If Raja Raja Chola helped the Rajputs defeat Mahmud of Ghazni

[LurkerBaba]

question is---would rajaraja have been able to defeat ghazni and defend india ??

options---1) yes 2) no 3) difficult to say .

Added. Along with civ's fourth option

 

[Iamanidiot]

Wenn theyy two face of conjecturee att best but Ghazini hadd betterr cavalryy Cholas had a better navy

 

[Tolaha]

Re: Emperor Raja Raja Cholan I birthday

---------------------------------------

Ashdoc, u dont understand Tamils. We dont go around picking fights in the name of religion.

We are a peaceful people, minding our own business.

"vantha sandayai vida maattan, valiya sandaikku sela maattaan" (we will not let go a fight brought to us, but we do not go around picki ng fights)

-------------------------------------------------------------
Raja Rajan's son Rajendra Cholan i conquered parts of Benagal, Burma, Malaysia and Indonesia.

Assuming Rajendran Cholan qualifies your criteria of being a Tamilian, it's astonishing that they managed to conquer anything at all!

Have you heard of a bunch of Pakistanis "conquering" Mumbai for a few days around 26/11?

 

[Virendra]

Exactly what scenario are we talking about? Because currently this is a close ended question where only very limited talk is possible.
A confederation of Rajputs, Cholas ?
A campaign by Chola Raja?
Or assuming his empire extending to north west India?
One or two battles? Yes he may have defeated Mahmud. But is that the only question or are we trying to build a bigger scenarion?

Also, keep in mind that Mahmud was not just any rag tag invader.
He was the leader of a highly organized Terrorist State machinery involved in systematic persecution.
He had personal, religious, economic - all sorts of motivations that kept him coming again and again.
He wouldn't have stopped after one or two defeats from Chola King.
He didn't in reality anyway, though he was defeated on couple of occasions.
After Huns, Indians were out of practice in facing Mahmud kind of enemies for 5 centuries.
From the 11th century India's perspective; he was an atypical, overwhelming enemy.

So build a proper scenario and then we can discuss better.

Regards,
Virendra

 

[civfanatic]

Re: Emperor Raja Raja Cholan I birthday

Even comparing Raja Raja with Ghazni is an insult. The Cholas did attack and plunder neighbouring Hindu Kingdoms but so did the Marathas, Guptas, Mauryas and others. But that in no way compares them with Ghazni and other invaders from outside, because the local Kings never destroyed Temples and idols with a vengeance.

When the Cholas invaded Sri Lanka, they did loot and destroy Buddhist monasteries and built Shiva temples over their ruins (some of these Shiva temples built by Cholas still survive today). Remind of you anything?

It is true that Indian dynasties generally refrained from wanton looting and destruction of religious structures and conducted warfare in a "humane" manner, but the Cholas were an exception to that rule. Even Ghazni never destroyed any mosques.

 

[LurkerBaba]

Re: Emperor Raja Raja Cholan I birthday

When the Cholas invaded Sri Lanka, they did loot and destroy Buddhist monasteries and built Shiva temples over their ruins (some of these Shiva temples built by Cholas still survive today). Remind of you anything?

It is true that Indian dynasties generally refrained from wanton looting and destruction of religious structures and conducted warfare in a "humane" manner, but the Cholas were an exception to that rule. Even Ghazni never destroyed any mosques.

@HeinzGud can probably offer his perspective in this matter

 

[Virendra]

Re: Emperor Raja Raja Cholan I birthday

Cholas invaded Sri Lanka, they did loot and destroy Buddhist monasteries and built Shiva temples over their ruins
...
Even Ghazni never destroyed any mosques.

But if the yardstick for Mahmud is "not destroying mosques", shouldn't it then be "not destroying temples" for the Cholas.
Why are we looking at Buddhist monasteries for Cholas, but Mosques for Mahmud?

 

[farhan_9909]

mahmood ghaznavi@

was simply out of scene

nothing like him as ever born or will be born in the sacred land south asia

he and khalib bin walid are exceptional cases

 

[Phenom]

Re: Emperor Raja Raja Cholan I birthday

When the Cholas invaded Sri Lanka, they did loot and destroy Buddhist monasteries and built Shiva temples over their ruins (some of these Shiva temples built by Cholas still survive today). Remind of you anything?

It is true that Indian dynasties generally refrained from wanton looting and destruction of religious structures and conducted warfare in a "humane" manner, but the Cholas were an exception to that rule. Even Ghazni never destroyed any mosques.

In one of the earlier post you were contesting that Cholas were the defenders of Hinduism, now you are saying they forcefully converted Buddhist monasteries into Hindu temples. Looks like something defenders of Hinduism would do, isn't it?

