208 J. Beames — The Rhapsodies of Gamhhir Rdi. [No. 3, 



general scope of the book, which is entirely in glorification of Jagat Singh. 



9^ ?TRT I take to be for Hindi ^^ T^TT, " to remain surrounding" ; 

 *frg, or tt, (Sanskrit ^ST), and TJ^T, for T^^T, the old infinitive in ifT (^T), 

 which is constantly used in these poems, as in most Rajput dialects, though 

 it has not left any very distinct traces in classical Hindi. 



f^^f^TT^t % I take to be a reduplicated form of f^^TPT in the invocation, 

 which, if derived from a root fa + f%, would mean ' to melt away.' The last 

 line contains the word Ti^RT, which is not clear. I have translated it as if 

 it were the same as Chand's word ^ffifTfr, a lengthened form of frf*fj = in ; 

 but this is not quite satisfactory. «T^TT^ft would be a verbal noun from «PTRT, 

 to destroy (»TTW) ; literally there is a destruction (as) of death, ■flTcT = Arab. 

 ©j*. This line needs further elucidation. It has been suggested that it 

 should be *r€t *T *TTTJ, in the land (fp€t), friends, Persian, jjL>, with ^T for 

 ^, but this also seems strained. 



3. King of kings, great king, lord Jagat Singh, 

 Thy full sword is a disguise for Bhawani. 

 Quoth Kavi Rai, such a hero has heen made, Jagat Singh 

 Bums like fire the thirst for hlood of (thy) kettledrum. 

 To this day, prince and beggar in the field lie rotting, 

 As many big sons of the Turk woman as they left there. 

 The born they slew, the unborn they destroyed through fear, 

 Thou didst not slay, the meeting destroyed the womb of the Hughalani. 



^Tt rl^rc *TCt perhaps means " the weight of thy sword", but this 

 would require ^1, which was erroneously given in my former extract. I now 

 take "tifX as passive part, of vx«11, and render " thy full sword" in the sense 

 of the sword being satiated with slaughter. T^T nas been made, or perhaps 

 'has been described', as ^"STT, like Greek 7rotetv, means often to make verses. 

 The next line has been suggested as divisible in another way thus, ^hr ^^ 

 *TrT STTrT " the (tent) pegs have fallen in the field," but this is deficient, inas- 

 much as it supplies no correlative to the " tall sons" of the next verse, xfrf 

 3TTrT is hardly in our author's style, though he may have, as I suspect also 

 in other places, here used purposely an archaic phrase. Another rendering 

 would be " in the fields of rich and poor", the fields round Mau being natur- 

 ally the property of Jagat Singh's Raos and of his poorer subjects, while 

 the Turks cannot well be called Raos. ^vT is of course the old Hindi geni- 

 tive modern «&T. It will be observed that the employment of the three 

 genitive participles is totally at variance with the practice of the modern 

 lano-uao-e, where we should expect g^T«ft % UcT in the plural. 



The last line may also be translated differently by dividing^ ^^737 (for 

 fsp^T, from f «re 1 C «T I ' to look'), ' thou didst look, (and) the meeting, etc.' 

 As given above the sense would be ' thou didst not smite, but the mere meet- 

 ing with thee made or destroyed.' 



