The Cambridge History of India, Vol. III: Turks and Afghans v3.c3: Preface
The Cambridge History of India, Vol. III: Turks and Afghans v3.c3
- Language
- English
Preface
v3.c3.1
This volume deals generally with the history of India under Muhammadan rule from the time of the earliest invasions of the Muslims to the overthrow of the Lodī dynasty on the field of Pānīpat and the establishment of Bābur the Tīmūrid on the throne of Delhi, and covers the period unfortunately described by that usually careful scholar, the late Mr Edward Thomas, as that of the "Pathan Kings" of Delhi. Of the five dynasties which occupied the throne of Delhi during this period, from about 1200 to 1526, three were Turkish, or of Turkish descent; one claimed to be of Arab blood, and one was Afghān, but probably not Pathān.
v3.c3.2
Mr Thomas's misnomer, after clinging obstinately, for many years, to this period of Indian history, has been generally discarded, and the period is now known as that of the Sultanate, or Kingdom, of Delhi, as distinguished from the Empire of the Tīmūrids founded by Bābur. This distinction is not entirely accurate, or satisfactory, for it suggests that the earlier Muslim rulers were content with a comparatively small kingdom in the neighbourhood of their capital, whereas for nearly half a century they ruled virtually the whole sub-continent of India, two at least of them being emperors of India in a truer sense than any of the first four Tīmūrids, and the ruin of their empire covered the greater part of India with a number of independent Muslim states. Nevertheless the term will serve, for imperial rule was not characteristic of the sovereigns of Delhi during the thirteenth, fourteenth, and fifteenth centuries. During the first century of their rule they were consolidating and extending their authority; then followed half a century of empire, and then the disintegration of that empire.
v3.c3.3
It is only in respect of Delhi, the historic capital of Muslim rule in India, that it has been found possible to adhere to the year 1526 as the termination of an epoch of that rule. In the case of other states, both Muslim and Hindu, it has been found necessary to carry the local history on, either to the termination of the state's independence or to a period at which it may conveniently be relinquished. The history of the Hindu Kingdom of Vijayanagar, for instance, is continued to 1565, the date of its overthrow by the confederate Muslim Kingdoms of the Deccan; that of the Muslim Kingdoms of Mālwa, Gujarāt, Bengal, and Kashmīr to the dates of their annexation by Akbar, and that of the independent Kingdoms of the Deccan to 1600, the date of the capture of Ahmadnagar by Akbar's third son, Sultān Dāniyāl.
v3.c3.4
Chapter I of this volume is introductory, and treats of the conquest of Sind by the Arabs in the eighth century. The Arabs never extended their authority or their influence beyond Sind and Multān, and their rule in those countries was a mere episode in the history of India. Chapter II treats of the Yamīnī or Ghaznavid dynasty. Mahmūd was a raider rather than a conqueror, but he and his successors were Indian rulers by virtue of their annexation and occupation of the Punjāb, the last of their great possessions which remained to them. Chapter III treats of the first actual Muslim conquerors of Northern India, Mu'izz-ud-dīn Muhammad b. Sām of Ghūr, his lieutenants, and his successors, the earlier Slave Kings of Delhi; and Chapter IV of the rule of Ghiyās-ud-dīn Balban and his worthless son. Chapter V treats of the Khaljī dynasty and the first Muslim conquest of the Deccan; Chapter VI of the first two Sultans of the Tughluq dynasty, and the second conquest and revolt of the Deccan; Chapter VII of the later Sultans of the Tughluq dynasty and the invasion of India by Tīmūr; Chapter VIII of the Sayyids; and Chapter IX of the Lodī dynasty. Then follows a series of chapters dealing with independent Muslim Kingdoms, all of which, with the exception of Kashmīr and Khāndesh, rose on the ruins of the great empire of Muhammad b. Tughluq; Chapter X with Jaunpur; Chapter XI with Bengal; Chapter XII with Kashmīr; Chapter XIII, which has been written by Professor Sir E. Denison Ross, with Gujarāt and Khāndesh; Chapter XIV with Mālwa; Chapters XV and XVI with the Bahmanī Kingdom of the Deccan; and Chapter XVII with the five independent Muslim Kingdoms of the Deccan. Chapter XVIII treats of Hindu states in Southern India, and Chapter XX with those in Northern India; and Chapter XIX treats of the states of Sind and Multān during their independent existence. Chapter XXI, which has been written by Mr G. E. Harvey of the Indian Civil Service, deals with the history of Burma between the years 1287 and 1531; and Chapter XXII, by Don Martino de Zilva Wickremasinghe, with the history of Ceylon from 1215 to 1527. Chapter XXIII, written by Sir John Marshall, C.I.E., Director General of Archaeology in India, who has also supplied the illustrations to this volume, deals with the monuments of Muhammadan rule in India between the years 1200 and 1526.
