[1] In most cases I have had the original letters and documents in my possession—in the rest, authenticated copies. The translations are official translations, verified, in some of the most important instances, as in the treaties in Book V., by one of the most accomplished Persian scholars in the kingdom.

[2] And again in the cold weather of 1798-99 he advanced as far as Lahore, but was recalled by the invasion of Khorassan by the Persian troops. Lord Wellesley had by this time succeeded to the government of India. The danger was then considered sufficiently cogent to call for an augmentation of the native army.

[3] I find this fact, which however is to be referred rather to dread of the Mahrattas than to hatred of the British, stated, among other answers to queries put in 1800-1 by Captain Malcolm to Mahomed Sadik.—MS.

[4] Of the two, perhaps, Lord Wellesley regarded the movements of the Douranee monarch with the livelier concern. Sir John Shore wrote: “Report speaks of an invasion of Hindostan by Zemaun Shah, and with respect to his intention is entitled to credit.... The execution of his intentions will be hazardous unless he can obtain the co-operation of the Sikhs and hostages for the continuance of it; and I have great doubt as to his success.” Lord Wellesley, two or three years later, spoke of the threatened invasion “creating the liveliest sensation throughout India;” and added, “Every Mahomedan, even in the remotest region of the Deccan, waited with anxious expectation for the advance of the champion of Islam.”

[5] Men who lived to occupy a space in history, as the Duke of Wellington, Sir Barry Close, and Sir Thomas Munro. Malcolm was Secretary to the Commission, and Munro his assistant.

[6] “Captain Malcolm,” he wrote to the Secret Committee, “returned from his embassy in the month of May, after having completely succeeded in accomplishing every object of his mission, and in establishing a connection with the government of the Persian Empire, which promises to the interests of the British nation in India political and commercial advantages of the most important description.”—[MS. Records.]

[7] A writer in the Calcutta Review, who betrays an acquaintance with his subject such as could only have been acquired in the countries of which he writes, or by the examination of an immense mass of contemporary records, justly observes: “That the storm was dissipated in the manner suggested by Lord Wellesley was creditable to his lordship’s foresight, but was entirely independent of his measures. The second expedition of Futteh Ali Khan into Khorassan in 1800, which drew Shah Zemaun from Candahar to Herat, took place almost simultaneously with Captain Malcolm’s journey from the south of Persia to the capital. His majesty received the British mission at Subzewar; and the subsequent proceedings of Shah Mahmood, which led, in the sequel, to his dethronement, so far from originating in British instigation or in Persian support, were in reality indebted for their success to their entire independence of all foreign aid. As the minion of Persia, Shah Mahmood could never have prevailed against his elder brother. As the popular Douranee champion he was irresistible.”—[Calcutta Review, vol. xii.] Malcolm was at Shiraz in June, 1800, when he received intelligence of the Shah’s successes in Khorassan.

[8] MS. Correspondence of Sir John Malcolm.

[9] Before Malcolm left Shiraz he began to have some misgivings on the score of his lavish expenditure. “I trust I will not disappoint your hopes,” he writes from that place, under date July 26, 1800, “but the expense I have incurred is heavy, and it is on that score alone I am alarmed. Not that it is one farthing more than I have to the best of my judgment thought necessary to answer, or rather further, the ends of my mission, and to support the dignity of the British Government; but people sometimes differ in their opinions on such points. However, ‘All’s well that ends well.’”—[MS. Correspondence of Sir John Malcolm.]

[10] Brigadier-General Malcolm to Lord Minto, October, 1810.

[11] Kishm is a large island, and Angani a small one at the entrance of the Persian Gulf. They properly belonged to the Arabs. Kharrack is at the further end of the Gulf, nearly opposite Bushire.

[12] MS. Correspondence.—In another letter Malcolm says: “Had I to do with men of sense and moderation I should not fear, but I have to deal with a race that are possessed of neither.” The necessity of adopting in all his negotiations the most flowery language, somewhat puzzled him at first; but in time he fell into the right vein of discourse. On one occasion, wishing to demonstrate the advantages of simplicity of style, he produced a copy of an Indian treaty, when the Meerza, after reading two articles of it, declared that he would “give in his resignation to his sovereign rather than that such a document should be copied into the records of the office over which he presided.”

[13] These treaties, which have never been officially published, are printed for the first time I believe in the appendix to Vol. I., “Life of Sir John Malcolm.”

[14] There was a considerable trade in horses; but rather through than from Afghanistan. The animals were brought from Balkh and Toorkistan, fattened at Caubul, and sold in India.

[15] “Five or six cafilas of this indigo leave the Derajat annually, which on an average consist of seven hundred camels, each carrying eighty Tabrizee maunds. These come into Persia by the route of Candahar and Herat.”—[Mahomed Sadik’s Answers to Captain Malcolm, 1800-1 (MS.).]

[16] And even this obligation ceased to be recognised by Ahmed Shah, who paid the Douranee horsemen for their services, alleging that their lands had been bestowed upon them as a free and unencumbered gift. In Zemaun Shah’s time they held pay-certificates, available when they were called out on active service, and realised, if they could, the amount due to them by means of orders on Cashmere, Mooltan, and other outlying provinces.—[MS. Records—Rawlinson and Malcolm.]

[17] Or, more strictly, for every parcel of land demanding the services of a single kulba, or plough; from which the division of land, and the assessment founded upon it, took its name.

[18] To an elaborate report on the revenue system of Western Afghanistan, especially as affecting the Douranee tribes, drawn up by Major Rawlinson in 1842, I am indebted for much valuable information, which will be found incorporated with subsequent portions of the narrative.

[19] The authority for this, according to Malcolm’s informant, was the Caubul records. Forster, who travelled in Afghanistan in the reign of Timour Shah, says that his entire army did not exceed 30,000 men, nor his revenue a million of our money. How these men contrived to pay themselves, may be gathered from a passage in Forster’s Travels, which is worth transcribing: “This day a body of Afghan cavalry encamped in the environs of Akorah, and overspread the country like a swarm of locusts, devouring and destroying wherever they went. It seemed as if the land was invaded; they entered in a violent manner every village within their scope, and fed themselves and horses at the expense of the inhabitants. Such expeditions afford these hungry creatures almost the only means of subsistence; for when inactive, they are often reduced to such distress by the blind parsimony of their prince, that their horses, arms, and clothes, are sold for a livelihood.” The same writer, speaking generally of the Afghan army, says that he “felt a sensible disappointment at seeing it composed of a tumultuous body, without order or common discipline.”

