Turkish slaves in the Delhi Sultanate

Last updated

Turkic slaves throughout the Islamic world, particularly in the Delhi Sultanate , were valued members of society. Their value, for their patrons, was their military capabilities, their loyalty and discipline. Their ability to capitalize on opportunity for social mobility, while maintaining their own unique cultural identity created an interesting tension in their social narrative. Their slave origins created a discrepancy in their nobility. This discrepancy was often alluded to in commentary by the Persian Chroniclers of the time.[ citation needed ]

Contents

Origins

The need to secure the Sultanate regime from Mongol marauders led to the delineation of a frontier that needed to be defended. [1] To guard the Punjab marches, there was increasingly more and more slaves that were being bought. Their allegiance was not along ethnic lines, and their dedicated patronage allowed them to incorporate themselves into the military hierarchy as trusted officers and commanders. The Sultanate bought Turks in order to develop a strong cavalry arm and in particular to amass a corps of mounted archers. [2] This was a proprietary way to build their military capacity, by taking advantage of a unique skillset. Jalaluddin Firuz Khalji and Ghiyath al-Din Tughluq were both frontier military commanders. When they tried to capitalize on their achievements, and take over the Delhi Sultanate they were not given support because of their un-noble origins. [3] When looking at the high level of military success, advancement and capacity that the Turkic slaves added, it is disproportionate to popular sentiment regarding their Turkic origins.

Turkicness

The Delhi Sultanate was shaped in many ways by the Turkic soldiers. To a significant extent the early Delhi Sultans, themselves of Turkic origin, deliberately sought to import exclusive signs of "Turkicness". [4] The Persian Chroniclers had to learn the Turkic language, and the Turkic language spread throughout the Sultanate. It is undeniable that the Turks strongly resisted cultural influences whether Hindu or Buddhist, and retained their unique identity which actually centered around a Persian culture and Islam. [5] Turks, being brought into a foreign land, having no particular ethnic allegiance still maintained a cultural identity. In addition to holding high rank in the military, certain Turks, that were particularly dedicated to their patron also enjoyed holding ceremonial positions in court. [6] The sultans even honored non-Turks with Turkic titles. [7]

Social status

As one Sufi saint noted "they were slaves, not learned in the secretarial or Islamic sciences, they were rude, bellicose and vain and their military calling undoubtedly led to unjust killing of innocent people". [8] One can see when viewing how the institution of Turkic slaves in the Delhi sultanate created a problem. Their excellence was preceded by slave origins. These origins were often not spoken of, where possible, in order to create a more refined image. The quality of being a Turk per se, was not a problem it was their slave origin that created a challenge. [9] It was ironic that these marginalized groups happened to be the political elites and Sultans of Delhi in itself creates a telling commentary on the incomplete state of evidence and the dire need to rewrite the narrative of the sultanate. [10]

Life in the Sultanate

There existed a racial divide among the Persians and the Arabs, this was displayed in social riots. The free counterparts to the slaves were distinct members of society, and were not able to predicate the term to which the Sultanate and the slaves would maintain its power. Authority was derived mostly from their patronage, and while they were deployed as military slaves it did not hinder their ability to seize political power. Their privileged job opportunities were not invulnerable to critique because of their slave origin. This shows that while status within the Sultanate can be seen through post - their origins were inescapable social paradigms. This is a subtle continuity of the hierarchical class structure based on birth from the Indian caste system [ citation needed ]. They were termed 'new Muslims' within the Sultanate.

Reputation

Turkic slavery was very distinct from the conventional idea of a slave-master relationship. While it was based on subservience, the high ranking positions and yielded power that resulted from their careers created an aura of power, rather than weakness and submission. Their reputation did not hinge on social status but on their relationship and their career. They had a mixed reputation for greed and turbulence as well as for martial accomplishments and perseverance in Islam. [11] They had subordinates of their own, and they had a level of autonomy that created a dismay from onlookers who were aware of their Slavic origins. Within the Sultanate, which was composed of Hindus, Buddhists, Muslims, Turks, Afghans and many other groups - the reputation of the Turks was of high stature - regarding them as elites in the community[ citation needed ]

