Chapter X

. below.

[301] Ind. Ant. XI. 306.

[302] Ind. Ant. VI. 13.

[303] Kávyamidam rachitam mayá Valabhyám, Srí Dharasena-narendra pálitáyám.

[304] Ind. Ant. VII. 76.

[305] Journ. Beng. A. S. IV. and an unpublished grant in the museum of the B. B. R. A. Soc.

[306] Ind. Ant. XI. 305.

[307] Since his authorities mention the destroyers of Valabhi under the vague term mlechchhas or barbarians and since the era in which they date the overthrow may be either the Vikrama B.C. 57, the Saka A.D. 78, or the Valabhi A.D. 319, Tod is forced to offer many suggestions. His proposed dates are A.D. 244 Vik. Sam. 300 (Western India, 269), A.D. 424 Val. Sam. 105 (Ditto, 51 and 214), A.D. 524 Val. Sam. 205 (Annals of Rájasthán, I. 83 and 217-220), and A.D. 619 Val. Sam. 300 (Western India, 352). Tod identifies the barbarian destroyers of Valabhi either with the descendants of the second century Parthians, or with the White Huns Getes or Káthis, or with a mixture of these who in the beginning of the sixth century supplanted the Parthians (An. of Ráj. I. 83 and 217-220; Western India, 214, 352). Elliot (History, I. 408) accepting Tod's date A.D. 524 refers the overthrow to Skythian barbarians from Sindh. Elphinstone, also accepting A.D. 524 as an approximate date, suggested (History, 3rd Edition, 212) as the destroyer the Sassanian Naushirván or Chosroes the Great (A.D. 531-579) citing in support of a Sassanian inroad Malcolm's Persia, I. 141 and Pottinger's Travels, 386. Forbes (Rás Málá, I. 22) notes that the Jain accounts give the date of the overthrow Vik. Sam. 375 that is A.D. 319 apparently in confusion with the epoch of the Gupta era which the Valabhi kings adopted. ((Similarly S. 205 the date given by some of Col. Tod's authorities (An. of Ráj. I. 82 and 217-220) represents A.D. 524 the practical establishment of the Valabhi dynasty. The mistake of ascribing an era to the overthrow not to the founding of a state occurs (compare Sachau's Alberuni, II. 6) in the case both of the Vikrama era B.C. 57 and of the Sáliváhana era A.D. 78. In both these cases the error was intentional. It was devised with the aim of hiding the supremacy of foreigners in early Hindu history. So also, according to Alberuni's information (Sachau, II. 7) the Guptakála A.D. 319 marks the ceasing not the beginning of the wicked and powerful Guptas. This device is not confined to India. His Mede informant told Herodotus (B.C. 450 Rawlinson's Herodotus, I. 407) that B.C. 708 was the founding of the Median monarchy. The date really marked the overthrow of the Medes by the Assyrian Sargon.)) Forbes says (Ditto, 24): If the destroyers had not been called mlechchhas I might have supposed them to be the Dakhan Chálukyas. Genl. Cunningham (Anc. Geog. 318) holds that the date of the destruction was A.D. 658 and the destroyer the Ráshtrakúta Rája Govind who restored the ancient family of Sauráshtra. Thomas (Prinsep's Useful Tables, 158) fixes the destruction of Valabhi at A.D. 745 (S. 802). In the Káthiáwár Gazetteer Col. Watson in one passage (page 671) says the destroyers may have been the early Muhammadans who retired as quickly as they came. In another passage (page 274), accepting Mr. Burgess' (Arch. Sur. Rep. IV. 75) Gupta era of A.D. 195 and an overthrow date of A.D. 642, and citing a Wadhwán couplet telling how Ebhal Valabhi withstood the Iranians, Col. Watson suggests the destroyers may have been Iranians. If the Pársis came in A.D. 642 they must have come not as raiders but as refugees. If they could they would not have destroyed Valabhi. If the Pársis destroyed Valabhi where next did they flee to.

[308] Tod (An. of Ráj. I. 231) notices what is perhaps a reminiscence of this date (A.D. 766). It is the story that Bappa, who according to Mewád tradition is the founder of Gehlot power at Chitor, abandoned his country for Irán in A.D. 764 (S. 820). It seems probable that this Bappa or Saila is not the founder of Gehlot power at Chitor, but, according to the Valabhi use of Bappa, is the founder's father and that this retreat to Irán refers to his being carried captive to Mansúra on the fall either of Valabhi or of Gandhár.

[309] Reinaud's Fragments, 143 note 1; Mémoire Sur l'Inde, 105; Sachau's Alberuni, I. 193. The treachery of the magician Ranka is the same cause as that assigned by Forbes (Rás Málá, I. 12-18) from Jain sources. The local legend (Ditto, 18) points the inevitable Tower of Siloam moral, a moral which (compare Rás Málá, I. 18) is probably at the root of the antique tale of Lot and the Cities of the Plain, that men whose city was so completely destroyed must have been sinners beyond others. Dr. Nicholson (J. R. A. S. Ser. I. Vol. XIII. page 153) in 1851 thought the site of Valabhi bore many traces of destruction by water.

[310] Lassen (Ind. Alt. III. 533) puts aside Alberuni's Arab expedition from Mansúra as without historical support and inadmissible. Lassen held that Valabhi flourished long after its alleged destruction from Mansúra. Lassen's statement (see Ind. Alt. III. 533) is based on the mistaken idea that as the Valabhis were the Balharas the Balharas' capital Mánkir must be Valabhi. So far as is known, except Alberuni himself (see below) none of the Arab geographers of the ninth, tenth or eleventh centuries mentions Valabhi. It is true that according to Lassen (Ind. Alt. 536) Masudi A.D. 915, Istakhri A.D. 951, and Ibn Háukal A.D. 976 all attest the existence of Valabhi up to their own time. This remark is due either to the mistake regarding Malkhet or to the identification of Bálwi or Balzi in Sindh (Elliot's History, I. 27-34) with Valabhi. The only known Musalmán reference to Valabhi later than A.D. 750 is Alberuni's statement (Sachau, II. 7) that the Valabhi of the era is 30 yojanas or 200 miles south of Anahilaváda. That after its overthrow Valabhi remained, as it still continues, a local town has been shown in the text. Such an after-life is in no way inconsistent with its destruction as a leading capital in A.D. 767.

[311] According to Alberuni (Sachau, I. 21) Al Mansúra, which was close to Bráhmanábád about 47 miles north-east of Haidarábád (Elliot's Musalmán Historians, I. 372-374) was built by the great Muhammad Kásim about A.D. 713. Apparently Alberuni wrote Muhammad Kásim by mistake for his grandson Amru Muhammad (Elliot, I. 372 note 1 and 442-3), who built the city a little before A.D. 750. Reinaud (Fragments, 210) makes Amru the son of Muhammad Kásim. Masudi (A.D. 915) gives the same date (A.D. 750), but (Elliot, I. 24) makes the builder the Ummayide governor Mansúr bin Jamhur. Idrísi (A.D. 1137 Elliot, I. 78) says Mansúra was built and named in honour of the Khalif Abu Jáfar-al-Mansur. If so its building would be later than A.D. 754. On such a point Idrísi's authority carries little weight.

[312] Elliot, I. 244.

[313] That the word read Barada by Elliot is in the lax pointless shikasta writing is shown by the different proposed readings (Elliot, I. 444 note 1) Nárand, Barand, and Barid. So far as the original goes Balaba is probably as likely a rendering as Barada. Reinaud (Fragments, 212) says he cannot restore the name.

