The Nāṣirī Generations 57: XIV. KHUSRAU SHAH, SON OF BAHRAM SHAH.
Tabakat-i-Nasiri 57
- Language
- English
XIV. KHUSRAU SHAH, SON OF BAHRAM SHAH.
57.1
Sultan Mu’ayyan-ud-Daulah-wa-ud-Din, but, according to some statements, Taj-ud-Daulah, Khusrau Shah, ascended the throne in the year 552 H. As the Maliks and Sultans of Ghur had shaken the empire of the house of Mahmud to its very foundations, and had wrested Ghaznin, Bust, Zamin-i-Dawar, and Tigin-abad out of their hands, and had ravaged and desolated them, feebleness had come upon its government, and its glory and splendour had passed away. When Khusrau Shah ascended the throne he was weak and powerless, and was unable to maintain his rule over the country. A horde of the tribe of Ghuzz, who had acquired dominion and power in Khurasan, in the reign of the august Sultan, Sanjar, who had now passed away, marched an army against Ghaznin. Khusrau Shah was unable to resist them, and he accordingly retired into Hindustan and Ghaznin was lost to him, and fell into the hands of the Ghuzz. They retained possession of that territory for a period of twelve years, until the august Sultan, Ghiyas-ud-Din Muhammad, Sam, led an army from Ghur to Ghaznin, overthrew Burak the Ghuzz chief, retook Ghaznin, and established [his brother] Sultan Mu’izz-ud-Din Muhammad, Sam, the martyr, upon the Ghaznin throne. Khusrau Shah had retired to Lahor, of Hindustan. His reign extended to a period of seven years, after which he died. His sons were Mahmud, Khusrau Malik, and Kai-Khusrau.
57.2
Guzidah says Bahram died in 544 H. after a reign of thirty-two years, while Fanakati asserts that he reigned twenty years, and died in 532 H. The Muntakhab-ut-Tawarikh, which is generally most particular and correct as regards dates, agrees with Guzidah as to the year, but confirms the statement of Yafa’i, Fasih-i, and the Nizam-ut-Tawarikh, as to Khusrau Shah having reigned but one year, after which the tribe of Ghuzz came against Ghaznin, and he, being unable to cope with them, retired into Hind, and took up his residence at Lahor, where he died in 545 H. The Muntakhab-ut-Tawarikh however adds, that, in the Rauzat-us-Safa the year 555 H. is given. Guzidah also says this event occurred in 555 H., and in this Kazi Baizawi agrees. Among more modern works, the Tazkirat-ul-Muluk and Tarikh-i-Alfi state that Bahram died in 547 H., after reigning thirty-five years, and Khusrau Shah in 555 H., and in this the Tabakat-i-Akbari, Badauni, and Firishtah, and other modern writers agree. Our author states that Bahram ascended the throne in 511 H., and died in 552 H., after a reign of forty-one years; and that Khusrau Shah, his son, succeeded, and reigned seven years, but does not give the date of his decease; but, by his statement, it would have been in 559 H., after which date his son, Khusrau Malik, succeeded. Their coins, mentioned farther on, tend to show the contrary.
57.3
As to ’Ala-ud-Din’s making over the government of Ghaznin to his nephews, there is not so much discrepancy in the earlier writers, with the exception of our author, who expressly states that they were detained within the walls of a fortress by him, and were only set at liberty by his son and successor, as mentioned in Section XVII., which see. This was the year after Saif-ud-Din’s death, who, according to Fasih-i, was slain in a battle with the Ghuzz near Balkh, in which same year his nephew, Ghiyas-ud-Din, succeeded him, and inflicted a defeat upon the Ghuzz, with considerable slaughter, and imposed tribute on them.
57.4
After Khusrau Shah comes his son Khusrau Malik, or Malik Khusrau, as he is also styled. Yafa’i, Baizawi, Guzidah, and Fanakati say the dynasty terminated with Khusrau Shah, and make no mention of his son, as his successor. Perhaps they considered him as ruler of the Panjab only. The Tazkirat-ul-Muluk states that Khusrau Malik succeeded his father as ruler of the Panjab in 555 H., and was put to death in 583 H., after reigning twenty-eight years, while the Muntakhab-ut-Tawarikh, which agrees in the date of his accession, says that he was immured in a fortress in Gharjistan in 583 H., and in 588 H. was murdered along with his son Bahram Shah, and the whole of the remainder of the Ghaznawi family then left. Rauzat-us-Safa, Habib-us-Seyr, Firishtah, and others say this occurred in 582 H., and Badauni, who merely gives this ruler a place “because the author of the Tabakat-i-Akbari does so,” as he remarks, says 583 H. Our author states that the Ghuris first appeared before Lahor in 577 H., and gained possession of it in 583 H., thus agreeing with some of the above statements, but mentions the year 598 H., as the year in which Khusrau Malik and all his family were murdered.
57.5
Fasih-i mentions the Ghurians as powerful in Ghaznin and Hind in 566 H., that Ghiyas-ud-Din took that capital from the Ghuzz tribe [What an excellent opportunity this would be, to the “comparative” or rather superlative “philologists,” to have derived the name of Ghaznin from the Ghuzz tribe!] in 569 H., and made it over to his brother, Mu’izz, as Wali. After referring to