Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

History of the Khaljis, A.D. 1290–1320 c2: Chapter II. Jalāluddīn Fīroz Shāh Khaljī (1290—1296)

History of the Khaljis, A.D. 1290–1320 c2

Language
English

Contents

Chapter II. Jalāluddīn Fīroz Shāh Khaljī (1290—1296)

c2.2

Jalāluddīn ascended the throne on the 3rd of Jamadi-us Sānī 689 (13th June 1290)¹ and assumed the title of Sultān Jalāluddīn Fīroz Shāh Khaljī.² As stated above he made Kīlugharī the seat of the government as he dared not enter Delhi. The palace of Mu‘izzuddīn was completed and decorated with fine carvings and inscriptions. A peerless garden on the banks of the Jumna was added to enhance the beauty of the buildings. The sultan desired the elite of the town to construct spacious mansions there. Markets were opened and the place looked like a “New City.”³

c2.3

¹ *Miftāhul Futūh*, Elliot Vol. III p. 536. *T.M.S.* Trs. p. 58 has Rabīul Akhir 689 or April-May 1290. Barani and Ferishtah have 688 and 687 H. respectively. According to *T.M.S.* Text p. 59 Mu'izzuddīn was murdered in 689 and so also says Badaoni Ranking Vol. I p. 228. Again all the known coins of Shamsuddīn Kaikāūs are dated 689 H. (N. Wright). The earliest known coins of Jalāluddīn are also of 689 H. (*Catalogue of coins in the Indian Museum*, Calcutta Vol. II no. 175). Thus it is certain that Khusrau's date which is supported by numismatic evidence is correct and Barani and Ferishtah are wrong. Also see Thomas: "*Chronicles*" p. 141 note *J.A.S.B. Numismatic Supplement*, p. 229. *Lucknow Museum Catalogue* no. 177.

c2.4

² No contemporary historian throws light on the ancestry of Jalāluddīn. Hājīuddabīr describing the Khaljīs of Mandu says that Afrasiyāb, a son-in-law of Changīz Khān, had three sons, the youngest of whom was Tolak Khān. Tolak had two sons Nāsiruddīn and Fīroz, the latter of whom served under Balban and seized the throne from the son of Kaiqubād. *Zafarul Vālī* p. 197. This narrative is legendry. Beale: *Oriental Biographical Dictionary*, p. 137 says that Qaem Khān was the father of Jalāluddīn. The actual name of Jalāluddīn's father is difficult to find. That Jalāl's father held the title of Yoghresh Khān is attested by a number of historians. *T.M.S.* p. 57. Badaoni, Ranking, Vol. I pp. 226, 230, Text, p. 167.

c2.5

³ Barani p. 176. says that Kīlughārī was given the name of Shahr-i-nau but that is wrong. It was already known as Shahr-i-nau and Minhāj Sirāj speaks of it as such. *Tab. Nas.* Text pp. 317, 318.

c2.6

A grand darbār was held. The scions of royalty and comrades in arms during the Revolution were meted with royal bounty. Ikhtiyāruddīn,⁴ the eldest son of the sultan, obtained the title of Khān-i-Khānān and the districts near about Delhi as fief.⁵ Hisāmuddīn,⁶ the second son was made Arkalī Khān and the youngest Qadr Khān. Malik Husain, the sultan’s uncle, received the title of Tājulmulk. The two nephews ‘Alāuddīn and Mu‘izzuddīn (better known as Almās Bēg) became Amīr-i-Tuzak and Akhūrbeg respectively. Malik Khāmosh,⁷ gained the title of Yoghresh Khān, and the post of ‘Ariz-i-Mumālik (Minister of War). The Vazārat was confirmed on Khvaja Khatīr; he had held this office under Balban and Mu‘izzuddīn Kaiqubad. The renowned Malikul‘umra too continued to hold his post of the Kotvāl of Delhi. The other noblemen who received honours were Malik Ahmad Chap, who became Naib Barbak, Malik Khurram, who became Vakil-i-dar and Malik Nasiruddīn Kuhrami, who became Hājib-i-Khās. Malik Fakhruddīn Kūchī was made Dādbēg or dispenser of justice; Malik Hiranmār, Amīr-i-Shikār; and Malik Nāṣiruddīn Ranah, Shahnah-i-Pīl. Malik Aʻizzuddīn, another nephew of Jalāluddīn became Ākhurbēg-i-Maimna. Some other prominent men like Tājuddīn Kūchī, Malik Kamāluddīn Abdul Mʻaālī and Malik Nuṣrat Subāh also obtained high posts. As time passed the Khaljī government gained strength. The kindness of Jalāluddīn won the confidence of the people and visitors from Delhi were very much impressed with the splendour and magnificence of Kīlughari. By and by the people of Delhi, willingly or unwillingly, sumbitted to the new king, and great and small all went out to Kīlughari and paid homage to Fīroz Shāh.

c2.7

⁴ *T.M.S.* p. 57 and Ferishtah p. 89 give this name.

c2.8

⁵ *T.M.S.* p. 56.

c2.9

⁶ *T.M.S.* p. 56 gives this name.

c2.10

⁷ ‘Isāmī and Yahya give his name as خامش and خـوش respectively. Jalāluddīn had two brothers Shihāb and Khāmosh. *Futūh* p. 220.

