Explanation:

Correct Option: (b) Explanation:  Statement 1 is incorrect: Rajput defeat to Turks cannot be attributed to superior weaponry with the Turks. This is because, Indian swords were considered the best in hand to hand combat and their arrows were more accurate and deadly as the arrowheads were dipped in poison. Also the iron stirrup, which changed the nature of warfare in Europe, had spread to India from the late 8th century onwards.  Statement 4 is incorrect: The caste system did not prevent the non-Rajputs or kuvarna (lower castes) from taking part in battles. Thus the Rajput armies were larger in number to those fi elded by the Turks. Causes of Rajput Defeat to Turks  The defeat of leading North Indian states within a span of 15 years was not because of superior weaponry with the Turks but due to weak social and organizational setup.  Administrative structure and military organization was weakened due to growth of feudalism and the subsequent rise of local landed chiefs, who rarely acted in coordination. The Turks on the other hand had a tribal structure.  Though the Rajputs were not accustomed to move as organized horsemen (like Turks) or carried heavily armed cavalry and mounted archery, they had greater human and physical resources than the Ghaznavid and Ghurid empires which should not have resulted into their defeat.  In each of the Rajput states, the army was highly centralized whereas the iqta and Khalisa systems enabled the Turks to maintain large standing armies.  Though the Rajputs pit up a spirited and prolonged resistance against the Turks, they lacked a strategic vision. For example, they did not attempt to recover the fallen territories of Kabul and Lahore from the Turks. Thus they remained focused on India and paid little attention to the affairs outside, especially to central India. Topic: Medieval India Sub-topic: North Indian Kingdoms