________________
104
THE INDIAN ANTIQUARY
[JUNE, 1920
dard of opposition and made the claim "I and there is none beside me." In the same way Majlis-i-A'la Malik Sultân Quli Qutb-ul-Mulk, 36 who, by the king's command, held the whole of the province of Telingana, raised the banner of independence and pride, and regarded none béside himself; Malik Fathullah, 'Imâd-ul-Mulk in the country of Berar, raised the standard of usurpation and pride sky-high, and gave currency to the habit of rebellion. In the same way all the rest of the amirs and maliks, who were in their own provinces, went astray, and Majlis-i-Mukarram Malik Qasim, Barid-i-Mamâlik, who held the districts of Qandahår 37 and Ausa 38 and their dependencies, raised the banner of authority and independence in the capital, Bidar, and took into his own hands the whole administration of the country, leaving to Sultan Mahmûd nothing but the name of a king In the meanwhile the amirs were constantly leading their armies from all parts to Bidar, in the attempt to overthrow Malik Qasim, Barid-i-Mamalik. In some of these expeditionis matters were compounded without bloodshed or fighting, but sometimes the quarrels of these erring men could not be settled without an appeal to the sword. In several of these expeditions Ashraf-i-Humâyûn Sultan Ahmad Shah Bahri was present in person, allaying strife, and punishing the quarrelsome and contumacious with the sword, as has already been described, until at last, on the date39 which has already been given, the king of the countries of Dakan, Sultan Mahmûd Bahmani, bade farewell to this transitory world and took his departure for the eternal abode.
Since Malik Naib suffered martyrdom at the instigation of the contumacious but still frustrated men, and the stirrers up of strife poisoned the mind of the king of the world, Mahmûd Shah Bahmani, against His Highness Ashraf-i-Humayan, Sultan Ahmad Shah Bahri, so that armies were several times sent against his highness with a view to crushing him, as has been related, the amirs and officers of the kingdom, who were in the service of His Highness Ashraf-i-Humayun, Sultan Ahmad Bahrî, represented that the disloyal amirs of the king had obtained the supreme power, and that very little authority was left in the hands of the king, while the whole of the attention of these disloyal amirs was devoted to attempts to crush the prince, and therefore the salvation of the prince's rule and of his dominions lay in his proclaiming himself independent and in his ascending the throne of sovereignty and donning the crown of royalty, in order that the administration might be efficiently continued and that the dominion might not depart from the great family of Bahman).
Abone.
36 This is not correct. Sultan Quli Qutb-ul-Mulk was of all the great provincial governors the most faithful to the house of Bahman, and though he often refused to recognize the orders issued by Qasim Barid, he would not formally declare his independence until Mahmud Shah died in 1518 and his young son Ahmad III was placed on the throne in Bidar by Qasim. Ahmad Nizâm-ul-Mulk was the first to propose to the other provincial governors that they should declare their independence of Bidar, and all, except Qutb-ul-Mulk, agreed.
37 The name of this place is always thus spelt by Muhammadan historians. The correct spelling is Kandhar. It is on the Manada river, about 68 miles north of Bidar.
38 Situated in 18° 15' N. and 77° 30' E.
39 The date already given is Zi-l-Hijjah 24, A.. 924 (December 27, A.D. 1518). See The History of the Bahmani Dynasty by Major J. S. King, p. 147. Firishta (i, 726) gives the date as Zi-l-Hijjah 4, 924 (Dec.7, 1518). Sayyid 'Alf conveniently ignores the existence of the nominal successors of Mahmûd, Ahmad III, 'Ald-ud-din, Wali-ullah, and Kalim-ullah, and makes it appear that Ahmad ascended the throne as a Bahmani king though he carefully avoids describing him as Bahmani and always gives him the distinctive cognomen of his dynasty, Bahri.
