The Foundation of Muslim Rule in India: A History of the Establishment and Progress of the Turkish Sultanate of Delhi, 1206–1290 A.D. c6.s4: The Western Rajputs

The Foundation of Muslim Rule in India: A History of the Establishment and Progress of the Turkish Sultanate of Delhi, 1206–1290 A.D. c6.s4

Language: English

The Western Rajputs

c6.s4.1

Three powerful dynasties ruled the land from Delhi to Gujrat including Rajputana. Of these the Chalukya dynasty of Anhilwara (Anahillapattan) attained the zenith of its power in the reign of Jayasinha Siddharaja, (1092-1143), who after prolonged warfare annexed a considerable portion of the Paramara kingdom of Malwa¹. He also conquered the principality of Chitor. Following the defeat of Jasovarma (1133-1143), the Paramaras practically became Chalukya feudatories. Not until the weak reign of the Chalukya, Mularaja II, (1176-1178) were the Paramaras, under Vindhyavarman, able to reassert their independence². Branches of the Paramaras, ruling in the country round Mt. Abu, also reduced to subjection, however, continued in their vassalage until 1179 when those ruling at Bagar were supplanted by the Guhelots of Mewar³. The Chauhana principality of Nadol also submitted to the Chalukyas⁴. Jayasinha also reduced the Jadava principality of Girnar, in Kathiawar peninsula⁵.

c6.s4.2

¹ Ojha: *Rajputana* pp. 196 and 217.

c6.s4.3

² *Ibid.* p. 199; *JAOS*, VII, p. 32-3.

c6.s4.4

³ Ojha: *op. cit.* p. 208; Bagar, according to Ray: *Dynastic History*, II, p. 1182, is to be identified with the modern state of Dungarpur.

c6.s4.5

⁴ Ojha; *op. cit.* p. 216.

c6.s4.6

⁵ *Ibid.* p. 217.

c6.s4.7

Their power soon brought them into hostility with other ambitious dynasties. Jayasinha fought an indecisive battle with the Chandellas of Bundelkhand⁶. His most powerful rival was the Chauhana king of Ajmer. This dynasty, founded by Samanta, received considerable extension of territory under Ajaipal who founded Ajmer in the eleventh century. His descendant, Arnoraja (c.1153-1164) was for a short period compelled to acknowledge Chalukya suzerainty, but soon obtained his independence. One of the Chauhana branches occupied Nadol, and about the year V.S. 1200/1143 A.D., supplanted the Pariharas of Mandor¹. Branches from this family founded the ruling houses of Kotah, Jalor, Sirohi and Bundi².

c6.s4.8

⁶ Ray: *Dynastic History*, II, p. 971.

c6.s4.9

¹ Inscription of Sahajapala, dated V.S. 1202/1145 A.D.; ASR, 1909-10, p. 102-3.

c6.s4.10

² Erskine: Rajputana Gazetteer, p. 236-7; EI, IX p. 72.

c6.s4.11

The two paramount dynasties of Rajputana with their insatiable ambition for power, could thus hardly live in peace. Between 1140 and 1150, Siddharaja's successor, Kumarapala (1143-1173) twice defeated Arnoraja of Ajmer³.

c6.s4.12

³ Ojha: op. cit. p. 218.

c6.s4.13

Decline of the Chalukyas.

c6.s4.14

For a second time the Chauhanas became vassals of Gujrat and Someswara, son and successor of Arnoraja, fought under Kumarapala's banners in the latter's war with the Silaharas of Konkan⁴. With his death, however, Chalukya power declined. The next ruler, Ajaipal suffered defeat from the petty Guhelot chieftain, Samanta Sinha of Chitor who, from a later inscription, appears to have expelled the Chalukyas from Mewar even in the life time of Kumarapala⁵. The Paramaras of Malwa also asserted independence and even invaded Gujrat⁶. Only the Paramaras of Chandravati, remained faithful to the Chalukyas even upto 1230⁷; the rest of western and southern Rajputana became independent. The next two rulers of Gujrat, Mularaja II and Bhima depended entirely on the support of their Paramara vassal and on the Baghela chief Lavanaprasada, whose son Viradhavala ultimately supplanted the dynasty.

c6.s4.15

⁴ Nagari Pracharini Patrika, I, p. 399. From inscriptions found in Udaipur, Kumarapala appears to have conquered Mewar also; EI, II, p. 421.

c6.s4.16

⁵ EI, VIII, p. 216; IA, LIII, pp. 100-102.

c6.s4.17

⁶ JASB, 1836, p. 378-9; Ojha: op. cit. p. 200.

c6.s4.18

⁷ Vienna Oriental Journal, XXI: "The Chirwa inscription"; IA 1928, p. 32.

c6.s4.19

With the decline of the Chalukyas, the Paramaras of Malwa and the Chauhanas of Ajmer rose to eminence. The former were not destined to retain power for long, for their success over the Chalukyas and the Guhelots was followed by a series of defeats which brought about a complete collapse. The Chauhanas on the other hand, rapidly swallowed up North-eastern Rajputana. Visalaraja of Ajmer was a mighty conqueror and by 1150 captured Delhi from the Tomaras¹. In his inscription he boasts of his having conquered and subjugated the land between the Himalayas and the Vindhya mountains including "Baikuntha and Jabalipura². His capture of Hansi from the Ghaznawides has already been mentioned. After the short and uneventful reigns of his son Amaragangeya and that of his cousin Prithviraja I, the throne devolved on his younger brother Someswara. He ruled from 1170 to 1179 and was succeeded by his son, the famous Prithviraja II, or Rai Pithora of the Muslim writers. Much of his alleged prowess and conquests, recounted in the *Prithviraja Rasau* of Chand Bardai have been disproved by modern research³. The only undoubted evidence of his military exploits is an inscription in the Lalitpur district of

c6.s4.20

¹ *JASB*, 1886, pp. 41-43; Ojha: *op. cit.* p. 234.

c6.s4.21

² *IA*, 1890, pp. 215-217.

c6.s4.22

³ See *Proc. Asiatic Society of Bengal*, 1893, p. 93-94; Cunningham, *Coins of medieval India*, p. 83; *JASB*, 1886, p. 5; *IA*, 1930, pp. 6-9, cf. Smith: *Early History of India* p. 402, note 2, who tries to explain the obvious impossibilities contained in the ballad.

c6.s4.23

Extension of Chauhana power.

c6.s4.24

Bundelkhand, dated 1118, recording his conquest of Mahoba from Paramardi, the Chandella king of Kalinjar¹. It is needless to refer to his war with the Paramaras of Abu, the Chalukyas of Gujrat or the Gahdvalas of Kanouj—the latter following his abduction of Jaichand’s (Jayachandra) daughter—for these rest on no better authority than the legendary and unreliable *Rasau*². He was undoubtedly a vigorous king though his claim to lord-paramountcy of North India requires substantiation. His relation with the neighbouring kings could hardly have been cordial which explains his single-handed resistance to the Muslim invader. We have no means of ascertaining the names of the feudatory princes who are said to have fought in his side against Muizzuddin³. It is probable that Govindarai (written Khandirai by the Muslim chronicler), and described as the Rai of Delhi, was his vassal and belonged to the Tomara dynasty.