Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Twilight of the Sultanate c8: Chapter 3: Bid for the Throne

Twilight of the Sultanate c8

Language
English

Contents

Chapter 3: Bid for the Throne

c8.2

Timur had converted the north-western Hindustan into a shambles. The countryside through which he had passed, suffered terribly from famine and pestilence. For full two months after his departure, Delhi "presented a scene of desolation and woe".¹ In that unfortunate city those who had escaped from the sword, succumbed to hunger and disease.² Decomposing corpses polluted the air and pestilence took its toll mercilessly. Agriculture and industry stood still and the morale of the people went under. The few officers and men that the invader had left behind either fell a prey to pestilence or otherwise at the earliest took the road to Kabul.³ The vacuum so created was not immediately filled. The absence of strong political authority encouraged military adventurers who harried the land for self-aggrandisement. Besides, a number of nobles and "sultans" made a bid for the throne, and it took full fifteen years to form a stable government at Delhi. In these circumstances the suffering of the people during this period can better be imagined than described.

c8.3

¹ T.M.S., 167; T.A., I, 256.

c8.4

² Badaonī, Ranking, I, 359.

c8.5

³ Z.W., III, 908.

Iqbāl Khan

c8.s1.1

On Tīmūr's departure from Delhi, Nāsiruddīn Nusrat Shāh the Pretender, who during his invasion had escaped into the Doab, now finding the field clear, decided to make an attempt for the throne.⁴ Encouraged by 'Ādil Khan of Meerut,⁵ he occupied the palace of Fīrōzābād, which was still in ruins, and sent Shihāb Khan of Mewāt against Mallū Iqbāl Khan who was at Baran. But Shihāb was defeated and killed by Iqbāl Khan with the help of the Hindu zamindars of the Doab over whom he had influence, and the latter proceeded towards Delhi in the middle of January, 1399 (Jamadiul Avval 801 H)⁶. About now, Nāsiruddīn Nusrat suddenly died, and Delhi quietly passed into the hands of Iqbāl Khan. He made Sīrī his headquarters.⁷ People who had migrated to various places during Tīmūr's upheaval, now started returning to Sīrī which again began to show signs of life.⁸

c8.s1.2

⁴ T.M.S., 167; Badaonī, Ranking, I, 359.

c8.s1.3

⁵ T.M.S., 167.

c8.s1.4

⁶ *Ibid.*, 168.

c8.s1.5

⁷ Sīrī was built by Sultan 'Alāuddīn Khaljī in 1303 on a village of the same name. It was situated about three miles to the N.E. of the Qutb Mīnār. The fort was still under construction when the Mongols invaded India. They were completely defeated, and the heads of some 8,000 of them were used as bricks in the construction of the walls. Tīmūr has described Sīrī in detail. In 1548 Shēr Shāh destroyed this city of 'Alāuddīn. Lal, *History of the Khaljīs*, 375-76.

c8.s1.6

⁸ T.M.S., 168; T.A., I, 257.

c8.s1.7

Iqbāl Khan had under his sway only the capital city and its environs. The empire had been parcelled out into independent kingdoms. Sindh and the Punjab were under Khizr Khan. Gujarat was ruled by Zafar Khan Wajīhul Mulk and Malwa by Dilāwar Khan. Nearer home, at Samana, ruled Ghālib Khan and at Bayana, Shams Khan Auhadī. Mahoba and Kalpi were under Mahmūd Khan, son of Malikzādā Fīrōz. In the east, the region from Qannauj to Bihar comprising of Sandilah, Dalmaū, Kara, Avadh, Bahraich and Jaunpur was under Mubārak Shāh Qaranfūl, an adopted son of Khwājā Jahān. Every one of these cast his greedy eyes on the Capital of the Sultanate.

c8.s1.8

With Delhi in his hands, Iqbāl Khan became keen to reclaim as much of the lost territory of the Sultanate as possible. Paucity of resources, however, prevented him from undertaking any major operations. In November, 1399 (Rabiul Avval 802 H)⁹ he marched to Bayana against its ruler Shams Khan Auhadī. He defeated him between Nūh and Tappal,¹⁰ but did not occupy Bayana¹¹ and pushed on to Katehar.¹² After exacting tribute from its ruler Rai Vīra Singh,¹³ Iqbāl Khan returned to Delhi.

c8.s1.9

⁹ T.M.S., 168-69 and T.A., I, 257 have the above date. Ferishta has 803 H.

c8.s1.10

¹⁰ T.M.S., 169 has نوه و بتل. Badaonī, Ranking I, 359, has Nūh and Patal. The correct names are Nūh and Tappal. Nūh is now in Gurgaon district and Tappal is a pargana in Khair. Both are indicated in Constable, pl. 27 C a. Nūh is 40 miles S.W. of Delhi and Tappal 31 miles S.W. of Aligarh. Hodivala, 397.

c8.s1.11

¹¹ T.M.S., 169; Ferishta, I, 159.

c8.s1.12

¹² Also see Thomas, *Chronicles*, 325 n. 2.

c8.s1.13

¹³ T.M.S., 169, and Badaonī, Ranking I, 359 have Harsing. Ferishta, I, 159 and T.A. have Nar Singh. He was Vīra Sinha who took possession of Gwalior consequent on the confusion created by Tīmūr. Arch. Sur. Rep., II, 381. Hodivala, 394.

c8.s1.14

These minor successes encouraged Iqbāl to try his strength with the more powerful kingdom of Jaunpur. It may be recalled that Sultan Nāsiruddīn Mahmūd had appointed Malik Sarwar, a talented eunuch, as the governor of Jaunpur in A. D. 1394 and had conferred upon him the title of Malikul Sharq (Master of the East). The brave and sagacious Khwājā brought the recalcitrant zamindars of U. P. and Bihar under control; but taking advantage of the declining power of the Sultanate he extended his influence up to Kol (Aligarh) and Rapri in the west and Tirhut in the east. He grew so powerful as to realise the tribute which the rulers of Bengal used to send to Delhi. There was nothing to stop him from assuming the title of Sultan, but he thought it prudent not to issue any coins in his name, and a Bihar inscription records that he did not assume the insignia of royalty.¹⁴ Khwājā Jahan died in A. D. 1399. He was succeeded by his adopted son Malik Wāsil who, because of his extremely dark complexion, earned the nickname of Qaranfūl (clove). He adopted the title of Sultan Mubārak Shāh.¹⁵ Iqbāl Khan could not forget that Jaunpur had not come to the aid of Delhi when Tīmūr had attacked it; at least he could not brook Mubārak adopting the title of Sultan and striking coins in his own name.¹⁶ Consequently he left for Qannauj, a dependency of Jaunpur, in December-January, 1400-1401 (Jamadiul Avval 803 H).¹⁷ On the way he was joined by Shams Khan Auhadī (who was obliged to Iqbāl Khan for leaving him in possession of Bayana), Mubārak Khan and Bahadur Nāhar of Mewat. When the allies reached Patiali,¹⁸ on the Kalindī (also known as Kālī Nadī or Āb-i-Siyāh),¹⁹ they were opposed by Rai Sumēr Singh of Etawah and other Zamindars of the vicinity who were determined to make capital out of the wretched condition of the Sultanate. But Sumēr was defeated; he retreated to Etawah and Iqbāl Khan resumed his march. His plan was to take Qannauj and then march out to occupy Lucknow and Jaunpur;²⁰ but Mubārak Shāh Sharqī checked his advance at Qannauj where he had arrived with his army. The two forces lay facing each other for full two months on either side of the Ganga, but neither dared to ford the river to fight. Indeed, Shams Khan Auhadi and Mubārak Khan were playing a treacherous game, and this made Iqbāl Khan order a retreat.²¹ At this the Sharqī king also returned to Jaunpur.

