History of India

Indian National Army

Indian National Army, also known as the Azad Hind Fauj, was formed for the liberation of India from the British rule. It was formed in South-East Asia in the year 1942 by pioneering Indian Nationalists and prisoners who wanted to throw off the yoke of foreign domination and liberate the country. The INA was initially formed under Mohan Singh, after the fall of Singapore, the captain in the 1/14th Punjab Regiment in the British Army. However, the first INA under Mohan Singh collapsed and finally it was revived under the leadership of Subash Chandra Bose in 1943. Bose`s army was declared as the Azri Hukumat e Azad Hind. Indian National Army emerged along with Mahatma Gandhi`s peaceful resistance movement within India. In contrast to Mahatma Gandhi, Bose advocated a more aggressive confrontation with the British authorities.

Origin of Indian National Army

INA was formed during the first world war when the Ghadar Party and the emergence form of the Indian Independence League planned to rebel in the British Indian Army from the Punjab through Bengal to Hong Kong. However, this plan met with failure after the information was leaked to British Intelligence. During the Second World War, the plan to fight the British found revival and a number of leaders and movements were initiated. These included the various “liberation armies” which were formed in as well as with the help of Italy, Germany as well as in South-east Asia. Thus in South East Asia the concept of the Indian National Army emerged. It was supported by the Japanese 15th army and led by Bose.

Composition of the Indian National Army

Indian National Army had many valued freedom fighters that helped in the battles. They all had a brilliant background and fought for a similar cause, freedom of India. The INA freedom fighters were from every sphere ranging from barristers to plantation workers. The revival of the Indian National Army was done by Subhash Chandra Bose. Most of the people who joined the army had no prior military experience and thus to ensure a well-trained army, Bose established an Officers Training School for INA officers and the Azad School for the civilian volunteers Many youth were also sent to the Imperial Military Academy in Japan for advanced training. Every soldier was required to spend about six to eight hours of training daily. The training included physical training, army drill and handling arms such as rifles, pistols, hand grenades and bayonets. The soldiers also attended lectures of Indian and world history and military subjects like map reading as well as signaling.

Battles of Indian National Army

The battles that were fought by the Indian National Army during World War II were fought in the South-East Asian region. The operations include Malayan Campaign in 1942 as well as Burma Campaign. The operations of the INA involved the battle of Imphal, Kohima, Pokoku and Irrawady River operations. It began a long march over land and on foot towards Bangkok, along with Subash Chandra Bose. At the time of Japan`s surrender in September 1945, Bose left for Manchuria to attempt to contact the advancing Soviet troops, and was reported to have died in an air crash near Taiwan. On the other hand the INA fighters were imprisoned. The prisoners faced the death penalty, life imprisonment or a fine as punishment if found guilty.

Women in Indian National Army

Indian National Army was structured in a way that lodged active participation from women. A women regiment was formed in 1943. INA had John Thivy, Dr. Lakhsmi Sehgal, Narayan Karruppiah as well as Janaki Thevar as its members. Among the masses attending Bose`s rally on 9 July, Dr.Lakshmi, responded immediately to his appeal to form a Women`s Regiment. She visited many families to persuade the women to join the INA. Many were reluctant; however, she managed to gather twenty enthusiastic girls who were willing to break the traditional barriers. The girls presented the guard-of-honour to Bose. He was impressed and invited Dr. Lakshmi to lead the Women`s Regiment. On 12 July 1943, Bose announced the formation of the Women`s Regiment, naming it “Rani of Jhansi Regiment” which in later years was considered to be a special characteristic of the INA. INA fighters were not invited to join the Indian Army after India`s independence. However, a few ex-INA members later have seen prominent public life or held important positions in independent India. The Indian National Army thus rose to power under the able leadership of Bose. Though it was ultimately disbanded, its heroic attempts at forming an army and taking a radical step towards Indian Independence marked a significant step in the Indian Independence Movement.

Subhas Chandra Bose

Subhas Chandra Bose was most dynamic leader of India`s struggle for independence. He is more familiar with his name Netaji. His contribution towards India`s Freedom struggle was of a revolutionary. Subhas Chandra Bose was born on 23rd Jan, 1897 in Cuttack, Orissa, India. From his childhood he was a bright student and was a topper in the matriculation examination from the whole of Kolkata province. He graduated from the Scottish Church College in Kolkata with a First Class degree in Philosophy. Influenced by the teachings of Swami Vivekananda, he was known for his patriotic zeal as a student. He went to England to fulfil his parents` desire to appear in the Indian Civil Services. He stood fourth in order of merit. But he left civil Service`s apprenticeship and joined India`s freedom struggle.

During his service with the Indian National Congress, he was greatly influenced by Bal Gangadhar Tilak and Sri Aurobindo. He did not agree with Gandhiji`s methods of achieving Independence through non-violence. He believed that the only way of achieving Independence was by shedding blood. He therefore returned to Kolkata to work under Chittaranjan Das, the Bengali freedom fighter and co-founder of the Swaraj Party. He was imprisoned for his revolutionary activities on various occasions. In 1921, Bose organized a boycott of the celebrations to mark the visit of the Prince of Wales to India for which he was imprisoned for the first time. Bose was elected to the post of Chief Executive Officer of the newly constituted Calcutta Corporation in April 1924. That same year in October, Bose was arrested on suspicion of terrorism. At first, he was kept in Alipur Jail and later he was exiled to Mandalay in Burma. Bose was once again arrested on January, 1930. After his release from jail on September 25, he was elected as the Mayor of the City of Kolkata. Netaji was imprisoned eleven times by the British over a span of 20 years either in India or in Rangoon. During the mid 1930s he was exiled by the British from India to Europe where he championed India`s cause and aspiration for self-rule before gatherings and conferences. Throughout his stay in Europe from 1933 to 1936, he met several European leaders and thinkers. He travelled extensively in India and in Europe before stating his political opposition to Gandhi. Subhash Chandra Bose married Emilie Schenkl, an Austrian born national, who was his secretary, in 1937 in German. Bose wrote many letters to Schenkl of which many have been published in the book “Letters to Emilie Schenkl”, edited by Sisir Kumar Bose and Sugata Bose.

Subhas Chandra Bose became the president of the Haripura Indian National Congress against the wishes of Gandhiji in 1938. He was elected as the president for two consecutive terms. Expressing his disagreement with Bose, Gandhi commented “Subhas` victory is my defeat”. Gandhi`s continued opposition led to Netaji`s resignation from the Working Committee. He was left with no alternative but to form an independent party, the “All India Forward Bloc”.

In his call to freedom, Subhas Chandra Bose encouraged full participation of the Indian Masses to strive for independence. Bose initiated the concept of the “National Planning Committee” in 1938. His correspondence reveals that despite his clear dislike for British subjugation, he was deeply impressed by their methodical and systematic approach and their steadfastly disciplinarian outlook towards life. The contrast between Gandhi and Bose is captured with reasonable measure in a saying attributable to him “”If people slap you once, slap them twice”. Having failed to persuade Gandhi for the mass civil disobedience to protest against Viceroy Lord Linlithgow`s decision to declare war on India`s behalf without consulting the Congress leadership, he organised mass protests in Kolkata. The disobedience was calling for the `Holwell Monument` commemorating the Black Hole of Kolkata. He was thrown in Jail and was released only after a seven-day hunger strike. Bose`s house in Kolkata was kept under surveillance by the British. With two pending court cases; he felt that the British would not let him leave the country before the end of the war. This set the scene for Bose`s escape to Germany, via Afghanistan and the Soviet Union. In Germany he instituted the Special Bureau for India under Adam von Trott zu Solz, broadcasting on the German-sponsored Azad Hind Radio. Here he founded the “Free India Centre” in Berlin, and created the Indian Legion consisting of some 4500 soldiers who were the Indian prisoners of war. The soldiers had previously fought for the British in North Africa prior to their capture by Axis forces.

Maha gujarat andolan

During British rule in India, sections of the western coast of India were the part of the Bombay Presidency. In 1937, Bombay Presidency was included as a province of British India. After independence of India in 1947, the demand for linguistic states came up. On 17 June 1948, Rajendra Prasad set up the Linguistic Provinces Commission to recommend whether or not the states should be reorganized on a linguistic basis. The commission included S. K. Dhar (retired Judge of the Allahabad High Court), J. N. Lal (lawyer) and Panna Lall (retired Indian Civil Service officer), and so it was called Dhar commission. In its 10 December 1948 report, the Commission recommended that “the formation of provinces on exclusively or even mainly linguistic considerations is not in the larger interests of the Indian nation”.

The Mahagujarat conference was held in 1948 to include all Gujarati speaking people under one administration which finally resulted in formation of Gujarat. According to the autobiography of Indulal Yagnik, Bombay state chief minister B. G. Kher and the then home minister Morarji Desai visited Dang in May, 1949. B. G. Kher stated that tribal people of Dang spoke Marathi and focus should be on that. Indulal Yagnik and others visited Dang to examine this. Gujarati Sabha also sent a committee for examination and agitate on negligence by government. The committee reported that Dang is more related to Gujarat.

By 1952, the demand for separate Telugu-majority Andhra State had started in Madras State. Potti Sreeramulu, one of the activists demanding Andhra State, died on 16 December 1952 after undertaking a fast-unto-death. Subsequently, Andhra State was formed in 1953. This sparked agitations all over the country demanding linguistic states.  In December 1953, Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru appointed the States Reorganisation Commission (SRC) to prepare report on the creation of linguistic states. The commission was headed by Justice Fazal Ali so it was called Fazal Ali Commission. The commission reported in 1955 to reorganise states of India.

