Twilight of the Sultanate c6.s2: Muhammad Shāh
Twilight of the Sultanate c6.s2
- Language
- English
Muhammad Shāh
c6.s2.1
On his return to Delhi, Sultan Muhammad gave his attention to the affairs of the State. Constant strife ever since the death of Fīrōz Tughlaq had weakened the Sultanate considerably; and its authority was challenged everywhere. Fīrōz Shāhī slaves had been done away with; but there arose other centrifugal forces. Gujarat was far away and planning independence, Mewat was restive and the Punjab contumacious. The east was gradually slipping out, and the Doab was defying the central authority Muhammad Shah took stock of the situation and determined to reassert his authority.
c6.s2.2
Early in the year A. D. 1391 (793 H) news was received of the recalcitrance of Nizām Shāh, the governor of Gujarat. Appointed to its charge in A. D. 1375-76 (777 H)²⁸ by Fīrōz Shāh, Farhatul Mulk, also known as Nizām Shāh Mufarrah, seems to have been very popular with his Hindu subjects.²⁹ This was sufficient cause for the "‘Ulema and the learned" to complain against him. Worse still he had also not sent any revenue to Delhi for some time.³⁰ This was a matter for concern, and Muhammad Shāh nominated Zafar Khan, son of Wajīhul Mulk, to replace Muffarah in Gujarat.³¹ Zafar Khan left for Gujarat with a large army in March, 1391 (Rabius Sānī, 793 H). Mufarrah could hardly submit to this injustice, and with a force of ten to twelve thousand he met Zafar Khan at the village of Kamboi, situated at about 20 miles west of Anhilwara, but he was defeated and killed.³² Zafar Khan entered Neherwala and started on a reign of peace and prosperity.³³
c6.s2.3
²⁸ Nizām Shāh was appointed as the governor of Gujarat in 777 H as is proved by the discovery of an inscription published in Epi. Indo-Mos., 1939-40, 1, and not in 778 H as asserted by Yahya and Ferishta. T.M.S., 131-33.
c6.s2.4
²⁹ Ferishta, II, 178.
c6.s2.5
³⁰ *Ibid.*, II, 179.
c6.s2.6
³¹ T.A., I, 247; Badaonī, I, 262; Ferishta, I, 153; II, 178. Also *Mirāt-i-Ahmadī*, I, 46.
c6.s2.7
³² *Mirāt-i-Ahmadī*, I, 47.
c6.s2.8
³³ Ferishta, II, 179.
c6.s2.9
Nearer home Sultan Muhammad was grappling with the chiefs of the Doab with a view to bringing them to obedience. Important amongst these were Rai Vīra Singh,³⁴ the Tomar chief of Gwalior, his younger brother Rāwat Uddhāran Singh, Rai Sumēr of Etawah³⁵ and Ranvīr Vāhan of Mainpuri. Fīrōz Tughlaq had marched against Sumēr and Uddhāraṇ in A. D. 1377-78 (779 H), and they with their families were taken to Delhi and forced to reside there. In the court Sumēr and Uddhāraṇ used to sit behind Zafar Khan junior and Āzam Khan Khurasānī, not like them on a carpet but on the bare ground.³⁶ They had put up with this humiliation during the reign of Fīrōz, but now finding the Sultanate weak, they not only declared their independence but also occupied the *pargana* of Balārām³⁷ in Etah district, and some other *parganas* in its vicinity. Sultan Muhammad could not put up with this affrontery. He sent the Vazīr against Vīra Singh and himself marched to Etawah against Sumēr and Uddhāraṇ. Vīra Singh was defeated and carried to Delhi, but Sumēr and Uddhāraṇ entrenched themselves in Etawah, fought a bloody battle for thirty-six hours, and in the end escaped from the fort at night. Muhammad dismantled the fortifications of Etawah³⁸ and then marched to Qannauj and Dalmaū, striking at the recalcitrant zamindars on the way, and thence to Jalesar. Since Jalesar had brought him good luck, he ordered the construction of a fort there and christened the place Muhammadābād.