Impact

The infusion of immigrants from the Afghan Punjab frontier into the Delhi Sultanate helped shape its future. Social and cultural history of Muslim society, and the reproduction of authority within the Delhi Sultanate can be attributed to these slaves. Their ambition was often degraded by their social status, through the scope of the existing ideals of the Persian Chroniclers and the institutionalized caste system of the Hindus. The outsiders, the deployed slaves, and their purpose can be said to be more than just military assets. They created for themselves their own circles of elites. They did this while maintaining their identity. Their language spread throughout the sultanate. Their story, often eluded by the narratives of the time, is one of dedication and discipline. Skills and expertise in battle acted as a catalyst to gain favor, reverence, that lead to high ranking positions which placed them as an authority in a heterogeneous society. The deliberate tension within the Delhi Sultanate due to their Turkic origins, only further displays their importance in society. The role of the Sultans, as former slaves, and their attempt to spread Turkicness, by electing Turkic titles to non-Turks, and by incorporating the Turkic slave into high governing ranks in the court - shapes the landscape both socially and politically. These 'new Muslims' helped shape the identity of the Delhi Sultanate and help instill Islamic culture into this Indian kingdom.

Studies

In the broader context of learning about South Asian history, one can find an inconclusive range of facts surrounding the portrayal of day-to-day life. Often, certain aspects of society or identity are left out because either they are thought to be insignificant or not part of the greater narrative. As one can see in the example of the Turkic slaves, the court chroniclers chose to elude aspects of their history. So, as the authors that have been referenced in this article have done, one must piece together the puzzle. To do this, the authors thought outside the box and looked beyond court scribes, into memoirs, personal letters, and documents indirectly linked to the topic. Turkic slaves provide a narrative of capitalizing on opportunity, building authority, and creating a reputation so large that its true origins had to be hidden, for they may tarnish views on their accomplishments. It is also questioned if the deployment into the frontiers and employment into the Delhi Sultanate a way for the 'Turkic' culture to flourish or it was a way to ensure the authority of Islam could flourish, through the installation of military men into the capital.

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Delhi Sultanate</span> 1206–1526 Indo-Turkic empire in the Indian subcontinent

The Delhi Sultanate or the Sultanate of Delhi was a late medieval empire primarily based in Delhi that stretched over large parts of the Indian subcontinent, for more than three centuries. The sultanate was established around c. 1206–1211 in the former Ghurid territories in India. The sultanate's history is generally divided into five periods: Mamluk (1206–1290), Khalji (1290–1320), Tughlaq (1320–1414), Sayyid (1414–1451), and Lodi (1451–1526). It covered large swaths of territory in modern-day India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, as well as some parts of southern Nepal.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ghilman</span> Slave-soldiers in the Islamic world

Ghilman were slave-soldiers and/or mercenaries in armies throughout the Islamic world. Islamic states from the early 9th century to the early 19th century consistently deployed slaves as soldiers, a phenomenon that was very rare outside of the Islamic world.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Timurid Empire</span> Central Asian Persianate Turco-Mongol empire (1370–1507)

The Timurid Empire was a late medieval, culturally Persianate Turco-Mongol empire that dominated Greater Iran in the early 15th century, comprising modern-day Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, much of Central Asia, the South Caucasus, and parts of contemporary Pakistan, North India and Turkey. The empire was culturally hybrid, combining Turko-Mongolian and Persianate influences, with the last members of the dynasty being "regarded as ideal Perso-Islamic rulers".

The Sayyid dynasty was the fourth dynasty of the Delhi Sultanate, with four rulers ruling from 1414 to 1451 for 37 years. The first ruler of the dynasty, Khizr Khan, who was the Timurid vassal of Multan, conquered Delhi in 1414, while the rulers proclaimed themselves the Sultans of the Delhi Sultanate under Mubarak Shah, which succeeded the Tughlaq dynasty and ruled the Sultanate until they were displaced by the Lodi dynasty in 1451.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Bahmani Kingdom</span> Kingdom in Deccan India (1347–1527)

The Bahmani Kingdom or the Bahmani Sultanate was a late medieval kingdom that ruled the Deccan plateau in India. The first independent Muslim sultanate of the Deccan, the Bahmani Kingdom came to power in 1347 during the rebellion of Ismail Mukh against Muhammad bin Tughlaq, the Sultan of Delhi. Ismail Mukh then abdicated in favour of Zafar Khan, who established the Bahmani Sultanate.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Indo-Persian culture</span> Cultural synthesis of Indian and Persian culture

