m

!: = ; f-
<i(|| <:

l |. -
..I,: ; ...
i I .. H.
M. . .1

i i . t i ' . i
i
Iilliill ftstr ,.
. j -!11ii
*:i i i|
pMti-Mfeift
111 llir %/i
Mil Is-1 - i
:n:k

mpwmnmt

*.- = i . i in'
in
1.. I

.
s 1 I : i ii
Pcrso-Arabic Sources of Information
on the Life and Conditions in the
Sultanate of Delhi

Iqtidar Husain Siddiqui

Munshiram Manoharlal
Publishers Pvt Ltd m
inclination, however,caused misunderstanding among the orthodox Muslims about him and
therefore, they became doubtful about his sincerity to Islam. The arts justified rebellion
against him for this reason.
Tie successor of Saltan Muhammad bin TugWuq, Sultan Firuzshah had to make all
possible efforts to convince his people about Ms deviation from the progressive policies of
his predecessor. As a result his reign was marked by reaction against the close associates
of Sultan Muha % Agha Mahdi Husain, Tughluq Dynasty.
45
A mithqai : mashas. The amount given, by the author seems to be
fantastic, proba iconic yielded by the iqta of the Khan at the time of
service,
46
No doubt, the Sultan was interested in the propagation of Islam in certain regions of
India as Siyar-ul-Auliya shows, but he is never reported to have demolished Hindu temples
in the conquered territories. He was rather first to appoint Hindus to important positions in
the Empire. The author of the Simi-i Firuzshahi says about the temple of Nagarkot:
The temple of Jawalamukhi (fire) was left untouched by the Saltan at the request,of the
rat (chief).
Barair ................. .
47
The
s these additional details. This Sultan is not tired
till he con
;word whatever remains of it. His hands diffuse eh
over lndii., r_.
are sweeter than those of this country and ilue than
embellish his a,
her precious stones. It is he who today ikes hold of
unite' *>;- "-c ~ - -
the girdle of the deserts and seas.
, ... .......................... ..............
vice every week (on
omplaint he had. The

i translation contains
s. . . . . . . 1 ' ' 'layaqitt t he count r ies
ofth a glass of wise of datewine, which t he great man
taker ' ...... ......... 10ur or a roan to whom he wants to show devotion
and o then opinion. By the will of God this will be
men
, Supreme Offict , Malik
50,-1
s'' .tteror of Hindusu . > ,> with
al-M \ r i , . ,>y on the Amir v. .u, m .jrijis the in the
ever. ,,, ,,v ..
houses slave girls who act rs
F.mperor about everything
convey this information to the
as spies for the?' > > !'i
bi r a n ) who informs the S u l t a n
Chief of the s<
accordingly, fit 105.
" Accordin-.. 4umr, i bo i yards.
A sea|x>rt, situated where now made
'A seaport, situated i n Kerala.
5
Probabiy the Raja mentioned here was Vailabh Rai of South India. The merchant,
Sulaiman mentions him Bathara as the fourth great ruler of the world during his limes.
 Chapter 7

