War with the Khokhars.—Two years after this, Chachak made war on Tharraj Khokhar, the chief of Pilibanga,[21]on account of a horse stolen from a Bhatti. The Khokhars were defeated and plundered; but his old enemies the Langahas, taking advantage of this occasion, made head against Chachak, and drove his garrison from the new possession of Dhuniapur.[22]Disease at length seized on Rawal Chachak, after a long course of victorious warfare, in which he subdued various tracts of country, even to the heart of the Panjab. In this state he determined to die as he had lived, with arms in his hands; but having [259] no foe near with whom to cope, he sent an embassy to the Langaha prince of Multan, to beg, as a last favour, the Juddhdan, or ‘gift of battle,’ that his soul might escape by the steel of his foeman, and not fall a sacrifice to slow disease.[23]The prince, suspecting treachery, hesitated; but the Bhatti messenger pledged his word that his master only wished an honourable death, and that he would only bring five hundred men to the combat. The challenge being accepted, the Rawal called his clansmen around him, and on recounting what he had done, seven hundred select Rajputs, who had shared in all his victories, volunteered to take the last field, and make Sankalp (oblation) of their lives with their leader. Previous to setting forth, hearranged his affairs. His son Gaj Singh, by the Seta Rani, he sent with her to her father’s house. He had five other sons, namely, Kumbha, Barsal, Bhimdeo (by Lala Rani, of the Sodha tribe), Rata and Randhir, whose mother was Surajdevi, of Chauhan race. Barsal, his eldest son, he made heir to all his dominions, except the land of Khadal (whose chief town is Derawar), which he bestowed upon Randhir, and to both he gave thetika, making them separate States. Barsal marched to Kahror,[24]his capital, at the head of seventeen thousand men.
Heroic Death of Rāwal Chachakdeo.—Meanwhile, Rawal Chachak marched to Dhuniapur, “to part with life.” There he heard that the prince of Multan was within two coss. His soul was rejoiced; he performed his ablutions, worshipped the sword[25]and the gods, bestowed charity, and withdrew his thoughts from this world.
The battle lasted four gharis (two hours), and the Jadon prince fell with all his kin after performing prodigies of valour. Two thousand Khans fell beneath their swords; rivers of blood flowed in the field; but the Bhatti gained the abode of Indra, who shared his throne with the hero. The king crossed the Bias, and returned to Multan.
While Randhir was performing at Derawar the rites of the twelve days ofmatam, or ‘mourning,’ his elder brother, Kumbha, afflicted with insanity, rushed into the assembly and swore to avenge his father’s death. That day he departed, accompanied by a single slave, and reached the prince’s camp. It was surrounded by a [260] ditch eleven yards wide, over which the Bhatti leaped his horse in the dead of night, reached the harem, and cut off the head of Kalu Shah, with which he rejoined his brethren at Derawar. Barsal re-established Dhuniapur, and then went to Kahror. His old foes, the Langahas, under Haibat Khan, again attacked him, but they were defeated with great slaughter. At the same time, Husain Khan Baloch invaded Bikampur.[26]
Rāwal Bersi,c.A.D.1436-40.—Rawal Bersi,[27]who at this time occupied thegaddiof Jaisalmer, went forth to meet Rao Barsal on his return from his expedition in the Panjab. In S. 1530 (A.D.1474) he made the gates and palace of Bikampur.
We may, in this place, desert the literal narrative of the chronicle; what follows is a record of similar border-feuds and petty wars, between ‘the sons of Kailan’[28]and the chiefs of the Panjab, alternately invaders and invaded, which is pregnant with mighty words and gallant deeds, but yielding no new facts of historical value. At length the numerous offspring of Kailan separated, and divided amongst them the lands on both sides of the Gara; and as Sultan Babur soon after this period made a final conquest of Multan from the Langahas, and placed therein his own governor, in all probability the Bhatti possessors of Kahrorkot and Dhuniapur, as well as Pugal and Marot (now Muhammadans), exchanged their faith (sanctioned even by Manu) for the preservation of their estates.[29]The bard is so much occupied with this Pugal branch that the chronicle appears almost devoted solely to them.
He passes from the main stem, Rawal Bersi, to Rawals Jeth, Nunkaran, Bhim, Manohardas, to Sabal Singh, five generations, with little further notice than the mere enumeration of their issue. With this last prince, Sabal Singh, an important change occurred in the political condition of the Bhattis [261].
1. [If the dates are approximately correct, this was Jalālu-d-dīn Fīroz Shāh, Sultān of Delhi,A.D.1290-96.]
1. [If the dates are approximately correct, this was Jalālu-d-dīn Fīroz Shāh, Sultān of Delhi,A.D.1290-96.]
2. The Rajputs, by their exterminatingsakhas, facilitated the views of the Muhammadans. In every State we read of these horrors.
2. The Rajputs, by their exterminatingsakhas, facilitated the views of the Muhammadans. In every State we read of these horrors.
3. The mere act of being betrothed disqualifies from a second marriage; the affianced becomes arand(widow), though akumari(maid).
3. The mere act of being betrothed disqualifies from a second marriage; the affianced becomes arand(widow), though akumari(maid).
