Recent from talks
Nothing was collected or created yet.
History of Pakistan
View on Wikipedia
| History of Pakistan |
|---|
| Timeline |
| History of South Asia |
|---|
The history of Pakistan preceding the country's independence in 1947[1] is shared with that of Afghanistan, India, and Iran. Spanning the western expanse of the Indian subcontinent and the eastern borderlands of the Iranian plateau, the region of present-day Pakistan served both as the fertile ground of a major civilization and as the gateway of South Asia to Central Asia and the Near East.[2][3]
Situated on the first coastal migration route of Homo sapiens out of Africa, the region was inhabited early by modern humans.[4][5] The 9,000-year history of village life in South Asia traces back to the Neolithic (7000–4300 BCE) site of Mehrgarh in Pakistan,[6][7][8] and the 5,000-year history of urban life in South Asia to the various sites of the Indus Valley Civilization, including Mohenjo Daro and Harappa.[9][10]
The ensuing millennia saw the region of present-day Pakistan absorb many influences—represented among others in the ancient, mainly Hindu-Buddhist, sites of Taxila, and Takht-i-Bahi, the 14th-century Islamic-Sindhi monuments of Thatta, and the 17th-century Mughal monuments of Lahore. Dynasties emerging from the region encompassing modern day Pakistan during this period included the Soomra dynasty, Samma dynasty, Sayyid dynasty, Kalhora dynasty, Talpurs, Langah Sultanate, Sultanate of Swat, Sial dynasty and the Shah Mir Dynasty. In the first half of the 19th century, the region was appropriated by the East India Company, followed, after 1857, by 90 years of direct British rule, and ending with the creation of Pakistan in 1947, through the efforts, among others, of its future national poet Allama Iqbal and its founder, Muhammad Ali Jinnah. Since then, the country has experienced both civilian-democratic and military rule, resulting in periods of significant economic and military growth as well those of instability; significant during the latter, was the secession of East Pakistan as the new nation of Bangladesh.
Prehistory
[edit]Paleolithic period
[edit]The Soanian is archaeological culture of the Lower Paleolithic, Acheulean. It is named after the Soan Valley in the Sivalik Hills, near modern-day Islamabad and is dated between c.774,000 and c.11,700 BCE.[11]
Neolithic period
[edit]Mehrgarh is an important Neolithic site discovered in 1974, which shows early evidence of farming and herding,[12] and dentistry.[13] The site dates back to 7000–5500 BCE and is located on the Kachi Plain of Balochistan. The residents of Mehrgarh lived in mud brick houses, stored grain in granaries, fashioned tools from copper, cultivated barley, wheat, jujubes and dates, and herded sheep, goats and cattle. As the civilisation progressed (5500–2600 BCE) residents began to engage in crafts, including flint knapping, tanning, bead production, and metalworking. The site was occupied continuously until 2600 BCE,[14] when climatic changes began to occur. Between 2600 and 2000 BCE, region became more arid and Mehrgarh was abandoned in favour of the Indus Valley,[15] where a new civilisation was in the early stages of development.[16]
Bronze Age
[edit]Indus Valley Civilisation
[edit]The Bronze Age in the Indus Valley began around 3300 BCE with the Indus Valley Civilization.[17] Along with Ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia, it was one of three early civilisations of the Old World, and of the three the most widespread,[18] covering an area of 1.25 million km2.[19] It flourished in the basins of the Indus River, in what is today the Pakistani provinces of Sindh, Punjab and Balochistan, and along a system of perennial, mostly monsoon-fed, rivers that once coursed in the vicinity of the seasonal Ghaggar-Hakra River in parts of north-west India.[17] At its peak, the civilisation hosted a population of approximately 5 million spread across hundreds of settlements extending as far as the Arabian Sea to present-day southern and eastern Afghanistan, and the Himalayas.[20] Inhabitants of the ancient Indus river valley, the Harappans, developed new techniques in metallurgy and handicraft (carneol products, seal carving), and produced copper, bronze, lead, and tin.
The Mature Indus civilisation flourished from about 2600 to 1900 BCE, marking the beginning of urban civilisation in the Indus Valley. The civilisation included urban centres such as Harappa, Ganeriwala and Mohenjo-daro as well as an offshoot called the Kulli culture (2500–2000 BCE) in southern Balochistan and was noted for its cities built of brick, roadside drainage system, and multi-storeyed houses. It is thought to have had some kind of municipal organisation as well.
During the late period of this civilisation, signs of a gradual decline began to emerge, and by around 1700 BCE, most of the cities were abandoned. However, the Indus Valley Civilisation did not disappear suddenly, and some elements of the Indus Civilisation may have survived. Aridification of this region during the 3rd millennium BCE may have been the initial spur for the urbanisation associated with the civilisation, but eventually also reduced the water supply enough to cause the civilisation's demise, and to scatter its population eastward. The civilisation collapsed around 1700 BCE, though the reasons behind its fall are still unknown. Through the excavation of the Indus cities and analysis of town planning and seals, it has been inferred that the Civilization had high level of sophistication in its town planning, arts, crafts, and trade.[21]
Early history – Iron Age
[edit]Vedic period
[edit]
The Vedic Period (c. 1500 – c. 500 BCE) is postulated to have formed during the 1500 BCE to 800 BCE. As Indo-Aryans migrated and settled into the Indus Valley, along with them came their distinctive religious traditions and practices which fused with local culture.[22] The Indo-Aryans religious beliefs and practices from the Bactria–Margiana Culture and the native Harappan Indus beliefs of the former Indus Valley Civilisation eventually gave rise to Vedic culture and tribes.[23][note 1] Early Indo-Aryans were a Late Bronze Age society centred in the Punjab, organised into tribes rather than kingdoms, and primarily sustained by a pastoral way of life. During this period the Vedas, the oldest scriptures of Hinduism, were composed.[note 2]
Ancient history
[edit]Achaemenid Empire
[edit]
The main Vedic tribes remaining in the Indus Valley by 550 BCE were the Kamboja, Sindhu, Taksas of Gandhara, the Madras and Kathas of the River Chenab, Mallas of the River Ravi and Tugras of the River Sutlej. These several tribes and principalities fought against one another to such an extent that the Indus Valley no longer had one powerful Vedic tribal kingdom to defend against outsiders and to wield the warring tribes into one organised kingdom. King Pushkarasarin of Gandhara was engaged in power struggles against his local rivals and as such the Khyber Pass remained poorly defended. King Darius I of the Achaemenid Empire took advantage of the opportunity and planned for an invasion. The Indus Valley was fabled in Persia for its gold and fertile soil and conquering it had been a major objective of his predecessor Cyrus the Great.[26] In 542 BCE, Cyrus had led his army and conquered the Makran coast in southern Balochistan. However, he is known to have campaigned beyond Makran (in the regions of Kalat, Khuzdar and Panjgur) and lost most of his army in the Gedrosian Desert (speculated today as the Kharan Desert).
In 518 BCE, Darius led his army through the Khyber Pass and southwards in stages, eventually reaching the Arabian Sea coast in Sindh by 516 BCE. Under Persian rule, a system of centralised administration, with a bureaucratic system, was introduced into the Indus Valley for the first time, establishing several satrapies: Gandāra around the general region of Gandhara, Hindush around Punjab and Sindh, Arachosia, encompassing parts of present-day Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, and Balochistan,[27] Sattagydia around the Bannu basin,[28] and Gedrosia covering much of the Makran region of southern Balochistan.[29]
What is known about the easternmost satraps and borderlands of the Achaemenid Empire is alluded to in the Darius inscriptions and from Greek sources such as the Histories of Herodotus and the later Alexander Chronicles (Arrian, Strabo et al.). These sources list three Indus Valley tributaries or conquered territories that were subordinated to the Persian Empire and made to pay tributes to the Persian Kings.[28]
Macedonian Empire
[edit]

By spring of 326 BCE, Alexander began on his Indus expedition from Bactria, leaving behind 3500 horses and 10,000 soldiers. He divided his army into two groups. The larger force would enter the Indus Valley through the Khyber Pass, just as Darius had done 200 years earlier, while a smaller force under the personal command of Alexander entered through a northern route, possibly through Broghol or Dorah Pass near Chitral. Alexander was commanding a group of shield-bearing guards, foot-companions, archers, Agrianians, and horse-javelin-men and led them against the tribes of the former Gandhara satrapy.
The first tribe they encountered were the Aspasioi tribe of the Kunar Valley, who initiated a fierce battle against Alexander, in which he himself was wounded in the shoulder by a dart. However, the Aspasioi eventually lost and 40,000 people were enslaved. Alexander then continued in a southwestern direction where he encountered the Assakenoi tribe of the Swat and Buner valleys in April 326 BCE. The Assakenoi fought bravely and offered stubborn resistance to Alexander and his army in the cities of Ora, Bazira (Barikot) and Massaga. So enraged was Alexander about the resistance put up by the Assakenoi that he killed the entire population of Massaga and reduced its buildings to rubble – similar slaughters followed in Ora.[30] A similar slaughter then followed at Ora, another stronghold of the Assakenoi. The stories of these slaughters reached numerous Assakenians, who began fleeing to Aornos, a hill-fort located between Shangla and Kohistan. Alexander followed close behind their heels and besieged the strategic hill-fort, eventually capturing and destroying the fort and killing everyone inside. The remaining smaller tribes either surrendered or like the Astanenoi tribe of Pushkalavati (Charsadda) were quickly neutralised where 38,000 soldiers and 230,000 oxen were captured by Alexander.[31] Eventually Alexander's smaller force would meet with the larger force which had come through the Khyber Pass met at Attock. With the conquest of Gandhara complete, Alexander switched to strengthening his military supply line, which by now stretched dangerously vulnerable over the Hindu Kush back to Balkh in Bactria.
After conquering Gandhara and solidifying his supply line back to Bactria, Alexander combined his forces with the King Ambhi of Taxila and crossed the River Indus in July 326 BCE to begin the Archosia (Punjab) campaign. His first resistance would come at the River Jhelum near Bhera against King Porus of the Paurava tribe. The famous Battle of the Hydaspes (Jhelum) between Alexander (with Ambhi) and Porus would be the last major battle fought by him. After defeating Porus, his battle weary troops refused to advance into India[32] to engage the army of Nanda Dynasty and its vanguard of trampling elephants. Alexander, therefore proceeded south-west along the Indus Valley.[33] Along the way, he engaged in several battles with smaller kingdoms in Multan and Sindh, before marching his army westward across the Makran desert towards what is now Iran. In crossing the desert, Alexander's army took enormous casualties from hunger and thirst, but fought no human enemy. They encountered the "Fish Eaters", or Ichthyophagi, primitive people who lived on the Makran coast, who had matted hair, no fire, no metal, no clothes, lived in huts made of whale bones, and ate raw seafood.
Mauryan Empire
[edit]
The Maurya Empire was a geographically extensive Iron Age historical power in South Asia based in Magadha, having been founded by Chandragupta Maurya in 322 BCE, and existing in loose-knit fashion until 185 BCE.[34] The Maurya Empire was centralised by the conquest of the Indo-Gangetic Plain, and its capital city was located at Pataliputra (modern Patna). Outside this imperial centre, the empire's geographical extent was dependent on the loyalty of military commanders who controlled the armed cities sprinkling it.[35][36][37] During Ashoka's rule (ca. 268–232 BCE) the empire briefly controlled the major urban hubs and arteries of the Indian subcontinent excepting the deep south.[34] It declined for about 50 years after Ashoka's rule, and dissolved in 185 BCE with the assassination of Brihadratha by Pushyamitra Shunga and foundation of the Shunga Empire in Magadha.
Chandragupta Maurya raised an army, with the assistance of Chanakya, author of Arthasastra,[38] and overthrew the Nanda Empire in c. 322 BCE. Chandragupta rapidly expanded his power westwards across central and western India by conquering the satraps left by Alexander the Great, and by 317 BCE the empire had fully occupied northwestern India.[39] The Mauryan Empire then defeated Seleucus I, a diadochus and founder of the Seleucid Empire, during the Seleucid–Mauryan war, thus acquiring territory west of the Indus River.[40][41]
Under the Mauryas, internal and external trade, agriculture, and economic activities thrived and expanded across South Asia due to the creation of a single and efficient system of finance, administration, and security. The Maurya dynasty built a precursor of the Grand Trunk Road from Patliputra to Taxila.[42] After the Kalinga War, the Empire experienced nearly half a century of centralised rule under Ashoka. Ashoka's embrace of Buddhism and sponsorship of Buddhist missionaries allowed for the expansion of that faith into Sri Lanka, northwest India, and Central Asia.[43]
The population of South Asia during the Mauryan period has been estimated to be between 15 and 30 million.[44] The empire's period of dominion was marked by exceptional creativity in art, architecture, inscriptions and produced texts.[45]
Classical history
[edit]Indo-Greek Kingdom
[edit]The Indo-Greek Menander I (reigned 155–130 BCE) drove the Greco-Bactrians out of Gandhara and beyond the Hindu Kush, becoming king shortly after his victory. His territories covered Panjshir and Kapisa in modern Afghanistan and extended to the Punjab region, with many tributaries to the south and east, possibly as far as Mathura. The capital Sagala (modern Sialkot) prospered greatly under Menander's rule and Menander is one of the few Bactrian kings mentioned by Greek authors.[47]
The classical Buddhist text Milinda Pañha praises Menander, saying there was "none equal to Milinda in all India".[48] His empire survived him in a fragmented manner until the last independent Greek king, Strato II, disappeared around 10 CE. Around 125 BCE, the Greco-Bactrian king Heliocles, son of Eucratides, fled from the Yuezhi invasion of Bactria and relocated to Gandhara, pushing the Indo-Greeks east of the Jhelum River. The last known Indo-Greek ruler was Theodamas, from the Bajaur area of Gandhara, mentioned on a 1st-century CE signet ring, bearing the Kharoṣṭhī inscription "Su Theodamasa" ("Su" was the Greek transliteration of the Kushan royal title "Shau" ("Shah" or "King")). Various petty kings ruled into the early 1st century CE, until the conquests by the Scythians, Parthians and the Yuezhi, who founded the Kushan dynasty.
It is during this period that the fusion of Hellenistic and Asiatic mythological, artistic and religious elements becomes most apparent, especially in the region of Gandhara, straddling western Pakistan and southern Afghanistan. Detailed, humanistic representations of the Buddha begin to emerge, depicting the figure with a close resemblance to the Hellenic god Apollo; Greek mythological motifs such as centaurs, Bacchanalian scenes, Nereids and deities such as Tyche and Heracles are prominent in the Buddhistic art of ancient Pakistan and Afghanistan.[citation needed]
Indo-Scythian Kingdom
[edit]
The Indo-Scythians were descended from the Sakas (Scythians) who migrated from southern Central Asia into Pakistan and Arachosia from the middle of the 2nd century BCE to the 1st century BCE. They displaced the Indo-Greeks and ruled a kingdom that stretched from Gandhara to Mathura. The power of the Saka rulers started to decline in the 2nd century CE after the Scythians were defeated by the south Indian Emperor Gautamiputra Satakarni of the Satavahana dynasty.[49][50] Later the Saka kingdom was completely destroyed by Chandragupta II of the Gupta Empire from eastern India in the 4th century.[51]
Indo-Parthian Kingdom
[edit]
The Indo-Parthian Kingdom was ruled by the Gondopharid dynasty, named after its eponymous first ruler Gondophares. They ruled parts of present-day Afghanistan, Pakistan,[52] and northwestern India, during or slightly before the 1st century CE. For most of their history, the leading Gondopharid kings held Taxila (in the present Punjab province of Pakistan) as their residence, but during their last few years of existence the capital shifted between Kabul and Peshawar. These kings have traditionally been referred to as Indo-Parthians, as their coinage was often inspired by the Arsacid dynasty, but they probably belonged to a wider groups of Iranic tribes who lived east of Parthia proper, and there is no evidence that all the kings who assumed the title Gondophares, which means "Holder of Glory", were even related. Christian writings claim that the Apostle Saint Thomas – an architect and skilled carpenter – had a long sojourn in the court of king Gondophares, had built a palace for the king at Taxila and had also ordained leaders for the Church before leaving for Indus Valley in a chariot, for sailing out to eventually reach Malabar Coast.
Kushan Empire
[edit]The Kushan Empire expanded out of what is now Afghanistan into the northwest of the subcontinent under the leadership of their first emperor, Kujula Kadphises, about the middle of the 1st century CE. They were descended from an Indo-European, Central Asian people called the Yuezhi,[53][54] a branch of which was known as the Kushans. By the time of his grandson, Kanishka the Great, the empire spread to encompass much of Afghanistan[55] and the northern parts of the Indian subcontinent at least as far as Saketa and Sarnath near Varanasi (Benares).[56]
Emperor Kanishka was a great patron of Buddhism; however, as Kushans expanded southward, the deities[57] of their later coinage came to reflect its new Hindu majority.[58] The monumental Kanishka stupa is believed to have been established by the king near the outskirts of modern-day Peshawar, Pakistan.
The Kushan dynasty played an important role in the establishment of Buddhism in India and its spread to Central Asia and China. Historian Vincent Smith said about Kanishka in particular:
He played the part of a second Ashoka in the history of Buddhism.[59]
The empire linked the Indian Ocean maritime trade with the commerce of the Silk Road through the Indus valley, encouraging long-distance trade, particularly between China and Rome. The Kushans brought new trends to the budding and blossoming Gandharan Art, which reached its peak during Kushan Rule.
H.G. Rowlinson commented:
The Kushan period is a fitting prelude to the Age of the Guptas.[60]
By the 3rd century, their empire in India was disintegrating and their last known great emperor was Vasudeva I.[61][62]
Alchon Huns
[edit]The Alchon Empire was the third of four major Huna states established in Central and South Asia. The Alchon were preceded by the Kidarites and succeeded by the Hephthalites in Bactria and the Nezak Huns in the Hindu Kush. The names of the Alchon kings are known from their extensive coinage, Buddhist accounts, and a number of commemorative inscriptions throughout the Indian subcontinent. Toramana's son Mihirakula, a Saivite Hindu, moved up to near Pataliputra to the east and Gwalior to central India. Hiuen Tsiang narrates Mihirakula's merciless persecution of Buddhists and destruction of monasteries, though the description is disputed as far as the authenticity is concerned.[63] The Alchons have long been considered as a part or a sub-division of the Hephthalites, or as their eastern branch, but now tend to be considered as a separate entity.[64][65][66] The Huns were defeated by the alliance of Indian rulers, Maharaja (Great King) Yasodharman of Malwa and Gupta Emperor Narasimhagupta in the 6th century. Some of them were driven out of India and others were assimilated in the Indian society.[67]
Medieval period
[edit]Arab Caliphate
[edit]
After conquering the Middle East from the Byzantine Empire and the Sasanian Empire, the Rashidun Caliphate reached the coastal region of Makran in present-day Balochistan. In 643, the second caliph Umar (r. 634–644) ordered an invasion of Makran against the Rai dynasty. Following the Rashidun capture of Makran, Umar restricted the army to not pass beyond and consolidated his position in Makran.[68] During the reign of the fourth caliph Ali (r. 656–661), the Rashidun army conquered the town of Kalat in the heart of Balochistan.[69] During the reign of the sixth Umayyad caliph al-Walid I (r. 705–715), the Arab military general Muhammad ibn al-Qasim commanded the Umayyad incursion into Sindh. In 712, he defeated the army of the Hindu maharaja Dahir of Aror (r. 695–712) and established the caliphal province of Sind. The historic town of al-Mansura was administered as the capital of the province. Afterward, Ibn al-Qasim proceeded to conquer Multan, which subsequently became a prominent centre of Islamic culture and trading. In 747, the anti-Umayyad rebel Mansur ibn Jumhur al-Kalbi seized Sind and was defeated by Musa ibn Ka'b al-Tamimi of the succeeding Abbasid Caliphate. In the 9th-century, Abbasid authority gradually declined in Sind and Multan. The tenth Abbasid caliph al-Mutawakkil (r. 847–861) assigned the governorship of Sind to Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz al-Habbari, who founded the hereditary Habbarid dynasty and became the autonomous ruler of Sind in 854. Around the same time, the Banu Munnabih established the Emirate of Multan while Ma'danids reigned over Sultanate of Makran. There was gradual conversion to Islam in the south, especially amongst the native Hindu and Buddhist majority, but in areas north of Multan, Hindus and Buddhists remained numerous.[70] By the end of the 10th century CE, the region was ruled by several Hindu kings.
Odi Shahis
[edit]The Turk Shahis ruled Gandhara from the decline of the Kushan Empire in the 3rd century until 870, when they were overthrown by the Hindu Shahis. The Hindu Shahis are believed to belong to the Uḍi/Oḍi tribe, namely the people of Oddiyana in Gandhara.[71][72]
The first king Kallar had moved the capital into Udabandhapura from Kabul, in the modern village of Hund for its new capital.[73][74][75][76] At its zenith, the kingdom stretched over the Kabul Valley, Gandhara and western Punjab under Jayapala.[77] Jayapala saw a danger in the consolidation of the Ghaznavids and invaded their capital city of Ghazni both in the reign of Sebuktigin and in that of his son Mahmud, which initiated the Muslim Ghaznavid and Hindu Shahi struggles.[78] Sebuk Tigin, however, defeated him, and he was forced to pay an indemnity.[78] Jayapala defaulted on the payment and took to the battlefield once more.[78] Jayapala however, lost control of the entire region between the Kabul Valley and Indus River.[79]
However, the army was defeated in battle against the western forces, particularly against the Mahmud of Ghazni.[79] In the year 1001, soon after Sultan Mahmud came to power and was occupied with the Qarakhanids north of the Hindu Kush, Jaipal attacked Ghazni once more and upon suffering yet another defeat by the powerful Ghaznavid forces, near present-day Peshawar. After the Battle of Peshawar, he died because of regretting as his subjects brought disaster and disgrace to the Shahi dynasty.[78][79]
Jayapala was succeeded by his son Anandapala,[78] who along with other succeeding generations of the Shahiya dynasty took part in various unsuccessful campaigns against the advancing Ghaznvids but were unsuccessful. The Hindu rulers eventually exiled themselves to the Kashmir Siwalik Hills.[79]
Ghaznavid dynasty
[edit]
In 997 CE, the Turkic ruler Mahmud of Ghazni, took over the Ghaznavid dynasty empire established by his father, Sebuktegin, a Turkic origin ruler. Starting from the city of Ghazni (now in Afghanistan), Mehmood conquered the bulk of Khorasan, marched on Peshawar against the Hindu Shahis in Kabul in 1005, and followed it by the conquests of Punjab (1007), deposed the Shia Ismaili rulers of Multan, (1011), Kashmir (1015) and Qanoch (1017). By the end of his reign in 1030, Mahmud's empire briefly extended from Kurdistan in the west to the Yamuna river in the east, and the Ghaznavid dynasty lasted until 1187. Contemporary historians such as Abolfazl Beyhaqi and Ferdowsi described extensive building work in Lahore, as well as Mahmud's support and patronage of learning, literature and the arts.
