It does not matter how many people you quote, they are ALL quoting from the DivyaVadana
This includes Romila Thaper and S R Goyal.
All you can do is parrot second hand quotes and point to the "greatness" of these second hand authors to convince me or anyone else. I am quoting the ROOT source, the DivyaVadana.
What description was there to read ? A lame conjuncture that MAYBE Pushyamitra Sunga destroyed them because DivyaVadan says so ?
Maybe the islamic invaders broke them. That is far more likely based on historical records and patterns.
LOL.... do you even bother to read your own link ?
It raises doubt and authenticity about the claims in your own link.
"Many other scholars have expressed skepticism about the Buddhist claims of persecution by Pushyamitra. Étienne Lamotte points out that the Buddhist legends are not consistent about the location of Pushyamitra's anti-Buddhist campaign and his death.[18] The Ashokavadana claims that Pushyamitra offered dinaras as a reward for killing Buddhist monks, but the dinara did not come into circulation in India before the 1st century CE. Ashokavadana also claims that Ashoka persecuted Nirgranthas (Ajivikas), which is an obvious fabrication, considering that Ashoka's edicts express tolerance towards all religious sects.[19] The Sri Lankan Buddhist text Mahavamsa suggests that several monasteries existed in present-day Bihar, Awadh and Malwa at the time Pushyamitra's contemporary Dutthagamani ruled in Lanka. This suggests that these monasteries survived Pushyamitra Shunga's reign."
"The fact that the Ashokavadana mentions Pushyamitra as a Mauryan further erodes its historical credibility, and weakens the hypothesis that he persecuted Buddhists because he was a Brahmin."
Are you now saying that king Jalaluka was the same as King Pushyamitra ?
Even Tipu Sultan in his desperate time donated to the sringeri shrine. It does not white wash his umpteen other sins.
Same holds true for Aurengzeb.
Finally I do not need any "Explanation on Slavery" any more than I need an "Explanation on Paedophilia" or an "Explanation on Canabalism". The very fact that you can make such a statement shows that you accept the concept of Slavery as a matter of principle.