________________
THE FALL OF PATAN SOMANATH.
THE FALL OF PATAN SOMANATH. Ballad of the fall of Patan.
BY MAJOR J. W. WATSON, PRESIDENT RAJASTHANIK COURT, KATHIAWAR.
JUNE, 1879.]
Α'
LL readers of Colonel Tod's interesting Travels in Western India must recollect his account of the fall of Pâtan, and his description of the discovery of a fragment of a poem describing the siege, obtained "from the ignorant scion of an ancient Câzi," which poem he subsequently paraphrases for the benefit of his readers. In a recent visit to Patan, I made inquiry for this fragment,' and eventually obtained the loan of it. I say this "fragment," because it so closely coincides with the account given by Colonel Tod; but if it really be the same, there are the following important points of difference between it and the account given by Tod: (1) the dialect is a mixture of Hindustani and Gujarâti with frequent Hindi, Arabic, and Persian words; (2) the poem is complete and no fragment; (3) not only does the style show that the author was a Muhammadan, but one of the final stanzas bears his name in full, together with the date of the composition; (4) no one who had read the poem through could ever think it was written by a bard; (5) the Kunwar Pål, who is described as Raja of P â tan, has nothing to do with Kunwar Pål of Anhilwârâ, so far from that, the ballad says plainly that his caste was Wagher. Jayapal of Mangrol is his brother-in-law, not his brother. (6) There are numerous minor discrepancies, such as the relative position of the armies, &c. &c., which would seem to point to this being a different ballad to Colonel Tod's, but if Tod made his version from a condensed rendering of the original made by some native, it is quite possible that certain errors may have crept in.
The errors and discrepancies noted, however, entirely alter the sense of the poem, which, as will be seen, does give the name "of the prince ly defender," and as the errors of Colonel Tod's version seem to be those of some one not well acquainted with the locality, I incline to think that this is the same ballad to which he refers. For instance, his version says: "The king took post at the great tank, and the Râjâ of Pâtan at the Bhälkâ-kund." Now this is a manifest absurdity, as we should have Mahmud
153
between the Raja's camp and the city, and the ballad says nothing of the kind, but on the contrary exactly reverses their relative positions. The whole version given by Colonel Tod appears to me to be one made on a hasty rendering of the original by some native. Most, if not all, of Colonel Tod's doubts and difficulties may be easily got over. Thus he wonders who could have overturned the temple prior to Mahmud, because there are reversed sculptures in the lower courses of masonry, and because there is "no record of a second visitation of Islâm." But, on the contrary, there is record not only of one but three distinct visitations, and the temple was cast down no less than thrice, subsequent to Mahmud's invasion, viz., once by Alagh Khân in the reign of Sulţân Alau'd-din of Dehli, and again by Sulțân Muzaffar I., and also by Sultan Aḥmad I. of Gujarat. And as Tod says, there can be no doubt of its having been cast down; for not only one, but fifty stones may be found reversed or displaced. Now as to the credibility of the ballad. It is, I think, though a very modern production dating only from A. H. 1216, founded to a certain extent on fact. The Puri. dome and the mosque of Jâfar and Muzaffar are still standing. And though probably the Rajâ was by caste a Châva dâ, and not a Wâgher, still in many points the local ballad seems reliable. One word more: the very interesting inscriptions at and near Pâtan discovered by Colonel Tod, appear to have been most erroneously translated; at least so I am informed by my learned friend Mr. Walabhji Acharya, who is a good Sanskrit scholar, and who has at my request recently copied these and other inscriptions, and translated them for me into Gujarâti. The following is a rough and condensed rendering of the ballad :---
In ancient times many Brahmans and idolworshippers resided at the town of Prabhas Pâ tan in Nâg her, and but few Musalmâns lived there, and they were sorely oppressed by the Rajâ, who had a large army of horse and foot. He was by caste a Wagher, and his name was Kunwar Pål, and his daily custom was to slay
