Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Life and Conditions of the People of Hindustan (1200–1550 A.D.) c5.s4: The Privileged and Other Social Classes

Life and Conditions of the People of Hindustan (1200–1550 A.D.) c5.s4

Language
English

Contents

The Privileged and Other Social Classes

c5.s4.1

*General remarks*:—The composition of various social classes was more or less simple. The Sultan, considering that he was the leader of the people and 'the main guarantee of peace in this world of strife and chaos' was at the head of society; the nobles and other privileged classes were in some form of subordinate alliance with him; the masses of the people (which term includes the various classes of Hindus and the lower classes of Muslims) were below them and divided from them by an almost impassable barrier in ordinary circumstances¹. Just at the commencement of the Muslim rule, there was an almost indiscriminate commingling of the upper Muslim classes, which were mainly composed of the *Ulama* and the religious class in general, the *Ahl-i-qalam* (what might be termed the intelligentsia), and the *Ahl-i-tigh* or soldiers. All of them served in various degrees in the great task of establishing Muslim rule in Hindustan, and were

c5.s4.2

¹ Compare A., 68 for the Sultan as leader of people; J.H., 2 for his function of restoring peace and order. For the position of the masses compare the Persian parallel from Mas'udi quoted by Sykes I, 465:—'There were three great divisions at court. The knights and princes stood thirty feet from the curtain on the right of the throne. A similar distance farther back were marshalled the Governors and tributary kings who resided at court; and finally, the buffoons, singers and musicians formed a third division......When the king gave permission for a subject to approach he tied a handkerchief over his mouth to prevent his breath polluting the 'Sacred Presence', and passing behind the curtain fell prostrate until bidden to rise.

c5.s4.3

| 2. | *Shahna-i-akhur* | ... | Chief Equerry. |
| 3. | *Hajib* ... | ... | 'Chief Usher', 'Gentlemen Ushers' and other Ushers of the Hall and Chamber. |
| 4. | *Barbak* ... | ... | Master of the Rolls. |
| 5. | *Ghilman* | ... | Pages of Honour. |
| 6. | *Naqib and Chaush* | ... | Earl Marshall with Heralds and Pursuivants. |
| 7. | *Sar-Jandar* | ... | Chief of the Life Guards. |
| 8. | *Muhr-dar* | ... | Lord Privy Seal. |
| 9. | *Tahvildar* | ... | Keeper of the Privy Purse. |
| 10. | *Hakima-i-haram* | ... | Mistress of the Robes. |
| 11. | *Shahna-i-bargah* | ... | Knight Marshall. |
| 12. | *Nadim* ... | ... | Gentlemen of the Privy Chamber. |
| 13. | *Sar-i-Jamadar* | ... | Lord Chamberlain (Book of the Court, 236-7). |
| 14. | *Vakil-i-dar* | ... | Lord Chamberlain of the Household. (Book of the Court, 318.) |

c5.s4.4

I have borrowed these terms from 'The Book of the Court' but it is always desirable to bear in mind the warning of Raverty (p. 868) that the precise significance of these titles must remain in abeyance until some good dictionary of old Turkish is forthcoming.

c5.s4.5

rewarded accordingly by the monarch.¹ With the growing organization of the State and Muslim society, however, a certain amount of specialization began in the assignment of the functions of various classes of Muslims. They may be theoretically divided into what Humayun calls the *Ahl-i-daulat* or the ruling class proper, which comprised the members of the royal family, the nobility and the army; the *Ahl-i-sa‘adat* or the intelligentsia which comprised the theologians (the *ulama*) the judicial functionaries (the *Qazis*), the Sayyids, the leaders of religious thought and men of reputed piety and religious devotion, men of learning especially poets and writers; the *Ahl-i-murad* or the class catering for pleasures, which was composed of musicians and minstrels, of beautiful girls and others who contributed to the success of pleasure parties. The last class of people, curious as it appears to class them with the other two, was of equal importance, considering that every one was fond of ‘smooth faces and of ravishing sweethearts’. If we follow a more detailed classification of these groups made by Humayun, we come to the enumeration of a dozen minor groups, which compare more or less favourably with the existing social divisions of the upper classes of Muslim society. The following is the order of their status : the Sultan, the royal family, the *Khans* and others of noble rank, the Sayyids, the *‘Ulama*, the aristocrats in general, the assignment-holders (under Mughals, the Mansabdars), the great functionaries of State, the leaders of the various clans, the corps of the royal pages, the keepers of the royal purse, the members of the royal guard (Jirga?), the household attendants of the Sultan, and his menial and domestic servants. They were further divided according to their grades into upper, middle, and lower classes. This classification overlaps in many places and is obviously unscientific, but it gives a general view of the ruling classes of Hindustan during the period under review.² The minor Muslim dynasties, which were formed later, and the Hindu States followed these lines of social development in general, the composition of a class differing in different places. The masses of the people had no place in the Government,³ no share in political power. They had very few rights, if any. Their duty principally consisted in paying heavy taxes to the State, which were usually realized through the headman of a village and a staff of revenue officers, all of whom oppressed them, and managed to keep a share of the sum realized for themselves, thus becoming very wealthy.¹ In such circumstances it is difficult to say that the Sultanate was supported by the people. All that can be said is that the people gave a feeble moral support to these social arrangements, but even this assertion is by no means conclusive.² This was the general position of the various classes of society.

c5.s4.6

¹ Compare F.J., 49; T.M., 89, 128.

c5.s4.7

² Compare Khvandmir, K., 130-133.

c5.s4.8

³ For the position of the masses of people in Hindustan compare T.M. (IV), 203; among others remarks of Khusrau in *Matla‘-ul-anwar*.

c5.s4.9

¹ Compare the remarks of Khusrau K.K., 733.

c5.s4.10

² Compare an instance of people supporting the local dynasty from Sind, E.D., I, 233; compare B., 575 for a discussion.

