Part 4 of 4
The deficiency of historical epigraphs from the reign of Firuz Shah on Delhi monuments is unfortunate. However, a number of epigraphs exist on monuments outside of Delhi.101 [Welch and Crane have pointed out the existence of epigraphs on four mosques which date from the reign of Firuz Shah: a mosque built by an amir, Malik Shahin Bek, dated 767/1366, in Hansi; a Friday mosque, dated 772/1371 in Ladnum, built by Firuz Shah’s master of the hunt; and two mosques in Didwana, both dated 779/1377, built by a weaver and a baker, respectively. See Welch and Crane, "The Tughluqs," p. 127; Epigraphica Indica: Arabic and Persian Supplement (1953-1954), p. 2; (1949-1950), pp. 18-20.] Besides the Fathabad [Fatehabad] column, whose contents have been alluded to by Horn and Parihar,...Figure 4. Pillar, Fatehabad. Photo: author.The third lat (fig. 4) is located in the town of Fathabad, or Fatehabad,16 Firuz Shah's earliest urban foundation, built in the first year of his reign, A.H. 752/A.D. 1351-52, and located on the road connecting the important sites of Delhi, Hansi, and Multan. The lat may date from this time, although no firm evidence supports this claim. Today it stands in the center of the courtyard of a modern 'idgah, but its original context is not known, and whether the pillar was free-standing or associated with a prior architectural structure remains a mystery. Fatehabad continued to be an important site into Mughal times, when a Humayun-period mosque was built on the site. Mughal patronage of the pillar is unlikely, and there is no evidence of any other builder at the site after the Tughluq period.17
The Fatehabad lat consists of a single column of beige stone standing 3.1 meters above the foundation. This piece is surmounted by a drum of white stone and four sections of red stone. The column is crowned by a red stone amalaka, a round fluted element of Indian origin,18 and a white stone cap raising the height of the column to 4.8 meters above the foundation. There is an estimated 1 to 1.5 meters below the ground. The diameter of the lat is 59 centimeters at its base and 52 centimeters at its top.
Fig. 5. Detail of pillar inscription, Fatehabad. Photo: author.The most remarkable feature of the Fatehabad lat is its inscription (fig. 5), one of the longest Indo-Islamic epigraphs of the Delhi sultanate; it is historical in content and specific to the Tughluq dynasty.19 [[Mehrdad] Shookoohy, Haryana I, 15-22 and pls. 1-70. [Haryana I. The Colum of Firuz Shah and Other Islamic Inscriptions from the District of Hisar. Plates i-xc. Shokoohy, Mehrdad. School of Oriental and African Studies, London 1988. 42 pp. + 90 plates. Publisher's cloth. 33,5x28,5 cm. Library stamps and bookplate. Corpus Inscriptionum Iranicarum. Part I IV Persian Inscriptions down to the early Safavid Period. Vol. XLVII India: State of Haryana.]] The date of the lat's installation is not known or given in the epigraph, but specific historical events referred to in the epigraph support attribution to Firuz Shah. The bottom section of the lat appears to be part of an ancient pillar brought to the site during the Tughluq period. Although a Mauryan origin is unlikely, it is nevertheless reused.20 [John Irwin expresses doubt about an Asokan origin for the Fatehabad lat in pt. 4, p. 744, n. 47 of John Irwin, "'Asokan' Pillars: A Reassessment of the Evidence," pts. 1-4, The Burlington Magazine 115 (Nov. 1973): 706-20; 116 (Dec. 1974): 712-27; 117 (Oct. 1975): 631-43; 118 (Nov. 1976): 734-53.] Citing similarities in stone type and column diameters, Cunningham believed that the pillar at Fatehabad and the pillar in nearby Hissar were originally parts of the same piece of stone. If his supposition is correct, then these columns were probably installed simultaneously.-- The Monumental Pillars of Fīrūz Shāh Tughluq, by William Jeffrey McKibben, Ars Orientalis, Vol. 24 (1994), pp. 105-118 (14 pages), Published by: Freer Gallery of Art, The Smithsonian Institution and Department of the History of Art, University of Michigan
On the uppermost part of the fort, there is an Idgah. In the precinct of this Idgah, there is a thick lofty pillar in the centre. Constructed with the mixture of Balua soil, red marble, white marble and iron, the pillar is 15.6 feet in height, and six feet in circumference. Verses from the Koran and some brief information about the Tughlaq dynasty have been carved out on 36 slabs of the pillar. Some historians claim this pillar to be the "Kirti Stambha" of Ashoka the Great. The Hisar gazetteer also mentions that the pillar seemed to have been constructed by some Hindu king as words from Sanskrit language have also been found on the slabs. Besides this, the artistic work on the two mosques in this fort also resemble the work on the ancient Hindu temples. These historians believe that the pillar was constructed during the Ashoka period and was given touches of Muslim art by Firoz Shah Tughlaq during 14th century. In the same Idgah, on the west side of the pillar, there is an inscription. On this has been engraved in Arabian language that the Mughal emperor Humanyun came here and constructed a mosque at this place.
-- Fatehabad: A town steeped deep in history, by Sushil Manav, 1999
Standing at a height of over 6 metres, the Lat appears to be a portion of one of the pillars erected by Emperor Ashoka possibly at Agroha or Hansi.
The Ashokan epigraph that was once engraved on the pillar was apparently very systematically chiseled off for writing the Tughlaq inscription, recording the genealogy of Firoz Shah in beautiful Tughra-Arabic characters carved in high relief. This Lat (the pillar) stands in the centre of what now looks like an ancient walled Idgah.
-- Lat of Feroz Shah, by fatehabad.nic.in
a group of epigraphs concentrated primarily in Biharsharif identify Firuz Shah as sovereign of that region.
All are foundation inscriptions, usually identifying the builder, date, and function of the building, but many provide useful insights about Firuz Shah. The Tughluqs held sway over Bihar from 1327 A.D., when it was acquired by Muhammad bin Tughluq, through ca, 1372 A.D., when the province was lost under Firuz Shah. Many of the inscriptions contain titulature which reflects how Firuz Shah’s authority was perceived in outlying regions.