c8.s1.15

¹⁴ J.A.S.B., 1873, 270. Also Ferishta, II, 304, *E.I., Arabic and Persian Supplement*, 1961, 32-34.

c8.s1.16

¹⁵ T.M.S., 169 ; Ferishta, I, 159.

c8.s1.17

¹⁶ Ferishta, II, 304, says that Mubārak Shāh struck coins, but no coins of his have been found. J.A.S.B., XVIII, 1922, Numismatic Supplement XXXVI, N 14.

c8.s1.18

¹⁷ T.M.S., 169 ; Ferishta, II, 304 ; T.A., I, 257.

c8.s1.19

¹⁸ Badaonī and T.A. have Baitali. Patiali lies on the old bank of the Ganga 22 miles N.E. of Etah in 27° 42' N. and 72° 5' E. *District Gaz.* Etah, 201.

c8.s1.20

¹⁹ Or "Black Water". It refers to Kalini or Kalinadī, a corruption of the ancient Kalindī. It is a tributary of the Ganga and is the chief river of Etawah district. It flows between Jumna and Ganga. Hunter, Imp. Gaz., VII, 327. Ferishta, I, 160, has Nahr-i-Gang.

c8.s1.21

²⁰ Ferishta, I, 159.

c8.s1.22

²¹ T.M.S., 170; T.A., I, 258; Ferishta, I, 160, II, 304-5. On his way back to Delhi, Iqbāl Khan got Shams Khan Auhadi and Mubārak Khan murdered as he suspected their loyalty.

c8.s1.23

It was now clear to Iqbāl Khan that there were sections of people in and around Delhi who were not willing to recognise his authority. Besides Khizr Khan was making preparations in Multan for a bid for the Sultanate. In these circumstances Iqbāl Khan thought it best to invite Sultan Mahmūd to Delhi. It may be recalled that after his defeat at the hands of Tīmūr, Mahmūd had secretly fled towards Gujarat. Though Muzaffar Shāh, the then ruler of Gujarat, gave every help to the refugees from Delhi who had flocked at Pātan, he did not encourage Sultan Mahmūd himself to come there perhaps because he apprehended peril to his position. Sorely disappointed, Mahmūd made his way to Malwa where he was welcomed by Dilāwar Khan.²² He was at Dhar when Iqbāl Khan, thinking that he would be of use to him, invited him to return.²³ Placed as he was, Mahmūd was quick to respond, and returned to Delhi in A. D. 1401 (804 H). He was cordially welcomed by Iqbāl Khan who lodged the Sultan in the palace of Jahan Panāh.²⁴ But Mahmūd was not satisfied with the mere show of loyalty on the part of Iqbāl who virtually retained the reins of government in his own hands.²⁵ Indeed it was too much to expect of the latter to surrender power which he had been enjoying for more than three years, though it may be said to his credit that he ruled only in the name of the Sultan.²⁶ Even so the gulf between the two went on widening and shortly after an incident completed the rupture.

c8.s1.24

²² Ferishta, II, 181. The author of *Mirāt-i-Sikandarī*, 15, indulges in an anachronism in saying that Mahmūd went to Alp Khan in Malwa. Alp Khan was the son of Dilāwar Khan and succeeded him in 1405 with the title of Hoshang Shāh. Lanepoole, *Local Muhammedan Dynasties*, 310; Ferishta, II, 181, 234; *Mirāt-i-Ahmadī*, I, 47; Bayley, *Gujarat*, 79; Commissariat, I, 56.

c8.s1.25

²³ Ferishta, I, 160; II, 234.

c8.s1.26

²⁴ T.M.S., 170. "This was the name given to the central portion of the triple citadel of Delhi with Sīrī. It was situated in the midst of the inhabited city, and had thirteen gates ; of the other two Sīrī had seven gates, and old Delhi ten gates". Badaonī, Ranking, I, 361. Also E and D, III, 448.

c8.s1.27

²⁵ T.M.S., 170-171 ; T.A., I, 258 ; Badaonī, Ranking, I, 361 ; Ferishta, I, 160.

c8.s1.28

²⁶ In an inscription dated 807 H. (A.D. 1404-5) on the Idgāh built by Iqbāl Khan, he chose to be called "Sultānī" or Slave of the Sultan. Arch. Sur. Rep. IV, 65, List, 164-66.

c8.s1.29

Encouraged by the arrival of Sultan Mahmūd, Mallū Iqbāl thought it opportune to settle accounts with Jaunpur, and taking Mahmūd with him he started for Qannauj in A. D. 1402. On the way they learnt that Mubārak Shāh Sharqī had died at Jaunpur.²⁷ Iqbāl Khan could not have hoped for better news. But Ibrāhīm Sharqī who had succeeded Mubārak²⁸ was no less warlike than his deceased brother,²⁹ and hearing of Iqbāl Khan’s movements, he came up to the Ganga³⁰ and fought a few skirmishes with the Delhi army. As the two forces lay facing each other Sultan Mahmūd, to whom the gilded bonds at Delhi had become too galling, left on the pretence of going on a hunting expedition and went over to Ibrāhīm Sharqī in the hope of securing his help in removing his aggressive friend. But disappointment lay in store for him because Ibrāhīm did not treat him well. It would have been foolish for him to go back to Iqbāl, and so he avenged himself on the Sharqī ruler by attacking and occupying Qannauj where he began to reside. His defection weakened Iqbāl Khan’s position and he returned to Delhi, while the newly crowned king of Jaunpur acquiescing in Mahmūd’s occupation of Qannauj, probably because it provided a distraction to Iqbāl Khan, also went back to Jaunpur. Iqbāl Khan could never forgive Sultan Mahmūd’s “treachery”, and three years later he led an attack against Qannauj.

c8.s1.30

²⁷ T.M.S., 171 ; T.A., I, 258.

c8.s1.31

²⁸ Ferishta, II, 305.

c8.s1.32

²⁹ T.M.S., 171.

c8.s1.33

³⁰ Ferishta, II, 305.

