The Story of Islamic Imperialism - II

The Mughal Empire

The Story of Islamic Imperialism II

The Mughal Empire

Babur (1483 -1531)

The foundation for the empire was established around the early 1500s by the Timurid prince Babur, when he took control of the Doab and eastern regions of Khorasan, which controlled the fertile Sindh region and the lower valley of the Indus River. Zahir ud-din Muhammad Jalal ud-din Babur (February 23, 1483 — January 5,1531) was a Muslim conqueror from Central Asia who, following a series of setbacks, finally succeeded in laying the basis for the Mughal dynasty of India. He was a direct descendant of Timur through his father, and a descendant also of Genghis Khan through his mother.

While the king of Kabul was preparing for the realization of his long-cherished dream of the conquest of Hindustan, the Hindustan of Ibrahim Lodi offered him the most favourable circum¬stances. Outside the Lodi kingdom there were the Muslim king¬doms of Multan, Sind, Gujarat, Malwa, Khandesh, and Bengal In Northern India while in the Deccan the Bahmani empire had been split into five States, viz., Berar, Bidar, Ahmadnagar, Bijapur and Golconda. The notable Hindu States were Rajasthan and Orissa in the north and Vijyanagar in the south. The Muslim kingdoms were very weak because of their internal divisions and mutual jea¬lousies. The Rajput confederacy led by Rana Sanga of Mewar had grown to be a great political force, almost ready to make a bid for the Delhi empire. The great expansion of the king¬dom of Vijyanagar under Krishnadeva Raya (1509-1530), who had humbled the power of Orissa, caused not a little anxiety to the Muslim powers of the Deccan. Such was the Indian scene when Babur seriously turned to invade the country.
Babur claimed to be the true and rightful Monarch of the lands of the Lodi dynasty. He believed himself the rightful heir to the throne of Timur. Following the unsurprising reluctance of Ibrahim to accept the terms of this "offer," and though in no hurry to launch an actual invasion, Babur made several preliminary incursions and also seized Kandahar.
However, while the Timurids were united, the Lodhi armies were far from unified. Ibrahim was widely detested, even amongst his nobles, and it was several of his Afghan nobles who were to invite Babur's intervention. Babur assembled a 12,000-man army, and advanced into India. This number actually increased as Babur advanced, as members of the local population joined the invading army.
Ibrahim Lodhi advanced against him with 100,000 soldiers and 100 elephants; and though Babur's army had grown, it was still less than half the size of his opponents, possibly as few as 25,000 men. This was to be their main engagement, the First battle of Panipat, and was fought on April 21, 1526. Ibrahim Lodhi was slain and his army was routed; Babur quickly took possession of both Delhi and Agra.
That very day Babur ordered Humayun to ride to Agra (Ibrahim's former capital) and secure its national treasures and resources from looting. Humayun found the family of the Raja of Gwalior there — the Raja himself having died at Panipat — sheltering from the invaders, fearing the dreadful nature of the 'Mongols' from the stories that preceded their arrival. After their safety was guaranteed they gave Humayun their family's most valuable jewel, a very large diamond, which some believe to be the diamond which came to be called the Koh-i-Noor or "Mountain of Light'. It is thought that they did this to retain their Kingdom. Whether it was because of the gift or not, the family remained the rulers of Gwalior, though now under their new rulers the Timurids. Babur then marched to Agra to join Humayun.
Battles with the Rajputs
Although master of Delhi and Agra, Babur records in his memoirs that he had sleepless nights because of continuing worries over Rana Sanga, the Rajput ruler of Mewar. This undisputed leader of the Rajput confederacy was an indefatigable fighter, with one arm and one eye lost and eighty scars in his body.
The Rajput lords had, prior to Babur's intervention, succeeded in conquering some of the Sultanate's territory. The Rajputs had possibly heard word of the heavy casualties inflicted by Lodhi on Babur's forces, and believed that they could capture Delhi, and possibly all Hindustan. They hoped to bring it back into Hindu Rajput hands for the first time in almost three hundred and fifty years since Sultan Shah-al Din Muhammad of Ghor defeated the Rajput Chauhan King Prithviraj III in 1192.
Despite the unwillingness of his troops to engage in further warfare, Babur was convinced he could overcome the Rajputs and gain complete control over Hindustan. He made great propaganda of the fact that for the first time he was to battle non-Muslims, the Kafir, to the extent of taking a vow to abstain from drinking (a common fraction among his people) for the rest of his life to win divine favour, and declared the war against, Rana Sanga. Rana Sanga offered stiff resistance but was defeated due to treachery within his own ranks.
Babur now assumed the title of ‘Ghazi’.
Babur had little re¬gard for the sanctity of human life: the massacre of Bajaur, the cold-blooded murder of prisoners, and the inhuman punishments which are referred to in his Memoirs only prove that he inherited the Mongol ferocity and Turkish savagery of his ancestors.

His face, presented by himself in his Tuzuk-i-Bãburi, suffers irreparable damage if it is denuded of the rich hues of horrible cruelties in which he habitually indulged. The lurid details he provides of his repeated massacres of the infidels, leave no doubt that he was mighty proud of his performance. He was particularly fond of raising higher and higher towers of Hindu heads cut off during and after every battle he fought with them. He loved to sit in his royal tent to watch this spectacle. The prisoners were brought before him and butchered by his “brave” swordsmen. On one occasion, the ground flowed with so much blood and became so full of quivering carcases that his tent had to be moved thrice to a higher level.

Humayun (1530 - 1556)

Babur's son Humayun succeeded him in 1530 but suffered major reversals at the hands of the Pashtun Sher Shah Suri and effectively lost most of the fledgling empire before it could grow beyond a minor regional state. From 1540 Humayun became a ruler in exile, reaching the Court of the Safavid rule in 1554 while his force still controlled some fortresses and small regions. But when the Pashtuns fell into disarray with the death of Sher Shah Suri, Humayun returned with a mixed army, raised more troops and managed to reconquer Delhi in 1555.

Sher Shah Suri (1538 - 1545)

Sher Shah Sur’s name is associated in our textbooks with the Grand Trunk Road from Peshawar to Dacca, with caravanserais, and several other schemes of public welfare. It is true that he was not a habitual persecutor of Hindus before he became the emperor at Delhi. But he did not betray Islam when he became the supreme ruler.

The test came at Raisen in 1543 AD. Shaykh Nurul Haq records in Zubdat-ul-Tawãrîkh as follows: “In the year 950 H., Puranmal held occupation of the fort of Raisen” He had 1000 women in his harem… and amongst them several Musulmanis whom he made to dance before him. Sher Khan with Musulman indignation resolved to conquer the fort. After he had been some time engaged in investing it, an accommodation was proposed and it was finally agreed that Puranmal with his family and children and 4000 Rajputs of note should be allowed to leave the fort unmolested. Several men learned in the law (of Islam) gave it as their opinion that they should all be slain, notwithstanding the solemn engagement which had been entered into. Consequently, the whole army, with the elephants, surrounded Puranmal’s encampment. The Rajputs fought with desperate bravery and after killing their women and children and burning them, they rushed to battle and were annihilated to a man.

Akbar (1556 - 1605)

Akbar succeeded his father on 14 February, 1556, while in the midst of a war against Sikandar Shah Suri for the throne of Delhi. Humayun had hardly any time free from troubles to devote to the service of Islam. But his son, Akbar, made quite a good start as a ghãzî. He stabbed the half-dead Himu with his sword after the Second Battle of Panipat.

The ritual was then followed by many more “brave warriors” of Islam led by Bairam Khan who drove their swords in the dead body. In 1568 AD Akbar ordered a general massacre at Chittor after the fort had fallen. Abul Fazl records in his Akbar-Nãma as follows. “There were 8,000 fighting Rajputs collected in the fortress, but there were more than 40,000 peasants who took part in watching and serving. From early dawn till midday the bodies of those ill-starred men were consumed by the majesty of the great warrior. Nearly 30,000 men were killed” When Sultan Alauddin (Khalji) took the fort after six months and seven days; the peasantry were not put to death as they had not engaged in fighting. But on this occasion they had shown great zeal and activity. Their excuses after the emergence of victory were of no avail, and orders were given for a general massacre.

Akbar thus improved on the record of Alauddin Khalji. Watching the war and serving the warriors were re-interpreted as acts of war! To top it all, Akbar travelled post-haste to Ajmer where he offered profuse thanks to Allah and the Prophet, and his (Akbar’s) patron saint, Muinuddin Chishti, and issued a Fathnãma in which many appropriate verses of the Quran were cited in order to prove that he had followed faithfully in the footsteps of the Prophet.

Akbar had three sons, two of whom died when they were young. The last prince known as Prince Jahangir, was in constant revolt with his father. These regular battles against his own son proved detrimental for his health and the great Mughal Emperor Akbar breathed his last in the year 1605.

At Allahabad Salim gave himself up to opium and wine and committed the worst bar¬barities; he had the news-writer who reported his misdeeds flayed alive in his presence and one of his associates was castrated and another beaten to death.

The other son of the emperor, Daniyial, who had just married a daughter of the 'Adil Shah of Bijapur, drank himself to death at Burhanpur in April, 1604.

Akbar him¬self set out for Allahabad to punish his recalcitrant son, but he had to return to Agra due to the serious illness of his mother who died on 10 September. Akbar deeply mourned her loss and discon¬tinued his movement against Salim who, by the persuasion of Mir Sadr Jahan as well as due to the necessity for remaining at court to counteract the intrigues of Khusrav's partisans, agreed to sub¬mit and on 16 November arrived at court with rich presents for his father. Akbar welcomed him at the public audience but after¬wards reproached him for his misconduct and imprisoned him in a room for ten days during which he was deprived of opium and wine. Thus ends the rebellion of Salim whom Akbar.

Meanwhile at court there was a strong party led by Khan A'zam and Raja Man Singh who favoured the succession of Salim's son Khusrav and induced Akbar to set aside the claim of his father. Khusrav was Khan A'zam's son-in-law and Raja Man Singh's nephew. Besides, Salim's misconduct had created an unfavourable opinion of him as heir to the throne.


THE MYTH OF AKBAR
It is curious but true that the very historians who refuse to see the pre-Akbar period of Muslim rule as a nightmare for Hindus, hail Akbar as the harbinger of a dazzling dawn for the same Hindus. They point out as to how Akbar abolished the pilgrim tax and the jizyah, how he appointed Hindus to high positions, and how he extended to them this or that concession which they had not enjoyed earlier. One may very well ask these worthies that if these discriminatory taxes and disabilities did not exist earlier, how come you find Akbar freeing the Hindus from them? All that one is bound to get by way of an answer will be another bundle of casuistry.
On the other hand, most Muslim historians and theologians frown upon Akbar as a villain in the history of Islam in India. Ishtiaq Husain Qureshi who believes that Hindus were far more happy under Muslim rule than under that of their own princes, accuses Akbar of jeopardising Pax Moslemaica by tempering with the established tenets of Muslim polity. Maulana Abul Kalam Azad has written that if Ahmad Sirhindi had not come to the rescue, Akbar had almost finished Islam in India.
One has, therefore, to go to the original sources in order to find the truth about Akbar. The story which these sources tell can be summed up as follows:
1. There was nothing Indian about Akbar except that he lived his life in India, fought his wars in India, built his empire in India, and dragged many Indian women into his harem. He knew nothing about India’s spiritual traditions, or India’s history, or India’s culture except for what he heard from some native sycophants who visited his court for very mundane reasons. He was illiterate. No Hindu saint or scholar worth his salt cared to meet or educate him about things Indian.
2. Akbar was every inch an Islamic bandit from abroad who conquered a large part of India mainly on the strength of Muslim swordsmen imported from Central Asia and Persia. He took great pride in proclaiming that he was a descendant of Taimur and Babur, and longed to recover the homelands of his forefathers in Transoxiana. He continued to decorate his name with the Islamic honorific ghãzî which he had acquired at the commencement of his reign by beheading the half-dead Himu. In his letters to the Sharifs of Mecca and the Uzbek king of Bukhara, he protested that he was not only a good Muslim but also a champion of Islam, and that the orthodox Ulama who harboured doubts about him did not understand his game of consolidating a strong and durable Islamic empire in India.
3. The concessions which Akbar made to Hindus were not motivated by any benevolence towards Hindus or Hinduism on his part. He was out to win Hindu support in his fight with two inveterate foes of every Muslim empire-builder - the Muslim chieftains and the die-hard Ulama. Alauddin Khalji and Muhammad bin Tughlaq had faced the same foes earlier, but failed to overcome them because they could not break out of the closed circle of the foreign Muslim fraternity in India. Akbar succeeded in fixing both the foes because he tried a new method, and discovered very soon that it worked. He fixed the Muslim chieftains with the help of Rajput princes and their retinues. He fixed the Ulama partly by making them fall foul of each other in the Ibadat Khana, and partly by flirting with jogis and Jains munis and Christian missionaries in order to frighten them. They had nothing except royal patronage to fatten upon.
4. Nor did he have to pay a heavy price for Hindu support. Fortunately for him, he started functioning at a time when Hindu resistance to Islamic imperialism stood at a low ebb except in small pockets like Mewar and Gondwana. Hindu resistance had been led so far by the Rajput princes. But numerous wars fought by them with Muslim marauders for several centuries had exhausted their manpower as well as material resources. Akbar discovered it very soon that he could buy Rajput help in exchange for a few gestures which might have sounded ominous to orthodox Islam at that time but which proved only superficial in the long run. In fact, when one comes to think of it all, Hindus had to pay a very heavy price for those gestures from Akbar. He demanded Hindu princesses for his harem, which meant surrender of Hindu honour.
It is true that the main fault lay with the Hindus for not being able to see through Akbar’s camouflage, and for helping him in consolidating an imperial power which Islam had never known in India in the pre-Akbar period of Muslim rule.

JAHANGIR

Jahangir was primarily a drunkard and a sadist scoundrel. The reign which opened with Jahangir was marred by his rebellion son, Khusrav. Khusrav wished to ascend the throne after Akbar. So he escaped from Agra on 6 April, 1606. He made his way to the Punjab, raising troops on the way. Jahangir followed Khusrav in person. Khusrav had neither the capacity to organize a successful revolt nor moral and material sup¬port of any influential party in the State. His army, ill led, ill equipped and ill organized, was defeated.

Khusrav, trembling and weeping, wanted to fall on the feet of Jahangir, who sternly ordered him to stand in his place, and put him in confinement. He further directed a double row of stakes to be set up from the garden to the city and several hundred of the rebels were impaled thereon. Two leading rebels were punished more severely. Hasan Beg was sewn up in the fresh hide of an ox and 'Abdur-Rahlm in that of an ass. Others were let off with lighter punishments.

Arjun, the fifth Guru of the Sikhs, an innocent helper of Khusrav, was unwittingly drawn into the whirlpool of this palace intrigue. Khusrav on his way to Lahore had stayed at Taran and was well received by the Guru who felt compassion for him and gave him Rs. 5,000. The Guru was at first fined by the Government, but as he refused to pay the fine, he was sentenced to death. The death of the Guru sowed the seeds of hatred be¬tween the Sikhs and the Muslims which the passage of time did not diminish. The execution of the Guru was not an act of religious persecution, but it was politically unwise and the Mughuls paid a heavy penalty for it.

According to other accounts, he asked the Guru to include some sûrahs of the Quran in the Ãdi Grantha, which the Guru refused to do. In the eighth year of his reign, he destroyed the temple of Bhagwat at Ajmer.

Shaikh Ahmad Sirhindi (1546-1624), the head of the Naqsh-i-bandi order, was extremely jealous of Guru Arjun's popularity and power. He greatly incited Jahanglr, when he halted at Sirhind in pursuit of Khusrav, against the Guru.

Mohsin Fani, who was born only nine years later, in 1615 A.D., writes that Guru Arjun was tied in the burning sun over hot sand and was tor¬tured. The severest heat of May overhead, hot sand under him and boiling water thrown on his naked body caused blisters all over. On 30 May, 1606, he took leave to bathe in the cold water of the Ravi flowing just below the Fort where he was kept a prisoner. Reciting his own composition, Sukhmani, and repeating God's Name, he had a dip, but being exhausted and famished, he collapsed in water. He was only 42 years old then.

He persecuted the Jains in Gujarat, and ordered that Jain monks should not be seen in his kingdom on pain of death. Finally, he sent Murtaza Khan to Kangra for reducing that city of temples. The siege lasted for 20 months at the end of which he himself went to Kangra for slaughtering cows in that sacred place of Hindus, and building a mosque where none had existed before.

