The Cambridge History of India, Vol. III: Turks and Afghans v3.c21: Chapter VIII. The Sayyid Dynasty
The Cambridge History of India, Vol. III: Turks and Afghans v3.c21
- Language
- English
Chapter VIII. The Sayyid Dynasty
v3.c21.2
THE claim of Khizr Khān, who founded the dynasty known as the Sayyids, to descent from the prophet of Arabia was dubious, and rested chiefly on its casual recognition by the famous saint Sayyid Jalāl-ud-dīn of Bukhārā. He assumed no title associated with royalty, but was content with the position of viceroy of Shāh Rukh, Tīmūr's fourth son and successor, to whom he is said to have remitted tribute, and with the title of *Rāyāt-i-A‘lā*, or ‘the Exalted Standards.’ His success reunited the Punjab to Delhi, but the turbulent governors and fief-holders who had withheld their allegiance from a lawful master hesitated at first to acknowledge an upstart, until by degrees many of the old nobles of the late dynasty submitted to him and were permitted to retain their former offices and emoluments.
v3.c21.3
The Hindus of the Doāb and Katehr withheld payment of tribute, and in the year of his accession Khizr Khān found it necessary to send an army under Tāj-ul-Mulk to reduce to obedience Har Singh, the rebellious raja of Katehr. The raja fled into the forests of Āonla, but a rigorous blockade compelled him to submit and to give an undertaking to pay tribute in future. Mahābat Khān, governor of Budaun, also made his submission, and Tāj-ul-Mulk recrossed the Ganges and compelled the fief-holders and Hindu chieftains of the lower Doāb, among them Hasan of Rāprī¹, Raja Sarwar of Etāwah, and the raja of Kampil, to own allegiance to their new master. In Chandwār he restored Muslim supremacy, which had been subverted by the Hindus, and returned to Delhi with the tribute, or plunder, which he had collected in the course of his expedition.
v3.c21.4
¹ In 26° 58′ N. and 78° 36′ E. Then an important town.
v3.c21.5
The chronicles of the Sayyid dynasty are chiefly a history of expeditions of this nature. Khizr Khān was the most powerful ruler of a house the influence and dignity of which decayed with an unvarying and unchecked rapidity seldom surpassed in the most ephemeral of eastern dynasties, and even in his reign military force was the normal means of collecting the revenue. Recalcitrants were not treated as rebels, and the only punishment inflicted was the exaction of the taxes due from them and of a promise, which they usually violated on the first opportunity, to make regular remittances in the future. Thus, in July, 1416, a most inconvenient season for the collection of revenue, Tāj-ul-Mulk was sent to Bayāna and Gwalior, not with a view to the reduction of these fortresses but merely to recover, by plundering at random the unfortunate cultivators, the equivalent of the tribute which should have been paid. With this, and with arrears of tribute which he collected from Kampila and Patiālī, he returned to Delhi.
v3.c21.6
In 1415 Malik Sadhū Nādira had been sent to Sirhind as the deputy of Khizr Khān's son Mubārak, on whom that district had been bestowed, and in the following year the Turkish landholders, kinsmen and dependants of Bairam Khān, the former governor, rose under the leadership of Malik Tughān, put him to death, and occupied the fortress. Zīrak Khān was sent against them and pursued them across the Sutlej and as far as the lower slopes of the Himālaya, but did not venture to continue the pursuit into the mountains, and returned to Delhi.
v3.c21.7
In the same year Khizr Khān himself took the field with the object of chastising Ahmad I of Gujarāt who, by pursuing his rebellious uncles to Nāgaur, which was nominally, at least, subject to Delhi, had violated the frontiers of the kingdom. Ahmad, on learning of his approach, fled into Gujarāt, and Khizr Khān retired, receiving on his homeward march tribute from Iliyās Khān, the Muslim governor of Jhāīn, the raja of Gwalior, and his own former protector, Shams Khān Auhadī of Bayāna, whom he might well have spared.
v3.c21.8
On his arrival at his capital he learnt that Tughān and his followers had returned to Sirhind and were besieging Malik Kamāl Badhan, who had been appointed deputy of Mubārak in the place of the murdered Nādira. On this occasion Zīrak Khān was more successful, for he overtook the fugitive Turks at Pāel, where Malik Tughān submitted and surrendered his son as an hostage for his good behaviour, for which subservience he was rewarded with the fief of Jullundur.
v3.c21.9
Early in 1418 Har Singh of Katehr was again in revolt, and was on this occasion brought to bay and suffered a complete defeat at the hands of Tāj-ul-Mulk. He fled, and was pursued into the hills of Kumāon, where Tāj-ul-Mulk, unable to seize the object of his pursuit, contented himself with the ignoble but customary satisfaction of plundering the people amongst whom the rebel had found an asylum, and returned to the plains. From Katehr he marched to Etāwah, and there besieged Raja Sarwar, who was again in rebellion. Unable to reduce the fortress, he plundered the inhabitants of the district and returned to Delhi in May, but his devastating progress, which had resembled rather the raid of a brigand chief than an expedition for the permanent establishment of order, had so exasperated the people of the region through which he had passed that before the end of the year Khizr Khān found it necessary to follow in the tracks of his lieutenant, and the record of his progress exhibits both the frailty of the bond between him and his subjects and the futility of the means which he employed for the establishment of his authority. He was compelled to use force against the people of Koīl, within eighty miles of his capital, and then, crossing the Ganges, laid waste the district of Sambhal. His proceedings so alarmed Mahābat Khān of Budaun, who was in his camp and was, perhaps, conscious of shortcomings in his administration or apprehensive of the discovery of his traffickings with the rebels, that he fled and shut himself up in Budaun, which Khizr Khān besieged for six months without success. For the history of this and the following reign the sole original authority is an encomiast of the Sayyids, and it is impossible to fathom the undercurrent of politics or to estimate the difficulties with which Khizr Khān was confronted, but Mahābat Khān was an old noble of the late dynasty, and there were in the royal camp several of his former comrades who had formally submitted to the new order of things, and in June, 1419, Khizr Khān discovered the existence among them of a conspiracy to which Mahābat Khān was doubtless a party, and, in order to separate his enemies, raised the siege and returned towards Delhi. On June 14 he halted on the banks of the Ganges and put the leading conspirators, Qavām-ul-Mulk and Ikhtiyār Khān, to death.
