Read Book Online : http://www.archive.org/stream/mulfuzattimuryor00timuuoft#page/n5/mode/2up

Download pdf Book : http://ia360612.us.archive.org/2/items/mulfuzattimuryor00timuuoft/mulfuzattimuryor00timuuoft.pdf

Timur was no Mughal. He was a Tartar. The language he spoke is known as Tartary.

Pulin Trivedi : That is the title of the book....cant help it.

Ah! I get the point. Sorry, missed out the detail. :(

Wonderful read. Here in India he is known only as someone who destroyed and looted already weak Delhi Sultanate, but his real talent was more than anyone can imagine...i read a book by Beatrice Forbes Manz "The Rise and Rule of Tamerlane"...from that book a quote: 'His looks do menace heaven and dare the gods. His fiery eyes are fixed upon the earth.' - Marlow

One more good reading book is: "March of the Barbarians" from early 1930-40 I don't have the name of the author here, but have the old book with me.

Is it a good idea to dig out the most painful episodes in Indian history and make them fresh again?

This was also one of the many episodes in our history that contributed in making our today...we are still divided, only ''Cricket" bring us together...lol.

democracy, the recognition of human rights and their violation, privacy as we know it today, monogamy ,small family, equal rights to women are very modern concepts please.....tell me where they existed elsewhere on the globe at that time . It was a period of might being the right always. It was 'raaj-dharma' to attack the neighbouring kingdom and annex it to increase the arable land of one's territory and one 's land revenue and fund the battles through plunder and loot. The Bedrock of civilisation was land revenue only. Mighty empires were founded and sustained on land revenue alone pre-dominantly. Why are we singling out Taimoor? On that premise even Herr Hitler should not be read, spoken about or discussed today.

this is especially for people like asad who unfortunately blocked me for no apparent reason. maybe he is inimical to intelligent women or those who can bash his concoted theories :) or more reasonably put, perhaps because i didnt agree with his historical whitewash like those of his fellow nehruvian-secularists like romila thapar and irfan habib. RBSI this is a GEM which every historian worth his 2 cents MUST read and unlearn what he has learnt in congress-left combined version of history in NCERT books http://www.scribd.com/doc/33600498/Tipu-Sultan-Hero-or-Villain

India is the only place where invaders are respected more than local kings...! SADLY UNFORTUNATE ! :(

Vikas, The local Hindu kings after defeating some of these uncultured low life invaders let them go home. Some came back shamelessly after and after winning they beheaded the benevolent magnanimous Rajput Kings and raped the women. Unfortunately, they have forgotten them and many here praise the glorious Mughal period.

Was it Timur who had very convenient dreams telling him that he should conquer the world? I rather suspect that the people who interpreted these "dreams" and/or advised him, had a very good reason for their interpretations and advice, which conveniently fitted in with what they already knew he wanted to do...they were not unnaturally, seeking to keep their heads firmly attached to their shoulders.

Historians in india who follow the Nehruvian-Secularism ideology have obliterated our history to the extent that even people who are in their 40s or 50s dont know anything even remotely close to the truth. This game of deception supported by the Congress and their Leftist brothers has been going on since we gained independence. People are advised to read about such authors who chose to be part of the gang that whitewashed our past, here - http://www.indiastar.com/wallia19.html

Timur was not a mughal (in the sense of babar and co).He was a tartar and a barbarian. Anyone who can come from so far and win has to be a great general.It was India's misfortune that we had a weak centre at the time.Recalling past is not a crime -it helps understanding.but glorifying the past ??. But the book is writtten in 1930 -.We can take it as curiosity value and ignore the praise

@ Vikas Singh. Not everyone, Vikas. I am writing on Chandragupta Maurya.

