[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Studies](https://indike.org/pramana/ins) › [General history and culture](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general) › [The Sultanate of Delhi, 711–1526 A.D.](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.srivastava-1950) › c19.s8 # The Sultanate of Delhi, 711–1526 A.D. c19.s8: Qutub-ud-din Mubarak, 1316-1320 The Sultanate of Delhi, 711–1526 A.D. c19.s8 - **Language:** English ## Contents - [c19.s8.t1 Accession](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.srivastava-1950.c19.s8.t1) — 1 part - [c19.s8.t2 Old ordinances cancelled](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.srivastava-1950.c19.s8.t2) — 2 parts - [c19.s8.t3 Rebellions : Devagiri and Madura reconquered](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.srivastava-1950.c19.s8.t3) — 1 part - [c19.s8.t4 Conspiracy against Mubarak](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.srivastava-1950.c19.s8.t4) — 1 part - [c19.s8.t5 Mubarak’s conduct : administration disorganised](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.srivastava-1950.c19.s8.t5) — 1 part - [c19.s8.t6 Mubarak murdered](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.srivastava-1950.c19.s8.t6) — 11 parts ### Qutub-ud-din Mubarak, 1316-1320 ### Accession ### [c19.s8.t1.1](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.srivastava-1950.c19.s8.t1.1) Under the influence of Malik Kafur, Ala-ud-din had disinherited his eldest son, Khizr Khan, and nominated his minor son, Shihab-ud-din Umar, as his successor. On the Sultan's death this boy, aged about six years, was placed upon the throne by Malik Kafur who became the regent and \*de facto\* ruler. He caused Khizr Khan and his younger brother, Shadi Khan, to be blinded. The regent then married Ala-ud-din's widow, appropriated all her jewellery and property and, finally, threw her into prison. He imprisoned the third son of Ala-ud-din, Mubarak Khan, then aged seventeen or eighteen years, and sent some of his agents to take out his eyes; but Mubarak bribed these men and sent them back to slay Kafur, which task they performed without difficulty. The nobles then recognised Mubarak as regent for his brother. After acting for about two months in that capacity, Mubarak dethroned and blinded his brother and seized the throne for himself. He carried out his enthronement on April 1, 1316, and assumed the title of Qutub-ud-din Mubarak Shah. ### Old ordinances cancelled ### [c19.s8.t2.1](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.srivastava-1950.c19.s8.t2.1) Mubarak began his reign well with the good-will of the nobles and the people. He released all prisoners and repealed all the harsh ordinances of his father's time. He recalled those of the old nobles and officers who had been banished by his father. Thus he followed the policy of forget and forgive. The murderers of Malik Kafur, however, were punished, as they demanded extravagant honours for themselves. The compulsory control of the market was done away with, confiscated lands were restored to their legitimate owners, and many of the taxes were reduced. People at last heaved a sigh of relief. As Barani says, they were no longer in fear of hearing the words " . . . . . do this, but do not do that; say this, but do not say that . . . . . " But the sudden removal of the strict ordinances produced an outburst of licence. There was a fall in the moral standard of the courtiers and the official class. The new Sultan, from almost the beginning of his reign, devoted himself to sensual pleasures and fell under the influence of a handsome favourite named Hasan who originally belonged to a depressed caste Bharvar—or Shepherd—and had recently become a convert to Islam. He was given the title of Khusrav⁵ and raised to the position of prime minister. The king’s example was followed by his courtiers. The administration became slack. ### [c19.s8.t2.2](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.srivastava-1950.c19.s8.t2.2) ⁵ For a discussion of Khusrav’s origin, see my paper in \*Indian Historical Quarterly\*, 1953. ### Rebellions : Devagiri and Madura reconquered ### [c19.s8.t3.1](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.srivastava-1950.c19.s8.t3.1) The lawless elements of the population at once took advantage of the change of administration. There was a rebellion in Gujarat. The Yadava ruler of Devagiri asserted his independence and some of the important states