[20] And even the character of Futteh Khan was at that time very little understood and appreciated. He was described to Captain Malcolm as a man of influence, but of low, dissipated habits, who spent all his time in drinking wine and in smoking bang. It should be mentioned that Prince Ferooz, Mahmoud’s brother, was associated in this enterprise. He became master of Herat, whilst Mahmoud pushed on to Candahar.

[21] The Kuzzilbashes, of whom frequent mention will be made in the course of this narrative, are Persian settlers in Afghanistan; many of whom are retained in the military service of the state.

[22] Since this passage was written, I have had reason to think that it ought to be accepted with some qualification. In October, 1840, when Dost Mahomed was flitting about the Kohistan, and the greatest anxiety prevailed among our political officers at Caubul, Shah Soojah said to Sir William Macnaghten, just as he was taking leave after an excited conference, “You know I have from the first expressed to you a mean opinion of my own countrymen. If you want further proof, look at that from my own brother.” The Shah then showed Macnaghten an intercepted letter, bearing the seal of Shah Zemaun, to the address of Sultan Mahomed Barukzye, purposing that, as Shah Soojah had made over the country to the infidels, the Barukzyes and the Sikhs united should make him (Shah Zemaun) King of Afghanistan.—[Unpublished Correspondence of Sir W. H. Macnaghten.] This story may seem to be at variance with the statement in the preceding page,—that “between a blind king and a dead king there is no political difference;” but I am acquainted with no Mahomedan law that excludes a blind prince from the throne. The exclusion is based upon the popular assumption that blindness disqualifies a man from managing the affairs of an empire. If, however, in Mahomedan countries, there have been no exceptions to this rule—of which I am doubtful—in the regal line, it is certain that many provincial governments have been in the hands of men who have been deprived of their sight. The case of Shah Allum, the blind King of Delhi, is hardly to the point; for during the years of his darkness, his royalty was only a name.

[23] This was in July, 1803. Shah Soojah’s own account of these transactions, which forms part of the autobiography written by him at Loodhianah in 1826-27, is contained in the following words:-“After our arrival at Kazee, we had scarcely prepared our force, when Futteh Khan’s army appeared; our troops immediately were drawn up in battle array, and an attack made upon them. The battle lasted from the morning to the evening prayer, when the enemy gave way, and retreated in great disorder to the valley Advaz, and then to Kamran’s camp in Candahar, where the drunkenness of the Kuzzilbash soldiery, and the ill-treatment which the Soonee doctors received, soon disgusted all our subjects, who entirely refused to give Kamran assistance. On hearing this we immediately returned to our capital. Shah Mahmoud was so disheartened by the news of our victory, that after swearing on the Koran he would not again be guilty of treachery, he sent some of his principal attendants to request the royal pardon, which we granted; and had him conveyed from the outer to the inner fort with all due respect to his rank. We then entered the Balla Hissar with regal pomp, and seated ourselves on the throne of Caubul.” Mr. Elphinstone says of this “victory,” that “Futteh Khan was at first successful; he routed the party of the enemy which was immediately opposed to him, and was advancing to the city, when the desertion of a great lord to Soojah threw the whole into confusion: his own party then fell off by degrees, till he found himself almost alone, and was compelled to provide for his safety by a precipitate flight. Next morning Shah Soojah entered Caubul in triumph. Mooktor-ood-Dowlah walked on foot by the side of his horse, and many other Douranee ameers followed in his train.”—[Elphinstone’s “Caubul”—Appendix.]

[24] “While in Candahar,” writes Shah Soojah, “we received letters from our beloved brother Shah-zadah Mooktor-ood-Dowlah, requesting Prince Kaysur’s pardon, as his inexperience and the advice of Futteh Khan and other rebels had led him from his duty. Out of respect to our brother we agreed to this. Prince Kaysur being in Dehleh, Shah Zemaun and Mooktor-ood-Dowlah went there and brought him into the presence. Shah Zemaun then requested that we would give him Candahar once more, and became security for his good behaviour in future. We agreed to this in spite of our good judgment.” It was whilst still engaged with the settlement of affairs at Candahar, not after their complete adjustment, and Soojah’s subsequent expedition to Sindh (as stated by Mr. Elphinstone), that ambassadors arrived at Bokhara to negotiate a marriage between the Khan’s daughter and the Shah. “A suitable answer,” says the Shah, “being given to the royal letter, and dresses of honour being given to the ambassadors, we dismissed them with gifts. Our thoughts were then directed to the state of Candahar.” The point is of little importance in Afghan history; and only worth noticing in illustration of the difficulty of determining with precision, the dates of different events, and the order in which they occurred. No two narratives altogether agree—but except where Shah Soojah speaks of his “victories,” we may regard him as a tolerably good authority in all that relates to himself.

[25] The number of Oriental names which it is necessary to introduce—the repetition of incidents, greatly resembling each other, of conquest and re-conquest, of treachery and counter-treachery, of rebellions raised and suppressed—creates a confusion in the mind of the European reader. It is difficult to interest him in these indistinct phantasmagoric transitions. The events, too, which I have narrated have been chronicled before. I have endeavoured, however, to impart some novelty to the recital by following, and sometimes quoting, Shah Soojah’s autobiography, which was not accessible to preceding historians.

[26] Hadjee Khalil Khan reached Bombay on the 21st of May, 1802, and was killed on the 20th of July.

[27] MS. Correspondence.

