Sa’adat Khan’s tenure as Subedar of Agra was a total failure. He could not completely control the recalcitrant Jats of Agra and Mathurā who had raised the banner of revolt against the Mughal emperor. His deputy Neelkanth Sagar was killed by Jats in a surprise attack. The emperor shifted him from Agra to Awadh on 9th September, 1722 and thus dawned the dynasty of the Awadh Nawabs. Here the credit goes to Sa’adat Khan that he defeated a number of local kings and Zamindars and unified the province of Awadh under one umbrella. The defeated kings and landlords were Mohan Singh, Raja of Tiloi in Rae-Bareli district, Chhatradhārī Singh Somabanśī, Raja of Pratapgarh; Chet Rai Bais of Baiswara, Raja Dutta Singh of Gonda and Raja Narain Singh of Balrampur. He subdued the Shaikhzadas of Lucknow easily and captured their prestigious Panchmehla. Then he left Lucknow and reached Ayodhyā.
Despite Sa’adat Khan being a valiant warrior and a competent ruler, he was a treacherous person. He had betrayed the Syyad Brothers who had initially patronized and promoted him. He stooped so low that he participated in their killings. Besides, his role in Nadir Shah’s plunder of Delhi is completely condemnable. After the destruction of the Safavid dynasty of Iran by the Afghans in 1722 Nadir, a Persian, who had started his career as a robber, suddenly rose to such a pinnacle of power that he chased the Afghans out of the Persian boundaries and crowned himself as the Shah of Iran in 1736. Thereafter, he attacked the Afghans of Qandhar and captured Lahore on 21st January, 1739. Then he advanced towards Delhi. The Mughal emperor Muhammad Shah was alarmed and along with his prominent nobles he marched with an army of 75,000 men and encamped at Karal. Sa’adat Khan was called to join the imperial army. He reached there at the earliest and saught the permission of the Council of War of the Mughal Emperor to attack. The Council decided to start aggression two days later after full preparation. But Sa’adat Khan opened the attack on Nadir Shah’s army on the same day, i.e. 23rd February, 1739. The result was that Sa’adat Khan was captured alive and presented before Nadir Shah who was informed by him that a large contingent of the Mughal army was ready for fight. Thereafter, Nadir Shah agreed to return to his country on receipt of an indemnity of 50,00,000 rupees after having negotiated it with the Nizam. Meanwhile, Sa’adat Khan learnt that after the death of Mir-bakhshi Khan-e-Duaran, who had helped him in his attack on Nadir Shah’s army, this post had been conferred on the Nizam. Sa’adat Khan had cherished this post for long; hence he conveyed it to Nadir Shah that a march to Delhi could get him twenty crore rupees and a lot of jewellery easily. In the light of this information Nadir Shah marched to Delhi and plundered it for several days and snatched the Kohinoor and Takht-e-taus (the Peacock Throne) and other jewelleries. Never in the history of Delhi such a barbarous loot had taken place. More than 20,000 persons were butchered on a single day on 11th March 1739. Despite the plunder for days the cash in loot did not reach the figure of rupees twenty crores. Then he called Sa’adat Khan and asked him as to where the amount of rupees twenty crores was lying and threatened him with corporeal punishment, if he failed to produce the promised sum. Sa’adat Ali could not withstand this humiliation and took a cup of poison during the night of 19th March, 1739 and died. There is another speculation that he commited suicide because of unbearable cancer pain.Thus, ended the life of a brave and intrepid warrior, able administrator but a man without a sense of gratitude. Though he unified the kingdom of Awadh, it was his ambition and a sense of revenge which ruined Delhi and the prestige of the Mughal Empire.
