Women on the throne: From Indira to Raziya

[Andhadhun]

as i said, there are intances of strong kingdoms giving away their daughters to the vassal states.

regards

Maybe that king had too many daughters or those vassal states were not as weak as you think or that strong kingdom were not as strong as you they they were.

No one gives their daughter in marriage to a janitor. The same rules apply.

 

[Kaniska]

Last Monday, large numbers of people in India remembered the life and legacy of Indira Gandhi on the 31st anniversary of her death. Some celebrated the memory of our slain prime minister, while others debated the ways, good and bad, in which she refashioned this country. Some recalled her triumph in the 1971 war, while others lambasted her for the socialism that romanticized poverty instead of embracing the idea of prosperity (then, of course, there were the trolls on Twitter who rejoiced that they had one more occasion to employ ghastly neologisms like “sickular"). Either way, Indira Gandhi loomed large this last day of last month, and so this column will reverse the date to the 13th of October, travel back over eight centuries, and remember, instead, another remarkable lady who ruled Delhi—and who too was murdered, closing her tale in tragedy.

If Gandhi was the first woman to lead democratic India, Sultan Raziya was the only woman to have occupied Delhi’s throne during the days of the Slave Dynasty. Like Gandhi, Raziya was first noticed as the daughter of a very important man, emperor Iltutmish. He must have been an unusual character in the 13th century, because he seems to have preferred his daughter over profligate sons, recommending her as his heir. There was precedent, his partisans claimed—Khosrow’s daughter Pourandokht had ruled Persia some centuries before in her own right. But the 40 nobles at court would have none of it—in poetry and verse they threatened to defy the imperial decree, and lamented loudly that beloved Raziya was not the emperor’s son. In other words, Raziya was all a monarch ought to be—except she had the wrong genitals. So when the old man died in 1236, they parked on the throne her half-brother.

This heir had the correct genitals, but all the wrong ideas about being king. He squandered his time in the harem, and made the mistake of keeping the chief among his 40 nobles waiting while he made merry with a favourite dancing girl. Six months into his reign, his courtiers reciprocated the sentiment, with the consequence that he was left somewhat diminished above the neck.

Raziya’s star rose and she was installed on the throne in place of her dead brother. Unlike him, she disdained the harem (and the veil) and rode elephants and horses around the city. When someone nudged her towards gentle, submissive femininity, she told them that as sultan she was not a woman but the guardian of her people. The veil never appeared, and she retained her horses, elephants, and “manly" conduct.

Gandhi too was created by her father’s men. But she informed the syndicate she wouldn’t be their cipher, toppled them, split the Congress party, and went on to prevail till slogans like “Indira is India, India is Indira" sounded like a good idea.

Raziya, on the other hand, never managed to survive her noblemen—perhaps she tried to do too much too soon. She abolished unjust taxes, established schools, welcomed the marginalized into the halls of power, and patronized poets and intellectuals, much to the horror of the Turkish elite. So they eventually hit her below the belt. There was a Lord of the Stables who became the sultan’s favourite. Rumour went around that the queen was having an affair with her stable boy, and a scandal was manufactured and transmitted across the empire. It also didn’t help that the protagonist in this love affair, an Abyssinian called Jamal-ud-Din Yaqut, was black.

Eventually in 1240 the nobles instigated a childhood associate of Raziya’s, who was governor of Bhatinda (hopefully a handsomer city in those days) and who had his own designs on Delhi, to rebel against his sultan. Raziya set out atop her elephant and led her armies to contain him. Sadly for her, she lost the battle and found herself under house arrest. But she did manage to turn the tide—by proposing marriage. There are, apparently, songs about their fabled love, though, of course, for both there were more pragmatic considerations to bear in mind than romance—a prisoner queen doesn’t have very many options, while her captor could claim the throne of Delhi by legitimately planting himself in her bedchamber. Having celebrated their wedding (the hated Abyssinian favourite had died sometime earlier), the couple marched on the capital, where the scheming nobles were ready for them.

This battle too Raziya lost, and while she fled, a band of Jats robbed her and her husband and killed them both. Her brother succeeded as emperor—till the nobles decided his head too looked better on a spike. Raziya lies today somewhere in the old city in an unremarkable tomb, surrounded by illegal constructions and tailor shops, though of course some feel she is buried elsewhere and this is not her tomb at all. Her resting place is essentially a little mound, with another next to it housing the remains of a sister (nobody of historical significance). Some locals know the story of the woman, but the yard where Raziya lies is primarily home to a board installed by the Archaeological Survey of India, and to itinerant beggars.

