AMBUSH ON THE ROAD: THE STORY OF A POLITICAL ASSASSINATION IN MUGHAL INDIA 1

The article explores the assassination of the greatest political figure, historian and thinker of Mughal India, Abu-l Fazl Allami. Modern and more recent sources allow us not only to analyze the variety of interpretations and reconstructions of this event in the interests of various political groups of the empire, but also to consider this incident in the context of such problems as movement and power in late medieval India.

Keywords: empire, state, territory, movement, power, Mughals, Rajputs, expansion, feudalism, appropriation of space.

August 12, 1602 near the town of Narwar (present-day Madhya Pradesh) One of the greatest statesmen, thinkers and writers of Mughal India, a minister and personal friend of Padishah Akbar, Abu l Fazl Allami, was killed. A fairly large armed detachment sent by the Rajput Prince Bir (Vir) Singh Bundela ambushed the road along which Abu'l Fazl and a handful of bodyguards were traveling to Agra. Despite their small numbers, the Minister and his companions took the fight, bravely resisted, but the forces were unequal, and Abu'l Fazl was killed. His severed head was sent to the real mastermind of the murder - Akbar's son and heir, Salim, who three years later ascended the Mughal throne under the name of Padishah Jahangir.

The name Abu'l Fazla Allami (b. 1551) is well known to anyone who studies the history of the Mughal Empire. Coming from a noble family of sheikhs known for their high education and free thinking, 2 he was introduced to Akbar by his younger brother Abu'l Faiz Faizi, who was already serving at the court.3 Abu'l Fazl's diverse talents, intellect, and outlook were appreciated by Akbar, who-

1 This article was written in the framework of the project "Movement and Peace in the History and Culture of South Asia "of the program of fundamental research of the Presidium of the Russian Academy of Sciences"Traditions and Innovations in History and Culture".

2 In the autobiographical part of the treatise "The Institutions of Akbar", Abu-l Fazl described his father's spiritual and pedagogical career, his public speech in defense of the Mahdist Sretists and the persecution that he and his entire family suffered for this [Abu-1 Fazl Allami, 1977-1978, III, p. 478-509]. See also: [Antonova, 1952, pp. 223-224].

3 Faizi became one of the greatest Persian-language poets of his time. His poem "Nal and Daman", which is based on one of the subjects of the Mahabharata, was translated into Russian by G. Plisetsky and G. Aliyev (Faizi, 1982).

page 19
In the young sheikh, Roi acquired one of the"nine treasures" 4 of his court - a politician, an administrator, a military commander, a historiographer, and, what is rarely the case with sovereigns, a sincere and loyal friend 5. Occupying various posts in the Mughal administration, Abu'l Fazl rose to the high position of wazir; in 1592, he was promoted to the rank of mansab of two thousand men; three years later, the rank was raised to two and a half thousand, and in 1600, to four; only the princes of the blood were higher in the court hierarchy.

Abu'l Fazl's influence at court, as well as on the Emperor himself, was enormous. He is rightly considered one of the ideologues of Akbar's reforms aimed at achieving a supra-confessional consolidation of the Muslim and Hindu feudal elites and turning the Mughal Empire into a strong centralized state.8 Unfortunately, there is still no scientific biography of this outstanding figure in world indology. Researchers were much more interested in the information on the agrarian system, taxes and administrative structure of the Mughal Empire contained in the main works of Abu'l Fazl-the chronicle "The Book of Akbar" (Akbar Nama) and the treatise " The Principles of Akbar "(A'in - i Akbari) than in the personality and worldview of the author9.

The death of Abu'l Fazl was not the first political assassination in the history of medieval India. Sources indicate that such crimes against those in power were common practice. For example, according to the Chinese traveler Xuan Jiang, as early as the middle of the seventh century, the Emperor Harshavardhana almost fell victim to an assassin sent by Brahmins who were dissatisfied with the policy of the Buddhist sovereign: the compassionate monarch released the assassin, and those who ordered the attempt escaped with exile [Beal, 1906, p.220-221]. In 1167, Bijjala, the ruler of the South Indian principality of Kalyani, was assassinated by supporters of the reformist Lingayat sect, who thus took revenge for the massacre of their brethren; the result was a mass extermination of members of the sect (Zvelebil, 1984, p.148-149). In 1325, the Delhi Sultan Giyas ud-din Tughlaq died under the ruins of a pavilion built by his own son and heir, who was then crowned under the name of Muhammad Shah Tughlaq. In 1564, Akbar himself became the victim of an assassination attempt: an unknown person wounded him with an arrow in the shoulder and was captured by guards; the emperor, with dark irony, ordered him to be executed on the spot, but not interrogated, because interrogation could reveal the involvement of too many courtiers in the attempt [Abu-1 Fazl Allami, 2000 (1907), p. 312]. The murder of Abu'l Fazl stands out in this list both by the circumstances themselves and by the results that allow us to analyze important patterns in the development of the Mughal state.

