The Cambridge History of India, Vol. III: Turks and Afghans v3.c24.3

v3.c24.3

The course of events in Bengal during the period of its dependence on Delhi, which was its normal condition until 1338, has already been traced. Although the country was regarded until that time as a province the loyalty of its governors was always, owing to the distance which separated Lakhnāwatī from Delhi, and climatic conditions which rendered military operations impossible for many months in each year, a very uncertain quantity. It depended almost entirely on the king’s ability to command obedience, and the dubious attitude of the governors of Lakhnāwatī to the central authority became a byword at Delhi. The royal title was occasionally assumed, as by ‘Alī Mardān, who obtained the government from Qutb-ud-dīn Aibak after the death of Muhammad Bakhtyār, and by Ghiyās-ud-dīn the Khalj, who succeeded ‘Alī Mardān. The first serious rebellion against a strong king of Delhi was that of Tughril against Balban, and the first instance of the unquestioned use of the royal title in Bengal was that of Nāsir-ud-dīn Mahmūd, the contemptible father of the still more contemptible Mu‘izz-ud-dīn, Balban’s successor on the throne of Delhi. The father was content with the sovereignty of Bengal, and outlived the son, who was unfit to wield the sceptre of Delhi. Mahmūd, on his death in 1291, was succeeded by his next surviving son, Rukn-ud-dīn Kaikāūs, who, though he used the royal title and coined money in his own name, owned allegiance to ‘Alā-ud-dīn Khaljī of Delhi.