History of PRC and Sanyo - Page 48

The above arguments are examined below:

Raval Samar Singh: Guhil Raval Samar Singh, father of Raval Ratna Singh of Padmini fame, is placed in c.1300 AD, is true. But the Raso does not associate Samar Singh with the Guhil clan of Rajputs. It is true that Chittaurgarh was ruled by the Guhil Rajputs for centuries and the first Guhil Raval was the famed Bappa Raval. But the question here is who was the contemporary of Prithviraj, ruling at Chittaurgarh. Was there another Raval Samar Singh? Sure enough, an examination of the list of inscriptions brings forth another Samar Singh placed in the required time period. Songira Chauhan Maharaj Samar Singh Dev issued two inscriptions dated in Samvat 1239 and 1242 corresponding to AD 1182 and 1185 (Bhandarkar, List Nos. 396 and 406) ³. Kirtipal (also known as Kitu), father of Samar Singh Dev was the founder of the Songira branch of the Chahamanas at Jalor. Kirtipal took possession of Chittaurgarh by defeating Guhil Samant Singh⁴. Kirtipal was succeeded by his son Samar Singh. It was this Samar Singh who was ruling at Chittaurgarh during the times of Prithviraj and whose wife was Prithabai the sister of Prithviraj.

In addition to the above inscriptions, there are available documents of the time of Samar Singh which corroborate the marriage of Prithabai and Samar Singh. These are as follows⁵:

•1. Letter from Prithviraj dated Anand Samvat 1143 (1175 AD) to Acharaj Rishikesh telling him that he has been assigned to Prithabai as part of her dowry.

•2. Letters of Raval Samar Singh to Acharaj Rishikesh

•(i) Dated Anand Samvat 1139 (1171 AD) welcoming him as a part of Prithabai's entourage and assigning him his rights.

(ii) Dated Anand Samvat 1145 (1177 AD) stating that the village of Moi is being granted to Acharaj Rishikesh.

•3. Letter of Prithabai to her son informing him that Samar Singh has been killed in battle and I am performing Sati, please take care of Rishikesh and his children.

It is clear from the above that Raval Samar Singh of the Raso is a Songira Chauhan ruler and not a Guhil King and that this Raval Samar Singh was ruling at Chittaur and was married to Prithabai.

Solanki Bhola Bhim: Detractors of Raso cite Chaulukya Bhimdev's copper plate grant of Samvat 1256 (No. 438 of Bhandarkar's list) ³ to point out that Solanki (Chaulukyas of Gujrat are also called Solanki) Bhim was living even after the last battle of Prithviraj (Samvat 1249) and hence conclude that Raso was wrong in stating that Bhola Bhim was killed by Prithviraj. As a matter of fact Inscriptions of Solanki Bhim Dev are available from Samvat 1235 (1178 AD) to Samvat 1296 (1239 AD) (Nos. 381, 386, 435, 438, 451, 452, 486, 487, 526 and 527 of the Bhandarkar list) ³ However, all of these do not belong to the same Bhim Dev. The inscription of Samvat 1236 (No. 386 of Bhandarkar list) calls Bhim as Bala Bhim son of Ajay. The geneology given in the copper plate of Samvat 1256 on the other hand, shows Bhim as grandson of Ajay and son of Mulraj. Clearly, Bala Bhim and Mulraj were brothers and Bhim Dev son of Muldev was a nephew of Bala Bhim. It is significant that Bhola Bhim is also called Balakka Bhim in the Raso. This Bala Bhim of inscriptions is the Bhola Bhim or Balakka Bhim of Raso who was killed in battle by Prithviraj sometime after Samvat 1236 (1179 AD).

Anand Samvat: The Samvats of Raso uniformly precede the known Vikram Samvats by 90 years. It only means that the Samvat used in the Raso has a starting point in 90 Vikram Samvat. In fact the Raso itself states that the Samvat of Prithviraj is Anand Samvat and is different from Vikram Samvat.

,dkn'k ls iapng fodze 'kkd vuanA

frfg fjiq iqj tS gju dks gq; i'fFkjkt ufjUnAA

In the year 1115 by Vikram Anand reckoning, Prithviraj took birth to win in battle the cities of the enemies.