SHAH JAHAN
The pendulum started swinging towards the true spirit of Islam at the very start of Shah Jahan’s reign in 1628 AD. Its outer symbol was the reappearance of the beard on the face of the emperor. Abdul Hamid Lahori records in his Bãdshãhnãma: “It had been brought to the notice of His Majesty that during the late reign many idol temples had been begun, but remained unfinished at Benares, the great stronghold of infidelism. The infidels were now desirous of completing them. His Majesty, the defender of the faith, gave orders that at Benares, and throughout all his dominions in every place, all temples that had been begun should be cast down. It was now reported from the province of Allahabad that 76 temples had been destroyed in the district of Benares.” That was in 1633 AD.
In 1635 AD, Shah Jahan’s soldiers captured some ladies of the royal Bundela family after Jujhar Singh and his sons failed to kill them in the time-honoured Rajput tradition. In the words of Jadunath Sarkar, “Mothers and daughters of kings, they were robbed of their religion and forced to lead the infamous life of the Mughal harem.” Shah Jahan himself made a triumphal entry into Orchha, the capital of the Bundelas, demolished the lofty and massive temple of Bir Singh Dev, and raised a mosque in its place. Two sons and one grandson of Jujhar Singh who were of tender age, were made Musalmans. Another son of Jujhar Singh, Udaybhan, and a minister, Shyam Dawa, had fled to Golconda where they were captured by Qutbul-Mulk and sent to Shah Jahan. According to Bãdshãhnãma again, “Udaybhan and Shyam Dawa, who were of full age, were offered the alternative of Islam or death. They chose the latter and were sent to hell.”
His son Aurangzeb led a rebellion when Shah Jahan became ill in 1657 CE (1067 AH) and publicly executed his brother and the heir apparent Dara Shikoh. Dara was the eldest of the sons and was the favorite of both the Emperor and the people. Shah Jahan was captured by his own son Aurangzeb and was locked away in a fort during the battle for succession to the throne among his sons. Shah Jahan was a helpless spectator as he was too old and weak to put up a fight against the army of his son.
AURANGZEB
As a zealous Sunni Muslim, he believed in the Islamic theory of Kingship according to which the ruler is to enforce strictly the Qur'anic law in the administration of his empire, or in other words, as a pious Muslim, he considered it to be his duty to "exert himself in the path of God" i.e., to carry on jihad (holy war) against infidels and convert his realm from dar-ul-harb (non-Muslim land) to dar-ul-Islam (realm of Islam).
Aurangzeb had started his career as a but-shikan (iconoclast) 13 years before he ascended the throne at Delhi.
In a farman granted to a priest of Banaras in 1659, Aurangzib ‘avowed that his religion forbade him to allow the building of new temples, but did not enjoin the destruction of old ones’. In 1664 he forbade temple to be repaired, and on 9 April,1669, an order was issued to the governors of the provinces “to demolish the schools and the temples of infidels and put down their teaching and religious practices strongly”. Besides innumerable temples throughout the empire, even the famous Hindu temple of Visvanath at Banaras, of Keshav Dev at Mathura, and Somanatha at Patan were destroyed. Even the loyal state of Jaipur was not spared, and 66 temples were razed to the ground at Amber.
In the month of Ramzan (January 1670) commanded the destruction of the Hindu temple of Mathura known by the name of Dehra Keshav Rai, and soon that stronghold of falsehood was levelled with the ground. On the same spot was laid, with great expense, the foundation of a vast mosques… The richly jewelled idols taken from the infidel temples were transferred to Agra and there placed beneath the steps leading to the Nawab Begum Sahib’s (Jahanara’s) mosque in order that they might be pressed under foot by the true believers. Mathura changed its name into Islamabad and was thus called in all official documents.
Maasir-i-Ãlamgîrî adds: “On 25 May 1679 A.D. Khan Jahan Bahadur arrived from Jodhpur bringing with him several cart-loads of idols, taken from the Hindu temples that had been demolished. His Majesty gave him great praise. Most of these idols were adorned with precious stones. It was ordered that some of them should be cast away in the outer offices and the remainder placed beneath the steps of the grand mosque, there to be trampled under foot. There they lay a long time until at last not a vestige of them was left.”
The year 1679 AD was the year of triumph for the “true faith”. On April 2, jizyah was reimposed on Hindus to “spread Islam and put down the practice of infidelism”. The Hindus of Delhi and around organised a protest and blocked Aurangzeb’s way to the Jami Masjid on one Friday. The mighty Mughal Emperor ordered his elephants to be driven through the mass of men. Many were trampled to death.
Various other measures were adopted to put pressure on the Hindus with a view to increasing the number of converts to Islam, By an edict in April, 1665, the customs duty on the commodities brought in for sale was fixed at 2.5 per cent, ad valorem for Muslim merchants and 5 per cent, for the Hindu merchants. In May, 1667, this duty in the case of Muslim traders was abolished, whereas it was retained at the old rate of 5 per cent, on the Hindus.
In 1671 an order was passed for the dismissal of all Hindu head-clerks and accountants, and replacing them by Muslims, but due to paucity of qualified Mohammedans the emperor, later on, allowed half of these posts to be held by the Hindus. In 1668 all Hindu religious fairs were prohibited, and in March 1695 another order was passed forbidding the Hindus to ride in Palkis, on elephant and good horses; they were also forbidden to carry arms.
Aurangzab's policy of intolerance and religious persecution rous¬ed the Sikhs to take up arms against him. He passed an order for the demolition of the Sikh temples and expulsion of the Sikh Guru's agents from the cities. Tegh Bahadura the Sikh Guru, offered open opposition and encouraged the Hindus of Kashmir in their resist¬ance against forcible conversion to Islam.

Aurangzab tried to teach the Sikhs a lesson and summoned Tegh Bahadur to Delhi. When he arrived together with five disciples he was asked to embrace Islam or Death. The Guru replied, “Give thy life, but do not give thy faith” (sar diya par sir nahi diya)
In order to terrorise the Guru into submission, one of his disciples, Bhal Mati Bias, was tied to two posts, and thus making him stand erect, his body was sawn across from head to loins. Another disciple was boiled alive. The other three fled away, but Guru Tegh Bahadur remained firm in his resolve. He was put in chains and then behead¬ed on 11 November, 1675.

The Sikhs were thus turned into bitter enemies of the Mughul government. Govinda Singh the next Guru and the only son of Tegh Bahadur, was determined to avenge his father's cruel murder. He devoted his time and energy in transforming the Sikhs into a military community and instituted the custom of baptism with a new oath. Those who accepted this baptism were known as the Khalsa (pure) and the members were required to put on a distinct¬ive dress, keeping five things on their person, viz., Kesh (hair), Kangha (comb), Kripan (sword), Kachha (underwear) and Kara (iron bangle).

In the hilly regions of the northern Punjab, Guru Govinda fought against the imperial forces in suppressing him, and won some victories over them. His stronghold at Anandapur was be¬sieged five times, and at last he had to leave it to take refuge in the plains, hotly pursued by the imperialists. His four sons were slain and he had no alternative but to proceed to the Deccan through Bikaner. He came back to Northern India after the death of Aurangzab and joined Bahadur Shah in the war of succession with his brothers. He also accompanied Bahadur Shah to the Deccan and, while encamped at Nander on the Godavarl, he was murdered by an Afghan follower (1708).He was the tenth and last Guru of the Sikhs.
MEWAR
FIGHT WITH THE RAJPUTS

Aurangzib was on the look-out for a suitable opportunity to establish direct control over Marwar one of the most powerful Hindu States in Northern India. The reasons behind his motive were that it occupied a position of strategic importance, as through it lay the shortest military and commercial routes from the Mughul capital to the rich cities and ports of Gujarat, and, secondly, such a power¬ful State was not only a menace to the safety of the empire but it might also offer stubborn opposition to his cherished religious policy.

On hearing of the Maharaja's Jasovanta Singh death, he took steps to seize Marwar and place it under direct rule of the Mughal government. He himself went to Ajmer to supervise the actions. As the State was then without a head and many Rathor officers and troops were in Afgha¬nistan, no resistance could be offered, and Marwar was easily brought under imperial control. Meanwhile, he learnt that the two widowed queens of Jasovanta had given birth to two posthumous sons; one was Ajit Singh and the other child having died a few weeks after birth

Aurangzib sent a strong force to seize Ajit and the Ranis. A band of brave Rathors opposed them with all their might, and another party under Durga Das (the son of Jasovanta’s minister ) stealthily came out of the mansion with Ajit and his mothers in male attire and rode away towards Marwar. The Rathors had taken up arms against Mughul oppression, and Aurangzab again went to Ajmer (25 September, 1679), despatching his son, prince Akbar, with a large army against the Rathors. Success attended Mughul arms and all the great towns including Jodhpur were plundered and temples destroyed.

Maharana Raj Singh of Mewar realized the gravity of the situation, and could well understand that his State would be the next victim of imperial aggression. He had been asked to pay the jizya tax for his entire State and this was as humiliating as vexatious. Added to these was also his deep concern for the safety of Marwar whose queen and mother of Ajit was a Mewar princess.

The Rajputs carried on guerilla warfare, raiding the Mughul outposts, cutting off their supplies and thus creat¬ing terror among the Mughuls. Even Akbar's camp near Chitor was once surprised at night.

A grand plan was made to enter into the hills of Mewar from three directions under the leader¬ship of three princes, A'zam, Mua'zzam and Akbar, but it did not even¬tually succeed, as the princes could not act up to the plan. As Akbar could not fare better in Marwar than in Mewar, he despaired of suc¬cess. Disgusted with censures from his father and removed from Mewar, and finding no other means of improving his situation, he hailed the invitation of the Rajputs in wresting the crown of Delhi from his father with their assistance.

Both Durga Das and Jay Singh, agreed to lend his support to the prince who, on 1 January, 1681, proclaimed himself emperor of Delhi, and on the following day, marched with his Rathor and Sisodia allies against his father who was then at Ajmer. Aurangzab had great affection for this son and was rudely shocked by his conduct.

As Akbar advanced nearer his father, desertions followed from his camp in large number, but 30,000 Rajputs remained faithful to him. Arriving at a distance of three miles from his father's camp, he halted there for the night for a battle on the next morning. During the night the shrewd emperor took to diplomacy for win¬ning over the prince's adherents. Tahavvur Khan was the right-hand man of Akbar left him also and went over to Aurangzab.

Meantime, the emperor had written a false letter to his re¬bellious son, commending him for bringing the principal Rajputs with him, according to his (emperor's) plan, so as to have them crushed between the imperial army and those of the prince in the next day's battle. As intended, the letter was dropped near the Rajput camp, and it upset Durga Das when he read it.

He went to Akbar for an explanation, but when informed that the prince was asleep, he sent men to call Tahavvur Khan only to learn that the latter had already left for the imperial camp. Believing treachery on the part of the prince, the Rajputs fell on his camp, looted as much as they could and hurried towards Mewar. After this, most of his other troops also deserted him and joined the emperor. When Akbar awoke and found himself in a helpless condition, he retreated hurriedly towards Mewar with some members of his family and the treasure he could carry.

As soon as the real matter came to light, Durga Das lent his helping hand to the prince and took him under his protection, Evading the Mughul pursuers, he escorted Akbar successfully through Rajasthan, Khandesh, and Baglana to the shelter of the Maratha king, Shambhuji.

Aurangzab's plan of action in Mewar was considerably affected by the prince's flight to the Deccan, and he was eager to patch up a peace with the Maharana for personal supervision of strong mili¬tary operations against his son in the Deccan. On the other hand, the Maharana also earnestly desired peace, specially because of ex¬tensive devastation of his cornfields by his enemies, threatening the whole population to starvation. He concluded a peace treaty with Mughal.

But Aurangzib's war with Marwar con¬tinued for about twenty-seven years more. After the treaty with Jay Singh, the emperor sent a powerful force under prince A'zam to pursue Akbar and he himself proceeded hurriedly towards the Deccan, reaching Burhanpur on 13 November, 1681, and Auranga-bad on 22 March, 1682.
SHIVAJI
During the period of Shivaji's birth, the power in Deccan was shared by three Sultanates - Bijapur, Ahmednagar, and Golconda. Most of the then Marathas forces had pledged their loyalties to one of these Sultanates and were engaged in a continuous game of mutual alliances and aggression. Shivaji Raje Bhosle (February 19, 1627 – April 3, 1680), popularly known as Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj was younger of the two sons of Shahaji Bhosle and Jijabai. His father, Shahaji, was a Maratha general who rendered military services at various times against the Bijapur Sultanate, Deccan sultanates and the Mughals. Shahaji appointed young Shivaji, under the care of his mother Jijabai, to manage the Pune holdings.
Shivaji along with his friends and soldiers took a blood oath to fight for the "Swarajya" at Rohideshwara temple. Shivaji espoused the ideology of Hindavi Swarajya and took a solemn oath in a Shiva temple with his friends and soldiers to directly challenge the Muslim rule of the Bijapur Sultanate and ultimately the mighty Mughal Empire. Shivaji succeeded in establishing control of a well defended segment of the present state of Maharastra in western India, during his lifetime.
Shivaji used to say “We are Hindus. These Yavans (Muslims) are inferior to us. There is none more inferior to them. I am distressed by serving them, eating food served by them, flattering them or even greeting them. It is so wrong to see the ridicule of one’s own religion. As we walk down the road we see cows being slaughtered. At that time I feel like beheading the killers and the distress grows even more. What is the use of living to see a cow being tormented? I am compelled to remain silent because of being reprimanded by my father otherwise I feel like killing the one indulging in cow slaughter. It is not at all good to be in the company of Muslims. So also it is inappropriate to go to the court (darbar) of the emperor or to visit every wealthy man.”
Prince Shivaji showed his valorous nature by chopping off the hand of a butcher who was dragging a cow for slaughter in another kingdom!
The pious Jija Bai blessed these sentiments. She daily wit¬nessed how complete darkness prevailed under Muslim government, where there was no law, no justice; the officials acted as they pleased. Violation of women's honour, murders and forcible conversions were the order of the day. News of demolition of temples, cow-slaughter and other atrocities poured upon the ears of that lady so constantly that she used to exclaim: "Can we not remedy this evil? Will not my son have the strength to come forth boldly to resist it?"

The Nizam Shah had openly murdered Jija Bai's father, his brothers and sons. Bajajl Nimbalkar, the ruler of Phaltan, a scion of the old Paramara race, was forcibly converted by the Sultan of Bijapur. The Hindus could not lead an honourable life.

This spectacle moved the lady and her son to righteous indignation. An intense feeling of revolt took possession of their minds. Shivaji prayed for strength, dreamt bright visions and entered upon a wild career full of hope and promise without caring for consequences. He possessed an in¬born capacity of judging the character of men almost at first sight. He mixed with all kinds of men and picked up suitable helpmates, and converted to his views even those who were leading evil lives.

His sympathy and selflessness and his earnest endeavor to serve his land appealed to all, so that within a few years the contrast became glaring between the improved conditions of his paternal Jagir and the disorder prevailing in the Muslim-ruled region outside. Soon a compact, well-knit geographical unit of a small swarjya came into being in which law and order prevailed, duties of officials were clearly defined, justice quickly rendered, honest work well rewarded and where life and wealth were perfectly secure. All this had pro¬found effect upon the ruling class and even Shivaji's father in far-off Bangalore.
In 1645, at the age of 17, Shivaji carried out his first military action by attacking and capturing Torna Fort of the Bijapur kingdom. By 1647 he had captured Kondana and Rajgad forts and had control of much of the southern Pune region. By 1654 Shivaji had captured forts in the Western Ghats and along the Konkan coast.
In the course of this affair, a young fair Muslim lady, the daughter in law of the governor, fell into the hands of Shivaji’s officers and was presented by them for Shivaji’s acceptance as a trophy of the war. Shivaji disapproved this wicked action of his subordinate, reprimanded them severely, and allowed the lady to return to her home. This unprecedented generosity, rare in the Muslim annals of India, enhanced Shivaji’s reputation far and wide as the great respecter of the Women.
Battle of Pratapgad
Afzal Khan, a seasoned commander and an accomplished warrior was sent to destroy Shivaji. After leaving Bijapur Afzal Khan desecrated Hindu temples at Tuljapur and Pandharpur. Shivaji, upon carefully weighing his options, strategically decided to stay in the hills and surprise Afzal Khan under the guise of diplomatic negotiations.
Agents of the two moved freely between them for some time negotiating for a personal meeting between the two for a solution. After several discussion, the Khan confident of his strength, agreed to meet Shivaji below the fort of Pratapgad.
Shivaji armed himself with weapons like bichhwa (dagger), wagh nakh (tiger claw) and chilkhat (chain-mail armour) prior to the meeting. What transpired during the meeting was not recorded by scribes, but folklore has it that Afzal Khan embraced Shivaji per their custom and attempted to stab Shivaji in the back. Shivaji's agility, strength and his armour helped to survive this attack. Shivaji counter-attacked Afzal Khan with a wagh nakh and bichhwa spilling his blood and entrails on the ground. Thereupon Afzal Khan's bodyguard Sayyed Banda responding to this incident set upon Shivaji but was intercepted by Jiva Mahala, Shivaji's personal bodyguard, cutting off one of Sayyed Banda's hands with a Dandpatta (Pata -a medieval weapon). Meanwhile, Afzal Khan stumbled out of the tent to get help and collapsed into a waiting palanquin, but was slain by Shivaji's associate Sambhaji Kavji Kondhalkar, before he could raise an alarm.
The Mughal Emperor Aurangzeb, now identified Shivaji as a major threat to the mighty Mughal Empire. To counter the loss at Pratapgad and to defeat the newly emerging Maratha power, another army, this time numbering over 10,000, was sent against Shivaji, commanded by Bijapur's renowned Abyssinian general Rustamjaman. With a cavalry of 5,000 Marathas, Shivaji attacked them near Kolhapur on December 28, 1659. This battle lasted for several hours and at the end Bijapuri forces were soundly defeated and Rustamjaman ignominiously fled the battlefield.
Adilshahi forces lost about 2,000 horses and 12 elephants to the Marathas. This victory alarmed the mighty Mughal empire who now derisively referred to Shivaji as the "Mountain Rat". Aurangzeb the Mughal emperor was now actively preparing to bring the full might and resources of the Mughal Empire to bear down on the potential Maratha threat.
Aurangzeb sent his maternal uncle (brother of late Queen Mumtaz Mahal) Shaista Khan, to the Government of Deccan and sent him well-equipped to annihilate Shivaji while it was not yet too late.

The Khan's strength was irresistible, being fully backed by the whole might of the Mughul empire. For three long years, Shivaji was so hunted out in all directions that he became a homeless wanderer and was at a loss how to get out of this almost hopeless situation. In this darkest hour Shivaji's innate ingenuity alone saved him and he succeeded in turning the whole game against the Khan.

He employed secret agents to obtain minute details about the arrangements and disposition of the Khan's camp and hit upon a bold plan of a surprise attack at night. With about fifty clever and intrepid followers, he entered the Mughul general’s harem on the evening of 15 April, 1663. After midnight, when the guards and the Khan's family were asleep and enveloped in darkness, Shivaji and his companions attacked the inmates in their beds, cutting and hacking indiscriminately. The noise and con¬fusion that resulted was indescribable; several were killed and wounded; the Khan himself, it was later discovered, escaped with only his forefinger lost. One of his son and 40 attendant were killed. The incident proved eminently successful for Shivaji’s purpose. Without undergoing a large scale fighting, he stuck terror into the heart of his opponents.
Within twenty-four hours of this attack, Shaista Khan left Pune and headed North towards Agra. An angered Aurangzeb transferred him to distant Bengal as a punishment for bringing embarrassment to the Mughals with his ignoble defeat in Pune.
The fact that Mughals the most dominant power/empire in India resorted to joining forces in close co-ordination with regional sutanate to defeat Shivaji whose army barely consisted of 20,000 men is a great testament to the superior strategic, organizational and fighting abilities of the Marathas and their great leader - Shivaji.
Aurangzeb was enraged and sent Mirza Raja Jai Singh I with an army numbering well over 100,000 to defeat Shivaji. The Mughal forces under Raja Jai Singh proved to be unstoppable in the battles and Shivaji lost so many forts and large number of men that he decided to surrender for the time-being and come to terms with Aurangzeb rather than lose more forts and men.
In the ensuing treaty of Purander, signed between Shivaji and Jai Singh on June 11, 1665, Shivaji agreed to give up 23 of his forts and pay 400,000 rupees to the Mughals. He also agreed to let his son Sambhaji become a Mughal Sardar, serve the Mughal court of Aurangzeb and fight with Mughals against Bijapur. He actually fought with Raja Jai Singh's Mughal forces against Bijapur's forces for a few months. His commander, Netaji Palkar, joined Mughals, was rewarded very well for his bravery, converted to Islam, changed his name to Quli Mohammed Khan in 1666 and was sent to Afghanistan. He returned to Shivaji after ten years in 1676 and was reconverted to Hinduism by Shivaji.
Trip to Agra and Escape
In 1666, Aurangzeb summoned Shīvajī to Agra, along with his nine-year-old son Sambhajī, on the occasion of his fiftieth birthday. Aurangzeb's plan was to send Shivaji to Kandahar, modern day Afghanistan to consolidate the Mughal Empire's north-western frontier. However in the court, on May 12, 1666, Aurangzeb made Shīvajī stand behind mansabdārs (military commanders) of his court. Shivaji took offense at this seeming insult and stormed out of court and was promptly placed under house arrest, under the watch of Fulād Khān, Kotwal of Agra. From his spies, Shīvajī learned that Aurangzeb planned to move his residence to Rājā Vitthaldās's Haveli and then to possibly kill him or send him to fight in the Afghan frontier. As a result Shīvajī planned his escape.
He feigned almost fatal sickness and requested to send most of his contingent back to the Deccan, thereby ensuring the safety of his army and deceiving Aurangzeb. Thereafter, on his request, he was allowed to send daily shipments of sweets and gifts to saints, fakirs, and temples in Agra as offerings for getting well.] After several days and weeks of sending out boxes containing sweets, Shīvajī and his nine year old son Sambhaji hid themselves in two of the boxes and managed to escape. Shīvajī and his son fled to the Deccan disguised as sadhus (holy men). After the escape, rumours of Sambhajī's death were intentionally spread by Shīvajī himself in order to deceive the Mughals and to protect Sambhajī.
It was the most thrilling exploit of all his wonderful deeds, which has for ever added a super natural glow to his unique personality. It immediately resounded throughout the country, making Shivaji an all India figure, divinely ordained with extraordinary power. The incident simultaneously exposed the emperor’s craft still further adding to his evil repute for cunning and cruelty. Shivaji’s reputation, on the other hand, reached its Zenith for having outwitted the cleverest and mightiest of the emperors.
Shivaji spent two years in comparative quiet and would have possibly continued inoffensive, had not a fresh impulse of fanaticism seized the emperor once more to which reference has been made above.