@Zeba :Thanks a Zillion for posting up these stuffs....The people should start thinking out of box...They should give up their religious bias.... @Sumedha Verma Ojha :Thank U so much ...It would be of great help If U could also write something on King Vikramaditya too ! @Mallya :Thanks for praise...I m Rajput too... :)

Please read DAWN of karachi and their editorial on Mohenjodaro and Harappa.It lamented that people do not understand difference between religion and culture and technology . The editorial continues - we should be proud of the fact that 5000 years ago we had a culture and civilization with planned roads and layout and drainage and language. Let the puritans say that islam is the true religion that has saved the nation.Let them thank GHORI for it.But should we not be proud of our ancient heritage ??. The same thing applies to this part of the country. When Murali Manohar Joshi applauded the fact that for the first time we had a carbon dating evidence of Dwaraka Bet dating to 4000 BC ,he was branded as a fundamentalist. the Goras exclude anything beyond tower of babel and teh commies guided by their foreign roots want to proclaim that civilization started from west and rescued India. Romila Thapar goes to extreme levels in differentiating between pre aryan and aryan - where does India disappear. They were existent in same country and till date there is no historical proof of a aryan invasion.The same historians who howl for proof become silent when they are asked about the "chosen people" the exploited minority. -congress and leftist brothers -a good description. Long live people like ZEBA KHAN if she is a moslem. ( I know a number who share these views)

@Muthuswamy Jayaram thanks for your kind words. i have posted a link of history curriculum in pakistan schools below which u might find an interesting read. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pakistan_Studies_curriculum marxist-historians in india are doing the exact same whitewash of history in our schools as their counterparts are doing in pakistan. the only difference is that those in pakistan are guided by the islamic ideology, the principles on which their country was founded. which means anything related to hindus and india are INFERIOR.

@Muthuswamy Jayaram you're an IIM-C grad??!! i wonder if anyone can argue with you and get away with it sir. I hold that great institution in highest regard and im in awe of its graduates.

@ Digvijay Singh Kushwaha Whatever your opinion about your community, whether shared by me or not please do not glorify the act of Jauhar. It is an extremely sexist ideology centring the possession of the woman by the man in the woman's body and calling any change of ownership dishonor. I wonder whether women themselves were had any meaningful opinions on this, whether they were consulted at all or simply brainwashed into believing that this was the best course available to them. To make a woman's body the battlefield for honor or dishonor is simply wrong. For instance would marital rape count as dishonor? It would probably be as violative and painful as any other rape. @ Vikas Singh A parallel project of mine is also to research the Kathasaritasagara which has the Betaal Pachisi so I think Vikramaditya could figure in what i write after that.

@Vikas you're welcome. People should realize that in this age of the internet kids dont look at yellow and rough papers of NCERT books for information. So its prudent for our whitewashers of history to smarten up their act and quit deception and falsifying of facts and obliteration of our history thats overflowing with blood and gore. that has slavery and extermination. incessant attacks on and humiliation of the local population. people will only get wiser by the day and will unlearn what they have been spoon fed and indoctrinated like mindless bots.

Even though Sati is considered an Indian custom or a Hindu custom it was not practiced all over India by all Hindus but only among certain communities of India. On the other hand, sacrificing the widow in her dead husband's funeral or pyre was not unique only to India. In many ancient communities it was an acceptable feature. This custom was prevalent among Egyptians, Greek, Goths, Scythians and others. It was more wide-spread after Islamic invaders used to carry Rajput's women to their harems,carry them as a war booty...(instance of Chittorgarh,& many other million battles)... Due to the efforts of Hindu reformers like Raja Ram Mohan Roy Britishers outlawed this EVIL custom in 1829 !!!

@ Vikas Singh When we stop to consider why such practices were so widespread it points to the universal commodification of women. Conquerors played out their victories on women and communities made their 'honor' a burden to be carried by women.

There's "NO HONOR" in Honor killings,Honor Suicides !!!!

Digvijay, I can only recall a few Rajput kings who stood up to the invaders, Prithviraj Chauan for one who was magnanimous and of course everyone knows Mirabai (my daughter played her part here in the in US). Rest of the Rajputs were feudal kings who fought each other and other Hindu kings and weakened themselves. Ultimately good or bad ended up under the British as tax collectors with a lavish life style of hunting and grand parties. Regarding the Mughals history has to be rewritten as it was written by the conqueror. Just one good seed does not make the whole bag good!

Shatruntapa, Please read my comment, I said a "few" stood up to the invaders. Next the very fact that these invaders came from afar with small armies and were able to conquer should tell you that there was little to no unity amongst the local kings. Now that was true with the invasion by the Central Asian Muslim warlords and then the British. Remember the "divide and conquer" philosophy it was easily done in both instances because the weak Hindu kings did it to themselves.

