[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Indian literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in) › [Dark Ages](https://indike.org/pramana/in.darkages) › [Delhi Sultanate (1206–1526)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.darkages.sultanate) › [Ṭabaqāt-i Nāṣirī](https://indike.org/pramana/in.darkages.sultanate.tabaqat-i-nasiri) › [Tabakat-i-Nasiri](https://indike.org/pramana/in.darkages.sultanate.tabaqat-i-nasiri~en-raverty) › 256.6 # The Nāṣirī Generations 256.6 Tabakat-i-Nasiri 256.6 - **Language:** English ### [256.6.1](https://indike.org/pramana/in.darkages.sultanate.tabaqat-i-nasiri~en-raverty.256.6.1) The Tarikh-i-Alfi gives another account of the origin of the war between the Sultan and the Gur Khan. The Karlughiah families stationed on the frontier of Arsalan Khan’s dominions had been harshly treated by him. He considered they multiplied too fast, and set overseers of his own over them to prevent them having intercourse with their wives. They endured this tyranny for a considerable time, not knowing whither to fly. At last, grown desperate, on the arrival on the frontier, which it was their duty to guard, of an immense kafilah of traders and merchants, consisting of Turks, Khita-is, and people from all parts to the eastward, they attacked the kafilah, and seized all the property and effects of the merchants composing it. They then made known to them that, if they desired to get their property restored to them, they must put them in the way of finding a place beyond Arsalan Khan’s dominions, provided with water and forage sufficient to enable them to subsist, as they were resolved to stay no longer under his rule. The merchants told them they knew of a tract of country well provided with what they required, sufficient for the subsistence of ten times their number, and that it lay in the territory of Bilad-saghun in Turkistan. The Karlughiah Turks, on this, restored the property of the merchants, seized their overseers, and, taking them along with them, made for the territory of Bilad-saghun, and there took up their quarters. ### [256.6.2](https://indike.org/pramana/in.darkages.sultanate.tabaqat-i-nasiri~en-raverty.256.6.2) They were, however, in constant dread of Arsalan Khan, until the Gur Khan, who had, by this time, arrived in that part, entered into hostilities with the ruler of Mawara-un-Nahr and Turkistan, and the Karlughiah entered into combination with him. At this juncture, Arsalan Khan, as previously mentioned, died, and Hasan-Tigin, who had been installed in his place by Sultan Sanjar, soon followed him. The sovereignty then devolved upon the Khaqan, Mahmud, son of Arsalan. Shortly after, the Gur Khan, with a vast army of Khita-is and Turks, numbering, it is said, 300,000 men, advanced into Mahmud’s territory, and began to annex it. The Gur Khan imposed one dinar as a tax upon each house in every city he reached, but neither allowed his troops to enter the people’s dwellings, nor their cultivated lands, and did not farther molest them. To such of the Maliks of Mawara-un-Nahr as submitted, the Gur Khan assigned a tablet of silver to be hung up at the entrance of their palaces. See Journal Ro. As. Soc., vol. v., for 1870, p. 29. champions of which army were the Sipah-salar, 'Khar-jam ### [256.6.3](https://indike.org/pramana/in.darkages.sultanate.tabaqat-i-nasiri~en-raverty.256.6.3) As previously mentioned, the Mahmud, was defeated, and, at his urgent prayer, Sultan Sanjar prepared to succour him. Sanjar is said to have taken six months to complete his arrangements, and, in the month of Zi-Hijjah, 534 H., to have crossed the Jihun with an army of 100,000 cavalry—an exaggerated number—and moved towards Samrkand. Serving in his army were the Maliks of Sistan, Siaznin, and Ghur, and the Hakims of Mazandaran. When Sanjar reached Samrkand Mahmud complained bitterly of the conduct of the Karlughiah, and the Sultan resolved to chastize them first. On becoming aware of his intention, they sought the protection of the Gur Khan, who sent a letter to the Sultan demanding what crime was laid to the charge of the Karlughiah. The Sultan’s reply, as may be imagined, was sufficiently haughty. The hostile forces moved to encounter each other, and, after an obstinate battle, the details of which have been already given, victory declared in favour of the Khita-is, who were immensely superior in point of numbers; and the Sultan, having cut his way out with a few followers, fled to Tirmiz. The Wali of Sistan was taken prisoner \[see page 188\], and Amir Kimaj, who had charge of the Sultan’s haram, and the whole of that establishment, were also made captive. ### [256.6.4](https://indike.org/pramana/in.darkages.sultanate.tabaqat-i-nasiri~en-raverty.256.6.4) It is stated in the Tarikh-i-Yafa’i, that nearly 30,000 Musalmans fell in this battle, and that among the slain were 4000 women. “In some other Histories it is also stated that, after the flight of the Sultan, the Turks and Khita-is poured into the camp and began to plunder. On their approaching the part where the haram was, Turkan Khatun, the Sultan’s chief consort, and most