The Sultanate of Delhi, 711–1526 A.D. c20.s7: Causes of the fall of the Tughluq dynasty

The Sultanate of Delhi, 711–1526 A.D. c20.s7

Language: English

Causes of the fall of the Tughluq dynasty

c20.s7.1

When Muhammad bin Tughluq became king the Sultanate of Delhi embraced almost the whole of the sub-continent of India, except Orissa, Assam, Nepal and Kashmir; but during the reign of Nasir-ud-din Mahmud, the last ruler of the dynasty, it dwindled to a small principality, the extent and prestige of which could be judged from a contemporary saying which runs thus : "The rule of the Lord of the World extends from Delhi to Palam." (Palam is the present aerodrome town, about seven miles from Delhi.) And, as we have seen, even this diminutive kingdom passed out of the hands of the Tughluq ruling family in 1413.

c20.s7.2

There were several causes of the decline and fall of the Tughluq kingdom. In the first place, Muhammad Tughluq's character and policy were greatly responsible for the shrinkage of his dominions. Owing to his visionary projects, excessively harsh punishments and wild schemes of conquests, many a provincial governor felt that his safety lay in rebellion and independence. In consequence of this feeling, the Bahamani and the Vijayanagar kingdoms came into existence in the Dakhin. Bangal cut itself off. Sindh was almost lost. In those provinces that yet remained parts of the Sultanate there was great dissatisfaction and discontentment. Secondly, although Firoz Tughluq tried to heal the wounds inflicted by his predecessor, his policy of leniency, religious intolerance, revival of feudalism, and imparting the discipline and efficiency of the army, undermined the royal authority and weakened the administration beyond repair. Thirdly, Firoz Tughluq had lived too long. Two of his elder sons, who could have managed the affairs of the state successfully, pre-deceased him. Moreover, the old Sultan did not make proper arrangement for the education of his successors, with the result that there was no member of the Tughluq family left who could have given promise of a successful reign. Fourthly, the government of the Tughluqs, like that of the previous Sultans of Delhi, was a centralised despotism which could function well only if the ruler at the helm of affairs happened to be a man of ability and strength of character. If, on the other hand, the ruler was weak, his weakness was bound to be reflected in all branches of administration. The later rulers of the [Figure: INDIA IN 1400 A.D. *Later Tughluqs.*]

c20.s7.3

Tughluq dynasty were incompetent, non-entities who were absorbed in pleasure and could not help falling tools into the hands of their powerful nobles. None of them had enough political insight and wisdom to choose the right sort of man for his prime minister and give him his full confidence and support. In the absence of this guiding factor, rival factions sprang up at the court, which led to civil wars. Fifthly, the nobles at the court were as demoralised as their ruler himself, with the result that a man of first-rate ability among the peers became a rare commodity. The slave system, in the early days of the Turkish rule in India, had tended to produce great men; but under Firoz this system deteriorated so rapidly that among the ranks of his slaves and those of his successors there was no Qutub-ud-din Aibak, no Iltutmish and no Balban. Sixthly, the Sultanate of Delhi was based on the force and efficiency of its military organisation. Under Muhammad, and much more under Firoz and his successors, the Delhi army ceased to be an instrument of force. It could not, therefore, hold the people in awe of the royal authority. Seventhly, the government was a police government concerning itself only with the maintenance of law and order and collection of revenues; and when it could not discharge these two duties satisfactorily, it lost reason for its existence. Eighthly, the Dakhin, which had for the first time been conquered in the time of Ala-ud-din Khalji, was yet an uneasy partner in the Sultanate of Delhi. It could be held only by a man of genius like the Khalji conqueror. Under weak rulers there were numerous rebellions in the Dakhin and the severance of its connection with Delhi caused unhealthy repercussions in northern India. And finally, the Hindus, though subjected to the foreign rule for about two hundred years in the north and over a hundred years in the south, had not given up their attempt to make a bid for their freedom. Certain parts even in northern India could never really be effectively subjugated by the Turks. It took more than a hundred and fifty years for Ranthambhor to be finally conquered and annexed. The Doab, though situated very near Delhi, could never really be made submissive. Taking advantage of the weakness of the Tughluqs, Rajasthan became independent. Gwalior and other principalities threw off their yoke. Under the cumulative effect of the above factors, it would have been surprising if the Sultanate of Delhi under the Tughluqs had survived longer than it actually did.

The Sultanate of Delhi, 711–1526 A.D. c20.s7: Causes of the fall of the Tughluq dynasty

Causes of the fall of the Tughluq dynasty

c20.s7.1

c20.s7.2

c20.s7.3

c20.s7.4

c20.s7.5

c20.s7.6

c20.s7.7

c20.s7.8

c20.s7.9

c20.s7.10

c20.s7.11

c20.s7.12

c20.s7.13