224 bo o k re vi ews

invaluable contribution to our understanding of precisely that—the views of

Qur8:n commentators and Aadith collectors, but certainly cannot stand in for all
forms of religious consciousness and valuation. (To be clear, Afsaruddin does not
make this claim.) That these early commentators saw the Qur8:nic permission for
fighting as a response to the aggression of the Makkan polytheists cannot
establish that the early Muslim expansion from the Eij:z to the Atlantic ocean in
the west and Transoxania in the east, and the centuries-long struggle with
Byzantium had no religious-moral justification or significance for pious Muslims
(for certainly they were not all responses to aggression). These sources reveal
important early perspectives but cannot tell us definitively what meanings
fighting, jih:d and martyrdom had in Islamic culture more broadly during the
first two to three centuries of Islam.
Similarly, Afsaruddin’s final two chapters on modern debates on jih:d are
outstanding but might be read as implying a choice between ‘militant’ thinkers
who stress the combative meaning of jih:d and affirm Islam’s right to expand
through force and more ‘moderate’ thinkers who affirm the (original) Islamic
conception of just war as self-defence and stress the pietist, spiritual dimension of
the religious duty of jih:d. But (as Afsaruddin would certainly note), Sayyid
Qu3b, Us:ma b. L:din and now (Caliph?) Ab< Bakr al-Baghd:d; did not call for
military struggle instead of moral and spiritual struggle. The word jih:d has
hardly lost its capacity to signal any kind of struggle with a religious purpose or
justification. Moreover, most modern Islamic thinkers have rejected the choice of
just war as either merely defensive or also expansionary, arguing for a unique
form of just war as defense of the Islamic mission (da6wa) in non-Muslim lands in
addition to fighting in self-defence.
But these are all questions and reflections offered in a spirit of solidarity and
collaboration with this profoundly impressive and learned book, which ought to
find a place on the syllabus of any class on war, ethics and intra-scholarly debates
in Islam.
Andrew F. March
Yale University
E-mail: andrew.march@yale.edu
doi:10.1093/jis/etu088
Published online 4 December 2014

Composite Culture under the Sultanate of Delhi

By Iqtidar Husain Siddiqui (Delhi: Primus Books, 2012), vii þ 191
pp. Price HB 795.00 Rr. EAN 978–9380607375.

