Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

History of the Khaljis, A.D. 1290–1320 c9.s1: Early Muhammadan Raids

History of the Khaljis, A.D. 1290–1320 c9.s1

Language
English

Early Muhammadan Raids

c9.s1.1

Rajputana being quite close to Sindh, Muhammadan invaders frequently descended upon it. Like other fortresses of Rajasthān, Chittor had also repulsed a few raiders before the year 1303. According to the *Chāch Nāmah* it was subjected to a siege soon after Chāch had ascended the throne of Sindh in 631 A.D. Later in the time of Jaitra Singh (1213-1233 A.D.) Mewār was invaded by Iltutmish some time between 1222 and 1229. But Persian chroniclers are silent about it,² though they refer to Iltutmish's expeditions against Jalor, Mandor and Ranthambhor. The reason for this omission may be the sultan's defeat in the campaign, a fact which is repeatedly mentioned in Rajput inscriptions and bardic literature.³ After Nagod had been ravaged by Iltutmish, Chittor became the permanent capital of Mewār. According to Ferishtah Mewār was next invaded by sultan Nāṣiruddīn Maḥmūd of Delhi whose rebellious brother had sought refuge there. For eight months the rebel was ruthlessly pursued in the hilly regions. Again, in 1299 Ulugh Khan while on his way to Gujarat tried to attack the Mewār country, but as stated above, he was repulsed. At length in the year 1303 Chittor was subjected to one of the greatest seiges in its history.

c9.s1.2

² Mr. Ojha deals with this expedition in detail. *Rajputana ka Itihās*, (Hindi) vol. II, pp. 463-68.

c9.s1.3

³ *Ibid.* pp. 470-71.

c9.s1.4

*The Siege*

c9.s1.5

On Monday the 8th of Jamādius Sani 702 (January 28th, 1303)⁴ 'Alāuddīn marched at the head of large army to conquer Chittor. Amīr Khusrau, historian and poet laureate accompanied the sultan on this expedition. He has left a graphic description of the citadel, its siege and final surrender. On his arrival in Chittor the sultan pitched his tents between the two rivers Gambheri and Berach, while the troops encircled the whole town, the right and left wings of the army encamping on either side of the fort. The sultan planted his flag on a hillock, known as Chattravardi or Chittorī on which he held his court and directed the operations of the siege personally.

c9.s1.6

⁴ *Khazāin*, Habib Trs. p. 47. ⁵ In an inscription dated Sam. 1358 (1301 A.D.) found at Chittor and published in the Rajputana Museum Report 1920-21 the name of the ruling prince is given as Rāval Samar Sinha. Thus Ratan Singh, his son, seems to have ascended the throne some time after 1301 and just before 'Alāuddīn attacked the kingdom in the early months of 1303 A.D. ⁶ *Deval Rani* pp. 66-67. ⁷ Barani the chief authority of the period only drops a line about the surrender of Chittor. He says (p. 299)

c9.s1.7

At the time of 'Alāuddīn's invasion Rānā Ratan Singh, son of Rānā Samar Singh and grandson of the valiant Jaitra Singh, was the ruler. He had ascended the throne in C. 1301 A.D.⁵ According to Amīr Khusrau the Rana of Chittor was the most exalted of all the Hindu rulers, and all the kings of Hindustan acknowledged his superiority.⁶ Describing the awful grandeur of the fortress the poet says that the citadel, which was cut out of a huge rock, was wonderful, and despite the onslaughts of the *minjniq*, it was not affected in the least. The brave Rajputs, under their gallant leader Ratan Singh offered a heroic resistence for full eight months, but then they gave way. No trustworthy account, contemporary or even later, of the various siege operations, tough battles and stratagems that would surely have occured during these eight months, is available to us.⁷ The fact that the siege was a prolonged one emphatically proves that the garrison were bent upon defending their fortress to the last man. It is not known if the neighbouring princes came to the rescue of Ratan; but considering the constant rivalries and callous indifference of the kingdoms of Rajputana towards one another, it can easily be

c9.s1.8

سلطان علاالدين از شهر باز لشكر كشيد و در چيتور رفت
چيتور را محصر كرد و زودتر آن حصار را بگشاد و از انجا
باز در شهر آمد —

c9.s1.9

Most of the contemporary and even later historians say very little about it. 'Isāmī and Yahya say something like Barani and do not give any details.

