Growth of Muslim Population in Medieval India, A.D. 1000–1800 c20.s1: Conversions
Growth of Muslim Population in Medieval India, A.D. 1000–1800 c20.s1
- Language
- English
Conversions
c20.s1.1
Some available facts, figures, and estimates of the numbers converted in the medieval period have been given in previous chapters, and any repetition here is uncalled for. Islam has spread in many parts of the world through wars and campaigns. In the medieval Indian chronicles the sovereign is always mentioned as 'the king of Islam', the territories of his empire are referred to as the 'land of Islam', its armies as 'soldiers of Islam', and its religious and judicial head as 'Shaikh-ul-Islam'. The monarch was committed to make Islam the true basis of private and public life through the enforcement of the Shariat and to convert the people to the "true faith". In India the Muslim rulers' keenness to obtain converts in war is vouched by many chroniclers. The *Tarikh-i-Muhammadi*, gives a clear idea of the psychology of the rulers in this regard. Its author was a contemporary of Sultan Nasiruddin Mahmud, the son of Firoz Tughlaq. He says that while fighting Rai Subir (Sumer) in the vicinity of Iraj, the Sultan thought: 'If I will give orders to...the army to fight (outright), they will not leave even a trace of the Kafirs in the region, but if I shall advance slowly, then probably these people will agree to embrace Islam'.³ What Professor Mohammad Habib writes concerning the Mongol applies equally to Turkish expeditions. "In 1330 the country was invaded by the Mongols who indulged in arson, rape and murder throughout the Valley (of Kashmir) The kings and the Brahmans fled away but among the inhabitants who remained...Muslim ways of life were gradually adopted by the people as the only alternative..."⁴ Thus warfare brought captives, and captives were made Musalmans. Such was not the situation only in the North; in South also such methods of conversion prevailed, especially during wars between Bahmani and Vijayanagar kingdoms Throughout the medieval period such wars were common, and forcible conversions helped in the rapid growth of Muslim population.
c20.s1.2
³ Muhammad Bihamid Khani, *Tarikh-i-Muhammadi*, British Museum Ms. 440b, trans. into Hindi by A.A. Rizvi in *Uttar Timur Kalin Bharat*, Pt. II (Aligarh, 1959), p. 30.
c20.s1.3
⁴ Mohammad Habib, *Some Aspects of the Foundation of the Delhi Sultanate*, *op. cit.* (XI, n. 6), p. 20.
c20.s1.4
The rulers used force and persuasion in equal measure. Their resources were great. They could give jobs, honours, and titles, and many other economic concessions and status benefits as inducements to conversion, and many people would have taken advantages of these facilities. We have referred to Mubarak Khalji's encouragement to Hindus to accept Islam by presenting the convert with a robe and a gold ornament. People used to be converted in this fashion right up to the reign of Aurangzeb and perhaps even thereafter. There were subtler methods too. The *Banshasmriti* of Satya Krishna Biswas states that in Bengal the Rajas and Zamindars who could not deposit land revenue by a certain date had to convert to Muhammadanism. The *Banshasmriti* narrates an isolated incident,⁵ but as this regulation of the thirteenth century had been revived by Murshid Quli Khan, or had continued right up to his times, many local Rajas and Zamindars would have been converted in the course of four centuries. Firoz Tughlaq (1351-88) instructed his revenue collectors to convert Hindus to Islam.⁶ He rescinded the Jiziyah to lure people to become Muhammadans, and this measure brought large additions to Muslim population.⁷
c20.s1.5
⁵ It gives a historical sketch and geneology of the family of Raja of Samudragarh, a place situated between Katwa and Bandel Railway stations. Since the writer Satya Krishna Biswas has descended from Gopi Mohan Biswas, the last Diwan of the ruling house (*op. cit.*, X, n. 52, p. 10), the narrative appears to be quite reliable. It says that after Bakhtiyar Khalji overran Bengal, it became a rule that if revenue was not deposited within the prescribed time, the defaulting landlord (*bhuswami*) had either to lose his land or become Musalman. This is also referred to in the *Banglar Itihasa* of Babu Raj Krishna (p. 7). *Banshasmriti* says that once Raja Ranjit Bhatt of Samudragarh went to deposit his land revenue, but at the Treasury he found that the Raja of Krishnanagar had not reached in time. He reflected that if the Raja of Krishnanagar became Muslim, much harm would be done because he was a bigger landlord. Therefore, "in the larger interest of Hinduism", Ranjit Bhatt deposited his money as revenue on behalf of the Raja of Krishnanagar and himself became a Muslim. But the most interesting part of the narrative is that on his return to his land the newly converted Raja started compelling others also to embrace Islam (because perhaps therein alone lay his security and defence). According to the author of the *Banshasmriti* the family still lives in Samudragarh, now only a small village. All the members are given two names—one Hindu and the other Muslim at the *namkaran* ceremony. The present Raja's (1926?) Muslim name is Ichamat Khan and Hindu name is Makhan Lal Thakur.
