Rajaputra - origin and evolution - Page 2

Created

Last reply

Replies

18

Views

2.3k

Users

6

Likes

2

Frequent Posters

VaRnI4Ever thumbnail
19th Anniversary Thumbnail Voyager Thumbnail
Posted: 17 years ago
#11
thnxx for the info rati!! 😃
256747 thumbnail
Posted: 17 years ago
#12
NOPE,prcns.. ALL Rajputs' are NOT Royal or Noble.. Most of them,aren't,actually.. It used to be in the earlier days.. But,not now
prcns thumbnail
17th Anniversary Thumbnail Dazzler Thumbnail
Posted: 17 years ago
#13

Originally posted by: lime ice

NOPE,prcns.. ALL Rajputs' are NOT Royal or Noble.. Most of them,aren't,actually.. It used to be in the earlier days.. But,not now

thnx, got it😊

RatiG thumbnail
17th Anniversary Thumbnail Rocker Thumbnail + 4
Posted: 17 years ago
#14
firstly sorry to every body here , as i made a topic n was not online for days .
it happed as i had to get my pc formmated n the s/w was when with one of my friend



so here continuing story.........


The Chauhan Rajaputras

The Chauhans already had a 600-year history when the twin Tarain battles were fought. In all these years, as the population of the clan increased, ambitious younger sons (Rajaputras) of various Chauhan Kings led their followers to capture fresh territories. In this way Nadol (near modern Jodhpur) was founded in the 10th Century—in the 12th Century the Chauhan King of Nadol and his younger brother played a crucial part in defeating Muhammad Ghori in his invasion of Gujarat. In the flush of victory this younger brother captured the principality of Jabalipura (modern Jalor) while one of his junior descendants similarly created the Kingdom of Devada (modern Deora) in the 13th Century. A fourth principality was founded by a Nadol prince at Satyapura (modern Sanchor).

These southern branches gradually acquired independence from the parent kingdom once they were able to muster greater resources. But in the north the Chauhan expansion remained under the direct control of the Kings of Ajmer—the ambitious Rajaputras were employed in the administration at the capital or were deputed to hold frontier forts and towns. One example of the former in the reign of Prithviraj was the Rajaputra Govindraj who, for some reason, was banished from the court. He founded the important fort of Ranthambhor, which commands the road to Madhya Pradesh—the story of his family will be related later.

Delhi, Hansi, and Sarhind too were governed by Rajaputra princes who died fighting with their King at Tarain. Muhammad Ghori was unable to capture the Chauhan capital and had to settle for some tribute from the Rajaputra Hariraj. In the south-east the chief of Ranthambhor, who as related above had been inimical to Prithviraj, agreed to be on the side of the victorious Turks. Delhi was attacked next but was stoutly defended by the Rajaputra Chandraraj and here too Muhammad Ghori had to be content with the promise of tribute—he left his slave Qutb-ud-din Aibak to watch over these recent conquests and returned to Ghazni.

But some of the lesser chieftains and soldiers of the Chauhans were not so fortunate. The prisoners from Tarain, the landowners who lay in the path of the advancing Turk army, and those now under the sway of Ghori's lieutenants in the conquered region were converted to Islam. The men and their male children underwent circumcision, their women were forced to observe new rules of conduct, and they were all robbed of their ancient traditions and were taught strange new modes of worship in a foreign language. But, as will be explained in later posts, they were not given equality of status with the Turks.

Some families were converted at a later period and for differing reasons. But whatever the mode, their descendants have today evolved into large tribes inhabiting northern Rajasthan, Punjab, Haryana, and UP—these are the Kaimkhanis, Sarwanis, and Lowanis among others. The complete alteration in the way of living of these early converts must have left a deep impression on the minds of the Chauhans who remained true to their ancestral culture. They were determined not to let such a calamitous fate fall on their own progeny.

