Modern proponents of the Marxist school of historiography such as the Associate Professor at Rutgers University and winner of the 2017 ‘John F. Richards’ Prize in South Asian History, Audrey Truschke; have posed a question on why Prithviraj Chauhan should be considered a ‘saviour of Hindus’. Some others went on to claim that the portrayal of Prithviraj as a fighter of ‘Dharma’ was ‘ahistorical’. In just conflicting scenarios of opinions and theories, it would be better to rather employ facts and their proper analysis to derive a better understanding.

Prithviraj Chauhan, the famous ‘Rai Pithaura’ of Delhi, was not the only emperor in the Indian subcontinent in the 12^th century. Delhi, the popularly conceived capital centre of the era, was not even the capital of Prithviraj, rather was ruled by the Tomar Rajputs, who acknowledged the supremacy of Rai Pithaura. Chauhan Rajputs of Shakambhari line had their capital in Ajmer. They weren’t the only power in the North either, other regions like the Gurjardesha and the valued Ganga doab were at that time ruled by the Solanki and Gaharwar Rajputs with almost equal territorial expansions.

So what made Prithviraj such a highly respected and revered king across India? The answer lies, not in the poems of Chandar Bardai, but in understanding the complex intricacies of that turbulent era and Prithviraj’s magnificent stand in the face of it.

India’s western front, the very gate to India, was already facing expansionist forces. Ghaznavids had raided multiple times; Mahmud for instance accounts for seventeen raids. Rai Pithaura’s own ancestors Govindaraj, Chamundaraj, Prithviraj, Arnoraj and Vigraharaj; all successfully fought against the Ghaznavids.
But the Ghurids were different. The city of Ghor, surrounded by the five mighty mountains acting as a natural fortification, was a centre of iron mining, which aided in the heavy production of shields and armour^[1]
Their military expedition generally resulted in the annexation and administration of the territory. When Ghaznavids crumbled, Ghurids captured almost the whole of their territories and substantial parts of the Khwarazmian dynasty, eventually ruling over the whole of Afghanistan and more from Herat to Ghazna. Mohammad Ghori then turned towards India and swiftly won Sindh by 1175 and Punjab by 1185.

The scale of the Ghurid conquest was unmatched. They conquered land from Herat to Punjab within twelve years. Such dreaded and versatile were the tactics and tricks of Mohammad Ghori that the Ghaznavid governor of Punjab, Khusrau Malik, was checkmated into surrendering without a fight in 1185.^[2]

 

Bhati Rajputs of Lodrava bravely resisted the Ghurids until 1178. Rawal Bhojdev Bhati even managed to defeat Ghori once^[3]. But eventually, they fell and later had to do a treaty. Ghurids similarly tried to run over the Solanki kingdom of Gujarat but had to face a crushing defeat at the hands of the Rajput confederacy at Kasahrada, in 1178 CE.
But the defeat was not at the battlefield alone. Ghori had to face humiliation at another front about which few people know. Before marching for Kasahrada, Ghori had sent a messenger to Prithviraj, asking the young Chauhan ruler, only about 14 or 15 years old then, to ally with him in waging a war against the Solankis, the arch-rivals of the Ajmer Chauhans. But the young and decisively strong Prithviraj roared in anger: “What should I tell him (Ghori)? Despite knowing that I have started my mission to kill mlecchas like him, he has sent his messenger to me.”^[4]

As apparent from the narration, Prithviraj had a clear basis for the distinction between his enemies and friends, and that was religion. The Chauhans of Ajmer and Solankis of Gujarat had great enmity; which worsened because of their relations with the Kalchuris and Chandelas respectively, both of them enemies of each other as well. This rivalry can be clearly seen laying out later in battles between Chauhans and Solankis from 1183 to 1187 CE. Yet Prithviraj not only refused to ally with Ghori against the Solankis but was also keen on assisting the other Hindu kingdoms in resisting the Ghurids. This honest intention of young Prithviraj, though, was spoiled by his ministers.

 

Prithviraj put himself into the responsibility of protecting the Dharma. It was his championing of the same Dharma that got him into an armed conflict with Ghori far away from his territory. When a distant Hindu chief from Sindh named Chandraraj, who was not even his vassal, came to Prithviraj asking for his assistance against the ravaging Ghurids; Prithviraj immediately stood true to his vow and marched west of his borders, somewhere in the Sutlej valleys to inflict a sound defeat on the Ghurids in 1183 CE^[5].

Post Ghurid conquest of Punjab, Prithviraj and Ghiyat-al-din Ghori, the Sultan, were sharing borders; and considering the topography and the nature of the rivalry, it is no surprise that the Ghurid forces had multiple confrontations with the Rajputs. Prithviraj kept Ghurid forces away at bay for years in that great struggle for freedom, which included various small confrontations and a clear victory at the battle of Tarain in 1191, until the Ghurids finally prevailed in 1192.

Contemporary texts like Prithvirajvijaya speak fondly of Prithviraj. He was seen and respected as a man of commitment, value and ideology. It was not merely because the poet of the text Jayanaka was his courtesan; later texts and chronicles too, such as Hammira Mahakavya and Surjan Charita, remember Prithviraj as a significant ruler. When Ziauddin Barani in his Tarikh-i-Firozshahi (1357 CE) had to introduce Hammirdev Chauhan, the mighty ruler of Ranthambore; he introduced him as a ‘descendant of Rai Pithaura of Delhi’^[6].

Prithviraj’s grand Kshatriya image and imagination in the later bardic and folk literature like Prithviraj Raso and Alha-Khand are a testament to his public perception and continued reverence. Even today the great Rai Pithaura is seen as one of India’s finest Kings – a King of legacy, character and insurmountable courage. His legacy continues to inspire us today, as it did the mutineers in 1857 during their resistance against the British rule.

 

References:

1. Warfare in Pre-British India, Kaushik Roy
2. Muslim Rule in Medieval India, Fouzia F. Ahmed, Pg 45
3. Rauzat-ut-Tahirin, Elliot & Dowson, Volume 6
4. Prithvirajvijaya, X, 42, translated by VS Rathore in his Prithviraj Chauhan, Pg 57
5. Prithviraj Chauhan, VS Rathore, Pg 64-70
6. Elliot & Dowson, Volume 3