Bhojsala - Legends, Myths and History

Dhār is a city located in the Malwa region of western Madhya Pradesh state in central India. It is presently the administrative headquarters of Dhar District. The town is located 33 miles (53 km) west of Mhow (Military Head Office of War), 559 m (1,834 ft) above sea level. It is picturesquely situated among lakes and trees surrounded by barren hills. The ancient name Dhara Nagari might indicate some old association with the fabled sword manufacturing in India.

Supposed to be the erstwhile capital of the legendary king Bhoj of Parmar dynasty, the present day town of Dhār is dominated by a large stone fortress surrounded by the modern town. The date of  fortress construction is not documented by inscription, but Jahāngīr visited the place in 1617 and referred to it in his memoirs, stating that  “. . . when Sultan Muhammad ibn Tughluq was proceeding to the conquest of the Deccan, he built a fort of cut stone on the top of the ridge. Outside it is very showy and handsome, but inside the fort is devoid of buildings”. Jahāngīr's attribution of the fort to Muhammad ibn Tughluq (1325–51) is confirmed by the general similarity of the fortifications to those at Tugluqābād in Delhi. The attribution is also supported by the policies of the Tughluqs who sought to consolidate their control over the territories conquered by the Khaljīs. Muhammad bin Tughluq signaled his wish to exercise power over the southern parts of his dominion by making Daulatābād the imperial co-capital in 1337. 

That Dhār was a key staging-post on the road to the Deccan is shown by the fact that when Ala’al-Dīn Khiljī dispatched Ayn al-Mulk Mūltānī to subdue Mālwa in the early fourteenth century, the latter made Dhār the provincial capital and served there as governor until 1313 after which time he was transferred to Daulatābād. It was still the capital of Mālwa some years later when Ibn Batuta travelled to the Deccan. The fort at Dhār stands on the north-eastern edge of a circle of tanks, channels and earthen ramparts that made Dhār, in effect, a moated, circular city (Figure below). This plan is alluded to in Merutuga's Prabandhacintāmani and is similar to that at Warangal in the Deccan. As the circular configuration is probably mentioned by Padmagupta in his Navasāhasākacarita, a work that casts King Bhoja's father Sindhurāja as a latter-day Vikramāditya, it seems likely that the plan was already taking shape in the tenth century.

Dhār. Plan of the medieval town showing the location of monuments and disposition of the ramparts.

In the exact centre of the circular city is the tomb of Kamāl al-Dīn Mālawī (circa 1238–1330). This Chishtī saint, called Mālawī because of his long residence in Malwa, was a follower of Farīd al-Dīn Mascūd Ganj-i Shakar (1175–1265) and Niaām al-Dīn Auliyā’ of Delhi (circa 1243/4–1325). Some details about Kamāl al-Dīn are recorded in Muhammad Ghawthī's Gulzār-i abrār, a reliable hagiography of Sufi saints composed in 1613. The custodians of Kamāl al-Dīn's tomb have served in an unbroken lineage for almost seven hundred years; their history can be found in an informative volume by Rām Sevak Garg. The structures in the complex belong primarily to the fifteenth century as documented by inscriptions still in situ.

Next to the tomb is a spacious hypo style structure. When this structure was constructed is not recorded, but an inscription of AH 795/1392–93, dug up in the small graveyard of the adjacent enclosure, mentions that the mosques of Dhār had fallen into disrepair and that they were renewed by Dilāwar Khān. This tructure was used for offering Friday prayers and is referred to as Kamal Maula’s Mosque in present representations of Archaeological Society of India (ASI).

Dhār. Interior of the Mosque at the tomb of Kamāl al-Dīn. Unknown photographer, 1902. Courtesy of the British Library, Photo 2/4(90), item 4303212.

The mosque at Kamāl al-Dīn was displaced as the focus of Friday prayers when Dilāwar Khān, assuming the title Amīd Shāh Dāwūd Ghōrī, built what is called the Lāt masjid as the new Jāmic in 1405.30 The Lāt masjid derives it's name from the pillar or lāt lying outside the building. Being a monolith cast in iron, the pillar is a technological marvel that has drawn considerable attention through the centuries. Jahāngīr reports that Dilāwar Khān installed the pillar outside the building. Where it was before Dilāwar Khān's time has not been discussed in a definitive fashion. As the old Jāmic at Kamāl al-Dīn was modelled on Delhi, it seems likely that the pillar at Dhār played an analogous role to the iron pillar at the Qutb and so stood at Kamāl al-Dīn between circa 1305 (conquest of Dhār and building of the first Jāmic) and circa 1405 (declaration of independence by Dilāwar Khān and the building of the second Jāmic). The location before circa 1305 remains uncertain. Originally some 13.5 m in length, the pillar was broken when the Sultan of Gujarāt attempted to move it in the 1500s. The three surviving portions are now placed on a small platform outside the Lāt mosque. The only dated inscription on the pillar records a visit by the Mughal Emperor Akbar in 1598 while on campaign towards the Deccan.The Lāt masjid is situated at the south-eastern edge of the old town near to what would have been the gate to Māndu. Because Māndu had long served as a hill-retreat for those at Dhār, it was natural for Dilāwar Khān to have built the new Jāmicon this side of the town. A similar pattern is seen at other centres, notably Chanderi, where a new Jāmic was constructed on the western edge of the town in the same period.

The first account of Dhār in a western language is found in John Malcolm's Report on the Province of Malwa, that was published in 1822. Malcolm's treatment of Dhār is brief, but in his historical survey he notes that it became the capital under Bhoja in the eleventh century. In a footnote Malcolm gives an extended account of one of  the folk-tales that were current in his time. According to one story, Bhoja made a vow to build a series of dams “to arrest the streams of nine rivers and ninety-nine rivulets”. A location was found in the kingdom that allowed the king to fulfil this vow and the dams were duly built at the site we now call Bhojpur. The dam at Bhopāl, according to this story, was built by the king's minister. In his description of Dhār, Malcolm is very brief, saying only that: “The materials of its finest temples appear to have been appropriated to build Palaces and Mosques for its new sovereign. The city did not however, remain the capital of the Mahomedans for long. Alif Khan (the son of Dilawur Khan) who became celebrated under the name of Hoshung Sha, removed the seat of Government to Mandoo”. In a footnote he adds: “I took, when last at Dhar, a fine polished stone tablet of large dimensions, on which there was a Hindu Inscription, from a ruined Mosque, where this sacred writing had been placed as the floor of the Mimbur or pulpit of the Mahomedan place of worship”. This is the first reference to the mosque of Kamāl al-Dīn and to the numerous inscribed slabs that subsequent visitors repeatedly observed in the floor of the building. Aside from the obvious fact that Malcolm makes no reference to the Bhojśālā, and clearly describes the building as a ruined mosque, what draws our attention is the inscribed slab he extracted from the minbar. This has not,  been noted or traced; there is a tantalizing possibility that his “fine polished stone tablet” is the missing part of the inscription containing the drama Pārijātamañjarī composed by Madana, the preceptor of the Paramāra King Arjunavarman, on which more below.

The encyclopaedic care with which Malcolm prepared his report made his book a standard reference and led to its republication in several editions under the title "A Memoir of Central India", including Malwa and Adjoining Provinces. The only other work in circulation was William Kincaid's 1879 edition of the History of Mandu, first published in 1844.40 Kincaid spent most of his life in Mālwa and recorded a number of folk-tales about Bhoja in the 1888 volume of Indian Antiquary. Like Malcolm, he documents popular memories of Bhoja as a great king, with a similar account of the temple and dams at Bhojpur. The Bhojśālā is singularly absent in these stories. In his detailed notes on Dhār and Māndū, added as numbered appendices to the History of Mandu, Kincaid mentions the Akl ka kua or ‘Well of Wisdom’ in front of the tomb of  Kamāl al-Dīn, observing, in passing, that “a loquacious Musalman here recounted to me a number of remarkable stories”. Of the mosque, however, he only says “. . . close by is a small masjid”. While Kincaid was not the most sympathetic of ethnographers, if there had been an active folk-tale about the Bhojśālā, the talkative person he encountered would surely have mentioned it and Kincaid made a note. The silence of both Malcolm and Kincaid on this point shows that there were no living traditions about the Bhojśālā in the middle decades of the nineteenth century.

