हम्मीर महाकाव्यम् (रणथम्भौर चौहान वीरगाथा एवं इतिहास)

THE HAMMÎRA MAHÂKÂVYA OF NAYACHANDRA SÛRI. EDITED BY NÎLKANTH JANÂRDAN KÎRTANE, AUTHOR OF A REVIEW OF CAPTAIN GRANT DUFF'S HISTORY OF THE MARATHAS", "A TRANSLATION INTO MARATHI OF SHAKESPEARE'S 'TEMPEST'", "NOTES ON THREE MALWA INSCRIPTIONS"; &C, &C Bombay PRINTED AT THE EDUCATION SOCIETY'S PRESS, BYCULLA. 1879 (Copyright reserved) चौखम्बा संस्कृत सीरीज आफिस, वाराणसी-१

प्रस्तुत पृष्ठ पूर्णतः रिक्त (खाली) है, इस पर कोई पाठ (text) उपलब्ध नहीं है।

Dedicate- TO H. H. NÁRÁYAN RAW DÂDÂ SÂHEB PAWAR, OF DEWÂS JUNIOR BRANCH, AS A TOKEN OF AFFECTION AND ESTEEM, BY HIS TUTOR, THE EDITOR Châuani, Indore, 20th November 1878

इस पृष्ठ पर कोई पाठ (text) उपलब्ध नहीं है, यह एक रिक्त (blank) पृष्ठ है।

THE HAMMÎRA MAHÂKÂVYA OF NAYACHANDRA SURI Dr Buhler, in his Introduction to the Vikramânka Charita (p 2), mentions the Hammiramardana, or "The destruction of Hammîra," as an historical Sanskrit poem that was extant some ninety years ago in the Jain library at Jesalmîr. I have recently obtained a work, written in the Jain character, styled The Ham- mira Mahâkâvya, which, notwithstanding the difference of the title, I presume is a copy of the same work as that which was once in the Jêsalmîr Sarasvatî Bhândar, since it ends with the death of Hammîra and a lamentation over the event. Colonel, Tod, indeed, mentions in his Râjasthân a Hammira Kâvya and a, Hammîra Râsâ, both composed, he says, by Śârangadhara, whom he makes the bard of Hammîra Chohân of Ranatham- bhôr. We have the authority of Sârangadhara himself for stating that he was not contemporary with Hammîra Chohân of Ranathambhôr, and that his grandfather, Raghunâtha, was that prince's Guru or spiritual teacher. Sârangadhara in his Paddhati, and Gadâdhara in his Rasika Jivan under the head of "anonymous,' quote some verses relating to Hammira that have no place in the present Kâvya. Appayyî Dîkshita, also, in his Kuvalayânanda, cites a verse as an instance of the Akramâtisayokti Alamkâra of which the subject is Hammîra, and which is not to be found in the work of our author. This shows that there must be some other poem in Sanskrit bearing the name of Hammîra Kâvya, but it may be doubted whether it

6

has any reference to the history of the hero of our poem. Colonel Tod does not inform us in what language the Hammîra Kâvya and the Hammîra Râsâ were written, though he says he possessed both, and mostly translated with the assistance of his Jain Guru. He does not attempt anything like a connected narrative of Hammîra. Indeed, what he says incidentally of Hammîra does not at all relate to any one individual of that name, but is a jumble of anecdotes relating to several distinct personages bearing the same name. I obtained the Hammîra Mahâkâvya through Mr. Govinda Śâstri Nirantar of Nâsik, who got it from a friend of his. The colophon reads—"The present copy was made for the purpose of reading by Nayahaṁsa, a pupil of Jayasiṁha Sûri, at Firuzpur, in the month of Śrâvaṇa of the Saṁvat year 1542" (A.C. 1496). Possibly this was made from the poet's original copy, and, as such, possesses an interest of its own. Nayachandra Sûri's work, as a poetical composition, has considerable merits, and deserves publication as a specimen of the historical poems so rarely met with in the range of Sanskṛit literature. Though the author did not live, like Bâṇa and Bilhaṇa, in the reign of the hero whose history he celebrates, yet his work is not of less historical importance than theirs. The information that the poems of Bâṇa and Bilhaṇa contain has been made accessible to English readers through the labours of two eminent European Sanskṛitists. The present attempt to place the English reader in possession of the historical information contained in the Hammîra Kâvya will, I presume, be acceptable to those who are interested in the advancement of our knowledge of Indian history. Following the custom of other writers in Sanskṛit, who have attempted historical compositions, our author devotes the greater part of one entire chapter, the fourteenth and last, to an account of his lineage, and the reasons that led to the production of his