Mahmud's successors, known as the Ghaznavids, ruled for 157 years. Their kingdom gradually shrank in size, and was racked by bitter succession struggles. The Hindu Rajput kingdoms of western India reconquered the eastern Punjab, and by the 1160s, the line of demarcation between the Ghaznavid state and the Hindu kingdoms approximated to the present-day boundary between India and Pakistan. The Ghurid Empire of central Afghanistan occupied Ghazni around 1160, and the Ghaznavid capital was shifted to Lahore. Later Muhammad Ghori conquered the Ghaznavid kingdom, occupying Lahore in 1187.[citation needed]
Ghurid dynasty
[edit]
The Ghaznavids under either Khusrau Shah or his son Khusrau Malik lost their control over Ghazni to the Ghuzz Turks along with some other territories. In the 1170s, Ghurid prince Muhammad of Ghor raided their territory and captured Ghazni from them and was crowned there by his brother Ghiyath al-Din Muhammad in 1173. Muhammad of Ghor marched from Gomal Pass into Pakistan and captured Multan and Uch before being rebuffed by Gujarat's Hindu Chaulukya (Solanki) rulers, which forced him to press upon the trumbling Ghaznavids. By 1186–87, he deposed the last Ghaznavid ruler Khusrau Malik, bringing the last of Ghaznevid territory under his control and ending the Ghaznavid empire. The Ghurids were overthrown in 1215, although their conquests in the Indian Subcontinent survived for several centuries under the Delhi Sultanate established by the Ghurid Mamluk Qutb ud-Din Aibak.
Delhi Sultanate
[edit]
The Turkic origin Mamluk Dynasty, seized the throne of the Sultanate in 1211. Several dynasties ruled their empires from Delhi: the Mamluk (1211–90), the Khalji (1290–1320), the Tughlaq (1320–1413), the Sayyid (1414–1451) and the Lodhi (1451–1526).[88] Although some kingdoms remained independent of Delhi, almost all of the Indus plain came under the rule of these large sultanates.
The sultans (emperors) of Delhi enjoyed cordial relations with rulers in the Near East but owed them no allegiance. While the sultans ruled from urban centres, their military camps and trading posts provided the nuclei for many towns that sprang up in the countryside. Close interaction with local populations led to cultural exchange and the resulting "Indo-Islamic" fusion has left a lasting imprint and legacy in South Asian architecture, music, literature, life style and religious customs. In addition, the language of Urdu (literally meaning "horde" or "camp" in various Turkic dialects, but more likely "city" in the South Asian context) was born during the Delhi Sultanate period, as a result of the mingling of speakers of native Prakrits, Persian, Turkish and Arabic languages.
Perhaps the greatest contribution of the Sultanate was its temporary success in insulating South Asia from the Mongol invasion from Central Asia in the 13th century; nonetheless the sultans eventually lost western Pakistan to the Mongols (see the Ilkhanate dynasty). The Sultanate declined after the invasion of Emperor Timur, who founded the Timurid Empire, and was eventually conquered in 1526 by the Mughal Emperor Babar.
The Delhi Sultanate and later Mughal Empire attracted Muslim refugees, nobles, technocrats, bureaucrats, soldiers, traders, scientists, architects, artisans, teachers, poets, artists, theologians and Sufis from the rest of the Muslim world and they migrated and settled in the South Asia. During the reign of Sultan Ghyasuddin Balban (1266–1286) thousands of Central Asian Muslims sought asylum including more than 15 sovereigns and their nobles due to the Mongol invasion of Khwarezmia and Eastern Iran. At the court of Sultan Iltemish in Delhi the first wave of these Muslim refugees escaping from the Central Asian genocide by the Mongol armies of Genghis Khan, brought administrators from Iran, painters from China, theologians from Samarkand, Nishapur and Bukhara, divines and saints from the rest of Muslim world, craftsmen and men and maidens from every region, notably doctors adept in Greek medicine and philosophers from everywhere.
Kingdom of Sindh
[edit]Soomra dynasty
[edit]The Soomra dynasty was a local Sindhi Muslim dynasty that ruled between the early 11th century and the 14th century.[89][90][91]
Later chroniclers like Ali ibn al-Athir (c. late 12th c.) and Ibn Khaldun (c. late 14th c.) attributed the fall of Habbarids to Mahmud of Ghazni, lending credence to the argument of Hafif being the last Habbarid.[92] The Soomras appear to have established themselves as a regional power in this power vacuum.[92][93]
The Ghurids and Ghaznavids continued to rule parts of Sindh, across the eleventh and early twelfth centuries, alongside the Soomrus.[92] The precise delineations are not yet known, but Sommrus were probably centred in lower Sindh.[92]
Some of them were adherents of Isma'ilism.[93] One of their kings, Shimuddin Chanisar, had submitted to Iltutmish, the Sultan of Delhi, and was allowed to continue on as a vassal.[94]
Samma dynasty
[edit]The Samma dynasty was a Sindhi dynasty that ruled in Sindh, and parts of Kutch, Punjab and Balochistan from c. 1351 to c. 1524 CE, with their capital at Thatta.[96][97][98]
The Sammas overthrew the Soomra dynasty soon after 1335 and the last Soomra ruler took shelter with the governor of Gujarat, under the protection of Muhammad bin Tughluq, the sultan of Delhi. Mohammad bin Tughlaq made an expedition against Sindh in 1351 and died at Sondha, possibly in an attempt to restore the Soomras. With this, the Sammas became independent. The next sultan, Firuz Shah Tughlaq attacked Sindh in 1365 and 1367, unsuccessfully, but with reinforcements from Delhi he later obtained Banbhiniyo's surrender. For a period the Sammas were therefore subject to Delhi again. Later, as the Sultanate of Delhi collapsed they became fully independent.[99] Jam Unar was the founder of Samma dynasty mentioned by Ibn Battuta.[99]
The Samma civilisation contributed significantly to the evolution of the Indo-Islamic architectural style. Thatta is famous for its necropolis, which covers 10 square km on the Makli Hill.[100] It has left its mark in Sindh with magnificent structures including the Makli Necropolis of its royals in Thatta.[96][101]
Early Modern Period
[edit]Mughal Empire
[edit]In 1526, Babur, a Timurid descendant of Timur and Genghis Khan from Fergana Valley (modern-day Uzbekistan), swept across the Khyber Pass and founded the Mughal Empire, covering parts of modern-day eastern- Afghanistan, much of what is now Pakistan, parts of India and Bangladesh.[103] The Mughals were descended from Central Asian Turks (with significant Mongol admixture).
However, his son and successor Humayun was defeated by Sher Shah Suri of Sasaram, in the year 1540, and Humayun was forced to retreat to Kabul. After Sher Shah died, his son Islam Shah Suri became the ruler, on whose death his prime minister, Hemu, ascended the throne and ruled North India from Delhi for one month. He was defeated by Emperor Akbar's forces in the Second Battle of Panipat on 6 November 1556.
Akbar was both a capable ruler and an early proponent of religious and ethnic tolerance and favored an early form of multiculturalism. For example, he declared "Amari" or non-killing of animals in the holy days of Jainism and rolled back the jizya tax imposed upon non-Islamic, mainly Hindu people. The Mughal dynasty ruled most of South Asia by 1600. The Mughal emperors married local royalty and allied themselves with local maharajas. Akbar was succeeded by Jahangir, who was succeeded by Shah Jahan. Shah Jahan was replaced by Aurangzeb following the Mughal war of succession (1658–1659).
After the death of Aurangzeb in 1707, different regions of modern Pakistan and India began asserting independence. The empire went into a rapid decline, and by about 1720 only really controlled a small region around Delhi. The emperors continued to pay lip service to them as "Emperor of India" by the other powers in South Asia until the British finally abolished the empire in 1858.
For a short time in the late 16th century, Lahore was the capital of the empire. The architectural legacy of the Mughals includes the Lahore Fort, Wazir Khan Mosque, Shalimar Gardens, Tomb of Jahangir, Tomb of Nur Jahan, Akbari Sarai, Hiran Minar, Shah Jahan Mosque and the Badshahi Mosque.[102] The Mughal Empire had a great impact on the culture, cuisine, and architecture of Pakistan.
18th Century Punjabi Muslim states
[edit]Chattha State (1750–1797)
[edit]The Chatthas under their leader Nur Muhammad Chattha declared independence from Mughal Empire in 1750 and formed the Chattha State.[104] After Pir Muhammad Chattha's death his son Ghulam Muhammad Chattha inherited the Chattha state and the hatred of Sukerchakias. The rivalry was passed down to Mahan Singh and Ghulam Muhammad Chattha.[105][106]
Under his leadership the Chathas gained several successes over the Sikhs,[107] and it at one time looked as if the progress of the Sikh arms had been arrested and their dominion in the Doab annihilated.[105]
Chattha State was annexed when Jan muhammad Chattha was killed in a siege led by Ranjit Singh when the latter recovered the lost Chattha state with Afghan aid.[108]
Pakpattan state (1692–1810 CE)
[edit]Following the disintegration of the Mughal Empire, the shrine's Dīwān was able to forge a political independent state centered on Pakpattan.[109] In 1757, Dīwān 'Abd as-Subḥān gathered an army of his Jat murīds, attacked the Raja of Bikaner, and thereby expanded the shrine's territorial holdings for the first time east of the Sutlej.[109] Around 1776, the Dīwān, supported mainly by his Wattu murīds, successfully repelled an attack by the Sikh Nakai Misl, resulting in the death of the Nakai leader, Heera Singh Sandhu.[109]
Sial State (1723–1816)
[edit]Sial state was established by the 13th Sial Chief Nawab Walidad Khan Sial in 1723.[110] He gradually gained control of the lower Rachna doab, including the cities of Chiniot, Pindi Bhattian, Jhang and Mankera.[111]
Next chief, Inayatullah Khan (r. 1747– 1787) was a successful general who won 22 battles against Bhangi Misl and the Multan chiefs.[112]
Sikh Empire invaded Jhang multiple times from 1801 to 1816.[113] Sial state was annexed by Sikh Empire and Ahmad Khan Sial was awarded a Jagir by Ranjit Singh.[114]
Maratha Empire
[edit]By early 18th century, the Mughal empire declined. In 1749, the Mughals were induced to cede Sindh, the Punjab region and the important trans Indus River to Ahmad Shah Durrani in order to save his capital from Afghan attack.[115] Ahmad Shah sacked Delhi in 1757 but permitted the Mughal dynasty to remain in nominal control of the city as long as the ruler acknowledged Ahmad Shah's suzerainty over Punjab, Sindh, and Kashmir. Leaving his second son Timur Shah to safeguard his interests, Ahmad Shah left India to return to Afghanistan.
In 1751–52, Ahamdiya treaty was signed between the Marathas and Mughals, when Balaji Bajirao was the Peshwa.[116] Through this treaty, the Marathas controlled whole of India from their capital at Pune and the Mughal rule was restricted only to Delhi (the Mughals remained the nominal heads of Delhi). Marathas were now straining to expand their area of control towards the Northwest of India. Ahmad Shah sacked the Mughal capital and withdrew with the booty he coveted. To counter the Afghans, Peshwa Balaji Bajirao sent Raghunathrao. He defeated the Rohillas and Afghan garrisons in Punjab and succeeded in ousting Timur Shah and his court from India and brought Lahore, Multan, Kashmir and other subahs on the Indian side of Attock under Maratha rule.[117] Thus, upon his return to Kandahar in 1757, Ahmad was forced to return to India and face the Maratha Confederacy.

In 1758, the Maratha Empire's general Raghunath Rao attacked and conquered Punjab, frontier regions and Kashmir and drove out Timur Shah Durrani, the son and viceroy of Ahmad Shah Abdali. In 1759, the Marathas and its allies won the Battle of Lahore, defeating the Durranis,[118][119] hence, Lahore, Dera Ghazi Khan, Multan, Peshawar, Kashmir, and other subahs on the south eastern side of Afghanistan's border fell under the Maratha rule.[120]
Ahmad Shah declared a jihad (or Islamic holy war) against the Marathas, and warriors from various Afghan tribes joined his army. Early skirmishes were followed by decisive victory for the Afghans against the much larger Maratha garrisons in Northwest India and by 1759 Ahmad Shah and his army reached Lahore and were poised to confront the Marathas. By 1760, the Maratha groups had coalesced into a big enough army under the command of Sadashivrao Bhau. Once again, Panipat was the scene of a confrontation between two warring contenders for control of northern India. The Third Battle of Panipat (14 January 1761), fought between largely Muslim and largely Hindu armies was waged along a twelve-kilometer front. Although the Durrani's army decisively defeated the Marathas, they suffered heavily in the battle.
The victory at Panipat was the high point of Ahmad Shah's—and Afghan—power. However, even prior to his death, the empire began to face challenges in the form of a rising Sikhs in Punjab. In 1762, Ahmad Shah crossed the passes from Afghanistan for the sixth time to subdue the Sikhs. From this time and on, the domination and control of the Empire began to loosen, and by the time of Durrani's death he had completely lost Punjab to the Sikhs, as well as earlier losses of northern territories to the Uzbeks, necessitating a compromise with them.[121]
Sikh Empire
[edit]
Guru Nanak (29 November 1469 – 22 September 1539), Sikhism's founder, was born into a Hindu Khatri family in the village of Rāi Bhōi dī Talwandī (present day Nankana, near Sial in modern-day Pakistan). He was an influential religious and social reformer in north India and the saintly founder of a modern monotheistic order and first of the ten divine Gurus of Sikh religion. At the age of 70, he died at Kartarpur, Punjab of modern-day Pakistan.
The Sikh Empire (1799–1849) was formed on the foundations of the Sikh Khalsa Army by Maharaja Ranjit Singh who was proclaimed "Sarkar-i-Khalsa", and was referred to as the "Maharaja of Lahore".[122] It consisted of a collection of autonomous Punjabi Misls, which were governed by Misldars,[123] mainly in the Punjab region. The empire extended from the Khyber Pass in the west, to Kashmir in the north, to Multan in the south and Kapurthala in the east. The main geographical footprint of the empire was the Punjab region. The formation of the empire was a watershed and represented formidable consolidation of Sikh military power and resurgence of local culture, which had been dominated for hundreds of years by Indo-Afghan and Indo-Mughal hybrid cultures.
The foundations of the Sikh Empire, during the time of the Sikh Khalsa Army, could be defined as early as 1707, starting from the death of Aurangzeb. The fall of the Mughal Empire provided opportunities for the Sikh army to lead expeditions against the Mughals and Pashtuns. This led to a growth of the army, which was split into different Sikh armies and then semi-independent "misls". Each of these component armies were known as a misl, each controlling different areas and cities. However, in the period from 1762 to 1799, Sikh rulers of their misls appeared to be coming into their own. The formal start of the Sikh Empire began with the disbandment of the Sikh Khalsa Army by the time of coronation of Ranjit Singh in 1801, creating a unified political state. All the misl leaders who were affiliated with the Army were from Punjab's nobility.[123]
Colonial period
[edit]British conquest and organisation
[edit]None of the territory of modern Pakistan was ruled by the British, or other European powers, until 1839, when Karachi, then a small fishing village with a mud fort guarding the harbour, was taken, and held as an enclave with a port and military base for the First Afghan War that soon followed. The rest of Sindh was taken in 1843, and in the following decades, first the East India Company, and then after the post-Sepoy Mutiny (1857–1858) direct rule of Queen Victoria of the British Empire, took over most of the country partly through wars, and also treaties. The main wars were that against the Baloch Talpur dynasty, ended by the Battle of Miani (1843) in Sindh, the Anglo-Sikh Wars (1845–1849) and the Anglo-Afghan Wars (1839–1919). By 1893, all modern Pakistan was part of the British Indian Empire, and remained so until independence in 1947.[124]
Under the British, modern Pakistan was mostly divided into the Sind Division, Punjab Province, and the Baluchistan Agency. There were various princely states, of which the largest was Bahawalpur. Sindh was part of the Bombay Presidency, and there were many complaints over the years that it was neglected by its distant rulers in modern Mumbai, although there was usually a Commissioner based in Karachi.[citation needed]
The Punjab (which included the modern Indian state) was instead technically ruled from even more distant Calcutta, as part of the Bengal Presidency, but in practice most matters were devolved to local British officials, who were often among the most energetic and effective in India. At first there was a "Board of Administration" led by Sir Henry Lawrence, who had previously worked as British Resident at the Lahore Durbar and also consisted of his younger brother John Lawrence and Charles Grenville Mansel.[125] Below the Board worked a group of acclaimed officers collectively known as Henry Lawrence's "Young Men". After the Mutiny, Sir John Lawrence became the first Governor of Punjab. The Punjab Canal Colonies were an ambitious and largely successful project, begun in the 1880s, to create new farmland through irrigation, to relieve population pressure elsewhere (most of the areas involved are now in Pakistan).
The Baluchistan Agency largely consisted of princely states and tribal territories, and was governed with a light touch, although near the Afghan border Quetta was built up as a military base, in case of invasion by either the Afghans or the Russians. The 1935 Quetta earthquake was a major disaster. From 1876 the sensitive far north was made a "Chief Commissioner's Province". The border with Afghanistan, which remains the modern border of Pakistan, was finally fixed on the Durand Line in 1893.
Railway construction began in the 1850s, and most of the network (some now discontinued) was completed by 1900. Karachi expanded enormously under British rule, followed to a lesser extent by Lahore and the other larger cities.
Different regions of Pakistan were conquered by East India Company as below:
•Sindh was conquered by Battle of Hyderabad and Battle of Miani in 1843.
•Punjab and eastern Khyber Pakhtunkhwa were conquered during Second Anglo-Sikh War in 1849.
Regions conquered by British Raj are as below:
•Southern Balochistan came under control by Treaty of Kalat in 1876.
•Western Balochistan was conquered by British empire in Second Anglo-Afghan War through Treaty of Gandamak, in 1879.
Early period of Pakistan Movement
[edit]In 1877, Syed Ameer Ali had formed the Central National Muhammadan Association to work towards the political advancement of the Indian Muslims, who had suffered grievously in 1857, in the aftermath of the failed Sepoy Mutiny against the East India Company; the British were seen as foreign invaders. But the organisation declined towards the end of the 19th century.

In 1885, the Indian National Congress was founded as a forum, which later became a party, to promote a nationalist cause.[126] Although the Congress attempted to include the Muslim community in the struggle for independence from the British rule – and some Muslims were very active in the Congress – the majority of Muslim leaders, including the influential Sir Syed Ahmed Khan, did not trust the party.
A turning point came in 1900, when the British administration in the United Provinces of Agra and Oudh acceded to Hindu demands and made Hindi, the version of the Hindustani language written in the Devanagari script, the official language. The proselytisation conducted in the region by the activists of Arya Samaj, a Hindu reformist movement also stirred Muslim concerns about their faith. Eventually, the Muslims feared that the Hindu majority would seek to suppress the rights of Muslims in the region following the departure of the British.
Muslim League
[edit]The All-India Muslim League was founded by Shaiiq-e-Mustafa on 30 December 1906, in the aftermath of division of Bengal, on the sidelines of the annual All India Muhammadan Educational Conference in Shahbagh, Dhaka East Bengal.[127] The meeting was attended by three thousand delegates and presided over by Nawab Viqar-ul-Mulk. It addressed the issue of safeguarding interests of Muslims and finalised a programme. A resolution, moved by Nawab Salimullah and seconded by Hakim Ajmal Khan. Nawab Viqar-ul-Mulk (conservative), declared:
The Musalmans are only a fifth in number as compared with the total population of the country, and it is manifest that if at any remote period the British government ceases to exist in India, then the rule of India would pass into the hands of that community which is nearly four times as large as ourselves ... our life, our property, our honour, and our faith will all be in great danger, when even now that a powerful British administration is protecting its subjects, we the Musalmans have to face most serious difficulties in safe-guarding our interests from the grasping hands of our neighbors.[128]
The constitution and principles of the League were contained in the Green Book, written by Maulana Mohammad Ali. Its goals at this stage did not include establishing an independent Muslim state, but rather concentrated on protecting Muslim liberties and rights, promoting understanding between the Muslim community and other Indians, educating the Muslim and Indian community at large on the actions of the government, and discouraging violence. However, several factors over the next thirty years, including sectarian violence, led to a re-evaluation of the League's aims.[129][130] Among those Muslims in the Congress who did not initially join the League was Jinnah, a prominent statesman and barrister in Bombay. This was because the first article of the League's platform was "To promote among the Mussalmans (Muslims) of India, feelings of loyalty to the British Government". The League remained loyal to the British administration for five years until the British decided to reverse the partition of Bengal. The Muslim League saw this British decision as partial to Hindus.[131]

In 1907, a vocal group of Hindu hard-liners within the Indian National Congress movement separated from it and started to pursue a pro-Hindu movement openly. This group was spearheaded by the famous triumvirate of Lal-Bal-Pal – Lala Lajpat Rai, Bal Gangadhar Tilak and Bipin Chandra Pal of Punjab, Bombay and Bengal provinces respectively. Their influence spread rapidly among other like minded Hindus – they called it Hindu nationalism – and it became a cause of serious concern for Muslims. However, Jinnah did not join the League until 1913, when the party changed its platform to one of Indian independence, as a reaction against the British decision to reverse the 1905 Partition of Bengal, which the League regarded it as a betrayal of the Bengali Muslims.[132] After vociferous protests of the Hindu population and violence engineered by secret groups, such as Anushilan Samiti and its offshoot Jugantar of Aurobindo and his brother etc., the British had decided to reunite Bengal again. Till this stage, Jinnah believed in Mutual co-operation to achieve an independent, united 'India', although he argued that Muslims should be guaranteed one-third of the seats in any Indian Parliament.

The League gradually became the leading representative body of Indian Muslims. Jinnah became its president in 1916, and negotiated the Lucknow Pact with the Congress leader, Bal Gangadhar Tilak, by which Congress conceded the principle of separate electorates and weighted representation for the Muslim community.[133] However, Jinnah broke with the Congress in 1920 when the Congress leader, Mohandas Gandhi, launched a law violating Non-Cooperation Movement against the British, which a temperamentally law-abiding barrister Jinnah disapproved. Jinnah also became convinced that the Congress would renounce its support for separate electorates for Muslims, which indeed it did in 1928. In 1927, the British proposed a constitution for India as recommended by the Simon Commission, but they failed to reconcile all parties. The British then turned the matter over to the League and the Congress, and in 1928 an All-Parties Conference was convened in Delhi. The attempt failed, but two more conferences were held, and at the Bombay conference in May, it was agreed that a small committee should work on the constitution. The prominent Congress leader Motilal Nehru headed the committee, which included two Muslims, Syed Ali Imam and Shoaib Quereshi; Motilal's son, Pt Jawaharlal Nehru, was its secretary. The League, however, rejected the committee's report, the so-called Nehru Report, arguing that its proposals gave too little representation (one quarter) to Muslims – the League had demanded at least one-third representation in the legislature. Jinnah announced a "parting of the ways" after reading the report, and relations between the Congress and the League began to sour.