v3.c21.10
In the following year he was reminded of his early misfortunes by the appearance in Bajwāra, near Hoshiārpur, of an impostor who pretended to be that Sārang Khān who had expelled him from Multān. The real Sārang Khān had died in captivity shortly after his surrender to Pīr Muhammad, and this fact must have been widely known, but interest may lead the intelligent, as ignorance leads the vulgar, to espouse the cause of a pretender; and the name of the man who had driven before him, as chaff before the wind, the occupant of the throne of Delhi was well chosen by the impostor. Khizr Khān was, however, well served. A family of the Lodī clan of the great Ghilzai or Khaljī tribe had recently been domiciled in India, and its leader, Malik Sultān Shāh Bahrām, subsequently styled Islām Khān, by which title he may now conveniently be known, had been appointed governor of Sirhind. He was dispatched against the pretender, who marched to the Sutlej to meet him but was defeated and compelled to retire. After the battle Islām Khān was joined by Zīrak Khān of Sāmāna and Malik Tughān of Jullundur, and before their overwhelming force the impostor fled, by way of Rūpar, which he had made his headquarters, into the mountains. He was ineffectually pursued but emerged and fell a victim to the perfidy of Malik Tughān, who inveighed him into his power and treacherously put him to death, being prompted to this act rather by cupidity than by loyalty, for the impostor had amassed great wealth.
v3.c21.11
In the same year Tāj-ul-Mulk was dispatched on another foray, dignified by the name of an expedition against rebels, into the districts of Koīl and Etāwah. Raja Sarwar was besieged in his fortress, but no important military success was gained. The wretched inhabitants of the country were, as usual, plundered and Sarwar purchased the retreat of the raiders by a contribution to the royal coffers and one of his oft-repeated promises to pay with more regularity in the future. On returning from Etāwah Tāj-ul-Mulk plundered Chandwār and invaded Katehr, where he compelled Mahābat Khān to pay the tribute due from him.
v3.c21.12
In August news was received at the capital that Malik Tughān, whose resources had been replenished by the plunder of the pretender, was again in rebellion and had marched from Jullundur to Sirhind where, having plundered the country, he was besieging the fortress. Malik Khair-ud-dīn was sent to its relief and, marching by way of Sāmāna, was there joined by Zīrak Khān. Tughān raised the siege of Sirhind and retreated, and Khair-ud-dīn and Zīrak Khān pursued him across the Sutlej and compelled him to seek refuge with Jasrat the Khokar, the son of that Shaidh khā who had established his independence in the reign of Mahmūd Shāh. Jasrat had been carried off into captivity by Tīmūr, with his father, but on the conqueror’s death had regained his freedom and returned to his country, where having established for himself an independent principality of considerable extent, he had gained over the army of Kashmīr¹ a victory which fostered in his mind extravagant notions of his power and importance and inspired in him the belief that the throne of Delhi was within his reach. Tughān’s fief of Jullundur was bestowed upon Zīrak Khān.
v3.c21.13
¹ See Chapter XII.
v3.c21.14
In 1421 Khizr Khān marched into Mewāt to assert his authority in that province, captured and destroyed the former stronghold of Bahādur Nāhir and received the submission of most of the inhabitants.
v3.c21.15
He then turned to Gwalior, and on January 13, during his march thither, his faithful minister, Tāj-ul-Mulk, died, and his office was bestowed upon his son, Malik Sikandar Tuhfa, who received the title of Malik-ush-Sharq. The raja of Gwalior took refuge within his fortress and by means of the usual dole and the usual empty promise relieved his subjects from the depredations of the royal troops. Thence the king marched to Etāwah, where Sarwar Singh had lately died and his son was prepared to purchase peace on the customary terms, and here he fell sick and hastened back to Delhi, where he died on May 20, 1421, having designated his son Mubārak Khān his heir. He is extolled as a charitable ruler but his charity was confined within the narrow limits of his territories and to the members of his own faith.
v3.c21.16
Mubārak, beside whose weakness that of his father assumes the appearance of strength, found it no longer necessary to feign vassalage to any of the rulers who now governed the fragments of Tīmūr's vast empire, and freely used the royal title of Shāh, which his father had never assumed. On his coinage he was styled Mu'izz-ud-dīn Mubārak Shāh, and another unmistakable claim to complete independence was exhibited in his profession of allegiance to the puppet Caliph alone. He confirmed most of the nobles in the fiefs and appointments which they had held during the late reign, but, conscious of his own weakness, pursued the fatuous policy of perpetually transferring them from one fief to another. He perhaps attained his object of preventing any one noble from acquiring a dangerous local influence in any district of the kingdom, but it was attained at the cost of efficient administration, and the discontent of the nobles, harassed by these vexatious transfers, led finally to his downfall. In pursuance of this policy Malik Rajab Nādira, son of the late Sadhū Nādira, was transferred from Fīrūzābād and Hānsī to Dīpālpūr, to make room for the king's nephew, Malik Bada, who eventually succeeded him as Muhammad Shāh.
