Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Later Mughals v1.c9.s38: Sec. 40.—Death of Farrukh-siyar.

Later Mughals v1.c9.s38

Language
English

Sec. 40.—Death of Farrukh-siyar.

v1.c9.s38.1

Although it involves a slight break in the exact chronological order, it seems better to carry on Farrukh-siyar’s story to his cruel and dishonoured end. The captivity he was held in appears to have been unnecessarily strict, and many anecdotes connected with it have been handed down. A few days after his accession, the new Emperor, Rafi-ud-darjat, sent a eunuch to inquire about his predecessor’s condition, Farrukh-siyar invoked a blessing on his head, and sent back the lines—

v1.c9.s38.2

“Be not taken by the gardener’s deceit, O nightingale,
Ere this I, too, had my nest in this garden.” [Warid, 158b.]

v1.c9.s38.3

Other verses attributed to him during his imprisonment are:

v1.c9.s38.4

“A heart is mad with wine, give it wine,
It is consumed with fire, give it fire.
To him who asks the state of my heart,
Breathe but a sigh, give that as answer.”*

v1.c9.s38.5

Even the Sayyid soldiers who formed the guard set over him grieved to see how he was treated. For instance, during four or five days at a time, he would be deprived of water for necessary ablutions. Unsuitable food had brought on diarrhœa, and having no water, he was forced to tear off pieces from his clothes to cleanse himself. Day and night he had passed his time in reciting the Quran, which he knew by heart. Even this distraction was denied him, for in his polluted state, it was unlawful to recite the words of the holy volume.

v1.c9.s38.6

It is believed that, although a needle had been passed through his eyes, Farrukh-siyar was still able to see. In spite of all that had happened, he was still eager for power and believed his restoration possible. He made repeated overtures to the Sayyids, promising to leave all power in their hands, if they would only release him and replace him on the throne. Then he tried to win over Abdullah Khan Afghan, one of his jailors. He promised this man the rank of Haft-hazari (7,000)

v1.c9.s38.7

∗ *Mirat-i-Aftab-numa*, B. M. Addl., 16,697, *f.* 216a. In *Bayan-i-waqi*, p. 175, and Gladwin, p. 194, the words are different.

v1.c9.s38.8

after he should have conducted him in safety to Rajah Jai Singh. The Afghan betrayed him to the Sayyids. People in the city spread about the story that Tahavvur Khan, Wala-shahi, Ruh-ullah Khan (son of Khanazad Khan) and many others were coming with Rajah Jai Singh at the head of a mighty army to deliver the captive. Popular rumour asserted that Farrukh-siyar could still see, and that in secret conclave the two brothers had repented, and would replace the deposed sovereign on the throne. After doing this, they would resign place and office, assume the garb of mendicants, and return to Barha, or make a pilgrimage to the holy places. This was openly spoken of. Then Hashim Ali Khan Dakhini said secretly to Husain Ali Khan, "I salute your lordship: Disease is dealt with in one of two ways—you either bear it, or remove the afflicted part. But once you have resorted to treatment, there is no hope of recovery till the offending principle is expelled." The Sayyids then made up their mind to remove Farrukh-siyar. They sent for Sidi Yasin Khan (son of Sidi Qasim, Fulad Khan, once kotwal of Dihli), and after promising him a reward said: "Farrukh-siyar took your father's life without cause, you have a legal right of retaliation, put your hand on your dagger and slay him." The young man refused. Had not his father and his family been the slaves of that royal house? To kill a master who for some supposed fault took a slave's life, was not permissible.