4. Even these anachronisms are proofs of the fidelity of these Annals. Ignorant native scribes, aware but of one great Moghul invasion, consider the invader to be Timur; but there were numerous Moghul invasions during the reign of Alau-d-din. In all probability that for which the services of the Bhatti prince obtained him the restoration of his dominions was that of Ibak Khan, general of the king of Transoxiana, who invaded India inA.H.705 (A.D.1305), and was so signally defeated that only three thousand out of fifty-seven thousand horse escaped the sword, and these were made prisoners and trod to death by elephants, when pillars of skulls were erected to commemorate the victory.—See Briggs’ Ferishta, vol. i. p. 363 f. [Elliot-Dowson iii. 199.]
4. Even these anachronisms are proofs of the fidelity of these Annals. Ignorant native scribes, aware but of one great Moghul invasion, consider the invader to be Timur; but there were numerous Moghul invasions during the reign of Alau-d-din. In all probability that for which the services of the Bhatti prince obtained him the restoration of his dominions was that of Ibak Khan, general of the king of Transoxiana, who invaded India inA.H.705 (A.D.1305), and was so signally defeated that only three thousand out of fifty-seven thousand horse escaped the sword, and these were made prisoners and trod to death by elephants, when pillars of skulls were erected to commemorate the victory.—See Briggs’ Ferishta, vol. i. p. 363 f. [Elliot-Dowson iii. 199.]
5. [Another version of a common folk-tale (Vol. I.342).]
5. [Another version of a common folk-tale (Vol. I.342).]
6. It is scarcely necessary to repeat that this is a free translation of the chronicle.
6. It is scarcely necessary to repeat that this is a free translation of the chronicle.
7. The Khichi prince, we may suppose, had no follower skilled in omens—they lived very happily, as appears by the Khichi chronicle, and she bore him a son, who was driven from Gagraun. The scandal propagated against the ‘ruby of Mewar’ was no doubt a ruse of the Sankhla chief, as the conclusion shows. However small the intrinsic worth of these anecdotes, they afford links of synchronisms, which constitute the value of the annals of all these States.
7. The Khichi prince, we may suppose, had no follower skilled in omens—they lived very happily, as appears by the Khichi chronicle, and she bore him a son, who was driven from Gagraun. The scandal propagated against the ‘ruby of Mewar’ was no doubt a ruse of the Sankhla chief, as the conclusion shows. However small the intrinsic worth of these anecdotes, they afford links of synchronisms, which constitute the value of the annals of all these States.
8. Sadhu was the son and heir of Raningdeo, and it was from this portion of the Bhatti annals I extracted that singular story, related at p. 730, to illustrate the influence which the females of Rajputana have on national manners. The date of this tragical event was S. 1462, according to the Bhatti annals; and Rana Mokal, the contemporary of Rawal Jeth and Rao Raningdeo, was on the throne of Mewar from S. 1454 to S. 1475. The annals of this State (Vol. I. p.331) notice the marriage of the ‘Ruby’ to Dhiraj, son of Achaldas, but say nothing on the other point. A vague recollection of some matrimonial insult being offered evidently yet prevails, for when a marriage was contracted inA.D.1821, through the Author’s intervention, between the Rana of Udaipur’s daughter and the present Rawal Gaj Singh of Jaisalmer, it was given out that there was no memorial of any marriage-alliance between the two houses. After all, it may be a vainglorious invention of the Bhatti annalist.
8. Sadhu was the son and heir of Raningdeo, and it was from this portion of the Bhatti annals I extracted that singular story, related at p. 730, to illustrate the influence which the females of Rajputana have on national manners. The date of this tragical event was S. 1462, according to the Bhatti annals; and Rana Mokal, the contemporary of Rawal Jeth and Rao Raningdeo, was on the throne of Mewar from S. 1454 to S. 1475. The annals of this State (Vol. I. p.331) notice the marriage of the ‘Ruby’ to Dhiraj, son of Achaldas, but say nothing on the other point. A vague recollection of some matrimonial insult being offered evidently yet prevails, for when a marriage was contracted inA.D.1821, through the Author’s intervention, between the Rana of Udaipur’s daughter and the present Rawal Gaj Singh of Jaisalmer, it was given out that there was no memorial of any marriage-alliance between the two houses. After all, it may be a vainglorious invention of the Bhatti annalist.
9. [The date of Lachhman Rāwal is uncertain. Inscriptions at Jaisalmer mention him as reigning inA.D.1402 and 1416 (Erskine iii. B. 9).]
9. [The date of Lachhman Rāwal is uncertain. Inscriptions at Jaisalmer mention him as reigning inA.D.1402 and 1416 (Erskine iii. B. 9).]
10. The termbasaihas been explained in Vol. I. p.206. The Basai is a slave in the mildest sense; one who in distress sells his liberty. His master cuts thechoti, or lock of hair, from the centre of the head, as a mark of bondage. They are transferable, like cattle. This custom prevails more in the desert States than in central Rajwara; there every great man has his Basai. Shyam Singh Champawat of Pokaran had two hundred when he fled to Jaipur, and they all fell with him fighting against the Mahrattas. All castes, Brahmans and Rajputs, become Basais; they can redeem their liberty by purchase.
10. The termbasaihas been explained in Vol. I. p.206. The Basai is a slave in the mildest sense; one who in distress sells his liberty. His master cuts thechoti, or lock of hair, from the centre of the head, as a mark of bondage. They are transferable, like cattle. This custom prevails more in the desert States than in central Rajwara; there every great man has his Basai. Shyam Singh Champawat of Pokaran had two hundred when he fled to Jaipur, and they all fell with him fighting against the Mahrattas. All castes, Brahmans and Rajputs, become Basais; they can redeem their liberty by purchase.
