Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

The Cambridge History of India, Vol. III: Turks and Afghans v3.c20: Chapter II. The Yamīnī Dynasty of Ghaznī and Lahore, Commonly Known as the Ghaznavids

The Cambridge History of India, Vol. III: Turks and Afghans v3.c20

Language
English

Contents

Chapter II. The Yamīnī Dynasty of Ghaznī and Lahore, Commonly Known as the Ghaznavids

v3.c20.2

THE Arabs never carried the standards of Islam far beyond the Indus, and though the doctrines of the new faith were accepted by many and familiar to all of the inhabitants of Sind, and Muhammadan dynasties were ruling at Mansūra until A.D. 976 and at Multān until a later date, India in general remained untouched by Islam until the beginning of the eleventh century, by which time the faith had lost its political unity and the control of its destinies had passed from the hands of the Arabian successors of Muhammad into those of independent dynasties acknowledging the Caliph at Baghdād merely as a spiritual head.

v3.c20.3

In the early part of the tenth century the descendants of Sāmān, a Persian chieftain of Balkh who had accepted Islam, extended their dominion over Transoxiana, Persia, and the greater part of the present kingdom of Afghānistān, but their great empire waned almost as rapidly as it had waxed and their power gradually passed into the hands of the Turkish slaves to whom they had been wont to entrust the principal offices in their court and kingdom. One of these, Alptigīn, rebelled and established himself at Ghaznī, where he reigned as an independent sovereign, though his successors found it convenient, when they were in difficulties, to acknowledge the Sāmānids, who now held their court at Bukhārā, and to court their favour. Alptigīn was succeeded in 963 by his own son Is-hāq, on whose death in 966 Mansūr I of Bukhārā acknowledged Balkātigīn, a former slave of Alptigīn. Pīrāi succeeded in 972, whose reign of five years is remarkable for the first conflict in this region between Hindus and Muslims, the former being the aggressors. The raja of the Punjab, whose dominions extended to the Hindu Kush and included Kābul, was alarmed by the establishment of a Muslim kingdom to the south of the great mountain barrier and invaded the dominion of Ghaznī, but was defeated.

v3.c20.4

Pīrāi's rule became unpopular and he was expelled, and on April 9, 977, Sabuktigīn, a slave upon whom Alptigīn had bestowed his daughter's hand, ascended the throne at Ghaznī. He found it expedient to seek, and readily obtained, confirmation of his title from Nūh II of Bukhārā, but thenceforward made small pretence of subservience to a moribund dynasty.

v3.c20.5

Later Muhammadan historians are prone to represent Sabuktigīn, who never crossed the Indus and led only two expeditions against the Hindus, as a champion of the faith whose chief occupation was the propagation of Islam with fire and sword among the idolators of India. In fact he was fully employed in extending the area of his small state, which at first comprised little beyond the immediate neighbourhood of Ghaznī. In the first twelve years of his reign he extended his frontiers to the Oxus on the north and approximately to the present boundary between Afghānistān and Persia on the west. Two years after his accession Jaipāl, raja of the Punjab, again invaded the kingdom of Ghaznī from the east, but terms of peace were arranged, and in 986 Sabuktigīn, whose power had been rapidly growing, invaded his enemy’s territory and carried off many captives and much booty. Two years later he again attacked Jaipāl and compelled him to cede Kābul and much other territory, but these expeditions were undertaken rather as measures of reprisal and for the purpose of securing his dominions than with any intention of propagating the faith.

v3.c20.6

In October 994 Sabuktigīn, by aiding Nūh II of Bukhārā to expel Abu ‘Alī Sūnjūr, a rebel and a leader of the Ismā‘īlian heretics, from Khurāsān, obtained the government of that province, to which he appointed as his deputy, his eldest son, the famous Mahmūd. Sabuktigīn died, in August 997, near Balkh, having firmly laid the foundations of the great empire which was to be extended and consolidated by his more famous son.

v3.c20.7

The nobles of Balkh, in obedience to Sabuktigīn’s will, acknowledged as their sovereign his younger son Ismā‘īl, but a party favoured the claims of the more able and energetic Mahmūd. Mahmūd wrote to his brother demanding the cession of Ghaznī and promising to retain him as governor of Balkh, but his demand was rejected, and the two brothers, one from Nīshāpūr and the other from Balkh, marched on Ghaznī. In a battle fought near the city Ismā‘īl was defeated and compelled to take refuge in the fortress, but his nobles surrendered him to his brother, who imprisoned him for the rest of his life.

v3.c20.8

Mahmūd was born on November 1, 971, and was therefore twenty-seven years of age when he deposed his brother and ascended the throne in 998. His kingdom at the time of his accession comprised the country now known as Afghānistān, and Khurāsān, or eastern Persia. In the following year he added to it the province of Sīstān. After this success he sought formal recognition of his sovereignty from the Caliph, al-Qādir Billāh, who sent him a robe of investment and a patent conferring on him the titles Yamīn-ud-Daulah and Amīn-ul Millah, from the former of which his successors are known to eastern historians as the Yamīnī dynasty. It was on this occasion that he is said to have vowed to undertake every year an expedition against the idolators of India, but intestine troubles claimed his immediate attention. ‘Abd-ul-Malik II, the last Sāmānid ruler of Bukhārā, was driven from his kingdom in 999 by Abu’l-Husain Nasr I, Īlak Khān, of Kāshghar, and his brother, Abu Ibrāhīm al-Mustansir, who had found an asylum in Gurgān, thrice attempted to establish himself in Khurāsān, where his forefathers had held sway. Twice he drove Nasr, Mahmūd’s brother, from Nīshāpūr, only to be expelled when Nasr returned with reinforcements, and on the third occasion he was defeated and fled to the Ghuzz Turkmans, with whom he took refuge.

