WHY THE RAJPUTS WERE UNABLE TO DEFEAT MUSLIM INVADERS?

Muslim chroniclers record that the Indian soldiers were resolute in battle and that the Afghans and Turks had initially been terrified by their huge armies led by gigantic elephants. They however also record that Indian armies were not trained to combine effectively. Rajput armies relied on one crushing victory and their martial pride could not face the ignominy of losing small tactical battles to win a greater war. Becoming a captive also entailed an unacceptable loss of caste that made death preferable to defeat. So whenever the prospect of victory faded the morale of the Rajput armies would be totally crushed. They fought according to inflexible rules of war and did not understand the principles of strategy and the importance of surprise.

Indian armies had also always been deficient in war horses and their reliance on elephants slowed them down and could often disrupt their own ranks if wounded. Muslim armies were much better mounted and their hardy ponies trained in rugged mountains were trained to make fast battlefield maneuvers. Indian armies always advanced slowly in big blocks according to a fixed, and thus predictable science that had hardly changed since it had been defined in the third century BC in Kautilya’s Arthashastra. Pomp and show was more important than strategy.

The hot Indian summer resulted in Indian armies choosing to only fight during the campaigning season between the end of September and the end of March usually marked by the festivals of Dusshera and Holi. Armies then rested in cool palaces during the appalling heat of summer with the result that both soldiers and their horses were weakened when they had to face invading armies. Enemies had to be awed by magnificence and surprise, a key element in warfare, had little part in their set piece planning. Their colorful tents and elaborate arrangements for food, religion and comfort required a huge train of camp followers including wives with the result that they moved slowly with a low ratio of fighting teeth to supporting tail. The caste system also played a big role as the masses of infantry were almost always poorly armed low caste infantry and archers. Though they were very numerous they were poorly trained and easily demoralized. Caste Hindus always rode on horses or elephants.

The short recurved bow, shot by mounted archers, was another big factor in the success of Afghan and Mughal armies. Indian archers who had been feared by Alexander’s Macedonians had degenerated into poorly skilled low caste infantrymen. A trained Muslim mounted archer could let loose six arrows in as many seconds while at full gallop. It was the mounted archers that mopped up Ibrahim Lodi’s army and later crushed Rana Sangha and Hemu. The eye of the latter was pierced by an arrow.

The courts of Indian rulers were also hotbeds of intrigue where courtiers, priests and womenfolk, behind the scenes, jostled for influence. Rulers were easily flattered to overlook their own weaknesses and to believe in their invincibility. Rivals with ability, sincerity or integrity were also dangerous in the courts of sycophants. These completely undermined the cooperation and teamwork so vital for sustained attack or defense. Rajput pride was a barrier to learning and new ideas, new weapons and new battle tactics were not welcome. There was great reliance in old traditions.

Astrology was a major problem. The Brahmins in all the royal courts had no conception of the importance of the opportune moment and would not allow military movements except at times that they deemed auspicious and after elaborate religious rituals. They were also so inward looking that they had little awareness of external threats and did not appreciate the fact that the Afghan and Turk invaders were a terrible menace that would destroy the very fabric of their way of life.

Rai Pithora (1149–1192 AD), who later called himself Prithviraj (world ruler), belonged to the Chauhan lineage but had received the kingdom of Ajmer from his maternal grandfather Anangpal and ruled from his twin capitals of Ajmer and Delhi. Prithviraj quite easily defeated Muhammad Ghori in the first Battle of Tarain in 1191. Ghauri however attacked the following year and Prithviraj despite having an army alleged to have 3,000 elephants and 300,000 soldiers was defeated at the second battle and later executed. Ghori’s victory was partly due to guile for he had by now learned that Hindu soldiers liked to only go to battle after sunrise subsequent to performing the rituals of their ablutions and prayers. A dawn attack therefore caught the great army unprepared. Prithviraj’s armies did however rally but were deceived into chasing a fake retreat to be hit by Ghori’s mounted archers who routed them.

Prithviraj had also been let down by Rajput allies he had been waiting for. The most important Rajput ruler was Raja Jaichandra Rathor of Kanauj whose honour, according to legend, had been deeply offended when Prithviraj had eloped with his daughter Samyukta seventeen years earlier. According to some legends he had even invited Muhammad Ghori to invade India to punish Prithviraj. His name soon became a metaphor for treachery. Despite a long period of several hundred years from the first plundering Afghan raids to the time the Mughals settled down, the Rajputs had learned nothing from their setbacks but forgot no insult to their pride.

