History of Mediaeval Hindu India (being a History of India from 600 to 1200 A.D.) v3.c34.s7: Note 1—Hanjamana Nagara.
History of Mediaeval Hindu India (being a History of India from 600 to 1200 A.D.) v3.c34.s7
- Language
- English
Note 1—Hanjamana Nagara.
v3.c34.s7.1
The identification of Hanjamana with Sanjan proposed by many has been accepted above. But this is doubted by Dr. Fleet who has republished the Bhandup grant of Chhittarāja in E. I. XII p. 275. Sanjan is the place where the Parsis allege that they came in 766 A. D. from Div in Kathiawar, in their migration from Persia. And they say that the name Sanjan is the name they gave to their settlement. Dr. Fleet thinks that Hanjamana original cannot be changed into Sanjamana and further that Sanjan mentioned by the Arab travellers is Sindan on the coast of Cutch near Cambay and not this Sanjan. These are not unsurmountable difficulties and Dr. Fleet has not suggested any other town as the Hanjamana of the inscriptions. He suggests that it was some administrative head-quarters town of the Śilāhāras beside their capital (p. 59). But this does not fit in with the description Hanjamana Nagara. Nor can Trivarga mean the three higher castes, for donations must be known by all classes. Our interpretation is that there were three classes of foreigners at Sanjan who had their own jurisdiction and who had dealings with the people of the land and who, therefore, were required to know of the grant of inam villages which enjoyed many rights. The name Hanjamana is no doubt a difficulty. It seems to us that Sanjan was a new settlement made by the Parsis near a village which must have existed at the place. The position of Sanjan is very favourable as a safe though small harbour just contiguous to the sea, and at present we are told there are remains of a fort near the harbour and also of a wall round the town of Sanjan. The remains are worth exploring. The Parsis appear to have come during the overlordship of the Chālukyas of Badāmi and in the Konkan there were many feudatories one of whom may be the Jādhava who gave permission to the Parsis to settle near the harbour. The place became probably a place for foreigners to settle and they managed their own affairs and had their own magistrates. The name Sanjan was probably given by the Parsis and the country people of the Konkan pronounced it Hanjamana or Haiyamana which appears to have been used in the inscriptions. Whether Sanjan is the Sindan of the Arab writers or not does not matter at all. It is almost certain that Sanjan is a Persian town name and it was given to their new settlement by the Parsis and not Hanjamana. This was the local pronunciation and it was naturally used in Konkan inscriptions.
v3.c34.s7.2
It is not necessary to look upon Hanjamana as a separate name given to the town as J. J. Mody tries to do. The difficulty no doubt is to explain how m-got into the name Sanjan which was really the name given by the Parsis. Secondly, Trivarga may mean Parsi, Mahomedan and Hindu inhabitants also. The Parsis do not consist of three grades. Lastly, from Al-Beruni's description given with distances Sindan is identifiable with Sanjan and is to be placed north of Sopara immediately and it may be suggested that the word Hanjamana-Nagara may be interpreted to mean the city of i. e. belonging to (not named) Hanjamana or the Anjuman (community) of the Parsis.