Immediately after Ghori's departure Hariraj raised a fresh army and attacked Ranthambhor. Aibak rushed down to the scene and forced Hariraj to retreat but was not able to fight or capture him. Govindraj of Ranthambhor did not allow the Muslims to enter his fort and persuaded Aibak to retire for a money consideration. In his absence Chandraraj had made a bid for independence and Aibak laid siege at, and finally won, the fort in Delhi—this town now became the base of operations for the Turks against the rest of the Kingdom of Ajmer.

Prithviraj's general Skanda joined hands with Hariraj and helped him to declare his independence. The two energetic men even attacked Delhi, defeated some Turkish units and looted their equipment. This audacious attack prodded Qutb-ud-din to collect his entire army and chase after the Chauhans who were cut-off near Ajmer. Aibak next besieged the Chauhan capital—having lost his best generals and soldiers but determined not to suffer the fate of the other converted Hindus, Hariraj and his family burnt themselves on a funeral pyre. And so in 1194, Ajmer was occupied by the Turks along with all the wealth of the dead Hariraj and his family.

The dejected followers of Skand and Hariraj traveled to Ranthambhor and took up service with Govindraj. This Rajaputra chieftain, who was not present at the Tarain battles, was deeply affected by the fate of his kinsmen and by the stories of Turkish brutality and the conversions of prisoners. He and his son accumulated wealth and power and declared their independence in 1215—it was only a decade later that Sultan Iltutmish of Delhi could launch an all-out attack on Ranthambhor. The fort was garrisoned for the first time by the Muslims but a few years later Vagbhatta Chauhan, the grandson of Govindraj, defeated the Turks and recaptured his ancestral fort.

This ruler captured many outlying towns and forts and stationed large infantry forces in them to ward off an attack on his capital. The strategy worked and Sultan Balban's two invasions of Ranthambhor were definite failures. The next ruler Jaitrasimha and his son Hammira continued strengthening their army. They had now raised a compact force of cavalry to plunder the neighboring kingdoms and thus accumulate more wealth and resources. With these actions the Chauhans of Ranthambhor repulsed several Turk invasions, increased the size of their kingdom, and became a major thorn in the side of the Delhi Sultanate.

Further south the other Chauhan princes had felt the weight of the invaders' army. They had allied with the Chaulukyas of Gujarat to repel the Turks, and though severely weakened, had managed to preserve their independence. Here too the manner of fighting of their kinsmen at Tarain, and the stout defence of Ranthambhor, left a deep impression on the minds of these Rajaputra families. They too began making changes to their fortifications, the composition of their armies, and the manner of cavalry warfare to match the Turks blow for blow.

The future battles of these kingdoms with the Turks have been described here. What was common in all these conflicts at the end was the immolation on a massive funeral pyre of the warrior families, the destruction of all their wealth, and the final death ride of the warriors into the heart of the enemy forces. They were determined to prevent their capture and conversion to Islam. In addition these Rajaputras now instituted certain rules to preserve the purity and independence of their ancestral culture. All those who converted to Islam were expelled from society and were deprived of their clan identity—this deterred the Turks from gaining any new converts. The fanatical force of Islam was met by the immovable object of a solid and vigorous Hindu society.

The valiant defence by these Rajaputra families and their refusal to submit and convert to an alien creed placed the word Rajput (modified through repeated use of Rajaputra) at the forefront of North Indian society—it practically replaced the word Kshatriya. This will be explained at length in later posts.

The lessons of the battles at Tarain were also learnt quickly by the Rajputs. The only way to defeat the mobile archery-wielding Turk cavalry was to ride into them at full gallop. This deprived the Turks of the room to maneuver and shoot arrows from long range, as was illustrated so clearly in the first Battle of Tarain. The tumultuous charge on horseback remained the proud preserve of the Rajputs till the 18th Century—this was wrongly attributed to their "reckless bravery" in later times. From the Tarain example it is clear that the Rajputs wished to fight the Turks on terms that were advantageous to them, which was a contest of sword-against-sword in a packed field—the heavily-armored Turks would be unable to ply their swords with the same energy and ferocity as the Rajputs.

