[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) › 294 # The Nāṣirī Generations 294: ACCOUNT OF THE MIRACLE \[WHICH HAPPENED IN BEHALF\] OF THE MUSALMANS OF MAYYA-FARIKIN. Tabakat-i-Nasiri 294 - **Language:** English ### ACCOUNT OF THE MIRACLE \[WHICH HAPPENED IN BEHALF\] OF THE MUSALMANS OF MAYYA-FARIKIN. ### [294.1](https://indike.org/pramana/in.darkages.sultanate.tabaqat-i-nasiri~en-raverty.294.1) Trustworthy persons of ’Arab and ’Ajam have related on this wise, that, during the period of three months that the son of Hulau carried on hostilities before the gate of the fortress of Mayya-farikin, \[the contents of\] every catapult discharged against that fortification from the infidel army came back again, and fell upon the heads of the infidels themselves, until they brought a famous catapult from Mausil. On the first day \[after it was brought\], they prepared within the fortress fire of naft \[naphtha\]. and discharged it \[the composition\] along with the stones of their catapults, and burnt that other catapult. ### [294.2](https://indike.org/pramana/in.darkages.sultanate.tabaqat-i-nasiri~en-raverty.294.2) During this period of several months that fighting went on before the gate of the fortress, every day, according to one statement, by the omnipotence of the Creator, the Most High and Holy, seven horsemen — according to another, six, and according to a third account, less than these — clothed in white garments, and with turbans \[on their heads\], were wont to sally down from the fortress and attack the Mughal forces. They used to despatch about a hundred or two hundred infidels to hell, while no arrow, sword, or lance of the infidels used to injure those white-clad horsemen, until about 10,000 Mughals had been sent to hell by that band. Hulau despatched Ilka Noyan to the presence of his son, saying: "I captured Baghdad in less than a week \[!\], and thou art not able to take a small fortress \[like this\] in this long period of time.” His son sent reply, saying: "Thou didst capture Baghdad through perfidy, whilst here it is necessary to me to wield the sword, and every day so many men are killed. It behoveth not to judge of this place by Baghdad.” When this message reached Hulau he commanded : “ Say ye to my son, ‘ take care to keep out of my sight, otherwise I will undoubtedly slay thee and Hulau took oath and vowed : I will capture this fortress in three days.” Then, with the utmost expedition he proceeded towards Mayyafarikin, and set to to attack the place. ### [294.3](https://indike.org/pramana/in.darkages.sultanate.tabaqat-i-nasiri~en-raverty.294.3) Every day, as on the previous occasions, several men in white garments, with turbans, were wont to come down, and used to despatch more than two or three hundred infidels to hell. For a period of three days conflicts were fought, and, subsequently, for three days more, Hulau continued there, and directed such severe attacks to be made that 10,000 more infidels went to hell. Hulau then intimated \[to the defenders\], saying : “This fortress belongs to Tingri, and therefore I have absolved you, but I have one request to make, and it is this. Show me those white clad horsemen, that I may look upon them, and see what sort of men they are.” ### [294.4](https://indike.org/pramana/in.darkages.sultanate.tabaqat-i-nasiri~en-raverty.294.4) When this message reached the people of the fortress, they with one accord swore the most solemn oath, \[saying\] : “In the same manner that they are unknown to you, we likewise know not that band, and know not who they are.” Hulau replied : “On this account, for the sake of Tingri, I present unto you, as a propitiatory offering, a thousand horses, a thousand camels, a thousand cattle, and a thousand sheep. Send out your confidential people that they may take possession of them.” The people of the fortress replied: “We have no want of any offerings of thine, neither will we send any one out. If thou hast anything to send indeed, send it here, otherwise send the whole to hell,” so that they \[the narrators\] relate, that Hulau left there that number of cattle, horses, camels, and sheep, and that he raised the investment, and went towards a place, a verdant plain, which they call the