Indian Antiquary Vol 59

Author(s): Richard Carnac Temple, Charles E A W Oldham, S Krishnaswami Aiyangar, Devadatta Ramkrishna Bhandarka
Publisher: Swati Publications

Page 13

JANUARY, 1930] FALSE STATEMENTS ABOUT KING JAYACHANDRA AND RÃO SHÅ
1
against Rainsi and killing him in the battle that followed, advanced further upon Kanauj. Hearing of this Jayachandra also arranged his army to enoounter him. But in the battle that ensued Jayachandra was killed and the Muhammadans were victorious.
The above story cannot stand any historical test. The Kamdhaj Rai mentioned in it is a fictitious name, inasmuch as we know of no individual of that name in history. Similarly the name of Jayachandra's father was not Vijaypal, but Vijayachandra, who lived not in the beginning of the twelfth century of the Vikrama era, but in the first half of the thirteenth century, as is evident from his oopper plate grants and insoriptions of V.S. 1224 and 1225. Again, although the period of Anangpål has not yet been precisely ascertained, yet this much is certain that Somesvara's third ancestor Vigraharaja (or Visaladeva IV) had acquired possession of Delhi, which is borne out by the inscription of V.S. 1220 (1163 A.D.) on the pillar of Firax Shah at Delhi. Under these circumstances we do not understand how Somesvara could have gone to Delhi to help Anangpål. Moreover, in the Prithvirdjavijaya-mahákávya, which was written in Prithviraja's time, the name of Prithviraja's mother is mentioned not as Kamalavati, but as Karpûradevi, who is stated to be the daughter not of Tunvar Anangpål, but of a king of the Haihaya dynasty (of Tripuri). In the Hammira-mahdkdvya also, the name of Prithviraja's mother is mentioned as Karpûradevi. The author of the Raso has mentioned the date of the birth of his hero Prithviraja as V.S. 1115, but in fact Prithviraja should have been born in V.S. 1217 (1160 A.D.) or somewhat later, as at the death of his father in about V.8. 1236 (1179 A.D.) he was a minor and his mother took charge of the administration.
Let us now consider the tale of Prithviraja having married a daughter of Nahad Rao, king of Mandor. This, too, is an absurdity, because from an inscription of V.S. 894 of king Bauka, who was tenth in descent from this NAhad Rao, we oonolude that the latter must have lived about V.8.714, i.e., nearly 500 years before Prithviraja. Sometime between V.S. 1189 and V.S. 1202 the Parihar dynasty of Mandor had ceased to exist, having been overthrown by Chauhan Raya pala, whose son Sahajapala ruled at Mandor in V.S. 1202, as appears from his inscription of that year found at Mandor. Besides this, the name of the prime anoestor of the Parihar dynasty of Kanau was also Nagabhata (or NAhad). From the copper grant dated V.8. 813 of the Chauhan king, Bhartrivaddha II, found at Hansot, it appears that this Nahad lived in the beginning of the ninth century of the Vikram era. Further, the first Parihår conqueror of Kavauj, too, was Nagabhata (NAhad II), who was fifth in descent from the aforesaid Nahad. He had died in V.S. 890, as appears from the Prabhava ka-caritra. No fourth Nahad besides these has been heard of in the history of India.
We have already mentioned above V.S. 1217 as the approximate birth year of Prithvi. raja. In such a case it would certainly be impossible to assume that Anangpal made over the kingdom of Delhi to Prithviraja in V.8. 1138 !
Further, the story of Prithviraja having abducted the daughter of the Yadava king, Bhan of Deogiri, and of the consequent battle between Prithviraja and Jayachandra, also seems to be spurious. The founder of the city of Deogiri was not Bhan, but Bhillama, who had founded the city about V.S. 1244 (1187 A.D.). Neitheveuoes this event find place in the history of Bhillama nor does the name Bhan occur in the pedigree of the dynasty. Similarly, Virachandra, the name of a nephew of king Jayachandra, ooours only in the Råso and nowhere else.
We have mentioned above that an ancestor, third from Prithviraja's father, had acquired possession of Delhi. Thus the talk of Tunvar Anangpal's effort to regain his kingdom from Prithviraja on complaint from his subjects about the latter's high-handedness is an untenable proposition.
Kielhorn's Supplement to Northern List (Ep. Ind., vol. VIII, Appendix I), p. 13.
Above vol. XIX, p. 218. . . The names of Prithviraj's ancestors mentioned in the Rdeo appear also to a large extent incorrect.
1 The Mandor inscription referred to here is not dated, so far as we know. It has been transcribed by Rai Bahadur Dayarama Sahni, Archool. Suru. Ind., 46. Rep., 1909-10, pp. 102-3.-D.R.B.
8 Ep. Ind., vol. XII, p. 197..