Indo Pak History
- May 11, 2018
- Posted by: admin
- Category: History of Pakistan and India
Pakistan’s History From 1947-till present
Liaquat Ali Khan as Prime Minister [1947-1951]
Liaquat Ali Khan’s contributions to the struggle for independence were numerous. After independence, he was thus the natural choice for the premiership. Liaquat Ali Khan was appointed as the first Prime Minister of Pakistan.
Being the first Prime Minister of the country, Liaquat Ali Khan had to deal with a number of difficulties that Pakistan faced in its early days. He helped Quaid-i-Azam in solving the riots and refugee problem and in setting up an effective administrative system for the country. they established the groundwork for Pakistan’s foreign policy. He also took steps towards the formulation of the constitution. Liaquat Ali khan presented The Objectives Resolution, a prelude to future constitutions, in the Legislative Assembly. The house passed it on March 12, 1949. It is considered to be the “Magna Carta” in Pakistan’s constitutional history. Liaquat Ali Khan called it “the most important occasion in the life of this country, next in importance, only to the achievement of independence”. Under his leadership a team also drafted the first report of the Basic Principle Committee and work began on the second report.
During his tenure, India and Pakistan agreed to resolve the dispute of Kashmir in a peaceful manner through the efforts of the United Nations. According to this agreement a ceasefire was affected in Kashmir in January 1948. It was decided that a free and impartial plebiscite would be held under the supervision of the
After the death of Quaid-i-Azam, he tried to fill the vacuum created by the departure of the Father of the Nation. The problem of religious minorities flared during late 1949 and early 1950, and it seemed as if India and Pakistan were about to fight their second war in the first three years of their independence. At this critical moment in the history of South Asia, Prime Minister Liaquat Ali Khan met Nehru to sign the Liaquat-Nehru Pact in 1950. The Liaquat-Nehru Pact was an effort on his part to improve relations and reduce tension between India and Pakistan. In May 1951, he visited the United States and set the course of Pakistan’s foreign policy towards closer ties with the West. An important event during his premiership was the establishment of National Bank of Pakistan in November 1949, and the installation of a paper currency mill in Karachi.
Liaquat Ali Khan was unfortunately assassinated on October 16, 1951. Security forces immediately shot the assassin, who was later identified as Saad Akbar. The question of who was behind his murder is yet to be answered.
The government officially gave Liaquat Ali Khan the title of Shaheed-i-Millat.
Jinnah – Mountbatten Talks 
The history of bilateral negotiations pertaining to Kashmir between the leaders of India and Pakistan at the state level can be traced back to November 1947. The meeting of the Joint Defense Council was scheduled at Delhi only four days after the occupation of Kashmir by the Indian forces. The venue of the meeting was changed from Delhi to Lahore. The Governor General and Prime Minister of the two countries were supposed to attend the meeting. However, to avoid direct talks with his Pakistani counterpart, Jawaharlal Nehru declared himself ill and his deputy, Sardar Patel, refused to come to
The boundaries had to be defined as such that provinces, districts, and villages that were predominantly Muslim went to Pakistan, while Hindu majority areas went to India. Provinces like Baluchistan, Sindh, N. W. F. P. and East Bengal provided little difficulty. But deep problems arose when boundaries in Punjab had to be fixed; there were also a substantial number of Hindus and Sikhs residing in this region, other than the Muslims. However, the province was partitioned.
When the boundaries were drawn between India and Pakistan, it resulted in many tragic events. In an almost frantic, cruel rush, the commission divided districts, villages, farmlands, water and property. Thousands of innocent men, women and children were caught unaware. The result was that many hastened across the border, leaving their homes, land and personal property to seek refuge. Panic, fear, revenge and reprisals followed. Both India and Pakistan were soaked in blood. It left on Pakistan’s doorstep, seven million refugees who had to be rehabilitated, clothed, fed and sheltered.
Partition also involved dividing of the assets of the Sub-continent. India, being the larger country, got the lion’s share in all transactions, leaving Pakistan with minimal resources to survive and build on.
Equally disastrous was the economic situation. There were not sufficient skilled personnel to run the railways, hospitals and offices. There weren’t enough chairs, tables or even stationery and paper pins for administrative purposes. Food was scarce. Pakistan had no industry.
