Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Virendra
BRFite
Posts: 1211
Joined: 24 Aug 2011 23:20

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Postby Virendra » 05 Dec 2012 16:50

peter wrote:Till Pratap and Amar Singh I do not see any problem with Mewar lineage. Sure Vikram, Banbir and Uday Singh for some time left a bit to be desired but Pratap was more exemplary then Sanga and Kumbha and Hamir.

In his efforts, Yes. In terms of Kingdom, No. The army he commanded and the Kingdom he inherited were as large as his ancestors had.
Kumbha ran his writ at Nagor and Sanga choked Lodi to the extent that Peel Khal near Agra was his northern boundary.
No need to mention how they humbled the sultanates further south again and again.
OTOH Pratap was fighting to hold ground at his own Kingdom and capital.
Not that it takes away anything from his glory, there is no campaign of Pratap outside Mewar.

peter wrote:They did not on their own. It was the specific act of giving daughters which made these principalities align with the Mughals.

Two of the major houses - Mewar and Amber were both politically and militarily weak at that time.
But I can see that not just Mewar, small states like Bundi also did not give any daughters to Mughals even though they allied to Mughals.

peter wrote:Succession issues have been there all the time. Prithviraj's granfather was killed by his own son and his father had to be whisked away to Gujarat and so on so forth. That is no reason for anyone to align with the Mughals.

Succession war is not what causes the alliance. The instability and splintered military because of political infighting at all levels is what renders the top leadership weak. Even Pratap was whisked away when Chittor was sacked by Akbar.
peter wrote:But this period is no more unique then the earlier periods. Earlier too Bhatis were at war with Rathores, Rathores were at war with Parihars, Sisodiyas were at war with Rathores and so on so forth.
This cannot be an excuse for Kachwahas to behave the way they did.

Yes but with the difference of degree in decentralization.
There are enough instances where large armies from all over Rajputana have gathered under one head and fought.
Rathores and Sisodiyas fought together under Kumbha, Kachhwahas and Sisodiyas fought together under Sanga
But look at Pratap, he never had the same pool of political, military resources cutting across Rajputana. Only the Bhils and traditional Mewar allies from south.
Further back, PrithviRaj's influence can be gauged from the fact that he ran to Tarain to fight Ghori and sieged one of his outposts in Punjab for moonths.
Tarain is not even on the border of modern Rajasthan while Ajmer is only a locality in the center of modern Rajasthan.
I'm not excusing Kachhwahas, I'm trying to deliberate and understand the various facets of what happened.


peter wrote:Diplomacy did happen even with Ghoris of the world. There is record of letter exchanges before the war(s) started. Apparently Ghori wrote that he would be happy and leave if Prithviraj converts to Islam. Obviosuly Mr Ghori did not know what Prithviraj was all about. So diplomacy failed.

Ok, point taken. My understanding is that PrithviRaj owned a much larger Kingdom than Amber of Akbar's times.
Not sure if this is the best comparison.[/quote]Let us not forget that during the Sultanate time many small kingdoms were reapetedly attacked by the Delhi as well as Gujarat and Malwa Sultanates. No one gave a daughter. Take the example of Songaras from Jalore or Hammir at Ranathambore. These were small principalities. No bigger then Amber.
I don't think Hammir was a petty Kingdom's ruler. He had a huge army and is influence and revenue sources ran into entire Malwa and even north Rajasthan :
-- Khandela 90 kms northeast to Amber
-- Mount Abu at southern most tip of Rajasthan
-- Dhar (in MP) 320 kms south east to Udaipur
-- Champa in south weast tip of Malwa
-- Gadha Mandala 550 kms south east to Ranthambore

And I don't know if before Akbar any other muslim King (turk/mughal) made a serious attempt to forge alliance with any of the Rajputs.

peter wrote:Can you please give a few examples of winning wars as enemy?
Pratap's and Chhatrasal's wars
The former defended and retook his Kingdom single handedly and the latter defeated many Mughals Generals including:
Rohilla Khan, Kaliq, Munawwar Khan, Sadruddin, Sheikh Anwar, Sayyid Latif, Bahlol Khan and Abdus Ahmed.
His Kingdom extended between Chitrakoot and Panna on the east and Gwalior on the west.
Streched from Kalpi in the north to Sagar, Garah Kota and Damoh in the south.
peter wrote:Why do you think the Marathas were fighting at Panipat against Abdali? It was too far north from their home.

Because Abdali had decided to fight them and the latter were stamping their authority up in north. They didn't raid Mughals.
In the various towns villages or forts Marathas raided .. were it Mughals who got overrun/capitulated or was it Hindu citizenry and Royals?
and if removing Rajputs from the battlefield was the only concern then what were they doing looting in Jaipur, Jodhpur, Bundi, Kota etc even after receiving (the much touted reason of agression) cash??
I would be happier if they had killed the opposing royals and established friendly governments or may be forge an alliance;
rather than Holkars laying entire Rajputana to waste that it couldn't get up again.
The arson and looting was ever increasing while people like Nana Saheb couldn't just by themselves hold all Marathas in discipline.
Settle it in open battlefield and spare the rest .. why the arson and looting .. or even better, if they needed money they were supposed to ally Rajputs and take on Mughals who were fat with sucking entire India's blood.
Mughals were the ones who deserved to be robbed of money, levied heavy taxes etc .. not Rajputs and Jats.

peter wrote:Think about who was the fighting arm of Mughals? It was the rajputs. If you have to subdue the central leadership in Delhi whom do you take on first? The fighting arm or the leadership itself?

So now Mughals don't have any army and administration of their own?

peter wrote:Think about it : if anyone comes occupies your territory/house no matter on whosoever's orders you don't like that person.

peter wrote:No. I think they wanted to neutralise the fighting arm of the mughals and then take on the central leadership. It was a perfect plan.

peter wrote:The point is that a cycle once started has to reach its conclusion. Karmically since rajputs were the first aggressors, no matter at whosoever's behest, and caused numerous raids in Marathaland the reverse had to happen too.

Like I said above, settle it as two armies why the arson and looting ... why lay entire Rajputana to waste?
I don't mind Marathas coming back at Rajput armies and rulers. But their method ... did they just challenge Rajputs to bring their army out in field and settle it like Hindus used to ?? No the people were hurt, that wasn't supposed to happen.
Here, read this from a Marathi author --
"And the Scindias and Holkars started on a ruthless campaign of extorting money from the lands they overran.
The Rajputs made the mistake of calling Maratha aid to sort out their internal strife and paid a very heavy price.
Ajmer, Jodhpur and Jaipur were to pay heavily to the Marathas. the Rajput treasuries too started getting empty
and the land was so ravaged by the invading troops that there were near famine conditions."
~ pg 71. The Rajputs of Rajputana: A Glimpse of Medieval Rajasthan By M. S. Naravane
What else do you think antagonised the Rajputs and Jats that they left Marathas on their own against Abdali?

peter wrote:Actually if we study the history of Rashtrakutas they defended India against the Arabs. Are modern Marathas descendants of Rashtrakutas? I am sure they are.

Any sources?
Reu and many others place Rathores as the descendants of Rashtrakutas and not the Marathas. Reu has written a complete book on it.

peter wrote:Mandore had Parihars. Bhatis were already in Jaisalmer and surrounding regions. Tomars in Delhi. Chauhans at Ajmer. Chalukyas in Gujarat. Parmars in Jalore and so on so forth.

Delhi is not medieval Rajputana. Gujarat is not medieval Rajputana.

peter wrote:
Virendra wrote:Yet PC emerges as the main leader in Rajasthan .. were there wars between politically+miitarily independent Kingdoms inside Rajasthan?

Yes. Many.
Yes there were more than one clans .. always. But like I said above, with the way PC ran upto Tarain and even sieged Ghori's outpost for months .. I doubt there was the same degree of fragmentation in Rajputana back then.
Moreover different clans used to come together under one imperial head and fight. That almost disasppeared by the time we reach Haldighati in 16th century.

peter wrote:Every clan of rajasthan fought under the banner of Pratap. There were Rathores, Bhatis, Tomars, Jhala, Chauhans, Hada, Deora, Songara and some Kachwahas too. What is happening in modern Rajasthan is that Pratap is not being given his due because Udaipur claims that they are the Hindu Suraj since they did not give daughters and every other major king of rajasthan resents this for obvious reasons. So they leave no stone unturned in humbling Pratap's achivement.