The Raso equates the Anand Vikram era with Gupta Era.

,dkn'k le;s lqd'r fodze ftfe /kzelqkA

r'rh; lkd i'Fohjkt dks fy[;ks foizxqu xqIrAA

The year 1100 refers to the reckoning of Prithviraj which like Vikram and Dharmaraj era's is a third era described by the learned as 'Gupta'.

This is an important statement regarding Gupta Era the starting point of which the Raso fixes at 90 Vikram. This is at variance with the view held by historians that the Gupta Era starts at 376 Vikram which view needs to be reconsidered in the light of the above assertion in the Raso.

In conclusion it can be said that based on inscriptional data, the objections raised with regard to the authenticity of the Raso are without foundation and result from ignorance of facts and incomplete homework on the part of the detractors of Raso. The decision by the British Regime to ban the publication of Raso was a highhanded and ill-motivated action. Dr. Buhler who initiated the action, did not base his recommendations on objective analysis and his claim to scholarship is questionable.

References

•1. Kaviraj Syamaldas "The Antiquity, Authenticity and Genuineness of the epic called the Prithviraj Rasa and commonly ascribed to Chand Bardai" J Asiatic Soc. of Bengal, V 55, Pt.1, 1886.

•2. dfojkt ';keynkl % ^i'Fohjkt jklk dh uohurk*] i'Fohjkt jklks dh foospuk] lEiknd eksguyky O;kl 'kkL=h ,oa ukFkwyky O;kl] i'- 1&61] mn;iqj] la- 2015 bZ- 1959

•3. D.R. Bhandarkar : List of Inscriptions of Northern India in Brahmi and its derivative scripts from about 200 A.C., Appendix to Epigraphia Indica Vol XIX to XXIII, 1983.

•4. D.C. Ganguly, "Northern India during the Eleventh and Twelfth Centuries", History and Culture of the Indian People, Ed. R.C. Majumdar, Vol 5, Ch II, pp 87-88, Bombay 1979.

•5. jk; cgknqj ia- xkSjh'kadj ghjkpUn vks>k % ^jklks dk fuekZ.k dky*] i'Fohjkt jklks dh foospuk] lEiknd eksguyky O;kl 'kkL=h ,oa ukFkwyky O;kl] i'- 214&48] mn;iqj] la- 2015 bZ- 1959

The tall and ever attractive monument of Delhi which can be seen from most parts of the city is called the Qutab Minar. Every body has the same question when one sees the structure for the first time. The question that is often being put up is "Why the monument is that big?" or "Was there any specific reason to build such a tall building or it was just a wish of the person who built it?" Well, the exact reason is assumed to have something related to commemorating the victory. Mughals used to build victory towers to proclaim and celebrate victories. Some say the minaret was used to offer prayer but it is so tall that you can hear the person standing on the top. Also, the minaret is not joined on to Qutuddin's mosque and the Iltutmish's mosque.
Qutab Minar is among the tallest and famous towers in the world. The minaret is 234 feet high and the highest individual tower in the world. Other towers in the world are the Great Pagoda in Pekin, China and the Leaning Tower of Pisa in Italy but these towers are not as high as the Qutab Minar in Delhi.
According to history books, the minar was started by Prithviraj or his uncle Vigraharaja who won Delhi from the Tomar Rajputs. However, it is assumed and historians believe that Qutubuddib and Iltutmish finished it though the minar may have been commenced by Prithviraj or Vigraharaja. The minar was completed in 1200 A.D and since then the tall structure has been there upright and ever beautiful keeping an eye to Delhi just like a sentry. When Alauddin returned from the wars in the Deccan, he had this thought in mind that he would build a victory tower somewhat similar to the Qutab Minar. The ruins of this very initiative can be seen adjacent to the Qutbuddin's mosque because Alauddin died at the very start of the construction work and no one carried on to finish the initiative taken by Alauddin. Qutab Minar is another great masterpiece of Mughal architecture. It has a number of floors or storeys which has beautiful carvings like the one on the tomb of Iltutmish. There are inscriptions all round the tower and these inscriptions reveal that Iltutmish finised the tower. The structure of the wall is made as such that it widens from top to bottom, just to make the minar stronger.
Moving upstairs inside the minar will give you a wonderful experience and counting the stairs is always a fun for visitors. It has 378 steps which takes good amount of energy to reach at the top. The top of the tower gives an insight to Delhi because you get to see the bird's eye view of the city. To point a few sight seeing from the top, you will find views of the Hauz Khaz on the left and the walls of the Jahanpanah and Siri on the right. It was this very top of Qutab Minar that was used by Khilji and Tughlaq kings to watch the wild Mongol hordes when they threatened Delhi. The top also served as the watch top for Tughlaq who watched Timur's army camp on the Wellingdon Airport. Other important monuments that is visible from the top are the walls of Tughlaqabad, Humayun's Tomb, Purana Qila, Firoz Shah Kotla and Jama Masjid

