How Islam came to India and why now it needs to go from India -11: economic decline under Islam – the strange case of the horse

Posted on August 31, 2008. Filed under: Hindu, India, Islam, Muslims, Politics, religion |

The Thaparian hypothesis of the important cause of ruin of the Indian economy from excessive import of horses from the West of India by feudatoty chieftains inside India for luxury and internecine warfare serves two purpose – first it provides one convenient internal scapegoat to which the general economic decline could be attributed to, and secondly by the other great Thaparian project to remove all traces of the destructive nature of Islam and its slaughtering, enslaving, and looting invasions in India it removes any external cause for this increased “consumption of horses”. The Thaparites are able to get away with this because Indian history textbooks are careful never to mention anything about the frequent Islamic raids, invasions, and the social and economic destructions and disruptions they caused and significantly the obvious resistance by the Hindus that required almost 500 years of continuous attacks and attempts from the side of Islam.  But more importantly this then allows the Thaparites to remove a possible crucial reason behind the need felt by the Indian rulers to import good quality horses suitable for military purposes. The suppression of the conflict also suppresses any realistic estimate of the degree of resistance and hence the resources that had to be committed to this conflict by the Hindu rulers. Here we recount this almost 500 year long conflict initiated by the Muslims to capture only about a third of Northern India as a possible indication of the scale of military resources that must have been needed by the Hindus, and which must have needed extraordianry number of horses to match the swift mounted soldiers and archers of the Muslims. For an idea of the number of horses among other military resources involved, look at Part 2 of this series which describes the last battles between Prithwiraj and allies and Ghori. Foreign breeds of horses, especially of the western Asian type, and specially those from Vanayu [Hindu name for Arabia] were found to be good quality war horse-material [ even now, reconstrucive historians find that few horses in a given batch can be trained to ignore the sights, smells and sounds of war, especially ignore the sounds of drawing the bow or releasing the arrow which must have been crucial for mounted archers] as described in Abhidhanaratnamala, and Vaijayanti. Breeding these horses appeared to be difficult because the Arabs prevented any farrier to come to India [Wassaf, in Eliott and Dowson, Marco Polo]. Chau-ju-kua in the Chinese text Ling-wai-ta aqlso refers to the Arabs importing large numbers of horses to Quilon. Prabandhachintamani refers to a ship importing 10,000 horses into Stambha [Cambay]. Wassaf gives one instance of the drain of resources in buying horses through the agreement made between an Arab merchant and a Pandya king, by which 14,000 horses were imported into the ports at a cost of 2.2 million dinars. This is supported by figures given  by Marco Polo [hearsay or otherwise, Marco’s figures appear to be consistent with Wassafs]. It is highly significant to note that the textrual evidence for the magnitude of horse imports increases rapidly towards the 12th and 13th centuries, and that most of these texts actually mention sea-ports on the southern sea-board of India as the main entreports. The Thaparites in their enthusiasm to remove any ideological contribution of Islam in Mahmud Gaznavi’s motivations to attack India, propose that he wanted to stop the import of horses into India through Sind and Gujarat, or control the trade in horses – if true then this can imply two possibilities that the limited Thaparite vision excludes – that horses were being imported through the sea and not through the North-West passage which he was in full control of , and the possibility that he realized the importance of horses in the resistance shown by the Hindus he wanted to subjugate.

