# Corps of Forty

The Corps of Forty (Persian: گروه چهارده), historically known as the Shamsi Bandagan and also known as the Dal Chalisa or the Turkan-e-Chihilgani, was a council of 40 mostly Turkic slave emirs who administered the Delhi Sultanate as per the wishes of the sultan. However, their number was not always 40, as Minhaj-i Siraj Juzjani says the group numbered 25 for some time.
It was initially formed by Shamsuddin Iltutmish, the third ruler of the Mamluk dynasty. After Iltutmish's death, the balance of power shifted and the sultan became a puppet of these emirs. They would enthrone and depose Iltutmish's children and grandchildren, often murdering them when they proved troublesome. Balban, one of Iltutmish's slaves and a former member of the Corps, broke the power of the emirs and restored the power and stature of the sultan. This destruction of the Corps would prove to be a double-edged sword. Without the Chihilgani around to maintain a Turkic monopoly on power, this left them vulnerable to the Khalji faction, which took power through a series of assassinations, and ultimately overthrew the Turks during the Khalji Revolution. The Turkan-i-Chihilghani were broken up, and they fled to and settled down in different villages in the region of Katehar, also known as Rohilkhand.

## Members

Jackson notes that there was only one Indian among the 25 Shamsi owned by Iltutmish and listed by Juzjani, namely Hindu Khan, who probably was in charge of all the other Shamsi slaves and held the title of the mihtar-i mubārak. The Turkic Shamsi slaves were drawn from, among others, Rumis (probably Greeks or Slavs from Byzantium) and Khitans (probably similar to the Qara Khitai). The Rumi slaves were 'Izz al-Din Kabir Khan Ayaz, Badr al-Din Sonqur and Nusrat Khan Badr al-Din Sonqur. The Khitan slaves were Sayf al-Din Aybeg, also called Yaghantut (capturer of elephants); and Sayf al-Din Ikit Khan Aybeg-i Khita'i. The Qara Khitai slaves were 'Izz al-Din Toghril Toghan Khan, Ikhtiyar al-Din Aytegin Qaraqush Khan, and Ikhtiyar al-Din Aytegin (the first slave commander to attain the position of naib).
There were many Kipchak slaves among the Shamsi. These include Qamar al-Din Qiran Temur Khan; Taj al-Din Sanjar, also known as Qabaqulaq (one with the protruding ears); Taj al-Din Sanjar *Kirit Khan; Ikhtiyar al-Din Yuzbeg Toghril Khan; 'Izz al-Din Balaban, later known as Küshlü Khan; and Sayf al-Din Aybeg Shamsi-yi 'Ajami. Küshlü Khan was purchased during the siege of Mandore in 1227 (A. H. 624). There were also notable slaves drawn from the group Iltutmish belonged to, the Olberli, who were a subdivision of either the Kipchaks or the Qanglïs. The Olberli slaves among the Shamsis were Baha al-Din Balaban, who later became the sultan; his brother Sayf al-Din Aybeg, later known as Kishli Khan; and their cousin Nusrat al-Din Sanjar, also known as Shir Khan. Balaban was purchased in 1231/1232 (A. H. 629); his brother Kishli Khan was bought the same year during an embassy sent by Iltutmish to Egypt and Baghdad. Taj al-Din Sanjar (later titled Arslan Khan), was also purchased during this embassy.

