Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Twilight of the Sultanate c14.s5: Relations with Malwa

Twilight of the Sultanate c14.s5

Language
English

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.

c14.s5.16

¹¹² Ferishta, II, 64.

c14.s5.17

¹¹³ T.A., III, 391. C.I.S.G., I, 210-11. According to Ferishta Sikandar Lodī recalled his army because Behjāt Khan delayed and made excuses about getting the Sultan's Khutba read and coins struck in his name at Chanderi, Ferishta, II, 265. Another version is that the presence of the Sultan's army in Sāhib Khan's (Muhammad's) camp frightened Sultan Mahmūd into agreeing to assign Bhilsa, Raisen and Dhamoni to Prince Muhammad, and the reconciliation rendered useless the presence of Sikandar's army in Muhammad's camp T.A., III, 392; Ferishta, II, 265. But reconciliation or no reconciliation, Sikandar Lodī, who was trying to get the best advantage out of the struggle, would not have recalled his forces until the threat from Medinī Rai was there.

c14.s5.18

¹¹⁴ Ferishta, II, 265.

c14.s5.19

¹¹⁵ Both T.A., I, 332-33 and Ferishta, I, 185 have راجه جگت سين کچهواهه but Briggs has Ugar Sen and that seems to be correct. Ugra Sen Khichi is said to have been obliged by domestic quarrels to abandon Gagraun and found Khichipur (wrongly called Khiljīpur). Hodivala, 472. Also *I.G.*, XV, 279. This Ugra Sen Khichi is most probably identical with Ugra Sen Purabiya of the Gujarat Chronicles. Bayely, 256 and 272 n.; Ferishta, II, 210. Khichi and Kachchwāhās are often confounded by Persian writers. The Khichīs are a branch of the Chauhans and are entirely distinct from Kachchwāhās, Crooke, *Tribes and Castes*, III, 278. Khichi country or Khichiwara comprises most of the country between Guna, Sarangpur and Bhilsa in Bundelkhand. *I.G.*, XXI, 34.

c14.s5.20

¹¹⁶ Briggs, I, 583-84.

c14.s5.21

Chanderi had fallen into the Sultan's lap without much effort on his part because of the civil war in Malwa. Besides, each and every candidate's efforts to gain Sikandar Lodī's support at one time or the other, had made him a very important factor in the politics of that region. This brought to him many more gains. In A. D. 1509 (915 H) he had been lucky in acquiring another important, though small, principality, that of Nagor under almost equally dramatic circumstances. It had so happened that ʻAlī Khan and Abu Bakr, brothers of Muhammad Khan, ruler of Nagor, had plotted against him and had fled to the court of Sikandar Lodī. Afraid lest Sikandar's support to them should bring about his ruin, Muhammad sent presents and gifts to the Sultan and made his submission by getting the Khutba read and coins struck at Nagor in Sultan Sikandar's name. Sikandar Lodī was immensely pleased with Muḥammad Khan and sent him a horse and a robe of honour.¹¹⁷

c14.s5.22

¹¹⁷ T.A., I, 331; Ferishta, I, 185. *Makhzan*, 64 (b).

c14.s5.23

After the acquisition of Chanderi, the prestige of the Sultan rọse very high. Many other governors of the Malwa Kingdom tried to go over to Sikandar Lodī. It was in these circumstances that in A. D. 1516 (922 H)¹¹⁸ 'Alī Khan Nagorī, governor of Shivpur persuaded Daulat Khan, governor of Ranthambhor in the Malwa dominion, to surrender the fortress to Sultan Sikandar. Daulat Khan felt inclined to espouse the friendship of a stronger ruler, and promised to surrender Ranthambhor if Sikandar Lodī came in person to take its possession. But when the Sultan went up to Bayana for the purpose, Daulat Khan evaded handing it over to the Sultan at the instance of 'Alī Khan who was playing a double game. Sikandar was greatly annoyed at the duplicity of 'Alī Khan, but he did not do anything beyond relieving him of Shivpur and giving it to his brother Abu Bakr.¹¹⁹

c14.s5.24

¹¹⁸ Ferishta, I, 185.

c14.s5.25

¹¹⁹ *Ibid.*, 186, line 5.

c14.s5.26

Leaving Bayana the King arrived at Agra via Bari, a township in the Sarkar of Agra,¹²⁰ and Dholpur. He once more thought of capturing Gwalior and, therefore, sent summons to his Amīrs to report at the capital with their armies. But his plans were set at naught by his illness, a sort of quinsy.¹²¹ "The Sultan became daily more and more emaciated and weak," writes 'Abdulla, "but owing to his overriding passion for work, he took no account of his health and discharged his duties, in spite of the physical breakdown".¹²² In the last stages even a morsel of food or water would not pass his throat, and he died on the night of Saturday-Sunday 21-22 November, 1517 (8 Zilqa'da, 923 H).¹²³

c14.s5.27

¹²⁰ Tieffenthaler, I, 166. Badaonī, Ranking, I, 425.

c14.s5.28

¹²¹ Ferishta as translated by Briggs, I, 585. Ranking, I, 425 n. 6 contradicts him. He says that Sikandar died from suffocation, owing to the impaction of a morsel of food in the air passage. But he does not seem to be correct in view of the fact that there was a gradual intensification of the disease, and he did not die of suffocation all of a sudden.

c14.s5.29

¹²² T.D., 99.

c14.s5.30

¹²³ T.A., I, 334; Ferishta, I, 186; T.D., 99 and Dorn, 65 have the year only. Badaonī alone has 17 Zilqa'da. The length of Sikandar's reign is stated by our chroniclers to be 28 years and 5 months. T.A., I, 334; Ferishta, I, 186. But they themselves aver that he had ascended the throne on 17 Sh'abān, 894 H. He, therefore, did not rule for 28 but 29 years and three months. Also see, Hodivala, 472.

Cites (1)