The Chahamanas Polity.My Research.
KINGSHIP.
Page 1.
Since the king was the head of the state, it seems that it was felt necessary to raise to the throne a competent member of the ruling family. In the pre-independence period, as long as the Chahamanas acknowledged allegiance to the Pratiharas, it was not much necessary that the ruler should be endowed with distinct qualities so as to enable him to direct the ship of the state; for there was the overlord to guide him in difficult circumstances. A minor or a less capable person might very well occupy the position of the head of the state. Hence Samantaraja’s successors, like Naradeva, Jayaraja, Vigraharaja I, Chamundaraja I and Gopendraraja were all insignificant rulers. But after the attainment of independence, it was a matter of grave concern whether the state was in capable hands or not. Interestingly enough, just in this period we find the case of suppression of legal heirs by distant relatives within the ruling family. Thus after Viryarama’s death the throne ought to have passed to his elder son Durlabharaja, but we find from our accepted sources that Viryarama was succeeded by his brother Chamundaraka.[1]
With the enhancement of the king’s position, his power and ambition began to increase. He was gradually actuated by the ambition of securing for himself an imperial authority, left as a legacy by the Pratiharas of Kanauj. This is evidenced by the assumption of great and high sounding titles. The early Chahamana rulers were satisfied with the simple titles of bhupa, nrpa and maharaja. But since the time of Prthviraja I, when the Chahamanas had consolidated enough power and authority they began to call themselves as Paramabhattaraka-Maharajadhiraja-Paramesvara, etc. Prthviraja II even assumed the title of Vharatesvara[2] on account of his ambition to be the overlord of India.In addition to these imperious titles, a divine character was also attributed to these later Chahaman rulers by their court poets and chroniclers. The Delhi Sivalik pillar inscription calls Vigraharaja IV as Purushottama[3] i.e. God Vishnu Himself. In the Hansi stone inscription, Prthviraja II si compared with Rama.[4] The Prthvirajavijaya mentions that Prthviraja III and his brother Hariraja were the two ‘incarnations of Rama and Lakshmana.’[5]
KING’S QUALITIES AND QUALIFICATION.
Let us now discuss the necessary qualities required for the king. The theoretical qualifications laid down by Sukra and Kamandaka are numerous but we need not devote much space to them, as they are the same as those described by the earlier political writers. Inscriptions and works on polity of our age emphasise that a king can became a successful ruler only if he waits upon the elders, studies the art of government, cultivates righteousness and protects his subjects as efficiently as the divine guardians. He was expected to be always in constant association with virtuous and learned men in order to derive the benefit of their experience and advice. He was to be kind-hearted and was not to oppress his subjects for his own selfish interest. A king, says Sukra, who is virtuous is divine in nature, one who is otherwise is devilish, he is destined for hell.[6] The king had to observe discipline, for it brings prosperity to him. He was to be well-versed in Sastras and in different branches of learning. A king, who is well-grounded in all the Vidyas, is respected by the good; he can never be inclined to a wrong course even if impelled by evil advisers.[7] Powess, strength, intelligence and valour were other necessary qualities required for the king, a king devoid of these qualities, says the Mataya Purana, though wealthy, can never administer ever a small kingdom.[8] The king is also advised to keep an even balance between dharma, artha and Kama.
On the negative side the king is advised to give up excessive gambling and hunting. He was not expected to sleep by day, nor was he to be too much talkative. Over-indulgence in music and dancing was to be avoided. Six enemies namely excessive indulgence, anger, intoxication, envy, convetousness, and self-delusion were to be carefully guarded against. All the vyasanas were to be avoided. According to Somadeva, ‘A single vyasana is enough to destroy a powerful king, even possessing four kinds of armies, what to say if there are all of the combined.[9] A good king should exert to eradicate these evils, keeping himself in the association of the learned men and away from the evil-doors.[10]
The records of our period usually describe the kings as possessing the above qualities prescribed by the Niti works. The Ratnapur inscription of the Chedi king Jajalladeva, informs us how king Prtithvideva possessed nobility, bravery and depth.[11] The Khajuraho inscription dated C. 954 A.D. states that the king Harsha combined in himself eloquence, statesmanship, heroism, vigour, ambition, modesty and self-confidence.[12] The king Sallakshanavarman is described as a master of the sacred lore, a kinsman of the virtuous, a store of arts and an abode of good conduct.[13] The Pratihara records usually describe the kings as endowed with bravery, valour and modesty. The Chahamana king is described as the sun of prowess, who secured success and prosperity by his heroism.[14] Prithvideva is described as the sun, endowed with the most intense brilliancy.[15] Gonerosity, truth, statesmanship and heroism were the qualities of the Chahamana king. The king Vairisimha is described as endowed with might, generosity, bravery, resoluteness and good fortune.[16] Inteligence, bravery, religiousness, truthfulness and gratitude were the qualities possessed by the Chahamana king, who had full controll over all his senses.[17] King of the Chahamana dynasty was the master of prosody, grammar, logic and astronomy. He was also a store of arts and could compose poetry in many languages.[18]
Sukra, further emphatically points out
at one place that kingship is due to previous merit[25]
and at another place attributes it to mere valour and bravery.[26]
But at no place does he state that the kingship arises because particles of
different gods enter into the body of a king, as has been crudely done by Manu.
He neither invests him with infallibility, nor enjoins absolute obedience to
him, even if he was a wicked or worthless ruler, as was doneby Narada in the
earlier period.[27]
On the other hand, he regards the bad, vicious and reprobate king as a demon
incarnate, and advises the subjects not to obey him.[28]
He further calls that king a dacoit, if he forsakes his duty, disobeys the high
ideal of kingship and oppresses the subjects.[29]
According to Sukra the question does not arise at all as to whether the
subjects are to obey such a king; he openly encourages them to intrigue and
conspire against him, and even to attempt to dethrone him[30]
with the help of neighbouring or feudatory kings, and to offer the crown to a
virtuous prince or to any other capable member of the royal family.[31]
The advice was not so difficult to follow in the past, when there were several
feudatory rulers aspiring to the imperial position and when the ruler possessed
an army not much more efficient than the forces that could be raised by the
oppressed subjects in co-operation with the feudatory, whom they wanted to
enthrone.
There was however another school,
probably of courtiers, which was inclined to accept the divinity of the king
more or less in a literal sense. According to this school, the king was
regarded as a divine incarnation. Some of the epigraphs of our age were written
by authors, who subscribed to this view.
The climax of this tendency is to be
seen in the practice of building temples not only in honour of dead kings, as
was the case under the Kushanas, but even of living kings. In one of the
Chahamana records, king Luntigadeva is said to have set up images of himself
and his queen, this obviously must have been done for being enshrined in the
temple.[32]
It is quite possible that the prevailing tendency of ascribing divinity to the
royal personages and of regarding them as divine incarnations may be
responsible for the erection of temples to living kings.
Whether the advocates of this school, which
regarded the king as a divine incarnation, were prepared to hold him as
infallible and above public secrutiny,
we do not know. Probably they did so, as would appear from a passage in the
Kadambari.[33]
It is very likely that the political writers of our period like Sukra may have
propounded their theories as a reply to the extreme views advocated by the
courtiers and expressed in some of our epigraphs.
KING’S FUNCTIONS :
The king was the supreme head of the
executive judicial and military administration. His paramount duty as the head
of the Government was to protect the people and work for their welfare. Sukra
clearly states at one place that the highest Dharma of the king isto protect
the subjects and to put down the wicked.[34]
Kamandaka says that the protection of the subjects is possible only if law and
order are preserved in society; the king should take proper steps to achieve
this goal.[35]
Being
the head of the judicial administration, the king was to administer law
impartially and to ascertain carefully whether proper justice was administered
by lower courts. The monarch, states, Sukra, who proceeds according to the
dictates of law, is blessed with virtue, wealth and enjoyment.[36]
Kamandaka advises the king to impose
just punishment upon the culprits according to the offences committed by them.[37]
Being
the head of the military administration, the king looked after the proper
maintenance of the army and had to take steps to increase its efficiency. He
was to make proper arrangements for the training and discipline of the fighting
forces. The king, who doesnot increase the strength of his army, who does not
protect his subjects and who does not make other princes to pay him tributes is
compared to barren sesame.[38]
Besides
these functions, the king had to promote Dharma, Artha and Kama for the
religious, socio-economic and aesthetic progress of the society. He was to
encourage virtue and morality. He was to help all the religious sects. He was
to maintain or support hospitals, rest houses and educational institutions, and
had to encourage trade, industry, agriculture and fine arts.
CORONATION :
In our period, the coronation
ceremony was usually performed soon after the death of the last ruler, There is
no evidence to show that it was postponed to the time when the king attained
majority. Of course if a king was minor at the time of the ceremony, a regent
carried on the administration for him.[39]
The
coronation ceremony of our period differed considerable from that in the Vedic
and post-Vedic times; it will be therefore necessary to survey its earlier
history in some details in order to understand the new developments in our age.
The
history of cornation goes back to hoary antiquity. Even in the Vedic period we
find it being solemnly performed with sacred mantras. It consisted of several
rituals among which the Rajasuya was the most important one; next to it were
the ‘Vajapeya’ and the ‘Sarvamedha’. According to the Aitareya-Brahmana,
the king would secure Samrajya, bhaujya, svarajya, Vairajya, etc. by
performing the Rajasuya sacrifice.[40]
According to the Satapatha-Brahmana, however, the ceremony but to
insugurate the reign of the king, however small.[41]
In this sacrifice the king used to take an oath[42]
undertaking not to work against the interest of the priestly order.[43]
The
Vajapeya sacrifice lays down some rituals, which are followed by the chariot
race, which was its main feature. The king was of course expected to win in
this race and was then proclaimed and installed to the high office. It is
however important to note that in the Vedic period the Vajapeya was of lesser
political importance than the Rajasuya. In the later Vedic period the Vajapeya
however obtained the higher rank than the Rajasuya because it was believed that
by performing the former, one secures the imperial position, while by
performing the latter, one attains to mere royalty.
Another
important feature of the Vajapeya sacrifice was the Ratnin oblations, which
were offered by the king to the Ratnins, (important courtiers and officials) by
repairing to their houses.
In
the epic period, the royal oath formed an important part in the coronation
ceremony. The Mahabharata admonishes the king ‘Take the oath in mind, word and
deed, namely I shall always look after the welfare of the people, regarding it
as supreme; whatever is prescribed by the rules of ethics, I shall always abide
by, I shall never be selfwilled.’[44]
In
the coronation ceremony of our period, however, the Vedic rituals like the
Vajapeya and the Rajasuya do not figure at all. The Vedic mantras had become
unintelligible; due to the complicated and complex nature of the sacrificial
rituals and greater repugnance for sacrificial slaughter, Vedic religion had
gone out to vogue. The Ratnins, who played an important part in the Vajapeya
sacrifice of the Vedic period also disappeared in our age. There is no doubt
that the ministers had taken their place, but it was no longer customary for
the king to go to their houses to offer any oblations at the time of the
coronation.
During
our age king’s power was regarded as supreme and the tendency to deify him was
getting stronger. That the king should take an oath to rule without oppressing
the people was probably regarded as incompatible with his power and dignity.
Chariot race and the dice play also ceased to be important elements of the
ceremony.
We
thus see that the Vedic form of coronation had gone out of vogue. Some Vedic
rituals like Vasodhara were performed and a number of Vedic mantras were
recited, but they do not appear to be connected with coronation. A number of
Pauranic rituals like Graha and Nakshatra-santi were introduced, attesting to
the faith in astrology of the age. These rites are described by Lakshmidhara in
the Rajadharmakanda of Kritya-Kalpataru, relying upon the authority of epics
and puranas.
Let
us now survey the important features of the coronation ceremony of our period.[45]
The proper date and auspicious time for the coronation were first settled by
the court astrologer. It may be noted here that the Vedic rituals do not refer
to any astrological considerations; in our period, however, astrology became a
popular science and people began to have more faith in it, so the advice of the
astrologer was usually taken on every important occasion. A chief priest was
then chosen, who was to direct the rites. It was essential that he should not
be the chief priest of any other ruler; only in that case he can pray to God
for the paramount sovereignty and prosperity of only one ruler and none else.
The preceptor of the king and the ministers were then to be presented to the
king.
A
number of preliminary arrangements were made for the coronation. The palace and
the capital were beautifully decorated. The main roads were washed by clean and
fresh water.[46]
Gold, precious stones, jewels white garlands, fried rice, honey, ghee, weapons,
new raiments, a white umbrella, a complete tiger skin and many other similar
things required for the occasion were collected. An elephant with auspicious
marks was also brought for the state procession after the coronation. Similarly
a chariot was also made ready, so that the king might mount on it before going
to make a circuit of the capital.
The
ceremony[47]
started with a ceremonial bath, given to the king by the water procured from
the confluence of the Ganga and the Yamuna at Prayaga and from other holy
streams as well.[48]
The king then performed a number of propitiatory rites, among which the
Vinayaka-santi, the Grahasanti, the Aindri-santi and the Abhyudaya-sraddha were
the most important.[49]
The Vinayaka-santi, was performed to overcome obstacles, the Graha – or
Nakshatra-santi was intended toward off evil influences of the planets and
stars. The followed the Abhyudaya – or Nandi-sraddha, which was an inevitable
ritual to be observed on every auspicious occasion. After the
Abhyudaya-saraddha, the king used to worship Vishnu and Divine Mothers. The
Vasordhara sacrifice, which followed this worship consisted of 401 ghee
offerings made continuously to fire in order to fulfill all varieties of
desires. For along time, it was connected with the royal coronation and was
performed at the time of the consecration ceremony, as is shown by the Nandsa
inscription. It was regarded as a kind of superior consecration ceremony for
the royal sacrificer himself, more potent than the Rajasuya or the Vajapaya.
The
Aindri-santi, the most important rite, which was performed before the actual
coronation, followed the Vasordhara sacrifice. Its aim was to overcome internal
and external enemies of the king. It was thus an important element in the
coronation ceremony.
On
the day of the actual Abhisheka, the priest decorated with turban and carrings,
used to start the ceremony by propitiating the sacred fire with offerings. A
few Vedic Mantras were then recited, but they are really not connected with the
royal coronation. Some of them like Ritashadi[50]
and Yata-Indra[51]
are calculated to make the king powerful
and to promote the prosperity of the nation. Majority of Mantras, however, like
Indriganya, which is not yet traced, Ashuhsishana[52] which, describes the power of Indra,
Agatsatya,[53]
which refers to the oblation to truth, Yaste-agne[54] which refers to the sanctification of fire
on an altar and Svastida,[55] in which, Indra is asked to drink Soma juice, have no connection at all with the coronation ceremony, and thus
are not of any political significance.
After the recitation of
the Vedic Mantras, the king was again given a bath[56] with
Panchagavya,[57]
consisting of Milk, curds, ghee, sugarand honey. It is interesting to note that
the bath with Panchagavya is not referred to by the Vedic texts, it is
therefore an innovation ofthe Pauranic age. Further, in the Vedic period, it
was the priest only, who used to give this bath to the king; none others
enjoyed this privilage. In our period, such was not however the case.
Representatives of all the four castes, including the Sudra, were permitted to
besprinkle the king. The Sudras, the Vaisayas, the Kshatriyas, and the
Brahmanas standing respectively to the west, south, east and north used to
besprinkle the king by the water, milk, curd and ghee (also described as
nectar) using earthen, copper, silver and gold pots[58]
respectively. This perhaps indicates that the king was anxious to have the
good-will of all the classes of his subjects on the occasion of his coronation.
After the bath, the
limbs of the king were rubbed by the earth collected from twelve different
localities.[59]
The selection of the spots from which the earth was collected is not quite at
random; some of them have symbolic importance. For instance, the mountain is
the highest place on the earth, and the rubbing of the king’s head with the
earth obtained from the summits of mountains was naturally believed to make the
king as prominent as a mountain peak. The right hand of the king was rubbed with
the dust dug with the tusk of an elephant and the left hand with the found
adhering to the horns of a bull. Now we know that the elephant and the bull are
both the symbols of strength and power and the earth dug by them was thought to
make the king most powerful. The temple was regarded as the most holy place,
and the earth obtained from it was used to rub the king’s face. The face is the
most significant limb of a person, and its rubbing with this holy earth was
obviously to sanctify the entire person of the king. The rubbing of the
remaining of the king’s limbs with the earth obtained from other diverse
localities like an ant-hill, a house of a prostitute, a confluence of streams,
a horse-stable, a conqushed and a river bed had probably similar significance,
though it cannot be now fully understood.
After this symbolic
rubbing, the king was asked by the priest to sit on a bhadrasana; he was then
besprinkled with water falling through a golden sieve (having hundred and eight
holes) by the members of four castes, by chaste women and by women with living
husband and children. The king then used to see hundred auspicious objects and
hundred and eight holy articles.[60] The
remaining rites were then performed and lastly the purnahuti or the final
oblation was offered to the fire.[61] All
these are new details in the coronation ritual introduced in our age reflecting
to changed outlook.
Later on the king used
to worship Ganesha, Brahma, Vishnu and Siva and also other deities popular in
contemporary times. For the satisfaction of the planets, the gods and the
manes, he used to bestow gifts on worthy recipients; an assurance of safety was
also given to all living beings.[62] The
prisoners were then released.[63] It
is interesting to not that the custom of releasing the prisoners was prevalent
in India since very early times; we find the great emperor Asoka releasing the
prisoners on every anniversary of his coronation. The release of cattle,
advocated by Lakshmidhara, is perhaps a grotesque extension of the principle of
the release of all under confinement at the coronation time. Probably only a
few cattle were let loose as a matter of formality.
When this was done, the
king was seated on a lion throne covered with a tiger skin and the chief priest
used to present him the customary madhuparka offering. Having worshipped his weapons and
royal umbrella (Chhatra), he used to give audience to his subjects. Then started the coronation
procession. For a time the king used to ride a charger, but after a short while,
he used to exchange the horse for an elephant. The royal procession went
through the principal thorough-fares of the metropolis. The city gods in
temples were visited and worshipped at that time and largesses were scattered
all the way. After returning to the palace, royal servants and guests were
offered a feast, which marked the end of the coronation.
KING’s TITLES :
We will now discuss the different royal
titles in use in our period. During the last half of the 1st.
Millennium before the Christian era, Indian kings were content with the simple
title Raja. In all his records, the great Mauryan emperor Asoka calls himself
merely a Raja; he does not bear any high sounding epithet. When the Scythians
and the Kushanas established themselves in northern India, they popularised the
imperial title Rajatiraja, ‘King of kings’ . Later on when the Guptas became
imperial rulers, they transformed the title Rajatiraja into Maharajadhiraja,
which soon became popular with the great conquerors and imperial rulers of
India.
During our period the
title Maharajadhiraja was usually used by the emperors. In Rajasthan, Bihar and
Bengal kings used to have variations of this title like ‘samastarajavalivirajita’. ‘paramesvara’ and
‘paramabhattaraka’.
Many Chahamana kings
assumed the title Vividhavidya-vichara-vachaspati, ‘deep scholar engaged in
pondering over the different branches of learning.’ This shows that some kings
were anxious to assume titles testifying to their scholarship or patronage of
learning. In one of his inscriptions, the king Hammiravarmadeva calls himself
Paramabhattaraka Shahiraja (C.I. XX, 135). The title Shahiraja was undoubtedly
adopted by him from the Muslims, who had established themselves in the
northwest by his time. In earlier times, of course,this title was used by the
Kushanas.
It is somewhat
surprising to note, that the title Maharajadhiraja was sometimes used by the
feudatories also. Thus for instance, Mathanadeva, who was a feudatory of the
king Vijayapaladeva calls himself Maharajadhiraja Parmesvara in the Rajor
inscription.[64]
Dharavarsha, the feudatory of the king Yasovarman, is described as
Maharajadhiraja Mahamandalesvara in the Kalavan plates.[65] This
tendency probably indicates the growing aspirations of feudatories and the
waving power of their overlords.
There were also some
titles in use, indicating the king’s faith in a particular religion or sect.
Thus Dharmapala and Devapala, the two great Pala rulers, called themselves as
Paramasugata in their records, clearly showing that they were the followers of
Buddhism. The title Paramamahesvara which was assumed by a number of kings of
the dynasties in Northern India, indicates that the ruler were the worshippers
of Siva. Similarly some of the Pratihara kings assumed the title
Paramasaktibhaktas, which indicates their faith in the worship of Sakti.
WAS MONARCHY LIMITED :
It is important to note that though the king
was the centre of all military, political, administrative and judicial powers,
he was expected not to behave arbitrarily. Hindu political writers have imposed
a number of checks upon the king to prevent him from becoming an autocrat.
In ancient India,
sovereignty was executive rather than legislative. In other words, the king had
no legislative power. He was expected to act according to the rules and laws
framed not by himself but by the wise sages and immemorial custom. He had to
respect desadharma (local customs), Jatidharma (Caste rules), Kuladharma (family traditions), and srenidharma
(guild regulations), which
together constituted the law of the land. PV clearly says that it is only by
following the Dharma or law that the king can earn fame in the world.[66] He
could not however make the law, nor could he act against it, because the law
was regarded as more divine, than the king himself. He was made to realise that
there was nothing higher than Dharma and that he must and he should act
according to it. Kamandaka says that it is only by following the law that the
king can enjoy the kingdom for a long time. One, who acts against the rules of Dharma, goes to hell.[67] Dharma alone brings prosperity to the kingdom and fame to the king. The king
should therefore act according to its dictates.