c2.11

*Character of Jalāluddīn.* The new king's character is clearly reflected in an incident which occurred early in his reign. After Jalāl had been firmly seated on the throne, writes Baranī, he rode one day into Delhi and visited the Red Palace of Balban. The old memories of how he had stood before the throne in years gone by filled his eyes with tears. He got down from his horse at the outer gate of the palace and bowed in obeisance. When Malik Aḥmad Chap reminded him that the palace now belonged to him and he should not behave in the way he did, Jalāluddīn burst into tears and remonstrated: "You know that nobody among my ancestors has been a king, so that the pride and dignity of kingship might have been inherited by me. Sulṭān Balban sat here on the throne and I served him. The awe and dignity of that monarch has not left my breast........ This palace had been built by Balban during his Khanship and it is his property and that of his sons and relatives...."^9 The old king could not think of sitting on the throne while his colleagues, who, like himself, had served under Balban, remained standing before him. He only took his seat among the nobles and putting his turban to his eyes wept bitterly.¹⁰

c2.12

⁹ Baranī p. 178. The discussion between Aḥmad Chap and Jalāl is interesting in so far as it raises the issue whether a palace built by a sultan was his private property or that of the state. In fact there was no distinction between the private property of the sultan and the royal exchequer in medieval times. The whole country belonged to him. But here Jalāl emphasises the point that the palace was built by Balban when he was a nobleman and not king, and, therefore, it was his private property. The emperor was right in his assertion.

c2.13

¹⁰ Barani p. 179.

c2.14

The touching scene silenced Ahmad Chap. It also confirmed Jalāluddīn's generosity and kindheartedness. But the strange behaviour of Firoz did not redound to his credit as the master of an empire so recently won in teeth of so great an opposition. On many other occasions, about which mention would be made presently, the sultan behaved most tactlessly. Both his age and his temperament were responsible for his extreme gentleness. The only punishment he could inflict upon robbers was to send them to some distant place. The only way in which he could castigate rebellious nobles was to cry in their presence and drink with them to remove all cause of misunderstanding. The king was incapable of harbournig any ill-will. Two persons, Sirājuddīn Sāvī and Manda Ahīr, had given him some cause of resentment during his Khanship. They began to despair of their lives when they heard he had become king. They came to the king, their heads hanging low, their faces all repentence. To the utter surprise of everybody present the sultan not only pardoned them for their misconduct in the past but rewarded them profusely. Sometimes the old king behaved like a child. Once he was tempted to add the title of Almujāhid fī Sabīlullah (The Fighter in the Way of God) to his name. Any other sultan would have done so without creating any fuss. Jalāluddīn, however, asked Malika-i-Jahān to instruct the barons to suggest to him to do so in open court. But when they actually did so Firoz at once confessed to them that he himself was responsible for that request and refused to take the title. Such a tactless sovereign was surely a misfit on the throne of Delhi. How Jalāluddīn fell a victim to his nephew's treachery forms one of the most tragic episodes of medieval history. Never was a man more unsuited to wear the crown than the founder of the Khaljī dynasty. To him kingship was a fraud and its magnificence a few days' unstable splendour.¹¹ He actually cursed his enemies not so much for plotting against him as for compelling him to strive for the throne.¹² Careless of fame, he was content with the status of a nobleman than that of the king, for the former was free from all turmoil.

c2.15

¹¹ *Baranī* p. 179.

c2.16

¹² *Ibid.* p. 179.

c2.17

Failure as a king, Fīroz was a perfect gentleman and one of the most pious Musalmans of his times. Fortune as well as merit had raised him to the highest pinnacle of greatness, still his elevation had not made him proud. God-fearing and indulgent, affectionate to his family and affectionate to all, he behaved with his nobles not as a king but as a friend. Jalāl's span of kingship was short but he had ruled his subjects as a father in a family. He declared himself incapable of tyranny. If his simplicity and his kindness were ridiculed by the worldly people, his age and benevolence were revreded by all.

c2.18

Refractory element was not slow to take advantage of his leniency. Plots began to be hatched against the crown in and outside the capital, and only a couple of months after Jalāluddīn's accession Malik Chhajjū rose in open revolt.

The Revolt of Malik Chhajjū (1290)

c2.s1.1

It was Shʻabān 689 (August-September 1290)¹³ that Malik Chhajjū Kishlī Khān, governor of Kaṛa, unfurled the standard of revolt. Lack of initiative on the part of Jalāluddin as well as the support that had been promised to him, encouraged him to try to wrest the throne of his forefathers. A large number of Rāvats and Paiks had flocked to his standard. Amīr ‘Alī Sarjandār, governor of Avadh, had lent him unflinching support and even a number of Jalālī Amīrs like Malik Tājuddīn Kūchī, Malik Muhammad Qutlagh Khān and Malik Nusrat Subah were not lacking in sympathy for him. A section of the nobility and populace of Delhi also considered him a rightful claimant to the throne on account of his relationship with the late Ghayāsuddīn Balban. Malik Chhajjū therefore declared independence, assumed the title of sultan Mughīsuddīn, struck coins and got the Khutbāh read in his name. He collected a large force and advanced upon Delhi.

