Historical Battles in Ancient & Medieval Bharat

[Singha]

indeed once the 4 sons of chengiz split the kingdom, the Il-khanate branch of the family took over the persian-uzbek territory and there was no more scope for the people there to form any sort of profitable kingdom. hence the contant procession of militant afghani "hordes" into north india to get some slice of the pie. in the case of sher shah sur, his tribe was sent onward from delhi to go setup shop in bengal and bihar! its another matter he turned back later, kicked out humayun and setup shop in dilli itself. similar pressure and diminishing prospects must have forced the ghorids and aibaks to settle down in india though they obviously hated the rainy climate and so their horse armies. babur was another bhagora from central asia.

ofcourse if we were to locate that one 'leader' that exalted leader of the coven of elders who best exemplifies the paki gene of looting and laying waste, it would have to be nadir shah

[Virendra]

Found this at Kitab-I-Yamini (memoirs of Sabuktagin and Mahmud Ghazni) :-

...And they bought out of the idol temple an engraved stone, upon which they had fastened a writing to the effect that it was forty thousand years since that building was constructed. And the Sultan expressed surprise at this extreme error and folly, for all the learned in rules, and skilled in guidance have agreed that the extent of the world's age is not more than seven thousand years...
...In these matters we must be content with the eyes of the learned and the explication of the wise, whoo all deny the assertion, and agree that the testimony of this stone is all a falsehood and untruth, and a mere invention of these bewildered liars.

It is mentioned in a section called - "Account of the event at Nazin" after which his attack at Thanesar is elaborated.
By the way I couldn't find this place called Nazin, but if it is before his attack at Thanesar then could be some Shahi King's region in Punjab.

Regards,
Virendra

[Sanku]

And the Sultan expressed surprise at this extreme error and folly, for all the learned in rules, and skilled in guidance have agreed that the extent of the world's age is not more than seven thousand years...

Sounds very similar to the behavior of the modern day Xian bigots (pretending to be scholars) like Wieztels, Wheelers etc. does it not (ref to OIT thread)

Cross posting your post in that thread.

[peter]

I was talking about when Mongols laid continous raids and many of the turko-afghan tribes had to migrate to India.
Basically what I'm saying is that Mongols aggression was one of the reasons many turko-afghan tribes pushed towards India to get out of a constant war zone where an upper hand for them wasn't even remotely visible.

Were there any aggressions before the Mongols?
What about after the Mongols?

[Virendra]

Into India? Yes there was, always has been.
Difference in case of early Turko-Afghans was that they had more of a compulsion to press into India.
It wasn't the usual pre-Monsoon annual raid into India, loot and go back to your lair. The lair itself was under Mongol threat and hence many had to fnd new lebensraum elsewhere.

Regards,
Virendra

[peter]

Into India? Yes there was, always has been.
Difference in case of early Turko-Afghans was that they had more of a compulsion to press into India.

What was the compulsion?

It wasn't the usual pre-Monsoon annual raid into India, loot and go back to your lair. The lair itself was under Mongol threat and hence many had to fnd new lebensraum elsewhere.

Did mongols attack their habitat repeatedly? What evidence do we have for that?

[Virendra]

Not every Turk came to India because he was chased by Mongols but some did. Other came in better circumstances, with planned invasions.
I don't have evidence but only references of what I read :
Conquest of Kara Khitai - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuchlug#Downfall_and_Death
Conquest of Anatolia - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_ ... e_Da%C4%9F
Conquest of Khwarezm - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad_II_of_Khwarezm
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_inv ... ntral_Asia


http://tribune.com.pk/story/328103/jalaluddin-khwarazm/

...Changez Khan then came down on Khwarazm like an all-destroying tempest. Mohammad fled and died on an island in the Caspian, his son hard put to procure even a shroud for the fugitive. Taking up the banner, with the Mongols hard on his heels, Jalaluddin fled first to Afghanistan and then across the Suleman Mountains into the Peshawar valley.
Outside the village of Nizampur (Nowshera), by the banks of the Sindhu River, a great battle was fought in February 1221. Changez Khan’s Mongols prevailed. When Jalaluddin knew defeat was certain, he madly galloped his horse to the river’s edge and made it leap off into the cold blue eddies below. Fraudsters like Hijazi bill him a hero because, Juvaini writes that the Khan called up his sons and pointing to the fleeing coward said that a father should hope to have a son as courageous as him.

Safe on the Punjab side, Jalaluddin stuck his spear in the ground and hung his wet clothes on it to dry. He watched the ransacking of camp and the rape of the women of his family on the far side. What Hijazi does not tell his readers is that Changez Khan also told his sons that the greatest pleasure for a man was to warm his bed with the women of his defeated foe’s family.

By the time Jalaluddin was facing the Khan in battle, he well knew that rape was a Mongol instrument of war. He would surely have known how Samarkand and Bokhara suffered because of his father’s foolishness. And he would have known, too, what the Pakhtuns of Bamian and the Kabul valley faced. It is not for nothing that we today know that the Mongol gene pool is the widest spread in the entire world.