(A) Muslim Society

c5.s4.t1.1

Let us examine the position of the privileged classes in their two broad divisions—the *Umara* or the nobility and the *Ulama* or theologians together with other religious classes.³

c5.s4.t1.2

³ It should not be forgotten in speaking of the *Ulama* that there is no room for ordained priesthood in Islam but the theologians have always managed to exist and to shape the religious outlook of the Muslims. So that we are justified in treating them as a separate class.

I. The Nobility

c5.s4.t2.1

1. *Its character.*—Immediately below the monarch came his nobles. They usually supported him in power, but at times usurped his functions, and if a ruling dynasty grew weak and effete they stepped into its shoes, and founded a new ruling dynasty of their own. Even if a noble was deposed or otherwise robbed of his position and power, the traditions of former dignity and social honour were unfailingly handed on to his descendants; and with the approbation of the people, who tenaciously adhered to the hereditary principle, restoration to former power was only a question of time and opportunity.

c5.s4.t2.2

A noble usually began his life as a slave or a retainer of the Sultan or of another noble, and proceeded on a graduated scale of promotion until a suitable opportunity brought to him the dignities of an office, and the rank of an *Amir*. Henceforth he was treated as a noble and his social position, as well as that of his descendants, was secure for ever afterwards. There was no valid rule of succession to the throne or any peculiar dignity which is associated with an ancient ruling house; there was not even a law of primogeniture, a fact which made the occupant of the throne very suspicious of the growing influence and power of a noble and his assumption of an independent attitude. A noble had no other choice except that of living as all other subjects of the Sultan or as a rebel. Thus in comparison with the privileges of their western compeers, or nearer home those of Rajput chiefs, the privileges of the nobles of Delhi fell short in one important respect, namely, that the State did not encourage their independence or even allow their titles and emoluments to descend to their children. Their dignities could be snatched away from them during their lifetime, and were always at the mercy of the reigning Sultan. This did not, however, affect the social importance¹ of a noble or of his descendants.

c5.s4.t2.3

¹ This rule, however, does not hold good when the Sultanat declined in power and the nobles succeeded in forming independent ruling dyansties after Sultan Firuz Tughluq.

c5.s4.t2.4

2. *The Titles and Distinctions.*—The highest among the nobles bore the title of *Khan* which signified the uppermost grade of nobility.² As a special distinction some of them were given the title of *Ulugh Khan-i-a'zam*.³ Next in rank came the title of *Malik*, and lastly that of *Amir*. There was no lower rank of peers in the court of the Sultans of Delhi. Below them came the military ranks of *Sipah-salar* and *Sar-khel* based probably on a decimal system, if we are to follow the opinion of Haji Dabir.⁴ In a generic sense the term ‘Amir’ may be applied to all the civil and military office-holders of the State, and should not be confused with the rank and title of the same name.¹ Similarly the term ‘Sipah-salar’ was sometimes indiscriminately used to denote a military officer irrespective of his rank and position. The official status of a noble was determined in relation to what were called the *Shughl*, the *Khitab* and the *Aqta* or their sinecures, their titles of honour, and the assignments of revenue respectively. There was no fixed rule for the award of offices at court or the distribution of titles of honour. All of them, however, had large revenue assignments to maintain them and their huge establishments.

c5.s4.t2.5

² K.R.; I, 107; compare Rawlinson, Five great Monarchies III, 223 for the Persian parallel :—‘Of right the position at the Persian Court immediately below that of the king belonged to the members of certain privileged families. Besides the royal family itself—or clan of the Achaemanidae—there were six great houses which had a rank superior to that of all other grandees’.

c5.s4.t2.6

³ Compare Raverty, 820, 862. The amusing instance of Hulagu who despised the use of such distinctive titles in Hindustan except in the case of Ulugh Khan Balban; compare also B.N., 278; for the change of titles among the Afghans who conferred the titles of *A'zam-i-Humayun*, *Khan-i-Jahan* and *Khan-Khanan* respectively.

c5.s4.t2.7

⁴ Compare the opinion of Haji Dabir in Z.W., II, 782; also B., 145. The amir was given the command of a thousand or above, and others in lower grades of hundreds and tens respectively.

c5.s4.t2.8

¹ Compare, for instance, B., 376.

c5.s4.t2.9

(a) *Shughl* and *Khitab*—As regards the *Shughl* or the offices at court, it was not possible to provide sinecures except for a few of the nobles. Other big offices in the gift of the monarch were not many. They included, as we have noticed, those of the royal household and the *karkhanas*, a few ministries and secretarial offices, governorships of certain districts and provinces and other civil and military offices, with titles of honour.² In the case of titles, though their range was as wide as the fancy and ingenuity of a monarch, discretion compelled the choice of a few to maintain their conspicuous dignity. Some of the distinctive titles were those of *Khvaja-Jahan*, *Imad-ul-mulk*, *Qivam-ul-mulk*, *Nizam-ul-mulk*, *A‘zam-ul-mulk*, *Qutlugh Khan*, *Ulugh Khan*, *Sadr-i-Jahan*, ‘*Alam-ul-mulk*, etc.³ Hindu influence made itself felt in outlying provinces; and the Sultans of Bengal even awarded such titles as *Nayaka Khan* and *Satya Raja*.⁴

c5.s4.t2.10

² Compare Raverty for illustration 645.

c5.s4.t2.11

³ Compare B., 410; T.M.S., 385.

c5.s4.t2.12

⁴ Compare P.P., 120.