11. These three tribes are either extinct, or were lost on becoming proselytes to Islam.
11. These three tribes are either extinct, or were lost on becoming proselytes to Islam.
12. The Sama or Samma tribe, which is well known in Muhammadan history, as having given a dynasty to Sind in modern times, is a great branch of the Yadus, and descended from Samba, son of Krishna; and while the other branch colonized Zabulistan, maintaining the original name of Yadus, the sons of Samba made his name the patronymic in Seistan and the lower valley of the Indus. Samma-ka-kot, or Sammanagari, was the capital, which yet exists, and doubtless originated the Minnagara of the Greeks. Sambos, the opponent of Alexander, it is fair to infer, was the chief of the Samma tribe. Samba, meaning ‘of, or belonging to, Sham or Syama’ (an epithet of Krishna, from his dark complexion), was son of Jambuvati, one of the eight wives of this deified Yadu. The Jarejas of Cutch and Jams of Sind and Saurashtra are of the same stock. The Sind-Samma dynasty, on the loss of their faith and coming into contact with Islam, to which they became proselytes, were eager to adopt a pedigree which might give them importance in the eyes of their conquerors;Samwas transformed intoJam, and the Persian king, Jamshīd, was adopted as the patriarch of the Sammas, in lieu of the legitimate Samba. Ferishta gives an account of this dynasty, but was ignorant of their origin. He says, “The Zemindars of Sinde were originally of two tribes or families, Somuna and Soomura; and the chief of the former was distinguished by the appellation of Jam.”—Briggs’ Ferishta, vol. iv. p. 424. The historian admits they were Hindus untilA.H.782 (A.D.1380, S. 1436); a point of little doubt, as we see the Bhatti prince intermarrying with this family about twenty years subsequent even to the date assigned by Ferishta for their proselytism. I may here again state, once for all, that I append these notes in order not to interfere with the text, which is abridged from the original chronicle.
12. The Sama or Samma tribe, which is well known in Muhammadan history, as having given a dynasty to Sind in modern times, is a great branch of the Yadus, and descended from Samba, son of Krishna; and while the other branch colonized Zabulistan, maintaining the original name of Yadus, the sons of Samba made his name the patronymic in Seistan and the lower valley of the Indus. Samma-ka-kot, or Sammanagari, was the capital, which yet exists, and doubtless originated the Minnagara of the Greeks. Sambos, the opponent of Alexander, it is fair to infer, was the chief of the Samma tribe. Samba, meaning ‘of, or belonging to, Sham or Syama’ (an epithet of Krishna, from his dark complexion), was son of Jambuvati, one of the eight wives of this deified Yadu. The Jarejas of Cutch and Jams of Sind and Saurashtra are of the same stock. The Sind-Samma dynasty, on the loss of their faith and coming into contact with Islam, to which they became proselytes, were eager to adopt a pedigree which might give them importance in the eyes of their conquerors;Samwas transformed intoJam, and the Persian king, Jamshīd, was adopted as the patriarch of the Sammas, in lieu of the legitimate Samba. Ferishta gives an account of this dynasty, but was ignorant of their origin. He says, “The Zemindars of Sinde were originally of two tribes or families, Somuna and Soomura; and the chief of the former was distinguished by the appellation of Jam.”—Briggs’ Ferishta, vol. iv. p. 424. The historian admits they were Hindus untilA.H.782 (A.D.1380, S. 1436); a point of little doubt, as we see the Bhatti prince intermarrying with this family about twenty years subsequent even to the date assigned by Ferishta for their proselytism. I may here again state, once for all, that I append these notes in order not to interfere with the text, which is abridged from the original chronicle.
13. It is said that Ranmall succeeded; but this was only to the northern portion, his appanage: he lived but two months.
13. It is said that Ranmall succeeded; but this was only to the northern portion, his appanage: he lived but two months.
14. Probably a branch of the Panwārs (Rose,Glossary, ii. 240).
14. Probably a branch of the Panwārs (Rose,Glossary, ii. 240).
15. Position unknown, unless it be the Tchin-kot of D’Anville at the confluence of the river of Kabul with the Indus. There is no doubt that this castle of the Bhatti prince was in the Panjab; and coupled with his alliance with the chief of Sehat or Swat, that it is the Tchin-kot, or Ashnagar of that celebrated geographer, whence the Acesines of the Greeks. [The Acesines or Chīnāb is the Vedik Asikni.]
15. Position unknown, unless it be the Tchin-kot of D’Anville at the confluence of the river of Kabul with the Indus. There is no doubt that this castle of the Bhatti prince was in the Panjab; and coupled with his alliance with the chief of Sehat or Swat, that it is the Tchin-kot, or Ashnagar of that celebrated geographer, whence the Acesines of the Greeks. [The Acesines or Chīnāb is the Vedik Asikni.]
16. I may here repeat that the Janjūa or Janjūba and Johya were no doubt branches of the same race; the Janjūha of Babur, who locates them about the mountains of Jud. [(Rose,(Rose,Glossary, ii. 353 f.;ASR, ii. 17).]
