Sir john Posted May 18, 2015 Posted May 18, 2015 In line with the Sangh Parivaar's push for Hindu icons, Union home minister Rajnath Singh on Sunday asked historians to revisit history by giving Mewar ruler Maharana Pratap more credit. "I have no objections to historians writing Akbar The Great. But why not Pratap The Great? The valour and sacrifice that the Maharana demonstrated in the Mewar region was equally impressive and he should be accorded more respect and dignity," he said while unveiling a statue of Pratap at the Collectorate campus in Rajasthan's Pratapgarh district on Sunday. "I personally consider Maharana Pratap as great," he said eulogizing the Mewar king who was defeated by Akbar in the historic Battle of Haldighati. "History should be presented in correct light. Pratap must be introduced as great for the next generations," Singh said. READ ALSO: A year in office, RSS, BJP to invoke Hindu icons He pointed out that Pratap's patriotism and the sacrifices he made should be highlighted and this would work as inspiration for the country. "The guerrilla warfare that the Maharana had waged against the Mughals became an inspiration for freedom fighters like Chandrashekhar Azad, Bhagat Singh and even Chhatrapati Shivaji and Banda Bairagi," he said. Singh said the Maharana was not king of a particular caste or community but fought for his country and people from all walks supported him. Union home minister Rajnath Singh in Rajasthan's Pratapgarh, where he inaugurated the statue of Maharana Pratap. (TOI photo) "Virtues of Maharana Pratap have become more relevant in today's world," he said. He further said that there are several accounts in Indian history that should be modified and corrected. "I congratulate the Rajasthan government for introducing a chapter on Maharana Pratap and I assure that I will take up with the HRD ministry to introduce a similar chapter in CBSE and ICSC syllabus too," Singh said. READ ALSO: NDA plans to rebuild image of Hindutva icon Syama Prasad Mookerji Singh referred to Nobel laureate VS Naipaul's book 'India: A Wounded Civilisation' and said, "Naipaul has observed that he found India the only country in the world where history written by foreign historians is taught in textbooks. Indian historians should heed to Naipaul and take measures in right earnest." Singh assured that the Centre would encourage celebration of Pratap's forthcoming 475th birth anniversary in a big way. :hatsoff:
Yoda-esque Posted May 18, 2015 Posted May 18, 2015 What is this Hindu icon? It means Indian history started from Babur and ended with Aurangzeb, then started again with Gandhi and ended with Nehru. Special mention here would be Delhi Sultanate that has been revived by Kejritard .
Desi Cartman Posted May 18, 2015 Posted May 18, 2015 I actually don't remember ready Akbar the great, I do remember reading Ashoka the great.
Precambrian Posted May 18, 2015 Posted May 18, 2015 Yep true.. No emphasis on the intermediary kings - nor the culture - the history books talk so much about mughal architecture and customs etc, and hardly about the other cultures. Also the space devoted to the great southern kingdoms is too less (cholas, pandyas, cheras and pallavas) - in fact, cholas were one of the greatest during its time - one of the best ever seafaring kingdoms and one that annexed parts of SE Asia during its peak. But people hardly know about it.
Raghav_12 Posted May 18, 2015 Posted May 18, 2015 Sorry though I am descendant directly of Maharana Pratap's clan, I really fail to understand what is really there for which Maharana Pratap can be called great. He was brave and ready to make all the sacrifices for his kingdom, but then there have been hundreds of other rulers with similar qualities. He was poor strategically and never won any significant war in his life. I have respect for him and wished if he was more successful, but with the overall achievements he had, it is difficult to call him great.
Precambrian Posted May 18, 2015 Posted May 18, 2015 Sorry though I am descendant directly of Maharana Pratap's clan, I really fail to understand what is really there for which Maharana Pratap can be called great. He was brave and ready to make all the sacrifices for his kingdom, but then there have been hundreds of other rulers with similar qualities. He was poor strategically and never won any significant war in his life. I have respect for him and wished if he was more successful, but with the overall achievements he had, it is difficult to call him great. Do you consider Bhagat Singh great?
Malcolm Merlyn Posted May 18, 2015 Posted May 18, 2015 For starters change those Aurangzeb Roads and Tughlaq Roads.
Shivaji bhonsle Posted May 18, 2015 Posted May 18, 2015 He didn't had the numbers like the mughal emperors, but he took on the mighty army which makes him great. Same with Chhatrapati shivaji. If only Hindus stayed united, the mughals wouldn't have been let inside our country. I don't see much difference even now, no unity, fighting along the lines of caste, color, language, states...keep it going...at times I feel like leaving Hinduism and convert to some other religion where there is unity.