v3.c3.5
A few explanations remain to be offered. The system of transliteration adopted is that used by the Government of India in their official publications. Except in the chapter on Ceylon diacritical marks, with the necessary exception of the macron, have been avoided. The *hamza* is represented, when necessary, by ’, the letter ع by ‘, and the letter ق by *q*. It has not been considered necessary to distinguish between the letters خ and ख and غ and घ by underlining the combinations *kh* and *gh*, and, in order to preserve the correct pronunciation of names and titles in which the Arabic article occurs, such forms as ‘Alā-ud-dīn and Badī‘-uz-Zamān have been preferred, partly for typographical and partly for other reasons, to the more scholarly and correct ‘Alā-*al*-dīn and Badī‘-*al*-zamān, or ‘Alā’u’-d-dīn and Badī‘u-’z-zamān.
v3.c3.6
In place-names the spelling of the *Imperial Gazetteer of India* has, with few exceptions, been followed, but the adoption of *q* as the equivalent of ق necessitates the substitution of Qandahār for the better-known Kandahār, and *e*, representing no Arabic or Persian letter, has been omitted from such names as Fathābād and Fathpur, the *Gazetteer* spelling of which serves only to stereotype a vulgar and corrupt pronunciation. The name of the great river of Southern India is spelt *Krishna*, as there appears to be no justification for the *Gazetteer* spelling *Kistna*; *Awsa* has been substituted for *Owsa* as the name of a town in the Deccan hardly well enough known to entitle it to the honour of a conventionalized spelling; and the name of the founder of the Lodī dynasty is spelt Buhlūl, as there appears to be no reason to preserve the mispronunciation enshrined in the more familiar Bahlol.
v3.c3.7
In order to avoid, as far as possible, the use of foreign words the plural of the words *amīr* and *malik* has usually been translated by ‘nobles,’ which will not mislead the reader if it be remembered that there has never been a recognized hereditary aristocracy in Muslim Kingdoms. The ‘nobles’ were military officers, or officers of state with military rank, whose titles, though occasionally revived in favour of a deserving son, did not become hereditary until the crown became so weak that a son was able to assume his father’s office and title. In the chapters on the history of the Deccan the word ‘Foreigners,’ when spelt with a capital letter, denotes members of the Foreign party.
v3.c3.8
A few words, such as *Islam*, *Sultan*, and *Raja* have been treated as naturalized English words, and written without the macron, except when they form parts of names or titles.
v3.c3.9
My best thanks are due to Sir John Marshall and Sir E. Denison Ross for having kindly undertaken arduous work in connection with this volume in spite of heavy official duties. I must also acknowledge the assistance of Mr G. E. Harvey, Mr S. Krishnaswami Ayyangar, Don Martino de Zilva Wickremasinghe, and Mr W. E. C. Browne, who has prepared the index. In conclusion, I desire to express my gratitude for the advice and assistance which I have at all times received from Professor E. J. Rapson, the editor of Volumes I and II of this history.
v3.c3.10
W. H.