Chapter 23 (2)

Without pausing to trace the moral springs of that devotion which influenced the Mohila maiden, we shall relate the sequel to the story (though out of place)[4.23.60] in illustration of the prosecution of feuds throughout Rajasthan. The fathers [630] now took up the quarrel of their sons; and as it was by the prowess of the Sankhla vassal of Mandor that the band of Sadhu was discomfited, the old Rao, Raningdeo, drew together the lances of Pugal, and carried destruction into the fief of Mehraj. The Sankhlas yield in valour to none of the brave races who inhabit the “region of death”; and Mehraj was the father of Harbuji Sankhla, the Palladin of Marudes, whose exploits are yet the theme of the erratic bards of Rajasthan. Whether he was unprepared for the assault, or overcome by numbers, three hundred of his kin and clan moistened the sand-hills of the Luni with their blood. Raningdeo, flushed with revenge and laden with spoil, had reached his own frontier, when he was overtaken by Chonda of Mandor, alike eager to avenge the loss of his son Arankanwal, and this destructive inroad on his vassal. A desperate conflict ensued, in which the Rao of Pugal was slain; and the Rathor returned in triumph to Mandor.

Unequal to cope with the princes of Mandor, the two remaining sons of Raningdeo, Tana and Mera, resolved to abandon their faith, in order to preserve the point of honour, and “to take up their father’s feud.”[4.23.61] At this period the king, Khizr Khan,[4.23.62] was at Multan; to him they went, and by offers of service and an open apostacy, obtained a force to march against Chonda, who had recently added Nagor to his growing dominions. While the brothers were thus negotiating, they were joined by Kilan, the third son of their common sovereign, the Rawal of Jaisalmer, who advised the use of _chal_, which with the Rajput means indifferently stratagem or treachery, so that it facilitates revenge. With the ostensible motive of ending their feuds, and restoring tranquillity to their borderers, whose sole occupation was watching, burning, and devastating, Kilan offered a daughter in marriage to Chonda, and went so far as to say, that if he suspected aught unfair, he would, though contrary to custom and his own dignity, send the Bhatti princess to Nagor. This course being deemed the wisest, Chonda acquiesced in his desire “to extinguish the feud (_wair bujhana_).”

=Nāgor taken by Stratagem.=—Fifty covered chariots were prepared as the nuptial cortège, but which, instead of the bride and her handmaids, contained the bravest men of Pugal.[4.23.63] These were preceded by a train of horses led by Rajputs, of whom seven hundred also attended the camels laden with baggage, provisions, and gifts, while a small armed [631] retinue brought up the rear. The king’s troops, amounting to one thousand horse, remained at a cautious distance behind. Chonda left Nagor to meet the cavalcade and his bride, and had reached the chariots ere his suspicions were excited. Observing, however, some matters which little savoured of festivity, the Rathor commenced his retreat. Upon this the chiefs rushed from their chariots and camels, and the royal auxiliaries advancing, Chonda was assailed and fell at the gate of Nagor; and friend and foe entering the city together, a scene of general plunder commenced.

Once more the feud was balanced; a son and a father had fallen on each side, and the petty Rao of Pugal had bravely maintained the _wair_ against the princes of Mandor. The point of honour had been carried to the utmost bound by both parties, and an opportunity of reconciliation was at hand, which prevented the shadow of disgrace either to him who made or him who accepted the overture. The Rathors dreaded the loss of the recent acquisition, Nagor, and proposed to the Bhattis to seal their pacification with the blood of their common foe. United, they fell on the spoil-encumbered Tatars, whom they slew to a man.[4.23.64] Their father’s feud thus revenged, the sons of Raningdeo (who, as apostates from their faith, could no longer hold Pugal in fief, which was retained by Kilan, who had aided their revenge) retired amongst the Aboharia Bhattis, and their descendants are now styled Momin Musalman Bhatti.

From such anecdotes it will be obvious wherein consists the point of honour with the Rajputs; and it is not improbable that the very cause which has induced an opinion that females can have no influence on the lords of the creation, namely, their seclusion, operates powerfully in the contrary way.

