Akbar's Heir : Battle of Succession - Salim, Murad, Danial, Khusrau - Page 4

Thanks for this very informative reply Abhay. It has cleared a lot of things for me.

hi abhay

Originally posted by: pilluitla

hi abhay

i read u r new posts .very interesting and u r doing excellent job. sorry i am not writing my views because my health is not good but iam reading .and u know i dont know much about history what ever i have that is because of u r and others posts. and thank you for remembering my request.

thank you

srilu

Srilu,
Take care of your health.

Thanks for posting. Post your views as your time permits. Hope you found most of your answers in this post. :)

Originally posted by: Bindu_nhbr

Abhay

Thanks for correcting me.I'm relieved that Akbar had only imprisoned them (which is better than what I actually imagined) or at least the other things aren't verified yet 😊

The other excerpt you've posted about Gulbadan Begum being eyewitness and her conclusions are interesting.The last lines are actually surprising 😊

Your other post as reply to Devki has cleared my doubts too.I couldn't get how come Akbar was left in the protection of Humayun's brothers when they were fighting among themselves for the throne.But as you said I think Humayun was confident that they would not harm Akbar no matter what happens.

There are some places where Akbar is held responsible for ill treatment of Hakim's sons and also it is said that he ordered Man Singh to do so, they were kept in a Bagh near Lahore, but that i could not verify. Hence, i take only the imprisoning part to be true as of now. :)

As for Humayun's case...yes... Your assessment is valid.

Abhay, Devki

Originally posted by: RadhikaS0

Abhay, Devki

Sorry for such a late response, but i really enjoyed the wonderful discussion between the two of you. :)

Since Babur was mentioned in this discussion, i wish to share these thoughts about him by Gulbadan Begum in her memoirs:

"From his Majesty Sahib-qirani [Timur] down to my royal father there was not one of the bygone princes who laboured as he did. He became king in his twelfth year, and the khutba was read in his name on June 10th, 1494, in Andijan, the capital of Farghana...

The toils and perils which in the ruling of kingdoms befell our prince, have been measured out to few, and of few have been recorded the manliness, courage and endurance which he showed in battle-fields and dangers."

I sometimes really wonder at the manner in which Babur was able to keep his hopes alive and kept running from place to place, trying to establish a kingdom and set up "home". How different must the hot plains of (north) Hindustan have been for this person from the cold slopes of Farghana. I agree with Abhay - it was a do-or-die situation for Babur. A lot more was at stake for him than for Akbar. It was Babur who crossed over into Hindustan and established the roots that let Akbar nurture the Mughal empire like a huge Banyan tree.

Babur not only respected his mother but also his sisters, aunts and elder relations and often bestowed them with gifts. Just reading about how he treated his paternal aunts makes me respect this aspect of Babur.

"All through the four years that (my father) was in Agra he used to go on Fridays to see his paternal aunts. One day it was extremely hot, and her Highness my lady said, "The wind is very hot, indeed; how would it be if you did not go this one Friday? The begams would not be vexed." His Majesty said, "Maham! It is astonishing that you should say such things! The daughters of Abu-sa'id Sultan Mirza, who have been deprived of father and brothers! If I do not cheer them, how will it be done?"

To the architect, Khwaja Qasim, his Majesty gave the following order: "We command a piece of good service from you. It is this: whatever work, even if it be on a great scale, our paternal aunts may order done in their palace, give it precedence, and carry it out with might and main." "

****************

Whatever century we may talk of, and whatever may be the customs of that era, i really believe that children should be kept out of the politics of the throne. To me, it is highly admirable that Kamran and Askari did not take out their vengeance on a young and vulnerable Akbar.

However, kings back then had their own compulsions. Like it is said, there is no kinship in kingship. The discussion about who set the ball rolling in terms of ill-treating kinsmen in order to protect the throne reminded me of these lines, mark the lines in bold:

"Mirza Kamran had gone as far as Bhira and Khush-ab when Adam Ghakkar, by plot and stratagems, captured him and brought him to the Emperor {Humayun}.