c2.s1.2

¹³ *T.M.S.* p. 63.

c2.s1.3

The news of this formidable revolt lashed Jalāluddīn into action. He appointed his eldest son Khān-i-Khānān as vice-regent at Kīlughari and himself marched out to crush the rebellion. After crossing the Jumna he divided his troops. One portion of the army was sent in advance under the command of Arkalī Khān¹⁴ and the other proceeded under his own command about ten of twelve kos behind his son's.¹⁵

c2.s1.4

¹⁴ According to Hājī-uddabīr Arkalī was given the command of 12,000 troops *Zafarul Vālī* p. 755.

c2.s1.5

¹⁵ Ferishtah p. 90.

c2.s1.6

By forced marches Arkalī Khān arrived on river Kalaibnagar, Kālī Nahar of the modern maps.¹⁶ The enemy had already reached the other bank and had seized the boats lying on the river. In spite of this initial precaution of Chhajjū Arkalī Khān managed to cross Kālī Nahar, which was then in spate, and fell upon the enemy. The "rice-eating" Hindustani foot-soldiers, who formed the advance compains of the rebel were taken by surprise and completely routed. Malik Chhajjū fled towards Chupāla.¹⁷ The imperial troops plundered his camp for two whole days and then started in his pursuit. Soon they overtook him and Chhajjū was compelled to give battle. During the engagement the centre of the army was commanded by Arkalī Khān himself. He was helped by his two cousions 'Alāūddīn and Qutlagh Tighīn,¹⁸ the latter of whom could "split a spear with an arrow." The right and left wings were put under the charge of Mīr Mubārak and Malik Muḥammad respectively.¹⁹ Malik Chhajjū rallied his scattered troops and fought a desparate battle which lasted for a whole day and "during which the sword found no rest." At night when Chhajjū heard that the sultan was himself coming to join Arkalī Khān his heart gave way. He fled away "concealing his departure by the beating of drums, as if he was preparing to renew the combat on the morrow." The remnant of his troops sought refuge in unconditional surrender. They were pardoned.

c2.s1.7

¹⁶ Baranī calls it آبِ کولاب نکر. Amīr Khusrau, Yahya and Badaonī call it Rahāb. In all probability it is the present Kali Nahar which joins the Ganga near Kanauj. It would have been unwise on the part of Malik Chhajjū to march north of the Ganga from Kara to cross after some distance both the Ganga and the Jumna to strike at Delhi. He surely marched from Kara on a route in between the two rivers. The river on which the battles were fought cannot, therefore, be Ramganga, as some writers have suggested. Hājī calls this river کولائت کی *kalat* means a castle on the top of mountain. Elliot, Vol. III p. 138, (note) gives the meaning of Kalaib nagar as a natural stronghold.

c2.s1.8

¹⁷ Khusrau has Jūbāla *Miftāḥul Futūḥ* Elliot, Vol. III p. 538. It was a Maḥāl in Sarkar Badaon in Delhi Ṣūbah. See *Āīn-i-Akbari*, Trs. Vol. II p. 290. *Elliot* Vol. V, p. 507.

c2.s1.9

¹⁸ He was younger to Almās Beg. *Futūḥ* p. 220.

c2.s1.10

¹⁹ *Miftāḥul Futūḥ* Elliot Vol. III p. 538.

c2.s1.11

It was Bairam Deva Koela, Rāja of Koel (Aligarh), who had informed Malik Chhajjū that the army of the sultan was about to join that of the prince and the rebel had escaped unscathed for a second time. Arkalī Khān was very much enraged at the behaviour of the Rāja. He recrossed the Kālī Nahar and attacked Aligarh. Bairam Deva was killed in a fight and Arkalī began the pursuit of Chhajjū once again.²⁰ At last Malik Chhajjū was captured from a fortress in which he had taken refuge. Flushed with victory Arkalī Khān returned to his father.

c2.s1.12

²⁰ Badaonī writes on the authority of Yahya. *T.M.S.* pp. 63-64.

c2.s1.13

Sultan Jalāluddīn after sending the vanguard under Arkalī had for some time followed him closely behind. He had then proceeded towards Bhojpur in Farukkhabad district on the western side of the Ganga. After staying there for some time he had crossed the Ganga and ruthlessly punished some Hindus in the land of Kabar (modern Rohilkhand). On his return to Badaon he was joined by Arkalī Khān. The sultan was very much pleased at the brilliant achievements of his son and appointed him governor of Multan. He held a court to deliver judgement on the rebels when he was horrified to see Malik Chhajjū and other great Maliks like Amīr 'Alī Sarjāndār, Malik Alghuchī, son of Malik Targhī, and Malik Tājward being brought before him in fetters and chains, their heads hanging low, their garments soiled. He ordered the prisoners to be unfettered, bathed, and dressed in clean garments. The ungrateful rebels hung their heads in shame when they pondered how treacherous they had been to such a good king. To the astonishment of the countries, however, Jalāluddīn consoled and cheered them up, saying that they had acted rightly in supporting a prince of the dynasty they had served in the past.²¹ He treated them with exemplary kindness and offered them cups of wine as if they were his guests. Ahmad Chap did not fail to remained the king that it was contrary to the principles of good government to treat the rebels with such generosity. Such a treatment would tempt many others to try for the throne and create fresh trouble.²² The king's reply was short and simple. "Oh Ahmad, I also know what kings have done to the rebels (in the past). But I am an old Musalman and am not habituated to shedding the blood of the Musalmans. I am now past seventy and have not killed a single Muwahid (believer in the Oneness of God)."²³ In short the rebels escaped scot free. Malik Chhajjū was sent to Multan where every comfort was provided for him. His fief of Kara was given to the charge of 'Alāuddīn. The trouble having ended the sultan was back in Kilughari on the last day of Muharram 690 (2nd February 1291).²⁴

c2.s1.14

²¹ Baranī pp. 183-84.