On 9 April, 1669, he issued general orders for demolishing all Hindu schools and temples and putting down all their religious teaching and practices. All Hindu fairs and cere¬monies were forcibly banned. The famous temple of Kasi Visvegvar was pulled down in 1669 and that of Keshab Rai in 1670, the news of which flashed like lightning throughout India. New grand mos¬ques arose on the sites of both the temples which stand to this day, visible for miles as one travels to Banaras and Mathura.

Shivaj and Jija Bai received these reports with sorrow and consternation and stood forth boldly to resist the emperor in retaliation. As Sinhgarh was the key fort of Deccan politics personally handed back by Shivaji five years ago, he now attacked it openly and wrested it from the Mughul pos¬session. This capture of Sinhgarh was effected in February, 1670, and was quickly followed up by Shivaji's seizure of the Mughul terri¬tories of Kalyan and other places of north Konkan. In April, Shivaji collected a large plunder by raiding several important Mughul towns. He declared he was taking revenge for the emperor's attack on the Hindu religion.
The last great venture in Karnataka
At the end of 1676, Shivaji Maharaj launched a wave of conquests in southern India with a massive force of 50,000 (30,000 cavalry and 20,000 infantry). He captured the forts at Vellore and Jinji that belonged to the sultanate of Bijapur and are in modern-day Tamilnadu. Shivaji soon died after this grand conquest. Shivají's conquests in the south proved quite crucial during future wars. Jinjee served as Maratha capital for 9 years during the War of 27 years.
A tribute to Shivaji
What the earnest endeavor of one man can achieve in this wicked world is illustrated in Shivaji's life narrated so far. It has not been possible, within the limited time, to give a more detailed account of all the varied activities and achievements of that unique personality. Only the main incidents and their prominent features could be attempted. But even these will doubtless prove the divine gift of genius which Shivaji possessed and which baffles analysis.
He called the Maratha race to a new life of valor and self-reliance, of honor and hope. Therefore, it is no exaggeration to say that he is the creator of the Maratha nation, as Sir Jadunath had aptly put it, "the last great constructive genius and nation-builder that the Hindu race has produced." Jadunath further observes:

"He called the Maratha race to a new life. He raised the Marathas into an independent self-reliant people, conscious of their one¬ness and high destiny, and his most precious legacy was the spirit that he breathed into his race. He has proved by his example that the Hindu race can build a nation, found a State, defeat enemies; they can conduct their own defense, protect and promote literature and art, commerce and industry; they can maintain navies and ocean-trading fleets of their own and conduct naval battles on equal terms with foreigners. He taught the modern Hindus to rise to the full stature of their growth. Shivaji has shown that the tree of Hinduism is not really dead, that it can rise from beneath the seemingly crushing load of centuries of political bondage; that it can put forth new leaves and branches. It can again lift up its head to the skies."

The 'people's war' in Maharashtra

It is a pity that Aurangzab could never gauge the real strength of the Marathas, neither in the early stage of their rise nor in the subsequent stage of their growth. He had been acquainted with the uncommon audacity and daring exploits of Shivaji as far back as 1657. The Maratha chief then raided not only the Mughul dis¬tricts of Ahmadnagar and Junnar but also sacked the rich city of Junnar. He was then routed and Aurangzab got him within his reach but did not take necessary steps to prevent his future growth. Shivaji thus got ample opportunities to fulfill his cherished ambi¬tion of establishing a powerful national State.

In 1690 and 1691 the emperor devoted his attention chiefly to¬wards taking possession of the southern and eastern portions of the late Bijapur and Golconda States. But he was soon faced with the 'people's war' in Maharashtra. After the flight of Rajaram to the fort of Gingee, it became the centre of Maratha activities in the east coast, while in the west, Maharashtra proper, resistance to the Mughuls was organized by the leaders there. In the eastern theatre of war Prahlad Niraji was the King's supreme agent, and in the west, the Maratha leaders were Ramchandra N. Bavdekar, Shankarji Malhar and Parashuram Trimbak. Ramchandra Bavde¬kar was created dictator (Hukumatpandh} with full authority over the commanders and other officials in Maharashtra. Two generals of outstanding ability, Dhana Jadav and Santaji Ghorpare, con¬ducted operations against the imperialists, moving from one theatre of war to another in the Deccan. By their guerilla tactics, they inflicted heavy losses on the Mughuls who, being unable to ascer¬tain the movements of their enemies, were thrown into great con¬fusion.

"The difficulties of Aurangzib", says Sir Jadunath Sarkar, "were multiplied by this disappearance of a common head and a central government among the Marathas, because every petty Mara¬tha captain now fought and plundered in a different quarter on his own account. The Marathas were no longer a tribe of banditti or local rebels, but the one dominating factor of Deccan politics, and an enemy all-pervasive throughout the Indian peninsula, elusive as the wind, the ally and rallying point of all the enemies of the Delhi empire and all disturbers of public peace and regular adminis¬tration throughout the Deccan and even in Malwa, Gondwana and Bundelkhand. The imperialists could not be present everywhere in full strength; hence, they suffered reverses in places."

The Maratha bands roving around cut off the supplies of the Mughuls and harassed them in all possible manner. By surprise attacks, Santa and Dhana harassed the imperialists with a view to wearing them out as far as possible. The Maratha roving bands were active throughout 1694 and 1695, making the position of the Mughuls very miserable and forced them to be on the defensive in Maharashtra and Kannada. Unable to follow the rapid movement of the enemies, the imperialist become bewildered and terror stricken.

The long and continuous hard labor of the emperor even in the ripe old age was too much for him to bear and he fell very ill while encamped at Devapur, on the bank of the Krishna, after the capture of Wagingera. But he recovered from this illness, and proceeded slowly to Ahmadnagar.

His long warfare in the Deccan for a quarter of a century resulted in utter desolation of the country and caused indescrib¬able misery to the people. Manucci, an eye-witness, says, "Aurangzab withdrew to Ahmadnagar, leaving behind him the fields of these provinces devoid of trees and bare of crops, their places be¬ing taken by the bones of men and beasts. Instead of verdure all is black and barren. There have died in his armies over a hun¬dred thousand souls yearly, and of animals, pack-oxen, camels, elephants, etc., over three hundred thousand. In the Deccan pro¬vinces from 1702 to 1704 plague (and famine) prevailed. In these two years there expired over two millions of souls."

The Marathas followed the emperor during his journey to Ahmadnagar, attacking his men from the rear and cutting off their food supplies. By this time they became very powerful and were no longer a band of plundering light horsemen; they were equip¬ped with artillery, musketry and other necessaries of a regular army like the Mughuls. They succeeded in establishing their mastery not only over nearly the whole of the Deccan but also in some places of Central India. Unable to cope with them, the imperialists were forced to be on the defensive. In 1706 the Marathas raided Gujarat and plundered Baroda which was then a rich trading cen¬tre. Even the emperor's camp at Ahmadnagar was not immune from attack, and it was besieged in May, 1706, when they were driven back with great difficulty. The province of Aurangabad was ravaged on many occasions, and a large Mughul convoy was plundered on the way from Aurangabad to Ahmadnagar; Dhana attacked Berar and Khandesh.

Thus the long and continuous endeavors of the emperor to crush the Marathas proved futile and Maratha nationalism flourished with all its vitality as a triumphant force. In the midst of these confusions and disorders, suffering from bereavements due to the death of two beloved daughters, one daughter-in-law, one sister and two nephews, and deep anxieties for the gloomy future of the empire, specially because of an appre¬hended civil war among his sons, Aurangzab breathed his last in his nineteenth year at Ahmadnagar in the morning of 3 March, 1707 (Friday).

Shivaji’s ideology of Hindavi Swarajya and subsequent expansion of the Maratha Empire, was partly responsible for re-establishment of Hindu rule and its re-emergent assertiveness throughout the mainland of present day India after being ruled and dominated by various Muslim dynasties for several centuries. The ideology of Hindavi Swarajya was in part the inspiration that propelled the succeeding generation of Marathas to establish independent kingdom in India prior to their eventual defeat by the British Empire.

THE DETERMINANTS OF HINDU DEFEATS: -Sita Ram Goel
It is true that Hindus resisted Islamic imperialism for a long time, and overcame it in the long run. But it would be foolish to forget that their failure for a long time in the face of an enemy, with whom they had become familiar pretty soon, was of frightening proportions. It is this failure of the Hindus and not the defeat of the Muslim marauders which invites a serious review and reflection. I will, therefore, do my own loud thinking on this subject. For I feel very strongly that the lessons we may learn from these failures are still valid for us.
It is held by almost all historians of this period, including those who neither swear by Marxism nor apologize for Islam, that the Hindu failure had its source in the Hindu social system, particularly the caste structure. But that proposition does not stand a deeper probe. Moreover, the proposition is preposterous because it reverses the chronological sequence. The Hindu social system became moribund and the caste system rigid only after Hindus had lost political power. There is sufficient evidence to prove that on the eve of Islamic invasions, the Hindu social system did not harbour the defects which it developed at a later stage. It is my considered opinion that it was their highly organic social system which saved the Hindus from extinction in the initial stages, and provided the powerful impetus which propelled them to victory in the long run. Iran, Iraq, Syria, Egypt, and North Africa were engulfed by Islam because they did not have a social structure which could withstand the storm.
The Foremost Failure: Spiritual
To start with, what strikes me most is the steep decline in the Hindu spiritual perception. The sacred and philosophical literature produced by Hindus from the 5th century onwards compares very unfavorably with similar literature of an earlier age - like Mahabharata, the Ramayana, the earlier literature Manusmriti. The earlier literature dwells naturally and effortlessly on the Himalayan heights of the human soul, but at the same time it pays due attention to every detail of terrestrial life. The family, the clan, the village, the janapada, the rãshtra - life at each of these levels is sustained by a dharma appropriate to the level and complexity of relationships involved. The janmabhûmi, the motherland, is equated with the janani, the loving mother, and endowed with sanctity higher than that of heaven. Human society in its smaller as well as larger segments is an enabling environment in which the individual seeks abhyudaya, mundane welfare, as well as nisshreyas, spiritual salvation. Society has a lot to give to the individual in terms of upbringing, education, status within the brotherhood of the varna, and livelihood in the fraternity of the jãti. But society also demands a lot in terms of self-discipline, performance of duties due from one’s station in life, and sacrifice which mostly means living for others. The rãjã, the state, is an embodiment of the protecting power of the Divine, and demands in turn taxes and obedience to legitimate laws.
In the eyes of this highly vigilant spirituality, evil is as much present in human nature as the good, and manifests itself in as many ways as the good. This spirituality is, therefore, wide awake to every eruption of evil, individual as well as collective. It can spot evil at the ideological and the psychological level as easily as at the level of its physical manifestation or concrete action. And it recommends a combat with evil, devãsura-samgrãma, in every sphere of life. In this spirituality, there is no place for suffering evil silently, or for explaining it away, or for facing it with a subjective sanctimoniousness, howsoever elevated the language that sanctimoniousness may employ. When Alexander had asked a Brahmin as to what they taught which inspired Hindu warriors to such high heroism, the Brahmin had replied in one sentence - “We teach our people to live with honor.”
While it does not lose any of its heights, its grip on life as lived in this world gets greatly loosened. There is an insistent and increasing rejection of terrestrial life, and turning one’s back upon it is termed as the highest human endeavor. Dharma is no more a comprehensive concept embracing the wide wealth of human relationships; it is narrowed down to specialized disciplines enjoined by the goal of individual salvation. In fact, human relationships start getting redefined as so many snares which entangle and encumber the individual soul in its journey towards the supreme attainment. Honor and heroism now become lower values when compared to the herculean effort of breaking the shackles of karma and getting across the ocean of rebirth. Most spiritual seekers now not only take to sannyãsa but also go into seclusion in search of samãdhi, the mystic trance. Tantra, mantra, mandala and yantra follow in sequence till spirituality in most cases gets reduced to some sort of an esoteric ritualism which is loath to subject itself to any objective test of character or performance. Those who do not feel drawn towards this highly elaborate but entirely subjective spirituality are now free to pursue artha, acquisitions, or kãma, pleasures, or both, without any guidance from dharma.
Many students of the spiritual literature of this period have hailed the medieval siddhas and the saints as harbingers of a casteless society. They do not see the perspective in which varna and jãti become irrelevant for the spiritual seekers of this period. The perspective is one of social indifference, not one of social concern. The siddhas and the saints are indifferent not only to varna and jãti, but also to the rãjã and the rãshtra. None of them tells the princes that the supreme test of their prowess and honour is the protection of their prajã. Some of them do bemoan the terror, destruction, desecration, and spoliation perpetrated by the Islamic invaders. But the complaint is addressed to God Almighty who allows such horrible things to happen. The voice which a Valmiki or a Vyasa would have raised for resistance to and destruction of the dasyu, marauder, and the ãtatãyî, gangster, is missing. Samartha Ramdas is the only exception.
It is small wonder, therefore, that Hindu saints of this period failed to see Islam with the eyes of a wholesome spirituality practised in earlier ages. They took at face value the professions of Islam that it was a religion like one of their own. Some of them were impressed by Islamic monotheism, and started denouncing the multiplicity of their own Gods and Goddesses. None of them could see that the Kalimah - there is no god but Allah and Muhammad is his last prophet - could emanate only from a beastly rather than a religions consciousness. Not a single Hindu saint made the effort to see or succeeded in seeing through the professions of Islam or the piety of its sufis, and exposing the sin and the sham masquerading as religion and sainthood. The NirguNa saints did question the exclusive claims of Islam. But none of them questioned its claim as an alternate path of salvation. And all of them assailed Brahmanism and polytheism.
The thinkers and philosophers of this period proved worse than the saints in this respect. They argued back and forth on all possible positions in metaphysics, ethics, aesthetics, logic, linguistics, social ceremonies, and religious rituals. But none of them made a systematic or serious study of Islam, or traced to its scriptural source its terrorism and cruelty. The saints at least soothed and strengthened their people by their songs and sermons. The thinkers and philosophers cannot claim even that much credit. They only divided their people by their highly sectarian scholasticism. A majority of the Muslims were Hindu converts who had been forced or lured into the fold of Islam which sat lightly on them for a long time. Hindu society closed its doors on them, and condemned them to permanent and progressive alienation. The results would have been radically different if Hindu thinkers and philosophers had rejected Islam, and won back the converts to Islam into their mother society.
THE SECOND FAILURE: CULTURAL
The failure of Hindu spiritual perception had something, perhaps much, to do with the failure of the Hindu cultural vision. There was a lapse of historical memory and cultural tradition about the essential unity, integrity, and sanctity of what the Mahabharata, the Ramayana, the Puranas, and the Dharmashastras had clearly defined as Bharatavarsha. This vast land which Islam has dismembered in due course into the separate states of Afghanistan, Pakistan, Hindustan, and Bangladesh had been a single indivisible whole since times immemorial. Bharatavarsha had been termed by the ancients as the cradle of varnaashrama-dharma, witness to the wheel of the caturyugas, and the kshetra for chakravãrtya, spiritual as well as political. This historical memory and cultural tradition was alive as late as the imperial Guptas. Kalidasa had clothed it in immortal poetry in his far-famed Raghuvam’a.
This failure of Hindu cultural vision had serious consequences. Hindus failed to organise a collective effort to guard the frontiers of Bharatavarsha. Hindu princes in the interior did not rally round Raja Dahir when Muhammad bin Qasim violated the sacred soil of Sindh. They made some better effort when the Hindu Shahiyas of Udbhandapur were challenged by Subuktigin. But the effort fizzled out before long, because very few of them had their heart in it. Hindu princes by now had taken a deep dose of Kautalya’s Arthasãstra. In this sterile statecraft, centred on the politics of the mandalayoni, one’s neighbour was always an enemy, and the enemy of an enemy always a friend! Hindu princes, therefore, failed to hang together in the face of a common calamity. In the event, they were hanged separately.
THE THIRD FAILURE: MENTAL
The third failure which was closely linked with the first two was the failure of mental alertness to what was happening in the world around. Hindu merchants were still selling the products of Indian agriculture and industry in all lands invaded by Islam. Hindu saints, particularly the Buddhist monks, were still practicing their austerities and preaching their sermons in their far-flung monasteries in Iran and Khorasan. But none of them could see the storm that was rising on the sands of Arabia and sowing a harvest of mass slaughter, pillage, plunder and enslavement, not even when it swept over neighboring lands. They waited where they were till they were slaughtered and/or plundered in their own turn, or, if they fled back home, they did not say the word that could have served as a warning. Nor were the Hindu princes in a mental mood to heed any warning even if it had been tendered to them. An awareness of what was happening in neighboring lands was no more needed by them. Each one of them was busy with his immediate neighbors. There was no lack of martial spirit, or sense of honour, or sentiments of chivalry in them. But all this wealth of character was wasted in proving their prowess over primacy of the right to a first dip in holy rivers and tanks, or to the hands of pretty princesses. What they lacked was statesmanship which is always an outcome of an alert and wide-ranging mind. They learnt neither from their own defeats, nor from the victories of the enemy. They mended neither their statecraft, nor their system of revenue, nor their military establishment, nor yet their art of warfare.
It cannot be maintained that Islam did not provide an ample opportunity to Hindu saints, philosophers and princes to understand its true character and role. Before the armies of Islam invaded India, the sufis had settled down in many parts of India, built mosque and khanqahs and started their work of conversion. They were the sappers and miners of Islamic invasions which followed in due course. Muinuddin Chishti was not the first “saint” of Islam to send out an invitation to an Islamic invader to come and kill the kãfirs, desecrate their shrines, and plunder their wealth. He was following in the footsteps of earlier Islamic “saints” functioning as fifth-columnists for Muhammad bin Qasim and Mahmud Ghaznavi. There was an interval of two and a half centuries between the Arab demonstration in Sindh of what Islam had in store for the Hindus, and the horrors let loose by Mahmud Ghaznavi. Again, there was another interval of a century and a half between the invasions of Mahmud Ghaznavi and those of Muhammad Ghuri. But neither the Hindu saints, nor the Hindu philosophers, nor the Hindu princes could see the sufis for what they were in essence, or draw any worthwhile conclusions about the character of Islam.
This triple Hindu failure on the spiritual, cultural, and mental levels prevented Hindu society from evolving and pursuing policies which were imperative in the unprecedented situation, and which would have saved it from the permanent scourge of a malignant fraternity embedded in its very heart.
THE POLICIES WHICH WERE NOT PURSUED
The first need of the situation was a centre round which Hindus could rally, and from which Hindu resistance to the Islamic invasion could be directed. The effectiveness of such a centre was demonstrated first in Mewar under Maharana Pratap, secondly in the South under Vijayanagara, thirdly in Maharashtra under Shivaji, and lastly in the Punjab under Banda Bahadur. But these centres crystallised too late. A nationwide centre established earlier could have contained Islamic imperialism at the borders of Bharatavarsha, or defeated and driven it out from wherever it had secured a foothold. Chandragupta, Vikramaditya, and Skandagupta had headed such a centre, and saved the motherland by hurling back the barbarians as soon as they came.
The second need of the situation was a forward policy which would have taken the war into the heartland of Islam, instead of being fought over the length and breadth of Bharatavarsha. But the Hindus during this period were afflicted by a fortress psychology. They waited for the invader till he arrived at Panipat, or shut themselves into citadels which could be stormed or starved into surrender while the unprotected populace outside was slaughtered. Nor did they ever pursue and destroy the invader even when he was defeated and made of flee. If the Chaulukyas of Gujarat had pursued and destroyed Muhammad Ghuri and his hordes when he was defeated by them in his first expedition in 1178 AD, he would not have come back to Tarain in 1191 AD. Again, if the Chauhans had pursued and punished Ghuri after his defeat in the first battle of Tarain, there would have been no second battle of Tarain, and perhaps no more Muslim invasion of India, at least for some time to come. The effectiveness of a forward policy was demonstrated first by the Marathas under Shivaji, and later on by the Sikhs under Banda Bahadur. But that was against an Islamic state already established in India. Meanwhile, Islam had succeeded in doing very severe damage to the self-respect and self-confidence of Hindu society, particularly to the psyche of its elite.
The consequences of this damage to the Hindu psyche came to the surface during the days of the Mughal empire. Hindu generals like Mansingh Kacchwaha, Jaswant Singh Rathore, and Mirza Raja Jaisingh, to name only the most notable, proved their great calibre when employed by an alien imperialism. Hindu administrators like Raja Todarmal streamlined the revenue system of an alien state. But they could not use their abundant talents for establishing their own leadership in the service of their own nation. The Marathas who finally occupied Delhi in 1771 AD provide an excellent example of this loss of elan. They could not muster the courage to proclaim their own sovereignty over their own motherland, and continued to function in the name of a phantom whom they had themselves freed from British captivity. They were frightened of their own greatness. The notion of an independent nationhood no more informed their vision.
The third need of the situation was a policy of reciprocity which nations have to follow when they are faced with gangsterism. Islam was suffering from the high fever of self-righteousness, and was badly in need of some strong medicine. If the Islamic invaders had been made to understand that what they intended to do to Somnath could also be done to the Ka’bah, they would have paused to think and shed some of their self-righteousness. But Hindus never tried to cure Islam of its iconoclastic zeal. On the contrary, they used every opportunity to convince Muslims that their mosques, mazars, and khanqahs were absolutely inviolable. No wonder Muslims came to the conclusion that while Somnath was built from bricks and mortar, and the Sivaliñga made of mere stone, the Ka’bah was hewn out of some spiritual substance and the sang-i-aswad hallowed by the Almighty Allah. Muslims felt sure that while Hindu images had no power to protect themselves, their own idol in Mecca was capable of hurling into hell whole armies of infidels. Their sense of surety would have been shaken and done them immense good if it had been demonstrated by Hindu armies that the Ka’bah was also built from bricks and mortar, and that the sang-i-aswad also had no power to save itself, not to speak of sending even a mosquito to perdition.
Europe saved itself from the depredations of Islam because it had a centre in the Catholic Church which gave a call for action to Christian princes, and followed a forward policy in the Crusades. It did not allow Islam to retain any of its self-righteousness. Spain was ruled by Muslims for several centuries. But today there is no Muslim “minority” in Spain to poison its body politic, and no Muslim “places of worship” from which Muslim hooligans can hurl stones on Christian processions or in which they can assemble arsenals.

