125The Changing Position of the Governor
Because of the peculiar economic and geographic position of the Punjab, there were still more issues to strain the relations between the province and the centre. The wazir kept Multan, Thatta, Kashmir and Kabul under the control of his own associates, especially in the circumstances when he tried but failed to have his own man as the governor of the Punjab. For, the effective maintenance of the centre’s authority in these provinces noticeably crippled the freedom of the governor of the Punjab. Again, the problem of the maintenance of the army on the north-western frontiers influenced the course of the developments leading to the changes in the position of the governor in the Punjab. The centre attempted to control effectively the local administration and the revenues of the parganas reserved for Kabul. The efforts of the central authorities to control, and the governor’s resentment over, the appointments of the faujdars, the diwans and the other local officials in Gujarat, Emanabad, Shamsabad and Sialkot have to be considered also in this light. Under the circumstances when the governor of Kabul was a protégé of the wazir, a kind of conflict between the governor of the Punjab and the centre was unavoidable.
Moreover, the immediate interests and the ambitions of the individual and the groups concerned and the governors’ estrangement with the centre represented a conflict between two views of administration. Saiyid Abdullah Khan, an advocate of the ‘new wizarat’, believed in and accordingly tried for the wazir’s complete control over the finance of the empire. He therefore fought to regulate appointments, transfers and dismissals of the revenue officials whose functioning had any bearing on finance. Notwithstanding the plight of the local soldiery in 1715, the diwan, as he was directed by the wazir, refused to grant to them anything from the revenue of the pargana of Sialkot which was reserved for Kabul.99 Such were precisely the cases which convinced the governor of the necessity to establish his control over the revenues. (p.93) In the face of steady increase in number and intensity of the local problems, the directives from Delhi were not available for immediate action. The lines of communication between the provinces and the centre were breaking down; the central authorities were unable to act promptly. In 1717, for instance, when the diwan acted on his own discretion and spent part of the revenues reserved for Kabul on an item which he thought of greater urgency, he was dismissed for violation of the rules. As the governors were confronted with local challenges and with the task of consolidating the power and prestige of the Mughal throne in the provinces, they demanded freedom to control the revenue resources and the important local offices. In the circumstances, the wazir’s effort or the new wizarat under Saiyid Abdullah turned out to be merely a device of his faction for the purpose of increasing its own power at the expense of the others.
Notes: (1) Compare Ain, I, Nawal Kishore, (1882), pp. 195–6 for the governor’s theoretical position. For the provincial diwan’s powers and duties in the
Page 18 of 32
126The Changing Position of the Governor
seventeenth century, see Khulasat-us-Siyaq, Subhanallah Collection (zamima), F, 900/15, Muslim University Library, Aligarh, ff. 16b–17a; Nigarnama-i Munshi, Abd-us-Salam Collection, 362/132, Muslim University Library, Aligarh, ff. 160b– 165a. For the local officials’ direct responsibility to the emperor and the central authorities see the specimens of appointment letters to the various officials in Nigarnama-i Munshi (ff. 122b–160b bab-i chaharum); see also its Part II which includes arzdashts of the local officials to the emperor. See also, P. Saran, The Provincial Government of the Mughals, 1526–1658, pp. 144–91.
(2) In 1700 when Kartalab Khan, later Murshid Quli Khan, was appointed to the diwani of Bengal, the empire, its treasury having been substantially drained out in the Deccan war, was in need of money. The diwan of Bengal, a rich and prosperous suba, was therefore given full authority which included even executive powers over about half of the revenue-yielding districts of the province. He enjoyed the full confidence of the emperor to the extent that on his report, Aurangzeb reprimanded the ablest of the princes, Muhammad Azim-ud- Din (Azim-ush-Shan) who was the governor of Bengal and on a number of questions at variance with Murshid Quli Khan. It was perhaps peculiar with Bengal that the headquarters of the diwani were permitted to be established far from the provincial capital. Compare Akhbarat BS, 1st R. Y., 25th Rabi II and 22nd Rajab, pp. 17 and 210; Abdul Karim, Murshid Quli Khan and his Times, Dacca, 1963, pp. 18 and 22–4; Ghulam Husain Salim, Riyaz-us-Salatin, Bib. Indic. Calcutta, 1898, pp. 243 and 247–50; Jadunath Sarkar (ed.), History of Bengal, II, second impression, Dacca, 1972, p. 403.
(3) Akhbarat BS, 1st R. Y., pp. 311, 362, 389 and 417; Yahya, f. 115a; M. U., II, p. 839 and Kamwar, f. 307b. Kamwar and M. U. do not give correct dates of Chin Qilich Khan’s posting in Awadh. According to M. U. he was the first, while actually he was the third governor of Awadh in the time of Bahadur Shah. Kamwar gives 15 Ramzan/29 November 1707 as the date of his appointment which is the date of Chin Qilich’s securing of faujdari of Khairabad. Cf. Akhbarat, p. 311.
(4) Ibid., BS, 2nd R.Y., pp. 14 and 82; Kamwar, f. 308a. Chin Qilich Khan’s resignation followed his removal from the faujdaris as a punishment for his indifference to the provincial affairs. Compare Yahya, f. 115b; Akhbarat BS, 1st R. Y., p. 389.
(5) Ibid., 2nd R. Y., p. 16 (10 February 1709). He was Saif Khan, the son of Amir Khan (d. 1698) who through his mother, Hamida Bano was the first cousin of Zulfiqar Khan. Hamida Bano’s mother, Malika Bano and Zulfiqar’s mother Mehrun-Nisa Begum were the daughters of Asaf Khan. Compare M. U., I, pp. 277–78, 311 and II, p. 93.
