Chapter XLIX: Book VI: , it follows that it was from Megasthenês that he drew his (5)

[531] Dr. Bühler's copperplate of Múlarája records a grant to this temple, said to be of Múlanáthadeva in Mandali in the Vardhi zilla, apparently the modern Mándal near Pañchásar in the Vadhiár province near Jhinjhuváda. The grant is in Samvat 1043 and is dated from Anahilapura though the actual gift was made at Srísthala or Sidhpur after bathing in the Sarasvatí and worshipping the god of the Rudramahálaya. The grant is of the village of Kamboika, the modern Kamboi near Modhera. Ind. Ant. VI. 192-193. The grant is said to have been written by a Káyastha named Káñchana and ends with the words "of the illustrious Múlarája."

[532] The difference between 1052 and 1053 is probably only a few months.

[533] The fight with Muñja must have taken place about A.D. 1011 (S. 1067). As Chámunda started just after installing Vallabha the beginning of the reign must be before A.D. 997 as Tailapa who fought with Muñja died in that year. This is proved by a manuscript dated A.D. 994 (S. 1050) which gives the reigning king as Muñja. That Bhoja Muñja's successor was ruling in A.D. 1014 (S. 1070) makes it probable that Muñja's reign extended to A.D. 1011 (S. 1067).

[534] This Svayamvara and the list of attendant and rival kings seem imaginary. The Nadol chiefship was not important enough to draw kings from the countries named.

[535] The text has son but Bhíma was Durlabha's nephew not his son.

[536] By sowing cowries Kulachandra may have meant to show the cheapness of Anahilaváda. Bhoja's meaning was that as shells are money, to sow shells was to sow Málwa wealth in Gujarát. If Kulachandra had sown salt all would have melted, and no trace been left. [This seems a symbolic later-stage explanation. The sense seems to be shell-sowing keeps the Anahilaváda guardians in place since guardians can live in shells: salt-sowing scares the guardian spirits and makes the site of the city a haunt of demons. Bhoja saw that thanks to his general the Luck of Anahilaváda would remain safe in the shells.]

[537] The Prabandhachintámani tells other stories of the relations between Bhíma and Bhoja. Once when Gujarát was suffering from famine Bhíma heard that Bhoja was coming with a force against Gujarát. Alarmed at the news Bhíma asked Dámara his minister of peace and war to prevent Bhoja coming. Dámara went to Málwa, amused the king by witty stories, and while a play was being acted in court degrading and joking other kings, something was said regarding Tailapa of Telingana. On this Damara reminded the king that the head of his grandfather Muñja was fixed at Tailap's door. Bhoja grew excited and started with an army against Telingana. Hearing that Bhíma had come against him as far as Bhímapura (?) Bhoja asked Dámara to prevent Bhíma advancing further. Dámara stopped Bhíma by taking him an elephant as a present from Bhoja. The Prabandhachintámani gives numerous other stories showing that at times the relations between Bhoja and Bhíma were friendly.

[538] See above page 9.

[539] See above page 160.

[540] With this silence compare the absence (Reinaud's Mémoire Sur l'Inde, 67) of any reference either in Sanskrit or in Buddhist books to the victories, even to the name, of Alexander the Great. Also in modern times the ignoring of British rule in the many inscriptions of Jain repairers of temples on Satruñjaya hill who belong to British territory. The only foreign reference is by one merchant of Daman who acknowledges the protection of the Phirangi játi Puratakála Pátasahi the king of the Firangis of Portugal. Bühler in Epigraphia Indica, II. 36.

[541] Elliot and Dowson, II. 468ff. Sir H. M. Elliot gives extracts for this expedition from the Tárikh-i-Alfi, Tabakát-i-Akbari, Tabakát-i-Násiri, and Rauzatu-s-safá.

[542] Since the earliest times Hindus have held eclipse days sacred. According to the Mahábhárata the Yádavas of Dwárká came to Somanátha for an eclipse fair. Great fairs are still held at Somanátha on the Kártika and Chaitra (December and April) fullmoons.

[543] This old Indian idea is expressed in a verse in an inscription in Somanátha Pátan itself.

[544] Ten thousand must be taken vaguely.

[545] Compare Sachau's Alberuni, II. 104. Every day they brought Somanátha a jug of Ganges water and a basket of Kashmir flowers. Somanátha they believed cured every inveterate sickness and healed every desperate and incurable disease. The reason why Somanátha became so famous was that it was a harbour for those who went to and fro from Sofala in Zanzibar to China. It is still the practice to carry Ganges water to bathe distant gods.

[546] These must be the local Sompura Bráhmans who still number more than five hundred souls in Somanátha Patan.

[547] Shaving is the first rite performed by pilgrims.

[548] Dancers are now chiefly found in the temples of Southern India.

[549] Mahmúd seems to have crossed the desert from Multán and Baháwalpur to Bikánír and thence to Ajmír.

[550] Apparently Delváda near Uná. Mahmúd's route seems to have been from Anahilaváda to Modhera and Mándal, thence by the Little Ran near Pátri and Bajána, and thence by Jhálávád Gohelvád and Bábriavád to Delvádá.

[551] The waves still beat against the walls of the ruined fort of Somanátha.

[552] This shows that the temple was a building of brick and wood. According to Alberuni (Sachau, II. 105) the temple was built about a hundred years before Mahmúd's invasion. An inscription at Patan states that Bhímadeva I. (A.D. 1022-1072) rebuilt the Somanátha temple of stone. In Dr. Bhagvánlál's opinion the first dynasty in Gujarát to make stone buildings were the Solankis. Before them buildings and temples were of wood and brick.

[553] Of the fate of the great Linga Alberuni (Sachau, II. 103) writes: Prince Mahmúd ordered the upper part to be broken. The rest with all its coverings and trappings of gold jewels and embroidered garments he transported to Ghazni. Part of it together with the brass Chakravarti or Vishnu of Thánesvar has been thrown into the hippodrome of the town: part lies before the mosque for people to rub their feet on.

[554] The next paragraph relating to Mahmúd's return will be found on page 249 of the same volume of Sir H. Elliott's work.

[555] Khandahat which must have been on the coast has not been identified. The description suggests some coast island in the gulf of Kacch. By the Girnár route forty parasangs that is 240 miles would reach the Kacch coast. Kanthkot in Vágad in east Kacch suits well in sound and is known to have been a favourite resort of the Solankis. But the ebb and flow of the tide close to it are difficult to explain. The identification with Kanthkot is favoured by Dr. Bühler. Colonel Watson (Káthiáwár Gazetteer, 80) prefers Gándhvi on the Káthiáváda coast a few miles north-east of Miáni. M. Reinaud and Dr. Weil suggest Gandhár in Broach on the left bank of the mouth of the Dhádhar river. Sir H. Elliot (I. 445 and II. 473) prefers Khandadár at the north-west angle of Káthiáváda.