4 The" nine treasures " of Akbar's court include, in addition to Abu'l Fazl and Faizi, Finance Minister Todar Mal, military leaders Man Singh, Abdul Rahim Hanhanan, and Mirza Aziz Koku, musician Tanssna, wit Birbal, and a mullah named Two Onions, a semi-folklore comedy character that researchers have not yet been able to identify. por.

5 The special relationship between Akbar and Abu'l Fazl is shown, for example, by the fact that the Emperor twice came to Abu'l Fazl's house to support him in his personal grief, first after his mother's death, and then at Faizi's deathbed.

6 Jesuit missionaries who arrived at Akbar's court in 1582 referred to Abu'l Fazl alternately as "prime minister" and "chaplain" (the latter apparently because of his active involvement in religious disputes) and emphasized the highest authority of "Abdulfasilius" at court. For more information, see [Monscrratc, 1922, p. 571.

7 For the Mughal system of service ranks (mansabs), see [Antonova, 1952, p. 146-149; Alaev, 2003, p. 166].

8 For more information, see [Vanina, 1993, pp. 33-45, 64-82].

9 Only the historiosophical concepts of Abu'l Fazl attracted the attention of researchers. For more information, see [Olimov, 1996; Mukhia, 2001, 2002].

10 For more information, see [Sakscna, 1970, p. 476].

page 20
MUGHAL EMPIRE: PERPETUAL MOTION

The Mughal Empire emerged as a result of the conquest of India by Central Asian and Afghan feudal lords led by the ruler of Ferghana, Himurid Babur. His campaign in India was the culmination of constant movement, first within the Ferghana domain, which had to be conquered and defended from ambitious rivals, then to Herat, where Babur, defeated by nomadic Uzbeks, was forced to flee; this was followed by the capture of Kandahar and Kabul, two campaigns in the Punjab, and finally, in 1526-1527, the conquest of a relatively small part of the country. Northern India. When Babur died in 1530, his possessions in India included Punjab, the area between Delhi and Agra; in the east, part of Bihar; in the south, the border of the empire was Gwalior [Richards, 2000, p.8-9]. Babur's son and heir Humayun, to whom his father bequeathed Indian possessions, first tried to expand his domain at the expense of Rajput princedoms and Gujarat, but then was defeated by rival brothers and Afghans led by Sherkhan Suri and fled: he wandered for a long time in Sindh, and then took refuge in Iran. His death in 1556. A year after her return to Delhi, she enthroned Akbar, the true creator of the Mughal Empire, under whom the main part of state policy was the appropriation and development of the geographical and cultural space of India.

Akbar began by asserting his authority in Rajputana. By marrying the daughter of Bharmal Kachhwaha, the ruler of the Amber principality, the emperor offered the Rajputs the honorable and advantageous role of vassal relatives, which was in keeping with their own traditions, according to which the bride's clan became a vassal of the groom's clan.11 Those Rajput princes who, like the powerful Sisodia clan of Mewar, had refused to enter into an alliance with the Mughals, had to be subdued by force; in this Akbar was readily assisted by the Rajputs of his new allies. Then, while suppressing the revolts of the old Uzbek and Afghan nobles who were dissatisfied with Akbar's alliance with the Rajputs, the emperor conquered Malwa in Central India and Gujarat with its rich cities and the strategically important port of Surat (1572-1573). After that, another rich region, Bengal (1574-1575), came under the rule of the Mughals and a large part of neighboring Orissa. In 1586, Akbar annexed the" earthly paradise " of Kashmir to the empire.

Akbar began expanding his empire to the south in the late 1990s. In 1596, Berar, a region in the north of present - day Maharashtra now known as Vidarbha, came under Mughal control. In 1600, the principality of Ahmadnagar, ruled by the warlike regent Chand Bibi, fell: her death as a result of a conspiracy of courtiers made it easier for the Mughals to win. Then, after a stubborn and bloody war, the principality of Khandesh fell: the Mughal army first captured its capital Burhanpur, and then, after a multi - month siege, the fortress of Asir, which was considered impregnable [Antonova, 1952, p. 226-233; Richards, 2000, p. 16-57]. Abu'l Fazl was directly involved in these wars, commanding 12 armies and at the same time taking measures to prevent discord between Mughal warlords and the unification of Deccan rulers against the empire. It was for his military and diplomatic achievements that he received the rank of four-thousandth. As a result of the Deccan campaign, by the end of Akbar's reign, the southern border of the Mughal Empire ran along the north of Maharashtra.

11 The example of the Amber Rajahs was followed by the rulers of a number of other princely states in the region: the Rajput cavalry became the backbone of the Mughal army; the elite of the region opened up unprecedented opportunities for court careers (for example, Man Singh Kachhwaha, nephew of Akbar and the Amber princess, became the empire's largest general and equaled the rank of princes of the blood).

