309Notes: (1) Cf. Kamwar, f. 380b, Miral-ul-Haqaiq, ff. 248b, 357a and 413b.
(2) For details see W. Irvine, Later Moghuls, II, pp. 52–62; Satish Chandra, Parties and Politics, p. 161; also see Kamwar, ff. 373b, 374a and 374b.
(3) Mirat-ul-Haqaiq, ff. 248b and 350b; Bahar-i Khayal, Rampur MS., pp. 46–7; Kamwar, f. 381a.
(4) This is illustrated from the case of Sarbuland Khan, the governor of Gujarat. Sarbuland Khan’s deputy, Shuja‘at Khan, a protege of Haidar Quli Khan, had utterly failed against Nizam-ul-Mulk’s man, Hamid Khan and the Marathas in Gujarat. By the beginning of 1725 Qamar-ud-Din Khan who represented the interests of Nizam-ul-Mulk and the ‘Mughal group’ at the court began to persuade and pressurize the emperor to remove Sarbuland Khan from Gujarat, and appoint instead his own son-in-law, Ghazi-ud-Din Khan, son of Nizam-ul- Mulk. Subsequently, Sarbuland Khan was divested of his mansab. This was alarming for Roshan-ud-Daulah and Haidar Quli, for Nizam-ul-Mulk’s control over Gujarat meant consolidation of his power as an independent governor in the Deccan. Burhan-ul-Mulk who had earned much acclaim from the emperor as the governor of Awadh was thus invited to plead the case of Sarbuland Khan. On 15 September 1725, Burhan-ul-Mulk along with Roshan-ud-Daulah and Haidar Quli approached the emperor and requested him to reinstate Sarbuland Khan to his earlier mansab so that he might leave for Gujarat to personally lead the campaign against Hamid Khan and the Marathas. Qamar-ud-Din Khan, being the wazir, resented Burhan-ul-Mulk’s intercession. On 13 October 1725, a verbal dispute took place between him and Qamar-ud-Din Khan. Haidar Quli’s sudden death and Burhan-ul-Mulk’s absence from the court, however, gave the wazir an opportunity to secure Gujarat for Ghazi-ud-Din Khan in July 1727. Burhan-ul-
Page 32 of 52
310The Imperial Court, the New Subadars and the Region
Mulk then rushed to the help of his friend and, very soon, on 14 August 1727, this appointment was cancelled in favour of Sarbuland Khan. Mirat-ul-Haqaiq, ff. 357b 361a and 441b.
(5) The case of Kazim Beg Khan, son of Haidar Quli Khan following the death of the latter in April 1727, is an example. Burhan-ul-Mulk initially wanted Kazim Beg Khan to inherit the office of the mir atish which his father had held. On the other hand Samsam-ud-Daulah wanted the office for his brother, Muzaffar Khan. Since Burhan-ul-Mulk’s suggestion was also opposed by the wazir and the diwani khalisa, Muzuffar Khan succeeded in obtaining the office. Muzuffar Khan also occupied Haidar Quli’s mansion, dispossessing the deceased’s relations. Compare Miral-ul-Haqaiq, f. 413b; Bahar-i-Khayal, pp. 46–7; T. Muhammadi, p. 62.
(6) Ausaf, ff.41b–42a.
(7) Muzaffar Khan then got the subadari of Ajmer and the faujdari of Narnaul and Sambhar while Khwaja Sa‘d-ud-Din Khan who had replaced him as the mir atish was retained in his existing office. T. Hindi, ff. 257b–258a.
(8) For details see W. Irvine, Later Moghuls, II, pp. 144–54, 169–96 and 242.
(9) Akhbarat FS, 3rd R. Y., II, p. 78.
(10) Saiyid Mazhar Husain Korwi, Tarikh-i Benaras, p. 56.
(11) Karam Ali, Muzaffarnama, Patna MS., ff. 1lb and 25b–26a.
(12) Akhbarat, FS, 4th R. Y., I, p. 24.
(13) Information about Azamgarh in the following four paragraphs is based on the manuscript copies of a local history of the family of the Rajas of Azamgarh. This history was originally written by one Girdhari, a member of the local Kayastha qanungo family, in 1801. Girdhari claims to have drawn on the qanungo papers of his ancestors for his work. The title of his work is Intizam-al-Raj or Intizam-i Raj-i Azamgarh, as the cataloguer puts it. But there is little on intizam (administration) in the book. It is a straight political and genealogical history in a very involved and highly ornate Persian. The prose is interrupted by poetic interpolations, sometimes from the classical Persian poets and often Girdhari’s own compositions. A manuscript copy of the work (No. 238) is preserved in the University Library, Edinburgh.
Later in the second half of the nineteenth, century, two other histories of Azamgarh (actually based on Girdhari’s work) were compiled. These are in simple, direct Persian prose style. A copy of one of these titled Sarguzasht-i Rajaha-i Azamgarh by Saiyid Amir Ali Rizwi is preserved in the Edinburgh University Library (No. 237) while the other titled Tarikh-i Azamgarh is in the
Page 33 of 52
311The Imperial Court, the New Subadars and the Region
India Office Library, London (I.0.4038). The author of the I.0. manuscript, is not known, individual references are from the I.0. manuscript, as the other two MSS of Edinburgh are not foliated. Much of the information contained in these manuscripts is available in the District Gazetteers of Azamgarh. Mr Najmul Raza Rizwi of Allahabad University has also based his brief narrative of the Azamgarh royal family on these manuscripts. Compare PIHC 41st Session, Bombay, 1980, pp. 239–44.
(14) Tarikh-i Azamgarh, I.0.4038, ff. 14b–17a.
(15) Ibid., ff. 15a and 26b.
(16) Ibid., f. 26b.
(17) Ibid., ff. 27.
(18) Qazi Muhammad Sharif of Bhadohin, Tarikh-i Bhadohin, I.0., 437.
(19) Ibid., ff. 9, 11, 14b, 15a, 16b, 17b and 19a.
(20) Ibid., ff. 21b, 26 and 30b.
(21) Ibid., ff. 37b–38. For Lalganj and Munnuganj see Ghulam Ali Khan, Shah Alam Noma, edited by Al-Mamun Suhruwardi and Aqa Muhammad Kazim Shirazi, Bib. Ind., Calcutta, 1874, p. 87.
(22) Ghulam Husain Khan, Zikr-us-Siyar, ff. 22a, 26b–27a and 31–7. For a comprehensive study of the growth of the towns, grain markets and their link to the agricultural production in the Benaras region in the later half of the eighteenth century see C. A. Bayly, Rulers, Townsmen and Bazaars Chs. 2, 3, 4, 5. See also K. P. Mishra, Banaras in Transition, 1738–1795, New Delhi, 1975, pp. 93–167.