[556] According to Ferishta (Bombay Persian Ed. I. 57, Briggs' Translation, I. 74) Mahmúd stayed and meant to make his capital at Anahilaváda not at Somanátha. That Mahmúd did stay at Anahilaváda the Martyr's Mound and the Ghazni Mosque in Patan are evidence. Still the mound was probably raised and the mosque may at least have been begun in honour of the capture of Anahilaváda on the journey south. Traces of a second mosque which is said to have had a tablet recording Mahmúd of Ghazni as the builder have recently (1878) been found at Munjpur about twenty-five miles south-east of Rádhanpur.

[557] Briggs' Ferishta, I. 75. This account of the Dábshilíms reads more like a tradition than an historical record. It is to be noted that the authors both of the Áin-i-Akbari (A.D. 1583) and of the Mirat-i-Ahmadí (A.D. 1762) give Chámunda as king at the time of Mahmúd's invasion. Their statements cannot weigh against Ibn Asír's account. Compare Dr. Bühler's remarks in Ind. Ant. VI. 184. Of Mahmúd's return to Ghazni (A.D. 1026) the Tabakát-i-Akbari says: 'When Mahmúd resolved to return from Somanátha he learned that Parama Dev, one of the greatest Rájás of Hindustán, was preparing to intercept him. The Sultán, not deeming it advisable to contend with this chief, went towards Multán through Sindh. In this journey his men suffered much in some places from scarcity of water in others from want of forage. After enduring great difficulties he arrived at Ghazni in A.D. 1029 (H. 417).' This Parama Dev would seem to be the Parmára king of Ábu who could well block the Ajmir-Gujarát route. The route taken by Mahmúd must have passed by Mansúra near Bráhmanábád, Bhátia, and Multán. It must have been in the crossing of the great desert that he suffered so severely from scarcity of water and forage. Ferishta (Briggs, I. 75) says that many of Mahmúd's troops died raging mad from the intolerable heat and thirst. The historian Muhammad Ufi (A.D. 1200) alleges (Elliot, II. 192) that two Hindus disguised as countrymen offered themselves as guides and led the army three days' march out of the right course, where they were saved only by Mahmúd's miraculous discovery of a pool of sweet water. [This tale of the self-sacrificing Bráhman or priest and the miraculous find of water has gathered round Mahmúd as the latest of myth centres. It is Herodotus' (Book III. 154-158) old Zopyrus tale (Rawlinson's Seventh Monarchy, 318); it is revived in honour of the Great Kushán Kanishka, A.D. 78 (Beruni in Elliot, II. 11), of the Sassanian Firoz A.D. 457-483 (Rawlinson's Seventh Monarchy, 318), and of a certain king of Zábulistán or Ghazni of uncertain date (Elliot II. 170). Similarly the puzzling Dabshilím tale seems to be peculiar neither to Gujarát nor to Mahmúd of Ghazni. It seems a repetition of the tale of Dabshilím the man of the royal race, who, according to the Panchatantra or Fables of Pilpai, was chosen successor of Porus after Alexander the Great's Viceroy had been driven out. [Compare Reinaud's Mémoire Sur l'Inde, 127-128.] The Tabakát-i-Násirí (A.D. 1227) adds (Elliot, II. 475) that the guide devoted his life for the sake of Somanátha and this account is adopted by Ferishta, Briggs' Translation, I. 78.

[558] Vasahiis Prákrit for Vasati that is residence. The word is used to mean a group of temples.

[559] Several later mentions of a Tripurushaprásáda show there was only one building of that name. The statement that the great Múlarája I. built a Tripurushaprásáda seems a mistake, due to a confusion with prince Múlarája.

[560] Meaning a large number of Bhils of whom Áshá was the head.

[561] Forbes' Rás Málá (New Ed.), 79.

[562] Probably a Bhíl goddess. The name does not sound Sanskrit.

[563] In one passage the Prabandhachintámani calls these princes half-brothers of Udaya. Further details show that they were half-brothers of one another and sons of Udaya.

[564] This Jayakesi is Jayakesi I. son of Shashthadeva (Suchakesi) the third of the Goa Kádambas. Jayakesi's recorded date A.D. 1052 (S. 974) fits well with the time of Karna (Fleet's Kánarese Dynasties, 91). The Prabandhachintámani tells the following story of the death of Jayakesi. Jayakesi had a favourite parrot whom he one day asked to come out of his cage and dine with him. The parrot said: The cat sitting near you will kill me. The king seeing no cat replied: If any cat kills you I too will die. The parrot left his cage, ate with the king, and was killed by the cat. Jayakesi made ready his funeral pyre, and, in spite of his minister's prayers, taking the dead parrot in his hand laid himself on the funeral pyre and was burned.

[565] Chandrapura is probably Chandávar near Gokarn in North Kánara.

[566] Rás Málá (New Edition), 83.

[567] Kielhorn's Report on Sanskrit Manuscripts for 1881 page 22.

[568] Dussala was sixth in descent from Vigraharája the enemy of Múlarája from whom Karna was fifth in descent.

[569] The date of his installation is given by the author of the Vichárasreni as Vikrama S. 1150.

[570] Ásapála and Kumárapála appear to be local chiefs.

[571] Compare Forbes' Rás Málá, I. 118-153.

[572] Goa Kádámba inscriptions say that Jagaddeva was the cousin of the Goa Kádamba king Vijayárka the nephew of Miyánalladeví and call him by courtesy the younger brother of Vijayárka's son Jayakesi II. He would seem to have been held in esteem by Vijayárka and his son Jayakesi, to have then gone for some time to Siddharája, and after leaving Siddharája to have transferred his services to Permádi. His being called Paramára may be due to his connection with Permádi. Fleet's Kánarese Dynasties, 91.

[573] Seventy-two a favourite number with Indian authors.

[574] Prabandhachintámani and Kumárapálacharita.

[575] Dr. Kielhorn's Report on Sanskrit Manuscripts for 1881 page 22.

[576] The Kumárapálacharita says that the title was assumed on the conquest of Barbaraka. The verse is:

siddho barbarakashvásya siddharájastatobhavat

that is, by him the demon Barbaraka was vanquished, therefore he became Siddharája The Lord of Magical Power.

[577] Ind. Ant. IV. 265.

[578] This Permádi may be the Goa Kádamba chief Permádi Sivachitta (A.D. 1147-1175), who was heir-apparent in the time of Siddharája, or the Sinda chief Permádi who was a cotemporary of Siddharája and flourished in A.D. 1144.

