Was I WRONG About No Royal Palaces In Ancient India? | Abhijit Chavda
Вставка
- Опубліковано 21 сер 2024
- #AskAbhijit Episode 20, Question 3
WATCH FULL EPISODE: #AskAbhijit 20: Indian History | Abhijit Chavda ► • #AskAbhijit 20: Indian...
SUBSCRIBE ► www.youtube.co...
SHORT CLIPS CHANNEL ► www.youtube.co...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUPPORT THE CHANNEL
------------------------------------------------------------------------
►UPI (G-Pay/PhonePe/Paytm): abhijitchavda@icici
►PayPal: paypal.me/Abhi...
►Become A Member on UA-cam: / @abhijitchavda
------------------------------------------------------------------------
JOIN #AbhijitChavda
------------------------------------------------------------------------
★Discord: / discord
★Twitter: / abhijitchavda
★Instagram: / theabhijitchavda
★Facebook: / theabhijitchavda
★Website:
★Email Inquiries: inquiries.chavda@gmail.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------
#AskAbhijitPodcast
------------------------------------------------------------------------
★Spotify: open.spotify.c...
★Apple Podcasts: podcasts.apple...
★Google Podcasts: podcasts.googl...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
#AskAbhijitChavda #Abhijit #Chavda #AskAbhijitShow
Glad he explained so humbly .. it's necessary to respond to criticism with humbleness and with facts .. rage only creates chain rage reactions
In Mahabharata, narada counsels yudhisthira that it is his(king) duty to serve the people of land without being attached to personal joys and sorrows.
A palace is for personal use of the king and the royal family, a fort is for military use. A palace is like the personal residence of the king while a fort is like the office of the king and his chief of army.
you should take NCERT books and do a video about your opinions on every thing wrong with let's say the history book of 8th standard of cbse, that will be an interesting video
If I am not Mistaken that is about Modern Indian History after Turkic rule of India which is the best ever propaganda driven book on history
Read Brainwashed Republic written by Niraj Atri .He has documented all the misinformation present in NCERT history books ,also checkout his UA-cam channel.
Or exposing NCERT series
@@HariKrishna-sy1kp Thats good! We would also like Abhijit Ji opinion on this issue. He got his own analystical style that is very charming.
🤣🤣 true bro
People just don't want to do homework.
Somone is making them aware of facts, and they are busy raising ill-informed questions about them.
its okay to raise ill-informed questions. but, there is a moral way of asking them. indic tradition has treated the "guru" or "acharya" with utmost respect. if you are a descendant of the King bharat, then first learn the ways to be indic. using swear words only accounts to the westernized concepts.
Questioning is the beauty of Sanatanism
@@PS-qv1eh I think the people who are doing so(I mean asking questions with sort of a mockery tone),are coming from an already biased position.
@@irondisulfide7480 true
It's good to ask questions!
I was also confused why you are telling that there weren't any royal palaces.
Now I understood the difference between fort and palace .
Thanks :)
I would like to add a few points:
1. During the Indus-Saraswati Valley Civilization(ISVC), we find Citadels & common baths(most probably temple space), granaries etc. but not palaces. This is such a big deal that basically communists try to put it as a fine example & proof of "Ancient Communist society" post dawn of agriculture and coming out of forests. That is one more reason why they don't want to give the ISVC heritage back to Hindus.
Even those ISVC towns or cities, the area is fortified with raised walls as a collective and not for some leadership alone. This is not a new thing.
2. There have been a few exceptions. Nanda kings have been portrayed as living royally while being miser in utilizing it for the commom good. Therefore they were not liked by many scholars & common citizens alike of that time. Thus, such a big dynasty whom even Alexander feared & ran away was defeated with the help of common people & small tributary kingdoms & republics under the leadership of Chandragupta Maurya & expert guidance of Chanakya. It was Chanakya who laid the whole plan for conquering Magadha. The society has never allowed luxury beyond a point to the kingship. Most kings & dynasties have understood their dharma & made their lifestyle sustainable & not pompous. Even the pompous ones were not living that luxurious of a life that you can put them on same level with the materialistic Western(&Eastern) counterpart, some due to their own understanding or fear of backlash & some due to actual backlash. You still cannot find huge palaces of Nandas or other kings because of the same. Anyway a patron king helps support develop culture & infrastructure in form of arts, sculptures, literature, dams, channels, roads & highways, temples (and its self-sustaining ecosystem) which catered to furthering education, medicine, food to poor, monetary temporary loans to people in need,philosophy, theology of the various granths, spirituality & discussions for change in the society.