c9.s1.10

surmised that the newly crowned king of Chittor had to fight single handed. An inscription dated Sam. 1517 (1460 A.D.) and preserved in the Udaipur Museum, however, mentions Mahārānā Lakshmī of Sesodia, one of the vassals of Chittor, to have died with his seven sons fighting the Musalmans (under ‘Alāūddīn).⁸ This alone shows that the battle before Chittor was terrible, a fact corroborated by Muslim historians.

c9.s1.11

⁸ *Arch. Sur. Rep.* 1925-26, p. 149.

c9.s1.12

Before the final surrender of the citadel the Rajput ladies of the fortress lighted the fire of Jauhar in a subterranean cavern which still exists, and perished into the devouring flames to save themselves from enslavement or dishonour. Col. Tod gives a picturesque description of the heart rending scene in which a procession of chivalrous Rajput women, headed by the fair Padmini, queen of Ratan Singh, threw themselves into the fire of Jauhar. “The fair Padmini closed the throng,” writes the author of the Annals, “which was augmented by whatever of female beauty or youth could be tainted by Tatar lust. They were conveyed to the cavern and the opening closed upon them, leaving them to find security from dishonour in the devouring element.”⁹

c9.s1.13

⁹ *Annals*, vol. I, p. 311.

c9.s1.14

The frightful rite of Janhar having been performed the Rajput warriors fought the Muslim invaders desperately. For long all attempts of the invaders to climb the fort by constructing a *pashib* met with a failure. But then Chittor capitulated after an open engagement on Monday the 11th of Muharram 703 (August 26th, 1303).¹⁰ The heroic resistance of the Rajputs had exasperated the sultan who (just as Akbar did two and a half centuries later) ordered a general massacre of the population. In a single day, says Amir Khusrau, some thirty thousand Hindus were "cut down like dry grass."¹¹ After this inhuman massacre the callous sultan "remained in Chittor for some days" and "committed every act of barbarity and dilapidation which a bigotted zeal could suggest, overthrowing the temples and other monuments of art."¹² Chittor was rechristened Khizrabad after the name of the king's eldest son Khizr Khan to whom the citadel was assigned. A red canopy, usually bestowed upon heir-apparents, a robe embroidered with gold and two standards one black and the other green were given to the prince. Thereafter 'Alāuddīn quickly returned to capital probably because he had an inkling of a Mughal invasion.

c9.s1.15

¹⁰ *Khazāin*, Habib Trs. p. 48.

c9.s1.16

¹¹ *Ibid.* p. 49.

c9.s1.17

¹² *Annals* vol. I, p. 311.

c9.s1.18

There is some discrepancy in the accounts of historians about the fate of Ratan Singh. Amir Khusrau says that life of the Rānā was spared by the sultan, and is corroborated by 'Isāmī.¹³ But this does not seem probable. When 'Alāuddīn could order a wholesale slaughter of 30,000 Hindus in a single day he would surely not have spared the life of the Hindu King, were he one of the survivors after the heroic defence. According to Nainsi Ratan Singh died fighting sultan 'Alāuddīn.¹⁴ Tod also writes that the ruling prince (whose name he incorrectly puts as Bhimsi) was killed on the field of battle.¹⁵ It is doubtful that the Rānā outlived the capitulation of Chittor as nothing is known about his later life.

c9.s1.19

¹³ *Futūh* p. 272. gives the name of the Rai of Chittor as Sonarsia (Samar Singh). Probably 'Isāmī did not even know of the unfortunate Ratan who had only ascended to be de-throned by 'Alāuddīn.

c9.s1.20

¹⁴ Khayāt (Hindi) vol. I, p. 21.

c9.s1.21

¹⁵ Tod *Annals*, vol. I, pp. 311-312.