Had he been anything but a coward, Jalaluddin would have fought to the bitter but glorious end. He fled and watched his family being raped. And we are told he was a Muslim hero! He had surely not known of the Rajput way of Johar. When defeat is imminent, the Rajputs burn their families alive and go into battle without head or foot gear. Not one man returns alive. That is the essence of true courage, as we, the people of the great and wonderful lands of the subcontinent have forever known it.

Samarkhand, Herat, Bamiyan and Kabul figure among the places hit by Mongols.

http://horsesandswords.blogspot.in/2006 ... clysm.html
...Chingiz left the destroyed city of Bamiyan to collect his scattered divisions. When Jelal-ud-din learnt that Bamiyan was gone and Chingiz had pulled together his army he fled towards India...

Regards,
Virendra

[peter]

Not every Turk came to India because he was chased by Mongols but some did. Other came in better circumstances, with planned invasions.
I don't have evidence but only references of what I read :
Conquest of Kara Khitai - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuchlug#Downfall_and_Death
Conquest of Anatolia - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_ ... e_Da%C4%9F
Conquest of Khwarezm - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad_II_of_Khwarezm
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_inv ... ntral_Asia


http://tribune.com.pk/story/328103/jalaluddin-khwarazm/
[..]
Samarkhand, Herat, Bamiyan and Kabul figure among the places hit by Mongols.

http://horsesandswords.blogspot.in/2006 ... clysm.html
...Chingiz left the destroyed city of Bamiyan to collect his scattered divisions. When Jelal-ud-din learnt that Bamiyan was gone and Chingiz had pulled together his army he fled towards India...

Regards,
Virendra

Thanks for a good overview of the great general Chengiz Khan and his warriors. Would you know if the mongols ever attacked India? Your links don't make it clear or perhaps I did not read them well.

Interestingly I too had thought that Jelal-ud-din was a brave fellow but the tribune analysis that you linked does create a doubt. I wonder if the tribune analysis is factual w.r.t Jelal watching his family getting decimated.

Coming back to the original question are there other references of attacks happening on India from Central Asia because some populations were hard pressed by Mongols?

Were you able to reach Airavat? Does anyone if all is well at his end?

[Virendra]

Would you know if the mongols ever attacked India? Your links don't make it clear or perhaps I did not read them well.

I never said they attacked India. Though a few sorties were laid once till Delhi but nothing much and permanent otherwise.
My point was, the Mongol attacks and expansion in Central Asia, West Asia had put pressure on Turkish tribes (most of whom were muslims) residing there.
Many were forced to enlist under Mongols and fight alongside them. Some who found themselves on the opposite side were either killed en masse or they fled here and there.
As given already, there are plenty of attacks and massacres cited in areas of what is now called Afghanistan. It was obvious for some of the fleeing Turks to seek refuge in India. It doesn't necessarily have to be drastic/dramatic. It can be a gradual process as well. Specially if you're getting beaten up in your home physically or politically.
Some would prefer a new place instead of roughing it up in stiff competition with other turkish and mongol tribes for the same pie. Exactly what Babur also did centuries later.
Yet how much the Turks were disgusted with Mongols is evident from how Babur (so late after Mongol-Turk assimilation) mentions them and hates them.

I haven't heard of any major popular migration/attack by Turks in India because they were attacked from behind by Mongols in central Asia. Those who're thrashed from their lebensraum by a nemesis like the Mongol wouldn't be capable of just launching in India hitting the ground zero running like a world famous invasion who references would be easy to find.
Those who didn't move out exactly running from something .. those who expanded from a settled center, for them we obviously cannot say they came to India because of Mongols.
But that Turk-Mongol strife is surely one of the factors why some Turks came to India.

wonder if the tribune analysis is factual w.r.t Jelal watching his family getting decimated

Such circumstantial & minute details of field warfare are hard to verify. Perhaps the author has some primary source that we don't know of. Not sure. But the major points of him getting thrashed and running towards India. That much seems reasonable.

About Airavat, even I am wondering where he is. There is no way to contact him even on his blog. His last blog entry was posted three months back. May be Airavat has some references.

Regards,
Virendra

[member_23629]

Thanks for a good overview of the great general Chengiz Khan and his warriors. Would you know if the mongols ever attacked India? Your links don't make it clear or perhaps I did not read them well.

Mongols had reached inside India and actually attacked Delhi too AFAIK when Allaudin Khilji was ruling. The Chor Minar is the place where the severed heads of Mongols were displayed.

[member_23360]

Khilji not only successfully defended, he went offensive and drove Mongol out of Afghanistan.

[ramana]

Peter the full text of the Tribune article gives the source:

Whenever I refer to Jalaluddin, the fugitive king of Khwarazm, as a coward, I draw flak. It seems everyone has read the spurious history of Nasim Hijazi and since, we are mostly undiscerning readers, we have failed to sift through Hijazi’s hash of fiction that hides real history. Moreover, since Jalaluddin is a Muslim name, subcontinental Muslims simply cannot come to grips with the fact that he could be anything but a hero.