c8.s1.34

Meanwhile, in pursuance of his policy of retrieving Delhi’s prestige, Iqbāl Khan marched against Gwalior in December, 1402 (Jamadiul Avval 805 H). During the confusion following Tīmūr’s invasion, Gwalior had become independent under its Tomar ruler, Vīra Singh. After his death his grand-nephew or grandson Vīrama Deva had become master of Gwalior.³¹ Since Gwalior formed a part of the Sultanate from almost its very inception, Mallū Iqbāl decided to reoccupy it. He marched to Gwalior, laid siege to the fort, but failed to take it. In impotent rage he laid waste its outlaying regions. Next year he made another attempt against it, but was compelled to return to Delhi achieving almost next to nothing.³²

c8.s1.35

³¹ Chronicles have again made a mistake about this Hindu name. Yahya calls him Bīram Deo. Ferishta has Baram Deo. He was Vīrama Deva. Virama was not the son but the grandson or grandnephew of Vira Singh as is clear from the dynastic list of the Tomar Rajas. A pillar on which these names are inscribed still exists outside the fort of Narwar. They are in the following order :
(1) Vīra Singh.
(2) Uddhāran Dēva son or brother of (1).
(3) Vīrama, son of (2).
(4) Ganapatī Deva, son of (3).
(5) Durgarēndra Deva (Dūngar Singh), son of (4).
(6) Kīrtī Singh, son of (5).
(7) Kalyānmall, son of (6).
(8) Māna Sāhi (Mān Singh), son of (7).
(9) Vikram Sāhī (Vikramāditya), son of (8).
(10) Rama Sāhī, son of (9).
(11) Salivāhan, son of (10). Several other inscriptions of these princes have been found. There are three of Vīrama Deva (A.D. 1408-1410), six of Durgarēndra or Dūngar Singh (1440-1453), five of Kīrtī Singh (1468-1473) and two of Mān Singh (1486-1517). I.G., XVIII, 397; Cunningham, Arch. Sur. Rep., II, 396. Hodivala, 398.

c8.s1.36

³² T.M.S., 172; Ferishta, I, 160 and T.A., I, 259 say that he returned without taking the fort. The dynastic list of the Tomar Rajas of Gwalior also shows that the latter went on ruling for decades later. But Badaonī wrongly declares that Iqbāl Khan “wresting it (the fort of Gwalior) from the possession of ‘Virama’ took it into his own control”. Badaonī, Ranking, I, 361.

c8.s1.37

During A. D. 1403 (806 H) Iqbāl Khan did not think it safe to move out of Delhi. Dangers threatened him from various quarters.

c8.s1.38

In the west Khizr Khān was making feverish preparations to capture Delhi. In the east Ibrāhīm Sharqī was as strong as ever and Sultan Mahmūd was in no mood for reconciliation. But the greatest threat was an impending invasion from Gujarat.³³ No prince knew more about the deplorable condition of Delhi than Tātār Khan, son of Muzaffar Shāh, ruler of Gujarat; and none perhaps was better placed to plan an invasion of Delhi since Gujarat was situated at too safe a distance for secrets to reach Delhi. To follow the situation it is necessary to throw a retrospective glance at the relations between Delhi and Gujarat. Tātār Khan had been appointed vazīr by Sultan Muhammad Shāh bin Fīrōz Tughlaq, and the Government of Gujarat was conferred upon his father Zafar Khan in 1391.³⁴ With the death of Sultan Muhammad affairs at Delhi fell into chaos, and Tātār Khan readily plunged himself into the intrigue for power. He fought Sārāng Khan and compelled him to retire to Multan,³⁵ but Iqbāl Khan foiled all his attempts to occupy Delhi.³⁶ Tātār Khan fled to his father at Patan in 1398 and constantly instigated the latter to attack Delhi. Muzaffar organised an army for the purpose,³⁷ but postponed the expedition on hearing of Tīmūr’s arrival in India. In these circumstances it is not surprising that the ruler of Gujarat did not afford shelter to the fugitive king of Delhi, Sultan Mahmūd.

c8.s1.39

³³ T.A., I, 259.

c8.s1.40

³⁴ Commissariat, I, 55; *Mirāt-i-Ahmadī*, I, 47. Also see Chapter I.

c8.s1.41

³⁵ Ferishta, II, 180-181.

c8.s1.42

³⁶ *Mirāt-i-Sikandarī*, 14.

c8.s1.43

³⁷ *Ibid.*, 14, 17; *Mirāt-i-Ahmadī*, I, 47.

c8.s1.44

After Tīmūr’s avalanche had subsided, Tātār Khan again urged his father to seize the capital of the Sultanate. Muzaffar was now sixty,³⁸ and was reluctant to enter upon any hazardous enterprise. Seeing his father’s reluctance the highly ambitious Tātār imprisoned him in 1403 (Jamadiul Avval 806 H) and crowned himself³⁹ at Asāwal⁴⁰ with the title of Nāsiruddīn Muhammad Shāh.⁴¹ Thereafter he started feverish preparations for an attack on Delhi, and it was this news which gave an anxious time to Iqbāl Khan.⁴² But fate had willed otherwise. Muzaffar Shāh appealed to his brother Shams Khan, the vazīr of Tātār Khan, asking him to kill his treacherous son and release him from confinement. Accordingly Shams Khan poisoned his nephew at Sinor⁴³ while he was about to leave for a campaign against Delhi.⁴⁴ Muzaffar once more assumed the reins of government, and the plan to invade Delhi was given up.

c8.s1.45

³⁸ Commissariat, I, 57.

c8.s1.46

³⁹ T.M.S., 172; Ferishta, II, 181; T.A., I, 259; *Mirāt-i-Ahmadī*, I, 47.

c8.s1.47

⁴⁰ Before Ahmedabad was built in 1411, Asāwal, in its vicinity, was one of the very important towns of northern Gujarat. Alberūnī mentions it and Idrīsī refers to it as populous, rich and industrial. Baranī, Yahyā, Nizāmuddīn Ahmad and the author of *Mirāt-i-Sikandarī* also write about it. It appears that Asāwal was situated outside the city walls of Ahmedabad, to its south, beyond the Jamalpur gate. Bayley, *Gujarat*, 427-28; Commissariat, I, 59-60. T.M.S., 172, has Broach in place of Asāwal.

c8.s1.48

⁴¹ *Mirāt-i-Sikandarī*, 16-17, relates that Muzaffar Shāh abdicated in favour of his son Tātār Khan, but afterwards repented at having done so, and caused him to be poisoned. But Ferishta, II, 181-182, disbelieves it, and gives detailed circumstances of Muzaffar's imprisonment and Tātār's assassination.

c8.s1.49

⁴² *Mirāt-i-Ahmadī*, I, 48.

c8.s1.50

⁴³ "Sinor is the headquarters of the *taluka* of the same name in the Baroda *prānt* of the Gaekwar's territories. The town is picturesquely situated on the steep banks of the Narbada and a noble flight of 100 steps leads from the houses to the waterside". Commissariat, I, 57 n.

c8.s1.51

⁴⁴ Ferishta, II, 181; Badaonī, Ranking, I, 361. Tātār Khan was buried at Patan.

c8.s1.52

But the recession of the threat from Gujarat hardly provided any relief to Iqbāl Khan for, in Sindh, Khizr Khan was gathering strength day by day. He was a potential danger to the ruler of Delhi. Besides being "one of the principal men of Hindustan", he was widely recognised as the rightful successor of Tīmūr in India. While making his plans both for the present and future, Khizr Khan could not ignore the implications of Tīmūr's legacy of bitterness and hatred among the masses and classes. His benefactor had left him with a kingdom but without any army. To make up this deficiency he invited the Afghan chiefs in India and from beyond the Indus to join his cause. Adventurous by nature, the Afghans found a good opportunity for advancement in the service of Khizr Khan and flocked to his banner in large numbers. He could depend upon their loyalty and they, on their side, could secure a strong position in the country if and when their support brought him success. In the east the powerful kingdom of Jaunpur posed another

c8.s1.53

Strangely enough Yahyā speaks very highly of Tātār Khan and credits him with a "disposition commendable and qualities angelic". T.M.S., 172. It is also averred that Muzaffar continued to weep for his son till the day of his death. Bird's *Gujarat*, 182.