c9.s1.22

*The Legend of Rani Padmini*

c9.s1.23

These are in a nut-shell the facts about the invasion of Chittor by 'Alāuddīn Khaljī. But a very interesting legend has grown in this connection. Malik Muhammad Jaisi, a poet of the sixteenth century wrote an epic "Padmavat" in the year 1540 A.D. in which he attributes the invasion of Chittor to Sultan 'Alāūddīn's desire to obtain possession of Padmini, the beautiful queen of the Raja of Chittor. According to Jāisi, Padmini or Padmavati was a princess of Cylon and Ratan Singh, king of Chittor, having learnt about her beauty from a parrot went to Ceylon in a mendicant's garb to woo her. As he was passionately in love with her he stayed there for twelve long years. At last Ratan Singh succeeded in winning his love and taking her with him came back to Chittor. A mendicant Raghava by name once had a glimpse of Padmini while she was giving him alms and he swooned at the sight of so superb a beauty. Raghava carried the tale of the extraordinary charms of the queen of Mewar to the sultan of Delhi, and 'Alāūddīn enchanted by the description of Padmini sent a message to Ratan Singh asking him to send Padmini to the royal *haram*. Ratan Singh was greatly incenced at the behaviour of the sultan of Delhi, who in turn laid siege to the fortress of Chittor. But 'Alāūddīn could not take the fort even after fighting for full eight years. Finding that the fortress was impregnable and the Rana unbending 'Alāūddīn reduced the demand and promised to return to Delhi if he could only have a look at the reflection of the fair Padmini in a mirror.¹⁶ He then returned from the fort and Ratan Singh as an act of courtesy accompanied the sultan up to the gates of the citadel, although his two brave commanders Gora and Badal had warned him about the Turk's vile intentions. As Ratan Singh was leaving the sultan at the gate he was treacherously imprisoned and forcibly carried away to Delhi. The people of Chittor were all aghast at the shameless treachery of the sultan. Soon after a royal order reached them saying that Ratan Singh could be released only on the condition that Padmini was sent to the royal *haram*. The Rani who heard about the tortures Ratan Singh was being subjected to at Delhi at once conferred with Gora and Badal and decided to go to Delhi. In 1,600 covered litters were accommodated Padmini and some of the bravest Rajput warriors, all armed to the teeth, and it was given out that Padmini and her companions and maids were going to the royal palace. When this party arrived at Delhi, Padmini asked for a favour from the sultan and it was to have a last interview with her lord Ratan, from whom she was to part for ever. ‘Alāuddīn, overjoyed at his success, readily granted the interview. The palanquins bearing the brave Rajputs entered the place where Ratan Singh was imprisoned. No time was lost in rescuing him and he and the queen took the road to Chittor. On their flight they were escorted by the brave Rajput warriors under Badal, while Gora gallantly opposed the royal forces which the bewildered sultan had sent to intercept the fugitives. In the battle between the royalists and the Rajputs Gora was killed. The engagement gave ample time to Rana Ratan Singh to reach Chittor safely where great rejoicings were held on his arrival. There he heard about the treachery of Devapala of Bhelnar (Kumbhalgarh), who had tried to seduce Padmini from Chittor in his absence. Ratan Singh invaded the kingdom and killed Devapala but he himself was also wounded in the engagement. Shortly after his return to Chittor Ratan died of the wounds he had received while fighting Devapala, and Padmini and another queen Nāgmati performed the rites of Sati. In the meantime the sultan again arrived in Chittor and the standard of Islam was hoisted on the soil.

c9.s1.24

¹⁶ This is unbelievable. Ratan who successfully fought the Muslims for eight years could never have consented to satisfy such a humiliating and absurd request of 'Alāūddīn.

c9.s1.25

This story of Malik Muhammad Jaisi in which romance, adventure and tragedy are all beautifully intermixed, very soon gripped the popular mind and here, there and everywhere the story of Padmini was told and retold. The Persian chroniclers who did not very much care to distinguish between fiction and fact readily accepted it as true history so that after the time of Malik Muhammad Jaisi the Padmini episode is mentioned as a historical fact in many historical works including those of Ferishtah and Hajiuddabir.

