Originally Posted by arleitter

This is what I said.there was no unity among Indian kings and they were vying each other who could outshine on others.In the year 1024,when Ghazni raided the temple,a Hindu ruler who had crossed his age 90,did fight Ghazni.His name was Ghoga Rana.

And I assume one more side to it.Those were the times a religion called `Hinduism' had not been there in the picture rather two sects `Vaishnavites(Those who were devotees of lord Vishnu)and Shivites(Devotees of Lord Shiva)had been there.There have been numerous instances in Indian history ,both sects tried to establish dominance over each other.Somnath temple is a temple dedicated to Lord Shiva and I assume,many of the Indian Rulers who did not intervene during Ghazni's attacks were Vaishnavites.They might not have felt the necessity to intervene.

As regards to your point to Indians surrendered to foreign invaders,It was only in India the Great Alexander tasted defeat and had to go back.All invaders including Mughals ,Portugese and British could not last in India forever(I do not want to play down the importance of British because they only gifted this present unified India and above all Hindusim as a religion).So your statement on Indians surrendering to foreign invaders does not stand at all.