c2.s1.15

²² *Ibid.* p. 184.

c2.s1.16

²³ *Ibid.* p. 185.

c2.s1.17

²⁴ *Miftahul Futūh*, Elliot Vol. III p. 540.

c2.s1.18

*Crimes and conspiracies.*

c2.s1.19

At the capital Jalaluddin engaged himself in internal administration. He was so disinclined to cause pain that many times thieves and Thugs were seized and brought before him but he set them free on promise that they would not commit theft again. On one occasion more than a thousand Thugs were captured.²⁵ But in place of punishing them severely the king ordered that they should be carried in boats to Lakhnauti and be left there, lest they should continue to harass the countryside (of Delhi).²⁶

c2.s1.20

²⁵ Barani has **هزار و اند ٹھگ**. *Tab. Akb.* has 1,000 and uses the word **قطاع الطريق**. As Hodivālā (p. 266) aptly remaks "This is perhaps the earliest reference in Muslim historical literature to the "Thugs" in the specific sense which the word has now acquired." It is here not used in the general signification of a cheat or swindler but for a peculiar class of high-way robbers.

c2.s1.21

²⁶ Barani pp. 189-90.

c2.s1.22

The treatment meted out to the partisans of Chhajjū and the Thugs encouraged some enterprising barons to indulge in loose talk at convivial parties. The sultan even got an inkling of the affair but overlooked it saying that the people who planned under the spell of intoxication should not be taken seriously. One of these days a grand drinking party was held at Malik Tājuddīn Kūchī's, a nobelman of some consequence. As the cups went round, some one opined that the Khaljīs were a worthless lot with the possible exception of Aḥmad Chap.²⁷ At least Jalāluddīn was quite unfit to rule, and the crown would well adorn the head of Malik Tājuddīn Kūchī. They all swore allegiance to their host, one promising to kill the sultan with a hunting knife, another with a sword. When the intelligence of the incident reached Jalāluddīn he sent for them and reprimanded them severely. Taking out his sword he threw it before them saying, "If any one of you is man enough he shall take up this sword and come face to face with me." The tension of the situation was relieved by the sweet-tongued Nuṣrat Ṣubāḥ, the Sardāwātdār, who himself had uttered some nonsense at the meeting. He told the sultan that they could never think of plotting against a king who was so dignified, generous and patient, and who treated them almost as his own sons; nor should he think of their destruction as he could not find such faithful and loyal Maliks and Malikzādās such as they. The king was silenced, his anger was subsided, and he pardoned them all but for a token punishment to some.²⁸

c2.s1.23

²⁷ Ibid. p. 190.

c2.s1.24

²⁸ Baranī p. 192.

c2.s1.25

*Conspiracy of Sīdī Maulā (February-March 1291).*²⁹

c2.s1.26

²⁹ Jalāluddīn returned after crushing Chhajju's revolt on 2nd February 1291 and started for Ranthambhor on March 22nd 1291. According to almost all historians the Sīdī Maulā episode occured between these two events. This finds corroboration in the fact that the plot was discovered and suppressed after Khan-i-Khanā's death and according to Badaoni he died shortly after Chhajju's revolt.

c2.s1.27

These tall talks under a fit of drunkenness were nothing compared to the organised conspiracy of some noblemen under the eigis of one Sīdī Maulā. Sīdī had first come from Persia to Ajodhan in the service of Shaikh Farīduddīn Shakarganj.²⁰ According to Ferishtah Sīdī was a Darvesh (saint) and had come to Delhi in the beginning of Balban's reign. He recited the Namāz but never visited the Jama' Masjid and did not pray in congregation. He practised great austerity, ate frugally and denied himself all the pleasures of the senses.²¹ He led the life of celibacy and kept no maid-servant or slave. He did not accept anything from the people but spent so lavishly that they suspected him of possessing knowledge of alchemy and natural magic (Kīmyā va Sīmyā). He built a great Khānqāh at Ajod Gate²² where people flocked from all quarters. He used to pay for what he bought by the queer way of telling the man to take such and such amount from under such and such brick or coverlet, and the *tankahs* found there looked so bright as if they had been brought from the mint that very moment.²³ So many people dined at Sīdī's table every day that if Barani is to be believed two thousand *man* of flour (maida), five hundred *man* of meat and an equal quantity of ghī (roghan), two to three hundred *man* of sugar and a hundred to two hundred *man* of vegetables used to be consumed in his kitchen every day. So much money was spent and so many kinds of dishes were served at the monastry as even the greatest nobles could not afford.²⁴

c2.s1.28

²⁰ Badaonī, Ranking vol. I p. 233.

