Let’s be honest, most of us, myself included, probably heard the word Jauhar for the first time while watching Sanjay Leela Bhansali’s grand spectacle Padmaavat. The fiery climax, where hundreds of women in red walk solemnly into a roaring fire, left many of us wide-eyed and confused. Was that real? Did people actually do this?

As dramatic as it looked on screen, Jauhar was more than just a tragic visual; it was a very real, very intense part of our history. Practiced mainly by the Rajput women of medieval India, Jauhar involved mass self-immolation to escape capture and dishonor when their kingdoms were on the verge of falling to invading forces.

While the visuals are haunting and the idea sounds like something out of an epic novel, Jauhar was rooted in a deep code of honor, loyalty, and collective resistance.

Who Were the Rajputs?

Before we understand why something like Jauhar happened, we need to understand who it happened to. The Rajputs were fierce warriors, proud rulers, and guardians of their kingdoms who left a deep imprint on the history of North and Western India.

The word Rajput means “son of a king,” and it wasn’t just a fancy title. Rajputs belonged to powerful warrior clans that rose to prominence around the 6th century CE and remained a major force for nearly a thousand years. Their influence was strongest in regions like Rajasthan, Gujarat, parts of Madhya Pradesh, and Uttar Pradesh. Even during the Mughal period, many Rajput states retained a degree of independence or negotiated powerful alliances. Rajput kingdoms like Mewar (Chittorgarh), Marwar (Jodhpur), Jaipur, Bikaner, and Jaisalmer became centers of not only warfare but also culture and tradition.

Now, Rajput culture was built around certain ideals: bravery, loyalty, sacrifice, and most importantly, honor. Men were raised to be warriors. Women, too, were brought up not just with grace and poise but also with the strength to endure. It’s within this intense cultural framework that traditions like Jauhar took root. Rajput women were not weak or passive; they were strong, decisive, and rose to protect not just themselves, but the very idea of their family’s and kingdom’s honor.

What Exactly Was Jauhar?

Jauhar wasn’t just one woman making a personal decision, it was a mass act, a collective choice often made by entire communities of women and children when defeat in war was certain and capture inevitable. Picture this: the enemy is at your gate, surrender means humiliation or worse, and your men have already decided to fight till their last breath. In that moment, Rajput women turned to fire, not out of fear, but as a way to preserve dignity.

The term itself likely comes from Jatugriha, meaning “house of lac,” a substance that burns fiercely, symbolic of the intensity of the act. Emerging primarily in northwestern India, especially in the princely states of Rajasthan, Jauhar became synonymous with the Rajput code of Rajneeti (warrior politics), where the ideas of izzat (honor), virta (bravery), and dharma (duty) governed every action. In this culture, the honor of a clan was considered more sacred than life itself. Thus, when the walls of a fort began to crumble under siege, and the enemy stood at the gates, women turned to fire to protect their dignity. It’s important to note that Jauhar wasn’t about glorifying death. It was about reclaiming control in a situation.

The Rajput worldview was sharply defined by Maryada (dignity) and Izzat (honor). A woman’s purity was symbolically tied to her family's and clan's reputation. This societal fabric left no room for what might follow if a woman were captured. Even if she survived, she would be deemed “defiled.” In this system, choosing fire was painted as the final act of loyalty, one that preserved family honor even in death, where there were no good choices.

The Three Famous Jauhars of Chittorgarh

• The First Jauhar – Rani Padmavati’s Legacy (1303 CE)

This is the story that most of us saw in Padmaavat. Led by Rani Padmini during Alauddin Khilji’s siege of Chittor. As the legend goes, upon learning of Khilji’s intentions to capture her, Rani Padmini and thousands of women performed Jauhar, turning the fort into a pyre of resistance. Though many historians debate the accuracy of this tale, it remains a powerful narrative of feminine bravery.

• The Second Jauhar – Rani Karnavati’s Defiance (1535 CE)

When Bahadur Shah of Gujarat besieged the fort, Rani Karnavati, the widow of Rana Sanga, led around 13,000 women in Jauhar. After the flames, the remaining men of the fort rode out in a suicidal last battle (Saka).