of the wives of the Amirs, and the soldiery who acted as their guard, defended it against the infidels, and slew a vast number of them; and it was only after 4000 women had fallen that the rest of the haram was captured, including Turkan Khatun. The Gur Khan left the females in charge of those of their own people who remained, and would not allow them to be interfered with. They were treated with honour and reverence, and, soon after, were sent back to the Sultan in Khurasan.” ### [256.6.5](https://indike.org/pramana/in.darkages.sultanate.tabaqat-i-nasiri~en-raverty.256.6.5) Mr. H. H. Howorth has not quoted my translation quite correctly \[Journal R. As. Soc. Vol. viii. p. 272\]. Nowhere have I said that At Khan was “in alliance with the chief of Kara Khitai.” In my note to page 154, I say “Sanjar fought a battle with At Khan,” which, as my authority related it, refers to one of the leaders of the Gur Khan’s forces. Most certainly At Khan was not “the dispossessed Khan” of Turkistan, nor was he the dispossessed chief of Bilasa-ghun, nor does Rashid-ud-Din, in his Jami’-ut-Tawarikh, anywhere state that the ruler of Kara Khitae adopted the title of Gur Khan—not “Ghur” Khan—“after great battle in 525 H.” because he says, \[in the MSS. before me\] that this battle took place in 536 H. \[which began 5th August, A.D. 1141\], while others make it one year, and some, two years earlier—534 H., A.D. 1139-40, and 535, A.D. 1140-41. Amir Timur, I also beg leave to say, never adopted the title of “Emir Timur Gur Khan” for the very significant reason that the title of the Kara-Khita-i chief consists of two words while the word applied to Amir Timur, which appears to have misled Mr. Howorth, is one and is written Gurgan, and in signification there is no connexion between them whatever. To return to my story. After having gained this great success, the Gur Khan overran great part of Turkistan and Mawara-un-Nahr, acquired predominance over those countries, and made their rulers tributaries. He in- \[cham\], and Muhammad-i-Khar-nak — on whom be peace! ### [256.6.6](https://indike.org/pramana/in.darkages.sultanate.tabaqat-i-nasiri~en-raverty.256.6.6) creased his forces, and his war materials accumulated; and, shortly after, he despatched an army under the command of his general, Arbaz \[this name is also mentioned by our author: “Imuz” is not correct\] towards the Khwarazm territory, in order to sack and devastate the rustaks \[a word particularly applied in Khwarazm to villages or collections of huts or felt tents, in distinction from the words dih and karyah used in ’Irak and Khurasan\]. His troops created great havoc, and Itsiz, Sultan of Khwarazm, despatched an envoy to the Gur Khan to sue for peace, and agreed to pay allegiance to him for the future, and a yearly tribute of 30,000 dinars besides cattle, flocks, and other things. On this accommodation having been entered into, Arbaz retired; and soon after, in 537 H. \[A.D. 1142-3\], the Gur Khan died. He was of the Mani \[Manichean\] religion himself, but his wife was a Christian. It is stated in Alfi that he died in the month of Rajab of the following year. He was succeeded by his wife, as no son remained to him, but some authors distinctly state that his daughter succeeded. To judge, however, from the events which followed, it is very improbable that the daughter then succeeded her father, because the name of the husband of the female sovereign who ruled so long is given, and it is scarcely probable that the Gur Khan’s wife married again, without some mention of it being recorded, nor was it the custom, I believe, for widows to re-marry. ### [256.6.7](https://indike.org/pramana/in.darkages.sultanate.tabaqat-i-nasiri~en-raverty.256.6.7) The wife, whose name is not given, dying some time after her succession, but without any date being mentioned, was succeeded by the Gur Khan’s daughter, Konik or Konayik Khatun, but whether the late sovereign was her mother has not transpired. The word is somewhat uncertain in some works, but I put the most trustworthy reading first upon all occasions, and that used by the majority of writers. It is written which, according to whether or be used, may be spelt in various ways, and which may be Koyunik, and Kolun — but another author, in two copies of his work, has Komanik or Gomanik or Komanig or Gomanig — according as to whether the Tazi or ’Ajami be meant. In the seventh year of I-yal-Arsalan, Khwarazm Shah’s reign \[557 or 558 H.\], because he was not punctual in the payment of his tribute, as stipulated by his father, his dominions were assailed by the Gur Khan’s forces. The Sultan sent forward, in advance, Gha-ir Beg, the Karlugh, a native of Mawara-un-Nahr, with an advance force, towards the Amuiah, but he was defeated and taken captive before I-yal-Arsalan could come to his support, and the latter fell sick and returned to Khwarazm where he died in the month of Rajab of the same year. --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.darkages.sultanate.tabaqat-i-nasiri~en-raverty.256.6](https://indike.org/pramana/in.darkages.sultanate.tabaqat-i-nasiri~en-raverty.256.6) · Pramāṇa