Excellent study material for all civil services aspirants - being learning - Kar ke dikhayenge!
SHARE:
Islam and the Arab invasions - Part 2
4.0 The Turkish Conquest of North India
After the Ghaznavid conquest of the Punjab, two distinct patterns of relations between the Muslims and the Hindus were at work. One was the lure for plunder which resulted in raids into the Gangetic valley and Rajputana by the successors of Mahmud. The rulers of the Rajput states put up a stout resistance against these raids and won victories against the Turks on a number of occasions. But the Ghaznavid state was no longer a very powerful state, and the gaining of a number of victories against it in local battles only made the Rajput rulers more complacent. At the second level, Muslim traders were allowed, even welcomed in the country, since they helped in strengthening and augmenting India's trade with the Central and West Asian countries, and thus increasing the income of the state: Colonies of Muslim traders sprang up in some of the towns in north India. In the wake of these came a number of Muslim religious preachers called the Sufis. The sufis preached the gospel of love, faith and dedication to one God. They directed their preachings mainly towards the Muslim settlers but they influenced some Hindus also. Thus, a process of interaction between Islam and Hindu religion and society was started. Lahore became a centre of Arabic and Persian languages and literature. Hindu generals, such as Tilak, commanded the Ghaznavid armies in which Hindu soldiers also were recruited.
These two processes might have continued indefinitely but for another large-scale change in the political situation in Central Asia. Towards the middle of the twelfth century, another group of Turkish tribesmen, who were partly Buddhist and partly pagan, shattered the power of the Seljuk Turks. In the vacuum, two new powers rose to prominence, the Khwarizmi Empire based in Iran, and the Ghurid Empire based in Ghur in north-west Afghanistan. The Ghurids had started as vassals of Ghazni, but had soon thrown off its yoke. The power of the Ghurids increased under Sultan Alauddin who earned the title of 'the world burner' (jahan-soz) because he ravaged Ghazni and burnt it to the ground in revenge for the treatment that had been meted out to his brothers at Ghazni. The rising power of the Khwarizmi Empire severely limited the Central Asian ambition of the Ghurids. Khorasan, which was the bone of contention between the two, was soon conquered by Khwarizm Shah. This left no option for the Ghurids but to look for expansion towards India.
In 1173, Shahabuddin Muhammad (1173-1206) (also known as Muizzuddin Muhammad bin Sam) ascended the throne at Ghazni, while his elder brother was ruling at Ghur. Preceding by way of the Gomal pass, Muizzuddin Muhammad conquered Multan and Uchch. in 1178, he attempted to penetrate into Gujarat by marching across the Rajputana desert. But the Gujarat ruler completely routed him in a battle near Mount Abu, and Muizzudin Muhammad was lucky in escaping alive. He now realised the necessity of creating a suitable base in the Punjab before venturing upon the conquest of India. Accordingly, he launched a campaign against the Ghaznavid possessions in the Punjab. By 1190, Muizzuddin Muhammad had conquered Peshawar, Lahore and Sialkot, and was poised for a thrust towards Delhi and the Gangetic doab.
Meanwhile, events had not been standing still in north India. The Chauhan power had been steadily growing. The Chauhan rulers had defeated and killed a large number of Turks who had tried to invade Rajasthan, most probably from the Punjab side, and had captured Delhi (called Dhillika) from the Tomars around the middle of the century. The expansion of the Chauhan power towards the Punjab brought them into conflict with the Ghaznavid rulers of the area.
While Muizzuddin Muhammad (called Muhammad Ghuri in history books) was overrunning Multan and Uchch, a young lad, barely 14 years old ascended the throne at Ajmer. He was Prithviraja who has been the subject of many legends and stories. The young ruler embarked upon a career of conquest. Overcoming the opposition of his relations, he overran many small states in Rajasthan. He invaded the Bundelkhand area and defeated the Chandella rulers in a battle near Mahoba. It was in this battle that the famous brothers, Alha and Udal, died fighting to save Mahoba. However, Prithviraja did not try to annex the country. He next invaded Gujarat, but the Gujarat ruler, Bhima II who had earlier defeated Muizzuddin Muhammad, defeated Prithviraja also. This forced Prithviraja to turn his attention towards the Punjab and the Ganga valley.
4.1 The Battles of Tarain
Thus, a battle between these two ambitious rulers, Muizzuddin Muhammad and Prithviraja, was inevitable. The conflict started with rival claims for Tabarhinda (Bhatinda). In the battle which was fought at Tarain in 1191, the Ghuri forces were completely routed, and Muizzuddin Muhammad's life was saved by a young Khalji horseman. Prithviraja now pushed on to Bhatinda and conquered it after a siege of 12 months. Little attempt was made by Prithviraja to oust the Ghurids from the Punjab Perhaps, he felt that this was another of recurrent Turkish raids, and that the Ghurid ruler would be content to rule over the Punjab. This gave Muizzuddin Muhammad time to regroup his forces and make another bid for India the following year. He rejected the proposal said to be made by Prithviraja to leave him in possession of Punjab.