c9.s1.26

Ferishtah writes the account of Chittor at two places. At one place he says that sultan ‘Alāuddīn, after a siege of six months conquered the fort of Chittor, and handed it over to Khizr Khan, whom he declard as heir-apparent. He does not even mention the name of the prince then ruling at Chittor. At another place, while describing the events of the year 704 H. (1304 A.D.) he writes that Raja Ratan Singh, who had been in imprisonment since the invasion of Chittor, effected his escape in a strange manner. Among the women (Zanān) of Ratan was one Padmini, whose beauty and skill had tempted the sultan to crave for her possession. He told the Rana that if he wished to be released he should deliver Padmini to the sultan. Ratan Singh agreed to the proposal and sent for Padmini but his relations disapproved of the dishonourable proposal and thought of poisoning Padmini to save her and her race from infamy. But a daughter of Ratan Singh who was known for her intelligence and dexterity struck at such a plan that she rescued her father from the sultan’s imprisonment without his stooping to adopt any dishonourable course. Ferishtah then almost reproduces Jaisi’s story of the brave Rajputs going in palanquins and effecting the escape of the Rana. Later on he says that from the day Ratan Singh was safely back in Chittor he began to raid his country occupied by the Musalmans. At last the sultan thought it useless to retain possession of Chittor and ordered Khizr Khan to evacuate it. It was then given over to the nephew (sister's son) of the Rana.¹⁷

c9.s1.27

¹⁷ Ferishtah pp. 111, 115.

c9.s1.28

Another important historian who writes about Padmini is Hajīuddabīr.¹⁸ He was a contemporary of Ferishtah. His narrative of Padmini episode is varied and he gives more than one version of the story. He says that after the conquest of Chittor its Hindu Raja was kept under imprisonment in a hilly retreat of Chittor itself and 'Alāuddīn sent him a message from Delhi guaranteeing him liberty if he delivered his wife, who was possessed of certain qualities,¹⁹ to the sultan. Such women, says Hajīuddabīr, are called Padmini in Hindustan. Another version, writes the Arabic historian, is that 'Alā-ūddīn had demanded the surrenedr of Padmini before leaving Chittor and had promised the Rana's²⁰ release in return. Thus says he, it is possible that while the sultan was returning to Delhi the Raja may have accompanied him. He may have requested the Sultan to let him stay in the Mewar country so that he might induce his wife to go to his *haram* and entrust her to the care of whomsoever the sultan ordered, and then himself come to Delhi under protection of the sultan's guards. 'Alāūddīn in the temptation of the woman left him there and himself went to Delhi. The Raja sent secret instructions to his trusted nobles and servants and they, 2,500 in number, arrived in palanquins, fought, and rescued him. Having heard of this 'Alāūddīn bestowed Chittor upon a niece (sister's daughter) of the Rana who was married to the sultan; but she was soon killed by the Raja's minister, whereupon the Hindu Raja come back to his country and established his power there. This state of affairs continued till 941.

c9.s1.29

¹⁸ *Zafarul Vālī* pp. 786-88.

c9.s1.30

¹⁹ Haji does not here use Padmini as a proper name but as a title of a woman possessed of certain special qualities (قباضه).

c9.s1.31

²⁰ He does not mention the name of Ratan Singh.

c9.s1.32

A.H. when Bahādur bin Muẓaffar of Gujarat conquered Chittor.²¹

c9.s1.33

²¹ *Zafarul Vāli* p. 788.

c9.s1.34

Relying on the local traditions of the Rajputs and their bardic literature (of the eighteenth century), Col. Tod repeats the story of Padmini in glowing words.

c9.s1.35

It is necessary to make a close study of the various narratives of Padmini to find out the truth about the story. Various absurdities and inaccuracies in the epic of Jaisi clearly show that it is not a historical fact. Firstly, it was not possible for Ratan Singh, who had reigned only for one year when 'Alāuddīn's invasion of Chittor occured, to go to Ceylon and stay there for twelve years in quest of Padmini. Then the king in Ceylon contemporary to Ratan Singh was Prakaramabahū IV and neither Govardhan of Jaisi nor Hamir Sank of Col. Tod.²² Again Jaisi's epic mentions that war between 'Alāuddīn and Ratan Singh continued to wage for eight years. This statement lacks corroboration in any writing contemporary or later. Jaisi, moreover, gives Padmini as the cause of the invasion of Chittor but Ferishtah and Hajiddabīr, who adopt the story, do not give the acquisition of Padmini as an incentive or pretext for the invasion.

