Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

History of Kanauj to the Moslem Conquest c17.s6: Rājyapāla

History of Kanauj to the Moslem Conquest c17.s6

Language
English

Contents

Rājyapāla

c17.s6.1.1

When Rājyapāla came to the throne, he was in no position to make any attempt to retrieve the fallen fortunes of his family, for not only were the frontiers of his attenuated kingdom hemmed in on all sides by powerful principalities, but the political situation had become further complicated by the aggressions of the Moslems of Ghazni, who now directed all their “thoughts to the conquest of the infidels.” We must, therefore, turn to trace the course of their progress eastward in order to understand the circumstances of the ultimate overthrow of the Pratihāra power in Kanauj. The rumblings of the coming storm were naturally first heard in the north-west, when Jayapāla, the ruler of Udabhāṇḍapur, driven to desperation by the gradual diminution of his ancestral kingdom, determined to retaliate and check the further advance of the Moslems by organising a counter-invasion of their territory. But the effete Hindu soldiers were no match for the hardy hosts of Sultan Sabuktigin, and Jayapāla was soon compelled to retreat after concluding a humiliating agreement.¹ In the safety of his capital, however, he repudiated the terms of the compact and imprisoned the Amir’s officers, which provoked the latter to such an extent that he at once marched like a “foaming torrent” to punish Jayapāla for his treachery.

c17.s6.1.2

The latter, despairing of success, invited the prominent Hindu states to help him in resisting the alien invader, to which the “neighbouring kings, particularly those of Delhi, Ajmer, Kālañjara, and Kanauj” readily responded with men and money². Jayapāla advanced to meet his adversary on the confines of Lamghan,³ but the ponderous forces consisting of 100,000 cavalry, “many elephants” (Nizamuddin), and “an innumerable host of foot” (Firishta), at his command soon gave way before the masterly manœuvres of Sabuktigin’s army with the result that the conqueror obtained immense booty, besides 200 elephants of war, and “the best things in Jayapāla’s most distant provinces.” The king of Kanauj whose contingent shared in this defeat was probably Rājyapāla, although we have no evidence that he himself took any active part in the battle. The next attack was made by Sultan Mahmud, the son and successor of Sabuktigin, in the year 392 Hijri or 1001 A. D. Here again the issues were decidedly against Jayapāla, who, being unable to bear the ignominy of another defeat, handed over the cares of the kingdom to his son, Ānandapāla, and then immolated himself by fire.¹ But Mahmud’s insatiable thirst for harrying the “idolaters” would not allow Ānandapāla to have a peaceful reign, and in the spring of the year 399 or 1008 A. D. the Sultan again formed plans to punish him for having lent his aid to Da’ud of Multan in his treasonable designs.

c17.s6.1.3

Hearing this, Ānandapāla despatched ambassadors to all parts of Hindustan appealing for assistance from other rulers, who “now considered the expulsion of the Muhammandans from India as a sacred duty.”² The king of Kanauj, who had helped his father on an earlier occasion, promptly answered the call of his campatriot by sending a huge contingent, his example being followed by the Rājās of Ujjain, Gwalior, Kālañjara, Delhi, and Ajmer.³ The confederate army, “the greatest that had yet taken the field”, encamped on the confines of the province of Peshawar, where it remained for forty days without going into action. A wave of sullen enthusiasm seems to have swept over Hindustan; the women “sold their jewels and melted down their golden ornaments to furnish resources for the war”, and even the Khokhars (Gukkurs) and other warlike tribes rose up to defend the gates of India. But nothing availed the Hindus. Their forces were signally routed just when victory seemed in sight, and Mahmud was suffering heavy losses by their furious charges. All of a sudden Ānandapāla’s elephant became unruly from the effects of naphtha balls and fled. This circumstance caused a panic among the Hindus who thought that their commander had deserted them, and the battle ended in a victory for Mahmud amid scenes of awful carnage and confusion.

c17.s6.2

¹ Elliot, *History of India*, II, p. 21; Briggs, Firishta, I, p. 17.

c17.s6.3

² Briggs, Firishta, I, p. 18; see also *Cambridge History of India*, III, pp. 15-16. Mahmud’s contemporary, Al Utbi, however, makes no mention of any such confederacy in the *Ta’rikh-i-Yamini* (Elliot, II, p. 23). The mention of Delhi indeed throws an element of doubt upon Firishta’s late account, for at this period it was a comparatively obscure town. It is significant that Utbi omits Delhi in the campaigns of Mahmud of Ghazni and Alberuni is also silent about it.

c17.s6.4

³ Briggs, I, p. 18. Raverty on the other hand thinks that the battle took place in the Kurram valley (Darrah) or nearby (see *Notes on Afghanistan*, p. 321).

c17.s6.5

¹ According to Firishta, there was a custom among the Hindus that “whatever Rājā was twice overpowered by strangers, became disqualified to reign” (Briggs, I, p. 38). See also Elliot, II, p. 27, for a slightly different explanation given by Utbi.

