r^s
HISTORY OF INI>I..
[Book I.
AD, ll'.il.
Hindoo struggle for iiulo- paiulence.
Dissensions among the rajahs.
Il
Their vic- tory over Shahab-u- din.
Sh;iliab-u-din, being tlius left in India without a Mahometan rival, deter- mined to extend his conquests. It is prol^aljle he did not anticipate much difficulty, as his army, diviwn Irom the warlike province of the west, must have been considered more than a match for any that the Hindoos could oppose to it. The struggle, however, was severe. Several of the Indian rajahs suc- cessfully maintained their ground, while few of them yielded without a manful resistance.
In this war of independence the Rajpoots particularly distinguished them- selves. Belonging to the military class in the original Hindoo system, they were bom soldiers, and lived under a kind of military feudal system, not unlike that of the clans in the Highlands of Scotland and some other countrie.s. While each chief had his hereditary territory, all the chiefs held under the rajah as their common head, and were thus in the po.sition most favourable for united action and individual exertion. At tiie same time they laboured under some disadvantages. Living almost secluded, they had a simplicity of manners little fitted to protect them again.st political wile.s, and an indolence and love of freedom which made it difficult to keep them under regular di.scipline.
Near the time of Shahab-u-din,' Hindoostan was mainly composed of four leading sovereignties — Delhi, Canouge, Ajmeer, and Callinjer. On a failure of heirs in the third, the heir-apparent of the first had been adopted, and thus Delhi and Ajmeer were united under one head. This arrangement had given great offence to the Rajah of Callinjer, who thought he ought to have been preferred in the adoption; and thus, when cordial union among the rajahs constituted their only safety, considerable dissension prevailed. The disunion, thus dangex'ous to them, was most opportune for Shahab-u-din, who, taking advantage of it, made his first attack on the newly amalgamated, but by no means firmly cemented rajahships of Delhi and Ajmeer. It commenced in 1191, with the capture of Batinda. He placed a garrison in it; but had scarcely left when he learned that the Rajah of Delhi, at the head of a powerful confederation, was advancing against it with an army of 200,000 horse and 3000 elephants. In retracing his steps to relieve the garrison, he was met by the enemy on the banks of the Soorsooty, about eighty mUes from Delhi. He immediately joined battle, but with forces so inferior that both wings, being outflanked, bent backwards tiU they met in the rear, and gave his army the form of a circle. While standing within its centre, affair's looked so desperate that he was advised to provide for his safety. This so enraged him that he cut down the messenger sent with the advice, and rushed into the enemy's lines, making terrible slaughter. The Rajali of Delhi, observing where he smote, drove his elephant right against him ; but Shahab saw his intention in time to frustrate it, and struck a blow with his lance which knocked out a
' Ferishta gives his full name as Moiz - n - din Mahomed. Ghoory, and speak.s of him under the name
of Mahomed Ghoory, not as joint sovereign, but onlv as the general of Gheias-u-din.