Indira Gandhi’s memorial, on the other hand, is well-maintained, though this year, because of a bird flu crisis, she too had few visitors.

https://www.livemint.com/Leisure/k7...omen-on-the-throne-From-Indira-to-Raziya.html




I think women make great leaders as they simply have the strong urge to prove themselves especially when they get into things that have been dominated by men since so many centuries.

@Juggernaut_Flat_Plane_V8 @Joe Shearer @Nilgiri @jamahir @Kaniska @Chhatrapati

Not sure about Razia Sultan, but Indira Gandhi is my most favorite brutal, nationalistic and ruthless leader that i always admire in Post independence history....She was a confident, poor mans leader and avid risk taker in her period as a politician..

 

[Andhadhun]

Not sure about Razia Sultan, but Indira Gandhi is my most favorite brutal, nationalistic and ruthless leader that i always admire in Post independence history....She was a confident, poor mans leader and avid risk taker in her period as a politician..

 

[T-123456]

Are you a Muslim celebrating Isabel la Católica?

Do you know who that lady was?

Modi is a friend of Muslims compared that lady.

Who is celebrating what?
Are you trying to score points or what?
What has my post got to do with Muslims or Jews(why not include them when talking about her)?
It is only about powerful women and she was damn powerful.
Next time,read before commenting.

 

[Joe Shearer]

what are you on about?

vassalage system was used by the guptas to rule india much the same way as the british and the mughals.

regards

You are both saying more or less the same thing. Indian feudal relations wert through a tremendous amount of development through the centuries). There was no concept of vassalage in India, as far as I can remember; there was, however, a concept of suzerainty.

In suzerainty, a monarch remains a sovereign; however, he acknowledges another state as having superordinate power over him, pays tribute, and accepts the presence in his court of powerful ambassadors, or rather, representatives of the suzerain power, who were in some ways brakes on his freedom of action.

The Mughals did not have vassals as a rule in their own dominions; however, they had taken control of certain kingdoms and handed those back to their original rulers, on conditions of payment of tribute and contribution of military strength on demand, in times of need: that is a classic vassalage system.

In their own domain, they appointed viceroys, with authority, both financial and legal (obviously backed up by military force), to act in the name of the emperor. These were not vassals, these were imperial representatives, precisely, viceroys.

The British did something altogether different, outside their own territory; they held themselves a suzerain power, meaning that the erstwhile sovereign, while remaining sovereign, with no legal constraint on his powers of rule, did suffer from some restraints, typically in terms of foreign relations and the freedom of military action. They enforced these restrictions by posting their own man on the spot, in the form of the Political Officer, a member of the Indian Political Service who more or less could stop the Nawab or the Maharaja right in his tracks if required to.

The Chinese, from the Qing dynasty onwards, exercised an almost identical suzerainty over Xijang, or Tibet. We find the same accoutrements of power: the Dalai Lama and the Panchen Lama exercised sovereign power, had their own Councils of Administration, and did what they wanted to, more or less. However, there were two Ambans from the Chinese Court keeping a permanent and watchful eye on the goings on, and foreign relations were strictly controlled by the Ambans. That is why the whole imbroglio over the MacMahon Line happened; at Simla, the Tibetan delegate signed the declaration making that boundary the official one, the Chinese delegate, Ivan Chen, adamantly refused.

To return to the point, there was no vassalage of the Vakatakas to the Guptas; the more precise relationship should be termed Suzerainty of the Guptas over the Vakataka. In this arrangement, marriages to cement the relationship were not uncommon; typically, it was the suzerain that contributed the female partner to the alliance.

I hope that helps.

 

[TheGreatMaratha]

"women rulers"....... this gender swapping thing has gotten to the point where men want strong women to wear the pants and rule them.... "let me off the ride!" is how I feel about the society today....

anyways, women rulers are against Islam.... women can be ruler of the kitchen

There were people like you in the 19th century who were against education of women, against liberation of slaves, etc. Guess what? Most of them are extinct now but unfortunately humanity still has to bear the likes of you.

You can't stop progressive thinking. Try all you can.

 

[AfrazulMandal]

"women rulers"....... this gender swapping thing has gotten to the point where men want strong women to wear the pants and rule them.... "let me off the ride!" is how I feel about the society today....

anyways, women rulers are against Islam.... women can be ruler of the kitchen

Women can play a greater role.

A direct head of state ? Perhaps not. But certainly not just the kitchen.

There were people like you in the 19th century who were against education of women, against liberation of slaves, etc. Guess what? Most of them are extinct now but unfortunately humanity still has to bear the likes of you.

You can't stop progressive thinking. Try all you can.

We do not make these rules. His interpretation seems incorrect though.

 

[TheGreatMaratha]

Razia sultan barely managed to rule for 3 years.

Rudramadevi of the Kakatiya Dynasty ruled the Kakatiya Empire from 1262 to 1295 CE.

