Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

History of Kanauj to the Moslem Conquest c19.s3: Final disappearance of the kingdom of Kanauj

History of Kanauj to the Moslem Conquest c19.s3

Language
English

Final disappearance of the kingdom of Kanauj

c19.s3.1

With the defeat and death of Jayacandra in 1194 A. D., the kingdom of Kanauj lay prostrate at the feet of the Moslems. They do not, however, appear to have resorted to immediate annexation or the destruction of the royal family. For a charter found at Machlisahr in the Jaunpur district of the United Provinces records that on the 15th *tithi* of the bright half of the month of Pauṣa in the Vikrama *saṃvat* 1253 or Sunday, the 6th January 1197 A. D., his successor, king Hariścandra, who is therein given the full sovereign titles of *Paramabhaṭṭāraka, Mahārājādhirāja, Parameśvara, Parama-māheśvara-Aśvapati, Gajapati, Narapati, Rajatrayādhipati, Vividha vidyā-vicāra-vācaspati*, after having bathed in the Ganges at the bathing-ghat named Cyavaneśvara, granted the village of Pamahi together with its outlying hamlets to one Rahīhiyaka.¹ The name of Hariścandra as son of Jayacandra is also known from two other copper plates. One of them, found at Kamauli, informs us that he was born on the 8th *tithi* of the dark half of Bhādrapada of the year 1232, equivalent to Sunday, the 10th of August, 1175 A. D., when his father gave the village of Vadesara in the Kangali *pattalā* to the Purohita Praharājaśatman in honour of his "*Jātakarma*" ceremony.² Another, which is now preserved in the Benares Sanskrit College library, records that on the 13th *tithi* of the dark half of the same month and year, corresponding to Sunday, the 31st of August, 1175 A. D., Hariś- canara’s “Nāmakaraṇa” (the ceremony of giving a name) was performed, on which occasion Jayacandra granted two villages to the Mahāpaṇḍita Hṛṣīkeśa-Śarman.¹

c19.s3.2

¹ *Ep. Ind.*, X, pp. 94, 98-99.

c19.s3.3

² *Ibid.*, IV, pp. 126, 127.

c19.s3.4

¹ Ind. Ant., XVIII, pp. 129-34.

c19.s3.5

Thus we learn from the combined testimony of these inscriptions that Hariścandra was nineteen years old, when his father was killed in battle, and that he ruled for at least three years after that event. But what was the nature of his authority? It is unthinkable that this boy-king could have maintained his independence, even within a circumscribed area, when many a war-worn veteran had fallen, and the Moslem army had reduced the kingdom as far east as Benares. It would, therefore, appear reasonable to hold that as “on a promise of punctual payment of a large tribute he (Sihābuddin) had delivered over the country of Ajmer to Gola or Kola, a natural son of Prithvīrāja,”² similarly Hariścandra was allowed to reign in a portion of his ancestral dominions after he had acknowledged himself a tributary of the newly-established Moslem power at Delhi.³ This hypothesis probably finds support from an inscription of Vikrama saṃvat 1253 or 1197 A. D., discovered at Belkhara (ancient Veḷasarā), a few miles to the south-east of Chunargarh (Chunar) in the Mirzapur district of United Provinces, which records the erection of a pillar when Rānaka Vijayakarṇa was the ruler of that region. The chief point to be noted, however, is that it does not mention the name of the king of Kanauj, but simply uses the phrase “Śrīmat Kānyakubja-vijayarā- jye.”¹ This indicates that although Vijayakarṇa had not made himself independent of Kanauj, the Moslem supremacy over the kingdom was perplexing or abhorrent to him, and so he discreetly omitted any specific reference to Hariścandra or his Moslem overlord.

c19.s3.6

² Briggs (Firishta), Vol. I, pp. 177-78; see also Tāj-ul-Maāsir : Elliot, History of India, II, pp. 214, 215, 219.

c19.s3.7

³ It has been stated that Zafarabad, four miles to the south-east of Jaunpur, was the site of a palace of the later rulers of Kanauj (Cunningham, Arch. Surv. Ind. Rep., XI, p. 104; Smith, J. R. A. S., 1908, p. 792; Führer, Sharqi Architecture of Jaunpur, p. 64.

c19.s3.8

¹ *Arch. Surv. Ind. Rep.*, XI, pp. 128-30; see also *J. A. S. B.*, 1911, N. S., pp. 757-70.

c19.s3.9

The royal family was probably spared from extermination owing to the political foresight of Siḥābuddin, who must have thought that concentration of all power in the hands of his Viceroy at Delhi might tempt the latter to hatch the egg of independence; and moreover, the loyalty of these distant conquests would best remain assured under such feudatories as owed their position to the Sultan’s protection and generosity. But the sudden assassination of Siḥābuddin by a fanatic of the Mulhidah sect in 602 *Hijri* or 1205-06 A. D. gave Qutbuddin the opportunity of becoming king of Hindustan, which he was duly proclaimed by the Moslem generals and nobles at Delhi, and was also accepted by the unambitious brother of Siḥābuddin. Henceforth Qutbuddin and his able lieutenant Altamash were free to reduce the whole of Northern India and to place Moslem rule on permanent foundations. We have no evidence as to how and when the last vestiges of Hindu authority in Kanauj were destroyed, but from a coin it is certain that during the reign of Altamash the land-revenue of Kanauj went to the Imperial coffers at Delhi.² Besides, the *Tabaqāt-i-Nāsirī* testifies that in *Hijri* 623 or 1226 A. D. the territory of Oudh was placed in charge of Malik Nāsir-uddin Mahmud, who overcame the “refractory infidels,” and brought a “considerable number under obedience.”³ This shows that by this date the Moslems were absolute masters of the Ganges-Jumna Doab, and their governors were ruling over the different provinces of the kingdom. Thus Kanauj, which had held pre-eminence in northern India for nearly six centuries and had been the centre of many a proud dynasty, ceased to exist as an independent Hindu state and soon sank into insignificance. Well may the hectic career of Kanauj remind one of the following stanza of Bhartrihari, the epitaph of its glories :

c19.s3.10

² *J. A. S. B.*, 1881, Pt. I, p. 66.

c19.s3.11

³ Raverty. Eng. Trans. Vol. I, pp. 628-29.

c19.s3.12

Bhrātaḥ kaṣṭamaho mahān sa nṛpatiḥ sāmanta-cakraṃ ca
Tat-pārśve tasya ca sā api rāja-pariṣattāś candra-bimbānanāḥ,
Udriktaḥ sa ca rājaputra nivahas te vandinas tāḥ kathāḥ,
Sarvaṃ yasya vasādagāt smṛtipadaṃ Kālāya tasmai namaḥ,”¹

c19.s3.13

¹ *Vairāgyaśataka*, v. 36.

c19.s3.14

i.e., “Alas, brother, the mighty king, the train of barons, the witty court at his side, the damsels with faces like the moon’s orb, the haughty troop of princes, the minstrels, the tales-homage to Time, by whose will all this hath passed into mere memories.”

Linked texts (4)