v3.c21.17
The early days of the reign were disturbed by the activity of Jasrat the Khokar, who, with the interests of the fugitive Tughān as a pretext and the throne of Delhi as a lure, crossed the Sutlej and attacked Rāi Kamāl-ud-dīn, a vassal of Delhi, at Talwandī. Rāi Fīrūz, a neighbouring fief-holder, fled towards the Jumna, and Jasrat occupied Lūdhiāna, ravaged the country eastwards as far as Rūpar, and, returning across the Sutlej, besieged Zīrak Khān in Jullundur, when a composition not very creditable to either party was effected. Zīrak Khān betrayed the interests of his master by the surrender of the fortress and Jasrat betrayed his guest by sending his son to Delhi as an hostage for his father’s good behaviour, and his former adversary, Zīrak, by seizing and imprisoning him. With Jullundur as a base Jasrat again crossed the Sutlej and on June 22 appeared before Sirhind, now held for Mubārak Shāh by Islām Khān Lodī. In July, although the rainy season was at its height, Mubārak Shāh marched to the relief of Sirhind, and as he approached Sāmāna Jasrat, after releasing Zīrak Khān, who rejoined his master, retreated to Lūdhiāna, whither Mubārak Shāh followed him. Jasrat, having collected all available boats, crossed the flooded river and encamped in security on the opposite bank. As the rains abated Mubārak Shāh retired, in real or feigned apprehension, along the bank of the river to Qabūlpūr, while Jasrat, who had failed to observe that a force had been dispatched up stream to search for a ford, followed him. The two armies were still facing one another when Jasrat learnt that this force had crossed the river and, fearing lest his retreat should be cut off, retreated precipitately towards Jullundur, but was unable to rest there owing to the vigour of Mubārak’s pursuit, during which the fugitives suffered heavy losses, and retired to the lower slopes of the Kashmīr highlands. Bhīm, raja of Jammū, guided the royal army to the principal stronghold of the Khokars, which was captured, with heavy loss to the defenders, and destroyed, but Jasrat escaped. From the hills Mubārak Shāh marched to Lahore, ruinous and deserted since its capture by Tīmūr’s troops and spent a month in replacing its once formidable defences by a mud fort. On returning to Delhi he left Malik Mahmūd Hasan, who had distinguished himself at the passage of the Sutlej and was henceforward the ablest and most active of his nobles, with a force of 2000 horse to hold the restored outpost of the kingdom. By May, 1422, Jasrat had reassembled his army, descended from the hills, and attempted to carry the new citadel by assault, but was repulsed and forced to retire. For more than a month he harassed Mahmūd Hasan by desultory skirmishes, but, finding his labour vain, retired to Kalānaur, his principal place of residence in the plains. Here he met Raja Bhīm of Jammū, who was marching to the assistance of Mahmūd Hasan, and after one battle made peace with him and retired towards the Beās. In the meantime Mubārak Shāh had dispatched to the aid of Mahmūd Hasan the minister, Sikandar Tuhfa, who crossed the Rāvī, once more drove Jasrat into the hills, and marched to Lahore, where he was welcomed by Mahmūd Hasan on September 28. Malik Rajab Nādira of Dīpālpur arrived at Lahore at the same time, and the three nobles marched to Kalānaur, where they were met by Rāja Bhīm, to punish Jasrat’s presumption. They invaded the Khokar country, but Jasrat had escaped into the higher ranges, and after plundering the homes of his tribesmen the three nobles returned to Lahore.
v3.c21.18
During the absence of the minister, Sikandar Tuhfa, from the capital the governor of Delhi, Sarvar-ul-Mulk, induced the feeble king to order, for the benefit of himself and his son, a redistribution of various important offices. Sikandar Tuhfa was dismissed from the office of minister, to make way for Sarvar-ul-Mulk, who was succeeded as governor of Delhi by his son Yūsuf. Sikandar Tuhfa received the fief of Lahore as compensation for the loss of the first post in the kingdom, but his transfer thither necessitated the removal of Mahmūd Hasan, who was transferred to Jullundur, but was ordered for the time to wait on Mubārak Shāh with the contingent maintained from his fief. These changes bred much discontent, to which may be traced the assassination of Mubārak Shāh, which took place twelve years later.
v3.c21.19
In 1423 Mubārak Shāh once more invaded Katehr, collected tribute from the people in the usual fashion, and, crossing the Ganges, entered the lower Doāb, where he treated the Rājputs with great severity and behaved as though he were in an enemy’s country. Zīrak Khān was left as governor of Kampil, but his ill-treatment of the Hindus so alarmed the son of Sarvar Singh that he fled from the camp to Etāwah and successfully defended the town against Malik Khair-ud-dīn Tuhfa, brother of Sikandar Tuhfa, who was fain to raise the siege on receiving the usual nugatory promise of tribute.
v3.c21.20
Recent successes encouraged Jasrat the Khokar again to invade the kingdom. He had defeated, and slain in battle his old enemy, Rāja Bhīm of Jammū and now overran and plundered the districts of Dīpālpūr and Lahore. Sikandar Tuhfa marched against him, but retired before him, leaving him free to prepare for more extensive aggressions. At about the same time it was reported that ‘Alā-ul-Mulk, governor of Multān, had died and that Shaikh ‘Alī, the deputy in Kābul of Suyurghātmish, the fourth son of Shāhrukh, who had succeeded to the greater part of Tīmūr’s empire, proposed to invade and ravage the western Punjab and Sind. Malik Mahmūd Hasan was sent to Multān, and restored some degree of confidence to the people who had been plundered by Shaikh ‘Alī’s troops.
v3.c21.21
Towards the end of the year Mubārak was obliged to march to the aid of Gwalior, which was besieged by Hūshang Shāh of Mālwa.
v3.c21.22
Hūshang, on learning that Mubārak was marching towards Dholpur, raised the siege and marched to the southern bank of the Chambal, so that when Mubārak reached the northern bank he found most of the fords held by the troops of Mālwa, but he discovered an unguarded ford, crossed the river, and permitted his advanced guard to attack some outlying parties of Hūshang’s army. A trivial advantage was gained and some prisoners and plunder were taken, but neither party desired a general engagement or a protracted campaign, and negotiations ended in the retreat of Hūshang to Māndū. Mubārak returned to Delhi in June, 1424, and in the following cold weather marched to Katehr, extorted three years’ arrears of tribute from the raja, Har Chand, plundered the country as far as the foot of the Kumāon hills, and, marching down the banks of the Rāmgangā, crossed the Ganges and entered the Doāb. It had been his intention to remain in the neighbourhood of Kanauj, and to establish his authority to the south of that district, but the country had suffered from famine and would neither repay rapine nor support the troops, and he was compelled to return. He turned aside with the object of crushing a rebellion in Mewāt, but the rebels laid waste their villages in the plains and retired into their mountain fastnesses, and the king was obliged to retire, but returned in 1425, when the rebels under Jallū, or Jalāl Khān, and Qaddū, or ‘Abd-ul-Qādir repeated their tactics of the preceding year. Mubārak on this occasion followed them into the hills, drove them from one stronghold, and pursued them to Alwar, where they surrendered. Jalāl Khān escaped, but Qaddū was carried prisoner to Delhi.