The second battle of Tarain in 1192 is regarded as one of the turning points in Indian history. Muizzuddin Muhammad had made careful preparations for the contest. It is said that he marched with 1,20,000 men, including a force of heavy cavalry fully equipped with steel coats and armour, and 10,000 mounted archers.
It is not correct to think that Prithviraja was negligent of the affairs of the state, and awoke to the situation when it was too late. It is true that at that time Skanda, the general of the last victorious campaign, was engaged elsewhere. As soon as Prithviraja realised the nature of the Ghurid threat, he appealed to all the rajas of northern India for help. We are told many rajas sent contingents to help him, but Jaichandra, the ruler of Kannauj, stayed away. The legend that this was because Prithviraja had abducted Jaichandra's daughter, Sanyogita, who was in love with him is not accepted by many historians now. The story was written much later as a romance by the poet, Chand Bardai, and includes many improbable events. There had been an old outstanding rivalry between the two states. Hence, it is not surprising that Jaichandra stayed away.
Prithviraja is said to have fielded a force of 3,00,000 including a large body of cavalry and 300 elephants. The strength of the forces on both sides may be exaggerated. The numerical strength of the Indian forces was probable greater; but the Turkish army was better organised and led. The battle was mainly a battle between cavalry. The superior organisation skill and speed of movements of the Turkish cavalry ultimately decide the issue. A large number of Indian soldiers lost their lives. Prithviraja escaped, but was captured near Saraswati. The Turkish armies captured the fortresses of Hansi, Saraswati and Samana. Then they attacked and captured Ajmer. Prithviraja was allowed to rule over Ajmer for some time, for we have coins of this period giving the date and the legend "Prithvirajadeva" on one side and the words "Sri Muhammad Sam" on the other.
Soon after, Prithviraja was executed on a charge of conspiracy, and Prithviraja's son succeeded him. Delhi also was restored to its ruler. But this policy was reversed soon after. The Tomara ruler of Delhi was ousted and Delhi was made a base for further Turkish advance into the Ganga valley. Following a rebellion, a Muslim army recaptured Ajmer and installed a Turkish general there. Prithviraja's son moved to Ranthambhor and founded a new powerful Chauhan kingdom there.
Thus, the Delhi area and eastern Rajasthan passed under the Turkish rule.
4.3 Turkish conquest of the Ganga Valley, Bihar and Bengal
Between 1192 and 1206, the Turkish rule was extended over the Ganga-Jamuna doab and its neighbouring area, and Bihar and Bengal were also overrun. In order to establish themselves in the doab, the Turks had first to defeat the powerful Gahadavala kingdom of Kannauj. The Gahadavala ruler, Jaichandra, was reputed to be the most powerful prince in India at the time. He had been ruling the country peacefully for two decades. Perhaps, he was not a very capable warrior because he had already suffered a reverse at the hands of the Sena king of Bengal.
After Tarain, Muizzuddin returned to Ghazni, leaving the affairs in India in the hands of his trusted slave Qutbuddin Aibak. During the next two years, the Turks overran parts of upper doab, without any opposition from the Gahadavalas. In 1194, Muizzuddin returned to India. He crossed the Jamuna with 50,000 cavalry and moved towards Kannauj. A hotly contested battle between Muizzuddin and Jaichandra was fought at Chandawar near Kanauj. We are told that Jaichandra had almost carried the day when he was killed by an arrow, and his army was totally defeated. Muizzuddin now moved on to Banaras which was ravaged, a large number of temples there being destroyed. The Turks now established their hold over a huge territory extending up to the borders of Bihar.
Thus, the battles of Tarain and Chandawar laid the foundations of the Turkish rule in north India. The task of consolidating the conquest thus won proved, however, to be an onerous task which occupied the Turks for almost 50 years.
Muizzuddin lived till 1206. During this period, he occupied the powerful forts of Bayana and Gwalior to guard the southern flank of Delhi. A little later, Aibak conquered Kalinjar, Mahoba and Khajuraho from the Chandella rulers of the area.
With their base in the doab, the Turks launched a series of raids in the neighbouring areas. Aibak defeated Bhima II, the ruler of Gujarat and Anhilwara and a number of other towns were ravaged and plundered. Though a Muslim governor was appointed to rule the place, he was soon ousted. This showed that the Turks were not yet strong enough to be able to rule over such farflung areas.
The Turks, however, were more successful in the east. A Khalji officer, Bakhtiyar Khalji, whose uncle had fought at the battle of Tarain, had been appointed in charge of some of areas beyond Banaras. He had taken advantage of this to make frequent raids into Bihar, which was at the time in the nature of a no-man's-land. During these raids, he had attacked and destroyed some of the famous Buddhist monasteries of Bihar, Nalanda and Vikramasila which had no protector left. He had also accumulated much wealth and gathered many followers around him. During his raids, he also collected information about the routes to Bengal. Bengal was a rich prize because its internal resources and flourishing foreign trade had given it the reputation of being fabulously rich. Please note that khalji is the same as Khilji.