How many Rathores, Bhatis, Tomars, Jhala, Chauhans, Hada, Deora, Songara and Kachhwahas on Pratap's side?
Half the clan? One third?
How many do you expect to come when there are multiple independent and warring Kingdoms (big/small) based on clans .. where the clannish armies are aligned to their respective Kingdoms and the Kingdoms aren't united.


By the time we go from Sanga to Pratap Mughals had settled themselves in delhi-Agra. Could Amber (adjacent to Delhi-Agra) in their political soup of weak Kings and succession wars; have stopped them alone? I think not.[/quote]
Sure. But so could the Khichis at Gagron not stop the Malwa sultanate from running them over. But did they yield a daughter? Why not?
Yes. I am not debating the daughter act. I'm looking at Amber's weaknesses.

peter wrote:See as is clear from the Ishwardas Nagar's write up that responsibility of getting Shivaji out was Ram Singh's. How does Shivaji find trusted men who are not Marathas and are willing to put their life on the line for him? They were Ram Singh's men. They could be sent back to Jaipur after the mission is over or to some other place.

Will have to repeat my point. Soldiers are always well accounted for. Wouldn't there absence be an easily noticed event in the administrative apparatus?

peter wrote:I actually do not understand his conversion to Islam bit. If you can find anything on it while you are in Jaipur I will be very happy to learn the details.

ok

peter wrote:Do you have examples from medieveal Indian history where the presence of gun powder carried the day?

From Babur's use of gunpoweder in India to Scinidia's use of French guns against native Indian forces.

peter wrote:But why not return home after they were healed? Doesnt add up.

Look at this:
RP Singh

Perhaps the general perception of Maratha prospects took a huge beating and the soldiers thought they might land in trouble enroute or had other thoughts about the conditions back home?

peter wrote:I thought that Malik Kafur was the first to have gone and attacked south of the Vindhyas. Was there somebody before him? Islamic sources would surely mention a name if indeed someone did cross Vindhyas?

Not if the effort wasn't a success. We know how silent they get on instances where their patrons fall short of victory.

Regards,
Virendra

peter
BRFite
Posts: 1207
Joined: 23 Jan 2008 11:19

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Postby peter » 07 Dec 2012 18:41

Virendra wrote:
peter wrote:Till Pratap and Amar Singh I do not see any problem with Mewar lineage. Sure Vikram, Banbir and Uday Singh for some time left a bit to be desired but Pratap was more exemplary then Sanga and Kumbha and Hamir.

In his efforts, Yes. In terms of Kingdom, No. The army he commanded and the Kingdom he inherited were as large as his ancestors had.
[..]

We have been discussing this for a while now! I commend your enthusiasm to find out why Amber did what it did. Suffice it to say that the condition Amber found itself in 1562 was no different then the condition numerous other rajput kings had found themselves in during last 800 years prior to 1562.

Even if you assume that Amber had some "special" / "unique" conditions that it was grappling with, what made rest of the rajputana line up with their daughters at Akbar's door? Was Amber's example so awesome that all others, barring a few, had to emulate it?

The answer to both Amber and rest of rajputana giving daughters to Akbar is one and the same. It is a decline in the morality and dharm of the Amber king which made him barter his daughter for the continuation of his kingdom and his own aisho aaram. This is the same reason why rest of rajputana followed suit. People like Pratap chose to sleep under the shadow of the stars instead of bartering their daughters.

Regarding Artillery and Babur we have covered that in great depth earlier in this thread. Baburnama proves that artillery had zero impact in the fight against Sanga.

Regarding Rashtrakutas: They ruled Maharasthra and fought against Arabs. Then they vanished from the Indian historical scene. Did they leave Maharasthra and settle somewhere else? Or did their progeny continue to live in Maharasthra? Did the Marathas of Shivaji all incomers to the land of Maharasthra?

Regarding the looting of Rajputana by Marathas: In a war when large armies move they tend to cause extensive environmental and agricultural damage. When big rajput armies moved in Maharashtra they caused damage similarly. Just think about how much hay you need to feed the horses.

The reason Marathas tangled up with Abdali at Panipat was because Mughal court was a puppet in their hands.

Ram Shah Tomar and his sons were with Pratap. Jaimal Rathore and many from his clan including Kalla (Jasol?) were serving Udaipur and their descendants continued to do so. Solankis were serving Pratap. Jhalas were serving Pratap. Honourable Champawats had left Marwar and joined Pratap. His mama's side had supplied Songaras to fight under his banner. There were Dodiyas present and so were Parmars. Gaurs and Gehlots were present too.

Pat
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 21
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 11:47

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Postby Pat » 09 Dec 2012 03:37

peter wrote:We have been discussing this for a while now! I commend your enthusiasm to find out why Amber did what it did. Suffice it to say that the condition Amber found itself in 1562 was no different then the condition numerous other rajput kings had found themselves in during last 800 years prior to 1562.

Even if you assume that Amber had some "special" / "unique" conditions that it was grappling with, what made rest of the rajputana line up with their daughters at Akbar's door? Was Amber's example so awesome that all others, barring a few, had to emulate it?

The answer to both Amber and rest of rajputana giving daughters to Akbar is one and the same. It is a decline in the morality and dharm of the Amber king which made him barter his daughter for the continuation of his kingdom and his own aisho aaram. This is the same reason why rest of rajputana followed suit. People like Pratap chose to sleep under the shadow of the stars instead of bartering their daughters.

Regarding Artillery and Babur we have covered that in great depth earlier in this thread. Baburnama proves that artillery had zero impact in the fight against Sanga.

Regarding Rashtrakutas: They ruled Maharasthra and fought against Arabs. Then they vanished from the Indian historical scene. Did they leave Maharasthra and settle somewhere else? Or did their progeny continue to live in Maharasthra? Did the Marathas of Shivaji all incomers to the land of Maharasthra?

Regarding the looting of Rajputana by Marathas: In a war when large armies move they tend to cause extensive environmental and agricultural damage. When big rajput armies moved in Maharashtra they caused damage similarly. Just think about how much hay you need to feed the horses.

The reason Marathas tangled up with Abdali at Panipat was because Mughal court was a puppet in their hands.

Ram Shah Tomar and his sons were with Pratap. Jaimal Rathore and many from his clan including Kalla (Jasol?) were serving Udaipur and their descendants continued to do so. Solankis were serving Pratap. Jhalas were serving Pratap. Honourable Champawats had left Marwar and joined Pratap. His mama's side had supplied Songaras to fight under his banner. There were Dodiyas present and so were Parmars. Gaurs and Gehlots were present too.



Peter -
Why do you think hill rajputs in Himachal, Rajput kings in Jammu and Rajputs in UP did not have marital alliance with Mugals? Why did they not line-up with their daughters as you say?
BTW - Everytime I have talked to any one from a rajput family from those areas I have found that they hold Rajasthanis in high esteem .

peter
BRFite
Posts: 1207
Joined: 23 Jan 2008 11:19

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Postby peter » 09 Dec 2012 05:49

Pat wrote:
peter wrote:We have been discussing this for a while now! I commend your enthusiasm to find out why Amber did what it did. Suffice it to say that the condition Amber found itself in 1562 was no different then the condition numerous other rajput kings had found themselves in during last 800 years prior to 1562.

Even if you assume that Amber had some "special" / "unique" conditions that it was grappling with, what made rest of the rajputana line up with their daughters at Akbar's door? Was Amber's example so awesome that all others, barring a few, had to emulate it?

The answer to both Amber and rest of rajputana giving daughters to Akbar is one and the same. It is a decline in the morality and dharm of the Amber king which made him barter his daughter for the continuation of his kingdom and his own aisho aaram. This is the same reason why rest of rajputana followed suit. People like Pratap chose to sleep under the shadow of the stars instead of bartering their daughters.

Regarding Artillery and Babur we have covered that in great depth earlier in this thread. Baburnama proves that artillery had zero impact in the fight against Sanga.

Regarding Rashtrakutas: They ruled Maharasthra and fought against Arabs. Then they vanished from the Indian historical scene. Did they leave Maharasthra and settle somewhere else? Or did their progeny continue to live in Maharasthra? Did the Marathas of Shivaji all incomers to the land of Maharasthra?

Regarding the looting of Rajputana by Marathas: In a war when large armies move they tend to cause extensive environmental and agricultural damage. When big rajput armies moved in Maharashtra they caused damage similarly. Just think about how much hay you need to feed the horses.

