Last week, the media in India picked up a tweet by the Taliban leader, Anas Haqqani, after his visit to the mausoleum of Mahmud Ghaznavi. Anas Haqqani lauded him as a "great Muslim fighter”. He praised Ghaznavi, who had attacked Gujarat, plundered the famous Somnath temple, and broken its jyotirlinga (idol) in the 11th century.
Mahmud was the son of Sebuktigin, a Turkish slave, who in 977 became the ruler of Ghazna and established the Ghaznavid dynasty. He was the first independent king of the Turkic dynasty of the Ghaznavids and ruled until 1030 AD. His empire stretched from northern Iran to Punjab in India.
Ghaznavi is believed to have attacked and looted the wealthiest cities and temple towns in mediaeval India, such as Mathura and Somnath. He is said to have vowed to invade India once a year and, in fact, led about 17 such expeditions. The first large-scale campaign began in 1001 and the last ended in 1026. In 1025, Mahmud Ghaznavi raided Gujarat, plundering and destroying the Somnath temple. Lord Shiva is the temple's main deity. Ghaznavi targeted Hindu temples primarily because they were the centres of wealth, economics, and ideology of the people of India. He utilised the wealth to expand his capital of Ghazni.
Reading about Anas Haqqani’s tweet praising Mahmud Ghaznavi, I was reminded of Amish Tripathi’s book titled ‘Legend of Suheldev: The King who saved India’, which I read last year. This was my first exposure to Amish’s writing, even though Amish has been one of India’s most popular writers for many years.
Legend of Suheldev tells the story of King Suheldev of Shravasti, who was so moved by the looting and destruction of the magnificent temple of Lord Shiva at Somnath, that he decided to give up the comfort of royal life as a Prince, to wage guerrilla warfare against the Turks brought to India by Mahmud of Ghazni. During his depredations of northern India, Mahmud of Ghazni won over several old kingdoms who were forced to become his allies. When necessary, Suheldev also fought against these Turkic allies.
The story in Amish’s book begins with the killing of Suheldev’s elder brother, Malladev, while defending the Somnath Temple from Mahmud of Ghazni. As Suheldev’s father, King Mangaldhwaj of Shravasti, was unable to raise a credible force to defend the Somnath Temple, Suheldev decides to leave his princely life for the forest. He attracted others, similarly motivated to join him in his fight for the motherland. Stories of his bravery and patriotism spread, and so did his band of loyal fighters. Together they ensured that the enemies never rested in peace. Amish narrates many stories of Suheldev’s bravery and exceptional leadership. There were times when Suheldev and his fighters were forced into a corner. Each time, his exceptional presence of mind helped him to either inflict a defeat on the enemy or live to fight another day.
As the King of Shravasti, Suheldev systematically built alliances with neighbouring kingdoms. In Amish’s book, Suheldev sends his trusted envoy to the most powerful King in India, the legendary King Rajendra Chola. Strengthened by the formation of a confederacy and armed with the support of the mighty Chola King, Suheldev is well prepared for the Battle of Bahraich with the Turkic forces. Following a long and hard battle, which sees many ups and downs, the patriotic Indian forces led by King Suheldev inflict a crushing defeat on the Turkic forces. So comprehensive was the victory that the Turks did not return to India for over one and a half-century, choosing to carry out their depredations in other parts of the world instead! It is the legend of this victory that served as an inspiration for Amish’s interesting book.
The story of King Suheldev is based on a legend. Amish creatively weaves a story of exceptional leadership, demonstrated not just in the battlefield, but also in Suheldev’s treatment of different castes and religions; Indian Muslims along with fighters cutting across caste lines were amongst his closest associates.
I was as offended by the tweet mentioned in the first para as any other Indian. Through my agitation, I could also understand that history can be viewed differently based on the perspective of where one stands. The Afghan view of Mahmud of Ghazni perhaps differs from how Indians see him. However, the reference to the smashing of the ‘idol of Somnath’ temple is reminiscent of the unforgivable smashing of the Bamiyan Buddhas. Like others, Mahmud of Ghazni was attracted to India for her wealth. Today’s India is not just wealthy but also strong enough to defend itself.
