CHAPTER 4
Rakhwāli.
It was not unfrequent that application for protection was made to the nearest chief by the tenants of the fisc; a course eventually sanctioned by the Government, which could not refuse assent where it could not protect. Here, then, we revert to first principles; and ‘seignorial rights’ may be forfeited, when they cease to yield that which ought to have originated them, viz. benefit to the community. Personal service at stated periods, to aid in the agricultural[[4]] economy of the protector, was sometimes stipulated, when the husbandmen were to find implements and cattle,[[5]] and to attend whenever ordered. The protected calls the chief ‘patron’; and the condition may not unaptly be compared to that of personal commendation,[[6]] like salvamenta, founded on the disturbed state of society. But what originated thus was often continued and multiplied by avarice, and the spirit of rapine, which disgraced the Rajput of the last half century, though he had abundance of apologies for ‘scouring the country.’ But all salvamenta and other marks of vassalage, obtained during these times of desolation, were annulled in the settlement which took place between the Rana and his chiefs, in A.D. 1818[[7]] [177].
But the crown itself, by some singular proceeding, possesses, or did possess, according to the Patta Bahi, or Book of Grants, considerable salvamenta right, especially in the districts between the new and ancient capitals, in sums of from twenty to one hundred rupees in separate villages.
To such an extent has this rakhwali[[8]] been carried when protection was desired, that whole communities have ventured their liberty, and become, if not slaves, yet nearly approaching the condition of slaves, to the protector. But no common visitation ever leads to an evil of this magnitude. I mention the fact merely to show that it does exist; and we may infer that the chief, who has become the arbiter of the lives and fortunes of his followers, must have obtained this power by devoting all to their protection. The term thus originated, and probably now (with many others) written for the first time in English letters in this sense, is Basai.
Basāi, Slavery.
“When small proprietors,” says Hallam, “lost their lands by mere rapine, we may believe their liberty was hardly less endangered.” The hali of Haraoti knows the bitter truth of this inference, which applies to the subject immediately before us, [178] the basai. The portion of liberty the latter has parted with, was not originally lost through compulsion on the part of the protector, but from external violence, which made this desperate remedy necessary. Very different from the hali of Kotah, who is servile though without the title—a serf in condition but without the patrimony; compelled to labour for subsistence on the land he once owned; chained to it by the double tie of debt and strict police; and if flight were practicable, the impossibility of bettering his condition from the anarchy around would render it unavailing. This is not the practice under the patriarchal native government, which, with all its faults, retains the old links of society, with its redeeming sympathies; but springs from a maire du palais, who pursued an unfeeling and mistaken policy towards this class of society till of late years. Mistaken ambition was the origin of the evil; he saw his error, and remedied it in time to prevent further mischief to the State. This octogenarian ruler, Zalim Singh of Kotah, is too much of a philosopher and politician to let passion overcome his interests and reputation; and we owe to the greatest despot a State ever had the only regular charter which at present exists in Rajasthan, investing a corporate body with the election of their own magistrates and the making of their own laws, subject only to confirmation; with all the privileges which marked in the outset the foundation of the free cities of Europe, and that of boroughs in England.
It is true that, in detached documents, we see the spirit of these institutions existing in Mewar, and it is as much a matter of speculation, whether this wise ruler promulgated this novelty as a trap for good opinions, or from policy and foresight alone: aware, when all around him was improving, from the shackles of restraint being cast aside, that his retention of them must be hurtful to himself. Liberality in this exigence answered the previous purpose of extortion. His system, even then, was good by comparison; all around was rapine, save in the little oasis kept verdant by his skill, where he permitted no other oppression than his own.
This charter is appended[[12]] as a curiosity in legislation, being given thirty years ago. Another, for the agriculturists’ protection, was set up in A.D. 1821. No human being prompted either; though the latter is modelled from the proceedings in Mewar, and may have been intended, as before observed, to entrap applause.
In every district of Haraoti the stone was raised to record this ordinance [179].
Gola—Das (Slaves).—Famine in these regions is the great cause of loss of liberty: thousands were sold in the last great famine. The predatory system of the Pindaris and mountain tribes aided to keep it up. Here, as amongst the Franks, freedom is derived through the mother. The offspring of a goli[[13]] or dasi must be a slave. Hence the great number of golas in Rajput families, whose illegitimate offspring are still adorned in Mewar, as our Saxon slaves were of old, with a silver ring round the left ankle, instead of the neck. They are well treated, and are often amongst the best of the military retainers;[[14]] but are generally esteemed in proportion to the quality of the mother, whether Rajputni, Muslim, or of the degraded tribes: they hold confidential places about the chiefs of whose blood they are. The great-grandfather of the late chief of Deogarh used to appear at court with three hundred golas[[15]] on horseback in his train, the sons of Rajputs, each with a gold ring round his ankle: men whose lives were his own. This chief could then head two thousand retainers, his own vassals.[[16]]
Slavery due to Gambling.