c5.s4.t2.13

Along with their titles of honour the nobles held other ‘dignities’ which were called *maratib*. The *Maratib* signified for instance, their privileges when the royal court was held, the specific quality of the dress, the sword and the dagger which the Sultan presented to them once a year, and the number of horses or elephants they were entitled to have in their processions; similarly, the number of their retainers, their ensigns, drums, trumpets and pipes, etc.⁵ In some cases, these *maratib* were almost regal in appearance.⁶ (b) *Aqta’*.—The award of *Aqta’s* or revenue-assignments was the most important, since in the last resort the material resources at the command of a noble determined his social position and his political influence. It appears that the system of *Aqta’s* in the form in which it came to India was first designed by the Caliph Muqtadir to secure a regular remittance of revenue from the governors who had made themselves almost independent on their lands. The *Muqti’* collected the entire revenue of the district, defrayed the administrative charges, paid the troops and remitted a fixed sum from the remainder to the Court of Baghdad. These grants were given the name of *Aqta’at*,¹ the grantee being styled the *Muqta’*. The assignments of revenue in Hindustan retained these essential features all along. It appears that the holder of an *Aqta’* was given a more or less free hand in the administration of his assignment, which he sometimes leased out to other persons for a bigger sum, the poor peasantry suffering all the burden of these increased exactions. The revenue department at Delhi sent out its touring auditors but it was very difficult to control the *Aqta’*-holders, especially in outlying places.² In form, and as long as the state was powerful enough to enforce its will in fact, the *Aqta’s* of a noble as well as his distinctions and honours were purely personal. The State insisted on a very clear distinction between private property, which was subject to the law of inheritance, and public offices and assignments in which no vested or contingent rights could accrue. The position was left somewhat undefined because of the weakened power of the central administration after the death of Muhammad Tughluq. When the Afghan nobles began to treat their *Aqta’s* as heritable Sultan

c5.s4.t2.14

⁵ Compare K.R., II, 82; T.M.S., 389; T.A., I, 342.

c5.s4.t2.15

⁶ Apart from the examples noted in the previous chapter in the account of the royal prerogatives, some more may be enumerated here. They are

c5.s4.t2.16

¹ Kremer, 363.

c5.s4.t2.17

² Compare I.K., II, 41-50 for an amusing report of an auditor’s experiences in an *Aqta*.

c5.s4.t2.18

usually confined to the nobles who had the rank of *Khan*. For instance, when Bakhtyar Khalji was nominated to Bengal, Sultan Qutb-ud-din Aibak invested him with a canopy of state, royal ensigns and kettle-drums, gave him royal stallions and a waist-band and his own robes of state (*vide* T.M., 55). Similarly on the birth of his son, Sultan Mubarak Shah Khalji invested some of his Khans with royal parasols (*Chatrs*) and gave his own parasol Khusrau Khan (*vide* K.K., 771). The Chatr of a noble of Firuz Tughluq named Tatar Khan was inscribed with a golden peacock, the use of which, like that of the *huma*, was a royal prerogative (*vide* B., 578; A., 391). Sher Khan, after appointing Haibat Khan to the charge of Multan gave him the title of *A’zam-i-Humayun* and a red canopy of state (*vide* T.S.S., 61).

c5.s4.t2.19

Sikandar Lodi made the position unmistakably clear to the successor of a famous Afghan noble, the *Masnad-i-Ali*, named Zain-ud-din. ‘Let Zain-ud-din understand’ so reads the royal *farman* ‘that the assignments are conferred on him in a purely personal capacity and not as a relation of the late *Masnad-i-Ali*’. For the son of the late noble, the monarch assigned a cash allowance and for the wife a piece of land as a *patta*, that is, subject to renewal and sanction every year. The same conditions applied to the grant of the cash allowance.¹ Thus, in its normally strong condition the State was very reluctant to forgo its rights of resuming the *Aqta* lands, or even religious and charitable *waqfs* (endowments). A weak monarch, however, found it convenient not to interfere with the arrangements of his predecessor. A succession of weak monarchs or a weak dynasty gave to the continued possession of an *Aqta* a certain amount of sanctity and resemblance to private property. The power of ensuring the descent of an honour or a revenue-assignment from the father to the son shows rather the weakness of the central government than the recognition of right of occupancy or right of private possession on the part of the Sultanate.²

c5.s4.t2.20

¹ Compare W.M., 28.

c5.s4.t2.21

² Compare the opinion of Sir Wolseley Haig in H.U.H., 3170.

c5.s4.t2.22

These assignments of revenue were very large and sometimes comprised whole provinces of the Kingdom. Even modest assignments were very remunerative.³ The huge totals of these assignments may be judged from the fact that when a valuation sheet was prepared under Firuz Tughluq, the total value of revenue-assignments came to more than 57 milions of silver coins.⁴ The emoluments of the nobles of rank will be dealt with later.

c5.s4.t2.23

³ Compare the case of Ibn Batuta who by administering the *Aqta* of a noble in his absence at Deogir, gained about 5,000 Tankas (*vide* K.R., II, 8).

c5.s4.t2.24

⁴ Moreland, Agrarian etc. 57; for a summary of *Muqta* or the position of a revenue-assignment holder—*ibid.*, Appx. B, pp. 218-221.

c5.s4.t2.25

As to the relative position of the various ranks of nobles: the *Khans*, as has been said occupied the highest rank. Next to them were the *Maliks* who were usually raised from among the *Amirs* on certain occasions, as for instance the installation of a new monarch, or on the discharge of some very conspicuous services to the State.¹ The *Maliks* shared with the *Khans* some of their ordinary privileges although a difference of degree was always retained. They were similarly entitled to be addressed by their title of *Malik* and any additional titles of honour, a breach of the rule being punishable at law.² It was the same with the last rank of the *Amirs*. They had similar distinctions and dignities, but the same difference of degree as compared with the two higher ranks. To illustrate the point, in using standards in public, the *Khan* was allowed to take out nine standards but the *Amir* was not to take more than three; or again, when a *Khan* was permitted to have ten horses led by hand in his procession, the *Amir* was allowed only two.³ When Sultan Ultutmish made a gift of an elephant to Nasir-ud-din, who was a *Malik*, he gave a horse to each of the *Amirs*.⁴

c5.s4.t2.26

¹ Compare, e.g., B. 242 for those raised on the occasion of a new accession to the throne.

c5.s4.t2.27

² Compare the observation of Ibn Batuta, K.R., I, 107.

c5.s4.t2.28

³ Compare Notices, etc. 190.

c5.s4.t2.29

⁴ Raverty 728, 731.

