Silla and the defence of the stranded royal troops

Leading soldiers after the king’s retreat

Silla appears in Kalhana’s Rajatarangini as the woman who took charge of royal troops left behind after the Gambhira bridge disaster in 1122. Sussala had escaped the river crossing and continued towards Srinagar. Silla led the remaining troops from Vijayeshvara towards Devasarasa, where Prithvihara attacked and killed her.

The surviving account is brief, but its central statement is direct: she led troops during a crisis. Her place in Kashmir’s history does not depend on supplying an imaginary childhood, military academy, royal title or series of earlier campaigns. The recorded action is itself evidence of a woman exercising authority in a landscape of contested local power.

Kalhana identifies her as Vijaya’s mother. Stein connects that Vijaya with a Damara of Devasarasa who had been Gargachandra’s brother-in-law. Her birth date, husband’s name and age at death are not established by the passages examined here.

Family connections in Devasarasa

Devasarasa, associated by Stein with the later Divsar district, was an important base of landed chiefs in the southern Valley. The chronicle repeatedly connects it with Vijaya, Tikka and other men who fought for or against the reigning king. These relationships help place Silla in a local political setting, but do not provide a complete family tree.

In the account of Sussala’s first reign, Vijaya of Devasarasa rebelled alongside Gargachandra. He was subsequently defeated, while his connection with Gargachandra helped sustain his importance. Later he brought Bhikshachara towards Kashmir and was killed after a failed attempt to enter Devasarasa. Stein’s index connects these episodes with the same Vijaya.

This identification matters because several other men called Vijaya appear nearby in the narrative. Vijaya son of Kayya, a royal officer, is not automatically Silla’s son. Neither are Vijaya of Varnasoma’s line or Vijaya son of Bhavaka. Shared names cannot substitute for the relationships explicitly given in the text.

Stein also connects Tikka with Vijaya’s family. Earlier verses distinguish the Great Tikka, who was killed during an attack on Sussala, from the Little Tikka, who escaped. The later Tikka’s association with Silla’s death belongs to that continuing local struggle. The source does not establish a simple, permanently united family party.

The bridge disaster and the abandoned force

Sussala had recovered the throne in 1121, but Bhikshachara and his supporters continued the war. During campaigning in 1122, the king advanced towards Vijayaksetra and then withdrew after learning of fighting and burning in Srinagar. His retreating troops crowded onto the Gambhira bridge, which collapsed.

The chronicle dates the collapse to the sixth day of the dark half of Jyeshtha. Many soldiers drowned, and the king escaped with difficulty. He left behind soldiers who had not crossed, together with local chiefs, and returned to the capital with a greatly reduced following.

Silla’s action follows immediately in the narrative. She led those troops from Vijayeshvara towards Devasarasa. The text gives no separate calendar day for her march or death. Her article is therefore placed in the 1122 sequence after the collapse, without borrowing the bridge’s exact lunar day as her own death date.

The distinction also limits what can be claimed about her role. The account does not say she commanded the bridge crossing before it failed, carried the king out of the river, or repaired the crossing. It records her leadership of the stranded force afterwards.

Attack, death and the transfer of her seat

Prithvihara attacked Silla and killed her. Kalhana then says Tikka was placed in her seat and the royal troops dispersed. Stein interprets the term upaveshana here as the seat of a Damara, the kind of local stronghold or residence that appears elsewhere in the chronicle.

This reference suggests a connection between Silla’s authority and control of a local seat. It does not preserve a land grant defining its boundaries, income, legal conditions or inheritance. Describing her as a holder of local power is supported more securely than assigning a detailed administrative title or a specific modern rank.

The wider force suffered further losses. Kalyanaraja was killed fighting, soldiers were captured, and Ojananda and other fugitives were put to death. Ministers including Janakasimha and Shrivaka escaped towards Vishalata beyond the mountains. These events belong to the same breakdown of royal power after the retreat, though the narrative does not identify every person as serving directly under Silla.

Her death was followed by a redistribution of power, not merely the removal of one battlefield leader. Tikka’s installation links the military action with possession of a local seat. The precise terms and duration of that possession require further evidence.

Silla and Chudda are different people

Silla is sometimes discussed alongside Chudda because both women appear in the same conflict and both died when opposing forces attacked them. Their roles should nevertheless remain distinct. Silla led troops left behind after the Gambhira collapse; Chudda was Gargachandra’s wife and later supported her son Panchachandra’s position in Lahara.

The chronicle attributes Silla’s killing to Prithvihara. In the later account of Chudda’s death, Tikka carries out the attack. Kalhana refers to another killing of a woman, and Stein explains that Tikka appears to have been involved in the earlier action against Silla even though Prithvihara is named as her killer.

Stein’s note also rejects an interpretation that would make Silla Tikka’s mother. He treats her as a relative, with the precise relationship not specified there. A difficult phrase in the Chudda passage should therefore not be used to manufacture a new maternal connection or to merge the two women.

What her leadership does and does not establish

Silla’s appearance challenges accounts of the period that include women only as queens, wives or mourners. Kalhana presents her acting in a military emergency, and the reference to her seat places her within the politics of landed authority. Both points belong in an account of the people who shaped the war.

At the same time, one episode cannot establish equal access to military office for all women or a general system of female command. The chronicle does not describe how Silla acquired her authority, how her troops were recruited, or what decisions she made before the retreat.

Calling her a commander can describe the function she performed. Calling her a general in a precisely ranked royal hierarchy would require evidence the cited verses do not provide. Her recorded leadership should neither be minimised nor enlarged into a modern service record.

There is also no need to invent a speech, portrait, birth year or final exchange with her attackers. Those additions may make a retelling more dramatic, but they would conceal how little of her own voice survives. The historical account is strongest when it says clearly what she did and where the record falls silent.

A brief life in a larger war

The principal evidence for Silla’s final action is in Book VIII, verses 1069–1070, with the surrounding retreat narrative and Stein’s notes supplying context. Earlier family references and the later discussion of Chudda help distinguish people and relationships. They are parts of the same underlying chronicle, not separate eyewitness accounts confirming one another.

Further research may identify additional textual readings, material evidence or carefully documented local traditions. For now, the secure outline is limited but significant: Silla, identified as Vijaya’s mother, led stranded royal troops towards Devasarasa in 1122, was killed in Prithvihara’s attack, and lost her seat to Tikka. Her story belongs beside the histories of the rulers whose wars placed those troops in danger.