Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

History of Mediaeval Hindu India (being a History of India from 600 to 1200 A.D.) v3.c38: Chapter XXII. The Fall of Other Rajput Kingdoms in Northern India.

History of Mediaeval Hindu India (being a History of India from 600 to 1200 A.D.) v3.c38

Language
English

Contents

Chapter XXII. The Fall of Other Rajput Kingdoms in Northern India.

v3.c38.2

Ajmer and Delhi, Kanauj and Benares having fallen before Shihabuddin Ghori and the two most powerful Rajput kingdoms having been conquered and annexed, the other Rajput kingdoms of Northern India fell with ease and with almost amazing suddenness within a quarter of a century and the whole of Northern India was finally enslaved by the Mahomedans. The story of this fall, as given by Mahomedan historians, must necessarily be appalling; but exaggerated as the account may be, it is not incredible, as Northern India was ready to fall for reasons which we will discuss in a separate chapter. Although most of these events happened after 1200 A. D. they are so intimately connected with this history that we can not conclude this book without describing them. They form the closing chapter in the history of Mediaeval Hindu India, though Hindu kingdoms in the south continued to exist for a century more.

v3.c38.3

This work of conquering the other Hindu kingdoms of Northern India was carried out by the generals of Shihabuddin and chiefly by his slave Kutubuddin. It is extremely surprizing to read that in those times, among the Mahomedans, slaves especially those brought from Turkestan were treated in a manner diametrically the opposite of that in which Negro slaves were treated by Christians in America and elsewhere. The history of Kutubuddin is indeed marvellous; from an ordinary slave, he rose to be the first emperor of India. He was not even a handsome man and he was called Aibak because he had lost the little finger of his right hand. But he was powerful in body and valorous in battle. He had remarkable wisdom which enabled him to rise from place to place and his generosity was so great that Mahomedan historians delight in telling stories of his munificence, one of which is that as Emperor of India he never made gifts of less than a lakh of rupees.

v3.c38.4

Kutubuddin, when a boy, was sold to the Kazi of Nishapur in Khorasan and at his house, along with his sons, he learned horsemanship and the use of arms, a treatment which indeed does immense credit to his Mahomedan master. From the Kazi he was taken by a merchant to Ghazni where he was purchased by Shihabuddin Ghori and employed in the army and in the civil administration of his empire. He rose from place to place till he was appointed governor of his Indian provinces beyond the Panjab at Kohram after the fall of Prithviraja.

v3.c38.5

We give this short history of the rise of this great general because we believe in the influence of the personality of individuals, of great men who are born from time to time to mould the destinies of nations. The rise of the Mahomedan power in India and the fall of Hindu kingdoms may in part be attributed to the birth of such men as Mahmud, Shihabuddin and Kutubuddin. The author of the Tabakat-i-Nasiri, in beginning the history of this great man, observes properly "When the Almighty God wishes to exhibit to his people an example of greatness and majesty, he endows one of his slaves with the qualities of courage and generosity and then friends and enemies are influenced by his bounteous munificence and warlike prowess" (E. II p. 298). Such men, witness Shivaji or Bajirao, easily collect bands of brave warriors about them and eventually become the founders of kingdoms and kingly lines. The work of conquering Northern India was carried out by Kutubuddin and also by Altamash also a slave from Turkestan brave, generous and fortunate like Kutubuddin himself who gave his daughter in marriage to him. It is also surprising to find that these slaves continued to be slaves even when they rose to the highest position and letters of freedom were given them at a very late stage in their life. The history of their conquests we give from Taj-ul-Ma'sir the almost contemporary history already quoted and from Tabakat-i-Nasiri also a nearly contemporary account written in the days of Nasiruddin.

