________________
34
THE INDIAN ANTIQUARY.
[FEBRUARY, 1873.
latter, however, is glaringly incorrect: the dura- tion of the reigns of successive râjâs never agrees with the period given in the dates of each succession ; while Parmal Deo's reign is dated 1044 Sambat, or a discrepancy of over 200 years from the date mentioned above. The date given by the Persian MS. of the succession of Sabhájit, son of Parmål Deo, 1223 Sambat, agrees more closely with that of the Hindi Ms. The Persian MS. probably erre in excess of names; as, for instance, when brother succeede brother on the gaddi, and the reign of the second is reckoned as that of a separate generation. It is clear, however, that no correct date can be assigned to any tribe in the long pedigree till the invasion of the Muhammadans.*
Chandra Varma, then, the reputed son of Chandra, established his dynasty after a series of battles waged, according to the Hindi MS., by countless hosts of horsemen, who were paid from extravagantly exaggerated treasures in Chande Chandawal in the Dakhan. To him and his successors the same MS. gives almost universal empire in India : he is represented as annually making expeditions with enormous armies and immense treasures, conquering râja after râjâ, and exacting tribute from the kings of Rûm and Ceylon. He, it is said, founded the fort of Kalingar; and branches of his family settled themselves in the Kârnâtik, in Kallu Kanhûr, in Mirat, the Sambal country (Rohilkhand), and Kumaon. The latter rûj was founded by Manikchand, fifth in descent from Parmal Deo, and son of Bihr Deo, who reigned at Kanauj, accord- ing to the Persian MS. ; while the Hindi MS. gives Kandar Varma, grandson of Chandra Varma, as the founder.f
It would seem fruitless to endeavour to define the exact limits of the territory actually subject to any one raja (as is attempted in Elliot's Supp. Glossary); for the claims of each to universal empire are mere romance, dexterously coloured by the bard with glowing accounts of huge armies, countless treasures, and innumerable marriages.
I divide the history of the Chandels into the following dynasties :
The Chande Chandawal. The Chanderi founded by Damkhoh (Persian MS.)
Bir Varma (Hindi MS.)
The Mahobafounded by Madan Varma (Persian MS.)
Mân Varma (Hindi MS.) The Kanauj, founded by Sabhájit.
The Sheoraj pûr, founded by Sheoraj Singh. of these five dynasties, those preceding the Mahoba line are pre-historic. Instead of the 18 râjâs of Mahoba given in Elliot's Glossary, the Persian Ms. gives but 8, and the Hindi MS. but 14. I give them here.
Mån Varma. Gyan Varma. Ján Varma (? Nanda, Ganda--Ell. Gloss.) Gaj Varma. Kil Varma (? Kirat Varma-Ell. Gloss.) Sakat Varma. Bhagat Varma. Jagat Varma. Rahlia Varma. Suraj Varma. Rûp Varma. Madan Varma. Kirat Varma.
Parmal Deo, after whom the suffix"Deo" was invariably used.
of the causes of the several migrations, no satisfactory explanation is given in either MS. If we accept the Mahoba as the only genuine Chandel dynasty, the two preceding dynasties can represent only the settlement of junior branches of original stock in convenient situations. It is, however, quite as reasonable to consider the whole lineage as one, and the migration to Mahoba (which is certainly not the original birth-place of a Chandel tribe, if name is any guide) as induced by the same causes as those that led to the subsequent migrations. With respect to the migration to Mahoba, the Persian MS. says : -" At this time the râjâ of Kanauj, a Gahlwar, who till this time was rich and prosperous, first frum the blows received at the hands of Rai-Pithaura, and afterwards from the pressure of Shahâb-ud-din Afghan Ghori, left his home and established himself in Banaras. Then Sabbajit, by advice of his wazirs and khedives, established himself in Kanauj." The Hindi MS., in a long involved passage attributing the destruction of Kanauj to Prithiraj, says“ Then Sabhájit left Mahoba for Kananj." This leaves the impression that the Chandels, finding the reputedly fertile and wealthy Kanauj open wal being eliminated); this sketch, however, is intended to show only what is contained in genuine native historier.
+ I have endeavogrod, without success, to obtain accurate information on this point.
. I regret I have not General Cunningham's account of this interesting race to verify the date, 800 A.D. given by him as that of their rise (it would seem to me to be that of the founding of Chanderi, the rajus of Chande Chanda
