Hindu &Turki Shahi

 

 

Hindu Shahi Rajputs

The Hindu Shahi connect

The Turk Shahi’s in the North Western region which is now Afghanistan were replaced by what Al-Biruni called ash-Shayyat al-Hindiyya. This translates to Hindu Shahi and may not be the official name but one given by Al Biruni the Persian scholar and author of Freishta. Based on the documented history by Al-Bruni, the chronicle Rajatarangani by Kalhana from Kashmir, the coins & artefact and the wars, a time line can be drawn as depicted in table 2.

 Mahipala the Parmar king of Kannauj was also known as Kshitipala. About the origins of the Varahas Muhnot Nainsi opines that both Varahas and Panwars (Parmars) were form the same racial stock. 

Abul Fazl in his Ain has shown the presence of Varhas in the Mahals of Sarhind, Sumana, Kary aí Rae Samu and Machhiwara of Sarkar Sarhind of Subah Delhi and Mahals of Baj wara, Dardak, Rahimabad and Sankarbanot of Sarkar Bet Jalandhar Doab of Subah Lahore. 

In early Musalman histories Jayapala is called the Raja of Bathinda, which is perhaps the same as Bhatinda in Central Punjab. But the references to the Shahiyas and their wars with the Turushkas in the Raja- tarangini leave no doubt that Jayapala was one of Jayapaia the Shahiya kings of Und. (Abdur, 1976)

The Hindu Shahi dynasty from Kallar till Bhim were of the same lineage but Jaypal was from a different clan. Bhim’s death may be placed between the beginning of A.D. 964 and September 965.

Al Masudi the Arab who travelled India in 915-16, in his book Murūj aḏ-Ḏahab has written about the rulers of India . He mentions that the king of India is Ballahara which is the name given to the Rashtrakutas. The king of Kannauj who is one of the kings of Sind is “Barah” (بورة). He also mentions that Kandhar was ruled by a Rahbut (Rajput) king.(Sprenger, 1841)

JAYAPALADEVA

Paramabhattaraka Maharajadhiraja Parameshvara Sri Jayapaladeva (13) succeeded Bhima in about A.D. 964. Jayapala’s relationship to his predecessor is not known. According to historians Cunningham, Elliot and Sachau, Jayapala had no blood relationship with Bhima and belonged to a different dynasty. Support for this theory has been taken from the ending of the names of the Sahi. The transition of power was not smooth as per the records.

According to the Tarikh-i Guzida (pp.390-92) Jayapala was the son of ’Haital’. Firishta records ’Ashtpal’ or ’Hatpal’ as the name of Jayapala’s father. The Tarikh-i Khairat gives it as ’Jaipal was Haital’ which is obviously a corrupted form of ’Jaipal bin Haital’ which occurs in the Tarikh-i Guzida. Haital is most likely a distortion of Kshitpal which was the title used by the Parmar Dynasty of Abu. 

The coins found in now Afghanistan show the presence of a ruler Maharaja Mahipal. The coins depict a bull and horseman on one side and inscription on the reverse. The bull engraved on the coin is a common them with the coins of Dharanivaraha of Parmar dynasty and other coins of the Hindu Shahi dynasty.

 

Kallar	Samtandeva	Lalliya
843-850 AD	850-870 AD	880-902 AD
Kamalu	Bhimdeva	Jaipal
903-921 AD	921-964 AD	964-1002 AD
Anandpal	Trilochanpal	Bhimpal
1002-1013 AD	1013-1021 AD	1021-1026 AD

Vakpati Muñja, also called Utpala was the founder of the   Parmar Dynasty of Abu. He extended his territories as far as the fortress of Chitor in the north, Lãta in the west, Tripurï in the east, the Deccan in the south and the Gangetic plain in the far north.The Udaypur prasasti suggests that Vâkpati's ambition was to vanquish all the rulers of the directions in  the manner of a traditional digvijaya. This validated his success as a military leader and justified his use of the imperial titles paramabhattãraka mahãrãjãdhirãja paramesvara.

Syak ascended the throne of Kannauj around 960 AD. He was succeeded by Munja or Vapatiraj in 975 AD. Siyak was succeeded by Munja or Vakpatiraj in the year 975 A.D, He was a great and ideal king and will  be remembered in the annals of Malwa for long ages to  come. Udaipur (Gwalior) Prashasti mentions in glowing terms  the unprecedented glory and splendour of this great king. 

