• Friday, February 28, 2020

First Battle of Rajasthan - Where Arab lost to Indians.

Discussion in 'Military History & Tactics' started by SwatCat, Jan 19, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. SwatCat

    SwatCat FULL MEMBER

    Messages:
    529
    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2012
    Ratings:
    +0 / 390 / -0
    Battle of Rajasthan-Triple Alliance between South and Northern Indian Kingdoms to drive Arabs from India​



    The Battle of Rajasthan is a battle (or series of battles) where the Gurjar Hindu alliance defeated the Arab invaders in 738 CE and removed the Arab invaders and pillagers from the area east of the Indus River and protected whole India. The final battle took place somewhere on the borders of modern Sindh-Rajasthan. Following their defeat the remnants of the Arab army fled to the other bank of the River Indus.The main Indian kings who contributed to the victory over the Arabs were the north Indian Gurjar Emperor Nagabhata I of the Pratihara Dynasty and the south Indian Gurjar Emperor Vikramaditya II of the Chalukya dynasty in the 8th century. The Muslim conquest of Persia by Arab forces in a short space of time contrasts sharply to the defeat of the Arab armies by the Hindus.

    [​IMG]

    Background

    With the break-up of the Gupta Empire (550 CE), northern India was covered with warring states, which attempted to wrest the imperial position left vacant by the Guptas. Among these were Yasodharman of Malwa, the Maitrakas of Vallabhi, and Emperor Harshavardhana of Thanesar. Emperor Harshavardhana unified whole North India in the 7th century. But in the early 8th century North India was divided into several kingdoms. The most powerful kingdoms of North India in the 8th century were the Gurjara Pratihara dynasty and the Pala dynasty.
    Before the onset of this age West Asia was conquered by the politico-religious ideology of Islam (7th Century). Under the Umayyad Caliphs the Muslim Arabs attempted to conquer the frontier kingdoms of India; Kabul, Zabul, and Sindh, but were repulsed. In the early 8th Century the Kingdom of Sindh under Brahmin King Dahir of the Rai dynasty was convulsed by internal strife——taking advantage of the conditions the Arabs renewed their assaults and finally occupied it under Muhammad ibn Qasim, the nephew of Al-Hajjaj (governor of Iraq and Khurasan). Qasim and his successors attempted to expand from Sindh into Punjab and other regions but were badly defeated by Lalitaditya of Kashmir and Yasovarman of Kannauj. Even their position in Sindh was unstable at this time. Arab forces failed to make any substantial gains in India.(Qasim tried to expand and got defeated :azn:)

    Events leading up to the battle

    Junayd ibn Abd al-Rahman al-Murri, the successor of Muhammad ibn Qasim, finally subdued the Hindu resistance within Sindh. Taking advantage of the conditions in Western India, which at that time was covered with several small states, Junaid led a large army into the region in early 730 CE. Dividing this force into two he plundered several cities in southern Rajasthan, western Malwa, and Gujarat.
    Indian records confirm this invasion but record the Arab success only against the smaller states in Gujarat. They also record the defeat of the Arabs at two places. The southern army moving south into Gujarat was defeated at Navsari by Avanijanashraya Pulakesi who was sent by the South Indian Gurjar Emperor Vikramaditya II of the Chalukya Empire. The army that went east, reached Avanti whose ruler Gurjara Pratihara [2] Nagabhata I utterly defeated the invaders and they fled to save their life.

    The Battle of Rajasthan

    Gauging at the seriousness of the situation as well as the power of the arab forces, pratihara king, Nagabhata made pact with Jaysimha Varman of the Rashtrakuta Empire. Jaysimha in turn sent his son Avanijanashraya Pulakesi to support Nagabhata. The two Dynasties of India supplemented the already fighting Hindu Gurjar Mewar Kingdom, under Bappa Rawal, at the border of Rajasthan.
    The battle was fought between 5,000-6,000 Gurjar Infantry and cavalry facing more than 30,000 Arabs. The Gurjar fought bravely and managed to kill the Arab leader Emir Junaid during the war. This enhanced the morale of the Gurjar hindu forces while the Arabs disorganized and demoralized due to their leaders death retreated and were frequently attacked by local forces until they reached the indus river taking great casualties.[3]

    Aftermath

    Junayd's successor Tamim ibn Zaid al-Utbi organized a fresh campaigns against Rajasthan but failed to hold any territories there. He would be further pushed across River Indus by the combined forces of the King of Kannauj, Nagabhata C.E. thus limiting the Arabs to the territory of Sindh across River Indus.
    In the words of the Arab chronicler Suleiman, “a place of refuge to which the Muslims might flee was not to be found.” The Arabs crossed over to the other side of the River Indus, abandoning all their lands to the victorious Indian kings. The local chieftains took advantage of these conditions to re-establish their independence. Subsequently the Arabs constructed the city of Mansurah on the other side of the wide and deep Indus, which was safe from attack. This became their new capital in Sindh.