[579] Ind. Ant. IV. 2. Regarding Barbaraka Doctor Bühler remarks in Ind. Ant. VI. 167: 'The Varvarakas are one of the non-Aryan tribes which are settled in great numbers in North Gujarát, Koli, Bhíl, or Mer.' Siddharája's contests with the Barbarakas seem to refer to what Tod (Western India, 173 and 195) describes as the inroads of mountaineers and foresters on the plains of Gujarát during the eleventh and twelfth centuries. To attempt to identify Bhut Barbar or Varvar is hazardous. The name Barbar is of great age and is spread from India to Morocco. Wilson (Works, VII. 176) says: The analogy between Barbaras and barbarians is not in sound only. In all Sanskrit authorities Barbaras are classed with borderers and foreigners and nations not Hindu. According to Sir Henry Rawlinson (Ferrier's Caravan Journeys, 223 note) tribes of Berbers are found all over the east. Of the age of the word Canon Rawlinson (Herodotus, IV. 252) writes: Barbar seems to be the local name for the early race of Accad. In India Ptolemy (A.D. 150; McCrindle's Edn. 146) has a town Barbarei on the Indus and the Periplus (A.D. 247; McCrindle's Ed. 108) has a trade-centre Barbarikon on the middle mouth of the Indus. Among Indian writings, in the Ramáyana (Hall in Wilson's Works, VII. 176 Note *) the Barbaras appear between the Tukháras and the Kambojas in the north: in the Mahábhárata (Muir's Sanskrit Texts, I. 481-2) in one list Var-varas are entered between Sávaras and Sakas and in another list (Wilson's Works, VII. 176) Barbaras come between Kiratas and Siddhas. Finally (As. Res. XV. 47 footnote) Barbara is the northmost of the Seven Konkanas. The names Barbarei in Ptolemy and Barbarikon in the Periplus look like some local place-name, perhaps Bambhara, altered to a Greek form. The Hindu tribe names, from the sameness in sound as well as from their position on the north-west border of India, suggest the Mongol tribe Juán-Juán or Var-Var, known to the western nations as Avars, who drove the Little Yuechi out of Balkh in the second half of the fourth century, and, for about a hundred years, ruled to the north and perhaps also to the south of the Hindu Kush. (Specht in Journal Asiatique 1883. II. 390-410; Howorth in Jour. R. A. S. XXI. 721-810.) It seems probable that some of these Var-Vars passed south either before or along with the White Húnas (A.D. 450-550). Var, under its Mongol plural form Avarti (Howorth, Ditto 722), closely resembles Avartiya one of the two main divisions of the Káthis of Kacch (Mr. Erskine's List in J. Bom. Geo. Soc. II. 59-60 for Aug. 1838). That among the forty-seven clans included under the Avartiyas four (Nos. 30, 35, 42, and 43) are Babariyas, suggests that the Káthis received additions from the Var-Vars at different times and places. Dr. Bühler (Ind. Ant. VI. 186) thinks that the Babaro or Barbar or Var-Var who gave trouble to Siddharája represent some early local non-Aryan tribe. The fact that they are called Rákshasas and Mlecchas and that they stopped the ceremonies at Sidhpur north of Anahilaváda seems rather to point to a foreign invasion from the north than to a local uprising of hill tribes. Though no Musalmán invasion of Gujarát during the reign of Siddharája is recorded a Jesalmir legend (Forbes' Rás Málá, I. 175) tells how Lanja Bijirao the Bhatti prince who married Siddharája's daughter was hailed by his mother-in-law as the bulwark of Anahilaváda against the power of the king who grows too strong. This king may be Báhalim the Indian viceroy of the Ghaznavid Bahrám Sháh (A.D. 1116-1157). Báhalim (Elliot, II. 279; Briggs' Ferista, I. 151) collected an army of Arabs, Persians, Afgháns, and Khiljis, repaired the fort of Nágor in the province of Sewálik, and committed great devastations in the territories of the independent Indian rulers. He threw off allegiance to Ghazni and advancing to meet Bahrám Sháh near Multán was defeated and slain. Except that they were northerners and that Báhalim's is the only known invasion from the north during Siddharája's reign nothing has been found connecting Barbar and Báhalim. At the same time that the Barbar or Var-Var of the Gujarát writers may have been non-Hindu mercenaries from the north-west frontier whom Siddharája admitted as Hindu subjects is made not unlikely by two incidents preserved by the Muhammadan historians. The Tárikh-i-Soráth (Bayley's Gujarát, 35 Note *) tells how in A.D. 1178 from the defeated army of Shaháb-ud-din Ghori the Turkish Afghán and Moghal women were distributed the higher class to high caste and the commoner to low caste Hindus. Similarly how the better class of male captives were admitted among Chakával and Wadhál Rájputs and the lower among Khánts, Kolis, Bábrias, and Mers. Again about thirty years later (A.D. 1210) when his Turk mercenaries, who were not converted to Islám, revolted against Shams-ud-dín Altamsh they seized Delhi and built Hindu temples (Elliot, II. 237-239). These cases seem to make it likely that among Báhalim's mercenaries were some un-Islamised North Indian Var-Vars and that they were admitted into Hinduism by Siddharája and as the story states served him as other Rájputs. Some of the new-comers as noted above seem to have merged into the Káthis. Others founded or joined the Bábariás who give their name to Bábariáváda a small division in the south of Káthiáváda. Though the tribe is now small the 72 divisions of the Bábariás show that they were once important. One of their leading divisions preserves the early form Var (Káthiáwár Gazetteer, 132-133) and supports their separate northern origin, which is forgotten in the local stories that they are descended from Jethvás and Ahirs and have a Bráhman element in their ancestry. (Tod's Western India, 413; Káthiáwár Gazetteer, 132-123.) Of the Var-Vars in their old seats a somewhat doubtful trace remains in the Barbaris a tribe of Hazáráhs near Herat (Bellew in Imp. and As. Quar. Review Oct. 1891 page 328) and in the Panjáb (Ibbetson's Census, 538) Bhábras a class of Panjáb Jains.

[580] Abhayatilaka Gani who revised and completed the Dvyásraya in Vikrama S. 1312 (A.D. 1256) says, in his twentieth Sarga, that a new era was started by Kumárapála. This would seem to refer to the Simha era.

[581] The Kumárapálacharita states that Sajjana died before the temple was finished, and that the temple was completed by his son Parasuráma. After the temple was finished Siddharája is said to have come to Somanátha and asked Parasuráma for the revenues of Sorath. But on seeing the temple on Girnár he was greatly pleased, and on finding that it was called Karna-vihára after his father he sanctioned the outlay on the temple.

[582] Ind. Ant. VI. 194ff. Dr. Bühler (Ditto) takes Avantínátha to mean Siddharája's opponent the king of Málwa and not Siddharája himself.

[583] Archæological Survey Report, XXI. 86.

[584] Jour. B. A. Soc. (1848), 319.

[585] The original verse is mahálayo maháyátrá mahásthánam mahásarah yatkritam siddharájena kriyate tanna kenacit .