The reason Marathas tangled up with Abdali at Panipat was because Mughal court was a puppet in their hands.

Ram Shah Tomar and his sons were with Pratap. Jaimal Rathore and many from his clan including Kalla (Jasol?) were serving Udaipur and their descendants continued to do so. Solankis were serving Pratap. Jhalas were serving Pratap. Honourable Champawats had left Marwar and joined Pratap. His mama's side had supplied Songaras to fight under his banner. There were Dodiyas present and so were Parmars. Gaurs and Gehlots were present too.



Peter -
Why do you think hill rajputs in Himachal, Rajput kings in Jammu and Rajputs in UP did not have marital alliance with Mugals? Why did they not line-up with their daughters as you say?
BTW - Everytime I have talked to any one from a rajput family from those areas I have found that they hold Rajasthanis in high esteem .

Rajas you mention gave their daughters to Mughals too.

Dara Shikoh's (Eldest son of Shah Jahan) son, Sulaiman Shikoh, was married to the daughter of Rajput Raja Prithvipat Shah of Garhwal.

Aurangzeb (Third son of Shah Jahan) was married to Rajkumari Anuradha Bai Sahiba [Kalimat un-nisa Khanum], given a false sayyidi pedigree to flatter her son, daughter of the Rajput Raja Chatar Shena [Taj ud-din Khan], Raja of Rajauri, in Kashmir.

Pat
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 21
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 11:47

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Postby Pat » 09 Dec 2012 13:42

peter wrote:
Rajas you mention gave their daughters to Mughals too.

Dara Shikoh's (Eldest son of Shah Jahan) son, Sulaiman Shikoh, was married to the daughter of Rajput Raja Prithvipat Shah of Garhwal.

Aurangzeb (Third son of Shah Jahan) was married to Rajkumari Anuradha Bai Sahiba [Kalimat un-nisa Khanum], given a false sayyidi pedigree to flatter her son, daughter of the Rajput Raja Chatar Shena [Taj ud-din Khan], Raja of Rajauri, in Kashmir.


This seems a small number of rulers. So what was happening to others? Were they not asked to give daughters or did they resist?

- I do know that Raja of Kangra had a marital alliance with Ranjit Singh. Does that seem like selling away dignity.
- Recently I read that French kings gave their daughters in marital alliance to Prince(s) of England and Greeks gave their daughters to Mauryan king...

The only thing you have to understand is that these kings were behaving most kings did in their times, considering the circumstances and the prevalent norms. I am sure you would not have bothered had these kings made marital alliances with hindu/ budhist/ sikh/ jain kings for obvious reasons.

Having said that I agree that - had these kings shown some spine and had they fought, they would have saved their dignity and would have gained respected from all of us forever.

peter
BRFite
Posts: 1207
Joined: 23 Jan 2008 11:19

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Postby peter » 09 Dec 2012 14:18

Pat wrote:
peter wrote:
Rajas you mention gave their daughters to Mughals too.

Dara Shikoh's (Eldest son of Shah Jahan) son, Sulaiman Shikoh, was married to the daughter of Rajput Raja Prithvipat Shah of Garhwal.

Aurangzeb (Third son of Shah Jahan) was married to Rajkumari Anuradha Bai Sahiba [Kalimat un-nisa Khanum], given a false sayyidi pedigree to flatter her son, daughter of the Rajput Raja Chatar Shena [Taj ud-din Khan], Raja of Rajauri, in Kashmir.


This seems a small number of rulers. So what was happening to others? Were they not asked to give daughters or did they resist?

But why is more then one important?

Pat wrote:- I do know that Raja of Kangra had a marital alliance with Ranjit Singh. Does that seem like selling away dignity.

No. In support of what you allude below Sikhs followed Hindu customs. Did not eat beef and did not break Hindu places of worship. Besides unlike the girls given to the Mughals, there was no restriction on these girls coming back to their parents homes.

Pat wrote:- Recently I read that French kings gave their daughters in marital alliance to Prince(s) of England and Greeks gave their daughters to Mauryan king...

They were co religionists that is French and English. In case of Mauryans Selucus was getting hammered by the Mauryas and to save his skin he offered daughter to Chandragupta.

Pat wrote:
The only thing you have to understand is that these kings were behaving most kings did in their times, considering the circumstances and the prevalent norms.
No. You cannot extrapolate. If giving daughters was such a norm why do you think the rajputs waited till 1562 to give their daughter? After all the first attack on India by Arabs took place in 7th century A.D. and attacks were a regular feature post that date. That is roughly a span of 900 years.

Pat wrote:I am sure you would not have bothered had these kings made marital alliances with hindu/ budhist/ sikh/ jain kings for obvious reasons.
Ofcourse. But do you sense a difference in behaviour of rajputs kings pre and post the daughter giving episode? Does their behavior, post the daughter giving episode, have any impact on the history of India?

member_22019
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 27
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Postby member_22019 » 09 Dec 2012 19:03

What mirza raja man singh and few rajput (in fact out-castes) kings did to save their kingdoms, can never never be justified. This is extremely hated among rajputs even today. There were many other kings too who chose to take on a hopeless fight and
were annihilated (few like Pratap survived). It is extremely tough to bear a rajput spirit inside a human body. Few humans like man singh were rajput by birth but found no benefit of carrying this spirit. Many carried till last breathe.

Is this justice to cast all (or most of) the rajputs as daughter sellers because of few loose characters who were too weak to carry on with an endless struggle which was more painful than death?

Pat
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 21
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 11:47

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Postby Pat » 09 Dec 2012 23:54

peter wrote:
Pat wrote:I am sure you would not have bothered had these kings made marital alliances with hindu/ budhist/ sikh/ jain kings for obvious reasons.
Ofcourse. But do you sense a difference in behaviour of rajputs kings pre and post the daughter giving episode? Does their behavior, post the daughter giving episode, have any impact on the history of India?


I like your approach... Sometimes the intent is lost in pages and pages of discussions that goes on...

As I see Jaipurias were and are brave people who chose to be servants to Mugals where as they could very well have fought a very tough or a losing battle a for a long time... while aligning with their kin in Mewar.

Another thing to remember is that Akbar wasn't a muslim in any sense of the word... and he is the one who started the marital alliances trends. So the situation was different adn difficult fro us to understand. I believe he was not breaking temples or anything such... Having said that still hate the idea of giving daughter in marital alliances...

It's kinda funny when we try to berate someone’s behaviors after hundreds of years. Two examples -
1. Its trendy for people to say that Bhagwan Ram exiled Sita so he was a bad man... Judgment passed with no context after 5000 years
2. This one is funny - a gori came to me after reading Gandhi's story and said that Gandhi was not a nice man since he stopped having sex with his wife later in life.. According to her this must have caused a lot of grief to her... I had little to say except for pointing her to literature related to four parts of life as explained in Hindu philosophy..

It's nice to learn so much from you:
1. Was Shivaji asked to give his daughter (s) i nmarital alliance?
2. Why did Shivaji agree to join durbar? I look like a pussy to me to have agreed to attend the durbar and rest is history...

peter
BRFite
Posts: 1207
Joined: 23 Jan 2008 11:19

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Postby peter » 10 Dec 2012 13:09

SiddharthS wrote:What mirza raja man singh and few rajput (in fact out-castes) kings did to save their kingdoms, can never never be justified. This is extremely hated among rajputs even today.

Can you elaborate your last point a bit more?

SiddharthS wrote:There were many other kings too who chose to take on a hopeless fight and
were annihilated (few like Pratap survived). It is extremely tough to bear a rajput spirit inside a human body. Few humans like man singh were rajput by birth but found no benefit of carrying this spirit. Many carried till last breathe.
Agree!

SiddharthS wrote:Is this justice to cast all (or most of) the rajputs as daughter sellers because of few loose characters who were too weak to carry on with an endless struggle which was more painful than death?

I agree it is not. And if you think I have over generalized please accept my apologies. But how many rajasthani kings can we count who did not give daughters?

peter
BRFite
Posts: 1207
Joined: 23 Jan 2008 11:19

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Postby peter » 10 Dec 2012 13:25

peter wrote:
Pat wrote:I am sure you would not have bothered had these kings made marital alliances with hindu/ budhist/ sikh/ jain kings for obvious reasons.
Ofcourse. But do you sense a difference in behaviour of rajputs kings pre and post the daughter giving episode? Does their behavior, post the daughter giving episode, have any impact on the history of India?

