Enlist various reasons that caused the downfall of the Rajput Kingdoms.
Answers
In this article we will discuss about the causes of the defeat of Rajputs against the Turks in India during the eleventh and twelfth centuries.
The Indians checked the rising power of Islam successfully for nearly three hundred years on its north-west frontier of Afghanistan. The Arab invasion had remained limited to Sindh and Multan while the conquest of Afghanistan and Punjab was not easy for the Turks.
The Indians of those days deserve respect for this achievement that they could fight out and resist for a long duration the power of Islam which had overwhelmed a large part of Asia, Africa and Europe by its might. But once their defence in the north-west was broken, the Indians failed bitterly against the Turks.
The defeat of the Indians against Mahmud of Ghazni in the eleventh century A.D. and against Muhammad of Ghur in the twelfth century A.D. was shameful and surprising. Of course, the Indians continued to resist and tried to defend their culture against the onslaughts of the invading and firmly entrenched Islam in India but their defeat against the Turks evokes curiosity.
Many Indians or we say the Rajput kingdoms who fought against the Turks were quite extensive, did not lack material and military- resources, could put up large armies in battles against their enemies, did not lack strength as well as is clear from the defeat of Muhammad in the battle of Anhilwara and the first battle of Tarain and the Rajput soldiers neither lacked courage and chivalry as compared to the Turks.
Yet, the Rajputs were defeated. Historians who have tried to investigate the causes of the defeat of the Rajputs are not unanimous in their opinions and if they have agreed on some they have differed in their emphasis.
There is one practical difficulty as well. Contemporary historians did not throw much light on the causes of the defeat of the Rajputs or that of the success of the Turks. Hasan Nizami and Minha-us-Siraj say nothing about them while Adubul Harb of Fakhr-i-Mudabbir is only of some help in this respect.
The historians of medieval age did not try to explore these reasons seriously and are silent about them. Therefore, modern historians have been left with no other alternative except to probe these causes mostly with their common sense, logic and interpretation of the then circumstances. As such it is quite natural that their opinions should differ from each other.
British historians such as Elphinstone, Lane-Poole and Vincent A. Smith have ascribed the Indian defeat to the superiority of the Turks who came from the cold climate of the north, were meat-eaters and had experience of fighting against the Seljuk-Turks while their Rajput opponents were mostly vegetarians, inoffensive and gentle.
But this view is not acceptable. The theory that tells that the non-vegetarian people or people belonging to cold climate are better fighters does not stand the test of scientific examination. The Indian soldiers have proved their courage and strength all throughout the course of Indian history.
Sir Jadunath Sarkar is of the view that complete equality and social solidarity, fatalism that sprang from an absolute reliance on God and freedom from drunkenness of Turkish soldiers were primarily responsible for the success of the Turks.
hope it helps
if can mark me as brainlist
Answer:
1. the rajputs were always fighting with each other and never united even against a common foe .
2. the feudal system proved disastrous for the rajputs
3. the rajputs were not conversant with the latest warfare techniques and their mode of fighting and weapons were outdated
please mark me as brainliest