16. I may here repeat that the Janjūa or Janjūba and Johya were no doubt branches of the same race; the Janjūha of Babur, who locates them about the mountains of Jud. [(Rose,(Rose,Glossary, ii. 353 f.;ASR, ii. 17).]
17. Now belonging to Marwar, and on its north-western frontier; but I believe in ruins. [Near Pokaran, 85 miles N.W. of Jodhpur city. It is in ruins.]
17. Now belonging to Marwar, and on its north-western frontier; but I believe in ruins. [Near Pokaran, 85 miles N.W. of Jodhpur city. It is in ruins.]
18. Most likely the Swatis, or people of Swat, described by Mr. Elphinstone (Vol. I. p.506) as of Indian origin, and as possessing a kingdom from the Hydaspes to Jalalabad, the Souastene of Ptolemy. [Souastēnē is the basin of the Souastos, the river of Swāt, the original form of the name being Subhavastu, which, by the usual mode of contraction, becomes Subhāstu or Suvāstu (McCrindle,Ptolemy, 106 f.). It seems hardly likely that this tribe interfered in the politics of the Indian desert.]
18. Most likely the Swatis, or people of Swat, described by Mr. Elphinstone (Vol. I. p.506) as of Indian origin, and as possessing a kingdom from the Hydaspes to Jalalabad, the Souastene of Ptolemy. [Souastēnē is the basin of the Souastos, the river of Swāt, the original form of the name being Subhavastu, which, by the usual mode of contraction, becomes Subhāstu or Suvāstu (McCrindle,Ptolemy, 106 f.). It seems hardly likely that this tribe interfered in the politics of the Indian desert.]
19. It must not be forgotten that Satalmer was one of the Bhatti castles wrested from them by the Rathors, who have greatly curtailed their frontiers.
19. It must not be forgotten that Satalmer was one of the Bhatti castles wrested from them by the Rathors, who have greatly curtailed their frontiers.
20. From this and many other instances we come to the conclusion that the Tatar or Indo-Scythic title of Khan is by no means indicative of the Muhammadan faith. Here we see the daughter of the prince of Swat, or Suvat, with a genuine Hindi name.
20. From this and many other instances we come to the conclusion that the Tatar or Indo-Scythic title of Khan is by no means indicative of the Muhammadan faith. Here we see the daughter of the prince of Swat, or Suvat, with a genuine Hindi name.
21. The position of Pilibanga is unknown; in all probability it has undergone a metamorphosis with the spread of ‘the faith’ over these regions. As before mentioned, I believe this race called Khokhar to be the Gakkhar, so well known to Babur, and described as his inveterate foes in all his irruptions into India. Their manners, especially that distinctive mark, polyandry, mentioned by Ferishta, mark the Ghakkars as Indo-Scythic. The names of their chiefs are decidedly Hindu. They were located with the Judis in the upper part of the Panjab, and, according to Elphinstone, they retain their old position, contiguous to the Yusufzai Jadons. [See Rose,Glossary, ii. 540. They have no connexion with the Rājput Jādons.]
21. The position of Pilibanga is unknown; in all probability it has undergone a metamorphosis with the spread of ‘the faith’ over these regions. As before mentioned, I believe this race called Khokhar to be the Gakkhar, so well known to Babur, and described as his inveterate foes in all his irruptions into India. Their manners, especially that distinctive mark, polyandry, mentioned by Ferishta, mark the Ghakkars as Indo-Scythic. The names of their chiefs are decidedly Hindu. They were located with the Judis in the upper part of the Panjab, and, according to Elphinstone, they retain their old position, contiguous to the Yusufzai Jadons. [See Rose,Glossary, ii. 540. They have no connexion with the Rājput Jādons.]
22. Dhuniapur is not located.
22. Dhuniapur is not located.
23. In this chivalrous challenge, or demand of the Juddhdan, we recognize another strong trait of Scythic manners, as depicted by Herodotus. The ancient Getae of Transoxiana could not bear the idea of dying of disease; a feeling which his offspring carried with them to the shores of the Baltic, to Yeut-land, or Jutland! [?]
23. In this chivalrous challenge, or demand of the Juddhdan, we recognize another strong trait of Scythic manners, as depicted by Herodotus. The ancient Getae of Transoxiana could not bear the idea of dying of disease; a feeling which his offspring carried with them to the shores of the Baltic, to Yeut-land, or Jutland! [?]
24. This fortress, erected by Rao Kailan, is stated to be twenty-two coss, about forty miles, from Bahawalpur; but though the direction is not stated, there is little doubt of its being to the northward, most probably in thatduabcalled Sind-Sagar. [Probably Kahror in Multān District, about 20 miles from Bahāwalpur.]
24. This fortress, erected by Rao Kailan, is stated to be twenty-two coss, about forty miles, from Bahawalpur; but though the direction is not stated, there is little doubt of its being to the northward, most probably in thatduabcalled Sind-Sagar. [Probably Kahror in Multān District, about 20 miles from Bahāwalpur.]
25. Couple this martial rite with the demand of Juddhdan, and there is an additional reason for calling these Yadus Indo-Scythic. See p.680for an account of the worship of the sword, or Khadga-sthapna.
25. Couple this martial rite with the demand of Juddhdan, and there is an additional reason for calling these Yadus Indo-Scythic. See p.680for an account of the worship of the sword, or Khadga-sthapna.