(23) Zikr-us-Siyar, ff. 65b, 70b and 71a. The descendants of Gopaldas and Gowaldas survived to continue as leading mahajans of Benaras in the lateeighteenth century. C. A. Bayly, ‘Indian Merchants in Traditional Setting, 1780– 1830’, in Clive Dewey and A. G. Hopkins, The Imperial Impact: Studies in the Economic History of Africa and India, London, 1978, pp. 171–93; K. P. Mishra, Banaras in Transition, pp. 172–4.
(24) C. A. Bayly, Rulers, Townsmen and Bazaars, Chapter 2.
(25) I.0., 4491
(26) Kamboh, f. 45a.
(27) Tuhfa, ff. 10a–11b; Kamboh, f. 65b.
Page 34 of 52
312The Imperial Court, the New Subadars and the Region
(28) I.0., 4491 for increase from 49,246/7½ in 1146 Fasli to Rs 75,000 in 1147 with a change from the amili of one Abd-ur-Rahim to the ta‘ahhud of one Mir Abdullah. It may be noted that Abd-ur-Rahim collected (or submitted from his collections) only Rs 17,000 in 1146 Fasli.
(29) For Ain’s figures see Ibid., Vol. II (Jarrett), pp. 173–6, 184 and 293–6. For eighteenth-century figures compare I.0., 4485, 4487 and 4489. The break up of the figures for the Moradabad-Bareilly and Benaras regions in our sources are as follows:
Jama in dams in the Jama in dams in the early and mid-18th Region Ain century Sarkar 6,69,41,431 21,16,82,068 Sambhal ” Badaon 3,48,17,063 14,18,25,000 ” Jaunpur 5,63,94,107 9,27,02,303 ” Ghazipur 1,34,31,308 3,42,30,204 ” Chunar 58,10,654 2,88,36,578 ” Benaras 88,69,315 1,93,38,895 (30) I.0., 4489 and 4485. However, the fact that the hasil figures in most of the cases included not only the collections of the current year but also the arrears of the past and the repayment of the loans (taqawi) should not be overlooked while considering the relationship these figures bore to the assessed revenues.
(31) Compare C. A. Bayly, Rulers, Townsmen and Bazaars, Chapter 2.
(32) Compare P.J. Marshall, ‘Economic and Political Expansion: The Case of Oudh’ Modern Asian Studies, Vol. 9, No. 4, 1975, pp. 465–82; Tom G. Kessinger in his article on the northern Indian Economy (1757–1857) also notes expansion of production and trade in the region in response to the stimulus which came from the demand for export goods. Cf. Dharma Kumar and Meghnad Desai (ed.), The Cambridge Economic History of India, Vol. 2: c. 1757−c. 1970, pp. 242–70. Almost the whole northern Indian region, east of Delhi seems to have responded positively to this stimulus. For some evidence about Aligarh and Etah regions, see S. Nurul Hasan’s comments on ‘Du Jardin Papers’, The Indian Historical Review, Vol. V, Nos 1–2, July 1978-January 1979.
(33) He held the governorship of Allahabad since November 1720, Cf. Kamwar, f. 376b; Shivdas, f. 58a; T. Muzaffari, f. 123b.
(34) Since the reign of Farrukh Siyar, he held eight parganas in Bundelkhand in his jagir. Cf. Ijad, f. 80b.
Page 35 of 52
313The Imperial Court, the New Subadars and the Region
(35) Not infrequently Muhammad Khan and Aziz Khan Chaghta of Shahabad visited the court together. Cf. Kamwar, f. 347b; Aziz Khan Chaghta whom we have noticed in Chapter 2 as governor of Awadh was the son of Bahadur Khan, son of Darya Khan Rohilla and held a rank of 7000/7000 when he died in 1723. T. Muhammadi, p. 49.
(36) See Chapter 6, section on the madad-i ma‘ash holders.
(37) As the entire land of the Bundelas except the sarkar of Kalpi lay within the territory of Allahabad, Muhammad Khan had to contain Satarsal, the recalcitrant Bundela chief. All the eight parganas of his jagir in Bundelkhand were under the control of the rebel. In 1724 and 1727 he led two series of expeditions in Bundelkhand. The first of these was inconclusive while the second which would otherwise have ended in victory was foiled by the Maratha support to the Bundelas and also by the hostile acts of Samsam-ud-Daulah. Compare Khujasta, f. 18b.
(38) Muhammad Khan wrote to his vakil at the court that he was not in favour of any concessions to the Bundelas. For the sake of Burhan-ul-Mulk, however, he was prepared to accept the latter’s recommendation for them ‘provided Satarsal and his sons Udai Narain and Jagat Raj presented themselves to the emperor and sincerely sought his pardon and gave in writing that they would no more obstruct to the establishment of the imperial thanas in their territory … they should also be content’, he added, ‘with the mahals bestowed upon them by the emperor.’ Khujasta, 208.
(39) W. Irvine, Later Moghuls, II, p. 240.
(40) Samsam-ud-Daulah reportedly promised a reward to Satarsal, if he brought the head of the Bangash chief to the emperor. On the other hand the wazir was not only a strong supporter of Muhammad Khan, but there was also no love lost between him and Burhan-ul-Mulk’s friends. This is illustrated from the stand the wazir and Roshan-ud-Daulah took on the occasion of the shoe-sellers riot. Cf. W. Irvine, Later Moghuls, II, pp. 257–62.
(41) See Chapter 6, section on jagir administration.
(42) We do not know the exact date of Burhan-ul-Mulk’s fourth visit to the court. It is, however, certain that he was present at the court in 1730. Early in 1730, the Persian envoy, Ali Mardan Khan Shamuli was received and then introduced at the court by Burhan-ul-Mulk. (Ashub, p. 24). As he was engaged in the encounters against the zamindar of Chachendi in the middle of 1729, the beginning of 1730 or the end of 1729 can be safely said to have been the date of Burhan-ul-Mulk’s fourth visit to Delhi.
Page 36 of 52
314The Imperial Court, the New Subadars and the Region
(43) Tabsira, f. 89a and Sharaif, p. 264. According to Dr A. L. Srivastava these sarkars came under Burhan-ul-Mulk around 1728. But unfortunately he cites no evidence for this. Cf. A. L. Srivastava, First Two Nawabs, p. 42.
