History of the Qaraunah Turks in India c9.11

c9.11

and West Africa, with the emperors of Constantinople and the kings of Bulgaria. But it is difficult to understand why he should promise help against Abu Sa'id when he had established friendly relations with him. Abul Feda who saw with his own eyes the 'Iraqian embassy at the Egyptian court writes that on Sunday Muharram 28, 728 A.H. the Sultans of Egypt and Sham summoned the envoys of Abu Sa'id to their camp. The embassy consisted of three men Arsha Bugha, the leader of the deputation and Ayaji or Abbaji and Barja, who was a son-in-law of Amir Badr-al-Din.⁶ According to D'Ohosson this friendship established in 728 A.H. lasted till the close of Abu Sa'id's reign.⁷ The two monarchs styled each other as brothers, and they frequently exchanged embassies. In 1328 A.D. when an envoy named Timūrbaka went to the Egyptian court to ask for the hand of one of Sultan Nasir's daughters on behalf of Abu Sa'id, the Sultan excused himself on the ground that his daughter was too young, and added that when she was grown up, the request should be granted. These friendly relations lasted for the rest of Abu Sa'id's reign, for in 734 A.H. Yasaur, a Mongol chief, against whom the Ilkhan bore a grudge, was put to death by Sultan Nasir's orders issued at the instance of Abu Sa'id. Ibn Batūtah who is a contemporary writer corroborates the above statement, and says that deep and genuine friendship existed between these two monarchs. Muhammad, in order to secure Sultan Nasir's help, sent an embassy to the Egyptian court in 1331-32 A.D., but it does not seem to have met with any satisfactory response.⁸ Possibly the western ruler felt that the acquisition of a slice of Persian territory on the frontier was a greater advantage than the friendship of the Sultan of Hind, who was certainly inferior to him in position. Tarmāshirīn Khan, the Chaghtai chief, on whose support the Sultan counted had remained on the Khorasan frontier for four years, but it does not appear as Mr. Gardener Brown suggests that he did so ‘to undertake his share of the invasion.’⁹ Tarmāshirīn was a doubtful ally, whose chief motive was to gain the utmost advantage for himself. Besides, his deposition just at this time by his turbulent barons who were disappointed at his dilatory policy, and according to Ibn Batūtah's statement at his non-observance of the *Yasāq*, cut short all his schemes of conquest, and placed him in an unfortunate predicament.¹⁰