3. Agree or not, the Varna system restricted power of each varna to specific functions & doesn't allow them to become arbitrary or dictatorial. Separation of power in total sense. Sovereignty & rule of Dharma being supreme, even to the Maharajas & Maharajadhirajas.
4. With the increase in population, diversity of terrain & culture, complexity of governance also increases & thus requires bigger, complex machineries to manage the kingdom or in modern context, the state. Hence, more fund is needes by the govt. At the same time, it slowly becomes a smaller share of overall wealth in the modern society simply because everyone is earning through direct or indirect but uncontrolled exploitation of nature. This leads to increase in wealth(once basic needs can be easily provided for like Green revolution as an example) of overall population, but also expedited unsustainable degradation of nature.
This was not the case in those societies before Industrial Revolution, except for the truly greedy kings & dynasties like Mughals, Sultanates & the Western & East Asian kingdoms.
🙏🙏🙏🇮🇳🇮🇳
Excellent description.
You seem to be very well read.🙏
After consciously reading of Indian history, I feel like Indian society was really very ideal one, I haven't seen any much more justified & prosperous, nor any capitalist or any other society
Sir if u were our professor during our school days, I would hv never failed in history subject 😔
This is absolute true!! Even here in Turkey the professors made us sleep more than learn anything 😁😄
@@1turkish1indian43 🤣🤣🤣
Don’t spoil his career…
💯💯
Mai to history me sabse zaada fail hota tha lekin
Abhijit sir ke vajah se lagta hai i wasted so much time??
People with little knowledge often question the wisdom of the Learned.
No big deal. We all know, "little knowledge is dangerous" !
Exactly. They strived to be the “naresh” , to live at the highest of standards of maryada. Mysuru wadeyars and sayyaji Rao of Vadodara we’re good kings but puppets of the British nevertheless.
Forgot about Nalvadi Krishnaraj wadeyar, he introduced a voting system, grampanchayat, and enforced women rights and jayachamarajendra constructed many Colleges funded,these kings were vassals of the mighty vijayangara kingdom they developed Mysore from scratch stop lying
@@moodykrish They were dharmic and good-hearted BUT still under the British occupation. That's why said British puppets. Maybe they thought they could do more for the people by going that way instead of revolting?
@@Priya-cm3tr actually they did revolt. There is record of the wodeyar secretly sending gold coins to fuel laxmi bai's revolt against the british.
It is a gross generalisation to call mysore wodeyars as puppets, its a lot greyer than that
This guy is absolutely wrong. Indian Empires built the most beautiful palaces in the world. Greek Travellers said that the Mauryan Palaces of Pataliputra exceeded the beauty of Persian Palaces in Susa. The Cholas had palaces made of gold in Gangaikonda Cholapuram. Xuanzang described the Mauryan Palace ruins as having been built by spirits. The Vijayangara Palace complex was the size of cities. All of these palaces were built with wood so they have not survived whereas Mughal and Rajput palaces were made of stone.
You are absolutely right sir, I am from mysore my house is just 1 km away from amba vilas palace, I know the history, what palace now is in mysore is latest buit, I mean just about 100 years ago before it used to be smaller palace not luxurious like one we see today, yes there was pure loktantra during our ancient kings, there used to be a great temples rather than Royal palaces
In Bihar too there are very few forts like Darbhanga fort, Shergarh fort, Jalalgarh fort, etc but they were built around British era... Some of them have Scottish architecture.
Sir you need not to add fort with this names because garh is already with it which means fort
@@dibyajyotipodder8084 No. Garh and fort are different things. Garh means place (ex- Azamgarh district of UP) and fort means Quila (शेरगढ़ किला)
There is a Lal Quila in delhi... you can't say it Lal Garh.
@@Aryan-gs6ky bro Quila is an Arabic word . Garh is a Urdu word . And both means same
@@Aryan-gs6ky and yes bro I can not call Lal Quila Lalgarh as it is already named as Lal Quila
@@dibyajyotipodder8084 Don't know much about arabic or urdu but in our area, we've places like Ramgarh, Azamgarh, shergarh...and if there is a fort inside that area we put quila/mahal/haweli next to the places' name (ex- shergarh quila). I'm telling what is locally used.