12 Akbar had to send Abu'l Fazl to the Deccan army, because the former commander of this army was Prince Sultan Murad. the second son of the emperor, at first neglected business because of addiction to alcohol and quarrels with other military leaders, and in 1598 died of delirium tremens.

page 21
From the very beginning to the very end of its history, the Mughal Empire represented a mainline culture aimed, as defined by A. V. Golovnev, at the appropriation and development of large spaces [Golovnev, 2009, pp. 21-22]. One of the factors that pushed the Mughals (and before them, the rulers of the Delhi Sultanate) to territorial conquests was the military-fief system. The only way to ensure loyalty to the throne of the confessional and ethno-culturally diverse elite (representatives of Central Asian peoples, Iranians, Afghans, Indian Muslims, then Rajputs) was the distribution of land holdings (jagirs) by the sovereign on the terms of service. This practice inevitably reduced the land fund in the hands of the Emperor and drained the treasury. Akbar's attempt to eliminate the military fief system failed, so the only way to replenish the crown lands fund was to conquer new territories.13
At the same time, the lands that became part of the empire had to be conquered first, and then, which turned out to be even more difficult, held. The local feudal lords, who, under the pressure of the Mughal army, showed their submission to the emperor, raised separatist uprisings at every opportunity, so that punitive expeditions against the rebels were as much an integral part of imperial state-political practice as conquests.

In general, the very nature of the Mughal Empire - a huge state entity created not as a result of natural integration processes, as was the case in a number of European states of the late Middle Ages, but through conquest from the outside-required the sovereign and his entourage to constantly move around their subject territories. The padishah, who embodied state power, had to constantly demonstrate himself to his subjects-punish rebels, administer justice, accept expressions of submission from local elites, visit certain territories under the pretext of hunting, pilgrimage to shrines, enjoying natural beauty, moving from one residence to another (the capital of the empire was either Delhi or Agra; during the summer, the court moved to Lahore or Srinagar). According to the calculations of the American researcher S. P. Blake, Akbar spent a fifth of his 49-year reign outside the capital (S. P. Blake did not take into account short-term trips, otherwise the result would have been even greater) [Blake, 1997, pp. 298-299] .14 The American researcher R. Lal had every reason to describe the home world of the early Mughals (from Babur to Akbar) as "peripatetic" (Lal, 2005, p. 103-139]. The Mughal emperors ' entourages were also constantly on the road, sometimes accompanying their ruler on incessant trips, sometimes as part of conquering or punitive expeditions, or on their own initiative - imitating the padishah in detours of their possessions, pilgrimages and hunting expeditions.

The story of the assassination attempt on Abu'l Fazl perfectly demonstrates all the features of the Mughal state, which were discussed above. A loyal servant and friend of the emperor was killed on the way to the capital from the south, where he commanded an army sent to conquer and hold new lands for the empire. There was unrest in the new provinces, and after Akbar left for Agra, leaving his son Daniel as governor of the Deccan, Abu'l Fazl had to calm the separatist movement in Berar. He managed to put down the mutiny, but soon the Wazir was urgently summoned back to Agra by order of the Emperor. The reason for this was important events.

As early as 1600, when the Mughal army led by Akbar himself was besieging the fortress of Asir, Salim, the king's eldest son and heir apparent, rebelled against

13 For more information, see [Vanina, 2000, pp. 29-31].

14 This result, according to the same calculations, looks rather modest in comparison with Padishah Aurangzeb (d. 1658-1707), who also ruled for 49 years and spent 34 of them outside the capital.

15 In fact, Salim was Akbar's third son. His two older brothers, the twins Hassan and Hussein, died in infancy.

page 22
my father. He captured Allahabad and declared himself a padishah, but, having received no support, brought his father a guilty head and was forgiven. The revolt was declared a misunderstanding by the courtiers, which is well reflected in one of the most remarkable works of literature of that time, the autobiographical poem "Half a Story", written by the Indian Jain Banarasi Das [Banarasi Das, 2000, pp. 213-214]. However, Akbar soon received information that Salim did not abandon his criminal plans to seize power and was able to attract to his side a number of large feudal lords who were dissatisfied with Akbar's policies. In this uneasy situation, the Emperor decided to summon Abu'l Fazl, on whose loyalty he could always rely, to the capital. Leaving his son Abd-ur-Rahman at the head of the army, Abu'l Fazl hurried to Agra along the road that led through Bundelkhand.

This region, which is now divided between the states of Uttar Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh, got its name from the Rajput Bundela clan, who owned this territory from the beginning of the XVI century. By the time of the Mughal conquest, Bundelkhand consisted of several small principalities, one of the most significant being Orchha. In the 70s of the XVI century, after stubborn resistance, the principality of Orchha was conquered and became part of the empire as a vassal state. Raja Madhukar Shah surrendered and sent one of his eight sons, Ratansen, to the Mughal service, who then took part in the Bengal campaign and died fighting in the Mughal army in 1582.

Ten years later, Raja Madhukar Shah died and the eldest of his sons, Ram Singh (or Ram Shah), ascended the throne. But the new rajah's younger brother, Bir Singh, rebelled and claimed the throne of Orchha. He voluntarily left the Deccan army, which he was part of with his retinue, returned to Bundelkhand and began an armed struggle against his brother, which could not but cause a negative reaction from Akbar - as a suzerain, he was obliged to protect the rights of his vassal and protect him from enemies. Anticipating an imminent reprisal, Bir Singh fled to Allahabad and joined Prince Salim (Kolff, 1990, p. 124-125; Busch, 2005, p. 35-38). Two rebels, who in their thirst for power had disregarded their family ties, met and united. It was to Veer Singh that Salim entrusted the murder of his father's loyal servant and friend.