Baranis Account of the Sultans of Delhi in the First

Version of Tarikh-i Fimzshahi

Zia-ud-din Barani is one of those Muslim historians of the middle ages whose
works rest on certain theoretical foundations, for they reflected thoughtfully on
the method and purpose of history. The variety of
changing research methodology and critical perspectives that have been brought
to bear upon Zia-ud-din Baranis (hereafter as Barani) Fatawa-i Jahmdari1 and
Tarikh-i .Firuzshahi2 reflect their width of reference and the strata of
significances. The aitn of this chapter is to draw the attention of modem scholars
to the manuscript copies of the first version (or recension) of the Tarikh-i
Fimzshahi, published by Barani earlier than the second revised version. The rare
copies of the first version are available in the libraries of U.K. and India.3
Besides, an attempt has also been made to discuss the problem, connected with
the date of the compilation of the Fatawa-Uahandari on the basis of some
similarity in Baranis approach to the history of the Sultanate in this work and
the first version of his Tarikh-i Fimzshahi,
The fust version of the celebrated Tarikh-i Fimzshahi was published by
Barani, sometime in the fifth regnal year of Sultan Firuzshahs reign, i.e. two
years earlier than the second revised version which is available: in print.4 The
first version covers the period from the reign of Sultan Ghiyath-ud-din Balban
AD 1266-87 upto the fourth regnal year of Sultan Firuzshahs reign. The credit of
bringing to light this first version of .Baranis Tarikh goes to Dr. Simon Digby.
lie refers to it in his work War-Horse and Elephant in the Sultanate of Delhi5
'faking his cue from Digby, Peter Hardy am pared the two versions and pointed
out divergence in Baranis approach to the history of Sultan .Muhammad bin
Tughluqs reign in the two versions.6 My study of the two versions enables me to
discuss the abridgement as well as enlargement of historical materials in the two
versions, marked, atleast from the reign of Sultan Ala-ud-din Khalji (1296-1316).
Details of certain events contained in the first version and omitted in the second
revised version or vice versa.
certainly extend our understanding of the important problems, connected with
the history of the Sultanate of Delhi. Our comparison of the two versions helps us
analyse the interaction of the authors mind with the materials he treats and
study the internal dynamics of the work as well. Baranis account of Muhammad
bin Tughluqs reign suggests that he decided, in particular, to portray the Sultan,
his benefactor in bright: colours in the first version but two years later he was
constrained to revise his approach in such a way that a ease could be made for
His own defence against his enemies who had got hold over the court of Sultan
Firuzslm and accused him of misleading the deceased Sultan (Muhammad bi:
Tughluq) with respect of state policies. In the changed circumstance after the
death of Suiter. >. rniad bin Tughluq, Barani seems to have been thrown on the
lion mma. His second version shows that b
was under constraint tc ... approach to the history of the reign c Muhammad bin
Tughluq and his successor, an approach he would nc have liked in norma ' v . ,'t
;cs. Ail this divergence require us to read Baranis account 01) Sultans in the
revised version togethe
with that of the first reading between the lines, The dtfferer
terms and express!* versions also necessitate a hermeneutic
approach and a close scrutiny.
Let us begin with Baranis account of the price control measure; introduced
by Sultan * Ala-ud-din Khalji in the metropolitan city of Deli during his reign.
The first version is brief on the prices of commodities only those of foodgrains
are given, whereas the revised one mentions the prices of almost ail the
commodities in demand, including those of the cattle, war-honses, slaves etc.
This revised and enlarged list of pricc casts better light on Baranis grasp over
the market phenomena and to competence for economic analysis.
The details furnished by Barani about the process of urbanization under the
patronage of Sultan ASa-ud-din Khalji in the first version are omitted in the
second version. The first version tell us that no reign could be compared with that
of Sultan Ala-ud-din Khalji its regards the construction of innumerble
buildings. The fortification walls of the city (Delhi), Jama' mosque, the
fortification of Sirt (new capital founded by Ala-ud- din Khalji near Delhi),
mosques, his own tomb (royal tomb), and several cities and towns were founded
and completed during his reign. The construction of a new minor (tower in the
Qutb complex)9 was begun and the sea like lake {[Hauz-i Kheis)m was built11
Unlike it the second revised version only refers to the city of Sin that by the year
1306 its fortification was complete and it had become a fairly-populous city.12
 The account given by Barani of Sultan Ghiyath-ud-din Tughluq Shah is more
or less the same in both of tbe versions but the first version briefly refers to the
accidental death of the Sultan at- Afghanpur, whereas the second version
becomes a bit detailed on this matter. According to the other contemporary
writers, Sultan Muhammad bin Tugfaluq was accused by people to have
coaspired against his fathers life in order to gain the throne.13 Barani who had
served Sultan Muhammad bin Tughluq as his nadim (counsellor as well as boon
courtier) for seventeen years and been showered upon with royal favours
frequently remained loyal to his memory eve? in the adverse e?m,mtaees caused
by the lattefs death.
two versa-,' ^gests that he had no doubts about < , - r
v 4 ,,, ienefactor ' v as the controversy regarding the oi -iultao Ghiym-ua-din
Tughluq Shah was concerned. 1 ?rites in the first version that a new
kushak (palace) was
w order of tbe Crown Prince) two or three kruhs (four
i- J . . - ' > i v ay from Tughluqabad f-v " ~ reception of the Sultan, c i - <
Bengal. On his arriv,- > ' Itac stayed there. Unfor- f, < Ml down and he
was to death.1** The passage
i ' <. . . sion tells us that the : -was raised in a hurry at . > ' . vicinity of the
capital a. J J;.*. _* ultan was accorded grand
i That everything was nicely arrange*!. But, all of a
erbolt from the -sky descended upon the earth, and the i
the Sultan was seated fell down, killing the Sultan along
v < ' .! arsons under its debris.55
s treatment of Sultan Muhammad bin Tughluqa reign j
vUoions, that contained in the first one, though comparet"*!*
1- led, helps highlight his intellectual portait of the Sultan i. i * . like the second
revised version, it neither contains crypti- raents nor omits reference to any
important event that took place during his reign, Ii begins to describe Sultan
Muhammad bin Tughluq as the most remarkable of the early and later rulers of
the past. He also calls him Sultm-t-Sa'M(the pious ruler) andShahid(martyr).16