Alauddin (aka Ata Malik) Juvaini wrote his masterful Tarikh-e-Jahan Kusha (History of the World Conqueror, circa 1255) and preserved the real history of the shameless Jalaluddin.

It was the beginning of the 13th century and Chengez Khan was on the ascendant. Having subdued and united the many free-ranging Mongol tribes, he was reaching westward. As he neared the valley of the Syr Darya, the Khan sent an embassy to Mohammad, Jalaluddin’s father. Besides court officials, there were over four hundred Muslim traders with merchandise of great value. The message to the Sultan was to take this overture as an invitation to friendship and opening up of trade and travel between the two dominions.

Disturbed by the Mongols unbroken string of victories, Mohammad, who called himself Alexander, was clearly bereft of reason. The merchants were ruthlessly murdered, their goods confiscated and the ambassadors expelled. Chengez Khan promptly sent another embassy seeking redress. One of the three officials was beheaded. The beards of the remaining officials were shaved and they were expelled in humiliation.

Changez Khan then came down on Khwarazm like an all-destroying tempest. Mohammad fled and died on an island in the Caspian, his son hard put to procure even a shroud for the fugitive. Taking up the banner, with the Mongols hard on his heels, Jalaluddin fled first to Afghanistan and then across the Suleman Mountains into the Peshawar valley.

Outside the village of Nizampur (Nowshera), by the banks of the Sindhu River, a great battle was fought in February 1221. Changez Khan’s Mongols prevailed. When Jalaluddin knew defeat was certain, he madly galloped his horse to the river’s edge and made it leap off into the cold blue eddies below. Fraudsters like Hijazi bill him a hero because, Juvaini writes that the Khan called up his sons and pointing to the fleeing coward said that a father should hope to have a son as courageous as him.

Safe on the Punjab side, Jalaluddin stuck his spear in the ground and hung his wet clothes on it to dry. He watched the ransacking of camp and the rape of the women of his family on the far side. What Hijazi does not tell his readers is that Changez Khan also told his sons that the greatest pleasure for a man was to warm his bed with the women of his defeated foe’s family.

By the time Jalaluddin was facing the Khan in battle, he well knew that rape was a Mongol instrument of war. He would surely have known how Samarkand and Bokhara suffered because of his father’s foolishness. And he would have known, too, what the Pakhtuns of Bamian and the Kabul valley faced. It is not for nothing that we today know that the Mongol gene pool is the widest spread in the entire world.

Had he been anything but a coward, Jalaluddin would have fought to the bitter but glorious end. He fled and watched his family being raped. And we are told he was a Muslim hero! He had surely not known of the Rajput way of Johar. When defeat is imminent, the Rajputs burn their families alive and go into battle without head or footgear. Not one man returns alive. That is the essence of true courage, as we, the people of the great and wonderful lands of the subcontinent have forever known it.

In the Attock district, not far from the village of Sojhanda, there is a place on the banks of the Sindhu they call Ghora Trup — the Horse’s Leap. Here a natural stony ramp extends into the river. On the far bank, a couple of hundred metres upstream is a high, sharp verge. Standing there I have seen Jalaluddin Khwarazm’s leap into the river and the languid flow of the February current carry him to the ramp they call Ghora Trup.

Published in The Express Tribune, January 28th, 2012.

[Virendra]

Alauddin (aka Ata Malik) Juvaini wrote his masterful Tarikh-e-Jahan Kusha (History of the World Conqueror, circa 1255) and preserved the real history of the shameless Jalaluddin.

Caught it at the Digitial Library of India Two volume book.
Apparently 'Boyle, John Andrew' has translated this one.
Thanks Ramana ji. Would be an interesting reading.

Regards,
Virendra

[gunjur]

Would you know if the mongols ever attacked India?

Not sure about mongols in general but certainly chinggis khan didn't raid india.

TIFWIW. In this book on chinggis khan, the author mentions that when chinggis kahn was in afghanistan region, he did turn towards indus valley, there he met a unicorn (author is of opinion that this might actually be a rhino) which said him to turn back. His shamans told this is a bad omen and asked him to follow. Hence chinggis khan didn't proceed further.

This book does provide a nice account on mongols. The author has visited various places in mongolia/north china related to chinggis khan's life like his birth place/burial place etc while writing the book (this travelouge is also there in the book).

[Gus]

This book does provide a nice account on mongols. The author has visited various places in mongolia/north china related to chinggis khan's life like his birth place/burial place etc while writing the book (this travelouge is also there in the book).

err..his burial place is not found yet. There are many legends that the funeral escorts killed everybody to keep it a secret or that the place was trampled and trees planted to hide it etc.

[Gus]

Among the many factors in the whole Islam invasion of India over many centuries, there is one thing that differentiated the Indics vs the TAP (turk, arab, persian) invaders.