"HE'S LIKE A THORN IN MY HEART"

The assassination attempt on Abu-l Fazl is not one of the mysterious and still unsolved historical crimes, about which contemporaries and descendants put forward various versions. The name of the contractor and customer became known almost immediately. In his memoirs, Salim, who became Padishah Jahangir after his father's death, spoke with disconcerting candor about how, immediately after his coronation, he conferred the rank of three-thousandth on Biru Singh Bundela, "who has earned my favor and surpasses his relatives and others of his equal rank in bravery, virtue and simplicity of heart." The Padishah goes on to describe the service for which the Rajput Prince was so richly rewarded.

Admitting that Abu'l Fazl "surpassed all the sheikhs of Hindustan in wisdom and learning," Jahangir accused him of seeking to sow enmity between Akbar and his heir. Jahangir recounts how Abu'l Fazl was summoned from the Dean's Office, "and because his feelings for me were not honest, he openly and secretly opposed me. At this time, when, through the machinations of intriguers and haters, the lofty feelings of my royal father were completely and completely hardened against me, it became clear that if Abu'l Fazl were to have the honor of communicating with my father, it would cause even greater misunderstandings and hinder our reconciliation. It was necessary to prevent Abu'l Fazl from coming to court. And since Bir Singh's domain was just down the road, and Bir Singh was a rebel at the time, I'd have to go back to the police station.-

page 23
send him a message that if he can stop and kill this troublemaker, he can expect any reward from me. By the grace of God, when Shaykh Abu'l Fazl was passing through the country of Bira Singh, the Rajah blocked his path and after a short fight dispersed his men and killed him, sending his head to me in Allahabad. And although this event provoked the late sovereign's intense anger, it still allowed me to finally calmly go to the court, kiss the threshold of my father's palace, and gradually the anger of the sovereign softened " [Jahangir, 1909, p. 24-25].

For all his apparent naivety, the crowned memoirist, of course, was lying. In fact, Akbar's bitterness against his eldest son was not caused by the "machinations of intriguers", but by the power ambitions of the heir himself, who openly rebelled against his father. The fact that the rebellion ended in reconciliation did not deceive anyone. The courtiers loyal to Akbar, including Abu'l Fazl, understood that Salim would not give up trying to win the throne, and that the emperor's enemies among the Muslim feudal lords and clergy, who openly accused Akbar of heresy and apostasy from Islam, would willingly support the rebel. Therefore, among the emperor's inner circle, the idea arose that it was necessary, in the interests of the state, to declare not Salim, but his son Khusro, as the heir to the throne. 16 Abu'l Fazl obviously supported this project [Alam and Subrahmanyam, 2000, p. 106-122; Alam and Subrahmanyam, 2012, p. 126-145]. That is why it was so important for Salim to prevent Abu'l Fazl from returning to court, where the Wazir, with his influence and energy, could easily have made Khusro the heir to the throne.

The following point is also interesting in Jahangir's confession. From the Prince's point of view, the fact that Bir Singh's domain lay "on the road" following Abu'l Fazl's motorcade not only made the assassin's task easier, but also justified him to some extent. And further in the above fragment, the crowned memoirist once again recalls that at the time of the murder, Abu-l Fazl was "passing through the country of Bira Singh." This shows how much the transformation of the Mughal Empire into a single centralized state was at that time a project, a political goal, and not a reality. Even for Salim, who had become Padishah Jahangir at the time of writing his memoirs, the imperial identity of the territory where Abu'l Fazl died was less legitimate and significant than that of the old Rajput rulers. Bir Singh committed the murder on "his own" land, which, in Jahangir's opinion, put him somewhat out of the jurisdiction of the central government.

For a long time, the story of Abu'l Fazl's murder was known only from Jahangir's memoirs. To some extent, it was repeated by subsequent authors, for example, Shah Nawaz Khan in the encyclopedic collection of biographies of Mughal statesmen "Contemporary of the Emirs" (Ma'athir ul-umara), (late XVIII century) [Shah Nawaz Khan, 1979, p. 122-123]. However, research in recent years has allowed us to introduce two sources into scientific circulation that do not refute the main version, but allow us to clarify a number of important details, including the role of the perpetrator of the murder, the Rajput prince Bir Singh Bundela. The main value of these sources is their alternative to the court chronicles and memoirs of Jahangir.

The dogma of the "anti-historicity of Indian consciousness" and "the absence of historical sources in medieval India, except for Persian-language chronicles", developed by colonial Indology and introduced into science for two centuries, has been successfully overcome by world science in recent decades.17 One of the interesting texts, vbe-

16 In ancient and medieval India, there was no birthright. The reigning sovereign had to declare during his lifetime the heir to the throne of the son whom he considered more worthy. This is what caused, for example, one of the main plot conflicts of the ancient Indian epic "Ramayana". And in real history, the struggle for the throne of brothers who did not agree with the choice of their father took place constantly.