Then we are told that the Sultan being a man of high spirit wanted to combine in
him the ftinci the caliph of the Prophet,17 (Khilafat-i Nabumt) and the
offic Sultan, i.e., he- desired to assume the combined role of the
spiritual .pj temporal leader. He also desired to have every country of the world
to be ruled over by one of his slaves. Furthermore, be was a man of transcendent
genius whom no one among his contemporaries could rival in military
generalship, learning, penmanship, oratory, large hearted generosity, etc.
 Another problem in the description of which difference can be marked in the
two versions is connected with the rationalist thinkers who influenced the Sultan,
Describing the Sultans interest in rationalist sciences (llm-iMaqul) and also his
fondness for the company of philosophers
and rationalist thinkers, Barani tells us in both the versions that the Sultan lost
faith ia the recorded traditions and questioned the accepted Truth under their
influence. But Baranis criticism of the philosophers, compared to their
condemnation in the second version is quite mild (in the
firs! one). For example, he writes in the second version about the Sultans
association with the philosophers and also his advocacy of rationalism
that 5ad Mantaqi (logician) who was a misled person, Ubaid Sha*ir (the poet),
an atheist and Najm Iniishar had become his associates since prior to his
accession to the throne. Another 'person, Maulana Alim-ud-din most learned of
the philosophers spent moss of his time with him in discussing philosophy. These
scholars believed in rationalism and under their influence the Suit"" discarded
traditional sciences (mattqul) and turned a great support son, To hi
religious scripture and the
Prophetic traditions ths in man the spirit of compassion and make
him moderate in life had no meanings. As a result, he did not refrain from killing
pious and religious Muslims, such as darveshes,'ultima, mashaikh (Sufi /en
Saiyids. Having explained all this, Barani emphati
cally ae Sultan led a pious life, offering prayers five time
puiiel ........ . _............. itrary to it, the first version provides as with interesting
details about Muhammad bin Tughluqs literary pursuits during the Khalji
period as well as his authoritative scholarship and erudition, further it provides us
with insights into the literary atmosphere in Delhi and the - formed by the
scholars, including those who had
specialise onalist sciences. He says: He (i.e., Muhammad bin
Tughluq) came irom Dipalpur to Delhi during the reign of Sultan Ala- ud-din
Khalji when he was yet a youth, He became one of the close associates of Sultan
Qutb-ud-din Mubarak Shah (Khalji from 1317-20), (Thus) he entered the circle
of high nobles at the royal court. He got the post of Amir-i akhur (in-charge of
royal stable) and an iqia as well. Interested in acquiring knowledge and
improving his learning, he joined the circle of the associates of Malik 8ad
Mantaqi (logician), Maulana Najm-ud-din Iniishar (also poet), Maulana (Alim-
ud-din) and Ubaid,lv the poet . These four persons belonged to the rationalist
school of thought ('ma'qulai). They had complete mastery over rationalist
sciences, Maulana Alim-ud-din, Sad Mantaqi and Najm Iniishar, the poet had
become the distinguished scholars both of scholasticism (Ilm-ul kalamf:0
and logic. No one could rival them in mastery over these sciences. They were-
found most of the time pre-oceupied with studying philosophical literature. As
for Ubaid, the poet, he was without any faith in religion. It was under his
influence that the Sultan was attracted towards the study of ma'qul (rationalist
sciences).21 In short, discussing Muhammad bin Tughluqs religious policy and
his religion, Barani describes the Sultan as the dominant mind of the age in his
first version. He implies explicitly that the conflict between him and people took
place because the 'latter were reactionary and not willing to co-operate with him
in the implementation of his policies and progressive schemes. Herein, Barani
refuses to speak of the .lack of faith in Islam on the part of the Sultan, and thus
present him an atheist. He rather portrays him as an intellectual follower of
Islam, anxious to lead his people on the path of progress through the new laws
and regulations foumulated by him.22 Barani is corroborated by his
contemporary Ikhtisan, the dabir-i Khas of the Sultan when the latter calls his
royal patron, Na'uman-i Sani (i.e. Abu Hanifa of the age) for his mastery over
tbe sources of Islamic law.23 But the Sultan calls himself on his coins Muhi-i
Sunm-i-Khatam-ul Ndbi een (reviver of the traditions of the Prophet). This
claim made by the Sultan implies that he decided to assume the role of mujtahtd
(the interpreter of law) 24 As regards the second revised version, it contains the
statement that the Sultan had Muslims murdered, not sparing even the ulmm,
mmhaikh (Sufi saints) and the Saiyids, yet it emphatically states that the Sultan
remained an orthodox Muslim in his personal life, offered prayers five rimes a
day and observed the month of fasting zealously.23
Similarly, the details of events, the royal projects, their sequence and the
rubrics under which these items have been described are different in two
versions. For instance, the rubric fatrat (trouble) in the first version is replaced
with andisha (idea or project) in the second one. In the first version, the transfer
of population from Delhi to Oaulatabad (old Deogiri) is not described under any
rubric. But we find here a more comprehensive account of the event. We are
informed that the evacuation of people was completed in three stages. First, the
families and dependants of the nobles were ordered to accompany Makhduma-i
Jahan (the mother of the Sultan) and her entourage. The treasures, royal house-
hold goods, horses and elephants were also taken with them to Daulatabad. That,
after the departure of Makhduma-i Jahan from Delhi, the Saiyids, ulama (schol-
ars), mashaikh (Sufi-saints) and other notables of the dty were summoned to
Daulatabad, All of them readied there with their families and dependants.. They
were received by the Sultan with favour; their allowances
were increased. They also got villages, in addition to other favours. Moreover
they were given money to have their houses constructed. Then we are told that
after the destruction of the rebel governor, Malik Aiba in Multan, Hie Sultan
came back to Delhi and ordered through the farman that all the inhabitants of
Delhi and suburbs upto four and five kuruhs (eight to ten miles) should be
grouped and sent in caravans to Daulatabad, Their houses were bought bv the
Stale and the once of each house was paid in cash to the . > from .V: t . :hai they
could have new houses built i ' > , . : , , man, the city and its
53 shtifhQ wf.rf* .; u. ..... ....... ...... not hf-' fH n