c6.s2.10
³⁴ Yahya calls him Bar Singh, Badaonī has Har Singh and Nizāmuddīn and Ferishta have Nar Singh. But none of them is correct. His real name was Vīra Singh as contained in the dynastic list of the Tomar rulers of Gwalior. The list is based on epigraphical records existing in Rohtas and Narwar. J.A.S.B., VIII, 693; XXXI, 404. Cunningham, Arch. Sur. Rep., II, 304.
c6.s2.11
³⁵ T.M.S., 134, 169 has Rai Sabīr. Ferishta has Sarwar which is also adopted in C.H.I., III, 205, 207. Neither of these names is correct. He was the Chouhan Raja Sumēr Singh of Etawah and his name is preserved in the dynastic list of the Chouhans. Strangely enough in Ferishta's Urdu translation (I, 246, 247) the correct name Sumēr (سمیر) is given. According to local tradition, Sumēr Singh is said to have founded the Chouhan house of Partabner, which lies six miles west of Etawah. The Rajas of Mainpuri claim him as their ancestor, and he is said to have built the fort of Etawah. U.P. *Gazetteer*, Ed. 1908, XI (Etawah), 129, 206, 220. Hodivala, 392, 394-5, 397.
c6.s2.12
³⁶ T.F.S. (A), 281; T.M.S., 133-34; Ferishta, I, 148; Z.W., III, 898.
c6.s2.13
³⁷ It was a Mahāl in Sarkar Kol, Sūba Agra, in the days of Akbar. It is now in Kasgunj Tehsīl, Etah district. Āīn. Trs., II, 186; *I.G.*, XV, 69. The place is indicated in Constable, *Pl.* 27 Db.
c6.s2.14
³⁸ T.M.S., 152; Badaoni, I, 262; T.A., 248; Ferishta, I, 153.
c6.s2.15
The Sultan returned to Delhi rather in haste in June, 1392 (Rajjab, 795 H).³⁹ He had been informed by Malik Sarwar, who bore a grudge against Islam Khan for having lost the Vazarat to him, that the latter was planning a revolt. After a summary and unsatisfactory investigation Islam Khan was put to death on the evidence of only one witness, his own nephew Jājū.⁴⁰ Thereupon Malik Sarwar Khwājā Jahān was once again elevated to the office of Vazīr.
c6.s2.16
³⁹ T.M.S., 152.
c6.s2.17
⁴⁰ T.M.S., 153; Ferishta, I, 153. Also Hodivala, 395-96.
c6.s2.18
The Sultan's last devastating campaign in western Uttar Pradesh had left bitter memories behind. No sooner was he back in Delhi than Sumēr and Uddhāraṇ reoccupied Etawah. Nay, even many neighbouring zamindars like Ajīt Singh Rathor of Rampur (District Etah), Narvīr Vāhan (Bīr Bhān of the chronicles),⁴¹ the Chouhan Raja of Bhongaon (near Mainpuri)⁴² and Abhai Chandra (Bhadaoria) the chief of Chandwār (near Fīrōzābād)⁴³ also joined their cause. The Sultan ordered Malik Muqqarabul Mulk, the governor of Jalesar, to march against Etawah. Finding his task formidable, Mu'qarrab preferred perfidy to a show of arms. He enticed all the aforementioned zamindars to accompany him to Qannauj to finalise the terms of a truce, and there got every one of them murdered except Rai Sumēr who managed to escape to Etawah.⁴⁴ Muqarrab returned to Muhammadābād (Jalesar) in a triumphant mood.
c6.s2.19
⁴¹ T.M.S., 153; T.A., I, 248; Ferishta, I, 153-54. Bīr Bhān may safely be identified with Rambīrbhān or Ranvīr Vāhan which name occurs in the dynastic list of the Rajas of Mainpuri. *U.P. Gazetteer*, Ed. 1876, IV, 370.
c6.s2.20
⁴² About ten miles from Mainpuri town, a Mahāl with a fort (Āīn., II, 195). Tradition attributes the founding of Bhongaon to Raja Bhīm. *I.G.*, VIII, 40-41; Badaonī, Ranking, I, 386 and n. 3. Also Hodivala, 406.