At the time of partition, the cash balances of undivided India stood at about Rupees 4,000 million. At the beginning of December 1947, India and Pakistan mutually came to an agreement that Pakistan would get Rupees 750 million as her share. Rupees 200 million had been already paid to Pakistan while Rupees 550 million were to be paid immediately. But this amount was withheld on the plea that Pakistan would use it in the war going on in Kashmir. However, as this stand was morally untenable, the remaining amount was later on released after Gandhi’s fast and under world pressure on January 15, 1948.
Soon afterwards, Sardar Patel threatened that the implementation of the agreement would depend upon the settlement of the Kashmir issue. But, it was upon Gandhi’s request that the Reserved Bank of India paid Pakistan Rupees 500 million, retaining the balance of Rupees 50 million to adjust some trumped up claim against Pakistan
The Indus Water
The most explosive of Indo-Pakistan disputes was the question of sharing the waters of the Indus basin.
On April 1, 1948, India cut off the supply of water from the two headworks under her control. Fortunately, Eugene Black, President of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development offered the offices of the Bank for the solution of the water problem in 1952. A solution acceptable to both governments was agreed upon in 1960 at the Indus Basin Development Fund Agreement at Karachi. This treaty is commonly known as the “Indus Water Treaty”.
The treaty allowed for a transitional period of 10 to 13 years, after which the three eastern rivers would fall exclusively to India’s share and the three western rivers to Pakistan. During the transitional period, Pakistan would construct a system of replacement works
consisting of two dams, five barrages and seven link canals financed by the Indus Development Fund.
3.Accession of Princely States
Prior to partition, there existed in British India many semi-autonomous Princely states whose future had to be settled before Britain withdrew from India.
There were some 560 such states all over the Sub-continent. Some fell within Indian territory, others in Pakistan.
On July 25, 1947, Lord Louis Mountbatten (the last Viceroy of India) in his address to the Chamber of Princes advised them that in deciding the question of accession, they should take into consideration communal composition and the geographical location of their states. Nearly all the states accepted the reality of the situation and opted either for Pakistan or India accordingly. But there were four states, Junagadh, Hyderabad, Jodhpur and Kashmir, which defied the principle of partition.
- Junagadh: The ruler of Junagadh was a Muslim but 80 percent of his subjects were Hindus. On September 15, 1947, the Nawab acceded to Pakistan, despite the fact that his state did not fall within the geographical grouping of Pakistan. India protested, stormed in her troops, and forcibly reversed the Nawab’s decision and Junagadh became a part of India.
- Hyderabad: Hyderabad, the second of the defiant states was the largest and richest in India. Its population was 85 percent Hindu but the ruler (Nizam) was a Muslim. He was reluctant to accede either to India or Pakistan but was dismissed by Mountbatten for adopting this course. The Nizam was forced by the Indian government and Lord Mountbatten to join India. A standstill agreement was concluded between India and Hyderabad. The Hindu subjects were incited to revolt against the Nizam’s desire to be independent. The whole province suffered turmoil and violence. Hyderabad filed a compliant with the Security Council of the United Nations. Before the hearing could be started, Indian troops entered Hyderabad to “restore order”, and under the pretext of “police action” Hyderabad was forced to join India. The Hyderabad army surrendered on September 17, 1948, and finally Hyderabad was annexed into the Indian Union.
III. Jodhpur: Yet another prince, the Maharaja of Jodhpur, expressed a wish to join Pakistan but Mountbatten warned him that his subjects were mostly Hindus and his accession to Pakistan would create problems. As a result Jodhpur, too, acceded to India.
- Please see “Kashmir Crisis”.
Kashmir Crisis 
Kashmir, the last of the defiant states, was the reverse of Hyderabad. It had a Hindu ruler, Maharaja Hari Singh, but his subjects were mostly Muslims, accounting to 78 percent of the total population. The Maharaja was reluctant to join either India or Pakistan. But Lord Mountbatten urged him to take a decision to join either of the states before August 15, 1947.
The Maharaja asked for more time to consider his decision. In the meantime he asked the Indian and the Pakistani government to sign a “standstill agreement” with him. Pakistan consented but India refused.
The local population of Poonch began to press the Maharaja to accede to Pakistan. In August 1947, they held a massive demonstration to protest against the Maharaja’s indecisiveness. The Maharaja panicked. He asked his Hindu paratroopers to open fire, and within a matter of seconds, several hundred Muslims were killed. Rising up against this brutal action, a local barrister called Sardar Muhammad Ibrahim immediately set up the Azad Kashmir government and began to wage guerrilla warfare against the Maharaja.
