Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

History of Mediaeval Hindu India (being a History of India from 600 to 1200 A.D.) v1.c14: Book II

History of Mediaeval Hindu India (being a History of India from 600 to 1200 A.D.) v1.c14

Language
English

Contents

Book II

v1.c14.1

( Circa 650-800 A. D. )

v1.c14.2

REVOLUTION IN SIND

v1.c14.3

( The following account is based on Chacha-nāma a Persian translation of an Arabic account of the 12th century A. D. The account is reliable in many ways, being based on contemporary records, but the dates are usually misgiven, even the conquest of Sind by the Arabs being placed before 712 A. D. by some years. We have tried to give our estimate of the dates by reference to Hiuen Tsang's account who personally visited Sind in 641 A. D. and who mentions that the king there was a Śūdra and not a Brahmin. There are certain legendary stories especially of astrologers' predictions which we omit as usually added afterwards in popular tradition almost all over the ancient world With these corrections Chacha-nāma may well be followed and it affords us interesting materials for many historical deductions ).

v1.c14.4

At the time of Harsha's death Sind was ruled, as we have already noted, by a Śūdra king named Sāhasī of the Maurya clan a branch of which ruled at Chitor in Rajputana. Sāhasī's capital was Alor a town situated on the left bank of the Indus, now in ruins, the river also having changed its course here. Subject to Sāhasī were three or four smaller kingdoms ruled by Jat and Kshatriya princes the chief two being the Lohana prince of Brahmanabad and the Rajput prince of Siwistān. What Brahmanabad, which is of course an Arabic name, was in ancient Indian geography it is difficult to determine. But it was a town to the south of Alor and some-where near Hydrabad* and its sway extended upto Debal a town on the sea-coast near modern Karachi. Siwistān seems to be nothing more than the country of the Sibis a noted Kshatriya clan in the Mahābhārata and even in Alexander's time. The Sibis had a principality to the west of the Indus and it was from ancient times subject to Sind. For even in the Mahābhārata Jayadratha king of Sind, is said to be lord of Sind, Sauvira, and Sibi (Vana P. ch. 267) and is accompanied by the princes of the two latter when he goes by way of the Kāmyaka forest on his expedition to the Sālva country. (Vana P. Ch. 265). These three are undoubtedly Alor, Brahmanabad, and Siwistān of the Chacha-nāma. Sind had subject chiefships in the north also towards the Panjab and this extensive country was ruled by Sāhasī with whose account the story of the Chacha-nāma begins. The whole country was thoroughly Buddhistic both the ruling king and the subordinate princes and the people generally being Buddhists even according to Hiuen Tsang. The country appears to have been, though nominally only, subject to the Emperor Harsha of Kanauj.

v1.c14.5

∗ In Alexander's time there was a city of the Brahmins which he conquered and where he killed many Brahmins for instigating its revolt. Hermatalia is the supposed name of it which is usually taken to be Brahmana-sthala of which Brahmanabad would be the Arabic translation (see Alexander's invasion by McCrindle).

v1.c14.6

Some time about 650 A.D. (so it may approximately be taken) Sāhasī fell ill and died without issue. And his kingdom was seized by Sāhasī's minister Chacha, a Brahmin, and an ambitious, energetic and unscrupulous man. The Chacha-nāma relates that he did so with the assistance, nay, by the instigation of Sāhasī's queen who had fallen in love with him. They kept the death of the king a secret, enticed the turbulant nobles and relatives of the king who were likely to oppose them to the palace and imprisoned them. Then as by an order of the sick king, the government was publicly entrusted to Chacha whose authority was already well established. Chacha made many nobles his partisans by giving them estates of the imprisoned Sardars and when he had a strong party in his favour, he announced the king's death and his own assumption of the crown. He strengthened his position further by marrying the guilty queen of Sāhasī and thus established his own dynasty in the kingdom on a firm basis.

v1.c14.7

Whatever the truth of the story of the queen's love, the usurpation by the minister Chacha is not a strange or improbable event. Similar events in ancient and modern Indian history can be quoted, for example the usurpation of the Pataliputra empire of the Sungas by their minister the Kanva or the supplanting of the last Bahmani king of Bedar by his minister Kasim Bereed. Nor is Chacha's marrying the queen an unreliable incident. The wives and concubines of deceased or deposed kings have usually been appropriated by usurpers even in Indian history as in Denmark of Shakespear's Hamlet. We may therefore well believe the story of Chacha's usurpation given in the Chacha-nāma though the queen's part in the affair may be set aside as improbable.

v1.c14.8

The usurpation by a minister is not an improbable event but was it a religious revolution? We shall presently see. Chacha was a singularly fortunate usurper. He defeated the king of Chitor who was, as we have said, a relative of Sāhasī and presumably a Buddhist and who came to lay claim to the crown and to dethrone the usurping minister. Chacha thus confirmed further strengthened his position and reputation by conquering the northern subject states of Sind and taking Multan made his boundary conterminous with Kashmir, so the Chacha-nāma relates, in the east.

v1.c14.9

When Chacha had also conquered the northern states of Iskania and Babia with the eastern states of Multan and Karur, he turned his arms towards the west, crossed the river Mekran (Arabic for the Indus) and conquered Mattah the king of Siwistān or the country of the Siwis (Sibis). He then finally turned towards the south (probably the Arab historian had the story of Chacha related to him by some native reporter who has given it the form of a Digvijaya by Chacha) and called upon Agham Lohana the powerful king of Brahmanabad to submit. But the latter decided to oppose Chacha and a battle was fought outside the town in which Agham was defeated. He retired into the town to which Chacha laid siege. The besieged Agham who was a Buddhist sent for aid to the ruler of Kanauj the then capital of Hindustan but before a reply could be received Agham died. His young son submitted to the fortunate Chacha who then entered the city and allowed the unmolested inhabitants to remain in the town as before, subject to himself.

