Page images
PDF
EPUB

of beautiful marble, which throughout the building has, strange to say, preserved its purity and whiteness. The mosque, however, is fast going to pieces, and, if some steps are not taken, decay will soon set its broad mark on this fine structure. There is a massive grandeur about the interior which cannot but strike the visitor, who should not fail to remark the great thickness of the blocks of stone which form the stairs leading to the roof, from whence there is a fine view. There is no regular road from the gateway of the fort to this building, and the better plan would be for the tourist to leave his conveyance outside the fort, and proceed on foot to visit the mosque.'

The Shere Mundil is another object. It is a lofty three-storied octagonal building of red sandstone, built by Shere Shah for his palace. On Hoomayun's re-accession to the throne he used this building as a library. The interior seems to have been once richly-decorated with paintings of flowers, of which there are now few traces remaining. In this building it was that Hoomayun met with the accident that terminated in his death. He was engaged in study, and, hearing the call to prayers from the neighbouring mosque, rose suddenly to hasten there, but his staff slipping, he fell down the stairs, and injured himself so seriously that he died in a few days.

There is not a more interesting spot in India than the city of Judishthira. We could have lingered there for hours, whiling away our time in contemplation of all that was great, and noble, and beautiful in the

history of our nation. The heavens were unclouded, and the sun was beaming in his full refulgence. Nothing could exceed the quiet beauty of the scene around us-all was as beautiful as when Vyas sang its praises. The plain, and the rocks, and the river were the same; but the once magnificent city, its citadel, and palaces, were gone for ever, and no remains were left to tell the passing traveller of her fallen greatness. It was near mid-day when we bade farewell, perhaps for ever, to Indraprastha, and turned our backs to retrace the way to our lodge-carrying, deeply impressed on our mind, the melancholy sentiment of the transiency of every sublunary possession.

To the old Hindoo City of Delhi next. Indraprastha and Delhi were two different cities, and situated about five miles apart-the one on the Jumna, and the other on a rocky hill to the south-west in the interior. Thirty princes, in a regular lineal descent from Judishthira, succeeded him on the throne of Indraprastha, but, excepting their names, little more has been recorded of them. The last of the Pandoos was Kashemaka, who is said to have been dethroned, and put to death, by his own minister. The name of this usurper was Viserwa, with whom commenced a line of fourteen princes, who held the sceptre for about 500 years, and the last of whom happened to be deposed in a manner analogous to that which had first put the dynasty in possession of the throne as if Nemesis had resolved to retaliate the treachery of the progenitor upon the last of his race. Next followed the dynasty of the Goutama-ransas, who

commenced their reign with Maharaj-the Maharaj, most probably of Feristha-and continued for fifteen generations down to Ultinai. Line after line succeeded to the throne of the Pandoo, but we believe these princes to have enjoyed little more than the shadow of royal authority. Such an inference is naturally drawn, when Indraprastha does not appear to be a famous place in the history of Buddha. The historians of Alexander and Seleucus, also, make no allusion to the princes of that city. Muttra has been spoken of, and a splendid account of Palibothra has been transmitted, but no notice whatever has been left of the capital of Pandoo sovereignty. No doubt a race of princes existed at this last place, but they must have dwindled into insignificance, or otherwise they would not have been passed over in utter silence. The Goutamas were followed by the Mauryas, a family consisting of nine princes. The last of the Mauryas is stated to have been attacked and slain by the Rajah of Kemayoon, named Sakaditya, or Lord of the Sakas. In his turn, the mountain chief was conquered by the famous Vicramaditya, a monarch whom fable represents to have sat upon a fairy throne, borne upon the shoulders of interdicted angels from Indra's court in heaven, and to have raised spectral agents, like Aladdin in the Arabian tale, for the execution of his behests. Vicramaditya is said to have had the Pandoo blood in him, but he removed the seat of his imperial government to Avanti, or Ougein.

It is about this period that the name of Delhi first

occurs in history. It cannot be a mere change of name, used instead of Indraprastha, when there are remains sufficient to attest to its separate existence. Nothing, however, is recorded of the circumstances that necessitated the building of this city. Probably the desire to perpetuate his name might have led an ambitious prince to change the site of his regal abode, and imperial Indraprastha must have waned and 'gan to pale its fires' before the brighter effulgence of the new city. Neither is there any certainty about the period in which had been laid the foundation of Delhi. The city must be presumed to have been already founded when it fell into the hands of Vicramaditya. The words Dilli-pat-kahayo-became king of Delhi,' applied to him, plainly indicate the existence of that city from an anterior period to his conquest. The origin of the name of Delhi is also a subject of various opinion, but the tradition which states it to have been derived from a Rajah of the name of Dilu, or Dhilu, seems entitled to a greater confidence than any other. That the city of Delhi may have been founded by a prince of similar name is probable enough, for it is a common custom in India, even at the present day, to name places after their founders. The name of Dilu may be recognized in Tilak, which again sounds not unlike to Nilagh, the prince who was the last of the Mauryas.* If this approximate identity of name can be depended upon, then the date of the foundation of Delhi may be fixed

The reader is referred for fuller particulars to the Archæological Report of Cunningham.

immediately prior to the era of Vicramaditya, or about

57 B.C.

There is a widely-spread tradition that, on the removal of the seat of government to Avanti, Delhi lay waste and desolate (ujarh rahi) for eight centuries. That it had ceased to be the metropolis of the land during all this period, may be said without much fear of contradiction. But it is erroneous to state that it had remained quite deserted and void of any population. The existence of both Delhi and Indraprastha in the second century, are recognized in the Daidala and Indabara of Ptolemy. There is again the Iron Pillar, the date of which is assigned to the early part of the fourth century, from which we may infer the place to have been occupied by the Rajah who has left it behind for posterity. It had no occasion to be erected in the midst of a jungle haunted by jackals and wolves. It was intended to be a proud monument of success- -to be the gaze of millions-and to gazette to the world the fact of a most glorious triumph; and a place thronged by populous numbers, and to which men bent their steps from far and near, was the most eligible position on which to erect that pillar. How native historians could have ignored all this it is not easy to explain.

* The mention of Delhi may possibly be found in Ptolemy's Daidala, which is placed close to Indrabara (perhaps Indrapat), and midway between Modura, or Mathura, and Batan Kaisara, or Sthanes. The close proximity of Daidala to Indrabara, joined to the curious resemblance of their names to Dilli and Indrapat, seems to me to offer very fair grounds for assuming their probable indentity with these two famous Indian cities.'-Cunningham.

wara.

[blocks in formation]
« PreviousContinue »