c9.s1.36

²² Ojha: *Rajputana Ka Itihās* Vol. II. p. 461. Ind. Ant. 1930 p. 236.

c9.s1.37

The narrative of Ferishtah, who wrote seventy years after Malik Muḥammad Jaisi is also full of discrepancies. In the description of the capitulation of Chittor he does not even mention the name of the ruler of Chittor, obviously because he depended on the contemporary authority of Amīr Khusrau, who also misses to mention the name. Later on Ferishtah talks of the escape of Ratan Singh by a stratagem, but he was not certain whether Padmini was a daughter or a wife of Ratan Singh.²² His description of later events in Chittor is also not trustworthy for sultan ‘Alāūddīn was not the man to tolerate an escaped prisoner ravaging his son's territories, much less ordering Khizr Khān to evacuate Chittor. Ferishtah describes the evacuation of Chittor by Khizr in his narrative of the events of the year 704 H. (1304 A.D.) and says that it was bestowed by the Sultan on a nephew (sister's son) of Ratan Singh. This date for the evacuation of Chittor is incorrect as other evidence shows that Khizr left Chittor long after the year 1304. Moreover could Ratan Singh bear his nephew occupy the throne of Mewar when he himself had come back to his country successful and alive?

c9.s1.38

²² At one place Ferishtah (p. 115) writes

c9.s1.39

The next writer Hajīaddabīr's account of Padmini is very confusing. The historian himself was in doubt about what he was writing. He never mentions the name of Ratan Singh and refers to Padmini as a woman possessed of certain qualities and not as a particular person. Then he attributes the stratagem of release to the scheming mind of the Rai and not to Padmini's intelligence. Again, according to him the Rai was not kept imprisoned at Delhi and the historian is not sure whether the demand for Padmini was made before the capitulation of Chittor or after Ratan Singh had become a prisoner in the hands of the sultan. The most surprising fact

c9.s1.40

”بسمع بادشاه رسانیدند که درمیان زنان راجه چیتور
زنی ست پدمنی نام“

c9.s1.41

Which obviously though not literally means that she was one of the wives of Ratan Singh. At many places after this he writes the word *zan* but later on writes that a daughter of the Rai (whose name he does not give)

c9.s1.42

”دختر رائے کہ بفہم و عقل مشهور خویش و قبیله خود بود“

c9.s1.43

thought of the strange plan of the escape of Ratan, went to Delhi, and rescued her father.

c9.s1.44

و عبی دولـت تدبیر دختر خوب سیرت از چنگ عقوبت
بادشاه نجات یافتہ

c9.s1.45

about Hājīuddabīr's narrative is that he does not mention the name of Khizr Khan, who according to contemporary writers, was appointed to the charge of Chittor after its capitulation.

c9.s1.46

Thus the stories of Ferishtah, Hājīuddabīr and other later Persian historians and the bards of Rajputana, except in certain minor variations, closely resemble one another and seem to have been drawn upon the Padmāvat of Jaisī.²⁴ So that while Jaisī had 16,000, Ferishtah has 700 and Hājīuddabīr only 500 litters that went to Delhi. Malik Muhammad Jaisī and Ferishtah say that the Rana was imprisoned at Delhi while Hājīuddabīr thinks that he never went to Delhi and was left a prisoner under guard in his own kingdom so as to induce Padmini to go to 'Alāuddīn. According to Jaisī it was the queen Padmini, according to Ferishtah it was a daughter of Ratan, and according to Hājīuddabīr it was the Rana himself who planned the strange stratagem for his escape. Thus except for a few variations the story of Padmini in all the bardic and historical books resembles in broad details that of Jaisī's Padmāvat. But it is doubtful whether even Jaisī ever meant to write about the life story of a princess of Chittor, while writing the Padmāvat. At the end of his book Malik Muhammad writes, "In this narrative Chittor stands for the body, the Rājā (Ratan Singh) for the mind, Singhal-dvīp (Ceylon) for the heart, Padmini for wisdom. . ., and sultan 'Alāuddīn for lust (Māyā)."²⁵

c9.s1.47

²⁴ Most of the historians later than Ferishtah mention Padmini episode in their histories. *Bahrulamvāj* (Bankipore Library Ms.), a general History of India written in the 18th cent. also mentions it.