v1.c14.10

The deplorable state of Buddhism of this time can be gathered from the story of the Samāni (Śramaṇa) recluse of the Navavihāra related in the Chacha-nāma. Like Hinduism Buddhism had drifted by this time from the highest philosophy into the grossest superstition and idolatry. This monk was supposed to be a great sorcerer of wonderful powers and Chacha was told that he had assisted Agham with his powers and enabled him to prolong the siege for more than a year. Chacha resolved to have him killed by his swordsmen and went to see him. He was fashioning clay idols of Buddha with his own hand. He did not at first notice the all-powerful king Chacha who for a time stood by him. Having finished his work of idol-making the Samani noticed the king and asked him to sit down offering him a grass mat. Chacha sat and eventually left, not only without having him killed but after promising to help him in repairing the Navavihāra. When asked why he had changed his mind Chacha said he saw a devil hovering above himself ready to pounce upon him! Such were the strange superstitious beliefs of the day about the necromancy of Buddhist monks.

v1.c14.11

But though Chacha spared the Samāni, he was a bigoted Hindu and his usurpation appears to have been actuated by religious motives also. The Chacha-nāma relates that Chacha while at Brahmanabad made certain rules by which he degraded the turbulent Lohanas and Jats in social position. He made it a rule that they should not carry swords except on occasions of urgent necessity, that they should not wear silken cloth, that they should use scarfs of black or red colour, that they should ride horses without saddle, that they must walk about bare-headed and bare-footed, that they must always, when they went out, have with them dogs to distinguish them and that they should supply firewood to the ruler of Brahmanabad, serve as guides and spies, and be trustworthy and honest. The story is certainly well founded that Chacha made these rules. They were enforced during his son's time also and even in the time of the Arabs who conquered Sind, for the Chacha-nāma relates that Mohomed Kasim enforced the same conditions. In fact some of these restrictions are still observed. Many tribes of Jats go about bare-headed still. Even in Rajput times, the Jats were not allowed to cover their heads with turbans or to wear red clothes, or to put a crown on the head of their bridegroom, or to put a *nath* in their women's nose. "The Ghatwals obtained success over the Rajputs and removed the obnoxious provisions. They thus are called Mālik and wear red turbans." (Ibbetson's caste in the Panjab p. 130.)

v1.c14.12

It does not appear that these restrictions were imposed solely because the Jats and Lohanas were troublesome and riotous and committed robberies on the roads as perhaps it might at first sight appear. For the restrictions given above explain at once the meaning of the whole story of this prohibition. It seems that the Jats and the Lohanas claimed to be Kshatriyas and to have all their privileges, viz. wearing the sword, riding a horse, having a red turban while the orthodox Hindu population denied these claims. It is easy to surmise, that during the preceding period of Buddhistic supremacy, many castes had thrown away Vedic practices and rites and had thus forfeited their title to be treated as Dvijas or Aryans. Now we have already seen that the Jats were Vaiśyas of Vedic times, and their occupation was agriculture which was not then exclusively the occupation of the Śūdras. The Lohanas appear to have been originally Kshatriyas, but they had during Buddhistic times become peaceful traders. Yet both must have kept up Kshatriya pretensions as every one naturally desires to raise himself up in social position. As Hinduism now gathered strength, Hindu society began to confirm each caste in the status which it held by its practices. The Jats who were agriculturists and who had lost entire touch with Vedic rites, became Śūdras in public estimation and were confirmed in that position and the Lohanas who now followed trade the profession of Vaiśyas became Vaiśyas in the Hindu view and were therefore confined to that status. Both appear to have practised widow marriage which was repugnant to the orthodox Hindu and the rigid Kshatriyas who did not practise it and this was a further reason in the confirmation of Lohanas as Vaiśyas and the Jats as Śūdras. These two races have still kept up their martial instinct but the historian cannot but observe that the gathering of strength by Hindu orthodoxy led to the demartializing of certain races which had an unfvourable influence on the future course of events.

v1.c14.13

Strangely enough in spite of this order Chacha married the widow of Agham Lohana much in the same way as he had married the widow of Sāhasī for political reasons. The power of Chacha was now firmly established and he ruled Sind successfully for several years. When he died we cannot well determine. Sind was conquered by the Arabs in 712 A. D. and Dahar the successor of Chacha the Brahmin king of Sind, so the Chacha-nāma relates, had ruled 33 years. It may be said therefore that Dahar came to the throne in 679 A. D. If we take Chandra, Chacha’s brother between Chacha and Dahar for 7 years as the Chacha-nāma relates, Chacha may be taken to have died in 672 A. D. after a rule of about 22 years.