c17.s6.6

² Briggs, Firishta, I, p. 46.

c17.s6.7

³ Ibid. There is no mention of this second confederacy also either in Utbi’s *Ta’rīkh-i-Yamīnī*, or in Ibn Asir’s *Kamil-ut-Tawārīkh*.

c17.s6.8

This was the last united effort of the states of Northern India to check the progress of the Moslems, and henceforth each one of them had to bear singly the brunt of Mahmud's ever-recurring aggressions. The turn of Kanauj came after several years, but unfortunately we have no information as to what happened there during the interval. On the 13th Junaidi of 409 *Hijri* = 27th September, 1018 A. D., the Sultan at last "bade farewell to sleep and ease", and departed along with his valiant warriors (11,000 regulars and 20,000 volunteers) for Kanauj, over which the shadow of the imperial power still hovered. Crossing the Jun or Jumnā on the 20th day of *Rajab*, 409 *Hijri*, or 2nd December, 1018, he arrived at the citadel of Barba (Baran) identified with Bulandshahr;¹ the local Rājā, Haradatta, became terror-stricken and purchased his life and kingdom by conversion to Islam with 10,000 of his followers. The next chief against whom Mahmud directed his attention on his way, was Kulacandar (Kulacandra) of Mahāban (Muttra district), "one of the leaders of the accursed satans, who employed his whole life in infidelity, and was confident in the strength of his own dominions."² The battle resulted in a victory for the Moslems, and Kulacandra slew his wife and himself with a dagger instead of submitting to forcible conversion. Then having sacked and desecrated the magnificent temples of Mathura, the cradle-land of Kriṣṇa, Mahmud proceeded towards Kanauj, appearing before its gates on the 8th day of *Shában* or 20th December, 1018,¹ with a "small body of troops, leaving the greater part of his army behind".² He there saw "a city which raised its head to the skies, and which in strength and beauty might boast of being unrivalled".³ He also found that the city held a very strategic position on the right bank of the Ganges, and its fortifications consisted of seven distinct forts. It was reputed, moreover, to contain 10,000 temples of high antiquity. But on hearing of Mahmud's sudden approach Rājyapāla (Utbi has corrupted the name into Rai Jaipāl or Rājā pāl),⁴ who had perhaps already shared in the defeat of the confederate armies on two occasions previously, became panic-stricken and fled across the Ganges to Bari; and the Sultan thus meeting with little or no opposition took all the seven forts in one day. He then gave free license to his soldiers to plunder the city, raze the temples to the ground, and massacre the unfortunate "infidels"; and he eventually returned to Ghazni laden with immense booty.

c17.s6.9

¹ Elliot, II, p. 42, note 3.

c17.s6.10

² *Ibid.*, p. 43.

c17.s6.11

¹ This date has been fixed from Wüstenfeld's "Vergleichungs-Tabellen der Muhammedanischen und Christlichen Zeitrechnung."

c17.s6.12

² The Tabakāt-i-Akbarī of Nizamuddin and the Ta'rīkh-i-Firishta have reversed the order of Mahmud's march against Kanauj. They represent him as proceeding direct to Kanauj, then back to Baran, from there to Mahawan, and lastly to Mathura (see Elliot, II, p. 460; Briggs, I, pp. 57-58). The correct order, however, is given in the Ta'rīkh-i-Yamīnī of Utbi, Rauzat-us-Safā of Mir-Khond, and the Habib-us-Siyar of Khond Mir, which has been adopted in the text (See also Elliot, II, pp. 458-59).

c17.s6.13

³ Briggs, I, p. 57.

c17.s6.14

⁴ Similarly, other authorities have also wrongly given the name. Thus Mīrkhond writes Jaipāl Rai and Khond Mir makes it simply Jaipāl. Nizamuddin calls him Kora, and following him Firishta gives the form Koowur-Ray.

c17.s6.15

This pusillanimous submission of Rājyapāla, however, enraged the native chiefs and soon after the invader's departure Ganda, the Candella chief,⁵ formed a confederacy with the neighbouring princes to punish the cowardly ruler of Kanauj. The command was entrusted to the Candella crown-prince named Vidyādhara¹, and a fierce battle ensued in which, as we are told in the Dubkuṇḍ inscription of the Kacchapaghāta Vikramasiṃha, Arjuna “being anxious to serve the illustrious Vidyādharadeva”, slew Rājyapāla “with many showers of arrows that pierced his neckbone”². The same event is probably referred to in the Mahoba inscription, which represents Vidyādhara as having “caused the destruction of the king of Kanyākubja”.³ In the *Kamil-ut-Tawārīkh* Ibn-ul-Asir also deposes that Bīdā⁴ the accursed, who was the greatest of the rulers of India in territory and had the largest armies, and whose kingdom was called Kajurāha, sent messengers to the Ray of Kanauj named Rājyapāl rebuking him for his flight and the surrender of his dominions to the Musulmans. Hostilities then broke out between them with the result that Rājyapāl was killed in the fight and most of his soldiers also perished”.⁵ When Mahmud received

c17.s6.16

⁵ Elliot, II, p. 463 and note 1; Briggs, I, p. 63. The Persian

c17.s6.17

¹ That Vidyādhara was at this time a crown-prince, seems evident from the fact of Ganda being alive when Mahmud undertook the punitive expedition after the murder of Rājyapāla (Elliot, II, p. 464; see also *J. R. A. S.*, 1909, p. 280 note).