c20.s1.6
⁶ Afif, *op. cit.*, (II, n. 15), pp. 268-69. Also I. Prasad, *Qaraunah Turks*, *op. cit.*, (V, n. 17), p. 331.
c20.s1.7
⁷ In his *Futuhat-i-Firoz Shahi*, Sultan Firoz Tughlaq candidly writes : "I encouraged my infidel subjects to embrace the religion of the prophet, and I proclaimed that every one who repeated the *kalima* of *tauhid* and became a Musalman should be exempt from Jiziyah....Information of this came to the ears of the people at large, and great numbers of Hindus presented themselves, and were admitted to the honour of Islam. Thus they came forward day by day from every quarter, go on coming to this day, and adopting the faith, are exonerated from the Jiziyah, and are favoured with *khilats* and presents". *Futuhat-i-Firoz Shahi*, trs. in E and D, III, p. 386. Also Hindi trs. in Rizvi, *Tughlaq Kalin Bharat*, II, *op. cit.* (VI, n. 2), p. 337.
c20.s1.8
Side by side the government's. efforts was the proselytizing activity of the Muslim missionaries. It is however not clear how far Sufi and other Mashaikh were interested in the work of conversion and what amount of success they achieved in this regard. Following in the footsteps of T.W. Arnold,⁸ Titus, Aziz Ahmad and Mujeeb assert that conversions to Islam were mainly a result of the labours of the mystics.⁹ On the other hand Mohammad Habib and A.A. Rizvi say that Sufi Mashaikh were not interested in effecting conversions. Prof. Habib says, "The Musalmans have no missionary labours to record......*We find no trace of any missionary movements for converting non-Muslims* (italics by the author himself). Medieval Islam was a converting creed, but it failed to develop any missionary activity...... So far as our country is concerned we have to confess frankly that no trace of a missionary movement for the conversion of non-Muslims has yet been discovered." In a footnote he adds : "Some cheap mystic books now current attribute conversion to Muslim mystics on the basis of miracles they performed. So in order to believe in the conversions one has to believe in the miracles also. But all such books will be found on examination to be later-day fabrications".¹⁰ Prof. Rizvi arrives at the same conclusion. He simply says that "the early mystic records (*Malfuzat* and *Maktubat*), contain no mention of conversion of the people to Islam by these saints."¹¹
c20.s1.9
⁸ T.W. Arnold, *The Preaching of Islam, op. cit.*, (IX, n. 11), pp. 264 ff.
c20.s1.10
⁹ Titus, *op. cit.* (IX, n. 11), Chapter III entitled "Peaceful Penetration". pp. 36-53. Aziz Ahmad, *Studies in Islamic Culture, op. cit.*, (VIII, n. 18), pp. 81-84. Mujeeb, *op. cit.*, (X, n. 24), p. 22.
c20.s1.11
¹⁰ K.M. Ashraf Memorial Lecture, *op. cit.* (XI, n. 6), pp. 18-19.
c20.s1.12
¹¹ S.A. Rizvi, *Muslim Revivalist Movements in Northern India in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries*, (Agra University, 1965), p. 18.
