The Nāṣirī Generations 183.2
Tabakat-i-Nasiri 183.2
- Language
- English
183.2.1
Kutb-ud-Din now [590 H., but some say in 589 H., the same year in which Dihli was made the seat of government] received intimation of the Sultan Mu’izz-ud-Din’s having marched from Ghaznin on an expedition against Jai Chand [Jai Chandra], Rajah of Kinnauj and Banaras, his former ally, against Rae Pithora, according to the Hindu Chroniclers, who, it is said, meditated an attack upon Kutb-ud-Din. On hearing of the Sultan’s having crossed the Sutlaj, Kutb-ud-Din proceeded some stages in advance to receive him and do him honour, bearing along with him rich offerings. [Firishtah, who gives an account of this matter, uses the word peshwa’i — — which signifies meeting and conducting a superior or a guest ; but his translators, Dow and Briggs, mistaking, say respectively that Kutb-ud-Din “proceeded as far as Peshawir” and “Pishawur” to meet him ! ! Where Dihli ? where Peshawar? where Kinnauj ? Fancy his marching from Dihli with 50,000 horse at his heels, and crossing the five great rivers of the Panjab, merely to meet his master marching to Kinnauj ! !]
183.2.2
Kutb-ud-Din’s following, upon this occasion, amounted to 50,000 horse [the Muhammadan forces of Hindustan] ; and, having joined the Sultan’s army, he, in concert with ‘Izz-ud-Din, Husain, son of Khar-mil [the same who afterwards turned traitor, and played such a false part towards Sultan Muhammad, Khwarazm Shah, mentioned in note 2, page 257], led the vanguard [the principal division unencumbered with heavy baggage, not “a small detachment of 1000 horse”] of the Sultan’s army. The Musalmans came in contact with Jai Chand’s forces in the environs of Chand-war and Itawah [another author says Chandā-war. It is probably Chand-wal of Itawah, a place a few miles S.E. during his government, subdued the cities of Bihar and of the latter town. See page 470], and compelled them to give way. Jai Chand, in person, then led on his forces to renew the action, in the heat of which an arrow struck him in one of his eyes, and he fell dead from his elephant. See also note page 470, and compare the absurd statement of the Kamil-ut-Tawarikh in Elliot: INDIA, vol. ii., page 250-251.
183.2.3
It is truly amusing to compare Firishtah's account of this affair with the versions of his translators. He, quoting the Taj-ul-Ma'asir, says—I give his own words—“At last Jai Chand, in person, appeared in the field against Kutb-ud-Din, and, during the very heat of the fight, a life-taking arrow entered the pupil of the Rajah's eye, and he fell from his elephant into the dust of contempt.” Dow renders this: "But Cuttub, who excelled in archery, sunk an arrow in the ball of his eye," and Briggs has: "Kootb ood Deen, who excelled in archery, came in contact with Raja Jye Chund, and with his own hand shot the arrow which, piercing his eye, cost the Rajah his life" !!!
183.2.4
The Musalman troops, having overthrown Jai Chand's army, and taken possession of the fortress of Asi, where his treasures were kept, pushed on to Banaras, “one of the most central and considerable cities of Hind;” and scores of idol temples were destroyed, and a vast amount of booty acquired, including a large number of elephants, among which was a white one. [Firishtah says this white elephant, a most rare animal, was presented by the Sultan to Kutb-ud-Din, who used to ride it up to the time of his death, and that it died of grief the day after. This, however, is mere supposition, for it appears that this same white elephant was taken to Ghaznin, and from thence to Ghur, to Sultan Ghiyas-ud-Din, Mu’izz-ud-Din's elder brother and sovereign; and it was afterwards presented by Mahmud, the former's son, to Sultan Muhammad, Khwarazm Shah, when he became subject to that monarch. See note para. 9, page 402]. Elphinstone says this victory over Jai-Chand “extended the Mussulman dominion unto Behar!” but this is not correct. Muhammad, son of Bakht-yar, it was who, shortly after these events, took the city of that name by surprise. After these successes Sultan Mu’izz-ud-Din returned to Ghaznin, and Malik Husam-ud-Din, Aghul-Bak [the same who took Muhammad, son of Bakht-yar, the Khalj, into his service, see page 549], was installed at Kol. [Firishtah, in his work, gives his account of the expedition against Bhiraj—para. 4 of this note—in this place.]
