The Institutes of Akbar 294: 67. I’timad Khan, of Gujrat.
The Áín i Akbari (Blochmann, Jarrett) 294
- Language
- English
67. I’timad Khan, of Gujrat.
294.1
He must not be confounded with No. 119. I'timad Khan was originally a Hindu servant of Sultan Mahmud, king of Gujrat. He was ‘trusted’ (i’timad) by his master, who had allowed him to enter the harem, and had put him in charge of the women. It is said that, from gratitude, he used to eat camphor, and thus rendered himself impotent. He rose in the king’s favor, and was at last made an Amir. In 961, after a reign of 18 years, the king was foully murdered by a slave of the name of Burhan, who besides killed twelve nobles. I'timad next morning collected a few faithful men, and killed Burhan. Sultan Mahmud having died without issue, I’t. raised Razi ul Mulk, under the title of Ahmad Shah, to the throne. Razi was a son of Sultan Ahmad, the founder of Ahmadabad; but as he was very young, the affairs of the state were entirely in I’t.’s hands. Five years later, the young king left Ahmadabad, and fled to Sayyid Mubarak of Bukhara, a principal courtier; but I't. followed him up, defeated him, and drove him away. Sultan Ahmad then thought it better to return to I’t., who now again reigned as before. On several occasions did the king try to get rid of his powerful minister; and I’t. at last felt so insecure, that he resolved to kill the king, which he soon afterwards did. I’t. now raised a child of the name of Nat’hu to the throne, ‘who did not belong to the line of kings ;’ but on introducing him to the grandees, I’t.
294.2
swore upon the Qoran, that Nat’hu was a son of Sultan Mahmud: his mother when pregnant had been handed over to him by Sultan Mahmud, to make her miscarry; but the child had been five months old, and he had not carried out the order. The Amirs had to believe the story, and Nat’hū was raised to the throne under the title of Sultán Muzaffar. This is the origin of Sultán Muzaffar, who subsequently caused Akbar’s generals so much trouble (vide pp. 326, 334, 335).
294.3
I’t. was thus again at the head of the government; but the Amírs parcelled out the country among themselves, so that each was almost independent. The consequence was, that incessant feuds broke out among them. I’t. himself was involved in a war with Chingiz Khán, son of ’Imádul Mulk, a Turkish slave. Chingiz maintained that Sultán Muzaffar, if genuine, should be the head of the state; and as he was strengthened by the rebellious Mírzás, to whom he had afforded protection against Akbar, I’t. saw no chance of opposing him, left the Sultán, and went to Dungarpur. Two nobles, Alif Khán and Jhujhár Khán, took Sultán Muzaffar to him, went to Chingiz in Ahmadábád, and killed him (Chingiz) soon after. The Mírzás seeing how distracted the country was, took possession of Bahronch and Súrat. The general confusion only increased, when Sultán Muzaffar fled one day to Sher Khán Fúládí and his party, and I’t. retaliated by informing Sher Khán that Nat’hū was no prince at all. But Sher Khán’s party attributed this to I’t.’s malice, and besieged him in Ahmadábád. I’t. then fled to the Mírzás, and soon after to Akbar, whose attention he drew to the wretched state of Gujrát.
294.4
When Akbar, in the 17th year, marched to Patan, Sher Khán’s party had broken up. The Mírzás still held Bahronch; and Sultán Muzaffar, who had left Sher Khán, fell into the hands of Akbar’s officers (vide No. 362). I’timád and other Gujrátí nobles had in the meantime proclaimed Akbar’s accession from the pulpits of the mosques and struck coins in his name. They now waited on the Emperor. Barodah, Chámpánír, and Súrat were given to I’t. as tuyúl; the other Amírs were confirmed, and all charged themselves with the duty of driving away the Mírzás. But they delayed and did nothing; some of them, as Ikhtiyárul-Mulk, even fled, and others who were attached to Akbar, took I’t. and several grandees to the Emperor, apparently charging them with treason. I’t. fell into disgrace, and was handed over to Shahbáz Khán (No. 80) as prisoner. In the 20th year, I’t. was released, and charged with the superintendence of the Imperial jewels and gold vessels. In the 22nd year, he was permitted to join the party who under Mír Abú Turáb (vide p. 198) went to Makkah. On his return, he received Patan as jágír.
294.5
In the 28th year, on the removal of Shihábuddín Ahmad (No. 26), he was put in charge of Gujrát, and went there accompanied by several distinguished nobles, though Akbar had been warned; for people remembered I’t.’s former inability to allay the factions in Gujrát. No sooner had Shiháb handed over duties than his servants rebelled. I’t. did nothing, alleging that Shiháb was responsible for his men; but as Sultán Muzaffar had been successful in Kát’híwár, I’t. left Ahmadábád, and went to Shiháb, who on his way to Court had reached Karí, 20 kos from Ahmadábád. Muzaffar used the opportunity and took Ahmadábád, Shiháb’s men joining his standard. Shiháb and I’t. then shut themselves up in Patan, and had agreed to withdraw from Gujrát, when they received some auxiliaries, chiefly in a party of Gujrátís who had left Muzaffar, to try their luck with the Imperialists. I’t. paid them well, and sent them under the command of his son, Sher Khan, against Sher Khan Fuladi, who was repulsed. In the meantime M. ’Abdurrahim (No. 29) arrived. Leaving I’timad at Patan, he marched with Shihab against Muzaffar. I’timad died at Patan in 995. The Tabaqat puts him among the Commanders of Four Thousand. In Abulfazl’s opinion, Gujratis are made up of cowardice, deceit, several good qualities, and meanness; and I’timad was the very type of a Gujrati.