صور الصفحة
النشر الإلكتروني

Wazir's house, the Emperor directed the boatmen to increase their speed, in spite of the fact that the imperial equipage was drawn up, and the wazir waiting on the river bank to receive him. Thus this occasion for untying the knot was lost, and the Emperor turned again to Samṣām-ud-daulah for advice. That noble repaired to Qutb-ul-mulk's on the 9th Zu, 1 Qa'dah (3rd October, 1718) and conferred with him. At this time, by reason of the rise of I'tiqad Khan (Muḥammad Murad), Samṣām-ud-daulah had fallen out of favour with Farrukhsiyar, and was even suspected by him of treachery. Being aware of this change of feeling, he was now far from well-affected to the Emperor, had improved his relations with Qutb-ul-mulk, and had inspired that noble with full confidence in his friendship. Listening to his advice, Qutb-ul-mulk presented himself in darbar, made his obeisance, and, to all appearance, the quarrel was again made up, after the usual false speeches had been exchanged.1

[ocr errors]

The story goes that Samṣām-ud-daulah had planned with Farrukhsīyar the arrest of Qutb-ul-mulk. The Emperor was to take his seat in the Tasbih Khanah, or chapel, round which the armed attendants were to be secretly collected. When the moment came, the signal was to be given by the cry of "Qul!" and, rushing in, the slaves were to seize the wazir and hurry him off to prison. Qutb-ul-mulk having entered with a small following, Farrukhsiyar, when the time came, called out as agreed on, "Qul!" From some motive, either of prudence or friendship, Samṣām-ud-daulah, instead of repeating the signal, changed the word, and shouted "Qul!" (armed retinue), the word used to signify that all those waiting for audience should be admitted. This slight change of one letter disarranged the whole plan. The slaves never stirred. But a large number of Qutb-ul-mulk's armed retinue at once appeared in the audience-chamber, and Farrukhsiyar was much disturbed at seeing this crowd. As soon as the minister had left, he vented his rage on Samṣām-ud-daulah. In his access of passion he threw at his favourite the seal, the box for holding the ink used with it, and, as some add, a metal spittoon. After this catastrophe Şamṣām-ud-daulah absented himself for several days, nor did he return until Farrukhsiyar had written him a friendly note in his own hand, asking him to attend court as usual.2

were mostly from Kashmir and used Kashmiri calls to each other when working. Anand Rām, (Mukhliṣ) Mirāt-ul-Iṣṭilāḥ, fol. 166b, B. M. Oriental, No. 1813 (Elliot MSS.). Anand Rām quotes Bábar as to the convenience of boat travelling.

1 Khāfi Khan, II., 803, 804, Kāmwar Khan, 182, Mirzā Muḥammad, 405.

2 Mīrzā Muḥammad, 405, Khushḥal Cand, 411a, Shiū Dás 17a, Yaḥyá Khān 123b, Kām Rāj, ‘Ibratnāmah, 56a, Kāmwar Khãn, 183,

J. 1. 41

After a few days the Emperor went out again on a hunting expedition, accompanied by many officers and state officials: and, as usual, the rumour spread that on this occasion, when Qutb-ul-mulk appeared to make his obeisance, hands would be laid upon him. Qutb-ul-mulk, receiving a hint from Samṣāmrud-daulah, came surrounded by men ; when he dismounted at the entrance, five hundred fully-armed soldiers dismounted with him. In spite of all that the chamberlain (Mir Tozak) and attendants (yasawal) could say, the whole of these men followed into the audience tent. Farrukhsiyar was greatly perturbed at the sight, and it was with much constraint that he was able to utter a few words of compliment before he dismissed the visitor. Further attempts to heal the breach were made. On the 20th Zū,l Qa’dah (14th October, 1718) Zafar Khan, the fourth Bakhshi, took I'tiqad Khan to Qutbul-mulk's house, when the favourite and the wazir interchanged presents, and three days afterwards, Samṣām-ud-daulah visited I'tiqad Khăn. About this time Farrukhsiyar, always of a suspicious nature, came to the conclusion that his foster-mother, who held an honoured position in the harem, and I'timad Khān, a eunuch, had betrayed his secret projects to the Sayyads.1


After waiting for more than a month, Mir Jumlah was at last admitted to audience on the 7th Zü,l Hijjah (31st October, 1718) under the auspices of Nizam-ul-mulk. He received the addition of "Tarkhan" to his former titles. Three days afterwards, it being the day of the 'Id, the Emperor proceeded to the 'Idgah for the usual observances, but by his express order Qutb-ul-mulk did not attend. The reason for this prohibition was that Farrukhsiyar recollected and resented the failure of his plans on the day of the former 'Id at the end of Ramazan. On the 12th (5th November, 1718) I'tiqād Khan paid Mir Jumlah a visit at his house, and the next day, by the Emperor's order, he invited Mir Jumlah to a banquet in return. All this intercourse was encouraged by Farrukhsiyar in the hope that the chief nobles would join with him heart and soul in the destruction of Qutb-ul-mulk. But all was without avail. The bringing forward of I'tiqād Khan had 1 This gives Kāmwar Khan, 183, an opening for quoting the saying, "one spot (or dot) turns “maḥram," (a confidant) into “mujrim,” (a crimi.