[314] Though, except as applied to the Porbandar range of hills, the name Barada is almost unknown, and though Ghumli not Barada was the early (eighth-twelfth century) capital of Porbandar some place named Barada seems to have existed on the Porbandar coast. As early as the second century A.D., Ptolemy (McCrindle, 37) has a town Barda-xema on the coast west of the village Kome (probably the road or kom) of Sauráshtra; and St. Martin (Geographie Grecque et Latine de l'Inde, 203) identifies Pliny's (A.D. 77) Varetatæ next the Odomberæ or people of Kachh with the Varadas according to Hemachandra (A.D. 1150) a class of foreigners or mlechchhas. A somewhat tempting identification of Barada is with Beruni's Bárwi (Sachau, I. 208) or Baraoua (Reinaud's Fragments, 121) 84 miles (14 parasangs) west of Somanátha. But an examination of Beruni's text shows that Bárwi is not the name of a place but of a product of Kachh the bára or bezoar stone.

[315] Elliot, I. 445.

[316] Compare Tod (Annals, I. 83 and 217). Gajni or Gayni another capital whence the last prince Síláditya was expelled by Parthian invaders in the sixth century.

[317] Compare Reinaud (Fragments, 212 note 4) who identifies it with the Áin-i-Akbari Kandahár that is Gandhár in Broach. The identification is doubtful. Tod (Annals, I. 217) names the fort Gajni or Gayni and there was a fort Gajni close to Cambay. Elliot (I. 445) would identify the Arab Kandahár with Khandadár in north-west Káthiáváda.

Even after A.D. 770 Valabhi seems to have been attacked by the Arabs. Dr. Bhagvánlál notices that two Jain dates for the destruction of the city 826 and 886 are in the Vira era and that this means not the Mahávira era of B.C. 526 but the Vikram era of B.C. 57. The corresponding dates are therefore A.D. 769 and 829. Evidence in support of the A.D. 769 and 770 defeat is given in the text. On behalf of Dr. Bhagvánlál's second date A.D. 829 it is remarkable that in or about A.D. 830 (Elliot, I. 447) Músa the Arab governor of Sindh captured Bála the ruler of As Sharqi. As there seems no reason to identify this As Sharqi with the Sindh lake of As Sharqi mentioned in a raid in A.D. 750 (Elliot, I. 441: J. R. A. S. (1893) page 76) the phrase would mean Bála king of the east. The Arab record of the defeat of Bála would thus be in close agreement with the Jain date for the latest foreign attack on Valabhi.

[318] The identification of the Balharas of the Arab writers with the Chálukyas (A.D. 500-753) and Ráshtrakútas (A.D. 753-972) of Málkhet in the East Dakhan has been accepted. The vagueness of the early (A.D. 850-900) Arab geographers still more the inaccuracy of Idrísi (A.D. 1137) in placing the Balharas capital in Gujarát (Elliot, I. 87) suggested a connection between Balhara and Valabhi. The suitableness of this identification was increased by the use among Rájput writers of the title Balakarai for the Valabhi chief (Tod An. of Ráj. I. 83) and the absence among either the Chálukyas (A.D. 500-753) or the Ráshtrakútas (A.D. 753-972) of Málkhet of any title resembling Balhara. Prof. Bhandárkar's (Deccan History, 56-57) discovery that several of the early Chálukyas and Ráshtrakútas had the personal name Vallabha Beloved settled the question and established the accuracy of all Masudi's (A.D. 915) statements (Elliot, I. 19-21) regarding the Balhara who ruled the Kamkar, that is Kamrakara or Karnátak (Sachau's Beruni, I. 202; II. 318) and had their Kánarese (Kiriya) capital at Mankir (Málkhet) 640 miles from the coast.

[319] After their withdrawal from Valabhi to Mewád the Válas took the name of Gehlot (see below page 98), then of Aharya from a temporary capital near Udepur (Tod's An. of Ráj. I. 215), next of Sesodia in the west of Mewád (Tod's An. of Raj. I. 216; Western India, 57). Since 1568 the Rána's head-quarters have been at Udepur. Ráj. Gaz. III. 18. After the establishment of their power in Chitor (A.D. 780), a branch of the Gehlot or Gohil family withdrew to Kheir in south-west Márwár. These driven south by the Ráthods in the end of the twelfth century are the Gohils of Piram, Bhávnagar, and Rájpipla in Káthiáváda and Gujarát. Tod's Annals of Ráj. I. 114, 228.

[320] The somewhat doubtful Jáikadeva plates (above page 87 and Káthiáváda Gazetteer, 275) seem to show the continuance of Maitraka power in North Káthiáváda. This is supported by the expedition of the Arab chief of Sandhán in Kachch (A.D. 840) against the Medhs of Hind which ended in the capture of Mália in North Káthiáváda. Elliot, I. 450. Hiuen Tsiang (A.D. 630) (Beal's Buddhist Records, II. 69) describes Sauráshtra as a separate state but at the same time notes its dependence on Valabhi. Its rulers seem to have been Mehrs. In A.D. 713 (Elliot, I. 123) Muhammad Kasim made peace with the men of Surasht, Medhs, seafarers, and pirates.

[321] The only contemporary rulers in whose grants a reference to Valabhi has been traced are the Gurjjaras of Broach (A.D. 580-808) one of whom, Dadda II. (A.D. 633), is said (Ind. Ant. XIII. 79) to have gained renown by protecting the lord of Valabhi who had been defeated by the illustrious Srí Harshadeva (A.D. 608-649), and another Jayabhata in A.D. 706 (Ind. Ant. V. 115) claims to have quieted with the sword the impetuosity of the lord of Valabhi.

[322] Tod An. of Raj. I. 217: Western India, 269.

[323] Tod An. of Raj. I. 112 and Western India, 148: Rás Málá, I. 21. It is not clear whether these passages prove that the Sesodias or only the Válas claim an early settlement at Dhánk. In any case (see below page 101) both clans trace their origin to Kanaksen.

[324] Tod's Western India, 51.

[325] Tod's An. of Raj. I. 230.

[326] The cherished title of the later Valabhis, Síláditya Sun of Virtue, confirms the special sun worship at Valabhi, which the mention of Dharapatta (A.D. 550) as a devotee of the supreme sun supports, and which the legends of Valabhi's sun-horse and sun-fountain keep fresh (Rás Málá, I. 14-18). So the great one-stone lingas, the most notable trace of Valabhi city (J. R. A. S. Ser. I. Vol. XIII. 149 and XVII. 271), bear out the Valabhi copperplate claim that its rulers were great worshippers of Siva. Similarly the Rána of Udepur, while enjoying the title of Sun of the Hindus, prospering under the sun banner, and specially worshipping the sun (Tod's Annals, I. 565) is at the same time the Minister of Siva the One Ling Eklingakadiwán (Ditto 222, Ráj. Gaz. III. 53). The blend is natural. The fierce noon-tide sun is Mahákála the Destroyer. Like Siva the Sun is lord of the Moon. And marshalled by Somanátha the great Soul Home the souls of the dead pass heavenwards along the rays of the setting sun. [Compare Sachau's Alberuni, II. 168.] It is the common sun element in Saivism and in Vaishnavism that gives their holiness to the sunset shrines of Somanátha and Dwárka. For (Ditto, 169) the setting sun is the door whence men march forth into the world of existence Westwards, heavenwards.