26. The foregoing (from p.1219), including the actions of Kailan, Chachak, and Barsal, must be considered as an episode, detailing the exploits of the Raos of Pugal, established by Kailan, third son of Rawal Kehar of Jaisalmer. It was too essential to the annals to be placed in a note.
26. The foregoing (from p.1219), including the actions of Kailan, Chachak, and Barsal, must be considered as an episode, detailing the exploits of the Raos of Pugal, established by Kailan, third son of Rawal Kehar of Jaisalmer. It was too essential to the annals to be placed in a note.
27. [Rāwal Bersi, son of Lachhman, son of Kehar, is mentioned in inscriptions as Chief of Jaisalmer,A.D.1436, and 1440 (Erskine iii. B. 9)].]
27. [Rāwal Bersi, son of Lachhman, son of Kehar, is mentioned in inscriptions as Chief of Jaisalmer,A.D.1436, and 1440 (Erskine iii. B. 9)].]
28. Rao Kailan had established his authority over nine castles, heads of districts, namely, Asini, or Aswinikot, Bikampur, Marot, Pugal, Derawar, Kahror (twenty-two coss, or about forty miles, from Bahawalpur), Guman, Bahan, Nadno, and Matela, on the Indus.
28. Rao Kailan had established his authority over nine castles, heads of districts, namely, Asini, or Aswinikot, Bikampur, Marot, Pugal, Derawar, Kahror (twenty-two coss, or about forty miles, from Bahawalpur), Guman, Bahan, Nadno, and Matela, on the Indus.
29. There never was anything so degrading to royalty as the selfish protection guaranteed to it by this Lycurgus of the Hindus, who says, “Against misfortune, let him preserve his wealth; at the expense of his wealth, let him preserve his wife; but let him at all events preserve himself, even at the hazard of his wife and riches.”—Manu,Laws, vii. 213. The entire history of the Rajputs shows they do not pay much attention to such unmanly maxims.
29. There never was anything so degrading to royalty as the selfish protection guaranteed to it by this Lycurgus of the Hindus, who says, “Against misfortune, let him preserve his wealth; at the expense of his wealth, let him preserve his wife; but let him at all events preserve himself, even at the hazard of his wife and riches.”—Manu,Laws, vii. 213. The entire history of the Rajputs shows they do not pay much attention to such unmanly maxims.
CHAPTER 5
Jaisalmer a Mughal Fief.—We have now reached that period in the Bhatti annals when Shah Jahan was emperor of India. Elsewhere, we have minutely related the measure which the great Akbar adopted to attach his Rajput vassalage to the empire; a policy pursued by his successors. Sabal Singh, the first of the princes of Jaisalmer who held his dominions as a fief of the empire, was not the legitimate heir to the ‘gaddiof Jaisal [262].’[1]Manohardas had obtained thegaddiby the assassination of his nephew, Rawal Nathu, the son and heir of Bhim, who was returning from his nuptials at Bikaner, and had passed the day at Phalodi,[2]then a town of Jaisalmer, when poison was administered to him by the hands of a female. But it was destined that the line of the assassin should not rule, and the dignity fell to Sabal Singh, the third in descent from Maldeo, second son of Rawal Nunkaran.
Rāwal Sabal Singh,A.D.1651-61.—The good qualities of young Sabal, and the bad ones of Ramchand, son of the usurper, afforded another ground for the preference of the former. Moreover, Sabal was nephew to the prince of Amber, under whom he held a distinguished post in the government of Peshawar, where he saved the royal treasure from being captured by the Afghanmountaineers. For this service, and being a favourite of the chiefs who served with their contingents, the king gave Jaswant Singh of Jodhpur command to place him on thegaddi. The celebrated Nahar Khan Kumpawat[3]was entrusted with this duty, for the performance of which he received the city and domain of Pokaran, ever since severed from Jaisalmer.
Pokaran lost to Jaisalmer.—This was the first considerable abstraction from the territories which had been progressively increased by Rawal Jaisal and his successors, but which have since been woefully curtailed. A short time before Babur’s invasion, the dependencies of Jaisalmer extended on the north to the Gara River,[4]west to the Mihran or Indus; and on the east and south they were bounded by the Rathors of Bikaner and Marwar who had been gradually encroaching for two centuries, and continue to do so to this day. The entirethalof Barmer and Kotra,[5]in the south, were Bhatti chieftainships, and eastward to the site of Bikaner itself.
Rāwal Amār Singh,A.D.1661-1702.—Amra Singh, son of Sabal, succeeded. He led thetika-dauragainst the Balochs, who had invaded the western tracts, and was installed on the field of victory. Soon after, he demanded aid from his subjects to portion his daughter, and being opposed by his Rajput minister, Raghunath, he put him to death. The Chana Rajputs, from the north-east, having renewed their old raids, he in person attacked and compelled them to give bonds, or written obligations, for their future good conduct.
