← Table of contents
History of Gujarát, Volume I, Part I.

Chapter XII · THE MIHIRAS OR MERS. a.d. 470–900.

Reading edition

Chapter XII. The Mers, a.d. 470–900. That the Guptas held sway in Káthiáváḍa till the time of Skandagupta (a.d. 454–470) is proved by the fact that his Sorath Viceroy is mentioned in Skandagupta’s inscription on the Girnár rock. After Skandagupta under the next known Gupta king Budhagupta (Gupta 165–180, a.d. 484–499) no trace remains of Gupta sovereignty in Sorath. It is known that Budhagupta was a weak king and that the Gupta kingdom had already entered on its decline and lost its outlying provinces. Who held Suráshṭra and Gujarát during the period of Gupta decline until the arrival and settlement of Bhaṭkárka in a.d. 514 (Gupta 195) is not determined. Still there is reason to believe that during or shortly after the time of Budhagupta some other race or dynasty overthrew the Gupta Viceroy of these provinces and took them from the Guptas. These powerful conquerors seem to be the tribe of Maitrakas mentioned in Valabhi copperplates as people who had settled in Káthiáváḍa and established a maṇḍala or kingdom. Though these Maitrakas are mentioned in no other records from Suráshṭra there seems reason to identify the Maitrakas with the Mihiras the well-known tribe of Mhers or Mers. In Sanskrit both mitra and mihira are names of the sun, and it would be quite in agreement with the practise of Sanskrit writers to use derivatives of the one for those of the other. These Mhers or Mers are still found in Káthiáváḍa settled round the Barda hills while the Porbandar chiefs who are known as Jethvás are recognized as the head of the tribe. The name Jethvá is not a tribal but a family name, being taken from the proper or personal name of the ancestor of the modern chiefs. As the Porbandar chiefs are called the kings of the Mhers they probably belong to the same tribe, though, being chiefs, they try, like other ruling families, to rank higher than their tribe tracing their origin from Hanúmán. Though the Jethvás appear to have been long ashamed to acknowledge themselves to belong to the Mher tribe the founders of minor Mher kingdoms called themselves Mher kings. The Porbandar chiefs have a tradition tracing their dynasty to Makaradhvaja son of Hanúmán, and there are some Puráṇic legends attached to the tradition. The historical kernel of the tradition appears to be that the Mhers or Jethvás had a makara or fish as their flag or symbol. One of the mythical stories of Makaradhvaja is that he fought with Mayúradhvaja. Whatever coating of fable may have overlaid the story, it contains a grain of history. Mayúradhvaja stands for the Guptas whose chief symbol was a peacock mayúra, and with them Makaradhvaja that is the people with the fish-symbol that is Chapter XII. The Mers, a.d. 470–900. the Mhers had a fight. This fight is probably the historical contest in which the Mhers fought with and overthrew the Gupta Viceroy of Káthiáváḍa.

Early in the tenth century a wave of invasion from Sindh seems to have spread over Kacch and Káthiáváḍa. Among the invading tribes were the Jádejás of Kacch and the Chúḍásamás of Sorath, who like the Bhattis of Jesalmír call themselves of the Yaduvaṃśa stock. Doctor Bhagvánlál held that the Chúḍásamás were originally of the Ábhíra tribe, as their traditions attest connection with the Ábhíras and as the description of Graharipu one of their kings by Hemachandra in his Dvyáśraya points to his being of some local tribe and not of any ancient Rájput lineage. Further in their bardic traditions as well as in popular stories the Chúḍásamás are still commonly called Áhera-ránás. The position of Aberia in Ptolemy (a.d. 150) seems to show that in the second century the Ahirs were settled between Sindh and the Panjáb. Similarly it may be suggested that Jádejá is a corruption of Jaudhejá which Chapter XII. The Mers, a.d. 470–900. in turn comes from Yaudheya (the change of y to j being very common) who in Kshatrapa Inscriptions appear as close neighbours of the Ahirs. After the fall of the Valabhis (a.d. 775) the Yaudheyas seem to have established themselves in Kacch and the Ahirs settled and made conquests in Káthiáváḍa. On the decline of local rule brought about by these incursions and by the establishment of an Ahir or Chúḍásamá kingdom at Junágaḍh, the Jethvás seem to have abandoned Bhúmli which is close to Junágaḍh and gone to Srínagar or Káṇtelun near Porbandar which is considered to have been the seat of Jethvá power before Porbandar.