In Awadh many local chiefs had declared themselves independent kings and he had to fight many battles to subdue them. He subjugated them but did not change the rulers. Uday Nath Kavindra, a court-poet of Gurudatta Singh, King of Amethi, has given the description of one such battle:
समर अमेठी के सरोष गुरुदत्तसिंह
सादत की सेना समसेरन ते भानी है।
भनत कविंद काली हुलसी असीसन को
स्सीन को ईस की जमाति सरसानी है।।
तहाँ एक जोगिनी सुभट खोपरी लै तामें
सोनित पियत ताकी उपमा बखानी है।
प्यालो लै चिनी को छकी जोबन तरंग मानो
रंग हेतु पीबति मजीठ मुगलानी है।
(Quoted in Digvijaya-bhushan)
Sa’adat Khan ruled from 1722 to 1739 A.D. He belonged to a celebrated Saiyyad family of Najaf in Persia. Though he fought battles against Hindu chiefs, his relation with Hindu subjects was satisfactory. He employed Hindus in Government departments, particularly the revenue department. He appointed Atmarama, a Khatri as his diwan and with his help he increased the revenues without rack-renting the peasantry and left well-filled treasury to his successors. Muzaffar Alam in his book ‘The crisis of Empire in Mughal North India: Awadh to the Punjab 1707-1748’ has named the following Hindu officers who had some important jobs during the time of Sa’adat Khan:
(i) Rai Saroman Das
(ii) Ballabh Ram
(iii) Mehta Ram Singh
(iv) Gulab Rai
(v) Rai Fatheh Chand
(vi) Hari Chand Rai
(vii) Pratap Rai
(viii) Raghunath Singh
(ix) Bhaiya Madan Mohan
In 1724 he defeated the brave king of Tiloi located in Rai Bareli district and Mohan Singh Kanhpuria, who fought valiantly and was killed in the battlefield. Though Sa’adat Khan had conqured Lucknow in 1722, yet he established his capital on the bank of Sarayū (Ghaghra) at a distance of only 2 miles from Ayodhyā. He made his accommodation on a high hill overlooking the banks of the river Ghaghra. He was a simple ruler and so made his house with unbaked bricks and it was called bangla. He was both a brave leader (Sa’adat Khan) and a good administrator (Burhan-ul-Mulk).
It is generally believed that Abul Mansur Khan alias Safdar Jung had given land to Abhayarāma Das for the construction of Hanuman-garhi temple at Ayodhyā. Mahant Gyan Das of Ayodhyā, who is in the proud possession of two sanads and other religious leaders of Ayodhyā were under this impression. I requested Mahant Gyan Das to give the photo-prints of these two sanads, and he graciously obliged me. When I got it deciphered by Persian scholars of Khuda Baksh Oriental Public Library, I was told that these two sanads of land grant were issued in favour of faqir (bairagi sadhu) Abhayarāma during the reign of the Mughal Emperor Abul Fatah Nasiruddin Muhammad Shah in 1723 and 1724 when Sa’adat Khan was the Governor of Awadh. These sanads have been discussed at length in the Eleventh Chapter.
These sanads nail the falsehood of the sinister propaganda, which was carried out by mischievous persons led by Ameer Ali, that Hanuman Garhi was built at a site where a mosque had been constructed by Aurangzeb.
(3) Safdar Jung (1739-1754 A.D.)
Abul-Mansur Khan Safdar Jung, also known as Muhammad Muqim, was the son of Sa’adat Khan’s eldest sister. He was invited by his maternal uncle Sa’adat Khan in 1723 to come from Persia and in 1724 he was married to Sadrunnisa Begum, the eldest daughter of Sa’adat Khan at the age of 16. Since Sa’adat Khan had no son, he had declared Mansur Ali as his successor. After the death of Sa’adat Khan Mansur Ali had to pay Rupees two crore to Nadir Shah and thereafter his appointment was confirmed by both Nadir Shah and Mughal Emperor Muhmmad Shah. He was given the title of Safdar Jung. The reign of Sa’adat Khan and Safdar Jung witnessed the establishment of many sects of Bairagis and the beginning of the construction of temples at Ayodhyā.