c6.s2.21
⁴³ Chandwār lies on the left bank of the Jumna, 3 miles S. W. of Fīrōzābād and about 29 miles E.S.S. of Agra. *J.R.A.S.*, 1905, 140.
c6.s2.22
⁴⁴ He lived up to A.D. 1421 and gave a lot of trouble to the Sultanate as long as he lived.
c6.s2.23
Meanwhile trouble was brewing in Mewat, where Bahadur Nāhar, who had ever opposed Muhammad, had risen in revolt and had made inroads into the environs of Delhi.⁴⁵ Notwithstanding his illness the Sultan proceeded in a palanquin to the Kotla of Bahādur Nāhar. The latter shut himself in his fortress and Muhammad could achieve little. He was still in feeble health when he returned to Jalesar, but only to learn that Shaikha Khokhar had risen in revolt at Lahore. He wrote to Humayūn Khan to march against the Khokhar chief, but just as the Prince was about to leave, the Sultan breathed his last on 20 January, 1394 (17 Rabiul Avval). His remains were taken to Delhi and interred at the Hauz-i-Khās.⁴⁶
c6.s2.24
⁴⁵ Badaonī, Ranking, I, 347; T.A., I, 249; Ferishta, I, 154.
c6.s2.25
⁴⁶ T.M.S., 154.
c6.s2.26
*Mahmūd Shāh*
c6.s2.27
Prince Humayūn succeeded his father as Sultan Sikandar Shāh, but he also died within a couple of months. Thereupon Muhammad's youngest son Mahmūd, a lad of barely ten years, ascended the throne on 23 March, 1394, with the title of Sultan Nāsiruddīn Mahmūd Shāh. The people were naturally sceptical about his capacity to rule,⁴⁷ but the boy-king proved to be quite precocious and from the very beginning he dealt effectively with the disturbed state of the country. Of late his predecessors had been completely preoccupied with the affairs of Mewat and the Doab. Consequently the eastern region of Jaunpur and beyond had gone out of control on account of the turbulence of the Hindu zamindars. Therefore, the Sultan conferred on Khwājā Jahān the title of Malikul Sharq "and appointed him governor of Hindustan from Qannauj to Bihar devolving upon him full powers and uncontrolled authority"⁴⁸ to bring the region under control. At the same time he sent Sārang Khan to Deopalpur to restore order in the west.
c6.s2.28
⁴⁷ ملکی گرفت كودك ده ساله ای عجب What a wonder! A lad of ten got a kingdom. *Tarīkh-i-Haqqī*, Bankipore MS., 29(b).
c6.s2.29
⁴⁸ According to Badaonī he was given the title of Sultanus Sharq, while according to Ferishta that of Malikul Sharq. Yahya also has Sultanus Sharq. It appears, however, that the title given was that of Malikul Sharq only, and when Khwājā Jahān strengthened his position on account of the weakness of the Sultanate, he took to himself the title of Sultanus Sharq. Badaonī, Ranking, I, 348; Ferishta, I, 154; T.M.S., 156.
c6.s2.30
Malikul Sharq marched towards the east in May, 1394 (Rajjab, 796 H), punishing the recalcitrant zamindars of Etawah, Kol, Khor, Kampil and Qannauj on the way. He made Jaunpur his headquarters⁴⁹ and brought into subjection important places like Kara, Sandīlah, Dalmaū, Bahraich and Tirhut.⁵⁰ For the time being all seemed well, but with the passage of time Khwājā Jahān's power and influence increased, and in the end this proved detrimental to the interests of the Sultanate.
c6.s2.31
⁴⁹ Jaunpur's history may be traced from the time when Gaharwār Rajputs ruled at Manaich, which was the chief town in the district which was later to include the capital of the Sharqī kings. In A.D. 1321 (721 H), during the reign of Ghayāsuddīn Tughlaq, his third son Zafar seized Manaich, which was changed to Zafarābād, and given to him as a jagir by the monarch. It was later on held by Sahibzādā Nāsir Khan, a natural son of Fīrōz Tughlaq. Fīrōz Tughlaq founded the city of Jaunpur on the Gomtī during his return march from Bengal rebellion in A.D. 1359-60 (760 H) in memory of his cousin Jūnā Khan later known as Sultan Muhammad Tughlaq. In A.D. 1394 Malik Sarwar Khwājā Jahān was appointed as its governor. J.R.A.S. 1905, 139-40; J.A.S.B., XVIII, 1922, Numismatic Supplement, xxxvi 10n-14n; District Gazetteer, Jaunpur, 150.