The political writers of
our period like those of the earlier ages[68]
regard the king as a servant of the people appointed to protect them. Narada
says that taxation is nothing but king’s pay for the protection of his
subjects.[69]
According to Apararka, who flourished in our period, no one ever makes a
payment without expecting a return; the taxes are therefore paid in return for
protection expected from the king.[70]
Sukra goes a step further and says that since the people pay him taxes, the
king should serve them as a dasa or a servant.[71] The
above statements are not to be taken literally; but they are obviously intended
to convey to the king that if the people paid the taxes, it was his duty to
protect them as their servant, specially appointed for this work.
The political writers of
our period have gone a step further and declared the king to be a trustee for
the people. They have advisedhim not to spend the state revenues for his own
personal enjoyment. They have clearly maintained that the taxes, which the king
collects, are held by him only as a trust for the subjects, and are to be used
only for their welfare. This king is repeatedly informed that the treasury is
not his own personal or private property. Sukra maintains that the king, who
spends therevenues for the maintenance of the army, for the welfare of the
subjects and for the performance of sacrifices, gets the hapiness in this as
well as in the next life, but the king, who spends it otherwise, goes down to
hell.[72]
The Agni-Purana,
however, goes a step still furtherand declares that the king’s responsibilities
are greater than those of trustees; the latter is not called upon to sacrifice
his own interests in favour of the object of trust; the king has to do so. This
authority compares the king to an expectant mother and states that just as the
latter sacrifices her own pleasures and conveniences for promoting the growth
and welfare of the baby in her womb, in the same way the king must sacrifice
his own ease, convenience and happiness, so that the subjects committed to his
care may prosper both materially and spiritually.[73] The Markandeya-Purana also advocates the same view, when it states
that the body of the king is not meant for pleasures and enjoyment; it has to
put up with great troubles and worries, while carrying out the royal duty of
protecting the subjects and fulfilling the Dharma.[74]
To sum up, a passage in
Sukra, I, 78-81 gives us perhaps a very good glimpseinto the views of the age
about the king. Like a father,the king was to promote the building up of good
character in his subjects; like a mother, he was to forgive them; like a
teacher, he was to offer them good advice, like a brother, he was to ensure
them a proper share in the revenues of the states; like a friend, he was to
guard their secrets; like Kubera, he was to grant them wealth and like Yama, he
was to mete out just punishments. In IV, 2, 131 Sukra sums up the whole
position, when he maintains that the king was a servant of the people as he
received his wages from the, but he was also their lord as he offered them
protection.
A functionary, who was
to discharge so many diverse duties, could of course not afford to act
capriciously. He is at every step asked to act after consulting his ministers,
preceptors and Brahmanas. Sukra advises the king to act normally according to
the advice of his ministers and preceptors. He clearly states that the king,
who does not listen to his ministers and acts according to his own whims, will
be soon destroyed. Even the wisest king cannot know everything, for different
persons have different aptitudes.[75] Even
Manu, who has put forth the rather crude theory that the king’s body is
fashioned out of the particles from the bodies of Dikpalas, reminds him that he
can never hope to govern the kingdom well, except with the genuine co-operation
of his ministers and advisers. We thus see that the ministers are expected to play
an important part in preventing the king from becoming an autocrat.
Kings usually become
arbitrary when they are not given good education and training. Our political
writers have therefore insisted that proper steps should be taken in this
direction. The training of the king taught him to be pious and religious to
cultivate good manners and to respect the public opinion.
Our political writers
have also imposed a number or religious and moral checks upon the king in order
to prevent him from becoming an arbitrary ruler. They assert that a king, who
does not rule according to the law and oppresses the subjects, will go to hell.
This threat of hell had a great terror in ancient times and it served as a
great deterrent.
Public opinion was also
expected to play an important part in checking the arbitrary powers of the
king. Through his spies, he was to ascertain what his subjects thought of him
and his administration and was to mend matters, if necessary.[76]
We thus see that the
political writers of our period have devised a number of administrative, moral
and religious checks in order to prevent the king from becoming an autocrat.
The records of our period, however, further reveal how a great decentralization
of the functions of the Government was brought about, and how it served to
protect the interests of the people. Large powers were vested in district, town
and village administrations, which could be effectively supervised and
controlled by local non-official councils, in which the voice of the people had
the upper hand. The village and town councils of our period discharged almost
all the functions of Government, except that of organising a regular army,
determining foreign policy and declaring and conducting a war. This extensive
decentralization was an effective check upon the powers of the king in ancient
India.
How far the above checks
and devises were successful in serving as breaks on royal power and in
preventing it from becoming arbitrary is however difficult to determine. During
our period there were some virtuous and able kings, who worked hard for the
welfare of the people and for the all round progress of their kingdom. But
there were also some tyrants, who oppressed the subjects and ruled arbitrarily.
The Rajatarangini supplies many instances of such cruel and
unprincipled rulers, who were helped by the Damara, Ekangas and Kayastha in
their oppressive activities. Very probably some of the monarchs of the
dynasties surveyed in this work might have belonged to the same category. An
account of their maladministration does not occur in our inscriptions probably
because they were composed by their court poets. Or it may be that normally a
successful rival tothe throne did not care to describe the administration of
the ruler, he had ousted. What was the percentage of tyrants to good rulers
cannot be unfortunately ascertained at present.
The kings, who ruled in
an arbitrary way in our period, could doso, because moral checks like those
described above, were not always effective and constitutional checks like those
in modern times did not exist in our age. In the Vedic period, the Samiti
apparently functioned as a constitutional check and controlled the king more or
less like a modern parliament. But during our period, there was no such body,
which could control a wicked ruler or bring his administration to a standstill.
It may be noted that the same was the case in Europe also in contemporary
times. The ministry could sometimes control a king, but normally this was
difficult for it because ministers were appointed by king and held office
during his pleasure.
The philosophy of the
resistence to misrule was not properly developed during the period. Our
political writers regarded the king to be a servant and the kingdom to be a
trust. What action was to be taken by people, if the august servant and trustee
did not discharge the duties properly is not discussed by the writers. Rights
of the people have not received that attention, which the modern age would have
liked to be paid to them. The result was that there were no constitutional
checks developed in our period, as was the case everywhere else.
v v v
MEMBERS OF THE ROYAL FAMILY
AND
THE MINISTRY
(A) MEMBERS OF THE ROYAL FAMILY :
Queens :
It seems that the Chahamana Queen used to
take some positive part in the benevolent activities and sometimes in the
administrative matters. The Prthvirajavijaya refers to the establishment of innumerable
temples of Shiva on the bank of the Pushkara by Rudrani, the Queen of Chandana.[77] A
Jayaraja’s wife Somalekha was so influential that she used ‘to coin fresh
(nava) rupakas every day.’[78] This
has been well substantiated by the discovery of certain silver and copper coins
bearing on the obverse the legend Sri
Somaladevi. But the most shining
among the Chahamana Queens was Karpuradevi, the mother of Prthviraja III. On
his death-bed king Somesvara had appointed her as the regent of the state
during Prthviraja’s minority. She fully justified the confidence reposed on her
by her husband. During her regency the country remained free from dangers, both
internal and external, and peace and prosperity prevailed in the kingdom, This
has been well attested by the Prthvirajavijaya.[79]
Yuvaraja :
We now turn to a discussion of the role of
the various members of the royal family in the administration of our period.
The first person to consider is the Yuvaraja or the crown prince. It may be
observed at the outset that the Yuvaraja was regarded as an important member of
the administration by our political writers. Sukra compares him to the right
eye and the right ear of the king; he was to be consulted on important administrative
problems.[80]
Naturally great care was
bestowed upon the proper training of the crown prince. The crown prince is
particularly warned that he should not become insolent on account of his
privileged position.He was to be respectful to the king and considerate to his
brothers. He was to help his father in carrying on the administration on proper
lines and to the satisfaction of the subjects.[81]
Though the Yuvaraja was
an important member of the administration, our political writers do not include
him in the ministry, probably because an heir-apparent, old enough to
participate in administration, was not always available. We may presume that
when a Yuvaraja, old enough to bear the burden of administration, was
available, he was included in the ministry. Possibly he may have occupied the
status of the Pratinidhi in Sukra’s cabinet.
We often find the
Yuvaraja exercising the royal prerogative of granting villages, of course with
the permission of the reigning king. Thus under the Gahadavalas, Yuvaraja Govindchandra
is seen granting a village in 1104 A.D., after taking his father’s permission.[82]
Similarly Yuvaraja Jayachandradeva donated the village of Haripur to
Praharajasarman with the consent of his father.[83]
Yuvaraja Asphotachandra issued a copper-plate in 1134 A.D., bearing his father
Govindachandra’s seal.[84] All
this evidence shows that under the Chahamanas and the Gahadevalas, the crown
prince enjoyed the right of making land grants after taking the emperor’s
permission. Probably such was also the case with other dynasties, though it is
not revealed by their records.
Some records of the
Chahamanas of Nanol refer to the rule of both the king and the crown prince at
the beginning. Thus the Sevadi inscription refers both to Maharajadhiraja
Asvaraja and the Yuvaraja Katukaraja.[85]
Another inscription from the same place refers to the king Katukaraja along
with their apparent Jayantasimha.[86]
These cases would show
that when the ruling kings were old, or incapacitated, the heir-apparent
naturally exercised almost all the powers of the ruling king. The seal of the
Yuvaraja was often regarded as necessary even when the seal of the king was
there. Thus Madanapala as Yuvaraja put his own seal on his father’s grant.[87]
Younger Princes :
The younger princes during our period
enjoyed suitable titles. Rajyapala, a younger son of Gahadavala king
Govindachandra, is described as ‘Samastarajaprakriyopeta.’[88] They
were often appointed to some important posts in the administration. Sometimes
they were in the ministry also. Thus under the Chahamanas, prince
Sallakshanapala was appointed as the prime minister by his own father, king
Visaladeva.[89]
This practice does not seem to be very common, for there was the danger in such
cases that the junior prince may conspire to secure the succession for himself.
Princes are often seen
taking keen interest in the administration. One of the Chahamana inscriptions
described prince Jajalla as Rajyachitaka,[90] i.e.
supervising or pondring over the problems of the administration. Another
inscription of the same dynasty informs us, how even the king sometimes used to
take help from the princes in the important administrative matters. Thus in the
Amaridakshina proclamation of the king Alhanadeva, his
two sons, Gajasimha and Kelhanadeva, are both stated to be concurring with him.[91] This
clearly shows that grown-up princes under the Chahamanas exercised considerable
influence in the administration. It is also possible that Alhanadeva had become
old by this time and was being assisted in administration by his two sons.
Princes more frequently
appear as the governors of towns in our records. Thus under the Chahamanas,
king Gajasimha appointed his son Chamundaraja as the governor of Mandavyapura
in 1170 A.D.[92]
Similarly the king Kelhana appointed his son Vikramasimha to the same post in
1180 A.D.[93]
In 1185 A.D., Mandavyapura had another royal governor Sotala, who was also a
son of king Kelhana.[94] We
thus see that different princes were appointed as governors of Mandavyapura at
different times. Even if they would have enjoyed it as a fief, they could do so
only for a short period, for it was regranted in succession. The above cases
hail from Rajastha only, but it is not unlikely that the same was the case with
other provinces also.
To carry on the town
administration properly, the prince governors were aided by military officers.
Thus when Gajasimha was acting as a governor of Mandavyapura, Sauliki Jasadhana
assisted him as his Baladhipa; this officer had been allotted the revenues of
village Jhamara, probably as part of his pay.[95] He,
however, could not make any alienation from his income, for we are told that
when he was assigning a drama from his income, he had to take the consent of
the royal governor Gajasimha.
Sometimes princes also
enjoyed considerable prestige. Thus when Maharajaputra Rajyapala, younger son
of the Gahadavala king Govindachandra, granted the village of Gamawami together
with some pattalas to Pandita Damodarasarman, he was allowed to
put his own seal on the charter, though he had to take the permission of his
father for the grant of the village.[96]
For their personal
enjoyment and expenses, princes were usually given fiefs known as Seja under the Chahamanas. It is, however, important to note that usually
the princes had no full rights over their fiefs, i.e. they were not regarded as
their personal property. For sometimes we find the central government
exercising the power of assigning revenues out of these fiefs. Thus Kelhanadeva
granted a well in 1165 A.D., which was situated within the fief of
Ajayapaladeva.[97]
We may well presume that similar practice prevailed in other dynasties also.
Princes usually could
not alienate land out of their fiefs. But they seem to have often enjoyed the
right of assigning small portion of the income as a gift for a charitable
purpose without taking the king’s permission. Thus the Chahamana prince
Kirtipala, who was given a fief of twelve villages, granted a yearly sum of two
drammas from each of the twelve villages to the Jina Mahavira at Naddulai.[98]
Probably the extent of a
prince’s fief differed according to circumstances. Sometimes we find that a
number of villages were given as a fief, as was the case with the Chahamana
prince Kirtipala, who was ejoying twelve villages as his fief.[99] On
the other hand, sometimes,only one village was given as a fief to two princes,
as was the casewith the Rajaputras Lakhanapala and Abhayapala, who were both
enjoying one village as a fief in 117 A.D.[100] It
appears that the extent of the fief depended upon the extet and resources of
the kingdom and the importance of the grantee.
(B) THE MINISTRY :
In discussing the Chahamana polity of
Sakambhari, the question arises whether the state policy was directed by the
king himself, or by the king along with his ministers. In the pre-indepedence
period it seems that as long as the Chahamanas were under the Pratihara rule,
they had no independent policy to persue. Hence the ministerial role in the
administration was insignificant. But with the attainment of independence the
condition completely changed. Hence-forth the entire responsibility for
evolving an independent policy fell directly on the shoulder of the king.
Obviously he thought it wise to take advice from experinenced men in public
affairs in conducting the business of the state. It is interesting to note that
the term Mantri or minister was first emphasised by the
Chahamana records in the post-independence period. The Prthvirajavijava mentions one Madhava as the Mantri of Durlabharaja II.[101] It
seems that this Madhava had some role in consolidating the kingdom of
Sakambhari, recently freed outside control.
Though the king used to
take advice of his minister in all important matters, yet it was his discretion
to accept it or not. Vigraharaja IV rejected the advice of his minister Sridhara
as to the course of action he would follow against the Muslim danger. Similarly
Prthviraja III acted contrary to the advice of his minister Somesvara on the
eve of the second battle of Tarain.[102]
But the power and
influence of the minister were felt, if there was a serious situation or during
the rule of a minor in the state. When Prthviraja II died childless, intrigues
and disorders were likely to prevail in the Chahamana kingdom. At that critical
moment the ministers decided to bring back his uncle Somesvara from Gujarat in
order to instal him on the throne of Sakambhari. Somesvara thus became the
Chahamana ruler due to the help of his ministers. We find again that the
ministers rendered valuable assistance to Karpuradevi in carrying on the
administration durig the minority of Prthviraja III. It was very likely that
these ministers exercised enough power and influence in the kingdom in such
circumstances.
The Delhi Siwalik Pillar
inscription refers to one Mahamantri during the rule of Vigraharaja IV.[103] The
mention of the terms Mantri and Maha-mantri in the
Chahamana records during the reigns of Durlabharaja II and Vigraharaja IV
respectively is really interesting. This tends to show the development of a
hierarchy in the ministry in the later stage of the Chahamana rule. This may be
explained by the fact that in the period of consolidation of the just
independent Chahamana kingdom, the administration was obviously a simple one
prevailing over a small area. Consequently the ministerial function was limited
in scope, and need was yet felt for a proper gradation of the post. But during
the period of so-called Chahamana imperialism, the kingdom was considerably
called Chahamana imperialism, the kingdom was considerably increased in size.
The administration did not remain a simple one, and the ministers grew in
number and importance to look after the vast territory. The obviously led to
the development of the hierarchy in the ministry with differet works to
perform. In other words, some sort of a council of ministers was probably
formed, headed by the Maha-mantri. We should, therefore, try to form an idea of
this council of ministers on the basis of the available Chahamana records.
MAHA-MANTRI :
In the council of ministers the Maha-mantri
or chief minister obviously became the most important member. As the head of
the council, he advised the king in administration, and supervised the work of
the council. This post, therefore, was generally reserved for the royal family
or for a very able and influential person. Vigraharaja IV’s chief minister was
his own son Sallakshnapala. Prthviraja III’s chief minister Kadambavasa appears
to be a very able and influential person in the Chahamana court. As the chief
minister, he had rendered great service to Queen-mother Karpuradevi during her
regency,and cotinued to do so during the early part of Prthviraja III’s
reign.The Chahamana king always attached a great importance to the advice of
this experienced chief minister. This is well illustrated in his policy towards
Bhimadeva II of Gujarat, when the latter was attached by Muhammad Ghuri.[104]
SENAPATI :
In an age of constant warfare, the Senapati comander of the
army must have been a very important person in the state. He was the ‘war
minister’, and probably occupied a position in the ministry next to the chief
minister. It was, therefore, quite likely that only a member of the royal
family or a very able and trusted person was appointed to that important
post.Vigraharaja IV’s Seapati was his maternal uncle Simhabala. Queen
Karpuradevi’s uncle Bhuvanaikmalla became the commander of the army during her
regency as well as in the early part of Prthviraja’s reign.[105] Prthviraja’s next commander was Skanda[106]
whose father and grand-father were the foreign ministers in the Chahamana
court.
It was the duty of the Senapati to organise the army and to help and advise the king in military
affairs by accompanying him in battle. But the final authority always rested
with the king. This is clearly illustrated in PrthvirajaIII’s campaign
against Nagarjuna which he under took without consulting or taking his
commander alongwith him.
SANDHIVIGRAHIKA :
The
Viruddhavidhi-vidhvamsa mentions that Skanda and his son Sodha
became one after another the Sandhivigrahika of Somesvara.[107]
Sodha’s son Vamana also succeeded to that post during the reign of Prthviraja
III.[108]
As the name signifies, Sandhivigrahika was the minister for peace and
war. He advised the king on foreign affairs. He thus appears to be the
syonymous with the present foreign minister. We do not know how much power ad
influence were vested into the hands of this minister. It seems quite unlikely
that the king should ask a lesser minister to decide such vital issues as the
affairs of war and peace in the period of continuous dynastic struggles and
Muslim aggressions. He, therefore, must have been a very capable and dependable
person to the king. So the ministery was likely to be hereditary in character,
if the son was found as suitable as his father. That is why Skanda served the
Chahamana dynasty in foreign affairs on an hereditary basis.
In dealing with foreign
affairs, the Sandhivigrahika had to draft royal charters. Hence he was
expected of good scholarship. The Viruddha-vidhi-vidhvamsa also mentions that Skanda and his
successors to the foreign ministry were all learned scholars.
From the Viruddha-vidhi-vidhvamsa it further appears that the Sandhivigrahika not only dealt with the civil administration, but also participated in
the battle field as well.[109]
Skanda was ‘a lion to the elephants in the form of the host of enemies.’ (Verse
6). His son was Sodha, who was ‘unbearable to the enemies’ (verse 7). It seems,
therefore, that there was o water-tight compartment between the civil and
military affairs. The administration of the country was carried on as a whole
unit, and the distribution of works was made according to efficiency and
convenience.
MINISTER FOR LITERARY ACTIVITY :
The Chahamana rulers
like Vigraharaja IV and Prthviraja III were great patrons of art and
literature. The Prthvirajavijaya calls the former Kavibandhava
or friend of the poets.[110] The
latter took a keen interest in religious and literary discussions where poets
and scholars used to participate from all quarters.[111] It
is interesting to note that literary activity received so much royal patronage
that a new ministry seems to have been created for that purpose. The Prthvirajavijaya mentions one such minister, named Padmanabha, who was in charge of the
literary activity in the state during the reign of Vigraharaja IV.[112] It
was his main duty to arrange all conferences of poets and Scholars.
THE CHAHAMANA OVERLORDSHIP
In this chapter we have
discussed the struggle of the Chahamana for suzerainty over Northern India.
Although, the thems of overlordship is not directly related with the
administration of the period, even then indirectly it throws light upon the
prevailing war strategy of the kings, undoubtedly a part of the administrative
pattern of the Chahamana.
AJAYARAJA :
Prthviraja
I’s successor was his son Ajayaraja known also as Ajayadeva[113] and
Salhana.[114]
Since the Revasa stone inscriptions of V.S. 1196 ( 1139 A.D.)were issued during
the reign of his son Arnoraja, it may be presumed that Prthviraja I and
Ajayaraja might have ruled during the first three decades of the 12th
century. Ajayaraja’s reign may, therefore, be placed in between C. 1110-1130
A.D.
This period was one of
intense warlike activities in Western India. The grim struggle between the
Chaulukyas and the Paramaras was going on. This dynastic rivalry continued for
nearlya quarter of a century until the Paramars were completely humiliated, and
their territories were largely captured by Chaulukya Jayasimha (C. 1094-1143
A.D.) who even assumed the title of Avantinatha.[115] As a consequence, the political situation in
Western India was completely changed, and the place of importance held by the
Paramaras now passed to the Chaulukyas.