7 work. Part of this will bear reproduction here in an English dress:— "Hail, Krishna Gachha, who gladdened the whole earth, the beauty of whose person was like that of a blooming bunch of the Navajâti flower, and whose praises were celebrated by crowds of learned men, who might well be compared to so many black humming bees,—he whose feet were ever borne on the crowns of the followers of the Jain religion! "In the circle of the Suris, whose actions are the homes of wonders, in time, Jayasiṁha Sûri was born, who was the crowning ornament of the wise, who easily vanquished in dispu- tation S'âranga, who was the leading poet among those who were able to write poetical compositions in six languages, and who was honest among the most honest, who wrote three works— (1) Nyâya Suratikâ, (2) A New Grammar, (3) A Poem on Kumâra Nripati,—and who hence became known as the chief of those who knew the three sciences of logic, grammar, and poesy. "To the lotus like Gâdi of Jayasiṁha Nayachandra is like the life giving sun, who is the essence of the knowledge of the sciences, who is the exciting moon to the sea of the races of the poets. This poet his spirits raised to the height of the subject by a revelation imparted to him in a dream by the king Hammîra himself, has composed this poem,¹ which is gratify- ing to the assembly of the kings and in which the heroic (rasa) is developed. "The author in lineal descent is the grandson of Jayasiṁha Sûri, the great poet, but in that of poesy his son. "Let not good readers take into much account the faults of expression that I may have fallen into. How can I, who am of ¹ Our poet also says that he was incited to the composition of this poem by a rash assertion which some courtiers of king Tomara Vîrama had the presumption to make in the presence of our poet that there existed no one now who could compose a poem that would come up to the excellence of the works of old Sanskrit poets. King Tomara Vîrama whoever he was appears to have lived seventy years before Akbar.

8

mean capacity, escape stepping. into that path which even poets like Kâlidâsa² were not able to avoid ? But a poem that is replete with good matter loses none of its value for a few common- places of expression." The poem begins, as is usual with Saṅskṛit authors, with invo- cations addressed to several deities, and the author has been at the pains of making the invocations seem applicable to both the Hindu gods and some of the Tîrthaṅkaras of the Jainas. This procedure calls for remark. Nayachandra Sûri, as his name implies, is a Jain by persuasion, and his seeming to invoke blessings at the hands of the most prominent members of the orthodox Hindu pantheon is to be explained either by the freedom of thought so characteristic of the age in which the author lived, when the narrow and bigoted intolerance even of the Muslîm had begun to appreciate the beauties of the allegorical language of the Hindu popular religion, or by the strong desire of writing dvayartha ('having two meanings') verses, with which the author seems possessed.³