of Rajputana, particularly Marwar, became free. It became necessary for the king to restore order. Ain-ul-mulk Multani was sent to Gujarat; he succeeded in quelling the rebellion there. The Sultan’s father-in-law, Zafar Khan, was now appointed its governor. Mubarak took upon himself the duty of recovering Devagiri. He set out for the Dakhin in 1317. Harapala Deva, the ruler of Devagiri, frightened by the news of the Sultan’s approach, fled from his capital. But he was captured and was flayed and his skin was stretched open, while his head was placed on one of the gates of Devagiri. The whole of Devagiri was divided into districts and placed in the hands of Turkish officers. Garrisons were established in the country. Gulbarga, Sagar and Dwarasamudra were occupied and placed under Muslim officers. Mubarak built a mosque at Devagiri from the materials of the Hindu temples which he demolished. He appointed Malik Yaklaki to be the governor of Devagiri and sent Khusrav to reduce Madura and then returned to Delhi. ### Conspiracy against Mubarak ### [c19.s8.t4.1](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.srivastava-1950.c19.s8.t4.1) During his journey back to Delhi, a conspiracy was hatched against the life of the Sultan. The chief conspirator was his cousin, Asad-ud-din, son of Yaghrush Khan, brother of Firoz Khalji. The conspirators planned to kill the Sultan and place a ten-year old son of Khizr Khan on the throne. One of the conspirators revealed the plot to the king who had the conspirators arrested and put to death. The conspiracy so much enraged Mubarak that he ordered all the male descendants of Yaghrush Khan to be put to death. At the same time, his brothers, Khizr Khan, Shadi Khan and Shihab-ud-din, were killed at his orders. He then married Deval Devi, Khizr Khan’s widow. ### Mubarak’s conduct : administration disorganised ### [c19.s8.t5.1](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.srivastava-1950.c19.s8.t5.1) Mubarak’s success in the Dakhin seems to have turned his head. He had his father-in-law, Zafar Khan, and his favourite, Shahim, whom he had left as his regent at Delhi during his absence in the Dakhin, murdered without any apparent reason. He neglected the administration and threw himself heart and soul into sensual pleasures. It is said that he appeared before his courtiers in female attire. He allowed jesters and courtesans to greet old and experienced nobles with lewd gestures and foul abuse. Barani tells us that sometimes the Sultan would run naked among his courtiers. The result was that all respect for the crown vanished and lawlessness everywhere raised its head. Malik Yaklaki, governor of Devagiri, raised the standard of rebellion and proclaimed himself king. He was, however, defeated by the loyal officer in the Dakhin and sent a prisoner to Delhi. Mubarak, instead of punishing him with death, ordered only his nose and ears to be cut off. He even pardoned him a little after and appointed him governor of Samana; but the associates of Yaklaki were put to death. Khusrav’s half-brother, Hisan-ud-din, who was appointed governor of Gujarat in place of Zafar Khan, revolted there, but like Yaklaki, he was defeated by some of the loyal nobles and sent a prisoner to Delhi. The king forgave him altogether in order to please his favourite, Khusrav. Khusrav himself harboured a design of carving out a kingdom for himself in the Dakhin. When some of the officers informed the king about his treasonable intention, Mubarak disbelieved it. He summoned Khusrav to the capital and punished his accusers with dismissal and imprisonment. ### Mubarak murdered ### [c19.s8.t6.1](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.srivastava-1950.c19.s8.t6.1) Khusrav had realised that it would not be possible for him to seize the throne without an army of his own. He sought the king's permission to raise a corps of 40,000 horse, consisting mostly of the Bharvars of Gujarat, a tribe to which Khusrav himself belonged. Mubarak agreed. Next, Khusrav requested that his relations and friends should be permitted to enter the palace gates and see him inside the palace, if they had any urgent work with him. This request was also granted. Khusrav had now his plan ready for the assassination of the king. A warning, however, was given to Mubarak by his former tutor. The Sultan paid no heed to it. On the night of April 14, 1320, when Khusrav's conspiracy had matured, his troops entered the palace and cut down the royal