Muhammad bin Qasim

Muhammad bin Qasim

Muhammad ibn Qasim leading his troops in battle
Born 31 December 695
Ta'if, Arabia
Died 18 July 715
Allegiance Al-Hajjaj ibn Yusuf, Governor to the Umayyad Caliph Al-Walid I
Rank General
Battles/wars Conquest of Sindh and Multan for the Umayyads.

‘Imād ad-Dīn Muḥammad ibn Qāsim ath-Thaqafī (Arabic: عماد الدين محمد بن القاسم الثقفي‎‎; c. 31 December 695 – 18 July 715) was an Umayyad general who conquered the Sindh and Multan regions along the Indus River (now a part of Pakistan) for the Umayyad Caliphate. He was born and raised in the city of Ta'if (in modern-day Saudi Arabia). Qasim's conquest of Sindh and southern-most parts of Multan enabled further Muslim conquests on the Indian subcontinent.

A member of the Thaqif tribe of the Ta'if region, Muhammad bin Qasim's father was Qasim bin Yusuf who died when Muhammad bin Qasim was young, leaving his mother in charge of his education and care. Umayyad governor Al-Hajjaj Ibn Yusuf Al-Thaqafi, Muhammad bin Qasim's paternal uncle, was instrumental in teaching Muhammad bin Qasim about warfare and governance. Muhammad bin Qasim married his cousin Zubaidah, Al-Hajjaj's daughter, shortly before going to Sindh.

Due to his close relationship with Al-Hajjaj, Bin Qasim was executed after the accession of Caliph Sulayman ibn Abd al-Malik.

Umayyad interest in Sindh

Map of expansion of Umayyad Caliphate

According to Berzin, Umayyad interest in the region occurred because of attacks from Sindh Raja Dahir on ships of Muslims and their imprisonment of Muslim men and women.[1] They had earlier unsuccessfully sought to gain control of the route, via the Khyber Pass, from the Kabul Shahi of Gandhara.[1] But by taking Sindh, Gandhara's southern neighbour, they were able to open a second front against Gandhara; a feat they had, on one occasion, attempted before.[1]

According to Wink, Umayyad interest in the region was galvanized by the operation of the Meds (a tribe of Scythians living in Sindh) and others.[2] Meds had pirated upon Sassanid shipping in the past, from the mouth of the Tigris to the Sri Lankan coast, in their bawarij and now were able to prey on Arab shipping from their bases at Kutch, Debal and Kathiawar.[2] At the time, Sindh was the wild frontier region of al-Hind, inhabited mostly by semi-nomadic tribes whose activities disturbed much of the Western Indian Ocean.[2] Muslim sources insist that it was these persistent activities along increasingly important Indian trade routes by Debal pirates and others which forced the Arabs to subjugate the area, in order to control the seaports and maritime routes of which Sindh was the nucleus, as well as, the overland passage.[3] During Hajjaj's governorship, the Meds of Debal in one of their raids had kidnapped Muslim women travelling from Sri Lanka to Arabia, thus providing a casus belli to the rising power of the Umayyad Caliphate that enabled them to gain a foothold in the Makran, Balochistan and Sindh regions.[2][4]

The Umayyad Caliphate on the eve of the invasions of Spain and Sindh in 710.

Also cited as a reason for this campaign was the policy of providing refuge to Sassanids fleeing the Arab advance and to Arab rebels from the Umayyad consolidation of their rule.

These Arabs were imprisoned later on by the Governor Deebal Partaab Raye. A letter written by an Arab girl who escaped from the prison of Partab Raye asked Hajjaj Bin Yusuf for help. When Hajjaj asked Dahir for the release of prisoners and compensation, the latter refused on the ground that he had no control over those. Al-Hajjaj sent Muhammad Bin Qasim for a revenge expedition against the Sindh kingdom in 711.

The mawali; new non-Arab converts; who were usually allied with Al-Hajjaj's political opponents and thus were frequently forced to participate in battles on the frontier of the Umayyad Caliphate — such as Kabul, Sindh and Transoxania.[5] An actual push into the region had been out of favor as an Arab policy since the time of the Rashidun Caliph Umar bin Khattab, who upon receipt of reports of it being an inhospitable and poor land, had stopped further expeditionary ventures into the region.