You are right sir, Bikaner (Where I live) have Junagarh fort which enclosed the city of Bikaner. That’s not palace, the palace is built under British era when Ganga Singh (One of the king of Bikaner) used to serve Britishers.
My family owns a fort in Rajasthan, but people still confuses it with palace. Built around 1400s in a small town near Jodhpur. These forts were for security purposes and had facilities like stacking food supplies and ammunitions, animals and water and people to hinde in case of attack, a siege of forts lasted for 1-6 months, if they made palace there, it would be ran over in day 1. I would love if you make a proper video explaining this topic. We don't have history of palaces, we only had forts, Mehrangarh is a fort so is Sinhgarh and every other gadh or gadhi.
Damn 🔥🔥🔥 dude....You must be packing a lot Dough !!! 🤣🤣🤣 Lucky you.....man...lucky you.
@@Subhashish69 Rajasthan was never United, there were mainly 3 sides, jodhpur, jaipur and mewar. They faught each other alot. To hold them back, forts were built. For example fort we own was built in 14th century by Sisodiyas of mewar but we took it from them and later in 15th century my great great great ... Grandfather got it due to administration system of Rajputs. But our clan of Rathores faught with Maharana Pratap's father and later with Maharana against Mughals despite opposition of Jodhpur, in return after winning first 2 wars we got more prestige but after losing the war lots of power were snached and a lot of tax was demanded for the area we controlled, and later Marathas too attacked and eventually won our area and looted and after 1 year released for some money. Later when British came they put their puppet ruler in Jodhpur and a civil war broke out even before 1857 revolution, and just when it was going to get resolved, revolution broke out and all the thakurs faught against British and captured many forts and holded up till 2 month until jaipur decided to send infantry and big one to crush them and they were successful, the last battle was faught on our fort for 5 weeks British laid siege but couldn't capture so they offered them to restore their titles and powers if surrendered. They did and revolt was over. Thats why you see big lavish palaces in Jaipur and Jodhpur made in 19th century as they were puppet of British. But those construction gave people job, their old structures were used as schools and hospitals and many dams and water system were built during that time so British can grow cash crops. It complicated and not so simple to explain as you think
@@Subhashish69 they did build schools, check the archives. Do some research yourself, if you go and look our all old hospital and prestigious schools and many army schools they were built during British era.
@@Subhashish69 I told you to do research first, I am not gonna provide you list of projects. There is already documented with every kingdom and yearly amount spend on development per town and village in records of every state. Their failures and success both. Go and read
👏👏
I have watched that previous video, and it did make me wonder if you missed those handful of palaces. Then, it became clear that most of them were constructed very very very recently compared to the thousands of years of Bharat's history. Also, I have to admit I missed the video description, which I hardly check unless if the video itself directs the viewer to look for any relevant links within the description.
Thanks for the follow-up. Unfortunate, that it had to be done due to the "experts" that grace their presence in the obscurity of UA-cam comments.
Those Mysore kings were paying taxes to British and were ruling with their permission
Clearly they were puppets
Also, why would the brits who occupied majority of India leave Mysore if it wasn’t subservient? There’s always a game in the background, assassinations of anti British princes, greedy ones sucking up to brits etc
Fort is short of Fortification , castle , lair, Dungeon all have different meanings..
Me: thinking 🤔 about history
Abhijit sir: lol
Really appreciate your efforts sir 🙏
1:14 legend Dhiraj ❤️
राजगड आणि रायगड खूप छान धीरज 🙏🏻👍
The Mahabharata also mentions palaces of both the Kauravas and Pandavas
That are not palaces , those were homes to both Kaurav and Pandav , remember both Pandav and Kaurav both had a big family.
but they wont be that great in size as what we think when we say the word 'palace' it would be a normal size
Maybey they did have palaces but then again, they never followed dharma.
Lakshagraha and Indraprastha Mayasabha?!!
In maharashtra, we have Rajwadas or Royal family houses but we also have other officials and rich people's wadas(mansions) which were bigger than Rajwadas. So none of them are palaces.
The city Palace was made under Udai Singh in the 14th century.
The existing Mysuru palace is renovated one because previous one was damaged due to fire... The old fort palace was built before british era...you can check it in Wikipedia...