c20.s1.13
From the hagiological literature also it is evident that Sufi Mashaikh were not organized for propaganda work in any modern way.¹² Sufi Shaikhs and scholars are not known to have preceded but always followed the armies of invasion.¹³ They mostly lived in metropolitan cities, in their respective *Khanqahs* or monasteries, and do not appear to have moved about in the countryside for propaganda work. The whole atmosphere in the *khanqah* was Muslim, not many, if any, Hindus ever visited them, not to speak of their coming in large numbers for being converted.¹⁴ The two greatest Chishti Mashaikh of the medieval period were Muin-ud-din Chishti and Nizam-ud-din Auliya. Rizvi rightly says that Shaikh Muin-ud-din Chishti "was neither a missionary nor a miracle monger. He did not work among the masses...."¹⁵ In the *Fawaid-ul-Faud*, a biographical memoir on Shaikh Nizam-ud-din Auliya, there is mention of conversion of only two individuals. Similarly during the reign of Iltutmish, Khwaja Qutbuddin Bakhtiyar Kaki and Qazi Hamid-ud-din Nagori were two prominent saints in Delhi, but no proselytizing activity is attributed to them.¹⁶ Indeed the Mashaikh sometimes resented government's appeals to do proselytizing work; and Muhammad bin Tughlaq, who wanted to employ this class on missionary work, met with lot of opposition from them.¹⁷
c20.s1.14
¹² Titus, *op. cit.* (IX, n. 11), p. 42.
c20.s1.15
¹³ *Ibid.*, p. 44.
c20.s1.16
¹⁴ Rizvi, *op. cit.*, (n. 11), p. 20. Also see Barani, *op. cit.*, (II, n. 11), pp. 343-347.
c20.s1.17
¹⁵ Rizvi, *op. cit.*, (n. 11), p. 15.
c20.s1.18
¹⁶ Ferishtah, *op. cit.*, (II, n. 6), I, pp. 66-67.
c20.s1.19
¹⁷ Mahdi Husain, *Tughluq Dynasty*, *op. cit.*, (V, n. 8), pp. 349-50, 160 and also p. 174 and n. 2-3. Also see Kirmani, *Siyar-ul-Auliya*, p. 328.
c20.s1.20
In brief, while it would not be safe to declare that hardly any conversions were effected by the Sufi Mashaikh, it has also to be admitted that not many reliable references to their proselytizing activity are available in genuine hagiological works. They may have helped those who showed any inclination to become Muslims. Occasionally they resorted to force also to convert people.¹⁸ But the Mashaikh were probably responsible only for stray and individual conversions and their contribution to the growth of Muslim population may not have been much. Saiyyad Muhammad bin Nasiruddin Jafar Makki al-Husaini, the Khalifa of Nasirudddin Chiragh-i-Dehli "held that there were five reasons which led the people to embrace Islam :
c20.s1.21
¹⁸ As for instance the efforts of Raju Qattal to convert Nahuwan, the Darogha of Uch. Jamali, *Siyar-ul-Arifin*, (Delhi, 1311 H.), pp. 159-60. Also Ferishtah, *op. cit.*, (II, n. 6), II, pp. 417-18. Also see their militant proselytizing activity in Bengal in Section XIV.
c20.s1.22
(1) fear of death,
c20.s1.23
(2) fear of their families being enslaved,
c20.s1.24
(3) propagation (of Islam) on the part of Muslims, (4) the lust for obtaining *mawajib* (pensions or rewards) and *ghanaim* (booty), and
c20.s1.25
(5) Tassub (bigotry or superstition ?).”¹⁹ Thus, according to Saiyyad Muhammad, propagation of Islam by Muslims did not necessarily involve missionary activity of Sufi Mashaikh.
c20.s1.26
¹⁹ Rizvi, *op. cit.*, (n. 11) p. 46 citing Sijzi, *Akhbar-ul-Akhiyar*, p. 136.
