Lodi dynasty

The Lodi dynasty (or Lodhi) was an Afghan dynasty that ruled the Delhi Sultanate from 1451 to 1526. It was the last dynasty of the Delhi Sultanate, and was founded by Bahlul Khan Lodi when he replaced the Sayyid dynasty.

Bahlul Lodi

• According to Abdullah, the Sultan plundered Nimsar Misrik in Hardoi district and “depopulated it of all riff-raff and undesirable elements.”
  • Abdullah, Tarikh-i-Daudi, Bankipore Ms. Text, ed. by S.A. Rashid, Aligarh.
  • Quoted from Lal, K. S. (1994). Muslim slave system in medieval India. New Delhi: Aditya Prakashan. Chapter 6

• Abbas relates how Sultan Bahlul Lodi was at first just one of many petty kings of Northern India who was left at peace so long as he remained stuck within the walls of Delhi, but whose city was besieged by the sultan of Jaunpur as soon as he had left it on an expedition to subdue Multan. Bahlul, however, knew his rivals’ weak spot. He told his nobles that none of these kings had a ‘national [gaumdar] following of their own’, whereas, far in the northwest, he had a large number of kinsmen who were valorous and poor and who, if brought to India, would firmly establish his hold over the country. A message was sent to the chiefs of Afghanistan in which Bahlul told them that the preservation of the honour of their kinswomen in Delhi was their affair as well as his. He would share all his possessions with them, he said, as with brothers, keeping only the sovereignty of India for himself. And so they descended to the plains ‘like ants and locusts’, as the usual cliché has it, to serve Bahlul. The Jaunpur king could not withstand these spirited tribesmen. It is true that he had ‘elephants like mountains’ and ‘innumerable zamindars’, but he lacked, Abbas implies, the human resources that Bahlul now commanded: ‘dear and near ones ... imbued with the spirit of honour and prestige’. Jaunpur was defeated. The Afghans were richly rewarded with iqca‘s (fiefs) and more of them began to stream into Hindustan every day.”
  • Dirk H.A. Kolff - Naukar, Rajput, and Sepoy_ The Ethnohistory of the Military Labour Market of Hindustan, 1450 1850 (1990, Cambridge University Press) 33-4. also quoted in Jain, M. (2010). Parallel pathways: Essays on Hindu-Muslim relations, 1707-1857.

• Like Ikhtiyaruddin Bakhtiyar Khalji before him, Bahlul Lodi also turned a freebooter in his exertions to attain to power and with his gains from plunder built up a strong force. This policy of totally destroying villages and towns continued even when he became the Sultan.
  • Lal, K. S. (1994). Muslim slave system in medieval India. New Delhi: Aditya Prakashan. Chapter 6

• [T]hey will get rid of the ignominy of poverty and I shall gain ascendancy.
  • Bahlul Lodi's invitation to the the Afghans of Roh to serve him in India, as quoted by Satish Chandra, History of Medieval India (2007), p. 177, with the comment of Abbas Sarwani: "On receipt of these farmans, the Afghans of Roh came like locusts to join the service of Sultan Bahlul."

Sikandar Lodi

A

• He was so zealous a Musulmán that he utterly destroyed divers places of worship of the infidels, and left not a vestige remaining of them. He entirely ruined the shrines of Mathura, the mine of heathenism, and turned other principal Hindu places of worship into caravansarais and colleges. Their stone images were given to the butchers to serve them as meat-weight, and all the Hindus in Mathura were strictly prohibited from shaving their heads and beards, and performing their ablutions.
  • From the Tarikh-i-Da‘udi, as quoted by H. M. Elliot, The History of India, as Told by Its Own Historians, Vol. IV (1872), p. 447

• It is also related of this prince, that before his accession, when a crowd of Hindus had assembled in immense numbers at Kurkhet, he wished to go to Thanesar for the purpose of putting them all to death...'He was so zealous a Musalman that he utterly destroyed diverse places of worship of the infidels, and left not a vestige remaining of them. He entirely ruined the shrines of Mathura, the mine of heathenism, and turned other principal Hindu places of worship into caravansarais and colleges. Their stone images were given to the butchers to serve them as meat-weight, and all the Hindus in Mathura were strictly prohibited from shaving their heads and beards, and performing their ablutions...'
  • Abdullah, Tarikh-i-Daudi, Tarikh-i-Da‘udi in Elliot and Dowson, History of India as told by its own Historians, 8 Volumes, Allahabad Reprint, 1964. Eliot and Dowson, Vol. IV, pp. 439-467