His claim of success against the Paramaras :
At the same time the Chahamana records also
claimed success over the Paramaras. The Prthvirajavijava states
that Ajayaraja attacked and vanquished Sulhana, king of Malava.[116] In
the opinion of H.C. Ray, as there was no king named Sulhana in Malava during
that period, he might be a general of one of the Paramara kings.[117]
This view seems to be based on the Bijolia inscription which mentions that Dandanayaka (Commander of the army) Sulhana was captured by Ajayaraja in battle.[118] A
stone inscription, found in the Adhai
Dinka Jhonpra, Ajmer, states that
Ajayaraja conquered the country upto Ujjain.[119]
The simulatneous claim
of success against Malava by both the Chaulukya and the Chahamana records is
interesting. From the activities of Ajayaraja against the Paramaras, it may
appear that the Chahamanas had either been won over by the Chaulukyas, or had
themselves joined the Chaulukyas in order to signalise their freedom from the
Paramara overlordship. In any case, a Chahamana-Chaulukya alliance seems to
have been formed against their common enemy, the Paramaras. This alliance
proved highly successful.
Ajayaraja also achieved
another military success. The Bijolia inscription mentions that he defeated and
killed three other kings, named Chachiga, Sindhula and Yasoraja. [120] But
they cannot be properly identified.
His claim of victory against the Muslims :
The Prthvirajavijaya mentions
that Ajayaraja defeated the Garjana
Matangas[121] i.e.
the Ghaznavite Muslims. This is quite evident as the Prthvirajavijaya equates Garjana with Ghazna[122] and
the commentator, Jonaraja, explains Matangas by the term Mlechchha[123]
i.e., the Muslim invaders. It seems to be an incidental victory of Ajayaraja
over the Muslims in the age-long Chahamana-Muslim conflict.
His activities in peace :
Ajayaraja not only won
many successes in war, but also achieved laurels in the art of peace as well. He
founded the famous city of Ajayameru, named after himself.[124]
This is, no doubt, the present town of Ajmer.[125] He
filled up his newly founded city with beautiful temples and palaces. It soon
achieved such prosperity that the Prthvirajavijaya states that even ‘the city Rama conquered
after crossing the sea (the Golden Lanka) and that founded by Krishna in the
sea (Dwarka) are not fit to be handmaid’s of Ajmer.’[126] The
capital of the Sakambhari kingdom was subsequently transferred from Sambhar to
Ajmer.[127]
Another great
achievement of Ajayaraja was that he was the first Chahamana king to issue
coins in the kingdom. The Prthvirajavijaya mentions that the king filled the world
with his rupakas composed of Durvarna[128] (Silver).
In fact, some silver coins have been discovered in those areas which formed the
Chahamana dominions. They bear aneffigy of a seated goddess on the obverse, and
the king’s name Sri Ajayadeva on the reverse. The Prthvirajavijaya further states that his queen Somalekha also used to coin fresh rupakas every day.[129]
Indeed, some silver and copper coins bearing on the reverse the inscription Sri Somaladevi have been discovered.Scholars have correctly identified Sri Somaladevi with the queen of Ajayaraja.[130] Her
silver coins have on the obverse a degraded representation of a king’s head,
while the copper coins bear the effigy of a horseman.
From the Dhod Stone
inscription it appears that Ajayaraja’s silver coins were current in the
Chahamana dominations even during the reign of his grandson Somesvara.[131]
Thus Ajayaraja occupies
a very important position in the Chahamana kingdom. He was powerful ruler, and
opened the way for Chahamana overlordship by lunching an aggressive war against
his neighbouring states. He founded the beautiful city of Ajmer, which subsequently
became the new capital of the Chahamana kingdom. His introduction of a standard
currency system marked an unprecedented prosperity in the kingdom due to the
development of trade and commerce.
He was a devout
worshipper of Siva,[132] but
he had no religious orthodoxy. This is well attested by his favour towards the
Vaishnava and the Jaina communities in the kingdom, as pointed out by D.
Sharma.[133]
ARNORAJA :
Ajayaraja was succeeded by his son
Arnoraja.The two Revasa stone inscriptions, dated in V.S. 1196 (=1139 A.D.) of
his reign mention him as Maharajadhiraja-Paramesvara-Sri
Arnorajadeva.[134]
This, however, doesnot indicate
that Arnoraja’s reign began in that year. As a matter of fact, there is
indirect evidence to show that his reign did begin much earlier.
It has been mentioned
before that his father Ajayaraja claimed to have captured the whole of Malava
territory upto Ujjain. On the other hand, Chaulukya Jayasimha also claimed to
have occupied the whole of Western Malava and driven away the Paramaras to find
shelter in the valley of Kali Sindhu in the extreme north-eastern corner of the
Vindhayas.[135]
In our opinion Ajayaraja’s success against the Paramaras as well as Jayasimha’s
success agaist them should be regarded as one broad incident carried out simultaneously
by these two monarchs. They probably formed an alliance between them against
their common enemy, Paramara Haravarman (C. 1104-1133 A.D.). As both Chahamana
Ajayaraja and Chaulukya Jayasimha claimed success over Paramara Naravarman, it
was obvious that their successes practically corresponded to the year 1133
A.D., when or shortly after, the Paramara ruler died.[136]
Again, Ajayarajas son and successor Arnoraja was also successful against
Naravarman.[137]
Hence we may tentatively regard 1133 A.D. as the date of Ajayaraja’s death and
the accession of Arnoraja to the throne.
So far as the end of
Arnoraja’s reign is concerned, the only evidence may be ascertained from the
Ajmer stone inscription of 1153 A.D.[138]
when Arnoraja’s son Vigraharaja IV was on the throne. However, it is not
possible to ascertain how much earlier Vigraharaja secured it, because it was
not a peaceful affair. But on an examination of the circumstantial evidences,
as mentioned in the Prthvirajavijaya
it would appear that this took
place probably in1150 or 1151 A.D. The Prthvirajavijaya mentions
that Arnoraja’s reign met a violent and when he was murdered by his eldest son.[139] But
the parricide, it appears did not rule long,and was soon overthrown by his
second brother Vigraharaja IV. All these incidents must have happened at least
two or three years before Vigraharaja’s Ajmer stone inscription was issued in
1153 A.D.
We may, therefore, place
Arnoraja’s reign in between (C.1133-1150-51 A.D.).
Of the principle events
of Arnoraja’s reign, two deserve special mention. One of them was a struggle
with the Chaulukyas of Gujarat, and the other was a clash with the Muslims.
Arnoraja and the Chaulukyas :
With
the accession of Arnoraja to the Chahamana throne, the Chahamana-Chaulukya
alliance formed during his father’s time, broke down. The probable cause seems
to be Arnoraja’s apprehension of the growing power of Jayasimha. But he did not
fare well against the Chaulukya ruler. This is indicated by both the Chaulukya
and the Chahamana sources. The Chaulukya work, like the Dvyasrayamahakavya of Hemachandra mentions that Arnoraja had to
accept the supremacy of Jayasimha.[140]
This is confirmed by the Kirti
Kaumudi of Somesvara which states
that the Chahamana ruler out of fear bowed down his head to Jayasimha, who in
turn gave his daughter in marriage to Arnoraja.[141] The
Prthvirajavijaya also mentions that Arnoraja had two queens,
of whom one came from Gurjara.[142]
According to the commentator Jonaraja, the Gurjara ruler was Jayasimha and his
daughter, who married Arnoraja, was named Kanchanadevi.[143] The
Sambhor stone inscription probably indicates the defeat of Arnoraja by
Jayasimha, who even seems to have occupied Sambhor for some time,[144]
from where this inscription of him was issued.
It is thus clear that
Chahamana Arnoraja had to acknowledge defeat at the hands of Chaulukya
Jayasimha. The struggle probably ended in a peace settlement, and Jayasimha’s
daughter was married to the Chahamana ruler.
The reasons which
induced Jayasimha to form a matrimonial alliance with his vanquished enemy are
unknown. It seems to be a very clever stroke of diplomacy on Jayasimha’s part
to pacify his Chahamana neighbour, so that the life and death struggle against
the Paramaras of Malava could be continued uninterruptedly. The policy was
highly successful, and for the time being, the Paramara kingdom was laid to the
dust. In this struggle Jayasimha obviously got an active help from his
son-in-law Arnoraja. While the Chaulukya sources claimed Jayasimha’s great
success over Paramara Naravarman of Malava, the Bijolia inscription also
mentions that Chahamana Arnoraja humiliated one Nirvana Narayana,[145]
i.e., Naravarman, for it was an epithet of the Paramara ruler.[146]
According to D. Sharma, the fragmentary Chahamana prasasti also claims success
of Arnoraja over Naravarman.[147]
But this good
Chahamana-Chaulukya relationship came to an end after the death of Jayasimha,
and gave way to a bitter struggle when the next Chaulukya ruler Kumarapala
ascended the throne in C. 1143 A.D.
There are conflicting
accounts of the origin of the struggle between Arnoraja and Kumarapala. From
Merutunga[148]
and Hemachandra[149] it
appears that it was caused due to the sheer ambition of the Chahamana king, who
finding a new ruler on the throne of Gujarat made an alliance with Bahada, the
rival of Kumarapala for the throne, and suddenly invaded the Chaulukya kingdom.
But according to jayasimha Suri[150] the
war was started due to the insult meted out by Arnoraja to his queen
Devaladevi, who happened to be the sister of Kumarapala. To avenge this insult,
the Chaulukya ruler marched with his army.
Jayasimha Suri’s account
of the personal factor which led to the Chahamana-Chaulukya conflict seems
unconvincing. According to the more reliable Jaina authorities, like Merutunga
and Hemachandra, the cause of the conflict was political rather than personal.
Moreover, from the Prthvirajavijaya,
one of the most authentic sources
of the Chahamaas of Sakambhari, it appears that Arnoraja had two queens one
Kanchanadevi of Fujarata, the daughter of Jayasimha, and the other Sudhava of
Marwar.[151]
As Arnoraja had no queen named Devaladevi, so Jayasimha Suri’s story of her
insult by her husband which led to the war, cannot be accepted.
It seems that the real
cause of the war was political. This is to be traced in the domestic trouble of
the Chaulukya family after the death of Jayasimha.[152]
Jayasimha had no male
issue to succeed him. In fact, the problem of succession had been under
discussion while he was alive. Kumarapala was the strongest claimant on the
throne, both because he belonged to the royal family and also as the nearest
relation of the king. But Jayasimha was unwilling to accept him as his
successor, because there were some question about the legitimacy of the branch
to which Kumarapala belonged. Hence Jayasimha nominated Bahada, his adopted
son, as his successor. This naturally offended Kumarapala, who, therefore,
tried to assert his position. It appears that an inter-family dispute began.
This embittered the last days of Jayasimha, who is said to have driven away
Kumarapala into exile. Shortly, after Kumarapala returned from his exile, and
Jayasimha suddenly died in C. 1143 A.D. Dr. H.C. Ray suspects some foul play
about the sudden death of Jayasimha.[153]
Thereafter, Kumarapala
ascended the Chaulukya throne with the help of the powerful Jaina party in
Gujarat and his brother-in-law Krishnadeva, who was the supreme commander of
the state army.[154]
Naturally those who had supported Jayasimha fell into disfavour of the new
king. This seems to have been the real cause of the struggle that ensued
between Kumarapala and Arnoraja, for the latter had marrid Jayasimha’s
daughter.
But Kumarapala had to
face a great difficulty due to the combination of his enemies against him.
Bahada, the rival claimant for the Chaulukya throne, persuaded Arnoraja to help
him, who readily agreed.[155]
Further, Arnoraja made a scheme with king Ballala of Western Malava to invade
the Chaulukya kingdom.[156] It
was arranged that Arnoraja and Ballala would attack Kumarapala from the north
and the east respectively, while an internal insurrection was to be raised in
the Chaulukya kingdom simultaneously. For the time being the position of
Kumarapala was really critical. But he was fortunate that the scheme of his
enemies was not successful, and he was able to maintain his position. This was
partly due to his ability as a soldier, and partly to the failure of his
enemies who could not act in a concerted manner. Bahada was taken prisoner;
Arnoraja was completely defeated; and all attempts for internal insurrection
were frustrated. The Dvyasrayamahakavya
of Hemachandra mentions that
Arnoraja had to buy peace by marrying his daughter to Kumarapala.[157]
Inscriptional evidences
also support the literary account of the defeat of Arnoraja at the hands of
Kumarapala. The Kradu[158] and
Bhatund[159]
inscriptions show that the Chahamana principality of Naddula was annexed within
the kingdom of the Chaulukya monarch. Naddula formed the buffer state between
the Chahamana and the Chaulukya kingdoms. According to H.C.Ray the Chaulukya
possession of Naddula ‘must have been effected by successful war.’[160]
This view point seems to be confirmed by one of the Chitorgadh stone
inscriptions of Kumarapala which clearly states that the Chahamana king was
defeated and his kingdom was devastated by Kumarapala.[161]
H.C. Ray, however, doubts about the complete humiliation of Arnoraja, and holds
the opinion that the Chahamana-Chaulukya conflict on the border of Naddula
‘raged for at least 8 years.[162] It
was probably brought to an end with a matrimonial alliance.
Arnoraja and the Muslims :
The other important incident of the reign of
Arnoraja was a clash with the Muslims. The Prthvirajavijaya mentions that once
Arnoraja utterly defeated the Turushkas, and slaughtered them in large numbers
when they had entered the Chahamana territory by crossing the desert. He then
purified the place by constructing a lake and filling it with the water of the
river Chandra.[163]
H.C. Ray properly indentifies the river Chandra with the river Luni which ‘takes
its rise in the Sambhar lake and flows by Pushkar.’[164] The
lake constructed by Arnoraja may be, therefore, indentified with the famous
Anasagara lake near Ajmer named after him.[165] The
Turushkas thus appear to have reached as far as Ajmer. According to Ray these
Turushkas were the troops of the Yaminis of Lahors, and they directed their
attack against the temples of the sacred Pushkaratirtha.[166]
Arnoraja’s other MilitaryAchievements :
Arnoraja achieved success in other
directions as well. On the basis of the fragmentary Chahamana prasasti of the
Ajmer Museum, Dr. D. Sharma points out that Arnoraja made a successful invasion
in the Haritanka country, and marched victoriously upto the Sindhu and the
Sarasvati.[167]
Both the Palam Baoli[168] and
Delhi Museum[169]
inscriptions mention that the Haritanaka or Hariyana country was ruled by the
Tomara Rajputs with Dhillika or Delhi as its capital. But Arnoraja did not
achieve a decisive victory over the Tomaras, for the struggle continued during
the reign of his son Vigraharaja IV when the Tomaras were finally beaten and
their territory was annexed to the Chahamana dominion.
The Bijolia inscription
mentions that Arnoraja also conquered the kingdom of Varana[170]
which was situated closely to the Haritanka country. Thus it seems that Arnoraja
successfully carried his armies northwards through the teritories of Varana and
Haritanaka upto the Sindhu and the Sarasvati in the Eastern Punjab. The
Chahamanas now became so powerful as to make an attempt for establishing their
overlordship in Northern India. The policy was vigorously persued during the
reign of his son Vigraharaja IV.
JUGADEVA :
The Prthvirajavijaya states
that the eldest son of Arnoraja ‘rendered the same services to his father as
Bhrgu’s son Parasurama had rendered to his mother.’[171]
This clearly indicates that Arnoraja was killed by his eldest son. But
unfortunately the Prthvirajavijaya does not mention the name of the parricide.
However, on the basis of the Prabandhakosa
the Hammira-mahakavya
and the Surjanacharita H.C.Ray
considers that most probably his name was Jugadeva.[172]
It may be assumed, therefore, that Arnoraja’s eldest son, named Jugadeva,
ascended the Chahamana throne by murdering his father. But he could not rule
long, and was soon overthrown by his younger brother Vigraharaja.[173]
VIGRAHARAJA
IV :
After deposing Jugadeva his
younger brother Vigraharaja IV ascended the throne of Sakambhari. The earliest
of his inscriptions dated in V.S. 1210 (= C. 1153 A.D.)[174]
has been discoverd in a mosque at Ajmer, known as the Adhaidinka-Jhonpra. The last three inscriptions of his reign are
found from the Siwalik Pillar of Asoka, now in Delhi, and they were issued in
V.S. 1220 (= C. 1164 A.D.).[175]
His known dates, therefore, vary from V.S. 1210 to V.S. 1220 (=C. 1153-1164
A.D.). It is very likely that he did not occupy the throne much earlier than
1153, and reign much beyond 1164. Though his reign was not a long one, yet it
marks an important stage in the progress of Chahamana power.
Vigraharaja
IV and the Chaulukyas :
In the south-west of Sakambhari
lay the Chaulukya kingdom of Gujarat, then ruled by Kumerapala (C. 1143-1173)
A.D. He was not at a good relation with the Chahamanas. Vigraharaja’s father
Aroraja, having suffered defeats at the hands of Kumarapala, had to purchase
peace by marrying his daughter to the Chaulukya king. With the accession of
Vigraharaja to the Chahamana throne, the old dynastic struggle again flared up.
This was probably due to the ambition of the new Chahamana king and his desire
for avenging the defeat and humiliation of his father.
But
the course of this Chahamana-Chaulukya struggle is not easy to follow.
The contemporary sources of this period seem to put forward different and
contradictory claims. Thus the third Delhi Siwalik Pillar inscription of Vigraharaja
IV claims to have conqured and exacted tributes from all the territories lying
between the Himalayas and the Vindhyas.[176]
On the other hand, the Chaulukya chronicles like the Kumarapala-Charita[177]
of Jayasimha Suri and the Kumarapala-prabandha[178]
of Jinamandan, put forward the claims that Chaulukya Kumarapala conquered all
the lands ‘upto the Ganges on the east, Vindhyas on the south, Sindh on the
west, and upto the Turuska (land)on the north.[179]
In
view of such contradictory claims, the fortune of the Chahama-Chaulukya
struggle may be studied only by gathering the chages effected in the position
of the border lands of the two kingdoms.
Chahamana
settlements had been established at Nadol, Jalor and Pali at the borders of the
Chaulukya kingdom. But from the Chaulukya sources it appears that these places
were included into the domains of Kumarapala. The Kumarapala-charita of
Jayasimha Suri mentions that Javalipura (modern Jalor) first submitted to
Kumarapala when he started for his digvijaya (world-conquest).[180]
The Kradu (V.S. 1209 = C. 1153 A.D.) and the Ratanpur (undated), inscriptions,
in the opinion of Dr. H.C. Ray, clearly indicate that Nadol was controlled by
the Chaulukya ruler.[181]
The Bhatund inscription of V.S. 1210 (= C.1254 A.D.) mentions that Kumarapala
appointed Vaijaka as the Dandanayaka (governor) of the Nadol area.[182]
On the basis of the Kumarapala-Prabandha. A.K. Majumdar suggests the
conquest of Pali by Kumarapala.[183]
His Pali inscription of V.S. 1209 (= C. 1153 A.D) also confirms this view
point.[184] Thus
the Chahamana frontier principalities of Jalor, Nadol and Pali, were all
occupied by the Chaulukya king.
On
the other hand, there is the epigraphic evidence to show that Chahamana
Vigraharaja IV also obtained a briliant success over these frontier lands. The
Bijolia inscription of V.S. 1226 (=C. 1170 A.D.) States that Vigraharaja “due
to resentment made Javalipura (Jalor) a city of flames, Pallika (Pali) an
insignificant village and Naddula (Nadol) like a bed of reeds.”[185]
Thus
the Chahamana-Chaulukya struggle affected seriously those principalities which
were situated at the borders of the two kingdoms. These often changed hands. It
appears that by defeating Chahamana Arnoraja, the Chaulukya monarch had
included those frontier lands into his kingdom. The Chalukya epigraphic
evidence indicates that in A.D. 1153.[186]
1156[187]
and 1159.[188]
Nadol and the neighbouring areas were in Kumarapala’s hands. On the other hand,
the Bijolia inscription of V.S. 1226 (= C. 1170 A.D.), issued during the reign
of Chahamana Somesvara states that Vigraharaja reduced Nadol and Pali, and
burnt the town of Jalor. Vigraharaja himself claims in the third Delhi Siwalik
Pillar inscription of V.S. 1220 (= C. 1164 A.D.) his sovereign authority in
Northern India. It appears, therefore, that the Chahamana sovereign recovered
the above places in between 1160 and 1164. But as Vigraharaja met with an early
death and his successors were involved in inter-family disputes, so Kumarapala
was able to retrieve his position, as indicated in the Jalor,[189]
and the Nadlai[190]
inscriptions, dated respectively in V.S. 1221 (=C. 1164 A.D.) and V.S. 1228 (=
C. 1171 A.D.).
According
to H.R.Ray the Chahamana ruler preferred the northern region as the field of
his expansion, because he found a formidable rival” like Kumarapala on the
southern border of his kingdom.[191]
This view point of Ray requires a critical examination. Kumarapala was
undoubtedly a very powerful ruler, but at the same time it appears that he was
circumscribed by Chahamana Vigraharaja. This is clear from the Bijolia
inscription which states that Vigraharaja defeated and killed on Sajjana.[192]
From the Chitorgadh stone inscription it appears that this Sajjan most probably
was the Chaulukya governor of Chitor.[193]
If this view is accepted, then by defeating and killing his governor,
Vigraharaja certainly humiliated Kumarapala. Further, Vigraharaja challenged
the authority of the Chaulukya monarch when he captured his frontier
principalities. These were recovered by Kumarapala only when the Chahamana
ruler was dead. Vigraharaja also seems to have conquered a substantial portion
of Mewar in the southern region. This is evident from the fact that henceforth
Chahamana inscriptions were issued from such distant places as Jahazpur,
Bijolia and mandalgarh in Mewar. Thus it is significant to note tha
Vigraharaja’s southern campaign was not without success inspite of the presence
of his powerful rival Kumarapala.