!
>rociaime

d version is
s led Agha

India at the

ft i
ver
. sun a 13 that he had givei > * . n
city as ic credit given to ,
w f Bugbra (condemned as one of the tyrants
* -adofMa or g&
st ha

. -, ', < eel th- ,*' . " ; 1, ' 1

avoided further co
ft is also noteworthy he second revised version Barani dr bribes
iter the details of tbe rebellion N * Bate- > > ;

in detail the recruitment of three hundred and seventy thousand sowars for the
conquest of Khurasan under the rubric Andisha-i Panjum (fifth project). He tells
us that the payment of salary and allowances to the soldiers in the,very first year
emptied the royal treasury and then it was difficult to maintain it with the
revenue from the provinces and therefore it had to be disbanded. All this led to
confusion in the provinces and, in addition to the heavy financial loss to the royal
treasury, also affected the royal prestige.31 As the event was disparaging of the
Sultan, Barani refers to it in the first version incidentally and not in its proper
sequence. Here he refers to it in his description of the causes which led to
estrangement between the Sultan and people. That the Sultan was annoyed by
peoples opposition to his schemes and he started out of anger to impose severe
punishments on them .in consequence. But the passage is very important in so
much as it helps us identify the region, of Khurasan that the Sultan wanted to
conquer as well as explain the circumstances in which the state revenue demand
was increased in the doab region. It clearly stows that by Khurasan the Indo-
Persian historians meant the region of Ghaznin during pre-Mughal period. For
example, Barani writes, As the desire to occupy Iqlim-i baio (high lands) look
hold of him, he decided to distribute money lavishly to the people from the city
(capital) upto Ghaznin, so that people (everywhere) might witness with their own
eyes what they had heard about his munificence and liberality. This necessitated
the collection of money (in every possible way). The Zahir- ul-Jemh (paymaster-
general of the army), i,e., naib-i-arz told noe that in one year four hundred and
seventy thousand sowars were entered on the rolls in the diwm-i-arz (army
ministry) and were paid their allowances from the royal treasury. The following
year there was left no money for payment and, therefore, they had to disperse.^
As the increase in the State revenue demand in the doab region was connected
with the Khurasan expedition, planned sometime in ad 1328*