Pat wrote:I like your approach... Sometimes the intent is lost in pages and pages of discussions that goes on...

As I see Jaipurias were and are brave people who chose to be servants to Mugals where as they could very well have fought a very tough or a losing battle a for a long time... while aligning with their kin in Mewar.

Indeed they could have and probably should have. But all that is history now.

Pat wrote:Another thing to remember is that Akbar wasn't a muslim in any sense of the word... and he is the one who started the marital alliances trends. So the situation was different adn difficult fro us to understand. I believe he was not breaking temples or anything such... Having said that still hate the idea of giving daughter in marital alliances...

He was breaking temples for sure:
Hindu temples saved

Akbar sent a golden umbrella for an idol which was destroyed. He also allowed conversion of a mosque into Hindu temple at Kurukshetra. This temple had previously been destroyed and converted into a mosque.[53] Shaikh Ahmad Sirhindi, a contemporary of Akbar, does not credit him for saving the temple instead gives credit to the "infidels" (Hindus) for building their own temple by demolishing the mosque.[54]

Hindu temples destroyed

Contrary to popular belief Akbar, continued the policy of Babur and Humayun in the destruction of Hindu temples.

It is recorded by Bayazid Biyat, personal attendant of Humayun, that Akbar gave two villages for the upkeep of a mosque and a Madrasa which was setup by destroying a Hindu temple, this was done under the supervision of 'Todar Mal' who was highly regarded Hindu minister (vizir) of Akbar.[53] In Akbar's time Todar Mal was called a simple one (sada-lauh) because he mourned the loss of the idols he used to worship and he was also called "a blind follower of custom and narrow mindedness" for being a Hindu.[55]

Akbar's army was responsible for demolition of rich Hindu temples which had gold idols in the Doab region between Ganga and Yamuna.[53]

Historian Abd al-Qadir Badauni records that during Akbar's reign at Nagarkot, near Kangra, 200 cows were slaughtered, numerous Hindus killed and a temple was demolished[53]

On the 1st Rajab 990 AD 1582 Akbar's forces encamped by a field of maize near Nagarkot. The fortress (hissãr) of Bhîm, which has an idol temple of Mahãmãî, and in which none but her servants dwelt, was taken by the valour of the assailants at the first assault. A party of Rajpûts, who had resolved to die, fought most desperately till they were all cut down. A number of Brãhmans who for many years had served the temple, never gave one thought to flight, and were killed. Nearly 200 black cows belonging to Hindûs had, during the struggle, crowded together for shelter in the temple. Some savage Turks, while the arrows and bullets were falling like rain, killed those cows. They then took off their boots and filled them with the blood and cast it upon the roof and walls of the temple.[56]

During the third siege of Chittor many temples were destroyed. The shrine of Moinuddin Chishti in Ajmer was presented brass candlesticks by Akbar which were taken after the destruction of Kalika temple by Akbar during the third siege of Chittor.[57]

Jesuit Father Monserrate, Aquaviva and Enrique arrived at Akbar's court in early 1580 and Monserrate recording his journey in a travelogue comments that religious zeal of Mussalmans has destroyed many Hindu temples and in their places countless tombs and shrines of mussalmans have been erected in which these men are worshipped as if they were saints.[58] Monserrate also tutored Emperor's son Murad.

Jihad against Hindu Kings

During his time Akbar was looked upon by orthodox Muslim elements as a pious Muslim committed to defending Islam against infidelity.[59] Rizqullah Mushtaqi, a well known Shaikhzada of Delhi, writing around 1580, says that Akbar was sent by God to protect Islam from being suppressed by Hemu.[60]

Akbar spread Islam in India by waging a holy war (Jihad) against Hindu kings. During the siege of Chittor in 1567 CE, 8000 rajputs had remained inside the fort to defend various temples after the cavalry sallied out to meet Akbar's army in the plain below. These 8000 died fighting to the last man in defense of Hindu temples when Akbar's army stormed the fort and attacked the temples. In addition there were 30,000 plus Hindu peasants inside the fort who were unarmed and massacred in cold blood by Akbar's forces[61] by his order on February 24, 1568 CE. Carthaginian on gaining the Battle of Cannae measured his success by bushels of rings taken from the fingers of equestrian roman soldiers and similarly Akbar measured his by the quantity of cordons of distinction (Janeu or the sacred thread) collected from the fallen rajput soldiers and other civilians of Chittor, which amounted to seventy four and half man (a unit of weight in India equalling 40 kg) by weight. To eternise the memory of this deed the number 74.5 is accursed and marked on a banker's letter in Rajasthan it is the strongest of seals, for "the sin of the sack of Chittor" is invoked on him who violates a letter under the safeguard of this mysterious number.[62]

Akbar celebrated the victory over Chittor and Ranthambore by laying the foundation of a new city, 23 miles (37 km) W.S.W of Agra in 1569. It was called Fatehpur Sikri (city of victory).[63]

Akbar, bolstered by his success, was looking forward to widespread acclamation as a great conqueror of Islam and his vigorous Islamic policy is illustrated by Fatahnama-i-Chittor issued by him after the conquest of Chittor at Ajmer, where he stayed for some time en route to Agra, on Ramazan 10, 975/March 9,1568, where the infidels (Hindus) are reviled:

..the Omnipotent one who enjoined the task of destroying the wicked infidels (Hindus) on the dutiful mujahids through the blows of their thunder-like scimitars laid down: "Fight them! Allah will chastise them at your hands and He will lay them low and give you victory over them".[64]

Further on the call to Jihad against Hindu kings of India is raised and also a call to the destruction of Hindu temples:

This is of the grace of my Lord that He may try me whether I am grateful or ungrateful — we spend our precious time to the best of our ability in war (ghiza) and Jihad and with the help of Eternal Allah, who is the supporter of our ever-increasing empire, we are busy in subjugating the localities, habitations, forts and towns which are under the possession of the infidels (Hindus), may Allah forsake and annihilate all of them, and thus raising the standard of Islam everywhere and removing the darkness of polytheism and violent sins by the use of sword. We destroy the places of worship of idols in those places and other parts of India.[65]

The reimposition of jizya in 1575 is also symbolic of vigrous Islamic policy.[66] Abd al-Qadir Badauni who was then one of Akbar's court chaplains or imams, states that he sought an interview with the emperor when the royal troops were marching against Rana Pratap in 1576, begging leave of absence for "the privilege of joining the campaign to soak his Islamic beard in Hindu infidel blood". Akbar was so pleased at the expression of allegiance to his person and to the Islamic idea of Jihad that he bestowed a handful of gold coins on Badaoni as a token of his pleasure.[67]

Akbar boasted that he was a great conqueror of Islam to the ruler of Turan, Abdullah Khan, in a letter in 1579:

Places and lands (India) which from the time of rise of the sun of Islam has not been trod by the horse-hooves of world conquering princes and where their swords had never flashed have become the dwelling places and homes of the faithful (Muslims). The churches and temples of the infidels (Hindus) and heretics have become mosques and holy shrines for the masters of orthodoxy. God (Allah) be praised![68]

Reaction of Hindus

Akbar forced many Hindus to convert to Islam against their will[73] and also changed the name of some of their holy places to Islamic ones, an example being, the changing of Prayag to Allahabad[74] in 1583.[75] During Akbar's reign, his general Husain Khan 'Tukriya' forcibly made non-Muslims (Hindus) wear discriminatory[76] patches of different colours on their shoulders or sleeves.[77]

Historian Dasharatha Sharma says that we are prone to idealise Akbar's reign with court histories like Akbarnama and give Akbar more than his due.[78] If one looks at other contemporary works like Dalpat Vilas it becomes clear that Akbar used to treat his Hindu nobles very badly.[79]

When Akbar began his Qamargah hunt in the Bhera-Rohtas-Girjhaka area, many of the (Hindu) Rajput chiefs accompanying the emperor were encamped on the bank of the river Jhelum. On Akbar's reaching there the chiefs went to meet him. One Rajput chief, Danhaji, was a bit late. Akbar whipped him himself. A young Rajput prince, Prithvidipa, was allowed to play on by his maternal uncle. Akbar ordered the poor uncle to be whipped, and the self-respecting Rajput, unable to bear the insult, stabbed himself thrice with his own dagger, thereby infuriating the emperor even further and making him pass an order for having the dying rajput trampled to death by an elephant. ... When prince Dalpat Singh of Bikaner and his companions saw Akbar after cremating the Rajput's body they found him shouting "Let the Hindus consume cows .....". Stories of the way Akbar treated Hindu rajputs must have reached Maharana Pratap and made him realize the utter ignominy of submitting to Akbar.[79]

Consequently Hindus did not hold Akbar or his Hindu generals in high regard which became apparent when they boycotted the Vishwanath temple built by Akbar's general Man Singh (which he built after taking Akbar's permission) because Man Singh's family had marital relations with Akbar.[80]

Akbar's Hindu generals could not construct temples without emperor's permission. In Bengal, Man Singh started the construction of a temple in 1595 but Akbar ordered him to convert it into a mosque.[81]

The contempt for Akbar came to fore when Hindu Jat community leader, Raja Ram, tried to ransack Akbar’s mausoleum at Sikandra, Agra. But his attempt was foiled by the local faujdar, Mir Abul Fazl. After a short while, Raja Ram reappeared at Sikandara in 1688[82] and taking advantage of the delay in coming of Shaista Khan, the governor-designate of Agra, he attacked and plundered Akbar’s mausoleum and carried away the precious articles of gold and silver, carpets, lamps etc. and destroyed what he could not carry.