Most of the epigraphs coincide with Firuz Shah’s expeditions through that region while enroute to Bengal. The epigraphs, ranging from 753/1353 through 774/1373 have been collected by Qeyamuddin Ahmad in his study of epigraphy of Bihar although many, as Ahmad notes, had attracted the attention of earlier scholars. All the inscriptions are Persian, with the exception of one mixed Persian-Arabic epigraph, written in a thuluth script.
The first of these epigraphs, dated 753/1353, is contained on the entrance to the mausoleum of Malik Ibrahim Bayyu, a Sufi saint, in Biharsharif, near Patna. The inscription begins;102 [Ahmad, Arabic & Persian Inscriptions of Bihar, p. 35.] During the reign of the world-conquering monarch [???], may he be nauroz [new year’s day] in the spring of the kingdom,
the emperor of the world, Sultan Firuz, who became victorious over the rulers of the world... [???]
The couplets of the inscription go on to identify Malik Bayyu and record the time of his death. Another inscription on the same monument identifies Malik Bayyu as an iconoclast who broke idols and wielded the sword of truth against infidelity.
Ahmad relates that, in fact, little is known about the Malik and suggests that he was the governor of Bihar whom Shams al-Din Ilyas Shah of Bengal conquered and killed, an act which instigated Firuz Shah’s first campaign.103 [Ahmad, Arabic & Persian Inscriptions of Bihar, p. 36. Ahmad (p. 38) identifies Malik Bayyu as Ibrahim ibn Abu Bakr popularly known as Ibrahim Bayyu, who carried the title of Saif al-Daulat and was a maqta' of Bihar. Desai believes that he was the governor of Bihar. Ahmad (pp. 38-40) discusses the historical evidence, sometimes contradictory, surrounding this man.]
Another Persian inscription, dated 761/1359-60, on a building of unidentified function in Biharsharif, is a record of restoration. In it, Firuz Shah’s sovereignty is recognized.104 [Ahmad, Arabic & Persian Inscriptions of Bihar, p. 43. Ahmad (p. 38) identifies Malik Bayyu as Ibrahim ibn Abu Bakr popularly known as Ibrahim Bayyu, who carried the title of Saif al-Daulat and was a maqta' of Bihar. Desai believes that he was the governor of Bihar. Ahmad (pp. 38-40) discusses the historical evidence, sometimes contradictory, surrounding this man.] This auspicious building was renovated in the reign of the justice-fostering king,
emperor of the world, Firuz Shah, through whom niches and pulpits [mosques] flourished;
through the efforts and at the instance of the favorite servant, [who is] the barid of the khitta in the period of the just king,
angel-natured, Malik of perfect competency, Fahim [who is] renowned in the seven climes.
Seven hundred [years] were past since the date of the [Prophet’s] Migration and sixty-one besides [A.H. 761=1359-60]
May the king be on the throne of good fortune forever, as victorious and successful as his name [Firuz=victorious].
The allusions to world conqueror, emperor, and victorious king certainly invoke an image of a military giant but in fact, it has been shown that Firuz Shah’s military prowess was relatively non-aggressive, if not conciliatory. The inscription coincides with Firuz Shah’s second campaign to Bengal. A reference in a contemporary manuscript reiterates the fervor of the campaign: "there was panic among God’s creation on account of the presence of the victorious armies of Firuz Shah."105 [Ibid., p. 44 and fn 1. Ahmad cites this reference from a copy of a manuscript, Malfuz al-Safar, dated 927/1520-21, in Phulwari Khanaqah Library. The quote is part of a conversation, under the heading date of 12 Safar 762/December 23, 1360, between the author of the Malfuz and a saint Sharf al-Din.]
Another inscription in the Amber dargah in Biharsharif also records the construction of a mosque:106 [Ibid., pp. 45-46. Ahmad suggests that Da’ud Khan belonged to a family whose descendents were treated favorably by Firuz Shah. Also, Ahmad notes that the builder Bangal Khani had probably rendered service to the sultan during his previous expedition.]The edifice of this mosque of blessed foundation and the ka'ba-like arch was constructed during the reign of the lord of the earth and king of Solomon’s standard, who is confident of the Merciful,
Abu’l-Muzaffar Firuz Shah, the Sultan, may God perpetuate his kingdom; and, during the governorship of the great Khan, Asadu’l Haqwad-Din, Ulugh A'zam Da’ud Khan, may God honour his helpers;
[by] the humble one [who is] hopeful of the [favour of the] Mighty Lord [namely] Khwaja Bangal Khani may God recompense him with a fine reward, on the first of the month of Rabi' I, year five and sixty and seven hundred (8 December 1363).
Da’ud Khan is thought to be the son of Malik Ibrahim mentioned above and his successor as governor of Bihar. [!!!]An undated inscription in the dargah of Shah Qumais in Biharsharif, which probably records the construction of a mosque, again alludes to Firuz Shah’s religious temperament and his encouragement of the building of mosques.107 [Ibid., pp. 52. Ahmad suggests that Da’ud Khan belonged to a family whose descendents were treated favorably by Firuz Shah. Also, Ahmad notes that the builder Bangal Khani had probably rendered service to the sultan during his previous expedition.][God, the most High, has said] One who believes in God and the Last Day causes mosques to be built. This auspicious [mosque] was built
[in the reign of] the king of the world, [who is] confident of the support of the Merciful, Abu’l Muzaffar Firuz Shah, the Sultan, [may God] perpetuate...
[by] the servant of the honourable Khanzada Malik Siraj al-Din [son of] Sulaiman, dated the second of [Shawwal]...
Khanzada Malik Siraj al-Din was probably a high-ranking official whose position is uncertain.
