The Foundation of Muslim Rule in India: A History of the Establishment and Progress of the Turkish Sultanate of Delhi, 1206–1290 A.D. c5.23

Language: English

c5.23.1

Apart from these works which are only supplementary in value, our chief original literary sources are very few in number. The earliest among them is the *Tajul-maasir* of Hasan Nizami, completed towards the end of Iltutmish's reign. It contains a narration of the chief military events of the years 588-626/1192-1228, and although extremely florid and ornamental in style, is generally correct in the minimum of facts which it embodies. The author came to India soon after the conquest of Delhi and commenced his work early in the reign of Aibak to whom the first part of the work was dedicated. Except one in the India Office, all the existing manuscripts of the work are defective in one place or another, and none of them contains the last portion covering the years 614 to 626/1217-1228, which Elliot quoted, in his extracts, from a copy in the possession of Nawab Ziauddin of Loharu. Extremely valuable for the early history of the conquest and independent of the *Tajul Maasir*, is the historical portion contained in the Introduction to the book of genealogies of Fakhruddin Mubarakshah, recently discovered and edited by Denison Ross. The author, who was a learned man of repute in the court of Ghazni and later of Delhi, wrote another history of the Ghorides in verse which, though mentioned by Minhaj-i-Siraj, unfortunately does not appear to be any longer extent.

c5.23.2

Another of his works, entitled *Adabul Harb was-Shujaat* and dedicat- to Iltutmish, has been preserved and supplies useful details about the government and military organisation of the newly established kingdom of Delhi. The famous collection of stories entitled *Jawamiul-Hikayat* by Nuruddin Muhammad Aufi, and dedicated to the *wazir* of Iltutmish, is useful only in its preface where Iltutmish’s military operations against Qubachah in 625/1227 are described and of which the author was an eye witness. For a connected contemporary account of the period, however, we are mainly dependant on the *Tabaqat-i-Nasiri* of Minhajuddin Abu Umar b. Sirajuddin al-Juzjani, completed in 658/1260. It is a general history of the world but its value consists in its first-hand account of the Shansabani conquests in India and the subsequent history of the new kingdom in which the author held high ecclesiastical and judicial offices. He was not only a contemporary, but also an actual participater in some of the events narrated in the work, which consequently suffers from personal prejudice. He is extremely biassed towards the Ghorides and the dynasty of Iltutmish and in many places conceals facts unfavourable to his patron Ulugh Khan and the Sultan Nasiruddin Mahmud to whom the work is dedicated. Although generally correct with regard to facts, he is very sparing in supplying details and in some places makes contradictory statements.

c5.23.3

Nevertheless its value as our main original source can hardly be over estimated. Although the author is known to have lived till the accession of Balban, it is unfortunate that he did not continue his history down to the death of Mahmud. The history of the period from 658/1260 to 664/1265 is thus left a perfect blank which has not been filled up by any subsequent writer. Ferishta mentions a work by Ainuddin Bijapuri, entitled *Mulhiqat-i-Tabaqat-i-Nasiri*, from which he draws some of his informations not found in any other known history. But neither the *Mulhiqat* nor its author is known at the present day. Ferishta quotes from another author, named Sadar Jahan Gujrati, the name of whose work is equally unknown. For the rest of the period, consequently, we are exclusively dependent on Ziauddin Barani, the author of *Tarikh-i-Firozshahi*, completed in 1359 and dedicated to Firoz Tughluq. Although he claims to have resumed the history from where Minhaj-i-Siraj left off, his account opens with the first year of Balban's reign. The work is anecdotal in character and is very deficient in dates and details. He is guilty of distortion of facts and of colouring the account with his own personal opinions. He is fond of long discourses which he puts in the mouth of the historical personages and thus strains after effect.

c5.23.4

His work can hardly be called a chronicle in the real sense of the term for facts which, in themselves, are scanty in a work of 600 pages and covering a period of nearly hundred years, are not objectively narrated as in the *Tabaqat-i-Nasiri*. They are presented in a manner designed to suit the particular character in which he wants to reveal the eight sultans treated in the book. The account of Balban's reign, for example, is not a faithful chronicle of events but a character-study in which he is made to appear more as a doctrinaire than as a practical statesman. This method of treating history is illustrated by another of his work, namely *Fatawah-i-Jahandari* written early in the 14th century in which he preaches his own views about the governmental policy and which are identical with those which Balban is reported to have held. Barani was, however, a deligent recorder of administrative details. Having held offices in the government, possibly in the revenue department, he shows an interest in agrarian affairs though his remarks are sometimes ambiguous and disappointingly scrappy.