Rajaram and his men removed the bones of Akbar and burnt them, a grave insult to a Muslim:[83]

... breaking the massive bronze gates, tearing away the costly ornaments, and destroying everything which they could not carry off. Their wrath against their Mughul oppressors led them to a still more shocking outrage. Dragging out the bones of Akbar, they threw them into the fire and burnt them.[84]



Pat wrote:It's kinda funny when we try to berate someone’s behaviors after hundreds of years. Two examples -
1. Its trendy for people to say that Bhagwan Ram exiled Sita so he was a bad man... Judgment passed with no context after 5000 years

Well what is your take on it?
Pat wrote:[..]
It's nice to learn so much from you:
1. Was Shivaji asked to give his daughter (s) i nmarital alliance?
2. Why did Shivaji agree to join durbar? I look like a pussy to me to have agreed to attend the durbar and rest is history...

Not sure if Shivaji was asked to give a daughter. I doubt it because he was never really defeated by the Mughals. Whether later Marathas gave a daughter to Mughals I would like to request Atri to answer the question.

Why Shivaji went to Durbar is not entirely clear to me. Again Atri's view from Maratha sources would be good to hear. My conjecture is that Shivaji was pressed hard by Jai Singh to go visit Delhi. Since Jai Singh was instrumental in the surrender of Shivaji and had also caused Shivaji to participate in a mughal expedition against the Bijapuris he seemed to have some influence on Shivaji.

Pat
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 21
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 11:47

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Postby Pat » 10 Dec 2012 14:03

peter wrote:
Pat wrote:It's kinda funny when we try to berate someone’s behaviors after hundreds of years. Two examples -
1. Its trendy for people to say that Bhagwan Ram exiled Sita so he was a bad man... Judgment passed with no context after 5000 years

Well what is your take on it?


:)

Virendra
BRFite
Posts: 1211
Joined: 24 Aug 2011 23:20

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Postby Virendra » 10 Dec 2012 14:55

peter wrote:Even if you assume that Amber had some "special" / "unique" conditions that it was grappling with, what made rest of the rajputana line up with their daughters at Akbar's door? Was Amber's example so awesome that all others, barring a few, had to emulate it?

The others that you talk about (except Marwar and Amber) are small time rulers who always align themselves to a larger power (same happens with Mewari allies of south Rajasthan).
Once Amber and Marwar bow to Akbar .. others would follow suit to the new political order.
That didn't happen in south Rajasthan because Mewari bulwark was still standing tall against Mughals. They still had their traditional senior power to rally to.

peter wrote:Regarding Artillery and Babur we have covered that in great depth earlier in this thread. Baburnama proves that artillery had zero impact in the fight against Sanga.

Ok. What about Mahadji Scindia and his Frenchmen? What about after after flintlocks and paper packed catridges were introduced in 1st half of 18th century.
Are you trying to say that gun poweder did not enable a foot soldier to shoot down the mounted cavalry soldier?
Is that not the reason that Infantry came back primary on Indian military scene after more than a thousand years?

peter wrote:Regarding Rashtrakutas: They ruled Maharasthra and fought against Arabs. Then they vanished from the Indian historical scene. Did they leave Maharasthra and settle somewhere else? Or did their progeny continue to live in Maharasthra? Did the Marathas of Shivaji all incomers to the land of Maharasthra?

I suggest you read Reu's book. If time allows I will post quotes from it.

peter wrote:Regarding the looting of Rajputana by Marathas: In a war when large armies move they tend to cause extensive environmental and agricultural damage. When big rajput armies moved in Maharashtra they caused damage similarly. Just think about how much hay you need to feed the horses.

Does history record and mention Rajputs going on Rampage in entire Maratha Kingdom just like it happened in Rajputana?

peter wrote:The reason Marathas tangled up with Abdali at Panipat was because Mughal court was a puppet in their hands.
Yes it was, thats not what I'm debating. My point is - did Marathas wage war against Mughals for it to happen?

peter wrote:Ram Shah Tomar and his sons were with Pratap. Jaimal Rathore and many from his clan including Kalla (Jasol?) were serving Udaipur and their descendants continued to do so. Solankis were serving Pratap. Jhalas were serving Pratap. Honourable Champawats had left Marwar and joined Pratap. His mama's side had supplied Songaras to fight under his banner. There were Dodiyas present and so were Parmars. Gaurs and Gehlots were present too.

What were the controbutions of these allies. Weren't these allies small time rulers/kingdoms with little power?
With these allies did Pratap statistically outnumber and over power his opponents in Haldighati? I doubt that.
I think Mughals didn't even have to sling in their full firepower. They were quite comfortable encircling the Rajputs of both sides and shooting arrows at will.
Stephen P. Rosen in his book Societies and Military Power: India and its Army says that when the opposing groups of Rajputs, engaged each other at Haldighati the mughal cavalry simply circled the Rajput soldiers, shooting arrows into them at will.
When asked on how to distinguish between the firendly and enemy Rajputs, the Mughal commander is recorded to have said, 'On whatever side a man falls, it is a gain to Islam because it is one Hindu less.'
I don't know what source he used to draw this out, but doesn't seem like completely unbelievable.

Regards,
Virendra

Virendra
BRFite
Posts: 1211
Joined: 24 Aug 2011 23:20

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Postby Virendra » 10 Dec 2012 14:55

SiddharthS wrote:What mirza raja man singh and few rajput (in fact out-castes) kings did to save their kingdoms, can never never be justified. This is extremely hated among rajputs even today. There were many other kings too who chose to take on a hopeless fight and
were annihilated (few like Pratap survived). It is extremely tough to bear a rajput spirit inside a human body. Few humans like man singh were rajput by birth but found no benefit of carrying this spirit. Many carried till last breathe.

Kachchwahas had a greater impact in south asian military history and administration than Mewar. They've marked their boots from Central Asia to Assam & Deccan down south.
But when it comes to respect and leading by example .. everyone in and out of Rajasthan knows that Mewari Rajputs have been the best.

SiddharthS wrote:Is this justice to cast all (or most of) the rajputs as daughter sellers because of few loose characters who were too weak to carry on with an endless struggle which was more painful than death?

No and I don't think that peter is painting the entire community with the same brush. Though mine and his interaction on this thread started with a point whether Rajputs in general are shrewd people and suckers for political power or is it only the rulers.
I think Rajputs have proven enough by standing on this Earth even after chewing a millenia of invasions, struggles and revolutionary changes in Indian History. There we don't need to explain ourselves to anybody.
But bitter or sweet there are specific events, turning points that should be scrutinized. If we didn't do it, others would do it and time would beat us (Indians) to death.
Reminds me of a good quote from Hassan Nisar (Pakistani author/columnist) - Jo Tareekh ko Masq karte hain Tareekh unhe Masq kar deti hai. Meaning .. those who play with / ignore history, history plays with them.
Last edited by Virendra on 10 Dec 2012 16:30, edited 1 time in total.