(44) Sarkar Kora was in the jagir of Qamar-ud-Din Khan. Earlier Jan Nisar Khan whose sister was married to him and had held the faujdari of the sarkar had been killed in an encounter against Bhagwant. The wazir, therefore, had sent his nephew, Azimullah Khan, with a strong army to chastise the rebel. Azimullah had also been made faujdar of the sarkar. Outnumbered, the frightened Bhagwant had run away and hid himself in the jungle. But Azimullah’s success had proved short-lived. For immediately after his return to Delhi, his deputy, Khwajim Beg Khan had been put to death by the rebel. It was at this juncture that Sarbuland Khan was replaced by Muhammad Khan Bangash who had accompanied the wazir in the letter’s march against Bhagwant. The fortress of the rebel was occupied and preparations were then being made to pursue him into the territory of the Bundelas where he had taken refuge. Before the expedition was undertaken, the wazir had to rush back to Delhi to foil a combination against him between Samsam-ud-Daulah, his arch-enemy and Burhan-ul-Mulk. Muhammad Khan was left to settle the matter. For the details of Bhagwant Singh’s revolt and the subsequent expeditions see Siyar, II, pp. 467–8; Shakir, ff. 27; Ma‘dan-us- Sa‘adat, f. 79a; Ausaf, f. 20a; A. L. Srivastava, First Two Nawabs, pp. 44–6; W. Irvine, Later Moghuls, II, p. 277.
(45) Khujasta, 283–84; Aziz-ul-Qulub, f. 96b; Siyar, II, p. 967; Shakir, f. 27b; A. L. Srivastava, First Two Nawabs, p. 47. It is interesting to note that the deputy of Burhan-ul-Mulk collected 25 to 30 lakhs of rupees from the sarkar of Kora. Cf. Hadiqat, p. 679. The amount was more than six or seven times higher than the assessed revenue of the sarkar in the late-sixteenth century. Compare Ain, II (Jarrett), p. 178.
(46) Compare Khizana-i Amira, p. 74; Jam-i Jahan Numa, II, p. 22. Tabsira, ff. 93b–94a. According to Jam-i Jahan Numa, Burhan-ul-Mulk conquered these sarkars.
(47) Khujasta, ff. 18. Earlier in November 1735, Muhammad Khan managed to get the governorship of Allahabad, but within a few months, on 5 May 1736 Sarbuland Khan was reinstated. Burhan-ul-Mulk replaced Sarbuland Khan.
(48) Tuhfa f. 3a.
(49) Compare, for example, Akhbarat, BS, 2nd R. Y., p. 77; 3rd R. Y., p. 213; 4th R. Y., p. 120; FS, 3rd R. Y., I, p. 192; II, pp. 4, 22, 23 and 157; 4th R. Y., II, pp. 87, 134, 143, 205 and 227.
(50) Akhbarat, FS, 3rd R. Y., II, p. 268.
Page 37 of 52
315The Imperial Court, the New Subadars and the Region
(51) Ibid., FS, 4th R. Y., II, pp. 91–2, 120 and 130.
(52) Tuhfa ff. 4a, 10a–11a, 14a–16a; Kamboh, ff. 5a, 6a, 16b–17a, 215–24a, 54b– 57a.
(53) Akhbarat, FS, 2nd R. Y., II, pp. 61–2.
(54) Murid Khan, the noble in charge of conducting the treasury, is reported to have written to Burhan-ul-Mulk’s deputy, Safdar Jang ‘due to its uncertainty and insecurity it is better and safer to abandon the imperial highway (shahrah) in favour of the road of suba Awadh.’ Maktubat, pp. 15 and 26.
(55) Compare Maktubat, p. 8, Safdar Jang’s arzdasht to the emperor in response to a farman and a hasb-ul-hukm from the wazir, p. 98, Safdar Jang’s letter to the governor of Bihar apprising him of the authority that a hasb-ul-hukm from Samsam-ud-Daulah had invested him in this regard to send his own man to Bihar to escort the treasury. In one case, however, the treasury was carried via Jaunpur to Qanauj where the deputy of Raja of Bhadawar waited to escort it further to Agra, Maktubat, pp. 44 and 60–1, Safdar Jang’s letters to the wazir and Burhanul-Mulk.
(56) T. Muhammadi, p. 49.
(57) No progress could be made in the operations till the Bhadauria Raja was sent to Hindu Singh to persuade him to make a compromise. Gopal Singh impressed upon the Chandela chief the inexpediency of coming into conflict with the Mughal nobles. He advised him to vacate the fortress for three days for the sake of Burhan-ul-Mulk’s prestige and promised him to strike a compromise after the passage of three days when he could reoccupy it. As Gopal Singh pledged his word on a solemn oath, Hindu Singh accepted his advice and left the fortress with his family and belongings. In violation of his word, Gopal Singh at the instance of Burhan-ul-Mulk took possession of the zamindari and fortress of the Chandela chief. T. Hindi, ff. 258–59a.
A. L. Srivastava writes that the area constituted a debatable frontier of the three provinces of Agra, Allahabad and Awadh and that the estate of Hindu Singh passed into the hands of Burhan-ul-Mulk (First Two Nawabs, p. 44). But unfortunately these statements are not supported by any contemporary evidence.
(58) See below the section ‘Safdar Jang and the Rohillas of the Moradabad- Bareilly Region’.
(59) In one of his letters to Safdar Jang, Muhammad Khan Bangash writes, —‘With the grace of God our pure love and conciliation of hearts is so strong that even a fraction of it is beyond description. It is our bounden duty to further the foundation of our unity. For the sake of these stages [of friendship] we
Page 38 of 52
316The Imperial Court, the New Subadars and the Region
should assist each other when needed. That is to say that God forbid if there arises any commotion in the districts under your officers, consolidation of the bases of our mutual affection will take place by despatching the troops from this side. And in case the dust of storm raises its head in this district, you shall gracefully depute your officials to help us. Earlier there were certain doubts and suspicions between me and the late Nawab Burhan-ul-Mulk. Now the hearts have been so much conciliated that there remained no difference between us. From this side you should be completely comforted and assured.’ Aziz-ul-Qulub, ff. 57b–58a.
(60) Compare Aziz-ul-Qulub, f. 55b. Safdar Jang accepted the invitation but since he had to rush to the court, he abandoned his plan to march through Farrukhabad. Muhammad Khan then sent his chelas, Samsher Khan and Afzal Khan to communicate the message of his good-will to Safdar Jang. Yet, when he heard that Safdar Jang had crossed the Ganga, Muhammad Khan wanted to proceed in person and meet the Nawab. Owing to his illness and old-age, however, he could not move out of Farrukhabad. Saiyid Ataullah was subsequently sent to the camp of Safdar Jang.
William Irvine however does not take notice of the evidence of the Aziz-ul-Qulub and suggests that relations between Lucknow and Farrukhabad remained strained even under Safdar Jang. According to him, in 1743 Safdar Jang’s march to Delhi was intercepted at Bilhaur by Samsher Khan, who was in charge of Muhammad Khan’s jagirs there. Safdar Jang’s protest against Muhammad Khan over Samsher Khan’s act brought an equally strongly worded and hostile response from the Bangash chief. Safdar Jang then ordered an encounter which was averted after persuasion by his friends. They suggested that ‘if you win the battle it will hardly bring credit to you, for Shamsher Khan is an ordinary amil and if you lose the odium will ever remain with you.’ Cf. William Irvine, ‘The Bangash Nawabs of Farrukhabad’, Journal of Asiatic Society of Bengal, Vol. 47, No. 1, 1878, pp. 259–383.