[327] This explanation is hardly satisfactory. The name Gehlot seems to be Guhila-putra from Gobhila-putra an ancient Bráhman gotra, one of the not uncommon cases of Rájputs with a Bráhman gotra. The Rájput use of a Bráhman gotra is generally considered a technical affiliation, a mark of respect for some Bráhman teacher. It seems doubtful whether the practice is not a reminiscence of an ancestral Bráhman strain. This view finds confirmation in the Aitpur inscription (Tod's Annals, I. 802) which states that Guhadit the founder of the Gohil tribe was of Bráhman race Vipra kula. Compare the legend (Rás Málá, I. 13) that makes the first Síláditya of Valabhi (A.D. 590-609) the son of a Bráhman woman. Compare (Elliot, I. 411) the Bráhman Chách (A.D. 630-670) marrying the widow of the Sháhi king of Alor in Sindh who is written of as a Rájput though like the later (A.D. 850-1060) Shahiyas of Kábul (Alberuni, Sachau II. 13) the dynasty may possibly have been Bráhmans. ((In support of a Bráhman origin is Prinsep's conjecture (J. A. S. Bl. LXXIV. [Feb. 1838] page 93) that Divaij the name of the first recorded king may be Dvija or Twice-born. But Divaij for Deváditya, like Silaij for Síláditya, seems simpler and the care with which the writer speaks of Chach as the Bráhman almost implies that his predecessors were not Bráhmans. According to Elliot (II. 426) the Páls of Kábul were Rájputs, perhaps Bhattias.)) The following passage from Hodgson's Essays (J. A. Soc. Bl. II. 218) throws light on the subject: Among the Khás or Rájputs of Nepál the sons of Bráhmans by Khás women take their fathers' gotras. Compare Ibbetson's Panjáb Census 1881 page 236.

[328] Tod's Annals, I. 229-231.

[329] Annals, I. 229.

[330] Gladwin's Áin-i-Akbari, II. 81; Tod's Annals, I. 235 and note *. Tod's dates are confused. The Aitpur inscription (Ditto, page 230) gives Sakti Kumára's date A.D. 968 (S. 1024) while the authorities which Tod accepts (Ditto, 231) give A.D. 1068 (S. 1125). That the Moris were not driven out of Chitor as early as A.D. 728 is proved by the Navsárí inscription which mentions the Arabs defeating the Mauryas as late as A.D. 738-9 (Sam. 490). See above page 56.

[331] Tod Western India 268 says Siddha Rája (A.D. 1094-1143): Múla Rája (A.D. 942-997) seems correct. See Rás Málá, I. 65.

[332] Káthiáwár Gazetteer, 672.

[333] The chronicles of Bhadrod, fifty-one miles south-west of Bhávnagar, have (Káth. Gaz. 380) a Selait Vála as late as A.D. 1554.

[334] Káthiáwár Gazetteer, 672. Another account places the movement south after the arrival of the Gohils A.D. 1250. According to local traditions the Válas did not pass to Bhadrod near Mahuva till A.D. 1554 (Káth. Gaz. 380) and from Bhadrod (Káth. Gaz. 660) retired to Dholarva.

[335] Káth. Gaz. 111 and 132. According to the Áin-i-Akbari (Gladwin, II. 60) the inhabitants of the ports of Mahua and Tulája were of the Vála tribe.

[336] Káth. Gaz. 680.

[337] Káth. Gaz. 414.

[338] The Vála connection with the Káthis complicates their history. Col. Watson (Káth. Gaz. 130) seems to favour the view that the Válas were the earliest wave of Káthis who came into Káthiáváda from Málwa apparently with the Guptas (A.D. 450) (Ditto, 671). Col. Watson seems to have been led to this conclusion in consequence of the existence of the petty state of Kátti in west Khándesh. But the people of the Kátti state in west Khándesh are Bhils or Kolis. Neither the people nor the position of the country seems to show connection with the Káthis of Káthiáváda. Col. Watson (Káth. Gaz. 130) inclines to hold that the Válas are an example of the rising of a lower class to be Rájputs. That both Válas and Káthis are northerners admitted into Hinduism may be accepted. Still it seems probable that on arrival in Káthiáváda the Válas were the leaders of the Káthis and that it is mainly since the fall of Valabhi that a large branch of the Válas have sunk to be Káthis. The Káthi traditions admit the superiority of the Válas. According to Tod (Western India, 270: Annals, I. 112-113) the Káthis claim to be a branch or descendants of the Válas. In Káthiáváda the Válas, the highest division of Káthis (Rás Málá, I. 296; Káth. Gaz. 122, 123, 131, 139), admit that their founder was a Vála Rájput who lost caste by marrying a Káthi woman. Another tradition (Rás Málá, I. 296; Káth. Gaz. 122 note 1) records that the Káthis flying from Sindh took refuge with the Válas and became their followers. Col. Watson (Káth. Gaz. 130) considers the practice in Porbandar and Navánagar of styling any lady of the Dhánk Vála family who marries into their house Káthiáníbái the Káthi lady proves that the Válas are Káthis. But as this name must be used with respect it may be a trace that the Válas claim to be lords of the Káthis as the Jetwas claim to be lords of the Mers. That the position of the Válas and Káthis as Rájputs is doubtful in Káthiáváda and is assured (Tod's Annals, I. 111) in Rájputána is strange. The explanation may perhaps be that aloofness from Muhammadans is the practical test of honour among Rájputána Hindus, and that in the troubled times between the thirteenth and the seventeenth centuries, like the Jhálás, the Válas and Káthis may have refused Moghal alliances, and so won the approval of the Ránás of Mewád.

[339] Káth. Gaz. 110-129.

[340] Western India, 207; Annals, I. 112-113.

[341] It is worthy of note that Bálas and Káthiás are returned from neighbouring Panjáb districts. Bálas from Dehra Ismail Khán (Panjáb Census Report 1891 Part III. 310), Káthiá Rájputs from Montgomery (Ditto, 318), and Káthiá Játs from Jhang and Dera Ismail Khán (Ditto, 143). Compare Ibbetson's (1881) Panjáb Census, I. 259, where the Káthias are identified with the Kathaioi who fought Alexander the Great (B.C. 325) and also with the Káthis of Káthiáváda. According to this report (page 240) the Válas are said to have come from Málwa and are returned in East Panjáb.

[342] Tod's Annals, I. 83 and 215; Elliot, II. 410; Jour. B. Br. A. S. XXIII.

[343] Annals, I. 215.

[344] Kath. Gaz. 589.

[345] Brihat-Samhitá, XIV. 21. The usual explanation (compare Fleet Ind. Ant. XXII. 180) Gold-Sakas seems meaningless.

[346] Sachau, II. 11. Among the legends are the much-applied tales of the foot-stamped cloth and the self-sacrificing minister.

[347] Western India, 213.

[348] Tod's Annals, I. 83, 215; Western India, 270-352.

[349] Sachau, I. 208, II. 341. For the alleged descent of the Sesodiás and Válas from Ráma of the Sun race the explanation may be offered that the greatness of Kanishka, whose power was spread from the Ganges to the Oxus, in accordance with the Hindu doctrine (compare Beal's Buddhist Records, I. 99 & 152; Rás Málá, I. 320; Fryer's New Account, 190) that a conqueror's success is the fruit of transcendent merit in a former birth, led to Kanishka being considered an incarnation of Ráma. A connection between Kanishka and the race of the Sun would be made easy by the intentional confusing of the names Kshatrapa and Kshatriya and by the fact that during part at least of his life fire and the sun were Kanishka's favourite deities.

[350] Gladwin's Áin-i-Akbari, II. 81: Tod's Annals, I. 235.

[351] The invasion of Sindh formerly (Reinaud's Fragments, 29) supposed to be by Naushirván in person according to fuller accounts seems to have been a raid by the ruler of Seistán (Elliot, I. 407). Still Reinaud (Mémoire Sur l'Inde, 127) holds that in sign of vassalage the Sindh king added a Persian type to his coins.

[352] Compare Tod's Annals, I. 235-239 and Rawlinson's Seventh Monarchy, 576.

[353] Rawlinson Seventh Monarchy, 452 note 3.

