W. Irvine— The Later MugAals. 
[No. 1, 
parody of the distich on Farrukhsiyar’s coinage. The details 'will be 
given when we come to speak of the coinage of the reign. 1 
Section 14 First Quarrel with the Satyads (April 1713). 
The story as told by Yaljya Khan, Farrukhsiyar’s Mir Munshi, 
is that at the enthronement ‘Abdullah Khan demanded the post of 
wazzr for himself. Farrukhsiyar made the objection that he had given 
his word to Ghazi-ud-din Khan (^.e., Ahmad Beg, Ghalib Jang), a 
promise which he could not break. ‘Abdullah Khan might retain all 
power under the name of Wakil-i-Mutlaq or vicegerent. ‘Abdullah 
Khan said there had been no Wahil-i-Mutlaq since Jahangir’s reign, 
except when Bahadur Shah gave that office to Asad Khan. But the 
two cases were not parallel; he had won the crown for Farrukhsiyar by 
his own sword and his own right hand, therefore his title to be wazir 
was indisputable. Farrukhsiyar thought it best to give way, as be had 
only newly succeeded and was not yet secure on the throne. In this 
version of the facts, the only certain point is the supersession of Ghazi- 
ud-din Khan, Ghalib Jang : but there is no sufficient reason to believe 
that Farrukhsiyar was, in any way, a reluctant participator in the new 
arrangement, although as soon as he had appointed ‘Abdullah Khan, 
he appears to have repented of it. 2 
As we have seen, a few days after the victory at Agrah, Qutb-ul- 
Mulk was detached to seize Dihli; and, for the moment, the second 
brother, Husain ’Ali Khan, was incapacitated by severe wounds from 
taking any active part in affairs. The opportunity was too good to 
be lost. Farrukhsiyar was never long of the same mind and fell 
always under the influence of the last speaker. Mir Jumlah, Khan 
Dauran, Taqarrub Khan, and other personal friends and favourites 
found thus a splendid opening for intrigue, of which they at once 
availed themselves. Between the departure of Qutb-ul-Mulk for 
Dihli and Farrukhsiyar’s own arrival at the capital barely a month 
elapsed; but this short iuterval was sufficient to implant in Farrukh¬ 
siyar’s mind the seeds of suspicion, and he arrived at Dihli already 
estranged from the two Sayyads. We have told how the Court party 
interfered between the Sayyads and Zu,lfiqar Khan, beguiling the latter 
1 Malahat-i-maqal , fol. 74a. Beale, p. 186, says Ezad Bakhsh,, Raza, was also 
executed, but as he died in 1119 H. (Rieu, Index, p. 1157), this must be a mistake. 
The Tarikh-i-Muhammadi, a very accurate work, gives Ezad Bakhsh’s death at 
Akbarabad under 1119 H., and says he was son of Aqti Mulla, son of Zain-ul-, 
'Abidain, son of Asaf Khan, Ja'far, the Sadiql, the Qazwini, alias the Akbarabadi. 
An account of this Asaf Khan is in Ma.dsir-ul-umara I., 113, 
8 Yabya |£han, 122a. 
