CHAPTER 5
=Jaisalmer a Mughal Fief.=—We have now reached that period in the Bhatti annals when Shah Jahan was emperor of India. Elsewhere, we have minutely related the measure which the great Akbar adopted to attach his Rajput vassalage to the empire; a policy pursued by his successors. Sabal Singh, the first of the princes of Jaisalmer who held his dominions as a fief of the empire, was not the legitimate heir to the ‘_gaddi_ of Jaisal [262].’[7.5.1] Manohardas had obtained the _gaddi_ by the assassination of his nephew, Rawal Nathu, the son and heir of Bhim, who was returning from his nuptials at Bikaner, and had passed the day at Phalodi,[7.5.2] then a town of Jaisalmer, when poison was administered to him by the hands of a female. But it was destined that the line of the assassin should not rule, and the dignity fell to Sabal Singh, the third in descent from Maldeo, second son of Rawal Nunkaran.
=Rāwal Sabal Singh, A.D. 1651-61.=—The good qualities of young Sabal, and the bad ones of Ramchand, son of the usurper, afforded another ground for the preference of the former. Moreover, Sabal was nephew to the prince of Amber, under whom he held a distinguished post in the government of Peshawar, where he saved the royal treasure from being captured by the Afghan mountaineers. For this service, and being a favourite of the chiefs who served with their contingents, the king gave Jaswant Singh of Jodhpur command to place him on the _gaddi_. The celebrated Nahar Khan Kumpawat[7.5.3] was entrusted with this duty, for the performance of which he received the city and domain of Pokaran, ever since severed from Jaisalmer.
=Pokaran lost to Jaisalmer.=—This was the first considerable abstraction from the territories which had been progressively increased by Rawal Jaisal and his successors, but which have since been woefully curtailed. A short time before Babur’s invasion, the dependencies of Jaisalmer extended on the north to the Gara River,[7.5.4] west to the Mihran or Indus; and on the east and south they were bounded by the Rathors of Bikaner and Marwar who had been gradually encroaching for two centuries, and continue to do so to this day. The entire _thal_ of Barmer and Kotra,[7.5.5] in the south, were Bhatti chieftainships, and eastward to the site of Bikaner itself.
=Rāwal Amār Singh, A.D. 1661-1702.=—Amra Singh, son of Sabal, succeeded. He led the _tika-daur_ against the Balochs, who had invaded the western tracts, and was installed on the field of victory. Soon after, he demanded aid from his subjects to portion his daughter, and being opposed by his Rajput minister, Raghunath, he put him to death. The Chana Rajputs, from the north-east, having renewed their old raids, he in person attacked and compelled them to give bonds, or written obligations, for their future good conduct.
Provoked by the daily encroachments of the Kandhalot Rathors, Sundardas and Dalpat, chiefs of Bikampur, determined to retaliate: “let us get a name in the [263] world,” said Dalpat, “and attack the lands of the Rathors.” Accordingly, they invaded, plundered, and fired the town of Jaju, on the Bikaner frontier. The Kandhalots retaliated on the towns of Jaisalmer, and an action took place, in which the Bhattis were victorious, slaying two hundred of the Rathors. The Rawal partook in the triumph of his vassals. Raja Anup Singh[7.5.6] of Bikaner was then serving with the imperial armies in the Deccan. On receiving this account, he commanded his minister to issue a summons to every Kandhalot capable of carrying arms to invade Jaisalmer, and take and raze Bikampur, or he would consider them traitors. The minister issued the summons; every Rathor obeyed it, and he added, as an auxiliary, a Pathan chief with his band from Hissar. Rawal Amra collected his Bhattis around him, and instead of awaiting the attack, advanced to meet it; he slew many of the chiefs, burnt the frontier towns, and recovered Pugal, forcing the Rathor chiefs of Barmer and Kotra to renew their engagements of fealty and service.
Amra had eight sons, and was succeeded by Jaswant, the eldest, in S. 1758 (A.D. 1702), whose daughter was married to the heir-apparent of Mewar.