(61) Siyar, III, p. 875.
(62) Maktubat, pp. 108 and 124. Safdar Jang’s letters to Abd-ul-Majid Khan and Jawahar Khan regarding the payment of the revenues of their jagirs in sarkar Qanauj.
(63) Siyar, III, 874; Shakir, ff. 60b–61a; Tabsira, f. 254b; Hadiqat, p. 141 and Imad, pp. 44–5; jam-i Jahan Numa, II, pp. 48–9.
(64) For a decade, escheat, which though in principle a part of the Mughal mansabdari system had rarely been applied, had been suggested as a possible cure for the financial ills of the empire. The suggestion however, came from the nobles in relation to the property of their rivals and reflected the infighting among the nobility more than any desire, on their part, to effect financial
Page 39 of 52
317The Imperial Court, the New Subadars and the Region
reforms. In 1739–40 Amir Khan advised the emperor to confiscate the jagir and properties of Badr ud-Din Khan, son of Qamar-ud-Din Khan, which could not be carried out due to resistance by the wazir and Nizam-ul-Mulk. Cf. Shakir, f. 77a.
(65) For details see W. Irvine, ‘Bangash Nawabs of Farrukhabad’.
(66) For some details of the circumstances leading to the rise of the Rohilla power in Moradabad see Muzaffar Alam, ‘Zamindar Uprisings and the Emergence of the Rohilla Power in Sarkar Moradabad’, PIHC, 38th Session, 1977, pp. 221–31.
(67) The zamindar of Takiapur, pargana Haveli Moradabad was, for example, an associate (mutawassil) of Safdar Jang. In one of his letters to the amil of Moradabad, Safdar Jang recommended the case of the zamindar who was then being harassed by the other zamindars of the pargana. Maktubat, p. 180.
(68) Ali Muhammad Khan had met Safdar Jang at Bareilly during one of his visits to the town. Since then Ali Muhammad Khan seems to have consistently intimated the governor of Awadh about his own affairs. He had also taken utmost care in preventing the exiles of Awadh from entering his dominion. Ibid., pp. 148–9.
(69) In one of his letters Safdar Jang replied to Ali Muhammad’s arzi wherein the latter told him about recent developments in Moradabad. The governor of Awadh advised him to settle the dispute amicably. Ibid., p. 149. Ali Muhammad Khan had built a fairly big zamindari and almost all the jagirdars in and around Moradabad had farmed out their jagirs to him. But apart from the wazir, a few of his associates and some big nobles the other jagirdars received little from him regularly. Ali Muhammad’s association with the wazir emboldened him to misappropriate the revenues of the jagirs of his (wazir’s) rivals as well. This brought him into conflict with Amir Khan in 1727. But, in the wake of Nadir Shah’s invasion, he refused to pay the revenue to the wazir too. For details see M. Alam, ‘Zamindar uprisings and the Emergence of the Rohilla Power in sarkar Moradabad’.
(70) Hadiqat, p. 139; Badi‘, 193; Siyar, III, 854, for the wazir’s recommendation in 1738 for a mansab of 5000/5000 for Ali Muhammad Khan.
(71) Shakir, f. 77b; A. L. Srivastava, First Two Nawabs, pp. 105–6.
(72) In 1727, Amir Khan’s amil in pargana Mu‘azzam Nagar alias Manuna was killed in an encounter with Ali Muhammad. Hadiqat, p. 139; Jam-i Jahan Numa, II, p. 29.
(73) For the details of the campaign see A. L. Srivastava, First Two Nawabs, pp. 103–9. Jadunath Sarkar, Fall of the Mughal Empire I, pp. 36–41. Neither of them,
Page 40 of 52
318The Imperial Court, the New Subadars and the Region
however, discusses some of the crucial developments which took place during the campaign.
(74) Hadiqat, p. 140. W. Irvine, Army of the Indian Moghuls, pp. 291–4 quoting from Khush-hal Chand.
(75) Safarnama, pp. 2–3 and 72.
(76) Initially the real objective of the march was kept secret from the wazir and his dependants. See Ibid., p. 2. The author who was in the service of the wazir describes the aim of the outing as ‘a pleasure hunt outing in the wake of which the emperor had thought of reprimanding Ali Muhammad Khan who had acquired some strength and an air of insubordination’. See also W. Irvine, Army of the Indian Moghuls, pp. 291–4.
Safdar Jang, however, did not fail to appreciate the implications of the wazir’s open opposition to his move. He kept up his efforts to secure his agreement to his plan. On 5 March, when the emperor was staying near Loni, Safdar Jang is reported to have gone to the wazir and apologized for whatever had happened in the past. The wazir’s visit to Safdar Jang and a luncheon in his honour at the latter’s residence followed a few days after. On 26 March 1745, the wazir’s son, Intizam-ud-Daulah, who had arrived from Jaipur was received near Garh Muktesar by Amir Khan. On 8 April, near Shahbazpur, when the Qazilbash units of Safdar Jang’s army plundered the adjoining villages, the wazir lodged a strong protest and wanted to depute an armed contingent to protect the fields and villages against such outrages. Safdar Jang, the mir atish, did accordingly. The Qazilbash offenders were severely punished and two of them were whipped to death. Shahbazpur and the adjoining villages were in the jagir of Sani Quli Khan, the foster-brother of the wazir. Safarnama, pp. 5, 27 and 34.
(77) The wazir had hoped that being an Afghan and a rival of Safdar Jang in the region, Qaim Khan Bangash would effectively present the case of the Rohillas to the emperor. On 22 April 1745 when Qaim Khan arrived at the court he was enthusiastically welcomed by the wazir and the other Mughal nobles. Qaim Khan was, however, won over by Amir Khan. Safdar Jang thus took over the negotiations with the Rohilla chief, so far handled by the wazir, himself. The terms and conditions of the compromise were first discussed between Amir Khan and Qaim Khan and then only were they put before the wazir. Ibid., pp. 51–2.
(78) Ibid, pp. 55–6.
(79) Compare Imad, p. 43; Maktubat, p. 180.
(80) For the details of these events see A. L. Srivastava, First Two Nawabs, pp. 109 and 139; Jadunath Sarkar, Fall of the Mughal Empire I, pp. 41 and 237.
Page 41 of 52
319The Imperial Court, the New Subadars and the Region
(81) Compare Siyar, II, p. 475 which extols Burhan-ul-Mulk’s bravery for his later policy of resistance to the Marathas ‘not withstanding the fact that the suba lay even beyond the Ganga towards the north’.