about prithviraj raso

have authenticated the great bravery poetry "Pruthveeraj Rasa" which was created by ChandBardai (Chand Bardai); in his historical books. But still Kaviraj Shyamaldasji is not agree with the stuff from "Pruthveeraj Rasa" (about Maharana SamarSinh). He also believes that "Pruthveeraj Rasa" is not a creation of ChandBardai (Chand Bardai), but (it is made by) some other Charan poet. The genius historian (Kaviraj Shyamaldasji) presents many evidences to prove his point and is keen to have us (knowledge of) true facts only. There is no danger in accepting the historical facts which are mentioned in "Pruthveeraj Rasa" which is accepted by almost all, as amazing and interesting bravery poetry, based on true historical facts only; and it is a monument of belief for not only the people of Bharat (people of India) but also respected historians of Bharat (historians of India). As when compared other creations of ChandBardi (Chand Bardai) with "Pruthveeraj Rasa"; the styles of writing (the Chhandas) of other praise poetries by ChandBardai (chand Bardai) matches with the same of "Pruthveeraj Rasa". It makes us believe that "Pruthveeraj Rasa" is a great poetry by great poet ChandBardai (Chand Bardai) only.
Especially, "Pruthveeraj Rasa" is amazing part of literature and is considered as one of the gems of history of Bharat (history of India). The stuff mentioned in it, is accepted and authenticated by respected historians. Based on this stuff, I also have mentioned (in this book) that Maharana SamarSinh and Pruthveeraj Chauhan (Prithviraj Chauhan) both belonged to the same time span. I am satisfied that this stuff is not only interesting in aspects of a novel but also based on the authenticated historical evidences as well.