Page 19 of 32
127The Changing Position of the Governor
(6) On 27 March 1709, Chin Qilich Khan was ordered to join Asad Khan and assist him in the proposed expedition against the Rathors of Jodhpur. But Chin Qilich Khan and Asad Khan held divergent views on the Rajput question. Asad Khan advocated a policy of reconciliation with the Rajputs while Chin Qilich Khan was for total war against them. Kamwar, f. 312b; M. M., f. 58a; Dastur-ul- Amal, f. 188a.
(7) Akhbarat BS, 4th R. Y., pp. 103 and 146. Correspondingly, the sawar rank of the diwan was raised from 400/300 to 1400/300 2–3h which implied a proportionate decline in the conditional sawar rank of Chin Qilich Khan.
(8) Ibid., 1st R.Y., p. 118; Yahya, f. 115a.
(9) Abu Nasr Khan and Shamsher Khan had preceeded Chin Qilich Khan as governors in Awadh under Bahadur Shah. Though Abu Nasr Khan (4 August 1707) was an important member of a powerful group, the family of Asad Khan, he hardly obtained any additional privileges as governor. He had not held any faujdari and his mansab at his death had only been 3000/2000/500 2–3h. Shamsher Khan had held the faujdari of Gorakhpur as well, but his appointment was a temporary arrangement. In fact it was a case of a faujdar ordered to look after the affairs of the suba temporarily. Akhbarat BS, 1st R. Y., pp. 18, 48 and 53. For Abu Nasr Khan’s relations with the family of Asad Khan see M. U., I, pp. 292 and 814; II, pp. 93 and 690; T. Muhammadi, pp. 14, 22 and 137. For Chin Qilich’s successors, Ali Quli Khan and Muhammad Amin Khan’s appointments see Kamwar, ff. 308 and 326b; Akhbarat BS, 4th R. Y., p. 339 and M. U., III, pp. 627–32.
(10) In 1708 Zulfiqar Khan was made governor of the Deccan with full authority in all revenue and administrative matters pertaining to the Deccan. Moreover Zulfiqar Khan was allowed to remain at the court and to combine his viceroyalty with the office of mir bakhshi. Cf. Satish Chandra, Parties and Politics, pp. 43–4.
(11) Chin Qilich had an eye on the office of wizarat which explains his close relations with Prince Azim-ush-Shan even during his retirement. Azim-ush-Shan used to see him frequently and promised him that, if ever he became emperor he would make him his wazir. It seems that the prince had marked him out as a man whose personality and influence could well be used against Zulfiqar Khan whose overweening authority he regarded with intense dislike.’ Cf. Yusuf Husain, The First Nizam, reprint, Bombay, p. 41.
(12) Jadunath Sarkar, History of Aurangzeb, Calcutta, 1919, Vol. IV, pp. 362–5.
(13) K. K., II, p. 608. It appears that it had also become difficult to bring under control the Deccan governors, some of whom had set about entrenching their
Page 20 of 32
128The Changing Position of the Governor
positions in the province. Compare J. F. Richards, Mughal Administration in Golconda, pp. 237–40 for Rustam Dil Khan’s ambitions in Hyderabad.
(14) For the will of Aurangzeb for the partition of the empire, see W. Irvine, Later Moghuls, I, pp. 5–6.
(15) Kamwar, ff. 322b and 324a; M. M., f. 100a; K. K., p. 674; Akhbarat BS, 4th R. Y., p. 254. In the meanwhile, however, some changes in the faujdaris seem to have been made to accommodate Chin Qilich Khan. Mirza Muhammad Khan and Qilich Muhammad Khan, for instance, replaced Saif Khan and Mir Abul Qasim as faujdars of Bahraich and Khairabad respectively. Cf. Ibid., 4th R. Y., pp. 165 and 301. But the order of his promotion to 7000/7000 was not implemented. Cf. Ibid., 4th R. Y., p. 254 and M. M., f. 100a which mention him as shash hazari (rank of 6000) the day he resigned.
(16) K. K., II, p. 665.
(17) Especially when initially the name of Shamsher Khan, the erstwhile faujdar of Gorakhpur was proposed to succeed Chin Qilich. Cf. Kamwar, f. 324a.
(18) Kamwar, f. 324b; Akhbarat BS, 4th R. Y., p. 339. Muhammad Amin Khan did not lose his position at the court. He accompanied the emperor in his campaigns against the Sikhs and governed the province through his deputies. On 7 January 1711, one Zia Khan was ordered to deputize for him in Awadh. Later, he was replaced by Abd-ur-Rasul Khan who was also faujdar of Gorakhpur and Khairabad. on 21 October, following a report about the irregularities of Abd-ur- Rasul Khan, he was replaced by a new naib. Cf. Kamwar, ff. 326b and 327a; Akhbarat BS, 4th R. Y., p. 24; 5th R. Y., pp. 48 and 421. For further favours of Muhammad Amin Khan see Akhbarat BS, 5th R. Y., p. 29; Kamwar, f. 328a.
(19) For Mir Musharraf see Chapter 6.
(20) Kamwar, ff. 341; M. M., f. 25a; K. K., II, 693; Dastur-ul-Amal, f., 200b; Akhbarat BS, 1st R. Y., pp. 103 and 172; Ajaib, f. 68a. Qilich Muhammad Khan was appointed in March 1713 and within a few months in October 1713 he was ordered to join Nizam-ul-Mulk in the Deccan while Sarbuland Khan replaced him in Awadh.
(21) For zamindar revolts see Chapter 3. For Sarbuland Khan’s association with the Shaikhs and Saiyids of Bilgram see Chapter 6.
