Ghaznavids had large number of Hindus in their army

[Braith]

The core of the Ghaznavid army was the slave force (ghilman). The slave army of Ghaznavids consisted of Indians/Hindus, Turks and some Tajiks. The Indians/Hindus in the army resembled the Turks in their lack of home ties , lack of local connections. Like Arabs and Kurds, the Indians/Hindus had their own commander, the "Sipahsalar-i-Hinduyan" , and had their own quarters in Ghazni. Religion was not bar to their employment , and the anonymous historian of Sistan (in Tarikh-i-Sistan) complains bitterly of the slaughter and violence to the Muslims and Christians of Zarang in 1003 AD by Mahmud's pagan Indian troops.

The Turks predominated in the slave army but Hindu soldiers formed a counterweight to the Turk soldiers. When the Turkish commander of the army in India, Ahmad Inaltegin , proved rebellious , Sultan Masud have this important post to a Hindu ghulam , one Tilak , formerly an official translator in the administration. The Indian campaigns of Ghaznavids provided constant supply of the Indian ghulams. In one of the campaign, 53,000 captives were carried off from Qannauj , and those slaves could be bought for two to ten dirhams in Ghazni.

Hindu soldiers were generally more reliable and loyal than Turks. When the brief reign of Muhammad bin Mahmud Ghaznavi was collapsing and many if his troops were defecting to his elder brother Masud, it was Muhammad's Hindu soldiers under their commander Suvendhray who remained loyal.

Reference: "Ghaznaved military organization" by C.E.Bosworth

 

[!eon]

That's how 100% pure BS looks like

 

[ebrahym]

The core of the Ghaznavid army was the slave force (ghilman). The slave army of Ghaznavids consisted of Indians/Hindus, Turks and some Tajiks. The Indians/Hindus in the army resembled the Turks in their lack of home ties , lack of local connections. Like Arabs and Kurds, the Indians/Hindus had their own commander, the "Sipahsalar-i-Hinduyan" , and had their own quarters in Ghazni. Religion was not bar to their employment , and the anonymous historian of Sistan (in Tarikh-i-Sistan) complains bitterly of the slaughter and violence to the Muslims and Christians of Zarang in 1003 AD by Mahmud's pagan Indian troops.

The Turks predominated in the slave army but Hindu soldiers formed a counterweight to the Turk soldiers. When the Turkish commander of the army in India, Ahmad Inaltegin , proved rebellious , Sultan Masud have this important post to a Hindu ghulam , one Tilak , formerly an official translator in the administration. The Indian campaigns of Ghaznavids provided constant supply of the Indian ghulams. In one of the campaign, 53,000 captives were carried off from Qannauj , and those slaves could be bought for two to ten dirhams in Ghazni.

Hindu soldiers were generally more reliable and loyal than Turks. When the brief reign of Muhammad bin Mahmud Ghaznavi was collapsing and many if his troops were defecting to his elder brother Masud, it was Muhammad's Hindu soldiers under their commander Suvendhray who remained loyal.

Reference: "Ghaznaved military organization" by C.E.Bosworth

ghaznavi had a considerable number of hindus in his Army but they were not very large
rest in the article is nothing far from truth

 

[Braith]

ghaznavi had a considerable number of hindus in his Army but they were not very large
rest in the article is nothing far from truth

The regular slave army , consisting of Turks and Hindus, was the core/nucleus of their army, not the entire army. Large number of Afghans and Khilji nomads, in the surroundings of Ghazni, used to get recruited on the occasions of campaigns .

The Hindu soldiers in the contemporary sources have been clearly called "ghilman" and "mamalik", meaning slaves. They were slave soldiers like Central Asian Turks. In contrast local Khiljis and Afghans were recruited as free non-regular mercenaries on the occasion of campaigns.

 

[ebrahym]

The regular slave army , consisting of Turks and Hindus, was the core/nucleus of their army, not the entire army. Large number of Afghans and Khilji nomads, in the surroundings of Ghazni, used to get recruited on the occasions of campaigns .

