But Balban was not withdrawing from power politics, only biding his time. Presently, the envy of the nobles about Balban came to be overshadowed by their growing resentment over Raihan, a Hindu convert to Islam, lording over them, the Turkish nobles. A group of these nobles then appealed to Balban to return to Delhi. In the ensuing manoeuvres and counter-manoeuvres, and in the face of the threat of a military conflict between rival factions, the sultan was persuaded by his advisers to dismiss Raihan from the court and reappoint Balban and his brother to their previous posts.
The sultan acted on that advice, and Balban returned to his old office in January 1255, after having been out of it for about two years. He then held that post till Mahmud’s death in February 1266.
MAHMUD WAS THE only one of Iltutmish’s descendants to have a long reign — of twenty years — while all the others ruled only for short periods, the shortest reign, of just seven months, being that of Rukn-ud-din Firuz, the first successor of Iltutmish. In fact, among the five descendants of Iltutmish who sat on the throne of Delhi — three sons, one daughter, and one grandson — all except Mahmud were overthrown and killed by the nobles.
Mahmud however was sultan only in name, for during virtually his entire reign it was Balban who actually ruled the kingdom. So Balban’s accession to the throne on the death of Mahmud was a natural and inevitable transition, from being the de facto ruler to being the de jure ruler. Mahmud is said to have designated Balban to succeed him; the choice was in any case inevitable, for no prince of Iltutmish’s lineage was then alive, and a ruler of the calibre and experience of Balban was essential at this time to prevent anarchy from engulfing the kingdom.
Balban reinforced his entitlement to the throne by claiming to be a descendant of Afrasiyab, the legendary Turkish royal hero, and thus placing himself well above all the other nobles of the Sultanate (his potential rivals) in social status. And this claim of royal lineage by Balban was a crucial determinant of the nature of his rule, for it enabled him to assume an exalted posture as sultan, and to adopt a demeanour and conduct to match the high pedigree that he claimed and the high office that he occupied.
The primary characteristics of Balban as sultan were his high sense of responsibility and unremitting hard work. He would not allow carelessness or sloth to erode his power in any way. As sultan, he gave up all the convivial pleasures that he had previously enjoyed, maintained his distance from nobles, and showed no intimacy with anyone. ‘Sultan Balban, while he was a khan, was addicted to wine drinking, and was fond of giving entertainments; two or three times in a week he would give banquets and gamble with his guests … But after he came to the throne he allowed himself no prohibited indulgences,’ observes Barani. His only remaining addiction was hunting, but that too he used to subserve his political purpose, as a means of exercising his army preparatory to launching military campaigns. In all matters he now strictly followed Islamic regulations. And at meals he preferred the company of Muslim clerics, with whom he discussed theological matters.
Balban now took care to present a forbiddingly stern, impassive façade to the public. Though behind this façade he still remained subject to common human dispositions and emotions, he kept them all under the strict control of his iron will. But if self-control and implacability are indispensable qualities required in a sultan, so was magnanimity. So Balban did sometimes, though rarely, condone the incompetence of his officers, and once even pardoned army deserters. And we are told that he often wept at sermons in the mosque. Balban’s general outward appearance of cold-blooded efficiency was a triumph of will over nature.
BALBAN, UNLIKE MOST of his predecessors on the throne, had a very lofty concept of kingship. Most of the sultans of Delhi who preceded Balban, except Iltutmish, were little more than first among equals. This, Balban felt, was a major weakness of the Sultanate, which led to laxity in administration and disarray in the empire, with courtiers and provincial governors constantly trying to tussle with the sultan and erode his power. From his long experience as regent — and perhaps under the influence of the ancient Persian concept of monarchy — Balban felt that the throne had to be raised well above the level of the nobles. And to do that, he enunciated the concept of the sultan as the vicegerent of god. This claim was not just an expression of royal vanity — the high status that Balban claimed was not for himself as a person, but for the office of the sultan, and it constituted a political concept of broad practical significance, which found expression in Balban’s own impeccable conduct, and in the strict manner in which he ran the government.
An essential expression of Balban’s exalted concept of kingship was his insistence that courtiers on approaching the sultan should prostrate before him and kiss the throne or the sultan’s feet. Court etiquette now became rigidly formal, and it was required to be strictly observed by all. In court, and in public, Balban was always escorted by a praetorian guard with drawn swords, which helped to create the needed physical and psychological distance between the sultan and all others. ‘No sovereign,’ concludes Barani, ‘had ever before exhibited such pomp and grandeur in Delhi … [Through all the] years that Balban reigned he maintained the dignity, honour, and majesty of the throne in a manner that could not be surpassed. Certain of his attendants who waited on him in private assured me they never saw him otherwise than fully-dressed. During the whole time that he was khan and sultan … he never conversed with persons of low origin or occupation, and never indulged in any familiarity, either with friends or strangers, by which the dignity of the sovereign might be lowered. He never joked with anyone, nor did he allow anyone to joke in his presence; he never laughed aloud, nor did he permit anyone in his court to laugh.’ In Balban’s court, frivolity was a serious misdemeanour, if not a crime.
BALBAN’S LONG YEARS as the de facto ruler of the Sultanate had given him ample time to reflect on the changes that were needed in government to consolidate royal power and to ensure efficient administration. He therefore introduced a number of administrative reforms soon after his accession. One of his key measures was to set up an elaborate network of carefully selected confidential spies and news reporters at all the sensitive spots in the empire and among all potential rebels, including his sons, for he believed that the crucial requirement for maintaining effective control over the empire was to have accurate and detailed information about all the significant developments everywhere in the empire.
Balban also took a number of decisive measures to systematise administrative procedures and to reform the army — he abolished many of the sinecures that had proliferated in the Sultanate over the decades, confiscated the lands of the fief-holders who were no longer rendering the services for which grants had been given to them, and cashiered a number of worthless or superannuated military officers. ‘Many of the grantees were old and infirm, many more had died, and their sons had taken possession of the grants as an inheritance from their fathers,’ notes Barani. ‘All these holders of service lands called themselves proprietors, and professed to have received the lands as free gift form Sultan Iltutmish … Some of them went leisurely to perform their military duties, but the greater part stayed at home making excuses, the acceptance of which they secured by presents and bribes of all sorts to the deputy muster-master and his officials.’ Balban initially ordered all these grants to be taken back by the state and the grantees to be given subsistence allowances, but later, rather uncharacteristically, he rescinded the order on compassionate grounds.
Читать дальше