17 For more information, see [Vanina, 2007, pp. 106-147].

page 24
The historical poem in braja 18, "The Life of Bira Singh Dev" (Virsihghdevcarit, 1607), written by the famous poet Keshavdas, is one of the most widely used texts in the world. This work was analyzed from a literary and cultural-historical point of view by the American researcher E. Bush in her article and recently published monograph [Busch, 2005; Busch, 2011, p. 46-61]19. He was also referred to in the monograph on the culture and literature of Mughal India by the Indian researcher S. Sharma [Sharma, 2011, p. 158-165].

Keshavdas (1556-1617) served the rulers of Orchha as a court Sanskrit scholar and poet. His career coincided with the annexation of the principality to the Mughal Empire, and Keshavdas reflected these events in his earlier poem "Fifty-two Stanzas on Ratna" (Ratnabavani)20. Almost three decades later, when "The Life of Bira Singh Deva" was written, the situation changed. The principalities of Bundelkhand, including Orchha, were firmly incorporated into the empire, and Bir Singh, in gratitude for the murder of Abu'l Fazl, received a high rank at the Mughal court, which apparently caused discontent and criticism of those who served Akbar. It became necessary, if not to acquit the murderer, then to mitigate his guilt. Keshavdas, as a loyal servant of Bira Singh, took on this difficult task.

The second source that reproduces the picture of the murder is a Farsi-language work called " Record of the events of Azad Beg "(Nuskha-i Ahval-i Azad Begh), which belongs to the same time as the "Biography". Its author was a certain Azad beg Qazwini, an official who was in the retinue of Abu'l Fazl at the initial stage of the fateful trip and described himself as a loyal servant and friend of the Wazir. On the orders of Abu'l Fazl, Azad beg remained with part of the detachment in the city of Sironj. But Akbar, having received news of the death of a loyal minister, demanded to find out where Azad beg was at that time, promising to personally "chop him to pieces" if he was guilty. Azad begu managed to justify himself, and, apparently, to avoid rumors and condemnation, he composed his "Record". His version of events largely coincides with that of Keshavdas; both Poetindus and the Muslim official were not direct witnesses to the events. Both men reconstructed them for their own purposes: one sought to exonerate his patron, the other to clear himself of the charges.

Keshavdas's poem begins with a detailed and very careful account of the struggle between Bir Singh and his brother Ram Singh for the throne of Orchha. Without directly supporting either side, the poet follows Bir Singh until he arrives in Allahabad and meets Salim. A Rajput rebel becomes a loyal servant

Braj is the first language spoken in Northern (especially Agra-Delhi), Central and Western India, and together with other languages of the region known in the Middle Ages under the collective name Hindi/ Hindavi. A rich literature was created on Braja, almost forgotten in India after the creation and introduction (XIX century) of the colonial linguistics in the literary and educational circulation of the Hindi language based on another four-Indian dialect-Khari boli. : [Vasilyeva, 2008, p. 293-298; Busch, 2011, p. 212-236].

19 E. Bush kindly sent me a copy of one of the editions of the poem and discussed the text with me in an e-mail correspondence, for which I sincerely thank her. Monograph by E. Bush " Poetry of Kings. Classical Hindi Literature of Mughal India " is a groundbreaking study of Riti's literary direction, to which Keshavdas belonged. This trend in Russian and foreign Indology has long been perceived as elitist and conservative in contrast to the" revolutionary " poetry of the reformist bhakti movement. E. Bush radically and reasonably revised these ideas. See my review of this book: [Vanina, 2012].

20 This work, probably the first in Keshavdas 'oeuvre, is a typical medieval Indian "epic of resistance" to the Muslim conquerors. Following the canons of this genre, especially rooted in Rajput literature, led the poet to "falsify history": in his case, Prince Ratansson Bundsla fell defending Orchha from the imperial army, when in fact he entered the service of Akbar and died, as mentioned above, during the Bengal campaign [Busch, 2005, p. 34-37].

page 25
and a friend of Mughal, swears allegiance to Salim. The poet especially emphasizes this circumstance-the key to the subsequent whitewashing of the killer. Loyalty to the suzerain was considered the most important virtue of a Rajput [Vanina, 2007, p. 180-183], who had to fulfill the order of the master, even if he did not agree with him. In Keshavdas ' opinion, it was his loyalty to this oath that justified Bira Singh. Salim showers the Rajput with praise, calls him an adviser and friend, promises to "die together", and then sets out his request: kill or capture Abu'l fazl:

He's like a thorn in my heart. If you can, pull it out.
No matter how many noble families there are, everyone respects me.
He's the only one who doesn't think anything of me, like I'm a blade of grass.
I took possession of the sovereign's heart and turned it away from me [Keshavdas, 1956, p. 80].