• In that year the Sultan sent Khawas Khan to take possession of the fort of Dhulpur [Dholpur]. The Raja of that place advanced to give battle, and daily fighting took place. The instant His Majesty heard of the firm countenance shown by the rai of Dhulpur in opposing the royal army, he went there in person; but on his arrival near Dhulpur, the rai made up his mind to fly without fighting' He (Sikandar) offered up suitable thanksgivings for his success, and the royal troops spoiled and plundered in all directions, rooting up all the trees of the gardens which shaded Dhulpur to the distance of seven kos. Sultan Sikandar stayed there during one month, erected a mosque on the site of an idol-temple, and then set off towards Agra...
  • Abdullah, Tarikh-i-Daudi, Tarikh-i-Da‘udi in Elliot and Dowson, History of India as told by its own Historians, 8 Volumes, Allahabad Reprint, 1964. Eliot and Dowson, Vol. IV, pp. 439-467

• Sultan Sikandar passed the rainy season of that year at Agra. After the rising of the star Canopus, he assembled an army, and set forth to take possession of Gwalior and territories belonging to it. In a short space of time he took most of the Gwalior district, and after building mosques in the places of idol-temples returned towards Agra...'Sultan Sikandar, after the lapse of two years, in AH 913 (AD 1507) wrote a farman to Jalal Khan, the governor of Kalpi, directing him to take possession of the fort of Narwar' Jalal Khan Lodi, by the Sultan's command, besieged Narwar, where Sultan Sikandar also joined him with great expedition. The siege of the fort was protracted for one year' Men were slain on both sides. After the time above mentioned, the defenders of the place were compelled, by the want of water and scarcity of grain, to ask for mercy, and they were allowed to go forth with their property; but the Sultan destroyed their idol-temples, and erected mosques on their sites. He then appointed stipends and pensions for the learned and the pious who dwelt at Narwar, and gave them dwellings there. He remained six months encamped below the fort.'
  • Abdullah, Tarikh-i-Daudi, Tarikh-i-Da‘udi in Elliot and Dowson, History of India as told by its own Historians, 8 Volumes, Allahabad Reprint, 1964. Eliot and Dowson, Vol. IV, pp. 439-467

F

• 'Sikundur Lody, having returned to Dholpoor, reinstated the Raja Vinaik Dew, and then marching to Agra, he resolved to make that city his capital. He stayed in Agra during the rains, but in the year AH 910 (AD 1504), marched towards Mundril. Having taken that place, he destroyed the Hindoo temples, and caused mosques to be built in their stead.'...'Having returned to Agra, the King proceeded in the year AH 912 (AD 1506) towards the fort of Hunwuntgur, despairing of reducing Gualiar. Hunwuntgur fell in a short time, and the Rajpoot garrison was put to the sword, the temples were destroyed, and mosques ordered to be built in their stead...
  • Tarikh-i-Firishta, translated by John Briggs under the title History of the Rise of the Mahomedan Power in India, first published in 1829, New Delhi Reprint 1981, Vol. I, p.338-343

• In the following year (AH 913, AD 1506), the king marched against Nurwur, a strong fort in the district of Malwa, then in possession of the Hindoos. The Prince Julal Khan governor of Kalpy, was directed to advance and invest the place; and should the Hindoos resist, he was required to inform the King' The King remained for the space of six months at Nurwur, breaking down temples, and building mosques. He also established a college there, and placed therein many holy and learned men.'...He was firmly attached to the Mahomedan religion, and made a point of destroying all Hindoo temples. In the city of Mutra he caused musjids and bazars to be built opposite the bathing-stairs leading to the river and ordered that no Hindoos should be allowed to bathe there. He forbade the barbers to shave the beards and beads of the inhabitants, in order to prevent the Hindoos following their usual practices at such pilgrimages
  • Tarikh-i-Firishta, translated by John Briggs under the title History of the Rise of the Mahomedan Power in India, first published in 1829, New Delhi Reprint 1981, Vol. I, p.338-343

