Sayyid Dynasty, History, Significant Rulers, Economy and Decline.

سلالة السيد في دلهي، التاريخ، الحكام الكبار، الاقتصاد والانحدار.

THE SAYYIDS

KHIZR KHAN (A D. 1414-21) 3

According to the contemporary writer, Yahya Sirhindi, author of the Tarikh-i-Mubarak Shahi, Khizr Khan, the founder of the Sayyid dynasty, was descended from the Prophet of Islam, and was hence styled a Sayyid. Yahyā, however, bases his conclusions on un- substantial evidence, namely, the testimony of the saint Jalāl-ud-din Bukhārī,' and Khizr Khan's noble character which distinguished him as the Prophet's descendant. It is likely that the family originally came from Arabia and settled in Multan where the governor, Malik Mardan Daulat, who was a man of pious disposition, adopted Khizr Khan's father, Malik Sulaiman, as his son. Malik Mardan was suc- ceeded by his son Malik Shaikh, and the latter by Malik Sulaiman, on whose death the governorship of Multān was conferred on Khizr Khan by Sultān Firuz Shāh. Khizr Khan continued to hold this office until he was expelled from Multan in A.D. 1395 by Sarang Khān, brother of Mallu Iqbal Khan. He escaped to Mewat for a time, but re-emerged to cast his lot with Timur. The invader, before leaving the Indian capital, is believed to have appointed Khizr Khan his viceroy at Delhi,5 but after his departure from the country, Khizr Khan was able to re-establish himself only in Multan, Dīpālpur and parts of Sind. He increased his power gradually and it has been related above how he first defeated and killed the usurper, Mallü Iqbal Khan, and then, having defeated Daulat Khan Lodi, entered Delhi in triumph on June 6, 1414. Immediately after defeating Daulat Khan he set about organizing the administration afresh by redistributing important offices of the state among his trusted follow- ers, treating kindly at the same time the nobles of Mahmud Tughluq's reign. He also made liberal grants and endowments to the poor to help them in their resettlement. The capital thus recovered from the shock of political disorders and the sack by Timür that had preceded his accession to the throne.

Khizr Khan held fast to the conviction that he owed his power and prestige to Timur's patronage, and continued, therefore, his allegiance to the latter's son, Shah Rukh, to whom he sent gifts and paid tribute throughout his reign. He did not adopt the popular title of Shah (King) and preferred to be addressed as Rayat-i-A'la (Sublime Banners). For three years he had only Shah Rukh's name recited in public prayers, and in 1417 obtained the latter's permission to have his own name also suffixed to that of Shah Rukh. This acknowledge- ment of foreign supremacy was, as a matter of fact, quite formal, as it did not materially affect his position as an independent king." Likewise, Khizr Khan did not strike coins in his own name but, in order to secure their ready acceptance, he used the types of coins that had become popular in the immediate past by altering their dates.8 This was, no doubt, meant to avoid a financial breakdown, but it also revealed his inherent weakness. By invoking the prestige of his Indian predecessors and that of a contemporary foreign potentate, Khizr Khan wished to buttress his position against the hostility of Turkish and Afghan nobles and the majority of his non-Muslim subjects.

Politically, India was at that time split up into a number of independent States, and the Sultanate of Delhi had, long before the rise of the Sayyids, been considerably diminished in size and strength. Bengal and the Deccan were lost before the middle of the fourteenth century and this was followed by the emergence of independent kingdoms in Jaunpur, Malwa, Gujarāt and Khandesh during the troublous times that marked the closing of the fourteenth and the beginning of the fifteenth century. A num- ber of smaller chieftains in the Doāb and adjacent areas also felt tempted to throw off their yoke of allegiance to Delhi. The Sultanate having thus been deprived of important and rich terri- tories, Khizr Khan's precarious hold beyond Delhi extended over a portion of the Doab and Mewät. His limited resources did not allow him to undertake major campaigns for reconquering the territories that had previously seceded. He was able to recover only some fertile areas in the vicinity of Delhi and realize arrears of tribute from refractory chieftains. For this purpose his minister, Tāj-ul- Mulk, led a series of expeditions directed mainly against the Rajput states of Katehr9 and Etäwa. Other places raided by him included Khor, Kampil, Pattiali, Jalesar, Gwalior and Bayana.10 Every- where he gained temporary success and collected revenues, with- out, however, effecting permanent submission. Khizr Khan's own visits to some of these places produced no better results.