[28] “I shall send,” wrote Major Malcolm, “Mr. Pasley with the Hadjee’s body, which will not only be considered a high compliment, but be useful in a thousand ways. It will preserve this transaction from the touch of Mr. Manesty and Mr. Jones. It will enable me to convey a correct state of the feeling here on the subject to many respectable Persians, and I shall obtain from Mr. P. a true account of the manner in which the transaction is received in Persia. He will give Lovett information which will secure him from error at the outset, and be of the highest utility to him during his residence in India.”—[MS. Correspondence.] It is not certain, however, that the high compliment here designed was duly appreciated by the Persians. Sir Harford Jones (from whose “touch” the transaction was to be preserved) says that “it seems to have escaped Marquis Wellesley that that which might be considered a compliment at Calcutta, might in Arabia, Turkey, and Persia, be regarded as so improper as almost to become an insult..... The Persian moollahs as well as the Persian merchants at Bagdad, were shocked, and on my applying to old Sulemein Pacha for certain honours to be paid to the corpse, when removed from Bagdad to be carried to Nejeef, he said, ‘Very well: as you desire it to be done, it shall be done: but Hadjee Khalil Khan lived an infidel, and with infidels, and was, therefore, destined to hell; he was, however, murdered by infidels, and so became a shahyde (martyr); but his former friends have robbed him of this chance, by deputing an infidel to attend his corpse to the grave; his fate, therefore, is now fixed, and you may carry him to the devil in any manner you like best.’”—[Sir Harford Jones’s account of the transactions of H. M.’s mission to the Court of Persia, &c. Note vii.] It is curious, but somewhat humiliating, to read the different versions of the same transactions put forth by Jones and Malcolm, and their respective adherents. For example, Sir Harford Jones says that when the Hadjee’s body reached Bagdad, Mr. Day, a Bombay civilian, who had been deputed to accompany it into the interior, took fright at the plague, and abandoned his charge. “Mr. Day’s alarm was so great,” he says, “as to become most tormenting to himself, and most ridiculous and troublesome to us, who had stood the plague the preceding year. I, therefore, re-shipped him for Bussorah as soon as possible, and undertook to receive and execute such wishes as the Khan’s relatives expressed to me.” Now the account given of this matter by one of the gentlemen of Malcolm’s mission, sets forth that “Jones had frightened away Mr. Day by alarming accounts of the plague.”-“On this subject,” it was added, “I need make no remarks to you, who know him so well. This might be improper, and would, I imagine, be perfectly unnecessary.” I have dwelt upon these personal matters at greater length than they deserve, because they illustrate the feelings, on either side, with which Jones and Malcolm, at a later and more important period, were likely each to have regarded the parallel but antagonistic mission of the other to the Persian Court. The bitterness which then overflowed was the accumulated gall of years.

[29] Especial instructions having been given to the British mission to secure the appointment of a man of rank as successor to Khalil Khan, the intrigues of Aga Nebee to obtain the appointment greatly embarrassed our diplomatists in Persia. But it was acknowledged that the aspirant was a man of good temper, good abilities, and more than average respectability. He professed himself to be heart and soul the friend of the English; and, doubtless, was perfectly sincere in his attachment to their wealth and profusion. Like all his countrymen, he was capable of profound dissimulation, and lied without the slightest remorse. Knowing the views of the British functionaries with regard to the succession, he sent through his brother to Mr. Lovett an account of an interview he had had with the Shah, representing that he had urged upon his majesty the propriety of appointing an elchee of high rank as successor to Hadjee Khalil Khan, but that the king had insisted upon appointing him. In the same letter an amusing attempt is made to persuade Mr. Lovett to proceed to Teheran as an ambassador from the British-Indian Government, “with handsome and splendid equipments, so as to exceed by many degrees those with which Major Malcolm travelled: for this is the particular wish of the king and his ministers, in order that it may get abroad universally that the English had, for the sake of apologising, made these new preparations far exceeding the former, and that it is evident they highly regard the friendship of the king, and were not to blame for the death of Hadjee Khalil Khan. His majesty, too, when he hears of the splendour and greatness of your retinue, will be much pleased, and most favourably inclined.... Do not be sparing in expenditure, or presents, or largesses. Every country has its customs; and every nation may be won somehow or other. The people of Persia in the manner above stated.” It is hard to say which is to be most admired, the candour or the craft of this.—[MS. Records.]

[30] Some French agents, under the feigned character of botanists, had visited Teheran before Buonaparte invaded Egypt, and wished Aga Mahomed Khan, the then ruler of Persia, to seize Bussorah and Bagdad. They also endeavoured to stimulate the Shah to assist Tippoo Sultan against the British, and endeavoured to obtain permission to re-establish their footing at Gombroon. Had the emissaries appeared in a more openly diplomatic character, they might have succeeded, for Aga Mahomed Khan coveted the territory named, and might have been induced to co-operate in an attack upon the Turkish dominions; but the doubtful character of the agents thwarted their schemes, and he gave little heed to the representations of the savans.—[See Brigadier Malcolm to Lord Minto: MS. Records.]

[31] General Gardanne’s suite, according to Colonel Malcolm, consisted of “twenty-five officers, two clergymen, a physician, some artillery and engineer officers, thirty European sub-officers, and a number of artificers.”—[MS. Records.]

[32] Malcolm wrote from Bombay on the 15th of April, stating the course of policy he intended to pursue, and the tone of remonstrance he purposed to adopt, at the same time urging the Governor-General to suspend the mission of Sir Harford Jones. In this letter he says that he should despair, “from his knowledge of Sir Harford’s character and former petty animosities on the same scene, of maintaining concord and unanimity in the gulf one hour after his arrival. Sir Harford,” he added, “is not in possession of that high local respect and consideration in the countries to which he is deputed that should attach to a national representative.”

[33] MS. Correspondence of Sir John Malcolm.

[34] MS. Records.—Copies of these letters were obtained by the Mission, and are now before me. I do not find in them anything to give colour to the suspicion that it was intended forcibly to detain Pasley at Shiraz. But such appears to have been the impression at the time, and may have been the case. Sir James Mackintosh, writing from Bombay to his son-in-law, Mr. Rich, at Bagdad, counsels him to be prepared for a rapid retreat, and adds, “Pasley was very nearly made prisoner at Shiraz.”

[35] MS. Records.

[36] “General Malcolm came round to Calcutta in August to communicate the information he had been able to collect, leaving his secretary at Abushire, who was obliged subsequently to quit the place to prevent his person being seized by the Persian Government, instigated by the French agents.”—[From letter of Instructions sent by Supreme Government to Mountstuart Elphinstone, in 1809.—MS. Records.]