The story of Islamic Imperialism -I

The story of Islamic Imperialism -I

The Mamluk Sultans of Delhi

The victories of Muhammad Ghori had only initiated process whose completion, requiring sustained military operation, seemed foredoomed by the implication of his sudden death on the bank of the Sindhu.

A unified command in India, unhampered by consideration of trans-Indus politics, was urgently called for, but to achieve this was in itself a major task. For Muhammad Ghori left no son but a band of slaves to claim his dominion.

Among these slaves, one was Qutb-ud-din Aibak who was placed as in charge of Delhi. Aibak remain preoccupied with the problem of preserving his government’s separate entity of establishing a political frontier. The task was still unaccomplished when he died in A.D 1210. He was succeeded by his son Aram but more powerful faction in Delhi favored his son in law, Illtutmish.

With equal energy and determination, but with less decisive results, he set to work to wrest the military initiative from the Hindu princes. In the area south, the Pariharas, had expanded their rule over Jhansi and Narwar. The extent of the revival of Hindu Powers and the difficulties facing the Delhi troops were heavily underlined by the inconclusive results of Iltutmish's operations in Rajputana. Opening the cam¬paign in A.D. 1226, he took Ranthambor and Mandawar and humbl¬ed Jalor, but was repulsed with heavy losses by the Guhilots from Nagda. Rajput records speak also of his failure in an attack on the Chaulukyas of Gujarat. A similar expedition, conducted by one of his officers against the Chauhans of Bundi, also ended in failure.
A seemingly successful raid into Malwa gave him more plunder. He destroyed an ancient temple at Vidisha. Badauni reports: “Having destroyed the idol temple of Ujjain which had been built six hundred years previously, and was called Mahakal, he leveled it to its foundations, and threw down the image of Rai Vikramajit from whom the Hindus reckon their era, and brought certain images of cast molten brass and placed them on the ground in front of the doors of mosques of old Delhi, and ordered the people of trample them under foot.”
Muslim power in India suffered a serious setback after Iltutmish. Balban had to battle against a revival of Hindu power. The Katehar Rajputs of what came to be known as Rohilkhand in later history, had so far refused to submit to Islamic imperialism. Balban led an expedition across the Ganges in 1254 AD. According to Badauni, “In two days after leaving Delhi, he arrived in the midst of the territory of Katihar and put to death every male, even those of eight years of age, and bound the women.” But in spite of such wanton cruelty, Muslim power continued to decline till the Khaljis revived it after 1290 AD.


The Delhi Sultanate

After the decline of the Slave dynasty, the Sultanate became even more fragile and instable due to the numerous revolts and internal aggression. The Khilji dynasty started with the crowning of Jalaluddin Khilji by the nobles. This was around the year 1290 A.D.

Jalal ud-din Firuz Khilji

The first Indian ruler of the Khilji dynasty was Jalal-ud-din Firuz Khilji, who ruled from 1290 - 1294. He invaded India and built his capital in Delhi, though he never really ruled from there. He constructed another capital at Kilokhri, and ruled from there for around 6 years. Jalaluddin Khalji led an expedition to Ranthambhor in 1291 AD. On the way he destroyed Hindu temples at Jhain. The broken idols were sent to Delhi to be spread before the gates of the Jama Masjid to be trodden upon by all. Jalal-ud-din Khilji was murdered by his own nephew when he was going to visit him in Kara.

Ala-ud-din Khilji
Alauddin led an expedition to Vidisha in 1292 AD. He brought much booty to the Sultan and the idol which was the object of worship of the Hindus, he caused to be cast in front of the Badaun gate to be trampled upon by the people. In 1298 AD he equipped an expedition to Gujarat. The invaders plundered the ports of Surat and Cambay. The temple of Somnath, which had been rebuilt by the Hindus, was plundered and the idol taken to Delhi for being trodden upon by the Muslims. The whole region was subjected to fire and sword, and Hindus were slaughtered en masse. Kamala Devi, the queen of Gujarat, was captured along with the royal treasury, brought to Delhi and forced into Alauddin’s harem.
Around 1301 A.D, he captured Ranthambhor and murdered the Rajput Hamir Deva. Ala-ud-din led an expedition against Ranthambhor with great vigour which repeatedly defy submission and soldier also lose morale, who had begun to despair of success before the impregnable walls of the fort. Ulti¬mately, shortage of provisions led to famine, which put the garrison to extreme hardship. Hamir Deva sent his minister Ranmal to 'Ala-ud-din to negotiate peace, but he rejected. As there was no hope, women performed jauhar; Hamir Deva with his Rajputs died fighting; and the fort capitulated on July 11, 1301. 'Ala-ud-din put to death Ranmal and other Rajputs who had joined him and had proved faithless to their master.
Mewar
Mewar was the most powerful kingdom of all the Rajput kingdoms and never had been conquered by the Muslims. On 29 January 1303 Alauddin Khilji started for Mewar. First Alauddin Khilji captured the city of Chitor and besieged the Chitor fort. Rana Ratan Singh strongly resisted and fought valiantly with his Rajput army. The Rajputs offered heroic resistance for about seven months. But, due to the long siege, there grew a severe shortage of food, drinking water and other rations. Consequently, the Rajputs surrendered. Women had perished in the flames of Jauhar, and 30,000 Rajputs were put to the sword. Alauddin remained at Chitor for some days, and during this period many temples were destroyed. Alauddin Khilji appointed Khidr Khan as the governor of Chitor. But Khilji was forced to retreat due to repeated counter attacks of the Rajputs. Alauddin Khilji then appointed Maldev, a Rajput, as the governor of Chitor. But Mewar was able to regain her independence immediately after the death of Alauddin Khilji.
Malwa
Alauddin Khilji's conquest of Mewar, Ranathamvor and Gujarat stroke terror in the mind of the remaining Rajput Kingdoms. But Mahlak Dev refused to give in to Alauddin Khilji so easily. He gathered 20,000 horsemen and 90,000 infantry to confront Alauddin's army. Harnanda Koka was the general of his army. On the other hand Ain-ul-Mulk Multani was on the head of a 160,000 Muslim army. After a bloody war Harnana Koka was killed by treachery and the Rajput forces retreated. The Muslims were decimated but due to larger numbers were able to prevail. Malwa along with Mandu, Dhara and Chanderi came in the hand of Alauddin Khilji. Ain-ul-Mulk Multani was appointed the governor of Malwa. It was in year 1294 A.D. when he acquired koh-i-noor from malwa and brought it to Delhi.
Expeditions in southern India

Alauddin then led an expedition towards the south of India. He was said to be the first Muslim king who went to the south to expand his territory.

Devagiri: - Alauddin Khilji invaded Devagiri in 1306. The invincible Malik Kafur was on the spearhead of the army. The huge army conquered Devagiri almost without a battle.
Warangal: - After conquering Devagiri Alauddin Khilji invaded Warangal with Malik Kafur as the General of the Muslim army. After a fierce battle Malik Kafur was able to occupy the Warangal fort.
Pandiya: -Alauddin Khilji then sent Malik Kafur against king Veera Pandian of the Pandiya kingdom at the southern most tip of India.
But the Pandiya princes, unlike other kings, did not shut themselves in forts which might be easily captured. They avoided open battle with the superior force of the invaders but frequently harassed the enemy, and thus made the entire coun¬try the theatre of military operations. This strategy ultimately ex¬hausted the invaders, and Malik Kafur failed to secure the submis¬sion of the Pandiya princes.
In spite of great hardship, Malik kafur reached to modern Chidambaram, where people were massacred , the Golden temple was razed to the ground, and its foundation were dug up. The temple of Srirangam and other temple in vicinity of Kannanur were also sacked and then they set the fire to the temple of Sokkanatha in Madurai.
He had to beat a retreat in the face of fierce Hindu resistance. But he did not forget to capture and carry with him an immense booty and hordes of prisoners who were sold into slavery all along his long route to the imperial headquarters at Delhi.
Taxes

Alauddin imposed many taxes on people to impoverish them and to make them ineffective for any kind of revolt. As a result of this, Hindus were so much impoverished that no gold or silver was to be found in the houses of the Hindus, they could not procure horses or weapons and their wives hade to serve for wages in the houses of the Muslims.

These measures were dictated as much by political consi¬derations as by hatred against the Hindus. Even on general ground the attitude of the Sultan to the Hindus must be regarded as very different from that adopted towards the Muslims. He wanted to crush Hindu at any cost and took extreme measure to fulfill his cherished goal.

This view is fully confirmed by the statement of QazI Mughis-ud-din of Bayana whom the King consulted as to the legality of these measures and certain other questions. Mughls-ud-dln whole¬heartedly justified 'Ala-ud-dln's rigorous policy towards the Hindus and pointed out that Islamic law sanctioned sterner principle, so much so that, “if the revenue collector spits into a Hindu's mouth, the Hindu must open his mouth to receive it without hesitation.”

He was gratified to learn that his treatment of the Hindus was in full accordance with Islamic law and assured the Qazi that he had given orders that the Hindus shall not be allowed to possess more than what is required for a bare subsistence. Alauddin died in January 1316. It is believed that his lieutenant Malik Naib hastened his death. His tomb and madarsa dedicated to him, exists at the back of Qutb complex, Mehrauli, in Delhi

Qutb-ud-Din Mubarak Shah

The third and last ruler of the Khilji dynasty in India was Qutb-ud-Din Mubarak Shah. He was the weakest ruler of all and during his reign, all taxes and penalties were abolished. He released all prisoners of war who were captured after waging gruesome battles. He was ultimately murdered by Khusru Khan who ascended the throne on September 8, 1320, under the title of Ghiyas-ud-din Tughlaq.

The Tughlaq Dynasty

The Tughlaq Dynasty which ruled a large part of India, from the throne in Delhi, was founded by Ghias-ud-din Tughlaq. This dynasty stayed in power between 1320 and 1412. The Tughlaq Dynasty had three prominent rulers; Ghias-ud-din Tughlaq, his son Muhammad bin Tughlaq and his nephew Firoz Shah Tughlaq. The first two ruled over an empire which comprised almost the entire country, but the empire of Firoz Shah was much smaller. After his death, the Tughlaq Empire disintegrated and north India was divided into a series of small states. Although the Tughlaqs continued to rule till 1412, the invasion of Delhi by Timur in 1398 marked the end of the Tughlaq Empire.

Ghiyas-ud-din Tughlaq.

Ghiyas-ud-din Tughlaq was the founder of the Tughlaq dynasty in India. His real name was Ghazi Malik and he ruled from 1320 - 1325. He was the one who founded the city of Tughlaqabad outside Delhi. He conquered many areas including eastern portion of Bengal, a huge territory.

Ghiyas-ud-din Tughluq blindly adhered to the Quranic laws as the basis of his civil administration. This explains his attitude towards his Hindu subjects "who were treat¬ed with great severity and were made to feel their position of in¬feriority in the body politic". According to 'the ordinance pro¬mulgated by the Sultan, "there should be left only so much to the Hindus that neither on the one hand should they become intoxicated on account of their wealth, nor on the other should they become so destitute as to leave their lands and cultivation in despair".

His attitude towards the Hindus was not very dissimilar to Allauddin Khilji. This shows that the position of the Hindus in the Islamic State of Delhi did not depend much on the character and presonality of the Sultan, but was determined by the Quranic policy, as it was understood in this country in those days. This was clearly based upon discrimination between Muslims and Hindus, and the latter were relegated to an inferior position without any political status or civil rights in the land of their birth.

Mohammed bin Tughlaq

He was considered crazy by those who were there in his court. He was known to mete out very cruel and brutal punishments to people who were found guilty of even small mistakes. He enjoyed a long reign of twenty-six years, and during the earlier part of it controlled twenty-four provinces, a dominion far larger than that of any of his predecessors. But the empire never was at rest; no sooner was one section brought back to its allegiance than another would seek to assert its independence, and by the end of Mohammed's reign it was falling to pieces.
Transfer of the capital to Daulatabad. One of the maddest of his schemes was the transfer of the capital from Delhi to Deogiri in the Deccan, which he renamed Daulatabad. The tyrant's order was carried out with such ruthless completeness that Delhi ' became so deserted that there was not left even a dog or cat in the city'. Ibn Batuta, the contemporary traveller, found Delhi 'almost a desert', and tells a gruesome story that, the Sultans's servants 'finding a blind man in one of the houses and a bedridden ,man to be projected from a catapult, and the blind one to be dragged by his feet to Daulatabad, which is at the distance of ten days, and he was so dragged; but his limbs dropping off by the way, only one of his legs was brought to the place intended, and was then thrown into it; for the order had been that they
should go to this place'. The unhappy people were afterwards forced to return to Delhi.
Other mad schemes; cruelty. The Sulatan aspired to the fame of a universal conqueror, and accordingly collected a vast army for the subjugation of Persia, which dispersed without affecting anything beyond the pillage of his subjects. Again, he thought to subdue China and sent a hundred thousand men into the Himalayas, where eighty thousand, mostly cavalry, perished miserably. In order to provide funds for his schemes of world-wide conquest, he tried to force people to take copper or brass money as silver, engraving upon it the legend, ' He who obeys the Sultan, truly, he obeys God'. But of course, the scheme failed in practice, 'till
at last copper became copper, and silver, silver' while heaps of the brass coins lay at Tughlakabad (a Delhi fort), ' and had no more value than stones'.
His administration, which he believed to be the perfectioin of justice, was so cruel and sanguinary that ' there was constanly in front of his royal pavilion and his civil court a mound of dead bodies and a heap of corpses, while the sweepers and executioners were weary of dragging the wretched victims and putting them to death in crowds. So that the people were never tired of rebelling, nor the king of punishing'. He also committed frightful massacres on a large scale, and is said to have organized man-hunts, driving men and women like game to the slaughter.
In the earlier days of his reign Mohammed had completed the reduction of the Deccan and brought it into some sort of order like the home provinces.
He led an expedition against Nagarkot, but the expedition proved to be one of the, greatest calamities. According to all accounts, the Sultan sent a large army for the expedition. Ibn Batutah says that it consisted of "a hundred thou¬sand horsemen besides a large number of infantry". It seems that the expedition passed through the Moradabad district. The royal troops captured the city of Jidya, which lay at the foot of the moun¬tain, along with the adjacent territories, and burnt the country. The people here, all Hindus, left their hearth and home and took refuge in the mountain heights. There was only one road leading up to the hill-top and only a single horseman could pass through it. The royal troops climbed by this way and captured the city of Warangal. They wrote about their victory to the Sultan who or¬dered them to remain there.

