Symbols of Authority in Medieval Islam: History, Religion,

and Muslim Legitimacy in the Delhi Sultanate

Blain H. Auer
London and New York: I.B. Tauris, 2012. 237 pages.

This insightful book, useful to scholars and students of Islamic and South
Asian history, illuminates the place of Islamic thought and institutions in the
political regimes of the Delhi Sultanate (1206-1526). Finding late approaches
to the historiography of the period unduly focused on “fact” and “fiction,”
rather than “meaning,” the author unravels the more complex relationship
between history and historiography in six pertinent chapters (p. xix). These
are complemented by maps, illustrations, thorough endnotes, and a useful
bibliography. As a whole, the cohort of Persian histories read lead to the con-
vincing conclusion that “historians played a major role in producing and sus-
taining ideas about power, justice and Islamic rule of the premodern empire”
(p. 160).

Chapter 1 lays the foundations of the discussion by considering how the
discourses of modern historicism produce a “misunderstanding of the rela-
tionship between religion and politics,” one that fails “to capture the pervasive
interpretative dimension” of the period’s historiography (p. 8). Also finding
traces of that misunderstanding in the late “historical-critical method” pio-
neered by Marilyn Waldman, Khaliq Ahmad Nizami, and others, Auer calls
for a “reevaluation” of previous approaches (p. 5). The work of reinterpretation
is begun here by drawing attention to the “rhetorical and didactic” aspects of,
in particular, the writings of Minhaj Siraj Juzjani, Ziya al-Din Barani, and
Shams al-Din Afif (pp. 9, 18-24). This “literary triptych,” as Auer ably demon-
strates in the following chapters, reflects a “unifying theme and mode of rep-
resentation” whose political and cultural influence endures for centuries to
come, beginning with the establishment of Delhi as the seat of Islamic au-
thority in South Asia (p. 19). 

Pre-Islamic prophetic paradigms, including Qur’anic themes, constitute
the attention of chapter 2. Auer excavates the manner in which Islamic/
Qur’anic conceptions of Abraham, Noah, Moses, and Joseph feature promi-
nently in historical writing. Models of just rulership connected with these
prophets, for example, are outlined and interpreted in light of the ideologies
of the early Delhi sultans. “Quranic themes and tales of the prophets,” Auer
explains, “were the measure by which the crafters of history understood their
time and place and the means by which historians attempted to convey their
values of leadership” (p. 46). Of course, the example of Muhammad represents

Book Reviews 117



the most persistent prophetic paradigm and is dealt with exclusively in chapter
three. The motif of “sultans as bearers of Muhammad’s virtues” is reflected
in such notions as Afif’s usage of the title “seal of sultans” and Barani’s ref-
erence to Muhammad as “sultan of the prophets” (pp. 50, 51, 56). Hadith lit-
erature is also considered part of the overall discussion of how Delhi’s sultans
are cast as “caretakers of the Islamic heritage” (p. 76).

The important role of Sufism as a legitimating discipline is explored in
the fourth chapter. The place of walŒyah, or the conception of Sufi shaykhs/
pirs as “friends of God,” is discovered through a variety of writings and its
significance brought to bear in the literary triptych under scrutiny. The en-
counters between Sufis and sultans described by Delhi’s historians, as well as
sultanic pilgrimages to Sufi shrines, are positioned to illustrate legitimating
functions. But most notably, Auer’s conclusion that the sultan was transformed
in the process from the “seeker and recipient” of mystical blessings into “a
producer of his own charismatic religious authority” opens the door to recon-
ceiving the institution of sultanate (p. 99). 

As the author implicitly concedes in the fifth chapter, however, Sufi-
inspired sultanic religious authority was always constrained by the place pro-
vided to the caliphate in the Islamic legal literature of the period. The practice
of “caliphal investiture,” in particular, proved to be “a reliable source of legit-
imacy” for sultans, but “restricted their power” to that set by a “normative
Sunni ideology” defined by law (p. 134). It is therefore fitting that the book’s
sixth and final chapter deals exclusively with “Shari‘ah and Justice” (p. 135).
Auer begins by outlining the theoretical bifurcation of legal authority inherent
in the concepts of shari‘ah (the jurisdiction of the ‘ulama’) and siyasa/davabit
(the legislative realm of the sultan). Using capital punishment as a measure,
Barani’s and Afif’s works are scoured to confirm the deployment of shari‘
provisions when limitations of sultanic authority are sought, while represen-
tations of the sultan’s impartiality and clemency are emphasized to reconcile
sultanic action with the shari‘ah. The author therefore concludes that the “sul-
tans of Delhi appropriated both the shari‘ah and siyasa judicial systems for
their own political purposes.” When this use of law is added to the other Is-
lamic themes and institutions discussed in previous chapters, Auer ends with
justifiable criticism of earlier scholarship that seeks to frame the Delhi Sul-
tanate as “either a theocratic or secular form of governance.” This approach
is shown to be “clearly a distorting anachronism” (p. 155). 

A short concluding chapter acknowledges the “major frame of reference”
provided later regimes and their historians – the Mughals, the British, and
communal nationalists – by the Delhi sultans’ literary triptych (p. 159). In
these historical writings, Auer surmises, each later regime and author “found

118 The American Journal of Islamic Social Sciences 30:2



Book Reviews 119

arguments to support their version of history.” What separates this book from
the distortions inherent in earlier studies is the recognition that “early Persian
historiography is as much an enterprise in representation and identity con-
struction as it is a record of dynastic action” (p. 160). 

Every work leaves some loose ends, and this book is no exception. Al-
though attempts to square shari‘ah and siyasa are amply discussed, the man-
ner in which sultans attempted to reconcile claims to Sufi-inspired religious
authority and the constraint of legal thought remains unanswered. This short-
coming arises from a thinner presentation of law than exegesis and other dis-
ciplines, including little consideration of the varying place of the law in
Sufism. By describing shari‘ah as “codified in a restricted body of legal
rules,” for example, the author not only skirts a large contingent of specialized
studies on Islamic law that disagrees, but falls into the very assumptions
about Islamic law held by previous approaches otherwise critiqued (p. 135).
Nevertheless, Auer’s reconsideration of approaches and reevaluation of key
historiographical sources successfully conveys many of the broader short-
comings of earlier readings. The book presents a far richer yet concise alter-
native, making it a valuable addition to the scholarly understanding of the
Delhi Sultanate in particular and of Islamic modes of political legitimation
more generally. 

M. Reza Pirbhai
Associate Professor, Department of History

Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA