one long garrisons. The Muhammadan governors in the Deccan also His reign revolted, while the troops in Guzerat rose in mutiny. Mu- revolt. hammad Tughlak rushed with an army to the south to take vengeance on the traitors, but hardly had he put down their rising than he was called away by insurrections in Guzerat, Málwá, and Sind. He died in 1351, while chasing rebels in the lower valley of the Indus. mad Tughlak's 1325-51. Muhammad Tughlak was the first Musalmán ruler of India Muhamwho can be said to have had a revenue system. He increased the land tax between the Ganges and the Jumna; in some revenue Districts tenfold, in others twentyfold. The husbandmen fled exactions, before his tax-gatherers, leaving their villages to lapse into jungle, and formed themselves into robber clans. He cruelly punished all who trespassed on his game preserves; and he invented a kind of man-hunt without precedent in the annals of human wickedness. He surrounded a large tract with his His 'manarmy, and then gave orders that the circle should close towards the centre, and that all within it (mostly inoffensive peasants) should be slaughtered like wild beasts. This sort of hunt was more than once repeated; and on a subsequent occasion, there was a general massacre of the inhabitants of the great city of Kanauj. These horrors led in due time to famine; and the miseries of the country exceeded all powers of description.'1 hunt.' His son, Firuz Tughlak (1351-88), ruled mercifully, but Firuz Shah Tughlak, had to recognise the independence of the Muhammadan 1351-88. kingdoms of Bengal and the Deccan, and suffered much from bodily infirmities and court intrigues. He undertook many public works, such as dams across rivers for irrigation, tanks, caravan-saráis, mosques, colleges, hospitals, and bridges. But his greatest achievement was the old Jumna Canal. This His canals. work drew its waters from the Jumna, near a point where it leaves the mountains, and connected that river with the Ghaggar and the Sutlej by irrigation channels.3 Part of it has been reconstructed by the British Government, and spreads a margin of fertility on either side to this day. But the dynasty of Tughlak soon sunk amid Muhammadan mutinies and Hindu revolts, and left India an easy prey to the great Mughal invasion of 1398. 1 Elphinstone's History of India, pp. 405, 406 (ed. 1866). 2 Materials for his reign: Sir Henry Elliot's Indian Historians, vols. i. iii. iv. vi. viii.; Firishta, vol. i. pp. 444-465 (ed. 1829). Thomas' Pathán Kings, p. 294. See article JUMNA CANAL, WESTERN, Imperial Gazetteer, vol. v. pp. 121, 122. Timúr's In that year, Timúr (Tamerlane) swept through the Afghán (Tamerlane's) passes at the head of the united hordes of Tartary. He invasion, defeated the Tughlak King, Mahmúd, under the walls of 1398. Delhi, and entered the capital. During five days, a massacre raged; some streets were rendered impassable by heaps of dead;'1 while Timúr calmly looked on and held a feast in honour of his victory. On the last day of 1398, he resumed his march, with a 'sincere and humble tribute of grateful praise' to God, in Fíruz's marble mosque on the banks of the Jumna. He crossed the Ganges, and proceeded as far as Hardwár, after a great massacre at Meerut. Then, skirting the foot of the hills, he retired westwards into Central Asia (1399). Timúr left no traces of his power in India, save the Tugh desolate cities. On his departure, Mahmúd Tughlak crept back from his retreat in Guzerat, and nominally ruled till 1412. The Tughlak line ended in 1414. The Sayyid dynasty ruled from 1414 till 1450, and the Afghán house of Lodi from 1450 to 1526. But some of these Sultáns reigned over only a few miles round Delhi; and during the whole period, the Hindu princes and the local Muhammadan kings were practically independent The Lodis, throughout the greater part of India. The house of Lodi was 1450-1526. crushed beneath the Mughal invasion of Bábar in 1526. Ruin of laks, 1399. The Sayyids, 1414-50. Hindu of the Chera, Bábar founded the Mughal Empire of India, whose last kingdoms representative died a British State prisoner at Rangoon in Deccan. 