Muslims forces & Tamil Kingdoms
  • Hi All,

    Looking through the quiz from Venkat, I was beginning to wonder, what could have been the difference between the armies of the muslim raiders and Indian & Tamil kingdoms? Where were technically or numerically disadvantaged or did we simply not grow with the rest of the world, inspite of having such long contacts with the rest of the world through commerce & trade? Or simply the raiders were huge in number and continuation of petty fights that simply ruined the fight? Pandyas & chera were related to the Sinhalese kings, did they not get enough support from them? I am just wondering aloud.. Any thoughts?
  • Hi,

    May be we were(are) not ruthless/brutal like them. The codes of Tamil warrirors like don't kill women and children, don't hit at the back may had a negative impact for the our ancient warriors. The fight between the neibouring kingdoms was the major drawback india had IMO. But is it not surprising with the similar kind of cultural and lingual diversity european countries flourished like anything without having much of a fight among themselfs(????? i am dull with european history).
  • There has to be something more to this, than a simple a cultural difference and codes of war.
  • -Hi

    the first major muslim invasion was around 1314 ad

    at that time the cholas had been extinguished and the pandyas ruled
    from two capitals madurai and cannanore( samaya puram)

    there was a great fight between two pandya broithers.

    if you ask the weapons of both the muslim and hindu armies were the
    same.
    it was that the muslim army had the support of the rebels and natural
    enemies of the country thast they were attacking that mattered. in
    this caser sundara pandya and the hoysalas under vir bhallaala helped
    malik attack madurai.
  • Malik's incursion into the south was resisted by the kakatiyas of
    warrangal, the yadavas of deogiri and hoysalas.
    malik conquered all of them in different ways. but in a way he was
    focussed. he never wanted to rule the lands he conquered but only used
    them as stepping stones for further conquest.
    there were reports that he wanted to use the pandya kingdom as a
    spring board for a naval expedition to srilanka

    kafur was only after gold.
    the delhi sultanate was regularly attacked by mongols from central
    asia and had to maintain a huge army.
    the gold that was conquered from the south atleast served one purpose.
    it helped stop mongols at the gates of delhi.

    another thing that helped malik take madurai was speed. he found
    absolutely no resistance till the gates of madurai. that was mainly
    because the pandyas had exterminated almost all dynasties including
    the cholas.


    venketesh
  • dear sivaram,

    Man is essentially an animal only more refined. Fight
    from day 1 is the norm. Europe is no exception. There
    were fights between greece and sparta. Romans invaded
    other countries. While we should thank the european
    renaissance for many of the present day cultures, the
    fight among them continues till day. The first and
    second world wars left death and destruction among the
    european countries besides fall out elsewhere.Among
    the european union itself there is always an ego clash
    between england and france who are sworn foes (in
    subcosciousness too) and the story continues. After
    all europe is a tiny fraction of the entire world!


    I am also august at the brutality of our tamil kings
    who will hold aloft the head of the defeated king on
    the tower as a mark of victory.Even then there were
    poets who saw reason and moderated them somewhat. But
    let us not examine them with the present day
    standards. What was the code and fashion of today will
    be dispised as brutal tomorrow. But the eternal
    values enshired in our books of Virtue endure for
    eternity such as TIRUKKURAL. And there lies their
    charm. Illaya?
    yours sincerely,
    d.seshadri
  • An interesting fact told by an IIT Professor in another group related to this topic(hopefully).

    a bit of history :

    In the 9/10th century a few ministers to the king of northern India ( fore
    fathers of the pritiviraj-samyukda) proposed to build a strong wall,
    completely closing the kiber pass.( something similar to the the great wall
    of china) .

    The ministers advised the kind to levy a special "wall tax" on the people
    for the construction.

    But the people agitated and refused to pay the "wall tax". After some time,
    the tax proposal and the wall project was dropped.


    Many years after drooping the proposal Ghajini Mohammed was planning to
    visit india and found the kiber pass to be the effortless way to enter. He
    succeeded and looted all the wealth and returned .

    He used that route to repeatedly visit india in the 9th/10th century. In a
    span of 20 years he made a total of 17 visits. Not even once he failed.
    Every time he went back with tones and tonne of gold snatched from the
    public.

    When the brilliant ministers proposed to completely close the kiber pass by
    building a strong wall, all the people should have contributed immediately
    and should have completed it .

    unlike the thousands of kilometer length of the great wall of china, this
    wall needed to be just a few kilometres long . The money and effort needed
    to build the wall was not even point one percent of what was lost for not
    contributing the construction of the wall.