 

 

Agitation

SRC considered to form states on linguistic basis but recommended that Bombay state should stay as a bilingual state. It was further enlarged by the addition of Saurashtra State and Kutch State, the Marathi-speaking districts of Nagpur Division of Madhya Pradesh, and the Marathawada region of Hyderabad. The southernmost districts of Bombay state were included in Mysore State. So it had Gujarati-speaking population in north and Marathi-speaking population in southern parts. Both Gujarati and Marathi people opposed the SRC’s recommendation and strongly demanded separate linguistic states. The situation became complicated because both of them wanted to include Bombay city (now Mumbai) in their own states due to its economic and cosmopolitan values. Jawaharlal Nehru also suggested to form three states; Maharashtra, Gujarat and centrally governed city-state of Bombay to solve conflict.

Protest broke out in Bombay and other Marathi-speaking districts later known as Samyukta Maharashtra Movement demanding separate Marathi state. Morarji Desai, then the Chief Minister of Bombay State, was against it. On 8 August 1956, some college students of Ahmedabad went to local Congress House near Lal Darwaza to demand separate state. Morarji Desai did not listen them and police repression resulted in death of five to eight students. It triggered massive protests across the state. Indulal Yagnik came out of his retirement from politics and founded Mahagujarat Janata Parishad to guide movement. Many protesters including Indulal Yagnik and Dinkar Mehta, Dhanvant Shroff were arrested and kept at Gaekwad Haveli in Ahmedabad for a few days and later imprisoned in Sabarmati Central Jail for  three and half months. Protest also spread in other parts of the state which forced Morarji Desai to go on week-long fast. People did not turned up to support him during fast and stayed in home following self-imposed curfew, Janata Curfew. Just before the declaration of carving three states as Nehru suggested, 180 members of Parliament suggested return to bilingual Bombay state together. There was conflict over Mumbai and Dang which was solved through discussions. Gandhian activist Ghelubhai Nayak actively lobbied for accession of Dang in Gujarat. Mumbai went to Maharashtra and Dang went to Gujarat.

 

The Delhi Sultanate basically refers to the Muslim rulers who ruled India through Delhi. This basically came into existence after Mohammed Ghori captured Delhi after defeating Prithviraj. After Prithviraj was captured, the Delhi Sultanate went into the hands of one of Ghori’s generals known as Qutub-ud-din Aibak. During the end of the 12th century, he established a series of rulers and this dynasty was called as the slave dynasty since the rulers had been military slaves. Read more about the history of the Delhi sultanate in India.

The extent of Delhi sultanate was till Bengal in the east and Deccan in the south. Even such a big sultanate faced constant threats from the North West and was also under pressure from internal politics within independent nobles. There was instability and unrest in the kingdom as there five dynasties that rose and fell which includes Slave dynasty, Khilji dynasty, Tughlaq dynasty, Sayyid dynasty and Lodhi dynasty. It was under the Khilji dynasty that most of South India was conquered. The territory was never fixed and depended upon the ability of the ruler as to how much was he able to conquer and control.

 

The effectiveness of a ruler during this time depended entirely upon his ability to conquer the places that fell near military highways and trade routes, collect land tax for revenue of the state and have firm authority over military and state governors. Agriculture and its related activities were the main source of livelihood in the kingdom but due to continued political unrest and instability, thepeasants suffered greatly. During this time, Persian language developed to a great extent at the places where power was concentrated.

 

Mahmud of Ghazni

• Ghazni was a small kingdom in Afghanistan, which was founded by a Turkish nobleman in the tenth century. One of its successors, namely Mahmud wanted to make Ghazni into a big and powerful kingdom; therefore, he decided to conquer a part of Central Asia.
• In order to make his large and powerful army, Mahmud had needed a huge property; hence, he decided to attack India to rob Indian wealth (to accomplish his great ambition).
• The first raid of Mahmud began in A.D. 1,000. In a short period of twenty-five years, Mahmud made seventeen raids. Meanwhile, he fought battles in Central Asia and in Afghanistan as well.
• Between A.D. 1,010 and 1025, Mahmud attacked only on the temple towns in northern India, as he had heard that there were much gold and jewelry kept in the big temples in India.
• One of these attacks, which is frequently mentioned while discussing Medieval History, was the destruction of the Somnath temple located in western India.
• In 1,030, Mahmud died and the people of northern India get relieved. Though Mahmud was destructor for the Indians, but in his own country, he was a builder of a beautiful mosque and a large library.
• Mahmud was the patron of the famous Persian poet, Firdausi, who wrote the epic poem ‘Shah Namah.’
• Mahmud sent the Central Asian scholar Alberuni to India, who lived here for many years and had written his experience, describing the country and the condition of the people.

 

Muhammad Ghori

• Muhammad Ghori was the ruler of the Ghor kingdom, a small kingdom of Afghanistan. He was the supreme ruler of Ghurid Empire.
• Ghori was more ambitious than Mahmud, as he was not only interested in robbing wealth of India, but also intended in conquering northern India and adding it to his kingdom.
• Since Punjab had already been a part of the Ghazni kingdom; therefore, it made easier to Ghori to plan India campaign.
• Muhammad’s most important campaign in India was against the Chauhan ruler, Prithviraj III. In 1191, Prithviraj defeated Ghori; this battle is popularly known as the ‘first battle of Tarain.’
• In 1192, Muhammad Ghori defeated Prithviraj in the second battle of Tarin. The defeat of Prithviraj opened the Delhi area to Muhammad and he began to establish his power.
• In 1206, Ghori was murdered and his kingdom in northern India was left in the control of his general Qutb-ud-din Aibak.
• After Muhammad Ghori’s death, slave sultans were ruled India.

 

The Slave Sultans (AD. 1206-1290)

• Mamlukswere the earliest rulers of the Delhi Sultanate. They are also known as the Slave Kings because many of them were either slaves or were the sons of slaves and became Sultans.
• The first of the slave kings was Qutb-ud-din Aibak, who was the general of Muhammad Ghori. After the death of Ghori, Qutb-ud-din stayed in India and established his kingdom.
• The ruler of Ghazni tried to annex the territory held by Qutb-ud-din, but he failed. When lltutmish succeeded Qutbud-din as Sultan, a separate kingdom was established in the northern India, namely Delhi Sultanate.
• Over a period of time, the Sultans of Delhi extended their control up to Bengal in the east and Sind in the west.
• During the Sultanate period, there was the problem of the local Indian rulers who had been conquered. Sultans had taken territories of some rulers and some others were allowed to keep it.
• The rulers who were allowed to keep their territories paid a sum of money as a tribute and agreed to help the Sultan with military support when required.
• Sultanate had also problems from the north-west, for example, the rulers of Afghanistan were quiet, but the Mongol people of Central Asia, led by Chenghiz Khan, made fresh conquests.
• The Sultan Iltutmishhad faced the administrative problems. However, when he died, his daughter Raziya became the sultan and she had to face the problems.
• After Iltutmish, the next important Sultans was Balban, a strong and iron-willed Sultan. He was more successful in solving the problems than his predecessors. He defended the Sultanate from the attacks of the Mongols.
• Balban fought against the local rulers who troubled him. His biggest problem was the nobles who had become very powerful and were threatening the position of the Sultan. Slowly but firmly, Balban broke their power and finally the position of the Sultan became all-important.
• Balban’s success was integrated into his strategic administrative policy. He successfully changed the organization of the army and curbed the revolt of the nobles.
• Balban encouraged people to do the ‘sijdah’ in his presence. Sijdahmeans, people had to kneel and touch the ground with their forehead in salutation to him (Balban).
• Sijdah, horrified the orthodox Muslims. According to Muslims belief, “all men are equal, and therefore, no one should do the sijdahbefore anyone else except God.”
• Khilji dynasty came afterMamluks and ruled until A. D. 1320.

 

Khilji Dynasty (1290 – 1320)

• In 1,290, the Slave Sultans were succeeded by a new dynasty, known as Khiljis. Jalal ud din Firuz Khilji was the founder of Khilji dynasty.
• Alauddin Khilji, who was the nephew and son-in-law of Jalal-ud-din was one of the most ambitious and powerful sultans of Khilji dynasty. He wanted to conquer the world (to become second Alexander).
• Alauddin Khilji, when became sultan, gave presents (of gold) to the citizens. At the same time, he also contended that he was a strong and powerful ruler and hence, he would deal severely with anyone who showed signs of disloyalty.
• Alauddin Khilji raised the land taxes on the wealthier people of the Doab (the fertile area between the Ganga and Yamuna rivers). Further, he strictly monitored the revenue, which the nobles got from their land and hence, did not allow them to keep anything, which was not their due.
• The prices of goods were also closely controlled so that everyone could afford to pay the price demanded as well as no one could make a large profit.
• Alauddin Khilji made a new policy i.e. he ordered a new assessment of the cultivated land and the revenue. First, the land under cultivation (of his kingdom) was measured. And the revenue of these lands was assessed on the basis of the measurement.
• Alauddin Khilji campaigned against the kingdoms of Gujarat and Malwa. He tried to establish his control over Rajasthan by capturing the famous forts of Ranthambhor and Chittor.
• Under the command of Malik Kafur, Ala-ud-din sent a large army towards the south with the intention to conquer the peninsula as well as obtain money and wealth.
• Malik Kafur plundered in all directions and collected a large amount of gold from the various kingdoms of the south, including the Yadavas(of Devagiri), the Kakatiyas (of Warangal), and the Hoyasalas (of Dvarasamudra).
• The defeated rulers were allowed to keep their throne provided they paid a tribute. Malik Kafur also conquered the city of Madurai. By the time, no north Indian ruler attempted to penetrate so far in the south India.
• In 1,315, Aladdin Khilji died. After his death, there was a chaotic situation for the succession. Ambitious Malik Kafur made himself as sultan, but lacked support from Muslim amirsand hence, he was killed only after few months.
• By 1,320, three more Khilji successors assumed power, but no one sustained rather killed brutally. Likewise, a new dynasty namely Tughlaq was founded.
• Tughlaq dynasty came after the Khilji dynasty and ruled from A.D. 1320 to 1413.