29, we may , Then he states

now discuss thethat after the
difference indes>
Baranis
,*ae. , 1 > .** > 16 tax on agricultural >le in produce i 'e
> versions.
his 1two collect it The
-> * ig to >' passage
relevant - >1 in the first on jssiti
11 the
details
the haveli-i Delhistyle,
in a lucid oft not difficult to interpret. Me- .....................................<tie,
jaran
it
, < i , .s with
(modem a clearer; perspective. As for the seqi;**
Bulandshau: cot
(upto
is
eastern U.P.); oppressive methods were adopted for the collection of tax. Strong
jandars (prefects) and collectors were posted in the towns and vilayats. They dealt
with people in a harsh manner. The collectors and finance officers became
oppressive while the cultivators found it beyond their means to meet the state
demand. As a result, the vilayats suffered and confusion arose everywhere. Ten
and twenty villages united and got shelter in the jungles. They plundered the
peaceful 'villages.33 The authors style being cryptic in the second version, does
not imply the cause of the revolt clearly. If the relevant passage is translated
MteraHy, it implies that the demand was increased ten and twenty times,
certainly an exorbitant measure.34
It is also worth-recalling that Barani avoids any criticism of Sultan
Muhammad bin Tughluqs patronage towards low-bom people in the first
version. In this he makes mention only of Aziz Khumar (liquor-brewer by
origin), calling ban of base stock because the action taken by him. in haste against
tbe Amiran-i-sadah (officers-in-charge of fiscal-cum-ad- ministrative units, each
comprising a hundred villages) in Malwa had led to widespread rebellions in
Gujarat and the Deccan. Aziz Khumar is said to have killed a number of Amiran-
i-sadah in Malwa jus! after bis posting there as governor because the latter acted
in defiance of the royal farman. Their killing made their counterparts elsewhere
fearful of the S<1tan wrath. In self-defence they organized themselves into a
force- and.. ^ > * rebellion in Gujarat, and Daulatabad;35 Bui in the second
revised
Barani is not only critical of the Sultans policy in this regard but also gives a long
list of officers who had started from below. They came from the very low-caste-
families. But for this list we would have not known that social stratification was
much breached if not totally broken down under Sultan Muhammad bin
Tughluq. in this regard Barani provides us the following details in the second
revised version: Najib, the musician of obscure origin was so much honoured
that he superceded in position and status many of the (old) nobles. lie was
assigned the charge of Gujarat, Multan and Badaon (the territorial units, perhaps
held in succession). Like him, Aziz Khumar and his brother were favoured.
Firuz Hajam (barber), Mankah, the cook, Mas'ud Khumar (liquor-brewer by
caste), Ladha Baghvan (gardener) and many others, base and ignoble persons
were elevated to important posts and given charge of iqtas. Shaikh Babu, s of
Nayak, the weaver was made a royal associate and, therefore, the ro| had become
an influential man in the society. Pira Mali (the gardener) who happened to be
the meanest and worst person in India was honoured with the charge of the
Diwan-i wizarat and raised in this way over a
above the maliks, nobles, Walls and Muqtas,36 Kishan Bazran of Indri who was
mean of the meanest got the governorship of Awadh (territory). Maqbul, the slave
of Ahmad Ayaz was entrusted with the governorship of Gujarat, an office meant
for high nobles and ministers of prominence, although he possessed no qualities
outwardly or inwardly. 1
Another marked difference in the two versions is found with regard to Sultans
conversation with Barani over peoples defiance of the royal policies. The first
version does not contain my reference- to it. While in the second one Barani
makes digressions to describe how the Sultan consulted him on several
occasions.38 This is not all. He also confesses here his fault in not being
courageous enough to point out to the Sultan what was lawful in connection with
the state policies according to the religious law, lest he should incur the royal
displeasure. He states that he and others who had knowledge of (religious)
sciences turned hypocrites out of greed for material pins after they had become
the courtiers. We could not, says Barani gather courage to tell the Sultan that
punishments dealt out to people by his order were in contravention of the law of
Shari* at (religious law) only for the sake of life which is after all perishable. We
approved of all the measures and even cited inauthentic traditions of the past in
their support. I do not ,"-' -aw would others fare (on the day of judgement); as
far as I am cor- . I have suffered much; neither position, nor prestige nor
means of t nor money have been
left with me. I do not know as to what will happen to me in the life hereafter.39
In short, he pleads not guilty of misleading Sultan Muhammad, He rather blames
the nobles of obscure origin as well as the temperament of the Sultan for the
suffering of people.
As regards Baranis account of the first four years of Sultan Firuzshahs
reign, it is brief, comprising the single chapter like the treatment of previous
reigns. Afraid of the royal displeasure, he provides us w i t h insights through
hints into the reaction that had started against the preceding regime. Two years
later, Barani decided to compile a detailed account of the first six yeas, dividing it
into eleven chapters under different headings. Each chapter reads like a
panegyric. These chapters suggest that perhaps, in view of the criticism by the
reactionary nobles at the court of Firuzshah or the hope of getting royal reward,
Barani not only takes altogether a different approach to the reign of Sultan
Muhammad bin Tughluq but also goes into details about events that had great
impact on the life and conditions of people in the empire. Each chapter on
Firuzshahs reign reads as panegyric.
However, the sixth chapter relating to the construction of a network of
>f which H ' .>> . f Sultan Firuzshah '

. >;s the S' :

