Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Twilight of the Sultanate c14: Chapter 9: Efforts at Stability

Twilight of the Sultanate c14

Language
English

Contents

Chapter 9: Efforts at Stability

c14.2

Bahlūl Lodi's sudden death in camp provided an opportunity to the Afghan nobles to push forward the claims of their favourite princes for the throne. Bahlūl had nine sons,¹ of whom (since Khwājā Bayezīd the eldest had pre-deceased his father), Nizām Khan, Bārbak Shāh, 'Ālam Khan and Fatēh Khan were possible claimants. Before marching to Gwalior the late Sultan, pleased with Nizām Khan's work against the rebels of the Punjab and Multan, had appointed him to the charge of Delhi and had also nominated him as the heir-apparent.² But about the time of his death some influential Lodī Amīrs prevailed upon the king to nominate as his successor his grandson Āzam Humayūn, son of Khwājā Bayezīd and governor of Kalpi. Unable to resist their solicitation Sultan Bahlūl sent for Nizām Khan from Delhi to convey to him his eleventh hour decision. But 'Umar Khan Sarwanī, the Vazīr, who was not a party to this choice, sent word to Nizām warning him not to leave Delhi. The prince, therefore, delayed his departure and meanwhile Bahlūl died at Milaulī near Saket.

c14.3

¹ T.A., I, 298. Also De's trs., 337 and n. 3. Ferishta, I, 174.

c14.4

² T.D., 31-35; T.S.A., 31-34; W.M., 9-10.

c14.5

In the camp the nobles who did not want Nizām Khan began to discuss the question of succession with all earnestness and heat, since now an immediate choice had to be made. According to Ferishta some of them were in favour of Āzam Humayūn while some others wanted Bārbak Shāh, the eldest surviving son of Bahlūl.³ While they were thus deliberating Nizām Khan's mother queen Zeba,⁴ who was watching the proceedings from behind the curtain, addressed the assembly and pleaded for Nizām's claims.

c14.6

³ Ferishta, I, 179.

c14.7

⁴ According to Yādgār her name was Hēmā, according to Ferishta, Zeba and according to Ni'āmatulla, Ambha. This lady was a goldsmith's daughter. Yādgār describing her beauty says that her face was like tulip and her hair black as jet. Bahlūl was attracted by her beauty while he was governor of Sarhind. He married her after ascending the throne of Delhi. T.S.A., 17; Ferishta, I, 179.

c14.8

But 'Isa Khan Lodī, son of Tātār Khan Lodī, and cousin of Nizām, snubbed her saying: "The son of a goldsmith's daughter was not fit to be the king as it is proverbial that monkeys make but bad carpenters". His insolence towards the widowed queen annoyed Khan-i-Khānān who rebuked 'Isa Khan. An altercation between the two only strengthened Khan-i-Khānān's support for Nizām. He took his party to Jalālī, 11 miles from Kol, together with the corpse of the deceased monarch and summoned Nizām Khan there. Intrigued at the situation, the prince consulted Qutlugh Khan, the Sharqī Vazīr, who after his capture had been won over and was living at Delhi, and on the latter's advice Nizām started post-haste for Jalālī. His arrival there disarmed his opponents who left for their respective fiefs. He sent his father's body to Delhi to be interred there, and with the support of Khan-i-Jahān, Khan-i-Khānān Farmūlī and the majority of the nobles⁵ he ascended the throne on Friday 17 July, 1489 (18 Sh'abān, 894 H)⁶ in the palace of Fīrōz Shāh on the bank of the Kali Nadi,⁷ with the title of Sikandar Shāh.

c14.9

⁵ *Makhzan*, 51 (b).

c14.10

⁶ T.A., I, 314; Badaoni, I, 313; Ferishta, I, 179; T.S.A., 34-5; T.D. 36; and *Khulāsat-ut-Tawārīkh*, 273. Dorn, 55 has 7 Sh'abān which was Monday and not Friday. *Makhzan*, 52 (b) correctly has 17.

c14.11

⁷ Nizāmuddin, and Badaoni have Kalī Nadī. Also T. D., 36 and T.S.A., 34-5. But Ferishta, I, 179 has Beah. Rizqulla, W.M., 6 (b), puts it very clearly. در نواحی جلالی در کنار آب کالی نی که آنجا كوشك سلطان فیروز شاه است میان نظام بر تخت سلطنت کامگاری کامرانی گردید (In the vicinity of Jalālī, on the bank of the (river) Kālīni, where there is a palace of Sultan Fīrōz Shāh, Mīan Nizām ascended the throne of the Sultanate.)

Suppression of Rivals

c14.s1.1

After celebrating his accession in a befitting manner⁸ the new Sultan repaired to Delhi.⁹ He had not waded through blood to the throne, but his opponents were strong and not yet reconciled. There were three potential rivals to be dealt with: (*a*) Āzam Humayūn, governor of Kalpi and son of the Sultan's brother Khwājā Bayezīd, (*b*) his elder brother Bārbak Shāh ruler of Jaunpur and (*c*) his brother 'Ālam Khan, governor of Rapri, who had asserted his independence by assuming the royal title.

c14.s1.2

⁸ Dorn, 55; T.S.A., 35.

c14.s1.3

⁹ According to 'Abdulla and Ahmad Yādgar he immediately marched to Bayana and according to Ferishta against 'Isa Khan Lodī. But they do not seem to be correct as later events would show. T.D., 48; T.S.A., 36-37; Ferishta, I, 179.

c14.s1.4

Sikandar Lodī first marched against his younger brother 'Ālam Khan. The latter shut the gates of Rapri but, unable to stand a siege, fled to 'Īsa Khan at Patiali.¹⁰ Sikandar conferred Rapri on Khan-i-Khānān Farmūlī and himself marched to Etawah where he stayed for seven months sending feelers to 'Ālam Khan to come over to his side. At last the Sultan succeeded in weaning away his brother from 'Īsa Khan's side by giving him the governorship of Etawah. Thereupon he marched to Patiali and Shamsābād. 'Īsa had opposed Sikandar's candidature, and was prepared for the worst. He fought like a man but was defeated and soon after succumbed to his injuries received in the battle.¹¹ The government of Patiali was conferred upon Rai Ganesh.¹² This was a diplomatic move. Ganesh was a partisan of Bārbak Shāh in the east and by this gesture was won over to Sikandar's side.

c14.s1.5

¹⁰ Dorn, 55.

c14.s1.6

¹¹ *T.A.*, I, 315; Ferishta, I, 180; *Makhzan*, 52 (b).

c14.s1.7

¹² Badaonī, I, 314.

c14.s1.8

From Patiali, the Sultan led his forces against his more formidable rival, Bārbak Shāh. He had sincerely wished to avoid a war with his brother, but in vain. Bārbak was ruling independently at Jaunpur ever since A. D. 1486 (892 H) with his own Khutba and coinage, but the legend on it shows that he was all obedience to his father.¹³ Sikandar had been lenient to his brother 'Ālam Khan and had reconciled with 'Īsa Khan before the latter died of his injuries.¹⁴ He, therefore, felt that Bārbak would learn a lesson from his liberal attitude and insert Sikandar's name in the Khutba and coinage of Jaunpur. On furnishing this proof of loyalty he was to be left undisturbed. But when Ism'aīl Khan Nūhānī carried the suggestion to Bārbak Shāh, the latter refused to comply.¹⁵ Not only that; instigated by some Afghan chiefs and secret intrigues of the exiled Husain Sharqī, he began to make preparations for war. This Sikandar could hardly tolerate and marched towards Jaunpur.

