Thread by @cbkwgl

Al Beruni states that the Shahi king Laghuturaman was deposed by his Wazir Kallar, who is a Brahmin. Kallar found a treasure which made him very rich and powerful. In fact, he didn’t depose the king but held him in captivity.

Kallar was very popular with the people and in due time, he deposed the king and took the throne. However, Lalliya of Rajatarangini, who is identified as Al Beruni’s Kallar didn’t plan a coup according to the book by Kalhana.

Two completely opposite narratives. The main problems with Muslim historians are a few. They entered the territories along with the armies/immediately after the armies conquered the territories. This means, on one side, whole records are destroyed and they will have to rely on

hearsay, sometimes, centuries after the events happened, and on the other side, supremacist propaganda(Firishtah is one of the best examples for that). Hindu history is slightly different - we aren't seeing a disruption in tradition and possibly, availability of court records.

Now, coming back to Al Beruni. Let's argue there was no coup. Lalliya came to throne around 870 AD. What would have happened? In 870, there is a Saffrid attack on Kabul in which the fort fell, the city was plundered of it’s wealth and the king was converted to forcibly Islam.

This is an echo of what happened around 820 - when Caliph al-Mamun is in Sistan, he sent an army over Kabul - same story. Fort taken, king converted. The Shahis set up a second capital city at Udabhandapura at the other end of Gandhara in 822 AD. After the 870 invasion of

Yaqub bin Lais, it's possible the capital city was permanently shifted to Udabhandapura. Though Kabul was taken back by 879, the writing is on the wall. So, what happened?
1. Shifting of capital city and royal treasure across the Khyber along with a new king taking charge.

2. The legend of Gorakshanatha/Goraknath gives some important information. Goraknath was born around the same time in Peshawar in a Buddhist family but later converted to the dominant Saivite sect in the area. Meaning, the capital shifted from Buddhist to Hindu areas.

3. The story of Kallar of Kabul and Chach of Sind are almost identical. Is it possible that Al Beruni was confused between Kallar and Chach? It's educative to know that both are Brahmins.

4. The words Zunbil/Rutbil are assumed to be Janapala/Ranapala/Prantapala, hinting their Sanskritic origins. In fact, an inscription from 862 in Tochi Valley mentions the name of the king as Naina Chandra(Nayana/Navina).

His titles included “Drinker of Liquor” and “Protector of Cows” – clearly, Kshatriya. This raises the question, who is that Lagturman/Laghu-Toramana? Also, going by the fact the kings held titles like Kujala, Khagan and thus, one need not be surprised if Toramana is also a title.

Now, look at the title of Kallar's successor - Kamaluka-Toramana or Kamalavarman. If Kallar really toppled the king, why would Kamaluka take the name/title of the dethroned line?
So, what happened? Capital city changed, and along with it the king. Because the power base

shifted from Buddhist areas to Hindu areas, mixing with the legend of Chach, Al Beruni would have invented a dynastic change - a Hindu toppling a Buddhist. But, remember, there is no way to tell whether a palace coup actually happened or not.

Now, coming to the rulers.
Lalliya of Kalhana/Kallar of Al Beruni(870-895)
Dewai Stone Inscription of Bhimadeva calls his father Kala-Kamalavarman. It is conjectured this Kala is a prefix added to the names of the kings with Kala-Lalliya becoming Kallar through Ralayorabheda.

No coin in either of the names are found but it is conjectured that the coins issued in the names of Spalapatideva(title of Minister of War in Persian Empire, extending till Armenia), Samantadeva and Vakka Deva are his while Padma who also issued coins isn't identified.

The use of Samanta Deva, again, doesn't explain anything. Is this Samantadeva ruling as a representative of the captured King in Kabul or did he accept the vassalage of Muslims? Another confusion is that a successor of his, probably, his son also used Samantadeva.

The famous Bull(which actually is Nandi) and horse coins famous all over Turan and even Khwarezm originated during his reign. Shahis issued coins only in copper and silver and not gold.

Shahis have a penchant for using multiple calendars. Use of Laukika(3076 BC), Kushanshah(230 AD), Saka(78 AD) and an era based on Khandakadhyayaka or Al-Arkand(665 AD) are known. There is another local era which started in 822 AD, probably referring the founding of a new capital.