Muslim homeland – "Now or Never"
[edit]
The general elections held in the United Kingdom had already weakened the leftist Labour Party led by Prime Minister Ramsay MacDonald.[134] Furthermore, the Labour Party's government was already weakened by the outcomes of World War I, which fuelled new hopes for progress towards self-government in British India.[134] In fact, Mohandas K. Gandhi travelled to London to press the idea of "self-government" in British India, and claimed to represent all Indians whilst duly criticising the Muslim League as being sectarian and divisive.[134] After reviewing the report of the Simon Commission, the Indian Congress initiated a massive Civil Disobedience Movement under Gandhi; the Muslim League reserved their opinion on the Simon Report declaring that the report was not final and the matters should be decided after consultations with the leaders representing all communities in India.[134]
The Round-table Conferences were held, but these achieved little, since Gandhi and the League were unable to reach a compromise.[134] Witnessing the events of the Round Table Conferences, Jinnah had despaired of politics and particularly of getting mainstream parties like the Congress to be sensitive to minority priorities. During this time in 1930, notable writer and poet, Muhammad Iqbal called for a separate and autonomous nation-state, who in his presidential address to the 1930 convention of the Muslim League said that he felt that a separate Muslim state was essential in an otherwise Hindu-dominated South Asia.[135][136]
India is a continent of human groups belonging to different races, speaking different languages, and professing different religions [...] Personally, I would like to see the Punjab, North-West Frontier Province, Sind and Baluchistan amalgamated into a single state. Self-government within the British Empire, or without the British Empire, the formation of a consolidated North-West Indian Muslim State appears to me to be the final destiny of the Muslims, at least of North-West India.
The name of the nation-state was coined by the Cambridge University's political science student and Muslim nationalist Rahmat Ali,[137] and was published on 28 January 1933 in the pamphlet Now or Never.[138] After coining the name of the nation-state, Ali noticed that there is an acronym formed from the names of the "homelands" of Muslims in northwest India:
- "P" for Punjab
- "A" for Afghania (now known as Khyber Pakhtunkhwa)
- "K" for Kashmir
- "S" for Sindh
- "Tan" for Balochistan; thus forming "Pakistan".[139][137]
After the publication of the pamphlet, the Hindu Press vehemently criticised it, and the word 'Pakstan' used in it.[140] Thus this word became a heated topic of debate. With the addition of an "i" to improve the pronunciation, the name of Pakistan grew in popularity and led to the commencement of the Pakistan Movement, and consequently the creation of Pakistan.[141] In Urdu and Persian languages, the name encapsulates the concept of Pak ("pure") and stan ("land") and hence a "Pure Land".[142] In 1935, the British government proposed to hand over substantial power to elected Indian provincial legislatures, with elections to be held in 1937.[143] After the elections the League took office in Bengal and Punjab, but the Congress won office in most of the other provinces, and refused to devolve power with the League in provinces with large Muslim minorities citing technical difficulties. The subsequent Congress Rule was unpopular among Muslims and seen as a reign of Hindu tyranny by Muslim leaders. Mohammad Ali Jinnah declared 22 December 1939, a "Day of Deliverance" for Indian Muslims. It was meant to celebrate the resignation of all members of the Congress party from provincial and central offices.[144]
Meanwhile, Muslim ideologues for independence also felt vindicated by the presidential address of V.D. Savarkar at the 19th session of the famous Hindu nationalist party Hindu Mahasabha in 1937. In it, this legendary revolutionary – popularly called Veer Savarkar and known as the iconic father of the Hindu fundamentalist ideology – propounded the seminal ideas of his Two Nation Theory or ethnic exclusivism, which influenced Jinnah profoundly.
1940 Resolution
[edit]
In 1940, Jinnah called a general session of the Muslim League in Lahore to discuss the situation that had arisen due to the outbreak of World War II and the Government of India joining the war without consulting Indian leaders. The meeting was also aimed at analysing the reasons that led to the defeat of the Muslim League in the general election of 1937 in the Muslim majority provinces. In his speech, Jinnah criticised the Indian Congress and the nationalists, and espoused the Two-Nation Theory and the reasons for the demand for separate homelands.[145] Sikandar Hayat Khan, the Chief Minister of Punjab, drafted the original resolution, but disavowed the final version,[146] that had emerged after protracted redrafting by the Subject Committee of the Muslim League. The final text unambiguously rejected the concept of a United India because of increasing inter-religious violence[147] and recommended the creation of independent states.[148] The resolution was moved in the general session by Shere-Bangla Bengali nationalist, AKF Haq, the Chief Minister of Bengal, supported by Chaudhry Khaliquzzaman and other leaders and was adopted on 23 March 1940.[149] The Resolution read as follows:
No constitutional plan would be workable or acceptable to the Muslims unless geographical contiguous units are demarcated into regions which should be so constituted with such territorial readjustments as may be necessary. That the areas in which the Muslims are numerically in majority as in the North-Western and Eastern zones of India should be grouped to constitute independent states in which the constituent units shall be autonomous and sovereign ... That adequate, effective and mandatory safeguards shall be specifically provided in the constitution for minorities in the units and in the regions for the protection of their religious, cultural, economic, political, administrative and other rights of the minorities, with their consultation. Arrangements thus should be made for the security of Muslims where they were in a minority.[150]
Final phase of the Pakistan Movement
[edit]
Islamic scholars debated over whether it was possible for the proposed Pakistan to truly become an Islamic state.[151][152]
While the Congress' top leadership had been in prison following the 1942 Quit India Movement, there was intense debate among Indian Muslims over the creation of a separate homeland.[152] The majority of Barelvis[153] and Barelvi ulema supported the creation of Pakistan[154] and pirs and Sunni ulema were mobilised by the Muslim League to demonstrate that India's Muslim masses wanted a separate country.[155] The Barelvis believed that any co-operation with Hindus would be counter productive.[156] On the other hand, most Deobandis, who were led by Maulana Husain Ahmad Madani, were opposed to the creation of Pakistan and the two-nation theory. According to them Muslims and Hindus could be one nation and Muslims were only a nation of themselves in the religious sense and not in the territorial sense.[157][158][159] At the same time some Deobandi ulema such as Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi, Mufti Muhammad Shafi and Maulana Shabbir Ahmad Usmani were supportive of the Muslim League's demand to create a separate Pakistan.[155][160]
Muslims who were living in provinces where they were demographically a minority, such as the United Provinces where the Muslim League enjoyed popular support, were assured by Jinnah that they could remain in India, migrate to Pakistan or continue living in India but as Pakistani citizens.
In the Constituent Assembly elections of 1946, the Muslim League won 425 out of 496 seats reserved for Muslims (polling 89.2% of total votes).[132] The Congress had hitherto refused to acknowledge the Muslim League's claim of being the representative of Indian Muslims but finally acquiesced to the League's claim after the results of this election. The Muslim League's demand for Pakistan had received overwhelming popular support from India's Muslims, especially those Muslims who were living in provinces such as UP where they were a minority.[161]
The British had neither the will, nor the financial resources or military power, to hold India any longer but they were also determined to avoid partition and for this purpose they arranged the Cabinet Mission Plan.[162] According to this plan India would be kept united but would be heavily decentralised with separate groupings of Hindu and Muslim majority provinces. The Muslim League accepted this plan as it contained the 'essence' of Pakistan but the Congress rejected it. After the failure of the Cabinet Mission Plan, Jinnah called for Muslims to observe Direct Action Day to demand the creation of a separate Pakistan. The Direct Action Day morphed into violent riots between Hindus and Muslims in Calcutta, with the violence displaying elements of ethnic cleansing. The riots in Calcutta were followed by intense communal rioting elsewhere, including in Noakhali (where Hindus were attacked by Muslims) and Bihar (where Hindus attacked Muslims) in October, resulting in large-scale displacement. In March 1947, such violence reached Punjab, where Sikhs and Hindus were massacred and driven out by Muslims in the Rawalpindi Division.[163]
The British Prime Minister Attlee appointed Lord Louis Mountbatten as India's last viceroy, to negotiate the independence of Pakistan and India and immediate British withdrawal. British leaders including Mountbatten did not support the creation of Pakistan but failed to convince Jinnah otherwise.[164][165] Mountbatten later confessed that he would most probably have sabotaged the creation of Pakistan had he known that Jinnah was dying of tuberculosis.[166]
In early 1947, the British had announced their desire to grant India its independence by June 1948. However, Lord Mountbatten decided to advance the date. In a meeting in June, Nehru and Abul Kalam Azad representing the Congress, Jinnah representing the Muslim League, B. R. Ambedkar representing the Untouchable community, and Master Tara Singh representing the Sikhs, agreed to partition India along religious lines.[citation needed]
Independence from the British Empire
[edit]On 14 August 1947, Pakistan gained independence. India gained independence the following day. The two provinces of British India, Punjab and Bengal, were divided along religious lines by the Radcliffe Commission. Mountbatten is alleged to have influenced the Radcliffe Commission to draw the line in India's favour.[167][168] Punjab's mostly Muslim western part went to Pakistan and its mostly Hindu/Sikh eastern part went to India but there were significant Muslim minorities in Punjab's eastern section and likewise there were many Hindus and Sikhs living in Punjab's western areas.
Intense communal rioting in the Punjab forced the governments of India and Pakistan to agree to a forced population exchange of Muslim and Hindu/Sikh minorities living in Punjab. After this population exchange only a few thousand low-caste Hindus remained in Pakistan's side of Punjab and only a tiny Muslim population remained in the town of Malerkotla in India's part of Punjab.[169] Political scientist Ishtiaq Ahmed says that although Muslims started the violence in Punjab, by the end of 1947 more Muslims had been killed by Hindus and Sikhs in East Punjab than the number of Hindus and Sikhs who had been killed by Muslims in West Punjab.[170][171]
More than ten million people migrated across the new borders and between 200,000 and 2,000,000[172][173][174] people died in the spate of communal violence in the Punjab in what some scholars have described as a 'retributive genocide' between the religions.[175] The Pakistani government claimed that 50,000 Muslim women were abducted and raped by Hindu and Sikh men and similarly the Indian government claimed that Muslims abducted and raped 33,000 Hindu and Sikh women.[176][177][178] The two governments agreed to repatriate abducted women and thousands of Hindu, Sikh and Muslim women were repatriated to their families in the 1950s. The dispute over Kashmir escalated into the first war between India and Pakistan. The conflict remains unresolved.
For the history after independence, see History of Pakistan (1947–present).
History by region
[edit]See also
[edit]Notes
[edit]- ^ Archaeological cultures identified with phases of Vedic culture include the Ochre Coloured Pottery culture, the Gandhara Grave culture, the Black and red ware culture and the Painted Grey Ware culture.[24]
- ^ The precise time span of the period is uncertain. Philological and linguistic evidence indicates that the Rigveda, the oldest of the Vedas, was composed roughly between 1700 and 1100 BCE, also referred to as the early Vedic period.[25]
References
[edit]- ^ Pakistan was created as the Dominion of Pakistan on 14 August 1947 after the start of British rule in, and partition of British India.
- ^ Neelis, Jason (2007), "Passages to India: Śaka and Kuṣāṇa migrations in historical contexts", in Srinivasan, Doris (ed.), On the Cusp of an Era: Art in the Pre-Kuṣāṇa World, Routledge, pp. 55–94, ISBN 978-90-04-15451-3 Quote: "Numerous passageways through the northwestern frontiers of the Indian subcontinent in modern Pakistan and Afghanistan served as migration routes to South Asia from the Iranian plateau and the Central Asian steppes. Prehistoric and protohistoric exchanges across the Hindu Kush, Karakoram, and Himalaya ranges demonstrate earlier precedents for routes through the high mountain passes and river valleys in later historical periods. Typological similarities between Northern Neolithic sites in Kashmir and Swat and sites in the Tibetan plateau and northern China show that 'Mountain chains have often integrated rather than isolated peoples.' Ties between the trading post of Shortughai in Badakhshan (northeastern Afghanistan) and the lower Indus valley provide evidence for long-distance commercial networks and 'polymorphous relations' across the Hindu Kush until c. 1800 B.C.' The Bactria-Margiana Archaeological Complex (BMAC) may have functioned as a 'filter' for the introduction of Indo-Iranian languages to the northwestern Indian subcontinent, although routes and chronologies remain hypothetical. (page 55)"
- ^ Marshall, John (2013) [1960], A Guide to Taxila, Cambridge University Press, pp. 1–, ISBN 978-1-107-61544-1 Quote: "Here also, in ancient days, was the meeting-place of three great trade-routes , one, from Hindustan and Eastern India, which was to become the `royal highway' described by Megasthenes as running from Pataliputra to the north-west of the Maurya empire; the second from Western Asia through Bactria, Kapisi and Pushkalavati and so across the Indus at Ohind to Taxila; and the third from Kashmir and Central Asia by way of the Srinagar valley and Baramula to Mansehra and so down the Haripur valley. These three trade-routes, which carried the bulk of the traffic passing by land between India and Central and Western Asia, played an all-important part in the history of Taxila. (page 1)"
- ^ Qamar, Raheel; Ayub, Qasim; Mohyuddin, Aisha; Helgason, Agnar; Mazhar, Kehkashan; Mansoor, Atika; Zerjal, Tatiana; Tyler-Smith, Chris; Mehdi, S. Qasim (2002). "Y-Chromosomal DNA Variation in Pakistan". The American Journal of Human Genetics. 70 (5): 1107–1124. doi:10.1086/339929. ISSN 0002-9297. PMC 447589. PMID 11898125.
- ^ Clarkson, Christopher (2014), "East of Eden: Founder Effects and Archaeological Signature of Modern Human Dispersal", in Dennell, Robin; Porr, Martin (eds.), Southern Asia, Australia and the Search for Human Origins, Cambridge University Press, pp. 76–89, ISBN 978-1-107-01785-6 Quote: "The record from South Asia (Pakistan, India and Sri Lanka) has been pivotal in discussions of the archaeological signature of early modern humans east of Africa because of the well-excavated and well-dated sites that have recently been reported in this region and because of the central role South Asia played in early population expansion and dispersals to the east. Genetic studies have revealed that India was the gateway to subsequent colonisation of Asia and Australia and saw the first major population expansion of modern human populations anywhere outside of Africa. South Asia therefore provides a crucial stepping-scone in early modern migration to Southeast Asia and Oceania. (pages 81–2)"
- ^ Coningham, Robin; Young, Ruth (2015), The Archaeology of South Asia: From the Indus to Asoka, c. 6500 BCE – 200 CE, Cambridge University Press Quote: ""Mehrgarh remains one of the key sites in South Asia because it has provided the earliest known undisputed evidence for farming and pastoral communities in the region, and its plant and animal material provide clear evidence for the ongoing manipulation, and domestication, of certain species. Perhaps most importantly in a South Asian context, the role played by zebu makes this a distinctive, localised development, with a character completely different to other parts of the world. Finally, the longevity of the site, and its articulation with the neighbouring site of Nausharo (c. 2800—2000 BCE), provides a very clear continuity from South Asia's first farming villages to the emergence of its first cities (Jarrige, 1984)."
- ^ Fisher, Michael H. (2018), An Environmental History of India: From Earliest Times to the Twenty-First Century, Cambridge University Press, ISBN 978-1-107-11162-2 Quote: "page 33: "The earliest discovered instance in India of well-established, settled agricultural society is at Mehrgarh in the hills between the Bolan Pass and the Indus plain (today in Pakistan) (see Map 3.1). From as early as 7000 BCE, communities there started investing increased labor in preparing the land and selecting, planting, tending, and harvesting particular grain-producing plants. They also domesticated animals, including sheep, goats, pigs, and oxen (both humped zebu [Bos indicus] and unhumped [Bos taurus]). Castrating oxen, for instance, turned them from mainly meat sources into domesticated draft-animals as well."
- ^ Dyson, Tim (2018), A Population History of India: From the First Modern People to the Present Day, Oxford University Press, ISBN 978-0-19-882905-8, Quote: "(p 29) "The subcontinent's people were hunter-gatherers for many millennia. There were very few of them. Indeed, 10,000 years ago there may only have been a couple of hundred thousand people, living in small, often isolated groups, the descendants of various 'modern' human incomers. Then, perhaps linked to events in Mesopotamia, about 8,500 years ago agriculture emerged in Baluchistan."
- ^ Allchin, Bridget; Allchin, Raymond (1982), The Rise of Civilization in India and Pakistan, Cambridge University Press, p. 131, ISBN 978-0-521-28550-6Quote: "During the second half of the fourth and early part of the third millennium B.C., a new development begins to become apparent in the greater Indus system, which we can now see to be a formative stage underlying the Mature Indus of the middle and late third millennium. This development seems to have involved the whole Indus system, and to a lesser extent the Indo-Iranian borderlands to its west, but largely left untouched the subcontinent east of the Indus system. (page 81)"
- ^ Dales, George; Kenoyer, Jonathan Mark; Alcock, Leslie (1986), Excavations at Mohenjo Daro, Pakistan: The Pottery, with an Account of the Pottery from the 1950 Excavations of Sir Mortimer Wheeler, UPenn Museum of Archaeology, p. 4, ISBN 978-0-934718-52-3
- ^ Murray, Tim (1999). Time and Archaeology. London: Routledge. p. 84. ISBN 978-0-415-11762-3.
- ^ Hirst, K. Kris (30 May 2019). "Mehrgarh, Pakistan and Life in the Indus Valley Before Harappa". ThoughtCo.
- ^ Coppa, A.; L. Bondioli; A. Cucina; D. W. Frayer; C. Jarrige; J. F. Jarrige; G. Quivron; M. Rossi; M. Vidale; R. Macchiarelli (2006). "Palaeontology: Early Neolithic tradition of dentistry". Nature. 440 (7085): 755–756. Bibcode:2006Natur.440..755C. doi:10.1038/440755a. PMID 16598247. S2CID 6787162.
- ^ Possehl, Gregory L. 1996. "Mehrgarh." Oxford Companion to Archaeology, edited by Brian Fagan. Oxford University Press, Oxford
- ^ The Centre for Archaeological Research Indus Balochistan Archived 28 September 2007 at the Wayback Machine, Musée National des Arts Asiatiques – Guimet
- ^ Chandler, Graham. 1999. "Traders of the Plain". Archived 18 February 2007 at the Wayback Machine Saudi Aramco World.
- ^ a b Wright 2009, p. 1.
- ^ Wright 2009: Quote: "The Indus civilization is one of three in the 'Ancient East' that, along with Mesopotamia and Pharonic Egypt, was a cradle of early civilization in the Old World (Childe 1950). Mesopotamia and Egypt were longer lived, but coexisted with Indus civilization during its florescence between 2600 and 1900 B.C. Of the three, the Indus was the most expansive, extending from today's northeast Afghanistan to Pakistan and India."
- ^ Blanc De La, Paul. "Indus Epigraphic Perspectives: Exploring Past Decipherment Attempts & Possible New Approaches 2013 Pg 11" (PDF). University of Ottawa Research. University of Ottawa. Archived from the original (PDF) on 4 September 2014. Retrieved 11 August 2014.
- ^ Feuerstein, Georg; Subhash Kak; David Frawley (1995). In search of the cradle of civilization: new light on ancient India. Wheaton, Illinois: Quest Books. p. 147. ISBN 978-0-8356-0720-9.
- ^ P. Biagi and E. Starnini 2021 – Indus Civilization. In Smith, C. (ed.) Encyclopedia of Global Archaeology. Springer Nature, Switzerland: 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-51726-1_3491-1
- ^ White, David Gordon (2003). Kiss of the Yogini. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. p. 28. ISBN 978-0-226-89483-6.
- ^ India: Reemergence of Urbanization. Retrieved 12 May 2007.
- ^ Witzel 1989.
- ^ Oberlies (1998:155) gives an estimate of 1100 BCE for the youngest hymns in book 10. Estimates for a terminus post quem of the earliest hymns are more uncertain. Oberlies (p. 158) based on 'cumulative evidence' sets wide range of 1700–1100
- ^ Petrie, Cameron A.; Magee, Peter. "Histories, epigraphy and authority: Achaemenid and indigenous control in Pakistan in the 1st millennium BC" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 11 June 2011. Retrieved 18 April 2024.
- ^ Schmitt, Rüdiger (10 August 2011). "Arachosia". Encyclopædia Iranica.
- ^ a b "Microsoft Word - GS_Alexander_Arrian.doc" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 19 May 2012. Retrieved 4 April 2013.
- ^ [A.B. Bosworth, "Conquest and Empire: The Reign of Alexander the Great." 1988. p. 146]
- ^ Mukerjee, R. K. History and Culture of Indian People, The Age of Imperial Unity, Foreign Invasion. p. 46.
- ^ Curtius in McCrindle, p. 192, J. W. McCrindle; History of Punjab, Vol I, 1997, p 229, Punjabi University, Patiala (editors): Fauja Singh, L. M. Joshi; Kambojas Through the Ages, 2005, p. 134, Kirpal Singh.
- ^ Plutarch, Mestrius (1994). "Chapter LXII". Plutarch's Lives. Vol. 7. Translated by Perrin, Bernadotte. London: Heinemann. ISBN 978-0-674-99110-1. Retrieved 23 May 2016.
- ^ Plutarch, Mestrius (1994). "Chapter LXIII". Plutarch's Lives. Vol. 7. Translated by Perrin, Bernadotte. London: Heinemann. ISBN 978-0-674-99110-1. Retrieved 23 May 2016.
- ^ a b Dyson, Tim (2018), A Population History of India: From the First Modern People to the Present Day, Oxford University Press, pp. 16–17, ISBN 978-0-19-882905-8 Quote: "Magadha power came to extend over the main cities and communication routes of the Ganges basin. Then, under Chandragupta Maurya (c.321–297 bce), and subsequently Ashoka his grandson, Pataliputra became the centre of the loose-knit Mauryan 'Empire' which during Ashoka's reign (c.268–232 bce) briefly had a presence throughout the main urban centres and arteries of the subcontinent, except for the extreme south."
- ^ Ludden, David (2013), India and South Asia: A Short History, Oneworld Publications, pp. 29–30, ISBN 978-1-78074-108-6 |quote=The geography of the Mauryan Empire resembled a spider with a small dense body and long spindly legs. The highest echelons of imperial society lived in the inner circle composed of the ruler, his immediate family, other relatives, and close allies, who formed a dynastic core. Outside the core, empire travelled stringy routes dotted with armed cities. Outside the palace, in the capital cities, the highest ranks in the imperial elite were held by military commanders whose active loyalty and success in war determined imperial fortunes. Wherever these men failed or rebelled, dynastic power crumbled. ... Imperial society flourished where elites mingled; they were its backbone, its strength was theirs. Kautilya's Arthasastra indicates that imperial power was concentrated in its original heartland, in old Magadha, where key institutions seem to have survived for about seven hundred years, down to the age of the Guptas. Here, Mauryan officials ruled local society, but not elsewhere. In provincial towns and cities, officials formed a top layer of royalty; under them, old conquered royal families were not removed, but rather subordinated. In most janapadas, the Mauryan Empire consisted of strategic urban sites connected loosely to vast hinterlands through lineages and local elites who were there when the Mauryas arrived and were still in control when they left.
- ^ Hermann Kulke 2004, pp. xii, 448.
