The Cambridge History of India, Vol. III: Turks and Afghans v3.c20.164

v3.c20.164

The consideration of the position of the Forty affords a convenient opportunity for an explanation of the name by which the dynasty under which they acquired their influence is known, for to most Europeans the appellation 'Slave Kings' must appear to be a contradiction in terms. In an eastern monarchy every subject is, in theory, the slave of the monarch and so styles himself, both in conversation and in correspondence. To be the personal slave of the monarch is therefore no disgrace, but a distinction, and, as eastern history abundantly proves, a stepping-stone to dignity and power. The Mamlūk or Slave Sultans of Egypt are a case in point. The Turks were at this time the most active and warlike people of Asia, and the Ghaznavids, themselves sprung from a Turkish slave, the princes of Ghūr, and other houses, surrounded themselves with slaves of this nation who, often before they received manumission, filled the highest offices in the state. Loyal service sometimes earned for them a regard and esteem which their master withheld from his own sons, born in the purple and corrupted from their cradles by flattery and luxury. A faithful slave who had filled with credit the highest offices was sometimes rewarded with the hand of his master's daughter in marriage, and was preferred to an unworthy or degenerate son or nephew. Alptigīn had been the slave of 'Abd-ul-Malik the Sāmānid and Sabuktigīn the slave and son-in-law of Alptigīn. Qutb-ud-dīn Aibak was Muhammad's viceroy in India for some time before he received manumission, and succeeded his master in the Indian conquests. He was indeed succeeded by his son, but Ārām Shāh was almost immediately compelled to make way for Iltutmish, Aibak's son-in-law and the ablest of his slaves. During the reign of Iltutmish the leading Turks formed themselves into a college of forty, which divided among its members all the great fiefs of the empire and all the highest offices in the state. The commanding genius of Iltutmish preserved the royal dignity intact, but in the reigns of his children the power of the Forty was ever increasing. Raziyya lost her throne by her preference for one who was not of their number and her brother Bahrām was no more than their nominee. There can be no doubt that the throne itself would ordinarily have been the prize of one of the Forty had not the jealousies of all prevented them from yielding precedence to one. They were thus content to own the nominal authority of one or other of the offspring of Iltutmish, but their compact with Bahrām at the time of his accession clearly indicated their determination to retain all authority for themselves, and the king, by destroying one of their number, sealed his fate.