v3.c21.23
In 1426 Mubārak traversed Mewāt, plundering the people, on his way to Bayāna to attack Muhammad Khān, a rebellious member of the Auhadī family. Most of the rebel’s men deserted to the royal standard and Muhammad Khān was sent, with all the members of his family, to Delhi, where he was interned in Jahānnumā. The district of Bayāna was divided into two fiefs, Bayāna itself being granted to Muqbil Khān and Sīkrī, later to be known as Fathpūr, to Khair-ud-dīn Tuhfa. Mubārak marched from Bayāna to Gwalior and returned to Delhi, which he reached in March, 1427, by way of the eastern bank of the Jumna. Shortly after his arrival at Delhi Muhammad Khān Auhadī and his family escaped from the capital and took refuge in Mewāt, where many of his former followers assembled around him. Muqbil was absent from Bayāna on an expedition, and Khair-ud-dīn Tuhfa held the fortress with an inadequate garrison. Muhammad Khān was joined by all classes of the inhabitants and Khair-ud-dīn was obliged to evacuate the fortress and retire to Delhi. Malik Mubāriz was sent from Delhi to recover Bayāna and besieged the place, but the garrison defended it obstinately while Muhammad Auhadī withdrew to Jaunpur to seek help of Ibrāhīm Shāh. Mubārak Shāh recalled Mubāriz and marched in person to Bayāna, but before he could form the siege was disturbed by an appeal from Qādir Khān of Kālpī, who implored his aid against Ibrāhīm Shāh, who was marching on Kālpī with the intention of annexing it. Mubārak abandoned for the time all intention of reducing Bayāna and turned against Ibrāhīm, who, having plundered the district of Bhongāon, near Mainpurī, was preparing to march on Budaun. Mubārak crossed the Jumna, and, on reaching Atraulī, sixteen miles from Koīl, learnt that Mukhtass Khān, Ibrāhīm’s brother, was threatening Etāwah. Mahmūd Hasan was detached against him and forced him to join forces with his brother, and the army of Jaunpur traversed the Doāb and crossed the Jumna near Etāwah with a view to supporting the garrison of Bayāna. Mubārak crossed the river near Chandwār (now Fīrūzābād) and Ibrāhīm, in February, 1428, marched towards Bayāna and encamped on the banks of the Gambhīr, while Mubārak encamped at a distance of ten miles from him. Neither was anxious to risk a battle and for some time the operations were confined to affairs of outposts, but on April 2 Ibrāhīm drew up his army for battle, and Mubārak, who lacked even the ordinary merit of physical courage, deputed his nobles to lead his army into the field. The two armies fought, with moderate zeal and without any decisive result, from midday until sunset, when each retired to its own camp, but on the following day Ibrāhīm retreated towards Jaunpur. He was followed for some distance, but Mubārak would not permit the pursuit to be pressed, and ordered that it should be abandoned. His encomiast praises his forbearance towards fellow Muslims, but we may believe that he did not choose to provoke too far an adversary whose strength he had not fully gauged.
v3.c21.24
Mubārak then marched to Gwalior on his usual errand, and, after collecting an instalment of tribute, returned towards Delhi by way of Bayāna, still held by Muhammad Auhadī, who, on May 11, evacuated the fortress and retired into Mewāt. Mahmūd Hasan was invested with the fief of Bayāna and Mubārak returned to Delhi, where he found that his prisoner Qaddū, the grandson of Bahādur Nāhir, had been in secret correspondence with Ibrāhīm during the late campaign. He was put to death and his execution led to a fresh rebellion in Mewāt headed by his brother, Jalāl Khān. Sarwar-ul-Mulk, the minister, who was appointed to suppress it, followed the rebels into the hills in which they had, after their manner, taken refuge and returned to Delhi on their paying him the empty compliment of a formal submission to his master.
v3.c21.25
Jasrat the Khokar was again active, and in August news was received that he was besieging Kalānaur and had driven back to Lahore Sikandar Tuhfa, who had attempted to relieve the beleaguered town. Emboldened by his success he attacked Jullundur, and though he failed to capture the town he plundered the district and carried off into slavery large numbers of its inhabitants. Zīrak Khān from Sāmāna and Islām Khān Lodī from Sirhind marched to support Sikandar Tuhfa at Lahore, but before they could reach him he had succeeded in effecting a junction with Rāi Ghālib, the defender of Kalānaur, and had defeated Jasrat, driven him into the hills, and recovered all his spoil.
v3.c21.26
Mahmūd Hasan, having restored the royal authority in Bayāna, returned to Delhi, and thence to Hissar, his former fief, and Mubārak invaded the plains of Mewāt, where Jalāl Khān and other chieftains of the country presented their tribute and were received at court.