Epigraphic research at Dhār began in earnest in 1871 when Bhau Dāji of Bombay sent his agents to take copies of inscriptions at Dhār.44 Dāji died in 1874 and does not seem to have done anything with these copies in the final years of his life. Nonetheless, Dāji did have an active interest in the literary figures at Bhoja's court and the prabandhas attached to Bhoja's name. Of Dhār itself, however, he says nothing.After Dāji, epigraphic research at Dhār was continued by Georg Bühler in 1875, or at least so we are told by C. E. Luard in hisGazetteer of 1908.46 However, Bühler's presence in Dhār is not something I have been able to trace. Bühler's report for 1874–75 documents a trip through Rājasthān in search of manuscripts; his report for 1873–74 also focuses on Rājasthān.47 Indeed in his report for 1873–74 he notes: “In conclusion, I beg to express the hope that Government will be pleased to give me an opportunity and funds to continue the search. Besides the great library at Saidhpur Pattan, Gujarat, there are the royal and private libraries of Kasmir, Jammu, Jaypur, Udaypur, Ujjain, and Dhar, which, if explored, no doubt will yield the solutions of many problems of Sanskrit philology”. This suggests that Bühler never reached Dhār in his quest for manuscripts.

Although Bühler cannot be placed in Dhār, it is nonetheless clear that he had an interest in the Paramāra dynasty and that he was well aware of the importance of Dhār as a centre of literary activity. In the course of his research into the Pāiyalachhīand Navasāhasākacarita, Bühler prepared the first study of the Udaypur praśasti of Udayāditya. In his article on this inscription, Bühler devoted considerable space to Bhoja's learning and proficiency as a poet, citing several manuscripts that supported the assertion in the praśasti that Bhoja was a poet-king. With reference to his temple building activities, also recounted in the Udaypur inscription, Bühler states, “Regarding the extensive building operations which Bhoja undertook according to verse 20, I am unable to bring forward any corroboration from other sources. But it is very probable that a prince, so fond of display as he was, adorned his capital and perhaps even foreign sacred places with architectural monuments”.

To put the matter another way and in a succinct form relevant to our theme, Bühler had before him evidence of Bhoja's interest in literature and architecture, and of Dhār as a centre of literary production, but he did not speculate about the king building a school for Sanskrit studies or a temple to Sarasvatī. This is all the more telling because Bühler actively engaged with traditional knowledge-holders in India and knew about Sanskrit schools. A particularly interesting account of his encounter with Paṇḍits working in the time-honoured manner is found in his report of 1869. This is worth giving in full because it provides a clear sense of how Sanskrit learning and Sanskrit schools operated in the middle decades of the nineteenth century.

"After receiving charge of the office of Inspector, I addressed a circular to the Deputies of Surat, Broach, Kaira, Ahmedabad, Káthtiáwar, Rewakantha and Khandesh, requesting them to name the chief towns where Sanskrit manuscripts are found, and to furnish me with lists of the person possessing Sanskrit libraries . . . On my tour, I visited a number of towns where Sanskrit learning is cultivated, amongst which I may mention Ahmedabad, Dholka, Limdi, Rájkoṭ, Gondal, Junágaḍh, Pálitáná, Bhaunagár, Nariad, Cambay, Broach, and Balsár. In all these places I had interviews with the Native scholars and possessors of libraries, and I explained to them the intentions of Government, and the purposes for which the present search for Sanskrit manuscripts is instituted. I mostly met with a very friendly reception on the part of the Bráhmans and Śástrís. They came willingly to talk with me, to show me the lists of their books, and to bring those which I wanted to inspect. At Balsár I held a regular sabbhá, or assembly of the learned, for the purpose of learned discussions. It was well attended. I examined first the pupils of the various Śástrís, and next proposed a few questions to the teachers, which they discussed in their peculiar manner, one upholding the Púrvapaksha, the first proposition, and the other its opposite, the Uttarapaksha. Finally I addressed them on the object pursued by Europeans in studying Sanskrit; the intentions of Government in regard to the cultivation of that language; the purposes for which Sanskrit books are collected, & c. All these topics appear to have great interest for them, as they listened eagerly, and frequently asked question demanding fuller explanations. The ceremony was concluded by the recitation of improvised poetry, and the orthodox distribution of pán, supárí and of dakshiṇá. In Junágaḍh, also, the whole posse of Śástrís was assembled at the examination of the Sanskrit School, and submitted to a rigorous examination in Sanskrit grammar"

If we cannot place Bühler in Dhār, the same is not true of his protégé Dr Alois Anton Führer (1853–1930). He visited central India in 1892–93 and published an account of his tour in the Annual Progress Report of the Archaeological Survey Circle, North-western Provinces and Oudh. Reading Führer's report as a whole, one is struck by the ambitiousness of his itinerary and the lightning speed with which he travelled across Rājasthān and Mālwa. The hurried nature of the tour shows in Führer's frequent mistakes and his basically meaningless comments on architecture. These consist of aesthetic disquisitions with a top-dressing of disparaging remarks about the influence of Islam, a stock-in-trade of British historical interpretation designed to undermine the Islamic rulers of India and highlight the benefit of colonial rule. 

About the temples at Mount Ābū he thus noted: “These two temples are perfect gems of Indian art workmanship and monuments of the architectural, plastic, and decorative arts based on sound principles of design and imbued with the hereditary skill of the artists, and preserved to us from the ravages of time and iconoclastic tendencies of the Musalmân rulers of India”. At Ajmer he admired the design of the mosque, but was compelled to say that it was built “of the spoils of many Hindû temples which were thrown down by the bigotry of these conquerors”.

Like many of his ilk, Führer seems to have combined an impressive personality with enough Indological knowledge to appear convincing, at least to those who did not know better or who did not take the time to check details. Of course the method of all con-artists, academic or otherwise, is to hoover-up other people's ideas, move quickly and create such a flurry of activity that details cannot be checked. Eventually, however, Führer was investigated and forced to resign from his position in the Archaeological Survey of India. That was in 1898. Vincent Smith conducted the investigation and uncovered a breath-taking degree of bad scholarship and bad archaeological practice. Smith's report is essential reading for anyone interested in the Indological and colonial history of north India. 

This background helps us assess Führer's account of Dhār. Thus Smith's report, which tells us that Führer openly admitted that “he was not in the habit of keeping a journal of his tours or of writing up notes of his observations from day to day”, helps explain how Führer could have said that the tomb of Shaykh Changāl “. . . is simply the transformation of a Jaina temple of the 12th century”. Based on this, he concluded: “This mode of adapting Hindû temples to their own service has been practiced by the Musalmâns at Mându, Dhâr, Jaunpur, Zafarâbâd and many other places”. There is, in fact, no trace of reused material in the fabric of the Dargāh or in the small mosque beside it, so either Führer never went there or is mixing up his memories. 

Führer remarked: “The dargâh of Maulânâ Kamâl-ud-dîn, built during the reign of Mahmûd Shâh Khiljî I., in A.H. 861, has a spacious quadrangle with a colonnade of very fine Jaina pillars on each side within the square, and some are very elaborately sculpted in a similar style as those in the Dailwârâ temples at Abû. The floor is formed of black stone slabs from which Sanskrit inscriptions of the 12th century have been effaced. The mihrâbs and mimbar of the masjid proper are very handsome. On two of the columns supporting the central dome of the masjid are inscribed a couple of grammatical sûtras, which show that they were probably part of a scholastic building”. 

This is the first published suggestion that the mosque, or the fragments built into it, marked the location of some kind of school. Of course Führer had no evidence for the proposition and he probably developed the idea from Bühler's Sanskrit researches. All the ingredients are there in Bühler's writing and Führer consistently drew on Bühler's work, often copying out Bühler's words verbatim, as Huxley's meticulous research has shown. After Führer was dismissed in 1898, his work was not cited as a source of reliable information. There is circumstantial evidence, however, that Führer's observations were picked up by the local officials with whom he interacted in the course of his tour.