G

• One may very well ask the purveyors of this puerile propaganda that if the record of Islam in medieval India was so bright and blameless, where is the need for this daily ritual of whitewashing it. Hindu heroes like Chandragupta Maurya, Samudragupta, Harihar, Bukka, Maharana Pratap, and Shivaji, to name only a few of the notables, have never needed any face-lift. Why does the monstrous men of an Alauddin Khalji, a Firuz Shah Tughlaq, a Sikandar Lodi, and an Aurangzeb, to name only the most notorious, pop out so soon from the thickest coat of cosmetics?
  The answer is provided by the Muslim historians of medieval India. They painted their heroes in the indelible dyes of Islamic ideology. They did not anticipate the day when Islamic imperialism in India will become only a painful memory of the past. They did not visualise that the record of Islam in India will one day be weighed on the scales of human values. Now it is too late for trying to salvage Islam in medieval India from its blood-soaked history. The orthodox Muslim historians are honest when they state that the medieval Muslim monarchs were only carrying out the commandments of Islam when they massacred, captured, enslaved, and violated Hindu men, women and children; desecrated, demolished, and destroyed Hindu places of worship; and dispossessed the Hindus of all their wealth. The Aligarh “historians” and their secularist patrons are only trying to prop up imposters in place of real and living characters who played life-size roles in history.
  • Sita Ram Goel: The Story of Islamic Imperialism in India

H

• He thus put an end to all the idolatrous rites of the infidels there; and no Hindu, if he wished to have his head or beard shaved, could get a barber to do it. Every city thus conformed as he desired to the customs of Islam.
  • The History and Culture of the Indian People, Delhi Sultanate, p 626

L

• Sikandar Shah had ruled for twenty-nine years, full of glory and distinction. He was the greatest ruler of the Lodi dynasty, and far outshone both his father Bahlil and his son Ibrahim. During his reign he had retrieved the prestige of the Sultanate and extended its territories... As a king as well as a man, Sikandar Lodi has earned high praise at the hands of Muslim historians. According to them he was verging almost on the ideal. He was averse to pomp and show and rebuked those who wasted money on ostentation. To his sagacity were added a liberal, polite and charitable disposition.... Although a just monarch, Sikandar Lodi could not rise above his religious prejudices. Indeed he revived some of those instruments of tyranny which had lain dormant for many years past. After Timur’s departure the Sultanate had got busy in recapturing and consolidating its lost ground. Here and there a Hindu might have been harshly treated or a temple broken, but by and large the fifteenth century Sultans of Delhi had not indulged in any senseless persecution. During this period the Sultanate was not so powerful as to be able to oppress the Hindus. It could not also antagonise the Hindu population in the interest of its own survival. Sikandar Lodi had succeeded in re-establishing the authority of the Sultanate on quite a firm basis. He was thus in a position to deal with the Hindus in a stern manner, and he did so. Even as a youth he had expressed a desire to put an end to the Hindu bathing festival at Kurukshetra (Thanesar). Such a prince could not have made a tolerant king, and many incidents are related pointing to his uncompromising attitude. But they are mere incidents and they do not point to a definite and persistent policy of persecution. An instance is the oft-quoted case of Bodhan or Naudhan Brahman. Bodhan lived at Kaner, near Lakhnor in Sambhal. He had declared that “Islam was true, but his own religion was also true.’’ Considering his views the Brahman seems to have been a disciple of Kabir or Ramanand. When the assertion of Bodhan became public there were protests from the ’Ulama. The Sultan summoned Qazi Piyéraé and Shaikh Badr from Lakhnor and many other doctors from ‘“‘all directions’ to deliberate on Bodhan’s claim. The discussions must have been exceedingly interesting, but the details are not known to us. All the learned men, however, gave the stereotyped verdict that the Brahman should either embrace Islam or die. Bodhan chose death...
  • K.S. Lal, Twilight of the Sultanate (1963) p. 185 ff.

• But some other acts of his, which are boastfully mentioned by Persian chroniclers, do defy justification. These are not given chronologically and we have no context of circumstances to find an explanation for them. It is said that in Mathura “and other places” he turned temples into mosques, and established Muslim Sarais, colleges and bazars in the Hindu places of worship.' The author of the Tartkh-i-Daidi adds that idols were given to butchers who used them as meat-weights. Mathura, one of the most venerable cities of the Hindus, associated with the life of Lord Krishna, had the strange fate of being situated between the two capitals of the Sultanate—Agra and Delhi. Time and again it suffered from the ravages of the iconoclasts right up to the time of Aurangzeb. That Sikandar’s bigotry found expression there is not surprising. But what were the ‘“‘other places’? Details given hint at Anahabad and Varanasi. It is mentioned that barbers were forbidden from shaving the Hindus at Mathura. Even bathing at these holy places was discouraged... Indeed the few facts mentioned by the chroniclers about Sikandar’s fanaticism are of the common type witnessed here and there throughout the Muslim rule in India.... Thus there does not seem to be anything extraordinary in the acts and policies of Sikandar Lodi.... in the last chapter. In such an atmosphere the few acts of intolerance on the part of Sikandar Lodi appeared to be so much out of tune with the spirit of the age that they shocked even the Persian chroniclers. In the fourteenth century, Sikandar Lodi’s attitude would have caused no surprise. He would have been considered one among the common one of monarchs. But in the fifteenth century his bigotry was particularly noticeable. Hence the assertion of the chroniclers.
  • K.S. Lal, Twilight of the Sultanate (1963) p. 185 ff.

