صور الصفحة
النشر الإلكتروني

changed. At first, the palace was guarded by the Sayyads' most trusted soldiers, and all offices withio it were held by their nominees. On the 14th Jamādi I (3rd May, 1719) a concession to propriety was so far made that the hereditary doorkeepers and palace servants were allowed to returu to duty. But the change was more nominal than real. It is asserted that even then the Emperor's meals were not served without the express order of his tutor, Himmat Khān, a Bārbah Sayyad. The young Emperor was allowed little liberty, and in his short reign he seldom left the palace. He visited Qutb-ul-mulk on the 19th Jamādi I (8th April, 1719) at his house in the Moti Bāgh, to condole with him on the death of a daughter. He paid another visit to Husain Ali Khān on the 14th Jamādi II (3rd May, 1719); and he also went on one hunting expedition to Shakkarpur (24th Jamādi I, 3rd April).

In addition to keeping the strictest watch over Rafi'-ud-darajāt, the Sayyads' conduct was in other respects indecorous and reprehensible. Qutb-ul-mulk, a man of pleasure, not content with a harem already filled with women collected from far and near, carried off two or three of the most beautiful women from the imperial harem. One writer, Khushḥāl Cand, makes a still more scandalous accusation against him. Through Şadr-un-nissā, head of the harem, he sent a message to 'Ināyat Bāno, the Emperor's wife, that he had fallen in love with her. The go-between executed her task, only to meet with an absolute refasal. Again she was sent to urge his suit; "like a longing lover, he was fast bound by the long curling locks of that fairy.” 'Ināyat Bāno writhed at the insult, undid her hair, which was over a yard long, cat it off, and threw it in the face of her tempter. The younger brother's sin being pride, he displayed his disrespect in another manner. One day he was present alone with Rafi'-ud-darajāt in his private chapel (tasbih khānah). The Emperor sat down on his chair. At once, without waiting for permission, Husain 'Ali Khān, sat down in front of him.3 Highly-placed orientals are rarely at fault on such occasions, and Rafi'. ud-darajāt showed his usual readiness at rebuking an affront. Stretching out his feet in the direction of Husain 'Ali Khān, he said: “Draw

1 Kẽmwar Khăn, 200, Suãnh--Khợrõ. % In spite

the evidence of Khushḥāl Cand, a contemporary and a resident of Dihlī, I fear that this story about the princess' catting off her hair, must be treated as what lawyers call common form." It is also related by N. Manucci, Phil. lips MS. No. 1945, Part I, p. 261, in regard to Ra'nā Dil, one of the widows of Dārā Shukoh, when summoned to his harem by 'Alamgir,

8 No one sat in the Emperor's presence without his order or permission. Yahya Khān, 127a, bas a version of this story, but he ascribes it to Rafi'-ud-daulah.


[ocr errors]

off my stockings (mozah).” Although inwardly raging, Husain 'Ali Khan could do nothing else but comply.

That the young man was not altogether devoid of sense, is proved by the story of a dispute that arose once between Qatb-ul-mulk and Rafi'-ud-darajāt. A warrant of appointment having been signed, next day the wazīr bronght a second order giving the same post to another nominee. The Emperor asked: "Is it the same village, or another with the same name ?" He was told it was the same one, but this man was fit for the place and offered more than the other. The Ena peror said it was foolishness to act like that, and threw the paper on the floor.

SECTION 8.-THE EMPEROR'S DEPOSITION AND DEATH. In the confusion and hurry attending his accession, no heed had been paid to the state of Rafi'-ud-darajāt's health. He was afterwards found to be far advanced in consumption, he was also addicted to the use of opium; and from the day that he ascended the throne, he became weaker and weaker. By the middle of Rajab (June) it was evident that his days were numbered. He then told the Sayyads that if they would comply with his most earnest desire, and raise to the throne his elder brother, Rafi'-ud-daulah, he should die happy. Accordingly on the 17th Rajab (4th June 1719) Rafi -ud-darajāt was deposed and sent back into the harem. Two days afterwards (6th June, 1719), Rafi'-uddaulah was seated on the throne in the Public Audience-hall within the palace at Dihli. On the 24th Rajab (11th June, 1719) Rafi'-uddarajāt expired, and was buried near the shrine of Khwajah Qutb-uddin.s

APPENDIX (Rafi'-ud-darajāt). Age. At his death Rafi-ud-darajāt was about twenty years of age ; the words wāris-i-tāj (1111 H.)," heir to the crown," giving the year of his birth, Khāfi Khān, II, 816. The Jām-i-Jam gives the precise date as the 8th Jamādi II, 1111 H. (30th November, 1699); Mirzā Muḥammad, Tārikh-i-Muhammadi, declares that he was only sixteen or seventeen years of age at his death. A chronogram for that event is :

Cün jān-i-Shahanshāh Rafīʻ-ud-darajāt
Rah just ba sāyah-i-nihāl-2-tūbā,
Rizwan ba dar-z-bihisht iqdām kunān
Guftā : khuld-i-barin maqām o māwā.”


