# Prominent Muslim Rulers/Dynasties throughout South Asian history



## dexter

If Indians can claim and praise every major Hindu Ruler in South Asia i.e. Raja Dahir, Prithviraj Chauhan, Shivaji etc and build several monuments of them then we should take liberty in praising and remembring our Muslim Rulers aswell specially those who chose to stay here, assimilated in local population and had their successors been born in this land i.e. Sultan Mahmud ghaznavi, Shahabuddin Ghauri, Alauddin Khilji, Zaheeruddin Babur, Akbar, Aurangzeb Alamgir, Ahmed Shah Abdali, Tipu Sultan etc. 

Islamic history in South Asia can be divided into following timeperiods:

Early Middle Ages
Medieval Period
Mughal Empire
British Era
Struggle for Pakistan (Tehreek-e-Pakistan)
Emergence of Islamic Republic of Pakistan

Right after rise of Islam under Rashidun Caliphate, the conquest of Persian Empire which occupied West portion of today's Balochistan Province, Pakistan led to the spread of Islam in region of South Asia and opened the doors of conquest of this region. After it, large number of Baloch people accepted Islam.

However, there are accounts of a King in South India Chakrawati Farmas (Today's Malabar, India) who witnessed splitting of Moon and investigated this phenomenon until he found out that it was done by *Prophet Muhammad (S.A.W.)* who claims to be last apostle of *ALLAH S.W.T *in Makkah. He traveled thousands of miles to Arabia and met *Prophet (S.A.W.)* and accepted Islam. When he returned to his homeland, he built a mosque there which still exists today.







The most famous historical account which marks the spread of Islam in this region is none other than conquest of Sindh in 712 AD by Muhammad Bin Qasim serving under Umayyad Caliphate.

*1. Early Middle Ages :*

*Muhammad Bin Qasim (695-715) :*






Muhammad bin Qasim was born around 695 AD. He belonged to the Saqqafi tribe; that had originated from Taif in Arabia. He grew up in the care of his mother; he soon became a great asset to his uncle Muhammad Ibn Yusuf, the governor of Yemen. His judgment, potential and skills left many other officers and forced the ruler to appoint him in the state department. He was also a close relative of Hajjaj bin Yousuf, because of the influence of Hajjaj, the young Muhammad bin Qasim was appointed the governor of Persia while in his teens, and he crushed the rebellion in that region. There is also a popular tradition that presents him as the son-in-law of Hajjaj bin Yousuf. He conquered the Sindh and Punjab regions along the Indus River for the Umayyad Caliphate.





*Raja Dahir*

There are both long and short term causes for the conquest of india. Arabs had trade with India and Eastern Asia. The trade was carried through sea rout; the rout was unsafe due to the plunder of the Pirates of Sindh. The Arab rebels also get refuge in Sindh. Thus the Umayyad wanted to consolidate their rule and also to secure the trade rout. During Hajjaj’s governorship, the Mids of Debal (Pirates) plundered the gifts of Ceylon’s ruler to Hijjaj and attacked on ships of Arab that were carrying the orphans and widows of Muslim soldiers who died in Sri Lanka. Thus providing the Umayyad Caliphate the legitimate cause, that enabled them to gain a foothold in the Makran, and Sindh regions.





Map of the maximum extents of Muhammad ibn Qasim's expansion of Umayyad rule into Pakistan and northwestern India, c. 711 CE

The Umayyad caliphate ordered Muhammad Bin Qasim to attack over Sindh. He led 6,000 Syrian cavalry and at the borders of Sindh he was joined by an advance guard and six thousand camel riders and with five catapults (Manjaniks). Muhammad Bin Qasim first captured Debal, from where the Arab army marched along the Indus. At Rohri he was met by Dahir’s forces. Dahir died in the battle, his forces were defeated and Muhammad bin Qasim took control of Sind. Mohammad Bin Qasim entered Daibul in 712 AD. As a result of his efforts, he succeeded in capturing Daibul. He continued his Victorious Progress in succession, Nirun, fortress (called Sikka), Brahmanabad, Alor, Multan and Gujrat. After the conquest of Multan, he carried his arms to the borders of Kigdom of Kashmir, but his dismissal stopped the further advance. Now Muslims were the masters of whole Sindh and a part of Punjab up to the borders of Kashmir in the north. After the conquest, he adopted a conciliatory policy, asking for acceptance of Muslim rule by the natives in return for non-interference in their religious and cultural practices. He also established peace with a strong taxation system. In return he provided the guaranty of security of life and property for the natives. Hajjaj died in 714. When Walid Bin Abdul Malik died, his younger brother Suleman succeeded as the Caliph. He was a bitter enemy of Hajjaj’s family. He recalled Mohammad Bin Qasim from Sindh, who obeyed the orders as the duty of a general. When he came back, he was put to death on 18th of July, 715AD at the age of twenty.

After the* Abbasid Revolt *in 750 AD and fall of Umayyad Caliphate, Sindh became independent and was captured by Musa b. K'ab al Tamimi in 752 AD. But soon Civil war erupted in Sindh in 842 AD, and the Habbari dynasty occupied Mansurah, and by 871, five independent principalities emerged, with the Banu Habbari clan controlling in Mansurah, Banu Munabbih occupying Multan, Banu Madan ruling in Makran, with Makshey and Turan falling to other rulers, all outside direct Caliphate control.





*Breakup of Abbasid Caliph*

*Habbari dynasty (854–1011) :*

The Habbari dynasty ruled the Abbasid province of Greater Sindh from 841 to 1024. The region became semi-independent under the Arab ruler Aziz al-Habbari in 841 CE, though nominally remaining part of the Caliphate. The Habbaris, who were based in the city of Mansura, ruled the regions of Sindh, Makran, Turan, Khuzdar and Multan. The Umayyad Caliph made Aziz governor of Sindh and he was succeeded by his sons Umar al-Habbari I and Abdullah al-Habbari in succession while his grandson Umar al-Habbari II was ruling when the famous Arab historian Al-Masudi visited Sindh. The Habbaris ruled Sindh until 1010 when the Soomra Khafif took over Sindh. In 1026 Sultan Mahmud Ghaznavi defeated Khafif, destroyed Mansura and annexed the region under the Ghaznavid rule.

*Rulers:* 


Umar ibn'Abd al-Aziz al'Habbari (855-884)
Abdullah bin Umar (884-913)
Umar bin-Abdullah (913-943)
Muhammad bin Abdullah (943-973)
Ali bin Umar (973-987)
Isa bin ali
Manbi ibn Ali bin Umar (987-1010)
Khafif (Soomra dynasty) (1010-1025)
*2. Medieval Period :*

*Soomra dynasty (1026–1356) :
*
The Habbari dynasty became semi independent and was eliminated and Mansura was invaded by Sultan Mahmud Ghaznavi. Sindh then became an easternmost State of the Abbasid Caliphate ruled by the Soomro Dynasty until the Siege of Baghdad (1258). Mansura was the first capital of the Soomra dynasty and the last of the Habbari dynasty. The Soomro tribe revolted against Masud, ruler of the Ghaznavids because they were betrayed by their own wazir. They were superseded by the Samma dynasty. Sindhi language prospered during this period. The Soomra dynasty ended when the last Soomra king was defeated by Alauddin Khalji, the second king of the Khalji dynasty ruling from Delhi.





*
Early History :
*
The Umayyad Caliphs appointed _Aziz al Habbari_ as the governor of Sindh. The Habbari dynasty was controlling Sindh under the orders of the Ummayad Caliphate. When troubles began between the Ummayads and the Abbasids Habbari rule became semi independent, though it still remained under the influence of the Ummayad Caliphate indirectly. Habbaris ruled Sindh until Mahmud Ghaznavi defeated the Habbaris in 1024 because Mahmud Ghaznavi, viewed the Abbasids to be the legitimate caliphs. Following the defeat of the Habbaris, the Abbasid Caliphate made Al Khafif from Samarra the new governor of Sindh for a stronger and stable government. Al Khafif allotted key positions to his family and friends thus Al-Khafif or _Khafif Soomro_became the first ruler of the dynasty in Sindh. Until the Siege of Baghdad the Soomro Dynasty was the Abbasid Caliphate's functionary in Sindh but after that it became independent. Since then some Soomros intermarried with several local women and adopted some local customs as well. Mansura was the first capital of the Soomro dynasty and the last of the Habbari dynasty.

*Soomro period :
*
The Soomro Dynesty later shifted their capital to Tharri, nearly 14 km eastwards of Matli on the Puran. Puran was later abandoned due to changes in the course of Puran river. Afterwards, Thatta was made the capital of Sindh for about 95 years until the end of their rule in 1351 AD. During this period, Kutch was ruled by the Samma Dynasty, who enjoyed good relations with the Soomros in Sindh.

*Salient features :*

In 1011 AD, the first Soomro King, Al Khafif was given control of Sindh by the Abbasid Caliphate to build a stronger government when Mahmud Ghaznavi defeated the Habbaris. in The beginning Soomro's had Arabic names thus admitting of their Arab past. since then some intermarried with local women. The Soomro Dynasty lost ties with the Abbasid Caliphate after the Siege of Baghdad (1258) and the Soomro kings Soomar, Bhoongar and Dodo-1, established their rule from the shores of the Arabian Sea to Multan, Bahawalpur, Sadiqabad and Uch in the north and in the east to Rajistan and in the west to Balochistan.
The Renaissance started from 1092 AD when Princess Zainab Tari Soomro became the sovereign Queen of Sindh. As a first step, attention was paid to Sindhi language, which had remained dominated by Arabic during the last three centuries. Not only reforms were made in promoting Sindhi language for good governance, but fast progress was made in arts and crafts, architecture, agriculture and music, both instrumental and vocal. Sports like horse and camel races, wrestling known "Mulluh" and other marshal sports were patronized.
A lot about Soomros is mentioned in the _Chachnama_ though not all of it is true even some of it is even baseless.

*Renaissance in Sindh :*

*Language and literature :
*
As everywhere in the world, the literature had a poetic start, so in Sindh also, the minstrels and bards made great strides in Sindhi folk poetry. They composed their poetry around popular myths, folk tales, historical events and romances. A minstrel named Sumang Charan stands prominent among all other minstrels and bards of the early period.
In this period, "Doha (couplets)", "Gaha", "Geech (marriage songs)" "Gaya (songs of Soomro women)", forms of Sindhi poetry developed as a part of dramatic narration. Later on new dimensions were brought to Sindhi poetry, after the battle of Dodo Chanesar, the Soomro kings with the armies of Sultan Allaulddin of Delhi, in 1313 AD near the city of "Thaar Banghar" which gave rise to epic form of poetry in Sindh.
A minstrel named Bhagu Bhan, also a court poet of Soomro Kings, was renowned as composer and singer of epic poetry. He was an expert in playing local musical instruments, especially "Surando". This instrument could be called the violin of the East.
There were other master musicians and singers as Chand Fakir, Bahiro Mangto, Lado Bhag and many others from Charans, Mangtas and Manganhars tribes. From the women poets, Mai Markha Shaikh was a remarkable poet of that time. They all played their part towards poetical progress in Sindhi literature during the rule of Soomro Dynasty in Sindh.
The great historical dramatic romances that took place in the reign of the last few Soomro kings were _Lilan Chanesar_, _Umar Marvi_ and _Momal Rano_. Earlier than this, the love tales of _Sassui Punhun_, _Suhni Mehar_ and _Sorath-Rai Dyach_ were narrated in melodious poetry by minstrels and bards in public musical evenings patronized by the Soomro Kings.
Centuries afterwards, the tales of these historic romances became the subject matter of Sufistic poetry by the famous Sufi poet of Sindh, Shah Abdul Latif Bhittai, who immortalized these tales. He transformed these tales into different _Surs_ i.e. musical composition with classical norms. Since then great Sindhi, master musicians and singers keep singing these soulful melodies even in this 21st.

*Fall of the Soomro dynasty :
*
The Siege of Baghdad (1258), saw the dynasty lose its ties with Abbasid Caliphate. Since then The Sultans of Delhi wanted a piece of Sindh. The Soomros successfully defended their kingdom for about 100 years but their dynasties soon fell to the might of the massive armies of the Sultans of Delhi, such as the Tughluks and the Khiljis because of a rebellion led by Chanesar who joined forces with the Khiljis and Dodo Bin Al Khafif died fighting in battle with the Khiljis.

*Ghaznavid dynasty (977–1186) :*

The Ghaznivid Empire was an empire that existed during the 10th-11th century; stretching at it's peak from Tehran to Northern India, and was Turkic-Persian in origin, largely following Sunni Islam. The date of it's foundation was 962-977, and that of it's disintegration 1180-1187; lasting some 224 years. The Ghaznivids were one of the most distinguished empires to have ever existed in Afghanistan. The empire was founded by the slaveAptigin (a Turkish Mamluk originally from Ghazni; who had fled from Balkh to Ghazni in 961 after a failed coup who revolted against the ruling Samanids of Iran, conquering their throne, thus establishing himself as ruler who would bring in great economic and political development. He was father in law to Sabuktagin (whom some historians also consider the founder of the Ghaznivids) who would later expand the empire extensively.

Altigpin crossed the Hindu Kush, after laying siege to the _"insignificant"_ Fort of Ghazni in 962 transforming it into _"one of the most dazzling capitals of the Islamic world"_ after his victory. The fort itself was militarily and politically advantageous for his cause; it lay near the lucrative Silk Road where it was nestled in between Kabul and Kandahar. The empire itself became significant for it's prestige and for being the first Islamic empire to spread itself across Asia, and well into Hindu-dominated Northern India. The centre of the Ghaznivid empire was known for being home to artisans, poets, musicians,philosophers, scholars/scientists and other intelligentsia; and were also responsible for building _"opulent palaces, gold encrusted mosques"_ and for having spread _"abundant"_ gardens into India. This empire also gave the world windmill's, which were one of the most important inventions the world has ever seen.





*Ghaznavid expansion into Pakistan and North-West India*

*Sultan Mahmud Ghaznavi (998 – 1030) :
*
Mahmood Gaznavi was born in 971AD, in khurasan. Mahmood Ghazni was the son of Abu Mansur Sabuktigin, who was a Turkish slave soldier of the samanid ruler. In 994 Mahmood joined his father in the conquest of Ghazni for Samanid ruler, it was the time of instability for Samanid Empire. In 998AD Mahmood took control of the Ghazni and also conquered Qandahar.






In 1001 Sultan Mahmud Ghaznavi defeated Jeebal the king of Kabulistan and marched further into Peshawar and in 1005 made it the center for his forces. From this strategic location Mahmud was able to capture Panjab in 1007, Tanseer fell in 1014, Kashmir was captured in 1015 and Qanoch fell in 1017. By 1027 Sultan Mahmud had captured Pakistan and parts of northern India.

On 1010 Mahmud captured what is today the Ghor Province (Ghor) and by 1011 annexed Balochistan. Sultan Mahmud had already had relationships with the leadership in Balkh through marriage and its local emir Abu Nasr Mohammad offered his services to Sultan Mahmud and offered his daughter to Muhammad son of Sultan Mahmud. After Nasr’s death Mahmud brought Balkh under his leadership. This alliance greatly helped Mahmud during his expeditions into Pakistan and northern India.

In 1030 Sultan Mahmud fell gravely ill and died at the age of 59. Sultan Mahmud was an accomplished military commander and speaker as well as a patron of poetry, astronomy, and math. Mahmud had no tolerance for other religions however and only praised Islam. Universities were formed to study various subjects such as math, religion, the humanities and medicine were taught, but only within the laws of the Sharia. Islam was the main religion of his kingdom and the Perso-Afghan dialect of Dari language was made the official language.

Ghaznavid rule in Pakistan lasted for over one hundred and seventy five years from 1010 to 1187. It was during this period that Lahore assumed considerable importance as the eastern-most bastion of Muslim power and as an outpost for further advance towards the riches of the east. Apart from being the second capital and later the only capital of the Ghaznavid kingdom, Lahore had great military and strategic significance. Whoever controlled this city could look forward to and be in a position to sweep the whole of East Punjab to Panipat and Delhi.

By the end of his reign, Mahmud’s empire extended from Kurdistan in the west to Samarkand in the northeast, and from the Caspian Sea to the Yamuna. All of what is today Pakistan and Kashmir came under the Ghaznavid empire. The wealth brought back to Ghazni was enormous, and contemporary historians (e.g. Abolfazl Beyhaghi , Ferdowsi) give detailed descriptions of the building activity and importance of Lahore, as well as of the conqueror’s support of literature.

Often reviled as a persecutor of Hindus (and in many cases Hindu temples were looted and destroyed) much of Mahmud’s army consisted of Hindus and some of the commanders of his army were also of Hindu origin. Sonday Rai was the Commander of Mahmud’s crack regiment and took part in several important campaigns with him. The coins struck during Mahmud’s reign bore his own image on one side and the figure of a Hindu deity on the other.

Mahmud, as a patron of learning, filled his court with scholars including Ferdowsi the poet, Abolfazl Beyhaghi the historian (whose work on the Ghanavid Empire is perhaps the most substantive primary source of the period) and Al-Biruni the versatile scholar who wrote the informative Ta’rikh al-Hind (“Chronicles of Hind”). It was said that he spent over four hundred thousand golden dinars rewarding scholars. He invited the scholars from all over the world and was thus known as an abductor of scholars. During his rule, Lahore also became a great center of learning and culture. Lahore was called ‘Small Ghazni’ as Ghazni received far more attention during Mahmud’s reign. Saad Salman, a poet of those times, also wrote about the academic and cultural life of Muslim Lahore and its growing importance.

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Crusher

Pakistan has nothing to do with india or bangladesh, stop lumping pakistan together with these foreign countries.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## dexter

Simurgh said:


> Pakistan has nothing to do with india or bangladesh, stop lumping pakistan together with these foreign countries.




As i mentioned in title "Muslim" then it should be quite understandable for you what my motives are, otherwise you are free to go ahead and ignore this thread

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Crusher

dexter said:


> As i mentioned in title "Muslim" then it should be quite understandable for you what my motives are, otherwise you are free to go ahead and ignore this thread



How does "muslim" make any difference, Pakistan is a separate country than those two ********.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Saiful Islam

The advent of Islam in Pakistan doesn't coincide with the advent of Islam in Bengal..


----------



## Ghost 125

dexter said:


> This thread is solely based on Muslim Rulers of South Asia. Kindly share the information and participate in this discussion.
> 
> Islamic history in South Asia can be divided into following timeperiods:
> 
> Early Middle Ages
> Medieval Period
> Mughal Empire
> British Era
> Struggle for Pakistan (Tehreek-e-Pakistan)
> Emergence of Islamic Republic of Pakistan
> 
> Right after rise of Islam under Rashidun Caliphate, the conquest of Persian Empire which occupied West portion of today's Balochistan Province, Pakistan led to the spread of Islam in region of South Asia and opened the doors of conquest of this region. After it, large number of Baloch people accepted Islam.
> 
> However, there are accounts of a King in South India Chakrawati Farmas (Today's Malabar, India) who witnessed splitting of Moon and investigated this phenomenon until he found out that it was done by *Prophet Muhammad (S.A.W.)* who claims to be last apostle of *ALLAH S.W.T *in Makkah. He traveled thousands of miles to Arabia and met *Prophet (S.A.W.)* and accepted Islam. When he returned to his homeland, he built a mosque there which still exists today.
> 
> The most famous historical account which marks the spread of Islam in this region is none other than conquest of Sindh in 712 AD by Muhammad Bin Qasim serving under Umayyad Caliphate.
> 
> *1. Early Middle Ages :*
> 
> *Muhammad Bin Qasim (695-715) :*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Muhammad bin Qasim was born around 695 AD. He belonged to the Saqqafi tribe; that had originated from Taif in Arabia. He grew up in the care of his mother; he soon became a great asset to his uncle Muhammad Ibn Yusuf, the governor of Yemen. His judgment, potential and skills left many other officers and forced the ruler to appoint him in the state department. He was also a close relative of Hajjaj bin Yousuf, because of the influence of Hajjaj, the young Muhammad bin Qasim was appointed the governor of Persia while in his teens, and he crushed the rebellion in that region. There is also a popular tradition that presents him as the son-in-law of Hajjaj bin Yousuf. He conquered the Sindh and Punjab regions along the Indus River for the Umayyad Caliphate.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Raja Dahir*
> 
> There are both long and short term causes for the conquest of india. Arabs had trade with India and Eastern Asia. The trade was carried through sea rout; the rout was unsafe due to the plunder of the Pirates of Sindh. The Arab rebels also get refuge in Sindh. Thus the Umayyad wanted to consolidate their rule and also to secure the trade rout. During Hajjaj’s governorship, the Mids of Debal (Pirates) plundered the gifts of Ceylon’s ruler to Hijjaj and attacked on ships of Arab that were carrying the orphans and widows of Muslim soldiers who died in Sri Lanka. Thus providing the Umayyad Caliphate the legitimate cause, that enabled them to gain a foothold in the Makran, and Sindh regions.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Map of the maximum extents of Muhammad ibn Qasim's expansion of Umayyad rule into Pakistan and northwestern India, c. 711 CE
> 
> The Umayyad caliphate ordered Muhammad Bin Qasim to attack over Sindh. He led 6,000 Syrian cavalry and at the borders of Sindh he was joined by an advance guard and six thousand camel riders and with five catapults (Manjaniks). Muhammad Bin Qasim first captured Debal, from where the Arab army marched along the Indus. At Rohri he was met by Dahir’s forces. Dahir died in the battle, his forces were defeated and Muhammad bin Qasim took control of Sind. Mohammad Bin Qasim entered Daibul in 712 AD. As a result of his efforts, he succeeded in capturing Daibul. He continued his Victorious Progress in succession, Nirun, fortress (called Sikka), Brahmanabad, Alor, Multan and Gujrat. After the conquest of Multan, he carried his arms to the borders of Kigdom of Kashmir, but his dismissal stopped the further advance. Now Muslims were the masters of whole Sindh and a part of Punjab up to the borders of Kashmir in the north. After the conquest, he adopted a conciliatory policy, asking for acceptance of Muslim rule by the natives in return for non-interference in their religious and cultural practices. He also established peace with a strong taxation system. In return he provided the guaranty of security of life and property for the natives. Hajjaj died in 714. When Walid Bin Abdul Malik died, his younger brother Suleman succeeded as the Caliph. He was a bitter enemy of Hajjaj’s family. He recalled Mohammad Bin Qasim from Sindh, who obeyed the orders as the duty of a general. When he came back, he was put to death on 18th of July, 715AD at the age of twenty.
> 
> After the* Abbasid Revolt *in 750 AD and fall of Umayyad Caliphate, Sindh became independent and was captured by Musa b. K'ab al Tamimi in 752 AD. But soon Civil war erupted in Sindh in 842 AD, and the Habbari dynasty occupied Mansurah, and by 871, five independent principalities emerged, with the Banu Habbari clan controlling in Mansurah, Banu Munabbih occupying Multan, Banu Madan ruling in Makran, with Makshey and Turan falling to other rulers, all outside direct Caliphate control.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Breakup of Abbasid Caliph*
> 
> *Habbari dynasty (854–1011) :*
> 
> The Habbari dynasty ruled the Abbasid province of Greater Sindh from 841 to 1024. The region became semi-independent under the Arab ruler Aziz al-Habbari in 841 CE, though nominally remaining part of the Caliphate. The Habbaris, who were based in the city of Mansura, ruled the regions of Sindh, Makran, Turan, Khuzdar and Multan. The Umayyad Caliph made Aziz governor of Sindh and he was succeeded by his sons Umar al-Habbari I and Abdullah al-Habbari in succession while his grandson Umar al-Habbari II was ruling when the famous Arab historian Al-Masudi visited Sindh. The Habbaris ruled Sindh until 1010 when the Soomra Khafif took over Sindh. In 1026 Sultan Mahmud Ghaznavi defeated Khafif, destroyed Mansura and annexed the region under the Ghaznavid rule.
> 
> *Rulers:*
> 
> 
> Umar ibn'Abd al-Aziz al'Habbari (855-884)
> Abdullah bin Umar (884-913)
> Umar bin-Abdullah (913-943)
> Muhammad bin Abdullah (943-973)
> Ali bin Umar (973-987)
> Isa bin ali
> Manbi ibn Ali bin Umar (987-1010)
> Khafif (Soomra dynasty) (1010-1025)
> *2. Medieval Period :*
> 
> *Soomra dynasty (1026–1356) :
> *
> The Habbari dynasty became semi independent and was eliminated and Mansura was invaded by Sultan Mahmud Ghaznavi. Sindh then became an easternmost State of the Abbasid Caliphate ruled by the Soomro Dynasty until the Siege of Baghdad (1258). Mansura was the first capital of the Soomra dynasty and the last of the Habbari dynasty. The Soomro tribe revolted against Masud, ruler of the Ghaznavids because they were betrayed by their own wazir. They were superseded by the Samma dynasty.[3] Sindhi language prospered during this period. The Soomra dynasty ended when the last Soomra king was defeated by Alauddin Khalji, the second king of the Khalji dynasty ruling from Delhi.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *
> Early History*
> The Umayyad Caliphs appointed _Aziz al Habbari_ as the governor of Sindh. The Habbari dynasty was controlling Sindh under the orders of the Ummayad Caliphate. When troubles began between the Ummayads and the Abbasids Habbari rule became semi independent, though it still remained under the influence of the Ummayad Caliphate indirectly. Habbaris ruled Sindh until Mahmud Ghaznavi defeated the Habbaris in 1024 because Mahmud Ghaznavi, viewed the Abbasids to be the legitimate caliphs. Following the defeat of the Habbaris, the Abbasid Caliphate made Al Khafif from Samarra the new governor of Sindh for a stronger and stable government. Al Khafif allotted key positions to his family and friends thus Al-Khafif or _Khafif Soomro_became the first ruler of the dynasty in Sindh. Until the Siege of Baghdad the Soomro Dynasty was the Abbasid Caliphate's functionary in Sindh but after that it became independent. Since then some Soomros intermarried with several local women and adopted some local customs as well. Mansura was the first capital of the Soomro dynasty and the last of the Habbari dynasty.
> 
> *Soomro period :
> *
> The Soomro Dynesty later shifted their capital to Tharri, nearly 14 km eastwards of Matli on the Puran. Puran was later abandoned due to changes in the course of Puran river. Afterwards, Thatta was made the capital of Sindh for about 95 years until the end of their rule in 1351 AD. During this period, Kutch was ruled by the Samma Dynasty, who enjoyed good relations with the Soomros in Sindh.
> 
> *Salient features :*
> 
> *Renaissance in Sindh*
> In 1011 AD, the first Soomro King, Al Khafif was given control of Sindh by the Abbasid Caliphate to build a stronger government when Mahmud Ghaznavi defeated the Habbaris. in The beginning Soomro's had Arabic names thus admitting of their Arab past. since then some intermarried with local women. The Soomro Dynasty lost ties with the Abbasid Caliphate after the Siege of Baghdad (1258) and the Soomro kings Soomar, Bhoongar and Dodo-1, established their rule from the shores of the Arabian Sea to Multan, Bahawalpur, Sadiqabad and Uch in the north and in the east to Rajistan and in the west to Balochistan.
> The Renaissance started from 1092 AD when Princess Zainab Tari Soomro became the sovereign Queen of Sindh. As a first step, attention was paid to Sindhi language, which had remained dominated by Arabic during the last three centuries. Not only reforms were made in promoting Sindhi language for good governance, but fast progress was made in arts and crafts, architecture, agriculture and music, both instrumental and vocal. Sports like horse and camel races, wrestling known "Mulluh" and other marshal sports were patronized.
> A lot about Soomros is mentioned in the _Chachnama_ though not all of it is true even some of it is even baseless.
> 
> *Language and literature*
> As everywhere in the world, the literature had a poetic start, so in Sindh also, the minstrels and bards made great strides in Sindhi folk poetry. They composed their poetry around popular myths, folk tales, historical events and romances. A minstrel named Sumang Charan stands prominent among all other minstrels and bards of the early period.
> In this period, "Doha (couplets)", "Gaha", "Geech (marriage songs)" "Gaya (songs of Soomro women)", forms of Sindhi poetry developed as a part of dramatic narration. Later on new dimensions were brought to Sindhi poetry, after the battle of Dodo Chanesar, the Soomro kings with the armies of Sultan Allaulddin of Delhi, in 1313 AD near the city of "Thaar Banghar" which gave rise to epic form of poetry in Sindh.
> A minstrel named Bhagu Bhan, also a court poet of Soomro Kings, was renowned as composer and singer of epic poetry. He was an expert in playing local musical instruments, especially "Surando". This instrument could be called the violin of the East.
> There were other master musicians and singers as Chand Fakir, Bahiro Mangto, Lado Bhag and many others from Charans, Mangtas and Manganhars tribes. From the women poets, Mai Markha Shaikh was a remarkable poet of that time. They all played their part towards poetical progress in Sindhi literature during the rule of Soomro Dynasty in Sindh.
> The great historical dramatic romances that took place in the reign of the last few Soomro kings were _Lilan Chanesar_, _Umar Marvi_ and _Momal Rano_. Earlier than this, the love tales of _Sassui Punhun_, _Suhni Mehar_ and _Sorath-Rai Dyach_ were narrated in melodious poetry by minstrels and bards in public musical evenings patronized by the Soomro Kings.
> Centuries afterwards, the tales of these historic romances became the subject matter of Sufistic poetry by the famous Sufi poet of Sindh, Shah Abdul Latif Bhittai, who immortalized these tales. He transformed these tales into different _Surs_ i.e. musical composition with classical norms. Since then great Sindhi, master musicians and singers keep singing these soulful melodies even in this 21st.
> 
> *Fall of the Soomro dynasty :
> *
> The Siege of Baghdad (1258), saw the dynasty lose its ties with Abbasid Caliphate. Since then The Sultans of Delhi wanted a piece of Sindh. The Soomros successfully defended their kingdom for about 100 years but their dynasties soon fell to the might of the massive armies of the Sultans of Delhi, such as the Tughluks and the Khiljis because of a rebellion led by Chanesar who joined forces with the Khiljis and Dodo Bin Al Khafif died fighting in battle with the Khiljis.
> 
> *Ghaznavid dynasty (977–1186) :*
> 
> The Ghaznivid Empire was an empire that existed during the 10th-11th century; stretching at it's peak from Tehran to Northern India, and was Turkic-Persian in origin, largely following Sunni Islam. The date of it's foundation was 962-977, and that of it's disintegration 1180-1187; lasting some 224 years. The Ghaznivids were one of the most distinguished empires to have ever existed in Afghanistan. The empire was founded by the slaveAptigin (a Turkish Mamluk originally from Ghazni; who had fled from Balkh to Ghazni in 961 after a failed coup who revolted against the ruling Samanids of Iran, conquering their throne, thus establishing himself as ruler who would bring in great economic and political development. He was father in law to Sabuktagin (whom some historians also consider the founder of the Ghaznivids) who would later expand the empire extensively.
> 
> Altigpin crossed the Hindu Kush, after laying siege to the _"insignificant"_ Fort of Ghazni in 962 transforming it into _"one of the most dazzling capitals of the Islamic world"_ after his victory. The fort itself was militarily and politically advantageous for his cause; it lay near the lucrative Silk Road where it was nestled in between Kabul and Kandahar. The empire itself became significant for it's prestige and for being the first Islamic empire to spread itself across Asia, and well into Hindu-dominated Northern India. The centre of the Ghaznivid empire was known for being home to artisans, poets, musicians,philosophers, scholars/scientists and other intelligentsia; and were also responsible for building _"opulent palaces, gold encrusted mosques"_ and for having spread _"abundant"_ gardens into India. This empire also gave the world windmill's, which were one of the most important inventions the world has ever seen.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Ghaznavid expansion into Pakistan and North-West India*
> 
> *Sultan Mahmud Ghaznavi (998 – 1030) :
> *
> Mahmood Gaznavi was born in 971AD, in khurasan. Mahmood Ghazni was the son of Abu Mansur Sabuktigin, who was a Turkish slave soldier of the samanid ruler. In 994 Mahmood joined his father in the conquest of Ghazni for Samanid ruler, it was the time of instability for Samanid Empire. In 998AD Mahmood took control of the Ghazni and also conquered Qandahar.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In 1001 Sultan Mahmud Ghaznavi defeated Jeebal the king of Kabulistan and marched further into Peshawar and in 1005 made it the center for his forces. From this strategic location Mahmud was able to capture Panjab in 1007, Tanseer fell in 1014, Kashmir was captured in 1015 and Qanoch fell in 1017. By 1027 Sultan Mahmud had captured Pakistan and parts of northern India.
> 
> On 1010 Mahmud captured what is today the Ghor Province (Ghor) and by 1011 annexed Balochistan. Sultan Mahmud had already had relationships with the leadership in Balkh through marriage and its local emir Abu Nasr Mohammad offered his services to Sultan Mahmud and offered his daughter to Muhammad son of Sultan Mahmud. After Nasr’s death Mahmud brought Balkh under his leadership. This alliance greatly helped Mahmud during his expeditions into Pakistan and northern India.
> 
> In 1030 Sultan Mahmud fell gravely ill and died at the age of 59. Sultan Mahmud was an accomplished military commander and speaker as well as a patron of poetry, astronomy, and math. Mahmud had no tolerance for other religions however and only praised Islam. Universities were formed to study various subjects such as math, religion, the humanities and medicine were taught, but only within the laws of the Sharia. Islam was the main religion of his kingdom and the Perso-Afghan dialect of Dari language was made the official language.
> 
> Ghaznavid rule in Pakistan lasted for over one hundred and seventy five years from 1010 to 1187. It was during this period that Lahore assumed considerable importance as the eastern-most bastion of Muslim power and as an outpost for further advance towards the riches of the east. Apart from being the second capital and later the only capital of the Ghaznavid kingdom, Lahore had great military and strategic significance. Whoever controlled this city could look forward to and be in a position to sweep the whole of East Punjab to Panipat and Delhi.
> 
> By the end of his reign, Mahmud’s empire extended from Kurdistan in the west to Samarkand in the northeast, and from the Caspian Sea to the Yamuna. All of what is today Pakistan and Kashmir came under the Ghaznavid empire. The wealth brought back to Ghazni was enormous, and contemporary historians (e.g. Abolfazl Beyhaghi , Ferdowsi) give detailed descriptions of the building activity and importance of Lahore, as well as of the conqueror’s support of literature.
> 
> Often reviled as a persecutor of Hindus (and in many cases Hindu temples were looted and destroyed) much of Mahmud’s army consisted of Hindus and some of the commanders of his army were also of Hindu origin. Sonday Rai was the Commander of Mahmud’s crack regiment and took part in several important campaigns with him. The coins struck during Mahmud’s reign bore his own image on one side and the figure of a Hindu deity on the other.
> 
> Mahmud, as a patron of learning, filled his court with scholars including Ferdowsi the poet, Abolfazl Beyhaghi the historian (whose work on the Ghanavid Empire is perhaps the most substantive primary source of the period) and Al-Biruni the versatile scholar who wrote the informative Ta’rikh al-Hind (“Chronicles of Hind”). It was said that he spent over four hundred thousand golden dinars rewarding scholars. He invited the scholars from all over the world and was thus known as an abductor of scholars. During his rule, Lahore also became a great center of learning and culture. Lahore was called ‘Small Ghazni’ as Ghazni received far more attention during Mahmud’s reign. Saad Salman, a poet of those times, also wrote about the academic and cultural life of Muslim Lahore and its growing importance.


thanks for always posting good historical content on the forum

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## dexter

Saiful Islam said:


> The advent of Islam in Pakistan doesn't coincide with the advent of Islam in Bengal..



Well i accept that mistake and i edited that part out.
Well our history dont cioncide but bangladesh was part of Pakistan as former East Pakistan and it was here that the foundation of a separate muslim state was laid by All India Muslim League.
That is the main reason i mentioned it.



Ghost 125 said:


> thanks for always posting good historical content on the forum



JazakALLAH brother, i appreciate your support.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## dexter

*Ghaurid Dynasty (879–1215) :*

*GHURIDS* (or Āl-e Šansab), a medieval Islamic dynasty of the eastern Iranian lands. They began as local chiefs in Ḡūr (q.v.) in the heartland of what is now Afghanistan, but became a major power from the mid-12th century until the opening years of the 7th/13th century. Ḡūr was then the nucleus of a vast but transient military empire which at times stretched from Gorgān (q.v.) in the west to northern India in the east, only to be overwhelmed by the Ḵᵛārazmšāhs (q.v.; see also CHORASMIA ii) and to disappear, as far as the eastern Iranian lands were concerned, on the eve of the Mongol cataclysm.

The Ghurids came from the Šansabānī family. The name of the eponym Šansab/Šanasb probably derives from the Middle Persian name Wišnasp (Justi, _Namenbuch_, p. 282). After the Ghurids had achieved fame as military conquerors, obsequious courtiers and genealogists connected the family with the legendary Iranian past by tracing it back to Żaḥḥāk, whose descendants were supposed to have settled in Ḡūr after Ferēdūn had overthrown Żaḥḥāk’s thousand-year tyranny. The Šansab family was then brought into the framework of Islamic history by the story that its chiefs received Islam from the hands of Imam ʿAlī, subsequently aiding Abū Moslem Ḵorāsānī’s uprising against the Omayyads and having its power legitimized by being invested with Ḡūr by the caliph Hārūn al-Rašīd (Jūzjānī, _Ṭabaqāt_ I, pp. 318-27, tr. Raverty, I, pp. 300-16, citing a versified genealogy of the Ghurids compiled for Sultan ʿAlāʾ-al-Dīn Ḥosayn Jahānsūz by Faḵr-al-Dīn Mobārakšāh b. Ḥosayn Marvrūdī, q.v.). It goes without saying that we have no concrete evidence for any of this. The chiefs of Ḡūr only achieve firm historical mention in the early 5th/11th century with the Ghaznavid raids into their land, when Ḡūr was still a pagan enclave. Nor do we know anything about the ethnic stock of the Ḡūrīs in general and the Šansabānīs in particular; we can only assume that they were eastern Iranian Tajiks.

Table 1. Geneological table of the Šansabāni family (the Ghurids).

There were at least three raids by the early Ghaznavids into Ḡūr, led by Sultan Maḥmūd and his son Masʿūd, in the first decades of the 5th/11th century; these introduced Islam and brought Ḡūr into a state of loose vassalage to the sultans (ʿOtbī, II, pp. 122-25; Bayhaqī, 113-21; Jūzjānī, I, p. 330, tr. I, p. 329; Nāẓim, pp. 70–72; Bosworth, 1961, pp. 122-23, 127–28). The Šansabānīs were only one amongst several chieftains at this time, and topographical gleanings from Bayhaqī (pp. 114-20), plus various details from Jūzjānī, show that they were petty rulers of the district of Mandēš on the upper Harīrūd near modern Āhangarān (see map in _Ḥodūd al–ʿālam_2, tr. Minorsky, Second Series of Addenda, p. xxix and the detailed discussion of the locations mentioned in Ḡūr at text, p. 110, comm. pp. 342-44). During the second half of the 5th/11th century, the Šansabānīs were squabbling amongst themselves but also trying to extend their power beyond Mandēš and to crush other chieftains; at one point, dissident Ḡūrī leaders appealed to the Ghaznavid Ebrāhīm b. Masʿūd (q.v.) to intervene against the oppressive Šansabānī ʿAbbās b. Šīṯ (Jūzjānī, I, p. 332, tr. I, pp. 331-32; Bosworth, _Later Ghaznavids_, p. 69), and Moḥammad b. ʿAbbās was set up as chief by the sultan. Moḥammad’s son, Ḥasan, was the first Šansabānī known to have an honorific title, namely Qotb-al-Dīn, but the history of the Ghurid dynasty, as it may now be fittingly styled, only becomes reasonably well known with the accession of ʿEzz-al–Dīn Ḥosayn b. Ḥasan (493-540/1100-46).

By now, Ghaznavid influence within the Ghurid lands was giving place to that of the Saljuqs, for Sanjar was able in 512/1118 to place his own nominee, Bahrāmšāh b. Masʿūd (q.v.), on the throne in Ḡazna. Already in 501/1107-8 Sanjar had raided Ḡūr from Khorasan (Jūzjānī, tr. Raverty, p. 336 n. 4), and ʿEzz-al-Dīn (493-540/1100-1145) now became his vassal, sending as part of the stipulated tribute mailed coats and the local breed of fierce dogs (Jūzjānī, I, p. 335, tr. I, pp. 336-37). Sayf-al-Dīn Sūrī b. ʿEzz-al-Dīn Ḥosayn succeed in 540/1146 in Ḡūr, but shared out his lands with his brothers on the basis of Ḡūrī tribal and patrimonial practice. He himself clashed with the Ghaznavids, and after an abortive attack on Ḡazna, was killed by Bahrāmšāh; this marked the beginning of a deep hatred between the two families. On his accession, his son ʿAlāʾ-al–Dīn Ḥosayn (544-56/1149-61) avenged the two of his brothers killed by Bahrāmšāh by declaring war on the Ghaznavids. In a great battle in Zamīndāvar and then another at Ḡazna itself, he defeated Bahrāmšāh and drove him into India. Ḡazna and Bost suffered frightful sackings by ʿAlāʾ-al-Dīn Ḥosayn, in which colleges and libraries were despoiled, and the buildings of previous sultans destroyed (Jūzjānī, pp. 343-45; _Čahār maqāla_, ed. Qazvīnī, p. 31), earning him the uneviable epithet of Jahānsūz (world incendiary). The Ghurids made no attempt to annex the Ghaznavid provinces of eastern Afghanistan, and soon afterwards Bahrāmšāh returned from the Punjab; but ʿAlaʾ-al-Dīn Ḥosayn does seem to have sought a higher status for himself. Not content with being a mere _malek_ or amir, according to Ebn al-Aṯīr (Beirut, XI, p. 166), he now styled himself, after the Saljuqs and Ghaznavids, _al-solṭān al–moʿaẓẓam_ and adopted the _čatr_(q.v.) or ceremonial parasol as one of the insignia of royalty (in fact, the designation _al-solṭān al-aʿẓam_ already appears on the coins of his predecessor in Fīrūzkūh, Bahāʾ-al-Dīn Sām b. Ḥosayn, r. 544/1149; Sourdel, p. 114, nos. 1258–60). He also aspired to cast off his subordination to the Saljuqs, but was defeated by Sanjar in 547/1152, and spent his last years extending Ghurid power into northern Afghanistan and southwards to the Helmand valley (Jūzjānī, I, pp. 346-48, tr. pp. 347-62; Ebn al-Aṯīr, Beirut, XI, pp. 164-66).

ʿAlāʾ-al-Dīn Ḥosayn’s expansionist policies raised the Ghurids into a power of significance well beyond Ḡūr itself. Latterly, he was able to take advantage of a certain power-vacuum in the eastern Islamic world which had arisen through the decay of the Ghaznavids and the collapse of Saljuq power in Khorasan consequent on Sanjar’s defeat and capture by the Ḡozz (q.v.) in 548/1153. The expansion of the territories controlled by the family facilitated a division of the patrimony amongst its various branches, so that, henceforth, the senior branch ruled over the heartland, Ḡūr, from the capital Fīrūzkūh (q.v.) on or near the upper Harīrūd. Fīrūzkūh was originally founded by Qoṭb-al-Dīn Moḥammad as the seat of his appendage of Waršāda, continued as the capital of ʿAlāʾ-al-Dīn Ḥosayn, and then expanded by the building activity of Ḡīāṯ-al-Dīn Moḥammad b. Bahāʾ-al–Dīn Sām (Jūzjānī, I, pp. 335-36, 353, tr. I, pp. 339, 370), which included the famed minaret of Jām, which was constructed either at the fortress of Fīrūzkūh itself or nearby. After Ḡazna had been finally taken from the Turks who had occupied it after the last Ghaznavids (579/1183-84), another branch was established there under Moʿezz-al-Dīn or Šehāb-al–Dīn Moḥammad b. Bahāʾ-al-Dīn Sām, and this branch used Ḡazna as a launching-pad for expansion into northern India. Finally, Faḵr-al-Dīn Masʿūd b. ʿEzz-al-Dīn Ḥosayn was installed in newly conquered Bāmīān (q.v.), and his branch expanded into northern Afghanistan as far as the Oxus and beyond it into Čaḡānīān (q.v.) and Waḵš (Jūzjānī, I, p. 385, tr. pp. 423-24).

Under the two brothers Ḡīāṯ-al-Dīn and Moʿezz-al-Dīn in Fīrūzkūh and Ḡazna respectively (558-99 /1163-1203 and 569-99/1173-1203), the Ghurid empire reached its greatest territorial extent and apogee of power. Although the earlier history of the Šansabānī family had been full of feuds and disputes, the brothers maintained a partnership, with mutual amity and a division of spheres of activity and influence. Ḡīāṯ-al–Dīn was broadly concerned with expansion westwards into Khorasan and with checking the ambitions there of the Ḵwārazmšāhs, whilst Moʿezz-al-Dīn led raids into India.





_*Map showing the Ghaurid Empire between 1149-1212 AD* _

In the west, Ḡīāṯ-al-Dīn, often in concert with his brother, extended his suzerainty over the _malek_s of Nīmrūz or Sīstān and even over the Kermān branch of the Saljuqs. Turkish amirs in Herāt and Balḵ were humbled, but the main thrust of Ḡīāṯ-al-Dīn’s efforts was in western Khorasan, where the Ghurid came to clash with the Ḵᵛārazmšāhs under Il-Arslan and Tekeš. The Ḵᵛārazmšāhs aimed at capturing Khorasan, backed at times by their suzerains the pagan Qara Khitay. The Ghurids adopted the role of defenders of Sunnism. They had cordial relations with the ʿAbbasids in Baghdad, frequently exchanging embassies (Jūzjānī’s father took part in one of the last, Jūzjānī, I, p. 361, tr. p. 383). Ḡīāṯ-al-Dīn was admitted to al-Nāṣer’s _fotūwa_ order, and the caliph more than once urged the Ghurids to halt the advance into western Persia of the Ḵᵛārazmšāhs (Jūzjānī, I, 302, tr. I, p. 243). The actual fighting in Khorasan at this time was largely between the Ghurids and Tekeš’s brother Solṭānšāh, who had carved out for himself personally a principality in western Khorasan, until in 586/1190 Ḡīāṯ-al–Dīn and Moʿezz-al-Dīn defeated Solṭānšāh near Marv in 588/1192, captured him, and took over his territories (Jūzjānī, I, 303-4, tr. I, pp. 246-47). When Tekeš died in 596/1200 (Ebn al-Aṯīr, Beirut, XII, pp. 156-58), Ḡīāṯ-al-Dīn was able to take over most of the towns of Khorasan as far west as Besṭām in Qūmes. At the same time, the Bāmīān branch of the dynasty under Bahāʾ-al-Dīn Sām b. Šams-al-Dīn Moḥammad (588-602/1192-1206) secured Balḵ and Ṭoḵārestān after the death of its Turkish governor, a vassal of the Qara Khitay (Jūzjānī, I, p. 389, tr. p. 431).

Moʿezz-al-Dīn, installed at Ḡazna since 569/1173-74 with the title also of sultan, began raiding through the Gomal Pass into India, capturing Moltān and Uččh (570/1175) and compelling the Sumerās in Lower Sind to acknowledge his suzerainty (578/1182). He was repulsed from Gujarat, hence turned to northern India, finally extinguishing the Ghaznavids in Lahore (582/1186) and then advancing down the Ganges valley to defeat various Hindu princes and to occupy Delhi, Ajmer, and Gwalior. Moʿezz-al–Dīn himself returned to Khorasan to aid his brother against the Ḵᵛārazmšāhs, but his conquests in India were carried on by his Turkish commander Qoṭb-al-Dīn Aybak (q.v.) and, expanding as far east as Bengal, by Eḵtīār-al-Dīn Moḥammad Ḵaljī. It was Aybak who at Delhi built the Qowwat-al-Eslām mosque (588/1192) and at Ajmer converted into the Arhāʾī-Dīn-kā-jhompŕā mosque (comp. 596/1200) a former Hindu college as visible signs of Ghurid might in India (Burton-Page, “Dilhi,” p. 259 with the plan of Qowwat-al-Eslām mosque; idem, “Hind,” p. 442).

For three years until his own death in 602/1206, Moʿezz-al-Dīn was supreme ruler, but in fact followed earlier practice by allotting appanages to members of the family, including Fīrūzkūh to Żīāʾ-al-Dīn or ʿAlāʾ-al-Dīn Moḥammad b. Šojāʿ-al-Dīn ʿAlī, and southern and western Afghanistan to Ḡīāṯ-al–Dīn Maḥmūd b. Ḡīāṯ-al-Dīn Moḥammad; the latter, however, very soon took control of Fīrūzkūh once Moʿezz-al–Dīn had died. Moʿezz-al-Dīn’s last years had been characterized by failure in the west. Ghurid rule in Khorasan proved oppressive and unpopular; according to Jovaynī (II, pp. 51-52, tr. Boyle, II, p. 319), Moʿezz-al–Dīn required forced sales and confiscated for his army grain which had been stored in the shrine of the Imām ʿAlī al-Reżā at Mašhad-e Ṭūs. An attempted pursuit of the army of the new Ḵᵛārazmšāh ʿAlāʾ-al-Dīn Moḥammad ended disastrously for the Ghurids, who were halted by flooding of the Chorazmian countryside and then routed at Andḵūy (q.v.) on the Oxus by the Qara Khitay (601/1204; Jovaynī, ed. Qazvīnī, II, pp. 57, 89, tr. Boyle, I, pp. 321-24; Barthold, _Turkestan_2, pp. 349-51). Moʿezz-al–Dīn escaped personally, but all Khorasan except Herāt was lost, and a year or so later the sultan was assassinated in India.

After this, the Ghurid empire rapidly fell apart. Ḡīāṯò-al-Dīn and Moʿezz-al–Dīn had skillfully maintained the unity of the realm and had kept firm control over the various elements of which the multi-ethnic Ghurid army was composed. Dissension now broke out within the Šansabānī family, with military factions taking sides. Thus the Ḡūrī troops supported for succession to the sultanate the Bāmīān line of the family, whereas the Turks favored Ḡīāṯ-al–Dīn Maḥmūd, who in the end prevailed at Fīrūzkūh. In Ḡazna, power was seized by the Turkish commander Tāj-al-Dīn Yïldïz (Īldūz), legitimized by Ḡīāṯ-al-Dīn’s grant to him of its governorship (602-11/1206-15). The last Ghurids were puppets of the Ḵᵛārazmšāhs, until in 612/1215 ʿAlāʾ-al–Dīn Moḥammad deposed the last sultan in Fīrūzkūh; the Bāmīān line was likewise suppressed; and Yïldïz was driven out of Ḡazna. Thus all the Ghurid lands, except those in northern India, fell under Choarazmian control, although it was not long before Sultan Moḥammad himself was overwhelmed by the Mongols (Jovaynī, ed. Qazvīnī, II, 108-16, tr. Boyle, II, pp. 327-86; Jovaynī, II, p. 85, is wrong in making the conquest of Ḡazna after the death of Yïldïz).





*Ghaurid Empire at its greatest extent.*

The constituting of the Ghurid empire was a remarkable achievement for a family of petty chiefs from a backward region like Ḡūr, which henceforth was to play no significant role in Islamic history. The sultans’ military strength was based on both the indigenous Ḡūrī mountaineers and Ḵaljīs from eastern Afghanistan plus the recruitment of Turkish military slaves, but these resources were not in the end adequate to withstand the Ḵᵛārazmšāhs, who had the manpower resources of the Inner Asian steppes behind them. It was, of course, in India that the Ghurid legacy was to be the most lasting, for it was the Turkish and Ḵaljī commanders of Moʿezz-al-Dīn who laid the foundations of the Delhi Sultanate (q.v.), in many ways a successor-state to the Ghurids, and who permanently implanted Islam in northern India.

Although the Ghurid empire was not a durable one, it seems possible to speak of a distinct Ghurid ethos and culture. Continuing the attitudes of the Ghaznavids, the Ghurids were strong upholders of the orthodox Sunni form of Islam, once the Šansabānī family had emerged from its pagan past. Ismaili propagandists from northern Persia penetrated into Ḡūr during the later years of ʿAlāʾ-al–Dīn Ḥosayn, and received some encouragement from the sultan; but his son Sayf-al-Dīn Moḥammad took strong measures to extirpate it (Jūzjānī, I, pp. 349-51, tr. I, pp. 361, 365-66). Of more lasting significance for the religious complexion of Ḡūr was the wide sympathy there for the pietistic, ascetic Sunni sect of the Karrāmīya (q.v.), which had arisen in Nīšāpūr during the 4th/10th century and had been patronized by the early Ghaznavid sultans. It may be, though the sources are not explicit, that this group,which placed a strong emphasis on missionary work (see daʿwa), was active in the 5th/11th century in spreading Islam in Ḡūr. Certainly, in the following century, the majority of the inhabitants of Ḡūr are said to have been adherents of the Karrāmīya, and it was only Ḡīāṯò-al-Dīn Moḥammad and Moʿezz-al-Dīn Moḥammad who changed over to the mainstream Shafiʿite and Hanafite law schools respectively (Bosworth, 1961, pp. 128-33). As noted above, these two sultans were certainly aware of orthodox, caliphal approval for their authority and the advantages of close diplomatic contacts with the ʿAbbasids.

Literary and artistic activities under the Ghurids likewise followed on from those of the Ghaznavids. The sultans were generous patrons of the Persian literary traditions of Khorasan, and latterly fulfilled a valuable role as transmitters of this heritage to the newly conquered lands of northern India, laying the foundations for the essentially Persian culture which was to prevail in Muslim India until the 19th century. ʿAlāʾ-al–Dīn Ḥosayn Jahānsūz reportedly was also a fine poet; his poetry, of which only a few lines have been preserved, was widely appreciated in Afghanistan and northern India. Moḥammad ʿAwfī had seen a copy of his _dīvān_ in Samarqand (_Lobāb_, ed. Browne, I, pp. 38-39, ed. Nafīsī, pp. 39-40; Jūzjānī, pp. 343-45; Ṣafā, _Adabīyāt_ II, pp. 53-55). The contemporary Neẓāmī ʿArūżī mentions as eulogists of the Ghurids such poets as Abu’l-Qāsem Rāfeʿī, Abū Bakr Jawharī, ʿAlī Ṣūfī, and himself (_Čahār maqāla_, p. 28, tr. p. 30). But while we have surviving several fairly complete _dīvān_s of the Ghaznavid poets, none of those from the Ghurid period have survived. It is clear, however, that all this literature was in Persian, and claims which were made in Afghanistan some decades ago (e.g., Ḥabībī in his ed. of Moḥammad Hōtak) of the existence of poetry in Pashto from the Ghurid period remain unsubstantiated. Of Ghurid prose literature, including history and genealogy, mention should be made of Faḵr-al-Dīn Mobārakšāh Moḥammad b. Manṣūr, known as Faḵr-e Modabber, the author of a genealogical work, _Baḥr al-ansāb_, and a treatise on kingship and statecraft, the _Ādāb al–ḥarb wa’l-šajāʿa_(q.v.). The great historian of the Ghurids, without whose information our knowledge of the dynasty would be much sparser, was Menhāj-al–Dīn-e Serāj-al-Dīn Jūzjānī (q.v.; d. the second half of the 7th/13th century), who was a diplomatic envoy for the sultans and who composed his _Ṭabaqāt-e nāṣerī_, in form a general history but in a large measure a special history of the dynasty.