c5.s4.t2.30

However, all ranks of nobles were assigned sufficient funds to employ a large number of retainers and to maintain a big establishment commensurate with their position. These establishments sometimes swelled to enormous dimensions.⁵ Further their rank and status were duly considered in the State ceremonies and in the assignment of their seats in all official functions.⁶

c5.s4.t2.31

⁵ Compare, for instance, that Khusrau Khan had 40,000 persons in his establishment under Mubarak Shah Khalji. Some of the Afghan nobles are reported to have employed as many as thirty to forty thousand paid men in their establishments. (*Vide* T.A., I, 342). Compare for the nobility of Mewar (Rajputana) the description of Tod, I, pp. 167-168; There is a three-fold division of Mewar chiefs as follows :— First class.—We have sixteen whose estates were from 10,000 to 50,000 rupees and upwards in yearly rent. These appear in the presence only on special invitation, upon festivals and solemn ceremonies, and are hereditary councillors of the crown. Second class.—From five to fifty thousand rupees. Their duty is to be always in attendance. From these chiefly, Foujdars and military officers are selected. Third class.—Is that of the Gol holding lands, chiefly under 5,000 rupees, though by favour they may exceed this limit.

c5.s4.t2.32

⁶ Compare A., 291-292.

c5.s4.t2.33

(c) *Minor Distinctions.*—Apart from the nobles of rank, other subjects were occasionally rewarded with a robe of honour (*khil‘at*) made of brocade and a waist-band, or with a horse and trappings, or with a grant of a piece of land, or a cash gift or allowance.¹ The horses so awarded were of four grades as regards the quality of the animal and the trappings.² The award of a robe of honour (*khil‘at*) became so popular with all classes of people at the close of the period that even the Sikh Guru Angad, is credited with distributing two *khil‘ats* to his followers every year.³ The system of *khil‘ats* as well as the nature of other rewards had a distinctly Persian origin.⁴

c5.s4.t2.34

¹ Compare for instance the list of awards to Ala-ul-mulk. B. 271; compare *ibid.*, 377 for instances from the reign of Mubarak Shah Khalji.

c5.s4.t2.35

² Compare K.R., II, 78.

c5.s4.t2.36

³ Compare Macauliffe, II, 40.

c5.s4.t2.37

⁴ Compare Huart, 148 for the Persian tradition :—"The gift of a robe of honour from the King's ward-robe was a very ancient custom......Sapor II gave the Armenian general "a royal garment, an ermine fur, a gold and silver pendant to attach to the eagle on his helmet, a diadem, breast ornaments, a tent, carpets and gold vessels. To reward the grand Mobed who brought him some good news, Ardashir I, filled his mouth with rubies, gold coins, pearls and jewellery"."

c5.s4.t2.38

3. The *Nobility and the Sultanate of Delhi*.—In the early period of the Sultanate the *Umara* or nobles were its greatest, if not its only, prop. Their significance was duly recognized by Sultan Shams-ud-din Iltutmish, who may be said to be the first to consolidate the possessions of his predecessors as well as his own considerable conquests.⁵ The establishment of the kingdom had only been possible because of the support and the devotion of these chiefs who came from the same class as other monarchs of the Slave dynasty, and had no particular reason to subordinate themselves like other common subjects of the State to the will of the Sultan. As a result, long before the reign of Sultan ‘Ala-ud-din Khalji, the power of the nobles and their organization began to develop. They organized themselves into a corporate body of nobles which was better known as ‘The Forty’. The behaviour of its members and its occasional conflicts with the administration convinced Sultan Ghiyas-ud-din Balban (who was one of them) that its existence was a serious menace to the State.⁶ He managed to exterminate most of its influential members and finally to dissolve the organization most ruthlessly. However, even Balban did not forget to safeguard the privileges of the nobles. He warned his son that no kingdom could prosper without the support of the nobility.¹ Thus the Sultanate was not opposed to the growth or the existence of the nobility, but only to its corporate organization. After this temporary set-back under Balban, the nobles established their political influence again, and became sufficiently powerful for the Sultans to court their support in maintaining their throne.²

c5.s4.t2.39

⁵ Compare B., 137 for the remarks attributed to Iltutmish, how, when the nobles honoured him by standing with folded hands in his presence, he on his part felt like stepping down from the throne and kissing their hands and even their feet.

c5.s4.t2.40

⁶ Compare Barani B., 28 for the organization; also K.R., I, 130. Compare a few examples to realize the political power of the nobles. When

c5.s4.t2.41

¹ Compare B., 78.

c5.s4.t2.42

² Compare B. (MS.), 70; compare how Bughra Khan felt extremely, satisfied that a strong faction of the nobles called the 'Kotwalians' (that is the sons and supporters of Fakhr-ud-din, the Kotwal of Delhi under Balban) had installed his son Sultan Kaiqubad on the throne of Delhi and were warmly supporting him. Similarly, when Jalal-ud-din Khalji came to the throne, he had not the courage to enter his own capital city, because of the opposition of Turkish nobles. (*Ibid.*, 180-181.)

c5.s4.t2.43

When 'Ala-ud-din Khalji came to the throne he realized the menace of the foreign nobles, and met the situation by incorporating an Indian element and by giving these Indian nobles position and power in the State. His successor also carried on this policy. Unfortunately, however, the Indian party at the court overdid itself, and the behaviour of Khusrau Khan and his friends antagonised the general Muslim opinion, which began to labour under the fear of being submerged in the rising tide of Indian (or Hindu) domination. This afforded an opportunity to the enterprising Ghiyas-ud-din Tughluq to supplant the usurper Khusrau Khan and establish his own kingdom. When Muhammad Tughluq came to the throne he calmly reviewed the whole position, in one of the scenes of which he had personally taken part. He found that the foreign Turkish nobles and their Indian successors had both

c5.s4.t2.44

Malik 'Izz-ud-din Balban assumed the royal authority and was crowned as a Sultan, these nobles superseded him by placing 'Ala-ud-din Mas'ud Shah on the throne, and the former had to submit to their decision. (Vide Raverty, 622.) Again when Ulugh Khan Balban was dismissed from his office by the Sultan because of the machinations of Malik Raihan, the protest and military demonstration of these nobles led to a 'mutual accommodation of affairs' between them and the Sultan, who had to reverse his earlier decision and turn out the rival of Balban from the office (ibid., 830). Similarly when one of the Forty, named Badr-ud-din, was discovered plotting for the overthrow of the Sultan, the latter merely called upon him 'to give up his intentions' and did nothing beyond sending the noble to his *Aqta'* of Buda'un (ibid., 753).

