Later Mughals v1.c9.s32: Sec. 34.—Arrival of Husain Ali Khan at Dihli.
Later Mughals v1.c9.s32
- Language
- English
Sec. 34.—Arrival of Husain Ali Khan at Dihli.
v1.c9.s32.1
Husain Ali Khan was approaching nearer and nearer to Dihli. He left Burhanpur on the 22nd Muharram 1131 H. (14th December, 1718) and Ujjain on the 4th Safar (26th December, 1718), having crossed the Narmada by the Akbarpur ferry. The embassy of Ikhlas Khan, who had met him near Mandu, had been unsuccessful in arresting his march. Then by letters from Barqandaz Khan, *faujdar* of Gwaliyar, and from his own agent at Court, he heard of the renewal of friendly intercourse on the 26th Muharram 1131 H. (18th December, 1718), between the Emperor and Qutb-ul-mulk. Publicly, he received the news with the remark that if His Majesty had no longer ill-will to them, they had no other object left than to serve him loyally; after he had seen the Emperor and settled certain matters, he would return to the Dakhin without delay. The Dakhin officials, on leaving Aurangabad, had been told that they would be dismissed at the Fardapur Pass; on reaching that pass, they were ordered to come on to Burhanpur. At Burhanpur, much to their disgust, their continued attendance was enjoined. Thus, when the news of a return march to the Dakhin spread from tent to tent throughout the camp, all men received it with joy and looked forward to speedily seeing their homes again. But, in a day or two, persons in the confidence of Husain Ali Khan divulged the fact that privately he had expressed the opinion that this was only a new plot hatched by Farrukh-siyar, that it was absurd on the face of it; had they never heard the saying: "When was a secret kept if it was told in an assembly?" A wise man could perceive the only possible result, namely, if they fell into the clutches of the Emperor, their lives would be forfeited; but if they get hold of him, his escape was hopeless. [M. M. 433, K. K. 799.]
v1.c9.s32.2
All this time the supposed Prince was surrounded and guarded with the greatest care. An elephant with rich trappings was set apart for him, and he rode in a canopied seat with the curtains drawn on all four sides, so that no one could see or recognize him. A separate division of the army was told off to escort him, and surrounded his elephant on every side. He was accorded the state and dignity of an imperial Prince, men of rank stood on watch all night round his quarters; and on the march, two men sat behind the canopy waving fans of peacock feathers. [Shiu Das, 20a.]
v1.c9.s32.3
When they came to the Rana of Udepur's country, some villages and a great deal of sugar-cane were plundered by the men of the army. Soon afterwards a Brahman sent by the Rana arrived with presents and cash. Strict orders were then issued to refrain from injuring the crops. On the contrary, when they passed into the lands of Rajah Jai Singh Sawai, the offering brought by one of his principal officers was refused, while many villages with their crops and cattle were pillaged by the camp-followers. Even the women and children of the cultivators were looked on as lawful plunder and carried off. [K. K. 803.]
v1.c9.s32.4
Another effort was now made by Farrukh-siyar, on the 1st Rabi I. 1131 H. (21st January, 1719) to conciliate Husain Ali Khan through Abdul-ghafur. This man was married to a sister of Itiqad Khan's (Muhammad Murad's) wife. Early in this reign he had joined Husain Ali Khan, was admitted to his intimacy, and made the confidant of his secrets. When his brother-in-law rose into favour, he asked permission from Husain Ali Khan and returned to Court. Through Itiqad Khan he was made a Duhazari (2,000). He was now promoted to 2,500 zat with a standard, and deputed to interview Husain Ali Khan, his former friend. By this time even Farrukh-siyar's intimates began to despair of him. Amin-ud-din wrote: "The complexion of affairs changes here daily, fickleness prevails, sense is absent, and every moment one futile device is succeeded by another. It reminds one of the fable of the mice and the cat. In a deserted spot there were many mice, and every day the cat came and took two or three of them. The mice met in council and resolved to hang a bell to the cat's neck, so that having warning they might flee in time. The bell was got. But who was there able to attach it to the cat's neck?" Farrukh-siyar's projects were of this sort, from which nothing but failure could result. He is represented as still believing that the storm would blow over as it had done before.