- ^ Thapar, Romila (1990). A History of India, Volume 1. Penguin Books. p. 384. ISBN 0-14-013835-8.
- ^ Keay, John (2000). India: A History. Grove Press. p. 82. ISBN 978-0-8021-3797-5.
- ^ R. K. Mookerji 1966, p. 31.
- ^ Seleucus I ceded the territories of Arachosia (modern Kandahar), Gedrosia (modern Balochistan), and Paropamisadae (or Gandhara). Aria (modern Herat) "has been wrongly included in the list of ceded satrapies by some scholars ... on the basis of wrong assessments of the passage of Strabo ... and a statement by Pliny" (Raychaudhuri & Mukherjee 1996, p. 594).
- ^ John D Grainger 2014, p. 109: Seleucus "must ... have held Aria", and furthermore, his "son Antiochos was active there fifteen years later".
- ^ Bhandari, Shirin (5 January 2016). "Dinner on the Grand Trunk Road". Roads & Kingdoms. Retrieved 19 July 2016.
- ^ Hermann Kulke 2004, p. 67.
- ^ Dyson, Tim (2018), A Population History of India: From the First Modern People to the Present Day, Oxford University Press, p. 24, ISBN 978-0-19-882905-8 Quote: "Yet Sumit Guha considers that 20 million is an upper limit. This is because the demographic growth experienced in core areas is likely to have been less than that experienced in areas that were more lightly settled in the early historic period. The position taken here is that the population in Mauryan times (320–220 BCE) was between 15 and 30 million—although it may have been a little more, or it may have been a little less."
- ^ Ludden, David (2013), India and South Asia: A Short History, Oneworld Publications, pp. 28–29, ISBN 978-1-78074-108-6Quote: "A creative explosion in all the arts was a most remarkable feature of this ancient transformation, a permanent cultural legacy. Mauryan territory was created in its day by awesome armies and dreadful war, but future generations would cherish its beautiful pillars, inscriptions, coins, sculptures, buildings, ceremonies, and texts, particularly later Buddhist writers."
- ^ "The Buddha accompanied by Vajrapani, who has the characteristics of the Greek Heracles" Description of the same image on the cover page in Stoneman, Richard (8 June 2021). The Greek Experience of India: From Alexander to the Indo-Greeks. Princeton University Press. p. 4. ISBN 978-0-691-21747-5. Also "Herakles found an independent life in India in the guise of Vajrapani, the bearded, club-wielding companion of the Buddha" in Stoneman, Richard (8 June 2021). The Greek Experience of India: From Alexander to the Indo-Greeks. Princeton University Press. pp. 88–89. ISBN 978-0-691-21747-5.
- ^ Strabo (1928). The Geography of Strabo. Vol. V. Translated by Jones, Horace Leonard. Harvard University Press. pp. Ch. XI.
- ^ The Questions of King Milinda. Translated by Davids, T. W. Rhys. Oxford: The Clarendon Press. 1890.
- ^ World history from early times to A D 2000 by B .V. Rao: p.97
- ^ A Brief History of India by Alain Daniélou p.136
- ^ Ancient India by Ramesh Chandra Majumdar p. 234
- ^ "Parthian Pair of Earrings". Marymount School, New York. Archived from the original on 24 October 2007. Retrieved 22 November 2007.
- ^ "Zhang Qian". Encyclopædia Britannica. 2015.
- ^ "Yuezhi". Encyclopædia Britannica. 2015.
- ^ Si-Yu-Ki, Buddhist Records of the Western World, (Tr. Samuel Beal: Travels of Fa-Hian, The Mission of Sung-Yun and Hwei-S?ng, Books 1–5), Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner & Co. Ltd. London. 1906 and Hill (2009), pp. 29, 318–350
- ^ which began about 127 CE. "Falk 2001, pp. 121–136", Falk (2001), pp. 121–136, Falk, Harry (2004), pp. 167–176 and Hill (2009), pp. 29, 33, 368–371.
- ^ Rafi U. Samad (2011). The Grandeur of Gandhara: The Ancient Buddhist Civilization of the Swat, Peshawar, Kabul and Indus Valleys. Algora Publishing. pp. 93–. ISBN 978-0-87586-859-2.
- ^ Grégoire Frumkin (1970). Archaeology in Soviet Central Asia. Brill Archive. pp. 51–. GGKEY:4NPLATFACBB.
- ^ Oxford History of India – Vincent Smith
- ^ Ancient and Medieval History of India – H.G. Rowlinson
- ^ "The History of Pakistan: The Kushans". www.kushan.org. Archived from the original on 7 July 2015. Retrieved 30 April 2017.
- ^ Si-Yu-Ki, Buddhist Records of the Western World, (Tr. Samuel Beal: Travels of Fa-Hian, The Mission of Sung-Yun and Hwei-S?ng, Books 1–5), Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner & Co. Ltd. London. 1906
- ^ Hiuen Tsiang, Si-Yu-Ki, Buddhist Records of the Western World, (Tr. Samuel Beal), Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner & Co. Ltd. London. 1906, pp. 167–168.
- ^ Rezakhani, Khodadad (2017). ReOrienting the Sasanians: East Iran in Late Antiquity. Edinburgh University Press. pp. 105–124. ISBN 9781474400305.
- ^ "Note 8: It is now clear that the Hephtalites were not part of those Huns who conquered the land south of the Hindu-Kush and Sind as well in the early 6th century. In fact, this latter Hunnic group was the one commonly known as Alkhon because of the inscriptions on their coins (Vondrovec, 2008)."
- ^ Rezakhani, Khodadad (4 October 2023). "From the Kushans to the Western Turks". King of the Seven Climes: 207.
- ^ History of India by N. Jayapalan p.134
- ^ Smith 1994, p. 77–78.
- ^ Hareir, Idris El; Mbaye, Ravane (1 January 2011). The Spread of Islam Throughout the World. UNESCO. ISBN 978-92-3-104153-2.
- ^ Sindh. (2007). In Encyclopædia Britannica. Retrieved 15 March 2007, from: Encyclopædia Britannica Online
- ^ Rahman, Abdul (2002). "New Light on the Khingal, Turk and the Hindu Sahis" (PDF). Ancient Pakistan. XV: 37–42.
The Hindu Śāhis were therefore neither Bhattis, or Janjuas, nor Brahmans. They were simply Uḍis/Oḍis. It can now be seen that the term Hindu Śāhi is a misnomer and, based as it is merely upon religious discrimination, should be discarded and forgotten. The correct name is Uḍi or Oḍi Śāhi dynasty.
- ^ Meister, Michael W. (2005). "The Problem of Platform Extensions at Kafirkot North" (PDF). Ancient Pakistan. XVI: 41–48.
Rehman (2002: 41) makes a good case for calling the Hindu Śāhis by a more accurate name, "Uḍi Śāhis".
- ^ The Shahi Afghanistan and Punjab, 1973, pp 1, 45–46, 48, 80, Dr D. B. Pandey; The Úakas in India and Their Impact on Indian Life and Culture, 1976, p 80, Vishwa Mitra Mohan – Indo-Scythians; Country, Culture and Political life in early and medieval India, 2004, p 34, Daud Ali.
- ^ Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, 1954, pp 112 ff; The Shahis of Afghanistan and Punjab, 1973, p 46, Dr D. B. Pandey; The Úakas in India and Their Impact on Indian Life and Culture, 1976, p 80, Vishwa Mitra Mohan – Indo-Scythians.
- ^ India, A History, 2001, p 203, John Keay.
- ^ Sehrai, Fidaullah (1979). Hund: The Forgotten City of Gandhara, p. 2. Peshawar Museum Publications New Series, Peshawar.
- ^ (Wynbrandt 2009, pp. 52–54)
- ^ a b c d e P. M. Holt; Ann K. S. Lambton; Bernard Lewis, eds. (1977), The Cambridge history of Islam, Cambridge University Press, p. 3, ISBN 978-0-521-29137-8,
... Jaypala of Waihind saw danger in the consolidation of the kingdom of Ghazna and decided to destroy it. He therefore invaded Ghazna, but was defeated ...
- ^ a b c d Ferishta's History of Dekkan from the first Mahummedan conquests(etc). Shrewsbury [Eng.] : Printed for the editor by J. and W. Eddowes. 1794 – via Internet Archive.
- ^ Schwartzberg, Joseph E. (1978). A Historical Atlas of South Asia. Oxford University Press, Digital South Asia Library. p. 147, Map "g".
- ^ Eaton 2019, p. 38.
- ^ Bosworth, C.E. (1 January 1998). History of Civilizations of Central Asia. UNESCO. pp. 432–433. ISBN 978-92-3-103467-1.
- ^ Thomas 2018, p. 26, Figure I:2.
- ^ Schmidt, Karl J. (20 May 2015). An Atlas and Survey of South Asian History. Routledge. p. 37, Map 16.2. ISBN 978-1-317-47681-8.
- ^ History of Civilizations of Central Asia. UNESCO. 1 January 1998. ISBN 978-92-3-103467-1.
In 1201 Ghurid troops entered Khurasan and captured Nishapur, Merv, Sarakhs and Tus, reaching as far as Gurgan and Bistam. Kuhistan, a stronghold of the Ismailis, was plundered and all Khurasan was brought temporarily under Ghurid control
- ^ Bosworth 2001b.
- ^ Turkish History and Culture in India: Identity, Art and Transregional Connections. BRILL. 17 August 2020. p. 237. ISBN 978-90-04-43736-4.
In 1205, Bakhtīyar Khilji sacked Nudiya, the pre-eminent city of western Bengal and established an Islamic government at Laukhnauti, the capital of the predecessor Sena dynasty. On this occasion, commemorative coins were struck in gold and silver in the name of Muhammad b. Sām
- ^ Gat, Azar (2013). Nations: The Long History and Deep Roots of Political Ethnicity and Nationalism. Cambridge University Press. p. 126. ISBN 9781107007857.
- ^ Siddiqui, Habibullah. "The Soomras of Sindh: their origin, main characteristics and rule – an overview (general survey) (1025 – 1351 AD)" (PDF). Literary Conference on Soomra Period in Sindh.
- ^ "The Arab Conquest". International Journal of Dravidian Linguistics. 36 (1): 91. 2007.
The Soomras are believed to be Parmar Rajputs found even today in Rajasthan, Saurashtra, Kutch and Sindh. The Cambridge History of India refers to the Soomras as "a Rajput dynasty the later members of which accepted Islam" (p. 54 ).
- ^ Dani, Ahmad Hasan (2007). History of Pakistan: Pakistan through ages. Sang-e Meel Publications. p. 218. ISBN 978-969-35-2020-0.
But as many kings of the dynasty bore Hindu names, it is almost certain that the Soomras were of local origin. Sometimes they are connected with Paramara Rajputs, but of this there is no definite proof.
- ^ a b c d Collinet, Annabelle (2008). "Chronology of Sehwan Sharif through Ceramics (The Islamic Period)". In Boivin, Michel (ed.). Sindh through history and representations : French contributions to Sindhi studies. Karachi: Oxford University Press. pp. 9, 11, 113 (note 43). ISBN 978-0-19-547503-6.
- ^ a b Boivin, Michel (2008). "Shivaite Cults And Sufi Centres: A Reappraisal Of The Medieval Legacy In Sindh". In Boivin, Michel (ed.). Sindh through history and representations : French contributions to Sindhi studies. Karachi: Oxford University Press. p. 30. ISBN 978-0-19-547503-6.
- ^ Aniruddha Ray (2019). The Sultanate of Delhi (1206–1526): Polity, Economy, Society and Culture. Routledge. p. 61. ISBN 978-0-367-22895-8.
- ^ "Historical Monuments at Makli, Thatta".
- ^ a b Census Organization (Pakistan); Abdul Latif (1976). Population Census of Pakistan, 1972: Larkana. Manager of Publications.
- ^ Rapson, Edward James; Haig, Sir Wolseley; Burn, Sir Richard; Dodwell, Henry (1965). The Cambridge History of India: Turks and Afghans, edited by W. Haig. Chand. p. 518.
- ^ U. M. Chokshi; M. R. Trivedi (1989). Gujarat State Gazetteer. Director, Government Print., Stationery and Publications, Gujarat State. p. 274.
It was the conquest of Kutch by the Sindhi tribe of Sama Rajputs that marked the emergence of Kutch as a separate kingdom in the 14th century.
- ^ a b "Home". www.panhwar.net.
- ^ "Archnet.org: Thattah". Archived from the original on 6 June 2012. Retrieved 8 December 2015.
- ^ Population Census of Pakistan, 1972: Jacobabad
- ^ a b c "Fort and Shalamar Gardens in Lahore". UNESCO World Heritage Centre. Retrieved 13 December 2018.
- ^ "The Islamic World to 1600: Rise of the Great Islamic Empires (The Mughal Empire)". Archived from the original on 27 September 2011. Retrieved 22 August 2017.
- ^ www.DiscoverSikhism.com. The Encyclopedia Of Sikhism – Volume I A-D.
- ^ a b Snehi, Yogesh (24 April 2019). Spatializing Popular Sufi Shrines in Punjab: Dreams, Memories, Territoriality. Taylor & Francis. p. 190. ISBN 978-0-429-51563-7.
- ^ Mirzā, Shafqat Tanvīr (1992). Resistance Themes in Punjabi Literature. Sang-e-Meel Publications. ISBN 978-969-35-0101-8.
- ^ Siddiqi, Dr. Mahmudul Hasan (2014) [1972]. "Appendix H: The Langāhs of Multan". History of the Arghuns and Tarkhans of Sindh (1507 –1593) (2nd ed.). Karachi: Endowment Fund Trust For Preservation Of The Heritage Of Sindh. pp. 220–225. ISBN 978-969-9860-06-5. Originally a doctoral dissertation presented at the University of Manchester in 1958, first published by the University of Sindh in 1972 (see Preface, pp. ix–xiii)
- ^ www.DiscoverSikhism.com. History Of The Sikhs Vol. IV The Sikh Commonwealth Or Rise And Fall Of Sikh Misls.
- ^ a b c Metcalf, Barbara Daly (1 January 1984). Moral Conduct and Authority: The Place of Adab in South Asian Islam. University of California Press. ISBN 978-0-520-04660-3.
- ^ Gilmartin, David (14 April 2020). Blood and Water: The Indus River Basin in Modern History. Univ of California Press. ISBN 978-0-520-35553-8.
- ^ Punjab Government (1883). Gazetteer Of The Jhang District.
- ^ Punjab Government (1883). Gazetteer Of The Jhang District.
- ^ Punjab Government (1883). Gazetteer Of The Jhang District.
- ^ Yasmin, Robina (2022). Muslims Under Sikh Rule in the Nineteenth Century: Maharaja Ranjit Singh and Religious Tolerance. I.B. Tauris. ISBN 978-0-7556-4035-5.
- ^ Meredith L. Runion The History of Afghanistan pp 69 Greenwood Publishing Group, 2007 ISBN 0313337985
- ^ Patil, Vishwas. Panipat.
- ^ Roy, Kaushik (2004). India's Historic Battles: From Alexander the Great to Kargil. Permanent Black, India. pp. 80–1. ISBN 978-81-7824-109-8.
- ^ Jacques, Tony. Dictionary of Battles and Sieges. Greenwood Press. p. 562. ISBN 978-0-313-33536-5.
- ^ "Marathas and the English Company 1707–1818 by Sanderson Beck". san.beck.org. Retrieved 10 April 2015.
- ^ Jaswant Lal Mehta (2005). Advanced Study in the History of Modern India 1707–1813. Sterling Publishers Pvt. Ltd. p. 224. ISBN 978-1-932705-54-6.
- ^ Meredith L. Runion The History of Afghanistan pp 71 Greenwood Publishing Group, 2007 ISBN 0313337985
- ^ Heath, Ian; Michael Perry (2005). The Sikh army 1799–1849. Oxford: Osprey Publishing. p. 3. ISBN 978-1-84176-777-2.
- ^ a b Chisholm, Hugh, ed. (1911). . Encyclopædia Britannica. Vol. 22 (11th ed.). Cambridge University Press. p. 892.
- ^ Smith, George (1882). The Geography of British India, Political & Physical. London: John Murray. Retrieved 2 August 2014.
- ^ J. S. Grewal, The Sikhs of the Punjab, Volumes 2–3, Cambridge University Press, 8 October 1998, p.258
- ^ Chandra, Bipan; Amales Tripathi; Barun De (1972). Freedom struggle. New Delhi: National Book Trust, India.
- ^ Jalal, Ayesha (1985). The sole spokesman : Jinnah, the Muslim League, and the demand for Pakistan. Cambridge (UK); New York: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-24462-6.
- ^ "The Statesman: The All India Muslim League". Government of Pakistan. Archived from the original on 25 December 2007. Retrieved 4 December 2007.
- ^ Talbot, Ian (1999). Pakistan: a modern history. New Delhi; New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-565073-0.
- ^ Blood, Peter R. (1995). Pakistan: a country study. Washington, D.C.: Federal Research Division, Library of Congress. pp. 28–29. ISBN 978-0-8444-0834-7.
- ^ Stanley A. Wolpert (1988). "The Indian National Congress in Nationalist Perspective". In Richard Sisson (ed.). Congress and Indian Nationalism: The Pre-independence Phase. University of California Press. pp. 25–. ISBN 978-0-520-06041-8.
For five years the League remained thoroughly loyalist to and fully supportive of British rule until King George V announced the revocation of Bengal's partition at his coronation Durbar in Delhi in December 1911. The Muslim League viewed that reversal of British policy in Bengal as a victory for "Hindu terrorist tactics".
- ^ a b Kulke, Hermann; Dietmar Rothermund (1986). A History of India. Totowa, New Jersey: Barnes & Noble. pp. 300–312. ISBN 978-0-389-20670-5.
- ^ Kulke, Hermann; Dietmar Rothermund (1986). A History of India. Totowa, New Jersey: Barnes & Noble. pp. 272–273. ISBN 978-0-389-20670-5.
- ^ a b c d e "Round Table Conferences". Story of Pakistan. Round Table Conferences. June 2003. Retrieved 27 September 2013.
- ^ "Sir Muhammad Iqbal's 1930 Presidential Address". Speeches, Writings, and Statements of Iqbal. Retrieved 4 December 2007.
- ^ Mir, Mustansir (2006). Iqbal. London; New York: I. B. Tauris. p. 138. ISBN 978-1-84511-094-9.
- ^ a b Ihsan Aslam (11 February 2004). "The History Man: Cambridge remembers Rahmat Ali". Daily Times. Archived from the original on 16 June 2008. Retrieved 4 December 2007.
- ^ Choudhary Rahmat Ali (28 January 1933). "Now or never: Are we to live or perish for ever?". Pakistan Movement Historical Documents. Retrieved 4 December 2007.
- ^ "Ch. Rahmat Ali". Archived from the original on 19 April 2011. Retrieved 23 August 2015.
- ^ Khursheed Kamal Aziz. Rahmat Ali: a biography.1987, p.92
- ^ Khursheed Kamal Aziz. Rahmat Ali: a biography.1987, p472-487
- ^ Brown, W. Norman (5 April 1947). "India's Pakistan Issue". Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society. 91 (2): 162–180. ISSN 0003-049X. PMID 20291795.
- ^ Admin (June 2003). "The Communal Award". Story Of Pakistan. The Communal Award.
- ^ "Rule of Congress Ministries | The Government of India Act of 1935 was practically implemented in 1937". Story of Pakistan. 1 June 2003. Archived from the original on 2 April 2019. Retrieved 2 April 2019.
- ^ Wolpert, Stanley A. (1984). Jinnah of Pakistan. New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-503412-7.
- ^ Tinker, Hugh (1987). Men who overturned empires : fighters, dreamers, and schemers. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press. p. 50. ISBN 978-0-299-11460-2.
- ^ Malik, Muhammad Aslam (2001). The making of the Pakistan resolution. Karachi: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-579538-7.
- ^ Ahmed, Syed Iftikhar (1983). Essays on Pakistan. Lahore: Alpha Bravo Publishers. pp. 29–30. OCLC 12811079.
- ^ Qutubuddin Aziz. "Muslim's struggle for independent statehood". Jang Group of Newspapers. Archived from the original on 19 February 2008. Retrieved 4 December 2007.
- ^ Qureshi, Ishtiaq Husain (1967). A Short history of Pakistan. Karachi: University of Karachi.
- ^ "Was Pakistan sufficiently imagined before independence? – The Express Tribune". The Express Tribune. 23 August 2015. Retrieved 8 March 2017.
- ^ a b Ashraf, Ajaz. "The Venkat Dhulipala interview: 'On the Partition issue, Jinnah and Ambedkar were on the same page'". Scroll.in. Retrieved 8 March 2017.
- ^ Long, Roger D.; Singh, Gurharpal; Samad, Yunas; Talbot, Ian (2015). State and Nation-Building in Pakistan: Beyond Islam and Security. Routledge. p. 167. ISBN 978-1-317-44820-4.
In the 1940s a solid majority of the Barelvis were supporters of the Pakistan Movement and played a supporting role in its final phase (1940-7), mostly under the banner of the All-India Sunni Conference which had been founded in 1925.
- ^ John, Wilson (2009). Pakistan: The Struggle Within. Pearson Education India. p. 87. ISBN 9788131725047.
During the 1946 election, Barelvi Ulama issued fatwas in favour of the Muslim League.
- ^ a b "'What's wrong with Pakistan?'". Dawn. 13 September 2013. Retrieved 10 January 2017.
However, the fundamentalist dimension in Pakistan movement developed more strongly when the Sunni Ulema and pirs were mobilised to prove that the Muslim masses wanted a Muslim/Islamic state...Even the Grand Mufti of Deoband, Mufti Muhammad Shafi, issued a fatwa in support of the Muslim League's demand.
- ^ Cesari, Jocelyne (2014). The Awakening of Muslim Democracy: Religion, Modernity, and the State. Cambridge University Press. p. 135. ISBN 978-1-107-51329-7.
For example, the Barelvi ulama supported the formation of the state of Pakistan and thought that any alliance with Hindus (such as that between the Indian National Congress and the Jamiat ulama-I-Hind [JUH]) was counterproductive.
- ^ Jaffrelot, Christophe (2004). A History of Pakistan and Its Origins. Anthem Press. p. 224. ISBN 978-1-84331-149-2.
Believing that Islam was a universal religion, the Deobandi advocated a notion of a composite nationalism according to which Hindus and Muslims constituted one nation.
- ^ Abdelhalim, Julten (2015). Indian Muslims and Citizenship: Spaces for Jihād in Everyday Life. Routledge. p. 26. ISBN 978-1-317-50875-5.
Madani...stressed the difference between qaum, meaning a nation, hence a territorial concept, and millat, meaning an Ummah and thus a religious concept.
- ^ Sikka, Sonia (2015). Living with Religious Diversity. Routledge. p. 52. ISBN 9781317370994.
Madani makes a crucial distinction between qaum and millat. According to him, qaum connotes a territorial multi-religious entity, while millat refers to the cultural, social and religious unity of Muslims exclusively.