c5.s4.t2.45

been tried and found wanting. He, therefore, hit upon the idea (in the earlier part of his reign) of recruiting foreigners from the Muslim lands outside India. The claims of Indians and those of Turkish origin domiciled in Hindustan were systematically ignored and the monarch showed extreme anxiety in getting outsiders at any price. The Sultan went to the extent of offering the most responsible and distinguished offices of the kingdom—for instance those of a Wazir, a Dabir, a military commander, a judge, a professor of theology or a Shaikh-ul-Islam to almost any foreigner of some learning. The foreigners coming into Hindustan were collectively known as ‘The Honourables’ (A‘izza).¹ If the foreigners did not make any use of these opportunities, the fault lay entirely with them. They came to Hindustan avowedly to make their fortunes and to return to their own country as soon as they could. They did not care to accept remunerative employment in the State which necessitated a prolonged stay in Hindustan. Even when some of them did choose to stay in Hindustan, they were more anxious to amass wealth by whatever means they could than to carry out the administrative measures of the Sultan for raising agricultural production, or for the greater efficiency of the State machinery.² After some experience of these foreigners, Muhammad Tughluq felt bitterly disappointed and reviewed his whole policy again.³ He had nothing to expect now from foreigners, or even from those of foreign extraction; the previous monarchs had tried the Turkish nobility and the Indians; he had tried the foreign Muslims; all had failed the Sultanate. The only course left was to try the common people of Hindustan irrespective of creed and religion. So, in the latter part of his reign, we find him introducing principles of extreme democratisation in administration, which provoked the wrath of the contemporary historian Barani and other Muslim writers whose interests were exposed to danger. The highest civil and military offices of the kingdom were thrown open to all classes of Indians, and the only qualification for recruitment was efficiency and talent.¹ Only perhaps the lowest were excluded from rising to the highest distinctions in the kingdom. Under his successor we come across the appointment of the first Indian Wazir—the famous Khan-i-Jahan. This was the highest office in the gift of a Sultan. The power and position of a Wazir was only second to that of the Sultan after the establishment of a strong administration. The rulers who succeeded to the throne of the Tughluqs after the brief interval of the invasion of Timur and the reign of the Sayyids, came from an essentially Indian stock.

c5.s4.t2.46

¹ Compare the account of Ibn Batuta, K.R., II, 3, 78; compare also ibid., 85, how when Muhammad Tughluq started for the Ma’bar expedition, he lavished gifts and rewards on the foreigners, to the exclusion of the Indians.

c5.s4.t2.47

² Compare K.R., II, 41 on the profiteering character of the foreigners, and how Ibn Batuta attributes the ruin and misfortune of one of them, Shihab-un-din, to the wrath of the divinity at his ill-gotten riches and wealth from Hindustan.

c5.s4.t2.48

³ Compare the remarks of Muhammad Tughluq B., 501, how he decided ‘to leave no foreigner alive on the face of the earth’.

c5.s4.t2.49

¹ Compare B., 505. Compare, that the list of persons he recruited for the administration consists of all classes of low-born persons—musicians, brewers, dancers, barbers, cooks, vegetable sellers, weavers, gardeners petty shop-keepers, slaves and ‘all sorts of low scum (bad-asls)’. Compare, also, that some Hindu names that appear in the list—like Nanka, Lodha, Pira, Kishen—cannot be mistaken. Compare for a few distinguished Indians : ‘Imad-ul-mulk the muster-master of Sultan Balban (vide B. (M.S.) 61); ‘Ain-ul-mulk the governor of Muhammad Tughluq in Kara. All foreigners (khurasanis) were mortally afraid of the latter when he rebelled ‘because he was an Indian who resented the domination of the foreigners’ (vide K.R. II, 64).

c5.s4.t2.50

Meanwhile, the social and cultural intercourse between the Hindus and the Muslims had gone far ahead, so that when Babur appeared on the scene he had to fight the combined force of the Hindus and the Muslims.² The last battle of the Afghans was fought under the command and the leadership of a Hindu noble and general when the crown passed to Akbar.³

c5.s4.t2.51

² Compare B.N., 28 where Babur speaks of a Hindu who bore the title of Khan-i-Jahan, creating trouble for the Mughals in the neighbourhood of Gwalior.

c5.s4.t2.52

³ Some idea may be gathered of the power and influence of Hemu, the Hindu General of the Afghans, from the remarks of the author of Tarikh-i-Daudi f. 121-122. When Hemu returned to Sultan ‘Adali after defeating the Afghans of the Karrani sect, the Sultan heaped many favours on him and conferred upon him the title of Vikramaditya. Some time later the monarch handed over to him all power in the State. Matters went to such lengths that hardly anything was left under the Sultan except bare means of subsistance. The elephants and treasures all passed under the control of Hemu. Compare also Abu’l Fazl’s appreciation of Hemu in A.N., I, 337.