The first coin identified in Khandanayaka era is 200 and based on this, some conjecture Lalliya captured power in 865 AD. Lalliya ruled territory from Kabul to almost Jhelum River bordered by Daradas and Multan on either side. With Shahis making Indus plains their home,

the story decisively shifted from the hills of Kabul to Indus-Gangetic plains. Even from the time of Lalliya, it was a multi-party struggle for ascendancy in the area -
1 Gurjara Pratiharas under Mihirabhoja and Mahendrapala
2. Shahis under Lalliya

3. Gurjara Alakhana in Gujrat-Gujranwala area
4. Utpala Dynasty of Kashmir under Avantivarman and Sankaravarman
5. Muslim Turks
Alakhana, Mihirabhoja and Lalliya generally formed a block against the Kashmir. With Lalliya holding two sides of Khyber, Turks weren't a problem yet.

One would question, when Shahis and Kashmir under Lalitaditya were under good terms, what happened during the time of Lalliya. One can build a narrative around the events which happened
1. There's a dynastic change in Kashmir with Avantivarman forming the Utpala Dynasty.

Avantivarman, either due to the domestic issues or reluctance to engage a powerful enemy refused to side the Shahis.
2. An angered Lalliya sided Mihirabhoja when he advanced upon Kashmir
3. Avantivarman bought the loyalty of Daradas by marrying his son and successor Sankaravarman

to the Darada princess Sugandhi. Daradas were actually one of the most avowed enemies of the Shahis.
4. Sankaravarman turned out to be a tougher nut to crack. Immediately on coming to throne, he launched a Digvijaya. Alakhana was attacked and Takka Desa(Central Punjab)

was siezed from him but Lalliya's intervention stopped any further damage. That can be estimated from the fact that Sankaravarman didn't make much headway against the Shahis. Shahi campaigns inside Afghanistan didn't seem to die off completely - they took back Kabul again in 879

It is understood that Kabul fort was out of the reach of the Shahis permanently but they were able to take control of the city and the rural areas. The situation stayed thus till the Shahis were ejected out of Kabul Valley. The last known coin from him is from 895 AD.

Kamalavarman(895,902-921)
While Nuruddin Muhammad Ufi writes that Kamlu, the Rai of Hindustan clashed with Amr-ibn-Lais(died 900), Kalhana mentions that Gopalavarman(902-904) deposed a rebellious Shahi and installed Toramana, the son of Lalliya on the throne.

He went by the names Kamalavarman and Kamaluka-Toramana. Muslims called him Kamlu. Clearly, the dates don't match. It is supposed that Kamalavarman actually succeeded his father but was deposed. He bounced back with the support of Kashmir.

Further information comes again from Ufi - Kamalavarman actually planned to march on Amr, but called off hearing the strength of Amr. This is not a proposition simply because the Shahis not just took Kabul, but wrested Zabul from the Saffrids as well.

The only option here is, learning of a coup back home, Kamalavarman had to call off the fight. Again, even after he clawed back to power, not much is known of his reign, probably because of the calm prevailing on both sides of Khyber.

Samantadeva(895-902)
Two kings in succession using the same name Samantadeva created much trouble in Shahi epigraphy. He can be anyone -
1. Sankaravarman installed his own on Shahi throne. He became the Samanta of Kashmir.
2. A scion of the erstwhile line whom Lalliya toppled.

What undid him? The rebellion of Amr ibn Lais and his capture in 900 led to massive changes in the local polity. A rebellion in Viranka led to the death of the Governor - Sankaravarman had to go in person to crush the rebellion.

Samantadeva also rebelled and instigated the border tribes to rebel. Sankaravarman himself is killed in a riot in Urasa. Urasa's proximity to Udabhandapura makes Shahi involvement a possibility. Kamalavarman would have stood by the Kashmiris to topple Samantadeva - Kashmiri

armies under Prabhakaradeva installed Kamalavarman under the name Kamaluka-Toramana. Now, it is possible, the second Samantadeva is Lalliya himself and Kamalavarman's fight with Amr is as a prince, not as a king. That gives a comparatively long reign of 40 years for Lalliya.