Let us first discuss briefly the numerous raids by Islamic invaders, and the Hindu efforts to rrepel them for almost 500 years. The armies of Islam after the death of its prophet in AD 632, conquered the Byzantine provinces of Palestine and Syria after a six month’s campaign in AD 636-637, the Sassanid empire of Persia which included Iraq, Iran, and Khorasan in AD 637, and by A.D. 643 the boundaries of the Caliphate touched the frontiers of India. The Turkish speaking territories of Inner Mongolia, Bukhara, Tashkand, and Samarkand, etc. were annexed by AD 650, while the Byzantine province of Egypt fell in AD 640-641,  and the Arab armies reached the Atlantic and crossed over into Spain in AD 709. These were not mere territorial conquests but in which people of different creeds and races such as Syrians, Persians, Berbers, Turks and others were all rapidly Islamised and their language and culture Arabicised. [“Fight and slay the pagans wherever you find them, and seize them, beleaguer them and lie in wait for them in every stratagem till they repeat and establish regular prayers and practise regular charity. -Quran, 11.5]. The same Islamic armies, however, had to struggle for 69 long years to make their first effective breach in the borders of India. In the next three centuries, they pushed forward in several provinces of Northern and Western India. But at the end of it all, India was far from being conquered militarily or assimilated culturally.

The Arab invasion of Sindh started soon after their first two naval expeditions against Thana on the coast of Maharashtra and Broach on the coast of Gujarat, had been repulsed in the reign of Caliph Umar (AD 634-644). The expedition against Debal in Sindh met the same fate “The leader of the Arab army, Mughairah, was defeated and killed. Umar decided to send another army by land against Makran which was at that time a part of the kingdom of Sindh. But he was advised by the governor of Iraq that “he should think no more of Hind”. The next Caliph, Usman (AD 646-656), followed the same advice and refrained from sending any expedition against Sindh, either by land or by sea. The fourth Caliph, Ali (AD 656-661), sent an expedition by land in AD 660. But the leader of this expedition and “those who were with him, saving a few, were slain in the land of Kikan in the year AH 42 (AD 662)”. Muawiyah, the succeeding Caliph (AD 661-680), sent as many as six expeditions by land. All of them were repulsed with great slaughter except the last one which succeeded in occupying Makran in AD 680. For the next 28 years, the Arabs did not dare send another army against Sindh. The next expedition was despatched to take Debal in AD 708. Its two successive commanders, Ubaidullah and Budail, were killed and the Arab army was routed. When Hajjaj, the governor of Iraq, asked the Caliph for permission to send another expedition, the Caliph wrote back: “This affair will be a source of great anxiety and so we must put it off, for every time an army goes, [vast] numbers of Mussalmans are killed.  So think no more of such a design.”
Hajjaj spent the next four years in equipping an army more formidable than any which had so far been sent against Sindh. While sending off his nephew as well as son-in-law, Muhammad bin Qasim, with this army in AD 712, Hajjaj said: “I swear by Allah that I am determined to spend the whole wealth of Iraq, that is in my possession, on this expedition.” Muhammad was successful in overcoming the fierce resistance he met at every step in his progress through Sindh. By AD 713 he had occupied the whole of this province as well as Multan. He was helped to a certain extent by the treachery of some merchants and local governors at a few places. But as soon as he was recalled in AD 714, “the people of India rebelled, and threw off their yoke, and the country from Debalpur to the Salt Sea only remained under the dominions of the Khalifa.” This was only a narrow coastal strip.
Subsequently, the Islamic armies reconquered Sindh, and advanced through Rajputana upto Ujjain in the east and Broach in the south. Their advance to the south was signally checked by the Chalukya ruler of Lat (S. Gujarat), Pulakesin Avani-Janasraya. The Navasari inscription (A.D. 738) records that Pulakesin defeated a Tajika (Arab) army which had defeated the kingdoms of Sindhu, Cutch, Saurashtra, Cavotaka, Maurya and Gurjara and advanced as far south as Navasari where this prince was ruling at this time. The prince’s heroic victory earned him the titles of ‘solid Pillar of Dakshinapatha (Dakshinapatha-sadhata) and the Repeller of the Unrepellable (Anivarttaka-nivartayi)’. The Gwalior inscription of the Gurjara-Pratihar King, Bhoja I, tells us that Nagabhatta I, the founder of the family who ruled in Avanti (Malwa) around A.D. 725, ‘defeated the army of a powerful Mlechha ruler who invaded his dominions’. The Gurjara-Pratiharas, known to the Arab historians as ‘kings of Jurz’, are sometimes acknowledged by them as ‘Among the princes of India there is no greater foe of the Mohammaden faith than he’.