Virendra
BRFite
Posts: 1211
Joined: 24 Aug 2011 23:20

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Postby Virendra » 10 Dec 2012 14:56

pat wrote:Another thing to remember is that Akbar wasn't a muslim in any sense of the word... and he is the one who started the marital alliances trends.
Akbar started the marital alliances but not out of generosity and finnesse they show via Hrithik Roshan in that movie.
Akbar was as fanatic and extremist a muslim as any other in his line .. till probably when he reached old age. The days of Din-e-Ilahi you know ;)
His decisions of marrying Hindu princesses was of political necessity. Him and his entire lineage was fraught with revolts, son, father, brothers killing each other. He couldn't trust his own. He needed Rajputs to help him win India.

Lets see about just one of the campaigns of Akbar as a Ghazi shall we?
From Tabaqati-i-Akbari, by Bakshi Nizamuddin Ahmad
The Emperor mounted on an elephant, and, attended by his devoted followers on foot, entered the fortress. An order for a general massacre was issued, and more than 8000 Rájpúts who were in the place received the reward of their deeds.* After noon the slaughter was stayed

From Fatehnama-i-Chittor by Jalaluddin Akbar, translated and annotated by Ishtiaq Ahmed Zilli as part of proceedings of Indian History Congress, New Delhi, 1972, pp. 350-61.
‘“Praise be to Allah who made good His promise, helped His servant, honoured His soldiers, defeated the confederates all alone, and after whom there is nothing.”
.......
“to help believers is incumbent upon us,
.......
Omnipotent one who enjoined the task of destroying the wicked infidels on the dutiful mujahids through the blows of their thunder-like scimitars laid down:
“Fight them! Allah will chastise them at your hands and He will lay them low and give you victory over them.”130“Glorified is He, and High Exalted from what they say,
“His sovereignty is not dependent on any friend and helper.”
.......
“This is of the grace of my Lord that He may try me whether I am grateful or ungrateful”
we spend our precious time to the best of our ability in war (ghiza) and Jihad and with the help of Eternal Allah, who is the supporter of our ever-increasing empire, we are busy in subjugating the localities, habitations, forts and towns which are under the possession of the infidels, may Allah forsake and annihilate all of them, and thus raising the standard of Islam everywhere and removing the darkness of polytheism and violent sins by the use of sword.
We destroy the places of worship of idols in those places and other parts of India. “The praise be to Allah, who hath guided us to this, and we would not have found the way had it not been that Allah had guided us.”
.......
‘The armies of Islam. placing their reliance in (the revelation) “Allah is sufficient for us and most excellent protector”,138 fearlessly and boldly commenced the assault. Within (the fort) the vigilant bands of jew-like infidels set ablaze the fire of conflict and brawl by discharging fire-raining manjaniqs and cannon (top) one after the other.
.......

the whole victorious troop entered the fort. In accordance with the imperative Command “And kill the idolators all together,”
.......

Check this out for ful text - https://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewt ... r#p1309471
Fatehnama-i-Chittor is compiled in a set of manuscripts called Munshat-i-Namakin.

One more:
Vincent Smith writes (pp.56) "An extraordinary incident which occured in April while the royal camp was at Thanesar, the famous Hindu place of pilgrimage to the north of Delhi, throws a rather unpleasant light on Akbar's character... The Sanyasins assembled at the holy tank were divided into two parties, called the Kurs and Puris. The leader of the latter complained to the King that that the Kurs had unjustly occupied the accustomed sitting place of the Puris who were thus debarred from collecting the pilgrims' alms."
They were asked to decide the issue by mortal combat. :eek:
They were drawn up on either side with their arms drawn. In the fight that ensued the combatants used swords, bows, arrows and stones."
Akbar seeing that the Puris were outnumbered gave a signal to some of his savage followers to help the weaker party."
In this fight between the two Hindu sanyasin sects Akbar saw to it that both were ultimately annihilated by his own fierce soilders. :evil:
The chronicler unctuously adds that Akbar was highly delighted with this sport.

Nice .. so this is the soft and secular Indian emperor Akbar.
He is one of the biggest whitewashes in Indian history. Negationsim at its best :roll:

pat wrote:It's kinda funny when we try to berate someone’s behaviors after hundreds of years.
True. we have to put ourselves in the contemporary perspective/context while studying a particular period of history.
Many times we misread history because we're looking at it from a mind conditioned with our own times, ideologies and knowledge.

member_22019
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 27
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Postby member_22019 » 10 Dec 2012 16:05

peter wrote:
SiddharthS wrote:What mirza raja man singh and few rajput (in fact out-castes) kings did to save their kingdoms, can never never be justified. This is extremely hated among rajputs even today.

Can you elaborate your last point a bit more?


I belong to a village in eastern up with rajput majority. Whenever I listened them discuss Maharana Pratap, there is always mention of man singh with a very abusive tone. No need to say that rajputs live outside of rajasthan too, but both our supreme hero and villain happens to be from rajasthan. There is also mention of raja bhoj, alha udal, gora badal (and shivaji too), but the respect Maharana Pratap gets has no comparison.
I am not aware whether rajasthani rajputs also share the same feelings as in my village, though I assume so.

peter wrote:
SiddharthS wrote:Is this justice to cast all (or most of) the rajputs as daughter sellers because of few loose characters who were too weak to carry on with an endless struggle which was more painful than death?

I agree it is not. And if you think I have over generalized please accept my apologies. But how many rajasthani kings can we count who did not give daughters?


No need for apology, your arguments are quite rational and factual not a blind rajput basher unlike some members in the forum who are not able to come over their regional and caste bias.
I don't have the count of rajasthani kings who gave their daughters, in fact i am not qualified enough to do that as my knowledge of history is sourced from stories in amar chitra katha and various short stories and novels (like mrignayani) rather than serious history literature. Although I would request you, before you make any count of daughter sellers, please do count the number of rajput kings (including non rajasthani rajput kings) after first islamic invasion who didn't give their daughters.

ranjbe
BRFite
Posts: 271
Joined: 12 Apr 2011 21:25

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Postby ranjbe » 10 Dec 2012 23:15

peter wrote:Regarding Rashtrakutas: They ruled Maharasthra and fought against Arabs. Then they vanished from the Indian historical scene. Did they leave Maharasthra and settle somewhere else? Or did their progeny continue to live in Maharasthra? Did the Marathas of Shivaji all incomers to the land of Maharasthra?

Marathi history books say that the Seunas, who were feudatories under Rashtrakutas, and then the Chalukyas (who followed Rashtrakutas in what is today most of the territory South of Narbada), split from the Chalukyas and took over what is today most of Maharashtra. In the process the court language became Marathi from the original Kannada in earlier times. They ruled from Devgari for more than 300 years, before Alaudin Khilji destroyed them. Thus the Yadavas were the first truly Maratha rulers, preceding Shivaji. Higher caste (96-family) Marathas include people with surname Yadav/Jadhav. The Rashtrakutas and Chalukyas probably continued to be part of the warrior/landed gentry class in Karnataka, Maharashtra and Telgu areas. Perhaps the 'Nayaks' in these areas were their descendants.

Yayavar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4791
Joined: 06 Jun 2008 10:55

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Postby Yayavar » 11 Dec 2012 06:15

Virendra wrote:
One more:
Vincent Smith writes (pp.56) "An extraordinary incident which occured in April while the royal camp was at Thanesar, the famous Hindu place of pilgrimage to the north of Delhi, throws a rather unpleasant light on Akbar's character... The Sanyasins assembled at the holy tank were divided into two parties, called the Kurs and Puris. The leader of the latter complained to the King that that the Kurs had unjustly occupied the accustomed sitting place of the Puris who were thus debarred from collecting the pilgrims' alms."
They were asked to decide the issue by mortal combat. :eek:
They were drawn up on either side with their arms drawn. In the fight that ensued the combatants used swords, bows, arrows and stones."
Akbar seeing that the Puris were outnumbered gave a signal to some of his savage followers to help the weaker party."
In this fight between the two Hindu sanyasin sects Akbar saw to it that both were ultimately annihilated by his own fierce soilders. :evil:
The chronicler unctuously adds that Akbar was highly delighted with this sport.
.


Interesting. Is this corroborated somewhere else? Where idd Vincent Smith (pardon my ignorance, who is he?) source this information from? Certainly shows Akbar in a bad light.
I also find it curious that the Sadhu sects were willing to make a go for it and kill each other. How true is it? A part of me does fell that if they were willing to kill each other and were thereby annihilated maybe they deserved it. Smarter ones would have got together or found separate ways.

