The Jats - Their Role in the Mughal Empire/Chapter IV
| Digitized & Wikified by: Laxman Burdak IFS (R) |
Contents
- 1 The Mughal Jat Relations After the Fall of the Sayyids (1720-1722)
- 2 Saadat Khan's First Operations Against The Jats (February-September, 1721)
- 3 Saadat Khan's Second Operations (September 1721-1722)
- 4 Character And Estimate Of Rao Churaman II
- 5 'Raja' Muhkam Singh (c. September-October, 1721-18 November, 1722XII
- 6 43. Jai Singh's Second Expedition (August-November, 1722)
- 7 Consequences Of Jai Singh's Second Expedition
- 8 Character And Estimate Of Muhkam Singh
The Mughal Jat Relations After the Fall of the Sayyids (1720-1722)
[p.81]: In befriending Rao Churaman II, the Sayyids had visualized to utilize a rising power for perpetuating their control on the government. But fate had decreed otherwise. One time "King Makers", now they could not stand even their own ground, and with their overthrow, Churaman was deprived of a gracious patronage, which had not only rescued him from difficult situations but had also raised him to the pinnacle of such power and prestige as he could not have ordinarily dreamt of. He was now exposed to the inescapable fury of the Mughals, which his alliance with the detested Sayyids had only served to heighten. It may not be far from truth to say that opposition to Churaman was, to a great extent, part and parcel of the general opposition to the Sayyids. The suppression of Ajit Singh,1 another Sayyid adherent, is a case in point. The common adversity brought the old associates, Churaman and Ajit Singh, still closer. They now entered into an alliance, promising armed support to each other in hour of need. Hence, in 1721, Churaman despatched his son, Muhkam Singh, to Ajmer at the head of a contingent for the aid of the Raja against the Mughals. He also attempted (about September, 1721) to obstruct Saadat Khan on his march from Agra to Delhi to lead the Mughal forces against Ajit Singh.2 The Jat Chief also established close relations with Chhatra Sal Bundela, whom he had an occasion to meet as a co-fighter during the Mughal campaign at Lohagarh (1710). Sometime in 1721 (c. April-May), Churaman sent aid, probably on request to Chhatra Sal in his encounter with Diler Khan, the deputy of Muhammad Khan Bangash.3
1. For details see Shivdas, 117ff.
3. M.Mitra, Ajit Singh, 250 (Basing on Hist. Essays); Irvine, Later Mughals, II, 110, 121. Qanungo, Jats, 57.
3 Irvine, Later Mughals, II, 121; Also Shivdas, 101 ff Following Irvine, Qanungo, Jats, 57.
Saadat Khan's First Operations Against The Jats (February-September, 1721)
[p.82]: Soon after the removal of the Sayyids (three months after the battle of Hasanpur) the Jats felt the pressure of the Mughals. Saadat Khan, who had played a leading part in the overthrow of Husain Ali Khan, was rewarded with the governorship of Agra (October, 1720)4 In February, 1721, he took leave from the Court to look after his new assignment. The Jats of Mathura were proving intractable, so he took the field against them and forced the rebels totake shelter in their fortresses. Then he besieged them and succeeded in capturing four of them situated near Mathura. A number of the defenders were put to the sword; Saadat Khan also lost 400 men in the process. Pleased with this news, the Emperor sent him a congratulatory message with a Khilat and a jewelled dagger.5 However, he could not personally follow up his success, as he was temporarily recalled to help suppress Ajit Singh. In his absence his deputy, Nilkanth Nagar, took up his unfinished task. With a force of 10,000 horses and more of infantry he attacked Jat villages in the environs of Fatehpur Sikri and penetrated as far as Pichuna (8 miles south of Bharatpur). Here he captured some villagers and their animals. But when he was returning Muhkam Singh and Shardul Singh of Halena whom Churaman had deputed earlier, fell upon him with a force of six thousand on horse and foot (l6th September, 1721-5th Zil-Hijja). Though his army was double in strength, Nilkanth could not cope with the valiant Jats and was beaten. In course of the fight he received bullet shot and fell down dead in the 'hauda' of his elephant. Those who could manage, escaped, while the rest surrendered their horses and arms and became prisoners in the hands of the Jats. Muhkam Singh, taking all the elephants, the captives and other goods, went to his place and obtained money in the form of fine from every prisoner according to his status.6
Meanwhile, an internal storm, largely the offshoot of Churaman's own impudence and indiscretion, had been brewing among the Sinsinwara Jats. A section of the Jat chieftains under Badan Singh was opposed to Churaman's rough behaviour, inordinate love of plunder and deceitful and aggressive tactics. It stood and pressed for a peaceful and systematic policy of expansion accompanied by friendlier relations
4. A.L. Srivastava, First two Nawabs of Oudh (Lucknow: 1933), 24.
5. Siyar , I, 315; Srivastava, Awadh, 27-28, Qanungo as also R. Pande have overlooked the above episode. This may account for the latter's wrong impression (Bharatpur, p.24) that Saadat Khan moved to Agra only after the death of Nilkanth Nagar.