@ Arvind Mallaya: Rajputs are the only warrior clan in the world whose women committed jauhar a day before the decisive battle was fought .Jauhar was committed because defeat was a certainty the next day.Ours were the only women who preferred death to dishonour.In all other cultures women of the losers were usurped by the victors through-out history.In the ensuing battle fought the next day the Rajput warriors fought to the last man as all was already lost an evening before in funeral pyres.I am extremely fortunate to be born in such a community and am fully mindful of the discussions I am engaging in. There are very few kings whom the historians have bestowed the epithet of "the great" on them and Akbar was one of them. Why the devil have they eulogised him such a great deal I wonder and not any of his successors ? An emperor who abolished the jaziah and the pilgrimage tax , discontinued cow slaughter in Hindu places of worship, allowed pig slaughter,gave grants to temples, allowed his wives to practice their own faith,was engaging in surya-namaskar, discontinued circumcision (genital mutilation) among his children, went incognito to check the medieval poetess / Saint Mirabai in Mewar and observed her in her act of worship and even touched her feet afterwords and when the Maharana got wind of the incident he made Mirabai's (his bhabi's) life miserable saying that "maleccho se pao chulwa liye". A man who forgave kings who were defeated in battles so long as they accepted his suzerainty and allowed them to rule in their respective kingdoms,performed 'saashtang dandawat pranam " before the oil portrait of Mother Mary presented to him by Jesuit missionaries, used to engage people in inter-religious dialogue, built a capital that has specimens of architecture of Rajput, Bangla Arch, Jain Brackets, Buddhist carving and of course Muslim Architecture and began construction of his own mausoleum which has two huge swatikas on either side of the principle entrance gateway in pietra dura............i can go on and on about him.....surely the Rajputs were not fools to marry their daughter to him.( maybe they were plain opportunists. in right?) He was a UNIQUE character from a time which is referred to as barbaric and dark ages alternately. It was a time of the dreaded Inquisitions and witch hunting in Europe and book burning and of crusades as well and yes of the renaissance , baroque and Rococo arts as well and If you are referring to me being a mis-guided missile I am certainly not one. I can also engage in harping on the negatives of the Mughal rule in India but the positives far outweigh the negatives.All conquistadors have engaged in rape as it was an act of plunder through-out history but violation of our women's modesty certainly was not easy.We as a community are not producing blue and green eyed beauties like the Khatris and the CkPS of Maharashtra and other Punjabis which is enough testimony to their being the world's most hybrid race (Punjabis) Not for nothing has my community ruling north India/ parts of Pakistan/Nepal for the last fifteen hundred years in some measure or the other to the present day. They have been able to provide administration and upheld the rule of law.The hall-mark feature of Rajput rule in the various riyasats was seculiarism. Might may aid in the establishment of a riyasat but hard headedness is required to sustain it through centuries.Unless they could adopt and evolve they certainly could not have sustained themselves for such a long period of time the Mameluke, Mughal and British invasions notwithstanding. @Rajshri Nandy: Many thanks for taking out your invaluable time and shredding my write-up sentence by sentence.Many salutations.You have a right to your opinion and I to mine as we are born in a democracy.I respect you and your right to express your opinion.It is only when we engage in a meaningful dialogue that new insights may pop up.I am the last one to take umbrage. "The "Nehruvian leftist" historians have perpetrated and contorted history and the same has been perpetuated by the Congress" is an oft repeated cliche. I wonder if the historians of the legacy of Macaulay were also biased in the 19th century or western historians who were un-encumbered by the leftist aandhi (storm) that swept India in the first quarter and half of the previous century ? In any case as the saying goes " History is nothing but plain gossip that has grown graceful over ages"