v3.c21.27
In July, 1429, Rajab Nādira died at Multān and Mahmūd Hasan received the title of ‘Imād-ul-Mulk and was transferred to that province, the government of which he had formerly held. In the cold weather Mubārak marched to Gwalior and thence against the contumacious raja of Athgāth¹, who was defeated and compelled to take refuge in the hills of Mewāt. His country was plundered and many of his people carried off into slavery, and Mubārak marched to Rāprī, expelled the son of Hasan Khān, and bestowed the fief upon Malik Hamzah. On his way back to Delhi he learnt of the death, at Bhātinda, of Sayyid Sālim, who had served his house for thirty years. Mubārak, who seems to have been unacquainted with the true character of the Sayyid, and was certainly ignorant of that of his offspring, rewarded the father’s long service by bestowing on his elder son the title of Sālim Khān and on the younger that of Shujā‘-ul-Mulk. The Sayyid had been both rapacious and parsimonious, and during his long tenure of the lucrative fief of Bhātinda had amassed enormous wealth. The central situation of this district in the province of which Khizr Khān had enjoyed the virtual sovereignty for some time before his establishment on the throne of Delhi had secured it from attack from without and from demands for contributions to the defence of the frontiers. The customary law of Muhammadan states in India, which made the ruler the heir of his officials, was especially formidable to those who had defrauded their sovereign and oppressed his subjects, and Sālim Khān and Shujā‘-ul-Mulk, who were in the king’s power, attempted to secure their wealth by instigating Fūlād, a Turkish slave of their late father, to rebel in Bhātinda. Their complicity in the rebellion was discovered, they were thrown into prison, and Yūsuf, son of Sarvar-ul-Mulk, and Rāi Hansū Bhatī were sent to treat with Fūlād and to induce him to surrender the treasure, but Fūlād, who had no intention of surrendering it either to the king or to his late master’s heirs, amused the envoys for a time with fair words and promises and, having thrown them off their guard, made a sudden attack on their troops, defeated them and was further enriched by the plunder of their camp. Zīrak Khān, Malik Kālū, and Islām Khān Lodī were then sent to besiege the rebel in Bhātinda. Fūlād announced that he was prepared to consider terms of submission provided that negotiations were conducted through ‘Imād-ul-Mulk of Multān, in whom he had confidence, and ‘Imād-ul-Mulk was summoned and arrived at court in August, 1430. He was sent to Bhātinda, but it was discovered that the rebel’s offer to treat with him had been merely a device to gain time, the negotiations broke down, and he returned to Multān after urging the officers before Bhātinda to continue the siege.
v3.c21.28
¹ On the Chambal, in 26° 48′ N. and 78° 46′ E.
v3.c21.29
Fūlād, after holding out for six months, sent a large sum of money to Shaikh ‘Alī of Kābul and summoned him to his aid. In January, 1431, he left Kābul and marched to Bhātinda, and on his arriving within twenty miles of the town Mubārak’s nobles hurriedly raised the siege and fled to their fiefs. Fūlād issued from the fortress to meet him, paid him 200,000 *tangas* as the price of his assistance, and entrusted his family to his care, in order that they might be removed to a place of safety. A passing remark of the historian of this reign throws much light on the position of affairs in the Punjab during Mubārak’s futile attempts to establish his authority in the Doāb, the trans-Gangetic region, and the south-eastern districts of his kingdom. Sikandar Tuhfa paid to Shaikh ‘Alī ‘the sum which he had been wont to pay him annually,’ and thus induced him to refrain from molesting Lahore during his retreat. From the reference to the yearly payment of blackmail it is clear that the kingdom had been exposed, during its intestine troubles, to the danger of invasion from the direction of Lahore. In the direction of Multān the worthless Mubārak was better served, and when Shaikh ‘Alī, during his retreat, attacked a fortress within the limits of that province, ‘Imād-ul-Mulk marched to Talamba and forced him to relinquish his prey. Unfortunately ‘Imād-ul-Mulk received orders to retire to Multān, and Shaikh ‘Alī, attributing his retreat to cowardice or a consciousness of weakness, crossed the Rāvī near Khatībpur, plundered the country along the banks of the Chenāb, and marched to within twenty miles of Multān. ‘Imād-ul-Mulk sent Islām Khān Lodī to stem his advance, but Islām Khān’s force, while still on the march, came unexpectedly on the invaders, and was defeated before it could form for attack or defence. Islām Khān was slain, and the remnant of his force fled back to Multān. Shaikh ‘Alī advanced to Khairābād, near Multān, and encamped there on May 15, 1431. On the following day he advanced to attack one of the gates, but his troops were repulsed by a sortie of the garrison, and he did not resume the offensive until June 8, when he made a second attempt to carry the place by assault, but was again repulsed with heavy loss, and thereafter contented himself with harassing the garrison in a series of skirmishes until the arrival of a strong relieving force which attacked him and drove him within his entrenched camp, whence he fled across the Rāvī¹. He was pursued, and numbers of his army perished in the river and by the swords of the pursuers, but he eventually threw himself into Shorkot, leaving all his horses, camels, and equipment in the hands of the victors. ‘Imād-ul-Mulk and the army which had marched to his relief followed the fugitives to Shorkot and Shaikh ‘Alī fled with a small force to Kābul, leaving his nephew, Amīr Muzaffar, with the remainder of his army in Shorkot. Further operations were stayed by the receipt of orders from the king, recalling to Delhi the relieving force, and most imprudently removing from Multān the able and energetic ‘Imād-ul-Mulk, who was relieved by Khair-ud-dīn Tuhfa. Misfortunes now fell thick and fast on Mubārak. Jasrat the Khokar again rebelled and marched on Jullundur. Sikandar Tuhfa, marching against him, met him on the Dhaulī Waīn, but was defeated and taken alive, and Jasrat marched to Lahore and besieged the city, which was defended by Sayyid Najm-ud-dīn, Sikandar’s lieutenant, and Malik Khushkhabar, his slave. Meanwhile Shaikh ‘Alī of Kābul had again invaded the Multān province and on November 13 captured Talamba, occupied the citadel, threw the leading citizens into prison, and plundered all the surrounding country. At the same time Fūlād, who still held Bhātinda, led an expedition against Rāi Fīrūz, whose fief lay in the neighbourhood, slew him and plundered the district which he had governed.
v3.c21.30
¹ Yahyā b. Ahmad and his copyists have ‘the Jihlam,’ but the Jhelum, or Chenāb, as it is called below its confluence with that river, has always flowed to the west of Shorkot, to reach which Shaikh ‘Alī must have crossed the Rāvī. Had he crossed the Chenāb he would have placed that river between himself and Shorkot.
