« السابقةمتابعة »
83. Further to the west and beyond the course of the Vitastā after its great bend, lay the ancient kingdom Uraśā-Hazāra. of Urasa. Its greatest part is comprised in the British district of Hazara, between the Vitastā and Indus. It is the Ovapoa or "Apoa of Ptolemy; its ruler figures as Arsakes in the accounts of Alexander's campaigns. Hiuen Tsiang mentions the territory by the name of Wu-la-shi and found it tributary to Kaśmir. Though this dependence seems soon to have ceased we find Uraśā often referred to in the Rajatarangini. The account of Samkaravarman's ill-fated expedition in this direction furnishes us with a clue as to the position of the old capital of Urasa. It probably lay between the present Mansahra and Abbottabad.2 Kalhana's notice of an expedition undertaken in his own time mentions in Urasa the town of ATYUGRAPURA. I have shown in my note on the passage that this locality is probably represented by the modern Agrōr, situated on the border of Hazara towards the Black Mountains.' We have an intermediary form of the name in Ptolemy's 'Ioáyoupos, given as the designation of a town in Uarsa or Arsa north of Taxila.
In Muhammadan times Uraśā was included in the region known as Pakhli. This is defined by Abu-1-Fazl as comprising the whole of the hill territory between Kaśmir in the east and the Indus on the west. Pakhli belonged also the lower valley of the Kisanganga and the valleys of the streams which flow into the latter from the Kājnāg Range and the mountains to the north-west of Kasmir.
This tract which is now known as Karnau, bore the old name of KARŅĀHA. It seems to have been held by Kisanganga Valley. small chiefs nominally tributary to Kaśmir even in later Hindu times. It is but rarely mentioned in the Chronicle. The inhabitants were Khasas,6 who are represented by the modern Bomba clans still holding Karnau. Their Rājās were practically independent till the Sikh conquest and often harried the north-western parts of Kasmir.7 The last irruption of the Karnau Bombas and their allies, the Khakha chiefs of the Vitasta Valley, occurred as late as 1846.
For a detailed synopsis of the old notices, see Rajat. v. 217 note.
2 See Rajat. v. 217 note and CUNNINGHAM, Anc. Geogr., p. 104.
3 Compare note viii. 3402.
4 See Ain-i-Akb., ii. pp. 390 sq.
Compare Rajat. viii. 2485 note.
6 See viii. 2756, 3006, 3088.
7 Compare for the modern Karnau, BATES, Gazetteer, p. 228.
The valley of the Kisanganga above its junction with the Karnau river and as far as Sardi, forms a separate tract known as Drava. This is possibly the DURANDA mentioned in a passage of Kalhana's Chronicle.1 The northernmost portion of the tract seems to have been a dependency of Kaśmir even during the later Hindu reigns. At Sardi we find the shrine of Sāradā, one of the most sacred Tirthas of old Kaśmir. To this as well as an old feudal stronghold in its neighbourhood we shall have occasion to refer thereafter (§ 127).
Through Sardi leads a route to Cilas on the Indus. But this territory as well as the other portions of the Upper Indus Valley lay apparently quite beyond the sphere of Kasmir political influence. Hence we meet nowhere in the Chronicles with their ancient names.
84. Immediately above Sardi the valley of the Kisangangā turns, as we have seen, into a narrow uninhabited Darad territory. At the other end of this gorge we gorge. reach the territory of the Darads. Their settlements on the Upper Kiṣangangā and its tributaries seem to have formed a separate little kingdom, called by a general name DARADDESA in the Chronicle.2 Its inhabitants who bore Hindu names, more than once attempted invasions of Kaśmir. DARATPURI, 'the town of the Darads,' which was the capital of their chiefs, may have occupied the position of the modern Gurez (map Goorais').3 The latter is the chief place of the valley where the Nawabs governing it till the Sikh conquest resided. The 'Mleccha' chiefs who on two occasions figure as the Darad Rājās' allies from the north, were perhaps rulers of other Darad tribes further towards the Indus who had early been converted to Islam.4 Crossing from the head-waters of the Kisangangā to those of the Dras River we arrive in high-level valleys Bhauṭṭas. inhabited by people of Tibetan race and language, the Bhauttas of the Chronicles. The Rajatarangiņi tells us nothing of the political organization or topography of the Bhautta territories. It is, however, possible that we have a reference to Leh, the capital of Ladakh, in the "foreign country called LoḤ," which Kalhana names in iii. 10.