The campaign

A map of Muhammad bin Qasim's expedition into Sindh in 711 AD.

Muhammad bin Qasim's expedition was actually the third attempt, the first two having failed due to stiffer-than-expected opposition as well as heat, exhaustion.

Hajjaj had put more care and planning into this campaign than the first campaign [5] under Badil bin Tuhfa. Hajjaj superintended this campaign from Kufa by maintaining close contact with Muhammad bin Qasim in the form of regular reports for which purpose special messengers were deputed between Basra and Sindh.[5] The army which departed from Shiraz in 710 CE under Muhammad bin Qasim was 6,000 Syrian cavalry and detachments of mawali from Iraq.[5] At the borders of Sindh he was joined by an advance guard and six thousand camel riders and later reinforcements from the governor of Makran transferred directly to Debal by sea along with five catapults[5] ("manjaniks"). The army that eventually captured Sindh would later be swelled by the Gurjars and Meds as well as other irregulars that heard of successes in Sindh.[5] When Muhammad bin Qasim passed through Makran while raising forces, he had to re-subdue the restive Umayyad towns of Fannazbur and Arman Belah (Lasbela)[6] The first town assaulted was Debal and upon the orders of Al-Hajjaj, he exacted a bloody retribution on Debal by giving no quarter to its residents or priests and destroying its great temple.[5]

Extent and expansion of Umayyad rule under Muhammad bin Qasim in medieval India (modern state boundaries shown in red).

From Debal the Arab army then marched north taking towns such as Nerun and Sadusan (Sehwan) peacefully.[5] often using their components; additionally one-fifth of the booty including slaves were dispatched to Hajjaj and the Caliph.[5] The conquest of these towns was accomplished easily; however, Raja Dahir's armies being prepared on the other side of the Indus[7] were yet to be fought.[5] In preparation to meet them, Muhammad bin Qasim moved back to Nerun to resupply and receive reinforcements sent by Hajjaj.[5] Camped on the east bank of the Indus, Qasim sent emissaries and bargained with the river Jats and boatmen.[5] Upon securing the aid of Mokah Basayah, "the King of the island of Bet", Muhammad bin Qasim crossed over the river where he was joined by the forces of the Thakore of Bhatta and the western Jats.[5]

At Ar-rur (Rohri) he was met by Dahir's forces and the eastern Jats in battle.[5] Dahir died in the battle, his forces were defeated and a triumphant Muhammad bin Qasim took control of Sindh.[5] In the wake of the battle enemy soldiers were put to death — but not artisans, merchants or farmers — and Dahir and his chiefs, the "daughters of princes" and the usual fifth of the booty and slaves was sent on to Hajjaj.[5] Soon the capitals of the other provinces, Brahmanabad, Alor (Aror) and Multan, were captured alongside other in-between towns with only light Muslim casualties.[5] Usually after a siege of a few weeks or months the Arabs gained a city through the intervention of heads of mercantile houses with whom subsequent treaties and agreements would be settled.[5] After battles all fighting men were executed and their wives and children enslaved in considerable numbers and the usual fifth of the booty and slaves were sent to Hajjaj.[5] The general populace was encouraged to carry on with their trades and taxes and tributes settled.[5]

The conquest of Sindh, in modern-day Pakistan, although costly, was major gain for the Umayyad Caliphate. However, further gains were halted by Hindu kingdoms during the Caliphate campaigns in India. The Arabs tried to invade India but they were defeated by the north Indian king Nagabhata of the Gurjara Pratihara Dynasty and by the south Indian Emperor Vikramaditya II of the Chalukya dynasty in the early 8th century. After the failure of further expeditions on Kathiawar, the Arab chroniclers admit that the Caliph Mahdi "gave up the project of conquering any part of India."[8]

Military and political strategy

The military strategy had been outlined by Al-Hajjaj in a letter sent to Muhammad bin Qasim:[9]

My ruling is given: Kill anyone belonging to the ahl-i-harb (combatants); arrest their sons and daughters for hostages and imprison them. Whoever does not fight against us...grant them aman (safety) and settle their tribute [amwal] as dhimmah (protected person)...