(22) He confirmed all the mu‘afis indiscriminately, without even asking the grantees to present themselves to the kachahri. Hadiqat, p. 152.
(23) Akhbarat FS, 3rd R. Y., I, pp. 141, 186 and 191; Kamwar, ff. 345b and 346a; Ajaib, f. 34b.
Page 21 of 32
129The Changing Position of the Governor
(24) In this connection it is interesting to note the developments at the court that attended Chhabele Rain’s appointment in Awadh. It seems that the governorship of Awadh was given or at least promised to him as early as 1712 when he deserted Prince Azz-ud-Din and joined Farrukh Siyar at Kora. (Shivdas, f. 3a; Mubarak, f. 77b and Tarikh-i Shahanshahi, Buhar MS, f. 14b). Later, however, the situation took a new turn at Agra and relations between the emperor and Saiyid Abdullah Khan, the wazir, began to deteriorate. At this juncture Farrukh Siyar asserted his authority and appointed his dependable followers—Afzal Khan and Chhabele Ram—to the offices of sadr and Diwan-i tan-o-khalisa respectively. Saiyid Abdullah Khan objected to these appointments on the grounds that they were a violation of his power as wazir. A compromise was finally reached. Chhabele Ram got the subadari of Agra but he seems to have remained at the court and governed the province through his deputy. He was deputed to accompany Saiyid Husain Ali Khan in the imperial campaign against the Rathors of Jodhpur. The antagonism between the emperor and the wazir became more acute during the campaign. According to some of our sources, Ajit Singh, the Rathor chief, was secretly directed by Farrukh Siyar to kill Husain Ali Khan. Chhabele Ram’s send off to Awadh was thus an attempt by the wazir to keep the emperor’s followers at a distance from the court. For details see Satish Chandra, Parties and Politics, pp. 103–4 and W. Irvine, Later Moghuls, I, pp. 286 and 292.
(25) Akhbarat FS, 3rd R. Y., I, p. 240. Within a month the faujdari of Lucknow was also assigned to Anand Ram. Anand Ram moved with Chhabele Ram to Allahabad and finally with Girdhar Bahadur to Malwa where he died fighting against the Marathas in the battle of Amjhara in November 1728. T. Muhammadi, p. 70.
(26) Ajaib, ff. 36–7.
(27) Thus while the faujdari of Khairabad was given to him, the faujdari of Lucknow was taken away from Anand Ram and was awarded to Mir Musharraf. This was done at the wazir’s instance, for Mir Musharraf had close links with the Saiyid Brothers. Subsequently, on Chhabele Ram’s protest Farrukh Siyar cancelled Mir Musharraf’s appointment. The emperor’s plea was that since the beginning of his reign the governorship of Awadh included the faujdari of Lucknow as well. But ironically within a few weeks, one Hashim Khan was appointed to the diwani, amini and faujdari of Lucknow. Akhbarat FS, 4th R. Y., I, pp. 97, 155; Allahabad 1316; Ajaib, ff. 67b–68.
(28) Kamwar, f. 350a; Ajaib, f. 42a.
(29) In 1719, after the deposition of Farrukh Siyar, Chhabele Ram refused to submit to the Saiyids. He instigated an uprising at Allahabad and compelled the Saiyids to negotiate with him. Cf. W. Irvine, Later Moghuls, II, pp. 6–16, Satish Chandra, Parties and Politics, pp. 145–7.
Page 22 of 32
130The Changing Position of the Governor
(30) See Chapter 7.
(31) He was appointed on 28 October 1715, Kamwar, f. 349b. Saiyid Muzaffar Ali Khan is to be distinguished from Muzaffar Khan, the brother of Samsam-ud- Daulah and Saiyid Muzaffar Khan Barha. Later in the 4th R. Y. of Muhammad Shah, Saiyid Muzaffar Ali Khan, then faujdar of Gwalior, was appointed deputy governor of Agra. Compare Kamwar, 378b.
(32) Akhbarat FS 5th R. Y., II, p. 258.
(33) Ibid., 6th R. Y., I, pp. 201 and 86.
(34) Kamwar, f. 351b.
(35) Compare Kamwar, p. 318. Aziz Khan Chaghta was one of those nobles who congratulated the emperor on the death of Saiyid Husain Ali Khan in 1720.
(36) They were Khan Zaman and Mahabat Khan. Khan Zaman was appointed on 4 December 1717. He was followed by Mahabat Khan on 12 February 1718. Akhbarat FS, 6th R.Y., II, p. 122, 7th R. Y., p. 55; Kamwar, ff. 355; M. M., f. 84a. In 1128/1715–16. Khan Zaman had deputized for the wazir in the suba of Multan. Mahabat Khan, who had been interned by Zulfiqar Khan in the time of Jahandar Shah, was reinstated by Farrukh Siyar on the recommendation of the Saiyid Brothers. On 13 December 1715, he was appointed darogha of the gurzbardars with a mansab of 4000/3000. On 12 February, 1718, however in the wake of the emperor’s bid to remove his adversaries from the court and have loyalists in key posts, Mahabat Khan was replaced by Muhammad Murad Kashmiri, better known as Itiqad Khan. Kamwar, ff. 350a and 355b.
(37) Kamwar, f. 359a; M. M., f. 115b.
(38) Ibid., f. 357b; Akhbarat FS, 6th–8th R.YS., p. 169.
(39) Ibid., f. 359b.