• From 1501 to 1505 Sikandar Lodi sacked Dholpur, a dependency of Gwalior, so thoroughly that trees and orchards extending to fourteen miles around were “torn up from roots”. Houses and temples were destroyed and mosques built with their debris.”’ (57)
  • Lal, K. S. (1995). Growth of scheduled tribes and castes in medieval India. New Delhi: Aditya Prakashan.

• The Sultan set out for conquering the fort of Narwar. Those inside the fort asked for refuge when they became helpless because of the dearness of grains and scarcity of water; they sought security of their lives and left the fort together with their goods. The Sultan took over the fort, demolished the temples and idol-houses in it and built mosques, and fixed scholarships and stipends for the teachers and the taught. He resided for six months in the fort.'...'The Islamic sentiment (in him) was so strong that he demolished all temples in his kingdom and left no trace of them. He constructed sarais, bazars, madrasas and mosques in Mathura which is a holy place of the Hindus and where they go for bathing. He appointed government officials in order to see that no Hindu could bathe in Mathra. No barber was permitted to shave the head of any Hindu with his razor. That is how he completely curtailed the public celebration of infidel customs...
  • Tarikh-i-Khan Jahan Lodi, Translated from the Urdu version by Muhammad Bashir Husain, second edition, Lahore, 1986, pp. 172-179. In Goel S.R. Hindu Temples What Happened to them. Tarikh-i-Khan Jahani wa Makhzan-i-Afghani of Khwajah Niamatallah Harwi, translated into Urdu by Muhammad Bashir Husain, second edition, Lahore, 1986.

• Sultan Sikandar was yet a young boy when he heard about a tank in Thanesar which the Hindus regarded as sacred and went for bathing in it. He asked the theologians about the prescription of the Shari'ah on this subject. They replied that it was permitted to demolish the ancient temples and idol-houses of the infidels, but it was not proper for him to stop them from going to an ancient tank. Hearing this reply, the prince drew out his sword and thought of beheading the theologian concerned, saying that he (the theologian) was siding with the infidels.
  • Tarikh-i-Khan Jahan Lodi, Translated from the Urdu version by Muhammad Bashir Husain, second edition, Lahore, 1986, pp. 172-179. In Goel S.R. Hindu Temples What Happened to them. Tarikh-i-Khan Jahani wa Makhzan-i-Afghani of Khwajah Niamatallah Harwi, translated into Urdu by Muhammad Bashir Husain, second edition, Lahore, 1986.

• Sikandar himself marched on Friday, the 6th Ramzan AH 906 (AD March, 1501), upon Dhulpur (Dholpur); but Raja Manikdeo, placing a garrison in the fort, retreated to Gwalior. This detachment however, being unable to defend it, and abandoning the fort by night, it fell into the hands of the Muhammadan army. Sikandar on entering the fort, fell down on his knees, and returned thanks to God, and celebrated his victory. The whole army was employed in plundering and the groves which spread shade for seven kos around Bayana were tom up from the roots'...'In Ramzan of the year 910 (AD 1504), after the rising of Canopus, he raised the standard of war for the reduction of the fort of Mandrail; but the garrison capitulating, and delivering up the citadel, the Sultan ordered the temples and idols to be demolished, and mosques to be constructed. After leaving Mian Makan and Mujahid Khan to protect the fort, he himself moved out on a plundering expedition into the surrounding country, where he butchered many people, took many prisoners, and devoted to utter destruction all the groves and habitations; and after gratifying and honouring himself by this exhibition of holy zeal he returned to his capital Bayana.'...'In 912, after the rising of Canopus, the Sultan went towards the fort of Awantgar' ...On the 23rd of the month, the Sultan invested the fort, and ordered the whole army to put forth their best energies to capture it' All of a sudden, by the favour of God, the gale of victory blew on the standards of the Sultan, and the gate was forced open by Malik 'Alau-d din' The Rajputs, retiring within their own houses, continued the contest, and slew their families after the custom of jauhar' After due thanks-giving for his victory, the Sultan gave over charge of the fort to Makan and Mujahid Khan, with directions that they should destroy the idol temples, and raise mosques in their places
  • Tarikh-i-Khan Jahan Lodi, in Elliot and Dowson, Vol. V, p. 97-101 . Elliot and Dowson, History of India as told by its own Historians, 8 Volumes, Allahabad Reprint, 1964.

