The Brave Warrior - Prithviraj Chauhan - 1149-1192 AD

[shinoj]

I did some recent research on Prithviraj Chauhan and found him to be extremely brave.

For someone who defeated the Evil Central Asian King Mohammed Ghori 16 times he must be quite something. Time and again he defeated Ghori but due to his forgiving Nature he pardoned him again and again and eventually the 17th Time Ghauri re-invaded India and supposedly attacked Prithivi's kingdom at Night and defeated him. He took him as a prisoner to Ghauri,Afghanistan and took out his eyes and tortured him severely. But his poet friend Chand Bardoi came to Ghauri's kingdom and convinced him to engage Prithvi in a Game in which he would hit a target blind folded with a Bow and Arrow. Ghauri being a lover of any new skill or a game got convinced and allowed Prithvi to engage in that game. And as the game ended Prithivi took a shot on Ghauri as he called out to hit on a target and killed Ghauri.

This Man must be brave by all accounts. Discuss

 

[Pratap]

I did some recent research on Prithviraj Chauhan and found him to be extremely brave.

For someone who defeated the Evil Central Asian King Mohammed Ghori 16 times he must be quite something. Time and again he defeated Ghori but due to his forgiving Nature he pardoned him again and again and eventually the 17th Time Ghauri re-invaded India and supposedly attacked Prithivi's kingdom at Night and defeated him. He took him as a prisoner to Ghauri,Afghanistan and took out his eyes and tortured him severely. But his poet friend Chand Bardoi came to Ghauri's kingdom and convinced him to engage Prithvi in a Game in which he would hit a target blind folded with a Bow and Arrow. Ghauri being a lover of any new skill or a game got convinced and allowed Prithvi to engage in that game. And as the game ended Prithivi took a shot on Ghauri as he called out to hit on a target and killed Ghauri.

This Man must be brave by all accounts. Discuss

Prithviraj was brave but your story is hoax. Ghuri was killed by khokhars not by Prithviraj who was slain some 14 years before murder of Ghori.
Prithviraj Raso is a very late text and hence not reliable as regards most of events. Some minor fights may have occured but there are only two major battles between both of them and so I do not know veracity of Ghuri forgiven by Chauhan 17 times.

 

[Peter]

Prithviraj was indeed brave but Pratap is correct.(Historical records validate him.)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prithviraj_Chauhan
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shahabuddin_Muhammad_Ghori

DOD of chauhan-1192/93
DOD of goat..I meant Ghori-1206

 

[shinoj]

Prithviraj was brave but your story is hoax. Ghuri was killed by khokhars not by Prithviraj who was slain some 14 years before murder of Ghori.
Prithviraj Raso is a very late text and hence not reliable as regards most of events. Some minor fights may have occured but there are only two major battles between both of them and so I do not know veracity of Ghuri forgiven by Chauhan 17 times.

But why is there a grave in Ghauri Afghanistan near Ghauri's Grave of Prithviraj Chauhans. Reportedly, Afghans think prithivi killed Ghauri and they disrespect his grave by spitting at it and kicking it before entering Ghauri's Tomb. There are various reports about it.

 

[Peter]

But why is there a grave in Ghauri Afghanistan near Ghauri's Grave of Prithviraj Chauhans. Reportedly, Afghans think prithivi killed Ghauri and they disrespect his grave by spitting at it and kicking it before entering Ghauri's Tomb. There are various reports about it.

If you go to wikipedia article go to the "talk" section.There when one user was to add the legend another user showed the fact was merely a hoax.