Vigraharaja
IV and the Tomaras :
The Bijolia inscription[194]
credits Vigraharaja IV with the conquest of Dhillika (Delhi) and Asika (Hansi).
The Chahamanas probably captured these two places from the hands of the
Tomaras, who were recognised as “one of the 36 celebrated Rajput tribes.”[195]
The conquest is confirmed by two later inscriptions found during the Muslim rule
in India, viz. the Palam Baoli inscription of V.S. 1337 (=1280 A.D.)[196]
and the Delhi Museum inscription V.S. 1384 (C= 1328 A.D.).[197]
According
to H.C.Ray[198]
the Tomaras probably settled themselves in Delhi and its neighbourhood about
the 9th century A.D.During the reign of Bhoja (C. 836-882 A.D.) and
Mahendrapala (C. 893-907 A.D.) they came under the sovereign authority of the
Pratiharas. When the Pratihara power began to decline in the beginning of the
10th century, the Tomaras established themselves round Delhi by
securing their independence. But soon they found very strong neighbours in the
Chahamanas of Sakambhari. Consequently there ensued a struggle between these
two dynasties which continued for more than 250 years. It was started during
the riegn of Chahamana-Chandanaraja (C. 900-910 A.D.) and finally ended in the
capture of Delhi and Hansi by Vigraharaja IV shortly before 1164 A.D. The
Tomara principality passed out of history.
Vigraharaja
IV and the Muslims :
The conquest of Delhi and Hansi
made VigraharajaIV master of the strategic land lying between the Sutlej and
the Yamuna. This made him the neighbour of the Ghaznavite Muslims of the
Punjab, which led to the inevitable struggle between the Chahamanas and the
Muslims.
His
cleash with the Muslims seems to have been first mentioned in the Lalita-Vigraharaja,[199]
a drama composed by his court-poet, Mahakavi Somadeva. According to this
drama Vigraharaja got the news from his spy that the Hammira had
advanced with a large army as far as Vavvera and sent a messenger to the
Chahamana king for asking his surrender. Vigraharaja consulted with his
maternal uncle Simhabala and his chief minister Sridhara, asto what should be
done. The cautious minister advised the king to avoid any battle with the
powerful enemy. But the Chahamana king preferred a battle rather than any
disgraceful negotiation. he was fully supported by Simhabala, his maternal
uncle. While all these discussions were going on, the Hammira’s
messenger arrived in the Chahamana court. he was struck with wonder at the
power and splendour of the Chahamana king, and probably retired without
performing the task, entrusted to him.
Unfortunately
the drama ends here. it is, therefore, difficult to conjecture what happened
next. Prof. Kielhorn assumes that on this present occasion, Vigraharaja and the
Hammira , did not fight.[200]
But it seems otherwise, as the Hammira retired without demanding any
formal Chahamana surrender. Most probably there took place a clash in which the
Hammira could not fare well. This may be corroborated by the later
incidents. The Hammira’s failure must have encouraged Vigraharaja to
adopt a Vigorous offensive policy against the Muslims. In his third Delhi
Siwalik Pillar inscription of V.S. 1220 (= C. 1164 A.D.), he claims to have
repeatedly exterminated the Mlechchhas, i.e., the Muslims, and made Aryavarta
once more the abode of the Aryans.[201]
According to H.C. Ray[202]the
success of Vigraharaja was largely due to the declining power of the
Ghaznavites of the Punjab during the weak rule of Khasru Shah Muizzud-Daulah
(A.D. 1152-1160) and Khasrau Malik Taj-ud-Daulah (A.D. 1160-1186).
A Short
Estimate of Vigraharaja IV :
Vigraharaja IV holds a unique
position in Chahamana history. His reign was short, but eventful. By his great
generalship he spread his authority far and wide. Chaulukya Kumarapala had to
abandon his frontier principalities, and was not successful to recover them
till the death of the Chahamana ruler, The Guhilas of Mewar acknowledged
Chahamana supremacy. The Tomaras were annihilated, and Delhi and Hansi were
captured from them. The Muslims suffered repeated reverses. The third Delhi
Siwalik Pillar-inscription credits the Chahamana ruler with the conquest of the
whole region from the Himalayas to the Vindhyas. Although this credit may
appear exaggerated, yet we shall not be far wrong to assume that his reign
positively inaugurated the era of Chahamana imperialism.
Vigraharaja
IV also revived the tradition of such illustrious Paramara rulers, as Munja and
Bhoja, in war and peace. Along with the expansion of power, he went ahead with
a steady development of peaceful arts as well. He himself was a poet of repute,
and highly patronised art and culture for which he was known as Kavibandhava.[203]
He also took a keen interest in building beautiful and imposing works. Indeed,
by his military skill and patronage of learning, the Chahamana monarch
represented a real type of the successful medieval Rajput king.
In
short, Vigraharaja IV may be regarded as the greatest of the Chahamana rulers
in the Kingdom of Sakambhari.
APARAGANGEYA
:
Dynastic
Struggle and the reign of Prthviraja II :
The Prthvirajavijaya mentions that Vigraharaja
IV was succeeded by his son Aparagangeya.[204]
He had possiblya variant of his name
like Amaragangeya or Amargangu, as found in other works.[205]
He had a very short reign and possibly died unmarried.
After
him Prthvibhata or Prthviraja II, theson of parricide Jugadeva, came to the
Chahamana throne. This dynastic change may be well illustrated from the
following geneological table :
Queen Sudhava =
Arnoraja = Queen Kanchanadevi
(
C. 1135-1150 A.D.)
Jugadev Vigraharaja IV
Somesvara=Karpuradevi
(
C. 1153-1164 A.D. ) ( C. 1170-1177
A.D. )
Prthviraja II Aparagangeya Prthviraja III Hariraja
( C.1167-1170 A.D. ) ( No
Inscription ) ( C. 1177-1192 A.D.
)
It
appears that this dynastic change did not happen in a peaceful way. This is
corroborated by prthviraja II’s Dhod stone inscription of V.S. 1325 (C. 1169
A.D.), which mentions that he secured a victory over the ruler of Sakambhari by
the strength of his arms.[206]
Probably
there began a struggle for the throne between The two princes of the ruling
family, Aparagangeya and Prthviraja II. This ultimately led to the removal of
the former and the installation of the latter to the Chahamana throne.
Prthviraja II thus appears to have been able to recover the kingdom of his
father Jugadeva, who had lost it to Vigraharaja IV, father of Aparagangaya. In
this succession struggle Aparagangeya probably lost his life as well, for
nothing further was heard of him.
PRTHVIRAJA
II :
As many as four inscriptions of
Prthviraja II have been discovered, one at Hansi[207]
in the Punjab, and the three others at the Mewar region in Rajasthan – two at
Menal[208]
and one at Dhod.[209]
The first one is dated in V.S. 1224 (C. 1167 A.D.) and the last one in V.S.
1225 (C. 1170 A.D.). He had, therefore, a very short reign but it was important
on account of the gradual development of the Chahamana-Muslim conflict.
After
ascending the throne, he turned his attention against the Muslims of the
Punjab. The Hansi stone inscription mentions that the king’smaternal uncle
kilhana was placed in charge of the strategic fort of Asika in order to watch
over the activities of the Hammira who had become the cause of anxiety to the
world."[210]
D.R. Bhandarkar identifies Asika with Hansi.[211]
The
activities of the Hammira’s probably indicate that the Muslims, i.e. the
Ghaznavites of the Punjab, were trying to penetrate into interior India. Though
they had been successfully checked by Vigraharaja IV, yet during the time of
Prthviraja II they became the cause of anxiety to the Chahamana kingdom. It
seems that when Vigraharaja IV died and the ruling family was involved in a
succession struggle, the Muslim found an opportunity to intensity their
activities. But Prthviraja II equally rose to the occasion, and took immediate
steps to meet the situation. He appointed an efficient governor, named Kilhana,
to the strategic fort of Asika or Hansi to check the Muslim aggression. The
fort of Asi or Asika was the gateway to India. As colonel Tod observes,
“Asigarh or Asidurg is celebrated as the scene of contest between the Hindus
and early Muhammedans. It was by this route that most of Shahabuddin’s attempts
were made to wrest the throne of Hindu from Prthviraja and, often did the
warriors of the mountains of Kabul find their graves before Asi.........the
route was by Pacapattan...........on the Sutlaj, to Bhatner and Fatchabad to
Asi and Delhi.”[212]
Colonel
Tod appears to have confused Prthviraja II of the Hansi stone inscription of
V.S.1224 (=C.1168 A.D.) with the famous Chahamana ruler Prthviraja III (C.
117-1192 A.D.), who was defeated Shiabuddin Muhammad Ghuri at the second battle
of Tarain in 1192 A.D. Muhammad Ghuri established his power in the Punjab by
overthrowing the last Yamini prince Khusrau Malik Taj-ud-Daulah (1160-1186),
and from that base he attempted to penetrate further into India at the cost of
the Chahamanas. But Prthviraja II’s inscriptions clearly show that he died much
earlier (C. 1170 A.D.) before Muhammad Ghuri’s conquest of the Punjab. Further
the Bijolia inscription which was the earliest inscription of Somesvara, who succeeded
Prthviraja II, was issued towards the end of V.S. 1226 (=1170 A.D.).[213]
It is thus clear that Colonel Tod’s “Prthviraja”, who possessed the strategic
fort of Asior Hansi, was none but Prthviraja II of the Hansi inscription. His
observation, however, clearly implies the strategic position of the fort of
Hansi.
In
the Chahamana-Muslim conflict Kilhana proved a successful officer. The Hansi
stone inscription mentions that he not only checked the Muslim aggressions, but
also captured Panchapura from them.[214]Both
H.C.Ray and[215]
D.R. Bhandarkar[216]
identify Panchapura with Panhapattana on the Sutlej river. This is in agreement
with Tod’s assumption[217]
also. According to Ray if the identification is correct them Prthviraja II
achieved some success against the Yamini Prince Khusrau MalikTaj-ud-Daulah
(1160-1186), who was a mild and pleasure-seeking ruler.[218]
Kilhana thus justified the confidence reposed on him.
Another
incident during the reign of Prthviraja II is mentioned by the Bijolia
inscription. It states that the Chahamana monarch defeated a king named
Vastupala, and took away his beautiful elephant, called Mansidhi.[219]
But king Vastupala cannot be properly identified.
Both
Prthviraja II and his queen Suhavadevi were devout workshippers of Lord Siva.
The Dhod stone inscription mentions that the Chahamana king took the title of Paramabhattaraka
Paramesvara, and during his reign the temple of Nitya Pramoditadeva was
built by his feudatory Adhiraja Kumarapla.[220]
According to the Bijolia inscription the Chahamana king used to perform his
religious duties by granting gold and villages to the Brahamanas.[221]
The Menal stone inscription states that Maharajni Suhavadevi made an annual
grant of 20 drammas to the Siva-temple at Menal, bearing the name of the
god as Suhavesvara.[222]
Though Prthviraja II was a devout Saiva Hindu, yet he was not orthodox in his
religious outlook. This is well illustrated by his tolerant attitude to the
Jainas. The Bijolia inscription states that he granted the village Morajhari to
the Jaina temple of Parasvanatha.[223]
SOMESVARA :
HIS ACTIVITIES IN GUJARAT :
According to the Prthvirajavijaya since the
death of Arnoraja, his youngest son Somesvara was living in Gujarat enjoying
the patronage of Chaulukya Jayasimha.[224] The last years of Arnoraja’s reign were marked
withconspiracies and political intrigues which resulted in the murder of the
Chahamana king by his eldest son Jugadeva, a civil war in the royal family, and
the final occupation of the throne by Arnoraja’s second son Vigraharaja IV. It
was very likely that Chaulukya Jayasimha became anxious to save the life of his
grands on Somesvara (who was the son of his daughter Kanchanadevi) from the
disorderly state of affairs in Sakambhari. Hence soon after the murder of his
son-in-law Arnoraja, the Chaulukya monarch took away Somesvara to his own
kingdom in Gujarat. The next Chaulukya king Kumarapala continued to favour and
bring up the Chahamana prince in such a manner that his name Kumarapala, i.e.,
‘protector of Kumara’, really became significant.[225]
While
living in Gujarat, Somesvara participated in the Chaulukya campaign against
Konaha. In the Prthvirajavijaya he is said to have cut off with his own
hands the head of the king of that country.[226]
Merutunga, the chronicler of Gujarat, gives his name as Mallikarjuna, but
attributes all the credit of defeating and killing him to the Chaulukya general
Ambada.[227]
On the other hand, Hemachandra, the contemporary Jaina scholar, states that
some Chaulukya soldiers killed the ruler of Konkana.[228]
In other words, he did not give the credit to Ambada. On account of such
conflicting claims, it appears very difficult to say who actually achieved that
distinction. A greater reliability may, however, be placed upon the statement
of the Prthvirajavijaya. Whose authenticity is generally accepted on the
ground that the information supplied by other Chahamana sources (including
their inscriptions) more or less agrees with that found in the Prthvirajavijaya.
However, all these conflicting claims may be reconciled by assuming that
Somesvara along with the Chaulukya soldiers defeated and killed the ruler of
Konkana, and Ambada was the commander of the Chaulukya army in the whole
compain.
The
Prthvirajavijaya states that Somesvara while living in Gujarat, married
the daughter of one Achalaraja, the ruler of Tripuri.[229]
Achalaraja seems to be a Kalachuri prince, not properly identified.[230]
Jonaraja, the commentator, mentions the name of his daugher as Karpuradevi.[231]
By
Karpuradevi, Somesvara had two sons, names Prthviraja and Hariraja. Bothe of
these princes were born in Gujarat when Chahamana Vigraharaja IV was rulling in
Sakambhari. he became very much pleased with the birth of his nephews, and died
in peace.[232]
After
the death of Vigraharaja IV, the Sakambhari kingdom age in fell into disorder.
His son and successor Aparagangeya was involved in a succession struggle which
led to his defeat and death, and Prthviraja II, the nephew of Vigraharaja IV,
succeeded to the Chahamana throne in C. 1167 A.D.
Somesvara brought from Gujarat
to Sakambhari :
It appears that Somesvara had practically lost touch
with Sakambhari when Prthviraja II occupied the Chahamana throne. However,
Prthviraja II did not reign long. He died in C. 1170 A.D., and probably left no
issue to succeed him. The ministers of the Sakambhari kingdom, therefore,
brought back Somesvara from Gujarat, and placed him on the throne.[233]
As
many as five inscriptions of his reign have been discovered, one at Bijolia[234]
two at Dhod,[235]
one at Revasa,[236]
and one at Anvalda.[237]
The earliest is dated in V.S. 1226 and the latest in V.S. 1234, corresponding
roughly to 1170-1177 A.D. His reign was, therefore, not a long one, and he
certainly died before 1178 A.D. when we find his son prthviraja III ruling at
Sakambhari.[238]
It seems that Somesvara came to the throne at a fairly advanced age by spending
most of his time in the court of Gujarat.
Along
with these inscriptions, Somesvara had also some coins of ‘the Bull and
Horseman type.’ The obverse bears the figure of a horseman with the legend ‘Sri
Somesvaradeva’ and the reverse has the figue of humped bull and the legend Asavari
Sri Sama (ntadeva).[239]
During
the reign of Somesvara the Chahamana territory seems to have been extended in
the Mewar region in the south, where most of his inscriptions have been discovered.
The Bijolia inscription states that he took the title of Pratapa-Lankesvara,[240]
which means that he was as powerful as Ravana, the Lord of Lanka.
Somesvara
efficiently carried on the administration by establishing peace and order in
the kingdom. He was always anxious to get the help of his ministers in his
administration. The sanskrit work, the Viruddhavidhi-Vidhvamsa[241]
mentions two important ministers during his reign. They were Skanda and his
son Sodha. They were the Nagara Brahamanas of Anandanagara. According to N.C.
Ray the place Anandanagara was moder Vadnagara in Northern Gujarat.[242]
Most probably Skanda came to Sakambhari from Gujarat when Somesvara ascended
the Chahamana throne in order to assist him in administration. He was vastly
learned scholar, as well as an efficient general. He was placed in charge of
the very important post of Sandhi-Vigrahika (ministry of peace and war).
After him this post was given to his worthy son Sodha. Kadambavasa seems to be
another minister of Somesvara. He became the Chief Minister during the regency
of Karpuradevi when Prthviraja III succeeded his father Somesvara as a minor
son.[243]
Deterioration of his relation
withthe Chaulukyas :
The Prthviraja-Raso[244]
states that Somesvara was killed in a battle by Chaulukya Bhimadeva II (C.
1178-1241 A.D) This seems to be a more fiction, as Chahamana spigraphic
evidence clearly points out that Somesvara had died before 1178 A.D.[245]
when Bhimadeva II ascended the Chaulukya throne of Gujarat.[246]
But from the Chaulukya records it appears that during the reign of Kumarapala’s
successor Ajayapala, there took place a conflict between the Chaulukyas and the
Chahamanas in which the latter were defeated and had to acknowledge Chaulukya
supremacy. Thus according to the ‘Sukrta-Samkirtana’the king of
Sapadalaksa sent a silver pavilion to Chaulukya Ajayapala as a feudatory gift.’[247]
This is corroborated by the Kadi inscription (V.S. 1263) of Bhimadeva II which
mentions that Ajayapala exacted tribute from the ruler of Sapadalaksa.[248]
According to H.C.Ray this ruler of Sapadalaksa was none but Chahamana
Somesvara.[249]
We should, therefore, try to find out the reasons which led to the breakup of
the good relation that existed between the Chaulukyas and the Chahamana since
the days of Kumarapala and Somesvara.
Chaulukya
Kumarapala died in C. 1173 A.D. He had no son, and therefore, the problem of
succession became acute. The Kumarapalaprabandha[250]
states that Kumarapala had desired that his daughter’s son, Pratapamalla,
should succeed him. But before he could make any arrangement, Ajayapala, the
son of Kumarapala’s brother Mahipala, seized the Chaulukya throne of Gujarat by
putting and end of Kumarapala’s life by poison.
It
seems that Ajayapala’s usurpation of the Chaulukya throne by a heinous means
led to his conflict with Chahamana Somesvara. There were reasons for Somesvara
to remain grateful to Kumarapala who had brought him up in Gujarat and probably
helped him in recovering his paternal throns. So when Ajayapala murdered
Kumarapala and usurped the Chaulukya throne, Somesvara was naturally perturbed.
It seems that the Chahamana king probably invaded the Chaulukya kingdom in
order to punish Ajayapala. But the Chaulukya monarch proved to be too powerful
for the Chahamana king who had to acknowledge the Chaulukya supremacy by paying
tribute.
v v v
SECRETARIAT AND THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
DEPARTMENTS
We shall survey in this chapter the organisation of
what in modern terminology might be conveniently called the Central Secretariat
and its various departments. Here also it may be noted that the records of our
period supply us no direct and detailed information about the machinery of the
central government; and hence it is difficult to say, how the secretariat and
its various departments were organised and how they used to function. The
records of our period merely give us a long list of officers, but they do not
throw much light upon their powers and functions. We can, however, form a
general idea of the secretariat and its different branches on the basis of the
list of officers, supplied by the records of the different dynasties of our
period. The contemporary Niti writers also help us a good deal in this respect.
The
success of administration depends largely upon the efficiency and ability of
the secretariat officer sand the accuracy with which they draft the orders of
the central government. Ancient Indian political writers have therefore advised
the king to take great care in the selection of the Secretariat officers. Sukra
states that the king should appoint officers in the secretariat only after
examining their fitness for the work.[251]
The Secretariat officers were also expected to be well trained and were
required to possess almost as high qualifications as ministers, as far as
ability and reliability were concerned. We have already seen in the last
chapter, how our Niti writers have attached great importance to the business of
the government being conducted in writing; the officers in the secretariat were
therefore expected to be expert in drafting.
Working of
the Secretariat :
The Secretariat was known as
Srikarana under the Chahamanas and Chaulukyas.[252]Its
head was usually a Mahamatya. It had a big record office, where official
documents were carefully kept. The account of Abdur Razak shows that the Diwankhana
of the Vijayanagar ministry was a big hall of 40 pillars with a gallery of 90’
x 18’ for accommodating the secretariat. [253]
We may presume that similar arrangements existed in our period. In its normal
work the secretariat had to deal with a considerable amount of correspondence.