The Turkish elements were far from being reconciled to the rule of the new dynasty and, in spite of Khizr Khan's conciliatory policy, they organized risings and plots which caused him consider- able embarrassment. In 1416, a group of Turkbachchas created trouble in Sirhind and assassinated Malik Sadhu Nädira, the deputy of Prince Mubarak who had been put in charge of its administra- tion. Royal armies defeated them and drove them into the mountains, but they rose again next year under their new leader, Tughān Rais, who was also defeated and, on promising to behave, was ap- pointed governor of Jullundur. Tughān, on recovering his strength, again attacked Sirhind but failing in the attempt, fled across the Sutlej, and effected a junction with the Khokhars whose incursions into the Punjab in the succeeding reign assumed threatening proportions.

Another Turkish noble, Mahabat Khan, amir of Badāûn, who had been apparently loyal, surprised Khizr Khan with his resistance in 1418 when the latter was returning from Katehr. The fort of Badaun was besieged and operations continued for about six months, but when success was almost in sight, Khizr Khan had suddenly to raise the siege on account of the treachery of some Turkish slaves. After arriving at Delhi he had the traitors, Qwam Khan and Ikhtiyar Khän, executed. Shortly afterwards in 1419 came the news of the rising in the Bajwāra mountains of an impostor who posed as Sārang Khãn, brother of Mallu Iqbal Khān. Sārang had expelled Khizr Khan from Multan in 1395 but had later been captured and carried away by Timur to Samarqand where he was executed. 10 The impostor was defeated by Khizr Khan's capable general, Sultan Shāh Lodi, and driven back into the mountains. Next year he was cap- tured by Tughān Rais who killed him in order to appropriate his 'wealth.

The only distant campaign which Khizr Khan undertook was the one towards Nagaur11 in 1416, on an appeal from its Muslim ruler against the aggression of Ahmad Shah of Gujarāt, who withdrew, however, on the approach of the Delhi army. Nagaur temporarily submitted to Khizr Khan but transferred its allegiance to Gujarat two years later under the threat of an inva- sion from Mālwa. 12 During his return from Nagaur, Khizr Khān visited Gwalior and Bayāna and realised customary payments.

In the last year of his reign Khizr Khän raided Mewat and destroyed the fortress of Kotla. He then ravaged Gwalior and, after exacting tribute, came to Etawa where the new Raja offered his submission and usual payments. He fell ill during the campaign and after returning to Delhi, died on May 20, 1421.

Khizr Khan possessed laudable traits of character which won him the affection of the people. He was wise, just and benevolent, and was free from the vices common in those days. His record as a ruler was not, however, impressive. The conquest of Delhi, after numerous set-backs, was a creditable achievement, but he proved Incapable of settling the problems of a country which had been plunged into virtual anarchy after Timur's invasion. During the seven years that he ruled over Delhi, he tried to restore the prestige of the Sultanate in the Punjab, the Doab, Rohilkhand and parts of Rajputana, but the kingdom which he founded was no better than many other independent ones which had sprung up all over the sub- continent after the decline of the Tughluq power. The odds against him proved to be too great to allow him to achieve anything sub- stantial.

MUBARAK SHAH (A.D. 1421-34)

Khizr Khan was succeeded by his son Mubarak 13 who, unlike the former, did not hesitate to adopt the title of Shah and have the khutba read in his own name. He issued coins also, 14 although for the first eight years of his reign he followed his father's example of using coins that were current in the past by merely altering the dates on them.

The newly founded Sayyid kingdom was threatened under Mubarak Shah with dangers from all sides. In the north and west the triple menace of the Khokhars, the Turkbachchas and the Mughuls created an alarming situation, while in the south and east, the kings of Malwa and Jaunpur were anxiously awaiting their chance for aggressive expansion. Mubarak rose equal to the occa- sion and, by fighting incessantly almost throughout his reign, he was able to preserve his kingdom intact without, however, adding any new territories to it.