Talkrithviraj Chauhan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Thus ended the story of the brave but unrealistic Prithviraj Chouhan Justrohitkumar (talk) 01:11, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[2]
Not done: This entire passage can be found in various places on the internet, worded exactly like this ... such as here, here, and here. This means that there is most likely a published source out there that uses this text, so putting it into the Wikipedia article would be plagiarism. Also, this request is not formatted as a request, so where to put this text is not clear, even if it was not plagiarism. Steel1943 (talk) 05:25, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
From the reliable historical sources I have found, the story, being requested for insertion, is simply a legend. According to MUHAMMAD B. SAM Mu'izz AL-DIN, T.W. Haig, Encyclopaedia of Islam, Vol. VII, ed. C.E.Bosworth, E.van Donzel, W.P. Heinrichs and C. Pellat, (Brill, 1993), 410; Prithviraj was slain at the 2nd battle of Tarain(1192), whereas Muhammad of Ghor was assassinated in 1205. --Kansas Bear (talk) 05:37, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
Face-smile.svg Thank you for finding that information! I noticed that this was not the first time this was requested either, so I figured something was not right. Steel1943 (talk) 06:16, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

 

[Peter]

For some unexplained reason wikipedia did not change the thing in the main section.Also the Prithviraj article has some gross inaccuracies.There is a mention of "ELEPHANT PHALANX".Can some historically adept person explain me what is elephant phalanx?(I know what is a phalanx and what is an elephant.)

 

[Pratap]

But why is there a grave in Ghauri Afghanistan near Ghauri's Grave of Prithviraj Chauhans. Reportedly, Afghans think prithivi killed Ghauri and they disrespect his grave by spitting at it and kicking it before entering Ghauri's Tomb. There are various reports about it.

Those bastard and kutta Afghans are cultureless animals so they disrespect grave( so contrary to Indian culture) thinking that it is of a hindu king. The legends can not be taken as history. There are cambodian kings who claim that they are descendants of Ashoka, does not mean that they are right. It might have been possible that Ghuri took corpse of Chauhan though but he was slain by him in 1192-93 and records are clear on this.

 

[Pratap]

For some unexplained reason wikipedia did not change the thing in the main section.Also the Prithviraj article has some gross inaccuracies.There is a mention of "ELEPHANT PHALANX".Can some historically adept person explain me what is elephant phalanx?(I know what is a phalanx and what is an elephant.)

Perhaps the tight formation of elephants arrayed against enemy army has been referred as " Elephant phalanx" . The term is not inaccurate completely.

 

[Peter]

Perhaps the tight formation of elephants arrayed against enemy army has been referred as " Elephant phalanx" . The term is not inaccurate completely.

Yes that maybe the case.However I thought the original phalanx meant a tight formation of Greek hoplites or for that matter infantry.I did not know elephants became infantry in India.

 

[Pratap]

Yes that maybe the case.However I thought the original phalanx meant a tight formation of Greek hoplites or for that matter infantry.I did not know elephants became infantry in India.

Agreed and coming to topic, I think Prithviraj was defeated either because he lacked enough cavalry or Ghuri simply outnumbered him. Ghurids were not small empire but at their height could threaten even KHwarizm empire( though in later times Ghuri was smashed by them) and from records it seems that in second battle of Tarain, they fielded as many as 52,000 horsemen( the norman invasion saw just 3-6 thousand horsemen) and 10,000 of them were horse archers. Imagine 10,000 horsemen galloping at full speed and discharging arrows at you. It was quite difficult for Indian armies to defeat such solid military machine.

 

[Peter]

Yes horsemen of middle ages were better than infantry.Well if anyone has played games like AOE,ROME TW which is an award winning historical battle simulator they will know this fact.An infantryman can be easily cut down by a horse charge.In the pre medieval era horsemen lacked stirrups which made them less effective.After stirrups were invented knights/palladins/cataphracts dominated the battlefields till invention of gunpowder.Only a tight pikemen could stop horsemen.In case of Prithviraj his army had fewer horses.So he was qualitatively and quantitatively inferior to those Muslim cavalry based army.Despite all those odds what one needs to remember is Prithviraj continued to fight on and made it extremely difficult for Ghori to get a victory.

 

[shinoj]

If you go to wikipedia article go to the "talk" section.There when one user was to add the legend another user showed the fact was merely a hoax.