The illegitimate sons of the Rana are called das, literally ‘slave’: they have no rank, though they are liberally provided for. Basai signifies ‘acquired slavery’; in contradistinction to gola, ‘an hereditary slave.’ The gola can only marry a goli: the lowest Rajput would refuse his daughter to a son of the Rana of this kind. The basai can redeem[[18]] his liberty: the gola has no wish to do so, because he could not improve his condition nor overcome his natural defects. To the basai nothing dishonourable attaches: the class retain their employments and caste, and are confined to no occupation, but it must be exercised with the chief’s sanction. Individuals reclaimed from captivity, in gratitude have given up their liberty: communities, when this or greater evils threatened, have done the same for protection of their lives, religion, and honour. Instances exist of the population of towns being in this situation. The greater part of the inhabitants of the estate of Bijolli are the basai of its chief, who is of the Pramara tribe: they are his subjects; the Rana, the paramount lord, has no sort of authority over them. Twelve generations have elapsed since his ancestor conducted this little colony into Mewar, and received the highest honours and a large estate on the plateau of its border, in a most interesting country.[[19]]
The only badge denoting the basai is a small tuft of hair on the crown of the head. The term interpreted has nothing harsh in it, meaning ‘occupant, dweller, or settler.’ The numerous towns in India called Basai have this origin: chiefs abandoning their ancient haunts, and settling[[20]] with all their retainers and chattels in new abodes. From this, the town of Basai near Tonk (Rampura), derived its name, when the Solanki prince was compelled to abandon his patrimonial lands in Gujarat; his subjects of all classes accompanying him voluntarily, in preference to submitting to foreign rule. Probably the foundation of Bijolli was similar; though only the name of Basai now attaches to the inhabitants. It is not uncommon [181], in the overflowing of gratitude, to be told, “You may sell me, I am your basai.”[[21]]
Private Feuds—Composition.
In these principalities the influence of revenge is universal. Not to prosecute a feud is tantamount to an acknowledgement of self-degradation; and, as in all countries where the laws are insufficient to control individual actions or redress injuries, they have few scruples as to the mode of its gratification. Hence feuds are entailed with the estates from generation to generation. To sheathe the sword till ‘a feud is balanced’ (their own idiomatic expression), would be a blot never to be effaced from the escutcheon.
In the Hindu word which designates a feud we have another of those striking coincidences in terms to which allusion has already been made: vair is ‘a feud,’ vairi, ‘a foe.’ The Saxon term for the composition of a feud, wergild, is familiar to every man. In some of these States the initial vowel is hard, and [182] pronounced bair. In Rajasthan, bair is more common than vair, but throughout the south-west vair only is used. In these we have the original Saxon word war,[[22]] the French guer. The Rajput wergild is land or a daughter to wife. In points of honour the Rajput is centuries in advance of our Saxon forefathers, who had a legislative remedy for every bodily injury, when each finger and toe had its price.[[23]] This might do very well when the injury was committed on a hind, but the Rajput must have blood for blood. The monarch must be powerful who can compel acceptance of the compensation, or mund-kati.[[24]]
The prosecution of a feud is only to be stopped by a process which is next to impracticable; namely, by the party injured volunteering forgiveness, or the aggressor throwing himself as a suppliant unawares on the clemency of his foe within his own domains: a most trying situation for each to be placed in, yet not unexampled, and revenge in such a case would entail infamy. It was reserved for these degenerate days to produce such an instance.
Amargarh-Shāhpura Feud.
Ummeda was eccentric, if the term be not too weak to characterize acts which, in more civilized regions, would have subjected him to coercion. He has taken his son and suspended him by the cincture to the pinnacle of his little chapel at Shahpura, and then called on the mother to come and witness the sight. He would make excursions alone on horseback or on a swift camel, and be missing for days. In one of these moods he and his foe Dilel encountered face to face within the bounds of Amargarh. Dilel only saw a chief high in rank at his mercy. With courtesy he saluted him, invited him to his castle, entertained him, and pledged his health and forgiveness in the munawwar piyala:[[28]] they made merry, and in the cup agreed to extinguish the remembrance of the feud.