=Influence of Women on Rājput Society.=—In spite of this seclusion, the knowledge of their accomplishments and of their personal perfections, radiates wherever the itinerant bard can travel. Though invisible themselves, they can see; and accident often favours public report, and brings the object of renown within the sphere of personal observation: as in the case of Sadhu and the Mohila maiden. Placed behind screens, they see the youths of all countries, and there are occasions when permanent impressions are made, during tournaments and other martial exercises. Here we have just seen that the passion of the [632] daughter of the Mohil was fostered at the risk of the destruction not only of her father’s house, but also that of her lover; and as the fourteen hundred and forty towns, which owned the sway of the former, were not long after absorbed into the accumulating territory of Mandor, this insult may have been the cause of the extirpation of the Mohils, as it was of the Bhattis of Pugal.

The influence of women on Rajput society is marked in every page of Hindu history, from the most remote periods. What led to the wars of Rama? the rape of Sita. What rendered deadly the feuds of the Yadus? the insult to Draupadi. What made prince Nala an exile from Narwar? his love for Damayanti. What made Raja Bhartari abandon the throne of Avanti? the loss of Pingali. What subjected the Hindu to the dominion of the Islamite? the rape of the princess of Kanauj. In fine, the cause which overturned kingdoms, commuted the sceptre to the pilgrim’s staff, and formed the groundwork of all their grand epics, is woman. In ancient, and even in modern times, she had more than a negative in the choice of a husband, and this choice fell on the gallant and the gay. The fair Draupadi was the prize of the best archer, and the Pandu Bhima established his fame, and bore her from all the suitors of Kampila. The princess of Kanauj, when led through ranks of the princes of Hind, each hoping to be the object of her choice, threw the marriage-garland (_barmala_) over the neck of the effigy of the Chauhan, which her father in derision had placed as porter at the gate. Here was incense to fame and incentive to gallantry![4.23.65]

In the same manner, as related in another part of this work, did the princess of Kishangarh invite Rana Raj Singh to bear her from the impending union with the emperor of the Moguls; and abundant other instances could be adduced of the free agency of these invisibles.

It were superfluous to reason on the effects of traditional histories, such as these, on the minds and manners of the females of Rajasthan. They form the amusement of their lives, and the grand topic in all their conversaziones; they read them with the Purohit, and they have them sung by the itinerant bard or Dholi minstrel [633], who disseminates them wherever the Rajput name extends. The Rajput mother claims her full share in the glory of her son, who imbibes at the maternal fount his first rudiments of chivalry; and the importance of this parental instruction cannot be better illustrated than in the ever-recurring simile, “make thy mother’s milk resplendent”; the full force of which we have in the powerful, though overstrained expression of the Bundi queen’s joy on the announcement of the heroic death of her son: “the long-dried fountain at which he fed, jetted forth as she listened to the tale of his death, and the marble pavement, on which it fell, rent asunder.” Equally futile would it be to reason on the intensity of sentiment thus implanted in the infant Rajput, of whom we may say without metaphor, the shield is his cradle, and daggers his playthings; and with whom the first commandment is, “avenge thy father’s feud”; on which they can heap text upon text, from the days of the great Pandu moralist Vyasa to the not less influential bard of their nation, the Trikala Chand.

-----

Footnote 4.23.1:

[“The custom handed down in regular succession since time immemorial
among the four chief castes and the mixed races of that country, is
called the conduct of virtuous men” (Manu, _Laws_, ii. 18).]

Footnote 4.23.2:

So says Valmiki, the author of the oldest epic in existence, the
Ramayana [see p. 693 above].

Footnote 4.23.3:

_Les Femmes, leur condition et leur influence dans l’ordre social_,
vol. i. p. 10.

Footnote 4.23.4:

So are some of the Hindu races in the mountainous districts about the
Himalaya, and in other parts of India. This curious trait in ancient
manners is deserving of investigation: it might throw some light on
the early history of the world. [“Each man has but one wife, yet all
the women are held in common: for this is a custom of the Massagetae,
and not of the Scythians, as the Greeks wrongly say” (Herodotus i.
216). For polyandry in India see Risley, _The People of India_, 2nd
ed. 206 ff.]

Footnote 4.23.5:

[Polygamy does to some extent prevail (_Census Report, Rājputāna_,
1911, i. 157 f.)]

Footnote 4.23.6:

_Laws_, v. 130.

Footnote 4.23.7:

_Ibid._ ii. 33.

Footnote 4.23.8:

_Digest of Hindu Law_, Colebrooke, vol. ii. p. 209 [Manu iii. 55-8].