[37] Another passage from this letter is worth quoting in the margin:-“What I doubt (for I presume to go no further), is, whether it be for our interest to force on the course of events in the present circumstances. You are a man of frank character and high spirit, accustomed to represent a successful and triumphant government. You must from nature and habit be averse to temporise. But you have much too powerful an understanding to need to be told, that to temporise is sometimes absolutely necessary, and that men of your character only can temporise with effect. When Gentz was in England, in 1803 (during the peace), he said to me, that ‘it required the present system, and the late ministers;’ for nothing required the reality and the reputation of vigour so much as temporising.”—[Mackintosh to Malcolm, July 13, 1808.]

[38] The first letter appears to have been written on the 10th of August. On the 22nd, Brigadier Malcolm landed at Calcutta. On the same day a letter was sent to Sir Harford Jones, directing him to wait for further orders, and on the 29th another and more urgent communication was addressed to him, with the intent of annulling his mission. It appears that in those days a letter took more than three weeks to accomplish the journey between Calcutta and Bombay. The Governor-General’s letter of the 10th of August must have reached the latter place about the 5th of September. Jones says, “In seven days from receiving Lord Minto’s letter, I embarked on board La Nereide, and she, with the Sapphire, and a very small vessel belonging to the Company, called the Sylph, sailed out of Bombay harbour for Persia on the 12th of September, 1808.” Malcolm had calculated that the letter of August 22nd would reach Bombay by September 13th; and that in all probability Jones would not embark before that date. But, as usual, he was over-sanguine.

[39] MS. Correspondence.

[40] MS. Correspondence.

[41] For example, in one of his minutes written about this time, he says: “It appears doubtful whether the partition of European Turkey will precede the French expedition to India. There appears to be reason, by the late advices, to suppose that the consent of the Porte may have been obtained to the passage of the French army. In this case, the approach of the army may be earlier than on the former supposition, and it will have less difficulty to encounter. The route of our divisions must in this event be through the territory of Bagdad.... I incline, under all the circumstances now known to me, to think that the force stationed at Karrack should be greater than we before looked to.”—[MS. Records.]

[42] MS. Correspondence of Sir John Malcolm.

[43] In one of these letters, written in February, 1809, it is said: “I cannot venture to omit acquainting you that, in the event of your not complying, without further reference or delay, with the instructions conveyed in this letter, by closing your mission and retiring from Persia, it has been determined, and measures have been taken accordingly, to disavow your public character in that country subsequent to your receipt of my letter of 31st of October.”—[MS. Records.]

[44] MS. Correspondence of Sir John Malcolm—December 24, 1808.

[45] Mr. Lumsden wrote a minute (July 10, 1809), in which he says: “We must either continue to employ at the Court of Persia an agent in whom we have no confidence, who has studiously endeavoured to degrade the authority of the Government of India, under whose orders he was placed; or by deputing an agent of our own to Teheran, whilst he continues there acknowledged by the Persian Government as the representative of his Britannic Majesty, we may expose the public interest to danger from the presence in Persia of two distinct authorities, who cannot act in concert, but will, it is to be feared, necessarily counteract each other, and occasion great perplexity to the Persian minister.” At the same time, Mr. Colebrooke wrote: “Our situation as regards Sir H. Jones is certainly difficult and embarrassing in the extreme. We are desirous of fulfilling the engagements he has contracted, and of maintaining the alliance concluded by him. And we are glad that he should continue at the Court of Persia to watch the wavering counsels of that Court, and to oppose the revival of French influence at it, until he can be replaced by our own envoy; but by either re-accrediting him with the Court, or silently executing his engagements, we acquiesce in the continued degradation of this government.”—[MS. Records.]

[46] On the details of Malcolm’s supplementary mission it is unnecessary to dwell. Its political results are compressible into the smallest possible space. It was, indeed, a mere pageant; and a very costly, but not wholly a profitless one. It yielded a considerable harvest of literary and scientific results, among the most important of which may be mentioned Malcolm’s elaborate and valuable “History of Persia” and the present Sir Henry Pottinger’s admirable “Account of Beluchistan;” works which, it has been well said, “not only filled up an important blank in our knowledge of the East, but which materially helped to fix the literary character of the Indian services.”

[47] It is just to Sir John Malcolm that his views of this question of bribery, with reference to his proceedings and those of Sir H. Jones, should be given in his own words: “Everything then,” he wrote, “with Jones is a question of money. By cash alone all political questions are decided—one article of a treaty he values at so much, another has its price also. Is a French agent to be removed? the price of his dismissal is as regularly settled as the price of a horse. The dismissal of one (Monsieur Jouanin) has been purchased four times—three times by advances of subsidy, and once with 50,000 piastres to monsieur himself; and I suspect the convenient instrument of extortion is not yet far from Tabruz. This is a country in which one cannot go on without a large expenditure of money; but it should never form the basis of our connection, as it now does; and if we add to our large annual bribe (for a pecuniary subsidy over the application or which we have no control, must be considered such) disbursements on every occasion where Persia shows an inclination towards our enemies, we shall lose both our money and our reputation.”—[Brigadier Malcolm to Mr. Manesty, Feb. 23, 1810. MS.]

[48] From 1826 to 1835, however, the nomination of the Persian envoy was again vested in the Indian Government; but the diplomatic control was not relinquished by the Foreign-office.

[49] “I doubt,” wrote Lord Minto, “whether his jealousy would permit him to admit, by treaty, our troops freely into his country, and to consent that we should establish such posts both in front against the enemy and elsewhere for the purpose of communication, as should render us independent of his fidelity. If he does not accede to this, we shall derive little benefit from his alliance.”—[Minute of Lord Minto: MS. Records.]

[50] A remarkably able paper, on the disposal of the subsidiary force which, under the provisions of the defensive alliance with Scindiah, that prince had agreed to receive, drawn up by Mr. Metcalfe, in 1804, conduced more, perhaps, than anything else to confirm Lord Wellesley’s high opinion of the young civilian’s talents. On a copy of it now before me is the following marginal note, written in the Governor-General’s fine, bold, characteristic hand:-“This paper is highly creditable to Mr. Metcalfe’s character and talents. It may become very useful. A copy of it should be sent to the Commander-in-Chief, and another to Major Malcolm.—W.”