There was a significant increase in research activity at Dhār in preparation for the visit of Lord Curzon in November, 1902. Captain Ernest Barnes, I.C.S., who served as the political agent at Dhār from 1900 to 1904, established a small archaeological department in September, 1902 and placed the Superintendent of State Education, Mr. K. K. Lele, in charge. Just prior, Barnes collected available information on Dhār and Māndu and communicated his findings to the Royal Asiatic Society, Bombay Branch, in June, 1902. Barnes's report contains a wealth of information and includes some important details about the archaeological investigations taking place at the mosque next to Kamāl al-Dīn's tomb. Most importantly, Barnes's report shows that by the time he was writing, Lele had found two serpentine inscriptions giving the alphabet and grammatical rules of the Sanskrit language. These were understood by Barnes as “confirming the local tradition” that the mosque was “known among the Hindoo population as ‘Raja Bhoja ka Madrassa’, i.e. Raja Bhoja's school”.

Concluding his account of the mosque, Barnes wrote: “Finally, a recent close inspection has brought to light the fact that the reverse side of two of the great black stone slabs which form the lining of the ‘Mehrab’ are covered with similar inscriptions, which happily by their position have escaped destruction, but which owing to that same position, it has only been possible up to the present to take fragmental impressions. These impressions seem to show that the inscriptions are a dramatic composition probably on an historical subject, written in the reign of a successor of Bhoja”.69 The state of understanding in the middle of 1902 is therefore clear: the mosque was being called ‘Raja Bhoja's Madrassa’ thanks to the two serpentine inscriptions found at the site by Lele but it was not yet known as the Bhojśālā and it was not yet associated with the goddess Sarasvatī.

Five months after Barnes completed his article, Lord Curzon came to Dhār. This visit was part of a wider campaign, which Curzon was leading, to modernise the government of India, not least the Archaeological Survey.70 During Curzon's visit, Lele reports that the inscribed slabs he had discovered “were seen by His Excellency Lord Curzon, Viceroy and Governor-General of India while yet in the wall on the 2nd November 1902. By his H. E.'s advice they were taken out and have since attracted much attention and interest”. We owe the preservation of this information to S. K. Dikshit who decided to print Lele's account in his 1968 edition of the inscription.71 Lele's report is titled: Summary of the Dramatic Inscription found at the Bhoja Shala (Kamal Maula Mosque), Dhar, C. I., in November 1903. This is of historical importance because it is the first recorded use of the word ‘Bhojśālā’. Coincidentally, the Summary also shows that Lele was a very competent Sanskrit scholar who took just a few weeks to read the inscription and grasp its purport and importance. It seems likely that he was trained in the kind of traditional Sanskrit school described by Bühler.

Lele circulated his report widely. This is shown, firstly, by the account of it given by R. Pischel in the Annual Report of the Archaeological Survey of India for 1903–04.72 Pischel was concerned with the Prakrit inscriptions and tells us that he received estampages from Professor E. Hultzsch who had them from John Marshall, the Director-General of the Archaeological Survey. For our concerns, the key point is that Pischel accepted Lele's Summary at face value and innocently refers to the “discovery of the two long inscriptions and several fragments found in the Bhojaśālā at Dhār”.Lele also sent his Summary to Hultzsch. This excited Hultzch's interest and, through various intermediaries, he received inked impressions and published the full text in the 1905–06 volume of Epigraphia Indica. As it turns out, the ink impressions came from Henry Cousens who was also studying the antiquities of Dhār at the time. Cousens was concerned with the iron pillar and published his detailed study in the first volume of the Archaeological Survey of India Report for 1902–03. In his attempt to locate the surviving parts of this pillar and the history of their placement and movement, Cousens made enquires through Captain Barnes. In reply Lele wrote: “As soon as your letter came, I drove to the Agency House and made a search for the bell-capital near the Havaldar's house. Nothing like it was found there or anywhere else. But on further enquiries I found, near the bāghbān's house, a flat octagonal slab of ordinary black-stone, which old people say rested upon the lāṭ while it was standing in the Agency garden . . . When Dr. Führer visited Dhar this slab with its support might have appear to him bell-shaped.”

This statement is critical because it demonstrates a link between Lele and Führer. Whether Lele met Führer personally or knew him only through his 1893 report is probably something we shall never know for sure. Vincent Smith examined Führer papers in 1898 and noted that the lists of inscriptions and antiquities he found were not Führer's own work, but “prepared by local officials”. Whether this shows that Führer met with Lele and took a list from him is uncertain, but it at least shows how Führer was able to give the correct dates and details for the Dhār inscriptions he mentions in his report. However that may be, the text of Lele's letter printed by Cousens leaves no doubt that Lele knew what Führer had said about Dhār and that he had a degree of respect for it. What this means is that Lele would have been aware of Führer's general understanding of Indian architecture, i.e. that that pre-Islamic temples were “. . . perfect gems of Indian art workmanship”, which in some case were “. . . preserved to us from the ravages of time and iconoclastic tendencies of the Musalmân rulers of India”, and that “. . . many Hindû temples . . . were thrown down by the bigotry of these conquerors” but, nonetheless, Islamic rulers sometimes recycled older buildings to their needs, “. . . a mode of adapting Hindû temples to their own service . . . practiced by the Musalmâns at Mându, Dhâr, Jaunpur, Zafarâbâd and many other places”. Führer was not, of course, the inventor of 

this style of interpretation. It was Führer, however, who introduced these themes to Dhār and it was Lele who developed them in the local setting.

The basic conundrum for Lele was that if the mosque at Kamāl al-Dīn was going to be explained away as a re-used Hindu building, then some sort of Sanskrit basis had to be found for ‘Bhoja's school’, the designation ‘Rājā Bhoja kā Madrassa’ being too manifestly Urdu to serve his purpose. Lele addressed the problem by inventing the term ‘Bhojśālā’. While this was a clever bit of Sanskritisation, it had no basis in common parlance or the architectural types known from śilpa-texts. A dharmśālā was and is a well-known place of refuge for pilgrims, and there are various functional buildings called śālā, such as those used by washer men (dhobīśālā). But there is no such thing as a Sanskrit śālā (that would be vidyālaya, vidyāpītha or jñānapītha) and no śālā named after a king. Lele coined the term to provide the descriptive terminology he needed for the pillared colonnades of the mosque and so advance the idea that the building was indeed an old structure put to new use by the Muslims.

Although Lele busied himself with promulgating the idea that the mosque was the Bhojśālā, and had some success in this , the proposal did not meet with universal acceptance. In Luard's landmark Gazetteer of 1908, the buildings of Dhār are described and ‘Bhoja's school’ duly noted. Because the statements that appeared in this publication were well-researched and represented an official government record, they have been repeated in more recent gazetteers and have enjoyed popular currency. This happened even though Luard openly stated that the name ‘Rājā Bhoja's School’ was “a misnomer”. Why Luard did not simply suppress the misnomer may be explained by the fact that his Gazetteer was meant to be an up-to-date account of realities on the ground, not a definite historical assessment.

Luard's scepticism was well grounded. No text mentioning the Bhojśālā was known in Luard's time and no text or inscription has been found subsequently. This shows that the present ‘tradition’ about the Bhojśālā has been created retroactively from the gazetteers. This conclusion is supported by the application of the sources at the hands of the historian K. M. Munshi. He asserted that: “Close to Sarasvatī-mandira was a large well, still known as ‘Akkal-Kui’ or the ‘Well of Wisdom’”. What Munshi omits to tell us is that he has lifted this information directly from the History of Mandu where it is recorded that the well took its name from the hundred Arabic books that fell accidentally into the well a long time ago, thus giving the name Akl ka kua.The Islamic source of the legend is proven by the fact that akl is an Arabic word.

The comment of K. M. Munshi just cited brings us to the final part of the Bhojśālā puzzle, namely the goddess Sarasvatī. As readers may have noticed, there is no trace of this goddess in Lele's writing or that of his contemporaries. What brought Sarasvatī into the limelight was Tawney's translation of the Prabandhacintāmani. This text, published in 1901, includes several episodes describing King Bhoja's visits to the temple of Sarasvatī at Dhār. Merutunga calls the temple the Sarasvatīkanthābharanaor - Necklace of Sarasvatī, transposing on the building the name of two texts attributed to Bhoja that were known in western India at the time. 