So far as can be discerned from the exiguous surviving examples of Ghurid art and architecture, there was a continuity here with the Ghaznavid age, since some of it cannot easily be separated stylistically from that of the preceding period. The city of Ḡazna rose again from the ashes of its destruction by ʿAlāʾ-al–Dīn Ḥosayn, and a unique type of glazed tile work has been ascribed by Umberto Scerrato to the Ghurids of the later 6th/12th century. The splendid minaret of Jām (q.v.) is the prime extant example of Ghurid architecture, but there are other remains in Herāt and ruins of a mosque and madrasa at Češt (q.v.) on the upper Harīrūd dating from the reign of Ḡīāṯ-al-Dīn Moḥammad (cf. Sourdel-Thomine). In the sphere of secular architecture, the extensive palace buildings at Laškarī Bāzār (q.v.) on the Helmand river near Bost seem to show a continuity from early Ghaznavid to Ghurid and Mongol times. Nevertheless, it does seem possible, according to Janine Sourdel–Thomine, to speak of the evolution of a distinctive Ghurid architectural style.

*Sultan Shahāb-ud-Din Muhammad Ghori (1149-1206) :
*
Sultan Shahab -ud -din Muhammad also known as, Muizzuddin Muhammad Bin Sam, was born in 1162. He was the younger brother of Ghiasuddin and son of Sultan Bahaudin Suri of Ghure. After Mahmud of Ghazni the next invader in India was Muhammad Ghori. He belonged to the Ghorid dynasty which replaced the Ghaznavids in Afghanistan. After the death of Mahmood Ghaznovi, he was the first Turkish who invaded India; after a long period of 150 years. He laid the foundation for Muslim rule in India and his slave Qutb -ud -din Aibak became the founder of the first Turkish rule in India.






He remained loyal to his elder brother Ghiyas-ud-din and helped him in his invasions until his death in 1202 AD. At that time at the west of Afghanistan there was strong empires so Muhammad Ghuri turned his attention toward East. Shahab-ud-din Ghori`s first invasions were on the Muslim states of Multan and the fortress of Ouch. In 1181, he attacked on Lahore and successfully ended the Ghaznavids Empire, bringing the remaining territory under his control. He fought the first battle of Tarain in 1191 against Raja Prithviraj Chauhan; the most powerful raja of India. In the second battle of Tarain, in 1192 Ghuri defeated raja Prithviraj and the victory paved the way for Ghori to push Muslim rule further in India. The other Rajas were not much strong to defend their rule against Ghuri’s strong military and power. With in a period of one year Ghuri get control of northern parts of India and marched to Delhi. The Kingdom of Ajmer was t given over to Golā, on condition that he would send regular tributes to the Ghurids.

After the death of Ghiys-ud-din he established the rule of the Ghuri dynasty in Afghanistan. Due to heavy taxes they became quite unpopular among their local people. This forced Muhammad Ghori to search out new sources of income and diverts the attention of Ghori towards the invasion of India, which was the richest neighboring country.

In 1206, Ghauri had to travel to Lahore to crush a revolt. On his way back to Ghazni, his caravan rested at Damik in Jhelum district of Punjab province in modern-day Pakistan. He was assassinated while offering his evening prayers by a small band of Hindu Khokars.The murderer killed him so brutally that there were 22 wounds on his body. As per his wishes, Ghauri was buried where he fell.

*Battles of Tarain :*

The Battles of Tarain, also known as the Battles of Taraori, were fought in 1191 and 1192 near the town of Tarain (Taraori), near Thanesar in present-day Haryana, approximately 150 kilometres north of Delhi, India, between a Ghurid force led by Mu'izz al-Din and a Chauhan Rajput army led by Prithviraj Chauhan.

*Defeat in the First Battle (1191) :*

In 1191, Mu'izz al-Din captured the fortress of Bhatinda in East Punjab, which was on the frontier of Prithiviraj Chauhan's domains. Prithviraj marched on to Bhatinda and met his enemy at a place called Tarain (also called Taraori) near the ancient town of Thanesar. The Ghurid army initiates battle by attacking with cavalry who launch arrows at the Rajput center. The forces of Prithviraj counter-attack from three sides and dominate the battle, pressuring the Ghurid army into a withdrawal. Meanwhile, Mu'izz al-Din is wounded in personal combat with Prithviraj's brother, Govind Tai. The victory of Prithviraj was decisive, he inflicted the crushing defeat on Mu'izz ad-Din by completely routing his forces and succeeded in stopping the Ghurid advance towards Hindustan in the first battle of Tarain. He did not pursue Ghori's army either not wanting to invade hostile territory or misjudging Ghori's ambition, instead electing to retake the fortress of Bhatinda.





*Prithviraj Chauhan

Victory in the Second Battle (1192) :
*
On his return to Ghazni, Mu'izz al-Din made preparations to avenge his defeat. When he reached Lahore, he sent his envoy to Prithviraj to demand his submission, but the Chauhan ruler refused to comply.

*Size of the forces and generals :*

According to Firishta, the Rajput army consisted of 3,000 elephants, 300,000 cavalry and infantry, considered exaggeration by some Indian historians. Minhaj-i-Siraj, stated Mu'izz al-Din brought 120,000 fully armored men to battle.

*Battle :*

The battle occurred in the same field as the first one. Knowing the Rajputs were well-disciplined, the Ghurids did not want to engage in melee combat with them. Instead the Ghurids army was formed into five units, and four units were sent to attack the Rajput flanks and rear. The flanking attacks failed and the fighting continued. In hopes of causing a break in the Rajput lines, Mu'izz al-Din ordered his fifth unit to feign retreat. The Rajput's charged the fleeing Ghurid unit, as the Ghurids expected. The Ghurids then sent a fresh cavalry unit of 12,000 and they managed to throw back the Rajput advance. The remaining Ghurid forces then attack and the Rajputs flee in panic. Prithviraj Chauhan abandons his elephant for a horse and tries to escape. But he is caught a few miles from the battlefield and promptly executed.

*The aftermath :*

Mu'izz al-Din barely won against Prithviraj, he followed up this victory by defeating Jayachandra in the Battle of Chandawar, eradicating Buddhism in that area. Later in 1202, his army completes the occupation of Hindustan by taking the province of Bengal.






* The Second battle of Tarain where Ghurid armies crushed Rajput army.*

*Most decisive battle :*

About hundred thousand Rajput soldiers are said to have died in the battle. Prithwiraj was imprisoned and was taken to Ghazni. The second battle of Tarain is believed to be most decisive battle in the Indian History as it opened the path for conquerors of India. Muhammad and his successors were able to conquest over the Rajputs and established an Islamic Empire in India, the Sultanate of Delhi.

*Further campaigns :*

When the state of Ajmer failed to fulfill the tribute demands as per the custom after a defeat, Qutbu l-Din Aibak, in 1193 took over Ajmer and soon established Ghurid control in northern and central India. Hindu kingdoms like Saraswati, Samana, Kohram and Hansi were captured without any difficulty. Finally his forces advanced on Delhi, capturing it soon after the Battle of Chandwar, defeating Raja Jaichand of Kannauj.Within a year, Mu'izz controlled northern Rajasthan and the northern part of the Ganges-Yamuna Doab.The Kingdom of Ajmer was then given over to Golā, on condition that he send regular tributes to the Ghurids.

Mu'izz returned west to Ghazni to deal with the threat to his western frontiers from the unrest in Iran, but he appointed Aibak as his regional governor for northern India. His armies, mostly under Turkic generals, continued to advance through northern India, raiding as far east as Bengal. followed by his conquest of Delhi. An army led by Qutbu l-Din Aibak, Mu'izz's deputy in India, invaded in ca. 1195–97 and plundered Anahilapataka.

*Death :*

In 1173 AD Shahab-ud-Din Ghuri finally brought an end of Ghaznavid Empire and established their dynastic rule. In 1206, Ghauri had to travel to Lahore to crush a revolt. On his way back to Ghazni, his caravan rested at Damik in Jhelum district of Punjab province in modern-day Pakistan. He was assassinated while offering his evening prayers by a small band of Hindu Khokars.The murderer killed him so brutally that there were 22 wounds on his body.





*Muhammed Ghori's grave within his tomb near Jhelum, Pakistan
*
As per his wishes, Ghauri was buried where he fell. His mouseleum was recently constructed by the Government of Pakistan. While driving from Rawalpindi to Jhelum on GT Road, just before Mandra, a road on the right leads towardsChakwal. On the left a narrow road connects several villages with GT Road. At the turning a small board guides to the tomb of Shahab-ud-Deen Ghauri.
*
Legacy :
*
He had no son to succeed him as a ruler but had Turkish slaves. After his assassination, his Empire was divided amongst his slaves.
Muhammad's death left his generals in control of the whole of North India. He was succeeded by Qutb-ud-din Aybak, who had started of by sacking Ayodhya in 1193 C.E. then served as Muhammad's governor in India. He was Sultan until 1210, claiming the title "Sultan of Delhi. His established the Ghulam Dynasty, which ruled until 1290. He also started to build the Qutb complex at Delhi. As a former slave, Qutb-ud-din Aybak lineage is described as a Mamluk, or slave dynasty. Under these rulers, "India became for the first time the seat of resident" Muslim "sovereigns. Another slave, Nasir-ud-din Qabacha became the ruler of Sindh and Multan. In fact, Qutb-ud-din Aibak laid down the foundation of slave dynasty in India. Nasir-ud-din Qabacha was finally defeated by Shams-ud-din Iltutmish and Sindh and Multan became part of the Delhi kingdom.

*Attributes of Ghori described by historians :*

*1.Ghori as a practical statesman :*
Historians regards Ghori as a practical statesman who took the fullest advantage of the rotten political structure of India. Ghori gave proof of his statesmanship while dealing with different Rajput rulers. After his victory over Prithviraj, instead of annexing Delhi and Ajmer to his territories, he handed over the administration of Delhi and Ajmer to the relatives of Prithviraj. Ghori did not change the status of those Hindu chiefs who accepted his suzerainty and did not interfere in their administration. Of course, he established forts in these territories. 

*2.Political realism of Ghori :*
Prof. K.A. Nizami puts stress on two qualities of Ghori i.e. his digged tenacity of purpose and his grim political realism. He wrote, “This Hero of three stupendous defeats at Andh-khud, Tarain and Anhilwara had to his credit the establishment of one of the greatest empires of the middle ages and in this he definitely rises above Mahmud of Ghazni.” According to Stanley Lane-poole, Ghori’s conquests in India were wider and far more permanent than Mahmud’s. He wrote, “of the two tides of Mohammedan invasion that surged into India, Mahmud’s had left little trace. It had been but a series of triumphant raids.” 

*3.Great ability to select officers :*
Ghori had the art of selecting the best men for his services. He trained generals and administrators like Qutab-ud- din Aibak, who proved quite competent to maintain his empire.

*4.Appointment of governors :*
Ghori appointed governors of the provinces he conquered. These governors consolidated the position of Turks and they suppressed rebellions. After the death of Ghori, Qutub-ud-din Aibak, his most able military commander founded the Slave Dynasty that ruled India for about one hundred years.

*5.Ghori as a conqueror of territory :*
In the words of Dr. R.C. Majumdar, “Sultan Mahmud was undoubtedly one of the greatest military leaders, the world has ever seen. It is true that he never faced any defeat. It is, however, equally true that he never tried to consolidate his position. He came like “a wind and went back like a whirl wind.” Unlike Mahmud, Ghori was not a great general and had to suffer humiliating defeats several times. He was defeated by Mularaja II, the ruler of Gujarat; by Prithviraj Chauhan in the first battle of Tarain and by Khwarizam Shah, the ruler of Persia. In fact, he was killed in his own camp by his Khokar enemies. But the greatness of Ghori was that none of these defeats could weaken his spirits or check his ambitions. He took his every failure as a valuable experience. He improved upon his weaknesses, removed them and ultimately got success. The conquests of Ghori brought about more permanent results than the conquests of Mahmud. Mahmud was contented to plunder the wealth of India and did not think of establishing his empire. Mahmud kept himself busy in invading and looting but Ghori attempted to build -up an empire which lasted for centuries.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Ghost 125

dexter said:


> *Ghaurid Dynasty (879–1215) :*
> 
> *GHURIDS* (or Āl-e Šansab), a medieval Islamic dynasty of the eastern Iranian lands. They began as local chiefs in Ḡūr (q.v.) in the heartland of what is now Afghanistan, but became a major power from the mid-12th century until the opening years of the 7th/13th century. Ḡūr was then the nucleus of a vast but transient military empire which at times stretched from Gorgān (q.v.) in the west to northern India in the east, only to be overwhelmed by the Ḵᵛārazmšāhs (q.v.; see also CHORASMIA ii) and to disappear, as far as the eastern Iranian lands were concerned, on the eve of the Mongol cataclysm.
> 
> The Ghurids came from the Šansabānī family. The name of the eponym Šansab/Šanasb probably derives from the Middle Persian name Wišnasp (Justi, _Namenbuch_, p. 282). After the Ghurids had achieved fame as military conquerors, obsequious courtiers and genealogists connected the family with the legendary Iranian past by tracing it back to Żaḥḥāk, whose descendants were supposed to have settled in Ḡūr after Ferēdūn had overthrown Żaḥḥāk’s thousand-year tyranny. The Šansab family was then brought into the framework of Islamic history by the story that its chiefs received Islam from the hands of Imam ʿAlī, subsequently aiding Abū Moslem Ḵorāsānī’s uprising against the Omayyads and having its power legitimized by being invested with Ḡūr by the caliph Hārūn al-Rašīd (Jūzjānī, _Ṭabaqāt_ I, pp. 318-27, tr. Raverty, I, pp. 300-16, citing a versified genealogy of the Ghurids compiled for Sultan ʿAlāʾ-al-Dīn Ḥosayn Jahānsūz by Faḵr-al-Dīn Mobārakšāh b. Ḥosayn Marvrūdī, q.v.). It goes without saying that we have no concrete evidence for any of this. The chiefs of Ḡūr only achieve firm historical mention in the early 5th/11th century with the Ghaznavid raids into their land, when Ḡūr was still a pagan enclave. Nor do we know anything about the ethnic stock of the Ḡūrīs in general and the Šansabānīs in particular; we can only assume that they were eastern Iranian Tajiks.
> 
> Table 1. Geneological table of the Šansabāni family (the Ghurids).
> 
> There were at least three raids by the early Ghaznavids into Ḡūr, led by Sultan Maḥmūd and his son Masʿūd, in the first decades of the 5th/11th century; these introduced Islam and brought Ḡūr into a state of loose vassalage to the sultans (ʿOtbī, II, pp. 122-25; Bayhaqī, 113-21; Jūzjānī, I, p. 330, tr. I, p. 329; Nāẓim, pp. 70–72; Bosworth, 1961, pp. 122-23, 127–28). The Šansabānīs were only one amongst several chieftains at this time, and topographical gleanings from Bayhaqī (pp. 114-20), plus various details from Jūzjānī, show that they were petty rulers of the district of Mandēš on the upper Harīrūd near modern Āhangarān (see map in _Ḥodūd al–ʿālam_2, tr. Minorsky, Second Series of Addenda, p. xxix and the detailed discussion of the locations mentioned in Ḡūr at text, p. 110, comm. pp. 342-44). During the second half of the 5th/11th century, the Šansabānīs were squabbling amongst themselves but also trying to extend their power beyond Mandēš and to crush other chieftains; at one point, dissident Ḡūrī leaders appealed to the Ghaznavid Ebrāhīm b. Masʿūd (q.v.) to intervene against the oppressive Šansabānī ʿAbbās b. Šīṯ (Jūzjānī, I, p. 332, tr. I, pp. 331-32; Bosworth, _Later Ghaznavids_, p. 69), and Moḥammad b. ʿAbbās was set up as chief by the sultan. Moḥammad’s son, Ḥasan, was the first Šansabānī known to have an honorific title, namely Qotb-al-Dīn, but the history of the Ghurid dynasty, as it may now be fittingly styled, only becomes reasonably well known with the accession of ʿEzz-al–Dīn Ḥosayn b. Ḥasan (493-540/1100-46).
> 
> By now, Ghaznavid influence within the Ghurid lands was giving place to that of the Saljuqs, for Sanjar was able in 512/1118 to place his own nominee, Bahrāmšāh b. Masʿūd (q.v.), on the throne in Ḡazna. Already in 501/1107-8 Sanjar had raided Ḡūr from Khorasan (Jūzjānī, tr. Raverty, p. 336 n. 4), and ʿEzz-al-Dīn (493-540/1100-1145) now became his vassal, sending as part of the stipulated tribute mailed coats and the local breed of fierce dogs (Jūzjānī, I, p. 335, tr. I, pp. 336-37). Sayf-al-Dīn Sūrī b. ʿEzz-al-Dīn Ḥosayn succeed in 540/1146 in Ḡūr, but shared out his lands with his brothers on the basis of Ḡūrī tribal and patrimonial practice. He himself clashed with the Ghaznavids, and after an abortive attack on Ḡazna, was killed by Bahrāmšāh; this marked the beginning of a deep hatred between the two families. On his accession, his son ʿAlāʾ-al–Dīn Ḥosayn (544-56/1149-61) avenged the two of his brothers killed by Bahrāmšāh by declaring war on the Ghaznavids. In a great battle in Zamīndāvar and then another at Ḡazna itself, he defeated Bahrāmšāh and drove him into India. Ḡazna and Bost suffered frightful sackings by ʿAlāʾ-al-Dīn Ḥosayn, in which colleges and libraries were despoiled, and the buildings of previous sultans destroyed (Jūzjānī, pp. 343-45; _Čahār maqāla_, ed. Qazvīnī, p. 31), earning him the uneviable epithet of Jahānsūz (world incendiary). The Ghurids made no attempt to annex the Ghaznavid provinces of eastern Afghanistan, and soon afterwards Bahrāmšāh returned from the Punjab; but ʿAlaʾ-al-Dīn Ḥosayn does seem to have sought a higher status for himself. Not content with being a mere _malek_ or amir, according to Ebn al-Aṯīr (Beirut, XI, p. 166), he now styled himself, after the Saljuqs and Ghaznavids, _al-solṭān al–moʿaẓẓam_ and adopted the _čatr_(q.v.) or ceremonial parasol as one of the insignia of royalty (in fact, the designation _al-solṭān al-aʿẓam_ already appears on the coins of his predecessor in Fīrūzkūh, Bahāʾ-al-Dīn Sām b. Ḥosayn, r. 544/1149; Sourdel, p. 114, nos. 1258–60). He also aspired to cast off his subordination to the Saljuqs, but was defeated by Sanjar in 547/1152, and spent his last years extending Ghurid power into northern Afghanistan and southwards to the Helmand valley (Jūzjānī, I, pp. 346-48, tr. pp. 347-62; Ebn al-Aṯīr, Beirut, XI, pp. 164-66).
> 
> ʿAlāʾ-al-Dīn Ḥosayn’s expansionist policies raised the Ghurids into a power of significance well beyond Ḡūr itself. Latterly, he was able to take advantage of a certain power-vacuum in the eastern Islamic world which had arisen through the decay of the Ghaznavids and the collapse of Saljuq power in Khorasan consequent on Sanjar’s defeat and capture by the Ḡozz (q.v.) in 548/1153. The expansion of the territories controlled by the family facilitated a division of the patrimony amongst its various branches, so that, henceforth, the senior branch ruled over the heartland, Ḡūr, from the capital Fīrūzkūh (q.v.) on or near the upper Harīrūd. Fīrūzkūh was originally founded by Qoṭb-al-Dīn Moḥammad as the seat of his appendage of Waršāda, continued as the capital of ʿAlāʾ-al-Dīn Ḥosayn, and then expanded by the building activity of Ḡīāṯ-al-Dīn Moḥammad b. Bahāʾ-al–Dīn Sām (Jūzjānī, I, pp. 335-36, 353, tr. I, pp. 339, 370), which included the famed minaret of Jām, which was constructed either at the fortress of Fīrūzkūh itself or nearby. After Ḡazna had been finally taken from the Turks who had occupied it after the last Ghaznavids (579/1183-84), another branch was established there under Moʿezz-al-Dīn or Šehāb-al–Dīn Moḥammad b. Bahāʾ-al-Dīn Sām, and this branch used Ḡazna as a launching-pad for expansion into northern India. Finally, Faḵr-al-Dīn Masʿūd b. ʿEzz-al-Dīn Ḥosayn was installed in newly conquered Bāmīān (q.v.), and his branch expanded into northern Afghanistan as far as the Oxus and beyond it into Čaḡānīān (q.v.) and Waḵš (Jūzjānī, I, p. 385, tr. pp. 423-24).
> 
> Under the two brothers Ḡīāṯ-al-Dīn and Moʿezz-al-Dīn in Fīrūzkūh and Ḡazna respectively (558-99 /1163-1203 and 569-99/1173-1203), the Ghurid empire reached its greatest territorial extent and apogee of power. Although the earlier history of the Šansabānī family had been full of feuds and disputes, the brothers maintained a partnership, with mutual amity and a division of spheres of activity and influence. Ḡīāṯ-al–Dīn was broadly concerned with expansion westwards into Khorasan and with checking the ambitions there of the Ḵwārazmšāhs, whilst Moʿezz-al-Dīn led raids into India.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _*Map showing the Ghaurid Empire between 1149-1212 AD* _
> 
> In the west, Ḡīāṯ-al-Dīn, often in concert with his brother, extended his suzerainty over the _malek_s of Nīmrūz or Sīstān and even over the Kermān branch of the Saljuqs. Turkish amirs in Herāt and Balḵ were humbled, but the main thrust of Ḡīāṯ-al-Dīn’s efforts was in western Khorasan, where the Ghurid came to clash with the Ḵᵛārazmšāhs under Il-Arslan and Tekeš. The Ḵᵛārazmšāhs aimed at capturing Khorasan, backed at times by their suzerains the pagan Qara Khitay. The Ghurids adopted the role of defenders of Sunnism. They had cordial relations with the ʿAbbasids in Baghdad, frequently exchanging embassies (Jūzjānī’s father took part in one of the last, Jūzjānī, I, p. 361, tr. p. 383). Ḡīāṯ-al-Dīn was admitted to al-Nāṣer’s _fotūwa_ order, and the caliph more than once urged the Ghurids to halt the advance into western Persia of the Ḵᵛārazmšāhs (Jūzjānī, I, 302, tr. I, p. 243). The actual fighting in Khorasan at this time was largely between the Ghurids and Tekeš’s brother Solṭānšāh, who had carved out for himself personally a principality in western Khorasan, until in 586/1190 Ḡīāṯ-al–Dīn and Moʿezz-al-Dīn defeated Solṭānšāh near Marv in 588/1192, captured him, and took over his territories (Jūzjānī, I, 303-4, tr. I, pp. 246-47). When Tekeš died in 596/1200 (Ebn al-Aṯīr, Beirut, XII, pp. 156-58), Ḡīāṯ-al-Dīn was able to take over most of the towns of Khorasan as far west as Besṭām in Qūmes. At the same time, the Bāmīān branch of the dynasty under Bahāʾ-al-Dīn Sām b. Šams-al-Dīn Moḥammad (588-602/1192-1206) secured Balḵ and Ṭoḵārestān after the death of its Turkish governor, a vassal of the Qara Khitay (Jūzjānī, I, p. 389, tr. p. 431).
> 
> Moʿezz-al-Dīn, installed at Ḡazna since 569/1173-74 with the title also of sultan, began raiding through the Gomal Pass into India, capturing Moltān and Uččh (570/1175) and compelling the Sumerās in Lower Sind to acknowledge his suzerainty (578/1182). He was repulsed from Gujarat, hence turned to northern India, finally extinguishing the Ghaznavids in Lahore (582/1186) and then advancing down the Ganges valley to defeat various Hindu princes and to occupy Delhi, Ajmer, and Gwalior. Moʿezz-al–Dīn himself returned to Khorasan to aid his brother against the Ḵᵛārazmšāhs, but his conquests in India were carried on by his Turkish commander Qoṭb-al-Dīn Aybak (q.v.) and, expanding as far east as Bengal, by Eḵtīār-al-Dīn Moḥammad Ḵaljī. It was Aybak who at Delhi built the Qowwat-al-Eslām mosque (588/1192) and at Ajmer converted into the Arhāʾī-Dīn-kā-jhompŕā mosque (comp. 596/1200) a former Hindu college as visible signs of Ghurid might in India (Burton-Page, “Dilhi,” p. 259 with the plan of Qowwat-al-Eslām mosque; idem, “Hind,” p. 442).
> 
> For three years until his own death in 602/1206, Moʿezz-al-Dīn was supreme ruler, but in fact followed earlier practice by allotting appanages to members of the family, including Fīrūzkūh to Żīāʾ-al-Dīn or ʿAlāʾ-al-Dīn Moḥammad b. Šojāʿ-al-Dīn ʿAlī, and southern and western Afghanistan to Ḡīāṯ-al–Dīn Maḥmūd b. Ḡīāṯ-al-Dīn Moḥammad; the latter, however, very soon took control of Fīrūzkūh once Moʿezz-al–Dīn had died. Moʿezz-al-Dīn’s last years had been characterized by failure in the west. Ghurid rule in Khorasan proved oppressive and unpopular; according to Jovaynī (II, pp. 51-52, tr. Boyle, II, p. 319), Moʿezz-al–Dīn required forced sales and confiscated for his army grain which had been stored in the shrine of the Imām ʿAlī al-Reżā at Mašhad-e Ṭūs. An attempted pursuit of the army of the new Ḵᵛārazmšāh ʿAlāʾ-al-Dīn Moḥammad ended disastrously for the Ghurids, who were halted by flooding of the Chorazmian countryside and then routed at Andḵūy (q.v.) on the Oxus by the Qara Khitay (601/1204; Jovaynī, ed. Qazvīnī, II, pp. 57, 89, tr. Boyle, I, pp. 321-24; Barthold, _Turkestan_2, pp. 349-51). Moʿezz-al–Dīn escaped personally, but all Khorasan except Herāt was lost, and a year or so later the sultan was assassinated in India.
> 
> After this, the Ghurid empire rapidly fell apart. Ḡīāṯò-al-Dīn and Moʿezz-al–Dīn had skillfully maintained the unity of the realm and had kept firm control over the various elements of which the multi-ethnic Ghurid army was composed. Dissension now broke out within the Šansabānī family, with military factions taking sides. Thus the Ḡūrī troops supported for succession to the sultanate the Bāmīān line of the family, whereas the Turks favored Ḡīāṯ-al–Dīn Maḥmūd, who in the end prevailed at Fīrūzkūh. In Ḡazna, power was seized by the Turkish commander Tāj-al-Dīn Yïldïz (Īldūz), legitimized by Ḡīāṯ-al-Dīn’s grant to him of its governorship (602-11/1206-15). The last Ghurids were puppets of the Ḵᵛārazmšāhs, until in 612/1215 ʿAlāʾ-al–Dīn Moḥammad deposed the last sultan in Fīrūzkūh; the Bāmīān line was likewise suppressed; and Yïldïz was driven out of Ḡazna. Thus all the Ghurid lands, except those in northern India, fell under Choarazmian control, although it was not long before Sultan Moḥammad himself was overwhelmed by the Mongols (Jovaynī, ed. Qazvīnī, II, 108-16, tr. Boyle, II, pp. 327-86; Jovaynī, II, p. 85, is wrong in making the conquest of Ḡazna after the death of Yïldïz).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Ghaurid Empire at its greatest extent.*
> 
> The constituting of the Ghurid empire was a remarkable achievement for a family of petty chiefs from a backward region like Ḡūr, which henceforth was to play no significant role in Islamic history. The sultans’ military strength was based on both the indigenous Ḡūrī mountaineers and Ḵaljīs from eastern Afghanistan plus the recruitment of Turkish military slaves, but these resources were not in the end adequate to withstand the Ḵᵛārazmšāhs, who had the manpower resources of the Inner Asian steppes behind them. It was, of course, in India that the Ghurid legacy was to be the most lasting, for it was the Turkish and Ḵaljī commanders of Moʿezz-al-Dīn who laid the foundations of the Delhi Sultanate (q.v.), in many ways a successor-state to the Ghurids, and who permanently implanted Islam in northern India.
> 
> Although the Ghurid empire was not a durable one, it seems possible to speak of a distinct Ghurid ethos and culture. Continuing the attitudes of the Ghaznavids, the Ghurids were strong upholders of the orthodox Sunni form of Islam, once the Šansabānī family had emerged from its pagan past. Ismaili propagandists from northern Persia penetrated into Ḡūr during the later years of ʿAlāʾ-al–Dīn Ḥosayn, and received some encouragement from the sultan; but his son Sayf-al-Dīn Moḥammad took strong measures to extirpate it (Jūzjānī, I, pp. 349-51, tr. I, pp. 361, 365-66). Of more lasting significance for the religious complexion of Ḡūr was the wide sympathy there for the pietistic, ascetic Sunni sect of the Karrāmīya (q.v.), which had arisen in Nīšāpūr during the 4th/10th century and had been patronized by the early Ghaznavid sultans. It may be, though the sources are not explicit, that this group,which placed a strong emphasis on missionary work (see daʿwa), was active in the 5th/11th century in spreading Islam in Ḡūr. Certainly, in the following century, the majority of the inhabitants of Ḡūr are said to have been adherents of the Karrāmīya, and it was only Ḡīāṯò-al-Dīn Moḥammad and Moʿezz-al-Dīn Moḥammad who changed over to the mainstream Shafiʿite and Hanafite law schools respectively (Bosworth, 1961, pp. 128-33). As noted above, these two sultans were certainly aware of orthodox, caliphal approval for their authority and the advantages of close diplomatic contacts with the ʿAbbasids.
> 
> Literary and artistic activities under the Ghurids likewise followed on from those of the Ghaznavids. The sultans were generous patrons of the Persian literary traditions of Khorasan, and latterly fulfilled a valuable role as transmitters of this heritage to the newly conquered lands of northern India, laying the foundations for the essentially Persian culture which was to prevail in Muslim India until the 19th century. ʿAlāʾ-al–Dīn Ḥosayn Jahānsūz reportedly was also a fine poet; his poetry, of which only a few lines have been preserved, was widely appreciated in Afghanistan and northern India. Moḥammad ʿAwfī had seen a copy of his _dīvān_ in Samarqand (_Lobāb_, ed. Browne, I, pp. 38-39, ed. Nafīsī, pp. 39-40; Jūzjānī, pp. 343-45; Ṣafā, _Adabīyāt_ II, pp. 53-55). The contemporary Neẓāmī ʿArūżī mentions as eulogists of the Ghurids such poets as Abu’l-Qāsem Rāfeʿī, Abū Bakr Jawharī, ʿAlī Ṣūfī, and himself (_Čahār maqāla_, p. 28, tr. p. 30). But while we have surviving several fairly complete _dīvān_s of the Ghaznavid poets, none of those from the Ghurid period have survived. It is clear, however, that all this literature was in Persian, and claims which were made in Afghanistan some decades ago (e.g., Ḥabībī in his ed. of Moḥammad Hōtak) of the existence of poetry in Pashto from the Ghurid period remain unsubstantiated. Of Ghurid prose literature, including history and genealogy, mention should be made of Faḵr-al-Dīn Mobārakšāh Moḥammad b. Manṣūr, known as Faḵr-e Modabber, the author of a genealogical work, _Baḥr al-ansāb_, and a treatise on kingship and statecraft, the _Ādāb al–ḥarb wa’l-šajāʿa_(q.v.). The great historian of the Ghurids, without whose information our knowledge of the dynasty would be much sparser, was Menhāj-al–Dīn-e Serāj-al-Dīn Jūzjānī (q.v.; d. the second half of the 7th/13th century), who was a diplomatic envoy for the sultans and who composed his _Ṭabaqāt-e nāṣerī_, in form a general history but in a large measure a special history of the dynasty.
> 
> So far as can be discerned from the exiguous surviving examples of Ghurid art and architecture, there was a continuity here with the Ghaznavid age, since some of it cannot easily be separated stylistically from that of the preceding period. The city of Ḡazna rose again from the ashes of its destruction by ʿAlāʾ-al–Dīn Ḥosayn, and a unique type of glazed tile work has been ascribed by Umberto Scerrato to the Ghurids of the later 6th/12th century. The splendid minaret of Jām (q.v.) is the prime extant example of Ghurid architecture, but there are other remains in Herāt and ruins of a mosque and madrasa at Češt (q.v.) on the upper Harīrūd dating from the reign of Ḡīāṯ-al-Dīn Moḥammad (cf. Sourdel-Thomine). In the sphere of secular architecture, the extensive palace buildings at Laškarī Bāzār (q.v.) on the Helmand river near Bost seem to show a continuity from early Ghaznavid to Ghurid and Mongol times. Nevertheless, it does seem possible, according to Janine Sourdel–Thomine, to speak of the evolution of a distinctive Ghurid architectural style.
> 
> *Sultan Shahāb-ud-Din Muhammad Ghori (1149-1206) :
> *
> Sultan Shahab -ud -din Muhammad also known as, Muizzuddin Muhammad Bin Sam, was born in 1162. He was the younger brother of Ghiasuddin and son of Sultan Bahaudin Suri of Ghure. After Mahmud of Ghazni the next invader in India was Muhammad Ghori. He belonged to the Ghorid dynasty which replaced the Ghaznavids in Afghanistan. After the death of Mahmood Ghaznovi, he was the first Turkish who invaded India; after a long period of 150 years. He laid the foundation for Muslim rule in India and his slave Qutb -ud -din Aibak became the founder of the first Turkish rule in India.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He remained loyal to his elder brother Ghiyas-ud-din and helped him in his invasions until his death in 1202 AD. At that time at the west of Afghanistan there was strong empires so Muhammad Ghuri turned his attention toward East. Shahab-ud-din Ghori`s first invasions were on the Muslim states of Multan and the fortress of Ouch. In 1181, he attacked on Lahore and successfully ended the Ghaznavids Empire, bringing the remaining territory under his control. He fought the first battle of Tarain in 1191 against Raja Prithviraj Chauhan; the most powerful raja of India. In the second battle of Tarain, in 1192 Ghuri defeated raja Prithviraj and the victory paved the way for Ghori to push Muslim rule further in India. The other Rajas were not much strong to defend their rule against Ghuri’s strong military and power. With in a period of one year Ghuri get control of northern parts of India and marched to Delhi. The Kingdom of Ajmer was t given over to Golā, on condition that he would send regular tributes to the Ghurids.
> 
> After the death of Ghiys-ud-din he established the rule of the Ghuri dynasty in Afghanistan. Due to heavy taxes they became quite unpopular among their local people. This forced Muhammad Ghori to search out new sources of income and diverts the attention of Ghori towards the invasion of India, which was the richest neighboring country.
> 
> In 1206, Ghauri had to travel to Lahore to crush a revolt. On his way back to Ghazni, his caravan rested at Damik in Jhelum district of Punjab province in modern-day Pakistan. He was assassinated while offering his evening prayers by a small band of Hindu Khokars.The murderer killed him so brutally that there were 22 wounds on his body. As per his wishes, Ghauri was buried where he fell.
> 
> *Battles of Tarain :*
> 
> The Battles of Tarain, also known as the Battles of Taraori, were fought in 1191 and 1192 near the town of Tarain (Taraori), near Thanesar in present-day Haryana, approximately 150 kilometres north of Delhi, India, between a Ghurid force led by Mu'izz al-Din and a Chauhan Rajput army led by Prithviraj Chauhan.
> 
> *Defeat in the First Battle (1191) :*
> 
> In 1191, Mu'izz al-Din captured the fortress of Bhatinda in East Punjab, which was on the frontier of Prithiviraj Chauhan's domains. Prithviraj marched on to Bhatinda and met his enemy at a place called Tarain (also called Taraori) near the ancient town of Thanesar. The Ghurid army initiates battle by attacking with cavalry who launch arrows at the Rajput center. The forces of Prithviraj counter-attack from three sides and dominate the battle, pressuring the Ghurid army into a withdrawal. Meanwhile, Mu'izz al-Din is wounded in personal combat with Prithviraj's brother, Govind Tai. The victory of Prithviraj was decisive, he inflicted the crushing defeat on Mu'izz ad-Din by completely routing his forces and succeeded in stopping the Ghurid advance towards Hindustan in the first battle of Tarain. He did not pursue Ghori's army either not wanting to invade hostile territory or misjudging Ghori's ambition, instead electing to retake the fortress of Bhatinda.
> 
> View attachment 561944
> 
> *Prithviraj Chauhan
> 
> Victory in the Second Battle (1192) :
> *
> On his return to Ghazni, Mu'izz al-Din made preparations to avenge his defeat. When he reached Lahore, he sent his envoy to Prithviraj to demand his submission, but the Chauhan ruler refused to comply.
> 
> *Size of the forces and generals :*
> 
> According to Firishta, the Rajput army consisted of 3,000 elephants, 300,000 cavalry and infantry, considered exaggeration by some Indian historians. Minhaj-i-Siraj, stated Mu'izz al-Din brought 120,000 fully armored men to battle.
> 
> *Battle :*
> 
> The battle occurred in the same field as the first one. Knowing the Rajputs were well-disciplined, the Ghurids did not want to engage in melee combat with them. Instead the Ghurids army was formed into five units, and four units were sent to attack the Rajput flanks and rear. The flanking attacks failed and the fighting continued. In hopes of causing a break in the Rajput lines, Mu'izz al-Din ordered his fifth unit to feign retreat. The Rajput's charged the fleeing Ghurid unit, as the Ghurids expected. The Ghurids then sent a fresh cavalry unit of 12,000 and they managed to throw back the Rajput advance. The remaining Ghurid forces then attack and the Rajputs flee in panic. Prithviraj Chauhan abandons his elephant for a horse and tries to escape. But he is caught a few miles from the battlefield and promptly executed.
> 
> *The aftermath :*
> 
> Mu'izz al-Din barely won against Prithviraj, he followed up this victory by defeating Jayachandra in the Battle of Chandawar, eradicating Buddhism in that area. Later in 1202, his army completes the occupation of Hindustan by taking the province of Bengal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> * The Second battle of Tarain where Ghurid armies crushed Rajput army.*
> 
> *Most decisive battle :*
> 
> About hundred thousand Rajput soldiers are said to have died in the battle. Prithwiraj was imprisoned and was taken to Ghazni. The second battle of Tarain is believed to be most decisive battle in the Indian History as it opened the path for conquerors of India. Muhammad and his successors were able to conquest over the Rajputs and established an Islamic Empire in India, the Sultanate of Delhi.
> 
> *Further campaigns :*
> 
> When the state of Ajmer failed to fulfill the tribute demands as per the custom after a defeat, Qutbu l-Din Aibak, in 1193 took over Ajmer and soon established Ghurid control in northern and central India. Hindu kingdoms like Saraswati, Samana, Kohram and Hansi were captured without any difficulty. Finally his forces advanced on Delhi, capturing it soon after the Battle of Chandwar, defeating Raja Jaichand of Kannauj.Within a year, Mu'izz controlled northern Rajasthan and the northern part of the Ganges-Yamuna Doab.The Kingdom of Ajmer was then given over to Golā, on condition that he send regular tributes to the Ghurids.
> 
> Mu'izz returned west to Ghazni to deal with the threat to his western frontiers from the unrest in Iran, but he appointed Aibak as his regional governor for northern India. His armies, mostly under Turkic generals, continued to advance through northern India, raiding as far east as Bengal. followed by his conquest of Delhi. An army led by Qutbu l-Din Aibak, Mu'izz's deputy in India, invaded in ca. 1195–97 and plundered Anahilapataka.
> 
> *Death :*
> 
> In 1173 AD Shahab-ud-Din Ghuri finally brought an end of Ghaznavid Empire and established their dynastic rule. In 1206, Ghauri had to travel to Lahore to crush a revolt. On his way back to Ghazni, his caravan rested at Damik in Jhelum district of Punjab province in modern-day Pakistan. He was assassinated while offering his evening prayers by a small band of Hindu Khokars.The murderer killed him so brutally that there were 22 wounds on his body.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Muhammed Ghori's grave within his tomb near Jhelum, Pakistan
> *
> As per his wishes, Ghauri was buried where he fell. His mouseleum was recently constructed by the Government of Pakistan. While driving from Rawalpindi to Jhelum on GT Road, just before Mandra, a road on the right leads towardsChakwal. On the left a narrow road connects several villages with GT Road. At the turning a small board guides to the tomb of Shahab-ud-Deen Ghauri.
> *
> Legacy :
> *
> He had no son to succeed him as a ruler but had Turkish slaves. After his assassination, his Empire was divided amongst his slaves.
> Muhammad's death left his generals in control of the whole of North India. He was succeeded by Qutb-ud-din Aybak, who had started of by sacking Ayodhya in 1193 C.E. then served as Muhammad's governor in India. He was Sultan until 1210, claiming the title "Sultan of Delhi. His established the Ghulam Dynasty, which ruled until 1290. He also started to build the Qutb complex at Delhi. As a former slave, Qutb-ud-din Aybak lineage is described as a Mamluk, or slave dynasty. Under these rulers, "India became for the first time the seat of resident" Muslim "sovereigns. Another slave, Nasir-ud-din Qabacha became the ruler of Sindh and Multan. In fact, Qutb-ud-din Aibak laid down the foundation of slave dynasty in India. Nasir-ud-din Qabacha was finally defeated by Shams-ud-din Iltutmish and Sindh and Multan became part of the Delhi kingdom.
> 
> *Attributes of Ghori described by historians :*
> 
> *1.Ghori as a practical statesman :*
> Historians regards Ghori as a practical statesman who took the fullest advantage of the rotten political structure of India. Ghori gave proof of his statesmanship while dealing with different Rajput rulers. After his victory over Prithviraj, instead of annexing Delhi and Ajmer to his territories, he handed over the administration of Delhi and Ajmer to the relatives of Prithviraj. Ghori did not change the status of those Hindu chiefs who accepted his suzerainty and did not interfere in their administration. Of course, he established forts in these territories.
> 
> *2.Political realism of Ghori :*
> Prof. K.A. Nizami puts stress on two qualities of Ghori i.e. his digged tenacity of purpose and his grim political realism. He wrote, “This Hero of three stupendous defeats at Andh-khud, Tarain and Anhilwara had to his credit the establishment of one of the greatest empires of the middle ages and in this he definitely rises above Mahmud of Ghazni.” According to Stanley Lane-poole, Ghori’s conquests in India were wider and far more permanent than Mahmud’s. He wrote, “of the two tides of Mohammedan invasion that surged into India, Mahmud’s had left little trace. It had been but a series of triumphant raids.”
> 
> *3.Great ability to select officers :*
> Ghori had the art of selecting the best men for his services. He trained generals and administrators like Qutab-ud- din Aibak, who proved quite competent to maintain his empire.
> 
> *4.Appointment of governors :*
> Ghori appointed governors of the provinces he conquered. These governors consolidated the position of Turks and they suppressed rebellions. After the death of Ghori, Qutub-ud-din Aibak, his most able military commander founded the Slave Dynasty that ruled India for about one hundred years.
> 
> *5.Ghori as a conqueror of territory :*
> In the words of Dr. R.C. Majumdar, “Sultan Mahmud was undoubtedly one of the greatest military leaders, the world has ever seen. It is true that he never faced any defeat. It is, however, equally true that he never tried to consolidate his position. He came like “a wind and went back like a whirl wind.” Unlike Mahmud, Ghori was not a great general and had to suffer humiliating defeats several times. He was defeated by Mularaja II, the ruler of Gujarat; by Prithviraj Chauhan in the first battle of Tarain and by Khwarizam Shah, the ruler of Persia. In fact, he was killed in his own camp by his Khokar enemies. But the greatness of Ghori was that none of these defeats could weaken his spirits or check his ambitions. He took his every failure as a valuable experience. He improved upon his weaknesses, removed them and ultimately got success. The conquests of Ghori brought about more permanent results than the conquests of Mahmud. Mahmud was contented to plunder the wealth of India and did not think of establishing his empire. Mahmud kept himself busy in invading and looting but Ghori attempted to build -up an empire which lasted for centuries.


Nice...you are going in sequence
after Ghurid Dynasty we shall move ahead to ...* Delhi Sulanate (1206-1526)* with its following 5 dynasties
-*Mamluk Dynasty (1206-1290)*, founded by _Qutb ud Din Aybak_
-*Khalji Dynasty (1290-1320)*, established by _Jalal ud Din Firoz Khalji_, followed by famous _Alla ud Din Khalji_
-*Taghlaq Dynasty (1320-1413)*, started by _Ghayas ud Din Taghlaq_ (thats the period when Tamer lane or Ameer Taimur invaded and sacked Delhi)
-*Sayyid Dynasty (1414-1451)*, formed by_ Khizar Khan_, former governor of Multan appointed by Timur himself.
-*Lodi Dynasty (1451-1526)*. _Bahlol Khan Lodi_, after he snatched power from Syyids. This is the first Pashtun Dynasty to rule here and it ended at the first battle of Panipat when Babar defeated Ibrahim lodi in 1526 and established *Mughal Empire
*
During the same era, *Bengal Sultanate(1342-1576)* or *Shahi Bangla* seperated itself from Delhi Sultanate and declared independence under then governer of bengal _Shams ud Din Ilyas Shah_ in 1342. Bengal Sultanate will eventually become part of Mughal Empire in 1576.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## dexter

Ghost 125 said:


> Nice...you are going in sequence
> after Ghurid Dynasty we shall move ahead to ...* Delhi Sulanate (1206-1526)* with its following 5 dynasties
> -*Mamluk Dynasty (1206-1290)*, founded by _Qutb ud Din Aybak_
> -*Khalji Dynasty (1290-1320)*, established by _Jalal ud Din Firoz Khalji_, followed by famous _Alla ud Din Khalji_
> -*Taghlaq Dynasty (1320-1413)*, started by _Ghayas ud Din Taghlaq_ (thats the period when Tamer lane or Ameer Taimur invaded and sacked Delhi)
> -*Sayyid Dynasty (1414-1451)*, formed by_ Khizar Khan_, former governor of Multan appointed by Timur himself.
> -*Lodi Dynasty (1451-1526)*. _Bahlol Khan Lodi_, after he snatched power from Syyids. This is the first Pashtun Dynasty to rule here and it ended at the first battle of Panipat when Babar defeated Ibrahim lodi in 1526 and established *Mughal Empire*



Exactly, im going to do the same. Keeping in mind several important events and battles as well.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Pan-Islamic-Pakistan

Great thread. Wish to read more. Out of curiosity, what is your source?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Pakistansdefender

First remove the bastard Afghans kings from the list. 
Stop fancing about them..
Also accept non Muslim Kings and rulers as your own who ruled your land such as maharaja ranjeet Singh, porus etc..
Even Iranians accepts xerxesas their king.
Also accept all the Buddhist Kings or Hindu kings too. 
Budha was born here in Pakistan and even his bones are here...
Accept your non Muslim heritage that would not make you a less of a Muslim...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Ghost 125

Pakistansdefender said:


> First remove the bastard Afghans kings from the list.
> Stop fancing about them..
> Also accept non Muslim Kings and rulers as your own who ruled your land such as maharaja ranjeet Singh, porus etc..
> Even Iranians accepts xerxesas their king.
> Also accept all the Buddhist Kings or Hindu kings too.
> Budha was born here in Pakistan and even his bones are here...
> Accept your non Muslim heritage that would not make you a less of a Muslim...


thread tittle clearly says 'Muslim Rulers'. No one is stoping you from opening another thread and people will be happy to discuss that even. 2ndly you cant force your opinion down anybodies throat, you dont like it dont participate. I ve seen the same Op posting historical threads about non muslims and many other battles as well which has nothing to do with muslims. if you want to learn history, you cant limit urelf to one specific area.
3rdly most of the ruler so far mentioned here have Turkik origins, they travelled or captured lands in what is NOW called afghanistan (it wsnt afghanistan back then). that is how history is made and we are discussing history here ...simple

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Talwar e Pakistan

Pakistansdefender said:


> First remove the bastard Afghans kings from the list.


Stop fancing about them..[/QUOTE]
70% of all Pashtuns are Pakistani, hence they have contributed greatly to the history of modern-day Pakistan.



Pakistansdefender said:


> Also accept non Muslim Kings and rulers as your own who ruled your land such as maharaja ranjeet Singh, porus etc..


Maharaja Ranjeet Singh and the other tyrants will never be accepted as our own, they turned our Masjids into stables, banned azan and halal-meat, persecuted Muslims. Rai Por (Porus) on the other hand is respectable and is revered/accepted by the general people of Pakistan.



Pakistansdefender said:


> Budha was born here in Pakistan and even his bones are here...


You clearly need to go over history class again.



Pakistansdefender said:


> Accept your non Muslim heritage that would not make you a less of a Muslim...


Read the title of this thread please.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Pan-Islamic-Pakistan

Pakistansdefender said:


> First remove the bastard Afghans kings from the list.
> Stop fancing about them..
> Also accept non Muslim Kings and rulers as your own who ruled your land such as maharaja ranjeet Singh, porus etc..
> Even Iranians accepts xerxesas their king.
> Also accept all the Buddhist Kings or Hindu kings too.
> Budha was born here in Pakistan and even his bones are here...
> Accept your non Muslim heritage that would not make you a less of a Muslim...



Feel free to open your own thread and propagate your ideas there.

Do not try to sabotage someone else’s thread.

I could refute your statements, but what is the point. I will wait for your thread on Pakistani history from your view.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Arulmozhi Varman

Its a shame that many Pakistanis do not even consider the contribution of one Sher Shah Suri as one of the greatest Muslim administrators of South Asia. He was tolerant, bought in tax administration and ruling changes which were inherited by Akbar who was impressed by it and followed it for next 100 years till Aurengzeb decided to scrap and introduce many new taxes to fund his wars.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## dexter

Pan-Islamic-Pakistan said:


> Great thread. Wish to read more. Out of curiosity, what is your source?



JazakALLAH,
Well quite alot of them but ill compile it for you guys.



Arulmozhi Varman said:


> Its a shame that many Pakistanis do not even consider the contribution of one Sher Shah Suri as one of the greatest Muslim administrators of South Asia. He was tolerant, bought in tax administration and ruling changes which were inherited by Akbar who was impressed by it and followed it for next 100 years till Aurengzeb decided to scrap and introduce many new taxes to fund his wars.



Indeed he was a great king and i will include his biography as well, you just have to be patient. I cant just go and copy paste wikipedia out.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Ghost 125

Arulmozhi Varman said:


> Its a shame that many Pakistanis do not even consider the contribution of one Sher Shah Suri as one of the greatest Muslim administrators of South Asia. He was tolerant, bought in tax administration and ruling changes which were inherited by Akbar who was impressed by it and followed it for next 100 years till Aurengzeb decided to scrap and introduce many new taxes to fund his wars.


we are going in chronological order, you will see his details on the thread after Babur's rule, i am sure

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Rusty

It's amazing how Pakistan has flipped flopped between Eastern and Western Empired. 
Indians are desperate to claim our history but we don't have the same history as them. 
Gangadesh was never part of the Greek/Persian/Mongol etc dynasties. So how can we be the same people?

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Pan-Islamic-Pakistan

dexter said:


> JazakALLAH,
> Well quite alot of them but ill compile it for you guys.



Wa iyya Kum. Please take your time.

I am interested in which books/sources you used.

I have another series of threads on Islamic history, check them out once you have some time.

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/the-sakas-scythians-kushans-hephthalites-white-huns.610977/



Arulmozhi Varman said:


> many Pakistanis do not even consider the contribution of one Sher Shah Suri



Don’t worry so much about what Pakistanis think.

Just read the thread and enjoy.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Pakistansdefender

Pan-Islamic-Pakistan said:


> Feel free to open your own thread and propagate your ideas there.
> 
> Do not try to sabotage someone else’s thread.
> 
> I could refute your statements, but what is the point. I will wait for your thread on Pakistani history from your view.


I would love to start a thread. I am an old member but I still am not allowed to open threads here. Don't know why? 
But try to see things from different angle.
I am not against the Muslim dynasties Infact I cherish them. 
But I also cherish the Hindu, sikh and Buddhist Kings... Not Indian ones but those who ruled Pakistan..
They are our ancesstors no matter how hard you try to deny them.
Our ancesstors can be non Muslims and there is nothing wrong with that. 
Before Islam came to sub continent our ancesstors may be Buddhist or Hindus and they later embraced Islam. 
So if you want to make monuments why not make a monument to remember porus that only king successful enough to stop alaxander. A momument Can be erected in the very same field where the fight took place...
Why not make a monument for maharaja ranjit Singh, for if not for ranjeet Singh Pakistan would be limited to the border of the attock river. 
Why not make monuments for Buddha who whole empire and university exist in this very land making it sacred for Muslims..

Remember that when there is a islamic sultanate in Delhi these bastards Afghans you glorify attacked the very same Muslim sultanate. 
Had they not been doing that then the Mughals would not be so week and not perished that way and we would still be ruling hindustan...
Or even if you want to remember Muslim rulers why not celebrate sirajudullah who fought the British and tipu sultan who fought bravely.



Talwar e Pakistan said:


> Stop fancing about them..


70% of all Pashtuns are Pakistani, hence they have contributed greatly to the history of modern-day Pakistan.


Maharaja Ranjeet Singh and the other tyrants will never be accepted as our own, they turned our Masjids into stables, banned azan and halal-meat, persecuted Muslims. Rai Por (Porus) on the other hand is respectable and is revered/accepted by the general people of Pakistan.


You clearly need to go over history class again.


Read the title of this thread please.[/QUOTE]
So what do you mean? 
70 percent of phustoons are Pakistanis then what do they have to do with afghan Kings?
I simply don't get the point. For example if a person killed, loot and plundered my own people but belong to the same ethnicity as myself then his crimes would be less or something... ?
What exactly have these afghans done except to weaken the Muslims sultanate ruling the Delhi. 
And maharaja ranjeet Singh did nothing of the sort you allege. He is the loyal son of punjab irrespective of his religion. No Muslim mosque was plundered ever. His kingdom punjab consists of 4 entities namely Indian and Pakistani punjab, gilgit baltistan, kashmir and kpk. And his subjects are Muslims. His cabinate solely consists of Muslim. Even his second wife is a Muslim and he respected all here tradition.
They never destroyed any Muslim architecture or mosque. They have added to it.. Stop reading the biased version of histroy. Yes when punjab was divided and people were asked to move to respective sides bloodshed was expected and it happened.. Infact punjab and bengal were divided so that bloodshed happens. And the enmity remains where as in real that is not the case.
And yes Buddhist kingdom exist here and we should embrace our Buddhist past. Our ancesstors can be Buddhist as much as they are Hindus and there is no shame in that.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Gandhi G in da house

Rusty said:


> It's amazing how Pakistan has flipped flopped between Eastern and Western Empired.
> Indians are desperate to claim our history but we don't have the same history as them.
> Gangadesh was never part of the Greek/Persian/Mongol etc dynasties. So how can we be the same people?



Pakistan was a part of the Mongol empire ?


----------



## Talwar e Pakistan

nick_indian said:


> Pakistan was a part of the Mongol empire ?


No, but it was invaded numerous times and were repulsed by the Mamluk Sultanate with the support of local tribes and Kingdoms. Western part of modern-day Pakistan was briefly under Mongol occupation.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Gandhi G in da house

Talwar e Pakistan said:


> No, but it was invaded numerous times and were repulsed by the Mamluk Sultanate with the support of local tribes and Kingdoms. Eastern part of modern-day Pakistan was briefly under Mongol occupation.



Allaudin Khalji repulsed them, I suppose. And you mean Western part I think. Rusty claimed that India wasn't a part of the Mongol dynasty, as if Pakistan was. So I wondered.


----------



## Talwar e Pakistan

nick_indian said:


> Allaudin Khalji repulsed them, I suppose. And you mean Western part I think. Rusty claimed that India wasn't a part of the Mongol dynasty, as if Pakistan was. So I wondered.


Yes, Western part I meant.


----------



## Taimur Khurram

dexter said:


> JazakALLAH brother, i appreciate your support.



Don't forget the khayr.



Pakistansdefender said:


> Also accept non Muslim Kings and rulers as your own



That's literally haram, unless they come from pre-Islamic times.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Rusty

nick_indian said:


> Pakistan was a part of the Mongol empire ?