guards. The noise reached the upper storey of the palace and the Sultan enquired from Khusrav as to what it was about. Khusrav replied that men were trying to catch some horses which had broken loose. As Khusrav spoke these words his followers reached Mubarak's apartment. The Sultan sprang up in terror and ran towards the female apartments of the palace; but Khusrav seized him by the hair, while one of his followers named Jaharia stabbed him to death. Mubarak's head was severed from the body and thrown down into the courtyard. ### [c19.s8.t6.2](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.srivastava-1950.c19.s8.t6.2) Qutub-ud-din Mubarak was the last king of the Khalji dynasty, and he was also the most worthless. He did not lack ability or courage, as he displayed both during the first year of his reign in his campaigns in the Dakhin. But his character was completely undermined by his excess in venery and prostitution. He was so infatuated by his favourite, Khusrav, that he failed to see the inordinate ambition of this low-born convert. Mubarak suffered a just penalty for his profligacy, folly and wicked conduct. ### [c19.s8.t6.3](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.srivastava-1950.c19.s8.t6.3) It was reserved for this licentious and good-for-nothing Khalji ruler to get rid of the age-long tradition of theoretical unity of the Muslim world. He kicked the idea of Khilafat and assumed the title of Khalifa, the viceregent of God of heaven and earth. ### [c19.s8.t6.4](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.srivastava-1950.c19.s8.t6.4) NASIR-UD-DIN KHUSRAV SHAH,⁶ 15th April—5th Sept., 1320 ### [c19.s8.t6.5](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.srivastava-1950.c19.s8.t6.5) ⁶ See Appendix A. ### [c19.s8.t6.6](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.srivastava-1950.c19.s8.t6.6) Immediately after Mubarak’s murder, Khusrav summoned the chief nobles to the court and obtained their approval to the \*fait accompli\*. With their consent he ascended the throne under the title of Nasir-ud-din Khusrav Shah (15th April, 1320). He confirmed most of the old officers and nobles in their posts; but those of them who were known to be partisans of the Khaljis were removed. Some of them were put to death. Khusrav married Deval Devi, the widow of Khizr Khan. He proceeded to win over as many of the nobles and officers as possible by a lavish distribution of honours and rewards. Wahid-ud-din Quraishi, who was a minister of Mubarak, was given the title of \*Taj-ul-mulk\* and was allowed to retain his post. Ain-ul-mulk Multani was confirmed and further promoted and given the titles of Alam Khan and \*Amir-ul-Umara\*. Fakhr-ud-din Muhammad Jauna was appointed master of the horse, while his father, Ghazi Malik, remained governor of the Panjab and warden of the marches. Several other Turkish officers, such as the governor of Multan, the governor of Samana named Malik Yaklaki, and the governor of Siwistan, gave their allegiance to the new ruler. Some of the most renowned and pious \*shaikhs\*, particularly the celebrated Shaikh Nizam-ud-din Auliya of Delhi, were won over by distribution of money. They supported the new reign. Khusrav’s own followers, who were mostly members of his tribe from Gujarat and Hindu by religion, were richly rewarded for their co-operation and services. ### [c19.s8.t6.7](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.srivastava-1950.c19.s8.t6.7) But Khusrav was an Indian Musalman, one who had become a convert to this religion but had originally been a Hindu of Bharvar or shepherd caste from Gujarat. This was intolerable to the racial pride of the arrogant Turks who had so far monopolised power and who would not brook the idea of an Indian Musalman appropriating to himself the sovereignty of the kingdom. Hence some of the Turkish \*maliks\* and \*amirs\* raised the cry that Islam was in danger in Hindustan. They charged Khusrav with being a half Hindu and with insulting Islam and promoting idolatrous worship in the palace.