03 January 2009

India's Greatest Kings

Question: Who were the greatest kings of India?
Answer: Ashoka and Akbar.

Our textbooks and our establishment (i.e., Marxist) historians have been parroting this line for many years. Sometimes explicitly – like the Q&A above. Sometimes implicitly – these are the only two kings whose names are suffixed with 'the great'.

But is this correct? What makes a king 'great' anyway? We can list the requirements that must be met for a king to be called 'great':
A) A reasonably large kingdom
B) A reasonably long rule
C) Military strength
D) Peace and stability
E) Economic prosperity
F) Achievements in arts and science

Even a casual glance at India's history reveals the following kings who meet these requirements comfortably:
1. Chandragupta Maurya (320 - 298 BC)
2. Samudra Gupta (335 - 380 AD)
3. Harshavardhana (606 - 647)
4. Pulikeshi II (610 - 642)
5. Amoghavarsha I (814 - 878)
6. Rajendra Chola (1014 - 1044)
7. Krishnadevaraya (1509 - 1529)
8. Chhatrapati Shivaji (1674 - 1680)
9. Ranjit Singh (1780 - 1839)

So we see that India has had many great kings. Then why this obsession with Ashoka and Akbar? One can guess what the answer is. Amartya Sen does us a great favour by stating it explicitly in his book Argumentative Indian. He says: "India's two greatest kings were Ashoka (a Buddhist) and Akbar (a Muslim). So how can anybody say that India is a Hindu country?"

Yes. That's what this is about. By upholding a Buddhist* and a Muslim as the only two great kings of India, the Leftists seek to deny Hindu India its glorious past and its legitimate claim to greatness. Thereby they seek to deny this country its true heritage and its true identity. What a lie! And what a motive behind that lie! The fraud – and the cynicism behind it – takes one's breath away. But the Ashoka-Akbar myth is not an exception. It is just one of a multitude of lies churned out by the Leftist propaganda machine in its war against this country's soul.

*There's another lie here: saying that Buddhists are not Hindu.

PS: The last two kings in the list may not meet requirement F. But we must remember the special circumstances and the special contributions of these two kings: They established independent kingdoms at a time when the country was in the clutches of foreign rulers (Mughals and Afghans + British, respectively).

33 comments:

Indian said...

Also see http://www.outlookindia.com/fullprint.asp?choice=1&fodname=20020121&fname=Amartya+Sen+(F)&sid=1

roadtriplife said...

you were always good with your historical facts

Anonymous said...

What about Prithviraj Chauhan. He was surely one of the greatest kings of india and did so much for india. Infact, he was the only king at his time who had the strength and courage to resist muslim invasion in India. Whilst many other kings only thought for themselves, surely the deeds of prithiviaj chauhan shows that his people and country had first priority, and therefore he was a wise king. He was very strong in warfare. Defeating him was impossible, the only way was through deciet. Some may say that Prithviraj was an idiot for not killing the Sultan invader before when he had the chance, but it is a proud thing to say that he magnaminously released the vanquished invader due to the rajput code of conduct. It is easy to just kill someone by any means, however, to stay within your honourable limits and stick to the honour of rajputs and tradition, sparing a life was a great deed when the sun has set, or when the opponent (sultan after the first battle of tarrain) has begged for his life and is unarmed. Prithviraj's defeat in itself was also not an actual defeat as he stll maintained the pride of Rajputs, and also killed the muslim invader despite blinded. It is a proud thing to say that he died a heroic death, keeping rajput honour intanct.

After everything he did for his people, his economy prospered, he made sure his people were happy.

How can we forget him? despite having a tragic and painful death for us indians, we still ignore him? His grave is still abused today in afghanistan, and nobody cares? We are indians and we should be proud of this great hindu king

Anonymous said...

You missed the Peshwas who ruled as large an empire as the Mughal empire at its peak. You can see a map of India at the height of Hindu maratha rule on dharmaveer's blog (I mentioned that blog to you earlier). The Peshwas were as grand as the great moguls, but of course, they committed the cardinal sin of being Hindus, and hence their achievements shall never be talked of in secular India.

Anonymous said...