c14.s1.9

¹³ Thomas, 377. On his coins he is mentioned as the *naib* (Deputy) of the Amīrul Mauminīn (used for Delhi Sultans on Indo-Muslim coins) at Jaunpur. On one side باربك شاه سلطان (Bārbak Shāh Sultan). On the other نائب اميرالمؤمنين بشهر جونپور ٨٩٢ (Naib Amīrul Mauminīn, in the city of Jaunpur, 892 H).

c14.s1.10

¹⁴ *Makhzan*, 52 (b).

c14.s1.11

¹⁵ Dorn, 56; T.D., 48 and T.S.A., 37 say that he was informed of Bārbak's attitude while at Delhi.

c14.s1.12

Bārbak Shāh also left Jaunpur with his army to meet his brother. On the way he was joined by Miān Muhammad Khan Farmūlī (also known as Kālā Pahār), Sikandar's sister's son and governor of Avadh and Bahraich. The contending forces met near Qannauj. After great slaughter¹⁶ Bārbak Shāh was defeated and his two trusted partisans Mubārak Khan Nūhānī and Muhammad Khan Farmūlī fell into the hands of Sikander Shāh. The sultan treated Kālā Pahār so well that he was not only won over to his side,¹⁷ but turned his sword against Bārbak. This sudden *volte face* of his supporter so completely demoralised Bārbak Shāh that he fled to Badaon, but was eventually compelled to sue for peace. Sikandar treated him well, took him back to Jaunpur and reinstated him there. However, he assigned the *parganas* around Jaunpur to his trusted officers as a check upon the activities of Bārbak as well as of Husain Shāh Sharqī who was still lurking in Bihar.¹⁸

c14.s1.13

¹⁶ Dorn, 56.

c14.s1.14

¹⁷ Ferishta, I, 180; *Makhzan*, 53 (a).

c14.s1.15

¹⁸ T.A., I, 316; Badaoni, I, 314; Ferishta, I, 180; T.D., 48-49; T.S.A., 37-38. Dorn, 56. *Makhzan*, 53 (a-b); M.R., I., 454.

c14.s1.16

The third rival Āzam Humayūn now hardly possessed any courage to oppose the Sultan, so that when Sikandar marched from Jaunpur to Kalpi, he just relieved Āzam Humayūn of it and conferred it on Mahmūd Khan Lodī.

c14.s1.17

With the suppression of his rivals, Sikandar Shāh was left the sole master of Hindustan. He was a mature man of a little over thirty at the time of his accession.¹⁹ As a child he had been precocious. Loved by his father, he had received an excellent education. In administration he was trained by Qutlugh Khan, the talented Vazīr of Jaunpur and in arms by commanders like Dariyā Khan Nūhānī and Khan-i-Khānān Farmūlī. As he grew up he was given Sambhal as his personal jagīr. Later on he was appointed governor of Sarhind. During the last days of Bahlūl, Tātār Khan of Lahore and Saif Khan of Multan, who had rebelled, were successfully defeated by him.²⁰ Bahlūl was so immensely pleased with the prince's exploits that before marching on his last campaign to Gwalior he had given him the charge of Delhi and nominated him as his heir-apparent.

c14.s1.18

¹⁹ 'Abdulla says that Sikandar was 18 years of age at the time of his accession, but he is incorrect. Almost all chroniclers say that he was born in the seventh year of Bahlūl's reign. Bahlūl ascended the throne in 1451 and so Sikandar must have been born in 1457 or 1458. In 1489 he would have been thirty-one. That he was advanced in age is confirmed by Ni'āmatulla and Nizāmuddīn who say that Sikandar had six sons at the time of his accession

c14.s1.19

²⁰ W.M., 9 (b); T.S.A., 31; T.D., 32.

c14.s1.20

Born of a beautiful woman, Sikandar was extremely handsome. Although resentful of the unhealthy attentions of Shaikh Hasan, grandson of Shaikh Abu Lala of Rapri²¹ towards his "beauty", he was conscious of his charming personality and his pen-name of Gulrukhī (Rose-faced) was perhaps not adopted just by accident. Ascending the throne at an advanced age, his habits and temperament had been set, and the prominent features of his character were well known. He cared little for magnificence or ostentation. Courage, liberality and politeness were his assets.²² Bigotry, which developed with age, too was not absent in his early days. Before his accession he had expressed a keen desire to go to Kurukshetra to destroy the infidels who had assembled there during a bathing festival. When Miān 'Abdulla Ajodhanī protested against his striking at a time-honoured custom, the prince flew into a rage.²³ Stories about the new Sultan's love of justice were also quite current.²⁴

c14.s1.21

²¹ T.D., 28-30; T.S.A., 29-30; W.M., 12 (a). For Shaikh Hasan's life see *Khazāin-ul-Sūfia*, I, 409 and *Akhbārul Akhyār*, 187.

c14.s1.22

²² T.D., 32-36; T.S.A., 31-34.

c14.s1.23

²³ T.D., 30-31; T.S.A., 30; W.M., 7(b)-8(a).

c14.s1.24

²⁴ T.S.A., 35-36.

c14.s1.25

To resume. Having done away with his last rival at Kalpi, Sikandar Lodī moved westward. Tātār Khan, the governor of Jahtara,²⁵ near Gwalior, came to pay him homage. The Sultan next moved towards Gwalior and sent Khwājā Muhammad Farmūlī with a special robe to Raja Mān Singh. The latter reciprocated the gesture of friendship and sent his nephew to attend on the Sultan. The prince accompanied Sikandar Shāh up to Bayana.

c14.s1.26

²⁵ T.A., I, 316 has Jathra جهتر or Jahtara. So has M.R., I, 456. Col. Ranking, Badaonī, I, Trs., 414 n. 3 also calls it Jathra having adopted it from Ferishta, I, 180 line 18. The place is not traceable now, but in Akbar's time there was a pargana bearing this name near Gwalior and included in the Sarkar of Iraj. Āīn., II, 188.

c14.s1.27

At that time Bayana was a walled city with a flourishing trade. It had become independent under Shams Khan Auhadī at the end of the fourteenth century. A buffer principality between the Sultanates of Delhi and Malwa, it continued to remain so for about a hundred years under the Auhadī (later changed to Jalwānī) house. Afraid of Delhi's encroachment, Bayana had leaned for support on Malwa, or failing it, on Jaunpur—both rivals of Delhi. When during his last days Bahlūl Lodī had marched through Bayana to Alhanpur near Ranthambhor, Sher Khan, governor of Chanderi, a dependency of Bayana, had thrown him back. Sikandar Lodi's success in consolidating his power obliged Bayana's ruler Sultan Sharf, son of Ahmad Khan Jalwānī, to acknowledge his authority. But Sharf had earlier ill-treated Bahlūl and removed his name from the Khutba, and Sikandar did not want to let him go unpunished. He therefore asked Sharf to give up Bayana in exchange for Jalesar, Chandwār, Marehra and Saket.²⁶ Sharf agreed to the proposal, took 'Umar Sarwānī with him to deliver the keys of the fort, but once back in the citadel he changed his mind. Sikandar Shāh had in the meantime proceeded towards Agra, a dependency of Bayana,²⁷ then held by Haibat Khan Jalwānī. Haibat Khan also barred the gates of Agra against the Sultan. He besieged Agra, left some Amirs to continue the siege, and himself returned to Bayana and captured it in A. D. 1492 (898 H).²⁸ Bayana was conferred upon Khan-i-Khānān Farmūlī, the Sultan's guardian in youth, and Sultan Sharf, who would have been wiser to keep his word, was chased out of it. The Sultan then returned to Delhi.

c14.s1.28

²⁶ *T.A.*, I, 316; Ferishta, I, 180; M.R., I, 455. Marehra is a town in Etah district, 27° 44′ N., 78° 35′ E. Dist. Gaz. U.P., XII, 187.

c14.s1.29

²⁷ *Makhzan*, 54 (a).

c14.s1.30

²⁸ *T.A.*, I, 316; Ferishta, I, 180; Badaoni, I, 315 and *Makhzan*, 54 (a) have 897 H. But Dorn, 56 and C.I.S.G., I, 233 have 898 H and they are correct. Jaunpur's rebellion was suppressed in 899 H and Sikandar Shāh marched to it immediately after the capture of Bayana.

