Fall of Ghazi Saiyyed Salar Masud

Ghazi Saiyyed Salar Masud was a Ghaznavid army general and the nephew of Sultan Mahmud Ghaznavi. He invaded India around 1031-33 AD. Probably he accompanied his uncle in the Ghaznavid raids on the Hindu temple at Somnath as a child. 

At the age of 16, he invaded India to propagate Islam. He captured Multan, Delhi, and Meerut with little resistance etc.  When he reached Delhi fresh reinforcements from Ghazni helped him in defeating Mahipal Tomar, the then ruler of Delhi. The kings of Kannauj welcome him. He dispatched separate armed contingents to capture Bahraich and Benares.

The local rulers, including the Raja of Bahraich (close to the Nepal boundary), formed an alliance against his army. To defeat these forces, Salar Masud himself arrived in Bahraich, in 1033 AD. Salar Masud had some initial successes until the arrival of Suhaldev. Suhaldev's army defeated Salar Masud, and masud was killed in ensuing battle. No prisoner of war was taken, no mercy was shown. All soldiers of Masud’s army were annihilated. The place, where their bodies were buried is known as Ganj-e-Shahidan, the colony of martyrs.

With the passage of time Masud’s grave has taken on a holy aura. It is now a Sufi Saint’s mazar  (shrine). People started coming here to seek mannat, the wishes they want to realise with the blessings of Sufi Saint Masud!

Both Hindus and Muslims visitors are oblivious of the historical events took place here centuries ago. For them this is merely a place, where they can seek mannat and hope to see them realised. Not many know who is buried there and with was intention he came to that area centuries ago. As usual, Muslim writers passed over this defeat of famous Ghaznavids. It broke their aura of Islamic invincibility, also the image of Hindu pusillanimity

.

This might have instilled new confidence in Hindus. Mahipal Tomar would later attack and got back Hansi and Thanesar (then called Sthaneshwar) from Madud; grandson of Md. Ghazni. Chauhan rulers also recorded their fight and victory against Ghaznavids.

This victory is not given its due in Indian historical narrative. This does not fit into natural narrative peddled by leftist’s historians that Hindus can’t fight and struggle.

Following is the version of Andre Wink from Al-Hind The Making of the Indo-Islamic World

“In 1030-31, a significant new initiative was the first invasion of Awadh under Sayyid Salar Mas'ud Ghazl, a nephew of Mahmud, who had been born in 1015. From a military point of view, it was a complete failure, and hardly any of the invaders returned alive. Nothing indicates, in other words, that Sayyid Salar's conquest was in any way permanent. An account of it is given in an historical romance written by a Sufi, 'Abd ar-Rahman Chishn, during the reign of the Mughal emperor jahangir, entitled Mir'at-i-Mas'ildl. This work is said by its author to have been mainly based on a book called the Tawarikh-i-Mahmildl, written by Muhammad Ghaznawl, a servant of Amlr Sabuktigln and one of the followers of Sayyid Salar who related events of which he had personal knowledge. There are also numerous tombs, scattered all over the northern districts of Awadh, which are said to cover the remains of martyrs of Sayyid  Salar's army………………….. Bahraich was probably reached in 1033, and Sayyid Salar appears to have been able to repeatedly defeat the local rais on the banks of the river Kosala (probably the Kauriala), until reinforcements arrived in the Hindu camp and the 'prince of martyrs' fell with virtually all his followers”

We have the capacity to venerate an invader as a saint, how many even know Suheldev?