6 min readNew DelhiMay 24, 2022 11:25 PM IST
First published on: May 24, 2022 at 11:25 PM IST
There is controversy around a new Akshay Kumar film called ‘Prithviraj’, with both the Gujjar and Rajput communities of Rajasthan laying claim over the 12th century king. On Friday (May 20), the Akhil Bhartiya Veer Gurjar Mahasabha claimed that Prithviraj Chauhan belonged to the Gujjar community, and demanded that the film depict him as such.
The Shri Rashtriya Rajput Karni Sena, who rose to infamy in 2017 after their protests against the film ‘Padmavat’, countered that Prithviraj was a Rajput, and also announced they would oppose the film unless the word ‘Samrat’ was prefixed to his name in the title.
To a vocal section of the Hindu right, Prithviraj Chauhan appears as “the last Hindu emperor” of India who made a valiant attempt to stop the Islamic invaders who would go on to rule over much of the country until the arrival of the Europeans. In the popular imagination, he is the heroic figure who symbolises the exalted ideals of patriotism and national pride — even if the historical evidence demonstrates rather different ways in which Prithviraj has been seen over the ages.
Prithviraj of legend
The image of Prithviraj as a fearless and skilled warrior that is now etched in the folk imagination can be traced back to his depiction in ‘Prithviraj Raso’, a poem in Brajbhasha attributed to Chand Bardai, which is thought to have been composed in the 16th century.
In the finale of the poem, after losing the Second Battle of Tarain (1192 AD) against Muhammad of Ghor, Prithviraj is captured and taken to Ghazni in modern-day Afghanistan, where is blinded and imprisoned. Here, the Ghurid king challenges Prithviraj to demonstrate his proficiency in archery by piercing seven metal gongs with an arrow. But the blinded king instead aims the arrow at Muhammad, placing his location by using his voice, and kills him before dying himself.
Most other historical sources indicate that the victorious Muhammad executed Prithviraj at the end of the Second Battle of Tarain.
Prithviraj of history
Despite being such a celebrated figure, not much is known about the historical Prithviraj. Information about him is available only in a handful of contemporary inscriptions, and historians have to rely on literary sources such as the ‘mahakavya’ genre, a kind of ornate and formulaic poetry that had limited concern with accuracy. Many of the textual sources, often dating to much later periods, contradict one another.
What we do know is that Prithviraj belonged to the Chauhan or Chahamana dynasty of Ajmer which emerged after the decline of the Pratihara empire in the 11th century AD. He ascended the throne in 1177 or 1178, and very quickly expanded his kingdom, defeating many of the smaller Rajput states. However, he struggled against the Chalukyas of Gujarat, and was forced to look towards the Ganga valley instead.
While Prithviraj’s army was able to decisively defeat the invading Ghurids in the First Battle of Tarain (present-day Haryana) in 1191, he was defeated in the Second Battle of Tarain in the following year. The battle marked a watershed moment in the history of medieval India, paving the way for the establishment of the Delhi Sultanate and the beginning of Muslim rule.
Buy Now | Our best subscription plan now has a special price
The “Hindu Emperor”
James Mill’s ‘The History of British India’ (1817) categorized Indian history into the Hindu, Muhammadan and British periods, using the religious affiliation of the dominant political power to define each period. In this formulation, Prithviraj Chauhan would be the last ruler of ‘Hindu’ India.
The description of Prithviraj as “the last Hindu emperor” can be traced to the British colonial official James Tod’s ‘Annals and Antiquities of Rajasthan’ (1829). However, the historical Prithviraj had several equally powerful Hindu contemporaries, and many Hindu kings continued to rule in southern India well after his time.
How do medieval texts describe the reign of Prithviraj? The ‘Prithviraja Vijaya’ (1191/1192), the earliest Sanskrit ‘mahakavya’, and the Persian ‘Taj al- Ma’asir’ (1217) see Prithviraj Chauhan and Muhammad of Ghor as rivals who could never come to terms with one another.
The ‘Prithviraja Vijaya’ describes the Ghurid king as a wicked eater of cows, and his ambassador as an extremely ugly character. The Muslims are labelled “turuska” (Turk) and “Yavana” (westerner), but also “raksasa” (ogre) and “asura” (demon). However, as the historian Cynthia Talbot (‘The Last Hindu Emperor: Prithviraj Chauhan and the Indian Past 1200-2000’, 2016) points out, the ‘Prithviraja Vijaya’ also dehumanised other rivals of Prithviraj such as the Hindu Chalukya rulers of Gujarat.
Version of ‘Prithviraj Raso’
The ‘Prithviraj Raso’, which was probably composed at a time when Muslim rule was well entrenched in North India, does not use dehumanising expressions for Prithviraj’s rivals. Talbot argues that the poem does not depict a simple Hindu-Muslim opposition. Muhammad Ghori is in fact joined by two other Hindu kings in his battle against Prithviraj Chauhan.
Also, instead of the conflicts with the Ghurid armies, Prithviraj Chauhan’s war with Jaychand of Kannauj is the central episode of the text. It is not only the longest, but also the most pivotal moment, as he loses many of his soldiers in this battle.
Evidently, the history of Prithviraj Chauhan is complex and multilayered. To read just a Hindu-Muslim binary in this fascinating and compelling tale of valour and romance would be simplistic.
A 19th century artist's imagination of the Second battle of Tarain, 1192 AD. (Wikimedia Commons)
Share