c8.s1.54

perennial problem. Qannauj, ruled by Sultan Mahmūd, provided another source of distraction to Iqbāl Khan. Besides being sandwiched between the powerful rulers of Sindh and Jaunpur, Iqbāl Khan was also faced with the recalcitrance of the independent chiefs of the Doab as well as the coalition of the Rajas of Gwalior and Etawah.

c8.s1.55

With such problems staring him in the face, Iqbāl Khan could not just sit quiet. He was compelled to be active. The prospects of expansion in the east or west being almost entirely closed, he occupied himself in subduing the independent chiefs of the Doab, it being incumbent upon any ruler of Delhi to occupy that region at least. In A. D. 1404 (807 H), therefore, he marched against Rai Sumēr, Rai Vīrama Deva of Gwalior and Rai Jalbahār⁴⁵ who had formed a coalition and had shut themselves up in the fortress of Etawah.⁴⁶ After a siege of four months, peace was made with them but without any decisive gains to Iqbāl Khan.⁴⁷ From Etawah, Iqbāl Khan proceeded to Qannauj against Sultan Mahmūd in April, 1405 (Shawwāl, 807 H), but the fort being too strong he returned to Delhi after fighting only a few skirmishes.⁴⁸

c8.s1.56

⁴⁵ T.A., I, 259 and E and D, IV, 39 have Rai Jalhar. Ferishta, I, 160, has Rai Jhala. T.M.S., 172, has Jalbahār.

c8.s1.57

⁴⁶ Badaonī, Ranking, I, 362.

c8.s1.58

⁴⁷ T.M.S., 172-73; Ferishta, I, 160. T.A., I, 259 alone says that the Rais agreed to give every year four elephants and the amount which the Rai of Gwalior used to send to the ruler of Delhi.

c8.s1.59

⁴⁸ T.M.S., 173; T.A., I, 259.

c8.s1.60

Having failed in the east, Iqbāl Khan thought of trying his luck in the west. At Samana ruled Bahrām Khan Turkbachchā, a slave of Sultan Fīrōz,⁴⁹ who had formerly become hostile to Sārang Khan⁵⁰ and was now in league with Khizr Khan. He must be subdued and if Khizr Khan could be defeated it would be ideal. In January 1405 (Sh‘abān 807 H) Iqbāl had already received the news of Tīmūr's death,⁵¹ and the happy tidings must have elated him and encouraged him to settle accounts with Tīmūr's nominee in Hindustan.

c8.s1.61

⁴⁹ از خانه زادان فیروز شاهی بود (Was a slave brought up in the household of Fīrōz Shāh). Ferishta, I, 160.

c8.s1.62

⁵⁰ T.A., I, 259; Ferishta, I, 160.

c8.s1.63

⁵¹ Bayley, *Gujarat*, 83.

c8.s1.64

So only three months after the Qannauj campaign Iqbāl Khan marched to Samana in June-July, 1405 (Muharram 808 H),⁵² On his arrival Bahrām Khan fled to the hills, but later on and at the intercession of Saiyyad Ilmuddīn, grandson of Saiyyad Jalāl-ul-Haqq, peace was concluded between the two on the condition that Bahrām would join hands with Iqbāl against Khizr Khan. Their joint forces proceeded towards Multan, but Iqbāl Khan, suspecting treachery on the part of Bahrām Khan Turkbachchā got him flayed alive at Talwandi⁵³ and imprisoned his other accomplices like Rai Dāūd, Rai Bhau son of Rai Bhattī, and Rai Kamāl Maīn. This considerably depleted Iqbāl’s strength and encouraged Khizr Khan to collect his forces of Multan, Deopalpur and the Punjab,⁵⁴ and march out of Multan to meet his enemy half way. Near Ajodhan a battle was fought between the two on the banks of the Dahinda⁵⁵ on 12 November, 1405 (19 Jamadiul Avval 808 H).⁵⁶ As the battle raged fiercely misfortune overtook Iqbāl Khan; his horse was wounded and it got stuck in the swampy river bank.⁵⁷ When Islām Khan Lodī’s men saw that Iqbāl could not extricate himself, they fell upon him from all sides and struck off his head. The severed head was presented to Khizr Khan, who sent it to Fatehpur,⁵⁸ his native town, where it was fixed up at the gate of the city.

c8.s1.65

⁵² T.M.S., 173.

c8.s1.66

⁵³ T.M.S., 173; Ferishta, I, 160. Badaonī says that he went to Rūpar, 43 miles north of Ambala, on way to Ajodhan. It is certain that Iqbāl Khan went to Talwandi. No other historian mentions Rūpar.

c8.s1.67

⁵⁴ Ferishta, I, 160.

c8.s1.68

⁵⁵ Dahinda is a stream which branches off the Sutlej to the east of Ajodhan, flows South-West and joins it again about 35 miles lower down. This course of the Sutlej is shown in Rennel’s map facing pp. 65 and 315. According to Abul Fazl the Sutlej bore different names in different parts of its course like Harhari, Dand (Dahinda) and Nurni. Āin. Trs., II, 326. Rennel, *Memoir of a Map of Hindostan*. Badaonī, Ranking, I, 362-63 n. Hodivala, 397.

c8.s1.69

⁵⁶ T.M.S., 174; T.A., I, 260; Ferishta, I, 160.

c8.s1.70

⁵⁷ T.M.S., 174; Ferishta, I, 160; Badaonī, Ranking, I, 363.

c8.s1.71

⁵⁸ This Fatehpur, Lat. 29-40 N., Long. 72-10 E., lies about 20 miles N.E. of Kahror. It is shown in Constable’s Atlas, Pl. 24, EC.

c8.s1.72

In Delhi the news of Mallū Iqbāl’s death was received with no regret. True, he had spent his life in the service of the Tughlaq throne, had tried to establish order in Delhi out of the chaos left by Tīmūr and had fought against independent rulers and zamindars to reassert the authority of the Sultanate; but in all his acts lurked his personal ambition. He had invited Sultan Mahmūd to join him, but his motives were not entirely altruistic. He was sorely disappointed when Mahmūd, whom he had brought up on the throne almost as a child, deserted him, but it was probably Iqbāl’s own ambition that had made Mahmūd suspicious. Ferishta writes that when he marched against Khizr Khan (late in A. D. 1405) he had thought of adopting the royal title after finishing off the ruler of Multan.⁵⁹ What his plans were after that last and fatal campaign, one cannot tell, but the fact remains that he never adopted the royal title, nor struck coins nor got the Khutba read in his name. Probably content with actual sovereignty, he cared little to assume its title and insignia. All the same his treatment of Sultan Mahmūd was an irremovable stigma. His campaign against Mahmūd at Qannauj and his heinous murder of Bahrām Khan must have antagonised even his confidants. His frailties brought about his downfall, but he met his death as a courageous soldier. He fought as long as he lived.

c8.s1.73

⁵⁹ Ferishta, I, 160.