[586] These, as quoted by Ráo Sáheb Mahípatrám Rúprám in his Sadhara Jesangh, are, the erection of charitable feeding-houses every yojana or four miles, of Dabhoi fort, of a kunda or reservoir at Kapadvanj, of the Málavya lake at Dholká, of small temples, of the Rudramahálaya, of the Ráni's step-well, of the Sahasralinga lake, of reservoirs at Sihor, of the fort of Sáelá, of the Dasasahasra or ten thousand temples, of the Muna lake at Viramgám, of the gadhs or forts of Dadharapur, Vadhwán Anantapur and Chubári, of the Sardhár lake, of the gadhs of Jhinjhuváda, Virpur, Bhádula, Vásingapura, and Thán, of the palaces of Kandola and Sihi Jagapura, of the reservoirs of Dedádrá and Kírtti-stambha and of Jitpur-Anantpura. It is doubtful how many of these were actually Siddharája's works.

[587] One of the best preserved slabs was sent by Sir John Malcolm when Resident of Málwa to the Museum of the B. B. R. A. S., where it still lies. It has verses in twelfth century Prakrit in honour of a king, but nothing historical can be made out of it.

[588] See above page 170.

[589] Devasúri was born in S. 1134 (A.D. 1078), took díkshá in S. 1152 (A.D. 1096), became a Súri in S. 1174 (A.D. 1118), and died on a Thursday in the dark half of Srávana S. 1226 (A.D. 1170). His famous disciple Hemachandra was born on the fullmoon of Kártika S. 1145 (A.D. 1089), became an ascetic in S. 1150 (A.D. 1094), and died in S. 1229 (A.D. 1173).

[590] The Prákrit local name was Âno, of which the Sanskritised forms would appear to be Arno, Arnava, Ánáka, and Ánalla as given in the Hammíramahákávya. The genealogy of these kings of Sákambhari or Sámbhar is not settled. The Nadol copperplate dated Samvat 1218 gives the name of its royal grantor as Alan and of Alan's father as Máharaja (Tod's Rajasthán, I. 804), the latter apparently a mistake for Anarája which is the name given in the Dvyásraya. Alan's date being V. 1218, the date of his father Ána would fit in well with the early part of Kumárapála's reign. The order of the two names Álhana and Ánalla in the Hammíramahákávya would seem to be mistaken and ought to be reversed.

[591] Kodinár is a town in Gáikwár territory in South Káthiáváda. This temple of Ambiká is noticed as a place of Jain pilgrimage by the sage Jinaprabhasúri in his Tírthakalpa and was a well-known Jain shrine during the Anahilaváda period.

[592] The Kumárapálaprabandha has Kelambapattana and Kolambapattana probably Kolam or Quilon.

[593] The Kumárapálaprabandha says that Udayana was appointed minister and Vágbhata general. Sollá the youngest son of Udayana did not take part in politics.

[594] Kirtane's Hammíramahákávya, 13.

[595] Dhavalakka or Dholka according to the Kumárapálaprabandha.

[596] According to the Kumárapálacharita Kumárapála's sister who was married to Ána having heard her husband speak slightingly of the kings of Gujarát took offence, resented the language, and bandied words with her husband who beat her. She came to her brother and incited him to make an expedition against her husband.

[597] The Dvyásraya does not say that Kumárapála's sister was married to Ána.

[598] This was a common title of the Siláhára kings. Compare Bombay Gazetteer, XIII. 437 note 1.

[599] Ámbadá is his proper name. It is found Sanskritised into Ámrabhata and Ambaka.

[600] This is the Káverí river which flows through Chikhli and Balsár. The name in the text is very like Karabená the name of the same river in the Násik cave inscriptions (Bom. Gaz. XVI. 571) Kaláviní and Karabená being Sanskritised forms of the original Káveri. Perhaps the Káveri is the Akabarou of the Periplus (A.D. 247).

[601] Sausara or Sásar seems the original form from which Samara was Sanskritised. Sásar corresponds with the Mehr name Cháchar.

[602] The Kumárapálacharita says that Samara was defeated and his son placed on the throne.

[603] The translation of the inscription runs: Steps made by the venerable Ámbaka, Samvat 1222. According to the Kumárapálaprabandha the steps were built at a cost of a lákh of drammas a dramma being of the value of about 5 annas. According to the Prabandhachintámani an earthquake occurred when the king was at Girnár on his way to Somanátha. The old ascent of Girnár was from the north called Chhatrasilá that is the umbrella or overhanging rocks. Hemáchárya said if two persons went up together the Chhatrasilá rocks would fall and crush them. So the king ordered Ámrabhata to build steps on the west or Junágadh face at a cost of 63 lákhs of drammas.

[604] The site of Báhadapura seems to be the ruins close to the east of Pálitána where large quantities of conch shell bangles and pieces of brick and tile have been found.

[605] This would appear to be the Kalachuri king Gayá Karna whose inscription is dated 902 of the Chedi era that is A.D. 1152. As the earliest known inscription of Gayá Karna's son Narasimhadeva is dated A.D. 1157 (Chedi 907) the death of Gayá Karna falls between A.D. 1152 and 1157 in the reign of Kumárapála and the story of his being accidentally strangled may be true.

[606] So many marriages on one day points to the people being either Kadva Kunbis or Bharváds among whom the custom of holding all marriages on the same day still prevails.

[607] The text of the inscription is:

(1) ... paushasudígurau adyoha shrímadan-
(2) hilapátake [samasta] rájávalíbirájitaparamabhattárakamahá-
(3) [rájádhirájanirjita]
sákambharíbhúpálashrímadavantináthashrímatku
(4) [márapála] ... niyuktamahámátyashríjasodhava--
(5) la shríkaranádau samastamudrávyápáránparipanthayatítyevam
(6) kále [pravartamáne mahárájá] dhirájashríkumárapáladevena vija
(7) ..... shrímadudayapuro .. rocakánvaye mahárája--
(8) putra ..... mahárájaputravasantapála evam ana
(9) ..... likhitá yátrá . adya somagrahanaparvani
(10) ... layavane samáhritatírthodake snátvá jagadgu
(11) ... sukhapunyajayavriddhaye udayapurakári
(12) ...... kárápita devashrí ........

Lines broken below.

[608] Annals of Rájasthán, I. 803.

[609] Rás Málá (New Edition), 154.

[610] Rás Málá (New Edition), 154.

[611] The text is:

yah kauberímá turushkamaindrímá tridivápagám
yámyámá vindhyamá sindhum pashcamám yo hásádhayat

[612] It is also interesting, if there is a foundation of fact to the tale, that this is the temple visited by the Persian poet Saádi (A.D. 1200-1230) when he saw the ivory idol of Somanátha whose arms were raised by a hidden priest pulling a cord. According to Saádi on pretence of conversion he was admitted behind the shrine, discovered the cord-puller, threw him into a well, and fled. Compare Journal Royal Asiatic Society Bengal VII.-2 pages 885-886. That Saádi ever visited Somanátha is doubtful. No ivory human image can ever have been the chief object of worship at Somanátha.