To be brief, all the assembled khans and sultans, and high and low, and plebian and noble, and soldiers and the rest who all bore the mark of Mirza Kamran's hand, with one voice represented to his Majesty: "Brotherly custom has nothing to do with ruling and reigning. If you wish to act as a brother, abandon the throne. If you wish to be king, put aside brotherly sentiment. What kind of wound was it that befell your blessed head in the Qibchaq defile through this same Mirza Kamran? He it was whose traitorous and crafty conspiracy with the Afghans killed Mirza Hindal. Many a Chaghatai has perished through him; women and children have been made captive and lost honour. It is impossible that our wives and children should suffer in the future the thrall and torture of captivity. With the fear of hell before our eyes (we say that) our lives, our goods, our wives, our children are all a sacrifice for a single hair of your Majesty's head. This is no brother! This is your Majesty's foe!" "

Sometime after this, Humayun ordered Kamran to be blinded. Was this a precedent to Jahangir attempting to blind Khusrau? Anyway, the point is, if we talk about Humayun and his brothers, ambitions ran high among all of them and it would be a futile exercise trying to see who was trying to harm whom. The one positive aspect was that Akbar remained safe during this tumultuous period. Similarly, in case of others, whether it was Akbar and Mirza Hakim, Jahangir, Shah Jahan, or Aurangzeb, we cannot use the same yardstick to judge each incident of attacking, imprisoning or harming a kinsman. Every incident is clouded by many shades of circumstances. Like Abhay said, we can debate from our POV whether someone was right or wrong. But we can never quite see the POV of the person at the center of it all or understand completely why he did what he did. Also pressure may be brought in by associates to act with someone in a certain way, as seen above.

I enjoyed reading this post a lot Radhika, thanks.

Yes, I read the same thing that Humayun was under pressure from his nobles to kill Mirza Kamran but settled with just blinding him.

One more thing I read I don't remember whether it was in AN or TA. It was that at one time Bairam Khan was actually thinking of trying to put Mirza Qasim(Kamran's son) on the throne. This was of course during the time that he and Akbar were having problems. I'll check and let you know. That may have played a role in why he was executed by Akbar in 1563/64. So that he is no longer the focus of dissenting factions(just like Mary, Queen of Scots was executed by her cousin sister, Akbar's contemporary Queen Elizabeth).

You are right, we can talk about all the POVs we want but we will never know exactly why so and so made such and such decision. Pressure from different groups, personal relationships, etc.

This is what it says in AN VOL2 page 142:

Radhika - Read your post.
You made some fine observations. Need time to write. Will revert slowly..

Right now replying to Devki , as she also made some interesting points. Would like to add to them.

As I had said this earlier --

The son of Mirza Kamran was kept in prison by Akbar from 1556 till mid 1560's when he was executed. This is what Akbarnama Volume-1, Pg-455 tells us. All such executions were done to safeguard the throne only, as we all seem to agree. The details can also be read in the Persian Akbarnama, Vol-1, Pg-365, Calcutta 1878 print.

Additionally, Akbarnama Volume-1, Pg-660 tells us that Tardi Beg (one of Humayun's generals) sent (surrendered) the son of Mirza Kamran to Akbar after he ascended the throne in 1556. Till this point in time, Mirza Kamran's son was in Tardi Beg's custody, as i said earlier.

Now, coming back to your post. You have quoted from Akbarnama, Volume-2, Pg-142, where it is mentioned that the son of Mirza Kamran was with Bairam Khan. Are you surprised to find him free, while i had said that he was in prison? :-P

Although i have already given the references above, for my statements, { I know you don't need references, as you said on the previous page. :) }, but let me explain the situation more clearly.

This was the time when Bairam Khan and Akbar were not on good terms. Bairam Khan was the regent and all-powerful during the early years of Akbar's reign - from 1556 to 1560. He may have taken the son of Mirza Kamran out of prison for his own reasons. Though, Akbar took him again back in his own custody. The approximate day when all these events happened is somewhere near 19th March, 1560.

