CHAPTER 5
Adoption.
On sudden lapses, the wife is allowed the privilege, in conjunction with those interested in the fief, of nomination, though the case is seldom left unprovided for: there is always a presumptive heir to the smallest sub-infeudation of these estates. The wife of the deceased is the guardian of the minority of the adopted.
The Case of Deogarh.
When these proceedings were reported, the Rana was highly and justly incensed. The late chief had been one of the rebels of S. 1848;[[6]] and though pardon had been [192] granted, yet this revived all the recollection of the past, and he felt inclined to extinguish the name of Sangawat.[[7]]
In addition to the common sequestration, he sent an especial one with commands to collect the produce of the harvest then reaping, charging the sub-vassals with the design of overturning his lawful authority. They replied very submissively, and artfully asserted that they had only given a son to Gokuldas, not an heir to Deogarh; that the sovereign alone could do this, and that they trusted to his nominating one who would be an efficient leader of so many Rajputs in the service of the Rana. They urged the pretensions of young Nahar, at the same time leaving the decision to the sovereign. Their judicious reply was well supported by their ambassador at court, who was the bard of Deogarh, and had recently become, though ex officio, physician to the prince.[[8]] The point was finally adjusted, and Nahar was brought to court, and invested with the sword by the hand of the sovereign, and he is now lord of Deogarh Madri, one of the richest and most powerful fiefs[[9]] of Mewar.[Mewar.] Madri was the ancient name of the estate; and Sangramgarh, of which Nahar was the heir, was severed from it, but by some means had reverted to the crown, of which it now holds. The adoption of Nahar by Gokuldas leaves the paternal estate without an immediate heir; and his actual father being mad, if more distant claims are not admitted, it is probable that Sangramgarh will eventually revert to the fisc.
Reflections.
We have nothing to apprehend from the Rajput States if raised to their ancient prosperity. The closest attention to their history proves beyond contradiction that they were never capable of uniting, even for their own preservation: a breath, a scurrilous stanza of a bard, has severed their closest confederacies. No national head exists amongst them as amongst the Mahrattas; and each chief being master of his own house and followers, they are individually too weak to cause us any alarm.
No feudal government can be dangerous as a neighbour; for defence it has in all countries been found defective; and for aggression, totally inefficient. Let there exist between us the most perfect understanding and identity of interests; the foundation-step to which is to lessen or remit the galling, and to us contemptible tribute, now exacted, enfranchise them from our espionage and agency, and either unlock them altogether from our dangerous embrace, or let the ties between us be such only as would ensure grand results: such as general commercial freedom and protection, with treaties of friendly alliance. Then, if a Tatar or a Russian invasion threatened our eastern empire, fifty thousand Rajputs would be no despicable allies.[[11]]
Rajput Loyalty and Patriotism.
“It was a powerful feeling,” says an historian[[14]] who always identifies his own emotions with his subject, “which could make the bravest of men put up with slights and ill-treatment at the hand of their sovereign, or call forth all the energies of discontented exertion for one whom they never saw, and in whose character there was nothing to esteem. Loyalty has scarcely less tendency to refine and elevate the heart than patriotism itself.” That these sentiments were combined, the past history of the Rajputs will show;[[15]] and to the strength of these ties do they owe their political existence, which has outlived ages of strife. But for these, they would have been converts and vassals to the Tatars, who would still have been enthroned in Delhi. Neglect, oppression, and religious interference, sunk one of the greatest monarchies of the world;[[16]] made Sivaji a hero, and converted the peaceful husbandmen of the Kistna and Godavari into a brave but rapacious soldier.
We have abundant examples, and I trust need not exclaim with the wise minister of Akbar, “who so happy as to profit by them?”[[17]]
The Rajput, with all his turbulence, possesses in an eminent degree both loyalty and patriotism; and though he occasionally exhibits his refractory spirit to his [195] father and sovereign,[[18]] we shall see of what he is capable when his country is threatened with dismemberment, from the history of Mewar, and the reign of Ajit Singh of Marwar. In this last we have one of the noblest examples history can afford of unbounded devotion. A prince, whom not a dozen of his subjects had ever seen, who had been concealed from the period of his birth throughout a tedious minority to avoid the snares of a tyrant,[[19]] by the mere magic of a name kept the discordant materials of a great feudal association in subjection, till, able to bear arms, he issued from his concealment to head these devoted adherents, and reconquer what they had so long struggled to maintain. So glorious a contest, of twenty years’ duration, requires but an historian to immortalize it. Unfortunately we have only the relation of isolated encounters, which, though exhibiting a prodigality of blood and acts of high devotion, are deficient in those minor details which give unity and interest to the whole.
Gallant Services to the Empire.
But Englishmen in the east, as elsewhere, undervalue everything not national. They have been accustomed to conquest, not reverses: though it is only by studying the character of those around them that the latter can be avoided and this superiority maintained. Superficial observers imagine that from lengthened predatory spoliation the energy of the Rajput has fled: an idea which is at once erroneous and dangerous. The vices now manifest from oppression will disappear [196] with the cause, and with reviving prosperity new feelings will be generated, and each national tie and custom be strengthened. The Rajput would glory in putting on his saffron robes[[21]] to fight for such a land, and for those who disinterestedly laboured to benefit it.