Bhimadeva(921-960)
Two eras exist over his accession - 921 and 923. The first may be in Udabhandapura and the second in Kabul. Bhimadeva is an aggressive king, making considerable advances even inside Afghanistan itself.

An inscription from Khajuraho gives some important information over Bhimadeva. The Vaikuntha Chaturmurti idol installed in Khajuraho was given by Bhimadeva to Gurjara Pratihara Herambapala(Mahipala). The Shahi received the idol from the King of Kira who got the idol from the

King of Bhota who procured it from Mt Kailasa. This idol was later handed over by Mahipala's son to the Chandelas. The idol is given by Bhimadeva in return for horses and elephants - some major action. Though the terms between Lalliya and Pratiharas

would discount the prospect of a war, the other possibilities are that Bhimadeva genuinely wanted war material and the other, he understood that it's a matter of time his kingdom will be overcome by the Islamic armies and wanted to move the idol to a safer place.

And as a premonition of things to happen, the place, Nagarkot or Bhimnagar, located somewhere near Balakot and Haripur and established by Bhimadeva is plundered and desecrated in 1009 by Mahmud of Ghazni. The importance of the place can be noted from the fact that

the Shahi mint itself moved there at some point of time. Bhimadeva married his daughter to Simharaja of Lohara. It is possible that, during a turmoil in Kashmir, Bhimadeva negotiated the marriage of Simharaja's daughter, Didda to the Kashmiri king Kshemagupta -

either to buy peace after he subjugated Urasa in 935 or to help Kashmir establish it's writ over Urasa. Bhimadeva built the richly endowed Bhima-Kesava temple in Kashmir in Bumazu, which itself is derived from Bhimadvipa. He is the last Shahi to issue coins. Bhimadeva's last date

is around 960 AD. Two events point to that
1. There is a rebellion in Shahi territory and Didda sent an army to crush the rebellion in 961-962. It is possible that the rebel Thakkana is a son of Bhimadeva himself - Mahmud of Ghazni was helped by a Shahi prince Sabli who guarded

the gates of Kashmir, son of Shahi, son of Bahmi.
2. Bhimadeva's successor Jayapaladeva was attacked by Sabuktegin when Alptegin(died 963) was the ruler.
This need of help from Kashmir can only mean invasion or succession trouble and no invasion during Bhimadeva's reign is known.

In fact, Bhimadeva installed one, Lawik at Zabul, pushing the Muslims back. Bhimadeva was actually planning for a showdown with Alptegin who was trying to eject Lawik out. It is possible that the attack by Sabuktegin is a consequence of that.

Jayapaladeva(960-1002)
Not much is known of the relation between Bhimadeva and Jayapala. Going by the fact that there is a succession dispute after Bhimadeva, he can be anyone, most probably his son. But, Rajatarangini staying completely silent over him and his son Anandapala is

something to look into, especially when Didda is the Queen there. Neither Al Beruni nor Kalhana hint a dynasty change but Firishta gives his father's name as Hutpal - Jetpal/Jetrapala(a name of Vishnu and probably Bhimadeva himself - he is known to use various names of

Lord Vishnu in his inscriptions) or Ashtapala - a person not known to history. That besides, there is already a theory that the word Januja itself is originated from Chach(Chach > Jaj > Janj), raising further doubts over their relation to the Shahis. He is the last Shahi to hold

Kabul and Isami calls him Shah-i-Kabul. Ki-ye, a Chinese pilgrim and one of the last from that direction who visited Gandhara in 964 hinted that the situation was still under control. The ejection of Abu Bakr Lawik in 963 by Alptegin opened the gates of Khyber to the Turks who

made frequent raids into Indus plains for both plunder and slaves. It was not a one way game, with Shahilla-varman's rout of the Turks, a prominent thing. It is possible that the Shahis made a common cause with them. After Lawik was ejected out of Zabul, Alptegin set up his own

kingdom there. A counter invasion launched by the Shahis, the Amir of Multan and the king of Bhattis, led by Lawik's son Abu Ali Lawik was defeated near Charakh with the capture of 10 elephants and 500 prisoners. Sabuktegin used this opportunity to topple the king Piritegin and

sieze the throne in 977. Sabuktegin turned out to be the real deal, as like his predecessors Toramana and others who burst from Afghanistan into India and whom, it took decades to push back. One factor which people failed to notice here is, the Shahis guarded Indus plains from

the Turks across the Khyber and did the job very effectively. No one felt the danger of it and the Shahi was a just another king against whom alliances were made. The Amir of Multan, for example, coaxed by Sabuktegin sided him for common plunder and learnt his mistakes only after