² Perhaps our author had in view the following lines of Dhanan-Jaya :— अपशब्दशतं माघे भारवौ तु शतत्रयम् । कालिदासे न गण्यंते कवीरेको धनंजयः ॥ ³ Probably everybody has heard of the Râghava Pâṇḍavîya Kâvya, every line of which can be so construed as to apply to either Râma or the Pâṇḍavas, at the option of the reader. I have recently been shown a Kâvya called the Sapta Sandhâna Mahâkâvya, by Megha Vijaya Gaṇi, a learned Jain of recent times, every verse of which can be made to apply alike to Râma, Kṛishṇa, and Jinendra. In the present Kâvya the first śloka of the Nândî is addressed to the Paramjyotis—'the divine flame,'—a manifestation of the divine being in whom both Hindus and Jainas, especially the Kevali Jainas, believe. The second śloka is addressed to Nâbhibhû, which may mean the Bramhâ of the Hindus, or the son of Nâbhi (Ṛishabha Deva), the first Tîrthaṅkara of the Jainas. The third is addressed to Śrî Pârśva, whom the Hindus may take for Vishṇu, the Jainas for Śrî Pârśvanâtha, the 23rd Tîrthaṅkara. The 4th śloka is addressed to Śaṅkara Vîravibhu, which may mean either Mahâdeva or Mahâvîra, the 24th Jain Tîrthaṅ- kara. The fifth verse is addressed to Bhâsvân Saśânti, who may either stand for the Sun, or Śânti, the 16th Jain Tîrthaṅkara. The sixth is addressed to Samudra-Janman, which may be either the Moon, or Neminâth, son of Samudra, the 22nd Jain Tîrthaṅkara.

9 The hero of the poem is Hammîra Chohân of Raṇaṣ- thambhapura (Raṇathambhôr), a name celebrated in Hindî song. Hammîra is one of those later heroes of India who measured their swords with the Muhammadan conquerors and fell in the defence of their independence. Even the history of the conquered is not without interest. The man who fights against hope,—fights because he thinks it his duty to do so,—who scorns to bow his neck before the oppressor, because he thinks such a course opposed to the ways of his ancient house, deserves our sympathy and our admiration. Hammîra is such a character. The poet places him on a par with Mândhâtâ, Yudhishṭhira, and Râma. This is poetical exaggeration, but we have no mean measure of praise in the following verses; and the grounds of eminence mentioned are some of the proudest that a Râjput can cherish, and a rigid maintenance of which singles out the race of the Sisodyâs of Udayapur and the Hârâs of Kotâ and Buńdi as the noblest among the chivalry of Râjasthân:— "सत्त्वैकदृप्तेः किल यस्य राज्यश्रियो विलासा अपि जीवितं च। शकाय पुत्रीं शरणागताँश्चाऽप्रयच्छतः किं तृणमप्यऽभूवन् ॥" Born in the noble house of the Chohâns, to whom, as Tod observes, "the palm of bravery amongst the Râjput races must be assigned," Hammîra tried to uphold the independence of his race and to make its usages respected, and was for a time preëminently successful in his wars against his enemies. Some of these were undertaken to protect those who had sought refuge with him (śaraṇa), and so far were disinterested. Indeed, he fell in a war undertaken to protect a Mongol nobleman who had fled to him from the tyranny of 'Alâ u'd-dîn. "In the third year of the reign of 'Alâu'd-dîn, a nobleman whom he had disgraced took refuge with Hammira, the Chohân prince of Raṇathambhôr, one of the strongest forts in India. 'Alâu'd-dîn demanded the delinquent of the B

10 Hindu monarch, who nobly replied that the sun would sooner rise in the west, and Sumeru be levelled with the earth, than he would break his plighted faith to the unfortunate refugee. The siege of Raṇathambhôr was immediately commenced, and the fort was at length captured, but the heroic Hammîra fell in its defence; and the females of his family, determining not to survive him, perished on the funeral pile.” This history of Hammîra supplies some information which the sentimental and enthusiastic annalist of Râjasthân would have gladly interwoven into the pages of his work, and which sheds fresh light on the eventful period in which the hero lived. The Hammîra Mahâkâvya is divided into fourteen cantos, of which the first four are concerned with the hero’s ancestors,—the Chohâns, many of whom were paramount lords of India. ‘The empire belongs to the Chohân’ is an admitted Indian historical fiction, and the mere mention of the names of the old kings, many of whom were the lords paramount of India, accompanied as it is with much poetical nonsense, carries our knowledge of them a step further than the researches of Colonels Wilford and Tod. The narrative is, all through, very uneven. The genealogy of the Chohâns, as given in the first three chapters, though with some more names than are to be found in Tod’s list, cannot be regarded as satisfactory. The author really knew nothing about the more ancient kings of the race; the names are simply brought in to give him opportunities of displaying his power for poetical conceits, and thus the accounts of the princes about whom he had no historical information are filled with fanciful conceptions, in which some of the natural phenomena are explained with admir- able contempt of the teachings of the “proud philosophy” of Nature. From Pṛithvirâja Chohân to the death of Ham- mîra the narrative is fairly historic; but the author now and then, even here, relapses into rhapsody which amounts to a confession of his ignorance of the historical facts of the reign in hand.