• The Third Jauhar – Under Akbar’s Siege (1568 CE)

Even the mighty Emperor Akbar couldn’t break the Rajput spirit without bloodshed. During his siege, the fort witnessed its third Jauhar. The pattern repeated: women entered the fire, and the men embraced death in battle. The act wasn’t just symbolic, it was strategic and heartbreaking.

Why Did They Do It?

This is where it gets complex. From our modern lens, it’s easy to wonder, why didn’t they just surrender? But in Rajput culture, honor (maan) was everything. Captivity wasn’t just about being imprisoned, it meant violation, humiliation, forced conversion, and slavery. And for the women, that risk was tenfold.

However, modern interpretations force us to question whether it was truly a choice or a cultural compulsion. Did the women willingly walk into fire, or were they compelled by a system that left them no viable alternative?

Invasions often ended with the victors taking women as war spoils, parading, enslaving, or placing them in royal harems as concubines. For many women, particularly queens and noblewomen, this fate was worse than death.

Jauhar, as terrifying as it sounds, was seen as choosing Maryada (dignity) and Izzat (honor) over degradation. It was also about loyalty to their kingdom, their husbands, and their heritage. In a world ruled by war and patriarchy, this was one last, radical act of resistance. Many Rajputs followed Hindu beliefs that associated death in extreme sacrifice, especially through fire, with moksha, the liberation from the cycle of birth and rebirth.

The emotional and psychological burden of Jouhar on Rajput society cannot be overstated. For the men, it was a signal to fight to the death without the worry of their families falling into enemy hands. For the women, it was a devastating decision, one born out of fear, obligation, and valor.

Generational memory in Rajput families often glorifies Jouhar, teaching daughters about strength and honor. Yet, this glorification sometimes glosses over the trauma, the screaming silences behind the flames.

The Architecture of the Jauhar Kund

While we often associate forts with towering ramparts, secret tunnels, and iron gates, there is another, more haunting feature tucked within some of Rajasthan’s ancient strongholds, the Jauhar Kund.

The Jauhar Kund at Chittorgarh Fort, perhaps the most infamous of them all, is a barren, open area where three recorded Jauhars are said to have occurred, each led by a queen: Rani Padmini, Rani Karnavati, and others. There are no intricate carvings here, no marble spires or ornamented pillars. The design was practical and large enough to hold hundreds of women and children, enclosed for privacy, and often located near temples or palaces so rituals and last prayers could be completed nearby.

Today, many of these spaces, particularly the Jauhar Kund in Chittorgarh, have become places of solemn remembrance. During annual commemorations like the Jauhar Mela, people gather not to glorify death, but to honor the courage of those who had no choices left.

What the Historians Say: Fact, Fiction, or Faith?

Some scholars believe that certain stories about Jauhar, especially the most well-known one involving a queen named Padmini, might not be based on real events. They point out that there are no records written during Alauddin Khilji’s siege of Chittorgarh in 1303. Instead, the earliest written versions of such tales appear a couple of centuries later, in Malik Muhammad Jayasi’s 16th-century Sufi poem Padmavat, these poetic works that mix fantasy with symbolism. According to this view, these stories were not meant to be historical facts but rather cultural stories that reflected ideals of bravery and purity.

At the same time, many researchers agree that Jauhar itself was not made up. There is real physical evidence, like the stone-lined Jauhar Kunds still present in forts like Chittorgarh and Jaisalmer, which suggests that these mass self-immolations did take place during times of war. Oral traditions passed down in Rajasthani families, murals on ancient walls, and historical writings from neighboring kingdoms all point to the same painful truth: when cities were invaded and defeat was certain, women sometimes chose fire over captivity. Rima Hooja, an expert on Rajasthan’s history, encourages a nuanced view, neither glorifying nor dismissing it, acknowledging the pain, the fear, and the impossibility of the choices faced by women at the time.

In the end, the women who walked into the flames did not ask for war. They did not hold swords or shape the politics of their kingdoms. Yet when the walls fell and the enemy breached the gates, it was they who bore the heaviest price. Whether you view Jauhar as an act of resistance, a symbol of patriarchal pressure, or a heartbreaking tragedy, one truth remains: these women deserve to be remembered as more than just characters in a dramatic tale.

.    .    .