So with Mertunga telling us that Bhoja visited the temple of Sarasvatī and with the inscription of Arjunavarman telling us that the Pārijātamañjarī was performed in the temple of Sarasvatī, all that was missing from the picture was the statue of Sarasvatī herself. This gap was filled in 1924. O. C. Gangoly and K. N. Dikshit discovered an inscribed sculpture in the British Museum and straightaway announced that it was Bhoja's Sarasvatī from Dhār. Gangoly was a celebrated art historian and Dikshit the Director-General of the Archaeological Survey of India, so their discovery was universally accepted and had a significant impact. The British Museum sculpture was repeatedly identified as Bhoja's Sarasvatī in the years that followed, most notably by C. Sivaramamurti, one-time Director-General of the National Museum of India. Some writers, such as K. M. Munshi and V. Raghavan, have also asserted that the British Museum sculpture was from 

the mosque of Kamāl al-Dīn. This is not correct. Already in 1943, C. B. Lele, who had access to the archival sources, reported that the sculpture had been found in the debris of the old city palace in 1875. The city palace was being rebuilt at that time and stands facing the central square of the town. 

Standing figure of the Jain goddess Ambikā at British Museum.

The inscription on the British Museum sculpture is damaged, but clearly mentions King Bhoja and Vāgdevī, another name for Sarasvatī. The editio princeps was prepared by H. V. Trivedi and published in Corpus Inscriptionum Indicarum. A re-examination of the inscription was undertaken by H. C. Bhayani, the well-known Sanskrit and Prakrit scholar. This was published in 1981 in an article co-authored with Kirit Mankodi. Their study showed that the inscription records the making of a sculpture of Ambikā after the creation of three Jinas and Vāgdevī. In other words, although Vāgdevī is indeed mentioned, the inscription's main purpose is to record an image of Ambikā, i.e., the sculpture on which the record is incised. That the sculpture is Ambikā is confirmed by the iconographic features, notably the lion and elephant goad. The composition also leaves space for a mango cluster in one of the missing hands, a frequent attribute of Ambikā. This is alluded to in the inscription which describes the goddess as ‘ever abundant in fruit’.

The current location of the Sarasvatī from Dhār remains an interesting mystery seeing that it is not located in the British Museum. There are famous and ancient Sarasvatī temples at several locations in India, notably Maihar in eastern Madhya Pradesh and in Kashmir. The site in Kashmir is known as Śāradā pītha. Envoys 

from Gujarāt visited this temple in the twelfth century to collect texts so the western Indian polymath Hemacandra could compose his comprehensive grammar, theSiddhahema. A more aggressive approach was taken by the Solankī and Vāghelā rulers toward Dhār. They sacked the city repeatedly in the dying days of the Paramāra regime, removing the libraries to their own cities where Paramāra texts were copied, studied and preserved. The inscription of Vīsaladeva from Kodinar dated 1271 records the creation of a pleasure garden (ketana) and college (sadas) sacred to Sarasvatī. This suggests that in addition to removing books, the western Indian kings also took away the sacred image of Sarasvatī, installing her in a new temple in Saurāstra, not far from Somnāth. The practice of moving images is well-testified. Aside from the examples documented by Richard Davis, attention may be drawn to Jinaprabhasūri (d. 1333) who states that an image of Candraprabha came to Somnāth from Valabhi along with figures of Ambā and Khetrapāla.

SOURCE : Research Article titled "Dhār, Bhoja and Sarasvatī: from Indology to Political Mythology and Back" by MICHAEL WILLIS,British Museum

Illustrated London News - May 16th 1863

Oxblood Ruffin (@OxbloodRuffin ) has curated some "Antique And Vintage South Asian Artifacts". 

Much goodness about our Bhopal, Nawab Secunder Begum, the order of the star of India and Saugar bridge built by English commisioner using native ore (iron ore in Saugar ?), local people and without any foundaries can be found in this "The Illustrated London News" dated 16 May, 1863 .

Don't miss the fascinating photograph at the bottom of the page of Upper Lake, with the identifiable Taj-Ul-Masjid. 

As far as the tears and "firmly attached to English" sentiments mentioned in the article is concerned, she is believed to have said, when asked by a close confident what she would have done if the British had lost in the mutiny of 1857, replied "In that event, the Bhopal army had made sure that the British garrison was neutralized"! 

Read details here  and details of the Nawab hereself here

Bhopal - Saris And A Scabbard

In the 19th century, the long-drawn-out process of being photographed in the growing number of studios provided plenty of time to decide on how a sari should be draped and a hand be positioned. Though tiring, the photographic ‘encounter’ had to be endured as for many clients, the new visual economy helped affirm a certain stage, a position within the life cycle. While it was usually men who visited photo studios, by the last decades of the century, family photographs and those of the conjugal couple became increasingly popular in growing urban spaces. A few women also had individual access to photographers, the earliest among them being the Nawab Begum of Bhopal, the redoubtable Sikander Begum, her family and Bibi Doolan, the wife of one of her ministers. In 1861, for her loyalty to the British during 1857, Sikander Begum was awarded the Star of India. In the same year, she enthusiastically welcomed James Waterhouse of the Bengal Artillery, a talented photographer, part of the team of officers and other professionals seconded by Governor General Canning to photograph the major groups and communities of India.

At that time, the 42-year-old Sikander Begum was the well-established second-in-line of female rulers of Bhopal. Relations with her husband were not cordial and the main difference apparently was over the Begum’s less than conventional use of purdah. Sikander Begum had interesting views, and, according to Shaharyar M. Khan, the biographer of the begums (The Begums of Bhopal: A Dynasty of Women Rulers in Raj India), ruled with the proverbial iron hand, went tiger-hunting, inspected troops, toured villages on horseback as well as commissioned a regular army and police force. As she had had the benefit of early education, the Begum was committed to the establishment of schools for girls. It is hardly surprising that this loyal subject set up a school for girls and called it Victoria School though, as Gouri Srivastava’s analysis of administrative reports (The Role of the Begums of Bhopal in Girls’ education) shows, school enrolments fluctuated. Clearly, as was true of many other parts of India, in these early years, it was not easy to get girls’ education on the private agenda of the average family. Undaunted, the Begum established Urdu and Hindi-medium schools in each pargana of the state, with the express instruction to officers to send their children to these schools. As for her daughter, Shah Jehan, English lessons as well as tuition in arithmetic were regularly scheduled. It is not surprising, then, that this self-confident and powerful woman would have no hesitation in allowing the camera into her palace.

When Waterhouse arrived in Bhopal, the state was celebrating its ruler’s recent award. Although she accepted the coveted Star of India, it was not before she had consulted her qazi on whether she could wear an ornament bearing the portrait of Victoria; the qazi decreed that this might indeed prove to be a distraction at prayer time. Duly cautioned, the Begum nevertheless wore the prized decoration on special occasions and was photographed wearing it with full ceremonial regalia. In The Waterhouse Albums — Central Indian Provinces, based on the extensive holdings of the Alkazi Collection of Photography in New Delhi, London and New York and edited by John Falconer of the British Library, we are introduced to the wide range of Waterhouse’s oeuvre. On his photographic encounter with the royal ladies, Waterhouse writes:

“Her Highness the Begum [Sikander Begum] showed a most intelligent and friendly interest in the proceedings and knowing the difficulty there was for a European photographer to obtain photographs of native ladies, she dressed herself, her daughter and some of her ladies in different costumes so that I could photograph them. In order, however, not to offend the Mahomedan prejudices, all these photographs were taken in purdah, i.e. from behind a screen, so that I never actually saw my lady sitters but only photographed them, the lens of the camera projecting through the screen.”

And what amazing photographs he took without ever ‘seeing’ his subjects! It is interesting that though the actual photograph was taken without the man behind the camera having a direct view, the Begum obviously had no objection to the photographs being used, either in The People of India volumes or otherwise. In fact, aware that in a purdah society it would not be easy for the Englishman to gain access to too many women, she, together with her daughter, Shah Jehan , and Bibi Doolan posed for him in several different attires from their extensive wardrobes. Apart from his role of photographer, Waterhouse was a bit of a chronicler of women’s dress as all his photographs have detailed captions on what the ladies were wearing: in the Star of India portrait , for instance, she was wearing the “richly embroidered cap, insignia and collar of the Most Exalted Star of India, rich kincab jacket with soft feathers of fur round the collar and sleeves... under this she wears a rich flowered kincab angarkha (coat)” and very “loose Turkish trowsers [sic] with embroidered slippers [photograph].”

