History of Kanauj to the Moslem Conquest c19.s1: Vijayacandra

History of Kanauj to the Moslem Conquest c19.s1

Language: English

Vijayacandra

c19.s1.1

Govindacandra must have ceased to reign shortly after 1154 A. D., which is his last known date.¹ He was succeeded by his son Vijayacandra, also sometimes called Vijayapāla² or Malladeva.³ The *Pṛthvīrāja-Rāso*⁴ credits him with victories against the Somavaṁśī king Mukundadeva of Kaṭak, Anangapāla of Delhi, Bholābhīm of Paṭṭanapura (Aṇhilvāḍ), and with having carried his arms to the regions of Tailanga, Karṇāṭa, and Konkan etc. These bardic accounts may be summarily rejected, for none of the monarchs named can be regarded to have been a contemporary of Vijayacandra. Orissa was perhaps then ruled by the Gaṅgā Rāghava (*circa* 1156-1170 A. D.), and besides sober history does not know of any Somavaṁśī Mukundadeva. Again, as we shall presently see, it was the Cāhamāna Vigraharāja Vīsaladeva, to whom Vijayacandra lost Delhi, and there can therefore be no question of the latter’s fight with Anangapāla. Similarly, if Bholābhīm is identical with Bhīmadeva II Cālukya (*circa* 1179-1240), he came to the throne several years after the time of the Gāhaḍavāla.

c19.s1.2

¹ *Ep. Ind.*, IV, p. 16.

c19.s1.3

² *Pṛthvīrāja-Rāso*, p. 123f, verses 617f. (Shyamsundar Das’ edition).

c19.s1.4

³ *Rambhāmañjarī*, (Bom. ed., 1899), p. 4.

c19.s1.5

⁴ See canto XLV, pp. 1255-58; *J. B. B. R. A. S.*, 1928, p. 166.

c19.s1.6

ruler. How could they then ever have come into conflict with each other? On the other hand, the *Kumārapālacarita-Prakrit-Dvyāśraya-Mahākāvya* of Hemacandra represents Kumārapāla as having devastated Kānyakubja and terrified its sovereign in the course of his glorious career.¹ Now, Kumārapāla is known to have ruled from *circa* 1144 to 1172 A. D., and so if there be any truth in the above statement, which is, of course, doubtful, surely he must have triumphed against Vijayacandra, for it appears rather improbable that Kumārapāla’s earlier Gāhaḍavāla contemporary, Govindacandra—a powerful potentate—could have ever suffered a reverse at his hands. Thus though we cannot rely upon Cand-Bardāi, one thing appears certain that Vijayacandra maintained his authority over a portion of Magadha. This is evident from an inscription of Vikrama *saṃvat* 1225 = 1169 A. D., discovered at Tārācaṇḍi in the vicinity of Sahasram in South Bihar,² in which the local ruler of Japila,³ Pratāpadhavala of the Khayaravala *vaṃśa* according to the Phulawariya (Rohtasgaḍh) inscription,⁴ makes a curious proclamation. He announces that a certain copperplate grant of the villages of Kalahandi and Badapila has been fraudulently procured by several Brahmans, on giving a bribe of goodly staves and ploughs, from one Deu, “a slave of the lord of Kānyakubja, the fortunate king Vijayacandra.” He concludes by exhorting his successors not to place dependence on it, but to continue the collection of the “proprietor’s share of produce and the like” as usual. Thus whatever resentment Pratāpadhavala might have felt,¹ the fact that in the year 1169 A. D. Vijayacandra was in a position to grant villages situated in the former's territory, proves beyond doubt that he was under the suzerainty of Kanauj.

c19.s1.7

¹ Canto VI, v. 79, p. 209, ed: S. P. Pandit (Bombay, 1900).

c19.s1.8

² *Jour. Am. Or. Soc.*, VI, pp. 547-49.

c19.s1.9

³ According to Colebrooke, Japila is a portion of Ramgarh in South Bihar (Ibid., p. 549, Note).

c19.s1.10

⁴ *Ep. Ind.*, IV, p. 311.

c19.s1.11

¹ This was probably because he had retained semi-independence.

c19.s1.12

Like his father, Vijayacandra also stood as a bulwark against the Moslems. It is recorded in a copper plate that he "swept away the affliction of the globe by streams (of water flowing as) from clouds from the eyes of the wives of Hammīra, the abode of wanton destruction to the earth."² Unfortunately we have no information regarding any Moslem incursion in the Doab at this time, but it would appear probable that Vijayacandra came into conflict with the forces of Amir Khusrau or his son Khusrau Malik who were in occupation of Lahore after having been driven out of Ghazni by Ala-ud-Din Ghorī. The defeat of the Moslem marauders was probably due to the waxing strength of the Ghoris, which must have arrested the Amir's attention more towards the west. Khusrau, however, died in 555 Hijri or 1160 A. D. without recovering Ghazni, and during the reign of his son Malik, Sihab-ud-Din Ghorī threatened the Panjab itself and "overran the provinces of Peshawar, Mooltan and the Indus."³

c19.s1.13

² *Ind. Ant.*, XV, pp. 7, 9, verse 9. Cf. "Bhuvana-dalana-helā-harmya-Hammīra-nārī-nayana jaladadhārā-dhauta-bhūlokatāpaḥ."

c19.s1.14

³ Briggs, Frishta, Vol. I, p. 157.

c19.s1.15

Lastly, there are indications that the ambitions of the Cāhamāna king Vigraharāja Visaladeve of Sākambharī brought him into conflict with Vijayacandra. An inscription dated in Vikrama samvat 1220 or A. D. 1164, which is engraved on the Delhi-Siwalik pillar or Firoz-Kotla's Lāt, boastfully records that Vigraharāja "made tributary the land between the Himālaya and Vindhya,”¹ while another found at Bijolia (Mewar) specifically credits him with the conquest of Delhi.² Similarly, the Delhi Museum inscription mentions that Delhi was for some time “the residence of the Cāhamānas until it was conquered by the Mleccha Sahābādīn” (Sihab-ud-Din).³ If, therefore, the Gāhadavāla suzerainty had extended upto Delhi in the time of Candradeva, as we have surmised above, we may be sure that during the course of these expeditions Vijayacandra must have suffered defeat at the hands of Vigraharāja.

Linked texts (6)

Tārīkh-i Firishta — Muḥammad Qāsim Hindū Shāh Firishta 1606, Persian
Epigraphia Indica
Pṛthvīrāj Rāso — Cand Bardāī, Hindi
Indian Antiquary
Kumārapālacarita (Prākṛtadvyāśraya) — Hemacandra, Prakrit
Rambhāmañjarī — Nayacandrasūri, Sanskrit