(40) Muhammad Amin Khan’s refusal to leave for Awadh can again be appreciated when it is considered against the background of the conflict between the emperor and the wazir. In 1714–15 Muhammad Amin Khan had been fully involved in the court intrigues against the wazir. He had aspired for the wizarat. At length by the end of 1717 he fell under imperial displeasure, was divested of his office of the second bakhshi and appointed subadar of Malwa. In the meantime, Farrukh Siyar had intensified his pursuits to eliminate the wazir. In December 1718 at the suggestion of Nizam-ul-Mulk, Muhammad Amin Khan was recalled to the court. The emperor, however, changed his mind before he arrived at Delhi. Subsequently, orders were sent to him directing his immediate return to Malwa. Amin Khan still proceeded and, on 11 January 1719, he was reported to have camped outside the capital. At this juncture, the wazir managed
Page 23 of 32
131The Changing Position of the Governor
to secure the imperial order for his appointment in Awadh which the latter blatantly turned down. Saiyid Abdullah Khan took full advantage of this incident. Muhammad Amin Khan was deprived of his mansab and his son Muhammad Qamar-ud-Din Khan lost his office of bakshi of the ahadis. Thereafter on 20 January the wazir established his own rapprochement with Muhammad Amin Khan and thus secured at least his neutrality in the coming conflict. According to some sources Muhammad Amin Khan was one of those who advised Husain Ali Khan to depose Farrukh Siyar. Cf. Satish Chandra, Parties and Politics, pp. 111– 16 and 141; W. Irvine, Later Moghuls, I, pp. 294–302 and 365–7.
(41) On the day of Farrukh Siyar’s deposition, even Mir Musharraf, the deputy governor of Awadh is reported to have been present in Delhi. Kamwar, f. 362a.
(42) Shivdas, ff. 35b and 36a.
(43) T. Hindi, ff. 240a–240b.
(44) Shivdas, f. 35b; K. K., p. 946; Mubarak, f. 110b. Also Rs 3,00,000 were paid to Girdhar as war indemnity.
(45) See Chapter 7. Control over the road from Benaras to Delhi passing through Lucknow and Bareilly was also a factor which later enabled Burhan-ul-Mulk to shape his relations with the centre on his terms.
(46) See Chapter 1, Section II.
(47) In 1690 Himmat Khan, the governor of Awadh, held the faujdari of Gorakhpur as well. Compare Maasir-i Alamgiri, Eng. tr. by Jadunath Sarkar, Calcutta, 1947, p. 202. Himmat Khan’s successors, however, did not combine any faujdari with their governorship. Cf. Ibid., pp. 223, 241, 279 and 307. However, in 1702, the faujdari of Jaunpur (a sarkar of suba Allahabad) was assigned to Murad Khan, the then subadar of Awadh, for a short period. Also Sipahdar Khan, the governor of Allahabad (1696–1702) held the faujdaris of Benaras (1696), Rae Bareli (1701) and Jaunpur (1702). Cf. S. N. Sinha, Subah of Allahabad, under the Great Mughals, Delhi, 1974, pp. 89–90; Chetan Singh examines this at length in Region and Empire: Panjab in the Seventeenth Century, Delhi, 1991.
(48) Compare Roshan Kalam, p. 7. How this created difficulties for the regular officials is evident from the following passage from a letter of Rad Andaz Khan which gives the details of the problems he was faced with in the parganas: ‘The jagirdars who possess faujdari rights over their jagirs have given shelter to the robbers in their mahals. These robbers are playing havoc in and around these places, especially in the jagir of Aziz Khan whose agent, Mahmud is (a leader of) robbers. What is the remedy?’ Ibid., p. 22.
Page 24 of 32
132The Changing Position of the Governor
(49) Cf. Philip C. Calkins, ‘Revenue Administration in Bengal’ and ‘The Revenue of Bengal and the Method of Assessment, 1700–1757’, mimeographed.
The extent of Murshid Quli Khan’s control over, and his indispensibility in handling the affairs of the suba of Bengal can be gauged from the following. In 1708 when Azim-ush-Shan dominated the court, he managed to get Murshid Quli transferred to the Deccan. In 1710, however, Murshid Quli was sent back to Bengal as the diwan and the deputy subadar of the suba. Again, in 1712 when Farrukh Siyar made a claim to the throne at Patna, Murshid Quli proved to be most hostile to his aspirations, yet Farrukh Siyar had to confirm him in his existing office. Moreover, he was made deputy governor to Farkhunda Siyar, the infant princely governor of Bengal and finally in September 1717 he gained the full subadari while the office of the diwan remained under the control of his relatives. Compare Akhbarat-i Bahadur Shah, Sarkar Collection, 19 January 1708 and 20 February 1712; Kamwar, ff. 307b and 320b; Abdul Karim, Murshid Quli Khan and His Times, p. 30. Ijad, f. 113b; Salimullah, Tarikh-i Bangala, Alighar transcript, pp. 45, 53, and 68; Ghulam Husain Salim, Riyaz-us-Saltain, pp. 263 and 274; Farrukh Siyar sent a detachment under Rashid Khan to march against Murshid Quli and bring back either his treasure or his head. In May 1712 Rashid Khan was killed in a battle outside Murshidabad and his army was routed. Jadunath Sarkar, History of Bengal, II, pp. 406–7.
(50) Cf. I. O. 4489 and 4506 Pt. II for Awadh. In the mid-eighteenth century in Awadh only 70,60,325 dams out of the total jama of the province (37,46,74,559 dams) remained in khalisa (66,28,125 dams from the mal and 432,200 dams from the sair). These dams were spread in the following parganas: Amethi, Bangar Mau and Jahangirabad in Lucknow sarkar, Haveli Khairabad, Bharwara(?), Laharpur, Hargam and Kherigarh in Khairabad sarkar, the town of Awadh (Ayodhya) in Awadh sarkar, Haveli Gorakhpur and Ramgarh-Gauri in Gorakhpur sarkar. Four mahals, namely, Behra, Rajhat, Sujauli and Dang-Dun, in Bahraich sarkar were earmarked for sarf-e khas. It may also be noted that five of six sair mahals were unassessed (bila qaid-i dami) and therefore the jama of these five mahals is not available.