c20.s1.27
Today many classes or groups of people who were originally Hindu are found to belong to the Muhammadan faith, and their conversion can be traced to medieval times. An oft-repeated reason for such conversions is said to be the tyranny of the Hindu caste system. Arnold, Titus and Aziz Ahmad give credit to “the democratic social system of Islam”²⁰ for the conversion of low caste Hindus to “win a degree of social freedom” because “for the lower Hindu castes acceptance of Islam meant an escape from the degraded status they had in the Hindu society.”²¹ Dr. Wise thinks that the Muhammadan Julaha (Jolha or Momin) weaver class of Bengal and Bihar belonged to a “despised Hindu caste who in a body became converts to Muhammedanism.” Ruben Levy also talks of the “coarse rabble” or Ajlaf in Bengal, who formed the functional groups such as weavers, cotton carders, oil pressers, barbers, tailors etc., as well as converts of originally humble castes in Bengal.²²
c20.s1.28
²⁰ Titus, *op. cit*, (IX, n 11), p. 36.
c20.s1.29
²¹ Aziz Ahmad, *op. cit.*, (VIII, n. 18), p. 82.
c20.s1.30
²² Ruben Levy, *The Social Structure of Islam* (Cambridge, 1957), p. 73.
c20.s1.31
However, contemporary writings of Persian chroniclers nowhere mention caste as a factor leading to conversions. Their evidence shows beyond doubt that conversions in India were brought about by the same methods and processes as seen in Arabia, Persia, Central Asia etc. India was not the first country where Islam was introduced in medieval times. It had spread in Persia, Central Asia, Afghanistan, and North Africa before it came to India. There was no caste system in these countries and yet there were large scale conversions there.
c20.s1.32
Therefore, a little reflection off the beaten track would show that the reason behind the conversion of some groups *en masse* was not due the oppression of the caste system but the opening of new avenues of employment and economic advancement by the Muslim regime and society. Naturally large numbers of poor people were attracted to Islam as the following Table, prepared on the basis of U.P. Census Report of 1931, indicates.
c20.s1.33
Table 8
c20.s1.34
*Showing some Muslim Low Castes of U.P.*²³
c20.s1.35
²³ Compiled from the *Census Report of India*, 1931, Vol. 18 (United Provinces), Part 2.
c20.s1.36
| | Per cent of caste Members adhering to Muslim Religion | Per cent of each Caste in Total Religious Membership |
| Julaha | 95.5 | 14.7 |
| Faqir | 93.0 | 12.9 |
| Dhunia | 93.5 | 5.4 |
| Teli | 25.1 | 3.4 |
| Nai (Hajjam) | 26.9 | 3.3 |
| Darzi | 69.5 | 2.3 |
| Qassab | 100.0 | 2.2 |
| Dhobi | 14.0 | 1.5 |
| Manihar | 96.4 | 1.4 |
c20.s1.37
Like U.P. functional groups many occupational groups in other parts of the country, especially in northern India, too went over to Islam in large numbers in medieval times. Now, did the ancestors of the above Muslim castes convert in medieval times because of the tyranny of the caste system? Let us take the Faqirs first. In Hindu society there is no 'caste' of beggars. But any number of beggars would be 'born' if they could get free food without doing any work. It is stated in almost every chronicle that in medieval times food was very cheap, even so many idlers would have avoided to do work if they could get free food just for a change of name—religion of the poor being the proverbial bread. Muslim regime provided it and Faqirs flocked to it and to Islam. The number of Faqirs had grown so large by the time of Ghayasuddin Tughlaq (1320-25) that the sultan wanted to put a stop to a free treat to them and wanted them to take up some work, but his attitude was resented and the sultan maligned.²⁴ According to Ahmad Abbas 40,000 beggars used to be fed by Ghayas's successor Muhammad Tughlaq.²⁵ Muhammad Tughlaq sometimes even attended the funeral of Faqirs.²⁶ The Faqirs were so well paid under Firoz Tughlaq²⁷ that some nobles, who used to recommend them to the liberality of the sultan, did not fail to take a 'bribe' out of their gains²⁸ Generosity of kings and nobles towards Faqirs never slackened even during the Mughal period. A good number of people would have converted in medieval times to become Muslim Faqirs to form a caste in the Muslim social order in modern times.
c20.s1.38
²⁴ Barani, *op. cit*, (II, n 11), pp 436-37.
c20.s1.39
²⁵ Rizvi, *Tughlaq Kalin Bharat*, I, *op. cit.*, (V, n. 32), p. 322. Also Ishwari Prasad, *op. cit.*, (V, n. 17), p. 309.