Virendra
BRFite
Posts: 1211
Joined: 24 Aug 2011 23:20

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Postby Virendra » 11 Dec 2012 10:55

viv wrote:Interesting. Is this corroborated somewhere else? Where idd Vincent Smith (pardon my ignorance, who is he?) source this information from? Certainly shows Akbar in a bad light.
I also find it curious that the Sadhu sects were willing to make a go for it and kill each other. How true is it? A part of me does fell that if they were willing to kill each other and were thereby annihilated maybe they deserved it. Smarter ones would have got together or found separate ways.

V Smith was a British Historian.
This is what he mentions on his sources for the incident:
Akbarnama by Abu Fazl vol ii pg423;
Tarikh-i-Badaoni, vol ii, pg94 ;
Tabakat-i-Akbari, translated by Elliott. & Dowson pg318
The affair is described and illustrated in the magnificent manuscript entitled Tarikh-i Khandan-i-Timuriyah, preserved in the Khuda Bakhsh or Oriental Public Library at Bandipore.

Yayavar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4791
Joined: 06 Jun 2008 10:55

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Postby Yayavar » 11 Dec 2012 11:00

^^thanks

Any non-persian/arabic source would be good too though I dont think we need to doubt these sources. I just find it curious that these Sadhus were so willing to kill and die for 'what cause'? No doubt Akbar was tempted to play with their lives.

Virendra
BRFite
Posts: 1211
Joined: 24 Aug 2011 23:20

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Postby Virendra » 11 Dec 2012 12:07

I guess the Sadhus were after the alms money that people donate in temples and religious rituals for charity etc.
Either some of them got greedy or they were trying to save the money from each other's (perceived) greed.
Nobody was squaky clean.
Akbar behaved like a savage nomadic horde's barbaric leader in ensuring and enjoying bloodbath of priests .. didn't behave like a King at all.
But then, that is what my point is .. you don't suddenly get a great messiah in a lineage of extremist tyrants. We shouldn't be surprised.

About the sources, that was the Mughal time. The only sources they would leave alone would be theirs.
Hindu sources end up burnt in libraries even in Turk-Mughal times. I haven't heard of prominent Budhhist/Chinese scholars visiting India and documenting it on a good scale during the violent medieval centuries post the Islamic hordes arrival in India.
There may be European sources of one or two visitors in Akbar's reign, but their coverage would obviously be scant, fragmentary, patchy at best. We can't expect them to report everything.
I forgot the name of this guy .. he was contemporary to Akbar and wrote about his India visit. Does anyone here remember?

Regards,
Virendra

member_23686
BRFite
Posts: 176
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Postby member_23686 » 11 Dec 2012 17:27

^^^Thomas Roe was in Jehangir's court as drinking buddy and gora spy. Akbar's I don't remember

member_23686
BRFite
Posts: 176
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Postby member_23686 » 11 Dec 2012 17:30

Fights among sadhu sects is quite common. Even these days mahants of some temples get murdered due to fights between akhadas for gaining control of temple.

member_23686
BRFite
Posts: 176
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Postby member_23686 » 11 Dec 2012 17:42

Wiki mentions an unnamed Portuguese ambassador, English merchant Mildenhall and French explorer Pierre Malherbe as Europeans who visited Akbar's court

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55241
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Postby ramana » 12 Dec 2012 00:05

peter, It does no good to pursue the line on what the kings had to do to survive in the barbarian age. That was apad dharma.
Thanks, ramana

Virendra
BRFite
Posts: 1211
Joined: 24 Aug 2011 23:20

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Postby Virendra » 12 Dec 2012 14:24

ramana ji
Please enlighten me on apad dharma
Also, does apad dharma have an absolute definition which applies same to Mewar and Amber .. or is it upto the judgment of the King in his own unique Kingdom and circumstances??

Virendra
BRFite
Posts: 1211
Joined: 24 Aug 2011 23:20

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Postby Virendra » 21 Dec 2012 12:52

Latest from Jaisalmer shedding some light on the use of Gunpoweder in medieval India.

500-yr-old bags of gunpowder found in Jaisalmer Sonar fort
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city ... 700184.cms

JAISALMER: Over 1,500kg of gunpowder in five leather bags has been found near the Jain temple in the Sonar fort of Jaisalmer, made famous by Satyajit Ray's film 'Sonar Kella'.

The explosive is expected to be 500-years-old. The district administration has sought the Army's help to destroy it.

Jaisalmer Vikas Samiti secretary Chandra Prakash Vyas said the gunpowder was found in a closed 'burj' (tower) on Wednesday night by some labourers engaged in repair work. The 'burj' was closed for centuries.

On getting the information, local authorities vacated nearby areas. Historian Nand Kishore Sharma said the explosives could be dated back to the time of Maharaj Loonkaran Singh in 1550 when the use of cannon was started.

He said that even today five big cannons are kept at the sonar fort in Jaisalmer and generally the explosives were stored near the cannons. Possibly the explosives were stored in burj near the cannon placed near the Jain temple and on Thursday it has come to light. The burj was lying closed for last many years.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Regards,
Virendra

Murugan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4191
Joined: 03 Oct 2002 11:31
Location: Smoking Piskobidis

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Postby Murugan » 19 Feb 2013 19:46

Chakra, Urumi and Deadly Trap - Practical Usage

A must Watch

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wq5b8wMuQD4


****

Mother of Kung-fu is India - by Farland Chan

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... bWuk5AjHhg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wSdoglsJB7s

ravit
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 53
Joined: 07 Feb 2009 14:13

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Postby ravit » 23 Feb 2013 04:03

Question about de-industrialisation/no-industrialisation of India during British rule. Wikipedia has this to say about it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_ ... ial_period
Historians have suggested that this was because India was still a largely agricultural nation with low wages levels. In Britain, wages were high, so cotton producers had the incentive to invent and purchase expensive new labour-saving technologies. In India, by contrast, wages levels were low, so producers preferred to increase output by hiring more workers rather than investing in technology.


So, is this narrative correct? About this being the cause? Few other papers I found have more or less same narrative I guess. Anyone here know of any other research done on this subject?

http://www.tcd.ie/Economics/staff/orour ... nDeind.pdf

Virendra
BRFite
Posts: 1211
Joined: 24 Aug 2011 23:20

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Postby Virendra » 25 Feb 2013 11:04

Sorry I couldn't understand the relevance of the above mentioned post, to this thread.

Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Postby Sanku » 27 Feb 2013 12:03

http://zeenews.india.com/news/uttar-pra ... 31821.html

Fatehpur Sikri was once a Jain pilgrimage centre: Book

Bhanu Pratap Singh, the author of "Jain Dharm Ka Pramukh Kendra Tha Fatehpur Sikri," said: "Sikri existed much before Akbar. The excavations have clearly established this fact."

DV Sharma, former superintending archaeologist of the ASI in Agra, who supervised the excavations, said: "We found scores of damaged statues piled up, and with dates, also a manuscript. These are now lying in the guest house at Fatehpur Sikri. They should have gone ahead with the excavations and engaged historians to research on the subject."

"My book on Fatehpur Sikri excavations is there in the ASI library with complete details of the findings which unmistakably point to a flourishing trade and pilgrimage centre of both the Jains and the Sikarwars. Akbar built a few structures and modified others that were already there. Who demolished the temples and the statues is a subject which further research alone can establish," Sharma added.

The ASI, for reasons known only to itself, abruptly stopped excavations at Fatehpur Sikri. "Had they pursued and dug up all the mounds, startling revelations would have been made that would have changed the course of our historical understanding," Bhanu Pratap Singh claimed.


Does anyone know which invader was responsible for the destruction of Sikri? Which battle was the fall of Agra a part of?

Virendra
BRFite
Posts: 1211
Joined: 24 Aug 2011 23:20

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Postby Virendra » 27 Feb 2013 17:07

If Akbar had the structures added and modified, aren't we looking at the very obvious ?
If someone has documented evidence, please share.

member_19686
BRFite
Posts: 1330
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Postby member_19686 » 19 Mar 2013 19:41

Image

Note the words: "On whichever side they may be killed, it will be a gain to Islam"

This is in the context of the Battle of Haldighat between Maharana Pratap Singh & the Mughals & their Rajput allies led by Man Singh.

It was also Badayuni IIRC who coined the expression "A Hindu wields the sword of Islam" about the likes of Man Singh.