The Bachgotīs

c14.s2.1

The Sultan had been in a camp for long and needed rest badly.

c14.s2.2

But only twenty-four days²⁹ after his arrival at the capital he had to rush to the east where the Bachgotīs were reported to be creating disturbances. The Bachgotīs were a tribe of turbulent Rajputs descended from the Mainpuri Chauhans.³⁰ Their leader was Jūgā.³¹ At the instigation of Husain Sharqī he collected a large force of a hundred thousand horse and foot³² and rose in revolt in the east. The Bachgotīs drove out Mubārak Khan, governor of Kara, killed his brother Sher Khan and frightened Bārbak Shāh into hurrying to Kālā Pahār at Dariyābād.³³ Raja Bhēd (Bhēdachandra) of Bhatghora (Rewa),³⁴ who also seems to have been in league with the rebels, attacked Mubārak Khan Nūhānī when the latter was crossing at the ferry of Jhusi, a small town across the Ganga opposite Allahabad, and imprisoned him.

c14.s2.3

²⁹ *T.A.*, I, 317; *Ferishta*, I, 180.

c14.s2.4

³⁰ Elliot, *Races of North Western Province*, I, 47-49. Badaonī, Ranking, I, 414-15 and n. 13. The Bachgotīs (or Basgotīs as they are called now) are still found in large numbers in the Allahabad-Jaunpur region.

c14.s2.5

³¹ *T.D.*, 50; T.S.A., 38; *W.M.*, 10 (a & b).

c14.s2.6

³² *T.A.*, I, 317; *T.D.*, 50; *T.S.A.*, 38; Badaonī, I, 315.

c14.s2.7

³³ In Barabanki dist., U.P., situated between Lucknow and Gonda. *Dist. Gaz. U.P.*, XLVIII, 197-98.

c14.s2.8

³⁴ All the texts have Raja Bhēd of Panna. Ferishta, I, 180 has Rai Sehdeva of Thatta. He is no other than Raja Bhēdachandra, the Baghela Raja of Bhatghora or Rewa.

c14.s2.9

Enraged at the activities of the Bachgotīs, Sikandar Lodī started for the east and within a week arrived at Dalmau, a town of great antiquity lying opposite Kara, in A.D. 1493 (early 899 H).³⁵ His arrival had a salutary effect. Bārbak Shāh hurried to join him. Raja Bhēd, overawed, released Mubārak Nūhānī who also repaired to the Sultan. Their joint forces defeated the Bachgotīs on the bank of the Gomti. The rebels were cut down and dispersed and much booty fell into the hands of the Sultan’s men, but Jūgā escaped to join Husain Sharqī in the fort of Chaund.³⁶ Sikandar tried to win over Husain by inviting him to jointly fight the "infidel rebels" but on receiving a rebuff attacked him. Husain Sharqī gave a determined fight at Katghar (in Distt. Rae Bareli), but he was defeated and fled back towards Bihar.³⁷ The Sultan was thoroughly disgusted at the incompetence of Bārbak Shāh in holding Jaunpur, and bestowed it upon Mubārak Khan Mujikhail.³⁸ Bārbak was imprisoned and left in charge of Haibat Khan and 'Umar Khan Sarwānī.

c14.s2.10

³⁵ *Makhzan*, 54 (b).

c14.s2.11

³⁶ *T.D.*, 50; *W.M.*, 10 (b). N.B.Roy identifies the place as Chanda, a village in Sultanpur, 25 miles from it. Roy, *Ni‘āmatulla’s History of the Afghans*, 139. But he is not correct. Chaund was a large Pargana with a fort, and is included in modern Chainpur, near Bhabua, in Shahabad district, (north) Bihar. Also see *Jour. Bihar Research Society*, XLI, 1955, Pt. II, 360.

c14.s2.12

³⁷ T.D., 50-53; T.S.A., 38-40; W.M., 11 (b). T.A. and Ferishta do not give any narrative of the fight with Husain Sharqī.

c14.s2.13

³⁸ T.A., I, 321. Also Ferishta, I, 182.

c14.s2.14

Sultan Sikandar then proceeded to Chunār but encountering a determined opposition from the officers of Husain Sharqī,³⁹ he diverted westward to Baghela or Bhata country. According to Ferishta the Raja of Bhata came to wait upon him at Kantit,⁴⁰ but distrustful of his intentions, fled away at night. In revenge the Sultan ravaged Arail opposite Allahabad,⁴¹ and then returned to Delhi via Kara, Dalmau and Sambhal.

c14.s2.15

³⁹ T.A., I, 318; Ferishta, I, 181; Dorn, 57.

c14.s2.16

⁴⁰ On the S.W. bank of Ganga in the Sarkar of Allahabad. Āīn, Jarett, II, 89; 158. It is now in Mirzapur distt. on the road from Allahabad to Rewa, 16 miles south of the former. Its chiefs are known as Rajas of Bijapur.

c14.s2.17

⁴¹ Arail, like Jhūsī, lies just opposite Prayag near Naini Railway station. It is now called Jalalabad.

The Baghelas of Rewa

c14.s3.1

Next year, A.D. 1494-5 (900 H), Sikandar Lodi started to teach a lesson to the Baghela Raja Bhēdachandra of Bhatghora.⁴² Not much is known about the early history of this house. It appears that after the extinction of Baghela rule in Gujarat by 'Alāuddīn Khaljī in 1299, the Baghelas quitted Gujarat *en masse* and settled down in the region round Banda and Kalinjar. About two centuries later their ruler Virama Deva was so hard pressed by the chieftains of Kalpi and Jaunpur, that his successor Raja Bhēdachandra moved to the country now called Baghelkhand bounded by the Kaimūr ranges on the north and north-west and by the Maikal ranges on the south and the south-west. According to the Sanskrit Mahākāvya *Vīrabhānudayā* of Madhava,⁴³ Bhēdachandra extended his authority along the line of the Ganga up to Kantit on the west and up to Gaya in south Bihar in the east.⁴⁴ His capital was Bandūgarh. The Lodī-Sharqī strife had ensured the safety of the Baghelas, but then the loss of Sharqī power threatened to disturb the political balance. Consequently Raja Mān of Gwalior and Raja Bhēd of Bhata helped Husain Sharqī after his crushing defeat at Sonhār. Again in 1493 when the Bachgotīs were instigated by Husain Sharqī to revolt, Bhēdachandra colluded with them and imprisoned Mubārak Khan Nūhānī. Having failed in his opposition to the Sultan, he thought of making amends by meeting Sikandar at Kantit, but the cloud between the two could not be lifted and Sikandar Lodī launched a campaign against Baghelkhand in 1495.