Provoked by the daily encroachments of the Kandhalot Rathors, Sundardas and Dalpat, chiefs of Bikampur, determined to retaliate: “let us get a name in the [263] world,” said Dalpat, “and attack the lands of the Rathors.” Accordingly, they invaded, plundered, and fired the town of Jaju, on the Bikaner frontier. The Kandhalots retaliated on the towns of Jaisalmer, and an action took place, in which the Bhattis were victorious,slaying two hundred of the Rathors. The Rawal partook in the triumph of his vassals. Raja Anup Singh[6]of Bikaner was then serving with the imperial armies in the Deccan. On receiving this account, he commanded his minister to issue a summons to every Kandhalot capable of carrying arms to invade Jaisalmer, and take and raze Bikampur, or he would consider them traitors. The minister issued the summons; every Rathor obeyed it, and he added, as an auxiliary, a Pathan chief with his band from Hissar. Rawal Amra collected his Bhattis around him, and instead of awaiting the attack, advanced to meet it; he slew many of the chiefs, burnt the frontier towns, and recovered Pugal, forcing the Rathor chiefs of Barmer and Kotra to renew their engagements of fealty and service.
Amra had eight sons, and was succeeded by Jaswant, the eldest, in S. 1758 (A.D.1702), whose daughter was married to the heir-apparent of Mewar.
Here ends the chronicle, of which the foregoing is an abstract: the concluding portion of the annals is from a MS. furnished by a living chronicler, corrected by other information. It is but a sad record of anarchy and crime.
Soon after the death of Rawal Amra, Pugal, Barmer, Phalodi, and various other towns and territories in Jaisalmer, were wrested from this State by the Rathors.[7]
The territory bordering the Gara was taken by Daud Khan, an Afghan chieftain from Shikarpur, and it became the nucleus of a State called after himself, Daudputra.[8]
Rāwal Jaswant Singh,A.D.1702-22.—Jaswant Singh succeeded. He had five sons, Jagat Singh, who committed suicide, Isari Singh, Tej Singh, Sardar Singh, and Sultan Singh. Jagat Singh had three sons, Akhai Singh, Budh Singh, and Zorawar Singh.
Rāwal Akhai Singh,A.D.1722-62.—Akhai Singh succeeded. Budh Singh died of the smallpox; Tej Singh, uncle to the Rawal, usurped the government, and the princes fled to Delhi to save their lives. At this period, their grand-uncle, Hari Singh (brother of Rawal Jaswant), was serving the king, and he returned in order to displace the usurper. It is customary for the [264] prince of Jaisalmer to go annually in state to the lake Gharsisar, to perform the ceremony ofLas, or clearing away the accumulation of mud and sand.[9]The Raja first takes out a handful, when rich and poor follow his example. Hari Singh chose the time when this ceremony was in progress to attack the usurper. The attempt did not altogether succeed; but Tej Singh was so severely wounded that he died, and was succeeded by his son,
Sawai Singh, an infant of three years of age. Akhai Singh collected the Bhattis from all quarters, stormed the castle, put the infant to death, and regained his rights.
Akhai Singh ruled forty years. During this reign, Bahawal Khan, son of Daud Khan, took Derawar, and all the tract of Khadal, the first Bhatti conquest, and added it to his new State of Bahawalpur, or Daudputra.
Rāwal Mūlrāj,A.D.1762-1820. Conspiracy against Mūlrāj.—Mulraj succeeded in S. 1818 (A.D.1762). He had three sons, Rae Singh, Jeth Singh, and Man Singh. The unhappy choice of a minister by Mulraj completed the demoralization of the Bhatti principality. This minister was named Sarup Singh, a Bania of the Jain faith and Mehta family, destined to be the exterminators of the laws and fortunes of the ‘sons of Jaisal.’ The cause of hatred and revenge of this son of commerce to the Bhatti aristocracy arose out of a disgraceful dispute regarding a Bakhtan, a fair frail one, a favourite of the Mehta, but who preferred the Rajput, Sardar Singh, of the tribe of Aef.[10]The Bhatti chief carried his complaint of the minister to the heir-apparent, Rae Singh, who had also cause of grievance in the reduction of his income. It was suggested to the prince to put this presumptuous minister to death; this was effected by the prince’s own hand,in his father’s presence; and as the Mehta, in falling, clung to Mulraj for protection, it was proposed to take off Mulraj at the same time. The proposition, however, was rejected with horror by the prince, whose vengeance was satisfied. The Rawal was allowed to escape to the female apartments; but the chieftains, well knowing they could not expect pardon from the Rawal, insisted on investing Rae Singh, and if he refused, on placing his brother on thegaddi. Theanof Rae Singh was proclaimed; but no entreaty or threat would induce him to listen to the proposal of occupying the throne; in lieu of which he used a pallet (khat). Three months and five days had passed since the deposal and bondage of Mulraj, when a female resolved to emancipate him: this female was the wife of the chief conspirator, and confidential adviser of the regent prince. This noble dame, a Rathor Rajputni, of the Malecha clan, was the wife of Anup Singh of Jinjiniali, the premier noble of Jaisalmer, and who, wearied with the tyranny of the minister and the weakness of his [265] prince, had proposed the death of the one and the deposal of the other. We are not made acquainted with any reason, save that of Swamidharma, or ‘fealty,’ which prompted the Rathorni to rescue her prince even at the risk of her husband’s life; but her appeal to her son Zorawar, to perform his duty, is preserved, and we give it verbatim: “Should your father oppose you, sacrifice him to your duty, and I will mount the pyre with his corpse.” The son yielded obedience to the injunction of his magnanimous parent, who had sufficient influence to gain over Arjun, the brother of her husband, as well as Megh Singh, chief of Baru. The three chieftains forced an entrance into the prison where their prince was confined, who refused to be released from his manacles, until he was told that the Mahechi had promoted the plot for his liberty. The sound of the grand nakkara, proclaiming Mulraj’s repossession of thegaddi, awoke his son from sleep; and on the herald depositing at the side of his pallet the sablesaropa,[11]and all the insignia of exile—the black steed and black vestments—the prince, obeying the command of the emancipated Rawal, clad himself therein, and accompanied byhis party, bade adieu to Jaisalmer and took the road to Kotra. When he arrived at this town, on the southern frontier of the State, the chiefs proposed to “run the country”; but he replied, “the country was his mother, and every Rajput his foe who injured it.” He repaired to Jodhpur, but the chieftains abided about Sheo Kotra and Barmer, and during the twelve years they remained outlaws, plundered even to the gates of Jaisalmer. In the first three years they devastated the country, their castles were dismantled, the wells therein filled up, and their estates sequestrated. At the end of the twelve, having made thetalak, or oath against further plunder, their estates were restored, and they were readmitted into their country.