- ^ Khan, Shafique Ali (1988). The Lahore resolution: arguments for and against : history and criticism. Royal Book Co. p. 48. ISBN 9789694070810. Retrieved 10 January 2017.
Besides, Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi, along with his pupils and disciples, lent his entire support to the demand of Pakistan.
- ^ Mohiuddin, Yasmin Niaz (2007). Pakistan: A Global Studies Handbook. ABC-CLIO. p. 70. ISBN 978-1-85109-801-9.
In the elections of 1946, the Muslim League won 90 percent of the legislative seats reserved for Muslims. It was the power of the big zamindars in Punjab and Sindh behind the Muslim League candidates, and the powerful campaign among the poor peasants of Bengal on economic issues of rural indebtedness and zamindari abolition, that led to this massive landslide victory (Alavi 2002, 14). Even Congress, which had always denied the League's claim to be the only true representative of Indian Muslims had to concede the truth of that claim. The 1946 election was, in effect, a plebiscite among Muslims on Pakistan.
- ^ Barbara D. Metcalf; Thomas R. Metcalf (2002). A Concise History of India. Cambridge University Press. pp. 212–. ISBN 978-0-521-63974-3
- ^ Talbot, Ian; Singh, Gurharpal (2009), The Partition of India, Cambridge University Press, p. 67, ISBN 978-0-521-67256-6,
The signs of 'ethnic cleansing' are first evident evident in the Great Calcutta Killing of 16–19 August 1946. Over 100,000 people were made homeless. They were also present in the wave of violence that rippled out from Calcutta to Bihar, where there were high Muslim casualty figures, and to Noakhali deep in the Ganges-Brahmaputra delta of Bengal. Concerning the Noakhali riots, one British officer spoke of a 'determined and organized' Muslim effort to drive out all the Hindus, who accounted for around a fifth of the total population. Similarly, the Punjab counterparts to this transition of violence were the Rawalpindi massacres of March 1947. The level of death and destruction in such West Punjab villages as Thoa Khalsa was such that communities couldn't live together in its wake.
- ^ McGrath, Allen (1996). The Destruction of Pakistan's Democracy. Oxford University Press. p. 38. ISBN 978-0-19-577583-9.
Undivided India, their magnificent imperial trophy, was besmirched by the creation of Pakistan, and the division of India was never emotionally accepted by many British leaders, Mountbatten among them.
- ^ Ahmed, Akbar S. (1997). Jinnah, Pakistan and Islamic Identity: The Search for Saladin. Psychology Press. p. 136. ISBN 978-0-415-14966-2.
Mountbatten's partiality was apparent in his own statements. He tilted openly and heavily towards Congress. While doing so he clearly expressed his lack of support and faith in the Muslim League and its Pakistan idea.
- ^ Ahmed, Akbar (2005). Jinnah, Pakistan and Islamic Identity: The Search for Saladin. Routledge. ISBN 978-1-134-75022-1.
When Mountbatten was asked by Collins and Lapierre if he would have sabotaged Pakistan if he had known that Jinnah was dying of tuberculosis, his answer was instructive. There was no doubt in his mind about the legality or morality of his position on Pakistan. 'Most probably,' he said (1982:39).
- ^ "K. Z. Islam, 2002, The Punjab Boundary Award, Inretrospect". Archived from the original on 17 January 2006. Retrieved 15 March 2017.
- ^ Partitioning India over lunch, Memoirs of a British civil servant Christopher Beaumont. BBC News (10 August 2007).
- ^ KHALIDI, OMAR (1 January 1998). "From Torrent to Trickle: Indian Muslim Migration to Pakistan 1947–97". Islamic Studies. 37 (3): 339–352. JSTOR 20837002.
- ^ Ahmed, Ishtiaq. "The Punjab Bloodied, Partitioned and Cleansed".
- ^ Butt, Shafiq (24 April 2016). "A page from history: Dr Ishtiaq underscores need to build bridges".
- ^ "Murder, rape and shattered families: 1947 Partition Archive effort underway". Dawn. 13 March 2015. Retrieved 14 January 2017.
There are no exact numbers of people killed and displaced, but estimates range from a few hundred thousand to two million killed and more than 10 million displaced.
- ^ Basrur, Rajesh M. (2008). South Asia's Cold War: Nuclear Weapons and Conflict in Comparative Perspective. Routledge. ISBN 978-1-134-16531-5.
An estimated 12–15 million people were displaced, and some 2 million died. The legacy of Partition (never without a capital P) remains strong today ...
- ^ Isaacs, Harold Robert (1975). Idols of the Tribe: Group Identity and Political Change. Harvard University Press. ISBN 978-0-674-44315-0.
2,000,000 killed in the Hindu-Muslim holocaust during the partition of India and the creation of Pakistan
- ^ Brass, Paul R. (2003). "The partition of India and retributive genocide in the Punjab, 1946–47: means, methods, and purposes" (PDF). Journal of Genocide Research. Carfax Publishing: Taylor and Francis Group. pp. 81–82 (5(1), 71–101). Archived from the original (PDF) on 14 April 2015. Retrieved 16 August 2014.
In the event, largely but not exclusively as a consequence of their efforts, the entire Muslim population of the eastern Punjab districts migrated to West Punjab and the entire Sikh and Hindu populations moved to East Punjab in the midst of widespread intimidation, terror, violence, abduction, rape, and murder.
- ^ Daiya, Kavita (2011). Violent Belongings: Partition, Gender, and National Culture in Postcolonial India. Temple University Press. p. 75. ISBN 978-1-59213-744-2.
The official estimate of the number of abducted women during Partition was placed at 33,000 non-Muslim (Hindu or Sikh predominantly) women in Pakistan, and 50,000 Muslim women in India.
- ^ Singh, Amritjit; Iyer, Nalini; Gairola, Rahul K. (2016). Revisiting India's Partition: New Essays on Memory, Culture, and Politics. Lexington Books. p. 14. ISBN 978-1-4985-3105-4.
The horrific statistics that surround women refugees-between 75,000–100,000 Hindu, Muslim and Sikh women who were abducted by men of the other communities, subjected to multiple rapes, mutilations, and, for some, forced marriages and conversions-is matched by the treatment of the abducted women in the hands of the nation-state. In the Constituent Assembly in 1949 it was recorded that of the 50,000 Muslim women abducted in India, 8,000 of then were recovered, and of the 33,000 Hindu and Sikh women abducted, 12,000 were recovered.
- ^ Abraham, Taisha (2002). Women and the Politics of Violence. Har-Anand Publications. p. 131. ISBN 978-81-241-0847-5.
In addition thousands of women on both sides of the newly formed borders (estimated range from 29,000 to 50,000 Muslim women and 15,000 to 35,000 Hindu and Sikh women) were abducted, raped, forced to convert, forced into marriage, forced back into what the two States defined as 'their proper homes,' torn apart from their families once during partition by those who abducted them, and again, after partition, by the State which tried to 'recover' and 'rehabilitate' them.
Works cited
[edit]- Wynbrant, James (2012). A Brief History of Pakistan. University of Nebraska Press. ISBN 978-0-8160-6184-6.
- The Imperial Gazetteer of India (26 vol, 1908–31), highly detailed description of all of Pakistan & India in 1901. complete text online
- Bosworth, C. Edmund (2001b). "Ghurids". Encyclopædia Iranica, online edition, Vol. X, Fasc. 6. pp. 586–590.
- Eaton, Richard M. (2019). India in the Persianate Age: 1000–1765. Allen Lane. ISBN 978-0713995824.
- John D Grainger (2014). Seleukos Nikator (Routledge Revivals): Constructing a Hellenistic Kingdom. Taylor & Francis. ISBN 978-1-317-80098-9.
- Jalal, Ayesha ed. The Oxford Companion to Pakistani History (Oxford University Press, 2012) 558 pp. Topical essays by leading scholars online review
- Hermann Kulke; Dietmar Rothermund (2004). A History of India (4th ed.). London: Routledge. ISBN 0-415-15481-2.
- R. K. Mookerji (1966). Chandragupta Maurya and His Times. Motilal Banarsidass. ISBN 978-81-208-0405-0.
- Thomas, David (2018). The Ebb and Flow of the Ghūrid Empire. Sydney University Press. ISBN 978-1-74332-542-1.
- Witzel, Michael (1989), Colette Caillat (ed.), Tracing the Vedic dialects, in Dialectes dans les litteratures Indo-Aryennes (PDF) (in French), Paris: de Boccard
- Wynbrandt, James (2009). A Brief History of Pakistan. New York: Infobase Publishing.
Surveys
[edit]- Bose, Sugata, and Ayesha Jalal. "Modern South Asia : History, Culture, Political Economy". Fourth edition. London ;: Routledge Taylor & Francis Group, 2018 ISBN 978-1-138-24368-2
- Burki, Shahid Javed. Pakistan: Fifty Years of Nationhood (3rd ed. 1999)
- Jaffrelot, Christophe (2004). A history of Pakistan and its origins. London: Anthem Press. ISBN 978-1-84331-149-2.
- Jalal, Ayesha, Democracy and authoritarianism in South Asia: A comparative and historical perspective (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995)
- Ludden, David, India and South Asia: A short history, 2nd edn (Oxford: One World, 2013)
- Metcalf, Barbara and T.R. and Metcalf, A concise history of modern India, 3rd edn (Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press, 2012)
- Qureshi, Ishtiaq Husain (1967). A Short history of Pakistan. Karachi: University of Karachi.
- Talbot, Ian. Pakistan: A Modern History (2010) ISBN 0230623042.
- Talbot, Ian and Gurharpal Singh. "The partition of India", Cambridge 2009
- Wilson, Jon, India conquered: Britain's Raj and the passions of Empire (London: Simon & Schuster, 2016)
- Ziring, Lawrence (1997). Pakistan in the twentieth century : a political history. Karachi; New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-577816-8.
Further reading
[edit]- Ahmed, Akbar . "Jinnah, Pakistan and Islamic Identity : the Search for Saladin", London ;: Routledge, 1997.
- Ahmed, Akbar S. (1976). Millennium and charisma among Pathans : a critical essay in social anthropology. London; Boston: Routledge & Kegan Paul. ISBN 978-0-7100-8348-7.
- Allchin, Bridget; Allchin, F. Raymond (1982). The rise of civilisation in India and Pakistan. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-24244-8.
- Baluch, Muhammad Sardar Khan (1977). History of the Baluch race and Baluchistan. Quetta: Gosha-e-Adab.
- Bolitho, Hector. "Jinnah, Creator of Pakistan", London: J. Murray, 1954.
- Smith, G. Rex, ed. (1994). The History of al-Ṭabarī, Volume XIV: The Conquest of Iran, A.D. 641–643/A.H. 21–23. SUNY Series in Near Eastern Studies. Albany, New York: State University of New York Press. ISBN 978-0-7914-1293-0.
- Weiner, Myron; Ali Banuazizi (1994). The Politics of social transformation in Afghanistan, Iran, and Pakistan. Syracuse, New York: Syracuse University Press. ISBN 978-0-8156-2608-4.
- Bhutto, Benazir (1988). Daughter of the East. London: Hamilton. ISBN 978-0-241-12398-0.
- Bosworth, Clifford Edmund (1963). The Ghaznavids; their empire in Afghanistan and eastern Iran, 994 : 1040. Edinburgh: University Press.
- Bosworth, Clifford Edmund (1977). The later Ghaznavids: splendour and decay. New York: Columbia University Press. ISBN 978-0-231-04428-8.
- Bryant, Edwin F. (2001). The quest for the origins of Vedic culture : the Indo-Aryan migration debate. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-513777-4.
- Choudhury, G.W. India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, and the major powers: politics of a divided subcontinent (1975), by a Pakistani scholar; Covers 1946 to 1974.
- Dixit, J. N. India-Pakistan in War & Peace (2002). online Archived 31 March 2019 at the Wayback Machine
- Lyon, Peter. Conflict between India and Pakistan: An Encyclopedia (2008). oonline Archived 31 March 2019 at the Wayback Machine
- Pande, Aparna. Explaining Pakistan's foreign policy: escaping India (Routledge, 2011).
- Sattar, Abdul. Pakistan's Foreign Policy, 1947–2012: A Concise History (3rd ed. Oxford UP, 2013). online 2nd 2009 edition
- Cohen, Stephen P. (2004). The idea of Pakistan. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution. ISBN 978-0-8157-1502-3.
- Davoodi, Schoresch & Sow, Adama (2007): The Political Crisis of Pakistan in 2007 – EPU Research Papers: Issue 08/07, Stadtschlaining
- Esposito, John L. (1999). The Oxford history of Islam. New York, N.Y.: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-510799-9.
- Gascoigne, Bamber (2002). A Brief History of the Great Moguls. New York: Carroll & Graf Publishers. ISBN 978-0-7867-1040-9.
- Gauhar, Altaf (1996). Ayub Khan, Pakistan's first military ruler. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-577647-8.
- Hardy, Peter (1972). The Muslims of British India. London: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-08488-8.
- Hopkirk, Peter (1992). The Great Game : the struggle for empire in Central Asia. New York: Kodansha International. ISBN 978-4-7700-1703-1.
- Ikram, S. M. "Makers of Pakistan and Modern Muslim India", Lahore, 1970
- Iqbal, Muhammad (1934). The reconstruction of religious thought in Islam. London: Oxford University Press.
- Jalal, Ayesha. "The Sole Spokesman: Jinnah, the Muslim League and the demand for Pakistan", Cambridge 1985, ISBN 0-521-45850-1
- Jalal, Ayesha. The Struggle for Pakistan: A Muslim Homeland and Global Politics Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2014.
- Jalal, Ayesha. “Conjuring Pakistan: History as Official Imagining.” International journal of Middle East studies 27, no. 1 (1995), 73–89.
- Jalal, Ayesha. “Inheriting the Raj: Jinnah and the Governor-Generalship Issue.” Modern Asian studies 19, no. 1 (1985), 29–53.
- Khan, Yasmin. The Great Partition: The Making of India and Pakistan (2008)
- Kenoyer, Jonathan Mark (1998). Ancient cities of the Indus valley civilisation. Karachi: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-577940-0.
- Moorhouse, Geoffrey (1992). To the frontier: a journey to the Khyber Pass. New York: H. Holt. ISBN 978-0-8050-2109-7.
- Raja, Masood Ashraf. Constructing Pakistan: Foundational Texts and the Rise of Muslim National Identity, 1857–1947, Oxford 2010, ISBN 978-0-19-547811-2
- Sayeed, Khalid B. Pakistan : the Formative Phase, 1857–1948. 2nd ed. London Oxford University Press, 1968.
- Sidky, H. (2000). The Greek kingdom of Bactria : from Alexander to Eucratides the Great. Lanham, Maryland: University Press of America. ISBN 978-0-7618-1695-9.
- Sisson, Richard, and Leo E. Rose, eds. War and Secession: Pakistan, India, and the Creation of Bangladesh (1991)
- Spear, Percival (1990) [First published 1965]. A History of India. Volume 2. New York: Penguin. ISBN 978-0-14-013836-8.
- Tarn, William Woodthorpe (1951). The Greeks in Bactria and India. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Thackston, Wheeler M.; Robert Irwin (1996). The Baburnama: Memoirs of Babur, Prince and Emperor. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-509671-2.
- Thapar, Romila (1990) [First published 1965]. A History of India. Volume 1. New York: Penguin. ISBN 978-0-14-013835-1.
- Welch, Stuart Cary (1978). Imperial Mughal painting. New York: George Braziller. ISBN 978-0-8076-0870-8.
- Wheeler, Robert Eric Mortimer (1950). Five thousand years of Pakistan : an archaeological outline. London: C. Johnson.
- Wheeler, Robert Eric Mortimer (1959). Early India and Pakistan: to Ashoka. New York: Praeger.
- Wolpert, Stanley A. (1984). Jinnah of Pakistan. New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-503412-7.
- Wright, Rita P. (2009), The Ancient Indus: Urbanism, Economy, and Society, Cambridge University Press, ISBN 978-0-521-57219-4
- Zaman, Muhammad Qasim, Islam in Pakistan: A History (Princeton UP, 2018) online review

External links
[edit]- Pakistan Journal of Historical Studies, a peer-reviewed semiannual scholarly journal sponsored by the Khaldunia Centre for Historical Research in Lahore, Pakistan.