11 Cantos V-VII of the poem are taken up, according to the rules of Sanskrit epic poetry, with descriptions of the seasons, and the sports and festivities in which Hammîra engaged. These cantos, as not possessing any historical value, may be ignored in this precis of the poem. I pass over a long lecture also on Nîti- sâstra which Jaitrasingh, the father of Hammîra is made to deliver to Hammîra. Chand gives a similar dissertation on grammar in his Prithvîrâja Râsau. With these introductory remarks, I come to the Pûrvaja Varnanam, i. e., the account of the ancestry of Hammîra, and, in order to give some faint idea of the author's style of writing, I shall, in the following, attempt some sort of translation of the first few reigns. The style throughout is so ornate, inflated and redundant, and the tendency of the author to punning is so per- sistent, that a longer translation is as difficult as the task would be tedious :— "Once upon a time, Brahmâ wandered in search of a holy place where to hold a sacrifice. The lotus which he held in his hand fell on the ground as if unable to bear the superior beauty of the lotus-like palm of the god. The god from this circumstance regarded the spot where the lotus fell as an auspicious one, and there, freed from anxiety, commenced the sacrifice. Anticipating persecution from the Dânavas, the god remembered the thousand- rayed one (the Sun), when a being, his face surrounded by a halo of radiance, came down from the orb of the sun. Him, the destroyer, Brahmâ appointed to the work of protecting the sacrifice. I "From that day the place where the lotus fell has been called Pushkara and he who came down from the sun the Chohân.* Having obtained the paramount power from the

• The 'Chaturbhuja Chohân as described by Tod issued like the other three progenitors of the Agnikulas—Parmâra Parihâra Châlukya—from the Agni Kunda the sacrificial fire fountain. But the genesis is described differently in different books. Perhaps where there is no truth we must not expect to find concord.

12 four-faced Creator, he ruled over the heads of the kings, as his ancestor the sun rules over the heads of the mountains. Bali, mortified at seeing the glory of his charity eclipsed by the greater charity of this king, has hidden himself in the nether world; for what else could a man afflicted with shame do? The moon, taken to task by this prince for attempting to rival his glory, every month hides himself, through fear, in the sun's disk, and comes out as if desirous of propitiating the offended king by presenting him with the brilliant orb. The fire of the king's valour has so burnt the gardens of the fame of his enemies, that the smoke issuing from the conflagration, ascending into the atmosphere, has to this day left its mark in the blue sky. The Ś e s h a n â g a, when he heard of the fame of this prince, was tempted to nod approval, but, fearing that the earth resting on his hoods might be thereby convulsed with pain, refrained from giving way to the generous impulse. Angry that his son should rival him in glory, the king deprived the ocean of his wealth of gravity. Are not sometimes fathers made to suffer for the faults of their sons? By the name of C h o h â n, this prince became the shoot of the family tree, served by the poets; famous in the three worlds; the bearer in abundance of human pearls. In this family rose many a monarch surrounded by a halo of glory, whose lives, beautified with the triple acquisition,⁵ are able to destroy mountains of sins. II. V â s u d e v a.—“In process of time D î k s h i t a V â s u d e v a was born, who conquered the world by his valour; who seemed the very incarnation of V â s u d e v a come down to this earth for the destruction of the demon Ś a k â s. He whetted his sword, blunt with striking down the heads of his enemies, in the fire of his valour, and then cooled the steel in the water of the tears gushing from the eyes of the wives of his enemies. The goddess of victory, as if enamoured of this prince, shone in his hand in the battle- ⁵ Acquisition of artha (wealth), kâma (love), and moksha (salvation).