Khyber has fallen. The coalition invaded the Shahi territories and some of the Shahi forts were taken. These frequent raids forced Jayapala to march on Sabuktegin but was defeated at the Battle of Ghuzak in 987, most probably due to a natural calamity. The equation has shifted

now decisively - when the Arabs were fighting with the Shahis, the Shahis held the hills and Arabs weren't able to break through, now, Shahis are unable to achieve a break through in the hills held by the Yamini Turks. That the Muslim armies were more intent on plunder and not on

destruction of the Shahis can be clearly seen from the fact that when Sabuktegin's son Mahmud asked his father to finish off the Hindus who are stuck in the middle of a blizzard, Sabuktegin refused and said plunder first - 10 lakh Shahi dirhams and some elephants were taken

along with some forts. Utbi writes, Jayapaladeva broke the peace by arresting the agents of Sabuktegin who came to collect the dues but the truth would have been much simple - the Yaminis saw Shahi wealth for the first time. From this time on, one would see the focus more on loot

and not conquest in every raid into Indus and Ganga plains, even if there is a conquest factor involved. The next major invasion was in 990 - it was beaten back and the whole of Kabul and Lamghan was lost to the Shahis with Khyber becoming the border. The onesidedness of the

Muslim narrative and the complete lack of material from the Hindu side makes one really wonder if the fight is really that one sided. One wouldn't call Jayapaladeva or Trilochanapala great warriors for nothing!! With territory extending till Khyber, Sabuktegin started a forced

conversion of the population into Islam and bought new recruits through that. With an eye on the Shahis, he strengthened the road network towards Khyber. In 991, Bharata, who usurped the throne of Lahore from his father invaded the Shahi territories. He was defeated and the

kingdom was saved when the prominents paid a fine and accepted vassalage. But Bharata's son Chandrahat attacked the Shahis again and this time, Anandapala, the Shahi Crown Prince annexed the kingdom. On the other side, the situation on the other side of Khyber is turning

interesting. Mahmud had real imperial aspirations unlike his father and he is infamous by breaking the unity of the Ummah - he asked the Caliph to declare him a Sultan(in effect, independent of Caliph) and when the Caliph refused, he turned his armies on Baghdad to coerce

the Caliph to make him a Sultan. After he became a Sultan, in 999, Mahmud declared he will launch an annual invasion into Shahi territories. The first expedition happened in 1000 - Bannu and Waziristan is taken. In 1001, Mahmud suddenly marched upon Peshawar.

An unprepared Jayapala was caught unawares and had to give a battle even before his whole troops arrived. Jayapaladeva himself is captured and Mahmud ordered him to be displayed as a slave in Khurasan slave markets. Udabhandapura also fell in the same campaign and the border

suddenly shifted from Khyber to Indus. On the other side, the Muslims wrote it as a preemptive strike by Shahis which was beaten back. It is understood that Mahmud regretted at the mistreatment of Jayapaladeva(Futuh us Salatin).

Jayapaladeva was ransomed off, with Anandapala playing the ransom for his father. Immediately after taking the Shahi lands, Mahmud stated an active campaign to exterminate Hinduism West of Indus and it's impact is seen even today.

It is interesting to note, this large scale conversion stopped at Indus, with the only major exception being Kashmir. After the fall of Udabhandapura, the capital was shifted to Nandana in the Salt Range. Utbi called it Nardin, Al Beruni, Nandna and Firishtah, Nidoona.

Jayapaladeva committed suicide almost immediately after his release by lighting his own funeral pyre after the insults meted out by Mahmud and the loss of his territory. And by the time Jayapaladeva exited the scene, the writing is on the wall for the Shahis.

Anandapala(1002-1013)
Till Jayapaladeva guarded the passes from Kabul, everyone was ready to test his luck against Jayapaladeva, siding Sabuktegin. But when the passes are breached and an imperialistic Mahmud started attacking and annexing these small entities.

