History of Aurangzib, Based on Original Sources v3.c42.s1: §1. Causes of friction with the Ahoms after the peace.
History of Aurangzib, Based on Original Sources v3.c42.s1
- Language
- English
§1. Causes of friction with the Ahoms after the peace.
v3.c42.s1.1
The retreat of Mir Jumla was not followed by the Mughals abandoning that part of Assam which the treaty had given to them; they continued to hold important points in it. Kajali on the south bank and Bansbari on the north bank remained their easternmost posts till 1667. The promised war-indemnity was also paid in full, though not in one year's time as stipulated, because we read of the last instalment being paid as late as May 1667. The Emperor and Dilir Khan corresponded with the Ahom king and his ministers in very friendly terms and presents were exchanged between the two Courts. But the Mughal *faujdar* of Gauhati seems to have been exasperated at the delay in the payment of the balance of the indemnity, and began to dun for it with growing harshness. The Mughal Government also dealt in an ungenerous and grasping way with the Ahom king in money matters. Whenever any of the elephants forming part of the indemnity died on the way to the Court after having been delivered to the Mughal agent, the Assam Government had to bear the loss and pay Rs. 2,000 for it. We know that many such elephants died every year, and thus the Ahoms, with all their sacrifices barely succeeded in clearing the balance of the war-indemnity, but the annual tribute fell into arrears.*
v3.c42.s1.2
Another cause of disagreement was that many subjects of Assam had accompanied the imperial army to Bengal. When Jayadhwaj remonstrated, Mir Jumla replied, "I am not carrying any one away with me by force or under pressure. I have merely not forbidden those who are following me of their own free choice." The Ahoms took this as a violation of the treaty by which each party had undertaken to restore the "captive" subjects of the other. Again, the Ahom king complained that the Mughal officers had encroached on his territory and refused to go back to their frontier as marked in the treaty. It was only by appealing to the Emperor himself that an order was secured for the restoration of the disputed territory to its rightful owner. The Bar Phukan, jealous of the influence of the Burha Gohain, intrigued with the Muslims for a new invasion of Assam; but the conspiracy was detected and eight nobles put to death for participation in it.
v3.c42.s1.3
∗ The terms of the treaty were that the Ahom king should deliver as war-indemnity 20 thousand tolas of gold, one lakh and 20 thousand tolas of silver and 20 elephants immediately, and thereafter a balance of 3 lakh tolas of silver and 90 elephants in three equal instalments, besides 20 elephants as the annual tribute (Fathiyah, 154. But Buranji II (b), 3 and 6 gives figures for gold and silver inconsistent with each other and with the Mughal account). The gold silver and 20 elephants were delivered on 5-9 Jan. 1663 (Fathiyah, 157-158). As for the balance, it was paid thus:—"In Chaitra 1584 Saka (=March 1663) 30 elephants were delivered....In Falgun 1585 (Feb. 1664) 40 elephants were delivered....In Aghan 1586 (Nov. 1664) 13 elephants were delivered....In Kartik 1585 (Oct. 1663) one lakh of Rupees was offered....In the same year in Falgun (Feb. 1664), Rs. 40,000 was paid. In Kartik 1586 (Oct. 1663) Rs. 40,000 was paid; in Bhadra (Aug-Sep.), ten elephants were given; in Jaishtha 1588 (May 1667) one lakh of Rupees and 50 elephants as equivalent to a further sum of one lakh." [Buranji, II. (b), 6-8.] This makes a total of 143 elephants and Rs. 2,80,000, paid to the Mughals. But at least 24 of the elephants are stated to have died and their price, at Rs. 2,000 for each, recovered from the Ahoms! For the correspondence about the indemnity, Buranji II. (b), 11-21.
v3.c42.s1.4
For these reasons the new king Chakradhwaj had been brooding over the injustice and insolence of the Mughals, ever since his accession in November 1663. He had been growing colder and more stiff-necked in his receptions of the Mughal envoys. At last his endurance reached its limit when Sayyid Firuz Khan, the new faujdar of Gauhati, demanded the balance of the indemnity in very provoking terms. Against the advice of his nobles, Chakradhwaj determined on war and made preparations for it.∗
v3.c42.s1.5
∗ For the causes of dispute, (Assamese accompany Mir Jumla) *Fathiyah*, 160 & 162; (Phukan intrigue with Mughals) *Buranji Khunlung* ii. 13-14; (Boundary dispute), *ibid.* 12, 18. *Buranji* II. (b), 10-11, 18; viii. 97. (Dunning for tribute), *Buranji* viii. 97-98.
v3.c42.s1.6
§2. Ahom king renews war and recovers Kamrup.
v3.c42.s1.7
In the meantime he had re-established friendly relations with the Rajah of Kuch Bihar and his lately disloyal vassal princes, and subdued several of the wild tribes along his frontier. A series of forts were built on strategic points along the Brahmaputra to support the intended advance westwards into Kamrup. The gods were propitiated by a grand religious sacrifice, and the augurs found the omens favourable.
v3.c42.s1.8
His plans having been matured, Chakradhwaj sent two armies under his Phukans down the two banks of the Brahmaputra in August 1667. The forts of Bansbari, Kajali, Jaiduar, Itakhali, Shahburj, Pandu and Rangmahal fell in rapid succession, and finally Gauhati itself was captured about the beginning of November. Its fugitive *faujdar* was defeated and taken prisoner on the bank of the Monas. Immense quantities of arms, horses, and other spoils fell into the hands of the victors, and large numbers of Muslims, including several officers, were taken prisoner and massacred. At one blow the Mughal frontier was pushed back to the Monas river. Gauhati became the seat of an Ahom viceroy and was strongly fortified. Forts were also erected at Pandu and Srighat.
v3.c42.s1.9
Next season the Mughals renewed the war, and some fighting took place round Rangamati and the country south of it across the river. Rajah Indraman, an imperial officer, advanced towards Srighat, but was compelled to retreat with failure.*