    Equipment and resources

    In the Gwalior inscription it is recorded that Nagabhata I “crushed the large army of the powerful Mlechcha king.” This large army consisted of cavalry, infantry, siege artillery, and probably a force of camels. Since Tamin was a new governor he had a force of Syrian cavalry from Damascus, local Arab contingents, converted Hindus of Sindh, and foreign mercenaries like the Turks. All together the invading army have had anywhere between 50,000-60,000 men. In comparison the Indians had around 30,000-40,000 men.
    The Arab chronicler Suleiman describes the army of the Imperial Gurjara Pratiharas as it stood in 851 CE; The king of Gurjars maintains numerous forces and no other Indian prince has so fine a cavalry. He is unfriendly to the Arabs, still he acknowledges that the king of the Arabs is the greatest of kings. Among the princes of India there is no greater foe of the Islamic faith than he. He has got riches, and his camels and horses are numerous.[4]
    But at the time of the Battle of Rajasthan the Gurjar Pratihars[5] had only just risen to power. In fact Nagabhatta was their first prominent ruler. But the composition of his army, which was predominantly cavalry, is clear from the description. There are other anecdotal references to the Indian kings and commanders riding elephants to have a clear view of the battlefield. The infantry stood behind the elephants and the cavalry formed the wings and advanced guard.

    Later events

    The Arabs in Sindh took a long time to recover from their defeat. In the early 9th Century the governor Bashar attempted an invasion of India but was defeated. Even a naval expedition sent by the Caliphs was defeated by the Saindhava clan of Kathiawar. After this the Arab chroniclers admit that the Caliph Mahdi, “gave up the project of conquering any part of India'.”
    The Arabs in Sindh lost all power and broke up into two warring Shia states of Mansurah and Multan, both of which paid tribute to the Gurjara Pratiharas. The local resistance in Sindh, which had not yet died out and was inspired by the victories of their Indian neighbors manifested itself when the foreign rulers were overthrown and Sindh came under its own dynasties like the Soomras and Sammas.

    Battle of Rajasthan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 10
  2. Ayush

    Ayush SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    7,806
    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2012
    Ratings:
    +3 / 11,368 / -5
    Country:
    India
    Location:
    India
    nice and informative.:tup:
     
  3. Teeta

    Teeta BANNED

    Messages:
    328
    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2012
    Ratings:
    +0 / 466 / -0
    Just the very fact that Arabs crossed entire Arabian peninsula, crossed the mountainous plains, and attacked the huge Indian landmass in 7th century is just astonishing.

    Historically, "Islamic Civilization" (as people call it) has maintained the best success ratio among ALL human civilizations of humanity's recorded history. Quite impressive. "Mashallah" for that...

    But this doesn't change the very fact of nature that is written in my signature...
     
  4. BATMAN

    BATMAN ELITE MEMBER

    Messages:
    26,931
    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2007
    Ratings:
    +15 / 17,907 / -31
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Pakistan
    False information!

    A confused nation, who dosn't know.. what they shall call them self.

    Hindustan was name given by the central Asians, once they occupied various tiny states of the region.

    India was name given by British.

    Bharat is a fictional state, in hinduism.

    After partition... India name is no more valid.

    Actually, after partition, popular hindu leaders use to call it Hindustan.. but it is fashionable to be addressed by the title given by masters.

    Now we can well imagine, what would become of history if current population of this India starts to re-write History.

    My advise... find a name for your state first... other wise if you loose it to Zaid Hamid.. there will be conflict to record your defeat... we may very well call it simple Hind.
     
  5. SwatCat

    SwatCat FULL MEMBER

    Messages:
    529
    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2012
    Ratings:
    +0 / 390 / -0

    Romans and Alexander will be rated high in this category. Romans also restored their empire in times of trouble unlike Arabs.


    Don't bhe delusional mate.

    "Hindusthanam" is a sanskrit word you find in Ancient Hindu texts.
     
  6. BATMAN

    BATMAN ELITE MEMBER

    Messages:
    26,931
    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2007
    Ratings:
    +15 / 17,907 / -31
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Pakistan
    So is Pakistan.. a sanskarit word in your books.. perhaps.
     
  7. SwatCat

    SwatCat FULL MEMBER

    Messages:
    529
    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2012
    Ratings:
    +0 / 390 / -0
    Pak is persian I think, sthan is a word both in sanskrit and persian.

    we are talking only about India here not Pakistan(no offence).
     
  8. Teeta

    Teeta BANNED

    Messages:
    328
    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2012
    Ratings:
    +0 / 466 / -0
    Alexander doesn't even come close! All his fairy tales aren't historically verifiable. His conquests left little or no mark in history.