c9.s1.48

²⁵ तन चितउर, मन राजा कीन्हा। हिय सिंघल, बुधि पदमिनि चीन्हा। *Jaisi Granthāvali*, *Padmāvat* p. 341.

c9.s1.49

नागमती यह दुनिया-धंधा। बांचा सोइ न एहि चित बंधा॥
राघव दूत सोई सैतानू। माया अलाउदीं सुलतानू॥
प्रेम कथा एहि भांति विचारहु। बूझ लेहु जो बूझे पारहु॥

c9.s1.50

From this remark of Jaisi it becomes clear that he was writing an allegory and not narrating a true historical event. May be that the selection of this particular theme may have been inspired by the tragic Jauhar of Chittor in Jaisi's own times when Bahadur Shah of Gujarat invaded Chittor in the year 1534. But once Jaisi had written the romantic story the Muhammadan historians of India, who not unfrequently copied verbatim from the Persion histories also, adopted this story in extenso. The Padmavat was completed 224 years after the death of ‘Alāuddīn and 237 years after the eventful siege of Chittor, and not a single historian or chronicler, Persian or Rajasthani, ever wrote about Padmini before the Padmavat of Jaisi was completed.

c9.s1.51

But one fact causes some hesitation in rejecting the story altogether. "The Mewar tradition which accepts the story is a very old one, handed down from generation to generation," and if Padmini episode was a mere "literary concoction" why did it gain so wide a currency in Rajputana?²⁸ The answer to this, however, is not far to seek. Tradition is not a very authentic source of history and it is not easy to say how old the Mewar tradition is, and whether it is really older than the Padmavat of Jaisi. The bardic chronicles were written long after the completion of the Padmavat and even Ferishtah's Tarikh, and it cannot be said with certainty whether the bards based their accounts of Padmini on oral tradition, or on the Padmavat itself. It is quite probable that Jaisi may have struck at the plot of Padmavat from the "terrible battle" of Chittor as Dickens struck at the plot of "A Tale of Two Cities" from the extra-ordinary times of the Franch Revolution. As to the wide currency it gained in Rajputana it may be said that once such stories are in the air they are repeated everywhere with added incidents and suggestions. The romantic story of Padmini got so much currency in India that not only Ferishtah and Hājīuddabīr but even the great scandal collector Manucci relates its incidents in connection with Akbar's invasion of Chittor, and says that Padminī was the queen of Raja Jaimal who was rescued from royal imprisonment through the stratagem of litters.²⁷

c9.s1.52

²⁸ Dr. Ishwari Prasad, *History of Medieval India* p. 226.

c9.s1.53

²⁷ Manucci: *Storia Do Mogor* Vol. I pp. 125-30.

c9.s1.54

Against these confused and varied accounts is the testimony of the contemporary historians, poets and travellers, Barani, 'Iṣāmī, Amīr Khusrau, Ibn Baṭṭūṭah, and the authors of *Tarikh-i-Muhammadi* and *Tarikh-i-Mubarak Shahi*, who never allude to the Padmini affair at all. All these historians and chroniclers cannot be accused of deliberately entering into a conspiracy of silence on the Chittor episode. Amīr Khusrau who accompanied the sultan to Chittor has very fearlessly and even exaggeratingly given the details relating to the siege. How can it be said that such an incident as that of Padmini, if it really happened, escaped mention from his pen? The story of Padmini is to be found in Jaisi's Padmavat, in traditional lore, and in those chronicles the accounts of which have borrowed it from the Padmavat and the traditions. Tradition is no doubt a source of history but it is surely the weakest one, and until it is corroborated by contemporary evidence—literary, historical, epigraphical and numismatical—it cannot be accepted as true history. In the case of Padmini the antiquity of the tradition which furnishes the story is not known, while the story itself is a long one. But it cannot be accepted simply because it was so popular and for so long a time. To say that where so much is alleged something must be true is not the historian's job.