Mahmūd Shāh Once More

c8.s2.1

On receipt of the news of Iqbāl Khan’s death, Daulat Khan, Ikhtiyār Khan and other leading nobles of the metropolis sent a deputation to Sultan Mahmūd at Qannauj inviting him to Delhi.⁶⁰ Accordingly he arrived in the capital in December, 1405 (Jamadiul Ākhir, 808 H)⁶¹ and once more ascended the throne. He sent the family of Iqbāl Khan to Kol (modern Aligarh), but did not harm it in any way.⁶² Such treatment was indeed commendable in that age. Daulat Khan and Ikhtiyāruddīn received befitting rewards; the former was appointed governor of the Doab and the latter of Fīrōzābād.⁶³ About this time Iqlīm Khan, son of Bahādur Nāhar, brought presents and tendered his submission to the Sultan.⁶⁴

c8.s2.2

⁶⁰ T.M.S., 174.

c8.s2.3

⁶¹ T.M.S., 174; T.A., I, 260; Badaonī, Ranking, I, 363. Only Ferishta, I, 160, has Jamadiul Avval.

c8.s2.4

⁶² T.M.S., 175; T.A., I, 260.

c8.s2.5

⁶³ T.M.S., 175; T.A., I, 260.

c8.s2.6

⁶⁴ T.M.S., 175; T.A., I, 260.

c8.s2.7

Sultan Mahmūd had at last recovered control of Delhi after a lapse of seven years, but he had also inherited the problems of Iqbāl Khan. He was opposed by Ibrāhīm Sharqī on the east and Khizr Khan on the west, and he decided to settle scores with both. Delhi and Jaunpur had ever been suspicious and scared of each other, for the latter had come into being at the cost of the former and in spite of it. Delhi had never recognised the independence of Jaunpur, and, on the other hand, not a few Sharqī kings were keen to incorporate Delhi in their kingdom. Thus perennial conflict between the two became inevitable. Worse still, Ibrahīm had personally insulted Mahmūd by refusing him asylum and support.

c8.s2.8

Qannauj, an appendage of the Sharqī kingdom, had been occupied by Sultan Mahmūd in A. D. 1401-2 (804 H). On the eve of his departure for Delhi he placed it in the charge of Malik Mahmūd Tarmatī. Ibrāhīm Sharqī thought it an excellent opportunity to retake Qannauj, and advanced upon it. Sultan Mahmūd was not slow to accept the challenge and in October-November, 1406 (Jamadiul Avval, 809 H)⁶⁵ he marched out to meet the king of Jaunpur. While Mahmūd's advance made Ibrāhīm think caution to be the better part of valour, Mahmūd was rightly reluctant to start the war. Therefore, as had happened on a previous occasion, their armies lay facing each other on the two banks of the Ganga for some time and then they returned to their respective capitals.⁶⁶

c8.s2.9

⁶⁵ T.M.S., 175.

c8.s2.10

⁶⁶ Ferishta, II, 305; T.A., I, 261. T.M.S. 175 has چون سلطان (محمود) نزديك قنوج رسيد سلطان ابراهيم مقابل قنوج گذارا آب گنگ آمده نزول كرد (At the approach of Sultan (Mahmūd) to Qannauj, Sultan Ibrahīm (also) arrived opposite to Qannauj at the ford of the river Ganga, and encamped.) In a foot-note the editor of the text says that one of the MSS. even omits the word آب (river). There is thus no reason to agree with Badaonī, Ranking, I, 363, that he crossed the Ganga.

c8.s2.11

Mahmūd had refrained from fighting because he had too many irons in the fire. Before marching to Qannauj, he had sent another strong force under Daulat Khan Lodī against Bairam Khan Turkbachchā of Samana, another of Fīrōz Tughlaq's Turkish slaves, who now governed the place as Khizr Khan's deputy after Bahrām Khan's tragic end. This division of the royal army had weakened both the forces. While Mahmūd dared not fight Ibrāhīm, Daulat Khan fared still worse in Samana. In a battle fought on Wednesday, 22 December, 1406 (11 Rajab, 809 H)⁶⁷ at about 2 *kurohs* from Samana, Daulat Khan had come off victorious. But since Bairam Khan owed fealty to Khizr Khan, the latter on hearing of the fall of Samana marched out of Multan to the rescue of his deputy. At this, Daulat Khan's courage failed him, and as Khizr Khan approached Fatehābād, he precipitately crossed the Jumna for the Doab.⁶⁸ Not only that, his officers who had been left behind, went over to Khizr Khan.⁶⁹ The whole of the region west of the Jumna thus passed into the hands of Khizr Khan, who bestowed large chunks of territory on officers close to him.⁷⁰ Thus, owing to his hasty and impolitic plan of action, Sultan Mahmūd's prestige and power received a severe setback, and Ibrāhīm Sharqī once again made preparations to attack Delhi. He wrested Qannauj without much difficulty, and making it his headquarters spent the rainy season there making feverish preparations for seizing Delhi. His hopes were shared by many Delhi nobles who deserted Mahmūd and joined the Sharqī king at Qannauj.⁷¹ Encouraged by these desertions, Ibrāhīm marched towards Delhi in October-November, 1407 (Jamadiul Avval, 810 H)⁷², leaving Qannauj in charge of Ikhtiyār Khan, grandson of Malik Daulat Yār Khan of Kampil. On the way he captured Sambhal in Rohilkhand and then by forced marches he arrived near Delhi and encamped on the Jumna. Delhi's fall seemed a matter of moments, when suddenly the situation took a different turn. As Ibrāhīm was about to cross the Jumna, information reached him that Zafar Khan of Gujarat was marching to attack Jaunpur.⁷³ Without wasting time or thought Ibrāhīm Sharqī retreated post-haste to save Jaunpur. Learning of his retreat, Zafar Khan did not proceed further. But Sultan Mahmūd took full advantage of the situation. In April, 1408 (Zilq'ada, 810 H) he defeated and killed Malik Marhaba whom Ibrāhīm had posted at Baran and then proceeding to Sambhal recaptured it.⁷⁴

c8.s2.12

⁶⁷ T.M.S., 177 and Basu, 182. T.A. has 5 Rajjab but agrees in month and year, Ferishta and Badaonī have 810 and 812 H respectively.

c8.s2.13

⁶⁸ T.M.S., 177.

c8.s2.14

⁶⁹ *Ibid.*

c8.s2.15

⁷⁰ Hisār Fīrōzā was given to Qawām Khan, Samana and Sunnam were taken away from Bairam and bestowed upon Majlis-i-Ālā Zirak Khan while Sarhind with the adjoining parganas was given to Bairam. T.M.S., 177.

c8.s2.16

⁷¹ T.M.S., 176.

c8.s2.17

⁷² *Ibid.*, 175. Malik Daulat Yār was probably the same person who had been given the title of Daulat Khan and made ‘Imādul Mulk and Āriz-i-Mumālik in the year of Mahmūd Shāh's accession. T.M.S., 156. Kāmpil is 60 miles N.W. of Qannauj and 28 miles N.W. of Fatehgarh. District Gaz. Farrukhābād.

c8.s2.18

⁷³ Zafar Khan had first invaded Malwa to avenge the death of his friend Dilāwar Khan at the hands of his son Alp Khan, who had ascended the throne with the title of Hoshang Shāh. He had imprisoned Hoshang and occupied Dhar (Commissariat, *I*, 58). Similarly, true to his loyalty to Sultan Mahmūd to the last, Zafar Khan had planned to help him against Iqbāl Khan, and had stopped only on learning of his death at the hands of Khizr Khan. Now hearing that Sultan Mahmūd was threatened by the Sharqī king, Zafar Khan was bound for Jaunpur after settling scores with Hoshang Shāh. Ferishta, *I*, 160; Bayley, *Gujarat*, 85.