v1.c14.14

As Chacha left sons behind him it does not seem probable that Chandra ruled for 7 years after Chacha as the Chacha-nāma states. Perhaps Dahar was a minor and hence Chandra’s rule for a brief period. Chandra is said to have become a monk or Buddhist. Probably the Buddhists were yet powerful in Brāhmanābād where he resided. After him or when Dahar came to majority Dahar became the king in 679 A.D. Dahar certainly ruled in Alor the capital of Sind and Brāhamanābād the subordinate kingdom was in charge of Daharsia, Dahar’s brother (it is probably a mistake that the latter is supposed to be an elder brother). There was some rivalry or dispute between them and their quarrel about the marriage of Bai their sister and the stories of the sagacity of Budhiman minister of Dahar in saving him from the attempts on his life by Daharsia we omit as rathar unhistorical. What we are certain of is that Dahar was a strong ruler* and his brother and his kinsmen including sons of Chandra were in charge of subordinate provinces or states. Whether Dahar was a son of Chacha by Sahasi's widow as the Chacha-nāma states can not definetely be determined. Dahar, Daharsia and Bai are said in the Chacha-nāma to be her children, but the same work states further on that Bai was Chacha's daughter by a Jat woman. It seems probable that Chacha as usual with Indian kings had several wives, Brahmin, Kshatriya, Jat or Vaiśya and Śūdra i. e. the queen of Sāhasi. Dahar was probably his son by a Brahmin or Kshatriya wife. For Dahar was treated as a Brahmin by the Brahmins of his time as the Chacha-nāma distinctly states. Whether Dahar is one of the 36 orthodox Rajput families, as Tod relates we will discuss in our second volume and will now proceed to describe the destruction of Dahar and the conquest of Sind by the Arabs, an epoch making event in the history of India.

v1.c14.15

[^ *]: We may believe the story of an invasion of Sind by Kanauj incited by Matta of Siwistān who after his defeat by Chacha had taken refuge with the Kanauj king. They were both Buddhists. Chacha had given a daughter in marriage to the Kashmir king and her son together with Sahiras king of Kanauj and Rasil his brother invaded Sind but Dahar defeated them by a stratagem. The details are of course not very historical and Sahiras of Kanauj is unquestionably Sriharsha whose name still rang in India when the Arabs conquered Sind. But since Harsha had long lain in rest in Dahar's time it must have been some other king if an invasion of Sind by Kanauj did take place in Dahar's regime. The Chacha-nāma also speaks of an invasion by a king of Ramal which in Arabic means sand and this may have been a Bhati king of the desert, that is, what Bahavalpur or Jaisalmere now are.

v1.c14.16

Like the nose of the alligator Sind is the most vulnerable part of India being exposed to foreign attack. The back of the country is covered by the Himalayan mountain chain and is therefore like the back of the alligator impossible to assail. The head of the country and its forehead too are protected by the Hindukush and the Suleiman ranges and are therefore practically unassailable. It is lower down where the river Indus falls into the sea that there is no natural obstacle in the path of a foreign invader. This nose of India is doubtless approachable through a sandy desert country without much water but to those who are accustomed to traverse deserts on camels and mules, Sind is easily accessible and hence it is that it has frequently fallen a prey to foreign invaders in the history of ancient India.

v1.c14.17

But though frequently thus attacked and conquered by the Persians before the period of which we treat the Indians of Sind as frequently asserted themselves and gained back their independence. The dynasty which Chacha subverted had ruled in Sind for about 150 years and Chacha and Dahar had ruled for about 60 years. The conquest of the country by the Arabs in Dahar's time, however, proved permanent and from 712 A. D. down to our day (with the apparent exception of a few years) Sind has remained under foreign subjection. We will, therefore, describe the conquest of Sind by the Arabs in detail and see what causes operated towards that eventually permanent enslavement of the country which overtook Sind at the beginning of the 8th century and the rest of the country at the end of the 12th. Many details are fortunately available in the Chacha-nāma an almost contemporary account for this event.

v1.c14.18

The Arabs, it is said in the Chacha-nāma, made several abortive attempts during the reign of several Khalifas to conquer Sind but when they had fully conquered Irān and had thus a nearer and a stonger base for their operations they made really earnest efforts to subjugate the country. A good pretext soon offered itself. Some ships conveying Mahomedan male and female pilgrims from Srendib or Ceylon (it is strange that the Arabs had already by this time taken their religion to Ceylon probably directly by sea from Arabia) with many valuable presents in jewels and pearls from the king of Ceylon to the Khalifa Walid who ruled in Baghdad, by way of the Persian gulf were compelled by adverse winds to go to Debal a seaport town of Sind situated on the western bank of the Indus. The Indus delta was then infested by robbers as even Hiuen Tsang has described. They were very bad men according to him though nominally Buddhists. These men attacked these ships, conveyed the treasure to Debal and imprisoned the Mahomedan men and women pilgrims. The authorities of the town ought not to have countenanced this act, but probably they had their due share in the spoils and so perhaps Dahar himself to whom a complaint was formally made on the subject by Hajjaj the governor of Irān. Dahar is said to have replied "That is the work of a band of robbers than whom none is more powerful. They do not even care for us." This was certainly not a fair reply for a powerful king to make and Hajjaj easily induced the Khālifa Walid to declare a holy war against Sind promising him in spoils twice the amount of money he would spend on an expedition for the conquest of Hind and Sind as the Arabs styled it.

v1.c14.19

Great preparations were made at Kufa the capital of Irān by Hajjaj who placed the expedition under the command of his nephew and son-in-law Mahomed Kasim, an upright true Mahomedan and a discreet energetic commander. 6000 men of good family from Sham (Syria) joined the expedition. There were battering rams and catapults also taken to assail fortified towns and these were put on board ships near Shiraz from whence they went by sea to Debal, while Mahomed Kasim marched by land through Mekran towards the same town. The army arrived fist at Ārman Bela and from thence proceeded to Debal where it was joined by the ships. The whole army with battering rams and catapults now encamped before the fortified town of Debal and socn invested it. Hajjaj kept up constant communication by means of swift runners ( on camels ) with the expedition and minutely directed and supervised its operations.