- National Fund for Cultural Heritage, Government of Pakistan Archived 26 January 2021 at the Wayback Machine
- Story of Pakistan website of story of Pakistan
- A look at some of the historic moments that have shaped Pakistan
- Quick History of Pakistan
Wikimedia Atlas of the History of Pakistan
History of Pakistan
View on GrokipediaPrehistoric Era
Paleolithic and Neolithic Periods
Archaeological evidence indicates human presence in the territory of modern Pakistan during the Lower Paleolithic period, with stone tools discovered in the Soan Valley of the Potwar Plateau dating back to approximately 2.5 million to 10,000 BCE, representing some of the earliest hominid activity in South Asia.[11] Sites such as Riwat in Punjab yield artifacts suggesting Homo erectus occupation around 1.9 million years ago, among the oldest evidence of early humans outside Africa.[12] In Sindh, Middle to Upper Paleolithic tools from Ongar and near Karachi are associated with Pleistocene deposits, spanning roughly 500,000 to 11,700 years ago, though systematic surveys remain limited due to challenging terrain and preservation issues.[13] Middle Paleolithic occupations in the Thar Desert, dated 80,000 to 40,000 years ago via optically stimulated luminescence, include Levallois technique flakes, pointing to hunter-gatherer adaptations in arid environments.[14] The transition to the Neolithic period, marked by sedentism and early agriculture, is exemplified by the Mehrgarh site in Balochistan's Kacchi Plain, where recent radiocarbon dating of human tooth enamel revises the onset of farming communities to approximately 5200 BCE, rather than the previously estimated 7000–9000 BCE.[15][16] This short-lived initial phase (Period I, lasting a few centuries) features mud-brick structures, domesticated wheat (emmer and einkorn) and barley, and herd animals like goats and sheep, evidencing a shift from foraging to cultivation independent of Near Eastern influences, as supported by genetic and archaeobotanical analyses.[15] Artifacts include early cotton fibers, the oldest known in the Old World, and proto-dentistry in burials, with the site's continuity into later periods highlighting gradual technological advancements like pottery and metallurgy precursors.[17] These findings underscore Balochistan's role as a cradle for Neolithic innovation in South Asia, predating broader Indus Valley developments.[15]Indus Valley Civilization
The northwest Indian subcontinental Indus Valley Civilization (IVC), also termed the Harappan Civilization, emerged around 3300 BCE and persisted until approximately 1300 BCE, primarily along the Indus River and its tributaries in regions now encompassing Pakistan's Sindh and Punjab provinces.[1] Its core phase, from 2600 to 1900 BCE, featured expansive urban settlements demonstrating advanced engineering, with over 1,000 sites identified, including major centers like Mohenjo-Daro in Sindh and Harappa in Punjab.[1] Mohenjo-Daro, excavated starting in 1922, covered about 250 hectares and housed an estimated population of 40,000, while Harappa spanned similar scales with comparable infrastructure.[18] These sites reveal a Bronze Age society reliant on flood-irrigated agriculture, cultivating wheat, barley, cotton, and pulses, supplemented by domesticated animals such as cattle, sheep, and elephants.[19] Urban planning in Indian subcontinental IVC cities exhibited remarkable uniformity, with streets laid out in a grid pattern oriented to the cardinal directions, constructed using standardized fired bricks measuring approximately 28x14x7 cm.[20] Multi-story houses featured private wells, bathrooms, and covered drains connected to a city-wide sewerage system that channeled wastewater to brick-lined pits or cesspools, evidencing sophisticated sanitation predating similar developments elsewhere by millennia.[1] Absence of monumental palaces or temples suggests a decentralized authority, possibly managed by councils or merchant elites, as inferred from the lack of royal burials and prevalence of equal-sized dwellings.[21] Artifacts like the bronze "Dancing Girl" figurine from Mohenjo-Daro and the steatite "Priest-King" statue indicate skilled metallurgy and craftsmanship, with jewelry, pottery, and seals produced in specialized workshops.[18] The economy thrived on internal trade networks and limited external exchanges, evidenced by carnelian beads and etched seals found in Mesopotamian sites dated to circa 2300 BCE, implying maritime or overland commerce via the Arabian Sea.[19] Indus script, comprising over 400 pictographic symbols on seals and tablets, remains undeciphered despite computational and linguistic efforts, hindering direct insights into governance, religion, or administration.[22] Religious practices, reconstructed from seals depicting horned figures in yogic postures—potentially proto-Shiva—and tree worship motifs, point to animistic or proto-Hindu elements, though interpretations vary due to interpretive biases in secondary analyses.[21] Decline commenced around 1900 BCE in the Mature phase, marked by urban abandonment and shift to rural settlements, attributed primarily to climatic aridification and monsoon weakening—corroborated by sediment cores showing a 4.2 kiloyear event drying the Ghaggar-Hakra (ancient Sarasvati) river system—rather than invasion or overexploitation alone.[23] Multiple stressors, including tectonic shifts altering river courses and reduced agricultural yields, likely prompted migration eastward, with Late Harappan phases persisting until 1300 BCE in de-urbanized forms.[24] Archaeological continuity in pottery and subsistence patterns indicates gradual transformation rather than catastrophic collapse, challenging earlier invasion hypotheses lacking empirical support from skeletal trauma data.[25]Ancient Periods
Vedic and Iron Age Developments
The decline of the Indian subcontinental Indus Valley Civilization around 1900 BCE led to a phase of de-urbanization in the region of modern Pakistan, with evidence of continued but smaller-scale settlements and a shift toward pastoralism in the Punjab and Sindh areas. By approximately 1500 BCE, migrations of Indo-Aryan-speaking pastoralists from the Eurasian steppes introduced new genetic components, as demonstrated by ancient DNA analysis from Iron Age sites in the Swat Valley showing admixture of up to 20-30% Steppe-related ancestry in local populations, distinct from earlier Indus Valley genetic profiles dominated by ancient Zagrosian-related farmers and Ancient Ancestral South Indian hunter-gatherer elements.[26] This influx aligns with linguistic evidence from the Rigveda, the earliest Vedic text composed circa 1500–1200 BCE, which locates early Indo-Aryan tribal society in the Sapta Sindhu—the land of seven rivers including the Indus (Sindhu), Jhelum (Vitasta), Chenab (Asikni), Ravi (Parushni), and others flowing through modern Pakistani Punjab, with rituals and battles such as the Dasarajna (Battle of the Ten Kings) described along these waterways.[27] Vedic culture emphasized oral transmission of hymns, cattle-based economy, horse-drawn chariots, and fire sacrifices, reflecting a semi-nomadic, patrilineal tribal structure without monumental architecture, which limits direct archaeological correlates.[28] Archaeological transitions in the post-Harappan period include Cemetery H culture at Harappa (circa 1900–1300 BCE), featuring cremation urns and pottery shifts that parallel Vedic funerary practices, though continuity from local traditions cannot be ruled out.[29] Genetic data further supports a male-biased migration pattern, with Steppe ancestry appearing prominently in Y-chromosome lineages linked to Indo-European languages, suggesting elite dominance or warrior groups integrating with indigenous populations.[26] These developments mark the onset of Vedic religious and social frameworks, including early formulations of the varna (social division) system, though empirical evidence remains textual and genetic rather than artifactual due to the perishable nature of Vedic material culture. The Iron Age in the region, commencing around 1200–1000 BCE, is exemplified by the Gandhara Grave Culture in northern Pakistan's Swat, Dir, and Peshawar valleys, spanning circa 1200–800 BCE and characterized by over 1,000 documented stone cist and chamber graves containing grey-black pottery, spindle whorls, copper/bronze ornaments, and rare horse remains indicative of pastoral mobility.[30] This culture reflects protohistoric social stratification, with grave goods varying by sex and status—women's burials often including jewelry and men’s with weapons—potentially tied to Indo-Aryan or early Indo-Iranian groups via ceramic styles and burial orientations, though local continuity from Bronze Age traditions is also evident. Iron artifacts, such as tools and weapons, appear in later phases around 800–500 BCE at sites like Butkara in Swat, signaling the adoption of ferrous metallurgy from regional innovations or diffusion, which enhanced agricultural clearance and warfare capabilities amid population growth.[31] By the late Vedic period (circa 1000–500 BCE), iron use facilitated settled villages and early chiefdoms in Punjab, bridging to urban revivals under subsequent empires, with Vedic texts attesting to expanding rituals and iron weaponry (ayas).[29]Achaemenid, Macedonian, and Mauryan Empires
The Achaemenid Empire expanded into the northwestern regions of the Indian subcontinent under Darius I, incorporating Gandhara and parts of the Indus Valley as satrapies by approximately 518 BCE, as evidenced by the Behistun Inscription which lists provinces including Hinduš (the Indus region) and Gandāra.[32] These territories, encompassing areas now in modern Pakistan such as Taxila and Peshawar, were administered from Taxila, which served as a provincial capital, and contributed tribute including gold dust extracted from river sands, as described by Herodotus in his account of the empire's 20th satrapy combining eastern Iranian lands with Indian districts.[33] Persian control facilitated trade along the Royal Road extending to the Indus and introduced administrative practices, coinage, and Aramaic script influences in the region, though local autonomy persisted under satraps who collected taxes and levied troops.[34] Alexander the Great's invasion reached the Punjab region in 327–326 BCE, following his conquest of the Achaemenid satrapy of Gandhara, where Taxila submitted without resistance under its ruler Ambhi (Taxiles), providing supplies and guides for the Macedonian advance.[35] The pivotal Battle of the Hydaspes occurred in May 326 BCE along the Jhelum River against King Porus, ruler of the Paurava kingdom between the Hydaspes and Acesines rivers, where Alexander's forces, employing innovative tactics like a feigned crossing and cavalry flanking despite monsoon rains and Porus's war elephants, secured victory after heavy casualties on both sides.[35] Porus surrendered but was reinstated as a vassal ally, controlling territories up to the Hyphasis (Beas) River; however, Macedonian troop mutiny at the Hyphasis halted further eastward expansion, leading Alexander to consolidate holdings in the Punjab before withdrawing westward in 325 BCE, leaving garrisons and founding cities like Nicaea and Bucephala.[35] Following Alexander's death in 323 BCE, the Mauryan Empire under Chandragupta Maurya (r. c. 321–297 BCE) absorbed the northwestern territories previously held by the short-lived Greco-Bactrian successors, defeating Seleucus I Nicator in a campaign culminating in a 303 BCE treaty that ceded Arachosia, Gedrosia, and Paropamisadae (encompassing parts of modern Pakistan's Balochistan and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa) in exchange for 500 war elephants, thereby securing Mauryan dominance over Gandhara and Taxila.[36] Chandragupta's grandson Ashoka (r. c. 268–232 BCE) extended centralized rule, evidenced by the Mansehra Rock Edicts inscribed around 260 BCE in Prakrit using Brahmi script on three boulders near Mansehra in northern Pakistan, recording 14 major edicts promoting moral governance, non-violence, and Buddhist-influenced Dhamma policies to diverse subjects including frontier tribes.[37] These edicts, alongside similar ones at Shahbazgarhi, represent the earliest confirmed writing in the region and underscore Ashoka's administrative reach, with Taxila functioning as a key Mauryan provincial center fostering trade, education, and religious propagation until the empire's fragmentation after his death.[37]Post-Mauryan Central Asian Invasions and Kingdoms
Following the disintegration of the Mauryan Empire around 185 BCE, the northwestern frontier regions of the Indian subcontinent, including Gandhara, Taxila, and parts of Punjab corresponding to modern Pakistan, faced successive incursions from Hellenistic successors of Alexander's empire and nomadic tribes originating from Central Asia.[38] These invasions exploited the power vacuum left by Mauryan decline, leading to the establishment of short-lived kingdoms characterized by military conquests, coinage reforms, and cultural syncretism, particularly in Gandhara where Greco-Buddhist art emerged.[39] The Indo-Greeks initiated this era, followed by Sakas (Scythians), Parthians, and culminating in the Kushan Empire's dominance.[40] The Indo-Greek Kingdom emerged from Greco-Bactrian expansions into the northwest around 180 BCE under Demetrius I, who conquered Arachosia, Gandhara, and possibly reached the Indus River, establishing control over Taxila by the mid-2nd century BCE.[41] Key rulers included Menander I (c. 165–130 BCE), whose reign centered in Sagala (Sialkot in modern Punjab, Pakistan) and who patronized Buddhism as evidenced by the Milindapanha dialogues and his coinage featuring Buddhist symbols alongside Greek deities.[42] The kingdom fragmented due to internal strife and external pressures, persisting in pockets until approximately 10 BCE, with archaeological evidence from Taxila and Ai-Khanoum showing Hellenistic urban planning and bilingual inscriptions.[43] Indo-Greek rule facilitated the transmission of Greek artistic techniques, influencing later Gandharan sculpture that blended Apollonian ideals with Buddhist iconography.[39] Subsequent Saka invasions, by nomadic Iranian-speaking tribes displaced from the Central Asian steppes, began around 85 BCE under Maues, who established the first Indo-Scythian kingdom in Gandhara and Arachosia, issuing coins that mimicked Indo-Greek styles but incorporated Scythian motifs.[38] The Sakas divided into branches, with the Northern Sakas controlling parts of Punjab and the upper Indus by the 1st century BCE, as attested by Rudradaman's Junagadh inscription referencing their earlier dominance before Satavahana resistance elsewhere.[42] Their rule, lasting until roughly the early 1st century CE, emphasized cavalry-based warfare and trade facilitation along emerging Silk Road routes, though political instability from tribal confederations limited centralized governance.[44] Indo-Parthian rule overlapped with waning Saka power, commencing around 19 BCE under Gondophares, a Parthian noble who seized Taxila and extended authority into Sindh and Punjab, as confirmed by coins and the Takht-i-Bahi inscription naming him as "Maharajadhiraja."[38] This kingdom, centered in Kabul and Taxila, endured until circa 45 CE, promoting Zoroastrian influences alongside tolerance for Buddhism, evidenced by Gondophares' patronage of monastic sites.[42] Parthian administration introduced administrative efficiencies from Iranian models, but vulnerability to Yuezhi migrations contributed to its rapid eclipse.[45] The Kushans, a confederation of the Yuezhi tribes driven southward by Xiongnu pressures around the 1st century BCE, consolidated under Kujula Kadphises (c. 30–80 CE), who unified Central Asian holdings and overran Indo-Parthian territories in Gandhara and Punjab by 50 CE. Kanishka I (c. 127–150 CE), the empire's zenith figure, established his capital at Purushapura (Peshawar, Pakistan), expanding from the Tarim Basin to the Ganges Valley, with the Rabatak inscription detailing his conquests and promotion of a Mahayana Buddhist ecumene via the Fourth Buddhist Council at Kundalvana.[40] Kushan coinage, featuring deities like Oesho (Shiva) and the Buddha, standardized gold issues weighing about 8 grams and facilitated transcontinental trade, while Gandharan art under their patronage—exemplified by schist statues from Taxila and Butkara—fused Hellenistic realism with Indic themes, influencing Buddhist iconography across Asia.[46] The empire's decline after Vasudeva I (c. 190–230 CE) stemmed from Sassanian incursions and internal fragmentation, ending Kushan control in the northwest by 375 CE.[40]Early Islamic and Medieval Periods
Arab Conquest and Early Muslim Rule
The Arab conquest of the region comprising modern-day Sindh began in 711 AD when Muhammad bin Qasim, a 17-year-old general and nephew of the Umayyad viceroy Al-Hajjaj ibn Yusuf, led an expedition against the Hindu ruler Raja Dahir of the Brahmin dynasty.[47] Triggered by raids on Arab merchant ships and the execution of Muslim prisoners by Dahir's forces, the invasion involved an army of approximately 6,000 Syrian cavalry, 6,000 Arab cavalry, and additional infantry supported by five manjaniks (catapults) transported by sea.[48] Qasim's fleet, commanded by his cousin Muhammad al-Harith, landed near Debal (modern-day near Karachi) in late 711 AD, where the initial siege succeeded after the use of the catapults breached the city's defenses, leading to its capture and the death of its governor.[49] Advancing inland, Qasim defeated Dahir's army at the Battle of Aror (near modern Rohri) in 712 AD, where Dahir was killed, allowing the conquest of the capital Alor and much of lower Sindh.[47] The campaign continued northward, with Multan falling in 713 AD after a siege that exploited internal divisions and the promise of lighter taxation to induce surrender from local leaders. By this point, Arab forces controlled Sindh and parts of southern Punjab, incorporating the territories into the Umayyad Caliphate as a frontier province with Qasim establishing administrative centers and garrisons.[50] Under Qasim's governance from 712 to 715 AD, non-Muslims were permitted to retain their religious practices in exchange for jizya tax, fostering relative stability and some conversions among lower castes disillusioned with Brahmanical rule.[51] He organized the region into fiscal units (iqtas), appointed local officials, and promoted Arab settlement in urban areas while maintaining Arab troops as the core military force.[52] However, following Al-Hajjaj's death in 714 AD and political shifts in Damascus, Qasim was recalled, imprisoned, and executed in 715 AD on unsubstantiated charges, marking the end of direct expansion beyond the Indus.[49] Subsequent Umayyad governors, such as Habib ibn Abi Ubayda, continued administration until the Abbasid Revolution in 750 AD transferred nominal suzerainty to Baghdad, with Sindh functioning as a semi-autonomous marchland.[53] Abbasid oversight involved periodic governors and tribute collection, but Arab influence waned without large-scale immigration, leading to reliance on local converts and mawali (non-Arab Muslims) in governance by the mid-8th century.[50] Trade links with the Islamic heartlands persisted via overland and sea routes, facilitating cultural exchange, though Islam's spread remained gradual, confined largely to urban elites and garrisons until the 9th century.[52] By the mid-9th century, weakening Abbasid control allowed local dynasties to emerge, signaling the decline of direct caliphal rule in the region.[53]Local Dynasties in Sindh and Multan
In Sindh, the Habbari dynasty, an Arab Muslim family originating from the Banu Tamim tribe, established semi-independent rule as emirs from 854 to 1024 CE, nominally under Abbasid suzerainty. The dynasty's founder, Umar ibn Abdullah al-Habbari, capitalized on the weakening Abbasid control to assert local authority, with subsequent rulers like Abdullah al-Habbari and Muhammad al-Habbari maintaining power through military strength and alliances with local tribes. Their governance focused on Mansura as capital, fostering trade along the Indus River while defending against internal rebellions and external threats from the Saffarids and Samanids. The dynasty's end came with Mahmud of Ghazni's invasion in 1024 CE, which sacked Multan and extended to Sindh, leading to the Habbari's overthrow.[53][52] Parallel to Sindh's developments, Multan emerged as a distinct polity under the Banu Munabbih, an Arab tribe, who governed the emirate from approximately 855 to 959 CE following the fragmentation of Umayyad and early Abbasid oversight. This period saw Multan function as a buffer state with a mixed Muslim-Hindu population, where rulers like the Banu Munabbih collected jizya from non-Muslims and maintained independence amid regional power vacuums. By 959 CE, Ismaili missionaries under Fatimid influence, led by da'i Jaylam bin Shayban, seized control, establishing an Ismaili emirate that lasted until 1005 CE. Under Ismaili rule, figures such as Hamid Lodi (r. circa 991 CE) promoted da'wa efforts, converting significant numbers of Hindus to Ismailism and aligning with the Fatimid Caliphate in Egypt, while issuing coinage invoking Fatimid imams. The emirate's tolerance of diverse faiths contrasted with orthodox Sunni pressures, but it ended with Mahmud of Ghazni's conquest in 1005 CE, which massacred Ismailis and looted the Sun Temple.[54][55] Following Ghaznavid raids, which did not result in permanent occupation, the Soomra dynasty of native Sindhi origin rose in Sindh around 1024 CE, ruling until 1351 CE and reasserting local autonomy after Habbari collapse. Claimed by some traditions to descend from the Rai kings or Arab settlers, the Soomras, starting with Al-Khafif (r. circa 1024–1050 CE), shifted capitals from Mansura to Thari and later Bhambore, emphasizing resistance to alien overlords and unification of Sindhi tribes. Their reign, marked by Shi'i leanings in some accounts, saw economic revival through irrigation and commerce, with rulers like Bhoongar (r. circa 1090 CE) consolidating power against Ghaznavid remnants. The dynasty's longevity stemmed from adept diplomacy and military defenses, though internal feuds weakened it by the 14th century.[56][57] The Samma dynasty succeeded the Soomras in 1351 CE, governing Sindh until 1524 CE as a Rajput confederacy of pastoral tribes from the Kutch-Sindh borderlands. Founded by Jam Unar after assassinating the last Soomra ruler, the Sammas established Thatta as capital, expanding influence into Punjab, Gujarat, and Balochistan at peak under Jam Nizamuddin II (r. 1461–1509 CE), who minted coins, built infrastructure, and patronized Sufi orders. Their rule blended Hindu Rajput customs with Islam, evidenced by Makli Necropolis tombs featuring syncretic architecture, and focused on naval trade via the Indus delta. The dynasty fragmented due to succession disputes and Arghun Turkic incursions, ending with Samma capitulation in 1524 CE.[58]Ghaznavid, Ghurid, and Mamluk Invasions
The Ghaznavid dynasty, ruled by Turkic Muslims from Ghazni, marked the onset of sustained Central Asian incursions into the northwestern Indian subcontinent, targeting territories now in Pakistan. Sultan Mahmud (r. 998–1030) led 17 expeditions between 1000 and 1025, focusing on Punjab and Multan during summer months to evade monsoons.[59] These raids exploited fragmented Hindu kingdoms like the Shahis and Pratiharas, employing superior cavalry tactics. In 1005, Mahmud defeated the Hindu Shahi king Jayapala near Peshawar, annexing frontier districts.[59] By 1021, after a prolonged siege, he captured Lahore, depopulating and torching the city before installing Malik Ayaz as governor and designating it the eastern capital.[60] [61] Mahmud's campaigns emphasized plunder over permanent settlement, yielding vast treasures—including gold from sacked temples in Multan and Punjab—that funded Ghazni's cultural patronage.[59] Multan, under Ismaili rule, fell early, with its ruler Daud executed for heresy. The invasions devastated local economies, scattered populations, and introduced Islamic governance, though Hindu resistance persisted amid caste divisions hindering unified defense.[59] Ghaznavid control over Punjab endured until Seljuk pressures weakened the empire by the mid-11th century. The Ghurid dynasty, Persianized Tajiks from central Afghanistan, overthrew Ghaznavid remnants and expanded into Punjab and Sindh under Mu'izz ad-Din Muhammad (r. 1173–1206). In 1175, Muhammad seized Multan via the Gomal Pass, ousting the Qarmatian Ismailis.[62] He then captured Uch from Bhatti Rajputs and fortified it. By 1179, Peshawar submitted; Sindh followed in 1182. Punjab's core, including Lahore, was conquered by 1186 after three sieges against Khusrau Malik, the last Ghaznavid. Muhammad appointed Qutb ud-Din Aibak as viceroy for Indian territories, blending raid with administration.[62] Ghurid victories, bolstered by iron resources and horse breeding from Ghor, defeated Rajput forces at battles like Tarain (1191–1192), securing doab regions adjacent to Punjab.[62] These conquests facilitated deeper Islamic penetration, with governors enforcing tribute and conversions, though full consolidation awaited successors. The empire's eastern thrust laid groundwork for the Delhi Sultanate, transforming Punjab into a Muslim-ruled frontier.[62] The Mamluk (Slave) dynasty emerged from Ghurid slaves post-Muhammad's 1206 assassination in Punjab. Qutb ud-Din Aibak, his Turkic general, proclaimed independence in Lahore before shifting to Delhi, founding the dynasty (1206–1290).[63] Aibak (r. 1206–1210) campaigned to stabilize Ghurid holdings, suppressing revolts in Punjab and the Indus Valley without major new invasions.[63] He secured Lahore and extended to the Sutlej, commissioning structures like Delhi's Quwwat-ul-Islam mosque from temple debris.[64] Successors like Iltutmish (r. 1211–1236) consolidated Punjab, quelling Mongol threats and integrating Sindh-Multan. The dynasty ruled core Pakistani regions—Punjab, Sindh—via iqta land grants to Turkic slaves, fostering military aristocracy.[64] This era entrenched Turkish-Islamic rule, blending Persian administration with local taxation, amid ongoing Rajput and Mongol pressures.[63]Sultanate and Pre-Mughal Era
Delhi Sultanate Expansion into Punjab and Sindh
Shams-ud-Din Iltutmish, the second sultan of the Mamluk dynasty (r. 1211–1236), consolidated Delhi Sultanate authority over Punjab and Sindh through military campaigns against regional rivals who had emerged following the fragmentation after Muhammad of Ghor's death in 1206.[65] Nasir-ud-Din Qabacha, a former Ghurid subordinate, had established semi-independent rule over Multan, Uch, and surrounding areas in Sindh and southern Punjab, exploiting the power vacuum.[66] In 1227, after repelling Mongol threats and stabilizing internal rule, Iltutmish dispatched separate armies: one from Lahore targeting Multan and another advancing on Uch to subdue Qabacha.[65] The siege of Uch began in early 1228, lasting approximately three months until Qabacha fled and drowned in the Indus River around May 1228 while attempting escape.[66] Iltutmish's forces subsequently captured Multan and annexed the territories, placing them under loyal governors and integrating them into the iqta system of land grants to Turkish nobles for administrative and military control.[65] This reconquest extended Delhi's direct influence westward, securing Punjab's core regions like Lahore—previously under fluctuating Ghurid control—and Sindh's key forts, which had seen earlier Arab and local dynastic rule.[67] The victories numbered among Iltutmish's key achievements, alongside recognition from the Abbasid caliph in 1229, affirming the sultanate's sovereignty over these frontier provinces amid ongoing threats from Central Asian nomads.[66] Subsequent rulers maintained and reinforced this control. Ghiyas-ud-Din Balban (r. 1266–1287) suppressed rebellions in Punjab and fortified borders against Mongol incursions, dispatching punitive expeditions to Doab and Lahore regions.[68] Under Alauddin Khilji (r. 1296–1316), in late 1296, Ulugh Khan and Zafar Khan led forces to quell a revolt in Multan led by Arkali Khan, reasserting authority and establishing garrisons to counter Mongol raids from the northwest.[69] These efforts transformed Punjab and Sindh into defensive bulwarks, with Multan serving as a critical outpost; by the early 14th century, the sultanate's writ extended firmly across the Indus Valley, facilitating tribute collection and troop levies despite periodic frontier instability.[68]Timurid Incursions and Fragmentation