    The morel of the story : Contribute for the right common cause.
    ( btw this is not a story.
    this is a recorded history of india)
  • Thank you Siva for an interesting topic.
  • -Hi Sivaram

    2 points

    khyber pass I think is on a range of mountains called hindu kush.
    named meaning " killer of hindus"

    whether it was the indian invader they meant or indian slaves is still
    a bone of contention.

    no wall however big can be a deterent to a determined invader.
    even the chinese great wall was crossed several times, not by
    demolition or assault but by simple bribery.

    the last time an army crossed it was in 1644, when the Manchus crossed
    the Wall by convincing an important chinese general Wu Sangui to open
    the gates of Shanhai Pass and allow the Manchus to cross. Legend has
    it that it took three days for the Manchu armies to pass. After the
    Manchu conquered China, the Wall was of no strategic value, mainly
    because the Manchu extended their political control on either side of
    it.

    warrangal fort had two surrounding walls. the middle space had ponds
    and rice fields. so a siege could last indefinitely. but malik
    conquered it using fire arrows. arrows with tips of a concoction of
    camel dung, plant fibre and coal dust where the fire would not be put
    off was used on the rice field which were ripe and dry.

    yesterday's question of whether the muslim invaders were different .my
    answer would be one man was different. malik kafur. but or him still
    the muslims would have come but a century or so later.
    regareds
    venketesh
  • Sir,
    I beg to differ here, Hoysalas and Chalukyas were always interferring with someone or the other. Hoysalas have supported cholas against pandiyas and again vice-versa also and Chalukyas were supporting Pandyas and Cholas against Pallavas. Pallavas internal fighting brought about the chola empire, vijaylaya supporting one brother against the other. Muslims were allowed to come in the same way by the Pandyas, who had outlived every other dynasty by that time.

    Pandyas had began their infighting during the time of cholas(Vira rajendra aiding and fighting Veera Pandian and Vikrama Pandiyan along with Sinhala Dantanayaka & Jagatvijayan. Singala Karunkasu introduced into Pandiya territory at this time). My other question is why Muslim raider, why did they not involve the Sinhala kings, being related to them??
  • "warrangal fort had two surrounding walls. the middle space had ponds
    and rice fields. so a siege could last indefinitely. but malik
    conquered it using fire arrows. arrows with tips of a concoction of
    camel dung, plant fibre and coal dust where the fire would not be put
    off was used on the rice field which were ripe and dry"

    During the crusades, the muslim defenders were using naptha(sticky fire) on the siege weapons of the crusading europeans. A simply but deadly concotion, that sticks and burns out the entire siege weapon, rendering them useless.
  • Hi

    the pandyas were at logger heads with the sinhalas during 1290-1310

    parakrama bahu the sinhala king was in the forest waging a guerilla
    battle.

    a group of generals called ariyan chakravattis were ruling the lands
    of lanka on behalf of the pandyas.( they later declared independence)

    the sinhalas had great reason to hate the pandyas.
    first kulasekharans brother vikrama and his illegitimate son
    veerapandiya whipped them in the battlefield.

    the latter( thought to have) taken the most precious treasure of the
    sinhalas- buddha's tooth from the hill fortress of abhaya giri back to
    madurai.

    the ransom was peace and parakramabahu came all the way to madurai to
    beg for it.

    the second time the tooth was taken away was by the goan portugese in
    1610.

    allies or not, malik would have come to madurai anyway. he had fought
    tougher battles earlier and this wouldnt have dettered him.
    the support of hoysalas and sundara pandya was incidental. infact
    because sundara was accompanying malik made veerapandya the pandyan
    king run away without offering resistance.

    actually malik being a hindu convert and a eunuch had to have frequent
    victories to ensure his position in the delhi court.
  • Hi Venkatesh,

    That pretty much solves it as to why the pandyas did not go to Sinhalese for help, which was forthcoming when cholas were present.
  • Hi Nanda

    the pandyas had a mini civil war( not the huge one in the earlier
    century) just a few decades before malik came.

    two brothers were pitted against each other. kulasekaran the king and
    vikrama his brother and the commander of the forces in lanka.

    vikrama was hugely popular with the army and a shaken kulasekaran had
    to seek the support of the chera.
    vikrama lost, and was exiled. but to keep him quiet his daughter was
    married off to the chera king.
    the system worked perfectly.

    when kulasekara was murdered by his legitimate son sundara there was
    some more strife. veera pandya his illegitimate son took on sundara
    chased him out and ruled madurai for quite some years.

    sundara met malik when malik had already crossed hoysala territory.(
    thiruvannamalai?) it is assumed by many that sundara went all the way
    to delhi to request help which is now considered wrong.

    after the first defeat by muslims vikrama pandya came back from exile
    he joined with his grand son the chera king's son and attacked
    madurai. he was repulsed in a rare show of unity between veera and
    sundara. then their history becomes obscure.

    when ulugh( thuklak) came in 1320 he defeats and kills a pandya king
    called parakrama.most possibly belonged to the next generation.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Top Posters