v1.c14.20

Dahar seems to have done nothing to save Debal. There was a band of 500 Arabs under one Alāfi in Dahar’s service, Alāfi having fled from his country in consequence of a murder committed by him. The Chacha-nāma states that Dahar consulted Alāfi who said that Mahomed Kasim was invincible and thereupon Dahar kept quiet. But probably Dahar thought the place strong as it had withstood attacks by previous Arab expeditions. This present expedition was however more serious than others that had preceded it and Debal fell before the conquering Kasim. One incident of the attack and capture requires to be noted. There was a high temple with a higher flag in the town and people said there was a talisman in it. So long as the tower and flag stood, Debal would not fall. Mahomed Kasim had that temple’s tower and its flag-mast thrown down by the charge of the Khālifa’s catapult an engine worked by 500 men and thus the city fell. Talismans and magic were believed in both by the Arabs and the Buddhists in those days and the magical absurdities related in the Arabian Nights of the day of Haroun-al-Rashid Khālifa of Baghdad are well known. The historian may set magic aside, but he cannot but remark that improved weapons of warfare are an important factor in the success of armies. The Arabs were skilful in the use of catapults which then were what cannons are now and catapults and and battering rams were not much known to the Indians. Their subjugation by the Arabs may therefore particularly be attributed to better weapons of destruction possessed by the Arabs.

v1.c14.21

The conquerors gave the first lessons of terrible Mahomedan warfare to the Hindus and Buddhists of Debal. For they massacred all the male population of the town. The people stood aghast and prayed for mercy; but Mahomed Kasim said he had no orders to show mercy; probably he wanted to make an example by inflicting a terrible lesson. When Mahomed Kasim came to the temple whose tower had been thrown down, he found "700 beautiful females under the protection of Buddha who were of course made slaves." The temple was probably a Buddhist female Vihāra. Debal was mostly Buddhist. The Governor was also a Buddhist and called in the Chacha-nāma Jahin Budh. He escaped, and joined Jaisiah son of Dahar who was then at Nerūn Mahomed Kasim had already granted pardon to certain persons who had promised to show the imprisoned Mahomedan male and female prisoners. These men were spared on bringing out the prisoners and also a Hindu officer who had charge of them for having treated them kindly during their confinement. What a great difference between the cruel treatment of prisoners by Mahomedans and their kind treatment by Buddhists!!! That officer, however, had to become a Mahomedan. The town was of course pillaged and the valuable plunder was divided into five parts one of which was sent to Hajjaj for the Khalifa as the government's share "according to the religious law" and the rest were shared between the commander and the soldiers according to fixed rules. In this manner the Arabs strove for conquests all the more for it was thus the self-interest of the government, the commander and each soldier to conquer. This procedure had its own share in the causes which may be assigned for the success of the Arabs.

v1.c14.22

Such was the terrible beginning of the eventual conquest of India by the Mahomedans, Debal being its first victim. The male population was mostl massacred, the town was completely plundered, many willing and unwilling people were converted, and beautiful females were carried away into captivity. It was a terrible example and when Mahomed Kasim after having arranged for the government of the town proceeded towards Nerūn, the next city higher up the Indus, also on the west bank, near modern Hyderabad, the city submitted without fighting. It had indeed shut its gates in the absence of its Samāni or Buddhist governor; and Jaisia, Dahar's son who was there with some force had by Dahar's order crossed the river and gone to Brahmanabad. But the Samāni soon returned, went to Mahomed Kasim's camp and tendered his allegiance. He also gave plentiful supplies to the army. Nerūn was therefore spared. Mahomed Kasim entered the town and built a mosque in place of a temple and made arrangements for the government of the place.

v1.c14.23

In order to leave no unconquered territory behind before he attempted to cross the Indus, Mahomed Kasim led his army towards Siwistān. The Sibis were a warlike people and probably Kshatriyas. The ruler of the fortified town was a cousin of Dahar, named Bachchra (Vatsarāj) son of Chandra. He resolved to fight and closed the gates. But the population was Buddhist. And there was a Samāni party (Buddhist) within. It said to Bachchra "We are a priestly class; our religion is peace. According to our faith, fighting and slaughter are not allowable. You are moreover sitting in a safe place. We are afraid the Arabs will take our place and will deprive us of our life and property. So we advise you to make peace." But Bachchra did not accept their cowardly advice and fought. Mahomed Kasim who brought up his battering rams and catapults up the Indus river in boats to Nerūn and from there took them by land to Siwistān now invested the town and fort. The Samāni party in the town sent word to him: "All the people whether agriculturists, artizans, merchants, and others have left Bachchra's side and do not acknowledge allegiance to him." The result was, the town was soon taken and Bachchra finding it difficult to hold the fort, fled with his men at night towards Budhia. Mahomed Kasim entered the fort, plundered the town except the Samāni party and made arrangements for the due government of the fort and the country. He sent the usual one-fifth of the plunder to Hajjaj and gave the rest to the army. He then moved in pursuit of Bachchra to Budhia where the Arabs had to fight, but eventually all the country to the west of the Indus was reduced to subjection and Kasim came back to Nerūn, without leaving any enemy behind him, to consider the means of crossing the Indus which it must be stated here has in recent times changed its course considerably. For it is now to the west of Hyderabad the modern substitute of Nerūn but in Kasim’s days it was to the east of it.

v1.c14.24

We cannot but pause here to reflect upon the conduct of the Buddhists of Nerūn and Siwistān. Indeed the verdict of history cannot but be that given by Giboon viz. that as Christianity enfeebled the Romans and was one of the causes of Rome’s downfall; so in India the spread and paramountcy of Buddhism was one of the causes of the fall of India’s independence. Of course Christianity has not enfeebled the Teutonic races, so has Buddhism not enfeebled the Mongolian races notably the Japanese. But as the tenet of Ahimsā or non-slaughter of living beings, together with the abandonment of animal food took strong root in India and became the supreme article of faith and conduct of the people martial spirit naturally declined. Cruelty has its dark side, but without cruelty there can be no martial spirit. The Budahist Harsha did succeed in establishing a widespread empire by his military achievements, but he was a meat-eater from his childhood though perhaps not to the end of his life. The Guptas who were orthodox Hindus and followers of the religion of animal sacrifice were of course a flesh-eating clan and during their days the middle class, the traders and agriculturists, the Vaiśyas so to speak were also carnivorous and were consequently as martial as the Brahmins above and the Śūdra population below them. It is hence that the Guptas of Magadha and the Vardhanas of Thanesar though Vaiśyas were able to drive away such ferocious foreign invaders as the Kushans and the Huns. But Harsha’s Buddhistic zeal and his imperial power succeeded in abolishing animal-slaughter and animal food from the land. The natural effect of this prohibition, working for nearly half a century, became visible among the middle classes of the country, the orthodox Brahmins and the strong Kshatriyas, however, evading the prohibition as well as the lowest classes. The middle class thus at the beginning of the 8th century was completely emasculated for ever (and it remains so to this day) and thus half nay more than half the population of the country was, when the Arabs came to India, as tame as sheep, only fit to be slaughtered by the ferocious Arabs. The Buddhists as we have seen openly declared that their article of faith was no slaughter and no fighting and we thus find at Nerūn and at Siwistān the people divided into two camps; those who did not want to fight and those who did. The former usually consisted of the agriculturists, the merchants and the artizans or the Vaiśyas and the quieter portions of the Śūdras, the middle class of the people so to speak. They were both averse to kill and afraid to be killed and they always sided with the Arabs when they found they were strong and likely to be victorious. The Brahmins and the Kshatriyas, however, fought vigorously. Bachchra and his Thakurs, the Chacha-nāma says, lost their lives “in trying to accomplish their sinful deeds”!!! The turbulent Jats too, though degraded by Chacha to the position of Śūdras fought valiantly. But as one-half of the population was cowardly and even favourable to the Arabs, Sind could not avert its fate. Fortunately at that very time Aryanism (we will not call it full Hinduism yet) or the religion of animal sacrifice revived elsewhere. Buddhism was conquered or driven into the background and the downfall of the rest of India was averted for three centuries more. Sind of course fell a prey to the Arabs and remained a Mahomedan province throughout the succeeding centuries of Indian history.

v1.c14.25

To return to our story, Mahomed Kasim was encamped on the west bank of the Indus for a long time unable to find a way to cross it. The river was certainly a great obstacle before him and Dahar was not unmindful of his duty and his opportunity. He made preparations to oppose the Arabs there. He had already called Jaisia his son from the opposite bank to his and now posted him with a strong force to oppose the crossing. He himself came down with a large army from Alor his capital and encamped in the open plain at some distance from Jaisiah. He even came down to the bank of the river opposite to the Arabs. He was a strong powerful man and a great archer. The Mahomedan historian himself relates how he strung his strong bow which none else could string and drawing it to its full length shot an arrow accross the river and killed an Arab horseman who also wanted to shoot Dahar from his side. This brave deed testifies to Dahar's strength and fearlessness which were not inferior to those of Poros before him and Prithviraj after him. But the strength and bravery of one man or many Rajput warriors was not of much avail against the bigotted impetuosity of the Arabs aided by defection on the side of the Indians. For here we come to the third cause of India's fall viz. the defection and treachery of its own sons which we proceed to describe as related in this Arab history itself.

v1.c14.26

Unable to secure boats, with scarcity of provisions in his camp and with sickness too among his men and horses, Mahomed Kasim was in great difficulties. But he was a resolute and a fortunate man. Hajjaj who backed him from Irān was also a resolute and a fortunate man. He sent him 2,000 fresh horses and a contingent of fresh soldiers and he gave him sound advice which is well worth repeating here. He wrote him "there are four ways of acquiring a kingdom : 1st conciliation and alliance, 2nd expenditure of money and generous gifts, 3rd adoption of expedient measures at the time of disagreement and 4th the use of overpowering force, strength and majesty. Try to grant every request made by the princes and please them by giving solemn promises." These four methods are the same as mentioned in Indian books on politics viz. Sāma, Dāna, Bheda and Danda or conciliation, payment, division and punishment. You can conquer an enemy by conciliating him or paying him large presents or by creating division in his camp or finally by using force pure and simple. The first two ways were not to be thought of for Dahar was implacable and rich. The other two remained and Mahomed Kasim succeded in finding an opportunity of creating division and defection. There was an island in the course of the river and this Bet was in possession of one Mokah Bassaya. He had probably cause to be dissatisfied with Dahar and he went over by a stratagem to Mahomed Kasim who promised to make him big grants of territory. And Moka Bassaya in all subsequent operations of the Arabs faithfully and zealously assisted Mahomed Kasim. He was in fact the Bibhīshaṇa of the story of the conquest of Sind. He was a Rajput and perhaps even a Brahmin and was conscious apparently of his duty to his country for he is said to have written to Kasim as follows (p. 106 Chachanāma): "The country of Sind is our native country. It is an acquisition of our fathers and grand-fathers and our heritage. There is a consanguinity between us and Rai Dahar. He is also a king over other kings of Hind. It should be our duty therefore to stand by him and co-operate with him. We are also affected by his pleasure and pain and we are partners in the same country. But reason and wisdom suggest and mystic philosophy proves that the country will go out of our hands" and therefore it is wiser for him to surrender to Kasim. Traitors like Moka Bassaya have usually betrayed their country's cause with similar casuistry to save their conscience in the history of India from the king of Taxila in Alexander's days down to the Nāgara minister of Rai Karna of Gujarat in later days and these traitors in whatever country found can never indeed be too much execrated.

