Essay on Varendra Rebellion for Students & Children’s | Essay on Kaivarta Revolt 

Essay on Varendra Rebellion: The Kaivarta Revolt of Bengal is one in all the foremost celebrated revolt within the history of Bengal. Vigrahapala III was succeeded by his son Mahipala II in 1070 A.D. The previous reign was flooded with foreign invasions.

A method of disintegration was within the air. So from the terribly starting Mahipala II was thrown into issues. Conspiracies and revolts became a continual method in his reign that ultimately ends up in his overthrow.

History of Kaivarta Revolt and Varendra Rebellion:

A contemporary work “Ramacharita” narrated the circumstances that result in the decline of Mahipala. On a false report of alleged conspiracy Mahipala unfree his 2 brothers Surapala and Ramapala. This angered the follower chiefs who at once revolted against him. While not paying heed to the recommendation of his ministers and with none preparation some, Mahipala long-faced the revolted chief and consequently died in their hands.

A high official of Mahipala II and a Kaivarta by caste, Divya currently assumed the royal authority. He became the master of Varendra or Northern Bengal and someday established a brand new family. This is often legendary in history because of the famed Kaivarta Revolt of Bengal.

The Kaivarta revolt has been characterized as a preferred revolt. Mahipala was a tyrant and unscrupulous unpleasant person for whom a small suspicion was enough to imprison folks, even his own brothers. He was primarily of warmongering nature and cared for no recommendation. 

The foremost burdened folks throughout his time of Mahipala were the Kaivartas and that they found in Divya their benefactor. Divya was neither an influence admiring nor a fly-by-night person of his master. However loyal motive compelled him to kill Mahipala to liberate folks from the hands of this tyrant. Divya, like Gopal, was asked by the folks to become the king.

However, it’s typically alleged that Divya cloaked his personal ambition by superpatriotic professions. The central government was terribly weak and Divya, like alternative social organization chiefs, taken the chance to determine his authority.

Thus the Kaivarta Revolt has caused a discussion among the students and till any details are received regarding the character of the struggle it’s of very little use to debate it in an elaborate way. However, at a similar time, the episode mirrored the condition of the then Bengal. As Mahipala II was headless of protective truth and polity, the Pala rule Bengal became significantly unpopular.

The feudatories were all nearly freelance of the Central authority. There have been continually conspiracies and makes an attempt of uprisings among these feudatories that much created the Central authority a great deal unstable and weak.

Suspicion on the part of Mahipala was so however a natural outcome of matters. Being apprehensive of a revolt against him he captive his brothers that crammed the cup of his quality. A general revolt of the feudatories as a natural consequence followed presently. Divya, the leader of the revolt found it straightforward to seize the facility from the palas that merely testified the latter’s weakness.

Kaivarta revolt is usually represented because of the revolt against the oppression. It looks like Divya had the support of native individuals as a result of they needed to urge eliminate the ruling king. However, it ought to be taken into serious account that Divya solely exercised his authority over components of northern India and therefore the feudatories became notably freelance when Mahipala II.

ALSO READ: ESSAY ON MAURYA CASTE SYSTEM

Thus Bengal lost its political unity and shortly became divided into petty political units. There was no smart relation among the varied chiefs who checked out one another with jealousy. within the ensuant days once the rule of Ramapala began we got a listing of twelve feudatories who helped Ramapala against Bhima, the successor of Divya in exchange for lavish displays and compensations.

This proves that even when restoration to power, Ramapala had very little management over these feudatories. So the political unity of the country was lost until it absolutely was regained by the Senas within the later quarter of the eleventh century.