The banished prince remained two years and a half with Raja Bijai Singh, who treated him like a son. But he carried his arrogant demeanour with him to Jodhpur; for one day, as he was going out to hunt, a Bania, to whom he was indebted, seized his horse by the bridle, and invoking theanof Bijai Singh, demanded payment of his debt. The prince, in turn, required him, with the invocation “by Mulraj!” to unloose his hold. But the man of wealth, disregarding the appeal, insolently replied, “What is Mulraj to me?” It was the last word he spoke; the sword of Rae Singh was unsheathed, and the Bania’s head rolled on the ground: then, turning his horse’s [266] head to Jaisalmer, he exclaimed, “Better be a slave at once than live on the bounty of another.” His unexpected arrival outside his native city brought out the entire population to see him. His father, the Rawal, sent to know what had occasioned his presence, and he replied that it was merely preparatory to pilgrimage. He was refused admittance; his followers were disarmed, and he was sent to reside at the fortress of Dewa, together with his sons Abhai Singh and Dhonkal Singh, and their families.
Sālim Singh, Prime Minister.—Salim Singh, who succeeded his father as prime minister of Jaisalmer, was but eleven years of age at the time of his murder. His young mind appears, even at that early age, to have been a hotbed for revenge; and the seeds which were sown soon quickened into a luxuriance rarely equalled even in those regions, where human life is held in little estimation. Without any of that daring valour which distinguishes the Rajput, he overcame, throughout a long course of years, all who opposed him, uniting the subtlety of the serpentto the ferocity of the tiger. In person he was effeminate, in speech bland; pliant and courteous in demeanour; promising, without hesitation, and with all the semblance of sincerity, what he never had the most remote intention to fulfil. Salim, or, as he was generally designated by his tribe, the Mehta, was a signal instance of a fact of which these annals exhibit too many examples, namely, the inadequacy of religious professions, though of a severe character, as a restraint on moral conduct; for though the tenets of his faith (the Jain) imperatively prescribe the necessity of “hurting no sentient being,” and of sitting in the dark rather than, by luring a moth into the flame of a lamp, incur the penalty attached to the sin of insect-murder, this man has sent more of ‘the sons of Jassa’ to Yamaloka[12]than the sword of their external foes during his long administration. He had scarcely attained man’s estate when the outlawed chiefs were restored to their estates by a singular intervention. Raja Bhim Singh had acceded to thegaddiof Marwar, and the Mehta was chosen by the prince of Jaisalmer, as his representative, to convey his congratulations, and thetikaof acknowledgment on his succession, to Raja Bijai Singh. On his return from this mission, he was waylaid and captured by the outlawed chieftains, who instantly passed sentence of death upon the author of their miseries. The sword was uplifted, when, “placing his turban at the feet of Zorawar Singh,” he implored his protection—and he found it! Such is the Rajput—an anomaly amongst his species; his character a compound of the opposite and antagonistical qualities which impel mankind to virtue and to crime. Let me recall to the mind of the reader that the protector of this vampire [267] was the virtuous son of the virtuous Rajputni who, with an elevation of mind equal to whatever is recorded of Greek or Roman heroines, devoted herself, and a husband whom she loved, to the one predominant sentiment of the Rajput, Swamidharma, or ‘fealty to the sovereign.’ Yet had the wily Mehta effected the disgrace of this brave chief, to whom the Rawal owed his release from bondage and restoration to his throne, and forced him to join the outlaws amidst the sand-hills of Barmer. Nothing can paint more strongly the influence of this first of the Bhatti chiefs over his brethren than the act of preserving the life of their mortal foe, thus cast into their hands; for not only did theydissuade him from the act, but prophesied his repentance of such mistaken clemency. Only one condition was stipulated, their restoration to their homes. They were recalled, but not admitted to court: a distinction reserved for Zorawar alone.
