Hello #twitterstorians! Sorry about the break for the last two days. There were...uh...technical difficulties...
But we're back! In this thread, I, @StevenMVose, want to give a brief #history of the #Delhi Sultanate and share some facts and recent scholarly takes that may complicate the #narrative of the Sultanate, and of #Islam in So. Asia, that I alluded to in the previous thread.
I will also highlight some #Jain interactions with the Sultans, which suggest a complex set of interactions between #Indian religious communities and the emerging #Islamicate "state" in the late 13th and early 14th c's. CE
The Delhi Sultanate was not a single polity but rather a series of five dynasties that ruled varying amounts of #India between 1206 and 1526 CE, reaching its height between 1326 and 1334, when Jinaprabhasūri was in Muhammad bin Tughluq's court.
But let's start by backing up a bit and taking stock of the advent of Islam and #Muslims in South Asia, and then think about the problematics of calling it "Islamic Rule."
Before any military engagements, Arab Muslim traders regularly traveled to India. The earliest mosque there is in #Kerala, claimed to have been built in 629 CE (three years before the Prophet Muhammad PBUH died).
At the dawn of the 8th c., India was ruled by numerous small kingdoms. Muslim traders In 711/2 CE, Muhammad bin Qasim, an Arab, led the conquest of #Sindh. This marks the first rule by a Muslim king in South Asia.
Muslim rulers of the region regarded the local Hindu population as "ahl al-dhimma." The Sun (Aditya) Temple in Multan, e.g., was allowed to carry on with worship and hosting pilgrims, dividing ⅓ of the revenue (keeping ⅔). Reversing course, Ismailis destroyed it in 986.
In the early 11th c., Mahmud of Ghazni, an Afghan, launched a series of plundering raids in India. However, he had no interest in ruling in India; he used the plunder to pay his armies for his westward aspirations.
Mahmud "famously" plundered the #Somnath Temple on the coast of peninsular Gujarat in 1024/5. #Persian sources claim that he carried the linga back to Ghazni. However, the wooden temple was restored quickly and a stone temple was constructed a century later (see photo).
In fact, no #Hindu sources note this sacking. Persian narratives suggest this event, along with his campaign against the Ismailis in Multan, helped Mahmud to gain an investiture from the #Abbasid Caliphate, which granted him the title of "Sultan" - the first to use it.
In his 1333 "Chapters on Various Pilgrimage Places" (VTK, Ch. 17), Jinaprabhasūri notes that in 1081 VS (1024/5 CE), "Gajjaṇa" attacked the temple.
The story of Mahmud's desecration came into Indian public consciousness in the 19th c., as #British colonialists deployed divide-and-rule tactics in the wake of the 1857 #SepoyRebellion, portraying it as evidence of Muslim antagonism against Hindus and #Hinduism.
Now for the main event. Between 1175 and 1192, another Afghan empire, the Ghurids, waged several campaigns against N. Indian kingdoms, finally defeating #Prithviraj Chauhan in 1192. Led by Mu'izz al-Din Muhammad, they established a permanent base in Delhi.
After Muhammad's assassination in 1206, his Mamluk (slave) General, Qutb al-Din Aybak declared independence from the Ghurids. This marks the beginning of the Delhi Sultanate.
Establishing their capital on the grounds of "King Prithviraj's Fort" (Qila Ra'i Pithora), one of their first tasks was to set up a Jama mosque. The Qubbat al-Islam (Dome of Islam) was built from parts taken, acc. to its inscription, from some 27 Hindu and Jain temples.
While temple parts were clearly used with faces effaced, expediency and conquest were likely the motivating factors. Quarrying new stone takes time; the same area of the temples was used for the mosque; and not all temples in the area were destroyed.
Until 1290, a series of Mamluk generals became sultans. They controlled much of N. India and the Ganges River.
In 1290, the Khaljis, a Turkish-Afghan family, ascended to power. Though short-lived, this dynasty would become the benchmark for future Sultans. Ala' al-Din (r. 1296-1316) launched a series of campaigns that greatly expanded the Sultanate, establishing a vast empire.
Although colonial and modern historians cast his conquest in religious terms and modern legend calls him "The Bloody" (Khuni), Ala' al-Din's army consisted of Hindu infantry (paiks) and disaffected Mongol generals.
They were also equal opportunity plunderers, taking equally, for example, from Hindu, Jain and Arab merchants in Cambay (modern Khambhat, Gujarat). This plunder and territory helped the Khaljis maintain a large army that fended off several #Mongol invasions.