' - canals, is invaluable.
the The <details
* s !o of
unilies, known cut
the canals, ! . -off from Mg as well as
small rivers arc ixcellent - . * than
more *insightful >their
>*;neratiom should not
account furnished by be
the. -anonymous
-ny harm
author of the Sirat-i Fimzshahi or Shams Siraj >* Afif,
* - .Barani clearly implies
:he popularity that
of the ruler
these canals would go a long way towards creating conditions favourable for
socio-economic growth in the areas through which > .they
leath the v That
flowed. these canals,
ght of b
besides irrigation facilities had already provided travel and transport facilities.4
It is, however, worth-stressing that Baranis statement about the elimination of
the most favourite nobles of the late Sultan is a bit more comprehensive in the
first version, Many confidants of the late Sultan were cither put to death or
thrown into prison. Though Barani outwardly eulogises Firuzshah yet there is
some criticism implied of the new Sultan. Describing the nice qualities of the
reigning Sultan, he indirectly refers to the elimination of the favourite nobles of
the late Sultan because they were close to their master ideol<>gically or carried
on his orders strictly. He fells us that their assets were confiscated and their
sawars and footmen es, contingents,41 In the revised second version Barani very
briefly mentions his own imprisonment in the fori he accession of Firuzshah.42
But he mentions bis plight s his work Sahifa-i-na'at-i MuhammmM, tbe fist
work after the death of his patron Sultan, He writes that when he seventieth year
of his life and old age and infirmity i * -a, affecting his organs, and he was afraid
of meeting J<4 to do something for the atonement of the p;
- . i- T* -nonths that he spent in prison at Bhatner (fort) in
- < >- >i mowing whether he would survive the day in the i.,oi 1.,.:^ ie
night in the evening. In these circumstances I thought i < r ki o praise of
the Prophet Muhammad.43 In - > r i translation of the Tar ikh-i ak-
Bammika (Barm

It wci y u v 'w ti & \jUs. mi wi ia asa C &v .

' his release, he found himself without a

support because every thing was lost. In extreme anguish and despair, he write:
1, Zia-i Barani, the compiler of the Tarikh-i Fimzshahi have fallen a victim to the
vicissitudes of fate after the passing away of Sultan Mohan!ad (may God bless
him), my ill-wishers, enemies and powerful rivals conspired against my life. I
have been turned mad by the wounds they have inflicted with the sticks of their
hostility. They have poisoned the eats of the Sultan, the Lord of the World, But
for the mercy of Almighty God and the coasideration of the Sultan (Firuzshah),
1 would have slept long ago in the lap of earth.46 (This passage is not found in the
first version). 'Hie second revised version seems to have led Sultan Firuzshah to
reward its compiler with a small pension, in no way enough to heal the wounds.47
I! is also noteworthy that Baranis other famous work Fatawa-i-J abandon
does not appear to have been written by him when be suffered torments. His
forceful expression in this work rather suggests that being an ambitious man, he
was sure to impress 'tbe reigning Sultan Muhammad bin Tughluq with this work,
and get an agreeable position at the royal court in reward through its
presentation. Because Baranfs advocacy of the need for the Sultan to formulate
state roles and regulations regardless of the recorded law (Islamic canon law) but
in accordance with the requirements of changed times, had an appeal to Sultan
Mohammad bin Tughluq, All this suggests that it was presented to him.48 Sultan
Muhammad bin Tughluq was a scholar of history and Islamic sources of law
.and desired to assume the role of Mujtahid (interpreter of religious law)49 It was
perhaps after the compilation of the Fatawa-i Jahandari that Sultan appointed
Barani his mdirn (a boon courtier as well as counsellor).50 It also needs to be
stressed that the Famwa-i Jahandari and the first version of the Tarikh-i
Fimzshahi do not contain didactic elements and clearly show how secular Barani
was in his approach to history and politics. AH this could no! be stated during
the reign of Firuzshah when the Muslim: orthodoxy had become powerful and
the Sultan acted as the Champion of taqlid (traditional orthodox system). This
work is also interesting in so much as it suggests that Barani was opposed to
Ma'qul as well as the em t people from the very beginning.
] a word may be added about the importance of
Bai * limah (Introduction) to the Tarikh-i Fimzshahi
wii .* . * the versions unaltered. This part o f . .
Bar . man of ideas in the history of Isla *
grapay.. uut us, kw) by modern scholars has given rise to i * 1 about Baranfs
approach to history as well as his idea of I
conversant with the sources of Islamic traditions of history, Barani traces the
origin of history writing among the Muslms to the Quran and the ahadith (the
traditions of the Prophet), He also finds co-relation between the ahadith and
History.51 This led Dr, Peter Hardy, the first scholar of medieval Indian history to
take up the study of Indo-Persian historiography * a new field for exploration, to
think Baranis approach theology-oriented. Barani treats history, says he, as
abranch of Theology.52 Inspired by Hardy some eminent scholars in India and
Pakistan took interest in Baranis approach and philosophy on the basis of his
extant works, the Tarikh-i Fimzshahi and the Fatawa-i Jahandari in particular.
In his Introduction to the English translation of Fatawah-i Jahandari by Mrs. A.
Salim Khan, Muhammad Habib having re-examined Baranis extant works
states: History was not a record or a chronicle or a story, it was very definitely a
scienc the science of the social order and its basis was not religion or tradition but
observation and experience.53 According to K.A. Nizami, * What makes
Barani bracket the study of history with the study of ahadith is not the
theological content of the ahadith but the Usui-i asnad ... the principles of critique
evolved by the scholars of ahadith," Further he remarks: Barani looks upon
history and ahadith as twins, and considers the principle of criticism applied to be
the same in both.54 But Barani nowhere talks about the significance of the Usui-
i asnad evolved by the early scholars of ahadith for evaluating the authenticity of
the tradition. What actually he stresses upon is the need for a historian to
ascertain the Truth of the reports he gets hold of and be trustworthy in the
Tradition of the early recorders of ahadith. That is why he is critical of the Shii
and the Kharajite writers, accusing them of distorting the facts about the early
history of Islam.'
Little information on Baranis life and career, contained in Baranis own
Tarikh-i Fimzshahi (especially in the revised version) as well as Mir Khurds
Siyar-ul-Auliya clearly show how preponderant was the Delhis imperial culture
in his life and thought. That is why he stood for social stratification of the society
and held that the throwing open the doors of bureaucracy to talent would help
the rise of the officers of obscure origin against the interest of old aristocratic
families. According to him the rise of low-born people led to social tensions,
disturbing the social equilibrium in the society. He held an elitist view of history.
Thus his social philosophy had nothing to do with the Islamic theology. It was
rather in conflict with the Islamic concept of the universal brotherhood of
mankind and the principle of egalitarianism. His aristocratic background in-
fluenced him more than his religious education. I may finally quote Irfan
Habib in this regard: (Barani) asserts his orthodoxy by implication adeast when
be makes it a pre-requisite for a historian. He applauds the suppression of
philosophy and inveighs against rationalism. Am! yet the
use of the theological idiom by him ought not to be overstressed.56