See, this is how different we are.
You people claim we are the same people, but you don't even know our basic history.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## AUz

Pakistansdefender said:


> First remove the bastard Afghans kings from the list.
> Stop fancing about them..
> Also accept non Muslim Kings and rulers as your own who ruled your land such as maharaja ranjeet Singh, porus etc..
> Even Iranians accepts xerxesas their king.
> Also accept all the Buddhist Kings or Hindu kings too.
> Budha was born here in Pakistan and even his bones are here...
> Accept your non Muslim heritage that would not make you a less of a Muslim...





Yeah, "lun per charh" chutiye...

Typical mentally challenged lonely loser libturd trying to get validation online by being "rATiONaL"

Look at the title of the thread you retarded cuck.

*MUSLIM* dynasties of S.Asia. What is so hard for you to comprehend?

And our ancestors in pre-Islamic times were non-Muslims. Those were _times of jahaliya_...Thank God for our ancestors who were smart enough to see the light of Islam and come out of dark age of _extreme_ caste-ism and idol worship.

For the "buddhist and hindu kings"-----they can go f*ck themselves. Don't care about them one bit (just like 99.9999% of Pakistanis).

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Rusty

nick_indian said:


> Allaudin Khalji repulsed them, I suppose. And you mean Western part I think. Rusty claimed that India wasn't a part of the Mongol dynasty, as if Pakistan was. So I wondered.


India wasn't part of the mongol empire, but as you can see by the map, western part of Pakistan was. 
So again, how can we be the same people when Pakistan has flipped flopped between eastern and western empires while India never really did so, they mostly had indigenous empires that fought each other.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## namefield_empty

Rusty said:


> You people claim we are the same people,


May be a few northern and north-western states claim so, it would be an insult to us in NE India if someone were to compare us to you. We have better chance of people calling us Chinese than Pakistanis. Not for nothing our ancestors successfully warded off every invasion from your ilk.


----------



## Rusty

Axomiya_lora said:


> May be a few northern and north-western states claim so, it would be an insult to us in NE India if someone were to compare us to you. We have better chance of people calling us Chinese than Pakistanis. Not for nothing our ancestors successfully warded off every invasion from your ilk.



Then why were you people against partition?
A million people died in 47 because you people could not let go of us with civility and dignity. 
Words are cheap (especially Indian's) but reality is that you people have built 70 years of history of hating us since you think we were the same people.

We are not. 


And trust me, no Pakistani would ever invade your swamp. 
We are blessed with amazing land why would we need to invade people who are forced to eat fish and ants all day.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Gandhi G in da house

Rusty said:


> See, this is how different we are.
> You people claim we are the same people, but you don't even know our basic history.



I don't claim anything like we are the same or anything. I have heard Pakistanis say the same thing as you claim btw. 

So the most populous parts of Pakistan were not in the Mongol empire. That's what your map shows. Thanks. Anyway, this is a history discussion. I only asked about the Mongols because the general consensus in history was that the Mongols were not able to take any significant part of India.

I personally believe that the land and people of Pakistan which lay to the West of river Indus are not the same or even similar to Indians, however, the land and people of Pakistan to the East of River Indus have a lot of similarities with North Indians.


----------



## namefield_empty

Rusty said:


> We are not.


WE ARE NOT, and a reprimand for those who think so. 


Rusty said:


> And trust me, no Pakistani would ever invade your swamp.


Don't know about the misplaced ambitions of your nation-state but your ancestors sure tried a lot and the humiliation they suffered each time is well recorded in the annals of history. Peace out.


----------



## Rusty

nick_indian said:


> I don't claim anything like we are the same or anything. I have heard Pakistanis say the same thing as you claim btw.
> 
> So the most populous parts of Pakistan were not in the Mongol empire. That's what your map shows. Thanks. Anyway, this is a history discussion. I only asked about the Mongols because the general consensus in history was that the Mongols were not able to take any significant part of India.
> 
> I personally believe that the land and people of Pakistan which lay to the West of river Indus are not the same or even similar to Indians, however, the land and people of Pakistan to the East of River Indus have a lot of similarities with North Indians.



50% of our landmass was taken by the Mongols, so I say that counts. 

We have also been part of the Persian, Greek, Arab, and other empires. While India has never really been part of them. 

It is true that east of the Indus we share more commonalities with Indians but that does not make us the same. 
Canada and US share a lot of commonality but they are absolutely different nations. 

PS. Indians tend to hate Arabs and call them invaders, but in all of Indian history Arabs have NEVER invaded India. Bin Qasim only invaded the Indus and that was the first and last time an Arab invaded Pakistan.



Axomiya_lora said:


> WE ARE NOT, and a reprimand for those who think so.
> 
> Don't know about the misplaced ambitions of your nation-state but your ancestors sure tried a lot and the humiliation they suffered each time is well recorded in the annals of history. Peace out.


hehe, making up fake history to pretend like you are a big man. 

Pakistan has never ever invaded your swamp, neither has any of our ancestors. We rather eat beef then fish and ants. 

But you people sure were easy to conquer by the British. 
British actually humiliated you for 400 years. 
They barely managed to hold Pakistan for less than 100 years. Even then they never fully conquered our western parts. 

Remember, it was the British who started the "Martial race" concept. They knew what they were talking about after dealing with you lot for 400 years.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## namefield_empty

Rusty said:


> making up fake history to pretend like you are a big man.


Lmao dolt, learn of how we treated your Mughal forefathers and their lackeys. We dislike your kind.


----------



## Gandhi G in da house

Rusty said:


> 50% of our landmass was taken by the Mongols, so I say that counts.
> 
> We have also been part of the Persian, Greek, Arab, and other empires. While India has never really been part of them.
> 
> It is true that east of the Indus we share more commonalities with Indians but that does not make us the same.
> Canada and US share a lot of commonality but they are absolutely different nations.
> 
> PS. Indians tend to hate Arabs and call them invaders, but in all of Indian history Arabs have NEVER invaded India. Bin Qasim only invaded the Indus and that was the first and last time an Arab invaded Pakistan.



Yeah we are not the same. But we are very similar. At least the Punjabis, Sindhis, Muhajirs etc. of Pakistan are very similar to North Indians. But not the same.

And nah, we don't generally hate Arabs or any other invading groups of people anymore. May be the British.


----------



## Rusty

Axomiya_lora said:


> Lmao dolt, learn of how we treated your Mughal forefathers and their lackeys. We dislike your kind.


It's time for you to eat your ants

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Pakistansdefender

Rusty said:


> See, this is how different we are.
> You people claim we are the same people, but you don't even know our basic history.


And I am pretty sure you and most of the people here on the forum are ethnically from that half part of pakistan that is not red...
Stop obsessing about ethnicity. 
Embrace it.instead. Embrace every Pakistani ethnicity and rejoice it .


----------



## Rusty

nick_indian said:


> Yeah we are not the same. But we are very similar. At least the Punjabis, Sindhis, Muhajirs etc. of Pakistan are very similar to North Indians. But not the same.
> 
> And nah, we don't generally hate Arabs or any other invading groups of people anymore. May be the British.



I would only say that we have a connection with Indian Punjabis. The rest are very alien to us. 

And I disagree with Indians not hating Arabs. 
Just read this forum, or any other site that mentions Islam/Pakistan/Arabs. 
The amount of misguided hatred Indians have for Arabs is insane.



Pakistansdefender said:


> And I am pretty sure you and most of the people here on the forum are ethnically from that half part of pakistan that is not red...
> Stop obsessing about ethnicity.
> Embrace it.instead. Embrace every Pakistani ethnicity and rejoice it .


Did you even read the point I was making?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Taimur Khurram

Some Muslim Punjabi heroes:

1. Ahmad Sirhindi, a Sufi Punjabi theologian and mystic. 

https://www.britannica.com/biography/Shaykh-Ahmad-Sirhindi

2. Ahmad Khan Karral, a Muslim Punjabi warrior who fought against both the British and the Sikh empires. He also ruled over a few villages. 

https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahmad_Khan_Kharal

3. Jasrath Khokhar, a Muslim Punjabi who conquered large portions of land, and at one point even ruled over Delhi.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jasrath_Khokhar

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## namefield_empty

Rusty said:


> It's time for you to eat your ants


We are not ashamed to embrace our culture and cuisine, are you, my Pakistani friend?


----------



## Rusty

Axomiya_lora said:


> We are not ashamed to embrace our culture and cuisine, are you, my Pakistani friend?


Question remains, why would we invade swamp midgets who have to eat ants while we can eat all of this
















And no one is going to murder you for eating their god 

So yeah, 400 years of humiliation at the hands of the British and forced to eat ants. 
Feel bad for you people.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Gandhi G in da house

Rusty said:


> *I would only say that we have a connection with Indian Punjabis. The rest are very alien to us. *
> 
> And I disagree with Indians not hating Arabs.
> Just read this forum, or any other site that mentions Islam/Pakistan/Arabs.
> The amount of misguided hatred Indians have for Arabs is insane.



Let's agree to disagree on the bold part. 

Anyway, most Indians don't hate Arabs. Extreme rightwinger Hindus may have some misguided hate for Arabs but then they hate almost everyone especially anyone associated with Islam. The negative feelings towards the British though, they are universal.


----------



## namefield_empty

Rusty said:


> Question remains, why would we invade swamp midgets who have to eat ants while we can eat all of this
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And no one is going to murder you for eating their god
> 
> So yeah, 400 years of humiliation at the hands of the British and forced to eat ants.
> Feel bad for you people.


We eat these instead, more meat per meal than you people can ever imagine, and then some gau-mata too which here is available for a fraction of your price in Pakistan. Come again!!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Gandhi G in da house

Taimur Khurram said:


> Some Muslim Punjabi heroes:
> 
> 1. Ahmad Sirhindi, a Sufi Punjabi theologian and mystic.
> 
> https://www.britannica.com/biography/Shaykh-Ahmad-Sirhindi
> 
> 2. Ahmad Khan Karral, a Muslim Punjabi warrior who fought against both the British and the Sikh empires. He also ruled over a few villages.
> 
> https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahmad_Khan_Kharal
> 
> 3. Jasrath Khokhar, a Muslim Punjabi who conquered large portions of land, and at one point even ruled over Delhi.
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jasrath_Khokhar
> 
> View attachment 562044



Jasrath Khokhar, son of Raja Shaikha Khokhar was a Hindu Punjabi. Please correct that.


----------



## Taimur Khurram

nick_indian said:


> Jasrath Khokhar, son of Raja Shaikha Khokhar was a Hindu Punjabi. Please correct that.



No, he was Muslim. His family had converted to Islam long ago. 

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id...dir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=shaikha khokhar&f=false

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Gandhi G in da house

Taimur Khurram said:


> No, he was Muslim. His family had converted to Islam long ago.
> 
> https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=e8o5HyC0-FUC&pg=PA280&dq=shaikha+khokhar&hl=en&sa=X&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=shaikha khokhar&f=false



Unable to access the link.

Jasrath is a very Hindu name though and they called themselves Rajas instead of Sultan or something. One would assume him to be a Hindu then until proven otherwise.


----------



## Taimur Khurram

nick_indian said:


> Unable to access the link.



It's a book that clearly states he was a Muslim. 



nick_indian said:


> Jasrath is a very Hindu name though



Their family had recently converted to Islam. Literally every source states that they were Muslim.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## dexter

@Pan-Islamic-Pakistan so far the sources i used, I forgot a lot of them these are the ones i remember:

https://insider.pk/life-style/religion/islam-came-indian-sub-continent/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_conquests_in_the_Indian_subcontinent
https://historypak.com/muhammad-bin-qasim/
http://www.cyberistan.org/islamic/farmas.html
http://soomraithadkamber.blogspot.com/2013/02/blog-post.html
http://materiaislamica.com/index.php/The_Great_Ghaznavid_Dynasty_(c._962—c._1186)
http://ancientpakistan.info/pakistan-history-timeline/ghaznavid-empire/
https://www.davidmus.dk/en/collections/islamic/dynasties/ghaznavids-and-ghurids
http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/ghurids
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battles_of_Tarain

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Buddhistforlife

dexter said:


> If Indians can claim and praise every major Hindu Ruler in South Asia i.e. Raja Dahir, Prithviraj Chauhan, Shivaji etc and build several monuments of them then we should take liberty in praising and remembring our Muslim Rulers aswell specially those who chose to stay here, assimilated in local population and had their successors been born in this land i.e. Sultan Mahmud ghaznavi, Shahabuddin Ghauri, Alauddin Khilji, Zaheeruddin Babur, Akbar, Aurangzeb Alamgir, Ahmed Shah Abdali, Tipu Sultan etc.
> 
> Islamic history in South Asia can be divided into following timeperiods:
> 
> Early Middle Ages
> Medieval Period
> Mughal Empire
> British Era
> Struggle for Pakistan (Tehreek-e-Pakistan)
> Emergence of Islamic Republic of Pakistan
> 
> Right after rise of Islam under Rashidun Caliphate, the conquest of Persian Empire which occupied West portion of today's Balochistan Province, Pakistan led to the spread of Islam in region of South Asia and opened the doors of conquest of this region. After it, large number of Baloch people accepted Islam.
> 
> However, there are accounts of a King in South India Chakrawati Farmas (Today's Malabar, India) who witnessed splitting of Moon and investigated this phenomenon until he found out that it was done by *Prophet Muhammad (S.A.W.)* who claims to be last apostle of *ALLAH S.W.T *in Makkah. He traveled thousands of miles to Arabia and met *Prophet (S.A.W.)* and accepted Islam. When he returned to his homeland, he built a mosque there which still exists today.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The most famous historical account which marks the spread of Islam in this region is none other than conquest of Sindh in 712 AD by Muhammad Bin Qasim serving under Umayyad Caliphate.
> 
> *1. Early Middle Ages :*
> 
> *Muhammad Bin Qasim (695-715) :*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Muhammad bin Qasim was born around 695 AD. He belonged to the Saqqafi tribe; that had originated from Taif in Arabia. He grew up in the care of his mother; he soon became a great asset to his uncle Muhammad Ibn Yusuf, the governor of Yemen. His judgment, potential and skills left many other officers and forced the ruler to appoint him in the state department. He was also a close relative of Hajjaj bin Yousuf, because of the influence of Hajjaj, the young Muhammad bin Qasim was appointed the governor of Persia while in his teens, and he crushed the rebellion in that region. There is also a popular tradition that presents him as the son-in-law of Hajjaj bin Yousuf. He conquered the Sindh and Punjab regions along the Indus River for the Umayyad Caliphate.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Raja Dahir*
> 
> There are both long and short term causes for the conquest of india. Arabs had trade with India and Eastern Asia. The trade was carried through sea rout; the rout was unsafe due to the plunder of the Pirates of Sindh. The Arab rebels also get refuge in Sindh. Thus the Umayyad wanted to consolidate their rule and also to secure the trade rout. During Hajjaj’s governorship, the Mids of Debal (Pirates) plundered the gifts of Ceylon’s ruler to Hijjaj and attacked on ships of Arab that were carrying the orphans and widows of Muslim soldiers who died in Sri Lanka. Thus providing the Umayyad Caliphate the legitimate cause, that enabled them to gain a foothold in the Makran, and Sindh regions.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Map of the maximum extents of Muhammad ibn Qasim's expansion of Umayyad rule into Pakistan and northwestern India, c. 711 CE
> 
> The Umayyad caliphate ordered Muhammad Bin Qasim to attack over Sindh. He led 6,000 Syrian cavalry and at the borders of Sindh he was joined by an advance guard and six thousand camel riders and with five catapults (Manjaniks). Muhammad Bin Qasim first captured Debal, from where the Arab army marched along the Indus. At Rohri he was met by Dahir’s forces. Dahir died in the battle, his forces were defeated and Muhammad bin Qasim took control of Sind. Mohammad Bin Qasim entered Daibul in 712 AD. As a result of his efforts, he succeeded in capturing Daibul. He continued his Victorious Progress in succession, Nirun, fortress (called Sikka), Brahmanabad, Alor, Multan and Gujrat. After the conquest of Multan, he carried his arms to the borders of Kigdom of Kashmir, but his dismissal stopped the further advance. Now Muslims were the masters of whole Sindh and a part of Punjab up to the borders of Kashmir in the north. After the conquest, he adopted a conciliatory policy, asking for acceptance of Muslim rule by the natives in return for non-interference in their religious and cultural practices. He also established peace with a strong taxation system. In return he provided the guaranty of security of life and property for the natives. Hajjaj died in 714. When Walid Bin Abdul Malik died, his younger brother Suleman succeeded as the Caliph. He was a bitter enemy of Hajjaj’s family. He recalled Mohammad Bin Qasim from Sindh, who obeyed the orders as the duty of a general. When he came back, he was put to death on 18th of July, 715AD at the age of twenty.
> 
> After the* Abbasid Revolt *in 750 AD and fall of Umayyad Caliphate, Sindh became independent and was captured by Musa b. K'ab al Tamimi in 752 AD. But soon Civil war erupted in Sindh in 842 AD, and the Habbari dynasty occupied Mansurah, and by 871, five independent principalities emerged, with the Banu Habbari clan controlling in Mansurah, Banu Munabbih occupying Multan, Banu Madan ruling in Makran, with Makshey and Turan falling to other rulers, all outside direct Caliphate control.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Breakup of Abbasid Caliph*
> 
> *Habbari dynasty (854–1011) :*
> 
> The Habbari dynasty ruled the Abbasid province of Greater Sindh from 841 to 1024. The region became semi-independent under the Arab ruler Aziz al-Habbari in 841 CE, though nominally remaining part of the Caliphate. The Habbaris, who were based in the city of Mansura, ruled the regions of Sindh, Makran, Turan, Khuzdar and Multan. The Umayyad Caliph made Aziz governor of Sindh and he was succeeded by his sons Umar al-Habbari I and Abdullah al-Habbari in succession while his grandson Umar al-Habbari II was ruling when the famous Arab historian Al-Masudi visited Sindh. The Habbaris ruled Sindh until 1010 when the Soomra Khafif took over Sindh. In 1026 Sultan Mahmud Ghaznavi defeated Khafif, destroyed Mansura and annexed the region under the Ghaznavid rule.
> 
> *Rulers:*
> 
> 
> Umar ibn'Abd al-Aziz al'Habbari (855-884)
> Abdullah bin Umar (884-913)
> Umar bin-Abdullah (913-943)
> Muhammad bin Abdullah (943-973)
> Ali bin Umar (973-987)
> Isa bin ali
> Manbi ibn Ali bin Umar (987-1010)
> Khafif (Soomra dynasty) (1010-1025)
> *2. Medieval Period :*
> 
> *Soomra dynasty (1026–1356) :
> *
> The Habbari dynasty became semi independent and was eliminated and Mansura was invaded by Sultan Mahmud Ghaznavi. Sindh then became an easternmost State of the Abbasid Caliphate ruled by the Soomro Dynasty until the Siege of Baghdad (1258). Mansura was the first capital of the Soomra dynasty and the last of the Habbari dynasty. The Soomro tribe revolted against Masud, ruler of the Ghaznavids because they were betrayed by their own wazir. They were superseded by the Samma dynasty. Sindhi language prospered during this period. The Soomra dynasty ended when the last Soomra king was defeated by Alauddin Khalji, the second king of the Khalji dynasty ruling from Delhi.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *
> Early History :
> *
> The Umayyad Caliphs appointed _Aziz al Habbari_ as the governor of Sindh. The Habbari dynasty was controlling Sindh under the orders of the Ummayad Caliphate. When troubles began between the Ummayads and the Abbasids Habbari rule became semi independent, though it still remained under the influence of the Ummayad Caliphate indirectly. Habbaris ruled Sindh until Mahmud Ghaznavi defeated the Habbaris in 1024 because Mahmud Ghaznavi, viewed the Abbasids to be the legitimate caliphs. Following the defeat of the Habbaris, the Abbasid Caliphate made Al Khafif from Samarra the new governor of Sindh for a stronger and stable government. Al Khafif allotted key positions to his family and friends thus Al-Khafif or _Khafif Soomro_became the first ruler of the dynasty in Sindh. Until the Siege of Baghdad the Soomro Dynasty was the Abbasid Caliphate's functionary in Sindh but after that it became independent. Since then some Soomros intermarried with several local women and adopted some local customs as well. Mansura was the first capital of the Soomro dynasty and the last of the Habbari dynasty.
> 
> *Soomro period :
> *
> The Soomro Dynesty later shifted their capital to Tharri, nearly 14 km eastwards of Matli on the Puran. Puran was later abandoned due to changes in the course of Puran river. Afterwards, Thatta was made the capital of Sindh for about 95 years until the end of their rule in 1351 AD. During this period, Kutch was ruled by the Samma Dynasty, who enjoyed good relations with the Soomros in Sindh.
> 
> *Salient features :*
> 
> In 1011 AD, the first Soomro King, Al Khafif was given control of Sindh by the Abbasid Caliphate to build a stronger government when Mahmud Ghaznavi defeated the Habbaris. in The beginning Soomro's had Arabic names thus admitting of their Arab past. since then some intermarried with local women. The Soomro Dynasty lost ties with the Abbasid Caliphate after the Siege of Baghdad (1258) and the Soomro kings Soomar, Bhoongar and Dodo-1, established their rule from the shores of the Arabian Sea to Multan, Bahawalpur, Sadiqabad and Uch in the north and in the east to Rajistan and in the west to Balochistan.
> The Renaissance started from 1092 AD when Princess Zainab Tari Soomro became the sovereign Queen of Sindh. As a first step, attention was paid to Sindhi language, which had remained dominated by Arabic during the last three centuries. Not only reforms were made in promoting Sindhi language for good governance, but fast progress was made in arts and crafts, architecture, agriculture and music, both instrumental and vocal. Sports like horse and camel races, wrestling known "Mulluh" and other marshal sports were patronized.
> A lot about Soomros is mentioned in the _Chachnama_ though not all of it is true even some of it is even baseless.
> 
> *Renaissance in Sindh :*
> 
> *Language and literature :
> *
> As everywhere in the world, the literature had a poetic start, so in Sindh also, the minstrels and bards made great strides in Sindhi folk poetry. They composed their poetry around popular myths, folk tales, historical events and romances. A minstrel named Sumang Charan stands prominent among all other minstrels and bards of the early period.
> In this period, "Doha (couplets)", "Gaha", "Geech (marriage songs)" "Gaya (songs of Soomro women)", forms of Sindhi poetry developed as a part of dramatic narration. Later on new dimensions were brought to Sindhi poetry, after the battle of Dodo Chanesar, the Soomro kings with the armies of Sultan Allaulddin of Delhi, in 1313 AD near the city of "Thaar Banghar" which gave rise to epic form of poetry in Sindh.
> A minstrel named Bhagu Bhan, also a court poet of Soomro Kings, was renowned as composer and singer of epic poetry. He was an expert in playing local musical instruments, especially "Surando". This instrument could be called the violin of the East.
> There were other master musicians and singers as Chand Fakir, Bahiro Mangto, Lado Bhag and many others from Charans, Mangtas and Manganhars tribes. From the women poets, Mai Markha Shaikh was a remarkable poet of that time. They all played their part towards poetical progress in Sindhi literature during the rule of Soomro Dynasty in Sindh.
> The great historical dramatic romances that took place in the reign of the last few Soomro kings were _Lilan Chanesar_, _Umar Marvi_ and _Momal Rano_. Earlier than this, the love tales of _Sassui Punhun_, _Suhni Mehar_ and _Sorath-Rai Dyach_ were narrated in melodious poetry by minstrels and bards in public musical evenings patronized by the Soomro Kings.
> Centuries afterwards, the tales of these historic romances became the subject matter of Sufistic poetry by the famous Sufi poet of Sindh, Shah Abdul Latif Bhittai, who immortalized these tales. He transformed these tales into different _Surs_ i.e. musical composition with classical norms. Since then great Sindhi, master musicians and singers keep singing these soulful melodies even in this 21st.
> 
> *Fall of the Soomro dynasty :
> *
> The Siege of Baghdad (1258), saw the dynasty lose its ties with Abbasid Caliphate. Since then The Sultans of Delhi wanted a piece of Sindh. The Soomros successfully defended their kingdom for about 100 years but their dynasties soon fell to the might of the massive armies of the Sultans of Delhi, such as the Tughluks and the Khiljis because of a rebellion led by Chanesar who joined forces with the Khiljis and Dodo Bin Al Khafif died fighting in battle with the Khiljis.
> 
> *Ghaznavid dynasty (977–1186) :*
> 
> The Ghaznivid Empire was an empire that existed during the 10th-11th century; stretching at it's peak from Tehran to Northern India, and was Turkic-Persian in origin, largely following Sunni Islam. The date of it's foundation was 962-977, and that of it's disintegration 1180-1187; lasting some 224 years. The Ghaznivids were one of the most distinguished empires to have ever existed in Afghanistan. The empire was founded by the slaveAptigin (a Turkish Mamluk originally from Ghazni; who had fled from Balkh to Ghazni in 961 after a failed coup who revolted against the ruling Samanids of Iran, conquering their throne, thus establishing himself as ruler who would bring in great economic and political development. He was father in law to Sabuktagin (whom some historians also consider the founder of the Ghaznivids) who would later expand the empire extensively.
> 
> Altigpin crossed the Hindu Kush, after laying siege to the _"insignificant"_ Fort of Ghazni in 962 transforming it into _"one of the most dazzling capitals of the Islamic world"_ after his victory. The fort itself was militarily and politically advantageous for his cause; it lay near the lucrative Silk Road where it was nestled in between Kabul and Kandahar. The empire itself became significant for it's prestige and for being the first Islamic empire to spread itself across Asia, and well into Hindu-dominated Northern India. The centre of the Ghaznivid empire was known for being home to artisans, poets, musicians,philosophers, scholars/scientists and other intelligentsia; and were also responsible for building _"opulent palaces, gold encrusted mosques"_ and for having spread _"abundant"_ gardens into India. This empire also gave the world windmill's, which were one of the most important inventions the world has ever seen.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Ghaznavid expansion into Pakistan and North-West India*
> 
> *Sultan Mahmud Ghaznavi (998 – 1030) :
> *
> Mahmood Gaznavi was born in 971AD, in khurasan. Mahmood Ghazni was the son of Abu Mansur Sabuktigin, who was a Turkish slave soldier of the samanid ruler. In 994 Mahmood joined his father in the conquest of Ghazni for Samanid ruler, it was the time of instability for Samanid Empire. In 998AD Mahmood took control of the Ghazni and also conquered Qandahar.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In 1001 Sultan Mahmud Ghaznavi defeated Jeebal the king of Kabulistan and marched further into Peshawar and in 1005 made it the center for his forces. From this strategic location Mahmud was able to capture Panjab in 1007, Tanseer fell in 1014, Kashmir was captured in 1015 and Qanoch fell in 1017. By 1027 Sultan Mahmud had captured Pakistan and parts of northern India.
> 
> On 1010 Mahmud captured what is today the Ghor Province (Ghor) and by 1011 annexed Balochistan. Sultan Mahmud had already had relationships with the leadership in Balkh through marriage and its local emir Abu Nasr Mohammad offered his services to Sultan Mahmud and offered his daughter to Muhammad son of Sultan Mahmud. After Nasr’s death Mahmud brought Balkh under his leadership. This alliance greatly helped Mahmud during his expeditions into Pakistan and northern India.
> 
> In 1030 Sultan Mahmud fell gravely ill and died at the age of 59. Sultan Mahmud was an accomplished military commander and speaker as well as a patron of poetry, astronomy, and math. Mahmud had no tolerance for other religions however and only praised Islam. Universities were formed to study various subjects such as math, religion, the humanities and medicine were taught, but only within the laws of the Sharia. Islam was the main religion of his kingdom and the Perso-Afghan dialect of Dari language was made the official language.
> 
> Ghaznavid rule in Pakistan lasted for over one hundred and seventy five years from 1010 to 1187. It was during this period that Lahore assumed considerable importance as the eastern-most bastion of Muslim power and as an outpost for further advance towards the riches of the east. Apart from being the second capital and later the only capital of the Ghaznavid kingdom, Lahore had great military and strategic significance. Whoever controlled this city could look forward to and be in a position to sweep the whole of East Punjab to Panipat and Delhi.
> 
> By the end of his reign, Mahmud’s empire extended from Kurdistan in the west to Samarkand in the northeast, and from the Caspian Sea to the Yamuna. All of what is today Pakistan and Kashmir came under the Ghaznavid empire. The wealth brought back to Ghazni was enormous, and contemporary historians (e.g. Abolfazl Beyhaghi , Ferdowsi) give detailed descriptions of the building activity and importance of Lahore, as well as of the conqueror’s support of literature.
> 
> Often reviled as a persecutor of Hindus (and in many cases Hindu temples were looted and destroyed) much of Mahmud’s army consisted of Hindus and some of the commanders of his army were also of Hindu origin. Sonday Rai was the Commander of Mahmud’s crack regiment and took part in several important campaigns with him. The coins struck during Mahmud’s reign bore his own image on one side and the figure of a Hindu deity on the other.
> 
> Mahmud, as a patron of learning, filled his court with scholars including Ferdowsi the poet, Abolfazl Beyhaghi the historian (whose work on the Ghanavid Empire is perhaps the most substantive primary source of the period) and Al-Biruni the versatile scholar who wrote the informative Ta’rikh al-Hind (“Chronicles of Hind”). It was said that he spent over four hundred thousand golden dinars rewarding scholars. He invited the scholars from all over the world and was thus known as an abductor of scholars. During his rule, Lahore also became a great center of learning and culture. Lahore was called ‘Small Ghazni’ as Ghazni received far more attention during Mahmud’s reign. Saad Salman, a poet of those times, also wrote about the academic and cultural life of Muslim Lahore and its growing importance.


The best Muslim rulers of this subcontinent were Mughal emperor Akbar and Humayun, Sher Shah Suri, Tipu Sultan, Nawabs of Bengal mainly Sirajud daulah, and sultans of Bengal sultanate. 

The worst and ruthless ones were Mughal emperor Aurangzeb and Shahjahan, Ahmed Shah Abdali, Alauddin Khilji, Mehmood Ghaznavi, Bakhtiyar Khilji, Ummayud Caliphs particularly Muhammad bin Qasim, Mamluk slave dynasties.


----------



## M. Sarmad

Taimur Khurram said:


> No, he was Muslim. His family had converted to Islam long ago.
> 
> https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=e8o5HyC0-FUC&pg=PA280&dq=shaikha+khokhar&hl=en&sa=X&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=shaikha khokhar&f=false




As per Bada'uni, Jasrath Khokhar was son of Shaikha Khokhar
But as per Ferishta, Jusrut was brother of Shaikha Gakhar 

While some historians do mention that Shaikha Khokhar converted to Islam, Yahya Sirhindi in his _Tarikh-i-Mubarak Shahi _mentions _Jasrath Shaika Khokhar_ as the most prudent infidel enemy of Muslim rulers.

@nick_indian

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Gandhi G in da house

M. Sarmad said:


> As per Bada'uni, Jasrath Khokhar was son of Shaikha Khokhar
> But as per Ferishta, Jusrut was brother of Shaikha Gakhar
> 
> While some historians do mention that Shaikha Khokhar converted to Islam, Yahya Sirhindi in his _Tarikh-i-Mubarak Shahi _mentions _Jasrath Shaika Khokhar_ as the most prudent infidel enemy of Muslim rulers.
> 
> @nick_indian



That's what i was thinking. Jasrath is a Hindu name and why would they call themselves Rajas if they converted to Islam. They would call themselves Sultans.

Anyway, thanks.


----------



## Pakistansdefender

Taimur Khurram said:


> Don't forget the khayr.
> 
> 
> 
> That's literally haram, unless they come from pre-Islamic times.


If a non Muslim accepts Islam he is still to obey his non Muslim parents except on one thing that is religion... He has to obey them, love them according to tge


Rusty said:


> I would only say that we have a connection with Indian Punjabis. The rest are very alien to us.
> 
> And I disagree with Indians not hating Arabs.
> Just read this forum, or any other site that mentions Islam/Pakistan/Arabs.
> The amount of misguided hatred Indians have for Arabs is insane.
> 
> 
> Did you even read the point I was making?


Did you understand what I am trying to say. 
While I am proud that half my country lies in central Asia, and I love and embrace the culture but I also am proud of the fact that half of my country lies in South Asia too.
And I am too proud of that. 
And if you go into details then some border areas of balochistan would also fall into middleeast. 
Which would make Pakistan very unique.
You can see the junction of South asia, central Asia and middleeast and hence different cultures. In another 200 years we would have developed a unique pakistani culture very different from India...
I know Pakistanis including me are bit touchy when it comes to Indian stealing away their culture, foods and other aspects but that is only because you deny your cultures.
Where is rajistani culture, different cultures in punjab, different cultures in kpk. 
Ofcourse everything would be refined with economy. We are busy in terrorism and economy and this comes far down the list. 
But we should embrace our Hindu and Muslim past and embrace all cultures weather similar to one or another country.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Pan-Islamic-Pakistan

dexter said:


> @Pan-Islamic-Pakistan so far the sources i used, I forgot a lot of them these are the ones i remember:
> 
> https://insider.pk/life-style/religion/islam-came-indian-sub-continent/
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_conquests_in_the_Indian_subcontinent
> https://historypak.com/muhammad-bin-qasim/
> http://www.cyberistan.org/islamic/farmas.html
> http://soomraithadkamber.blogspot.com/2013/02/blog-post.html
> http://materiaislamica.com/index.php/The_Great_Ghaznavid_Dynasty_(c._962—c._1186)
> http://ancientpakistan.info/pakistan-history-timeline/ghaznavid-empire/
> https://www.davidmus.dk/en/collections/islamic/dynasties/ghaznavids-and-ghurids
> http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/ghurids
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battles_of_Tarain



Thank you brother.



Pakistansdefender said:


> If a non Muslim accepts Islam he is still to obey his non Muslim parents except on one thing that is religion... He has to obey them, love them according to tge
> 
> Did you understand what I am trying to say.
> While I am proud that half my country lies in central Asia, and I love and embrace the culture but I also am proud of the fact that half of my country lies in South Asia too.
> And I am too proud of that.
> And if you go into details then some border areas of balochistan would also fall into middleeast.
> Which would make Pakistan very unique.
> You can see the junction of South asia, central Asia and middleeast and hence different cultures. In another 200 years we would have developed a unique pakistani culture very different from India...
> I know Pakistanis including me are bit touchy when it comes to Indian stealing away their culture, foods and other aspects but that is only because you deny your cultures.
> Where is rajistani culture, different cultures in punjab, different cultures in kpk.
> Ofcourse everything would be refined with economy. We are busy in terrorism and economy and this comes far down the list.
> But we should embrace our Hindu and Muslim past and embrace all cultures weather similar to one or another country.



Pakistan is in the same region as Iran and Afghanistan. We are in all three: Middle East, Central Asia, and South Asia.

Culturally, we have more similarities with Islamic and Persian-Turkish states rather than interior Gangetic plateau. This extends from Albania, Turkey, Azerbaijan, Kurds, Caucasus, Iran, Tatarstan, CARs, Uyghurs, Afghanistan, until Pakistan and Kashmir.

The other point I wanted to make is that our history is one of destiny (qudrat.) Pakistan was founded on a mission by our founding fathers to bring greatness to Islam and the Muslims all around the world.

Historically, as well as, politically, we are Islamic, more than anything else.

We don’t identify much with our pre-Islamic (Jahiliyyah) ancestors, similar to how Arabs, Persians, and Turks broke from them when they embraced Islam.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Yankee-stani

Pan-Islamic-Pakistan said:


> Thank you brother.
> 
> 
> 
> Pakistan is in the same region as Iran and Afghanistan. We are in all three: Middle East, Central Asia, and South Asia.
> 
> Culturally, we have more similarities with Islamic and Persian-Turkish states rather than interior Gangetic plateau. This extends from Albania, Turkey, Azerbaijan, Kurds, Caucasus, Iran, Tatarstan, CARs, Uyghurs, Afghanistan, until Pakistan and Kashmir.
> 
> The other point I wanted to make is that our history is one of destiny (qudrat.) Pakistan was founded on a mission by our founding fathers to bring greatness to Islam and the Muslims all around the world.
> 
> Historically, as well as, politically, we are Islamic, more than anything else.
> 
> We don’t identify much with our pre-Islamic (Jahiliyyah) ancestors, similar to how Arabs, Persians, and Turks broke from them when they embraced Islam.



Pakistan is Pakistan thats all in fact I would argue we are not a South Asian nation or just a partial South Asian nation we been a cross roads of all types of peoples we should really not shy away from our glorious ancient past there needs to be education to prevent the rise of confused young people who feel Pakistan is just piece of land created in 1947 there is more to it than that nothing wrong with using old symbols too

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Pakistansdefender

Pan-Islamic-Pakistan said:


> Thank you brother.
> 
> 
> 
> Pakistan is in the same region as Iran and Afghanistan. We are in all three: Middle East, Central Asia, and South Asia.
> 
> Culturally, we have more similarities with Islamic and Persian-Turkish states rather than interior Gangetic plateau. This extends from Albania, Turkey, Azerbaijan, Kurds, Caucasus, Iran, Tatarstan, CARs, Uyghurs, Afghanistan, until Pakistan and Kashmir.
> 
> The other point I wanted to make is that our history is one of destiny (qudrat.) Pakistan was founded on a mission by our founding fathers to bring greatness to Islam and the Muslims all around the world.
> 
> Historically, as well as, politically, we are Islamic, more than anything else.
> 
> We don’t identify much with our pre-Islamic (Jahiliyyah) ancestors, similar to how Arabs, Persians, and Turks broke from them when they embraced Islam.


It seems you are trying so very hard to prove that you are similar with turk and Persian and not at all similar with your Indian kin...
Yes Pakistan has always been influenced by them.. Turkish and Pakistani language share so many words.. Family life is same. 
But culture is different. 
A gilgit baltistan and balochi is more similar to Turkish Persian infulnece then a punjabi or a sindhi.. And the majority is punjabi and sindhi. You are making it as though God stopped your said culture in kashmir. 
Don't try to prove what you are not. 


Pan-Islamic-Pakistan said:


> Pakistan was founded on a mission by our founding fathers to bring greatness to Islam and the Muslims all around the world.
> 
> Historically, as well as, politically, we are Islamic, more than anything else.
> 
> We don’t identify much with our pre-Islamic (Jahiliyyah) ancestors, similar to how Arabs, Persians, and Turks broke from them when they embraced Islam.


Please don't even go there..
Dont try to make that you are some destined nation there to help the whole Islamic world..
We have lost most of our power and value chasing that u chase able dreams. 
Muslims can never unite. They all speak about being Muslim but in real ethnicities are very thing. 
Just look at bengal, where is your complete Pakistan then... 
Pakistan should just look towards their own house and stop chasing the dreams of glory. 
The Arabs identify themselves with pre Islamic culture. What do you think they have invented new Islamic culture ? 
The culture, the language has been the very same. 
The Iranians are proud of the fact that they embraced Islam but also proud of the Pee Islamic Iran. They are not like us. 
This 10 years of zia has done what no one has done. Brainwashed people like you into radical zealots who are not even ready to embrace your own identity. 
There is nothing wrong with being Hindu ancesstors and whwreeever Islam went and people accepted Islam they kept their local. Cultures alive. 
Yes different nations have islamified their cultures but there is no stopping in Islam of practicing their recpective cultures. 
The malays are malay 
The Arabs are Arabs 
The Indonesians are Indonesians 
The Turks are Turks 
But Pakistanis are not Pakistanis but Arabs Turks of sunni and Persian if Shia. 
Wtf....

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Imad.Khan

Pan-Islamic-Pakistan said:


> Pakistan is in the same region as Iran and Afghanistan. We are in all three: Middle East, Central Asia, and South Asia.
> 
> Culturally, we have more similarities with Islamic and Persian-Turkish states rather than interior Gangetic plateau. This extends from* Albania*, Turkey, Azerbaijan, Kurds, Caucasus, Iran, Tatarstan, CARs, Uyghurs, Afghanistan, until Pakistan and Kashmir.



Except Albania, the rest is correct. Albanians are a mix of different European ethnic groups, there might be a few Turkish genes in them now because of the ottoman rule but its not widespread. 

Another interesting fact, the legendary Janissaries of the Ottomon army were mostly from the region of Albania.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Yankee-stani

Pakistansdefender said:


> It seems you are trying so very hard to prove that you are similar with turk and Persian and not at all similar with your Indian kin...
> Yes Pakistan has always been influenced by them.. Turkish and Pakistani language share so many words.. Family life is same.
> But culture is different.
> A gilgit baltistan and balochi is more similar to Turkish Persian infulnece then a punjabi or a sindhi.. And the majority is punjabi and sindhi. You are making it as though God stopped your said culture in kashmir.
> Don't try to prove what you are not.
> 
> Please don't even go there..
> Dont try to make that you are some destined nation there to help the whole Islamic world..
> We have lost most of our power and value chasing that u chase able dreams.
> Muslims can never unite. They all speak about being Muslim but in real ethnicities are very thing.
> Just look at bengal, where is your complete Pakistan then...
> Pakistan should just look towards their own house and stop chasing the dreams of glory.
> The Arabs identify themselves with pre Islamic culture. What do you think they have invented new Islamic culture ?
> The culture, the language has been the very same.
> The Iranians are proud of the fact that they embraced Islam but also proud of the Pee Islamic Iran. They are not like us.
> This 10 years of zia has done what no one has done. Brainwashed people like you into radical zealots who are not even ready to embrace your own identity.
> There is nothing wrong with being Hindu ancesstors and whwreeever Islam went and people accepted Islam they kept their local. Cultures alive.
> Yes different nations have islamified their cultures but there is no stopping in Islam of practicing their recpective cultures.
> The malays are malay
> The Arabs are Arabs
> The Indonesians are Indonesians
> The Turks are Turks
> But Pakistanis are not Pakistanis but Arabs Turks of sunni and Persian if Shia.
> Wtf....



Partial correct much of Ancient lands that made up Pakistan were not Hindu but had their own folk religions some parts where Taxilla is were Buddhist besides the term Hindu not to butthurt Is a English term to make feel better to erase 1000 years of Muslim dominance of the Sub Continent

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Taimur Khurram

M. Sarmad said:


> While some historians do mention that Shaikha Khokhar converted to Islam, Yahya Sirhindi in his _Tarikh-i-Mubarak Shahi _mentions _Jasrath Shaika Khokhar_ as the most prudent infidel enemy of Muslim rulers.
> 
> @nick_indian



They only said that because he fought against the Delhi Sultanate. His family were Muslim converts, this is rigorously attested to.

And I'd like a source.



Pakistansdefender said:


> If a non Muslim accepts Islam he is still to obey his non Muslim parents



1. Your parents cannot be compared to strangers.
2. If they were the enemies of Islam, that would absolutely not be the case. And these Kafir rulers over Pakistan in post-Islamic times were exactly that, they fought against the Muslim rulers who brought Islam to the region.



Buddhistforlife said:


> The worst and ruthless ones were Mughal emperor Aurangzeb and Shahjahan



The Mughal Empire reached it's peak under their rule, they were some of the richest men in the world at the time, and South Asia's GDP made up 1/4 of the world's total output during their reign. They also built some truly splendid architecture and were much more Islamic than their predecessors (especially Alamgir).



Buddhistforlife said:


> Ahmed Shah Abdali



Butchered the Marathas and mauled the Khalsa, he was a true Islamic ruler who helped save Muslims from their wretched advance.



Buddhistforlife said:


> Alauddin Khilji



Protected Hind from the Mongols, spread Islam throughout it, and further developed the region.



Buddhistforlife said:


> Mehmood Ghaznavi,



He made Ghazni and Lahore into some of the world's most beautiful cities.



Buddhistforlife said:


> , Bakhtiyar Khilji,



He brought Islam to the Bengal.



Buddhistforlife said:


> Ummayud Caliphs particularly Muhammad bin Qasim



The first individual to truly bring Islam to the region. Without him, Pakistan wouldn't exist today.



Buddhistforlife said:


> Mamluk slave dynasties.



They developed Hind and spread Islam throughout it.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Mamadouso

Very interesting history. One thing no one mentioned but it is pretty clear Kashmir from its history shares far more history with the Pakistan side that the Indian history. 

Kashmir is culturally very much Pakistani rather than a Indian Ganges based culture.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Taimur Khurram

Arulmozhi Varman said:


> Its a shame that many Pakistanis do not even consider the contribution of one Sher Shah Suri as one of the greatest Muslim administrators of South Asia.



We do. 



Pakistansdefender said:


> They are our ancesstors no matter how hard you try to deny them.



So are the Muslims that conquered the region, no matter how hard you try to ignore them. 



Pakistansdefender said:


> Why not make a monument for maharaja ranjit Singh



Because he was an enemy of Islam. 



Pakistansdefender said:


> 70 percent of phustoons are Pakistanis then what do they have to do with afghan Kings?



Are you joking? 



Pakistansdefender said:


> Even his second wife is a Muslim



That's haram you dayooth. 



Axomiya_lora said:


> Not for nothing our ancestors successfully warded off every invasion from your ilk.



They didn't, but whatever makes you feel better.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Pan-Islamic-Pakistan

Pakistansdefender said:


> It seems you are trying so very hard to prove that you are similar with turk and Persian and not at all similar with your Indian kin...
> Yes Pakistan has always been influenced by them.. Turkish and Pakistani language share so many words.. Family life is same.
> But culture is different.
> A gilgit baltistan and balochi is more similar to Turkish Persian infulnece then a punjabi or a sindhi.. And the majority is punjabi and sindhi. You are making it as though God stopped your said culture in kashmir.
> Don't try to prove what you are not.
> 
> Please don't even go there..
> Dont try to make that you are some destined nation there to help the whole Islamic world..
> We have lost most of our power and value chasing that u chase able dreams.
> Muslims can never unite. They all speak about being Muslim but in real ethnicities are very thing.
> Just look at bengal, where is your complete Pakistan then...
> Pakistan should just look towards their own house and stop chasing the dreams of glory.
> The Arabs identify themselves with pre Islamic culture. What do you think they have invented new Islamic culture ?
> The culture, the language has been the very same.
> The Iranians are proud of the fact that they embraced Islam but also proud of the Pee Islamic Iran. They are not like us.
> This 10 years of zia has done what no one has done. Brainwashed people like you into radical zealots who are not even ready to embrace your own identity.
> There is nothing wrong with being Hindu ancesstors and whwreeever Islam went and people accepted Islam they kept their local. Cultures alive.
> Yes different nations have islamified their cultures but there is no stopping in Islam of practicing their recpective cultures.
> The malays are malay
> The Arabs are Arabs
> The Indonesians are Indonesians
> The Turks are Turks
> But Pakistanis are not Pakistanis but Arabs Turks of sunni and Persian if Shia.
> Wtf....



As a Punjabi myself from Faisalabad, I feel I have the right to say that our culture is more Persian and Turkish than Indian.

We share some things in common with Sikh Indians, but our commonality is even stronger with other neighboring linguistic groups like Kashmiris, Paharis, Seraikis, Hindkowans, and Pukhtoons.

I am continually shocked to discover the similarities with Turks and Iran which we have shared for thousands of years, even before Islam.

I don’t understand your agenda to make us something which we are not.

My grandparents all were fluent in Dari and spoke it amongst each other. All were big on Farsi shairi.

Our culture was heavily Persianized before the British came, as that was the state language of the Mughal empire.



Imad.Khan said:


> Except Albania, the rest is correct. Albanians are a mix of different European ethnic groups, there might be a few Turkish genes in them now because of the ottoman rule but its not widespread.
> 
> Another interesting fact, the legendary Janissaries of the Ottomon army were mostly from the region of Albania.



Some of my best friends in Med school were Albanians.

They share a lot of culture with us, but much of the Islamic part had been wiped out by Communism and their national hero Skanderberg was a kaffir and traitor to Ottomans.

I would identify them as thoroughly Persian-Turkish Islamic in culture, although they are basically a different racial group.



OsmanAli98 said:


> Partial correct much of Ancient lands that made up Pakistan were not Hindu but had their own folk religions some parts where Taxilla is were Buddhist besides the term Hindu not to butthurt Is a English term to make feel better to erase 1000 years of Muslim dominance of the Sub Continent



You are on the right track here.



Taimur Khurram said:


> They only said that because he fought against the Delhi Sultanate. His family were Muslim converts, this is rigorously attested to.
> 
> And I'd like a source.
> 
> 
> 
> 1. Your parents cannot be compared to strangers.
> 2. If they were the enemies of Islam, that would absolutely not be the case. And these Kafir rulers over Pakistan in post-Islamic times were exactly that, they fought against the Muslim rulers who brought Islam to the region.
> 
> 
> 
> The Mughal Empire reached it's peak under their rule, they were some of the richest men in the world at the time, and South Asia's GDP made up 1/4 of the world's total output during their reign. They also built some truly splendid architecture and were much more Islamic than their predecessors (especially Alamgir).
> 
> 
> 
> Butchered the Marathas and mauled the Khalsa, he was a true Islamic ruler who helped save Muslims from their wretched advance.
> 
> 
> 
> Protected Hind from the Mongols, spread Islam throughout it, and further developed the region.
> 
> 
> 
> He made Ghazni and Lahore into some of the world's most beautiful cities.
> 
> 
> 
> He brought Islam to the Bengal.
> 
> 
> 
> The first individual to truly bring Islam to the region. Without him, Pakistan wouldn't exist today.
> 
> 
> 
> They developed Hind and spread Islam throughout it.



Haven’t seen you for a while.

Welcome back brother. Ramazan Mubarak.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Buddhistforlife

Taimur Khurram said:


> They only said that because he fought against the Delhi Sultanate. His family were Muslim converts, this is rigorously attested to.
> 
> And I'd like a source.
> 
> 
> 
> 1. Your parents cannot be compared to strangers.
> 2. If they were the enemies of Islam, that would absolutely not be the case. And these Kafir rulers over Pakistan in post-Islamic times were exactly that, they fought against the Muslim rulers who brought Islam to the region.
> 
> 
> 
> The Mughal Empire reached it's peak under their rule, they were some of the richest men in the world at the time, and South Asia's GDP made up 1/4 of the world's total output during their reign. They also built some truly splendid architecture and were much more Islamic than their predecessors (especially Alamgir).
> 
> 
> 
> Butchered the Marathas and mauled the Khalsa, he was a true Islamic ruler who helped save Muslims from their wretched advance.
> 
> 
> 
> Protected Hind from the Mongols, spread Islam throughout it, and further developed the region.
> 
> 
> 
> He made Ghazni and Lahore into some of the world's most beautiful cities.
> 
> 
> 
> He brought Islam to the Bengal.
> 
> 
> 
> The first individual to truly bring Islam to the region. Without him, Pakistan wouldn't exist today.
> 
> 
> 
> They developed Hind and spread Islam throughout it.


If spreading means forced conversion, raping women, killing people of other faiths for non converting to Islam then yes Aurangzeb and Ghaznavi were champions in spreading Islam.


----------



## dexter

*Delhi sultanate (1206–1526) :*

*Introduction:
*
The Delhi Sultanate refers to the five short-lived Muslim kingdoms of Turkic and Pashtun (Afghan) origin that ruled the territory of Delhi between 1206 and 1526 CE. The Delhi Sultanate was a Muslim sultanate that was existed between the 13th and 16th centuries. Based in Delhi, the territory of the Delhi Sultanate was mainly confined to the northern part of India and Pakistan, though at its peak, it was in control of much of the Indian subcontinent.

Over the course of its history, the Delhi Sultanate was ruled by five different dynasties – the Mamluk Dynasty, the Khalji (spelled also as Khilji) Dynasty, the Tughlaq Dynasty, the Sayyid Dynasty, and the Lodi Dynasty. When the last sultan of the Lodi Dynasty was killed in battle, the Delhi Sultanate came to an end and led to the foundation of the Mughal Empire.

The five dynasties included:

the Mamluk Dynasty (1206–1290)
the Khilji Dynasty (1290–1320)
the Tughlaq Dynasty (1320–1414)
the Sayyid Dynasty (1414–1451)
the Afghan Lodi Dynasty (1451–1526)







Delhi sultanate, principal Muslim sultanate in north India from the 13th to the 16th century. Its creation owed much to the campaigns of Muʿizz al-Dīn Muḥammad ibn Sām (Muḥammad of Ghūr; brother of Sultan Ghiyās̄ al-Dīn of Ghūr) and his lieutenant Quṭb al-Dīn Aibak between 1175 and 1206 and particularly to victories at the battles of Taraōrī in 1192 and Chandawar in 1194.

The Ghūrid soldiers of fortune in India did not sever their political connection with Ghūr (now Ghowr, in present Afghanistan) until Sultan Iltutmish (reigned 1211–36) had made his permanent capital at Delhi, had repulsed rival attempts to take over the Ghūrid conquests in India, and had withdrawn his forces from contact with the Mongol armies, which by the 1220s had conquered Afghanistan. Iltutmish also gained firm control of the main urban strategic centres of the North Indian Plain, from which he could keep in check the refractory Rajput chiefs. After Iltutmish’s death, a decade of factional struggle was followed by nearly 40 years of stability under Ghiyās̄ al-Dīn Balban, sultan in 1266–87. During this period Delhi remained on the defensive against the Mongols and undertook only precautionary measures against the Rajputs.

Under the sultans of the Khaljī dynasty (1290–1320), the Delhi sultanate became an imperial power. ʿAlāʾ al-Dīn (reigned 1296–1316) conquered Gujarat (_c._ 1297) and the principal fortified places in Rajasthan (1301–12) and reduced to vassalage the principal Hindu kingdoms of southern India (1307–12). His forces also defeated serious Mongol onslaughts by the Chagatais of Transoxania (1297–1306).

Muḥammad ibn Tughluq (reigned 1325–51) attempted to set up a Muslim military, administrative, and cultural elite in the Deccan, with a second capital at Daulatabad, but the Deccan Muslim aristocracythrew off the overlordship of Delhi and set up (1347) the Bahmanī sultanate. Muḥammad’s successor, Fīrūz Shah Tughluq (reigned 1351–88), made no attempt to reconquer the Deccan.

The power of the Delhi sultanate in north India was shattered by the invasion (1398–99) of Turkic conqueror Timur (Tamerlane), who sacked Delhi itself. Under the Sayyid dynasty (_c._ 1414–51) the sultanate was reduced to a country power continually contending on an equal footing with other petty Muslim and Hindu principalities. Under the Lodī (Afghan) dynasty (1451–1526), however, with large-scale immigration from Afghanistan, the Delhi sultanate partly recovered its hegemony, until the Mughal leader Bābur destroyed it at the First Battle of Panipat on April 21, 1526. After 15 years of Mughal rule, the Afghan Shēr Shah of Sūr reestablished the sultanate in Delhi, which fell again in 1555 to Bābur’s son and successor, Humāyūn, who died in January 1556. At the Second Battle of Panipat (Nov. 5, 1556), Humāyūn’s son Akbar definitively defeated the Hindu general Hemu, and the sultanate became submerged in the Mughal Empire.

The Delhi sultanate made no break with the political traditions of the later Hindu period—namely, that rulers sought paramountcy rather than sovereignty. It never reduced Hindu chiefs to unarmed impotence or established an exclusive claim to allegiance. The sultan was served by a heterogeneouselite of Turks, Afghans, Khaljīs, and Hindu converts; he readily accepted Hindu officials and Hindu vassals. Threatened for long periods with Mongol invasion from the northwest and hampered by indifferent communications, the Delhi sultans perforce left a large discretion to their local governors and officials.

*The Beginning of The Delhi Sultanate :*

The Delhi Sultanate was a major Muslim sultanate from the 13th to the 16th century in India. It began with the campaigns of Muʿizz al-Dīn Muḥammad ibn Sām (Muḥammad of Ghūr; brother of Sultan Ghiyās̄ al-Dīn of Ghūr) and his lieutenant Quṭb al-Dīn Aibak primarily between 1175 and 1206.

It was the victory against the Rajputs that began the established the reign of the Delhi Sultanate.

