::I have read the discussion I simply disagree with the conclusions. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence and if you're gong to have a list of 'really bad things people have done to one another sorted by how many were killed', putting a 500 year - eg 2-3x or more as long as ANYTHING else on the list - conquest by ... Who? Muslims! - needs a lot more than one Indian prof's book that has been disputed by other historians and  when he is potentially biased. I'd like to see other scholarship - of any origin - that makes their own estimates of the death tolls. The conquests of India can be profitably divided since it was not some undifferentiated mass of 'Muslims' but rather specific people from specific places who invaded at specific times. The estimates given by Lal are based on population decrease, but ascribing that all to the conquests is a stretch and based on debatable methodology, it's hard time to reason about such matters which is probably why no-one else has done such estimates. Remember, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and as our star entry we need something more than this.