Writing a socio-cultural history of pre-Mughal era is fraught with certain

problems, a major issue being inadequacy of information from contemporary
chroniclers. One has to sift through an expansive corpus of source materials, of
different forms and tenors, in order to gain insight into the social history of the
period. Although scholarship on the Delhi Sultanate over the last few decades has
 bo o k re vie w s 225
introduced us to the significance of non-political sources in understanding the
social moods of the times, areas requiring fresh enquiries still remain. A primary
concern of Professor I. H. Siddiqui’s book is to highlight those aspects of life and
culture of the Delhi Sultanate that require a renewed focus and in-depth study.
At a time when scholarship on the Sultanate is unfortunately dwindling, this
work will be seen as a welcome addition.
The book is divided into three parts of unequal length. The first (six chapters)
deals with different aspects of life and culture in the Delhi Sultanate. The second
part (two chapters) is on the foreign relations of the Sultans mainly with the
Mongols. The final part (also with two chapters) studies the representations of
women in the Sultanate period. In his introduction to the book, the author refers
to some conceptual issues that arise when we apply geographical terms such as
‘shatter zones’ and ‘core areas’ to understand the processes of acculturation in the
Sultanate period. In the following chapters, the author tries to show how
complex the process of acculturation was, but does not explain how his
arguments support or refute the application of such geographical terms to the
historical data. A main theme of the book is the emergence of ‘composite culture’
over the Sultanate period. He notices a percolation and continuity of traditions
and elements of the ‘composite culture’ from the Arab and Ghaznavid times to
that of the Delhi Sultans. He explains in the Introduction, that prior to the
establishment of the Delhi Sultanate, the north-west region including Sind,
Multan, Punjab and Roh became the nucleus of a ‘composite culture’ under Arab
and Ghaznavid rule and that the traditions set over that period influenced the
newly established Sultanate in the thirteenth century.
Carrying forward this argument, ch. 1 (‘The Role of Hazrat-i-Delhi in the
Process of Acculturation’), explains how the newly established capital of Delhi
with its urban settlement fostered trade, money economy, migration, architecture
and patronage networks that led the socio-economic growth of the Sultanate.
Professor Siddiqui highlights the role played by Sufis in creating a cultural
synthesis through their humanism, poetry, music and teachings during the early
Sultanate period, however much of the evidence cited here appears to be dated.
The disinterest of Sufis towards religious conversion, for example, has been dealt
with in more detail by Bruce Lawrence (‘Early Indo-Muslim Saints and
Conversion’, in Y. Friedmann [ed.] Islam in Asia [Jerusalem, 1984], i. 109–45)
and also in a different context by Richard Eaton (‘Approaches to the Study of
Conversion to Islam in India’, in Richard Martin [ed.], Approaches to Islam in
Religious Studies [Tucson, 1985], 106–23). In his discussion on the emerging
‘composite culture’ and cross-cultural encounters, the author points to a ‘Persian’
translation of the Sanskrit work Amrit Kund, titled Eawz_ al-Aay:t, which he
suggests was done during the time of Bakhtiyar Khalji in the early thirteenth
century. However, according to Carl Ernst, this was an Arabic translation, the
Persian translation being BaAr al-Aay:t done in the sixteenth century. He has also
challenged the authenticity of this thirteenth-century translation: see his article
‘Sufism and Yoga according to Muhammad Ghawth’, Sufi, 29 (1996), 9, and
his more detailed analysis in ‘The Islamization of Yoga in the Amrtakunda
Translations’, JRAS, 3, 13, 2 (2003): 199–226. The chapter nevertheless gives
226 bo o k re vi ews
sufficient evidence of cross-cultural interactions and pushes the argument for an
emerging ‘composite culture’ from Mughal India into the early Sultanate period.
That argument is taken further in ch. 2 (‘The Position of Hindus in the
Sultanate of Delhi’). In this chapter, the author points to evidences suggesting a
conciliatory policy of the Delhi Sultans towards Hindus in general and hereditary
land chiefs in particular, which promoted mutual understanding. He examines
the position of Hindus employed in the army and at the court. Equally interesting
is his discussion of the role of k:rkh:nas in ameliorating the economic condition
of daily wage-earners. He also points to the social mobility among Hindus and
Muslims that continued undiminished during the Sultanate period. This
discussion is based on an extensive use of source materials including the
evidence of a thirteenth-century Tibetan traveller, Dharmasvamin. It would have
been useful to hear more from the author about jizya, which is dismissed in only
five lines (p. 42). As in some other chapters, there are instances of unwarranted
generalizations. For instance, he writes, ‘In fact, the tradition set by the Arab
rulers of Sind and Multan and followed by the Ghaznavid sultans provided a
reference point not only to these rulers but also to their successors during the
subsequent centuries’ (pp. 32–3). This argument which the author reiterates three
times in these two pages is only partly true. While the attitudes of Arabs and
Ghaznavids towards the non-Muslim population may have been a reference
point at the time of inception of the Sultanate, the traditions set by them were in
no way binding on the Sultans of Delhi, who determined their relations on the
basis of existing political expediencies and the requirements of statecraft.
