Page:The Indian Antiquary Vol 2.djvu/354

 316 THE INDIAN ANTIQUARY. [Novimbkr, 1873. Kumar Pala is thus used. The JethvA chronicles say that the title of Ran a was derived from a defeat by Jethva Sangji of the WAghelA RanA of Anhilwada Pattan, Kumar P Ala’s son Karsanji or Krishnaji. The Jethva is said to have de¬ feated Karsanji and taken him prisoner, but to have released him at the intercession of the neighbouring chieftains, among whom was Ak- herajji of Sirohi. A condition of the reloase was that the Waghela should resign the title of Rana, which has from that day been held by the Jethva Chief of Porbandar. The bardic couplet regarding this battle is as follows:

Sangaji, with a body like the sun, founded a (new) title ; While the Rana who descended into the Ran had his title of RAnA burned to ashes. Now as Akh&raj of Sirohi ascended the gddi in Samvat 1580 (a. d. 1524), it is clear that this could not be Kumar Pala of Anhilwada Patten, and it is highly probable that the Waghela Rana in question was Rana Mandanji of Gedi in Waghar, or possibly Rana Yisal De of MorwAdA, both of whom were Waghela RAnAs and contemporaries, being both of them sons of Rana Vanoji of Gedi. Rana Yisal De’s date is known from the inscription on the Rana Wav near Morwada, to have been Sam. 1516, or a.d. 1460. His younger brother Mandanji succeeded to the gddi, and is in all probability the Rana in ques¬ tion. if it be not Visal De himself, who may have essayed to conquer Morbi after his esta¬ blishment at Morwada. If this slight alteration then be made in the names of the sovereigns of Patten in the legends in question, the dates given in Ranchodji Devan’s history may be accepted as the approximately correct ones. The legend about Ra Gario styles him grandson of Rae Chuda, who was probably Chudachand YAdav, and who is well known in the contemporary annals of the Rajput houses. Tod assigns to j Rao Chudachand the date Sam. 960 (a.d. 904), whereas if he were grandfather of Ra Gario, Sam. 760 (a.d. 704) would be nearer the mark. This discrepancy is difficult to reconcile, but as in the main features of the legend respecting Ra Gario there is no striking improbability, I would be inclined to assign to Rao Chudachand the older date. Rao Chudachand is said to have originated the name Chudasama, his descend¬ ants being called Chuda-Sammas. Ra Gario vrould thus be the second Chudasama. Look¬ ing also at the antiquity of the Chudasama dynasty, its introduction into Kathiawad at about the middle of the eighth century of the Christian era seems also probable, and this i account fits in with the Yala and Gehlot chro¬ nicles. However it may be, these legends may. in abler hands than mine, form a connecting link between the era of the Valabhi kings and the consolidation of the Chudasama rule in Saurashtra. A better translation also of the Gujarati verses might throw more light on the subject, and this I doubt not might be furnished by many of the readers of the Antiquary. Pos¬ sibly, however, the king of Patten who fought with Ra Khengar was Mula Raja Solanki. In the account by Kinloch Forbes of Mula Raja’s warfare in Saurashtra (see lids Mdld, vol. I. pp. 53 etc. and 154 etc.), quoting from both the Dvydshruya and the Prabandh Chintd- mani, the Lord of WAmanasthali is described as a Shepherd King, or Ahir Rana. Now both Noghan and Khengar might fairly be called by such a name, as Noghan was placed on the throne by the aid of the Ahirs. It will be seen by referring to the Sindhi version of the legend of Ra Dyas that the account given therein of the cause of quarrel between Anerai and the Ra is almost exactly the same as the one in the Turi’s version quoted by Mr. Forbes. Mr. Forbes re¬ presents Lakh A Phulani to have been slain by Mularaja, but he also mentions that the honour, of slaying Lakha has been also claimed by Sinhoji Rathod. It will, I think, be easy to prove that LAkhA Phulani did not live for up¬ wards of four centuries after MularAja, and as the descendants of Sinhoji Rathod still enjoy lands in GujarAt, and as the WAghela chronicles show Muluji, the conqueror of SirdArgadh in KAthiawAd, and founder of the Sirdhara Waghe- las, to have been a contemporary of Lakha, and defeated Lakha at Adkot, where Lakha fell by the hand of Sinhoji, it may fairly be inferred that Lakha was a contemporaiy of WaghelA Muluji. Professor Wilson has pointed out (in Bombay Government Records No. XV. New Series) that the era of LAkha GhurarA has been antedated by 621 years. This would make the death of LakhA, if the JhAdejA chronicles be
 * _ A
 * that it was Muluji who with Sinhoji Rathod