Sense of purpose. They kept winning because of that despite the many initial defeats. And once Shivaji led Marathas and Ranjit Singh led Sikhs had it - they were able to reverse the tide. All else are secondary and could have been overcome IMHO.

[gunjur]

This book does provide a nice account on mongols. The author has visited various places in mongolia/north china related to chinggis khan's life like his birth place/burial place etc while writing the book (this travelouge is also there in the book).

err..his burial place is not found yet. There are many legends that the funeral escorts killed everybody to keep it a secret or that the place was trampled and trees planted to hide it etc.

Maybe i should have put it this way. The author has actually done some RnD as to where he could have died and from that place where his body could have been shifted etc ( Actually there is a whole capter dedicated on last days of chinggis khan. i currently don't have this book ). The author certainly has put some efforts travelling to various places in mongolia and northern china. Again TIFWIW. But certainly a good read is what i feel.

[Yagnasri]

Jambudeepa started one more line on the Madhuravijayam and the early Vijayanagara Empire. See his blog.

[Anand K]

When Chengiz did his DigVijaya thing, Iltumish was the ruler of Delhi and the primary power in N. India. After Khwarazam fell Jalal-ud-Din (at the head of a large Khwarazm army, chased by a Mongol detachment) entered Punjab. Iltumish rushed to the "western marches" to shore up defences and meet the dual threat. However, the Khwarazam forces left for Southern Iran and Chengiz Khan decided to go west instead.

Maybe the great Khan considered the Khwarazm ruler as unfinished business. Maybe was wary of fighting wily Iltumish for every river and hill between Attock and Lakhnauti with his flanks exposed to Khwarzam's roving band, the Rajputs, the Khokars, Nasir ud Din Qabacha and the Loharas. He knew that if he chased Khwarazm into Persia the Indians would leave him alone..... after all, Iltumish refused to grant asylum to the Khwarazm forces when they lost to Chengiz's pursuing force.

Later Mongols did try to conquer India and they did come as far as present day NCR.... those attempts were defeated by Alauddin Khilji and his ace general Zafar Khan

[Virendra]

Iltumish refused to grant asylum to the Khwarazm forces when they lost to Chengiz's pursuing force.

Ah I see. So much for the Ummah !!

Later Mongols did try to conquer India and they did come as far as present day NCR.... those attempts were defeated by Alauddin Khilji and his ace general Zafar Khan

They tried to conquer Delhi Sultanate and failed in that. Lets not bring the whole India business into this.

[mody]

Illutmish did not grant assylum to the persian forces, specifically not to antagonize the the Mongols.
The mongol legend and string of victories and the consequences of opposing them, were known far and wide by then.

A valley in bamian, afghanistan is known as the valley of screams. This is so, because chengiz khan had every living thing killed in this valley after he had defeated them.

The mongol conquest of central asia, afghanistan, persia, modern day iraq and turkey is also known as a Muslim Holocaust, because of the number of muslims slaughtered by the mongols.

[Lalmohan]

who else would roll up the caliph himself in a carpet and have him trampled under the hooves of his ponies?
who else would compel the greatest emir to drink his gold?
who else would be known as "the scourge of god" to the ummah?



and yet paquis think of him as being muslim

[mody]

Virendraji, can you post the link to digital library of India, where you found the book?

Thanks
Got it never mind.

[vic]

http://kalchiron.blogspot.in/2008/08/ba ... 33-ad.html


Introduction

The nephew of Mahmood Gazni, known as Masud Gazni, invaded India with army of more than 100,000 men in may 1031 AD. This time, the army was not a raiding party like that of Mahmood who came with intention of raiding, looting and retreating with the loot to Afghanistan. They were backed by the imperial army Persian empire and came here with the intention of permanent conquest and Islamization of India.

King Anandpal Shahi tried to check this Gazni advance towards heartland of India. He was helped by king of Sialkot, Rai Arjun. But, this alliance was overwhelmed by superiority of numbers of Pathan army. After defeating Anandpal Shahi and Rai Arjun, Masood advanced towards towards Malwa and Gujarat. King Mahipal Tomara tried to check their advance here but was defeated too.

After victories across North Indian plains, Masood Gazni settled at Bahraich near Lucknow. He stayed here up to mid 1033.

Meanwhile, 17 Rajput Kings of north India forged an alliance. This is biggest confederation that have ever existed in India. The head of this confederation was Raja Sukhdev, a Gurjara-Rajput King.

In June 1033, as per Hindu traditions, Masood Gazni was intimated by Rajput confederation that the land belonged to Rajputs and Hindus and Masood should evacuate these lands. Masood replied that all land belongs to Khuda and hence he would not retreat.

On 13th June, Morning, Rajput army of about 120,000 descended on Gazni camp of Bahraich. Masood's army was completely besieged and encircled. The battle continued for hours. In the end, each and every man in Masood's camp was killed. No POW's were taken, no mercy was shown on the Afghan army. The location of this battle to be precise was near Chittaura Jheel, a lake about 8 KM away from modern Bahraich on Bahraich-Gond Road. The battle ended on 14th June with Victory of Raja Sukhdev and his Rajput alliance.