6. Shivdas, 121-122, 125; Siyar, I. 328; Iqbal, 106; Pathena Raso quoted by Ganga Singh. op.cit., 88-91.
[p.83]: with the neighbours and the Mughal court. However, Churaman, acting rashly imprisoned Badan Singh.7 This made other Jats suspicious about his ulterior designs and they insisted for Badan Singh's release. At last Churaman had to bow down and he set Badan Singh free (about 1721).8
Saadat Khan's Second Operations (September 1721-1722)
Obviously, these developments widened the rift in the Jat leadership. Badan Singh after his release proceeded to Agra to make a common cause with Saadat Khan, who after the route of his deputy was ordered to proceed at once to the rebellious area. On his arrival Badan Singh approached him. Saadat Khan found it prudent to win him over to his side and hence gave him a khliat and a chain of elephants.9 We learn from Sujan Charita that Saadat Khan established intimacy with Badan Singh's brother, Rup Singh also.10 About this time (c. 17th September-10th October, 1721-6th to the end of Zil Hijja, 1133 A.H.) Churaman committed suicide by swallowing the deadly poison11 and the leadership
7. Qanungo, Jats, 57; V.S. Bhatnagar, Jai Singh, 102b; Tod, Rajasthan, 652 (differing in details; Ganga Singh, op.cit., 88-90. Though none of these quote any authority in support of them, their generally similar contention seems to be correct in the light of Badan Singh's flight to Saadat Khan and other developments. They are, however, silent about Badan Singh's second activity. U.N. Sharma (Itihas, 303-305), generally agreeing with the above, emphasizes here, Badan Singh's insistence on the division of Chura's "extensive state". He speaks of Badan Singh's flight to Saadat Khan but is silent about his arrest on this occasion.
8. Qanungo, Jats, 57. According to a local tradition, the decision of Churaman to get Muhkam Singh married in a Deshwar family of Kailuri (2 miles to the south-west of Jatauli) further provocated the supporters of Badan Singh and they threatened to break off all social contacts with him. Also see Ganga Singh op.cit., 90.
9. Shivdas; 122.
10. Sujan, 60.
11. The authorities accessible to us furnish different versions about the time and manner of Churaman's death. Of the relevant authorities on the Jats, Fransoo completely ignores the subject, while Wendel (Memoires des Jats, 15, 84 and 1 f.n.) makes uncertain observation that he died either during or just before Jai Singh's second expedition (i.e. Sept.-Oct., 1722), reportedly poisoned by Muhkam Singh. Partly agreeing with Wendel, Rustam (495) suggests his death during Jai Singh's war. Siyar (I, 329) and Majma-ul-Akhbar (in Elliot, VIII, 361) show Churaman living at the commencement of Jai Singh's war. But they differ regarding the manner of his death. Siyar says that upon Badan Singh's desertion, Muhkam reproached Churaman for the extremities suffered by the besieged. Thereupon, Churaman swallowed poison and expired. Majma-ul-Akhbar relates that when Badan Singh helped Jai Singh to open the fort of Thun, Chura becoming desperate burnt himself in the fort Magazine. These sources obviously do not help us much. Shivdas (118-119) a contemporary author, who ends his account at the completion of the 4th regnal year of Muhammad Shah's reign, does speak of Chura's death but not of Jai Singh's war, clearly implying thereby that Chura had died before that event, more precisely towards the close of the fourth regnal year. Still more precise is the corroborative testimony of Tarikh-i-Muhammadi (quoted in Later Mughals, II, 122f.n.). According to it Chura passed away in Zil-Hizza, 1133 A.H. (i.e. between 12 Sept-10th Oct., 1721). Khafi Khan (II, 944) seems to indirectly support it when he refers that Chura died before the commencement of Saadat Khan's second campaign (i.e. late in Sept., 1721). Significantly, Kamwar Khan (II,483), though silent about the date of the death, does mention that Thun was defended against Jai Singh by his sons and not by Chura himself. Thus, if he does not clearly endorse, he does not contradict either, the weighty evidence of contemporary Shivdas. Tarikh-i-Muhammadi and impliedly Khafi Khan. As we have noted above Chura issuing instructions to Muhkam and Shardul on the day of their action against -Nilkanth i.e. 16th Sept., it becomes clear that he died after that date i.e. between 17th Sept. and 10th Oct., 1721.