• At the centre, Sultan Sikandar Lodi is credited with constructing mosques in almost all important cities including Lahore, Karnal, Hansi, Makanpur (District Kanpur) besides many in Delhi and Agra.13 In addition to the tombs in Lodi Gardens in Delhi, there are also so many other nameless tombs belonging to the Lodi period. Sikandar Lodi, like Firoz Tughlaq before him, is credited with constructing a canal in 1492-9314 and a Baoli in Rajasthan. In “Mathura and other place” like Allahabad and Banaras he turned temples into mosques, and established Muslim Sarais, colleges and bazars in Hindu places of worship. Like Firoz Tughlaq, Sikandar was also a great repairer and conserver of old Muslim monuments. An inscribed frieze at the entrance doorway of the Qutb Minar credits him with repairing this edifice in 1503 (909 H).
  • Lal, K. S. (1994). Muslim slave system in medieval India. New Delhi: Aditya Prakashan. Chapter 8

M

• These differences are generally sought to be explained away or minimised, and even eminent scholars demur to pointed references to the oppressive acts of bigoted Muslim rulers like Firuz Tughluq and Sikandar Lodi even though proved by the unimpeachable testimony of their own confessions. Such an attitude may be due to praiseworthy motives, but is entirely out of place in historical writings.
  • R.C. Majumdar, Volume 6: The Delhi Sultanate [1300-1526](xxxi)

• He got the temples of the infidels destroyed. No trace of infidelity was left at the place in Mathura where the infidels used to take bath. He got caravanserais constructed so that people could stay there, and also the shops of various professionals such as the butchers, bawarchis, nanbais and sweetmeatsellers. If a Hindu went there for bathing even by mistake, he was made to lose his limbs and punished severely. No Hindu could get shaved at that place. No barber would go near a Hindu, whatever be the payment offered.
  • Mathura (Uttar Pradesh) . Waqiat-i-Mushtaqi, by Shykh Rizqullah Mushtaqi, in: Uttara Taimura Kalina Bharata, Persian texts translated into Hindi by S.A.A. Rizvi, 2 Volumes, Aligarh, 1958-59. Vol I. p. 102 ff, and In Goel, S.R. Hindu Temples - What happened to them

• At the time of his return he restored the fort of Dholpur also to Binayik Deo, and having spent the rainy season in Agra after the rising of the Canopus in the year AH 910 (AD 1504), marched to reduce the fortress of Mandrayal, which lie took without fighting from the Rajah of Mandrayal, who sued for peace; he also destroyed all the idol-temples and churches of the place...'And in the year AH 912 (AD 1506), after the rising of the Canopus, he marched against the fortress of untgaRh and laid siege to it, and many of his men joyfully embraced martyrdom, after that he took the fort and gave the infidels as food to the sword' He then cast down the idol-temples, and built there lofty mosques.'183
  • Muntakhabut-Tawarikh, translated into English by George S.A. Ranking, Patna Reprint 1973, Vol. I, p. 420-22

N

• His faith (bigotry) in Islam was to that extent, that he went beyond the bounds even of excess. He levelled to the ground all the places of worship of the kafirs ; and left neither their name nor any vestige of them. In Mathurah and other places, where there are places for the ablution of the Hindus, he built serais, and bazaars, and mosques, and colleges, and employed men to prevent the Hindus from bathing. If any Hindu wanted to shave his beard or head in Mathurah, the barber refused to place his hand on his beard or head ; and he completely abolished all heathenish practices by public orders. He forbade the annual procession of the lance of Salar Masa'ud. He also prohibited the going of women to the tombs of holy men.
  • The Tabaqat-i-akbari Of Khwajah-Nizamuddin-Ahmad, Volume 1 [1]

• After the rainy season was over, he marched in Ramzãn AH 910 (AD February-March, 1505) for the conquest of the fort of Mundrãil. He stayed for a month near Dholpur and sent out armies with orders that they should lay waste the environs of Gwãlior and Mundrãil. Thereafter he himself laid siege to the fort of Mundrãil. Those inside the fort surrendered the fort to him after signing a treaty. The Sultãn got the temples demolished and mosques erected in their stead…
  • Sultãn Sikandar Lodî (AD 1489-1517) Mandrail (Madhya Pradesh)
  • Tabqãt-i-Akharî by Nizamuddin Ahmad.