1 Anhilwad

v3.c38.s1.1

The first kingdom to fall next was that of Anhilwad or Gujarat, an event which we have already described from Gujarat Chalukya records. But we must give also the account given by the contemporaneous Mahomedan history Taj-ul-Ma'sir. It relates that in 1195 when Kutubuddin was again at Ajmer he was informed that the Mers (who were then Hindus) had invited an army from Naharwala. He sent an army to oppose and forestall that movement, but that army was defeated and pursued to Ajmer, the fort of which appears to have been even invested by Naharwala forces. Kutubuddin requested reinforcements from Ghazni which were sent. The army of Gujarat appears to have then retired. The Mahomedans now took the offensive and advanced on Gujarat. "The lofty forts of Pali and Nadul were found abandoned, the Hindus had collected at the foot of Mount Abu under Rai Karan and Dārāburs in the mouth of a pass." As Muhammad Ghori had been defeated in that very pass before, the Mahomedans would not attack them there. They, therefore, made a feint as if they were terrified and retreated towards Ajmer. The Hindus leaving the pass came into the open to attack them. A severe action was fought and the Hindus were signally defeated, most of the Hindu leaders being killed or taken prisoner. Rai Karan escaped; but twenty thousand slaves, twenty elephants and arms beyond computation fell into the hands of the victors. "You would have thought that the treasures of the kings of the inhabited world had come into their possession. The city of Naharwala and the kingdom of Gujarat came under the dominion of the Mussalmans. The standards of victorious Khusru returned to Ajmer and thence to Delhi. Kutubuddin sent to Ghazni various treasures and rarities" (E. II p. 280-1).

v3.c38.s1.2

This account shows that Kutubuddin after his victory somewhere near Mount Abu must have proceeded to Naharwala (Patan) and occupied and plundered that city. This event is said to have happened in 1197 A. D., but as stated before, Bhīma issues a grant from Anhilwad Patan in 1199 A. D. It seems, therefore, that Anhilwad was occupied later in 1199. The fact that Gujarat was overrun and the capital occupied appears clear from the reference to the terrible condition of Gujarat described in the grant of Jayantasinha dated 1202 who, after Bhīma had fled, retrieved the fortunes of Chalukya arms and driving out the Mahomedans recovered Gujarat and its capital and ruled for a time in Anhilwad in place of Bhima. The destruction of some of the temples built by Siddharāja Jayasinha may be dated at this time. Gujarat was sorely shaken, but was not finally subjugated by the Mahomedans till a century later.

2 Kalanjar.

v3.c38.s2.1

Having destroyed the power of Gujarat and secured Ajmer, Kutubuddin turned his attention towards the next powerful Hindu kingdom on his border and attacked Kalanjar. We have already given the history of this attack in the chapter on the Chandellas and we will only give here a few particulars from the account given in the contemporaneous Taj-ul-Ma'sir. "In 599 H. or 1202 A.D., Kutubuddin accompanied by Altamash marched against Kalanjar. The accursed Parmar (Paramardideva) fled into the fort but after a desperate resistance submitted and accepted the same terms as had been imposed upon his ancestor by Mahmud. He, however, died and his Mehta Ajadeo was not disposed to surrender so easily and gave much trouble. He too was compelled to capitulate in consequence of a severe drought which dried up all the reservoirs of water in the fort. The fort of Kalanjar, celebrated throughout the world, was taken and the temples there were converted into mosques. Fifty thousand men were carried into slavery. Twenty elephants and countless arms were among the spoils. The reins of victory were then directed against Mahoba. The government of the country was conferred upon Hasan Amiral." This account as that about Gujarat is corroborated by Chandel inscriptions. The Chandellas obtained back the possession of Kalanjar and a large part of Chandel territory and like the Chālukyas of Gujarat lived as an independent ruling family for a century more as detailed in the chapter on the Chandellas.