The Arabs also made advances to the north of Sindh into the Punjab and towards Kashmir. Here they were blocked and driven back by Lalitaditya Muktapida (AD 724-760) of Kashmir. He was in alliance with Yasovarman of Central India. “He is said to have ordered the Turushkas to shave off half of their heads as a symbol of their submission.” Biladhuri wrote that “the Mussalmans retired from several parts of India and left some of their positions, nor have they upto the present advanced so far as in days gone by”. Further, “The people of India returned to idolatry with the exception of the inhabitants of Qasbah. A place of refuge to which the Moslems might flee was not to be found, so he [Arab governor] built on the further side of the lake, where it borders on al-Hind, a city which he named at-Mahfuzah [the protected] establishing it as a place of refuge for them, where they should be secure and making it a capital.”

Arab travellers to India of the 10th century all speak of only two independent Arab principalities with Multan and Mansurah as their capitals. The Pratihara kings waged constant war against the “Arab prince of Multan, and with the Mussalmans, his subjects on the frontier”. Multan would have been lost by the Arabs but for a Hindu temple. Al-Istakhri wrote about AD 951 that in Multan “there is an idol held in great veneration by the Hindus and every year people from distant parts undertake pilgrimages to it… When the Indians make war upon them and endeavour to seize the idol, the inhabitants [Arabs] bring it out pretending that they will break it and burn it. Upon this the Indians retire, otherwise they would destroy Multan.” Thus even after 300 years of continuouis efforts from the first raid into Broach, the Arab dominion in India was limited to the relatively small states of Multan and Mansurah. And here they only survived by utilizing the Hindu idols. The Arab conquest of other countries, outside India, had been followed by wholesale conversions and replacement of local institutions by Islamic ones. In Central Asia, the idolaters for whom, unlike the People of the Book protected under subjugation and Jezia, the choice given by Islam was between death or Islam, had been rooted out. The failure of the Arabs in Sind however is proved by the fact that even after Debal where the temples were demolished and mosques founded, a general massacre endured for three days, prisoners were taken captive; women raped and enslaved and exported for the pleasures of the Muslim religious leadership and immense plunder was collected,  the Hindus rebuild their temples and performed their worship and the three per cent which had been allowed to the priests under the former government was not discontinued.

Many historians, particularly the apologists for Islam, have presented this expediency as a proof of Islamic liberalism under the early Arabs. But the military and political leaders always knew when and where to make a compromise in the interests of self-preservation, and till the next stage of aggrandisement arrived in the vicissitudes of war. The same story was repeated by the Hindu kingdoms of Kabul (Kapisa) and Zabul (Jabal) which lay to the north-west of Sindh, and which the Islamic armies had started attacking soon after they annexed Khorasan in AD 643. It was in AD 650 that the first Islamic army penetrated deep into Zabul by way of Seistan, which at that time was a part of India territorially as well as culturally. The struggle was intense and protracted with the Islamic army defeated and driven out after suffering heavy losses. Another attack followed in AD 653. The Arab general, Abdul Rahman, was able to conquer Zabul and levy tribute from Kabul. The king of Kabul was reluctant in paying tribute regularly. Finally, another Arab general, Yazid ibn Ziyad who had been the governor of Seistan for some time, attempted retribution in AD 683. He was killed by the Hindus, and his army was put to flight with great slaughter. The Arabs lost Seistan also, and had to pay 5,00,000 dirhams to get one of their generals, Abu Ubaida, released.