The invasion was completely crushed and such resounding was this victory that none of the king from Northwest dared to invade India for 160 years..

This is one of the golden pages of Indian History. India is indebted to series of Rajput Kings along the western border of India and in Central India. They were extremely instrumental in keeping Arab invaders at bay for 3 centuries. This was the time when Arabs were at their zenith. The Khilafat extended from Western Sindh to Spain.. However, they could not defeat Rajputs and enter Indian heartlands.

Rajputs were also instrumental in initial defeat of Muslim invaders from Northwest. The Battle of Bahraich was the peak point of Rajput valor. Their resistance waned with time over next 5 centuries. Rana Pratap was perhaps last famous Rajput general to fight invaders.

The tomb of Masood Gazni is still present at Bahraich. People there have elevated him to the status of peer and Gaazi and worship him. And there is no single mention of this glorious victory of Hindus. This, in my opinion, is an insult of Rajput valor. Same is the case with tomb of Afzal Khan at Pratapgarh in Maharashtra who was slain by Shivaji.

I do not oppose theistic beliefs. However, people worshiping the tombs of people like Masood Gazni and Afzal Khan should be made aware of their heinous deeds.

Edited to add:

I came across this verse written by Goswami Tulasidas pertaining to Bahraich and tomb of Gazni..

लही आँखि कब आँधरे बाँझ पूत कब ल्याइ ।
कब कोढ़ी काया लही जग बहराइच जाइ ॥
--Dohavali

When did a blind person regain his eye sight?, when did a barren woman get son? And when a leper was cured for his leprosy and got his beautiful body back?. But even then people visit Baharaich. (for no particular reason out of misplaced superstition)

It is for every one to decide now; even the contemporary Indic saints were opposed to idea of worshipping the tombs of invaders and mass-murderers and elevating them to the higher pedastle of sainthood.

[vic]

Battle of Rajasthan

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Rajasthan

The Battle of Rajasthan is a battle (or series of battles) where the Hindu alliance defeated the Arab invaders in 738 CE and removed the Arab invaders and pillagers from the area east of the Indus River. The final battle took place somewhere on the borders of modern Sindh-Rajasthan. Following their defeat the remnants of the Arab army fled to the other bank of the River Indus. The Muslim conquest of Persia by Arab forces in a short space of time contrasts sharply to the defeat of the Arab armies by the Hindus.

........

Junayd ibn Abd al-Rahman al-Murri, the successor of Muhammad ibn Qasim, finally subdued the Hindu resistance within Sindh. Taking advantage of the conditions in Western India, which at that time was covered with several small states, Junaid led a large army into the region in early 730 CE. Dividing this force into two he plundered several cities in southern Rajasthan, western Malwa, and Gujarat.
Indian records confirm this invasion but record the Arab success only against the smaller states in Gujarat. They also record the defeat of the Arabs at two places. The southern army moving south into Gujarat was defeated at Navsari by Avanijanashraya Pulakesi who was sent by the South Indian Emperor Vikramaditya II of the Chalukya Empire. The army that went east, reached Avanti whose ruler Gurjara Pratihara [2] Nagabhata utterly defeated the invaders and they fled to save their life.

Junayd's successor Tamim ibn Zaid al-Utbi organized a fresh campaigns against Rajasthan but failed to hold any territories there. He would be further pushed across River Indus by the combined forces of the King of Kannauj, Yaso Varman C.E. thus limiting the Arabs to the territory of Sindh across River Indus.
In the words of the Arab chronicler Suleiman, “a place of refuge to which the Muslims might flee was not to be found.” The Arabs crossed over to the other side of the River Indus, abandoning all their lands to the victorious Indian kings. The local chieftains took advantage of these conditions to re-establish their independence. Subsequently the Arabs constructed the city of Mansurah on the other side of the wide and deep Indus, which was safe from attack. This became their new capital in Sindh.

The Arabs in Sindh took a long time to recover from their defeat. In the early 9th Century the governor Bashar attempted an invasion of India but was defeated. Even a naval expedition sent by the Caliphs was defeated by the Saindhava clan of Kathiawar. After this the Arab chroniclers admit that the Caliph Mahdi, “gave up the project of conquering any part of India'.”
The Arabs in Sindh lost all power and broke up into two warring Shia states of Mansurah and Multan, both of which paid tribute to the Gurjara Pratiharas. The local resistance in Sindh, which had not yet died out and was inspired by the victories of their Indian neighbors manifested itself when the foreign rulers were overthrown and Sindh came under its own dynasties like the Soomras and Sammas.

[ramana]

Thanks Vic.