As regards the manner of his death, Shivdas states the one of his relations, a wealthy man, expired childless. The brethren summoned and handed over to Mukhan Singh all the deceased's riches and the zamindari. Chura's second son, Zul Qaran, pressed for his share also. A verbal dispute followed between the two. Zul Qaran collected his men and engaged Muhkam in his house. Meanwhile, Chura having been informed about the affair, went there to pacify his sons. But Muhkam spoke abusingly and became ready to fight his father. In anger and anguish Chura swallowed the deadly poison, which he always carried with him. He went to a nearby garden and lay down dead. After a long time had elapsed the people sent to enquire about, found him dead. Of the other authorities, relevant here, Kamwar ignores this issue, while Khafi Khan, by merely announcing it, suggests a natural death. Without specifying the underlying cause, Tarikh-i-Muhammadi does support, though in brief, Shivdas's reference to the tussle between Chura's sons, Tham Singh (?) and Muhkarn and Chura's unsuccessful bid at their reconciliation. But it differs from Shivdas in so far as it makes Chura perish in the fighting itself. This part of its story is not confirmed by any other source, whereas Shivdas's version of suicide through poison finds its endorsement in the current local tradition also. The latter adds that having swallowed poison at Thun, Chura galloped on to a village, Nautha (5 miles south of Nadbai) where he lay unconscious under a Peepal tree. He expired shortly after the arrival of the search party on the spot. There is a Chabutara, nearby a Peepal tree in Nautha, which the popular belief links with the name of Churaman II.
[p.84]: now passed on his eldest son, Muhkam Singh12: Saadat Khan commenced his second campaign under the guidance of dissident Jat brothers. The Khan had a name for bravery and determination and though for long he made all possible efforts, he failed to chastise the Jats led by Muhkam Singh. The inaccessibility and strength of the Jat strongholds and their guerilla tactics foiled his diplomacy and valour alike.13 Possibly, Badan Singh went back disappointed sometime during Saadat Khan's operations.
Character And Estimate Of Rao Churaman II
Before proceeding further with the study of the Mughal-Jat relations, it would not be out of place to pause here and form an estimate of
12. Memoires des Jats, 16; Tawarikh-i-Hunud, 14a; Siyar, I, 329; Alexander Dow, The History of Hindustan (London: 1812), II, 352.
13. cf. Shivdas, 123, 125 and 127; K.K., II, 944-945; u.u., 1,426-427 and 440 (merely reproduced Khafi Khan)
[p. 85]: Churaman and his work. Rao Churaman II was one of those men of history to whom destiny proved remarkably unsparing and bounteous. Majma-ul-Akhbar, though a later work, aptly sums up," ... his good fortune proved like waters richly fertilizing the field of his successful career in life ... "14 More due to the combination of fortuitous circumstances than to his own endeavours, he rose from the depths of a despised rebel to the enviable height of a Panchhazari Mansabdar and the uncrowned king of the region between Delhi and [[Chambal. Stars smiled upon him right from the dawn of his eventful career. It was his luck as a chief Fateh Singh failed and hence the leadership was devolved on him, though he did not directly descend from the famous Raja Ram. Further, his tenure as the Jat chief coincided with the waning Mughal power. This offered him golden opportunities to fulfill his designs. Besides, it is noteworthy that, although he was not negligent in his turbulent ways, again and again he received royal favours. To crown all, he was extremely fortunate in gainig the favour of certain influential nobles of the day.
Our authorities speak very little of his character. An inference may, however, be drawn on the basis of his performance. Ambitious, bold and rapacious, Churaman II was cunning to-an-unusual degree. Certain traits of his character suggest that as a person he was complex. His movements after the murder of Husain Ali reflect his coolness and foresight, but the case of his suicide reveals his impulsiveness. His relations with the Sayyids and Ajit Singh illustrate his sense of devotion and gratitude. At the same time his conduct in the wars of succession generally testifies to his being unscupulous and deceitful. Similarly, while his treatment of his nephew, Badan Singh, smacks of his intransigence and imperious disposition,the way he held back in face of extreme provocation from his eldest son, Muhkam Singh, speaks of his occasional resignation and self-restraint.
Churaman displayed a passionate love for money and plunder throughout his life. Example of occasional loot were not wanting among the Jats either before or after him. But no other Jat leader of his calibre had ever given himself to plunder to this extent. In the process he set a bad precedent for his followers.By his misdeeds he, as also some others, heaped such infamy on the Jat community as could not be completely removed even by the noble deeds of illustrious Suraj Mal. These, coupled with his rough tactics, also turned a section of his own people against him. Little surprise then, that this aspect of his life brought him severe condemnation-severer than in case of any other Jat leader - from the contemporary and later writers. He has been denounced as "the mischief fomentor"15, "accursed wretch", "rascal", "good-for nothing-fellow",
14. Majma-ul-Akhbar in Elliot, VIII. 360; Francklin, The History of the Reign of Shah Aulam (London: ).)98), 51
15. Shivdas, 16 and 24.
[p.86]: "belonging to the race of traitors", "notorious freebooter",16 "demon of the waste17, "rogue" "one of the hereditary disloyal persons", 18 "robber chief",19 "evil-minded one"20," "practised plunderer"21 and so on. And yet, it must be conceded that such phrases in the absence of due emphasis on some of his good qualities, only demonstrate the biased approach of most of the authors. They give the impression as if he had no other quality or no other mission in life except incessant plunder. So far as Churaman's loot in course of wars was concerned, it must be remembered that it was in keeping with the general practice of the age.22 The examples of the Mughals, Marathas and even Rajputs indulging in it can easily be multiplied. Much of the criticism of Churaman by his contemporaries reflected the official view-point. As it was, most of them repeatedly hit only on one aspect-however bad-of his life, ignoring the other side of his activities.