Again, what you say is factually incorrect. You say Ranjeet Singh ruled at a time when country was in clutches of Afghans + British. Not true. Till 1818 (the second Anglo Maratha War), most of India was under Maratha rule. In fact the British got almost 2/3rds of their territory in India directly as a result of the Maratha defeat in that war. For how many years after that did Ranjeet rule? 20? So hardly a case of "rescuing country from British clutches".

As for the AFghans - again pl. read serious history. The Afghans and the Marathas fought for decades over who should rule Punjab (read encyclo Brit. entry on Afghan-Maratha wars, for instance, or Cambridge History of India, vol. 8, Marathas). That is why Panipat was fought!

At Panipat, the Marathas lost. But it was a pyrrhic victory for the Afghans. They never ventured into Punjab again (compare to Ghazni's annual raids). So the Marathas stopped these raids by Abdali. While the Marathas lost about 100,000 men that day, the Afghans too lost the cream of their army (about 40,000). They essentially had to vacate Punjab. That is when Sikh power was able to occupy those vacated positions.

So it is hardly the case (unless you read history books published by SGPC) that the Sikhs "rescued" Punjab from either the British or the Afghans. In fact there is not a SINGLE battle the sikhs fought with the Afghans that could be considered a large scale battle (like Panipat - III).

Once again, I request you not to post such "history" on a Sangh blog. You are a vistarak, and I expect better from you.

Anonymous said...

Also Dheeraj-ji, pl. take a look at six glorious epochs by Shri Savarkar - he gives a good Indian account of the Maratha period and how the saffron flag was planted as far into Afghan territory as Attock.

This should be a matter of pride for all Hindus. Yet we never speak of it. I myself learned of it rather late, and was quite surprised to read British historians matter of factly saying "We conquered most of India from the Mahrattas, who ruled most of India when we started our conquest."


Anyways, Shri Savarkar's book is now back in print - it is available from Abhishek publications, Chandigarh.

PS: If you can get your hands on it, the "History of the Mahrattas" by Duff is the classic. A large tome though, and will take time. He begins thus "I describe the Mahrattas, our predecessors in conquest of India..." In fact, the British and Marathas were the two dominant military powers who were trying to conquer India in the late 18th - early 19th century. The Marathas wanted to create a united Hindu empire in all of Akhand Bharat. They almost succeeded. The British of course had imperialist ambitions.

Once again, here is the map of India in 1760:http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/historical/colbeck/india_1760.jpg

Another unsung glory of Hindu history is Vijayanagar, which stood like a rock in the Deccan against Islam when Islam was at its expansionist best. For 300 years!! Against 7 Islamic states who sorrounded it, and waged Jihad on it yearly as part of their religious obligation (read Encyclo Brit. account of this "collective Jihad").

At least I would expect a Sangh person like you to know this.

Indian said...

Krishnadevaraya of Vijayanagara is present in the list.

azadajju said...

what abt Iltutmish,who saved us from chengis kahn...and abt harshavardhana...?

Indian said...

Iltutmish "protecting" India from Genghis Khan was a case of one bandit "protecting" his loot from another :-)

Harshavardhana is present in the list.

pavan said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
pavan said...

According to me,MAHARANA PRATAP is one of the bravest warrior that India had... he single handedly took on the mighty mugal army. he lived in jungles & vowed that he will never sleep on bed until he wipe out the last muslim army in India just like his grand father, Rana Sangha, Another Great warrior. He remained the last obstacles for the Akbar army to conquer the entire west India...

pavan said...

let us not forget the last Hindu king who sat on Delhi throne, Hemu Or Hemachandra. Being a brahmin & born to a purohit father, Hemu took up arms by seeing the suffering of his people by the hands of invading muslim army.He was never defeated by any kings. the only battle he was defeated where he wes beheaded by Mugal General in the battle of paniput.
Till that time, Hindu Kings were used to be under Muskim rulers, But under Hemu, Afgan cheaftains consisted in his army & hence he was known as Vikramaditya.

Booker said...