By October 1947, the war of Kashmir had begun in earnest. The Pathan tribesmen from the North West Frontier Province, wanting to avenge the deaths of their brothers, invaded the valley. On reaching the valley of Kashmir, they defeated the Maharaja’s troops and reached the gates of Srinagar, the capital.
The Maharaja sensing his defeat took refuge in Jammu whence he appealed to India to send troops to halt the onslaught of the tribesmen. India agreed on the condition that Kashmir would accede to India. On October 26, 1947, the Maharaja acceded to India. Lord Mountbatten accepted the accession on behalf of India.
On October 27, 1947, India began to airlift her troops to Srinagar, and launched a full-scale attack on the tribesmen. Pakistan was stunned. Despite her scant military resources, Pakistan was prepared to send in her troops but the British General Gracey, Commander-in-Chief of the Pakistan Army, was against it. Jinnah proposed an immediate ceasefire and later on a fair and free plebiscite in Jammu and Kashmir.
In January 1948, India took the dispute to the Security Council. There it accused Pakistan of aggression and demanded that Pakistan withdraw her tribesmen. But Pakistan held that the accession of Kashmir had been brought about by force. The government requested the Security Council to arrange a cease-fire and asked both the tribesmen and the Indian troops to withdraw so that a free and impartial plebiscite could be held to ascertain the wishes of the people of Kashmir.
While the Kashmir issue was still on the table, the Indian troops launched a full-scale attack and drove the tribesmen right back to the Pakistani border.
Pakistan rushed her regular troops into Kashmir and a full-scale war with India ensued. She took control of the Azad Kashmir Army. But the Security Council on August 13, 1948, called for an immediate ceasefire, the withdrawal of all Pakistani and Indian troops and holding of plebiscite under United Nations’ supervision. Both the Indian and Pakistani governments accepted the resolution.
In January 1949, the resolution began to be implemented. In July 1949, the ceasefire line was demarcated. Pakistan’s side of Kashmir consisted of some parts of Jammu, Poonch, some areas of Western Kashmir, Gilgit, and a great chunk of Ladakh territory near the Chinese border in the North. India kept the valley of Kashmir, Jammu and the remainder of Ladakh territory near the Tibet border.
The cease-fire has remained in existence since 1949. No plebiscite has been held and thus the Kashmir issue still remains disputed and unresolved.
Jinnah Passes Away 
Quaid-i-Azam had been ailing since long before Independence. By the time of Independence, he was quite an old man but still possessing a strong spirit. He hid the debilitating weakness caused by severely advanced tuberculosis. Researchers like Professor Stanley Wolpert believed that by the end, cancer had developed as well. Quaid-
i-Azam was convinced that if word of illness leaked out, his opponents would make the most of it. He denied his illness even to himself and remained intent and unflinching so as to achieve the dream of millions of Muslims. He worked almost 24 hours a day and always preferred performing his national obligations to his own ailment.
At the time of independence, he was worn out by his intense struggle and opted to take the position of Governor General instead of that of Prime Minister. It had been proposed that the last Viceroy of India, Lord Mountbatten, be allowed to continue as a joint Governor General of both Pakistan and India. Quaid-i-Azam refused to accept this proposal as he felt that a joint Governor General would not be able to do justice to both the countries. He firmly believed that since Pakistan was a sovereign state, it must be sovereign in all respects with its own executive and government.
By this time, both aging and illness had mounted a terrible toll upon the Quaid. Although the flame still burnt bright, it was now at the cost of his own life. His physicians regularly advised him to take care of his health and to ease back on his work. But he never cared for it and kept on working hard day and night.
After the establishment of Pakistan, India created numerous problems. The refugee problem, the withholding of Pakistani assets by India, and the Kashmir problem were a real test for the Quaid. However, his indomitable will prevailed. He also worked out a sound economic policy, established an independent currency and the State Bank of Pakistan. He selected Karachi as the federal capital. His health deteriorated to such an extent, that he had to go to Ziarat for the restoration of his health. Despite the warning from his physicians, he went to Karachi to inaugurate the State Bank of Pakistan. This was his last public appearance.