After the fall of Valabhi no other reliable record remains of any dynasty ruling over the greater part of Gujarát. The most trustworthy and historical information is in connection with the Chávaḍás of Aṇahilapura. Even for the Chávaḍás nothing is available but scant references recorded by Jain authors in their histories of the Solaṅkis and Vághelás.

The migration of the Sammas to Kacch is ascribed by the Taríkh-i-Tahiri (a.d. 1621) to the tyranny of the Súmra chiefs. The Sammas found Kacch in the possession of the Cháwaras, who treated them kindly, and whom they requited by seizing the fort of Gúntrí by a stratagem similar to that which brought about the fall of Girnár.

The date of the Chúḍásamá settlement at Vanthalí is usually fixed on traditional evidence, at about a.d. 875, but there is reason to think that this date is rather too early. In the first place it is worthy of notice that Chúḍáchandra, the traditional eponym of the family, is in the Tuhfat-ul-Kirám made a son of Jádam (Yádava) and only a great-grandson of Kṛishṇa himself, a fact which suggests that, if not entirely mythical, he was at all events a very distant ancestor of Múlarája’s opponent Grahári, and was not an actual ruler of Vanthalí. As regards Grahári’s father Viśvavaráha and his grandfather Múlarája, there is no reason to doubt that they were real persons, although it is very questionable whether the Chúḍásamás were settled in Káthiáváḍa in their time. In the first place, the Morbí grant of Jáikadeva shows that the Jethvás had not been driven southwards before a.d. 907. Secondly Dharaṇívaráha’s Vadhván grant proves that the Chápa family of Bhínmál were still supreme in Káthiáváḍa in a.d. 914: whereas the Taríkh-i-Tahiri’s account of the Chúḍásamá conquest of Kacch implies that the Cháwaras, who must be identified with the Chápas of Bhínmál, were losing their power when the Chúḍásamás captured Gúntrí, an event which must have preceded the settlement at Vanthalí in Káthiáváḍa. Beyond the fact that Múlarája Solaṅki transferred the capital to Aṇahilaváḍa in a.d. 942, we know nothing of the events which led to the break-up of the Bhínmál empire. But it is reasonable to suppose that between a.d. 920 and 940 the Chápas gradually lost ground and the Chúḍásamás were able first to conquer Sindh and then to settle in Káthiáváḍa.—A. M. T. J.]