v3.c21.31
Mubārak, on receiving news of these calamities, acted with unusual vigour and decision, and, having dispatched Sarvar-ul-Mulk in advance, with a force sufficient to check, if not to crush, Fūlād, left Delhi, in January, 1432, for Lahore. The sudden flight of his enemies occasioned a modification of his plans. Jasrat raised the siege of Lahore and fled into the mountains, carrying with him his captive, Sikandar Tuhfa, and Shaikh ‘Alī evacuated Talamba and retreated to Shorkot. Mubārak advanced no further, but bestowed the fief of Lahore on Nusrat Khān Gurgandāz and sent Sarvar-ul-Mulk to Lahore to escort the family of Sikandar to Delhi.
v3.c21.32
In August Jasrat was again active. He issued from his stronghold, plundered some districts in the plains, and attacked Gurgandāz in Lahore, but, being worsted by him, retired again into the mountains. Mubārak, who had marched as far as Pānīpat on hearing of his renewed activity, returned to Delhi on learning of his retreat, and sent ‘Imād-ul-Mulk into the districts of Bayāna and Gwalior. In September he again left the capital to quell some disturbances in the Sāmāna district, but returned to Delhi on hearing of his mother’s illness and arrived in time to be present at her obsequies. Having rejoined his army he sent Sarvar-ul-Mulk with a large force against Fūlād, and Sarvar-ul-Mulk, after completing all dispositions for the siege of Sāmāna, left Zīrak Khān in charge of the operations and returned to the royal camp at Pānīpat. Mubārak now abandoned his intention of taking the field in person, and sent Malik Ilāhdād Lodī to supersede Gurgandāz in the fiefs of Lahore and Jullundur, but as he was approaching the latter town Jasrat fell upon him at Bajwārā, near Hoshiārpur, defeated him, and drove him into the lower slopes of the mountains.
v3.c21.33
In November Mubārak invaded Mewāt, where Jalāl Khān was again in revolt, and drove him from one stronghold to another, compelling him to purchase peace on the usual terms of a present payment and promise of amendment. He was joined by ‘Imād-ul-Mulk on his return from his successful foray into the Bayāna district and dispatched Kamāl-ud-dīn and other officers on similar raids into the districts of Etāwah and Gwalior, returning, in January, 1433, to Delhi, where he learnt that Shaikh ‘Alī was again preparing to march to the relief of Bhātinda, and dispatched ‘Imād-ul-Mulk with reinforcements for the besieging army. This measure curtailed the extent of Shaikh ‘Alī’s activity, but he issued from Shorkot, plundered the villages on the banks of the Rāvī, enslaved their inhabitants, and marched on Lahore, which was held for the king by Yūsuf, son of Sarvar-ul-Mulk, and Malik Ismā‘īl.
v3.c21.34
These two officers, after enduring a short siege, discovered that the fidelity of the citizens, which had been sorely tried by constant attacks against which the royal garrison could ill protect them, was uncertain, and fled from the city with their troops. During their flight they suffered heavy losses at the hands of a force dispatched in pursuit of them by Shaikh ‘Alī, who plundered Lahore, placed a garrison of 10,000 horse in the city, marched to Dīpālpūr, where Yūsuf had taken refuge, and besieged that town. ‘Imād-ul-Mulk, who was still besieging Bhātinda, sent his brother, Malik Ahmad, to the relief of Yūsuf, and Shaikh ‘Alī raised the siege of Dīpālpūr, but occupied all the towns lying between that place and Lahore.
v3.c21.35
Mubārak at length perceived that affairs in the north-western provinces of his kingdom demanded his personal attention, and marched to Sāmāna, where he was joined by Kamāl-ud-dīn and the other officers who had been sent to Etāwah and Gwalior, and advanced to Talwandī, where ‘Imād-ul-Mulk joined him from Bhātinda. The officers who still remained before that town were summoned to the royal camp, and Mubārak advanced to the Rāvī. Here Sikandar Tuhfa, who had escaped from Jasrat’s custody, appeared before him and received the ill-deserved title of Shams-ul-Mulk and a grant of the fiefs of Lahore, Dīpālpūr, and Jullundur. In the meantime Shaikh ‘Alī had retreated across the Chenāb, and, as Shams-ul-Mulk advanced to take possession of his new fiefs, fled precipitately, leaving most of his horses, and his baggage, camp equipage, and booty, which were already bestowed in boats for transport across the Chenāb, in his enemy’s hands. Mubārak crossed the Rāvī at Talamba and besieged Shorkot, which, after the lapse of a month, was surrendered to him by Amīr Muzaffar, Shaikh ‘Alī’s nephew, who secured his safety by large gifts, and by bestowing a daughter in marriage on Muhammad Khān, the nephew and adopted son of Mubārak. The king then retired towards Multān after dispatching Shams-ul-Mulk to Lahore, where the garrison left by Shaikh ‘Alī purchased for itself a safe retreat by the surrender of the town and citadel. Mubārak, after retiring to Dīpālpūr, wisely removed Shams-ul-Mulk from the important fiefs which he had recently bestowed upon him to Bayāna, and conferred Lahore, Dīpālpūr, and Jullundur on ‘Imād-ul-Mulk. On his return to Delhi he discovered that Sarvar-ul-Mulk had for some time past been remiss in the performance of his duties as minister of the kingdom, and appointed Kamāl-ud-dīn as his coadjutor in the hope that the two would work in harmony. He was disappointed, for the influence of the abler and more energetic Kamāl-ud-dīn soon eclipsed that of Sarvar-ul-Mulk, who, resenting his virtual supersession in office, formed a faction consisting of some discontented Khatrīs, Mīrān Sadr, the deputy muster-master-general, Qāzī ‘Abd-us-Samad Khān, a royal chamberlain, and others, and conspired against the king’s life.