Rani Durgavati ruled Kingdom of Gondwana from 1550 to 1564. She fought in every battle her men fought.

Ahilyabai Holkar ruled Malwa for 30 years. From 1765 to 1795. She personally led the army in the wars . She developed the village called Indore to a prosperous capital city in her era. She built dozens of temples, ghats, wells, tanks and rest-houses across an area stretching from the Himalayas to pilgrimage centres in South India. The Bharatiya Sanskritikosh lists as sites she embellished, Kashi, Gaya, Somnath, Ayodhya, Mathura, Haridwar, Kanchi, Avanti, Dwarka, Badrinarayan, Rameshwar and Jaganathpuri. Ahilyadevi also supported the rise of merchants, farmers and cultivators to levels of affluence, and did not consider that she had any legitimate claim to their wealth, be it through taxes or feudal right.

Maharani Kempananjammanni of Mysore Kingdom is a legend.

These are just 4 names from hundreds.

Did Gautamiputra Satakarni's mother also rule for a few years?

Not sure about Razia Sultan, but Indira Gandhi is my most favorite brutal, nationalistic and ruthless leader that i always admire in Post independence history....She was a confident, poor mans leader and avid risk taker in her period as a politician..

Indira Gandhi certainly is one of the strongest Indian leaders post Independence and that's including CM's and PM's. She is the reason we don't have any headache on the Eastern border now.

Who is celebrating what?
Are you trying to score points or what?
What has my post got to do with Muslims or Jews(why not include them when talking about her)?
It is only about powerful women and she was damn powerful.
Next time,read before commenting.

You don't understand the prism through which they look at things everyday.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Did Gautamiputra Satakarni's mother also rule for a few years?

No. Her son honoured her, he did not let her rule.

Indira Gandhi certainly is one of the strongest Indian leaders post Independence and that's including CM's and PM's. She is the reason we don't have any headache on the Eastern border now.

 

[Andhadhun]

Did Gautamiputra Satakarni's mother also rule for a few years?

There is no record of her actually ruling. Though her names is taken with reverence and is found in inscriptions.

So there is a possibility of her being regent to the king for quite some time.

Indira Gandhi certainly is one of the strongest Indian leaders post Independence and that's including CM's and PM's. She is the reason we don't have any headache on the Eastern border now.

We have a different kind of headache on the eastern border now.

She is the reason we are still poor and backward. The reason we have nepotism and family owned political parties.

Except for creation of BD, there is not a SINGLE thing which Indian can thank her for.

She was certainly strong. So was Ravan.

Both had similar approach to politics.

 

[TheGreatMaratha]

No. Her son honoured her, he did not let her rule.

In my state, some say that our Hindu year calendar starts from when Gautamiputra Satakarni defeated the Shaka king Nahapana and thus he is called Shaka-karta or the person who defeated the Shakas.

We have a different kind of headache on the eastern border now.

She is the reason we are still poor and backward. The reason we have nepotism and family owned political parties.

Except for creation of BD, there is not a SINGLE thing which Indian can thank her for.

She was certainly strong. So war Ravan.

Our worries would have been doubled if there was a nuclear East Pakistan now. Imagine a brainwashed East Pakistan like present day Pakistan. Atleast, Bangladesh is more progressive compared to Pakistan.

 

[Joe Shearer]

In my state, some say that our Hindu year calendar starts from when Gautamiputra Satakarni defeated the Shaka king Nahapana and thus he is called Shaka-karta or the person who defeated the Shakas.

If it interests you, forget about what they say or do not say about these things, and look up the Saka Era and the Vikram Era for yourself.

 

[ChennaiDude]

I think women make great leaders as they simply have the strong urge to prove themselves especially when they get into things that have been dominated by men since so many centuries.

Totally agree- If they can bring up kids/hold fort on the home front/ bear children etc, they would make great leaders-- Mentally I feel that women are stronger than Men- Men are just physically stronger thats all- They would make great leaders if given a fair chance.

“There are two powers in the world; one is the sword and the other is the pen. There is a great competition and rivalry between the two. There is a third power stronger than both, that of the women.”
― Muhammad Ali Jinnah

 

[TheGreatMaratha]

If it interests you, forget about what they say or do not say about these things, and look up the Saka Era and the Vikram Era for yourself.

What do you mean? Even I'm not sure to be honest. There have been disputes as to when he actually defeated Nahapana.

 

[ChennaiDude]

I like that 1971 epoisode, she made the enemy generals stoop for surrender.. not ten or hundreds but thousands.. what a lady.. Iron.. India misses her..

Yes was a great leader-She did have her flaws, but hey thats OK - Manekshaw should be given his due also for the 1971 episode- He was the one who made it happen.