c5.s4.t2.53

4. Personal Relations between the Nobles and the Sultan

c5.s4.t2.54

It is somewhat difficult to determine the exact nature of the private relations between a Sultan and his nobles. When, at an earlier period of his life, a noble was a slave of the Sultan, the position of the latter was that of a master; their relations were frankly those of dependence and service, as has been pointed out before. There were no personal rights or privileges in that status of social life. But when the slave, after being manumitted, ascended the social ladder, expediency and convention compelled the sovereign to abstain from interfering in his life too much. The position was by no means very clear even now. The Sultan persisted in maintaining his former position which was never openly disputed by the nobles. There was thus no border-line where the domain of the monarch ceased to exist and the private life of a noble began. In times of insecurity, the Sultan actively interfered in the lives of the nobles.¹ Under better and more stable conditions, there was greater harmony between the two. The Sultan usually acted as a patron and a friend, took a sympathetic interest in the affairs of his nobles, and even composed their mutual quarrels when they fell out with each other. Under the later dynasties of the Sayyids and the Afghans the original hold of the Sultan was relaxed, and the nobles were left to themselves more or less completely, until political reasons compelled the State to interfere in their life.²

c5.s4.t2.55

¹ The Sultan conferred the children of a noble in marriage as a rule; in fact, Sultan ‘Ala-ud-din Khalji made it obligatory for the nobles to secure the permission of the Sultan before entering into any form of relationship among themselves. Similarly, Ala-ud-din prohibited them from calling on one another or inviting one another to dinners or social parties without his approval. His orders were faithfully carried out (vide B., 286-7; compare Raverty, 767).

c5.s4.t2.56

² Compare A., 411 how Firuz Shah Tughluq treated his nobles and composed their mutual quarrels; compare also T.S.S., 57 for the action of Sher Shah against a governor of Bengal who married the daughter of a former king of Bengal and assumed an air of independence. Sher Shah had him summarily punished and forbade all others under threat of severe punishment from entering into relations with a deposed royal family without previously securing his approval.

c5.s4.t2.57

5. *The Composition of the Nobility.*—It is difficult to give the exact number of nobles of various ranks under the Sultanate;³ in point of composition they were a heterogeneous body, being composed of all sorts of foreigners and Indians, whose character and number varied with every ruling dynasty. In the beginning of the Muslim rule almost all of them were of Turkish extraction. The Afghans came to be incorporated gradually at a later date.

c5.s4.t2.58

³ Compare A., 109. Several thousand followed Firuz Tughluq in his invasion of Bengal.

c5.s4.t2.59

They are said to have come to India from Roh, a territory between Hasan Abdal and Kabul, and claimed to be descended from the Sultans of Ghur. Firuz Shah Tughluq was the first monarch who extended his favours to the Afghans though the latter had come and settled in Hindustan long before.¹ The Mongol invasions introduced a small element of Mongols who accepted Islam and were favoured by the State in the beginning. They were given the appellation of *Nau-Muslims* or new-converts to Islam. 'Ala-ud-din Khalji massacred them wholesale on the rebellion of some of them in Gujarat.² The Tughluqs are supposed to be of a 'mixed breed' being originally the slaves of Sultan Balban who had intermarried with the Jats in Hindustan.³ The later Mughal conquest of India introduced many Persians, Mongols, and Turks into the existing classes of nobles. In coastal towns, especially on the coast of Gujarat, all sorts of Muslim foreigners—the Arabs, the Abyssinians, the Persians, the Afghans, the people of Java, the Turks, the Egyptians, and still others, came to be domiciled and added to the variety of the racial stock of the Muslim upper classes of Hindustan.⁴ More important among these classes were the Turks in the beginning, and the Afghans and the Mughals at the close, of the period. The relations between the Mughals and the Afghans were not very pleasant for a while, until at last the passage of time healed all rancours and reconciled the latter to the dominion of the former.⁵ We may add to these classes the Rajput chiefs of Rajputana who stoutly held to their ground in opposing the Muslim domination, until at last the Sultanate recognized their status. We meet these chiefs earlier in the period as vassals at the Court of the Sultan or occasionally at the Courts of his.

c5.s4.t2.60

¹ Compare T.F., I, 412, 281. For earlier references, Amir Khusrau who gives an estimate of their character in A.S., 37; Ibn Batuta who describes them as a tribe of Ajam (*vide* K.R., I, 241). Timur mentions that they used to live in the west of Kashmir (*vide* Z.N., 304).

c5.s4.t2.61

² Compare for details the account of Barani in B. 219.

c5.s4.t2.62

³ Compare T.F., I, 230-231.

c5.s4.t2.63

⁴ Compare Barbosa I, 119-120; also Ross, Introduction to Z.W., II, XXXI.

c5.s4.t2.64

⁵ Compare T.S.S., 54, for an interesting story of an Afghan noble named 'Isa Khan' who had once saved the life of Bairam Khan when Humayun was driven out of India by the Afghans. When Bairam came to power as the regent of Akbar, the Afghan noble in spite of his want and poverty, refused to go to a Mughal for favour as too humiliating for the pride of an Afghan.

c5.s4.t2.65

viceroys in their own territory. At the close of the period we find them on fairly good terms with the rulers of Delhi and with the Sultans of new provincial dynasties, e.g., Gujarat and Malwa.¹

c5.s4.t2.66

¹ Compare a very interesting instance of the personal relations between Salim Shah Sur and the Raja of Gwalior, T.D., 110-111. ‘Compare T.F., I, 128 for an early recognition of Hindu chiefs; compare ‘Ala-ud-dins treatment of Raja of Deogir, T.F., I, 206; for Firuz Shah B., 587-588.

II. The ‘Ulama and the Religious Classes

c5.s4.t3.1

The religious class of Islam was composed of a number of important groups, namely, the theologians, the ascetics, the Sayyids, the Pirs, and their descendants. Of these, the most important were the theologians, whose functions and position in the state have been dealt with previously. The theologians who occupied the judicial and religious offices in the kingdom, were collectively known as *Dastar-bandan*, or turban-wearers, because they wore their official head-dress, the turban. The Sayyids were recognized by their distinctive head-dress of a pointed cap or *kulah* and were known as *kulah-daran* or cap-wearers.² Both of these groups with their distinctive head-dresses had a recognized status in the kingdom, being the exponents of orthodox Islam. Both of them followed the Sunnite form of Islam and the Hanafite school of Muslim Law. The other schools of Sunnite Law, though not prohibited, were not encouraged. The respect and reverence for ‘Ali as the fourth Caliph of Muhammad and for all persons claiming descent from the Prophet was general; but the Shi‘ahs were uniformly persecuted under various charges of religious heterodoxy and agnosticism. It was only at the close of the period, and mainly through Persian influence and Mughal Emperors that this persecution of Shi‘ahs ceased, though Sunnite Islam still held its official and dominant position. Other religious groups were not so well marked out as the theologians and the Sayydis. These groups may be treated separately as follows :—

c5.s4.t3.2

² Raverty, 705.

