Comprehensive Biography of Ghiyas-ud-Din Tughluq

Ghiyas-ud-Din Tughluq or Ghazi Malik was the founder of the Tughluq Dynasty. This dynasty is also known as the Dynasty of the Qaraunah Turks as the father of Ghiyas-ud-Din Tughluq was a Qaraunah Turk. Ibn Batuta tells us that he heard from Shaikh Rukn-ud-Din Multani that Sultan Tughluq was of the stock of Qaraunah, Turks who lived in the mountainous region between Sindh and Turkistan.

Speaking of the Qaraunahs, Marco Polo tells us that this name was given to them because they were the sons of Indian Mothers by Tartar fathers.

Nay Elias, the translator of Mirza Haider’s Tarikh-i-Rashidi, made enquiries, regarding the origin of the Qaraunahs and his conclusion was that the Qaraunahs were among the Mongols of Central Asia and they took a prominent part in Mongol campaigns in Persia in early times. The Muhammadan Historians of India do not write anything about the Qaraunahs.

His Rise

Ghazi Tughluq was a man of humble origin. While his mother was a Jat woman from the Punjab, his father was a Turkish slave of Balban. On account of his parentage, “Ghazi Malik typified in his character the salient features of the two races: the modesty and mildness of the Hindus and the virility and vigour of the Turks.”

Although he started his life as an ordinary trooper, he rose to prominence by his ability and hard work. During the reign of Ala-ud-Din Khilji, he was appointed the Warden of the Marches and Governor of Dipalpur. He fought against the Mongols on 29 occasions and chased them out of India.

Ghazi Malik was one of the most powerful nobles in the kingdom at the time of the death of Ala-ud-Din Khilji and he continued to be so during the reign of Mubarak Shah. Although Khusrau Shah tried to conciliate him, that had no effect on Ghazi Malik. Assisted by his son Juna Khan, he marched against Khusrau Shah, defeated him and then got him executed.

It is stated that after his entry in Delhi as a conqueror, Ghazi Malik caused an inquiry to be made whether there was any descendant of Ala-ud-Din Khilji whom he could put on the throne of Delhi. It is difficult to say how far that inquiry was sincere and how far ii was merely a show. Anyhow, Ghiyas-ud-Din Tughluq ascended the throne on 8 September, 1320. He was the first Sultan of Delhi who took up the title of Ghazi Malik or slayer of the infidels.

Domestic Policy

The reign of Ghiyas-ud-Din Tughluq can be discussed under two heads: Domestic Policy and Foreign Policy. As regards Domestic Policy, his first task was to win over the confidence of the nobles and officers and to restore order in the empire. It is true that the supporters of Khusrau Shah were ruthlessly exterminated but the other nobles and officers were leniently treated He restored the lands of all those who had been deprived of them by Ala-ud-Din Khalji.

He ordered a secret inquiry to be made into claims and jagirs and all unlawful grants were confiscated to the state. He tried to recover the treasure which had been squandered by Khusrau Shah or plundered during the confusion after his fall and he succeeded in that attempt to a large extent.

Many Shaikhs who had received large sums of money from Khusrau Shah returned the same. However, Shaikh Nizam-ud-Din Auliya who had received five lacs of Tankas, refused to refund the amount on the plea that he had given away the same in charity. This was not liked by Ghazi Malik but he could do nothing against the Shaikh on account of his popularity.

He tried to denounce the Shaikh “for indulgence in the ecstatic songs and dances of Darveshes, a form of devotion regarded as unlawful by rigid Sunnis of the established region.” However, he did not succeed in doing so as the 53 theologians consulted by him did not find any fault in the actions of the Shaikh.

To prevent corruption and embezzlement. Ghazi Malik paid his officers well and promoted to high rank only those who gave proof of their loyalty and devotion. While distributing rewards, he was guided by considerations of rank, merit and length of service. He avoided all invidious distinctions. Ghazi Malik was not a whimsical despot but a sagacious and thoughtful ruler who always consulted his councilors in important matters of state.

As regards his Revenue Policy, he discontinued the system of fanning of taxes. The farmers of revenue were not allowed even to approach the Diwan-i-Wizarat.