Until the end of 12th century, it was Prithviraj Chauhan who ruled on the Indian land. During his reign, Prithviraj Chauhan fought many battles out of which both the battles of Tarain fought in the late 12th century were crucial. In both battles, he fought Muhammad of Ghur of the Ghuride dynasty of Afghanistan.

In the first battle of Tarain between Muhammad of Ghur and Prithviraj Chauhan and other Indian rulers that was fought in 1191 A.D, Muhammad of Ghur faced a harsh defeat and had to retreat. And in the second battle that was fought in 1192 A.D., he returned and fought with more reinforcements and a stronger army with an intention to defeat the Rajputs and succeeded in doing so. This defeat ended the Rajputs’ supremacy in north India and gave way for Turkish emperors to establish themselves in the sub-continent.

*Political and Cultural History in Detail :
*
Although the influence of Persian civilization upon that of northern India under the sultans of Delhi has long been treated as a foregone conclusion, attempts to identify the extent of the processes by which that influence was transmitted involve the historian in a web of hypotheses and generalizations (for the historiography of the sultanate, see Hardy, 1960; Rashid; Hasan; Sarkar; Nizami, 1983). As Carl W. Ernst (p. 6) has expressed it, “‘influence’ is nothing but a rather physical metaphor suggesting a flowing in of a substance into an empty vessel. This is hardly a satisfactory model for the complicated process by which people of one culture interpret and put to new uses themes and symbols from another culture.” Because of its origins and subsequent history the sultanate provided for three and a quarter centuries a unique opportunity for the continual transmission to India of a broad range of cultural manifestations emanating from the Persian plateau: language and literature, customs and manners, concepts of kingship and government, religious organization, music, and architecture.

_Persian influence in northern India before the sultanate_. Islam had already entered India via Sind and up the Indus; by the late 10th century Ismaʿili communities had been established in and around Multan, but they were Carmatians from Bahrain and probably constituted a wholly Arab element. The seepage of Persian influences into northwestern India resulted, in the first instance, from the transfer of political power on the Persian plateau from ʿAbbasid governors to local dynasts. The early Saffarids Yaʿqūb b. Layṯ (d. 265/879) and ʿAmr b. Layṯ (d. 289/902) exercised a loose sway over what are today the Indo-Afghan borderlands, in which dissidents from the Persian plateau had probably established themselves free from ʿAbbasid surveillance (Bosworth). The Samanids (204-395/819-1005) later extended their hegemony over the same area, including the Kabul valley, Gardīz, Ḡazna, and Zābolestān, leading to penetration of these lands by Persian or persianized officials, traders, and adventurers. Under their aegis rebellious slave commanders like Alptigin, Sebüktigin, and the latter’s son Maḥmūd used Ḡazna as a base for raids across the Indus and into Hindustan. A century later the Saljuq vizier Neẓām-al-Molk, in his _Sīāsat-nāma_ (p. 147), described these raids, emphasizing that plunder and adventure, as much as piety, had motivated them. The Ghaznavid Maḥmūd himself (388-421/998-1030) may well have viewed these raids as providing the means to play an active role on the Persian plateau, but after the defeat of his son Masʿūd (421-32/1031-41) by the Saljuqs at Dandānqān in 431/1040 the fulcrum of Ghaznavid power shifted east into the Punjab, and Lahore became the capital of the rump empire. The later Ghaznavids, though ethnic Turks, were wholly assimilated to Persian culture; Persian was the language of the court, and Ghaznavid Lahore must have been a typical Persian city. The first flowering of Persian poetry on Indian soil took place there, led by Abu’l-Faraj b. Masʿūd Rūnī, the panegyrist of Sultan Ebrāhīm b. Masʿūd (451-92/1059-99) and his son Masʿūd III (492-508/1099-1115), and Masʿūd-e Saʿd-e Salmān (Marek, pp. 714-15). It was also in Lahore that ʿAlī b. ʿOṯmān Hojvīrī, whose _Kašf al-maḥjūb_ was one of the earliest accounts in Persian of Sufi theory and practice, finally settled and died (ca. 465-69/1072-77; Hojvīrī, pp. x-xi) .

Although the ethnic origins of the Ghurid, or Shansabanid, dynasty (ca. 390-612/1000-1215) remain uncertain, there can be no doubt that the conquest of Ḡazna by the Ghurids’ Turkish _ḡolām_s in 545/1150 marked the end of Ghaznavid rule west of the Indus. The last two Ghaznavids, Ḵosrow Shah (547-55/1152-60) and Ḵosrow Malek (555-82/1160-86), controlled only the Punjab, and under their rule the cities there must have experienced further persianization. In 582/1186 the Ghurid ruler Ḡīāṯ-al-Dīn Moḥammad (558-99/1163-1203) occupied Lahore, where he established a condominium with his younger brother Moʿezz-al-Dīn Moḥammad, to whom he delegated the eastern and southern possessions of the dynasty. Thenceforth Moʿezz-al-Dīn was responsible for the extensive conquests in Hindustan. Delhi was captured in 588-89/1192, Ajmer in 589/1193, and Qannauj in 595/1198; Ghurid suzerainty thus extended in a great arc from Mount Abū in Rajasthan through Gwalior to Bundelkhand. Farther east Baḵtīār Ḵaljī proceeded into Bihar and Bengal in 599-601/1202-04, capturing the cities of Nadia and Lakhnawti (Jūzjānī, _Ṭabaqāt_I, pp. 422-32). Following the assassination of Moʿezz-al-Dīn in 599/1206 his territories were partitioned among his principal amirs: Tāj-al-Dīn Yildiz in Ḡazna; Nāṣer-al-Dīn Qobāča in Multan, Uch, and Bhakkar; and Qoṭb-al-Dīn Aybak in Lahore, Ajmer, and Delhi, the last city being held by his lieutenant Šams-al-Dīn Iltutmiš. In Bihar and Bengal the situation remained fluid: Baḵtiār had either died or been assassinated, and successive commanders endeavored to hold those distant provinces and to determine the basis of their legitimacy by dealing with various power brokers in the northwest (Eaton, 1993, pp. 38-39). Eventually Aybak emerged more or less supreme, though he had had to come to terms with Qobāča and probably, contrary to tradition, never assumed the title “sultan.” Nor was his son Ārām Shah able to succeed him after his premature death. His successor was his favorite ḡ_olām_, the far-sighted and resolute Iltutmiš (607-33/1211-36), who is counted the first and among the greatest of the sultans of Delhi.

The Turkish _ḡolām_s of the Ghurids who laid the foundations of Muslim rule in India were no barbarian conquerors; rather, despite their origins in Central Asia, they were effective agents and purveyors of Persian civilization on the subcontinent. Aybak himself had, as a young slave, been educated by a _qāżī_ (religious judge) in Nīšāpūr, where he had acquired a reputation as a reciter of the Koran (Jūzjānī, I, p. 416). Iltutmiš had belonged to a learned man of Bukhara, who educated him thoroughly before selling him to a merchant, who took him to Baghdad and thence to Ḡazna (Jūzjānī, I, p. 442). Qobāča, too, seems to have been a man of considerable polish; it was in his time that the _Čāč-nāma_ was rendered from Arabic into Persian, and he provided temporary refuge from the Mongols for both Šadīd-al-Dīn ʿAwfī and Abū ʿAmr Jūzjānī. He appointed the latter to a position at the Fīrūzīya _madrasa_ at Uch, which may have been his own foundation (Jūzjānī, I, p. 420). The biographical notices on prominent amirs of the early Delhi sultanate incorporated into Jūzjānī’s _Ṭabaqāt-e nāṣerī_ confirm the impression of a cultivated persianized ruling elite. The earliest surviving buildings erected by the sultans of Delhi also reflect Persian antecedents (see ii, below).

The Ghaznavid and Ghurid invaders constituted a well-defined ruling elite, reinforced by adventurers of all kinds from the Muslim lands farther west. Neẓām al-Molk reported that, after news of the booty that Alptigin had acquired in the Indus frontier region became known, men flocked from Khorasan, Transoxania, and Sīstān to serve under him (Neẓām-al-Molk, p. 146). Few of these early invaders would have brought wives with them, relying principally upon Indian slave women to provide for their domestic needs and bear them sons. Apart from soldiers, little is recorded about early migrants from Persia and the borderlands into what later became the Delhi sultanate. There must have been writers from the Ghaznavid court at Lahore and in the late Ghurid period _ʿolamāʾ_ like Jūzjānī. It can be assumed, too, that among immigrants to northern India there were armorers, metalworkers, tentmakers and furnishers, manufacturers of cavalry gear, and other craftsmen, though none is mentioned in the sources. Merchants must have followed the armies to convert the plunder (often unwieldy and practically useless in the hands of common soldiers) into cash; the vast majority of Indian captives must thus have become objects of commerce. Traders and craftsmen alike most probably came from urban centers in the eastern Persian world and, with bureaucrats and _ʿolamāʾ_, provided the nucleus of the free, nonmilitary Persian-speaking population of such centers as Multan, Uch, Bhakkar, Lahore, Dipalpur, and Bhatinda in the Punjab, as well as Delhi.

_The dynastic history of the sultanate_. Iltutmiš was succeeded by five descendants, the last of whom died in 664/1266, but usurpation and murder more often determined the succession at Delhi. In that year his former _ḡolām _Ḡīāṯ-al-Dīn Balban seized the throne, ruling for two decades (664-86/1266-87) in grim splendor amid the trappings of “Sasanian” kingship (Nizami, 1961, pp. 95-105); after his death his grandson and great-grandson were soon ousted, and the throne was then seized by the Turkish or turkicized Ḵaljīs (689-720/1290-1320; on this dynasty, see Haig; Nigam; Lal, 1967). After the murder of the last of the line, Qotbá-al-Dīn Mobārak Shah (716-20/1316-20), by his favorite the sultanate was restored by Ḡāzī Malek, governor of Dipalpur (Punjab), who mounted the throne as Ḡīāṯ-al-Dīn Toḡloq and founded the Tughluqid dynasty (720-817/1320-1414), under which the sultanate of Delhi reached its greatest extent but also experienced the beginning of fragmentation into smaller states. Ebn Baṭṭūṭa described Ḡāzī Malek as a Qarāʾūnā Turk from southern Afghanistan, though in India the term Qarāʾūnā may have meant descendants of Turks by Indian mothers (Ebn Baṭṭūṭa, III, p. 649). Under the Tughluqids, especially Moḥammad b. Toḡloq (725-52/1325-51) and Fīrūz Shah (752-90/1351-88), the Delhi sultanate reached the zenith of its splendor (on the Tughluqids, see Haig; Husain, 1938; idem, 1963). Even before Tīmūr’s devastating raid on Punjab and Delhi in 800/1398-99, however, the Tughluqid state had contracted to a mere shadow of its former self, and the adventurers who ruled after Tīmūr’s withdrawal, Mallū Khan, Dawlat Khan Lōdī, and Ḵeżr Khan, had no claims to legitimacy and controlled little more than the countryside immediately surrounding Delhi. Keżr Khan’s successors came to be known as the Sayyed dynasty (817-55/1414-51), probably because of spurious claims to descent from the Prophet Moḥammad; they were eventually swept away by the Lōdīs (855-932/1451-1526), themselves part of a larger infiltration of Afghan tribes into the Punjab and the Ganges plain, from which local dynasties also eventually emerged in Bengal and Malwa. The most significant legacy of the Sayyeds and Lōdīs was architectural. The last Lōdī sultan was killed at Panipat fighting the invading forces of Bābor.

Although the extent of Persian immigration into India before the 1220s is a matter of guesswork, events during the 13th century undoubtedly contributed to an increase. The garrison towns and administrative centers in the upper Jumna-Ganges plain (e.g., Baran, Etawah, Badaon, Qannauj) must have become even more persianized after the arrival of successive waves of refugees from the west. The first such wave was the result of campaigns by Čengīz Khan in Transoxania and Khorasan in 616-19/1219-22; he actually reached the Indus in 618/1221 and briefly threatened the Punjab (Jovaynī, ed. Qazvīnī, II, pp. 139-42). Many fugitives sought sanctuary in Delhi during the reign of Iltutmiš and undoubtedly stimulated a greater diffusion of Persian customs and values in lands that had previously been unstable marches on the frontiers of the Islamic world. Jūzjānī is an example, having fled from Tūlak south of Herat, arrived by boat in Uch, where he was warmly received by Qobāča, and then passed on to Delhi, where he enjoyed a moderately successful career in the service of the sultanate (Jūzjānī, I, pp. 420, 447).

The Mongol invasion of Persia continued into the 1250s, and it must be assumed that the exodus also continued, though presumably limited to persons of means or possessing marketable skills. A further stage in the spread of Persian influence must have followed Hülegü’s invasion of Persia in 653-56/1255-58; many refugees crossed the Indus during the reign of Sultan Nāṣer-al-Dīn Maḥmūd Shah (644-64/1246-66), and the impetus may have continued during the late 1270s and 1280s after the Negüderis or Qarāʾūnās had occupied Zābolestān in what is now southern Afghanistan, a region that became a bone of contention between Il-khanids and Chaghatayids (see CHAGHATAYID DYNASTY). The latter successfully asserted their hegemony in the borderlands northwest of the Indus and engaged in protracted internal dynastic struggles between Mongol traditionalists and those newly converted to Islam (e.g., ʿAlāʾ-al-Dīn Tarmašīrīn, 726-34/1326-34). Among the refugees who came to Delhi was the party with which Ebn Baṭṭūṭa traveled in 734/1333. The most prominent member was the _qāżī_ of Termeḏ, who was accompanied by his women and children, three brothers and a nephew, and two notables from Bukhara and Samarqand respectively, each with an entourage of servants and hangers-on (Ebn Baṭṭūṭa, pp. 606-07). This group was probably typical of such refugees, representing high Persian culture. Sultan Moḥammad b. Toḡloq was especially renowned for his hospitality to foreigners (see Jackson), among whom the “Ḵorāsānīs” (a term used indiscriminately in Delhi to include refugees from Persia proper, the borderlands across the Indus, and Turkestan) were especially numerous. Ebn Baṭṭūṭa mentioned the sultan’s practice “of honouring strangers and showing affection to them and singling them out for governorships or high dignities of state” (p. 595). “. . . Well known is his generosity to foreigners, for he prefers them to the people of India, singles them out for favour, showers his benefits upon them . . . and confers upon them magnificent gifts” (p. 671). When the Il-khanate in Persia collapsed in 736/1336 Tughluqid Delhi provided a _carrière ouverte aux talents_, thus ensuring that Muslim India would become a cultural extension of Persia.

Perhaps more than elsewhere in the Muslim east, the political style of the rulers of Delhi reflected traditional concepts of Persian kingship, for Iltutmiš and his successors lacked any other obvious tradition to draw upon (Hardy, 1978a). Indigenous Rajput polities offered no meaningful exemplars, and it is unlikely that the Turks in northern India retained memories of the steppe _imperium_ of the Oḡuz or Qarakhanids. The ʿAbbasid caliphate had provided a legitimizing mechanism, but its demise in 658/1258 left a mere fictive device. On the other hand, the culture of the courts of eastern Persia, that is, Samanid Bukhara, in whose service Alptigin had grown gray (Neẓām-al-Molk, p. 139), and the persianized milieux of the Ghaznavids and Ghurids offered a dynamic, ultimately Sasanian concept of _šāhānšāhī_ to set against contemporary Hindu notions of kingship or the threatening universalism of the Chinghizids. This concept could be harnessed to the idea, prevalent from the time of the first Mongol incursions across the Indus, that the central functions of the rulers of Delhi were chastisement of the idolaters of Hindustan and defense of the sultanate against the Mongol infidels (Ahmad, p. 12). In his determination to enhance his authority Ḡīāṯ-al-Dīn Balban, who claimed descent from Afrāsīāb, sought to overawe his turbulent followers with the splendid ceremonial of pre-Islamic Persia (Nizami, 1985, pp. 148-52). It is surely no coincidence that his grandsons were named Kay Ḵosrow, Kay Qobād, Kay Kāvūs, and Fīrūz. The greatest poet of the Delhi sultanate, Amīr Ḵosrow Dehlavī (651-725/1253-1325; see Rypka, _Hist. Iran. Lit._, pp. 257-59), in his _Qerān al-saʿdayn_, an account of the reconciliation of Balban’s son Bōgrā Khan, ruler of Bengal, with his own son Moʿezz-al-Dīn Kay Qobād in 686/1287, glorified the external symbols of kingship and authority. ʿEsāmī, with his _Fotūḥ al-salāṭīn_, composed in the Deccan in 750-51/1349-50, aspired to write the _Shāh-nāma_ of India.

By the time of Amīr Ḵosrow’s death Persian was firmly established as the language of polite learning, diplomacy, and higher administration among the Muslims of the subcontinent. This success owed as much to the diffusion of the Sufi orders throughout northern India, especially during the 14th century, as to elite patronage of panegyric and belles lettres. The process had begun a century earlier, with the establishment of Moʿin-al-Dīn Češtī (q.v.; d. 633/1236) in Ajmer, Ḥamīd-al-Dīn Nāgawrī (d. 675/1276) in Rajasthan, and Qoṭb-al-Dīn Baḵtīār (d. 633/1235) in Delhi (Lawrence, pp. 20-44). From them flowed the great Češtī tradition in India, embodied in Qoṭb-al-Dīn’s disciple Farīd-al-Dīn Masʿūd “Ganj-e Šekar” (664/1265); the latter’s spiritual heir, Neẓām-al-Dīn Awlīāʾ (d. 725/1325), who counted the poets Amīr Ḵosrow Dehlavī and Amīr Ḥasan Sejzī (d. 729/1328) as his friends; and Awlīāʾ’s successor, Nāṣer-al-Dīn Maḥmūd “Čerāḡ-e Dehlī” (d. 757/1356). Other orders, notably the Sohravardīya and the Ferdowsīya, had established themselves after the Turkish invasions, the former chiefly in the Punjab, the latter in Bihar and Bengal (Lawrence, pp. 60-71, 72-79). At the time of Tīmūr’s invasion of Hindustan (800/1398-99) the leading disciple of Čerāḡ-e Dehlī, Moḥammad Ḥosaynī “Gīsū Derāz” (d. 825/1422), abandoned Delhi for the Deccan, where he established himself at Golbarga (Eaton, 1978, pp. 50-52). By that time, however, Sufis had spread far and wide through Muslim territory in India. Their propensity to preserve their conversations (_malfūẓāt_), letters (_maktūbāt_), and hagiology (_taḏkera_) in Persian did much to encourage dissemination of that language. Little survives from before the time of Awlīāʾ, but Sejzī’s _Fawāʾed al-foʾād_, in which Awlīāʾ’s table talk over about fifteen years is recorded, is perhaps the most important example of the _malfūẓāt_ genre. Ḥamīd Qalandar, in his _Ḵayr al-majles_, attempted to do the same for Čerāḡ-e Dehlī but lacked his predecessor’s talents as a mystic and as a poet.

_Sīar al-Awlīāʾ_ by Amīr Ḵord, though not properly a _taḏkera_, is in the _taḏkera_tradition, containing biographical notices on the early Češtīs, especially Awlīāʾ. Although Amīr Ḵord wrote during the reign of Fīrūz Shah Toḡloq, he had access to much older oral and probably written material that is now lost. Moḥammad-Akbar Ḥosaynī, the son of Gīsū Derāz, also composed a _malfūẓāt_ of his father’s conversations, _Jawāmeʿ al-kālem_, which includes important material on earlier Češtī shaikhs. Other orders developed their own literary traditions, among which the _Maktūbat-e ṣadī_ of the Ferdowsī shaikh Šaraf-al-Dīn b. Yaḥyā Manerī “Maḵdūm-al-Molk” (d. 782/1381) was particularly celebrated. Without such works and the spiritual dynamism of the Sufi orders that inspired them, it may be doubted that the Persian language and the Persian cultural ethos would have pervaded Hindustan so deeply during the sultanate period.

*



*
*A painting of west gate of Firozabad fort, near Delhi. This fort was built by Feroz Shah Tughlaq in the 1350s but destroyed by later dynasties.*

*The Administration of the Delhi Sultanate :*

The Delhi Sultanate was administrated and governed as per the laws stated in the holy Quran. This Quranic law was the supreme law of the empire. The Caliph was the supreme leader according to the Islamic theory. And all the Muslim rulers in the world were to be his subordinates.

*1. Sultan – The head of the Sultanate :*
The head of the administration of the Sultanate was the king or the Sultan himself. The Sultan was embodied with all the powers in his will and his will would be the law of the country. Since there was no principle of hereditary succession the Sultan had the power to nominate the heirs of his choice and they would be recognized by all other nobles.

All the Muslims were allowed in the Sultan’s office but that was only theoretically, in reality, the Sultanate was open only for the immigrant Turkes. In the later period, the Sultanate became even more restricted allowing only the members of the royal family.

Following the Islamic theory, the Sultans of Delhi were considered to be the messengers of Allah, i.e. God and it was their duty to enforce the laws stated in the Holy Quran.

*2. Wazir or The Prime Minister :*
The Wazir exercised the Sultan’s power and rules and regulations laid down by him. The Wazir appointed all the important officers of the state under the name of the Sultan. In the absence of the Sultan, it’s the Wazir who took care of everything.

He advised the Sultan in the matters of administration and always kept him updated about the sentiments and needs of his people. The Wazir handled all the financial matters; he was also the superintendent of the civil servants and commanded the military establishment. All the requirements of the army were to go through him.

*3. The Army Master or Diwan-i-Ariz :*
Diwan-i-Ariz controlled the military establishment. Diwan-i-Ariz recruited the troops for the army. The Sultan was the commander-in-chief of the army. He mostly looked after the discipline of the army and their equipment and their requirements on the battlefield that were then informed to the Wazir.

*4. The minister for foreign affairs or Diwan-i-risalt :*
He was the minister responsible for the foreign affairs and handled the diplomatic correspondences, the ambassadors, and the envoys received from the other rulers.

*5. Minister of the department of religions or Sadr-us-Sudur :*
The Sadr-us-Sudur was the minister who handled the religious department, endowment, and charity. He was to enforce the Islamic rules and regulations and it was his duty to ensure that all Muslims strictly followed these rules and regulations.

*Economy :*

The village during the Sultanate period remained as in the ancient period a self-contained unit of economic life. The cities flourished under the Sultans. The testimony of Ibn Battuta who visited the subcontinent in the first half of the fourteenth century shows that there were rich sea ports in Gujrat, Deccan and Bengal. There were also flourishing cities all over the subcontinent.

Agriculture: Throughout the sultanate period agriculture was in a prosperous condition. All the foreign travelers who visited the subcontinent during the period speak highly of the fertility of the soil which made it possible for the cultivators to grow two crops every year. Among grains and fruits wheat, barley, millet, peas, lentils, mangoes, jackfruits, black-berries, oranges, coconuts and bananas are mentionable. Malabar was noted for its spices, such as ginger and pepper. In Bengal Ibn Battuta passed through orchards which were similar to those along the banks of the Nile. Among the products of Bengal he mentions rice, millets, beans, ginger, mustard, onion, garlic, cucumber, egg-plant, coconut, betel nut, banana, jackfruit, pomegranate, sugarcane, and honey. There was also abundance of buffaloes, cows, sheep and domestic fowls.

Industries: The subcontinent was famous for various industries among which metal-work, sugar, indigo and paper were famous. The textile industry was the most flourishing as it is today although the variety of cloth was originally limited. Gujrat, Cambay, Malabar and Calicut were famous for their silk and cotton textiles which were exported to the Red Sea ports and Western Europe. Bengal was also famous for the volume and variety of fine textiles. Other factories included metal work industries and ivory products, etc. There were also several metal-work industries like sword-making and the manufacture of basins, cups, steel guns, knives and scissors.

Trade: The subcontinent had a long tradition of inland and foreign trade which was further developed after the arrival of the Muslims. The trading classes were Muslim in the north and banias of Gujrat. Foreign Muslim merchants called as Khurasanis also played an important role in handling the trade. Between the producers and traders there was a clan of brokers. There were also money-lenders and bankers known as mahajans who lent out money on interest. The imports consisted mainly of articles of luxury for the upper classes and supply of horses and mules. The exports on the other hand included numerous articles and commodities such as food, grains and clothes. Among agricultural products wheat, millet, rice, lentils, scents and medicinal herbs were exported in large quantities. From Bengal cotton and sugar were exported. Textiles both silk and cotton were important items of export.

Trade Relations: The area which depended most on supplies from the subcontinent included the islands in the Pacific Ocean, the Malayan islands and the east coast of Africa. Commodities from the subcontinent also reached European markets. The Arabs carried these articles to the Red Sea and thence to Damascus and Alexandria from where these were marketed in the Middle Eastern countries and Europe.

*Revenue System :*

The revenue system was in accordance with the Islamic theory and duly inherited from the Ghaznavids. It was, however, compatible to the local conditions of India. The state demand on agricultural produce was the main source of income. The general rate of the state demand was one-fifth of the income which was increased by Ala-ud-Din Khalji to one-half due to administrative reasons. Tax could be paid in both cash and kind. Village headmen helped the local officials in collection of taxes and received their commission. There were also tributary chiefs whose obligation to the state fluctuated in proportion to the strength of the central Government. Officials in far-flung areas were often paid in the form of assignments of the revenue accruing from certain areas called iqta. Among the other sources of income were import duties, the ghanimah (the spoils of war), the imposts on mines and treasure-troves and jaziyah, i.e., tax levied on non-Muslims in return of which they were provided assurance for security of life and property by the government. Contemporary historians do not make any mention about zakat but their silence denotes that zakat was voluntarily paid by Muslims as a religious duty. Fiqh-i-Firoz Shahi mentions a separate treasury for zakat.

*Military System :
*
The army was administered by ariz-ul-mumalik. He was not the commander-in-chief but the controller-general. He exercised great influence over the state. His duties were to keep up the strength and the efficiency of the army and provide equipment, horses and ration. His office maintained the descriptive roll of each solider. He distributed salaries to the troops. Even the officers of the court who held military ranks received their salaries from his office. Cavalry was the most important part of army. Elephants also served in the army. To tackle with the Mongol army, a large standing army was concentrated in the centre. There were also paik (foot solders) but they were not as significant as cavalry. Gun powder was also used at the end of this period. A corps of engineers was maintained to act as sappers and miners. Every army had a corps of well-trained scouts and a unit of surgeons and ambulances. A large number of forts were built to make the defense strong.





*‘The army of Alaudeen on March to Deccan’ , a 20th-century artist's impression.*

*Architecture under the Delhi Sultanate :*

The early rulers of the Delhi Sultanate are often viewed as iconoclastic pillagers, best known for their indiscriminate destruction of Hindu, Buddhist, and Jain temples. They enacted Islamic prohibitions of anthropomorphic representations in art, which had been common at the time. However, the fusion of indigenous and Muslim customs and styles under the Delhi Sultanate gave rise to the beginnings of Indo-Islamic art and architecture, which reached its zenith in later years under the Mughal emperors. The Sultanate’s greatest contribution to the fine arts of India lies in their advances in architecture.





*The Qutb Minar and the Alai Darwaza*: One of the earliest and best known of the Delhi Sultanate architectural monuments, and also the tallest minaret in India. Its accompanying gateway, the Alai Darwaza, bears the first surviving true dome in India.

*The Qutb Minar :*

Qutb-ud-din Aibak, the governor of Delhi and, subsequently, the first sultan of the Delhi Sultanate (ruling from 1206–1210 CE), started the construction of the Qutb Minar in 1192, which was completed after his death by his successor Iltutmish. Made of fluted red sandstone and marble, the Qutb Minar is the tallest minaret in India, standing at a height of 238 feet. It comprises several superposed flanged and cylindrical shafts , separated by balconies supported by Muqarnas corbels (an architectural ornamentation reminiscent of stalactites employed in traditional Islamic and Persian architecture). The walls of the minaret are covered with Indian floral motifs and verses from the Quran.

*Religion :*

Muslim dynasties rose and fell but Islam as a unifying force sustained the Muslims throughout these centuries. The ulema and sufis played a dominant role in the preservation of Islam. In the capital cities where the upper-class of Muslim society lived, ulema were the custodians of religion. Among the masses the Sufis worked most assiduously, generation after generation, to preserve the inner spirit of Islam and won thousands of converts from the indigenous communities. Islam in the subcontinent was, indeed, not spread by political power but through the missionary activities, as the heaviest concentration of Muslims in present Pakistan and Bangladesh (East Pakistan) was away from the influence of metropolitan cities of Delhi, Agra and Lahore. The saints of Islam excelled the Hindu priests and monks in piety, foresight and in every aspect of morality due to which Islam spread almost in every core and corner of the country. It were the sufis and saints of Islam who consummated the process of conquest, moral and spiritual, by establishing dargahs and khanqahs on the ruined sites of Hindus and Buddhist worship. By and by Hindus who had been venerating these sites gradually forgot their past and easily transferred their allegiance to the Muslim pirs and walis who were really paragons of compassion, courtesy and kindness. All the Sufis, pirs and walis who were the religious men of lofty character started coming to the Subcontinent in larger numbers in the wake of Muslim conquerors and some of them arrived even before the military and political conquests.
*
Judicial System :*

Judiciary comprised four types of courts: diwan-i-mazalim (Court of complaints and justice), presided by the rulers or his representative known as Amir-i Dad; qazi courts; the courts of muhatasibs especially to deal with certain offences against religious ordinances. These courts gained more power and prestige under the Tughluqs and later under Aurangzeb; and the police (shurta) courts. Along with the system of dispensation of justice by the king or his representatives an important designation was that of qazi who dispensed with the civil disputes among Muslims. With diwan-i-siyasat the king, his military commander and expert jurists dealt with rebellion and treason.

There was a grass root networking of qazi (judges) on provincial and local level. Kotwal (head of the city police) also acted as a court of first instance of the criminal cases. The muhtasib was regarded as the upholder of the public morals and protector of the rights of the weak against the strong. He supervised the markets and inspected weights and measures.

*Education :
*
Knowledge was highly advanced and endorsed in Sultanate era. The government took keen interest in the establishment of necessary institutions of learning. Education was common, free and widespread. Individual scholars and men of learning received stipends and rewards from the state so that they could carry on teaching in specialized branches of learning to students who flocked round them because of their erudition. For advanced students universities and colleges called madrissas were set up by sultans and munificent persons. Only the names of a few famous ones have come down to us. However, their extent can be easily gauged by the evidence of Ibn Battuta who found a thousand institutions of higher learning in the city of Delhi alone.

*Literature :*

Sultanate era witnessed the rise of Persian as the court language. The real credit of important developments that took place in the field of poetry, prose, biography, political & moralistic literature and historiography really goes to Sultans who were great patrons of learning and literature. The early men of letters followed trans-Indus tradition led by Sadid-ud-din Muhammad Aufi and Muhammad bin Mansur Quraishi generally known as Fakhr-i Mudabbir while indigenous tradition began to take shape with Amir Khusrau.

*History: *The Muslims introduced the art of historiography and made valuable contributions in the field of history. Fakhr-i Mudabbir, Hasan Nizami, Minhaj-us-Siraj, Afif, Khusrau, Yahya, Isami and Zia-ud-din Barani were the important historians who wrote in a distinguished style from their personal knowledge since they held high official positions and generally participated themselves in several events of the time. Barani though regarded as the historian with the most obvious bias is the most interesting amongst them. He wrote history as an artist and arranged his material without showing any monotony and emphasizing the characteristics o various rulers and reigns. Fakhr-i-Mudabbir was the author of Adab-ul-mumluk wa Kifaya-ul-Mamluk, (Rules of the Kings and the Welfare of the subjects) in which he seems to be distinguished scholar-statesman. In this book he has drawn not only the administrative pattern set up at Ghazni – following the models of Baghdad and Bukhara but also prescribed minutely the lines for the administrative and military organization of a Muslim state. Fakhr-i Mudabbir was really gifted with pratical idealism, moderation and good sense.

*Poetry:* Hasan was an important poet who wrote beautiful prose. His Faw’aid al-Fu’ad is considered as a literary classic of the period that is based upon Malfuzat or say the table talk of Nizam-ud-Din Auliya. Amir Khusrau wrote ghazals and masnawis which are among the finest in Persian literature. Celebrating the reign of Qutb-ud-din Mubarak Shah, Amir Khusrau wrote in Persian poetry Nuh Sipihr and challenged the poets of Iran, and eloquently sang of his native land, its flowers and learned people. Badr of Chach, a poet of repute flourished at the court of Muhammad-bin Tughluq.

*Prose: *Sadid-ud-din Muhammad Aufi wrote Lubab-ul-Albab, a collection of biographies of Persian poets, Jawami’ ul-hikayat, a great store-house of anecdotes and translated the famous collection of short stories entitled al-Faraj ba’d-ush-shiddat. Zia Nakhshabi wrote in simple and eloquent prose a romantic mathnavi Gulrez and Tuti Namah while his Silk-us-Suluk is well known in mystic circles. Summaries of Tuti Namah have been translated in Turkish, German, English and many Indian languages.

*Sansikrit:* Persian was not the only language that flourished in that era, as Sansikrit was also in its full bloom in which most of the Hindu religious and philosophical literature was produced. Under the patronization of the Muslim rulers ancient Hindu books Ramayana and Mahabharta were translated from Sansikrit into regional languages such as Bengali. During Sultanate era was the great revival of Jainism which produced teachers like Hemachandra Suri. There were numerous Jain writers of Sanskrit, some of whom were duly honored by Muslim Sultans like Muhammad Tughluq. In Kangra under the orders of Firuz Tughluq, Sanskrit books dealing with astronomy and music were translated into Persian with the help of Brahman scholars. Maladhar Vasu translated the Bhagavata into Bengali under the patronage of Sultan Hussain Shah. Among the early Hindi poets the most prominent was Chandbardai, the author of Prithvi Raja Rasan.

Jagaayak wrote Alhakhand which presents the picture of Rajput life in the 13th and 14th centuries. It was the age of Bhakti movement whose leaders used to write in Hindi. Kabir of Kabir Panthi sect wrote in Hindi which had great mass appeal. In South Marathi, Tamil and Telegu languages developed. Indeed the sultanate era was an age of remarkable literary renaissance.

*Cultural Developments :*

During the Sultanate era an exotic Indo-Muslim culture came into being which was the blend of Arabic, Turkish, Afghan, Persian, Central-Asian and Indian traditions. Initially, the conquests from Afghanistan culturally influenced the northern India as Lahore, which turned into a smaller Ghazni and later Delhi became the most significant cultural centre in the Muslim East. After the fall of Baghdad in 1258, Delhi became the most important cultural center of Muslim East. When the centers of learning in Central and Western Asia were devastated, Delhi turned out to be the bulwark of Muslim power. It generously afforded refuge to the talented Muslims who came in increasing numbers and added to the splendor of the court of Delhi. Balban had great regard for these distinguished refugees. The next reign was that of Ala-ud-din Khalji famous for patronage of men of letters. Muhammad Tughluq and Firuz Tughluq were also keen supporters of learning. The cultural life of the Sultanate received a fresh stimulus during the reign of Sikandar Lodhi. It was undoubtedly on the foundations laid by the sultans of Delhi that the great edifice of cultural development was erected by the Mughal rulers.

*Medicine :
*
Muslims practiced and patronized the Indo-Muslim medicine popularly known as Yunani Tibb. Zia-ud-din Barani in his historical accounts mentions the names of important physicians of the time of Balban and Ala-ud-din Khalji. The most prominent among them were Maulana Badr-ud-din and Maulana Hamid Mutris, both from Damascus. They were teachers as well as practicing physicians. Barani also mentions Hindu physicians like Man Ghandra and Raja, the surgeon. Avicenna’s al-Qanun was an important text on medicine, as it had been throughout European medical colleges, in the entire sultanate era.

*Works on Medicine :*
Important works on medicine were written under the royal patronage. Muslim writers and practitioners drew upon both the foreign and indigenous sources. The earliest existing work on medicine was Majmu’ah-i-Zia’i written by Zia Muhammad during the reign of Muhammad Tughluq. Important books like the Tibb-i-Firuz Shahi and Rahat-ul-Insan were dedicated to Firuz Tughluq who built many hospitals for the public. In Kashmir, books on medicine entitled Kifayah-i-Mujahidiya and Tashrih-i-Mansuri were composed during the reign of Sultan Zain-ul-Abidin. During the reign of Sikandar Lodhi Tibb-i-Sikandari was written by his wazir, Mian Buhwah who was at liberty to draw on the works of ancient Hindu authors. This book remained the standard text book on medicine in the sub-continent for a long time.

*Food :
*
The Muslim food in Sultanate era was predominantly Central-Asian. It has still endured for centuries in Muslim culture of sub-continent as so many dishes in India and Pakistan are Central-Asian. However, the olive oil was replaced by ghee. Dishes were simpler as compared to those of today. Even Turkish dishes like qormah, mutanjan and pula’u were not so common. A popular dish was sakba comprising various kinds of meats.

*Ceremonies and Festivals :*

Among the ceremonies the most important were those associated with ‘aqiqah, bismillah, circumcision, marriage and funeral. These were Muslim and Central Asian in form. Among the religious ceremonies pilgrimage to the shrines of saints particularly on the occasion of anniversaries called urs was common as it is even today. The two eids have always been great occasions for widespread rejoicing. Shab-i-barat was and is still observed by night vigil and display of fire-works. Besides these religious and social festivals the common people enjoyed witnessing royal cavalcades, coronations, and receptions with momentous rejoicing and marry making.

*Games :*

Among the games and pastimes chaugan (polo), riding, racing, hunting and archery were popular among the Muslim nobility and the upper classes. Indoor games like chess and back gammon were common. There were a class of jesters and buffoons to entertain the elite and the rich.

*Major Achievements :*

The Sultanate era was a unique epoch of Muslim achievements. Firstly, because a small minority which was just the ratio of one to thousands conquered, established control and administered the vast Indian land in a very brief period of time. Secondly, the young Sultanate dynasty successfully checked the Mongol attacks which had ruined older, stable empires from Central Asia to borders of Egypt and Crimea. Thirdly, the efficient system of administration proved to be the foundation for the great Mughal Empire. They built great buildings that motivate our aesthetic sense and inspire our imagination up till now. The era produced great men of letters, poets, musicians, artists, architects and craftsmen that added to the cultural richness of the subcontinent.

The Delhi Sultanate’s greatest contribution to Indian fine arts , however, was the introduction of Islamic architectural features, including true domes and arches , and the integration of Indian and Islamic styles of architecture.
Built by the first sultan of Delhi, the Qutb Minar is the tallest minaret in India, the walls of which are covered with Indian floral motifs and verses from the Quran.
The Alai Darwaza is the main gateway on the southern side of the Quwwat-ul-Islam mosque in the Qutb complex; built in 1311 CE, it features the earliest surviving true dome in India.
There is little architecture remaining from the Sayyid and Lodi periods, but a few fine examples survive in the Lodi Gardens in Delhi, including the tomb of Mohammad Shah, the last sultan of the Sayyid Dynasty , built in 1444.

*Mamluk/Slave Dynasty (1206–1290):*

The concept of equality in Islam and Muslim traditions reached its climax in the history of South Asia when slaves were raised to the status of Sultan. The Slave Dynasty ruled the Sub-continent for about 84 years. Qutb-ud-din Aibak, Shams-ud-din Iltutmush and Ghiyas-ud-din Balban, the three great Sultans of the era, were themselves sold and purchased during their early lives. The Slave Dynasty was the first Muslim dynasty that ruled India.

Muhammad Ghuri had no son so he raised thousands of slaves like his sons. Ghuri had the habit to buy every talented slave he came across. He would then train them in the way royal children were trained. During Ghuri’s regime, slaves occupied all key positions in the government machinery. Three favorite slaves of the Sultan were Qutb-ud-din Aibak, Taj-ud-din Ildiz and Nasir-ud-din Qubachah. He appointed them governors of Delhi, Ghazni and Lahore, respectively. Ghuri never nominated his successor but it was obvious that the successor was to be one of his slaves.

When Ghuri died in 1206, the amirs elected Aibak as the new Sultan. Aibak first shifted his capital from Ghazni to Lahore and then from Lahore to Delhi. Thus he was the first Muslim ruler who ruled South Asia and had his headquarters in the region as well. Aibak could only rule for four years and died in 1210. He was succeeded by his son Aram Shah, who proved to be too incompetent to hold such an important position. The Turk nobles invited Iltutmush, one of the slaves and son-in-law of Aibak, to assume charge of the state affairs. Iltutmush ruled for around 26 years from 1211 to 1236 and was responsible for setting the Sultanate of Delhi on strong footings.

After the death of Iltutmush, a war of succession started between his children. First Rukn-ud-din Firuz sat on the throne for seven months. He was replaced by Razia Sultana. Another son of Iltutmush, Bahram, took over from Razia Sultana in 1239. Next, Masud, son of Rukn-ud-din Firuz, became Sultan from 1242 to 1245. Finally the youngest son of Iltutmush, Nasir-ud-din Mahmud became Sultan in 1245. Though Mahmud ruled India for around 20 years, but throughout his tenure the main power remained in the hands of Balban. On death of Mahmud, Balban directly took over the throne and ruled Delhi. During his rule from 1266 to 1287, Balban consolidated the administrative set up of the empire and completed the work started by Iltutmush.

Prince Muhammad, who was trained as the successor of Balban, was killed in one of the battles against Mongols during his fathers’ lifetime. This created a vacuum for a good successor and it was not possible for the incompetent rulers who followed Balban, to meet the administrative standards set by their predecessor. Balban was succeeded by his seventeen years old grandson, Kaiqubad. Kaiqubad started spending his wealth on pursuits of pleasure. The practical affairs of the government went into the hands of Malik Nizam-ud-din. Nizam-ud-din murdered all the nobles and princes who were against him. Later on, differences arose between Kaiqubad and Nizam-ud-din and Kaiqubad killed Nizam-ud-din. Kaiqubad suffered a stroke and was paralyzed. His nobles replaced him by his three years old son Kaimurs. On June 13, 1290, Firuz, a Khalji Malik and the Ariz-i-Mumalik appointed by Kaiqubad, took over the throne from the infant Sultan and declared his independence with the title of Jalal-ud-din Khalji. With this the rule of the Slave Dynasty came to an end.

The most important institution that developed under the Slave Dynasty was the institution of Chalgan or the Forty. Chalgan were a corps of highly placed and powerful officers, whom Iltutmush had organized as his personal supporters. They were like the cabinet for the Sultan. However, during the days of civil war between the successors of Iltutmush, the Chalgan started looking for their personal gains and played one prince against the other. During this era they became very strong. Each one of them started considering himself as the deputy of the Sultan. When Balban assumed charge as Sultan, he murdered some of them while others were banished from the kingdom. There is no doubt that by crushing their power, Balban strengthened his rule, but actually he destroyed the real power of the slave dynasty.






*Qutbuddin Aibak (1206 – 1210):*

The Early Turkish Empire, which lasted from 1206 to 1290 A.D. popularly known to the students of history as “The Slave Dynasty” and sometimes known as the Pathan or Afghan dynasty. It is generally believed that the dynasty derives its name from Qutbuddin who was originally a slave.

*” No Slave ascended the throne unless he got manumission from his Master “*

Qutbuddin Aibak got a letter of freedom from the nephew and successor of his royal Master.

The early Sultans of Delhi were Turks and not Afghans or Pathans. Qutbuddin Aibak was brought from Turkistan and sold to Qazi Fakharuddin of Nishapur. The author of the Nishat Namah says, ” No slave bought at a price has ever become a king except among the Turks.” The accession of Qutbuddin to the throne of Delhi, has established this fact that Islam makes no distinction between master and servant.

Sultan Muhammad Ghuri had left no male issue and so his empire was divided among his Turkish slaves who were trained up in the art of warfare and administration.

Of all the slaves of Muhammad Ghuri, Qutbuddin Aibak played the most important role in the history of Indo-Pakistan. Qutbuddin was purchased early by Qazi Fakhruddin Kufi of Nishapur who gave him the best education and most efficient training.

Out of Ghuri’s thousands of slaves, Aibak, because of his character and qualities, became one of his master’s favorite. Aibak steadily rose through the ranks and eventually became a General. Like his owner Ghuri, Aibak performed his greatest deeds while still a subordinate. He was responsible for most of the conquests of Northern India and was appointed as Ghuri’s Viceroy to Delhi. When Ghuri died in 1206, the Turkish Amirs and Generals elected Aibak as the new Sultan. It was he who shifted the capital first from Ghazni to Lahore, and then from Lahore to Delhi, and thus is considered as the first Muslim ruler of South Asia.

After the death of his master, Qutb-ud-Din Aibak came to power and celebrated his crown in Lahore with the title of Sultan. Hearing this news, Taj-ud-Din Yalduz, the ruler of Ghazna revolted against him and marched towards Punjab which resulted in the capture of Lahore by Yaldus. Sultan Aibak met Yalduz and forced him to retreat and made Lahore his capital after regaining it. Other generals of Mohammad of Gaur also claimed the throne. Nasir-ud-Din Qabacha stood against Aibak whereas Ali Mardan raised a voice against him in Bengal. Instead of opening war on all the fronts, Aibak adopted a reconciliatory policy to pacify the insurgents. He married the daughter of Yalduz and wedded his own daughter to Shams-ud-Din Altumish and second daughter to Nasir-ud-Din Qabacha. These political “kinships” brought about the message of peace for him from these adversaries.

*





The reign of* *Qutb-ud-Din Aibak :*

Aibak ruled only for four years after the death of his master Shahab-ud-Din Ghauri. But his administrative qualities can be seen in the life of Ghauri who showered his favors on him due to his valor and loyalty. He was declared as prince crown of the empire by the Sultan in 1205 AD when the later was killed on the bank of River Indus. Quwwat-ul-Islam Masjid and Qutab Minar in Delhi (built in the commemoration of Khawaja Bakhtiyar Kaki, a famous Sufi saint of his time and which was completed by his successor), and Adhay Din ka Jhonpra Mosque at Ajmer are the remarkable monuments of Qutb-ud-Din Aibak. Being a man of good taste, he patronized the writers like Fakhruddin, the author of Tarikh-e-Mubarak Shahi and Hasan Nizami, the writer of Taj-ul-Muasir. It is surprising that he had to meet no military power in his reign partly because his tenure was too short and partly due to his reconciliatory policy towards his opponents especially Taj-ud-Din Yalduz who was the strongest rival. Qutb-ud-Din Aibak died in 1210 AD when, playing polo, he fell down from the horse and died of the subsequent wounds. His tomb lies in Anarkali Bazar of Lahore.

*Career of Qutb-ud-din :*

Qutb-ud-din Aibak was born of Turkish parents in Turkistan. He was sold as a slave in his childhood and after passing through few hands was purchased by Sultan Muhammad of Ghur. Very soon he drew the attention of his master by his talent and superb swordsmanship. He was offered with several responsible posts gradually. He was very faithful to his master Muhammad Ghori and was with him throughout his Indian campaigns.

Owing to his meritorious services, he was assigned with the charge of his Indian conquests after the second battle of Tarain in 1192 A.D. It was Qutb-ud-din who consolidated and extended his conquests in India. In 1206 A.D., Qutb-ud-din was formally invested with viceregal powers and promoted to the rank of Malik by Sultan Muhammad of Ghur.

After the death of Muhammad, the people of Lahore invited Qutb-ud-din to ascend the throne. The title of Sultan was conferred upon him later on by Ghiyas-ud-din, the Sultan of Ghur. Of course formal letter of manumission was not granted to him. Though he did not struck coins or read the khutba in his name but remained as the defacto Sultan of his master’s territories in India.

*Qutb-ud-din as a Sultan :*

Qutb-ud-din ascended the throne of Delhi in A.D. 1206 and became the first Turkish Sultan of Delhi. But, the throne of Delhi was not a bed of roses for him. He had to face many challenges from in and outside the country. He could not depend on the loyalty of all his Turkish officers who were jealous of him. The Rajput’s, on the other hand though vanquished in north India were eagerly waiting for a possible opportunity to strike.

Moreover, he had to face strongest opposition from Taj-ud-din Yeldoz and Nasir-ud-din Qubacha, the two more contenders for the throne of Delhi. Yeldoz was the ruler of Ghazni and Qubacha was of Uch and both had matrimonial relations with Qutb-ud-din. Yeldoz was his father-in-law and Qubacha was his brother-in-law as he had married one sister of Qutb-ud-din.

Besides, there were two more contenders also for the throne of Delhi. They were nobles like Baha-ud-din Tughril Khan and Bakhtiyar Khalji but to the good fortune of Qutb-ud-din they were dead by then. According to historians like Professor K.A. Nizami, this was due to the weak position of Qutb-ud-din over the throne of Delhi as Muhammad of Ghur did not decide anything about his succession in India before his death; therefore each of his governors and lieutenants was left free to decide his own course of action.

This may be a fact but as the struggle for supremacy was the order of the time, the question of legal sanction behind the throne of Delhi has nothing to do with that. Besides, there was another great danger for him from outside. Khwarizm Shah Ala-ud-din Muhammad, the ruler of persia had desired to capture Ghazni and Delhi.

*His Achievements :*

In the face of these difficulties, Qutb-ud-din stood with determination. After all he himself was a gifted soldier and a great military leader. He decided to keep himself free from the policies of Central Asia. He had to move with caution. He first strengthened his position in Delhi and Lahore. He tried to persuade some Turkish nobles to accept his subordination. He gave his sister in marriage to Qabacha and his daughter to Iltutmish and secured their support. Yeldoz who was his father-in-law did not accept his claim over Delhi. In the meanwhile an interesting situation arose which went in favour of Qutb-ud-din.

Yeldoz who was the ruler of Ghazni, was pressurized by Khwarizm Shah to leave the throne of Ghazni. Yeldoz had no way out. He left Ghazni and proceeded towards Punjab. Qutb-ud-din faced him and forced him to return back. Qutb-ud-din even occupied Ghazni but was forced to leave it after forty days when Yeldoz reached back there. But he did not allow Yeldoz to occupy any Indian territories further.

Qutb-ud-din had to face some internal problems as well. Ali Mardan Khan, the ruler of Bengal and Bihar was dethroned and imprisoned by some Khalji nobles and they had offered the throne to Muhammad Sheran who had promised to rule Bengal independently. However, Ali Mardan escaped from prison, reached Delhi and requested Qutb-ud-din to interfere in the affairs of Bengal.

Qutb-ud-din accepted his prayer and deputed Qaiwaz Rumi Khan, a noble to settle the matter. Rumi Khan used both force and diplomacy to win over the Khalji nobles of Bengal. He convinced them to accept Ali Mardan as the governor of Bengal under the Suzerainty of Delhi. Thus, finally, Ali Mardan became the governor of Bengal and agreed to pay annual tribute to Qutb-ud-din.

However Qutb-ud-din could not pursue the policy of extension of his kingdom. He remained busy in defending his independent position. The affairs in the north-west and Bengal in the east were his primary concerns. That is why mostly he remained at Lahore instead of Delhi. But he could not live long. While playing polo, he fell from his horse and shortly died in 1210 A.D.





*A modern artist's impression of the accident that caused Aibak's death*

*Estimate of Qutb-ud-din :*

Qutb-ud-din Aibak was the real founder of Turkish rule in India. He was the key man behind Muhammad’s success in India. After the death of Sultan Muhammad, he” consolidated his Indian conquests by adding some more victories to his credit. He established his supremacy over his Turkish nobles by following a policy of war and diplomacy. He succeeded in putting down Yeldoz and Qubacha, the two contenders for the throne of Delhi.

Qutb-ud-din rose to a high position from the life of a slave. He proved to be the most capable slave among the slaves of Sultan Muhammad. He was a self-made man who rose to the status of Sultan by his own merit and services. He possessed the qualities of both head and heart. He had the good qualities of loyality, generosity, courage and sense of justice.

He was a good diplomat and possessed practical wisdom. He saved the infant Turkish kingdom by following a policy of war and diplomacy. He was also a seasoned soldier and a military leader of high ability. As an individual he was both generous and cruel. But he was not a good administrator as he ruled the country as a military jagir which lacked the elements of stability.

He was intolerant in the matters of religion. He had destroyed some Hindu Temples and had constructed mosques out of the materials of the temples. However he had left his tasks unfinished as he died shortly in 1210 and perhaps could not provide stability to his rule. He also could not make Delhi entirely free from the coveted eyes of Yeldoz and other Turkish nobles. These tasks were completed by Iltutmish, his son-in-law and successor. But he had paved the way for the independence of Delhi and had claimed to be the founder of Turkish rule in India.

*Death :*

Aibak could not rule for long and died in 1210 after falling from a horse while playing polo. He is buried near the Anarkali Bazaar in Lahore, where a new tomb was constructed over his grave around 1970.






Though his tenure as a ruler was only four years, and most of them were spend in dealing with the revolts of nobles like Taj-ud-din Ildiz, Nasir-ud-din Qubachah and a few Hindu chiefs, yet he established a firm administrative system. He restored peace and prosperity in the area under him and roads were free from thieves and robbers. He started the construction of Quwaat-al-Islam Mosque at Delhi. He also laid the foundation of the Qutb Minar, which was completed by his successor Iltutmush. Aibak was known as Lakh Baksh because of his generosity. He was also a pious Muslim. Historians have praised his evenhanded justice. He patronized Nizami and Fakh-i-Mudabbir, both of whom dedicated their works to Aibak. His successors, who ruled India till 1290, were also slaves like him and the dynasty is known as the Slave Dynasty.

*Sultan Shamsuddin Iltutmish (1211 – 1236) :*

Sultan Shamsuddin Iltutmish ascended the throne of Delhi in 1211. He belonged to the reowned Ilbari tribe in Turkistan. His intelligence, sagacity and handsome appearance excited the jealousy of his brothers who sold him into slavery in infancy.
Sultan Shamsuddin Iltutmish received his early education and training in the cultured family of the Cheif Justice of Bokhara. Sultan Shamsuddin Iltutmish had helped Sultan Muhammad Ghuri in quelling there billion of the turbulent Khokhar tribe of the punjab and in recognition of his service he was manumitted by his master at the Sultan’s order.
Sultan Shamsuddin Iltutmish found himself confronted with innumerable dangers and difficulties. He had to fight against Tajuddin Yalduz, the ruler of Ghazni, and Nasiruddin Qubacha of Sind, who were asserting their independence.

The hereditary succession of Aram Shah was refused by the Turkish nobility of Delhi, as he was an incompetent and unpopular ruler. Iltutmish was invited from Badaun to assume the leadership of Sultanate. Aram Shah refused to abdicate but was defeated and deposed by Iltutmish in 1211. Iltutmish was the real founder of the Delhi Sultanate. He made Delhi his seat of governance in preference to Lahore and proved to be a strong and capable ruler who enjoyed a long reign of twenty- six years. When Iltutmish ascended the throne, the country was full of rivals and hostile chiefs, and the rebellious nobles and the vanquished Rajas and Ranas were threatening the existence of the Sultanate of Delhi. The situation was better handled by Iltutmish and his foresight energy and military skill, proved himself equal to the situation. He suppressed the rebellious nobles with an iron hand,crushed the power of the rivals like Yildiz and Qabacha and recovered the lost provinces. He secured the Sultanate of Delhi diplomatically from the Mongol invasion by warding off their invasion. He not only saved the empire and rescued his people from danger, but also added the provinces of Malwa and Sind to the dominions of has master. In consideration of his contribution to the growth of Muslim rule in India, Iltutmish may rightly be called the real founder of the Sultanate of Delhi. The contribution of Iltutmish to the monetary system of the Sultanate was very great. It was he who introduced the Silver Tanka and the Copper Jital, the two basic coins of the Sultanate period. Besides, he was a builder as well as a conqueror and an administrator, and left monuments both at Delhi and Ajmer displaying his taste in architecture. Iltutmish was a pious Muslim. However, he was intolerant towards the Shias. His treatment of Hindus was also not enlightened. He continued to persecute them. In short, his reign was thus a perpetual series of efforts towards the expansion of an originally small territory. In 1235, Iltutmish made an attempt to bring the Khokhars under his subjugation, but the Khokhars showed no signs of appeasement.
Sultan Shamsuddin Iltutmish took a strong action against those Qutbi nobles who had revolted against him and refused to recognize his sovereignty. Sultan Shamsuddin Iltutmish was obliged to wage war against Yalduz. Yalduz was defeated in the field of Tarain (1216).
After the overthrow of Yalduz, Sultan Shamsuddin Iltutmish take action against Nasiruddin Qubacha who had occupied Lahore. Nasiruddin Qubacha was repelled from that city by Iltutmish in 1217 and his power was finally crushed in 1228.
Exhausted by continuous warfare, Iltutmish fell sick, returned to Delhi and breathed his last in April, 1236. He was buried in the magnificent tomb which he had got constructed for himself in Delhi.