13

field in the disguise of his sword red with the blood of the necks of his enemies that he had severed. In the field of battle, while the martial bands were playing, and the gods in the heavens viewing the performance, the king caused the goddess of victory to dance in the guise of his quivering sword. Does not the sun, surpassed by this prince in brilliancy, drown himself in the deep, and—alas! for the pain of dying—come every day above the waters in his struggles?" III Naradeva.—' Vâsudeva begat Naradeva, fit to be praised by Brahmâ himself, the delight of the eyes of women— his body surpassing in beauty that of Cupid himself. When the king went out into the world, the other chiefs, to protect their possessions, did not take the sword out of its sheath, but only took wealth from their coffers. In the battlefield his arms, bearing the brilliant white sword, bore the beauties of the Eastern Mountain, destroying the freshness of the lotuses of the faces of his enemies. It is but natural that the fire of the king's valour should have burnt down the forests of iniquity, but it is strange that the same fire should have filled his enemies with cold shakings. Methinks the sun, with his progeny, in token of submission, had fixed his abode in the toe nails of this prince." IV "Chandrarâja by his fame and the beauty of his countenance, achieving a double conquest over the moon, vindi- cated the appropriate significance of his name, which means 'Lord of the moon.' Strange was the power of the fire of his valour, for it burnt bright in the enemy in whom the stream of bravery flowed, while it was extinguished in that enemy who was destitute of this stream,' &c. The above paragraphs may suffice to show the style of fulsome eulogy used by the poet in disposing of those princes of whom he had no historical information to give. The same similes occur again and again, and often the language is stiff and artificial. I subjoin a list of the Chohân princes up to Hammîra as

14 given by our author, and below that given by Tod in his Rájasthán :- (1) Châhaman (Canto .I sh. 14-25). (2) Vâsuḍeva (ib. 26-30). (3) Naradeva (ib. 31-36). (4) Chandrarâja (ib. 37-40). (5) Jayapâla Chakri (ib. 41-52). (6) Jayarâja (ib. 53-57). (7) Sâmanta Simha (ib. 58-62). (8) Guyaka (ib: 63-68). (9) Nandan (ib. 67-71). (10) Vapra Râja (ib. 72-81). (11) Hari Râja (ib. 82-87). (12) Simha Râja (ib. 88-102)—(killed Hetim, the Muhammadan general, and captured four elephants in the battle). (13) Bhîma (nephew of Simha, adopted by him) (Canto II. sh. 1-6) (14) Vigraha Râja (killed Mûla Râja of Gujarât,⁶ and conquered the country) (ib. 7-9). (15) Gangadeva (ib. 10-15). (16) Vallabha Râja (ib. 16-18). (17) Râma (ib. 19-21). (18) Châmunḍa Râja (killed Hejama'd-dîn) (ib. 22-24). (19) Durlabha Râja (conquered Shahâbu'd-dîn) (ib. 26-28). (20) Duśala (killed Karṇadeva⁷) (ib. 29-32). (21) Viśvala (Visaldeva), killed Shahâbu'd-dîn (ib. 33-37). (22) Prithvi Râja I. (ib. 38-40).