The excesses of the collectors of revenue were checked. The Amirs and Maliks were not allowed to take as their fee more than I /15th of the revenue of their provinces. The Karkuns and Mutsarrifs were not allowed to take more than 5 to 10 per thousand.

It was ordered that the Diwan-i-Wizarat should not increase tha land revenue of any Iqta beyond one-tenth or one-eleventh in a year. If there was to be any enhancement, the same should be spread over a number of years. Barani tells us that “the Khiraj was to increase gradually over a number of years and not all at once, for by doing so the country suffers and the path of progress is blocked.

“Again “Jagirdars and Hakims were asked to be careful in the realization of the Khiraj so that the Khuts and Muqaddams may not impose and additional burden upon the people besides the state dues. Large remissions of revenue were made in times of draught and the defaulters were treated with great generosity. No man was to be held in bondage for the sake of money and every facility was to be provided by the state to enable the people to meet their obligations without any discomfort or vexation.”

The practice of the survey of land was given up as it was not working satisfactorily and it was ordered that the land revenue should be assessed by the collectors in person. Ghazi Malik also took steps to bring more area under cultivation.

His view was that the surest method of increasing revenue was “the extension of cultivation not the enhancement of the demand.” The result of his policy was that a lot of waste land was brought under cultivation. Canals were also excavated to irrigate the fields. Gardens were planted.

Forts were also built to give shelter to cultivators against brigands. It appears from Barani that all sections of the people were not treated a like. The same writer tells us that certain sections of the people were to “be taxed so that they might not be blinded with wealth and so become discontented and rebellious; nor, on the other hand, be so reduced to poverty and destitution as to be unable to purpuse their husbandry.”

Ghazi Malik paid attention to all departments of the state. The judicial and police arrangements were so efficient that “the wolf dared not seize upon the lamb and the lion and the deer drank at one stream.”

The Chehra and Dagh system introduced by Ala-ud-Din was continued. A most efficient postal service was restored. Posts were carried by runners and horsemen who were stationed at distances of two-thirds of a mile or 7 or 8 miles respectively all over the kingdom. News traveled at the rate of one hundred miles a day. Ghazi Malik devised a system of poor relief. He patronized religious institutions and literary men. Amir Khusro was his poet laureate and he received from the state a pension of 1,000 Tankas per mensem.

Ghazi Malik “made his court more austere than it had ever been except probably in the time of Balban.” He acted with moderation and wisdom. No wonder, Amir Khusro praises him in these words: “He never did anything that was not replete with wisdom and sense. He might be said to wear a hundred doctor’s hoods under his crown.”

Foreign Policy

As regards his foreign policy, Ghazi Malik was a great annexationist. He was determined to bring under his control all those who had defied the authority of the Delhi Sultanate.

(1) In pursuance of that policy, he sent in 132I his son Juna Khan, later on Muhammad Tughluq, to subdue Prataparudradeva II of Warangal who had increased his power during the period of disorder following the death of Ala-ud-Din Khalji and had also refused to pay the usual tribute to Delhi Government.

The mud fort of Warangal was besieged but the same was defended by the Hindus with courage and determination. Juna Khan had to come back without achieving any success on account of the outbreak of pestilence and intrigues.

According to Barani and Yahiya-bin-Ahmed who have been followed by Nizam-ud-Din Ahmad, Badauni and Ferishta, those intrigues were due to some traitors in the army. However, Ibn Batuta tells us that prince Juna Khan whc intended to seize the throne was responsible for those intrigues.

Sir Wolseley Haig the able editor of the Cambridge History of India, Vol. Ill, accepts the view of Ibn Batuta.’ However, this view is not accepted by Dr. Ishwari Prasad in his History of Qaraunah Turks.

Four months after the return of Juna Khan to Delhi, he was sent once again to Warangal at the head of another expedition. This was in 1323. Juna Khan captured Bidar and then marched on Warangal. The Hindus fought desperately, but were unsuccessful against the invaders.

Ultimately, Prataparudradeva II, his family and nobles fell into the hands of the invaders. The Raja was sent to Delhi. The Kakatiya Kingdom of Wrangle, though not formally annexed by Ghazi Malik, was divided into many districts which were allotted to various Turkish Nobles and Officers. The city of Warangal was named Sultanpur.