c14.s3.2

⁴² Gahora or Ghora, which was the capital of Bhata, is now a forsaken village, about 12 miles east of Karvi in Banda district,

c14.s3.3

⁴³ Written in the sixteenth century and translated in abridgement by Hīrānand Shastri in the *Archaeological Survey of India, Memoir* No. 21, 1925.

c14.s3.4

⁴⁴ Arch. Sur. *Memoir*, No. 21, 6.

c14.s3.5

The Sultan put the countryside to fire and sword. On arrival at Kharan Ghati⁴⁵ he was encountered by Vahārarāya Deva,⁴⁶ son of Bhēdachandra. The prince was defeated and he was forced to vacate his capital. They fled towards Sarguja⁴⁷ but Vahārarāya died on the way and the father followed suit because of the shock. At this Sikandar Lodī gave up their pursuit and returned to Bandūgarh.⁴⁸ He had enjoyed devastating the countryside, but now he paid for it. Provisions became so scarce that even salt was difficult to obtain.

c14.s3.6

⁴⁵ *T.A.*, I, 317 has کهارن گھاٹی and *Ferishta*, I, 181 کهارن و كاتی. *Makhzan*, 55 (b) has Kahal while Dorn has Gungauni, 58.

c14.s3.7

⁴⁶ He is called Bīr Singh Deo and Narsingh Deo in Persian annals, but *Vīrbhānudayā* gives the above name.

c14.s3.8

⁴⁷ Sarguja or Ambikapur, one of the former Eastern States, lies about 32 miles S.E. of Daltongung in Chhotanagpur.

c14.s3.9

⁴⁸ Because of the varied spellings of this name in the Persian texts (Ferishta, I, 181; T.A., I, 317; *Makhzan*, 56 (a)) Sir Wolseley Haig, (C.H.I., III, 237), has got it wrong as Phāphāmau. This is not the insignificant village of Phāphāmau near Allahabad but Behavand or Bandhu, which had a strong fort Bandūgarh, Lat. 23° 27′ N., Long. 81° 3′ E. During a later campaign our chroniclers do write the correct name of Bandu or Bandūgarh, about 90 miles S.S.E. from Panna, commonly referred to by our historians, and 60 miles South of Rewa. Also *I.G.*, VI, 358-59; Ranking, I, 417 and n. 7. Rennel's map in *Memoir of a Map of Hindostan*.

c14.s3.10

Besides an epidemic carried away many of his men and ninety per cent of his horse and he was forced to retreat.⁴⁹

c14.s3.11

⁴⁹ *Makhzan*, 56 (a). T.A., I, 319; Ferishta, I, 181; Dorn, 58.

c14.s3.12

Lakshmi Chand, son of Bhēdachandra, was not slow to take advantage of this situation. He sent an urgent invitation to Husain Sharqī to strike at the enemy in distress. Husain collected a force in Bihar including a hundred elephants,⁵⁰ crossed the Ganga at Kantit and arrived near Varanasi. When he was at a distance of fifteen *kos*⁵¹ from Varanasi he sent messengers to Sālivāhan, brother and successor of Bhēdachandra, asking for his help. But Sikandar in the meantime had won over Sālivāhan,⁵² who, afraid lest Lakshmi Chand after victory should lay claim to the throne, readily accepted the Sultan's offer of friendship. Reinforced by Sālivāhan, Sikandar met Husain in battle near Varanasi and inflicted a crushing defeat on him. Husain Sharqī fled towards Bihar, but now Sikandar was determined to put an end to his constant pin-pricks once for all. He gave Husain hot pursuit and chased him out of Bihar. Husain went to Colgong,⁵³ situated within the kingdom of Lakhnauti, and sought shelter with Sultan Husain Shāh of Bengal (\textsc{a.d.} 1493-1518).⁵⁴ Sikandar consolidated his hold on Bihar⁵⁵ and obliged the chiefs of Sāran and Tirhut to acknowledge his suzerainty. The Sultan then proceeded to Colgong but retreated on obtaining an assurance from the king of Bengal that he would not help Husain Shāh against Sikandar.⁵⁶ After appointing Āzam Humayūn, son of Khan-i-Jahān, as governor of Darveshpur (situated near Maner) and Dariyā Khan Nūhānī as governor of Bihar, Sikandar Shāh returned to Jaunpur.

c14.s3.13

⁵⁰ So have T.A., I, 319; E and D, V, 95. Ferishta, 181, has a few elephants.

c14.s3.14

⁵¹ T.A., I, 319 has 18 *kuroh*, Badaonī, Ni‘āmatulla and ’Abdulla have 15 only; E and D, V, T.D., 59.

c14.s3.15

⁵² Ferishta, I, 181, *Makhzan*, 56 (a) and all other Persian writers have son of Rai Bhēd. So has Dorn, 58. But Sālivāhan was the brother of Bhēdachandra. See Memoir of Arch. Sur. Ind., No. 21. See also Jour. Bihar & Orissa Research Society, 1930. Supple. article.

c14.s3.16

⁵³ It is given as Khulgaon in T.A. and Ferishta and Kahlgawn in T.D., 69-70. It is Colgong now in Bhagalpur district, Lat. 25° 13′ N. Long. 37° 17′ E, about 23 miles east of Bhagalpur town. Constable 29 B.C.

c14.s3.17

⁵⁴ During the reign of Ahmad Shāh of Bengal (1431-1442) Ibrāhīm Sharqī of Jaunpur invaded Bengal. Ahmad Shāh sent ’Abdul Karīm Hājī to Shāh Rukh, the successor of Tīmūr residing at Herat, with an appeal for help. The ambassador was received well. Shāh Rukh sent Maulānā ’Abdul Rahīm with a letter to Sultan Ibrāhīm. The latter received the letter with much respect and never afterwards invaded Bengal, and the relations of Jaunpur and Bengal remained cordial thereafter. The letter is cited in *Ferishta* and the circumstances of the embassy are given in the *Matlaus S’adain*. It may not be out of place here to continue the activities of the Iranian ambassador. He went to Malabar from Bengal, but was shipwrecked in the vicinity of Calicut. He was hospitably received by the Zamorin, who along with the Iranian sent an envoy to the court of Herat. It was to repay this compliment that Shāh Rukh sent in A. D. 1442 (846 H) Maulānā 'Abdurrazzāq to Calicut, whence he was invited to Vijāyanagar of which he has given a graphic account in the *Matlaus S'adain*. See *Annual Asiatic Register* of 1800. Also Stewart, *History of Bengal*, 96-99.

c14.s3.18

⁵⁵ *Makhzan*, 56 (b); *T.D.*, 69-70.

c14.s3.19

⁵⁶ *T.A.*, I, 319; *Makhzan*, 57 (a); *T.D.*, 58-60; Ferishta, I, 181.