Indo-Persian culture refers to a cultural synthesis present on the Indian subcontinent. It is characterised by the absorption or integration of Persian aspects into the various cultures of modern-day republics of Bangladesh, India, and Pakistan. The earliest introduction of Persian influence and culture to the subcontinent was by various Muslim Turko-Persian rulers, such as the 11th-century Sultan Mahmud Ghaznavi, rapidly pushed for the heavy Persianization of conquered territories in northwestern Indian subcontinent, where Islamic influence was also firmly established. This socio-cultural synthesis arose steadily through the Delhi Sultanate from the 13th to 16th centuries, and the Mughal Empire from then onwards until the 19th century. Various dynasties of Turkic, Iranian and local Indian origin patronized the Persian language and contributed to the development of a Persian culture in India. The Delhi Sultanate developed their own cultural and political identity which built upon Persian and Indic languages, literature and arts, which formed the basis of an Indo-Muslim civilization.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Mamluk dynasty (Delhi)</span> Dynasty that ruled northern India (c. 1206–1290)

The Mamluk dynasty, or the Mamluk Sultanate, is the historiographical name or umbrella term used to refer to the three dynasties of Mamluk origin who ruled the Ghurid territories in India and subsequently, the Sultanate of Delhi, from 1206 to 1290 — the Qutbi dynasty (1206–1211), the first Ilbari or Shamsi dynasty (1211–1266) and the second Ilbari dynasty (1266–1290).

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Khalji dynasty</span> 1290–1320 Turco-Afghan dynasty of the Delhi Sultanate

The Khalji or Khilji dynasty was a Turco-Afghan dynasty that ruled the Delhi Sultanate for three decades between 1290 and 1320. It was the second dynasty to rule the Delhi Sultanate which covered large swaths of the Indian subcontinent. It was founded by Jalal ud din Firuz Khalji.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Turco-Mongol tradition</span> 14th-century ethnocultural synthesis in Asia

The Turco-Mongol or Turko-Mongol tradition was an ethnocultural synthesis that arose in Asia during the 14th century among the ruling elites of the Golden Horde and the Chagatai Khanate. The ruling Mongol elites of these khanates eventually assimilated into the Turkic populations that they conquered and ruled over, thus becoming known as Turco-Mongols. These elites gradually adopted Islam, as well as Turkic languages, while retaining Mongol political and legal institutions.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Jalal-ud-Din Khalji</span> Founder of Khalji dynasty (c. 1220–1296)

Jalal-ud-Din Khalji, also known as Firuz al-Din Khalji or Jalaluddin Khilji was the founder and first Sultan of the Khalji dynasty that ruled the Delhi Sultanate of India from 1290 to 1320.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Balban</span> Sultan of the Delhi Sultanate (r. 1266–1287)

Ghiyas-ud-din Balban was the ninth Sultan of Delhi. He had been the regent of the last Shamsi sultan, Mahmud until the latter's death in 1266, following which, he declared himself sultan of Delhi.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Malik Ambar</span> Military leader of the Ahmadnagar Sultanate (1548–1626)

Malik Ambar was a military leader and statesman who served as the Peshwa of the Ahmadnagar Sultanate and its de facto ruler from 1600 until his death in 1626.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ruknuddin Firuz</span> Ruler of Delhi sultanate

Rukn-ud-din Firuz, also transliterated as Rukn al-Din Firoz, was a ruler of Delhi sultanate for less than seven months in 1236. As a prince, he had administered the Badaun and Lahore provinces of the Sultanate. He ascended the throne after the death of his father Iltutmish, a powerful Mamluk ruler who had established the Sultanate as the most powerful kingdom in northern India. However, he pursued pleasure, wine, women, and left his mother Shah Turkan in control of the administration. The misadministration led to rebellions against Ruknuddin and his mother, both of whom were arrested and imprisoned. The nobles and the army subsequently appointed his half-sister Razia on the throne.

The composite Turko-Persian, Turco-Persian, or Turco-Iranian is the distinctive culture that arose in the 9th and 10th centuries AD in Khorasan and Transoxiana. According to the modern historian Robert L. Canfield, the Turco-Persian tradition was Persianate in that it was centered on a lettered tradition of Iranian origin; it was Turkic in so far as it was for many generations patronized by rulers of Turkic ancestry; and it was "Islamicate" in that Islamic notions of virtue, permance, and excellence infused discourse about public issues as well as the religious affairs of the Muslims, who were the presiding elite."

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Slavery in India</span>

The Early History of slavery in the Indian subcontinent is contested because it depends on the translations of terms such as dasa and dasyu. Greek writer Megasthenes, in his 4th century BCE work Indika or Indica, states that slavery was banned within the Maurya Empire, while the multilingual, mid 3rd Century BCE, Edicts of Ashoka independently identify obligations to slaves and hired workers, within the same Empire.

The Mongol Empire launched numerous invasions into the Indian subcontinent from 1221 to 1327, with many of the later raids made by the Qara'unas of Mongol origin. The Mongols occupied parts of the subcontinent for decades. As the Mongols progressed into the Indian hinterland and reached the outskirts of Delhi, the Delhi Sultanate of India led a campaign against them in which the Mongol army suffered serious defeats.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Persian language in the Indian subcontinent</span>

Before British colonisation, the Persian language was the lingua franca of the Indian subcontinent and a widely used official language in North India. The language was brought into South Asia by various Turkics and Afghans and was preserved and patronized by Local Indian dynasties from the 11th century onwards, notable of which were the Ghaznavids, Sayyid Dynasty, Tughlaq dynasty, Khilji dynasty, Mughal Dynasty, Gujarat Sultanate, Bengal sultanate etc. Initially it was used by Muslim dynasties of India but later started being used by Non-Muslim empires too, For example the Sikh empire, Persian held official status in the court and the administration within these empires. It largely replaced Sanskrit as the language of politics, literature, education, and social status in the subcontinent.

Alp Khan was a general and brother-in-law of the Delhi Sultanate ruler Alauddin Khalji. He served as Alauddin's governor of Gujarat, and held considerable influence at the royal court of Delhi during the last years of Alauddin's life. He was executed on the charges of conspiring to kill Alauddin, possibly because of a conspiracy by Malik Kafur.

Ramya Sreenivasan is an Indian scholar of English and early modern Indian history. She is an associate professor in the Department of History at the University of Pennsylvania. She was originally appointed in the Department of South Asian Studies in 2009. Best known for her book The Many Lives of a Rajput Queen, she is a winner of the Ananda Kentish Coomaraswamy Prize.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Bukhara slave trade</span>

The Bukhara slave trade refers to the historical slave trade conducted in the city of Bukhara in Central Asia from antiquity until the 19th century. Bukhara and nearby Khiva were known as the major centers of slave trade in Central Asia for centuries until the completion of the Russian conquest of Central Asia in the late 19th century.

References

  1. Sunil Kumar, "The Ignored Elites: Turks, Mongols and a Persian Secretarial Class in the Early Delhi Sultanate," Modern Asian Studies 43, no. 1 (2009): 45–77.
  2. Peter. Jackson, "Turkish Slaves on Islam’s Indian Frontier," in Slavery & South Asian History, ed. Indrani Chatterjee and Richard M. Eaton (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2006), 63–82
  3. Sunil Kumar, "The Ignored Elites: Turks, Mongols and a Persian Secretarial Class in the Early Delhi Sultanate," Modern Asian Studies 43, no. 1 (2009): 45–77
  4. Sunil Kumar, "Service, Status, and Military Purposes in the Delhi Sultanate: Thirteenth and Fourteenth Centuries." in Slavery & South Asian History, ed. Indrani Chatterjee and Richard M. Eaton (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2006)86
  5. Peter. Jackson, "Turkish Slaves on Islam’s Indian Frontier," in Slavery & South Asian History, ed. Indrani Chatterjee and Richard M. Eaton (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2006)65
  6. Turkish Slaves 64
  7. Sunil Kumar, "Service, Status, and Military Slavery in the Delhi Sultanate: Thirteenth and Fourteenth Centuries." in Slavery & South Asian History, ed. Indrani Chatterjee and Richard M. Eaton (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2006), 83–114.
  8. Sunil Kumar, "Service, Status, and Military Slavery in the Delhi Sultanate: Thirteenth and Fourteenth Centuries." in Slavery & South Asian History, ed. Indrani Chatterjee and Richard M. Eaton (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2006), 89
  9. Sunil Kumar, "The Ignored Elites: Turks, Mongols and a Persian Secretarial Class in the Early Delhi Sultanate," Modern Asian Studies 43, no. 1 (2009): 61
  10. Sunil Kumar, "The Ignored Elites: Turks, Mongols and a Persian Secretarial Class in the Early Delhi Sultanate," Modern Asian Studies 43, no. 1 (2009): 45–77.
  11. Sunil Kumar, "The Ignored Elites: Turks, Mongols and a Persian Secretarial Class in the Early Delhi Sultanate," Modern Asian Studies 43, no. 1 (2009): 45–77.