The portrait became the Frontispiece to the Begum’s candid account of her 1864 trip to Mecca, A Pilgrimage to Mecca by the Nawab Sikander Begum of Bhopal. This English translation by a Mrs Willoughby-Osborne was made available to the world in 1870 and provides an insight into the mind of the lady of strong opinions. Accompanied by her elderly mother, Begum Qudsia, who in her day had been the first Muslim woman ruler in the region, Sikander Begum in turn was the first Muslim ruler to perform Hajj. Sikander Begum found Jeddah “a desolate-looking city, very dirty and pervaded by unsavoury odours” and though in treeless Mecca the “moonlight is magnificent”, she noted disapprovingly the preponderance of beggars. She commented that it would appear as though “almost all the bad characters that have been driven out of India may be found in Mecca”. As for the ‘native’, her comments are no less acerbic — “In character the majority of the people are miserly, violent-tempered, hard-hearted and covetous, and they are both awkward and stupid.” Little wonder then that the local authorities were annoyed by the royal pilgrim’s observation that if she were in charge, she would bring about “a complete restoration” in civic amenities.

Apart from this photograph, the Begum allowed the use of several more taken by Waterhouse in her recollections of Mecca; that she was greatly appreciative of the camera as well as of the older and more established tradition of portrait-painting is evident in her response to the arrival of the artist, Louis Rousselet, at the court. Though she greeted him with a ritual breast-beating — her daughter, Shah Jehan, had been recently widowed — she ushered him into the young woman’s presence. Not only was Shah Jehan not in purdah and widow’s weeds, but rather she was resplendently dressed, and at her side hung “an elegant poniard with jeweled hilt”. Shaking hands with the visitors, she set up a date to pose for them a month hence when “she added, she would no longer be compelled to hide herself like a poor slave behind a straw curtain”. Apparently sensitive to Rousselet’s discomfiture, Sikander Begum conceded that she mourned her son-in-law as one would “a faithful friend and counselor” (details). But why would her daughter mourn — “Does the prisoner regret his gaoler?”

Hardly surprising then that Shah Jehan continued her mother’s strong rule, only to be succeeded by her daughter, Sultan Jehan, who wrote her memoirs in three volumes and became the first woman chancellor of Aligarh Muslim University. Both these rulers continued Sikander Begum’s commitment to visual representation, reaffirming the need to be ‘seen’ by a public far beyond their subject people. From the point of view of the expanding photographic world of those days, such portraits not only emboldened the portfolios of professionals but also provided an enduring visual dimension to remarkable women who ventured into the world beyond.

More photographs

MALAVIKA KARLEKAR

A Post Veer Revisit To Bhopal's History and Pindaris

Recently Salman Khan acted and produced a film called Veer, which revolved around the Pindharis. Pindharis belonged to the valleys of Narmada, and Bhopal staged many important episodes of their life. This is my attempt to reconnect these episodes.

“Their (Pindaris) true history has perhaps not yet been written. The profuse British accounts suffer from a natural bias created by the last years of their activities perpetuating the impression that the Pindaris were the enemies of society and such loathsome pests as deserved to be exterminated.” G. S. Sardesai, Maratha historian.

Bhopal founder Dost Mohammad Khan  was succeeded by Yar Mohammed Khan - his son. His two successors  - Faiz Mohammed Khan and Haiat Mohammed Khan,  proved to be utterly incompetent,and both devoted themselves to a life of religious austerity and seclusion. Their ministers were therefore the real masters of the state and the post of dewan was the object of frequent contest.

During this period two Pindari leaders, Hiru and Barun,sons of Shahbaz Khan,offered their services to the Nawab of Bhopal. Shahbaz Khan organized one of the main division of the Pindaris, generally connected with Sindhias of Gwalior. Shahbaz Khan died in a campaign in Sindhia's service, but his group continued their association with the house of Sindhia. During the chaotic phase of Bhopal there was hardly a person who could take any decision. When no decision was seen for some period, the Bhonsla family at Nagpur hired the two brothers. The Pindaris' first assignment, which they executed with enthusiasm and success, was to plunder Bhopal. However, jealous of the wealthy loot accumulated in this assignment and siding with Hiru in a dispute, the Bhonsla Raja plundered the Pindari camp and took Barun prisoner. Hiru fled back to Sindhia uncertain of his own safety. Both leaders died shortly afterwards in 1800.

Meanwhile in Bhopal Chotey Khan became the all powerfull diwan (Chief Minister). He fought the battle of Phanda, thrust upon him by Bahu Begum. His son was made diwan after his death by Nawab Hayat Mohammad Khan. Amir Khan, Son of Chottey Khan, and his brothers conspired with the Scindias, raided the treasury, made off with 1½ lakh cash and took refuge with Daulat Rao Scindia. Amir eventually persuaded Daulat Rao Scindia to invade Bhopal with force of 49000.Nawab Hayat Mohammad Khan was in no position to oppose and conceded the forts of Hoshangabad and Raisen.

The saviour appeared in the form of Wazir Mohammad Khan. After the death of Murid, Wazir Mohammed imitated the example of Sindhia and Holkar, and started supporting his army by similar acts of aggression to his neighbours. During this period a Pindari by the name Karim Khan tried to get into Bhopal. Karim Khan was briefly the wealthiest and most powerful Pindari leader. As a young soldier, he successively served under the Peshwa, Sindhia, and Barun. When the Bhonsla Raja took Barun prisoner, he fled and served under Sindhia. In the wars against Hyderabad, especially at Kharda (1795), he amassed a fortune in plunder. To safeguard this newly acquired wealth, he established himself at Shujaulpur in central India. There he attracted a large Pindari following. Later, in 1804, Sindhia confirmed his possession of this land which was worth 15 lakhs of rupees annual revenue. Seeking to set himself up as a prince, Karim Khan tried to expand unsuccessfully into Bhopal. In 1806, Sindhia, fearing Karim Khan's expansionist ambitions and growing power, enticed him to his camp and took him prisoner. Karim Khan's mother fled with her son's wealth to the prince of Kotah, Zalim Singh. During the next five years, Karim Khan remained a prisoner of Sindhia while other Pindari leaders continued to expand their power.
Chitu, the other outstanding Pindari leader of the Independent Period, was born a Jat near Delhi. Dobble Khan, whose sons led Barun's durrah, bought Chitu as a slave and then adopted him as his son. Eventually Chitu acquired the leadership of Barun's group. Like Karim Khan, Sindhia gave Chitu a title and lands in 1804, but also took him prisoner in 1807.

Meanwhile in Bhopal, Nawab Ghous Mohammad Khan, the heir apparent, engaged in  treacherous deals with Marhattas of Gwalior and Nagpur. This left the British unsure of Bhopal’s commitment to resisting Marhatta power, while Wazir was negotiating with the Britishers for a treaty that would give Bhopal protection against its neighbors. Hayat died on 17 November 1807, aged 73, and Ghous Mohammad Khan succeeded him 18 days later. Soon Raghuji Bhonsle sent a force of 40,000 under his able general, Sadiq Ali. Sadiq Ali took over Bhopal and demanded that Ghous hand over Wazir and his wife as hostage. No sooner had Sadiq Ali left Bhopal than Wazir swooped down from Ginnor fort and routed the Nagpur forces and resumed governance of Bhopal.

On payment of a large ransom, Sindhia released both leaders, Chitu and Karim Khan, in 1811. During the Dusshera festival they planned to join forces against Sindhia and the Bhonsla. As has already been mentioned, the Bhonsla bought off Chitu with grants of land. Chitu then joined Sindhia by helping his officer, Jago Bapu, defeat Karim Khan. Karim Khan fled to Zalim Singh for protection. At the same time Sindhia threatened Zalim Singh with reprisals if he gave Karim Khan asylum. Karim Khan finally turned to Amir Khan and Holkar for help. They negotiated a settlement, by which Karim Khan remained under their confinement until 1816. When he obtained his freedom in that year. he again attempted a union with Chitu for a common defense against the British. Quarrels between the two prevented such an alliance. Namdar Khan and Wasil Muhammad were among the leaders of smaller durrahs during this Period. As Karim Khan's nephew, Namdar Khan occasionally plundered Sindhia's territory to avenge his uncle's subjugation. His durrah numbered only about 2,000 men compared to the 10,000 of Karim Khan's. Wasil Muhammad, who was a son of Hiru, generally remained loyal to Sindhia with a durrah of 5,000 men.

