Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

History of the Khaljis, A.D. 1290–1320 c7.s4: The Expedition to Warangal via Bengal (1302-3)

History of the Khaljis, A.D. 1290–1320 c7.s4

Language
English

The Expedition to Warangal via Bengal (1302-3)

c7.s4.1

The year which witnessed Chittor campaign,³⁷ also saw the despatch of an army to Warangal under the command of Malik Jūna, son of Ghāzi Malik and Malik Jhūjhū, governor of Kara and nephew of Nusrat Khan. Choicest troops were placed at the disposal of the commanders and they were ordered to take the eastern route via Bengal and Orissa.³⁸ The sultan as a prince had himself marched into the Deccan peninsula; but he had then taken the Ellichpur route which was shorter than the one via Bengal and Orissa. "For some obscure reason", writes col. Woolseley Haig, "this expendition marched on warangal, the capital of the Kākatiya rajas, by the then unexplored eastern route, through Bengal and Orissa."³⁹ This "obscure reason"

c7.s4.2

³⁷ Barani (p. 300) puts the invasion of Chittor, the expedition to Warangal and the invasion of the Mughals under Targhī in one and the same year. He also says that 'Alāūddin received the news of Targhī's invasion while he was on his way back from Chittor. The situation at the capital, therefore, after the king's return from Chittor was very serious and he could not have thought of sending an expedition "consisting of the choicest troops" at a time when the Mughals were preparing to attack Delhi. In all probability, therefore, the expedition was sent before 'Alāūddin marched to Chittor and Ferishtah also writes so. Amir Khusrau gives the date of the march to Chittor as Monday the 8th of Jamadi-ul-Akhir 702 (January 26th., 1303). Thus Malik Jūna must certainly have left Delhi about the beginning of 1303 or in the last months of 1302 A.D. Khazāin Allahabad University Ms. fol. 30 b.

c7.s4.3

we find Shamsuddin Firoz establishing himself at Lakhnauti in the year 701 A.H. (1301—2 A.D.). In fact the history of Bengal of this period is shrouded in obscurity and it is difficult to know whether Ruknuddin died in 701 A.H. or was ousted by his brother Shamsuddin Firoz who established himself in Western Bengal.⁴² Not much is known even about Shamsuddin except that his coins which range from the year 701 to 722 A.H. (1302 to 1321 A.D.) indicate his possession of Lakhnauti during that period. His coins minted at Sunargaon establish his possession of the eastern provinces of Bengal also.⁴³ It is significant, however, that Shamsuddin felt strong enough to style himself as "Sultan" as is clearly manifest from his coins. It is quite probable that the outbreak of the various rebellions of Ikat Khan, Hāji Maula and 'Umar and Mangū, as also Sultan 'Alāūddīn's pre-occupation at Ranthambhor, might have induced Firoz to assume independence. This view is supported by an inscription on the Madrasa of Zafar Khan in Hugli District.⁴⁴ It is dated 713 A.H. (1313-14 A.D.) and mentions Shamsuddin Abul Muzaffar as the reigning monarch. 'Alāūddin could never have tolerated Bengal to become independent of the Delhi Sultanate. In fact he had an eye on Bengal even before he became king. On his return from Devagiri he had despatched Zafar Khan to make preparations for the occupation of Bengal in case he failed in his plans against Jalāluddīn.⁴⁵ Again, when Zafar Khan's popularity had excited the envy of the Sultan the latter had thought of giving the former a large force and ordering him to seize and govern Bengal.⁴⁶ Preoccupation with other affairs had left him no time to prosecute his designs. But when Firoz's conduct became intolerable, he made up his mind to send an army in 1302-3 A.D. Thus the object of the campaign was two-fold—to punish the recalcitrant Firoz,⁴⁷ and, if possible, to effect the conquest of Warangal.

c7.s4.4

⁴² Thomas: *Chronicles* p. 193.