The Paramaras had become independent rulers by 974 CE and were ruling from Kannauj. Utpala died fighting in Deccan between 993-998 AD. The Persian book “A Persian geography” 372-982 AD Translated by V Minorsky documents the relationship between the rulers of Kannauj, the Parmars and Jaypal.

The translation connects Vayhind, a large town, Its king Jaypal who was under the orders (the raja) of Qinnauj (Alam,Hudud al ).

Mahipal the Kannauj Parmar king in his conquest reached the territories of Hindu Shahi. The Khajuraho stone inscription of Dhanga of V.S. 1011 (A.D. 954-55), belonged to a certain Sahi whose name is not mentioned but who is generally identified with Bhima Sahi. Bhima's association with the Kangra valley may also be seen in the name of Bhimnagar (Bhima nagara), the present day Nagarkot. The text of the inscription does not explicitly mention that Kira was ever invaded by the forces of Mahipala. But Rajasekhara's reference to the conquest of certain Kulutas (people of the Kullu valley in the Panjab) and Ramathas (whose location is not known) by the forces of Mahipala suggests that his arms reached close to the Sahi borders. Moreover the Kiraraja, the inscription says, exchanged an image of Vaikuntha (Vishnu) for a force of elephants and horses.

The inscriptions of Khajurao also tell us that the Shahi king was a contemporary of Herambapal (Mahipal of Parmar dynasty) and a worshipper of Vaikuntha or Vishnu. His Vaishnavisim is also known from Rajatarangani (VI.178, VII. 1082) as well. 

The fact that Jaypal shared the same title as the Parmar kings, the possibility of Jaypal’s father being documented as Kshitpal or Mahipal and that Jaypal was taking orders from Kinnauj, ruled by the Parmars show that they belonged to the same clan. This shows the movement of the clan from Central India to Afghanistan and later to Punjab.

Defending the frontiers

Hindu Shahi dynasty has been defending the frontiers of North West India from the invaders. Hindu Shahi King Jaypal was the last strong king who had put up a brave fight against the rulers of Ghazni.

Conflict with Alptigin of Ghazni 

In 963 A.D. Alptigin seized Zabulistan together with its capital in 963 A.D. His general Subuktigin frequently invaded Multan and Lamghan, carrying away the inhabitants as slaves (Briggs,1, P5). A confederation of three kings was formed to repulse the attacks. The Barikot (upper SWAT) inscription mentions of three kings in Vajiristhana (Wajiristhan) where the name of Jaypal is clear and the names of the remaining two kings have rubbed off.

The battle of Charak

The Indian army reached Charkh it was engaged by the Turkish troops of Ghazna, Gardiz, Bust and Bamian. The Muslims were evidently outnumbered, but the powerful cavalry attacks of a body of 500 Turks under the command of Sabuktigin turned the tables on the Hindus, who gave way after a number of their troops were killed.

The battle of Ghuzak

The first major conflict, the battle of Ghuzak between Jaypal and the Turks took place between 986-87 A.D. The battle continued for days and Jaypal was gaining ground. The Turks managed to halt his progress through unchivalrous means and Jaypal was forced to sue for peace.

The battle of Lamghan

Seeing the diminishing territory, Jaypala decided to attack the Turks in 990-991 A.D. The Turk army was positioned on a higher ground and had a strategic advantage. A couple of quick decisions by the Turks and Jaypal’s army, even though huge in numbers lost to the Turks who acquired all their wealth and forts.

The Turks marched towards India and to prevent this onslaught, Jaypal sought the help of Indian kings.According to Firishta, kings of Delhi, Ajmer, Kalanjara, Kannauj and a few others decided to help Jaypal.

FIrishta states that." in the year 435 A. H. (=1043 A D.), the raja of Delhi, In conjunction with other rajas retook Hansy, Tahnesur and their dependencies, from the governors to whom Madood had entrusted them. The Hindus from thence marched towards the fort of Nagrakote, which they besieged for four months, and the garrison, being distressed for provisions, and no succour coming from Lahore, was under tha necessity of capitulating (Firishia (Brigg’s) vol. I, p. 118; Cambridge History of India (1958) vol. Ill, pp. 32-33.) 