Talkrithviraj Chauhan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Thus ended the story of the brave but unrealistic Prithviraj Chouhan Justrohitkumar (talk) 01:11, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[2]
Not done: This entire passage can be found in various places on the internet, worded exactly like this ... such as here, here, and here. This means that there is most likely a published source out there that uses this text, so putting it into the Wikipedia article would be plagiarism. Also, this request is not formatted as a request, so where to put this text is not clear, even if it was not plagiarism. Steel1943 (talk) 05:25, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
From the reliable historical sources I have found, the story, being requested for insertion, is simply a legend. According to MUHAMMAD B. SAM Mu'izz AL-DIN, T.W. Haig, Encyclopaedia of Islam, Vol. VII, ed. C.E.Bosworth, E.van Donzel, W.P. Heinrichs and C. Pellat, (Brill, 1993), 410; Prithviraj was slain at the 2nd battle of Tarain(1192), whereas Muhammad of Ghor was assassinated in 1205. --Kansas Bear (talk) 05:37, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
Face-smile.svg Thank you for finding that information! I noticed that this was not the first time this was requested either, so I figured something was not right. Steel1943 (talk) 06:16, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

I am really not sure about 100 % authenticity of Wikipedia Either. Find it difficult to explain why would someone write such an elaborate story, that Prithvi was blinded and then taken to Afghanistan and so on.

And there are are number of Indian sources citing it. including Prithviraso and so on. There has been even an Indian TV Serial Based on that. It just depends on whom you believe to.

 

[Peter]

I am really not sure about 100 % authenticity of Wikipedia Either. Find it difficult to explain why would someone write such an elaborate story, that Prithvi was blinded and then taken to Afghanistan and so on.

And there are are number of Indian sources citing it. including Prithviraso and so on. There has been even an Indian TV Serial Based on that. It just depends on whom you believe to.

Yes that`s correct.Its the winners who write the history books. Prithviraj`s great deeds may have been done away from the pages of history.However Ghori surely died in 1206 AD.It was rare for Muslim rulers actually to spare the chieftains of their opposing enemies.So Ghori taking Chauhan back to Afghanistan would be too kind a thing done by the villainous Ghori.For me Prithviraj died in the battlefield defending his country`s honour like a true king and brave champion.

Also Prithvirajraso is not a reliable historical source.

 

[Pratap]

Yes horsemen of middle ages were better than infantry.Well if anyone has played games like AOE,ROME TW which is an award winning historical battle simulator they will know this fact.An infantryman can be easily cut down by a horse charge.In the pre medieval era horsemen lacked stirrups which made them less effective.After stirrups were invented knights/palladins/cataphracts dominated the battlefields till invention of gunpowder.Only a tight pikemen could stop horsemen.In case of Prithviraj his army had fewer horses.So he was qualitatively and quantitatively inferior to those Muslim cavalry based army.Despite all those odds what one needs to remember is Prithviraj continued to fight on and made it extremely difficult for Ghori to get a victory.

Toe stirrups were first seen in India and China but their heavy use was started by Sassanids of Iran in third century and since then, horsemen dominated battlefield till invention of gunpowder. Though Iranians and particlarly Central Asian Iranians like Kushnas and Scythians were pioneers in horse based warfare, the one who took lead were the mongoloids of steppes meaning Turks and Mongols. The turks dominated entire world starting from 11th century based on their use of both heavy and light cavalry. First they discharged arrows and softened enemies' ranks and once the opposing army was in disarray, the heavy cavalry swept off the army . This deadly combination could not be broken by pikemen as seen in Mongol invasion of Hungary where numerous knights wearing 20 kg armour were butchered easily by mongols( at one time however mongols were nervous and Batu khan was on verge of getting killed).

In this also, there was a pattern, the mongols and tungusic people were greatest in horse based warfare, followed by turks who were better than Iranian and Arabs. The Indians, living in tropical climate were inferior in cavalry, and hence easily defeated. Those who make fun of Bengalis should note this important point that Bengal is very humid and hence good horses can not be bred there and so easy defeats of Senas.