The Arabs' first concern was to facilitate the conquest of Sindh with the fewest casualties while also trying to preserve the economic infrastructure.[9] Towns were given two options: submit to Islamic authority peacefully or be attacked by force (anwattan), with the choice governing their treatment upon capture.[9] The capture of towns was usually accomplished by means of a treaty with a party from among the enemy, who were then extended special privileges and material rewards.[10] There were two types of such treaties, "Sulh" or "ahd-e-wasiq (capitulation)" and "aman (surrender/ peace)".[10] Among towns and fortresses that were captured through force of arms, Muhammad bin Qasim performed executions as part of his military strategy, but they were limited to the ahl-i-harb (fighting men), whose surviving dependents were also enslaved.[10]

Where resistance was strong, prolonged and intensive, often resulting in considerable Arab casualties, Muhammad bin Qasim's response was dramatic, inflicting 6,000 deaths at Rawar, between 6,000 and 26,000 at Brahmanabad, 4,000 at Iskalandah and 6,000 at Multan.[11] Conversely, in areas taken by sulh, such as Armabil, Nirun, and Aror, resistance was light and few casualties occurred.[11] Sulh appeared to be Muhammad bin Qasim's preferred mode of conquest, the method used for more than 60% of the towns and tribes recorded by Baladhuri and the Chach Nama.[11] At one point, he was actually berated by Al-Hajjaj for being too lenient.[11] Meanwhile, the common folk were often pardoned and encouraged to continue working;[10] Al-Hajajj ordered that this option not be granted to any inhabitant of Debal, yet Qasim still bestowed it upon certain groups and individuals.[11]

After each major phase of his conquest, Muhammad bin Qasim attempted to establish law and order in the newly conquered territory by showing religious tolerance and incorporating the ruling class – the Brahmins and Shramanas – into his administration.[10]

Reasons for success

Muhammad bin Qasim's success has been partly ascribed to Dahir being an unpopular Hindu king ruling over a Buddhist majority who saw Chach of Alor and his kin as usurpers of the Rai Dynasty.[4] This is attributed to having resulted in support being provided by Buddhists and inclusion of rebel soldiers serving as valuable infantry in his cavalry-heavy force from the Jat and Meds.[12] Brahman, Buddhist, Greek, and Arab testimony however can be found that attests towards amicable relations between the adherents of the two religions up to the 7th century.[13]

Along with this were:

  1. Superior military equipment; such as siege engines and the Mongol bow.[4][14]
  2. Troop discipline and leadership.[4]
  3. The concept of Jihad as a morale booster.[4]
  4. Religion; the widespread belief in the prophecy of Muslim success.[4][13]
  5. The Samanis being persuaded to submit and not take up arms because the majority of the population was Buddhist who were dissatisfied with their rulers, who were Hindu.[13]
  6. The laboring under disabilities of the Lohana Jats.[13]
  7. Defections from among Dahirs chiefs and nobles.[13]

Administration by Muhammad bin Qasim

After the conquest, Muhammad bin Qasim's task was to set up an administrative structure for a stable Muslim state that incorporated a newly conquered alien land, inhabited by non-Muslims.[15] He adopted a conciliatory policy, asking for acceptance of Muslim rule by the natives in return for non-interference in their religious practice,[15] so long as the natives paid their taxes and tribute.[4] In return, the state provided protection to non-Muslim from any foreign attacks and enemies. He established Islamic Sharia law over the people of the region; however, Hindus were allowed to rule their villages and settle their disputes according to their own laws,[4] and traditional hierarchical institutions, including the Village Headmen (Rais) and Chieftains (dihqans) were maintained.[15] A Muslim officer called an amil was stationed with a troop of cavalry to manage each town on a hereditary basis [15]