*



*

*Early Career :*

Iltutmish’s full name was Shams-ud-din Iltutmish and was born in a Turkish family in Central Asia. His family belonged to the Ilbari tribe of the Turks. He was handsome and intelligent and loved by his parents. His brothers being envious had sold him as a slave to a slave merchant named Jamal-ud-din. He took him to Delhi and sold him again to Qutb-uddin-Aibak.

He received training as a soldier and learnt reading and writing as well. Very soon he proved his talent and became a great warrior. It is said that Muhammad of Ghur was much impressed and recommended him to Qutb-uddin-Aibak in these words: Treat Iltutmish well, for he will distinguish himself. His words become true. Under Aibak, Iltutmish rose from position to position and just before his Sultan-ship he was the governor of Badaun. Aibak made him his son-in-law by giving him his daughter in marriage. However with a stroke of good fortune and hard work he became the Sultan of Delhi and ascended the throne in 1211 A.D. after the death of his great master.

*His Early Difficulties :*

Iltutmish ascended the throne of Delhi at a time of crises. The difficulties which his master Aibak had faced were not yet over. Therefore, he did not find the throne a bed of roses. He had to face a number of difficulties at home and from outside. After Aram Shah there were dangerous rivals like Taj-ud-din Yeldoz of Ghazni and Nassiruddin Qubacha of Uch’s upper Sind & Multan.

Yeldoz reasserted his sovereign power over Hindustan and treated Iltutmish as his vassal. Qubacha, the governor of Multan had marched upto Lahore by declaring his independence. Ali Mardan, the governor of Bengal and Bihar had declared his independence immediately after the death of Qutb-uddin.

The Rajput states like Ranthambhor, Jalor, Ajmer, Gwalior and others had stopped paying tributes and also had declared their independence. Thus the Sultanate of Delhi was in a precarious position when Iltutmish ascended the throne. It looked like almost non-existent. But Iltutmish was a man of high courage and determination. He accepted the challenge and faced the problems bravely.

*Defeat of Yeldoz :*

The most formidable enemy of Iltutmish was Taj-ud-din Yeldoz of Ghazni. At first owing to internal problems he did not like to direct conflict with Yeldoz. He admitted him as his-overlord and remained in his book for some time. After Aram Shah issue was over, he made preparations to face Yeldoz. In the mean while Yeldoz was defeated by Khwarizm Shah and fled to India. In India, Yeldoz defeated and drove Qubacha and occupied Lahore and Punjab. According to Ferishta, he succeeded in occupying the Punjab upto Thaneswar.

Iltutmish considering it as the right time attacked Yeldoz and a battle between the two took place in the historic battle field of Tarain in 1215 A.D. Yeldoz was defeated and put to death. With this all connections with Ghazni were cut off and Iltutmish felt more secured. But he did not attack Qubacha and allowed him to rule over Multan. Punjab only came to the occupation of Iltutmish.

*The Mongol Invasion :*

During the reign of Iltutmish, the greatest danger to the country was the possible invasion of Mongols under the leadership of Chengiz Khan. It was in 1221 A.D., Chengiz Khan; the Mongol hero appeared at the border of India by following Jalal-ud-din Mangbarni, the defeated Shah of Khwarizm empire. Mangabarni fled into Punjab, took shelter there by making a matrimonial alliance with the khokhar chief of Punjab. Chengiz Khan on the other hand halted on the bank of the river Indus and observed the activities of Mangabarni. He also sent a message to Iltutmish not to give shelter to Mangabarni.

Mangbarni proceeded towards Lahore and sent an envoy to Iltutmish with an appeal for help and shelter. Iltutmish was a very wise and clever ruler and he knew this would provoke Chengiz Khan and as a result the country would face a great Mongol invasion. So he refused to give any help or shelter to Mangbarni and requested to withdraw from the Punjab.

So he diverted his attention and proceeded towards Multan and inflicted a crushing defeat upon Qubacha. This attitude of Iltutmish perhaps gave satisfaction to Chengiz Khan who withdrew instead of invading India. And due to this wise policy of Iltutmish, not only Delhi was saved from Mongol raids but also Qubacha was punished by Mangbarni.

*Defeat of Qubacha :*

Nasir-ud-din Qubacha was another formidable enemy of Iltutmish. But by the time his power had been reduced due to the reverses. He was severely suffered by the attack of Yeldoz and Mangabarni one after another within a very short period. After the attack of Mangabarni, Qubacha was almost ruined. Iltutmish, thought it the right time to attack and finish Qubacha once for all.

For this purpose, he sent two armies, one from Lahore to attack Multan and the other from Delhi to invade Uch. During the capture of Uch, Qabacha being defeated took shelter in the fort of Bhakkar which was besieged by the Delhi Army. At last finding no way out, he committed suicide by drowning himself in the river Indus. As a result Sind and Multan were annexed to the empire of Delhi Sultanate.

*Suppression of Revolt in Bengal :*

Bengal another distant province in the east was under the authority of Delhi Sultan during the reign of Qutb-ud-din Aibak. But she had declared her independence soon after the death of Aibak. Iltutmish on the other hand was busy in the Frontier provinces in west and had no time to divert his attention to Bengal. But soon after the completion of his work in the west with the death of Qubacha, he thought of invading Bengal.

By then the ruler of Bengal was Sultan Ghiyasud-din. Iltutmish sent an expedition against Bengal and himself followed the same. Sultan Ghiyasuddin submitted without any fighting recognised the suzerainty of Delhi and agreed to pay the annual tribute. But within a very short period of this Glriyasuddin again revolted and declared Bengal independent.

This time Iltutmish by sending an Expedition to Bengal defeated and killed Sultan Ghiyasuddin. He appointed his son Nasir-ud-din Muhmud as the governor of Bengal. After Nasirud-din’s departure there was again another rebellion in Bengal under the leadership of Balka Khalji. This was in 1230 A.D., Iltutmish proceeded to Bengal in person defeated and killed Balkha Khalji and Bengal was annexed to Delhi Empire.

*The Conquest of Rajput Kingdoms :*

After the death of Qutb-ud-din Aibak, the Rajput states had declared their independence. Iltutmish, as he was busy in northwestern frontier had no time to pay his attention to the Revolts of Rajput states. The Rajput Kingdoms such as Ranthambhor, Jalor, Mander Kalinjar, Gwalior, Ajmer, Bayana, Thangir and many other had raised the standard of rebellion and put an end to the Turkish supremacy. Iltutmish dealt with them one after another and re-annexed those states.

*Investiture of Khalifa :*

Iltutmish was the first Sultan of Delhi, who received the Investiture of Khalifa. In 1229 A.D. the Khalifa of Baghdad, A1 Mustansir Billah, bestowed on Iltutmish the titles of “Sultan-i- Azam” or the Sultan the great and “Nasir-amir-al-Mommin” or the Deputy of the leader of faithful. This investiture not only guaranteed his right to the throne but also increased his power and prestige in the Muslim world. As a mark of commemoration of this event, Iltutmish introduced a coin inscribing his name thereon as the representative of Khalifa. This was a great achievement of his life.

*Some other Conquests of Iltutmish :*

Iltutmish is said to have conquered some more kingdoms such as Ajmer, and Gwaliar which were left unconquered during his campaign against Rajput states. Kanauj and Benaras were reoccupied in 1231 A.D. In 1239 A.D. he annexed Malwa and Ujjain to his empire. As a result, Iltutmish made the Turkish empire in India as vast as it was during the time of Aibak.





*Extent of Delhi Sultanate under Iltutmish*

*Administration :*

Iltutmish occupies the most prominent place among the Turk Ilbari sultans. In his 20 years’ rule, he not only pacified the military upraises against him but also expanded his empire from Sindh, Ranthambor, and Malwa to Nirbada. “The Forty” were the forty slaves of Iltutmish who were elevated from slavery to the high-profile ranks in his court. One of these Negro slaves, Jalal-ud-Din was bestowed with extraordinary favors of the Sultan and was promoted to the office of Amir-ul-Umara (chief of the chiefs). Their influential role excited the envy of the provincial governors plotted against them in the days to come. He is accredited for his coinage in silver and copper called Taanka and Jital respectively. He also introduced Iqtadari system which was the division of the empire into small parts to grant salaries of the officials.

*Architecture :*

Qutab minar was finished in the age of Iltutmish. Haud-e-Shamsi, Jamea Masjid Qutabi, and Mehrabi Jali are the notable constructions in his age.

*His Last Days and Death:*

Iltutmish fell ill in 1235 A.D. due to continuous military operations. During his last expedition against Bayana, he was attacked by severe illness and was brought to Delhi immediately for treatment. But he could not recover from such illness and struggling with life for about a year he breathed his last 1236. With his death the country lost a great ruler and also there came to an end the long twenty-five years glorious reign of Delhi Sultanate.






His devoutness and piety have been quoted by the chroniclers who call him a saint. When *Khawaja Qutab-ud-Din Bakhiyar Kaki*, a famous Sufi of his day died, no one was eligible to lead his Namaz-e-Janaza (the funeral prayer) because according to the will of Bakhtiyar Kaki, it should be led only one who had never missed the four “Sunnah of the Asr Prayer” and had never committed Zina (rape) in his life. After waiting sometimes, Shams-ud-Din Iltutmish stepped ahead and led the funeral prayer of the saint. He was succeeded by his sons and the universally famous daughter Razia Sultan in the later years.

*Character and Achievements of Iltutmish :*

*“The history of Muslim sovereignty in India, properly speaking, begins with Iltutmish. It was he who gave the country a capital, an independent state, a monarchical form of government and a governing class. Among his other achievements, beautification of the city of Delhi as well as execution of a better administration in the country were important”*

Iltutmish has occupied a place among the outstanding rulers of Medieval India. From the life of a slave he rose to the status of the Sultan of Delhi by his talent, meritorious services and good luck. When he ascended the throne, the Sultanate of Delhi was almost non-existent as most of the states under the Sultanate had declared their independence and the politics at Delhi had plunged into crises. But as he was a brave soldier and shrewd statesman, he could easily save the Sultanate from the impending dangers.

He destroyed the powers of Yeldoz and Qubacha and made his position safe on the throne of Delhi. He saved the country from a great Mongol invasion by adopting wise policy and not allowing the enemy of Chengiz Khan to take shelter at Delhi. After making his position safe at Delhi, he made a series of campaigns against Rajput States and the ruler of Bengal and Bihar and annexed those kingdoms to the empire of Delhi Sultanate. As a result of his conquests and annexation, the Turkish empire of Delhi became vast and the political unity of the country was achieved.

He decorated the city of Delhi with construction of mosques and the famous Qutub Minar. He also invited scholars, Muslim saints, artists and artisans to Delhi to make the city developed both culturally and industrially. Iltutmish trained a band of good slaves numbering forty and placed them in responsible posts for better and efficient administration. He is said to have introduced new silver and copper currency which were two basic coins of the sultanate period. He was very much religious in his personal life and observed the Islamic rites with a sense of respect and devotion.

His greatest achievement was the grant of Investiture by Khalifa to him. This not only gave a guarantee to his right to throne of Delhi but also made him one of the prestigious men in the Muslim world. However, he was intolerant towards the Hindus. He destroyed some famous Hindu Temples like Mahakala Temple of Ujjain and hurt the religious sentiments of the Hindus. But his deeds for the establishment of Muslim rule in India have made him the founder of Delhi Sultanate.

*Razia Sultana (1236 − 1240) :*

Daughter of Iltutmush, Razia Sultana was the first female Muslim ruler of South Asia. She was a talented, wise, just and generous woman. She was a great administrator and was well versed in governmental affairs. She was not only a good leader in the battlefield but herself was also an excellent fighter. As the most capable son of Iltutmush died during his own life, and the rest were incompetent to govern, Iltutmush nominated his daughter, Razia Sultana, as his successor on the throne of Delhi. Whenever Iltutmush had to leave his capital, he used to leave Razia Sultana in charge of the affairs in Delhi. But when Iltutmush died, Rukn-ud-din Firuz, one of his sons, occupied the throne and ruled for about seven months. Razia Sultana, with the support of the people of Delhi, secured the throne after defeating her brother in 1236.

Razia Sultana established complete law and order in her country. To rule the country, she abandoned her femininity and adopted a masculine getup. She used to dress as a man when appearing in public, be it in court or on the battlefield. She made an Ethiopian slave named Jalal-ud-din Yaqut her personal attendant and started trusting him the most. This challenged the monopoly of power claimed by the Turkish nobles.

The Turkish nobles resented having a woman as their ruler, especially when she started challenging their power. They began conspiring against her. In 1239, the Turkish governor of Lahore rebelled against Razia Sultana. However, when she marched against him, he first fled and then apologized. Then the governor of Bhatinda revolted. When Razia Sultana was trying to suppress the rebellion in Bhatinda, her own Turkish officers deposed her from the throne of Delhi and made her brother Bahram the Sultan. Razia Sultana married the governor of Bhatinda, Malik Altunia, and with his help tried to reoccupy the throne. She was defeated by the Turkish nobles and was compelled to flee away. A peasant who had offered her food and shelter while fleeing from an encounter killed her in her sleep. She died in 1240.

*Detailed History :*

Islam liberated men and women from the shackles of slavery and made them masters of the world. The history of the Mamlukes illustrates this observation. In the 9th and 10th centuries, there was a brisk slave trade down the Volga River, near the Caspian Sea. The Vikings raided Europe with unrelenting ferocity in search of booty and slaves. Eastern Europe, fossilized as it was between local fiefdoms, was a particular target of these raids. Men, women and children were captured in northern and eastern Europe, brought down the Volga River and sold to Muslim and Jewish merchants. Ibn Fadlun gives a graphic picture of the deplorable conditions in the Viking slave ships.

The root word in Arabic for Mamluke is _m-l-k_ (_malaka_, to own). The European slaves were in great demand in Muslim courts because the men made excellent soldiers and the women were sought for their fair skin. Young Mamluke men were trained in special camps as bodyguards, taught the precepts of Islam and inducted into the army. The Spanish court of Cordoba as well as the Fatimid court in Cairo employed Mamluke bodyguards. However, it was with the rise of the Turks that the Mamlukes came into their own. The Turks displaced the Arabs and the Persians from the centers of power in Asia during the 9th and 10th centuries and became kingmakers. As the Mamlukes were inducted into the armies and the Turks dominated the armed forces, the slaves came to be referred to as Mamluke Turks. Some of the slaves were from Turkish tribes (prior to their conversion to Islam) in which case there was both an affinity of blood with their Turkish owners as well as an affinity of profession.

According to the _Shariah_, a Muslim may not hold another Muslim as a slave. Therefore, as the Mamlukes became Muslim, they became free men and women, with full privileges accorded to all believers. In an age when the path to kingship led through the army, the Mamlukes were not only great soldiers but were in close proximity to the center of power. Through their exploits they rose through the court ranks, married the daughters of the sultans and themselves became kings and sultans. Islam had taken them from the slave ships of the Vikings to the luxurious thrones of Asia and Africa. It was from the ranks of these Mamlukes that the 13th century dynasties of India and Egypt emerged.

Razia was the daughter of Altumish, a Mamluke who was a slave of Qutbuddin Aibak, Turkish sultan of Delhi. Altumish demonstrated such extraordinary abilities as a soldier that he was rapidly promoted to be a general officer in the army. Qutbuddin gave his own daughter in marriage to Altumish. After the death of his father-in-law, Altumish ascended the throne of Delhi (1211). He proved himself to be not only a first class soldier but an outstanding statesman as well. When Genghiz Khan descended upon Central Asia (1219), Altumish kept him out of India through consummate diplomacy and a determined military posture. Delhi and Lahore were saved from the ravages of the Mongols. Altumish had three sons and one daughter, Razia. The sons proved to be incompetent, more interested in wine and song than in the affairs of the state. Altumish therefore nominated his daughter to be his successor, against the advice of some of his courtiers and _kadis_. In accordance with her father’s wishes, Razia ascended the throne of Hindustan in the year 1236.

Altumish was an exceptional monarch not only because he rose from being a slave to become the sultan of one of the most powerful dynasties of the age, but because he broke with tradition and nominated his daughter as his heir-apparent in recognition of her merit and ability over his sons who were incompetent. Razia immediately faced a challenge from her brother Ruknuddin who had killed his own brother to intimidate Razia and force her to abdicate. Razia, a consummate politician, went public and in the _Jamia Masjid_ of Delhi, appealed to the general populace for justice. The common folk displayed their intrinsic love of fair play. Ruknuddin was arrested for the murder of his own brother, tried before a _Shariah_ court and executed.

Razia wasted no time in establishing her authority as the sovereign of Hindustan. She ordered coins minted in her name as “Pillar of women, Queen of the times, Sultana Razia, daughter of Shamsuddin Altumish”. The _juma’a khutba_ was read in her name. However, her authority was not legitimate until the Caliph in Baghdad accepted it. Even though he had lost all of his dominions in Asia to the Mongols, the Caliph was still the spiritual and titular head of Sunni Islam and he carried the title of Emir ul Momineen (leader of the believers). Only he could bestow legitimacy upon a sultan. Razia, a Turk and a Sunni, declared her allegiance to the Abbasid Caliph with the following proclamation: “In the time of Imam al Mustansir, Emir ul Momineen, Malika Altumish, daughter of Sultan Altumish, she who increases the glory of Emir ul Momineen”. The Caliph recognized her as the “Malika” of Delhi (1237), in part because he needed a Sunni bulwark to the east of the vast territories now controlled by the Mongols, who were closing in on Baghdad itself.

A great deal of information about Sultana Razia has come down to us through the writings of Ibn Batuta, one of the greatest world travelers, who visited and lived in India (1335-1340) a hundred years after Razia. According to him, Razia rode the horse into battle dressed like a soldier, administered justice, conquered new territories and presided over the affairs of state. But the jealousy of men knows no bounds. To the Turkish generals and noblemen, the ascension of a woman to the throne was a difficult pill to swallow. Razia was young, beautiful and unmarried. Many of the noblemen made marriage proposals to her. She spurned these proposals. Instead, she fell in love with an African slave of the court, Jamaluddin Yaqut, who was the keeper of the royal stables. The rumor mill of Delhi, fanned by the jealousy of spurned and disappointed generals, went to work. Her case was brought before the _kadis_ of Delhi. Accusations were made that she had gotten too close to a man. The _kadis_ruled that Razia had violated the _Shariah_ and should therefore step down, get married and retire behind the veil. They nominated a Turkish general Altuniya as her successor. Undaunted, Razia marched out of Delhi Fort to meet the general in battle. As fate would have it, she was defeated and was taken prisoner. Razia was not only a splendid monarch; she was also a beautiful young woman. The victorious Altuniya fell in love with his prisoner and married her. The two advanced together towards Delhi to recapture the city that was hers as her father’s legacy. Unfortunately, once again, the combined forces of Razia and Altuniya suffered defeat. Razia fled the battlefield. Exhausted and hungry, she took refuge in a farmer’s hut. As she slept, the farmer noticed that his guest, who was dressed like a man, wore a garment embroidered in gold. He killed her in her sleep but was caught by the townspeople as he tried to sell the gold ornaments.

In an obscure lot in the old city of Delhi lies buried this stalwart lady. The alleys to her tomb lead a visitor through decrepit buildings and nauseous open gutters. A simple inscription marks the entrance to her tomb, hidden from the gully. Encroachments have all but consumed the site, blocking the sun from her wistful tomb. Her husband Altuniya lies by her side and the graves of two infants of unknown origin lie near their feet. Such is the fate history has accorded to one of the most celebrated women the world has known.

Ibn Batuta records how the common folks venerated their queen. By the year 1335, when Ibn Batuta visited Delhi, her grave had become a venerated tomb and a place of pilgrimage. A beautiful mausoleum with a dome had been erected on her grave. India was by now a land influenced by Sufi movements and Razia had become a saint. No wonder!

Razia had triumphed in her tragedy. She had changed history. The common man and woman saw in her one of their own who rose from being the daughter of a slave to becoming the first Muslim queen of one of the most powerful empires in the world. She rose like a star and like a meteorite she fell, illuminating the world both in her rise and in her fall. She demonstrated in her brilliance that a woman could be the head of a Muslim state, in spite of the constraints put upon her by tradition and custom. Women throughout the ages would invoke her name in defense of their rights and her name would forever be inscribed indelibly in the lyrics and folklore of the vast subcontinent of India and Pakistan and in the languages of distant lands in all continents.

*



*

*Childhood & Early Life :*

Razia Sultan was born as Raziya al-Din in 1205 in Budaun, India, to Shams-ud-din Iltutmish as his only daughter. She had three brothers. Her father had come to Delhi as a slave working under Qutb-ud-din. He had impressed the ruler with his hard work and valor so much that Qutb-ud-din appointed him as a provincial governor. He went on to play a significant role in the governance and Qutb-ud-din eventually gave him his daughter in marriage.

After Qutb-ud-din's death his son Aram Baksh inherited the throne in 1210. However he proved to be an incompetent ruler and Iltutmish took over the throne with the backing of the Amirs—the Turkish nobility,

Iltutmish was not only a very efficient ruler, but also a very liberal minded person. He saw to it that all of his children, including Razia, received good training in martial arts and administration. He also observed that all of his sons were incompetent and more interested in enjoying the pleasures of life while his daughter was highly skilled and competent. He broke away from Muslim tradition and named Razia as his heir apparent, becoming the first sultan to appoint a woman as his successor.

*The First Female Successor for the Throne :*

Iltutmish arrived at the Delhi sultanate as a Turk slave. He grew to be a great favorite of his master, Qutb Al-Din Aibak, the first Sultan of Delhi and so was married to the sultan’s daughter Qutub Begum becoming an actual part of the ruling family. With Qutb-Al-Din Aibak, he had a son Nasiruddin Mahmud and a daughter Jalalat-Al-Din Raziya. When Raziya was still a child, her grandfather Aibak died and her father became second Sultan of Delhi.

During the final years of his life, Sultan Iltutmish had to make an important decision. Whom would he hand-over the administration of the sultanate? Based on _qabliyat_ (i.e. capability), Iltutmish would have chosen his son Nasiruddin Mahmud, who at that time also ruled as governor of Bengal. Yet, under mysterious circumstance, Nasiruddin Mahmud died and Iltutmish was at a loss. None of his other sons, born from his other wives, were too young to be crowned his successor.

His daughter Raziya had already shown her capability of managing the sultanate. When her father left for business or campaigning affairs, she took charges as a competent regent with the assistance of the Sultan’s trusted minister. She had become a well-educated woman, both in formal education as in the _Qu’ran_. Moreover, she was skilled in martial arts and, thus, an excellent trained warrior, rode both horses and elephants with an exquisite accomplishment and exercised authority with great dignity.

Without consulting the _ulama _(i.e. scholars within the Muslim law), Iltutmish appointed his daughter Jalalat-Al-Din Raziya as his successor, for he saw “the signs of power and bravery” in her. Whenever someone questioned his decision he would reply: “My sons are devoted to the pleasures of the youth, and not one of them is qualified to be king […]. After my death, you will find that there is none more competent to guide the state than my daughter.” As such, Iltutmish became the first Sultan to appoint a woman as his heir apparent.

As a woman, Raziya was not given full support from the noblemen. She only managed to secure her control over the throne by dividing the opposition. After her official accession, many nobles opposed her. Ultimately, she won the majority over and the kingdom slumbered into peace again. She could extend the power of the state widely through the obedience and submission of _maliks _(i.e. kings) and _amirs _(i.e. state leaders).

By building a system of roads, she could easily inform herself of the affairs in the distant parts of the empire. She linked towns up with villages and built small forts as guard posts around these routes. In addition, she established schools, academics, research centers and public libraries where both Islamic tradition manuscripts and Hindu works shared places. Only one of the many examples that showed that Raziya considered the Muslim community and the Hindu community on an equal footing.

Raziya was clearly a devoted leader for her empire and subjects. She listened to her people’s complaints and demands, trying to reserve herself as a guiding hand among them instead of an indifferent ruler. By stating her title to be officially Raziya Sultan, rather than Raziya Sultana, she underlined her rightful credibility as a powerful sovereign leader of the Sultanate of Delhi. As her desire was to keep close relations with her people, Raziya Sultan substituted her female attire with that of a man’s head-dress and tunic, abandoned the veil and rode out on elephant without _purdah _(i.e. covering of the face).

*Accession & Reign :*

Shams-ud-din Iltutmish died on 30 April 1236. Even though Razia was his appointed heir apartment, the Muslim nobility was not in favor of appointing a woman as a sultan. Thus her brother Rukn ud din Firuz was seated on the throne instead.
Rukn ud din Firuz proved to be very incompetent as a ruler. Iltutmish's widow Shah Turkaan ran the government for all practical purposes while the so-called ruler immersed himself in pursuit of pleasures. After just six months, on 9 November 1236, both Ruknuddin and his mother Shah Turkaan were assassinated.
Razia came to power on 10 November 1236 and ascended the throne with the name of Jalâlat ud-Dîn Raziyâ. Upon becoming the sultan, she adopted men’s attire and gave up the veil in a move which shocked the conservative Muslim society.
She quickly began establishing her authority and ordered for coins to be minted in her name as “Pillar of women, Queen of the times, Sultana Razia, daughter of Shamsuddin Altumish”.
She proved to be a good ruler, a just and benevolent sultan who genuinely cared about her subjects. A skilled and brave warrior, she led in battles and conquered new territories and attempted to strengthen her kingdom. She was also a good administrator.
She was also a religiously tolerant sultan who established schools, academies, and public libraries that included the works of ancient philosophers along with the Qur'an. Hindu works in the sciences and literature were also reportedly studied in the institutions.However, her accession to the throne did not go well with the Turkish nobles who were jealous that a woman could become the sultan. They made a plan to revolt against her and hatched a conspiracy. The leader of this conspiracy was Malik Ikhtiar-ud-din Aitigin who had risen from the office of the governor of Badaun.

In accordance with the plan, Malik Ikhtiar-ud-din Altunia the governor of Bhatinda and her childhood friend, first raised a revolt. She courageously commanded an army against him, but was defeated and taken prisoner by Altunia. After Razia’s capture, her brother, Muizuddin Bahram Shah, usurped the throne.

*Major Works :*

Razia Sultana was the first and last female ruler of Delhi Sultanate. A very brave woman, she defied Muslim tradition to ditch the veil and lead her horse into the battlefields. She is also credited to have been a just and generous ruler who genuinely cared about her subjects. Unfortunately her reign did not last long and she fell victim to conspiracies by jealous rivals.

*Personal Life & Legacy :*

As sultan, she showed considerable favoritism towards an Abyssinian slave, Jamaluddin Yaqut. This fuelled rumors that she was in love with him—it has been debated for centuries whether the two were lovers or not. Yaqut was killed in the battle between Razia and Altunia.



After her capture by Altunia, she was incarcerated at Qila Mubarak at Bathinda. Altunia and Razia were childhood friends, and some sources also suggest that they were deeply in love once upon a time. She was treated royally even as a prisoner and eventually the couple got married.



Razia and her husband decided to take back the kingdom from her brother. However they were defeated at the ensuing battle and fled Delhi. While escaping with their lives, they fell into the hands of Jats who robbed and killed them on 13 October 1240.
After Sultana Raziya Iltutmish’ third son *Bahram Shah* ruled Delhi only for two years 1240-1242. He was considered only as de jure ruler, while Naib-e-mamlakat (the regent) was de facto ruler. Bahram Shah lost his life after failed attempt to assert his authority once on the throne.

*Masud Shah *son of Raknuddin but was disposed after Balban and Nasiruddin Mahamud’ Mother, Malika-e-Jehan_,_ conspired against him and established Nasiruddin Mahamud as the new Sultan.

*Sultan Nasiruddin Mahmud (1246-1266) :*

*Sultan Nasiruddin Mahmud (1246-1266)* was an amiable and pious king who led the life of a _Saint. _He was honoured with the title of “_Ulugh Khan_” by the Sultan. Sultan Nasiruddin Mahmud was generous, compassionate. simple and God fearing. Sultan Nasiruddin Mahmud died in 1266 after a reign of 20 years.







Nasiruddin Mahmud was the posthumous child of the eldest son of Iltutmish named Shahzada Nasiruddin. Due to the intense love for eldest son, Iltutmish gave same name to his eldest son to his grandson. Iltutmish wanted the young baby to be considered his son and not grandson for dynastic reasons. So we should not be surprised at the fact he was called the son of Iltutmish all his life. Nasiruddin was a young lad of seventeen at the time of accession to the throne. He had no ambition to become a king but was rushed to the capital disguised as a woman along with his mother and was placed on the throne by the conspirators, who had killed Masud Shah. Balban was one of the patrons of Nasiruddin.

Nasiruddin was an educated and intelligent man of gentle and pious nature. He was devoted to his faith and lived a virtuous life. He had never more than four living wives and no concubines. He kept himself busy with religious activities. He was also a good calligraphist, as a past time, he used to write copies of the Quran which gave currency to the popular belief that he made his living by selling his scripts alone. He adopted an attitude of complete self surrender towards the man in power and played a role of puppet in their hands. Rather it would be more appropriate to say that Nasiruddin was the constitutional Chief Executive of the Turkish oligarchy. That is why he became more acceptable to all the nobles who were left free to settle the matters of state between themselves. As for as the independent status of Nasiruiddin is concerned, Isami tells us that sultan expressed no opinion without their (Shamsi nobles) permission. He did not move his hands or feet except at their orders. He stares clearly that Ulugh Khan (Balban) served the king and controlled all his affairs. The king lived in the palace and Ulugh Khan governed the empire.

asir-ud-din Mahmud’s accession to the throne after Razia’s death and as a matter of fact while she was away from Delhi in connection with checking revolts, the ‘Corps of forty’ had made Bahram Shah, (1240- 1242) the son of Iltutmish as the Sultan of Delhi.
The ‘Corps of Forty’ pressurised the Sultan to work according to their dictates. The Sultan, however, tried to exert himself which cost him his life.

After Bahram Shah, the ‘Corps of Forty’ managed to make Masood Shah (1242-46) the Sultan of Delhi. The Sultan was forced to delegate all his power to the ‘Corps of Forty’. A conspiracy was hatched against the Sultan and he was murdered. After the deposition of Masood, the ‘Corps of Forty’ made Nasir-ud- din the youngest son of Iltutmish, as the Sultan of Delhi. Balban one of the ‘Corps of Forty’ became so powerful that he assumed all the real powers of the Sultan. Nasir-ud-din remained the Sultan in name only.

The new Sultan knew the power of the Turkish nobles and was aware of the fact that his two predecessors who had dared to challenge the authority of the nobles were murdered. Balban was the ‘Naib’ or the Deputy to the Sultan and enjoyed vast powers. He married his daughter to the Sultan.

*An estimate of Nasir-ud-din :*

Some historians hold the view that Nasir-ud-Din was a religious minded man. He had no wordly desires or ambitions. Several anecdotes became popular about him. It is said that he earned his living by copying the ‘Quran’ and selling it.

Again it is stated that his wife prepared his meals. One day, her fingers were burnt and she requested the Sultan to keep a maid-servant. But the Sultan refused to do soon the plea that he was simply a trustee of the state and therefore, could not utilise public money for his personal convenience. It may also be remembered that his wife was the daughter of Balban, his ‘Naib’-holding the most important post.

It is stated by several historians that such claims are exaggerated. According to P. Saran, the Sultan was very much afraid of the Turkish nobles and therefore kept himself aloof from active politics. It is accepted that he possessed the virtues of continence, frugality and practical piety and simplicity but more than that the circumstances had forced him to behave like that. He knew the power of the Turkish nobility.

Therefore, as Prof. K.A. Nizami writes, “The surrender was absolute” the Sultan did nothing which could provoke the displeasure of ‘forty.’ According to historian Islami,” He expressed no opinion without their prior permission; he did not move his hands or feet except at their order. He would never drink nor go to sleep except with their knowledge. “In the words of Thomas, “Mahmud (Nasir-ud-Din) seems, like the sons of Iltutmish to have been but little fitted to dominate over his own turbulent nobles or to coerce imperfectly conquered native, races, nominally subject to his “sway.”

*Ghiyasuddin Balban (1266-86) :*

Ghiyas-ud-din Balban was born in a well-to-do Turk family of the Ilbari tribe. The Mongols captured him when he was a child. They sold him to Khwajah Jamal-ud-din Basri in Baghdad. Later he was brought to Delhi where Iltutmush purchased him. From the beginning he was in the good books of his master and eventually became one of the Chalgan, a group of the forty most important nobles of the court. During the rule of Nasir-ud-din Mahmud, he became the most powerful amongst the Chalgan. While Nasir-ud-din spent most of his time engrossed in religious affairs, Balban was the real ruler. Nasir-ud-din married Balban’s daughter, which made the latter even more powerful. After the death of Nasir-ud-din, Balban became the Sultan in early 1266.

Balban considered himself, the king, as the deputy of God on earth. He believed that the king should be very powerful so as to frighten everyone around him. He organized his court on the pattern of the courts of Irani kings. Nobody could even dare smile in his court. Smartly dressed well-built soldiers armed with unsheathed swords marched along beside him wherever he went. A number of rulers and princes who had taken refuge in his court were supposed to stand obediently in the court. Some ambassadors even used to faint when he entered his court. Balban established the department of intelligence. He spread his spies throughout the country and used them to gather information about all political developments and conspiracies. This helped him in taking action to stop trouble before it started.

As a Sultan, Balban adopted a blood and iron policy. He knew that during the twenty-year rule of Nasir-ud-din, the Chalgan had become very strong. Each one of them started to consider himself as a second to the Sultan. They did not like the growing power of Balban and were jealous of his ascent. After becoming Sultan, Balban decided to crush the power of the Chalgan. He had some murdered while others were banished to far off places.

When Balban ascended the throne, the Mewatis, Jats and Rajputs had become strong and often revolted against the government. The Mewatis lived near Delhi and had become so bold that they used to plunder the people living right outside the four walls of Delhi. When the royal forces were sent against them they took refuge in the jungles. Balban ordered his forces to crush them even if they had to completely destroy the forests.

During Nasir-ud-din’s rule, the Mongols had advanced many times and plundered Lahore. In order to check the Mongol invasion, Balban built new forts and ordered the repair of the old ones between the river Indus and Delhi. He deployed the best of his troops on the northern borders to check the Mongols. His policies paid off, as he managed to stop the Mongol threat from advancing into his territories.

In the last days of Balban, Tughral Baig, the governor of Bengal, revolted against him. Bengal was far away from Delhi and the Sultan was very old. An army sent by Balban was defeated. In spite of his old age, Balban decided to lead an attack against the rebellion leader. He re-conquered Bengal and hanged thousands who took part in the revolt. He appointed his son Bughra Khan as the governor of Bengal and warned him that he would meet the same fate if he ever revolted against him.

The greatest setback for Balban in his entire life was the death of his favorite son, Prince Muhammad, during the war against the Mongols. He realized that without his son, the centralized monarchy that had been built up with such care was bound to dissolve again, as it had at the death of Iltutmush. This realization broke him. He never recovered from the death of Prince Muhammad and died in 1287.

In short Balban put the Muslim rule on firm footings. He completed the task started by Iltutmush. He made the Muslim rule in India so strong that it lasted in one form or the other till 1857.






*Early Career :
*
Balban like his master Iltutmish was born in a Turkish family of Ilbari Tribe. He was kidnapped by the Mongols in his early youth and was sold to a slave trader named Khwaja Jamal-ud- din. He took him to Delhi where he was purchased by Iltutmish. During his stay at Delhi, Iltutmish was very much impressed by the intelligence and ability of Balban and enrolled him as a member of the famous corps of the forty slaves.

During the reign of Raziya Sultana, he was promoted to the post of Amir- i-Shikar (Lord of the Hunt). He was loyal to Raziya in his early days. But later on he joined hands with the nobles who deposed Raziya Sultana from the throne of Delhi successfully. The next Sultan was Bahram Shah who gave him the Jagir of Rewari and Hansi in lieu of his service to him.

He played the role of a kingmaker. As a great warrior, he also successfully repelled a Mongol invasion during the period of Bahram Shah. Similarly he was instrumental in deposing Masud and raising Nasir-ud-din Mahmud to the throne of Delhi. Nasir- ud-din rewarded him by offering the post of principal adviser to the Sultan. He also strengthened his relations with Sultan by his daughter in-marriage to him.

The Sultan being pleased with the loyalty and devotion of Bulban, bestowed on him with the title of Ulugh khan and made him Naib-i-mamlikat or the Deputy Sultan. This was perhaps due to the fact that Nasir-ud-din was weak and incompetent and was relying more on him for the management of state affairs. As a result, the real power gradually passed into the hands of Balban.

His power and popularity grew more and more. He put down a number of internal rebellions and also checked the external aggressions especially of Mongols. The Sultan Nasir-ud-din felt him indispensable. As Nasir-ud-din had no heir to the throne, he had nominated Balban to be his successor. Nasir-ud-din Mahmud died in 1266 and Balban ascended the throne by assuming the title of Ghiyasuddin Balban.

*His Early Difficulties : *

Balban had to face a number of problems after his accession to the throne. The affairs of the state had fallen into confusion as well as the prestige of the crown had sunk low due the misrule of weak and incompetent successors of Iltutmish. The powers of the nobles had increased and the majority of the members of the famous Forty had become disloyal to the throne. They were proud, arrogant and were jealous of Balban. In the words of Barani, “Fear of the governing power which is the basis of all good governments and the source of the glory and splendor of the state, had departed from the hearts of all men, and the country had fallen into a wretched condition.”
The royal treasury was empty and the army was not well-organised. The Mongol invasion was imminent as well as the internal rebellions were raising their heads at regular intervals. Such was the critical stage, when Balban had been given the responsibility to face and fight. However he proved himself to be more than an equal for them.

*Restoration of the Crown’s Prestige :*

Balban had realized that without the restoration of crown’s prestige which had sunk low during the rule of weak successors of Iltutmish, no better and effective government could be possible. He also knew that this could be restored through the policy of absolute despotism. He believed that absolute despotism alone could exact obedience from his subjects and ensure security of the country.

He also knew that in order to be a successful despot one must follow the policy of theory of kingship. The concept of theory of kingship is that the right to rule is given by the God and not by the people and for his actions whether good or bad, the ruler is answerable and accountable to God but not to the people he rules.

Balban at first made out his concept of theory of kingship to his subjects. Secondly he emphasized on external dignity and prestige as essential for kingship. He maintained a great distance from the people and denied to meet the common people. He organised his court on the Iranian model and followed the etiquette and Ceremonials of the Persians very strictly.

Having a long beard on his long face and wearing a very big crown on his head, he sat on the throne with the dignity of the great Sassanid kings. He maintained his dignity by grim and serious looks. He appointed tall and fearsome body-guards who stood round him with their swords drawn and dazzling in the sun.

He ordered for Sijda (prostration) and paibos (feet- kissing) as the normal form of Salutation for the king. He prohibited drinking, jokes, laugh and even smile among the courtiers and officers. He himself also gave up wine and merry-making. He also dismissed all low-born persons from important offices of his administration. Thus Balban by displaying his power, authority and dignity struck terror in the hearts of the people and made them submissive. This was a right step at that time for the restoration of the crown’s prestige.

*Destruction of the Forty :*

The Forty a select body of Turkish nobles was created by Iltutmish for better and effective administration. The members of this body were chosen on the basis of loyalty and meritorious service. But after Iltutmish, the members of the Forty enjoyed unlimited power due to his weak and incompetent successors. They considered the Sultan just a puppet in their hands. Balban clearly knew that in the path of his despotism, the Forty would be a great obstruction.

And without its destruction, he could not achieve his goal. So he planned to bring them under control by destroying their organisation. At first, he promoted the junior Turks to important positions and placed them on par with the Forty. Secondly, he inflicted severe punishments on the members of the Forty for minor offences and reduced their importance in the eyes of the people.

He flogged Malik Baqbaq, the governor of Badaun and a member of the Forty, publicly for beating his servant to death. Haibat Khan, another influential member of the Forty and governor of Awadh, had killed a man while he was drunk with wine. He was flogged with 500 stripes and was handed over to the widow of the deceased whom he paid 20,000 tankas to get himself liberated.

He was so much insulted that he never came out of his home till death. Similarly Amir Khan, governor of Awadh was hanged at the city gate for his failure to curb a rebellion in Bengal. Sher Khan, another influential member of the Forty, excited jealousy of Balban who poisoned him to death. In this way he finished some of his great enemies and others surrendered at his feet for the safety of their life and honour. This was in fact a bold step in the direction of his royal despotism.

*The Spy system :*

Balban organised an efficient system of espionage as an instrument of his despotism. He appointed reporters and news- writers in every department, in every province and district to collect information’s of various happenings in the state. They did it with utmost honesty and secrecy. They were severely punished if they failed in their duties.

The news reporter of Badaun was hanged over the city gate because he failed to report in time regarding the misconduct of Malik Baqbaq. They were highly paid and were independent of the control of the governors and commanders. They were also rewarded for their daring services. With the result, internal rebellions could not take place and even the nobles could not meet for discussions. Balban through this system of espionage could keep effective control over the government and people. Law and order was perfectly established throughout his reign.

*Re-organisation of Army :*

Balban re-organised his army and made it strong and efficient as it was the main pillar of his despotic government. He appointed Imad-ul-Mulk who was a competent vigilant officer, as the Diwan- i-Ariz (minister of war) in charge of the army. The minister in charge of the army was made independent of the financial control of the Wazir and he enjoyed full confidence of the Sultan.

The lands, given in Jagir to the military personnel since the time of Aibak and now enjoyed by their widows, sons and successors were taken back and they were paid pensions in cash. Of course, the young men whose predecessors were in military service were asked to retain their Jagir but they were not allowed to collect revenue. They were also paid in cash but the revenue from their land was collected by the government. But it is said there was a lot of reactions against this order.

However, Balban did not introduce any revolutionary change in the military organisation. But certainly he raised the efficiency and morale of the Army. With the help of a strong and powerful army he could successfully suppress the internal rebellions and external aggressions.

*Suppression of Rebellions :*

During the reign of Balban, Some severe rebellions took place which he put down with a strong hand. The most dangerous rebellious men were the Mewatis, the people of Mewat, who were very often plundering the vicinity of Delhi. As there were jungles around Delhi, it was covenant on their part to plunder and escape.

Balban closed the western gate of the capital and cleared off the jungles around Delhi and built roads to facilitate movement. He sent his army against the Mewatis and massacred them. He constructed four forts around Delhi and garrisoned them with Afghan soldiers. Similarly he crushed the rebellions of the Hindus of the Doab region and their chiefs were cowed down.

The people of Katehar also revolted against him. Balban ordered his soldiers to attack and set fire to their houses and to wipe out their adult male population. Their women and children were made slaves. Barani says, after this incident, the kateharias never raised their heads and the entire region became safe for the travellers.

*Rebellion in Bengal :*

Bengal was a part of the Delhi Sultanate and its governor, Tughril Khan was a slave of Balban. Tughril Khan was very courageous and ambitious and was loyal to the Sultan in the beginning. But in 1279 he declared the independence of Bengal and defied the authority of Balban. Most probably, he was encouraged by the old age of Balban as well as frequent Mongol invasions. But Balban was not the man to leave him so easily. He sent an expedition under Amin-Khan against him. But Amin-Khan was defeated by Tughril. This enraged Balban so much that he ordered Amin-Khan to be hanged publicly.

Balban also sent another army under a military officer named Bahadur. He was also driven back by Tughril Khan. At last Balban proceeded in person against Tughril. When Tughril heard of the approach of Balban, he fled away towards east but was captured and put to death. His followers were also mercilessly put to death. Then he appointed his own son Bughra Khan as the governor of Bengal and returned back to Delhi.

*Mongol Invasion :*

The Mongol invasion was frequent on the border and it was a constant headache to Sultan Balban. In the western border, Lahore was then under the sphere of Mongol influence and Sind and Multan were always exposed to their invasion. Sultan Balban, therefore, adopted a number of measures for the safeguard of the western borders.

He built a line of forts along the frontier and garrisoned them with able-bodied Afghan soldiers, secondly he appointed Sher Khan, a distinguished warrior as the commander of the army at the border. She Khan was successful against the Mongols on a number of occasions. But due to the unfortunate death of Sher Khan in the year 1270, the Mongols started their plundering raids without any fear. Balban appointed experienced Amirs in charge of frontiers, but they failed to check the Mongols.

At last he divided the frontier region into two parts. One part which consisted of Sind, Multan and Lahore was kept under the charge of his eldest son, Prince Muhammad Khan. The second part which consisted of the province of sunam and Samana was given to his second son Bughra Khan.

Prince Muhammad though successfully repelled the Mongol invasion twice in 1279 and 1285, but he himself became a victim of the Mongols in his third encounter with them. Prince Muhammad died fighting in the battle field in the year 1286. This was the greatest shock to Balban. Though he re-occupied Lahore from the Mongols, but he could not recover himself from the shocks of his son’s death. Prince Muhammad was his most favorite son.

*Death of Balban :*

Balban’s health gradually declined after the shock of his son’s death. He was old and was at quite advance stage of his life. Realizing his end he summoned his youngest son Bughra Khan, the governor of Bengal to Delhi. But Bughra apprehending some danger did not turn up. Balban then nominated Kai Khusrav, the son of his eldest son prince Muhammad as his heir. He died in 1287 at the age of eighty.

*Estimate of Balban :*

It can be said undoubtedly that Balban was one of the greatest Sultans of Delhi. He to his credit, guided the destinies of the Sultanate for a long period of forty years, twenty as prime minister and twenty as Sultan. By ascending the throne at a time of confusion and crises, he did everything right and appropriate for the restoration of crown prestige and good governance of the state.

By following the divine right theory of kingship he maintained a great distance from the common people. He set up a magnificent court and displayed his power and authority with kingly dignity. He did everything to strike fear in the heart of the people and officers in the administration. Thus he could restore the status and prestige of the Sultan.

Next he was successful in destroying the power and influence of the corps of forty which was the greatest obstruction in the path of his royal despotism. He even did not mind to inflict severe exemplary punishments to them for their slight offence and mistakes. Further by organizing an efficient espionage system, he was successful in establishing law and order in the country.

He kept the nobles under control and strengthened the Central Government. He was also a good administrator and he had strong sense of justice. Peace, protection and consolidation of the empire were the prime objectives of his administration. According to Dr. Iswari Prasad, “A great warrior; ruler and statesman who saved the infant Muslim state from extinction at a critical time, Balban will ever remain a great figure in medieval Indian history.

It was Balban who saved the country from the frequent Mongol raids. It was he who consolidated the empire by bringing Rajput States to the fold of Sultanate of Delhi and by rendering a good administration. Dr. Iswari Prasad has remarked further that the successful career of conquest of the great Ala-ud-din was possible because of the consolidation work of Balban.

Balban was a great patron of learning and education. He had provided scope and facilities to a large number of learned men migrated from Central Asia. The great Persian poet Amir Khusru and Amir Hosan flourished during his time. His son Prince Muhammad was a learned man and was greatly inspired by those two great poets. Besides he was a very affectionate father. He dearly loved his sons and relations. The shock of his son’s death practically killed him. He was also very much religious and had great respect for the Ulemas.

Nevertheless he had some grave defects in his character. Balban was often harsh and cruel. He did not forgive anybody even for small offence. He did not care for the means for the achievement of his goal. Balban did not live the men of low birth and he had great hatred for Indian Muslims. He always insisted on high birth and appointed the men of Turkish origin in army. For that he could not raise a vast and strong army. However he was one of the greatest Sultans of Delhi Sultanate.

*Death, Legacy and succession :*

Balban died in 1287, after 20 years of rule as a general & Minister and 20 years as a Sultan of Delhi. Balban was the first king who understood the conditions and requirements of being a Sultan of Delhi and fulfilled them practically. He is known as one of the severest kings of India. He introduced Sijda or Zaminbosi and Paibosi practices of the Persian courts in India. People would Kneel down and touch the ground with their head to greet the Sultan {Sijda / Zaminbosi} and kiss the feet of Sultan {Paibosi}.
He forwarded the Iranian Theory of Divine Rights, that Sultan is the representative of God on Earth. He executed the “Corp of Forty” and ended its influence.
To counter the Mongols, he organized his military. For this he made some changes like abolition of the post of the Naik and creating a new department of military affairs known as Diwan-i-arz. The in charge of Diwan-i-arz was Ariz-i-Mumalik. 
He kept Hindus away from army or other authorities. He instructed the Ulemas to confine themselves to the religious affairs only.
Balban had destroyed the powerful group of slaves called “Chihalagani” who were true inheritors of Iltutmish. His hopes for his own succession were focused around his eldest son who died before him. His second son, Bugara Khan, who was governor of Bengal, was offered the throne but Bugara Khan preferred to stay at Bengal. In irritation, Balban left the throne to his deceased son’s son named Kaikubad, a young lad of 17 years as his heir apparent.
After his death in 1287, Kaikubad was “placed” on the throne. Kaikubad, the young chap was carefully brought up under his grandfather. This young man had been taught of all the good things and none of the bad things. All of a sudden, he found himself as master of India and now everything his youth desired was available to him.
The result was that he indulged in so much of drinking and debauchery, that he found himself struck with paralysis.
The Kingdom crippled and a series of murders followed. The heirs designate of Balban, the son of the Martyred Prince Kaikubad, who was declared king at the age of 3 years was killed. There was a war of the races in Delhi, all the Turks, Afghans and Pathans were now to try their sword to decide the fate of India.

*Legacy :*

*Muiz ud din Qaiqabad (1287-1289) *the son of Bughra Khan, to the throne in 1287. Kaiqubad was killed by the Khiliji family, which saw end of Slave dynasty and beginning of Khiliji dynasty at Delhi throne.
The Slave Dynasty Sultans covered a period of 84 years. During this period, eleven Sultans ruled successively in Indo-Pakistan of the Sultans, Qutubuddin, Iltutmish and Balban were the prominent and the most successful.
The authority of the Sultans was established over the United Provinces of Agra and Oudh, Bihar, Gwalior, Sindh and some parts of Rajputana and Central India.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Taimur Khurram

Buddhistforlife said:


> If spreading means forced conversion



That's not physically possible. 



Buddhistforlife said:


> raping women



Never happened on a mass scale, rape is haram. 



Buddhistforlife said:


> killing people of other faiths for non converting to Islam



That's an oversimplification of what took place.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Pakistansdefender

Pan-Islamic-Pakistan said:


> As a Punjabi myself from Faisalabad, I feel I have the right to say that our culture is more Persian and Turkish than Indian.
> 
> We share some things in common with Sikh Indians, but our commonality is even stronger with other neighboring linguistic groups like Kashmiris, Paharis, Seraikis, Hindkowans, and Pukhtoons.
> 
> I am continually shocked to discover the similarities with Turks and Iran which we have shared for thousands of years, even before Islam.
> 
> I don’t understand your agenda to make us something which we are not.
> 
> My grandparents all were fluent in Dari and spoke it amongst each other. All were big on Farsi shairi.
> 
> Our culture was heavily Persianized before the British came, as that was the state language of the Mughal empire.
> 
> 
> 
> Some of my best friends in Med school were Albanians.
> 
> They share a lot of culture with us, but much of the Islamic part had been wiped out by Communism and their national hero Skanderberg was a kaffir and traitor to Ottomans.
> 
> I would identify them as thoroughly Persian-Turkish Islamic in culture, although they are basically a different racial group.
> 
> 
> 
> You are on the right track here.
> 
> 
> 
> Haven’t seen you for a while.
> 
> Welcome back brother. Ramazan Mubarak.


Lol good for you then. 
A faisalabad and turk or Persian .... 
Lol . 
What would I call you ethnicity from now on? Persian and what language do you speak? Farsi ..... 
Great turk sahab...
You took you parents too seriously when they say 'that you can be anybody when you grow up' . And you become a Persian..



Pakistansdefender said:


> Lol good for you then.
> A faisalabad and turk or Persian ....
> Lol .
> What would I call you ethnicity from now on? Persian and what language do you speak? Farsi .....
> Great turk sahab...
> You took you parents too seriously when they say 'that you can be anybody when you grow up' . And you become a Persian..


Even I am amazed to find so much similarity with Turks even more then Persian. 
The family culture, joint family system and so many loan words incorporated into urdu. 
Yes the similarities are endless . 
But so did the similarities exists between every Muslim nation..


----------



## Taimur Khurram

Pakistansdefender said:


> Indian kin...



Most Pakistanis will not:

1. Drink from the same cup as a Hindu.
2. Marry a Hindu.
3. Befriend a Hindu.
4. Eat meat slaughtered by a Hindu.
5. Follow their beliefs and customs or respect them. 

Rightly or wrongly, these are the facts. For you to say "WE IZ KIN" is just laughable, and genetic evidence doesn't agree with you.








Pakistansdefender said:


> There is nothing wrong with being Hindu ancesstors



There is nothing wrong with HAVING Hindu ancestors, but taking pride in your ancestors that were active disbelievers is simply un-Islamic.



Pakistansdefender said:


> A faisalabad and turk or Persian ....



He never said that, you're skewing his words.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Pakistansdefender

Pan-Islamic-Pakistan said:


> Our culture *was* heavily Persianized before the British came, as that was the state language of the Mughal empire.


As you yourself said our culture was persianized but is not anymore unless the balochi culture which is too very much a different culture on its own..
Yiu are confusing Islamic culture with Persian culture. 
Yes official language of the court was Persian till the very end But the Muslims of sub continent has developed this beautiful language called urdu, which is so sweet that even Hindus can't resist it..
After British came urdu is the official language of India and written in Arabic script. 
But can a pakistani even speak pure urdu now.... 
I was saying the same thing with a different angel which you people are not understanding or don't want to understand..
You are Muslim so you have a generalised Muslim culture..
Then You are a punjabi and have a generalised punjabi culture...
Then you are a pakistani and there you are very conflicted about your culture . Pakistan is a union of different cultures..
Personally if you make me incharge of cultural ministry I would try to influfence people more to adopt western Pakistani cultures. Because they are unique and not like Indian.
But on the same hand we must embrace all our cultures and our histroy and our Kings which are not Muslims all the time. 
For example if pyramids are in Pakistan the. You would have destroyed them by now and denied them as our ancesstors..
While a common Egyptian accept those people as their ancesstors and it didn't harm their Muslimness. 
Simply the Persians which you are so much in love with also accept their zoorsostrian or other ancesstors..
We must also accept our past and culture and glorify it as much as we glorify our Muslim past...
We are yet a very new nation..
It would take us million of years to each to a point where we have generalised culture..
We are in the process of evoultion in which we would try to create a culture that is only Pakistani.

Same problem exist with Indian or any other nation that are unions.
Other nations have one or two ethnicities.
Both of our nations have thousands of ethnicity.. A single Pakistani punjab province contains Atleast 4 different ethnicities. And least popular province balochistan too have Atleast 4 different ethnicities.. And don't even go to Sindh or gilgit baltistan and the amount of ethnicities you find there.


----------



## Taimur Khurram

Pakistansdefender said:


> As you yourself said our culture was persianized but is not anymore



It still is. We write using a Perso-Arabic script, and much of our vocabulary is Persian in origin. 



