History of the Qaraunah Turks in India c10.119

c10.119

When the Sultan was encamped at Saragdwāri, ‘Ain-al-Mulk and his brothers Shahrullah, Nasrullah and Faizullah worked zealously to collect supplies.⁸⁵ This conduct, so strikingly at variance with that of other governors, made a great impression upon the Sultan, and he reposed full confidence in the Malik and his brothers. But this did not last long. A singular lack of foresight on the part of the Sultan drove the loyal governor into rebellion. The cause of the rebellion described by Barani, Ibn Batūtah and later writers like Yahya, Nizam-al-Din, Badaoni, Firishta and Hajji-ad-Dabir is more or less the same. Reports had reached the Sultan from the Deccan that Qutlugh Khan's officers (Karkuns) had misbehaved themselves through greed and selfishness, and that they had inflicted much misery upon the population by their exactions and deprived the state of its revenues. He, therefore, decided to remove Qutlugh Khan from his command and to appoint ‘Ain-al-Mulk in his place. Qutlugh Khan was a man of recognised integrity, and the sudden removal of such a veteran officer for whom the Sultan cherished a great regard came as a surprise to the Malik and his brothers. They thought that it was only a diplomatic move on the part of the Sultan to deprive ‘Ain-al-Mulk and his brothers of their present position and possibly to take their lives. Besides, there were other circumstances which created distrust. During the famine when the Sultan had forbidden emigration, many nobles, officers and others had gone to Oudh and Zafrabad to escape from the wrath of the Sultan.⁸⁶ Nizam-al-Din and Firishta follow Barani in saying that these men had been charged with embezzlement and ordered to be punished. They had sought shelter with ‘Ain-al-Mulk who treated them kindly, farmed out lands to them, and entered into relationship with them. These refugees further confirmed the suspicions of the Malik and his brothers by telling all sorts of stories about the Sultan. Barani clearly says that these men told ‘Ain-al-Mulk that the Sultan meant treachery, while Ibn Batūtah simply says that the Malik’s brothers conspired with him and resolved to set him up as their king. The author of the Tarikh-i-Mubarak Shahi positively states that ‘Ain-al-Mulk's proposed transfer to Devagiri was represented to him in such a light that he thought that the Sultan