History of JaiMal and Patta : HEROes of the 3rd Siege of Chittor - Page 13

Originally posted by Kaana

Abhay, the resources I understand. But the strategy - like Akbar built Sankara? What did they do similar? I understand they were stuck inside but I am sure given Maharana's brains they would have designed things to thwart Akbar's progress. And you had mentioned about them bringing down the sabats - how did they achieve it? canons? if so why the enemy camp was not destroyed - they were at an afvantageous position - so is it something else they did then? definitely they defended fiercely - That is why the so long war I suppose. So am curious to know what all, how all they defended and blocked Akbar's progress. Anything described from the Chittor end anywhere? Or is it like they all have perished anyway- nobbe left to capture the events :-(( Sorry to trouble with loads of questions. But I can never be content knowing about Maharana:-)

Originally posted by Kaana

Abhay, this is what beats me - no unity. Agreed there was no united India as such - for that matter the Bharat that was there as a single entity during the days of Bharat, then during the Maurya age etc got fragmented. It is all selfishness to own a piece of land and have a crown on head finally. Remember the DD show of Chanakya - the fight he had to put up and the extent of trouble he underwent to unite the kingdoms under one umbrella. The sanskriti is same - people forget that. Remember Chanakya was insisting in the commonality of this culture - one reason good enough to stand united. I understand the situation then and that my desire could not have seen light then. But that is the weakness of India- rather the curse of Hindus as people that they cannot stand united. Even the commonality in their roots could not bring them together against a foreign invasion which could result in them loosing their roots. Ambi of Taxila would be a bad example, but Rajputs kinda surprise me here.

Originally posted by history_geek

<font face="Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif">Kaana,
I remember the case of Chanakya.
Though, his times and his case was different.
Leaving this point for a later time.

BTW,
Now India is united, but do you find the unity is really there ? After every 30-40 kms, the way of speaking changes. People still are divided on basis of caste, religion, language, etc.. despite so much "modernity" being introduced in our lives...What is your opinion on this ?

BTW, Did not get the comparison of Rajputs with Ambi of Taxila.
Could you explain ?
</font>

Originally posted by Kaana

Abhay
India is all about unity in diversity. Yes there maybe disputes even over sharing water between states. Or disputes based in caste etc. But if a neighbour attacks, the whole country would stand together in unison.
Why attack even if someone comments on us, east west north south will give back in a single voice. Indianess tubs in our blood very much.

Ambi is not known to be a desh bhakt, even for his own piece of land. His desire for lady love and neighbouring land was more these values. Rajputs in general ate known for their desh prem, values. That was what I was trying to point out.