Twilight of the Sultanate c13.s2.50

c13.s2.50

⁵⁹ Nizāmuddīn Ahmad, Ni'āmatulla, Ahmad Yādgār and 'Abdulla say that Qutb Khan Lodī had been in captivity for seven years. Only Ferishta (I, 176 lines 7 ff) has seven months. T.A., I, 303; *Makhzan*, 47 (a); T.S.A., 14; T.D., 17. A.B. Pandey in *The First Afghan Empire in India*, 73, agrees with the other chroniclers. But the period of incarceration given by Ferishta appears to be more reasonable. The year of the last war between Bahlūl and Mahmūd Sharqī is not known, but it is clear from the narrative of the chroniclers that Qutb Khan was imprisoned only a little before the death of Mahmūd. Mahmūd had died in camp while the war was on. His successor Muhammad ruled for five months only (Ferishta, II, 309). The first act of Muhammad's successor Husain Shāh was to come to terms with Bahlūl and release Qutb Khan. So seven months and not seven years is the correct time. Badaonī does not explicitly mention seven months but implies that Qutb's release was effected within a period of one year. (I, 307-8; Ranking I, 404). It may also be remembered that Bahlūl had not visited Delhi during this time. As he was returning after the battle with Mahmūd, Shams Khātūn had sent him a taunting message which had made him immediately turn back towards Jaunpur. He was in all probability not away from the capital for seven long years just after his accession. Pandey's mistake lies in accepting July, 1452 (p. 72 n. 5) for the "second war" with Jaunpur, for which there is no warrant.