________________
232
EPIGRAPHIA INDICA.
the acquisition of the part of Mewar now known as Vāgada (Vaṭapadraka of inscriptions), which at present forms the territory of two different states, viz., Dungarpur and Banswara.1 About the identification of Jaitresvara, who died at the hands of Hammira, the present inscription does not give any clue. But in v. 25 of the Eklingji inscription of V.S. 1545 mention has been made of a Jaitrakarna born in Ilachala (Idar), sustaining the loss of life at the hands of Hammira. The Ekalinga-mahatmya also mentions Jitakarna, the Ila-durga-nayaka or the lord of the fort of Idar' as conquered by Hammira. Thus it is not difficult to ascertain that Jaitresvara of the present record was none else than Jaitrakarna of the inscription at Eklingji and Jitakarna of the Ekalinga-mahatmya. He was, as is evident, the master of the fort of Idar, but when killed by Hammira he seems to have been at Ranthambhor as known from this record. There is absolutely no evidence to prove that Ranthambhor was a part of his dominions; but as it was at that time the centre of Rajput confederacy against the Pathan monarchy of Delhi, it seems quite probable that he might have gone there in connection with some such activity. The last exploit of Hammira as mentioned here is the reduction of Palhanapura to ashes. The latter is the phonetically decayed form of Prahladanapura. This city was founded by Prahladanadeva, the younger brother of Dharavarsha, the Paramara ruler of Abu. Formerly it was a part of the Paramāra dominion, but now it is the capital of a separate state known as Palanpur.
1 Raj. Itihs., Fasc. II, p. 549, u. 1.
2 Ibid., p. 549, n. 2.
[VOL. XXIII.
Hammira was succeeded by his son Kshetra popularly known as Khetsi. With regard to him it has been recorded here that he conquered Ami Saha in battle, leaving alive not a single man of his army, and brought his entire treasury and numberless horses to his own capital. He also demolished Māṇḍalgarh which a monarch as mighty as Ala-ud-din had dared not touch. Though the present inscription is of little help in identifying Ami Šaha we are in a position to do so from other records. Thus, this event has been mentioned in v. 156 of the Princes' chapter of the Ekalinga-māhātmya, as a bygone illustration to prince Kumbha's victory over Mahamud Khilji of Malwa, where Ami Saha, conquered and killed by Kshetra, has been described as Malavapati or the Sultan of Malwa. It is therefore clear that Ami Šaha whom prince Kshetra defeated, was the governor of Malwa, and the scene of this battle was somewhere in the vicinity of the famous fort of Chitor as recorded in v. 223 of the unpublished inscription of V.S. 1517(=A.D. 1460) located in the uppermost story of Kumbha's Tower of Victory at Chitor. Thus Ami Šaha was none else than Dilavar Khan Ghuri who was the first Sultan of Mandu (Malwa) as known from the Memoirs of Jahangir. He was contemporary to the Delhi Sultan Mahammad Tughlak. Col. Tod in his treatment of Kshetra says that he obtained a victory over the Delhi monarch Humayun at Bakrol.'s Here he has obviously been misled by the bardic chronicles wherein 'Ami' might have been identified with Humayun' on the meagre phonetic semblance between the two names; or the name of a well-known monarch such as Humayun might have been inserted in place of that of one who was not so well-known, a practice that was not infrequent among the bards of Rajputana. Humayun ascended the throne in V.S. 1587 (=A.D. 1530), whereas Kshetra's accession had taken place in V.S. 1421 (=A.D. 1364). They, therefore, could not be contemporary to each other. Rai Bahadur Ojha says that Col. Tod had in his knowledge the dates of accession of both Kshetra and Humayun, but that the misstatement was due to not comparing them at the time of writing.
Ibid., p. 563, n. 1.
A. Rogers' Eng. Trans., Vol. I, p. 107.
Tod's Rajasthan, Vol. I, p. 321 (W. Crooke's ed.).
Raj. Itiks., Fast. II, p. 565, para. 2.