* * * * *
Here ends the chronicle, of which the foregoing is an abstract: the concluding portion of the annals is from a MS. furnished by a living chronicler, corrected by other information. It is but a sad record of anarchy and crime.
Soon after the death of Rawal Amra, Pugal, Barmer, Phalodi, and various other towns and territories in Jaisalmer, were wrested from this State by the Rathors.[7.5.7]
The territory bordering the Gara was taken by Daud Khan, an Afghan chieftain from Shikarpur, and it became the nucleus of a State called after himself, Daudputra.[7.5.8]
=Rāwal Jaswant Singh, A.D. 1702-22.=—Jaswant Singh succeeded. He had five sons, Jagat Singh, who committed suicide, Isari Singh, Tej Singh, Sardar Singh, and Sultan Singh. Jagat Singh had three sons, Akhai Singh, Budh Singh, and Zorawar Singh.
=Rāwal Akhai Singh, A.D. 1722-62.=—Akhai Singh succeeded. Budh Singh died of the smallpox; Tej Singh, uncle to the Rawal, usurped the government, and the princes fled to Delhi to save their lives. At this period, their grand-uncle, Hari Singh (brother of Rawal Jaswant), was serving the king, and he returned in order to displace the usurper. It is customary for the [264] prince of Jaisalmer to go annually in state to the lake Gharsisar, to perform the ceremony of _Las_, or clearing away the accumulation of mud and sand.[7.5.9] The Raja first takes out a handful, when rich and poor follow his example. Hari Singh chose the time when this ceremony was in progress to attack the usurper. The attempt did not altogether succeed; but Tej Singh was so severely wounded that he died, and was succeeded by his son,
Sawai Singh, an infant of three years of age. Akhai Singh collected the Bhattis from all quarters, stormed the castle, put the infant to death, and regained his rights.
Akhai Singh ruled forty years. During this reign, Bahawal Khan, son of Daud Khan, took Derawar, and all the tract of Khadal, the first Bhatti conquest, and added it to his new State of Bahawalpur, or Daudputra.
=Rāwal Mūlrāj, A.D. 1762-1820. Conspiracy against Mūlrāj.=—Mulraj succeeded in S. 1818 (A.D. 1762). He had three sons, Rae Singh, Jeth Singh, and Man Singh. The unhappy choice of a minister by Mulraj completed the demoralization of the Bhatti principality. This minister was named Sarup Singh, a Bania of the Jain faith and Mehta family, destined to be the exterminators of the laws and fortunes of the ‘sons of Jaisal.’ The cause of hatred and revenge of this son of commerce to the Bhatti aristocracy arose out of a disgraceful dispute regarding a Bakhtan, a fair frail one, a favourite of the Mehta, but who preferred the Rajput, Sardar Singh, of the tribe of Aef.[7.5.10] The Bhatti chief carried his complaint of the minister to the heir-apparent, Rae Singh, who had also cause of grievance in the reduction of his income. It was suggested to the prince to put this presumptuous minister to death; this was effected by the prince’s own hand, in his father’s presence; and as the Mehta, in falling, clung to Mulraj for protection, it was proposed to take off Mulraj at the same time. The proposition, however, was rejected with horror by the prince, whose vengeance was satisfied. The Rawal was allowed to escape to the female apartments; but the chieftains, well knowing they could not expect pardon from the Rawal, insisted on investing Rae Singh, and if he refused, on placing his brother on the _gaddi_. The _an_ of Rae Singh was proclaimed; but no entreaty or threat would induce him to listen to the proposal of occupying the throne; in lieu of which he used a pallet (khat). Three months and five days had passed since the deposal and bondage of Mulraj, when a female resolved to emancipate him: this female was the wife of the chief conspirator, and confidential adviser of the regent prince. This noble dame, a Rathor Rajputni, of the Malecha clan, was the wife of Anup Singh of Jinjiniali, the premier noble of Jaisalmer, and who, wearied with the tyranny of the minister and the weakness of his [265] prince, had proposed the death of the one and the deposal of the other. We are not made acquainted with any reason, save that of Swamidharma, or ‘fealty,’ which prompted the Rathorni to rescue her prince even at the risk of her husband’s life; but her appeal to her son Zorawar, to perform his duty, is preserved, and we give it verbatim: “Should your father oppose you, sacrifice him to your duty, and I will mount the pyre with his corpse.” The son yielded obedience to the injunction of his magnanimous parent, who had sufficient influence to gain over Arjun, the brother of her husband, as well as Megh Singh, chief of Baru. The three chieftains forced an entrance into the prison where their prince was confined, who refused to be released from his manacles, until he was told that the Mahechi had promoted the plot for his liberty. The sound of the grand nakkara, proclaiming Mulraj’s repossession of the _gaddi_, awoke his son from sleep; and on the herald depositing at the side of his pallet the sable _saropa_,[7.5.11] and all the insignia of exile—the black steed and black vestments—the prince, obeying the command of the emancipated Rawal, clad himself therein, and accompanied by his party, bade adieu to Jaisalmer and took the road to Kotra. When he arrived at this town, on the southern frontier of the State, the chiefs proposed to “run the country”; but he replied, “the country was his mother, and every Rajput his foe who injured it.” He repaired to Jodhpur, but the chieftains abided about Sheo Kotra and Barmer, and during the twelve years they remained outlaws, plundered even to the gates of Jaisalmer. In the first three years they devastated the country, their castles were dismantled, the wells therein filled up, and their estates sequestrated. At the end of the twelve, having made the _talak_, or oath against further plunder, their estates were restored, and they were readmitted into their country.
