Rajputs in medieval age - battles and discussions

Discussion in 'Military History' started by Bornubus, Dec 16, 2015.

  1. Tamil TigerWoods

    Tamil TigerWoods Regular Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2016
    Messages:
    108
    Likes Received:
    115
    For all the criticism directed towards Rajputs- and let’s be real, much of it is indeed warranted- one cannot deny the 700 years of resistance and military fortification they provided for the vast Indian subcontinent prior to the advent of the Mughal Empire...and even thereafter there were countless clans which never submitted and continued to resist.

    The Rajput role in defeating the Arab Muslim expansionists- the same Caliphate which in the decades following the death of Mohammed had overrun the civilizations of both Byzantium and Persia and stretched as far as Southern Europe to Afghanistan- is a damn impressive feat.

    The fact is that the Battle(s) of Rajasthan deserve a place in historical re-examination much to the same degree as the Battle of Tours in Europe. Sadly, Indian scholarship is an abject failure in this regard.
     
    AnantS, Lancer, itsme and 3 others like this.
  2. AUSTERLITZ

    AUSTERLITZ Regular Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2013
    Messages:
    210
    Likes Received:
    482
    Location:
    India
    Rajputs held the fort for 500 years between 700-1200.Even between 1200-1500 from ratan singh, hammir, kumbha,sanga they were the persistent thorn in the flesh for the sultanate.Outside rajputana hindu resistance moved to a sub-state level led by local zamindars -many were rajputs.By the time the sultanate armies began to penetrate into the south and devastate those regions starting from devgiri under kafur,there was no big power in the south like chalukyas,cholas,rashtrakutas or satavahans.Here vijaynagar is vital.It also served as shivaji's model and inspiration and he always carried a royal vijaynagar coin with him.
    Without the rajputs in the north and the vijaynagar in the south politically,and the bhakti saints socially we would have been wiped out as a civilization.They held the fort until the marathas.And once the marathas began to absorb the whole attention and military focus of the mughals the bundelas,satnamis,jats,sikhs,rajputs began to break it down.Let us also remember the brave ahoms of lachit borphukan,the ahoms used terrain incredibly well and defended their land -though due to their limited manpower and lack of horses they were not able to counterattack like the marathas.
     
    Lancer and Tamil TigerWoods like this.
  3. Lancer

    Lancer Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2019
    Messages:
    525
    Likes Received:
    1,682
    Just came across this thread as a new user; the beginning was absolutely fucking disgusting. I don't know what the name of the thread was originally before being changed, but the original purpose of the thread based on context of comments seems to have been to shame Rajputs with the same old tired taunts and stereotypes; when the practice of forming matrimonial alliances was mainly followed by certain households - most famously the Kachwahas - who later formed the leadership class and supplied large amounts of soldiers to the Mughal armies, responsible for a lot of their consolidation/success (though this is not something to be proud of).

    It completely ignores several basic facts, like the fact that Kshatriyas/Rajputs were around for much much longer than most other resistance groups. Kshatriyas functioned as a wall for Ancient India, once any wall gets old enough and receives enough blows, it falls. But we held long enough that India didn't befall the same fate as Persia (including ensuring that Arabs never came beyond Sindh), and enough time/space were left for other groups to take up the mantle - Marathas, Hindu Jats, Sikhs etc - after our resources and energies were exhausted. Most of us have great respect for these groups and their leaders (who didn't handicap themselves with honor/ethics against dishonorable enemies the way Rajputs did, and took up more practical tactics - including guerrilla warfare first pioneered by Maharana Pratap), because Rajputs respect courage and strength - you'd be hard pressed to find Rajputs who don't respect Maharana Pratap's Bhil warriors. Although the early comments by Bornubus were quite distasteful and disgraceful (I don't judge them more harshly than that because I don't know if he may have been provoked/insulted).

    There's also the fact that many of those Rajput clans which actually converted to Islam - did so to protect their citizenry from extreme persecution - as was the case with Gujarat - which nominally spent many years under "Islamic Rule" but was actually under the same native Rajput clans as before who managed to prevent practices like jizya against their citizens (and DO NOT mix up real Rajputs with a lot of Pakistanis who erroneously claim Rajput descent but can't tell the difference between Gujjars, Jatts and Rajputs, or can't even tell you their clan & vansh - every other Pakistani thinks he's a Syed too).

    The early part of the thread also conveniently leaves out the fact that most Rajput kingdoms only submitted after putting up brave final resistances - meaning we threw our women and children into fires then rode out to saka with the sole intention of fighting til death - and even after "submitting" picked and chose their moments/opportunities to rebel based on their capabilities. The Marathas & Sikhs may have struck a Coup de Grace on the Mughals, but the Rajputs also played a significant role in rising up against Aurangzeb in the famous Rajput Rebellion - where the Houses of Sisodiya from Mewar, Rathores of Marwar and even the Kachwahas of Amber (who were a powerful clan but otherwise notorious for association with the Mughals) worked together and seriously destabilized the Mughal throne in near-coordinated fashion with the other resistance groups; something the Mughal Dynasty never truly recovered from.

    Overall, I don't support Chauvinism by any group - including Rajputs - even though we all have our pride, or denigration of other groups/regions; nor do I see the point in digging up dead bodies from the past just to rehash old inter-conflicts that held us back as a civilization and country - but I also won't abide cowardly cheap shots on my own people, especially largely stereotypical and inaccurate ones. And even more so if the people making them didn't themselves lose several generations of family members in the service of the land/country all the way from historic times til date. And as stated by a few other members early on, it's not that similar jibes can't be made against any other group, but I would consider such a practice to be counter productive, needlessly divisive, and beneath me.
     
    Last edited: May 13, 2019
    AUSTERLITZ likes this.
  4. Tamil TigerWoods

    Tamil TigerWoods Regular Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2016
    Messages:
    108
    Likes Received:
    115
    My point is that the fact that there were Rajput clans that submitted to the Mughals and became their military vanguard is indeed a legitimate detraction.

    The Rajputs were and still are some of the most valiant of martial peoples in the world. However, their willingness to turn on each other and their coreligionists out of covetousness for wealth and prestige was inherently problematic.
     
    AUSTERLITZ likes this.
  5. AUSTERLITZ

    AUSTERLITZ Regular Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2013
    Messages:
    210
    Likes Received:
    482
    Location:
    India
    Biggest problem for rajputs is the peculiar clan based organization.These clans are always fighting and raiding each other and would often join hands with outside forces rather than unite.The gurjara pratihara had avoided this,but chauhana confederacy was at odds with both solankis of gujarat and gahadvals of kannauj as well as chandelas of central india.The final confederacy that was formed under the leadership of mewar under hammir who took back chittor and rajputana from the khiljis and defeated tughluqs,gujarat and malwa sultans under kumbha reached its peak under sanga and might yet have returned to delhi but were defeated because they had no counter to mughal gunpowder weapons of babur at khanua.
     
    Lancer likes this.
  6. sthf

    sthf Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2016
    Messages:
    2,232
    Likes Received:
    5,013
    You are judging them by today's standards which were not present then. The historic infighting was anything but.

    When most North and Central Indian rulers were Rajputs they didn't consider their neighbouring kingdoms as their kin, they were considered rivals.

    Catholics fought Catholics, Sunnis fought Sunnis, so on and so forth.

    Us vs them was and still is a fact of life but the definitions of both have evolved by leaps and bounds over the years.
     

Share This Page