Another Persian inscription, dated 767/1365, now in the Indian Museum, Calcutta, was originally attached to Bayley Sarai in Biharsharif. The inscription is fragmentary but in it the reference, "Firuz Shah, the prop of the Universe" is still intelligible.108 [Ibid., pp. 48. Ahmad suggests that Da’ud Khan belonged to a family whose descendents were treated favorably by Firuz Shah. Also, Ahmad notes that the builder Bangal Khani had probably rendered service to the sultan during his previous expedition.] Bayley Sarai (Biharsharif): It is situated in the town itself the most remarkable building is huge inn, erected about 100 year ago. The dispensary is housed in this building and in front of it is an elaborately designed clock tower.
-- Nalanda (Bihar Sharif) District, by biharattractions.com
A fragmentary inscription, dated 774/1373, in situ in a private house in Biharsharif refers to "the merciful, Abu'l Muzaffar Firuz Shah, the Sultan," but the purpose for which it was intended is not known.109 [Ibid., pp. 56. Ahmad suggests that Da’ud Khan belonged to a family whose descendents were treated favorably by Firuz Shah. Also, Ahmad notes that the builder Bangal Khani had probably rendered service to the sultan during his previous expedition.]
An undated epigraph bearing Firuz Shah’s name also appears on a slab of uncertain provenance but last traceable to Biharsharif. The fragment reads:110 [Ibid., pp. 61. Ahmad suggests that Da’ud Khan belonged to a family whose descendents were treated favorably by Firuz Shah. Also, Ahmad notes that the builder Bangal Khani had probably rendered service to the sultan during his previous expedition.][Sultan] who is shelter of the world, [and who is] confident of the support of the merciful, Firuz Shah the Sultan...
The inscription appears on the reverse side of a two-sided tablet. The obverse of the slab mentions an officer, perhaps the builder, who was hajib or "chamberlain for the Hindus of the kingdom," but the name of the reigning monarch is obliterated. Ahmad believes that the slab was removed from its original location by Firuz Shah who had the former king’s name effaced and its reverse side inscribed.
Yet another fragmentary inscription, in situ in an enclosure wall of Fadlu’llah Gosain’s tomb in mahalla Baradari in Biharsharif, includes the phrase; "took place in the prosperous reign of the ruler of the world, Firuz Shah."111 [Ibid., pp. 63. Ahmad suggests that Da’ud Khan belonged to a family whose descendents were treated favorably by Firuz Shah. Also, Ahmad notes that the builder Bangal Khani had probably rendered service to the sultan during his previous expedition.]
Ahmad also includes an Arabic and Persian inscription, dated 774/1373, in situ in a mosque in Tajpur Saran in Saran District, which records the construction of a fort by a certain Mukhlis Da’ud Khani.112 [ Ibid., pp. 58. Ahmad suggests that Da’ud Khan belonged to a family whose descendents were treated favorably by Firuz Shah. Also, Ahmad notes that the builder Bangal Khani had probably rendered service to the sultan during his previous expedition.] The fragmentary epigraph refers to "Abu’l Muzaffar Firuz Shah, the Sultan, May God perpetuate his kingdom and sovereignty." Ahmad points to this epigraph as evidence of Tughluq dominion in northwest Bihar.Location of Bihar
Several observations can be made about this group of Bihar inscriptions. First, of course, is that building activity in the area was enthusiastically pursued. Although none of the known inscriptions identify Firuz Shah as the builder, they point to a considerable level of sub-imperial patronage, perhaps as a result of Firuz Shah’s encouragement. Most, if not all, monuments were built by high-ranking officials who, in some cases, continued their own dynastic precedents. For example, successive foundation epigraphs can be assigned to a dynasty of governors of Bihar. All of the epigraphs which contain Firuz Shah’s name recognize his sovereignty and most identify him as sultan. Many reiterate his religious beliefs, his just disposition, and his reputation as a builder of mosques. The perceptions of him as an imperialist, however, are stated in universal nomenclature: shelter of the world, prop of the universe, emperor of the world, lord of the world, world-conquering monarch, and victorious over rulers of the world.
Ahmad points out that the phraseology of these inscriptions was stereotypic and that they were nearly interchangeable without any substantive change in their meanings.113 [Ibid., pp. 61. Ahmad suggests that Da’ud Khan belonged to a family whose descendents were treated favorably by Firuz Shah. Also, Ahmad notes that the builder Bangal Khani had probably rendered service to the sultan during his previous expedition.] It is possible that the repetitive titulature found in them is based on prototypes formulated in Muhammad bin Tughluq’s reign.114 [Ibid., pp. 23-32. Ahmad suggests that Da’ud Khan belonged to a family whose descendents were treated favorably by Firuz Shah. Also, Ahmad notes that the builder Bangal Khani had probably rendered service to the sultan during his previous expedition.]
If this were the case, then the Tughluqs encouraged sub-imperial patronage in Bihar over an extended period of time.
However the inscriptions dated to Firuz Shah’s reign depart from those of his predecessor’s in their omission of the name of the caliph, contained in at least two epigraphs belonging to the latter’s reign.
The concentration of the epigraphs in Biharsharif suggests that it was an outpost of the Tughluq governors and a religious center of the province. Its former reputation as a major Buddhist center perhaps influenced its growth as a Muslim center.115 [Ibid., pp. 41-42. Ahmad suggests that Da’ud Khan belonged to a family whose descendents were treated favorably by Firuz Shah. Also, Ahmad notes that the builder Bangal Khani had probably rendered service to the sultan during his previous expedition. Ahmad notes that Sufi saints often selected Buddhist sites as their base.] in fact, the sub-imperial initiative is pointed to as an acceptable means of stating piety.116 [Welch and Crane, "The Tughluqs," p. 160.]The Bihar inscriptions collectively provide valuable evidence which has almost disappeared from the Delhi monuments. [???!!!] Although these epigraphs do not provide direct evidence about Firuz Shah’s patronage, they shed light on his influence on sub-imperial patronage in this part of his empire.[T]he mind seems persistently to formulate what Claude Lévi-Strauss has called a science of the concrete... mind requires order, and order is achieved by discriminating and taking note of everything, placing everything of which the mind is aware in a secure, refindable place, therefore giving things some role to play in the economy of objects and identities that make up an environment. This kind of rudimentary classification has a logic to it, but the rules of the logic by which a green fern in one society is a symbol of grace and in another is considered maleficent are neither predictably rational nor universal. There is always a measure of the purely arbitrary in the way the distinctions between things are seen. And with these distinctions go values whose history, if one could unearth it completely, would probably show the same measure of arbitrariness.... But if we agree that all things in history, like history itself, are made by men, then we will appreciate how possible it is for many objects or places or times to be assigned roles and given meanings that acquire objective validity only after the assignments are made....