c8.s2.19

⁷⁴ T.M.S., 176; Ferishta, *I*, 160, 161, has Malik Marziā.

c8.s2.20

Success in the east encouraged Sultan Mahmūd to retrieve his position in the west. Daulat Khan's debacle had cost him all his territory west of Delhi. Even Hisār Fīrōzā was in the hands of Qawām Khan, a governor appointed by Khizr Khan. Sultan Mahmūd's ambition was justifiable, but instead of making adequate preparations to fulfil it, he only incited his enemies into action. In November-December, 1408 (Rajjab 811 H) he attacked Hisār Fīrōzā, and having reduced Qawām Khan to submission⁷⁵ returned to Delhi via Dhatrath.⁷⁶ This was not a great victory, but it provoked Khizr Khan into action. He marched to Fatehābād and punished all those who had joined Sultan Mahmūd. From there he sent Malik Tuhfā to ravage the Doab and himself proceeded to Delhi via Rohtak and, on 1 February, 1409 (15 Ramzān, 811 H),⁷⁷ besieged Mahmūd at Sīrī and Ikhtiyār Khan at Fīrōzābād. The fall of Delhi seemed to be a matter of days but the countryside, wasted by several years of famine, was no longer capable of supporting an army of invasion, and Khizr Khan was compelled to raise the siege due to scarcity.⁷⁸

c8.s2.21

⁷⁵ Ferishta, *I*, 161; T.A., *I*, 262; T.M.S., 177.

c8.s2.22

⁷⁶ T.M.S., 177, 178, has دهارترهت. MS. M has دهارترهه. T.A., *De*, 289 n. 2 writes. "It is difficult to make out this name". Badaonī has دهات رته which Col. Ranking translates as the village of Rata. Another MS. of Badaonī has Rana.

c8.s2.23

⁷⁷ T.M.S., 178 has یازدهم. Basu has obviously read it as پانزدهم.

c8.s2.24

⁷⁸ T.M.S., 178; Ferishta, *I*, 161.

Khizr Khan

c8.s3.1

Khizr Khan had returned without achieving anything worth the name, but he had made a correct appraisal of the situation. He clearly saw the pecarious position of Sultan Mahmūd and was convinced that one day he would be able to defeat him and occupy Delhi. So from now onwards he made persistent efforts towards that end. In A. D. 1409-10 (812 H) he attacked Bairam Khan Turk-bachchā, who had gone over to Daulat Khan Lodī, and compelled him to allegiance. Next year he marched to Rohtak,⁷⁹ and although its governor Malik Idrīs held out for full six months without any reinforcements from Delhi, he was forced into submission.

c8.s3.2

⁷⁹ 42 miles N. W. of Delhi.

c8.s3.3

Even when the intentions of Khizr Khan were now no longer a secret, Sultan Mahmūd was more complacent than ever. Yahyā makes a pointed reference to the fact that after the Sultan's in-vestment by Khizr Khan in 1409 "Mahmūd remained in Delhi and undertook no further incursions". Only once did he go out to Katehar, but that too just for hunting, and kept himself busy in "amusement and merry-making".⁸⁰

c8.s3.4

⁸⁰ T.M.S., 178-79.

c8.s3.5

Meanwhile in A. D. 1411-12 (814 H) Khizr Khan once again marched to Rohtak. Malik Idrīs and his brother Mubāriz Khan were "admitted to the honour of kissing his feet".⁸¹ He ravaged Narnaul,⁸² which was in the hands of Iqlīm Khan, son of Bahādur Nāhar, and proceeding further into Mewat,⁸³ he sacked Tijārā,⁸⁴

c8.s3.6

⁸¹ T.M.S., 179. Also Ferishta, I, 161.

c8.s3.7

⁸² Narnaul is now a railway station lying S.W. of Rewari on the Delhi-Ajmer line. It is situated in 28° 2′ N., 76° 14′ E.

c8.s3.8

⁸³ Mewat was so called after the Meos, of obscure origin, claiming descent from Rajputs. According to some Mewat is the Sanskrit *Mīnā-Vati*, rich in fish, while some others derive Meo from Mahes, a word used in driving cattle. The original Meos were probably converted to Islam during the time of Mahmūd of Ghaznī. Throughout the Sultanate period the Meos harassed the kings of Delhi and vice versa right up to the coming of Bābur. During Tīmūr's invasion, Bahādur Nāhar founded the sub-division of the Mewatīs called Khan-Zadas, members of which ruled Mewat for many years. Mewat lay south of Delhi and in Mughal times formed part of the Sūbā of Agra. Its most famous towns were Narnaul, Alwar, Tijārā and Rewari. Today the region comprises of the districts of Mathura and Gurgaon, a considerable portion of Alwar and some of Bharatpur. See Tieffenthaler, III, map where the province is marked; Hunter, Imp. Gaz., 4, 8, ff; Badaonī, Ranking, I, 365 n; Basu's Trs. of T.M.S., 184 n; 209-10 n; Imp. Gaz. U.P., I, 223.

c8.s3.9

⁸⁴ Tijārā lies about 30 miles N.E. of Alwar. I.G., XXIII, 358. It is shown in Constable, Pl. 27 Cb. Bābur describes it as a stronghold of the Mewatīs, B.N. (B), II, 578. Tijārā is well-known for its security because of the strength of the hills surrounding it. Powlett, Gaz. of Alwar, 132.

c8.s3.10

Sarahta and Kharol.⁸⁵ Ikhtiyār Khan, the governor of Fīrōzābād, deserted to Khizr Khan, who thus gained possession of the Doab and the environs of Delhi.⁸⁶ He once again besieged Sultan Mahmūd at Sīrī. But the city was not yet destined to fall. Scarcity of provisions once again compelled him to raise the siege, and he returned to Fatehpur via Panipat⁸⁷ in April-May, 1412 (Muharram, 815 H).

c8.s3.11

⁸⁵ Sarahta is four miles east of Tijārā. Kharol is Gahrol, now a ruined town.

c8.s3.12

⁸⁶ T.M.S., 179.

c8.s3.13

⁸⁷ Panipat lies 53 miles north of Delhi, Lat. 29° 23′ N., Long. 71° 1′ E.

c8.s3.14

Six months after Sultan Mahmūd died a natural death at Kaithal in October, 1412 (Rajjab, 815 H).⁸⁸ He had ruled for a little more than eighteen years. All chroniclers, without a single exception, mistakenly write that he ruled for twenty years and two months. Obviously the error of one seems to have been copied by the others.⁸⁹ Inclined to a life of pleasure and ease and neglectful of the affairs of the state, Mahmūd had ruled all these years only in name.⁹⁰ The ruler of Jaunpur did not respect him; Iqbāl Khan, who had first invited him to Delhi, developed a contempt for him for his “treachery”. The turmoils of his times would have proved too much even for a capable ruler; Mahmūd simply could not face them. His stars however did him one good turn. In the end he could reoccupy the throne; and he died as the Sultan of Delhi if he had not quite lived as one. With his death the house of Tughlaq ceased to exist.

