« السابقةمتابعة »
The Later Mughals (1707-1803.)—By WILLIAM IRVINE, Bengal Civil Service (Retired.)
In continuation of the articles in Part I of the Journal for 1896
Vol. LXV, pp. 136-212; for 1898, Vol. LXVII, pp. 141-166; and 1903 Vol. LXXII, pp. 33-64. *
Table of Contents.
Section 19. Sikh Campaign, capture and execution of Bandah, July 1713 to June 1716— (Omitted, being already printed in the “Asiatic Quarterly Review" for April 1894, pp. 420-431.) 4 ,, 20. The Jät Campaign, September 1716–April 1718.
,, 21. Continued Intrigues against the Sayyads, July 1715.
,, 22. Return to Dihli of Mir Jumlah, January 1716.
,, 23. Continuation of Plots: Appointment of “Ināyatullah Rhān, March 1716–April 1718.
Note A.—The Jizyah or Poll Tax. , 24. Sudden rise of Muhammad Murād, Kashmiri, December 1717. ,, 25. Sarbuland Khān recalled to Court, July 1718. , 26. Attempt to seize ‘Abdullah Khān, 27th August 1718. ,, 27. Mahārājah Ajit Singh sent for, August 1718. ,, 28. Nizām-ul-mulk is summoned.
, 29. Mir Jumlah's second return to Dihli, September 1718,
,, 30. Mir Jumlah pardoned, October 1718.
,, 31. Husain ‘Alī Khān starts from the Dakhin, November 1718.
, 32. Progress of events at Dihli, December 1718—January 1719.
, 33. Return of Muhammad Amin Khān from Mälwah, January 1719.
Section 34. Arrival of Husain ‘Ali Khān at Dihli, February 1719. , 35. Husain ‘Alī Khān marches to Wazirābād, 16th Feb
ruary 1719. ,, 36. Husain ‘Ali Khān's first audience, 23rd February 1719. ,, 37. The Sayyads take possession of the palace, 27th February 1719.
, 38. The last day of the reign begins 28th February 1719. ,, 39. Farrukhsiyar is made a prisoner and deposed, 28th February 1719. ,, 40. Death of Farrukhsiyar, 27th April 1719. , 41, The conduct of the Sayyads considered. ,, 42. Character of Farrukhsiyar. Appendix I (Reign of Farrukhsiyar).
A. Farrukhsiyar's age.
E. Farrukhsiyar's wives.
SECTION 20,--THE JAT CAMPAIGN, September 1716–April 1718.
We have now to deal with another branch of that wide-spread Jät or Jat race," which formed such a large proportion of the Sikh fighting line. Without entering into Colonel James Tod's speculations about their identity with the Goths or Getae, it may be assumed as a certainty that, for many hundreds of years, a branch of this people has been settled in the country south of the Jamnah, between the cities of Agrah and Dihli. This region, ending on the east at the Chambal river or a little beyond it, marks the eastern limit of their advance from the west. East and north-east of that point there are practically no Jäts. Their position on the flank of the high road between two great capitals and of the routes from both those places through Ajmer onwards to the Dakhin, must in all ages have given this robust race an opening for plundering on the highways, a temptation which they found it impossible to resist.”