[354] Compare Tod's Annals, I. 63; Thomas' Prinsep, I. 413; Cunningham's Arch. Survey, VI. 201. According to their own accounts (Rás Málá, I. 296) the Káthis learned sun-worship from the Vála of Dhánk by whom the famous temple of the sun at Thán in Káthiáváda was built.

[355] Válas Musalmán Játs in Lahor and Gurdaspur: Váls in Gujarát and Gujranwálá: Váls in Mozafarnagar and Dhera Ismael Khan. Also Válahs Hindus in Kángra. Panjáb Census of 1891, III. 162.

[356] Brihat Samhitá, V. 80.

[357] Corp. Ins. Ind. III. 140-141.

[358] The references are; Langlois' Harivamsa, I. 388-420, II. 178. That in A.D. 247 Balkh or Báktria was free from Indian overlordship (McCrindle's Periplus, 121), and that no more distant tribe than the Gandháras finds a place in the Harivamsa lists combine to make it almost certain that, at the time the Harivamsa was written, whatever their origin may have been, the Báhlikas were settled not in Báktria but in India.

[359] The passage from the Karna Parva or Eighth Book of the Mahábhárata is quoted in Muir's Sanskrit Texts, II. 482, and in greater fullness in St. Martin's Geog. Greque et Latine de l'Inde, 402-410. The Báhikas or Bálhikas are classed with the Madras, Gandháras, Arattas, and other Panjáb tribes. In their Bráhman families it is said the eldest son alone is a Bráhman. The younger brothers are without restraint Kshatriyas, Vaisyas, Sudras, even Barbers. A Bráhman may sink to be a Barber and a barber may rise to be a Bráhman. The Báhikas eat flesh even the flesh of the cow and drink liquor. Their women know no restraint. They dance in public places unclad save with garlands. In the Harivamsa (Langlois, I. 493 and II. 178, 388, 420) the Bahlikas occur in lists of kings and peoples.

[360] Kern in Muir's Sanskrit Texts, II. 446. St. Martin (Geog. Greque et Latine de l'Inde, 149) takes Báhika to be a contraction of Báhlika. Reasons are given below for considering the Mahábhárata form Báhika a confusion with the earlier tribes of that name rather than a contraction of Báhlika or Bálhika. The form Báhika was also favoured by the writer in the Mahábhárata because it fitted with his punning derivation from their two fiend ancestors Vahi and Hika. St. Martin, 408.

[361] St. Martin Geog. Greque et Latine de l'Inde, 403, puts the probable date at B.C. 380 or about fifty years before Alexander. St. Martin held that the passage belonged to the final revision of the poem. Since St. Martin's time the tendency has been to lower the date of the final revision by at least 500 years. The fact noted by St. Martin (Ditto, page 404) that Jartika which the Mahábhárata writer gives as another name for Báhika is a Sanskritised form of Jat further supports the later date. It is now generally accepted that the Jats are one of the leading tribes who about the beginning of the Christian era passed from Central Asia into India.

[362] The name Valabhi, as we learn from the Jain historians, is a Sanskritised form of Valahi, which can be easily traced back to one of the many forms (Bálhíka, Bálhika, Balhika, Bahlíka, Báhlika, Váhlíka, Vahlíka, Válhíka, Válhika, Valhika) of a tribal name which is of common occurrence in the Epics. This name is, no doubt rightly, traced back to the city of Balkh, and originally denoted merely the people of Baktria. There is, however, evidence that the name also denoted a tribe doubtless of Baktrian origin, but settled in India: the Emperor Chandra speaks of defeating the Váhlikas after crossing the seven mouths of the Indus: Varáha-Mihira speaks of the Válhikas along with the people who dwell on Sindhu's banks (Br. Sam. V. 80): and, most decisive of all, the Kásiká Vritti on Pán. VIII. iv. 9 (A.D. 650) gives Bahlíka as the name of the people of the Sauvíra country, which, as Alberuni tells us, corresponded to the modern Multán, the very country to which the traditions of the modern Válas point.

If the usual derivation of the name Bálhika be accepted, ((There is a very close parallel in the modern Panjáb, where (see Census Report of 1881) the national name Baluch has become a tribal name in the same way as Bálhika.)) it is possible to go a step further and fix a probable limit before which the tribe did not enter India. The name of Balkh in the sixth century B.C. was, as we learn from Darius' inscriptions, Bákhtri, and the Greeks also knew it as Baktra: the Avesta form is Bakhdhi, which according to the laws of sound-change established by Prof. Darmsteter for the Arachosian language as represented by the modern Pushtu, would become Bahli (see Chants Populaires des Afghans, Introd. page xxvii). This reduction of the hard aspirates to spirants seems to have taken place about the first century A.D.: parallel cases are the change from Parthava to Palhava, and Mithra to Mihira. It would seem therefore that the Bahlikas did not enter India before the first century A.D.: and if we may identify their subduer Chandra with Chandragupta I., we should have the fourth century A.D. as a lower limit for dating their invasion.

Unfortunately, however, these limits cannot at present be regarded as more than plausible: for the name Balhika or Valhika appears to occur in works that can hardly be as modern as the first century A.D. The Atharvaveda-parisishtas might be put aside, as they show strong traces of Greek influence and are therefore of late date: and the supposed occurrences in Pánini belong to the commentators and to the Ganapátha only and are of more or less uncertain age. But the name occurs, in the form Balhika, in one hymn of the Atharvaveda itself (Book V. 22) which there is no reason to suppose is of late date.

The lower limit is also uncertain as the identification of Chandra of the inscription with the Gupta king is purely conjectural.--(A. M. T. J.)

[363] Hodgson's Essays on Indian Subjects, I. 405 Note.

[364] McCrindle's Periplus, 121. Compare Rawlinson's Seventh Monarchy, 79. The absence of Indian reference to the Yuechi supports the view that in India the Yuechi were known by some other name.

[365] According to Reinaud (Mémoire Sur l'Inde, 82 note 3) probably the modern Kochanya or Kashania sixty or seventy miles west of Samarkand. This is Hiuen Tsiang's (A.D. 620) Ki'uh-shwangi-ni-kia or Kushánika. See Beal's Buddhist Records, I. 34.

[366] Etude sur la Geographie Grecque et Latine de l'Inde, 147.

[367] McCrindle's Alexander in India, 350.

[368] The suggestion is made by Mr. A. M. T. Jackson.

[369] McCrindle's Alexander, 136.

[370] McCrindle's Alexander, 252.

[371] Compare Strabo, XV. I. 8. The Oxydrakai are the descendants of Dionysus. Again, XV. I. 24: The Malloi and the Oxydrakai who as we have already said are fabled to be related to Dionysus.

[372] See McCrindle's Alexander, 157, 369, 378, 398. Compare St. Martin Geog. Grecque et Latine de l'Inde, 102.

[373] Strabo, XV. I. 8 and 24, Hamilton's Translation, III. 76, 95.

[374] References to the vines of Nysa and Meros occur in Strabo, Pliny, Quintus Curtius, Philostratus, and Justin: McCrindle's Alexander in India, 193 note 1, 321, and 339. Strabo (Hamilton's Translation, III. 86) refers to a vine in the country of Musikanus or Upper Sindh. At the same time (Ditto, 108) Strabo accepts Megasthenês' statement that in India the wild vine grows only in the hills.

[375] The Kathaioi Malloi and Oxydrakai are (Arrian in McCrindle's Alexander, 115, 137, 140, 149) called independent in the sense of kingless: they (Ditto, 154) sent leading men not ambassadors: (compare also Diodorus Siculus and Plutarch, Ditto 287, 311): the Malloi had to chose a leader (Q. Curtius, Ditto 236).

[376] Káthiáwár Gazetteer, 138.