The Marhatas were furious at Wazir’s presumptuous counter-attack. Accordingly Gwalior and Nagpur jointly resolved to defeat Wazir and carve up the state of Bhopal among themselves. Wazir sought Bhopal’s salvation in British support, sent numerous messages to the Governer-General and to British army commanders soliciting a treaty of friendship. The British were initially inclined to respond to Wazir’s entreaties but drew back from committing their support, partly because they did not entirely trust Wazir and partly because they hoped to neutralize the Marhattas by compromise. When Gwalior and Nagpur armies, numbering 82,000, converged on Bhopal on 15 October 1812, Wazir stood virtually alone. He could muster up only 11,000 able bodied fighters, which included three thousand were Pindaris, commanded by Namdar Khan, a nephew of Kareem Khan. A few weeks into the siege, Wazir’s allies, the Rajput, sikh and some Pindari forces decided to quit and withdraw from the fort. The Bhopal forces were now reduced to 6000. The seize of Bhopal continued for about nine months, by the end of which Bhopal state was reduced to 200 men and women manning the fort. At end Sadik Ali lost his patience and abandoned the Siege. His departure destroyed the hopes of Sindhia's forces, already dispirited by the duration, and events of the siege; they accordingly followed the example of the Nagpur troops, and marched to Sarangpur, where they were stationed during the rains. (Check related details)

When the regular forces of the Marathas had been broken up in the campaigns conducted by Sir Arthur Wellesley and Lord Lake, the Pindaris made their headquarters in Malwa, under the tacit protection of Maratha Dynasties like Sindhia and Holkar. Many Pindari leaders owned lands in the Narmada valley. On these lands their families and followers subsisted when they were not plundering. Other lands were located within the territories of the ruler who employed or supported Pindari leaders. Many of them were within the territory of the Nabab of Bhopal, and it was from this area. which included Nemawar, Sutwas (don't know where is this?), Raisen and Bhilsa (Vidisha) that the Pindaris conducted their raids. They were accustomed to assemble every year at the beginning of November, and went into British occupied territory in search of plunder. In one such raid upon the Masulipatam coast they plundered 339 villages, killing or wounding 682 persons, torturing 3600 and carrying off property worth a quarter of a million pounds. In 1808-09 they plundered Gujarat, and in 1812 Mirzapur. In 1814 they were reckoned at 25,000 to 30,000 horsemen.

Although the attack of Bhopal was thus repelled, there was every appearance of its being speedily and successfully resumed. Meanwhile Lord Hastings, with the approval of the Court of Directors of the East India Company, decided to exterminate and eliminate the Pindaris in September 1816. Hastings put into place a plan by the end of 1817. To begin with, he entered into an understanding with several other powers active in India. The eminent war between Bhopal state and Marathas was prevented by the treaty between Wazir's son Nazar Mohammad Khan and the East India Company in 1818.  This organized campaign of Lord Hastings was known as the Pindari War or the Third Anglo-Maratha War.

Chitu fled to Bhopal, where he tried to reach an agreement with the British through the Nawab. The British rejected his plans as too extravagant. Karim Khan's group split into three bodies, but the British troops still detected them. Clarke's cavalry attacked one group around Gangraur, while Adams pursued the rest into the Bhopal area. Soon, most of the Pindari leaders surrendered to the British authorities. Namdar Khan gave himself up on February third, and Karim Khan surrendered to Malcolm on the fifteenth. Others gradually followed their example.

Only Chitu escaped. He participated in the events connected with Appa Sahib at Nagpur but eventually fled to the jungle, deserted by his followers. Near the end of February 1819 his body was brought to Malcolm. He had been attacked and killed by a tiger.

John George arranged for the Pindari leaders and their families to settle in northern India at Gorakhpur with pensions and land. To prevent any resurgence of the Pindaris, the British permitted only Namdar Khan, Karim Khan's nephew, to settle in Bhopal near the old banes of the Pindaris.

In conjunction with British consolidation after the war, John Malcolm arranged for the Pindari leaders and their families to settle in northern India at Gorakpur with pensions and land. To prevent any resurgence of the Pindaris, the British permitted only Namdar Khan, Karim Khan's nephew, to settle in Bhopal near the old banes of the Pindaris.

About a century later a Gorakpur gazetteer reported the inglorious history of the Pindari descendants and their land. The land had passed from rent-free to assessed land though the revenue was very low. The descendants lived in pretentious opulence with the title of Nawab, which the Government refused to recognize. Though a few leaders, such as Sheikh Dulla, continued to plunder the Deccan areas during the 1820's, their followers were few and their devastation minimal. By 1825 Malcolm reported that most of the Pindaris had become absorbed into the general population of central India. He found it difficult to trace them.

In 1866 Alfred Lyall wrote in "The Old Pindaree" of laments of Pindaree, the fiercely independent fighter/pluderer from central india: 

And if I were forty years younger, with my life before me to choose

I would'nt be lectured by Kafirs, or bullied by fat Hindoos;

But I'd go to some far-off country where Musalmans still are men

Or take to the jungle, like Cheettoo, and die in the tiger's den.

Other groups and events now occupied the center of the Indian stage of history.

Waterhouse Photographs - Bhopal and surroundings

In a compelling chapter on sartorial conventions by Rosemary Crill from the V&A, London, Crill describes the begums as ‘wearing an elaborate embroidered and plumed hat and, like so many of Waterhouse’s subjects, apparently enjoying the photographic session. How Waterhouse arranged the photographing of Shah Jahan is unclear, since although a number of portraits were made, in one of his notes Waterhouse briefly mentions that her photograph was ‘taken inpurdah, so I did not see her’. Presumably, the general arrangements for the photographs were made in her absence, possibly with a stand-in, and then Waterhouse either withdrew, leaving an assistant to make the actual exposure, or perhaps operated the camera himself, while concealed behind a curtain of some sort.’


An article by the Curator of Alkazi Foundation for the Arts. An exhibition of photographs based on the book, The Waterhouse Albums: Central India Provinces, edited by John Falconer and published by Alkazi Collection of Photography and Mapin, will run at Shridharani Gallery, Triveni Kala Sangam, New Delhi from 18 December to 6 January

Ice Cream - From Bhopal To The World

After 1947, Bhopal commissioner marked the Roshanpura area (then called the Roshanpura Naka) of Bhopal as the outer boundary of the city. The city started to crawl out of the Polytechnic Square after Bhopal was declared the capital of Madhya Pradesh. 

 Bungalows, buildings were built in the area named Tatya Tope Nagar (T. T. Nagar). Vallabh Bhawan was built on Area Hills, followed by the Birla temple and its museum. An unorganized market slowly started taking shape across the Roshanpura Naka.

Fortunately the administration in the early days of Bhopal was prompt to name it the New Market, before it could be named as 0 number la the 10 number, 6 number, 7 number etc markets of Bhopal. By the 1970s a small ice cream parlour was also set up in this market. The Sindhi business man who had migrated from Bhusawal of Maharastra, used to procure Ice Creams from Agra and sell it at an ice cream parlour named Madhu IceCream. The growing city, lack of hang outs and even landmarks soon catapulted this small time ice cream joint to fame.

By 1988, this IceCream joint, renamed Top 'N Town, had set up its first creamery at Bhopal by the name of Ramani Ice Cream Company Pvt Ltd. (RICPL). The Top N Town has since emerged as one of the biggest brand names in central India, with manufacturing facilities located at Bhopal, Lucknow, Nagpur and Nasik.