v3.c20.9

It is difficult to follow the long series of expeditions led by Mahmūd into India in pursuance of his vow, to reconcile the accounts of historians who contradict not only one another but themselves, and to identify places disguised under a script ambiguous in itself and mutilated by generations of ignorant scribes. The number of these expeditions is almost invariably given as twelve, but there are few historians who do not give accounts, more or less detailed, of more than twelve. The first is said to have been undertaken in 999 or 1000, when Mahmūd, after annexing Sīstān, crossed the Indian frontier and plundered or annexed some towns, but the authority for this expedition is slight, Mahmūd had at this time little leisure for foreign aggression, and the campaign may be regarded either as apocryphal or as a foray undertaken by some of his officers.

v3.c20.10

In September, 1001, Mahmūd left Ghaznī with 15,000 horse and advanced to Peshāwar, where Jaipāl I of the Punjab was prepared to meet him with 12,000 horse, 30,000 foot and 300 elephants. The raja was expecting reinforcements and was in no haste to engage before their arrival, but Mahmūd’s impetuosity left him no choice, and on November 27th the two armies advanced to the attack, discharging clouds of arrows. Those of the Hindus did great execution, but the Muslims had the better mark, and their arrows, as well as the swords of their horsemen, rendered many of Jaipāl’s elephants unmanageable or useless. The Hindus could not withstand the impetuosity of the Muslim horse and by noon were in full flight, leaving 15,000 dead on the field or slain in the pursuit. Jaipāl and fifteen of his relations were captured, and their jewels, including a necklace of enormous value worn by the raja, formed part of Mahmūd’s plunder.

v3.c20.11

After the battle Mahmūd attacked and plundered Ūnd¹, then an important city, and Jaipāl was permitted to ransom himself for a large sum of money and a hundred and fifty elephants, but as the ransom was not at once forthcoming was obliged to leave hostages for its payment. His son, Anandpāl, made good the deficiency and the hostages were released before Mahmūd returned to Ghaznī, his soldiers speeding them on their way with a contemptuous buffet on their hinder parts.

v3.c20.12

¹ This is the town variously called Hind, Ohind, and Waihind. It is situated in 34° 2′ N. and 72° 27′ E. fifteen miles above Attock, on the west bank of the Indus.

v3.c20.13

After Mahmūd's departure Jaipāl, overwhelmed with shame and mortification, bowed to the decision of his subjects, who refused to acknowledge a king who had been a captive in the hands of the Muslims, and, after designating Anandpāl as his successor, mounted a funeral pyre and perished in the flames.

v3.c20.14

In 1002 Mahmūd was occupied in crushing a rebellion in Sīstān. The leader of the rebels escaped death by means of a ready tongue and when brought before his conqueror addressed him by the then unfamiliar title of Sultān². He was pardoned and rewarded with the government of another district, Sīstān being included in the provincial government of Khurāsān.

v3.c20.15

² According to another account the Caliph bestowed this title on Mahmūd, who is said to have been the first prince so honoured, but this is improbable, for Mahmūd never used it on his coins but was always content with the designation of Amīr, which seems to have been that by which the Caliph distinguished him.

v3.c20.16

In his campaign against Jaipāl Mahmūd had expected aid from Bajra, the ruler of Bhātiya, the modern Uch, who had been on friendly terms with Sabuktigīn, but he had been disappointed and in 1004 he marched from Ghaznī to punish Bajra for his failure to support him. He was stoutly opposed but defeated Bajra before Uch and compelled him to flee for refuge to the jungles on the banks of the Indus, where, to escape capture by the Muslims, he stabbed himself. His head was carried to Mahmūd and a general massacre of his disorganised troops followed. Mahmūd, after plundering Uch, remained there for some time, engaged in making arrangements for the permanent annexation of the state and the conversion of its inhabitants, and it was not until the rivers were in flood in 1005 that he set out on his return journey. In crossing them he lost his plunder and much of his baggage, and was attacked during his retreat by Abu-'l-Fath Dāūd, the ruler of Multān, and suffered considerable loss.

v3.c20.17

Dāūd was the grandson of Shaikh Hamīd Lodī, who had established himself in Multān and had always cultivated friendly relations with Sabuktigīn, but his grandson had embraced the doctrines of the Ismā'īlī sect, and was therefore as abominable in Mahmūd's eyes as any idolator in India. In the autumn of 1005 Mahmūd had marched against him, and in order to avoid the passage of the rivers in their lower waters marched by way of Ūnd, in the dominions of Anandpāl, of whose subservience he was assured. Ānandpāl, however, opposed his advance, but was defeated and fled into Kashmīr, and Mahmūd pursued his way through the Punjab, plundering the country as he advanced.

v3.c20.18

The defeat of Anandpāl and Mahmūd's triumphal and devastating progress overcame the resolution of Dāūd, who shut himself up in Multān, and when Mahmūd prepared to form the siege of the city offered as the price of peace a yearly tribute of 20,000 golden *dirhams* and abjuration of his heretical doctrines. The invasion of his northern province by the Turks of Transoxiana under Abu'l-Husain Nasr I of Bukhārā obliged Mahmūd to accept these terms, and he returned with all speed towards the Oxus, appointing as governor of Ūnd, by which place he marched, Sukhpāl, a grandson of Jaipāl, who, having been taken prisoner with his grandfather, had accepted Islam, and was now known as Nawāsa Shāh. We are not concerned with the details of Mahmūd's campaign against the Īlak Khān, who was defeated and driven across the Oxus, but it is an interesting fact that a corps of Indians formed part of the victorious army.