@@harveyspecter1855 dude did u checked wiki
@@ekanthbaburj1540 yeah it’s a fort what’s the big deal
@@ckiran4741 it also says new one as a fort, are they confused or confusing us...
@Aunty Imrandu Ik bratha but the I don't think they would've added missinformation in this topic...mostly
In Humpi there was a palace which was fully made of ivory and sandal wood. Bahumani Kingdom burnt it after Battle of Talikot (Also known as Battle of Rakkasa/Rakshasa Tangadi)
Before starting your video i think these people should be given some 'Badam' so that they can understand what the actual question is about 😐
Megasthenes described the royal palace in his book "indica" and described the royal mauryan palace , the great hall had around 80 pillars one of which is still present in the patna museum. It is often stated that since the palaces of ancient India were primarily made from wood and mud. It's decaying over centuries is quite eminent.
@@descendedofrigvedicclans2216 so what a lut ramayan and mahabharat mentions of palaces likeravan say to shree ram that your palace is made of up of good but my whole lanka is made up of gold
Certainly very true not only that archeogists couldn't find palaces or any special housing for kings in harappan civilization too although they were very advanced and their society had features which our cities don't have even today.
Slight Correction:-
The present Mysore palace was built in British Era but Mysuru had a wooden Palace( Mush smaller compared to Present One) Got destroyed in a lightning accident and after that again a palace was built but after few years when Tipu took control he transformed the whole place into a fort like and renamed it as Nazarabad by house arresting minor Price and Queen,and few years later when Tipu lost the war with british ( there is a native story which goes the deal was struck between Queen of Mysore and British to eliminate tipu so he got back stabbed by his own men eventually at the end ) after the war british took down the complete fort thing and rebuilt another palace for new king under British Raj and this palace also got destroyed in a fire accident which was built in Hindu Style then gain the contract was given to british architect and the new palace what we see today was built.
Another Correction;- even though Mysore Kingdom was under british control. The King Didn't rule the state directly but it is said that he works as a servant of Nada Devi ( goddess of Land ) Chamundeswari ( Chamundi) , even today it is the same stuff during Dasara Navaratri
i love his over confident speech delivery though.. I understand slip of tongue but how did he not see what he was typing. 🤣🤣 he went like..
*"nonsense, there are many PALACES in India. See all those FORTS."* 😂
@Prafful Bhatia he meant the lady who wrote the comment
@Prafful Bhatia bhaiya english nahi ati hai to koi bari baat nahi hai.. humara apna language nahi hai english.. hindi me v bol dunga but samajh to lo maine kya bola.. 🙏
@@esportslobby2440 left??!! 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🙏🙏
@@avijitkarmakar8221 😂
@@esportslobby2440 🤣
We are actually proud that our wodeyars had built one of the most royal palace in world , the mysore palace. Wodeyars tho were not puppet kings of british
Yes, there is no palace in Badami, chalukya capital, manyakheta (currently known as maLakheDa) Rashtrakoota capital, banavasi capital of kadambas, and even one can not find any huge palace of hoysalas, capital and numerous other actual royal dynasties. The kings who built or commissioned the construction of many magnificent temples could have simply built a palace for them if they wanted and we could have seen some traces of them..
Even in Ramayana and Mahabharat and other Hindu Texts there are descriptions of palaces. There hasn't been any archeological excavation done to find out about the Ramayan, ofc the Ram setu is enough with the varied description of the geography of the Indian subcontinent and the world in the Ramayan, to prove that it did happen, they mention huge palaces(kop Bhavan reference), bhavans, forts, in Mahabharat there has been one Excavations done in UP(Hastinapur area of mahabharat) where they found a palace, plus Pitama bheeshma has been said to destroy hundreds of forts and palaces during his Digvijay yagya(conquest of the world), plus there is reference of palaces of each queen in Dwarka of Bhagwan Shri Krishna, plus his own palace, pillars have been found for this, and in Rig ved Indra Dev is said to be Purandar( destroyer of forts), Indra dev himself lives in a palace, Many ancient kings millions of years ago lived in Palaces according to the texts, and now coming to the modern(BCE) India, chandragupt maurya is said to have lived in a palace of wood, mentioned by Megasthenes, and there was a palace in Hampi (pampa devi the orignal name) mentioned by Domingo Paes and other travelers to India, plus many other historical records talk of palaces in India both ancient, mediaeval and modern. So Sir, I would respectfully disagree with you on this. 🙏
One more instance is of Chanakya himself where he was insulted by King Dhana nanda in his 'Palace'. Another example from ancient history.