His sickness grew more serious until his death on September 11, 1948. He was buried in Karachi amidst the tears of the entire nation mourning an irreparable loss.
Khawaja Nazimuddin Becomes Governor General [1948-1951]
After Pakistan came into being on August 14, 1947, Nazimuddin was appointed the first Chief Minister of the Province of East Bengal. When the founder of Pakistan, Quaid-i-Azam, Muhammad Ali Jinnah died on September 11, 1948, Nazimuddin was appointed as the second Governor General of Pakistan.
Objectives Resolution is passed 
The history of formulation of the constitution of Pakistan begins with the Lahore Resolution in 1940. It was here
that the idea of Pakistan, a separate homeland for the Muslims of India, was first outlined. It came to be known as the Pakistan Resolution.
On June 3, 1947, the British Government accepted in principle the partition of India in order to create two independent dominions of Pakistan and India. The British Parliament passed the Indian Independence Act on July 18, 1947. Accordingly, the new state of Pakistan came into being on August 14, 1947. This new state was formed of East Bengal, a part of Assam (Sylhet), West Punjab, Sindh, N. W. F. P. and Baluchistan provinces of undivided India.
Under Section 8 of the Indian Independence Act of 1947, the Government of India Act of 1935 became, with certain adaptations, the working constitution of Pakistan.
However, the Quaid’s aim was the establishment of a truly Islamic society. As a result, a Constituent Assembly was set up under the Independence Act. The Constituent Assembly had a dual purpose; to draft the constitution of Pakistan and to act as a legislative body till the new constitution was passed and enforced
On March 12, 1949, the Constituent Assembly adopted a resolution moved by Liaquat Ali Khan, the then Prime Minister of Pakistan. It was called the Objectives Resolution. It proclaimed that the future constitution of Pakistan would not be modeled on European pattern, but on the ideology and democratic faith of Islam.
The Objectives Resolution, which is considered to be the “Magna Carta” of Pakistan’s constitutional history, proclaimed the following principles:
- Sovereignty belongs to Allah alone but He has delegated it to the State of Pakistan through its people for being exercised within the limits prescribed by Him as a sacred trust.
- The State shall exercise its powers and authority through the chosen representatives of the people.
- The principles of democracy, freedom, equality, tolerance and social justice, as enunciated by Islam, shall be fully observed.
- Muslims shall be enabled to order their lives in the individual and collective spheres in accordance with the teachings of Islam as set out in the Holy Quran and Sunnah.
- Adequate provision shall be made for the minorities to freely profess and practice their religions and develop their cultures.
- Pakistan shall be a federation.
- Fundamental rights shall be guaranteed.
- Judiciary shall be independent.
The Objectives Resolution is one of the most important and illuminating documents in the constitutional history of Pakistan. At the time it was passed, Mr. Liaquat Ali Khan called it “the most important occasion in the life of this country, next in importance only to the achievement of independence”.
The importance of this document lies in the fact that it combines the good features of Western and Islamic democracy. It is a happy blend of modernism and Islam. The Objectives Resolution became a part of the constitution of Pakistan in 1985 under the Eighth Amendment.
Basic Principles Committee [1949-1952]
After the Objectives Resolution was passed in 1949, the Constitution Assembly set up a number of committees to draw the future constitution on the basis of the principles given in the Objectives Resolution. The most important among those committees was the Basic Principles Committee set up on March 12, 1949, by Khawaja Nazimuddin on the advice of Prime Minister Liaquat Ali Khan.
The main function of this committee was to determine the basic principles of the future Constitution of Pakistan. The committee comprised 24 members. Maulvi Tamiz-ud-din Khan headed it and Liaquat Ali Khan was its Vice President. The committee presented its interim report to the Legislative Assembly in 1950. This was a short document presenting the guidelines and principles of the future Constitution of Pakistan.
Representatives of East Pakistan raised objections against the report. The main criticism was against the quantum representation in the Central Legislature. East Pakistan, with a majority of the population, was given an equal number of seats in the Upper House as West Pakistan, thus reducing the representation of the majority of the population in Pakistan by one-fifth. East Pakistan representatives also did not like Urdu being declared as the only national language of Pakistan.