1 Khāfi Khān, II, 821, Khushḥal Cand, B.M. MS. No. 3288, fol. 415a. % Yahya Khān, 1276. s Wārid, 159a, Tārīkh --Muzaffari, 165.


[ocr errors]

“When the soul of the Lord of Lords, Rafi'-ud-darajāt

Sought the shade of the tree of goodness,
Rizwan greeting him at the gate of Paradise

“ Cried : “Most blessed of abodes and asylums.'
(Jan-2-Jan, and Miftāḥ, 304).

Reign. He reigned from his accession on the 9th Rabi' II to his deposition on the 17th Rajab 1131 H., for a period of three months and nine days.

Titles.-His style and title as Emperor was Abu-l-barakāt, Sultan
Shams-ud-din, Muḥammad Rafi -ud-darajät, Badshāh, Ghāzi. (Mirzā
Muḥammad, Tazkirah, 470).
Coin.--The distich placed upon his coin was:

Zad sikkah ba Hind hazārān barakāt
Shāhan-shāh-i-bahr-o-bar, Rafi-ud-darajat.
"Coin was struck in Hind, with a thousand blessings,

By the king of kings on land and sea, Rafi'-ud-darajāt.” But on the second day of the reign Qatb-ul-mulk called on Fath Khān, Fāzil, to provide a couplet which should allow of a different word for gold coins (ashrafi) and silver coins (rupees), as was the case with 'Alamgir's coinage. The poet on the spur of the moment pro. duced the following lines :

Sikkah zad Shah Rafi'-ud-darajat

Mihr-mānind ba yamin-o-barakāt.
“ The Emperor Rafī'-ud-darajāt struck coin,

“Sun-like, with power and felicity." On the rupee the word bndr (moon) was substituted for mihr (sun). It is not known whether these lines were ever actually brought into use, as we have no coin on which they appear; but there is another variant on one coin in the Lahore Museum:

Sikkah-z-mübărik-z-bādshäh-z-ghāzī, Rafi'-ud-darajat. There are twenty-three coins of this reign in the three public col. lections at London, Calcutta, and Lahore; four of gold and nineteen of silver, all circular in shape. All except one are dated according to the Hijra or the regnal year, or both. All except one coin can be classed under the şūbahs in which their place of mintage was situated. These twenty-two coins belong to ten mints in eight out of the twenty-one provinces ; Kashmir, Tatthah, Ajmer, Gnjarāt, Mālwah, Bengal, Orissa and the six Dakhin şübahs being uvrepresented. The number of coins

i British Museum Catalogue, p. 372, Lahore Museum Catalogne, p. 206, Kām. war Khan, 197, Mirzā Muhammad, 470.

J. L 6

from each mint is: Kābul (1), Lāhor (4), Multán (1), Shāhjahânābād (5), Akbarābād (5), Gwaliyār (1), Ițāwah (2), Mu'azzamābād, i.e., Audh (1), Korā (1), Patnah (1). It is curious that in such a short reign a distant province like Kābul should have issued any coin; but the other places were well within control of the court. In the gold coins the weights are 160, 168, 169, and 169-5 grains, and the diameters 77, 8, 85, and 94 of an inch. For the silver coins the weight and the diameter are respectively 172 (2), 173 (4), 174 (1), 174.5 (2), 175 (5), 176 (2), 177 (1), 178 (1), and 179 (1), grains, and 82 (1), 85 (2), -90 (5), .95 (5), .96 (1), 97 (1), 1:0 (3), 1.03 (1) of an inch. Mr. M. Longworth Dames (“Numismatic Chronicle," Fourth Series, II, 275309) has three coins of this reign; adding thereby two more mints to the above, viz., Burhānpur and Sihrind.

Family. The only reference to Rafi'-ud-darajāt's wife or wives is to be found in the story given a page or two back, from which we learn the name of one wife, 'Ināyat Bāno. He seems to have left no children. One notable point about him was his descent on both sides from "Alamgir, his mother being the daughter of prince Akbar, that monarch's fourth son. With such an ancestry it is strange that he did not display more of the energy and ability characteristic of the earlier generations of his house.