⁷ ### [c19.s8.t6.8](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.srivastava-1950.c19.s8.t6.8) ⁷ For Hindu worship in the palace, some of Khusrav Shah's relations, who were Hindus, were responsible. This is clearly recorded in \*Tabqat-i-Akbari\* (Persian Text), Vol. I, p. 187. ### [c19.s8.t6.9](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.srivastava-1950.c19.s8.t6.9) Zia-ud-din Barani, the historian, who belonged to their fraternity, has indulged in bitter invective and tried to show that Khusrav was thoroughly unpopular with all the nobles and the people. The fact, however, is that he was supported by a large number of influential Muslim commanders and officers and had the moral support of important Muslim divines, such as Shaikh Nizam-ud-din Auliya. Only a small minority, for racial as well as for personal reasons, was opposed to him. Ghazi Malik, the warden of the marches, had his own ambition. He was, moreover, representative of the thirteenth century Turkish oligarchs who were bitter opponents of the claims of Indian Musalmans to have a share in the government of the country. So he put himself at the head of a movement against Khusrav and made an attempt to win the support of the governors of Siwistan, Multan and Samana, but without success. He invited Ain-ul-mulk Multani to join the party. None of these, however, gave their support to Ghazi Malik, probably because they did not see any danger to Islam. Having failed in this Ghazi Malik resorted to intrigue and instigated the lower officers in the above three provinces against the new king and fomented a rebellion. This plan was successful. The reactionary officers in alliance with the fanatical population of these three provinces were easily won over. ### [c19.s8.t6.10](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.srivastava-1950.c19.s8.t6.10) While this move was going on silently, Fakhr-ud-din Muhammad Jauna, son of Ghazi Malik, escaped secretly one night from Delhi and joined his father at Dipalpur. When all was ready, Ghazi Malik marched against Delhi. Malik Yaklaki, governor of Samana, opposed him, but was defeated. He was again encountered at Sirsa by Hisam-ud-din, the new king's half-brother; but the latter was defeated and put to flight. As Ghazi Malik approached Delhi, Khusrav came out of the capital and met the rebels near Indraprastha. Before the battle Ain-ul-mulk withdrew along with his troops to Malwa. Yet Khusrav fought boldly on 5th September, 1320, but was defeated and killed. ### [c19.s8.t6.11](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.srivastava-1950.c19.s8.t6.11) Since the establishment of the Turkish Sultanate in northern India only two attempts were made by Indian Muslims to seize power. The first notable Indian Musalman to aspire \*de facto\* control of government was Imad-ud-din Rayhan, who ruled as prime minister for a period of one year only. But he fell a prey to the racial arrogance of the Turkish monopolists. Khusrav was the second Indian Muslim to aspire for power, not as a minister but as a full-fledged sovereign; but he, too, became a victim of Turkish intrigue and racial intolerance. Khusrav was a Musalman. It did not matter what he had been before his conversion to that religion. As Islam claims to be a democratic religion and believes that kingship is not the monopoly of any privileged class but belongs to those who have the power and ability to hold it, there was no reason why Khusrav should have been debarred from enjoying the position he had won. The charge that he insulted Islam and allowed idolatrous worship and ‘the use of the copies of the \*Quran\* as seats and stools’ was nothing more than an interested propaganda designed to cloak the ambition of Ghazi Malik and his son, Jauna Khan. The \*Shaikh-ul-Islam\* (Nizam-ud-din Auliya) at Delhi should have been a better judge of the king’s religious conduct than the military governor in a far-off province. If Khusrav was a murderer of his benefactor, so was Ala-ud-din Khalji and, possibly, Balban also. It is a pity that modern writers of our medieval history have become dupes of exaggerated denunciations indulged in by Barani and copied by later historians. Ghazi Malik was successful and captured the throne of Delhi in September 1320. ## Cites (5) - [Devagiri (Daulatabad)](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.devagiri) - [Dvārasamudra (Halebīḍu)](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.dvarasamudra) - [Marwari](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.marwari) - [Sagari](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.sagari) - [Tārīkh-i Fīrūzshāhī](https://indike.org/pramana/in.darkages.sultanate.tarikh-i-firuzshahi-afif) — Shams-i Sirāj ʿAfīf, Persian --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.srivastava-1950.c19.s8](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.srivastava-1950.c19.s8) · Pramāṇa