Bir Singh tries to dissuade Salim from killing, calls for leniency, which befits a master in relation to a servant, recalls the friendly relations of Abu-l Fazl with Akbar, begs not to make rash decisions. But Saleem is adamant: "As long as he is alive, consider me dead." So Bir Singh goes to one of his villages, gathers an army, and sends spies to inform him of the movement of Abu'l Fazl and his motorcade. And so, when the minister and his guards moved on after spending the night at the town of Paraichha, Bir Singh and his warriors attacked them. They immediately managed to capture the banner - the personal standard of the wazir.

According to Azad beg, Abu'l Fazl was warned several times about a possible ambush, but he ignored the danger and even left part of his squad with Azad beg in Sironja, which was expected to be attacked by Indrajit Bundela, another brother of Bir Singh, who also took the path of rebellion and power struggle. According to Azad beg, this was the will of fate, so that the death of Abu'l Fazl was predetermined in advance, and nothing could have prevented it [Alam, Subrahmanyam, 2000, p. 113-117]. Keshavdas does not report any warnings. At the same time, both authors vividly and colorfully describe, each in his own way, the events that followed the attack. An Afghan guard, convinced of the overwhelming strength of the enemy, urged the Wazir to escape, promising to apprehend the assassins, and reminded him of the impatience with which the Padishah awaited his return, and of the grief which the news of the death of his faithful servant would bring to the emperor. But Abu'l Fazl was adamant:

The sovereign is relying on me, how can I escape?
Having lost the banner, what will I say when I present myself to the sovereign? [Keshavdas, 1956, p. 84-85]21.

Keshavdas goes on to give a vivid account of the battle and the bravery displayed by Abu'l Fazl in an unequal battle. Then the two authors ' versions diverge. Keshavdas reports that Vazir was killed by a bullet through the heart. Azad beg, for his part, relates that Abu'l Fazl, wounded in the back by a spear, was taken away from the battlefield by one of his companions named Jabbar, but because of the Wazir's serious condition, he was forced to stop. Bir Singh, who had ridden up with his warriors, approached the wounded man on the ground, wiped the blood from his face, and then said that he had come on the orders of Prince Salim, on whose behalf he had promised the Wazir complete safety. He even showed a certain document that allegedly confirmed his good intentions. Abu'l Fazl responded by hurling insults at the Rajput. Jabbar, who initially believed in the nobility of the enemy, drew his sword and attacked Bir Singh, and the soldiers accompanying him cut off Abu'l Fazl's head [Alam, Subrahmanyam, 2000, p. 115-117], which the killer presented to Salim.

21 I thank L. Z. Tanseva-Salomatshasva for his help in translating this passage.

page 26
"I WISH HE'D KILLED ME."

Paradoxically, Azad beg was much more successful than Keshavdas in whitewashing the killer: in his version, Abu'l Fazl is killed not by Bir Singh himself, but by his soldiers. Seeking to prove his innocence by any means, Azad beg emphasizes that Abu-l Fazl died by the will of fate, as well as due to his own carelessness and self-confidence. His story does not count any heroic behavior as a wazir. The picture of Keshavdas ' murder is quite different. In his narrative, Abu'l Fazl fights like a hero from a Rajput epic.

The sheikh fought to the death, not retreating a single step.
In defending both faiths, he did not overstep the boundaries of dharma.
Reproved by his master's trust, he went to paradise (Keshavdas, 1956, pp. 87-88).

Thus, Keshavdas, who served the murderer and sought to acquit him, pays homage to the murdered man. A Hindu, he does much more for the posthumous elevation of Abu'l Fazl than the co-religionist Azad beg. In Keshavdas, Abu'l Fazl defends "both faiths" and does not overstep the "boundaries of dharma", which makes the Mughal nobleman, famous for his broad views and intolerance of religious fanaticism, a hero in the eyes of Hindus. After death, his dust-covered body, described by Keshavdas, emits a" fragrance " (sugandh), which gives the deceased an almost divine status. Bir Singh himself, who cut off Abu'l Fazl's head and sent it to Salim, is " overcome with joy and sorrow." Salim, on the other hand, is thrilled to receive this ominous souvenir and declares that "Bir Singh has won power for me today" (Keshavdas, 1956, p.89-90). It is difficult to determine with certainty what the poet's real intention was, but the result of his efforts makes it doubtful that the author actually sought to justify Bira Singh and Salim. In the literature of the Indian Middle Ages, there are few texts of such accusatory power, especially those created "from the opposite".

The two narratives then converge in describing Akbar's reaction to the death of a loyal minister. None of the courtiers dares to tell the emperor the terrible news; he, concerned about the long absence of both Abu'l-Fazl himself and any news about him, constantly asks his entourage, but receives no answer. Finally, a courtier named Ramdas Kachhwaha, whom Akbar demanded to clarify the situation, dared to tell the padishah the terrible truth. Hearing this, Akbar sheds bitter tears at Azad Beg and immediately demands to find out the role of Azad beg in the events that took place.