v1.c9.s32.5
He did not seem to see that "to heal an estranged heart was as hard as to mend a broken glass," and advice was thrown away upon him. [Kamwar 187, Dastur-ul-insha 30.]
v1.c9.s32.6
When Abdul-ghafur had started, Farrukh-siyar recollected that for a long time past Qutb-ul-mulk had urged that, until the office of darogha or superintendent of the privy audience had been made over to one of his brothers, he and his brother could not feel themselves safe. As Husain Ali Khan's arrival grew nearer, the Emperor felt sure he would make the same request, nay, would never come to an audience till it had been granted. But if such an appointment were made, Samsam-ud-daulah would be ousted. He had long taken Farrukh-siyar's side, and though lately he had fallen out of favour, his public disgrace was not desired. Accordingly on the 10th Rabi I. (30th January, 1719) he was consoled with the place of 2nd Bakhshi, from which Islam Khan was ejected. Samsam-ud-daulah's duties as deputy of Husain Ali Khan, the first Bakhshi, were transferred to Zafar Khan Turra-i-baz, who was friendly with the Sayyids, and at the same time professed to be zealous for the Emperor. He made all the efforts he could to bring the parties to an agreement. For his attempts to keep friends with everybody he was described, Khafi Khan [806] says, as "the ingredient in every dish." Sayyid Salabat Khan succeeded Zafar Khan as fourth Bakhshi. [M. M. 444.]
v1.c9.s32.7
Sarbuland Khan had lately been appointed to Kabul, but was still discontented. To appease him the Emperor ordered Qutb-ul-mulk to visit him. This visit took place on the 9th Rabi I. (29th January, 1719), Itiqad Khan accompanying the Wazir. Sarbuland Khan on the 13th moved out as far as the Salt Market on his way to Kabul. Three days afterwards he was visited, by express orders, by Maharajah Ajit Singh and Maharao Bhim Singh. Then at Sarai Mihr-Parwar, nine kos from the city,* he halted and awaited the course of events. [M. M. 445, Qasim 248.]
v1.c9.s32.8
∗ Sarai Mihr-Parwar is not marked on the Indian Atlas; it must have been between Narela and Sonpat, perhaps near Akbarpur Barota. Miskin, B. M. Oriental, No. 1918, fol. 67a, mentions it as lying ten kos from Dihli.
v1.c9.s32.9
Another new appointment, made on the 18th Rabi I. 1131 H. (7th February, 1719), was that of Nizam-ul-mulk to the province of Azimabad-Patna in place of Khan Zaman Khan. From the first up to this time Nizam-ul-mulk had never asked a favour from Qutb-ul-mulk or his brother, and had even refrained from visiting them. On many occasions, during these troubles, he had urged on Farrukh-siyar the uprooting of the Sayyids as the best course he could pursue. On this account the two brothers were far from well disposed towards him. But now Farrukh-siyar, in a state of mortal fright, had placed himself completely in the hands of the two brothers. Under these altered circumstances, it was to the Emperor's interest to put an end to the quarrels and ill-feeling among the nobles, and he urged Qutb-ul-mulk to take the first step in making friends with Nizam-ul-mulk. This reconciliation falling in with Qutb-ul-mulk's own ideas, on the 18th Rabi I. (7th February, 1719) accompanied by two of his sister's sons, Sayyid Ghairat Khan and Sayyid Shujaat-ullah Khan, and by Zafar Khan, he paid a visit to Nizam-ul-mulk. Their talk was of a friendly character and to all appearance amity took the place of enmity. This was followed on the 23rd (12th February, 1719) by a banquet given to Nizam-ul-mulk at Qutb-ul-mulk's house, when the host loaded his guest with costly presents. Nizam-ul-mulk at the request of the Wazir was now appointed governor of Bihar. With one exception, that of Rajah Jai Singh, all the influential nobles had now been won over to the party of the Sayyids and had deserted Farrukh-siyar. The case of Nizam-ul-mulk furnishes a flagrant instance of Farrukh-siyar's short-sightedness. He had recalled this noble from Muradabad, and without providing him with any equivalent, his charge was given to Itiqad Khan, the favourite. Naturally Nizam-ul-mulk was disgusted, and became a willing listener to overtures from Qutb-ul-mulk.*