Raghav_12 Posted May 18, 2015 Posted May 18, 2015 He didn't had the numbers like the mughal emperors' date=' but he took on the mighty army which makes him great. [b']Same with Chhatrapati shivaji. If only Hindus stayed united, the mughals wouldn't have been let inside our country. I don't see much difference even now, no unity, fighting along the lines of caste, color, language, states...keep it going...at times I feel like leaving Hinduism and convert to some other religion where there is unity. Big difference between Maharana Pratap and Shivaji. Marathas can be called great but not so Rajputs. Shivaji was able to establish a kingdom which controlled almost complete India within 70 years of his death. At the times of Bajirao and Balaji bajirao, Mughal Emperor was at the mercy of peshwas. I believe Pehswas are under-represented and under-celebrated in our history. But may be they didn't last really long like Mughals. In comparison Rajputs have no such achievements to show. Maharana Pratap did challenge Akbar but somebody can not be called Great just for challenging another great.
mishra Posted May 18, 2015 Posted May 18, 2015 For starters change those Aurangzeb Roads and Tughlaq Roads. :cantstop:
Sachin=GOD Posted May 18, 2015 Posted May 18, 2015 I actually don't remember ready Akbar the great' date=' I do remember reading Ashoka the great.[/quote'] Yeah. It seems many people in BJP/RSS only view history from a religious point of view. Inke liye kuch aur hai hi nahi history mein.
Shivaji bhonsle Posted May 18, 2015 Posted May 18, 2015 Big difference between Maharana Pratap and Shivaji. Marathas can be called great but not so Rajputs. Shivaji was able to establish a kingdom which controlled almost complete India within 70 years of his death. At the times of Bajirao and Balaji bajirao, Mughal Emperor was at the mercy of peshwas. I believe Pehswas are under-represented and under-celebrated in our history. But may be they didn't last really long like Mughals. In comparison Rajputs have no such achievements to show. Maharana Pratap did challenge Akbar but somebody can not be called Great just for challenging another great. Marathas were united. Rajputs fought among themselves and always had less numbers compared to mughals. Big difference. But, the valor and courage of Rajputs are second to none. That's why still significant numbers of Rajputs represent Indian armed forces. Im a bundela rajput. We took on mughal empire in the 16th century, lost due to less numbers, but didn't convert like few cowards. Lot of People from bundela rajput caste left to south India where they are called as "bondilli" a corrupted name of Bundela. Hinduism is a part of our lives. Although, I feel bad and worried about unity of our religion, I will always be proud of my forefathers who didn't convert to an alien religion. they gladly accepted death before submission. You may not be proud, but I am.
mishra Posted May 18, 2015 Posted May 18, 2015 Yeah. It seems many people in BJP/RSS only view history from a religious point of view. Inke liye kuch aur hai hi nahi history mein. Depends on which Board u studied. I for one in West Bengal read Akbar the great. Also mughal age was compared with golden period of India.
Sachin=GOD Posted May 18, 2015 Posted May 18, 2015 Depends on which Board u studied. I for one in West Bengal read Akbar the great. Also mughal age was compared with golden period of India. Mughal Age was compared with golden period but I didn't read Akbar the great.
mishra Posted May 18, 2015 Posted May 18, 2015 Mughal Age was compared with golden period but I didn't read Akbar the great. Did a lil google. http://www.learncbse.in/akbar-the-great-cbse-class-8-english-worksheet/
diga Posted May 18, 2015 Posted May 18, 2015 Yeah. It seems many people in BJP/RSS only view history from a religious point of view. Inke liye kuch aur hai hi nahi history mein. Sirji, even oxford dictionary says this http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/Akbar-Jalaludin-Muhammad ( 1542–1605), Mogul emperor of India 1556–1605; known as Akbar the Great. Akbar expanded the Mogul empire to incorporate northern India and established an efficient and enlightened administration. Several textbooks had him as Akbar the great ps: I dont have a viewpoint on this ..dont really care whether he was Akbar the emperor or Akbar the great
Sachin=GOD Posted May 18, 2015 Posted May 18, 2015 Did a lil google. http://www.learncbse.in/akbar-the-great-cbse-class-8-english-worksheet/ Sirji, even oxford dictionary says this http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/Akbar-Jalaludin-Muhammad Several textbooks had him as Akbar the great ps: I dont have a viewpoint on this ..dont really care whether he was Akbar the emperor or Akbar the great I said that I had not read about Akbar the great, not that it has not been written in about any books. And yeah, agree that such petty things don't matter. Rajnath Singh wants to call Maharana Pratap the great - he can do so. No need to create controversy by unnecessary comparisons. If Maharana Pratap deserves (or doesn't deserve) to be called GREAT, it should be on his own merits, not because Akbar is also called GREAT.
diga Posted May 18, 2015 Posted May 18, 2015 I said that I had not read about Akbar the great, not that it has not been written in about any books. you also said this It seems many people in BJP/RSS only view history from a religious point of view. Inke liye kuch aur hai hi nahi history mein
.svg.png.5ab3ce86b8af4a762132502c85a350db.thumb.png.8a4574a4556391f1df10aa68196a2ab0.png)
Recommended Posts