v3.c21.36
On November 1 the king founded Mubārakābād, on the Jumna, and while superintending the building of this town learnt that the protracted siege of Bhātinda had at length been brought to a successful conclusion. The news was confirmed by the receipt of the head of the rebel, Fūlād, which had been severed from his body after his capture by Mīrān Sadr. He marched to Bhātinda and, after extinguishing the smouldering embers of disaffection, learnt that a dispute had arisen between Ibrāhīm Shāh of Jaunpur and Hūshang Shāh of Mālwa regarding the town and district of Kālpī, which had ever been included, in name at least, in the dominions of Delhi, and that they were marching to decide the question by an appeal to arms. He could not but resent an insult so gross and returned to Delhi to assemble his forces. On his way to Kālpī he turned aside to visit Mubārakābād, and here, on February 19, 1434, Sarvar-ul-Mulk found the opportunity which he had been seeking. Mīrān Sadr relieved the royal bodyguard with a force of his own troops, and while the king was preparing for prayers entered his apartment on the pretext of taking leave of him, posting Sidhāran, one of the Khatrīs, at the door to prevent the entrance of any person not privy to the plot. While he engaged the king in conversation Sidhū Pāl, another Khatrī, cut him down with his sword, and Rānū and other Hindus rushed in and completed the bloody work.
v3.c21.37
On the death of Mubārak Shāh, who had left no son, the nobles at Delhi raised to the throne Muhammad, the son of his brother Farīd. Sarvar-ul-Mulk’s complicity in the murder of the late king could not be concealed, but as he held possession of the royal treasury, armoury, and elephants he was too powerful to be touched, and though he was suspected of designs on the throne it was necessary, for the time, to confirm him in his office, and he received the title of Khānjahān, while his accomplice, Mīrān Sadr, received that of Mu‘īn-ul-Mulk. Kamāl-ud-dīn, whose appointment had been the cause of Sarvar-ul-Mulk’s disaffection, and others of Mubārak’s nobles were desirous of avenging his death, but were compelled to bide their time, and Sarvar-ul-Mulk, with a view to intimidating them executed one officer of high rank and imprisoned others, seized all the vacant fiefs in the kingdom and distributed them among his creatures. Bayāna, Amroha, Nārnaul, Guhrām, and some districts in the Doāb were granted to Sidhāran, Sidhū Pāl, and their relatives who had been personally concerned in the murder of the late king. Sidhū Pāl sent his slave Rānū, another assassin, to Bayāna to collect the revenue, but Yūsuf Khān Auhadī marched from Hindaun to meet him, and when Rānū attempted to take possession of the fort attacked, defeated, and slew him.
v3.c21.38
The nobles who still held their fiefs made preparations for overthrowing Sarvar-ul-Mulk. Malik Ilāhdād Lodī, now governor of Sambhal and Āhār, Malik Chaman of Budaun, Amīr ‘Alī Gujarātī, Amīr Kambal, and others agreed to stand or fall together and raised the standard of revolt. Sarvar-ul-Mulk assembled an army to crush them, and appointed to its command Kamāl-ud-dīn, who had dissembled his hostility, associating with him his own son Yūsuf, Sayyid Khān, and Sidhāran the Khatrī. This force advanced from Delhi to Baran and Ilāhdād Lodī retired, but halted at Āhār on learning that Kamāl-ud-dīn favoured his cause. His hostility to the minister and sympathy with the faction in arms against him could no longer be concealed, and Sarvar-ul-Mulk sent from Delhi to the army his slave Hūshyār, nominally as Kamāl-ud-dīn’s assistant, but in fact as a spy upon his actions and a coadjutor of Yūsuf and Sidhāran. Malik Chaman of Budaun now joined Ilāhdād Lodī at Āhār and Kamāl-ud-dīn’s attitude became so menacing that Yūsuf and Sidhāran returned to Delhi. On their departure Ilāhdād and his allies joined Kamāl-ud-dīn, marched with him on Delhi, defeated Sarvar-ul-Mulk’s troops in a battle before the city, and besieged him for three months in Sīrī. Sarvar-ul-Mulk discovered, in the course of a siege which lasted for three months, that the king was in sympathy with the besiegers, and attempted to slay him as he had slain his predecessor, but Muhammad was prepared for the attempt and his armed attendants slew Sarvar-ul-Mulk, and seizing the sons of Mīrān Sadr, executed them on the spot. Kamāl-ud-dīn and the confederates were then summoned into the city and the remaining conspirators retired to their houses. Sidhū Pāl imitated the Rājput custom of *jauhar*, set fire to his house, immolated his family, and died fighting, but Sidhāran and the other Khatrīs were taken alive and put to death, and Hūshyār the slave and Mubārak, police magistrate of the city, were executed at the *Lāl Darwāza*, or Red Gate.
v3.c21.39
The confederates repeated the ceremony of enthroning Muhammad Shāh and swore allegiance to him, and in the new distribution of offices and fiefs Kamāl-ud-dīn became minister and received the title of Kamāl Khān, Malik Chaman was entitled Ghāzī-ul-Mulk and was confirmed in the fiefs of Budaun and Amroha, Ilāhdād Lodī, who would accept no title for himself, obtained that of Daryā Khān for his brother, who succeeded him in Sambhal, Malik Khoīrāj retained Hissar, and Hājī Shudanī was entitled Hisām Khān and appointed governor of the capital.
v3.c21.40
In October Muhammad Shāh made a pilgrimage to Multān to visit the shrines of the saints, and in 1436 marched to Sāmāna and dispatched thence an army which is said to have laid waste the country of the Khokars.