You missed out two undefeated great kings of india narashima verman also known as mamalan the pallava king who defeated pulikesi 2 and rajendra cholan son of rajaraja cholan..

ilaya said...

ya, the king rajendra cholan was missed in the list, he was the only king in india who captured overseas kingdoms.malaysia and maldives under his control at his period.

anurag said...

if u luk at d history of indian kings .then u need to decide how long u can luk bak in history.
for me,
king YUDHISHTRA ws n still d best of all times!!!
n not just f india bt of d whole world!!!

Anonymous said...

You have forgot the name of MAHARANA PRATAP who was one of the bravest king of India.Althogh he knew that his army was very small as compared to the Mansingh army he dared to fight the war of haldhighati for the sake of protecting his motherland.In the war a time comes when Pratap could easily kill mansingh when his beloved horse chetuk had jumped over the head of the elephant on which mansingh was fighting.Suddenly mansingh hide his head behind the seat.Pratap pardoned him by saying that my mother had told me not to war on any weaponless man . Maharana pratap had many qualities that make him great king.

Anonymous said...

what do you mean by saying buddhist are not hindu is a lie are you a fool or stupid, you want to show that budhhists are hindu faggot!, go and try to read about what is buddhism 'the buddha and his dhamma by dr. baba saheb ambedkar', and dont try to mix up them, there are many difference between them, what id hinduism is the oldest religion but it does not mean that it is origin of all religion don't write when you don't know about what is buddhism!

Kumar .L. Dipak said...

Chhtrpati Shivaji Maharaj was great king in India,We know Ravan killed by Raja Ram,we know Kanse killed by Shree Krushna Like that we also Know Afjal khan Killed by Raja Shivaji.

Anonymous said...

what about mansingh who agreed to be a british servent............lol

Anonymous said...

maharaja "kharavela" of united kalinga. just look into his history and you would be surprised to know he is one of the few kings of india who was never defeated.

Anonymous said...

Immadi pulikeshi is greatest king in india

Khan Rocs said...

I will say Chanakya as he was not the king itself but was responsible for the maurya kingdom. he also defeated Alexander- The Great and was backbone of the Indian Politics

Anonymous said...

The anonymous guy has just read his maratha history well and thats where his serious history ends. This seems to be the reason he does not have great things to say about other great rulers/warriors including the Sikhs. Sikh armies did not exist for a long time before the battle he mentions. Abdali and other afghans kept coming back to india even after the battle. Ranjit singh's forces ruled well into the afghan territories.

Anonymous said...

Buddhism not based on God where hindu is totally based on God then how you says?

Anonymous said...

i would say tipu sultan was one of the great rulers.

Indian said...

Replaced Rajaraja Chola with Rajendra Chola.

Anonymous said...

Firstly the term Indian subsumes all religious denominations. Next to that some clarifications:The greatest Tamil king was Rajaraja Chola, and not his son Renjendra - at least that's what most Tamils believe. The fact that Ashoka patronized Buddhism, doesn't take away the fact that he was born a Hindu ! And the fact that Akbar was a muslim doesn't mean he was foreign to India or its constituesnts. If that is the case, i.e. taking a narrow perspective, Chhatrapati Shivaji, a Marathi, must have been foreign to Bengal and Kashmir !

Anonymous said...

chatrapati shivaji I think the greatest king of India.really who established the 'hindavi swarajya'.

Anonymous said...

Shivaji maharaj and chandragupta was best becouse they started from zero and against odds.... Jay Bhavani Jay Shivaji....

sushant pavaskar said...

Sambhaji Bhosale (संभाजी भोसले)(14 May 1657 – 11 March 1689) was the eldest son and successor of Chhatrapati (sovereign) Shivaji Maharaj.Sambhaji's rule was largely shaped by the ongoing wars between the Maratha kingdom and the Mughal Empire, as well as other neighbouring powers such as the Siddis, Mysore and the Portuguese in Goa.In just nine years, he managed to win 128 battles and brought glory upon his father’s name

ajay said...

where is ashoka the grear

Nicky Singh said...

prithviraj chauhan,maharana pratp and also dont forget shivaji theese are the real hero in our india. go to http://prithvirajraso.info for all story of our real hero.

Anonymous said...

Shivaji is greatest king in the world