 

Tughlaq Dynasty (1320 – 1413)

• In 1,320, Ghazi Malik became the king under the title ofGhiyath al-Din Tughlaq. Likewise, the ‘Tughlaq’ dynasty began.

Muhammad-bin-Tughlaq

• Muhammad-bin-Tughlaq(1325-51), the eldest son and successor of Ghiyath al-Din Tughlaq, was one of the most ambitious and powerful Sultans of Tughlaq dynasty.
• Ibn Battutah, the North African Arab traveler, came India during Muhammad-bin-Tughlaq’s period and he had written the detailed description of the Muhammad’s kingdom.
• Muhammad was a man of ideals who attempted as far as possible, to rule on the principles of reason. He was a great knowledgeable mathematician and a logician.
• Muhammad increased the taxes of the peasants (especially who were from the Doab area). However, a famine in the Doab region made condition worse.
• As a result of famine, the people refused to pay the extra taxes and rose in rebellion; therefore, finally, the Sultan had to cancel his order.
• Muhammad also moved the capital from Delhi to Devagiri (which he renamed Daulatabad). As per his strategic plan, Daulatabad (located nearby modern Aurangabad in Maharashtra) was a better place for controlling the Deccan.
• The moving of the capital was, however, not successful, as it was too far from northern India, and hence, the Sultan could not keep a watch on the northern frontiers. Therefore, Muhammad returned the capital back to Delhi.
• Muhammad decided to issue ‘token’ coins on brass and copper, which could be exchanged for silver coins from the treasury. This scheme would have worked, if he had monitored it carefully and allowed strictly only to the government body to issue token coins. But it did not happen rather many people started making brass and copper ‘tokens’ and the Sultan, therefore, had no control over the finances. The token coins had to be withdrawn.
• Unfortunately, Muhammad’s many administrative policies failed; hence, gradually he lost the support not only of the people, but also many of the nobles and theulema.
• Theulema were the scholars of Islamic learning who were generally orthodox in their outlook.

Firoz Shah Tughlaq

• In March, 1351, Muhammad died. After his death, his cousinFiroz Shah came to the throne who ruled till 1388.
• Firoz realized that one of the reasons for the failure of Muhammad was that he did not have the support of the nobles. Therefore, Firoz first established a friendly relation with them and made them happy by giving them, grants or revenue.
• Firoz, further, allowed the orthodoxulema to influence state policy in certain matters. Thus Firoz improved his relationship with the powerful groups at the court; however, in spite of all these, the power of the Sultan decreased.
• In the meantime, the governors of certain provinces, including Bihar and Bengal, had rebelled against the Sultanate. Firoz tried to control them, but was not very successful.
• Firoz was interested in improving the general welfare of his subjects. He improved parts of the kingdom by starting new irrigation schemes. The Yamuna Canal was one of his schemes.
• Firoz also established a few new towns, such as Ferozpur, Ferozabad, Hissar-Firoza, and Jaunpur.
• Firoz also constructed many educational centers and hospitals. He was interested in the ancient culture of India. Firoz order to translate a number of Sanskrit books into Persian and Arabic languages.
• Firoz also owned two of the pillars of the emperor Ashoka and one of them was placed on the roof of his palace.
• In September 1388, Firoz died, after which there was a civil war among his descendants. Because of the political instability, the governors of many provinces became independent kings and finally only a small area around Delhi remained in the hands of the Tughluq Sultans.

 

Sayyid Dynasty (1413 – 1451)

• By 1413, the Tughlaq dynasty ended completely and local governor occupied Delhi and given way toSayyid Dynasty.
• In 1398, Timur, the Turkish chief invaded India and robbed Indian wealth. While returning back, he appointedKhizr Khan as the governor of Delhi.
• Khizr Khan had taken Delhi from Daulat Khan Lodi and founded Sayyid dynasty in 1414. Sayyid dynasty ruled Delhi until 1451.
• In 1421, Khizr Khan died, hence, his son Mubarrak Khan succeeded. Mubarrak Khan represented himself as ‘Muizz-ud-Din Mubarak Shah’ on his coins.
• Mubarrak Khan ruled till 1434 and he was succeeded by his nephew Muhammad Shah. Muhammad Shah ruled till 1445.
• Muhammad succeeded by Ala-ud-din Alam Sham, who ruled till 1451. In 1451, Bahlul Lodi became the Sultan and founded the Lodi dynasty.
• Lodi Dynasty came after Sayyid dynasty and ruled until A.D. 1526.

 

Lodi Dynasty (1451–1526)

• Lodi dynasty was originally from Afghan who ruled Delhi Sultanate for about 75 years.

Bahlul Lodi

• Bahlul Lodi, who founded the dynasty and ruled Delhi from 1451 to 1489. After his death in 1489, his second son Sikandar Lodi succeeded the throne.

Sikandar Lodi

• Sikandar Lodi took the title of Sikandar Shah. It was Sikandar Lodi who founded Agra city in 1504 and moved capital from Delhi to Agra.
• Sikandar Lodi, further, abolished the corn duties and patronized trade and commerce in his kingdom.

Ibrahim Lodi

• After Sikandar Lodi, Ibrahim Lodi (the youngest son of Sikandar Lodi) became sultan. Ibrahim Lodi was the last ruler of Lodi dynasty who ruled from 1517 to 1526.
• Ibrahim Lodi was defeated by Babur in 1526, in the first battle of Panipat and from now Mughal Empire established.

Lodi Administration

• The Lodi kings tried to consolidate the Sultanate and attempted to curb the power of rebellious governor.
• Sikandar Lodi who ruled from 1489-1517, controlled the Ganges valley up to western Bengal.
• Sikandar Lodi moved capital from Delhi to Agra, as he felt that he could control his kingdom better from A gra. He also tried to strengthen the loyalty of the people by various measures of public welfare.

The Nobles

• During the sultanate period, the nobles played a powerful role. Sometimes, they even influenced state policy and sometimes (as governors), they revolted and became independent rulers or else usurped the throne of Delhi.
• Many of these nobles were Turkish or Afghani, who had settled in India.
• Some of the nobles were men who came to India only in search of their fortune and worked for the Sultan.
• After Ala-ud-din Khilji, Indian Muslims and Hindus were also appointed as officers (nobles).
• The Sultan followed the earlier system of granting the revenue from a piece of land or a village to the (noble) officer instead of paying them salary.
• As the power of the Sultanate gradually declined, the number of new kingdoms arose in different parts of the subcontinent. Most of them began as provinces of the Sultanate, but later became independent province.

Rajputas

Rajput is a caste from the Indian subcontinent. The term Rajput covers various patrilineal clans historically associated with warriorhood: several clans claim Rajput status, although not all claims are universally accepted.  The term “Rajput” acquired its present meaning only in the 16th century, although it is also anachronistically used to describe the earlier lineages that emerged in northern India from 6th century onwards. In the 11th century, the term “rajaputra” appeared as a non-hereditary designation for royal officials. Gradually, the Rajputs emerged as a social class comprising people from a variety of ethnic and geographical backgrounds. During the 16th and 17th centuries, the membership of this class became largely hereditary, although new claims to Rajput status continued to be made in the later centuries. Several Rajput-ruled kingdoms played a significant role in many regions of central and northern India until the 20th century.

Scholarly opinions differ on when the term Rajput acquired hereditary connotations and came to denote a clan-based community. Historian Brajadulal Chattopadhyaya, based on his analysis of inscriptions (primarily from Rajasthan), believed that by the 12th century, the term “rajaputra” was associated with fortified settlements, kin-based landholding, and other features that later became indicative of the Rajput status. According to Chattopadhyaya, the title acquired “an element of heredity” from c. 1300. A later study by of 11th-14th century inscriptions from western and central India, by Michael B. Bednar, concludes that the designations such as “rajaputra”, “thakkura” and “rauta” were not necessarily hereditary during this period.

Rajput kingdoms

The Rajput kingdoms were disparate: loyalty to a clan was more important than allegiance to the wider Rajput social grouping, meaning that one clan would fight another. This and the internecine jostling for position that took place when a clan leader (raja) died meant that Rajput politics were fluid and prevented the formation of a coherent Rajput empire. The first major Rajput kingdom was the Sisodia-ruled kingdom of Mewar. However, the term “Rajput” has also been used as an anachronistic designation for the earlier Hindu dynasties that succeeded the Gurjara-Pratiharas, such as the Chahamanas (of Shakambhari, Nadol and Jalor), the Tomaras, the Chaulukyas, the Paramaras, the Gahadavalas, and the Chandelas. These dynasties confronted the Ghaznavid and Ghurid invaders during the 11th and 12th centuries. Although the Rajput identity did not exist at this time, these lineages were classified as aristocratic Rajput clans in the later times. Chittor Fort, built by a dynasty of Sisodia Rajputs, is one of the largest forts in India. In the 15th century, the Muslim sultans of Malwa and Gujarat put a joint effort to overcome the Mewar ruler Rana Kumbha but both the sultans were defeated. Subsequently, in 1518 the Rajput Mewar Kingdom under Rana Sanga achieved a major victory over Sultan Ibrahim Lodhi of Delhi Sultanate and afterwards Rana’s influence extended up to the striking distance of Pilia Khar in Agra. Accordingly, Rana Sanga came to be the most distinguished indigenous contender for supremacy but was defeated by the Mughal invader Babur at Battle of Khanwa in 1527. From as early as the 16th century, Purbiya Rajput soldiers from the eastern regions of Bihar and Awadh, were recruited as mercenaries for Rajputs in the west, particularly in the Malwa region.