Making careful preparations, Bakhtiyar Khalji marched with an army towards Nadia, the capital of the Sena kings of Bengal. Moving very stealthily, the Khalji chief disguised himself as a horse-merchant, and a party of 18 persons entered the Sena capital. He was not detected because Tutkish horse-merchants had become a common sight in those days. Reaching the palace, Bakhtiyar Khalji made a sudden attack and created a great confusion. The sena ruler Lakshmana Sena had been a noted warrior. However, taken by surprise and thinking that the main Turkish army had arrived, he slipped away by a back-door and took refuge at Sonargaon. The Turkish army must have been near, for they soon arrived and overpowered the garrison. All the wealth of the ruler, including his wives and children were captured. These events are placed in 1204.
Due to the large number and size of the rivers, Bakhtiyar Khalji found it difficult to keep hold of Nadia. He, therefore, withdrew and fixed his capital at Lakhnauti in north Bengal. Lakshmana Sena and his successors continued to rule south Bengal from Sonargaon.
Although Bakhtiyar Khalji was formally appointed the governor of Bengal by Muizzuddin, he virtually ruled it as an independent ruler. But he was not to enjoy his position for long. He foolishly undertook an expedition into the Brahmaputra valley in Assam, though writers say that he wanted to lead an expedition into Tibet. The Magh rulers of Assam retreated and allowed the Turkish armies to come in as far as they could. At last the tired an exhausted armies found they could advance no further and decided to retreat. They could find no provisions on the way, and were constantly harassed by the Assamese armies. Tired and weakened by hunger and illness, the Turkish army had to face a battle in which there was a wide river in front and the Assamese army at the back.
The Turkish armies suffered a total defeat. Bakhtiyar Khalji was able to come back with a few followers with the help of some mountain tribes. But his health and spirits were broken, and one of his own amirs stabbed him while he was in bed mortally sick.
While Aibak and the Turkish and Khalji chief were trying to expand and consolidate the Turkish gains in north India, Muizzuddin and his brother were trying to expand the Ghurid Empire into Central Asia. The imperialistic ambitions of the Ghurids brought them into headlong conflict with the powerful Khwarizmi Empire. In 1203, Muizzuddin suffered a disastrous defeat at the hands of the Khwarizmi ruler.
This defeat came as a blessing in disguise to the Turks, for they had to bid good bye to their Central Asian ambitions and to concentrate their energies exclusively on India. This paved the way for the emergence after some time of a Turkish state base exclusively in India. In the immediate context, however, the defeat of Muizzuddin emboldened many of his opponents in India to rebel. The Khokhars, a warlike tribe in western Punjab, rose and cut off the communications between Lahore and Ghazni. Muizzuddin led his last campaign into India in 1206 in order to deal with the Khokhar rebellion. He resorted to large-scale slaughter of the Khokhars and cowed them down. On his way back to Ghazni, he was killed by a Muslim fanatic belonging to a rival sect.
Muizzuddin Muhammad bin Sam has often been compared to Mahmud Ghazni. As a warrior, Mahmud Ghazni was more successful than Muizzuddin having never suffered a defeat in India or in Central Asia. He also ruled over a large Empire outside India. But it has to be kept in mind that Muizzuddin had to contend with larger and better organised states in India than Mahmud.
Though less successful in Central Asia, his political achievements in India were greater. But it was Mahmud's conquest of the Punjab which paved the way for Muizzuddin's successes in north India. Considering that the conditions facing the two were very different, no useful comparison can be made between the two. The political and military motives of the two in India were also different in important respects.
Neither was really concerned with Islam. Once a ruler submitted, he was allowed to rule over his territories unless, for some other reasons, it was necessary to annex his kingdom in part or whole. Hindu officers and soldiers were used by Mahmud as well as by Muizzuddin. But neither scrupled to use the slogans of Islam for their purposes, and to justify their plunder of Indian cities and temples.
The defeat of the leading states of north India within a short space of about 15 years by the Turkish armies also needs some explanation. It may be stated as an axiom that a country is conquered by another only when it suffers from social and political weaknesses, or becomes economically and militarily backward compared to its neighbours. Recent research shows that the Turks did not have any superior weapons at their disposal as compared to the Indians. The iron stirrup which had changed the code of warfare in Europe, as we have noted earlier, had spread in India from the 8th century onwards. The Turkish bows could shoot arrows to a longer distance, but the Indian bows were supposed to be more accurate and more deadly, the arrowheads being generally poisoned. In hand to hand combat the Indian swords were considered to be the best in the world. The Indians also had the advantage of elephants. Perhaps the Turks had horses which were swifter and more sturdy than the horses imported into India.
Thus, the superiority of the Turks was more social and organisational. The growth of feudalism, i.e., rise of the local landed elements and chiefs had weakened the administrative structure and military organisation of the Indian states. The rulers had to depend more on the various chiefs who rarely acted in coordination, and quickly dispersed to their areas after battle. On the other hand, the tribal structure of the Turks enabled the Turks to maintain large standing armies which could be kept in the tield for a long time.
But for these factors, the Rajput states, many of which had greater human and physical resources at their disposal than the Ghaznavid and Ghurid Empires, would not have suffered defeat or would have been able to recover if they had been defeated in a battle.
COMMENTS