After the Galata conference in 1718 A.D. the Bairagi Sadhus started renovating and reconstructing temples at Ayodhyā. Abhayarama Das received land grant from the Nawab of Awadh, Sa’adat Khan in 1724 A.D. at a very vantage site where stands the present Hanuman-garhi. Similarly, Govinda Das established Nirmohi Akhada at Ayodhyā. This Nirmohi Akhada ha
s been in the forefront in all the litigation against the protagonists of the mosque and was a party in the suits decided by the Allahabad High Court on 30th September, 2010. It will not be unreasonable to presume that the substitute Janma-sthāna temple, too, was built during his period; although Carnegy in his famous book on Ayodhyā published in 1870 arbitrarily assigned 166 years since its foundation. He named Ramadasji as its founder and informed that 7 generations had expired since then. It is further intimated by Carnegy that Mir Masum-ali mafidar had allotted more than one acre (Ac.1 R. 1 P.1) of land to Ramadasji of Gudar sect for the construction of the temple of Ramachandra. If the period of 166 years is accepted, then this temple was constructed in the year 1704 A.D. when Aurangzeb was the emperor. During his reign no Mir could dare to gift land for the construction of a substitute Rāma temple at Ayodhyā, when the Emperor himself was instrumental in the demolition of three temples there. But if it is calculated on the basis of 20 years for a generation gap, the period for 7 generations will be 140 years and the time of the gift of land to Ramadas will be c. 1730 A.D. which is in the proximity of the period, when the Ramanandi Bairagi sadhus under the dynamic leadership of Bālānanda moved into Ayodhyā and tried their best to take possession of many parts of Ayodhyā. When on the original Janma-sthana they found that there existed a mosque, then on the request of Bairagi Sadhus, the Nawab or some noble Mir Masum-ali might have given the land for the construction of a substitute Janma-sthana temple. But the Hindu devotees never forgot the original site and continued to throng to it even in the most depressing and oppressing conditions.
Abhayarāma’s name is associated with Safdar Jung also. Carnegy writes in his book on Ayodhyā that ‘on a certain occasion the Nawab just named (i.e. Mansur Ali) was seized with a severe illness, which it was thought, was cured by the prayers of Abhi Ram, the chief of the then mendicants of Ajudhia, and this secured for the latter Mansur Ali’s good offices and gratitude.” (p. 18)
Safdar Jung appointed a Hindu Nawal Rai as his Prime Minister and Army-commander. He was a very capable Prime Minister and a brave warrior. In the matter of administration he did not allow even the son of Safdar Jung to intervene. After occupying the Bangash territory near Farrukhabad, Nawal Rai was made the head of the administration there. But because of his overconfidence and treachery by an Afghan soldier he was defeated and killed in a sudden attack by Ahmad Khan Bangash in August 1750, before the Nawab could reach with reinforcements. Rajendra Giri Gosain was another Hindu who sacrificed his life for Safdar Jung. He was a sannyasi who had a jagir and commanded the cavalry contingent. Safdar Jung unhesitatingly solicited the help of the Jats and the Marathas in his fights against the Muslims.
Nawal Rai renovated Nageshvara Nath and Lakshmana Qila temples at Ayodhyā. The ancient Hanuman Garhi was fortified during the time of Safdar Jung.
(4) Shuja-ud-daula (1754-75)
Safdar Jung was succeeded by his only son Shuja-ud-daula on 6th October, 1754. Shuja-ud-daula had to fight two major battles; one in 1761 at Panipat where he sided with Ahmad Shah Abdali and second at Buxar against East India Company. In the first battle at Panipat, although his alliance with Abdali succeeded in defeating Marathas, there was a huge loss to his army; as his army had to withstand the worst of the Maratha attack. Thereafter, his military power was incapacitated and this was the main cause of his defeat at Buxar, where he, along with the Mughal Emperor Shah Alam and Mir Kasim, fought against the East India Company and lost. Thereafter, he remained Nawab but became subservient to the Company. During his tenure the Marathas put pressure on him to hand over control of Ayodhyā, Prayāga and Kāśī right from the beginning. He went on dodging the Maratha Sardars until the Marathas were defeated in the third battle of Panipat in 1761.
Despite these aberrations, Shuja-ud-daula was a liberal ruler and during his reign there was a lot of development at Ayodhyā. He did not prevent Bairagi Sadhus from building temples at Ayodhyā. When there was a question in the British Parliament about his policy towards pilgrim places, then the official reply was:
“That there are two places of bathing and worship in the neighborhood of Faizabad where on the arrival of the pilgrims, guards were stationed to protect them in their religious observations; and Shouja Dowalh constantly made large donations amongst the poorer sort of the pilgrims, for their maintenance during their pilgrimage.”