c14.s3.20

Sikandar Lodī's friendship with Sālīvāhan, born out of necessity of dealing with Husain Sharqī, was snapped as soon as the Sultan had gained his end. His original plan was to annex the kingdom. Therefore, three years later, in A.D. 1499 (409 H),⁵⁷ he once again marched against Baghelkhand. The excuse was Sālīvāhan's refusal to enter into a matrimonial alliance with him. He forced his way across the defiles to Bandūgarh, sacking and pillaging, and so devastated its environs that he "blotted out all traces of cultivation".⁵⁸ He again suffered for his reckless action, for scarcity of provisions forced him to vacate the country. The rulers of Bandūgarh continued to rule independently, but repeated Afghan invasions affected its prosperity and crippled its strength.⁵⁹

c14.s3.21

⁵⁷ *Makhzan*, 57 (b).

c14.s3.22

⁵⁸ *Makhzan*, 57 (b).

c14.s3.23

⁵⁹ For the first quarter of the sixteenth century Bandūgarh had hardly any history. In 1527 its Raja Bīr Singh joined the camp of Rana Sanga at the battle of Kanuah. Subsequently he attached himself to Bābur.

c14.s3.24

Thus by 1499 Sikandar Lodī had finally succeeded in crushing all opposition in the east and had annexed Bihar. With Husain Sharqī's death in Bengal in A.D. 1500 (905 H)⁶⁰ the remotest apprehension of danger from that quarter also eliminated. The country from Bihar to Bayana had been completely brought under control. South of the Ganga the Raja of Bhata had been rendered harmless and other rebellious elements had been put down. Sikandar Shāh now thought of subjugating the western region. He began by settling matters with the powerful kingdom of Gwalior.

c14.s3.25

⁶⁰ Lanepoole, *The Muhammedan Dynasties*, 304, 309.

The Tōmars of Gwalior

c14.s4.1

Gwalior had remained under Muslim occupation ever since its conquest by Iltutmish in 1232 up to the end of the fourteenth century when, taking advantage of the Sultanate's weakness, Vīr Singh, a Tomar chief, gained possession of the fortress. Thereafter, in spite of the Saiyyad rulers' pressure and the aggressive attitude of the Sharqī kings and Bahlūl Lodī, the principality continued to grow in strength under its Tomar rulers Dungar Singh, Kīrti Singh and Kalyān Singh. Dungar Singh even felt strong enough to attack the Narwar fort, then acknowledging the authority of the Malwa sultan, Hoshang Shāh. The latter, however, foiled this attempt by a diversionary attack on Gwalior fort. Dungar's reign has become notable for two achievements: firstly, for the Jain sculptures on the Gwalior rock and secondly, for his present of certain musical works to Zainul Ābidīn of Kashmir.⁶¹ After him his successor Kīrti Singh kept the Gwalior territory intact despite the attempted aggression of Bahlūl Lodī and Husain Sharqī. But the greatest ruler of this house was Raja Mān Singh (1486-1517).

c14.s4.2

⁶¹ T.A., De's Trs., III, 659-60; Mohibbul Hasan, *op. cit.*, 73.

c14.s4.3

Mān Singh was a veritable genius. He was great in war and still greater in peace. Because of his extremely liberal religious views, he was popular with both Hindus and Muslims, so much so that according to Ni'āmatulla he was "taken to be a Muslim by the Muslims and a Hindu by the Hindus". The chronicler also avers that it was because of his popularity and friendship with the Muslims, that no Muslim ruler could gain ascendancy over him.⁶²

c14.s4.4

⁶² *Makhzan*, 78 (b).

c14.s4.5

Sikandar Lodī was angry with Mān Singh for giving shelter to an important nobleman of the Punjab whom the Sultan had banished. The hold of the Lodīs on the Punjab was precarious. During his last days Bahlūl had to face a difficult situation there. The reason was that the Punjab was held by the Afghan relations and dependents of the Lodīs of Delhi, but they were not unconditionally loyal or obedient to the latter, and Bahlūl and Sikandar "were content with such acknowledgement of their supremacy as was indicated by occasional remittances of tribute or revenue".⁶³

c14.s4.6

⁶³ C.H.I., III, 241.

c14.s4.7

They were not asked, perhaps because they were not willing, to provide large contingents for the subjugation of Hindustan. Otherwise the kingdom of Jaunpur would not have taken as much as three decades to subdue. In A.D. 1500 Sa‘īd Khan Sarwānī, governor of Lahore, came to pay his respects to the Sultan but, according to Ni‘āmatulla,⁶⁴ he and Asghar, *hākim* of Delhi, together with twenty members of the military aristocracy joined in a plot to raise Sikandar’s brother Fatēh Khan to the throne. The Prince himself divulged the plot and the conspirators were punished with imprisonment and exile. Asghar was jailed and Sa‘īd Khan Sarwānī along with his associates like Tātār Khan and Muhammad Shāh were banished. They fled to Gwalior, where, in keeping with the traditions of medieval hospitality, they were given shelter by Mān Singh. But to avoid a crisis in his relations with Delhi, the Raja sent one Nihāl with presents and tributes to the Sultan, who, unprepared for a compromise, sent the envoy back in rage with threats of coming to reduce Gwalior.⁶⁵ Refuge to fugitives, a common excuse for declaration of hostilities in medieval times, was there indeed, but Sikandar’s real intention was expansionist; the country from Bihar to Bayana had been brought under control and now Gwalior should also be annexed.

c14.s4.8

⁶⁴ *Makhzan*, 58 (a)-59(b).

c14.s4.9

⁶⁵ T.A., I, 323; Ferishta, I, 183; T.D., 68; M.R., I, 462.

c14.s4.10

The Sultan began with an attack on Dholpur, a dependency of Gwalior, lying 34 miles south of Agra and 37 miles northwest of Gwalior,⁶⁶ and ruled by Vināyak Dēva. ’Ālam Khan from Mewat, Khan-i-Khānān from Rapri, and Khawās Khan from Delhi were ordered to converge on Dholpur. Their combined attack was too much for the small fort of Dholpur, but Vināyak Dēva⁶⁷ gave a tough fight in which a large number of royalists were killed,⁶⁸ including the veteran warrior Khwājā Babban. At this the Sultan himself left for the site of action on 26 March, A.D. 1501 (6 Ramzān, 906 H).⁶⁹ His arrival unnerved Vināyak Dēva who fled to Gwalior and the garrison surrendered. Sikandar plundered the place so that trees and orchards extending to fourteen miles around Dholpur were "torn up from the roots". Houses and temples were destroyed and mosques built.⁷⁰

c14.s4.11

⁶⁶ Hunter, Imp. Gaz., IV, 273.

c14.s4.12

⁶⁷ Ferishta and a MS. of T.A. clearly have بنايك ديو (See note 1 in T.A., De, 370). Only *Makhzan*, 60 (a) and Dorn, 61 have Manik Deo, which, with slight variation in Persian, will be Bināyak or Vināyak.

c14.s4.13

⁶⁸ Badaoni, I, 318.

c14.s4.14

⁶⁹ T. A., I, 324; Ferishta, I, 183; Dorn, 61, *Makhzan*, 60 (a).

c14.s4.15

⁷⁰ *Makhzan*, 60 (a); Ferishta, I, 183; T.A., I, 324; T.D., 68.

