View source for Mewar 26: Ratan Singh defeated

 [[Category:India |M ]]
[[Category:History |M ]]
{| class="wikitable"
|-
|colspan="0"|<div style="font-size:100%">
This page is an extract from <br/>
ANNALS AND ANTIQUITIES <br/>
OF <br/>
'''RAJASTHAN '''<br/>

OR THE CENTRAL AND WESTERN <br/>
RAJPUT STATES OF INDIA <br/>

By <br/>
LIEUT.-COL. JAMES TOD <br/>
Late Political Agent to the Western Rajput States <br/>

Edited with an Introduction and Notes by <br/>
WILLIAM CROOKE, CIE. <br/>
Hon. D.Sc. Oxon., B.A., F.R.A.l. <br/>
Late of the Indian Civil Service <br/>

In Three Volumes <br/>
VOL. IV: ANNALS OF MEWAR<br/>
[The Annals were completed in 1829]<br/>

HUMPHREY MILFORD <br/>
Oxford University Press <br/>
London Edinburgh Glasgow New York <br/>
Toronto Melbourne Bombay <br/>
1920 [The edition scanned] <br/>
</div>
|}
Note: This article is likely to contain several spelling mistakes that occurred during scanning. If these errors are reported as messages to the Facebook page, [http://www.facebook.com/Indpaedia Indpaedia.com] your help will be gratefully acknowledged.

=Mewar 26: Ratan Singh defeated=

==Cessions made to Sindhia==
Thirty-three lakhs in jewels and 
specie, gold and silver plate, and assignments on the chiefs, were 
immediately made over to Sindhia, and lands mortgaged for the 
liquidation of the remainder. For this object the districts of 
Jawad, Jiran, Nimach, and Morwan were set aside to be superin
tended by joint officers of both governments, with an annual 
investigation of accounts. From S. 1825 to S. 1831 [a.d. 1768-74) 
no infringement took place of this arrangement ; but in the latter 
year Sindhia dismissed the Rana's officers from the management, 
and refused all further settlement ; and with the exception of a 
temporary occupation on Sindhia's reverse of fortune in S. 1851 
[a.d. 1794], these rich districts have remained severed from 
Mewar. In S. 1831 [a.d. 1774] the great officers of the Mahratta 
federation began to shake off the trammels of the Peshwa's 
authority ; and Sindhia retained for the State of which he was 
the founder, all these lands except Morwan, which was made 
over to Holkar, who the year after the transaction demanded of 
the Rana the surrender of the district of Nimbahera, threatening, 
in the event of non-compliance, to repeat the part his predatory 

1 Mutasadi kharch [rmitasadi, ' a clerk, accountant ' ; kharch, ' expenses '] 
or douceur to the officers of government, was an authorized article of every 
Mahratta miCamala, or war contribution. 
coadjutor Sindhia had just performed. The cession was un
avoidable. 
Thus terminated, in S. 1826 [a.d. 1769], the siege of Udaipur, 
with the dislocation of these fine districts from Mewar. But let 
it be remembered that they were only mortgaged : 1  and although 
the continued degradation of the country from the same causes 
has prevented their redemption, the claim to them has never 
been abandoned. Their recovery was stipulated by the am
bassadors of the Rana in the treaty of a.d. 1817 with the British 
Government ; but our total ignorance of the past transactions 
of these countries, added to our amicable relations with Sindhia 
[434], prevented any pledge of the reunion of these districts ; and 
it must ever be deeply lamented that, when the treacherous and 
hostile conduct of Sindhia gave a noble opportunity for their 
restoration, it was lost, from policy difficult to imderstand, and 
which must be subject to the animadversions of future historians 
of that important period in the history of India. It yet remains 
for the wisdom of the British Government to decide whether half 
a century's abeyance, and the inability to redeem them by the 
sword, render the claim a dead letter. At all events, the facts 
here recorded from a multiplicity of public documents, and 
corroborated by living actors 2  in the scene, may be useful at 
some future day, when expedience may admit of their being 
reannexed to Mewar. 