3 Lakhnauti.

v3.c38.s3.1

The third kingdom on the borders of Mahomedan rule now firmly established in Delhi, Kanauj and Benares was the kingdom of Bengal under the Senas; and the history of the fall of Bengal is the most marvellous that has been recorded by historians. The conquest was made by Mahammad son of Bakhtyar Khilji and not by Kutubuddin and the account of it is to be found not in the contemporaneous Taj-ul-Ma'sir but is given by the author of the Tabakat-i-Nisiri from admittedly hearsay reports.

v3.c38.s3.2

We give the account as given by the Tabakat with such comment as seems proper. Mahammad Bakhtyar was a Khilji (not Turk but Afghan) adventurer who sought employment and fortune under the expanding power of Shihabuddin Ghori. It is natural that when victorious people conquer countries far and wide, turbulent spirits from the home country come forward in numbers to advance their fortunes (as Maratha cavaliers did under Shivaji or Bajirao) and find employment as military administrators of newly conquered territories. Mahammad Bakhtyar Khilji was one such hair-brained adventurer who after some refusals obtained employment as governor of Mirzapur. Collecting an army of Turks and Afghans, he first attacked Bihar and conquered it, plundering town and country. He is said to have seized a Buddhist settlement described as a Vihāra (probably Vikramaśila) and massacred all the defenceless shaven-headed Brahmins (Buddhists) and thrown away their sacred books "which none was left to read or explain." This event probably happened in 1199 A. D. as Mahammad Bakhtyar is described by Taj-ul-Ma'sir as appearing before Kutubuddin with presents from the conquest of Oudh and Bihar (probably at Mahoba). He was honoured with a robe and again sent to Bihar.

v3.c38.s3.3

"He then planned the conquest of Bengal and secretly prepared an army and suddenly made a raid on Nadia the capital of Bengal. In his impetuosity he reached the city with only eighteen horsemen with him and entering it in an inoffensive manner, looking as if he were a dealer in horses, reached the palace and at once drawing swords attacked the guards. The palace was in consternation and none opposed him. The aged king Lakshmanasena heard the uproar as he was about to sit to dinner and knowing the reality fled by the back door. He escaped and went to Jagannath. The palace and the city were taken possession of by the army which soon arrived. It is needless to say that there was no resistance and the city was plundered and even destroyed. Mahammad Bakhtyar made Gaur or Lakhnauti his capital which was the principal capital of the Sena kings."

v3.c38.s3.4

Doubts have been expressed about the truth of this account. That the political government of Bengal should have been so lax and supine as not to know of the advance of an army over such a great distance (Vikramaśila to Nadia) or that there was no preparedness to resist the dangerous enemy, when the whole country has talking of the fall of Delhi and Kanauj or that there was actually not a single blow struck in defence of Nadia or the kingdom is indeed strange. This is, however, a sheer exaggeration of the Mahomedan informants of the author of the Tabakāt-i-Nasiri if not of the historian himself. The absurd story that the birth of king Lakhamana was delayed for the arrival of the fortunate moment of birth by tying up the feet of the pregnant queen which is told in the Tabakat is proof enough of the absurd nature of the whole story. This event is placed by the Tabakat in 1199, the 80th year of the Lakshmanasena era; but it probably happened after his death and in about 1202 A. D. The account tries to explain the entire absence of defence by Lakshmana by the supposed superstitions of the Brahmin counsellors of the old king who had told him long before that the kingdom was fated to be taken by a Turk according to the prognostications of astrology. It is even added that when the king enquired what the mark of the conqueror would be, it was stated by the learned astrologers that the conqueror would have long arms reaching below the knees. The king sent men to ascertain what Turk had that mark and Mahammad Bakhtyar was found to have such long arms. There may be some truth in the fact that the resistance of the Hindus was weakened to some extent by the foretelling of the Purāṇas that Bhāratavarsha was fated to be conquered by Mlechhas or the absurd and fearful prognostications of astrologers. But the above story is on the face of it too absurd to be true and we at once set down this account of the fall of Bengal as exaggerated and untrue and Bengal may be taken to have fallen after much resistance against Mahammad Bakhtyar and not all at once but gradually as in the case of Gujarat and Bundelkhand.