The Khokhars lived in the Punjab, mostly in the valleys of the Jhelum and the Chenab,15 and constantly raided the surrounding territories. During Khizr Khan's reign they had not been very ac- tive, but now their indomitable leader, Jasrath, made desperate attempts to overthrow the Sayyids. He received some help from Sultan Zain-ul-'Abidin of Kashmir16 and, making good use of his alliance with Tughan Rais Turkbachcha, raided Jullundur early in Mubarak's reign. He advanced as far as Sirhind, but was checked by the stubborn opposition of Islam Khan Lodi. Thereafter Sultān Mubarak Shah personally marched from Delhi and, by vigorous counter-attacks, drove him back across the Chenab into his hilly resort of Tekhar.17 In 1422, Jasrath twice raided Lahore and some other areas but withdrew each time on the approach of royal armies. He remained apparently quiet for the next five years but is be- lieved to have been secretly in touch with Shaikh 'Ali, the Mughul deputy governor of Kabul,18 whom he wished to undertake an attack on Siwastan, Bhakkar and Tattah, so that a diversion of Mubarak Shah's armies in that direction might facilitate his own movements towards Delhi. The plan did not, however, succeed and, when Jasrath attacked Kalānaur and Jullundur in A.D. 1428, Malik Sikandar Tuhfa, by a heroic action, forced him back to Tekhar. Later in the year the Mughul invasion took place, and a contingent of Khokhars under 'Ãîn-ud-din and Malik Abu-'l-Khair joined the in- vaders at Talwara to guide them onwards. Jasrath, availing himself of this chance, attacked Jullundur again and defeated Malik Tuhfa whom he carried away as a prisoner. 19 He then marched to Lahore but on the arrival of reinforcements from Delhi under Sarvar-ul- Mulk, he retreated to the hills. Another attempt on Lahore about six months later proved equally futile, and Jasrath was finally exhaust- ed with a last heavy raid on Jullundur. Nothing further was re- ported during Mubarak's reign, but in 1436, his successor Muhammad Shah sent an expedition against Jasrath and later asked Buhlül Lodi, then governor of Sirhind, to suppress him. The wily Khokhar chief, realizing, however, that the rise of Lodi power in the Punjab had made it impossible for him to conquer Delhi, hastened to make peace with Buhlül urging the latter to oust the Sayyids and occupy Delhi, 194 He did not, however, live to see the fruition of his plan, for, in A.D. 1442, he was murdered by his queen to avenge the death of her father, Rai Bhilam.20

Another insurrection, which appeared less significant at first but led to serious development afterwards, was headed by Pulad Turkbachcha. He was a slave of Shaikh Salim who held under Khizr Khan the district of Sarsuti, Amrohā and several parganās in the Doab in addition to the fort of Tabarhindah,21 where he had collected a large treasure and a huge store of grain and provi- sions. After the Shaikh's death early in A.D. 1430, Mubārak Shah bestowed all his lands on his two sons who did not, however, seem to be satisfied with their lot, and for ulterior motives incited Pulad to revolt.22 Pulad, who was keen to advance his own inter- ests, entered the fort of Tabarhindah about the middle of the year and, appropriating all of his late master's wealth, raised the standard of revolt. Mubarak Shāh, on discovering the complicity of the Shaikh's sons, ordered their arrest, and sent two of his officers, with some force, to treat with the rebel and recover the treasure. Pulād engaged them in negotiations and, after feigning friendliness, deli- vered a surprise attack at night and defeated them. They retreated hurriedly to Sarsuti leaving behind all their baggage and equip- ment which added to the rebel's strength. When the Sultan heard of their discomfiture, he set out immediately for Tabarhindah, but stopped at Sarsuti, from where he sent an army to besiege the fort. He also called 'Imad-ul-Mulk, governor of Multan, to join him. Pulad, who had taken precautions to defend himself, however, sent word that he would agree to surrender if 'Imad-ul-Mulk were sent to assure him of his safety. This was arranged, but on learning secretly that he was being deceived, he reaffirmed his resolve to resist. Mubarak Shāh, instead of forcing the rebel to surrender by intensifying the pressure on him, acted unwisely in slackening the operations against him. He sent back 'Imad-ul-Mulk to Multan and himself returned to Delhi, leaving the other amirs, Islam Khan, Kamal Khan and Rai Firuz, to continue the siege which dragged on for about six months.

The interval gave Pulād time to arrange for help from other quarters, and he sent his agents to Kabul invoking Shaikh 'Ali's help by promising a large sum of money in return. The latter responded favourably and, in February-March 1431, crossed into the Punjab. Advancing towards Tabarhindah, he attacked on his way the fiefs of Rai Firüz who was compelled to abandon the siege immediately without even informing his other colleagues. Islam Khan and Kamal Khan behaved similarly, for, when Shaikh 'Ali was ten miles from Tabarhindah, the besiegers had all dispersed. Pulad came out to receive Shaikh 'Ali, presented him a sum of 200,000 tankahs and entrusted his family to him for being carried to safety. The latter then went away to plunder other districts, while Pulād, thus relieved of danger, freely ravaged the country around and killed Rai Firuz. Mubarak Shāh marched out again at the close of the year, but he remained so much pre-occupied with the affairs of Lahore that he could not visit Tabarhindah. In September 1432, he despatched another force to besiege the fort, but it had to be again withdrawn to meet fresh Mughul attacks. It was not until after the Mughul invader had been finally expelled that the siege of Tabarhindah was pressed on with vigour. By October 1433, the fort at last fell and Pulad was slain.