Churaman was a good soldier, a fine tactician and a diplomat of considerable merit. If no brilliant exploits are associated with his name, he could certainly boast of having thwarted his enemies more than once. His successful defence of Thun against Raja Jai Singh stands out as his masterpiece. Churaman was a skillful military organiser too. The interest he evinced in training, equipment and expansion developed the Jat army into a reckonable force. He also improved upon the system of Jat defence by building strong mud forts like Thun well provided with arms and ammunitions. By his skillful handling of his opportunities and resources as well as his high associations, Churaman grew extremely strong. He became the "de facto ruler and law giver" of the entire population under his sphere of influence.23 Yet, there IS insufficient ground to style him as "great revolutionary" or "great epoch maker" and to equate his relentless plundering with "a revolution?24 and so on.
The Jat power made rapid progress during his leadership. Essentially Machivellian approach, he could change postures to serve his end. An implacable rebel till the end of Aurangzeb's reign, he later found it
16. K.K. in Elliot, VIII, 511, 512, 514, 515 and 532.
17. Iqbal, 88.
18. Ahwal, 105.
19. Imad, 83, Qanungo, Jats, 47-48.
20. M.U., I,438.
21. Irvine, Later Mughals, I, 231.
22. Tarikh-i-Ahmad Shahi (my own micro-film copy, from the original in British Museum. Br. Mus. Or. 20005), 133b, preserves a significant remark of Malharrao Holkar, reflecting the general tendency of the soldiers. Upon Imad's objection against the Maratha loot (in 1754) Malhar spoke, "These are soldiers. They always do it."
23. Qanungo, Jats, 45, 49.
24. U.N. Sharma, Itihas, 185, 188,201,308.
[p.87]: convenient to profess loyalty to the Mughal throne. In turn he, for the first time, gained the royal favours. But he reverted to his old ways and tried to fish in troubled waters during the reign of Farrukh Siyar, Efforts at his suppression were tried but failed and in the end Churaman received additional concessions. However, the concessions offered from a position of apparent helplessness defeated their very objective. Instead of making Churaman sincerely loyal, they made him corrserous of his mischief potential and thus eventually whetted his conscious designs. Side by side the dictates of self interest drew him closer to the mighty Sayyids and the latter themselves,for reasons already explained, extended their support to Churaman to the point of infuriating Farrukh Siyar. With the Emperor demanding his annihilation and the Wazir and the Mir Bakhshi offering him full protection, the Jat problem in general and Churaman's case in particular assumed interesting dimensions. More so, when the Emperor himself by virtue of his bickerings about and patronage to equally questionable persons like Itiqad Khan, looked like behaving almost as a factional leader. Thus, the policy towards the Jats became a factional issue at the Court.
The role of Sayyids in the ascendancy of Churaman has not been properly brought out. Besides what we have described at the relevant places, it is to be noted that for the first time in the history of Jats, a chief could attain such heights as to become an ally and close confidant of an Imperial Wazir and a Mir Bakhshi. To their patronage, more than to any other single factor, Churaman owed, his spectacular rise - a debt which he openly acknowledged. He received all that he could perhaps aspire for, except the title or Raja, which though promised, could not be conferred upon him due to the murder of Husain Ali. In return, the grateful Jat served them-with devotion till their end. This was a pleasant exception in a career otherwise marred by unrivalled cunning and deceit.However, his association with the Sayyids was not an unmixed blessing. It gave an added provocation to their opponents as already mentioned.
It has been argued that the work of Churaman "left no trace" behind and Badan Singh "had to begin everything from the very foundations".25 This does not appear to be entirely correct. Undeniably, Churaman II did not prove himself to be a farsighted statesman. He lacked that vision, prudence and spirit of accommodation, which were necessary in a successful leader of a tribal arid democratic people like the Jats. Though born and brought up among them, he failed to appreciate their susceptibilities. As a result, despite his resources and status he could not weld them into a compact and homogeneous unit or state. On the