• After the rainy season was over, he led an expedition towards the fort of Udit Nagar in AH 912 (AD 1506-07)… …Although those inside the fort tried their utmost to seek a pardon, but he did not listen to them, and the fort was breached at many points and conquered… The Sultãn thanked Allãh in the wake of his victory… He got the temples demolished and mosques constructed in their stead…
  • Sultãn Sikandar Lodî (AD 1489-1517) Udit Nagar (Madhya Pradesh)
  • Tabqãt-i-Akharî by Nizamuddin Ahmad.

• “After the rainy season was over, he made up his mind to take possession of the fort of Narwar which was in the domain of Mãlwã. He ordered Jalãl Khãn Lodî, the governor of Kãlpî, to go there and besiege the fort… The Sultãn himself reached Narwar after some time… He kept the fort under siege for a year… The soldiers went out to war everyday and got killed… “Thereafter the inhabitants of the fort were in plight due to scarcity of water and dearness of grains, and they asked for forgiveness. They went out with their wealth and property. The Sultãn laid waste the temples and raised mosques. Men of learning and students were made to reside there and given scholarships and grants. He stayed for six months under the walls of the fort.”
  • Sultãn Sikandar Lodî (AD 1489-1517) Narwar (Madhya Pradesh)
  • Tabqãt-i-Akharî by Nizamuddin Ahmad.

• “He was a stout partisan of Islãm and made great endeavours on this score. He got all temples of the infidels demolished, and did not allow even a trace of them to remain. In Mathurã, where the infidels used to get together for bathing, he got constructed caravanserais, markets, mosques and madrasas, and appointed there officers with instructions that they should allow no one to bathe; if any Hindû desired to get his beard or head shaved in the city of Mathurã, no barber was prepared to cut his hair.”
  • Sultãn Sikandar Lodî (AD 1489-1517) Mathura (Uttar Pradesh). Tabqãt-i-Akharî by Nizamuddin Ahmad.
  • Tabqat-i-Akhari, Translated from the Hindi version by S.A.A. Rizvi included in Uttara Taimur Kalina Bharata, Aligarb, 1958. Vol. I, In Goel, S.R. Hindu Temples - What happened to them

• “At the same time the Sultãn thought that though ‘Sultãn Sikandar had led several expeditions for conquering the fort of Gwãlior and the country attached to it but met with no success.’ Consequently he sent ‘Ãzam Humãyûn, the governor of Karã, with 300,000 horsemen and 300 elephants for the conquest of Gwãlior… After some time the royal army laid a mine, filled it with gunpowder, and set fire to it. He entered the fort and took possession of it after the wall of the fort was breached. He saw there a bull made of brass, which the Hindûs had worshipped for years. In keeping with a royal order, the bull was brought to Delhî and placed at the Baghdãd Gate. It was still there till the reign of Akbar. The writer of this history saw it himself.”
  • Sultãn Ibrãhîm Lodî (AD 1517-1526) Gwalior (Madhya Pradesh)
  • Tabqãt-i-Akharî by Nizamuddin Ahmad.

W

• Khawas Khan, who was the predecessor of Mian Bhua, having been ordered by the Sultan [Sikandar Lodi] to march towards Nagarkot, in order to bring the hill country under subjection, succeeded in conquering it, and having sacked the infidels temple of Debi Shankar, brought away the stone which they worshipped, together with a copper umbrella, which was placed over it, and on which a date was engraved in Hindu characters, representing it to be two thousand years old. When the stone was sent to the King, it was given over to the butchers to make weights out of it for the purpose of weighing their meat. From the copper of the umbrella, several pots were made, in which water might be warmed, and which were placed in the masjids and the Kings own palace, so that everyone might wash his hands, feet and face in them and perform" his purifications before prayers.
  • Nagarkot Kangra (Himachal Pradesh) . Waqi‘at-i-Mushtaqi in Elliot and Dowson, History of India as told by its own Historians, 8 Volumes, Allahabad Reprint, 1964. Eliot and Dowson, Vol. IV, pp. 544 ff

• [Rizqullah says that under Sikandar Lodi] one half of the country was assigned... to the Farmulis and the other half to other Afghan tribes.
  • Waqiat-i-Mushtaqi, trs. in E and D., IV, p.547. [2] quoted from Lal, K. S. (1990). Indian muslims: Who are they.