Mughul incursions into Indian territory during the latter part of Mubarak's reign constituted perhaps the most vital danger to the kingdom of Delhi. The attacks which were led by Shaikh 'Alï, deputy governor of Kabul on behalf of Mas'ud Mirzā, grandson of Shah Rukh, are held by Firishta to have been the outcome of un- friendly relations between Mubarak and Shah Rukh, presumably because of Mubarak's inclination towards complete independence. Since contemporary evidence suggests that the governor of Lahore continued making some sort of a payment, bribe or tribute, to Käbul up to the time of Shaikh 'Ali's invasion, and that Shāh Rukh favoured Mubarak as well as his successor Muhammad Shah with robes of honour and umbrella etc. usually sent to a vassal, it is doubtful if Shaikh 'Ali's invasions had been authorized by Shäh Rukh himself 22 The operations appear to have been independently undertaken by Shaikh 'Ali with the sanction of Mas'ud Mirzā, governor of Kabul and Ghazni.

The earliest reports of Shaikh 'Ali's movement towards Bhakkar and Sewistan were received in 1423, but no details are available of the actual raid which was presumably of no consequence. It was in 1431 that he actually launched an invasion which helped to raise the siege of Tabarhindah, described above. Thereafter he ravaged the areas of Jullundur, Firuzpur and Lahore where the gov- ernor, Sikandar Tuhfa, offered him the customary payment. March- ing through Dipalpur, without resistance, he came to Multan where the toughest battle was fought and the invader was signally defeated by the royal forces under 'Imad-ul-Mulk. The retreating Mughul army was pursued up to Seor,23 but the royal army returned without dislodging Amir Muzaffar, Shaikh 'Ali's nephew, from the fort. It was a mistake on Mubarak's part to have halted operations at this point. Perhaps a greater blunder was to remove 'Imãd-ul-Mulk from Multan, a fact which induced Shaikh 'Ali to attack Multăn again within four months. Mubarak was at the time seriously pre- occupied with the Khokhars and the coincidence suggests that Shaikh 'Ali was in league with Jasrath. In November 1431, Shaikh 'Ali plundered Khospur and Tulamba, and committed terrible atro- cities on the inhabitants. Mubarak was in a grave predicament on account of the simultaneous risings of Pulad and Jasrath, but when he marched towards Sāmāna, fortunately for him, his enemies be- gan to disperse. Jasrath returned to Tekhar, Pulad withdrew into the fort, and Shaikh 'Ali retired to Bartot.24 After a few months, however, the Mughul adventurer re-appeared at Lahore and merci- lessly sacked the town. When the situation had deteriorated consi- derably, Mubarak moved forward towards Dipalpur with a big army reinforced by 'Imad-ul-Mulk and Islam Khän. Shaikh 'Alī, finding himself unable to oppose the combined force, ran away hurriedly, leaving behind all his baggage. His nephew, Amir Muzaffar of Seor, also negotiated peace with Mubarak and gave his daughter in mar- riage to the Sultan's adopted son, Muhammad Shah. Shaikh 'Ali did not come again, and Mubarak was able to save India from Mughul occupation for nearly a century.

The relations of Mubarak Shah with Ibrahim, the Sharqi ruler of Jaunpur, remained unhappy throughout his reign. Their inter- ests clashed over Bayana, Kälpi and Mewät, and the simmering hostility ultimately led to an open clash. Amir Khan Auhadi, ruler of Bayāna, resisted Mubarak Shah in 1423; he was, however, forced to surrender, but allowed to retain his fief. His successor, Muham- mad Khan, revolted again, but was defeated and brought to Delhi, from where he escaped and re-occupied his fort. On Mubarak's advance he ran away and joined Ibrāhīm Sharqi, who was march- ing forth to seize Kalpi. This small principality owed nominal allegi- Its ruler, ance to Delhi from which it was separated by Etawa. Qadir Khan, rightfully sought Mubarak's help, but Ibrāhīm, in order to miteriupt comniunication between Delhi and Kalpi, sent his brother Mukhtass Khan to occupy Etawa. This attempt was frustrated by the timely arrival of Mubarak's general Mahmud Hasan (later called 'Imad-ul-Mulk) who expelled Mukhtass imme- diately. Thereupon Ibrāhīm changed his plans and turned round to meet Mubarak. The two armies were pitched against each other near Bayāna along the river Kanbhir where, after skirmishing for twenty-two days, a heavy but indecisive battle was fought on March 24, 1428, which led to Ibrahim's sudden retreat. In the fol- lowing May, Mubarak reconquered Bayana and appointed Mahmud Hasan to settle its affairs. There was quiet for some years, but towards the close of Mubarak's reign, Ibrahim set out again to cap- ture Kalpi, where he found a stronger rival in Húshang Shah of Malwa who was marching from the opposite direction. Mubarak prepared to intervene, but was suddenly assassinated. Meanwhile, Hushang succeeded in annexing Kālpī, and Ibrahim Sharqi returned disappointed.

