Monday, May 21, 2012

SYSTEMATIC EFFORTS ARE ON WAY TO DISTORT HISTORY BY MODERN REAL JAICHANDS


                               SYSTEMATIC EFFORTS ARE ON WAY TO DISTORT            
                                     HISTORY BY MODERN  REAL JAICHANDS

                                                DR K Prabhakar Rao

                    Entire nation has grown till date learning that Rajput King Prithviraj Chauhan of Thaneswar ( Near Delhi) was betrayed by King Jai chand in his fight against Mahmood Ghori at II nd  battle of Tarain ( Tarori) in  1192  . Defeat and slaying of Prithviraj by Ghori resulted in enslaving of India by Muslims that could not be warded off till the Englishmen took over. Episode of Rani samyuktha is well known and love affair between  Samyuktha and Prithiviraj was highly resented by Jai chand. However Chauhan managed to carry her away and married her. It is fully believed that this was the most valid reason for the enmity between  both of them. There are also legends that Chauhan was captured after his defeat and was  blinded and taken to Kabul along with his follower Chand Bhatt and they were confined in a jail. We have also learnt that Jai chand was a coward and he drowned himself in a river fleeing from forces of Ghori. No one believed that he was a hero. As per the ballads, Chauhan killed Ghori using Shabdabhedi arrow in full court when he was asked to prove his prowess with bow and arrow. First Chauhan shot at the bell after hearing the sound of the bell. Ghori shouted Wah.. Wah.. applauding the act. The next arrow like lightening flew from his bow and pierced  throat of Ghori killing him on the spot. Later King Chauhan and Chand Bhatt stabbed  themselves and committed suicide. It is also learnt that the  graves of Chauhan and Ghori exist at Kabul close to each other and  visitors ( Mulsims) worship the grave of Ghori while they throw stones and abuses at the grave of Chauhan. They also stab at the grave as vengeance (2).

                 However NCERT books  during 2005 appear to have  believed something different. These are govt approved and published books and the new theories can be seen as the deliberate attempts to twist history for the purpose of appeasement of minorities. They stated (3) :-

"Prithviraj Chauhan was a coward who ran away to save his life during the second battle of Tarain with Mohammad Ghauri."
"Jaichand (generally believed to be a traitor) was, in fact a 'hero' who gave up his life while fighting the forces of Ghauri."
. According to the new book, there were major political differences between the two kings and Samyukta was not part of it.
                        Edited by Prof. Satish Chandra, the fifth chapter of the book on Medieval History clearly stated that Prithviraj Chauhan tried to run away from the battle, but was taken prisoner. The book says that when Prithviraj accepted the supremacy of Mohammad Ghauri, the latter allowed him to continue as ruler of Ajmer. Prithviraj was later killed on charges of treason, according to the book, which goes on to say that Jaichand's valour was unmatched and that he was killed while fighting the forces of Ghauri in Kannauj.
                    This is the "new" history that students of Class 11  would  have learnt under the CBSE and ICSE courses.    The revised history book, Medieval India History, published by NCERT, demolishes old beliefs and tramples over heroes of history.   Can we allow  such blatant lies to be told to students? Who are the people  behind such actions? Can any one dare to say similar things about  minorities in this country? Answer can be guessed by any sane person. This is an important point to ponder over. RSS better wake up.

Bibliography,

1.Oxford history of India

2. Save the grave of Prithviraj chauhan, Petition on line,  http://www.petitiononline.com/A1910A/petition.html


3.Amit Verma, NCERT: Prithviraj coward, Jaichand hero, http://asianage.com/ - BOTTOMLINE


3 comments:

Virendra said...

I certainly don't subsrcibe to excessive glorification of defaming of historical figures. That includes both

Prithviraj and Jaichand. None was a villain or a perfect superhero.
I also understand that the worse than nanny-style (no offense to nanny) distorted history that Govt.

feeds us in testbooks is only worth trashing.
But lets look at the facts objectively and separate grain from chaff.

1. PrithviRaj-Sanyogita love affair,
2 Jaichand's vengeance and
3. The 17 defeats to Ghori etc
are all good bed time stories to entertain ourselves with, but do not stand any historical scrutiny.
All three are mentioned only in the heavily inaccurate and challenged PrithviRaj Raso which mentions

a completely wrong name even for his mother.
There is no mention of these in :
a) Prithviraja Prabandha
b) Hammir MahaKavya
c) Prabandha Kosa
d) PrithviRaj Vijaya
e) Viruddhavidhi-vidhvamsa

PrithviRaj-Sanyogita love affair :-
Never happened. Battle Tarain-I was fought in early 1191, for thirteen months after this Prithviraj was

busy in the siege of Sarhind (early 1192) central Punjab; Tarain II was fought only a few months later. In

all this, when did Prithviraj have the time to correspond with a princess, admit his love to her, and make

arrangements to carry her away from Kannauj 400 miles away in the south east?
The time given for this love affair is 1175 AD. and Ghori - PrithviRaj battles took place at 1191-92. It is

odd to imagine that a man would be so obsessed with his woman even after 17 yrs that it would lead to

his fall or that he rfather would be so mad even after 17 yrs that he would collude with enemies.

Jaichand's vengeance :-
The kingdoms of Ajmer and Kannauj did not have a common border, fought no battles. As per the

inscriptions, during PR-Ghori battles Jayachandra was fighting against the Sena ruler

(LakshmanaSena) in the region of Bihar, far in the east.
Raso states that after the first Battle of Tarain Prithviraj fell in love with, carried away, and married

Sanyogita, daughter of Jaychand Rathor of Kannuaj.
According to contemporary literature, inscriptions, and coins the rulers of Kannauj were Gahadvals…the

Rathors of Badaun were their tributaries. There is no record of a conflict between Ajmer and Kannauj for

the simple reason that they did not have a common border.

The 17 defeats to Ghori :-
Hammir Mahakavya states only 7 border skirmishes and 2 wars after Ghori had expanded his territory

upto Ajmer Kingdom's border.

There is still controversy on the fate of PR and Ghori after Tarain-II. None of the versions has yet been established irrefutably.

Dr K Prabhakar Rao said...

Thanks for detailed account and your version.

Dr K Prabhakar Rao said...

Thanks for detailed account and your version.