## History
### In Delhi

Historian Peter Jackson notes that the medieval chronicler Minhaj-i Siraj Juzjani provides biographies of 25 Shamsi Turkish slaves. During the reign of Iltutmish, these amirs were granted Turkish titles, including the title of khan, a title not held by Ghurid or Tajik nobles. Some Shamsi had previously been slaves of other commanders, however, most of them were purchased from slave traders. Traveler Ibn Battuta has related an account about Iltutmish sending merchants to Samarkand, Bukhara and Termez to purchase Turkish slaves for him. Their purchases dates are spread out over a long period of time, starting from the time Iltutmish held the iqta' (fief) of Baran (now known as Bulandshahr).
The contemporary medieval chronicler Ziauddin Barani, after the death of Iltutmish, had taken notice of how each Shamsi had demanded he be given similar iqta's, troops, high ranks and honor, as those given to the other Shamsi. Barani had lamented in his work that the lack of experience of Iltutmish's sons, and the power of the Shamsi, had led to the monarchy losing its majesty. According to Abdul Malik Isami, Iltutmish's successor Ruknuddin Firuz (r. April 1236 – November 1236) did not pay enough attention to the Shamsi, and instead chose to rely on multiple Tajik bureaucrats. Juzjani mentions a group of Turks who had left Delhi for Awadh, probably to join one of Firuz Shah's brothers. One of these Turks was the future sultan Balaban, who was imprisoned for some time. These bureaucrats were massacred at Tarain by the Shamsi during the campaign against the rebellious Kabir Khan. The Turks and Iltutmish's private slaves were the ones who had rebelled at Tarain, and also the ones who had defected from Firuz Shah's camp at Kilokhri and supported Razia Sultana instead.
Other than Küshlü Khan, this group included many others who were rewarded with promotions and fiefs. *Altunapa (also known as Malik Altunia), previously Iltutmish's chief canopy-bearer (sar-i chatrdar), received Baran as a grant. Balaban had been a falconer (khasadar) at the time of Iltutmish's death, Razia elevated him to the office of lord of the hunt (amir-i shikar). Balaban's brother Kishli Khan had worked in the sultan's home, he was then promoted by Razia to the rank of deputy bodyguard commander (na'ib-i sar-i jandar). Taj al-Din Sanjar (later titled Arslan Khan) had also been a falconer, Razia promoted him to the rank of cupbearer (chashnigir) and granted him the iqta' of Balaram (now known as Ballabhgarh). Hindu Khan was granted the iqta' of Uch by Razia, but he was removed from the position after her death.
Razia Sultana (r. 1236–1240) enjoyed the strong support of the Shamsi, however, she soon started building her own group of supporters. After the death of Sayf al-Din Aybeg-i *Tutuq in 1237, the Turkic deputy army commander (na'ib-i lashgar), she did not choose a Turk as his successor and instead chose the Ghurid amir Qutb al-Din Hasan b. 'Ali. Razia was deposed after she elevated Jamal-ud-Din Yaqut, her African slave, to the office of stable intendant (amir-i akhur). This ruffled the Turkish faction, especially angering the amir-hajib Ikhtiyar al-Din Aytegin. An attempted uprising in Lahore in 1239 by Kabir Khan did not succeed. Aytegin and his ally Altunia, the governor of Tabarhind (possibly Bathinda), triggered a mutiny the following year while Razia was campaigning and killed Yaqut. Razia was imprisoned at Tabarhind where Altunia watched over her.
Muiz ud din Bahram (r. 1240–1242) was crowned as the next sultan. During his reign, the Turk amirs began strengthening their power; the new office of the na'ib (viceroy) was given to Aytegin. Moreover, the Bay'ah (oath of allegiance) of the Turks was contingent on the designation of Aytegin as the na'ib. When Aytegin began encroaching on imperial powers, Bahram had him killed in 1240 during the month of Muharram (July). Another Shamsi, Badr al-Din Sonqur-i Rumi, who was the new amir-hajib, became influential. He was instrumental in the campaign against Altunia, who had married Razia and marched to Delhi to crown her after the death of Aytegin. The next highly influential figure was the new wazir (prime minister), Muhadhdhab al-Din, who instigated the sultan against Sonqur after his relations with the latter soured. Sonqur was moving to crown one of Bahram's brothers, and the wazir reported this to Bahram. Sonqur was exiled from the royal court to his iqta' of Budaun in August 1241 (Safar, A. H. 639); when he arrived at the royal court three months later without imperial approval, he was executed. During Bahram's reign, Balaban was promoted from amir-i shikar to amir-i akhur. Balaban was then pivotal during the siege of Delhi in 1242 (A. H. 639), and was rewarded with the iqta' of Hansi. Kabir Khan Ayaz and Qaraqush Khan, by now, had practically declared themselves independent of the sultanate at their iqta's in Lahore and Sindh.