The Hindu soldiers in the contemporary sources have been clearly called "ghilman" and "mamalik", meaning slaves. They were slave soldiers like Central Asian Turks. In contrast local Khiljis and Afghans were recruited as free non-regular mercenaries on the occasion of campaigns.

as i said nothing you said is far from simple truth and is the truth described in simplest tongue
but then again i would say Hindus made up a considerable amount of his regular troops and the mercenaries hired during campaigns with hindu origins is another thing
all in all Ghaznavis main Army was slave
accompanied by his own people during numerous raids
he mainly used his hindu troops towards charging south and west as you clearly mentioned in OP about Zarang
but his campaigns in east usually did not use those troops who remained stationed in ghazni as guards

nevertheless great share

 

[Kambojaric]

Are there any primary sources on this topic? I wouldn't be surprised if Punjabi's and Hindkos (many if not most of whom will have originally been Hindu) would have joined armies such as Mahmuds as mercenaries. Whether they remained Hindu is another matter but a soldier is a soldier, and fighting is how he earns his bread and butter.

Folklore for example states that a member of my tribe Hasan Mahmudi Kamboh (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hasan_Mahmudi_Kamboh) fought in Ghaznavis army. His descendants became the nawabs of meerut and rose to high ranks during Mughal rule.

Hence its perfectly plausible that Punjabi Hindus during this period joined Turkish armies (and by my speculation became Muslim as well).

 

[Braith]

Are there any primary sources on this topic? I wouldn't be surprised if Punjabi's and Hindkos (many if not most of whom will have originally been Hindu) would have joined armies such as Mahmuds as mercenaries. Whether they remained Hindu is another matter but a soldier is a soldier, and fighting is how he earns his bread and butter.

Folklore for example states that a member of my tribe Hasan Mahmudi Kamboh (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hasan_Mahmudi_Kamboh) fought in Ghaznavis army. His descendants became the nawabs of meerut and rose to high ranks during Mughal rule.

Hence its perfectly plausible that Punjabi Hindus during this period joined Turkish armies (and by my speculation became Muslim as well).

I doubt that. The Hindus in Ghaznavid army are clearly mentioned as "ghilman" and "mamalik", meaning slaves......and they were captives from Indian campaigns of Ghaznavids, including Peshawar and Punjab. The free mercenaries in Ghazni's army were either Afghans or Khiljis from the environs of Ghazni. While the free regular corps (other than slave corps) mostly consisted of Arabs, Kurds and Khorasanians. The contemporary sources are that of Utbi, Bayhaiqi and Gardezi.

The Komboh nawab claiming to be wazir of Mahmud Ghaznavi, is a false one not corroborated by any contemporary or near contemporary source. Such claims have been made by several such nawabs in India to make their genealogy and history illustrious.

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

Need to add that the Hindus mentioned here were ancestors of Eastern Pakistanis and Sikhs - not ancestors of today's Ganga and Deccan landers. No one in their right mind would recruit small sized races from the swamps.

pathetic.. No proud people would claim something like that..

 

[Kabira]

Need to add that the Hindus mentioned here were ancestors of Eastern Pakistanis and Sikhs - not ancestors of today's Ganga and Deccan landers. No one in their right mind would recruit small sized races from the swamps.

In Zarang? These "hindus" we most likely locals of current day Afghanistan. Before Ghaznavi these people were "hindus" kaffirs or what ever you call them.

 

[Hellraiser007]

Need to add that the Hindus mentioned here were ancestors of Eastern Pakistanis and Sikhs - not ancestors of today's Ganga and Deccan landers. No one in their right mind would recruit small sized races from the swamps.

Yes definitely not Deccans or Ganga landers because no one can employ patriots against their own land.

 

[Mamluk]

Poor Hindus of that part whose bravery was reduced to either change of faith or enslavement.... All hail to bravery of mass murderers ....

All soldiers were generally slaves. Voluntary conscription like today did not exist in that age. Even the Turks were slaves. They were slaves to their own non-Muslim kings and later to Mahmud.
Anyways once their armies were destroyed, they had only 2 options: be a soldier in the Ghaznavid army OR stay unemployed.

No change of faith was not required. The non-Muslims soldiers were used to keep the Muslim armies in check, and vice versa. Divide & rule.

Yes definitely not Deccans or Ganga landers because no one can employ patriots against their own land.

British used Deccan and Ganga sepoys to fight against their own land, in hundreds of thousands. Where was this patriotism?

But later British realized their mistake and started getting more selective (once they occupied Pakistan) and only hired from the martial races.

pathetic.. No proud people would claim something like that..

We need to own our history.

Hindus meant people living in the Indus plains - it did not necessarily refer to any particular religion, though back then the majority was non-Muslim.

Indians would have you believe that Hindu means (tropical) Indian, and that in turn means this land always belonged to a country called India.

Need to destroy this distorted narrative.

In Zarang? These "hindus" we most likely locals of current day Afghanistan. Before Ghaznavi these people were "hindus" kaffirs or what ever you call them.