c14.s4.16

After about a month the Sultan left Dholpur in charge of Ādam Khan Lodī and himself started for Gwalior. Crossing the river Chambal he encamped on the bank of the Asi, otherwise called Mandaki.⁷¹ There, because of shallow water in the river, an epidemic, probably cholera, broke out in the camp and took a heavy toll in lives. Raja Mān of Gwalior thought it a good opportunity to come to terms with the Sultan. He sent his son Vikramāditya with presents to Sikandar and promised to expel Sa'īd Khan, Babū Khan and Rai Ganēsh on the condition that Dholpur would be returned to Vināyak Dēva. In face of the difficulties he was confronting, Sikandar Lodī readily agreed to these terms, and returned to Bayana via Dholpur where he reinstated Vināyak Dēva.⁷² Although the narrative of the chroniclers is as usual flattering to the Sultan, yet it appears that Gwalior had successfully resisted the Lodī attack for more than a year and Vināyak Dēva had not lost Dholpur after all.

c14.s4.17

⁷¹ Asi is nothing else than the modern Asūn or Ashīn flowing west of Gwalior. Mandaki in T.A. is very near to the Sanskrit Manduki which means frog-hunted. Ranking, Badaonī, I, 418 writes a note (6) on it. In Rennel's map the river is indicated, but is given no name.

c14.s4.18

⁷² M.R., I, 464; *Makhzan*, 60 (b); T.A., I, 325; Ferishta, I, 183.

c14.s4.19

This initial failure kept the Sultan away from the Gwalior region for the next four years. The offensive was resumed in February, 1504 (Ramzān, 910 H)⁷³ when Sikandar Lodī marched against the fortress of Mandrael. The Tomars had built a strong line of fortresses all round Gwalior, and the Sultan's plan now seems to have been to reduce these citadels to force Gwalior into surrender. Mandrael was situated on a round hill twelve miles S. S. East of Karauli and two miles distant from the western bank of the Chambal.⁷⁴

c14.s4.20

⁷³ *Makhzan*, 60 (b).

c14.s4.21

⁷⁴ Tieffenthaler, I, 174. The place is not shown in Rennel's Map. Ranking spells it as Maudalayer. In Keith Johnson's Atlas it is Mandler. Āīn, Jarret, II, 190 has Mandlair. It was the chief town of a Sarkar in Sūba Agra. Also see note 5 by Ranking, Badaonī, I, 420; Constable 27 cb; I.G. Atlas, 34 E 2.

c14.s4.22

The fort was easily taken but, as was the Sultan’s habit, he sacked and plundered the country to earn the “felicity of a holy war”. Indiscriminate killing and destruction resulted in the outbreak of “typhus and other bad diseases”⁷⁵ and many of his men lost their lives. Leaving Mian Mākhan in charge of the fort, the Sultan returned to Delhi.

c14.s4.23

⁷⁵ *Makhzan*, 60 (b).

c14.s4.24

Recent expeditions had impressed upon the King the necessity of establishing the headquarters of his army at a place from which “rebels in the neighbourhood might be rendered obedient and submissive”, in other words, places like Bayana, Dholpur and Gwalior could be brought under complete control. Accordingly he sent out some officers on an exploratory mission to recommend a site for a new capital. The commission after going from Delhi to Etawah on the Jumna recommended the place where Agra city now stands. The Sultan approved of the site and “at an auspicious hour” ordered the foundations of a fort to be laid. It was in this way that in A.D. 1505 (911 H)⁷⁶ the foundations of modern Agra were laid. Gradually a splendid city, which became the headquarters of the army and the capital of the Sultanate, grew up.⁷⁷

c14.s4.25

⁷⁶ *Ibid.*, 61 (a); Dorn, 62. Ishwari Prasad, *Medieval India*, 484, has A. D. 1504 (910 H).

c14.s4.26

⁷⁷ Tradition gives a long antiquity to Agra. It is said to have been a state prison in the time of Raja Kans, uncle of Lord Krishna, who ruled at Mathura. (Abdul Latif, *Agra Historical and Descriptive*, Calcutta, 1896, 2). When Mahmūd of Ghaznī invaded Hindustan he so ruined the place that it was reduced to an insignificant village. Later on it regained some of its old importance, and a Hindu prince Bādal Singh built a fort Bādalgarh there in A. D. 1475. Cunningham, Arch. Sur. Rep., IV, 1871-72, 98 n., 137. According to 'Abdulla it was formerly only a village of the district of Bayana (T.D., 42), but that is not correct, for it was a walled town when it was captured from Haibat Khan in 1492. Thus it seems to have been already well populated when Sikandar Lodī founded his new capital there (J.I.H., VII, 131), to justify mention of an earthquake on 6 July, 1505 (3 Safar, 911 H) when "buildings fell down and hills began to shake... and people thought the day of resurrection had come." T.A., I, 325-26; Ferishta, I, 183; T.D., 68-69; Badaonī, I, 319-20; Ranking, 1, 421 & n.; *Makhzan*, 61 (a & b). Whatever the importance or population of Agra, it was Sikandar Lodī who rebuilt it. There he founded the Sikandara which is called after him and built a fine *bārādarī* or summer-house, afterwards converted into the tomb of Maryam Zamānī, Jahāngīr's mother. But the new capital took time to be as good as Delhi as the coins of Sikandar Lodī struck at Agra are not so fine as those of Delhi (J.(P.)A.S.B., XI, 1915, 479). Akbar (A.N., II, 246-47) and Jahāngīr (*Tuzuk*, Rogers and Beveridge, I, 4) revived its glory. When Shāhjahān retransferred his capital to Delhi, one reason for doing so was Agra's overgrowth of population, narrowness of streets and want of space in the fort. Arch. Sur. Rep., 1911-12, 2.

c14.s4.27

The first effect of the shifting of the capital from Delhi to Agra was that Dholpur was captured. The Sultan placed it in charge of Qamaruddīn⁷⁸ with a garrison. Dholpur's capture so much encouraged the Sultan that making it a base of operations he started for Gwalior after the rainy season in A.D. 1505 (911 H.).⁷⁹ He declared the war to be a Jihād⁸⁰ and constantly ravaged the Raja's territory in the hope of exacting his surrender. But his devastation of the countryside only made the campaign a long-drawn and nerve wrecking affair. For about a whole year from September, 1505 to May, 1506 he fought and destroyed, but Raja Mān Singh successfully defied him by his hit-and-run tactics. It appears that Sikandar was not strong enough to force the surrender of Gwalior, nor was Raja Mān strong enough to drive him out. At last the reckless destruction of the place came as a boomerang to the Sultan. No crops were left standing, and because of the terror Sikandar had inspired, even the Banjārās (gipsy merchants) would not go near the royal camp,⁸¹ and scarcity of provisions compelled the Sultan to raise the siege. Mān Singh ambushed the retreating army near Jatwar⁸² lying north of Gwalior, and inflicted heavy casualties. In a word the campaign to Gwalior ended in utter failure.

c14.s4.28

⁷⁸ T.A., I, 325; Ferishta, I, 83; M.R., I, 464; *Makhzan*, 61 (b) has Mu'izuddīn in place of Qamaruddīn.

c14.s4.29

⁷⁹ T.A., I, 326; Ferishta, I, 183.

c14.s4.30

⁸⁰ *Makhzan*, 61 (a); T.A., I, 326.

c14.s4.31

⁸¹ T.A., I, 326; Ferishta, I, 183; *Makhzan*, 61 (a).

c14.s4.32

⁸² Ferishta, I, 183 last line has Janwar and Nizāmuddīn has Chatawar. So has Ni'āmatulla, *Makhzan*, 61 (a). Jatwar lies north of Gwalior. Āīn, Jarrett, II, 187.