[51] “The Rajah coupled his acquiescence in the proposed arrangements of defence against an invading European army with the condition of being permitted to extend his dominions over all the Sikh territories between the Sutlej and the Jumna. He also provisionally demanded that the British Government should not interfere in favour of the King of Caubul in his aggressions against that monarch’s dominions—at the same time shackling the advance of the British troops into his country, and the establishment of the necessary depôts, with conditions which would render any engagements with him for that purpose entirely inefficient and nugatory. Even during the reference he made to government on these demands, he crossed the Sutlej to attack the Sikh territories. The extreme jealousy and suspicion of us evinced by the Rajah, together with his own conduct and ambitious character, rendered it indispensably necessary to resist his pretensions to sovereignty over the territories on this side of the Sutlej, and the Rajah was required to withdraw his army.”—[Statement in Instructions to Mr Elphinstone: MS. Records.]

[52] “The point to aim at in our present transactions with the Rajah of Lahore,” wrote Lord Minto, “appears to be that we should keep ourselves as free as can be done without a rupture. I should, on this principle, rather wish to protract than to accelerate the treaty.”—[Minute of Lord Minto: MS. Records.]

[53] “At the time when the proposal was made for the adjustment of differences, the forces on both sides remained quiet in sight of each other, when the news of the defeat of Junot (Duke of Abrantes) at Vimiera, by the British army, under Sir Arthur Wellesley, was received in the camps of General St. Leger and Colonel Ochterlony, and, as usual, celebrated by royal salutes. The cause of this firing being made known to Runjeet Singh, the salute was, by his special command, repeated from all the artillery in his camp—a circumstance which, whether it be attributed to politeness towards the British commanders, with whom he was in treaty, or to a general condemnation of the system of Buonaparte, was felt equally agreeable.”—[Asiatic Annual Register.]

[54] An accidental collision between some of the Mahomedan sepoys of Mr. Metcalfe’s mission, and a far superior body of Sikhs, in which the inferiority of the latter was most unmistakeably demonstrated, had no inconsiderable effect upon the mind of Runjeet Singh, who was a spectator of the discomfiture of his countrymen.

[55] MS. Records.

[56] Under date March 6, 1809.

[57] MS. Records. Another paragraph of these instructions is worth quoting. “Although there is not now the same immediate exigency for forming a friendly connexion with the Court of Caubul, yet that measure is of importance, and contains an object of sound policy, in the event, however remote, of either the French or any other European power endeavouring to approach India by that route.”

[58] It is worthy of remark in this place, that Mr. Strachey, who accompanied Mr. Elphinstone’s Mission in the capacity of secretary, and who on this as on other occasions evinced the possession of a high order of intellect, drew up a very able memorandum on the advantages of forming a connexion with Bahwul Khan. In this paper there occurs the following prescient passage:-“Bahwul Khan might also be induced, in the event of actual hostilities, to invade the territories of Runjeet Singh at any point we might suggest, and thereby form an important diversion, whilst the British army would be advancing from another quarter of the Sikh territory.”—[MS. Records.]

[59] It is said that Mr. Elphinstone’s Mission received this hint from an European deserter, named Pensley, who had been entertained, in a military capacity, by Shah Soojah. They might have learnt the lesson from Mr. Forster, who, twenty years before, had travelled in Afghanistan. That enterprising gentleman, a civil servant of the Company, found his beard of the greatest service. He suffered it to grow for fifteen months, and had reason to regret that before he had wholly shaken off Eastern associations, he allowed the razor to profane it. Putting himself on board a Russian frigate in the Caspian, he thought that he might reduce his face to its old European aspect; but he tells us that “the Ghilan envoy, then proceeding on the frigate, expressed a surprise to see me, whom he thought a Mahomedan, eating at the same board with the Russian gentlemen; but when he saw a barber commencing an operation on my beard, which I took the opportunity of having shaved, he evinced great amazement and indignation; nor did he, until repeatedly informed of my real character, cease his reprehension of the act; during the process of which he threw on me many a look of contempt. When the barber began to cut off the moustachios, he several times, in a peremptory manner, required him to desist, and, seeing them gone, ‘Now,’ said he, ‘of whatever country or sect you may be, your disgrace is complete, and you look like a woman.’ Thus, after a growth of fifteen months fell my beard, which in that period had increased to a great magnitude, both in length and breadth, though it had been somewhat shrivelled by the severity of the late winter. When you advert to the general importance of an Asiatic beard, to the essential services which mine had rendered, and to our long and intimate association, I trust that this brief introduction of it to your notice will not be deemed impertinent. This operation of cutting it ought, however, to have been postponed till my arrival at Astracan.”

[60] It was the very costliness of these presents, and the lavish expenditure of the entire Mission, that gave the death-blow to the old system of diplomatic profusion. When the accounts of the Afghan and Persian Missions came before the Governor-General in Council, Lord Minto stood aghast at the enormous expenditure, and, in a stringent minute, recorded “his deliberate opinion, that the actual expenditure has far exceeded the necessity of the occasion—that the personal expenses of the envoys might have been limited with respect both to the nature and extent of the items composing them, and that the provision of articles for presents to an extent so enormous as that exhibited in the accounts of these Missions has been regulated by a principle of distribution unnecessarily profuse.”—[MS. Records.]

[61] It is to be regretted that Shah Soojah’s own notices of the British Mission are very scanty. He says, in his autobiographical narrative, “On receiving intelligence that the English ambassadors had arrived at Kohat, we sent an appropriate party to meet and do them honour. On their arrival, we gave them suitable dwellings, and ordered their wants and wishes to be attended to. After a few days’ rest the ambassadors came to the presence, and presented various articles of European and Hindostanee workmanship, also many elephants with superb accoutrements. Dresses of honour were conferred on all. We gave strict orders that the Mission should be treated with every dignity, and our most confidential Ameers waited on them.... We learned that Shah Mahmoud had left Caubul, and halted at Chuk-Dilah. Hearing this, we immediately reflected on the state of the Company’s ambassadors. We resolved, first, to place them in a state and place of safety; and proceed to punish the rebels; and then, if God would grant a victory, we intended to return to treat them in a proper manner.”