Zahir-u-Din Mohammad Babur had brought something in 1526 A.D. that was unknown in India. it was no match for the chaturangi forces of both the Afghans and even the consolidated forces of the Rajputs under Rana Sanga.Their own elephants and horses used to get startled and trample their own army on it's usage This was gunpowder. Just as aviation changed the world forever in the 20th century so did usage of artillery in the 16th. @Arvind:We accepted the religion of the Aryans and they did ours so they are not invaders.But the Muslims shall forever remain invaders inspite of having been in India for 1000 yrs because they never accepted the sanatan dharma right? For You it is always us versus them.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pakistan_Studies_curriculum @All these so-called secularist historians who specialize in turning a wolf into a goat have gone on for far too long and its time we show the real side of history to the new generation and let them decide which one they would consider to be closer to the truth instead of force feeding them concoctions! Rajputs willfully gave away their women to akbar's harem just so they could keep their kingdoms! bravery? or lust for power? you decide. Another example of a displaced sense of our obscurantist marxist-historians who chose to glorify a bigot and a barbarian - Tipu Sultan. http://www.scribd.com/doc/33600498/Tipu-Sultan-Hero-or-Villain

One BRAVE rajput we all forget to mention and 'venerate' time and again a mr jaichand, an Agnivnshi rajput ruler of kannauj. enough said.

@Shatruntapa Patel it is indeed true that hindus never ever studied Islam even after it exterminated millions of them in India. If they had studied the ideology of the barbarians who were raiding India incessantly they could have devised ways to stem the tide of muslim invasions. However how far they could have managed to save themselves from the tyranny is debatable since there wasnt any semblance of unity on the basis of religion or for that matter any other reason other than the lust for power.

Digvijay, Rajputs were not the only Hindus who (women) performed Sati. Pietro Del Valle the Italian traveler in the 1600's describes a Sati done in present day Karnataka willingly by a women after passing of her husband, Pietro tried to persuade her not to do it but failed. One more point, I will appreciate if you can stick to the topic and not go into character assassination, it not "us against them" as you pointed out about me. You know nothing about me and my social standing or my religious views and my immediate family. There was one more (Singh last name) who questioned my faith and belief in god, these are petty side distractions from the debate here. Take care and continue the healthy arguments.

Shantrutapa, Agree with your views as above "if you don't know your history you are condemned to repeat it" -George Santyana, Poet and Philosopher. So watch out!

MrArvind it has become a penchant of marxist-historians and their coterie in cahoots to wantonly engage in character assassination of those who dont toe their line. its sad but then our mature wisdom tells us to avoid the bait and press the BLOCK button. the only people who unfortunately are compelled to toe their line are the kids in our schools who read the whitewashed and phoney history churned out by these psuedo-intellectuals. the problem is if any 'informed' kid grows out of his history books and writes what parents like us teach him at home then i wonder if he would clear his history exam lol because no history tutor in india worth his mettle would have the guts to teach anything other than what's written in those shoddy NCERT books. the child would invite the wrath of all and sundry unnecessarily for speaking the truth and being an apologist or politically correct. so much for history! ha!

Zeba, I find it interesting to see all these Indian history books, paintings and other precious artwork tucked away in a library here in the west. Most of the history prior to and after Independence was concocted to keep the masses dumb and happy. The latter was my Dad's opinion to and he was a history major, he would point out to us the historical untruths and false hood perpetrated by a few in power back then. Anyway with the advent of Internet perhaps we can unravel some of the falsehoods and set the record right for future generations.

Wow!! so many comments.Again the topic almost became a rajput attack and counter. Why not get back to basics History is written by the victor History is biased and people in control of the official wing interpret it in future. So they can afford to interpret history the way they feel like and with authoritative reference to the biased history accounts. In India since independence the Governing Council has been occupied by congress and leftist friends as Ms ZEBA KHAN calls them and our children have been condemned to read history of the British conquerors and their followers the gang referred above The fact that contrarian books are available in foreign universities is a logical fallout.There is very little organized support for this in India. We need a new movement perhaps funded by private sector to re-interpret history in true perspective. First let us accept that all victors robbed the vanquished (religion was a convenient to justify their plunder -remember crusades? ,remember ghazni and somnath? Second women were exploited (even now, many would claim) all over the world - practices , norms modes were different.Let us not try to defend these practices or attack them.They were considered good enough in a period of history for the exploiter and accepted as such.We should read to make sure they are ignored now. Third, how does it matter whether a rajput married a mughal. Let us understand that mughals came to India and stayed here.In a macroeconomic sense there was only a redistribution of wealth not a loss as against other invaders like british and persians and even Alexander. Yes, in their reign there were good bad and ugly and irrelevant.I think all dynasties had this motley if they ruled long enough.