But when the rains set in, a disease broke out in the army. Accordingly, with the permission of the Sultan, the troops began to descend, but the people took their stand in the gorges and occupied the pass before them. Then they threw down pieces of huge trees which killed a large number of the Sultan's army. Those who survived were captured and the people plundered the wealth, horses and the arms of the royal army. Only three officers of this army escaped, and the rest perished.

But far more serious was the rising of the Hindus in Telingana, Andhra and the territory to the south of the Krishna-Tungabhadra. A sort of Hindu confederacy was attempted in the south in order to free the country from the yoke of the Muslims. This is quite natural and easily intelligible, for the first Muslim inroad into this region, which was more of the nature of a raid than of a conquest, took place during the reign of 'Ala-ud-dln Khalji, barely a quarter of a century ago, and the destruction of the Kakatiya kingdom and the firm establishment of Muslim rule in the Deccan and South India were only a recent event barely five years old. The Muslim chronicles either ignore this movement among the Hindus or merely view it as one more rebellion against the Sultan. In any case their reference to it is brief and casual. This shows how much we are liable to misread or misinterpret Indian history so long as we have to derive our information from Muslim chronicles alone.

Though the ruling houses and many noble families in the Deccan perished on account of the Muslim raids, some of the chief¬tains who survived the catastrophe joined hands with the object of freeing their country from the Muslim yoke. According to con¬temporary Hindu records, Prolaya Nayaka drew his sword against the Musulmans to re-establish the Hindu dharma, to restore the worship of the gods, and to protect the Brahmana and the cow. People from all parts joined their standard, and under their inspiring leader¬ship defeated the Muslims in a series of battles. As a result of these victories Prolaya Nayaka drove the Muslim garrison from the coastal districts of Andhra and established himself at Ekapalli in the Bhadrachalam taluk in the East Godavari district.

Prolaya died between A.D. 1330 and 1335 and was succeeded by his nephew (brother's son), Kapaya Nayaka, the Kanaya or Krishna Nayak of the Muslim historians. Kapaya Nayaka was a shrewd statesman and could easily read the signs of the time. He was the leader of a confederacy of seventy-five chiefs, and in order to hasten the impending ruin of the Sultanate, he tried to organize a league of all the Hindu chiefs of the South.

Kapaya Nayaka, accompanied by the Hoysala troops, invaded Tiling and stirred up a Hindu rebel¬lion. A similar national movement of the Hindus had also been working in the region along the Krishna under the leadership of Chalukya Somadeva, the progenitor of the Aravidu family.

Somadeva is said to have captured a number of forts and won many battles. But his greatest achievement was his victory over Malik Muhammad who was appointed governor of Kampill after it was conquered by Muhammad Tughluq only a few years before, as noted above in connection with the rebellion of Gurshasp.

Muhammad Tughluq had succeeded, by A.D. 1328, in establishing his authority almost up to the southern ex¬tremity of Indian Peninsula. But in less than ten years he lost the entire region to the south of the Krishna-Tungabhadra line, and even a part of Telingana and the coastal districts of Andhra. It marked the disintegration of the empire in a manner which no one could fail to notice. When the Sultan returned from Warangal to Delhi famine was raging in Delhi and its neighbourhood in a severe form, and men and cattle died in thousands.
Oh his way back from Gujarat expedition, he contracted fever and died on March, 20, 1351. Thus ended the career of one of the most blood thirsty tyrant that ever sat on the throne of Delhi. He had extended the Delhi Empire to its farthest limits, but before his death he lost everything south of the Vindhya.
Feroz Shah Tughlaq
Feroz Shah Tughlaq was the successor of Mohammed Bin Tughlaq. He built the city of Firuzabad on the bank of the Yamuna, which become known as New Delhi
Firuz Shah Tughlaq led an expedition to Orissa in 1360 AD. He destroyed the temple of Jagannath at Puri, and desecrated many other Hindu shrines.
According to Sîrat-i-Fîrûz Shãhî which he himself wrote or dictated, “Allah who is the only true God and has no other emanation, endowed the king of Islãm with the strength to destroy this ancient shrine on the eastern sea-coast and to plunge it into the sea, and after its destruction he ordered the image of Jagannãth to be perforated, and disgraced it by casting it down on the ground.
They dug out other idols which were worshipped by the polytheists in the kingdom of Jãjnagar and overthrew them as they did the image of Jagannãth, for being laid in front of the mosques along the path of the Sunnis and the way of the musallis (Muslim congregation for namãz) and stretched them in front of the portals of every mosque, so that the body and sides of the images might be trampled at the time of ascent and descent, entrance and exit, by the shoes on the feet of the Muslims.”
After the sack of the temples in Orissa, Firuz Shah Tughlaq attacked an island on the sea-coast where “nearly 100,000 men of Jãjnagar had taken refuge with their women, children, kinsmen and relations”. The swordsmen of Islam turned “the island into a basin of blood by the massacre of the unbelievers”. A worse fate overtook the Hindu women. Sîrat-i-Fîrûz Shãhî records: “Women with babies and pregnant ladies were haltered, manacled, fettered and enchained, and pressed as slaves into service in the house of every soldier.”
Still more horrible scenes were enacted by Firuz Shah Tughlaq at Nagarkot (Kangra) where he sacked the shrine of Jvalamukhi. Firishta records that the Sultan “broke the idols of Jvãlãmukhî, mixed their fragments with the flesh of cows and hung them in nosebags round the necks of Brahmins. He sent the principal idol as trophy to Medina.”

About the same time the Sultan led an expedition against Kharku, the Raja of Katehr (Rohilkhand). In A.D. 1380, the Sultan marched with an army to Katehr and perpetrated almost a wholesale massacre of the Hindus. The Sultan then attacked Kumaon and a very large number of Hindus were killed and 23,000 captured and enslaved. Before returning to Delhi, Firuz left a positive order to devastate Katehr annually for the next five years, and appointed an Afghan to execute this bloody work, The Sultan himself annu¬ally visited the region during the next five years in order to see that his ferocious order was duly carried into effect. The result was: "In those years not an acre of land was cultivated, no man slept in his house…".
Biography : Futuhat-i-Flruz Shahi

The weak and vacillating policy of Firuz was conspicuous throughout his reign, in both civil administration and military affairs. The only occasion on which he showed strength, resolu¬tion and firm determination was in the persecution of the Hindus. A glaring instance is furnished by his barbarous method of warfare in Katehr, referred to above, and the tenacity with which he persecuted the Hindus of that region offers a striking contrast to his humane attitude towards Muslim rebels, for example those in Bengal. As he himself said, "he was resolved never more to make war upon Muslims."

This brings us to the question of the bigotry of Firuz Shah which formed the blackest spot on his character. Anyone who reads the Futuhat-i-Flruz Shahi written by the Sultan himself, cannot avoid the impression that Firuz possessed both the virtues and vices of an orthodox Muslim ruler. The most prominent of these vices was the intolerance of any faith other than orthodox Islam. It is evident from this book that the Sultan divided man¬kind into two groups, Musulmans (by which he meant Musulman of the approved orthodox type), and non-Musulmans, and regard¬ed the former alone as his special concern.

So far as the Hindus were concerned, the following passage gives an idea of his bigoted attitude:—

"The Hindus and idol-worshippers had agreed to pay the money for toleration (zar-i-zimmiya), and had consented to the poll tax, in return for which they and their families enjoyed security.

These people now erected new idol-temples in the city and the environs in opposition to the Law of the Prophet which declares that such temples are not to be tolerated. Under Divine guidance I destroyed these edifices, and killed those leaders of infidelity who seduced others into error, and the lower orders I subjected to stripes and chastisement, until this abuse was entirely abolished. The fol¬lowing is an instance:-—In the village of Maluh there is a tank which they call kund (tank). Here they had built idol-temples, and on certain days the Hindus were accustomed to proceed thither on horseback and wearing arms. Their women and children also went out in palankins and carts. There they assembled in thou¬sands and performed idol worship. This abuse had been so over¬looked that the bazar people took out there all sorts of provisions, and set up stalls and sold their goods.

When intelligence of this came to my ears my religious feelings prompted me at once to put a stop to this scandal and offence to the religion of Islam. On the day of the assembling I went there in person, and I ordered that the leaders of these people and the pro¬moters of this abomination should be put to death and destroyed their idol temples, and instead thereof raised mosques".

Firoz also cites another concrete instance where the Hindus who had erected new temples were put to death before the gate of the palace, and their books, the images of deities, and the vessels used in their worship were publicly burnt. This was to serve "as a warning to all men, that no zimmi could follow such wicked practices in a Musulman country".

Other instances are given by contemporary writers. 'Afif gives a graphic description of one such case. A Brahman of Delhi was charged with "publicly performing the wor¬ship of idols in his house and perverting Muhammadan women, leading them to become infidels". The Brahman was told that according to law he must "either become a Musulman or be burned." The Brahman having refused to change his faith, "was tied hand and foot and cast into a burning pile of faggots'. 'Afif, who wit¬nessed the execution, ends his account by saying: "Behold the Sultan's strict adherence to law and rectitude, how he would not deviate in the least from its decrees".

The Sultan himself boasts that he adopted every means to induce the Hindus to adopt Islam. This will be evident from the following passage:—

"I encouraged my infidel subjects to embrace the religion of the Prophet, and I proclaimed that every one who repeated the creed and became a Musulman should be exempt from the jizya, or poll-tax. Information of this came to the ears of the people at large and great numbers of Hindus presented themselves, and were ad¬mitted to the honor of Islam. Thus they came forward day by day from every quarter, and, adopting the faith, were exonerated from the jizya, and were favoured with presents and honours". This is probably the first recorded instance, after Muslim conquest of India, of the State itself becoming a proselytizing agency.

Firuz regarded the Sultanate as a Muslim State. So, "as far as the beneficent activities of the State were concerned (e.g. educa¬tion, care of the poor, provision of the unemployed, marriage of the poor girls, religious endowments, etc.), it was largely the Muslims who benefited". This is clearly admitted by 'Afif. "Political power remained exclusively in Muslim hands and no post of influence is known to have been held by any Hindu".
He had about 180,000 slaves, who had been brought from all over the country, trained in various arts and crafts. They however turned out to be undependable. Transfer of capital was the highlight of his reign.
Firoz Shah's death led to many rebellions. His lenient attitude had weakened the sultan's position. His successor Ghiyas-ud-Din Tughluq II could not control the slaves or the nobles. The army had become weak. Slowly the empire shrank in size. Ten years after his death, Timur's invasion devastated Delhi.
AMIR TIMUR
The climax came during the invasion of Timur in 1399 AD. Once in a course of a fight, he was wounded by an arrow in the leg and he limped for the rest of his life. Hence he was named as “Timur-i-lang” (limping Timur).
He starts by quoting the Quran in his Tuzk-i-Timûrî: “O Prophet, make war upon the infidels and unbelievers, and treat them severely.” He continues: “My great object in invading Hindustan had been to wage a religious war against the infidel Hindus” [so that he can become martyr] the army of Islam might gain something by plundering the wealth and valuables of the Hindus.”
To start with he stormed the fort of Kator on the border of Kashmir. He ordered his soldiers “to kill all the men, to make prisoners of women and children, and to plunder and lay waste all their property”. Next, he “directed towers to be built on the mountain of the skulls of those obstinate unbelievers”.
Soon after, he laid siege to Bhatnir defended by Rajputs. They surrendered after some fight, and were pardoned. But Islam did not bind Timur to keep his word given to the “unbelievers”. His Tuzk-i-Timûrî records: “In a short space of time all the people in the fort were put to the sword, and in the course of one hour the heads of 10,000 infidels were cut off. The sword of Islam was washed in the blood of the infidels, and all the goods and effects, the treasure and the grain which for many a long year had been stored in the fort became the spoil of my soldiers. They set fire to the houses and reduced them to ashes, and they razed the buildings and the fort to the ground.”
Timur was now moving through Haryana, the land of the Jats. He directed his soldiers to “plunder and destroy and kill every one whom they met”. And so the soldiers “plundered every village, killed the men, and carried a number of Hindu prisoners, both male and female”
Loni which was captured before he arrived at Delhi was predominantly a Hindu town. But some Muslim inhabitants were also taken prisoners. Timur ordered that “he Musulman prisoners should be separated and saved, but the infidels should all be despatched to hell with the proselytising sword”
By now Timur had captured 100,000 Hindus. As he prepared for battle against the Tughlaq army after crossing the Yamuna, his Amirs advised him “that on the great day of battle these 100,000 prisoners could not be left with the baggage, and that it would be entirely opposed to the rules of war to set these idolators and enemies of Islam at liberty”. Therefore, “no other course remained but that of making them all food for the sword”. Tuzk-i-Timûrî continues: “I proclaimed throughout the camp that every man who had infidel prisoners should put them to death, and whoever neglected to do so should himself be executed and his property given to the informer. When this order became known to the ghãzîs of Islam, they drew their swords and put their prisoners to death. One hundred thousand infidels, impious idolators, were on that day slain. Maulana Nasiruddin Umar, a counsellor and man of learning, who, in all his life, had never killed a sparrow, now, in execution of my order, slew with his sword fifteen idolatrous Hindus, who were his captives.”
The Tughlaq army was defeated in the battle that ensued next day. Timur entered Delhi and learnt that a “great number of Hindus with their wives and children, and goods and valuables, had come into the city from all the country round”. He directed his soldiers to seize these Hindus and their property. Tuzk-i-Timûrî concludes: “any of them (Hindus) drew their swords and resisted” The flames of strife were thus lighted and spread through the whole city from Jahãnpanah and Siri to Old Delhi, burning up all it reached. The Hindus set fire to their houses with their own hands, burned their wives and children in them and rushed into the fight and were killed… On that day, Thursday, and all the night of Friday, nearly 15,000 Turks were engaged in slaying, plundering and destroying. When morning broke on Friday, all my army went off to the city and thought of nothing but killing, plundering and making prisoners”.
The following day, Saturday the 17th, all passed in the same way, and the spoil was so great that each man secured from fifty to a hundred prisoners, men, women, and children. There was no man who took less than twenty. The other booty was immense in rubies, diamonds, garnets, pearls, and other gems and jewels; ashrafis, tankas of gold and silver of the celebrated Alãi coinage: vessels of gold and silver; and brocades and silks of great value. Gold and silver ornaments of Hindu women were obtained in such quantities as to exceed all account. Excepting the quarter of the Saiyids, the ulama and the other Musulmãns, the whole city was sacked.”
A historian has very correctly observed that Timur had inflicted “on India more misery than had ever before been inflicted by any conqueror in a single invasion”. Although his avowed objective was to destroy the infidel Hindus and plunder their property and this pious task he did to the best of his ability.
After the departure of Timur, chaos and confusion prevailed over a large part of Northern India. Delhi was almost depopulated and the few that remained were severely affected by famine and pestilence. This miserable lot of the proud imperial city of the Muslim Sultans was brought by one who regarded himself as the champion of that faith. The Empire also perished. Bengal, Deccan and Vijyanagar had already become independent before Timur invasion. Now Gujarat, Malwa and Jaunpur become powerful independent principalities.
Sayyid Dynasty
After the Tughlaq dynasty disintegrated, the Sayyid dynasty rose to power. They were essentially the rulers of the Delhi Sultanate of India and reigned from 1414 to 1451. The Sayyid Empire was formed amidst chaos when there was no figure of authority to control Delhi. The Sayyid dynasty had four basic rulers.

Khizr Khan

The founder of Sayyid dynasty was Khizr Khan and ruled from 1414-1421. Though he didn't wage many battles during his reign, he was busy suppressing revolts in different parts of his kingdom.

Mubarak Shah

After the death of Khizr Khan, his son Mubarak Shah succeeded him on the throne. city of Mubarakabad was founded by him in the year 1433.

Muhammad Shah

After the death of Mubarak Shah, his brother's son Muhammad Shah succeeded him on the throne since Mubarak Shah did not have a son. Muhammad Shah ruled from 1434-1444. He was not an able ruler and misused his power and position of authority. He lost the trust and affection of his nobles and royal force who had freed him from his captors. He was lethargic and lazy ruler who just wanted to live his life in pleasure.

Alam Shah

After the death of Muhammad Shah in 1444, his son took over the throne under the title of Alam Shah. During the year 1447, he visited a place called Baduan and loved it so much that he decided to stay there forever. Till 1451, Delhi was ruled by Buhlul Lodhi. Alam Shah ruled Baduan till he died in the year 1478. with his death the Sayyid dynasty came to end.
Lodi Dynasty
The Lodi dynasty in India arose around 1451 after the Sayyid dynasty. They formed the last phase of the Delhi Sultanate. There were three main rulers in the history of Lodi dynasty.

Buhlul Khan Lodi

Buhlul Khan Lodi (1451-1489) was the founder of the Lodi dynasty in India and the first Afghan ruler of Delhi. Buhlul Khan seized the throne without much resistance from the then ruler, Alam Shah.

Sikandar Lodi

After the death of Buhlul Khan, his second son succeeded him as the king. He was given the title of Sultan Sikander Shah. He was the one who founded a new town where the modern day Agra stands.

Unfortunately, Sikandar, deeply devoted to Islam, was in¬tolerant of other faiths. His attitude towards this religion of a vast majority of his subjects was influence by Islamic law, as usual with Muslim rulers. Sikandar, as a king, however, fre¬quently razed temples to the ground and erected mosques and public utility buildings in their place, as illustrated by his behaviour at Mandrail, Utgir and Narwar. At Mathura he prevented the Hindus from bathing at their sacred ghats or having themselves shaved, The stones of broken images of Hindu idols brought from Nagarkot were given away to butchers to be used as weights.
Ibrahim Lodhi

Ibrahim Lodhi was the son of Sikander who succeeded him after his death. Ibrahim was known to be a very stern ruler and was not liked much by his subjects. In order to take revenge of the insults done by Ibrahim, the governor of Lahore Daulat Khan Lodhi asked the ruler of Kabul, Babur to invade his kingdom. Ibrahim Lodhi was thus killed in a battle with Babur who was the founder of the Mughal dynasty in India. With the death of Ibrahim Lodhi, the Lodhi dynasty also came to an end.



The succession state of the Delhi Sultanate
Gujarat Sultanate
The Gujarat Sultanate was an independent kingdom established in the early 15th century in Gujarat. The founder of the ruling, Muzaffar Shah I was appointed as governor of Gujarat by Nasir-ud-Din Muhammad bin Tughluq IV in 1391. The next sultan, his grandson Ahmad Shah I founded the new capital Ahmedabad in 1411 on the banks of Sabarmati River, which he styled as Shahr-i-Mu'azzam (the great city). Sultan Ahmad Shah died in 1443 and succeeded by his eldest son Muizz-ud-Din Muhammad Shah.
Malwa Sultanate
The Malwa Sultanate was a late medieval independent kingdom in the Malwa region of the present day Madhya Pradesh state in India. The kingdom was founded by Dilawar Khan Ghuri, the governor of the Delhi Sultanate in Malwa.
Initially Dhar was the capital of the new kingdom, but soon it was shifted to Mandu which was renamed Shdiabad (the city of joy). After his death, he was succeeded by his son Alp Khan, who assumed the title of Hoshang Shah.
The Ghuri dynasty founded by Dilawar Khan Ghuri was replaced by Mahmud Shah I, who proclaimed himself king on May 16, 1436. The Khilji dynasty founded by him ruled over Malwa till 1531. Mahmud I was succeeded by his eldest son Ghiyas-ud-Din. The last days of Ghiyas-ud-Din was embittered by a struggle for throne between his two sons, Nasir-ud-Din and Ala-ud-Din. Nasir-ud-Din, however emerged victorious and ascended throne on October 22, 1500. The last ruler Mahmud Shah II surrendered to Bahadur Shah, the sultan of Gujarat after the fort of Mandu fell to Bahadur on May 25, 1531.
The main interest in the history of Malwa during the reign of Mahmud II, is the clash between the Hindu and the Muslim nobles. Hindu under the leadership of Medini rai emerges victorious. Medina Rai become so powerful that Mahmud felt restive under his power and escaped to Gujarat with his queen and son.

