sign in sign up
<<
Home , Gunpowder, Musket

EARLY USE OF AND

IN INDIA:

A.D. I442-I526 BY

IQTIDAR ALAM KHAN (Aligarh)

The surviving evidence on the development of tech- nology in India prior to A.D. 1326 comprises stray statements in the sources which can be subjected to divergent, sometimes even contradictory, interpretations. A major part of this evidence, contained in Tdrïkh-i Firisbta (completed in A.D. 1607) and a few other later sources like Tabaqjt-i Akbari (completed in A.D. Burhin-i Ma'asir (completed in A.D. and Sikandari (completed in A.D. 1611 or 1613), is problematic in nature. It can be relied upon only to the extent that it is corroborated by contemporary records. On the basis of a critical study of this evidence, it is, however, possible to make out a plausible case that gunpowder was introduced in the Sultanate through contact with the during the 13th century. The Mongols in turn had, apparently, learned the use of gunpowder from the Chinese. Gunpowder was definitely being used for display of pyrotechny at Delhi during Firuz Shah Tughlaq's reign (A.D. 1 3 j 1-8 8), and for purposes in the form of tir-i bawdli or bdn in during the z 5 th century. But the history of the introduc- tion into India of proper, viz., cannon and musket, before these were employed by Babur (A.D. 1326-30), is yet to be worked out properly 1). P. K. Gode has tried to establish that in the second half of the i s th century, and were being already used in Gujarat, Malwa and Kashmir. But since much of the evidence about the use

1) Cf. my article, 'Origin and Development of Gunpowder in India: A.D. I2S0-Isoo', The Indian Historical Review, Vol. IV, NO.1, July 1 977. 147 of cannons and muskets in this period is confined to Persian chronicles it could not have been directly accessible to Gode, who was not pro- ficient in the . In his study, he had to depend on English translations or on the information reproduced in secondary works. Moreover, he has taken into account mainly the information furnished by later histories like Tabaqdt-i ?l?bari and Tdrikb-i Firishta. This made it difficult for him to sift and critically examine the available evidence in its totality. He was thus neither able to work out the chronology of the introduction of cannon and musket in different regions nor able to identify the stages through which the tactical use of firearms was evolved in India down to A.D. In addition to Gode, the problem of the introduction and use of cannon and musket before A.D. i ? 26 has also been studied by M. Akram Makhdoomee and Abu Zafar Nadvi. Both these authors have tried to prove that was present in the from the very beginning. By implication they suggest its introduction in North India by the Turks. These two have sought to substantiate this view by citing evidence derived from contemporary as well as later Persian texts. M. Akram Makhdoomee has also used two of the Persian dictionaries compiled in India during the i S th century. How- ever, the interpretations of both these authors often suffer from one basic flaw. To some of the terms used for missile-throwing instruments in the i 3 th and texts, they have attributed meanings which were attached to them in the i S th century. In other words, while interpreting the evidence derived from i 3 th and '4the century sources, they have often tended to ignore the process of gradual transfer of many of the terms denoting missile-throwing instruments like the (tufak or tufang) and the mangonel (ma¡/2ribï) to different kinds of firearms that came to be used in India during the 1 the century. This serious weakness in the methodology of M. Akram

2) P. K. Gode, "Use of and Gunpowder in India from A.D. 1400 Onwards", "The Manufacture and Use of Firearms in India Between A.D. z q. S ando and "History of in India Between A.D. 1400 and 1900", Studies in Indian Cultural History, Vol. II, Poona, ig6o.