Liaquat Ali Khan agreed to consider the objections with an open mind. He, therefore, postponed the deliberation of the Constituent Assembly in order to enable the Basic Principles Committee to examine and consider suggestions that might be made by the people regarding the principles of the Constitution. In order to include public opinion, Liaquat Ali Khan called forth general comments and suggestions by the public on the report. A large number of proposals and suggestions were sent by the public, which were examined by a special subcommittee headed by Sardar Abdur Rab Nishtar. The setting up of the committee was a right and commendable step, but its working was immensely affected by the assassination of Liaquat Ali Khan. The subcommittee, however, gave its report to the Basic Principles Committee in July 1952, which was presented by Khawaja Nazimuddin in the National
According to the Basic Principles Committee Report, the head of the state was to be a Muslim, elected by a joint session with the majority vote of the Central Legislature for a period of five years. The Prime Minister was to be appointed by the head of the state. The Central Legislature was to consist of two houses: the House of Units with 120 members and the House of People with 400 members. There were to be three lists of subjects for the division of power between the Federation and the Units.
Adult franchise was introduced. The judiciary was to be headed by the Supreme Court of Pakistan consisting of a Chief Justice and two to six other judges. The Chief Justice was to be appointed by the head of state. There was to be a High Court for each of the units of East Pakistan, Punjab, Sindh Baluchistan and the N. W. F. P. A Board of Ulema was to be set up by the head of state and provincial governors. The Board of Ulema was to examine the law making process to ensure that no law was passed that went against the principles of the Quran and Sunnah. The Objectives Resolution was adopted as a preamble to the proposed Constitution.
The Basic Principles Committee’s report was severely criticized and raised much bitterness between East and West Pakistan. The Prime Minister, Khawaja Nazimuddin, however, welcomed the report and commended it as a valuable document according to the aspirations of the people of Pakistan. But the fact was that the nation was not satisfied with the report and hence there was a serious deadlock in making of the constitution.
Liaquat-Nehru Pact 1950
At the time of independence, many communal riots broke out in different areas of India and Pakistan. These riots had a great impact on the status of minorities in the two nations
Due to brutal killings by the majority community, a huge number of Muslims migrated from India, and Hindus and Sikhs from Pakistan. Yet, the mass migration failed to solve the minority problem. Even after the migration, almost half of the Muslims living in the Sub-continent were left in India and a sizable number of Hindus in Pakistan. Those who were left behind were unable to become an integral part of the societies they were living in. The people and government of their countries looked upon them as suspects. They were unable to assure their countrymen of their loyalty.
This problem escalated during the late 40’s and early 50’s. It seemed as if India and Pakistan were about to fight their second war in the first three years of their independence. At this critical juncture in the history of South Asia, Prime Minister of Pakistan, Liaquat Ali Khan issued a statement emphasizing the need to reach a solution to the problem. He also proposed a meeting with his Indian counterpart to determine how to put an end to the communal riots and the fear of war.
The two Prime Ministers met in Delhi on April 2, 1950, and discussed the matter in detail. The meeting lasted for six long days. On April 8, the two leaders signed an agreement, which was later entitled as Liaquat-Nehru Pact. This pact provided a ‘bill of rights’ for the minorities of India and Pakistan. Its aim was to address the following three issues:
- To alleviate the fears of the religious minorities on both sides.
- Elevate communal peace.
- Create an atmosphere in which the two countries could resolve their other differences.
According to the agreement, the governments of India and Pakistan solemnly agreed that each shall ensure, to the minorities throughout its territories, complete equality of citizenship, irrespective of religion; a full sense of security in respect of life, culture, property and personal honor.
It also guaranteed fundamental human rights of the minorities, such as freedom of movement, speech, occupation and worship. The pact also provided for the minorities to participate in the public life of their country, to hold political or other offices and to serve in their country’s civil and armed forces.
The Liaquat-Nehru Pact provided for the mechanism to deal with oppressive elements with an iron hand. Both the governments decided to set up minority commissions in their countries with the aim of observing and reporting on the implementation of the pact, to ensure that no one breaches the pact and to make recommendations to guarantee its enforcement. Both Minority Commissions were to be headed by a provincial minister and were to have Hindu and Muslim members among its ranks.
India and Pakistan also agreed to include representatives of the minority community in the cabinet of the two Bengals, and decided to depute two central ministers, one from each government, to remain in the affected areas for such period as might be necessary. Both the leaders emphasized that the loyalty of the minorities should be reserved for the state in which they were living and for the solution of their problems they should look forward to the government of the country they were living in.