The banished prince remained two years and a half with Raja Bijai Singh, who treated him like a son. But he carried his arrogant demeanour with him to Jodhpur; for one day, as he was going out to hunt, a Bania, to whom he was indebted, seized his horse by the bridle, and invoking the _an_ of Bijai Singh, demanded payment of his debt. The prince, in turn, required him, with the invocation “by Mulraj!” to unloose his hold. But the man of wealth, disregarding the appeal, insolently replied, “What is Mulraj to me?” It was the last word he spoke; the sword of Rae Singh was unsheathed, and the Bania’s head rolled on the ground: then, turning his horse’s [266] head to Jaisalmer, he exclaimed, “Better be a slave at once than live on the bounty of another.” His unexpected arrival outside his native city brought out the entire population to see him. His father, the Rawal, sent to know what had occasioned his presence, and he replied that it was merely preparatory to pilgrimage. He was refused admittance; his followers were disarmed, and he was sent to reside at the fortress of Dewa, together with his sons Abhai Singh and Dhonkal Singh, and their families.
=Sālim Singh, Prime Minister.=—Salim Singh, who succeeded his father as prime minister of Jaisalmer, was but eleven years of age at the time of his murder. His young mind appears, even at that early age, to have been a hotbed for revenge; and the seeds which were sown soon quickened into a luxuriance rarely equalled even in those regions, where human life is held in little estimation. Without any of that daring valour which distinguishes the Rajput, he overcame, throughout a long course of years, all who opposed him, uniting the subtlety of the serpent to the ferocity of the tiger. In person he was effeminate, in speech bland; pliant and courteous in demeanour; promising, without hesitation, and with all the semblance of sincerity, what he never had the most remote intention to fulfil. Salim, or, as he was generally designated by his tribe, the Mehta, was a signal instance of a fact of which these annals exhibit too many examples, namely, the inadequacy of religious professions, though of a severe character, as a restraint on moral conduct; for though the tenets of his faith (the Jain) imperatively prescribe the necessity of “hurting no sentient being,” and of sitting in the dark rather than, by luring a moth into the flame of a lamp, incur the penalty attached to the sin of insect-murder, this man has sent more of ‘the sons of Jassa’ to Yamaloka[7.5.12] than the sword of their external foes during his long administration. He had scarcely attained man’s estate when the outlawed chiefs were restored to their estates by a singular intervention. Raja Bhim Singh had acceded to the _gaddi_ of Marwar, and the Mehta was chosen by the prince of Jaisalmer, as his representative, to convey his congratulations, and the _tika_ of acknowledgment on his succession, to Raja Bijai Singh. On his return from this mission, he was waylaid and captured by the outlawed chieftains, who instantly passed sentence of death upon the author of their miseries. The sword was uplifted, when, “placing his turban at the feet of Zorawar Singh,” he implored his protection—and he found it! Such is the Rajput—an anomaly amongst his species; his character a compound of the opposite and antagonistical qualities which impel mankind to virtue and to crime. Let me recall to the mind of the reader that the protector of this vampire [267] was the virtuous son of the virtuous Rajputni who, with an elevation of mind equal to whatever is recorded of Greek or Roman heroines, devoted herself, and a husband whom she loved, to the one predominant sentiment of the Rajput, Swamidharma, or ‘fealty to the sovereign.’ Yet had the wily Mehta effected the disgrace of this brave chief, to whom the Rawal owed his release from bondage and restoration to his throne, and forced him to join the outlaws amidst the sand-hills of Barmer. Nothing can paint more strongly the influence of this first of the Bhatti chiefs over his brethren than the act of preserving the life of their mortal foe, thus cast into their hands; for not only did they dissuade him from the act, but prophesied his repentance of such mistaken clemency. Only one condition was stipulated, their restoration to their homes. They were recalled, but not admitted to court: a distinction reserved for Zorawar alone.
