Rawal Ratan Singh of
Rajasthan and his Resistance against the Turks
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rawal
Ratan Singh of Rajasthan and his Resistance against the Turks |
|
The Warlike Traditions
and Resistance
The rulers of Mewar had their glorious history by virtue of offering
tremendous resistance for the cause of their country against the Arab and
Turkish invaders. Bapa and Khuman have been credited to have successfully
repelled the Arab invaders and checked their expansion beyond Multan and Sindh.
During the four centuries that followed, the Guhilots of Mewar had
occasionally to face reverses at the hands of their powerful neighbours, the
Chalukyas, the Paramars and the Chauhans. Jaitra Singh (12l3 – 61)
consolidated his own power and shook off completely the ascendancy of rival
princes. He tried to check the advance of the Truks towards Rajasthan and made
Chittor the seat of the government. When Rawal Ratan Singh, the son and
successor of Samar Singh, ascended the gaddi in the year 1302, he had to
maintain the warlike tradition of his house by defending the fort of Chittor
against Alauddin’s invading forces. His war against the Khalji Sultan ended in
disaster for him and the Rawal house, and he died defending the fort against
his enemies in the year 1303 A.D.
The siege of Chittor (1303 A.D.)
The fall of the fort and the death of the Rawal are the interesting
accounts of the siege of the fortress. Alauddin Khalji, who was one of the
most ambitious rulers that ever sat upon the throne of Delhi, undertook the
difficult task of reducing the powerful state of Mewar to submission. Early in
1303 he started from Delhi and besieged the fort of Chittor, the capital of
the guhilots. This expedition was the outcome of the Sultan’s ambitious desire
for territorial expansion. It was also directed, in all probability, towards
the achievement of conquering the regions of independent Hindu chiefs. After
the reduction of the fort of Ranthambore in 1301, the occupation of the fort
would really help his scheme of expansion in the Deccan. It tradition is to be
believed, the immediate cause of his expedition was his infatuation for
Padmini, the fair queen of Rawal Ratan Singh. Amir Khursau, who was the
poet-laureate and who accompanied the Sultan on this expedition, has left
gralphuic description of the siege of the fort and its fall.
On his arrival in Chittor, Alauddin pitched his white canopy on the top of an
adjacent hillock, known as Chittori. He occupied this position in order to
hold his court and direct (he operations of the siege personally. Then the
right and left wing of the army was stationed on either side of the fort. The
troops were also ordered to encircle the whole town. For about seven months
the siege continued, but all the attempts o capture the fort failed. The brave
Rajputs, under their gallant leader Ratan Singh, defended the fort to the last
man. The wonderful citadel was not affected in the least despite the
onslaughts of the marjniq, battles and clever stratagems. The gallant Sisodia
vassal chief Lakshman Singh fell fighting along with his seven sons. Gora and
Badal, the two brave sons of Chittor, fought but they failed to withstand the
combined strength of the enemy. The woman performed the awful ritual of jauhar
to save their honour. The life in the fort was thereafter thrown into utter
confusion, leading to its inevitable collapse. The Rana had to submit
ultimately on the 26th August 1303 A.D.
Mr. Tod gives a picturesque description o the last scene o resistance. “When
further resistance seemed impossible, they preferred death to disgrace, and
performed that horrible rite, the Jauhar, where the females are immolated to
preserve them from the pollution or captivity. The funeral pyre was lighted
with in the ‘great subterranean retreat,’ in chambers impervious to the number
of several thousands. The fair Padmini closed upon them, leaving them to final
security from dishonor in the devouring element.”
Alauddin’s army then entered the fort. “The heroic resistance of the Rajputs
had exasperated the Sultan who ordered a general massacre of the population.”
Amir Khusrau, who was eyewitness, says that 30,000 Hindus were killed in a
single day. This was followed by demolition of the temples and other objects
of art. After staying therefore sometime, the victorious Sultan left for
Delhi, put-staying there his eldest son Khizra Khan in its charge. The fort
was rechristened Khizrabad. |
|
|
|
|
Controversies Regarding the
end of Ratan Singh |
|
Nothing is known
about the Rana’s end. According to Nensi, Ratan Singh died a
heroic death fighting the Sultan. Tod also accepts this version.