Pakistansdefender said:


> For example if pyramids are in Pakistan the. You would have destroyed them by now



Because they are Mushrik tombs and must be flattened, there is an Islamic consensus on this. 



Pakistansdefender said:


> While a common Egyptian accept those people as their ancesstors and it didn't harm their Muslimness



That's rather silly since the Egyptian identity is an Arab one. Arabs came and conquered the region, suppressing the original culture and replacing it with that of the Arabs. Therefore, it doesn't make sense for an Egyptian to identify with the Ancient Egyptians when they are culturally aligned with the Arabs who invaded the region. Not only that, but Islam despises the Ancient Egyptians. 

Likewise, Pakistan shouldn't identify with it's pre-Islamic past. We are Muslims, we write in a Perso-Arabic script, we eat Mughlai cuisine, our vocabulary contains many Farsi and Arabic loanwords, we pray in Arabic, our women wear hijabs/niqabs, we sacrifice cows, the most prestigious lineages in Pakistan are considered those of the Ashraf, not the Brahmin, and most importantly, our country exists because of Islam. Our national identity starts with the first moment Islam came to the region as a dominant political force under the Ummayad Khilafah. 

We can recognise our pre-Islamic ancestors for what they may have achieved, but we should not "identify" with them since we have far more in common with the Muslims who invaded the region than the locals who defended it. And it's not like we're all 100% native either, a lot of Muslims from the region do have some foreign blood in us. 



Pakistansdefender said:


> Both of our nations have thousands of ethnicity



Hence why an ethnic identity will not work, it must instead be based on a common ideology.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Talwar e Pakistan

Axomiya_lora said:


> May be a few northern and north-western states claim so, it would be an insult to us in NE India if someone were to compare us to you. We have better chance of people calling us Chinese than Pakistanis. Not for nothing our ancestors successfully warded off every invasion from your ilk.


I'm sorry but no one from Pakistan would like to associate with 4 feet Burmese of North East India who are rejected by their own countrymen.



nick_indian said:


> however, the land and people of Pakistan to the East of River Indus have a lot of similarities with North Indians.


With North West India (which makes up around 6% of India's population), not North India in general.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Pan-Islamic-Pakistan

Pakistansdefender said:


> Lol good for you then.
> A faisalabad and turk or Persian ....
> Lol .
> What would I call you ethnicity from now on? Persian and what language do you speak? Farsi .....
> Great turk sahab...
> You took you parents too seriously when they say 'that you can be anybody when you grow up' . And you become a Persian..



You are not fit to reply to. I am not sharing any more personal information with you so you can insult me.

Sharam karo.

As far as I am concerned, Pakistan is fine as it is. Imran Khan is doing good work to promote our Islamic past.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## masterchief_mirza

Brilliant history lesson. Thanks OP.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## crankthatskunk

Pakistansdefender said:


> First remove the bastard Afghans kings from the list.
> Stop fancing about them..
> Also accept non Muslim Kings and rulers as your own who ruled your land such as maharaja ranjeet Singh, porus etc..
> Even Iranians accepts xerxesas their king.
> Also accept all the Buddhist Kings or Hindu kings too.
> Budha was born here in Pakistan and even his bones are here...
> Accept your non Muslim heritage that would not make you a less of a Muslim...



Stop bad mouthing my ancestors idiot. 
You seems to fancy the non-Muslim rulers with pride while bad mouthing those who defeated your "rulers".

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## S.Y.A

Buddhistforlife said:


> If spreading means forced conversion, raping women, killing people of other faiths for non converting to Islam then yes Aurangzeb and Ghaznavi were champions in spreading Islam.


Indeed they were, otherwise we would all still be drinking cow urine.



Buddhistforlife said:


> The best Muslim rulers of this subcontinent were Mughal emperor Akbar and Humayun, Sher Shah Suri, Tipu Sultan, Nawabs of Bengal mainly Sirajud daulah, and sultans of Bengal sultanate.
> 
> The worst and ruthless ones were Mughal emperor Aurangzeb and Shahjahan, Ahmed Shah Abdali, Alauddin Khilji, Mehmood Ghaznavi, Bakhtiyar Khilji, Ummayud Caliphs particularly Muhammad bin Qasim, Mamluk slave dynasties.



Akbar wasnt a Muslim.

Aurangzeb, Alauddin, Abdali, Muhammad bin Qasim etc. were heroes. 

Apart from Sher Shah Suri and Tipu Sultan all in your list were incompetent idiots.

Myths about Aurangzeb



Pakistansdefender said:


> So if you want to make monuments why not make a monument to remember porus that only king successful enough to stop alaxander.


LOL, wasnt he defeated? his forces were tired out by Alexander's fake marches along the river, and then Alexander finally landed on other bank and defeated him.



AUz said:


> For the "buddhist and hindu kings"-----they can go f*ck themselves. Don't care about them one bit (just like 99.9999% of Pakistanis).


You should for they are eventually the ancestors, they should be recognized, but one should not take pride in them.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Buddhistforlife

S.Y.A said:


> Indeed they were, otherwise we would all still be drinking cow urine.
> 
> 
> 
> Akbar wasnt a Muslim.
> 
> Aurangzeb, Alauddin, Abdali, Muhammad bin Qasim etc. were heroes.
> 
> Apart from Sher Shah Suri and Tipu Sultan all in your list were incompetent idiots.
> 
> Myths about Aurangzeb
> 
> 
> LOL, wasnt he defeated? his forces were tired out by Alexander's fake marches along the river, and then Alexander finally landed on other bank and defeated him.
> 
> 
> You should for they are eventually the ancestors, they should be recognized, but one should not take pride in them.


Yeah keep on justifying genocide, rape and mass murder and cry foul when you are being called a terrorist.


----------



## Taimur Khurram

crankthatskunk said:


> You seems to fancy the non-Muslim rulers with pride while bad mouthing those who defeated your "rulers".



Because he's an ethno-centrist.


----------



## S.Y.A

Buddhistforlife said:


> Yeah keep on justifying genocide, rape and mass murder and cry foul when you are being called a terrorist.


That is what your buddhist brethren are doing in burna and sri lanka. I think you may be a by product of these rulers, maybe that is why you hate them so much.


----------



## Pan-Islamic-Pakistan

S.Y.A said:


> That is what your buddhist brethren are doing in burna and sri lanka. I think you may be a by product of these rulers, maybe that is why you hate them so much.



Just report and don’t reply.

They are starved for attention.


----------



## Buddhistforlife

Pan-Islamic-Pakistan said:


> Just report and don’t reply.
> 
> They are starved for attention.


Why report? This dude started the fuss. I just replied. If you can't handle replies in controversial topics then you shouldnt be in this forum as this forum ain't a place where you will write and others will listen.


----------



## dexter

*Khalji Dynasty (1290–1320) :*

Jalal-ud-din Khilji overthrew Balban’s successors and founded the Khilji Dynasty, which ruled large parts of South Asia between 1290 and 1320. That was the second dynasty to rule the Delhi Sultanate of India. “The Khilji dynasty was named after a village in Afghanistan. Some historians believe that they wereAfghans, but Bharani and Wolse Haig explain in their accounts that the rulers from this dynasty who came to India, though they had temporarily settled in Afghanistan, were originally Turkic”.The Khiljis were a Central Asian Turkic dynasty but having been long domiciled in Afghanistan, and adopted some Afghan habits and customs. They were treated as Afghans in Delhi Court”. The three sultans of the Khalji dynasty were noted by historians for their faithlessness and ferocity. To some extent, the Khilji usurpation was a move toward the recognition of a shifting balance of power attributable to the developments outside the territory of the Delhi Sultanate (in Central Asia and Iran) and to the changes which followed the establishment of Turkic rule in northern India. The court languages of the Khiljis were Persian, followed by Arabic, their native Turkoman language and some northern-Indian dialects. Although it was not their native language, the Khilji sultans encouraged the use of Persian. This co-existence of different languages gave birth to an early form of Urdu. According to Ibn Batuta, the Khiljis encouraged conversion to Islam by making it customary to have the convert presented to the sultan (who would place a robe on him and reward him with gold bracelets). During Ikhtiyar Uddin Bakhtiyar Khilji’s control of Bengal, Muslim missionaries in India achieved their greatest success in the number of converts to Islam.







The founder of the Khalji Dynasty in South Asia, Malik Firuz, was originally the Ariz-i-Mumalik appointed by Kaiqubad during the days of decline of the Slave Dynasty. He took advantage of the political vacuum that was created due to the incompetence of the successors of Balban. To occupy the throne, he only had to remove the infant Sultan Kaimurs. On June 13 1290, Malik Firuz ascended the throne of Delhi as Jalal-ud-din Firuz Shah. Khaljis were basically Central Asians but had lived in Afghanistan for so long that they had become different from the Turks in terms of customs and manners. Thus the coming of Khaljis to power was more than a dynastic change. As majority of the Muslim population of Delhi was Turk, the arrival of a Khalji ruler was not much welcomed. Yet Jalal-ud-din managed to win the hearts of the people through his mildness and generosity. He retained most of the officers holding key positions in the Slave Dynasty. His own nephew and son-in-law Alauddin Khalji, killed Jalal-ud-din and took over as the new ruler. From 1296 AD to 1316 AD Alauddin Khilji dominated the Delhi sultanate with many courageous achievements. Soon after becoming the Sultan of Delhi Alauddin Khilji in 1297 AD went out to win over the various parts of Gujarat state Ala- ud-din also was able to implement startling economic reforms, although their effects were probably restricted to Delhi and the 100 mile radius around it. Nevertheless this was truly creditable for he achieved what modern governments in India have not completely achieved. Ala-ud-din re-organized the market so that there were fixed prices which were affordable, he developed warehousing facilities to ensure ready stock of goods, the government entered the business of transportation and provided facilities for the swift movement of goods. Alauddin’s reign is marked by innovative administrative and revenue reforms, market control regulations and a whirlwind period of conquests. It is considered the golden period of the Khalji rule. However, before the death of Alauddin, his house was divided into two camps. This resulted in the ultimate collapse of the Khalji dynasty. He died on January 1316 due to an acute health condition.

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 and this ended the Khilji dynasty in India.






*Summary on the Khilji Dynasty of Delhi Sultanate :*

The Khiljis served under the Ilbari dynasty of Delhi. Malik Firuz was the founder of the Khilji Dynasty who was originally the Ariz-I-Mumalik appointed by Kaiqubad during the days of the decline of the Ilbari Dynasty. He took advantage of the political vacuum and ascended the throne of Delhi as Jalal-ud-din Firuz Khilji.

The Khilji Dynasty was the second dynasty of Delhi Sultanate who came from Central Asia. In course of time they adopted the Khura Sanian's urbane culture and certain Afghan custom and social traditions from Ghaznavids. Therefore, the court of Khiljis was of multi-ethnical background with people of Persian, Indian, Arab and Turkish origin. This marked an end to the monopolization of power and racial dictatorship by Ilbari Turks and also led to the widening of the social base of the ruling class. Here, we are giving a complete detailed summary on the Khilji Dynasty of Delhi Sultanate.

*Jalal-ud-din Firuz Khilji (AD 1290-96) :
*
Malik Feroz, the founder of Khalji dynasty, ascended the throne on 3rd June, 1290 as Jalaluddin Firoz Shah. The Khaljis were Central Asian in origin but had lived in Afghanistan so long that they had become different from the Turks in their customs and manners. The Muslim population of Delhi was overwhelmingly Turkish and did not react favorably to the change. So Firoz enthroned himself at Kaikubad and preferred to stay there for some time. Soon, the mildness and generosity of Firoz removed all popular prejudice against him, and he formally entered the city and took residence in the old palace. He came to power after the overthrow of the so- called Slave Dynasty. As regards an estimate of Jalaluddin, he was successful general before becoming the king but gave up the policy of aggression after becoming the Sultan. He followed the policy of peace and reconciliation towards all. He was very modest. It is stated that he did not ride in the courtyard of the palace of Balban and also refused to sit upon it on the ground that he used to stand before it as a servant. When he ascended the throne, he adopted the policy of appeasement by retaining some of the leading officers of the past, Alauddin Kishlu Khan famous as Malik Chajju, a nephew of Balban and a sole survival of old dynasty, was permitted to retain his governorship of Karah- Manikpur. A couple of months after his accession Malik Chajju pressed his claim to the throne and assumed royal title at Karah. He started for Delhi with a large army but was stopped near Badaun and defeated. So his revolt not be successful.

His policy to deal with the thieves and thugs was not based on the harsh and severe punishments. It is stated that once a number of thieves were arrested and brought before the Sultan. Instead of punishing them, he gave a lecture on the evils of stealing. On another accession thousands of thugs and murderers were captured. Instead of punishing them the Sultan sent them to Bengal in boats down the Gangas and there they were set free. Firoz was more successful in his a campaign against the Mongols. In 1992, a vast horde of Mongols under Abdullah was overpowered and they withdrew. Ulghu, a descendant of Chengiz Khan decided to stay back. He accepted Islam with 4000 of his followers and the Sultan gave his daughter in marriage. According to Dr.K. Lal, “Firoz was failure as a king, a perfect gentleman and one of the most pious Muslims of his time”. The death of Firoz was the exceptional case in history. A plot was hatched by his nephew Alauddin, to kill him in order to occupy the throne, to which he had not a shadow of claim either by divine or by human law. When Sultan met his nephew and son- in- law with few unarmed attendants, Sultan embraced his nephew, on the signal of Alauddin, Sultan was given two swords- blow. Later, the head of Sultan was cut from his body and the other followers of Sultan were also put to death.






1. He came to the throne at the age of seventy and ruled for six years, but did not dare to sit on the throne of Balban whom he had served earlier. He made Kilokhari as his capital.

2. He adopted a conciliatory policy towards the nobles of earlier regime and even the Mongols. So, he appointed *Malik Chajju* who was a Balban's nephew, as the Governor of Kara, but he rebelled later.

3. One of the most important events of his reign was the invasion of Devagiri, the capital of the Yadava king, Raja Ramachandradeva, in the Deccan, by Ali Gurshasp, the nephew and son-in-law of the sultan, and the Governor of Kara.

4. After his successful campaign, Ali Gurshasp invited the Sultan to Kara to receive the enormous wealth. Jalaluddin came to Kara in July 1296, where he was murdered by Ali Gurshasp, who proclaimed himself the Sultan with the title of Alauddin.

*Alauddin Khilji (AD 1296-1316) :*

Alauddin Khalji was the nephew and son- in- law of Jalaluddin Khalji. After the downfall of the Malik Chajju and after being appointed the governor of Karah near Allahabad, he won over the confidence of the Sultan by handing over a large amount of booty to him which he had collected in the expedition of Malwa in 1292. He had won great reputation as a soldier. In 1296, after a treacherous murder of his uncle Jalaluddin Firoz Khalji, he proceeded to Delhi to acquire the throne. There, the widow of Firoz had set up one of her sons Qadir Khan on the throne. But Alauddin was very clever for her. He won over a large number of ministers and nobles to his side with the help of gold and money. So he silenced all murmurs of disapproval and discontent by stopping the mouths of people with gold. The army was also won over by lavish distribution of wealth and presents. The cruel measures he adopted to secure his ill- gotten throne showed clearly that Alauddin was a heartless tyrant. He had no regard for justice. But in spite of his vices it must be said that he was brave soldier and a vigorous ruler.

Alauddin was not only a great military leader but a great administrator. He crushed the power of nobility to bring about peace in the country. He confiscated their excess amount of money and property and put a ban on their social gatherings and prohibited them to use wine. He did not allow the Ulemas to interfere in the political affairs of the State. He is also credited to have introduced various reforms on the land revenue and military departments. His control of the markets is regarded as one of the marvels of medieval statesmanship. There prevailed complete peace and tranquility during his reign. Alauddin was a great patron of learning. Amir Khusrau was patronized by him.

He largely extended the frontiers of the Muslim dominions in India and effectively checked the Mongols in roads. Alauddin was a great military general. He dreamt to become another Alexander. Sultan maintained a strong army and punished the Mongols so terribly that they dared not to attack India again. He conquered most of Hindu states in the North and over- ran whole of the South. All his military exploits were crowned with success. Alauddin treatment of Hindus was very severe. They were forced to pay land revenue at a higher rate. They were also required to pay several unjustified taxes. They were taxed so heavily that no Hindu could afford to ride a horse or wear fine clothes and carry arms. Besides, for administrative success, he kept a strict eye on the movements of his officials and people. So for this purpose he organized an efficient spy system. They were kept at the provincial headquarters, in markets and in all the units of the army. This system kept the nobles in terror and Sultan remained well- informed about the all good and bad things. Although, Alauddin was quite illiterate but he had great administrative and organizing qualities. He laid the foundation of highly organized administrative machinery through his reforms.







He was the greatest ruler of the Khilji Dynasty and was the first Muslim ruler to extend his empire right up to the extreme South of India. He lavishly distributed money and gold among his people, noble and ministers so that they might forget the murder of Jalal-ud-din and support him.
He was the first ruler of Delhi Sultanate who did not ask for *manshur* (letter of investiture) from the Caliph but called himself the deputy of the Caliph.
He concentrated all power of the state in his own hands; therefore, the period marked the zenith of despotic government as well.
Alauddin Khilji is said to have been poisoned by *Malik Kafur*. He died in January 1316.
*
Mongol Expansion into South Asia : *

He also defended this region from the ravaging Mongols who controlled most of Asia back then. Mongols were utterly ruthless, divided into different tribes and attacked countries from multiple places. They were known for their brutality. Khilji kept India, its culture and its people safe from the Mongols.






*Early Mongol attacks :*

Ala-ud-din had to face Mongol attack from the time he assumed the power of the Sultanate. From the year 1296 A.D. to 1308 A.D. every year Mongals invaded Delhi. The Mongols attacked Delhi repeatedly. The existence of Sultan Shahi became endangered. But Alauddin checked allthe attacks with courage and determination. At the same time, he made the security of the northwestfrontier strong and firm.

*Mongol Policy of Alauddin :*


During the early years of the reign of Alauddin, the Mongols invaded the sultanate several times and even plundered Delhi and adjoining districts, but they were always defeated.
He adopted "*blood and iron*" policy of Balban in tackling the Mongol menace. So, he built a protecting wall around Delhi and repaired the old forts on the route of Mongols.
Strong military consignments were posted at Samana and Dipalpur.
Increased the numerical strength of an army. Appointed to his trusted commanders, including Ghazi Malik (later Sultan Ghiyassudin Tughluq), as warden of the North Western marches.

*Defeat of Mongols at Battle of Amroha :
*
The Battle of Amroha was fought on 20 December 1305 between the armies of the Delhi Sultanate of India and the Mongol Chagatai Khanate of Central Asia. The Delhi force led by Malik Nayak defeated the Mongol army led by Ali Beg and Tartaq near Amroha in present-day Uttar Pradesh.

*Background :
*
India’s North-West border was attacked by the Mongols many times from the past years. They had already suffered two defeats against armies serving the Sultan 'Ala ud-Din, at Jalandhar in 1298 and Kili in 1299. Sultan Alauddin Khalji, had been working on fortification of his northern borders in an effort to strengthen his defenses. He had fortified his forts that lied along the borders and equipped with larger garrisons. Khalji had heavily armed the forts and trained the army specializing to handle the attacks, under the command of an special governor, whose mission was managing and guarding the border areas. Despite such massive preparations, the Mongols lead by Ali Beg and Tartaq arrived from Punjab and marched towards Amroha in 1305. The Mongols had traveled advancing south-east, following the Himalayas and plundering all in their way until they reached Amroha.
'Ala ud-din responded immediately by sending an army commanded by Malik Kafur Hazardinarai (one of his personal slaves) and Malik Ghiyas-ud-Din Tughlug (a future sultan) to engage the invaders (Mangols).

*Battle :*

Alauddin sent a 30,000-strong cavalry led by Malik Nayak to defeat the Mongols. Malik Nayak's subordinate commanders included Bahram Aibah, Tughluq, Mahmud Sartiah, Qarmshi, Qutta, Takli, and Tulak. This army faced the Mongols somewhere in present-day Amroha district on 20 December 1305.

The Mongols launched one or two weak attacks on the Delhi army. In words of the Delhi chronicler Amir Khusrau, they were "like an army of mosquitoes which tries to move against a strong wind". The Delhi army inflicted a crushing defeat upon the invaders. According to another Delhi chronicler Ziauddin Barani, Alauddin captured 20,000 horses belonging to dead Mongols after the battle was won.

The Delhi force surprised the Mongols, who were on their way back to Central Asia with their plunder and inflicted a heavy defeat on them. The Mongol generals, Ali Beg and Tartaq, were captured along with 8,000 of their men, brought back to Siri Fort in Delhi.

*Aftermath :*

Alauddin organized a grand _durbar_ (court) in Delhi to receive Malik Nayak and his victorious army. Alauddin was seated on a throne at _Chautra-i Subhani_, and the Delhi army stood in double row, forming a long queue. According to Barani, a huge crowd gathered to see this event, leading to exorbitant increase in the price of a cup of water.

The Mongol commanders Ali Beg and Tartaq, who had surrendered, were presented before Alauddin with other Mongol prisoners. According to Amir Khusrau, Alauddin ordered some of the captives to be killed, and others to be imprisoned. However, Barani states that Alauddin ordered all captives to be killed by having them trampled under elephants' feet. The number of these captives was around 9,000. The 16th century historian Firishta claims that the heads of 8,000 Mongols were used to build the Siri Fort commissioned by Alauddin.

Amir Khusrau and another chronicler Isami state that Alauddin spared the lives of Ali Beg and Tartaq (probably because of their high ranks). According to Amir Khusrau, one of these commanders died "without any harm being done to him", and the other was "left alone". He ambiguously adds that Alauddin "was so successful in sport that he took their lives in one game after another". According to Isami, Alauddin made the two Mongol commanders _Amirs_ (officials with high status), and also gave each of them an India-born slave girl. Two months later, Tartaq started demanding answers about the fate of his army and his belongings, in a state of drunken stupor. As a result, Alauddin ordered him to be killed. Sometime later, Ali Beg was also killed because of "the evil in his heart".

Historian Peter Jackson speculates that Ali Beg and Tartaq might have been killed when a large number of Mongols in Delhi rebelled against Alauddin, prompting the Sultan to order a massacre of all the Mongols in his empire.

*Reforms and Experiments :*

The reforms of Alauddin aimed at improving the administration, strengthening the army, and gearing up the machinery of land revenue administration, expand and improve the cultivation and welfare of the people.

*Administrative measures for prevention of rebellions :*


The sale and use of liquor and intoxicants was prohibited in Delhi and neighbouring areas. Sultan himself gave up drinking.
He forbade parties and marriage relations among the nobles without his permission.
He confiscated many jagirs and estates and stopped all pensions and allowances. All religious endowments and grants of lands (waqf and inam) by the state were revoked.
He established a network of spices all over his kingdom.

*Revenue/Agrarian Reforms :*

Zabita regulation Biswa declared as the standard unit of measurement of cultivable land.
Land revenue (Kharaj) was fixed at half of the produce on the basis of paimash (measurement) in the Doab i.e., the territory between the Ganga and the Jamuna. Suppression of the hereditary revenue collectors-Rai, Rana, Rawat (top level) and Khut, Muqaddam, Chaudhari (village level). House tax (ghari) and pasture tax (charai) were also levied.
Land revenue was calculated in kind but demanded in cash.
Establishment of a new revenue department, Diwan-i-Mustakharaj. Khuts were a new set of intermediaries who arose at the parganah or shiq (district) level. Amir Khusrau, for the first time, referred to them as zamindars.

*Market Control or Economic Regulation :*


According to Barani, the economic regulations were primarily a military measure, i.e., to maintain a large and efficient army for keeping the Mongols in check. But, Amir Khusrau considers it a welfare measure to ensure the supply of important commodities at reasonable rates.
Zabawit or detailed regulations were made to fix the cost of all commodities from food grains to horses cattle and slaves.
He established three separate markets in Delhi for - food grains, costly cloths, horses, slaves and cattle.
The markets were controlled by two officers, Diwan-i-Riyasat and Shahana- i-Mandi.
He gave loans to the rich Multan merchants for purchasing cloth from different parts of the empire and to bring them for sale in the Sarai-Adl (cloth market at an open place inside Badaun gate.)
Horses were sold directly to the military department (Diwan-i-Arz),
Food grains were stocked at the warehouses set up by the state itself and were released during famine or shortage of supply.
The Karwanis or Banjaras carried the grains from villages to Delhi. No hoarding was allowed and all merchants were registered at state daftars.

*Military Reforms :*


The realisation of land revenue in cash enabled Alauddin to pay his soldiers in cash. He was the first sultan to do so.
Direct recruitment of the soldiers by Arz-i-Mamalik.
Like Balban, he built several forts on North West frontier and repaired old ones.
Introduction of Daag (branding the horses) and Huliya or Chehra (descriptive rolls of soldiers) system.
Introduction of three grades of soldiers: *Foot soldiers*; *Soldiers with one horse *(ek-aspa); *Soldiers with two horses* (do-asps)

*Art and Learning :*


Though Alauddin was illiterate, he was a great patron of art and learning.
Both Amir Khusrau and Mir Hasan Dehlvi enjoyed his patronage.
He built a new city called Siri, enlarged the Qutabi mosque and erected a gateway.
He built the Jamait Khana Masjid at the dargah of Nizam-ud-din Auliya, and Alai Darwaza near Qutb Minar.
He began the construction of Alai Minar near Qutub Minar but could not complete it.

After the death of Alauddin, his favourite Kafur, tried to usurp the throne. He placed Shihab-ud-din Omar, an infant son of the late sultan, on the throne. But Kafur was murdered after five weeks. Mubarak Khilji, another son of Alauddin ruled for four years. He abolished all the agrarian and market control regulations of his father. He was murdered by Khusrau Malik.

Khusrau Shah proved a great tyrant and was defeated and beheaded by Ghazi Tughluq, the warden of the marches and the Governor of Punjab. Ghazi Tughluq became the new ruler of the Delhi sultanate under the title of Ghias-ud-din Tughluq. Thus, Khilji dynasty was replaced by Tughluq dynasty.

*Last days: 
*
Last life of Alauddin was very painful and tragic. Taking the opportunity of his inability hiscommander Malik Kafur assumed the entire power. He became hopeless and sick and died in the year1316 A.D.
*
End of Khilji Rule: 
*
Within four years of Alauddin’s death, the rule of the Khiljis came to an end. Ala-ud-din’s younger son Shahabuddin was dethroned by his third son *Mubarak Shah*, who ruled from 1316 to1320 A.D. He again was killed by a conspiracy by *Nasir-ud-din *(1320); finally he was dethroned and killedin a battle by one Ghazi Malik, the governor of Punjab.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Buddhistforlife

dexter said:


> *Khalji Dynasty (1290–1320) :*
> 
> Jalal-ud-din Khilji overthrew Balban’s successors and founded the Khilji Dynasty, which ruled large parts of South Asia between 1290 and 1320. That was the second dynasty to rule the Delhi Sultanate of India. “The Khilji dynasty was named after a village in Afghanistan. Some historians believe that they wereAfghans, but Bharani and Wolse Haig explain in their accounts that the rulers from this dynasty who came to India, though they had temporarily settled in Afghanistan, were originally Turkic”.The Khiljis were a Central Asian Turkic dynasty but having been long domiciled in Afghanistan, and adopted some Afghan habits and customs. They were treated as Afghans in Delhi Court”. The three sultans of the Khalji dynasty were noted by historians for their faithlessness and ferocity. To some extent, the Khilji usurpation was a move toward the recognition of a shifting balance of power attributable to the developments outside the territory of the Delhi Sultanate (in Central Asia and Iran) and to the changes which followed the establishment of Turkic rule in northern India. The court languages of the Khiljis were Persian, followed by Arabic, their native Turkoman language and some northern-Indian dialects. Although it was not their native language, the Khilji sultans encouraged the use of Persian. This co-existence of different languages gave birth to an early form of Urdu. According to Ibn Batuta, the Khiljis encouraged conversion to Islam by making it customary to have the convert presented to the sultan (who would place a robe on him and reward him with gold bracelets). During Ikhtiyar Uddin Bakhtiyar Khilji’s control of Bengal, Muslim missionaries in India achieved their greatest success in the number of converts to Islam.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The founder of the Khalji Dynasty in South Asia, Malik Firuz, was originally the Ariz-i-Mumalik appointed by Kaiqubad during the days of decline of the Slave Dynasty. He took advantage of the political vacuum that was created due to the incompetence of the successors of Balban. To occupy the throne, he only had to remove the infant Sultan Kaimurs. On June 13 1290, Malik Firuz ascended the throne of Delhi as Jalal-ud-din Firuz Shah. Khaljis were basically Central Asians but had lived in Afghanistan for so long that they had become different from the Turks in terms of customs and manners. Thus the coming of Khaljis to power was more than a dynastic change. As majority of the Muslim population of Delhi was Turk, the arrival of a Khalji ruler was not much welcomed. Yet Jalal-ud-din managed to win the hearts of the people through his mildness and generosity. He retained most of the officers holding key positions in the Slave Dynasty. His own nephew and son-in-law Alauddin Khalji, killed Jalal-ud-din and took over as the new ruler. From 1296 AD to 1316 AD Alauddin Khilji dominated the Delhi sultanate with many courageous achievements. Soon after becoming the Sultan of Delhi Alauddin Khilji in 1297 AD went out to win over the various parts of Gujarat state Ala- ud-din also was able to implement startling economic reforms, although their effects were probably restricted to Delhi and the 100 mile radius around it. Nevertheless this was truly creditable for he achieved what modern governments in India have not completely achieved. Ala-ud-din re-organized the market so that there were fixed prices which were affordable, he developed warehousing facilities to ensure ready stock of goods, the government entered the business of transportation and provided facilities for the swift movement of goods. Alauddin’s reign is marked by innovative administrative and revenue reforms, market control regulations and a whirlwind period of conquests. It is considered the golden period of the Khalji rule. However, before the death of Alauddin, his house was divided into two camps. This resulted in the ultimate collapse of the Khalji dynasty. He died on January 1316 due to an acute health condition.
> 
> 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 and this ended the Khilji dynasty in India.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Summary on the Khilji Dynasty of Delhi Sultanate :*
> 
> The Khiljis served under the Ilbari dynasty of Delhi. Malik Firuz was the founder of the Khilji Dynasty who was originally the Ariz-I-Mumalik appointed by Kaiqubad during the days of the decline of the Ilbari Dynasty. He took advantage of the political vacuum and ascended the throne of Delhi as Jalal-ud-din Firuz Khilji.
> 
> The Khilji Dynasty was the second dynasty of Delhi Sultanate who came from Central Asia. In course of time they adopted the Khura Sanian's urbane culture and certain Afghan custom and social traditions from Ghaznavids. Therefore, the court of Khiljis was of multi-ethnical background with people of Persian, Indian, Arab and Turkish origin. This marked an end to the monopolization of power and racial dictatorship by Ilbari Turks and also led to the widening of the social base of the ruling class. Here, we are giving a complete detailed summary on the Khilji Dynasty of Delhi Sultanate.
> 
> *Jalal-ud-din Firuz Khilji (AD 1290-96) :
> *
> Malik Feroz, the founder of Khalji dynasty, ascended the throne on 3rd June, 1290 as Jalaluddin Firoz Shah. The Khaljis were Central Asian in origin but had lived in Afghanistan so long that they had become different from the Turks in their customs and manners. The Muslim population of Delhi was overwhelmingly Turkish and did not react favorably to the change. So Firoz enthroned himself at Kaikubad and preferred to stay there for some time. Soon, the mildness and generosity of Firoz removed all popular prejudice against him, and he formally entered the city and took residence in the old palace. He came to power after the overthrow of the so- called Slave Dynasty. As regards an estimate of Jalaluddin, he was successful general before becoming the king but gave up the policy of aggression after becoming the Sultan. He followed the policy of peace and reconciliation towards all. He was very modest. It is stated that he did not ride in the courtyard of the palace of Balban and also refused to sit upon it on the ground that he used to stand before it as a servant. When he ascended the throne, he adopted the policy of appeasement by retaining some of the leading officers of the past, Alauddin Kishlu Khan famous as Malik Chajju, a nephew of Balban and a sole survival of old dynasty, was permitted to retain his governorship of Karah- Manikpur. A couple of months after his accession Malik Chajju pressed his claim to the throne and assumed royal title at Karah. He started for Delhi with a large army but was stopped near Badaun and defeated. So his revolt not be successful.
> 
> His policy to deal with the thieves and thugs was not based on the harsh and severe punishments. It is stated that once a number of thieves were arrested and brought before the Sultan. Instead of punishing them, he gave a lecture on the evils of stealing. On another accession thousands of thugs and murderers were captured. Instead of punishing them the Sultan sent them to Bengal in boats down the Gangas and there they were set free. Firoz was more successful in his a campaign against the Mongols. In 1992, a vast horde of Mongols under Abdullah was overpowered and they withdrew. Ulghu, a descendant of Chengiz Khan decided to stay back. He accepted Islam with 4000 of his followers and the Sultan gave his daughter in marriage. According to Dr.K. Lal, “Firoz was failure as a king, a perfect gentleman and one of the most pious Muslims of his time”. The death of Firoz was the exceptional case in history. A plot was hatched by his nephew Alauddin, to kill him in order to occupy the throne, to which he had not a shadow of claim either by divine or by human law. When Sultan met his nephew and son- in- law with few unarmed attendants, Sultan embraced his nephew, on the signal of Alauddin, Sultan was given two swords- blow. Later, the head of Sultan was cut from his body and the other followers of Sultan were also put to death.
> 
> View attachment 562560
> 
> 
> 1. He came to the throne at the age of seventy and ruled for six years, but did not dare to sit on the throne of Balban whom he had served earlier. He made Kilokhari as his capital.
> 
> 2. He adopted a conciliatory policy towards the nobles of earlier regime and even the Mongols. So, he appointed *Malik Chajju* who was a Balban's nephew, as the Governor of Kara, but he rebelled later.
> 
> 3. One of the most important events of his reign was the invasion of Devagiri, the capital of the Yadava king, Raja Ramachandradeva, in the Deccan, by Ali Gurshasp, the nephew and son-in-law of the sultan, and the Governor of Kara.
> 
> 4. After his successful campaign, Ali Gurshasp invited the Sultan to Kara to receive the enormous wealth. Jalaluddin came to Kara in July 1296, where he was murdered by Ali Gurshasp, who proclaimed himself the Sultan with the title of Alauddin.
> 
> *Alauddin Khilji (AD 1296-1316) :*
> 
> Alauddin Khalji was the nephew and son- in- law of Jalaluddin Khalji. After the downfall of the Malik Chajju and after being appointed the governor of Karah near Allahabad, he won over the confidence of the Sultan by handing over a large amount of booty to him which he had collected in the expedition of Malwa in 1292. He had won great reputation as a soldier. In 1296, after a treacherous murder of his uncle Jalaluddin Firoz Khalji, he proceeded to Delhi to acquire the throne. There, the widow of Firoz had set up one of her sons Qadir Khan on the throne. But Alauddin was very clever for her. He won over a large number of ministers and nobles to his side with the help of gold and money. So he silenced all murmurs of disapproval and discontent by stopping the mouths of people with gold. The army was also won over by lavish distribution of wealth and presents. The cruel measures he adopted to secure his ill- gotten throne showed clearly that Alauddin was a heartless tyrant. He had no regard for justice. But in spite of his vices it must be said that he was brave soldier and a vigorous ruler.
> 
> Alauddin was not only a great military leader but a great administrator. He crushed the power of nobility to bring about peace in the country. He confiscated their excess amount of money and property and put a ban on their social gatherings and prohibited them to use wine. He did not allow the Ulemas to interfere in the political affairs of the State. He is also credited to have introduced various reforms on the land revenue and military departments. His control of the markets is regarded as one of the marvels of medieval statesmanship. There prevailed complete peace and tranquility during his reign. Alauddin was a great patron of learning. Amir Khusrau was patronized by him.
> 
> He largely extended the frontiers of the Muslim dominions in India and effectively checked the Mongols in roads. Alauddin was a great military general. He dreamt to become another Alexander. Sultan maintained a strong army and punished the Mongols so terribly that they dared not to attack India again. He conquered most of Hindu states in the North and over- ran whole of the South. All his military exploits were crowned with success. Alauddin treatment of Hindus was very severe. They were forced to pay land revenue at a higher rate. They were also required to pay several unjustified taxes. They were taxed so heavily that no Hindu could afford to ride a horse or wear fine clothes and carry arms. Besides, for administrative success, he kept a strict eye on the movements of his officials and people. So for this purpose he organized an efficient spy system. They were kept at the provincial headquarters, in markets and in all the units of the army. This system kept the nobles in terror and Sultan remained well- informed about the all good and bad things. Although, Alauddin was quite illiterate but he had great administrative and organizing qualities. He laid the foundation of highly organized administrative machinery through his reforms.
> 
> View attachment 562558
> 
> 
> 
> He was the greatest ruler of the Khilji Dynasty and was the first Muslim ruler to extend his empire right up to the extreme South of India. He lavishly distributed money and gold among his people, noble and ministers so that they might forget the murder of Jalal-ud-din and support him.
> He was the first ruler of Delhi Sultanate who did not ask for *manshur* (letter of investiture) from the Caliph but called himself the deputy of the Caliph.
> He concentrated all power of the state in his own hands; therefore, the period marked the zenith of despotic government as well.
> Alauddin Khilji is said to have been poisoned by *Malik Kafur*. He died in January 1316.
> *
> Mongol Expansion into South Asia : *
> 
> He also defended this region from the ravaging Mongols who controlled most of Asia back then. Mongols were utterly ruthless, divided into different tribes and attacked countries from multiple places. They were known for their brutality. Khilji kept India, its culture and its people safe from the Mongols.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Early Mongol attacks :*
> 
> Ala-ud-din had to face Mongol attack from the time he assumed the power of the Sultanate. From the year 1296 A.D. to 1308 A.D. every year Mongals invaded Delhi. The Mongols attacked Delhi repeatedly. The existence of Sultan Shahi became endangered. But Alauddin checked allthe attacks with courage and determination. At the same time, he made the security of the northwestfrontier strong and firm.
> 
> *Mongol Policy of Alauddin :*
> 
> 
> During the early years of the reign of Alauddin, the Mongols invaded the sultanate several times and even plundered Delhi and adjoining districts, but they were always defeated.
> He adopted "*blood and iron*" policy of Balban in tackling the Mongol menace. So, he built a protecting wall around Delhi and repaired the old forts on the route of Mongols.
> Strong military consignments were posted at Samana and Dipalpur.
> Increased the numerical strength of an army. Appointed to his trusted commanders, including Ghazi Malik (later Sultan Ghiyassudin Tughluq), as warden of the North Western marches.
> 
> *Defeat of Mongols at Battle of Amroha :
> *
> The Battle of Amroha was fought on 20 December 1305 between the armies of the Delhi Sultanate of India and the Mongol Chagatai Khanate of Central Asia. The Delhi force led by Malik Nayak defeated the Mongol army led by Ali Beg and Tartaq near Amroha in present-day Uttar Pradesh.
> 
> *Background :
> *
> India’s North-West border was attacked by the Mongols many times from the past years. They had already suffered two defeats against armies serving the Sultan 'Ala ud-Din, at Jalandhar in 1298 and Kili in 1299. Sultan Alauddin Khalji, had been working on fortification of his northern borders in an effort to strengthen his defenses. He had fortified his forts that lied along the borders and equipped with larger garrisons. Khalji had heavily armed the forts and trained the army specializing to handle the attacks, under the command of an special governor, whose mission was managing and guarding the border areas. Despite such massive preparations, the Mongols lead by Ali Beg and Tartaq arrived from Punjab and marched towards Amroha in 1305. The Mongols had traveled advancing south-east, following the Himalayas and plundering all in their way until they reached Amroha.
> 'Ala ud-din responded immediately by sending an army commanded by Malik Kafur Hazardinarai (one of his personal slaves) and Malik Ghiyas-ud-Din Tughlug (a future sultan) to engage the invaders (Mangols).
> 
> *Battle :*
> 
> Alauddin sent a 30,000-strong cavalry led by Malik Nayak to defeat the Mongols. Malik Nayak's subordinate commanders included Bahram Aibah, Tughluq, Mahmud Sartiah, Qarmshi, Qutta, Takli, and Tulak. This army faced the Mongols somewhere in present-day Amroha district on 20 December 1305.
> 
> The Mongols launched one or two weak attacks on the Delhi army. In words of the Delhi chronicler Amir Khusrau, they were "like an army of mosquitoes which tries to move against a strong wind". The Delhi army inflicted a crushing defeat upon the invaders. According to another Delhi chronicler Ziauddin Barani, Alauddin captured 20,000 horses belonging to dead Mongols after the battle was won.
> 
> The Delhi force surprised the Mongols, who were on their way back to Central Asia with their plunder and inflicted a heavy defeat on them. The Mongol generals, Ali Beg and Tartaq, were captured along with 8,000 of their men, brought back to Siri Fort in Delhi.
> 
> *Aftermath :*
> 
> Alauddin organized a grand _durbar_ (court) in Delhi to receive Malik Nayak and his victorious army. Alauddin was seated on a throne at _Chautra-i Subhani_, and the Delhi army stood in double row, forming a long queue. According to Barani, a huge crowd gathered to see this event, leading to exorbitant increase in the price of a cup of water.
> 
> The Mongol commanders Ali Beg and Tartaq, who had surrendered, were presented before Alauddin with other Mongol prisoners. According to Amir Khusrau, Alauddin ordered some of the captives to be killed, and others to be imprisoned. However, Barani states that Alauddin ordered all captives to be killed by having them trampled under elephants' feet. The number of these captives was around 9,000. The 16th century historian Firishta claims that the heads of 8,000 Mongols were used to build the Siri Fort commissioned by Alauddin.
> 
> Amir Khusrau and another chronicler Isami state that Alauddin spared the lives of Ali Beg and Tartaq (probably because of their high ranks). According to Amir Khusrau, one of these commanders died "without any harm being done to him", and the other was "left alone". He ambiguously adds that Alauddin "was so successful in sport that he took their lives in one game after another". According to Isami, Alauddin made the two Mongol commanders _Amirs_ (officials with high status), and also gave each of them an India-born slave girl. Two months later, Tartaq started demanding answers about the fate of his army and his belongings, in a state of drunken stupor. As a result, Alauddin ordered him to be killed. Sometime later, Ali Beg was also killed because of "the evil in his heart".
> 
> Historian Peter Jackson speculates that Ali Beg and Tartaq might have been killed when a large number of Mongols in Delhi rebelled against Alauddin, prompting the Sultan to order a massacre of all the Mongols in his empire.
> 
> *Reforms and Experiments :*
> 
> The reforms of Alauddin aimed at improving the administration, strengthening the army, and gearing up the machinery of land revenue administration, expand and improve the cultivation and welfare of the people.
> 
> *Administrative measures for prevention of rebellions :*
> 
> 
> The sale and use of liquor and intoxicants was prohibited in Delhi and neighbouring areas. Sultan himself gave up drinking.
> He forbade parties and marriage relations among the nobles without his permission.
> He confiscated many jagirs and estates and stopped all pensions and allowances. All religious endowments and grants of lands (waqf and inam) by the state were revoked.
> He established a network of spices all over his kingdom.
> 
> *Revenue/Agrarian Reforms :*
> 
> Zabita regulation Biswa declared as the standard unit of measurement of cultivable land.
> Land revenue (Kharaj) was fixed at half of the produce on the basis of paimash (measurement) in the Doab i.e., the territory between the Ganga and the Jamuna. Suppression of the hereditary revenue collectors-Rai, Rana, Rawat (top level) and Khut, Muqaddam, Chaudhari (village level). House tax (ghari) and pasture tax (charai) were also levied.
> Land revenue was calculated in kind but demanded in cash.
> Establishment of a new revenue department, Diwan-i-Mustakharaj. Khuts were a new set of intermediaries who arose at the parganah or shiq (district) level. Amir Khusrau, for the first time, referred to them as zamindars.
> 
> *Market Control or Economic Regulation :*
> 
> 
> According to Barani, the economic regulations were primarily a military measure, i.e., to maintain a large and efficient army for keeping the Mongols in check. But, Amir Khusrau considers it a welfare measure to ensure the supply of important commodities at reasonable rates.
> Zabawit or detailed regulations were made to fix the cost of all commodities from food grains to horses cattle and slaves.
> He established three separate markets in Delhi for - food grains, costly cloths, horses, slaves and cattle.
> The markets were controlled by two officers, Diwan-i-Riyasat and Shahana- i-Mandi.
> He gave loans to the rich Multan merchants for purchasing cloth from different parts of the empire and to bring them for sale in the Sarai-Adl (cloth market at an open place inside Badaun gate.)
> Horses were sold directly to the military department (Diwan-i-Arz),
> Food grains were stocked at the warehouses set up by the state itself and were released during famine or shortage of supply.
> The Karwanis or Banjaras carried the grains from villages to Delhi. No hoarding was allowed and all merchants were registered at state daftars.
> 
> *Military Reforms :*
> 
> 
> The realisation of land revenue in cash enabled Alauddin to pay his soldiers in cash. He was the first sultan to do so.
> Direct recruitment of the soldiers by Arz-i-Mamalik.
> Like Balban, he built several forts on North West frontier and repaired old ones.
> Introduction of Daag (branding the horses) and Huliya or Chehra (descriptive rolls of soldiers) system.
> Introduction of three grades of soldiers: *Foot soldiers*; *Soldiers with one horse *(ek-aspa); *Soldiers with two horses* (do-asps)
> 
> *Art and Learning :*
> 
> 
> Though Alauddin was illiterate, he was a great patron of art and learning.
> Both Amir Khusrau and Mir Hasan Dehlvi enjoyed his patronage.
> He built a new city called Siri, enlarged the Qutabi mosque and erected a gateway.
> He built the Jamait Khana Masjid at the dargah of Nizam-ud-din Auliya, and Alai Darwaza near Qutb Minar.
> He began the construction of Alai Minar near Qutub Minar but could not complete it.
> 
> After the death of Alauddin, his favourite Kafur, tried to usurp the throne. He placed Shihab-ud-din Omar, an infant son of the late sultan, on the throne. But Kafur was murdered after five weeks. Mubarak Khilji, another son of Alauddin ruled for four years. He abolished all the agrarian and market control regulations of his father. He was murdered by Khusrau Malik.
> 
> Khusrau Shah proved a great tyrant and was defeated and beheaded by Ghazi Tughluq, the warden of the marches and the Governor of Punjab. Ghazi Tughluq became the new ruler of the Delhi sultanate under the title of Ghias-ud-din Tughluq. Thus, Khilji dynasty was replaced by Tughluq dynasty.
> 
> *Last days:
> *
> Last life of Alauddin was very painful and tragic. Taking the opportunity of his inability hiscommander Malik Kafur assumed the entire power. He became hopeless and sick and died in the year1316 A.D.
> *
> End of Khilji Rule:
> *
> Within four years of Alauddin’s death, the rule of the Khiljis came to an end. Ala-ud-din’s younger son Shahabuddin was dethroned by his third son *Mubarak Shah*, who ruled from 1316 to1320 A.D. He again was killed by a conspiracy by *Nasir-ud-din *(1320); finally he was dethroned and killedin a battle by one Ghazi Malik, the governor of Punjab.


The Delhi sultanate was the worst Muslim empire known for committing horrible genocides and destruction of ancient civilizations. The Delhi sultanate and it's policies perhaps were much worse than the Ummayud Caliphate, Rashidun Caliphate and Abbasid Caliphate.


----------



## Mamluk

Buddhistforlife said:


> The Delhi sultanate was the worst Muslim empire known for committing horrible genocides and destruction of ancient civilizations. The Delhi sultanate and it's policies perhaps were much worse than the Ummayud Caliphate, Rashidun Caliphate and Abbasid Caliphate.



The Delhi Sultanate protected your collective asses from Mongols. Have some gratitude.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Manidabest

i dont know about dynasties but the time of Khulfa e rashideen was the best

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## M. Sarmad

@Pakistansdefender ... What you are saying is historically accurate and technically correct... But sometimes it's _politically incorrect_ to disagree with the popular narrative/indoctrination..... So, better let it pass....

*Pakistan Paindabad*


----------



## Taimur Khurram

M. Sarmad said:


> What you are saying is historically accurate and technically correct


Rofl of course you agree with him.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## dexter

*Tughlaq Dynasty (1320–1413) :*

The Tughlaqs were a Muslim family of Turkic origin. The dynasty reached its zenith point between AD 1330 and 1335 when Muhammad Bin Tughlaq led military campaign.

The etymology of the word "Tughluq" is not certain. The 16th century writer Firishta claims that it is a corruption of the Turkic term "Qutlugh", but this is doubtful. Literary, numismatic and epigraphic evidence makes it clear that Tughluq was the personal name of the dynasty's founder Ghiyath al-Din, and not an ancestral designation. Historians use the designation "Tughluq" to describe the entire dynasty as a matter of convenience, but the dynasty's kings did not use "Tughluq" as a surname: only Ghiyath al-Din's son Muhammad bin Tughluq called himself the son of Tughluq Shah ("bin Tughluq").

The ancestry of dynasty is debated among modern historians, because the earlier sources provide different information regarding it. Tughluq's court poet Badr-i Chach attempted to find a royal genealogy for the dynasty, but this can be dismissed as flattery. Another court poet Amir Khusrau, in his _Tughluq Nama_, states that Ghiyath al-Din Tughluq described himself as an unimportant man ("_awara mard_") in his early career. The contemporary Moroccan traveler Ibn Battuta states that Ghiyath al-Din Tughluq belonged to the "Qarauna tribe of the Turks", who lived in the hilly region between Turkestan and Sindh. Ibn Battuta's source for this claim was the Sufisaint Rukn-ud-Din Abul Fateh, but the claim is not corroborated by any other contemporary source. Firishta, bsaed on the inquiries made at Lahore, wrote that Tughluq was a Turkic slave of the earlier emperor Balban, and that his mother came from a Jat family of India. No contemporary sources corroborate this claim.

*



*
*Territory under Tughlaq dynasty of Dehli Sultanate*

*Rise to power :*

The Khalji dynasty ruled the Delhi Sultanate before 1320. Its last ruler, Khusro Khan, was a Hindu who had been forcibly converted to Islam and then served the Delhi Sultanate as the general of its army for some time. Khusro Khan, along with Malik Kafur, had led numerous military campaigns on behalf of Alauddin Khalji, to expand the Sultanate and plunder non-Muslim kingdoms in India.

After Alauddin Khalji's death from illness in 1316, a series of palace arrests and assassinations followed, with Khusro Khan coming to power in June 1320 after killing licentious son of Alauddin Khalji, Mubarak Khalji. However, he lacked the support of the nobles and aristocrats of the Khalji dynasty in Delhi. Delhi's aristocracy invited Ghazi Malik, then the governor in Punjab under the Khaljis, to lead a coup in Delhi and remove Khusro Khan. In 1320, Ghazi Malik launched an attack and killed Khusro Khan to assume power.

*Ibn Battuta's memoir on Tughlaq dynasty :*

Ibn Battuta, the Moroccan Muslim traveller, left extensive notes on Tughlaq dynasty in his travel memoirs. Ibn Battuta arrived in India through the mountains of Afghanistan, in 1334, at the height of Tughlaq dynasty's geographic empire. On his way, he learnt that Sultan Muhammad Tughluq liked gifts from his visitors, and gave to his visitors gifts of far greater value in return. Ibn Battuta met Muhammad bin Tughluq, presenting him with gifts of arrows, camels, thirty horses, slaves and other goods. Muhammad bin Tughlaq responded by giving Ibn Battuta with a welcoming gift of 2,000 silver dinars, a furnished house and the job of a judge with an annual salary of 5,000 silver dinars that Ibn Battuta had the right to keep by collecting taxes from two and a half Hindu villages near Delhi.






In his memoirs about Tughlaq dynasty, Ibn Batutta recorded the history of Qutb complex which included Quwat al-Islam Mosque and the Qutb Minar. He noted the 7 year famine from 1335 AD, which killed thousands upon thousands of people near Delhi, while the Sultan was busy attacking rebellions. He was tough both against non-Muslims and Muslims. For example,

Not a week passed without the spilling of much Muslim blood and the running of streams of gore before the entrance of his palace. This included cutting people in half, skinning them alive, chopping off heads and displaying them on poles as a warning to others, or having prisoners tossed about by elephants with swords attached to their tusks.

— Ibn Battuta, Travel Memoirs (1334-1341, Delhi)

The Sultan was far too ready to shed blood. He punished small faults and great, without respect of persons, whether men of learning, piety or high station. Every day hundreds of people, chained, pinioned, and fettered, are brought to this hall, and those who are for execution are executed, for torture tortured, and those for beating beaten.

— Ibn Battuta, Chapter XV Rihla (Delhi)

In Tughlaq dynasty, the punishments were extended even to Muslim religious figures who were suspected rebellion. For example, Ibn Battuta mentions Sheikh Shinab al-Din, who was imprisoned and tortured as follows:

On the fourteen day, the Sultan sent him food, but he (Sheikh Shinab al-Din) refused to eat it. When the Sultan heard this he ordered that the sheikh should be fed human excrement [dissolved in water]. [His officials] spread out the sheikh on his back, opened his mouth and made him drink it (the excrement). On the following day, he was beheaded.

— Ibn Battuta, Travel Memoirs (1334-1341, Delhi)

Ibn Batutta wrote that Sultan's officials demanded bribes from him while he was in Delhi, as well as deducted 10% of any sums that Sultan gave to him. Towards the end of his stay in Tughluq dynasty court, Ibn Battuta came under suspicion for his friendship with a Sufi Muslim holy man. Both Ibn Battuta and the Sufi Muslim were arrested. While Ibn Battuta was allowed to leave India, the Sufi Muslim was killed as follows according to Ibn Battuta during the period he was under arrest:

(The Sultan) had the holy man's beard plucked out hair by hair, then banished him from Delhi. Later the Sultan ordered him to return to court, which the holy man refused to do. The man was arrested, tortured in the most horrible way, then beheaded.

— Ibn Battuta, Travel Memoirs (1334-1341, Delhi)

*Ghiyath al-Din Tughluq (1321-1325) :*

Ghiyath-ud-din Tughlaq was the founder of Tughlaq Dynasty. His father Malik Tughlaq was a Turkish slave of Ghiyath-ud-din Balban and his mother was a Jat lady of Punjab. Their son distinguished himself in the service of the Sultans of Delhi, and for his brilliant and victorious campaigns against Mongols earned the title of Ghazi Malik. He was appointed as the Governor of Dipalpur by Ala-ud-din Khilji. The low-caste usurper Khusrau Khan had completely extinguished the family of Ala-ud-din Khilji, so the nobles called upon Ghazi Malik to ascend the throne. This he did under the title of Ghiyath-ud-din Tughlaq Shah, and became the first ruler of Tughlaq dynasty.

Ghiyath-ud-din was an experienced administrator. He proved a firm and wise ruler. He reestablished the military might of the Delhi Sultanate and subdued the rebellious rulers. Not only the revolt of Bengal dealt with, the kingdoms of Warangal and Madura annexed and Ghiyath-ud-din also conquered Tirhut on the borders of Nepal and most part of South Asia and annexed the territories of all those rulers who had defeated by him and hence became the master of more extensive empire than that of Ala-ud-din Khilji.

About Ghiyath-ud-din as an administrator, a modern Historian says:

“The administration of Ghiyath-ud-din was based upon the principles of justice and moderation. The land revenue was organized and the Sultan took great care to prevent abuses. Cultivators were treated well and officials were severely punished for their misconduct. The departments of Justice and Police worked efficiently, and the greatest security prevailed in the remotest parts of the empire.”