[613] From the Prabandhachintámani and the Kumárapálacharita.

[614] The head-quarters of the Dhandhuka sub-division sixty miles south-west of Ahmadábád.

[615] Another reading is Láhiní.

[616] Prabandhachintámani.

[617]

bhavavíjánkurajananá rágádyáh kshayamupágatá yasya .
brahmá vá vishnurvá haro jino vá namastasmai .
yatra tatra samaye yathá tathá yosi sosyabhidhayá yayá tayá .
vítadoshakalushah sa cedbhaváneka eva bhagavannamostu te .

[618] samvat 1229 vaishákhashudi 3 some adyeha shrímadanahillapashthake samastarajávalívirájitamahárájádhirájaparameshvara ajayapáladevakalyánavijayarájye tatpádapadmopajívini mahámátyashrísomeshvare shríkaranádau.

[619] Regarding the remarkable story that not long before their deaths both Hemáchárya and Kumárapála inclined towards if they did not become converts to Islám (Tod's Western India, 184) no fresh information has been obtained. Another curious saying of Tod's (Ditto, 182) also remains doubtful. Kumárapála expelled the tribe of Lár from his kingdom. That this tribe of Lár can have had to do either with Láta or South Gujarát or with the caste of Lád Vánis seems unlikely. The alternative is Pársis from Lar on the Persian Gulf whom Tod (Annals of Rajasthán, I. 235) notices as sending an expedition from Laristhán to Gujarát. In this connection it is worthy of note that Lár remained the seat of a Gueber prince till A.D. 1600 the time of Shah Abas (D'Herbelot Bib. Or. II. 477). A repetition of the Pársi riots (Cambay Gazetteer, VI. 215) may have been the cause of their expulsion from Gujarát.

[620] See the Dvyásraya. A Patan inscription lying at Verával also calls Ajayapála the brother's son of Kumárapála.

[621] It is stated in a grant of Bhíma II. dated S. 1283, that Ajayadeva, as he is there called, made the Sapádalaksha or Sámbhar king tributary. Ind. Ant. VI. 199ff.

[622] The Udayapura inscription mentions Somesvara as the minister of Ajayapála in Samvat 1229 (A.D. 1173). See above page 193.

[623] The abuse of Ajayapála is explained if Tod's statement (Western India, 191) that he became a Musalmán is correct.

[624] Fleet's Kánarese Dynasties, 93.

[625] Chapter II. Verse 57.

[626] We know much less about this event than its importance deserves, for with the exception of a raid made in A.D. 1197 by one of the Ghori generals this victory secured Gujarát from any serious Muhammadan attack for more than a century. We learn from various grants made by Bhímadeva II. (Ind. Ant VI. 195, 198, 200, 201) that Múlarája's regular epithet in the Vamsávalí was "He who overcame in battle the ruler of the Garjjanakas, who are hard to defeat": and Dr. Bühler has pointed out (Ditto, 201) that Garjjanaka is a Sanskritising of the name Ghaznavi. As a matter of fact, however, the leader of the Musalmán army was Muhammad of Ghor, and the battle took place in A.D. 1178 (H. 574). One of the two Muhammadan writers who mentions the invasion (Muhammad 'Ufi, who wrote at Delhi about A.D. 1211) says that Muhammad was at first defeated, but invaded the country a second time two years later "and punished the people for their previous misconduct." But this is only mentioned incidentally as part of an anecdote of Muhammad's equity, and there is some confusion with Muhammad's victory in the second battle of Náráyan (in Jaipur territory) in A.D. 1192, as a better, though slightly later authority, Minháj-us-Siráj, speaks of no second expedition to Gujarát led by Muhammad himself. Minháj-us-Siráj's account of the defeat is as follows (Elliott, II. 294): He (Muhammad) conducted his army by way of Uch and Multán towards Nahrwálá. The Ráí of Nahrwálá, Bhímdeo, was a minor, but he had a large army and many elephants. In the day of battle the Muhammadans were defeated and the Sultán was compelled to retreat. This happened in the year 574 H. (1178 A.D.)". Further on we read (Elliott, II. 300): "In 593 H. (1197 A.D.) he (Muhammad's general Kutb-ud-dín) went towards Nahrwálá, defeated Ráí Bhímdeo, and took revenge on the part of the Sultán." As no conquest of the country is spoken of, this expedition was evidently a mere raid. The only inaccuracy in the account is the mention of Bhíma instead of Múlarája as the king who defeated the first invasion.--(A. M. T. J.)

[627] Sarga II. Verse 47.

[628] Sarga II. Verse 60.

[629] The Vichárasreni also gives S. 1235 as the beginning of his reign.

[630] Elliot's History of India, II. 294. This event properly belongs to the reign of Múlarája. See above page 195 note 5.

[631] Ind. Ant. VI. 207.

[632] Chapter II. Verse 61.

[633] Kielhorn's and Peterson's Reports on Sanskrit Manuscripts.

[634] Ind. Ant. VI. 197.

[635] The text is dattvásmai doshyate yuvarájyam rájyam ciram kuru.

[636] The text is cáhú rána that is cáhumána ránaka. The term Ránaka would show him to be a Chohán chief.

[637] Ánáka survived Kumárapála and served also under Bhímadeva II. Seeing the kingdom of his weak sovereign divided among his ministers and chiefs Ánáka strove till his death to re-establish the central authority of the Solanki dynasty. Káthavate's Kírtikaumudí, xiii.

[638] Rás Málá (New Edition), 200.

[639] Kírtikaumudí, Bombay Sanskrit Series Number XXV.

[640] Ind. Ant. VI. 188 footnote. According to Merutunga a cotemporary chronicler an epigram of Bhíma's minister turned back Subhatavarman.

[641] Ind. Ant. VI. 188.

[642] According to one story Madanarájñí left her husband's house taking Víradhavala with her, and went to live with Deva Rája Pattakíla the husband of her deceased sister. On growing up Víradhavala returned to his father's house. Rás Málá (New Edition), 201.

[643] Dr. Bühler in Ind. Ant. VI. 189.

[644] According to the Kírtikaumudí, Káthavate's Ed. XIV. note 1, under Vastupála low people ceased to earn money by base means; the wicked turned pale; the righteous prospered. All honestly and securely plied their calling. Vastupála put down piracy, and, by building platforms, stopped the mingling of castes in milk shops. He repaired old buildings, planted trees, sank wells, laid out parks, and rebuilt the city. All castes and creeds he treated alike.