Mewat or the country of the Meos, a spacious area to the south of Delhi including the districts of Mathura, Gurgaon, and parts of for- mer states of Alwar and Bharatpur, was a notorious abode of rebels and a source of constant trouble to the kings of Delhi. It was ruled by the line of Khānzādahs, founded by Balıādur Nähir, mentioned above, who wielded considerable power during the days of the later Tughluqs. Almost throughout Mubarak's reign Mewät remained un- settled and rebellious. The first insurrection in 1425 was crushed with 'fire and sword', but only a year later the Mewātīs rose again under their twin leaders Jalal Khan and 'Abdul Qadir, nick-named Jallu and Qaddū, grandsons of Nähir. Severe punishment was in- flicted again, and while Jallu disappeared, Qaddü was arrested and after some time put to death, for being secretly in touch with Ibrahim Sharqi. This compelled Jallu to come out again. He car- ried on resistance for some time but ultimately surrendered to Mubarak's minister, Sarvar-ul-Mulk, on terms of paying tribute. When the Sultan visited Mewat in 1432, Jallu turned hostile again, but, finding the security afforded by his small fortress of little value against the pressure of royal troops, he submitted once more on the usual promise of paying tribute.

There were a number of minor expeditions but they need not be dwelt upon at length. Mahabat Khan, Amir of Badaun, who had resisted Khizr Khan, submitted to Mubarak voluntarily. Katehr was raided twice in 1422 and 1424 and tribute was exacted. The Rājā of Etāwa, who had surrendered in 1422, later became scared and shut himself in the fort. The Sultan compelled him to yield again and, in addition to the payment of dues, also had his son sent to the court as a hostage. Gwalior was visited by royal forces a number of times. In 1423 Mubarak saved it from the aggressive attack of Hüshang Shah of Malwa who was driven off after a battle. The Rajā was, however, irregular in paying his tribute to Mubarak and no less than three times, in 1427, 1429 and 1432, expeditions had to be organized to realize the arrears due from him.

In the fourteenth year of his reign Mubarak fell a victim to a treacherous conspiracy hatched by his chief minister Sarvar-ul-Mulk to avenge an alleged wrong. Sarvar was a Hindu convert, originally named Malik Sarup, who was appointed governor of the city of Delhi by Khizr Khan. He retained this office after Mubarak's acces- sion but when the chief minister, Sikandar Tuhfa, was sent to Lahore in 1422 to help Mahmud Hasan in defeating Jasrath Khokhar, Sarvar managed to have himself appointed chief minister, while his son Yusuf succeeded to the governorship of Delhi. Towards the close of his reign Mubarak found that Sarvar, apart from being haughty and arrogant, had not been very efficient in carrying out his duties. The Sultan did not think it expedient to dismiss him, but in 1433 divested him of the work pertaining to revenue which was entrusted to Kamāl-ul-Mulk, deputy-commander of royal forces, who had recently come into prominence. Sarvar continued to hold the charge of political affairs, but he took the bifurcation of the offices of diwan and wazîr as a personal insult, and decided to put a violent end to Mubarak's rule. His chief accomplices were Kanku and Kaju Khatri who had enjoyed royal favour for long, Mirän Sadar, deputy to the chief secretary and Qâzi 'Abdul Samad, the royal chamberlain. An opportunity soon presented itself when the Sultan, on his way to Kālpī, turned aside to visit his newly founded city of Mubarakābād. There, on February 19, 1434, as he was en- tering for his Friday prayers, Sidh Pāl, grandson of Kajū, and Rănŭ the Black, basely murdered him in the precincts of the mosque.

Mubarak Shah proved to be the ablest king of the house of Khizr Khän. He endeavoured his best to preserve his father's gains and exhibited qualities of a brave warrior in overcoming the dangers that threatened his kingdom both from within and without. He was wise and resourceful, and had always at his disposal a loyal army of his own and that of his feudal allies which kept a watch on the important border posts of Lahore, Dipalpur and Multan in the north and west, and fought to maintain his position at strategic points in the south and east. He did not, however, display similar shrewdness in the choice and treatment of his ministers and officers, and his mistrust of some of them, resulting in frequent transfers of holders of key-positions, produced disastrous consequences which contributed to his tragic end. He was just and kind towards all of his subjects, and even though a firm Muslim in belief and action, was free from the taint of bigotry. He patronized the Khatris of Delhi although some of them joined the plot against his life. He saved the Hindu state of Gwalior from lushang's aggression as keenly as he protected Kilpi against Ibrahim Sharqi's designs. Likewise, his treatment of Katehr and Etawa was perhaps far from severe as compared with the merciless sack of Mewät and the coer- cion of Bayanla Mubarak's architectural activity is evidenced by the founding of the new city of Mubarakābād in 1433 on the banks of the Yamuna with a big mosque. He also extended patronage to the contemporary chronicler, Yahya Sirhindi, whose well known work, the Tarikh-i-Mubarak Shahi, forms the most authoritative source of the history of the period.