It received the reports from the districts and replied to them. Sukra lays down
that daily monthly or periodical reports were to be submitted.[254]
The
secretariat had also its inspecting staff to control provincial and district
officers and find out whether its orders were being properly carried out or not
by the subordinates. The inspection machinary of the central government is but
rarely referred to in the records of our period; so far we have come across
only one such instance in Northern India during our period. The Partapgarh
inscription ofMahendrapala refers to a touring officer called Madhava
designated as Tantrapala.[255]
He is stated to have made a tour to Ujjayini to investigate certain matters as
desired by the king. It may be, however, added that the inspecting officers are
referred to in the Vakataka, Gupta and Chola records, Sukra also, while
recommending tours of inspection, observes that the king or the higher officers
should inspact the villages and towns in order to have a first hand information
about the real condition and feelings of their residents.[256]
The solitary reference to the inspection agency in our epigraphs may be
accidental. Administration is hardly possible without an efficient inspecting
machinary.
Our
records are usually land transfer documents, and they frequently refer to the
work of the secretariat in connection with land-grants. That some secretariate
used to keep duplicate copies of at least some land grants is suggested by the
epigraphical evidence. One Palimpsest plate, containing and original
inscription of the Rashtrakutas and a latter one of the Paramaras, has been found.[257]
It is plausible to suggest that the plate was obtained by the Paramaras, when
they looted the Rashtrakuta treasury at Malkhed. If such was the case, then it
may be permissible to conclude that office copies of some charters were kept in
some secretariats. The evidence however is very insufficient to arrive at a
definite conclusion.
Sometimes
the donees wanted to exchange the village granted to them earlier. Thus the
Nagpur Prasasti of the Paramara king Naravarman informs us that the king
donated three new villages in lieu of the two assigned earlier by his
predecessor.[258]
This must have been done after consulting the original charter.
Sometimes
when the letters of the grant used to became blurred due to lapse of time,
steps were taken to replace the charter by a new one. This was done by the
Chahamana king Ratnapala, when he renewed the grant of the village in the
Saptasata Vishaya, originally made by Maharaja Jindaraja to the Brahmana
residents in that village, as its letters became blurred due to lapse of time.[259]
The
central government used to take proper and immediate steps to annul fraudulent
grants. Sometimes government officers themselves went astray, took bribes and
issued false copper plates. When such things occurred, the central government
used to punish such officers. Thus in the Tarachandi inscription we find that
when an officer of the Gahadavala king Vijayachandra made a certain
unauthorised land grant to some Brahmanas after receiving from them some bribe,
the local ruler of Japila at once declared it to be fraudulent.[260]
Sometimes
owing to anarchy also the donees could not enjoy their full rights given to
them under the land grants; when however order was re-established, the land
grants were re-examined and renewed. The Barah Copper plate of the Pratihara
king Bhoja informs us that the possession of the village Valkagrahara, lying in
the Udumbara Vishaya of the Kalanjara Mandala, which had been originally
granted by Nagabhatta, was disturbed by the prevailing anarchy in the reign of
Ramabhadra. When sufficient evidence was adduced, the grant was renewed.[261]
From aother inscription of the same king we learn that the king Bhoja revived a
grant in the year 893 A.D. in Gurjaratra-bhumi, originally made by Vatsaraja
and later confirmed by Nagabhatta, but subsequently fallen into desuetude
during the time of Ramabhadra owing to anarchy.[262]
All these records clearly show how the central secretariat was very careful in
revenue transactions.
In
modern administration, the minister is an official different from the head of
his department; in ancient times; the two posts were ofte held by the same
individual. We often find an officer rising to the position of a minister. The
cases of Pratihara Gadadhara and Ananta rising to the ministerial position have
been already referred to. This procedure is in accordance with the practice
recommended by Sukra, according to whom the king should promote an officer
successively to higher positions leading ultimately to the post of a minister,
when he proves himself fully qualified and competent.[263]
Number of
Departments :
As regards the number of the
departments of the secretariat, there is no unanimity among the writers on
polity. The epics[264]
and the Arthasastra usually refer to eighteen departments;[265]
the latter however, shows their number was often increased by five or six if
necessary.[266]
According to Sukra, there should be twenty departments in the secretariat;[267]
supervised by the superintendents of elephants, horses, chariots, infantry,
cattle, camels, deer, birds, gold, jewels, silver, clothes, parks, buildings,
palaces, religion and charity. The records of our period, however, disclose
some further departments, which are referred to by neither the Smriti nor the
Niti writers. As it is difficult to enumerate them separately, we shall for the
sake of convenience group them under the different heads of administration.
Royal Household Department :
Monarchy being the normal form of government, we shall
at the outset discuss the royal household department. The royal palaces ad
buildings were[268]
in charge of an officer called Saudhagehadhipa by Sukra and Avasathika by Pala
inscriptions.[269]
Probably he might have had an assistant to issue permits to the intending
visitors. Under him worked Dvarapala,[270]
who used to check visitors’ entry into and exist from the palace premises. The
officer, who used to take the visitors to the royal presence,was know as Maha-Pratihar.[271]
His assistants were known as Pratiharas. The position of Mahapratihara was
similar to that of the modern aid-de-camp. Besides having a fine personality,
he was expected to possess tact, charmad suavity.[272]
Mahapratiharas were assisted by Vetradharas, who used to instruct the visitors
in the formality of the proper department. The king was always guarded by his
body-guards designated as Angarakshkas by Pala inscriptions[273]
and Anganiguhakas by Chaulukya records.[274]
Maharajaguru
or the royal preceptor is the next officer that we have to consider. He figures
frequently in our records. In the Khajuraho inscription, Vasavachandra appears
as Maharajaguru of the Chandella king Dhanga.[275]
Being a very learned man, he was sometimes asked to compose the copper plate
grants; probably it was thought that he would compose the melegantly. Thus
under the Paramaras, the Bhopal plates of 1214 and 1215 A.D. were both composed
by Rajaguru Madana with the consent of Mahasandhi—vigrahikas Rajasalana and
Bilhana.[276]
Sometimes he used to act as a witness, when the king made a land grant. For
instance, when the Paramara king Devaraja made a grant in V.S. 1059, the
witness was his Guru Matvaka.[277]
Sometime the duties of the royal priest and preceptor were combined in the same
person. In the Kamauli grant king Jayachandra is stated to have granted the
village of Osia to his Mahapurohita, who was also his royal preceptor.[278]
Besides
the royal preceptor there was also a royal physician in the king’s court. He
has been called Bhishak[279]
in the Gahadavala records and Antaranga[280]
in the Sena ones. Lakshmidhara describes him as Vaidya.[281]
He was expected to be well grounded in the eight branches of the medical
science.
The
‘science’ of astrology had become well-established during our period and we
find the king’s court usually having a court astrologer. he was called
Naimittika[282]
under the Gahadavalas, and Jyotshi[283]
under the Chahamanas and Mahamauhurtika under the Chaulukyas. Lakshmidhara
calls him Rigu,[284]
a word whose derivation is difficult to make out. He was not only expected to
be a master of omens but also of medicine. It may be noted that even in modern
times Ayurvedic physicians often start their treatment after satisfying
themselves that the day is auspicious. Justas we now sometimes have physicians
– cum—astrologers, in the past, there were probablyastrologers-cum-physicians,
Being a learned man, he was sometimes entrusted with the drafting of the land
grants. The Delhi Siwalik pillar inscription of the Chahamana king Visaladeva
was written by the astrologer according to the orders of the king.[285]
Since
very early times, the royal courts used to have their own poet laureates. The
practice was continued during our period also. Under the Chandellas, they were
often given the title Kavichakravarti. The Khajuraho inscription of the
Chandella king Dhanga refers to Kavichakravarti Nandana.[286]
The
internal management of the royal palace was looked after by several officers.
Sambharapa was one of them;[287]
his duty was to keep a proper stock of the things necessary for the maintenance
of the royal household. Under him worked the superintendent of kitchen,[288]
who had to take particular precaution to see that no attempt was made to poison
the king.
The
royal harem was put in charge of an officer designated by Sukra as Antahapurayogyapurusha.[289]
Lakshmidhara calls him Antahpuradhyaksha.[290]
He was to be sexless, truthful and sweet-tongued. The officer called Sayyapala,[291]
mentioned only in the Chaulukya records, was probably in charge of the king’s
bed; he must have worked under the Antahapuradhipa. Besides him there were also
maid-servants or Paricharikas, working in the inner apartments. They were
expected to be skilful in serving and to take part in the diverse work of the
royal harem allotted to them.
MILITARY DEPARTMENT :
We shall now consider the different departments of the
state administration. Among these the military department was the most
important one. The commander-in-chief, who was in charge of this department,
was known by different designations under different dynasties. The Gahadavala[292]
and the Paramara[293]
records call him by the simple name Senapati, while those of the Palas[294]
and Senas[295]
give him the more high sounding title of Mahasenapati. The title Kampanadhipati
was in use in Kashmir.[296]
The commander-in-chief was usually a member of the ministry also, as shown in
the last chapter. His duty was to organise the fighting forces and to maintain
them at maximum efficiency.
The
Senapati was assisted in his work by a number of subordinate military officers.
The fighting force during our period had three main arms; infantry, cavalry,
and elephant corps – each being in charge of one separate commander. The Pala
kingdom, which had the sea coast, had a naval arm as well We do not know
whether the Chaulukyas maintained a navy to protect their coast.
The
superintendent of infanty was probably called Baladhipa[297]
under the Chahamanas and Baladhyaksha under the Palas.[298]
He had under him a number of officers of lower rank, who are referred to by
Sukra. The Pattipala[299]
was the lowest among them; he was in charge of five or six foot soldiers and
corresponded to a modern lance Naik. The next officer, called Gaulmika[300]
was in charge of thirty foot soldiers according to Sukra; he corresponded
to the modern Jamadar. he appears in the Pala and Sena records also, but
unfortunately they do not throw any light upon his functions. R.C. Majumdar
suggests that Gaulmika was an officer in charge of a military squadron called
Gulma consisting of nine elephants, nine chariots, twenty-seven horses and
forty-five foot soldiers.[301]
U.N. Ghoshal takes him to be a collector of customs duties and refers to the
term Gulmadeya[302]
used in the Arthasastra in the
sense of dues paid at the military or the police stations. While justifying his
interpretation, he points out that in the Pala records, Saulkika is immediately
followed by Gaulmika and hence he must be an officer connected with the revenue
department.
R.C.Majumdar,
however, does not agree with U.N.Ghoshal and he, while criticising the latter’s
view, argues that in the Sena records, Gaulmika immediately follows the
military officers and hence he mustbe a member of that category. It is
difficult to say which of the above views is correct, for neither in the Pala
records nor in the Sena’s spigraphs are the functions of Gaulmika referred to
any-where. It would appear that the functions of the Gaulmika may have differed
in different administrations. However, it may be pointed out that R.C.
Majumdar’s view is supported by Sukra, who definitely states that he was a
military officer.[303]
The
next higher officer mentioned by Sukra is Satanika.[304]
He was the head of one hundred foot-soldiers. He was expected to be
well-grounded in the art of warfare and its different tactics. His duty was to
train the soldiers both in the morning and evening and supervise military
parades. he was assisted in his work by an officer called Anusatika,[305]
who was also of the same rank as that of Satanika.
The next
higher officers referred to by Sukra were Sahasrika[306]
and Ayutika[307] in
charge of a thousand and ten thousand foot soldiers respectively.
The
bow, the spear and the sword were the main weapons of the age and soldiers used
to fight generally with them. Lakshmidhara, while describing the army, refers
to Dhanurdharis and Khadgadharis.[308]
The swordsman and the bowman had to fight sometimes on foot and sometimes from
the back of the horse or the elephant. Lakshmidhara therefore insists that
swordsmen and bow-men should be able to manage the horse as well as the
elephant. Probably the same was expected of the spearmen, though they are not
referred to in this connection in the Rajadharma Kanda of Krityakalpataru.
Among the minor weapons of the army referred to in the Manasollasa
(II. 681-83) may be mentioned clubs (Mudgara), battleaxes, knives, tridents
and machines to throw missiles. The work also refers to sellachakra, whose
nature is not clear. Sukra refers to fire arms and artillery (IV, 7,213) but
these passages are later than our period, as already pointed out. There is no
evidence so far forthcoming to show that fire-arms were used by the Hindus
before C. 1370 A.D.
The
superintendent of cavalry is called Asvapati[309]
by Sukra. He was to be adept in military parades and was expected to know how
to guide, train and treat the horse. Mahasadhanika mentioned in some Chaulukya
records[310]
and Mahasvasadhanika[311]
figuring in some Chedi inscriptions were the designations of cavalry officers
working under Asvapati. Sahani[312]
of the Chahamana epigraphs was perhaps the master of stables.
The
Mahasadhanika appears to have been an important officer, for sometimes he is
seen enjoying the revenues of a town or a village without the power of
alienation. Thus Asni, the wife of Mahasadhnika Mahaika, owned a plot of land
in Semvalapuraka Grama, which was enjoyed by her husband, but she had to
supplicate for the permission of the Paramara king Vakpatiraja[313]
when she wanted to alienate a portion of it.
The
superintendent of the elephant corps was designated as Mahapilupati[314]
by the Sena records and Pilupati[315]
by the Pala ones. Sukra describes him as Gajapati.[316]
He was expected to have the knowledge of differentiating the three kinds of
elephants and also of nourishing them properly; when they were ill, he was to
make adequate arrangements to treat them. The officer called Nayaka,[317]
who used to be in charge of twenty elephants, worked under him.
The
superintendent of chariots does not appear in the records of our dynasties
under survey, probably because the chariot corps had ceased to be a part of the
fighting force. But it appears that the army still used to require some
chariots, probably for the use of high official on ceremonial occasions. It
therefore had a chariot superintendent. Sukra calls him Rathadhyaksha[318]
and states that he should be skilled in moving, turning and controlling the
chariots. He was also expected to know how to manufacture strong and durable
chariots.
The
officer called Mahavyuhapati[319]
who is referred to only in the Pala and Sena inscriptions, was one of the
highest officersof the military department. His position was similar to that of
the chief of the military staff in modern times. Unfortunately the precise
nature of his work is not descrived any where in inscriptions, but there is no
doubt that he had to study the different kinds of battle arrays, which formed
an important part in military strategy.
The
officer called Mahaganastha,[320]
appearing in the Sena records was probably a military officer, for according to
Sukra Gana denotes a body of troops consisting of 27 chariots, as many
elephants, 81 horses and 135 foot. Unfortunately we are not in a position to
ascertain how and what functions this officer used to discharge, for the
inscriptions throw no light upon the point.
Forts
as units of defence were very important in our age, and the army had to supply
the personnel for their garrison. Each fort was in charge of a capable and
experienced officer. He was known as Kottapala[321]
under the Pratiharas. Sukra calls him Durgadhyaksha.
The
warden of the marches called Maryadadhurya[322]
by the Pratihara and Prantapala by the Pala records was an important military
officer. His duty was to watch over the frontier and to prevent undesirable or
hostile persons from entering the kingdom. In Kashmir, he was known as
Dvarapala, He worked in close cooperation with the superintendents of forts in
his vicinity.
Sometimes
government used to appoint the same individual in charge of a fort and the
adjoining frontier. Thus under the Pratihara dynasty, Gwalior, which was a very
important fort, had only one officer, who was discharging the duties of both
the Kottapala and Maryadadhurya[323].
This would have happened only when one officer was found efficient enough
to discharge both the duties.
The
military department had its own store of weapons. Under the Imperial Guptas,
there used to be a separate office called Ranabhandagaradhikarana, which
was in charge of the stores and weapons. Whether such an office existed during
our period also, we do not know, for there are no references to it in any of
the records of our dynasties. It is, however, natural to assume that a separate
officer was put in charge of stores of weapons during our period also, though
he is not mentioned in the inscriptions.
The
military department also looked after the distribution of the army in the
different territories. It is important to note that as the means of
communications were poor, the big empires in ancient India used to have
battalions of their army stationed in the different directions, Thus under the
Pratiharas, we find that there was a southern army to watch over the
Rashtrakutas, an eastern army to check the Palas and a western army to oppose
the Muslims.[324]
Not only in the North but in the South also during our period of survey there
were provincial head-quarters for the army. It is interesting to note that even
today our army has its different commands like the southern, the northern and
the eastern ones.
Most
of the kingdoms of our period were land bound and hence had no navy. The Palas
and the Senas, however, were maritime powers, and we find them maintaining a
navy. Their records frequently refer to navy or naubala.[325]
The officer known as Nakadhyaksha also appears in the Pala records; according
to R.C.Majumdar this title is a corrupt form ofNavadhyaksha or Naukadhyaksha.[326]
It is not possible to say how the navy was organised and how its administration
was carried on, as both the literary and epigraphical sources are silent on the
point.
FOREIGN
DEPARTMENT :
The Foreign Department was another
important department at the centre. The minister in its charge is generally
called Mahasandhivigrahika in the records of our period. There were a
number ofsubordinate officers in the foreign department to help the foreign
ministerwhose work, as we have already seen in the last chapter, was very
heavy, as he had to look after the feudatories and neighbouring powers. His
work in connection with the former has been described in an interesting manner
by somesvara in the Manasollasa (II.128). He was to summon the different
feudatories at proper time to have discussions with them and then to dismiss
them.
The
officer called Mahamudradhikrita appearing in the Sena records probably
worked in this department.[327]
His duty was probably togrant passports to foreigners for entering the country.
The Pala records refer to another officer called Dutapreshanika.[328]
Who seems to have been in charge of the dispatch of the envoys to other states
on diplomatic business. The next officer concerned with this department was
Gamagamika.[329]
Gamagamika literally means one, who comes and goes. It is also not unlikely, as
suggested by U.N. Ghoshal, that he would have been carrying out functions of an
urgent character in connection with the diplomatic department of the state,
requiring frequent visits to the neighbouring kingdoms or to the dominions of
vassals.
POLICE
DEPARTMENT :
The police department may be
conventently considered at this point. Unfortunately the records of our period
do not clearly distinguish between the police and military officers. It is
likely that Dandanayakas of our period were both military and police officers.
Sometimes the military officers did the duty of the police officers and
vice-versa. They had a number of subordinate officers like Dandapasikas,
Chauroddharanikas, Dandikas, Dandasaktis, Chatas and Bhatas, who are frequently
referred to in our records.
The
Dandapasika,[330]
who is referred to only by the Pala and Sena records, was probably of the
status of the modern district superintendent of police. As his designation
indicates, his duty was to catch the thieves. Sometimes he was entrusted with
the important work of discharging the functions of a Dutaka[331]
in connection with the delivery of a land-grant.
The
Chauroddharanikas[332]
were mainly concerned with the detection of thefts and the punishment of the
concerned thieves. The Kalavan plates of Yasovarman refer to an officer called
Chaurika, but he was probably not different from Chauroddharanika.
The
duty of the officer called Dasaparadhika[333]
was most probably to collect fines for the ten traditional criminal
offences. Some of these crimes were serious like murder, adultery, abortion,
etc., while others were relatively lighter like defamation, obscene speech,
etc.
Dandasakti
and Dandika figure only in the Chahamana records. R.C. Majumdar[334]
is of opinion that Dandasakti was responsible for his duties to the military
department, but this view does not seem to be a convincing one. The Dandasakti
may as well have been in charge of the execution of punishment imposed upon
criminals.
The
functions of the officer called Mahadauhasadhasadhinika[335]
are difficult to determine. Most probably officers of this cadre were
entrusted with specially difficult tasks, The Jabalpur plates of the Chedi king
jayasimhadeva refers to an officer called Dushtasadhya;[336]
he is probably the same as Dauhasadhasadhanika.
The
state in ancient India controlled the institution of prostitution since very
early times and it is not unlikely that the officer entrusted with this work,
who is called Ganikadhyaksha by Kautilya, worked under the police
department. It was his duty to have full information about the persons who used
to visit prostitute. This was often useful to detect persons who were of bad
character and to watch their movements and activities. Very probably these
officers worked under police department; it is however not improbable that in
cities they may have worked under city superintendents.
The
functions of the officer called Khola[337]
have not yet been correctly ascertained. The meaning of this term, as revealed
by Sanskrit dictionaries, is a lame person it can hadly have any thing to do
with this officer. If the term is connected with Khala (wicked person), he
would be an officer working under the police department, if it is connected
with Khalaka, he would be an officer under the revenue department.
REVENUE DEPARTMENT :
The revenue department was in charge of the income of
the state from taxes and state properties and concerns. Lakshmidhara in his Krityakalpataru
mentions an officer called Aksharakshita,[338]
who had to keep a comprehensive account of income and expenditure of the state.
He must have been the right hand man of the revenue minister. As we have
already seen in the last chapter, the revenue department had to supervise the
collection of taxes and revenues, which were usually paid partly in kind and
partly in cash. It is therefore but natural that his office had to make
elaborate arrangements for the proper administration of government granaries.
He was probably keeping the duplicate copies of the land grants; for sometimes
it so happened that people showed forged charters in their own names. When such
frauds took place, the revenue department used to consult the original
documents and arrive at a decision about the genuineness of the disputed
records. The steps taken by the government in this connection have been already
referred to earlier.