25. Sarkar, Fall, II, 426.
[p.88]: contrary, unrest and rift came to the forefront even during his lifetime. In the circumstances, Badan Singh had o Considerably overhaul his system and devise sagacious policies for the creation of the Jat state. Nevertheless, it would be unfair to deny Churaman his due recognition. By leaving an armed force, numbering 14000 quite a few strong mud forts, considerable wealth and people conscious of their potentiality, he contributed a good deal towards the emergence of the Jat state. All his shortcomings admitted, the general condition Of tile Jats at the time of his death was better than it was at his assumption of their leadership. Except depletion in his rank and followers, the rest of his s long life's work was intact, when his son, Muhkam Singh stepped into to fill up his place. As we shall see, Jai Singh's victory over the latter, no doubt, inflicted a blow to the rising Jat power. But Churaman cannot be held solely responsible for whatever happened after his death. Likewise, it would be much to presume that his achievements were obliterated and the zamindari as it finally passed on to Badan Singh wore altogether a deserted look, with no vestiges of preceding leaders' sustained efforts. In any case Churaman's much-talked-about treasures escaped Jai Singh,26 and returned out to be much use to Badan Singh. 27Similarly, a single military set-back could not have shattered the Jat spirit and self-confidence worked up during the days of Churaman. If even this much survived, it was of no mean value to his successors for self-confidence is a pre-requisite for the rise and growth of a people.
'Raja' Muhkam Singh (c. September-October, 1721-18 November, 1722XII
Muhkam Singh succeeded his father to the leadership. Fransoo, while giving the genealogy of the Jat rulers, mentions him as the first Raja, who set up his Raj at Thun.28 It appears, however, that he himself adopted the title of the Raja.29
Ill-tempered, domineering and pugnacious, young Muhkam Singh was incapable as a leader.30 He is believed to have forcibly occupied the vacant leadership, much against the then prevavent custom among the Jas. A majority of the Jat leaders ,(apparently headed by Badan Singh) dill not approve it. They also disliked his intemperance and wished to
26. KK II, 945-946; M.U., I,440,
27. Memoires des Jats, 18; Jadunath Sarkar (Fall, II, 430) himself admits it.
XII.Contra see Rajpal Singh, the period (1721-Nov.I722) covered by this heading belonged to Churaman as he was alive at this time. Rise of the Jat Power, pp 36-42.-Editor.
28. Tawarikh-i-Hunud, 14a and 14b.
29. Dow, Hindustan, II, 352.
30. Siyar, 1,329; For his character see Appendix, A., Tawarikh-i-Ilunud, 16b.
[p.89]: sack him.31 This situation precipitated an internal crisis again. Getting jealous of Badan Singh's "bravery and ability", Muhkam Singh threw that chief into prison at Khoh (6 miles north west of Deeg). He posted two guards outside his cell, preventing both ingress and egress, instructing them not to admit anybody to him.32 This was thus Badan Singh's second imprisonment within a short time. The maltreatment at the hands of Muhkam Singh ultimately strengthened his cause. Fransoo adds that as many as 22 prominent sardars (said33 to be Raja Ram's son, Fateh Singh of Ajan, Anup Singh of Arig, Ati Ram's son, Shardul Singh of Halena, Gujars of Sihi and Helak, Purohit Kalu Ram and Lalji of Barsana and others), who loved Badan Singh for his "good behaviour", appealed to Muhkam Singh to release hisS cousin but he refused. At length they sought the intervention of Muhkam's guru, Makhan Das Bairagi. Moved by the entreaties, the Bairagi ordered his disciple to set Badan free. Muhkam reluctantly yielded to the command of his guru, saying, "I know for definite that your holiness has now passed on the sovereignty of Brij from me to the hands of Badan Singh". Thus, securing his freedom, the latter returned to his Jagir Kumbher and began devising plans for ejecting the hated leader. Ultimately his thoughts turned to Jai Singh and he went to that Raja to seek his help in the matter. By his devoted services and courage he gained "closeness and status" with the Raja. Then he insisted upon him to invade and destroy insolent rebel, Muhkam Singh, holding out the temptation that thereby his (Raja's) "rule will prevail in the Brij country". Jai Singh agree to it.34
At a time when Muhkam's strength was dwindling owing to the widening discord, he and his brother Zul Qaran further provocated the Mughals. They created widespread turbulence in their neighbourhood. They committed depredations on the royal highway, and despoiled the village and towns. Expelling the revenue officials, they illegally realized revenue from the khalisa and jagir mahals. Saadat Khan failed all through to chastise the insurgents. All this caused deep anxiety to the government, as is evident from a farman addressed to Nizam-ul-Mulk, wherein he is ordered to tackle this and other pressing problems.35
31. Ganga Singh, op.cit., 93: Also Tawarikh-i-Hunud, 15a.
32. Tawarikh-t-Hunud, 14b-15a. He does not take note of his first captivity by Churaman. In fact he omits all relevant details about that leader: Also Imperial Gazetteer, VIII, 75; Madhava Jayati by Somnath, quoted by U.N. Sharma, Itihas, 310.
