The Indian Analyst
 

South Indian Inscriptions

 

 

Contents

Index

Introduction

Contents

List of Plates

Additions and Corrections

Images

Contents

A. S. Altekar

P. Banerjee

Late Dr. N. K. Bhattasali

Late Dr. N. P. Chakravarti

B. CH. Chhabra

A. H. Dani

P. B. Desai

M. G. Dikshit

R. N. Gurav

S. L. Katare

V. V., Mirashi

K. V. Subrahmanya Aiyar

R. Subrahmanyam

T. N. Subramaniam and K. A. Nilakanta Sastri

M. Venkataramayya

Akshaya Keerty Vyas

D. C. Sircar

H. K. Narasimhaswami

Sant Lal Katare

Index

Appendix

Other South-Indian Inscriptions 

Volume 1

Volume 2

Volume 3

Vol. 4 - 8

Volume 9

Volume 10

Volume 11

Volume 12

Volume 13

Volume 14

Volume 15

Volume 16

Volume 17

Volume 18

Volume 19

Volume 20

Volume 22
Part 1

Volume 22
Part 2

Volume 23

Volume 24

Volume 26

Volume 27

Tiruvarur

Darasuram

Konerirajapuram

Tanjavur

Annual Reports 1935-1944

Annual Reports 1945- 1947

Corpus Inscriptionum Indicarum Volume 2, Part 2

Corpus Inscriptionum Indicarum Volume 7, Part 3

Kalachuri-Chedi Era Part 1

Kalachuri-Chedi Era Part 2

Epigraphica Indica

Epigraphia Indica Volume 3

Epigraphia
Indica Volume 4

Epigraphia Indica Volume 6

Epigraphia Indica Volume 7

Epigraphia Indica Volume 8

Epigraphia Indica Volume 27

Epigraphia Indica Volume 29

Epigraphia Indica Volume 30

Epigraphia Indica Volume 31

Epigraphia Indica Volume 32

Paramaras Volume 7, Part 2

Śilāhāras Volume 6, Part 2

Vākāṭakas Volume 5

Early Gupta Inscriptions

Archaeological Links

Archaeological-Survey of India

Pudukkottai

EPIGRAPHIA INDICA

ruler. There is no reference to the Sūr occupation of Chitor in Tod’s work which is mainly based on the Rājput chronicles. While briefly describing Sher Shāh’s campaigns in Rājputānā against Māladeva, the powerful Rāṭhor king of Jodhpur, Wolseley Haig says, “ He (Sher Shāh) left Khavāss Khān and ‘Isā Khān Niyāzī to establish his authority in Marwar and marched to Chitor, the keys of which were sent to him by the officer who held it on behalf of Rāṇā Uday Singh of Mewar.”[1] Quanungo observes, “ He (Sher Shāh) spent a few months at Agra and rejoined his camp at Ajmir about the middle of June 1544. From Ajmir he marched towards Chitor which he easily acquired … Mewar had not yet recovered from the evil effects of the civil dissensions which ended with the installation of the boy king Udai Singh in 1542 A.D. (see Tad’s Rajasthan, pp. 330-33). Chitor was placed in charge of Shams Khan, a brother of Khawas Khan (Dorn’s History of the Afghans, p. 140), Mian Ahmed Sarwani and Husain Khan Khalji (Abbas MS, p. 235).”[2] Ojha quotes Abbas Sarwanī’s Tārīkh-i-Sher Shāhī[3], according to which Sher Shāh advanced against Chitor in A.H. 950 (1543 A.D.) after having dispersed Māladeva’s forces : “ Sher Shāh . . . marched towards the fort of Chitor. When he was yet 12 Kos from the fort of Chitor, the Rājā who was its ruler sent him the keys. When Sher Shāh came to Chitor, he left in it the younger brother of Khawās Khān, Mīān Ahmad Sarwanī and Hussain Khān Khiljī. Sher Shāh himself marched towards Kachwāra.” But in this connection the author of the Udaypur Rājyakā Ithihās observes, “ It was almost the beginning of Udayasiṁha’s reign.

>

Thus it is possible that Udayasiṁha considered it unwise to fight with Sher Shāh and managed to send him away after making peace with him. Neither the Persian histories nor the local chronicles explain, as is expected in such a case, how Chitor came back into Udayasiṁha’s possession [after its occupation by the Sūrs].”[4] N. B. Roy, author of The Successors of Sher Shah, does not suggest that any of the later Sūrs had anything to do with Mewār. While describing Sher Shāh’s achievements in Rājputānā, Quanungo does not clearly state that any of the Rajput rulers acknowledged the suzerainty of the Sūr emperor. Roy is likewise silent on the point as to how long the Sūrs succeeded in maintaining the position gained in Rājputānā by the founder of their house. The inscription under study, however, suggests that Rāṇā Udayasiṁha of Mewār not only acknowledged the suzerainty of Sher Shāh but even continued his allegiance to the Sūr dynasty down to the early years of the reign of Islām Shāh, son and successor of that monarch. There is no reason to believe that Islām Shāh, represented as the overlord of the Rāṇā in October-November, 1547 A.D., himself subdued Udayasiṁha. The mention of the Rāṇā as the rules of Kumbhalamera in our record seems to suggest that he was staying at the fort of Kumbhalgarh till the end of 1547 A.D. while the fortress of Chitor continued to be in the possession of the Afghan governors employed by the Sūr emperors. Apparently the presence of a strong Afghan garrison at Chitor prevented Udayasiṁha from throwing off the Sūr yoke.[5]

When exactly the Rāṇā succeeded in freeing himself from the domination of the Sūrs is difficult to determine in the present state of our knowledge. After the celebrated Afgan general

____________________________________________________

[1] Camb. Hist. Ind., Vol. IV, p. 55.
[2] Sher Shah, pp. 332-33.
[3] Elliot and Dowson, History or India as told by own Historians, Vol. IV, p. 406.
[4] Op. cit. p. 718.
[5] Professor Tiwari informs me that the Amarakāvya (MS No. 14935 of the Saraswati Bhandar, Udaipur, folio 32a) represents Udayasiṁha as an independent monarch and speaks of several engagements between the Rāṇā and Sher Shāh, while the Vaṁśāvalī, No. 872, states that Udayasiṁha defeated the Pathans. But we can hardly rely on these traditions. It is well known that the Mughal emperor Akbar defeated Udayasiṁha and occupied a considerable part of Mawār including its capital Chitor and that the Rāṇā was compelled to take shelter in the southern part of his dominions. In spite of this, the chroniclers of Mewār continued to represent Udayasiṁha as one who humbled the Mughal emperor (cf. above, Vol. XXIV, p. 68, verse 39). For Tiwari’s views, see IHQ, Vol. XXX, pp. 311 ff. ; Journ. Bomb. Univ., July 1955, pp. 10-11 and notes. He relies too much on the Rajput traditions, for the untrustworthiness of which, see remarks on the evidence of the Rājapraśastikāvya, above, Vol. XXX, App., p. 118.

Home Page

>
>