« السابقةمتابعة »
the house of Taimur to take his place. But a prince once deprived of eyesight could not be raised to the throne. The Emperor resolved, therefore, to deprive of their eyesight the more prominent and more energetic of the many scions of the house of Taimur held in captivity in the palace. On the 6th Muharram 1126 H. (21st January, 1714), three of the princes, A‘zzu-d-din, eldest son of Jahāndār Shah, 'Ala Tabar, son of A'zam Shah, and Farrukhsiyar's own younger brother, Humayun Bakht (then only ten or twelve years old), were removed from the palace to the prison at the Tirpoliyah or Triple gate. It was the place where Jahāndār Shāh's life had been taken, and where in a few years' time Farrukhsiyar himself was to suffer the same fate. A needle was passed through the eyes of the three princes, and they were thus rendered incapable of ever becoming rivals for the throne. Mir Jumlah is credited with having been the man who urged Farrukhsiyar to carry out this harsh act.2
Finally, on the 2nd Rabi' II, 1126 H. (16th April, 1714), the Qalmaq woman, Shādman, entitled Rãe Man, a servant in the palace, was made over to Sarbarah Khan, the kotwal or Chief of the Police, and her head was cut off at the Chabūtrah,8 or central police-station. Her crime was that, during the reign of Jahandar Shah, one of her relatives had drawn his sword on Mir Jumlah. Rãe Mān is the woman who gave the alarm when an attempt was made to assassinate Jahāndār Shāh;4 she bravely attacked the assailants and slew one of them with her own hand. For this good service she had received the titles of Razā Bahādur, Rustam-i-Hind, and the rank of 5,000 zāt.5
Although not mentioned in the general histories, the humoristic poet, Sayyad Muḥammad Ja'far of Narnol, poetically Zațali, is said to have been one of the victims. His crime is said to have been a satirical
1 Wâlâ Tabar in Khafi Khan. 11., 740.
2 A chronogram was made for it:
Shih-i-'àlam, ba aghwäe-i-shayātīn,
Kashidah mil dar cashm-i-salātīn (1126 H).
"The lord of the world, at the instigation of devils,
Warid, 150%, Kămwar Khăn, p, 144, Khāfi Khăn II, 740.
3 Chabūtrah means a platform of earth or masonry raised slightly above the surface of the ground. This name was given to the office of the head police officer of Dihli; it was situated in the Chandnī Cauk, the main street leading from the Lahor gate of the city to the Lahor gate of the citadel.
4 See Journal, Vol. LXV (1896), p. 147.
↳ Kāmwar Khān, 146, Mīrzā Muḥammad, 187.
J. 1, 6
parody of the distich on Farrukhsiyar's coinage. The details will be given when we come to speak of the coinage of the reign.1
SECTION 14. FIRST QUARREL WITH THE SAYYADS (April 1713).
The story as told by Yahya Khan, Farrukhsiyar's Mir Munshi, is that at the enthronement "Abdullah Khan demanded the post of wazir for himself. Farrukhsiyar made the objection that he had given his word to Ghāzi-ud-din Khan (i.e., Aḥmad Beg, Ghalib Jang), a promise which he could not break. Abdullah Khan might retain all power under the name of Wakil-i-Mutlaq or vicegerent. Abdullah Khan said there had been no Wakil-i-Mutlaq since Jahangir's reign, except when Bahadur Shah gave that office to Asad Khan. But the two cases were not parallel; he had won the crown for Farrukhsiyar by his own sword and his own right hand, therefore his title to be wazir was indisputable. Farrakhsiyar thought it best to give way, as he had only newly succeeded and was not yet secure on the throne. In this version of the facts, the only certain point is the supersession of Ghāziud-din Khan, Ghalib Jang: but there is no sufficient reason to believe that Farrukhsiyar was, in any way, a reluctant participator in the new arrangement, although as soon as he had appointed 'Abdullah Khan, he appears to have repented of it.2
As we have seen, a few days after the victory at Agrah, Quṭb-ulMulk was detached to seize Dihli; and, for the moment, the second brother, Husain 'Ali Khan, was incapacitated by severe wounds from taking any active part in affairs. The opportunity was too good to be lost. Farrukhsiyar was never long of the same mind and fell always under the influence of the last speaker. Mir Jumlah, Khān Dauran, Taqarrub Khan, and other personal friends and favourites found thus a splendid opening for intrigue, of which they at once availed themselves. Between the departure of Qutb-ul-Mulk for Dihli and Farrukhsiyar's own arrival at the capital barely a mouth elapsed; but this short interval was sufficient to implant in Farrukhsiyar's mind the seeds of suspicion, and he arrived at Dihli already estranged from the two Sayyads. We have told how the Court party interfered between the Sayyads and Zu,lfiqār Khān, beguiling the latter
1 Malāḥat-i-maqāl, fol. 74a. Beale, p. 186, says Ezad Bakhsh,, Razā, was also executed, but as he died in 1119 H. (Rieu, Index, p. 1157), this must be a mistake. The Tarikh-i-Muḥammadi, a very accurate work, gives Ezad Bakhsh's death at Akbarābād under 1119 H., and says he was son of Aqa Mulla, son of Zain-ul‘Abidain, son of Aṣaf Khān, Ja'far, the Şadīqi, the Qazwini, alias the Akbarābādī. An account of this Aṣaf Khãn is in Ma,äşir-ul-umară I., 113.
