History of the Qaraunah Turks in India c10.82

c10.82

It appears from the narrative of Barani and Ibn Batūṭah that this rebellion occurred before that of ‘Ain-al-Mulk. He was appointed to the fief of Bidar, when the Sultan had gone to the Deccan to suppress the rebellion of Jalal-al-Din Ahsan Shah, and when he was obliged to stay at Devagiri, after having returned from Warangal on account of plague. The Sultan was in the Deccan during the years 735-37 A.H. for about two and a half years. Nusrat Khan was appointed to his office sometime in 736 A.H. Barani says that he remained in office for three years from which we may conclude that the rebellion must have occurred sometime in 739-40 A.H. That the rebellion must have occurred not later than 740-41 A.H. is beyond doubt. Barani clearly places it before the rebellion of ‘Ain-al-Mulk and Ibn Batūṭah says that after the Sultan’s return from Saragdwāri in 741 A.H., Nusrat Khan and ‘Ain-al-Mulk both were pardoned and admitted to royal favour. Ibn Batūṭah has made some confusion in giving an account of this rebellion. He writes: ‘when the king returned from Telingana and the rumour of his death began to spread, Taj-al-mulk Nusrat Khan Turk, who was governor of Telingana, and was one of the old courtiers of the king rebelled on hearing of the report.’⁶⁵ This is incorrect. Ibn Batūṭah himself says in describing the Sultan’s visit to the shrine of Salar Mas‘ud at Bahraich that Nusrat was pardoned with ‘Ain-al-Mulk in 741 A.H.⁶⁶ If Nusrat rebelled, when the Sultan was in the Deccan, how is it that he was pardoned after nearly four years? Again, this is in conflict with Barani’s statement that he held office for three years.