v1.c9.s38.9

As no one else was willing, they were forced to act themselves. They began by supplying Farrukh-siyar with bitter and oversalted dishes, but without effect. Slow poison was then tried for a time. Farrukh-siyar now made use of violent language, and cursed the Sayyids in the most virulent terms. Their patience being at an end, they sent executioners into the prison to strangle their victim. In spite of a violent resistance, these men effected their purpose, beating the ex-Emperor on the hands till he let go the strap that they had tied round his neck. To make sure, he was stabbed several times in the abdomen. This happened on the night between the 8th and 9th Jamadi II. 1131 H. (27th-28th April, 1719). There is a somewhat apocryphal story told in the Siyar-ul-mutakherin as to the mode of Farrukh-siyar’s death, by which the direct blame for it is removed from the shoulders of the Sayyids. Farrukh-siyar is supposed to have evaded his guardians and made an attempt to escape. He passed from one terrace roof to another, and was already at some distance before his absence was detected. The Afghan officer in charge searched for his prisoner, found him hiding in the shadow of a wall, and brought him back, ending by giving him an unmerciful beating. Farrukh-siyar, stung to the quick by his disgrace, ran at the wall, dashed his head against it, and fractured his skull. The evidence for this story seems insufficient, and the author’s animus, as Sayyid and Shia defending other Sayyids and Shias, is sufficiently obvious here as elsewhere.*

v1.c9.s38.10

On the following day, 10th Jamadi II. 1131 H. (29th April, 1719), the body was thrown down on a mat within the fort for purposes of identification, and the blackness of the face showed that Farrukh-siyar had been strangled; there were also several cuts and wounds to be seen. The body was then prepared for the grave and the bier brought out. Dilawar Ali Khan, paymaster of Husain Ali Khan’s household, and Sayyid Ali Khan, brother of Abdullah Khan’s paymaster, were sent to carry out the burial rites. They were followed by all the eunuchs, some of the mansabdars, and a part of the State equipage. When the body was brought to the Akbarabadi mosque,† it was received by 15,000 to 20,000 men from the camp and bazars. After recital of the prayers over the dead, Abdul-ghafur lifted the corpse and carried it out, to the accompaniment of weeping and wailing from the crowd. As the procession passed, lamentations arose from every roof and door. Men and women, old and young, rich and poor, shed tears for the departed Emperor and cursed his oppressors. The streets and lanes were rendered impassable by the crowds. The rabble and the mendicants, who had received alms from Farrukh-siyar, followed his bier, rending their garments and throwing ashes on their heads, and as it passed, the women on the roofs raised their cry of mourning, and flung stones and bricks upon the servants and officers of the Sayyids. The body was deposited in the crypt of Humayun's tomb, in the place where a few years before the body of Farrukh-siyar's father, Azim-ush-shan, had rested before its departure for Aurangabad. The bread and the copper coins, brought for distribution to the poor, were rejected by the crowd with scorn; and on the third day, the rabble and professional beggars assembled on the platform where the body had been washed, and there cooked and distributed a large quantity of food, and until day dawned sang funeral laments.*

v1.c9.s38.11

∗ Text, i. 42; Qasim, 259; Khafi Khan, 819. In the Bayan-i-waqi, 175, poison is alleged.

v1.c9.s38.12

† It stands in the Faiz Bazar, that is, on the road from the Dihli Gate of the fort to the south or Dihli Gate of the city.

v1.c9.s38.13

For many a day, no begger deigned to appeal for charity to any passing noble who had been concerned in Farrukh-siyar's death. Zafar Khan's liberal gifts of bread and sweetmeats were far famed; but these, too, were refused. The beggars said that in their mouths was still the flavour of the kindness bestowed by the martyred Emperor, adding, "May he be poisoned who takes a morsel bearing upon it the mark of those men." They made collections from artisans and shopkeepers, and distributed alms of food every Thursday at Humayun's tomb. If any great noble passed along the roads or through the bazars, they pursued him with shouts and harsh reproaches. Especially was this the case with regard to Maharajah Ajit Singh and his followers, so that they were forced to reach darbar by the most out-of-the-way routes. The Rajputs raged inwardly, and fiercely laid hand on sword or dagger. But who can fight a whole people? At length, several spoon-sellers and bazar touts having been killed by the Rathors, the habit of abusing them was abandoned. [Qasim, 262.]

Linked texts (1)