c2.s1.29

²¹ Ferishtah p. 92.

c2.s1.30

²² *Zafarul Vāli* p. 763. Haji-uddabir writes on the authority of *Tabqāt-i-Bahadur Shāhi of Husām Khan*.

c2.s1.31

²³ Barani p. 209.

c2.s1.32

²⁴ Barani p. 209. Badaonī Ranking vol. I p. 234, gives a story according to which Jalāluddin once went in disguise to Sīdī's monastry and saw for himself that he expended even more than was reported.

c2.s1.33

The activities of Sidi showed beyond doubt that he was not a saint in the real sense. He aspired for name and fame and honour. He freely associated with Amīrs and Maliks and flirted with politics. When he was leaving Ajodhan for Delhi, Shikh Farīd, cognizant of Sidi's nature, had warned him against seeking name and renown or associating too much with noblemen. During Balban's strict rule it was not possible for him to spend recklessly and openly give "five thousand or ten thousand *tankahs* to reliable men." With the coming of the weak and licentious Mu'izzuddīn, Sidi's expenses knew no bounds and he began to attract people. During Jalāluddīn's reign the congragations began to swell in numbers and great and small, nobles and commoners, began to pay him homage. Even Khān-i-Khānān, the eldest son of the king, become his disciple. The fact appears to be that since Jalāluddīn was past seventy and could die any week, his two elder sons had set their hearts on the throne and tried to strengthen their position even while the king was alive. Thus two parties seem to have been formed at the capital,—one under Khān-i-Khānān, who associated himself with Sidi and the other under Arkalī, who naturally turned hostile to the saint.³⁵ So openly was Khān-i-Khānān drawn towards Sīdī that the latter used to address him as his son,³⁶ and there is every reason to think that Khān-i-Khānān financed the establishment of Sīdi Maula. The Turkish Amīrs who had not forgotten their enmity with the Khaljīs also flocked to Sīdi's Khānqāh. Jalāluddīn's kindness indirectly encourage the underground activities of these people. Qazī Jalāl Kāshānī, a very influential and intriguing man³⁷ closely attached himself to Sīdī Maulā and used to pass days and nights with him. Kotvāl Biranj and Hathiya Pāik, the latter of whom was a well reputed wrestler and now had fallen on bad days, joined Sīdī. Some other nobles who had lost their jāgīrs and stipends under the Khaljīs also began to frequent the Khānqāh of Sīdī. Soon the number of his followers reached the staggering figure of 10,000.³⁸

c2.s1.34

³⁵ Ferishtah p. 93.

c2.s1.35

³⁶ Barani, p. 209.

c2.s1.36

³⁷ Ferishtah, p. 93, says: جلال الدین کا شانی کہ مرد فتنہ انگیز و از اعیان بادشاه بود-

c2.s1.37

³⁸ Ibid p. 93.

c2.s1.38

As time passed people were not slow to understand that the nocturnal meetings of Qāzī Jalāl Qāshānī, Qāzī Urdu,³⁹ and many others at Sīdī Maulā's mansion one day would surely bring about some trouble. Kotvāl Biranjtan and Hathiya Pāik even planned an open revolt and decided to assault sultān Jalāluddīn on a Friday when he went to Jāmaʻ Masjid for prayers. After finishing Jalāluddīn their plan was to declare Sīdī as Khalīfa and marry him to a daughter of sultān Nāsiruddīn. Qāzī Jalāl Qāshānī was to receive the title of Qāzī Khān and the jāgīr of Multan. Jāgīrs and offices were to be distributed among the sons of the nobility of Balban. As generally happens one of the persons present there turned approver and plainly told the sultān of all that had transpired at Sīdī's place.⁴⁰ All the conspirators were instantly arrested, beaten and fettered, and then dragged to the presence of the king.⁴¹ The more Jalāluddīn asked them to make confessions the more they professed their innocence. It was not the custom in those days to extort confession by torture,⁴² and therefore, it was decided to test their veracity by ordeal of fire. A fierce fire was lighted at Bahārpur and the king proceeded there accompanied by his nobles and the accused. All the learned and important men of the city assembled there, and the people of Bahārpur only added to the crowd. The sultan ordered that the accused should be made to sit in the fire and if they were truthful they would escape unscathed. But the 'Ulamā dissented. Ordeal by fire, argued the jurists, was contrary to reason and forbidden by law. The quality of fire was to burn, and it made no distinction between the guilty and not-guilty. Moreover Sidi and his henchmen could not be declared guilty since the accusation levelled against them by only one man had not been confirmed by witnesses.⁴⁵

c2.s1.39

³⁹ Badaoni, Ranking vol. I p. 234.

c2.s1.40

⁴⁰ It appears that the death of Khan-i-Khanān about this time had weakened the party. Ferishtah, however, leaves the impression that he died after Sidi's execution. Fershtah, p. 94.

c2.s1.41

⁴¹ Badaoni, Ranking vol. I p. 234.

c2.s1.42

⁴² Barani p. 211. Here the historian most probably compares the days of ʻAlāuddīn when torture was commonly practised.

c2.s1.43

⁴⁵ Barani p. 211.