1862. Before entering on the story of that empire, I turn to the kingdoms, Hindu and Muhammadan, on the south of the Vindhya range. The three ancient kingdoms, Chera, Chola, and Pándia occupied, as we have seen, the Dravidian country peopled by Támil-speaking races. Pándia, the largest of them, had its capital at Madura, and traces its foundation to the 4th century B.C. The Chola kingdom had its headquarters successively at Combaconum and Tanjore. Talkád, in Mysore, now buried by the sands of the Káveri, was the capital of the Chera kingdom. The 116th king of the Pándia dynasty was overthrown by the Muhammadan general Malik Káfur in 1304. But the Musalmáns failed to establish their power in the extreme south, and a series of Hindu dynasties ruled from Madura over the old Pándia kingdom until the 18th century. No European kingdom can boast a continuous succession such as that of Madura, traced back by 1 Firishta, vol. i. p. 493. His whole account of Timúr's invasion is very vivid, vol. i. pp. 485-497 (ed. 1829). 2 Ante, p. 214; and articles CHERA, CHOLA, PANDIA, Imp. Gaz. vols. ii. vii. the piety of genealogists to the 4th century B.C. The Chera kingdom enumerates fifty kings, and the Chola sixty-six, besides minor dynasties. But authentic history in Southern India begins with the Kingdom of VijayaHindu kingdom of Vijayanagar or Narsinha, from 1118 to nagar, 1565 A.D. The capital can still be traced within the Madras 1118-1565. District of Bellary, on the right bank of the Tungabhadra river,-vast ruins of temples, fortifications, tanks, and bridges, haunted by hyenas and snakes. For at least three centuries, Vijayanagar ruled over the southern part of the Indian triangle. madan Those Sultáns derived their origin from the conquests of MuhamAlá-ud-dín (1303-06). After a period of confused fighting, States the Bahmaní kingdom of the Deccan emerged as the repre- in the sentative of Muhammadan rule in Southern India. Zafar Deccan, 1303. Khán, an Afghán general during the reign of Muhammad Tughlak (1325-51), defeated the Delhi troops, and set up as Musalmán sovereign of the Deccan. Having in early youth been the slave of a Bráhman who had treated him kindly and foretold his future greatness, he took the title of Bahmaní,1 and transmitted it to his successors. The rise of the Bahmaní dynasty is usually assigned to the The year 1347, and it lasted for 178 years, until 1525.2 Its Bahmaní dynasty, capitals were at Gulbargah, Warangal, and Bídar, all in the 1347-1525. Haidarábád territory; and it loosely corresponded with the Nizám's Dominions of the present day. At the height of their power, the Bahmaní kings claimed sovereignty over half the Deccan, from the Tungabhadra river in the south to Orissa in the north, and from Masulipatam on the east to Goa on the west. Their direct government was, however, much more confined. They derived support, in their early struggle against the Delhi throne, from the Hindu southern kingdoms of Vijayanagar and Warangal. But during the greater part of its career, the Bahmaní dynasty represented the cause of Islám against Hinduism on the south of the Vindhyás. Its alliances and its wars alike led to a mingling of the Musalmán and Hindu populations. For example, the King of Málwá invaded the 1 His royal name in full was Sultán (or Sháh) Alá-ud-dín Gángo Bahmaní. 2 I take these extreme dates from E. Thomas' Pathán Kings, pp. 340, 341. Materials for the Bahmaní dynasty : Sir Henry Elliot's Indian Historian, vols. iv. vii. viii.; Firishta, vol. ii. pp. 283-558 (ed. 1829). 