On the 19th Rajab 1131 H. (6th June, 1719), Rafi'-ud-daulah, middle son of Prince Rafi'-ush-shān, third son of Bahādur Shāh, ascended the throne in the audience-hall at Dihli in succession to his brother, Rafi'-ad-darajāt. He was eighteen months older than his predecessor. He received the title of Shāhjahān $ānī, or the seoond Shāhjahān. At his accession no changes took place, except the insertion of his name on the coin and in the Friday prayer. He remained like his brother in the hands of Qatb-ul-mulk's nominees. His coming out and going in, his appearances in the audience-hall, what he ate and what he wore, his every act was under the control of Himmat Khān, Bārhah. He was not allowed to attend the public prayers on Friday, to go hunting, or to converse with any noble, unless one of the two Sayyads or his guardian was present. His first formal audience was held in the ramnah or hunting preserve of Khizrābād on the 24th Rajab (11th June, 1719) when the generals appointed for duty at Agrah were presented and took their leave. After this the Khutbah was read at the great

[ocr errors]

mosque in the new Emperor's presence on the 26th of the same month (13th June, 1719).

SECTION 2.-RISING OF SHĀISTAH KHAN AT DIHLĪ. Shāistah Khān, maternal uncle of the late Emperor, Farrukhsiyar, was naturally discontented with the new régime, and at the instigation of Rājah Jai Singh, began to collect soldiers, with the intention of escaping from Dihli and joining the Rājah, then on his march to the assistance of Nekāsīyar. Meanwhile he kept the Rājah well informed of all that was going on at Dihli. Khān Daurān, (Khwājah A'sim) and other great men attempted to dissuade Shāistah Khān from this dangerous course. He paid no heed to them and continued his preparations. Then by accident a letter addressed by him to Rājah Jai Singh fell into the hands of Husain 'Ali Khān. By this time the malcontent was reported to have collected seven or eight thousand men.

On the 23rd Rajab 1131 H. (10th June, 1719), Zafar Khān and Nāhar Khān, Hansawit were sent against Shāistab Khan with a strong force. They stormed bis mansion and, taking him a prisoner, conveyed him to Husain 'Ali Khān then at Bārahpulah, where he had been encamped since the 7th Rajab, (25th May, 1719). Shāistab Khān's property in cash and goods, his horses and his elephants, his cows and his asses, were given up to plunder. This incident aroused suspicions in the Sayyads' hearts with regard to many other of the nobles. But at

1 Kāmwar Khān, 203. Khāfi Khān, IT, 831, fixes the 20th Rajab for the acces. sion, perhaps to suit his chronogram: Shambah bistam-i-mah-i-Rajab büd, (1131 H.). Nor was it possible for the 20th to have fallen on a Saturday; it was either a Wednesday or a Thursday. The author of the Risälah-i-Muhammad Shän, B. M. Or. Ms. No. 180, fol. 75, says he composed two tārīkh for the accession. The first is the same as that claimed by Khāfi Khān as his own. The other is :

Pãe 'adū afgand Shāh Rafā'-ul-qadr, Rafi-ud-daulah. This is, he tells us, a taʻamah, giving 6 in excess, but if the foot (pãe) of 'adū, i.e., the letter 55 waw" (=6) is thrown out (afgand) we get the exact date. But on adding ap the figures, I make them come to 1431 instead of 1131. The Khizrābād referred to is about five miles south of the new city or Shāhjahānābad, and near the Jamnab river.

% Kh wājah 'Ināyatullah, Kashmirī, entitled Shäistah Khăn, died early in Rajab 1141 H. (January, February, 1729,) at Shāhjahānăbăd, Tārīkh-i-Mhdī.

8 Khāfi Khān, II, 831, Kāmwar Khān, 204, and Siwānih-i-Xhiçrī.

4 That is “native of Hānsī. He was either a Rānghar (a Mahomedan Rajput) or a Khāuzādah. Possibly he is identical with the Nāhar Khān, Shekhzādah, of Hānsī, mentioned as faujdôr of Dholkah in Gujarāt, see Kāmwar Khān, p, 200, entry of 24th Jamādi I, 1131 H. Kām Rāj, 'Ibratnāmah, 69a, says S. Dilā war 'AI Khan, Bakhshi of the wazīr, was also sent against Shäistah Khan.


« السابقةمتابعة »