india's history

[HH]

By the way Razia sultana***** was the first woman ruler to rule delhi, Rudrama devi^^^^^ of kakatiya dynasty ruled AP in the 12th century. ...

***** Razia Sultana [1205-1240]



Daughter of Iltutmush, ***** Razia Sultana was the first female Muslim ruler of South Asia. She was a talented, wise, just and generous woman. She was a great administrator and was well versed in governmental affairs. She was not only a good leader in the battlefield but herself was also an excellent fighter. As the most capable son of Iltutmush died during his own life, and the rest were incompetent to govern, Iltutmush nominated his daughter, Razia Sultana, as his successor on the throne of Delhi. Whenever Iltutmush had to leave his capital, he used to leave Razia Sultana in charge of the affairs in Delhi. But when Iltutmush died, Rukn-ud-din Firuz, one of his sons, occupied the throne and ruled for about seven months. Razia Sultana, with the support of the people of Delhi, secured the throne after defeating her brother in 1236.

***** Razia Sultana established complete law and order in her country. To rule the country, she abandoned her femininity and adopted a masculine getup. She used to dress as a man when appearing in public, be it in court or on the battlefield. She made an Ethiopian slave named Jalal-ud-din Yaqut her personal attendant and started trusting him the most. This challenged the monopoly of power claimed by the Turkish nobles.

The Turkish nobles resented having a woman as their ruler, especially when she started challenging their power. They began conspiring against her. In 1239, the Turkish governor of Lahore rebelled against ***** Razia Sultana. However, when she marched against him, he first fled and then apologized. Then the governor of Bhatinda revolted. When Razia Sultana was trying to suppress the rebellion in Bhatinda, her own Turkish officers deposed her from the throne of Delhi and made her brother Bahram the Sultan. Razia Sultana married the governor of Bhatinda, Malik Altunia, and with his help tried to reoccupy the throne. She was defeated by the Turkish nobles and was compelled to flee away. A peasant who had offered her food and shelter while fleeing from an encounter killed her in her sleep. She died in 1240.

Visit:
http://www.storyofpakistan.com/person.asp?perid=P047

kaakati rudramanu***** maruvagalugunevaru? soodarii !
raayala pauruSamu maruvaraadennaDu soodaraa !

Visit:
http://www.fafi.org/Langues_indiennes/banniere.html

[CtrlAltDel]

...if the foundations of the Golconda were laid in the 12th century then why is Hyderabad only 414 years old? We say Hyderabad came into existence from about the time the Golconda fort did.

the city of hyderabad was nmot existing during the Kakatiya (capital: Warangal) rule. it was just a fort and few adjoining villages. the Qutub Shahi dynasty made this area the capital of their kingdom and the foundation of a great city was laid.

[vakibs]

Huns did attack India. They were one of the reasons for the disintegration of the Gupta empire.



The caste system, in all its ferocity, did not develop until the age of the mighty kingdoms ( i.e, until a little before the Mauryan empire ) The major reason for the development of caste system was to build a proper hierarchy of labourers - to be used for the strengthening of kingdoms. There were several places in India (which followed vedic religion) which did not observe a caste system, until they were absorbed into the mighty kingdoms.



The seat of Delhi could not be historically called the centre of India. For a big part of the history, the biggest kingdoms were built around Pataliputra and later around Kanauj. There was a time when the Sathavahana empire in the south was the biggest of all.



A prominent reason why India did not have a huge naval power was geography. Had the land mass around Indian ocean been similar to Europe (where the distances that had to be traversed over the sea were much smaller) the Indian kingdoms would have encouraged building a stronger navy.



Also, Indians did not cross the hindu-kush mountains to invade into Persia and central asia because the rewards would not seem profitable enough. India was extremely richer than these areas and the spoils of the war would not have been motivating enough for fuelling an invasion. It would make more economical sense to gain suzereignity over the whole of Indian than go attacking outside. I think this was the main reason for India for not attacking other countries (not because of Buddhism or peace-loving-nature blah blah blah..)

[Mayavi Morpheus]

Throughout history, the ruler of Delhi is accorded the status of the King of India.

That History starts from 1500 AD when Mughal empire started spreading across India with Delhi as its power center. Before the Mughals, no ruler of delhi had control over entire India. Infact, they couldnt even reach the vindhyas. Delhi was but a small princely state and only important because it provided access to India from both eas and west.

So yes, Razia Sultana is the first empress of India. Rudrama Devi (I must say I never heard of her, but I will take your word for it) might have been the first woman ruler in India but that does not take away the fact that Razia Sultana was the first empress of India.

As I said before, Delhi in 1200 AD was a small kingdom, hardly an empire. If you want to know more about Rani Rudrama devi, travel 120 KM north of Hyderabad to Warangal, the remains of the forts built in her era still stand.

Another thing that caught my eye was that if the foundations of the Golconda were laid in the 12th century then why is Hyderabad only 414 years old? We say Hyderabad came into existence from about the time the Golconda fort did.

Again, Gol conda was a border outpost of Kakatiya empire. Hyderabad as we know it did not exist then. Gol conda was built with mud by Rudramadevi in the later years of her rule, just before she was succeeded by her son Pratapa Rudra(?). Kakatiya dynasty ended with Pratapa Rudra and the fort fell in disuse till QQ shah renovated it with granite. hope it helps.