The Dynastic History of Northern India (Early Mediaeval Period) v2.c32.s6.149

v2.c32.s6.149

Kelhaṇa's conflict with the Muslims is further attested by the Sundha hill-inscription which states that the Cāhamāna prince, "after destroying the Turuṣkas, erected a golden *toraṇa*, like a diadem for the abode of the holy Someśa.¹ Apparently then Kelhaṇa may have won some success against the hosts of Mu'izz ud-Dīn when the latter was disastrously defeated by the Caulukya Bhīma II and retreated to his capital amidst considerable difficulties. We may assume that Kelhaṇa recovered his capital after the departure of the Turuṣkas. But it seems that he was not allowed to end his days in peace. Quṭb ud-Dīn Aibak, the general of Mu'izz ud-Dīn after his capture of Ajmer in *c.* 1194 A.D. from the Cāhamāna Harirāja, came into hostile conflict with the Caulukya Bhīma II. In the first battle, which took place in A.H. 591 (A.D. 1195), Quṭb ud-Dīn was severely defeated and driven back into the fort of Ajmer. After receiving reinforcements he again advanced towards the Gujarat frontier from Ajmer in A.H. 593 (A.D. 1197). Ḥasan Nizāmī relates that when "he reached the lofty forts of Pālī and Nandūl, he found them abandoned, and the abode of owls, for the people had fled at the approach of the Musalmāns and had collected under their leaders Rāī Karan and Dārābaras in great numbers at the foot of the Mount Abu and at the mouth of a pass stood ready for fight and slaughter.''² Prof. D. R. Bhandarkar has suggested the identification of these two generals of Bhīma II with the Abu Paramāra Dhārāvarṣa (*c.* 1164-1219 A.D.) and the Naddūla Cāhamāna Kelhaṇa.³ Whether we accept the identification of "Rāī Karan" with Kelhaṇa or not, it is certain that after the victory of Quṭb ud-Dīn the position of the Cāhamānas became increasingly difficult, and before long they were compelled to abandon Nadol and seek a new base for their struggle with the Muslims. For all practical purposes I am disposed to regard Kelhaṇa as the last prince of this line who ruled from Nadol. Bhandarkar has however pointed out an inscription¹ of his son Jayatasīha (Jayantasiṁha) dated in V. S. 1251 (*c.* 1194 A.D.), which is engraved on a pillar in the temple of Jāgeśvara at Sādadī in the Desūrī district of Jodhpur, and which according to him ‘originally belonged to some temple at Nādōl.’ In this inscription the prince is given the epithet *Mahārājādhirāja*. Another inscription discovered in Bhinmal gives to the *Mahārājaputra* Jayatasīha the date V. S. 1239 (*c.* 1182 A.D.).² If we are to accept Bhandarkar's conclusion that Jayatasīha succeeded his father at Nādol sometime before 1194 A.D., we must give up his suggestion that “Rāi Karan” is the same as “Kelhaṇa,” for the former was one of the leaders of the Caulukya forces in 1197 A.D., and is reported by Ḥasan Niẓamī to have escaped from the battle-field after the defeat of his army. The subsequent history of the descendants of Kelhaṇa and Jayantasiṁha is not clear. In V. S. 1283 (*c.* 1226 A.D.) we find the region now known as the Bali district in Godwar under the Cāhama (Cāhamāna) Dhāndhaladeva, son of Vīsadhavala who was a feudatory of the (Caulukya) Bhyivadeva (Bhīma II).³ It is at present uncertain whether these two rulers had any connection with Kelhaṇa and Jayantasiṁha.