It is perfectly possible to argue that some distinctive objects are made by the mind, and that these objects, while appearing to exist objectively, have only a fictional reality. A group of people living on a few acres of land will set up boundaries between their land and its immediate surroundings and the territory beyond, which they call “the land of the barbarians.” In other words, this universal practice of designating in one’s mind a familiar space which is “ours” and an unfamiliar space beyond “ours” which is “theirs” is a way of making geographical distinctions that can be entirely arbitrary....
The French philosopher Gaston Bachelard once wrote an analysis of what he called the poetics of space. The inside of a house, he said, acquires a sense of intimacy, secrecy, security, real or imagined, because of the experiences that come to seem appropriate for it. The objective space of a house -- its corners, corridors, cellar, rooms -- is far less important than what poetically it is endowed with, which is usually a quality with an imaginative or figurative value we can name and feel: thus a house may be haunted, or homelike, or prisonlike, or magical. So space acquires emotional and even rational sense by a kind of poetic, process, whereby the vacant or anonymous, reaches of distance are converted into meaning for us here. The same process occurs when we deal with time. Much of what we associate with or even know about such periods as "long ago” or “the beginning” or “at the end of time” is poetic -- made up. For a historian of Middle Kingdom Egypt, “long ago” will have a very clear sort of meaning, but even this meaning does not totally dissipate the imaginative, quasi-fictional quality one senses lurking in a time very different and distant from our own. For there is no doubt that imaginative geography and history help the mind to intensify its own sense of itself by dramatising the distance and difference between what is close to it and what is far away....
We need not decide here whether this kind of imaginative knowledge infuses history and geography, or whether in some way it overrides them. Let us just say for the time being that it is there as something more than what appears to be merely positive knowledge....
Consider how the Orient, and in particular the Near Orient, became known in the West as its great complementary opposite since antiquity. There were the Bible and the rise of Christianity; there were travellers like Marco Polo who charted the trade routes and patterned a regulated system of commercial exchange, and after him Lodovico di Varthema and Pietro della Valle; there were fabulists like Mandeville; there were the redoubtable conquering Eastern movements, principally Islam, of course; there were the militant pilgrims, chiefly the Crusaders. Altogether an internally structured archive is built up from the literature that belongs to these experiences. Out of this comes a restricted number of typical encapsulations: the journey, the history, the fable, the stereotype, the polemical confrontation....
[A] new median category emerges, a category that allows one to see new things, things seen for the first time, as versions of a previously known thing. In essence such a category is not so much a way of receiving new information as it is a method of controlling what seems to be a threat to some established view of things. If the mind must suddenly deal with what it takes to be a radically new form of life -- as Islam appeared to Europe in the early Middle Ages -- the response on the whole is conservative and defensive. Islam is judged to be a fraudulent new version of some previous experience, in this case Christianity. The threat is muted, familiar values impose themselves, and in the end the mind reduces the pressure upon it by accommodating things to itself as either “original” or “repetitious.” Islam thereafter is “handled”: its novelty and its suggestiveness are brought under control so that relatively nuanced discriminations are now made that would have been impossible had the raw novelty of Islam been left unattended....
The point is that what remained current about Islam was some necessarily diminished version of those great dangerous forces that it symbolised for Europe. Like Walter Scott’s Saracens, the European representation of the Muslim, Ottoman, or Arab was always a way of controlling the redoubtable Orient, and to a certain extent the same is true of the methods of contemporary learned Orientalists, whose subject is not so much the East itself as the East made known, and therefore less fearsome, to the Western reading public.
***
Orientalism is after all a system for citing works and authors. Edward William Lane’s Manners and Customs of the Modern Egyptians was read and cited by such diverse figures as Nerval, Flaubert, and Richard Burton. He was an authority whose use was an imperative for anyone writing or thinking about the Orient, not just about Egypt: when Nerval borrows passages verbatim from Modern Egyptians it is to use Lane’s authority to assist him in describing village scenes in Syria, not Egypt. Lane’s authority and the opportunities provided for citing him discriminately as well as indiscriminately were there because Orientalism could give his text the kind of distributive currency that he acquired....
Orientalism was fully formalized into a repeatedly produced copy of itself.
-- Orientalism, by Edward W. Said
The historical perspective provided by evidence in contemporary literature and epigraphy establishes a framework for examining individual monuments attributed to Firuz Shah.
The attributions of extant monuments to him is based almost entirely on literary evidence. In the next chapter, these literary sources are compiled and a list of monuments is reconstructed and surviving structures are identified.
Without the confirmation of foundation inscriptions, all attributions can be called into question, but where textual and epigraphic evidence is lacking, art historical evidence -- similarity of architectural form and stylistic conventions -- provides.
_______________
Notes:1 Probably the best known modern histories of Firuz Shah include Jamini Mohan Banerjee’s History of Firuz Shah Tughluq (1967), Manazir Ahmad’s History of Firoz Shah Tughlaq (1978), and chapters on Firuz Shah in Agha Mahdi Husain’s Tughluq Dynasty, to name only a few.
2 Riazul Islam, "Firuz Shah Tugluk," Encyclopedia of Islam, p. 924.
The designation "Tughluk" (alternatively "Tughluq") is a modern innovation and is not mentioned by contemporary Persian authorities.3 ‘Afif, Ta’rikh (Elliot and Dowson), p. 271.