v1.c14.27

Moka Bassaya master of the Bet (Mahomed Kasim promised him the province of Bet as his own estate and passed a written document to that effect with his own signature and seal) not only now supplied provisions to Kasim but assisted him in crossing the river. He furnished him with boats and advised him to cross it at the Bet (island). A bridge of boats was made of length corresponding to the breadth of the river at this place along-side the western bank. When Rai Dāhar heard of the defection of Moka Bassaya he appointed his (Moka's) younger brother Rasil to oppose the Mahomedans in crossing the river. He too was a renegade and also lukewarm though appointed governor of Bet by Dahar. The Arabs were also assisted by many Thakurs and Jats besides Moka who had paid homage to the Arabs and joined them. These were posted at the island or Bet to assist the Arabs in crossing. Fixing one point of the long bridge of boats on the west bank, the Arabs moved the other which under the force of the stream reached the opposite coast. It was immediately made fast there with moorings by intrepid warriors amidst divided opposition by the Indians, Mokah Bassaya and his Jats and Thakurs interfering with the opposers under Rāsil. Thus the Arab army was able to cross the Indus without much difficulty. Jaisiah with his force fought with this army of Arabs on the east bank but was defeated Jaisiah a brave man was unwilling to fly but the driver of his elephant in his loyal solicitude addressed the elephant. "Do you want to escape" "How can that be done" said Jaisiah and the clever intrepid driver drove his elephant against the Arabs who had surrounded him, forced his way out and safely took Jaisiah to his father Dāhar who was glad to see his son safe and sound.

v1.c14.28

The Arabs having succeeded in crossing the river and in driving away Jaisiah placed there to oppose them, their subsequent victories need not be detailed at length. Dāhar who had left Alor and had come down with his most efficient forces, to the district of Jhim (somewhere to the south of Brāhmanābād) fought a determined battle with the Arabs, resolved like the ancient Kshatriyas to die or conquer. The contest was terrible. Dāhar had according to the Chacha-nāma about 5000 horsemen, 100 elephants and 20,000 foot soldiers with complete armour or coat of mail. Dāhar himself was seated on a furious elephant with a litter lashed to it and an iron coat spread over it. He was armed cap-a-pie and had a tightly strung bow in his hand. Two maid-servants were sitting with him in the litter, one of them handing him arrows and the other giving him betel leaf. His right was commanded by Jaisiah, his left by his nephew Jahin. His son Daharsia with many chief men of Sind (many names are given here) and all the Jats of the eastern part of the country brought the rear. How many men Mahomed Kasim had is not clear. He had probably 6000 horsemen and they used bows carrying lance also with arrows. He had infantry also and he had the assistance of renegade Indian forces such as those of Moka Bassaya and others,—Thakurs and Jats of the western portion of Sind (to the left of the Indus). But these must not have been considerable. The contest was fierce and determined and lasted from morn to about 4 in the evening when an unfavourable accident happened. The god of battles had decreed the day to the Mahomedans. Dāhar was fighting determinedly with arrows as also with discs (the peculiar Indian weapon called chakra) which was not known to the Arabs and which he threw with such force and aim that "it severed the head of a horse, a horseman or a foot at whosoever it was thrown." But at this time naphtha arrows shot by Arabs set the litter of Dahar's elephant on fire. The Indian battles show usually similar accidents. The commanders strangely enough always ride elephants which give sure targets to assailants. The elephant unable to bear the heat, disobeyed the driver, rushed out of the battle-field towards a lake that was near and plunged himself into the water. The driver as well as Dāhar were thrown down violently. They came or they were rescued out of the water but a party of Arabs assailed them and killed them. The army of Sind when the elephant of the king thus fled out of the battle as usual gave way and dispersed. The rout was soon complete and many were massacred, but a few reached the fort of Raor (not Alor) which was nearest the battlefield. Thus ended the chief battle in this conquest in favour of the Arabs on the 10th day of Ramzan of the 93rd year of the Hezira (712 A. D.).

v1.c14.29

Enormous plunder fell into the hands of the victor. Elephants, horses, wearing stuffs, cattle etc. were seized, a fifth part of the value of which was sent to Hajjaj as also the head of Dāhar and the heads of his tributary princes together with their ensigns and royal umbrellas, with a letter of exultation and thanks given by Mahomed Kasim. Among the slaves was a wife of Dāhar and several daughters of princes and Ranas and a niece of Dahar. They were sent further of course to the Khalifa with the exception of Ladi, Dāhar's wife whom Mahomed Kasim ransomed and married according to the usual predilection of conquerors for the wives of conquered princes.