v3.c38.s3.5

For, this account of the Tabakat written about 1250 A. D., distorted as it must be from the natural desire of the bragging adventurers who accompanied Mahammad Bakhtyar to exaggerate the courage of the conquerors and the cowardice of the conquered, as also from the inaptitude of foreigners coming suddenly into the midst of a strange people to understand their feelings and their ideas, and thirdly probably from a wish to have a hit at the Hindu belief in astrology, this foreign account must be tested and equated with the evidence of a contemporaneous Indian record, viz. the Bakerganj inscription of Keśavasena (J. R. A. S. Bengal Vol. VII pp. 40-50). This inscription no doubt exaggerates the prowess both of Lakshmaṇasena and his son, the grantor Keśavasena, and thus errs on the other side. But it makes no mention whatever of this ignominious defeat of Lakshmaṇasena. It may be urged that its omission was natural as inscriptions rarely record the defeats of the inscriptor; though disastrous fights with Turushkas are mentioned even in inscriptions as in Gujarat and Bundelkhand; but we may at least take into account the fact that Lakshmaṇasena is herein rightly praised as a valiant king who had raised three victory columns at Allahabad, Benares and Jagannath. It is impossible to believe that the valiant Lakshmaṇasena fled without striking a blow. Secondly we must admit that Keśavasena was still a powerful king ruling in Eastern Bengal. It is, therefore, certain that the descendants of Lakshmaṇasena ruled in Eastern Bengal for a long time after this event. It is also possible that Nadia may have been attacked after the death of Lakshmaṇasena during Mādhavasena's reign whose name appears to have been erased from this Bakerganj copper-plate (ditto p. 42). We, therefore, think that if we put the two opposite accounts together, we can only believe that Bengal fell after much resistance and not all at once, as already stated.

v3.c38.s3.6

But even if it be conceded that the account given by the Tabakat represents facts, these are not as dishonourable as is usually supposed. In the first place it must be noted that Nadia was not the chief capital of the Senas. It was a Brahmin settlement newly made, which was almost a Brahmin vihāra, in an island of the Ganges and Lakshamaṇasena only occasionally resided there. The guards at the palace must have been few and the army in the city only nominal. Secondly, a sudden raid on such a place is not impracticable.* Indeed such raids are recorded in history. Allauddin made such a sudden and wily raid on Devagiri in the Deccan a hundred years after this event. Nay only five years after this event, Shihabuddin Ghori the conqueror of Hindustan was surprised in his tent pitched on the eastern bank of the Indus by a few Gakkhars who eluding guards reached the place through water and murdered Shihabuddin. Thirdly, to escape from such an attack and start fresh resistance from a new capital was not at all dishonourable but on the contrary proper and creditable. This was what Rājyapāla of Kanauj or Bhīma of Gujarat did against Mahmud or Rajaram did in Maratha history against Aurangjeb and this is what even modern governments do. They give up the capital attacked and making another town the capital, carry on resistance from there. This is exactly what Lakshmaṇasena and his descendants appear to have done. They established themselves at Vikrampur which was an important town to the east of Nadia (a grant issued from Vikrampur by Lakshmaṇasena has been found) and ruled for nearly a century more in Eastern Bengal, continuing their resistance to the Mahomedans, as in Gujarat or in Bundelkhand. The Tabakat-i-Nasiri records that when Nasiruddin marched on Lakhnauti, the Khilji had marched his forces from Lakhnauti "with the intention of entering the territory of Bang," i. e. against the Sena king (Raverty p. 629). Why such resistance eventually failed to re-establish Hindu power not only in Bengal but in the other parts of Northern India also, is the real question and the cause of this failure we will discuss at length later on.