c5.s4.t3.3

1. *The ‘Ulama.*—The special favourites and associates of the Sultanate as was mentioned in the first chapter, were the ‘Ulama or the state theologians. As a rule they had undergone a course of training in Muslim Law, Logic, Arabic letters, and the religious literature of Islam in general, namely Tafsir, Hadis, Kalam, etc.¹ Although the Qur'an emphasizes their position in a general way as a separate class of Muslims, ‘inviting people to the path of goodness’, no special provision was made for them in the Holy Book.² Spurious traditions soon began to be spread among the people. The Prophet was reported to have said : ‘Honour the ‘Ulama, for they are the successors of the prophets; he who honours them, honours the Prophet of Islam and Allah thereby’. Similar emphasis was laid on the peculiar distinction that attaches to the acquirement of religious education.³

c5.s4.t3.4

¹ The fact that they were nick-named ‘turban-wearers’ is probably because of their undergoing the prescribed academic course at the end of which a turban is conferred. This is equivalent to the conferment of an academic degree in a University convocation in modern times.

c5.s4.t3.5

² Holy Qur'an, 3 : 103.

c5.s4.t3.6

³ Compare T.M. (II), 82.3. The saying attributed to Muhammad in the case of religious education and especially Muslim Law (*Fiqh*) runs : ‘Forget not to belong to one of the three groups; a teacher of Law, a student of Law, or at least one who listens patiently to its exposition; for verily, he who does not belong to any of the above categories, is foredoomed to perdition.’

c5.s4.t3.7

Under the special conditions of development of Muslim society in Hindustan, it was natural to expect that the ‘Ulama would acquire an undue prominence. Before Sultan ‘Ala-ud-din Khalji, no monarch had sufficient courage to put an effective check to the growing influence of the ‘Ulama, in spite of their sometimes acting in a manner contrary to his interests.⁴ Sultan ‘Ala-ud-din felt it necessary to define the exact functions of the ‘Ulama under the Sultanate, and to compel them to confine all their activities strictly within these prescribed limits. These limits were : to decide on judicial cases and to arbitrate on purely religious matters; all other matters were put outside their scope.⁵ The Sultan, however, held all real power, and though he humoured the Sufis now and then, he ruled very strictly according to the demands of a situation, and religious considerations found no favour with him. Muhammad Tughluq wanted to go a step further in secularising the State. He put the ‘Ulama exactly on the same footing as other employees of the State, and treated them accordingly.¹ With the advent of Firuz Tughluq the tide turned somewhat in favour of the ‘Ulama and the growth of religious influence in State counsels. The theologians took advantage of the numerous failures of Muhammad Tughluq, and persuaded his successor to listen to their advice in matters of State policy.² A number of law books were compiled, new impetus was given to religious schools and other institutions, and the ‘Ulama had reassumed their earlier position and influence when the invasion of Timur took place. But meanwhile the State was too well organized to admit the influence of the religious class except in certain matters of comparative insignificance. The Afghans, on coming to power, treated the ‘Ulama with marked respect but never admitted them to any effective voice in the administration. On the other hand, they used the religious influence of the theologians for their own ends.³

c5.s4.t3.8

⁴ Compare the attitude of Muhammad bin Sam of Ghur and Qutb-ud-din Aibak in Hasan Nizami T.M. (I), 56 (II), 118 (IV), 112, 203: compare Raverty 629 for the gifts of Nasir-ud-din immediately after the conquest of Bengal; compare Raverty 709, how the ‘Ulama of Delhi invited a faction of nobles headed by Qutlugh Khan and ‘Izz-ud-din to occupy Delhi under Sultan Nasir-ud-din Mahmud. Compare B., 47 how Sultan Balban used to call on ‘Ulama in person, and to attend the burial ceremony if any of them died. Similarly, he supported the families of deceased theologians.

c5.s4.t3.9

⁵ Compare T.F., I, 192.

c5.s4.t3.10

¹ Compare K.R., II, 54, for an interesting case in which some theologians of Sind were charged with misappropriation of State funds and were severely punished.

c5.s4.t3.11

² Compare B. 580; compare J.A.S.B., XIX, 280, for the offer of Firuz Tughluq to the ‘Ulama of Bengal to add to their existing emoluments in the event of his victory over the ruler of Bengal.

c5.s4.t3.12

³ Compare the instructive instance of Sher Shah massacring Puran Mal and his four thousand warriors of Raisen after bringing them out of their fortress under the most solemn pledges of security and after an oath on the Qur’an to the same purpose. The ‘Ulama issued a *Fatwa* (legal pre-cept) authorizing this act, one of the ugliest and most dishonourable in the whole history of India.

