Causes of Ala-ud-Din Khilji’s Success in the Deccan

The success of Ala-ud-Din in the Deccan can be attributed to many causes. The kingdoms of the South were constantly fighting against one another and hence could not present a united front to the armies of the North.

When Ala-ud-Din attacked Devagiri in 1296, Singhana Deva had gone towards the Hoysala frontiers with his forces. When Malik Kafur marched against the Hoysala country, its ruler Ballala Deva was absent in farther South trying to snatch a portion of the Pandya territory. Sundara Pandaya and Vira Pandya were the deadly enemies of each other.

The rulers of the Southern states also helped the invaders against one another. Ram Chandra helped Malik Kafur in the conquest of Telingana. Vira Ballala escorted the imperial army farther South in Malabar.

Sundara Pandya asked Malik Kafur to help him against his step brother Vira Pandya. The consequences of such a policy were obvious and no wonder the Southern states were defeated.

Another cause of the success of the armies of Ala-ud-Din was their efficiency. The mobility of their cavalry was staggering. It is pointed out that the distance between Delhi and Devagiri was almost annihilated on account of the speed of the horses.

Before the Southern states could find time to get ready for meeting the invasion, they were attacked all of a sudden and defeated. The soldiers from the North combined in themselves the zeal for religion and greed for plunder. They were superior to the Southern soldiers in discipline, strategy and tactics.

Referring to the soldiers of South India, Marco Polo says: “The people of the country go to the battle all naked, with only a lance and a shield and are the most wretched soldiers.” Marco Polo also points out that they were mostly vegetarians and very orthodox people.

They were more particular about their regular baths and untouchability than about fighting. It is obvious that such people could not fight against the armies from the North. No wonder, the armies of Ala-ud-Din were successful in the South. As regards the Deccan Policy of Ala-ud-Din, it is to be noted that like Samudra Gupta, Ala-ud-Din did not intend to annex the territories of the Rulers of Southern India.

His main object was to get as much of wealth as possible so that he could pay for the expenses of a huge army which he was maintaining. According to Dr. Aiyangar, Ala-ud-Din regarded the Deccan as a milch cow for the gold that he required to stabilise his position in the North. Ala-ud-Din sent Malik Kafur four times to the South not to conquer it but to get its gold, silver, pearls, jewels and elephants. Ala-ud-Din also had no religious motive in his wars against the Southern states.

There were no wholesale conversions. Even the rulers of the Deccan states were not forced to change their religion. It is true that temples were demolished by Kafur in his Deccan campaigns but that was done more for economic than for any religious purpose. It is true that some mosques were built but there does not seem to have been any religious motive behind them. Their object was merely to commemorate his brilliant victories.

The successful Deccan campaigns must have strengthened the position of Ala-ud-Din in the North. No ruler or governor could dare to defy Ala-ud-Din. The wealth of the South must have improved the financial position of Ala-ud-Din and helped him in his administration of the country.

It is pointed out that the expeditions of Malik Kafur which were accompanied by the sack of cities, slaughter of the people and plunder of temples, must have made an immense impression on the people of the South. They could not resist him and hence submitted before him but they harboured a feeling of discontaitment in their hearts and that ultimately found expression in th? Vijayanagar Empire.

Death (1316)

The twenty years rule of Ala-ud-Din came to an end with his death on 2nd January, 1316. The Sultan was not keeping good health. “His ill-health made him more suspicious and irritable than ever; and like most people who distruct the bulk of mankind, he was the dupe of one artful individual.”

So great was the influences of Malik Kafur on Ala-ud-Din that the latter imprisoned Khizr Khan, his eldest son and his mother on a charge of conspiracy. Shihab-ud-Umar was nominated successor so that Malik Kafur, acting as regent, could exercise all the powers.

Rebellions broke out on all sides. Harapala, the successor of Shankar Deva in Devagiri, was the first to declare his independence and drive out the Muslim garrisons from his territory. Rana Hamir of Chittor turned out the Muslims from Rajasthan. Gujarat also followed suit.

According to Elphinstone, “The paroxysms of rage produced by a succession of these tidings increased the king’s suffering and soon brought him to the brink of the grave. His end is said to have been accelerated by poison, administered by Kafur.”

It is rightly pointed out that Ala-ud-Din was a great administrative genius. No Muslim ruler before the Mughals had shown so much of interest in organizing the affairs of the state. He made a large number of reforms in various spheres of administration some of which were really origi lal.