c2.s1.44

The persistent refusal of the accused to confess anything exasperated the sultan. There was no way of proving their guilt, but to all appearances a conspiracy had been hatched and Jalāluddīn was determined to punish the offenders. Qāzī Jalāl Kāshānī was transferred as Qāzī of Badaon. The sons of nobles understood to be partisans in the clique were exiled to various places and their property was confiscated. Biranjtan and Hathiya Pāik, who had taken the responsibility of killing the king were severely punished. Sidi Maula, fettered and chained, was brought before the king. His very presence threw Jalāl into a rage and he addressed Shaikh Abu Bakr Tūsī of the Haidrī order, who was present there with his disciples, to avenge him of Sīdī Maula. Bahri, a follower of the order, attacked Sīdī with a razor⁴⁶ and hamstringed him. They shaved off his whiskers to the chin and stabbed him in the side with a sack-makers needle. Meanwhile Arkali Khan who entertained ideas of hostility towards Sidi beackoned to an elephant driver who drove the animal over the victim and crushed him to death.

c2.s1.45

⁴⁶ The order of the Haidri Qalandars was founded by Shaikh Najmuddin Tūsī. The Qalandars shave off their head and face and even eye-brows. It is, therefore, customary with them to keep a razor. Consequently Bahri was able to whip out a razor and attack Sidi.

c2.s1.46

The death of Sidi Maula was too much for an orthodox Maulana like Ziyāuddīn Baranī to stand. He had visited the Shaikh a number of times and had had the privilege of dining at his mansion.⁴⁵ Therefore he associates some unpleasant happenings to such an unjust execution. According to him on the day of the Shaikh's death a black wind-storm covered the sky and from that day the Jalālī government lost its stability. Shortly after, the rains stopped. Delhi witnessed one of the most terrible famines. The price of grains rose to a *ser a tankah* and the people forgot the taste of bread.⁴⁶ Peasants⁴⁷ of Sivalik flocked into Delhi and in batches of twenty or thirty flung themselves into the Jumna. The sultan and his nobles tried their utmost to ameliorate the distress but could do little.⁴⁸ Next year so havy were the rains that people hardly remembered ever to have witnessed the like of them. It was only after constant prayers that conditions became normal in about two years' time.⁴⁹

c2.s1.47

⁴⁵ Baranī p. 209.

c2.s1.48

⁴⁶ *Futūh*, p. 212.

c2.s1.49

⁴⁷ Baranī has Hindus.

c2.s1.50

⁴⁸ *Futūh*, p. 212.

c2.s1.51

⁴⁹ *Futūh*, p. 213.

c2.s1.52

The closing remarks of Baranī lead one to the inference that Sīdī was unjustly punished and died a martyr's death. But that is not so. It is true that the sentence of death was hastily awarded and a thorough inquiry was not made, but that a conspiracy was hatched against the sultan in which Sīdī was seriously implicated is clearly attested in the narrative of Baranī himself. The revolt of Malik Chhajjū, the gauntlets thrown at Malik Tājuddīn's, and the open talks that Jalāluddīn was a misfit on the throne, had sufficiently exasperated the sultan. Following upon these came the blood-curdling conspiracy, in which Jalāluddīn was to be killed, Sīdī was to marry a royal princess and become Khalīfā. No other king would have tolerated all that happened at Sīdī's for months together. The politician-cum-saint would have received the same doom at the hands of any other king. Jalāluddīn was quite justified in ordering Sīdī's execution.⁵⁰

c2.s1.53

⁵⁰ According to Yahya, three days after Sīdī's death a pit 10 yards (gaz) long and three yards wide was dug out and a great fire kindled for the purpose of throwing into it the remaining adherents of the Maula. But Arkali Khān interposed on their behalf and they were released. *T.M.S.* p. 67. It is quite probable. Arkalī's staunch enemy having been executed no useful purpose could have been served by killing his followers.

c2.s1.54

*Abortive Expedition to Ranthambhor (1291 A.D.).*

c2.s1.55

Soon after Sīdī's execution sultan Jalāluddīn marched with a large force towards the fortress of Ranthambhor⁵¹ on Thursday 18th Rabīul Avval 690 (22nd March 1291).⁵² Since Ikhtiyāruddīn Khān-i-Khānān, the eldest son of the sultan had died, Jalāluddīn left his second son Arkalī Khān as viceroy (naib) at Kīlugharī.⁵³ The king left Sīrī for Lohravat⁵⁴ and proceeded to Chāndāval⁵⁵ where he stayed for some time. In two more marches they reached Rewari⁵⁶ lying about fifty miles south west of Delhi. The march was continued and they arrived at Narnaul a town lying south west of Rewari. They crossed the sandy tracts of Rajputana where "the people had their mouths shut through thirst and a hundred camels were laden with water to satisfy the necessities of the army." After a fortnight's march they arrived on the borders of Ranthambhor. A reconnoitring party was sent in advance to collect information while the soldiers busied themselves in plundering the neighbourhood of Jhain.⁵⁷ During these operations the Turks used poisoned arrows and killed many.⁵⁸

c2.s1.56

⁵¹ For the situation of the fortress see chapter viii note 8.

c2.s1.57

⁵² This is the date of Amīr Khusrau, *Elliot*, vol. III p. 540. *Oriental College Magazine Lahore*, Text, November 1936 p. 28. Barani wrongly has 689.