Details of Tughluq ancestry are given, according to ‘Afif, in his Manakib-i Sultan Tughlik. This manuscript is now lost.4 Bosworth, The Islamic Dynasties, pp. 190-191.
5 ‘Afif, Ta’rikh (Elliot and Dowson), p. 271.
His full name, Abu al-Muzzafar Firoz Shah, is given in the Sirat-i Firuz Shahi. See Rashid, "Firoz Shah’s Investiture," p. 70. It also appears in several instances in architectural epigraphy (as reigning monarch, not the builder).
6
Hardy, Historians of Medieval India, p. 43, states that the events surrounding the parents of Firuz Shah and his life prior to his accession were intended by ‘Afif to "read as hagiology, full of signs and portents of coming greatness. Events are mentioned for their symbolical import."7 ‘Afif, Ta’rikh (Elliot and Dowson), pp. 273-274.
8 ‘Afif, Ta’rikh (Elliot and Dowson), p. 274. ‘Afif notes in the Ta’rikh that he explains the motives for Muhammad bin Tughluq’s actions in his Manaqib-i Muhammad bin Tughluq, a manuscript now lost.
9 The accession remains a question of debate. Both Barani, Ta’rikh (Elliot and Dowson), pp. 266-267, and ‘Afif, Ta’rikh (Elliot and Dowson), pp. 275-286, assert that his election was by unanimous consent of those who accompanied the royal entourage to Thatta. It is not certain who was in attendance and whether this was an election by the ‘ulama’ or the military. Barani mentions Makhdum Zada ‘Abbasi, the Shaikh al- Shaiyukh of Egypt, Shaikh Nasir al-Din Mahmud Oudhi, and "chief man" attending the camp. ‘Afif identifies members of the camp as khans, princes, learned men, shaikhs, and officials. In either event both ‘Afif and Barani have chosen to downplay the possibility of struggle and emphasize Firuz’s election as logical, legitimate, and even ordained by God. Bosworth, Islamic Dynasties, p. 186, recognizes the short interim during which Mahmud was placed on the throne in Delhi by Khwaja Jahan. Although ‘Afif reports that Firuz Shah forgave the Khwaja for his actions, he acquiesced to his execution. Some authors have suggested that Firuz Shah was designated as regent by Muhammad bin Tughluq and that he usurped the throne (Wolseley Haig, JRAS (1922), p. 365); for discussion of this point, see Majumdar (Editor), The Delhi Sultanate in The History and Culture of the Indian People, p. 90 and p. 107, footnote 1).
Modern historians accept the belief that Firuz Shah was elected. Banerjee, History of Firuz Shah Tughluq, pp. 12-18, discusses the question of his succession at length in light of traditional Muslim practice.
10 The 'ulama' was the collective religious community. Members included not only the pious clergy ('ulama'-i akhirat) but people who were were knowledgeable of Islamic Law (‘ulama’-i dunya or "worldly").
11 The accession of Firuz Shah was clouded by circumstances in Delhi. Khudawand Zada, the daughter of Ghiyath al-Din Tughluq and sister of Muhammad bin Tughluq, advanced her own son, Dawar Malik, the nephew of Muhammad. Malik Saif al-Din Khaju was sent from Thatta to thwart the claim, insisting that the youth was incompetent and unable to assume the responsibilities of rule. His argument was convincing and Dawar Malik was instead given the title of naib bar-bak. Afterwards Firuz Shah considered the claim without animosity and he regularly visited Khudawand Zada in the harem following the Friday sabbath. Moreover, he spared her life when she was implicated in an assassination attempt on him a few years later. See ‘Afif, Ta’rikh (Elliot and Dowson), pp. 276, 278, 290, 292.
A second claimant to the throne was advanced by Khwaja Jahan Ahmad Ayas, the vizier left in charge of Delhi during Muhammad bin Tughluq’s absence in Sind. Rumors of Muhammad bin Tughluq’s death, the attack on the imperial troops by the Chaghatai bands at Thatta, and the uncertain fate of Firuz Shah led Khwaja to react to the exigencies of the moment and he advanced a son of that sultan, Mahmud. Although Mahmud’s accession is recognized by Bosworth, he never actually exerted authority or gained recognition of the ‘ulama’. See Bosworth, The Islamic Dynasties, p. 186.Later, as Firuz Shah approached the city of Delhi, members of the court who had supported the Khwaja’s action defected in the face of the former’s popularity and military advantage. Firuz Shah granted the vizier leave from court but was afterwards indicted in the Khwaja’s subsequent death. See Husain, Tughluq Dynasty, pp. 390-391; Majumdar, The Delhi Sultanate" p. 91; Hardy, Historians of Medieval India, p. 45; ‘Afif, Ta’rikh (Elliot and Dowson), p. 279. ‘Afif refutes the idea that Khwaja Jahan had acted out of line. The relationship between Firuz Shah and Khwaja Jahan was good. When Firuz Shah approached Delhi, the Khwaja fled to Hauz Khas from where he appealed for forgiveness (pp. 284-285). Firuz Shah banished him from the court and he was killed while enroute to Samana.
12 Barani, Ta’rikh (Elliot and Dowson), p. 267, and ‘Afif, Ta’rikh (Elliot and Dowson), pp. 277-278.
13 ‘Afif, Ta’rikh (Elliot and Dowson), p. 278.
14
Riazul Islam, "Firuz Shah Tughluk," p. 924, says that Firuz Shah was "thoroughly incompetent as a general: his conduct of war suffered from his professed desire to avoid all bloodshed and his vacillating judgment."
15 Ibid., p. 924. Riazul Islam states that Firuz Shah had a "keen desire to regain provinces lost by Muhammad bin Tughluq particularly Bengal and Deccan but his campaign to Bengal resulted in a loss of the territory and the campaign to Sind was concluded in a similar manner. He never undertook a campaign to the Deccan.