Bahram himself was deposed in 1242 (A. H. 639) when, influenced by his courtier Fakhr al-Din Mubarak Shah Farrukhi, he was considering the complete discharge of all the Turkish slave commanders. During October 1242 (Jumada al-Awwal, A. H. 640), the Turks stormed and killed Muhadhdhab al-Din, who was trying to consolidate imperial powers with his office and keep the Turks out of governmental affairs. Balaban had been supported by Sonqur, who had helped him get his first iqta' in Rewari. Therefore, Balaban likely took part in the deposal of Bahram. Jackson thinks the reason the major figures behind this move were not executed was because they had the support of the new sultan, Masud Shah (r. 1242–1246). Balaban partook in the strike against Muhadhdhab al-Din, and Juzjani implies he was promoted to the rank of amir-hajib after the wazir's death in 1244/1245 (A. H. 642). Qaraqush Khan was demoted and sent to his iqta' in Bayana, then probably dismissed to Kara-Manikpur; Balaban was possibly behind these transfers. Masud Shah also tried to reduce the power of the Turks, and he possibly relied on African slaves instead. Balaban was a major figure in the dethronement of Masud Shah and the elevation of Nasiruddin Mahmud Shah (r. 1246–1266). Qaraqush Khan was possibly killed in the aftermath of these events, because he was most probably an opponent of Balaban.
In 1249 (A. H. 647), Balaban married his daughter to the sultan, was appointed the na'ib and allowed the title of Ulugh Khan. He transferred his rank of the amir-hajib to his brother Kishli Khan. Many of his supporters were elevated. Among them, the Shamsi Taj al-Din *Teniz Khan, said to be a loyal deputy of Balaban, was made the deputy amir-hajib. One of Balaban's slaves, Ikhtiyar al-Din Aytegin mui-yi daraz (long-haired), who had previously been the deputy amir-i akhur, was appointed the chief amir-i akhur after Kishli Khan's promotion. At this point, according to Jackson, opponents of Balaban's faction had emerged within the Shamsi. Balaban and his group started making a coordinated assault on 'Izz al-Din Balaban, also known as Küshlu Khan. Küshlü Khan had lost Multan after it was conquered by Hasan of the Qarlughid dynasty. Multan was then occupied by Ulugh Khan's cousin Shir Khan, and Küshlü Khan did not succeed in his attempts to recapture the city. Ulugh Khan and the sultan expelled him from Nagaur, and the city was granted to Kishli Khan. Küshlü Khan then retreated to Uch, but he was imprisoned by Shir Khan and freed only after he had commanded the city's garrison to surrender. Küshlü Khan was then granted Budaun in early 1251 (A. H. 649).
Küshlü Khan avenged his mistreatment during 1252-1253 (A. H. 650-651). In the course of a campaign that year, Ulugh Khan was expelled to his iqta' in Hansi, and then the iqta' was taken from him and given to the sultan's newborn son. Meanwhile, Ulugh Khan was sent to Nagaur. His role as the na'ib was transferred to Qutb al-Din Hasan, and all his allies in the imperial government were demoted. Kishli Khan and *Teniz Khan were removed from imperial service, and Shir Khan (who by now held the iqta's of Uch, Multan and Tabarhind) was deposed by imperial forces and fled to Mongol lands. Küshlü Khan and his allies Qutlugh Khan and Imad al-Din Rayhan took these ranks and fiefs for themselves; Rayhan was made the wakil-i dar and Küshlü Khan was granted the iqta's he had previously held in Sindh. Qutlugh Khan had married the sultan's mother, probably in early 1255. The faction opposed to Ulugh Khan included Turks like Küshlü Khan, Qutlugh Khan and his son-in-law 'Izz al-Din Balaban-i Yuzbegi. Many Turks also supported Rayhan because of their opposition to Ulugh Khan. However, this faction was not just limited to Turks, but it also included other ethnic factions.
The rivals of Ulugh Khan were probably supported by the sultan and his mother; Rayhan was probably the slave of Mahmud Shah himself. Ulugh Khan's faction rose to power after it joined forces with the sultan's rebellious brother, Jalal al-Din Masud. Masud had left his iqta' in Santur and joined the Mongols. Masud had left India after he had become anxious about the Turkish slave commanders. Wassaf and Rashid al-Din Hamadani, Persian writers from contemporary Ilkhanate Iran, had named some of these Turks. Masud came back with a Mongol army, and established a client state in Lahore and northwest Punjab. In 1254 (A. H. 652), Masud moved eastwards from Lahore, along with Ulugh Khan's faction, which included Kishli Khan of Kara; Aybeg-i Khitai of Sunam and Mansurpur; and Yuzbeg Tughril Khan who had been dismissed from his fief in Kannauj. Both the rebels and the imperial forces made indecisive movements, then they arrived at a compromise where Rayhan lost out and was dismissed to his iqta' in Budaun. Arslan Khan, who had replaced Shir Khan in Tabarhind, was part of the group who had earlier deposed Ulugh Khan and now switched their allegiances to Masud. Ulugh Khan and the sultan arrived at Delhi in January 1255 (Dhu al-Hijjah A. H. 652).
Ulugh Khan quickly reestablished his hegemony in the imperial court. The Ghurid na'ib was beheaded and his position passed to Ulugh Khan, while his iqta' of Meerut was granted to Kishli Khan, who had been appointed as the amir-hajib again. Qutlugh Khan and his wife were excused from the imperial court, and dismissed to his new iqta' in Awadh. Budaun was taken from Rayhan and granted to *Teniz Khan, who was a supporter of Ulugh Khan's faction. Rayhan was sent to Bahraich and died there at the hands of Taj al-Din Siwistani in August 1255 (Rajab, A. H. 653). Qutlugh Khan continued to fight in Awadh, and then allied with Küshlü Khan in 1257 (A. H. 655). They tried to instigate a coup at Delhi, which was foiled by the supporters of Ulugh Khan. The two then laid siege to Delhi for some time, but had to lift it after Ulugh Khan and his army arrived. Qutlugh Khan now disappears from records, and Jackson thinks he may have joined the Mongols. Küshlü Khan went back to Sindh; Juzjani says his army had shrunk after soldiers from Uch and Multan defected to Ulugh Khan's army. According to Juzjani's account, Ulugh Khan's rivals were denied any powerful positions during the ten years preceding Ulugh Khan's coronation.
Ulugh Khan's long and mostly peaceful career had allowed him to gather resources, including his own personal troops. Ulugh Khan also had his own Turkish slaves, even before he had become the sultan. These included Aytegin-i Mui-yi Daraz, and the sipahsalar (army commander) Qarachomaq. Ulugh Khan's enthronement is highly likely to have been supported by his old allies like Nusrat Khan Badr al-Din Sonqur and 'Imad al-Mulk, both of them were Shamsi and had supported Ulugh Khan during the brief siege of Delhi in 1257. Barani says Ulugh Khan, wanting to ruin his old Shamsi colleagues, had many of them poisoned.
Ulugh Khan's cousin Shir Khan (who had been granted the iqta's of Lahore, Sunam and Dipalpur), did not visit the imperial court during the reign of both Mahmud Shah and Ulugh Khan, afraid of also being poisoned. He was finally poisoned in 1269/1270 (A. H. 668) by Ulugh Khan. The Shamsi who escaped this elimination were excused only because they were favored by the sultan. Barani gives the names of two such Shamsi, Temür Khan and 'Adil Khan. Temür Khan Sonqur-i 'Ajami was the malik of Ghuram, and he received the iqta's of Sunam and Samana after the death of Shir Khan. 'Adil Khan was the title of Sayf al-Din Aybeg Shamsi-yi 'Ajami. 'Imad al-Mulk, the maternal grandfather of Amir Khusrau, was also a Shamsi according to Barani. Nusrat Khan also continued to hold Bayana in 1271 (A. H. 669). However, Ulugh Khan's elimination of the Shamsi was not fully accomplished, as Barani says many sons of the Shamsi were officials during the reign of Ulugh Khan's family. Ulugh Khan has been accused of eliminating Turkish power in India by modern historians. Jackson says his eventual goal was to replace the Shamsi with his own slaves. Ulugh Khan may have intentionally supported the growing power of the Khalaj.