⁶ According to the Gujarâti chroniclers, Mûla Râja reigned from 998-1053 A.V., i. e. 55 years. Soon after his succession to the throne he was assailed by two armies—that of the Sapâdalakshîya, Râja of Sakâmbharî (Sâmbhar), and that of Bârapa, the general of Tailapa of Kaliyân : see Ind. Ant. vol. VI. p: 184. Sapâdalakshîya might be a biruda of Vigraha Râja. [Bhagavânlâl Indraji points out that Sapâdalaksa or Savâlakha is the name of the Sivâlik hills, and that the early râjas of Kamaun called themselves Sapâdalakshanṛipatis; and that the Sakâmbharî râjas may have originally come from that country.] ⁷ Is this Karnadeva the same with the Karnadeva of Gujarât, the fifth in descent from Mûla Râja I. ? His date, as given by Dr. Bühler, is 1068-1093 A.D. Duśala is sixth in descent from Vigraha, the enemy of Mûla Râja: see Ind. Ant. vol. VI. p. 186.

15 (23) Alhana (ib. 41 44) (24) Anala (dug a tank at Ajmer) (ib 45-51) (25) Jagadeva (ib- 52 55) (26) Visala (ib 56 59) (27) Jayapâla (ib 60 62) (28) Gangapâla (ib 63 66) (29) Somesvara (married Karpurâ Devî, or, according to Tod, Rukâdevi, daughter of Anangapâla Tunar of Dehli) (ib 67 74) (30) Prithvî Râja II (Canto II sloka 75—Canto III sloka 72) (31) Harî Râja (ib 91) (Canto III sloka 73—Canto IV sloka 19) (32) Govinda of Ranathambhôr, father of—(Canto IV sloka 20—31) (33) Bâlhana—had two sons—Prahlâda and Vâgbhata (Canto IV sloka 32—40) (34) Prahlada (son of Bâlhana) (41—71) (35) Vîranârâyana (son of Prahlâda) (72—105) (36) Vâgbhata (son of Bâlhana) (106—130) (37) Jaitrasingh (son of Vâgbhata) (131—142) (38) Hammîra (son of Jaitrasingh) (Canto IV 143—Canto XIII sloka 225) Genealogy of the Chohâns as given by Tod — Anbala or Agnipâla (the first Chohân, probable period 650 before Vikrama, when an invasion of the Turushkâs took place, established Mâhâvatî Nagrî (Garha Mandla), conquered the Konkana, Aser, Golkonda Suvâcha Mallana Gulan Sûr Ajanâla Chakravarthi (universal potentate, founder of Ajmer— some authorities say in 202 of Vikrama, others of the Vîratah Samvat, the latter is the most probable) * Dola Râya (slain, and lost Ajmer, on the first irruption of the Muhammadans, S 741, A D 685) Mânikya Râya (founded Sâmbhar, hence the title of Sâmbhari Râo

• Wilford inserts here Sâmanta Deva, Mahâdeva Ajayasimha, Virasimha Vindasura, and Vasu Vibhata

16 borne by the Chohân princes his issue : slain by the Mosque invaders under Abu'l Aâs).⁹ Harsharâja or Harihara Râi (defeated Naziru'd-dîn [qu. Subakte- gin ?], thence styled 'Sulṭângrâha'). Bîr Bîllandeva, (Balianga Râi or Dharmagachha; slain defending Ajmer against Mahmud of Ghazni). Bisaldeva (classically Vîśaladêva); his period from various inscriptions, S. 1066 to S. 1130. Saraṅgadêva, his son (died in nonage). Âna Deva (constructed the Ânâ Sâgar at Ajmer, which still bears his name), his sons— Jayapâla or Jayasiṁha (A.D. 977) father of— Hursapâl (Hispâl of Ferishtah). Ajaya Deva or Anandeva, son of Jayapâla (A.D. 1000); Bijyadeva and Udayadeva were his brothers. Someśvara, son of Ajaya Deva, married Rukâbâi, the daughter of Anangapâla of Dehli. His brothers were Kanharâi and Jaitrasiṁha, Goelwâl Kanharâi's son Îśvaradâs turned Muhammadan. Pṛithvî Râja (A.D. 1176), son of Someśvara, obtained Dehli; slain by Shahâbu'd-dîn, S. 1249, A.D. 1193. Reṇasî (A.D. 1192), son of Pṛithvirâja, slain in the sack of Dehli. Vijayarâja, son of Châhaḍadeva, the second son of Someśvara (adopted successor to Pṛithvirâja; his name is on the pillar at Dehli). Lâkhansî, son of Vijayarâja, had twenty-one sons; seven of whom were legitimate, the others illegitimate, and founders of mixed tribes. From Lakhansî there were twenty-six generations to Nonad Siṁha, the chief of Nîmrânâ (in Col. Tod's time), the nearest lineal descendant of Ajayapâla and Pṛithvirâja). As observed before, up to the time of Pṛithvirâja, the last great Chohân, the poem is made up mostly of poetical bombast, in which, at intervals, a grain of historical matter may be ⁹ Tod, Raj. vol. II. p. 444. Ten more names are given in Bombay Govern- ment Selections, vol. III. p. 193; and Prinsep's Antiquities by Thomas, vol. II. Us. Tab. p. 247.

