I 



72 



Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal. [N.S., XIII, 



This prince, desirous of carrying out his father's policy, seven 



. 9 • •» T •>* * — "I 1 a 1 J • _ ^ 1 _ -^ J »— ■- 4-1^ nnc 



nvaded 



* * * At this time the reigning Raja of Garhwal was Mahipat 



1 



'/ 



first Raja who consolidated the rule over Garhwal. * * * Ak- 

 bar's Sarkar of Kumaon contained twenty-one Mahals, but 

 none of these seem to have been situated in the hills. * * * 

 Whatever the reason may have been, the Muhammadans 

 do not ever seem to have subjugated the hill rajas, though 

 some expeditions successful to a certain extent, as far as the 

 partial Muhammadan historians may be trusted, were fitted 

 out. In 1654-55 Khalil ullah Khan was despatched with 8000 

 men to coerce the "Zemindar of Srinagar," the only title 

 then conceded to the Raja of Garhwal at that time, Pirthi 

 Sah, the suceessor of Mahipat Sah. The hostile force met with 

 little resistance and speedily overran Dehra Dun, then subject 

 to the Garhwal Rajas, but did not penetrate within the hills/ 

 (District Gazetteers of the United Provinces, British Garhwal, 

 pp. 115-117). 



In the Volume on Almora we read : 



" At the same time, the negative testimony of the Ain»irAk- 

 bari proves conclusively that no portion of the hills ever paid 

 tribute to Akbar." (District Gazetteers of the United Pro- 

 vinces, Almora, p. 172). 



But if there is no reference to the Srinagar of Garhwal in 

 the Mughal annals before the reign of Shahjahan, how doe 

 the case stand with respect to the Srinagar of Kashmir' 

 Neither Badaoni nor Nizamu-d-din Ahmad of the Tabaqat-i- 

 Akbari is acquainted with any other Srinagar than that of the 

 Happy Valley. (Lowe's translation, Vol. II, 365; Elliot and 

 Dowson, Vol. V, 454, 457). The same is the case with the 

 Am, which explicitly states (Jarrett, II, 355 and 384-5) just 

 as do Badaoni and Nizamu-d-din (Lowe II, 365; Elliot and 



Dowson, V, 454), that Srinagar was the capital of the country. 





true that the Akbarnamah once mentions 



name of Srinagar in Bengal. (Bibl. Ind. Text, III. p. 824): 

 but such a place cannot have any connection with the point m 

 dispute. All the other eleven references to Srinagar in tha 

 ''continent of a book" (Vol. Ill, pp. 506, 507, 542, 543, 553. 

 565 623, 624, 630, 726, 729), of which the earliest belongs to the 



nnL gD f l year ( " 4 A,H -> and the late8t to the forty- second 

 ( IU05 a.h.), are applicable to that citv only, which is repeatedly 



called the ^U tjh (Metropolis) of Kashmir. {Ibid. Ill, 542, 



Jarretrinfli a8ar ° f Ka * hmir is m ««t^d also on pp. 31 1 and 368 < 



