Warfare of the Hindus

The Hindus is generic term to denote the inhabitantsPoros Armies lacked mobility and were slow moving
of India. The history of India is dotted with numerousaffairs. The Hindu Kings and Generals did not learn
wars and conflicts. In India, like the Greeks andanything from the Macedonian's. Generally, the
Chinese, the existence of a 'Heroic Age' in war isstrategy of the Magadha Kings centered on a huge
known. Manuals like the Arthashastra of KAUTILYAelephants force (e.g., Chandragupta 9,000 elephants,
indicate the prominence of war. The Army was calledHarsha 60,000 elephants etc). These were decisive in
the 6th of the seven essential elements in the state.positional warfare and jungle areas, but were found
But from all accounts no single king or soldier ofwanting against quick moving horsemen in the plains.
prominence arose. Battles were confined to multipleThe essence of the Turkish Islamic armies which the
duels between Charioteers accompanied by footHindus faced later was a controlled mobility and
soldiers.coordination ever large areas. The Hindu Armies used
At about this time the elephant was introduced into positional warfare could not understand or counter
war. The preference of the elephant over the horsethe Arab tactics of harassment and exhaustion
was probably dictated by necessity, as good breedscarried out by hordes of encircling, elusive mounted
of horses were not available. Though elephants hadarchers. The tactics of the Turku-Islamic Invaders
strength and terrifying appearance yet by all availablewere simple. They planned to surprise the enemy,
accounts they made a poor showing in battle.marching rapidly by day and night. In battle, they
Between 325-27 BC, Alexander invaded India.would seek to encircle the enemy by moving around
Alexander crossed the Hindu Kush and after a seriesone of his flanks. They also used the tactics of
of battles was met by king Poros on the bank of thesimulated flight before turning and outflanking the
river Jhelum. The battle is well documented andenemy.
Alexander won a Pyrrhic victory. From all accounts itIn contrast to this, Hindu Armies remained the same
was a bitter battle with the Greeks unable to makeas during the Magadha Empire. No innovations were
much headway. So fierce was the resistance thatmade and the art of war degenerated into a massed
Alexender's men refused to go forward. It was acharge with elephant and men. The Hindu's normally
decisive battle and heralded the end point of Greekwent to battle without a fixed plan. No contingency
conquest.was made as to what would be the next step if the
After the departure of Alexander to the time ofKing fell in the battle. Thus on the death of the
Harsha the composition of Hindu Armies and theirleader, Hindu Armies were liable to disintegrate, as
tactics and strategy in war did not alter appreciably.happened to King Dahir of Sind in 712 AD. Also Hindu
Chandragupta, Samudragupta, Yasodharan,Kings on their part generally allowed the initiative to
Skandagupta and Harsha are the important militarybe taken from their hands by their waiting for the
contributors of this period. But it appears that all ofArab-Turk hordes to attack first. Rajputs had
them lacked tactical sense, as the passes of thetremendous courage but could not produce and
Hindu-Kush were left unguarded. The Armies of thatoutstanding soldier.
period consisted of Foot Soldiers armed with spearsAn important date in the military history of the
and bows. There was also a corps of chariots andHindus is the invasion of Mohd Ghori. Ghori was
elephants. Earlier chariots had two horses, a driverdefeated at the first battle of Tarain by Prithviraj,
and a bowman. Later chariots had 4 horsemen andthe Hindu King. But the Hindus did not show any
carried 6 men - two archers, two drivers and twostrategic sense and did not pursue Ghori energetically.
shield bearers. Elephants had a pride of place in HinduGhori was able to get away and subsequently
Armies. They were defended by elaborate armour ofdefeated Prithviraj at the second battle of Tarain. In
steel. Elephants were trained to move into battle tothis battle Ghori had 120,000 men. The Rajput
the accompaniment of drums and couch-shells. Theprincess opposed him with 300,000 men and 3,000
commander-in-Chief normally mounted an elephantelephants. The forces of Ghori were divided into 4
and directed the battle. Cavalry was another arm.sections. Ghori proved himself a master General by
Though theoretically, it was rated above infantry butdividing his remaining forces of 10,000 horsemen each
practically it was neglected Arm. Cavalry was of twoand launched an enveloping attack. He also carried out
types - heavy and light. Mounted Cavalry men carrieda strategic retreat and counter attack that sealed
spears and swords, but mounted bowmen werethe fate of Prithviraj. The Hindus despite their
never developed.incredible numbers were defeated by Ghori. Ghori's
The Hindu Army was essentially a voluntary force.invasion marked the end of Hindu domination over
The recruitment was carried out accordingly. FromNorthern India.
the Arthasastra, we learn that the recruitment wasThe advent of the Muslims and Turks marks a
from the following five sources viz Choras-robbersturning point in the military history of India. The Turks
and bandits, Mlechennias-highlanders, Organized gangs(overcame the Hindus and slowly and surely
Choraganas), Atavikas-foresters and lastly warriorestablished Islamic rule over India. The Turks were
clans ( Sastropajivas and srenis).Such recruitmentable to defeat the Hindus because they possessed in
militated against professionalism.an outstanding measure the qualities, the Hindus
The Indian Army in battle was divided into thelacked. The complacency and tolerance of the Hindus
following groups:was met with death and destruction by the Muslims.
(a) Regular corps - The professionalsThey were also fanatically devoted to Islam which
(b) Hereditary troopswas their major unifying factor. The Arabs were
(c) Mercenarieshighly mobile, being mounted on fast moving horses.
(d) Contingents from feudal chiefsTheir Armies were in fact hordes of mounted
(e) Bandits and jungle tribesarchers and the Hindus never had any. That is the
From what has been written in the proceedingessence of Hindu warfare-neglect of a fundamental
paragraphs, it can be seen that basically the postprinciple of war -mobility.