Sahra-i-Mush \[the Rat's Plain\], where there is soft mud and stagnant water, and sank in it; while some have related that he encountered the army of Sham in battle, and was vanquished, and annihilated along with all his army, and went to hell. ### [294.5](https://indike.org/pramana/in.darkages.sultanate.tabaqat-i-nasiri~en-raverty.294.5) Others again relate that the Malik-un-Nasir of Halab sought help from all the forces of Sham, and from the Farangs \[Franks\]; and that, numerous forces having collected about him, Hulaku, the accursed, is, up to this date, occupied with them, and has, once, sustained a severe defeat; so that, what may be the issue of the matter who shall say? Please God, that it may be victory and success to the Musalmans. ### [294.6](https://indike.org/pramana/in.darkages.sultanate.tabaqat-i-nasiri~en-raverty.294.6) One among the comers from those parts has stated to occasions, hostilities arose between ’Izz-ud-Din, I-bak, and the Malik-un-Nasir of Sham. After reigning seven years, ’Izz-ud-Din, I-bak, had returned home one day from playing at the game of Chaugan, and on reaching his palace ordered the bath to be prepared. He entered it, and, while he was at the bath, Muhsin-i-Jauhari, one of his retainers, accompanied by a slave, entered, and slew him. This happened on the night of Wednesday \[our Tuesday night\], the 11th of Muharram — but some say the 25th, and others that it was the 25th of Rabi’-ul-Awwal — 655 H. The following day, Wednesday, the assassins were taken and hung. ’Izz-ud-Din, I-bak, was a man of talent and valour, but a blood-shedder. The Amirs and Ministers of the kingdom of Misr, on this, set up I-bak's son, the Malik-ul-Mansur, Nur-ud-Din, ’Ali ; but in Rabi’-ul-Akhir, 655 H., Saif-ud-Din, Kuduz, a Turk-man, became his Ata-Bak, and Amir-ul-Umra, and soon after set aside Nur-ud-Din, ’Ali, and under the title of Malik-ul-Muzaffar, usurped the sovereignty of Misr for himself. ### [294.7](https://indike.org/pramana/in.darkages.sultanate.tabaqat-i-nasiri~en-raverty.294.7) A number of the leaders and soldiery of the rulers of Misr and Sham, at this period, had been formerly in the service of Sultan Jalal-ud-Din, Khwarazm Shah. After the battle at Akhlat they had retired into Sham, under their Sardars, Barkat Khan, Malik Ikhtiyar-ud-Din Khan, son of Baltarak or Yaltarak, Malik Saif-ud-Din, Sadik Khan, son of Manguka or Manguek, Malik Nasir-ud-Din, Kashlu Khan, son of Bek-Arsalan, Atlas Khan \[in some I-yal-Arsalan\], and Nasir-ud-Din, Fughamiri — also written Kaimiri, and even Kushairi — and others. See pages 230 and 766. When Hulaku moved towards Sham, they kept out of the way, but, after he left and returned towards Azarbaijan again, they assembled, and turned their faces towards Misr and Kahirah \[vul. Cairo\], and stated their distress to Saif-ud-Din, Kuduz. He treated them generously and liberally, and took them all into his service ; and they became the bulwark of his kingdom. ### [294.8](https://indike.org/pramana/in.darkages.sultanate.tabaqat-i-nasiri~en-raverty.294.8) When the Mughal envoys reached the presence of he consulted with the Khwarazmi Amirs. It appears that they had news of the death of Mangu Ka’an by the time these envoys arrived, and they exhorted him to resist the Mughals, particularly as Kaibuka had been left in those parts \[in Sham — in Halab and Damashk\]. Nasir-ud-Din, Fughamiri or Kaimiri, urged that it was "far better to die fighting honourably than trust to the good faith of Mughals, who never fulfilled their most solemn promises and compacts, as witness the case of Khur Shah ; the Lord of the Faithful, the Khalifah ; Husam-ud-Din, ’Akah ; and the Sahib of Arbil." approved of this, and thought it best, since the Mughals had carried their devastations into so many parts, even as far as the territory of Rum, in such wise that neither seed remained to sow, nor oxen to plough the land, to be beforehand with them, and attack them, and so save Misr from invasion, or perish honourably. The principal of the Amirs of Misr, Bandukdar, advised that the envoys should be treated in Mughal fashion and put to death, and that they should fall unawares upon Kaibuka. The emissaries accordingly were put to death one night, and, the