Let us, then, apply history to its proper use. We need not turn to ancient Rome for illustration of the dangers inseparable from wide dominion and extensive alliances. The twenty-two Satrapies of India, the greater part of which are now the appanage of Britain, exhibited, even a century ago, one of the most splendid monarchies history has made known, too extensive for the genius of any single individual effectually to control. Yet was it held together, till encroachment on their rights, and disregard to their habits and religious opinions, alienated the Rajputs, and excited the inhabitants of the south to rise against their Mogul oppressors. ‘Then was the throne of Aurangzeb at the mercy of a Brahman, and the grandson[[22]] of a cultivator in the province of Khandesh held the descendants of Timur pensioners on his bounty’ [197].
[1]. [The abandonment of the policy of escheat or lapse, and the recognition of the right of adoption were announced by Lord Canning in 1859.]
[2]. As in Deogarh.
[3]. [Umara, plural of Amīr, ‘a chief.’]
[4]. Gokuldas, the last chief, was one of the finest men I ever beheld in feature and person. He was about six feet six, perfectly erect, and a Hercules in bulk. His father at twenty was much larger, and must have been nearly seven feet high. It is surprising how few of the chiefs of this family died a natural death. It has produced some noble Rajputs.
[5]. Ek bap ka beta.
[6]. A.D. 1792.
[7]. That of the clan of Deogarh.
[8]. Apollo [Krishna] is the patron both of physicians and poets; and though my friend Amra does not disgrace him in either calling, it was his wit, rather than his medical degree, that maintained him at court. He said it was not fitting that the sovereign of the world should be served by clowns or opium-eaters; and that young Nahar, when educated at court under the Rana’s example, would do credit to the country: and what had full as much weight as any of the bard’s arguments was, that the fine of relief on the Talwar bandhai (or girding on of the sword) of a lac of rupees, should be immediately forthcoming.
[9]. Patta. [About 30 miles south of Udaipur city.]
[10]. Such interference, when inconsistent with past usage and the genius of the people, will defeat the very best intentions. On the grounds of policy and justice, it is alike incumbent on the British Government to secure the maintenance of their present form of government, and not to repair, but to advise the repairs of the fabric, and to let their own artists alone be consulted. To employ ours would be like adding a Corinthian capital to a column of Ellora, or replacing the mutilated statue of Baldeva with a limb from the Hercules Farnese. To have a chain of prosperous independent States on our only exposed frontier, the north-west, attached to us from benefits, and the moral conviction that we do not seek their overthrow, must be a desirable policy.
[11]. [The author’s prediction has been realized by recent events.]
[12]. Yamaloka.
[13]. The gunchhor (ungrateful) and satchhor (violator of his faith) are consigned, by the authority of the bard, to sixty-thousand years’ residence in hell. Europeans, in all the pride of mastery, accuse the natives of want of gratitude, and say their language has no word for it. They can only know the namak-haram [‘he that is false to his salt’] of the Ganges. Gunchhor is a compound of powerful import, as ingratitude and infidelity are the highest crimes. It means, literally, "abandoner (from chhorna, ‘to quit’) of virtue (gun)."
[14]. Hallam, vol. i. p. 323.
[15]. Of the effects of loyalty and patriotism combined, we have splendid examples in Hindu history and tradition. A more striking instance could scarcely be given than in the recent civil distractions at Kotah, where a mercenary army raised and maintained by the Regent, either openly or covertly declared against him, as did the whole feudal body to a man, the moment their young prince asserted his subverted claims, and in the cause of their rightful lord abandoned all consideration of self, their families and lands, and with their followers offered their lives to redeem his rights or perish in the attempt. No empty boast, as the conclusion testified. God forbid that we should have more such examples of Rajput devotion to their sense of fidelity to their lords!
[16]. See statement of its revenues during the last emperor, who had preserved the empire of Delhi united.
[17]. Abu-l Fazl uses this expression when moralizing on the fall of Shihabu-d-din, king of Ghazni and first established monarch of India, slain by Prithwiraja, the Hindu sovereign of Delhi [Āīn, ii. 302]. [Muhammad Ghori, Shihābu-d-dīn, was murdered on the road to Ghazni by a fanatic of the Mulāhidah sect, in March, A.D. 1206 (Tabakāt-ī-Nāsiri, in Elliot-Dowson ii. 297, 235). According to the less probable account of Ferishta (Briggs, i. 185), he was murdered at Rohtak by a gang of Gakkhars or rather Khokhars (Rose, Glossary, ii. 275).]
[18]. The Rajput, who possesses but an acre of land, has the proud feeling of common origin with his sovereign, and in styling him bapji (sire), he thinks of him as the common father or representative of the race. What a powerful incentive to action!
[19]. Aurangzeb.
[20]. Raja Man of Jaipur, who took Arakan, Orissa, and Assam. Raja Jaswant Singh of Marwar retook Kabul for Aurangzeb, and was rewarded by poison. Raja Ram Singh Hara, of Kotah, made several important conquests; and his grandson, Raja Isari Singh, and his five brothers, were left on one field of battle.
[21]. When a Rajput is determined to hold out to the last in fighting, he always puts on a robe dyed in saffron. [This was the common practice, saffron being the colour of the bridal robe (Malcolm, Memoir of Central India, 2nd ed. i. 358; Grant Duff, Hist. of the Mahrattas, 317; Forbes, Rāsmālā, 408).]
[22]. Sindhia.