The Arabs recovered Seistan some time before AD 692. Its new governor, Abdullah, invaded Kabul. The Hindus trapped the Arab army in the mountain passes after allowing it to advance unopposed for some distance. Abdullah agreed to cease hostilities, and the king of Kabul agreed to renew payment of an annual tribute, but both the treaty as well as Abdullah was dismissed by the Caliph. The war against Kabul was renewed in AD 695 when Hajjaj became the governor of Iraq. He sent an army under Ubaidullah, the new governor of Seistan. Ubaidullah was defeated and forced to retreat after leaving his three sons as hostages and promising that “he shall not fight as long as he was governor”. Once again, the treaty was denounced by the Caliph, and another general, Shuraih, was sent to advance upon Kabul. He was killed by the Hindus, and his army suffered huge losses as it retreated through the desert of Bust. Ubaidullah died of grief. In the next round, Hajjaj commissioned Abdul Rahman once again who made some conquests but could not consolidate his hold. Hajjaj threatened to supersede him inciting Abdul Rahman to revolt and enter into a treaty with the Hindu king to “carry arms against his master”. The treaty did not work, and Abdul Rahman committed suicide. The Hindu king, however, continued the war. Masudi, the Arab historian, mentions a prince in the valley of the Indus who after having subjugated Eastern Persia, advanced to the bank of the Tigris and Euphrates. Hajjaj had to make peace according to which the Hindu king was entitled to keep his kingdom in exchange for an annual tribute. The Hindu king, however, stopped payment in the reign of Caliph Sulayman (AD 715-717). Some attempts to force him into submission were made in the reign of Caliph Al-Mansur (AD 745-775). But they met with only partial success, and we find the Hindus ruling over Kabul and Zabul in the year AD 867. The kingdom of Kabul suffered a temporary eclipse in AD 870. The Turkish adventurer, Yaqub bin Layth, who started his career as a robber in Seistan and later on founded the Saffarid dynasty of Persia, sent a message to the king of Kabul that he wanted to come and pay his homage. The king was deceived into welcoming Yaqub and a band of the latter’s armed followers in the court at Kabul. Yaqub bowed his head as if to do homage but he raised the lance and thrust it into the back of Rusal so that he died on the spot. A Turkish army then invaded the Hindu kingdoms of both Kabul and Zabul. The king of Zabul was killed in the battle, and the population was converted to Islam by force. But the succeeding Hindu king of Kabul who had meanwhile transferred his capital to Udbhandapur on the Indus, recovered Kabul after the Saffarid dynasty declined. Masudi who visited the Indus Valley in AD 915 designates the prince who ruled at Kabul by the same title as he held when the Arabs penetrated for the first time into this region. The Hindus lost Kabul for good only in the closing decade of the 10th century. In AD 963 Alaptigin, a Turkish slave of the succeeding Samanid dynasty, had been able to establish an independent Muslim principality in Kabul with his capital at Ghazni. It was his general and successor, Subuktigin, who conquered Kabul after a struggle spread over twenty years. The Hindus under king Jayapala of Udbhandapur tried to recapture Kabul in AD 986-987. A confederate Hindu army to which the Rajas of Delhi, Ajmer, Kalinjar and Kanauj has contributed troops and money, advanced into the heartland of the Islamic kingdom of Ghazni. According to Utbi, the battle lasted several days and the warriors of Subuktigin, including