16 His campaigns to Bengal are described at length by ‘Afif, Ta’rikh (Elliot and Dowson), pp. 293ff and pp. 303ff. The extent of his architectural legacy is only beginning to be understood. The foundation of Jaunpur during his second Bengal campaign is well known. Epigraphy is the key to rediscovering some of these monuments. See Qeyamuddin Ahmad, Corpus of Arabic & Persian Inscriptions of Bihar (A.H. 640-1200), Patna, K. P. Jayaswal Research Institute, 1973. Pages 23 through 73 deal with inscriptions of the Tughluq sultans.
Dani, Muslim Architecture of Bengal, p. 58, contends that the Bengal ruler Sikandar Shah constructed the famous Adina Masjid in emulation of Firuz Shah’s capital of Firuzabad.17 Firishta, Ta’rikh (Briggs), p. 259, and Majumdar, The Delhi Sultanate, p. 91. ‘Afif attributes the pursuit of Shams al-Din as the motive for the campaign. It is unlikely that Firaz Shah had other motives. It is not certain whether his campaign was a calculated move to regain the Bengal or in response to a plea for help. Barani states that Ilyas Shah was harassing Muslims and Hindus. See Ahmad, "Barani’s References to ‘The Hindus’," p. 297. The Insha-i Mahru contains a letter justifying the invasion of Bengal to suppress the tyrant and injustice of Haji Ilyas and invites all classes of men to desert him. See Hodivala, Studies in Indo-Muslim History, v. 1, p. 338;
Riazul Islam, "Firuz Shah Tughluk," p. 924, suggests that Bengal was already lost by Muhammad bin Tughlug
but Majumdar, p. 91, suggests that Firuz Shah acknowledged its independence in 1356, subsequent to the first campaign implying that his peace negotiations after the first campaign granted this concession.
Hardy, Historians of Medieval India, p. 46, says that Firuz Shah went to Bengal the first time in search of fame.
18 Although he does not provide a specific chronology, ‘Afif gives the dates of the founding of Firuzabad and Hissar as occurring between the two Bengal campaigns. ‘Afif, Ta’rikh (Elliot and Dowson), pp. 298-299 and 302-303.
19 ‘Afif, Ta’rikh (Elliot and Dowson), pp. 303-305. The plea was delivered by Zafar Khan, the son-in-law of Shams al-Din, who was loyal to Fahr al-Din.
20 See Bosworth, Islamic Dynasties, pp. 193-194. An inscribed tablet, dated 769/1367, whose provenance is believed to be Champanagar in Bihar, records the foundation of a mosque by a general Ulugh Taghi Khan. The inscription begins:
In the name of God, the best of Names. This mosque was constructed in the reign of the Sultan, warrior in the cause of religion, Sikandar Shah, son of Ilyas Shah, the Sultan.
See Ahmad, Corpus of Arabic & Persian Inscriptions of Bihar, p. 54.
21 ‘Afif, Ta’rikh (Elliot and Dowson), pp. 312-315. The Puri temple is identified as the Jagannatha temple, a Vasinava temple built by the Ganga rulers in the mid-eleventh century A.D. It remains in active worship today.
22 Majumdar, The Delhi Sultanate, p. 94.
23 ‘Afif, Ta’rikh (Elliot and Dowson), p. 317.
24
‘Afif, Ta’rikh (Elliot and Dowson), p. 322, refers to Jam and Babiniya as two separate persons. Firishta (Briggs, p. 263) considers them one and the same.25 ‘Afif, Ta’rikh (Elliot and Dowson), pp. 320.
26
Firuz Shah’s troops approached Sind by water. Embarking his troops on 5000 boats to Thatta, the sultan accompanied the fleet along the riverbank. A grain shortage and pestilence killed nearly three quarters of his horses and interrupted the campaign. The troops had hoped to retire to Gujarat for reinforcements and supplies but instead were plagued by continuing famine, equine pestilence, and disloyalty. For six months no news was received in Delhi. The vizier Khan-i Jahan maintained order in Delhi despite rumors of Firuz Shah’s disappearance. Following this tragic interim, the rains alleviated the dire situation and Firuz Shah was able to continue into Gujarat where he dismissed the governor, Amir Husain, for treason. The imperial troops returned to Sind during the harvest season to find the people of Thatta unprepared. Peace was quickly negotiated and Firuz Shah extended generous concessions in return for recognition of his sovereignty.27 ‘Afif, Ta’rikh (Elliot and Dowson), pp. 317-318; Firishta, Ta’rikh (Briggs), p. 263.
28 Firishta, Ta’rikh (Briggs), p. 264; Majumdar, The Delhi Sultanate, p. 96.
29 Majumdar, The Delhi Sultanate, p. 76; Firishta, Ta’rikh (Briggs), p. 265. Majumdar, The Delhi Sultanate, pp. 103 and 106.
31 See Banerjee, History of Firuz Shah Tughluq, pp. 58-59; and Majumdar (Ed.), The Delhi Sultanate, v. 5, pp. 93-94. Both authors discuss the interpretations by modern scholars of Firuz Shah’s motives for undertaking the expedition to Puri.
32 Firishta, Ta’rikh (Elliot and Dowson), p. 63.
33 Firuz Shah, Futuhat (Elliot and Dowson), p. 381.
34 Ibid., p. 381.
35 Ibid., p. 380.
36 ‘Afif, Ta’rikh (Elliot and Dowson), p. 366.
37 Firuz Shah, Futuhat (Elliot and Dowson), p. 378.
38 Ibid., pp. 378-379
39 Ibid., p. 379.
40 Ibid., pp. 379-380.
41 Ibid., pp. 377-378. In his actions against Shi’as, Firuz Shah singled out the Rawafiz.
42 Ibid., p. 378.
43 Ibid., p. 375.
44
Welch and Crane see the broadening of the base of architectural patronage as an acceptable means of expressing piety as well as a significant element in the development of an architectural style. See Welch and Crane, "The Tughluqs," p. 160.