(82) This happened towards the end of 1735 when it was rumoured that Rup Singh, the son of the zamindar of Kora, Bhagwant Singh, who had been defeated and killed at the hands of Burhan-ul-Mulk’s army at the beginning of the same year had taken refuge in Bundelkhand and was trying to enlist the support of the Marathas to recover the zamindari of his deceased father. A. L. Srivastava, First Two Nawabs, pp. 51–2; Jadunath Sarkar, Fall of the Mughal Empire, I, p. 160.
(83) Compare Satish Chandra, Parties and Politics, pp. 210–17.
(84) Compare Shakir, f. 38b; Siyar, II, 475; T. Muzaffari, f. 206a and T. Hindi, f. 258b, for Anirudh’s father, Gopal Singh’s assistance to Burhan-ul-Mulk in the latter’s campaigns against the Chandela zamindars of Qanauj, on the southwestern borders of Awadh.
(85) According to A. L. Srivastava the march was in response to an imperial order which directed Burhan-ul-Mulk to cooperate with the wazir and the mir bakshi. First Two Nawabs, p. 53. It is not possible to accept his opinion. For the Persian sources he quotes to support it do not mention the farman. Cf. Shakir, f. 39a, Siyar, II, 475. On the other hand some other sources clearly suggest it to have been undertaken without an imperial order. Cf. Tabsira, f. 94a; Khizana-i Amira, p. 43; Imad, p. 16.
(86) Khizana-i Amira, p. 44; A. L. Srivastava, First Two Nawabs, p. 54; W. Irvine, Later Moghuls, II, p. 287.
(87) There is more than one version of Samsam-ud-Daulah’s letter to Burhan-ul- Mulk. According to Imad (p. 17), for example, Samsam-ud-Daulah reproached Burhan-ul-Mulk for marching against the Marathas and directed him to immediately retreat. According to Siyar (II, p. 476) Samsam-ud-Daulah grew jealous of Burhan-ul-Mulk’s achievement and wrote to him to wait till he arrived to embark upon a joint expedition against the Marathas.
(88) The three terms that the author of Imad-us-Sa‘adat (p. 17) cites on the basis of the news that circulated among the people and also among certain nobles were as follows: (1) The Marathas would never lay claims to the chauth of Awadh so long as the province remained under the control of Burhan-ul-Mulk or any member of his family. (2) Whenever he needed it and asked for it, the governor of Awadh would be assisted by the Marathas against his enemies. (3) The Marathas would not come to northern India without informing and consulting Burhan-ul-Mulk.
Page 42 of 52
320The Imperial Court, the New Subadars and the Region
(89) Jadunath Sarkar, Fall of the Mughal Empire, I, p. 168. Burhan-ul-Mulk was still mindfull of Anirudh’s difficulties and went out of his way to write to Muhammad Khan to assist him. Cf. Aziz-ul-Qulub, f. 126b.
(90) In 1737, for example, he sent Safdar Jang to the relief of Nizam-ul-Mulk at Bhopal. Safdar Jang along with Durjan Sal, the Raja of Kota, was however, intercepted on the way. But it is curious that it was only Durjan Sal who was later punished by Baji Rao for the unfriendly act of providing assistance to Nizam-ul-Mulk. Jadunath Sarkar, Fall of the Mughal Empire. I, p. 169.
(91) This was in March 1741 when Balaji Rao, the Maratha Peshwa reached Gwalior. Jai Singh wrote to the emperor about the inability of his sardars to withstand the Maratha warfare and sought the assistance of the nobles of the empire from the emperor. Accordingly, an imperial farman was sent to Safdar Jang. No assistance, however, could be provided to Jai Singh who then sent his envoys to open peace negotiations with the peshwa and asked him to remain contented with the chauths of the subas of Gujarat and Malwa and not to disturb any other provinces. The peshwa agreed to do so and eventually on the recommendation of Jai Singh, the deputy governorship of Malwa was conferred on Balaji Rao. See for details Jadunath Sarkar, Fall of the Mughal Empire, I, pp. 172–3.
(92) Safdar Jang received this farman at Benaras where he had gone to receive the Bengal treasury and subsequently escort it via Lucknow to Delhi. Maktubat, p. 24.
(93) Maktubat, pp. 10–12.
(94) In the beginning of 1743 the Maratha Peshwa is reported to have been in Allahabad and Benaras. In compliance with the imperial order to assist Ali Vardi Khan, Balaji Rao left for Bengal and reached Allahabad on 26 January 1743 and remained there up to 30 January. On 8 February he reached Mirzapur and on 12 February he encamped at Rampura near Benaras where he halted for two days and then crossed the river Karamnassa and entered the territory of suba Bihar. Satara Rajas and Peshwas Diaries, II, p. 242, SPD (New Series), I, L. No. 57.
(95) Maktubat, p. 104.
(96) Ibid, pp. 154–7.
(97) Aziz-ul-Qulub, ff. 55b–56a.
(98) Siyar, II, 522. According to the Siyar Safdar Jang became alarmed at Balaji’s movements, for they were hereditary enemies. Burhan-ul-Mulk had severely defeated Balaji’s father, Baji Rao and had captured a large number of the Maratha sardars who were still in the custody of Safdar Jang.
Page 43 of 52
321The Imperial Court, the New Subadars and the Region
This statement is erroneous. Burhan-ul-Mulk had never defeated Baji Rao and there is no evidence of there being any Maratha sardar in the custody of Safdar Jang in 1743.
(99) Compare V. K. Verma, ‘Subah of Allahabad, 1707–65’, unpublished PhD thesis submitted to the University of Allahabad, 1969, p. 104n.
(100) Siyar, II, p. 523.
(101) In this connection it is interesting to note that even an unsavoury incident in 1744 did not affect the peshwa’s relations with Safdar Jang. The peshwa’s envoy at the court, Mahadeva Bhat Hingane represented the Jaipur Raj as well. Sometime in February 1744 in the midst of a discourse with Safdar Jang to adjust certain matters relating to the Jaipur Raj, Mahadeva Bhat abused Safdar Jang. This led to violence between the supporters of the two leaders in which Mahadeva Bhat received fatal wounds. His son too was injured. However, relations between the peshwa and Safdar Jang, instead of deteriorating soon took a new turn towards friendship. For details of the incident see A. L. Srivastava, First Two Nawabs, p. 170.
(102) Compare G. S. Desai, (ed.), Selections from the Peshwa Daftars, II, Letters 2, 4, 9 and 13.
