The Foundation of Muslim Rule in India: A History of the Establishment and Progress of the Turkish Sultanate of Delhi, 1206–1290 A.D. c21.28

c21.28

The son of the reigning king, even his heir apparent, was only one of his courtiers⁴. The Sultan's authority was unquestionable but the right of his descendent to a similar authority was not necessarily conceded. In other words, the monarch's unquestioned right to obedience could not be made inherent in his dynasty but had to be acquired in every individual case. The absence of a law of primogeniture was another qualifying factor in the development of a dynastic absolutist kingship, for the *Shariah* allots an equal share to all the sons. A Muslim king's rightful heirs were usually many and in a position to assert their claims; even nomination by the deceased monarch could hardly decide the choice. Succession became still more complicated by the fact that slaves also were regarded as the master's heirs, though, usually, the descendents of his body were conceded priority. Despite the crown's almost superhuman status, its undefined methods of transfer thus tended to hamper its perpetuation.