Mahmud was cordially received by Muzaffar and soon a Gujarat army, led by the two kings, invaded Malwa and besieged Mandu. Medini Rai and his broher, Silhadi, went to Maharana Sainga to gain his help, leaving the affairs of Malwa in the hands of MedinI Rai's son, Rai Pithora, that is Prithviraja. Prithviraja defended the fort of Mandu as long as possible, but ultimately it fell to the invaders before Maharana Sanga could arrive, and a large number of Hindus were massacred. Muzaffar then restored Mahmud to his throne and returned to Gujarat, leaving a contingent of Gujarat cavalry to help Mahmud.

Though Mahmud had thus recovered his capital, most of the strong points and forts such as Chanderi, Kawun, Bhilsa, Haisen and Sarangpur were in the hands of Medini Ral's followers. Mahmud therefore besieged the fort of Gagraun which was held by one Hema-karana, on behalf of MedinI Rai.

While this siege was in progress, Medini Rai advanced into Malwa with the army led by Maharana Sariga, and Mahmud, on hearing the news, hastily raised the siege and advanced towards the Rajput army. As Mahmud's army was resting after a day's march, the Maharana, without giving his troops any rest, suddenly attacked and routed the Malwa army. Mahmud fell wounded and was taken a prisoner.

According to Rajput chronicles, Mahmud was taken to Chitor, and was kept in honourable captivity for a period of several months. Nizam-ud-dm and Firishta. however, relate that Mahmud was re¬leased after he regained his health, and then the Maharana returned to Chitor. But all the historians have praised highly this generous conduct of the great Maharana. Nizam-ud-dln says: "No act similar to this wonderful one is known up to the present day."

Maharana Sanga has been adversely criticized for what has been called his misplaced generosity. But it should be remembered that he annexed a part of Malwa, and Silhadi, a Hindu chief, became the independent ruler of the territory extending from Sarangpur to Bhilsa and Raisen. A Muslim noble, called Sikandar Khan, took possession of the territory near Satwas. Thus Mahmud was left practically powerless with a very small territory.

The Vijyanagar Kingdom
Harihara I and Bukka Raya I, the originators of the kingdom, were the ones primarily allied to the Kakatiya kingdom who acquired power of the northern regions of the Hoysala Empire through its decline.

Under the influence of sage of Vidyaranya, whom they accepted their guide both in temporal and spiritual matters, they came to believe that it was their duty to champion the cause of the ancient Hindu dharma. Harihara was crowned in AD 1336 as the king of Vijayanagar.
In the first two decades after the founding of the empire, Harihara I gained control over most of the area south of the Tungabhadra River and earned the title of Purvapaschima Samudradhishavara ("master of the eastern and western seas").
Harihara died without issue; and Bukka I succeeded him as the sole sovereign of the Kingdom. The first step which he took after assuming control of the state was to unify the kingdom and strengthen his position. Vijyanagar Empire was in constant struggle with two Muslim Kingdom, one in north i.e. Bahmani kingdom and another is Madura in south.
By 1374 Bukka Raya I had defeated Bahmani Kingdom and gained control over Goa in the west and the Tungabhadra-Krishna River doab in the north. When the affairs of the northern and eastern frontiers were thus settled to his satisfaction, Bukka I clashed with the Sultanate of Madura.
A clash between the two kingdoms was inevitable; and the miserable plight to which the Hindus were reduced by the Muslim rulers of Ma'bar loudly called for interven¬tion. Most of the Hindu shrines were destroyed; good many of them were converted into mosques. The people were killed by hundreds and thousands; their properties were confiscated; religious practices were forbidden; cows were butchered; and terror reigned supreme. Bukka, as the head of a Hindu State which was founded specially to protect the Hindu society and re-establish the Hindu dharma, could not remain indifferent, and launched an attack some time about A.D. 1370. He entrusted the supreme command of his army to his son, Kumara Kampana, who had been governing the Tamil districts of the kingdom as his viceroy since the overthrow of the Sambuvaraya in A.D. 1360-61.
The army set out about the beginning of A.D. 1370 from Gingee in the South Arcot district and inflicted a crushing defeat on the forces of Madura at Samayavaram near Srirangam. Kannanur-Kuppam, the chief stronghold of the Musulmans in this region, fell into the hands of the invaders who, after having restored god Siiranganatha at Srirangam and Hoysalesvara at Kannanur-Kuppam to their respective shrines, marched against Madura. A severe engagement took place somewhere between Trichinopoly and Madura in which the Sultan was defeated and killed. The death of the Sultan, however, did not put an end to the war. Some of his follow¬ers appear to have shut themselves in the capital and declined to submit. Kumara Kampana laid siege to Madura, and took it by storm. Thus ended the Sultanate of Madura after a brief but bloody existence of nearly forty years during which the Hindus of the country were subjected to inhuman tyranny.

With the conquest of Madura, the whole of South India, extend¬ing up to Setubandha Ramesvaram, came under the sway of Vijaya¬nagara, and it thus rapidly grew up into an empire.

Bukka died not live long after this battle and died in AD 1377. He was one of the greatest monarchs of the age, and was the real architect of the Vijayanagara empire. He was a great soldier and achieved conspicuous success on the field of battle, speci¬ally against the Muslims. In an age marked by religious bigotry and fanaticism, special reference must be made to the policy of tolerance adopted by Bukka I in dealing with the religious sects in his kingdom. Taking advantage of the dispute between the Vaishnavas and the Jainas, he issued an edict, copies of which were set up in important centres, proclaiming that from the standpoint of the State, all religions were equal and entitled to protection and patronage. The policy of religious concord, indicated in this edict, was followed by all his successors. All religious communities of the kingdom including the Jews, Christians and Muslims, looked upon the Raya as the guardian of their religious rights and privileges.

Bukka I took an active interest in the revival of the Vedic dharma. He assumed the title of Vedamarga-pratishthadpaka or the establisher of the path of the Vedas, and gathered together all the scholars learned in the Vedic literature. Having placed them under his kula-guru, Madhavacharya-Vidyaranya and his famous brother Sayanacharya, he commanded them to compose fresh commentaries and expounded the meaning of the Vedas and the allied religious texts. He also encouraged Telugu literature and was a patron of Nachana Soma, the greatest Telugu poet of the age.

Bukka I succeed by his son Harihara II. The Bahmani Sultan invaded his kingdom in large force. The sultan had met an inglorious failure and his army was defeated. Harihara II (1377 – 1404 A.D.) extended his dominions in Konkana beyond Goa to Chaul. His son Virupaksha quelled the wide spread rebellion in the Tamil region.
On the death of Harihara II the succession to the throne was disputed. Virupaksha I ruled for only a few months and was followed by Bukka II (1404 – 1406 A.D.) Finally Devaraya I (1406 – 1422) came to the throne. He had to fight against the Reddis of Kondavidu, Velamas of Rajakonda and the Bahamani Sultan of Gulbarga.
For a period of 50 years (A.D. 1372-1422) during which he participated in the administration of the kingdom, he endeavour¬ed to increase the efficiency of his army. He was the first king of his family to realize the value of cavalry which contributed greatly to the success of medieval armies. By purchasing on a large scale horses from Arabia and Persia and recruiting suitable troopers to man them, he enhanced the strength and the fighting capacity of his forces. Devaraya was also the first ruler of Vijayanagara to employ in his service Turkish bowmen whom he attracted to his court by liberal grants of land and money. Under the fostering care of Devaraya I, the Vijayanagara army became an efficient instrument for victory, and enabled him to emerge successfully from the long-drawn contest with the Bahmanl Sultan Firuz Shah.
Devaraya I was an ardent Saivite, and was specially devoted to the worship of the Goddess Pampa of the Tampl-tirtha. He built several temples at Vijayanagara some of which still remain in dilapidated condition. Devaraya was fond of learning, and extend¬ed his patronage to men of letters, philosophers and artists. He invited them to his court and discoursed with them on the arts and sciences in which they were proficient. The 'Pearl Hall' of the palace where he honoured distinguished poets, philosophers and artists by bathing them in showers of gold coins and gems is im¬mortalized in literature and is still remembered in the Telugu country. Under Devaraya I, Vijayanagara became the chief centre of learning in the whole of South India to which gravitated all seeking public recognition and fame. Vijayanagara had indeed be¬come Vidyanagara, the city of learning and the abode of the Goddess Sarasvati.

Devaraya I was followed by his sons Ramachandra (1422) and Vira Vijaya (1422 - 24) whose rule was not eventful. Devaraya II (1424 – 1446) repulsed the intrusion of Gajapati Kapilesvara and restored the Reddi Kingdom of Rajamahendri to its former position. When Ahmad Shah I of Bahamani invaded Vijayanagar he was driven out. Perhaps it was the danger from Vijayanagar that forced the Bahamani ruler to shift his capital to Bidar even when the war was in progress. Devaraya II had to fight two wars against Ala – Ud – Din. Both the wars were confined to the Krishna – Tungabhadra and centered round the forts of Mudgal and Raichur.
A naval expedition under the command of Lakkanna was dispatched against Ceylon and King of that island was forced to pay tribute. During the regime of Devaraya II the Sangama dynasty reached the highest watermarks of its glory. Although he was continuously at war with the enemies, he found time to patronize men of letters in Sanskrit and vernaculars. He promoted fine arts and adorned his capital with new temples.
Mallikarjuna (1446-1465) was a weak ruler and during his reign Bahamanis came very near the capital in 1450. These reverses caused the decline in the fortunes of the Sangama dynasty. Taking advantage of troubled condition in the empire, Virupaksha, the cousin of Mallikarjuna usurped the throne.
Virupaksha II (1465 – 85) was a weak and unworthy sovereign. He precipitated the disruption of the empire, which was undermined by the insubordination of the nobles and officers of the state on the one side and by the in roads of external enemies on the other. Sultan Muhammad Shah III sent his Prime Minister Mahamud Gawan to conquer the whole of the Konkana coast including Goa, Chaul and Dabul. The rule of Virupaksha became unpopular and roused the whole empire to indignation and rebellion. The King was killed in 1485 by his own son. The total disruption was averted by Saluva Narasimha, an able general who ended the rule of the Sangama dynasty.
The Saluva Dynasty (1485 – 1505 A. D.)
During the short span of six years Saluva Narasimha tried to restore the empire to its past glory; but his success was not complete. Gajapati Kapilendra re – conquered Udayagiri in 1491. The Chiefs of Ummattur and Srirangapatna remained unsubdued. However, Narasimha improved the condition of cavalry, transformed the peace – loving farmers of Vijayanagara into a nation of warriors, infused fresh vigour into the body politic and rescued the state from destruction.
At the time of Narasimha’s death his two sons were too young too rule. Therefore, he entrusted the Kingdom to the care of his trusted general and minister Tuluva Narasa Nayaka. Prince Timma was murdered by a minister and Saluva Narasimha II was crowned by Narasa Nayaka. When the new King turned hostile to Narasa, he was removed to Penugonda where he remained in confinement. Narasa Nayaka now ruled Vijayanagara like a sovereign.
Narasa Nayaka restored peace and retained the boundaries of the empire. He suppressed many rebellions and pushed the invasion of the Gajapatis back. When Narasa Nayaka dies in 1503, his son Vira Narasimha succeeded him. In 1505 Saluva Narasimha II was murdered and his dynasty came to an end.
The Tuluva Dynasty (1505 – 1567 A. D.)
Vira Narasimha (1505 – 1509 A. D.) became the founder of the Tuluva Dynasty when he ascended the Vijayanagara throne after the assassination of Saluva Narasimha II. He had to counteract the incursions of Yusuf Adil Khan who tried to conquer Adoni Karnul. He was defeated by Aravidu Ramaraja and Timma, the able generals of Narasimha. Vira Narasimha extended the hand of friendship to Portuguese, increased the strength of the army and attended to the welfare of the peasants and agriculturists. He was succeeded by his step – brother Krishnadevaraya.
Krishnadevaraya
Krishnadevaraya is synonymous with the pomp and splendor of Hampi. South India bursts with joy at the very mention of his name. It symbolizes Hindu pride. His rule not only ensured a secure Hindu State but also led to the encouragement of art, literature and architecture.

The way Krishnadevaraya established a Hindu kingdom with his courage, dharmic outlook and encouragement to culture, litterateur and art is unprecedented. With Vijayanagar as his Capital, he emerged as an Emperor in South India. He ruled for 21 years from1509 to 1530. There are very few Kings who managed to achieve all-round development for the state. Krishnadevaraya was not just an Emperor – expert in domination. He was also soft-hearted and a poet-extraordinaire himself.

His Empire extended from Nellore to Udayagiri, from Kanyakumari in South to Kalinga in East and Goa in West. His name is counted among the nation’s great kings like Chandragupta, Ashoka, Harsha and Shivaji. Even before he turned 20, Krishnadevaraya was destined to go on his Empire extension.

For several reasons, Krishnadevaraya’s forays into extending his empire was a necessity. Several of the samanths (junior Kings) were ambitious and tried to be independent at the cost of Hindu sovereignty. Such a divisive outlook would have spelt doom with the Portugese missionaries and Islamic Jihadi’s keeping a predatory watch. Sultan Adil Shah and Kalinga Kings were forever conspiring to swallow Vijayanagar. Krishnadevaraya made it a point to improve his relationship with the Kings in his region. It was his attempts at synergy to put the foreign invaders at bay. He also achieved a certain level of harmonious relationship with the Portugese and prevented a possible tie-up between the Portugese and Muslims. By extending his credibility, he managed to extend his Kingdom as well as subdue his enemies.

Expedition against the Bahmani kingdom

At the very outset of his reign, Krishnadeva was involved in war with his neighbours in the north and the north-east. The Bahmani Sultan, Mahmud Shah, in pursuance of the compact of Bidar, and probably at the instance of Yusuf 'Adil Khan, declared a jihad on the infidels of Vijayanagara towards the end of A.D. 1509; and he was joined by all the chiefs and nobles who nominally acknowledged his supremacy.

The Bahmani Sultan marched from his capital at the head of a vast army. A fierce engagement took place in which the Bahmani forces suffered a crushing defeat. The Sultan himself was wounded and his nobles and captains, unable to face the victorious enemy, beat a hasty retreat. Yusuf 'Adil Khan who, since the declaration of virtual independence, had been fomenting trouble for Vijayanagara, was killed in the fight, and the infant state of Bijapur was thrown into confusion and disorder.
Taking advantage of the anarchic conditions prevailing in Bijapur, Krishnadevaraya invaded the Krishna-Tungabhadra-docib and captured Raichur (A.D. 1512). He next set out for Bidar in pursuit of Band, and having de¬feated him once again in battle, captured the fort. Krishnadevaraya then restored Sultan Mahmud Shah to power, and assumed, in com¬memoration of the act, the title of Yavana-rajya-sthapan-acharya. This was not a whimsical step. Krishnaraya was not only a great general but a skilful politician. He set the Sultan at liberty and restored him to power, because he wanted to weaken his Muslim neighbours by throwing an apple of discord in their midst. He knew that so long as the shadow of the Bahmani monarchy persisted, there would be no peace among the Muslim rulers of the Deccan.
War with Bijapur

It has been mentioned above, that Krishnadevaraya captured the fort of Raichur from Isma'il 'Adil Khan in A.D. 1512 during his minority when Kama'1 Khan was the regent of the kingdom. Isma'il did not, however, reconcile himself to the loss of the fort and, together with it, the mastery over the Krishna-Tungabhadra-doab. Therefore, when he came to power after the overthrow of Kamal Khan, he took advantage of Krishnadevaraya's preoccupation with the Orissan and other wars on the east coast, and invaded the doab and captured Raichur. In A.D. 1520, as soon as Saluva Timma returned to the capital from Kondavidu, he set out at the head of a large army and laid siege to Raichur. Isma'il 'Adil Khan hastened towards the doab with all his forces, crossed the Krishna, and established himself in an entrenched camp near the village of Gobbur. A fierce engagement took place in which the Bijapuris sustained a crushing defeat; large numbers were massacred and many were drowned in the river while attempting to escape. Isma'l 'Adil Khan fled precipitately from the field, abandoning his camp and war equipment to be plundered by the victorious Vijyanagar forces.

As soon as Krishnadevaraya returned to Vijayanagara after the capture of Raichur, an ambassador of Isma'il 'Adil Khan arrived at his court, protesting against the unprovoked attack, ag he term¬ed it, upon his master's kingdom and requesting that all that had been taken from him in the recent war, including the fort of Raichur, might be restored to him. Krishnaraya promised to comply with 'Adil Khan's request, provided that the latter would pay homage to him by kissing his feet. On being informed of this, the 'Adil Khan agreed to do so, and it was arranged that the ceremony should take place at Mudgal on the frontier between the two kingdoms. But when Krishnaraya reached Mudgal, he did not find Isma'Il 'Adil Khan there. Enraged at the slight put upon him, Krishnadeva crossed the frontier and advanced upon Bijapur to chastise him. 'Adil Khan fled from his capital in panic; and Krishnaraya entered his enemy's capital without opposition, and occupied the royal palace for several days.
Krishnaraya's victory over Isma'il 'Adil Khan was complete. He was personally inclined to continue the war against 'Adil Khan, but, on the advice of the Council of Ministers which he considered wise and prudent, he resolved to give up hostilities and return to his kingdom. Before he started upon his return march, he placed, on the ancestral throne, the eldest of the three sons of Sultan Mahmud Shah II, whom 'Adil Khan had kept in confinement in the fort of Gulbarga; and took the other two with him to Vijayanagara where he kept them in safety, bestowing an annual pension of fifty thousand gold paradaos on each of them. This step was prompt¬ed by motives of policy. The continuance of the Bahmani monarchy, even in a shadowy form, was a source of potential danger to the stability of the new Deccani Muslim states; and if 'Adil Khan or any other Muslim ruler of the Deccan imprisoned or made away with the prince whom he set upon the throne, he held the other two in reserve to make use of them, as he deemed fit, in any new situation that might arise in the future.
Krishnadevaraya as a warrior and general
Krishnadevaraya was famous both as a warrior and general. He believed like most of his contemporaries, that the proper place of a monarch on the battlefield was at the head of his forces. His prowess was well known; he led his armies personally, fought in the front line of the battle, and won the respect of his friends and foes alike. He was a great general, who knew how to win victories under the most discouraging circumstances. He knew no defeat. Whenever he took the command of his armies in person, he was uniformly victorious, and he invariably swept away the forces arrayed against him on the battlefield. His triumphant armies entered the capitals of his enemies, and planted the boar-standard on the battlements of Cuttack, Bidar, Gulbarga and Bijapur. His success must be ascribed to his capacity for organization and the extraordinary skill which he displayed in leading his forces.
He showed amazing resourcefulness in overcoming obstacles besetting his path. He smashed rocks and boulders for making a road for his soldiers to reach the fort of Udayagiri, set up movable wooden platforms around Kondavidu to enable his men to ftght on an equal footing with the garrison defending the fort, cut canals to drain the waters of a river swollen with floods to seize the stronghold of the rebel chief of Chatuir, and put to the sword his own soldiers who turned their backs on the enemy at Raichur, and converted a disaster into a brilliant victory.
But even more than his personal bravery or his skilful management of troops, what enabled him to over¬throw hostile forces was the devotion and attachment of his soldiers to his person. Krishnaraya was accustomed, after the conclusion of every battle, to go about the battlefield, looking for the wounded; he would pick them up and make arrangements to give them medi¬cal help and other conveniences needed for their recovery. Those that specially distinguished themselves in the fight were placed directly under his supervision so that he might bestow particular attention on them and help them to regain their health as quickly as possible. The care with which Krishnadevaraya nourished the wounded soldiers and warriors did not go unrewarded. It won him the affection of the rank and file of his army. The soldiers as well as officers were prepared to throw themselves into the jaws of death in executing his commands.
End of Vijyanagar Empire

The Vijyanagar Empire was one of the greatest Hindu empires of Southern India down the ages, and Krishnadeva Raya--the greatest of the Vijyanagar kings-- one of the greatest kings India has known.