Battle of Peshawar

In 999 A.D. after the death of Sabuktigin, Mahmud took over power of Ghazni. After an year of consolidation he marched towards India. He marched towards Peshawar in 1001 A.D. Jaypal lost the battle and 15 members of his family along with him, besides some other chiefs, were taken prisoner. Jaypal managed to secure a release with Sabuktigin by paying an enormous sum. He later abdicated the throne to his son Anandapal and sacrificed himself to the flames. Thereafter the Hindu Shahi gradually declined as Anadapal moved his capital to Punjab.

Battle of Indus

In the spring of the year 1006 A.D., the Ghaznavid Sultan Mahmud, on his way to punish Daud, the ruler of Multan, asked the permission of Anandapala to pass through his territory. The Shahi suspected the intentions of Mahmud and the request was therefore  turned down. Infuriated at the refusal of the Shahi, Mahmud decided to turn his attention to him before proceeding to Multan.

Anandapal suffered a severe defeat and, deserting his capital, took to flight. He was pursued as far as Sodra ,at present a small town to the east of Wazirabad, where he

eluded the Sultan by escaping into the hills of Kashmir.

Battle of Chhach

Having subjugated Multan the Sultan once again resolved to invade the country of the Shahis. Anandapala sent his son Trilocanapal at the head of a huge army which, according to Firishta, also included contingents from the neighbouring rajas. Trilocanapal seems to have taken up his position in the plains of Chhach but he failed to prevent the Ghaznavid force from crossing the river. A son of Anandapala fell into the hands off the enemy. The victors captured invaluable spoils. This was the last contest of arms between Anandapal and Mahmud. 

Unlike their predecessors, the Turk Sahis, who, thanks to their flexible and expedient foreign policy, saved the country for a long time from being completely absorbed by the Arabs, the Hindu Sahis followed a rigid line and put everything at stake to preserve their national pride. For a long time they refused to accept the reality that Ghazna had grown disproportionately powerful and that the continuous state of war which could be exploited by the stronger party was dangerously undermining their own position (Rehman, Abdur, 1976)

As per the theses written by Abdur Rehman, nothing is known about the ethnological background of the Hindu Sahis. The local sources known so far do not give us even the slightest clue; and whatever is known from foreign sources is far too little to give a reliably true picture. Of the earlier Muslim writers only Mas'udi has something to say on the subject* 'The King of Kandahar (Gandhara), who is one of the kings of Sind and its mountains', he says 'is called Hahaj; this name is common to all sovereigns of that country. From his dominions comes the river Raid, one of the five rivers which form the Mihran of Sind. Kandahar (Gandhara) is called the country of the Rahbut (Rajput) (Elliot, op.cit., vol.i, p.22.)

 

(THE LAST TWO DYNASTIES OF THE SAHIS (An analysis of their history, archaeology,
coinage and palaeography) by Abdur Rehman)

Read the theses here by Abdur Rehman

Turki Shahi 

Alberuni the noted traveler and scholar of the eleventh century who has provided some vital clues about the origin of the Turki Shahis of Afganistan and Punjab, could also help us through reading of the same information. The founder of Turki Shahi dynasty was Barhatakin. Historians differ on the time of the origin of this dynasty in India but it appears that Turki Shahis were quite active in the regions of Kabul, Zabul, Kapisa and Gãndhar during the period from fifth to ninth century. The word ' Takin ' or ' Tekin ' or Tegin ' is a Turkish one meaning 'a prince of the blood' and in this particular case it is associated with the name of Barha or Varha. So the name of the founder prince is 'Barha'. It is just possible that the descendants of Barha or Varha Takin might have come to be known as Varhas or Barhas or in other words this Barhatakin was the progenitor of the Barhas or Varhas. We have already seen similar kinds of development in the case of the Bhatis and other ruling clans of this period. Further, Rajasthani sources have recorded only those names and titles of the ruling clans that were popular during their time. This might be the one reason why the contemporary authors did not bother to write about the Turki Shahis at the time of addressing these Varhas. It is quite possible that when the Turki Shahis were struggling in the frontier regions some of their branches known after the name of their progenitor got settled in the lower Punjab and upper Sind and Rajasthan. 

As per the these written by Abdur Rehman, "we are unable to give a convincing interpretation of the name Tarabil". The Arabic initial Jb suggests the Indian retro flext, but if we attribute this to erroneous pronunciation the word might be restored as Taravira, a possible Rajput name. It is equally possible, however, that the name is Turkic, since there were many Hindus of Turkish origin in the region.