[Virendra]

Battle of Rajasthan
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Rajasthan
The Battle of Rajasthan is a battle (or series of battles) where the Hindu alliance defeated the Arab invaders in 738 CE and removed the Arab invaders and pillagers from the area east of the Indus River. The final battle took place somewhere on the borders of modern Sindh-Rajasthan. Following their defeat the remnants of the Arab army fled to the other bank of the River Indus. The Muslim conquest of Persia by Arab forces in a short space of time contrasts sharply to the defeat of the Arab armies by the Hindus.

I had posted the before but not sure if here or somewhere else. Seems relevant so here goes :

Indian resistance to Arab invasions attempts in 8th century A.D. :-
Many power Indian Kingdoms in north and west held sway as a bulwark of Indian defense against the Arab invasions.
If it hadn't happened the following way, India would perhaps be like middle east today. In North to South sequence :

1. Lalitaditya Muktipada a.k.a. Ashwa-ghas (Cavalry expert) of Karkota dynasty ruled Kashmir. He defeated advancing Arab armies thrice as mentioned by Kalhana. In his lifetime his territories maximized to - Iran borders in west, Tukharistan in north, parts of Tibet in east and Punjab in south. He ordered Turks (under Arab rule then) to shave off their heads as a symbol of their submission. This is corroborated by records of contemporary Chinese travelers.

2. King Yashovarman of Kannauj defeated Arabs between Kannauj and southern Punjab.

3. Bappa Rawal (Kalbhoj) of Guhil clan was the unchallenged ruler in Rajasthan then.
His power can be gauged from the fact that he was able to join (with Mewar) many smaller Rajput states like Ajmer and Jaisalmer to form his own confederation against Arabs. He defeated the Arab advance from Rajasthan beating them in retreat across entire Rajputana from Mewar to beyond the borders of Rajasthan.

3. Nagabhatta of Gurjara-Pratihara clan from Gurjaratra desh was ruling in Gujarat, Malwa, parts of S. Rajasthan - south of Bappa and his minor allies. He defeated the Arab advance at Avanti. This is recorded at the Gwalior inscription of King Bhoja I. He has been specially mentioned by Arab chroniclers this way "Among the princes of India there is no greater foe of the Islamic faith than he. He has got riches, and his camels and horses are numerous".

5. Prince Avanijanashraya Pulakesi, son of Governor Jayasimha Varman of Lat (South Gujarat) was ruling in Navasari on Behalf of Chalukyan emperor from south - Vikramaditya II. He defeated the Arab advance at Navasari. This is recorded at the Navasari inscription where Pulakesi is adorned with titles such as "Solid pillar of Dakshinapatha" and "Repeller of the unrepellable".

Lalitaditya and Yashovarman had as allies defeated the Arabs as corroborated by Chinese accounts (before former defeated and killed the latter).
Pulakesi and Nagabhata above were actively allied together in achieving their victories over Arabs. There are references to Nagabhata's alliance with Bappa Rawal also but we haven't yet been able to verify it.

Regards,
Virendra

[ramana]

Virendra, Try to get as much as you can about Bappa Rawal:time, extent of his kingdom and other facts.

Rawalpindi is named after him.

[Lalmohan]

has anyone found credible sources/references to arms/uniforms/standards/orbat from this early medieval period?

[Virendra]

Virendra, Try to get as much as you can about Bappa Rawal:time, extent of his kingdom and other facts.
Rawalpindi is named after him.

ramana ji .. I have tried before.
AFAIK Bappa Rawal's victories are not mentioned by Islamic chroniclers in their records, which is quite expected of them.
I think there would be some reliable indigenous records like Jain texts but these traditional ones are rarely googlable and even more rarely translated.
Readily available are only some debatable references of James Tod who in turn compiled what Jain scholars and texts told him.

Overall, Bappa's story seems somewhere between myth and truth.
From Guha / Guhadatta, the Mewar clan has its name Guhil / Guhilot . Later other clans like Sisodia (hailing from 'Sisoda' jagir) emerged from Guhils
Naravahana / Eklingji inscription of 971 AD records the name of a king named Sri Bapaka (Bapa Rawal), "the moon among the princes of the Guhila (Guhilot) dynasty", who reigned at a place named Nagahavda (Nagahrada or Nagda).
Nagda was an old capital of Mewar Kings.
Atpur inscription of 977 AD puts forth a Guhilot geneology of 20 Kings starting from Guhadatta. The name Bappa Rawal does not appear in the list.
Bappa means a Father / Senior figure while Rawal means of Royal lineage. So Bappa Rawal may have been more of a generic title / designation for Kings or prominent figures; rather than the unique name of one person.
True of Guhilot lineage of worshipping Eklingji, Bappa since his young age was under influence of Shaivite sects and saints including Harita Rasi.
Some associate him with "Kalbhoj" who was 8th in line from Guha as per Atpur inscription. Others associate him with Khumman / Khomma who was 9th in line. From 'Khumman' is the traditional Rajput greeting "Khamaghani". It literally means "Hail Khumman".
Bappa rose to prominence after he gained the ancient fortress of Chittor. There are various versions on that.
Guhilots were feudatories of Moris / Mauryas from Chittor.
Some say that the rulership of Chittor passed to Bappa peacefully after the last Mori ruler Manuraja died childless. And Bappa only fought and defeated Arab attack on Chittor later.
Others say that after he wrested it back from Arabs as a Military General in the Mori ruler's army, he deposed the Mori by force to gain Chittor.
The Mori King's inscription proves him ruling at least 713 AD and Bappa left his throne in 753 AD after around 30 years of rule, so that puts Bapa on throne approximately at 723 AD. Barely a few years of difference between the two's rulership.
What seems most probable is that Arabs took Chittor from Moris and Bappa took it back from Arabs after gathering small allies from all around Rajasthan who were equally troubled by Arabs.
There's a Gold coin contemporary of his reign, that many scholars consider to be of Bappa Rawal.
The coin is inscribed with words "Sri Boppa" on the obverse, together with a trident, a Shiva Linga, a Cow / Bull, image of a man, large ears with exaggerated holes.
Extent of his empire was roughly - South East Rajasthan (Mewar), Central Rajasthan (Ajmer) and West Rajasthan (Jaisalmer). It would extend to parts of present day Pakistan if one believes that he drove Arabs out till Iran and not just Rajasthan.