On January 26, 1565 the Deccan Sultanates of Ahmadnagar, Berar, Bidar, Bijapur and Golconda, who had formed a grand alliance, met the Vijyanagar army at Talikota. The allied powers fought against Rama Raya`s army on 23rd January 1565 and the latter was killed in the battle. The panic-stricken Vijyanagar soldiers fled from the scene, but most of them were caught and killed. The Muslim armies plundered Vijayanagara (present day Hampi). Following this rout, the glorious city of Vijayanagara was ransacked and desecrated.

The Battle of Talikota was so catastrophic that never perhaps in the history of South India has such havoc been wrought on a splendid city which was reduced to ruins amid scenes of savage massacre and horrors beggaring description.

It is said that this particular conquest was so ferocious that it left not a stone upon a stone, that it was as if a powerful earthquake had destroyed large areas in the empire, and that even a common soldier of the Bahamani confederacy had become extremely wealthy after the looting and killings that took place.

The battle spelt the death knell for the large Hindu kingdoms in India, and it also ended the last great southern empire in India. What followed was a victorious army along with hordes of robbers and jungle dwellers falling upon the great city, looting, robbing, murdering and pillaging the residents. With axes, crowbars, fire and sword the victorious armies went about the task of bringing to rubble the city of Vijayanagara which never recovered from the onslaught.


MEWAR & MARWAR: RAJPUT STATES
MEWAR

The history of the Guhilaputras till the capture of Chitor by 'Ala-ud-dln Khalji in A.D. 1303 has been referred to above. While the siege of Chitor was in progress the ruling prince Ratnasimha, who belonged to the elder branch of the Guhila family, was dethron¬ed and another member of a junior or Sisodiya branch of the same family was proclaimed as the ruler. The prince who thus secured the throne in a very perilous moment was Lakshmansinha, who had no other alternative but to die fighting with the enemy in defense of Chitor along with seven of his sons. Only one son, Ajaya-sinha, was allowed to save himself by flight; but so precarious was his position that he had to hide himself in the Aravallis and main¬tain a miserable existence. When he died (1314), his elder brother's son, Hammir, succeeded to his titles.

This prince was the real founder of the modern State of Mewar.Nearly a year previously, the Khalji dynasty had come to an end being replaced by the Tughluqs.

Meanwhile Hammir did not remain idle. From the notices left in the inscriptions, it appears that he proceeded in the task of re¬construction in a most statesmanlike way. The mountain strong¬hold of Kelwara in the Aravallis was his principal headquarters. His first attempts were directed towards consolidating his autho¬rity in the neighborhood. In pursuance of this object he cap¬tured the fort of Jilwara which occupied a position commanding the narrow mountain defile that connects Mewar with Marwar across the Aravallis. He could now launch his attacks in either direction at his will and harass the Muslims both in the Mewar and the Marwar regions.

Maldeo, ruler of the nearby state of Jalore, who had allied with them during the recent war. In a bid to reconcile and co-opt the natives of the land to his rule, Maldeo arranged for the marriage of his widowed daughter Songari with Hamir.

On Hammir’s death his son Kshetrasimha succeeded to the throne and ruled for than quarter of century (1378-1405). Kshetrasimha came to be involved in fighting with Dilavar Khan Ghauri of Malwa. A sanguinary battle took place near Chitor and he defeated Dilavar Khan.

Not very long after Kshetrasimha died and succeed by his eldest son Lakshasimha or Lakha. One of the most important events of his reign was the discovery of silver and lead mines in a village called Jawar in the Magra district of the state. That placed the kingdom on a strong foundation without which it would not have been possible for Mewar to carry on the wars with the neighboring states in the 15th and 16th centuries and at the same time reared up some of the most splendid monuments that country can boast of. The artificial lake near Udaipur was also constructed which today is known as Pichhola Lake.

In those days help given to pilgrims was considered very meritorious. Actuated by this idea the aged Lakha gave relief to the Hindu pilgrims that visited the sacred places of Gaya, Banaras and Prayaga. These places were then included within the territories of the Sultan of Jaunpur who imposed severe taxes on such pilgrims, causing great inconvenience to them.

When Lakha died, his son, Mokal succeed to the throne. In his reign Sultan of Gujarat attacked and advanced as far as Jilwara. Rana Mokal went to meet the enemy but was killed. The sudden death of Mokal left the kingdom in a most difficult position. Muslim ruler of Malwa and Gujarat sought to take advantage of Mewar’s trouble. Mokal was succeeded by his son Kumbha.

Kumbha was one of the greatest rulers of medieval India. When the records of his reign that lie scattered in more than sixty inscrip¬tions and many other sources have been fully worked out into a comprehensive and connected account, Kumbha will be found to occupy a place in no way inferior to the greatest of the contemporary sovereigns, Hindu or Muslim.

The most astonishing feature of his life was that though more than two-thirds of his reigns were spent in warfare, he could still find time to devote to the cultivation of arts and literature as well. The erroneous belief that the Rajput ruler was a mere fighting animal is sure to be dispelled by a clear appreciation of this aspect of his achievements. A contemporary manuscript called the Eklingamahatmya credits him with proficiency in the Vedas, Smritis, Mimamsa, Upanishads, Vyakarana, politics and literature. This is fully supported by what is left of his own activities as a man of letters. He wrote a commentary on Jaya-deva's Gitagovinda and an explanation of the Chandlsatakam. For his knowledge of dramatic art and literature he has been described as the new Bharata. He wrote four dramas in which he is said to have made use of four provincial languages. He was also highly proficient in music, and wrote three works on the science of music called Sangitaraga, Sangitamimamsfr and Suraprdbandha.

Consider¬ing that most of his life was spent in warfare, it was but natural that he should take particular interest in strengthening the defences of the country. He is thus said to have built as many as 32 out of the 84 forts in Mewar. He surrounded the citadel of Chitor with a number of bastions and built a cart-road with seven gates from the foot of the hill, on which the citadel stood, up to its summit. In 1458 was laid the foundation of a new fort at Kumbhalgarh.

Be¬sides the defensive works, he was responsible for the construction of a number of temples and wells with arrangements for drawing water. Mention may be made of the Kirtistambha already referred to, and the temples of Kumbhasvaml and Adivarsiha. The temple of Eklingaji having been partially destroyed, Kumbha rebuilt it with the addition of an annexe called Kumbha-mandapa. The example of the ruler was imitated by the people. The beautiful Jain temples at Ranpur and Sirohi as well as the exquisite Sringar Chauri temple at Chitor were also executed in K«fltf>ha's reign, but by private individuals.
Rana Raimal (1473-1509) succeed Rana Kumbha. Early in Raimal's reign, Ghiyas Shah of Malwa attacked Chittor unsuccessfully. Soon after, Ghiyas Shah's general, Zafar Khan attacked Mewar and was defeated at Mandalgarh and Khairabad. By marrying Sringardevi (daughter of Rav Jodha), Raimal ended the conflict with the Rathores. Raimal also strengthened the state of Mewar and repaired the temple of Eklingji in Chittor. The last years of Raimal's rule were marked by conflict between his sons with Prince Sanga (Maharana Sangram Singh) having to flee Chittor. The oldest sons, Prithiviraj and Jagmal were both killed. At this difficult juncture, the Rana was informed that Sanga was still alive and in hiding. Raimal summoned Sanga back to Chittor and died soon afterwards.
Rana Sanga (1509-1527) was among the most prominent Rajput chieftains of his day. Rana Sanga was born in 1482. He was thus 27 when he ascended the throne in 1509, and he died at the age of 46 in 1528, after a reign of 19 years. Not only was Mewar now the most power¬ful of the principalities in Northern India, it was even possible for its ruler to make an attempt on the imperial throne of Delhi. Several causes account for this unique position attained by Mewar. In the first place, since the accession of Hammir, the kingdom had the good fortune to produce a succession of intelligent and strong rulers. It was also fortunate that on account of the timely dis¬covery of valuable mines within the kingdom, the rulers did not lack the economic resources which are indispensable for all progress. In addition to this we have to remember that since the last quarter of the 14th century the central authority in Delhi had been gradually losing its position, and its power had been usurped by half a dozen 'provincial governments, none of which was strong enough to keep the rulers of Mewar under control. Above all, there was the personality of the new Rana.

As Rana Sanga had given a help to Medini Rai , Hindu enemy of Malwa ruler Mahmud Khalji. He bore a grudge against Sanga and attacked the district of Gagraun in 1519. But his expectations were completely belied. The Muslim historians themselves maintain that as many as 30 officers in the Muslim army were killed and the Sultan himself fell a prisoner into Sanga's hands. He was then taken to Chitor where he had to stay for six months. At the end of this period, he was allowed to return to his own kingdom after he had signed a treaty on the following terms:—(1) payment of a large war indemnity, (2) surrender of a gold cap and a belt which were considered as heirlooms by the Malwa ruling family, (3) dispatch of a son of Mahmud Khalji to the Mewar darbdr as a pledge of the future good relation of the Malwa Sultan to the latter. In lieu of these terms Mahmud Khalji was left in the possession of those parts of Malwa which belonged to him before the outbreak of the present war.

While Sanga's relations with Malwa were thus being brought to a conclusion in every way satisfactory to the Rana, those with Gujarat were also receiving his attention. A Muslim officer named a street dog 'Rana Sanga' and kept it chained at the gates of Idar city. When the information reached the Rana, he immediately attacked and Muslim army was defeated and Ahmadnagar fell into Sanga's hands.

These events led to a war between the kingdoms of Mewar and Gujarat. Sultan Muzaffar at first proposed to undertake personally an expedition against Mewar, and prepared a large army for the purpose in December, 1520. After some consideration, however, he changed his mind and sent the expedition in charge of an officer called Malik Ayaz who was to be helped by two other officers. By this time Mahmud Khalji of Malwa had also joined the Gujarat army in the hope of satisfying his vengeance against Mewar.

It was an open secret that the officers who had been sent to co-operate with Malik Ayaz were not in a mood to do so, as they looked upon the Malik's appointment as commander-in-chief as an act of suppression of their just claims. During the interval, Sanga collected a large army and won over Mahmud Khalji by pro¬mising to release the latter's son kept as a hostage in Mewar since 1519. Meanwhile, the ill feelings between the Muslim officers of Gujarat increased with the progress of time, so much so that when the negotiations fell through, they began to quarrel among them¬selves as to which one of them should lead the first attack on Manda¬sor. The bitterness among the Muslim officers reached such serious proportions that Malik Ayaz retired with his contingent from the campaign, which thus ended in failure.

In 1517 the throne of Delhi had passed to Ibrahim Lodi who was, however, faced by a rebellion led by his younger brother with the help of a number of noblemen in the kingdom. After two or three years of warfare the rebellion was crushed and the noblemen brought under control. It seems that Sanga took advantage of this situation to enhance his own position at the cost of the Sultanate. But as soon as Ibrahim's hands were free, he undertook an expedition against the Rana who how¬ever defeated the former in a battle near Dholpur.

This failure, however, prompted the Sultan to undertake another expedition on a large scale. Three of the best officers of Delhi were put in charge of a huge army which penetrated into Mewar, and Sanga came for¬ward to meet it.

Rajput army attacked the enemy which was decisively beaten. Many Muslim officers were killed and Mian Makan was compelled to take to his heels, closely pursued by the Rana's men who drove him back as far as Bayana. Sanga's success against Ibrahim Lodi was the crowning achieve¬ment of his career. It was the culmination of a series of successes against his neighbours, as a consequence of which the boundaries of Mewar were considerably extended.

In getting the better of his rivals, Rana Sanga had secured for himself the leading position in Northern India, and, in inflicting a crushing defeat upon the occupant of the imperial throne at Delhi, he advanced a claim upon that throne itself. It marks the beginning of Mewar's imperial ambition. During the years that followed (1523-28), Sanga sought to materialize this ambition both by diplomatic means and military efforts.

It was probably after his success against Sultan Ibrahim that Sanga proposed to Babur a simultaneous expedition against Ibrahlm Lodi. Babur was to move against Agra from Kabul and Sanga from his own kingdom. Apparently Sanga was determined to bring about the annihilation of the Sultan and, to ensure it, invited Mughul help. But it is clear from Sanga's later conduct that it was not his intention to admit Babur as a co-sharer in the assets of the Sultanate, which he hoped to secure for himself.

Sanga thought that like previous Mongol invaders, Babur would leave the country after he had collected sufficient booty; or, that the Mughuls and the Lodl would fritter away their strength in a long struggle, making it easier for himself to establish influence over Delhi. It will be seen later that all such hopes, if there were any, were ulti¬mately frustrated.

On the 16th of March, the Rajput army attacked the entrenched posi¬tion of Babur near the village of Khanua. This proved to be the most fateful battle of the 16th century in which the Rajput army suffered a complete defeat at Babur's hands.

Meanwhile, Sanga had not given up everything for lost. From contemporary Rajasthani songs as well as Muslim records, it ap¬pears that he was preparing for another contest with Babur. Rana Sanga is famous for 80 scars on his body, he embodies the spirit of rajput to fight unto immortality. Legend says after being seriously injured still wanted the battle to continue and was poisoned by some of his nobles.

Marwar
The period which witnessed the gradual advancement of the Sisodiya State of Mewar also saw the establishment of the Rathor States of Marwar and Bikaner. The most important ruler of this dynasty was Chunda.
The important achievement of Chunda's life was the" capture of Mandor which had been for the last eight centuries a seat of Pratihara or Parihar power. The Parihar ruler had been dispossessed of his principality by the Muslims some time ago. Now the Rathors and the Parihars combined and their joint efforts were crowned with success. Mandor was recovered and the Muslims driven away.

Within 50 years, his grandson, Jodha, founded a new city within eight miles of Mandor. This city, called Jodhpur after its founder, continued till recently to be the capital of the Rathors of Marwar.

Chunda had also entered into a matrimonial alliance with the Sisodiya family of Mewar—an incident which shows that he possessed more diplomatic talents than are to be found in an average Rajput.

Chunda was succeeded by his son Ranamalla. For the next 10 years he was the most influential person in Rajputana as the strings of the policy of Marwar and Mewar lay in his hands. Ranamalla used this influence in undertaking an expedition against the Muslim ruler of Nagaur who had been partly responsible for the death of his father Chunda. It met with complete success. The Muslim ruler was killed and his lands occupied.

But Marwar could not long profit by his presence. In 1432, his nephew Rana Mokal was killed. This brought Ranamalla again in Mewar and thanks to his endeavour Mokal's son Kumbha secured the throne. The new ruler was young and not yet out of difficulties and therefore Ranamalla must have felt his presence in Mewar necessary. But his presence in and influence over the State raised against him the ill-feeling of the Sisodiya sardars who brought about his assassination in Chitor in 1438.

At the time of Ranamalla's death his son Jodha was also in Chitor, but his father had just managed to pass a note of warning, so that Jodha fled in hot haste towards Marwar, closely pursued by the Sisodiya sarddrs. Thus began that long feud between the two clans that lasted for centuries.

Jodha could not at first make any stand against the Sisodiya invasion. But ultimately in 1459 he was able to lay the foundation of the modern city of Jodhpur. The first 20 years of Jodha's reign (1438-58) form an interest¬ing landmark in the evolution of the Rathor State which was gradu¬ally assuming its modern shape. Throughout this period, but more specially during the next 30 years (1458-1488), another aspect of Rathor history also came more and more into prominence. This was the dispersal of the Rathor princes in various directions and the foundation of new principalities by them. Two factors helped this process—the extraordinary fecundity of the ruling family and the opportunities offered by the political situation of Western India in general and Rajputana in particular at that time.

Jodha had seventeen sons and it was not possible to secure for each one of them an appendage within the State itself. Hence the younger princes sought to acquire contiguous lands and effect settlement therein. Thus one of his sons, Satal, captured the lands near Phalodhi and founded an estate called after him Satalmer. Another son, Bika, occupied Nagaur and founded the city called Bikaner after himself. Still another, Duda by name, occupied Merta and his descendants ruled there under the name of Merta Rathors.




The Kashmir Dynasty


Shahmera founded a Muslim dynasty of rulers about AD 1339. The Muslim historians call him Shah Mir. One of the cruelest rulers of this dynasty was Sikandar. Sikandar’s reign marks a turning point in the history of Kashmir from social and religious point of view. It appears that although the rulers were Muslims the State was hitherto predominantly Hindu, and even the Muslim kings and peoples were not very ortho¬dox in their belief. This is proved, among other things, by the Hindu names like Lakshmi and Sobha borne by the queens, conse¬cration of a golden linga by the latter, and the performance of a yajna (sacrifice) by Qutb-ud-dm to avert famine. This was probably due to the paucity of Muslims in the country.

But a great change took place during the reign of Sikandar. A large immigration of Muslims from outside flooded the country, and there seems to be little doubt that they brought with them that fanatic iconoclastic zeal which distinguished Islam in other parts of India, but from which Kashmir was happily free up to this time.

Many Muslims left other sovereigns and took shelter under this king who was re¬nowned for charity. As the wind destroys the trees, and the locusts' the sail crop, so did the Muslims destroy the usages of Kashmir. Attracted by the gifts and honours which the king bestowed, and by his kindness, the mlechchhas entered Kasmira even as locusts enter a good field of corn." They occupied all the offices of the State and became friends of the king.