==Ratan Singh defeated==

Amra's defence of the capital, and 
the retreat of the Mahrattas, was a deathblow to the hopes of 
the Pretender, who had obtained not only many of the strong
holds, but a footing in the valley of the capital. Rajnagar, 
Raepur, and Untala were rapidly recovered ; many of the nobles 
returned to the Rana and to their allegiance ; and Ratna was 
left in Kumbhalmer with the Depra minister, and but three of the 
sixteen principal nobles, namely Deogarh, Bhindir, and Amet. 
These contentions lasted till S. 1831 [a.d. 1774], when the chiefs 
above named also abandoned him, but not until their rebellion 
had cost the feather in the crown of Mewar. The rich province 
of Godwar, the most fruitful of all her possessions, and containing 

1  Little Maloni, now Gangapur, with its lands, was the only place de
cidedly alienated, being a voluntary gift to Sindhia, to endow the establish
ment of his wife, Ganga Bai, who died there. 
2  Zalim Singh of Kotah, and Lalaji Belal, both now dead. 
the most loyal of her vassalage, the Ranawats, Rathors, and 
Solankis, was nearly all held on tenure of feudal service, and 
furnished three thousand horse besides foot, a greater number 
than the aggregate of the Choudawats. This district, which 
was won with the title of Rana from the Parihara prince of 
Mandor, before Jodhpur was built, and whose northern boundary 
was confirmed by the blood of the Chondawat chief in the reign 
of Jodha, was confided by the Rana to the care of Raja Bijai 
Singh of Jodhpur, to prevent its resources being available to 
the Pretender, whose residence, Kumbhalmer, commanded the 
approach to it : and the original treaty yet exists in which the 
prince of Marwar binds himself to provide and support a body 
of three thousand men for the Rana's service, from its revenues. 
==Assassination oS Rana Ari Singh, a.d. 1773==

This province 
might have been recovered ; but the evil genius of Arsi Rana at 
this time led him to Bundi to [435] hunt at the spring festival (the 
Alieria), with the Hara prince, in spite of the prophetic warning 
of the suttee, who from the funeral pile denoimced a practice 
which had already thrice proved fatal to the princes of Mewar.1 
Rana Arsi fell by the hand of the Bundi prince, and Godwar, 
withheld from his minor successor, has since remained severed. 
The Bundi heir, who perpetrated this atrocious assassination, was 
said to be prompted by the Mewar nobles, who detested their 
sovereign, and with whom, since the late events, it was impossible 
they could ever unite in confidence. Implacable in his disposition, 
he brooded over injuries, calmly awaiting the moment to avenge 
them. A single instance will suffice to evince this, as well as the 
infatuation of Rajput devotion. The Salumbar chief, whose 
predecessor had fallen in support of the Rana's cause at the battle 
of Ujjain, having incurred his suspicions, the Rana commanded 
him to eat the pan (betel leaf) presented on taking leave. Startled 
at so unusual an order, he remonstrated, but in vam ; and with 
the conviction that it contained his death-warrant he obeyed, 
observing to the tyrant, " My compliance will cost you and your 
family dear " : words fulfilled with fearful accuracy, for to this 
and similar acts is ascribed the murder of Arsi, and the completion 

1  [In 1382 Rana Kliet Singh was murdered by Lai Singh of Banbaoda, 
brother of Bar Singh, Rao of Biindi. Rana Ratan Singh II. and Rao Siirajmall 
killed each other while shooting at Bundi in 1531. The feud between the 
two houses is not yet forgotten (Erskine ii. A. 25).] 
of the ruin of the country. A colour of pretext was afforded to 
the Bundi chief m a boundary dispute regarding a patch of land 
yielding only a few good mangoes ; but, even admitting this as a 
paUiative, it could not justify the inhospitable act, which in the 
mode of execution added cowardice to barbarity : for while both 
were pursuing the boar, the Bundi heir drove his lance through 
the heart of the Rana. The assassin fell a victim to remorse, the 
deed being not only disclaimed, but severely reprobated by his 
father, and all the Hara tribe. A cenotaph still stands on the 
site of the murder, where the body of Arsi was consumed, and 
the feud between the houses remains unappeased. 