 Mughal period

Akbar’s policy (Akbar – Shah Jahan)

After the mid-16th century, many Rajput rulers formed close relationships with the Mughal emperors and served them in different capacities It was due to the support of the Rajputs that Akbar was able to lay the foundations of the Mughal empire in India. Some Rajput nobles gave away their daughters in marriage to Mughal emperors and princes for political motives. For example, Akbar accomplished 40 marriages for him, his sons and grandsons, out of which 17 were Rajput-Mughal alliances. Akbar’s successors as Mogul emperors, his son Jahangir and grandson Shah Jahan had Rajput mothers.The ruling Sisodia Rajput family of Mewar made it a point of honour not to engage in matrimonial relationships with Mughals and thus claimed to stand apart from those Rajput clans who did so.

 

Aurangzeb’s policy

Akbar’s diplomatic policy regarding the Rajputs was later damaged by the intolerant rules introduced by his great-grandson Aurangzeb. A prominent example of these rules included the re-imposition of Jaziya, which had been abolished by Akbar. However,despite imposition of Jaziya Aurangzeb’s army had a high proportion of Rajput officers in the upper ranks of the imperial army and they were all exempted from paying Jaziya The Rajputs then revolted against the Mughal empire. Aurangzeb’s conflicts with the Rajputs, which commenced in the early 1680s, henceforth became a contributing factor towards the downfall of the Mughal empire. In the 18th century, the Rajputs came under influence of the Maratha empire. By the late 18th century, the Rajput rulers begin negotiations with the East India Company and by 1818 all the Rajput states had formed an alliance with the company.

British colonial period

The medieval bardic chronicles (kavya and masnavi) glorified the Rajput past, presenting warriorhood and honour as Rajput ideals. This later became the basis of the British reconstruction of the Rajput history and the nationalist interpretations of Rajputs’ struggles with the Muslim invaders. James Tod, a British colonial official, was impressed by the military qualities of the Rajputs but is today considered to have been unusually enamoured of them. Although the group venerate him to this day, he is viewed by many historians since the late nineteenth century as being a not particularly reliable commentator. Jason Freitag, his only significant biographer, has said that Tod is “manifestly biased”.

The Rajput practices of female infanticide and sati (widow immolation) were other matters of concern to the British. It was believed that the Rajputs were the primary adherents to these practices, which the British Raj considered savage and which provided the initial impetus for British ethnographic studies of the subcontinent that eventually manifested itself as a much wider exercise in social engineering.

 

Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel

Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel handled effectively the integration of the princely states with his diplomatic skills and foresightedness. The problem of amalgamating 562 independent states with a democratic self-governing India was difficult and delicate. But it was essential to save India from balkanization, once the Paramountcy of British crown would lapse. Sardar Patel took charge of the states department in July 1947. He sensed the urgent and imperative need of the integration of princely states. He followed an iron handed policy. He made it clear that he did not recognize the right of any state to remain independent and in isolation, within India.

Sardar vallabhbhai Patel always raised his voice on several issues against exploitation and criticized the high-handedness of authority, the exploitative revenue policy of the Government and maladministration in the Princely states. He not only criticized the arbitrary policies of confiscation of movable and immovable properties, but also insisted on guarded regulations on land reforms and nationalization of key industries. His efforts to reform the Hindu religion and protect the people of other faiths reflected his longing for the right to religion. He encouraged the duly elected authority to bring restrictions through various legislative measures to freedom for all. Thus, his political value system was a fine synthesis of liberalism, conservatism and welfarism.

His vision of State was in tune with the pattern of his political values. In his concept, the State was founded and held together by a high sense of nationalism and patriotism. Individual liberty was to be in conformity with the provisions of the Constitution, to create a Nation-State, he pressed for the emancipation of backward communities and women and bring about Hindu- Muslim unity through the Gandhian constructive programme and skillfully utilised the higher castes for social integration and political mobilisation. Thus, he strengthened the plural basis of the nation-state by bringing electoral participation as effective political mobilisation. He saw a nation as ‘democratic in structure, nationalistic in foundation and welfarist in spirit and function’.

The process of the integration of the various states and the part played by Sardar in it, we realize the important role that Sardar had in the integration of the country. The states included Saurastra (including Junagadh) Hyderabad, Travancore, Cochin, Kashmir and other small states. Sardar’s role in each of these states was vital. The continuation of a divided and weak central government would in Patel’s mind, result in the wider fragmentation of India by encouraging more than 600 princely states towards independence. Between the months of December 1946 and January 1947, Patel worked with civil servant V.P. Menon on the latter’s suggestion for a separate dominion of Pakistan created out of Muslim-majority provinces. Communal violence in Bengal and Punjab in January and March 1947 further convinced Patel of the soundness of partition. Patel, a fierce critic of Jinnah’s demand that the Hindu-majority areas of Punjab and Bengal be included in a Muslim state, obtained the partition of those provinces, thus blocking any possibility of their inclusion in Pakistan. By August 15, 1947 all except Hyderabad, Junagarh and Kashmir acceded to India. He thereafter carried three fold processes of assimilation, centralization and unification of states. The states were amalgamated to form a union and that union was merged with the Union of India. He handled the Junagarh and Hyderabad crisis as a seasoned statesman. Nawab of Junagarh wanted to accede to Pakistan.The integration of the princely states thus acted as a synchronizing phenomenon and established a State of balance between chaos and segmentation and solidarity of the newly born Indian Union.

 

Kabir

Scholars differ about Kabir’s parentage, his family, the place of his birth, the time and place of his death etc. Instead of concentrating on various beliefs about Kabir’s life, the scholar deems it appropriate to side with the beliefs that are widely accepted. Scholars agree with the fact that Kabir belonged to the time of Sikandar Lodi and was a disciple of Swami Ramanand. Apropos this fact, most scholars believe that Kabir was born in 1455 and died in 1575.

At a very early stage, Kabir seems to have realised the fact that any kind of tenets, dogmas, precepts, principles and cult are counterproductive as far as true devotion is concerned as all these things breed dogmatism and fanaticism, which ultimately do not allow humankind to see the truth as it is. That is why, probably, many of his poems appear to urge to discard creeds and beliefs that embrace without any rational thinking.

Besides, Kabir appears to talk of the God that does not live at a holy shrine or a temple but within man. However, Kabir seems to say that ironically that is why people cannot notice God and oblivious of their real self they keep thronging at Kashi and Kaba:

How funny!

In the midst of water,

A fish thirsts for water,

The thing lies at home,

But searching for it,

In the woods, they roam.

Without self knowledge,

The world is false,

Be it Mathura or Kashi.

Here, Kabir seems to believe that as a fish lives in water and is surrounded by water, human beings live in God and are surrounded by God but they are still away from God because in vain they seek Him outside.

Kabir’s devotion looks to be not a blind devotion born of an impulse. Rather it seems to be an application of his belief in logic and evidence. The researcher holds that Kabir scoffs at the prevalent ritual of chanting God’s name on beads, despite the fact that in Hindu and Muslim religions chanting God’s name is believed to liberate one from suffering of this life.

This kind of egalitarianism, seems to be a need of the time when Kabir lived, as society was presumably divided into various strata of hierarchy and those belonging to the lower strata were believed to bear the brunt of inhumane discrimination, ostracism and untouchability. Thus, Kabir might have opposed differentiation made on the basis of castes not because he is a social reformer but because he is a rationalist in his thinking and a humanist at heart.

Kabir seems to believe that a person has to be careful of what he speaks and ensure that his words do not hurt anybody. It is observed that though means of communication have increased, communication between two people has decreased because people unnecessarily indulge in grumbling about and criticising others. Consequently nobody is ready to listen. If a person speaks words imbued with love, other people will love to hear him. On the other hand, if he keeps bitching about others, he will alienate a lot of people and lose his friends. As a result, a person will be left alone and the loneliness will tear him asunder. Thus, being polite in our speech is very much essential for social solidarity.

Solanki of Gujrat

The Solanki dynasty ruled parts of what are now Gujarat and Kathiawar in India between 950-1300 CE. The kings of the dynasty used the self-designation Chaulukya, and are also known as the Chalukyas of Gujarat or as the Solanki Rajputs. The dynasty ended when Alauddin Khalji conquered Gujarat. Gujarat was a major centre of Indian Ocean trade, and their capital at Anhilwara (modern Patan, Gujarat) was one of the largest cities in India, with population estimated at 100,000 in 1000 CE. In 1026, the temple complex of Somnath in Gujarat was destroyed by Mahmud of Ghazni. After 1243, the Solankis lost control of Gujarat to their feudatories, of whom the Vaghela dynasty of Dholka came to dominate. After 1292, the Vaghelas became tributaries of the Seuna (Yadava) dynasty of Devagiri in the Deccan Plateau.

The Solankis were usually referred to as the “Chalukyas of Gujarat” by their contemporaries. The vast majority of their own records describe them as “Chaulukya”, which is thought to be a variant of “Chalukya”. There are several other dynasties with this name: the Chalukyas of Badami, the Chalukyas of Kalyani, the Chalukyas of Vengi and the Chalukyas of Lata. The various dynasties using this name are sometimes thought to be branches of the same family, but the relationship between all of them is not certain. Unlike the Chalukyas of Kalyani and Vengi, the Solankis never claimed a shared descent or any other association with the original Chalukya dynasty — the Chalukyas of Badami. Moreover, they never used the term “Chalukya” to describe themselves, instead using its variant “Chaulukya”.

