You are right. That is why I thought for a minute before I coined the words "Instigated Wars". I am pretty sure, Rajendra I would not have felt, his own invasions, as a problem. But when some one instigates when his concentration is elsewhere, then it is a problem and you have clearly exposed it in your last para regarding the inability of Kundavai and Vimaladitya.
Yes, I feel disgusted about the fact that the Foreign Invasions (through the seas) of Rajendra I was never accorded the grandeur, it deserved, in history. We do not know why, but Ghazni the rogue emperor, who destroyed almost all the North, North Central and Western India, never ventured into Rajendra-I's territory.
Madhan mentions about this in his book "vandhArgaL vendRargaL". (That was a real "bloody" account of the Ruthless invasions of the Mohammedans). He even throws the question as to whether Ghazni never had the courage to venture into Rajendra's territory. But does not conclude and leaves it for the readers to conclude. Whatever the reason may be, the fact that Ghazni did not venture into Rajendra's territory, speaks volumes about his greatness!!!
Unfortunately all the historians from the north were so biased that they even refused to look down to the history of the south, except for the cursory glance. This is clearly indicated by KAN Sastri in his book "History of South India".
Nevertheless, a Tubelight cannot overpower the one and only Sun!!!
I feel RRC's fame eclipsed Rajendra's only because, after the initial invasions to expand the empire, RRC concentrated a lot on the people welfare and local administration which kept him amids the masses. While we know that Rajendra was always fighting and expanding the empire to a larger extent than that was under RRC. So keeping the popularity aside, both were equally great in respective aspects and I, personally, cannot favour one over the other.
the fact that the Foreign Invasions (through the seas) of Rajendra I was never accorded the grandeur, it deserved, in history.
but Ghazni the rogue emperor, who destroyed almost all the North, North Central and Western India,
Hi dont all invasions have to be under one category regardless of the religion of the invader rajendras invasions and mamalla's before that have been recorded in very bad light by the countries which suffered the invasions. similarly the mahavmsa in lanka also records the destruction wrought by the chola's just a logical question how come ghazni was different from rajendra? venketesh
never ventured into Rajendra-I's territory. > > Madhan mentions about this in his book "vandhArgaL vendRargaL". > (That was a real "bloody" account of the Ruthless invasions of the > Mohammedans). He even throws the question as to whether Ghazni never > had the courage to venture into Rajendra's territory. But does not > conclude and leaves it for the readers to conclude. Whatever the > reason may be, the fact that Ghazni did not venture into Rajendra's > territory, speaks volumes about his greatness!!! > > Unfortunately all the historians from the north were so biased that > they even refused to look down to the history of the south, except > for the cursory glance. This is clearly indicated by KAN Sastri in > his book "History of South India". > > Nevertheless, a Tubelight cannot overpower the one and only Sun!!! > > I feel RRC's fame eclipsed Rajendra's only because, after the > initial invasions to expand the empire, RRC concentrated a lot on > the people welfare and local administration which kept him amids the > masses. While we know that Rajendra was always fighting and > expanding the empire to a larger extent than that was under RRC. So > keeping the popularity aside, both were equally great in respective > aspects and I, personally, cannot favour one over the other. > > Regards, > Venkatesh > --- In [email protected], "Sivapathasekaran"
I feel you missed my point. I never compared the invasions of Rajendra and Ghazni with one another.
While expressing my anguish at Rajendra not being accorded the grandeur, he deserved, by the Biased (if I can say so) North Indian historians, regarding Ghazni, I only said that he did not dare to venture into Rajendra's territory and this speaks volumes about Rajendra's greatness and valour. I did not say that Rajendra was very noble, in comparison to the 'bloody' invasions of Ghazni. Hope I have clarified.
So from a invaded citizen's perspective, there will be no difference between Ghazni or any other King.
Hi some where in the archives are the kalvettus about the cruelty of pallavas and cholas
of course these were in the invaded territories. i realise it was a cruel age and kings had to be very cruel to even survive let alone succeed.
vathapi was burnt to ashes by the pallavas. that is as bad as an invader can get. i dont think religion should be an issue ghazni is on record having feudatory hindu kings.
and the point of ghazni not venturing into rajendras territory too is disputed. ghazni's last visit to india was somnath and gujarath. did rajendra's territory border gujarath. even when ghazni came into gujarat in his last years he was having lots of problems back home . last 4 years of his life i dont think he ventured out of afganistan.
6 kings who have never lost a war in the battle field Chandra gupta maurya, Ashoka, Karikala 1st sangam, RRC, RJC, Narasimha Pallava. it is a honor to have 4 tamil kings in the 6 list. I have been puzzled why the last 4 have never got the same publicity compared to the first two.
All history buffs, I have a question. Was Rajendra I really born to Vaanathi, of PS? It is hard to imagine a lady of Vaanathi's character give birth to a warrior of his stature. Was Vaanathi's character purely Kalki's imagination or is there any indication of her in historical records? Was Rajendran born to her in reality?
Yes. Rajendra's mother was Vanavanmadevi which Kalki shortened as Vanathi. Vanathi alias Vanavanmadevi is a real life character who was the mother of RJC, but the characterization of Vanathi in PS is purely Kalki's imagination. For that matter, I would say all the characterizations are Kalki's imagination and only the characters might be real.
Its an unsolved mystery, why Rajendra built a pallipadai for his step mother Panchavanmadevi and not to his own mother vanavanmadevi.
Thanks Satish, I would think atleast Kundavai and Sembian Mahadevi have their characterisation related to reality? Kundavai did take an active part in governing and Sembian Mahadevi too was active in religious matters?
Quote : Udayar Shree Rajendra Chozha devarUTHARAPADATHIL BOOPATHIYARAI JEYITHARULI (On Nothern Country - on the banks of Ganges - part of Bengal - conquored the Ruler) YUTHOTSAVA VIBAVATHAL (by virtue of conquering the Battle) GANGA PARIGRAHAM PANNIYARULINA GANGAI KONDA CHOZHNENNUM THIRUNAAMATHAL ( and brought Ganges and thus became known Gangai Konda Chozhan! ) ITH THIRUMUTRATHIL VAITHRULINA UTHAMAKKIRA GANGAI KONDA CHOZHANIL.. " inscription in Ennayiram - near South West of Tindivanam! Where Rajendra constructed a siva temple for his siva Guru, Sarva Siva Pandithar !
sps
=============
Reposting mail ::
THAT settles all speculations Re Rejendra's Ganges expedition!