183.2.5
Kutb-ud-Din soon had to take the field again, against Bhiraj [or Hamir], who had issued from the hills of Alwur, whither he had fled, first fought an engagement with his nephew of Ajmir, defeated him, compelled him to fly for shelter to Rantabhur, and took possession of Ajmir, and despatched a force under a leader named Jhat Rae towards Dihli; but Kutb-ud-Din, having speedily selected a force of 20,000 horse, marched to encounter him. Jhat Rae faced about, and was pursued by the Musalmans to Ajmir. Bhiraj [or Hamir] then drew out his forces to give battle, but he was defeated, and retired within the walls; and then, finding resistance fruitless, ascended a funeral pyre and perished. After this a Muhammadan governor was left in charge of Ajmir, but what became of Rae Pithora's son has not transpired. After this, on disposing of the affairs of Ajmir, Kutb-ud-Din is said to have led his forces, in 591 H., towards Nahrwalah of Gujarat, and encountered the general of Bhim Diw [according to Tod, Komar-pal was his name], Rae of Nahrwalah, who is styled by the name of Jatwan, and who was encamped with Nudiah, and that country [Bihar], as will be hereafter recorded. When the Sultan-i-Ghazi, Mu’izz-ud-Din, Muhammad-i-
183.2.6
maintained what his father left. She headed her Rajpoots, and gave battle to Kootub-o-din, near Amber, where the viceroy was wounded.” In a note he adds: “This must be [of course!] the battle referred to by Ferishta. See Dow, p. 169, vol. ii.” The wound or wounds must also have come from Dow or Briggs, for it is not in Firishtah. This statement of the translators, not Firishtah’s, must have led Elphinstone astray, when he says [page 315 of third ed.]: “Kutb u Din was overpowered on this occasion, and had difficulty in making his way, covered with wounds, to Ajmir,” &c. The statement of Firishtah’s is this: — “But his horse, having received a wound, came to the ground. The army of Islam became heart-broken, and they, having by main force — placed him on another horse, took him to Ajmir. This is all; but his translators certainly display much fertility of imagination in their rendering of Firishtah’s words. Dow has: “But he was defeated, received six wounds, and was often dismounted; yet he fought like a man who had made death his companion. Forced, at last, by his own friends, to abandon the field, he was carried in a litter to Ajmere.” Briggs has: “But he was defeated. After being frequently dismounted in the action, and having received six wounds, he still fought with his wonted courage, till, being forced at length by his attendants off the field, he was carried in a litter to Ajmeer.” ! ! !
183.2.7
Emboldened by this success, the rebel Hindus [the of Firishtah], with the troops of Nahrwalah, followed Kutb-ud-Din and his force, pursued them to Ajmir, and took up a position a short distance from it; and for several months they shut up Kutb-ud-Din within the walls, and carried on hostilities against the place. On intimation of the state of affairs having reached Sultan Mu’izz-ud-Din, he despatched a large force from Ghaznin, under several of the great Amirs, to succour Kutb-ud-Din; but the infidels thought fit to retire before it arrived. From 591 H. the Taj-ul-Ma’asir jumps at once to 593 H., immediately before giving an account of the expedition against Thankir or Thangir and Gwaliyur in 592 H., thus showing that 591 H. cannot be correct. The correct date of this reverse must be the ninth or tenth month of 592 H., as Firishtah states. To return, however, to the narrative. Kutb-ud-Din, finding himself thus supported, resolved upon taking vengeance on the Rae of Gujarat, and, in the middle of Safar — the second month of the year — 593 H., which year is confirmed by our author and several others, he began his march towards Nahrwalah. When he reached the bounds of Pali and Nadul [these names are not certain, but such they appear in the Taj-ul-Ma’asir. In proceeding from Ajmir to Nahrwalah, Kutb-ud-Din had the choice of two routes, that on the eastern slopes of the Arawali mountains, by Udipur and Idur, or that on the western or Marwar side, clear of the mountains;
183.2.8
and this last he would in all probability have chosen by the direct route of Pali and Sirhoi, keeping Abu on his left. Nadul, where, as at Pali, are the remains of ancient forts, lies about twenty-five miles or more south of Pali, but off the direct line of route by Sirhoi; but it must also be mentioned that there are places named Palri and Bhagoni close to the hills nearer to Sirhoi, and a Ruira still nearer Abu. Firishtah does not appear to have taken his account from the Taj-ul-Ma’asir in this instance, as the two names he gives may be either Hutali or Dhutali and Bazul or Barul, or Rahi and Bartuki and Nuzul or Nadul, as above] he found those places abandoned — thus tending to show that they were in the lower and less tenable parts — and the enemy under two leaders, one of whom is styled Rae Karan [Kurnah, probably] in the Taj-ul-Ma’asir, and Ursi Sam, attained martyrdom Sultan Ghiyas-ud-Din, Mahmud permanently acquired by the Musalmans until long after.] Promotions and favours were conferred upon the Muhammadan chiefs, and even the poor and needy [Musalmans] of Dihli shared in Kutb-ud-Din's bounty and munificence. No other operation is mentioned from this time to the year 599 H., a period of nearly six years; and it is somewhat surprising to find the Musalmans in India so quiet for such a length of time.
183.2.9
It may be partly accounted for, especially the last three years, through the Sultans—Ghiyas-ud-Din and Mu'izz-ud-Din—being occupied with the affairs of Khurasan since the accession of their powerful rival, Sultan Muhammad, Khwarazm Shah, the events of whose reign will throw some light upon this period.