Talk:Siege of Chittorgarh (1303)

Satish Chandra saying almost all modern historians reject Padmini legend

I don't know why Satish Chandra says so, but as I have read most modern historians agree and do not reject Padmavati legend. Except Dr Qanungo and KS Lal most historians accept the story as somewhat true. Dr A.L. Shrivastava, Prof Habib, SC Datta, Dr Dashratha Sharma, RV Somani all accept that Padmini existed. Even KS Lal who do not accept this story agrees atleast that Jauhar did happen and there may have been a queen of Ratan Singh named Padmini who also sacrificed herself in flames of Jauhar. So it is astonishing that Satish Chandra state so confidently that almost every Modern Historians reject this legend without giving name of any historians except Ojha who is probably not as modern as other guys mentioned here. Satish Chandra doesn't give any citation for the same. Others can give their opinions.Sajaypal007 (talk) 18:25, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

@Sajaypal007: Although I concur with you on her existence but it's a fact that Padmavat text can not be considered as a historical text. It mentions ancestry of text's heroine wrong as well.

• It claimed that Ratan Singh went all the way to Sri Lanka and married her, Jayasi claimed her as daughter of ruler Gandharvasen. In entire history of that state there was no ruler with this name that ever existed. Ratan Singh only ruled for a year or so, even during that span his capital was besieged by Alauddin for eight months, which make it impossible that he travelled to Sri Lanka to marry her.
• I agree that unlike this common myth that she is poetic creation of Jayasi, she was pretty much a historical figure. (Unlike this flawd narrative that Jayasi was first to mention here, she is mentioned in several early texts as well before Jayasi poem & Jayasi in his poem mentions that he took this poetic piece from the poet Bain) {who lived just few years after the event}
• Even I was surprised that a fringe claim of B.P Prasad that Jauhar of Chittor is a fabrication is given WP:Undue weightage here. Even Chandra mentions Jauhar here, diff.
• I think this article as it stands, only mentions that the historicity of the legend is disputed not that of Padmini. Packer&Tracker «Talk» 11:22, 12 June 2022 (UTC)

@Sajaypal007: Very interesting please add there references with quotes here. 2409:4051:2D8B:FF47:9F0E:7B5E:672B:303C (talk) 12:18, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

Jauhar

In my recent revert, diff, I removed the part where Saxena claimed that Jauhar of Chittor here is a fabrication of later writers. All Saxena did here is quoting Amir Khusrao (Alauddin's courtier); who according to him did not mention Jauhar here while he do so in case of Sack of Ranthambore couple of years prior. On which basis, this version is taken as definite truth ? Amir did not explicitly claimed that Jauhar did not happened. Even If he did not make mention of it in his account, this is well known fact that Khusrao was notorious for omitting unpleasant facts about Alauddin, i.e. His murder of Uncle Jalaluddin Khilji for throne, his defeat against Mongols, capture of Devaldevi etc. Does this make all this incidents fabrications of later writers ?? Beside all this, I never encountered a secondary source which claimed that Jauhar of Chittor is fabrication of later times. Three Sakas of Chittor in 1303, 1535 & finally 1568 are well documented historic facts.

• Saxena even doubted that Alauddin ordered massacre of 30,000 Hindus inside fort by claiming that in Persian chronicles, three and thirty are written more or less the same way. R.V Somani, History of Mewar from earliest times to 1751 A.D, p.97 (footnotes) .

• There is a clear dishonesty among Persian chronicles in general and in case of Jauhar it's even more evident. Do read Abu-Fazl work regarding Akbar's Sack of Chittod 1567/68 as well about how he described Jauhar.

Thanks. Packer&Tracker «Talk» 04:02, 12 June 2022 (UTC)