1 Beames, I, 134, note, says that between Jät and Jat there is only a dialectic difference.
* A lively picture of the dangers of this road early in Bahādur Shāh's reign is given by Yār Muhammad, Dastiár-wl-Inshà, 130. Between Mathurā and Dihli the road had been entirely stopped for two months, and a crowd of many hundred
Without attempting to carry very far back the history of these Jāt depredations, we find, without question, that in the reign of Shāhjahān (1047 H., 1637), they killed Murshid Quli Khān, the faujdúr of Mathură, during an attack on one of their strongholds. In the next reign, that of ‘Alamgir, they several times gave trouble. In Zu-l Hijjah 1079 H. (April 1669) another faujdar, ‘Abd-un-nabi, lost his life in an attack on a village called Sorah, the home of a Jāt freebooter named Kokalā, who had raided the town of Sa'dabâd in the Düäbah. ‘Alamgir marched in person from Agrah, and sent on before him a new faujdar, Hasan ‘Ali Khān, son of Allah wirdi Khān. Kokalā and a follower of his, Sanki, were captured and executed, limb being torn from limb; Kokalā's daughter was married to the Emperor's favourite slave, and his son was made a Mahomedan." t
‘Ālamgir's prolonged absence in the Dakhin speedily weakened the imperial authority in Northern India. In their master's absence the provincial governors took their ease and winked at abuses. Favoured by this negligence, the Jāts resumed their depredations. At length in 1099 H. (1687-8)” Khān Jahān, Zafar Jang, Kokaltásh, and Prince Bedár Bakht, son of A'zam Shāh, were sent from the Dakhin to restore order. At this time the chief stronghold of the Jāts was at a village called Sansani, eight miles south of Dig, and sixteen miles northwest of Bhartpur. This place was taken on the 15th Ramazān 1099 H. (14th July, 1688), the chief, Rājā Râm, was killed, and his head sent to the Emperor. Prince Shāh ‘Alam, when he was put in charge of the Agrah subah in the thirty-ninth year, i.e., 1106 H. (1694), also had trouble with the Jäts. Bhajjā, the father of Curāman, is the next leader of whom we hear, and his abode was also at Sansani. In the forty-ninth year of ‘Alamgir's reign, 2nd Rajab 1117 H. (19th October, 1705), Sansani was destroyed a second or third time by Mukhtār Khān, the then säbahdār of Agrah; and shortly afterwards, on the 18th Ramazān 1119 H. (13th December, 1707), Rizā Bahādur attacked it again, sending in ten carts filled with weapons and one thousand heads.”
When Bahādur Shāh and his brother, Å’zam Shāh, took the field against each other and met between Agrah and Dholpur, Curāman collected as many men as he could, and hung about the neighbourhood of both armies, ready to pillage the vanquished. In the end, so much plunder fell into his hands, that he became from that time forth a most formidable partisan leader, with whom it was necessary to reckon in such troublous times. While Bahādur Shāh was at Ågrah, Curāman came in, and professing to have repented of his turbulent ways, was granted the rank of 1500 zāt, 500 horse. In Ramazān 1120 H., (November 1708), he helped Rizā Bahādur, the imperial faujdar, in an attack on Ajit Singh, zamindār of Kāmā, where Curāman was wounded and Rizā Bahādur was killed. In 1122 H. (1710) Curāman joined the Emperor at Ajmer, and took a part in the campaign against the Sikhs at Sādhaurah and Lohgarh. He went on with Bahādur Shāh to Lähor, and was present during the fighting which took place there after that Emperor's death (March 1712). He also seems to have fallen upon and plundered the baggage of both sides impartially, when Jahāndār Shāh and Farrukhsiyar met in battle array near Agrah in Zu-l Hijjah 1124 H. (January 1713).
travellers, including the wife of Amin-ud-Din, Sambhali, had collected. In 1712 the Dutch envoy and his party also found the road infested by robbers, who were, no doubt, Jāts, F. Walentyn IV, 302. The same state of things is reported in the diary of our own envoy, John Surman, a year or two afterwards, Orme Collections, p. 1694, entries of the 8th, 16th, 26th, and 30th June 1715. , 1 Ma,āgīr-wl-wmarā, I, 540, Pådshāhnāmah, I, 7, Mirzā Muhammad, 294. * Khāfī Khān, II, 316, has 1095 H. (1683), but the Ma,ásir-i-‘Alamgiri is a preferable authority. à It is still in the Bhartpur Rājah's territory. * * Cură, or more politely Curāman, son of Bhajjā, of Sansani, had by this time
Early in Farrukhsiyar's reign Chabelah Rām, then säbahdār of Agrah, received orders to march against Curāman, and efforts to reduce his power were continued for a long time without success, owing to the underhand opposition of the Wazir and his brother. The next holder of that Government, Samsām-ud-daulah, Khān Daurán, not feeling strong enough to use force, tried to make terms. Curāman agreed to come to Court, and on the 16th Ramazān (5th October, 1713), when he arrived at Bârahpulah near the city, Rājah Bahādur, Ráthor, son of ‘Azim-ushShān's maternal uncle, was sent out to meet and escort him. Curāman marched in at the head of 3,000 to 4,000 horsemen, and was conducted to the Dīwān-i-khâs) by Samsām-ud-daulah in person. Charge of the royal highway from Bârahpulah near Dihli to the crossing on the Cambal, was made over to him, and he soon returned home. But by slow degrees he fell into disfavour, the extent of the country he took possession of was thought excessive, his realisation of road dues was objected to, and his interference with jūgīr-holders was disliked. All that a jāgīrdār could collect from him was a little money thrown to him as if it were an alms. These things were repeated to the Emperor in detail, over and over again, until they produced an effect, and he resolved that some action must be taken. The difficulty was to find anyone succeeded to the leadership of the Jäts. Ma,ášîr-i-‘Alamgiri, 311, 498, Dānishmand Khān, under above date, Khāfi Khān II, 316, Ma,āsir-ul-wmarā, I, 809.