@Arvind: Indeed I am aware that Rajput women were certainly not the only ones who committed Sati neither did i infer so but they were the ONLY ones who comitted Jauhar.Who am I to justify that act today but it is a historical un-deniable fact that Jauhars happened thrice in the history of Mewar alone.The grandest temple dedicated to Sati in India is of Rani Sati and it is dedicated to a baniya lady in Rajasthan,all govt. efforts to curtail the glorification of sati in modern India notwithstanding. Sati has been happening all over the north Indian states. In fact two queens of Maharaja Ranjit Singh of Punjab committed sati on his death and he was a Sikh not even a Hindu ! Not for nothing did Raja Ram Mohan Roy (a madarsa product not of Macaulay's education) persevered hard to get it banned and was successful too.Forcible sati was a social evil doubtlessly. This reply was in response to your comment about all women getting raped by 'inavders' which is not true. Secondly my comment (us vs them) was as a response to your:'the only Rajput King who stood up to invaders , being Prithviraj Chauhan' because your comment infers that only he is notable ('barring a few others whom you kindly acknowledge'). I am certainly not quoting out of context.If you perceive that as character assassination well that is your view not mine.I care a row of pins about the other 'Singh' who questioned your faith and belief in God I am certainly not doing that. Your social standing and immediate family is of no consequence to anybody here nor is it pertinent to the discussion. I'd agree with Muthuswamy Jayaram who rightly points out that there was only re-distribution of wealth in India because the Muslims settled down here and were not plunderers who fled away with spoils of war.In any case 80% population of Muslims in India is of converts from the natives only. Not all the ancestors of the present day Muslims arrived here on camel-back from Iran , Asia Minor or the Arab World.

@Sumedha and Vikas: I respect your right to your opinion.'Commodification of women' and women being used as personal property has happened throughout history.The act of a woman changing her surname after marriage is enough testimony of that. To the best of my knowledge ,Muslims and Rajputs (Rajasthani only) are the only two communities in India whose women continue to use their maiden surnames even after marriage traditionally.The reason sadly is because both come from polygamous societies and a wife was known by her father's name among several others who inhabited her husband's harem.(Bigamy was outlawed among Hindus by an act of parliament in 1955.Prior to that polygamy had social and religious sanction) Feminism had certainly not arrived on the world scene then.The consequences of a philandering man do not come home in the form of children and affect his married life (unless his wife chooses to) but those of a promiscuous woman do. It is a sad reality Pls do not view it as a MCP comment.I hasten to add that I am most certainly not condoning the act of philandering here.It is reprehensible at all events. Moreover contraceptives were invented in the 1960's only.Maybe owing to this reason only women have been 'owned' throughout history. My response is in reply to your comment about my supposedly glorifying the act of Jauhar.Who are we to justify or condone that in today's context. It has to be viewed in context of those times only.They did what they found honorable as per the wisdom of the prevailing times.I would not like to liken it to honour killings of today.There were no honour killings a hundred years back.We get to learn about them in the mayhem of post-partition India only. As an aside there is a hypothetical question that perturbs me. I wonder what would the enlightened feminists of today would have chosen to do if they were in the shoes of Rani Padmini when defeat at the hands of Allahuddin Khilji was a certainty for their husbands forces, given the sheer strength of Allahuddin's army in terms of numbers and might ? And also because the Long siege had rendered their husband's forces weak and hungry sans supplies and the requisite wherewithal .

@ digvijay..waht rajput lacked was the strategy to fight islam...they just took heavy dose of opium.. put safforn attire and jumped in to war..opening the fort gates.. islamic invaders were shrude.. u said _the defead was certain- why was the defeat certain?... rajput gave up and also the Johar was done ..the women were jumping in to the live fire.what a terrible ritual....in opium trance they even did not know ,,with whom they are fighting...with fellow rajput or an enemy..Among rajputs ..to survive after the defeat was a big shame.. and to die fighting enemy was a honour and every one wanted the honor.. that the bards will sing the songs of their valour and courage..after they are no more...the rules of were war games were different for both rajput and muslims...for hindoo kings they had diff rules for a war and its norms... islam had brutality and unity..eating from same plate...which hindoos did not...in desert u cant surivive alone..they have desert mantality.. we were more individualistic...i would love a blanced view from all....