v3.c20.19

On his return towards Ghaznī in 1007 Mahmūd learnt that Nawāsa Shāh had apostatised, was expelling the subordinate Muslim officers from the district committed to his charge, and purposed to rule it either as an independent sovereign or as the vassal of his uncle, Ānandpāl. He marched at once towards Ūnd and ordered those of his officers whose fiefs lay near that district to attack the renegade. They captured Nawāsa Shāh and the treasure which he had amassed and carried him before Mahmūd, who confiscated his wealth and imprisoned him in a fortress for the remainder of his life.

v3.c20.20

In the following year Mahmūd resolved further to chastise Ānandpāl for his opposition to the passage of the Muslim army through his dominions on its way to Multān, and in the autumn of 1008 marched to Peshāwar. Ānandpāl, who had been aware of his intention, had appealed for aid to other Hindu rajas, and one historian mentions the rajas of Ujjain, Gwalior, Kālinjar, Kanauj, Delhi, and Ajmer as having either marched in person or sent troops to his assistance. The number and consequence of his allies are perhaps exaggerated, but it is evident from Mahmūd's excessive caution that Anandpāl had received a considerable accession of strength and that the army which he led into the field was a very different force from that which Mahmūd had so easily brushed aside on his way to Multān. Among the most valuable of Anandpāl’s auxiliaries were the wild and warlike Khokars from the lower hills of Kashmīr.

v3.c20.21

The Hindu army was encamped between Ūnd and Peshāwar, and Mahmūd lay in camp before it for forty days without venturing to attack it, although each day’s delay brought it fresh reinforcements and the only inconvenience which it suffered arose from the difficulty of provisioning so great a force. This was alleviated by the devotion of the men’s wives, who sold their jewels to enable their husbands to keep the field.

v3.c20.22

Mahmūd protected his flanks with entrenchments and instead of following his usual impetuous tactics strove to entice the enemy to attack him in his own strong position. In this he succeeded and the Hindus attacked on December 31. A force of 30,000 Khokars, bareheaded and barefooted and armed with strange weapons, charged both his flanks simultaneously, passed over his trenches, and did such execution among his troops that he was meditating a retreat when a fortunate accident decided the day in his favour. Anandpāl’s elephant took fright and bore his rider from the field, and the Hindus, believing their leader’s flight to be intentional, broke and fled. The battle was now at an end and the pursuit began. The Muslims pursued their enemy for a great distance, slaying 8000 and taking thirty elephants and much other plunder.

v3.c20.23

The dispersal of this great army opened the way for a raid into India and Mahmūd marched towards the fortress of Nagarkot, or Kāngra, famous for its wealth. So little had his victory and subsequent advance been expected that the fortress had been left without a garrison, and was occupied only by the Brāhmans and servants of the temple, who appeared on the walls and offered to surrender. After some parleying the gates were opened to Mahmūd on the third day after his arrival, and the booty which fell into his hands is said to have amounted to 700,000 golden *dīnārs*, besides large quantities of vessels of gold and silver and of unworked gold and silver, and jewels. With this plunder he returned to Ghaznī and exhibited it, piled on carpets in the courtyard of his palace, to the wondering eyes of his subjects.

v3.c20.24

A year later he marched to Ghūr¹, a small district in the hills between Ghaznī and Herāt, which had hitherto remained inde- [Figure: INDIA in 1022 The boundary of the Kingdom of Ghaznī is shown thus: ----- Countries and Peoples thus ... CHAUHĀNS Towns . . . . . Parashūr Rivers . . . . . *Mahānadī* Scales English Miles pendent under its Tājik or Persian rulers, defeated its prince, Muhammad *bin* Sūrī, and reduced him to the position of a vassal. This expedition, though not directly connected with the history of India is interesting in view of the subsequent relations between the princes of Ghūr and those of Ghaznī. The former exterminated the latter and achieved what they had never even attempted—the permanent subjugation of northern India.

v3.c20.25

¹ Usually written *Ghor*, but Ghūr is correct.

v3.c20.26

Later in 1010 Mahmūd again invaded India. There are some discrepancies regarding his objective, which the later historians, who confound this expedition with that of 1014, describe as Thānesar. He probably intended to reach Delhi but he was met at Tarāorī, about seven miles north of Karnāl, by a large Hindu army, which he defeated and from which he took much plunder, with which he returned to Ghaznī.

v3.c20.27

In 1011 he visited Multān, where his authority was not yet firmly established, brought the province under more efficient control, and extinguished the still glowing embers of heresy.

v3.c20.28

Meanwhile Anandpāl had died and had been succeeded by his son, Jaipāl II, who made the fortress of Nandana¹ his chief stronghold, and in 1013 Mahmūd invaded India to attack him. On hearing of Mahmūd's advance he retired into the mountains, leaving his son Nidar Bhīmpāl, or Bhīmpāl the Fearless, to defend his kingdom. The accounts of the campaign are strangely at variance with one another. According to one Bhīmpāl was besieged in Nandana and forced to surrender, while according to another he ventured to meet Mahmūd in the open field, and was with difficulty defeated. Defeated, however, he was, and Mahmūd turned into the hills in the hope of capturing him, but captured only his baggage. Large numbers of the natives of the country, guilty of no crime but that of following the religion of their fathers, were carried off to Ghaznī as slaves, and the remarks of one historian probably reflect contemporary Muslim opinion on this practice: ‘Slaves were so plentiful that they became very cheap and men of respectability in their native land were degraded to the position of slaves of common shopkeepers. But this is the goodness of God, who bestows honour on His own religion and degrades infidelity.’ An officer named Sārugh was appointed governor of Nandana and held that position at the time of Mahmūd's death.

v3.c20.29

¹ Situated in 30° 43′ N. and 73° 17′ E.