45
The tas-i ghariyal was allegedly placed near the kushk-i shikar. Hodivala speculates its location near the observatory which he identifies as Pir Ghaib on the northern ridge of Delhi. Hodivala, Indo-Muslim History, v. 1, p. 325.
46
Asher suggests that the linkage between saints and royalty was a means of creating an elevated and fabricated genealogy; for Sher Shah, it underscored his legitimacy. See Asher, Patronage of Sher Shah Sur, pp. 298 and 301.47 Firuz Shah’s prohibition against Muslim women visiting graves, expressed in the Futuhat, seems to have been motivated as much out of concern for their personal safety as proscribed by Muslim Law. Firuz Shah, Futuhat (Elliot and Dowson), p. 380.
48 Firuz Shah, Futuhat (Elliot and Dowson), p. 387 and 377.
49 ‘Afif, Ta’rikh (Elliot and Dowson), p. 321.
50 Ibid., p. 282 and 321.
51 Firuz Shah, Futuhat (Elliot and Dowson), pp. 383-384.
52 ‘Afif, Ta’rikh (Elliot and Dowson), p. 329.
53 Ibid., p. 362.
54 Firuz Shah, Futuhat (Elliot and Dowson), p. 376.
55 Ibid., p. 387.
56 Raychaudhuri and Habib, The Cambridge Economic History of India, v. 1, p. 188.
The authors state that Firuz Shah abandoned all attempts at controlling prices, resulting in a "happy time" for merchants and engrossers. See also ‘Afif, Ta’rikh (Elliot and Dowson), pp. 344-347.
57 Raychaudhuri and Habib, The Cambridge Economic History of India, v. 1, p. 98.
58 Ibid., p. 49.
59 Ibid., p. 49; ‘Afif, Ta’rikh (Elliot and Dowson), p. 300; Firishta, Ta'rikh (Briggs), p. 260.
60 ‘Afif, Ta’rikh (Elliot and Dowson), p. 345; Raychaudhuri and Habib, Cambridge Economic History, pp. 53 and 101.
61 Raychaudhuri and Habib, Cambridge Economic History, p. 73.
62 Firuz Shah, Futuhat (Elliot and Dowson), p. 377; Banerjee, History of Firuz Shah Tughluq, pp. 122-123.
63 Raychaudhuri and Habib, Cambridge Economic History, p. 55.
64 ‘Afif, Ta’rikh (Elliot and Dowson), p. 347.
65 ‘Afif, Ta’rikh (Elliot and Dowson), p. 289; Hardy, Historians of Medieval India, p. 47; Raychaudhuri and Habib, Cambridge Economic History, p. 73.
66 Firuz Shah, Futuhat, p. 377.
67 Ibid., p. 387.
68 Anthony Welch and Howard Crane, "The Tughluqs," p. 127.
69 Hardy, Historians of Medieval India, p. 50, makes note of the alienation of wealth when he assesses ‘Afif’s positive comments about the prosperity of the reign.
The institution of slavery grew to unprecedented proportions under Firuz Shah. According to ‘Afif, the slave population in Delhi was 180,000, compared to 50,000 under ‘Ala’ al-Din Khalji. Firuz Shah forbade the export of slaves which closed the slave market. The slaves included artisans, attendants, soldiers, concubines, and personal bodyguards of the sultan. One modern author points to the large slave population as a disturbing factor in the state.
70 Firuz Shah, Futuhat (Elliot and Dowson), pp. 384-385; Raychaudhuri and Habib, Cambridge Economic History, p. 75.
71 ‘Afif, Ta’rikh (Elliot and Dowson), p. 361; Firuz Shah, Futuhat (Elliot and Dowson), p. 385.
72 ‘Afif, Ta’rikk (Elliot and Dowson), p. 361.
73 ‘Afif, Ta’rikh (Elliot and Dowson, p. 301.
74
Raychaudhuri and Habib, Cambridge Economic History, p. 97, attribute the exhaustion of the royal treasury to the scale of military operations, the loss of the provinces of Bengal and Deccan (both sources for the precious metals of the currency), and the already depressed money economy of the middle of the 14th century.75 Majumdar, The Delhi Sultanate, p. 107.
76 Firuz Shah, Futuhat (Elliot and Dowson), p 382; ‘Afif, Ta’rikh (Elliot and Dowson), p. 363.
Simon Digby gives a different translation of ‘Afif’s passage than that in Elliot and Dowson:And that quantity of the customs which were established as governmental usage [?] and those customs appeared in conflict with the Shar’iat, he forbade them all; one of these [was] the drawing of animate forms [naqqashi-yi-musawar] in the private apartments [mahall-i-khilvatgah] of the Sultan: and [as for] that, it is the custom of kings that they always arrange picture galleries with figures in their place of rest [albatta dar maqam-i-aramgah ishan nigarkhanahayi-musawar rast kunand]. Sultan Ferozshah, out of his great fear of God, ordered that they should not make pictures of living forms in those galleries...because it is in conflict with the Shar’iat: and in the place of the depictions of figures [suratgari] they should draw a design [naqsh] with various kinds of Bostan [orchard, garden, sc. flowering trees] in accordance with the desires of friends...for the spectacle [tamasha].
See Simon Digby, "Literary Evidence for Painting in the Delhi Sultanate," Bulletin of the American Academy of Benares, vol. I, Varanasi, 1967, p. 53.
77 Barani, Fatawa-yi Jahandari, parts translated and edited by Habib and Begum as The Political Theory of the Delhi Sultanate, p. 18.
Barani’s advice is presented in the form of a paradigm for Muslim rulers. He does not cite Firuz Shah by name.78 ‘Afif, Ta’rikh (Elliot and Dowson), p. 361.
79 Firuz Shah, Futuhat (Elliot and Dowson), p. 382.
80 Firishta, Ta’rikh (Briggs), p. 263.
81 ‘Afif, Ta’rikh (Elliot and Dowson), pp. 361-362.