[377] Káthiáwár Gazetteer, 137.

[378] Cutch Gazetteer, 80.

[379] Cutch Gazetteer, 81.

[380] Bom. Gaz. XIV. 372.

[381] Ind. Ant. VIII. 243.

[382] Ind. Ant. VIII. 244.

[383] J. B. B. R. A. S. XVI. 1ff.: Proceedings VIIth Oriental Congress, 210ff.

[384] See Chap. X. below.

[385] Ind. Ant. XIII. 73.

[386] Ind. Ant. XIII. 70.

[387] B. B. R. A. S. XVI. 5.

[388] For the Moris or Mauryas, described as a branch of Pramáras, who held Chitor during the eighth century compare Tod. Jr. R. A. S. 211; Wilson's Works, XII. 132.

[389] The text of the copperplate runs:

sharajhasíramudraroddhárini taralataratárataraváridá [24] ritoditasaindhavakacchellarsoráshtra cávotaka mauryagurjarádirá [jye] nihshoshadákshinátyakshitipatiji [25] gíshayá dakshinápathapravesha ......... prathamamevanavasárikávishayaprasádhanáyágate tvarita

Plate II.

[1] turagakharamukharakhurotkhátadharinidhúlidhúsaritadigantare kuntaprántanitántavimardyamánarabhasábhidhávito [2] dbhatasthúlodaravivaravinirggatámtraprathutararudhiradhárámjitakavacabhíshanavapushi svámimahá [3] sanmánadánagrahana=krayíkritasvashirobhirabhimukhamápatitaipradamyadashanágradashtoshtaputakairane [4] kasamarájiravivaravarikatitatahayavidhatanavishálitadhanarudhirapatalapátalitapatukrapánapaththairapi mahá [5] yovairalabvaparabhágaih vipakshakshapanákshepakshiprakshipratíkshnakshuraprapraháravilúnavairishira=kamalagalanálairá [6] havarasarabhasaromámcakamcukáccháditatanúbhiranekairapi narendravramdavradárakairajitapurvaih vyapagatamasmáka [7] mranamanena sváminah svashirah pradánenádyatávadekajanmíyamityevamishopajátaparitoshánantaraprahatapatupa [8] taharavapravrittakabanvabaddharásamandalíke samarashiráse vijitetájikánike shoyyánuráginá shrívadatramanarem [9] drena prasádíkritáparanámacatushtayastaddhyathá dakshinápathasádháranacalukvikulálamkáraprithvívadatramánivarttakaniva [10] rttayitravanijanáshrayashrípulakeshirájassarvánevátmíyán

[390] Journal B. B. R. A. S. XVI. 105.

[391] Ind. Ant. VII. 241.

[392] Ind. Ant. IX. 123.

[393] Ind. Ant. V. 109ff; Ind. Ant. VII. 61ff.; Jour. R. A. S. (N. S.), I. 274ff.; Ind. Ant. XIII. 81-91; Jour. B. B. R. A. Soc. X. 19ff.; Ind. Ant. XIII. 115-119. Ind. Ant. XVII. and Ep. Ind. II. 19ff.

[394] See above page 107.

[395] That Nándor or Nándod was an old and important city is proved by the fact that Bráhmans and Vániás called Nándorás that is of Nándor are found throughout Gujarát, Mángrol and Chorvád on the South Káthiáváda coast have settlements of Velári betelvine cultivators who call themselves Nandora Vániás and apparently brought the betelvine from Nándod. Dr. Bühler, however, identifies the Nándípurí of the grants with an old fort of the same name about two miles north of the east gate of Broach. See Ind. Ant. VII. 62.

[396] Ind. Ant. XIII. 81, 88.

[397] Ind. Ant. XIII. 70.

[398] The fact that the Umetá and Iláo plates give their grantor Dadda II. the title of Mahárájádhirája Supreme Lord of Great Kings, is one of the grounds for believing them forgeries.

[399] Ep. Ind. II. 20.

[400] Ep. Ind. II. 21.

[401] Ind. Ant. VII. 162.

[402] Ep. Ind. II. 19.

[403] Ind. Ant. VII. 68, VIII. 302, XIII. 160, and XV. 187.

[404] Ind. Ant. VI. 9, VII. 70.

[405] Ind. Ant. XIII. 81-88.

[406] Ind. Ant. VII. 70.

[407] Beal's Buddhist Records, II. 266, 268.

[408] Ind. Ant. XIII. 81-88, Ep. Ind. II. 19.

[409] On these forged grants see below page 117.

[410] Ind. Ant. XIII. 70.

[411] Beal's Buddhist Records, II. 259.

[412] Ind. Ant. VIII. 237.

[413] Ind. Ant. XV. 335.

[414] Ind. Ant. V. 109, XIII. 70.

[415] B. B. R. A. S. Jl. XVI. 1ff.

[416] Ind. Ant. V. 109, XIII. 70. The earlier grant was made from Káyávatára (Kárwán): the later one is mutilated.

[417] Before A.D. 738-9. See Chap. IX. above.

[418] Tod's Annals of Rájasthán, I. 88; II. 2.

[419] Ind. Ant. XI. 112.

[420] Bombay Arch. Sur. Separate Number, 10, 94.

[421] This verse which immediately follows the mention of Govinda's conquests on the banks of the Mahí and the Narbadá punningly explains the name of the Mátar táluka as meaning the Mother's táluka.

[422] Ind. Ant. XII. 156.

[423] The Khándesh Reve and Dore Gujars of Chopdá and Raver in the east, and also over most of the west, may be a remnant of these Gujars of Broach who at this time (A.D. 740), and perhaps again about sixty years later, may have been forced up the Narbadá and Tápti into South Málwa and West Khándesh. This is doubtful as their migration is said to have taken place in the eleventh century and may have been due to pressure from the north the effect of Mahmúd Ghaznavi's invasions (A.D. 1000-1025).

[424] Ind. Ant. VI. 65; Jour. R. A. Soc. V. 350.

[425] Ind. Ant. VI. 65.

[426] The kingdom is not called Láta in the copperplate but Látesvara-mandala. An unpublished Baroda grant has shástá pratápaprathitah prithivyám sarvasya láteshvaramandalasya The ruler famous by glory, of the whole kingdom of the king of Láta. Other published grants record Govinda's gift of Gujarát to Indra as taddattalateshvaramandalasya Of him (Indra) to whom the kingdom of the lord of Láta had been given by him (Govinda). Ind. Ant. XII. 162.]

[427] Ind. Ant. XII. 160; unpublished Baroda grant. Srívallabha appears to mean Amoghavarsha who is also called Lakshmívallabha in an inscription at Sirur in Dhárwár (Ind. Ant. XII. 215).

[428] Several copperplates give Karka the epithet Putríyatastasya Son-yearning.

[429] All village and boundary details have been identified by Dr. Bühler. Ind. Ant. V. 148.

[430] Ind. Ant. XIV. 199.

[431] This donee is said to have been given the name of Jyotishika by the illustrious Govindarája apparently the uncle and predecessor of the granting king.

[432] Ind. Ant. XII. 179.

[433] Ind. Ant. XII. 184. The verse may be translated 'By whom before long was occupied the province handed down from his father which had been overrun by the forces of Vallabha and distracted by numbers of evil-minded followers.'

[434] Ind. Ant. XII. 179.

[435] This plate was in Dr. Bhagvánlál's possession. It is among the plates bequeathed to the British Museum. Dr. Bhandárkar (B. B. R. A. S. Jl. XVIII. 255) mentions another unpublished grant of S. 789 (A.D. 867) made by Dhruva's brother Dantivarmman.