Especially after Mahmud annexed Bhatiya in 1005, a scared Multan sided Shahis again. Mahmud attacked again in 1006 after Multan's Amir Abdul Fath Daud stopped paying tribute. Mahmud wanted to pass through Shahi territories but Anandapala contested the crossing of Indus.

Anandapala is defeated(Firishtah, as is his wont, wrote that Anandapala was chased by Mahmud till Sodra before he escaped into Kashmir - it makes zero sense because the expedition was against Multan and marching in the direction of Lahore would have unnecessarily

stretched his lines). Multan fell after a seven day siege but knowing of a rebellion in Khorasan, Muhammad had to rush back, leaving Nawab Shah as the governor in Multan. The rebellion was supported by Ilak Khan who ruled the steppes east of Caspian.

This Nawab Shah is a Shahi Prince Sukhapala who was converted to Islam and is probably, Anandapala's brother or son. It looks like Anandapala allowed his kingdom to be plundered by Mahmud and established order in the territories after Mahmud left.

By this time, Herat, Balkh and Khorasan have already fallen and rather than using the opportunity to push the Yaminis to the other side of Khyber, Anandapala offered to help Mahmud instead.

"I have learned that the Turks have rebelled against you and are spreading in Khurasan. If you wish, I shall come to you with 5000 horsemen, 10000 foot-soldiers and 100 elephants, or if you wish, I shall send you my son with double the number.

In acting thus, I do not speculate on the impression which this will make on you. I have been conquered by you, and therefore I do not wish that another man should conquer you"

This was one of the very rare opportunities the Shahis have got to rid Gandhara of Muslims, probably, permanently and undo the demographic damage done by Mahmud and Anandapala wasted that, whatever his reasons. May be, his father's treatment overawed him. Ilak Khan was defeated

but he returned back with a bigger army in 1007. Possibly at his instigation, Sukhapala rebelled. In a forced march, Mahmud attacked Multan, defeated and imprisoned him. It is understood that Anandapala didn't help him even then.

You would have noticed by now that the story of Shahis became more detailed - that's because this is not the story of Shahis but that of Mahmud of Ghazni.
Back to Mahmud. Mahmud is not of the kind to reciprocate the goodwill of Anadapala and on the other side,

his coffers went dry and the only way he knows to refill his coffers is to loot the Shahis. This actually explains why Sabuktegin restrained Mahmud from finishing off Shahis. Anandapala decided to take a stand - he threw everything he has got including the troops of his vassals

and even the fort garrisons. The troops were personally led by Trilochanapala whose name was morphed by Muslims as Brahmanapala, Brahmapala and even Waban-bin-Abdal. In the sanguine Battle of Chach, Mahmud achieved a pyrrhic victory, that too when Anandapala's elephant was scared

and ran away. It is possible Mahmud threw his personal guard as the last gamble to capture Anandapala and he retreated. It was a major battle – with at least 20000 soldiers of Anandapala fell. The retreat was cohesive as only 8000 were killed in retreat as against the whole army.

Bhimnagar(Nagarkot) fort was then invested and a huge plunder was obtained both from the temple and the fort – 7 crore Shahiya Dirhams, 7 lakh mans of gold and the throne of Bhima Shahi, probably, the throne of the Shahis. Anandapala gave up after the plunder of Narayana,

probably, his vassal state in 1010 – he sent emissaries to Kabul to accept vassalage along with 2000 soldiers to serve under Mahmud, fifty elephants and an annual tribute. This reopened the ancient trade route between India and Khorasan. Using this excuse of vassalage, Mahmud

demanded help from Anandapala to attack Thanesar in 1012. Anandapala offered 50 elephants to stop Mahmud from attacking Thanesar and the famous temple of Chakraswami there. Mahmud refused the offer and asked Anandapala to join his forces instead – Anandapala sent 2000 soldiers.

The king of Dera tried to stop Mahmud from crossing Sutlej was defeated but Mahmud took heavy losses. The king ruling Thanesar refused to engage and the city was plundered. Mahmud decided not to test his luck further and retreated back, fearing an encirclement from the local

kings, Multan rebels and Anandapala and retreated back before Anandapala had a change of mind. Either at the end of his reign or at the start of his son Trilochanapala’s reign, Trilochanapala’s daughter Bimba was married to Kandarpasimha, the only son of Tunga, the Prime Minister

of Kashmir. It is interesting to note that Rajatarangini doesn’t mention Anandapala in spite of the fact that he coerced Kashmiris to adopt Ugrabhuti’s Sishyahitavritti by bribing the scholars with a hefty reward for those who read the book, after Kashmiris rejected it.