v3.c20.30

Mahmūd was next attracted by the wealth of the sacred city of Thānesar, between Ambāla and Karnāl, and in 1014 marched from Ghaznī. When Jaipāl heard of his intention he sent a mission to Ghaznī, offering to send him fifty elephants annually if he would spare so sacred a place, but Mahmūd rejected the offer and required of Jaipāl a free passage through his territory. Jaipāl perforce assented, but warned Bijayapāl, the Towār raja of Delhi, of the approach of the invader, thus enabling him to summon others to his assistance.

v3.c20.31

Mahmūd marched with such rapidity through the Punjab as to forestall Bijayapāl’s preparations, and found the shrine at Thānesar undefended. He entered it without encountering serious opposition¹, plundered it of its vast treasures, and destroyed its idols, except the principal object of worship, which was sent to Ghaznī to be buried in a public thoroughfare, where it might be trodden underfoot by the people. After this easy success Mahmūd wished to march on Delhi, but was over-ruled by his advisers, who were averse from advancing so far into India until the annexation of the Punjab should have furnished a base of operations within its borders.

v3.c20.32

¹ According to al-‘Utbī, one of the earliest authorities, the Hindus had assembled, and it was only after overcoming a desperate resistance that Mahmūd entered the shrine, but al-‘Utbī’s topography is faulty, and he appears to be confounding this expedition with another.

v3.c20.33

In 1015 Mahmūd invaded Kashmīr and besieged Lohkot or Loharkot, but the weather was so inclement and the garrison so constantly received reinforcements that he was compelled to raise the siege and retire. This was his first serious reverse in India. His army lost its way in the unfamiliar highlands and its retreat was interrupted by flooded valleys, but at length, after much toil, it debouched into the open country and returned to Ghaznī in disorder.

v3.c20.34

In 1016 and 1017 Mahmūd was occupied in Khvārazm and in the northern provinces of his empire, and it was not until 1018 that he was able again to turn his attention to India. He now prepared to penetrate further into the country than on any former occasion, and to plunder the rich temples of Hindūstān proper. With an army of 100,000 horse raised in his own dominions and 20,000 volunteers from Turkistān, Transoxiana, and the confines of Khurāsān, soldiers of fortune eager to share in the rich spoils of India, he marched from Ghaznī in September, before the rainy season in India was well past, and, guided by the Lohara raja of Kashmīr, crossed with some difficulty the Indus and the rivers of the Punjab. On December 2 he crossed the Jumna and pursued his march southwards. Avoiding Delhi, he followed the eastern bank of the Jumna until he reached Baran, the modern Bulandshahr, the first strong place which lay in his path. Hardat, the governor, fled from the fortress and left the garrison to make what terms they might with the invader. They propitiated him by the surrender of a great quantity of treasure and thirty elephants, and he passed thence to Mahāban, on the eastern bank of the Jumna. Kul Chandra, the governor of this place, drew up his forces and made some attempt to withstand the Muslims but his army was put to flight and he first slew his wife and son and then committed suicide. Besides much other spoil eighty elephants were taken by Mahmūd at Mahāban, and he crossed the river in order to attack Muttra, the reputed birthplace of Krishna and one of the most sacred shrines in India. The city, though fortified and belonging to Bijayapāl, the raja of Delhi, was undefended, and Mahmūd entered it and plundered it without hindrance. His hand was not stayed by his admiration of its marble palaces and temples, unsparingly expressed in the dispatch in which he announced his success, and the temples were rifled and, as far as time permitted, destroyed. The plunder taken was enormous, but it is difficult to believe stories of a sapphire weighing over sixteen pounds and a half and of five idols of pure gold, over five yards in height, though the quantity of gold taken may very well have been over 548 pounds, as is recorded.

v3.c20.35

Mahmūd continued his march and on December 20 arrived before Kanauj, the capital of the Rāhtor Rājputs, whose raja, Jaichand, terrified by the numbers, the discipline and the achievements of the invading army, withdrew from his strong city, the ramparts of which were covered by seven detached forts, and left it open to Mahmūd, who occupied both the city and the forts. The raja returned and preserved his city from destruction by making submission to the conqueror and surrendering eighty-five elephants, much treasure and a large quantity of jewels.

v3.c20.36

From Kanauj Mahmūd marched to Manaich, afterwards known as Zafarābād, near Jaunpur. The fortress was strongly garrisoned and well furnished with supplies, but a vigorous siege of fifteen days reduced the defenders to such despair that they performed the rite of *jauhar*¹, first slaying their wives and children and then rushing out to perish on the swords of the enemy.

v3.c20.37

¹ This Hindī word signifies ‘taking one’s own life’ and is applied to a rite performed by Rājputs when reduced to the last extremity. First the women and children are destroyed, or destroy themselves, usually by fire, and the men, arrayed in saffron robes, rush on the enemy sword in hand and fight until all are slain. Instances of the performance of this rite, the object of which is to preserve the honour of the women from violation by the enemy, are common in Indian history.

v3.c20.38

After plundering Manaich, Mahmūd attacked Asnī, a fortress in the immediate neighbourhood, defended by deep ditches and a dense jungle, that is to say an enclosure of quickset bamboos, similar to that which now surrounds the city of Rāmpur in Rohilkhand and forms an impenetrable obstacle. Asnī was the stronghold of a powerful chief named either Chandpāl or Chandāl Bor, who had recently been at war with Jaichand. On hearing of Mahmūd’s approach he fled, leaving his capital a prey to the invader.