[436] These may be either the Gurjjaras between Málwa and Gujarát, or the Bhínmál Gurjjaras north of the Mahí. It is also possible that they may be Chávadás as in this passage the term Gurjjara does not refer to the tribe but to the country. [There seems little reason to doubt the reference is to the Gurjjaras of Bhínmál or Srímál, probably

## acting through their underlords the Chávadás of Anahilaváda whose

king in A.D. 865 was the warlike Kshem Rája (A.D. 841-866). Census and other recent information establish almost with certainty that the Chávadás or Chávotakas are of the Gurjjara race.]

[437] The identification is not satisfactory. Except the Bráhman settlement of Mottaka, apparently the well known Motála Bráhman settlement of Motá, which is mentioned as situated on the west though it is on the north-east, none of the boundary villages can be identified in the neighbourhood of Palsána. In spite of this the name Palsána and its close vicinity to Bagumrá where the grant was found make this identification probable.

[438] Ind. Ant. XIII. 65.

[439] Ind. Ant. XIII. 65-69.

[440] These were among Dr. Bhagvánlál's copperplates, and seem to be the same as the two grants published by Dr. Bhandárkar in B. B. R. A. S. Jl. XVIII. 253.

[441] See above page 127.

[442] The text is: udyaddídhitiratnajálajatilamvyákrishtamídagdhanuh . kuddhenopari vairivírashirasámevam vimuktáh sharáh . dhárásáriní sendracápavalaye yasyettha mabdágame garjjaravrúrjjarasamgaravyatikaram jírnojanah shamsati.

[443] It will be noted that in Saka 836 (A.D. 914) Krishna's grandson Indra re-grants 400 resumed villages many of which were perhaps resumed at this time by Krishna.

[444] It follows that none of Dhavalappa's three ancestors had any connection with Gujarát.

[445] Dr. Hultsch (Ep. Ind. I. 52) identifies Vyághrása with Vaghás, north-east of Kapadvanj. Dr. Bhagvánlál's account of the grant was based on an impression sent to him by the Mámlatdár of Kapadvanj.

[446] The text is: sella vidyádharenápi selu [helo] llálita tapáni pániná nihatyá shatrún samadhe [re] yashasákulamalamkritam. Dr. Hultsch takes the Sella-Vidyádhara here named to be another brother of Prachanda and Akkuka. The verse is corrupt.

[447] The Khárepátan grant makes this clear by passing over Indra's father Jagattunga in the genealogy and entering Indra as the grandson and successor of Akálavarsha. Jour. B. B. R. A. Soc. 1. 217.

[448] The text has Helonmúlitameruná to chime with the poetical allusion and figure about Indra. By Meru no doubt Mera or Mehr is meant.

[449] Kurundaka may be the village of Kurund in the Thána zilla seven miles north-east of Bhiwndi. It was a village given away in grant and cannot therefore be any large town. [Kurundvád at the holy meeting of the Krishna and Pañchgangá in the Southern Marátha Country close to Narsoba's Vádi seems a more likely place for an investiture.]

[450] J. R. A. S. III. 94.

[451] Ind. Ant. XI. 109.

[452] See above.

[453] Though the name of the gotra Lakshamanasa and Láksháyanasa differs slightly in the two grants, the identity of the name Nennapa the son of Dhoddi and the father of Siddhabhatta the A.D. 914 grantee, suggests that the original grant of the village of Tenna by Dhruva I. (A.D. 795) had been cancelled in the interval and in A.D. 914 was renewed by king Indra Nityamvarsha. [Dr. Bhandárkar reads the name in Indra's Navsárí grant (A.D. 914) as Vennapa.]

[454] That in A.D. 915 the Dakhan Ráshtrakútas held Gujarát as far north as Cambay is supported by the Arab traveller Al Masúdi who (Prairies d'Or, I. 253-254) speaks of Cambay, when he visited it, as a flourishing town ruled by Bania the deputy of the Balhára lord of Mánkir. The country along the gulf of Cambay was a succession of gardens villages fields and woods with date-palm and other groves alive with peacocks and parrots.

[455] It seems doubtful whether the Kánarese Rattas the Belgaum Radis and the Telugu Reddis could have been Rástikas or locals in the north Dakhan. The widespread Reddis trace their origin (Balfour's Encyclopædia of India, III. 350) to Rájamandri about thirty miles from the mouth of the Godávari. A tradition of a northern origin remains among some of the Reddis. The Tinnivelly Reddis (Madras J. Lit. and Science, 1887-88, page 136 note 96) call themselves Audh Reddis and assert that Oudh is the native country of their tribe. The late Sir George Campbell (J. R. As. Soc. XXXV. Part II. 129) has recorded the notable fact that the fine handsome Reddis of the north of the Kánara country are like the Játs. With this personal resemblance may be compared the Reddis' curious form of polyandry (Balfour's Encyclopædia, III. 330) in accordance with which the wife of the child-husband bears children to the adult males of the family, a practice which received theories (compare Mr. Kirkpatrick in Indian Ant. VII. 86 and Dr. Muir in Ditto VI. 315) would associate with the northern or Skythian conquerors of Upper India during the early centuries of the Christian era. In support of a northern Ráta element later than Asoka's Rástikas the following points may be noted. That the Kshaharáta or Khaharáta tribe to which the great northern conqueror Nahápana (A.D. 180) belonged should disappear from the Dakhan seems unlikely. Karahátaka the Mahábhárata name (As. Res. XV. 47, quoted in Wilson's Works VI. 178) for Karád on the Krishna suggests that Nahapána's conquest included Sátára and that the name of the holy place on the Krishna was altered to give it a resemblance to the name of the conqueror's tribe. That, perhaps after their overthrow by Gautamíputra-Sátakarni (A.D. 140), the Khaharátas may have established a local centre at Kurandwád at the meeting of the Krishna and the Pañchgangá may be the explanation why in A.D. 914, centuries after Mányakheta or Málkhet had become their capital, the Ráshtrakúta Indra should proceed for investiture to Kurundaka, which, though this is doubtful, may be Kurandwád. The parallel case of the Khaharátas' associates the Palhavas, who passed across the southern Dakhan and by intermarriage have in the Pállas assumed the characteristics of a southern tribe, give a probability to the existence of a northern Khaharáta or Ráta element in the southern Ráshtrakúta and Rattas which the facts at present available would not otherwise justify.

[456] The eleventh century Kanauj Gáhadaválas are now represented by the Bundelas who about A.D. 1200 overthrew the Chándols in Bundelkhand. These Gáharwáls or Bundelas trace their origin to Benares or Kási and may, as Hoernle suggests, have been related to the Pálas of that city who several times intermarried with the Dakhan Ráshtrakútas. The Gáharwáls seem to have nothing to do with the district of Garhwál (Gadwál) in the Himálayas.--(A. M. T. J.)