{ This explanation is somewhat similar to the last reply where i explained how the said traveller was able to meet Khusrau and the sons / grandsons of Mirza Hakim in prison. BTW, just like Bairam Khan (probably) took away Kamran's son from prison, Nur Jahan & her supporters and even Khurram had attempted to gain the custody of Khusrau, who was a captive of Jahangir at that time. }


In Akbarnama, Volume-2, Pg-145, Abu'l Fazl TRIES hard to make us BELIEVE that Bairam Khan wanted to enthrone the son of Mirza Kamran, though i was not convinced. Fazl says - Bairam Khan enquired about Kamran's son and "nothing but sorrow and regret came into his hands".

About a month later, around 18th April, 1560, Akbar marched from Delhi to pursue Bairam Khan. This is from Akbarnama, Volume-2, Pg-152. Maham Anga also had her role in all this drama.

Hope it is clear now. :)

The mention of the execution of the Queen of Scots is timely. I found it surprising that her son, James VI was very cool about the idea of his mother getting executed and was himself in the coterie of Queen Elizabeth I. He became the King after Elizabeth's death. BTW, there are reports that Mary had planned the assassination of Elizabeth I for which she was finally executed. Allegedly, letters written by her and sent out from her castle were discovered. But one fact which holds true is that she lived a luxurious life at Chartley during her long 'house arrest'.

Originally posted by: history_geek

Radhika - Read your post.
You made some fine observations. Need time to write. Will revert slowly..

Right now replying to Devki , as she also made some interesting points. Would like to add to them.

As I had said this earlier --

The son of Mirza Kamran was kept in prison by Akbar from 1556 till mid 1560's when he was executed. This is what Akbarnama Volume-1, Pg-455 tells us. All such executions were done to safeguard the throne only, as we all seem to agree. The details can also be read in the Persian Akbarnama, Vol-1, Pg-365, Calcutta 1878 print.

Additionally, Akbarnama Volume-1, Pg-660 tells us that Tardi Beg (one of Humayun's generals) sent (surrendered) the son of Mirza Kamran to Akbar after he ascended the throne in 1556. Till this point in time, Mirza Kamran's son was in Tardi Beg's custody, as i said earlier.

Now, coming back to your post. You have quoted from Akbarnama, Volume-2, Pg-142, where it is mentioned that the son of Mirza Kamran was with Bairam Khan. Are you surprised to find him free, while i had said that he was in prison? :-P

Although i have already given the references above, for my statements, { I know you don't need references, as you said on the previous page. :) }, but let me explain the situation more clearly.

This was the time when Bairam Khan and Akbar were not on good terms. Bairam Khan was the regent and all-powerful during the early years of Akbar's reign - from 1556 to 1560. He may have taken the son of Mirza Kamran out of prison for his own reasons. Though, Akbar took him again back in his own custody. The approximate day when all these events happened is somewhere near 19th March, 1560.

{ This explanation is somewhat similar to the last reply where i explained how the said traveller was able to meet Khusrau and the sons / grandsons of Mirza Hakim in prison. BTW, just like Bairam Khan (probably) took away Kamran's son from prison, Nur Jahan & her supporters and even Khurram had attempted to gain the custody of Khusrau, who was a captive of Jahangir at that time. }


In Akbarnama, Volume-2, Pg-145, Abu'l Fazl TRIES hard to make us BELIEVE that Bairam Khan wanted to enthrone the son of Mirza Kamran, though i was not convinced. Fazl says - Bairam Khan enquired about Kamran's son and "nothing but sorrow and regret came into his hands".

About a month later, around 18th April, 1560, Akbar marched from Delhi to pursue Bairam Khan. This is from Akbarnama, Volume-2, Pg-152. Maham Anga also had her role in all this drama.

Hope it is clear now. :)

The mention of the execution of the Queen of Scots is timely. I found it surprising that her son, James VI was very cool about the idea of his mother getting executed and was himself in the coterie of Queen Elizabeth I. He became the King after Elizabeth's death. BTW, there are reports that Mary had planned the assassination of Elizabeth I for which she was finally executed. Allegedly, letters written by her and sent out from her castle were discovered. But one fact which holds true is that she lived a luxurious life at Chartley during her long 'house arrest'.