For the Punjab two jama figures of the khalisa are available. According to one figure, apparently of the early years of Muhammad Shah’s reign (1720s), 30,31,90,415 dams of the total jama of the province (1,06,64,19,937 dams) were in khalisa. By the 1740s, only 22,14,19,492 dams of the total had been left in the khalisa. These dams were spread over 91 mahals (31 mal mahal and 60 sair mahals) in the five Doabs and the Biruni Panjnad. Cf. I. O. 4488 and 4506 Pt. I. See also Irfan Habib, Agrarian System, pp. 271–3 for the general proportion of the khalisa to the jama of the empire in the seventeenth century.
(51) Roshan Kalam, pp. 6, 11, 15 and 19–20.
Page 25 of 32
133The Changing Position of the Governor
(52) M. U., II, p. 61 in the context of the Deccan where developments towards provincial autonomy occurred on similar lines. It may be noted that the jagirdars demanded faujdari rights over their jagirs as and when the provincial administration became unable to keep order and enforce revenue collections. See J. F. Richards, Mughal Administration in Golconda, pp. 196–8 for an explanation for such developments in the Hyderabad province at the end of the seventeenth century.
(53) M. U., III, p. 668.
(54) For details see Satish Chandra, Parties and Politics, pp. 25–6 and also W. Irvine, Later Moghuls, I, pp. 37–40.
(55) Compare Akhbarat BS, 1st R. Y, p. 132 and 3rd and 4th R. YS., pp. 2 and 75 for the office of kotwal of Lahore to Mir Abd-us-Salam and Sultan Ali Khan, associates of Asad Khan’s son, Zulfiqar Khan.
(56) Kamwar, f. 311b. He was Mir Khan, a son-in-law of Bahramand Khan who was a son-in-law of Asad Khan. M. U., I, pp. 456–7.
(57) He was Dil Diler Khan, a brother of Lutfullah Sadiq who had risen under the patronage of Mun‘im Khan. In the reign of Jahandar Shah when Zulfiqar Khan, Asad Khan’s son, came to power Lutfullah lost his position and even his house was confiscated. Later, however, he managed to regain his position under Farrukh Siyar. Compare M. U., III, p. 177.
(58) Akhbarat BS, 4th R.Y., p. 445 and 4th–5th R.YS., p. 435. For Asad Khan’s two arzdashts to the emperor in 1709 see, Kamwar, ff. 311b and 317a.
(59) M. U., I, p. 205; Akhbarat BS, 3rd R.Y., p. 193, 3rd–4th R. YS., p. 15 for Beth Jalandhar; for chakla Gujarat, Wazirabad and Emanabad, see Akhbarat BS, Ist R. Y., pp. 97. 103 and 143; 3rd–4th R. YS., p. 116 in the volume entitled Aurangzeb I; 4th R.Y., p. 116; 4th R Y., pp. 369 and 448; Kamwar, 307b, 324b and 330. The faujdar of Gujarat belonged to the family of an eminent orthodox Hanafi theologian of Agra (T. Muhammadi, pp. 21 and 75; Majma-un-Nafais, Rampur MS., f. 326b) and the faujdar of Emanabad was related to Inayatullah Kashmiri who had quarrelled with Asad Khan’s son, Zulfiqar Khan. M. U., I. pp. 319–20, II, p. 830.
(60) For example, Jahandar Shah who had good relations with Asad Khan was replaced by Hoshdar Khan, an associate of Mun‘im Khan, in the faujdari of Beth Jalandhar. (October 1711). In January 1712, Rustam Dil Khan who had been appointed to the qiladari of Kangra on the recommendation of Zulfiqar Khan, was removed from office. The office of the kotwal of Lahore, hitherto held by Sultan Ali Khan, an associate of Zulfiqar Khan, was ultimately assigned to Muttalib Khan. Akhbarat BS, 5th R. Y., I, p. 259; II, pp. 318, 342, 441 and 476;
Page 26 of 32
134The Changing Position of the Governor
Kamwar, f. 330a. For biographical notices of Rustam Dil Khan and Muttalib Khan’s association with Mun‘im Khan and Azim ush-Shan, see, Kamwar, ff. 329b and 336b; M. U., II, pp. 650–1.
(61) In July 1711, for instance, Latatat Khan Azim-ush-Shani was made bakshi waqaiʿnigar of Lahore while Rahimullah Khan was appointed the waqaiʿnigar of the province. Within three months, Fakhr-ud-Din, was transferred from Delhi to Lahore as the bakhshi waqai‘nigar of the entire Punjab. Akhbarat, BS 5th R. Y., I, pp. 235, 238 and 396; T. Muhammadi, p. 96. Fakhr ud-Din was a brother of Qutbud-Din, the faujdar of Gujarat, and thus disliked Asad Khan. Rahimullah Khan was a maternal nephew who was imprisoned at Zulfiqar Khan’s instance in Jahandar Shah’s time. T. Muhammadi, p. 75; Kamwar, p. 159.
