1.2 Origin and the Rise of Rajputs

Origin and the Rise of Rajputs

2020-04-27 12:10:21

Factors for the Origin

Agnikula Rajputs

  • myth originated the fire of sacrifice by sage Vasistha were Pratihara, Chalukyas, Paramaras and Chahmanas

  • Were Indianised foreigners

  • Arab invasion played key role in their cultural and political unification

    BD Chattopadhyay : origin was phenomena of the proliferation of lineage based states

Various other Factors of Origin Were

  • Expansion of agrarian economy
  • New features in land distribution
  • Inter clan collaboration through political and matrimonial alliance
  • Construction of large no. of fortresses

Various Rajput Clans

Gurjara Pratihara (doorkeeper) (730 CE - 1036 CE)

  • by Harichandra a Brahmana
  • Claimed lineage from Lakshmana, could have been Huna invaders, 2 different families
  • Nagabhatta I resisted Arab invasion
  • Bhoja (d. 885 CE) was best known king and greatest ruler.
    • Barah copper plate insc
    • Accounts of Merchant Suleiman mentions him as Juzr
    • Earlier was defeated by Rashtrakuta, Palas and Kalachuris Later defeated them
    • Was Viashnavite and adopted title of Adivaraha. Sometimes also called as Mihir Bhoja.
  • Al Masudi arab traveller called the Kingdom as Al-Juzr and Bhoja as Baura.
  • Mahendrapala I succeeded him
  • GP were well known for the cavalry. Were also Great patron of Sanskrit.
  • Mahipala was grandson of Bhoja. Rajashekara great dramatist lived in his court.
  • Rashtrakuta invasions by Indra III and Krishna devastated city of Kannauj.
  • Wiped off by Ghaznavids.
  • successors Chauhans, Chalukyas/Solankis in Gujarat, Paramaras/Pawars in Malwa.

Chandellas of Bundel

Kalachuris

  • of Chedi country ruled from Tripuri/ Jabalpur
  • Rajashekahara's drama Viddhashalabhanjika is staged in the court of King Yuvaraja

Guhilas

  • ruled during the 7th century around south east Rajasthan Mewar capital from Nagda-Ahada and Kishkindha

Tomara Rajputs

  • ruled around Hariyana capital at Dillika
  • Mehrauli pillar inscription
  • Anangpala established Delhi

Others

  • Chandels of Kalinjar and Mahoba, Chauhans of Sakambari, Rajasthan, Paramars of Malwa, Chalukyas of Gujarat

Rajput Society/ Polity

  • Feudal in org, split into various clans, all land w/ ruling chief - distributed among lesser chiefs called Thakurs, paid fixed revenue or tribute
  • Village community governed by panchayats
  • Laws based on customs and traditions
  • Courage, chivalry, honest, generous, hospitable, sword of arm
  • More : 1.5 Society - Status of Brahmans and New Social Order

Reasons for the Defeat of Rajputs :

Reasons for Turkic Success

  • Lack of centralized power : After fall of GP empire, no single state took its place.
  • Small states : Gahadavalas in Kannauj, Parmaras in Malwa, Chalukyas in Gujarat, Chauhans in Ajmer, Tomars in Delhi, Chandellas in Bundelkhand rose but they quarreled among themselves
  • peculiar social hierarchy
    • $ Fakhr Mudabbir in his Adab-ul Harb wa'al Shuja excluded majority of pop from mil training, concept of untouchability led soldiers who were high caste do all of the menial works themselves
  • Use iron stirrup and horse shoes increased striking power,mobility and stamina of cavalry
  • Area around Ghur was rich in iron, tradition of weapons production
  • constant feud b/w states of central Asia - to their militarisation,
  • horses well bred, cavalry skilled, fast moving, Elephants slow moving
  • Ghazi spirit -> defending and spreading Islam
  • Iqta system -> to collect land revenue, taxes only, was to furnish troops to the sultan
  • Subuktigin defeated the Hindu Shahi ruler Jayapal annexed Kabul and Jalalabad paved way for early inroad.
  • Ghazni gave patronage to Firdausi.
  • Invasions period was of great flux and confusion