(2) When Prince Juna Khan was on his way back to Delhi, he attacked the Kingdom of Utkala in Orissa. He was able to capture 50 elephants and many other valuable articles.

(3) Ghazi Malik had also to intervene in Bengal. There was a civil war among the three sons of Shams-ud-Din Firuz Shah and their names were Ghiyas-ud-Din, Shihab-ud-Din and Nasir-ud- Din. Ghiyas-ud-Din who was the Governor of East Bengal, overthrew Shihab-ud-Din and occupied the throne of Lakhnauti in 1319.

This was coveted by Nasir-ud-Din and the latter appealed to the Delhi Sultan for help. The Sultan responded to the appeal and personally marched to Bengal. On the way, Ghazi Malik was jointed by Nasir-ud-Din, Ghiyas-ud-Din-was defeated and made a prisoner.

Nasir-ud-Din was put on the throne of West Bengal as a vassal of Delhi and East Bengal was annexed to Delhi. On his way back to Delhi, Ghazi Malik reduced to submission Raja Har Singh Deva of Tirhut (Mithila). Henceforth, Tirhut became a fief of the Delhi Sultanate.

(4) In 1324, the Mongols invaded North India. However, they were defeated and their leaders were captured and brought to Delhi.

Death

When Ghazi Malik was in Bengal, he received information about the activities of his son Juna Khan. The latter was increasing the number of his followers in order to have a powerful party of his own. He became a disciple of Shaikh Nizam-ud-Din Auliya who was on bad terms with his father.

The Shaikh is said to have made a prophecy that Prince Juna Khan would become king of Delhi very soon. Likewise, the astrologers stated that Ghazi Malik would not come back to Delhi. Ghazi Malik came back to Delhi from Bengal hurriedly. Prince Juna Khan erected a wooden pavilion

Lissinoil

1. Cambridge History of India, part III, Sir Wolseley Haig at Afghanpur, a village about 6 miles from Delhi, to give reception to his father. The building was so designed as to fall when touched in a certain part by elephants.

Ghazi Malik was entertained under the pavilion. When the meal was over, Ghazi Malik was requested by his son Juna Khan to have a view of the elephants brought from Bengal. Ghazi Malik having agreed, the elephants were paraded.

When they came into contact with that part of the building which had been designed to bring about its collapse, the entire pavilion fell. Ghazi Malik was crushed along with his son Prince Mahmud Khan. The Sultan was found bent over the body of Mahmud Khan as if trying to protect him. Juna Khan is said to have purposely delayed the removal of the debris.

There are different views regarding the circumstance leading to the death of Ghazi Malik. Barni simply tells us that a thunderbolt of a calamity from heaven fell upon the Sultan and he was with five or six others crushed under the debris.

From the translation of Elliot, it appears that lightning fell upon the root and the whole structure came down with a crash. Ibn Batuta who came to India in 1333 A.D., definitely tells us that Prince Juna Khan was the cause of the death of his father. The source of his information was Shaikh Rukn-ud-Din Multani who present with the emperor on the occasion.

He also tells us that Prince Juna Khan deliberately delayed the arrival of workmen who were called to dig up the body of the Sultan with their shovels. Ibn Batuta also tells us that the construction of the pavilion was the work of Ahmed Ayaz who was later on made Chief Minister when Juna Khan himself became Sultan. Circumstantial evidence is also in favour of Ibn Batuta. He has also no axe to grind.

Nizam-ud-Din Ahmed tells us that the hasty construction of the structure creates a suspicion that Prince Juna Khan was responsible for the death of his father. The death of Ghazi Malik was due to Ahmed. Abul Fazl and Badauni also suspect a conspiracy of Juna Khan. Isami, a contemporary writer, also supports Nizam-ud-Din Ahmed. The view of Dr. Ishwari Prasad is that there are strong reasons for thinking that the death of the Sultan was the result of a conspiracy in which Juna Khan took part and was not due to any accident.

Sir Wolseley Haig also holds that the death of the Sultan was the result of a plot cleverly engineered by Juna Khan. However, Dr. Mahdi Husain holds that the pavilion fell of its own accord and Prince Juna Khan had absolutely no hand in the matter. The view generally accepted is that Prince Juna Khan was responsible for the death of his father.