Everywhere taxes (mal) and tribute (kharaj) were settled and hostages taken — occasionally this also meant the custodians of temples.[10] Non-Muslim natives were excused from military service and from payment of the religiously mandated tax system levied upon Muslims called Zakat,[15] the tax system levied upon them instead was the jizya - a progressive tax, being heavier on the upper classes and light for the poor.[15] In addition, three percent of government revenue was allocated to the Brahmins.[4]

Incorporation of ruling elite into administration

During his administration, Hindus and Buddhists were inducted into the administration as trusted advisors and governors.[4] A Hindu, Kaksa, was at one point the second most important member of his administration.[16] Dahir's prime minister and various chieftains were also incorporated into the administration.[17]

Jat clashes with Muhammad bin Qasim

Significant medieval Muslim chronicles such as the Chachnama, Zainul-Akhbar and Tarikh-I-Baihaqi have recorded battles between the Jats and forces of Muhammad bin Qasim .[18]

Treatment of Jats

The narrative in the Chach Nama conveys that Chach of Alor humiliated the Jats and Lohanas. He compelled them to agree to only carry sham swords, to wear no undergarments of shawl, velvet or silk; only wear silk outer garments provided they were red or black in color, to put no saddles on their horses, to take their dogs when they went out, to furnish guides and spies and carry firewood for the royal kitchen. Qasim maintained these regulations, declaring that the Jats resembled the savages of Persia and the mountains. He also fixed their tribute. Jats of Ghasul who had submitted to the Arab rule garrisoned the Ságara and the island of Bait.[19]

Religion

There are conflicting views regarding religious policy in his reign. According to some historians, no mass conversions were attempted and the destruction of temples such as the Sun Temple of Multan was forbidden.[20] Lane-Poole writes that, " as a rule Muslim government was at once tolerant and economic".[21] But other historians like Elliot, Cousens, Majumdar and Vaidya have held the view that there was coercive conversion during his reign and destruction of temples was a reflection of the more basic, religiously motivated intolerance.[11]

A small minority who converted to Islam were granted exemption from Jizya in lieu of paying the Muslim mandated Zakat.[15] Hindus and Buddhists were given the status of Dhimmi (protected people).[4]

An eccelastical office, "sadru-I-Islam al affal", was created to oversee the secular governors.[15] While some proselytization occurred, the social dynamics of Sindh were no different from other regions newly conquered by Muslim forces such as Egypt, where conversion to Islam was slow and took centuries.[15]

Death

Muhammad bin Qasim had begun preparations for further expansions when Hajjaj died, as did Caliph Al-Walid I, who was succeeded by Sulayman ibn Abd al-Malik, who then took revenge against all who had been close to Hajjaj. Sulayman owed political support to opponents of Hajjaj and so recalled both of Hajjaj's successful generals Qutaibah bin Muslim and Qasim. He also appointed Yazid ibn al-Muhallab, once tortured by Hajjaj and a son of Al Muhallab ibn Abi Suffrah, as the governor of Fars, Kirman, Makran, and Sindh; he immediately placed Qasim in chains.[22]

There are two different accounts regarding the details of Qasim's fate:

Whichever account is true is unknown. What is known however is that he was 20 years old when he was killed by his own Caliph. The location of his grave is unknown.

Muhammad bin Qasim had a son named Amr bin Muhammad who later became governor of Sindh.

Controversy

There is controversy regarding the conquest and subsequent conversion of Sindh. This is usually voiced in two antagonistic perspectives viewing Qasim's actions:[11]

His conquest, as described by Stanley Lane-Poole, in Medieval India (Published in 1970 by Haskell House Publishers Ltd), was "liberal". He imposed the customary poll tax, took hostages for good conduct and spared peoples' lives and lands. He even left their shrines undesecrated: 'The temples;, he proclaimed, 'shall be inviolate, like the churches of the Christians, the synagogues of the Jews and altars of the Magians'.[27] In the same text, however, it is mentioned that "Occasional desecration of Hindu fanes took place...but such demonstrations were probably rare sops to the official conscience..".