Thus, we notice that, Anandapala, a frontline commander under his father has lost his enterprise by the time he became a king and sadly, turned out to be the wrong one on the throne when the Shahi throne demanded an aggression, not passivity and chivalry.

Trilochanapala(1013-1021)
Anandapala's death gave another opportunity for Mahmud to attack the Shahis, probably because Trilochanapala stopped paying the tribute. Trilochanapala anticipated it and asked Kashmir for help. Tunga marched forth, but coming to know Mahmud isn't able

to advance due to the snow-blocked passes, Tunga returned. When Mahmud finally crossed Udabhandapura, now famous as Waihind, Trilochanapala, went again to Kashmir for the army. Bhimapala was sent to block Margalla Pass in current Islamabad to give time for Trilochanapala

to return. Bhimapala's show made him famous in folklore as Nidar Bhim(the Fearless Bhima) and Mahmud wasn't able to break the siege. The seriously injured commander of one of the wings is rescued by Mahmud's personal guard and Mahmud got a window only when Bhimapala tried to

attack Mahmud. After the pass is forced, Bhimapala sent a strong contingent to Nandana while he marched towards his father. Nandana fell after a long siege and amidst much plunder. One wouldn't understand this thing. It looks like the Shahis are very rich and every plunder of a

city revealed vast riches. Another important thing to note here is that, every plunder involved Shahi elephants. After Nandana, unknown that Trilochanapala is marching against him, Mahmud marched upon Kashmir for plunder. The engagement happened somewhere near Poonch and in spite

of Trilochanapala asking Tunga to play a waiting game to wear away Mahmud(a rare acceptance hinting that the Shahis forced the Yaminis to back down repeatedly) but Tunga didn't pay heed. In a pitched battle, Tunga was defeated but Trilochanapala led the armies to retreat

in order. Tunga's foolish act, on one side led to the destruction of his power and death on one side, and led to the extinction of Shahi kingdom. Trilochanapala is now a king without a kingdom and with his exit from the scene, vast swathes of territories and many petty rulers

swore fealty to Mahmud and many converted to Islam. This led to open Islamization of the whole of Shahi territory and slaves were driven in hordes into Central Asian slave markets. He returned back to Ghazni after a one-and-a-half year campaign.

Should the story end here or should this continue till the end of the ruling line?
Shahis created a new problem for the Ganga belt. Trilochanapala's power is without a kingdom but his power is not broken. Trilochanapala started to form a new kingdom - by 1015, he established

himself in the Sivaliks, making inroads towards Sharwa and the Ganga Doab. His new capital city is conjectured to be either Sarbal(Sabalgarh) or Hastika(Hastinapur). Trilochanapala understood the fight with the Raja of Sharwa Chand Ray is futile and tried to negotiate

the marriage of Bhimapala with the daughter of Chand Ray - it is understood that Chand Ray detained Bhimapala, but made him his son-in-law. Mahmud entered the scene in 1018 for another plunder. Sharwa, Mathura and other forts fell; Bhimapala asked his father-in-law not to engage

Mahmud but escape with the treasure. He didn't want his father-in-law to meet the same fate of his family. But, when Sharwa was taken and Mahmud found nothing, he chased Chand Ray, caught up with him and defeated him. Pratihara Rajyapala, ruling from Kannauj, hearing Mahmud’s

advance, fled to Bari. The whole kingdom was plundered. In the meanwhile, Trilochanapala made a friendly aggrement with Chandal(Chandrapala) Bhor whose forts gave him extra protection. Rajyapala's flight led to the rise of a new power in the area - Chandela Vidyadhara.