c6.s2.32
⁵⁰ T.M.S., 157; T.A., I, 250-51; Badaonī, Ranking, I, 348-49; Ferishta, I, 154.
c6.s2.33
In the west Sārang Khan arrived at Deopalpur in June, 1394 (Sh'abān, 796 H).⁵¹ He began preparations to deal with Shaikha Khokhar who had occupied Lahore and had been left untouched by Prince Humayūn because of the demise of his royal father. At the end of the rainy season Sārang Khan started for Lahore with Rai Daljīt Bhatti of Bhatnīr, Rai Daūd of Jalandhar, Rai Kamāluddīn Maīn of Ludhiana and many other chiefs of the Punjab. He forded the Sutlej at the village of Tirhara,⁵² but his movements did not daunt his adversary. On the contrary, working on the principle that offence was the best form of defence, Shaikha plundered the suburbs of Deopalpur and laid siege to Ajodhan. Sārang Khan, undismayed, continued his march, and when Shaikha was convinced that Lahore would be invested, he hurried to its rescue. A well-contested engagement took place at Samuthala.⁵³ The Khokhar chief was routed and he fled towards the mountains of Jammu.⁵⁴ Sārang Khan placed Lahore under the command of his brother Khandu, entitled 'Ādil Khan, and himself returned to Deopalpur.⁵⁵
c6.s2.34
⁵¹ T.M.S., 157; T.A., I, 251.
c6.s2.35
⁵² T.M.S., 157. Tirhara is in Ludhiana district. It was a Mahāl in Sarkar Sarhind, Sūbā Punjab, and had a brick fort in Akbar's days. Aīn., Trs., II, 295; J.A.S.B., 1869, 88.
c6.s2.36
⁵³ T.M.S., 157; Badaonī, I, 264. Nizāmuddīn and Ferishta do not give the name of the place. It remains unidentified.
c6.s2.37
⁵⁴ T.M.S., 157; Badaonī, I, 264; T.A., I, 251; Ferishta, I, 154.
c6.s2.38
⁵⁵ T.M.S., 158.
c6.s2.39
During the course of these events Sultan Mahmūd visited Bayana and Gwalior, leaving Muqarrab Khan, the Vakīl-us-Sultanat, as the regent at Delhi. S'aādat Khan, the Barbak (Lord Chamberlain) was in the royal camp. When the King was at Gwalior some nobles headed by Mallū Khan, a brother of Sārang Khan, jealous of S'aādat Khan's influence on the young Sultan, conspired against him. Getting scent of the plot, S'aādat Khan got the conspirators put to death, but Mallū Khan escaped to Delhi and joined Muqarrab Khan. Muqarrab was an old enemy of S'aādat, and when the Sultan returned to Delhi, Muqarrab Khan fearing reprisals closed the gates of the city against him.⁵⁶ S'aādat Khan, with the Sultan in his camp, laid siege to the fortress. The siege of Delhi went on for three months after which Muqarrab Khan, to outwit his rival, invited the Sultan into the city. Mahmūd had got weary of the siege and his humiliating position. He forsook S'aādat and entered Delhi in November, 1394 (Muharram, 797 H).⁵⁷ But the Sultan's action did not impair S'aādat's strength who had all the army still under his control. He even determined to teach a lesson to Sultan Mahmūd himself. Proceeding to Fīrōzābād, he invited from Mewat another prince of the royal blood, Nusrat Khan, son of Fateh Khan and grandson of Fīrōz Shāh,⁵⁸ and enthroned him under the title of Nasīruddīn Nusrat Shāh in December, A. D. 1394 (Rabiul-Avval 797 H). There were now two titular kings, Nasīruddīn. (Mahmūd) at Delhi and Nasīruddīn (Nusrat) at Fīrōzābād. Badaonī's cryptic remark is very significant. He says that as in the game of chess neither could win nor be removed;⁵⁹ both remained mere puppets in the hands of their patron-nobles.