N OTES

l
ln 1941 tad 1942, A.B.M. Habibullah aid Ishtiaq Husain Quresbi brought to light tie
existence of the rare manuscript copy of this work la the India Office Library, London. In their
respective works they also pointed out the sigBificsaee of the contents of Fatcma-i Jahandari. Cf.
A.B.M. Habibullah, Re-evaluation of the Literary Sources of Pie-Maghal History, Islamic
Culture, vol. XV, Hyderabad, 1941, pp. 10-11; lit Qureshi, The Administration of Ike Sultanate of
Delhi, reprint, New Delhi, 197 l,p.267.
Thereafter, Muhammad Habib and Peter Hardy took interest ia evaluating its value aid
regarded it as important source of information on the political philosophy of the Delhi
Siitat.ate.Cf, M, Habib, Political Theory of the Delhi &i/3v:at<r, Allahabad, 196#, Introduction;
Peter Hardy, Unity and Variety in iado-Mamicaad Perso-islamic Civilization: Some Ethical aid
Political Ideas of Zia-ud-din Barani of Delhi, ofal-Ghazzali and of Nasir-ud-din Tttsi", Cf., iron,
vol. XVI, 1978, pp. 127-35.
1
Of the modern scholars, Dowson was first to observe that Baranis Tarikh-i Firuzshahi
approaches more nearly to the European idea of history. He further ternaries that Barani has
s care for matters besides lie interests of his religion and fie warlike exploits of the sovereign
representative of his faith. Long after Dawson, Hasan Bstaai contributed m article on Banal,
dealing with his family background,career aid his philosophy of history as well. In recent yeans
Peter Hardy's chapter on Barani in his pioneering woric that opens tip pathways, still being
explored, has aroused certain scholars of Sob Asia to reappraise the value of Baranis
contribution to Islamic historiography from different points of view.
Cf. Elliot and Dowson, History ofIndia as Told by its Own Historians, vol. HI, London, 1897,
p.vit; S. Hasan Barani, Zu-ud-din Barani Islamic Culture, vol. XII, no.l,January, 1938, pp. 76-
97; Peter Hardy, Historians of Medieval India, London, 1966, pp. 20-39; K.A. Nizami, Zia-od-
din Ba ran i , Historians of Medieval India, ed. Mohibbu! Hasan, Meerst, 1969, pp. 37-52; Irfan
Habib,Baranis Theory of the History of the Delhi Sultanate, The huBan Historical Review, New
Delhi, July 1980-January 1981, vol.VII, nos. 1-2, pp. 99-115.
3
There are three manuscript copies of this first version, known so far. One is available in the
Bodleian Library, Oxford,Elliot Collection, no.353, other in the Raza library, Ramptir while the
third one belongs to the personal collection of Dr Simon Digby (MS. 5T). i have utilised the
Bodleian and Rampur copies.
^Tarikh-iFiruzshahi, ed. Sir Sycd Ahmad Khan, Calcutta, 1866.
"Cf. Simon Digby, War Horse and Elephant in the Sultanate of Delhi; Karachi, 1971, p.83.
Veter Hardy, Didactic Historical Writing in Indian Islam: Zia-ud-din Baranis Treatment
of Ike Reign of Saltan Muhammad Tughluq, Islam in Asia, ed.Y. Friedmann, Jerusalem, 1984,
pp. 51-57.
^iret version of Tarikh-i Firuzshahi, MS, Raza library, Rampur, f. 1.10a, hereafter cited
Rampur MS., also MS, Bodleian Library, Oxford, f. 144a, hereafter cited Bodleian MS,
^Tarikh-i Firuzshahi. text, pp. 303-19, hereafter cited Barani.
 a
till I ,1 :F I I S I I & s JS -8 3
% Hr
i is 3 . a i 5 ? 2
& = I: I ,? ? S i = ;= I - a - s 5 z
i
I I?!iib
i - e 1.5 s ; 5
"2 z Z =
T- ^C ;BI ?. 5 5 s