c20.s1.40
²⁶ *Masalik-ul-Absar*, *cp. cit.*, (II, n. 5), p. 580
c20.s1.41
²⁷ Barani, pp. 558 59. Afif, *op. cit.*, (II, n. 15), pp. 448-49, 512.
c20.s1.42
²⁸ Afif, p. 449.
c20.s1.43
Similar was the position with regard to the Qassab. Arab geographers of the ninth to twelfth centuries found most Indians vegetarians. Some Hindus ate game but not flesh of animals and animals were not slaughtered for providing meat.²⁹ By many Hindus meat is still called 'shikar' (game). The Hindu Gorkhas call it only by this name. Therefore, while it would be difficult to categorically state that Hindus in the pre-Muslim period did not do the work of meat-selling, there does not seem to have been a caste of Hindu butchers which went over to Islam because of the oppression of caste system. The few Hindu butchers might have become Musalmans because their vocation found a flourishing and sympathetic clientele among Muhammadans but many others who were not butchers by profession would have found in cutting and selling of meat a new avenue of employment in a new society and joined it to form a Muslim caste of hundred per cent Qassab.
c20.s1.44
²⁹ Al Masudi, *op. cit* (II. n, 1), p. 19. Al Idrisi, *op. cit*, (III, n. 20), p. 83. Qazwini, *op cit.*, (IX, n. 2), p. 96.
c20.s1.45
In the case of *darzis* or tailors, their employment chances lay more with the Muslim community. Muslims dressed elaborately,³⁰ and the sartorial habits of Arabs and Turks would point to even some tailors having come from abroad, and converted Hindu tailors joining their ranks. The requirements of the Sultan,³¹ the elite, and even the common Muslims would have needed the services of a whole tribe of tailors, who, passing the whole day in the palace workshops or catering to the needs of the patronizing Muslim society would have found it profitable and convenient to become Muslim. The interdependence of cotton-carders, weavers, (dhunia, julaha) and tailors would have induced the former to embrace Islam, and once some people of this class converted to Muhammadanism, others followed suit because of class affiliation and vocational compulsions. Cotton-carders, weavers, and tailors were there both in the urban and the rural areas; only in the urban they were more skilled and produced fine quality stuffs required by the Muslim nobility and elite, and conversions seem to have occurred mostly in the urban areas; and many village julahas have remained Hindu. A Hajjam does not enjoy a better status in Muslim society than a Nai in Hindu, but the Hajjam’s profession provided greater avenues of economic betterment in Muslim society: he did the work of circumcision and other minor surgical operations.
c20.s1.46
³⁰ Barani, *op. cit*, (II, n. 11), pp. 273-74. Afif, *op. cit.*, (II, n. 15), pp. 263. Also Lal, *Twilight*, (VI, n. 5), pp. 271.
c20.s1.47
³¹ Ahmad Abbas says that in the royal workshops of Muhammad bin Tughlaq 200,000 robes of honour were prepared every year for presentation to the nobles alone. In the Sultan’s manufactory there were 400 silk-weavers and 500 manufacturers of golden tissues, besides others. *Masalik*, *op. cit.*, III, n. 5), p. 578.
c20.s1.48
Such instances need not be multiplied, but some other cases not included in the above Table may also be mentioned in passing. Many elephant drivers (mahauts) are today Muslims. It is on record that Muslim rulers were extremely fond of elephants. Mahmud of Ghazni had an elephant corps of 2,500, all collected from India.³² Minhaj Siraj affirms that during Bakhtiyar’s Bengal campaign, *many elephants were captured with their drivers*.³³ He also writes that Sultan Ruknuddin Firoz Shah (son of Iltutmish), “*was very fond of... elephants, and all the elephant drivers were much benefited by his bounty* (italics mine).”³⁴ Ferishtah says that by the time of Bahram Shah (A.D. 1240) the sultans had monopolised the privilege of keeping elephants.³⁵ Being in the employment of Muslim rulers and nobles, living in the palace or Sultans' forts all the time, and benefiting from their bounty, it was but profitable for them to convert to a faith in which advantages of service and profession lay. One the contrary those professional groups, which had a mixed Hindu-Muslim clientele, but whose business would have been adversely affected by losing the Hindu customers if they had converted to Islam, like the *panwaris* (betel sellers), *halwais* (sweetmeat-sellers), *banias*, goldsmiths etc., did not convert and have remained Hindu through the ages.