However, the Solankis did share a myth of origin with the Chalukyas of Kalyani and Vengi. According to this legend, the progenitor of the dynasty was created by Brahma. The version of the legend mentioned in the Vadnagar prashasti inscription of Kumarapala is as follows: the deities once asked the creator god Brahma to protect them from the danavas (demons). Brahma then created a hero from his chuluka (pot or folded palm), which was filled with Ganges water. This hero was named Chulukya, and became the progenitor of the dynasty. A variation of this legend is mentioned by Abhayatilaka Gani in his commentary on Hemachandra’s Dvyashraya-Kavya. According to this version, Brahma produced the hero to support the earth, after his other creations disappointed him. These stories are of no historical value, as it was customary for contemporary royal houses to claim mythical and heroic origins. The Kumarapala-Bhupala-Charita of Jayasimha Suri presents Chulukya as a historical warrior, whose capital was Madhupadma. Mularaja was his descendant, with nearly a hundred generations separating the two.This account may be partly historical: Madhupadma has been identified variously as a location outside Gujarat, including present-day Mathura.

The Prithviraj Raso mentions the Agnikula legend, according to which some of the Rajput dynasties including the Solankis were born from a fire-pit on Mount Abu. A section of colonial-era historians interpreted this mythical account to suggest a foreign origin for these Rajputs. According to this theory, the foreign ancestors of these Rajputs came to India after the decline of the Gupta Empire around 5th century CE, and were admitted in the Hindu caste system after performing a fire ritual. Based on this legend, D. R. Bhandarkar and others theorized that the Chalukyas were a branch of Gurjaras, whom they believed to be of foreign origin. However, the Solankis’ own inscriptions do not claim an Agnikula origin for their dynasty. The Agnikula legend of origin was first used by the neighbouring Paramara dynasty The original copies of Prithviraj Raso do not mention this legend. The 16th century poets might have extended the Paramara legend to include other Rajput dynasties, in order to foster Rajput unity against Mughals. The Solanki inscriptions from the reign of Bhima II prove that the Solankis knew about the Agnikula legend, but associated it with the Paramaras, not themselves.

Solanki kings

Mularaja

Mularaja Mularaja supplanted the last Chavda king of Gujarat and founded an independent kingdom with his capital in Anahilapataka in 940-941 AD. He was a Shaiva king operating within Brahmanical and Vedic paradigms of kingship. He built Mulavasatika (Mula’s residence) temple for Digambaras and the Mulanatha-jinadeva (the Jina who is Mula’s lord) temple for the Svetambaras.

 

Bhima 1

Bhima I was the next important ruler after Mularaja. He built Sun Temple, of Modhera. His wife Udaymati built the Rani ki vav step-well in his memory.  The guardian family deity of the Solanki was Somnath at Prabhas. It was during the Solanki’s rule that the scared shrine was sacked by Mahmud of Ghazni.

Karna

Bhima I’s successor Karna defeated a Bhil chieftain and founded Karnavati which is now known as Ahmedabad. Karna married Mayanalladevi by whom he begot Jayasimha Siddharaja.

Jayasimha Siddharaja

Jayasimha Siddharaja ruled for half a century starting in 1094 and enlarged the kingdom to become an empire. The Rudra Mahakala Temple at Siddhapur is an architectural expression of his rule. Hemachandra, a Jain monk, rose to prominence and had good relation with the king. Apart from Saurashtra and Kutch, Jaysinh also conquered Malwa. One of the favourite legends of the Gujarat bards is woven around the siege of Junagadh by Jaysinh. The fort was ultimately captured by him along with Ranakdevi, wife of the Chudasama ruler Ra Khengar. Ranakdevi preferred to commit sati rather than remarry Jaisinh and he was persuaded to allow her to burn herself on a pyre at Wadhwan. Ranakdevi Temple still stands in Wadhwan at the site of her death.

Kumarapala

Siddhraj’s successor Kumarapala’s reign lasted for 31 years from 1143 to 1174 CE. He too had good relationship with Hemchandra and he propagated Jainism during his rule in Gujarat. He rebuilt Somnath temple. During Kumarapala’s reign, Gujarat’s prosperity was at its peak.

Mularaja II

Mularaja II successfully repelled the incursions of Muhammad of Ghor who had the ambition of repeating the act performed by Mahmud of Ghazni.

Shungas

The Sunga Empire (or Shunga Empire) is a Magadha dynasty that controlled North-central and Eastern India as well as parts of the northwest (now Pakistan) from around 185 to 73 B.C.E. It was established after the fall of the Indian Mauryan empire. The capital of the Sungas was Pataliputra. Later kings such as Bhagabhadra also held court at Vidisa, modern Besnagar in Eastern Malwa. The Sunga Empire is noted for its numerous wars with both foreign and indigenous powers although several kings patronized Buddhism. The Mathura school of art and the works of Patanjali colored North India during this empire. It was replaced by the Kanva dynasty.

Foundation of dynasty

The Sunga dynasty was established in 185 B.C.E., about 50 years after Ashoka’s death, when the king Brhadrata, the last of the Mauryan rulers, was assassinated by the then commander-in-chief of the Mauryan armed forces, Pusyamitra Sunga (“Pusyamitra is said in the Puranas to have been the senānī or army-commander of the last Maurya king Brhadratha”) while he was taking the Guard of Honor of his forces. Pusyamitra Sunga then ascended the throne.

Pushyamitra Sunga became the ruler of the Magadha and neighboring territories. The kingdom of Pushyamitra was extended up to Narmada in the south, and controlled Jalandhar and Sialkot in the Punjab in the north-western regions, and the city of Ujjain in central India. The Kabul Valley and much of the Punjab passed into the hands of the Indo-Greeks and the Deccan to the Satavahanas.  Pushyamitra died after ruling for 36 years (187-151 B.C.E.). He was succeeded by son Agnimitra. This prince is the hero of a famous drama by one of India’s greatest playwrights, Kalidasa. Agnimitra was viceroy of Vidisha when the story takes place. The power of the Sungas gradually weakened. It is said that there were ten Sunga kings.  The Sungas were succeeded by the Kanva dynasty around 73 B.C.E.

 

 

Wars and conflicts during sungas

War and conflict characterized the Sunga period. They are known to have warred with the Kalingas, Satavahanas, the Indo-Greeks, and possibly the Panchalas and Mathuras.  The Sunga Empire’s wars with the Indo-Greek Kingdom figure greatly in the history of this period. From around 180 B.C.E. the Greco-Bactrian ruler Demetrius, conquered the Kabul Valley and is theorized to have advanced into the trans-Indus. The Indo Greek Menander is credited with either joining or leading a campaign to Pataliputra with other Indian Kings; however, very little is know about the exact nature and success of the campaign. The net result of these wars remains uncertain.

Pushyamitra is recorded to have performed two Ashvamedha Yagnas and Sunga imperial inscriptions have extended as far as Jalandhar. Scriptures such as the Divyavadhana note that his rule extended even farther to Sialkot, in the Punjab. Moreover, if it was lost, Mathura was regained by the Sungas around 100 B.C.E. (or by other indigenous rulers: The Arjunayanas (area of Mathura) and Yaudheyas mention military victories on their coins (“Victory of the Arjunayanas,” “Victory of the Yaudheyas”), and during the first century B.C.E., the Trigartas, Audumbaras and finally the Kunindas also started to mint their own coins). Accounts of battles between the Greeks and the Sunga in Northwestern India are also found in the Mālavikāgnimitram, a play by Kālidāsa which describes a battle between Greek cavalrymen and Vasumitra, the grandson of Pushyamitra, on the Indus river, in which the Indians defeated the Greeks and Pushyamitra successfully completed the Ashvamedha Yagna.

Nevertheless, very little can be said with great certainty. However, what does appear clear is that the two realms appeared to have established normalized diplomatic relations in the succeeding reigns of their respective rulers.  The Indo-Greeks and the Sungas seem to have reconciled and exchanged diplomatic missions around 110 B.C.E., as indicated by the Heliodorus pillar, which records the dispatch of a Greek ambassador named Heliodorus, from the court of the Indo-Greek king Antialcidas, to the court of the Sunga king Bhagabhadra at the site of Vidisha in central India.

 

Cultural achievements during sungas

While there is much debate on the religious policies of the Sunga dynasty, it is recognized for a number of contributions. Art, education, philosophy, and other learning flowered during this period. Most notably, Patanjali’s Yoga Sutras and Mahabhasya were composed in this period. It is also noted for its subsequent mention in the Malavikaagnimitra. This work was composed by Kalidasa in the later Gupta period, and romanticized the love of Malavika and King Agnimitra, with a background of court intrigue. Artistry on the subcontinent also progressed with the rise of the Mathura school, which is considered the indigenous counterpart to the more Hellenistic Gandhara school of Afghanistan and Pakistan.

During the historical Sunga period (185 to 73 B.C.E.), Buddhist activity also managed to survive somewhat in central India (Madhya Pradesh) as suggested by some architectural expansions undertaken at the stupas of Sanchi and Barhut, originally started under King Ashoka. It remains uncertain whether these works were due to the weakness of the control of the Sungas in these areas, or a sign of tolerance on their part.

The last of the Sunga kings was Devabhuti (83-73 B.C.E.). He was assassinated by his minister (Vasudeva Kanva) and is said to have been over fond of the company of women. The Sunga dynasty was then replaced by the subsequent Kanvas.

 

Foreign travelers

India has always been the dream destination for people who want to explore one of the earliest civilizations in the world. Since time immemorial, India has received a number of keen travelers who came here and fell in love with its traditions and colors.