=Death of Rāe Singh.=—When Rae Singh was incarcerated in Dewa, his eldest son, Abhai Singh, Rajkumar, ‘heir-apparent,’ with the second son, Dhonkal, were left at Barmer, with the outlawed chiefs. The Rawal, having in vain demanded his grandchildren, prepared an army and invested Barmer. It was defended during six months, when a capitulation was acceded to, and the children were given up to Mulraj on the bare pledge of Zorawar Singh, who guaranteed their safety; and they were sent to the castle of Dewa, where their father was confined. Soon after, the castle was fired, and Rae Singh and his wife were consumed in the flames. On escaping this danger, which was made to appear accidental, the young princes were confined in the fortress of Ramgarh, in the most remote corner of the desert, bordering the valley of Sind, for their security and that of the Rawal (according to the Mehta’s account), and to prevent faction from having a nucleus around which to form. But Zorawar, who entertained doubts of the minister’s motives, reminded the Rawal that the proper place for the heir-apparent was the court, and that his honour stood pledged for his safety. This was sufficient for the Mehta, whose mind was instantly intent upon the means to rid himself of so conscientious an adviser. Zorawar had a brother named Ketsi, whose wife, according to the courtesy of Rajwara, had adopted the minister as her brother. Salim sounded his adopted sister as to her wish to see her husband become lord of Jinjiniali. The tempter succeeded: he furnished her with poisoned comfits, which she administered to the gallant Zorawar; and her lord was inducted into the estates of Jinjiniali. Having thus disposed of the soul of the Bhatti nobility, he took off in detail the chiefs of Baru, Dangri, and many others, chiefly by the same means, though some by [268] the dagger. Ketsi, who, whether innocent or a guilty participant in his brother’s death, had benefited thereby, was marked in the long list of proscription of this fiend, who determined to exterminate every Rajput of note. Ketsi knew too much, and those connected with him shared in this dangerous knowledge: wife, brother, son, were therefore destined to fall by the same blow. The immediate cause of enmity was as follows. The minister, who desired to set aside the claims of the children of Rae Singh to the _gaddi_, and to nominate the youngest son of Mulraj as heir-apparent, was opposed by Ketsi, as it could only be effected by the destruction of the former; and he replied, that “no co-operation of his should sanction the spilling of the blood of any of his master’s family.” Salim treasured up the remembrance of this opposition to his will, though without any immediate sign of displeasure. Soon after, Ketsi and his brother Sarup were returning from a nuptial ceremony at Kanera, in the district of Balotra. On reaching Bhikarai, on the Jaisalmer frontier, where the ministers of the Mehta’s vengeance were posted, the gallant Zorawar and his brother were conducted into the castle, out of which their bodies were brought only to be burnt. Hearing of some intended evil to her lord, Ketsi’s wife, with her infant son, Megha, sought protection in the minister’s own abode, where she had a double claim, as his adopted sister, to sanctuary and protection. For five days, the farce was kept up of sending food for herself and child; but the slave who conveyed it remarking, in coarse, unfeeling language, that both her husband and her brother were with their fathers, she gave a loose to grief and determined on revenge. This being reported to the Mehta, he sent a dagger for her repose.