1 Dänishmand Khan, entries of the 28th Jamādi II, and 9th Rajab 1119 H. (27th September and 6th October 1707).
competent to undertake such an arduous task. Curāman had meanwhile constructed a new stronghold at a place called Thün." At length in the fifth year of the reign, Jamādi II. 1128 H., May— June 1716, Rājah Jai Singh, Sawāe, returned to court” from his government of Mālwah. Finding out Farrukhsiyar's secret desire to get rid of Curāman, he offered himself as ready to undertake and carry out the work. Early in Shawwal (September 1716) he received his orders, and started on the 9th of that month (25th September 1716), being the Hindú festival of the Dasahrah. Some troops under Sanjar Khān and Shamsher Khān, of the Wālā Shāhīs, were posted at Palwal, thirty-six or thirty-seven miles from the city, to keep communications open, and provide convoys from that place to Hodal in one direction, and Faridābād in the other. A large sum in cash was disbursed to Rājah Jai Singh from the imperial treasury, and he sent for troops from his own country. Serving under him were Māhārāo Bhim Singh, Hădă, of Kotah, Rājah Gaj Singh, Mårwāri, and Māhārāo Rājah Budh Singh, Hădă, of Bondi.8 Thin having been completely invested, the siege began on the 5th Zü,l Hijjah 1128 H. (19th November, 1716). The fort was provided with lofty walls and a deep ditch filled from springs, and round it spread a thick and thorny jungle “through which a bird could hardly make its way.” Supplies were abundant; indeed, (though this is probably an exaggeration), there was said to be grain, salt, ghi, tobacco, cloth, and firewood sufficient for twenty years. When the siege was imminent, Curāman had forced all merchants and traders, with their families, to quit the place, leaving their goods behind them. Curāman made himself personally responsible for their compensation if he gained the day, and as the property could not be removed, the owners gave their consent without much demur.” Curāman's son, Muhkam Singh, and his nephew, Rüpā, issued from the fort and gave battle in the open. In his report of the 7th Muharram, 1129 H. (21st December, 1716), the Rājah claimed a victory. He next cut down all the trees round the fort, and erected a large number of 1 Thün does not seem to be well known now. Can it be the Toond of the Indian Atlas, Sheet 50, between Dig and Gobardhan P. Or is it Jatolee Thoon, 8 miles west of Sansani ? An 18th century writer remarks: “Il y a encore (1767) un
Thoun, mais dans un autre endroit, peutétre pour conserver la mémoire d’une place qui, quoique malheureuse, n'a pas donné peu de reputation aux Jats,” Orme Collections, p. 4218. 8 Mace bearers were sent to fetch him on the 27th Rabī‘ II. 1128 H. (19th April, 1716), Kāmwar Khān, 140, 163, Ma,āsir-ul-wmară, Mirzā Muhammad, 293. 8 Kāmwar Khān, 140, 168, Shili Däs, 11b. * Kāmwar Khān, 168, Shiii Däs, 12b. Hodal, 18 or 19 m. S. of Palwal, Indian