Hiuen Tsang from China (629-645)

One of the earliest and the most celebrated travelers to India, Hiuen Tsang came from China to India in search of Buddhist belief and practice. He has been described as the “prince of pilgrims” and his accounts carry a lot of information on the political, social and religious set up of India. Hiuen Tsang visited Kashmir, Punjab and proceeded to Kapilavastu, Bodh-Gaya, Sarnath, and Kusinagara. He studied in the University of Nalanda and travelled through the Deccan, Orissa and Bengal. Since he stayed in India for 14 long years, his accounts reflect what ancient India must have been once.

Megasthenes

Megasthenes was a famous Foreign Envoy and ambassador of Seleucus Nikator of Syria . He visited the Chandragupta Maurya (Sandrokottos) court. He wrote the great book Indica which explains the reign of Chandragupta Maurya. He explained Social and administrative status at the time of Mauryas. Megasthenes was the first foreign envoy who visited India.

Fa-Hien

Fa-Hien is a Foreign Envoy  who visited India at the time of Chandragupta II, known as Vikramaditya. He was a Chinese pilgrim. Fa-Hien was the first Chinese pilgrim to visit India. Fa-Hien came to India to collect Buddhist texts and relics. Fa-Hien visited Lumbini, the Buddha’s birth place. He compiled his experiences in a travelogue “Record of Buddhistic Kingdoms”.

 

Al Beruni from Persia (1000-1025)

Al Beruni was an Islamic scholar who was “commissioned” by Mahmud of Ghazni to write his monumental commentary on Indian philosophy and culture Kitab fi tahqiq ma li’l-hind. In the words of the historians today, “His observations on Indian conditions, systems of knowledge, social norms, religion … are probably the most incisive made by any visitor to India.” Born in Uzbekistan, this traveler remained in India for thirteen long years to understand its culture and literature.

Ibn Battuta from Morocco (1333)

Its unbelievable that a person could have traveled so much in times where no travelling paraphernalia was available. Meet Ibn Battuta who had a passion for travel unparalleled in history, inimitable by any individual. It is hard to believe that Ibn Battuta  journeyed more than 75,000 miles (121,000 km), a figure unsurpassed by any individual explorer until the coming of the Steam Age some 450 years later. He was the only medieval traveller who is known to have visited the lands of every Muslim ruler of his time. His journeys include trips to North Africa, West Africa, Southern Europe and Eastern Europe in the West, Middle East, South Asia, Central Asia, Southeast Asia and China in the East, a distance surpassing threefold his near-contemporary Marco Polo.

Marco Polo

Marco Polo from Italy (b.1254-d.1324) Marco Polo, the Venetian traveler, is perhaps the most celebrated traveler even till today. He is said to have visited South India twice, in 1288 and 1292, where he saw a tomb of St. Thomas “at a certain little town” which he does not name. Many historians accept these dates and visits without question, and identify the little town that he speaks of with Mylapore.

Abdul Razzak from Persia (1442-1445)

One of the earliest mention of Vijaynagar empire in India comes through Abdul Razzak, the Persian traveler who visited it around 1440. His accounts of the Hampi marketplace, its architecture and grandeur have left a lot of corpus of history for later historians to work on. Abdul Razzak was the ambassador of Shahrukh of Timurid Dynasty.

Nicolo Conti from Italy (1420-1421)

Nicolo De Conti’ (fl. 1419-1444) was a Venetian explorer and writer who visited the west coast of India to Ely, and struck inland to Vijayanagar, the capital of the principal Hindu state of the Deccan. Of this city Conti gives an elaborate description and one of the most interesting portions of his narrative. From Vijayanagar and the Tungabudhra he travelled to Maliapur near Madras, present day Chennai.

Afanasy Nikitin from Russia (1469-1472)

Nikitin, the Russian merchant, spent more than two years in India traveling to different cities, getting acquainted with local residents and carefully describing everything he saw. The notes of the merchant were compiled in the form of a so-called “Journey,” that is more like a traveler’s log. This work accurately described the nature and political organization of India as well as its traditions, lifestyle and customs.

Domingo Paes from Portugal (1520-1522)

After the conquest of Goa in 1510 and its rise as capital of the Portuguese Estado da India, several Portuguese travellers and traders visited Vijayanagara and wrote detailed reports about the glory of Bisnaga or Vijayanagara. Most valuable are that of Domingos Paes written in c. 1520-22. The report of Paes, who visited Vijayanagara during Krishnadeva’s reign, is based primarily on careful observation as he describes in detail the so-called feudal nayankara system of Vijayanagara’s military organisation and the annual royal Durga festival.

 

BHAGAT SINGH

The name Bhagat Singh has become a synonym of revolution. He was one of the great revolutionaries who made supreme sacrifice for the nation. Thousands of young people sacrificed their lives in the altar of India’s liberation struggle but the name Bhagat Singh has a special place in the history of our independence. No other young revolutionary of India got much empathy in the minds of the people of India like Bhagat Singh. Still he is an inspiration source for the patriotic people of our motherland. It is important today to study the contributions of Bhagat Singh and his comrades when our country is again falling under the grip of imperialism and its designs. Unfortunately Bhagat Singh did not have much place in the history textbooks. There was a concerted effort to underestimate the contributions of revolutionaries who sacrificed everything for the liberation of our motherland.

Bhagat Singh came from a family of patriots and freedom fighters. His uncle, Ajit Singh was a pioneer in opposing the Colonization Act 1905 and had to remain in exile till the country gained independence. His father also was an active participant in the struggle for the liberation of the country from the colonial rule. While as a student Bhagat Singh came under the influence of the revolutionaries. The October revolution led by Lenin attracted Bhagat Singh and he started to collect and read the literatures about socialism and socialist revolution. The years of the twenties in general and those of 1928-30 in particular were of great significant in the history of India’s freedom struggle.

Due to the failure of first non-cooperation movement, the revolutionaries of that period were frustrated and started to think about some alternative action plan. The formation of the Hindustan Republican Association, the Hindustan Socialist Republican Army and the Naujawan Bharat sabha (All India Youth League) all happened during this period. Bhagat Singh and his comrades were imbued with the ideas of revolution and socialism. The manifesto of HRA says “The immediate object of the revolutionary party in the domain of politics is to establish a federal republic of the United States of India by an organized and armed revolution. The basic principle of this republic shall be universal suffrage and the abolition of all system, which makes the exploitation of man by man possible. In this republic the electors shall have the right to recall their representatives if so desired, otherwise the democracy shall be a mockery”. India could not think about such ideas even after sixty years of independence!

The protest against the visit of Simon Commission turned into violence. Lala Lajpath rai died due to police lathicharge. The country witnessed unprecedented protest rallies. Bhagat Singh and his associates threw bombs in Central Assembly. A few days’ later bombs exploded in the Central Assembly they were arrested. The trial began in 1929 July. The farcical trial ended in October 1930 awarded death sentence to Bhagat Singh, Rajguru and Sukhdev. The charge was conspiracy to overthrow the British rule and murder of a British official. They accepted the verdict with raising slogans. A few days before the execution Bhagat Singh wrote a letter to the British authorities demanding that as he and his two condemned comrades were prisoners of war, they should not be hanged but that the sentence should be executed by a firing squad of the British army. This was the unconquerable spirit and stuff of which Bhagat Singh was made.

The conduct of Bhagat Singh and his comrades during their historic trial at Lahore created new precedents of revolutionary behaviour. They were making use of the British courts as a forum to address the people, broadcast their revolutionary views and ideology. This was something different from the nationalist tradition set by Mahatma Gandhi. They appeared everyday in the nationalist press and every activity of theirs was watched by lakhs of people. Their revolutionary declarations were also denied publicly but this did not restrain them. Intent upon every aspect of British Court, justice and jail administration, they fought against every humiliating restriction, every discriminatory rule and demanded proper status for freedom fighters in jail. They refused to be treated as common criminals and demanded treatment in consonance with dignity and prestige of the freedom struggle. During the trial days Bhagat Singh and his comrades were asked to refrain from raising revolutionary slogans in the court. But they continued to shout ‘Inqilab Zindabad’. They were beaten and handcuffed in the court; they were assaulted with lathis till they bled profusely and fell unconscious. Bhagat Singh and his comrades succeeded in completely exposing the anti-Indian and arbitrary character of British justice in India and the barbarities of the British Indian jails. This was the aim of their fight for which they prepared to undergo all the tortures. They turned their trial into a public trial of the British government.

In a joint statement before the trial court, Bhagat Singh and Batukeswar Dutt explained why they threw the bombs in the Central Assembly. They said their purpose was not to harm anyone but to expose the dependent character of the Legislative assembly which was being paraded by the British as a Parliament create the belief that India was being democratically governed. The statement further says’A radical change, therefore, is necessary and it is the duty of those who realize this to reorganize society on a socialistic basis. Unless this thing is done and exploitation of man by man and nation by nations is brought to an end, sufferings and carnage with which humanity is threatened cannot be prevented. All talk of ending war and ushering in an era of universal peace is undisguised hypocrisy”. In the statement they explained about their concept about revolution. They said that” By revolution, we mean the ultimate establishment of an order of the society which may not be threatened by such breakdown and in which the sovereignty of the proletariat should be recognized and a world federation should redeem humanity from the bondage of capitalism and the misery of imperial wars” Bhagat Singh symbolized his struggle in the slogan he raised after he threw a bomb in the Legislative Assembly of Delhi- “Long Live revolution” (Inquilab Zindabad), a slogan totally unfamiliar at that time to the Indian people.