The princes, Abhai Singh and Dhonkal Singh, confined in the fortress of Ramgarh, soon after the murder of Ketsi were carried off, together with their wives and infants, by poison. The murderer then proclaimed Gaj Singh, the youngest but one of all the posterity of Mulraj, as heir-apparent. His brothers sought security in flight from this fiend-like spirit of the minister, and are now refugees in the Bikaner territory. The following slip from the genealogical tree will show the branches so unmercifully lopped off by this monster:
Mulraj. │ ┌─────────────────┼─────────────────────┐ │ │ │ Rae Singh, Jeth Singh (_kana_), Man Singh, poisoned. living. killed by a fall from his horse. │ │ │ ├───────┐ │ ┌───────┬─────┼────────┐ Abhai Singh, │ Maha Singh, │ Devi Singh, │ Fateh Singh, poisoned. │ blind. │ in exile. │ in exile. │ │ │ Dhonkal Singh, Tej Singh, Gaj Singh, poisoned. in exile. reigning prince.
[269.]
Maha Singh, being blind of one eye[7.5.13] (_kana_), could not succeed; and Man Singh being killed by a fall from his horse, the Mehta was saved the crime of adding one more “mortal murther to his crown.”
=Long Reigns of Rājput Princes.=—It is a singular fact, that the longest reigns we know of in Rajwara occurred during ministerial usurpations. The late Maharao of Kotah occupied the _gaddi_ upwards of half a century, and the Rawal Mulraj swayed the nominal sceptre of this _oasis_ of the desert upwards of fifty-eight years. His father ruled forty years, and I doubt whether, in all history, we can find another instance of father and son reigning for a century.[7.5.14] This century was prolific in change to the dynasty, whose whole history is full of strange vicissitudes. If we go back to Jaswant Singh, the grandfather of Mulraj, we find the Bhatti principality touching the Gara on the north, which divided it from Multan; on the west it was bounded by the Panjnad, and thus included a narrow slip of the fertile valley of Sind; and we have seen it stretch, at no remote period, even to the ancient capital Mansura, better known to the Hindu as Rori-Bakhar,[7.5.15] the islandic capital of the Sogdoi (Sodha) of Alexander. To the south, it rested on Dhat, including the castles of Sheo, Kotra, and Barmer, seized on by Marwar; and in the east embraced the districts of Phalodi, Pokaran, and other parts, also in the possession of Marwar or Bikaner. The whole of the State of Bahawalpur is formed out of the Bhatti dominion, and the Rathors have obtained therefrom not a small portion of their western frontier. This abstraction of territory will account for the heartburnings and border-feuds which continually break out between the Bhattis and Rathors, and ‘the children of David (Daudputras).’
Could the same prophetic steel which carved upon the pillar of Brahmsar the destinies of the grandson of the deified Hari, eleven hundred years before Christ, have subjoined to that of Jaisal the fate which awaited his descendant Mulraj, he would doubtless have regarded the prophecy as conveying a falsehood too gross for belief. That the offspring of the deified prince of Dwarka, who founded Ghazni, and fought the [270] united kings of Syria and Bactria, should, at length, be driven back on India, and compelled to seek shelter under the sign of the cross, reared amidst their sand-hills by a handful of strangers, whose ancestors, when they were even in the maturity of their fame, were wandering in their native woods, with painted bodies, and offering human sacrifices to the sun-god—more resembling Balsiva than Balkrishna—these would have seemed prodigies too wild for faith.
-----
Footnote 7.5.1:
Nunkaran had three sons, Harraj, Maldeo, and Kalyandas; each had issue. Harraj had Bhim (who succeeded his grandfather Nunkaran). Maldeo had Ketsi, who had Dayaldas, father of Sabal Singh, to whom was given in appanage the town of Mandila, near Pokaran. The third son, Kalyandas, had Manohardas, who succeeded Bhim. Ramchand was the son of Manohardas. A slip from the genealogical tree will set this in a clear light.