[62] The Ameers had sent vakeels to Persia, seeking assistance against Caubul; and the Persian ambassador had accompanied them on their return to Sindh.

[63] Nor was this the only error into which Captain Seton had fallen. That officer was instructed, before Mr. Elphinstone’s Mission had been determined upon, to ascertain the practicability of sending an embassy to Candahar or Caubul, by the route of Sindh; and upon the strength of these instructions, had taken upon himself to address a letter to the King of Caubul, expressing the desire of the British Government to form an alliance with that monarch.

[64] I need scarcely write the names of Elphinstone and Pottinger—or allude to their respective works. Of the former statesman I have already spoken. The Lieutenant Henry Pottinger, who, early in the century, accompanied the Sindh Mission, and was attached to General Malcolm’s staff on his second visit to Persia, after passing, at a later stage of his career, from the management of the wild tribes of Beloochistan to play an intricate game of diplomacy with the flowery courtiers of the Celestial Empire, and thence to the control of the Caffre savages of Southern Africa, closed his public life in the more commonplace government of Madras.

[65] The Shah says: “Mokhum Chund, on the part of Runjeet Singh, informed us, that his master was anxious that we should proceed to Lahore as soon as at liberty, and visit the residence of our seraglio in that city; he also mentioned that his master’s fame would be increased by our going. According to Futteh Khan’s petition, we agreed to this, and marched towards Lahore with Mokhum Chund and other Singhs, whilst Futteh Khan returned to Shah Mahmoud in Caubul.”

[66] Shah Soojah records that the faithful Rajah, on the King announcing his determination to depart, “burst into tears. He urged the dangers of the road, his wish to sacrifice his wealth for us, and every excuse which affection could dictate, to prolong our stay.” “The Rajah,” he adds, “accompanied us two marches, and at parting, which took place in silence, tears stood in the eyes of both parties. We had no dress of honour, no khillaut worth his acceptance, but he accepted our thanks and blessing, and departed with every mark of grief.” Amidst so much of selfish rapacity and dark ingratitude as marks these annals of the Douranee Empire, it is a pleasure to chronicle such an episode as this in the history of Shah Soojah’s fortunes. I am too willing to believe the whole story to encourage any doubt of its authenticity. The free use, indeed, which I have made of Shah Soojah’s autobiography is sufficient proof of my belief in the general fidelity of the narrative. It was written by the Shah’s Moonshee, under his Majesty’s superintendence. I have quoted Lieutenant Bennett’s translation, as published in the Calcutta Monthly Journal. It supplies, at the same time, more interesting and more authentic materials of Afghan history than are to be found elsewhere, and to the majority of readers is probably as fresh as manuscript.

[67] “By an honorary or devotional vow of his mother he was consecrated to the lowest menial service of the sacred cenotaph of Lamech.... This cenotaph is known in the colloquial dialect of the country by the appellation of Meiter Lam. In conformity with the maternal vow, when the young aspirant became capable of wielding a brush, he was carried to Meiter Lam by his mother, and instructed to exonerate her from the consequences of a sacred obligation, by sweeping, for the period of a whole day, the votive area included within the precincts of the holy place inclosing the alleged tomb of the antediluvian, the father as he is termed of the prophet Noah.”—[General Halan.]

[68] There are varying accounts respecting the identity of this lady. Mr. Vigne says that she was daughter of Timour Shah, and sister to Shah Mahmoud. Mohun Lall, probably with more correctness, places her in a lower generation—asserting that she was the sister of Prince Kamran, and the wife of Prince Malik Quasim, son of Ferooz-ood-Deen. There is something rather perplexing in these relationships. As Ferooz-ood-Deen was the brother of Shah Mahmoud, if Mr. Vigne’s account be correct, his son was the nephew of the lady in question.

[69] So Shah Soojah—who, however, does not allude to the outrage committed by Dost Mahomed. He merely says, “After the Kujjar campaign, Futteh Khan grew ambitious, and determined to take into his own hands the reins of government, and for this purpose resolved to ensnare Prince Kamran, who, hearing of the plot, seized Futteh Khan, put out his eyes with the point of a sharp dagger, and after performing on him an operation similar to the African mode of scalping, placed him in confinement.”—[Autobiography.]

[70] Calcutta Review. This passage, with many others of the present chapter, is taken, with some additions and curtailments, from a biography of Dost Mahomed Khan, written a few years ago by the author of this work. As the article was the result of much research, and written at least with the greatest care, I do not know that I can much improve upon it. Of the circumstances attending the death of Futteh Khan, an elaborate account is given by Captain James Abbott in his “Journey to Khiva.” He received the story from Sumund Khan, “who had been much about the person of Shah Kamran.” I subjoin the closing scene of this tragic episode:-“Futteh Khan was brought into a tent, pitched between Herat and the river, (?) in which sat a circle of his mortal foes. They commenced by each in turn accusing him of the injuries received at his hands, and heaping upon him the most opprobrious epithets. Atta Mahmoud Khan then stepped up to him, and seizing one of his ears, cut it off with his knife, saying, ‘This is for such and such an injury done to such an one of my relatives.’ Shahagaussie Newaub cut off the other ear. Each, as he wreaked this unmanly vengeance upon the victim, whom he would have crouched to the day before, named the wrong of which it was the recompence; thus depriving him of the highest consolation the mind of man can possess under torment—the conscience void of offence. Another of the barbarians cut off his nose; Khana Moolla Khan severed his right hand; Khalook Dad Khan his left hand, the blood gushing copiously from each new wound. Summurdar Khan cut off his beard, saying, ‘This is for dishonouring my wife.’ Hitherto the high-spirited chief had borne his sufferings without either weakness or any ebullition of his excitable temper. He had only once condescended, in a calm voice, to beg them to hasten his death. The mutilation of ears and nose, a punishment reserved for the meanest offences of slaves, had not been able to shake his fortitude; but the beard of a Mahomedan is a member so sacred, that honour itself becomes confounded with it; and he who had borne with the constancy of a hero the taunts and tortures heaped upon him, seemed to lose his manhood with his beard, and burst into a passion of tears. His torments were now drawing to a close. Gool Mahomed Khan, with a blow of his sabre, cut off his right foot, and a man of the Populzye tribe severed the left. Attah Mahomed Khan finished his torments by cutting his throat.”

