REIGN OF SULTÁN MUHAMMAD FARRUKH SIYAR, SON OF 'AZÍMU-SH SHÁN, SON OF BAHÁDUR SHÁH, FOURTEENTH IN DESCENT FROM AMÍR TÍMÚR.

[vol. ii. p. 707.] When Prince 'Azímu-sh Shán, eldest son of Bahádur Sháh, left the súba of Bengal, to proceed to the Dakhin, in obedience to the summons of the Emperor Aurangzeb, he placed his middle son, Farrukh Siyar, as his deputy in the súba of Bengal, * * and Farrukh Siyar remained acting as deputy of his father in Bengal until Bahádur Sháh returned from the Dakhin to Láhore. In the year 1122 A.H. (1710 A.D.), in the fifth year of the reign, the súba of Bengal was taken from Farrukh Siyar, and given to A'azzu-d daula Khán-khánán. Farrukh Siyar was recalled to Court, and starting on his journey, he got as far as 'Azímábád, i.e. Patna. For personal appearance, and for intelligence, he was not held in the same esteem by his father as his elder brother, Muhammad Karím, or his younger brother, Muhammad Humáyún Bakht. So his coming to Court was disagreeable to his father. On reaching Patna, Farrukh Siyar, alleging a want of money and the approach of the rainy season, made a stay in the environs of that city. * *

When Farrukh Siyar received intelligence of the death of Bahádur Sháh, he caused the khutba to be read and coins to be struck in the name of 'Azímu-sh Shán. * *

Husain 'Alí Khán Bárha was acting as deputy of 'Azímu-sh Shán in the súbadárí of Patna, but at this time he had gone out into the country to punish some robbers. When he heard that the name of 'Azímu-sh Shán had been placed in the khutba and on the coins, before the defeat of his three brothers had been ascertained, he felt very sorry for and suspicious of Farrukh Siyar. The Prince, on his side, had observed the high courage of the Bárha Saiyids, and the sway of Husain 'Alí Khán in that súba had deeply impressed him. He addressed kind and friendly letters to Husain, inviting him to his side. The mother of Farrukh Siyar also interceded with Husain 'Alí, and promises and engagements having been made, doubt and suspicion were changed into brotherly concord.

The intelligence of the death of 'Azímu-sh Shán, and of the victory of Jahándár Sháh reached Patna. Thereupon Farrukh Siyar, in the beginning of Rabí'u-l awwal, 1123 A.H., struck coins, and had the khutba read in his name, and day by day he entered into closer relations with Husain 'Alí. Saiyid 'Abdu-llah Khán, otherwise known as Hasan 'Alí Khán, was Súbadár of Alláhábád, and during these troubles about the succession the treasure of Bengal had come into his possession. He was considered a man of courage and judgment. Some intimations of his suspicion and mistrust, and of his want of obedience to the profligate Jahándár, reached Farrukh Siyar. So the Prince wrote him re-assuring letters, informing him of the compact he had made with his brother Husain 'Alí. He also gave him permission to retain the treasure and to enlist troops. Husain 'Alí also wrote what was necessary on the subject, and removed all doubt from his mind. After that the two brothers, who were chiefs of the brave Bárha Saiyids, worked heart and soul to assist Farrukh Siyar. New engagements were openly and secretly exchanged, and they set about making preparations for the great emprise, with hearts full of hope and in union with each other.

March of Farrukh Siyar from Patna.

[Text, vol. ii. p. 715.] Farrukh Siyar marched from Patna towards Dehlí with his two faithful generals, also with Saf-shikan Khán, who held the deputy súbadárship of Orissa, and * * other devoted followers, amounting in all to twenty-five thousand horse. He was in difficulty as to money. Out of the royal treasure, and of the treasure arising from the jágír of 'Azímu-sh Shán that was sent from Bengal that year, nearly twenty-eight lacs fell into the hands of Saiyid 'Abdu-llah Khán. About seventy-five lacs came into the possession of Farrukh Siyar, and he borrowed two or three lacs from the merchants of Patna. Of all the treasure that fell into the hands of Sarbuland Khán, Faujdar of Karra, he kept some lacs, and the remainder he carried, with the help of hired carriers, to Jahándár Sháh. On arriving with it, Jahándár was pleased with him, and made him Súbadár of Ahmadábád in Gujarát. [Victory over Jahándár.]

[Text, vol. ii. p. 724.] After the victory of Muhammad Farrukh Siyar had been loudly proclaimed, the men of Saiyid 'Abdu-llah Khán began to search among the dead for Husain 'Alí Khán. They found him lying senseless, and he had been stripped naked by plunderers; but the moment the good news of the victory of Farrukh Siyar fell upon the ears of the wounded man, new life came into his body, and he got up and went to his brother Saiyid 'Abdu-llah Khán.

Jahándár Sháh remained a night in Ágra. He and Zú-l fikár Khán arrived at Dehlí within a watch of each other.* * * Ásafu-d daula saw that Jahándár's* course was run, and sent him to the fort, to be kept in custody. He said to his son Zú-l fikár, who opposed this violent course, “It is our duty to render obedience to whomsoever of the House of Tímúr the sovereign power devolves; so, as Jahándár Sháh has been removed, we must betake ourselves to the other.” The counsel of Ásafu-d daula in restraining his son was * * wise and appro­priate; but he did not know that it would result in the loss of his son's life and of the honour of his house.

Personal to the Author.

[vol. ii. p. 726.] I have already said in my Preface, that it is the duty of an historian to be faithful, to have no hope of profit, no fear of injury, to show no partiality on one side, or animosity on the other, to know no difference between friend and stranger, and to write nothing but with sincerity. But in these changeful and wonderful times of Farrukh Siyar Bád-sháh, * * men have shown a partiality or an animosity to one side or the other exceeding all bounds. They have looked to their own profit and loss, and turned the reins of their imagination accordingly. The virtues of one side they have turned into faults, while they have shut their eyes to the faults of the other—passing all the bounds of moderation. The writer of these leaves, who, following his own inclination, has wasted his days in authorship, has not been partial either to friends or strangers, and has flattered neither nobles nor wazírs in the hope of reward. What he himself saw, what he heard from the tongues of men who from time to time were the associates of Muhammad Farrukh Siyar, and from the Saiyids who were his companions at the banquet table and in battle, that he has honestly committed to writing, after endeavour­ing to arrive at the truth when statements varied. But as notes of various occurrences and transactions did not reach the author, and as, through distress and the unfriendliness of fortune, he was unable to procure paper for his rough drafts, and as dis­crepancies in the various statements became greater, if it should appear that in any place the author differs in any particulars from other histories and writers, who themselves may not be free from partiality, and as variations will appear in the most trustworthy histories, he begs that his stories being excused, they may not be made a target for the arrows of censure, but that the pen of kindness may be drawn over his hasty statements.