The Hindus had allowed
their strength to be wasted in internal
division and war; they had adopted religions
like Buddhism and Jainism, which unnerved
them for the tasks of life; they had failed to
organize their forces for the protection of
their frontiers and their capitals, their wealth
and their freedom, from the hordes of
Scythians, Huns, Afghans and Turks
hovering about India's boundaries and
waiting for national weakness to let them in.
For four hundred years (600-1000 A.D.) India
invited conquest; and at last it came.
The first Moslem attack was a passing raid
upon Multan, in the western Punjab (664
A.D.) Similar raids occurred at the
convenience of the invaders during the next
three centuries, with the result that the
Moslems established themselves in the Indus
valley about the same time that their Arab
co-religionists in the West were fighting the
battle of Tours (732 A.D.) for the mastery of
Europe. But the real Moslem conquest of
India did not come till the turn of the first
millennium after Christ.
In the year 997 a Turkish chieftain by the
name of Mahmud became sultan of the little
state of Ghazni, in eastern Afghanistan.
Mahmud knew that his throne was young
and poor, and saw that India, acrossthe
border, was old and rich; the conclusion was
obvious. Pretending a holy zeal for
destroying Hindu idolatry, he swept across
3
the frontier with a force inspired by a pious
aspiration for booty.
He met the unprepared
Hindus at Bhimnagar, slaughtered them,
pillaged their cities, destroyed their temples,
and carried away the accumulated treasures
of centuries. Returning to Ghazni he
astonished the ambassadors of foreign
powers by displaying "jewels and unbored
pearls and rubies shining like sparks, or like
wine congealed with ice, and emeralds like
fresh sprigs of myrtle, and diamonds in size
and weight like pomegranates."
Each winter Mahmud descended into India,
filled his treasure chest with spoils, and
amused his men with full freedom to pillage
and kill; each spring he returned to his
capital richer than before. At Mathura (on the
Jumna) he took from the temple its statues of
gold encrusted with precious stones, and
emptied its coffers of a vast quantity of gold,
silver and jewelry; he expressed his
admiration for the architecture of the great
4
shrine, judged that its duplication would cost
one hundred million dinars and the labor of
two hundred years, and then ordered it to be
soaked with naphtha and burnt to the
ground.
`Six years later he sacked another
opulent city of northern India, Somnath,
killed all its fifty thousand inhabitants, and
dragged its wealth to Ghazni.
In the end he
became, perhaps, the richest king that history
has ever known. Sometimes he spared the
population of the ravaged cities, and took
them home to be sold as slaves; but so great
was the number of such captives that after
some years no one could be found to offer
more than a few shillings for a slave.
Before
every important engagement Mahmud knelt
in prayer, and asked the blessing of God
upon his arms. He reigned for a third of a
century; and when he died, full of years and
honors, Moslem historians ranked him as the
greatest monarch of his time, and one of the
greatest sovereigns of any age.
5
Seeing the canonization that success had
brought to this magnificent thief, other
Moslem rulers profited by his example,
though none succeeded in bettering his
instruction.
In 1186 the Ghuri, a Turkish tribe
of Afghanistan, invaded India, captured the
city of Delhi, destroyed its temples,
confiscated its wealth, and settled down in its
palaces to establish the Sultanate of Delhi- an
alien despotism fastened upon northern
India for three centuries, and checked only
by assassination and revolt.
The first of these
bloody sultans, Kutb-dDin Aibak, was a
normal specimen of his kind - fanatical,
ferocious and merciless.
His gifts, as the
Mohammedan historian tells us, "were
bestowed by hundreds of thousands, and his
slaughters likewise were by hundreds of
thousands." In one victory of this warrior
(who had been purchased as a slave), "fifty
thousand men came under the collar of
slavery, and the plain became black as pitch
with Hindus."
6
Another sultan, Balban, punished rebels and
brigands by casting them under the feet of
elephants, or removing their skins, stuffing
these with straw, and hanging them from the
gates of Delhi. When some Mongol
inhabitants who had settled in Delhi, and
had been converted to Islam, attempted a
rising, Sultan Alau-d-din (the conquerer of
Chitor) had all the males - from fifteen to
thirty thousand of them - slaughtered in one
day.
