The Dynastic History of Northern India (Early Mediaeval Period) v1.c11.187

v1.c11.187

We have seen that the dominating power in Lower Sind, the Sūmras were displaced by the Sammas in the middle of the 14th century. It is possible that they established their power by taking advantage of the confusion which prevailed all over India during the later years of the reign of Muhammad Tughluq. But the history of the Sammas is as obscure as that of the Sūmras. Mīr Ma'ṣūmī, our chief authority on their history, frankly states that he met with no written account of the tribe and had composed his 'summary' entirely from local hearsay. He records the tradition that the tribe was formerly settled in Cutch, whence a portion of it migrated and settled in Sind and formed alliances with the people of the country.¹ Mīr Tāhir tells us that ‘the labouring classes and land-holders of the Sammas’ held the Hindu faith, but their heterodoxy is proved by the fact that they ‘never drank wine without partaking of a young buffalo-calf.’² He also states that the Sammas were oppressed by the Sūmras and compelled to take shelter in Cutch, which they captured from the Chāwaras.³ After the defeat and disposal of the Sūmras by Sultān ‘Alā-ud-Dīn of Delhi, the Sammas again gradually spread over Sind.⁴ ‘Alī Shīr Qānī‘ observes, that the Sammas were the owners of land throughout Sind, as far as Gujarat, including also the greater part of Rajputana, and they formed the majority of the population of Sind. He refers to the following tradition, concerning the origin of the Sammas. “Sām was the son of ‘Umar, son of Hishām, son of Abū Lahib; according to others he was the son of ‘Umar, son of ‘Akerma, son of Abū Jahl. The title of Jām renders it probable that he was descended from Jāmshīd.”⁵ Tod has described the Sammas as a great branch of the Yadu race, who were descended from Sāmba, the son of Kṛṣṇa. The sons of Sāmba, in his opinion, made his name the patronymic in Seistan and the Lower Indus Valley, and opposed Alexander in the 4th century B.C. under their chief Sambos. Commenting on their alleged origin from Jamshīd he says, that the Sammas in Sind, after accepting Islam, were eager to adopt a pedigree which might give them importance in the eyes of their conquerors. “Sām was therefore transformed to Jām, and the Persian king, Jāmshīd, was adopted as the patriarch of the Sammas, in lieu of the legitimate Sāmba.”⁶ That the Sammas were settled in Sind is attested by the *Chach-nāma*, which tells us that they came out with trumpets and shawms to proffer their allegiance to Muhammad Qāsim, when the latter was on the banks of the Lower Indus valley.¹ Elliot considers "Sāmba, the governor of Debal, on the part of Chach" to be a representative of the tribe at an earlier period. 'They were either Buddhists or Hindus and were received into favour' by the early Arab conquerors in consideration of their prompt and early submission.² Whatever may be the real origin of the Sammas, it is clear from the above discussion that they formed one of the indigenous tribes who were settled in the Lower Indus valley, Western Rajputana and Cutch, long before the advent of Islam. The connection of Jām, the title of their rulers with Jāmshīd is certainly fictitious. The title is even now found in Rajput ruling houses in Kathiawar peninsula.³ The State of Navanagar whose Rajput chief bears this title, is not far removed from Cutch, a place closely connected with the Sammas. The Jareja tribe, to which its chief and the Rao of Cutch still belong, is regarded by competent authorities as a branch of the Sammas.⁴ According to Elliot they became 'proselytes to Islam some time after 793 A.H. (1391 A.D.).' But this must have happened some time earlier, for Shams-i-Sirāj, while describing the campaign of Fīrūz Tughluq (764-766 A.H.) against the Jām of Sind refers to "the combatants on both sides as Musalmans."⁵