But the writer of the Khazain-ul-Futuh says tat after the
capitulation of Chittor, the Rana sought refuge in Alauddin’s
camp and his life was spared. Isami supports this fact. Kakka
Sur, a Jain writer, in his work Nabhinandana –
jinodhara-prabandha, composed in 1336, says that
Alavadiri(Alauddin) captured Ratan Singh, took away his
property, and made him move like a monkeys from one city to
another. According to Jatmal’s Gora- Badal –Chaupa (composed in
1613 A.D.). Ratan singh was imprisoned by the Sultan and he was
ill treated. But if the traditional stories are believed, it
appears that his imprisonment was the early affair. When Gora
and Badal managed to rescue Ratan Singh from Alauddin’s camp, he
went back to the for fort and there in an active action embraced
death. |
|
|
|
|
Later history of Chittor |
|
Khizra Khan could not stay in Chittor for a
long time. He had to leave it about the year 1311 A.D. The
valiat Rajputs constantly harassed the royal troops garrisoned
at the fort. As a result of this the Sultan ordered Khizra Khan
to evacuate it. He then entrusted the charge of the fort to
Maldeo, the Sonagara chief of Jalore. But the Rajputs did not
bear the occupation of the fort by one who was a tributary of
the Sultan. Hamir, the Sisodia chief, recovered the fort and it
once again became the capital of Mewar about 1325 A.D.
|
|
|
|
|
The Historicity of Padmini |
|
Many moderm scholars
are inclined to reject the story of Padmini altogether. They
regard Padmini’s story a legend. The episode of Padmini has
received a great deal of prominence, through the Padmavat of
Malik Muhammad Jayasi written about 1540 A.D. According to him,
Padmini was a princess of Ceylon. She was well-known for her
beauty from a parrot, fell in love. He went to Ceylon in
mendicants dress and succeeded in winning her love. She was then
brought to Chittor. Once by chance, Raghavdev, a wizard, saw
her. He was highly impressed by her superb beauty. He went to
the court of Alauddin Khilji and reported to the Sultan about
Padmini’s extraordinary charm. Alauddin in order to have her in
his harem laid siege to the fort of Chittor. Finding the task of
reducing the fort difficult, he tried to get her by some other
device. He sent a message to the Rana that if Padmini’s
reflection should be shown to him in a mirror, he would go back
to Delhi. He agreed to gratify the Sultan’s wishes by allowing
him to behold the princes through the medium of mirror. When the
Sultan was going back after looking at the reflection of the
fair Padmini and when Rana accompanied the Sultan up to the gate
of the fort, as courtesy demanded, he was treacherously
imprisoned and carried away to the Sultan’s camp. From his camp
the Sultan sent word to the Rani that her husband would be
released if she chose to come into his harem. In order to
counteract the treachery of Sultan, the Rani expressed her
willingness to do so. Hence under the leadership of Gora and
Badal 1,600 covered litters, occupied by armed warriors, reached
the royal palace and demanded for a private interview of the
Rani with her husband. The Sultan readily granted. The brave
Rajputs rescued the Rana and carried him off to Chittor. Then
followed a deadly fight resulting in the end of the brave Gora
and Badal along with their followers. In the meantime, Alauddin
again invaded the fort and occupied it.
Some of the critics like Dr. Ojha, Dr. Qanungo, Dr. Lal etc.
regard the story of Padmini a fiction, intermixed with romantic
and adventurous tales. They are of opinion that Padmini’s story,
which originated from Jayasi’s mind has been uncritically
accepted as a true historical fact. Dr. Qanungo not only rejects
the story of Padmini but also doubts the very existence of Ratan
Singh. The major arguments for rejecting this story are: (1)
Amir Khusrau, who accompanied the Sultan says nothing about it;
(2) other contemporary writers also make no mention of Padmini;
(3) the story has been borrowed from Padmavat, a later work of
1540 A.D., which is a romance rather than a literary work. It is
nothing but a literary concoction of Malik Muhammed Jayasi.
“Further, the later writers, who reproduced the story with
varying details, flourished long after the event and differ from
one another on essential points. It has also been argued that
the invasion of Chittor was natural corollary to the
expansionist policy of Alauddin and no Padmini was needed for
his Casus Belli”.
As against this. Dr. A. L. Srivastava feels that these arguments
are based on a superficial reading of Khusrau’s work and are
fallacious. He further says, “Amir Khusrau” does throw a hint
about the episode when he compares Alauddin with Solomon, refers
to his Seba as being in the fort of Chittor, and of himself as ‘Hud-Hud’,
the bird that brought the news of the beautiful Bilquis, queen
of Seba, to king Solomon of Ethopia. Khusrau’s narrative makes
it clear that Alauddin entered the fort accompanied by him
before it had capitulated, a fort to which birds were unable to
fly. The Rana came to Alauddin’s tents and submitted only after
the Sultan had returned from the fort. After the Rana’s
submission, the massacre of 30,000 Hindus took place by the
disappointed Sultan’s order. Reading between the lines brings to
light the main incidents of the story. Khusrau, who was a court
poet, was not in a position to write anything more, than he
actually did, and we know that he had omitted many an
unpalatable truth, such as, Allauddin’s murder of his uncle,
Jalauddin, the Sultan’s defeat at the hands of the Mongols, the
Mongols’ siege of Delhi etc. it is wrong to say, as Mr. Ojha and
Dr. Lal and others have contended, that the incident was
concocted by Jayasi. The fact is that Jayasi wrote out a
romance, the plot of which he derived from Amir Khusrau’s
Khazain-ul-Futuh. Most of the romantic details of Jayasi’s
Padmavat are imaginary; but the main plot of the story that
Padmini was coveted by Alauddin and was shown in a mirror to the
lustful Sultan who had her husband arrested, is most probably
based on historical truth. It seems the women performed Jauhar
after Ratan Singh’s arrest and then the Rajputs fell on the
invaders and rescued the Rana. But they were out down to a man,
and the fort and the country passed into Alauddin’s hands.
