Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

History of Mediaeval Hindu India (being a History of India from 600 to 1200 A.D.) v3.c35.s16: 1 Kashmir

History of Mediaeval Hindu India (being a History of India from 600 to 1200 A.D.) v3.c35.s16

Language
English

1 Kashmir

v3.c35.s16.1

The kingdom of Kashmir at the beginning of this sub-period came under the Lohara dynasty after the death of the notorious queen Diddā. She was the daughter of a king of Lohara and grand-daughter of Bhīma, Shahi king of Kabul and she died in 1003 A. D. after a long reign both as regent of her sons and grandsons and latterly in her own name. Sangrāmarāja, her brother's son, came to the throne of Kashmir by Diddā's selection after her and his descendants ruled over Kashmir throughout this sub-period. The rulers of this dynasty were all capable men and they were, therefore, able to save the kingdom of Kashmir from being swallowed up in that flood of Mahomedan conquest which submerged first the Panjab under Mahmud and later, Northern India under Shihabuddin Ghori. We have already given the history of this dynasty from the Rājataranginī down to 1148 A. D. wherewith ends the work of Kalhaṇa and we give here the subsequent history from the supplementary work of Jonarāja. We may first recapitulate the former portion given in Vol. I pp. 227-232 with some further remarks.

v3.c35.s16.2

Sangrāmarāja, as usual with founders of dynasties, was a wise and able ruler. He ruled from 1003 to 1029. As we have already shown in this volume, Mahmud made two attempts to take the frontier stronghold of Kashmir but failed.

v3.c35.s16.3

Kashmir was a sealed country and Mahmud could not break the seal. When Sir V. Smith says that Kashmir was protected by its inaccessible mountains, he is right; though it does not appear, as Smith thinks, that Kashmir was defeated. We must, however, vary our statement made in Vol. I p. 228 that Kashmir was not invaded at all in the days of Sangrāma and state that though attempt was twice made to invade Kashmir, it could not be entered. We have already described the defeat of the Hindus in the battle fought by Trilochanapāla, Shahi king, in 1021 A. D. with the aid of Kashmir troops sent by Sangrāma both in this volume and in Vol. I, p. 227. Trilochanapāla fled from place to place and probably his son Bhīma also whose end is recorded in 1027. But his other sons or cousins Rudrapāla and others remained in Kashmir under the protection of Sangrāma who was probably their relative.

v3.c35.s16.4

These Shahi princes gave valuable aid to Anantarāja the son and successor of Sangrāma who ruled from 1029 to 1039 A. D. In his reign a treacherous Kashmir sardar brought into Kashmir an invasion by the Turks assisted by Daradas. By the valour of the Shahi princes and of Anantarāja himself this formidable force was utterly defeated and Kashmir was saved from being subjected to Moslem rule for 300 years. We have already described this battle in Vol. I (p. 228).

v3.c35.s16.5

Anantarāja and his queen Sūryamatī daughter of a Trigarta king were a very religious pair who ruled justly and ably for a long time. In their old age they retired and placed their son Kalaśa on the throne of Kashmir. They were ill-treated by this son and Ananta died in grief and his queen died a sati on his funeral pyre. Kalaśa in other respects was a good ruler. His son Harsha rebelled against him but was defeated and imprisoned. When Kalaśa died in 1073 A. D., he was succeeded by his second son Utkarsha. Harsha was, however, liked by the people. He was the most accomplished prince of his time, learned, fond of music and a patron of learned men. He may be compared to his namesake Harsha of Kanauj or to Bhoja; but unlike both his end was miserable. His second brother Vijayamalla raised a rebellion in his favour against Utkarsha who was defeated and killed in battle in 1089. Harsha being liberated and placed on the throne by Vijayamalla ruled long from 1089 to 1101. In the latter part of his reign Jayamalla by the instigation of unscrupulous courtiers rebelled against Harsha but was unsuccessful. Harsha thereafter relentlessly persecuted his partisans and misrule and oppression so far increased that Uchchala, a collateral cousin, successed in leading a rebellion and defeating Harsha took possession of the capital. Harsha's queens burnt themselves in the palace while he himself took refuge in a Maṭha. His son Bhoja who had been expelled came into Kashmir to relieve him but was killed in a battle with Uchchala. Harsha, finding everything going adverse, rushed upon the soldiers who had surrounded the Maṭha and was killed. Thus ended the first branch of this Lohara dynasty which ruled Kashmir ably for about a hundred years (1003 to 1101). Uchchala ruled till 1111 and his brother Sussala ruled after him till 1128. Sussala's son Jayasinha was ruling in 1148 A. D. when Kalhaṇa finished his Rājataraṅgiṇī. These rulers were also able and good rulers, though various intrigues described by Kalhaṇa went on as usual.

v3.c35.s16.6

The Lohara dynasty was a Rajput dynasty and thus in the 11th and 12th centuries, as elsewhere in India, there were Rajput kings in Kashmir also. The preceding dynasty of Parvagupta was a Vaiśya one while that which preceded it viz. that of Yaśaskara was a Brahmin dynasty. It may, however, be added that these two were also practically Kshatriya as they married into Kshatriya families and followed Kshatriya life. The Lohara ruling familly is said to belong to the Bhatti clan of Rajputs and hence the Kashmir kings were probably Bhattis.

v3.c35.s16.7

The Dāmaras in Kashmir were a turbulent local people who were always troublesome to the reigning king and helpful to rebels. "King Harsha ordered a slaughter of these Dāmaras; but they combined with two refugee princes and put an end to his life" (Panjab H. S. Vol. II p. 81). Thus it seems that Uchchala gained the throne with the usual help of powerful Dāmaras.

Linked texts (1)