[71] This was in 1818. See close of the last chapter. “Azim Khan,” says Shah Soojah, in his autobiography, “sent us a fawning petition, informing us that he had collected all Futteh Khan’s relations, comprehending the whole of the Barukzye tribe, and swearing, by everything sacred, that he and the other chiefs had taken an oath of fidelity to us their lawful king, entreated that we would march immediately to Peshawur, where he would join the royal standard with all the troops and the treasury of Cashmere. We sent for Mr. Murray, and ordered him to make the Resident of Delhi acquainted with this, and inform us of their opinion. This opinion he gave us, some days afterwards, namely, ‘That for political reasons no assistance could be given, but that we were at liberty either to depart or remain in the asylum allotted to us.’ Two years had been passed in ease, and we now determined to make an attempt to reascend our throne.”

[72] Shah Soojah attributes his defeat to an accidental explosion of gunpowder. “Our attendants,” he says, “only amounted to 300, with two guns, but they had taken up an advantageous position on a bridge, near the garden. The Meer Akhor charged us with his horse; but the first fire from the cannon made him bite the dust, when an unfortunate accident happened. A large quantity of powder had been brought to be divided among the matchlock men. This caught fire, by which fifty men were blown up and others wounded. Resistance was now in vain, and we escaped with difficulty to the Khybur hills.”

[73] The story is worth giving in a note, as eminently characteristic of Afghan history. Dost Mahomed, who had proclaimed Sultan Ali king, advised that prince to murder Shah Ayoob; and Azim Khan advised Shah Ayoob to murder Sultan Ali. Sultan Ali indignantly rejected the proposal; Shah Ayoob consented, on condition that Azim Khan would return the compliment, by assassinating Dost Mahomed. This was agreed upon. Sultan Ali was strangled in his sleep. Shah Ayoob then called upon Azim Khan to perform his part of the tragedy; but the minister coolly asked, “How can I slay my brother?” and recommended a renewal of the expedition to Shikarpoor.

[74] Azim Khan does not appear to have recognised the strength of Dost Mahomed’s character; and to this grand error must be attributed his premature death. Shortly before the expedition to the Sikh frontier, he had not only contemptuously declared that he did not require the services of his brother, but had actually laid siege to Ghuzni. Azim Khan’s batteries caused great slaughter; but Dost Mahomed could not be persuaded to open the gates of the fortress. A negotiation took place; and the brothers embraced. But they never forgave each other.

[75] “One Haji Ali,” says Mr. Masson, “who is reported to have shot the Prince, despoiled the Shah of his raiments and clad him in his own; then by the Sirdar’s orders, placed him behind himself on a horse and carried him off to the Burj Vazir. A singular spectacle was offered to the people of the city as Haji Ali bore the degraded monarch along the streets; but they had become familiar with extraordinary events, and regarded them with apathy. The Sirdars, when they had given the orders consequent on the feat they had performed, returned to their dwellings in the city with the same composure after the deposition of a monarch, as if they had been enjoying a morning ride.” The unfortunate puppet subsequently found his way to Lahore, where Runjeet Singh allowed him a monthly pension of 1000 rupees.

[76] Masson.—Mr. Vigne says, that Dost Mahomed and Shere Dil Khan were the cherry-eaters. We do not pretend to determine the point.

[77] “The days,” says General Harlan—and the truth of the statement is not to be questioned-“That Dost Mahomed ascended the musnud, he performed the ‘Toba,’ which is a solemn and sacred formula of reformation, in reference to any accustomed moral crime or depravity of habit. He was followed in the Toba by all his chiefs, who found themselves obliged to keep pace with the march of mind—to prepare for the defensive system of policy, this assumption of purity, on the part of the Prince, suggested. The Toba was a sort of declaration of principles; and the chiefs, viewing it in that light, beheld their hopes of supremacy in imminent hazard.... In later life the Ameer became sensible of the advantages arising from learning. Although knowledge of literature among Mahomedan nations is confined to a contracted sphere, at least the reputation of theological science was essential to the chief, on whom had been conferred the title of Ameer-ul-Mominin, or Commander of the Faithful. To escape the humility of dependence upon subordinate agents, more especially the secretaries necessarily employed in all revenue and judicial transactions, he tasked his mind with the acquisition of letters, and became worthy, by his industry and success in the pursuit, of the greatest respect of the great, as he commanded the admiration of the vulgar, who are ever accustomed to venerate the divinity of wisdom.”

[78] Among other stipulations was one, that “the heir-apparent of the Shah shall always attend his highness with a force, having also his family along with him; that he shall be treated with distinction, and expected to accompany the Maharajah in all his journeys.” Another demand put forth by Runjeet was for the delivery to him of the sandalwood gates of Somnauth (or Juggernauth, as the Maharajah called them), destined afterwards to confer such celebrity upon the Indian administration of Lord Ellenborough. Shah Soojah’s answer to the demand is worth quoting:-“Regarding the demand of the portals of sandal at Ghiznee, a compliance with it is inadmissible in two ways: firstly, a real friend is he who is interested in the good name of his friend. The Maharajah being my friend, how can he find satisfaction in my eternal disgrace? To desire the disgrace of one’s friend is not consistent with the dictates of wisdom. Secondly, there is a tradition among all classes of people that the forefathers of the Sikhs have said that their nation shall, in the attempt to bring away the portals of sandal, advance to Ghiznee; but having arrived there, the foundation of their empire shall be overthrown. I am not desirous of that event. I wish for the permanence of his highness’s dominion.”

[79] “The Sindhians have agreed to pay a contribution of either five or seven lakhs of rupees to farm the Shikarpoor territory for a settled annual sum from Shah Soojah, and to provide him with an auxiliary force, the Shah taking hostages from them for the entire execution of these articles.”—[Captain Wade to Mr. Macnaghten, March 5, 1834.]

