History of Mediaeval Hindu India (being a History of India from 600 to 1200 A.D.) v3.c33.s2.25

v3.c33.s2.25

We have given this long description from the pen of Utbi both to show his poetical manner of description and the difficulties which consequently arise. Utbi was not an eye-witness of these events and he, a secretary of Mahmud, wrote from information. It is first difficult to understand why this expedition to a distant place was resolved upon. Utbi assigns no reason. Subsequent historians have stated that Bijairai was a subordinate of Jaipal and did not pay his quota of the tribute to be paid to Mahmud. But that was no reason for Mahmud to attack Bijairai. Moreover it does not appear that any tribute was promised to be paid by Jaipal when he was released by Mahmud. Nor was Ānandapāla allowed to depart on condition of payment of tribute. In fact Mahmud had despoiled a large portion of Jaipal's territory and that was sufficient compensation. The cause of this war was, therefore, some thing else than this and Utbi gives no clue. The Bhatia king was perhaps a powerful independent king to the south-west of Multan who laid claim to territory on the western side of the Indus and incited the people there. The Bhattis were originally masters of Zabulistan as we have already seen. The surmise that Jaipal, Ānandapāla and others were not Brahmins but were Bhattis is not correct according to our view. Though the name-ending changed here from deva to pāla in the Brahmin Shahi line, it does not indicate a change of dynasty for deva is as much taken by Kshatriya kings as pāla and the Shahi kings though Brahmins were practically Kshatriyas, marrying Kshatriya princesses and giving daughters to Kshatriya princes. In fine, it does not appear that Mahmud determined to march against Bhatia because the king of the place was an offending relation of Jaipal.