In 1398, Timur, the Turco-Mongol conqueror ruling from Samarkand, launched an expedition into the Indian subcontinent, targeting the weakening Tughlaq dynasty of the Delhi Sultanate. His forces, numbering approximately 90,000 to 200,000 troops, crossed the Indus River near Attock on 24 September, entering the Punjab region. They quickly subdued local resistance, besieging and capturing Multan after overcoming determined defense from its garrison, which inflicted significant casualties on the invaders before surrendering. Advancing eastward through Punjab, Timur's army devastated towns and countryside, enslaving tens of thousands and massacring resistors, including at Tulamba where 100,000 were reportedly killed for opposing him.[70][71][72] Timur's campaign reached its climax with the sack of Delhi on 17–20 December 1398, where his troops looted the city for several days, killing an estimated 100,000 to 200,000 inhabitants and carrying off vast treasures, artisans, and slaves. Before withdrawing northwestward in early 1399—without establishing permanent garrisons—Timur appointed Khizr Khan, a Punjabi Khokhar chieftain who had submitted to him, as viceroy over Punjab, Multan, and upper Sindh to collect tribute for the Timurid Empire. This arrangement nominally extended Timurid influence into these territories but proved short-lived, as Timur prioritized consolidation in Persia and Central Asia over sustained occupation.[70][73][74] The invasion precipitated the fragmentation of Delhi Sultanate authority in Punjab and Sindh, as central control collapsed amid anarchy, famine, and depopulation. In Punjab, provincial governors and tribal leaders, including Khokhars and Janjuas, asserted de facto independence; Khizr Khan expanded from his base in Multan and Lahore to seize Delhi in 1414, founding the Sayyid dynasty (1414–1451), which maintained fragile rule over core territories but lost effective hold on outer Punjab districts to local potentates. Upper Sindh saw similar devolution, with Timurid-appointed officials unable to enforce tribute amid revolts. In lower Sindh, the Samma dynasty, already semi-autonomous since the mid-14th century, consolidated power around Thatta, rejecting Delhi's suzerainty and expanding influence free from Tughlaq oversight. This era of balkanization persisted until the Lodi dynasty's partial restoration of central power in the early 16th century, fostering enduring regional identities and power vacuums exploited by later invaders.[73][75][76]Mughal and Early Modern Era
Establishment and Peak of Mughal Rule
The Mughal Empire's establishment in the regions comprising modern Pakistan began with Zahir-ud-din Babur's campaigns in the early 16th century. Babur, a Timurid descendant, captured Lahore in 1524, securing a foothold in Punjab amid conflicts with local Afghan rulers.[77] His decisive victory over Ibrahim Lodi at the First Battle of Panipat on April 21, 1526, marked the foundation of the empire, extending Mughal control over northern India including Punjab, though initial holdings in the northwest remained contested by Afghan remnants.[78] Babur's memoirs detail his consolidation of Punjab territories, leveraging artillery and cavalry tactics superior to local forces, but his rule was brief, ending with his death in 1530.[79] Humayun, Babur's successor, faced immediate challenges, losing control of Punjab and Delhi to the Suri dynasty under Sher Shah in 1540 after defeats at Chausa and Kannauj.[51] Exiled until 1555, Humayun regained Delhi with Safavid aid, reasserting Mughal authority over Punjab by 1556, though his death shortly after left the empire fragile.[78] Akbar, ascending at age 13 in 1556, stabilized the northwest through the Second Battle of Panipat, defeating Hemu and securing Punjab as a base for further expansion.[78] Akbar's reign (1556–1605) represented the empire's peak in administrative consolidation and territorial reach within modern Pakistan's borders. He occupied Lahore and seized Multan, integrating Punjab fully into the imperial structure, and established Lahore as the capital from 1584 to 1598 to oversee northwestern frontiers against Afghan and Central Asian threats.[80] Conquests extended to Sindh in 1591 under Mirza Muhammad Jani Beg Tarkhan, incorporating Thatta and Balochistan fringes, while Multan Subah was reorganized for revenue extraction from the Indus valley's agriculture.[81] Akbar's mansabdari system assigned ranks to nobles overseeing these provinces, fostering loyalty and efficient taxation, with Punjab's fertile lands yielding substantial zabt revenue assessed via zabt-i-dahsala.[82] Successors Jahangir (1605–1627) and Shah Jahan (1628–1658) maintained this zenith, with Lahore evolving as a cultural hub of gardens, forts, and naqshbandi Sufi influences, while Punjab subahs like Lahore and Multan supported imperial armies numbering over 200,000 horsemen.[83] Aurangzeb (1658–1707) achieved maximal territorial extent, fortifying northwest defenses against Safavids and Uzbeks, but prolonged Deccan wars strained resources, initiating subtle decline in peripheral control over Punjab's Pashtun areas despite peak revenues exceeding 100 million rupees annually.[81] Mughal rule introduced Persian administration, land grants (jagirs), and Islamic legal frameworks, transforming local economies through canal irrigation precursors and trade routes linking Kabul to Delhi via Punjab.[82]Decline, Successor States, and Regional Powers
The death of Emperor Aurangzeb in 1707 marked the onset of the Mughal Empire's decline, exacerbated by protracted wars in the Deccan that depleted the treasury and overstretched administrative control, particularly in peripheral subahs like Lahore (Punjab) and Multan.[84] Succession struggles among weak emperors, such as Farrukhsiyar (r. 1713–1719) and [Muhammad Shah](/page/Muhammad Shah) (r. 1719–1748), further eroded central authority, allowing local governors and zamindars in the northwest to assert greater autonomy amid rising rebellions and fiscal shortfalls.[85] In Punjab, Mughal governors like Abdus Samad Khan (subahdar 1713–1726) attempted to suppress Sikh misls and restore order but faced persistent resistance, highlighting the empire's inability to maintain coercive power in the region.[86] The Persian invasion by Nader Shah in 1739 delivered a severe blow, as his forces traversed Punjab en route to the decisive Battle of Karnal on February 24, 1739, where Mughal armies numbering around 300,000 were routed by Nader's 55,000 troops due to superior tactics and artillery.[87] Following the occupation of Delhi and a massacre triggered by riots—resulting in an estimated 20,000–30,000 deaths—Nader extracted immense tribute, including the Peacock Throne and Koh-i-Noor diamond, while compelling Emperor Muhammad Shah to cede all territories west of the Indus River, effectively detaching Kabul and parts of modern northwestern Pakistan from Mughal suzerainty.[88] This plunder, valued at over 700 million rupees, crippled Mughal finances and prestige, accelerating fragmentation by emboldening regional actors and exposing military vulnerabilities.[87] Ahmad Shah Durrani's establishment of the Durrani Empire in 1747, following Nader's assassination, positioned it as the dominant regional power in the northwest, with eight invasions of India between 1748 and 1767 that nominally vassalized Punjab and extracted annual tribute from Lahore.[89] After his third campaign in 1752, Ahmad Shah annexed Punjab and Kashmir, appointing governors such as Mir Mannu (1748–1753), who oscillated between Mughal titles and Durrani allegiance, underscoring the empire's role in supplanting Mughal influence without full annexation.[90] These incursions, culminating in the Third Battle of Panipat in 1761 against the Marathas, temporarily stabilized Afghan dominance over Punjab but drained local resources, fostering conditions for local resistance.[89] In Sindh, the Kalhora dynasty emerged as a successor state amid Mughal enfeeblement, initially as appointees like Yar Muhammad Kalhoro (d. 1718), who was granted authority over the Thatta subah around 1701, but achieving de facto independence by the 1730s under Noor Muhammad Kalhoro (r. 1719–1753).[91] The Kalhoras consolidated control over Sindh, southern Punjab, and parts of Kutch from their capital at Khudabad (founded c. 1720s), leveraging Sufi networks and irrigation projects to build a sovereign polity that reduced Mughal oversight to nominal tribute until the dynasty's fall in 1783.[92] This transition exemplified how peripheral Mughal provinces transitioned into autonomous entities, with the Kalhoras representing indigenous Sindhi assertion against imperial decay, though internal strife and Baloch incursions later undermined their stability.[91] Similarly, the Khanate of Kalat in Balochistan maintained semi-independence under Brahui rulers, paying lip service to Mughals while expanding influence eastward.[93]Sikh Empire and Maratha Interventions
In the mid-18th century, amid the fragmentation of Mughal authority in Punjab, Maratha forces under Raghunath Rao invaded the region to counter Afghan incursions led by Ahmad Shah Durrani. In April 1758, the Marathas captured Lahore after defeating local Afghan governors, establishing control over the city and extending their campaigns to secure Multan, Peshawar, and Attock by May of that year.[94] These conquests were facilitated by alliances with Sikh misls and the Punjabi governor Adina Beg, who sought to expel Durrani's influence from the five rivers' territory. The Marathas held Lahore for approximately 18 months, imposing tribute and administering the area nominally on behalf of the Mughal emperor, until Durrani's counteroffensive in October 1759 recaptured Punjab, routing Maratha garrisons.[94] The Maratha presence in Punjab ended decisively with their defeat at the Third Battle of Panipat on January 14, 1761, where an estimated 45,000–60,000 Maratha troops and 200,000 non-combatants faced Durrani's coalition of Afghans, Rohillas, and Oudh forces, resulting in 60,000–70,000 Maratha deaths and the slaughter of 40,000 prisoners.[95] This battle, fought near Delhi, inflicted around 100,000 total Maratha casualties and halted their northward expansion, destabilizing their confederacy for roughly a decade while enabling Sikh misls to regroup and challenge Afghan dominance in Punjab.[95] Post-Panipat, Maratha recovery under Peshwa Madhavrao focused southward, abandoning sustained claims on Punjab, where local Sikh warriors exploited the power vacuum through guerrilla resistance against repeated Afghan invasions between 1762 and 1790s.[94] The vacuum left by Maratha withdrawal paved the way for Sikh consolidation, culminating in the establishment of the Sikh Empire under Maharaja Ranjit Singh. Born in 1780 near Gujranwala (in present-day Pakistan), Ranjit Singh, leader of the Sukerchakia misl, captured Lahore from Afghan control on July 7, 1799, unifying disparate Sikh confederacies into a centralized state by 1801.[96] His reign (1801–1839) saw systematic expansion across Punjab's plains from the Sutlej to Indus rivers, incorporating territories now comprising Pakistani Punjab, including the annexation of Multan in June 1818 following a prolonged siege against Nawab Muzaffar Khan.[97] Further conquests included the Peshawar Valley, secured after the Battle of Nowshera in March 1823 against Afghan forces, with full control asserted by 1834 under Hari Singh Nalwa.[98] The empire's territorial peak encompassed Lahore as capital, Multan, and extensions into modern Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, bolstered by the Treaty of Amritsar on April 25, 1809, whereby the British East India Company recognized Sikh sovereignty north of the Sutlej River in exchange for non-aggression.[99] Ranjit Singh's multi-ethnic army, integrating Sikh, Muslim, and European officers, maintained stability through religious tolerance and efficient revenue systems, controlling key trade routes and fortresses in the region until his death on June 27, 1839.[100] Subsequent court intrigues and succession disputes eroded central authority, rendering the empire vulnerable to British intervention by the late 1840s.British Colonial Period
Conquest of Sindh, Punjab, and Frontier
The British East India Company initiated the conquest of Sindh in early 1843, motivated by strategic interests in securing the Indus River route and countering perceived threats from the Talpur Amirs' alliances with Persia and Afghanistan. General Sir Charles Napier, commanding approximately 2,800 troops, advanced against the forces of Hosh Muhammad, an Amir of Hyderabad, culminating in the Battle of Miani on February 17, 1843. Despite facing an enemy force estimated at 20,000 to 30,000, including Baloch cavalry, the British secured victory through disciplined infantry volleys and artillery, inflicting around 6,000 casualties while suffering 270 of their own.[101] This engagement shattered the Talpur resistance, leading to the Battle of Hyderabad (or Dubba) on March 24, 1843, where Napier defeated remaining Amirs, resulting in Sindh's formal annexation as a British province under his governorship.[102] The annexation of Punjab followed the erosion of the Sikh Empire after Maharaja Ranjit Singh's death in 1839, marked by internal instability and British suspicions of Sikh military buildup near the Sutlej River. The First Anglo-Sikh War erupted in December 1845 when Sikh forces crossed into British territory, prompting Governor-General Sir Henry Hardinge to deploy 20,000 troops against a Sikh army of comparable size. Key battles included Mudki (December 18, 1845), Ferozeshah (December 21–22, 1845), and Sobraon (February 10, 1846), where British resilience overcame initial setbacks, leading to the Treaty of Lahore on March 9, 1846. This treaty ceded Jullundur Doab territories, imposed a 1.5 million rupee indemnity (partially remitted via the Koh-i-Noor diamond), and installed a British resident to oversee the young Maharaja Duleep Singh.[103] Renewed Sikh revolts, including the Multan uprising led by Mulraj Chopra in April 1848, ignited the Second Anglo-Sikh War. British forces under Lord Gough faced fierce resistance at Chillianwala (January 13, 1849), a costly draw with heavy losses on both sides—around 2,300 British casualties against 4,000 Sikh—but decisively triumphed at Gujrat on February 21, 1849, using overwhelming artillery against 60,000 Sikhs. The Sikh army surrendered on March 12, 1849, enabling Governor-General Lord Dalhousie to proclaim Punjab's annexation on March 29, 1849, incorporating its revenues and the Sikh Khalsa into British administration while exiling the Maharaja.[103] The North-West Frontier, extending from the Indus to the Afghan border and dominated by independent Pashtun tribes, presented ongoing challenges post-Punjab annexation, as the Sikh Empire had only loosely controlled it through subsidies and forts. British policy initially favored a "closed frontier" of non-interference beyond the settled districts, but tribal raids and Russian-Afghan tensions necessitated expeditions, such as the 1852–1853 Black Mountain campaign against Hassanzai tribesmen, involving 5,000 troops to punish raids and secure supply lines. Further operations, including the 1863–1864 Umbeyla Campaign against Bunerwals and the 1897 Tirah Expedition against Afridis and Orakzais (mobilizing 34,000 troops under Sir William Lockhart), aimed at punitive destruction of strongholds rather than permanent occupation, reflecting a balance between forward defense and cost constraints. These efforts culminated in the 1901 demarcation of the North-West Frontier Province from Punjab, administering settled areas like Peshawar and Kohat under a chief commissioner, while leaving tribal agencies semi-autonomous under political officers enforcing the Durand Line boundary established in 1893.[104][105]Administrative Reforms and Canal Colonies
Following the annexation of Punjab in 1849, the British established a Board of Administration comprising Sir Henry Lawrence, John Lawrence, and Charles Mansell to implement administrative and economic reforms across the province's six divisions.[106] This body focused on stabilizing governance by formalizing land revenue systems, conducting initial settlements that assessed ownership and taxation rights for 15-year terms, and prioritizing efficient tax collection through rural land formalization.[107] Reforms included creating institutions for revenue, finance, and education, while adapting pre-existing Sikh-era structures to British oversight without wholesale replacement.[108] In Sindh, annexed in 1843, British administration emphasized revenue extraction via the ryotwari system, directly assessing individual cultivators rather than intermediaries, which contrasted with Punjab's village-based assessments and aimed to curb local taluqdars' influence. Key legislative measures, such as the Punjab Land Alienation Act of 1900, restricted permanent land transfers from "agricultural tribes" (primarily Muslim and Sikh peasants) to non-agriculturists like urban moneylenders, intending to shield indebted farmers from dispossession amid rising indebtedness; however, it disrupted credit access and favored certain ethnic groups deemed martially reliable by British officials.[109] These reforms reinforced a paternalistic framework, classifying communities by perceived loyalty and productivity to sustain military recruitment and agricultural output. Parallel to administrative changes, British engineers developed extensive canal irrigation to reclaim arid tracts in western Punjab, initiating with the Upper Bari Doab Canal (completed 1873, operational from 1859) to irrigate higher "bar" lands.[110] From 1885 to 1940, nine major canal colonies—such as Chenab, Jhelum, and Lower Bari Doab—were established, transforming over 14 million acres from desert into arable land by 1947, up from 3 million in 1885, and settling more than 1 million colonists, predominantly Punjabi Muslims and Sikhs selected for their agricultural and military utility.[110] This system boosted wheat production and revenue, funding further infrastructure, though it exacerbated ethnic tensions by allocating prime lands preferentially to loyal groups and displacing nomadic pastoralists.[111] In Sindh, complementary projects like the Sukkur Barrage (planned post-1920s but foundational in earlier barrages) extended irrigation, yet Punjab's colonies dominated due to the Indus and its tributaries' perennial flow.[112]Socio-Economic Transformations and Famines
The British administration in Punjab, following its annexation in 1849, implemented land revenue assessments based on soil classification and productivity, shifting from pre-colonial irregular collections to fixed cash payments every 30 years, which incentivized investment in agriculture but imposed strains during shortages.[113] In Sindh, conquered in 1843, a ryotwari system was introduced, granting individual cultivators proprietary rights while demanding direct revenue payments, fostering some commercialization but yielding lower assessments than in Punjab due to arid conditions.[114] The North-West Frontier Province, incorporated gradually from the 1850s, retained tribal jirga-based revenue in agency areas, with limited formal assessments in settled districts, prioritizing security over economic overhaul.[115] Canal irrigation projects marked a pivotal transformation, particularly in Punjab, where irrigated acreage expanded from approximately 3 million acres in 1885 to 14 million by 1947 through systems like the Chenab and Jhelum canals, enabling a shift from subsistence farming to commercial wheat and cotton production that positioned Punjab as a key exporter.[116] These canal colonies, allocated preferentially to "martial races" such as Punjabi Muslims and Sikhs for military recruitment, boosted agricultural output—wheat exports rose significantly by the 1920s—but entrenched social hierarchies by favoring loyal groups and displacing pastoral nomads.[117] In Sindh, barrages like the Lloyd Barrage (completed 1932) irrigated over 5 million acres, promoting rice and cotton, though benefits accrued unevenly to large landlords.[118] Frontier regions saw minimal irrigation, with economic activity confined to timber and trade routes, supplemented by British-built roads for strategic access. Railway expansion from the 1860s integrated these regions into global markets, facilitating grain exports—Punjab's wheat shipments to Britain surged post-1880—while cash crops like cotton supported textile demands, though overall industrialization remained negligible, with manufacturing limited to small-scale ginning and flour mills.[119] Socially, these changes eroded tribal communal landholding in favor of individual proprietorship, spurring rural indebtedness among smallholders and urban migration, yet also enabling a class of prosperous yeoman farmers in colonies.[120] Demographic pressures intensified, with Punjab's population growing from 20 million in 1881 to 34 million by 1941, straining resources amid commercialization.[121] Famines recurrently exposed vulnerabilities in these systems, triggered primarily by monsoon failures but aggravated by rigid revenue demands and food exports. The Upper Doab famine of 1860–1861, affecting Punjab's canal-irrigated tracts, caused around 2 million deaths from starvation and disease due to crop failures and inadequate initial relief.[122] The Great Famine of 1876–1878 impacted Punjab and Sindh amid the El Niño drought, killing over 5 million across affected areas, with colonial exports of grain continuing despite local scarcity, prompting criticism of policy priorities.[122] Later, the 1896–1897 and 1899–1900 famines struck Punjab and parts of Sindh, claiming hundreds of thousands amid rinderpest epidemics decimating livestock, though British relief works—employing laborers on canals—mitigated totals compared to earlier events.[123] Responses evolved with the Famine Codes from 1883, mandating grain reserves and public works, which curbed mortality in subsequent scarcities, reflecting adaptive governance despite underlying extraction.[124] In the Frontier, localized scarcities persisted without major recorded famines, as tribal economies relied on mobility.[115]Pakistan Movement
Origins of Muslim League and Two-Nation Theory
The All-India Muslim League was established on December 30, 1906, during the annual session of the Muhammadan Educational Conference in Dhaka, then part of British India's Bengal Presidency.[125][126] The founding followed the Simla Deputation of October 1906, in which a delegation of 35 Muslim leaders, led by Aga Khan III, met Viceroy Lord Minto to demand proportional representation and separate electorates for Muslims in legislative councils, citing their demographic minority status—approximately 25% of British India's population—and cultural distinctions from the Hindu majority.[127] These demands reflected growing Muslim apprehensions over the Indian National Congress's push for elected governance, which elites feared would sideline Muslim interests in a Hindu-dominated polity, especially after the 1905 partition of Bengal temporarily enhanced Muslim leverage in the province before its 1911 reversal.[128] The League's initial objectives, as outlined in its 1906 platform, focused on promoting loyalty to the British Crown, protecting Muslim political rights, and preventing Hindu-majority rule without safeguards, rather than immediate separatism.[126] Aga Khan III served as its first president, with early leadership comprising landed aristocracy and professionals who viewed the organization as a counterweight to Congress's unitary nationalism.[127] Membership remained limited to elites, numbering around 1,300 by 1927, underscoring its origins as a defensive elite forum amid British India's evolving constitutional reforms, such as the Morley-Minto Reforms of 1909 that conceded separate electorates.[125] The Two-Nation Theory, positing Hindus and Muslims as distinct nations based on irreconcilable religious, cultural, and social differences, emerged from 19th-century Muslim intellectual responses to colonial demographics and Hindu revivalism.[129] Its foundational articulation is attributed to Sir Syed Ahmed Khan (1817–1898), founder of the Aligarh Movement, who shifted from early advocacy of Hindu-Muslim unity to separatism following the 1867 Hindi-Urdu controversy, where Hindu campaigns to replace Urdu script with Devanagari in official use highlighted linguistic divides rooted in religious identities.[130] In 1888, Sir Syed explicitly stated that mixing Hindus and Muslims was like mixing "two different nations," warning that democratic self-rule would lead to Muslim subjugation given their numerical disadvantage and historical conquest-based presence in India.[131] He urged Muslims to prioritize Western education and British allegiance over Congress participation, fostering institutions like Aligarh Muslim University to build a separate Muslim political consciousness.[129] This theory gained momentum in the League's framework, with Muhammad Iqbal's 1930 Allahabad presidential address envisioning a consolidated Muslim state in northwest India to preserve Islamic identity against assimilation.[130] Muhammad Ali Jinnah, initially a Congress advocate for composite nationalism, embraced it post-1937 provincial elections, where Congress ministries allegedly marginalized Muslims through policies like the Wardha Scheme, prompting League reorganization and mass mobilization.[131] The theory's causal logic rested on empirical realities: Muslims' non-assimilative faith, separate legal codes (e.g., Sharia vs. Hindu personal law), and regional concentrations (e.g., 55% in Punjab, 52% in Bengal per 1941 census), which rendered unified governance untenable without partition to avert civil strife.[132] While critics, including some Congress leaders, dismissed it as elite-driven divisiveness, proponents substantiated it with evidence of intercommunal riots (e.g., 1920s-1930s violence claiming thousands of lives) and failed unity pacts like the 1937 elections' aftermath.[133]Lahore Resolution and Demand for Pakistan
The annual session of the All-India Muslim League, its 27th, convened in Lahore from March 22 to 24, 1940, amid escalating tensions over constitutional reforms and the outbreak of World War II, which had prompted the British to involve Indian leaders without consensus.[134] Muhammad Ali Jinnah, as League president, delivered a presidential address on March 22 emphasizing irreconcilable differences between Hindus and Muslims, declaring them two distinct nations based on divergent religious philosophies, social customs, literatures, and civilizations that precluded unified governance.[135] This articulation built on earlier ideas, such as those from poet Muhammad Iqbal in 1930, but Jinnah framed it as a pragmatic response to perceived Hindu dominance under potential Congress-led rule, rejecting federalism under the 1935 Government of India Act as unworkable for Muslim interests.[135] On March 23, 1940, the Lahore Resolution—drafted by committee including Zafarullah Khan and moved by A.K. Fazlul Huq—was adopted unanimously by the assembly of approximately 100,000 attendees at Iqbal Park (then Minto Park).[134] [136] The text rejected the territorial nationalism of a single Indian federation, instead demanding that Muslim-majority districts in the north-western and eastern zones of British India be grouped into independent states with sovereign, autonomous units, allowing Muslims to order their lives per Islamic principles free from non-Muslim majorities.[134] [136] It specified no constitutional plan should impose domination by one community over another, reflecting League concerns over the 1937 provincial elections where Congress victories had sidelined Muslim representation despite separate electorates.[136] Though the resolution avoided the term "Pakistan"—coined by Choudhry Rahmat Ali in 1933 as an acronym for Muslim-majority regions—it crystallized the demand for territorial separation, evolving from vague autonomy calls into a blueprint for sovereign Muslim homelands, later interpreted as endorsing partition.[136] Jinnah initially maintained ambiguity on "Pakistan's" precise form, using it as leverage in negotiations, but by 1946, League rhetoric explicitly tied it to statehood.[137] The Indian National Congress condemned it as divisive, with leaders like Jawaharlal Nehru labeling it a "reactionary" threat to unity, while Hindu Mahasabha opposed any concessions to separatism.[136] In Punjab and Bengal, communitarian responses varied, with some Muslim groups initially favoring federation but shifting toward League positions amid fears of marginalization. The resolution marked a pivotal escalation in the Pakistan Movement, galvanizing Muslim political mobilization and shifting League support from 4.8% in 1937 elections to majorities in key provinces by 1946, as it provided a clear ideological and territorial framework rooted in the Two-Nation Theory.[136] British officials, including Viceroy Linlithgow, noted its implications for postwar settlements, though implementation hinged on wartime alliances and failed unity talks like the 1946 Cabinet Mission Plan.[138] In retrospect, while some historians debate its intent as a maximalist bargaining position rather than fixed partition blueprint, its adoption formalized the irretrievable demand for Muslim self-determination, culminating in the 1947 creation of Pakistan.[137]Partition Negotiations and Independence in 1947