[80] Not the minister—but a Persian adventurer of the same name, who afterwards obtained service in Bokhara.

[81] Mr. Vigne says that he had this from Campbell himself. The word indicates more properly a plundering attack; but is employed here to signify an irregular descent, or rush, upon the enemy.

[82] Shah Soojah, when on his way to Shikarpoor, in 1833, had entered into a treaty with Runjeet Singh, by one of the articles of which he ceded Peshawur to the Sikhs. But Runjeet Singh was by no means inclined to wait until the Shah had established his title to give away any portion of the Afghan dominions; so he sent his grandson, Nao Nehal Singh, a boy, who then “took the spear into his hand” for the first time, to take possession of the place.

[83] He had been recommended by some to assume the titles of royalty, but he replied, that as he was too poor to support his dignity as a Sirdar, it would be preposterous to think of converting himself into a King.

[84] General Harlan.

[85] Harlan originally went out to China and India as supercargo of a merchant vessel. He left his ship at Calcutta, and obtained service, as a supernumerary, on the medical establishment of the Company. He was posted to the artillery at Dum-Dum, and afterwards accompanied Major (now Sir George) Pollock to Rangoon. He does not appear to have earned a very good name during his connexion with the Company’s army, which he soon quitted, and obtained service with Runjeet Singh—afterwards to seek the patronage of Dost Mahomed, whom he had so foully betrayed.

[86] It would appear that Dost Mahomed, instigated by Meerza Samad Khan, seized Mr. Harlan, as well as the Fakir Aziz-ood-een, who was also sent as an ambassador into the Ameer’s camp. The Ameer endeavoured to throw the odium of the act upon Sultan Mahomed, hoping thereby to ruin him utterly in the opinion of the Sikhs; but Sultan Mahomed, after having taken a number of oaths on the Koran, pledging himself to compliance with the Ameer’s wishes, sent back the prisoners (or hostages, as Dost Mahomed called them) to the Maharajah’s camp. Mr. Harlan himself, however, says nothing about this. Mohun Lal says that “the appalling news (of the treachery of Sultan Mahomed) wounded the feelings of the Ameer most bitterly. There were no bounds to the sweat of shame and folly which flowed over his face, and there was no limit to the laughter of the people at his being deceived and ridiculed. His minister, Meerza Samad Khan, was so much distressed by this sad exposure of his own trick, and still more by the failure of his plan in losing the Fakir, that he hung down his head with great remorse and shame, and then, throwing away his state papers, he exclaimed, that he would avoid all interference in the government affairs hereafter.”

[87] The authorities consulted in the preparation of this chapter are the published works of Burnes, Conolly, Vigne, Masson, Mohun Lal, Harlan, &c.; the autobiography of Shah Soojah; and the manuscript reports of Colonel Rawlinson. To the latter I am indebted for much valuable information relative to the Douranee tribes.

[88] Russia refused to accept the formal mediation of Great Britain; but the good offices of the ambassador were employed with success.

[89] “Poor Captain Christie and Lieutenant Lindsay,” says Sir Harford Jones, “by their indefatigable perseverance had brought, when I left Persia, the one, several of the regiments of the Prince’s infantry, and the other, the corps of horse artillery, considering the shortness of the time they had been employed, to a state of perfection that was quite astonishing. And what is equally to the credit of these gallant officers, they were both adored by the officers and men under their tuition; though in the beginning they had often been obliged to treat the latter with a degree of severity that could not then have been practised with safety at Constantinople. The Prince Royal, however, had much merit in this respect, for whenever a punishment was inflicted and complained of to him, he invariably gave the offender a double portion of it, and by this means soon put an end to complaint.”—[Sir Harford Jones’s Account of the Transactions of His Majesty’s Mission to the Court of Persia, 1807-1811.] Malcolm took with him to Persia, as a present from the Indian Government to the Shah, twelve field-pieces, with harness and all necessary equipments for horse artillery.

[90] Captain Christie was an officer of the Bombay army, selected for employment in Persia, by General Malcolm, on account of his high reputation for gallantry and personal activity, and his thorough acquaintance with the native character. Associated with Pottinger, on their first entry into Beloochistan, he afterwards diverged to the northward, and, in the guise of a horse-dealer, penetrated through Seistan to Herat, and thence, by the way of Yezd and Ispahan, reached the northern regions of Persia. A great part of the line which he thus traversed had never before, and has never, I believe, since been explored by an European traveller. Stories of Christie’s extraordinary personal strength and prowess, are current to the present day in the north of India and in Persia. In the latter country, indeed, he was adored by the soldiery, and his name is still a household word among the old officers of the Azerbijan army. He was killed at the head of his famous Shegaughee brigade, in the night attack which was made by the Russians on the Persian camp at Aslandooz, in November, 1812.

Lieutenant Lindsay was an officer of the Madras Horse Artillery, and, to scientific attainments of no ordinary extent, added the most imposing personal appearance. He was six feet eight inches in height (without his shoes), and thus realised, in the minds of the Persians, their ideas of the old heroes of romance. After many years’ service in Persia, he resigned his appointment in the Indian service, and, succeeding to the estate of Kincolquhair, settled in Scotland as Lindsay Bethune. In 1834 he was again sent to Persia by the British Government, with a view to his employment in the expected war of the succession, and was thus enabled, in the following year, to add to his former laurels, by leading (on the death of Futteh Ali Shah) the advanced division of the Persian army from Tabreez to Teheran, and subsequently quelling a very serious rebellion against the authority of Mahomed Shah, that was set afoot in the south of Persia by the Prince of Shiraz and his sons. For this service, on his return to England, he was rewarded with a baronetcy, and in 1836 he was a third time sent out with a Major-General’s commission, to take command of the Persian army. Owing, however, to the misunderstanding which arose out of the advance upon Herat, the Persian Government on this occasion declined to employ him, and he finally retired from military life in 1839. He lived more than ten years after this; and at the close of his life, again travelled in Persia, revisiting the scenes of his former exploits. But death overtook him before he could return.

[91] Sir Gore Ouseley to the Court of Directors: March 21, 1812.—[MS. Records.]