Indian Antiquary Vol 47

SR No.: 032539
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Richard Carnac Temple, Devadatta Ramkrishna Bhandarkar
Publisher: Swati Publications
Publication Year: 1984
Total Pages: 386
Language: English
Classification: Book_English
File Size: 15 MB

Page 259

SEPTEMBER, 1918] ON THE YAJVAPALAS OR JAJAPELLAS OF NARWAR
The new historical information noticed above is important as it clears away the obscurity that hitherto hung over the history of the Châhada Deva of Narwar.
243
C
A Muhammadan historian named Marlânâ Minhâju-d-din informs us that in A. H. 631 or 632 (=A. D. 1234 or 1235) the forces of Shamsu-d-din Altamsh defeated at Ranthambhor a powerful ruler of the name of Rânâ Châhada Achârî who sustained another defeat in A H. 649 (A D. 1251) near Narwar at the hands of Ulugh Khân. According to Cunningham, Raverty held that two different Hindu chiefs were intended here. But Mr. E. Thomas thinks them to be one and the same. Cunningham says Major Raverty's opinion is not without support, but I am inclined to agree with Thomas. I found my conclusion on the title of Achârî which is given to Ranthambhor Châhada in this account and to the Narwar Châhala Deva in all the accounts. Recently Rai Bahadur Daya Ram Sahni in his article on the Rataul plates of the Chihamina Châhada Deva (of Ranthambhor) supports the identification of the Châhada of Ranthambhor with his name sake of Narwar. His conclusion is based on three arguments:
(1) The type of characters used in the Rataul plate inscription of the Châhamana Châha la fits in very well with the time of the Châhala of Narwar.
(2) His second authority is the historian Minhâju-d-dîn referred to above.
(3) His third argument is afforded by numismatic records. The coins of Châha Ja discovered at Narwar and other places are of two kinds, namely, those issued by him as an independent ruler and secondly those struck by him as a tributory to Altamsh. The coins of both these kinds are of the bull and horseman type like those of the Châhamâna rulers, and what is more, those of the first kind also bear on the reverse the legend of Asâvarî Sri Sâmanta Deva which occurs only on the coins of the Chahamâna Sômeśvara and his son Prithviraja.'
Now this identification of the Châhamâna Châhada of Ranthambhor with his namesake of Narwar, which was generally favoured by writers on the subject in the light of facts hitherto known, is clearly refuted by our newly found inscriptions of Bhimpur and Narwar kacheri, which as already noticed inform us that the Chahada of Narwar was a Yajvapila or Jajapella and not a Châhamâna.
The arguments adduced by previous writers in favour of the identification of the two Chihadas are also not unimpeachable. Let us examine them :
(1) The palæographical argument afforded by the Rataul plate can show nothing more than that the Châhamâna Châha la was a contemporary of the Chahada of Narwar and not that they were identical.
(2) As for the statement of the historian Minhâju-d-din it is seen from Cunningham's remarks quoted above, that opinion is divided as to whether the two accounts of the historian really refer to one and the same Hindu chief. It is just possible that the two Châhaḍas were contemporary of each other and the historian identified them through oversight.
(3) The numismatic evidence also is not convincing. Coins of the Narwar Jajapellas Chahada, Asala or Asalla, and Ganapati have been found hitherto. The coins of the two latter princes are represented by only one type showing on the obverse a rude figure of a horseman and on the reverse, a legend specifying the name of the prince preceded by the word
5 Cunningham, Coins of Medieval India, pp. 90-91, where the authority quoted is Raveriy's Translation of Tabqat-i-Nasiri, pp. 731 and 824. See also Duff's Chronology of India, pp. 184 and 194.
6 Pathan Kings of Delhi, p. 67. 8 Ep. Ind., Vol. XII, pp. 223-24.
7 Cunningham, C. M. I., p. 01.
8 Cunningham, C. M. I., p. 73, Nos. 8-10.