For Keshavdas, the picture is more vivid and tragic. When Akbar learns of what has happened, he falls into a deep faint, which terrifies all the courtiers; when he comes to, he asks for details, bursts into tears, refuses to eat, and calls for death.22 The retinue and the entire palace are also overcome with grief; one of the courtiers, Azam Khan, tries to console the sovereign, and in a very peculiar way: he reminds Akbar of the strength and greatness of his empire, lists the names of the most important dignitaries and asks if it is worth mourning one sheikh with so many loyal servants. But Akbar is inconsolable: the Contemporary of the Emirs reports that he mourned a loyal minister and friend more than his own sons; Shah Nawaz Khan put the following bitter words in his mouth:" If Salim wanted the throne in this way, he would have killed me, but spared the life of Abu'l Fazlu" [Shah Nawaz Khan,

If Keshavdas, who was not present at this scene, followed the literary canons (this is how they prescribed to depict grief and grief), his description can be trusted - if not in detail, then in substance, especially since it largely coincides with other testimonies. Grief for a loyal servant and friend, according to the general view of contemporaries, brought Akbar's death closer.

page 27
1979, p. 123-124]. Akbar ordered Bir Singh to be found and delivered. According to Keshavdas, his brother Ram Singh was the first to follow the order of the padishah, and Akbar sent him along with other military leaders to search for the killer. Despite their best efforts, Biru Singh managed to escape into the jungles of Bundelkhand and survive until Akbar's death (1605), after which the mastermind of the assassination ascended to the throne and generously thanked the performer.

More than a century and a half later, the orthodox Shah Nawaz Khan recorded the controversy that was being waged among the educated Muslim elite about Abu l Fazl. "The notion that the sheikh was an infidel was on everyone's lips," he wrote. "Some accused him of being a Hindu, others called him a fire-worshipper. Still others went so far as to call him a sinner and an atheist in their disgust. But those in whom justice prevailed and who, like mystics, give good names to bad things, attributed him to the supporters of "peace for all," 23 to those who hold broad views, accept all religions, seek to weaken the law and are freethinkers." While acknowledging Abu'l Fazl's high intelligence and extensive knowledge, Shah Nawaz Khan further expressed regret that the Wazir, with all his virtues, "did not enter into an agreement with the wise and rejected the true path" (Shah Nawaz Khan, 1979, p. 124-125).

Among the orthodox Muslim clergy and other opponents of Akbar's policies, the death of Abu'l Fazl was greeted with joy. Tradition dictated that important events should be marked with a chronogram; one of the nobles, Khan Azim, suggested the following text:" the miraculous sword of God's prophet cut off the head of a rebel " [Shah Nawaz Khan, 1979, p. 124]. Abu'l Fazl, of course, was not a rebel; on the contrary, he was famous for his loyalty to Akbar. In the eyes of the Muslim Orthodox, however, the rebels were both the minister and his crowned friend. Both of them, as well as their like - minded members of the "enlightened philosophers"-the so - called circle of free-thinking rationalists, of which Akbar himself was the head, 24-were accused of heresy and apostasy from Islam throughout their lives.

The" heresy " was an attempt to transform the Mughal Empire from a loose conglomerate of feudal possessions, created on the model of the Golden Horde, into a centralized empire, from a Muslim state to a supra-confessional one, based on an alliance of Hindu and Muslim elites. It was heresy to officially recognize all religions as equally true and to allow everyone, from the padishah to the last of his subjects, to freely practice their religion. The heresy was Akbar, Abu'l Fazl and their like-minded unorthodox Muslims ' awareness of their Indian identity, their interest in Indian culture, and their desire to make Mughal power as Indian and "their own" as possible for the non-Muslim majority. The assassination of a prominent statesman and thinker in Mughal India was a grim parody of the union of Hindu and Muslim elites that Abu'l Fazl and Akbar had longed for. Cooperation in the name of strengthening the state and "peace for all" was replaced by the kinship of the base interests of the two rebels. The process of supra-confessional consolidation of the ruling classes-Rajputs and Mughals-developed after the death of their initiators, but the unified imperial identity that Akbar and Abu'l Fazl sought to create largely remained a project, which was confirmed by the collapse of the Mughal state that began several decades after the events discussed in this article.

23 "Peace for all" (sulh-i kul) - the doctrine developed in the writings of Abu-l Fazl, according to which the sovereign should be guided in his policy not by the dogmas of faith, but by the principles of the common good. For more information, see [Vanina, 1993, p. 64-82].

24 For more information, see [Vanina, 1993, p. 67-83; Vanina, 2011, p. 40-48].

page 28
LIST OF LITERARY DEPARTMENTS

Alaev L. V. Srednevekovaya Indiya [Medieval India]. St. Petersburg: Alstsya Publ., 2003.

Antonova K. A. Ocherki obshchestvennykh otnosheniy i politicheskogo stroya Mughal'skoy Indii vremena Akbar (1556-1605) [Essays on public relations and the political system of Mughal India in the time of Akbar (1556-1605)].
Banarasi Das. Half the story. Family chronicle of the XVI-XVII centuries. Prsdysl. and translated from Hindi by N. Yu.Vanina // Voices of the Indian Middle Ages. / Ed. by I. D. Serebryakov, E. Yu. Vanina, Moscow: Editorial URSS, 2000.