Lord Mountbatten, appointed Viceroy of India in March 1947, began urgent negotiations with leaders of the Indian National Congress (such as Jawaharlal Nehru and Vallabhbhai Patel) and the All-India Muslim League under Muhammad Ali Jinnah to accelerate the transfer of power. These talks took place amid mounting communal unrest and the Muslim League’s demand for a separate Muslim-majority state based on the two-nation theory. The tensions had intensified following the Great Calcutta Killings of August 1946, which erupted after Jinnah’s call for Direct Action Day on August 16 to press for Pakistan. He had warned that the choice was “either a divided India or a destroyed India.” The riots, initiated by Muslim League–inspired Muslim mobs, resulted in an estimated 4,000–10,000 deaths within four days and were soon followed by further communal violence in Noakhali in October 1946, where Muslim League–inspired Muslim mobs launched widespread attacks on Hindus, leading to thousands more casualties.[139] The talks revealed irreconcilable demands: Congress favored a united federal India with strong central authority, while the League rejected power-sharing arrangements that it viewed as risking Hindu-majority dominance over Muslims, leading Mountbatten to abandon plans for a united dominion.[140] On June 3, 1947, Mountbatten announced his partition plan, which proposed dividing British India into two independent dominions—India and Pakistan—with Pakistan comprising the Muslim-majority provinces of Punjab, Bengal, Sindh, the North-West Frontier Province, and Baluchistan, though subject to boundary adjustments.[140] The plan allowed princely states to accede to either dominion or remain independent, advanced the independence date from June 1948 to August 15, 1947, to preempt further violence following events like the 1946 Calcutta Killings, and required provincial assemblies in Punjab and Bengal to vote on partitioning those provinces along religious lines.[140] Both Congress and the League accepted the proposal by June 10, despite Congress's reservations about the hasty timeline and potential for chaos.[140] To demarcate boundaries, Mountbatten established the Punjab and Bengal Boundary Commissions in June 1947, chaired by British lawyer Cyril Radcliffe, who arrived in India on July 8 with a five-week deadline despite lacking prior knowledge of the regions.[141] The commissions considered factors like contiguous Muslim or non-Muslim majorities, natural boundaries, and irrigation systems, but political pressures and incomplete census data led to contentious decisions, such as awarding Gurdaspur district (with a Muslim majority) to India, enabling access to Kashmir.[141] The Radcliffe Line, as the boundary became known, was finalized but withheld until August 17, 1947—two days after independence—to avoid preemptive violence, exacerbating uncertainty during migrations.[141] The British Parliament enacted the Indian Independence Act on July 18, 1947, which legally partitioned British India into the dominions of India and Pakistan effective August 15, terminated British suzerainty over princely states, and empowered the new dominions to frame their own constitutions while retaining Commonwealth ties.[142] Pakistan declared independence at midnight on August 14, 1947, with Jinnah sworn in as its first Governor-General in Karachi; India followed at midnight on August 15, with Nehru addressing the Constituent Assembly in Delhi.[140] The partition triggered immediate mass migrations, with approximately 14.5 to 18 million people—Hindus and Sikhs eastward to India, Muslims westward to Pakistan—crossing borders amid widespread communal riots, train massacres, and village burnings, particularly in Punjab.[143] Reliable estimates place deaths from violence, disease, and starvation between 500,000 and 2 million, though exact figures remain disputed due to chaotic record-keeping and politicized reporting.[143] [144] The British military's withdrawal to barracks prior to August 15 left limited forces to quell unrest, contributing to the scale of the humanitarian crisis.[140]Early Republic (1947-1958)
Refugee Crisis, Integration of Princely States, and Dominion Status
The partition of British India triggered one of the largest forced migrations in history, with approximately 14 to 17 million people displaced amid communal violence, particularly in Punjab and Sindh. In the territories comprising Pakistan, around 7 million Muslim refugees arrived from India by 1951, overwhelming urban centers like Karachi, Lahore, and refugee camps in Punjab, where inadequate infrastructure led to disease outbreaks, food shortages, and makeshift settlements. The exodus of roughly 6.5 million Hindus and Sikhs from Pakistan to India left abandoned properties, which were later classified as evacuee assets for redistribution to incoming refugees, though mismanagement fueled corruption and disputes. Accompanying riots and massacres claimed between 200,000 and 2 million lives across the subcontinent, with Pakistan experiencing targeted attacks on minorities and retaliatory killings, exacerbating the new state's administrative and humanitarian burdens.[145][146][147] Efforts to integrate princely states focused on securing Muslim-majority or strategically vital territories, with Pakistan inheriting fewer such entities than India—primarily in Punjab, Sindh, and the northwest frontier. Bahawalpur State, covering 45,000 square kilometers and ruled by Nawab Sadiq Muhammad Khan V, acceded on 5 October 1947, providing vital economic resources including canal-irrigated lands. Khairpur State in Sindh followed on 3 October 1947 under Regent Mir Ghulam Hussain Khan Talpur, bolstering Pakistan's control over the Indus region. The Khanate of Kalat, encompassing Balochistan's core areas like Quetta and including subordinate states such as Las Bela and Kharan, resisted initial overtures; its ruler, Ahmad Yar Khan, declared independence on 15 August 1947, but after failed negotiations and the arrest of Baloch levies, formally acceded on 27 March 1948. Frontier agencies like Dir, Swat, Chitral, and Amb acceded between August and October 1947, often through tribal jirgas, ensuring border security against Afghanistan. These integrations, completed by 1949, involved treaties preserving some rulers' privileges until the 1955 One Unit scheme abolished most states, merging them into West Pakistan.[148][149][150] Pakistan entered independence as a dominion in the British Commonwealth on 14 August 1947, with the British monarch—initially George VI, then Elizabeth II after 1952—serving as ceremonial head of state, represented locally by a governor-general appointed on the advice of the Pakistani prime minister. Muhammad Ali Jinnah assumed the role of first governor-general, wielding significant executive powers under the borrowed Government of India Act 1935, until his death on 11 September 1948; he was succeeded by Khawaja Nazimuddin (1948–1951), Ghulam Muhammad (1951–1955), and Iskander Mirza (1955–1956). Dominion status facilitated transitional governance amid constitutional delays caused by linguistic divides, Islamic provisions, and East Pakistan's demands for parity, avoiding immediate republican upheaval. This arrangement ended with the 23 March 1956 constitution, which established Pakistan as an Islamic republic, retained Commonwealth membership, and shifted to a presidential system in practice under Mirza.[151][152][153]Constitutional Debates and 1956 Republic Declaration
Following independence on August 14, 1947, Pakistan's Constituent Assembly, comprising members indirectly elected by provincial legislatures, convened its first session on August 10 to draft a constitution, with Muhammad Ali Jinnah elected as its president.[154] The assembly initially operated under the modified Government of India Act 1935, retaining dominion status under the British Crown, as framing a new document was deferred amid immediate crises including mass refugee influxes exceeding 7 million and the integration of princely states covering 56% of territory.[155] Debates centered on reconciling Islamic principles with democratic governance, federalism balancing East Pakistan's population majority (54% of total) against West Pakistan's geographic and administrative diversity, and representation formulas that initially favored parity over population proportionality, exacerbating East-West tensions.[154] The Objectives Resolution, moved by Prime Minister Liaquat Ali Khan on March 7, 1949, and adopted on March 12, served as a preamble for future constitutional efforts, asserting that sovereignty resides with Allah, exercised through representatives under Islamic democratic ideals, while guaranteeing minority rights and fundamental freedoms subject to law and public morality.[156] This resolution, passed by a vote of 21-10 amid opposition from Hindu members citing potential minority subordination, embedded religious directives like enabling Muslims to live per Quran and Sunnah, yet faced criticism for vagueness on implementation, reflecting ideological divides between secular nationalists and Islamists.[156] Subsequent Basic Principles Committee reports in 1950 and 1952 proposed Islamic head of state, separate electorates for minorities, and excessive central powers, but were rejected due to East Pakistani objections over weakened provincial autonomy and language disputes, culminating in 1952 riots after Urdu's imposition as sole national language despite Bengali's demographic weight.[155] Delays persisted through leadership vacuums—Jinnah's death on September 11, 1948, and Liaquat's assassination on October 16, 1951—and political fragmentation, with the assembly dissolving ministries thrice by 1953 amid no-confidence motions.[155] The 1954 elections rendered the assembly defunct, prompting Governor-General Ghulam Muhammad to appoint a second assembly in July 1955, which enacted the One Unit scheme merging West Pakistan's provinces into a single entity for equal footing with East Pakistan in a bicameral parliament (300 seats total, half each wing).[154] Under Prime Minister Chaudhry Muhammad Ali, this body finalized the draft after reconciling federal lists (defense, foreign affairs central) with concurrent powers, incorporating directive principles for Islamic economic equity and education. The 1956 Constitution, adopted unanimously on February 29, 1956, and authenticated by Governor-General Iskander Mirza on March 2, proclaimed Pakistan an Islamic Republic effective March 23, ending dominion status with Mirza as first president under a parliamentary system where the prime minister held executive authority and the president ceremonial duties. Key provisions included unicameral National Assembly (initially), fundamental rights with Islamic provisos, an Islamiyat advisory council, and prohibitions on usury and alcohol, though enforcement mechanisms remained advisory, prioritizing unity over rigorous theocracy. This document, spanning 234 articles, addressed prior impasses but sowed seeds of instability through One Unit's artificial parity, ignoring East Pakistan's numerical edge and cultural distinctions, factors later contributing to its abrogation in 1958.[155]Political Instability Leading to Martial Law
Following the death of Muhammad Ali Jinnah on September 11, 1948, Pakistan experienced a leadership vacuum that exacerbated governance challenges in the nascent state.[157] Khawaja Nazimuddin succeeded as Governor-General, but real executive power shifted toward bureaucratic and military influences amid ongoing refugee integration and territorial disputes.[9] The assassination of Prime Minister Liaquat Ali Khan on October 16, 1951, in Rawalpindi further destabilized the political order, leaving Nazimuddin to assume the premiership while Ghulam Muhammad became Governor-General.[158] This event highlighted vulnerabilities to internal threats, including suspected conspiracies involving disaffected elements, and prompted a reliance on interim leadership without clear succession mechanisms.[159] Governor-General Ghulam Muhammad's dismissal of Prime Minister Nazimuddin on April 17, 1953, despite parliamentary support, marked a pivotal erosion of democratic norms, justified by Muhammad as necessary to counter anti-government agitations like the 1953 Lahore riots over the Ahmadiyya community's status.[157] He appointed Muhammad Ali Bogra as prime minister, initiating a pattern of executive overreach where the Governor-General wielded disproportionate dismissal powers under the borrowed Government of India Act, 1935.[9] Bogra's tenure saw the formation of a "Ministry of Talent" in 1954 to sideline entrenched politicians, but Ghulam Muhammad's own incapacitation led to Iskander Mirza's appointment as acting Governor-General in 1954 and full Governor-General in 1955.[158] Chaudhry Muhammad Ali replaced Bogra as prime minister in 1955, overseeing the merger of West Pakistan's princely states into "One Unit" to balance East Pakistan's demographic weight, yet this administrative reform fueled regional grievances rather than resolving them.[159] Constitutional delays compounded the instability, with the first Constituent Assembly dissolved by Ghulam Muhammad in October 1954 on grounds of inefficiency, leading to legal challenges and the formation of a second assembly in 1955.[9] The 1956 Constitution, promulgated on March 23, 1956, established Pakistan as an Islamic republic with Iskander Mirza as its first president, but it failed to curb factionalism; prime ministers changed rapidly—Chaudhry Muhammad Ali resigned in September 1956, followed by brief tenures of I.I. Chundrigar (October–December 1956) and Huseyn Shaheed Suhrawardy (1956–1957), culminating in Malik Firoz Khan Noon's appointment in December 1957.[158] These seven prime ministerial shifts in eleven years reflected chronic horse-trading among Muslim League factions, provincial lobbies, and bureaucratic cabals, alongside economic strains like food shortages and inflation, which eroded public confidence.[160] Ethnic and linguistic tensions intensified the crisis, notably the 1952 Bengali Language Movement in East Pakistan protesting Urdu's imposition as the sole national language, resulting in deaths on February 21, 1952, and sowing seeds of East-West alienation.[157] Suhrawardy's ouster in October 1957 via a no-confidence vote, amid allegations of corruption and inability to manage One Unit dissent, left Noon facing a fragmented National Assembly.[9] By 1958, escalating street protests, opposition alliances like the Progressive Democratic Front, and military unease over civilian incompetence prompted President Mirza to declare martial law on October 7, 1958, abrogating the constitution, dissolving assemblies, and banning political parties.[161] Mirza appointed General Muhammad Ayub Khan as Chief Martial Law Administrator, citing the need to end "political chaos and misrule" that had paralyzed development and national security.[162] This intervention, while initially welcomed by some for restoring order, entrenched military dominance, as Ayub soon ousted Mirza on October 27, 1958, assuming full control.[158]Ayub Khan Military Regime (1958-1969)
Basic Democracies System and Economic Industrialization
The Basic Democracies Order, promulgated by President Muhammad Ayub Khan on October 26, 1959, established a tiered system of local governance designed to promote grassroots participation while maintaining centralized executive control. This framework replaced the previous parliamentary structure, which Ayub deemed inefficient and prone to elite capture, with elected councils at four levels: union (local village or ward level), tehsil (sub-district), district, and division. Approximately 80,000 basic democrats—elected representatives without strict party affiliations—were chosen through non-partisan elections held between December 1959 and January 1960, forming the foundational electoral college for higher administrative and national decisions. The system's architects argued it would channel public input into development projects, such as rural infrastructure and sanitation, bypassing urban-dominated politics that had stalled national progress since 1947.[163][164] Implementation emphasized administrative efficiency over broad political pluralism, with basic democrats tasked with advisory roles in local affairs, revenue collection, and dispute resolution, while higher councils handled development planning under bureaucratic oversight. In practice, the regime restricted opposition involvement, co-opting many basic democrats through patronage, which ensured loyalty during key events like the 1962 constitutional referendum—where 75,283 of 80,000 voted in favor—and Ayub's indirect election as president in 1965 via the same college. Proponents credited the system with stabilizing governance after years of instability, enabling focused resource allocation for local works that improved rural connectivity and basic services in provinces like Punjab and Sindh. Critics, however, highlighted its authoritarian undertones, as it subordinated elected bodies to the president's discretion, limiting accountability and fostering dependency on military-backed administration rather than genuine devolution. Empirical outcomes included expanded rural electrification and road networks, though data on participation rates showed uneven engagement, with turnout varying from 50-70% in initial polls.[165][163] Concurrently, Ayub's economic policies accelerated industrialization, framing 1958-1968 as the "Decade of Development" through export-led growth, private investment incentives, and state-guided planning. The second five-year plan (1960-1965) allocated 20% of investments to heavy industries like steel, chemicals, and machinery, supported by the Pakistan Industrial Development Corporation's establishment of 45 public projects, while protective tariffs and tax rebates spurred private sector expansion in textiles and consumer goods. Gross domestic product grew at an average annual rate of 6.8%, outpacing population growth of 2.4%, with industrial output rising from 11.9% of GDP in 1959-1960 to 14.5% by 1964-1965; manufacturing specifically expanded by 9-10% yearly, driven by cotton and jute processing that boosted exports from $60 million in 1958 to $250 million by 1968. Finance Minister Muhammad Shoaib's liberalization measures, including rupee devaluation and foreign aid inflows exceeding $3 billion (much from U.S. Consortium agreements), facilitated capital imports for factories, though this increased external debt to 25% of GDP by 1969.[166][167] These reforms yielded measurable gains in urban employment and infrastructure, with per capita income climbing from 272 rupees in 1959-1960 to 418 rupees by 1969-1970, but disparities emerged as benefits concentrated in West Pakistan's industrial belts like Karachi and Lahore, exacerbating regional imbalances with East Pakistan and fueling later unrest. Industrial licensing favored large conglomerates, enabling 22 families to control 66% of banking and 87% of insurance by 1968, per a government commission's findings, which critics linked to cronyism despite official claims of merit-based allocation. Overall, the era's causal drivers—stable governance via Basic Democracies and pro-business policies—demonstrated that prioritizing production over redistribution could generate surplus for reinvestment, though sustainability hinged on addressing inequities, as evidenced by stagnating agricultural shares (dropping to 43% of GDP) without complementary land reforms.[168][166]1965 War with India and Tashkent Agreement
The 1965 Indo-Pakistani War originated from the unresolved Kashmir dispute, with Pakistan seeking to alter the status quo through military means amid perceived Indian weakness after the 1962 Sino-Indian conflict. President Ayub Khan authorized Operation Gibraltar, a covert infiltration plan launched in early August 1965, involving over 30,000 Pakistani personnel disguised as Kashmiri locals crossing the Line of Control to incite an uprising in Indian-administered Jammu and Kashmir. The operation presupposed widespread local support for accession to Pakistan, but it collapsed due to lack of insurgency, effective Indian counterintelligence, and the capture or neutralization of most infiltrators by mid-August.[169][170] India responded with limited offensives to secure infiltration routes, prompting Pakistan to escalate on September 1, 1965, with Operation Grand Slam aimed at capturing the Akhnoor bridge to sever Indian supply lines to Kashmir. India countered by opening a new front in the Punjab sector on September 6, leading to intense ground battles including the tank engagements at Chawinda—described as the largest since World War II—and Phillora, as well as air and naval actions such as Pakistan's bombing of Dwarka port. The conflict expanded beyond Kashmir into Rajasthan and Punjab, involving over 1,000 tanks total, but neither side achieved breakthroughs; a United Nations-mandated ceasefire took effect on September 23, 1965, following Security Council Resolution 211.[171] Casualty estimates remain contested: Indian records report approximately 3,000 killed and 100 tanks lost, while claiming 5,800 Pakistani deaths and 200-450 tanks destroyed; Pakistani figures invert these, asserting lower own losses around 3,800 killed. Declassified U.S. intelligence assessed India as the victor, citing greater territorial gains (about 1,900 km² versus Pakistan's 540 km²) and proportionally fewer manpower and matériel losses.[172][173] The war ended in military stalemate, with no permanent territorial changes and mutual exhaustion, compounded by a U.S.-UK arms embargo that disproportionately strained Pakistan's re-equipment needs.[171] Postwar negotiations culminated in the Tashkent Declaration, mediated by Soviet Premier Alexei Kosygin and signed on January 10, 1966, by Ayub Khan and Indian Prime Minister Lal Bahadur Shastri in Tashkent, Uzbekistan. The agreement mandated mutual withdrawal of forces to positions held before August 5, 1965, by February 25, 1966; cessation of hostilities and propaganda; non-interference in internal affairs; restoration of diplomatic, economic, trade, communications, cultural, and consular ties; repatriation of prisoners of war; and establishment of mechanisms for ongoing dialogue, though it deferred substantive talks on Kashmir. Shastri's sudden death the following day fueled Indian suspicions, but withdrawals proceeded. In Pakistan, the declaration provoked domestic backlash against Ayub for forgoing wartime gains without concessions on Kashmir, portraying it as a diplomatic retreat that undermined the military's claimed defensive success and eroded his regime's legitimacy amid rising opposition.[174][171]Green Revolution and Social Reforms
The Green Revolution in Pakistan during Ayub Khan's regime (1958–1969) marked a pivotal shift in agricultural policy, emphasizing high-yielding crop varieties, chemical inputs, and expanded irrigation to achieve food self-sufficiency. Initiated in the early 1960s, it drew on global innovations like Norman Borlaug's dwarf wheat strains, which were adapted locally through collaborations with international agencies; these varieties, combined with increased fertilizer use and tubewell irrigation, boosted per-acre yields significantly, particularly in Punjab province.[175][176] Government incentives, including subsidized seeds and credit via institutions like the Agricultural Development Bank of Pakistan (established 1961), facilitated rapid adoption among progressive farmers, resulting in wheat output nearly doubling from 3.8 million metric tons in 1960 to 7.3 million metric tons by 1968.[177][178] However, the revolution's benefits skewed toward larger landowners capable of investing in mechanization and inputs, exacerbating rural inequalities and contributing to environmental issues like soil salinity from over-irrigation.[179] Complementing agricultural modernization, Ayub Khan pursued land reforms in 1959 to dismantle feudal structures and enhance productivity, imposing ceilings of 500 acres for irrigated land and 1,000 acres for unirrigated land per individual, with excess redistributed to tenants.[180][181] A Land Reform Commission, formed in January 1959, recommended these measures to promote owner-cultivation and reduce absentee landlordism, though implementation was limited—only about 1.3 million acres were redistributed by 1969, as exemptions for orchards and religious endowments diluted impact, and evasion through benami transfers persisted.[182] These reforms causally linked to Green Revolution gains by enabling smaller holdings to adopt intensive farming, yet they failed to fundamentally erode elite land control due to weak enforcement and political resistance from agrarian interests.[183] Social reforms under Ayub emphasized secular modernization, most notably the Muslim Family Laws Ordinance promulgated on March 15, 1961, which mandated registration of marriages, required arbitration councils for divorce (talaq), and conditioned polygamy on the existing wife's consent and proof of financial capacity.[184][185] Aimed at curbing arbitrary practices and empowering women through legal safeguards, the ordinance drew from a 1959 commission's report but faced clerical opposition for allegedly overriding Sharia; empirically, it reduced unregulated polygamous unions and streamlined inheritance claims for females, though cultural enforcement lagged in conservative areas. These measures reflected Ayub's top-down vision of controlled social progress, prioritizing state-mediated equity over traditional norms, but they sowed seeds of Islamist backlash by prioritizing administrative efficiency over theological consensus.[186]Yahya Khan Interregnum and 1971 War (1969-1971)
1970 Elections and East Pakistan Civil Unrest
The Legal Framework Order of March 30, 1970, promulgated by President Yahya Khan, served as an interim constitutional framework following the abrogation of the 1962 Constitution, stipulating that the National Assembly—elected on the basis of population—would draft a new constitution within 120 days of its first meeting.[187] This order delineated Pakistan into two provinces (East and West) with one unit each, allocated 162 seats to East Pakistan and 138 to West Pakistan in the 300-seat National Assembly, and emphasized Islamic principles alongside federalism with provincial autonomy.[188] Elections were scheduled for October but postponed due to the Bhola cyclone on November 12, 1970, which killed an estimated 300,000 to 500,000 people in East Pakistan; the central government's delayed and inadequate relief efforts exacerbated Bengali grievances over perceived neglect by the Punjabi-dominated West Pakistani elite.[189] The general elections on December 7, 1970, marked Pakistan's first instance of direct universal adult suffrage for the National Assembly, with regional assemblies elected on December 17.[190] In East Pakistan, Sheikh Mujibur Rahman's Awami League campaigned on its 1966 Six-Point program demanding greater provincial autonomy, including separate currencies, fiscal powers, and paramilitary forces, capitalizing on long-standing resentments over economic exploitation—East Pakistan generated most export revenue but received disproportionate development—and cultural marginalization, such as the imposition of Urdu.[191] Turnout exceeded 50 percent amid cyclones' disruptions, but the Awami League secured a sweeping victory in the East, winning 160 of 162 National Assembly seats allocated there, translating to 167 overall seats and an absolute majority.[190] In West Pakistan, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto's Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) won 81 seats, primarily on socialist promises, while other parties fragmented the remainder.| Party | Leader | Seats Won (National Assembly) | Primary Base |
|---|---|---|---|
| Awami League | Sheikh Mujibur Rahman | 167 | East Pakistan |
| Pakistan Peoples Party | Zulfikar Ali Bhutto | 81 | West Pakistan (Punjab, Sindh) |
| Others (e.g., Jamaat-e-Islami, independents) | Various | 52 | Scattered in West |