I 4 5

I ;
,2 I

4 5
I
III!!
,5 i 5 S fc 11
~ 111 ! 1 ii S' 5 u, " 3
3 1*13 ~
1 I I S'11 = |
Cl
I
a
I
it

1 I , 1
1 t
i
^mmmi
1
S
I'
J
1

!H ' : i !1 j a Si
-3
J i 1 f I I I

- - ? 11 1 1 115 3 1
I
I
HI
i iss IPi a f l
i l 1
S

2 o3o
t i
*
- S i i I I
I1 ! I*
R C
,5
<7 l
S .2 s=
lit m S
v
"

fimi a; * it a h

f1 ill I
- !a

1 -g a <
^j
ii S 5 I *f ?f,a *
- i iI I
111 Ifgi
.^1
3N

- ill * J,
1
' I fi !
:5
^ S S ? -
S3 1 <S "3 t- C;i
U; |J ~4 sdmgS'q
8 ^ S i I I 11
- |S 1
-O = 8 -
a s " 2 ' i aj I 3 1 11##! a &
s - .s. c
iI l
^ The Political Theory of the Delhi Sultanate, Allahabad, a,d., p. 125.
54
K.A, Nizami, On History and Historians of Medieval India, New Delhi, 1983, pp. 125-26.
^Barani, p. 14.
>6
Irfan Habib, "Bararifs Theory of the History of the Delhi Sultanate*', The Indian
Historical Review, New Delhi, vol. VII, nos. 1-2, July 5980-Januay 1981, pp.99-115.
 Chapter 8

The Thirteenth and Fourteenth Century

Farmans concerning the Conduct of the
Governors under the Sultans of Delhi
Certain aspects of the history and culture of medieval Indian history during the
Delhi Sultanate period remain unexplored, while those which have received
attention from modem scholars call for a reappraisal both in view of the
discovery of fresh evidence and new research methodology. Though provincial
government of the Sultans of Delhi played a pivotal role in tbe foundation of the
Delhi Sultanate, it has received very little attention. Apparently the reason is the
paucity of positive evidence on the powers and functions of the governors
(designated as wali or muqta) available in the contemporary historical works. In
the beginning, the Muslim conquest of north India was partial. The muqta, in
most of the cases, was not entrusted with the government of a controlled
territorial unit but assigned the charge of a situation therein. He had to establish
his control over it by subduing the local potentates. Even after his initial victory
over his rivals, he lived in his headquarters with his military contingent, allowing
the Hindu landed aristocracy to reign in Supreme in the countryside.
However, the adoption by the Sultan of a reconciliatory policy towards the
hereditary landed aristocracy combined with his superiority both in military
equipment and tactics led the Hindu chiefs to acquiesce into his authority. The
submission by the land potentates to the Sultan made possible the availability of
local support, so necessary for consolidating his authority in India. It is also
worth-noting that the governors were also directed through the farmans to
destroy the enemies of the Sultan in an exemplary way, so that their case could
serve as a deterrant for others. No distinction was ever made on the basis of
religion in this regard.
The royal farmans, issued by the Sultans of Delhi with regard to the posting of
walk and Muqtas (governors) in the provincial units are rare. A few of them are
found contained in the contemporary Persian works. They arc invaluable in so
far as they contain interesting information on