  • Prithviraj during his conquest of North India isolated himself politically
  • ABM Habibullah - success of Ghori was the consumption of a process which extended over whole of 12th century
  • Breaching of outer defence/ Base of operation formed after Ghazni's conquests
  • Lack of strategic insights among the Rajputs - no anti turk alliance formed due to lack of political unity and absence of dominant power in NW India
  • Successors of Ghazni were always on the offensive
  • Inferior org + leadership, no unified command, slow moving ex Elephants,
  • Agility and mobility of Turkic warriors, accustomed to maintaining large armies, Troops paid in cash, Iqta system
  • Slave system gave them loyal, able bodies men who were great commanders
  • Samanta systems/ Feudatories - hereditary wanted to get independent, difficult to control vis a vis Centralised system of Turks, Iqtas not hereditary
  • KS Lambden - Patriotism not known among Central Asians, Sultan expected them to pay taxes did not receive loyalty from common man.
  • Rajput loyalty towards caste, clan, village, city to defence of home
  • Greater social mobility among Turks, R had untouchability concept
  • Narrow perspective among the IN society
    • Al Biruni - Hindus belive there is not country but theirs, no nation, no Kings, no science like theirs - perpetuated ignorance, growing insularity, loss of strategic perspective - growth of structurally weaker states

PYQs

Polity: Major political developments in Northern India and the Peninsula, origin and the rise of Rajputs

  1. Bring out the salient features of the polity & social structure of the Rajputs. To what extent were they responsible for the weakness of the Rajputs to the foreign invaders? [1988, 60m]

1.  Military culture: The Rajputs were primarily a military caste, and their society was centered around the military. They were skilled in warfare, horsemanship, and archery, and placed a great emphasis on personal honor and bravery.
    
2.  Ruling classes: The Rajputs were a ruling class in medieval India, with their own kingdoms and principalities. They were often divided into numerous clans, each with its own ruling family.
    
3.  Patriarchal society: The Rajput society was largely patriarchal, with male members holding most of the power and authority. Women were considered subordinate to men and were not allowed to participate in warfare or hold positions of power.
    
4.  Joint families: The Rajputs had a tradition of living in joint families, with several generations living together under one roof. The eldest male member of the family was the head of the household and had the final say in all matters.
    
5.  Feudal society: The Rajputs lived in a feudal society, with the king or ruler at the top, followed by a hierarchy of nobles and vassals. The nobles were expected to provide military support to the king in exchange for land and other privileges.
    
6.  Rajput chivalry: The Rajputs had a code of chivalry called "Rajputana dharma," which emphasized bravery, honor, and loyalty. The Rajputs were expected to protect the weak and defend their honor at all times, even if it meant going to war.

weaknesses were:

Lack of political unity among different Rajput states
Lack of economic resources due to lavish spending and frequent plundering by foreigners
Lack of moral and ethical flexibility in warfare, such as adhering to rigid codes of conduct and not adopting new techniques or strategies
Lack of cultural openness and curiosity, such as not learning from other civilizations or religions
  1. "The inferior cavalry of the Rajputs was not the only cause of their defeat at the hands of Turko-Afghans and Mughal." Comment. [2001, 60m]

- ! Answered in details in the notes.



1.  Satish Chandra: According to Satish Chandra, a noted Indian historian, the primary cause of the Rajput defeat was their inability to adapt to changing military tactics. The Mughals introduced new technologies and tactics that the Rajputs were unable to match.
    
2.  Jadunath Sarkar: Jadunath Sarkar, another prominent historian, argued that the Rajputs were too proud and chivalrous, which made them vulnerable to Mughal military tactics. The Mughals were more pragmatic and willing to use deception and surprise to win battles.
    
3.  R. C. Majumdar: R. C. Majumdar, a well-known historian of medieval India, believed that the Rajputs were weakened by their internal divisions and infighting. This made it difficult for them to unite and mount an effective resistance against the Mughals.
    
4.  K. S. Lal: K. S. Lal, a controversial historian, argued that the Rajputs were not defeated by the Mughals due to their military prowess, but because they were weakened by centuries of internal decay and corruption.