Who was also known as Rai Pithora
Answers
Answer:
King Prithviraj Chauhan is also known as Ray Pithora.
Answer:
King Prithviraj Chauhan
Explanation:
In the popular tradition, the construction of the fort is attributed to the 12th-century Chahamana king Prithviraj Chauhan (called "Rai Pithora" in Persian-language chronicles). In the mid-19th century, archaeologist Alexander Cunningham made a distinction between the ruins at the site, classifying them among them to older "Lal Kot" fortification built by the Tomaras and the newer "Qila Rai Pithora" built by the Chahamans.
However, there is no concrete historical evidence connecting the site to Prithviraj, whose capital was Ajmer, and later excavations have cast doubt on Cunningham's classification.
Association with Prithviraj Chauhan
The texts contemporary or near-contemporary to Prithviraj place him in Ajmer: these texts include Sanskrit-language works such as Prithviraja Vijaya and Kharatara-gachchha-pattavali, as well as the Persian-language chronicles such as Taj al-Masir and Tabaqat-i Nasiri. Later texts such as Prithviraj Raso and Ain-i-Akbari associate him with Delhi in order to present him as an important political figure, because when these texts were written, Delhi had become an important political centre, while Ajmer's political importance had declined.
Although there is no doubt that some of the structures at the site were built before the Delhi Sultanate period, there is no evidence connecting the site to Prithviraj or any other Chahamana ruler. In the mid-19th century, archaeologist Alexander Cunningham divided the pre-Sultanate structures at the site into two phases, attributing the older "Lal Kot" to the Tomaras, and the newer "Qila Rai Pithora" to the Chahamanas. Cunningham cited Ain-i-Akbari to assert that Qila Rai Pithora was the second of "old Delhi's seven cities". As late as in the early 21st century, modern scholars have used the term "Qila Rai Pithora" to denote Delhi's old citadel while referring to the older Persian-language chronicles, although these chronicles themselves do not use the term, instead calling the site simply "Dehli".
Prithviraj's uncle Vigraharaja IV appears to have brought Delhi under Chahamana suzerainty, and Prithviraj may have been an overlord of the contemporary ruler of Delhi. However, there is no concrete evidence that Prithviraj himself lived in Delhi or even visited that city. A short inscription on the Qutb Minar reads Pirathi Nirapa, which some writers read as vernacular for "King Prithvi", but this inscription is undated and its reading is uncertain, thus rendering it flimsy evidence. Some coins, called "Dehliwalas" in the early sources of the Dehli Sultanate, were issued by a series of kings which include the Tomara rulers and a king called "Prithipala". Even if "Prithipala" is assumed to be a name of Prithviraj (although some scholars believe him to be a distinct Tomara king), it is possible that Prithviraja's coins were called "Delhiwalas" not because they were minted in Delhi, but because they were used in Delhi after the city became a major Ghurid garrison.
hope it helps u
please mark my answer as brainliest