Paradoxically, although there was a large religious and cultural chasm between Hindus and Muslims, they were remarkable tolerant about hiring mercenary soldiers of the other faiths. There were many Muslims in all the Hindu armies and vice versa. Maharana Pratap, was one of the few Rajput maharajas to staunchly oppose the Mughals till the end but his army at the battle of Haldighati (1526) had a large contingent of Afghans led by Hakim Khan Sur. At a later time even the great Hindu hero Shivaji had many Muslims in his army while his adversary Aurangzeb’s army was commanded by a number of Rajput generals including Raja Jaswant Singh of Jodhpur and Raja Jai Singh of Amber.

CRIMINAL TRIBES IN INDIA’S VIOLENCE AND CORRUPTION

CRIMINAL TRIBES

People have been shocked by a recent report that a 35 year old woman and her 13 year old daughter were brutally gang raped near Ghaziabad in UP. It now emerges that this gang had committed similar crimes on this highway earlier. The police now claim that it is the work of a criminal class of Banwarias living in the area. 

Scheduled classes and castes have great political clout today so it was not surprising that the political establishment reacted angrily when sociologist Ashis Nandy’s had earlier said that they were responsible for much of the corruption in India. These scheduled castes include numerous criminal tribes that had once been well known for violence, theft and other anti social behavior.

As it is politically incorrect today to speak of criminal tribes we have almost forgotten that they once existed and may still form a large though almost invisible social stratum among a number of overlapping social layers. This might also explain why the system of law and order is sometimes so out of sync with ground realities and why India’s politicians and bureaucrats have been incapable of a clear response.

There used to be a Criminal Tribes Act of 1924 that had listed 313 nomadic and other communities (including some of the Ahir, Bangars, Bhanjaras, Bawarias, Bhattis, Gujjars, Jats, Lambadis, Kanjars, Meenas, Sansis, Vagharis, Yadhavs, etc.) Regulating their activities began with the suppression of Thugees in 1831 and was further elaborated in 1871 when 127 tribes were kept under constant police scrutiny. They were described as being “so habitually criminal” that their arrests were non bailable. The British forcibly settled many of these mostly pastoral tribes about a century ago on virtual wastelands like the areas around Faridabad, Manesar and Greater Noida where new industries were to later find cheap land but had to sometimes also face serious violence in their industrial disputes. These tribes and castes were then estimated to number 60 million or around 16 % of India’s population making them too large a number to be so ruthlessly suppressed. It is not a coincidence that many instances of rape and violence including industrial violence have routinely erupted in most of the areas close to where these tribes had been forcibly settled.

After independence the criminal tag was deleted to help them assimilate into India’s mainstream but laws and rules do not instantly change the social behavior or the habits of people. Vote bank politics were to also give them considerable political muscle and further embolden their ambitions. Most Indians may be moral, ethical and religious but there is also a vicious strata that cannot be wished away.

The social values of many these communities as well as some of these clans of north India is also a subject that is seldom discussed. Several social studies have not only shown their tendency to violence and intoxication but a terrible attitude towards women. While their mothers and wives were usually held in honor any other woman is still considered to be open game for exploitation. In many tribal communities marriage by capture had long been a normal custom and this automatically implied rape. How can such people be shocked by rape when young brides in some communities were routinely `deflowered’ by their own fathers-in law or uncles? Why should we then be surprised that village `khaps’ or panchayat courts should self-righteously uphold their mediaeval and often gender hostile old customs. Young members may have had some education but these do not instantly change their social conditioning.

Apart from the molestation of women a cult of violence seeking instant justice or revenge has unfortunately been the stuff of many Indian films and TV shows and may have been especially appealing to socially unsettled people who have long been at the outer fringes of the law. As they had been virtually ostracized by the richer classes they also had little compunction about stealing from them or molesting their women. Over the past few decades India has seen many millions of young villagers move from rural to urban areas. The lucky few got jobs in the petty bureaucracy, property, contractors, trade, small businesses, driving taxis, cars, autos, trucks or buses and in the army or police. The frustrated failures usually drifted into the criminalized underbelly of every town and indulged in violence, car thefts, bootlegging and rape whenever opportunity allowed.