v3.c20.39

From Asnī Mahmūd marched westwards to a town which appears in Muslim chronicles as Sharva and may perhaps be identified with Seūnza on the Ken, between Kālinjar and Banda or Sriswagarh on the Pahūj not far from Kūnch. This town was the residence of another Jaichand, who is said to have been long at enmity with Jaichand of Kanauj and even now held his foe’s son in captivity. Jaichand of Kanauj, who wished to terminate the strife and had sent his son Bhīmpāl to arrange a marriage between his sister and Jaichand of Sharva, wrote to the latter dissuading him from rashly attempting to measure his strength against that of the invader, and Jaichand of Sharva followed this advice and left his capital, taking with him into the forest in which he took refuge the greater part of his army and his elephants. Mahmūd, not content with the plunder of Sharva, pursued him by difficult and stony tracks into the forest, suddenly attacked him shortly before midnight on January 5, 1019, and defeated him. Jaichand’s elephants were captured, specie and jewels rewarded the exertions of the victors, and captives were so numerous that slaves could be purchased in the camp at prices ranging from two to ten *dirhams*.

v3.c20.40

After this victory, the last exploit of a most laborious and adventurous campaign, Mahmūd returned to Ghaznī, and the booty was counted. It is impossible to reconcile the conflicting accounts of the enormous quantity of treasure taken, but the plunder included over 380 elephants and 53,000 human captives. Of these poor wretches many were sold to foreign merchants, so that Indian slaves became plentiful in Transoxiana, ‘Irāq and Khurāsān, ‘and the fair, the dark, and rich and the poor were commingled in one common servitude.’

v3.c20.41

It was after this most successful raid that Mahmūd founded at Ghaznī the great Friday mosque¹ known as ‘the Bride of Heaven’

v3.c20.42

¹ In a Muslim city each quarter has its mosque for the daily prayers, but it is the duty of the faithful to assemble on Fridays at a central mosque in order that the whole congregation may make a united act of worship. This mosque is known as the *Masjid-i-Jāmi‘*, ‘the mosque which gathers all together.’ The expression ‘Friday mosque’ is not a literal translation, but is a convenient English equivalent.

v3.c20.43

and the college which was attached to it. His example was eagerly followed by his nobles, who had been enriched by the spoils of India and were amply supplied with servile labour; and mosques, colleges, caravanserais, and hospices sprang up on every side.

v3.c20.44

The date of Mahmūd's next expedition is given by some historians as 1019, but those authorities are to be preferred which place it in 1021. Its occasion was the formation of a confederacy, headed by Nanda, raja of Kālinjar, for the purpose of punishing Jaichand of Kanauj for his pusillanimity and ready submission to the invader. Nanda led the army to Kanauj and defeated and slew Jaichand, whose death Mahmūd resolved to avenge, and an army greater than any which he had hitherto led into India was assembled at Ghaznī for the purpose. Jaipāl II, who had tamely acquiesced in Mahmūd's passage through the Punjab, was now dead, or had abdicated the throne, and had been succeeded by his more spirited son, Bhīmpāl the Fearless, who joined the Hindu confederacy but, instead of rashly opposing Mahmūd on his western frontier where he would have been beyond the reach of help from his allies, withdrew to the banks of the Jumna, where they might have supported him. Here Mahmūd found him encamped, and hesitated to attempt the passage of the swollen river in the face of his army, but eight Muslim officers, apparently without their king's permission or knowledge, suddenly crossed the river with their contingents, surprised the Hindus and put them to flight. The eight officers continued to advance and occupied a city which cannot now be identified¹, and Mahmūd, whose way was cleared before him, crossed the Jumna and the Ganges, and found Nanda awaiting him on the banks of the Sai with an army of 36,000 horse, 105,000 foot, and 640 elephants. Before this host Mahmūd's heart failed him for a moment, and he repented of having left Ghaznī, but prayer restored his courage and he prepared for battle on the following day. In the night, however, Nanda was unaccountably stricken with panic and fled with a few attendants, leaving his army, his camp and his baggage at the mercy of the invader. The confusion which prevailed among the Hindus on the discovery of Nanda's flight was at first suspected by Mahmūd to be a stratagem to induce him to attack, but having ascertained that it was genuine he permitted his army to plunder the camp, and a vast quantity of booty was collected without a blow. Of Nanda's elephants 580 were taken and Mahmūd, who was apprehensive of disturbances in the Punjab, returned, content with this victory, to Ghaznī.

v3.c20.45

¹ Professor Dowson has suggested that it was Bārī, in the present state of Dholpur, but the identification is unconvincing.

v3.c20.46

Later in the same year he led an expedition into two districts disguised in Persian histories under the names of Qīrāt and Nūr and said to have been situated between the boundaries of India and Turkistan. The most probable conjecture identifies them with the districts of Dīr, Swāt, and Bajaur. The enterprise was successful and the command of the last named district having been bestowed upon ‘Alī *bin* Qadr, a Saljūq Turk, Mahmūd again invaded Kashmīr and besieged Loharkot, but abandoned the siege after a month and retired from Kashmīr. He did not return at once to Ghaznī, but marched into the Punjab to chastise Bhīmpāl for having joined the confederacy of the rajas of Hindūstān. The army, instead of besieging Lahore, dispersed throughout the neighbouring country in order to subsist upon it and to prevent supplies from reaching the capital, and Bhīmpāl was reduced to such straits that he fled and sought an asylum with the Chauhān raja of Ajmer. His flight marks the formal annexation of the Punjab by Mahmūd, who may henceforth be regarded as an Indian ruler. Less than a century and a half after his death the Indian province of his great empire became the kingdom and the sole refuge of his descendants.

