1-INTRODUCTION:

The character of Muhammad bin tughluq has aroused a great deal of controversy. The contemporary historians like Ibn Batuta and Barani blame him for all the unfortunate events. Scholars now hold that “he was neither a visionary, nor impractical and that he was a grossly misunderstood sovereign.”

According to these apologists, the failures of the sultan are attributed to the circumstances over which he had no control. Such as the long famine, opposition of orthodox muslim and the backwardness of the people who failed to appreciate his advanced ideas.


2-EARLY TROUBLES:

i. rebellions of his cousin Bahauddin Gurshasp who held the fief of Sagar near Gulabara- he was defeated, captured and flayed alive.

ii. Followed by revolt of Bahram Aiba Kishlu Khan, the governor of multan. Tughluq marched against him and defeated him.

iii. About this time, Tarmashirin, the Chagtai King of Khurasan came to indopak for support from tughluq. Tuighluq gave him 500, dinar as a present to diplomatically handle the matter . the view that Tarmashrin invaded indopak was entirely wrong.


3-ESTABLISHMENT OF CAPITAL AT DEOGIR:

i. capital at deogir (daulatabad) was shifted due to Deccan problem- more centrally situated. Account of Ibn Batuta that it was changed to punish people of Delhi is wrong.

ii. Before Tughluq Alauddin had conquered Deccan but didn’t annex it. Tughluq wanted to annex it, and establish effective Muslim rule there.

iii. He wanted to establish the culture of Islam in the Deccan which had Hindu preponderance.


Reason of Failure (justification):

Due to the Mongol invasions, revolts and anarchy in the Northern parts, the capital had to be changed back to Delhi. Many nobles also wanted to go back because they couldn’t adjust to the new environment. So the return was ordered. Besides the attempt of having a new or even two was not something fantastic and foolish. It was tried in the past by many rulers. It can be said in favor of the Sultan that he ordered the people to go back as soon as he realized the futility of the plan. He had also been very sympathetic to the people whom he provided with all facilities on both journeys and abolished many tax for them.


FAILED EXPEDITIONS:

A number of failed and untimely expeditions by the Sultan added to the list of failed plans and also placed burdens on the treasury.

i- Khurasan Expedition:

· Undertaken due to insistence of Khurasani nobles

· 37,000 men were prepared alongwith help from Amir Nauroz, son-in-law of Tarmashirin, and An-Nasir, the King of Egypt.

· The expedition ended without even beginning due to political changes in which the Sultan had no part to play.
ii- Qarachil Expedetion:
· Some historians blame tughluq for thinking of Conquering China, which is not the case.

· The expedition first saw success under the leadership of Khusrau Malik, who advanced to Tibet but there was overtaken by disease and rain. The whole army was destroyed there.

· Again it was a stroke of bad luck for the Sultan.

4- INTRODUCTION OF TOKEN CURRENCY:

· Thomas calls Tughluq the “Prince of Moneyers”.

· He introduced copper coins due to scarcity of silver and inspiration by Chinese and Persian paper currency.

· It is a mistake to regard it as a desperate measure to counter the bankruptcy caused by colossal failures of the Sultan.

· His scheme was sound, scientific, and useful. But he was ahead of his age and it ended in failure.


Causes of Failure (justification):

i- traditional instability of Muslim rule in India.

ii- The abundant coinage which appeared to people as if the Sultan wanted to rob them.

iii- No step by the government to check and stop forgery.


5- INCREASED TAXATION IN DOAB AND FAMINE:

· Poor finances of the State compelled Tughluq to increase taxes in the Doab, Delhi.

· These taxes however increased at a time when Delhi and the Doab were experiencing the worst famine.

· According to Farihta“taxes were increased 3 or 4 times”. But according to Barani: “ taxes were increased 10 to 20 times.” Barani himself belonged to doab so his statement cant be accepted without due consideration.

· These taxes at the wrong time drove many to rebellion and created further problem from an act which was a usual necessity but gone wrong due to circumstances.

· Tughluq became mightily unpopular due to this step.


Reason for increase in tax (justification):

i- khilji charged 50% of the gross produce during his reign, the same was charged by tughluq, there was no change.

ii- Doab was a fertile land and people were rich and prosperous.

iii- According to Brown “it (tax) was neither oppressive nor excessive”.
But unfortunately, it was carried out at a time when famine had struck Malwa, Delhi and Doab. So the experiment failed.


6- REBELLIONS:

· The year 1335 was a landmark in rebellions which were a result of the failed economic measures. These rebellions added to the woes of the Sultan.

· Jalaluddin Ahsan Shah of Mabar opened revolt against the Sultan first.

· In 1338, Fakhruddin Shah of Bengal threw off his allegiance to the Delhi Sultanate and created more problems.

· In 1340, Oudh rebelled against tughluq under Ainul Mulk.

· Many Deccan states like Warrangal, Vijaynagar etc were also lost for which the shift of the capital had to carried out earlier.

· Many foreign amirs of Daulatabad also revolted against the Sultan in 1337.
These many revolts and rebellions didn’t make things better for the Sultan.


7- NON COOPERATION OF OFFICERS:

Finally, the non cooperation of the officers and opposition of many Ulemas always created hurdles for the king. The versatile and elaborate schemes of the Sultan were too complicated for the officers to understand and carry out. And the Sultan hasty temperament which invoked severe punishments if his plans were not converted into reality, made the officers wary of him. In these circumstances, it was difficult to accomplish even simple tasks.


CONCLUSION:

Mohammad bin Tughluq’s career has been rightly described as “tragedy of high intentions self defeated”. The administrative experiments not merely were visionary projects, they had a logic behind them and had been inspired by cogent reasons and calculated thoroughly to promote the efficiency of the government and the welfare of the masses in the long run. But unfortunately, they failed. They did not suffer from any inherent defects, but because of some extraneous circumstances such as Famine, conservative nature of people and the hasty and hot temperament of the Sultan.

Lanepoole says” : with the best intentions, excellent ideas, but no balance or patience, no sense of proportion, Muhammad Tughluq was a transcendent failure”.

I have read that,

"There is ample edidence in the pages of BARANI and IBN BATUTA to show that he was not fond of shedding blood for its own sakeand that he could be kind, generous and just even towards his enemies"(A SHORT HISTORY OF MUSLIM RULE IN INDIA BY ISHWAR PRASAD)

But contrary to that you have mentioned that,
"The contemporary historians like Ibn Batuta and Barani blame him for all the unfortunate events" ???????