Conclusion
Barani confesses, though, that he did not have the courage to speak the truth. He was limited
by the notions of royalty. He was looking for patronage. While he wrote about Muhammad
bin Tughlaq, we must note that both the Sultan and Barani were two fundamentally different
individuals where the former was a rationalist and the latter was an orthodox. Despite this
ideological difference, the credit to Barani is that he was able to provide information on the
Sultan’s entire reign, but of course, his account has to be supplemented with the accounts of
his contemporaries such as Juzjani and ‘Isami. Barani, in his Tarikh-i-Firuz Shahi, gives an
account of 9 Sultans starting from Balban and ending with Firoz Shah Tughlaq. In the latter
part of his chronicle, he reflects his staunch sycophancy. He speaks of divine qualities in
Firoz Shah. He sees his court as the court of Allah. But also, he used his writings to warn the
Sultan against his nobility. In another chronicle, Fatwa-i-Jahandari, Barani talks about
political philosophy. He deals with the concept of divinity of kingship. He clearly exposes
the contradiction between the institution of kingship and the principles of Islam but
recognizes and approves of the necessity of kingship, because “the world had returned to its
old wickedness”. Similarly, he allows the Sultan to adapt old laws or frame new ones in
accordance with changing circumstances. As we read the 2 works, we notice the similarity
between the 2. Both of them were written by Barani to give directions to the Sultan, one in
the form of history and the other in the form of philosophy. This means that Barani
combined theory/philosophy with analytical study of history.
Barani, and presumably others, were conscious of the contradiction between the principles
of Islam and the institution of kingship. At the same time, they recognized the necessity of
kingship. They understood that this institution was needed in the existing social structure.
Also, while writing under Persian tradition, they were keen in gaining patronage of the
Sultan to fulfill their economic needs. Thus, they always wrote in eulogy of the Sultans in
the most ornamental language possible.
Inspired by the Quran and Hadis, the Arabic scholars began writing history in the 8th
century. Apart from what was available in the Quran and other Islamic texts, efforts were
made to collect the material from oral traditions also. The life and activities of the Prophet
and his followers formed the main theme of these early histories in the 8th and 9th centuries.
Later on, along with these earlier themes, certain different themes such as history of
religion, of conquests and of Islamic rulers were also taken up. With the development of
local dynasties, the dynastic histories acquired prominence and became the main theme of
the later Arabic and Persian historiographies.
The Indian subcontinent has contained a vast array of ethnicities, cultures, traditions and
languages since the beginning of civilisation. While classical Indian civilisation was based
on Sanskrit, the sacerdotal language of the Brahmins, this sacred language did not affect the
general mass of people, nor literature beyond a privileged elite. The first true lingua franca
that transcended caste barriers to a certain extent was Persian, which was adopted by the
ruling dynasties of Muslim India (who themselves were generally Turks or indigenous
Indians rather than Persians), their Hindu peers, as well as the civil servants. However, from
the beginning of the seventeenth century Urdu began to form around the lower echelons of