Looking Through Broken Glass: Rajput Victories In Indian History
- Thread starter RATHORE
- Start date
I actually look like Chacha Nehru.
The jury is split 50:50 almost down the middle between him (in topi and Nehru coat) and Rajiv Gandhi (in Ray Bans) ....
Cheers, Doc
You disappoint me with your attitude towards Dalits bro.
It's surely not something you learned in the US.
Am sure it's not your upbringing either.
Please get off those toxic WhatsApp groups.
They are poison. You are way too young.
Cheers, Doc
You disappoint me with your selective reading of my arguments.
I've made it amply clear that I've got nothing against the average Dalit. Can't stand the JNU-Marxist kind or BSP types though.
Or should I smile quietly and watch on as a portion of them insult Rajputs and Brahmins in BS revisionist history papers like the one you quoted (I happen to be both), or as they fervently chant "Tilak, Taraazu aur Talwaar, Inko Maaro Joote Chaar!"
Last edited:
After Behenji realised the limitations of being the sole beneficiary of Dalit votes and that the Muslims would never support her wholeheartedly as they did MYS & his SP , she came up with a new formula and slogan in the 2007 polls courtesy her latest advisor and Chief of staff , SATISH Chandra MISHRA - Haathi nahin , Ganesh hain , Brahma , Vishnu ,MAHESH hain.
This appeal to Brahmins & other upper castes and her new Man Friday encouraged them to give the BSP a chance . That's how she captured the mandate and became the first CM in UP in nearly 2 decades to win a simple majority and a 5 year term .
There were several small principalities like Kamboj, Gandharas and Madras that fought in North West India during sixth century BC.
The area was fertile and rich and Iranian Empire was expanding so they attacked those areas. Parts of Punjab, West of Indus and Sindh was under Darius rule. This was quite rich area for Iran as tax collected records shows.
Xeres, successor of Darius employed Indians in long war against Greeks and till the invasion of Greek that part of India was under Iranian control which later gave us Kharosti script.
In 4th century BC, almost 200 years after Darius Greeks and Iranians fought and Greeks destroyed them pretty bad. Greeks came to India and won the small small principalities one by one and then attacked Porus. Porus lost but was restored just like other small kingdoms after accepting Alexander's sovereignty in that area.
Alex wanted to go ahead but his army refused, partly because of war fatigue, climatic conditions and mostly due to fear of elephants of Nand.
Alexander lamented in frustration: "I am trying to rouse the hearts that are disloyal and crushed with craven fears".
Moral of the story:
Porus Persian? Yes most probably.
Persians lost to Greeks? Pretty badly.
Porus lost to Greeks? Yes
Indians and Porus fought together? Definitely.
Persians and some Indians fought together? Sure.
Who was more brave? Indians or Porus? Can't say, both fought side by side, leader was Persian and army Indian.
Bonus:
Greek historian Adrian says: "in the art of war the Indians were far superior to the other nations inhabiting the area at that time"
I think this can give us clearer picture.
Before moving on to my last paper for the night, I need to also inform the reader that Alexander was actually a Godsend to the Indians.
His defeat of the Persians, and Porus, before retreating, set in motion a hiatus period of a power vacuum.
Which the Mauryas came in and eventually filled, paving the way for consolidation of power centralised under the Mauryas as never before in India's history, and never since (till the Maratha confedracy centuries later).
It also lay grounds for the first and only time till then and since that Indic control extended into tge fringes of Persian territory. Again never to be repeated till briefly by the Sikhs and the Marathas centuries later.
There is nothing to exult in defeat. Sure.
But there is surely no auto-orgasming matter to appropriate someone else's honorable defeat either.
Especially when you are blessed with so many uniquely of one's own.
Back to the books now ...
Cheers, Doc
His defeat of the Persians, and Porus, before retreating, set in motion a hiatus period of a power vacuum.
Which the Mauryas came in and eventually filled, paving the way for consolidation of power centralised under the Mauryas as never before in India's history, and never since (till the Maratha confedracy centuries later).
It also lay grounds for the first and only time till then and since that Indic control extended into tge fringes of Persian territory. Again never to be repeated till briefly by the Sikhs and the Marathas centuries later.
There is nothing to exult in defeat. Sure.
But there is surely no auto-orgasming matter to appropriate someone else's honorable defeat either.
Especially when you are blessed with so many uniquely of one's own.
Back to the books now ...
Cheers, Doc
Last edited:
What's the source for Porus being a Persian or a Persian Satrap ?
It's Arrian.
Arrian lived in the 1st century CE , nearly 300+ years after Alexander and though his history is considered by many to be the most authentic of the accounts of Alexander's conquests principally of Persia , based as it is on primary sources ( Ptolemy , Aristobulus and Nearchus - all senior generals of Alexander ) since lost , his writings are also known to tilt towards hagiography , blatant apologia and in some cases downright misleading as compared to his contemporaries .
Typical attitude, British were godsend to India ........
That time of century there was never really a state that could stand to Magadh, not even close, the closest one Avanti was subjugated centuries back.
Greeks weekend Iranians, Nanda and Maurya never really planned to go to Tigris or Amu Darya so whatever issue those two had never benefited us.
That is pretty interesting.