He attempted to improve the finances of the state and for this purpose he established the system of taxes. Barani tells that the king believed that people should ‘be taxed so that they are not blinded with wealth and so become discontented and rebellious; nor, on the other hand, be so reduced to poverty and destitution as to be unable to pursue their daily bread.’ He improved the means of communication and conditions of roads, bridges and canals.

Giyath-ud-din faced twin sided challenges both internal and external. The administration system was completely destroyed by the incapable successors of Ala-ud-din Khilji. The usurper Khusrau Khan emptied the state treasury completely by lavish expenditures on friends and nobles to obtain their support and had granted expensive gifts to them. When Ghiyas-ud-din assended the throne he felt the need to take those gifts back to reorganize the state treasury. This created a sense of disliking and enimity between the Sultan and the sufi saint Nizam-ud-din Auliya. Hadrat Nizam-ud-din Auliya received five lakh tankas from Khusrau, but when he was asked to refund the money, he replied that it had already been spent for the relief of the poor in his monastery. Ghiyath-ud-din did not pursue the matter but it was the beginning of an unpleasant relationship between the king and the Sheikh.

Ghiyath-ud-din died in 1325 as a result of the falling of a pavilion hastily constructed by his son at Afghanpur (near Delhi) to receive him before his ceremonial entry into the capital on return from his successful campaign in Bengal. There are conflicting accounts on whether this was an accident or a conspiracy by his son to usurp power, so it remains a bit of a mystery. After his death his son Muhammad bin Tughlaq proclaimed himself the Sultan.

*Difficulties of Ghiyas-Ud-Din Tughluq Shah :*

Ghiyas-ud-din faced both internal and external problems. The administrative setup established by Ala-ud-din was destroyed by his successors while no steps were taken to establish a new one. The nobles and the courtiers had become negligent towards their responsibilities and engaged themselves in physical pleasures. The Sultan had lost his prestige both among the nobility and the subjects.

Both Mubarak Shah and Khusrav Shah had distributed large amount of wealth among his nobles and subjects and, thereby, had exhausted the Sultan’s treasury. But above all was the difficulty of keeping provincial governors and feudatory chiefs under submission who were prepared to throw away the authority of the Sultan at any opportune moment. However, Ghiyas-ud-din faced all these difficulties and succeeded.

*Domestic Policy of Ghiyas-Ud-Din Tughluq Shah :*

The first task of Ghiyas-ud-din was to strengthen his position on the throne and for that he tried to conciliate the nobles and the people. He pursued a policy of conciliation mixed up with sternness towards the nobles. He succeeded in getting support from the Turkish nobles on the basis of race. But he tried to please even those nobles who had supported Khusrav against him.

He forgot their past and allowed them to enjoy their former posts. He also arranged for the marriages of girls of the Khalji family. But those nobles who were found confirmed supporters of the previous regime were devoid of their official positions and their jagirs were snatched away from them. However, he restored the jagirs of those people who were devoid of them during the regime of Ala- ud-din.

Ghiyas-ud-din was successful in getting loyalty of the nobles and his subjects by these measures. He also tried to take that wealth from the concerning people which was squandered by Khusrav to please them. He was partly successful in that. Many people returned it but some like Shaikh Nizam-ud-din Auliya refused to return it.

Ghiyas-ud-din attempted to improve the finances of the state and for that purpose, pursued the policy of encouraging agriculture and protecting cultivators. His twin objects were to increase the land under cultivation and improve the economic condition of the farmers. The state-demand of revenue was fixed between 1/5 to 1/3 of the produce. He ordered that the revenue be increased only gradually and, in no case, beyond 1/11 to 1/10 from a province in a year.

In case of famine, the peasants were exempted from paying the revenue. More- land has expressed that in case of failure of crop and absence of good production on newly cultivated lands, the peasants were not asked to pay the revenue. Besides, the peasants were asked to pay revenue on the cultivated land alone. The land which was not cultivated by the peasants was free from the revenue. The privileges of the previous Hindu revenue officers were restored.

However, the officers were instructed to observe that the Hindus did not enrich themselves very much. The practice of measurement and survey of land which was adopted during the reign of Ala-ud-din was abandoned. Instead, the old system of sharing of the produce, i.e., Batai and Nasq was revived. The revenue collectors were assigned lands which were free of tax. They were not paid any commission or salary.

The government officers were asked not to be cruel with peasants but to look after their welfare. If any officer collected excess revenue, he was punished. However, minor excesses of the officers were overlooked. But Ghiyas-ud-din insisted that his officers should be honest. He also improved means of irrigation and planted many gardens. These measures of Ghiyas-ud- din succeeded. The area under cultivation increased and the condition of farmers improved. He could also satisfy his officials and tax-collectors.

Ghiyas-ud-din improved the means of communication. Roads were repaired and improved. Bridges and canals were also constructed. He improved the postal system. Runners or horsemen were posted at a distance of two-thirds of a mile so that the post moved fast. He also improved the judicial system. The practice of rigorous punishment and that of torture for extracting truth was generally prohibited.

It continued only in cases of thieves, revenue defaulters or those who embezzled money of the state. Barani wrote that ‘because of the justice of Tughluq Shah even a wolf could not dare to look towards a sheep.’ Besides, Ghiyas-ud-din attempted to check gambling, drinking of liquor and other immoral abuses as well.

Ghiyas-ud-din was a capable military commander and, according to Barani, he loved his soldiers as a father loved his sons. He looked after their welfare and paid them well. But he was a strict disciplinarian as well. He strictly enforced the practice of keeping Huliya of the soldiers and that of Dagh viz., branding of the horses. Within two years after his accession, Ghiyas-ud-din succeeded in enhancing the strength of his army.

Towards the Hindus, Ghiyas-ud-din pursued nearly the same policy as was practised by Ala-ud-din. His policy was that neither the Hindus should be allowed to amass wealth so that they might rise in revolt nor they be reduced to poverty so much so that they might leave cultivation of their fields.

Thus, the basis of the policy which he adopted towards the Hindus was political. Dr Ishwari Prasad writes- “If he pursued oppression against the Hindus, it was not because of religious bigotry but the result of political necessity.”





*Silver Tanka of Ghiyasal-Din Tughlaq Dated AH 724*

*The Suppression of the Revolts and the Expansion of the Empire :*

Ghiyas-ud-din proved himself more aggressive imperialist than even Ala-ud- din. Ala-ud-din did not annex the territories of the kingdoms of the South. He was satisfied by bringing them under his suzerainty. Devagiri was annexed to his empire only when Shankar Deva completely refused to accept his overlordship. On the contrary, Ghiyas-ud-din frankly pursued the policy of annexation. He annexed the territories of all those rulers who were defeated by him.

Telingana claimed his first attention. Prataprudra Deva had reasserted independence and had not paid the yearly tribute. Ghiyas-ud-din sent his son, Jauna Khan alias Ulugh Khan, to subdue him in 1321 A.D. Jauna Khan moved swiftly, reached Warangal without any opposition and besieged the fort.

After six months Prataprudra Deva submitted and agreed to pay the annual tribute. But as Jauna Khan asked him to submit without any prior condition, no settlement could be made. Then the Hindus cut down the lines of communication of the besiegers so that news from Delhi ceased to come.

The same time a rumour was spread that Ghiyas-ud-din had died. This created panic among the army of Delhi and many officers along with their soldiers left Jauna Khan. Jauna Khan himself fled away to Devagiri. Contemporary historians differ regarding this incident.

Ibn Batuta described that Jauna Khan himself intended to rebel against his father and therefore, asked his companion Ubaid to spread this false rumour in the hope that the officers and the soldiers would come to his side. But the result was the opposite one.

Many officers left Jauna Khan which, ultimately, resulted in the failure of the first expedition of Warangal. But Isami and Barani have disagreed with Ibn Batuta. They expressed that Jauna Khan had no hand in spreading that false rumour.

Ubaid alone was responsible for it. Among modern historians Sir Woolseley Haig and many others have accepted the version of Ibn Batuta, while Dr Ishwari Prasad, Dr Mahdi Husain and Dr B.P. Saxena have accepted the account of Isami and Barani.

Jauna Khan reached Delhi and begged mercy from the Sultan. Ghiyas-ud- din pardoned him and killed all those nobles who had revolted against him. Then he sent another army again under Jauna Khan to attack Warangal. Jauna Khan attacked Warangal in 1323 A.D. On the way, he conquered Bidar and certain other forts so that he could keep safe his line of communication with Delhi. The fort of Warangal was captured after a siege of five months.

Prataprudra Deva was sent to Delhi as a prisoner where, according to Dr B.P. Saxena, he died in prison or committed suicide, but according to Dr R.C. Majumdar he was left free and he finished his life as a feudatory to the Sultan or as a petty independent chief somewhere. Warangal was named Sultanpur and the kingdom of Telingana was annexed to the territories of the Delhi Sultanate.

Jauna Khan, probably, also attacked the far-south state of Malabar and conquered and annexed Madura in 1323 A.D. But contemporary Muslim historians did not mention it in their accounts. However, Jauna Khan certainly attacked Orissa (Jajnagar) and after plundering it or after having met reverse, returned to Delhi.

Hardly the Sultan had become free from the campaigns of the South when he had to face an attack of the Mongols from the north-west in 1324 A.D. The Mongols, however, were defeated. Probably, at this very time, a revolt occurred in Gujarat but it was also suppressed.

Ghiyas-ud-din got an opportunity to interfere in the affairs of Bengal which had been independent since the death of Sultan Balban. The three brothers, Ghiyas-ud-din, Shihab-ud-din and Nasir-ud-din had quarrelled among themselves for the throne of Bengal. Ghiyas-ud-din had defeated Shihab-ud-din and occupied Lakhanauti, the capital of Bengal in 1319 A.D.

The third brother, Nasir-ud-din sought the help of Ghiyas-ud-din Tughluq to capture the throne. The Sultan welcomed this opportunity and proceeded towards Bengal in person. He was joined by Nasir-ud-din at Tirput.

Then the Sultan sent Zafar Khan to attack Lakhanauti. Ghiyas-ud-din was defeated and Nasir-ud-din was placed on the throne as a vassal-ruler of Delhi. However, Nasir-ud-din was handed over only North Bengal. East and South Bengal were annexed to the Sultanate of Delhi.

According to Isami, Ghiyas-ud-din, on his way back, attacked Tirhut (Mithila). Raja Har Singh Deva fled to Nepal and his kingdom was annexed to Delhi. But the Sultan had proceeded towards Delhi before the completion of the conquest.

*Death of Ghiyas-Ud-Din :*

Historians have differed regarding the death of Ghiyas-ud-din. Dr Mahdi Husain and Dr B.P. Saxena have expressed that he died of an accident while Dr Ishwari Prasad and Sir Woolseley Haig regarded it as a result of conspiracy of prince Jauna Khan against the Sultan.

Dr A.L. Srivastava and Dr R.C. Mazumdar also agree with their view. Among contemporary historians Ibn Batuta and Isami blamed the prince for the death of Sultan while the account of Barani is short and inconclusive. He simply wrote that ‘the Sultan had an accident because of the sudden fall of lightning.’





*Mausoleum of Ghiyath al-Din Tughluq, Dehli*

*Scholars who find no fault of Jauna Khan in the death of his father have argued that :*

(1) Both Ibn Batuta and Isami expressed that elephants were paraded not on the order of the prince, Jauna Khan but of the Sultan.

(2) Both Ibn Batuta and Isami based their opinion on what they heard from others.

(3) Jauna Khan had cordial relations with his mother when he became the Sultan which could not be possible if the prince would have participated in the death of his father.

(4) Nobody opposed Jauna Khan when he ascended the throne, and

(5) Jauna Khan was lovable to every member of his family and it was not expected of him that he would get his father murdered.

*On the other hand, scholars, who doubt Jauna Khan of a conspiracy to murder his father have argued that :*

(1) Ibn Batuta was a contemporary of Ghiyas-ud-din and had no reason to be against him. Therefore, we should accept his version reliable.

(2) Barani wrote nothing clearly because he desired protection of the court particularly from Firuz Tughluq who was in good books of Muhammad Tughluq.

(3) Nizamuddin Ahmad in Tabakata-i-Akbari, Badayuni in Muntakhab-ul-Tawarikha and Abul Fazl in Ain-i-Akbari described that the version of Barani of the fall of lightning which resulted in the death of Ghiyas-ud-din was pure fabrication.

(4) According to Tarikh-i-Mubarakshahi, the accident occurred during the month of February-March but that was the season when there was no possibility of lightning.

(5) Jauna Khan was ambitious and therefore, his intentions could be doubtful, and

(6) when Jauna Khan became the Sultan, instead of punishing Ahmad Aiyaz who got constructed that temporary building, he promoted him to the rank of vazir.

According to Ibn Batuta, while the Sultan was in Bengal, he received disquieting news of the activities of prince Jauna in Delhi. He was informed that the prince was increasing the number of his followers, had become the disciple of Shaikh Nizam-ud-din Auliya with whom the Sultan was displeased and, probably, aspired for the throne.

The Sultan, therefore, threatened that he would punish both the prince and the Shaikh after his return to Delhi. The Shaikh is said to have remarked- ‘Hanuz Delhi dur ast’ (Delhi is still far off). Prince Jauna Khan welcomed the Sultan in Afghanpur, a village six miles to the south-east of Delhi.

There the prince had constructed a wooden pavilion which was so designed that it could fall immediately when touched at a certain part by the elephants. After the meal was over, the prince requested his father to display those elephants that he had brought from Bengal. The elephants were then paraded and when they came in contact with the weak part of the pavilion, the entire building collapsed.

The Sultan and his younger son, Mahmud Khan, were crushed under the building. Jauna Khan is said to have delayed in removing the debris and when these were removed the Sultan was found bent over the body of prince Mahmud Khan as if to protect him. Ibn Batuta was told of this incident by Shaikh Rukn-ud-din who was present in the pavilion at that time but was asked by prince Jauna Khan to leave for his prayers before elephants were brought for parade.

Thus, Ibn Batuta charged prince Jauna Khan for the murder of the Sultan. Whether the charge is correct is disputable but most of the historians agree that even if there was any conspiracy to murder the Sultan, Shaikh Nizam-ud-din Auliya had probably nothing to do with it.

*Muhammad bin Tughluq (1325–1351) :
*
Muḥammad ibn Tughluq, (born _c._ 1290, Delhi, India—died March 20, 1351, Sonda, Sindh [now in Pakistan]), second sultan of the Tughluq dynasty (reigned 1325–51), who briefly extended the rule of the Delhi sultanate of northern Indiaover most of the subcontinent. As a result of misguided administrative actions and unexampled severity toward his opponents, he eventually lost his authority in the south; at the end of his reign, the sultanate had begun to decline in power.

Muhammad bin Tughlaq Shah, generally known as Muhammad Tughlaq, who ascended the throne on the death of his father has been a puzzle to the historians. He received a good liberal education, and was highly gifted and accomplished. He was well versed in logic, philosophy, mathematics, astronomy and physical sciences also had the knowledge of medicine and dialectics. He was generous and possessed great purity of character but his rule brought misery to the people and materially weakened the government.

His reign coincided with a long period of draught and a protracted famine which in its intensity and extent was one of the worst the subcontinent has known. The rains are said to have failed for seven successive years (1335-1342) and there was wide spread famine. The king tried to deal with the situation by opening poor houses and distributing grain freely but the problem was beyond his resources and the people suffered heavily. This created many difficulties for the king but his misfortunes were not all due to natural and unavoidable causes. While he was a remarkable man he focused more on fantastic ideas, always thinking out of new measures but lacked two essential qualities to be a successful Sultan Practical judgment and common sense, moreover, an impatient man. He tried to take bold steps to improve the condition of his people and administrative system but it resulted in great follies and failure.

Muhammad Tughlaq tried to improve revenue administration. He ordered for the complete compilation of land assessment records. The work completed with intense supervision and the system began to work smoothly. An unrest rose among peasants of fertile Doab region when they were ordered to pay tax 50 % higher than that of Alaudin Khilgi’s time. The time was incorrect as the peasants were faced with a terrible famine. This whole process caused damage to Sultan’s prestige.

Sultan Muhammad Tughlaq tried to introduce some new monetary techniques. The prolonged famine and the expensive wars had severely strained the exchequer. To deal with the situation, the king issued brass and copper tokens in place of silver coins. It was designed to be an effective token currency however the measure was not welcome to the people particularly the commercial class. The failure was due to inefficiency of the government to prevent the issue of forgery. It reached such a level that people were manufacturing coins in their own homes. As Barani says, “every Hindu’s house became a mint”. The king had the sense to acknowledge his failure and the token currency was withdrawn from circulation after three or four years. Its introduction and failure however, neither enhanced public confidence in the Sultan nor did it restore economic prosperity to the country.

In 1327, he decided to change the seat of government to more centralized position to control the rebellions in the South. He selected the city of Divagiri for this purpose and renamed it as Daulatabad. He made it a fabulous city and provided a highway connecting Delhi to Daulatabad along with a regular post. Than he called upon the Muslim inhabitants of Delhi to migrate to the new capital, but they were reluctant to get settled in an unfamiliar land. The king adopted sturn measures to enforce his decree and ordered a complete evacuation. But his orders brought great sufferings to the people. Many perished on the long route of 700 miles to Daulatabad.

The king’s decision was much of a strategic importance. Consolidation of Muslim rule in the South was perhaps his main consideration, and there is no doubt that the migration of a large Muslim population drawn from all sections of society established Muslim rule in that part of the subcontinent. After some time the Sultan allowed those who so desired to return to Delhi, but many of the people who had gone to the South stayed on and were a source of strength to the Muslim rulers of the south. Some other measures of the king were equally ill-conceived and ill-fated. His plan to interfere in the affairs of Transoxiana and Persia, with a view perhaps to annexing some areas and the project conquest of Tibet in 1337-38 ended in fiasco and considerable loss of life and money.






Muhammad Tughlaq’s policy towards Sufi saints was as much different as his other policies. He thought the position and esteemed that Sufi saints held was a danger to the throne so he took various steps to break their power. He dispersed them or, otherwise persecuted them. He sharply discouraged enthusiasm for the contemporary leading Sufis. The result of this systematic policy was that the influence of the Sufis at Delhi sharply declined. Muhammad Tughlaq’s policy towards the Sufis at the capital was primarily dictated by political consideration, but according to Barani, it was also due to his association with skeptics and philosophers.

There were wide spread rebellions and the vast empire started breaking up. In 1335 Ma’bar became independent, followed by Bengal three years later. In 1346 Vijayanagar became the nucleus of a powerful Hindu state. In the same year Gujrat and Kathiawar revolted, but the Sultan was able to quell the rebellions in these two areas. Next it was the turn of Sind, and, in1351, the king was marching towards Thatta to put down the revolt there when he fell ill and died. As Bada’uni says: “The king was freed from his people and they from their king.”


*" Muhammad bin Tughlaq was well known for his wisdom and character. People had a lot of expectations from him and he on the other hand, had the desire for more valuable contribution for his countrymen than his predecessors.*

*That is why right from the beginning of his rule; he decided to take some bold reformative measures for the improvement as well as safeguard of the country. "*

Muhammad-bin-Tughluq next to Alluddin Khilzi was the greatest sultan of Delhi who is best remembered for his bold experiments and innovative thought in the field of administration as well as in agriculture.





*Muhammad Tughlak orders his brass coins to pass for silver, A.D. 1330*

He was one of the most remarkable rulers of his time. He was highly educated and was well versed in Arabic and Persian language. He was well read in the subjects of religion, philosophy, astronomy, mathematics, medicine and logic.

He was also a good calligraphist. Further from military point of view, he was an excellent commander and during the time of Sultan Mubarak Shaha Khiliji he was promoted to the rank of the master of the horse from an ordinary soldier. And again during the time of his father Sultan Giyasuddin Tughlaq he led the imperial forces to Telengana and Warrangal. He was highly ambitious and was a man of high moral character. He was very much faithful to his own religion and obeyed the religious rites and was regular at his daily prayers. He abstained himself from drinking in public. He was very kind and generous to the poor and pandits.

In spite of high qualification and knowledge, Sultan Muhamad-bin- Tughlaq suffered from certain qualities of hastiness and impatience that is why many of his experiments failed and he has been called an ill starred idealist. Muhammad-bin-Tughlaq ascended the throne just three days after the sudden death of his father, Giyasuddin Tughlaq. When he was inspecting an elephant parade standing on a pavilion at Tughluqabad, the Pavilion collapsed and the Sultan along with his second son Muhammad Khan crushed under it and died. It is said that it was a conspiracy on the part of Muhammad-bin Tughlaq who was impatient for power.

Muhammad Bin Tughlaq just after the death of his father, declared himself as the Sultan in Tughlaqabad and after staying 40 days there, he proceeded to Delhi where he was greeted by the people as well as the Nobles. His coronation ceremony was duly performed in the Red Palace of Balban.

*Life :*

Muḥammad was the son of the sultan Ghiyās al-Dīn Tughluq. Very little is known of his childhood, but he apparently received a good education. He possessed an encyclopaedic knowledge of the Qurʾān, Muslim jurisprudence, astronomy, logic, philosophy, medicine, and rhetoric. In 1321–22 his father sent him against the city of Warangal in the Deccan, in which campaign, after initial reverses, he subdued the rebellious Hindu rajas. From his accession to the throne in 1325 until his death in 1351, Muḥammad contended with 22 rebellions, pursuing his policies consistently and ruthlessly. Ziyāʾ al-Dīn Baranī, his close companion and counsellor for 17 years, often advised him to abdicate, but Muḥammad disdainfully rejected his advice.

As his reign began, Muḥammad attempted, without much success, to enlist the services of the _ʿulamāʾ_, the Muslim divines, and the Ṣūfīs, the asceticmystics. Failing to win the _ʿulamāʾ_ over, he tried to curtail their powers, as some of his predecessors had, by placing them on an equal footing with other citizens. The Sultan wanted to use the Ṣūfīs’ prestigious position to stabilize his authority as ruler. Yet they had always refused any association with government and would not accept any grants or offices except under duress. Muḥammad tried every measure, conciliatory or coercive, to yoke them to his political wagon. Although he humiliated them, he could not break their opposition and succeeded only in dispersing them from the towns of northern India.

In the four pages of his so-called autobiography, Muḥammad’s only surviving literary work, he confesses that he had wavered from traditional orthodoxy to philosophic doubts and then found his way to a rational faith. To still his own doubts, as well as to counteract the opposition of the Muslim divines, he obtained from the caliph in Cairo a _manshūr_ (patent of royalty) legitimizing his authority.


The transfer of the capital in 1327 to Deogir (now Daulatabad) was intended to consolidate the conquests in southern India by large-scale—in some cases forced—migration of the people of Delhi to Deogir. As an administrative measure it failed, but it had far-reaching cultural effects. The spread of the Urdu language in the Deccan may be traced to this extensive influx of Muslims. He introduced several reforms in the monetary system, and his coins, in design as well as in workmanship and purity of metal, excelled those of his predecessors. His introduction of token currency, coins of baser metal with the face value of silver coins, however, failed dismally.

A projected Khorāsān expedition (1327–28) that never materialized was intended to secure more defensible frontiers in the west. The Karajil (Garhwal-Kumaon) expedition (1329–30), an attempt to adjust the boundary dispute with the northern hill states then dominated by China, ended in disaster, but it was followed by an exchange of emissaries between China and Delhi. The conquest of Nagarkot in the foothills of the Himalayas in northwestern India was based on Muḥammad’s policy of establishing secure frontiers.

Between 1328 and 1329 the Sultan increased the land tax in the Doab—the land between the Ganges (Ganga) and Yamuna rivers—but the taxpayers resisted it, especially because a severe drought coincided. Muḥammad was the first ruler to introduce rotation of crops, establish state farms, and tend cultivation and improve artificial irrigation by establishing a department of agriculture. When famine broke out in northern India (1338–40), he moved his residence to Swargdawari to supervise famine relief measures himself.

Muḥammad’s last expedition, against the rebel Ṭaghī, ended with his death at Sonda in Sindh in 1351. He died with a smile on his face and verses of his own composition on his lips. In the words of a contemporary, “the Sultan was rid of the people and the people of the Sultan.”

*Domestic measures :*

Muhammad bin Tughlaq was well known for his wisdom and character. People had a lot of expectations from him and he on the other hand, had the desire for more valuable contribution for his countrymen than his predecessors. That is why right from the beginning of his rule; he decided to take some bold reformative measures for the improvement as well as safeguard of the country.

*Revenue Reforms :*

At first Muhammad-bin-Tughlaq wanted to make an assessment of the total income and expenditure of the country. He therefore issued an ordinance for the compilation of a register showing the incomes and expenditures of the provinces. The governors of the provinces were directed to submit the documents showing their incomes and expenditures and other necessary materials for the compilation work.

He opened a separate office where a large number of clerks and officers were appointed to do the compilation work. He did it in-order-to introduce a uniform standard of land revenue as well as to assess every village of his kingdom. It was definitely a praise-worthy step of Muhammad-bin-Tughlaq.

*Establishment of Agriculture Department :*

In order to bring an improvement in agriculture, Muhammad-bin-Tughlaq decided to undertake a number of measures and he, therefore established a department of agriculture called Diwan-i-kohi. The department’s main work was to find out uncultivated lands and make all sorts of arrangements for the cultivation of horse lands. At first a large area of land say sixty square miles in area was taken up in the project.

A large number of peasants were engaged in the work of cultivation. They were supplied with all sorts of agricultural instruments and seeds. They were asked to grow different crops in rotation. A large number of officers and guards were appointed to look after the project. The government spent over it more than seventy lakhs. In spite of this, the scheme failed miserably. The target amount of production could not be achieved. The expenditure in it outstripped the income from it. It was due to several reasons.

Firstly, the land chosen for cultivation was not fertile. Secondly, the officers lacked experience which accounted for bad planning or faulty implementation. There were also some corrupt officials who misappropriated a huge amount of production and money.

Lastly, it was a novel experiment, therefore, required more time and attention on the part of the Sultan which he could not give. He could have tried more to improve it. Though the scheme failed disastrously during his reign, yet it had a long term impact. But he was misunderstood by the people.

*Transfer of the Capital :*

Transfer of the capital from Delhi to Devagari (Daultabad) has the most controversial step of Muhammad-bin-Tughlaq. Several factors prompted him to take this decision.

Firstly Devagiri had been a base for the expansion of Turkish rule in India. It was not always possible to operate army from Delhi for the occupation of Southern states. Muhammad-bin-Tughlaq himself had spent a number of years as prince to occupy and guard the southern states during the time of his father.

Secondly as Devagiri was situated at a central place so the administration of the north and the south could be possible. He also did it in order to consolidate the newly conquered states of south. Further the people of the south were under the feeling of an alien rule.

Thirdly Delhi was nearer to the North-Western frontier which was exposed to Mongol invasions. But Devagiri would be a safe place and almost free from Mongol raids.

Lastly, it was in the mind of the Muhammad-bin-Tughlaq that he would be able to utilize the vast wealth and resources of the south, if his capital would be there at Devagiri. But lb Batuta gives a complete different reason for this transfer of capital.

According to him, Sultan Muhammad-bin- Tughlaq was disgusted with the life of Delhi because he was getting almost daily many anonymous letters from the people of the city abusing and criticizing him and therefore, he wanted to leave it for good. Whatever may be the fact Muhammad-bin-Tughlaq ordered for the transfer of capital in 1327 A.D.

He ordered his courtiers, officers, leading men including Sufi saints as well as all people of Delhi to shift to Devgiri. Though the inhabitants of Delhi were unwilling to leave their dear land of birth, they had to obey the Sultan’s order. Nobody was allowed to stay at Delhi. According to Ibn Batuta “A search was made and a blind man and a cripple man were found. The cripple man has put to death while the blind man was tied with the tail of horse and was dragged to Daulatabad where only his one leg reached.”

Of course this version of Iban Batuta has been debatable. Batuta says, the citizens of Delhi used to write letters containing abuses and scandals to the Sultan. Therefore, the Sultan decided to lay Delhi waste in order to punish them. Sir Woolreley Haig has accepted the version of Ibn Batuta, Isami also says that the Sultan Muhammad-bin-Tughlaq resolved to break-up the power of the citizens of Delhi and therefore, decided to transfer the capital. Thus, he also supported the version of Iban Batuta. But professor Habibullah and others have given almost the different views.

However the people were asked to shift. The distance from Delhi to Daulatabad (Devagiri) was nearly 1500 km. The Sultan had set up rest houses on the way to help the travellers. Since this event took place during the summer season and the journey was rigorous one, many people died on the way. Many of those who reached Daulatabad felt home sick because the land and climate were not suitable to their health and they were also reminded of their dear birth place where they had lived generations together.

Hence, there was a good deal of discontent. After a couple of years, Muhammad Tughlaq decided to abandon Daulatabad because he realized the fact that just as he could not control the South from Delhi in the same way he could not control North from Daulatabad. He changed his mind and again in 1335 A.D. he ordered the retransfer of the Capital to Delhi and asked everybody to go back to Delhi. So his transfer of capital with the entire population of Delhi was a blunder. He could have shifted only the official seats and officers and courtiers but not the entire people of Delhi.

Though the attempt to make Devagiri a capital failed, it had a number long-range benefit. It helped in bringing north and south closer together by improving communications. Many people, including religious divines who had gone to Daulatabad, settled down there. They became the means of spreading in the Deccan the cultural, religious and social ideas which the turks had brought with them to north India.

This resulted in a new process of cultural interaction between north and South India. However Muhammad-bin-Tughlaq has been criticized for this transfer of capital. Neither his selection of the place Devagiri as a site of capital nor his act of shifting the entire population of Delhi was welcomed by any historian. According to Standly Lane-poole, “Daulatabad was a monument of misdirected energy.”

*Introduction of Token Currency :*

Introduction of token currency was another bold experiment of the Sultan Muhammad-bin-Tughlaq. Since currency or money is a medium of exchange, it is greatly required that to with a huge quantity to serve the purpose of exchange in modern time. Muhammad-bin- Tughlaq’s predecessors depended on gold and silver coins as medium of exchange. But during the time Muhammad-bin-Tughlaq a huge quantity of coins was required for various transactions and there was a dearth of gold and silver coins in the country.

Further he had squeezed the treasury by spending a lot of money in his various experiments including the transfer of the capital. And again he had the ambition to conquer distant countries which would require a good deal of money. Considering all those factors he decided to introduce a bronze coin which was to have the same value as the silver tanka. He was also encouraged by Qublai Khan, the ruler of China and Ghazan Khan, the ruler of Persia who had successfully experimented with a token currency. Muhammad- bin-Tughlaq introduced bronze coins in place of silver and gold but there remained certain defects which made him a big failure in this experiment.

Within a very short time specimens of this coin were found in different parts of the country. A huge amount of forged coins entered into market and government treasury as those were minted secretly by private parties. The government took no steps to prevent this. As a result each house turned to be a mint.

Further, people made payments to the government with new bronze coins and hoarded gold and silver. The government treasury was filled with bronze or copper coins. The new coins also began to be greatly devalued in the markets. Muhammad-bin- Tughlaq could not stop the forging of new coins. Had he been able to do so, he could have been successful.

Finally he decided to withdraw the token currency. He promised to exchange silver coins for bronze coins. In this way a huge amount of new coins were exchanged for silver. But the forged coins which were detected were not exchanged.

These coins Barani says, were heaped up outside the fort and remained lying there for many years.- These above experiments not only brought wastage of money but also affected the prestige of the Sultan.





*Token currency coin*

*Khurasan Expedition :*

Muhammad-bin-Tughlaq’s experiments were not confined to internal matters only; it was also down with external affairs. His Khurasan project was the first of them. In-order-to fulfill his ambition of a great conqueror; he planned to conquer the kingdom of Khurasan which was then ruled by Iraq. He recruited one lakh soldiers for this purpose and paid them one year’s salary in advance.

He spent nearly three lakhs of rupees for this mission. But this project was dropped because he did not get the help of the Persian emperor who had assured him to help in this mission. Ultimately the Sultan incurred a huge financial loss and his reputation as a conqueror hampered much.

*Karajal Expedition :*

Karajal expedition was another mis-judged step of Muhammad-bin- Tughlaq. Karajal was a Hindu kingdom located between India and China. In 1337 Muhammad-bin-Tughlaq sent a huge army to invade Karajal. After some initial success, the Delhi army perished in the mountainous region of Himalayas due to severe rain fall.

The army suffered terribly and we are told by Barani that out 10, 000 army only 10 horse-men could return to Delhi to tell the story of the disaster. It was a great loss to the Sultan both in men and money. Though the Hindu raja of Karajal accepted the Suzerinty of Delhi, but considering to the amount of loss, it can be described that the Karajal expedition was an unsuccessful adventure of Sultan.

Further against the Mongols, the Sultan Muhammad-bin- Tughlaq felt weak as he had neglected the defence of the northwestern frontier. The Mongols under their leader Tarma-Shirin Khan had invaded India and plundered upto Multan and Lahore without any opposition.

When they advanced towards Delhi, the Sultan Muhammad-bin-Tughlaq not knowing what to do, bribed the invader with a huge quantity of gold and silver. This weakness of the Sultan made people feel most insecure. Failure in both the military expeditions as well as his inability to defend the Mongols made him unpopular.

*The Estimate of Sultan Muhammad-bin- Tughlaq :*

While making an estimate of Sultan Muhammad-bin- Tughlaq’s character and achievements, historians have strongly differed and have expressed diametrically opposite views. Historians like Elphinstone, Edward Thomass, Havell and V.A. Smith have agreed that the Sultan Muhammad-bin-Tughlaq was affected by some degree of insanity. But on the other hand historians like Gardiner Brown and Dr. Iswari Prasad have described Muhammad-bin-Tughlaq with high sounding words and do not believe that he was suffering from insanity.

Even contemporary historians like Barani and Ibn Batuta have expressed opposite views about the character and achievements of the Sultan. So in this context, it is very difficult to make an important and unprejudiced assessment of the Sultan Muhammad-bin-Tughlaq. Almost all the historians have agreed that Sultan Muhammad was one of the most learned and accomplished scholars of his time.

He had profound knowledge in logic, philosophy, mathematics astronomy and physical sciences. He was well versed in Arabic and Persian language and literature. He was a lover of music and fine arts. Barani says, the sultan Muhammad-bin-Tughlaq was a veritable wonder of creation whose abilities would have taken by surprise even Aristotle and Asaf.

But he was proved to be a big failure as a ruler particularly with regards to his different experiments. His increase of tax in the fertile Doab region was not at all in-correct. As a ruler he had the every right to increase tax in-order-to meet the day to day expenditures of the country. But it came at a time when the Doab region was at famine.

People who were already paying almost fifty percent of the land revenue since the time of Ala-ud-din suddenly became unwilling to pay more than that. And the very situation was not favourable to make-up their minds to pay more. Neither the Sultan nor his officers did realize the matter. Secondly his creation of Department of Agriculture for the purpose of Large Scale cultivation of lands for surplus production was a welcomed step. But while implementing it he did a mistake by not choosing a fertile land for this purpose. Again the officers appointed in this work were corrupt and lacked experience. He did a great mistake by dropping this project just after one failure. It seems that though his idea was good, but he lacked executional ability.

Again in case of his transfer of capital from Delhi to Daulatabad, he displayed his lack of Wit. Instead of shifting the en masse population, he could have shifted only the official seats and officers. Even if he had the intention to punish the people of Delhi for their abusing and scandlous letters, he could do so by some other method, but not by physically shifting them to Devagiri, the new capital. Further his introduction of token currency was amazing one.

As there was shortage of gold and silver coins to serve as a medium of exchange due to the increase in the transactions, the sultan was very right to go for the introduction of a Copper Currency which had the same value as the Silver Coin. But he failed to keep an effective control over its minting. It was found a huge amount of foreged copper coins in the market as a result of private minting. He also did not make any elaborate effort to check it except banning it.

As regards to his foreign expeditions, he was seen as a great failure. He lost both men and money in both the expeditions of Khurassan and Karajal. He had exhibited lack of wisdom and commonsense in these expeditions. He was also mild before the Mongols.

It was due to the failure in different matters he has been called a mad Sultan. He has also been characterised as a mixture of opposites and a bundle of contradictions. It is sure that he had many good ideas, but he had not the capacity to execute them. He was surely one of the extraordinary kings.

*Legacy :
*
Sultan Muḥammad was among the most controversial and enigmatic figures of the 14th century. A dauntless soldier, he was tolerant in religion and was normally humane and humble, but these traits were vitiated at times by cruelty sometimes approaching the inhuman. He lived in constant conflict between faith and action, faith in the correctness of his policies and action in the means by which he sought to implement them. A born revolutionary, he desired to create a more equitable social order by making Islam a religion of service rather than a means of exploitation. This end, he believed, could be achieved only by a strong centralized authority based on justice and patronage of the poor, the learned, and the pious and on the suppression of rebellions mainly of the privileged classes in a tradition-ridden society.

All contemporary historians based their assessment of Muḥammad on his administrative measures, which were neither vicious nor visionary. They failed because of the harshness of the Sultan in executing them, the challenge they posed to the privileged classes, the general lethargy and conservatism of his subjects, and the expansion of the empire with which Muḥammad’s administrative machinery could not cope.

*Firuz Shah Tughlaq (1351–1388) :*

Sultan Firuz Shah Tughlaq was a Turkic Muslim ruler of the Tughlaq Dynasty, who reigned over the Sultanate of Delhi from 1351 to 1388. His father's name was Rajab who had the title Sipahsalar. He succeeded his cousin Muhammad bin Tughlaq following the latter's death at Thatta in Sindh, where Muhammad bin Tughlaq had gone in pursuit of Taghi the ruler of Gujarat. For the first time in the history of Delhi Sultanate, a situation was confronted wherein nobody was ready to accept the reins of power. With much difficulty, the camp followers convinced Firuz to accept the responsibility. In fact, Khwaja Jahan, the Wazir of Muhammad bin Tughlaq had placed a small boy on throne claiming him to the son of Muhammad bin Tughlaq, who meekly surrendered afterwards. Due to widespread unrest, his realm was much smaller than Muhammad's. Tughlaq was forced by rebellions to concede virtual independence to Bengal and other provinces.






*Remains of buildings at Firoz Shah Kotla, Delhi, 1795.*

*His Rule :*

Firoz was majorly depended on an earlier commander, Malik Maqbul who accepted Islam after he was arrested. Sultan used to call him _khan-i-jahan_ which meant real ruler. Malik helped him in his rule when he was on expeditions. Tughlaq decided not to repeat the mistakes done by his cousin Muhammad's. He chose not to reconquer territories that had split away, nor to keep further regions from taking their autonomy.

Firoz gave various imperative concessions to the scholars. He attempted to boycott practices which the standard scholars considered un-Islamic. In this manner, he denied the act of Muslim ladies going out to pray at the graves of holy people. He mistreated various Muslim groups which were viewed as unorthodox by the scholars.

Firoz provided the principal of inheritance to the armed force. Officers were permitted to rest and enjoy and send their children in army in their place. The officers were not paid in real money but rather by projects on land revenue income of towns. This novel strategy of instalment prompted numerous misuses.

*Achievements of Firoz Shah :*

Firoz Shah Tughlaq worked majorly for development of infrastructure in his kingdom. He built schools, hospitals, river canals, reservoirs, rest houses among other things. He also repaired the Qutub Minar which had been damaged by an earthquake.

He established the Diwan-i-Khairat -- office for charity
He established the Diwan-i-Bundagan -- department of slave
He established Sarais (rest house) for the benefits of merchants and other travellers
He adopted the Iqtadari framework
He is known to establish four new towns, Firozabad, Fatehabad, Jaunpur and Hissar
He established hospitals known as Darul-Shifa, Bimaristan or Shifa Khana
*He constructed canals from :*

Yamuna to the city of Hissar
Sutlej to the Ghaggar
Ghaggar to Firozabad
Mandvi and Sirmour Hills to Hansi in Haryana

*Taxes imposed under Firoz Shah Tughlaq :*

Kharaj: land tax which was equal to one-tenth of the produce of the land
Zakat: two and a half per cent tax on property realized from the Muslims
Kham: one-fifth of the booty captured (four-fifth was left for the soldiers)
Jaziya: levied on the non-Muslim subjects, particularly the Hindus. Women and children were, however, exempted from the taxes
*Bright side of Firoz Tughlaq’s reign :*

*1. Assessment of the revenue:*

Firoz Tughlaq appointed a special officer namely Khawja Hisan-ud-Din to prepare an estimate of the public revenue of the kingdom. It took 6 years to complete this work. The Khawja toured the entire kingdom and prepared proper records. Thereafter he fixed the revenue of the ‘Khalsa’ land (Government land) in the kingdom at six crores and eighty-five lakhs of ‘Tankas’ (silver coins).

*2. New system of taxation:*

In accordance with the Islamic law, he imposed the following four taxes:

*(i) ‘Kharaj’:
*
It was the land tax which was equal to one-tenth of the produce of the land.
*
(ii) ‘Zakat’:
*
It was two-and-half per cent tax on property realized from the Muslims and utilized for specific religious purposes only.
*
(iii) ‘Kham’:
*
It was one-fifth of the booty captured and the four-fifth was left for the soldiers.
*
(iv) ‘Jijya’:
*
It was levied on the Non-Muslim subjects, particularly the Hindus. Women and children were, however exempted from the taxes.
*
3. Levy of other taxes:
*
The irrigation tax, garden tax, octroi tax and the sales tax were the other important taxes.
*
4. Irrigation works:
*
With a view to encourage irrigation, the Sultan paid a lot of attention to irrigation works.
*
Following four canals were constructed:
*
(i) The first and the most important and the longest canal were one which carried the waters of the river Jamuna to the city of Hissar. It was 150 miles long.

(ii) The second canal was drawn from river Sutlej to Ghaghra. It was about 100 miles long.

(iii) The third canal was from Mandvi and Sirmur hills to Hansi.

(iv) The fourth canal ran from Ghaghra to the newly established town of Firozabad.

Irrigation tax was charged at the rate of one-tenth of the produce of the irrigated land.

*5. Laying out gardens:*

The Sultan laid out about 1200 gardens in and around Delhi. These gardens produced so much fruit that they brought to the treasury an annual income of one lakh and eighty thousand tankas’.

*6. Welfare of the peasants:*

The Sultan waived off the loans that were given to them by Muhammad Tughlaq at the time of drought. He issued strict instructions to the officers not to harass the peasants.

*7. Benevolent works:*

*These included the following:*

*(i) ‘Diwan-i-Kherat’:*

It performed two main functions. The marriage bureau gave grants to the poor parents for the marriage of their daughters. It also provided financial help to the destitute.

*(ii) ‘Dar-ul-Shafa’:*

Hospitals were set up in important towns where medicines were given free of charge. Poor people were also supplied food.

*(iii) ‘Sarais’:*

About 200 ‘ ‘sarais’ (rest houses) were built by the Sultan for the benefits of merchants and other travellers.

*(iv) Grants to sufferers:*

The Sultan gave liberal grants to all those persons or their heirs who had suffered bodily or executed during the reign of Muhammad Tughlaq.

*8. Public works department:*

The Sultan got constructed four canals, ten public baths, four mosques, thirty palaces, two hundred, Sarais’, one hundred tombs, 30 towns and one hundred bridges. Firoz Shah had a passion for public works. About his building activities, Sultan himself observed, “Among the gifts which God has bestowed upon me, His humble servant, had a desire to erect public buildings. So 1 built many mosques and monasteries that the learned and the devout and the holy, might worship God in these edifices and aid the kind builder with their prayers.”

Four important towns founded by him were of Firozabad, Fatehabad, Jaunpur and Hissar Firoza. Two pillars of Ashoka were brought to Delhi—one from Meerut and the other from Topra, Arnbala district—and erected in Delhi. In this regard Dr. V.A. Smith has observed, “Asiatic kings as a rule show no interest in buildings erected by their predecessors, which usually are allowed to decay uncared for. Firoz Shah was particular in devoting much attention to the repair and rebuilding of the structures of former kings and ancient nobles.”

*9. Promotion of education and literature:*

Firoz Tughlaq was a great patron of historians, poets and scholars. He himself was a man of learning and wrote his biography entitled ‘Fatuhat-i-Firozshah’. He established thirty educational institutions including three colleges. Teachers were liberally paid and stipends were granted to the students.

Zia-ud-Din Barani wrote ‘Fatwah-i-Jahandari’ and Afif wrote his ‘Tarikh-i-Firuzshah’.
Maulana Jalal-ud-Din Rumi, the famous theologian also flourished in his court.

*10. Judicial reforms:*

Firoz Tughlaq was opposed to severe punishments. He ended punishments like cutting of the limbs, extracting the eyes, putting melted glass in the throat, burning alive etc. He established courts at all important places of his empire and appointed Qazis etc. to administer justice.

*11. Reforms in the currency system:*

The Sultan introduced several types of new coins and small coins and ensured that no false coins came into circulation.

*Dark Side of Firoz Tughlaq‘s Reign :*

*1. Failure as a conqueror :*

Firoz Tughlaq was not an able general. No significant conquests were made by him.

*Main military events are given below:*

*(i) Bengal:*

Firoz Tughlaq made two attempts to conquer Bengal but failed.

*(ii) Orissa:*

While returning from Bengal, he attacked Orissa. The ruler agreed to pay tribute to the Sultan.

*(iii) Nagarkot (Kangra):*

It took about six months to subjugate the Raja who acknowledged the Sultan’s suzerainty.

*(iv) Sindh:*

In the initial attacks by the Sultan himself, about three- fourth of his army was destroyed. Later the Sindh ruler accepted the suzerainty of the Sultan.

*2. Army organization :*

The Sultan introduced several reforms in the army which produced negative results.

(i) He did not maintain a standing army,

(ii) Military service was made hereditary,

(iii) The principle of merit was ignored,

(iv) The Sultan introduced the system of paying salary by grant of land.

This meant that a soldier had to go to his village for collecting his land revenue in lieu of salary.

*3. Evils of Jagirdari system :*

Firoz Tughlaq introduced the system of granting jagirs (lands) to his officials in place of cash payment. In due course, jagirdars became very powerful and created difficulties for the rulers

*4. Nereauary nobles :*

Firoz Tughlaq decreed that whenever a noble died, his son should be allowed to succeed to his position. This reduced the chances of competent persons being appointed at responsible posts.

*5. Slave system :*

It is said that Firoz Tughlaq had maintained about one lakh, eighty thousand slaves. It put great economic burden on the state. This slave system proved very harmful and became one of the contributory factors of the downfall of the Tughlaq empire.






*An estimate of Firoz Tughlaq :*

“The welfare of the people”, says Dr. Ishwari Prasad, “was the watchword of his administration. Therefore, Firoz is considered by Barani as an ideal Muslim King.”

In the words of Havell Firozj’s reign “is a welcome breath in the long chain of tyranny, cruelty and debauchery which make up the gloomy annals of the Turkish dynasties.”

Afif, a contemporary of Firoz writes, “Their (peasants) homes were replete with grain, everyone had plenty of gold and silver. “No women was without ornaments”

About the previous penal code and the changes brought about by Firoz, S.R. Sharma states, “it was left to his less appreciated successor (Firoz) to mitigate its ferocity.”

About the judicial system, V.A. Smith has said, “One reform the abolition of mutilation and torture, deserves unqualified commendation.”

About his love for buildings, Sir Woolseley Haigh has remarked, “He indulged in a passion for building which equalled if it did not surpass that of Roman emperor Augutus.”

*Emergence of Bengal Sultanate :*

The Delhi Sultanate lost its hold over Bengal in 1338 when separatist states were established by governors, including Fakhruddin Mubarak Shah in Sonargaon, Alauddin Ali Shah in Lakhnauti and Shamsuddin Ilyas Shah in Satgaon. In 1352, Ilyas Shah defeated the rulers of Sonargaon and Lakhnauti and united the Bengal region into an independent kingdom. He founded the Turkic Ilyas Shahi dynasty which ruled Bengal until 1490. During this time, much of the agricultural land was controlled by Hindu zamindars, which caused tensions with Muslim Taluqdars. The Ilyas Shahi rule was challenged by Raja Ganesha, a powerful Hindu landowner, who briefly managed to place his son, Jalaluddin Muhammad Shah, on the throne in the early 15th century, before the Ilyas Shahi dynasty was restored in 1432. The late 1480s saw four usurper sultans from the mercenary corps. Tensions between different Muslim communities often affected the kingdom.

After a period of instability, Alauddin Hussain Shah gained control of Bengal in 1494 when he was prime minister. As Sultan, Hussain Shah ruled till 1519. The dynasty he founded reigned till 1538. Muslims and Hindus jointly served in the royal administration during the Hussain Shahi dynasty. This era is often regarded as a golden age of the Bengal Sultanate, in which Bengali territory included areas of Arakan, Orissa, Tripura and Assam. The sultanate gave permission for establishing the Portuguese settlement in Chittagong. Sher Shah Suriconquered Bengal in the 16th century, during which he renovated the Grand Trunk Road. After conquering Bengal, Sher Shah Suri proceeded to Agra. His governor in Bengal rebelled and later reclaimed the sultanate. The Pashtun Karrani dynasty was the last royal family of the kingdom.

The absorption of Bengal into the Mughal Empire was a gradual process. It began with the defeat of Bengali forces under Sultan Nasiruddin Nasrat Shah by Babur at the Battle of Ghaghra. Humayun occupied the Bengali capital of Gaur during the invasion of Sher Shah Suri against both the Mughals and Bengal Sultans. Mughal rule formally began with the Battle of Raj Mahal when the last reigning Sultan of Bengal was defeated by the forces of Akbar. The Bengal Subah was created. The eastern deltaic Bhati region remained outside of Mughal control until being absorbed in the early 17th-century. The delta was controlled by a confederation of twelve aristocrats of the former sultanate, who became known as the Twelve Bhuiyans. Their leader was Isa Khan, a former nobleman of the sultanate. The Mughal government eventually suppressed the remnants of the sultanate in Bhati and brought all of Bengal under imperial rule.

*Legacy :*

His eldest son, Fath Khan, died in 1376. The Sultan then abdicated in August 1387 and made his other son, Prince Muhammad, king. A slave rebellion forced the Sultan to confer the royal title to his grandson, Tughluq Khan.

Tughlaq's death led to a war of succession coupled with nobles rebelling to set up independent states. His lenient attitude had strengthened the nobles, thus weakening the Sultan's position. His successor Ghiyas-ud-Din Tughlaq II could not control the slaves or the nobles. The army had become weak and the empire had shrunk in size. Ten years after his death, Timur's invasion devastated Delhi. His tomb is located in Hauz Khas (New Delhi), close to the tank built by Alauddin Khalji. Attached to the tomb is a madrasa built by Firoz Shah in 1352-53.


*Sultan Ghiyath-ud-din Tughluq Shah (1388–1389)*
*Sultan Abu Bakr Shah (1389–1390)*
*Sultan Muhammad Shah (1390–1394)*
*Sultan Ala-ud-din Sikandar Shah (1394)*
*Sultan Nasir-ud-din Nusrat Shah Tughluq (1394–1398)*
*
Nasir-ud-Din Mahmud Shah Tughluq (1394 – 1413) :

Nasir-ud-Din Mahmud Shah Tughluq* (reign: 1394 – February 1413 CE) was the last sultan of the Tughlaq dynasty to rule the Islamic Delhi Sultanate. During his reign in 1398, Amir Timur the Chagtai ruler invaded India. He carried away with him a large booty from Delhi and the surrounding area. Soon after the invasion, the Tughlaq dynasty came to an end.

*Timurid Invasion :*

Timur (1336-1405 A.D.) was a great military commander and conqueror of Central Asia. He conquered one kingdom after another. In course of a fight, his one leg was wounded and he limped for the rest of his life. Thereafter he came to be known as Timur-the Lame. The Persians called him ‘Timur-i-Lang’.
Timur succeeded in establishing a vast empire which included Transoxiana, a part of Turkistan, Afghanistan, Persia, Syria, Qurdistan, Baghdad, Georgia and the major part of Asia Minor. He successfully looted southern Russia and several parts of India. Delhi was perhaps the worst sufferer. 

*Fulfilling the task of Changez Khan :*

It is said by some historians that Timur wanted to realise the dream of Changez Khan which he had seen at the time of Iltutmish.

*Unstable political condition of India :*

Timur wanted to make the best use of the political chaos of India.





*Timur’s attack on Delhi Sultanate:*

In 1398, Timur invaded northern India, attacking the Delhi Sultanate ruled by Sultan Nasir-ud-Din Mahmud Shah Tughluq of the Tughlaq dynasty. He was opposed by Ahirs and faced some reversals from the Jats, but the Sultanate at Delhi did nothing to stop him. After crossing the Indus River on 30 September 1398, he sacked Tulamba and massacred its inhabitants. Then he advanced and captured Multan by October.

Timur crossed the Indus River at Attock (now in Pakistan) on 24 September 1398. His invasion did not go unopposed and he encountered resistance from the Governor of Meerut during the march to Delhi. Timur was still able to continue his approach to Delhi, arriving in 1398, to fight the armies of Sultan Nasir-ud-Din Mahmud Shah Tughluq, which had already been weakened by a succession struggle within the royal family.

*Capture of Delhi (1398) :*

The battle took place on 17 December 1398. Sultan Nasir-ud-Din Mahmud Shah Tughluq and the army of Mallu Iqbal had war elephants armored with chain mail and poison on their tusks. As his Tatar forces were afraid of the elephants, Timur ordered his men to dig a trench in front of their positions. Timur then loaded his camels with as much wood and hay as they could carry. When the war elephants charged, Timur set the hay on fire and prodded the camels with iron sticks, causing them to charge at the elephants howling in pain: Timur had understood that elephants were easily panicked. Faced with the strange spectacle of camels flying straight at them with flames leaping from their backs, the elephants turned around and stampeded back toward their own lines. Timur capitalized on the subsequent disruption in the forces of Nasir-ud-Din Mahmud Shah Tughluq, securing an easy victory. Nasir-ud-Din Mahmud Shah Tughluq fled with remnants of his forces. Delhi was sacked and left in ruins. Before the battle for Delhi, Timur executed 100,000 captives.

The capture of the Delhi Sultanate was one of Timur's greatest victories, arguably surpassing the likes of Alexander the Great and Genghis Khan because of the harsh conditions of the journey and the achievement of taking down one of the richest cities at the time. After Delhi fell to Timur's army, uprisings by its citizens against the Turkic-Mongols began to occur, causing a retaliatory bloody massacre within the city walls. After three days of citizens uprising within Delhi, it was said that the city reeked of the decomposing bodies of its citizens with their heads being erected like structures and the bodies left as food for the birds by Timur's soldiers. Timur's invasion and destruction of Delhi continued the chaos that was still consuming India, and the city would not be able to recover from the great loss it suffered for almost a century.





*Delhi after sack of Timur Lang, 1398*

*Effects of Timur’s Invasion :*
*
Economic effects :
*
(a) Carrying away enormous wealth of India to Central Asia.

(b) Destruction of standing crops and ravaging grain stores.

(c) Breaking out of diseases and famine.
*
3. Political effects :
*
(a) Death blow to the already tottering power of the Tughlaq dynasty.

(b) Disintegration of the Delhi Sultanate.

(c) Exposure of India’s military weakness and paving way for Babur’s invasion.