The use of elephants also changed. Previously a large corps of elephants formed the center of the Hindu armies, while the cavalry manned the wings. But now the number of elephants was reduced and placed in the vanguard, in the manner of the Turks. These elephants would be sent ahead to create gaps in the enemy formations—the main body of cavalry would then come charging through and complete the rout of the enemy[1].

The Rajputs in addition adapted to the use of catapults and ballistae of the Turks along with the changed construction of their forts. It is suggested that when Iltutmish took Ranthambhor he left it to be garrisoned jointly by the Turks and some of the Chauhan soldiers. Later when Vagbhatta besieged it the Rajputs inside the fort threw their Turk comrades over the walls and opened the gate for the son of their former King. The new techniques in building forts would have been learnt by these Rajputs in this time.

Edited by sweet rati - 17 years ago
RatiG thumbnail
17th Anniversary Thumbnail Rocker Thumbnail + 4
Posted: 17 years ago
#15
Muhammad Ghori's blunder

Students of Indian History have often expressed their angst over Prithviraj Chauhan's mistake after the first Battle of Tarain—he did not try to liberate Punjab when he had the best opportunity. Well, he certainly had the opportunity, but it is equally certain that he lacked the means to grab that opportunity.

As has been shown in the earlier post, the different formations of the Hindu army (elephants, infantry, cavalry) prevented them from chasing down and destroying Ghori's army. It can be speculated that they should have avoided besieging Sarhind, to first cross the Sutlej and liberate Punjab from Muslim occupation, while Shihab-ud-din was running home to Ghazni. But then the 1200 Turk cavalry in Sarhind fort would not have sat idle—they would've swooped down to raid the Chauhan Kingdom and cut-off Prithviraj's communication links until their master returned from Ghazni with a fresh army. Alternatively they could have followed the Chauhan army into Punjab and harassed them with cavalry maneuvers for several months until the return of Muhammad Ghori.

In either case the Chauhans would have been trapped and destroyed in that alien land. Punjab had been under Muslim occupation then for under 200 years…many of its towns and forts had small garrisons of Turks and many converted Hindus. Such a land could not be liberated in one campaign. Secondly the Chauhans needed to protect their own borders in the south and east from their ambitious neighbors…focusing exclusively on the north would have meant the eventual loss of their kingdom to their other neighbors. With these circumstances it appears that Prithviraj did the right thing in going step-by-step by first liberating Sarhind and acquiring a base for future operations in the north.

The second mistake of Prithviraj is also shared by other Hindu kings of that period (and also of an earlier age). It is often asked why he couldn't organize counter-raids into the enemy lands just as the Turks raided deep into Indian Territory for loot and slaughter? Again this was possible in theory…the Chauhan infantry and elephants could have blockaded the Turk garrison in Sarhind while their cavalry carried out these raids. They had adequate cavalry (between 5000-10,000 horse) for not only looting Punjab but also going further to attack the unprotected population living around the forts in Ghazni and Ghor.

But the Turks attacked civilians to either sell them as slaves or convert them to Islam…there was no slave-trade in India and what would the Hindus convert the enemy civilians to? But more importantly what was there to loot in the lands under Turk occupation? Punjab, Sindh, and Afghanistan had been turned into economic wastelands by the Islamist onslaught as described by the eyewitness Al-Beruni centuries ago. The Chauhan cavalry would have gained nothing for all their exertions. On the other hand the Turk-Islamic state survived primarily on raiding and robbing their wealthy neighbors…their economy was geared permanently towards war and they did little for the civilian population living under their protection.

These are the so-called mistakes of Prithviraj Chauhan, which should be seen in the light of the prevailing circumstances…but there were some crucial mistakes committed by Muhammad Ghori. Yes, the victorious Muhammad Ghori!

Consider this. After Tarain II, according to the graphic accounts of the Muslim chroniclers, the Chauhan army was not only defeated but also destroyed. So it is surprising that Muhammad Ghori was unable to capture either Ajmer or Delhi. The Chauhan military strength had evaporated, morale was devastatingly low, and only small garrisons sat fearfully in these places while the huge Turk army ranged through the land—and yet Ghori failed to carry this fight to the finish.