The Khalji army launched campaigns in western India in 1298-1310, which brought many Jains into the Sultanate state. In 1313, a Jain temple at #Shatrunjay was plundered and the main image broken.
Several Jain sources note that the local governor, Alp Khan (d. 1316) worked with a Jain layman, #Samara Shah, to restore the temples and images in 1315.
Ala' al-Din employed Hindus and Jains to important positions. Thakkur Pherū, a Jain, held a high position in his mint, where he authored a number of #Apabhramsa works on #coin alloys ("billons"), #gemmology, and mathematics. He served the #Tughlag court, too. (See SR Sarma)
The Tughluqs succeeded the Khaljis in 1320. Muhammad (r. 1325-1351) expanded the empire to its greatest extent, holding more territory than any Indian empire since #Ashoka's Mauryan Empire (321-185 BCE).
I’ll be back in a few hours to talk more about the reign of Muhammad bin Tughluq. Preview: everything you know about him is wrong. Goodnight!
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Hi all, @mediaevalrevolt here, putting up my last #Tweethistorian thread today, this one on how the #Jacquerie ended and how people remembered (and forgot) it afterward. - jfb
When the cities abandoned the Jacques, the nobles' vengeance took free rein. They burned whole villages and slaughtered the innocent along with the guilty. Widows search for the bodies of their husbands to give them proper burial - jfb
Villagers fought back, though, and what started as a social uprising in May turned into a social war in June and July. - jfb
Welcome to #Tweethistorian 🧵4 by @mediaevalrevolt on the #Jacquerie. I am making Thanksgiving dinner (in Scotland 🏴) today and it's going to look exactly like this:
In the meantime, let me tell you about who actually joined the #Jacquerie and how they did and did not get along. Here I'm drawing from my article in Speculum last year and ch. 7 of my book. - jfb journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.108…
First up, men and women: All but 11 of the ca. 500 rebels we know by name were male, but this doesn't mean that women didn't participate or weren't important to the revolt. - jfb
Welcome to 🧵3 in this week’s #Jacquerie posts by @mediaevalrevolt . Today I'll talk rebel organization
Medieval revolts often look like undirected mob fury, but most, including the Jacquerie, had formal leadership directing the action - jfb
In the #Jacquerie many villages chose local captains to lead them. Local captains reported to a 'General Captain of the Countryside' named Guillaume Calle. The locations of some of these captains and their movements are shown in blue here. - jfb
Calle had a number of close associates - his 'top brass' - who rode with him and who carried his messages and decisions to local contingents (though they did not always do what he said - more on that anon) -jfb
In the previous thread we looked at premodern human rights discourse in Islamic intellectual history. In this final thread we will look at the relationship between Islam and modern human rights discourse.
So let us begin where the genesis of our question lies, at the birth of modern human rights themselves. After WWII the United Nations formed out of the League of Nations to represent the new world emerging out of the ashes of colonialism and world wars.
~aym
Out of these same ashes several forces, including religious forces such as the Catholic philosopher Jacques Maritain (d.1973), used
the post-war momentum to bind the new order to the highest ethical standards that went beyond the earlier international treaties.
The focus of this thread is this question: Are human rights a modern invention? This depends on your definition of human rights. If you believe human rights are exactly like we’ve them today in international law, then yes, that is modern. You can’t project those on the past.
~aym
To compare modern human rights law to Islam is to compare two things that developed in separate contexts, even though Muslim countries were deeply involved in developing modern international human rights law. This comparison is therefore about Islam *and* human rights.
~aym
But as we’ll see, ethical religions like Islam also developed over the centuries their own concepts of human rights. Both as a moral and legal concept, and already in medieval times. And it is of course this aspect of Islam we should compare to modern human rights discourse.
~aym
In a series of threads I’ll focus on another combination of Islamic studies and philosophy of religion: Islam and human rights.
This topic is mainly approached from the pov of legal studies whereby both Islam and human rights are approached as contemporary positive law.
~aym
But as I argue in my JIE article, only one part of Islam overlaps with what we would call positive law, while the rest would fall under legal theory and ethics.
Apart from the false reduction of Islam to law, there is also the issue of the historicity of human rights discourse. Are human rights a modern invention? Have we become more humane over the centuries? Were some ethical concepts unknowable in the centuries before?