Kavi Raj Sliyamal Das —On the rrithi BciJ Bdsd. [No. 1, 
20 
13. Suclii Varma—22. 
14. Naravarma—23. 
15. Kirti Yarma—^fnr 24. 
16. Bairad—25. 
17. Bairi Singli—26. 
18. Bijai Singh—27. 
19. Ari Singh—28. 
20. Chond Singh— 29. 
21. Vikram Singh—30. 
Ksliein Singh— 
Samant Singh— 
Kumar Singh— 
Mathan Singh— 
Padma Singh— 
Jaitra Singh— 
Tej Singh— 
Samar Singh— 
Ratna Singh— 
In this list there is only one Samar Singh (No. 29) who ruled at 
Chitor—and the ‘ Rasa ’ also mentions Samar Singh, as the son of 
Raw^al Tej Singh, and that Ratna Singh (No. 30) was his elder son. 
(Kumbh Karan was the younger.) These facts identify the genea¬ 
logical No. 29 to be the person meant by the author of the “ Rasa,” who 
has by mistake placed Samar Singh’s name in the poem in connection 
with the 12th century of Yikram’s era. 
Alauddin Khilji of Delhi took the Fort of Chitor after severe 
bloodshed in S. 1359 (= A. D. 1302-3) when Ratna Singh, the son of 
Samar Singh, was the reigning prince there : this fact disproves the 
statement of the ‘ Rasa ’ that Rawal Samar Singh married the sister of 
Prithi Raj, and was killed with him in S. 1158 (= A. D. 1101) which is 
impossible, because a son and successor can by no means reign two cen¬ 
turies after his father’s death. 
(1.) Thus, a mistake of a very serious nature was caused by the 
‘ Prithi Raj Rasa ’ in the history of Mewar, viz.^ that “ Rawal Samar 
Singh ascended the throne of Mewar in S. 1106 (= A. D. 1050) and wa.s 
killed with Prithi Raj Chauhan fighting on his side against Shahabud- 
din Ghori in S. 1158 ( = A. D. 1101). 
This statement makes Rawal Samar Singh flourish about two* 
centuries earlier than his actual existence, and having been believed 
to be true by the bards and poets of Rajputana, the period intervening 
between Rawal Samar Singh and Mokul Ji was thus lengthened; and 
the poets had to adjust this ignorantly or blindly made up long period 
among the reigns between Samar Singh and (the death of) Mokul Ji, 
and the gap was thus bridged over. 
(2.) In like manner, the historians of Jodhpur took for granted 
the S. 1132 (= A. D. 1075) for the accession of Raja Jai Chandra 
Rathor of Kanauj, because Prithi Raj had married Sanjogita, daughter 
of Jai Chandra. They too divided the hundred years of the error among 
the number of generations between Jai Chandra and (the death) of Rao 
Chanda of Mandore. 
1344 — 1168 = 186 years. 
