Talk:Siege of Mandsaur

Persian sources cannot be trusted
Many historians disagree that Malik ayaz won against rana sanga.

History of Mewar, from Earliest Times to 1751 A.D. page 165-66

'According to Mirat-e-Sikandari, when Malik Ayaz, reached Ahmadabad, the Sultan reprimand and all the people of Gujrat called him a “coward”, This account proves that the army of Sultan suffered a heavy setback, Dr. Nagendra singh has discussed this point in detail, According to him, an obvious attempt was made in Persian chronicles to uphold the position of the Sultan of Gujrat vis-a-vis that of Rana, who had an upperhand throughout the various engagements and saved his country also. Therefore, such account of the Persian chronicles are not worthy of credence' Narook (talk) 08:01, 4 April 2024 (UTC)


 * @Kemilliogolgi your sources are not reliable Narook (talk) 08:16, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
 * tagging @Ranadhira here
 * Please review the sources added by @Kemilliogolgi, none sources added by this person are reliable Narook (talk) 08:17, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
 * All the sources that I have added follows the WP:Reliability.Not a single source is Self Published and all sources contains the reputation to be used in the context.Please recheak the sources and conclude with WP:NPOV.Hope you will recheak all the sources.I have also cited the paragraph for your better assistance.Thanks!! Kemilliogolgi (talk) 08:21, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
 * your sources have been rejected by historians, Persian chronicles of Gujrat Sultanate have been considered as fairy tales Narook (talk) 08:24, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
 * There is no criteria to find out the persian sources are reliable or not.We need to use the reliable sources excluding Self Published and Copyrighted sources.Here all the sources that Are used to define context of siege and it's result are WP:Reliable.Please cheak the criteria for WP:Reliability and conclude with neutral point of view. Kemilliogolgi (talk) 08:28, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
 * What about the sources that claim Rajput victory?? Narook (talk) 08:30, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I wanna know about the sources that claims the rajput victory.If you are talking about book that you cited for persian info, than you must have to check the page no. 165 para 1.This para stated that
 * "The presence of Kiwam-ul-Mulk made his position more precarious, as the latter advanced his battary and wanted to enter into the fort, but Malik Eias, fearing that victory might be ascribed to him, kept him away from taking any action."
 * And cheak the line that mentioned about victory due to which jealousy between them occurred.Editor hadn't cited any persian source he referred to source "49" mentioned on footnote.Where the Writer refers to Mr.Bayley who wrote history of gujarat.I hope you will re cheak all the sources and conclude the result.
 * @Gog the Mild And I hope you will also cheak the sources fairly.
 * If it was a rajput victory why does they mentioned about the victory of Malik?
 * Best Regards!! Kemilliogolgi (talk) 09:06, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
 * @ImperialAficionadoHere I am dealing with the sources that follows the criteria of reliability.The sources clearly states that the Rana sanga was defeated..Here comes the another source says that "Malik Eias,Fearing that victory might be ascribed to him" if there was no victory for Gujarati than why Malik felt jealous?Why the historian mentioned it cheak the reference pg.165 The first para Kemilliogolgi (talk) 09:36, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
 * @ImperialAficionado @Kemilliogolgi The 1st source provided by you clearly states that Rana sanga defeated Ayaz on the next page
 * History of Mewar: from earliest times to 1751 A.D. page 164
 * Maharana Sanga with a large army advanced to the village Nandasa, situated about 20 miles away from Mandsaur and encamped there, Nearly all important Hindu Chiefs of Rajasthan with their armies joined him, The Maharana, according to Persian chronicles," sent emissaries to Malik Eiaz, requesting him to abandon the siege operations. But this account can hardly be given credence, as on his return to Gujrat the Sultan admonished Malik Eias on his failure
 * And on page 165-66 of the same book states that Persian chronicles could not be trusted
 * According to Mirat-e-Sikandari, when Malik Ayaz, reached Ahmadabad, the Sultan reprimand and all the people of Gujrat called him a “coward”, This account proves that the army of Sultan suffered a heavy setback, Dr. Nagendra singh has discussed this point in detail, According to him, an obvious attempt was made in Persian chronicles to uphold the position of the Sultan of Gujrat vis-a-vis that of Rana, who had an upperhand throughout the various engagements and saved his country also. Therefore, such account of the Persian chronicles are not worthy of credence
 * Another trusted source A History of Rajasthan By Rima Hooja · 2006
 * The following winter, 1520, the Sultan of Gujarat joined hands with the
 * Sultan of Malwa, who had suffered an equal y humiliating defeat at the hands of
 * Sanga previously. At their behest, forces of Gujarat and Malwa, led by their
 * respective commanders, Ajaz and Qawan-ul-Mulk, took the field against
 * Sanga’s armies. The joint armies attempted to take the fort of Mandsor (now part
 * of modern Madhya Pradesh), but failed.
 * And the 3rd source provided by you falls under WP:RAJ
 * Tagging @Ranadhira @Gog the Mild in the discussion Narook (talk) 10:09, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
 * @ImperialAficionado I am here to assist you with my further sources.
 * 1)In January, 1521, Muzaffar sent an army of 100,000 horse and 100 elephants under the command of Malik Ayaz, governor of Sorath, to chastise the Ränä for his raid into Gujarat. Bakor¹, Galiākot, Dūngarpur, Sagwāra, and Banswara were ravaged and laid waste. At Banswara a large force of Hindus lying in ambush was attacked and put to flight after suffering losses. Malik Ayaz then marched to Mandasor, and besieged that town. Rānā Sangrama marched to its relief, but would not venture within twenty miles of the Muslim camp, and sent agents to Malik Ayāz offering to pay tribute to Muzaffar II if he would raise the siege, but his prayers were unheeded. Mahmüd II joined Malik Ayaz, and Mandasor might have been captured and Sangrama defeated, or pg.320
 * 2)"September, H. 926, Shauwal. Muzaffar II of Gujarat proceeds against the Ränä of Chitor; encamps at Harsil Muharram, H. 927 (December); appoints Malik Ayaz to the command. He and Kiwamu-l-Mulk proceed to Dhamolah and defeat the Rana" or pg.272 (Clear Mention of The Defeat)
 * 3)Sultan Muzaffar decided to send his men-at-arms against Chitor. 57 He invited Malik Ayaz from Junagad along with other amirs of the kingdom. Malik Ayaz brought one lakh horses and one hundred elephants and a number of cannons, cannoneers, musketeers and archers. 58 He was made the commander-in- chief of the huge contingent against Chitor. Rana Sanga marched from Chitor and encamped at Mandsur. Malik Ayaz made attempts to attack Mandsur. But there arose some misunderstanding and he feared that the entire credit of the victory over Rana Sanga would be claimed by Malik Dawam- ul-Mulk, one of the amirs of Gujarat. So, when Rana Sanga sent a messenger announcing that he would be a vassal of the Sultan, he readily accepted the terms of peace proposed by the Rajput ruler, even against the general feeling of the other amirs, who grieved in their hearts against Malik Ayaz.pg.36 (Source for vassalisation)
 * 4)Mahmud II Khalji of Malwa had joined Malik Ayaz with his army during the siege of Mandasor, and as the trenches had been completed right up to the walls of the fort, the stronghold would have been captured and Rana Sangram humiliated. or pg.279
 * 5)Malik Eiáz Sultáni, the abadKings governor of Sorath, was in A.D. 1521 sent with a large force The ráná of to revenge this inroad. But owing to dissensions between Chitor sub- Malik Eiáz and the Gujarat nobles, this expedition did not mita, effect much, and Muzafar Shah, greatly displeased with the result, determined himself to march against Chitor. He was, however, dissuaded by a submissive embassy from that chief, who sent his son to Ahmadábád with valuable presents for the king. or Pg. 47
 * 6)Next year, Mozaffer II. retaliated by sending an army, under A'iáz Sultáni, against Sanga. A'iáz besieged the rána in Mandesór, and had granted him terms, when the king of Málwa arrived to co- operate with his army. pg.210 Kemilliogolgi (talk) 03:03, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
 * The further Sources are as follows
 * 7)Sāngā "would not venture within twenty miles of the Muslim camp, and sent agents to Malik Ayaz offering to pay tribute to Muzaffar II if he would raise the siege, but his prayers were un- heeded. pg.169 and pg 193
 * 8)He held the command of fort of Mandsaur in 1520 A.D. when Malik Ayaz attacked and besieged the fort. pg.2 Kemilliogolgi (talk) 03:07, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
 * There is too much going on in this discussion but most of the sources you are showing come underWP:RAJ. These books have been published at a later date but their authors are all colonial era writers. One of your ref's "History and Culture Of The Indian People Vol.6" seems fine but you have only partially quoted the author. The whole quote says that the "the muslim historians seem to be fanciful" after what you have shown. Ranadhira (talk) 07:36, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