v3.c38.s3.7

Kutubuddin conquered or humbled the strong kingdoms on the borders of his Mahomedan empire. The work of destroying kingdoms a little more remote was carried out by his successor Altamash who was an equally brave and fortunate Sultan. Altamash was like Kutubuddin a slave but his valour was noted by Shihabuddin and he was given his deed of freedom and preferred from place to place by him as also by Kutubuddin who gave his daughter in marriage to him, having originally purchased him at Delhi as the Sultan had forbidden his sale and purchase at Ghazni (Tabakat, E. II 322). When Kutubuddin died at Lohur (Lahore), the commander-in-chief of Delhi with the consent of nobles invited Shamsuddin Altamash from Badaun where he was governor and elected him Sultan. Some officers and governors like Kubacha opposed the election but they were defeated; "by divine favour every one who opposed or rebelled was subdued and all territories belonging to Delhi Badaun, Oudh, Benares and the Siwalik hills came into his possession." Even Lahore was taken from Yildus and Sind and Bakkhar from Kubacha in 1217 A. D. (E. II 324). Altamash subdued Bengal under Ghiyasuddin Baktyar who acknowledged him suzerain and paid him tribute (1225).

v3.c38.s3.8

∗ The coming of Mahomedan dealers in horses was again a common thing at that time, at capitals of kings. Arab and Persians horses were prized by Hindu kings who paid high prices for them and Mahomedan dealers in horses constantly visited Hindu camps in these days and it was a common incident exciting no suspicion at all.

4 Ranthambhor and Mandawar.

v3.c38.s4.1

Thus the Mahomedan Empire of Delhi came into the possession of another capable sovereign and he naturally turned his attention towards first conquering refractory Hindu nobles in his own territory. "In 623 H. (1226) he marched against Ranthambhor before which seventy sovereigns had failed. The Sultan's servants by the favour of the Creator took it. In 624 H. (1227) he marched against Mandawar within the Siwalik (territory) and its capture likewise, the Almighty facilitated and the Sultan returned with much booty" (Raverty's Tabakat p. 611). These two places were probably in the possession of Chauhan chiefs and they proving refractory were attacked and dispossessed.

v3.c38.s4.2

We have seen that Ranthambhor had been attacked by Kutubuddin also but the chief had then submitted and been spared. Ranthambhor was again taken by the Chauhans and its last king was the valorous Hammir hero of the Hammira Mahākāvya. There is some dispute as to what Mandawar was and the mention of its location in Siwalik (not hills as in E. II but territory as in Raverty) leads to some doubt. Hānsi is similarly supposed to be in the Siwalik hills at the base of the Himalayas but it really is a place in Karnal District. But we have already shown that Siwalik meant Sapādalaksha territory of the Chauhans of Sambhar (Vol. II p. 36). Probably Mandawar which was originally the seat of Nāhararai Pratihāra conquered by Prithvīrāja, was now a part of the dominions of the Chauhans and a Chauhan chief was ruling there. Mandawar is now in ruins and is about 4 miles from the modern city of Jodhpur.

5 Gwalior.

v3.c38.s5.1

The next place which Altamash attacked was the fort of Gwalior which had been spared by Kutubuddin on its submission. This was a strong place within the Mahomedan empire and required to be seized. This place was not now in the possession of the Kachhwahas who seem to have removed to Amber a more distant place. It was in possession of Parihāras who (according to Gwaliornāmā published by Prince Balawantrao Bhayyasaheb Scindia) had seized the place. The Gwalior Gazetteer states that the Parihāras took the fort from Kachhwahas in 1129 A.D. Solankhapāla from whom Kutubuddin took it was a Parihāra. It was put in possession of Altamash in 1210 and was retaken by the Parihāras and hence this attack by him. "In 629 H. (1232 A. D.) Altamash marched against the fort and invested it. Malikdeo (Raverty reads Mangaldev) son of Basil (Raverty reads Maldev) began the fight. For 11 months the army sat before it. At last Malikdeo fled at night. About 500 men received punishment before the tent of the king. After appointing officers to Gwalior the Sultan returned to Delhi." (E. II p. 327). We think that the men punished were those of the Sultan's army itself who had been careless enough to allow Malik to escape and not men of Malikdeo; for none is stated here to have been captured nor could they be described as punished. And further an inscription on the Gwalior fort existing in Babar's time showed that Rajput ladies on the fort destroyed themselves in a pyre and the place is still called Johartal (Gwalior Gazetteer p. 125). The Rajput soldiers must have either died in the attack on the investing army or escaped. The subsequent history of the fort of Gwalior is given by Prince Balwantrao Bhayyasaheb which we need not give here in detail. The place changed hands often, the Tuars taking it in the days of Timur and holding it for a time when it was taken again by Babar. During Mogul days it was used as a prison for princes. It was again taken by Bhadaura kings from whom it was taken by Scindia. From them it was taken by the English twice but it is now with Scindia.