Both had been summoned to the court of the sovereign. The Raja proposed that they should go together, and invited him to go by Shahpura. Dilel accordingly saddled his twenty steeds, moved out his equipage, and providing himself with fitting raiment, and funds to maintain him at the capital, accompanied the Raja to receive the return of his hospitality. They ate from the same platter,[[29]] drank of the same cup and enjoyed the song and dance. They even went together to [184] their devotions, to swear before their deity what they had pledged in the cup—oblivion of the past. But scarcely had they crossed the threshold of the chapel, when the head of the chief of Amargarh was rolling on the pavement, and the deity and the altar were sprinkled with his blood! To this atrocious and unheard-of breach of the laws of hospitality, the Raja added the baseness of the pilferer, seizing on the effects of his now lifeless foe. He is said, also, with all the barbarity and malignity of long-treasured revenge, to have kicked the head with his foot, apostrophising it in the pitiful language of resentment. The son of Dilel, armed for revenge, collected all his adherents, and confusion was again commencing its reign. To prevent this, the Rana compelled restitution of the horses and effects; and five villages from the estate of the Raja were the mund-kati (wergild) or compensation to the son of Dilel. The rest of the estate of the murderer was eventually sequestrated by the crown.
The feuds of Arja and Sheogarh are elsewhere detailed, and such statements could be multiplied. Avowal of error and demand of forgiveness, with the offer of a daughter in marriage, often stop the progress of a feud, and might answer better than appearing as a suppliant, which requires great delicacy of contrivance.[[30]] Border disputes[[31]] are most prolific in the production of feuds, and the Rajput lord-marchers have them entailed on them as regularly as their estates. The border chiefs of Jaisalmer and Bikaner carry this to such extent that it often involved both states in hostilities. The vair and its composition in Mandalgarh will, however, suffice for the present to exemplify these things.
Rajput Pardhans or Premiers.
But these are general duties. In all these States some great court favourite [186], from his talents, character, or intrigue, holds the office of premier. His duties are proportioned to his wishes, or the extent of his talents and ambition; but he does not interfere with the civil administration, which has its proper minister. They, however, act together. The Rajput premier is the military minister, with the political government of the fiefs; the civil minister is never of this caste. Local customs have given various appellations to this officer. At Udaipur he is called bhanjgarh; at Jodhpur, pardhan; at Jaipur (where they have engrafted the term used at the court of Delhi) musahib; at Kotah, kiladar, and diwan or regent. He becomes a most important personage, as dispenser of the favours of the sovereign. Through him chiefly all requests are preferred, this being the surest channel to success. His influence, necessarily, gives him unbounded authority over the military classes, with unlimited power over the inferior officers of the State. With a powerful body of retainers always at his command, it is surprising we have not more frequently our ‘mayors of Burgundy and Dagoberts,’[[34]] our ‘Martels and Pepins,’ in Rajasthan.
We have our hereditary Rajput premiers in several of these States: but in all the laws of succession are so regulated that they could not usurp the throne of their prince, though they might his functions.
When the treaty was formed between Mewar and the British Government, the ambassadors wished to introduce an article of guarantee of the office of pardhan to the family of the chief noble of the country, the Rawat of Salumbar. The fact was, as stated, that the dignity was hereditary in this family; but though the acquisition was the result of an act of virtue, it had tended much towards the ruin of the country, and to the same cause are to be traced all its rebellions.
SALUMBAR.
To face page 216.
The ambassador was one of the elders of the same clan, being the grand uncle of the hereditary pardhan. He had taken a most active share in the political events of the last thirty years, and had often controlled the councils of his prince during this period, and actually held the post of premier himself when stipulating [187] for his minor relative. With the ascendancy he exercised over the prince, it may be inferred that he had no intention of renouncing it during his lifetime; and as he was educating his adopted heir to all his notions of authority, and initiating him in the intrigues of office, the guaranteed dignity in the head of his family would have become a nonentity,[[35]] and the Ranas would have been governed by the deputies of their mayors. From both those evils the times have relieved the prince. The crimes of Ajit had made his dismissal from office a point of justice, but imbecility and folly will never be without ‘mayors.’
When a Rana of Udaipur leaves the capital, the Salumbar chief is invested with the government of the city and charge of the palace during his absence. By his hands the sovereign is girt with the sword, and from him he receives the mark of inauguration on his accession to the throne. He leads, by right, the van in battle; and in case of the siege of the capital, his post is the surajpol,[[36]] and the fortress which crowns it, in which this family had a handsome palace, which is now going fast to decay.