following morning, the troops of Misr set out. A Mughal Amir, Paedar by name, who, with a force of Mughals, formed the advanced post towards Misr, as soon as he became aware of this movement, sent a courier to Kaibuka, who was then at Ba’albak, warning him of their coming. ### [294.9](https://indike.org/pramana/in.darkages.sultanate.tabaqat-i-nasiri~en-raverty.294.9) Kaibuka directed him to hold his ground firmly, and expect his speedy arrival. It so happened, that Kuduz drove Paedar back as far as the banks of the river of ’Asi — the Orontes — and then, with much military skill, disposed of the greater part of this effect, that Hulaku has gone to hell, and that his son his troops in ambush, and, with the remainder, took up his position on a hill near the 'Ayn-i-Jalut— Goliath's Spring — to act on the defensive, Kaibuka having arrived near by with a great army. The Mughals, seeing but a small force posted on a hill, proceeded to attack it, upon which, Kuduz, after a slight opposition, faced about, and pretended to fly. The Mughals, on this, became still more daring, and pursued them, inflicting some loss on the troops of Kuduz; but, when they were fairly drawn into the ambuscade, the troops of Misr attacked them front and rear, and on both flanks, throwing them into confusion. The engagement lasted from early morning to noon ; and Kaibuka was charging the Misris in person, in all directions, and endeavoured to restore order, although advised to fly, to which he replied : "Since death cannot be escaped, better to meet it in fame and honour. If a single man out of this army is able to reach the presence of the Khan, let him say to him that his servant, Kaibuka, did not wish to return ashamed. ### [294.10](https://indike.org/pramana/in.darkages.sultanate.tabaqat-i-nasiri~en-raverty.294.10) Tell him not to take this reverse to heart : let him merely imagine that the wives of his soldiers have not become pregnant this year, and that his mares have not foaled." At this juncture he was brought from his horse to the ground and made captive. After the capture of Kaibuka, the Naeman, the remnant of the Mughal army that remained, concealed themselves in a cane forest, in the Wadi, near by the scene of the battle, and Kuduz gave order to fire it in all directions, which was done ; and they were all burnt. After this, Kaibuka, the Naeman, was brought with his hands bound, before Kuduz, the Turk-man, who said to him : "Kaibuka ! because that thou hast shed a vast deal of innocent blood unjustly, hast destroyed chiefs and great men after getting them into thy power by false and treacherous promises, and hast ruined numbers of ancient families, thou hast now to answer for all this, and suffer the punishment such acts call for." Kaibuka boldly replied, according to the Pro-Mughal writers : "If, at thy hands, I am killed, I hold it to come from the Great God, not from thee ; and, when Hulaku Khan hears of my death, the sea of his wrath will rise into such a storm, that, from Azarbaijan to Misr's gate, the ground will be levelled beneath the hoofs of the Mughals' horses, and they will carry away the sands of Misr in their horses' nose-bags. He has 300,000 \[some have 600,000\] horsemen like unto me ; ### [294.11](https://indike.org/pramana/in.darkages.sultanate.tabaqat-i-nasiri~en-raverty.294.11) account them one the less." Kuduz answered him \[here again was the hereditary enmity between Turks and Mughals : Kuduz was a Turk-man, and Bandkadar, his Wazir, a Kifchak Turk\] : "Boast not so much, perfidious man, of the powers of the horsemen of Turan. They effect their purposes by treachery, perfidy, and fraud : not manfully and openly like the hero, Rustam." After a few more taunts on either side, Kuduz had the head of the Nu-yin Kaibuka struck off and sent to Misr. He then pushed on with his forces, as far as the Furat plundered the Mughal made captives of their women and children, and "carried them away into the house of bondage;" slew the whole of the Mughal Shahnahs and officials located in Sham \[Syria\] by Hulaku, with the exception of the Shahnah of Damashk, who fled the very night the news of the defeat of Kaibuka reached him. The "horsemen of Turan" did not "carry away the sands of Misr