This pact was broadly acknowledged as an optimistic beginning to improve relations between India and Pakistan.
Khawaja Nazimuddin becomes Prime Minister [1951-1953]
The causes, nature and impacts of Ghaznavid invasion
The causes, nature and motives of Ghaznavid invasion
Mahmud’s place in the history
Lecture delivered by Professor Irfan Waheed Usmani
- 1) Introduction:
Mahmud Ghaznavi’s invasions of India occupy a great significance in the annals of the history of the subcontinent. These invasions had great impact on the subsequent history of India and it further led towards the establishment of Muslim rule. Mahmud is regarded as one of the most intelligent generals of his time but, the controversy surrounds his invasions.2) Controversy of Mahmud’s invasions:
Historians hold distinct views about Mahmud Ghaznavi’s invasions. There are three distinct schools of thought regarding Mahmud’s invasion1. First school of thought:
First are the Hindu nationalist historians who dubbed these invasions or campaign as acts of loot and plunder. According to this school of thought, Mahmud was a plunderer who just invaded India looted and went back.2. Second school of thought:
Muslim historians believe that Mahmud Ghaznavi was led by Islamic passion. He was a great champion of Islam and it is absolutely wrong to ascribe him as a plunderer or looter.3. Third school of thought:
The third school of thought is comprised of S.M. Jaffar, Ishwari Prasad and Dr. Nazim. They believe Mahmud as a great conqueror and military general whose ambitions brought him to India. These historians highlight the politico-economic motives of his invasion and these motives impelled him for the invasions.3) Arguments of various schools of thought:1. Arguments of the first school of thought:i) The proponents of the first school of thought present the following arguments to corroborate their views of Mahmud as a looter. These nationalist historians say that had he been an empire builder, he would have incorporated India into his empire. But, he came and went back and his motive was to satisfy his lust for wealth and he didn’t establish his rule in India.
ii) Secondly, these nationalist historians point towards the oblivious non-religious character of his campaigns. Mahmud Ghaznavi had Hindu generals in his army. Had, he been driven by religious motives, why he had kept these generals in his army then? Moreover, Mahmud shed the blood of his Muslim coreligionists in Persia and in
iii) Thirdly, the nationalist historians say that his main motive was loot of wealth and he was Raider in Chief and used his might to plunder the Indian wealth.
2. Arguments of the second school of thought:
i) The second school of thought is comprised of Muslim historians and they are of the view that the main aim of Mahmud Ghaznavi was to transplant Islam in India.
ii) He was especially engaged by the Caliph Qadir Billa and he undertook the task of spreading of Islam by the instructions of the Caliph.
iii) Secondly, the alliance which was aimed against Mahmud was of essentially religious character so, his invasions cannot be denied as religious passion. The alliance formulated against him was based on ‘Dharam’ (religion) and he also had to adopt religious means to reach the ends e.g. Mahmud Ghaznavi was deeply religious person by temperament.
iv) He allowed no schisms in Islam, suppressed Shias and introduced many reforms to purge Islam of evils. Then the suspicious questions arises, how could he detach himself from religion while fighting Hindus?
v) By his invasions, the cause of Islam was greatly served. He smashed the myth of the Hindu might, destroyed the political fibre of the Hindu society and was accompanied by saints, priests like Sheikh Ismail Bukhari RA, Data Ganj Baksh RA.
3. Arguments of the third school of thought:
i) The third school of thought says that the main motive behind the invasions of India was to satisfy his ambition of conquest.
ii) These historians also highlight the oblivious non-religion character of his campaigns. They say that idea of holy war was over at that time and the idea of propagation of Islam ceased to be considered as a part of duty of sovereign (ruler). Now, no sovereign could assign himself the duty of spreading of Islam.
iii) Mahmud cherished the idea of extending empire towards Central Asia. As a consequence, the idea of annexation of certain parts of India was out of necessity. He conquered India as second line of defence and wanted a strategic depth.
- iv) Furthermore, he wanted friendly Punjab and Upper-Sindh to strengthen his line of defence. Mahmud Ghaznavi’s policy of consolidation and expansion in Central Asia was premised on Indian conquest.v) Another view advanced by the third school of thought is that Mahmud needed money to finance his campaigns against his Central Asian enemies. The destruction of temples was due to the military programme and he had nothing against religious teachings of the Hindus. These temples were the centres of military, economic and political power of the Hindus.