2 Yaḥya Khan, 122a.
to his destruction. These intrigues had not remained altogether concealed from Ḥusain ‘Ali Khan, and in the most secret manner he communicated his suspicions to his brother. He wrote, we are told, that on his brother's leaving the camp it was clear, from the Prince's talk and the nature of his acts, that he was a man who paid no regard to claims for service performed, one void of faith, a breaker of his word, and altogether without shame. Thus it was necessary for them to act in their own interests without regard to the plans of the new sovereign. If Ḥusain 'Ali Khan really wrote these words, at such an early stage of his acquaintance with Farrukhsiyar, it proves him to have possessed wonderful penetration and great insight into character. The remainder of our story yields abundant evidence of the fact that the character of Farrukhsiyar could hardly be delineated with greater accuracy than in the above words. Acting on his brother's hint, ‘Abdullah Khān, as a precaution, assumed possession of the house lately occupied by Kokaltāsh Khāu, Jahāndar Shah's foster-brother, and with it all the cash and property contained therein.
For a couple of weeks after Farrukhsiyar's entry into Dibli, the appearance of amity was preserved. But the weapons of discord lay in abundance ready to hand. The disputes that now began raged round two things: The nominations to office, and the appropriation of the confiscated wealth of the Jahāndār Shāhi nobles. A third lever for persuading Farrukhsiyar to get rid of the two Sayyads was found in his superstitious fears.
When 'Abdullah Khan reached Dilhi in advance of the Emperor, he took upon himself to promise the post of Diwān of the Khāliṣah, or Exchequer Office, to Lutfullah Khān, Ṣādiq, and that of Sadr-uş-Şudür, or Head of the Religious Endowments, to the former holder, Sayyad Amjad Khan: On the march from Agrah, Farrukhsiyar gave these offices to his own followers; Chhabilah Ram, Nagar, receiving the Diwani of the Khāliṣah, and Afzal Khan, who had taught Farrukhsiyar to read the Quran, being made Şadr. Over these conflicting orders a quarrel broke out directly the Emperor reached Dihli. 'Abdullah Khan, Qutb-al-Mulk, fell into a passion, and said that if his very first exercise of power was contested, what was the object of being wazir? Mir Jumlah and other favourites did their best to inflame the wound by remarking that when a sovereign deputed power to a minister, it was for
1 Amjad Khan's original name was Bū 'Ali; he was Bakhshi and Waqi'ah Nigar of Dihli at the time of 'Alamgir's death and was made Şadr by Bahadur Shah.-Khushḥal Cand, 376a.
2 Chhabilah Rām's appointment was made on the 17th Z6,1 Hijjah, Kāmwar Khan, 127.
the minister to recognise the limits of that power, and not make appointments to high office without sanction. A compromise was at last arrived at; Lutfullah Khan retained the Diwani and Afzal Khan, the Sadarat with the titles of Sadr Jahān. Chhabilah Ram was consoled with the Government of Agrah.1
Owing to the violent change of government, there were naturally many confiscated mansions at the disposal of the crown. Two of these with their contents were conferred on Qutb-ul-Mulk and his brother. One known as Ja'far Khan's, which Kokaltāsh Khān, Khân Jahān, had held, was given to Qutb-ul-Mulk; and another called Shaistah Khan's, recently in the possession of Zū'lfiqār Khān, was made over to Ḥusaiu 'Ali Khān. As soon as the distribution had been made, Farrukhsiyar's private circle of friends poured into his ear suggestions that these two mansions contained untold treasures, the accumulated wealth of many generations. In them was stored, they said, the property which had belonged to the four sons of Bahadur Shah, and the whole revenues of Hindustan for a year past. All this had now fallen into the possession of the two Sayyads. On the other hand, the imperial treasury had been emptied and the palace denuded of everything to pay Jahāudar Shah's soldiers.&
Superstition was even more powerfully brought into play. It was a superstitious country and a superstitious age; and Farrukhsiyar was as much subject to these influences as any of his contemporaries. A prophesy had been made, which met with the widest acceptance, that after Bahadur Shah's death his youngest descendant would reign. He would, in his turn, be followed by a Sayyad. Talk about this became so common that soon everyone had heard it. Of course, it was at once urged on the Emperor that the Sayyad who was to reign could be no other than one of the two brothers. Acting on the principle that dropping water wears away a stone,3 they repeated this story over and over again to Farrukhsiyar, till it had the effect of making him openly show ill-feeling to the two Sayyad brothers.
The quarrel had proceeded so far by the beginning of Rabi ‘I. (27th March 1713), that Qutb-ul-Mulk ceased to attend the daily audience, an infallible sign that a noble had a grievance or was out of
1 Mḥd. Qāsim, 171. Afzal Khan died at Dihli in the end of Rabi 'II. or early in Jamādī I, 1138 H. (January 1726), Rank 5000–T-i-Mhd., Khafi Khăn II, 729, 731.
2 Kāmwar Khān, 132, Wārid, 149a.
8 The Persian saying is Hezam kashān, 'ālam
and you can burn the world "
Go on gathering firewood;
* Warid, 149a.
humour. Farrukhsiyar was always ready to take any step, however humiliating, which might for the moment postpone decisive action and give him time to plan some fresh treachery. Accordingly, on the 9th Rabi 'I. (4th April 1713), on his way back from Wazīrābād, a place on the banks of the Jamnah, where he had gone to hunt, he paid a visit to Qutb-ul-Mulk's house and embraced him affectionately. He deigned to eat his breakfast and take his midday sleep there before returning to the palace. Qutb-ul-Mulk, in return for so much condescension, made many costly gifts to His Majesty, receiving others in return. This is noted as the first public disclosure of the ill-feeling between the Emperor and his minister, which went on increasing year by year till it ended in catastrophe.1
SECTION 15. CAMPAIGN AGAINST RAJAH AJIT SINGH RAHTOR
As we have already explained, the Rajput states had been for fifty years in veiled revolt from the Imperial authority. Bahadur Shāh had been unable, owing to more pressing affairs, to reduce the Rajahs effectually. During the confusion which arose on that monarch's death, Ajit Singh, after forbidding cow-killing and the call for prayer from the 'Alamgiri mosque, besides ejecting the imperial officers from Jodhpur and destroying their houses, had entered the imperial territory and taken possession of Ajmer. Early in Farrukhsiyar's reign it was determined that this encroachment must be put an end to; and as the Rajah's replies to the imperial orders were not satisfactory, it was necessary to march against him.2
At first it was intended that the Emperor in person should take the field, but he was dissuaded on the ground that his dignity would suffer if the rebel fled into the desert, where there was nothing but sand to feed upon. Nor does the Emperor appear to have been in particularly good health. Husain 'Ali Khan was therefore appointed, Şamṣām-ud-daulah receiving charge of his seal as his deputy at Court. The plots against the Sayyads were still being carried on in Farrukhsiyar's 1 Kāmwar Khan, 134, Warid, 1496.
2 Khāfi Khān I1, 738. Aḥwāl-i-khawāqīn, 696. According to Tod, II., 82, the Rājah had been called on to send in his son, Abhai Singh, but had refused. Instead, he sent men to Dihli to assassinate one Mukand, his enemy. This outrage produced the invasion of Jodhpur. Probably this Mukand is the same as Mulkan of Mairtha on p. 75 of the same volume.
8 Farrukhsiyar was ill from the 1st Zū,l Hijjah 1125 H. (18th December 1713), but was better on the 9th (26th December), and to stop rumours, he appeared at the Jama 'Masjid on the 'Id i.e., the 10th. His bathing after recovery took place on the 22nd (8th January 1714).—Kāmwar Khān, 143.