Chapter 3 (‘The Science of Medicine and the Emergence of Hospitals’) offers
interesting perspectives on a hitherto little explored field. The author discusses
the rise of d:r al-shif:8 (hospitals) in the period, the patronage extended to the
physicians by the Sultans, and the ways in which 6ilm al-tibb (science of medicine)
was synthesized with knowledge of ancient Ayurveda. He notices that some of
the key medical texts written in this period utilized Sanskrit works and medical
terms were often given local names. This practice, as the author remarks, was
continued in regional kingdoms, particularly in the Malwa Sultanate.
In ch. 4 (‘The Role of Time and Space in History and Culture’), the author
discusses the consciousness of time and change in medieval historical works. He
deals with the question of how some key writers, like Minh:j-al-Sir:j Jurj:n; and
Z_ iy: al-Din Baran;, viewed the past traditions established since the time of the
Prophet, and their understanding of human experience of time. Heconcludes that
the traditions set by the Prophet and his Companions provided a basis for the
reinterpretation of law and framed an ideal to be realized. But, as Baran;
believed, these traditions could not be followed literally in managing the affairs
of State where the regulations have to be in accordance with the changed times.
Chapter 5 (‘Life and Culture under the Lodi Sultans, ad 1451–1526’) is a
narrative extensively based on Vaqi6:t-i Musht:q; of Rizq All:h; Musht:q;. It
manages however, drawing on the available biographical accounts, successfully
to shift attention away from the usual fare of battles, intrigues and rebellions.
The author focuses on the contribution of the royalty and nobility to intellectual
thought and cultural trends. He highlights their patronage of men of learning,
 bo o k re vie w s 227
their sense of justice, their contributions to architecture and literature, and their
promotion of rapid urbanization, all of which enabled the Sultans of Delhi to
create a rich cultural legacy. Interestingly, as suggested by the author, influenced
by the standards set by the Lodi Sultans, their nobles also introduced new
cultural patterns in the provinces. Professor Siddiqui sees this period as the
culmination of the processes of social integration and religious tolerance which
had accelerated in the fourteenth century. The importance of this long neglected
fifteenth century is clear from the recent publication of After Timur Left: Culture
and Circulation in Fifteenth Century North India (Francesca Orsini and Samira
Sheikh [eds.]; OUP India, 2014).
Chapter 6 (‘Interstate Relationship: The Sultanates of Delhi and Gujarat’)
presents the diplomatic relations between the Lodis and the Sultanate of Gujarat
that came with the decline of Malwa and the rise of Rajput power. The author
suggests that the cordial relations established between the Delhi and Gujarat
courts ensured Gujarat’s neutrality in the Lodi expansion against Malwa. More
significant was the safe haven which Afghans received in Gujarat after the fall of
the Lodis in 1526. Many Afghans fled to Gujarat in the post-Panipat period and
continued to operate against the Mughals. Even after the collapse of the Sur
regime, as the author notes, Afghans remained loyal to the Gujarat Sultanate
until its annexation into the Mughal Empire by Akbar.
The next two chapters relate to the northwest frontier of the Delhi Sultanate
and the Mongol presence in that region. Ch. 7 (‘Sultan Jalal u’ddin Khwarazm
Shah and the Mongol Advance’) highlights evidence mainly from T:r;kh-i Jah:n
Gush: of Juvayn; and S;rat al-Sul3:n Jal:l al-D;n of Nasaw; regarding the
campaigns of Mangbarn; against the Mongols and his relations with Qub:cha
and Iltutmish. The chapter reads as a political narrative of the events that
unfolded following the destruction of Khwarazmian Empire and the escape of
Mangbarn; towards northwest India. In ch. 8 (‘Mongols in North-West India’),
the author points to the continued Mongol menace in the Binban and Koh-i-Jud
areas and its effect on trade, migration, agriculture, and the life of the local
people. The author makes passing mention of the different policies which the
Sultans of Delhi from Iltutmish to F;r<z Sh:h Tughlaq devised to meet Mongol
threats. It comes as a surprise not to see Peter Jackson’s authoritative study (The
Delhi Sultanate: A Political and Military History [Cambridge, 1999]) referred to
in this chapter, although he cites an article published by the same author back in
1975 (‘The Mongols and the Delhi Sultanate in the Reign of Muhammad bin
Tughluq’, Central Asiatic Journal, 19 [1975]: 118–57).
The final two chapters deal with gender issues. Chapter 9 (‘Socio-Political Role
of Women in the Delhi Sultanate’) explores the positions held by women in the
Delhi Sultanate. The author talks about the ladies of the royal household who
enjoyed privileged positions—Sh:h Turk:n, Sul3:n Raziya, Malik:-i Jah:n,
Makhd<ma-i Jah:n, etc.—also highlights their philanthropic works, which
raised their esteem among the ruling elite and the public. Although women
played various roles as musicians, singers, dancers and philanthropists, he rightly
concludes that the period was a male dominated era where even ‘women of talent
too found it difficult to manoeuvre for positions in society without the support of
228 bo o k re vi ews
strong men’ (p. 162). Chapter 10 (‘Sufi Perspectives on Women and Marriage’) is
slightly disappointing as it lacks analysis of admittedly significant information
drawn from malf<C literature. Filled with long anecdotes, almost exclusively
from the lives of Far;d al-D;n Ganj-i-Shakar, NiC:m al-D;n Awliy:8 and N:Bir al-
D;n Chir:gh, the chapter looks at their attitude towards marriage, the rights of