  1. Coercive conversion has been attributed to early historians such as Elliot, Cousens, Majumdar and Vaidya.[11] They hold the view that the conversion of Sindh was necessitated. Qasim's numerical inferiority is said to explain any instances of apparent religious toleration, with the destruction of temples seen as a reflection of the more basic, religiously motivated intolerance.[11]
  2. Voluntary conversion has been attributed to Thomas W. Arnold and modern Muslim historians such as Habib and Qureishi. They believe that the conquest was largely peaceful, and the conversion entirely so, and that the Arab forces enacted liberal, generous and tolerant policies.[11] These historians mention the "praiseworthy conduct of Arab Muslims" and attribute their actions to a "superior civilizational complex".[28]

Various polemical perceptions of Islam, Hinduism and Buddhism are also reflected in this debate.[28] Elliot perceived Islam as a religion of "terror, devastation, murder and rapine" where the conquering Arabs were characterized as "ruthless bigots" and "furious zealots" motivated by "plunder and proselytism".[11] The period of Qasim's rule has been called by U.T. Thakkur "the darkest period in Sind history", with the records speaking of massive forced conversions, temple destruction, slaughters and genocides; the people of Sindh, described as inherently pacifist due to their Hindu/Buddhist religious inclinations, had to adjust to the conditions of "barbarian inroad".[29] On one extreme, the Arab Muslims are seen as being compelled by religious stricture to conquer and forcibly convert Sindh, but on the other hand, they can be seen as being respectful and tolerant of non-Muslims as part of their religious duty, with conversion being facilitated by the vitality, equality and morals of the Islamic religion.[28] Citations of towns taken either violently or bloodlessly, reading back into Arab Sindh information belonging to a later date and dubious accounts such as those of the forcible circumcision of Brahmins at Debal or Qasims consideration of Hindu sentiment in forbidding the slaughter of cows are used as examples for one particular view or the other.[28]

Some historians strike a middle ground, saying that Qasim was torn between the political expediency of making peace with the Hindus and Buddhists; having to call upon non-Muslims to serve under him as part of his mandate to administer newly conquered land; and orthodoxy by refraining from seeking the co-operation of "infidels". It is contended that Qasim may have struck a middle ground, conferring the status of Dhimmi upon the native Sindhis and permitting them to participate in his administration, but treating them as "noncitizens" (i.e. in the Khilafat, but not of it).[15]