[457] The Vatsarája defeated by Dhruva who has hitherto been identified with the Vatsa king of Kosambi is more likely to prove to be a Bachrája of the Gurjjaras of Bhínmál or Srímál in north Gujarát. Among references to southern settlements in North India between A.D. 600 and 1000 may be noted the tradition (Wilson's Indian Caste, II. 143) of a Dravidian strain in the Kashmir Bráhmans and in the eleventh century also in Kashmir (Rajátaranginí, VI. 337) the presence of a Sátaváhana dynasty bearing the same name as the early Sátaváhanas of Paithan near Ahmadnagar. Other instances which might seem more directly associated with the southern Ráshtrakútas (A.D. 500-970) are the six Kárnátaka rulers of Nepál beginning with A.D. 889 (Ind. Ant. VII. 91) and the natives of Karnátadesa in Máhmúd Ghaznavi's army (A.D. 1000-1025) who (Sachau's Alberuni, I. 173; II. 157) used the Karnáta alphabet. The presence of Karnáta rulers in Nepál in the ninth and tenth centuries remains a puzzle. But the use of the term Karnáta for Chálukyas of Kalyán in A.D. 1000 (Ep. Ind. I. 230) suggests that the Nepál chiefs were Chálukyas rather than Ráshtrakútas: while Máhmúd Ghaznavi's Karnátas may naturally be traced to the mercenary remains of Bárappa's army of Kalyán Chálukyas whose general Bárappa was slain (Rás Málá, I. 51) and his followers dispersed in north Gujarát by Múla Rája Solanki at the close of the tenth century. The only recorded connection of the southern Ráshtrakútas with Northern India during the middle ages (A.D. 750-1150) are their intermarriages with the Pálas of Benares (A.D. 850-1000) mentioned above (Page 132 Note 1), and, between A.D. 850 and 950, with the Kalachuris of Tripura near Jabalpur (Cunningham's Arch. Survey Report for 1891, IX. 80).

[458] The details compiled from the excellent index and tables in the Panjáb Census yield the following leading groups: 37 sub-castes named Ráthor, Rátor, and other close variants; 53 Rath and Rathis and 2 Rahtas; 50 Ratas, Ratis, or other close variants. Compare Ráhti the name of the people of Mount Abu (Rájputána Gazetteer, III. 139) and the Raht tract in the north-west of Alvar (Ditto, 167).

[459] Ind. Ant. XII. 179.

[460] Ind. Ant. II. 257.

[461] Ind. Ant. XII. 151.

[462] The inscription calls Chápa the founder of the dynasty. The name is old. A king Vyághrarája of the Chápa Vamsa, is mentioned by the astronomer Brahmagupta as reigning in Saka 550 (A.D. 628) when he wrote his book called Brahma-Gupta Siddhánta. The entry runs "In the reign of Srí Vyághramukha of the Srí Chápa dynasty, five hundred and fifty years after the Saka king having elapsed." Jour. B. B. R. A. Soc. VIII. 27. For Dharanívaráha's grant see Ind. Ant. XII. 190ff.

[463] Elliot's History, I. 266.

[464] According to the Káthiáwár Gazetteer pages 110 and 278, the first wave reached about A.D. 650 and the second about 250 years later. Dr. Bhagvánlál's identification of the Mers with the Maitrakas would take back their arrival in Káthiáváda from about A.D. 650 to about A.D. 450. The Mers were again formidable in Gujarát in the late ninth and early tenth centuries. In A.D. 867 (see above Pages 127 and 130) the Ráshtrakúta Dhruva II, checked an inroad of a Mihira king with a powerful army. Again in A.D. 914 the Ráshtrakúta Indra in a moment uprooted the Mehr (Ditto).

[465] The Áin-i-Akbari (Gladwin, II. 69) notices that the sixth division of Sauráshtra, which was almost impervious by reason of mountains rivers and woods, was (A.D. 1580) inhabited by the tribe Cheetore that is Jetwa.

[466] Of the Jhálás or Chalahs the Áin-i-Akbari (Gladwin, II. 64) has: Chaláwareh (in north-east Káthiáváda) formerly independent and inhabited by the tribe of Chálah.

[467] Tod's Annals of Rájasthán, II. 113.

[468] Elliot and Dowson, I. 114 and 519-531. It is noted in the text that to the Arab invaders of the eighth and ninth centuries the Medhs of Hind were the chief people of Káthiáváda both in Soráth in the south and in Mália in the north. They were as famous by sea as by land. According to Beláduri (A.D. 950) (Reinaud's Mémoire Sur l'Inde, 234-235) the Meyds of Sauráshtra and Kacch were sailors who lived on the sea and sent fleets to a distance. Ibn Khurdádba (A.D. 912) and Idrísi (A.D. 1130), probably from the excellent Aljauhari (Reinaud's Abulfeda, lxiii. and Elliot, I. 79), have the form Mand. Elliot, I. 14. The form Mand survives in a musical mode popular in Rájputána, which is also called Rajewári. The Mand is like the Central Asian Mus-ta-zad (K. S. Fazullah Lutfallah.)

[469] Indian Antiquary, VI. 191.

[470] Rájputána Gazetteer, I. 11.

[471] Rájputána Gazetteer, I. 66; North-West Province Gazetteer, III. 265; Ibbetson's Panjáb Census page 261. Some of these identifications are doubtful. Dr. Bhagvánlál in the text (21 Note 6 and 33) distinguishes between the Mevas or Medas whom he identifies as northern immigrants of about the first century B.C. and the Mers. This view is in agreement with the remark in the Rájputána Gazetteer, I. 66, that the Mers have been suspected to be a relic of the Indo-Skythian Meds. Again Tod (Annals of Rajasthán, I. 9) derives Meváda from madhya (Sk.) middle, and the Mer of Merwáda from meru a hill. In support of Tod's view it is to be noted that the forts Balmer Jesalmer Komalmer and Ajmer, which Pandit Bhagvánlál would derive from the personal names of Mer leaders, are all either hill forts or rocks (Annals, I. 11, and Note †). It is, on the other hand, to be noted that no hill forts out of this particular tract of country are called Mers, and that the similar names Koli and Malava, which with equal probability as Medh might be derived from Koh and Mala hill, seem to be tribal not geographical names.

[472] The tales cited in the Rás Málá (I. 103) prove that most of the Kolis between Gujarát and Káthiáváda are Mairs. That till the middle of the tenth century the south-east of Káthiáváda was held by Medhs (Káth. Gazetteer, 672) supports the view that the Kolis, whom about A.D. 1190 (Tod's Western India, I. 265) the Gohils drove out of the island of Piram, were Medhs, and this is in agreement with Idrísi (A.D. 1130 Elliot, I. 83) who calls both Piram and the Medhs by the name Mand. Similarly some of the Koli clans of Kacch (Gazetteer, 70) seem to be descended from the Medhs. And according to Mr. Dalpatram Khakkar three subdivisions of Brahmo-Kshatris, of which the best known are the Mansura Mers and the Pipalia Mers, maintain the surname Mair or Mer. (Cutch Gazetteer, 52 note 2.) Mera or Mehra is a common surname among Sindhi Baluchis. Many of the best Musalmán captains and pilots from Káthiáváda, Kacch, and the Makrán coast still have Mer as a surname. Mehr is also a favourite name among both Khojáhs and Memans, the two special classes of Káthiáváda converts to Islám. The Khojáhs explain the name as meaning Meher Ali the friend of Ali; the Memans also explain Mer as Meher or friend. But as among Memans Mer is a common name for women as well as for men the word can hardly mean friend. The phrase Merbaí or Lady Mer applied to Meman mothers seems to have its origin in the Rájput practice of calling the wife by the name of her caste or tribe as Káthiáníbaí, Meraníbaí. In the case both of the Khojáhs and the Memans the name Mer seems to be the old tribal name continued because it yielded itself to the uses of Islám. Mehr, Mihr, and Mahar are also used as titles of respect. The Khánt Kolis of Girnár, apparently a mixture of the Maitrakas of the text and of a local hill tribe, still (Káthiáwár Gazetteer, 142) honour their leaders with the name Mer explaining the title by the Gujaráti mer the main bead in a rosary. Similarly in Málwa a Gurjjara title is Mihr (Rájputána Gazetteer, I. 80) and in the Panjáb Máhar (Gazetteer of Panjáb, Gujrát, 50-51). And in Kacch the headman among the Bharwáds, who according to some accounts are Gurjjarás, is called Mir (Cutch Gazetteer, 81). Similarly among the Rabáris of Kacch the name of the holy she-camel is Máta Meri. (Ditto, 80.) All these terms of respect are probably connected with Mihira, Sun.