c14.s4.33

A direct attack on Gwalior having failed again, the Sultan reverted to the policy of capturing the smaller fortresses in its vicinity. On February 6, 1507 (23 Ramzān, 912 H)⁸³ Sikandar Lodī arrived at Uditnagar or Avantgarh lying south of Mandlaer on the Chambal. Situated 28 miles south-west of Karauli it lies at the southern mouth of the Pannar Pass running between Narwar and Gwalior.⁸⁴ Naturally, according to Ferishta, the King considered Uditnagar (Utgir) as the key to the reduction of Gwalior,⁸⁵ and began the investment of the citadel at a time declared auspicious by the astrologers. Malik 'Alāuddīn succeeded in effecting a breach in the bastions, and although he was blinded in the act, he forced his entry into the citadel. After the fort was taken by assault, the Rajputs fell back on their dwellings and villas and fought bravely,⁸⁶ but unable to force the enemy to retreat, the women performed *jauhar* and the men died fighting.

c14.s4.34

⁸³ *Makhzan*, 62 (a).

c14.s4.35

⁸⁴ Avantgarh also called Utgir and Himmatgarh was a Mahāl in Sarkar Mandlaer. Āīn., Jarrett, II, 190; Blochmann, I, 412 n. 1; Cunningham, Arch. Sur. Rep., II, 328, 330; *I.G.* Atlas, pl. 34 E2, where it is shown as Utgarh; C.I.S.G., I, 243.

c14.s4.36

⁸⁵ Ferishta, I, 184, lines 6-9.

c14.s4.37

⁸⁶ *Makhzan*, 62 (a).

c14.s4.38

The Sultan conferred Uditnagar on Mian Bhīkan, son of Mujāhid Khan, to destroy temples and raise mosques in their stead.⁸⁷ Soon after, however, Mujāhid Khan was arrested on a charge of disloyalty and the fort was transferred to Malik Tājuddīn Kambūh. In the last week of May, 1507 (Muharram, 913 H) Sikandar Shāh left for Dholpur by a circuitous route probably because he feared an attack from Raja Mān. But the departure from the usual route proved unfortunate. "Men died of thirst and were crushed to death by the press of the baggage animals. A single jug of water sold at 15 Sikandarī *tankās*. Some died of want of water; others who obtained water drank so unrestrainedly that they also collapsed. The dead were counted at 800."⁸⁸ With great difficulty the Sultan arrived at Dholpur and thence proceeded to Agra where he passed the rainy season.

c14.s4.39

⁸⁷ *Makhzan*, 62 (a); Ferishta, I, 184; T.A., I, 327.

c14.s4.40

⁸⁸ T.A., I, 328; *Makhzan*, 62 (a-b); Ferishta, I, 184.

c14.s4.41

Sikandar's encirclement of Gwalior was proceeding according to plan. Dholpur, Mandlaer and Avantgarh situated on the west and north-west of Gwalior had been captured. At the close of the rainy season in September, A. D. 1507 (913 H),⁸⁹ the Sultan marched against Narwar, a strong fortress with a perimeter of eight *kuroh*, situated 44 miles south of Gwalior.⁹⁰ He also ordered Jalāl Khan, son of Mahmūd Lodī and governor of Kalpi, to march against it. Jalāl was already investing the fort when the Sultan arrived there. Narwar was a dependency of Malwa,⁹¹ but its Tomar Raja, whose ancestors had ruled it since 1398,⁹² fluctuated in his allegiance between the Sultan of Malwa and the ruler of Gwalior. Undaunted by the combined attack of Kalpi and Agra, the ruler of Narwar offered determined resistance which was prolonged to one full year⁹³ because of the dissensions and suspicions existing between Sikandar Lodī and Jalāl Khan from the very beginning. Sikandar was envious of the strong army of Jalāl, and when in spite of it the besiegers died in large numbers, he began to suspect the loyalty of Jalāl Khan. He contrived to imprison the prince, sent him to Avantgarh, and in the end succeeded in starving Narwar into surrender, but not before the garrison had left the citadel with all their belongings.⁹⁴ The Sultan stayed at Narwar for six months during which time he destroyed temples, built mosques, and constructed a fort wall around it.⁹⁵

c14.s4.42

⁸⁹ T.A., I, 328. Ferishta, I, 184 has 914 H. We learn from both Nizāmuddīn (T.A., I, 329) and Ferishta (I, 184, line 8 from below) that the siege of Narwar alone took one year. Again we learn from both (T.A., I, 330; Ferishta, I, 185, lines 1-2) that he returned from there in Sh'abān, 914 H. Consequently he could not have gone there in 914 H but in 913 H only.

c14.s4.43

⁹⁰ Tieffenthaler, I, 175 gives a description of the fort. Also Āīn, Jarrett, II, 190; Imp. Gaz., X, 227; Ranking, Badaoni, I, n. T.A. De, 376 n. 3. *Makhzan*, 62 (b).

c14.s4.44

⁹¹ T.A., I, 328; Ferishta, I, 184; *Makhzan*, 62 (b).

c14.s4.45

⁹² C.I.S.G., I, 272-73.

c14.s4.46

⁹³ T.D., 81.

c14.s4.47

⁹⁴ T.A., I, 329; Ferishta, I, 184; *Makhzan*, 63 (a).

c14.s4.48

⁹⁵ T.A., I, 330; Ferishta, I, 185; T.D., 71.

c14.s4.49

Leaving Narwar in charge of Rāj Singh Kachchwāhā,⁹⁶ he marched to Lahayer situated 50 miles south-east of Gwalior,⁹⁷ on 10 December, 1508 (26 Sh'abān, 914 H).⁹⁸ He stayed there for some months during which he appointed his son Jalāl Khan to the governorship of Kalpi. Sikandar Shāh left Lahayer on 1 May, 1509 (10 Muharram, 915 H), cleared its neighbourhood of "rebels and disturbers of peace", and then establishing small posts on the route 'at every place',⁹⁹ he returned to Agra.

c14.s4.50

⁹⁶ C.I.S.G., I, 273.

c14.s4.51

⁹⁷ Rennel's map has Lahar, correctly so, in Gwalior State. Hunter, Imp. Gaz., 400; Ranking, Badaonī, I, 423 n. 5.

c14.s4.52

⁹⁸ T.A., I, 330; Ferishta, I, 185; Badaonī, I, 321. M.R., I, 469.

c14.s4.53

⁹⁹ T.A.,I, 330.

c14.s4.54

The capture of Narwar cut off the possibility of military assistance to Raja Mān Singh from the side of Mewar. Besides, the occupation of Dholpur, Mandrael, Avantgarh, Narwar, Lahayer and Hathkant had cast an iron ring of encirclement round Gwalior, and it was left in isolation to await its inevitable doom, which it at last met at the hands of Sikandar's son and successor Ibrāhīm Lodī. But the ten years (1500-1509) of continual warfare had cost the Sultanate much more than it had gained from it. In 1505 Bābur had started his campaigns in the North-Western-Frontier region of India. In his *Memoirs* Bābur notes that when he first came to Kabul in 1504-5 (910 H), the government of Behreh, Khushāb and Chenāb was held by Saiyyad 'Alī Khan on behalf of Sikandar Lodī, but alarmed by his (Bābur's) inroads, he had surrendered it to Daulat Khan Lodī, the governor of the Punjab.¹⁰⁰ It is clear from this statement that Sikandar Lodī, while fighting against the Tomars, criminally neglected the North-West-Frontier and the Punjab. In view of the fact that Sikandar's successor paid for this neglect as dearly as with his life and Empire, the gain of a few strongholds in the Tomar country was a poor compensation. Besides, Gwalior, which he had tried his best for a decade to humble, stood defiant.

c14.s4.55

¹⁰⁰ B.N. (B), II, 382.