The Hot Spot is an Ice Cream chain in the making in neighbouring Pakistan. An  idea of two brothers Omar and Ali Khan, they started in 1995 on a small scale selling homemade ice cream to close friends and relatives. Soon, the demand went soaring and they had to establish their first commercial outlet that they later moved to F-7 Markaz. The Unique Selling Point of this Ice Cream joint is their home made Ice Creams, which has helped them extend their parlors to Islamabad, Lahore & Karachi.

Wondering what could be the connection between the Hot Spot of Pakistan and Bhopal? Omar and Ali Khan are grand sons of Abida Sultan, about whom her son Shaharyar M. Khan had written in the epilogue of “Memoirs of a Rebel Princess”:

“The doubts that gnawed at her conscience throughout her life in Pakistan related to her taking this momentous decision on my behalf while I was still young and impressionable. She felt that she might have forced my hand in denying me a life of comfort and financial security in Bhopal”

Princess Abida Sultan - Bhopal's Pakistan Connection

Earlier Posts on Adida Sultan 1, 2
The marriage of Abida Sultan did not last, and was broken up rather violently. As a single mother Abida brought up her son, Shehryar Mohammad Khan (nick named Mian and Bubbles in family) and continued in her tomboy ways. She was instrumental in assuaging the feelings of old Bhopal families like the Jalalabad clan, the Misti khels and the Mirazi khels, relations with whom had grown strained due the Bhopal succession case. The credit for getting her second sister Sajida alias Majkul married to Iftikar Ali Khan Pataudi also goes to her. Meanwhile she went on to become the second Muslim woman in the world and the first woman in India to hold a flying license which she received on 25th January 1942. The Noor-Us-Sabah (photograph above), constructed as dowry for Abida Sultan by Sultan Jahan Begum, continued to be her residence.
Abida Sultan was brought up by Sultan Jahan  Begum to carry on the long tradition of Bhopal Begums. She was trained to taste (actually taste - by putting it on tongue) the soil to tell what would be tax rate for the land. An able administrator, Abida Sultan was appointed the Chief Secretary and President of Cabinet by her father Hamidullah Khan. She acted as the head of state during the frequent absence of her father, who had started playing an active role in the Muslim politics of the subcontinent. She was outstanding at squash, becoming All India Women's Squash Champion in 1949. Hamidullah Khan and Abida Sultan had grown a deep bond, that of two friends more than that of father and daughter. However, true to the long history of Bhopal male rulers, Hamidullah also ended up being a miserable ruler in spite of all the pains taken by Sultan Jahan Begum to educate Hamidullah properly. Hamidullah would spend most of his leisure time surrounded by women of Bhopal gentry. From this changing group of women, suddenly Hamidullah married Aftab Jahan, a school friend of Abida Sultan. 
The relation with Abida Sultan started to sour with her father after this marriage, which ended in Abida Sultan migrating to Pakistan. In an interview much later in life, she said that she did not want people to say that a woman ruler could not protect her kingdom and handed it over to India. She even fantasized about going down fighting like Wazir Mohhamad khan during the Seige of Bhopal, but eventually moved away to England and finally to Pakistan. The Indian government, represented by Krishna Menon, tried to bring her back to India. The Indian government sensed her potential and wanted her to stay on India as a Muslim leader. She refused, her faith on Pakistan as the ideal nation state for the progressive Muslim not shaken, even by the death Mr Jinnah during her stay at England. She moved in to Karachi and settled at Malir - about 12 kms from Karachi. Although she could not continue with her sports activities in Pakistan, Abida Sultan represented Pakistan in UN in 1954 and visited China in 1956. She supported Fatima Jinnah in her opposition to Ayub Khan's marshal law as the head of Combined Opposition Party, which ended prematurely with the death of Fatima. Abida Sultan had serious doubts later in her life about the decision to move away to Pakistan, which continued till her son Shehryar M. Khan refused the offer of Hamidullah Khan to return to Bhopal and claim his heritage in January 1954. After staying away from Hamidullah Khan for twelve years, Abida Sultan was present in Bhopal during the death of her father. She narrates her last meeting with Hamidullah Khan:

As I entered the room where HH (Hamidullah Khan) lay propped up with pillows, I noticed he was unable to focus on me. He enquired "Who is there"? The aide whispered "Bia Huzur has come." HH's face lit up and he said "Barkul has come?" and opened his arms. I went into his embrace unhesitatingly and realized then he was blind! ...
The old families of Bhopal and the public gave me a moving and highly sentimental response. 'Don't go back, stay with us. We recognize you as the Nawab's chosen succesor'. I recall a simple tonga-walla recognizing me, peering into my car and saying 'you are Bia Huzoor. I won't let you go now. You belong to us. You must be our guide and savior'....
I therefore told my sister, Manjkul (Sajida Sultan), to hurry back to Delhi to establish her rights. She duly departed for Delhi to duly establish her claim as successor to the title with  Pandit Nehru who was always her well wisher. Despite an emotional clamor from the Bhopali public, I had no desire to play a titular or administrative role in Bhopal.

She was even chided by President Ayub Khan for returning to Bhopal, who wanted her to remain in Bhopal as true friend of Pakistan. On Abida Sultan's insitence, Ayub even issued a letter confirming her Pakistani nationality in the event of the Indian Government accepting her as her father's successor. Her claim was conveyed through the foreign office of the Indian Government. In view of her staunch criticism of Indian policies at the UN General Assembly, her able administration from a public office at Bhopal for twenty two years, a son in the Pakistan Foreign Service, her popularity with Bhopal public and her headstrong and proactive ways she was a unsuitable candidate in a Bhopal which was no longer an autonomous princely state. During subsequent discussions in April 1960 with Prime Minister Nehru and Home Minister Govind Ballabh Pant, she conveyed firmly that she wanted to remain a Pakistan citizen. In March 1961, Sajida Sultan was announced successor of the title of Bhopal Nawab.
Years later, G. Vishwanathan, former Commissioner of Bhopal, told his Oxford contemporary, Ishaat Habibullah, that there was no way that the Indian government would accept "a firebrand like Abida Sultan" in its midst. In fact Viswanathan had tried to find some lapse, some fault in her tenure as Heir Apparent and Chief Secretary but could not find a single incident that could damage her reputation and intigrity. By October 2001, Abida was bed ridden with pain in knees from arthritis and bladder prblems. She was admitted to the Shaukat Omar Memorial Hospital on 27th April 2002, where she died of cardiac failure on 11 May 2002.  Digvijay Singh, Cheif Minister of Madhya Pradesh telephoned his condolences to her son, Shaharyar M. Khan  within two hours of her death saying that in Bhopal every mosque, every temple would be mourning Princess Abida Sultan's Death.
Abida Sultan left India after the turmoil of partition, holding a belief that the Muslims of India will not be able to prosper under a Hindu leadership. She however found that democracy took root in India while dictatorial feudal leadership ruled the roost in Pakistan. She noted the incidents of Gujrat smugly, as the indications of her apprehensions coming true. Her apprehensions are reflected in her will:

Finally I follow the example of my revered grandmother, Nawab Sultan Jahan Begum of Bhopal in humbly begging my most beloved son, family, friends, acquaintances, neighbors and people in general to forgive me for any pain or harm that I may have inadvertently caused during the course of my lifetime. This applies with emphasis to my son and grandchildren who have so cheerfully shared the privations of my life and, who with noble courage and fortitude, have suffered the consequences of my settling in Pakistan. They would have, no doubt, enjoyed an enormous inheritance with countless other advantages had they remained in Bhopal. May God bless and amply reward them for their sacrifices.

The Princess who could have become the leading face of Muslims in an independent India, was rarely used for any fruitful endeavour in Pakistan. Even after Abidas death, the Pakistan government continued in usual uncaring ways.

NIKAH

Selectively quoted from "Memoirs Of A Rebel Princess" by Princess Abida Sultan

On Friday, 18 June 1926 at about 3 p.m., during the festivities connected with my father's coronation, we three sisters were seriously engaged in pillow-fighting with some of the ex-Sikandaria girls when Khalloo (Zaheda Begum, a trained midwife who was given charge of attending to me after my birth) came in saying I had to take a bath and get dressed in my ceremonial clothes. Having always hated ceremonies and dressing up, I made faces at her and poking my tounge out in protest said, " Why am I always singled out for these stunts? What is all this fuss about?" "It is the price you pay for being the eldest," Khalloo smiled. Taking no notice of her, I resumed the pillow-fight with greater enthusiasm. Presently Sarkar Amman padded in. "Is this how a bride behaves on the day of her nikah?" she growled. "The Qazi Saheb has arrived and you are not even dressed, you are busy pillow-fighting."  "You", pointing at Khalloo, "what do you think you are here for?"  and boxing my ears she pushed me into the bathroom to prepare me for the ceremony.....