Those critics who have classed the story of Padmini as fiction
have forgotten the fact that traditional lore’s have some
historical background. The bardic chronicles and some Persian
histories preserved the current story of Padmini from Mewar
tradition. The story was so popular that Ferishta and
Hajiuddabir gave place to the story in their works. Even Manucci
records the events related with Padmini, Raja’s imprisonment and
the clever strategem of litters. Col. Tod also repeats the story
of Padmini in glowing terms. Nensi and Surajmal Mishran too do
not miss to refer the Padmini affair. The varied accounts of
Padmini’s story narrated by the writers, poets and travelers
offer a strong testimony to draw that it is not the case of
imagination but an event borrowed from current tradition. Dr.
Ishwari Prasad is right to suggest that the mewar tradition
which accepts the story is a very old one, handed down from
generation to generation, and if Padmini episode was a mere
‘literary concoction’ why did it gain so wide a currency in
Rajputana ? The views of S.Roy also deserve due consideration in
this connection. He says, “it should be remembered that
Alauddin’s lust for a Hindu queen is proved by the known
instances of Queen Kamla Devi of Gujarat and the daughter of
King Ramchandra of Devagiri. It is to be remembered also, that
Abul Fazi definitely says that he gives the story of Padmini
from “ancient chronicles.” Which cannot obviously refer to the
Padmavat, an almost contemporary work. On the whole, it must be
admitted that there is no inherent impossibility in the kernel
of the story of Padmini devoid of all embellishments, and it
should not be totally rejected off hand as a myth. But it is
impossible, at the present state of our knowledge, to regard it
as a definite historical fact.” |
|
|
|
|
Causes of the fall of Chittor |
|
The fall of
the fort should not be ascribed to the inferiority of the Rajput
defenders as soldiers, and to the superiority of the Turks who
came from the cold region, and used the superior skill of
warfare. The Rajput soldiers have been superb is a fact which no
one would deny. For centuries they showed their mettle in the
field of battle. The fact that the Rajputs offered heroic
resistance for about seven months is a strong proof of Rajput
valour and strength. Again, the fact that the siege was a
prolonged one emphatically proves that the garrison was
determined to defend the fort to the last man. The main cause of
the fall of the fort is to be traced in the political disunity.
When Chittor was passing through the moments of critical crisis,
the neighbouring Rajput clans and fellow rulers did not come to
its aid. The Rawal of Chittor had to fight single handed. No
effort was made to put up a united defence against the invader.
Dr. Lal has rightly remarked. “It is not known if the
neighbouring princes came to the rescue of Ratan but considering
the constant rivalry and callous indifference of the kingdoms of
Rajputana towards one another, it can easily be surmised that
the newly crowned king of Chittor had to fight single handed.”
In the field of military equipment and tactics, the Rajputs were
stationary. They were, therefore, outclassed in weapons and out
maneuvered in tactics. The Rajput swordsmanship and arrowmanship
proved ineffective against the onslaughts of the marjniqs. By
closing the door of the fort and allowing the civil population
of the neighbouring region to seek protection within the
citadel, the defenders were deprived of the provision that was
stored for a longer siege. The enemies on the other hand
devastated the towns and villages, and collected material
through their swoop and shock – tactics. Moreover, creating a
second defense line or military station, was sadly missed by the
Rajputs, while the Sultan had several military outposts from
Delhi onward for the supply of arms and provision. The Sultan
had also taken special care to survey the site and pitched his
tent between the two rivers Gambhiri and Berach, the natural
defense lines. By occupying a hillock, known as Chittori, he
made his task easy for directing the operations of the siege
personally. The mobile Turkish troops encircled the town and the
right and left wings of the army encamped on other side of the
fort. This arrangement was made to exploit the weaknesses of the
Rajputs and to dishearten and demoralize the civil population.
Thus the superior military organization of the Turks rendered
the heroic resistance futile in long run. |
|
|
|
| 