@@shlokjoshi2849 difference between real and translation
@@RinkiSingh-wy1ff i didn't get what you mean.
I am from Magadha where great kings like Chandragupta Maurya, Ashoka ruled and it was also capital of Gupta empire at that time but not a single Palace only Temples and that also got destroyed by invaders.
Jab bhi Abhijit sir ese comment ke reply dene ke liye video bnate hai itni energy kush alag hi hoti hai. 😊
Concept of very large palaces for the Kings is indeed absent.
In fact the main diety of the King were honoured with large temple complexes and these were open to commoners during specific festive and auspicious times.
Now these temple complexes cum palaces in India during last 1000 years were either demolished or converted into a Muslim monument and explained in history by some fake.
narrative.
Be it Taj Mahal , kutub minar complex,various tombs in Delhi like haus khas, etc were temple palaces used by the king for worship as well as a place for trade related activities.
This guy is absolutely wrong. Indian Empires built the most beautiful palaces in the world. Greek Travellers said that the Mauryan Palaces of Pataliputra exceeded the beauty of Persian Palaces in Susa. The Cholas had palaces made of gold in Gangaikonda Cholapuram. Xuanzang described the Mauryan Palace ruins as having been built by spirits. The Vijayangara Palace complex was the size of cities. All of these palaces were built with wood so they have not survived whereas Mughal and Rajput palaces were made of stone.
@@dwarasamudra8889Your source
Abhijit, in my early college years, I studied Indian History and agree with your conclusions. Insightful and Brilliant!
I don't agree that King's didn't build palaces for them in olden times. You have the description of grand palace built by Vishwakarma for Pandavas in Indraprastha. The grandeur of the palace made Duryodhana jealous. And his slipping off in the palace, and laughter by Draupadi for his slip, led to the incident of draupadi vastrapaharan.
In That palace, people also lived in them..the palace wasn't just built for the Pandavas but for the people n soldiers too...what do u think, the people would have stayed in Indraprastha? Indraprastha wasn't just a palace but the magnificent city 🙏🙏🙏
I think Indian version of palaces are lot different than Europeans.
Give the shaloka number from Mahabharat in which it is written that Pandavas made palace for them.
Lol Draupdi was not even there when Duryodhan feet slipped into water the whole story is made by TV serials.
What about
Mahishmati samrajyam?
Bahubali will be angry
Lol 😂
Built recently. 😂😂😂
found in ramoji film city
#AskKatappa 😅
Can you compare it with outside India palaces & castles? I know Europe has lots of castles.
@@saber3570 palace* not forts
If you want to ask questions then please be respectful you have a doubt you think you're right its ok but here are some people just talking like they know everything and try to mock people Great Answer Sir 🙏
im from mysore. there was no palaces in mysore state but was just forts like chitradurga kote, mysuru kote etc. mysore palace was built in british era. and tippu sultan had luxurious palace and to match him vodeyar family went mad. they even sold almost all of family jewels and they experienced same scam as indian railway. the british architect looted them. its just a electric bulb filled cement structure and all the paintings inside are 2d[islamic] and only 3-5 have protruding arts that too cheap. its a disgrace to chamundi[kali] coz its supposed to be dedicated to her.
The fort you used in the thumbnail is Jodhpur's ummed palace that was built to give jobs to the people because marwar state was struggling with drought... The thing which made me feel proud was even new born infants were paid in this. The wage of an infant was 25% of what it's mother or father is getting a day.
Have you worked as a teacher ? ( Love your videos )
Forts and ghads are of mainly military used.
You're True 🙂
True sir, I have always wondered about this, like I go to Badami, Pattadkallu, Aihole, Hampi, and couldn't find a place (multistoreyed and luxurious), like I have seen a multistoreyed building that was for watching Dasara celebrations in Hampi, but not a palace, there was bathing house for queens and royal family, buildings for royal gatherings but not a big palace. I always wondered why, but yea this might be the reason.
This guy is absolutely wrong. Indian Empires built the most beautiful palaces in the world. Greek Travellers said that the Mauryan Palaces of Pataliputra exceeded the beauty of Persian Palaces in Susa. The Cholas had palaces made of gold in Gangaikonda Cholapuram. Xuanzang described the Mauryan Palace ruins as having been built by spirits. The Vijayangara Palace complex was the size of cities. All of these palaces were built with wood so they have not survived whereas Mughal and Rajput palaces were made of stone.