I think you're being selective in your approach vis a vis Cholas, even the Mauryans and Marathas and Vijayanagar carried out punishing raids and attacks into other Hindu kingdoms because that's how warfare is conducted. 'Humane' warfare is oxymoron, there is no such thing.

 

[civfanatic]

Re: Emperor Raja Raja Cholan I birthday

But if the yardstick for Mahmud is "not destroying mosques", shouldn't it then be "not destroying temples" for the Cholas.
Why are we looking at Buddhist monasteries for Cholas, but Mosques for Mahmud?

My contention is that the Cholas and the Ghaznavids were similar in their savagery and warmongering. So yes, if you want you can use the yardstick of "not destroying temples" for the Cholas and compare them in that regard to the Ghaznavids, who refrained from destroying mosques. However, you can also compare the Cholas' destruction of Buddhist monasteries with the Ghaznavid destruction of Hindu temples. The Cholas' sectarian intolerance was truly unique in this regard, as most Indian dynasties were liberal and open-minded in matters of religion and patronized multiple sects. The Guptas and Satavahanas are good examples; they were essentially "Hindu" dynasties who were also great patrons of Buddhism and Jainism. And of course the Mauryas.

 

[natarajan]

You can refer here
Chola dynasty - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Chola Navy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[kayal]

I did not know that there is this much hatred against Tamils among some non-Tamils of south Asia. This explains a lot.

Raja Raja Cholan and Thanjai Big Temple

 

[LurkerBaba]

OT

I did not know that there is this much hatred against Tamils among some non-Tamils of south Asia. This explains a lot.

Raja Raja Cholan and Thanjai Big Temple

Are you an author on Tamil Tribune ?

 

[kayal]

OT


Are you an author on Tamil Tribune ?

Just a member of the Friend Of Tamil Tribune (FOTT) group

 

[HeinzGud]

Re: Emperor Raja Raja Cholan I birthday

@HeinzGud can probably offer his perspective in this matter

Well I do agree with this. Cholas never destroyed Buddhist shrines and built Hindu temples over them. Rather they looted the wealth out from Buddhist monasteries, (According to the Sri Lankan tradition, rulers donated huge sums of gold, jems and other valuable items etc. to the Buddhist shrines and monasteries.) and took them to India. Some of the loot was transferred to the newly built Hindu temples.

Even though there was no major incident like destroying monasteries, Cholas oppressed Buddhism. They took the traditional villages which supported monasteries and ordered them to support Hindu temples draining out out much needed supplies to such monasteries and expelled or killed monks.

So it is unjustifiable to call Chola invasion on Sri Lanka is peaceful in terms of religious perspective. Though it was much more peaceful than the invasion led by Kalinga Magha.

 

[Bhoja]

I think Rajendra Chola the successor of Raja Chola was able to defeat Mahmud Ghazni because Rajendra Chola was allied
with the north Indian ruler Raja Bhoj of Malwa.
Anyway I read somewhere that Raja Bhoj attacked Mahmud Ghazni when he looted the Somnath temple and that Mahmud Ghazni fled via the desert to Afghanistan to avoid a battle.

 

[mikhail]

i don't know why some people are comparing the great Rajendra Chola I with that barbarian Mahmud of Ghazni:shocked:!Rajendra Chola was a devout Hindu and was a great conquerer of India who not only conquered various parts of India but many SE Asian nations like SL,Malasia,Thailand,Indonesia etc.due to him the hindu culture and civilisation spread in these parts of the world and you guys are comparing this great man with that s*um Mahmud who invaded the north western part of our country no less than 17 time and plundered and decimated our temples(including the famous Somnath temple).i am damn sure that if Rajendra Chola had faced that barbarian mahmud he would have crushed that **sh*le like an ant!

 

[Rahul92]

United we Stand Divided we Fall

 

[Virendra]

Mahmud didn't have an easy run in India anyway.
Though he was a clever war stretegist and military general.

Will post a summary of his hardships soon. His strength was that he chose his battles and he moved away from those he didn't deem plausible and profitable.
That is how he survived in India and kept coming back.

Regards,
Virendra

 

[Phenom]

^^
What are your views on Prithviraj, In history he's either heavily romanticized or heavily villanised by either side, there doesn't appear to be any neutral view on him. What are your views on him as a commander? I think leaving Mahmud to raid the country 17 times without seriously challenging him seem to suggest lackluster leadership. I always believed if the Rajputs had a better king then they could have crushed Mahmud by themselves, like they did with the Arabs earlier.

On Topic, I do think a combined Chola-Rajput army would have routed Mahmud army's, but there was no chance for such a alliance to happen. Confrontation between the Afgans and Cholas could have happened only if Mahmud marched further south into the Deccan.