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

Khawās Khān had taken refuge in the hills of Kumāūn, Islām Shāh is stated to have recorded a solemn oath that he had forgiven all his past offences and begged him to attend at court and proceed against the Rāṇā of Udaypur who had again raised his head, plundered several of the royal possessions and carried off the wives and daughters of Muslims, although at the same time orders were sent to the governor of Sambhal to put the general to death as soon as he should come within reach.[1] This event took place in A.H. 959 corresponding to 1551 A.D. according to some authoritirs.[2] Rāṇā Udayasiṁha thus seems to have thrown off his allegiance to the Sūrs before the date of Khawās Khān’s murder.[3]The reference to the Sūr territory, which was plundered by the Rāṇā and whence Muslim women were carried away, seems to point to the reoccupation of Chitor by Udayasiṁha. Tod is silent in regard to the date of the recovery of the Jodhpur region by Māladeva from the Afghans.[4] But B.N. Reu has quoted the following facts : Sher Shāh occupied the Jodhpur region of Mārwār in 1544 A.D. and left Khawār Khān at Jodhpur as his viceroy ; the Sūr occupation of parts of Mārwār lasted only for about one year and a half ; Māladēva (1532-62 A.D.) drove out the Afghans from Jodhpur before the end of V.S. 1603 (1546 A.D.).[5] Unfortunately no authority has been cited in support of the last statement. Whether Rāṇā Udayasiṁha helped the Rāṭhors in ousting the Afghans from Jodhpur cannot be determined, although that is not improbable. But the Rāṇā does not appear to have continued his allegiance to the Sūrs for any considerable length of time after the expulsion of the Afghans from Mārwār. This seems to be suggested by the prominent mention of the Rāṇā’s aggression in Islām Shāh’s communication to Khawās Khān, which does not mention Māladeva, often described by Muslim authors as the most powerful ruler in Rājputānā. Thus the date of Rāṭhor success against the Sūrs may actually be little later than that suggested by Reu. Reference has been made by Reu to the existence of Khawās Khān’s tomb (now called Khāsgā Pīr’s Dargah) at Jodhpur. This may suggest that Jodhpur was under Muslim occupation till the time of Khawās Khān’s death.

>

Another very interesting fact disclosed by the inscription under review is the inclusion of at least parts of the present Jaipur District within the dominions of the Rāṇās of Mewār.[6] Cunningham sketched the history of Toḍā-Rāising on the basis of Rājput traditions which, however, have nothing to say on this particular point.[7] This no doubt shows that these traditions are not quite trustworthy as a source of history. There is also no mention of the chief Rāmachandra

___________________________________________________

[1] Camb. Hist. Ind., op. cit., p. 59 ; Roy, op. cit., p. 33 ; Elliot and Dowson, op. cit., p. 531.
[2] Badāūnī’s Muntakhab-ut-Tawārīkh, Ranking’s trans., Vol. I, pp. 525-26.
[3] The date of Khawās Khān’s murder is given sometimes as 1546 A.D. (Camb. Hist. Ind., op. cit., p. 59) and 1550 A.D.=A.H. 957 (Elliot and Dowson, op. cit., p. 532, note 1). The first of these two dates is impossible unless it is believed that the hostility attributed to the Rāṇā in Islām Shāh’s communication to Khawās Khān was merely a bluff, although the probability is that the Rāṇā’s revolt and act of aggression were widely known facts. Our inscription shows that Udayasiṁha did not completely shake off his allegiance to Islām Shāh till the close of 1547 A.D.
[4] Op. cit., Vol. II, p. 30.
[5] Mārwārkā Itihās, Vol. I, pp. 131-32.
[6] Qanungo says that Toḍā was a border town of the expanded dominions of Māladeva (op. cit., p. 264). If it was taken by the Rāṭhor ruler from Mewār, Udayasiṁha may have recovered it either as a Sūr partisan or in the confusion that resulted from Sher Shāh’s victory over Māladeva.
[7] Archaeological Survey Reports, Vol. VI, pp. 124 ff. Cf. “ Thoda was originally founded by the Dhoda or Dhore tribe, from whom the present name of the place, Thoda or Thore, is said to be derived. Thoda next came into the possession of the Solankis, under Siddha Rai Solanki, in Samvat 1131. …Thoda passed out of the hands of the Solankis in Samvat 1360, when it was taken by the Chohans, probably in the time of Hararaja Chohan who founded Būndi. On the extension of the powers of the Kachhwāhas of Amber, they took Thoda from the Chohans and held it for some years. The possession of Thoda was next made over to the Sisodias by one of the Mughal emperors of Delhi. ….Lastly, Thoda again came into the possession of the Kachhwāhas in whose possession in has since remained.” The name of the first ruler of the Sisodia dynasty is given as Rāising (Rāyasiṁha) after whom the place came to be known later as Toḍā-Rāising.

Home Page

>
>