It was the predecessor of the present chief of Salumbar who set up a pretender and the standard of rebellion; but when foreign aid was brought in, he returned to his allegiance and the defence of the capital. Similar sentiments have often been awakened in patriotic breasts, when roused by the interference of foreigners in their internal disputes. The evil entailed on the State by these hereditary offices will appear in its annals.
In Marwar the dignity is hereditary in the house of Awa; but the last brave chief who held it became the victim of a revengeful and capricious sovereign,[[37]] [188] who was jealous of his exploits; and dying, he bequeathed a curse to his posterity who should again accept the office. It was accordingly transferred to the next in dignity, the house of Asop. The present chief, wisely distrusting the prince whose reign has been a series of turmoils, has kept aloof from court. When the office was jointly held by the chiefs of Nimaj and Pokaran, the tragic end of the former afforded a fine specimen of the prowess and heroism of the Rathor Rajput. In truth, these pardhans of Marwar have always been mill-stones round the necks of their princes; an evil interwoven in their system when the partition of estates took place amidst the sons of Jodha in the infancy of this State. It was, no doubt, then deemed politic to unite to the interests of the crown so powerful a branch, which when combined could always control the rest; but this gave too much equality.
The Chief of Pokaran.
Premiers in Kotah and Jaisalmer.
Like those of the Merovingian race, these puppets of royalty in the east are brought forth to the Champ de Mars once a year, at the grand military festival, the Dasahra. On this day, presents provided by the minister are distributed by the prince. Allowances for every branch of expenditure are fixed, nor has the prince the power to exceed them. But at Kotah there is nothing parsimonious, though nothing superfluous. On the festival of the birth of Krishna, and other similar feasts, the prince likewise appears abroad, attended by all the insignia of royalty. Elephants with standards precede; lines of infantry and guns are drawn up; while a numerous cavalcade surrounds his person. The son of the minister sometimes condescends to accompany his prince on horseback; nor is there anything wanting to magnificence, but the power to control or alter any part of it. This failing, how humiliating to a proud mind, acquainted with the history of his ancestors and imbued with a portion of their spirit, to be thus muzzled, enchained, and rendered a mere pageant of state! This chain would have been snapped, but that each link has become adamantine from the ties this ruler has formed with the British Government. He has well merited our protection; though we never contemplated to what extent the maintenance of these ties would involve our own character. But this subject is connected with the history of an individual who yields to none of the many extraordinary men whom India has produced, and who required but a larger theatre to have drawn the attention of the world. His character will be further elucidated in the Annals of Haravati [190].
[1]. See Appendix, Nos. [VII]., [VIII]., and [IX].
[2]. This is the ‘sauvement ou vingtain’ of the French system: there it ceased with the cause. “Les guerres (feudal) cessèrent avec le régime féodal, et les paysans n’eurent plus besoin de la protection du Seigneur; on ne les força pas moins de réparer son château, et de lui payer le droit qui se nommait de sauvement ou vingtain” (Art. ‘Château,’ Dict. de l’Ancien Régime).
[3]. The chief might lose his patta lands, and he would then dwindle down into the bhumia proprietor, which title only lawless force could take from him. See Appendix, No. [IX].
[4]. See Appendix, No. [X]., Art. II.
[5]. This species would come under the distinct term of Hydages due by soccage vassals, who in return for protection supply carriages and work (Hume, vol. ii. p. 308).
[6]. Hallam, vol. i. p. 169.
[7]. In indulging my curiosity on this subject, I collected some hundred engagements, and many of a most singular nature. We see the chieftain stipulating for fees on marriages; for a dish of the good fare at the wedding feast, which he transfers to a relation of his district if unable to attend himself; portions of fuel and provender; and even wherewithal to fill the wassail cup in his days of merriment. The Rajput’s religious notions are not of so strict a character as to prevent his even exacting his rakhwali dues from the church lands, and the threat of slaughtering the sacred flock of our Indian Apollo has been resorted to, to compel payment when withheld. Nay, by the chiefs it was imposed on things locomotive: on caravans, or Tandas of merchandise, wherever they halted for the day, rakhwali was demanded. Each petty chief through whose district or patch of territory they travelled, made a demand, till commerce was dreadfully shackled; but it was the only way in which it could be secured. It was astonishing how commerce was carried on at all; yet did the cloths of Dacca and the shawls of Kashmir pass through all such restraints, and were never more in request. Where there is demand no danger will deter enterprise; and commerce flourished more when these predatory armies were rolling like waves over the land, than during the succeeding halcyon days of pacification.