v3.c21.41
Muhammad had been, until the fall of Sarvar-ul-Mulk, the victim of factions and the sport of circumstances, but when he had an opportunity of displaying his fitness for rule he so abused it as to lose both the affection and the confidence of those who had freed him from his enemies. After his return to Delhi from Sāmāna his counsellors were perturbed by the news of successive calamities. In Multān the Langāhs, an Afghān tribe recently settled in the district, rebelled against Muhammad Shāh's governor; in the opposite direction Ibrāhīm Shāh of Jaunpur invaded and annexed some of the south-eastern districts of the kingdom; and to the south of Delhi the raja of Gwalior and other Hindu chieftains openly repudiated their liability to pay tribute. Even the forays undertaken in his uncle's reign would have been preferable to inaction, but Muhammad remained in his capital, sunk in indolence and pleasure, until his nobles, losing heart, clearly perceived that if the ancient prestige of Delhi were to be preserved they must seek another leader. It was during this period that the commanding qualities of Malik Buhlūl Lodī¹, nephew and adopted son of Islām Khān and now governor of Sirhind, first attracted attention. As the king's weakness and meanness of spirit became more apparent he gradually extended his influence over the whole of the Punjab, and began to withhold the revenue due to the royal treasury. The condition of the remnant of the kingdom of Delhi was deplorable. Muhammad's nominal authority did not extend beyond Pānīpat to the north; on the south and south-east the raja of Gwalior, who had during the previous reign periodically acknowledged the sovereignty of Delhi, no longer made any pretence of fealty, and the king of Jaunpur had invaded and annexed the districts bordering on his kingdom. The Hindus of the Doāb, always refractory, disregarded with impunity an authority which was never asserted, and the turbulent tribesmen of Mewāt plundered the country to within a short distance of the walls of the city. The nobles of Delhi, despairing of a king who was content to loiter in his palace while his kingdom dissolved, had recourse, in 1440–41, to Mahmūd Shāh Khaljī of Mālwa, an active and warlike prince who had in 1436 seized the throne of that kingdom¹, and sent repeated messages to him representing the miserable plight of the once glorious kingdom and imploring him to march to Delhi for the purpose of restoring peace and order. Mahmūd set out, and Muhammad Shāh, roused at length from his disgraceful torpor, prepared to oppose him. Assembling such troops as he could muster, he sent an appeal for help to Buhlūl Lodī, whose readiness to respond had its origin not in loyalty to Muhammad, but in the resolve to preserve the kingdom for himself. He would not, however, lend his aid unconditionally, and demanded as its price the death of Hisām Khān, governor of the capital, in whom he recognised either a dangerous rival or too staunch and powerful a champion of hereditary right. The condition was fulfilled, and Buhlūl led his forces to the support of the king.
v3.c21.42
¹ In English histories this name is usually written 'Bahlol,' as it is also pronounced by the vulgar in India. Buhlūl is the correct form. The word is Arabic, and means one who laughs or smiles, or a prince endowed with every accomplishment.
v3.c21.43
¹ See Chapter XIV.
v3.c21.44
Meanwhile Mahmūd, marching from Mālwa by way of Hindaun, was there joined by Yūsuf Khān Auhadī and continued his advance to Delhi. Muhammad marched forth to meet him, and the two armies confronted one another between Tughluqābād and the city. Here Muhammad, who had already proved himself to be devoid of the qualities of a leader of men, sank to the lowest depths of contempt by showing that he lacked the mere physical courage expected of the humblest soldier. He would not take the field in person, but entrusted the command of his troops nominally to his son ‘Alā-ud-dīn, with whom he associated Sayyid Khān, Daryā Khān Lodī, Qutb Khān, and other officers. Like Muhammad, but for a different reason, Mahmūd Khaljī refrained from personally engaging in the conflict. His courage was never impugned, and he was, indeed, brave to rashness, but he would not deign to take the field against Muhammad’s officers, and was resolved to show that his own subordinates were well able to cope with them. Retaining for the protection of his person a small force of picked cavalry he entrusted the command of the rest of his army to his two sons Ghiyās-ud-dīn and Nusrat Khān. The battle began at noon and lasted, without any decisive advantage to either side, until nightfall, when each army returned to its own camp. The pusillanimous Muhammad, dreading the alternative prospects of being obliged to take the field or of falling into the hands of the enemy, hastened to make undignified proposals for peace, which might have been rejected with contempt, had not Mahmūd received reports which necessitated an immediate return to his capital. A mob at Māndū had removed the royal umbrella suspended over the tomb of Hūshang Shāh and had raised it over the head of a pretender whom they had proclaimed king of Mālwa as representative of the Ghūrī family¹. Accordingly he welcomed the overtures for peace and on the following day began his retreat. With flagrant disregard of the agreement between the two kings Buhlūl Lodī followed and attacked the retreating army, and obtained a trivial advantage over its rearguard and some plunder. It need not be assumed that Muhammad was privy to this act of treachery, for Buhlūl was beyond his control, but he participated in its guilt by becoming, in legal phrase, an accessory after the fact. The perfidious Afghān was received on his return with extravagant demonstrations, his mean and petty triumph was magnified into a victory over the army of Mālwa, and the king distinguished him by styling him his son, and conferred on him the title of Khān Khānān.
v3.c21.45
¹ Some historians attribute the retreat of Mahmūd Khaljī to a report that Ahmad I of Gujarāt had invaded or was about to invade his dominions, but the account of the circumstances given in the text is to be preferred.
v3.c21.46
Buhlūl now consulted his interest by feigning loyalty to Muhammad and in the following year the king marched to Sāmāna and there formally bestowed on him, in addition to the fiefs which he already held by grant from the crown, Dīpālpūr and Lahore, which were no longer his to bestow. Buhlūl deigned to accept a commission to attack Jasrat the Khokar, but, on discovering that Jasrat was inclined to favour his designs on the throne of Delhi, made peace with him on easy terms and withdrew to Sirhind, where he strengthened himself by annexing the districts adjoining those which he already held, and by enlisting large numbers of Afghāns, especially of his own tribe², in his army. He picked a quarrel, on trivial grounds, with Muhammad Shāh, marched to Delhi, and besieged it, but failed to capture it, or perhaps, for he returned unmolested to his own dominions, where he styled himself Sultān Buhlūl, was bought off, or retired on realising the magnitude of the task with which he would be confronted after taking the city.
v3.c21.47
² The Lodīs were Khaljīs or Ghilzāis, Turks by origin, but so long resident in Afghānistān that by the fifteenth century they could be correctly described as Afghāns.
First 46 of 53 passages. Read on