The
revenue department had a large number of officers. The Mahakshapatalika, who
was in charge of records, was an important one among them. During our period of
survey, he is often seen composing copper plate charters. Thus Mahakshapatalika
Thakkura Vosarin,[339]
Mahakshapatalika Thakkura Kumyara,[340]
Mahakshapatalika Thakkura Govinda[341]
and Akshapatalika Kayastha Somasinhadeva[342]
were the writer soft he different documents known as Kadi platesof the
Chaulukya king Bhim II. The writer of the Lucknow Museum plate of the
Gahadavala king Jayachandradeva was Akshapatalika Sripati,[343]
While that of the Sunak grant of the Chedi king Karnadeva was Akshapatalika
Kekkaka.[344]
We have already seen in the last chapter that in some administrations, the Sandhivigrahika
was also doing this duty. It is not unlikely That the historical part of
the grant was drafted by the Sandhivigrahika and the details about land and
taxes were supplied by Akshapatalika. For convenience sake, drafting of the
document, though done by two persons, might have been ascribed to one of them.
The
next officer of this department, who was in charge of collecting the revenue,
was known as Mahakaranika under the Chedis.[345]
He and his assistants Karanikas were stationed in the different provinces,
towns and cities. The Karnikas are sometimes seen as the writers of copper
plate charters. Thus the writer of the Gohrwa grant of the Chedi king Karna was
the Karanika Sarvananda.[346]
Karanika Dhira was the writer of the Bihari stone inscription of the Chedi king
Yuvaraja I. [347]
Karanika Jaddha was the writer of the Khajuraho inscription of the Chandella
king Dhanga.[348]
Karanika Srisakti was the writer of the Bayana inscription of Chitralekha.[349]
Sometimes the post of Karikas used to be hereditary.
It is
important to note that in Maharashtra, the village revenue officer was till
recently known as Kulkarni – a name derived from Kula-karanika – i.e. an
officer in charge of the land revenues of different families in a village.
The
Chedi records refer to another officer called Mahapramata,[350]
who was probably assisted by an officer known as Pramatri[351]
under the Palas and Senas. The functions of both these officers are difficult
to determine. Some scholars take them to be judicial officers in charge of
recording evidence, whileothers take them to be judges concerned with civil
cases only.[352]
Both those conjectures, however, do not seem to be probable. The term Pramatri
is derived from the root ma to measure. Pramatri therefore should be
taken as a land measuring officer working under the Mahakshapatalika. He was
thus similar to the Rajjukas of Asokan inscriptions. The Jabalpur grant of the
Chedi king Jayasimhadeva refers to an officer called Pramattavara.[353]
The term may be a Prakrit derivative from Pramatri.
Another
officer of the revene department was Kshetrapa.[354]
His function is difficult to determine;it is not improbable that he might have
been in charge of some matters concerning cultivated lands. Probably he was
keeping an account of every holding paying taxes to the king, and as such his
activities were correlated to those of the Mahakshapatalika and his staff. He
figures only in the Pala inscriptions.
The
Pala records mention an officer called Shashthadhikrita.[355]
We have no information about his jurisdiction. Whether he was a Taluka or
district officer, we do not know. Most probably he worked under the revenue
department. Land tax was traditionally to be one sixth of the produce and so
the officer Shashthadhikrita might have been in charge of collecting it from
the cultivators.
Besides
the Shashthadhikrita, there was another officer called Bhogapati,[356]
who probably collected the tax known as Bhoga, which was most probably a
periodical supply of fuel, fruits, firewoods, flowers and the like, which the
villagers had to furnish to the king. This officer is called Mahabhogika[357]
in the Sena records.
The
term Bhoktri abbreviated into Bho was often used to denote a certain class of
officers in Rajasthan under the Chahamanas.[358]
They had often octroi dues assigned to them. Whether they were the same as
Bhogapatis, it is difficult to say.
Taxes,
as we already know, were paid both in kind and cash during our period. Tax in
cash was called Hiranya under the Palas and the Senas and it was perhaps levied
upon certain special kinds of crops. The officer, who was entrusted with the
work of collecting taxes in cash, was known as Hiranyasamudayika in
Bengal.[359]
Cattle-breeding
was an important element in the economic life and the state did not neglect it.
The officer, who was in charge of the herds, was known as Gokulika[360]
in the Paramara and Gahadavala kingdoms, Sukra also refers to officers in
charge of camels, cattle, deer and birds; [361]
They were expected to be skilled in breeding and rearing them.
Royal
parks and forests were an important item of state property. The superintendent
of parks was known as Aramadhipati.[362]
One of his dutis was to develop the resources by supplying proper manure at the
suitable time. He was also expected to know the medicinal properties of the
trees and plants. The forests also had a superintendent, though he does not
figure in our records. He had a suitable staff to assist him.
TREASURY
DEPARTMENT :
The treasury department was in charge of a
superintendent, who is called Koshadhyaksha both by Kautilya[363]
and Sukra.[364]
Paramara records call him Koshadhikari. He was expected to be well-versed in
financial administration. The work of this department was onerous; it had to
look after the government balance in kind and cash and to keep in in safe
custody. It naturally engaged a number of officers. Among them the
superintendent of granary, who is called Dhayadhyaksha[365]
by Sukra, was the most important one.Gahadevala inscriptions refer to him as Bhandagaradhikrita.[366]
His duty was to store properly the corn collected as tax in the government
granaryand to replace it periodically by new stock. He was expected to know how
to store corn and how to dispose it off at profit at suitable time.
FINANCE DEPARTMENT :
Unfortunately there is hardly any
reference to the finance department in the records of the dynasties surveyed by
us. In the Chaulukya administration only, we come across an officer in charge
of the expenditure known as Vyayakaranamahamatya,[367]
who probably belonged to this department. It is very likely that the work
of this department was being discharged by the treasury department and hence
there are no frequent references to the officers of finance. The superintendent
of treasury himself would have looked after the allotment of revenue and
expenditure of the state. In this connection, it may be noted that the Smritis
also rarely refer to the officers working under the finance department.
COMMERCE AND
INDUSTRY DEPARTMENT :
There were several officers
working under this department. The first among them was the superintendent of
markets; he was called Drangika[368]
in Kathiawad and Hattapati in Bengal. According to Kautilya, his duty was to
fix the rates of different articles and to put the government products in the
market under favourable condition. He also organised imports of goods required
in the locality and supervised their sales at reasonable rates.[369]
Another
officer, who worked under this department, was the toll superintendent, who is
designated as Saulkika[370]
in the Pala records. He was to collect the octroi duties from the merchants at
the gate of a town before they imported their articles for sale.
The
third officer working under this department was Tarika or Tarapati.[371]
He figures only in the Pala records. He was probably in charge of ferry
service. He had also to look after the construction of ferries, their repairs
and upkeep.
Mining,
spinning, weaving and Jewelry-making seem to have been the principal industries
of the age. The state paid great attention to the mining industry, as the mines
produced a large part of the wealth of the country. The superintendent of mines
is called Akaradhipati[372]
in the Gahadavala records. His duties must have been similar to those described
in the Arthasastra, i.e. to exploit the resources of existing mines and
to carry out operations, which might lead to the discovery of new ones.
Cloth
industry was another flourishing industry of our period, and government took
keen interest in it. The superintendent of this department is designated as Sutradhyaksha
by Kautilya and Vastradhipa by Sukra.[373]
He was expected to have the knowledge of the finances and roughness of texture
of the cotton, woolen and silken cloth as well as of their durability.
According to Kautilya, the employees of this department used to send cotton to
the homes of weak and destitute persons and get the yarn spun through them at
agreed rates;[374]
whether this was being done in our period, we do not know.
Sometimes,
the state used to give licence to goldsmiths for the manufacture of silver and
golden wares and ornaments. The officer, who was entrusted with this work, is
called by Sukra as Suvarnadhyaksha. He was expected to have the
knowledge of distinguishing the values of different metals by their weight,
luster and colour.
Slaughter
houses were also under strict state control, their superintendent is called
Saunika[375]
in the Pala records. According to Kautilya, it was the duty of this officer to
prevent the outsiders from killing the animals in the game forests. How he discharged
his duty during our period, we do not know.
JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT :
The administration of justice was also carried on with
the help of a number of officers. The king was at the head of this department
and the administered justice, when he was present at the capital. If, however,
due to ill health or the pressure of other work, he was unable to discharge
this duty, the chief justice or Pradvivaka presided over the court at the
capital. It is rather strange that the record of the dynasties under consideration
do not refer to him. The non-mention of his office may be accidental.
The
chief justice was assisted in hiswork by a number of judges known as Mahadharmadhyakshas
[376]
under the Senas and probably Dharmapradhanas[377]
under the Chedis. It is difficult to say whether the Dharmalekhins,[378]
who figure in the Chandella and Chedi records, were the pleaders, who wrote
the complaints or judicial officers, who wrote the judgments. Probably they
were state judicial officers, since they are sometimes seen as drafting the
copper plate charters. Thus under the Chandellas, the writer of the Banda plate
of Madanavarman was the Darmalekhi Dasisudha,[379]
and that of the Semra plate was the Dharmlekhi[380]
Prithvidhara. The writer of the Pacher plate of the Chandella king Paramardi
was Dharmalekhi Shubhananda[381]
and of Mahoba plate was Dharmalekhi Prithvidhara.[382]
The writer of the Kharha grant of the Chedi king Yasakarna was the Dharmalekhi
Vacchuka.[383]
The
chief justice used to have his own office in charge of an officer named as Mahadharmadhikaranika
under the Chedis.[384]
He was probably in charge of the records of the office, where all documents
concerning important cases were kept. The officer called Dasaparadhika,[385]
who collected fines imposed upon criminals, probably worked under the chief
justice or his assistants.
The
judicial department probably looked after the management of jails also. The
epigraphs of our period, however, do not refer to the jail officer and hence we
do not know how he used to function. The non-mention of the jail officer may be
probably due to the fact that imprisonment was only one of the ten modes of
punishment in our period.
ECCLESIASTICAL DEPARTMENT :
The last department that we have to consider is the
ecclesiastical department, which was in charge of an officer called Pandita by
Sukra. An officer with this title does not figure at all in any of the records
of the dynasties under consideration; it is unlikely that his function might
have been discharged by the Purohita or Rajaguru, who figures in some of our
records. His duty as we have already seen, was to advise the king in religious
matters. He must have been assisted in his work by a number of subordinate
officers, though they do not appear in our records. Their duty was to supervise
all religions and sects. These officers were called Dharmamahamatras under
the Mauryas, Vinayasthitisthapakas under the Guptas and Dharmankusas
under the Rashtrakutas.
The
superintendent of religious establishments, institutions and charities is
described as Danadhyaksha by Sukra.[386]
It is very likely that the donation made on the recommendation of this officer
to the Brahmanas and temples would have been utilised by them in organising
schools, colleges, hospitals and poor-houses. The officer called Dharmadhikarin
appearing in the Chedi records probably discharged similar functions.[387]
An
officer called Agraharika, appearing in the Chahamana records, might have
worked under this department. He probably looked after the administration of
the villages granted to temples and Brahmanas. It was his duty to see that
there were no difficulties created in the enjoyment of grants given to the
donees.
OFFICIALS- FEUDATORIES-TERRITORIAL UNITS
(A) OFFICIALS OFTHE STATE :
The Chahamana records of
Sakambhari mention some other officials who were entrusted with specific duties
in the administration. The following were the most important of them;
Pratihara :
The Pratihara was the royal
chamberlain who used to hold a prominent place in the administrative framework
in the early medieval Indian states. It was his duty to bring the visitors into
the presence of the king. In the Sakambhari kingdom the term is mentioned in
the drama, Lalitavigraharaja[388]
and the Sanskrit Kavya, Prthvirajavijaya.[389]
Duta :
He was the envoy or political
agent of the king for communicating royal messages and orders. He thus appears
to hold an important position in the administration. Hasan Nizami mentions that
on the eve of the second battle of Tarain, Chahamana Prthviraja III sent such
an envoy to Muhammad Ghuri asking him to retire or face the consequences of the
battle.[390]
Spies :
The Chahamana rulers seem to have
maintained spies for getting first-hand information of the activities of their
rivals and enemies. The drama, Lalita-vigraharaja, mentions that
Vigraharaja IV sent his spy to the Muslim camp in order to ascertain of their
strength and stragic position.[391]
Juotishika :
The Delhi Siwalik pillar inscription was composed in
the presence of the Jyotishika (astrologer), Sri Tilakaraja, to
commemorate the victory of vigraharaja IV over the Muslim.[392]
It thus appears that a royal astrologer was maintained at the court of the
Chahamanas. It was his duty to forecast auspicious moments by reading about the
effects of stars and planets. After his advice, the king probably undertook all
his important assignments, especially his military campaigns. It seems,
therefore, that the astrologer was a very influential person in the Chahamana
court. This is also indicated in the Delhi Siwalik pillar inscription, which
mentions the term ‘illustrious’ to astrologer Tilakaraja.[393]
Karanikas :
The Karanikas, mentioned in the Chahamana
inscriptions, appear to have been connected with the revenue administration of
the kingdom. As the name signifies, they were probably the clerical officers,
engaged to write the documents of the land grants of the king. From the Dhod
stone inscription of Somesvara it appears that the post of the Karanikas was
an important one, which was served by the Brahmins as well.[394]
Gauda-Kayasthas :
The Chahamana inscriptions were also composed by
another class of people, called the Gauda-Kayasthas. They were mainly engaged
for writing royal prasasti in the inscriptions on important occasions.[395]
(B) FEUDATORIES:
The feudatory chiefs under the Chahamana sovereign seem
to have played on important role in the kingdom. Whenever required, they
rendered military help to the king, and personally accompanied him in battle.
According to Firishta one hundred and fifty chiefs joined Prthviraja III in his
second campaign against Muhammad Ghuri.[396]
Govindaraja of Delhi personally took part in the two battles of Tarain, and was
killed in the second battle.
The
feudatories also participated in peaceful activities as well. The Dhod stone
inscription mentions that the temple of Nityapramoditadava was constructed by
the feudatory of Prthviraja II.[397]
The
Chahamana inscriptions mention different titles, assumed by these feudatories,
like Duhsadhya,[398]
Thakura,[399]
Adhiraja,[400]
Maham[401]etc.
But as these titles were simply mentioned without any proper explanation, it is
neither possible to differentiate them from each other, nor to assess their
exact status. However, it appears that Dandhuka, who assumed the title of
Duhsadhya was a very important feudatory chief. The Harsha stone inscription
call him ‘illustrious’.[402]
Further, along with king Simharaja and the royal family, he also donated the
village of Mayyrapadra to the temple of Harsha.[403]
But
these feudatory chiefs had to acknowledge the suzerainty of the king, and could
do nothing independently. Even the ‘illustrious’Dandhuka had to seem the
permission of his overlord for simply donating his personal property (which he
had received from the king) to the temple of Harsha.
The
Chahamana territory of Sakambhari was designated as the ‘Sapadalaksa’[404]
country. It was under the direct rule of the king. For the sake of
administrative convenience, it was divided and sub-divided into smaller units.
In the
early stage of Chahamana administration, we do not find the well-known terms of
early medieval India, like bhuktia, bhumis or mandalas, representing
provinces in which the kingdom was usually divided. Instead, the Harsha stone
inscription mentions only visayas[405]
or districts. It seems that the Sakambhari kingdom was not big enough to he
divided into provinces. It was small in area, simply divided into a number of visayas,
and such Visaya consisting of several villages. Some villages were,
however, organised into a group or union. The Harsha stone inscription mentions
one such group of twelve villages –the Tunakupaka-dvadasaka in the
pattabaddhaka – visaya.[406]
But
with the enlargement of the Sakambhari kingdom, need was felt for a proper
territorial division. Hence the term Mandala or province comes into
existence, which was placed under the charge of a governor, known as Mandalesvara.
Kadambavasa, the chief minister of Prthviraja III, was such a Mandalesvara.[407]
It
seems that the enlarged Sakambhari kingdom was probably divided into a number
of such mandalas or provinces. Each province consisted of several
districts, and each district was sub-divided into a number of villages. The
village formed the smallest unit of administration.
It
is interesting to note that Prthviraja III’s Revasa stone inscription of V.S.
1243 (= C. 1188 A.D.) mentions some Chandels of Khaluvana village in the
Chandel pratiganaka.[408]
According to D. Sharma, the term Pratiganaka, was somewhat
equivalent to a Paragana of the Mughal period.[409]
If that is so, then a pratiganaka must have comprised a number of
villages. In other words, the former village unions probably took a definite
name in the later period of the Chahamanas.
JUDICIAL, MILITARY AND REVENUE
ADMINISTRATION
JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION :
Due to the paucity of materials it is really very
difficult to say anything definite about the judicial administration of the
Chahamanas of Sakambhari. Some stray references are scattered here and there
from which a mere idea may be gleaned of their judiciary.
The
king was probably the highest court of appeal. This will be evident from the Kharataragachchhapattavali
which mentions that the Sarvadhikarin of Prthviraja III, in the
absence of the king, presided over a religious dispute at Narayana, and give
impartial justice with the help of the Panditas,[410]
The Sarvadhikarin thus appears to hold the next position after the king for
delivering justice in a dispute. He, therefore, might have held the position of
the chief justice of the state. The panditas seem to be the learned Brahmanas, well-versed
in Dharmasastras, the apparently they had some influence in the judicial
administration.
MILITARY ADMINISTRATION :
The fall of the Pratihara Empire was followed by the
rise of more than half a dozen local Rajput dynasties, engaged in continual
struggles among themselves. These warring principalities were each actuated by
the ambition of securing for itself an imperial authority, as achieved by the
Pratiharas. Further, all these inter-dynastic struggles were going on at a time
when the Muslims were knocking at the gate of India. hence an atmosphere of
continuous warfare prevailed in North India in early medieval period of Indian
history.
The
Chahamana Rajputs of Sakambhari were no exception to the rule. After the period
of independence and consolidation, they were also inspired with the ideal of
imperial authority. Arnoraja assumed the title of Maharajadhiraja-Paramesvar.[411]
Vigraharaja IV claimed to have conquered the whole region from the
Himalayas to the Vindhyas.[412]
Prthviraja III was after the overlordship of India, that is why he called
himself as Bharatesvara.[413]
At
the same time the Chahamanas were also heavily engaged against the Muslim
invaders for mearly two hundred years. Hence they had to take appropriate
measures against the Muslim danger. Obviously in an age of dynastic ambition
and recurring Muslim aggression, there was constant warfare. The army
therefore, had a vital role to pay in the country. The Chahamanas seem to have
been quite conscious of it, which is evident in the military administration
followed by them.
The
Chahamanas maintained a large army. The Ajmer stone inscription mentions that
Vigraharaja IV marched against the Muslims with an army consisting of a
thousand elephants, a hundred thousand horses, and a million of men.[414]
Hasan Nizami almost a contemporary Muslim writer, states that Prthviraja III
advanced against Muhammad Ghuri in the second battle of Tarain with an army of
three hundred thousand horses.[415]
This was confirmed by Firishta, in whose opinion an additional three thousand
elephants and a body of infantry accompained the said cavalary force.[416]
Though all these estimates may appear exaggerated to some extent yet the
strength of the Chahamana army cannot be denied.
From
the sources mentioned above, it appears that the Chahamana army mainly
consisted of three units – the elephant, the cavalry and the infantry. Chariots
seem to have become absolute in warfare; they are referred more as conventional
than an essential feature in the composition of the army.[417]
The
elephant probablyconstituted the most important unit in the army, as the
dignitaries of the kingdom, like the king and other feudatory rulers, fought
the battle from its back. Govindaraja of Delhi wounded Muhammad Ghuri from the howdah
of his war-elephant in the first battle of Tarain.[418]
The Kharataragachchha-pattavali mentions that Prthviraja III maintained
a good elephant force.[419]
The
cavalry was also an important wing in the Chahamana armyfor its swift movement.
In an emergency the horse was used by the king instead of the elephant. After
his defeat in the second battle of Tarain, Prthviraja III dismounted from his
elephant, and tried to escape from the battle field on a horse. The Kharataragachchha-pattavali
states that Prthviraja III started his digvijaya (conquest of all
the quarters) with 70,000 horse.[420]
But from the Muslim sources it appears that there was more than a four-fold
increase in the number on the eve of the second battle of Tarain. This tends to
show the growing importance of the cavalry in the Chahamana army.
Last
of all was the infantry. But due to its seldom reference in the contemporary
sources, it is difficult to asses its proper role in the Chahamana army.
The
Bijolia inscription mentions that Chahamana Ajayaraja brought to Ajmer the
captive commander of Malava by binding him to the back of his camel.[421]
The Prthvirajavijaya also states that Prthviraja III had with him camels
and other regular army units in his campaign against Nagarjuna.[422]
The mention of the camel in the Chahamana records is really interesting. There
is no evidence of using that animal for fighting purposes. It seems, therefore,
that the camel was most probably used for carrying food and other essentials
for the army in the sandy tracts of the Chahamana territory.