Footnote 4.23.9:

Of all the religions which have diversified mankind, whatever man
might select, woman should choose the Christian. This alone gives her
just rank in the scale of creation, whether arising from the demotic
principle which pervades our faith, or the dignity conferred on the
sex in being chosen to be the mother of the Saviour of man. In turning
over the pages of Manu we find many mortifying texts, which I am
inclined to regard as interpolations; as the following, so opposed to
the beautiful sentiment above quoted: “A wife, a son, a servant, a
pupil, and a younger brother, may be corrected when they commit faults
with a rope, or the small thong of a cane” [viii. 299]. Such texts
might lead us to adopt Ségur’s conclusions, that ever since the days
of the patriarchs women were only brilliant slaves—victims, who
exhibited, in the wreaths and floral coronets which bedecked them, the
sacrifices to which they were destined. In the patriarchal ages their
occupations were to season the viands, and bake the bread, and weave
cloth for the tents: their recreations limited to respire the fresh
evening air under the shade of a fig tree, and sing canticles to the
Almighty. Such a fate, indeed, must appear to a Parisian dame, who
passes her time between the Feydeau and Tivoli, and whose daily
promenade is through the Champs Élysées, worse than death: yet there
is no positive hardships in these employments, and it was but the fair
division of labour in the primitive ages, and that which characterizes
the Rajputni of the present day.

Footnote 4.23.10:

Manu lays down some plain and wholesome rules for the domestic conduct
of the wife; above all, he recommends her to “preserve a cheerful
temper,” and “frugality in domestic expenses” [_Laws_, v. 150]. Some
of his texts savour, however, more of the anchorite than of a person
conversant with mankind; and when he commands the husband to be
reverenced as a god by the virtuous wife, even though enamoured of
another woman, it may be justly doubted if ever he found obedience
thereto; or the scarcely less difficult ordinance, “for a whole year
let a husband bear with his wife who treats him with aversion,” after
which probation he is permitted to separate [ix. 77]. It is very
likely the Rajputs are more in the habit of quoting the first of these
texts than of hearing the last: for although they have a choice at
home, they are not ashamed to be the avowed admirers of the Aspasias
and Phrynes of the capital; from the same cause which attracted
Socrates and made Pericles a slave and which will continue until the
united charms of the dance and the song are sanctioned to be practised
by the _légitimes_ within.

Footnote 4.23.11:

Manu ix. 101.

Footnote 4.23.12:

Parmāl or Paramardi Chandel (A.D. 1165-1203). He was defeated by
Prithirāj Chauhān in 1182.]

Footnote 4.23.13:

On the Pahuj, and now belonging to the Bundela prince of Datia. The
author has been over this field of battle.

Footnote 4.23.14:

[On the Bannāphar sept, from which sprang the heroes Alha and Udal,
see Crooke, _Tribes and Castes North-West Provinces_, i. 137 ff.;
their bravery forms the subject of numerous ballads (_ASR_, ii. 455
ff.).]

Footnote 4.23.15:

Hindaun was a town dependent on Bayana, the capital of the Jadons,
whose descendants still occupy Karauli and Sri Mathura.

Footnote 4.23.16:

[The modern Rohilkhand Division.]

Footnote 4.23.17:

Rao Pajun of Amber, one of the great vassals of the Chauhan, and
ancestor of the present Raja of Jaipur.

Footnote 4.23.18:

In the original, “the land of the Baghel to that of the Chandel.” Rewa
is capital of [or leading State in] Baghelkhand, founded by the
Baghela Rajputs, a branch of the Solanki kings of Anhilwara.

Footnote 4.23.19:

Antarved, the Duab, or Mesopotamia of the Jumna and Ganges.

Footnote 4.23.20:

A district S.W. of Delhi, notorious for the lawless habits of its
inhabitants: a very ancient Hindu race, but the greater part forced
proselytes to the faith of Islam. In the time of Prithiraj the chief
of Mewat was one of his vassals.

Footnote 4.23.21:

_Jayapattra_, or ‘bulletin of victory.’

Footnote 4.23.22:

Jaichand was then king of this city, only second to Delhi. He was
attacked in 1193 (A.D.) by Shihabu-d-din, after his conquest of the
Chauhan, driven from his kingdom, and found a watery grave in the
Ganges. [The battle was fought at Chandāwar in the Etāwa District,
A.D. 1194 (Smith, _EHI_, 385).]

Footnote 4.23.23:

Jagnakh had two villages conferred upon him, besides an elephant and a
dress.

Footnote 4.23.24:

[Compare _Iliad_, xii. 237 ff.]

Footnote 4.23.25:

The phenicopteros. [The great crane, _Grus antigone_.]

Footnote 4.23.26:

A large red duck, the emblem of fidelity with the Rajputs. [The
Brahmani duck, _Anas casarca_.]