c17.s6.18

² *Ep. Ind.*, II, pp. 233, 237, line 12. Cf. “Śrī-Vidyādharadeva kārya-nirataḥ Śrī-Rājyapālaṃ haṭhāt, Kaṇṭhāsthi-cchidaneka bāṇanivahairhatvā mahatyāhave.”

c17.s6.19

³ *Ibid.*, I, pp. 219, 222, verse 22. Cf. “... vihita-Kanyākubja-bhūpālabhaṅgam.”

c17.s6.20

⁴ This is obviously a corrupted form of Vidyā (or Vidyādhara).

c17.s6.21

⁵ *Kamil-ut-Tawārīkh*, ed. Bulak (1874) Vol. IX, p. 115 f. Ibn-ul-Asir is here wrong in representing Bīdā as king, for we know from other Moslem writers that Nanda or Ganda was alive during this expedition of Mahmud. Dr. H. C. Ray, to whom I owe this reference, on the other hand makes the novel suggestion that

c17.s6.22

texts call him Nanda, which appears to be a mistake, due to the omission of a stroke, for the form Ganda found in inscriptions (see e. g., *Ep. Ind.*, I, p. 295, etc.).

c17.s6.23

advices that a Rājā named Nanda (Ganda) had slain the “Rai of Kanauj” for “placing himself in subjection to him he was furious and forthwith determined to chastise the miscreant Hindu rulers for their audacity. He accordingly marched from Ghazni in the autumn of 410 Hijri i.e., October, 1019 A. D.,¹ and first advanced against Tarū Jaibāl or Tarū Jaypāl (Trilocanapāla), the son of the dead king,² who had ascended the throne probably as a protégé of Ganda. Unlike his father, Trilocanapāla tried to offer resistance,³ but a surprise attack by a selected body of the Sultan’s troops, who had crossed the river Rahib or Rāmgangā⁴ unnoticed, threw his army into utter confusion; and Bari, which had become a sort of capital after Rājyapāla’s retirement thither,⁵ fell an easy prey to the cruel sword of the invader. This city lay to the east of the Ganges at a distance of three to four days’ journey from Kanauj,⁶

c17.s6.24

¹ Ibn Asir, however, wrongly gives the date as 409 Hijri.

c17.s6.25

² Other variant readings for this name are Pur Jaipal, or Parū, Narū, or Barū Jaypāl. Some scholars doubt if all the forms refer to the same person. There are no doubt certain difficulties in accepting this, but we must not forget to make allowance for the author’s as well as the copyists’ errors, and the peculiarities of the Persian or Arabic script (see Dy. Hist. North. Ind., Vol I, pp. 600-08 for a detailed discussion).

c17.s6.26

³ Nizamuddin’s statement that Pur Jaypāl or Tarū Jaibal had often fled before Mahmud’s troops, appears to be substantially correct, because the son must have, as well observed by Smith, shared his father’s flight in the year preceding (see J. R. A. S., 1909, p. 280 note).

c17.s6.27

⁴ According to Utbi the scene of the battle was the Rahib, but Nizamuddin erroneously places it on the Jumnā.

c17.s6.28

⁵ The transfer of the capital to Bari is attested by Nizamuddin and Abu Rihān Alberuni. (See Elliot, I, p. 54; II, p. 464; Sachau, I, p. 199).

c17.s6.29

⁶ Ibid.

c17.s6.30

Nandā is a mistake not for Ganda but for Bidā (Dy. Hist. North. Ind., Vol. I, p. 606).

c17.s6.31

most of which, as testified by Alberuni, was then “in ruins and desolate” owing to the transfer of the capital. Mahmud next dealt with Ganda, who came forward to oppose him with a stupendous force, but just at the psychological moment he also became alarmed at the intrepidity and strength of the Moslem hosts, whereupon under cover of the night he “fled with some of his personal attendants leaving all his baggage and equipments”.¹ Thus the Pratihāra power, which was long tottering to its fall, received the final blow from the ever-victorious arms of Mahmud, and although Trilocanapāla escaped death, history has not condescended to record anything of note about him or his successors, if any.

c17.s6.32

¹ Elliot, II, p. 464.

Linked texts (3)