(103) Nasir Jang, a son of the late Nizam-ul-Mulk was secretly invited from the Deccan to dislodge Safdar Jang from the office of wazir. Realizing Safdar Jang’s strength, Nasir Jang, however, tried to humour Safdar Jang and wrote to him expressing his desire to befriend him. He suggested that Safdar Jang should not rely on the peshwa. He also sent letters to his elder brother, Ghazi-ud-Din Firoz Jang and Intizam-ud-Daulah. Bapuji Hingane, the Maratha vakil at the Mughal Court who was aware of Nasir Jang’s scheme, disclosed the contents of these letters to Safdar Jang. He also warned him to be on his guard against the deep conspiracy which, he believed to be an attempt to isolate Safdar Jang from the peshwa and thus reduce his strength at the court. Safdar Jang then posted his Maratha allies, Malhar Holkar and Jayoti Sindhia in Kota to prevent Nasir Jang from crossing the Chambal and entering Hindustan. Further, he asked Hingane to despatch a letter on his behalf to the peshwa expressing his full confidence in his friendship and instructing him to make adequate arrangements to check Nasir Jang. Subsequently, Safdar Jang’s foes at the court were frightened. The emperor visited him along with his mother and Nasir Jang was directed to immediately return to Aurangabad with a farman formally appointing him the viceroy of the Deccan. Siyar, III, p. 886; M. U., III, p. 850. Lachmi Narayan ‘Shafiq’, Ma’asir-i Asafi MS. Asiatic Society of Bengal, f. 127b; Najm-ul-Ghani in his Tarikh-i Haidrabad Deccan (Urdu), Nawalkishore, Lucknow, pp. 180–83 gives translations of some of these letters. Tarikh-i Ahmad Shah, f. 36b; Setections from Peshwa Daftars, II, letters No. 12 and 13.
Page 44 of 52
322The Imperial Court, the New Subadars and the Region
There is hardly any support in the authorities that A. L. Srivastava quotes for his opinion that Safdar Jang was disappointed by his Maratha allies and made his own arrangements to meet the threat (First Two Nawabs, pp. 130–1). Evidently, besides seeking the support of the Marathas, Safdar Jang made his own preparations as well. His summoning of Nawal Rai and instigation of Sadullah, the deputy governor of Bijapur to revolt against Nasir Jang were elements of these preparations.
(104) T. Ahmad Shahi, ff. 18b and 35; Bayan-i Waqi f. 104a; see also A. L. Srivastava First Two Nawabs, pp. 173–6.
(105) Maktubat, p. 150. The nature of the relationship between the governor of Awadh and the Bundela chief is further illustrated by the following incident. Two persons, Mir Khuda Yar Khan and Khwaja Hafizullah, were carrying some animals and goods from Delhi to Awadh. On their way at Sarai Akbarpur they were deprived of everything by robbers who apparently belonged to the Bundela country. Subsequently, Safdar Jang wrote to Jagat Raj, emphasizing his association with the victims, to recover the robbed goods and despatch them through Khwaja Muhammad Khan specially deputed by Safdar Jang for this purpose. Ibid., p. 154.
(106) Maktubat, pp. 159–60.
(107) Ibid., p. 159.
(108) Cf. Satish Chandra, Parties and Politics, pp. 206–7.
(109) Mubarak, f. 139a.
(110) Shaikh Ali ‘Hazin’ in his autobiography, Tazkirat-ul-Ahwal mentions that Nadir Shah had sent a letter and an envoy to Burhan-ul-Mulk, Cf. F. C. Balfour’s English translation, London 1830, p. 285.
(111) Shakir, f. 41b. According to the author of the Risala, Zakariya Khan, in league with Nizam-ul-Mulk and Sa’adat Khan, invited Nadir Shah and admitted him to Lahore, f. 100a.
(112) We, however, know that the governor of the Punjab was not happy with Samsam-ud-Daulah. The latter did not respond to his repeated appeals for help from the centre to defend the province. Compare Jahan Kusha-i Nadiri, p. 231.
(113) Risala, f. 106b.
(114) Compare Satish Chandra, Parties and Politics, p. 250.
Page 45 of 52
323The Imperial Court, the New Subadars and the Region
(115) Mubarak, f. 138b. In this connection may also be noted the conduct of the soldiers of Burhan-ul-Mulk in the chakla of Etawah which was the jagir of Samsam-ud-Daulah. They ravaged the chakla and its people.
(116) On the eve of the battle of Karnal, for example, Burhan-ul-Mulk, is reported to have stated his relations with the Mughal Emperor as follows: ‘I have a chronic disease and death has shown [me] its face. As I have risen from an ordinary (lit. of one horse) position to [the rank of] 7000 in the service of the Lord of the World and become master of 50,000 horsemen and a huge treasury, I wish I may sacrifice myself for His Majesty and pass away from this world cheerfully and triumphantly.’ Risaia, f. 108a.
(117) Compare A. L. Srivastava, First Two Nawabs, p. 87.
(118) Sher Jang petitioned the emperor that being the son of Burhan-ul-Mulk’s brother he was the rightful heir to the office of the deceased and that so long as he was available it would be unjust to confer it on Safdar Jang, the other claimant, who was merely a son of the late governor’s sister. On the other hand, Lachhmi Narayan, the vakil of Burhan-ul-Mulk at the court, pleaded the case of Safdar Jang on the strength of the confidence that the late governor had reposed in him. He argued that Burhan-ul-Mulk did not have full confidence in the capacity of Sher Jang nor was he well-disposed towards him. Otherwise he would not have given his favourite daughter in marriage to Safdar Jang. ‘In actuality’, he added, ‘neither Abul-Mansur nor Sher Jang have claim to the office and property of Burhan-ul-Mulk. They belong first to the emperor who might confer them on any body he pleases and according to the Sharia and the order of His Majesty to the daughter of the deceased. Imad, pp. 30–1; Hadiqat, p. 135; Siyar, II, 485; Tarikh-i Shahiya Nishapuriya, pp. 19–20.
(119) Compare K. K. Datta, Alivardi Khan and His Times, Calcutta, 1939, pp. 17– 40 for the details of the dispute between Sarfaraz Khan and Alivardi Khan.
(120) Burhan-ul-Mulk following Nadir Shah’s demand, sent Sher Jang to Awadh. Two thousand Persian troopers also accompanied him. Sher Jang later brought a sum of Rs 1,80,00,000. Compare Mubarak, f. 153b. This amount should not be mixed up, as Srivastava has done (p. 90n), with the peshkash of rupees two crore which Safdar Jang promised to pay to Nadir Shah on his appointment to the governorship of Awadh. The amount of the peshkash was brought from Awadh not by Sher Jang but by the people of diwani (yasawalan-i diwan), Cf. Durra-i Nadira, p. 198.
(121) Compare Siyar, II, 487.
(122) In one of his arzdashts to the emperor, Safdar Jang complained of financial losses and his inability to meet the challenges in the suba with the existing resources. He, therefore, asked for the grant of the jagirs of his uncle. Later
Page 46 of 52
324The Imperial Court, the New Subadars and the Region
when he knew of the wazir’s opposition, he despatched a personal letter to the wazir explaining condition in the suba and sought his help in securing the jagirs. Maktubat, pp. 19 and 48.