Having said this, I do think that performance of Chalukyas of Gujarat was simply remarkable. In 1175-76, the Gujarat kingdom under leadership of Nayaki Devi( regent queen) smashed army of Ghuri completely . When Chauhans were destroyed, a strong army from Gujarat came to aid of Rajputs at Ajmer which threatened Qutbud din and it was reinforcement from Ghazni that saved him. Later on he smashed Anahilwara Patan( modern day Mehsana in Gujarat some 100 KM away from Ahmedabad) but his army was driven out from Gujarat by heroic struggle by generals of Chalukya armies at Dabhoi and Veraval. Defeating central asiatic armies time and again was no mean achievement and this done by a small state like Gujarat makes it even more remarkable.

Chauhan too was not that bad and he did rout Ghuri in frst battle where the horsemen were not as numerous as on second occasion. Even at second battle, Jadunath Sarkar says that battle was tough and bitterly contested. In short, there was no lack of bravery or resolution but having less complex war machine brought doom to Hindus.

 

[Pratap]

Yes that`s correct.Its the winners who write the history books. Prithviraj`s great deeds may have been done away from the pages of history.However Ghori surely died in 1206 AD.It was rare for Muslim rulers actually to spare the chieftains of their opposing enemies.So Ghori taking Chauhan back to Afghanistan would be too kind a thing done by the villainous Ghori.For me Prithviraj died in the battlefield defending his country`s honour like a true king and brave champion.

Also Prithvirajraso is not a reliable historical source.

There are other evidences too. There was an empire of turks called Khwarizm and we have record of its ruler( based on khwarizm's accounts ) defeating Ghuri in 1204-05 some 12 years after death of Prithviraj. Surely, the khwarizmians were not fighting with ghost of ghuri

 

[Peter]

Yes horses were then very important.Well I spotted that there was a similar thread in DFI in 2010.Check it out.(It mentions Prithviraj fled the battlefield!!!!)

http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/...auhan-truimph-islam-india-written-myself.html
(by ashdoc not by me)

This is a little OT but in Wikipedia first battle of tarain,there is a line saying that Aibak was the first king of India.

Battles of Tarain - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

(mera bheja fry ho gaya after reading this)

"The victory of Ghori led to the foundation of Sultanate of Delhi.It results in the further conquest of Muslims in India. Ghori made His slave, Qutb-ud-din Aibak, the first king of India and India came under the rule of Muslims."-Wikipedia

 

[Bhadra]

Prithviraj was indeed brave but Pratap is correct.(Historical records validate him.)

Prithviraj Chauhan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Mu'izz al-Din Muhammad - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

DOD of chauhan-1192/93
DOD of goat..I meant Ghori-1206

Wikipedia can not be sited as a historical source.

 

[Peter]

Wikipedia can not be sited as a historical source.

Yes but some articles are correct in wikipedia.Also there is little doubt in Ghori`s date of death(1205-1206).I think pratap has already mentioned one source and there are many books where you will get that.

(Also its cited not sited)

 

[Pratap]

Wikipedia can not be sited as a historical source.

But " Turkestan down to the Mongol Invasion" by one of greatest historians W. Barthold can be cited and that book describes conflict of Ghuri with khwarizm in 1204 or 1205 years after death of Prithviraj Chauhan.

 

[Bhadra]

"Char bans, chaubis gaj, angul ashta praman,
Ta upar sultan hai, Chuke mat Chauhan."

This was the poem recited by Chandbardai for Prithviraj Chauhan to kill Muhammad Gori.
Four Bamboo lengths in front, then twenty four hands and eight fingers in height, the sultan is sitting. Dont miss him Chauhan.(Prithviraj was blinded then so Chandrabardai gave him the hint about Sultans's location through his poem).


History is what people believe in ...