The Dynastic History of Northern India (Early Mediaeval Period) v2.c34.50

v2.c34.50

Before giving an account of all these various branches I would add, by way of introduction, that none of them appear to have held any considerable power till nearly the second half of the 12th or the beginning of the 13th century A.D. We have seen that according to traditional and epigraphic evidence they were feudatories of the Mauryas in the 8th century A.D. In the 9th they must have gradually come into the orbit of the mighty Pratīhāra empire, which extended from Kāthiawar to Northern Bengal. The annals of the bards are silent on this point; but the Chatsu inscription of the Guhila Bālāditya refers to the inevitable fact. One of his ancestors Harṣarāja, we are told, conquered princes in the north and presented horses to Bhoja,² who, as we shall see, must be identified with the first Pratīhāra prince of that name (*c.* 836-82 A.D.). Again, the Partabgarh inscription of the Pratīhāra Mahendrapāla II, shows that in *V.S.* 999 (*c.* 942 A.D.) the Medapāṭa Guhila Bhartṛpaṭṭa II, son of Khommāṇa III, still acknowledged the sovereignty of the Kanauj emperor.³ There is no doubt therefore that from about the middle of the 9th to the middle of the 10th century the Guhilas occupied the position of feudatories of the powerful Pratīhāra empire. From the middle of the 10th to the end of the 12th century most of the region occupied by the Guhilas either directly came into the possession of the three powerful kingdoms, the Caulukyas of Anhilvada, the Paramāras of Mālava and the Cāhamānas of Sākambharī, which sprang up on the ruins of the Kanauj empire, or became the bone of contention between them. Some of the branches, as those of Āsikā¹ and Saurāṣṭra² definitely figure as vassal chiefs of Caulukyas and the Cāhamānas respectively. The early attempts of the Medapāṭa branch to secure a sovereign position were speedily frustrated by the growing strength of these three powers. One of the Medapāṭa chiefs, Ambāprasāda, who probably ruled in the first quarter of the 11th century, lost his life in the hands of the Śākambharī Cāhamāna Vākpatirāja II,³ while the Chirwa inscription of the Guhila Samarasimha (V. S. 1330) shows that the Mālava Paramāra Bhoja (*c.* 1010-55 A.D.) was in possession of the fort of Chitor itself.⁴ The Atru (1127-28 A.D) and the Talwara inscriptions of the Caulukya Jayasiṁha and the Chitorgadh inscriptions (*c.* 1150 A.D.) of his successor indicate that the triangular area between Kotah, Mewar and Banswara was included within the Caulukya dominions during the first half of the 12th century.⁵ It seems very likely that after the second half of the 12th century, when the power of the Caulukyas and the Paramāras had declined, the Guhilas of Medapāṭa found opportunities to establish themselves as sovereigns. But by this time the Turks were in possession of Delhi and Ajmer, and the temples and cities of Mewar were not seldom visited by their plundering bands. Aided by their hills, the Guhilas kept up a desperate resistance against Delhi. Their efforts were not always successful. Often when the throne of Delhi was occupied by an able military leader, as in the reign of ‘Alā ud-Dīn Khaljī (1296-1316 A.D.), their fortunes sank very low. But they recovered their strength during the weak reigns which often followed. The halo of romance and dignity with which tradition has invested the history of the Guhila-putras is due to this struggle often against enormous odds to save Hindu independence from being completely submerged in Northern India by the Turkish and Timurid¹ floods. Their history before the 13th century lacks the dramatic element and seems to contain nothing which could fire the imagination of poets and bards. The bulk of the bardic annals about the Guhila-putras therefore grew up very late, certainly not before the 14th century. This explains their frequent divergence from fact when they deal with the early history of their heroes’ family.