There are two views of third school of thought
a) Politico-economic line
- b) Religion-political lineViews of third school of thought4.1. Politico-economic view:A. Politico view (motive):i) The view held by S.M. Jaffar, Ishwari Prasad and Dr Nazim highlight the politico-economic nature of Mahmud’s invasion and it seems to be closer to the truth and objectivity. Mahmud cherished the idea of expansion of his conquests in Central Asia and wanted a line of defence in North Western India.ii) Mahmud remained dissatisfied with the invasion of Punjab and wanted a strategic depth to protect Ghazna and Kabul from back. He conquered Punjab and Upper-Sindh and was not interested in the conquest of whole India. These two places formed a second line of defence.iii) His political motives were also affected by other considerations e.g.a) Violation of treaties by the Hindu Rajas, these Rajas betrayed him.
b) Political betrayal of these Rajas in form of help to Mahmud’s enemies.
c) Molestation of his allies by the Hindu Rajas. These Rajas used to fight with his allies so, he used to come to rescue his allies.
d) Obvious non-religious character of his policy. Despite the fact that he was a staunch believer, his religious policy was based on tolerance. There were many Hindus in his army e.g. Tilak Rai, Sonia Rai, Hazari Rai and Tash etc.
iv) Mahmud gave full religious liberty to these generals and they had temples, bazaars etc in Ghazna. It was not on the account of his religious inclination that the destroyed a temple. He never destroyed a temple in the time of peace. The destruction of temples was part of his military programme and not religious programme because these temples were the storehouses of wealth. This view is given by Al-Beruni, Ishwari Prasad and Ishwari Topa. The pious Hindus used to give bounty and this bounty was stored in these temples. These temples stored the precious products and hence Mahmud Ghaznavi exported it to become rich.
v) According to Ishwari Prasad; these temples were the storehouses of enormous and untold wealth.
vi) Ishwari Topa is of the view that; these temples were storehouses of wealth. Temples were destroyed for reasons other than religious. In the time of peace, Mahmud never demolished a single temple.
B. Economic motive:
i) S.M. Jaffar, Professor Habib Ullah, Dr. Nazim presents this view. S.M. Jaffar is of the view that need not the greed for gild laid at the root of Indian invasion by Ghazna. This view also held by Dr. Nazim and he says that Mahmud needed money to finance his campaign and it was
not his lust of money which was the cause Indian
ii) Professor Habib Ullah views that Mahmud Ghaznavi fully realized the importance of wealth in attaining the political power when India offered him that chance, he availed himself of that opportunity.
4) Causes of invasions of Mahmud of Ghazna:
A. Political causes:
1. The hostilities started by the Hindu Shahi dynasty e.g. Jaypal, Ananpal at the end of 10th Century. This Hindu Shahi dynasty occupied the territories up to Peshawar and was a threat to Ghazna.
2. The violation of terms of treaty by the Hindu Rajas, molestation of Mahmud’s allies by these Rajas, rebellion of Indian Princes.
3. Mahmud cherished the idea of establishing empire in the Central Asia. He was aware of the strategic significance of Indian frontier and he erected a second line of defence in India.
B. Economic causes:
1. S.M. Jaffar, Dr Nazim and Professor Habib Ullah views that Mahmud Ghaznavi needed money to finance his campaign and it was not his lust of money which was the cause of Indian invasion.
2. Professor Habib Ullah views that Mahmud Ghaznavi fully realized the importance of wealth in attaining the political power when India offered him that chance, he availed himself of that opportunity.
5) Impacts of Mahmud Ghaznavi’s invasion:
1. Destroyed the myth of Hindu might – exposed the weakness of India:
Mahmud’s invasion shattered the myth of Hindu might and he destroyed the political centre of India e.g. Pal family (Jaypal’s Hindu Shahi dynasty). He further opened way for future invasions. Even Ghauri was inspired by Mahmud’s invasion.
2. Great psychological impact:
Sher Muhammad Garewal in his book, ‘Islamia-e-Hind Ka Shandar Mazi’ (The Glorious Past of Muslims of India) has highlighted that these attacks created great psychological superiority of Muslims over the Hindus and determined that Muslims cannot be defeated. Ghaznavi was never defeated in India and psychologically the Hindus were overwhelmed by the Muslims.