Interestingly, this is what I read about origin of Rawalpindi on Wikipedia. The page was arranged by pakis obviously, so brace already

Rawalpindi, named after Raja Pindi, is a bustling city on the northernmost part of the Punjab province, strategically located between the North-West Frontier Province and Azad Jammu and Kashmir.

Now, I googled "Raja Pindi" and I got zilch.
Forget King it is not even a person, it is not a concept either. It seems to be .... 'nothing but a concoction'
Pind means 'Village'. Pindi could mean 'Village' or 'Villager' and Rawal means 'of Royal lineage'.
So to me "Rawalpindi" makes sense as "Rawal's village".

Regards,
Virendra

[ramana]

Thanks, ramana

[Nilesh Oak]

Thanks, ramana

Ramana ji,

Is this the 'epic' thread, you were referring to on 'OIT' thread?

[Katare]

Never heard of this great Raja Sukhdev until today. That sounds like a great victory, if it was true i would expected it too a bit more popular than it is. Killing 120K people in one battle is unbelieveable and unheard off.

Wiki articles without proper citations and independent corroboration from other authentic sources are usually someone's wet dream or psyop, not reality.

I would check it in couple of good history books that I have for that era.

[ramana]

Katare, Apparently Feroz Tughlaq raised a memorial for Masud Ghazni at Bhariach many centuries after teh event.

[Katare]

Raman,

Actually as per my little probing of authentic sources it appears that quoted wiki article is totally wrong. It seems they have mixed-up multiple events, individuals and imagination to create a story which is funny. The story has mixed 2 different Masuds and another unrelated event of killing of 120K muslims which is not supported by historical accounts.

Sabuktigin was the first Ghazni king, his son Mahmud was the chief tormentor of India. He made 17-18 raids in India, butchered 100s of thousands of Hindus and demolished many temples including Somnath and Mathura temple. He died of natural causes and his son Masud Ghazni took power but he was dethroned and put into prison by his brother (who was either born on the same day from a different mother or was a twin) where he died shortly afterword. Within few years Ghazni dynasty (Ghaznavid) was eliminated by Muhammad of Ghor who eventually fought and killed Prithviraj Chouhaan. Several years later Ghor was killed by a Ghakkar hill tribe of Punjab in a daring raid on his camp.

None of the Ghazni's were killed or defeated at Bahraich.

The famous dargaah/mazzar at Bahraich belongs to a masud ghazi (not ghazni). This Syed Salar Masud Ghazi was son of Salar Sahoo and he was also nephew of Mehmud of ghazni. This would make this Masud cousin of sultan Masud of Ghazni. The Salar Masud came to India to preach islam and he was all of 18-19 year old and must have commanded a small army or security detachment. He was killed by a local king (Sukhdev) along with his converted followers/army/security detachment. A mazar was built by Tughluq to owner the young "Islamic saint"

About 120,000 muslims being butchered some time in that era comes from a single source, a book written by Mahmud Ghazni's biographer/commentator - Tabakat-i-nasiri (page 329). This author claims that in Oudh/Awadh there was some bloody revolt by Hindus that resulted in killing (martyrdom) of 120,000 muslims. The revolt, as per nasiri, was led by a mysterious person identified as "Bartuh". This story is not supported by any other source and most likely an error/misreporting. Barthu is not mentioned anywhere else in contemporary or later historical accounts. It is likely that a small revolt resulted in killing of may be 1200 or 12000 muslims and the number is a typo by Nasiri.

[peter]

Raman,


About 120,000 muslims being butchered some time in that era comes from a single source, a book written by Mahmud Ghazni's biographer/commentator - Tabakat-i-nasiri (page 329). This author claims that in Oudh/Awadh there was some bloody revolt by Hindus that resulted in killing (martyrdom) of 120,000 muslims. The revolt, as per nasiri, was led by a mysterious person identified as "Bartuh". This story is not supported by any other source and most likely an error/misreporting. Barthu is not mentioned anywhere else in contemporary or later historical accounts. It is likely that a small revolt resulted in killing of may be 1200 or 12000 muslims and the number is a typo by Nasiri.