Addition of Reliable Sources about Context of the Siege
All the sources added on the previous revision of the article are reliable.No personal opinions were cited there.All the information was added with WP:Reliable Sources and the Reliability of sources may be cheaked.Article have several mistakes regarding results that are fixed in previous revision.User:Narook Must have to cross cheak all the sources that they are reliable or not.All the information regarding the results is added following WP:NPOV and neither a single source falls under the criteria of WP: Unreliable.Recheak the sources, for now I am reverting the article to previous edit.Thanks!! Kemilliogolgi (talk) 08:13, 4 April 2024 (UTC)


 * all the sources added by you were based on Persian chronicles which have been rejected by historians Narook (talk) 08:15, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
 * @DeepstoneV@Gog the Mild I am inviting you to involve in a fair talk and give your opinions about the sources.Please cheak all the matter carefully and give your opinion with maintaining the neutrality about the topic.Thanks!!
 * ]] Kemilliogolgi (talk) 08:54, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
 * @Kemilliogolgi History of Mewar: from earliest times to 1751 A.D. page 164
 * Maharana Sanga with a large army advanced to the village Nandasa, situated about 20 miles away from Mandsaur and encamped there, Nearly all important Hindu Chiefs of Rajasthan with their armies joined him, The Maharana, according to Persian chronicles," sent emissaries to Malik Eiaz, requesting him to abandon the siege operations. But this account can hardly be given credence, as on his return to Gujrat the Sultan admonished Malik Eias on his failure. Narook (talk) 09:56, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
 * @Narook, if any historian has claimed "Persian chronicles are unreliable", you are ought to bring the evidence for it. I can see nothing but just weasel words fighting here. Provide quotations from sources @Kemilliogolgi@Narook. Imperial  [AFCND]  09:01, 4 April 2024 (UTC)