Yaśodharma, a feudatory of Nara Sinha | Zain-ul-bilād, mint town, 80,

JOURNAL

OF THE

ASIATIC SOCIETY OF BENGAL,

Part I.-HISTORY, LITERATURE, &c.

Extra No.-1904.

Some Notes on the Bahmanī Dynasty. -By MAJOR W. HAIG.
[Read 2nd November, 1904.]

(1) THE ORIGIN OF THE COGNOMEN BAHMANI.

The legends commonly related by historians regarding the origin of the cognomen Bahmani connect it with the name of the priestly caste of the Hindus. The story preferred by Firishta and repeated by Khafi Khān in the third volume of the Muntakhabu-l-Lubab is that Hasan, the founder of the dynasty, was, in his youth, a servant of Kānkū, Gāngū, or Gangū, a Brahman astrologer who enjoyed the confidence of Muhammad-bin Tughlaq before he ascended the throne. One day, as he was ploughing some waste land for the Brahman, his plough stuck fast. On digging it out of the ground he found that it had

1 In this article the editions referred to are the following:

Firishta-Bombay edition of 1832.

Badāoni-Bibliotheca Indica edition.

Burhan-i-Ma'agir and Tazkiratu-i Mulük-translation by Major J. S. King, Luzac & Co., 1900.

Muntakhabu-l-Lubab, Vol. III.-MS. in writer's possession.
Jabaqāt-i-Akbari-Newal Kishor Press edition.

J. I. 1

caught in a chain and that to the chain was attached a chest containing ashrafis and uncoined gold, which he took straight to his master. The Brahman was so pleased with Hasan's honesty that he brought him to the notice of the prince, Muhammad-bin Tughlaq, by whose influence he obtained an appointment in the imperial service. Shortly after this the Brahman informed Hasan that he had cast his horoscope, and foretold that he would rise to the highest dignity. He asked him to promise that he would, when this prophecy should be fulfilled, take the name of his original benefactor as part of his title, and Hasan made the required promise and, when the time came, fulfilled it by styling himself, as king, "Hasan Kānkū-i-Bahmani." In corroboration of this story Firishta records (i. 527) that Hasan, after being proclaimed king of the Dakan, made Kānkü the Brahman the controller of the finances of his kingdom, and that he was the first Muhammadan ruler to employ a Brahman in so high a post.

The only authority which we have for this story is that of Firishta, for Khafi Khan, being admittedly little more than a copyist so far as the affairs of the Dakan are concerned, cannot be accounted an authority. The author of the Tabaqat-i-Akbarī, the Burhan-i-Ma'asir, and the Tazkiratu-l-Mulūk relate other legends, all more or less improbable, but do not commit themselves to Firishta's account of Hasan's servitude in the house of a Hindu. The predictions of his greatness are attributed variously to one Gangū, a Brahman, not said to be his master, Shaikh Nizāmu-d-din Auliya of Dibli, and Shaikh Muhammad Siraj-iJunaidi, in whose service he is said to have held some post.

The titles of Hasan, as king of the Dakan, are variously given by historians as follows:-In Firishta's history (i. 525), 'Alā'u-d-din Hasan Kānkū-i-Bahmanī, by Khafi Khan in the third volume of the Muntakhabu-l-Lubāb, 'Alā'u-d-dīn Kānkū-i-Bahmanī, curf Hasan, by Nizāmu-d-din Ahmad in the Tabaqāt-i-Akbarī, 'Ala'u-d-dīn Hasan Shah, by 'Ali-bin 'Azāzi-'llāh Tabatabā in the Burhān-i-Ma'āşir, 'Alā'u-d-dīn Hasan Shah Gangū-i-Bahmanī, and 'Alā'u-d-din Hasan Shah al Vali-ulBahmanī, by the author of the Tazkiratu-l-Mülūk, 'Alā'u-d-dīn Bahman Shah, and by Badāoni in the Muntakhabu-t-Tawarikh (i. 231) "the Sultan who is known as Hasan Kānkü and at last obtained the Kingdom of the Dakan under the title of 'Ala'u-d-dīn Bahman Shāh.”

The title given by Badāoni and the author of the Tazkiratu-lMulūk is correct. Hasan did not add to his title the epithet Bahmanī, but assumed the name of Bahman. There is in the fort of Gulbarga a contemporary inscription, bearing the date A.H. 754 (A.D. 1353) in which his titles are given as "Alā'u-d-dunya wa'd-din Abū-'l-Muzaffar Bahman Shah." The names Hasan and Kānku, or Gangu, and the epithet Bahmani, which is used on the coins of his successors and is correctly applied to them only, are omitted. The inscription, which was cut while Bahman Shah was still alive and reigning, and was placed over a mosque in his capital, is far better evidence of the style under which he reigned than any statements of historians. Other evidence, however, exists. I have a copper coin which bears the inscription "Ahmad Shah bin Ahmad Shah bin Bahman Shah." This inscription needs some explanation-a question which will be considered hereafter-but there is no doubt that the words "Bahman Shah " refer to the founder of the Bahmani dynasty. There is also the Bahman-nāma, a versified history of the Bahmani kings, the authorship of which is uncertain, but which is often quoted by Firishta. The title of this history cannot refer to the epithet Bahmanī, but can and evidently does refer to the name Bahman.

The question of the title under which the founder of the Bahman dynasty assumed the sovereignty of the Dakan is important as an indication of the derivation of the name by which that dynasty is known. It is conceivable that a Muhammadan king might have distinguished himself, from gratitude to a Brahman benefactor, by the epithet Bahmani, even though that epithet is never found in its uncorrupted form Brahmanī, but no Muhammadan king would have styled himself "King Brahman." The derivation of the title Bahman Shah must, therefore, be sought in Hasan's claim to descend from the Sāsānidise. His pedigree, as given by Firishta, is as follows:-'Alā'u-d-din Hasan, the son of Kaikāūs, the son of Muhammad, the son of 'Ali, the son of Hasan, the son of Saham, the son of Simun, the son of Salam, the son of Ibrahim, the son of Nasir, the son of Munsur, the son of Rustam, the son of Kaiqubad, the son of Minuchihr, the son of Namdar, the son of Isfandiyar, the son of Kaiyumars, the son of Khurshid, the son of Sa'sā, the son of Faghfür, the son of Farrukh, the son of Shahryar, the son of Amir, the son of Suhaid, the son of Malik Dā'ūd, the son of Hushang, the son of Nik Kardar, the son of Firüz Bakht, the son of Nuh, the son of Sani', who was descended from Bahram-i-gür the Sāmāni, who was descended from Bahman the son of Isfandiyar. This pedigree is varied as follows by the author of the Burhan-i-Ma'āṣir :'Alā'u-d-dunya wa-'d-din Hasan Bahman Shah, son of Kaikāūs Muhammad, son of 'Ali, son of Hasan, son of Bahtām, son of Simān, son of Salām, son of Nuh, son of Ibrahim, son of Nasir, son of Mansür, son of Nub, son of Sani', son of Bahram, son of Shahrin, son of Sad, son of Nusin, son of Dāvād, son of Bahrām-i-gür. Both historians express some doubts as to the authenticity of the pedigrees which they give, and there can be little doubt that both pedigrees are fictitious.

4