c8.s3.15

⁸⁸ T.M.S., 180.

c8.s3.16

⁸⁹ Including Sir Wolseley Haig in C.H.I., III, 192. Mahmūd had come to the throne in Jamadiul Avval 796 H, March, A.D. 1394 (T.M.S., 159) and died in Rajjab 815 H, October, A.D. 1412 (T.M.S., 180). Thus he reigned only for eighteen and a half years.

c8.s3.17

⁹⁰ Ferishta, I, 161; T.M.S., 179; Badaonī, Ranking, I, 366.

c8.s3.18

On Mahmūd’s death the nobles paid homage to Daulat Khan. Although he had no claims to the throne, yet the nobility of Delhi could not just think of offering the crown to Khizr Khan, the hated “nominee” of the “accursed” Tīmūr. Daulat was aware of his precarious position and the strength of Khizr Khan. So, to begin with, he only concentrated on securing as many allies as possible. He succeeded in obtaining the fealty of Rai Vīra Singh of Katehār and the support of Mahābat Khan of Badaon.⁹¹ Even Malik Idrīs and Mubāriz Khan, who had submitted to Khizr Khan, were induced to come over to his side. But his enemies were stronger than his few friends, and when Ibrāhīm Sharqī besieged Qādir Khan, son of Mahmūd Khan, at Kalpi,⁹² Daulat Khan avoided fighting him. Meanwhile Khizr Khan started on a full-scale invasion of Delhi. He sent a strong force to besiege Rohtak and himself marched to Mewat where he received the submission of Iqlim Khān's nephew Jalāl Khan. Thence he marched across the Doab and sacked Sambhal. He arrived in Delhi in March, 1414, with 60,000 horse,⁹³ and invested Sīrī.⁹⁴ Daulat Khan withstood the siege for full four months and surrendered only when some officers led by Malik Lona⁹⁵ treacherously admitted the besiegers. Daulat Khan was taken prisoner, confined in the Hisār Fīrōzā and later killed.⁹⁶

c8.s3.19

⁹¹ T.M.S., 180; Badaonī, Ranking, I, 375.

c8.s3.20

⁹² Ferishta, I, 161. Qādir Khan has been mentioned as the son of Sultan Mahmūd Khan by chroniclers like Badaonī and Ferishta. This was not the Sultan Mahmūd of Delhi but Nāsiruddīn Mahmūd Khan, son of Malikzādā Fīrōz, son of Malik Tājuddīn Turk who is said to have held the Shiqq of Mahoba and Kalpi. See Hodivala, 400. For the history of Mahmūd Khan see Hodivala in the Numismatic Supplement No. XLII to the J.A.S.B., 1930. Also Thomas, *Chronicles*, 325-26.

c8.s3.21

⁹³ Ferishta, I, 161.

c8.s3.22

⁹⁴ T.M.S., 181.

c8.s3.23

⁹⁵ T.M.S., 181.

c8.s3.24

⁹⁶ Badaonī, Ranking, I, 375.

c8.s3.25

Thus did the Sultanate of Delhi finally pass into the hands of Khizr Khan Saiyyad on Monday, 4 June, A. D. 1414 (15 Rabiul Avval, 817 H).⁹⁷

c8.s3.26

⁹⁷ T.M.S., 181, has این واقعه در ماه ربیع الاول .... بود (*i.e.* this event took place in the month of Rabiul Avval). In a foot-note of the translation (p. 186) Basu remarks that MS. M-BM reads در هفتم ماه ربیع الاول (On the 7th of the month of Rabīul Avval). JNS has ماه در هفدهم (17th of the month). In E and D, IV, 45, the date is 8 Rabīul Avval while in Ferishta, I, 161, it is 15th. At another place Yahyā (T.M.S., 183) says that Khizr Khan took Sīrī on 15 Rabīul Avval. This date is agreed upon by Nizāmuddīn (T.A., I, 265) and Ferishta (I, 161). Badaonī, Ranking, I, 375 has 17 while E and D, IV, 45, in the translation of T.M.S., has 8 Rabiul Avval. Thomas, *Chronicles*, 326, has 7 Rabiul Avval, 817 H.

The Sultanate vis-a-vis Other States

c8.s4.1

In the bid for the throne Iqbāl Khan, Nāsiruddīn Nusrat, Nāsiruddīn Mahmūd, Daulat Khan, the Sharqī king and Khizr Khan had all played their game. But in the end Khizr Khan Saiyyad had emerged as the hero of the struggle. True, he had not been quite welcome for being the agent and nominee of the hated Tīmūr, but once he got possession of the throne the people submitted to him, for tired of the constant upheavals they wanted peace at any price. Besides, Tīmūr's invasion was now becoming a matter of memory.

c8.s4.2

But the Sultanate of Delhi was no longer an imperial power. It comprised only of Sindh, the Punjab and the western Uttar Pradesh. In extent it was the largest compared with the other kingdoms into which the empire had broken up, but it was not the strongest of them. Kingdoms like Jaunpur, Gujarat, Malwa, Rajasthan, Bahmanī and Vijāyanagar were equally strong if not more powerful. Some of them like Jaunpur and Malwa even tried to swallow up the Delhi Sultanate itself. Consequently, the Saiyyad rulers as well as their Lodī successors had to remain vigilant about the activities of these states. Therefore, before commencing the study of the Saiyyad rulers, it would be pertinent to make a brief study of the independent states which affected the course of the Sultanate's history from the accession of Khizr Khan to the fall of Ibrāhīm Lōdī.

c8.s4.3

These states fall into four well-defined groups. The first group comprised the Hindu states of Rajasthan of which Mewar (modern Udaipur) was the leader. The Muhammedan states of Gujarat and Malwa formed the second group. The third group lay in the south—the Bahmanī kingdom (Muhammedan) and the Vijāyanagar empire (Hindu). The fourth comprised the kingdoms of the east—Gondwānā, Orissa, Bengal and Jaunpur.

c8.s4.4

For the study of these kingdoms, the plan of Rushbrook Williams, of starting from the south, working upwards and finally concentrating on the Sultanate of Delhi, would suit best.⁹⁸ For well-nigh two centuries the empire of Vijāyanagar remained united and helped preserve the Hindu religion and culture from the onrush of the Islamic ideas and forces in the south. The Bahmanī kingdom suffered from all the weaknesses of a Muslim ruling dynasty—uncertainty of succession, intrigues of the nobles, political murders, excessive drinking, multi-marriages (with consequent over-growth of population)⁹⁹ and zeal for aggressive wars against neighbouring "infidel kings". Of the eighteen rulers of the Bahmanī dynasty, five were murdered, three were removed from the throne and two died of intemperance. And towards the close of fifteenth century the kingdom had broken up into a number of small principalities—Ahmadnagar, Golkunda, Bījāpur, Bidar and Berār. Their constant internecine wars gave the Deccan peninsula a distinct character and kept the Sultans of Delhi free from anxiety. The Bahmanī kingdom was also too close to Malwa and Gujarat, a fact which these two states could ill afford to forget. That is why whenever Gujarat, and more so Malwa, tried to take advantage of the Delhi-Jaunpur wars, the restraining influence of the Bahmanī kingdom did not let either of them become so powerful as to be tempted to attack the Sultanate of Delhi, at least never in full force.