v1.c14.30

One great incident which happened before this battle requires to be related at length. There were as already stated, 500 Arabs under Alafi in the service of Dāhar and on the eve of battle Dāhar asked them to lead the vanguard in fighting. Alafi said, "Oh king! we are indebted to you for many acts of kindness. But we are musalmins and cannot draw our sword against the army of Islam. If we are killed, we die the death of poluted wretches. If we kill we are responsible for murder and our punishment will be fire of hell." Alafi and his 500 Arabs thus refused to fight against their brethren and correligionists and had to leave the service of Dāhar. It is said they went to Kashmir immediately. Others state they remained behind assisted Jaisiah for a time and when he left Sind and went towards the modern Rajputana then they went to Kashmir. This incident shows the glaring contrast between the conduct of Hindus and Mahomedans on this eventful day. There were Hindus who fought against Hindus in this memorable battle but there were no Mahomedans against Mahomedans. This incident not only illustrates the stern religious earnestness of the early Arab Mahomedans but their elevated morality also. The 500 Arabs of Dāhar did not act the treacherous part which the Mahomedans of Ramrai of Vijayanagar played in later history at the famous battle of Talikot. The latter showed as if they fought with the Mahomedan enemies of Ramrai but when the proper time came they turned their arms against the Hindus themselves. Alafi could have done that, but treachery was no part of the Mahomedan religion in his days. It was not a tenet of that religion then that one may without sin be treacherous to an infidel. Christianity in later days preached and practised this debased doctrine and Mahomedans of later history also did the same. But the Arabs of Mahomed Kasim's days kept their promises most scrupulously. To massacre *opposing* Indians and to appropriate their women was their *avowed* creed. But if they promised pardon to any infidel Indians, they never broke their word. Even in religious matters they kept theie promises. The question whether those who had accepted subjection and payment of tribute for freedom of religious worship should be allowed to build their temples and to worship their idols was referred to Hajjaj and even that stern and cruel man said "Since we have accepted their tribute, we must allow them freedom of their own worship." It is clear then that the conquering Arbs of the early days were distinguished not only by religious zeal but high morality and the latter seems to be as much a requisite of success in war as unity and military superiority.

v1.c14.31

Jaisiah with a few followers escaped from the bloody battlefield and went to Raor. That fort was not thought safe and he went to Brāhmanābād where were the accumulated riches of his father and sufficient forces to oppose the Arabs. Dahar's another queen Bai remained in Raor with 15000 warriors and opposed Kasim who soon invested it with his victorious army. Bai found that "She could not escape the clutches of those chāndālas and cow-eaters" and resolved to burn herself. "She and many Rajput women were of one mind and so they entered a house, set fire to it and soon were burnt to death." This was probably the first immolation of Indian women in its history. The Indians no doubt fought among themselves in former times and even sometimes appropriated the women of the conquered princes as has been stated before. But there was no compulsion in these cases. If they refused to be wives and concubines of the victors they remained only as servants and were even allowed to go away as Buddhist nuns or other recluses. And there was no loss of religion or of caste. But with the Mahomedan conquerors the case was entirely different. Women were forcibly appropriated by them as wives or as concubines or as slaves and were also forcibly converted. And the eating of cows' flesh and the slaughter of cows were the most abominable things with the Indians. The courage of Indian women had always been exhibited in the long established practice of sati and thus Indian women during Mahomedan times often, nay almost always, made those terrible holocausts of themselves which make the history of the Mahomedan conquest of India hideous and painful. This sacrifice by Bai said to be Dāhar's step-sister and wife and other Rajput women was thus probably the first of its kind in Indian history.

v1.c14.32

Raor was taken and plundered. The fighting people were massacred and the women enslaved. Altogether there were, it is said in the Chacha-nāma, 60000 slaves including many beautiful women of princely families. These were like the plunder, divided between the government and the soldiers. From thence Kasim went to Brāhmanābād, capturing two towns and forts on the way, Bahror and Dahlila. Jaisiah not finding it safe even at Brāhmanābād left it with many followers and took his position in the desert, deciding to harass Kasim's forces during investment of the city. It was well prepared for the siege and withstood it for six months. There were about 40 thousand fighting men in the city and they made frequent sallies fighting with determination from sunrise to sunset. Jaisia also harassed the Arabs from behind. In this way Mahomed Kasim was sorely troubled, but Moka Bassaya came to his relief. He gave him accurate information about Jaisiah and asked a force to be sent against him. Jaisia was finally defeated (much like Indrajit of Rāvana defeated by Bibhīshana's aid) and he betook himself to Chitore. The fate of Brāhmanābād was now sealed. It fell in the usual way. The merchants and other non-fighting people threw themselves on the mercy of Mahomed Kasim and opened the gates. The city was immediately taken possession of, the merchants were spared, the warriors were slaughtered and the city was plundered. Women slaves were captured; among them were two virgin daughters of Dāhar who were sent to the Khalifa along with the fifth royal share of plunder. These as is well-known eventually became the cause of Kasim's downfall and death.