[645] Káthavate's Kírtikaumudí, xv.

[646] The use of the date Monday the fullmoon of Vaisakha, Samvat 1288 (A.D. 1232) in the second part of the Forms seems to shew that the work was written in A.D. 1232.

[647] Though the object is to give the form of a treaty of alliance, the author could not have used the names Sinhana and Lavanaprasáda unless such a treaty had been actually concluded between them. Apparently Sinhana's invasion of Gujarát took place but a short time before the book of treaties was compiled. Bhandárkar's Search for Sanskrit Manuscripts (1882-83), 40-41.

[648] Bhandárkar's Search for Sanskrit Manuscripts (1882-83), 40.

[649] According to other accounts Sankha, a Broach chieftain, took up the cause of a certain Sayad or Musalmán merchant with whom Vastupála had quarrelled. In the fight Lunapála a Gola, one of Vastupála's chief supporters, was slain and in his honour Vastupála raised a shrine to the Lord Lunapála. Rás Málá (New Edition), 201-202.

[650] Káthavate's Kírtikaumudí, xv.-xvi.

[651] Káthavate's Kírtikaumudí, xv.-xvi.

[652] The modern Gujaráti Ráná.

[653] Bhímadeva's name is preceded by the names of his ten Chaulukya predecessors in the usual order. The attributes of each are given as in published Chaulukya copperplates. Ind. Ant. VI. 180-213.

[654] Bhandárkar's Search for Sanskrit Manuscripts (1882-83), 39.

[655] Káthavate's Kírtikaumudí, xxiii.

[656] Káthavate's Kírtikaumudí, xxiii.

[657] Káthavate's Kírtikaumudí, xxiii.-xxiv.

[658] Elliot and Dowson, II. 209.

[659] Káthavate's Kírtikaumudí, xxiv.-xxv.

[660] Káthavate's Kírtikaumudí, xx.; J. B. R. A. S. XVIII. Number XLVIII. 28. The Jain writers delight in describing the magnificence of the pilgrimages which Vastupála conducted to the holy places. The details are 4500 carts, 700 palanquins, 1800 camels, 2900 writers, 12,100 white-robed and 1100 naked or sky-clad Jains, 1450 singers, and 3300 bards. Káthavate's Kírtikaumudí, xvi.

[661] Káthavate's Kírtikaumudí, xviii.-xix.

[662] Rás Málá, 202.

[663] Ind. Ant. VI. 191. The word for Mewád is Medapáta the Med or Mher land.

[664] The Karnáta king would probably be Somesvara (A.D. 1252) or his son Narasimha III. (A.D. 1254) of the Hoysala Ballálas of Dvárasamudra. Fleet's Kánarese Dynasties, 64, 69.

[665] These details are mentioned in a grant of land in Mándal in Ahmadábád to Bráhmans to fill a drinking fountain, repair temples, and supply offerings. Ind. Ant. VI. 210-213.

[666] Rás Málá (New Ed.), 212. A Jaina Pattávali or succession list of High-priests notices that the famine lasted for three years from Samvat 1315 (A.D. 1259). The text may be translated as follows: Vikrama Samvat 1315, three years' famine the king (being) Vísaladeva. Bhandarkar's Search for Sanskrit Manuscripts for 1883-84, 15, 323.

[667] See Ep. Ind. I.

[668] The inscription was first noticed by Colonel Tod: Rajasthán, I. 705: Western India, 506.

[669] This is not Sultán Rukn-ud-dín of the slave kings, who ruled from A.D. 1234 to A.D. 1235. Elliot and Dowson, II.

[670] All four dates tally. The middle of A.D. 1264 (Samvat 1320) falls in Hijra 662. As the Valabhi era begins in A.D. 318-319 and the Simha era in A.D. 1113, 945 of Valabhi and 151 of Simha tally with A.D. 1264.

[671] Bombay Government Selections CLII. New Series, 71.

[672] From an unpublished copy in the possession of Ráo Sáheb Dalpatram Pranjiwan Khakhar, late Educational Inspector, Kacch. Only the upper six lines of the inscription are preserved.

[673] Asiatic Researches, XVI. 311; Rás Málá, 213.

[674] Professor Bhandarkar's Report for 1883-84, 17-18.

[675] The bardic story is that king Karna had two Nágar Bráhman ministers Mádhava and Kesava. He slew Kesava and took Mádhava's wife from her husband. In revenge Mádhava went to Delhi and brought the Muhammadans. After the Muhammadan conquest Mádhava presented Alá-ud-dín with 360 horses. In return Mádhava was appointed civil minister with Alaf Khán as military governor commanding a lákh of horsemen, 1500 elephants, 20,000 foot soldiers, and having with him forty-five officers entitled to use kettledrums. Rás Málá, 214.

[676] Rás Málá, 222. The Jhálás were firmly fixed in the plains between the Lesser Ran of Kacch and the Gulf of Cambay. The Koli branches of these clans with other tribes of pure or of adulterated aboriginal descent, spread over the Chunvál near Viramgám and appeared in many remote and inaccessible tracts of hill or forest. On the east, under the protection of a line of Rájput princes, the banner of the goddess Káli floated from the hill of Pávágad; while in the west the descendants of Khengár held their famous fortress of Junágadh from within its walls controlling much of the peninsula over which they had maintained undisputed sway. Chiefs of Junágadh origin were scattered over the rest of the peninsula among whom were the Gohils of Gogo and Piram, and of the sea-washed province which from them derived its name of Gohilvád.

[677] The first notice of the exercise of sovereignty by the Musalmán rulers of Gujarát over lands further south than the neighbourhood of Surat is in A.D. 1428, when king Áhmed I. (A.D. 1412-1443) contested with the Dakhan sovereign the possession of Máhim (north latitude 19° 40'; east longitude 72° 47'). As no record remains of a Musalmán conquest of the coast as far south as Danda Rájapuri or Janjira, about fifty miles south of Bombay, it seems probable that the North Konkan fell to the Musalmáns in A.D. 1297 as part of the recognised territories of the lords of Anahilapura (Pátan). Rás Málá, I. 350. One earlier reference may be noted. In A.D. 1422 among the leading men slain in the battle of Sárangpur, about fifty miles north-east of Ujjain in Central India, was Sávant chief of Danda Rájapuri that is Janjíra. Mirat-i-Sikandari (Persian Text), 40, and Farishtah (Persian Text), II. 468.

[678] The details of Akbar's settlement in A.D. 1583 show Sorath with sixty-three subdivisions and Navánagar (Islámnagar) with seventeen. Similarly in the Áin-i-Akbari (A.D. 1590) Sorath with its nine divisions includes the whole peninsula except Jháláváda in the north, which was then part of Áhmedábád. Gladwin, II. 64 and 66-71.

[679] Bird's History of Gujarát, 418.