Y

• One day he ordered that an expedition be sent to Thaneswar, (the tanks at) Kurkaksetra should be filled up with earth, and the land measured and allotted to pious people for their maintenance, He was such a great partisan of Islam in the days of his youth..... Sultan Sikandar led a very pious life Islam was regarded very highly in his reign. The infidels could not muster the courage to worship idols or bathe in the (sacred) streams. During his holy reign, idols were hidden underground. The stone (idol) of Nagarkot, which had misled the (whole) world, was brought and handed over to butchers so that they might weigh meat with it.
  • Kurukshetra (Haryana) , Nagarkot Kangra (Himachal Pradesh) . Tarikh-i-Shahi, by Ahmad Yadgar, in: Uttara Taimura Kalina Bharata, Persian texts translated into Hindi by S.A.A. Rizvi, 2 Volumes, Aligarh, 1958-59. p. 322-331 ff Vol I, In Goel, S.R. Hindu Temples - What happened to them

Z

• In his time Hindu temples were razed to the ground, and neither name nor vestige of them was allowed to remain.
  • Zubdatu’t-Tawarikh in Elliot and Dowson, History of India as told by its own Historians, 8 Volumes, Allahabad Reprint, 1964. Eliot and Dowson, Vol. IV, pp. 187

• It is said that one day a Brahman declared in the presence of several Muhammadans that the religion of Islam was true, but that his own religion was also true. When this declaration reached the ear of the Doctors, they reported it to the Sultan and as he was remarkably fond of religious and legal questions and theological controversies, he summoned the learned from various quarters, and invited their opinion on what the Brahman had asserted. The learned gave it unanimously as their opinion that he should be imprisoned, and that he should then be desired to embrace Islam, and if he should reject it, that he should be slain. Accordingly, when the Brahman was desired to embrace the Muhammadan religion, he refused to do so, and he was put to death. Many other similar instances of his zeal for religion occurred during his reign.
  In his time, Hindu temples were razed to the ground, and neither name nor vestige of them was allowed to [p. 126] remain. In the city of Mathura, if a Hindu wished to have his head or beard shaved, there was not a barber that dared to comply. He prohibited the procession of the spear of Salar Mas’ud Ghazi, which went every year to Bahralch, and women were not allowed to go on pilgrimages to shrines.
  • Zubdatu-t Tawarikh of Shaikh Nuru-l Hakk. In The History of India as Told by its own Historians. The Posthumous Papers of the Late Sir H. M. Elliot. John Dowson, ed. 1st ed. 1867. 2nd ed., Calcutta: Susil Gupta, 1956, vol. 6, pp. 120-132. also in [3] [4] [5]
  • The same story is reported in Tarikh-i-Daudi: Sikandar Lodi’s “empire” was much smaller than that of Firuz Shah Tughlaq. But he enforced the “law” of Islam with no less zeal. A typical case of his reign is recorded by Abdulla in his Tarikhi-i-Daudi: “It is related in the Akbar Shahi that there came a Brahman by name Bodhan who had asserted one day in the presence of Musulmans that Islam was true, as was also his own religion. This speech of his was aired abroad, and came to the ears of the ulema… Azam Humayun, the governor of that district, sent the Brahman into the king’s presence at Sambal. Sultan Sikander …summoned all the wise men of note from every quarter… After investigating the matter, the ulema determined that he should be imprisoned and converted to Islam, or suffer death, and since the Brahman refused to apostatize he was accordingly put to death by the decree of the ulema. The Sultan after rewarding the learned casuists, gave them permission to depart.” Quoted from Goel, Sita Ram (2001). The story of Islamic imperialism in India. ISBN 9788185990231

Ibrahim Lodi

A

• At the same time the Sultan thought that though 'Sultan Sikandar had led several expeditions for conquering the fort of Gwalior and the country attached to it but met with no success.' Consequently he sent 'azam Humayun, the governor of Kara, with 300,000 horsemen and 300 elephants for the conquest of Gwalior' After some time the royal army laid a mine, filled it with gunpowder, and set fire to it. He entered the fort and took possession of it after the wall of the fort was breached. He saw there a bull made of brass, which the Hindus had worshipped for years. In keeping with a royal order, the bull was brought to Delhi and placed at the Baghdad Gate. It was still there till the reign of Akbar. The writer of this history saw it himself.
  • Tabqat-i-Akhari, Translated from the Hindi version by S.A.A. Rizvi included in Uttara Taimur Kalina Bharata, Aligarh, 1955, Vol. I, p. 236-37, In Goel, S.R. Hindu Temples - What happened to them