v3.c20.47

In the autumn of 1022 Mahmūd again invaded Hindūstān in order to inflict further punishment on Nanda of Kālinjar. He marched through the Doāb, crossed the Jumna below Delhi, and was attracted by the strong fortress of Gwalior, to which he laid siege but, finding that the operation was likely to be protracted, permitted the Kachhwāha raja to compound for a formal submission by a gift of no more than thirty-five elephants, and pursued his way towards his real objective, Kālinjar, to the reduction of which he was prepared to devote more time. After a protracted siege Nanda was permitted to redeem his stronghold for three hundred elephants which, instead of being formally delivered, were mischievously driven in a body towards the Muslim camp, in the hope that they would throw it into confusion; but the Turks had by now some experience of elephants, and caught and managed them. According to a possibly mythical account of the event, their success compelled the unwilling admiration of Nanda, who addressed to Mahmūd an encomiastic poem which was so highly praised by learned Hindus in the Muslim camp that its author was rewarded with the government of fifteen fortresses, a grant probably as hollow as the flattery which had earned it. After this composition with Nanda, Mahmūd returned to Ghaznī with his spoils.

v3.c20.48

In 1023 he was occupied in Transoxiana and in the following year set out on his most famous expedition into India. There is a conflict of authority on the subject of the date of his departure from Ghaznī, but he appears to have left his capital on October 17, 1024, at the head of his own army and a body of 30,000 composed, as on a former occasion, of volunteers from Turkistān and other countries, attracted by the hope of booty.

v3.c20.49

It is said that the impudent vaunts of the Brāhmans attached to the wealthy religious establishment of Somnāth, on the coast of Kāthiāwār suggested to Mahmūd the desirability of striking a blow at this centre of Hinduism. The wealth and importance of the shrine far exceeded those of any temple which he had yet attacked. One thousand Brāhmans daily attended the temple, three hundred barbers were maintained to serve the pilgrims visiting it, and three hundred and fifty of the unfortunate women whom the Hindus dedicate nominally to the service of their gods and actually to the appetites of their priests danced continually before the idol, which was a huge *lingam* or phallus. These priests and attendants were supported from the endowments of the temple, which are said to have consisted of the revenues of 10,000 villages, the idol was washed daily with water brought from the Ganges, 750 miles distant, and the jewels of the temple were famed throughout the length and breadth of India.

v3.c20.50

The Brāhmans attached to this famous shrine boasted that their master Shiva, the moon-lord, was the most powerful of all the gods and that it was only owing to his displeasure with other gods that the invader had been permitted to plunder and pollute their shrines. This provocative vaunt suggested to Mahmūd the destruction of the temple of Somnāth as the readiest means to a wholesale conversion of the idolators.

v3.c20.51

He reached Multān on November 20 and decided to march across the great desert of India to Ajmer. In his arduous undertaking he made elaborate preparations. Each trooper was ordered to carry with him fodder, water and food for several days, and Mahmūd supplemented individual efforts by loading his own establishment of 30,000 camels with water and supplies for the desert march. These precautions enabled his army to cross the desert without mishap, and on its reaching Ajmer, or rather the Chauhān capital of Sāmbhar, for the modern city of Ajmer was not then built, the raja fled and the invaders plundered the city and slew many Hindus, but did not attempt the reduction of the fortress. From Sāmbhar the army marched towards Anhilvāra, now known as Pātan, in Gujarāt, capturing on its way an unnamed fortress which furnished it with water and supplies. Mahmūd, on arriving at Anhilvāra early in January, 1025, discovered that the raja, Bhīmdeo, and most of the inhabitants had fled, and the army, having plundered the supplies left in the city, continued its march to Somnāth. On his way thither Mahmūd captured several small forts and in the desert of Kāthiāwār encountered a force of 20,000, apparently part of Bhīmdeo's army, which he defeated and dispersed. Two days' march from Somnāth stood the town of Dewalwāra, the inhabitants of which, secure in the protection of the god, had refused to seek safety in flight and paid for this misplaced confidence with their lives.

v3.c20.52

On reaching Somnāth the Muslims perceived the Hindus in large numbers on the walls, and were greeted with jeers and threats. On the following day they advanced to the assault and, having driven the Hindus from the walls with well directed showers of arrows, placed their scaling ladders and effected a lodgement on the rampart. Many Hindus fell in the street-fighting which followed but by dusk the Muslims had not established themselves sufficiently to justify their remaining in the town during the night, and withdrew to renew the attack on the following morning. They then drove the defenders, with terrible slaughter, through the streets towards the temple. From time to time bands of Hindus entered the temple and after passionate prayers for the moon-lord's aid sallied forth to fight and to die. At length a few survivors fled towards the sea and attempted to escape in boats, but Mahmūd had foreseen this and his soldiers, provided with boats, pursued and destroyed them.

v3.c20.53

When the work of blood was finished Mahmūd entered the temple, the gloom of which was relieved by the light from costly lamps, which flickered on the fifty-six polished pillars supporting the roof, on the gems which adorned the idol, and on a huge golden chain, the bells attached to which summoned to their duties the relays of attendant priests. As the eyes of the conqueror fell upon the hewn stone, three yards in height above the pavement, which had received the adoration of generations of Hindus, he raised his mace in pious zeal and dealt it a heavy blow. Some historians relate that when he commanded that the idol should be shattered the Brāhmans offered to redeem it with an enormous sum of money, and that their prayers were seconded by the arguments of his courtiers who urged that the destruction of one idol would not extinguish idolatry and that the money might be employed for pious purposes. To both Mahmūd replied that he would be a breaker, not a seller of idols, and the work of destruction went forward. When the idol was broken asunder gems worth more than a hundred times the ransom offered by the Brāhmans were found concealed in a cavity within it and Mahmūd’s iconoclastic zeal was materially rewarded; but this story appears to be an embellishment, by later historians, of the earlier chronicles. Of the fragments of the idol two were sent to Ghaznī to form steps at the entrance of the great mosque and the royal palace, and two are said to have been sent to Mecca and Medina, where they were placed in public streets to be trodden underfoot.