1. Nunkaran │ ┌─────────────┼─────────────┐ │ │ │ Harraj. Maldeo. Kalyandas. | | │ 2. Bhim. Ketsi. 3. Manohardas. │ │ │ Nathu. Dayaldas. Ramchand. │ 4. Sabal Singh.
Footnote 7.5.2:
[About 75 miles N.W. of Jodhpur city.]
Footnote 7.5.3:
Another synchronism (see Annals of Marwar for an account of Nahar Khan) of some value, since it accounts for the first abstraction of territory by the Rathors from the Bhattis.
Footnote 7.5.4:
The Gara is invariably called the Bias in the chronicle. Gara, or Ghara, is so called, in all probability, from the mud (_gar_) suspended in its waters. The Gara is composed of the waters of the Bias and Sutlej. [See _IGI_, vii. 139, xxiii. 179.]
Footnote 7.5.5:
[About 60 miles S. of Jaisalmer city.]
Footnote 7.5.6:
[A.D. 1669-95.]
Footnote 7.5.7:
The most essential use to which my labours can be applied is that of enabling the British Government, when called upon to exercise its functions, as protector and arbitrator of the international quarrels of Rajputana, to understand the legitimate and original grounds of dispute. Here we perceive the germ of the border-feuds, which have led to so much bloodshed between Bikaner and Jaisalmer, in which the former was the first aggressor; but as the latter, for the purpose of redeeming her lost territory, most frequently appeals as the agitator of public tranquillity, it is necessary to look for the remote cause in pronouncing our award.
Footnote 7.5.8:
[Bahāwalpur.]
Footnote 7.5.9:
[Lāsa, ‘anything clammy,’ like mud. This is a common pious act, performed at sacred tanks, and by some castes, like the Idaiyans of Madras, at marriages (_North Indian Notes and Queries_, ii. 111; Thurston, _Tribes and Castes of S. India_, i. 360 f.).]
Footnote 7.5.10:
[This tribe has not been traced.]
Footnote 7.5.11:
_Saropa_ is the Rajput term for khilat, and is used by those who, like the Rana of Udaipur, prefer the vernacular dialect to the corrupt jargon of the Islamite. _Sar-o-pa_ (from ‘head,’ _sar_, to ‘foot,’ _pa_) means a complete dress; in short, _cap-à-pied_. [See Yule, _Hobson-Jobson_, 2nd ed. 808.]
Footnote 7.5.12:
Pluto’s realm.
Footnote 7.5.13:
A person blind of one eye is incompetent to succeed, according to Hindu law. Kana is the nickname given to a person labouring under this personal defect, which term is merely an anagram of _ânka_, ‘the eye.’ [This is wrong. It is derived from Skt. _kāna_, ‘one-eyed’.] The loss of an eye does not deprive an occupant of his rights—of which we had a curious example in the siege of the imperial city of Delhi, which gave rise to the remark, that the three greatest men therein had only the complement of one man amongst them: the emperor had been deprived of both eyes by the brutality of Ghulam Kadir; the besieging chief Holkar was kana, as was the defender, Sir D. Ochterlony. Holkar’s name has become synonymous with kana, and many a horse, dog, and man, blind of an eye, is called after this celebrated Mahratta leader. The Hindus, by what induction I know not, attach a degree of moral obliquity to every individual kana, and appear to make no distinction between the natural and the acquired defect; though to all kanas they apply another and more dignified appellation, Sukracharya [the regent of the planet Venus], the Jupiter of their astromythology, which very grave personage came by his misfortune in no creditable way—for, although the Guru, or spiritual head of the Hindu gods, he set as bad a moral example to them as did the classical Jupiter to the tenants of the Greek and Roman Pantheon.
Footnote 7.5.14:
[Ummed Singh of Kotah, A.D. 1771-1819; Mūlrāj of Jaisalmer, 1762-1820; Akhai Singh of Jaisalmer, 1722-62.]
Footnote 7.5.15:
Mansura was many miles south of Bakhar.
-----
##