(62) For example Iradat Khan, a son-in-law of Mir Sanjar of Lahore was appointed faujdar of Beth Jalandhar on Mun‘im Khan’s recommendation. Iradat Khan’s son Hoshdar Khan held the faujdari of Nur Mahal. Also, for Ibrahim Khan who belonged to Sodhra, a town in the Punjab, Mun‘im Khan secured from the emperor the title of Ali Mardan Khan and the governorship of Kabul. Ibrahim Khan had specially been helped by Mun‘im Khan when he had been asked to give explanation for certain irregularities he had committed in Bengal. M. U., I. pp. 205 and 300; III, p. 833. Bindraban Das ‘Khushgo’, Safina-i Khushgo (ed. A. Rahman, Patna, 1959), p. 84. Mir Sanjar of Mashhad was a Naqshbandi sufi and yet is reported to be a Shiʿa. He died in Lahore in 1105 a. h. T. Muhammadi, p. 5.
(63) The case of Muhammad Athar Khan of Wazirabad illustrates the tendency. In 1711, Athar Khan continued to be the faujdar and jagirdar of pargana Wazirabad, even though he had been officially replaced by Qutb-ud-Din Khan and his jagir converted into khalisa. An imperial order of 8 July 1711, eventually had to legitimize his de facto position in the pargana. Athar Khan could successfully flout the imperial order because he had strong social ties in the locality. He was the son of Hakim Ilm-ud-Din, entitled Wazir Khan, an eminent noble of Aurangzeb’s reign. Wazir Khan hailed from Chanaut, a qasba in the Punjab, in the neighbourhood of which he founded the town of Wazirabad. Akhbarat BS, 5th R. Y., I, p. 92. For Hakim Ilm-ud-Din see M. U., III, pp. 933–6; see also T. Muhammadi, pp. 90 and 126.
(64) M. U., III, p. 833; see also II, p. 90; Kamwar, ff. 307b, 315a and 318a; T. Muhammadi, p. 27; III, p. 159.
(65) Akhbarat, miscellaneous, II, p. 46; Kamwar, f. 337a.
(66) M. U., III, p. 802; Kamwar, f. 337a; Akhbarat, JS, p. 22. It is interesting to note that Zulfiqar Khan as well as Husain Ali Khan and Nizam-uI-Mulk who aspired for more than a mere subadari in the Deccan, manipulated to have Gujarat, very likely due to its richness and strategic importance, under the control of their own men. Sarbuland Khan was first chosen by Kokaltash to
Page 27 of 32
135The Changing Position of the Governor
deputize for Asad Khan in Gujarat. But he was soon replaced by Daud Khan, a protégé of Zulfiqar Khan. When Saiyid Husain Ali Khan held the viceroyalty of the Deccan, Ajit Singh, an associate of the Saiyid Brothers, governed Gujarat, with a brief break in 1717 when Khan Dauran held it. In the wake of the appointments and promotions following the decline of the Saiyid Brothers, Haidar Quli Khan, one of those who had planned to assassinate Husain Ali Khan replaced Ajit Singh, as governor of Gujarat. But as soon as Nizam-ul-Mulk, the viceroy of the Deccan, had his way, he managed to secure the governorship of Gujarat for himself. Later, even after the appointment of Shuja‘at Khan, Hamid Khan who deputized for Nizam-ul-Mulk in Gujarat resisted handing over the suba to the new governor. Cf. Kamwar, ff. 342, 348b, 354a and 379a; W. Irvine, Later Moghuls II, pp. 169–89.
(67) As soon as the government of Farrukh Siyar was proclaimed, he sent 500 ashrafis to the new emperor. Kamwar, f. 341b.
(68) Abd-us-Samad Khan was a protége of Zulfiqar Khan. He had served and fought against Azim-ush-Shan with a strong army of 10,000 ‘Mughals’ in the Civil War in 1712 in Lahore. Zulfiqar Khan had reciprocated magnanimously. He raised Abd-us-Samad Khan from obscurity to the high rank of 7000/7000. But Abd-us-Samad Khan escaped the wrath of Farrukh Siyar. Though he could not retain his existing office and the mansab he soon managed to reach the highest rung of the nobility under Farrukh Siyar. The ‘Mughal’ nobles’ neutral attitude at Samugarh and much more than that, the necessity of a governor of high military and administrative calibre in the Punjab accounted for Farrukh Siyar’s favours to Abd-us-Samad Khan. Cf. Warid, p. 290; Tarikh-i Shahanshahi, f. 21a.
(69) Ijad, f. 131a; K. K., II, p. 762; Warid, p. 291; M. M., f. 24b; also see Nur-ud- Din Faruqi, Jahandar Noma, Br. M. Or. 3610, f. 62a. Siyar’s account is confused Cf. II, p. 402. Zabardast Khan died on 23 May 1713, and subsequently his property was escheated. Compare Kamwar, ff. 341b and 343b.
(70) Compare Ijad, f. 131a; K. K., II, p. 762; Warid, p. 291 and Jahandar Nama, f. 62a.
(71) For his relations with the centre during this period, see, Kamwar, ff. 344a and 345; Akhbarat FS, 3rd R. Y., I. p. 239.
(72) In February 1715, for example, Iradatmand Khan was reported to have colluded with the Sikhs in their ravages of the khalisa villages in pargana Emanabad. The Sikhs had promised him half the booty. Earlier, he had misappropriated half of the revenue of pargana Shamsabad. And yet the emperor’s order to sack him remained unimplemented, apparently with the wazir’s connivance. In May 1715, Iradatmand Khan and Mir Muhammad Khan, the amins of khalisa, paid little attention to a petition of the governor for the
Page 28 of 32
136The Changing Position of the Governor
payment of Rs 8,00,000 against the pay-claim of a section of the army. Akhbarat FS, 4th R. Y., I, p. 131.