This statement is a part of the Parliamentary Register of the Great Britain Parliament, 1781 A.D., and is a great compliment to Shuja-ud-daula’s liberal religious policy. The Parliamentary Register further testifies to the liberal policy of Shuja-ud-daula by writing thus:
“...that many of the principal Officers were Hindoos, and amongst them several who held commands; that the Vizier was more attentive to the Hindoo Officers than to those of his own religion, in order to attach his Gentoo subjects more to his person and Government.” (A. 1781, p. 488)
He appointed Ram Narayan, the eldest son of Atmaram his diwan and his younger brother Maha Narayan an advisor. Two more members of Ram Narayan’s family were elevated to high posts. Beni Bahadur was given important military responsibility. In the battle of Buxar he fought from a very important strategic position. However, the Britishers broke through the army lines, where Beni Bahadur was in command. His loyalty was suspected and he was arrested after the battle and died in captivity. Another member Surat Singh was an employee in the revenue section and after his death his son Jaggan Nath was appointed and eventually elevated to the post of the diwan. Thus, the family of Atmaram enjoyed the diwani administration for generations during the early Nawabs.
During the reign of Shuja-ud-daula, particularly after he shifted the capital from Ayodhyā to Faizabad, the Bairagi Sadhus of the Rāmānanda sect built a number of Rāma-Jānakī temples at Ayodhyā. Though he dodged the Marathas all the time in handing over Ayodhyā to them, yet he championed the Hindu cause considerably by transferring the royal seat. On account of the migration of a large Muslim population from Ayodhyā to Faizabad the Bairagis had found vast chunks of vacant lands whereupon they constructed new temples and established new Vaishnava mutts and sects. Dayārām came from Chitrakuta and established the Khaki Akhada at Ayodhyā, Purushottama Das came from Kotabundi and established the Mahanirvani akhada at Ayodhyā. Viramala Das of Kota established Nirālambī sect at Ayodhyā during his reign. The construction and the fortification of the Hanuman temple which had started during the days of Safdar Jung by Abhayarama Das continued unabated during the reign of Shuja-ud-daula.
P. Carnegy informs that Shuja-ud-daula built the Samanburj near his palaces “wherefrom at a considerable distance the river then flowed. He further adds that according to tradition ‘by offering up 125,000 cows and milk in proportion, the Nawab induced the river to change its course, and to flow under his castle.” It is corroborated by the travelogue of William Hodges who writes that Shuja-ud-daula successfully made fervent prayer for bringing the Sarayù river on the bank.
Shuja-ud-daula was the only son and under great influence of his mother, Sardi Jahan Begum who was a strict disciplinarian. From Ghulam Husain Khan’s ‘Seir-ul-Muntakhirin’, (Vol. VI pp 65-66) an interesting incident is known. When Shuja-ud-daula was a young prince, he was caught red-handed one night trying to climb into the room of a young pretty girl. The matter was reported to the kotwal by the guardians of the girl. A nervous kotwal contacted Nawab Safdar Jung who ordered for the arrest of his son and when the son contacted his mother Begum Sadri Jahan, she declined to intervene and the young Prince was kept in captivity for a few days. But the same mother came to his rescue when he was on the throne. After becoming Nawab he once got an 18 year-old Khatri girl of Ayodhyā abducted. There was such an uproar that his throne was in danger. She called Raja Ram Narayan and asked him why such a huge hue and cry was being made over such an insignificant ‘unclean’ Hindu girl. Ram Narayan took the hint and pacified the public protests and nobles’ anger. Shuja-ud-daula was a man of moral laxity and whenever he slept with some other
woman in place of his wife, he used to pay Rupees five thousand for his infidelity to his wife.
He developed Faizabad in such a beautiful fashion that it vied with other best towns of the country. He is remembered for the architectural excellence which he exhibited in the construction of buildings, palace and mausoleums there. He was the only Indian ruler who had to participate in two momentous wars, one at Panipat in 1761 and another at Buxar in 1764. Though in the first war his alliance headed by Ahmad Shah Abdali emerged victorious, his army was mauled by the Marathas and it was incapacitated so intensively that it could not withstand the military might of a trading company. But thereafter it was a strong contingent of Dasanami Sannyasi under Umrao Giri that brought victory laurels for the Nawab of Awadh. These Gosain contingents were so outstanding that Col. Champion, the conqueror of Rohilkhand estimated them to be ‘the best cavalry in the Oudh’ (Macpherson, Soldiering in India, 203). They were the biggest bulwark against all onslaughts. Similarly, a large number of Bairagi Sadhus also participated in the military expeditions of Shuja-ud-daulah.
Ayodhya Revisited Page 77