Along
with the offensive activities, the Chahamana rulers of Sakambhari took
defensive measures as well to resist the Muslim invaders by constructing strong
forts at the strategic points of their dominions. The forts of Hansi,
Tabarhindah, Samana, Ajmer, Delhi, Kyhram, and Sirsa were the most important
among others. The army was garrisened in these forts, and a careful watch was
made over the activities of the Muslims. Sometimes an offensive action was
directed against them from these forts.
REVENUE ADMINISTRATION :
Sources of Revenue :
For maintaining the proper administration of a state, a
regular income is very essential. The revenue administration of the state is
generally developed on the basis of this regular income. The revenue
administration of the Chahamanas of Sakambhari should also be studied by
following this very principle.
As
sufficient materials are not available , it is really very difficult to make a
proper and systematic study of the Chahamana revenue system. However, it may be
conjectured that there existed some sort of regular income of the state for
running the administration of the vast Chahamana kingdom of Sakambhari.
It
seems that the royal revenue was mainly derived from the following sources :
1.
Income from the private estates of the king.
2.
Feudal dues of the nobility.
3.
Tributes from the vassal states.
4.
Spoils of wars.
5.
Taxes paid by the traders.
6.
Revenue from the currency system
The Chahamana
king possessed private estates of various dimensions.[423]
As the well-know terms of land revenue, like bhaga and bhoga
fail to occur in the Chahamana records, it may be presumed that the private
estates of the king formed a very important source of royal revenue.[424]
The chahamana
rulers were served by many feudatory chiefs.[425]
The mobility gave its feudal dues to the king, and rendered military help to
him whenever requred. These must have been of much help to the king inthe
sphere of revenue administration.
Another considerable royal
revenue was derived from the tributes paid by the vassal states. The Chahamana
kings, therefore, took a keen interest to increase the number of the tributory
states. It served two purposes. One was the increase of royal power and
prestige; and the other was a regular supply of revenue to the royal treasury.
In the third Delhi Siwalik pillar inscription Vigraharaja IV claimed to have
made all the territories in between the Himalayas and the Vindhyas tributory to
him.[426]
Another probably
source of royal income was the spoils of war. From the Madanpur stone
inscriptions it appears that Prthviraja III brought much wealth to his treasury
by plundering the Chandella kingdom.[427]
The
Prthvirajavijaya mentions that the Sambhar Lake was an important sourc of
revenue to the Chahamana kingdom.[428]
That Lake was famous for the manufacture of salt. The Harsha stone inscription
states that the traders of Sakambhari paid taxes on salt.[429]
It thus appears that the state levied a tax on salt, which must have yielded a
substantial amount to the royal treasury.
The
currency system had also an important bearing on the royal revenue of the
state. Silver and copper coins are first noticed in the Chahamana kingdom
during the reign of Ajayaraja.[430]
It seems that with the establishment of peace and order in the kingdom, trade
and commerce flourished. Consequently need was felt for a regular currency
system. This was developed during the reign of Ajayaraja, and it continued to
exist in the subsequent reigns. As the coining of the currency appears to be
the state monopoly, it was, therefore, another important source of royal
revenue.
Expenditures
of the State :
The chief items of expenditure of
the Chahamana kingdom were on the royal household, maintenance of civil and
military administration, laying and development of the town of Ajmer,
construction of temples, palaces, lakes and other public works. In an age of
constant war, the army seems to have been the most important item of
expenditure. The Chahamana rulers had to maintain a vast army for their
military needs, and this army must have put a heacy, if not the heaviest,
pressure on the royal exchequer. Yet they were able to spend considerably for
the purpose of peaceful reconstruction as well. It seems, therefore, that the
economic condition of the Chahamaa kingdom was more or less satisfactory.
According to the Prthvirajavijaya the city Rama conquered after crossing
the sea (the Golden Lanka) and that founded by Krishna in the sea (Dwarka) are
not fit to be handmaids of Ajmer.”[431]
In fact, the poet compares Ajmer with Amravati,[432]
the capital of Indra. Though there may be some poetic exaggeration, yet it
undoubtedly reflects the general prosperity of the Chahamana kingdom of
Sakambhari.
CONCLUSION
In the preceding chapters an attempt
has been made to give an account of the Chahamana’s polity during a
transitional period in Indian History. The period is marked by the Hindu
domination gradually making way for the Muslim rule in Northern India. For
nearly two hundred years the Chahamanas made effective resistance to the
foreign aggression but ultimately failed due to the prevailing political
condition of the country.
However,
the Chahamanas of Sakambhari played a very significant role in the political
and administrative history of Northern India for several centuries before the
advent of the Muslim rule in the country. It also appears from the above
perusal that the administrative system of the period was well organised and it
was divided into several wings for better and efficient administration.
Since
the king was the head of the state it seems that it was felt necessary to raise
to the throne a competent member of the ruling family. The title Maharajadhiraja
was usually used by the emperors. Though the king was the centre of all
military, political, administrative and judicial powers, he was expected not to
behave arbitrarily. A number of checks upon the king was imposed to prevent him
from becoming an autocrat.
It
seems that the Chahamanas queen used to take some positive part in the
benevolent activities and sometimes in the administrative matters. Yuvaraja or
crown prince was regarded as an important member of the administration.
Naturally great care was bestowed upon the proper training of the crown prince.
He was to help his father in carrying on the administration on proper lines and
to the satisfaction of the subjects. The younger princes were often appointed
to some important posts in the administration. Sometimes they were in the
ministry also.
Council
of ministers have played an important role in the administration. But in the
pre-independence period, as long as the Chahamanas were under the Pratihara
rule, they had no independent policy to persue. Hence, the ministerial role in
the administration was insignificant. But with the attainment of independence
the condition completely changed and the entire responsibility for evolving on
independent policy fell directly on the shoulder of the king the later used to
take advice of his ministers in all important matters. In the council of
ministers. The Maha-mantri or chief minister became the most important member.
As the head of the council, he advised the king in administration and
supervised the work of the council.
In
the age of constant warfare, the senapati or commander of the army must have
been a very important person in the state. He was the war minister and probably
occupied a position in the ministry next to the chief minister. Sandhivigrahika
was the minister for peace and war. He advised the king on foreign affairs.
The
theme of Chahamanas overlordship is not directly related with the
administration of the period under review, even indirectly it throws light upon
the prevailing war strategy of the kings, undoubtedly a part of the
administrative pattern of the Chahamanas.
The
success of the administration depends largely upon the efficiency and ability
of the secretariat officers. Hence, ancient Indian political writers advised
the king to take great care in the selection of the secretariat officers. That
the records of the period under discussion supply us no direct and detailed
information about the machinery of the central government; and hence it is
difficult to say, how the secretariat and its various departments, were
organised and how they used to function? The records of the period merely give
us a long list of officers. However, we have form a general idea of the
secretariat and its different branches on the basis of the records of the
different dynastis of the period. The secretariat was known as Srikarana under
the Chahamanas. Its head was usually a Mahamatya. It had a big record offices
where official documents were carefully kept. The secretariat had also its
inspecting staff to control provincial and district officers. Different heads
of the administration are known as the Royal Household Department; Military
Department; Foreign Department; Police Department, Revenue Department; Treasury
Department; Finance Department; Commerce
& Industry Department; Judicial Department & Ecclesiastical Department
etc.
The
Chahamanas records mention Pratihara, Duta, Spies, Jyotishika, Karanikas, Gauda
Kayasthas as officials who were entrusted with specifie duties in the
administration. The feudatory chiefs seem to have played an important role in
the kingdom. Judicial, military and revenue administration were well organised
during the period under review.
v v v
SELECT
BIBLIOGRAPHY
ORIGINAL SOURCES:
Chand Bardai : Prthviraja-Raso- Edited by
K.M.Singh, 4 Vols., Udaipur, Samvat 2011-2012
Hasan Nizami : Taj-ul-Ma asir – Extracts, Trans. in
ED, Vol. II, pp. 204 ff.
Hem Chandra : Dvyasraya Kavya (with the commentary
of Abhayatilaka Gani) –Edited by A.V. Kathvate, 2 Vols., Bombay, Vol. I (1915),
Vol. II (1921).
Jayanaka : Prthvirajavijaya (with the
commentary of Jonaraja) – Ed. by G.H. Ojha and C.S. Gulri, Ajmer, 1941.
Jayasimha Suri : Kumarapala-charita – Edited by K.V.Gani,
Bombay,1926
Jinapala : Kharataragachchha pattavali
– Extracts, Trans. in IHQ, 1950, pp. 223-31.
Lakshmidhara : Virduddhavidhividhvamsa – Extracts,
Trans. in IHQ, Vol. XVI, pp. 567-573.
Merutunga Acharya :
Prabandha chintamani – Trans. by C.H. Tawney, Calcutta, 1901.
Minhaj-ud-din : Tabaqat-i-Nasiri – Trans. by Raverty
Calcutta 1880. Also Extracts, Trans. in ED, Vol. II, pp. 259ff.
Muhammad Qasim Firishta :
Tarikh-i-Firishta – Trans. by 3. Briggs, Calcutta, 1900.
Muhammad Ofi : Jamiul-Hikayat – Extracts, Trans. in ED,
Vol. II, pp. 200ff.
Nayachandra Suri : Hammira-mahakavya – Ed. by N.J.Kirtans,
Bombay, 1879. Also Extracts, Trans. in IA, Vol. III, pp. 55-73.
Nizam-ud-din-Ahmad :
Tabaqat-i-Akbari – Trans. by B.De, Vol. I, Calcutta, 1927.
Somesvara : Kirtikaumudi – Ed. by A.V.
Kathvate, Bombay, 1983
MODERN WORKS:
Altekar, A.S. : The Rashtrakutas and their times,
Poons, 1934.
-------------- : State and Government in Ancient
India, Banaras, 1949.
Asopa, J.N. : Origin of the Rajputa, Delhi,
1976.
Bose, N.S. :Historyof the Candellas of
Jejakabhukti, Calcutta, 1956.
Brown, Percy : Indian Architecture, Bombay, 1949.
Chattopadhyaya, S. : Early History of North India (C.200 B.C. –
A.D. 650) Calcutta, 1958.
Crooke, W. : Tribes and castes of the
North-Western Provinces and Oudh, Vol. II, Calcutta, 1896
Cunningham : Coins of Medieval India, London,
1894
--------------- : Later Indo-Scythians, Varanasi,
1962.
Elliot and Dowson : The History of India as told by its own
Historians, Vol. II.
Fergusson, J. : History of India and Eastern
Architecture, 2 Vols. London, 1910.
Ganguly, D.C. : History of the Paramara Dynasty,
Dacca, 1933.
Ghurye, G.S. : Rajput Architecture.
Habibullah, A.B.M.:
Foundation of the Muslim Rule in India, Lahore, 1945.
Haig, W. (Ed.) : The Cambridge History of India, Vol.
III, Delhi, 1958.
Hodivala, S.H. : Studies in Indo-Muslim History,
Bombay, 1939.
Lallanji, Gopal : The Economic Life of Northern India
(C.700-1200 A.D.), Varanasi, 1965.
Majumdar, A.K. : Chaulukyas of Gujarat, Bombay, 1956.
Majumdar, R.C. : History
of Ancient Bengal, Calcutta, 1971.
Majumdar,
R.C. & : The
Age of Imperial Kanauj, Pushlkar, A.D.(Ed.) Bombay,
1955
Majumdar,
R.C. & : The
Struggle for Empire, Pushlkar, A.D.(Ed.) Bombay,
1957
Mitra, S.K. : The Early Rulers of Khajuraho, Calcutta, 1958
Niyogi, R. : The History of
Gahadavala Dynasty, Calcutta, 1959.
Ojha, G.H. : Rajputana-ka-Itihasa
(Hindi), Vol. I, Ajmer, 1933.
Rapson, E.J. :Catalogue of Indian Coins in
the British Museum (Andhras, Kshatrapas, etc.), London, 1908.
-------------(Ed.) : The Cambridge History of India,
Vol. I, Delhi, 1968.
Ray, H.C. : Dynastic History of
Northern India, 2 Vols., Calcutta, 1931 and 1936.
Raychaudhuri, G.C. : History of Mewar, Calcutta, 1957.
Russell, R.V. : Tribes and castes of the
Central Provinces of India, Vols. II and IV, London, 1916.
Sastri, K.A.N.(Ed.) : A comprehensive History of India,
Vol. II, Calcutta, 1957.
Sharma, Dasharatha : Early Chauhan Dynasties, Delhi, 1959.
Smith, V.A. : Early History of India (4th
Edition) Oxford, 1924.
-------------- : Catalogue of the Coins in
the Indian Museum, Calcutta, Vol. Oxford, 1906.
Tod, James : Annals and Antiguities of
Rajasthan, 2 Vols., London, 1957.
Tripathi, R.S. History of Mediaeval Hindu
India, 3 Vols., Poona, 1921-26.
ARTICLES AND PERIODICALS :
Avasthy, R.S. and : Reference to Muhammadans in Sanskrit
inscriptions in Northern India (A.D.730-1320) Journal of Indian History,
Vol.XV, 1936, pp. 161-184.
Baden Powell, B.H. : Notes on the origin of the ‘Lunar’and
‘Solar’ Aryan Tribes, and on the ‘Rajput’ Clans –JRAS, 1899, pp. 295-328.
Bhandarkar, D.R. : Foreign elements in the Hindu
population – IA, 1913, pp. 7-37.
--------------- : Chahamanas of Marwar – EI,
Vol. XI, pp. 26-78.
-------------- : Some published
inscriptions reconsidered, IA, Vol. XLIII(March, 1913).
------------- : Slow progress of
Islamic Power in Ancient India – Proceedings and Transactions of the Fourth
Oriental Conference (1926), Allahabad University (1928), November, Vol. II, pp.
753-765.
Bhattacharya, U.C. New light on the Chahamana History
(Barla Inscription of Prthviraja III) PIHC, 1951, pp. 326-28.
--------------- : Some Masterpieces of
Medieval Art of Rajasthan (Summary), PIHC, 1955, p. 122.
Bose, N.S. : Karpuradevi (Mother of
Prthviraja Chauhan) – PIHC, 1856, pp. 197-202.
Burn Richard : Coinage bearing the names of
Indian Queens – JNSI, Vol. VII, Parts I and II, pp. 69-77.
Ganguly, D.C. : A new light on the history of
the Chahamanas – IH, Vol. XVI (September, 1940), pp. 567-573.
Haldar, P.R. : Some reflections on
Prthviraja- Raso – JBRAS, Vol.III, (1927), pp. 203-211.
Jagan Nath : Early History of the
Maitrakas of Valabhi- IC, Vol. V, pp. 407-414.
Kielhorns : Chahamanas of Naddula, EI,
Vol. IX, pp. 62-83, 158-159
Lahiri, B. : The coin-types of the
foreign successors of the great Kushanas, JNSI, Vol. XXXI, (1969), Part- II,
pp. 122-134.
Majumdar,R.C. : The Gurjara Pratiharas, -
Journal of the Department of Letters, Vol. X, pp. 1-76.
Ojha, G.H. : Coins of Ajayadeva and
Somaladevi – IA, 1912, pp. 209-211.
Ray, H.C. : The Age of the
Chahamana Prthviraja III- IC, Vol. VIII(April-June, 1942, No.4), pp. 323-328.
Ray, N.R. : Maitrakas of Valabhi
–IHQ, Vol, IV, pp. 453-474.
Sarda, H.B. : The Prthviraja – Vijaya –
JRAS, Vol. VIII, Part –I (1913), pp. 259-81.
------------- : Kumarapala and Arnoraja
– IA, 1912, p. 195.
Sharma, Dasharatha : Prthviraja III, The last Hindu
Emperior of Delhi – IC, Vol. XI, pp. 57-73.
------------- Coin of Muhammad bin sam
and Prthviraja – JNSI, Vol. XVI, Part I (1954), p. 122.
------------- : History of Samyogita –
The Heroine of the Prthviraja – Raso – PIHC, 1938, pp. 237-240.
------------ : Gleanings from the
Kharataragachchha-Pattavali – A History of the Jaina Acharyas of the Kharatara
branch (1010-1336 A.D) – IHQ, Vol. XXVI, (1950), pp. 223-31.
Syamal Das : The Antiquity,
Anthenticity and Genuineness of the Epic called the Prthi Raj Rase, and
commonly ascribed to Chand Bardai – JASB, Vol. LV (1887), pp. 5-65.
Tripathi, R.S. : The Pratihara Administration
– IHQ, (Haraprasad Memorial Number) Vol. IX, pp. 121-130
v v v
PREFACE
With the Arab conquest of Sind in 712
A.D. the Muslims first set a foothold in India. From Sind they tried to
penetrate into Western India, but met a rebuff from the Pratiharas.The
Pratiharas established an empire which extended from Gujarat to Bihar and from
the frontiers of the Punjab to those of Orissa. The Pratihara Empire was based
on a tradition of national greatness in resisting the Muslim invasion. For
about two centuries it was able to fulfil its historic mission.
But the distintegration of the
Pratihara Empire set in from C.916-917 A.D., and by 950 it was definitely on
the decline. The political unity of Northern India was lost, and a number of
dynasties, which ruled in different principalities as the vassals of the
Pratihara Empire, began to rise into independence. These were the Chandellas in
Bundelkhand, the Chahamanas in Sakambhari, the Chaulukyas in Gujarat, the
Paramaras in Malava, the Kalachuris in Tripuri, and the Guhilets in Medapata.
These dynasties were generally grouped together under the name Rajput. They
were not satisfied with the mere achievement of independence. Each of them was
actuated by the ambition of securing for itself an imperial authority as the
Pratiharas had achieved. In doing so these Rajput dynasties were involved in
constant struggle with each other even by ignoring the common Muslim danger
before them. As failed to joi together against the impending danger, they had
to pay the penalty of their blunder. They fought with the Muslim invaders
separately, and suffered defeat and humiliation. In fact the mutual rivalry
among these Rajput dynasties paved the way for the establishment of Muslim rule
in Northern India.
After the decline of the Pratihar
power, the Hindu Shahi dynasty of Afghanistan and the Punjab earnestly
responded to the task of opposing the Turkish invaders from Ghazni. But the
task was found to be too heavy for them, and the Ghaznavites ultimately
conquered both Afghanistan and the Punjab. Henceforth the Punjab become the
Muslim base for further raids into the interior of India.
Though the fall of the Pratihara
Empire was followed by the rise of the local Rajput Kingdoms engaged in
internecine struggles, yet the Muslims were not able to make an easy conquest
of Northern India. It was the Chahamana dynasty of Sakambhari which rose to the
occasion, and took the enerous responsibility of checking the Muslim inroads.
For nearly two hundred years the Chahamanas magnificently did their duty, and
when they collapsed in 1192, all hopes were lost. It is a significant fact that
within a decade after the second battle of Tarain, the Muslims conquered
practically the whole of Northern India from the Punjab to Bengal.
It is the polity of this valiant
Chahamaa dynasty of Sakambhari that forms the Chief theme of our study. We have
tried to discuss the subject from an analytical standpoint with the help of
available evidences.
First of all I must express my deep
gratitude to my supervisor, Dr. Vinod Kumar Yadvendu, P.G. Deptt. of Ancient
Indian and Asian Studies, Magadh University, Bodh-Gaya who not only suggested
this topic to me but kindly supervised the work to its completion. It was with
his co-operation and blessings that I could complete the present work. My
thankfulness stads for my Pricipal, Aasis Kumar Jana DAV Public School, P.C. Campus,
Biharsharif.
I am thankful to my relatives and
friends who have encouraged me in various ways in completion of the present
work.
My thanks are also due to the great
scholars in the field from whose works, I have been benefitted much in my
present investigations.
My thanfulness stands for my
Principal, A.K. Jana and my dearest friend Dr. Ajay Kr. who always give my
proper, support and guide time for completing this work successfully.
I cannot forget that encouragement
given by my brother in law, Ashish Kr. that always inspires me for having a
reasearch work.
( Madhup Raman )
ABBREVIATIONS
AIK : The Age of Imperial Kanauj.
AR : Annals and Antiquities
of Rajasthan.
ASI :
Archaeological Survey of India – Annual Report.
ASI, WC :
Archaeological Survey of India – Western Circle.
ASR :
Archaeological Survey Reports.
BG :
Bombay Gazetteer.
CCIM :
Catalogue of the Coins in the Indian Museum Calcutta.
CG :
Chaulukyas of Gujarat.
CHI :
Cambridge History of India.
CMI :
Coins of Mediaeval India.
DHNI :
Dynastic History of Northern India.
IK :
Dvyasraya – Kavya of Hemachandra.
ECD :
Early Chauhan Dynasties.
ED :
The History of India as told by its own Historians.
EHI :
Early History of India.
EHNI :
Early History of North India.
EI :
Epigraphia Indica.
HAB :
History of Ancient Bengal.
HC :
History of the Candellas of Jejakabhukti.
HK :
History of Kanauj
HM :
Hammira-mahakavya of Nayachandra Suri.
HMHI :
History of Mediaeval Hindu India.
HPD :
History of the Paramara Dynasty.
IA :
Indian Antiquary.
IC :
Indian Culture.
IHQ :
Indian Historical Quarterly.
JASB :
Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal.
JBRAS :
Journal of the Bombay Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society.
JRAS :
Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society.
KK :
Kiriti Kaumudi of Somesvara.
