(a) i-D, ii-C, iii-A, iv-E
(b) i-E, ii-D, iii-B, iv-A
(c) i-C, ii-D, iii-A, iv-B
(d) i-A, ii-B, iii-C, iv-D
Assertion and Reason
Mark (a) if ‘Assertion’ (A) is correct, but ‘Reason’ (R) is wrong.
Mark (b) if (A) is wrong, but (R) is correct.
Mark (c) if both (A) and (R) are correct, and if (R) is the correct explanation
or justification for (A).
Mark (d) if both (A) and (R) are correct, and if (R) is not the correct
explanation or justification for (A).
Assertion (A): North India between AD 750 and 1200 witnessed the
emergence and full growth of a new politico-socio-economic structure.
Reason (R): There is total unanimity among historians to describe this new
structure as ‘feudalism’.
Assertion (A): The object of political ambition in north India between AD
750 and 1000 was to capture and hold the city of Kanauj.
Reason (R): The continuous triangular conflict among the Palas, Pratiharas
and Rashtrakutas over the possession of Kanauj diverted attention from their
feudatories who succeeded in making themselves independent.
Assertion (A): Among the numerous Rajput clans which rose into prominence
in the 10th century AD four claimed a special status and started calling
themselves the Agnikula.
Reason (R): The four Agnikula clans which dominated early Rajput politics
claimed descent from a mythical figure who rose out of a vast sacrificial fire
pit near Mount Abu.
Assertion (A): An overwhelmingly large section of Indian society was highly
apathetic to the political events in north India during the 11th and 12th
Reason (R): The Turkish invaders of north India during this period received
enthusiastic support from the local masses who saw a better future for