If the accounts of Prithviraj's captivity are true, they would indicate Shihab-ud-din's desire to get money for his war expenses. Or perhaps he did not have the time to besiege these cities—just as Prithviraj had conflicts with his Indian neighbors, the Turks of Ghor had enemies like the Ghuzz Turks and the Khwarazim Turks. After each Indian campaign Ghori had to return to his post in Ghazni to watch over them and support his elder brother.

Whatever the reason, it proved to be a blunder of monumental proportions. As is shown in the earlier post the Chauhan Rajaputras quickly recovered their spirit and took the initiative in counter-attacks on the Turks—all the efforts of Ghori's lieutenants to crush them ultimately went in vain and the spirit of resistance spread throughout the Kingdom of Ajmer. But this monumental blunder also affected the Muslim expansion into other regions.
RatiG thumbnail
17th Anniversary Thumbnail Rocker Thumbnail + 4
Posted: 17 years ago
#16
The Rajaputras of Kannauj

From Delhi Aibak attacked the neighboring principalities, which paid tribute to the rulers of Kannauj, and thus acquired a base to invade that kingdom. In 1193 Muhammad Ghori came from Ghazni with 50,000 cavalry and joined his lieutenant to follow the course of the Yamuna River for invading Kannauj. Jaychand too advanced to fight the invader at Chandwar—throughout the head-on clash the Gahadval army prevailed until Jaychand was killed. The leaderless forces lost their momentum and unity of command—they were defeated and chased by the Turks who captured many towns and forts at a gallop.

Once again Ghori returned to his home to watch over the Turks of Khwarazim while Aibak was diverted by the attacks of the Chauhan Rajaputras on Delhi—these should have been mopped up immediately after Tarain II when they were at their weakest. But the invaders made matters worse by repeating this mistake in the east. The force left behind in Kannauj was in no position to mop up the local resistance in that newly-conquered land—the Rajaputra Harishchand defeated these Muslims and recovered his father's domain. Ghori's initial mistake had created the situation for committing that same mistake in the east, and the later Sultans would live to regret these repeated mistakes.

The tributaries of the Gahadvals, the Rathors of Badaun and the Bhor chieftains, also recovered their lands and resisted future attacks. The same story was repeated in the lesser principalities like Bayana, Gwalior, and Narwar. In each case at the very moment of their triumph against a particular fort, the Turks would be called away to fight Rajaputra chieftains in another place and the same cycle would be repeated endlessly. All this was the result of Muhammad Ghori's inability, or a lack of will caused by overconfidence, to crush the power of the Chauhan Rajaputras when it was extremely weak—a blunder of monumental proportions.

In 1202 Muhammad Ghori's became the Amir of Ghor on the death of his elder brother—Qutb-ud-din Aibak became his deputy with the title of Sultan. The new Amir did not long enjoy his exalted position. In 1205 the Ghori Turks were crushed at Andkhui by the Turks of Khwarazim—when this news reached India several rebellions broke out. In crushing these rebellions Amir Muhammad Ghori met his end in circumstances that will be related in the section on Punjab.
RatiG thumbnail
17th Anniversary Thumbnail Rocker Thumbnail + 4
Posted: 17 years ago
#17
for more details see here

http://hindurajput.blogspot.com/#Rajputs_and_Invasions_of_In dia
Edited by sweet rati - 17 years ago
bhuvana3 thumbnail
17th Anniversary Thumbnail Rocker Thumbnail
Posted: 17 years ago
#18
Wow... Thts a whole lesson on History Rati.. Thanks for sharing 😛
256747 thumbnail
Posted: 17 years ago
#19
MS Reeti.. The new History teacher 😆

Related Topics

Top

Stay Connected with IndiaForums!

Be the first to know about the latest news, updates, and exclusive content.

Add to Home Screen!

Install this web app on your iPhone for the best experience. It's easy, just tap and then "Add to Home Screen".