c2.s1.58

⁵³ *Baranī* p. 213.

c2.s1.59

⁵⁴ Elliot vol. III p. 540 wrongly has Sohrait. *Oriental College Magazine* Text of *Miftāhul Futūh*, Nov. 1936, p. 28, correctly has Lohravat. The village then lying to the west of Sīrī is not traceable now. It was here that Nāsiruddīn Khusrau lost the throne to Ghāzī Tughlaq in 1320.

c2.s1.60

⁵⁵ It lay south-west of Delhi on the road to the Deccan.

c2.s1.61

⁵⁶ It was the *jagir* of Malik Naib during the reign of ‘Alāuddīn.

c2.s1.62

⁵⁷ *Mif. Fut. Elliot*, vol. III p. 541. *Or. Col. Mag.* Nov. 1936 p. 29. For the location of Jhain see chapter VIII note 12

c2.s1.63

⁵⁸ تير زهر آلوده *Mif. Fut. O. C. Mag.* 1936, p. 31.

c2.s1.64

It was then decided to attack the city of Jhain itself. A force of 1,000 strong was despatched under officers like Malik Khurram; Malik Qutlagh Tighin; A‘zam Mubarak, Amīr of Narnaul; Ahmad Sarjandār; Mahmūd Sarjandār; the chief huntsman Ahmad; and Abaji Akhūrbeg. Alarm soon spread in Jhain. The Rai sent one Gurdan Saini with a force of 10,000 Ravats to check the advance of the Turks. Gurdan Saini was a great general and had led several expeditions into the country of Malwa and Gujarat.⁵⁹ But after a severe engagement he was killed and the Hindus fled pell-mell.⁶⁰ The chieftain of Jhain took shelter in the hills of Ranthambhor and three days after this signal victory Jalāluddīn entered Jhain. He greatly admired the beautiful figures, carvings and exquisite colours on stone and wood in the Raja's palace. He also visited the temples ornamented with elaborate work in gold and silver. But his aesthetic tastes were overshadowed by his inconoclastic fervour. He ordered their destruction and thus "made a hell of paradise."⁶¹ Two large bronze images of Brahma, each weighing "more than a thousand *man*," were broken into pieces and the fragements were distributed among officers for throwing them at the gates of Jama' Masjid at Delhi.⁶² A plundering party was despatched under Mahmūd Sarjandār to sack Malwa also, after crossing the rivers Chambal and Kuwari.⁶³ The expedition was a success. Temples were destroyed and the royalists returned with plunder and loot.⁶⁴

c2.s1.65

⁵⁹ Ibid. pp. 33-34.

c2.s1.66

⁶⁰ "But only one man was killed among the royal troops." Ibid. p. 34. Here the poet-historian indulges in gross exaggeration.

c2.s1.67

⁶¹ Elliot vol. III, p. 542. *Or. Col. Mag.* Nov. 1936 pp. 35-38. Also Barani, p. 213.

c2.s1.68

⁶² Elliot, vol. III p. 542. *Futūh* pp. 216-17.

c2.s1.69

⁶³ *O. C. Mag.* Feb. 1937, Text of *Mif. Fut.* pp. 38-39. Baranī p. 213.

c2.s1.70

⁶⁴ Ferishtah p 94.

c2.s1.71

The Rana of Ranthambhor,⁶⁵ says Barani, together with the Rais and Muqaddams and their families shut themselves up in the fort and prepared to stand a siege. Jalāluddīn ordered construction of war engines like Maghrabi, Sabāt and Gargach⁶⁶ to encircle the fort. He proceeded to Ranthambhor to reconnoitre the fort personally but returned to Jhain the same day. He plainly told his officers that he would not be able to capture it.⁶⁷ A large number of soldiers would be killed even in raising a *pashib* and constructing *gargach* and the sultan was not prepared to waste so many lives nor dared he see face to face the widows and orphans of the dead. The strange argument of the sultan prompted Malik Aḥmad Chap to waste some lessons on statecraft. "Whenever a conqueror has determined on some expedition no consideration had deflected him from attaining his object. If Your Majesty returns without taking the citadel, the Raja of this place will become proud and your kingly dignity will be lowered in the breasts of men."⁶⁸ But the non-virile sultan had made up his mind to return. Boasting that "he did not value even ten such forts above a single hair of a Musalman,"⁶⁹ he struck the camp and arrived at the capital on the 3rd of Jamadiul Akhir 690 (June 2, 1291).⁷⁰

c2.s1.72

⁶⁵ He was Hammīra, who ascended in 1283 and was killed fighting 'Alāuddīn.

c2.s1.73

⁶⁶ For these appliances of war see chapter VIII note 14.

c2.s1.74

⁶⁷ Barani, p. 213.

c2.s1.75

⁶⁸ Barani, pp. 214, 215.

c2.s1.76

⁶⁹ *Ibid.* p. 213.

c2.s1.77

⁷⁰ *Miftahul Futūh O. C. Mag.* Feb., 1937 p. 39. Elliot vol. III p. 543.

c2.s1.78

*Mongol invasion 1292.*⁷¹

c2.s1.79

⁷¹ The account of this invasion by 'Isāmī is misleading. He puts it in the beginning of Jalāl's reign and says that Malik Khāmosh and not the king commanded the Indian army. *Futūh*, pp. 203-08.