3. Contributed towards the propagation of Islam:
i) Indirectly, the invasions by Mahmud contributed towards the propagation of Islam in India.
ii) Though we may not agree that his invasion was religious but indirectly, it paved the way for the Muslim society.
- iii) The 3rd Phase of Muslim society started with Ghaznavi’s invasion.iv) During this Phase, the process of conquest and immigration and settlement was going on in Punjab. Sheikh Ismail Bukhari RA and Hazrat Data Ganj Baksh RA came to India with Mahmud.4. Great cultural impact:i) Mahmud developed Ghazna as a great cultural centre of Asia.ii) The great personalities were associated with his court and included Farruhi, Asjadi, Manuchehri, scholars like Al-Beruni, astrologers like Al-Farabi and historians like Utibi and Bhaqui.iii) Mahmud founded new city of Lahore. It was called Mansurpura. Lahore became a centre of cultural activity after Ghazna as it attracted scores of traders, merchants from Ghazna, Khurasan and Iran.iv) Mahmud patronized the Persian language.5. Punjab became part of the Muslim empire:
In 1021-1022 A.D. Punjab became part of Muslim empire and this rule was so firmly established in Punjab that when Mahmud’s empire declined in Ghazna, his family migrated to Punjab.
6. 6. Destroyed the centres of Indian culture/civilization from archaeological point of view:
Mahmud destroyed cultural monuments, statues and caused great loss to Indian heritage from the archaeological point of view.
Year of Event Event
|570||Birth of Holy Prophet Muhammad (S.A.W).|
|632||Death of Holy Prophet (S.A.W).|
|712||Arab conquest of Dabul, Nion and Brahmand|
|713||Arab Conquest of Multan|
|750||Arab conquest replace the Umayyeds|
|771||Delegations of Indo-Pak scholars at Baghdad|
|825||Arabs in Malabar|
|870||Muslims conquest of Kabul|
|870||Foundation of Ghazni|
|871||Sind and Multan virtually independent of Baghdad|
|874-999||Rise of Bukhara as a great political and cultural center|
|977-97||Subuktigin, Ruler of Ghazni|
|997-98||Death of Subuktigin: Accession of Mahmood|
|1030||Death of Mahmood|
|1203||Muhammad Ghuri ascends the throne|
|1206||Assassination of Muhammad Ghuri|
|1211||Accession of Iltutmish|
|1236||Death of Iltutmish|
|1246||Accession of Nasir-ud-din Mahmud.|
|1265||Accession of Balban|
|1287||Death of Balban|
|1290||Accession of Jalal-ud-din Firoz Khilji|
|1296||Accession of Ala-ud-din Khilji|
|1316||Death of Ala-ud-din Khilji|
|1325-1351||Muhammad b. Tughlaq|
|1388||Death of Firoz Tughlaq|
|1398||Invasion of Timur|
|1413||Death of Mahmud Tughlaq|
|1414-51||The rule of the Sayyads|
|21 April 1526||First battle of Paniput.|
|December 1530||Babur’s death and Humayun’s Accesion|
|1539||Humayun defeated at Chausa|
|1539||Sher shah proclaims himself Emperor|
|1545||Sher shah’s death.|
|1545-54||Islam Shah Sur|
|June 1555||Humayon’s reconquest of Dehli.|
|January 1556||Death of Humayun|
|14 February 1556||Enthronment of Akber|
|27 october 1605||Death of Akber|
|5 november 1605||Accession of Jahanger|
|28 october 1627||Death of Jahanger|
|Februrary 1628||Shah Jahan’s Enthronment|
|september 1657||Illness of Shah Jahan: War of Succession|
|21 July 1658||Informal Enthronment of Aurangzab|
|5 June 1659||Second coronation of Aurangzab|
|1666||Death of Shah Jahan|
|3rd March 1707||Death of Aurangzab|
|1707||Accession of Bahadur Shah|
|1712||Death of Bahadur Shah: War of Succession|
|1713||Farrukh Siyar becomes Emperor|
|1719||Murder of Farrukh Siyar|
|1719||Enthronment of Muhammad Shah|
|1748||Death of Muhammad Shah|
|1748||Accession of Ahmad Shah|
|1754||Ahmad Shah Deposed|
|1754||Alamgir 2 Enthroned|
|1757||Abdali Sacks Delhi|
|1761||Shah-Alam becomes Emperor|