PC :
Prabandha Chintamani of Merutunga.
PIHC :
Proceedings of the Indian History Congress.
PR :
Prthviraja-Raso of Chand Bardal.
PV :
Prthvirajavijaya of Jayanaka.
RMR :
Rajputana Museum Report.
SE : The Struggle for
Empire-Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan.
TA : Tabaqat-i-Akbari of
Nizamuddin.
TF : Tarikh-i-Firista.
TKA : Al Tarikh-ul-Kamil of
Ibn-ul-Athir-Bulak.
TN : Tabaqat-i-Nasiri of
Minhaj-ud-din.
v v v
CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that Madhup
Raman has worked under my supervision on “Aspects of Chahamana’s Polity”
for requisite number of terms. The present work incorporate the result of his
independent study the best of my knowledge and belief.
( Dr. Vinod Kumar Yadvendu )
PAGE
NO.
PREFACE - (i) - (iii)
ABBREVIATION - (iv) - (vi)
CHAPTER - I: KINGSHIP - 01 - 31
CHAPTER - II: MEMBERS OF THE ROYAL
FAMILY AND
THE MINISTRY - 32 - 46
CHAPTER - III: THE CHAHAMANA OVER-
LORDSHIP - 47 -
85
CHAPTER - IV: SECRETARIAT
AND THE CENTRAL
GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS - 86 -
121
CHAPTER - V: OFFICIALS- FEUDATORIES-
TERRITORIAL UNITS - 122 - 127
CHAPTER – VI: JUDICIAL,
MILITARY AND REVENUE
ADMINISTRATION - 128 - 136
:
CONCLUSION - 137 - 140
[1] PV, Canto V, Verse 68; Bijolia
Inscription, Verse 14.
[2] PV , Canto XI, Verse
8.
[3] Delhi Siwalik Pillar
Inscription (No.11) Verse 2.
[4] Hansi Stone Inscription,
Verse 9.
[5] PV, Canto IX, Verse
86; JRAS, 1913, p. 278
[6] Sukra, I, 86-87
[7] Ibid., I, 148-9
[8] Agni-Purana, 239,
2-5
[9] Nvk., p. 62
[10] Ibid.
[11] EI., I, p. 35
[12] EI., I, p. 131
[13] EI., I, p. 195
[14] EI., I, p. 41
[15] EI., I, p. 33
[16] EI., II, p. 183
[18] EI., XVIII, p. 95
[19] Sukra, I, pp. 73-77
[20] Agni-Purana, 225, 16
[21] Matsya-Purana; Ch.22
[22] Padma-Purana, I, 30.45ff.
[23] Markandeya-Purana,
27,21,ff.
[24] Sukra, I, pp. 78-80
[25] Ibid., I, p. 20
[26] Ibid., I, 26-27
[27] Narada, XVIII, p. 31
[28] Sukra, I, p. 87
[29] Sukra, II, 257
[30] Ibid., IV, Sect. I, 113
[31] Ibid.
[32] EI., IX, 79-81
[33] Sukanasa’s address,
Kadambari, p. 206
[34] Sukra, I, 14
[35] Kamandaka , I, 15
[36] Kamandaka, VI, 15
[37] Kamandaka, VI, 15
[38] Sukra, I, 126
[39] PV, Canto, V.
[40] A. Br. p. VII, 2. 6. VIII,
3, 13.
[41] Sa. Br., V. 2-3
[42] A. Br., VIII. 15
[43] Ibid.
[44] Mbh., XII, 58, 115-6
[45] Ibid.
[46] PV, Canto V, Vrs. 67
[47] Ibid.
[48] KKt. R. Chap. II, p. 16
[49] Ibid., p. 10
[50] VS., 18..38
[51] AV., 19.15. I; RV.,
8.61, 13.
[52] RV., 10, 103, I, AV.,
19.13.2
[53] T. Br., 3.12.32
[54] T.Br., I, 1.7.3.
[55] RV.,10, 116,2.
[56] Altekar, Rashtrakutas,
p.109
[57] KKt. R. Chap. II, p. 11
[58] Kkt. R. Chap. II, p. 11.
[59] KKt. R. Chapt. II, 11-12
[60] KKt. R. Chap. II, p. 12
[61] Ibid.
[62] Ibid.
[63] Ibid.
[64] EI., III, 266-67
[65] IA., LVI, 50
[66] PV., Canto, V.
[67] Kamandaka, I, 14-15
[68] B.D.S., I, 10, 6; AS., X, 3
[69] Narada, XVIII, 48.
[70] On Yaj, I, 366
[71] Sukra, IV, Sec. II, 130
[72] Sukra, IV, Sect. II, 3-4
[73] Agni-Purana, 222, 8.
[74] Markandeya-Purana, 130, 33
[75] Sukra, II, 2-7
[76] Sukra, I, 13-12.
[77] PV, Canto V, Verse 27
[78] PV, Canto V, Verse 90
[79] PV, Canto IX, Verses 1-35
[80] Sukra, II, 12.
[81] Ibid., II, 35-50
[82] IA, XIV, 101-4
[83] EI, IV, 118
[84] EI, VIII, 155-56
[85] EI, XI, 29-30
[86] EI, XI, 34
[87] IA, XVIII, 9-14
[88] MV, Krishna Rao, The Gangas
of Talkad, p. 129
[89] EI, XIII, 217
[90] EI, XI, 53-54
[91] EI, XI, 45
[92] F.A. S.B., XII, 104.
[93] F.A. S.B., X, 209
[94] F.A. S.B., XIV, 104
[95] E.I., VIII, 157-8.
[96] EI, VIII, 157-8
[97] EI, XIII, 210.
[98] EI, IX, 68
[99] EI, IX, 68
[100] EI, XI, 50
[101] PV, Canto V, Verse 54.
[102] SE, P. 111.
[103] IA, Vol. XIX, P. 219.
[104] PV, Cato XI, Verse 3-5.
[105] PV, Canto IX, Verses 86-89
[106] IHQ, Vol. XVI, P. 570
[107] IHQ, Vol, XVI, p. 570
[108] Ibid.
[109] IHQ, Vol. XVI, p. 570
[110] PV, Canto VIII, Verse 55.
[111] IHQ, Vol. XXVI, PP. 226-227
[113] DHNI, Vol. II, p. 1070, fn.
5
[114] PV,Canto V, Verse 84
[115] Gala Inscription, JBRAS,
Vol. XXV, p. 324, Line 2.
[116] PV, Canto V, Verse 85.
[117] DHNI, Vol. II, p. 1071
[118] Bijolia Inscription, Verse
15
[119] DHNI, Vol. II, p. 1071;
HPD, p. 165
[120] Bijolia Inscription, Verse
15
[121] PV, Canto V, Verse 113
[122] PV, Canto X, Verse 40
[123] PV, Canto X, Verse 42
[124] PV, Canto V, Verse 120.
[125] DHNI, Vol. II, p. 1071
[126] PV, Canto V, Verse 180
[127] HMHI, Vol. III, p. 148
[128] PV, Canto V, Verses 88-89
[129] PV, Canto V, Verse 90
[130] IA, 1912, p. 211; DHNI,
Vol. II, p. 1072; JNSI, Vol. VII, p. 70
[131] IA, Vol. XLI (1912), p.
209,fn. 6; RMR, 1912, p. 2
[132] PV, Canto V, Verse 97
[133] ECD, pp.41-42
[134] ECD, p. 43, fn. 4
[135] DHNI, Vol. II, p. 884
[136] DHNI, Vol. II, p. 882
[137] Bijolia Inscription, Verse
17; ECD, p. 45, fn. 10
[138] IA, Vol, XX, p. 201
[139] PV, Canto VII, Verse 12.
[140] IA, Vol. IV, p. 268; DK.
Canto XVIII, Verses 84-86
[141] KK, Canto II, Verses 27-28;
CG, p. 71
[142] PV, Canto VI, Verses 29-30
[143] PV, Canto VI, Commentary on
Verse 34, which itself, however, is missing.
[144] IA, Vol. LVIII, (1929) pp.
234-236.
[145] Bijolia Inscription, Verse
17.
[146] ASI, WC, 1914, p. 59; EI,
Vol. XXVI, p. 94
[147] ECD, p. 45.
[148] PC, p. 120
[149] IA, Vol. IV, pp. 267ff.
[150] Kumarapala-charita, Canto
IV, Verses 170ff.
[151] PV, Canto VI, Verses 29-31.
[152] DHNI, Vol, II, pp. 975-976.
[153] DHNI, Vol. II, p. 976.
[154] DHNI, Vol. II, pp. 976-977;
CG, p. 100
[155] DHNI, Vol. II, p. 987; PC,
p. 120
[156] IA, Vol.IV, p. 267
[157] IK, Canto XIX, Verses
36-60; DHNI, Vol. II, p. 1073; CG, pp. 104-105.
[158] EI, Vol. XI, Lines 4-6; pp. 43-46
[159] ASI, WC, 1908, p. 52
[160] DHNI, Vol. II, p. 988
[161] EI, Vol. II, p. 423, Lines
10-11.
[162] DHNI, Vol. II, p. 988.
[163] PV, Canto VI, Verses 1-23.
[164] DHNI, Vol. II, p. 1073, fn.
3.
[165] JRAS, 1913, p. 274, fn. 1.
[166] DHNI, Vol. II, pp.
1073-1074.
[167] ECD, p. 45
[168] JASB, Vol. XLIII, pp.
104-110, Verse 3.
[169] EI, Vol. I, pp. 93-95,Verse
3.
[170] Bijolia Inscription, Verse
17.
[171] PV, Canto VII, Verse 12.
[172] DHNI, Vol. II, p. 1074.
[173] DHNi, Vol. II, p. 1074.
[174] IA, Vol. XX, pp. 201-202
[175] IA, Vol. XIX, pp. 215-219
[176] IA, Vol. XIX, p. 219.
[177] Kumarapala Charita, Canto IV, Verse 117.
[178] BG, Vol. I, Part I, p. 189,
fn. 1.
[179] DHNI, Vol. II, p. 986.
[180] DHNI, Vol. II, p. 985.
[181] DHNI, Vol. II, pp. 987-988.
[182] ASI, WC, 1908, p. 52.
[183] CG, pp. 106-107.
[184] EI, Vol. XI, p. 70; ASI,
WC, 1907-1908, pp. 44-45.
[185] Bijolia Inscription, Verse
21.
[186] Second Kiradu Inscription
(EI, Vol.XI, p. 43).
[187] Pali Inscription (EI, Vol.
XI, p. 70).
[188] Nadol grnat Inscription
(IA, Vol. XLI, 1912, pp. 202-203).
[189] EI, Vol. XI, pp. 54-55.
[190] EI, Vol. XI, pp. 47-48
[191] DHNI, Vol. II, p. 1078
[192] Bijolia Inscription, Verse
20.
[193] EI, Vol. II, p. 424, Line
27.
[194] Bijolia Inscription, Verse
22.
[195] DHNI, Vol. II, pp. 1145.
[196] JASB, Vol. XLIII, p. 108,
L. 31.
[197] EI, Vol. I, pp. 93-95,
Verse 4.
[198] DHNI, Vol. II, p. 1148.
[199] IA, Vol. XX, pp. 202-203.
[200] IA, Vol. XX, p. 203
[201] IA, Vol. XIX, p. 219.
[202] DHNI, Vol. II, p. 1077.
[203] PV, Canto VIII, Verse 55.
[204] PV, Canto VIII, Verse 54.
[205] DHNI, Vol. II, p. 1078, fn.
5
[206] G.H.Ojha –History of
Udaipur, Vol. I, p. 57; JRAS, 1913, p. 276, fn. 2
[207] IA, Vol XLI (1912) , pp.
17-19
[208] (a) ASI, WC, 1906, pp.
59-60 (Menal Stone Inscription)
(b) JASB, Vol. LV (19886), Part I, pp. 15-16
(Menalgarh Pillar Inscription). For the
two inscriptions found at Menal please see also G.H.Ojha – History of Udaipur, Vol.I, pp. 60-61.
[209] RMR, 1923, p. 2; G.H.Ojha –
History of Udaipur Vol. I, p. 57
[210] IA, Vol. XLI (1912) , p.
17.
[211] IA, Vol. XLI (1912), p. 17.
[212] JRAS, Vol. I, p. 135.
[213] IA, 1891, p. 133.
[214] IA, Vol. XLI, (1992), p. 18
[215] DHNI, Vol. II, p. 1080
[216] IA, Vol. XLI, (1912), p. 18
[217] JRAS, Vol. I, p. 135
[218] DHNI, Vol. II, p. 1080
[219] Bijolia Inscription, Verse
25.
[220] RMR 1923, p. 2
[221] Bijolia Inscription, Verse
25.
[222] ASI, WC, 1906, p. 59, No.
2191
[223] Bijolia Inscription, Verse
24.
[224] PV, Canto VI, Verse 35.
[225] PV, Canto VII, Verse 11.
[226] PC, pp. 122-123
[227] PC, pp. 122-123
[228] CG, p. 113
[229] PV, Canto VII, Verse 16,
The name Achalaraja is actually found in PV, Canto IX, Verse 87.
[230] DHNI, Vol. II, p. 1081, fn.
4
[231] PV, Canto IX, Verse 87.
[232] PV, Canto VIII, Verses 57-58
[233] EI, Vol. XXVI, pp. 102-112;
JASB, Vol. XL, Part I, pp. 14-15; 28-32; 40-46
[234] RMR, 1923, p. 2
[235] ASI, WC, 1910, p. 52
[236] RMR, 1923, p. 2
[237] PIHC, 1951, p. 328
[238] CCIM, pp. 257 and 161.
[239] Bijolia Inscription, Verse
27.
[240] IHQ, Vol. XVI, p. 570,
Verses 6-7
[241] DHNi, Vol. II, p. 984, fn.
4
[242] PV, Canto IX, Verses 35-43
[243] PV, Canto IX, Verses 35-43
[244] Prthviraja-Raso, Part III,
pp. 56-57
[245] PIHC, 1951,pp. 326-327
[246] DHNI, Vol. II, p. 1016
[247] BG, Vol. I, Part- I, p. 194
[248] IA, Vol. VI, p. 194, Line 8
[249] DHNI, Vol. II, p. 1001.
[250] BG, Vol. I, Part I, p. 194
[251] Sukra, II, 53.
[252] EI, IX, 64
[253] Saletore;Social and
Political life in the Vijayanagar Empire I, 252
[254] Sukra, II, 294-5
[255] EI, XIV, 182-8
[256] Sukra, I, 374
[257] EI, XXIII, 101
[258] EI, II, 183
[259] EI, XIX, 15-19
[260] EI, XIV, 182-8
[261] EI, XIX, 15-19
[262] EI, V,213.
[264] Ramayana II, 100.36; Mbh.
5. 38
[265] Raj, I, 118-28
[266] ASI, Chap. 8
[267] Sukra, II, 117
[268] Sukra, II, 119
[269] R.C. Majumdar, History
Bengal, p. 284
[270] Kkt. R, IV, 28
[271] Sukra, II, 273
[272] Kkt, R, IV, 28
[273] R.C. Majumdar, History of
Bengal, p. 285
[274] Bhavagar Inscriptions, p.
158
[275] EI, I, 136
[276] FASB, V, 377-82; FAOB, VII,
253
[277] EI, XXII, 196
[278] EI, IV, 120
[279] EI, XVIII, 22
[280] EI, XXI,217
[281] Kkt, R. IV, 26
[282] IA, XVIII, 17
[283] EI, II, 343
[284] IA, XIX, 218
[285] Kkt. R, Chap. IV, p. 28
[286] EI, I, 140-7
[287] Sukra, II, 162
[288] Sukra, II, 157
[289] Sukra, II, 185
[290] Kkt. R., Chap, IV, 29
[292] EI, IV, 121, XVIII.
[293] IA, XXV, 205-8.
[294] IA, XV, 306
[295] EI, XXI, 217
[296] Raja, I, 232
[297] EI, XI, 308
[298] R.C.Majumdar, History of
Bengal, p. 285
[299] EI, IV, 248
[300] Sukra, II, 140
[301] R.C.Majumdar, History of
Bengal, p. 285
[302] Ibid., p. 285
[303] Sukra, II, 140
[304] Ibid., II, 141.
[305] Ibid., II, 141
[306] Ibid., II, 142
[307] Ibid., II, 142
[308] Kt. R., Chap. IV, 26
[309] Sukra, II, 130
[310] IA, XVIII, 341
[311] EI, II, 309
[312] EI, XI, 29
[313] IA, XIV, 159
[314] EI, XXI, 217
[315] EI, IV, 248
[316] Sukra, II, 127
[317] Ibid., II, 147
[318] Sukra, II, 131-32
[319] EI, IV, 248
[320] EI, XXI, 217; EI, XXVI, 7.
[321] EI, I, 154
[322] Ibid.
[323] Ibid.
[324] Elliot, I, p. 23
[325] IA, XV, 306, IOA., XXI,
217.
[326] R.C.Majumdar, History of
Bengal, p. 286.
[327] EI, XXI, 217
[328] IA, XV, 306
[329] IA, XV, 308
[330] EI, XXVI, 7; EI, XXIII,
290.
[331] EI, XIX, 58
[332] EI, XXI, 217
[333] Sukra, IV, 5, 83-4
[334] R.C.Majumdar, History of
Bengal, p. 286; Ancient India, p. 445
[335] IA, XV, 306
[336] EI, XXI, 95
[337] EI, IV, 248
[338] Kkt. R., Chap. IV, p. 28
[339] IA, VI, 194
[340] IA, XI, 71-3
[341] Ibid., VI, 210
[342] Ibid., VI, 199
[343] EI, XXIV, 291
[344] EI, I, 317
[345] EI, II, 309
[346] EI, XI, 139
[347] EI, II, 174
[348] EI, I, 123-135
[349] EI, XXII, 122
[350] EI, II, 309
[351] IA, XXI, 266
[352] R.C.Majumdar, History of Bengal,
p. 286 Ancient India, p. 445
[353] EI, XIX, 95
[354] EI, XXIII, 290
[355] EI, IV, 248
[356] EI, XXI, 217
[357] Ibid.
[358] Ibid., XI, 36
[359] R.C.Majumdar, History of
Bengal, p. 277
[360] EI, XVIII, 221, EI, XIX, 71
[361] Ibid., II, 117
[362] Sukra, II, 158
[363] As, II, Chap. 34
[364] Ibid.,II, 118
[365] Sukra, II, 156, Raj. VII,
266
[366] EI, XXIII, 229
[367] F.B.B.R.A.S., XXV, 322.
[368] F.B.B.R.A.S., XXV, 322.
[369] EI, IX, 4--6
[370] AS, II, Chap. 16
[371] IA, XV, 306
[372] EI, XVIII, 221
[373] Sukra, II, 119
[374] AS, II, Chap. 25
[375] EI, IV, 248
[376] EI, XXI, 95
[377] EI, XXI, 95
[378] EI,XV, 205; IA, XVI, 208
[379] IA, XVI, 208
[380] EI, IV, 160
[381] Ibid., X, 47
[382] Ibid.,
[383] Ibid., XII, 205
[384] Ibid., II, 309
[385] R.C.Majumdar, History of
Bengal, p. 285
[386] Sukra, II, 163
[388] IA, Vol. XX, p. 202
[389] PV, Canto XI, Verse 6.
[390] TN, p. 466, fn. 1
[391] IA, Vol. XX, p. 202
[392] IA, Vol. XIX, p. 219
[393] Ibid.
[394] Ibid.
[395] IA, Vol. XIX, p. 219
[396] TF, Vol. I, p. 175
[397] RMR, 1923, p. 2
[398] EI, Vol. II, p. 130 (Harsha
stone inscription of Vigraharaja II).
[399] RMR, 1923, p.2. (Dhod stone
inscriptionof Prthviraja II).
[400] Ibid.
[401] RMR, 1911-12, p. 2 (Bajta
image inscription of Prthviraja II).
[402] EI, Vol. II, p. 130
[403] Ibid.
[404] ASI, WC, 1921, p. 56
[405] EI, Vol. II, p. 129
[406] EI, Vol. II, p. 129
[407] IHQ, Vol. XXVI, p. 227
[408] ECD, p. 94
[410] IHQ, Vol. XXVI, p. 227
[411] ECD, p. 43, fn. 4
[412] IA, Vol. XIX, p. 219
[413] PV, Canto XI, Verse 8
[414] IA, Vol. XX, p. 202
[415] TN, p. 466, fn. 1
[416] TF, Vol. I, p. 175
[417] PV, Canto X, Verse 19
[418] TN, p. 460
[419] IHQ, Vol. XXVI, p. 226
[421] Bijolia Inscription, Verse
15
[422] PV, Canto X, Verse 20.
[423] EI, Vol. II, pp. 129-30
[424] SGAI, p. 209
[425] TF, Vol. I, p. 175
[426] IA, Vol. XIX, p. 218.
[427] ASR, Vol. XXI, pp. 173-174
[428] PV, Canto IV, Verses 84-85
[429] EI, Vol. II, p. 130
[430] PV, Canto V, Verses 88-90
[431] PV, Cato V, Verse 180;
JRAS, 1913, p. 273
Comments
Post a Comment