Nor do the later Chronicles supply us with any details in this direction, though the several invasions which Kasmir suffered from this side give Jonarāja and Srivara occasion to refer more frequently to the Bhauṭṭas and their rulers. It may, however be noted that Srivara
1 See viii. 2709 note.
2 Compare Rajat. vii. 911; for other references to the Darads, i. 312 note.
8 See vii. 911 note.
4 See viii. 2762 note.
already knows the terms 'Little and Great Bhutta-land." They refer to Baltistan (Skardo) and Ladakh which have continued to be known to the present day as 'Little and Great Tibet,' or among Kasmiris as Lukh Butun and Bud Buṭun. These terms are in fact of a far older date, as they are found already in the Chinese Annals as Little and Great Poliu.3
The eastern frontier of Kasmir is, as we have seen, formed by a mountain range which runs from the Zōji-Lā almost due south towards Kaṣṭvār. Along this range on the east lies a long narrow valley marked as Maru-Wardwan on the map (in Kaśmiri Mṇḍivāḍvan). It is drained by a large river which joins the Cinab near the town of Kast var. Owing to its high elevation and the rigours of its climate it is inhabited only by a scanty population. According to Mr. Drew's race map and other authorities, this consists now chiefly of Kaśmiris. Whether this was already the case in old times, is uncertain. The Valley is nowhere mentioned in our old Kaśmirian texts. It is hence doubtful whether it belonged to Kasmir territory in Hindu times. Yet Abu-l-Fazl counts it among the Parganas of Kaśmir. Beyond it to the east stretches an uninhabited belt of high mountains and glaciers, dividing Maḍivāḍvan from the Tibetan tracts of Saru and Zanskar. To the south we reach once more the territory of Kāṣṭhavāṭa from which our present survey has started.
1 See Sriv. iii. 445 (Sūkṣmabṛhadbhuṭṭadeśau).
8 Butun (connected with the ethnic term Bufo < Bhauṭṭa; see above, § 58), is the Kasmiri term for Tibet in general.
8 Compare A. RÉMUSAT, Nouveaux mélanges asiatiques, i. p. 194; and SIR H. YULE, Cathay, p. lxx.
♦ The Trisaṁdhyāmāhātmya which refers to the Valley as Maḍavātīra, cannot claim any particular antiquity.
See Ain-i-Akb., ii. p. 369.
SECTION II. ANCIENT POLITICAL DIVISIONS.
85. The Valley of Kasmir to which we may now return has from early times been divided into two great parts, known by their modern names as
Kramarajya, Madavarājya. Kamráz and Marāz. These terms are derived from Skr. KRAMARAJYA and MADAVARAJYA, which are found very frequently in the Rajatarangini as well as the later Chronicles.1 The original form of the modern Kamraz was known to the tradition of the Srinagar Pandits generally. With the old name Maḍavarājya, however, I found only those few acquainted who, like the late Paṇḍit Damodara and Pandit Govind Kaul, had specially studied Kalhana's Chronicle.
According to the generally prevailing notion Maraz comprises the districts on both sides of the Vitastā above Srinagar, and Kamraz those below. The present tradition places the boundary of the two great divisions more accurately at the Shōrgarhi palace. That the boundary was already in old times indicated by a line drawn through the capital is easily proved by an examination of all passages in the Rajatarangiņi and other Chronicles naming Maḍavarajya and Kramarajya. They invariably show localities situated above Srinagar in the former and those below in the latter division.