v1.c9.s32.10
As Husain Ali Khan was now not very far off, on the 21st Rabi I. (10th February, 1719) Zafar Khan, and a day or two afterwards Itiqad Khan, were sent out to greet him on the Emperor's behalf. They found his camp, on the 25th Rabi I. 1131 H. (14th February, 1719), at Sarai Allahwirdi Khan, about sixteen miles south-west of the city.* They are said to have met with a very ungracious reception. Zafar Khan gave offence by his ostentatious retinue; but more potent still was the talk of Rajah Ratan Chand, who had managed to anticipate them. He had already impressed Husain Ali Khan with the belief that even after the last reconciliation, Farrukh-siyar continued both openly and secretly to favour those who wished to supersede the Sayyids, and had conferred on their enemies gifts and promotions, giving them hints to carry on the struggle. In short, through bad advice, the Emperor was still intent on "using his hatchet to cut his own foot." Amin-ud-din was one of the men who interviewed Husain Ali Khan at this halting-place. He writes to the Emperor that, having been taken by Ikhlas Khan to the Mir Bakhshi, he laid before him the message with which he had been entrusted. Husain Ali Khan smiled but said nothing. As it was getting late, Amin-ud-din asked what answer he should send. Husain Ali Khan said that, as there was no time left, he would see him again on the morrow at the next stage, Sarai Moth.† But if, as he had demanded, the interior of the palace were made over to their guards, all the Emperor's servants turned out, and the keys of all the gates handed to their men, he would, in the presence of His Majesty say and do what was requisite. In Amin-ud-din's opinion things looked very black, even Ikhlas Khan threw the blame of his ill-success on Farrukh-siyar's inconsistent conduct; "or rather what fault did your Majesty commit; Fate had willed that it should be so."
v1.c9.s32.11
∗ Khafi Khan, ii. 792; Mirza Muhammad, 446; Kamwar Khan, 188.
v1.c9.s32.12
∗ Khafi Khan, ii. 804, says that Zafar Khan and Ratan Chand reached the camp four stages from Dihli. Sarai Allahwirdi Khan is on the Indian Atlas, sheet No. 49, s. w. : it lies two miles south of Gurganw. Ahwal-ul-khawaqin, 139, mentions Kot Patili, 99 miles s. w. of Dihli in Jaipur territory, as one of Husain Ali Khan's halting places, Thornton 528, Lat. 27° 43', Long. 76° 16'.
v1.c9.s32.13
† Sarai Moth is no doubt meant for Moth ki Masjid, about 5½ miles south of the Dihli Gate of Shahjahanabad, see map in Carr Stephens, p. 1, and description on p. 166.
v1.c9.s32.14
Amin-ud-din winds up by offering a choice of two courses. First, Itiqad Khan having been sent a prisoner to the kotwali or city police office, Samsam-ud-daulah, Ghalib Jang, Mir Mushrif, and others should be called out to defend their sovereign; neither the guards of the palace should be withdrawn nor the keys of the gates made over; and His Majesty should issue forth and take the command in person. The other suggestion was that Farrukh-siyar should mount his horse and ride out alone, and presenting himself as a supplicant, ask for forgiveness: whatever sacrifice was demanded must be made. Even thus it was doubtful if Husain Ali Khan would be appeased.*