The kaffirs were brought to Zaranj to suppress rebellions - they were not native to Zaranj. OP:

historian of Sistan (in Tarikh-i-Sistan) complains bitterly of the slaughter and violence to the Muslims and Christians of Zarang in 1003 AD by Mahmud's pagan Indian troops.

Afghanistan was never mostly Hindu. The one north-Indian origin religion that made the greatest inroad in that region was Buddhism, which existed alongside other older religions like Zoroastrianism, etc.​

 

[Hindustani78]

Mahmud Ghaznavi who had succeeded his father, Subuktigin, in AD 997.


Ghaznavid government has been mainly relied on military system. Although number of armies of Saboktekin has not been clear, occurrence of several wars such as attack to Afghanistan and India required huge military force. Armies of Sultan Mahmud, infantry and cavalry, have been estimated about 100 thousand persons.

He had taken part in all of his father's campaigns against Jaipal, and knew the weakness of the Indian armies as well as the riches of the kings and temples. The series of invasions he launched against the sub-continent were to carry his armies farther than any previous Muslim ruler had penetrated. His first important battle was fought near Peshawar on November 28, 1001, and ended with the defeat and capture of his father's old opponent, Raja Jaipal.


acquired uncounted Hindus as prisoners of war ibanbi) and slaves(hand*) to Chazflln from Lamghan, Pcshewnr. Dhatia. Ihanesar. Nandana.Katinauj, Sarasali, Mausi and Sonepat.the battle of Peshawar, 100,000 men and women were taken as slave

 

[Kabira]

The kaffirs were brought to Zaranj to suppress rebellions - they were not native to Zaranj. OP

Brought from where? Not much details and Zarang is small town far away. I didn't mean they were from Zarang but most likely hindus from current day Afghanistan. These were all converted and soon there was no trace left of pre islamic Afghans.

 

[Braith]

Brought from where? Not much details and Zarang is small town far away. I didn't mean they were from Zarang but most likely hindus from current day Afghanistan. These were all converted and soon there was no trace left of pre islamic Afghans.

10th century sources like Hudud-i-Alam and Surat-ul-ard reveals that much of population of eastern Afghanistan in that period was already Muslim, and even Kabul city had mixed population of Muslims and Hindus under Hindu Shahis.

"Sirat-ul-ard" by Arab geographer ibni-Hawkal, written in 977 AD, says "Kabul is a town with a very strong castle, accessible only by one road : this is in the hands of Musalman ; but the town belongs to the infidel Indians" (English trans. by William Ouseley, p-226)

Hudud-i-Alam, written in 982 AD describes Kabul as " a borough possessing a solid fortress known for its strength. Its inhabitants are Muslims and Indians , and there are idol-temples in it. The royal power of Raja of Qannauj is not complete untill he has made a pilgrimage to those idol-temples , and here too his royal standard is fastened."

 

[Joe Shearer]

That's how 100% pure BS looks like

What is wrong? This is a fact that not many know, and that is why it seems unlikely. Please consult the sources.

Brought from where? Not much details and Zarang is small town far away. I didn't mean they were from Zarang but most likely hindus from current day Afghanistan. These were all converted and soon there was no trace left of pre islamic Afghans.

No, that was the correct account. These were captives in the wars, who were formed into military slave formations.

Need to add that the Hindus mentioned here were ancestors of Eastern Pakistanis and Sikhs - not ancestors of today's Ganga and Deccan landers. No one in their right mind would recruit small sized races from the swamps.

Really an abominable post.
Please don't let your prejudices interfere with the evidence. Look up Kanauj.

Are there any primary sources on this topic? I wouldn't be surprised if Punjabi's and Hindkos (many if not most of whom will have originally been Hindu) would have joined armies such as Mahmuds as mercenaries. Whether they remained Hindu is another matter but a soldier is a soldier, and fighting is how he earns his bread and butter.

Folklore for example states that a member of my tribe Hasan Mahmudi Kamboh (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hasan_Mahmudi_Kamboh) fought in Ghaznavis army. His descendants became the nawabs of meerut and rose to high ranks during Mughal rule.

Hence its perfectly plausible that Punjabi Hindus during this period joined Turkish armies (and by my speculation became Muslim as well).

Apart from the primary question that you put, which can be answered separately, the Kamboh is a very interesting ethnic group. They date back to very ancient times, and can be identified with the Scythians. No time now to digress on this, but even a cursory examination will be fascinating.