v3.c20.54

Mahmūd was now informed that Bhīmdeo of Anhilvāra had taken refuge in the island of Beyt Shankhodhar¹, at the north-western extremity of the peninsular of Kāthiāwār, and pursued him thither. If the chroniclers are to be credited it was possible in those days to reach the island on horseback at low tide, for native guides are said to have pointed out the passage to Mahmūd and to have warned him that he and his troops would perish if the tide or the wind rose while they were attempting it. Mahmūd nevertheless led his army across and Bhīmdeo was so dismayed by his determination and intrepidity that he fled from the fortress in a mean disguise and left it at the mercy of the invaders, who slew all the males in the town and enslaved the women, among whom, according to one authority, were some of the ladies of Bhīmdeo’s family.

v3.c20.55

¹ The stronghold is variously styled in Persian texts Kandana, Khandana, and Khandaba, in which some resemblance to the last two syllables of the name of the island can be traced, but the Persian script, being easily corruptible by ignorant or careless scribes, is ill-suited for the preservation of the correct forms of proper names, and it is the description of Bhīmdeo’s retreat that enables us to identify it with Beyt Shankhodhar.

v3.c20.56

From Beyt Shankhodhar Mahmūd returned to Anhilvāra, where he halted for some time to refresh his troops. It is difficult to believe that the climate and situation of the city and the reputed existence of gold mines in its neighbourhood induced Mahmūd seriously to propose that the court should be transferred thither. The historian responsible for this statement adds that Mahmūd’s proposal was successfully combated by his counsellors, who impressed upon him the impossibility of controlling from Anhilvāra the turbulent province of Khurāsān, the acquisition and retention of which had been so difficult and so costly; and Mahmūd prepared to return to Ghaznī. The line of retreat chosen was through the desert of Sind to Multān, for Mahmūd was loth to risk his booty in a battle with the raja of Sāmbhar, who had closed with a great army the line by which he had advanced.

v3.c20.57

The army suffered much in its retreat, first through the arid desert of Sind and next through the Sind-Sāgar Doāb, where it was so harassed and delayed by the Jāts of that region that it was not until the spring of 1026 that it reached Ghaznī.

v3.c20.58

Mahmūd’s vanity was flattered after his return by the receipt of complimentary letters from the Caliph al-Qādir Billāh conferring fresh titles on him, distinguishing his sons in the same manner, and formally recognizing him as ruler of Khurāsān, Hindūstān, Sīstān, and Khvārazm, the whole of which great empire, with the exception of India, where he held only one province, actually acknowledged his sway.

v3.c20.59

In the autumn of this year Mahmūd made his last incursion into India, a punitive expedition against the Jāts who had harassed his retreat. He marched to Multān and there prepared a fleet of 1400 boats, each armed with an iron spike projecting from the prow and similar spikes projecting from the gunwale on either side and carrying a crew of twenty men armed with bows and arrows and hand grenades of naphtha. The Jāts launched four, or, according to some authorities, eight thousand boats and attacked the Muslims, but their boats were pierced or capsized by the spikes and the victory was so complete that the Jāts, almost to a man, were drowned or slain. The Muslims then disembarked on the islands where the Jāts had placed their wives and families for safety and carried off the women and children as slaves.

v3.c20.60

The remainder of Mahmūd’s reign was occupied by the suppression of the Saljūq Turks, whom he had incautiously encouraged too far and by the annexation of western Persia. He died at Ghaznī on April 21, 1030.

v3.c20.61

It is only in a limited sense that Mahmūd can be described as an Indian sovereign, for it was not until the later years of his reign that he annexed and occupied the Punjab, the only Indian province which he held, but he was the first to carry the banner of Islam into the heart of India and to tread the path in which so many followed him. He founded an Indian dynasty, for the later kings of his house, stripped of all their possessions in Persia, Transoxiana, and Afghānistān, were fain to content themselves with the kingdom of the Punjab, which had been but an insignificant province of his great empire.

v3.c20.62

To Muslim historians Mahmūd is one of the greatest of the champions of Islam. How far his Indian raids and massacres were inspired by a desire of propagating his faith, for which purpose they were ill adapted, and how far by avarice, must remain uncertain, for Mahmūd’s character was complex. Though zealous for Islam he maintained a large body of Hindu troops, and there is no reason to believe that conversion was a condition of their service. The avarice most conspicuously displayed in his review of his riches before his death and in his undignified lamentations over the prospect of leaving them gave way to lavishness where his religion or his reputation was concerned. His patronage of architecture adorned Ghaznī with many a noble building and his no less munificent patronage of letters made his court the home of Firdausī, ‘Asāirī, Asadī of Tūs, Mīnūchihrī of Balkh, ‘Unsuri, ‘Asjadi of Marv, Farrukhī, Daqīqī, and many other poets of less note. His treatment of the first-named poet, whom he paid for his great epic in silver instead of the promised gold, is remembered to his discredit, though it was probably due less to his niggardliness than to a courtier’s jealousy.

v3.c20.63

Some European historians, ignorant of the principles of oriental abuse and of the Islamic law of legitimacy have asserted, on the authority of the satire which Firdausī, after his disappointment, fulminated against his patron, that Mahmūd was a bastard, but Firdausī’s charge against him is only that his mother was not of noble birth. He seems to have been the son of a concubine or handmaiden, but by the law of Islam the son of a concubine or handmaiden is as legitimate as the son of a regularly married wife.