[473] Compare Tod (Western India, 420): Though enrolled among the thirty-six royal races we may assert the Jethvás have become Hindus only from locality and circumstance. Of the Jhálás Tod says (Rajasthán, I. 113): As the Jhálás are neither Solar Lunar nor Agnikula they must be strangers. Again (Western India, 414): The Jhálá Makvánás are a branch of Húnas. Of the name Makvána (Káthiáwár Gazetteer, 111; Rás Málá, I. 297) two explanations may be offered, either that the word comes from Mák the dewy tracts in Central Kacch (Cutch Gazetteer, 75 note 2) where (Káthiáwár Gazetteer, 420) the Jhálás stopped when the Mers and Jethvás passed south, or that Makvána represents Mauna a Puránic name for the Húnas (Wilson's Works, IV. 207). Tod's and Wilford's (Asiatic Researches, IX. 287) suggestion that Makvána is Maháhuna is perhaps not phonetically possible. At the same time that the Makvánás are a comparatively recent tribe of northerners is supported by the ascendancy in the fourteenth century in the Himálayas of Makvánis (Hodgson's Essays, I. 397; Government of India Selections XLVII. 54 and 119) who used the Indo-Skythian title Sáh (Ditto). With the Nepal Makvánis may be compared the Makpons or army-men the caste of the chief of Baltistán or Little Tibet. Vigne's Kashmir, II. 258, 439.

[474] The evidence in support of the statement that the Maitrakas and Húnas fought at the same time against the same Hindu rulers is given in the text. One of the most important passages is in the grant of Dhruvasena III. (Epig. Ind. I. 89 [A.D. 653-4]) the reference to Bhatárka the founder of Valabhi (A.D. 509-520) meeting in battle the matchless armies of the Maitrakas.

[475] Mr. Fleet (Epigraphia Indica, III. 327 and note 12) would identify Mihirakula's tribe with the Maitrakas. More recent evidence shows that his and his father Toramána's tribe was the Jáuvlas. That the White Húnas or other associated tribes were sun-worshippers appears from a reference in one of Mihirakula's inscriptions (Corpus Inscriptionum Indicarum, III. 161) to the building of a specially fine temple of the sun; and from the fact that in Kashmír Mihirakula founded a city Mihirapura and a temple to Mihireshwar. (Darmsteter in Journal Asiatique, X. 70: Fleet in Indian Antiquary, XV. 242-252.) Mihirakula's (A.D. 508-530) sun-worship may have been the continuance of the Kushán (A.D. 50-150) worship of Mithro or Helios (Wilson's Ariana Antiqua, 357). At the same time the fact that Mihirakula uses the more modern form Mihir makes it probable (Compare Rawlinson's Seventh Monarchy, 284) that Mihirakula's sun-worship was more directly the result of the spread of sun-worship in Central Asia under the fiercely propagandist Sassanians Varahan V. or Behram Gor (A.D. 420-440), and his successors Izdigerd II. (A.D. 440-457), and Perozes (A.D. 457-483). The extent to which Zoroastrian influence pervaded the White Húnas is shown by the Persian name not only of Mihirakula but of Kushnawaz (A.D. 470-490) the great emperor of the White Húnas the overthrower of Perozes. That this Indian sun-worship, which, at latest, from the seventh to the tenth century made Multán so famous was not of local origin is shown by the absence of reference to sun-worship in Multán in the accounts of Alexander the Great. Its foreign origin is further shown by the fact that in the time of Beruni (A.D. 1020 Sachau's Edition, I. 119) the priests were called Maghas and the image of the sun was clad in a northern dress falling to the ankles. It is remarkable as illustrating the Hindu readiness to adopt priests of conquering tribes into the ranks of Bráhmans that the surname Magha survives (Cutch Gazetteer, 52 note 2) among Shrimáli Bráhmans. These Maghas are said to have married Bhoja or Rájput girls and to have become the Bráhman Bhojaks of Dwárka. Even the Mands who had Saka wives, whose descendants were named Mandagas, obtained a share in the temple ceremonies. Reinaud's Mémoire Sur l'Inde, 393.

[476] Wilson's Vishnu Purána Preface XXXIX. in Reinaud's Mémoire Sur l'Inde, 391. Details are given in Wilson's Works, X. 381-385.

[477] Reinaud's Mémoire Sur l'Inde, 393; Wilson's Works, X. 382.

[478] The name Mehiraga is explained in the Bhavishya Purána as derived from their ancestress a daughter of the sage Rigu or Rijvahva of the race named Mihira (Reinaud's Mémoire Sur l'Inde, 393; Wilson's Works, X. 382). The name Mihiraga suggests that the spread of sun-worship in the Panjáb and Sindh, of which the sun-worship in Multán Sindh Káthiáváda and Mewád and the fire-worshipping Rájput and Sindh coins of the fifth and sixth centuries are evidence, was helped by the spread of Sassanian influence into Baluchistán Kacch-Gandevi and other parts of western Sindh, through Sakastene the modern western Seistan near the lake Helmund. This Sakastene or land of the Sakas received its name from the settlement in it of one of the earlier waves of the Yuechi in the second or first century before Christ. The name explains the statement in the Bhavishya Purána that sun-worship was introduced by Magas into Multán from Sakadvipa the land of the Sakas. In this connection it is interesting to note that Darmsteter (Zend Avesta, xxxiv.) holds that the Zend Avesta was probably completed during the reign of Sháhpur II. (A.D. 309-379): that (lxxxix.) Zend was a language of eastern Persia an earlier form of Pashtu; and that (lxxxiv.) western Seistan and the Helmund river was the holy land of the Avesta the birth-place of Zoroaster and the scene of king Vishtasp's triumphs. A memory of the spread of this western or Sassanian influence remains in the reference in the Mujmalu-T-Tawárikh in Elliot, I. 107-109, to the fire temples established in Kandabil (Gandevi) and Buddha (Mansura) by Mahra a general of Bahman that is of Varahran V. (A.D. 420-440). It seems probable that Mahra is Mehr the family name or the title (Rawlinson's Sassanian Monarchy, 224 note 4 and 312) of the great Mihran family of Persian nobles. The general in question may be the Mehr-Narses the minister of Varahran's son and successor Izdigerd II. (A.D. 440-457), who enforced Zoroastrianism in Armenia (Rawlinson, Ditto 305-308). Mehr's success may be the origin of the Indian stories of Varahran's visit to Málwa. It may further be the explanation of the traces of fire temples and towers of silence noted by Pottinger (1810) in Baluchistán (Travels, 126-127) about sixty miles west of Khelat.

[479] Wilson's Works, IX. 207.

[480] Compare Priaulx's Embassies, 222.

[481] The White Húnas overran Bakhtria and the country of the Yuechi between A.D. 450 and 460. About a hundred years later they were crushed between the advancing Turks and the Sassanian Chosroes I. or Naushirván (A.D. 537-590). Rawlinson's Sassanian Monarchy, 420; Specht in Journal Asiatique (1883) Tom II. 349-350. The Húnas supremacy in North India did not last beyond A.D. 530 or 540. The overthrow of their supremacy perhaps dates from A.D. 540 the battle of Karur about sixty miles east of Multán, their conqueror being Yasodharmman of Málwa the second of the three great Vikramádityas of Málwa. Of the Húnas' position among Hindu castes Colonel Tod says: The Húnas are one of the Skyths who have got a place among the thirty-six races of India. They probably came along with the Káthi, Bála, and Makvána of Sauráshtra. Tod's Annals of Rajasthán, I. 110.

[482] Specht in Journal Asiatique (1883), II. 348.

[483] Specht in Journal Asiatique (1883), II. 349.

[484] Compare above