(73) M. M., ff. 50b–51b; K. K., II, p. 767. Isa Khan Mein who had lately risen to power was closely associated with Jahandar Shah. In recognition of his services to Bahadur Shah in the battle of Jaju in 1707, he was given a mansab and thus incorporated in the Mughal imperial service. In the reign of Jahandar Shah when he rose to the rank of 5000/5000 and got the faujdari of Lakhi Jungle and Jalandhar, he spared no effort to expand his zamindari and influence in the Punjab. After Jahandar Shah’s defeat, Isa Khan lost his position and became zortalab. No jagirdar could realize the revenue from his territory which extended from the bank of the Beas to the town of Thara in sarkar Sirhind. Besides, he began to plunder the revenue of the neighbouring parganas and the caravans that passed through his territory. In a number of encounters, he defeated the armies of the faujdars. In the meanwhile, he approached Samsam-ud-Daulah and the latter seems to have further encouraged him in his spoliations. M. U., II, pp. 825–8; M. M., ff. 50b–51b; Warid, pp. 287–8.
(74) Kamwar, f. 350a; M. U., II, pp. 825–28. For Shahdad Khan see M. U., pp. 711–15. Shahdad Khan’s victory greatly enhanced the prestige of the governor and a number of refractory zamindars are reported to have then surrendered to him.
(75) Khush-hal, p. 386; K. K., II, p. 771; Kamwar, f. 350a. In 1714, as we know, it was decided that Mir Jumla and Husain Ali Khan who never agreed on any issue, would leave for Bihar and the Deccan respectively. Mir Jumla, however, either at the emperor’s instance or on his own, soon returned to Delhi, but the emperor, primarily to appease the wazir, had to order him to withdraw to Lahore. For a different version of the context of these orders see Satish Chandra, Parties and Politics, pp. 107–12, 118, 119 and 138.; W. Irvine, Later Moghuls, I, pp. 301, 330–1 and 352. We have depended mainly on the evidence of Khush-hal which seems to have been overlooked. Mir Jumla, however, did not proceed beyond Sirhind. He probably wanted to avert any conflict with Abd-us-Samad Khan, for he did not want to lose the backing of the Turani nobles who were equally resentful of the rise of the Saiyids and were thus his allies. He realized that his appointment in the Punjab was at the instance of the wazir and that the wazir’s aim was to create a rift between him and the Turani nobles.
(76) This phase of the governor’s relations with the centre is interpreted by a chronicler, whose prejudices are avowedly in favour of the wazir, as the governor’s love for pleasure and a state of confusion and disorderliness in the suba.
(77) Akhbarat FS, 4th R. Y., II, p. 54.
(78) Ibid., p. 62.
Page 29 of 32
137The Changing Position of the Governor
(79) Thus, in September 1716, the gurzbardars (mace-bearers) who were carrying a khilat (robes of honour) and some precious presents for Nasir Khan, the governor of Kabul, were robbed of their belongings somewhere near Lahore. Thereafter the gurzbardars were directed by the centre to realize as compensation from Abd-us-Samad Khan the khilat and the presents and carry them to Kabul. To the subsequent petition of the gurzbardars, the governor reacted as follows: ‘If His Majesty orders me, I pay the compensation from my own house, otherwise the presents, etc., were plundered in the territory of the faujdari of the sons of the late Amir Khan and (hence) they should be interrogated for it.’ Subsequently, Amin Khan was directed to write to Abd-us- Samad that his response to the gurzbardars’ petition was a lame excuse and that as governor he was responsible for whatever happened in the suba. He should therefore recover the stolen goods or do something in compensation. Akhbarat, FS, 5th R. Y., II, p. 74.
(80) Akhbarat, 5th R. Y., II, pp. 3 and 13. According to convention, imperial orders to high officials in the province were normally communicated through either the wazir or the mir bakhshi. The hasb-ul-hukms to Abd-us-Samad Khan therefore were usually despatched through Saiyid Abdullah Khan, the wazir, and Samsam-ud-Daulah, the deputy mir bakhshi, for the mir bakhshi (Husain Ali Khan) had left for the Deccan. In the existing situation, the emperor probably realized the futility of despatching hasb-ul-hukms to Abd-us-Samad Khan through either the wazir or Samsam-ud-Daulah. Muhammad Amin Khan therefore was ordered to intercede and urge the governor of the Punjab to immediately send the effects of Isa Khan to the court. This also shows the extent of the influence of court politics on the functioning of provincial government.
(81) Ibid., 6th R. Y., I, pp. 203, 213; II, p. 139 (14 April 1717).
(82) Even Jammu was once taken away from Zakariya Khan. But the new faujdar failed in administering the area and Zakariya Khan had to be reinstated. Earlier, in 1715, the appointment of Ikhlas Khan walashahi had imposed a check on Zakariya Khan. Akhbarat, FS, 4th R. Y., I, p. 47; 6th R.Y., II, p. 115. Walashahis, literally of the exalted king, have been described as the body-guard or defenders of the imperial person. Cf. W. Irvine, Army of the Indian Moghuls, pp. 43–4.
(83) Saif-ud-Din Barha (appointed on 2 March 1713) and Abd-un-Nabi Barha (appointed on 16 March 1713) were faujdar of Gujarat and qiladar of Lahore respectively, while the faujdari of Emanabad was held by Saiyid Iradatmand Khan (appointed on 26 February 1713 on the recommendation of the wazir) and following him by Khiradmand Khan of Hansi (appointed on 24 September 1717), an associate of Samsam-ud-Daulah.