Yes sir... You are right...
There were royal palaces but they were very modest in nature.
#AskAbhijit Is dark matter responsible for differences in observed and theoretical speed of stars revolving around the centre of galaxies, or is it something else?
the city palace in jaipur wasn't built during the british era, but during the turko mongol era. In fact there are palatial structures in Rajasthan which predate the british era. Ofcourse, the turko mongol era cannot be considered as ancient india. But you get the point. Medieval India was definitely a different place and despite being labeled as co conspirators, several rulers of Rajasthan did a lot to preserve the struggling hindu culture during the Mughal rule and act as patrons to several arts and artisans. Rajasthan is brimming with hindu culture unlike most other places in northern india.
Thanks for the informations and comments we enlightened on the issue.
These great men and women probably would say Red Fort is also a palace!
What was haveli culture of North India
Badal palace of Kumbhalgarh build by Maharana Kumbha of Mewar....
Please visit Kumbhalgarh Udaipur, Rajasthan
Oldest Indian Palace is Rambagh Palace in Rajasthan which was built in 1835. But I have a doubt over Kumhrar, can you explain what was that Structure actually?
Jodhpur Umaid bhawan palace was built during British Era... to provide employment during famine
They were just looking for a reason to criticize you.
But glad that u answered it well.
Angkor wat is a good example. They built massive temple but not a massive palace for themselves unless they used temples as their palace which doesnt make sense.
But in Mahabharata they mention about a grand palace bulit by maya 🤔
I am from Chittorghar he is right in chittorghar fort people still live having their own homes horses..etc.
There is/was Shaniwar wada which was destroyed by British..... 🙄
But what about Rama and Sita who were prince and princesses of Kings and used to live in a Palace/Whatever Residence . Goddess Sati also used to live in a Palace. It is clearly mentioned in many Puranas. In Fact it is also mentioned how Ravan used live a Luxury Life and Acquired Pushpak Viman from Lord Kuber. CORRECT ME IF I AM WRONG!! Where do they all used to live? Was it really not luxury at all? Even Lord Krishna had a Palace in Dwarka where He used to live with his 1600 Wives....... Please Elaborate the Explaination!
Jal Mahal was built in 1699.
What about hawa mahal
Hampi pronunciation spot on
Rajasthan city palaces are very small.
Sir aap agr hmare teacher hote....to hmare class k sare students history se pyar kr lete
You are correct.
People should do a little more research before asking questions... especially in matters of history because that's definitely your forte.
Abhijit is correct!!!! Hindu Kings serving for people and Temples..... not palaces....Great to hear!!!!
The Narayan Dynasty of Kashi has one
You should work in developing new education system policy.
What about padmini mahal, jal Mahal, hawa Mahal in jaipur and chittorgarh some of them are older than even the Mughal occupation.
Sir the way you explain history. I bow down to you and show my respect.
In jodhpur,there are both a fort mehrangrah and a place umed bhawan
#AskAbhijit What about Foreign travellers' account about palace of patliputra ?
You are absolutely right Abhijit ji! 🙏🇮🇳
What about the palaces in Ramayan and Mahabharat - the Pandavas palace in Indraprasth, the palace in Hastinapur, Ram Ji’s palace in Ayodhya and more…
@@descendedofrigvedicclans2216 jake thoda indraprastha k bare me padho pata lagega
Lol give the proof of Shri Ram palace in Ramayan.
Kudos to you sir for approaching criticism in such a gracious way. The 1st person's comment was very rudely presented in my opinion. This is how respect is earned - by approaching things in the right way. Thanks to internet, I found people like him to look up to. My respects, sir 🙏🙏
What about Thirumalai Naicker Palace in Madurai or Thanjavur Maratha Palace? They were not British puppets as many Tamil kings resisted Islamic and British forces.
yeah i truly agreee i am frm jaipur and the great kings of here built forts not palaces the only palace in jaipur is the city palac and it was in the time of britishers otherwise u can see they built fort that were strong enough to bear attacks
#askabhijit
Sir what about Ashoka's palace that Fa hien saw when he came during Chandragupta 2nd's rule??