17 found concealed under bushels of poetical chaff. It is therefore useless to give a further analysis of this part of the poem. I begin with Somes'vara, the father of Prithvî Râja. After the death of Gangadeva, who was brave like Bhîshma of old, Somes'vara became king. He was married to Karpûrî Dêvî, who gave birth to a son as the east gives birth to the cold rayed beautiful disk of the moon. This son was named Prithvîrâja by the king his father. Day by day the child throve, and grew up a strong and healthy boy. After he had acquired proficiency in letters and arms, Somes'vara installed him on the gadi, and himself retiring into the woods died in the practice of the yoga. As the eastern mountain shines beautiful by the rays that it receives from the author of day, so did Prith- vîrâja shine in the royal insignia obtained from his father. While Prithvîrâja was ruling over his subjects with justice, and keeping his enemies in terror, Shahâbu-d-dîn was vigorously trying to subjugate the earth. The kings of the West, suffering greatly at his hands, chose Śrî Chandrarâja, son of Govin- darâja, as their spokesman, and in a body came to Prithvî- râja. After the customary presents had been offered, the suppliant kings seated themselves in the presence of Prithvîrâja, who, seeing the settled gloom of their countenances, asked the reason of their sorrow. Chandrarâja replied to him that a Muhammad- an named Shahabu'd dîn had arisen for the destruction of kings, and that he had pillaged and burnt most of their cities, defiled their women, and reduced them altogether to a miserable plight. “Sire,” said he, “there is scarcely a mountain-pent valley in the country but is filled to suffocation with Râjputs who have fled thither for protection from his tyranny. A Râjput has but to appear before him in arms, when at once he is transferred to Yama’s gloomy realm. Methinks Shahâbu'd dîn is Para- śurâma come down to this earth again for the extirpation of the warrior caste. The people are so panic-stricken that they abstain C

18

from rest, and, not knowing from what quarter he may appear, circumspectly raise their eyes in every direction. The noblest of the Râjput families have disappeared before him, and he has now established his capital at Multân. The Râjas now come to seek the protection of your Majesty against this unrelenting enemy and his causeless persecution." Pṛithvirâja was filled with anger when he heard this account of the misdeeds of Shahâbu'd-dîn, his hand was raised to his moustache by the vehemence of his feelings, and he declared to the assembled princes that he would force this Shahâbu'd-dîn to beg their pardon on his knees with his hands and feet heavily manacled and fettered, else he were no true Chohân. After some days, Pṛithvirâja, with an efficient army, set out for Multân, and after several marches entered into the enemy's country. Shahâbu'd-dîn, when he heard of the king's approach, also advanced to encounter him. In the battle which ensued, Pṛithvirâja took Shahâbu'd-dîn captive, and was thus enabled to fulfil his vow: for he obliged the haughty Muhammadan on his knees to ask forgiveness of the princes whom he had despoiled. His vow now fulfilled, Pṛithvirâja gave rich presents and gifts to the suppliant princes, and sent them to their respective homes. He also allowed Shahâbu'd-dîn to go to Multân, bestowing on him like gifts. Shahâbu'd-dîn, though thus well treated, felt bitterly mortified at the defeat he had sustained. Seven times after this did he advance on Pṛithvirâja to avenge his defeat, each time with greater preparations than before, but each time was signally defeated by the Hindu monarch. When Shahâbu'd-dîn saw that he could not conquer Pṛithvirâja either by the force of his arms or by the ingenuity of his stratagems and tactics, he communicated an account of his successive defeats to the king of the Ghaṭaika¹⁰

¹⁰ Might not this be a name for the modern Kumbheri?