v1.c14.33

As Moka Bassaya said, Brāhmanābād was the chief city of Sind and when that was conquered the whole of Sind came into Kasim's possession. He made a long stay there and made arrangements for the administration of the country. One day it is said a thousand Brahmins came before him with shaven heads and beards. On inquiry they said "We are Brahmins; many of us had killed themselves when our Brahmin king Dāhar was killed. We have shaved our heads and beards in token of our loyalty to him." Kasim pardoned them, extolled their conduct and asked them to serve the country as before. They were asked to do the same duties to government as heretofore and were reinstated in their offices. Those who were actual priests were allowed to worship the idols in the temples as before and were allowed even to beg as before "with a copper-bowl collecting corn in it." This description probably applies to the Buddhist monks. Kasim even allowed the cultivators to give three out of every hundred Dirhams of revenue to the Brahmins and to pay the rest to the treasury. This toleration of the religion of the people—their being permitted to build their temples, to worship, their idols and to pay their priests is in strange contrast with the policy of the Mahomedan conquerors in succeeding centuries. As we have said before, Kasim followed this wise and honourable policy with the consent of Hajjaj who said that on payment of tribute the subjects had a right to worship in their own way. The tribute was fixed at 48 Dirhams on rich men (about 12 rupees in weight of silver), 24 for the middle class and 12 for the poor yearly. As the old revenue administration and even old officers were confirmed we may take it that the old system of revenue taxation remained in force and was not changed and taxation increased as in later times. The whole policy of Mahomed Kasim and his superiors was thus generous and truly wise.

v1.c14.34

But he was not equally generous in his treatment of the Lohanas and the Jats or as it is said here of the Lākhās and Sāmmās. Perhaps policy also dictated that these turbulent and warlike tribes should be kept down rather than relieved of the disabilities imposed upon them by Chacha. Perhaps orthodox Hindu feeling also was against them. Vazir Siyakar, minister of Dāhar (now converted) said that they were compelled by Chacha to wear coarse cloth, to take dogs with them when they went out in order to be distinguished, and not to ride horses or take swords. "If any headman or Rānā was obliged to use a horse, he was to ride without a saddle. If any accident occurred to any traveller, the Jat tribes were called to help; if any one committed theft his children were thrown into flames, that is, burnt. They guided caravans at night." Mahomed Kasim dealt with them exactly in the same way and further directed, following the rule made by Umār about the people of Syria, that "they should entertain a traveller within their limits for one day and if he fell sick for three days."

v1.c14.35

Mahomed Kasim now turned his attention towards Alor and Multan, the northern chief cities of Sind. He first came to a town called Musthal with a beautiful lake in its vicinity. The inhabitants were all Samānis and Buddhists and these submitted as also the Jats of the surrounding country. They were pardoned and subjected to tribute. Then he came to the country "where the Sammahs lived. They came forward dancing to the music of drums and pipes and said that was their way of receiving a king. He then came to the country of the Sahtas. These came out bareheaded and bare-footed and implored pardon. They were taken under subjection and tribute imposed on them. Taking guides from this place he came befor Alor "the biggest town in the whole of Sind." Tofi son of Dāhar was there. He still believed that Dāhar was alive and had gone to Hind to bring an army, (a belief like that which prevailed after the battle of Panipat about Sadashivrao Bhau.) The place was invested and the warriors fought valiantly. But Dāhar did not come with any reliefs. As usual the merchants and artizans were not fighters and dreaded being massacred. They sent word to Kasim imploring pardon. Tofi finding the temper of the people changed, sought safety in escape and joined his brother Jaisiah at Chitor. The city fell into the hands of Kasim who spared the merchants and the artizans for Ladi’s sake and even the fighters who submitted, slaughtering only those who opposed the Arabs. Hajjaj blamed him for leniency and declared that all fighting people or races should be killed; a practice which was certainly safe for a conqueror but which the great Kasim did not always follow upto this time. He, however, observed it more truly in his conquest of Multan towards which he now turned and which offered him more stubborn resistance.

v1.c14.36

He first came to Babia on the Beas where Kaksa son of Chandra and thus a nephew of Dāhar, after Dahar’s death at the memorable battle of Zhim where he was present, had taken refuge. Kaksa submitted without opposition. He was the most prominent man of his time and was placed in charge of the treasury of the kingdom. But at Golkondah Kasim was opposed and here the wariors suffered the same fate as at Alor and Brāhmanābād, 4000 men of the military class being killed. Again at Sikkah he was opposed by Bachera Tāki (belonging to the Takshaka tribe of Rajputs of the Panjab). Here for 17 days bloody battles were fought and many noted Arab chiefs fell. Bachera eventually left the fort, crossed the river and went to Multān where Kasim followed him destroying all neighbouring towns. At Multān Kundrai and Bachrai fought with him every day for two months (Kaksha couisn of Dāhar is strangely said here to have despaired of success against the Arabs and to have gone to the king of Kashmir! Did he leave the Arabs and join the Hindus?)

v1.c14.37

Eventually a traitor showed a place where the fortress of Multān could be burrowed under and thus enabled the Arabs to gain it. 6000 warriors were put to the sword and merchants, agriculturists and artizans as usual were spared. But a heavy tribute was exacted from them. 60000 Dirhams in silver were collected by the nobility and gentry and were given to the soldiers. Kasim demanded more tribute for the Khalifa. In this extremity a Brahmin showed a temple where in the midst of a beautiful pond was a golden image in a small chamber placed on copper vessels full of gold coins: "The idol was perfectly like a man with two rubies in its eyes. It weighed 230 maunds of gold and 40 copper jars under it contained 1320 maunds of gold." These were of course seized. Does this refer to the idol of the sun for which Multān was so famous as described by Hiuen Tsang? It looks like it but Al-Beruni has stated that Mahomed Kasim conquered Multān but left the idol of the sun intact; but Jahan-Ibn-Shaiban broke the idol and killed the priest. But this must have been later on. Alberuni also describes the idol as a wooden one covered with a red coat of leather though that idol too had two rubies for its eyes. Perhaps there might have been two idols one immoveable and the other moveable made of gold to be carried in processions.

First 37 of 273 passages. Read on

Linked texts (12)