c9.s1.55

Setting aside the traditional narratives of the story the true facts are that Sultan 'Alāuddīn invaded Chittor in the year 1303 and after a hard fight of about eight months captured it. The brave Rajput warriors died fighting the invaders;

c9.s1.56

the brave Rajput women perished in the flames of Jauhar. Among those who perished was perhaps a queen of Ratan Singh whose name was Padmini. Except these bare facts all else is a literary concoction and lacks historical support.

c9.s1.57

*Later History of Chittor.*

c9.s1.58

Khiẓr Khān ruled over Chittor for some years, but not in peace. The valiant Rajputs could hardly bear a foreigner ruling in their land and constantly harassed the royal troops garrisoned at Chittor. At times they grew so daring as to throw the Musalmans down the battlements of the fortress, and it became impossible for the prince and his deputies to stay there. According to Ferishtah the sultan thought it useless to retain Chittor and ordered Khiẓr Khān to evacuate it.²⁸ But it can well be imagined that the sultan would not have given up the fortress in such an easy way. In fact, the gallant Rajputs who put an edge on the tooth of a mighty emperor like Akbar two and a half centuries later, rendered impossible the stay of Khiẓr Khān in Chittor and 'Alāuddīn ordered Khiẓr Khān to vacate it. Chittor was handed over to Maldeva, brother of Kānhar Deva Chouhān, the Songara chief of Jalor. Maldeva had saved 'Alāuddīn from a fatal accident during the siege of Jalor and as a token of gratitude the sultan bestowed upon him the governorship of Chittor²⁹ some time between the years 1313 and 1315³⁰. Maldeva remained all his life a tributary to the sultan and sent him presents, and always joined the imperial standard in the field with 5,000 horse and 10,000 foot.³¹

c9.s1.59

²⁸ *Ferishtah* p. 115.

c9.s1.60

²⁹ Nainsi *Kheyāts* Vol. I p. 153.

c9.s1.61

³⁰ There is some discrepancy in Ferishtah's statements about the time of Khiẓr Khān's evacuation of Chittor. While describing the events of the year 704 A.H. (1304 A.D.) Ferishtah writes, "At length finding it of no use to retain Chittor the sultan ordered prince Khiẓr Khān to evacuate it and to make it over to the nephew of the Raja." But this date

c9.s1.62

³¹ Ferishtah p. 115.

c9.s1.63

The Rajputs, however, were never willing to submit to a puppet of the sultan and created difficulties in the way of Maldeva. Maldeva's greatest enemy was Hammīr, Rānā of Sesoda, whose grandfather Lakshman Singh had died with his seven sons including Arsi Singh, father of Hammīr, fighting in the battle of Chittor. After Ajai Singh, the only uncle of Hammīr who had survived the memorable battle, Hammīr became the Rana of Sesoda estate and constantly waged war to obtain Chittor. Maldeva tried to conciliate him. He married his daughter to Hammīr and ceded certain parts of Chittor to him, but the brave Rānā was determined to regain the whole of Chittor. At last his efforts were crowned with success and after the death of Maldeva in about 1321 A.D. Hammīr became master of the whole of Mewar, and assumed the title of Mahārānā. In an inscription of Mahārānā Kumbhā's time, dated 1438 A.D.; Hammīr is said to have killed a large number of Musalmans and earned renown.³² Hammīr's descendants have ruled Mewar to the present day.

c9.s1.64

³² *J.B.B.A.S.* Vol. XXXIII, p. 50.

c9.s1.65

is wrong. An inscription dated the 10th of Zilhijjah 709 (13th of May 1310) in Chittor mentions 'Alāuddīn as the ruler. It reads:—

c9.s1.66

شهر یار جہاں محمد شاه — آفتاب زماں و ظل الله
بوالمظفر سکندر ثانی — شد مسلم برو جہانبانی
محشر ذوالحجه موسم قربان — سال بد هفتصد و نه از هجران
تا بود کعبه قبله عالم — باد ملک شاه بنی آدم

c9.s1.67

Thus it is certain that Chittor was not evacuated by the imperialists till the year 1310. Ferishtah himself describing the events of the year 1311-12 says that "the Rajputs at Chittor threw the Muhammedan officers over the walls and asserted their independence", which clearly means that until that year the imperial garrison was present in Chittor and it had not been handed over to Maldeva till then.

Cites (4)