MUHAMMAD SHAH (A.D. 1434-45)

After Mubarak Shah's death his brother's son, Muhammad Khān bin Farīd Khan, ascended the throne and styled himself Sultān Muhammad Shah.25 For about six months all power was usurped by Sarvar-ul-Mulk who had received the title of Khän-i-Jahan. lIc began to uproot the old nobles who organized a stiff resistance under the leadership of Kamal-ul-Mulk. Bayana was the first to revolt and its fief-holder, Yusuf Khan Auhadi, killed the Khatri, Ränü the Black, whom Sarvar had sent to take over the fort. This was followed by a general revolt of the outlying fief-holders who pooled their strength. Kamal-ul-Mulk cleverly concealed his hostility to Sarvar and feigned loyalty so that he was appointed the commander of royal forces, and sent to suppress the revolt. He proceeded quietly and halted at Ahar, where the rebel amirs, on receiving a hint of Kamal's real intentions, came and joined him in May 1434. Their united force marched towards Delhi to punish the regicides. The success of Kamal's plan lay in depriving Sarvar of the support of the Delhi army, and the latter, finding himself thus outdone, made an attempt also on the new king's life, but was immediately killed by the body-guards who surrounded Muhammad Shah. All of his companions met the same fate. Thereafter the liberating army, which had besieged the city for about three months, was welcomed into Delhi, and all the nobles renewed their allegiance to Muhammad Shah. Kamal-ul-Mulk was appointed the chief minister.

Muhammad Shah, freed from the control of Sarvar, became the sovereign de facto. As the nobles were united in supporting him, he had an excellent opportunity of reorganizing the affairs of the kingdom, but he soon disappointed everyone by his neglect of kingly duties and his desire for leisure and pleasure. The result was dis- order all round, and as it grew worse, the Mewati leader Jalāl Khān and his companions, together with the elite of Delhi, sent an invi- tation to Sultan Mahmud Khalji of Malwa who encamped within ten miles of Delhi at a place called Talpat. Muhammad Shah, unable to defend himself, called in Buhlül Lodi, the chief of Sir- hind, to his aid. Buhlul came with 20,000 mounted soldiers and fought in the vanguard of the imperial army as its virtual com- mander 20 The battle at the end of the first day remained inconclu- sive, but Muhammad Shah, without consulting any of his amirs, sent emissaries for peace the very next morning. The Khalji monarch who, during the intervening night, had been upset by a vision of disturbance at his own capital,27 welcomed the proposal and withdrew immediately to Mandū. Buhlul, to whom Muhammad Shah's decision was distasteful, retrieved the prestige of his own soldiers and that of the Delhi army by treacherously attacking the rear of the Khalji forces, killing some men and capturing baggage. The imbecile Sultan joined the chorus of praise for Buhlül by call- ing him a son and conferring on him the title of Khan-i-Khānān. He later on acquiesced in Buhlül's occupation of the major part of the Punjab and asked him to coerce the still unsubdued Khokhar rebel, Jasrath, who was, however, shrewd enough to accommodate matters with Buhlül. The Lodis had, by now, immensely increased their power and Buhlül launched an attack on Delhi in 1443 but did not succeed.

The last few years of Muhammad Shah's reign witnessed the rapid decline of his kingdom. Multan became an independent king- dom. The Sharqis annexed some parganas in the east; numerous fief-holders withheld payment of tribute, and even some amīrs with- in an area of twenty miles of Delhi began to assert independence. A short while before his death in 1445,28 Muhammad Shah called from Badaun his son ‘Ala-ud-dîn whom he nominated as his successor.

ALA-UD-DIN ALAM SHAH (A.D. 1445-51)

'Alā-ud-din, who adopted the high-sounding title of 'Alam Shah,20 was perhaps the most unworthy king of his line. The only notable event of his reign was the transfer of power from the Sayyids to the Lodis, an act which was more formal than real, for Buhlül already held more extensive territories than his nominal suzerain could claim. The Sultanate of Delhi had practically ceased to exist, and its place had been taken by petty tribal kingdoms whose boundaries verged on the borders of Delhi. 'Alam Shah, who was morally perverse, realizing his inability to bring back into submission the rebellious amirs, retired to Badäün where he gave himself up to pleasure and enjoyment. This created a vacuum at Delhi which was soon to be filled. Buhlül Lodi had, even before 'Alam Shah's departure, made a second unsuccessful attack on Delhi in 1447. His opportunity at last came when 'Alam Shah's minister, Hamid Khan, apprehending the forcible occupation of Delhi by some powerful neighbouring monarch, 30 invited, of his own accord, Buhlül Lodi and Qiyam Khan of Nagaur3 either of whom, he believed, would agree to play the puppet king while he retained all power as wazir. Buhlül, being nearer at Sirhind, rushed in at once, and Qiyam Khan, who was yet on his way to Delhi, returned disappoint- ed. Buhlul treacherously got rid of Hamid Khan after some time32 and informed 'Alam Shah of his assumption of power, allowing the latter, however, to retain Badaun for the remainder of his life.23

Foot Notes

1. He was the grandfather of the well-known divine, Sayyid Jalal, popularly called Makhdum-i-Jahaniyan Jahan Gasht. He came from Bukhara to Bhakkar and ultimately went to Uchh where he died. See 'Abdul Haqq: Akhbär-al-Akhyär (Delhi Ed. p. 60).