[8]. The method by which the country is brought under this tax is as follows: “When the people are almost ruined by continual robberies and plunders, the leader of the band of thieves, or some friend of his, proposes that, for a sum of money annually paid, he will keep a number of men in arms to protect such a tract of ground, or as many parishes as submit to the contribution. When the terms are agreed upon he ceases to steal, and thereby the contributors are safe: if any one refuse to pay, he is immediately plundered. To colour all this villainy, those concerned in the robberies pay the tax with the rest; and all the neighbourhood must comply or be undone. This is the case (among others), with the whole low country of the shire of Ross” (Extract from Lord Lovat’s Memorial to George I. on the State of the Highlands of Scotland, in A.D. 1724).
[9]. In Persian ghulām, literally ‘slave’; evidently a word of the same origin with the Hindu gola. [The words have no connexion.]
[10]. Hallam, vol. i. p. 217.
[11]. From hal, ‘a plough.’ Syl is ‘a plough’ in Saxon (Turner’s Anglo-Saxons). The h and s are permutable throughout Rajwara. [The words have no connexion.] In Marwar, Salim Singh is pronounced Halim Hingh.
[13]. Female slave.
[14]. See Appendix, No. [XIX].
[15]. The reader of Dow’s translation of Ferishta [i. 134] may recollect that when Kutbu-d-din was left the viceroy of the conqueror he is made to say: “He gave the country to Gola the son of Pittu Rai.” [“He delivered over the country to the Gola, or natural son, of Pithow Ray” (Briggs’ trans. i. 128).] Dow mistakes this appellation of the natural brother of the last Hindu sovereign for a proper name. He is mentioned by the bard Chand in his exploits of Prithwiraja.
[16]. I have often received the most confidential messages, from chiefs of the highest rank, through these channels. [There are, at the present day, several bastard castes originally composed of the illegitimate children of men of rank, Rājputs, Brāhmans, Mahājans, and others. These are now recruited from the descendants of such persons, and from recently born illegitimate children (Census Report, Rajputana, 1911, i. 249f.).]
[17]. Germania, xxiv.
[18]. The das or ‘slave’ may hold a fief in Rajasthan, hut he never can rise above the condition in which this defect of birth has placed him. “L’affranchissement consistait à sortir de la classe des serfs, par l’acquisition d’un fief, ou settlement d’un fonds. La nécessité où s’étaient trouvés les seigneurs féodaux de vendre une partie de leurs terres, pour faire leurs équipages des croisades, avait rendu ces acquisitions communes; mais le fief n’anoblissait qu’à la troisième génération.” Serfs who had twice or thrice been champions, or saved the lives of their masters, were also liberated. “Un évêque d’Auxerre déclara qu’il n’affranchirait gratuitement, qui que ce soit, s’il n’avait reçu quinze blessures à son service” (see Article ‘Affranchissement,’ Dict. de l’ancien Régime).
[19]. I could but indistinctly learn whether this migration, and the species of paternity here existing, arose from rescuing them from Tatar invaders, or from the calamity of famine.
[20]. Basna, ‘to settle.’
[21]. I had the happiness to be the means of releasing from captivity some young chiefs, who had been languishing in Mahratta fetters as hostages for the payment of a war contribution. One of them, a younger brother of the Purawat division, had a mother dying to see him; but though he might have taken her house in the way, a strong feeling of honour and gratitude made him forgo this anxious visit: “I am your Rajput, your gola, your basai.” He was soon sent off to his mother. Such little acts, mingling with public duty, are a compensation for the many drawbacks of solitude, gloom, and vexation, attending such situations. They are no sinecures or beds of roses—ease, comfort, and health, being all subordinate considerations.
[22]. Gilbert on Tenures, art. “Warranty,” p. 169. [Wergild, wer, ‘man,’ gield, gieldan; vair is Skt. vīra, ‘hero’; O.E. wer, O.H.G. werran, ‘to embroil,’ Fr. guerre.]
[23]. “The great toe took rank as it should be, and held to double the sum of the others, for which ten scyllinga was the value without the nail, which was thirty scealta to boot” (Turner’s Anglo-Saxons, vol. ii. p. 133).