Idei i obshchestvo v Indii XVI-XVIII vvakh [Ideas and Society in India of the XVI-XVIII centuries]. Moscow: Vostochnaya literatura, 1993.

Vanina E. Y. Chapter I. Historical review / / India: a country and its regions. Vanin, Moscow: Editorial URSS, 2000.

Srednevekovoe myshlenie: indyskiy opekt [Medieval Thinking: the Indian version]. Moscow: Vostochnaya literatura, 2007.

Vanina E. Y. "Enlightened Philosophers" and "Companions of Jesus": the first contact of intellectual communities in India and the West. Almanac of Intellectual History. № 36, 2011.

Vasilyeva L. A. From the "Shah's court" to the Urdu language // The language will bring you to India. In memory of A. T. Aksenov. I Ed. and comp. by I. P. Glushkov. Moscow: Vostochnaya literatura Publ., 2008.

Golovnsv A.V. Anthropology of movement (antiquities of Northern Eurasia). Yekaterinburg: Ural Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Volot Publ., 2009.

Olim M. A. Evolution of historiosophical views in the Farsi-language historiography of India. 1996. № 3.

Faizi, Abul Fayz. Nal and Daman: A Poem. Translated from the Persian by G. Plisetskogo, Moscow: Khudozhestvennaya literatura, 1982.

Abu-1 Fazl Allami. A'in-i Akbari. Vols. I (tr. by H. Blochmann), II& III (tr. by H.S. Jarrctt). Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal, 1977-1978 (reprint).

Abu-1 Fazl Allami. Akbar Nama. / Tr. by H. Bcvcridgc. Vol. II. Calcutta: The Asiatic Society (reprint), 2000 (1907).

Alam M., Subrahmanyam S. Witnessing Transition: Views on the End of the Akbari Dispensation // The Making of History. Essays Presented to Irfan Habib. / Ed. by K.N. Panikkar, Terence S. Byres and Utsa Patnaik. Delhi, Tulika, 2000.

Alam M., Subrahmanyam S. Writing the Mughal World: Studies on Culture and Politics. N.Y.: Columbia University Press, 2012.

Bcal S. (tr.), Si-yu-ki, Buddhist Records of the Western World. Vol. I. L., Trubner, 1906.

Blake S. The Patrimonial-Bureaucratic Empire of the Mughals // The State in India 1000-1700. / Ed. by H. Kulke. Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1997.

Busch A. Literary Responses to the Mughal Impcrium: the Historical Poems of Kcsavdas // South Asia Research. 2005. Vol. 25. No 1.

Busch A. Poetry of Kings. The Classical Hindi Literature of Mughal India. N.Y: Oxford University Press, 2011.

Jahangir. The Tuzuk-i Jahangiri or Memoirs of Jahangir. / Tr. by A. Rogers; cd. by H. Bcvcridgc. L.: Royal Asiatic Society, 1909.

Kcshavdas. Virsihghdevcarit / Ed. by Shyam Sundar Dvivcdi. Prayag: Matribhasha mandir, 1956.

Kolff D.H.A. Naukar, Rajput and Sepoy: the Ethnohistory of the Military Labour Market in Hindustan, 1450-1850. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990.

Lal R. Domesticity and Power in the Early Mughal World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005.

Monscrratc A. The Commentary of Father Monserrate S.J. On His Journey to the Court of Akbar. / Trans. by J.S. Hoyland. L.: Humphrey Milford, 1922.

Mukhia Harbans. Time, Chronology and History: the Indian Case // Making Sense of Global History. / Ed. by Solvi Sogncr. Oslo: Univcrsitctsforlagct, 2001.

Mukhia Harbans. Time, Religion and History in India // Historical Inquiry. Vol. 29. June 2002.

Richards J. F. The Mughal Empire. The New Cambridge History of India. Delhi: Foundation Books, Cambridge University Press, 2000.

Sakscna B.P. Ghiyasuddin Tugluq // A Comprehensive History of India / Ed. Mohammad Habib, R.C. Mazumdar, R.C. Sharma. Vol. V. Delhi: People's Publishing House, 1970.

Shah Nawaz Khan. The Maathir-ul-Umara, Being Biographies of the Muhammadan and Hindu Officers of the Timurid Sovereigns of India from 1500 to About 1780 A.D. / Ed. and tr. by H. Bcvcridgc, B. Prasad. Vol. I. Patna: Janaki Prakashan, 1979.

Sharma S. Literature, Culture and History in Mughal North India 1550-1800. Delhi: Primus Books, 2011.

Vanina E. Review of: Allison Busch, Poetry of Kings: The Classical Hindi Literature of Mughal India. N.Y.: Oxford University Press, 2011 // The Indian Historical Review. 2012. Vol. 39(2).

Zvclcbil K. The Lord of the Meeting Rivers: Devotional Poems of Basavanna. Delhi: Motilal Banarasidass, 1984.

page 29

Permanent link to this publication: