Who were The Delhi Sultanates?
The Delhi Sultanate was an Islamic empire centered in Delhi that ruled over large parts of the Indian subcontinent for 320 years (1206–1526). The Delhi Sultanate was ruled by the Mamluk dynasty (1206–1290), the Khalji dynasty (1290–1320), the Tughlaq dynasty (1320–1414), the Sayyid dynasty (1414–1451), and the Lodi dynasty (1451–1526) in succession. It included large swaths of present-day India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh, as well as parts of southern Nepal.
The Delhi Sultanate, as a successor to the Ghurid dynasty, was originally one of a number of principalities ruled by Muhammad Ghori's Turkic slave-generals (who had conquered large parts of northern India), including Yildiz, Aibek, and Qubacha, who had inherited and divided the Ghurid territories amongst themselves. The Mamluks were toppled in the Khalji revolution, which signified the transfer of power from the Turks to a heterogeneous Indo-Muslim nobility after a long period of infighting. The dynasties that followed, the Khalji and Tughlaq, experienced a new wave of Muslim invasions far into South India. During the Tughlaq dynasty, the sultanate finally achieved the pinnacle of its territorial extent, encompassing the majority of the Indian subcontinent. This was followed by a period of collapse as a result of Hindu reconquests, Hindu kingdoms such as the Vijayanagara Empire and Mewar declaring independence, and new Muslim sultanates breaking away, such as the Bengal Sultanate. The Sultanate was conquered by the Mughal Empire in 1526, and the Mughal Empire took over in 1527.
Delhi Sultanate - Who was the Founder of Slave Dynasty?
The sultanate is known for its integration of the Indian subcontinent into a global cosmopolitan culture (as evidenced by the development of the Hindustani language and Indo-Islamic architecture), for repelling Mongol attacks (from the Chagatai Khanate), and for enthroning Razia Sultana, one of the few female rulers in Islamic history, who reigned from 1236 to 1300. The annexations of Bakhtiyar Khalji resulted in widespread degradation of Hindu and Buddhist temples, as well as the destruction of universities and libraries (leading to the fall of Buddhism in East India and Bengal). Mongolian attacks on West and Central Asia paved the way for centuries of migration of fleeing soldiers, intellectuals, mystics, traders, artists, and artisans into India and the rest of the region, developing Islamic culture in India and the rest of the region.
(Image will be uploaded soon)
Who was Qutub-ud-din-Aibak?
Qutb-ud-din Aibak was a slave and a sipahasalar under Muhammad Ghori. He was born in Central Asia to a Turkish family and sold as a slave as a child. Qutb-ud-din Aibak (1206-11) was succeeded by Iltutmish, who was followed by Razia (1236-40) and Balban (1265-85).
Qutb-ud-din Aibak was a slave and a sipahasalar under Muhammad Ghori. He was born in Central Asia to a Turkish family and sold as a slave as a child. In 1194 AD, he sacked Banaras as viceroy of Sultan Muhammad Ghori. He also vanquished Ajmer's raja. After conquering Gwalior, he forced Raja Solankhoal to pay tribute. In addition, he was victorious in the Gujarati kingdom.
Qutb-ud-din Aibak (1206-11) was succeeded by Iltutmish, who was followed by Razia (1236-40) and Balban (1265-85). When Qutb-ud-din Aibak fell from his horse while playing Chaugan, he perished.
Following the assassination of Muhammad Ghori in 1206 AD, Aibak became the Sultan of India and established the Mameluk dynasty, often known as the Slave dynasty. Muhammad Ghori appointed him as Naib us Sultanate (viceroy of the Ghori Indian Empire) only in 1206 AD.
Qutb-ud-din Aibak was a slave and a sipahasalar under Muhammad Ghori. He was born in Central Asia to a Turkish family and sold as a slave as a child. Qutb-ud-din Aibak (1206-11) was succeeded by Iltutmish, who was followed by Razia (1236-40) and Balban (1265-85). Qutub Minar was started by Qutb-ud-din Aibak and finished by Iltutmish.
Qutb-ud-din Aibak was a sipahasalar under Muhammad Ghori as well as his slave. He was born to a Turkish family in Central Asia and was sold as a slave in his childhood. As viceroy of Sultan Muhammad Ghori, he sacked Banaras in 1194 AD. He also defeated the raja of Ajmer. He forced Raja Solankhoal to pay tribute after conquering Gwalior. Besides, he won the kingdom of Gujarat.
Slave Dynasty Rulers List - Who was the First Ruler of Slave Dynasty?
After Muhammad Ghori’s assasination in 1206 AD, Aibak became the Sultan of India and laid the foundation of Mameluk dynasty or Slave dynasty. In 1206 AD only, he was appointed as Naib us Sultanate (viceroy of Indian Empire of Ghori) by Muhammad Ghori.
The following points related to Qutb-ud-din Aibak are as followed:
He was only in power for four years. He died in 2010 while performing the role of Chaughan.
He was the Sultan of Delhi's first ruler.
He belonged to the Aybak tribe of Turkey.
He was known as Lakha Baksh Sultan because of his giving nature.
He is credited with building the foundation for the Qutub Minar, which was named after a Sufi saint named KhwajaQutb-ud-din Bakhtiyar Kaki.
He also built the mosque Qutub Al Islam.
His son-in-law Iltutmish took over as his successor.
His mausoleum is in the Pakistani city of Lahore.
Iltutumish Dynasty - Who was Illtutumish?
He was a Turk from the Illabari tribe. He was Aibak's son–in–law, and he succeeded him as Sultan of Delhi.
He is credited with the construction of the Hauz-i-Shamshi at Mahrauli, Delhi. He also finished the construction on Qutub Minar that his predecessor had begun.
He also established the Iqta system in the Sultanate of Delhi, which was a form of tax farming. An officer was awarded a grant of revenue from a territory in place of salary under the Iqta system. The Iqta system, on the other hand, was not inherited. The Iqta system linked the Sultanate's most remote areas to the central administration.
Silver Tanka and Copper Jital are said to have been issued by him. The weight of the silver tanka was 175 grains.
The Mongols raided India under Chengez Khan during Iltutmish's reign. However, they quickly departed India and headed for Multan, Sind, and Qabacha.
Razia succeeded Iltutmish as ruler of the Delhi Sultanate after his death. However, not an easy task. The main reason for her becoming Sultan was because Iltutmish had considered all of his sons to be unfit for the throne, and Razia met all of the qualifications for a worthy successor. As a result, he named Razia as his successor.The Chihalgani, or the Forty Turkish Chiefs, defied Iltutmish's dying wish and installed his son Rukn ud din Firuz on the throne.
Rukn ud din Firuz was inept and overindulged in sensual pleasures, causing the state's affairs to be mismanaged. Within seven months, he was assassinated.
In 1236, he was succeeded by Razia. She reigned for three and a half years, from 1240 to 1241. Despite the fact that she possessed all of the traits of a good king, the Chihalgani (a group of forty Turkish chiefs) refused to accept her authority. When Razia chose her favorite Yakut as the director of the Stables, they revolted. Yakut was an Abyssinian, which made Turko-Afghan nobility envious.
Malik Altunia, the governor of Bhatinda, backed the rebel chiefs. Soon after, combat broke out between the two warring gangs, in which Yakut was murdered and Razia was kidnapped.
Razia married Altunia, and the two of them worked together to reclaim the sultanate, which had been captured by Razia's brother Muizuddin Bahram Shah. Razia and her husband, on the other hand, were defeated and forced to escape. They were kidnapped and assassinated by the Jats while fleeing to Kaithal.
Muiz un din Bahram ruled for two years, a period marked by killings and betrayals. He was afterward assassinated by his own troops. During this time, some puppet kings sat on the throne of the Delhi Sultanate.
Nasir-ud-din Mahmud, Iltutmish's youngest son, governed from 1246 to 1266, with the help of a Turk chief named Balban. Nasir-ud-din Mahmud's successor was Balban.
Is this page helpful?
FAQs on Delhi Sultanate Slave Dynasty
1. Why were the first sultans of Delhi known as the slave dynasty?
For roughly 320 years, the Delhi Sultanate was a Muslim Sultanate located in Delhi that dominated wide swaths of the Indian subcontinent. Five separate dynasties governed it. They are the Mamluks, the Khaljis, the Tughlaqs, the Sayyids, and the Lodis, in that order.
These five dynasties are classified as slave dynasties because of their Turkic ancestry, despite the fact that the Lodi family is fully Afghan (according to many historians). Qutb al-Din Aibak, the first Sultan of Delhi, was a Mamluk slave of Muhammed of Ghor ( Muhammed Ghori). This Mamluk dynasty is not to be confused with the Egyptian or Iraqi Mamluk dynasties. The name Mamluk means "slave" in general, leading to the labeling of the entire Sultanate as "slave dynasties." It's important to remember that the early Islamic empires were meritocracies, which meant that a talented slave could rise to become powerful enough to declare himself king or emperor. As a result, there are several Mamluk dynasties.
The dynasties that followed the Mamluk dynasties were Turkic/Nomadic in origin, and as a result, they are commonly referred to as the Slave dynasties. Ibrahim Lodi, the last of the Delhi sultans, was killed in combat with Babur, kicking off the Mughal empire.
Despite having Turkic roots, the Mughals portrayed themselves as descended from the Mongols via Chagatai and the Timurid dynasty.
2. Why was the slave dynasty called so?
Because when Muhammad Ghori died in 1206, the Delhi Sultanate was ruled by his slave, Qutb-ud-din Aibak. When Aibak died in 1210, it was his slave, Iltutmish, who succeeded him as Sultan. Iltutmish's daughter succeeded him as Sultan(a?) after he died in 1236. However, I'm not sure if a female sultan can be referred to as Sultana. Regardless, I studied it as Raziya Sultana, a slave's daughter who succeeded her father.
It is most likely because of these three monarchs that the dynasty is known as the Slave dynasty. Even though Iltutmish was a good ruler who prevented the Mongols from attacking India, which would have meant absolute destruction, they were never extremely popular among their subjects.
The nobility of the court, however, did not enjoy the fact that a slave was a sultan, and the general Hindu public did not like Muslims at the period, and their treatment at the hands of Muslims justified their hatred.