F

• “…The fortress of Badalgarh, which lies below the fortress of Gwalior, a very lofty structure, was taken from Rai Man Singh and fell into the hands of the Muslims, and a brazen animal which was worshipped by the Hindus also fell into their hands, and was sent by them to Agra, whence it was sent by Sultan Ibrahim to Dihli, and was put over the city gate. The image was removed to Fathpur in the year AH 992 (AD 1584), ten years before the composition of this history, where it was seen by the author of this work. It was converted into gongs, and bells, and implements of all kinds.”
  • Tãrîkh-i-Firishta by Firishta. Sultan Ibrahim Lodi (AD 1517-1526) Gwalior (Madhya Pradesh)

• “…The Dehly army, arriving before Gualiar, invested the place… After the siege had been carried on for some months, the army of Ibrahim Lody at length got possession of an outwork at the foot of the hill, on which stood the fort of Badilgur. They found in that place a brazen bull, which had been for a long time an object of worship, and sent it to Agra, from whence it was afterwards conveyed to Dehly, and thrown down before the Bagdad gate (AH 924, AD 1518).”
  • Tãrîkh-i-Firishta by Firishta. Sultãn Ibrãhîm Lodî (AD 1517-1526) Gwalior (Madhya Pradesh)

L

• “…When the thought occurred to Sultan Ibrahim, he sent ‘Ãzam Humayun on this expedition… The Afghan army captured from the infidels the statue of a bull which was made of metals such as copper and brass, which was outside the gate of the fort and which the Hindus used to worship. They brought it to the Sultan. The Sultan was highly pleased and ordered that it should be taken to Delhi and placed outside the ‘Red Gate’ which was known as the Baghdad Gate in those days. The statue was so fixed in front of the ‘Red Gate’ till the time of the Mughal emperor, Akbar the Great, who ordered in AH 999 that it be melted down and used for making cannon as well as some other equipment, which are still there in the government armoury. The author of this history… has seen it in both shapes.”
  • Sultan Ibrahim Lodi (AD 1517-1526) Gwalior (Madhya Pradesh).Tarikh-i-Khan Jahan Lodi, translated by Muhammad Bashir Husain, second edition, Lahore, 1986, quoted in S.R. Goel, Hindu Temples What Happened to them, Vol. II

• In the long roll of the Sultans of Delhi, Ibrahim Lodi was the only one who died fighting on the field of battle. Therefore, about his bravery there can be no two opinions. In private life too his character was blemishless. He was kindly disposed towards his subjects. Their welfare was ever in his mind. He took a keen interest in the promotion of agriculture. During his reign, crops were abundant, food grains were cheap and the people in general lived happily in the midst of plenty.
  • K.S. Lal, Twilight of the Sultanate (1963) p. 225

S

• “It so happened that Raja Man, the ruler of Gwalior who had been warring with the Sultans for years, went to hell. His son, Bikarmajit, became his successor. The Sultan captured the fort after a hard fight. There was a quadruped, made of copper, at the door of the fort. It used to speak. It was brought from there and placed in the fort at Agra. It remained there till the reign of Akbar Badshah. It was melted and a cannon was made out of it at the order of the Badshah.”
  • Sultan Ibrahim Lodi (AD 1517-1526), Gwalior (Madhya Pradesh) Tarikh-i-Shahi, S.A.A. Rizvi in Uttara Taimur Kalina Bharata, Aligarh, 1955, Vol. I, p. 343 In Goel, S.R. Hindu Temples - What happened to them

Z

• In the year 950 H. (1542 CE) Puran-mal, son of Salhdi, held occupation of the fort of Raisin, and brought several of the neighbouring parganas under subjection. He had 1000 women in his harem, from the east and from Sind, and amongst them several Musulmanis, whom he made to dance before him. Sher Khan, with Musulman indignation, resolved to conquer the fort. After he had been some time engaged in investing it, an accommodation was proposed, and it was finally agreed that Puran-mal, with his family and children, and 4000 Rajputs of note, should be allowed to leave the fort ummolested. Several men learned in the law gave it as their opinion that they should all be slain, notwithstanding the solemn engagement which had been entered into. Consequently, the whole army, with the elephants, surrounded Puran-mal’s encampment. The Rajputs fought with desperate bravery, and after killing their women and children and then burning them, they rushed to battle, and were annihilated to a man.
  • Zubdatu-t Tawarikh of Shaikh Nuru-l Hakk. In The History of India as Told by its own Historians. The Posthumous Papers of the Late Sir H. M. Elliot. John Dowson, ed. 1st ed. 1867. 2nd ed., Calcutta: Susil Gupta, 1956, vol. 6, pp. 120-132.also in [6] [7] [8]