There was a six point review from Quint, of the recently released movie on Prithviraj Chauhan.

It looks like a coercive critique done just because you want to do it.
Let’s poke more than six holes in this so called six pointer review.

First of all, why would you go looking for “historical accuracy” in a Bollywood film, that too when it makes no such claims. Necessity to make a video for social media?

Second, the “academic” reviewer in this video claims that the movie has omitted a battle between Prithviraj and Jaichand where Prithviraj was badly defeated and fled to Delhi.
Fact? There was no battle “between Prithviraj Chauhan and Jaichandra Gahadavala”. Not in any other text and not even in the Raso.
The only fleeing in Raso is when Jaichandra’s forces chased Prithviraj’s hopelessly small and covert entourage (more like a surgical strike party) fleeing with Sanyogita from Kannauj to Delhi. And that retreat with Sanyogita I believe is shown in the movie.
In Mahoba khand which came even after Raso, a part of Jaichandra’s forces are said to have participated against Prithviraj’s invading army, to support the local Chandella ruler. In this battle as well the defending. Chandella army was eventually routed by Chauhans after which the Chandella ruler had to surrender and sign a peace treaty.
So there’s no “Prithviraj vs Jaichandra” battle where the former flees. The two kingdoms didn’t even share a border.

Moreover when the fleeing couple had entered Chauhan territory, the Kannauj King recalled his forces and sent dowry, other ritual items to the wedding of his daughter. Prithviraj vs Jaichandra battle you say?

Prithviraj Raso

Third, she says that the movie doesn’t remain true to the Prithiviraj Raso it is based on, and then rues the fact that the movie is focused on Delhi. Guess which source focuses the narrative on Delhi – Prithviraj Raso. All other preceding ones focus on Ajmer.

Fourth, “Prithviraj lost Tarain-II rather swiftly” she says. The battle of Tarain-II began at dawn. While Abdul Malik Isami of Futuh-us-Salatin grudgingly admits that the kafirs fought bravely.

The combined understanding from Maulana Ufi’s Jawami-ul-Hiqayat and Ferishta’s account is that the when it was afternoon and the battle was still fought hard. The Sultan had to call in his reserve forces of 12,000 Mamluk heavy cavalry to go for final kill and end the long drawn battle.

Not only that, it is further corroborated by the fact that almost none of the Indian combatants survived the battlefield that day, which every muslim source ratifies and the Hindu sources confirm in saying that the Rajput army that went into the battle that day was smaller than Tarain-I and not the full force.

Swift losers are the ones who flee the battlefield at sight of death, not those who fight till the last man’s last breath and die as martyrs. What an insult to the Indian sacrifice and then the gumption to proclaim that she was disappointed from the movie as an Indian.

Fifth, she says Prithviraj was captured and sent to Ajmer to rule as a vassal of Ghori. Why the vassalage was a lie is something I have detailed in the book using contemporary and near contemporary sources. It is not something that can be properly transmitted after ruthlessly squeezing in a twitter thread.

Sixth, she says that the movie is unduly and retrospectively polarising Prithviraj’s history on Hindutva-Islam whereas Prithviraj has not been called a Hindu anywhere.
While Hindu-Muslim polarity wasn’t the only factor driving the medieval politics, it certainly existed as a key one. I will share only few instances of how Prithviraj Raso, the supposed basis of this movie, as well as the Kanhad de Prabandh dated before Raso have both projected the Chauhan struggle on a Hindu-Muslim polarity.

Kanhad De Prabandh 15th century Kanhad De Prabandh – 15th century

Who are these Hindusthanis of Kanhad De Prabandh Madam?

Coming to the contemporary Sanskrit texts because she says that the Hindu-Muslim polarity didn’t exist in Prithviraj Chauhan’s time. Why then is the contemporary Prithvirajvijaya calling the Ghurids as cow-killing Mlechhas and extols Chauhans as Arya and Kshatriya?

And no, Chauhan is not an ethnicity that she stated. It is rather the name of one of dozens of Kshatriya clans

Seventh, she complains that there’s no jauhar in Raso and yet they have shown it in the movie. Please wash your eyes and read. This is Sanyogita and other royal ladies entering fire to commit Sati, IN PRITHVIRAJ RASO :

The other “this ahistorical that ahistorical” bickerings around marble palaces, type of arenas, too many Farsi words and window patterns, etc are innuendos. They shouldn’t be placed if you have already relayed the awareness that the movie is based on 16th century Raso. The reviewer should have at least educated herself on how many Farsi words exist in the film’s basis text – Raso. That would’ve helped from the foot in mouth utterances.

I am no fan of that movie or of the tendency of absorbing Bollywood movies as history. But this Quint review is a mockery done just for the sake of it.