Sikandar evidently learnt his lessons well, and his reign was disgraced by a series of acts, inspired by religious bigotry and icono¬clastic zeal, for which there is hardly any parallel even in the annals of the Muslim rulers of India.

His minister, Suhabhatta instigated the king to break down the images of gods. Suha-bhatta's advice fell on willing ears. The result is thus described by Jonaraja: "The king forgot his kingly duties and took a delight day and night, in breaking images.......... He broke the images of Martanda, Vishaya, Isana, Chakrabhrit and Tripuresvara. .......There was no city, no town, no village, no wood where Suha the Turushka left the temples of gods unbroken."

But this was not all. An attempt was made to destroy the caste of the Brahmanas by force, and those who resisted it were subjected to heavy fines. The Muslim version of the activities of Sikandar is given in detail by Firishta who, of course, includes them among his "good institutions'.

According to Firishta, Sikan¬dar issued "orders proscribing the residence of any person other than Muhammadans in Kashmir; and he required that no man should wear the mark on his forehead, or any woman be permitted to burn with her husband's corpse. Lastly, he insisted on all the golden and silver images being broken and melted down, and the metal coined into money". No one can fail to be struck with the con¬trast between Kashmir under Shihab-ud-dln and Sikandar and note that much water had flown down the Vitasta during a quarter of a century.

Firishta continues: "Many of the Brahmins, rather than abandon their religion or their country, poisoned themselves; some emigrated from their native homes, while a few escaped the evil of banishment by becoming Muhammadans.

After the emigration of the Brahmins, Sikandar ordered all the temples in Kashmir to be thrown down." Some temples were levelled with the ground, 'and in one case, we are told that Sikandar, who was personally present, did not desist till the building was entirely razed to the ground, and its foundations dug up. The Muslim historians inform us that for having broken the Hindu temples Sikandar got the title of Butshikan, or the destroyer of idols.

Sikandar died in A.D. 1413 and was succeeded by his son Mir Khan who assumed the name 'Ali Shah. His king, at the begin¬ning of his reign, left the management of affairs in the hands of Suhabhatta who remained the Chief Minister till his death and con¬tinued his policy of persecuting the Hindus. According to Nizam-ud-din, he perpetrated various kinds of oppressions and tyranny on the people, with the result that most of the Hindus left the country and some killed themselves.

Jonaraja gives more details. He begins by saying that while Sikandar put some limits to the persecution of the Hindus, these were now exceeded and there was no restraint. What he probably means is that, while the religious bigotry in the preceding reign took the forms mainly of destroying temples and demolishing the images of gods, Suhabhatta now more violently persecuted the Brahmanas. He imposed a fine or inflicted punishment on the Brahmanas and forbade religious sacrifices and processions.

Lest the Brahmanas leave the country to avoid the oppression and maintain their caste, orders were issued that no one might leave Kashmir without a passport, so that Suhabhatta might torment the Brahmanas as a fisherman torments the fish after put¬ting them in a net in river. In spite of the regulation, some left the country by unfrequented roads. As to the rest, some tried to save themselves by putting on Muslim dress, while others put an end to their lives by fire, poison, drowning, hanging and jumping from a precipice. In order to put a stop to Hindu learning, Suhabhatta stopped the allowances of the Brahmanas, who had to move from door to door, like dogs, for food. It is interesting to note that Suhabhatta maintained that all these he did out of his regard for Islamic faith, and not out of any malice towards the Brahmanas.


HINDU – MUSLIM RELATIONSHIP

Status of the Hindus

The political and religious condition under which the Hindus were forced to live in a Muslim State raised a great barrier between the two communities. The political supremacy of the Muslims was absolute; the Hindus not only enjoyed no political status in practice, but could not even aspire to it under Islamic theory. This has been lucidly expressed by Sir Jadunath Sarkar, an eminent historian of international reputation, in an article from which the following passage is quoted:

"The poison lay in the very core of Islamic theocracy. Under it there can be only one faith, one people, and one all overriding authority. The State is a religious trust administered solely by His people (the Faithful) acting in obedience to the Commander of the Faithful, who was in theory, and very often in practice too, the supreme General of the Army of militant Islam (Janud). There could be no place for non-believers. Even Jews and Christians could not be full citizens of it, though they somewhat approached the Muslims by reason of their being "People of the Book" or believers in the Bible, which the Prophet of Islam accepted as revealed.

"As for the Hindus and Zoroastrians, they had no place in such a political system. If their existence was tolerated, it was only to use them as hewers of wood and drawers of water, as tax-payers, "Khiraj-guzar", for the benefit of the dominant sect of the Faithful. They were called Zimmis or people under a contract of protection by the Muslim State on condition of certain service to be rendered by them and certain political and civil disabilities to be borne by them to prevent them from growing strong. The very term Zimmi is an insulting title. It connotes political inferiority and helpless¬ness like the status of a minor proprietor perpetually under a guar¬dian; such protected people could not claim equality with the citizens of the Muslim theocracy.

"Thus by the basic conception of the Muslim State all non-Muslims are its enemies, and it is the interest of the State to curb their growth in number and power. The ideal aim was to exterminate them totally, as Hindus, Zoroastrians and Christian nationals have been liquidated (sometimes totally, sometimes leaving a negligible remnant behind) in Afghanistan, Persia and the Near East.

"The Quran (IX.29) calls upon the Muslims 'to fight those who do not profess the true faith, till they pay jizya with the hand in humility.' This was a poll-tax payable by Hindus (and also Christians) for permission to live in their ancestral homes under a Muslim sovereign.

"In addition to the obligation to pay this poll-tax, the Hindu was subjected to many disabilities by the very constitution of the Muslim theocracy. He must distinguish himself from the Muslims by wearing a humble dress, and sometimes adding a label of a certain color to his coat. He must not ride on horse-back or .carry arms,* though wearing the sword was a necessary part of the dress of every gentleman of that age. He must show a generally respectful at¬titude towards Muslims. The Hindu was also under certain legal disabilities in giving testimony in law-courts, protection under the criminal law, and in marriage. Finally, in the exercise of his religion he must avoid any publicity that may rouse the wrath of the followers of the Prophet.

"There is another mandate relating to those subjects who are unbelievers and protected people (zimmi). For their governance, the observance of those conditions which the Caliph 'Umar laid in his agreement for establishing the status of the fire-worshippers and the People of the Book (Jews and Christians) and which gave them safety is obligatory on rulers and governors. Rulers should impose these conditions on the zimmts of their dominions and make their lives and their property dependent on their fulfilment. The twenty conditions are as follows:

1. In a country under the authority of a Muslim ruler, they are to build no new homes for images or idol temples.
2. They are not to rebuild any old buildings which have been destroyed.
3. Muslim travelers are not to be prevented from staying in idol temples.
4. No Muslim who stays in their houses will commit a sin if he is a guest for three days, if he should have occasion for the delay.
5. Infidels may not act as spies or give aid and comfort to them.
6. If any of their people show any inclination towards Islam, they are not to be prevented from doing so.
7. Muslims are to be respected.
8. If the zimmis are gathered together in a meeting and Muslims appear, they are to be allowed at the meeting.
9. They are not to dress like Muslims.
10. They are not to give each other Muslim names.
11. They are not to ride on horses with saddle and bridle.
12. They are not to possess swords and arrows.
13. They are not to wear signet rings and seals on their fingers.
14. They are not to sell and drink intoxicating liquor openly.
15. They must not abandon the clothing which they have had as a sign of their state of ignorance so that they may be distinguished from Muslims.
16. They are not to propagate the customs and usages of poly-theists among Muslims.
17. They are not to build their homes in the neighborhood of those of Muslims.
18. They are not to bring their dead near the graveyards of Muslims.
19. They are not to mourn their dead with loud voices.
20. They are not to buy Muslim slaves


At the end of the treaty it is written that if Zimmis infringe any of these conditions, they shall not enjoy security and it shall be lawful for Muslims to take their lives and possessions as they though were the lives and possession of unbelievers in a state of war with the faithful.

It is little wonder then that, as the history of the Muslim States in Medieval India clearly shows, the Hindus had hardly any place in the highest branches of administration or in the formula¬tion of its policy. With a few exceptions, here and there, almost all the high offices were bestowed upon the Muslims, whether Indian or foreign. It is interesting to note that many Muslim noblemen or adventurers, coming from Iran or Turan, were immediately ap¬pointed to posts of honor, dignity and importance in a Muslim court, which were practically barred to the Hindus. The Muslim politicians and writers of the period took for granted that the natural distinction was between Muslims and Hindus, and not between Indians and foreigners. The State and society were divided horizontally and not vertically.

It is true that Hindu occupied a large number of junior posts and, towards the close of the period, occasionally a few high offices, in civil administration, and more rarely, in the army. But they had no political status and lived on sufferance in the land of their birth, which was regarded as, and publicly declared to be, a Muslim State and country. The Hindus could, therefore, be hardly expected to be even as much satisfied with their political condition as the Hindus and Muslims at the be gaining of the twentieth century when they held the offices even, of governors and members of Viceroy's council under the British rule. Whether we look at the intrinsic importance of the posts, or the number of them filled up by the subject people, the Hindus were in much worse condition after three hundred years of Muslim rule than the Indians after one hundred and fifty years of British supre¬macy. Judged by a similar standard, the patronage and cultivation of Hindu learning by the Muslims, or their contribution to the deve¬lopment of Hindu culture during their rule of three hundred years, pale into insignificance when compared with the achievements of the British rule during half that period in the same direction. It is only by instituting such comparison that we can make an objec¬tive study of the condition of the Hindus under Muslim rule, and view it in its true perspective.

Social and religious difference

The two lived almost in two different worlds. The Muslims relished beef which was extremely abhorrent to the Hindus.

The absence of mar¬riage restriction within certain degrees of consanguinity, as well as easy methods of divorce and remarriage of females among the Muslims, were repugnant to the Hindus.

The laws of succession, disposal of the dead, and modes of eating and greeting were different.

The Muslims assumed Arabic names, used Arabic calendar of lunar months, and adopted distinctive dresses.

Their congregational prayers were radically different from Hindu mode of worship, and music, which was an essential part of Hindu religious ceremonials, was usually forbidden within the precincts, or even in the neighborhood of mosques.

The intellectual Inspiration of the one was supplied by Arabic and Persian, and of the other by Sanskrit literature.

The fact that the Muslims turned towards the west and the Hindus towards the east, while offering prayers or worship to God, though by itself of no great significance, very cor¬rectly symbolized the orientation of the two cultures.

The Muslim naturally looked with pride and glory upon their successive military triumphs which laid the Hindus low and made them masters of the country. But no Hindu could possibly recollect them without a sense of shame and humiliation.

Facts of History

Ibn Batutah

A learned Muslim of Africa who traveled widely throughout the country about the middle of the fourteenth century AD during the reign of Muhammad Tughlaq. He observed:

1) …there was forcible conversion, mass enslavement and the inferior status of the Hindus as Zimmis.

2) Ceaselessly he would fall upon the infidels and would kill all its male population and made the womenfolk prisoner and seized everything in it.


3) There are several references to Hindu female captives of the highest rank being accorded the most humiliating treatment. Referring to one incident on Id ceremony, “then enter the musicians, the first batch being daughter of the infidels rajas – Hindus – captured in a war that year. They sing and dance, and the sultan gives them away to the amirs and a’izza.

4) Ibn Batutah was a near relative of the Sultan and lived in his court. There is, therefore, no reason to dis¬credit the story, incredibly horrible though it might appear to us, as it did to Ibn Batutah. He has also cited other instances of cruelty inflicted upon the Hindus by the same Sultan in the most callous manner. One day while Ibn Batutah was taking his meals with the Sultan a Hindu (infidel) "was brought in along with his wife and their son who was seven years of age. The Sultan beckoned the executioners ordering them to cut off the Hindu's (infidel's) head", and then uttered some words meaning "and his wife and son". Ibn Batutah turned away his eyes while this was being done. Another day the Sultan ordered the hands and feet of a Hindu to be cut off. Ibn Batutah left the place on pretence of saying prayers, and when he returned he found the unfortunate Hindu weltering in blood.


Indian literature

Vidyapati, the famous poet of Mithila in the 15th century A.D. has given a gruesome account of the oppressions of the Hindus by the Turks. How the Turks force the Hindus to work without pay, place the leg of the dead cow on the heads of Brahmanas, lick the sandalwood mark on their foreheads, tear off their sacred thread, break temples and build mosques in their place, abuse the Hindus and assault them.

The medieval religious writers of Bengal, particularly the Vaishnavas, have left a vast literature which contains casual references to the miserable plight of the Hindus in Bengal. These Vaishnavas were the most inoffensive and peaceful members of the Hindu community and their views cannot be regarded, by any stretch of imagination, to be tinged by political or racial bias of any kind.

The Chaitanya-mangala of Jayananda describes as follows the plight of the Brahmanas of Navadvipa, the birth-place of Chaitanya, shortly before his birth (A.D, 1485): "The king seizes the Brahmanas, pollute their caste, and even 'take their lives, If a conch shell if heard to blow in any house, its owner is made to forfeit his wealth, cattle and even life, The king plunders the houses of those who wear sacred threads on the shoulder and put sacred marks on the forehead, and then bind them. He breaks the temples and up¬roots Tulasi plants, and the residents of Navadvipa are in perpetual fear of their lives. The bathing in the Ganga is prohibited and hundreds of sacred ASvattha and jack trees have been cut down.

Such pogroms of Hindus were not accidental or merely pass¬ing episodes. As Jayananda so tersely puts it, the feud between the Yavanas and the Brahmanas was everlasting. So we find that, far from improving, the communal relation became even worse during the benign rule of 'Ala-ud-dm Husain Shah (A.D. 1493-1519). who is generally regarded as the most liberal-minded Muslim ruler of Bengal.

Vijaya Gupta gives a grue¬some detailed description of the outrage on Hindus by the Muslim qazis, Hasan and Husain. These two made a pastime of baiting the Hindus in all possible ways. Anyone found with the sacred Tulasi leaf on his head (an obligatory Vaishnava custom) was taken to the qazi with hands and feet bound, and heavy blows were administered to him. The piyada (peon) tore away the sacred thread from a Brahman and spat saliva in his mouth. On one occasion a Muslim mulla happened to pass by a hut in a wood where some shepherd boys were worshipping the goddess Manasa the symbol of sacred earthen pots to the accompaniment of music. In righteous indignation the mulla demolished the shepherd's hut, broke the sacred pots into pieces, and threw away the offerings to the goddess. The affrighted shepherd boys had concealed themselves in the wood, but some of them were hunted out and seized.

Isana Nagara, another contemporary writer, describes the con¬dition of the Hindus under Husain Shah as follows:

"The wicked mlechchhas pollute the religion of the Hindus every day. They break the images of the" gods into pieces and throw away the articles of worship. They throw into fire Srimad-Bhagavat and other holy scriptures, forcibly take away the conch-shell and bell of the Brahmanas (two necessary articles of worship), and lick the sandal paints on their bodies. They urinate like dogs on the sacred Tulasi plant, and deliberatfty pass faeces in the Hindu temples. They throw water from their mouths on the Hindus en¬gaged in worship, and harass the Hindu saints as if they were so many lunatics let large.

The two great biographies of the great Vaishnava saint Chaita¬nya, namely, the Chaitanya-charitamrita and the Chaitanya-bhagavata, contain many stories of the religious bigotry of the Muslims and the consequent persecution of the Hindus. Both the books re¬fer to a famous episode in the life of Lord Chaitanya. He had intro¬duced the system of public worship in the form of kirtan (a sort of congregational song loudly sung together by a large number of men in public streets to the accompaniment of special musical instruments). This enraged the Muslim qazi, and one day when Chaitanya's devotees were singing the name of God in the streets of Nadiya (Navadvipa in Bengal), he came out, struck blows upon every¬body on whom he could lay hands, broke the musical instruments, and threatened with dire punishment all the Hindus who would dare join a Kirtan party in this way in his city of Nadiya.

To pre¬vent the 'recurrence of public Kirtan, the qazi patrolled the streets of Nadiya with a party. The people of Nadiya got afraid, but Chai-tanya decided to defy the qazi's orders, and brought out a large fcirtan party which was joined by thousands. The qazl was at first wild with anger and held out the threat that he would destroy the caste of all the Hindus of Nadiya; but terror seized him when his eyes fell upon the vast concourse of people in a menacing attitude. He fled, and his house was wrecked by the angry crowd.

All these merely indicate the degree of abject surrender and the depth of moral degradation of the Hindus of Bengal caused by three hundred years of political servitude and religious oppression. Evidently a new spirit was infused into them by Chaitanya, at least for the time being.

Throughout the Chaitanya-bhagavata there are casual references to Hindus being constantly oppressed by the fear that the public per¬formance of Kirtan, and even singing religious songs loudly in one's own house, would provoke the Sultan and bring untold miseries upon the people of Nadiya.
Permanent wedge between Hindu and Muslim
The Islamic invaders were not the first foreigners to come and settle down in India. In earlier times, the Iranians, the Greeks, the Parthians, the Scythians, the Kushanas, and the Hunas had also invaded India, and settled down here. There were some Mongolian incursions also in the north and the north-east. But by the time the Islamic invaders came to India, all these foreigners had been fully assimilated in the native population, and their cultures synthesized with the indigenous Indian culture. We have never had an Iranian, or a Parthian, or a Greek, or a Scythian, or a Kushana, or a Huna, or a Mongolian minority, or culture, or problem.
The Muslim made a large number of converts in India and, by the end of the period; the vast majority of Indian Muslim must have been descendant of Hindu converts. Influences of Hindu and Muslim community on each other were very meager. Neither the Hindu nor the Muslim imbibed the chief characteristic features of the other’s culture.

The Muslim never moderated their zeal to destroy ruthlessly the Hindu temple and images of gods, and their attitude in this respect remained unchanged from the day when Muhammad Qasim set foot on the soil of India till the 18th Century when they lost their all political power. Muhammad bin Tughluq was asked by Chinese Emperor asked for his permission to build a temple at Samhal, a place of pilgrimage in the Himalayan hills frequented by the Chinese, which the Muslim army "had seized, destroyed and sacked. But the Sultan replied to this effect: "Islam does not allow the furthering of such an aim and the permission to build a temple in a Muslim country can be accorded only to those who pay the jizya”

An orthodox section of the Indian Muslims followed Hanafite doctrine. As QazI Mughls-ud-dln pointed out to 'Ala-ud-din Khaljl, 'it was Hanifa alone who assented to the impo¬sition of the jizya on the Hindus. Doctors of other schools allow no other alternative but 'Death or Islam'. One of the greatest historian of the period, Barani had said’ “If Mahmud was a Shafi'ite, and according to Imam Shafi'i the decree for Hindus is "either death or Islam'—that is to say, they should either be put to death or embrace Islam. It is not. lawful to accept jizya from Hindus as they have neither a prophet nor a revealed book."

If a learned historian and a distinguished Muslim felt no scruple in openly expressing such views in writing up the fourteenth century A.D., i.e. six hundred years after the Muslims first settled in India, one can well understand why the gulf between the Hindus and the Muslims could never be bridged.