Annals and Antiquities of Rajasthan, v. 1 of 3: or the Central and Western Rajput States of IndiaTod, James
History
Annals and Antiquities of Rajasthan, v. 1 of 3: or the Central and Western Rajput States of India
Tod, James
Rajasthan (India) -- History; Rajput (Indic people) -- History
private property of princes, and others belong to the Jain
communities.[i.28]
If we consider the political changes and convulsions which have happened
in Hindustan since Mahmud’s invasion, and the intolerant bigotry of many
of his successors, we shall be able to account for the paucity of its
national works on history, without being driven to the improbable
conclusion, that the Hindus were ignorant of an art which has been
cultivated in other countries from almost the earliest ages. Is it to be
imagined that a nation so highly civilized as the Hindus, amongst whom
the exact sciences flourished in perfection, by whom the fine arts [ix],
architecture, sculpture, poetry, music, were not only cultivated, but
taught and defined by the nicest and most elaborate rules, were totally
unacquainted with the simple art of recording the events of their
history, the characters of their princes, and the acts of their reigns?
Where such traces of _mind_ exist, we can hardly believe that there was
a want of competent recorders of events, which synchronical authorities
tell us were worthy of commemoration. The cities of Hastinapur and
Indraprastha, of Anhilwara and Somanatha, the triumphal columns of Delhi
and Chitor, the shrines of Abu and Girnar, the cave-temples of Elephanta
and Ellora, are so many attestations of the same fact; nor can we
imagine that the age in which these works were erected was without an
historian. Yet from the Mahabharata or Great War, to Alexander’s
invasion, and from that grand event to the era of Mahmud of Ghazni,
scarcely a paragraph of pure native Hindu history (except as before
stated) has hitherto been revealed to the curiosity of Western scholars.
In the heroic history of Prithiraj, the last of the Hindu sovereigns of
Delhi, written by his bard Chand, we find notices which authorize the
inference that works similar to his own were then extant, relating to
the period between Mahmud and Shihabu-d-din (A.D. 1000-1193); but these
have disappeared.
After eight centuries of galling subjection to conquerors totally
ignorant of the classical language of the Hindus; after almost every
capital city had been repeatedly stormed and sacked by barbarous,
bigoted, and exasperated foes; it is too much to expect that the
literature of the country should not have sustained, in common with
other important interests, irretrievable losses. My own animadversions
upon the defective condition of the annals of Rajwara have more than
once been checked by a very just remark: "when our princes were in
exile, driven from hold to hold, and compelled to dwell in the clefts of
the mountains, often doubtful whether they would not be forced to [x]
abandon the very meal preparing for them, was that a time to think of
historical records?"
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account