Having had no previous warning or information about the nikah, I kept asking Khalloo while she dressed me whose Nikah it was and with whom. Perhaps she was too scared to talk about it and only smiled. "Be a little patient, you will find out." She said. I was then conducted to the kutchery room (audience chamber). There were hundreds of swarming women and children squeezing themselves into this small room. Some perfumed and bedecked in their finery, others smelling of stale sweat and mustard oil. Pandamonium prevailed. No one had prepared or instructed me on how to conduct myself with result that I walked into the nikah chamber, pushing the gathered women out of my way, my face uncovered, sulking as usual for being chosen again for some new  experiment.  There were immediate indignant remarks. "Just look at this shameless bride". I still did not comprehend. Then I saw another bride traditionally bent over and huddled up in a corner, shaking with histerical sobs and alomst fainting in the heat under her heavy bridal brocades. She was my cousin Noor Jahan (daughter of the Late Nawab Nasrullah Khan) whose nikah with Saeed Mian was to take place simultaneously with mine.

Glaring at me and grumbling at my shocking entry, Sarkar Amman covered my face and told me to bend over like a bride. I complied and wasx made to squat next to cousin Noor Jahan. On the other side of the screen, my father, the Qazi Sahab, and other male members of the family were awaiting  my arrival. A male voice started reciting the nikah formula, first asking Noor Jahan if she was willing to accept Saeed Mian as her husband.  She made no reply. The whole process was repeated, read and re-read, again and again, with Sarkar Amman and several other women pleading and begging Noor Jahan to make the required "Hoon" (yes). But she would not. Finally in exasperation, her aunt, Surraiya Bi, put her head under Noor Jahan's head covering, and squeaked the "Hoon". This faked "hoon" was accepted by the males on the other side of the screen as Noor Jahan's own consent to become Saeed Main's wife.

I was shocked and outraged at this hypocrisy, so when the Qazi's voice addressed me, "Do you Abida Sultan, accept Sarwar  Ali Khan as your husband" I clearly and promptly said 'Yes , I Do' On the very first asking, creating another uproar at my immodesty. Meanwhile cousin Noor Jahan had fainted. Taking advantage of people's pre-occupation in reviving her, I slipped away without waiting for Sarkar Amaan's permission and without being escorted by the self-appointed bridesmaids. Later on, at Sadar Manzil the bridegrroms, Nawabzada, Captain Saeed-Uz-Zafar Khan, and Nawab Sarwar Ali Khan of Kuwai gave their consent in an all male ceremony.

There were still about ten weeks before my thirteenth birthday. I was nature's child, a tomboy, not in the least interested in marriage or aware of sex. Sarkar Ammans stict supervision had kept us ignorant of the facts of life. Therefore, marriage was, for me, a strange custom that I had never tried to analyse. Nevetheless, I was fond of Dadabhai who was the kindest, most affectionate, sympathetic person I knew. The prospect of finding my freedom by living with him away from 'horrible' Sarkar Amman was sweet indeed. I looked forward to it with happy anticipation.

Previous Posts on Abida Sultan 1, 2

Abida Sultan - The Best Nawab Bhopal Never Had (2)

The most touching part of Abida Sultan's life, and one that throws light on the way these Pathan Begums of Bhopal were treated more than equal to their male counterparts is her description about how she cannot remember herself without agun ever, even as a toddler when she could not handle nothing more tha a toy gun. 'Sarkar Amman' (HH Sultan Jahan Begum) was very proud of Abida Sultan's riding and shooting skills from a very young age, but the discipline was very strict. Sarkar amman brought the sisters (three sisters - Abida alias Barkul the eldest, Sajida alias Majkul the middle one and Rabia alias Rabboo) up single handedly and was sole dominating influence in the upbringing. Nawab Hamidullah Khan lived in the mardana (Gents quarters) and showed little interest in the education of the girls while the mother was simply not allowed to do so. 

By Abida's own admission, when Sarkar Amman was attending her ailing son Obaidullah Khan, Abida was going wild riding tonga horses, donkeys and even the pet cheetal. She went tearing around in a car, propped up by several cushions as a nine year olds legs were not long enough to reach the pedals. Sajida preferred playing with dolls, but the younger Rabboo spent her time body-building and eating eight or ten poached eggs a day to be able to defeat Abida in whatever she did!

Abida finally discovered her parents during in London during the Bhopal Succesion case . Hamidullah Khan and Maimoona Sultan became her friends during the long stay in a gloomy London during the long drawn legal battle, which ended on Hamidullah Khan being declared the last Nawab and Sultan Jahan abdicating in his favour. By the end of the case Abida was asked to start observing purdah (veil) by her grand mother, who wanted her to get married to Sarwar Ali Khan of Kurwai. Brought up under strict discipline by Sultan Jahan Begum and competing with the boys of the household, Abida did not know anything about sex. The Nikah of Abida Sultan with Sarwar Ali Khan of Kurwai, known as Dadabhai took place on Friday, 18th June 1926.

Abida Sultan - The Best Nawab Bhopal Never Had (1)

Those who have followed the amazing journey of Bhopal state from foundation by Dost Muhammad Khan till  end with Hamidullah Khan would have observed the strange consistency with which the male rulers were miserable rulers while the strength of the Bhopal state were the women rulers. The 13th Nawab of Bhopal State Hamidullah Khan's eldest daughter was Abida Sultan. Till date, many older families of Bhopal consider Abida Sultan the true successor of the Bhopal state.

Abida Sultan was brought up by Sultan Jahan Begum in the mould of the traditional, devout, but independent Begums of Bhopal.  She was an able rider of horse by the age of eight, who could not be controlled by her horse riding coach Thakur Chiman Singh, and had to be transferred to her fathers riding school where she trained with her father's Polo team as well as tent pegging with sword and lance. She was an ace shooter and could handle firearms from a very young age. Encouraged by her father, she escaped to the freedom of riding, shooting and enjoying manly sports, turning into a headstrong tomboy who loved danger, the open skies and eventually adopting a defiant attitude towards her aging grandmother. It was only much later that Abida Sultan recognized that Sultan Begum's greatest gift to her was her discipline - of knowing her God and her religion. It helped her carry her torch of revolt, especially against the misinterpretation of Islam by the bigoted mullahs. 

Railways at Bhopal

 
Qudsia Begum started negotiating a railway through Bhopal and provided funds from her personal account as distinct from state funds for the construction of part of the railway. Sikandar Begum took the idea forward, and conceived the building of a railway line that linked Bhopal to with the national grid. Sikandar and Qudsia recognized the importance of a railway connection and spent private sums of money to help build the railway. This was a far-sighted move, strongly supported by the Resident, Sir Henry Daly that brought prosperity and importance to Bhopal as a railway junction that was virtually a cross-road between north and south, east and west. Sikander’s dream of opening a railway line in Bhopal was realized several years after her death and even Qudsia, the lean old dowager died two years before the first locomotive steamed into Bhopal on 18^th November 1882, during the reign of Shahjehan.
The railway gave a special importance to Bhopal as an economic cross-road for India. The town was expanded and the railway station itself became a hub of activity with its engineers, maintenance crew, and station masters and lines men, many of them Indian Christians, forming a colony of expatriates and adding color and variety to Bhopal’s ethnic and cultural kaleidoscope. Successive Nawabs of Bhopal enjoyed the privileges of the railways. At the time of independence of India and subsequent merger of Bhopal states with India, Hamiduallah Khan was provided with an additional compensation of Rs. 5 lakhs per annum from Indian government for the railways. Today, though Bhopal has got another railways station by the name of Habibganj (check here) catering to the requirements of new Bhopal, Bhopal Station remains an important milestone of India.
(Photograph: Waiting for the first train - Bhopal railway station 18^th November 1882)