[24]. Appendix, No. [XVIII]. The laws of composition were carried to a much greater extent amongst the Hindu nations than even amongst those of the Anglo-Saxons, who might have found in Manu all that was ever written on the subject, from the killing of a Brahman by design to the accidental murder of a dog. The Brahman is four times the value of the soldier, eight of the merchant, and sixteen times of the Sudra. “If a Brahman kill one of the soldier caste (without malice), a bull and one thousand cows is the fine of expiation. If he slays a merchant, a bull and one hundred cows is the fine. If a Sudra or lowest class, ten white cows and a bull to the priest is the expiation” [Laws, xi. 127 ff.]. Manu legislated also for the protection of the brute creation, and if the priest by chance kills a cat, a frog, a dog, a lizard, an owl, or a crow, he must drink nothing but milk for three days and nights, or walk four miles in the night.
[25]. Ummeda, ‘hope.’
[26]. Together £20,000, equal to £100,000 of England, if the respective value of the necessaries of life be considered.
[27]. Barchi is ‘a lance.’ In these marauding days, when there was a riever in every village, they sallied out to ‘run the country,’ either to stop the passenger on the highway or the inhabitant of the city. The lance at his breast, he would call out dohai, an invocation of aid. During harvest time barchi-dohai used to be exacted.
[28]. ‘Cup of invitation.’ [Munawwar, Pers. ‘bright, splendid.’]
[29]. This is a favourite expression, and a mode of indicating great friendship: ‘to eat of the same platter (thali), and drink of the same cup (piyala).’
[30]. The Bundi feud with the Rana is still unappeased, since the predecessor of the former slew the Rana’s father. It was an indefensible act, and the Bundi prince was most desirous to terminate it. He had no daughter to offer, and hinted a desire to accompany me incog. and thus gain admission to the presence of the Rana. The benevolence and generosity of this prince would have insured him success; but it was a delicate matter, and I feared some exposure from any arrogant hot-headed Rajput ere the scene could have been got up. The Raja Bishan Singh of Bundi is since dead [in 1828]; a brave and frank Rajput; he has left few worthier behind. His son [Rām Singh, 1821-89], yet a minor, promises well. The protective alliance, which is to turn their swords into ploughshares, will prevent their becoming foes; but they will remain sulky border-neighbours, to the fostering of disputes and the disquiet of the merchant and cultivator.
[31]. Sim—Kankar.
[32]. A salutation, only sent by a superior to an inferior.
[33]. The kitchen is large enough for a fortress, and contains large eating halls. Food for seven hundred of the prince’s court is daily dressed. This is not for any of the personal servants of the prince, or female establishments; all these are separate.
[34]. Dagobert commended his wife and son Clovis to the trust of Ega, with whom she jointly held the care of the palace. On his death, with the aid of more powerful lords, she chose another mayor. He confirmed their grants for life. They made his situation hereditary; but which could only have held good from the crowd of imbeciles who succeeded Clovis, until the descendant of this mayor thrust out his children and seized the crown. This change is a natural consequence of unfitness; and if we go back to the genealogies (called sacred) of the Hindus, we see there a succession of dynasties forced from their thrones by their ministers. Seven examples are given in the various dynasties of the race of Chandra. (See Genealogical Tables, No. II.) [The above is in some ways inaccurate, but it is unnecessary to correct it, as it is not connected with the question of premiers in Rājputāna: see EB, xvii. 938.]
[35]. So many sudden deaths had occurred in this family, that the branch in question (Ajit Singh’s) were strongly suspected of ‘heaping these mortal murders on their crown,’ to push their elders from their seats. The father of Padma, the present chief, is said to have been taken off by poison; and Pahar Singh, one generation anterior, returning grievously wounded from the battle of Ujjain, in which the southrons first swept Mewar, was not permitted to recover. The mother of the present young chief of the Jhala tribe of the house of Gogunda, in the west, was afraid to trust him from her sight. She is a woman of great strength of mind and excellent character, but too indulgent to an only son. He is a fine bold youth, and, though impatient of control, may be managed. On horseback with his lance, in chase of the wild boar, a more resolute cavalier could not be seen. His mother, when he left the estate alone for court, which he seldom did without her accompanying him, never failed to send me a long letter, beseeching me to guard the welfare of her son. My house was his great resort: he delighted to pull over my books, or go fishing or riding with me.
[36]. Surya, ‘sun’; and pol, ‘gate.’ Poliya, ‘a porter.’
[37]. “The cur can bite,” the reply of this chief, either personally, or to the person who reported that his sovereign so designated him, was never forgiven.
[38]. His son, Sabal Singh, followed in his footsteps, till an accidental cannon-shot relieved the terrors of the prince.
[39]. L’Esprit des Loix, chap. vi. livre 31.