Footnote 4.23.27:

The jackal.

Footnote 4.23.28:

Commander of the succours of Kanauj.

Footnote 4.23.29:

_Asis_ is a form of benediction only bestowed by females and priests:
it is performed by clasping both hands over the person’s head, and
waving a piece of silver or other valuable over him, which is bestowed
in charity [the object being to disperse evil influence].

Footnote 4.23.30:

This is a very ancient ceremony, and is called _Nicharavali_ [or
_ārti_. The Author has frequently had a large salver filled with
silver coin waved over his head, which was handed for distribution
amongst his attendants. It is most appropriate from the fair, from
whom also he has had this performed by their proxies, the family
priest or female attendants.

Footnote 4.23.31:

The sankh, or war-shell, is thrice sounded, and the nakkaras strike
thrice, when the army is to march; but should it after such
proclamation remain on its ground, a scape-goat is slain in front of
the imperial tent.

Footnote 4.23.32:

This picture recalls the remembrance of Hacon and the heroes of the
north; with the Valkyries or choosers of the slain; the celestial
maids of war of Scandinavia.

Footnote 4.23.33:

[Collyrium.]

Footnote 4.23.34:

Baghnakh or Naharnakh. [This weapon is best known by its use by Sivaji
when he slew Afzu-l Khān in 1659 at Pratāpgarh (Grant Duff, _Hist.
Mahrattas_, 78). Four specimens in the Indian Museum are described,
with an illustration, by Hon. W. Egerton (_Illustrated Handbook of
Indian Arms_, 115).]

Footnote 4.23.35:

Barmala.

Footnote 4.23.36:

_Mala_, a necklace. The _tulasi_ [the plant _Olymum sanctum_] or
_rudraksha_ [the nuts of _Elaeocarpus ganitrus_, the former worn by
Vaishnavas, the latter by Saivas] had the same estimation amongst the
Hindus that the mistletoe had amongst the ancient Britons, and was
always worn in battle as a charm.

Footnote 4.23.37:

Prithiraj.

Footnote 4.23.38:

A Rajput never names his wife. Here it is evidently optional to the
widow to live or die, though Alha shows his wish for her society
above. See chapter on Satis, which will follow.

Footnote 4.23.39:

Sanichar.

Footnote 4.23.40:

It was a _jantar_ or phylactery of Hanuman the monkey deity; probably
a magical stanza, with his image.

Footnote 4.23.41:

A crooked scimitar.

Footnote 4.23.42:

One of the names of Mena or Parvati. This passage will illustrate the
subject of Satis in a future chapter.

Footnote 4.23.43:

“’Tis a pleasure (says Bernier) to see them with the fume of opium in
their heads, embrace each other when the battle is to begin, and give
their mutual farewells, as men resolved to die.” [Ed. 1914, p. 40. The
battle of Dharmāt was fought on the banks of the river Sipra (_IGI_,
xxi. 14 f.) on 15th April, 1658. Manucci was not present, but gives an
account derived from Aurangzeb’s artillery officers of the battle at
Dharmātpur, about 14 miles from Ujjain (i. 259 f., and see Jadunath
Sarkar, _Life of Aurangzeb_, ii. 1 ff.). The latter (ii. 20 f.) speaks
highly of the valour of Jaswant Singh, but Khāfi Khan (Elliot-Dowson
vii. 219) says that he acted in a cowardly way. The account quoted by
the author is not in the original work of Ferishta, but in Dow’s
continuation (ed. 1812, iii. 206 f).].

Footnote 4.23.44:

Bernier’s _History of the Late Revolution of the Empire of the Mogul_,
fol. p. 13, ed. 1684 [ed. 1914, p. 40 f., where a somewhat different
version is given].

Footnote 4.23.45:

It is deemed unlucky to see this emblem of Ganesa in sleep.

Footnote 4.23.46:

The battle-shout of the Rajput. [Hara, a title of Siva.]

Footnote 4.23.47:

‘Half-body,’ which we may render, in common phraseology, ‘other half.’

Footnote 4.23.48:

[The impersonation of the female energy.]

Footnote 4.23.49:

Delhi [“the city of the witch or sorceress”].

Footnote 4.23.50:

[The “Ganore” of the text possibly represents the town of Ganora in
the Bānswāra State. There is another place of the same name in
Gwalior.]