Sa‘adat Kar Khan, kotwal of Lahore, (appointed on 15 April 1713), Altaf Khan, qiladar of Kangra, (appointed on 30 June 1713) being Indian Muslims had links
Page 30 of 32
138The Changing Position of the Governor
with the wazir and Samsam-ud-Daulah. Ghulam Husain, faujdar of kalbhalak (appointed on 5 May 1714), Muhammad Husain, amin faujdar of Sialkot (appointed on 13 July 1714), and Ikhlas Khan, deputy faujdar of Jammu, all walashahis, were under the influence of Samsam-ud-Daulah who held the office of the bakhshi of the walashahis. Akhbarat, FS, 1st R. Y., I, pp. 127, 170 and 322; 2nd R. Y., I, p. 147; 3rd R. Y., I, pp. 103, 210; 4th R. Y., I, p. 47; II, p. 207; 6th R. Y., I, pp. 203 and 286; II, p. 139; Kamwar, ff. 329a and 341a; T. Muzaffari, f. 209; T. Muhammadi, p. 84.
We have information in our sources about three bakhshi waqai‘nigars of the Punjab in Farrukh Siyar’s reign, namely Qasim Khan (appointed on 2 May 1715), Ashraf Khan (appointed on 28 March 1716). None of them seems to have an amicable association with Abd-us-Samad Khan. Qasim Khan and Mahdi Yar Khan were Iranis and Ashraf Khan was an Indian Muslim. Akhbarat, FS, 4th R. Y., p. 36 (Sarkar Collection, National Library, Calcutta); 5th R. Y., I, p. 49; 7th R. Y., p. 8; T. Muhammadi, pp. 24, 29, 56 and 65.
(84) Dil Diler Khan (16 September 1714 to 29 October 1715), Khan Zaman son of Mun‘im Khan (30 October 1715 to 3 November 1716), Aqidat Khan son of Amir Khan (1 December 1716 to October 1719) and Saiyid Hasan Khan Barha (October 1719 to 13 November 1720) deputized for the wazir in Multan. Kamwar, ff. 346b. 350a.
(85) Kamwar, f. 376a.
(86) Ibid., ff. 347a, 351b, 352a and 365a; T. Muhammadi, p. 44.
(87) Ibid., ff. 347b, 359b and 360a. Sarbuland Khan’s appointment in Kabul was also a result of the wazir’s compromise with him and formed pan of Saiyid Abdullah’s scheme to isolate the emperor from every section of the nobility. For details see Satish Chandra, Parties and Politics, p. 138; W. Irvine, Later Moghuls, I, pp. 345–7.
(88) Ibid., ff. 342a, 345a, 354 and 371a.
(89) Qasim, f. 103a. In the wake of disturbed conditions in the late-seventeenth and early-eighteenth centuries, Husain Khan Khweshgi had consolidated his position in the Punjab. He expanded his zamindari at the expense of numerous weak zamindars. In the reign of Farrukh Siyar he even drove out some of the amils of the jagirdars from his territory. Compare Warid, p. 289; K. K., II, p. 861 and M. U., I, pp. 602–3.
(90) K. K., II, p. 862; Kamwar, f. 370a; M. U., I, pp. 602–3; T. Muzaffari, f. 131a and Siyar, II, p. 425.
(91) K. K., II, p. 865.
Page 31 of 32
139The Changing Position of the Governor
(92) Compare Shivdas, f. 54b. Saiyid Abdullah Khan, the wazir’s arzdasht sent to the emperor after the assassination of Saiyid Husain Ali Khan. For the details of Nizam-ul-Mulk’s revolt against the centre and the subsequent march of the emperor and Husain Ali Khan towards the Deccan and the latter’s assasination at the hands of the Turani nobles, see W. Irvine, Later Moghuls, II, pp. 16–56; Satish Chandra, Parties and Politics, pp. 154–62. As for the Punjab we have no evidence for Abd-us-Samad Khan’s revolt apart from his conflict with the diwan and the wazir and the consequent breakdown of law and order in the province. Saiyid Abdullah Khan might have referred to Abd-us-Samad Khan’s march against Husain Khan Khweshgi, a friend of the Saiyids, as the governor’s revolt.
(93) Ibid., ff. 50b–53a.
(94) Ibid., ff. 53.
(95) Abd-us-Samad Khan presented to the emperor 1000 muhrs and Rs 1000 while his son offered 100 muhrs. Both were reciprocated by the emperor with special khilats and other favours. On 22 November, Abd-us-Samad Khan’s associates, Saiyid Mahmud Khan and Faizullah Khan received khilats from the emperor. In January 1721, in the wake of the celebrations of victory over Saiyid Abdullah Khan, Abd-us-Samad Khan offered Rs 1,00,000 to the emperor. After about a three-month stay in Delhi, on 9 February 1721, Abd-us-Samad Khan left for Lahore. Kamwar, ff. 376 and 377a; K. K., II, pp. 935–6 and 938; Shivdas, ff. 63a and 67a; Siyar, II, pp. 444 and 451. Saiyid Mahmud Khan of Sonepat, died in 1724. Cf. T. Muhammadi, p. 51. We could not identify Faizullah Khan. T. Muhammadi, however, notices two Faizullah Khans in our period, pp. 49, 93 and 101.
(96) Although Kauramal and Lakhpat Rai have been mentioned as diwans of the Punjab, they, like Atma Ram in Awadh and Rai Durlabh in Bengal, were totally subordinated to the governor and were practically little more than assistants to the governor in both personal and provincial financial matters.
(97) At the beginning of 1717, for example, in response to a farman asking him to join the Jat campaigns, Abd-us-Samad Khan arrived at the court and exchanged the usual rich presents with emperor. Kamwar, ff. 353a and 354a; M. M., f. 76a.
(98) See above, footnote 80.
(99) Akhbarat, FS, 4th R. Y., II, p. 62.
Page 32 of 32