    Romans are a contender, but eventually they themselves fell to Islamic Power between 7th to 14th century....

    Arabs didn't restore their authority when in trouble? This is particularly wrong. Actually, Arabs faced this dilemma right after the death of the Prophet.

    Islam remained global dominant force for 1100+ years out of its total history of 1400 years!! This ratio is exceptional. It means that "Muslims", if you wanna call it, remained a global dominant force, in one form or the other, for about 71.3% of their entire history! No ideology/civilization even comes slightly close to this success ratio.

    Lets say Rome after birth of Christ...It took 300 years for Christianity to gain hold..and then in next three hundred years, the Empire lost its power already. This followed 1000 years of "dark ages" before Europe (Rome if you wanna call it) came back again.

    This will make it as 600/2000 years of global dominant/influential force....a mere 30% of Christendom's total history.

    So you see what I'm talking about?

    Islamic World is in "dark ages", if we must say, for last 200-300 years..but the astonishing fact is that Islam is a complete, comprehensive ideology. If it went down "politically", the "religious" aspect of Islam kept on growing and gaining more global influence..Now, "Muslims" are already coming back! They have starting to make some progress in science and tech, society, revolutions against monarchs, rise of Political aspect of Islam etc..

    History of humankind has never seen an ideology as strong, consistent, and influential as Islam. Muslims can have "Mashallah" to this...

    But Islam operates in the realm of reality and human nature..and if Muslims don't correct their path...then *read my signature*
     
  9. SwatCat

    SwatCat FULL MEMBER

    Messages:
    529
    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2012
    Ratings:
    +0 / 390 / -0
    @Teeta Christians in the West contributed to Global GDP and scientifically than any group and the influence of the West is more than any religious group on this planet.

    It is Ottaman Empire which can be considered as a strong Islamic Empire which dominated some parts of Europe.

    I agree with you on Alexander, I am talking in the perspective of the distance he traveled from his Home land.

    You are very true in you signature what rises will eventually fall and it is a universal law.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 5, 2013
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  10. IND151

    IND151 BANNED

    Messages:
    10,172
    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2010
    Ratings:
    +3 / 7,319 / -0
    Country:
    India
    Location:
    India
    Interesting thread

    Like all other invasions, we suffered because we weren't united.

    All invaders defeated us one by one.

    In this case a triple alliance of Indian Kingdoms defeated Arab Invaders, had such alliances formed continuously, there wouldn't be any Mughal Empire.
     
  11. Teeta

    Teeta BANNED

    Messages:
    328
    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2012
    Ratings:
    +0 / 466 / -0
    Well "Christians of the West" obviously has contributed most to the human civilization....BUT...in the last 300 years or so (after industrialization)...I was talking about "over-all" human history and success ratio of human civilizations...

    And not necessarily, Islam will only fall IF Muslims keep acting like baffoons!

    Fall of Islam, if it ever happened, will mark the end of era of religion in human civilization. As I already said, Islam is THE most strongest/most consistent ideological force humankind has ever seen...to have it go down, something drastic in history would have to happen.

    Just a hint : Islam adds~ 24,000,000 new followers to its bag every year....:rolleyes:

    I have no problem with Islam, but with some retarded Muslims who are still stuck in 7th century...
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 5, 2013
  12. IND151

    IND151 BANNED

    Messages:
    10,172
    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2010
    Ratings:
    +3 / 7,319 / -0
    Country:
    India
    Location:
    India
    not true.

    Bharat Varsha existed, it was not a single nation but a bunch several small and large kingdoms together known as Bharat Varsha(Mauryan Empire was perhaps first empire which united a large part of Northern and central Indian Subcontinent, if we choose not to believe in Emperor Bharat)

    Bharat means one who is enjoying adhyatm
     
  13. Tridibans

    Tridibans FULL MEMBER

    Messages:
    1,741
    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2012
    Ratings:
    +1 / 3,993 / -2
    Country:
    India
    Location:
    India
    Sorry my maths is really bad, can you clarify how did you reach the figure of "1000" years? History says it was max to max 400 years. That too is debatable as most of South and East India were either never under this rule or were for the last 150 years of the empire.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 3
  14. IND151

    IND151 BANNED

    Messages:
    10,172
    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2010
    Ratings:
    +3 / 7,319 / -0
    Country:
    India
    Location:
    India
    I have already told this various times to posters, but........

    Officially it lasted from 1526 to 1857, making it hardly 331 years (I am referring to Mughal empire as no other Muslim Dynasty ruled that much large land mass of subcontinent)
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 2
  15. SwatCat

    SwatCat FULL MEMBER

    Messages:
    529
    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2012
    Ratings:
    +0 / 390 / -0
    They get confused with the arrival of Islam to the Indian Subcontinent with Islamic rule :D
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.