v3.c20.64

The story of the contest between Mahmūd’s two sons is a mere repetition of that of the contest between Mahmūd and his brother Ismā‘īl. Mas‘ūd, the abler of the two, was at Hamadān when his father died, and at once set out for Ghaznī, where a party of the nobles had, in obedience to Mahmūd’s will, acknowledged Muhammad as their sovereign. Mas‘ūd was joined during his advance by several of the leading nobles, including Ayāz, Mahmūd’s favourite slave and confidential adviser, and on October 4 those who had hitherto supported Muhammad perceived that his cause was lost, imprisoned him, and joined his brother, who had reached Herat, but their tardy submission availed them little, and they were either executed or imprisoned for life. The unfortunate Muhammad was blinded, and was carried by Mas‘ūd to Balkh, which for a time became the royal residence.

v3.c20.65

Mas‘ūd never attempted to emulate his father’s activity, but history now sheds more light on the administration of the Indian province of the empire. The government of the Punjab had been entrusted by Mahmūd to a Turkish officer named Ariyāruq, whom Mas‘ūd summoned to Balkh. He was charged with oppression and extortion, with preventing his victims from having access to their sovereign, and with retaining with treasonable intent a large part of the revenue. His power was so great that it was considered unlikely that he would obey the summons of Mas‘ūd, but he presented himself at Balkh with a large contingent of Indian troops and by ingratiating himself with the leading courtiers contrived to evade for some time an inquiry into his administration, but his enemies watched their opportunity and one day, when they knew that he was drunk, persuaded Mas‘ūd to summon him to court. He was constrained to obey and Mas‘ūd, incensed both by his dilatoriness in appearing and by the unseemliness of his conduct, caused him to be arrested as a preliminary to an investigation. His Indian troops were disposed to attempt a rescue but were dissuaded by the threat that the first act of violence would be the signal for his execution and by the promise that they should not suffer by the change of masters, the royal officers were thus enabled to enter Ariyāruq’s quarters, and seize his movable property, his treasure, and, more important than all, his accounts, which furnished ample evidence of his misconduct. He was sent to Ghūr, where he was put to death, and his friend Āsaftigīn Ghāzī shortly afterwards shared his fate.

v3.c20.66

Mas‘ūd entered Ghaznī on May 23, 1031, and incurred much odium by requiring, against the advice of his counsellors, a refund of all the largesse which had been distributed by his brother on his proclamation as Amīr.

v3.c20.67

The affairs of the empire were now suffering from the loss of Mahmūd’s strong guiding hand. Western Persia was disturbed and a new governor was sent thither, but the Punjab was in even greater confusion, for no governor had been appointed since the recall of Ariyāruq, and the officers sent to seize his property and conduct a local inquiry into his administration were unable to cope with the opposition of his relations and their dependants and partisans. There was nobody at court fit for the important post of governor of the Indian province, and Mas‘ūd, with some misgivings, appointed to it his father’s treasurer, Ahmad Niyāltigīn, whose honesty was dubious and whose inexperience of civil and military affairs was notorious. It was believed that the retention of his son at Ghaznī as a hostage would ensure his fidelity and the instructions issued for the guidance of officials in India indicate the nature of the irregularities of Ariyāruq’s administration. They were not to undertake, without special permission, expeditions beyond the limits of the Punjab, but were to accompany Ahmad on any expedition which he might undertake; they were not to drink, play polo, or mix in social intercourse with the Hindu officers at Lahore; and they were to refrain from wounding the susceptibilities of those officers and their troops by inopportune displays of religious bigotry.

v3.c20.68

Mas‘ūd would have visited the Punjab in person had his presence not been more urgently required in the north, where the Saljūqs threatened Balkh, and in the west, where the governor of ‘Irāq needed support and where the daily expected death of the Caliph, al-Qādir Billāh, might breed fresh disorders. The news of his death actually reached Balkh on November 9. Ahmad Niyāltigīn, on arriving in India, at once quarrelled with Abu-’l-Hasan, ‘the Shīrāzī *Qāzī*,’ one of the officials who had been sent to collect the revenue and inquire into Ariyāruq’s administration. Abu-’l-Hasan was inclined to resent what he regarded as his supersession by Ahmad and the latter’s success in collecting revenue which he himself had been unable to collect, but his opposition was based chiefly on the newcomer’s treasonable designs. Ahmad’s appointment had turned his head, and he encouraged the circulation of a rumour that his mother had been guilty of an intrigue with Mahmūd, of which he was the offspring, and planned an expedition to distant Benares, the wealth of which might enable him to establish himself as an independent sovereign in India. Abu-’l-Hasan advised him to devote his attention to the civil administration and to delegate the actual command of the troops to a military officer, but was curtly told to mind his own business. Each party then reported the other to Mas‘ūd, Ahmad complained that Abu-’l-Hasan was attempting to undermine his authority and Abu-’l-Hasan warned his master of Ahmad’s designs. In this contest Abu-’l-Hasan was worsted. He was ordered to confine his attention to the collection of the revenue, which was his affair, and to leave the general civil and military administration to the governor.

v3.c20.69

Mas‘ūd suffered for his neglect of the warning. Ahmad led his troops to Benares¹, indulged them with twelve hours’ plunder of the city and in 1034 returned to Lahore with enormous wealth. He reported his success in glowing terms to Mas‘ūd, but his report was not accompanied by the expected remittance of spoil. Abu-’l-Hasan reported at the same time that Ahmad was employing the plunder of Benares in the raising of a large army recruited from the most turbulent and disaffected ruffians of Lahore and the Punjab, that he openly boasted of being the son of Mahmūd, and that he was on the point of repudiating his allegiance. This report was corroborated by Ahmad’s conduct and it was decided to treat him as a rebel. There was an awkward pause when Mas‘ūd asked who would undertake the task of crushing the rebellion. The Muslim nobles, who understood the difficulty of the enterprise and disliked the Indian climate, were mute, and their silence was the opportunity of the Hindu Tilak, who offered his services as a native who knew the country and for whom the climate had no terrors.

First 68 of 575 passages. Read on

Linked texts (3)