People who really haven't studied history would point out such palaces and forts. The title of the video says "ancient India" not medieval or modern India. All these palaces that have been mentioned are from the mediveal or modern period. Are there any significant palaces from the Sapt Sindhu period? Name one. There are a few mentioned in some inscriptions, but there are rarely any archeological remains to prove anything. And the said period is supposed to be the later phase of Ancient Indian history. What about the Vedic Era? Nothing much on Palaces. More research is required to look into the political systems of ancient India, but what he is suggesting it's not implausible, so don't question just for the sake of proving someone else wrong. It could turn out to be embarrassing.
Yes, this is correct, I am from Mysore. But even after discounting Mysore palace - pls ask people to go through the innumerable houses and lands gifted away by the king - even when he was the puppet king. The most famous Vijayanagar king’s generation’s son lives in the same house - there is a UA-cam video available for anyone to see - that is a house that is built in the old style. That is all. And pls compare these king’s dwelling with the richly ornate temples the same kings built - that will tell the stories of the lives these kings lead. Perhaps also compare with the way our modern “permanent kings” live at Janpath and elsewhere refusing to vacate even when they lose their seats.
Yes, although in British era kings were puppet in the sense that they had no real power and had to pay tributes to them, many of them still worked for dharma, society etc.
Leela palace , udaipur
#AskAbhijit sir then what about the magnificent palaces mentioned in the ramayana i.e the palace in ayodhya and the palaces mentioned in mahabharata i.e. the indrapastha
Same question
#askabhijit if there are no palaces then how to see old Indian architecture of homes (not for temples cause I know there are some temples in south)
Sir according to what I know , children of that time were playing in the Mysore palace premises and anybody would visit the palace area, King never object there presence.
Sir I totally agree but I am confused where the term 'rajmahal' originated as it is used in almost every Indian film/book based on ancient India. Is it a post-British-era word or a mistranslation to palace? Please do answer 😁
Love u sirji 🔥
This makes so much sense. There are thousands of years old monumental temples. But no palaces. It wasn't difficult for them to build luxurious palaces or chateaux like the ones built in Europe. A truly Dharmik king would not live that kind of lifestyle (विलासी जीवनशैली).
City palace in jaipur was bulit in 1732 before the company intially started rulling india in 1757 after the battle of Plassey
Why does Mahabharata and Ramayan depict such a luxurious lifestyle of kings?
The Serials did that.
@Anant radhe Kuchh galat keh diya kya mei ne?
#AskAbhijit Then what about the descriptions in Ramayana Mahabharatha ?
Make sure to use #askAbhijeet
@@sonisingh53 ok. thankyou
Sir or anyone in comment section...plz answer my query - Then what about the Dwarka palace ( submerged in ocean now, scientifically proven ) owned by Lord krishna when he was dwarkadish naresh
( I m asking this in a humble tone and genuine quest to know🙏 )
Shivani maharaj raigad has nothing but like a normal house. One room for each person of family and other liberary darbar etc
Sir what about the Shaniwar wada
Fort.
@@madhugreenleaf it's not a fort that's why I am asking
@@nikunjsoni1463 It is a fort. Its full name is shaniwar Wada killa. Just look at the building walls before declaring it a palace.
Sir, you are the social studies teacher to all the grown ups.
Our ancestors left monuments of fabulous temples with worlds most advanced architectural merits devoted to the Lord's.Sree Rama, Sree Krishna and so on. They never lived a rich life. They ruled for the welfare of the people. Today we have those monuments which were devoted to our Gods. They did not make monuments for the dead like Taj Mahal.
Unfortunately the so-called intellectual creatures of India, never talk on this interesting topic. Despite having the world's best rock-cut Architecture and Concepts of Vastushastra, Indian Kings didn't build huge palaces like that of Sassanid and Roman Kings.
The Rajputs forts including that of Kalinjar, Kangra, and Gwalior were all military defenses, in which the In-charge along with his family and Army resided. Look at the Champaner Fort in the hills, Is this a Royal Palace alone. It was the outpost to keep eye on the enemy.
Even you don't find any Royal palace in ancient Indus valley. The luxuries of the city were accessible to the locals of that region.
It is another proof of the continuity of our civilization until the Mughal era.
Exactly the Rajput forts like Kumbhalgarh,Mandalgarh and Chittorgarh are original Rajput Forts and heritage!!❤😎