Col. Tod (Colonel James Tod) – the author of the great encycloipedia – history of Rajasthan, authenticates the writing found from the books of BhartCharans and VahiVanchas (VaheeVanchas). Of course, the stuff found from the same is mostly added with fantasy and amazing facts. It is also in the form of a story to tell, which makes it's historical values very low (and will found more interesting to the people). But what can be done here? As BharatDesh (the country of India) respects the ancestors, but it is found somehow irresponsible in keeping the up-to-date history (with true facts written within). Hence (we) have to rely on the resources available. And luckily praise tales and praise poetries, the statements of donations, the writing on the stones, the monuments and the historical stuffs (remaining) helped a lot to the historians and researchers.
In the family lineage the name of RatnaSinh (RatanSinh) comes after the brave king SamarSinh Rawal. As he have ruled for a very little, there is no specific events found in his life (which can be explored, or are important); hence the biography of his (RatnaSinh's) descendent Rawal KarnSinh (KarnaSinh or KaranSinh) is explored more and it is widespreaded for both the generations.
The Rajput ladies, who are the inseparable part of the prideful and splendid history of Bharatiya Rajputs. The brave (the other name of the power) Rajput ladies deserve such a great respect that even words are lacked to describe the same. There is no way to measure the greatness of these great ladies. They are beyond the boundaries.
As the great and respectable lady for Bharatiya people (people of India); who was the owner of the beauty which was able to conquer the universe; the incredible beauty and the queen of Chittod (Chittaud / Chittor / Chittaur) Maharanee Padminee (Maharani Padmini) was considered as the wife of RatnaSinh by Kavi Shyamaldasji. But most of the historian believe that she was wife of Maharana BheemSinh, son of Rana LaxmanSinh. I also have accepted the view, authenti I also have accepted the view, authenticated by the majority and I kept the bravery poety which is very famous in Bharat (India) named "Khuman Rasa" and the history authored by Col. Tod (Colonel James Tod) as the base (and the support).
Well, I believe that the disputes about the times of existence, and the internal relations of the family lineages are not as much important. (But) The (real) pride of the history of Sooryavanshee (Sooryavanshi / Suryavanshi) lineage of the rulers of Chittod (Chittaud / Chittor / Chittaur) lies into the sacrifices and the bravery shown by Rajput males and females both, their desperate power and courage. (And it is the continuous source of inspiration for all the Bharatiyas – all the Indians).
These glimpses of history of brave Indians are the source of inspiration for the brave countrymen to desperately fight to keep (and get) the independence. This inspiration is the root of Bharatiya Asmita (Pride of India). These sources of inspiration for the fighting (for the pride and independence of the motherland) have played a vital role in defeating the foreign attackers (who attacked the golden land of India frequently).
During the ruling time of the king of Mevad (Mewad / Mewar / Mewaad) LaxmanSinh, Allauddin have attacked (the kingdom of Mevad). In that deadly battle, the brave Rajput warriors have sacrificed their lives by doing "Kesariya" in order to save their family pride, values and the independence of the motherland. When all the great efforts have not been able to prevent the defeat of Chittod (Chittaud / Chittor / Chittaur), the brave Rajput ladies led by queen Padmini (Maharani Padmini / Maharani Padminee) have sacrificed their lives to the lap of fire (instead of getting caught by the attackers). Afterwards, Maharaa AriSinh, the brave successor of Maharana LaxmanSinh have shown utmost bravery and got the kingdom of Chittod (Chittaud / Chittor / Chittaur) back under his rule by defeating the enemies. This way he have received back the pride of (bravery of) Mevad (Mewad /

chand bardai

Thanks for sharing khushi dear!

Prithviraj was a coward: NCERT book

Author:
Publication: Deccan Chronicle
Date: July 13, 2005 "Prithviraj Chauhan was a coward who ran away to save his life during the second battle of Tarain with Mohammad Ghauri." "Jaichand (generally believed to be a traitor) was, in fact a 'hero' who gave up his life while fighting the forces of Ghauri." This is the "new" history that students of Class XI will learn under the CBSE and ICSE courses from this academic session. The revised history book, Medieval Indian History, published by NCERT, demolishes old beliefs and tramples over heroes of history. Edited by Prof. Satish Chandra, the fifth chapter of the book on Medieval History clearly states that Prithviraj Chauhan tried to run away from the battle, but was taken prisoner. The book says that when Prithviraj accepted the supremacy of Mohammad Ghauri, the latter allowed him to continue as ruler of Ajmer. Prithviraj was later killed on charges of treason, according to the book, which goes on to say that Jaichand's valour was unmatched and that he was killed while fighting the forces of Ghauri in Kannauj. History, till now, had taught that Jaichand was a coward and a traitor who first betrayed Prithviraj Chauhan, and then was drowned while trying to flee the forces of Ghauri (History of Rajasthan, page 156). The NCERT history book also demolishes the belief that the main cause of bitterness between Prithviraj and Jaichand was the fact that the latter's daughter Sanyogita had eloped with Prithviraj and that Jaichand never forgave them.

According to the new book, there were major political differences between the two kings and Sanyogita was not part of it. While the NCERT book throws new light on Prithviraj Chauhan and Jaichand, the Class 11 book Ancient India History, written by Prof. Ram Sharan Sharma, discards the presence of Lord Krishna during the Mahabharata. The book says, "Although Krishna plays an important role in the Mahabharata, inscriptions and sculptural pieces found in Mathura dating back to 200 BC and 300 AD do not attest to his presence. Because of this, ideas of an epic age based on the Ramayana and Mahabharata have to be discarded."

i felt bad after reading it so sharing it wid all of u what do u think