Muslim Barbarity in the 14th century in India.

The Moslem onslaught against the 'West' during the 14^th and 15^th centuries is summarized here. It was worse in India. The greatest untold genocide in history is the Arab-Turkic-Mongol annihilation of Indians, their culture and society from 800 or so AD to the British Raj. Many Indian investigators put the dead over this 1000 year period at between 100 million and 150 million. Nothing like this carnage exists anywhere in history. It is an astounding and never recited fact that what occurred in the sub-Continent was nothing less than the erasing and cleansing of non-Muslims.

Witness the bloody 14^th and 15^th centuries. In the early 14^th century the ever-so-moderate Sultan Allauddin Khaliji continued the Muslim Jihadic terror, including its attendant slave-taking and looting, which made him the richest and most extensive of the Muslims rulers during the so-called 'Sultanate Period' (c 1200-1500 CE). In the second sack of the reconstituted Somnath temple in central India, a Hindu place of homage, pilgrimage and worship, Khaliji's Muslim army captured 20,000 women and children as slaves, many of them used for sex and procreation. [Wassaf, Bk IV, p. 448]. In 1301 Ranthambhor was attacked and in 1303 Chittor in which 30,000 innocents were massacred in cold blood [Khazain, Habib trs p 49]. Tens of thousands of women and children were enslaved. A similar list of atrocity occurred in the attacks on Malwa, Sevana and Jalor (1305-1311). According to Shams Shiraj Afif, Khalji's Turkish army was indiscriminate in its Jihad; “...the Turks, whenever they please, can seize, buy or sell any Hindu.” [Nuh Sephr, trs, in ED III, 561]. The Sultan apparently possessed some 50,000 slave boys who were engaged in his the provision of his personal services [and pleasure] and over 70,000 slaves who labored continuously on his public projects. Of course many of these would perish in their work and need to be replaced. Another Muslim chronicler one Barani, describes the almost endless batches of slaves in the markets of Delhi and elsewhere, taken in war as the Muslim state pushed ever further southwards.

Following the Khalji's, there arose the Tughlaqs who ascended to the Sultanate. This Turkish clan was even more ruthless, skilled and determined in making war against the Hindus and enslaving them. Shihabuddin Ahmed Abbas writes of Muhammad Tughlaq, “The Sultan never ceases to show the greatest zeal in making war upon the infidels… Everyday, thousands of slaves are sold at a very slow price, so great is the number of prisoners”. [Masalik-ul-Absar, E.D. III, 580]. Sultan Tughlaq subjugated the once thriving Hindu city states of Dwarsamudra, Malabar, Kampil, Warangal, Lakhnauti, Satgaon, Sonargaon, Nagarkat and Sambhal amongst a score of others. [Qaraunab Turks, 96, 126, 129-30, 173]. Tughlaq also pitilessly put down 16 major rebellions initiated by the over-taxed, reviled, and Dhimmi Hindus. In each campaign, after the utter defeat and massacre of the opponent, slaves were captured with impunity. The famous Muslim traveler Ibn Battutah testifies that in the defeat of Halajun rebellion (in Lahore), captured females were sent to far-off Gwalior to provide sex harems and domestic slaves [Battutah, p. 123]. Many of the enslaved were also converted to the moon cult and married to Muslims according to the Islamic tradition. [Battutah, p. 63].

Firoz Tughlaq, who ascended to the throne in 1351, was even more determined than his father and grandfather in the capturing and trading of slaves. Within a few years of his accession some 180,000 Hindus had been taken. Contemporary Shams Shiraj Afif further testifies that during Firoz' reign; “Slaves became too numerous” and that the institution took root in every centre of the country. [Afif, pp. 267-273]. According to Afif the third Tughlaq invaded Eastern India or Bengali and killed 180,000 Hindus. With their skulls he erected a Tower as a warning to other non-Muslims who would not submit to the Islamic cult [Lal, p. 73]. Given the history of the Mongols, Chinghis Khan, and his successors who converted to Islam including Timur the Lame, the erection of piles of skulls as signals of omnipotence and warning, were part and parcel of Islamic war.

Things did not improve for the Hindus in the 15^th century. The aforementioned Timur the Lame invaded northern India in the 14^th century at the head of a vast host of Turkic Muslims. Information about Timur comes mainly from “Zafer Nama” written during early 15th century and his own diary, Mulfuzat-i-Timuri, which are full of Koranic references in justification of his invasions, wars and mass murders and destructions. He set out on his campaign in 1399 against India solely because the Muslim rulers were per his understanding of Islamic Fasicsm, too lenient towards the idolater Hindu subjects. Hard to believe bu true. By the time, he reached Delhi he had taken around 100,000 non-Muslim captives. A few thousand artisans and clever mechanics, including builders and stone masons, were taken back to Samarkhand while the rest were massacred in a single day [Mulfuzat-i-Timuri, trs ED, III, 447]. He built victory pillars with the severed heads of the infidels. On his way out of India, he pillaged Miraj, pulled down the monuments and flayed the Hindu inhabitants alive. [Why I am Not a Muslim, ibn Warraq, p. 234-235].

This is the same Timur the Lame who devastated Christian country in and around Tifflis in Anatolia taking slaves and killing tens of thousands in 1400. In 1403, he returned to Tifflis to decimate the country again destroying over 700 large villages and minor towns, and massacring the inhabitant whilst razing Churches to the ground. This systematic destruction of Christianity neutered the once thriving states of the Nestorians and Jacobites of Mesopotamia. At Sivas, 4,000 Christians were buried alive; at Tus, there were 10,000 victims. Historians estimate the number of dead at Saray to be 100,000; at Baghdad 90,000 and at Isfahan 70,000 [Why I am Not a Muslim, Ibn Warraq, pp. 234-235]. other than these atrocities the Muslim Jihad was moderate.

The destruction of the infidel is a genetic component of Islam. No matter how much Muslims and their apologists cry that Islam is peace and love, the reality is that Islam was and is a warring political theolgy named appropriately Submission, in which the church and state are mixed and in which the infidel is never tolerated. The history of Islam in India is perhaps the most lurid and vivid account of this truism.