Relations with Malwa

c14.s5.1

The capture of Narwar had brought Sikandar Lodī too close to Malwa, in whose politics he could not help getting interested and involved. In October, A. D. 1500 (906 H) there had ascended the throne of Malwa Sultan Nāsiruddīn, a cruel, half-imbecile monarch.¹⁰¹ How he could maintain himself on the throne for ten long years, in spite of the numerous conspiracies to remove him, is a matter of surprise. At last in A. D. 1510 (916 H) the disgusted nobles persuaded his eldest son Shihābuddīn to assume charge of the government. The prince left Mandu and collected a large force to seize the throne, but he was defeated by his father in the neighbourhood of Dhar. Thereupon Shihābuddīn appealed to Sikandar Lodī promising to surrender Chanderi as the price for his help.¹⁰² The Sultan naturally felt very happy at the offer and, as the fleeing Malwa prince arrived at Shivpur,¹⁰³ he sent him a horse and a robe of honour.¹⁰⁴

c14.s5.2

¹⁰¹ The king was believed to be a regicide. Besides, he used to abandon himself to the most shameless excesses, particularly in drunkenness. One day in a state of intoxication he fell into a reservoir of water. Four female slaves, at the risk of their lives, pulled him out. Next day, when they related to him the incident, he thought they were ironical about his inebriety and cut them down with his own sword in spite of their cries for mercy. Ferishta, II, 261. His father Ghayāsuddīn (1469-1500) was no better. He maintained a harem as large as a city. Ferishta, II, 261. Also, *Memoirs of Jahāngīr*, Rogers and Beveridge, I, 366-67.

c14.s5.3

¹⁰² T.A., I, 330; Ferishta, I, 185; II, 262.

c14.s5.4

¹⁰³ Badaonī, I, 321; Ranking, I, 454; Ferishta, I, 186. *Makhzan*, 63 (a) has Sipri. Shivpur, on the western boundary of the erstwhile Gwalior State, is quite close to Avantgarh. I.G. Atlas, 38, B2; Hodivala, 498.

c14.s5.5

¹⁰⁴ This happened according to Nizāmuddīn, Ferishta, and Ni'āmatulla in about December, 1508 (Sh'abān, 914 H), when after the reduction of Narwar, the Sultan was staying there. T.A., I, 330; Ferishta, I, 184-85; *Makhzan*, 63 (b). At another place, in their narrative of Malwa history, Nizāmuddīn and Ferishta put the rebellion of Shihāb Khan in A. D. 1510 (916 H). T.A., III, 382, Ferishta, II, 262 line 11. This ambiguity finds repetition in C.H.I., III, 244, 364. But 916 H seems to be correct. Nizāmuddin says that Shihāb died one year after the rebellion, and according to him Shihāb died in 917 H (A. D. 1511). T.A., De, III, 870 ff. Also Ferishta, II, 264.

c14.s5.6

But soon after the Malwa king breathed his last after nominating his third son Mahmūd as his successor. At this Shihābuddīn cancelled his proposed visit to Sikandar Lodī and turned back towards Mandu to claim the throne. Mahmūd having been accepted by the nobles headed by Muhāfiz Khan, Mandu refused admittance to Shihāb. However, Mahmūd soon after fell out with the all powerful Muhāfiz, and afraid of the latter's power he slipped out of the fort and sought the help of the veteran Rajput Medinī Rai and Sharza Khan, son of Behjat Khan, governor of Chanderi.¹⁰⁵ On his departure Muhāfiz Khan gave the crown to prince Sāhib Khan the second son of Nāsiruddīn. Now a triangular contest for the Malwa throne ensued among the three princes, Shihāb Khan, Sāhib Khan who was supported by Muhāfiz Khan, and Mahmūd who was supported by Medinī Rai. Mahmūd and Medinī attacked and defeated Sāhib Khan who with Muhāfiz Khan fled to Gujarat.¹⁰⁶ Thereafter Sāhib Khan became a refugee with 'Ādil Khan III, the ruler of Berar.¹⁰⁷ Meanwhile Shihābuddīn also died of his exertions in A. D. 1511 (917 H).¹⁰⁸

c14.s5.7

¹⁰⁵ Ferishta, II, 263.

c14.s5.8

¹⁰⁶ In Gujarat a quarrel arose between Sāhib Khan and the Persian ambassador Yādgār Beg Qizilbāsh, and, although all accounts attribute the trouble to the ambassador's misconduct, both he and the prince were ordered to leave Champaner, A. D. 1513. Ferishta, II, 263. *Mīrāt-i-Sikandarī*, 140, gives the name of the ambassador as Mīrzā Ibrāhīm. Commissariat, *Gujarat*, I, 286-87.

c14.s5.9

¹⁰⁷ *Ibid.*, I, 285.

c14.s5.10

¹⁰⁸ Ferishta, II, 264.

c14.s5.11

Mahmūd's rivals were thus eliminated for the time being and he got firmly established in Mandu. His friend in need, Medinī Rai, ordered a purge of all the disaffected and intriguing elements, and a large number of nobles were executed or removed from service. But the ascendancy of the Rajputs under Medinī Rai was resented by the Malwa grandees headed by Behjat Khan, governor of Chanderi. Behjat appealed to Sikandar Lodī and promised to read the Sultan's Khutba at Chanderi if he helped in defeating Mahmūd and Medinī Rai and crowning Sāhib Khan in Mandu.¹⁰⁹ Muhāfiz Khan, who was with Sāhib Khan, also in the meantime personally approached Sikandar Lodī for succour,¹¹⁰ and the latter sent a force of twelve thousand cavalry under the command of 'Imādul Mulk Lodī¹¹¹ and Sa'īd Khan to help Sāhib Khan upon whom he conferred the title of Sultan Muhammad, thereby obliging both Behjat Khan as well as the fugitive prince.

c14.s5.12

¹⁰⁹ T.A., III, 388; Ferishta, II, 264; M.R., I, 471.

c14.s5.13

¹¹⁰ Ferishta, II, 264, line 6 from below.

c14.s5.14

¹¹¹ Ferishta, II, 264 line 5 from below. T.A., I, 332 has 'Imādul Mulk Badah, whose name was Ahmad'.

c14.s5.15

But Medinī Rai, who had just then defeated a force of Muzaffar Shāh Gujaratī,¹¹² was not to be daunted by all this. He marched with 40,000 Rajputs against 'Imādul Mulk at which, according to Nizāmuddīn Ahmad, the Sultan recalled his forces.¹¹³ Very soon after, however, he took advantage of the differences which had arisen between Behjat Khan and prince Muhammad¹¹⁴ and ordered Saʻīd Khan son of Mubārak Khan Lodī, Shaikh Jamāl son of ʻUsmān Farmūlī, Rai Ugra Sen Khichi,¹¹⁵ Khizr Khan and Khwājā Ahmad to help Muhammad Khan seize Chanderi from Behjat. Finding resistance useless, Behjat made his submission in A. D. 1515 (921 H.).¹¹⁶ The royal generals occupied Chanderi, and although the fief remained in the name of prince Muhammad, the authority of Sikandar Lodī was firmly established there.

First 152 of 251 passages. Read on

Cites (15)