c2.s1.80

The disgraceful retreat from Ranthambhor was followed by another disaster. In 691 H.⁷² (1291-92 A.D.) 'Abdullah, a grandson⁷³ of Halāku Khan of Persia, advanced with a force of 150,000 Mughals.⁷⁴ On receiving the news sultan Jalāluddin marched out of the capital to encounter the Mughals.⁷⁵ By forced marches he arrived on the confines of Sannam,⁷⁶ where the Mongol vanguard had already arrived. The river Sindh separated the two armies and preparations to fight a decisive battle were made on both sides.⁷⁷ Meanwhile small skirmishes were desultorily fought between detached parties of the rival forces in which the enemy was worsted.⁷⁸ One day a portion of the Mongol army crossed the river and joined in a fearful battle with the royal vanguard. According to Baranī the enemy was completely defeated and a large number of them were slain. About a thousand Mongol officers, commanders of a hundred horse (Amirān-i-Sadah), fell into the hands of the Indian army. About this time negotiations for a truce were started and after some formalities a meeting was arranged between 'Abdullah and Jalāluddīn. They met on terms of cordiality and presents were exchanged on both sides. 'Abdullah returned to his native land but Alghu, or Ulugh Khan, who was also related to Changīz, together with some high officers remained in this country and accepted Islam. Jalāluddīn married one of his daughters to Alghu and he and his 4,000 adherents⁷⁹ came with their families to the capital city. They were granted facilities and allowances by the king. They fixed their colonies in Ghayāspur, Indarpat, Kilugharī and Taluka,⁸⁰ which were known as Mughalpura.⁸¹ They mixed up with the people of the country and came to be known as neo-Muslims.⁸²

c2.s1.81

⁷² Barani p. 218.

c2.s1.82

⁷³ Barani has "عبدالله نبسه هلوالعين" *nabshah* means a relation, a grandson. Hallu is surely a mistake for Halāku conqueror of Persia and grandson of Changiz.

c2.s1.83

⁷⁴ Barani, p. 218, has ten to fifteen *tumans*. Ferishtah p. 94, has ten *tumans*. A *tuman* consisted of 10,000 horse.

c2.s1.84

⁷⁵ According to 'Isāmī the Indian army consisted of 30,000 horse. *Futūh* p. 206.

c2.s1.85

⁷⁶ Baranī has بررام, Ferishtah هرام and Hājiuddabīr, following on Baranī has بورام. But in all probability it is Sannam on the north west frontier. 'Isāmī also has Barrām and says that the engagement was fought near river Sindh. *Futūh* p. 205. Badaonī, has Sanām, Ranking vol. I p. 236.

c2.s1.86

⁷⁷ The Indians were always on the defensive. Either on account of fear or for a point of strategy Indians never took to offensive in fighting the Mughals. Even the war-lord 'Alāuddīn never attacked the mongols first.

c2.s1.87

⁷⁸ Baranī, also Ferishtah p. 94.

c2.s1.88

⁷⁹ Ferishtah p. 94.

c2.s1.89

⁸⁰ All these lay in the suburbs of Delhi and on the west bank of the Jumna. Indarpat was in north, Kilugharī in middle and Ghayāspur in south. In Ghayaspur lies the tomb of Nizāmuddīn Aulia. Taluka (تلوكه) cannot be identified.

c2.s1.90

⁸¹ Mughalpura is still the name of a village near Delhi and is indicated in the map prefixed to Thomas: *Chronicles*. According to Badaoni Ghayāspur and Mughalpura are synonymous, Ranking vol. I p. 230.

c2.s1.91

⁸² Barani p. 219.

c2.s1.92

The narrative of Barani leaves the impression on the reader's mind that the Mongols lost against the royalists and were granted a treaty by the king. But the fact is that Jalāluddīn had not dared face the 150,000 Mongols in a major encounter and had hurried to make a settlement, giving the Mongols very favourable terms. True, he had defeated the Mongols on many former occasions but in his old age he had lost all vigour and virility and during the seven years of his rule he was an extreme pacifist.

c2.s1.93

*Some minor campaigns of Jalāluddīn (1292-95)*

c2.s1.94

The Mongol trouble having concluded, Jalāluddīn turned his attention to state affairs. He gave the governorship of Lahore, Multan and Sindh to Arkali Khan⁸³ ostensibly to check the Mongols. About the end of 691 H. (1292 A.D.) he led two minor campaigns and was successful at both. First he advanced on Mandor⁸⁴ and took it in the very first assault. He pillaged its environs and returned with a large amount of booty. His second attack was directed against Jhain which he had once before raided during his march to Ranthambhor.

c2.s1.95

⁸³ Ferishtah p. 94.

c2.s1.96

⁸⁴ *Tab. Akb.*, wrongly has Mandu.

c2.s1.97

These victories of Jalāluddīn were followed by a brilliant feat of ‘Alāuddīn at Bhilsa and then at Devagīrī. The last days of Jalāluddīn were eclipsed by the brilliant achievements of ‘Alāuddīn in south India, who henceforward played the chief role in the arena of Indian history.

Cites (5)