@Anup: I salute your knowledge of history I am sure you have done extensive research to arrive at your conclusion that all Rajput warriors of yore were opium addicts and Quixotic in their strategy !

Digvijay and Muthuswamy, Perhaps you both got the wrong impression (Muthuswamy's comment on Rajput attack), no doubt Rajputs deserve the honor and rightful place as a community in Hindu history, however my point being not all Rajputs displayed the same valor and unity with their brethren. To your point (Digvijay) what would Padmini do (my Mom's name is Padmini) raised us male and female with the same set of rules and gave us the same educational opportunities and goals. We use the same model for our daughters, teach them to be like Mirabai and at the same time grow up to be an astronaut, Engineers, Doctors, join the Armed Forces when required and take the fight to the intruders. A far cry indeed from the Sati and harem option of yesteryear's. Regarding macroeconomics (Muthuswamy's comment), raiding the Somanath temple multiple times and carrying the ill gotten gains back to Central Asia, destroying more then a 1000 temples and wiping out an entire city/state (Chittor and Vijayanagar), forced inquisition by the Portuguese and driving out my ancestors out of Goa is not what I would call beneficial to the region or people, like it or not history and ethnic cleansing is repeating once again in present day Kashmir, Bangladesh, Pakistan. Enough said!

Amita Roy : Such a thorough and matured perspective... Thanks !

bhai anup dave you are absolutely correct. jouhar and keshariya are the same act, which were performed by the rajput men and women at the time of final war. i think such act can be commited only by the Rajput . no other race in the world has such inner power of self secrifice.

@Arvind Mallya - My write up on macroeconomics was to differentiate between the Babar & Co and Timur,Nadir and Ghazni. the latter were plunderers and looters like all invaders including British, Portuguese who took their moneys back home.They destroyed temples (english excluded) as they knew that a lot of wealth lay beneath the idols consecrated. their love of Islam etc was a subterfuge.The rest of the foreign moslem rule was india centric. Chittorgarh et al were personal idiosyncrasy where love and infatuation ruled over power and common sense. For example , Prithviraj is being glorified whereas the root cause for success of Ghori was the dissension amongst the rajputs. Who caused it? The personal love of Prithviraj who humiliated the king and took away his daughter created the feud. We had the example of RAM who banished his wife for the sake of kingdom (kept kingdom above his person) and we have Prithviraj. Before anyone pounces on me on who was right and wrong let me state that above example is only to illustrate another point of view which is also logical in approach. Another monkey I like to offload - India as we discuss now was seldom a nation.Even when central rule was apparent it was a true amalgam of republics.No central rule exceeded over 100years.Please note that when we got our independence we still had over 300 princely kingdoms with their own local rule. But there was a common thread of dharma and shastras including natya shastra leave alone artha shastra , nyaya shastra common over the land across kingdoms. MAULANA AZAD'd solution which was ruined by NEHRU and JINNAH was built on this historical fact FINALLY, as regards ethnic cleansing we cannot forget the maxim - read history not to avenge but to remember so that we do not allow history to repeat itself. And when we remember it must be with a clear unemotional and impartial reading of the facts.

@Digvijay: The reason Maharaja Ranjit Singh's wives committed Sati is because they were Rajputs and the head Maharani was Maharani Katoch, my great great grandfather's niece. Don't try to use examples unless you know what was the reason behind it.

@Bhargav ji,thank you fr the beautiful compliment. @Anup,please think about how u categorise sumthings which u don't understand.

@Anup,ofcource ur comment can be concidred correct but Honour is sumthings on which we all depend on,Muslim Invaders were shrewd yes they were,But they tasted enough defeat from the Rajputs,that is why still today our families are their and can trace their lineage back 2000 years,WHERE ARE THE MUGHALS?

Hi Arvind Mallaya, Rajput women did not perform sati. It was called Jauhar. This was invented more to save themselves or their body from being touched by another man. Sati is a completely different concept and Rajsthan rarely had it. Please check the facts.

Hi Arvind Mallaya, Mewad was one of the few regions which kept fighting the Moguls and was known to be a haven for hindu in that period. Why otherwise would a statue from dwarka of lord krishna be brought to udaipur and be installed at Mathura in 1672. It continues to be there.