[680] Naiyad is the present Naiyadkántha about ten miles south-west of Rádhanpur containing Jatvár and Várahi in the west near the Ran and spreading east to Sami and Munjpur thirty to forty miles south-west of Pátan. Hálár is in the north-west of the peninsula; Káthiáváda in the centre; Gohilváda in the south-east; Bábriáváda south-west of Gohilváda; Chorár or Chorvár north-west of Virával; Panchál in the north-east centre; Okhágir or Okhámandal in the extreme west. Nalkántha is the hollow between Káthiáváda and the mainland. Besides these names the author of the Mirat-i-Áhmedi gives one more district in Sorath and others in Gujarát. The name he gives in Sorath is Nágher or Nághír which he says is also called Sálgogah. Sálgogah is apparently Siálbet and its neighbourhood, as Kodinár, Mádhúpúr, Chingaria, and Pata in south Káthiáváda are still locally known as Nagher, a tract famous for its fruitfulness. The Mirat-i-Áhmedi contains the following additional local names: For Kadi thirty-five miles north-west of Áhmedábád, Dandái; for Dholka twenty-five miles south-west of Áhmedábád, Práth-Nagri; for Cambay, Támbánagri; for Víramgám forty miles north-west of Áhmedábád, Jháláwár; for Múnjpur twenty-two miles south-east of Rádhanpur and some of the country between it and Patan, Párpas; for the tract ten miles south-east of Rádhanpur to the neighbourhood of Pátan, Kakrez; for the town of Rádhanpur in the Pálanpur Political Superintendency and its neighbourhood, Vágadh; for the town of Pálanpur and its neighbourhood up to Dísa and Dántiváda, Dhándár; for Bálásinor forty-two miles east of Áhmedábád with a part of Kapadvanj in the Kaira district, Masálwada; for Baroda, Párkher; for the subdivision of Jambúsar in the Broach district fifteen miles north-west of Broach city, Kánam; for Alimohan that is Chhota Udepur and the rough lands east of Godhra, Pálwára.

[681] Rás Mála, I. 241.

[682] Maktaa and iktáa, the district administered by a muktia, come from the Arabic root kataá, he cut, in allusion to the public revenue or the lands cut and apportioned for the pay of the officers and their establishments.

[683] Further particulars regarding these village headmen are given below.

[684] Bird's History of Gujarát, 192; Mirat-i-Sikandari, Persian Text, 44.

[685] Elphinstone's History, 76.

[686] In Márwár and in the north and north-east this official was styled tahsíldár and in the Dakhan kamávísdár.

[687] Zakát, literally purification or cleansing, is the name of a tax levied from Muslims for charitable purposes or religious uses. In the endowments-treasury the customs dues from Muslims at 2 1/2 per cent (the technical 1 in 40) as contrasted with the five per cent levied from infidels (the technical 2 in 40) were entered. Hence in these accounts zakát corresponds with customs dues, and is divisible into two kinds khushki zakát or land customs and tari zakát or sea customs.

[688] Bird's History of Gujarát, 93. Though under the Mughal viceroys the state demand was at first realized in grain, at the last the custom was to assess each sub-division, and probably each village, at a fixed sum or jama. The total amount for the sub-division was collected by an officer called majmudár, literally keeper of collections, the village headmen, patels or mukaddams, being responsible each for his own village.

[689] Bird's History of Gujarát, 325.

[690] Bird's History of Gujarát, 341.

[691] Mirat-i-Áhmedi Persian Text page 115.

[692] The title rája is applicable to the head of a family only. The payment of tribute to the Mughals or Maráthás does not affect the right to use this title. Rána and ráv seem to be of the same dignity as rája. Rával is of lower rank. The sons of rájás, ránás, rávs, and rávals are called kuvars and their sons thákurs. The younger sons of thákurs became bhumiás that is landowners or garásiás, that is owners of garás or a mouthful. Jám is the title of the chiefs of the Jádeja tribe both of the elder branch in Kachh and of the younger branch in Navánagar, or Little Kachh in Káthiáváda. Rás Málá, II. 277.

[693] Under the Maráthás the title zamíndár was bestowed on the farmers of the land revenue, and this practice was adopted by the earlier English writers on Gujarát. In consequence of this change small landholders of the superior class, in directly administered districts, came again to be called by their original Hindu name of garásia. Mr. Elphinstone (History, 79 and note 13) includes under the term zamíndár: (1) half-subdued chieftains, (2) independent governors of districts, and (3) farmers of revenue. He also notices that until Aurangzíb's time such chiefs as enjoyed some degree of independence were alone called zamíndárs. But in Colonel Walker's time, A.D. 1805, at least in Gujarát (Bombay Government Selections, XXXIX. 25) the term zamíndár included desáis, majmudárs (district accountants), patels, and talátis (village clerks).

[694] Details of A.D. 1571 given in the Mirat-i-Áhmedi show that the chief nobles were bound to furnish cavalry contingents varying from 4000 to 25,000 horse, and held lands estimated to yield yearly revenues of £160,000 to £1,620,000. Bird's Gujarát, 109-127.

[695] According to the European travellers in India during the seventeenth century, provincial governors, and probably to some extent all large holders of service lands, employed various methods for adding to the profits which the assigned lands were meant to yield them. Of these devices two seem to have been specially common, the practice of supporting a body of horse smaller than the number agreed for, and the practice of purveyance that is of levying supplies without payment. Sir Thomas Roe, from A.D. 1615 to 1618 English ambassador at the court of the emperor Jehángír, gives the following details of these irregular practices: 'The Pátan (that is Patna in Bengal) viceroy's government was estimated at 5000 horse, the yearly pay of each trooper being £20 (Rs. 200), of which he kept only 1500, being allowed the surplus as dead pay. On one occasion this governor wished to present me with 100 loaves of the finest sugar, as white as snow, each loaf weighing fifty pounds. On my declining, he said, 'You refuse these loaves, thinking I am poor; but being made in my government the sugar costs me nothing, as it comes to me gratis.' Sir Thomas Roe in Kerr's Voyages, IX. 282-284. The same writer, the best qualified of the English travellers of that time to form a correct opinion, thus describes the administration of the Musalmán governors of the seventeenth century: 'They practise every kind of tyranny against the natives under their jurisdiction, oppressing them with continual exactions, and are exceedingly averse from any way being opened by which the king may be informed of their infamous proceedings. They grind the people under their government to extract money from them, often hanging men up by the heels to make them confess that they are rich, or to ransom themselves from faults merely imputed with a view to fleece them.' Sir Thomas Roe in Kerr's Voyages, IX. 338.

[696] Of these settlements the principal was that of the Ráthod chief who in the thirteenth century established himself at Ídar, now one of the states of the Mahi Kántha. In the thirteenth century also, Gohils from the north and Sodha Parmárs and Káthis from Sindh entered Gujarát. Rás Mála, II. 269.