Sultan Muhammad bin Tughlak
acquired the throne by murdering his father,
became a great scholar and an elegant writer,
dabbled in mathematics, physics and Greek
philosophy, surpassed his predecessors in
bloodshed and brutality, fed the flesh of a
rebel nephew to the rebel's wife and children,
ruined the country with reckless inflation,
and laid it waste with pillage and murder till
the inhabitants fled to the jungle. He killed so
many Hindus that, in the words of a Moslem
historian, "there was constantly in front of his
7
royal pavilion and his Civil Court a mound
of dead bodies and a heap of corpses, while
the sweepers and executioners were wearied
out by their work of dragging" the victims
"and putting them to death in crowds."
In order to found a new capital at Daulatabad
he drove every inhabitant from Delhi and left
it a desert; and hearing that a blind man had
stayed behind in Delhi, he ordered him to be
dragged from the old to the new capital, so
that only a leg remained of the wretch when
his last journey was finished.
The Sultan complained that the people did
not love him, or recognize his undeviating
justice. He ruled India for a quarter of a
century, and died in bed. His successor, Firoz
Shah, invaded Bengal, offered a reward for
every Hindu head, paid for 180,000 of them,
raided Hindu villages for slaves, and died at
the ripe age of eighty. Sultan Ahmad Shah
feasted for three days whenever the number
8
of defenseless Hindus slain in his territories
in one day reached twenty thousand.
These rulers were often men of ability, and
their followers were gifted with fierce
courage and industry; only so can we
understand how they could have maintained
their rule among a hostile people so
overwhelmingly outnumbering them. All of
them were armed with a religion militaristic
in operation, but far superior in its stoical
monotheism to any of the popular cults of
India; they concealed its attractiveness by
making the public exercise of the Hindu
religions illegal, and thereby driving them
more deeply into the Hindu soul.
Some of these thirsty despots had culture as
well as ability; they patronized the arts, and
engaged artists and artisans- usually of
Hindu origin- to build for them magnificent
mosques and tombs; some of them were
scholars, and delighted in converse with
9
historians, poets and scientists.
One of the
greatest scholars of Asia, Alberuni,
accompanied Mahmud of Ghazni to India,
and wrote a scientific survey of India
comparable to Pliny's "Natural History" and
Humboldt's "Cosmos". The Moslem
historians were almost as numerous as the
generals, and yielded nothing to them in the
enjoyment of bloodshed and war.
The
Sultans drew from the people every rupee of
tribute that could be exacted by the ancient
art of taxation, as well as by straightforward
robbery; but they stayed in India, spent their
spoils in India, and thereby turned them back
into India's economic life. Nevertheless, their
terrorism and exploitation advanced that
weakening of Hindu physique and morale
which had been begun by an exhausting
climate, an inadequate diet, political
disunity, and pessimistic religions.
The usual policy of the Sultans was clearly
sketched by Alau-d-din, who required his
10
advisers to draw up "rules and regulations
for grinding down the Hindus, and for
depriving them of that wealth and property
which fosters disaffection and rebellion."
Half of the gross produce of the soil was
collected by the government; native rulers
had taken one-sixth. "No Hindu," says a
Moslem historian, "could hold up his head,
and in their houses no sign of gold or silver...
or of any superfluity was to be seen.... Blows,
confinement in the stocks, imprisonment and
chains, were all employed to enforce
payment."
When one of his own advisers
protested against this policy, Alau-d-din
answered: "Oh, Doctor, thou art a learned
man, but thou hast no experience; I am an
unlettered man, but I have a great deal. Be
assured, then, that the Hindus will never
become submissive and obedient till they are
reduced to poverty. I have therefore given
orders that just sufficient shall be left to them
from year to year of corn, milk and curds, but
that they shall not be allowed to accumulate
11
hoards and property." This is the secret of the
political history of modern India.
Weakened by division, it succumbed to
invaders; impoverished by invaders, it lost
all power of resistance, and took refuge in
supernatural consolations; it argued that
both mastery and slavery were superficial
delusions, and concluded that freedom of the
body or the nation was hardly worth
defending in so brief a life. The bitter lesson
that may be drawn from this tragedy is that
eternal vigilance is the price of civilization.
A
nation must love peace, but keep its powder
dry.