==Rana Hamir Singh II., a.d. 1773-78==

Rana Arsi left two sons, 
Hamir and Bhim Singh. The former, a name of celebrity in their 
annals, succeeded in S. 1828 (a.d. 1772) to the little enviable title 
of Rana. With an ambitious mother, determined to control 
affairs during his minority, a state pronomiced by the bard 
and the vengeful 
competition of the Salumbar chief (successor to the murdered 
noble), who was equally resolved to take the lead, combined with 
an unextinguishable enmity to the Saktawats, who supported 
the policy of the queen-mother [436], the demoralization of Mewar 
was complete : her fields were deluged with blood, and her soil 
was the prey of every paltry marauder. 

==Outbreak of the Sindis==

The mercenary Sindis, who, won by 
the enthusiasm of Amra, had for a moment assumed the garb of 
fideUty, threw it off at their prince's death, taking possession of 
the capital, which it will be remembered had been committed to 
the charge of the Salumbar chief, whom they confined and were 
about to subject to the torture of the hot iron 1  to extort their 
arrears of pay, when he was rescued from the indignity by the 
unlooked-for return of Amra from Bimdi. This faithful minister 
determined to establish the rights of the infant prince against all 
other claimants for power. But he knew mankind, and had 
attained, what is still more difficult, the knowledge of himself. 
Aware that his resolution to maintain his post at all hazards, 
and against every competitor, would incur the imputation of 
self-interest, he, like our own Wolsey, though from far different 
motives, made an inventory of his wealth, in gold, jewels, and 
plate, even to his wardrobe, and sent the whole in trays to the 
1  A heated platter used for baking bread, on which they place the culprit. 
queen-mothef . Suspicion was shamed and resentment disarmed 
by this proceeding ; and to repeated entreaties that he would 
receive it back he was inflexible, with the exception of articles of 
apparel that had already been in use. 

This imperious woman 
was a daughter of Gogunda. She possessed considerable talents, 
but was ruled by an artful intrigante, who, in her turn, was 
governed by a yomig homme d'affaires, then holding an inferior 
office, but who subsequently acted a conspicuous part ; slew and 
was slain, like ahnost all who entered into the politics of this 
tempestuous period. The queen-mother, now supported by the 
Chondawats, opposed the minister, who maintained himself by 
aid of the Sindis, kept the Mahrattas from the capital, and iDro
tected the crown land ; but the ungrateful return made to his 
long-tried fidelity rendered his temper ungovernable. Ram
piyari 1  (such the name of the intrigante) repaired on one occasion 
to the office of the minister, and in the name of the regent queen 
reviled him for some supposed omission. Amra, losing all temper 
at this intrusion, applied to the fair abigail the coarsest epithets 
used to her sex, bidding her begone as a Kothi ki Rand (a phrase 
we shall not translate), which was reported with exaggeration to 
the queen, who threw herself into a litter and set off to the Salum
bar chief. Amra, anticipating [437] an explosion, met the 
cavalcade in the street, and enjoined her instant return to the 
palace. Who dared disobey ? Arrived at the door of the 
Rawala, he made his obeisance, and told her it was a disgrace to 
the memory of her lord that she should quit the palace under 
any pretext ; that even the potter's wife did not go abroad for 
six months after her husband's death, while she, setting decorum 
at defiance, had scarcely permitted the period of mourning to 
elapse. He concluded by saying he had a duty to perform, and 
that he would perform it in spite of all obstacles, in which, as it 
involved her own and her children's welfare, she ought to co
operate, instead of thwarting him. But Baiji Raj (the royal 
mother) was young, artful, and ambitious, and persevered in her 
hostility till the demise of this uncompromising minister shortly 
after, surmised to be caused by poison. His death yielded a 
flattering comment on his life : he left not funds sufficient to 
cover the funeral expenses, and is, and will probably contmue, 
the sole instance on record in Indian history of a minister 
1  ' Tlio beloved of Rama.' 
having his obsequies defrayed by subscription among his fellow
citizens. 
The man who thus lived and thus died would have done honour 
to any, even the most civilized, country, where the highest in
centives to public virtue exist. What, therefore, does not his 
memory merit, when amongst a people who, through long oppres
sion, were likely to hold such feelings in little estimation, he 
pursued its dictates from principle alone, his sole reward that 
which the world could not bestow, the applause of the monitor 
within ? But they greatly err who, in the application of their 
own overweening standard of merit, imagine there is no public 
opinion in these countries ; for recollections of actions like this (of 
which but a small portion is related) they yet love to descant 
upon, and an act of vigour and integrity is still designated Amra
chanda ; ^ evincing that if virtue has few imitators in this country, 
she is not without ardent admirers. 