c6.s2.40
⁵⁶ Badaonī, Ranking, I, 350, says he was greatly scared.
c6.s2.41
⁵⁷ T.M.S., 158-59; Ferishta, I, 155.
c6.s2.42
⁵⁸ Badaonī, I, 265; Ferishta, I, 155.
c6.s2.43
⁵⁹ Badaonī, I, 266; Ranking, I, 351 n.
c6.s2.44
S'aādat's success soon made him arrogant and he became unpopular in his camp.⁶⁰ Afraid of an attack on his life, he fled to seek shelter in Delhi. There he was first beguiled and then treacherously done to death by Muqarrab Khan. But the mischief he had done did not end with his death; many influential Amīrs like Muhammad Muzaffar Tatār Khan, Shihāb Nāhar and Fazlullā Balkhī threw in their lots with Nāsiruddīn Nusrat. Nāsiruddīn controlled the districts between the Doab, Sambhal, Panipat and Rohtak, while Mahmūd possessed the old Delhi, Sīrī and some adjoining districts.⁶¹ Sultan Mahmūd placed Bahadur Nāhar, who had remained loyal to him, in charge of the fortress at old Delhi, and gave to Mallū the title of Iqbāl Khan and the command of the fortress at Sīrī. From now onwards regular skirmishes between Delhi and Fīrōzābād became an everyday affair. Sometimes Delhi was besieged, at others Fīrōzābād, and the Hindus and Musalmāns were killed in large numbers.⁶² "The Amīrs and Maliks of the Empire set themselves up as rulers, and levied taxes and tribute and for the next three years the affairs of the country remained in this state.”⁶³
c6.s2.45
⁶⁰ Ferishta, I, 155; T.M.S., 160.
c6.s2.46
⁶¹ T.M.S., 160; Badaonī, I, 266.
c6.s2.47
⁶² T.M.S., 160; Ferishta, I, 155.
c6.s2.48
⁶³ T.M.S., 160-61. Also T.A., I, 253 ; Badaonī, I, 266 ; Ferishta, I, 155.
c6.s2.49
Such are the euphemistic references of the chroniclers to the miserable condition of the people of Hindustan. In the time of Fīrōz Tughlaq, when peace prevailed, no “strong man could tyrannise over the weak”.⁶⁴ But now it was all confusion. Kings were changing, or were being changed, almost every year if not every month. As if this was not bad enough, there were pairs of kings—Abū Bakr and Muhammad, Nāsiruddīn Mahmūd and Nāsiruddīn Nusrat. The intrigues of the nobility made matters worse. S‘aādat and Muqarrab fought regular battles using kings as pawns in their game of power politics. Indeed, according to Yahya, “each and every nobleman wanted to become the Sultan.”⁶⁵ The Hindu chiefs and zamindars could hardly refrain from making the most of this. They gathered strength, withheld payment of taxes and tribute, and even plundered the villages of the Musalmāns.⁶⁶ Everywhere in Hindustan the rural and urban population suffered terribly.⁶⁷ For a decade after Fīrōz’s death the princes manoeuvred, the nobles intrigued and the people suffered. Still worse was to happen.
c6.s2.50
⁶⁴ T.M.S., 140.
c6.s2.51
⁶⁵ T.M.S., 140.
c6.s2.52
⁶⁶ *Ibid.*, 147.
c6.s2.53
⁶⁷ Ferishta, I, 155.
c6.s2.54
Sārang Khan, the governor of Deopalpur, had at last dislodged Shaikha Khokhar from Lahore and had re-occupied it. His ambition did not rest there. He attacked Khizr Khan at Multan and occupied it (1396).⁶⁸ Khizr Khan fled and sought refuge with Shams Khan Auhadi at Bayana.⁶⁹ Next year Sārang attacked Samana, but its governor Ghālib Khan with the help of Tātār Khan, Nusrat Shāh’s Vazīr, inflicted a crushing defeat on him on 8 October, 1397 (15 Muharram, 800 H).⁷⁰
c6.s2.55
⁶⁸ T.M.S., 161. Badaoni, Ranking, I, 352.