c20.s1.49
³² Minhaj, *op. cit.*, (VI, n. 4), p. 83. Bosworth, *op. cit.*, (IX, n. 3), p. 166. S.H. Hodivala, *Studies in Indo-Muslim History* (Bombay, 1939), pp. 139-40, 146.
c20.s1.50
³³ *Tabaqat-i-Nasiri*, trs. in E and D, II, p. 315.
c20.s1.51
³⁴ *Ibid.*, p. 332.
c20.s1.52
³⁵ Ferishtah, *op. cit.*, (II, n. 6), I, p. 69.
c20.s1.53
Besides, not all low-caste Muslims have converted from low-caste Hindus. Many foreign Muslims also would have been relegated to low caste on marrying low-caste women. The sultans and Amirs usually married in the families of the Rajas and Zamindars they defeated. But the common soldiers or common Musalmans would have married either in their own religious group, that is among the newly converted, or among the low-caste Hindus.³⁶ And as class distinctions crystallized in medieval Indian Muslim society, these people would have been given only a low caste, having obtained it through their wives.³⁷ Needless to say that such Muslims, originally of foreign extraction, would have swelled the ranks of low-caste Muhammadans.
c20.s1.54
³⁶ Barbosa, *op. cit.* (VI, n 7), I, p. 74 tells how the Moplahs inter-married with low-castel natives.
c20.s1.55
³⁷ Such was not the case only with the Muslims. All foreigners who married low-caste persons in this country were counted among low-castes. The case of the early Portuguese in India is an instance in point.
c20.s1.56
Thus the few low caste groups which converted to Islam did so not "to escape from the tyranny of the caste system" because they have remained at as lower a rung in Muslim society as they were in Hindu, but because of new professional and vocational
c20.s1.57
"After capturing Goa, (it became the policy of the Dominican head of the Church, and Albuquerque) at Cochin and Goa of encouraging and subsidizing marriages between native women and the Portuguese Since most of the marriages contracted were between common Portuguese and low-caste natives .....it had the effect of lowering all Christians in the eyes of the higher castes..."
D.F. Lach, *Asia in the Making of Europe*, *op. cit.* (V, n. 24), I, pp. 230-34.
Also *cf.* Manucci, *op. cit.* (II, n. 41), III, p 323, for the seventeenth century.
c20.s1.58
opportunities in a changed society. Such conversions took place mostly in urban areas. Artisans, mechanics, handicraftsmen were loyal to their guilds and their caste. Where guilds were loosely knit and contained many occupational groups or the occupational groups on which the grip of Brahminical hold was lax chances of conversion were more. There was a greater possibility of such a situation in the urban areas and port-towns where there was concentration of Muslim clientele and influence of Muslim religious, political and economic leadership. In the conversions at port-towns, for example, foreign Muslim merchants played a great part. From what we know of their contribution in the conversion of South-East Asia,³⁸ it stands to reason that their propagandism for Islam in India too would have been very effective The Zamorin of Calicut, for instance, encouraged the fishermen of Malabar to become Muslamans in order to man his warships: and to this end ordered "that, in every family of fishermen in his dominions, one or more of the male members should be brought up as Muhammadans."³⁹ Either in deference to the wishes or conditions of his Arab or other Muslim captains and crew, or to see that the men working on the ships under Muslims should have no caste inhibitions, the Zamorin may have issued such orders. But the fact is that today large number of boatmen and fishermen in Bengal and other parts of the Indian seacoast are Muhammadans. Similarly some mercantile groups like Khojas and Bohras also converted to Islam under the influence of foreign merchants, although legendary accounts attribute their conversion to saints.
c20.s1.59
³⁸ D.G.E. Hall, *op. cit.*, (III, n 26), pp 476-85.
c20.s1.60
³⁹ Arnold, cited in Titus, *op. cit.*, (IX, n 11), p 79.