6 Bhelsa and Ujjain.

v3.c38.s6.1

"In 632 H (1234 A. D.) Altamash sent an army against Malwa and took the city and fort of Bhelsa. There was a temple there which was three hundred years in building. It was 105 gaj high. It was demolished" (E. II p. 328). This was probably the famous Bhaillaswāmin (sun) temple mentioned by Al-Beruni. The Garudastambha inscription of the 1st century B. C. belonged probably to a Vishnu temple on the other side of the river Betwa which probably had already fallen.

v3.c38.s6.2

Whatever this may be, the Udepur temple of Śiva some miles distant from Bhelsa is not the one referred to here. For this temple built by Udayāditya Paramāra which has also a very high pinnacle still survives to attest the glory of the Paramāra rule. This event happened during the reign of the last Paramāra king Devapāla who, as stated in the chapter on the later Paramāras, ruled from 1216 to 1240 A. D.

v3.c38.s6.3

"From Bhelsa he (Altamash) proceeded to Ujjain where there was the temple of Mahākāla which he destroyed as well as an image of Vikramāditya who ruled Malwa 1346 years before this time. The Hindu era dates from his reign (as this figure leads to 1289 A. D. as the date of the capture of Ujjain which really is 1234 A. D. we may take 55 years as the length of Vikrama's rule). Some other images cast in copper were carried to Delhi with the stone image of Mahākāla" (E. II p. 328). There is no reason to doubt the truth of this concise unexaggerated statement, though we find no corroborating contemporaneous Hindu record. The temple of Mahākāla was then converted into a mosque which, history tells us, was again converted into a Hindu temple of Mahākāla in the days of Ranoji Scindia whose descendants still rule in Ujjain and worship Mahākāla. It may be mentioned that the present high-pinnacled temple of Mahākāla was built by the Shenvi Diwan of Ranoji Scindia, Ramachandra Bābā, who was childless and who, therefore, used most of his wealth in this great work (1745 A. D.). Probably the present temple stands in the very place where the old temple stood. It may also be noted that later on the Mahomedan rulers of Malwa allowed the Hindus to have a Mahākāla idol set up at a short distance from the original temple (destroyed and converted into a mosque ) and it is known now as the Vridhha or old Mahākāla.

v3.c38.s6.4

This expedition into Malwa was apparently for the sole purpose of destroying famous Hindu idols, a religious expedition in the manner of the Somnath expedition of Mahmud. There was no attempt at conquest of Malwa and its reduction into a Mahomedan province. Probably the territory was too distant and not contiguous like Gwalior. We have already stated that the Paramāra rule endured for about a century more just as Gujarat remained under Chālukyas for about the same time. Malwa was finally conquered by Allauddin Khilji.

7 Nagda, Capital of Mewad.

v3.c38.s7.1

We have sketched above the fall of almost all the leading Hindu kingdoms of Northern India, Chauhan, Rathod, Chandella, Chālukya, Sena, Parihāra and Paramāra. The Guhilots of Mewad came in their turn to be attacked later. Though we have not many details, we find that Mewad was attacked in the days of Nasiruddin while Jaitrasinh was ruling ( 1253 A. D. ) and that its capital Nagda was destroyed. The Mahomedans were, however, defeated by Jaitrasinh and its hill capital Chitod remained intact. It continued to rule with vigour till even Chitod was taken by Allauddin Khilji.

Linked texts (2)