________________
SEPT., 1920] HISTORY OF THE NIZAM SHAHI KINGS OF AHMADNAGAR
In the course of the march, the king's loyal servants, seizing a favourable opportunity, advised the king to issue to the amirs who had fled from the court for fear of 'Aziz-ul-Mulk and had taken refuge with 'Imâd-ul-Mulk in Berar, a safe conduct to court, in order that by their aid he might be freed from the domination of disloyal and ungrateful subjects. The king acted on this advice and sent a safe conduct to the amirs who, by great good fortune, joined the royal camp from that direction before the army reached Antûr, and, before they had even paid their respects to the king, entered 'Aziz-ul-Mulk's tent, seized him, and blinded him with a red-hot iron, thus freeing the world from the strife and confusion caused by that chief of the lords of oppression and injustice., They then went on to the king's presence and had the honour of making their obeisance. They were honoured with robes of honour, golden girdles, and other marks of the royal favour, in order that it might be made clear to the world that loyalty and obedience are rewarded and disloyalty and ingratitude punished.
163
After the blinding of 'Aziz-ul-Mulk, the king appointed no other person to the office of pishvd, but, in spite of his tender age, which was no more than twelve years, took the whole administration of the kingdom into his own hands and so apportioned his time that every moment was devoted to some affair of importance; and he never, for a long time, varied this arrangement. Like the sun, he never rested by day from attending to the wants of the humble and, like his own wakeful fortune, he scarcely slept at night for employment in the affairs of his subjects.
Meanwhile, Mir Rukn-ud-din, who was a faithful and pious man, was vazir of the kingdom of the Dakan, Shaikh Ja'far and Maulânâ Pir Mu', ammad Shirvana, who were companions of Mir Rukn-ud-dîn, having been admitted to the king's presence by the favour of the Mir, were appointed to be his companions.
Since, however, the dealings of Mir Rukn-ud-din with the king's subjects were not mark. ed by justice and equity, complaints of him reached the royal threshold and he had been vazir for a short time only, when the office was taken from him and given to Shaikh Ja'far.01
XXIII-AN ACCOUNT OF THE WARFARE BETWEEN BURHIN NIZAM SHAH AND 'IMAD-UL-MULK, AND OF THE DEFEAT OF 'IMAD-UL-MULK IN THE LAST
BATTLE AND HIS FLIGHT TO GUJARIT.
After 'Imâd-ul-Mulk had fled before the royal troops in the battle which took place in the neighbourhood of the town of Rânûbarî, and had lost most of his elephants, horses and munitions of war, he was constantly overwhelmed with shame at the thought of the disgrace which had befallen him, and was again preparing for war in the hope that he might be able to retrieve his honour. He collected a large army of capable troops and marched for Berar with the object of making war on Burhân Nizam Shah.
61 The death of Mukammal Khan shortly after the battle of Rahuri, the appointment of his son 'Aziz. ul-Mulk as pishvd, and Danayya's feigned rebellion in Antûr are not mentioned by Firishta, who says that Mukammal Khan was still in power in A.H., 924 (A.D. 1518) after the capture of Pathri by Burhan Nizam Shah, when the king was seventeen years of age. Burhân, after his return to Ahmadnagar, became enamoured of a courtesan named Amana or Amina, and was so infatuated with her that he married her and made her the chief lady of his seraglio. She led him into evil courses and taught him to drink wine, so that he neglected his royal duties and spent his time in riotous living. Mukammal Khân, now an old man, tendered his resignation of his office on the ground that the king had reached years of discretion. His resignation was accepted and Shaikh Ja'far the Dakant was appointed vabil and pishvá. Mukammal Khan's son, perhaps 'Aziz-ul-Mulk, was made an amir, but there is no mention of his being appointed to any particular office. Mukammal Khan lived henceforth in retirement, only occasionally attending at court. (F. ii, 200, 201.)
It is impossible to reconcile these two accounts, but it is more probable that a youth of seventeen should give way to sensuality than that a boy of twelve should administer and rule a kingdom,