We arrive at the same result on a reference to the Ain-i Akbari. Abu-l-Fazl distinctly informs us that "the whole kingdom was divided under its ancient rulers into two divisions, Marāj on the east and Kamraj on the west." He then proceeds to tabulate the thirty-eight Parganas into which Kasmir was divided under Akbar's administration, separately under the two main-heads of Marāj and Kamraj. The city of Srinagar is counted with the former, and so are also all Parganas above the capital, while those below are shown in Kamrāj.
The term of Kamrāz has in modern times occasionally been used also in a more restricted sense, for the designation of the Pargaņas to the west and north-west of the Volur lake. This usage probably arose from the fact that at various periods several of the small Parganas in this portion of the Valley were for administrative purposes grouped together in one Pargana, to which the name Kamrāz was given.3 This
I See my note on Rajat. ii. 15.
2 Compare Ain-i-Akb., ii. p. 368.
8 Thus Abu-l-Fazl's table seems to show that in Akbar's time the old Parganas of Uttar, Lolau, Hamal and Machipur were embodied in the large Pargana of 'Kamrāj;' see Aïn-i Akb., ii. p. 371. In Moorcroft's and Baron Hügel's list the Pargaņa Kamrāj includes Uttar, Hamal and Mạch1pūr. Owing to the frequent changes
circumstance explains the different accounts referred to by Prof. Bühler in his note on the term Kramarājya.1
Though the terms Maḍavarajya and Kramarajya are so often employed in the Chronicles, we have no distinct evidence of the two divisions having in Hindu times formed separate administrative units or provinces. It is possible that this was the case at one or the other period. But Abu-l-Fazl's account as well as the usage traceable from his time to the present day show that the terms in their popular geographical significance could maintain themselves quite independently of actual administrative divisions.2
86. The whole of the Valley has from an early date been subdivided for administrative purposes into a considerable number of small districts known in recent times as Parganas.' Their ancient designation was viṣaya. The number, names and limits of these subdivisions have been subject to considerable variations during the period over which our documents extend.
The great majority of the Pargaņas known in recent times can be safely assumed to have existed already during the Hindu rule. This is proved by the fact that the names of numerous Parganas are found in their ancient forms already in the Rajatarangini and the other Chronicles. But these texts do not furnish us anywhere with a complete list of the Parganas. It is hence impossible for us to restore in full detail the map of the administrative sub-divisions for any particular epoch
of the Pargana divisions (see below) the extent of the 'Pargaṇa Kamrāj' has also varied from time to time.
1 See Report, p. 11.
2 The only trace I can find of a general division of Kasmir other than that into Maḍavarajya and Kramarājya, is contained in an unfortunately corrupt and fragmentary passage of the Lokaprakāśa, iv. It seems to divide the twenty-seven Visayas or Parganas of Kasmir (see below) into three tracts, viz. (i) Kramarājya from Khōyāśrāmika onwards (Khuyahōm, the old Khūyāśrama is meant); (ii) Madhyamarajya from the Canula [river ?] to Lahara or Lar; (iii) Maḍavarājya from Srivantaka (?).
The text is in a deplorable condition and the explanation of Canula and Srīvantaka quite uncertain. The former may be the river of doubtful name and identity referred to in Rājat. note v. 109. It appears as if at the time to which the Lokaprakāśa's notice goes back, an intermediate slice of territory had been formed between Kramarājya and Maḍavarājya and dubbed Madhyamarājya ‘the middle province.' Five thousand villages out of the 66,063 with which the text credits Kasmir, are attributed to this intermediate division.
8 Compare for the term visaya Rajat. v. 51; viii. 1260, 1413, 2697.
The expression Pargana may have been introduced by the Mughal administration. Its Skr. original puragana is not found in the Chronicles.