Lalitaditya's invasion of Tokharistan
| Lalitaditya's Invasion of Central Asia | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Part of Lalitaditya's Northern Campaign | |||||||||
| |||||||||
| Belligerents | |||||||||
| Karkota Empire |
In other parts
In Bukhara | ||||||||
| Commanders and leaders | |||||||||
| Lalitaditya Muktapida | Unknown | ||||||||
Lalitaditya's invasion of Central Asia was an invasion led by Lalitaditya (Muktapida) in Turkistan (which was located in present day Badakhshan and the tracts of the upper Oxus) against the Tocharians and Turks.[1] His army emptied the Kamboja stables of horses (a reference to the Kamboja country's reputation for good-quality horses). The resulting darkness made them appear as if they were filled with black buffaloes instead.[2] The Tukharas fled to mountain ranges on Lalitaditya's approach, leaving behind their horses.[2]
Lalitaditya's three battles against Mummuni
[change | change source]He also defeated Mummuni three times in a battle, and made the Bhauttas very anxious. Lalitaditya was too dignified to tolerate the wine-drinking Daradas.[3][4]
Turushkas' badge of shame
[change | change source]Lalitaditya returned to Kashmir with the immense wealth obtained from his conquests. He appointed his attendants as the kings of Jalaṃdhara, Lohara and other countries. By Lalitaditya's order, the Turushkas and Dakshinatyas in his kingdom had to display a badge of shame. The Turushkas had to carry their arms at their backs and shave half of their heads, to mark their bondage.[5]
Scholars' consensus
[change | change source] | This article does not have any sources. (December 2024) |
Scholars such as Stein, Goetz, Wink and Inden agrees on Lalitaditya's military accomplishments to a varying extent. Others however, takes Kalhana's Rajatarangini as exaggeration to a varying extent.
The campaign of Lalitadity is very debatable among scholars. Scholars such as Stein Consider campaign of Lalitadity as exaggerated campaign excluding his kannauj and Bengal campaign. Later art historian consider campaign as a real event. Here scholars such as wink inden agree with Herman gotez. But on the other hand scholars such as Tansen Sen analysis the theory of Stein and Herman gotez and in end rejected and types of conquest of Lalitadity. However professor Cynthia analysis the opinion of both sides and give her theory that Lalitadity Digvijay was a real event but not a Conquest. It was massive looting And plundering.
References
[change | change source]- ↑ Wink, André (2002). Al-Hind, the Making of the Indo-Islamic World: Early Medieval India and the Expansion of Islam 7Th-11th Centuries. BRILL. pp. 244–245. ISBN 978-0-391-04173-8.
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 MA Stein 1 1900, p. 136.
- ↑ MA Stein 1 1900, p. 137.
- ↑ "IV. 167. He thought Mummuni [had been] defeated [only] after having vanquished him three times in battle. The valorous, indeed, think a single victory over an enemy [as accidental] as a letter which is traced by the boring] of a wood-worm." Sen, Tansen (2004). "Kaśmīr, Tang China, and Muktāpīḍa Lalitā-Ditya's Ascendancy Over the Southern Hindukush Region". Journal of Asian History. 38 (2): 149. ISSN 0021-910X. JSTOR 41933381.
{{cite journal}}: More than one of|pages=and|page=specified (help) - ↑ MA Stein 1 1900, p. 138.