c7.s4.5

⁴³ Many a veteran numismatist like Thomas (*J.A.S.B.* 1867 p. 45), Lanepoole (*Catalogue of Indian coins in the British Museum, Muhammadan states* p. 10) and Nelson wright determine the period of Firoz's reign from 702 to 722 A.H. But in a hoard of coins of Bengal kings recently discovered from Kalna, District Burdwan, there are four silver coins of Shamsuddin Firoz struck at Lakhnauti bearing the date 701 distinctly inscribed round the margin. See *Jour. Num. Soc. of India* vol. V, Part I, pp. 65-66.

c7.s4.6

⁴⁴ This inscription is copied and translated by Blochmann in his "*Notes on the Arabic and Persian inscriptions in the Hoogli District*" *J.A.S.B.* 1870 pp. 280-88. The title on the inscription confirms that Firoz Shah must have been firmly established in western Bengal.

c7.s4.7

⁴⁵ *Baranī* pp. 228-9.

c7.s4.8

⁴⁶ *Ibid.* p. 254, has او را چند هزار سوار دهد و طرف لکھنوتی فرستد تا اقلیم لکھنوتی بگیرد و هما نجا باشد —

c7.s4.9

⁴⁷ In 1302 A.D. when the expedition was sent, Chittor, Jalor, Sevana, Malwa, Bihar and Bengal and so many kingdoms in north India itself were out of the pale of the Muslim government. Why then did 'Alāuddīn think of the conquest of Telingana all at once while most of north India was yet unconquered? Moreover, 'Alāuddīn conquered the Deccan kingdoms from 1308 A.D. onwards, when he had subjected almost the whole of northern India. Thus the expedition of 1302 meant to accomplish the conquest of Warangal was in fact sent to Bengal as will be clear hereafter.

c7.s4.10

No detailed account of the expedition has been give by Ziyāuddīn or Ferishtah. From their narratives it is not even clear if the army ever reached Warangal. Ferishtah, while describing the second expedition to Warangal under Malik Naib Kāfūr, says that on a previous occasion an expedition had been sent to Warangal through Bengal but since it had come back confused and shattered without accomplishing anything, a second expedition was sent to that country under Malik Kāfūr.⁴⁸ He does not say where the catastrophe befell the imperial army. Barani, however, says that the army reached Arangal (Warangal) but as rains had set in nothing could be accomplished.⁴⁹ Barani's meagre information about this expedition may be due to the reason that the unpleasant affairs of Bengal might have been kept secret by ‘Alāūddīn. As early as in 700-701 A.H. (1300-02 A.D.) the sultan had to face a number of revolts. He was much upset. While at Ranthambhor, he made a secret of the rebellion of Hājī Maula. Under such circumstances and in keeping with his habit he should have kept secret any risings or reverses, and hence the silence of Barani. Moreover, Ziyā Barani was ignorant of the local history of Bengal. He all along thought that Bengal was peaceful under the rule of Nāṣiruddīn Maḥmūd, son of Balban, throughout the reigns of ‘Alāūddīn and his successors, until the time of Ghiyāsuddīn Tughlaq, who, on his march towards Bengal found Nāṣiruddīn in Tirhut and reinstated him.⁵⁰ The historian has clearly confused Nāṣiruddīn son of Shamsuddīn Fīroz with his grandfather of the same name. He would thus have us believe that the same Nāṣiruddīn ruled for forty three years. Such a contention is untenable against overwhelming numismatical and epigraphical evidence. Had Barani been a little more informed about the contemporary events in Bengal some further information about the expedition, which was, in fact, directed mainly against Bengal and only incidently against Warangal, would have been given by him.

c7.s4.11

⁴⁸ Ferishtah p. 118.

c7.s4.12

⁴⁹ Barani p. 300.

c7.s4.13

⁵⁰ Ibid. p. 451.

c7.s4.14

In short the enterprize failed altogether and Malik Jūna and Malik Jhūjhū returned with their shattered forces to join the Sultan at the capital, but were stopped in the vicinity of Badaon as Qutlugh Khvājā was investing Delhi. In Bengal Shamsuddīn Fīroz remained firmly secure as ever and wielded authority until 722 A.H. (1321 A.D.) while Warangal does not seem to have been affected at all by the expedition.

Cites (3)