पृथ्वी राज चव्हाण और मोहम्मद गौरी के सत्रì

[phoolkumar]

पृथ्वी राज चव्हाण और मोहम्मद गौरी के सत्रह युद्धों की तारीखें:

मैं उन सत्रह युद्धों की सत्रह तारीखें ढून्ढ रहा हूँ जो पृथ्वी राज चव्हाण ने मोहम्मद गौरी से लड़े थे और सत्रहवें युद्ध में गौरी से हारे थे| लेकिन अभी तक जितने भी रिसोर्स एंड रिकॉर्ड खंगाले असलफता ही हाथ लगी| क्या आप में से कोई इन तारीखों को ढूंढ़ने में मेरी मदद कर सकता है?

[DrRajpalSingh]

पृथ्वी राज चव्हाण और मोहम्मद गौरी के सत्रह युद्धों की तारीखें:

मैं उन सत्रह युद्धों की सत्रह तारीखें ढून्ढ रहा हूँ जो पृथ्वी राज चव्हाण ने मोहम्मद गौरी से लड़े थे और सत्रहवें युद्ध में गौरी से हारे थे| लेकिन अभी तक जितने भी रिसोर्स एंड रिकॉर्ड खंगाले असलफता ही हाथ लगी| क्या आप में से कोई इन तारीखों को ढूंढ़ने में मेरी मदद कर सकता है?

Friend,

Only two battles known as The First Battle of Tarain 1191 AD and the Second Battle of Terrain 1192 AD are known to historians which were contested between Prithvi Raj Chahman and Md. Ghauri in which first was won by Chahman and in the second Md. Ghauri won. If you have some more information, it would be great service to the cause of not only Indian history but the world history as well.

Thanks.

[phoolkumar]

Really great information Rajpal ji, in fact in high school syllabus books and some bollywood movies and even in book from PrithviRaj Raso, it is written there that he faught 17 fights against Gauri.

Thanks!


Friend,

Only two battles known as The First Battle of Tarain 1191 AD and the Second Battle of Terrain 1192 AD are known to historians which were contested between Prithvi Raj Chahman and Md. Ghauri in which first was won by Chahman and in the second Md. Ghauri won. If you have some more information, it would be great service to the cause of not only Indian history but the world history as well.

Thanks.

[DrRajpalSingh]

Really great information Rajpal ji, in fact in high school syllabus books and some bollywood movies and even in book from PrithviRaj Raso, it is written there that he faught 17 fights against Gauri.

Thanks!

Friend,

Kindly quote all the original sources in support of what you say mentioning name of the book, page number, year of publication, publisher and place of publication so that we can also quote the same for updating the knowledge of history.

Thanks

[dndeswal]

Ghauri was undoubtedly a dacoit with a large gang or army. His aim was to loot Indian wealth and escape with the booty to his home town in Afghanistan. His gang of soldiers, however, was not capable enough to capture an Indian kingdom on a permanent basis. We have read that he invaded India 17 times. It does not mean that every time he invaded Prithviraj Chauhan's capital and had direct fights with him. On some occasions he might have adopted slightly different routes and may have escaped with the loot. There, he might have had small battles with local populace, rather than a duel with a mighty king like Prithviraj Chauhan each and every time.

So, the series of 17 attacks (which are assumed as 'battles' by us) were fought during a set period (say within 17-20 years or almost two decades - based on the assumption Ghauri invaded north India each time after a gap of one year). The stories written by Bards (Bhats) are often misleading - their sagas, mostly written to please their masters, do not give correct dates and chronology of events.

Even otherwise, the exact dates of events of 1000-year old history are difficult to find. At the most, one can find the year of an event (that too in different Indian calendars like Saka era and Vikrami Samvat), instead of correct dates in Christian era.

Our ancient war system was largely based on the theory that if your enemy lays down arms and begs pardon, he should be pardoned unconditionally. Reason was that the enemy (like in Mahabharata) is also your own brother or like your brother. And brotherhood demands that you forgive and forget - that is our ancient Kshatriya Dharma. However, this ancient theory, according to Chanakya, is applicable when the opponent is from your own clan (or he is also a fellow of our clan, an Indian king). Chanakya says that a foreign invader (म्लेच्छ) can be forgiven only once - that too on humanitarian grounds only - and he should not at all be forgiven the second time. Prithviraj Chauhan may not have read Chanakya's theory and made a blunder mistake by pardoning Ghauri, perhaps 3-4-5-6 times (though not exactly 17 times).

I think in today's context, foreign invaders and terrorists in our own territory should not be forgiven even once! We are repeating this mistake even today!

.

[phoolkumar]

Sir, I think firstly you should apply such concrete explanations in your own posts. Beside just a general statement, like in your post 2 of this thread you would have explained the things in the manner you are expecting from others like from me in this case.

And if this is defined as some hard and fast rule of debates on JL, then announce it with bold letters on JL and all will follow the same.

Rest the minimum required references, which I felt important have mentioned in my response. And that should be enough for a person to refer him/her to right book or source?

And surely, I don't thrash myself like being agitated from your post in quote and will include as maximum as possible references for me as been in past!



Friend,

Kindly quote all the original sources in support of what you say mentioning name of the book, page number, year of publication, publisher and place of publication so that we can also quote the same for updating the knowledge of history.

Thanks

[phoolkumar]

Deshwal Sir,

Its proved in the debate above now that there held only two battles between the two and not 17. Second Gauri was killed by Khokhar Jats of Sindh and not by Prthivraj as per Prthivraj Raso.


Ghauri was undoubtedly a dacoit with a large gang or army. His aim was to loot Indian wealth and escape with the booty to his home town in Afghanistan. His gang of soldiers, however, was not capable enough to capture an Indian kingdom on a permanent basis. We have read that he invaded India 17 times. It does not mean that every time he invaded Prithviraj Chauhan's capital and had direct fights with him. On some occasions he might have adopted slightly different routes and may have escaped with the loot. There, he might have had small battles with local populace, rather than a duel with a mighty king like Prithviraj Chauhan each and every time.

So, the series of 17 attacks (which are assumed as 'battles' by us) were fought during a set period (say within 17-20 years or almost two decades - based on the assumption Ghauri invaded north India each time after a gap of one year). The stories written by Bards (Bhats) are often misleading - their sagas, mostly written to please their masters, do not give correct dates and chronology of events.

Even otherwise, the exact dates of events of 1000-year old history are difficult to find. At the most, one can find the year of an event (that too in different Indian calendars like Saka era and Vikrami Samvat), instead of correct dates in Christian era.

Our ancient war system was largely based on the theory that if your enemy lays down arms and begs pardon, he should be pardoned unconditionally. Reason was that the enemy (like in Mahabharata) is also your own brother or like your brother. And brotherhood demands that you forgive and forget - that is our ancient Kshatriya Dharma. However, this ancient theory, according to Chanakya, is applicable when the opponent is from your own clan (or he is also a fellow of our clan, an Indian king). Chanakya says that a foreign invader (म्लेच्छ) can be forgiven only once - that too on humanitarian grounds only - and he should not at all be forgiven the second time. Prithviraj Chauhan may not have read Chanakya's theory and made a blunder mistake by pardoning Ghauri, perhaps 3-4-5-6 times (though not exactly 17 times).

I think in today's context, foreign invaders and terrorists in our own territory should not be forgiven even once! We are repeating this mistake even today!

.