Bhagat Singh was not content with slogans. He embodied the indomitable courage, the death-defying spirit, the capacity to sacrifice everything and unflinching courage in the face of torture. In 1930 July Bhagat Singh told some of his fellow comrades in jail said, “This is the highest award for patriotism and I am proud that I am going to get it. They think that by destroying my terrestrial body they will be safe in this country. They are wrong. They may kill me, but they cannot kill my ideas. They can crush my body, but they will not be able to crush my spirit. My ideas will haunt the British like a curse till they are forced to run away from here. But this is one side of the picture. The other side is equally bright. Bhagat Singh dead will be more dangerous to the British enslavers than Bhagat Singh alive. After I am hanged, the fragrances of my revolutionary ideas will permeate the atmosphere of this beautiful land of ours. It will intoxicate the youth and make him mad for freedom and revolution and that will bring the doom of the British imperialist nearer. This is my firm conviction. I am anxiously waiting for the day when I will receive the highest award for my services to the country and my love for my people”. Now this is the duty of the present day youth to fulfill the dreams and aspirations of Shaheed-eAzam Bhagat Singh by organizing revolutionary movement against neo imperialism and neo colonialism. In this context the three slogans rose by Bhagat Singh and his comrades Long live revolution, long live proletariat and own with imperialism -are still relevant.

Surya Sen (1894-1934)

Surya Sen(March 22, 1894 – January 12, 1934) (also known as Masterda Surya Sen) was a prominent Bengali freedom fighter, an Indian independence activist and the chief architect of anti-British freedom movement in Chittagong, Bengal (now in Bangladesh).He was born on 22 March 1894 in Chittagong district now in Bangladesh. He participated in nationwide non-cooperation movement as a revolutionary. He was arrested in February 1933 by British and was hanged on 12 January 1934.The Government of India released a commemorative stamp on him in 1977. Bangladesh issued a commemorative stamp on him in 1999.

Early life

His father’s name was Ramaniranjan.  A resident of Noapara in Chittagong, he was a teacher by profession. He was initiated into revolutionary ideas in 1916 by one of his teachers while he was a student of Intermediate Class in the Chittagong College and joined the renowned revolutionary group Anushilan.  But when he went to Behrampur College for BA course, came to know about Jugantar and became more inspired with their ideas. On his return to Chittagong in 1918, he organized Jugantar there. All revolutionary groups were using Indian National Congress as umbrella to work. Consequently in 1929, Surya Sen became the president of the Chittagong district committee of the Indian National Congress. He continued to organize the hardline patriotic organisations and first became a teacher of the National school in Nandankanan and then joined the Umatara School at Chandanpura. Hence, he was known as Mastarda (teacher brother).

By 1923 Surya Sen spread the revolutionary organization in different parts of Chittagong district. Aware of the limited equipment and other resources of the freedom fighters, he was convinced of the need for secret guerrilla warfare against the colonial Government. One of his early successful undertakings was a broad day robbery at the treasury office of the Bengal Assam Railway at Chittagong on December 23, 1923.

Chittagong  armoury raid and its aftermath.

His major success in the anti-British revolutionary violence was the Chittagong Armoury Raid on April 18, 1930. Subsequent to the raid, he marched to the Jalalabad hills along with his fellow revolutionaries. After the battle with the British troops on April 22, he escaped from there. Surya Sen, being constantly followed up by the police, had to hide at the house of Sabitri Devi, a widow, near Patiya. A police and military force under Captain Cameron surrounded the house on 13 June 1932. Cameron was shot dead while ascending the staircase and Surya Sen along with Pritilata Waddedar and Kalpana Datta escaped to safety.

Surya Sen was always in hiding, moving from one place to another. Sometimes he used to take a job as a workman; sometimes he would take a job as a farmer, or milkman, or priest, houseworker or even as a pious Muslim. This is how he used to avoid being captured. Either because of money, or out of jealousy, or because of both, Netra Sen told the British Government that Surya Sen was at his house. As a result, the police came and captured him on February 16, 1933. This is how India’s supreme hero was arrested. But before Netra Sen was able to get his 10,000-rupee reward he was killed by the revolutionaries. This is how it happened. Netra Sen’s wife was all for Surya Sen, and she was horrified by her husband’s deed. She felt mortified by her husband’s betrayal of Surya Sen. One evening she was serving her husband food when a great admirer of Surya Sen came into the house. He was carrying a very big knife, which is called a “daa”. With one stroke of the dal he chopped off the head of Netra Sen in the presence of his wife. Then slowly and stealthily he went away.

When the police arrived to investigate, they asked Netra Sen’s wife if she had seen who the murderer was. She said, “I saw with my own eyes, but my heart will not permit me to tell you his name. I am sorry. I feel miserable that I was the wife of such a treacherous man, such an undivine man as Netra Sen. My husband betrayed the greatest hero of Chittagong. My husband betrayed a great son of Mother India. My husband cast a slur on the face of India. Therefore; I cannot tell the name of the person who took his life. He has definitely done the right thing. You can do anything with me. You can punish me, you can even kill me, but I shall never tell the name of the person who killed my husband. Our Master-da will be hanged, I know, but his name will forever be synonymous with India’s immortal freedom-cry. Everybody loves him. Everybody adores him. I, too, love him and adore him, for he is the brightest sun in the firmament of Chittagong. Surya means sun and he is truly our sun. “Tarakeswar Dastidar, the new president of the Chittagong Branch Jugantar Party, made a preparation to rescue Surya Sen from the Chittagong Jail. But the plot was unearthed and consequently frustrated. Tarakeswar and Kalpana along with others were arrested. Special tribunals tried Surya Sen, Tarakeswar Dastidar, and Kalpana Datta in 1933.

Surya Sen along with his Tarekeshwar Dastidar was hanged by the British rulers on January 12, 1934. Before the death sentence Surya Sen was brutally tortured. It was reported that the British executioners broke all his teeth with hammer and plucked all nails and broke all limbs and joints. He was dragged to the rope unconscious. After his death his dead body was not given any funeral. The prison authority, it was found later, put his dead body in a metallic cage and dumped into the Bay of Bengal.

His last letter to his friends, written on 11 January, stated, “Death is knocking at my door. My mind is flying away towards eternity …At such a pleasant, at such a grave, at such a solemn moment, what shall I leave behind you? Only one thing that is my dream, a golden dream-the dream of Free India…. Never forget the 18th of April, 1930, the day of the eastern Rebellion in Chittagong… Write in red letters in the core of your hearts the names of the patriots who have sacrificed their lives at the altar of India’s freedom.

Hindustan Socialist Republican Association

Hindustan Socialist Republican Association before 1928 was known as the Hindustan Republican Association. It is reckoned as one amongst the Indian independence associations during the time of freedom struggle. Bhagat Singh, Yogendra Shukla and Chandrasekar Azad were the key functionaries of Hindustan Socialist Republican Association. The group is also considered one of the first socialist organisations in India. HSRA was invigorated by the ideologies of the Bolsheviks involvement in the Russian Revolution of 1917.

Hindustan Socialist Republican Association was first launched during a meeting in Bholachang village, Brahamabaria subdivision, East Bengal. Praiseworthy freedom fighters like- Pratul Ganguly, Narendra Mohan Sen and Sachindra Nath Sanyal were present at the meeting. The association was formed as an outgrowth of the Anushilan Samiti. The party was established with the aim to organise armed revolution in order to end the colonial rule and establish a Federal Republic of the United States of India. The name Hindustan Socialist Republican Association was implicative after a similar revolutionary body in Ireland.

During that period Gandhiji had declared to cancel the Non-cooperation movement after the Chauri Chaura incident. This decision of his created a lot of rancour amongst the youngsters. Some of them had jeopardised their careers for the movement.As HSRA was a revolutionary group, they attempted to loot a train. They were informed that the train was transferring government money.On 9th August 1925, the revolutionists ransacked the train. This now famous incident is known as the Kakori train robbery.As a result of the Kakori train robbery case, Ashfaqullah Khan, Ramprasad Bismil, Roshan Singh, Rajendra Lahiri were hanged to death. It was an important setback for the Hindustan Socialist Republican Association.

Hindustan Socialist Republican Association was aiming to create a Federal Republic of the United States of India. But later they changed their focus towards creating an India based on the Socialist ideals of Lenin and Marx. Bhagat Singh declared this at the Ferozshah Kotla Ruins in Delhi on 9th September 1928. Afterwards, the association was renamed Hindustan Socialist Republican Association, from Hindustan Republican Association. HSRA in non-violent protest advancement against the Simon Commission at Lahore decided to support Lala Lajpat Rai. But in the protest procession, the police plunged into a mass lathicharge and the wounds imposed on Lalaji proved life-threatening to him. This incident was witnessed by Bhagat Singh and he swore to take revenge.

It was decided by Hindustan Socialist Republican Association that the attempt would be taken against J.A Scott, who had ordered the unlawful lathi-charge. Bhagat Singh, Rajguru, Chander Shekhar Azad and Jai Gopal were given the charge to execute the plan. It was designed that Jai Gopal would signal Bhagat Singh and Rajguru when J.A Scott would come out of his office. At the appointed time, on 17th December 1928 at Lahore, a British official J. P.Saunders, the A.S.P., a youngman of 21 but a probationer stepped out of his office. Raj Guru swooped on the British official with a pistol at Jai Gopal`s signal. The bullet perforated through his neck and almost killed him. Bhagat Singh also rushed and pounced on him and fired four or five shots.J.P.Saunders died on the spot. Incidentally it was a terrible miscalculation on the part of Jai Gopal. He failed to differentiate between Scott and Saunders. Chanan Singh- a head constable came forth to chase Bhagat Singh and Raj Guru, but Chandra Shekhar Azad shot Chanan down. The next day, Hindustan Socialist Republican Association came forward in public and in their proclamation said, “Inquilab Zindabad (Long Live Revolution). We don`t enjoy killing an individual, but this individual was ruthless, mean and part and parcel of an unjust system. It is necessary to destroy such a system. This man has been killed; because he was a cog in the wheel of British rule. This government is the worst of all governments.” Another significant action carried out by the Hindustan Socialist Republican Association was the Assembly Bomb Case. The association adjudicated to burst a blank bomb in the Central Assembly in Delhi, in order to express opposition against the tyrannical legislation and arouse public opinion. Bhagat Singh and Batukeshwar Dutt offered to carry out the bombing and get arrested. The ideology behind the bombing was `to make the deaf government hear the voices of its oppressed people`. Bhagat Singh also believed that `the only way to successfully convey his message to the public of India was to propaganda from Court`. He believed that since all statements were registered in Court and then promulgated, they could benefit support for their crusade.