Death of Rāe Singh.—When Rae Singh was incarcerated in Dewa, his eldest son, Abhai Singh, Rajkumar, ‘heir-apparent,’ with the second son, Dhonkal, were left at Barmer, with the outlawed chiefs. The Rawal, having in vain demanded his grandchildren, prepared an army and invested Barmer. It was defended during six months, when a capitulation was acceded to, and the children were given up to Mulraj on the bare pledge of Zorawar Singh, who guaranteed their safety; and they were sent to the castle of Dewa, where their father was confined. Soon after, the castle was fired, and Rae Singh and his wife were consumed in the flames. On escaping this danger, which was made to appear accidental, the young princes were confined in the fortress of Ramgarh, in the most remote corner of the desert, bordering the valley of Sind, for their security and that of the Rawal (according to the Mehta’s account), and to prevent faction from having a nucleus around which to form. But Zorawar, who entertained doubts of the minister’s motives, reminded the Rawal that the proper place for the heir-apparent was the court, and that his honour stood pledged for his safety. This was sufficient for the Mehta, whose mind was instantly intent upon the means to rid himself of so conscientious an adviser. Zorawar had a brother named Ketsi, whose wife, according to the courtesy of Rajwara, had adopted the minister as her brother. Salim sounded his adopted sister as to her wish to see her husband become lord of Jinjiniali. The tempter succeeded: he furnished her with poisoned comfits, which she administered to the gallant Zorawar; and her lord was inducted into the estates of Jinjiniali. Having thus disposed of the soul of the Bhatti nobility, he took off in detail the chiefs of Baru, Dangri, and many others, chiefly by the same means, though some by [268] the dagger. Ketsi, who, whether innocent or a guilty participant in his brother’s death, had benefited thereby, was marked in the long list of proscription of this fiend, who determined to exterminate every Rajput of note. Ketsi knew too much, and those connected with him shared in this dangerous knowledge: wife, brother, son, were therefore destined to fall by the same blow. The immediate cause ofenmity was as follows. The minister, who desired to set aside the claims of the children of Rae Singh to thegaddi, and to nominate the youngest son of Mulraj as heir-apparent, was opposed by Ketsi, as it could only be effected by the destruction of the former; and he replied, that “no co-operation of his should sanction the spilling of the blood of any of his master’s family.” Salim treasured up the remembrance of this opposition to his will, though without any immediate sign of displeasure. Soon after, Ketsi and his brother Sarup were returning from a nuptial ceremony at Kanera, in the district of Balotra. On reaching Bhikarai, on the Jaisalmer frontier, where the ministers of the Mehta’s vengeance were posted, the gallant Zorawar and his brother were conducted into the castle, out of which their bodies were brought only to be burnt. Hearing of some intended evil to her lord, Ketsi’s wife, with her infant son, Megha, sought protection in the minister’s own abode, where she had a double claim, as his adopted sister, to sanctuary and protection. For five days, the farce was kept up of sending food for herself and child; but the slave who conveyed it remarking, in coarse, unfeeling language, that both her husband and her brother were with their fathers, she gave a loose to grief and determined on revenge. This being reported to the Mehta, he sent a dagger for her repose.
The princes, Abhai Singh and Dhonkal Singh, confined in the fortress of Ramgarh, soon after the murder of Ketsi were carried off, together with their wives and infants, by poison. The murderer then proclaimed Gaj Singh, the youngest but one of all the posterity of Mulraj, as heir-apparent. His brothers sought security in flight from this fiend-like spirit of the minister, and are now refugees in the Bikaner territory. The following slip from the genealogical tree will show the branches so unmercifully lopped off by this monster:
[269.]
Maha Singh, being blind of one eye[13](kana), could not succeed; and Man Singh being killed by a fall from his horse, the Mehta was saved the crime of adding one more “mortal murther to his crown.”
Long Reigns of Rājput Princes.—It is a singular fact, that the longest reigns we know of in Rajwara occurred during ministerial usurpations. The late Maharao of Kotah occupied thegaddiupwards of half a century, and the Rawal Mulraj swayed the nominal sceptre of thisoasisof the desert upwards of fifty-eight years. His father ruled forty years, and I doubt whether, in all history, we can find another instance of father and son reigning for a century.[14]This century was prolific in change to the dynasty, whose whole history is full of strange vicissitudes. If we go back to Jaswant Singh, the grandfather of Mulraj, we find the Bhatti principality touching the Gara on the north, which divided it from Multan; on the west it was bounded by the Panjnad, and thus included a narrow slip of the fertile valley of Sind; and we have seen it stretch, at no remote period, even to the ancient capital Mansura, better known to the Hindu as Rori-Bakhar,[15]the islandic capital of the Sogdoi (Sodha) of Alexander. To the south, it rested on Dhat, including the castles of Sheo, Kotra, andBarmer, seized on by Marwar; and in the east embraced the districts of Phalodi, Pokaran, and other parts, also in the possession of Marwar or Bikaner. The whole of the State of Bahawalpur is formed out of the Bhatti dominion, and the Rathors have obtained therefrom not a small portion of their western frontier. This abstraction of territory will account for the heartburnings and border-feuds which continually break out between the Bhattis and Rathors, and ‘the children of David (Daudputras).’
Could the same prophetic steel which carved upon the pillar of Brahmsar the destinies of the grandson of the deified Hari, eleven hundred years before Christ, have subjoined to that of Jaisal the fate which awaited his descendant Mulraj, he would doubtless have regarded the prophecy as conveying a falsehood too gross for belief. That the offspring of the deified prince of Dwarka, who founded Ghazni, and fought the [270] united kings of Syria and Bactria, should, at length, be driven back on India, and compelled to seek shelter under the sign of the cross, reared amidst their sand-hills by a handful of strangers, whose ancestors, when they were even in the maturity of their fame, were wandering in their native woods, with painted bodies, and offering human sacrifices to the sun-god—more resembling Balsiva than Balkrishna—these would have seemed prodigies too wild for faith.