But why would you say that a court chronicler is wrong and exaggerating the slaughter of his own co-religionists?

[Yagnasri]

There is no proof to say that it does not happend. I have been to Madurai resently and no one in Madurai know about the Sulthanite there and the atrocities it has done. Does it mean it also never happend?

Historical records showing any Muslim defeats are most likely be destroyed by later Muslim rulers. We hardly know about the revolt of Jhats against Moguls, on Battle of Rajasthan and even about the 27 years war. So we can not just brush aside what is written also particularly the written record is not favourable to the writer side.

[Katare]

It happened (if it did) in early 13th century and records for that from contemporary and later historians/bards are very limited/nonexistent. It may very well have happened but I doubt about it's accuracy for several reasons including -

1) It's out of character for dharmma loving Hindus to go out of their way to commit massacre at that scale. Hindu dahmma did not sanction massacres of non hindus, these religious massacres of non-believers were monopoly of Muslim invaders. Hindu kings even when they won the war against invedors/muslim rulers never gave a chase to destroy retreating armies. Such an act was below their dignity, against dahmma but from realpolitik POV it was naive and suicidal.
2) Delhi (including Awadh), Bihar, and Bengal were under rule of muslim Sultans in 1220 but none of their bards write about this incidence or reprisals that would most certainly have followed by "sword of Islam". Indian invasion was started on orders of caliph because some muslim maidens (daughter's of dead muslim merchants) that were shipped to him were kidnapped by pirates of the cost of Sindh and king Jaypal could not recover them for caliph.
3) Until 1192 when Prithvi Raj Chouhan lost to Muhammad of Ghor in second battle of Tarain, almost all of present day India was firmly under Hindu control. Muslim concentration of such large numbers so far east were probably not yet established, except at the capitals, for anyone to engineer massacre of such scale.
4) Historians from either side have hardly recorded any large scale revolt, by "Hindu masses" against Muslim invaders and rulers. Although they faced most ferocious and sustained resistance that islamic expansion faced anywhere else in the world but all of it came from the Hindu kings, wild tribes and warriors clans like Rajpoots. Verna system, which worked wonderfully in internal Bharat wars, had given the job of fighting/defending/ruling to Kshatriya/Brahmans while rest had their job defined for them and they focused on it.

[peter]

It happened (if it did) in early 13th century and records for that from contemporary and later historians/bards are very limited/nonexistent. It may very well have happened but I doubt about it's accuracy for several reasons including -

1) It's out of character for dharmma loving Hindus to go out of their way to commit massacre at that scale. Hindu dahmma did not sanction massacres of non hindus, these religious massacres of non-believers were monopoly of Muslim invaders. Hindu kings even when they won the war against invedors/muslim rulers never gave a chase to destroy retreating armies. Such an act was below their dignity, against dahmma but from realpolitik POV it was naive and suicidal.

What about Ashoka? I am assuming that if you have seen your kind massacred at some instance the same urge rises in you?

2) Delhi (including Awadh), Bihar, and Bengal were under rule of muslim Sultans in 1220 but none of their bards write about this incidence or reprisals that would most certainly have followed by "sword of Islam". Indian invasion was started on orders of caliph because some muslim maidens (daughter's of dead muslim merchants) that were shipped to him were kidnapped by pirates of the cost of Sindh and king Jaypal could not recover them for caliph.

What time period are you talking about? And how does this relate to 1220?

3) Until 1192 when Prithvi Raj Chouhan lost to Muhammad of Ghor in second battle of Tarain, almost all of present day India was firmly under Hindu control. Muslim concentration of such large numbers so far east were probably not yet established, except at the capitals, for anyone to engineer massacre of such scale.

The invaders used to come with large armies. Even if the numbers are exaggerated (and I agree with you here) do we have solid evidence that the court chronicler is wrong?

4) Historians from either side have hardly recorded any large scale revolt, by "Hindu masses" against Muslim invaders and rulers. Although they faced most ferocious and sustained resistance that islamic expansion faced anywhere else in the world but all of it came from the Hindu kings, wild tribes and warriors clans like Rajpoots. Verna system, which worked wonderfully in internal Bharat wars, had given the job of fighting/defending/ruling to Kshatriya/Brahmans while rest had their job defined for them and they focused on it.

Well masses means people who fight. I don't understand your argument.

[Yagnasri]

Purhaps you all should read writers like Sitaram Goyal. There is lot of records of Muslim leaders of the mass kills and all the evil things done in India during islamic invasion. With due respect you should read the previous posting in this thread also before making statments like that. I am surprised that the entire records of Jihad is being denied in this thread.

In respect of Ashoka - Peterji - Which historial account you are referring? Which books say that he has killed people because his religion told him to?