Notes in this chapter

Note 1 · Ind. Ant. XII. 179. ↑Note 2 · Ind. Ant. II. 257. ↑Note 3 · Elliot’s History, I. 266. ↑Note 4 · According to the Káthiáwár Gazetteer pages 110 and 278, the first wave reached about a.d. 650 and the second about 250 years later. Dr. BhagNote 5 · The Áin-i-Akbari (Gladwin, II. 69) notices that the sixth division of Sauráshṭra, which was almost impervious by reason of mountains rivers Note 6 · Of the Jhálás or Chalahs the Áin-i-Akbari (Gladwin, II. 64) has: Chaláwareh (in north-east Káthiáváḍa) formerly independent and inhabited byNote 7 · Tod’s Annals of Rájasthán, II. 113. ↑Note 8 · Indian Antiquary, VI. 191. ↑Note 9 · Rájputána Gazetteer, I. 11. ↑Note 10 · The tales cited in the Rás Málá (I. 103) prove that most of the Kolis between Gujarát and Káthiáváḍa are Mairs. That till the middle of the Note 11 · The evidence in support of the statement that the Maitrakas and Húṇas fought at the same time against the same Hindu rulers is given in the Note 12 · Wilson’s Vishṇu Purána Preface XXXIX. in Reinaud’s Mémoire Sur l’Inde, 391. Details are given in Wilson’s Works, X. 381–385. ↑Note 13 · Reinaud’s Mémoire Sur l’Inde, 393; Wilson’s Works, X. 382. ↑Note 14 · Wilson’s Works, IX. 207. ↑Note 15 · Compare Priaulx’s Embassies, 222. ↑Note 16 · The White Húṇas overran Bakhtria and the country of the Yuechi between a.d. 450 and 460. About a hundred years later they were crushed betweNote 17 · Specht in Journal Asiatique (1883), II. 348. ↑Note 18 · Specht in Journal Asiatique (1883), II. 349. ↑Note 19 · Compare above Chapter VII. page 73 note 3. ↑Note 20 · Dr. Bhagvánlál (Text, 33) traces one set of Medhs to the Mevas the tribe of Ysamotika the father of the Kshatrapa Chashṭana (a.d. 130). He hNote 21 · The Jethvás are closely allied to the Medhs (Káth. Gaz. 138); they entered Káthiáváḍa along with the Medhs (Ditto, 278). ↑Note 22 · The passages are somewhat contradictory. Tod (Western India, 413) says: Jethvás marry with Káthis, Ahirs, and Mers. In the Káthiáwár GazetteNote 23 · Bombay Administration Report for 1873. Colonel Tod made the same suggestion: Western India, 256. Compare Pottinger’s (Travels in BaluchistánNote 24 · Tod’s Western India, 413. ↑Note 25 · Compare Bühler in Epigraphia Indica, I. 294. Like the Chálukyas and other tribes the Jethvás trace the name Jethva to a name-giving chief. ONote 26 · Nos. 6 and 82 of Colonel Watson’s List, Káthiáwár Gazetteer, 621. The Pandit’s evidence in the text ascribes to the somewhat doubtful JáikadNote 27 · The form Yetha is used by the Chinese pilgrim Sung-yun a.d. 519. Beal’s Buddhist Records, I. xc. ↑Note 28 · Journal Asiatique (1883), II. 319. ↑Note 29 · Journal Asiatique (1883), II. 314. ↑Note 30 · Compare for the chief’s name Jetha, Colonel Watson Káth. Gaz. 622 in the Jyeshṭha Nakshatra. ↑Note 31 · Census of 1891. III. 116. A reference to the Jhauvlas is given above page 75 note 4. General Cunningham (Ninth Oriental Congress, I. 228–244Note 32 · Tod’s Western India, 194 Note ‡. Tod adds: Chand abounds in such jeu-de-mot on the names of tribes. ↑Note 33 · Rás Málá, I. 302: Káthiáwár Gazetteer, 111. ↑Note 34 · Tod’s Annals of Rajasthán, I. 111. ↑Note 35 · Among references to Húṇas may be noted: In the Váyu Purána (Sachau’s Alberuni, I. 300) in the west between Karṇaprávarna and Darva; in the VNote 36 · The Káthiáváḍa Mhers are a peculiar tribe whose language dress and appearance mark them as foreign settlers from Upper India. Like the MálavNote 37 · A similar copperplate in which the king’s name appears in the slightly different form Jáikadeva has been found at Dhiniki in the same neighbNote 38 · A copperplate found at Haddálá on the road from Dholka to Dhandhuka dated a.d. 917 (Śaka 839) shows that there reigned at Vadhwán a king namNote 39 · The Chúḍásamás, a.d. 900–940.[The modern traditions of the Chúḍásamá clan trace their origin to the Yádava race and more immediately to the Note 40 · [Káthiáváḍa contains three peculiar and associated classes of Hindus, the Mers, the Jethvás, and the Jhálás. The Mers and the Jethvás stand Note 41 · Formerly except the vague contention that the Medhás, Jhetvás, and Jhála-Makvánás were northerners of somewhat recent arrival little evidencNote 42 · Though the sameness in name between the Mihiras and Mihirakula (a.d. 508–530), the great Indian champion of the White Húṇas, may not imply sNote 43 · That the Multán sun-worship was introduced under Sassanian influence is supported by the fact (Wilson’s Ariana Antiqua, 357) that the figureNote 44 · Chapter XII. The Mers, a.d. 470–900. White Húṇas. Dr. Bhagvánlál’s view that the Jethvás are Medhs ennobled by long overlordship is somewhatNote 45 · Jhálás.Another name for the White Húṇas, or for a section of the White Húṇa swarm, is preserved by Cosmas39 in the form Juvia. This form, if
Explore with AITake your curiosity a little further.

Reading settings