[697] Gujarát of about the year A.D. 1300 is thus described: 'The air of Gujarát is healthy, and the earth picturesque; the vineyards bring forth blue grapes twice a year, and the strength of the soil is such that the cotton plants spread their branches like willow and plane trees, and yield produce for several years successively. Besides Cambay, the most celebrated of the cities of Hind in population and wealth, there are 70,000 towns and villages, all populous, and the people abounding in wealth and luxuries.' Elliot's History of India, III. 31, 32, and 43. Marco Polo, about A.D. 1292, says: 'In Gujarát there grows much pepper and ginger and indigo. They have also a great deal of cotton. Their cotton trees are of very great size, growing full six paces high, and attaining to an age of twenty years.' Yule's Edition, II. 328. The cotton referred to was probably the variety known as devkapás Gossypium religiosum or peruvianum, which grows from ten to fifteen feet high, and bears for several years. Royle, 149-150.

[698] Elphinstone's History, 762.

[699] Bird's History of Gujarát, 110, 129, and 130.

[700] The passage from the Mirat-i-Áhmedi, Bird 109, is: 'A sum of 25 lákhs of húns and one kror of ibráhíms, that were two parts greater, being altogether nearly equal to 5 krors and 62 lákhs of rupees, was collected from the Dakhan tribute and the customs of the European and Arab ports.' The word hún, from an old Karnátak word for gold, is the Musalmán name for the coin known among Hindus as varáha or the wild-boar coin, and among the Portuguese as the pagoda or temple coin. Prinsep Ind. Ant. Thomas' Ed. II. U. T. 18. The old specimens of this coin weigh either 60 grains the máda or half pagoda, or 120 grains the hún or full pagoda. Thomas, Chron. Pat. Ks. II. 224, note. The star pagoda, in which English accounts at Madras were formerly kept, weighs 52·56 grains, and was commonly valued at 8s. or Rs. 4 (Prinsep as above). At this rate in the present sum the 25 lákhs of húns would equal one kror (100 lákhs) of rupees. The ibráhími, 'two parts greater than the hún,' would seem to be a gold coin, perhaps a variety of the Persian ashrafi (worth about 9s. English. Marsden, N. O. 455). Taking the two parts of a hún as fánams or sixteenths, this would give the ibráhími a value of Rs. 4 1/4, and make a total customs revenue of 425 lákhs of rupees. This statement of the revenues of the kingdom is, according to the author of the Mirat-i-Áhmedi, taken from such times as the power of the Gujarát kings continued to increase. The total revenue of the twenty-five districts (£5,840,000) is the amount recovered in the year A.D. 1571. But the receipts under the head of Tribute must have been compiled from accounts of earlier years. For, as will be seen below, the neighbouring kings ceased to pay tribute after the end of the reign of Bahádur (A.D. 1536). Similarly the customs revenues entered as received from Daman and other places must have been taken from the accounts of some year previous to A.D. 1560.

[701] The remains at Chámpáner in the British district of the Panch Maháls are well known. Of Mehmúdábád, the town of that name in the district of Kaira, eighteen miles south of Áhmedábád, a few ruins only are left. In A.D. 1590 this city is said to have contained many grand edifices surrounded with a wall eleven miles (7 kos) square with at every 3/4 mile (1/2 kos) a pleasure house, and an enclosure for deer and other game. (Áin-i-Akbari: Gladwin, II. 64.) The Mirat-i-Áhmedi makes no special reference to the sovereign's share of the revenue. The greater part of the £5,620,000 derived from tribute and customs would probably go to the king, besides the lands specially set apart as crown domains, which in A.D. 1571 were returned as yielding a yearly revenue of £900,000 (900,000,000 tankás). This would bring the total income of the crown to a little more than 6 1/2 millions sterling.

[702] So Sikandar Lodi emperor of Dehli, A.D. 1488-1517, is reported to have said: 'The magnificence of the kings of Dehli rests on wheat and barley; the magnificence of the kings of Gujarát rests on coral and pearls.' Bird, 132.

[703] The twelve Gujarát ports mentioned by Barbosa are: On the south coast of the peninsula, two: Patenixi (Pátan-Somnáth, now Verával), very rich and of great trade; Surati-Mangalor (Mangrul), a town of commerce, and Diu. On the shores of the gulf of Cambay four: Gogari (Gogha), a large town; Barbesy (Broach); Guandári or Gandar (Gandhár), a very good town; and Cambay. On the western coast five: Ravel (Ránder), a rich place; Surat, a city of very great trade; Denvy (Gandevi), a place of great trade; Baxay (Bassein), a good seaport in which much goods are exchanged; and Tanamayambu (Thána-Máhim), a town of great Moorish mosques, but of little trade. (Stanley's Barbosa, 59-68). The only one of these ports whose identification seems doubtful is Ravel, described by Barbosa (page 67) as a pretty town of the Moors on a good river, twenty leagues south of Gandhár. This agrees with the position of Ránder on the Tápti, nearly opposite Surat, which appears in Al Bírúni (A.D. 1030) as Ráhanur one of the capitals of south Gujarát and is mentioned under the name Ránir, both in the Áin-i-Akbari (A.D. 1590) and in the Mirat-i-Áhmedi for the year A.D. 1571, as a place of trade, 'in ancient times a great city.' In his description of the wealth of Cambay, Barbosa is supported by the other European travellers of the fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries. According to Nicolo de Conti (A.D. 1420-1444), the town, including its suburbs, was twelve miles in circuit abounding in spikenard, lac, indigo, myrobalans, and silk. Athanasius Nikotin (A.D. 1468-1474) found it a manufacturing place for every sort of goods as long gowns damasks and blankets; and Varthema (A.D. 1503-1508) says it abounds in grain and very good fruits, supplying Africa Arabia and India with silk and cotton stuffs; 'it is impossible to describe its excellence.' Barbosa's account of Áhmedábád is borne out by the statement in the Áin-i-Akbari (Gladwin, II. 63) that the whole number of the suburbs (purás) of the city was 360, and in the Mirat-i-Áhmedi, that it once contained 380 suburbs each of considerable size, containing good buildings and markets filled with everything valuable and rare, so that each was almost a city. Bird, 311.

[704] Gladwin's Áin-i-Akbari, II. 62-63. Compare Terry (Voyage, 80, 131) in 1615: Gujarát a very goodly large and exceeding rich province with, besides its most spacious populous and rich capital Áhmedábád, four fair cities Cambay Baroda Broach and Surat with great trade to the Red Sea, Achin, and other places. At the same time (Ditto, 179-180) though the villages stood very thick, the houses were generally very poor and base, all set close together some with earthen walls and flat roofs, most of them cottages miserably poor little and base set up with sticks rather than timber.