He rebuked Rajyapala for his flight, invaded Kannauj and killed him. It is understood the invasion is led by Arjuna of the Kachhapaghatas. It is understood Trilochanapala played a major role in this(aided by Chand Ray) as further events would tell. Historians tell that an angry

Mahmud marched again to avenge the death of his vassal, but the reality is completely different - Trilochanapala was actually planning for an invasion of his lost kingdom with the aid of Chandelas and other kings, and possibly Kashmir. But, Mahmud didn't know Trilochanapala

was the one who is leading the fight. To save his empire, Mahmud marched again in 1021. After heavy resistance, Takka Vishaya held by Trilochanapala's governor was taken. The resistance petered out after Mahmud entered Ganga-Yamuna Doab - in fact, it was deliberate.

Only then, Mahmud realized who he was facing and was utterly surprised. But, Trilochanapala refused to fight - he was marching either towards Kalinjar, Vidyadhara's capital city or towards Bari, where Rajyapala's son Trilochanapala is stationed. Suddenly, Trilochanapala decided

to take a stand on Rama Ganga and contested the crossing. But his attempts to retreat in the night betrayed his strength. Mahmud's army was sufficiently bruised but the Shahi lost everything - his wife and daughters were captured and the Shahi was severely injured.

It is possible, in an attempt to save their king, the soldiers forgot everything. Trilochanapala died almost immediately, either of his injuries or was murdered by Mahmud's agents who created a riot.

This sudden fall of Shahis between 987 and 1013 didn't miss the eyes of the chroniclers -
Al Beruni said
"The Hindu Shahi dynasty is now extinct, and of the whole house there is no longer the slightest remnant in existence. We must say that, in all their grandeur, they never

slackened in the ardent desire of doing that which is good and right, that they were men of noble sentiment and bearing
Kalhana
That Empire of the Shahis, with those ministers, the sovereign, and his entourage-whether it ever had an existence or not is what the people now wonder

This sudden fall of the Shahis reminds one of the same situation the Sassanid Persia faced. Flat 25 years, kingdom missing from the face of the earth.

Bhimapala(1021-1026)
Bhimapala, the hero of the Battle of Margalla Pass isn't considered to be an aggressive king may be because he understood his strength and fully knowing that there is no middle ground in the fight with Muslims.

His letter to Chand Ray hints he is more inclined for peaceful counsels due to the continuous losses he faced. Al Beruni hints Bhimapala is killed in some battle. It appears that Bhimapala suddenly landed upon Nandana around 1025/26

when Mahmud was in his Somnath raid and retreating through the desert and was killed in the next expedition Mahmud launched to punish those who troubled his army on his return from Somnath. With this ends the history of Shahis as independent kings.

Kalhana writes that Shahis settled in Kashmir and became prominent nobles close to the royalty. He mentions four generations of the Shahis. The use of the words Suta Shaheh, Shahi Putra and Shahi Tanaya for the first generation and Shahi Vamsaja for the later ones indicate that

the first are sons of Trilochanapala or Bhimapala.
Rudrapala was a confidant of Ananta, king of Kashmir and married Asamati, the daughter of Induchandra, Lord of Jalandhara, probably, Kangra. Using this relationship, Ananta later married a younger daughter of Induchandra.

He defeated the allied forces of Mlechhas led by the king of Daradas Achalamangala,whom he beheaded. Rudrapala died of some skin disease and with him, the family slid from prominence. The next names we hear is that of Bijja, who was a close associate of Kalasa and fought for him.

After the suicide of Ananta, Bijja lost favour and accepted self-exile to Gauda where he died in a brawl. Of his brothers who followed him, Pajaka was killed by a tiger. Not much is known of the other two. The later references to Shahis, like Kumarapala and others are

not prominent – an indication that they slowly disappeared into the Kashmiri nobility, with some getting married into the royal line like Vasantalekha, the queen of Harsha. After this, they stood by Harsha’s line – of Kumarapala’s sons, Padmaka was killed by enemies of Harsha

in 1101, Daryaka was reared by Sussala, Harsha’s enemy but was exiled later. He joined Bhoja’s son Bhikshachara, who himself was moved out of Kashmir by Shahis for his safety. Daryaka was killed leading the troops of Bhikshachara in 1112,

his half brothers Jyeshtapala and Raktika stood by Bhikshachara and Raktika was killed in battle immediately after Bhikshachara is killed in 1130. And because by the time of Kalhana, Sussala came back to throne, it is but obvious that they are sidelined.
*FINIS*

@threadreaderapp unroll