History of the Qaraunah Turks in India c14.46

c14.46

from other independent sources; as for example, no historian, not even Barani, has recorded the story of Qazi Jalal's revolt, but the *Sirat* makes mention of it and it is corroborated by Ibn Batūṭah. Similarly it gives more details about the life of Taghī and the cause of his rebellion and in all important particulars it is substantially in agreement with Barani and others. The *Munshāt-i-Māhrū* of ‘Ain-al-Mulk Multani compiled towards the close of the 14th century is an extremely rare work of which a copy is in the possession of the Asiatic Society of Bengal. The MS. is not dated, but there is plenty of internal evidence to show that its author was ‘Ain-al-Mulk Multani and that the present copy was transcribed not later than the 15th century. The author is a man of wide learning, well-versed in Islamic theology and jurisprudence and experienced in the affairs of state. There is no doubt about his identity for he describes himself as (بندہ جان بخشش ایں خداوند) slave of the Sultan who was pardoned his life and sometimes as (بندہ قدیم) old slave. It will be remembered that after his rebellion his life was spared by Sultan Muhammad. The *Munshāt-i-Māhrū* does not contain a word about the rebellion of its author, but it says much about the other aspects of his life and the times in which he lived. He mentions Sultan Muhammad's name with gratitude and supplies information regarding his reign which supplements Barani. He writes much about the system of administration as it existed under Firuz and a comparison of his account with Barani, Ibn Batūṭah, the *Sirat* and the *Fatūḥāt* enables us to understand the institutions of the time which were not radically transformed. ‘Ain-al-Mulk must have been aware of the cause of Sultan Ghiyās's death, but he slurs over it and in an *arzdāsht* we read only the remark that ‘the solid and well-founded palace fell down by the will of Providence’. As the MS. is an old copy, it is obscure in certain places and it is difficult to explain the precise meaning of the technical terms he employs in describing the fiscal system. Despite these defects ‘Ain-al-Mulk is more elegant and polished than Barani, but our only regret is that he does not give us an account of his rebellion and his relations with Sultan Muhammad. He clearly distinguishes between the Gakkars and the Khokhars and gives much useful information about the provincial administration as it existed in the 14th century.