Our contemporary History narrates a tale of great King Raja Prithviraj and his Heroics . Modern History of India long dominated by Leftist and Marxist Leaning Historians often tell us a story of how Raja Jaichand betrayed Prithviraj Chauhan in the decisive second Battle of Tarain against the Invading Islamic forces of Muhammad Ghori in the year 1192 AD. Infact Indian History Paints Raja Jaichand as a Traitor. This Blog will try to correct a Historical wrong by examining facts and establish the true identity of Raja Jaichand.
How did this Myth of Raja Jaichand being a Traitor become Mainstream?
The narrative of Jaichand inviting Ghori to India as a part of Big conspiracy to defeat Prithivraj can be traced to a book by the name Ain-i-Akbari or the “Administration of Akbar”, written in the 16th-century regarding the administration of the Mughal Empire under Emperor Akbar. This book was written by his court historian, Abu’l Fazl in the Persian language. Interestingly this book was written roughly 400 years after the battle of Tarain. Unfortunately, this same narrative was later peddled in the mainstream History and texts written in multiple languages. This piece of Muslim literature replete with fiction and rumours without any Historical evidences became the final word on History about Jaichand inviting Ghori to India. This book infact was a blatant attempt by Mughals to justify their Invasions into India by blaming the Hindu Kings of the 12th Century thereby giving them a legitimacy to invade and rule India.
Another epic literary work “Prithviraj Raso” written by Chand Bardai who is said to be a poet at the court of Prithviraj Chauhan is often cited as reference of this so called treachery by Jaichand. However many Historians contest to the fact that Chand Bardai was a contemporary of Prithiviraj Chauhan. They argue that his work was flawed and his poem is a work of fiction. Additionally, there are several inaccuracies in his work including narratives on Prithiviraj-Sanyogita Marriage the very reason for the enmity of between Prithviraj and Jaichand. Infact the number of marriages of Prithiviraj changes in various revisions and recensions of his own text.
The earliest (and briefest) recension of Prithviraj Raso which describes the battle between Jaichand and Prithviraj never charges Jaichand with inviting the Ghurids to India to defeat Prithviraj (Reference, Gupta M. 1963 Prithviraj Rasau p. 477). Renowned Historian Roma Niyogi in fact came to the conclusion that this enmity however was perfectly natural according to Kautilyan statecraft and there is no reliable evidence of conflict between these two kings. At best it might be probable that they were not on friendly terms.
Raso also suffers from several flaws in terms of mentions of genealogy of Prithiviraj . For Instance it states that Anangapal Tomar was the maternal Grandfather of Prthiviraj. However, the fact is that Prithviraj’s mother was a Kalachuri (Malwa) Princess named Karpur Devi and not a Tomar Princess. Other inconsistencies include, Raso states that Anangapal Tomar awarded Prithiviraj Chauhan authority over Delhi or Dhillika as it was called before. The Fact however is Delhi was already a part of Chahmana dynasty to which Prithiviraj belonged. Delhi was captured by Vigraharaj-IV Chauhan in 1163 much before the reign of Prithiviraj. Vigraharaj-IV Chauhan would have been atleast 4th generation ancestor of Prithiviraj Chauhan. Thus “Prithviraj Raso” is an unreliable source for understanding the dynamics of the 12th century because of these historical errors and exaggerations. Raso therefore is not recognized as a legitimate historical text by any scholar or historian of distinction.
Raja Jaichand and His Contributions-
The Gahadvala king Jaichand also known as Jayantchandra or Jaitrachandra in historical accounts was the son of Gahadvala king Vijaychandra and the grandson of Govindchandra Gahadvala of Kannauj. As per several inscriptions found in Ayodhya called as “Vishnu Hari Inscriptions” it becomes clear that it was Govindchandra under whose reign the original Ram temple of Ayodhya (Ram Janam Bhumi) was constructed. It was in 1170 AD that Jaichand was crowned king of the Gahadvala kingdom.
The Gahadvala dynasty to which Jaichand belonged had a long history of repelling Muzlim invasions and successfully defending its territory. Furthermore, the inscriptions found in Gahadval indicate that a tax called Turushkadanda was gathered within their kingdom in order to fund their military campaigns against the Turushkas or Muzlims. Jaichand continued the Turushka-fighting custom that his forefathers had started. The Rambhamanjari penned by Nayachandra Suri in 1400 CE claims that Jaichand defeated the Yavanas (Muslims).
Also it must be specially mentioned here that several concurrent Persian chronicles like Taj-ul-Maasir, Tabaqat-i-Nasiri and Kamil-ut-tawarikh have portrayed Jaichand as a Hindu king who fought the Ghurid army at Chandawar. Infact the sheer despise that these texts have for Jaichand highlights the fact that Muzlims harbored a strong dislike for him and considered him as the adversary of Izlam (Reference – Elliot and Dowson 1869, The History of India). Jaichand in fact died on the battlefield fighting the Ghurids to defend his country. He fought very hard and sustained such injuries and cuts on his body that he could be identified only by his teeth, which were gold plated. Moreover Jaichand is nowhere mentioned in the entire Hammira Mahakavya (written circa 1400 CE) which have sections dedicated to Prithviraj and Muhammad Ghori.
Conclusion-
All of the above evidences suggest that Jaichand was neither the one who invited nor participate in any conspiracy to align with Ghurids to defeat Prithviraj Chauhan.Thus this theory has been rejected by all eminent historians. Eminent Historian Dr RC Majumdar has beautifully summarized the prevailing situation at that time. He points out that invasion of the rest of India was almost an inevitable corollary to Ghori’s complete victory over Ghaznavids in Punjab.
It is high time that all of us give the long due respect to Maharaja Jaichand and not indulge in mockery or labelling him as a traitor. Rather than allowing history to be twisted we must honor our glorious past. The least what we can do now is to call upon our academicians, historians, Policy makers and politicians to acknowledge Maharaja Jaichand and remove this baseless blot from his legacy.
Jai Hind!