women, slavery, etc. It remains focused on these three stalwarts of the Chishti
order and, sadly, there is hardly anything on Suhrawardi or Firdawsi Sufis except
for passing references. (The chapter also needs some editing. For instance, on
p. 167, an anecdote has been abruptly split into different paragraphs; the last
sentence on p. 171 should have ‘Narrating . . .’ instead of ‘Narrated . . .’; and on
p. 172 in the last six lines, ‘Chishti and Chishtis’ have been misspelled as ‘Chisti’
and ‘Chistis’.)
As a whole, by covering such diverse issues ranging from processes of
acculturation, cultural interactions, Hindu–Muslim relations, concepts of time
and space in medieval historiography, the Mongol presence and diplomatic
history, and the conditions of women etc., the book serves its purpose of
highlighting areas needing the further attention of historians. The use of source
material is also impressive. However, a reader aware of the earlier scholarship by
Professor Siddiqui is bound to notice a few shortcomings. In a book aiming to
encourage exploration of new fields of study, one expects a review, at least
mention, of some of the more recent scholarship in the field. However, this book
and its bibliography have missed out on some valuable researches: there are no
references to the relevant scholarship on the Delhi Sultanate by C. Ernst, Andre
Wink, Sunil Kumar, Raziuddin Aquil, Tanvir Anjum and others. Although the
book is rich in citations from Persian sources, it would have been helpful to
inform the readers how these themes relate to the existing researches in the field.
As mentioned earlier, in places the author has indulged in generalizations that
do not take account of the complexities involved. For instance, in ch. 1, he
writes: ‘It should be noted that the centrality of the sharia (canon law) in society
promote[s] a sense of equality among the believers. Again it may be emphasized
that Islamic culture continued to be marked by an egalitarian current at odds
with the social realities and the hierarchical ideas of a stratified society’ (p. 25).
This statement needs some nuancing—how far early Sultanate society was in
practice Shar;6a-compliant is a moot point among historians. Similarly, there are
important assertions that are not adequately substantiated. In ch. 10 while
suggesting Sufi attitudes towards austerity and poverty, he writes, ‘After the
death of Shaikh Nasiruddin Chiragh in ad 1356, there was left no difference
between Chishti and non-Chishti Sufis. The Chishti Sufis also maintained close
relations with the royal courts in different regions and also got land grants’
(p. 172). This is surely grossly over-simplified—the conclusion is not supported
by historical evidence and ignores the diversity within the Chishti order in terms
of its relations with political power—even after 1356 the Chishti attitude
towards politics varied depending on the concerned shaykh and the existing
political situation, and their attitude also remained markedly different from other
orders, notably the Naqshbandis.
 bo o k re vie w s 229
A few minor points may be noted regarding some avoidable inconsistencies in
the transliteration, diacritics and spellings. For instance, V:qi6:t-i Musht:q; is
written as W:qi‘:t-i-Mushtaqi and most of the Persian sources are without
diacritics (Tabaqat-i Nasiri, Tabaqat-i Akbari, Akhbar al-Akhyar etc.).
Dharmaswamin (p. 25) is spelled as Dharmasvamin on pp. 34 and 36. Also,
instead of Qur8:n, the author has preferred the (now uncommon) Anglicization,
‘Koran’ (ch. 4).
Notwithstanding these shortcomings, Professor Siddiqui’s book is a com-
mendable effort to revive interest in study of the Delhi Sultanate. By exploring
diverse areas of the socio-cultural and political life of the Sultanate, the author
has opened up fresh areas of enquiry. In each chapter he has provided useful
information gleaned from various contemporary sources that should facilitate
further research. It is hoped that the book will encourage further exploratory
studies into many of the long neglected aspects of the Sultanate period.
Moin Ahmad Nizami
Oxford Centre for Islamic Studies
Email: moin.nizami@oxcis.ac.uk
doi:10.1093/jis/etv008
Published online 4 March 2015

Secularizing Islamists? Jama‘at-e-Islami and Jama‘at-ud-Da‘wa in

Urban Pakistan
By Humeira Iqtidar (Chicago, IL and London: University of
Chicago Press, 2014 [2011]), xiii þ 216 pp. Price PB £19.50. EAN
978–0226141732.

The reviewer need not agree with the book’s author about the precise import of
the book in order to find together with other readers and (most probably also)
with the author that the book is both important and interesting. To put the point
slightly more severely an author may be mistaken about the value of the book
without being mistaken in believing that the book is a contribution of value. This
reviewer found an abundance in this book that was both important and
interesting, and indeed original in its content and innovative in its methods—
without necessarily sharing the author’s stated view about which features of the
book qualified as its leading contributions.
The import of this book is not the critical scrutiny it levels at liberalism, which
the book treats as the ‘dominant ideology informing contemporary politics’ (last
page, 162). One reason for concluding that this is not the, or even a, crucial
insight of the book is that in only a handful of passages does the author even
articulate what liberalism is; it is not even formulated in sufficient detail to
become a target for attack. Also the dominance of liberalism—whether in the
theoretical or in the political arena—is assumed rather than shown; that it is
dominant in this or some other (undefined) sense is not self-evident. Dr. Iqtidar