prince Mahmood, were reduced to despair. But a snow-storm and rains upset the plans of Jayapala who opened negotiations for peace. He sent the following message to Subuktigin: ‘You have heard and know the nobleness of Indians – they fear not death or destruction… In affairs of honour and renown we would place ourselves upon the fire like roast meat, and upon the dagger like the sunrays.’” But this peace treaty was short lived and  the Muslims resumed the offensive leading to the Hindus being defeated and driven out of Kabul. By the time of Ghori, the Islamic armies had struggled successively for nearly 540 years in order to seize the heartland of India but they had succeeded only in occupying the frontier areas of Kabul, Zabul, the North-West Frontier Province, Multan, and parts of Punjab and Sindh. This was rather small compared to the area under Islam, outside of India.
The Yaminis (Ghaznavids) were replaced in Afghanistan by the new dynasty of Shansabanis (Ghurids) around the time that Vigraharaja (also called Visaladeva) was recovering his lands from the Muslim possessions in the Punjab. Prithiviraja II, the successor to Vigraharaja, had placed his maternal uncle, Kilhan, in charge of the fort at Asika (Hansi). His Hansi stone inscription of AD 1168 describes the Hammira (Amir) as a “dagger pointed at the whole world”. The flag that fluttered at the gateway of this fort, we are told, “defied the Hammira, as it were”. Another line in this inscription compares Prithiviraja II to Sri Rama, and Kilhana to Hanumana. Besides the Chauhans of Delhi and Ajmer, India at that time had two more powerful kingdoms positioned against the Muslims – the Chaulukyas (Solankis) of Gujarat and the Gahadavals of Kanauj. Muhammad Ghuri was installed at Ghazni in AD 1173 by his elder brother, Ghiyasuddin, who had himself ascended the throne at Ghur in AD 1163. The task of conquering India was assigned to Muhammad Ghuri while his brother was extending the Ghurid empire towards the west. The Ghaznavids were still in possession of the provinces they had been able to conquer in north-western India.
Ghuri bypassed the weaker Gaznavid rulers in Punjab, [apparently not to alert the Chauhans beyond Sutlej by attacking the Gaznavids] entered India through the Gomal pass and took Multan from the Qaramatih chiefs in AD 1175. He intrigued with the wife of the Bhatti Rai of Uch and promised to marry her if she poisoned her husband. Firishta records that “she declined the honour for herself but secured it for her daughter, caused her husband to be put to death and surrendered the fort”. Ghuri’s way to Gujarat now lay open by way of Western Rajasthan. Prithviraj III [the famous later opponent of Ghuri], had ascended the throne of Ajmer the previous year and was pressed by his Chief Minister, Kadambavasa, not to intevene. Muhammad Ghuri advanced upon Gujarat in AD 1178 with a large army. Merutunga writes in his Prabandhachintamami that “the mother of young Mularaja, queen Naikidevi, the daughter of Parmardin of Goa, taking her son in her lap, led the Chalukya army against the Turushkas and defeated them at Gadararaghatta near the foot of Mount Abu”. Mularaja II was a minor at that time. Firishta records that the king of Gujarat “advanced with an army to resist the Mohammedans and defeated them with great slaughter. They suffered many hardships before they reached Ghazni.” In Sanskrit inscriptions of Gujarat, Mularaja is invariably mentioned as the “conqueror of Garjanakas [dwellers of Ghazni]”. One inscription states that “during the reign of Mularaja even a woman could defeat the Hammira [Amir]”.