Footnote 4.23.51:

[Several of our best authorities—Sir Lauder Brunton, Sir G. Birdwood,
Professors A. Keith and A. Doran of the Royal College of Surgeons—have
kindly investigated the question of death by poisoned robes, of which
various instances are reported in this work. The general result is
that it is doubtful if any known poison could be used in this way. Sir
Lauder Brunton remarks that a paste of the seeds of _Abrus
precatorius_ is used for killing animals. Dr. N. Chevers (_Manual of
Medical Jurisprudence in India_, p. 299) writes: “Any one who has
noticed how freely a robust person in India perspires through a thin
garment can understand that, if a cloth were thoroughly impregnated
with the cantharidine of that very powerful vesicant, the _Telini_,
the result would be as dangerous as an extensive burn.” For _telini_
(_Mylabris punctum_), used as a substitute for _Cantharis
vesicatoria_, see Sir G. Watt (_Dict. Economic Products of India_, v.
309). Manucci (i. 149) says that Akbar placed such poisons in charge
of a special officer. The stock classical case is that of Herakles
killed by an ointment made from the blood of Nessus. An old writer, W.
Ramesey (_Of Poisons_ (1660), p. 14 f.) speaks of poisoning done in
this way: but he regards some of “these and the like storeyes to be
merely Fabulous ... and rather to be attributed to the Subtilty,
Craft, and Malice of the Devill” (12 series, _Notes and Queries_, i.
(1916) p. 417).]

Footnote 4.23.52:

The physician (unless he unite with his office that of ghostly
comforter) has to feel the pulse of his patient with a curtain between
them, through a rent, in which the arm is extended. [See the amusing
account by Fryer (_New Account of E. India and Persia_, Hakluyt
Society, ed. i. 326 f.).]

Footnote 4.23.53:

[This is a stock story (Risley, _The People of India_, 2nd ed. 179 f.;
Rose, _Glossary_, ii. 220; cf. Herodotus v. 12).]

Footnote 4.23.54:

Sriphala.

Footnote 4.23.55:

Literally ‘lamp-holders’; such is the term applied to these handmaids;
who invariably form a part of the _daeja_ or ‘dower.’ [The custom of
sending handmaids with the bride, the girls often becoming concubines
of the bridegroom, is common (Russell, _Tribes and Castes Central
Provinces_, i. 63, ii. 77). In Gujarāt they are known as Goli or
Vadhāran, and are sometimes married to the Khawās, or male slaves of
the harem (_BG_, ix. Part i. 147, 235).]

Footnote 4.23.56:

Panch Kalyan is generally, if not always, a chestnut, having four
white legs, with a white nose and list or star.

Footnote 4.23.57:

_Arankanwal_, ‘the lotos of the desert,’ from _aranya_ (Sanskrit), ‘a
waste,’ and _kamala_ (pronounced _kanwal_), ‘a lotos’: classically it
should be written _aranykamala_; I write it as pronounced.

Footnote 4.23.58:

The rites to the manes on the completion of the ‘sixth month.’

Footnote 4.23.59:

The rites to the manes on the ‘twelfth day.’

Footnote 4.23.60:

The greater portion of these anecdotes, the foundation of national
character, will appear in the respective annals.

Footnote 4.23.61:

_Bap ra wair lena._

Footnote 4.23.62:

[Khizr Khān, of the Sayyid dynasty of Delhi, was left in charge by
Timūr, and died A.D. 1421.]

Footnote 4.23.63:

[For this legend see Vol. I. p. 308 above.]

Footnote 4.23.64:

Khizr Khan succeeded to the throne of Delhi in A.D. 1414 [or rather,
was left in charge of Delhi by Timūr, and died A.D. 1421], and
according to the Jaisalmer annals the commencement of these feuds was
in A.D. 1406.

Footnote 4.23.65:

The Samnite custom, so lauded by Montesquieu as the reward of youthful
virtue, was akin in sentiment to the Rajput, except that the fair
Rajputni made herself the sole judge of merit in her choice. It was
more calculated for republican than aristocratic society: “On
assembloit tous les jeunes gens, et on les jugeoit; celui qui était
déclaré le meilleur de tout prenoit pour sa femme la fille qu’il
vouloit: l’amour, la beauté, la chastité, la vertu, la naissance, les
richesses même, tout cela était, pour ainsi dire, la dot de la vertu.”
It would be difficult, adds Montesquieu, to imagine a more noble
recompense, or one less expensive to a petty State, or more
influential on the conduct of both sexes (_L’Esprit des Lois_, chap.
xvi. livre vii.).

-----