33. U.N. Sharma, Itihas, 304, 310.
34. Tawarikh-i-Hunud, 15a-17a; Also Dikshit, op.cit. 29; Tod, Rajasthan, 652 (in details differing); cf KK, 11,945; M.U: I, 440; Memoires des Jats. 16; Imperial Gazetteer. VIII, 75. U.N. Sharma (Itihas, 310-311) says that before going to Jai Singh, Badan Singh met Rati Ram Jat of Jargavan (8 miles south of Bhasawar ?=Bhusawar) and married his son, Suraj Mal with that chieftain's daughter, Hansia.
35. Shivdas, 123, 125 and 127; Also Kamwar, 11,484; u.u., 1,440;Tawarikh-i-Hunud, 16b.
43. Jai Singh's Second Expedition (August-November, 1722)
[p.90]: At last, Jai Singh, who himself was keen for undertaking the task, received orders to march for the second time against the Jats. On 9th April, 1722 (4th Rajab), Raja Girdhar Bahadur, Arjun Singh of Orchha, Ajit Singh of Kaman others were placed under him.36 A force of 14,000 to 15,000 horsemen, artillery and ammunition was under his charge. Rupees two lakhs were given to him for necessary expenditure.37 On 19th August, 1722, (18th Zi-qada) Jai Singh and Muzaffar Khan were ordered to be ready for their departure. The Bakhshis were required to make up an expeditionary force of 50,000 horsemen. On 22nd August (21st Ziqada) Jai Singh was appointed governor of Agra (vice Saadat Khan) and faujdar of Mathura. The territories under Jat occupation were granted to him as jagir. Some more nobles - Sayyid Muzaffar Khan (Jai Singh's deputy at Agra) , Hamid Khan, Iradat Mand Khan and Muhammad Khan Bangash- were posted to serve under the Raja. Now he marched and when he was still on his way to Thun, Badan Singh coming from Deeg, met him once more, and offered him presents. Jai Singh reciprocated the gesture by presenting, a shield and a sword.39
As on the first occasion, Jai Singh began by cutting down the jungles and pushing his trenches forward. The Jats made frequent, though unsuccessful sorties, resulting in casualties on both sides. On 15th October, 1722 (15th Muharram), it was reported at the Court that the skirmishes were taking place daily at Thun, where Muhkam Singh stood bravely to meet the assailants.40 On 21st October, 1722, the Court received the reports of the fall of enemies three outlying fortesses and resulting increasing despair of the enemies. A big cannon, 300 bans, 500 maunds of gun-powder and leads and 100 rahkalas, on demand were ordered to be sent from the imperial arsenal.41 Muhkam Singh had earlier appealed to Ajit Singh for help. Accordingly, on a promise to pay Rupees three lakhs in advance and meet daily expenses he sent a force under Vijay Raj Bhandari. It came upto Jobnair (26 miles north-west of Jaipur) and
36. Kamwar, II, 480; Also K.K., II, 945; Rustam, 495; M.U., I, 440; Majma-ul- Akhbar in Elliot VIII, 361.
37. K.K., II, 945.
38. Kamwar, II, 482; Also see Rustam, 495; Majma-ul-Akhbar in Elliot VIII. 361.
39. Kamwar, II, 483; Tazkira-i-Shakir Khan by Shakir Khan (R.S.L Sitamau Ms.), hereafter referred to as Shakir,2; Memoires des Jats, 84, Siyar, I, 329 (Its English translation mentions "Ajit Singh Sevai", which is an obvious slip for Jai Singh Sawai); Scott, Dekkan, II, 187; Zahir-ud-Din Malik Muhammad Shah (unpublished thesis, Muslim University Aligarh), 171; Dastur Qaumwar, V[I, 435 and Farman (Kapatdwara), 160,27/36 quoted by U.N. Sharma. Itihas, 313-315.