Legacy

See also

Footnotes

  1. 1 2 3 Alexander Berzin, "Part I: The Umayyad Caliphate (661 - 750 CE), The First Muslim Incursion into the Indian Subcontinent", The Historical Interaction between the Buddhist and Islamic Cultures before the Mongol Empire Last accessed September 11, 2007
  2. 1 2 3 4 Wink (2002), pg.164
  3. ↑ Wink (2002), 51-52
  4. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Nicholas F. Gier, FROM MONGOLS TO MUGHALS: RELIGIOUS VIOLENCE IN INDIA 9TH-18TH CENTURIES, Presented at the Pacific Northwest Regional Meeting American Academy of Religion, Gonzaga University, May, 2006
  5. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Wink (2004) pg 201-205
  6. ↑ Wink (2004) pg 131
  7. ↑ The Indus River during this time flowed to the east of Nerun, but a 10th-century earthquake caused the river to change to its course.
  8. ↑ Sailendra Nath Sen (1999-01-01), Ancient Indian History and Civilization, New Age International, pp. 343–, ISBN 978-81-224-1198-0
  9. 1 2 3 Derryl pg. 37-39
  10. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Wink (2002) pg. 204-206
  11. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Derryl pg.22-29
  12. ↑ "The fall of Multan laid the Indus valley at the feet of the conqueror. The tribes came in, 'ringing bells and beating drums and dancing,' in token of welcome. The Hindu rulers had oppressed them heavily, and the Jats and Meds and other tribes were on the side of the invaders. The work of conquest, as often happened in India, was thus aided by the disunion of the inhabitants, and jealousies of race and creed conspired to help the Muslims. To such suppliants Mohammad Kasim gave the liberal terms that the Arabs usually offered to all but inveterate foes. He imposed the customary poll-tax, took hostages for good conduct, and spared the people's lands and lives. He even left their shrines undesecrated: 'The temples,' he proclaimed, 'shall be inviolate, like the churches of the Christians, the synagogues of the Jews, and the altars of the Magians.'" Stanley Lane-Poole, Medieval India under Mohammedan Rule, 712-1764, G.P. Putnam's Sons. New York, 1970. p. 9-10
  13. 1 2 3 4 5 6 The Chachnamah, An Ancient History of Sind, Giving the Hindu period down to the Arab Conquest. (1900). Translated from the Persian by Mirza Kalichbeg Fredunbeg. Karachi: Commissioners Press.
  14. ↑ The Evolution of the Artillery in India quoting Ibid 342
  15. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Appleby. pg. 291-292
  16. ↑ H. M. Elliot and John Dowson, The History of India, as Told by Its Own Historians, (London, 1867-1877), vol. 1, p. 203. "Kaksa took precedence in the army before all the nobles and commanders. He collected the revenue of the country and the treasury was placed under his seal. He assisted Muhammad ibn Qasim in all of his undertakings..."
  17. ↑ The Chach-Nama. English translation by Mirza Kalichbeg Fredunbeg. Delhi Reprint, 1979. Online version, last accessed 3 October 2006
  18. ↑ Chapter by S Jabir Raza Passages in the Chachnama, Zainul-Akhbar And Tarikh-i-Baihaqi, Text and Translation, from the book The Jats, Their Role and contribution to the socio-Economic Life and Polity of North and North-West India, Volume 2, pp. 43–52
  19. ↑ page 358 Volume 11 A Glossary of the Tribes and castes of the Punjab and North -West Frontier Province compiled by H. A. Rose and based on the Census Report for the Punjab 1883. Published By the Asian Educational Services
  20. ↑ Schimmel pg.4
  21. ↑ Medieval India by Stanly Lane-Poole, Pub 1970, Page 10.
  22. ↑ Wink (2002) pg. 53
  23. 1 2 Keay, pg. 185
  24. ↑ https://books.google.com/books?id=g2m7_R5P2oAC&pg=PA207&lpg=PA207&focus=viewport&dq=al+baladhuri+qasim&output=html_text
  25. ↑ Pakistan, the cultural heritage by Aḥmad Shujāʻ Pāshā Sang-e-Meel Publications, 1998, Page 43
  26. ↑ Iqtidar Husain Siddiqi (2010). "Indo-Persian Historiography Up to the Thirteenth Century". Primus Books. p. 32. ISBN 9788190891806.
  27. ↑ Medieval India by Stanley Lane-Poole, Published by Haskell House Publishers Ltd. NY 1970. Page 10
  28. 1 2 3 4 Derryl pg.31-33
  29. ↑ Sindhi Culture by U.T. Thakkur, University of Bombay 1959
  30. 1 2 Markovits, Claude The Global World of Indian Merchants, 1750-1947: Traders of Sind from Bukhara to Panama, Cambridge University Press, June 22, 2000, ISBN 0-521-62285-9, pg. 34.
  31. ↑ Akbar, M.J, The Shade of Swords, Routledge (UK), December 1, 2003, ISBN 0-415-32814-4, pg. 102.
  32. ↑ Federal Research Division. "Pakistan a Country Study", Kessinger Publishing, June 1, 2004, ISBN 1-4191-3994-0 pg.45.
  33. ↑ "History books contain major distortions". Daily Times.
  34. ↑ "Pakistan Movement". cybercity-online.net.
  35. ↑ APP (November 7, 2003). "KARACHI: Babul Islam day observed". Dawn. Retrieved May 20, 2012.
  36. ↑ Cheesman, David Landlord Power and Rural Indebtedness in Colonial Sind, Routledge (UK), February 1, 1997, ISBN 0-7007-0470-1

References

This article is issued from Wikipedia - version of the 11/24/2016. The text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share Alike but additional terms may apply for the media files.