1347-1525. Bahmaní Bahmaní dominions with a mixed force of 12,000 Afgháns and kingdom, Rajputs. The Hindu Rájá of Vijayanagar recruited his armies from Afghán mercenaries, whom he paid by assignments of land, and for whom he built a mosque. The Bahmaní troops, on the other hand, were frequently led by converted Hindus. Mingling The Bahmaní armies were themselves made up of two hostile of Hindus sects of Musalmáns. One sect consisted of Shiás, chiefly máns. Persians, Túrks or Tartars from Central Asia; the other, of native-born Musalmáns of Southern India, together with Abyssinian mercenaries, both of whom professed the Sunni faith. The rivalry between these Musalmán sects frequently imperilled Fall of the Bahmani throne. Its dynasty reached its highest power Bahmani under Alá-ud-dín 11. about 1437, and was broken up by its dynasty, 1489-1525. discordant elements between 1489 and 1525. and Musal hammadan States of the Deccan, Out of its fragments, five independent Muhammadan kingdoms in the Deccan were formed. These were—(1) The Adíl Five Mu Sháhí dynasty, with its capital at Bijápur, founded in 1489 by a son of Amurath II., Sultán of the Ottomans; annexed by the Mughal Emperor Aurangzeb in 1686-88. (2) The Kutab Shahi 1489-1686. dynasty, with its capital at Golconda, founded in 1512 by a Túrkomán adventurer; also annexed by Aurangzeb in 1687-88. (3) The Nizám Sháhí dynasty, with its capital at Ahmednagar, founded in 1490 by a Bráhman renegade from the Vijayanagar Court; subverted by the Mughal Emperor Shah Jahán in 1636. (4) The Imad Shahí dynasty of Berar, with its capital at Ellichpur, founded in 1484 also by a Hindu from Vijayanagar; annexed to the Ahmednagar kingdom (No. 3) in 1572. (5) The Baríd Shahí dynasty, with its capital at Bidar, founded 14921498 by a Túrk or Georgian slave. Territories small and undefined; independent till after 1609; Bídar fort taken by Aurangzeb in 1657. Fall of Hindu kingdom of Vijaya nagar. Battle of Tálikot, 1565. It is beyond my scope to trace the history of these local Muhammadan dynasties of Southern India. They preserved their independence until the firm establishment of the Mughal Empire in the north, under Akbar's successors. For a time they had to struggle against the great Hindu kingdom of Vijayanagar. But in 1565 they combined against that power, and, aided by a rebellion within its own borders, they overthrew it at Tálikot in 1565. The battle of Tálikot marks the final downfall of Vijayanagar as a centralized Hindu kingdom. But its local Hindu chiefs or Náyaks seized upon their respective fiefs, and the Muhammadan kings of the south were only able to annex a part of its dominions. From the Nayaks are descended the well-known Pálegárs of the Madras Presi dency, and the present Mahárájá of Mysore. One of the blood-royal of Vijayanagar fled to Chandragiri, and founded a line which exercised a prerogative of its former sovereignty by granting the site of Madras to the English in 1639. Another scion, claiming the same high descent, lingers to the present day near the ruins of Vijayanagar, and is known as the Rájá of Anagundi, a feudatory of the Nizám of Haidarábád. The independence of the local Hindu chiefs in Southern India, throughout the Muhammadan period, is illustrated by the Manjarábád family, which maintained its authority from 1397 to 1799.1 dence of Lower Bengal threw off the authority of Delhi in 1340. Its IndepenMuhammadan governor, Fakír-ud-dín, set up as sovereign, with Bengal, his capital at Gaur, and stamped coin in his own name. A 1340-1576; succession of twenty independent kings ruled until 1538, when Bengal was temporarily annexed to the Mughal Empire by Humáyún. It was finally incorporated with that empire by Akbar in 1576. The great Province of Guzerat in Western India Of Guzehad in like manner grown into an independent Muhammadan rat, 1391kingdom, which lasted for two centuries, from 1391 till conquered by Akbar in 1573. Málwá, which had also set up as an independent State under its Muhammadan governors, was annexed by the King of Guzerat in 1531. Even Jaunpur, Of Jaunincluding the territory of Benares, in the centre of the Gangetic pur, 1393 valley, maintained its independence as a Musalmán State for nearly a hundred years from 1393 to 1478, under the disturbed rule of the Sayyids and the first Lodí at Delhi. 1 See post, p. 281; and article MANJARABAD, Imperial Gazetteer, vi. 321. 1573; 1478. Q |