40. Kamwar, II, 483: K.K., II, 945; Rustam, 495; MU, I, 440.
41. Kamwar, II, 483: Also M U, I, 440.
[p.91]: encamped there (October, 1722).42 Meanwhile, Badan Singh guided Jai Singh to the vulnerable spots in the defences of the fort of Thun. He also seouced many of Muhkam's captains to cross over to the side of the Raja. Having resisted the imperialists for two months Muhkam now lost heart and decided to escape from the fort. But before that he laid out a death-trap for the enemy. He dug up mines in the fort and spread gun powder on their floor. Then carrying as much treasure as possible he made off in the darkness of night (c. 8th November) to Ajit Singh at Sambhar. Next morning the Raja wanted to enter the fort. But Muhkam's flight, despite abundance of supplies in Thun, convinced Badan Singh of the leader's treachery. He, therefore, dissuaded the Raja from going inside the fort and thereby prevented a major disaster. Hardly had Jai Singh decided otherwise when the fort mines began to explode, "hurling-the stones through the sky". Jai Singh expressed his gratefulness to Badan Singh for having wisely saved his own and his associates' lives.43 Hectic attempts to trace out the much publicized treasures of Churaman were made but in vain. The city and fort of Thun were demolished and the soil was ploughed by asses by Jai Singh to make it detestable in public eyes.44 On 10th November, 1722 (11th Safar, 1135 H.) Jai Singh's Vakil, Jag Ram conveyed to the Emperor the welcome news of the conquest of Thun and the flight of the sons of Churaman, presenting him 500 mohars on his master's behalf. Muhammad Shah ordered the Raja to arrest Muhkam and his family members.45
A few days later, Jai Singh entered into an agreement with [[Badan Singh]] in his camp at Thun. The Raja laced a turban on his head.The French missionary says that he also bestowed upon the Jat chief the title of "Raja of Birch (Brij) " , the teeka, the nishan, the naqqara (kettle-drum) and the five-coloured flag (which was that of the Rajas of Jaipur also). But Badan Singh took no other title except that of the "Thakul'.46
42. Pancholi Rai Chand - Jai Singh, 28, October, 1722, Jaipur Archives, quoted by V.S. Bhatnagar, Jai Singh, 103; M. Mitra, Ajit Singh, 250.
43. Tawarikh-i-Hunud, 17a-18b; Also Kamwar, II, 484, K.K II 945; Rustam, 495; Memoires des Jats, 15, 16; Siyar, I, 329; M U I, 440; Majma-ul-Akhbar, in Elliot, VIII, 361.
44. Thun was, however, rebuilt, though on a different site, well before Wendel's arrival in the Jat country. See Memoires des Jats, 15. Side note Tawarikh-i-Hunud (19b) relates an interesting incident that during the Maratha invasion of Bharatpur (1754) Malharrao, in order to assuage Muhkam Singh, ploughed the site of the former Thun with elephants and sowed pearls.
45. Kamwar, II. 484; KK., II, 945-946; Memoires des Jats, 15; Tawarikh-i-Hunud, 18b; MU, 1,440; Majma-ul-Akhbar in Elliot, VIII, 361; Scott, Dekkan, II, pt. V, 187; Bhaskar, 3081; Zahir-ud-Din Malik, Muhammad Shah, 172.
46. Memoires des Jats, 16 main body and footnote; Also see Rustam, 495, Dastur Qaumwar, VII, quoted by U.N. Sharma, Itihas, 321; SPD, XXX, 124; Siyar, I, 329-330; If. U, I, 44.0; Majma-ul-Akhbar in Ell iot, VIII, 361.
[p.92]: Generally corroborating Wendel, Fransoo adds that the right of coinage and the kotwali of the sadar (Agra) was also given to Badan Singh.47 In May 1723, the Emperor ordered Jai Singh to give some portions of the zamindari of Churaman to Badan Singh and thus he acknowledged his leadership. Following a written agreement in June, 1725, Jai Singh formally made over to the Jat chief the lands of Churaman on the condition of his paying an annual tribute of rupees eighty three thousand to Jaipur.48 According to Fransoo the tracts assigned to Badan Singh consisted of Mathura, Vrindaban, Mahaban, the parganas of Hissar, Chhata, Kosi, Hodal etc. yielding a total revenue of 50 to 60 lakhs.49 He apparently includes here those areas also which only gradually came under the possession of Badan Singh. Thus, the new Jat chief started his career as a feudatory of the Jaipur Raja. It is interesting to note here that the great Suraj Mal, even in the heyday of his power when he far outstripped the Jaipur King, Madho Singh, formally behaved himself as the vassal of the Raja. 50, XIII
Consequences Of Jai Singh's Second Expedition
Jai Singh's second Jat expedition was no less remarkable than the first one. Thie conquest of Thun and the other forts -fulfilled the cherished desire of the Mughals as well as the Jaipur chief. The Emperor expressed his great pleasure by ordering the beating of drum continuously for three days. 51. Jai Singh avenged his former disgrace and at the same time gratified the long-standing desire of the Jaipur rulers (as also of the Mughals) to humble the recalcitrant Jats. It added also to his fame and fortune.52 His political ambition to establish personal overlordship over the Jats also seemed to have been realized. Likewise, the humility and submissiveness of the new Jat chief must have tickled his typically Rajput notion of social superiority as well.
A deeper insight, however, cannot but reveal the shallowness of the achievement. It has to be conceded that Jai Singh thrived upon the
47. Tawarikh-i-Hunud, 18b.
48. Kapatdwara papers, 73, quoted by V.S. Bhatnagar, Jai Singh, 103; U.N. Sharma, Itihas 321-322.
49. Tawarikh-i-Hunud, 18b.
50. See Tawarikh-i-Hunud, 63; Sujan, 36; Qanungo, Jats, 60; Contra see Pande, Bharatpur, 30-31.
XIII. More details for the period 1722-1725 see Rajpal Singh, Rise of the Jat Power, pp 36-42.-Editor.
51. Kamwar, II, 484; Memoires des Jats, 84; side note.
52. In reward for his services the Raja received the titles (in June 1723) of "Rajah-i-Rajeshwar, Shri Rajadhiraj, Maharaja Sawai Jai Singh". See Irvine. Later Mughals, II, 124.