As the police, who are supposed to control them, often come from the same village stock it is not surprising that they are often unwilling or incapable of opposing their own village brothers whose social values they share. This problem needs to be recognized and fully understood before effective measures to solve them can be contemplated.

RELIGIOSITY IS THE DEATH OF RELIGION

 

If lakhs of Naxalites were to block all the roads between Hardwar, Delhi and surrounding areas for nearly a month, virtually shut down Meerut and other nearby towns, torch a few dozen trucks, buses, tractors and petrol pumps and block the bridges in retaliation for the deaths of a few of their colleagues in road accidents, the Government would have responded with alacrity and the army would have acted with an iron hand. But if these vandals were on a mission of religious piety no political party would dare to interfere.

The season of the `Kanwarias’ is upon us again. An estimated 7 Lakh devotees will block most of the roads from Hardwar to their home towns and villages in a 300 KM radius during the lunar month of Shravan. They are called Kanwarias because these saffron clad devotees carry small pots of holy Ganga water on their shoulders on a bamboo pole called a Kanwar. For the most part the short pilgrimages are pious and peaceful but for the advent of a new custom of `Dak Kanwars’ with groups of running Kanwarias who run in relays to quickly get to their destinations. While one devotee runs with the pots on his shoulder, the rest of his team follows on motorcycles, buses, cars or other vehicles and are violently angry if their passage is delayed or stopped. 

So for four weeks from late July, it will be nearly impossible for children to get to school in this area or for mourners to take the ashes of their departed for immersion to Rishikesh or Hardwar. Ambulances will become virtually immobile, fire brigades, police and other emergency vehicles will find it difficult to operate.        

This custom was almost unknown a decade ago and was transplanted here during the period of BJP rule from a similar custom that began many years earlier in Sultanganj near Bhagalpur in Bihar. This annual migration with its raucous religiosity is a very far cry from quiet spirituality of true religion. The custom has no place in any of the Hindu scriptures but has become a popular act of piety in which both the devotees as well as the numerous supporters providing them with food, refreshments and shelter believe that they will gain `punya’ or good Karma for a better next life. Professional priests also encourage many sit-at-home donors to hire Kanwarias to earn punya by proxy for them.

Priests of all religions have for many centuries exploited gullible devotees by persuading them that they would earn many otherworldly rewards in exchange for donations, pilgrimages, fasts, sacrifices or austerities. With surprising speed new religious customs explode. Soon even the less credulous succumb to the comfort of going with the flow rather than face the possible wrath of the heavens, the anger of priests or the public by challenging the authenticity of such customs or by defying the demands of devotees.

Paradoxically such customs were not the command of the sages, prophets or founders of any religion. None of them had asked for temples, mosques or churches let alone the colourful trappings or demonstrations of religion with sacred robes, triumphant flags, loud religious music or colourful processions. But power corrupts and the priests of all faiths are intoxicated by the power that religiosity gives them. Politicians happily support religiosity that can serve their political agendas. With amazing speed, the social and moral ideas of the founders become lost in an ocean of meaningless rituals and superstitions. Outward form becomes more important then inner substance and religiosity masquerades as religion.

But curiously, it is at this stage of the most feverish religiosity that religions have collapsed. History shows that new reformers disgusted with empty rituals, superstitions and the arrogance of the priests have always appeared to break away to become the founders of new faiths. Zoroaster and Buddha, disgusted with the sacrifices of the old Avestan and Vedic priests, founded simple new faiths. Jesus, horrified by the excesses of Jewish priests who had made their house of prayer into a `den of thieves’ founded Christianity. Muhammad, appalled by the sacrifices to 365 idols at Mecca founded Islam. Martin Luther appalled by the ridiculous `indulgences’ of Catholic priests, who offered places in heaven in exchange for donations founded Protestantism. Guru Nanak contemptuous of the empty rituals of Brahmanism founded Sikhism. Dayanand Saraswati disturbed by more recent Brahmin excesses, founded the Arya Samaj to try to bring Hinduism back to the purity of simple Vedic concepts.

But the insidious influence of ritual and superstition is difficult to eradicate. Many millions of insecure or gullible people are easy prey. Rituals, penances, processions and offerings packaged as joyous distractions cost much less than the effort of understanding and practicing the deeper moral, social and philosophical tenets of religion. So populist priests and charlatans thrive and ritual and superstition have crept into all the practiced forms of Buddhism, Christianity, Islam, Hinduism and other faiths.