==Revolt of the Chief of Begiin==
In S. 1831 (a.d. 1775) the 
rebellion of the Begun chief, head of a grand divsion of the 
Chondawats, the Meghawat, obliged the queen-mother to call 
upon Sindhia for his reduction, who recovered the crown lands 
he had usurped, and imposed on this refractory  noble a fine of 
twelve lakhs of rupees, or £100,000 [438] sterling.2  But instead 
of confining himself to punishing the guilty, and restoring the 
lands to the young Rana, he inducted his own son-in-law Berji 
Tap into the districts of Ratangarh Kheri and Singoli ; and at 
the same time made over those of Imia, Jath, Bichor, and Nadwai 
to Holkar, the aggregate revenue of which amounted to six lakhs 
annually. Besides these alienations of territory, the Mahrattas 
levied no less than four grand war contributions in S. 1830-31, 3  
while in S. 1836  4  their rapacity exacted three more. Inability 
1  Amra Chand, it will be recollected, was the name of the minister. 
2 The treaty by which Sindhia holds these districts yet exists, which 
stipulates their surrender on the Hquidation of the contribution, The Rana 
still holds this as a responsible engagement, and pleaded his rights in the 
treaty with the British Government in a.d. 1817-18. But half a century's 
possession is a strong bond, which we dare not break ; though the claim now 
registered may hereafter prove of service to the family. 
3  1830, Mahadaji Sindhia's contribution (mu'dmala) on account of 
Begun ; 1831, Berji Tap's mu'amala through Govind and Ganpat Rao ; 
1831, Ambaji Inglia, Bapu Holkar, and Daduji Pandit's joint mu'dmala. 
4  1. Apaji and Makaji Getia, on Holkar's account; 2. Tukuji Holkar's, 
through Somji ; 3. Ah Bahadur's, through Somji. 
to liquidate these exorbitant demands was invariably a signal 
for further sequestration of land. Amidst such scenes of civil 
strife and external spoliation, one Mahratta following another 
in the same track of rapine, Hamir died before he had attained 
even Rajput majority, 1  in S. 1834 (a.d. 1778). 

==Recapitulation==

We may here briefly recapitulate the diminu
tion of territory and wealth in Mewar from the period of the first 
Mahratta visitation in a.d. 1736, to the death of Hamir. It were 
a waste of time to enumerate the rapacious individuals who 
shared in the spoils of this devoted country. We may be content 
to say their name was ' legion.' These forty years were sur
charged with evil. The Mogul princes observed at least the forms 
of government and justice, which occasionally tempered their 
aggressions ; the Mahrattas were associations of vampires, who 
drained the very life-blood wherever the scent of spoil attracted 
them. In three payments we have seen the enormous sum of one 
crore and eighty-one lakhs,2  upwards of two millions English 
money, exacted from Mewar, exclusive of individual contributions 
levied on chiefs, ministers, and the Pretender's party : and a 
schedule drawn up by the reigning prince of contributions levied 
up to his own time, amounts to £5,000,000 sterling. Yet the 
land would eventually have reimbursed [439] these sums, but the 
penalty inflicted for deficiencies of payment renders the evil 
irremediable ; for the alienated territory which then produced 
an annual revenue of twenty-eight lalchs, 3  or £323,000 sterling, 
exceeds in amount the sum-total now left, whether fiscal or feudal, 
in the present impoverished state of the country. 
 [[File: Recapitulation.png||frame|500px]]