in their nose-bags," as Kaibuka vainly boasted, but they carried off defeat again and again. The overthrow of Kaibuka, the Naeman, is not to be found in the Fanakati : these defeats are ignored, and victories only chronicled. Bandkadar above referred to, who was a Turk of Kifchak, under the style and has been set up at the city of Rai in his father’s place but God knows the truth. ### [294.12](https://indike.org/pramana/in.darkages.sultanate.tabaqat-i-nasiri~en-raverty.294.12) title of Malik-ut-Tahir \[called Sultan Firuz, by Guzidah\], dethroned the Malik-ul-Muzaffar, Saif-ud-Din, Kuduz, and succeeded to the sovereignty of Misr, in Zi-Ka'dah, 658 H. To him Ahmad, son of Muhammad, son of Ibrahim, son of Abi-Bakr, son of Khallikan, a native of Arbal \[Arbela of Europeans\], near Mausil, known generally as Ibn Khallikan, dedicated his celebrated biographical work. He went into Misr in 654 H. Fustat, also written Fustat of Misr, was Bandukdar's capital. I must go back a little. On the approach of Hulaku towards Sham, the Malik-un-Nasir, Salah-ud-Din, Yusuf, son of the Malik-ul-'Aziz, fled from Halab, and, taking his family with him, sought safety in the desert of Karak. Subsequently, after Hulaku retired from Sham, Kaibuka was desirous of investing him therein, but the Malik-un-Nasir agreed to submit, on his safety being promised; and he came down, and delivered up that fortress. Kaibuka sent him to the presence of Hulaku, who treated him well, and promised to restore him to the sovereignty over Sham when he, Hulaku, should have subdued Misr. How Mughal promises were fulfilled the following will show. The very day before the news of the Nu-yin Kaibuka's overthrow on the 27th of Ramadan, 657 H., reached Hulaku, near the Ala Tagh, on his way back into Azarbaijan, he had conferred on the Malik-un-Nasir the rulership of Damashk, and had permitted him to set out thither, escorted by 300 Sazi — Shami? — horse. ### [294.13](https://indike.org/pramana/in.darkages.sultanate.tabaqat-i-nasiri~en-raverty.294.13) On the news of the disaster, a great change came over Hulaku; and, at this juncture, a Shami, who was an old enemy of the Malik-un-Nasir, influenced the mind of Hulaku against him. He insinuated that he was not loyally disposed, and related matters which produced such an effect, that 300 Mughal cavalry were forthwith despatched in pursuit of him. The advance party of that force, having overtaken the Malik-un-Nasir, stated that they had orders, from the Badshah, to give him a feast, wherever they might meet him; and, with this plea, got him to alight. They began to ply him with wine, at this entertainment; and, when he was sufficiently intoxicated \[and his escort too, probably\], the Mughals fell upon him, and slew him, and every one of his party, with the single exception of one man, a Maghrabi, a pretended astrologer, whom they allowed to escape. This happened at the close of the year 657 H., but there is another account in which it is stated that the Malik-un-Nasir was put to death in 658 H. \[early in the year—which is much the same\], on receipt of the news of Kaibuka's defeat, together with his son, the Malik-ut-Tahir, and all who belonged to them, and that, thereby, that branch of the Aiyubi Kurdi dynasty terminated. ### [294.14](https://indike.org/pramana/in.darkages.sultanate.tabaqat-i-nasiri~en-raverty.294.14) After this act, the Nu-yin, Ilkan, with a numerous army was despatched into Sham to recover what had been lost, and take vengeance for this defeat. Rashid-ud-Din says, Hulaku intended to have done so himself, but was prevented through the disturbances which arose consequent upon the death of Mangu Ka'an. In the year 658 H., the Shah-zadah, Yushmut, accompanied by the Amir, Suntae, after the affair of Mayya-farikin, by command of his father, proceeded to subdue the territory of Mardin. When Yushmut and his forces appeared before that fortified city, they were amazed on beholding its strength. It is described in the Masalik wa Mamalik, and in Ibn Haukal, as an impregnable --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.darkages.sultanate.tabaqat-i-nasiri~en-raverty.294](https://indike.org/pramana/in.darkages.sultanate.tabaqat-i-nasiri~en-raverty.294) · Pramāṇa