Muhammad Ghuri did not lead another expedition against the Hindus for the next 12 years but concentrated on occupying the Ghaznavid possessions in India till he reached Lahore in AD 1186. He was opposed by the Chauhan ruler of Ajmer (AD 1177-1192)  Prithiviraja III, whose feudatory, Govindaraja, was stationed at Delhi. Prithviraja-vijaya tells us that the Chauhan ruler was aware of a “beef-eating Mlechha named Ghori in the north-west who had captured Garjani [Ghazni]”. Hammira-mahakavya of Nayachandra Suri states that Prithviraja defeated Muhammad Ghuri at least seven times while Prabandha-chintamaNi of Merutunga and Prithvirajaraso of Chand Bardoi puts the number of Prithviraja’s victories at twenty-one. Muslim historians – Minhaj, Firishta, and others – on the other hand, mention only two battles between these two rulers, one in AD 1191 and the other a year later. Dasharatha Sharma reconciles these two versions by suggesting that the Ghorid generals began raiding the Chahmana [Chauhan] territories soon after the occupation of Lahore in AD 1186 but were beaten back by the Chahmana forces. Muslim historians have ignored them altogether.

It was only in AD 1191 that Muhammad Ghuri gathered sufficient forces to advance against the fortress of Tabarhindah (Sirhind) and took that stronghold. This was a frontier fortress held by a Chauhan feudatory. Hearing of the rather provocative public rape and enslavement of women from messengers and fleeing refugees who swarmed to Delhi, Prithviraja now advanced with his own army and met Muhammad Ghuri at Tarain. Before the onslaught of the Chahmana army, the right and left flanks of the Muslim army broke down and took to flight. The Sultan might have fallen off his horse had not a Khalji youth recognised him and carried him out of the field of battle. The Muslim army, losing sight of their leader, fled headlong from the battlefield and did not draw rein till they had reached a place considered safe from pursuit. The Sultan was also brought there in a litter of broken spears. From there, they returned to their own dominion. The Rajputs simply recovered Sirhind but did not pursue Ghori. Before he reached Tarain again next year  Muhammad Ghuri sent a messenger from Lahore asking Prithviraja “to embrace the Musalman faith and acknowledge his supremacy.” Firishta reproduces the letter which Prithviraja wrote to him from the field of battle: “To the bravery of our soldiers we believe you are no stranger, and to our great superiority in numbers which daily increases, your eyes bear witness… You will repent in time of the rash resolution you have taken, and we shall permit you to retreat in safety; but if you have determined to brave your destiny, we have sworn by our gods to advance upon you with our rank-breaking elephants, our plain-trampling horses, and blood-thirsty soldiers, early in the morning to crush the army which your ambition has led to ruin.” Ghori, as is typical in Muslim strategic behaviour towards non-Muslims, replied: “I have marched into India at the command of my brother whose general I am. Both honour and duty bind me to exert myself to the utmost… but I shall be glad to obtain a truce till he is informed of the situation and I have received his answer.” The Hindus fell into the trap. Firishta records “The Sultan made preparations for battle… and when the Rajputs had left their camp for purposes of obeying calls of nature, and for the purpose of performing ablutions, he entered the plain with his ranks marshalled. Although the unbelievers were amazed and confounded, still in the best manner they could, they stood the fight.” The battle raged upto afternoon, when the Hindus found themselves tired and exhausted. They had not eaten even a breakfast. The fight was finished when Ghuri threw in his reserve division constituted by the flower of his army. The Rajputs were defeated, and suffered great slaughter.

The Muslims now occupied Delhi and marched into Ajmer. Prithviraja who had been made captive and who refused to swear submission, was brutally tortured according to the Muslim chroniclers and beheaded. Rajput resistance was still continuing in the countryside. Ghuri realized that his victory by deception was now well known among the Hindus and their combined forces could make his position precarious and tried to play for time by installing a son of Prithviraj as the new king. Hariraja, the younger brother of Prithviraja, reoccupied Ajmer in AD 1193.  He also planned to attack and take Delhi again but failed because Ghuri had assembled another big army for his march on the Gahadaval kingdom of Kanauj. Hariraja committed suicide out of apparently shame from being unable to prevent the slaughter of his countrymen and had been unable to redeem his own pledge.
Jayachandra, the Gahadavala ruler of Kanauj, had not only kept away from the battles raging to his south and west; he had also rejoiced in the defeat of the Chauhans, the traditional rivals of the Gahadavalas in his bid for control over Northern India. It was his turn to face Ghuri in AD 1194 at Chandawar. The battle was fiercely contested and the Gahadavals led by Jayachandra almost carried the day when the latter seated on a lofty howdah received a deadly wound from an arrow and fell from his seat to the earth. The Muslims were able to plunder Kanauj and Asni where Jayachandra had kept his treasure. But Rajput resistance continued till Jayachandra’s son, Harishchandra, recovered Kanauj, Jaunpur and Mirzapur in AD 1197. Kanauj seems to have stayed independent till the reign of Iltumish who ultimately conquered it from Harish Chandra’s successor, Adakkamalla. Bihar, which had been a bone of contention between the Gahadavals and the Senas of Bengal, was conquered unopposed by Bakhtiyar Khalji, a general of Ghuri, in AD 1202, and he reached Navadvipa, the capital of the Senas, a year later probably using deception and a surprise raid in the guise of Muslim horse-traders.  The Senas fled to Sonargaon in East Bengal where we hear of at least two further Senas, Vishwaroop and Abhiroop or Keshav ruling in Estern Bengal from their capital and naval base at the time, Bikramanipur.