2. Some of his virtues are thus enumerated in the TM (p. 182). "He was generous,

brave, gentle, kind, humble, true to his promise, temperate and God-fearing.' Badauni (Muntakhab, I, p. 295), enlarging upon it, writes: "The Sayyid is a man in whom are manifest the virtues of Muhammad (peace be upon him) and the grace of 'Ali, the accepted."

3. His original name was Khvāja Zia-ud-dīn and he was a descendant of the famous saint, Khvāja 'Abdullah Harvi. He migrated from Herat to India in A.D. 1353, and came to the count of Firuz Shah Tughluq who bestowed on him the title of Malik Mardan Daulat and the governorship of Mullan to reward him for his services during the Bengal campaign. Mir'ät-i-Jahān Numā, Cambridge MS. f. 141b.

3a. See above, Ch. VI, p. 113.

4. According to the Zafar Nama by Yazdi and other original accounts of Timür's invasion, Khizr Khan had sought asylum at Bayana. Yahyä Sirhindi, however, states that he went to Mewât.

5. Mughul historians omit any reference to this nomination which is, however, confirmed by the contemporary writers Yahya Sirhindi and Muhammad Bihāmad Khanî. See TM 166, and Tarikh-i-Muhammadi BM. MS. f. 306b.

6. According to Firishta, he occupied Lahore also. Cf. p. 124, n. 14.

6a. See Matla'us-Sa'dain, Vol. II, Part I, p. 342.

6b. He sent a special envoy to Shah Rukh's court for this purpose. See Tarikh-i-

Hafiz Abrú B.M. MS. f. 291-2 and Matlaʻus-Sa'dain, II (i) 342,

7. Nur-ul-Haqq, the author of the "Zubdat-al-Tawārīkh", made it very clear: "Although he did not assume royal titles, yet he ruled and administered his territories like a king." See Lahore MS. p. 54.

8. Edward Thomas has compared it to a system "which the East India Company imitated of their own free will, with much credit and simplicity, by striking their rupees in the name of Shah Alam and other defunct monarchs of Delhi whose money had of old obtained good repute in the local Bazars." (Chronicles of the Pathan Kings of Delhi, 330).

9. Later known as Rohilkhand.

10. Khor and Kampil-both in the Farrukhābād district, U.P.; Pattiali in the Elah

district.

10a. See Tarikh-i-Muhammadi, B.M. MS. f. 306b.

11. In the former Jodhpur State.

12. Sultan Hüshang Shah of Malwa, who was then preparing to invade Gujarāt, had called upon Firüz Khan Dandani, ruler of Nagaur, to join him and promised the

186 territory of Naharwala in return for the latter's aid. Firūz Khan, however, appeared unwilling to side with him and preferred to get in touch with Sultāni Ahmad of Gujarāt,

13. His full name was Mu'izz-ud-din and he styled himself as Sultan Mubarak Shah.

 14. They bore the title, Nāib-i-Amïr al-Mu'minin, which he probably assumed to

strengthen his legal position as some previous Turkish Sultans had done.

15. Particularly the districts of Jhang, Shahpur and Jhelum. A smaller number of

them was also scattered over the districts of Lahore and Sialkot.

16. The story that he also waylaid Sultan 'Ali, king of Kashmir, on the latter's return from Tattah is incredible, as none of the kings of Kashmir ever invaded lower Sind. Hodivala considers Tattah to be an error either for Tatta Kuti, a mountain pass in Kashmir or for Tibet. (Studies in Indo-Muslim History, 402-3).

17. Possibly a village called Thakkar in the Gujarat district, West Pakistan, about 13 miles from the Chenäb to the western side.

18. His contact with the Mughuls is confirmed by a casual reference in the TM. (p. 201) to the fact that during Jasrath's second raid on Lahore in 1422, when he ravaged Dipalpur also, there was a small contingent of Mughuls united to the Khokhar force.

19. He managed to escape after some time and joined Mubarak Shah when the latter was marching in pursuit of Shaikh 'Ali.

19a. See Maʼdan-i-Akhbār-i-Ahmadi, Vol. I, B.M. MS. f. 144b.

20. Rai Bhilam had assisted royal troops sent against Jasrath in 1422. After a short

time, however, Jasrath engaged the Rai in battle and killed him. TM 201.

21. Probably modern Bhatinda. [The identification has been discussed in Vol. V, p. 115, n. 2. Ed.]

22. The contemporary writer Yahya Sirhindi is silent as to the real motive of the two brothers or that of Pulad. Haig (CHI, III. 216) writes that the Shaikh's sons were anxious to get back their father's wealth, which, according to Firishta, however, they had already been allowed to inherit. They were confident, adds Firishta, that they would be deputed by the king to suppress Pulad and might then get a chance of leading a general rebellion for their personal aggrandize- ment. 22a. See Tarikh-i-Muhammadi, B.M. MS. f. 311-12; Majāmi'ul-Ākhbār, 10. MS., f. 333b; TM, 218.

23. Modern Shorkot.

24. Identified as Marwat in the Bannu district (Hodivala: Studies in Indo-Muslim History, 409).

25. Some writers have wrongly described him as Mubarak's son.

26. The nominal command had been entrusted to Prince 'Ala-ud-din as Muhammad Shah did not take the field himself. Mahmud Khalji also sent forth his two sons to lead the troops and held back himself,

27. See Ma’āsir-i-Mahmûd Shāhi. Bodleian MS. f. 113B. He is also believed to have feared an attack on Malwa from Gujarat. See Tarikh-i-Haqqi, Cambridge MS., p. 67, TA, III, 322, Muntakhab (Hasan Khāki) Eton MS. fol. 140a.

28. There is some controversy about the date of Muhammad Shah's death which the TA (Calcutta Text, Vol. I, p. 292) states as 847 A.H. (A.D. 1443-4), while the Tārikh-i-Firishta (Bombay Text, Vol. I, p. 313) gives 849 A.H. (A.D. 1445-6). The numismatic evidence, is, however, conclusively in favour of 849 A.H. (H. N. Wright: The Coinage and Metrology of the Sultans of Delhi, pp. 236, 241). Ishwari Prasad considers 849-50 A.H. as the correct date (History of Mediaeval India, 1948 ed., p. 483, f.n. 14). Both Wright and Prasad have, however, made an error in quoting the TM. to support the date which is otherwise correct. They have overlooked the fact that this contemporary work on the Sayyids covers only one year of Muhammad Shah's reign and concludes its account on 8 Rajab, 838 A.H. (February 7, 1435). Probably they have relied upon Dowson's transla- tion of TM in Volume IV of HIED (p. 86), where, after 838 A.H., the extracts to complete the narrative of the Sayyid Dynasty have been borrowed from the TA. The MS. of the TA., used by Dowson, unfortunately, had 844 A.H. as the date of Muhammad Shah's death, and Dowson, considering it obviously wrong, changed it into 849 A.H. remarking in the foot-note that he borrowed the latter date from Firishta. Prasad has, in addition, ascribed to Muhammad Shah a reign of 13 years, 3 months and 16 days which is, in fact, the period of Mubarak Shah's reign. For this also he has quoted the TM, in support, remarking further that it thus corroborated Firishta's statement. As noticed above, the TM, ends with the year 838 A.H., while according to Firishta, Muhammad Shah reigned for 12 years and some months. Hodivala supports 849 A.H. as the date of Muhammad Shah's death, but has made a mistake, probably through oversight, in the last sentence of his note which reads: "Mubarak Shah really reigned for twelve years" (Studies in Indo-Muslim History, 410). It should be Muhammad Shah and not Mubarak Shāh.

29. Literally meaning 'Lord of the World', although the ridiculous extent of his territories was commonly expressed in the following_epigram: Padshāhi-yi-Shāh- i-ālam az Dehli tā Pālam, Tārīkh-i-Dāˆūdī, Lahore, P.U.MS. f. 7b. "The Kingdom of the Lord of the World extends from Delhi to Palam." Pālam is a village about twelve miles south of Delhi, near the site of the present civil aerodiome which is named after it. [In CHI, III. (p. 205), this epigram is taken to refer to the last Tughluq Sultan Mahmud Shah. Ed.].

30. The likeliest aggressors would have been the kings of Jaunpur and Malwa.

31. The name of the ruling chief of Nagaur, as stated in the TA, is Mujāhid Khân. Qiyam Khan, whose name has been mentioned in the Waqi'ät-i-Mushtaqi and Tartha--Da idi, was either another member of the same family or, probably, there has been an elor in reproducing his name.

32. During a friendly visit to his house, Buhlul suddenly had him arrested after  dining with him; Waqiat-i-Mushtaqi, B.M. MS. pp. 6-7.

33. 'Alam Shah died at Badaun in 1478.  N.B.-(7'4 in this chapter refers to the B.I. edition of the text.)