The above is from a translation of his "Muntaḵẖabu-t-tawārīḵẖ" & can be read for free here:

http://books.google.ca/books?id=n7woAAA ... navlinks_s

Virendra
BRFite
Posts: 1211
Joined: 24 Aug 2011 23:20

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Postby Virendra » 20 Mar 2013 11:53

Image doesn't show at my end but I know of the incident.
When the mass of Rajput soldiers from both sides collided at Haldighati, Mughal cavalry archers encircling them were confused as to whom to shoot and how.
Their Commander ordered them to shoot at will and said - whichever side a man falls is a gain to Islam.
Abdul Qadir Badayuni's (present at Haldighati) narration was later quoted by Stephen P Rosen.

Murugan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4191
Joined: 03 Oct 2002 11:31
Location: Smoking Piskobidis

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Postby Murugan » 05 Apr 2013 12:15

Canon Drilling Tools at Canon Foundry Jaigarh Fort Jaipur

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... ndry_1.jpg

or just search for more images in google images

canon drilling tool jaigarh fort

Murugan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4191
Joined: 03 Oct 2002 11:31
Location: Smoking Piskobidis

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Postby Murugan » 05 Apr 2013 12:28

Gun History of Bharat

http://indiagunhistory.wordpress.com/ca ... ory-india/

from above, 17th Century a tanjavur Gun

Image

Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Postby Sanku » 09 Apr 2013 21:07

http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?284803

The Tyrant Diaries
From the memoirs of a French adventurer who served at Tipu’s court

In December 8, 1988, an old trunk was discovered in the attic of the house of Elaine de la Taille Tretinville, who died at 91 in her 14th arrondissement flat in Paris. She was a descendant of the family of Les Ripaud Montaudeverts. Among the contents was a manuscript in the hand of the most famous of the Montaudeverts—Francois Fidele Ripaud de Montaudevert. It starts with these words (in old French): “I, Francois Ripaud, am old today, but I want to tell you the true story of Tipu Sultan.”

In his diary entry of January 14, 1799, he writes: “I’m disturbed by Tipu Sultan’s treatment of these most gentle souls, the Hindus. During the siege of Mangalore, Tipu’s soldiers daily exposed the heads of many innocent Brahmins within sight from the fort for the Zamorin and his Hindu followers to see

“Most of the Hindu men and women were hanged...first mothers were hanged with their children tied to their necks. That barbarian Tipu Sultan tied the naked Christians and Hindus to the legs of elephants and made the elephants move around till the bodies of the helpless victims were torn to pieces. Temples and churches were ordered to be burned down, desecrated and des­troyed. Christian and Hindu women were forced to marry Mohammedans, and similarly, their men (after conversion to Islam) were forced to marry Moha­mm­edan women. Christians who refused to be honoured with Islam were ordered to be killed by hanging immediately.

Murugan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4191
Joined: 03 Oct 2002 11:31
Location: Smoking Piskobidis

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Postby Murugan » 22 Jun 2013 10:43

Valmiki Ramayana Balakand

सूत मागध संबाधाम् श्रीमतीम् अतुल प्रभाम् |
उच्चाट्टाल ध्वजवतीम् शतघ्नी शत संकुलाम् || १-५-११

She that prosperous city Ayodhya is muchly crammed with many a eulogist and panegyrist, yet she is highly splendorous with many a bastion, flag and hundreds of batteries of canons, and Dasharatha dwells therein. [1-5-11]

Comment: This shataghnii literally is that which can kill a thousand people, and it is said to be a canon and also said to be thorny weapon: shataghnii catuH talaa loha kaNTaka sa~ncitaa | ayaH kaNTaka sa~ncchannaa mahatii shilaa -- elaborate accounts of this shataghni, kshipaNi are there in yajur aaraNyaka .

Horses

कांभोज विषये जातैः बाह्लिकैः च हय उत्तमैः |
वनायुजैः नदीजैः च पूर्णा हरिहय उत्तमैः || १-६-२२

22. kaambhoja viSaye = Kaambhoja, the country; jaataiH = born in; baahlikaiH = in Baahlika country; haya uttamaiH = horses, the best ones; vanaayu jaiH = Vanaayu, born; nadii jaH = rivers, born; cha = also; puurNaa = full with; hari haya uttamaiH = like Indra's, horse, the best one.

That city is full with best horses born in countries like Kaambhoja, Baahlika, Vanaayu, and also in river-bed counties, which are like the horse of Indra namely ucChiashrava. [1-6-22]

It is said that the horses born in the rivers nadii+ja are brought to the city Ayodhya. They are not water horses but horses born at the place where the historically prominent Seven Rivers of Indus Valley Rivers flow.

Here again an account of countries is given as a glimpse. These countries Kambhoja, Bahlika, Vanayu may not be taken as the provincial countries within the present day India. Prior to the present-day peninsular India, the belt from Himalayas to Alps had a great rapport in cultural and trade exchanges without demarcations of east or west

Elephants

विंध्य पर्वतजैः मत्तैः पूर्णा हैमवतैः अपि |
मदान्वितैः अतिबलैः मातङ्गैः पर्वतौपमैः || १-६-२३

23. vindhya parvata jaiH = Vindhya, mountains, born in; mattaiH = vigorous; puurNa = full of; haimavataiH api = Himalayan born, also; mada anvitaiH = fattened, fully; ati balaiH = most, mighty; maatangaiH = elephants; parvata upamaiH = mountain, in similitude.

Born in Vindhya Mountains, and also from Himalayan regions, mighty are the elephants fully vigorous and fattened ones, and most powerful in their strength and each in similitude is a huge mountain. [1-6-23]

Verse Locator
इरावत कुलीनैः च महापद्म कुलैः तथा |
अंजनादपि निष्क्रान्तैः वामनादपि च द्विपैः || १-६-२४

24. iraavata = Iravata [the Elephant of Indra]; kuliinaiH cha = from that breed of; mahaapadma kulaiH = from Mahapadma breed; tatha = thus; anjanaat api = From Anjana breed, also; niSkraantaiH = derived from; vaamanaat api cha = from Vamana breed, too; dvipaiH = elephants.

High bred from the classes of Iravata, the Elephant of Lord Indra, and from Mahapadma, Anjana and Vamana, too...are the elephants [of that city] [1-6-24]

It is said that eight elephants from eight corners called aSTa diggaja support the Universe. And these eight elephants have their presiding deities. From those eight elephants, four are prominent. They are iravata , the Elephant of Indra, anjana , the Elephant of varuNa , the Rain-god, vaamana , the Elephant of Yama, the Lord of Death, and another is punDariika . Thus, the elephants of Ayodhya are termed as divine breed.

Verse Locator
भद्रैः मन्द्रैः मृगैः च एव भद्र मन्द्र मृगैः थथा |
भद्र मन्द्रैः भद्र मृगैः मृग मन्द्रैः च सा पुरी || १-६-२५
नित्य मत्तैः सदा पूर्णा नागैः अचल सन्निभैः |

25-26a. saa purii = that city; bhadra = class of Bhadra; mandra = class of Mandra; mR^iga = class of mriga; cha eva = like that; bhadra mandra mR^igaH tathaa = a mixture of these three; bhadra mandraiH = bhadra and mandra; bhadra mR^ igaiH = bhadra and mriga; mR^iga mandra cha = mriga and mandra, also; nitya mattaiH = always, vigorous; naagaiH = elephants; achala sannibhaiH = mountain, like; sadaa puurNaa = always, full with.

That city is always full with vigorous and mountain like elephants bred mainly from three classes viz., Bhadra, Mandra and Mriga. And inter-bred among these three main classes are Bhadra-Mandra, Mandra-Mriga, Bhadra-Mriga and the like. [1-6-25-26a]

The bhadra is the elephant class for King's ride, called bhadra gaja . It is a state elephant with high honors and for occasional or ceremonial use. mandra and mR^iga are classes of breed tamed and used in wars or for the ride of other nobility. These are the essential mammals used for other lifting and carrying works

Yagnasri
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9945
Joined: 29 May 2007 18:03

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Postby Yagnasri » 22 Jun 2013 12:19

fairly details discription of weapons, fort of lanka etc were given in Ramayana

Murugan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4191
Joined: 03 Oct 2002 11:31
Location: Smoking Piskobidis

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Postby Murugan » 22 Jun 2013 14:04

I share.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55241
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

Postby ramana » 24 Jun 2013 08:21

Virendra, If you look at the long history of the Muslim raiders from the NWFP and Rajputs, the former realized that Rajputs value their womenfolk and especially targeted them: Rani Padmini on to Rani Jodha and so on.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Atmavik, brar_w and 49 guests