Assertion (A) >: Vira Narasimha deposed the last Saluva ruler of Vijayanagar and seized the throne for himself. Reason (R) >: Vira Narasimha wanted to save the kingdom from disintegration due to the revolts of feudatories which could not be controlled by

examrobotsa's picture

Submitted by examrobotsa on

Q: 108 (CDS-I/2005)

Assertion (A): Vira Narasimha deposed the last Saluva ruler of Vijayanagar and seized the throne for himself.
Reason (R): Vira Narasimha wanted to save the kingdom from disintegration due to the revolts of feudatories which could not be controlled by the Saluva ruler.

question_subject: 

History

question_exam: 

CDS-I

stats: 

0,65,40,65,19,17,4

keywords: 

{'vira narasimha': [0, 0, 1, 0], 'saluva ruler': [0, 0, 1, 0], 'last saluva ruler': [0, 0, 2, 0], 'vijayanagar': [1, 0, 1, 2], 'correct explanations': [0, 0, 7, 0], 'disintegration': [0, 1, 2, 2], 'throne': [4, 0, 5, 0], 'revolts': [0, 0, 3, 0]}

The given assertion (A) states that Vira Narasimha deposed the last Saluva ruler of Vijayanagar and seized the throne for himself. The reason (R) provided is that Vira Narasimha wanted to save the kingdom from disintegration due to the revolts of feudatories which could not be controlled by the Saluva ruler.

Option 1 states that both assertion (A) and reason (R) are individually true, and reason (R) is the correct explanation of assertion (A). This option suggests that Vira Narasimha indeed deposed the last Saluva ruler of Vijayanagar and seized the throne for himself, and the reason behind this action was to prevent the disintegration of the kingdom caused by the uncontrollable revolts of feudatories under the Saluva ruler.

Option 2 states that both assertion (A) and reason (R) are individually true, but reason (R) is not the correct explanation of assertion (A). This option suggests that although Vira Narasimha did depose the last Saluva ruler and seize the throne, the reason behind this action is different from what is stated in the reason (R).

Option 3 states that assertion (A