Based on similar facts that I collected, I have something similar to narrate. My dad passed away when he was 80, and on the morning he passed away, he was talking to his eldest brother's daughter-in-law who was visiting him from Jalandhar then. Suddenly, he started talking of Mahmud of Ghazni and Mohammad Ghauri, the destruction they did and the battles about them.
Same night he passed away. When I visited Haridwar to perform his last rites, after completing it, we were directed to the pandit who kept records belonging to different gotras. This is the only one thing honest about Haridwar, that you are not cheated on the records. I gave him the Gotra and last name and place where my Dad's ancestor lived; he could dig out past 6 generations (since 1884) of his family tree. This I confirmed with my Dad's older brother and he confirmed at least past four generations. And then the pandit said that we are Khukhrains, panjo-jaati. I didnt know what it meant, so I asked him what it means. He said that the panjo-jaatis - Anand, Bhasin, Chaddha, Sahani, Suri were the main rulers/Kings of Punjab, originally started in the Jhelum-Chenab Doab region and then expanded, now in Pakistan.
I did some research and found that interestingly Biji Rai was the Khukhrain King around the time of Ghazni and my dad's name was Vijay. This is the extent to where I could connect. But I am not deriving any conclusions out of this
, though it was all very interesting to find out and connect the dots That is possibly the reason of my DNA - the store of subtle drives and memories from past, and why I sometimes go wild on the forum which gets no mercy from our respected secular Mods
That is pretty interesting.
Based on similar facts that I collected, I have something similar to narrate. My dad passed away when he was 80, and on the morning he passed away, he was talking to his eldest brother's daughter-in-law who was visiting him from Jalandhar then. Suddenly, he started talking of Mahmud of Ghazni and Mohammad Ghauri, the destruction they did and the battles about them.
Same night he passed away. When I visited Haridwar to perform his last rites, after completing it, we were directed to the pandit who kept records belonging to different gotras. This is the only one thing honest about Haridwar, that you are not cheated on the records. I gave him the Gotra and last name and place where my Dad's ancestor lived; he could dig out past 6 generations (since 1884) of his family tree. This I confirmed with my Dad's older brother and he confirmed at least past four generations. And then the pandit said that we are Khukhrains, panjo-jaati. I didnt know what it meant, so I asked him what it means. He said that the panjo-jaatis - Anand, Bhasin, Chaddha, Sahani, Suri were the main rulers/Kings of Punjab, originally started in the Jhelum-Chenab Doab region and then expanded, now in Pakistan.
I did some research and found that interestingly Biji Rai was the Khukhrain King around the time of Ghazni and my dad's name was Vijay. This is the extent to where I could connect. But I am not deriving any conclusions out of this
That is possibly the reason of my DNA - the store of subtle drives and memories from past, and why I sometimes go wild on the forum which gets no mercy from our respected secular Mods
I feel you bro.
There is nothing secular about me either.
Were we a billion plus today, the world would have been a different place.
Cheers, Doc
Porus is the distorted name - his real name was Purushottam aka Puru, which became Porus.
No Ahura from Persia, the practitioners of ASURA (s is pronounced as h in persia) could ever come close to the virtues of Porus. Persian kings believed in fulfilling their blind AMBITION of Power and Wealth through expansion, betrayal, deception and cunningness. That is when Chanakya came in to understand the enemy from West and successfully pushed them back.
Porus = Puru = Purushottam, same as how Alexander is now adopted in India as Sikandar. Many Indians do keep such name.
It is for the same reason with whom you are arguing now ... @STEPHEN COHEN who is actually a HINDU with a real Hindu Name
The traditional form of Porus is Porushasp.
And many Persians n Parsis name their boys that too, to this day.
Cheers, Doc
The only reason India was rarely invaded by the world conquering Persians was the age old rift and reluctance to attack and re-mingle with the Daeva worshippers, from the legion of the dark forces of Angra Manyu.
This became even more solidified and codifief in the civilization psyche after Zoriastrianism from the earlier dualist Mithraiism and Babakism and Magiism and the even earlier polytheism. With offshoots like Manicheism and Yazidism on conquered lands.
Cheers, Doc
This became even more solidified and codifief in the civilization psyche after Zoriastrianism from the earlier dualist Mithraiism and Babakism and Magiism and the even earlier polytheism. With offshoots like Manicheism and Yazidism on conquered lands.
Cheers, Doc
Last edited:
As an avid student of the military history, I can merely guffaw at your attempt to twist the contention I had posted to, and to which you have replied -- the need to post a counter-narrative to give a balanced approach to the attempt here itself.
The succession of events of collusion and defeats that have pre-dominantly been the characteristic of the Rajput history and which is recorded as a fact. Wonder why is there an attempt at painting an alternative history then? Perhaps an image makeover?
Why not list these facts and your facts and let the information be left as such, for each to draw their own conclusion? Wonder how, when the Rajputs ruled over the territories of present day Iran-Afghanistan and Pakistan, did Muslim rule get established? Wonder why, if Rajputs indeed won so many victories, did they lose (as historically) to every Muslim ruler who captured Delhi?
What allowed the invading Muslim armies to sustain sieges for months in inhospitable climate and terrain, with long drawn out supply lines through what is essentially considered Rajput territory? (Recall that Chandels (chandelas) ruled over this territory with Khajurao as the capital)
Will be blessed to have your insights