c6.s2.56
⁶⁹ Z.N., II, 175 has Ahodan (اهودن), but the person referred to is Shams Khan Auhadi who was Amīr of Bayana from about 1397 to 1416 (800 to 819 H). Ferishta, I, 159.
c6.s2.57
⁷⁰ T.A., I, 254 ; T.M.S., 162.
c6.s2.58
Sārang Khan had hardly recovered from the shock of defeat when, on his return to Multan, he learnt that Pīr Muhammad, grandson of Amīr Tīmūr of Khurāsān, having crossed the Indus had laid siege to Uchch. The governor of Uchch 'Alī Malik had held out for a month when Sārang Khan sent him a reinforcement of 4,000 horse under his deputy Malik Tājuddīn.⁷¹ To intercept this succour Pīr Muhammad lifted the siege of Uchch, attacked and defeated Tājuddīn at Taratama⁷² on the banks of the Sutlej and marching in his pursuit came up to Multan. He besieged Multan and after six months occupied it on 5 June, 1398 (19 Ramzān 800 H).⁷³ Sārang Khan, along with his family, was taken prisoner.⁷⁴
c6.s2.59
⁷¹ T.M.S., 162 has 4,000. Badaonī, Ranking, I, has 1,000 only.
c6.s2.60
⁷² T.M.S., 162; Basu's trs., 169. In E and D, IV, 33 it is given as Tamtama. Also Badaonī, I, 267-68; Ranking, I, 353.
c6.s2.61
⁷³ Z.N., II, 14-15; R.S., VI, 100; T.M.S., 158-59.
c6.s2.62
⁷⁴ T.M.S., 163; Badaonī, Ranking, I, 354.
c6.s2.63
The news of the arrival of Pīr Muhammad and his occupation of Multan should have warned the rulers of Delhi and Fīrōzābād to sink their differences, but they continued to remain puppets in the hands of their intriguing nobles. The ambition of Mallū Iqbāl Khan, younger brother of Sārang Khan, knew no limits. He had owed his rise to Muqarrab Khan and Sultan Mahmūd, but resenting the dominance of his benefactor Muqarrab he leagued himself with Sultan Nāsiruddīn Nusrat Shāh "on a most solemn oath" in June-July, 1398 (Shawwāl, 800 H),⁷⁵ and both of them attacked old Delhi. When Iqbāl Khan could not take Delhi, he treacherously attacked Nāsiruddīn himself and occupied Fīrōzābād. A little later he managed to kill Muqarrab Khan also and obtained complete control of Delhi.
c6.s2.64
⁷⁵ *Ibid.*
c6.s2.65
After Iqbāl's treachery Nusrat Shāh left for Panipat to seek help from his Vazīr, Muhammad Muzaffar Tātār Khan, and, the following month, marched towards Delhi. Iqbāl Khan leaving Delhi in the hands of his trusted men marched to Panipat and invested it. The capitulation of Panipat made Tātār Khan give up the siege of Delhi. He fled with his army to his father in Gujarat,⁷⁶ while Nusrat Shāh found asylum in the Doab.
c6.s2.66
⁷⁶ T.M.S., 164; T.A., I, 254. Badaonī, Ranking, I, 354; *Mirāt-i-Sikandarī*, 14.
c6.s2.67
Iqbāl returned victorious to Delhi, rich with spoils of war, horses and elephants. He was now all powerful. The boy-king Mahmūd was his puppet. But his triumph was short-lived for news had flashed forth that Amīr Tīmūr had marched into Hindustan, had sacked Tulamba and was fast approaching Delhi.
Cites (3)
- Tārīkh-i Firishta — Muḥammad Qāsim Hindū Shāh Firishta 1606, Persian
- Tārīkh-i Fīrūzshāhī — Shams-i Sirāj ʿAfīf, Persian
- Tārīkh-i Mubārakshāhī — Yaḥyā b. Aḥmad Sirhindī