Final answer:
Option (A), It can be inferred that East Africans believed their king to be a divine being as rulers often claimed a divine right to rule, similar to the connections between human rulers and divine entities seen in Egyptian and Mohist examples.
Step-by-step explanation:
Based on the words of Ali al-Masudi and the historical context provided, it can be inferred that East Africans believed their king was a divine being. The references make it clear that rulers in these societies often claimed a divine right to rule. The king was seen as an intermediary between the terrestrial and divine realms, embodying both a human and an eternal divine aspect of kingship. This spiritual and divine role provided the authority to the human ruler, linking him with the god Horus in Egypt, for example, or presenting him as a figure chosen by heaven in the case of the Mohists, as seen in the references.
Thus, the most appropriate answer to the question would be: A) They believed the king was a divine being. The other options do not align with the descriptions of kingship where divine right was the basis of authority, and there is no support for electability, figurehead status, or arbitrary oppression in the given references.