On April 8th 1929 when Vitthal Bhai Patel, President of the Central Assembly, moved up to give his ruling on failing to get an authority from the government that the bill would not be imposed retrospectively, a bomb was detonated near the empty treasure benches, followed by another bomb explosion. Panic predominated everywhere. Nobody got killed as it was not thought of. The hall got filled with smoke. Bhagat Singh and BK Dutt started crying out “Long Live Revolution, Down with Imperialism” as the smoke cleared. They also threw red leaflets on the floor, which began with the slogan of a French revolutionary “It needs a loud voice for a deaf to hear”.

On April 15th 1929, police raided the bomb factory of HSRA. As a result Kishori Lal, Sukhdev and Jai Gopal were arrested. The Assembly Bomb Case trial was started following this raid.On 23rd March 1931 Bhagat Singh, Sukhdev and Rajguru were hanged. The great nationalist Baikuntha Shukla was also hanged for murdering Phanindrananth Ghosh who had become a government approver which later on led to the hanging of Bhagat Singh, Sukhdev and Rajguru.Baikuntha Shukla joined the freedom struggle at a young age and took active part in the `Salt Satyagraha` of 1930.He was also associated with revolutionary organisations like the Hindustan Seva Dal and Hindustan Socialist Republican Association.

Bhagat Singh, Rajguru and Sukhdev were executed in 1931, as a result of their trial in the `Lahore conspiracy case`. Their death penalty gave birth to tremendous agitation throughout the country. Phanindrananth Ghosh was a key figure of the Hindustan Socialist Republican Association. By turning into an approver, he betrayed the cause of the party. Baikuntha Shukla was given the charge to execute Phanindrananth Ghosh as an act of ideological revenge. He completed it in a successful manner on 9th November 1932.As a result Baikuntha Shukla was arrested and tried for murder. On May 14th 1934; Baikunth was convicted and hanged in Gaya Central Jail only at a young age of 28.

Another key revolutionary of Hindustan Socialist Republican Association, Chandrasekar Azad was killed on 27th February 1931 in a gunfight with the police. With the death of Chandrashekar Azad and the hanging of its popular activists, Bhagat Singh, Sukhdev and Rajguru, the fate of the association was yet indecipherable. Hindustan Socialist Republican Association was always in the forefront of revolutionary movements in the northern parts of India. The association consisted of younger generations of U.P, Bihar, Punjab, Bengal and Maharashtra. The group possessed ideals, which were directly opposite to Mahatma Gandhi`s Congress.

Taxila university

By some accounts, Taxila was considered to be one of the earliest (or the earliest) universities in the world. Others do not consider it a university in the modern sense, in that the teachers living there may not have had official membership of particular colleges, and there did not seem to have existed purpose-built lecture halls and residential quarters in Taxila, in contrast to the later Nalanda university in eastern India.  Taxila became a noted centre of learning (including the religious teachings of Buddhism) at least several centuries BCE, and continued to attract students from around the old world until the destruction of the city in the 5th century. It has been suggested that at its height, Taxila exerted a sort of “intellectual suzerainty” over other centres of learning in India and its primary concern was not with elementary, but higher education. Generally, a student entered Taxila at the age of sixteen. The ancient and the most revered scriptures, and the Eighteen Silpas or Arts, which included skills such as archery, hunting, and elephant lore, were taught, in addition to its law school, medical school, and school of military science. Students came to Taxila from far-off places such as Kashi, Kosala and Magadha, in spite of the long and arduous journey they had to undergo, on account of the excellence of the learned teachers there, all recognised as authorities on their respective subjects.

Taxila had great influence on Hindu culture and the Sanskrit language. It is perhaps best known for its association with Chanakya, also known as Kautilya, the strategist who guided Chandragupta Maurya and assisted in the founding of the Mauryan empire. Chanakya’s Arthashastra (The knowledge of Economics) is said to have been composed in Taxila itself. The Ayurvedic healer Charaka also studied at Taxila. He also started teaching at Taxila in the later period. Pāṇini, the grammarian who codified the rules that would define Classical Sanskrit, has also been part of the community at Taxila. The institution is significant in Buddhist tradition since it is believed that the Mahāyāna branch of Buddhism took shape there.[citation needed] Jivaka, the court physician of the Magadha emperor Bimbisara who once cured the Buddha, and the Buddhism-supporting ruler of Kosala, Prasenajit, are some important personalities mentioned in Pali texts who studied at Taxila.

Nalanda university

Nalanda was an acclaimed Mahavihara, a large Buddhist monastery in the ancient kingdom of Magadha (modern-day Bihar) in India. The site is located about 95 kilometres (59 mi) southeast of Patna near the town of Bihar Sharif, and was a centre of learning from the fifth century CE to c. 1200 CE. It is a UNESCO World Heritage Site. The highly formalized methods of Vedic learning helped inspire the establishment of large teaching institutions such as Taxila, Nalanda, and Vikramashila which are often characterised as India’s early universities. Nalanda flourished under the patronage of the Gupta Empire in the 5th and 6th centuries and later under Harsha, the emperor of Kannauj. The liberal cultural traditions inherited from the Gupta age resulted in a period of growth and prosperity until the ninth century. The subsequent centuries were a time of gradual decline, a period during which the tantric developments of Buddhism became most pronounced in eastern India under the Pala Empire.

At its peak, the school attracted scholars and students from near and far with some travelling from Tibet, China, Korea, and Central Asia. Archaeological evidence also notes contact with the Shailendra dynasty of Indonesia, one of whose kings built a monastery in the complex.  Much of our knowledge of Nalanda comes from the writings of pilgrim monks from East Asia such as Xuanzang and Yijing who travelled to the Mahavihara in the 7th century. Vincent Smith remarked that “a detailed history of Nalanda would be a history of Mahayanist Buddhism”. Many of the names listed by Xuanzang in his travelogue as products of Nalanda are the names of those who developed the philosophy of Mahayana. All students at Nalanda studied Mahayana as well as the texts of the eighteen (Hinayana) sects of Buddhism. Their curriculum also included other subjects such as the Vedas, logic, Sanskrit grammar, medicine and Samkhya.

The decline of Nalanda is concomitant with the disappearance of Buddhism in India. When Xuanzang travelled the length and breadth of India in the 7th century, he observed that his religion was in slow decay and even had ominous premonitions of Nalanda’s forthcoming demise.[69] Buddhism had steadily lost popularity with the laity and thrived, thanks to royal patronage, only in the monasteries of Bihar and Bengal. By the time of the Palas, the traditional Mahayana and Hinayana forms of Buddhism were imbued with Tantric practices involving secret rituals and magic. The rise of Hindu philosophies in the subcontinent and the waning of the Buddhist Pala dynasty after the 11th century meant that Buddhism was hemmed in on multiple fronts, political, philosophical, and moral. The final blow was delivered when its still-flourishing monasteries, the last visible symbols of its existence in India, were overrun during the Muslim invasion that swept across Northern India at the turn of the 13th century.

Vikramshila university

Vikramashila was one of the two most important centres of learning in India during the Pala Empire, along with Nalanda. Vikramashila was established by King Dharmapala (783 to 820) in response to a supposed decline in the quality of scholarship at Nalanda. Atisha, the renowned pandita, is sometimes listed as a notable abbot. It was destroyed by the forces of Muhammad bin Bakhtiyar Khilji around 1200.  Vikramashila (village Antichak, district Bhagalpur, Bihar) is located at about 50 km east of Bhagalpur and about 13 km north-east of Kahalgaon, a town in Bhagalpur district . It is approachable through 11 km long motorable road diverting from NH-80 at Anadipur about 2 km from Kahalgaon.

A number of monasteries grew up during the Pāla period in ancient Bengal and Magadha. According to Tibetan sources, five great Mahaviharas stood out: Vikramashila, the premier university of the era; Nalanda, past its prime but still illustrious, Somapura, Odantapura, and Jagaddala. The five monasteries formed a network; “all of them were under state supervision” and there existed “a system of co-ordination among them. It seems from the evidence that the different seats of Buddhist learning that functioned in eastern India under the Pāla were regarded together as forming a network, an interlinked group of institutions,” and it was common for great scholars to move easily from position to position among them. Vikramashila was founded by Pāla king Dharmapala in the late 8th or early 9th century. It prospered for about four centuries before it was destroyed by Bakhtiyar Khilji along with the other major centres of Buddhism in India around 1200. Vikramashila is known to us mainly through Tibetan sources, especially the writings of Tāranātha, the Tibetan monk historian of the 16th–17th centuries.Vikramashila was one of the largest Buddhist universities, with more than one hundred teachers and about one thousand students. It produced eminent scholars who were often invited by foreign countries to spread Buddhist learning, culture and religion. The most distinguished and eminent among all was Atiśha Dipankara, a founder of the Sarma traditions of Tibetan Buddhism. Subjects like philosophy, grammar, metaphysics, Indian logic etc. were taught here, but the most important branch of learning was tantrism.