[p.93]: mutual discord and enmity among the Jat fraternity, as is evident from a traditional local saying.53, XIV It is open to dispute whether without Badan Singh's help and guidance, the Rajput could have succeeded so quickly or comfortably. This naturally makes dim the glory of Jai Singh's victory. Even this victory was of precarious nature. In the ultimate anaiysis, what he succeeded in destroying was the power of the sons of Churaman and not the Jat power as such. The loss sustained by the Jats was, thus, more ostensible than real,54 The imperialists attained little beyond reducing or destroying a few Jat forts and putting to flight the existing leader, Muhkam Singh. Paradoxical though it may sound, their victory turned out to be a boon in disguise for the Jats. It only forced the deficient and unpopular Muhkam to make room for the capable Badan Singh, who raised Jats glory to unprecedented heights. In the process, he showed himself to be more dangerous than Muhkam or even his father, for the Mughal authority, in the suba of Agra at least. In respect of the Jaipur house also, if not Badan Singh or his son (Suraj Mal), certainly his grandson (Jawahar Singh), proved a potential source of anxiety and trouble to his Jaipur contemporary.55 Yet the irony was that the Mughal Emperor and Jai Singh themselves had facilitated as well as sanctioned the elevation of Badan Singh. Keeping these cross currents in view, Wendel appeared to be lamenting, "But it was Jai Singh himself who undid what he had done himself".56 Thus, whatever might have appeared at the moment, in reality there was not much for the Court to feel jubilant over, or contended about the episode.
As an upshot of this war the relations between the new Jat leadership and the Kachhwahas on the one hand and the Rathors on the other underwent a transformation. While in the case of the Kachhwahas the former enmity gave way to amity, coolness and ill-will were bound to supersede the earlier warmth between the Jat leadership and the Rathors, following Ajit Singh's act of extending asylum to Muhkam Singh.
53. "They wanted to takeover Delhi and Agra, but due to brother's enmity lost their own Thun."
XIV. लेन चहति हे दिल्ली आगरा घर की थून दई। बंधु बैर अनबन के कारण कैसी कुमति ढई॥ बृजेंद्र वंश भास्कर, p.30. जयसिंह बदन जट्टहिं संहेत, बहुभव दिवाय थूनहि समेत। है साह हिंतु मुहकम हराम, यातें पलाय गय धन्व धाय॥ वंश भास्कर, p. 3080-81.-Editor
54. Satish Chandra, Parties and Po lilies, 178-179; Contra see Sarkar, Fall, II, 426.
55. Memoires des Jats, 16.
56. Ibid.
Character And Estimate Of Muhkam Singh
[p.94]: Muhkam Singh gained experience of warfare and politics as a helper to his father, Rao Churaman II. Like Rup Singh he distinguished himself as a brave and energetic warrior on several occasions. He held his guru, Makhan Das Bairagi in high esteem but he showed himself wanting in love for his family. He shared his father's attachment to a predatory life.
As a person he was offensive, jealous and selfish and thus he apparently created more enemies than friends. He nurtured high ambition yet he lacked vision and purpose to sustain it. Likewise, however, bold and daring, he did not possess heroic fortitude to overcome moments of peril.
Muhkam's tenure in office was too short to enable us to judge him properly as a leader. His incapability, however, is evident. Imperious and self-indulgent, he failed to inspire confidence in his own people. He foolishly clung to the policies, disapproved of even during the lifetime of his father. Therefore, the rift which he had inherited from his father widened under him and several chieftains having deserted him, helped the imperialists in putting him to flight. Thereafter, Muhkam Singh lived as a fugitive for more than half a century. Recapture of his patrimony with external help remained the object of his activities till well past the reign of Badan Singh. To seek help he approached Ajit Singh, Malharrao Holkar, Imad-ul-Mulk, the Emperor Ahmad Shah and others and in the process apparently caused deep anxieties to the Jat rulers. Besides, his intrigues obviously influenced the Jat policy towards the personages concerned and vice versa. At last, disappointed from all sides poor Muhkam stood a suppliant at the gates of Raja Suraj Mal and Raja Ranjit Singh. Both, especially the former, generously provided for him. In the end Muhkam went to Ajmer where he died at a fairly ripe age in presence of Jiwa Ram Jat, the Mukhtar of Suraj Mal.57
57. For details of Muhkam's subsequent career see Memoires des Jats, I, footnote; Tah. 94b, 98b, 102b-103b, 106b-I07a, 131b; Tawarikh-i-Hunud, 19b-20a, 26a; S.PD. XXX, 134. 11,23, XXVII, 83; M.U., 1,440; Also see Appendix A.