c8.s4.5

⁹⁸ *An Empire Builder of the Sixteenth Century*, Introduction, 6.

c8.s4.6

⁹⁹ Athnasius Nikitin in Major, *India in the Fifteenth Century*, 14.

c8.s4.7

The little kingdom of Khandēsh lay snugly in the valley of the Tapti and had little concern with the politics of the Sultanate. Similarly the vast tract of Gondwānā was not yet destined to play any important role in India's history. The little kingdom of Orissa was occasionally subjected to attacks from Bengal, Jaunpur, Malwa and Bahmanī kingdoms, but it did not affect the politics of the Sultanate in any way. The same was the case with the self-sufficient, independent and distant Bengal. But Malwa, Gujarat, Rajasthan and Jaunpur played a very important part in determining the course of events of the Sultanate of Delhi throughout the fifteenth century. Hence it would be necessary to give a brief account of the history of these kingdoms.

c8.s4.8

The kingdom of Malwa lay south-west of Delhi. It was conquered by 'Alāuddīn Khaljī in 1305 and continued to remain a province of the Delhi Sultanate till 1401, when its governor Dilāwar Khan Ghorī, a descendant of Muhammad Ghorī, declared his independence taking advantage of the confusion created by Tīmūr's invasion. But when the fugitive Sultan, Mahmūd Tughlaq, after his cold reception in Gujarat, came to Malwa, he was received by Dilāwar with all marks of respect. Dilāwar's subservient attitude so much infuriated his son Alp Khan that he retired to Mandu. After Sultan Mahmūd's departure to Delhi (1401), Dilāwar once again became completely independent. He died in 1405. His son and successor Hoshang Shāh (1405-35) shifted his capital from Dhar to Mandu and adorned it with many beautiful buildings. He was involved in many wars against the neighbouring kingdoms of Gujarat, Mewar, Delhi and Jaunpur which will be referred to in their proper sequence. Suffice it here to say that having failed against the ruler of Gujarat, his western neighbour, Hoshang tried his luck against the Sultan of Delhi, but he was beaten back by Mubārak Shāh Saiyyad to whom he had to pay a handsome tribute.¹⁰⁰ However, in 1431, he was successful in wresting Kalpi from the king of Jaunpur. Hoshang Shāh was succeeded by his son Ghaznī Khan, a worthless debauchee, who was murdered by his minister Mahmūd Khan, a Khaljī Turk. Thus came into power the dynasty of the Khaljī sultans of Malwa.

c8.s4.9

¹⁰⁰ T.M.S., 209-10.

c8.s4.10

Mahmūd Khaljī I (A.D. 1436-1469) was a great warrior "so that his tent became his home, and the field of battle his resting place".¹⁰¹ His long reign was spent in waging wars against Bahādur Shāh I of Gujarat, Rana Kumbhā of Mewar, Muhammad Shāh Saiyyad and Bahlūl Lodī of Delhi and Muhammad Shāh III Bahmanī. Malwa's contiguity to the Sultanate kept her very much interested in the affairs of the latter. Malwa was ambitious; she fought against Delhi and Jaunpur and carried on raids in Gondwānā and Orissa (1422). In 1440 Mahmūd Khaljī marched against Muhammad Saiyyad of Delhi, but Bahlūl Lodī successfully resisted his advance. All the same he conquered lands up to Kalpi (in 1445) and compelled the Auhadī ruler of Bayana (in the Delhi Sultanate) to read the Khutba in his name (1446).¹⁰² About the time of the end of the Saiyyad dynasty, Malwa had extended its rule up to Kalpi in Bundēlkhand and its ruler was being considered by the Delhi nobles as a possible candidate for the Delhi throne. Even Bahlūl Lodī sought his help against the Sharqī king Husain Shāh (1468). But as years passed, Malwa lost in strength chiefly because of its failure against Gujarat and Mewar, so much so that during Sikandar Lodī's reign it was destined to lose Ranthambhor, Narwar, Chanderi, Bayana and Kalpi to the Sultanate of Delhi.

c8.s4.11

¹⁰¹ Ferishta, Urdu trs., II, 379 ff.

c8.s4.12

¹⁰² In 1465 he received a robe of honour and patent of sovereignty from Al Mustānjid Billāh Yūsuf, the Abbaside Caliph of Egypt, but the more important recognition of his sovereignty came from Tīmūr's great-grandson Abū Sa'īd who exchanged envoys with him.

c8.s4.13

Mahmūd Khaljī I died in 1469 after a long reign of thirty-four years. He was succeeded by two slothful monarchs—Ghayāsuddīn (1469-1500) and his son Nāsiruddīn (1500-10)—whose main occupation was the administration of their harems. The latter was succeeded by his son Mahmūd II in 1510, but only after a long civil war in which Sikandar Lodī gained many districts of the Malwa kingdom. By this time the power of Mewar and Gujarat was in the ascendant. In Malwa the nobles were fishing in the waters troubled by the civil war. To curb the power of his intriguing nobles Mahmūd II appointed as his Prime Minister, Medinī Rai (Purbīyā), a Rajput chief of a small district in eastern Malwa but well known for his valour. Medinī Rai soon acquired supreme power in the state by filling offices of responsibility with his own trusted lieutenants. At this the sultan grew suspicious of his powerful but loyal minister, and he called in the aid of Muzaffar Shāh Gujaratī to expel him. But Medinī Rai with the aid of Sangrām Singh of Mewar inflicted a crushing defeat on his sovereign in 1519. Mahmūd was captured and carried away to Chittor by Rana Sangā who was in a position to annex Malwa, but he released and reinstated Mahmūd after the right royal Rajput fashion.¹⁰³

c8.s4.14

¹⁰³ However, such magnanimity was wanting in Bahādur Shāh II of Gujarat who, incensed with Mahmūd for sheltering his rebel brother, attacked and killed Mahmūd and annexed his kingdom in March, 1531. Malwa continued to be a part of Gujarat till 1535 when the Mughal Emperor Humayūn defeated Bahādur Shāh. Shēr Shāh Surī appointed Shujā’at Khan as the governor of Malwa. Shujā’at’s son was Bāz Bahadur, whose passionate love for princess Rūpmati of Sārangpur has immortalised his name in Malwi folklore and legend.

c8.s4.15

Thus when Bābur invaded Hindustan, Medinī Rai was all powerful in Mandu; his officers held Gagraun and Chanderi and his brother Silahdī ruled in Raisēn, Vidisha (Bhilsa) and Sārangpur.

c8.s4.16

To the west of Malwa was situated the kingdom of Gujarat. Its immense wealth, due particularly to its commercial and maritime activity, had tempted many invaders to attack it. Mahmūd of Ghaznī had carried away immense wealth from Somnath, and Muhammad Ghorī had invaded it in 1196. ’Alāuddīn Khaljī had annexed Gujarat to the Empire of Delhi in 1299, but during the confusion created by Tīmūr’s invasion Zafar Khan, a convert from the Tauk¹⁰⁴ clan of the Rajputs, assumed independence in 1401. After the death of his rebel son Tātār Khan, he assumed the title of Sultan Muzaffar Shāh. He waged a successful war against Sultan Hoshang of Malwa and captured Dhar, but four years later he was poisoned by his grandson Ahmad Shāh in June, A.D. 1411.

First 143 of 166 passages. Read on

Cites (5)