19 country and solicited his aid. Thus he obtained in the form of many horses and men from the king's army. Thus reinforced, Shahâbu'ddîn rapidly advanced upon Dehlî, which he at once captured. The inhabitants were panic-stricken, and fled from the city in every direction. Prithvîrâja was greatly surprised at this, and said that this Shahabu'ddîn was acting like a naughty child, for he had already been defeated several times by him, and as often allowed to go unmolested to his capital. Prithvîrâja, elated with his former victories over the enemy, gathered the small force that was about him, and with this handful of men advanced to meet the invader. Slightly attended as the king was, Shahâbu'ddîn was greatly terrified at the news of the approach of the king, for he remem- bered too well the former defeats and humiliations sustained at his hands. In the night, therefore, he sent some of his con- fidential servants into the king's camp, and through them, with promises of large sums of money, he seduced from their allegiance the king's master of the horse and the royal musicians. He then sent a large number of his Muhammadans secretly to the enemy's camp, who entered it early in the morning, when the moon in the west had scarcely reached the horizon, and the sun was but beginning to illuminate the east. All was now uproar and confusion in the king's camp. Some cried out, "Oh, brave comrades! up and to your arms! Haste, haste! the enemy has approached and taken us by surprise. Let us fight and return conquerors to our homes or to heaven!" While the king's followers were thus preparing to meet their assailants, the disloyal master of the king's horse, as advised by his seducers, saddled and brought forth as the king's charger that day a horse styled Nâtyârambha ('leader of the dance'), and the musicians, who were waiting their opportunity, when the king had mounted, began to play upon their instruments tunes that were the king's favourites. At this the royal steed

20 began to dance proudly, keeping time with the musicians. The king was diverted with this performance for a time, and forgot the all important business of the moment. The Muhammadans took advantage of the king's indolence and made a vigorous attack. The Râjputs, under the circum- stances, could do little. Secing this, Pṛithvirâja alighted from his horse and sat on the ground. With the sword in his hand he cut down many Muhammadans. Meanwhile, a Muham- madan taking the king unawares from behind, threw his bow round his neck and drew the king prostrate to the ground, while other Muhammadans bound him captive. From this time the royal captive refused all food and rest. Pṛithvirâja, before he set out to encounter Shahâbu'd-dîn, had commanded Udayarâja to follow him to attack the enemy. Udayarâja¹¹ reached the battlefield just about the time when the Muhammadans had succeeded in taking Pṛithvirâja captive. But Shahâbu'd-dîn, fearing the consequences of further fighting with Udayarâja, retired into the city, taking with him the captive monarch. When Udayarâja heard of the captivity of Pṛithvirâja, his heart throbbed heavily with pain. He wished himself in the place of Pṛithvirâja. He was unwilling to return back leaving the king to his fate. Such a course, he said, would be detrimental to his fair name, in his own country of Gauṛadeśa. He therefore laid siege to the city of the enemy (Yoginîpura or Dehli, which Shahâbu'd-dîn had taken possession of before this battle), and sat before the gates for a whole month, fighting day and night. One day during the siege, one of Shahâbu'd-dîn's people went up to him and remarked that it would be becoming on his part for once to release Pṛithvirâja, who had several times taken ¹¹ This must be the famous Udayâditya Puwâr of Mâlwâ, mentioned by Chanda as the great friend and ally of Pṛithvirâja.