The Legacy of Muslim Rule in India c8.s4.4

c8.s4.4

Soldiers in permanent service, and the kings bodyguards called Jandars, were largely drawn from his personal slaves.¹²⁷ Right from the days of Mahmud of Ghazni the pivot of the regular army was provided by the slave force (*ghilman*, *mamalik*).¹²⁸ Young slaves were obtained as presents, as part of tribute from subordinate rulers and as captives during campaigns. They were also purchased in slave markets in India and abroad. Captured or imported, they were broken in and brainwashed at an early age, their minds moulded and their bodies trained for warfare. The practice may sound cruel but it was eminently Islamic and was universal in the Muslim lands.¹²⁹ Compare, for example, the *Dewshirme* (collecting boys) system of the Turkish empire according to which every five years, and sometimes every year, the Ottomans enslaved all Balkan Jewish and Christian boys aged 10-15, took them to Constantinople and brought them up in Islamic ideology. They were used for the further subjugation of their own people.¹³⁰ The value of the slave troops lay in their lack of roots and local connections and attachment to the master by a personal bond of fealty. The foundation of this relation was military clientship, the attachment of man to man, the loyalty of individual to individual, first by the relation of chief to his companion and, if the warrior master succeeded in conquest and setting up a dominion, by the relation of suzerain to vassal. The devotion of man to man is the basis of the slave system, of feudalism, of imperialism of the primeval type, and of the success of medieval Muslim army. Slaves were collected from all countries and nationalities. There were Turks, Persians, Buyids, Seljuqs, Oghuz (also called Irani Turkmen), Afghans, Khaljis, Hindu etc. in the army of Mahmud. The success of the Ghaznavids and Ghaurids in India was due, besides other reasons, to the staunchly loyal slave troops.¹³¹ This tradition of obtaining slaves by all methods and from all regions, was continued by the Delhi Sultans. In his campaign against Katehar Balban massacred all male captives except boys up to the age of eight or nine.¹³² It was the practice with most sultans,¹³³ and making slaves of young boys by Muslim victors was common. As these slave boys grew in age, they could hardly remember their parents and remained loyal only to the king. Alauddin Khalji possessed 50,000 slave boys,¹³⁴ who, as they grew up, would have made his strong army stronger. Muhammad Tughlaq also obtained slaves through campaigns. Firoz Tughlaq commanded his fief-holders and officers to capture slaves whenever they were at war. He had also instructed his Amils and Jagirdars to collect slave boys in place of revenue and tribute.¹³⁵ In short, the medieval Muslim slave-system was a constant supplier of loyal troops to the Muslim army, from India and abroad.