c5.s4.t3.13

We have explained in an earlier chapter the reactions of the establishment of the Sultanate on the religious life of Muslims and the essentially useful service which the ‘Ulama performed by associating themselves very closely with the Sultanate. Let us study here the reactions of this association on the moral and spiritual outlook of the ‘Ulama, who cannot be dissociated from their main function of the spiritual and religious leadership of the Muslims of India. The religion of Islam claims to provide a comprehensive code of life for its followers. The question of its leadership is thus intimately mixed up with the broader questions of public morals and the ethical outlook of the Muslim community, and as such deserves a careful consideration. The ‘Ulama abdicated from their office of leading the Muslims in the path of virtue and piety. Sultan Balban complained of the want of truthfulness and courage among the ‘Ulama as a whole.¹ It was with a certain amount of pain that Bughra Khan discovered the fact that ‘un-Islamic’ and godless theologians had dispensed his son Sultan Mu-izz-ud-din Kaiqubad from the observance of the obligatory fast of Ramazan, and had deliberately explained away the Qur’anic injunctions, through sheer greed of ‘the accursed gold’. He emphatically warned his son against trusting these ‘latter day’ ‘Ulama, and asked him to keep away from these theologians, whom he described as ‘greedy rogues whose highest deity was this world and not the next’. On the other hand, Bughra Khan recommended to his son the association and company of those who had renounced this world.² Muhammad Tughluq held similar views. Besides these royal estimates of the ‘Ulama, let us see what Amir Khusrau, himself an orthodox Muslim and a shrewd observer, has to say about the position. He gives his considered opinion that the Qazis (or those of the ‘Ulama who occupied judicial offices) were thoroughly ignorant of the principles of Muslim law and were otherwise unfit to occupy any responsible position in the kingdom. According to him they had neither learning nor virtue of any kind to their credit. When a monarch was a tyrant, the ‘Ulama were sure to support him. In their private lives they exhibited a perfect disregard of religious injunctions and were unscrupulously bold in committing sins and violating all provisions of Islam. Amir Khusrau finds that the only distinguishing feature of the theologians as a class was their hypocrisy, vanity and conceit. He sums up the whole position in a sentence, by declaring that the respect paid to the ‘Ulama was purely through force of convention, and that if intrinsic virtue were to decide the measure of social honour ‘the laity was a thousand times better than the priesthood’.¹ These estimates are rather sweeping and too strong, but since they come from those whose interests were not opposed to those of the ‘Ulama, are worthy of the greatest consideration.

c5.s4.t3.14

¹ Compare B., 94.

c5.s4.t3.15

² Compare ibid., 154-155; compare also the Memoirs of Sultan Muhammad Tughluq, 317, for the considered opinion of the monarch. According to him the ‘Ulama of his times were singularly irreligious. They were notorious for concealing the truth and their greed for money made them vicious and godless. They had degraded themselves to the position of petty ‘job-hunters’. In a word, the dignity of Islam and religious integrity had disappeared from the face of the earth.

c5.s4.t3.16

¹ Compare M.A. for a long discussion 55-60, 69; compare in this connection Barani (B.,446) for an interesting personal confession of the historian who also belonged to the class of learned theologians. He declares that he himself along with others of his class had actively helped the Sultans in openly violating the religious injunctions of Islam, by deliberately stretching the meaning of the Qur‘anic texts to carry out the desires of the monarch. ‘I do not know’ says the repentant scholar ‘what will happen to others but my present miseries and sufferings in my old age are largely the fruits of my sayings and doings.’

c5.s4.t3.17

*The Sayyids.*—A peculiar sanctity always attaches to a Sayyid in Muslim society, probably because of his alleged descent from the Prophet. The Muslims as a rule pay exaggerated honours to the memory of their prophet, which comes to be shared in some degree by every one who professes to be descended from Muhammad,² through his daughter Fatima. The rise of the Abbasids and the spread of Shi‘ite movements in Islam has greatly added to the moral position of the Sayyids. The sentiment of respect for Sayyids was very strong right from the beginning of the Sultanate, though their numbers were not very large. A large number of Sayyids came to seek shelter in Hindustan from the ravages of the Mongols in their own land and were welcomed warmly by Sultan Balban.³ Like the brothers of Joseph, other Sayyids were not slow in taking advantage of these opportunities in the Muslim kingdom of Delhi. It was not surprising to find in a land which had been used to the privileges of the Brahman hierarchy, an exaggerated and indiscriminate respect for these privileged visitors. Every Sayyid, from the fact of his being descended from the family of the Prophet, was supposed to be brave, truthful, pious, and possessed of every other noble quality. It was considered the height of impropriety, if not an actual sin, to employ a Sayyid in a low position.⁴ The Sayyids were similarly credited with possessing the knowledge of occult phenomena and of supernatural mysteries. Even proud monarchs, therefore, did not hesitate to humble themselves before them.¹ After the invasion of Timur in 1398 A.D., the Sayyids even succeeded for a while in establishing a ruling dynasty on the throne of Delhi. Unfortunately, they were not well qualified for this task and their last king quietly renounced his throne, ignominiously resigning himself to the *Aqta* of Buda'un. The loss of political power, however, did not damage the social position of the Sayyids as a class, and the Afghan successors scrupulously, and even superstitiously, respected the concessions and privileges of the Sayyids.²

c5.s4.t3.18

² Compare Hasan Nizami T.M. (II) for early feelings towards a Sayyid. ‘His ancestors were the pride of Yasrib and Batha (the holy land of Arabia) and his forefathers, the decoration of the Muslim pulpit and leaders of prayers.’

c5.s4.t3.19

³ Compare B., 111.

c5.s4.t3.20

⁴ Compare for instance T.M.S., 431. Compare also Amir Khusrau’s apology to a Sayyid and his feelings towards the class. K.K., 463 ; also Barani’s estimate B., 349.

c5.s4.t3.21

¹ Compare the most flattering honours Muhammad Tughluq paid to the *Makhdum-zada* or descendant of the caliph who came to India (in Barani's account and in T.F., I, 271-272). More interesting in some ways is the attitude of Timur towards the Sayyids. According to all accounts of the Indian invasions he uniformly protected the lives of Sayyids and other Muslims of religious classes all along his march while making an indiscriminate and savage slaughter of all other human beings. In fact, it is soberly reported (*vide* M., 5) that when a chief of Transoxiana named ‘Abd-ullah had certain scruples in offering prayers for the soul of Timur whom he considered an ungodly savage whose hands were red with human blood, the Prophet of Allah himself came to assure him in a dream that his scruples were baseless, for had not Timur, while killing human beings in the service of the Lord, uniformly protected the lives of his descendants. Timur's love of the religious class and his spiritual attitude in general has drawn from the pen of his chronicler some very interesting verses which disclose the spiritual outlook of an average Muslim Sultan who believed in the power of the recluses and the ascetics and in the mediation of the ‘adepts’ in religion, similarly in the belssings of the Sayyids (*vide* Z.M., 6).

First 99 of 159 passages. Read on

Linked texts (1)