*Successor to Tughluq Dynasty :*

After the return of Amir Timur, Nasir-ud-Din Mahmud Shah Tughluq (reign: 1394 – February 1413 CE), the last sultan of the Tughlaq dynasty was under the effect of Amir Mallu Iqbal (ruler of the land between river Ganga and Jamuna river). In 1408 Amir Mallu Iqbal attacked the Punjab but was defeated and killed by its ruler Sayyid Khizr Khan. After Mallu's death, Nasir-ud-Din Mahmud Shah returned to Delhi and established his Kingdom with help of Dauwlat Khan Lodi. Nasir-ud-Din Mahmud Shah died in February 1413. Dauwlat Khan Lodi was raised as Sultan of Delhi by the Wazeers and Amirs of the last Tughlaq Sultan Nasir-ud-Din Mahmud Shah. He remained as autonomous King for almost a year. On 28th May 1414, Sayyid Khizr Khan surrounded the city, defeated the Daulat Khan's army and established the Sayyid dynasty. In 1414, the power vacuum created by Timur's invasion was filled by the first Sayyid Sultan.
The succeeding sultan of the Delhi Sultanate was Khizr Khan, the first of the Sayyid dynasty.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## dexter

*Sayyid dynasty (1414–1451) :*

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 history of the Sayyid dynasty is not clearly known but they claimed to be the descendants of Prophet Mohammed. The Sayyid Empire was formed amidst chaos when there was no figure of authority to control Delhi. The Sayyid dynasty had four basic rulers.
The Sayyid Dynasty was founded by Khizr Khan, who was the governor of Multan and Timur's deputy in India. This dynasty ruled for 37 years from 1414 to 1451 AD by four rulers- Khizr Khan, Mubarak, Muhammad Shah, Alam Shah. Here, we are giving a complete detailed summary on the Sayyid Dynasty of Delhi Sultanate.

The first Sayyid ruler of Delhi was Khizr Khan (reigned 1414–21), who had been governor of the *Punjab*. He and his three successors occupied themselves in raids to collect revenue, barely maintaining themselves against the Sharqī sultans to the east and the Khokars to the northwest. Khizr’s successor, Mubārak Shah, had some success, but, after the latter’s assassination in 1434, his two successors, Muḥammad Shah and ʿĀlam Shah, proved incapable. ʿĀlam Shah abandoned Delhi for Badaun in 1448, and three years later Bahlūl Lodī, already ruler of the Punjab, seized Delhi and inaugurated the Lodī, the last dynasty of the Delhi sultanate.







Following the 1398 Sack of Delhi, Amir Timur appointed the Sayyids as the governors of Delhi. Their dynasty was established by Sayyid Khizr Khan, deputised by Timur to be the governor of Multan (Punjab). Khizr Khan captured Delhi on 28 May 1414 thereby establishing the Sayyid dynasty. Khizr Khan did not take up the title of Sultan and nominally, continued to be a _Rayat-i-Ala_ (vassal) of the Timurids - initially that of Timur, and later his grandson Shah Rukh.

Khizr Khan was succeeded by his son Sayyid Mubarak Shah after his death on 20 May 1421. Mubarak Shah referred to himself as _Muizz-ud-Din Mubarak Shah_ on his coins. A detailed account of his reign is available in the _Tarikh-i-Mubarak Shahi_ written by Yahya-bin-Ahmad Sirhindi. After the death of Mubarak Shah, his nephew, Muhammad Shah ascended the throne and styled himself as Sultan Muhammad Shah. Just before his death, he called his son Sayyid Ala-ud-Din Shah from Badaun, and nominated him as successor.

The last ruler of the Sayyids, Ala-ud-Din, voluntarily abdicated the throne of the Delhi Sultanate in favour of Bahlul Khan Lodi on 19 April 1451, and left for Badaun, where he died in 1478.

*Khizr Khan (1414–1421) :*

When Timur ‘the Scourge of God’ departed India, the Delhi Sultanate was in an appalling state of disintegration. The once large empire had fragmented into small independent states, some of which were larger than the core Delhi Sultanate itself. Even so, the Sultanate endured for another 114 years, mostly in perilous condition, till Babur the Mughal wiped it away and established the Mughal Empire in India. Following the death of Sultan Mahmud, there followed two years of chaotic interregnum before two successor dynasties came to power—first, the Sayyids ruling for 37 years under four successive sultans; followed by the Lodis ruling for 75 years under three sultans.

Khizr Khan Sayyid founded the dynasty named after the appellation with his name that signified his descend from the Prophet Muhammad—the Sayyid Dynasty. The veracity of this claim of descent from the Prophet is not readily ascertainable and is therefore uncertain. Khizr Khan’s ancestors had indeed come from Arabia, migrating to India during the early part of the Tughluq rule. They had settled in Multan and Malik Suleiman, Khizr Khan’s father, had been appointed the governor of Multan by later Tughluq rulers. Khizr Khan inherited the position on his father’s death, but managed to lose it during the confusion that followed Firuz Shah’s death in Delhi. During that chaotic time, Sarang Khan, the brother of Mallu Iqbal Khan the strongman of Delhi, captured Khizr Khan and took over the governorship of Multan. Khizr Khan however, managed to escape.

After escaping captivity, Khizr joined Timur during his return trip from the sack of Delhi. On Timur’s final departure, Khizr regained his previous position when he was once again appointed governor of Multan. He stayed in the position and on the death of Mahmud, the last Tughluq ruler, he overthrew Daulta Khan who had come to the throne of Delhi and ascended the throne as Sultan Khizr Khan Sayyid.

It was not possible for Khizr Khan to take stern measures as Balban did to reclaim the former provinces of the Delhi Empire. That was beyond his acumen and resources. But there were refractory chiefs near Delhi and it was only natural that he should attempt to subdue them. In the year of his succession his wazir, Taj-ul-Mulk led a series of expeditions against the Rajput princes of Katehar and Etawah. Other expeditions sent to Kampil. Patiali, Jalesar, Gwalior, Biyana and Mewat. These expeditions met with temporary success but failed to produce any positive result. The people in the capital recovered as he helped the poor resettle.

Khizar Khan’s rule united the Punjab with Delhi. In his seven year rule Khizar Khan attacked the Raja of Etawah four times. Those of Katehar and Gwaliar thrice and several fief holders once or twice. The Khokars from the north Punjab frequently raided the territory of Delhi, he suppressed them. He also defeated the Rajput Etawah and compelled him submit again to the Delhi government. Apart from that, in 1421, the rebels of Mewat were crushed and the ruler of Gwaliar was forced to pay the tribute. He also crushed the rebellions of Khar, Kambila and Sakit in 1414 A.D. Khizr Khan fell ill in one of his expeditions and on his return to Delhi died on 20 May 1421. After his death his son Mubarak Khan ascended the throne of Delhi.






*Ancestry and early life :*

A contemporary writer Yahya Sirhindi mentions in his _Takhrikh-i-Mubarak Shahi_ that Khizr Khan was a descendant of Muhammad, but his conclusion was based only on a testimony of the saint Syed Jalal-ud-Din Bukhari of Uchh Sharif. Malik Mardan Daulat, the Governor of Multan, adopted Khizr Khan's father, Malik Sulaiman, as his son. Sulaiman succeeded Malik Shaikh, another son of Malik Mardan, to the governorship. After his death, Firuz Shah Tughlaq appointed Khizr Khan as governor. But in 1395, he was expelled from Multan by Sarang Khan, brother of Mallu Iqbal Khan. He fled to Mewat and later joined Timur. It is believed that before his departure, Timur appointed Khizr Khan his viceroy at Delhi although he could only establish his control over Multan, Dipalpur and parts of Sindh. Soon he started his campaign and defeated Mallu Iqbal Khan. After defeating Daulat Khan Lodi, he entered Delhi victoriously on 6 June 1414.







*Sultanate in Dire Straits :*

Even though a new Sultan had ascended the throne, the process of the Sultanate’s disintegration continued unabated. In Delhi, the nobles continued their mad scramble for power, changing allegiances rapidly and regularly. Sordid ambitions were nakedly visible and led to unprincipled opportunism and the focused pursuit of pure self-interest. Since the days of the mighty Balban, the Doab had been the most restive region under the Sultanate. During the confusion of the last days of the Tughluq dynasty, Rajput chieftains of the Rathor clan had become independent rulers in Etawah, Katehar, Kanauj and Badayun. They stirred rebellions on a regular basis, necessitating the repeated mounting of punitive expeditions by the Delhi Sultans. These expeditions were required to bring a semblance of order to the region but were never entirely successful.

By the end of the 14th century, the kingdoms of Malwa, Jaunpur and Gujarat had acknowledged independent status. They were not only engaged in fighting each other and other neighbours but regularly encroached on Delhi territory. Multan and Lahore had come under the control of Jasrat Khokhar, who paid scant attention to Delhi and established independent control by taking advantage of the prevalent chaos. Around Delhi, the Mewatis were seething with discontent. This was the state of the Sultanate that Khizr Khan had captured.

*Stabilisation Attempts :*

Khizr Khan was pragmatic enough to accept the diminished state of the Sultanate and mindful of the fact that he only controlled a small territory around Delhi. Further, he was devoid of the large amount of resources necessary to attempt any major campaigns to recapture seceded regions and return them to the Sultanate fold. He could only attempt minor expeditions with the very limited objective of gathering arears of revenue from the small-time chieftains. Even these minor forays were not always successful. Khizr Khan’s minister Taj-ul-Mulk carried out few raids against the Rajput rulers in Etawah and Katehar with limited success. He managed to collect some amount of revenue, but did not attempt any permanent subjugation or annexation.

At this juncture, as if to create a further debacle for the embattled Sultan, the northern frontier erupted in violence. In 1416, a group of Turkbachchas assassinated Malik Sadhu Nadira, the deputy of Prince Mubarak. On the arrival of Delhi forces to quell the rebellion they fled to the mountains. However, they renewed their rebellion under the command of Tughan Rais. The forces loyal to Delhi managed to suppress the rebellion and Tughan Rais was forced to accept vassal status. To ensure his loyalty in the future, his son was taken and kept as a hostage in Delhi. However, treachery and rebellions continued unabated across the entire Sultanate.

Khizr Khan and his indefatigable minister Taj-ul-Mulk continued to lead punitive expeditions against rebels in order to contain the fires that were being lit on a regular basis. These expeditions, undertaken at enormous cost to a depleted exchequer, were never able to fully extinguish the rebellions, nor were they able to control the chieftains even after they were defeated in battle. The Delhi Sultanate lacked the resources to follow through on battlefield victories and had to be content with minimal tributes that were paid by defeated chiefs and rulers. This situation permitted the chieftains to invariably bounce back and commence yet another rebellion. This was an endless cycle that sapped the strength and resources of an embattled Sultan.

*The Nagaur Campaign :*

The only long distance campaign that Khizr Khan attempted was an expedition that he led towards Nagaur on the appeal by its ruler for assistance against an incursion by Ahmad Shah of Gujarat. On the approach of Khizr Khan’s army, Ahmad Shah withdrew to Gujarat without offering battle. Some narratives proclaim this withdrawal as Khizr Khan’s victory. However, this is a tenuous claim and it is difficult to accept this verdict of a ‘victory’. At the time of this episode, the Hindu kings of Idar, Champaner, Jhalawar and Nagaur had formed a confederacy to oppose Ahmad Shah who was perpetuating religious intolerance against the Hindus in Gujrat and neighbouring areas. They were also joined by the Muslim ruler of Malwa, who had also been on the receiving end of Ahmad Shah’s offensives. Since the neighbourhood was hostile to him, Ahmad Shah could not have stayed away from Gujarat for a lengthy period of time. This was more so since Malwa was also opposed to him. Therefore the strategic retreat to Gujarat was self-imposed and not really a military victory for the Delhi forces.

In any case, Nagaur accepted Delhi suzerainty although it changed allegiance to Gujarat a mere two years later when it was threatened by Malwa. Even though no battle had been fought or won, the long march out of Delhi and the withdrawal of Ahmad Shah to Gujarat on the arrival of the Delhi forces has a salutary effect on some of the minor chieftains of the region, who submitted to Delhi control without resistance. In the last year of his reign Khizr Khan raided Mewat and destroyed a fortress at Kotla. He went on to sack Gwalior and collected some tribute. This was a show of force that indicated the gradual revival of the power of the Delhi Sultanate. However, Khizr Khan was already a sick man and on his return to Delhi, took to his bed and died on 20 May 1421.

*Khizr Khan – The Reluctant Sultan :*

Khizr Khan genuinely believed that he owed his stature to the largesse of Timur and therefore displayed unswerving loyalty to Timur and his descendants throughout his life. He was not enamoured by the trappings of power and did not even assume the title of ‘sultan’, living life in the true style of a Sayyid. It was the substance of power that mattered to Khizr Khan and all his policies were marked by prudence and rectitude. In matters of state he displayed remarkably similar traits to that of Firuz Shah—caution, moderation and benevolence. He also displayed an exemplary sense of justice, treating even rivals and adversaries with fairness and generosity. On ascending the throne, he treated the top officials of the Tughluq regime honourably, not shedding blood unnecessarily and not committing any atrocities that usually accompanied the usurpation of the throne. It is also noteworthy that Khizr Khan was free of all the common vices that afflicted the royalty of the time.

When Khizr Khan came to the throne of Delhi, the Sultanate was just one among the many kingdoms that littered the fragmented North India. He made cautious moves to expand territorial holdings, not with much success. Khizr Khan was a sensible monarch and had the good sense to clearly judge and separate the possible from the impossible, prudently tailoring his policies accordingly. He recognised the constraints under which he would have to operate and understood the importance of pursuing one objective at a time. The brutal truth was that the Sultanate did not have the resources necessary to pursue multiple objectives simultaneously. Khizr Khan only attempted to collect revenue from territories close to Delhi, resources that were essential for him to stay on as Sultan. His military expeditions were all oriented towards achieving this aim. Khizr did not formulate any grandiose or ambitious military plans. He did not attempt to fight either Gujarat or Jaunpur, both provinces that were fully independent and more powerful than Delhi. Instead, he concentrated on stamping out sedition within his reach.

While a traditional sultan of the times, he was also liked by his subjects for his thoughtful kindness and attention to their welfare—a trait that was not common amongst rulers in medieval times. His short seven-year rule was on the whole a positive period for the Sultanate, with some very minor developments towards stability taking place. He was unable to restore the prestige of the Sultanate—the odds against him were too high; and his personal abilities and capacity to be decisive under stress could not match the need of the hour. In fact the situation in the Sultanate had deteriorated to such an extent that Khizr Khan was constrained to requisition the services of some Afghan warlords in order to stay in power. Unfortunately, while this move ensured the fragile stability of his rule, it resulted in the ascendancy of the Afghan nobles in the administration. This progression proved disastrous in the long run for the continuance of the Sayyid dynasty.

*Mubarak Shah (1421–1434) :*

After the death of Khizr Khan, his son Mubarak Shah succeeded him on the throne. Like his father, Mubarak Shah was a wise man and an efficient ruler and remained on the throne from 1421-1434. He used his resources carefully and to the fullest. He was a devout Muslim and cared for his subjects. He was not quite able to possess many areas and kingdoms during his rule and kept suppressing revolts like his father. The city of Mubarakabad was founded by him in the year 1433.

Yahya Bin Sirhindi, a famous historian of his time, in his book Tarikh- i-Mubarak Shah’ has written about his reign as, “The reign of Mubarak Shah was a period of disquiet and rebellions, so his entire reign was spent in suppressing these.” One feature of his reign is remarkable. In the history of Sultanate, for the first time we learn that there were two Hindu Amirs in his reign.” Mubarak Shah built a city on the banks of river Jamuna and named it Mubarkabad. He was assassinated in a plot.






*Mausoleum of Mubarak Shah (Sayyid dynasty)*

Jasrath, the leader of the Khokars was an aspirant to the throne of Delhi. Mubarak Shah, however, did not make any attempt to recover any territory lost to the Delhi Sultanate. In one respect his reign was a departure from many of his predecessors, for he appointed one or two Hindus to his court. Under him some of the Muslim and Hindu nobles led by Sarwar-ul-Mulk, the wazir, hatched a conspiracy against the Sultan. The conspirators fell on him unawares when he was supervising the construction of a town on the bank of the Jamuna and killed him Sultan Mubarak Shah (February, 1434).

*Muhammad Shah (1434-45):*

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.

Muhammad Shah was a very weak ruler. The real authority of the Sultan extended merely 40 miles around Delhi. During his reign, disorder and mismanagement prevailed. The ruler of Malwa attacked Delhi during his reign. However with the timely help of Bahlol Lodi, the governor of Lahore and Sirhind, the Sultan was able to face the challenge successfully.

Later on during the reign of Muhammad Shah, Bahlol Lodi tried to capture Delhi but he failed. About the state of affairs during the reign of Muhammad Shah, the historian Nizam-ud-Din wrote, “The affairs of the state grew day by day more and more confused.”

In the meantime, Mahmud Shah Khalji of Malwa showed his gumption to raid Delhi. However, Buhlul Khan Lodi, the governor of Lahore and Sirhind, frustrated the designs of the Malwa ruler. All these led to the decline of the Sayyid Dynasty and it was only a matter of time that dynasty, founded by Khizr Khan, was doomed to annihilation. Muhammad Shah died in 1445. He lies buried in a tomb, located in the Lodhi Gardens in Delhi.

*Ala-ud-Din Alam Shah (1445-1451):*

Alam Shah was a pleasure-loving, incompetent and weak king. He used to reside at Badaun. According to some historians, he transferred his capital from Delhi to Badaun on account of the fear of Bahlol Lodi, governor of Lahore and Sir-hind. Taking advantage of his absence from Delhi, Bahlol Lodi, supported by Sudan’s ‘Vazir’ occupied Delhi in 1451. Alam Shah continued to live at Badaun till his death in 1478.

Ala-ud-din Alam Shah was the son of Muhammad Shah. He was a man of week and dissolute character and the weakest monarch of the Delhi Sultanate. He ascended the throne as all the chieftains except Bahlul Lodi took an oath of allegiance to him otherwise his dominion was ironically limited for an area of only ten miles from Delhi to Palam. It was aptly styled in a Persian saying: Padshahi-e-Shah Alam az Delhi ta Palam (The kingdom of the Lord of the world extends from Delhi to Palam).

The entire territory of *Punjab *was now under Bahlul Lodi’s sway. When he made one more abortive attempt for his rule in 1447, the indolent Sultan was obliged to retire and take rest in Badaun in order to spare himself from the constant pressure and troublemaking of Bahlul Lodhi. The capital was left in the charge of the wazir, Hamid Khan. Trouble, however, persisted and Hamid Khan finally invited Bahlul to Delhi and made him commander of the army. But Buhlul who had been dreaming of the throne for years got rid of Hamid Khan and became a full-fledged king in 1451. Alam Shah was left forlorn in Badaun till his death in 1478.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## dexter

*Lodi dynasty (1451–1526) :*

The Lodhi Dynasty was the first and last Afghan dynasty to rule in South Asia, with the exception of Sher Shah Suri, the only other Afghan who ruled this region. The Lodhi elders served in the court of Firuz Shah and Khizar Khan and held positions of responsibility. Buhlul Lodhi, the founder of the dynasty, was the governor of Sarhind. When the Saiyids became weak, he first occupied the province of Punjab and later on captured the throne of Delhi. His coronation was held on April 19, 1451. He took the title of Sultan Abul Muzzaffar Buhlul Shah Ghazi. In the following era of anarchy, there were a number of attempts to destabilize the newly established rule. But with the help of the Afghans, Buhlul managed to secure the foundations of the House of Lodhis. He also managed to capture a number of nearby states that had become independent in the final days of the Tughluqs and Saiyids.

When Buhlul died in July 1489, his son Nizam Khan succeeded him. Nizam took over the crown on July 17, 1489. He assumed the title of Sikandar Shah. Sikandar proved to be the most capable ruler of the Lodhi Dynasty. He not only managed to crush the revolts of his relatives, but was also able to establish just administration in India. He was the founder of the historical city of Agra. Like his father, Sikandar also died a natural death in November 1516.






After Sikandar’s death, war over the succession of the thrown broke out between his two sons, Ibrahim and Jalal. The nobles, who were interested in their personal benefits, played a key role in creating an atmosphere of disharmony between the two brothers. The war of succession resulted in the weakness of Lodhis, and ultimately resulted in the downfall of their rule. Ibrahim Lodhi was the last of the Sultans of the Lodhi Dynasty. Zahiruddin Babur, the Mughal ruler from Central Asia, attacked India in 1526.Ibrahim’s defeat at the hands of Babur in the first battle of Panipat on April 21 1526, not only resulted in end of Lodhi Dynasty, but also brought an end to the 320 years rule of the Sultans in Delhi. Babur declared himself king and established a monarchy.

*Bahlul Lodhi (1451–1489) :*

Bahlol Lodhi was the founder of the Lodhi Dynasty. In 1419, Sultan Shah, his uncle was appointed the Governor of Sarhind by Khizar Khan and given the title of Islam Khan. _Farishta _tells us that Islam Khan married his daughter to Bahlol and although he had his own sons, he nominated Bahlol as his heir on account of his ability. After the death of Islam Khan Bahlol became the governor of Sarhind. He was allowed to add Lahore to his charge. Thus he became a very important governor in Sayyid empire on account of the strength of his forces.

Bahlol Lodhi who had been dreaming of the throne for years, he took early steps to consolidate his position and reassert the authority of Delhi. One of his first acts was to overthrow the Wazir, Hamid Khan who had called him to the throne, and whose influence might have endangered his position. He was very patient with his Afghan tribesmen, and tried to run the government as a tribal chief.

Energetic, ambitious, and vigilant, Bahlol overlooked no opportunity of extending his dominion. He tried to take Multan from Hussain Langah, but did not succeed. He subdued the Hindu chiefs of Mewat and the Doab. An attempt to subdue the Raja of Etawah brought him in conflict with the Sultan of Jaunpur, who claimed suzerainty over the territory but a truce was arranged between the two kingdoms. In 1458, Sultan Hussain Sharqi came to the throne of Jaunpur. His wife Jalilah instigated him to attack Delhi. This led to hostilities which ultimately ended in the capture of Jaunpur by Bahlolin 1479.

Bahlol was not only the founder of the Lodhi dynasty but was responsible for its strength and glory. He was successful in subduing the various chiefs who could defy the central power. He was able to nestablish the prestige of the empire on a firm footing. His great achievement was the annexation of Jaunpur which defied him for many years. Bahlol was forced to spend most of his time in fighting wars and consequently there was hardly any time left for civil administration.






*Achievements of Bahlol Lodi as a ruler :*

*End justifies the means :*

Bahlol Lodi was a courageous soldier, successful general, a great diplomat and a realist. He believed in the principle that the end justifies the means. He understood his limitations and circumstances.

*Pragmatic dealing with Afghan nobles :*

Bahlol won the confidence, cooperation and respect of the Afghan nobles with his very amiable behaviour. He gave them jagirs and high offices. He treated them as friends and considered himself as one of them. In a crisis, he would not hesitate to take off his turban from his head and solicit forgiveness from his Amirs saying, “If you think me unworthy of the situation I occupy, choose someone else and bestow on me some other office.” This paid him dividends. This enabled him to consolidate and utilize the strength of the Afghans in the interest of the state.

It is said about him that he personally attended on the sick nobles.

The Sultan avoided showing his superior status. In the words of S.R. Sharma, “In social meetings he never sat on the throne and would not allow his nobles to stand; and even during public audiences he did not occupy the throne, but seated himself on a carpet.”

*Conquests of Bahlol Lodi :*

When he ascended the throne, the territory of his kingdom extended upto Palam and a few miles around Delhi. But the time he died at the age of eighty, his empire extended from Panipat to the frontiers of Bihar and included many important towns and cities. A part of Rajasthan was also under him. Bahlol’s most important conquest was that of the state of Jaunpur. This proved his military talents. It added to his resources and raised his prestige among nobles and other rulers.

*A devout Muslim :*

He was liberal in his general as well as religious outlook. He offered Namaz regularly. He kept the company of the Ulemas, studied Quran carefully but he was not a fanatic. He gave several important offices to the Hindus. Bahlol could be very generous to the defeated enemy. He captured twice the wife of his enemy ruler Hussain Shah but sent her back to her husband honourably both times. Dr. K.S. Lai’s comment on this are, “For a victorious Muslim Sultan in medieval India, this treatment was unique.”

*Sikandar Lodhi (1489-1517) :*

Bahlol Lodhi was succeeded by his son Nizam Khan who took up the title of Sikandar Shah. There was some hesitation on part of the nobles to accept Sikandar Shah as their ruler as his mother was the daughter of a goldsmith and her son was more of a plebeian than a prince. However this hesitation was overcome and he became the king.

Sikandar Lodhi consolidated the gains made during his father’s reign. Soon after his succession he quelled a serious rebellion in Jaunpur, where the Hindu Zamindars had assembled an army of 100,000 horse and foot. The rebels opposed the advance of royal army but they were defeated with great slaughter and dispersed. Sikandar once again reinstated his brother Barbak Shah and retired towards Oudh.

Sikandar Shah transferred his capital from Delhi to Sikandria, a suberb of Agra, the Sultan wanted to have more effective control over the fief-holders of Etawah, Biyana, Koil, Gawalior and Dholpur. The new city of Agra was founded in 1504 and very soon a beautiful town came into existence. The Sultan also transferred his residence from Delhi to Agra.

Sikandar Shah had to spend a lot of time in fighting but he managed to find some time to look after the administration. He weakened the various chiefs and thereby strengthens his own position. He insisted on the auditing of the accounts of the Afghan Nobles even at the risk of their displeasure. The Sultan encouraged agriculture and abolished corn duties. Traders and merchants were helped in every way to do their work in peace and security. Under the orders of Sultan lists of poor people were prepared every year and they were given Raation for six months. Prisoners were released on certain days in a year.

Sikandar Lodhi was a very striking figure of medieval India. He gave a new orientation to Afghan polity in India and considerably raised the stature and dignity of the office of Sultan. Sikandar Lodhi was an able administrator. There was the peace and prosperity in the country. The common man got justice. The judicial system was efficiently organized under Mian Bhua. He patronized men of letters, artists and poets etc. Unfortunately he was narrow-minded and fanatical in religious matters and injured the feelings of his Hindu subjects.

*Greatest Lodi Sultan:*

Sikandar Lodi has been accepted as the greatest Lodi Sultan. He established law and order. He was a brave and dauntless general. He encouraged agriculture and trade which resulted in economic prosperity. He enhanced the glory and power of the king. He was known for impartial justice. He asked all governors and officers to submit proper accounts of their income. He himself was a great scholar and patronized men of learning.

*Sikandar Lodi’s main achievements are discussed below:*

*1. Conquests:*

First of all Sikandar Lodi defeated his elder brother and seized Jaunpur and brought it under his direct control. He afterwards led his attack on Bihar, defeated its ruler and annexed it. He conquered the states of Dholpur, Bidar, Gwalior, Chanderi and other nearby kingdoms. He entered into a friendship treaty with the ruler of Bengal. Sikandar’s empire extended from the Punjab to the borders of Bengal and included the territories between Sutlej and Bundelkhand.

*2. Control over nobles:*

His control over his noble was so tight that he could boast, “If I order one of my slaves to be seated in a palanquin, the entire body of nobility would carry him on their shoulders at my bidding.” By his stern justice, code of conduct for the nobles and its strict adherence without any distinction, spy system and following a policy of happy blending of sternness and generosity, he succeeded in commanding the respect of his nobles. Sikandar’s sole motive was to restore the prestige of the Sultan and in that he succeeded.

Important measures that he adopted to strengthen his position were as under:

(i) He started sitting on the throne and compelled his nobles to show formal respect to him in the ‘darbar’ (court) and outside.

(ii) He framed certain rules which were observed by all his nobles and governors.

(iii) The governors were ordered to receive Sultan’s ‘firmans’ (orders) six miles ahead of their capital.

(iv) He asked all his governors and officers to submit their accounts of their income and expenditure. The offenders were punished. The governor of Jaunpur was punished on this very account and compelled to pay the embezzled money.

(v) A very efficient espionage system was organised. He posted spies and informers at every important place including the houses of his nobles.

*3. Efficient administration:*

Sikandar Shah was a well-meaning Sultan. He was very laborious. He attended to the smallest matter of administration. He worked hard from morning till night to supervise the administrative work.

*4. Occasional tours in disguise:*

Very often the Sultan toured in disguise to have the first hand information about the condition of the people and the activities of the Amirs and the Ulemas.

*5. Efficient espionage system:*

He was so well informed about every thing significant in the state through his spy system and his own tours that the people believed the Sultan had supernatural powers to assist him.

*6. Impartial justice:*

He brought about several reforms in the judicial system. He himself was the highest appeal of justice. He dispensed impartial justice to his subjects.

*7. Economic welfare of the people:*

He kept with him the rate-list of all articles of everyday use so that he could assess the economic condition of the people. An informal system of price control prevailed in the market which enabled people to get necessities of life at affordable price.

*8. Development of agriculture:*

He abolished duty on grain and encouraged farmers to improve agriculture.

*9. Progress of trade:*

The Sultan abolished all internal trade duties.

*10. Development of literature:*

The Sultan was an accepted scholar. He was well-versed in Persian and composed poems in this language. He was a partron of learned men.

*11. Promotion of education:*

The Sultan invited two eminent philosophers from outside India to improve the system of education in his empire.

He encouraged education particularly among children of Afghan nobles so as to make them cultured. He made mosques as centres of education.

He appointed one religious preacher, one teacher and one scavenger in each mosque at state expense. His court was a centre of learning and several scholars adorned it.

It is said that about seventy scholars discussed academic and religious problems every night by the side of his bed.

Several scholarly works were translated from Sanskrit into Persian.

*12. Promotion of music:*

The Sultan took a great interest in music. He enjoyed ‘sehnai’ very much. A reputed work on music titled ‘Lahjat-i- Sikandar Shahi’ was prepared during his reign.

*13. Promotion of architecture:*

The Sultan built the city of Agra which became an important administrative and cultural centre of the Mughals. He built many mosques and also the tomb of his father Bahlol Lodi in Delhi.

*14. Public welfare activities:*

The Sultan made suitable arrangements for the free distribution of ration to the poor from the royal treasury and opened free kitchen.

*15. Reforms in Islam:*

Sikandar tried to check certain customs which he considered bad in Islam. He forbade the visit of Muslim women to the shrines of saints. He prohibited the procession of ‘Tazias at the festival of Moharram.





*Lodhi Garden: Sikandar Lodi's Tomb*

*Ibrahim Lodi (1517 –1526) :*

After the death of Sikandar Shah, his eldest son Ibrahim was put on the throne on 21st November 1517 with the unanimous consent of the Afghan Nobles and he took up the title of Ibrahim Shah. He was intelligent, courageous and brave. He had some reputation for piety and orthodoxy. Like his father he was interested in music. As a man, he was generous and kind, but as a ruler he had many shortcomings which were heightened by the adverse circumstances in which he was placed. A faction of the nobility advocated a partition of the kingdom and set up his younger brother Jalal Khan on the throne of Jaunpur. But soon Jalal Khan was assassinated by his brother’s men.

He had a certain amount of vanity and he demanded more implicit obedience than was customary among the Afghans. His treatment of the nobility was on the whole tactless and indiscreet. His policy was calculated to provoke opposition and rebellion. He lacked qualities of generalship and seldom took the field himself. Soon disputes between the king and the Afghan nobles, which were simmering throughout the Lodhi period, became acute and Daulat Khan Lodhi, the governor of the Punjab and the king’s uncle, invited Babur, the ruler of Kabul, to invade India. After early incursions confined to the north-west and the Punjab, Babur met Ibrahim on 21st April, 1526 in the first battle of Panipat, and, by defeating him and capturing Dehli and Agra, laid the foundation of Mughal rule. This was also the end of Lodhi dynasty with the death of Ibrahim Lodhi at the battlefield of Panipat.






Ibrahim Lodhi an Afghan by blood was the last ruler of the Lodhi dynasty. He succeeded his father Sikander Lodhi but could not match his ability as a ruler. He was defeated by Babur in the battle of Panipat which saw the end of Delhi Sultanate and the beginning of the Mughal reign.

When Sikander died and Ibrahim ascended the throne, he faced resistance from a faction of the nobility.They advocated a partition of the kingdom and set up Jalal Khan-the younger brother of Ibrahim on the throne of Jaunpur. However Jalal was killed by Ibrahim’s men and he claimed the whole empire.
Ibrahim did not have good relations with the nobles. He ill-treated and imprisoned them. He was also cruel to his subjects and killed and poisoned many noblemen. Rebellions started to erupt in various corners of his kingdom. One of his noblemen-Daulat Khan invited Babur to invade India and take revenge on their behalf. Babur responded to his call and set out to meet the Delhi Sultan.

Babur reached Ambala without any resistance and then prudently organized his army in a defensive position. For eight days Babur waited for Ibrahim’s army and when they finally arrived they were surprised by the unique strategy. The use of Turko-Mongol bows by Babur’s men made things worse for Ibrahim as they were unaware of such weapons. Despite having a great numerical advantage
the Afghans lost the battle. However Ibrahim was a brave soldier and led his army from the front and gave his life in the war. Thus the first battle of Panipat (1526) witnessed the establishment of the Mughal kingdom in India.

*Main Events of his Reign :*

*1. Partition of the Kingdom:*

The Afghan nobles were divided into two groups. They wanted to divide the empire into two parts.

Ibrahim accepted his proposal and accordingly Jalal Khan, his brother became the ruler of Jaunpur.

However, Ibrahim changed his mind and it resulted in a serious conflict with his brother. Jalal Khan was defeated. Ibrahim got his brother poisoned to death and ruthlessly punished the supporters of Jalal Khan. This act created suspicion and distrust among the Afghan nobles for Ibrahim.

*2. Conflict with the Nobles:*

Ibrahim Lodi wanted to treat Afghan nobles as his servants. This led to a fierce conflict between Ibrahim and a large number of nobles. The battle was unprecedented. Describing the battle Niamatullah, the author of ‘Tarikh-i-Khan-i- Jahani’ states, “Dead bodies, heap upon heap, covered the field, and the number of heads lying upon the ground was beyond the reach of recollection.”Streams of blood ran over the plain. Brother against brother and father against son, urged by mutual rivalry and in born bravery, mixed in the conflict.
*
3. Conquest of Gwalior:
*
The ruler of Gwalior—a Rajput had given shelter to Jalal Khan, brother of Ibrahim. Therefore, Ibrahim attacked and annexed Gwalior to his kingdom.

*4. Conflict with Rana Sangram Singh popularly known as Rana Sanga of Mewar:*

Encouraged by his success against Gwalior, Ibrahim decided to conquer Mewar whose ruler was Rana Sanga—a great warrior. The armies of Delhi met with several reverses. Ibrahim lost his prestige and resources.
*
5. Battle of Panipat (1526):
*
Several Afghan nobles particularly Daulat Khan Lodi, governor of Punjab and Alam Khan Lodi, uncle of Ibrahim Lodi invited Babur, the ruler of Kabul to invade Delhi. This was done to take revenge from Ibrahim Lodi. Babur had already set his eyes upon India. He attacked India with about 12,000 soldiers and a number of cannon (machine guns).

Ibrahim faced Babur at Panipat on April 21, 1526 with a force of about 1, 00,000 soldiers. Ibrahim offered stiff resistance but was defeated and killed in the battlefield. This was perhaps the first instance in the history of Sultanate of Delhi that a Sultan lost his life in the battlefield. Thus came the end of the rule of the Lodi dynasty and the beginning of the Mughal rule in India.

*Fall of the empire :*

By the time Ibrahim ascended the throne, the political structure in the Lodi Dynasty had dissolved due to abandoned trade routes and the depleted treasury. The Deccan was a coastal trade route, but in the late fifteenth century the supply lines had collapsed. The decline and eventual failure of this specific trade route resulted in cutting off supplies from the coast to the interior, where the Lodi empire resided. The Lodi Dynasty was not able to protect itself if warfare were to break out on the trade route roads; therefore, they didn’t use those trade routes, thus their trade declined and so did their treasury leaving them vulnerable to internal political problems. In order to take revenge of the insults done by Ibrahim, the governor of Lahore, Daulat Khan Lodi asked the ruler of Kabul, Babur to invade his kingdom. Ibrahim Lodi was thus killed in a battle with Babur. With the death of Ibrahim Lodi, the Lodi dynasty also came to an end.

Another problem Ibrahim faced when he ascended the throne in 1517 were the Pashtun nobles, some of whom supported Ibrahim's older brother, Jalaluddin, in taking up arms against his brother in the area in the east at Jaunpur. Ibrahim gathered military support and defeated his brother by the end of the year. After this incident, he arrested those Pashtun nobles who opposed him and appointed his own men as the new administrators. Other Pashtun nobles supported the governor of Bihar, Dariya Khan, against Ibrahim.
Another factor that caused uprisings against Ibrahim was his lack of an apparent successor. His own uncle, Alam Khan, betrayed Ibrahim by supporting the Mughal invader Babur.






Rana Sanga, the Hindu Rajput leader of Mewar (r. 1509–1526), extended his kingdom, defeated the Lodi king of Delhi and was acknowledged by all the Rajput clans as the leading prince of Rajputana. Daulat Khan, the governor of Punjab region asked Babur to invade the Lodi kingdom, with the thought of taking revenge from Ibrahim Lodi. Rana Sanga also offered his support to Babur to defeat Ibrahim Lodi.

After being assured of the cooperation of Alam Khan and Daulat Khan, Governor of the Punjab, Babur gathered his army. Upon entering the Punjab plains, Babur's chief allies, namely Langar Khan Niazi advised Babur to engage the powerful Janjua Rajputs to join his conquest. The tribe's rebellious stance to the throne of Delhi was well known. Upon meeting their chiefs, Malik Hast (Asad) and Raja Sanghar Khan, Babur made mention of the Janjua's popularity as traditional rulers of their kingdom and their ancestral support for his patriarch Emir Timur during his conquest of Hind. Babur aided them in defeating their enemies, the Gakhars in 1521, thus cementing their alliance. Babur employed them as Generals in his campaign for Delhi, the conquest of Rana Sanga and the conquest of India.

The new usage of guns allowed small armies to make large gains on enemy territory. Small parties of skirmishers who had been dispatched simply to test enemy positions and tactics, were making inroads into India. Babur, however, had survived two revolts, one in Kandahar and another in Kabul, and was careful to pacify the local population after victories, following local traditions and aiding widows and orphans.

Despite both being Sunni Muslims, Babur wanted Ibrahim's power and territory. Babur and his army of 24,000 men marched to the battlefield at Panipat armed with muskets and artillery. Ibrahim prepared for battle by gathering 100,000 men (well-armed but with no guns) and 1,000 elephants. Ibrahim was at a disadvantage because of his outmoded infantry and internecine rivalries. Even though he had more men, he had never fought in a war against gunpowder weapons and he did not know what to do strategically. Babur pressed his advantage from the start and Ibrahim perished on the battlefield in April 1526, along with 20,000 of his men.

After Ibrahim's death, Babur named himself emperor over Ibrahim’s territory, instead of placing Alam Khan (Ibrahim's uncle) on the throne. Ibrahim's death marked the end of the Lodi dynasty and led to the establishment of the Mughal Empire in India. The remaining Lodi territories were absorbed into the new Mughal Empire. Babur continued to engage in more military campaigns.

Ibrahim Lodi's brother, *Mahmud Lodi*, declared himself Sultan and continued to resist Mughal forces. He provided 10,000 Afghan soldiers to Rana Sanga in battle of Khanwa. After the defeat, Mahmud Lodi fled eastwards and again posed a challenge to Babur two years later at the Battle of Ghaghra.


----------



## Kamikaze Pilot

Pakistansdefender said:


> Budha was born here in Pakistan/QUOTE]
> What is your source?


----------



## Pakistansdefender

All of the Buddhist history kinddom lies here and there are countless sources..
His empire likes in these lands. The religion of Buddhism started here.


----------



## Chhatrapati

Pakistansdefender said:


> All of the Buddhist history kinddom lies here and there are countless sources..
> His empire likes in these lands. The religion of Buddhism started here.


Nope, there is no evidence of Buddha being from the west. By the time Buddhism originated, todays Pakistan had fallen into Non-Vedic tribes. Kamboja, Kekaya, later Puru (Poros). Infact the language that was spoken in those kingdoms were different. Given Buddha's teaching were in oral tradition and mostly in Magadhi Prakrit. Which is only found in ancient Kingdom of Magadha. 

I don't know many Buddhist kings hailing from today's Pakistan. Buddhist Kings were not great rulers as they were not interested in expanding their territories. The only prominent one I know are Shakas, Kushanas, who are Indo-Scynthians. And few Greek Kings mostly in Afghanistan.


----------



## Pakistansdefender

Chhatrapati said:


> Nope, there is no evidence of Buddha being from the west. By the time Buddhism originated, todays Pakistan had fallen into Non-Vedic tribes. Kamboja, Kekaya, later Puru (Poros). Infact the language that was spoken in those kingdoms were different. Given Buddha's teaching were in oral tradition and mostly in Magadhi Prakrit. Which is only found in ancient Kingdom of Magadha.
> 
> I don't know many Buddhist kings hailing from today's Pakistan. Buddhist Kings were not great rulers as they were not interested in expanding their territories. The only prominent one I know are Shakas, Kushanas, who are Indo-Scynthians. And few Greek Kings mostly in Afghanistan.


Askoka empire is in Pakistan..
He was from Pakistan. 
Chanakiya was a pakistani etc 
And other Kings of maurian empire


----------



## Chhatrapati

S.Y.A said:


> Akbar wasnt a Muslim.


Yeah, many don't consider him Muslim because he had this fascination for Eastern Philosophy and created a mixed religion. Din-i llahi Which I presume is a big no no among the Mullahs at the time. And they didn't show any discontent at the time because of love for their heads. But after his death, the idea was dropped by the following rulers and later kings went the theocracy way.


S.Y.A said:


> Apart from Sher Shah Suri and Tipu Sultan all in your list were incompetent idiots.


Sher Shah was indeed a great ruler and a General. But Akbar is the one consolidated the Mughal rule, by defeating the Targhans all the way to Safavids who now ruled Kandahar. Of course all these were when he was still a "muslim". Maybe he drifted during his retirement.(pun)

Tipu Sultan is no different in that aspect compared to Akbar, during his expansion times he was all rough and tough, very theocratic but towards end he started consulting Hindu Astrologers given he was losing battles, he naturally thought it was due to his previous actions (karma as we say), then started heavily donating to temples, rebuilding temples which he destroyed.



Pakistansdefender said:


> Askoka empire is in Pakistan..
> He was from Pakistan.
> Chanakiya was a pakistani etc
> And other Kings of maurian empire


Oh dear you can't even Spell Ashoka properly. Chanakya wasn't a king, he was a minister and adviser to the King.

Chanakya was indeed from Takshashila, who was just a poor Brahmin who went for alms in Nanda empire. He picked up a street boy playing king and fostered him later he toppled the then ruler Dhana Nanda. 

Ashoka being the 3rd in line from Mauryan empire was nothing but a Bihari or a Bengali. His parents were Bihari-Bengali, his granparents were Bihari - Greek origin (highly debatable). So, nope. 

I'll ignore any further stupendous claims. Not even gonna explain how Buddha was not a Pakistani lol. You seem to lack a good shot at history.


----------



## Pakistansdefender

Chhatrapati said:


> Yeah, many don't consider him Muslim because he had this fascination for Eastern Philosophy and created a mixed religion. Din-i llahi Which I presume is a big no no among the Mullahs at the time. And they didn't show any discontent at the time because of love for their heads. But after his death, the idea was dropped by the following rulers and later kings went the theocracy way.
> 
> Sher Shah was indeed a great ruler and a General. But Akbar is the one consolidated the Mughal rule, by defeating the Targhans all the way to Safavids who now ruled Kandahar. Of course all these were when he was still a "muslim". Maybe he drifted during his retirement.(pun)
> 
> Tipu Sultan is no different in that aspect compared to Akbar, during his expansion times he was all rough and tough, very theocratic but towards end he started consulting Hindu Astrologers given he was losing battles, he naturally thought it was due to his previous actions (karma as we say), then started heavily donating to temples, rebuilding temples which he destroyed.
> 
> 
> Oh dear you can't even Spell Ashoka properly. Chanakya wasn't a king, he was a minister and adviser to the King.
> 
> Chanakya was indeed from Takshashila, who was just a poor Brahmin who went for alms in Nanda empire. He picked up a street boy playing king and fostered him later he toppled the then ruler Dhana Nanda.
> 
> Ashoka being the 3rd in line from Mauryan empire was nothing but a Bihari or a Bengali. His parents were Bihari-Bengali, his granparents were Bihari - Greek origin (highly debatable). So, nope.
> 
> I'll ignore any further stupendous claims. Not even gonna explain how Buddha was not a Pakistani lol. You seem to lack a good shot at history.


You can ignore my this comment too.


----------



## Taimur Khurram

Chhatrapati said:


> I don't know many Buddhist kings hailing from today's Pakistan.



The two most notable ones are Kanishka (from Peshawar) and Menander (from Sagala).

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Talwar e Pakistan

Pakistansdefender said:


> Askoka empire is in Pakistan..
> He was from Pakistan.
> Chanakiya was a pakistani etc
> And other Kings of maurian empire


No... you have to be trolling.

Chanakya was from Taxila but Ashoka and others of the Mauryan Empire were foreigners. Chanakya may have been a foreigner as well who had come to study in Taxila since he helped the Mauryans subdue his own people as there were two major rebellions in Gandhara against Mauryan occupation, but we are not sure.



Chhatrapati said:


> Nope, there is no evidence of Buddha being from the west.


You are correct, that was a silly claim for him to make. 



Chhatrapati said:


> By the time Buddhism originated, todays Pakistan had fallen into Non-Vedic tribes.


Coterminous Pakistan followed early Vedic tradition which had become taboo among the post-Vedic religions and cultures of the Ganges region. Introduction of Buddhism to the Indus Region morphed into Vedic synchronism with Buddhism which is best highlighted in Gandharan art.



Chhatrapati said:


> Kamboja, Kekaya, later Puru (Poros)


The Kamboja were not as major as the other peoples of Sapta Sindhu (Indus Region), Kekaya and the Purus were undoubtedly Vedic, though the Puru tribe has nothing to do with Porus and such connection is not academically recognized.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Talwar e Pakistan

Chhatrapati said:


> I don't know many Buddhist kings hailing from today's Pakistan. Buddhist Kings were not great rulers as they were not interested in expanding their territories.


You are quite wrong, but I do not blame you, even 99.9% of us Pakistanis are ignorant to our forgotten own history and heritage.

Majority of the rulers of the Indus Region have been Buddhist and they are among our greatest historic leaders. In comparison, Hindu influence was quite insignificant with there only being three short-lived Hindu dynasties, all three of which arose after a Brahmin minister murdered or deposed (through court intrigue) the rightful Buddhist king.

One famous Buddhist power was the indigenous Sindhu Rai Empire, which was nearly double the size of modern-day Pakistan, uniting the Indus Region as well as expanding into modern-day Afghanistan and Gujarat.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Taimur Khurram



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Chhatrapati

Talwar e Pakistan said:


> Coterminous Pakistan followed early Vedic tradition which had become taboo among the post-Vedic religions and cultures of the Ganges region. Introduction of Buddhism to the Indus Region morphed into Vedic synchronism with Buddhism which is best highlighted in Gandharan art.


It has nothing to do with the religion, they were sidelined following a brief war. Which weakened their Kingdom, and the eastern region amassed wealth through agriculture given those regions had abundance of rivers, all this happened in the later vedic period.



Talwar e Pakistan said:


> The Kamboja were not as major as the other peoples of Sapta Sindhu (Indus Region), Kekaya and the Purus were undoubtedly Vedic, though the Puru tribe has nothing to do with Porus and such connection is not academically recognized.


I'm not talking about early Vedic period, I'm talking about the history since the advent of Buddhism. That's why I said, Kekaya, Kamboja I missed Gandhara, had fallen into non-Vedic tribes by the time of Buddha. 
Coming to Puru, again I'm not talking about Vedic puru but the Puru that ruled during the invasion of Alexander. The name Porus is inaccurate and a greek given name. I didn't say they are the same. 



Talwar e Pakistan said:


> even 99.9% of us Pakistanis are ignorant to our forgotten own history and heritage.


It may have to do with the invasions, you are right in the middle connecting todays India and West Asia, the chances of invasion from two sides made the region a hotspot for different civilizations a lot of history got destroyed by these invasions. And Vedic people have the habit of writing these tales as poems, hymns etc... that too in Sanskrit which made it difficult to completely decipher the locations.



Talwar e Pakistan said:


> One famous Buddhist power was the indigenous Sindhu Rai Empire, which was nearly double the size of modern-day Pakistan, uniting the Indus Region as well as expanding into modern-day Afghanistan and Gujarat.


Gujarat at the time were under Sakas or Maitraka. 



Talwar e Pakistan said:


> Majority of the rulers of the Indus Region have been Buddhist and they are among our greatest historic leaders. In comparison, Hindu influence was quite insignificant with there only being three short-lived Hindu dynasties, all three of which arose after a Brahmin minister murdered or deposed (through court intrigue) the rightful Buddhist king.


I'm not sure about that. Many empires followed Buddhist traditions but there was significant Hindu chiefants throughout which can be corroborated from your own claim of having Brahmin ministers, and I'm intrigued by the name Brahmin Kingdom because no Kingdoms name themselves as Brahmin because they essentially loss their status and become Kshatriya. Anyway, not divulging into that any further. 



Taimur Khurram said:


> The two most notable ones are Kanishka (from Peshawar) and Menander (from Sagala).


Yes I mentioned them.



Chhatrapati said:


> prominent one I know are Shakas, Kushanas, who are Indo-Scynthians. And few Greek Kings mostly in Afghanistan.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Taimur Khurram



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## dexter

Sorry for not posting new stuff here, ill soon continue the series from where I left it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Taimur Khurram

Rare photo of Ghazi Ilm Uddin

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SingHee

Taimur Khurram,

Appreciate the work here, but just wanted to point out that we should be careful not to pass judgement on muslim brothers, especially those that are a very prominent part of our history. Specifically, there's no evidence to suggest the Khokhars were recently converted hindus, or even that they assassinated Ghori. 

In fact, there's an extremely detailed and specific account of the traditions and history of the tribe in what is probably the most well known book of recent times, which connects many important dots and largely makes a convincing case of their own tradition of being connected to Afghanistan.

A glossary of the Tribes and Castes of the Punjab and North-West Frontier Province By H.A. Rose
https://archive.org/details/glossaryoftribes03rose/page/n1113

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Taimur Khurram

SingHee said:


> Taimur Khurram,
> 
> Appreciate the work here, but just wanted to point out that we should be careful not to pass judgement on muslim brothers, especially those that are a very prominent part of our history. Specifically, there's no evidence to suggest the Khokhars were recently converted hindus, or even that they assassinated Ghori.
> 
> In fact, there's an extremely detailed and specific account of the traditions and history of the tribe in what is probably the most well known book of recent times, which connects many important dots and largely makes a convincing case of their own tradition of being connected to Afghanistan.
> 
> A glossary of the Tribes and Castes of the Punjab and North-West Frontier Province By H.A. Rose
> https://archive.org/details/glossaryoftribes03rose/page/n1113



The story of Qutb Shah is complete nonsense, they are not descended from him. Historical evidence shows that they were initially Hindu, before becoming spiritually Pak (clean) and converting to Islam. Genetic evidence also refutes the idea that they would have Arab origins. 

Not only that, but the very name Khokhar is Hindu in origin and mentioned in old Hindu texts.


----------



## SingHee

Taimur Khurram said:


> The story of Qutb Shah is complete nonsense, they are not descended from him. Historical evidence shows that they were initially Hindu, before becoming spiritually Pak (clean) and converting to Islam. Genetic evidence also refutes the idea that they would have Arab origins.
> 
> Not only that, but the very name Khokhar is Hindu in origin and mentioned in old Hindu texts.




Correlation does not equal causation, a simple rule in logic and reason.

I also made no mention of Qutb Shah, I provided a complete historical source which refutes what you are stating as fact.

Additionally, I should mention that all the so called 'nonsense' can be traced back to a certain K.S. Lal, who is widely quoted by many historians in the same context as your assertions. Of course, K.S. Lal's historical books, where he also associates much of his work to Firishta [who did not say Khokhars], follows your narrative of showing a dominant hindu warrior people in the extreme north west that opposed the so-called invading muslim armies.

Further context of the works of K.S Lal show much obvious bias to the recent re-writing of history in India, and he has been associated with the RSS by other well known Indian writers such as Irfan Habib. Furthermore, K.S Lal was appointed head of the Indian NCERT Committee to draft the model school syllabus on Indian History. Continuing on from where he left off, the exact same assertions as you, concerning the Khokhars, are being made in the Indian school history books.

Beyond a specific agenda, I see no value in these assertions. However, we are all of course free to claim what we wish, but doing so at the expense of others is not considered good etiquette.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Taimur Khurram

SingHee said:


> Correlation does not equal causation, a simple rule in logic and reason.
> 
> I also made no mention of Qutb Shah, I provided a complete historical source which refutes what you are stating as fact.
> 
> Additionally, I should mention that all the so called 'nonsense' can be traced back to a certain K.S. Lal, who is widely quoted by many historians in the same context as your assertions. Of course, K.S. Lal's historical books, where he also associates much of his work to Firishta [who did not say Khokhars], follows your narrative of showing a dominant hindu warrior people in the extreme north west that opposed the so-called invading muslim armies.
> 
> Further context of the works of K.S Lal show much obvious bias to the recent re-writing of history in India, and he has been associated with the RSS by other well known Indian writers such as Irfan Habib. Furthermore, K.S Lal was appointed head of the Indian NCERT Committee to draft the model school syllabus on Indian History. Continuing on from where he left off, the exact same assertions as you, concerning the Khokhars, are being made in the Indian school history books.
> 
> Beyond a specific agenda, I see no value in these assertions. However, we are all of course free to claim what we wish, but doing so at the expense of others is not considered good etiquette.



The Khokhars were Hindus before converting, if you have proof stating otherwise, kindly please present it.


----------



## B.K.N

Taimur Khurram said:


> The Khokhars were Hindus before converting, if you have proof stating otherwise, kindly please present it.



Are you a khokhar


----------



## Taimur Khurram

Brass Knuckles said:


> Are you a khokhar



No.


----------



## B.K.N

Taimur Khurram said:


> No.



I asked because people usually don't care about the history of other qoums or zaats


----------



## SingHee

Taimur Khurram said:


> The Khokhars were Hindus before converting, if you have proof stating otherwise, kindly please present it.



I think they were martians.

Please add that to your history.



Brass Knuckles said:


> I asked because people usually don't care about the history of other qoums or zaats



We can all appreciate this.

Furthermore, concerning genetics, recent research has decisively shown Pakistanis as a whole to fall in the same cluster as other Central Asians, while the modern nation of India has been shown to occupy a distinct cluster shared only with South Indians.

The following paper was jointly published by over 90 researchers, and all research has since continued to affirm its findings:

The Genomic Formation of South and Central Asia
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/292581v1.full

As shown in the research, we can expect many Pakistanis to be carrying the R1a Y-DNA haplogroup, which passes on from father to son, and can also be found among Arabs.

The Hindutva agenda should no longer expect any success, and Pakistanis will certainly continue to move forward as a whole.


----------



## Taimur Khurram

SingHee said:


> As shown in the research, we can expect many Pakistanis to be carrying the R1a Y-DNA haplogroup, which passes on from father to son, and can also be found among Arabs.



A lot of Indians have that Y Chromosome too, and no, it's not particularly common among Arabs.

I'll give your paper a look, but Pakistanis tend to cluster closer to Indians than anyone else.


----------



## SingHee

Taimur Khurram said:


> Pakistanis tend to cluster closer to Indians than anyone else.



Please stop spreading lies.


----------



## Taimur Khurram

SingHee said:


> Please stop spreading lies.



Rofl stop being so silly, it's the truth. Nobody but yourself believes what you're saying.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## B.K.N

Taimur Khurram said:


> Rofl stop being so silly, it's the truth. Nobody but yourself believes what you're saying.



These people say because Indians specialy of those areas away from Pakistan are darker than Pakistanis so they are from different racial groups and Pakistanis are descentents of central Asians
But these people don't want to look at the climate of these different regions
Pakistan is relatively farther from the equator so Pakistanis are relatively lighter than Indians and southern India is closer to equator which means more exposure to sun 
Central Asia is away from equator therefore central Asians have lighter skins

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------