Mahram ba yak nuktah mujrim shavvad.

For the meaning and attributes of this distinction, see Blochmann, 'Ain, I., 364, and Tārikh-i-yaashidi, Ross and Elias, p. 55, note.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

estranged many who were otherwise well affected to the Emperor's person, and had caused them to enter into terms with Qutb-ul-mulk. By expatiating on the wazir's Sayyad lineage, on his claims for service done, and on his bravery in the field, they found reasons for holding that right was on his side. I'tiqād Khan's sudden rise, which was without apparent justification, rankled like a thorn in their hearts. Farrukhsiyar paid no heed to this discontent, but continued to support I'tiqād Khan, whose counsels he received as equivalent to a revelation from on high, nor could he bear the man to be away from him for a moment. At the annual rejoicing for the defeat of Jahāndār Shāh, 15th Zū,l Hijjah 1130 H. (8th November, 1718), Qutb-ul-mulk did not attend.1


On the 1st Muḥarram 1131 H. (23rd November, 1718) an official report reached the Court that in the previous month Husain 'Ali Khẩn had started from Aurangabad. On the 22nd Muharram (14th December, 1718) he left Burhanpur, and Ujjain on the 4th Şafar (26th December, 1718), continuing his route via Mandeshwar. Before this time he had put forward a pretext that the Dakhin climate did not agree with him, and had asked to be recalled. Farrukhsiyar said he might try a change to Aḥmadābād, and if he did not recover, he might then return to Hindustan. About this time Husain 'Ali Khan also reported that Mu'in-ud-diu, a reputed sou of Prince Akbar, the rebel son of 'Alamgir, had been captured by Rajah Sahu, the Mahrattah, and made over to him, on the condition that he obtained the release of the Rājah's mother and brother, who had been prisoners since the year 1101 H. (15th Muharram 1101 H., 28th October, 1689) and were still at Dihli. Farrukhsiyar ordered the Bakhshi to send the pretended prince to Dihli.4

[ocr errors]

Compliance with this order did not fall in with Husain Ali Khān's plans; for his brother's, Qutb-ul-mulk's, letter had already warned him that his presence was necessary at Court. He had already made up his mind to return to Hindūstān, and the fiction of having found a son of Prince Akbar was only part of this design, and in fact a mere excuse.

1 Kamwar Khăn, 183, 184, Mirza Muhammad, 410.

* Mandeshwar, Thornton, 645, now in Sindiah's dominions, Lat. 24° 1′, Long. 75° 9'.

8 'Aḥwāl-i-khawāgīn, Ib. 127a, refers to the pretended prince as Jawan Bakht, who had come to the Karnatak from Iran when Prince Akbar died. Yahya Khān, 124a, says he was called a son of Kām Bakhsh.

4 Kāmwar Khan, Shiu Dās, 20a, Khafi Khan, II., 793, 795.

He had given out in open darbār that he expected the arrival from Satarah of a prince, Mu'in-ud-din Husain, son of Prince Akbar. When Prince Akbar, after rebelling against the Emperor 'Alamgir, left India for Ișfahān, this son had been, it was said, left behind. Equipage suitable for a prince of the Gurgāni family was prepared; scarlet tents, a throne, and a crown were made ready. The Mir Bakhshi at the same time announced that he was about to pay a visit to Hindūstān. The youth selected for the rôle of royal pretender was the son of a Qāzi in one of the Dakhin towns, good looking, talented, and with some external resemblance to the princes of the royal house. Mu'azzam Khān, a jama'dar, was deputed to bring to camp the so-called prince. The news writers and intelligencers asked for instructions as to what entry they should make. The Nawab replied that he would in a short time make a report, and himself write detailed letters to Court. Next day the tents were pitched outside the city; more soldiers were enlisted and a month's pay given to them in advance. Terms were come to with Rājah Sāhū, and payment to him of the Chauth, or one-fourth of the revenues of the Dakhin, was agreed to. Husain ‘Ali Khān also obtained the services of Mahrattas at the daily rate of one rupee for each man, to be paid from the time of crossing the Narbadā until their return home.1 After three or four days, Mu'in-ud-din Husain was placed on an elephant in a high-sided canopy, with a white cloth over it to keep out the dust. Red and white tents were erected, a deep ditch was dug all round his camp, sentinels were set, and all the externals of royalty were assigned to him. To keep up appearances, Husain ‘Ali Khān went daily to have a mujrā or ceremonious interview with his prisoner, such as would be necessary in the case of a real prince.2

Finally on the 15th Shawwal (10th September, 1718) Husain ‘Ali Khan appointed his brother, Saif-ud-din ‘Ali Khān, to the command of a vanguard of 4,000 to 5,000 men, and sent him towards Burhanpur to collect artillery and other stores. 'Alim 'Ali Khan,3 his nephew and adopted son, was named as his representative during his absence. Saif-ud-din 'Ali Khan temporarily replaced Jan Nisar Khan as gover1 G. Duff, 197.