### In Awadh
## Analysis

Jackson notes that many of the 25 Shamsi rose to notable positions only after Iltutmish's death. He further observes how Turkish slave commanders in the Delhi Sultanate did not have a monopoly on high ranks and offices, a monopoly Turks did have in Mamluk Egypt. However, Jackson notes how the children of the Turks had avenues for social mobility, a privilege not afforded to the children of the Mamluks in Egypt, who were termed the awlād al-nās and could not rise to powerful government offices. Jackson observes that the succession of Razia Sultana to the throne was possibly a result of the Turkish slave commanders' pagan background. He posits that the Khitan and Qara Khitai, who belonged to the eastern steppes where women had more freedom, may have raised Razia in the manner of their pre-Islamic culture.
According to Jackson, Masud Shah being enthroned instead of 'Izz al-Din Balaban suggests the possibility of a multi-racial alliance. Jackson posits that the Turks becoming sultans was not acceptable to the Ghurids, and the other Shamsi slaves did not want to abandon the family of their deceased lord. He argues that a compromise was achieved between the multiple elite factions. As a result, a Ghurid became the na'ib and Qaraqush Khan was appointed the amir-hajib; while Taj al-Din Sanjar-i Qabaqulaq, who had restrained 'Izz al-Din, received the latter's iqta' of Budaun. Jackson further argues that the strife within the sultanate was extended and risky because of internal divisions within the Shamsi. Jackson also posits that the junior slaves were bound together much closely, because they were a markedly different group with their own aims. Jackson notes the high proportion of the junior slaves amongst the group who had deposed Firuz Shah and crowned Razia. The growing standing and ambitions of these juniors is likely to have angered both the non-Shamsi and the senior Shamsi. According to Jackson, the history of the Mamluk dynasty after the death of Iltutmish was largely centered around the growth of his junior slaves, and their internal conflicts which risked the survival of the relatively new sultanate.
Historian S. B. P. Nigam argues that the years preceding Balaban's coronation saw rival ethnic factions like Africans and Tajiks being violently removed from power. This led to the Turkish faction's power becoming unopposed; the Turkish groups then fought each other for dominance, albeit in a less violent manner where they achieved relatively peaceful regime changes and compromises. Jackson says this period can be considered peaceful, when compared to its preceding events like the massacre of the Tajiks in 1236. However, interpersonal struggle intensified, with no quarter given to rivals belonging to the same unit. As an example, Küshlü Khan had hoped Shir Khan would spare him because both were members of the same house, but he was not shown any mercy. Jackson says the strife in the 1250s can be considered more threatening than previous conflicts, because these were two similar groups participating in a total civil war. Furthermore, both factions had requested help from the Mongols. Mahmud Shah was probably deposed forcefully, and Jackson argues his reign had lasted longer only because he had his own soldiers.

## Historiography

Jackson notes how Barani had used the number forty (chihil) in his account of the Shamsis, which led the 16th-century chroniclers Nizam al-Din Ahmad Harawi and Firishta to presume Iltutmish had 40 slaves. It is also possible Harawi and Firishta where influenced by the account given by Abdul Malik Isami, where Iltutmish was shown forty slaves and chose to buy all of them except Balaban. As such, modern historians also talk about a group of forty. However, Jackson postulates that the Chihilgani led a unit of forty slaves each, which is why they were named similarly. Jackson makes note of a similar practice in Mamluk Egypt, where amirs led groups of forty royal mamluks. Jackson argues that the Chihilgani were a different body among the Shamsi slaves, and not the term used for all the Shamsi slave commanders. Jackson makes note of Barani naming only three amirs from the Chihilgani, and notes how they were comparatively junior slaves.