(123) There are three such instances which illustrate this. Since the beginning of Muhammad Shah’s reign, Qutb-ud-Din Ali Khan was in the service of Burhan-ul- Mulk and then of Safdar Jang. After his death, his son, Azam Khan was given a rank of 1000/500 and a title of Azam Ali Khan. Mir Nasir-ud-Din, a maternal cousin of Safdar Jang, came to India in the time of Burhan-ul-Mulk. His rank and position under Burhan-ul-Mulk is not known to us. Safdar Jang, however, promoted him to 3000/2000 with a title of Nasir-ud-Din Khan Haidar. Muhammad Baqar Beg, described as young, polite, useful and serviceable was given a mansab of 500. These mansabs and titles were subsequently approved by the emperor through Lachhmi Narayan. Maktubat, pp. 40 and 186.
(124) Kalyan Singh, Khulasat-ut-Tawarikh, Patna MS., f. 50a.
(125) Their protest over the plot flared up when Amir Khan suggested that the principle of escheat be employed in the case of the properties of Badr-ud-Din Khan, son of the wazir. The wazir and Nizam-ul-Mulk strongly resented the move. They left the capital and threatened to set out for the Deccan. A compromise, apparently at the suggestion of Ishaq Khan, was then arrived at. Accordingly, Nizam-ul-Mulk left for the Deccan leaving his son Ghazi-ud-Din Khan Firoz Jang as deputy mir bakshi at the court while Amir Khan had to go to Allahabad. Compare Shakir, f. 77a; Siyar, III, p. 847.
(126) Imad, p. 32; Ma‘dan, ff. 150b–151a.
(127) In 1736 when Burhan-ul-Mulk obtained the suba of Allahabad he retained Mir Rustam in his existing position. But the amount of ijara was raised from Rs 5,00,000 to Rs 8,00,000. This was resented by Mir Rustan who then began to collude with the refractory zamindars. In 1738 therefore with a view to chastinsing the Mir, Safdar Jang reached Jaunpur. The Mir was not prepared for this. He sent Mansa Ram, the sub-ijaradar and the zamindar of Banaras, to negotiate with safdar Jang on his behalf. In the meanwhile, however, sarkar Ghazipur was taken away from the Mir and was assigned to Burhan-ul-Mulk’s associate, Shaikh Abdullah. Mansa Ram, who has his own grievances against the Mir, then manipulated to get the remaining three sarkars for himself on the payment of an annual sum of Rs 13,00,000. Cf. Tuhfa, 10a–11b and Maktubat, pp. 60 and 175.
(128) Kamboh, f. 65b; see also Korwi, Tarikh-i Benaras, p. 124–5.
(129) Balwant Singh secured a farman from the emperor awarding the zamindari of the Benaras region and the title of raja. After that he is reported to have stopped the revenue to Safdar Jang. Mir Rustam tried to obtain the deputy
Page 47 of 52
325The Imperial Court, the New Subadars and the Region
governorship of Allahabad along with the faujdari of the sarkars Benaras and Jaunpur. Before he could get a response to his arzdasht, however, he was captured by Safdar Jang for his failure to clear the account of a huge sum of ijara. He was put into prison where he died. Kamboh, ff. 48b–49b and Korwi, Tarikh-i Benaras, p. 130.
(130) This is illustrated by the fact that in 1742 when Safdar Jang was ordered by the emperor to march towards Bengal to assist Ali Vardi Khan against the Marathas, Safdar Jang wanted the fort of Rohtas. Cf. A. L. Srivastava, First Two Nawabs, pp. 93–7. Again, even though he held the faujdari of the sarkar of Chunar, the fort of Chunar was not under his control. He could secure the fort only in 1744. Cf. Tarikh-i Shahiya Nishapuriya, p. 23.
(131) Siyar, III, pp. 849 and 852–53; Mubarak, f. 163b; Maktubat, p. 32. Muhammad Ali Khan’s statement that Safdar Jang obtained the office of the mir atish in lieu of his governorship of Awadh is obviously wrong. Cf. T. Muzaffari, f. 257b.
(132) Compare Ausaf, f. 42a which eulogizing Safdar Jang states that in the wake of Safdar Jang’s assumption of the office of the mir atish (topkhana-i mu‘alla) the forts of Hindustan, e.g., Akbarabad, Gwalior, Ilahabad, Chunar, Kalinjar, Rohtas, Alwar, Tijara and Daulatabad stood on a firm and stable footing.
(133) Compare Siyar, III, p. 852.
(134) ‘The fort of Delhi had been vacant after the return of Nadir Shah. Now within a day Safdar Jang filled it with his own soldiers’. Cf. Ausaf, f. 42a.
(135) Siyar, III, p. 853; Mubarak, f. 163b.
(136) Kamboh, f. 49b and Korwi, Tarikh-i Benaras, pp. 129–30.
(137) Compare Siyar, III, pp. 857–8.
(138) Since Najm-ud-Daulah was the son of the late Mutamad-ud-Daulah Muhammad Ishaq Khan I who owed his fortunes to the patronage of Amir Khan, the latter treated him and his brothers with contempt. The emperor therefore wanted to strengthen Najm-ud-Daulah’s position by negotiating a marriage between his sister and the son of Safdar Jang in 1745. Cf. Siyar, III, p. 858 and Tarikh-i Shahiya Nishpuriya, pp. 24–5.
(139) Amir Khan then grew apprehensive of the emperor’s intentions and in desperate haste even plotted to depose Muhammad Shah and place on the throne one of the princes imprisoned in the Salimgarh fort. When he failed there, he insisted on replacing the existing nazir-i darbar (chief watchman of the court) by one of his own associates. In consequence, an aggrieved servant of Amir Khan was allegedly instigated to stab him to death. (25 December 1746).
Page 48 of 52
326The Imperial Court, the New Subadars and the Region
And nobody, not even Safdar Jang, took the responsibility of performing the last rituals for the deceased immediately. Amir Khan had not paid his troopers’ salaries for fourteen months. They, therefore, immediately after his death, demanded the payment of their arrears and did not allow his burial to take place. On the fifth day apparently after the jewellery and the treasury of the deceased had been valued, Safdar Jang took it upon himself to discharge the debt. Amir Khan’s assets worth 50 to 60 lakhs of rupees were valued at Rs 1,00,000 only. Compare Siyar, III, pp. 850–1 and 860–1.
(140) Siyar, p. 860. Najm-ud-Daulah succeeded Yahya Khan who was appointed to the office of the diwan-i khalisa in 1744–5 after the dismissal of Abd-ul-Majid Khan Kashmiri. He was a poet and a good prose writer (Cf. Qayam ud-Din ‘Hairat’: Maqalat-ush-Shu‘ra MS. Rampur, f. 80b) and was presumably a friend of Amir Khan whose friends and supporters according to our sources were mainly the artists and the men of letters.
(141) A. L. Srivastava, First Two Nawabs, p. 116.
(142) Siyar, III, pp. 868–9; T. Ahmad Shahi, f. 14b. Safdar Jang had been nominated to the wizarat on the day of Ahmad Shah’s accession at Panipat. But in fear of Nizam-ul-Mulk it was kept secret and to ascertain his views, the emperor and Safdar Jang wrote to him to come to Delhi and take over the responsibilities of the wizarat. Nizam-ul-Mulk, however, excused himself on account of old age and ill-health and advised Safdar Jang to accept the office. Yet, the formal appointment was delayed till Nizam-ul-Mulk died on 31 May 1748. See for details A. L. Srivastava, First Two Nawabs, pp. 122–4; Jadunath Sarkar, Fall of the Mughal Empire, I, pp. 212–13.
(143) T. Muzaffari, f. 268b; Khizana-i Amira, p. 78; Tabsira, f. 107b; M. U., I, pp. 60–1. Only M. U. mentions Baqaullah Khan as the deputy of Safdar Jang in Allahabad. Also, according to M. U., Safdar Jang got the subadari of Allahabad in 1743 much before the death of Amir Khan.
I could not find any evidence for Sir Jadunath Sarkar’s opinion that after the death of Amir Khan, Baqaullah Khan (whom he has wrongly identified as the son of the deceased), was appointed the subadar of Allahabad. See his note on the lead page of the Tarikh-i Suba-i Ilahabad (anonymous) MS., Allahabad University Library.
(144) See Chapter 2, Section II.
(145) Kamwar, ff. 371a and 377a; K. K., II, p. 867; Shivdas, f. 76a and T. Muzqffari, 171a. According to the Asrar-i Samadi (p. 33) Abd-us-Samad Khan, in addition to his existing governorship of the Punjab, was made governor of Kashmir with Zakariya Khan as his naib.
Page 49 of 52
327The Imperial Court, the New Subadars and the Region
For the disturbances in Kashmir see Kamwar, p. 300 and M. U., III, pp. 761–5.
(146) Kamwar, f. 377a.
(147) T. Muzaffari, ff. 182b–183a; Bahr-ul-Mawwaj. f. 284a.
(148) For disturbances on the north-west frontiers at this time see M. U., III, pp. 703–6.
(149) Mirat-ul-Haqaiq, f. 294b. Abd-us-Samad Khan was appointed the governor of Kabul on 15 Jumada I, 1136/30 January 1724, and an entry dated 26 Zi Hijja 1136/4 September 1724, in the Mirat-ul-Haqaiq records his refusal.
(150) Ibid., ff. 297b, 306a and 351b for the arzdashts dated 12 Muharram 1137/20 September 1724; 26 Rabi I, 1137/2 December 1724 and 9 Zi Hijja 1137/8 August 1725; 299a for Zakariya Khan’s arrival near Delhi on 22 Muharram 1137/30 September 1724.
(151) Ibid, ff. 403, 412a, 433b and 435b.
(152) Cf. Asrar-i Samadi, p. 41.
(153) Shivdas. f. 67a: T. Muzaffari, f. 190a.
(154) T. Muhammadi, p. 95 and T. Muzaffari, f. 80b. Abul-Barakat Khan was the son of Muhammad Kazim Khan who had earlier held the niyabat and the diwani of Kashmir in the time of the subadari of Inayatullah Khan, K. K., II, p. 867; T. Muhammadi, pp. 82 and 131. Later Diler Dil Khan was replaced by Ataullah Khan, son of Inayatullah Khan, out the niyabat remained with Abul-Barakat Khan.
(155) M. U., II, p. 517; Siyar, II, p. 477; and T. Muzaffari, f. 80b.
(156) Akhbarat, BS, 5th R.Y., 11, pp. 399, 439–40 and 459.
(157) Sometimes cultivation in the villages seems to have been disturbed due to some extraneous reasons such as the tyranny of the local officials. Cf. Akhbarat FS, 6th–8th R.YS., p. 104.
(158) The magnitude of the defiance can be seen from a letter from the court to the governor of Kabul in response to the latter’s desperate arzdasht to the emperor.
‘[your petition] in regard to the expenditure of the suba [of Kabul] and the request for issuing a strict order to Abd us-Samad Khan was put before the emperor. All at once, an instruction was sent to the vakil of the aforementioned Khan [Abd-us-Samad Khan] stating “that the pargana of Eminabad, etc., as per the former practice is a frontier. God forbid, if any disturbance occurs, your
Page 50 of 52
328The Imperial Court, the New Subadars and the Region
client will be asked for explanation”. He [the vakil] said that he would present to the emperor the razinama from the agent of the governor of Kabul within the period of a month. Accordingly, a muchalka [bond] has been taken from him [the vakil]. You do not worry there will not be any delay in the despatch of the sum from the above mentioned mahals.’ Dastur-ul-lnsha, ff. 54.
(159) Chahar Gulzar, f. 355b.
(160) Ashub, f. 136a.
(161) Ibid., f. 160a.
(162) Zakariya Khan, though unsupported by the court, had made what defensive arrangements he could within his limited resources. Eventually he decided to surrender, but he could not save the suba from being plundered by the troops of Nadir Shah. Besides, every person in the province seems lo have tried to take advantage of the disturbances and ‘put forth his hand to plunder and pillage’. Cf. W. Irvine, Later Moghuls, II, pp. 331 and 333–4.
(163) Cf. Siyar, II, p. 482.
(164) Siyar, II, pp. 482 and 487. Nur Muhammad Leti, entitled Khuda Yar Khan was a powerful chief of Multan. His father Yar Muhammad had earned the title of Khuda Yar Khan and a mansab from Farrukh Siyar. In 1149/1736–7 Nur Muhammad was appointed the governor of Thatta and sarkar Bhakkar. The nature of his relations with Zakariya Khan at this juncture is not known to us. A powerful zamindar’s rise to such position in and around Multan was, however, unwelcome to Zakariya Khan, Cf. M. U., I, pp. 825–9.
(165) Tazkira Mukhlis, p. 78.
(166) Mubarak, f. 158b.
(167) Siyar, III, pp. 848–9.
(168) Cf. Tazkira Mukhlis, p. 134. By Balkh and Bukhara were meant the towns in Central Asia from where the ‘Mughal’ nobles (Turanis) hailed.
(169) Ibid., p. 135.
(170) Ibid.
(171) Compare Sujan Rai Bhandari, Khulasat-ut-Tawarikh, p. 88; Jadunath Sarkar, Fall of the Mughal Empire, I, pp. 119–21; Ganda Singh, Ahmad Shah Durrani, pp. 40–3.
Page 51 of 52