2 Kām Rāj, ‘Ibratnāmāh, 64b.

8 ‘Alim ‘Alī Khān had been adopted when an infant, (Kām Rāj, ‘Ibratnāmah, 64b.) The farman of appointment can be seen in Majma'-ul-inshā (litho.) p. 84. It includes the 6 ṣubahs of the Dakhin with the faujdār-ship of the Karnatak and of Bijāpur, and the collectorship (taḥṣīldārī) of the tribute (peshkash) due from the zamīndārs of Sọndhã and Bidnūr. Mubāriz Khān, Daler Khan, and the other governors were placed under him, and letters notifying this fact were transmitted to them through him.



nor of Khandesh, and Sādāt Khān, an old officer now blind of ho h eyes, was sent as commandant of the fort at Ahmadnagar. 'Alim 'Ali Khan was put under the tutelage of Shankarā Mulhār, a trusted agent of Rajah Sahû.2 About November, 1718, Husain 'Ali Khan started himself, accompanied by Sayyad Asadullah (Nawāb Auliyā), the sons of Jan Nisar Khan, 'Iwaz Khan, deputy governor of Barar, Asad 'Ali Khãn, the one-handed, the ‘Ali Murād Khānī, Dil Daler Khan (brother of Lutfullah Khan, Sadiq), Ikhtiṣāṣ Khau (grandson of Khan Zamān), Haji Saifullah Khan, Zia-ud-din Khan, diwan of the Dakhin, Firūz ‘Ali Khān, Bārhah, the Amir-ul-umara's Bakhshi, Diyānat Khān (grandson of Amănat Khān, 'Khāfi), Rajah Jai Singh, Bundelah, Rājah Muḥkam Singh, one of the chief employés, and Khizr Khân, Pannī (sister's son of Daud Khan, Panni). In all there were twenty-two imperial commanders, many of whom followed unwillingly. There were 8,000 or 9,000 of his own troops and 11,000 or 12,000 Mahrattas, besides Bhils and Talingas. He carried with him nearly all the civil establishments of the Dakhin, and anyone who made excuses and turned back was punished by the loss of his jāgīr.5 The total force was 25,000horsemen, besides the artillery, and 10,000 to 11,000 infantry armed with matchlocks. At the head of the Mahrattas were Bālā Ji Wiswanath, the Peshwa, Khandu Rão Dhabariyah, Santa, and 6 others. These leaders received horses and elephants, robes of honour,

1 Khāfi Khăn, II, 797.

• For Shankara, see Grant Duff, 197, Khafi Khăn, II., 796.


8 Khāfi Khan, the historian, was himself present in Husain ‘Ali Khan's army, see II., 798. He had just been removed from the faujdārī of Muṣṭafābād.

4 Muḥammad Qāsim, Lāhorī, 225. Ikhtiṣāṣ Khan, eldest son of Manavvar Khan, Qutbi, son of Manavvar Khan, son of Khan Zaman, Ma,āṣir-ul-umară, III., 655, Zia-ud-din Khan, diwan of the Dakhin, see Ma, äşir-ul-umară, III., 36, and Khafı Khan, II., 790, Diyanat Khan, grandson of Amanat Khan, Ma,āṣir-ul-umarà, I., 258. Diyanat Khân, No. 2, id. II., 62, Rājah Mukḥam Singh (Khatrī), Ma‚āṣir-ulumarā, II., 330, died Jamādī II, 1137 H., Tārīkh-i-Muḥammadi. For the Pannis, see Ma,āṣir-ul-umară, II., 63. Instead of "Jai Singh" the Siyar-ul-muta, akharîn has "Partit Singh."

5 Khäfi Khan, II., 803.

6 Or Khandi. This man was Rajah Sahu's so-called Subahdar in Khandesh, (Khāfi Khan, II., 798). An abstract of his career runs thus (Grant Duff, 162, 163, 196, 209): he was, present at the council held after the death of Sambhā Jī (1689); and took a part in the flight of Rājā Rām. In 1716, after a long absence, he reappeared at the court of Satara and was made Senapati (commander-in-chief). He died in 1721, shortly after the defeat of 'Alim Ali Khan. Santa Ji was said to be the natural son of Parsù Ji, Bhonslah (G. Duff, 199, note). Briggs in a note (p. 178) calls him Santā Jī, Kadam,

« السابقةمتابعة »