Muslims had occupied the big cities and the fortified towns but the countryside was in revolt. The first to deliver a counter-attack were the Mher Rajputs around Ajmer. They rose in AD 1195 and appealed to the Chaulukya ruler of Gujarat for help. The help came. Qutbuddin Aibak, another general of Ghuri, was in charge of Ajmer at that time. According to Hasan Nizami, a contemporary historian, “The action lasted the whole day and the next morning that immense army of Naharwala [Anhilawara, capital of Gujarat] came to the assistance of the vanguard, slew many of the Musalmans, wounded their commander, pursued them to Ajmer and encamped within one parasang of the place.” Aibak rushed messengers to Ghazni, crying for help. “It was only after a very large army was despatched to reinforce him, that Aibak could be rescued.” Aibak, in turn, invaded the kingdom of Gujarat in AD 1197. The Chalukyan army again faced the Muslims at the foot of Mount Abu where Ghuri had been defeated in AD 1178. The Muslim army became nervous and dared not attack. Hasan Nizami indicates that the Islamic forces advanced under the cover of darkness of night and caught the Chalukyan army unprepared at dawn. The Hindus were defeated this time. Anhilawara was occupied and sacked. But the Muslims could not hold Gujarat for long. In the next four years, Bhimadeva II, the Chaulukyan king, recovered the whole of his kingdom from the invaders and was back in Anhilawara in AD 1201. Arnoraja, the Vaghela feudatory of Bhima Deva, met his death in this campaign. But his son, Lavanaprasada, won a singular victory at Stambha, modern Cambay. Sridhara, the governor of Devapattan, inflicted another crushing defeat on the Muslims. How and when this army of occupation was driven out of Gujarat is nowhere mentioned by Muslim historians. It is precisely here that the two inscriptions of Dabhoi and Verawal refer to the heroic struggles of two generals of the Chaulukya king, Lavanaprasada and Sridhara. In the east Bakhtiyar Khalji could not conquer East Bengal. The Madanpara and Edilpur inscriptions of Visvarupa Sena and Keshava Sena, the successors of Lakshmana Sena, speak of victories won by them over the yavanas. Hodivala points out that “we possess epigraphic evidence of Lakshmana Sena’s descendants having ruled for at least three generations at Vikramapur near Sonargaon in Dacca”. Blocked by the Senas from East Bengal, Bakhtiyar Khalji advanced into Assam. But his army was destroyed by the king of Kamarupa. He was able to escape with his own life and about a hundred followers. But his army was slaughtered so that he fell sick due to excessive grief and died or was murdered in sick bed by a Muslim rival.

part 12: economic decline under Islam – the fate of producers

Part 1: enslavement of non-Muslims

part 4: myth of role of Sufis in conversion


Make a Comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

2 Responses to “How Islam came to India and why now it needs to go from India -11: economic decline under Islam – the strange case of the horse”

RSS Feed for Dikgaj’s Weblog Comments RSS Feed

Cure for Jehadi mentality to bring peace,

Just read articles of a scholar muslim Ali Sina in

FAITHFREEDOM.ORG and find peace.

very well written article. Makes me sick of the wa indian authors and the way they write history. feeling produd that i didnt pursue history, but science for my career

Where's The Comment Form?

Liked it here?
Why not try sites on the blogroll...

%d bloggers like this: