;~ 68·•r 3•, w.H •. Moreland.,, Agrar1an system ot Mos1EII1 lndiat
(Allahabad, 1929) .• , pp.,, a2S:a6... I · _ ·"'
treasurr.1 · 8~ran12 used. this term tor a Village headman~ The tenn. Kh!l!£ maT thus be 1dent1t1e4 With the sanskrit
· word GriJPllSuSii, or a V1ll~e headJDan.3
7.he ~s and MUqaddams held promlnct pos1 t1on
under th~ Sultans ot l)Etlb1, probably-~ only neXt to BII:!J
and the Turkish rulers were obliged to rely mostlY on their
· cooperation 1n m~tters ot local admini stratton·.· · Baran1
warns the SUltans acainst the · growth ot their wealth
and power.4
Chaudhuris
Another teflll .used vas Cqaudburi. 5 Ibn Batu.ta
·states that the CJ:!audbur1 , acted as the head ot a ....U..
or a colleCtion or hundred Villages and was thus the
chief ot the locSl infidels.~ Chaudhuri thus represented
a man of status intermecl1ate b.etween a cb1et, lllrl-and a
Village headman.
1. A~K•Sen1 PeoPle and Pol1 tics in Early Mec),1gv!.l ~nSU.a ·(Calcutta, 1961') t p, il3.
2. B$ran1t t.F.ij., teEt., p, 291.
3• Hodiwala, Stu41es in Xndo-Mgslim His~;ry, (Bombatt 1939), PP• 277-78.
4. Barani, .L..L.s.., text.!., Vol. I,. P• 291. Barani, also .usei"th'e 'term 1.H1nd.u• 1n..case of .UPPer cl.aas · Hindus only- and not for. common peasantry., See Motel.and1-~oPQo1-t., P• ,32 trn. · · - .
the otfloials Uat•d above who were e1 thai'
raveoue colleCtors or the reo1p1eots of lecl srants la
reco&Di tiOD ot tbeS.r services, e3oye4 real power 1n
the colm.trysldeJ and the SUltana in matters of tax or
tribute collec'faon had to 4GP&cl laraely on their local
and. tracii tionAl ~1nnue11ce. 1
,.
'
It .ls not clear whether the offices ot . . Mugadd!!t
&hl&.t aad QhiUdb»U. or1glnated v1th the Delbt.. SUltanate
or are tatum over by the SUltans trom earlier polity •.
Untll now tbe existence ot the offices Cd 4ea1patloaa
ln the earlier t1mea e1 ther 1n Ralasthan or elsewhere,
bas not bean cont1rme4 by eP1grapb1c or u.te:ra17 ev14ence.
Xt is thd'efore, l.ikelf tbat these had: no ant~edeeta 1D
the earl1el' 'Ra3pu.t• poUty.
Mawaa or Mawaaata
M1nha3 1n bis fabaqat-1-Ra~~i has used another
teftl MA!Ma . ( if IJ' ) o:r Mawasa<C3 ( ~·~ fr ) wbiob
aocorcu.ns to Bl&l1sb · traalators stoOd tor the Aama ot
a ~ern tory. 4 Tho H1n41. means.ns. of Kawy 1s abel. tar or
ps-otect1on.
1. A .• K.sen, op.ct t., P• ll3.
a. M1nl'la3, Lll•t ·'ext•,.t P• 1111 tl'• P• 708. · a • IbiA'• , · teat.~, · P• 306.: ·
4 •. llliot and Dowsoa. (Vol. II, p. 355) translate 1t aa Mew~ whereas according to Briggs (tr. 'ladkJ'l• l:-i!ftl1.ah'a> 1t. was. santpur near Abu.
70
Although there 1s some 41.ft1culty with respect
to the exact meaning wbich M1nha3 desired to convey by
tbe vord KllXA&h 1 t probablY referred to the neighbouring
independent .Hindu tribes and the tracts they dwelt 1n.1
Apart from the above mentioned offices, a number
of others such as Qlras:J.a, Bhum1a, and Pattawt etc., were.
also 1n use during the Mughal period. Although tbe1r
existeoce 1s not confirmed during ou:r period, 1 t is
possible·. that these too had their origin during
our period.
the G1ras1a landholder or meclieval Rajasthan was
one who held Q\taa i.e. subsistmce bJ a grant ( eatta )
ot the prov1nee tor whioh he had to perform service w1 th
sp~lfiecl quotas at home and abroad~ ~s class of
taverce was sub3ect to resumption and was renewable, and
was comparable to ant other £1ef'-holder. 2
The bol4er of a land on the other hand, it
a m111 tary vassal 'ltas called Bhumia. lbum'a one actuallY
lden t1 tied w1 th the so11 (kJ!p1) • AJmm& 1 held b1 s land
. by prespective possession which was 1nher1 ted as an
. . . _ ,.~~-- ;a._G .. R&'Ver,~y, __ tr., M1nha3 1 , u.. .. , p. 705, fn., 7 ..
-~a .• ~ !od~ .. Apnrd§.~,·- Volr. 1- p. l331 p.; saran, ~tudfes 1n Medieval lndi,an 111story1 . _ ~nena._. 1962), P· 11, · _
71 J
,•
indefeasible Patrimony and thus he does not renew his
grant. The Bh:umiat according to Tod, 1 was the counterpart
of the allod1 al proprietor of Europe. He could be called
upon for local service in the district where he resided
~d fo.r a ~J~~tain ,pertod only •. J\ similar t1 tle Zmgindm:
was bestowed upon .the Hindu tributory sovereigns under the ~ ' , ,, . .
Mughals - not out of disrespect but in the true apPlication ' ') ' •• ~ ' • t
ot their own term Bhomia Ra~, expressive of their .tcacity . . . .
·to the soil. 2 ·
The Patta~t similarly signiti·es vassal chief or
Rajasthan on mutual contract of support and fidelity. . .
Whatever obligations it laid upon the vassal of service to
his lord, corresponding duties of protection were imposed
by it on the lord towards his vassal.3
Apart f~om this several other types ·Of landed
intermediaries emerg.ed in Rajasthan as a result of gifts
ot religious grants. Tb~ ~rantees in such cases, were not
only charged W1 th the duty of main ta.1n1ng law and order in .
the Villages but also realising various revenues, which
1. Tod,: Ap.na1g, Vo;L. Is P• 133~
· 2. Ibid., p. 393.
a. 1.91S,., p. 121.
72
cOUld not have been PQs.s1ble w1 thout engasJ.na
subQrdinate staft tor the purpose. Thus reUgtoua
gran toes too eersed as lan4.ed 1ntermed1ar1es ia
charge of POlice an4 t1soal 4ut1es and graduallJ held
Yarioue all"arian and. aclm1Distrat1ve -r1ahts;1
••••• ••• •