82 Ibid., p. 341.
83 Firuz Shah, Futuhat (Elliot and Dowson), pp. 382-385.
84 Firishta, Ta'rikh (Briggs), p. 270.
85 ‘Afif, Ta’rikh (Elliot and Dowson), pp. 354-355.
86 Ibid., p. 354.
87 Raychaudhuri and Habib, Cambridge Economic History, p. 81.
88 Firishta, Ta’rikh (Briggs), pp. 266-267.
89 Majumdar, The Delhi Sultanate, p. 97; ‘Afif, Ta’rikh (Elliot and Dowson), p. 362. ‘Afif writes: "As long as he lived he paid attention to the elders of the religion, and towards the end of his reign, he himself became a shaveling." Shaveling is a reference to tonsure, or shaving of the head in preparation for initiation into a dervish order.
90
Firishta, Ta’rikh (Briggs), p. 267, states that Firuz Shah died at the age of 90 however if one accepts ‘Afif's word that he was born in 709/1309, then he was 79 years old when he died. See also Majumdar, The Delhi Sultanate, p. 108, footnote 21.
91 Stephen, Archaeology and Monumental Remains, p. 146, fn.
92 The Persian inscription given in the text in located on the doorway of the fifth storey. Firuz Shah’s repairs to the Qutb Minar have been been the topic of much discussion.
Page, Historical Memoir on the Qutb, pp. 19-20, indicates that the fourth and fifth stories of the minar were probably Firuz Shah’s construction. Besides the Persian inscription, two nagari inscriptions on the minar refer to repairs in 1369 A. D. Page (pp. 34 and 42-43) gives the following translations from the Archaeological Survey’s reports. The first nagari inscription (on the 8th course of the third balcony):
On Thursday, the 15th day of the dark fortnight of Phalguna in the year Samvat 1425 (i.e., 1369 A.D.) lightning fell. The [monument] was [then] repaired in the year Samvat 1425. The architects were Nana, Salha, Lola and Lashmana.
The second nagari inscription (on the left abutment of the fourth balcony):
Om. In the auspicious reign of the illustrious Firoz Shah Sultan on Friday the 5th of the bright fortnight of Phalguna in the year Samvat 1426, the restoration of the Minar was carried out in the palace or temple of Visvakarman. The architect was the maternal grandson of the son of Chahadadevapala; the measuring cord was drawn and the foundation laid.
93 Welch and Crane, "The Tughluqs," p. 154.
94 ‘Afif mentions that Khan-i Jahan Maqbul was a convert from Hinduism. See Stephen, Archaeology and Monumental Remains, p. 152, fn.
95 Stephen, Archaeology and Monumental Remains, pp. 151-152.
96 Welch and Crane, "The Tughluqs," p. 139.
97
The attributions of the seven mosques were made by Sayyid Ahmad Khan. Stephen, Archaeology and Monumental Remains, p. 149) accepted Sayyid Ahmad Khan’s attributions but only two of the mosques, the Kalan Masjid and Kali Masjid, have foundation epigraphs.98 Nath, Sultanate Architecture, pp. 56-57; Husain, Rise and Fall, pp. 119-120; Welch and Crane, "The Tughluqs," p. 161, fn 45.
99 Welch and Crane, "The Tughluqs," p. 139; Husain, A Record of All Quranic and Non-Historical Epigraphs, p. 21.
100 Archaeological Survey, Lists of Monuments, v. 2 Mahrauli Zail, p. 73-74, no. 112. The authors state that they do not know why the tomb is referred to as the "Saubate-tomb." The tomb, belonging to the chhatri type is situated within a walled enclosure. The latter contains three mihrabs on the west. It is presently maintained by waqf of Mutawalli Khadims of the dargah of Qutb Sahib.
The identity of Shah Abdul Haq is uncertain but it is doubtful that he is Firuz Shah’s deputy architect referred to in the Futuhat.101 Welch and Crane have pointed out the existence of epigraphs on four mosques which date from the reign of Firuz Shah: a mosque built by an amir, Malik Shahin Bek, dated 767/1366, in Hansi; a Friday mosque, dated 772/1371 in Ladnum, built by Firuz Shah’s master of the hunt; and two mosques in Didwana, both dated 779/1377, built by a weaver and a baker, respectively. See Welch and Crane, "The Tughluqs," p. 127; Epigraphica Indica: Arabic and Persian Supplement (1953-1954), p. 2; (1949-1950), pp. 18-20.
102 Ahmad, Arabic & Persian Inscriptions of Bihar, p. 35.
103 Ibid., pp. 36. Ahmad (p. 38) identifies Malik Bayyu as Ibrahim ibn Abu Bakr popularly known as Ibrahim Bayyu, who carried the title of Saif al-Daulat and was a maqta' of Bihar.
Desai believes that he was the governor of Bihar. Ahmad (pp. 38-40) discusses the historical evidence, sometimes contradictory, surrounding this man.
104 Ibid., p. 43.
105 Ibid., p. 44 and fn 1. Ahmad cites this reference from a copy of a manuscript, Malfuz al-Safar, dated 927/1520-21, in Phulwari Khanaqah Library.
The quote is part of a conversation, under the heading date of 12 Safar 762/December 23, 1360, between the author of the Malfuz and a saint Sharf al-Din.106 Ibid., pp. 45-46.
Ahmad suggests that Da’ud Khan belonged to a family whose descendents were treated favorably by Firuz Shah.
Also, Ahmad notes that the builder Bangal Khani had probably rendered service to the sultan during his previous expedition.107 Ibid., p. 52.
108 Ibid., p. 48. The inscription also refers to
Khanzada Sulaiman, the son of Ulugh Da’ud, who is believed to be yet another successor as governor of Bihar.
109 Ibid., p. 56.
110 Ibid., p. 61.
111 Ibid., p. 63.
112 Ibid., p. 58.
113 Ibid., p. 61.
114 Ibid., pp. 23-32.
115 Ibid., pp. 41-42.
Ahmad notes that Sufi saints often selected Buddhist sites as their base.116 Welch and Crane, "The Tughluqs," p. 160.