Ibrāhīm Lodī

Sultan of Delhi (r. 1517-1526)

• Born: Late fifteenth century
• Birthplace: Delhi, Lodī Empire (now in India)
• Died: April 21, 1526
• Place of death: Pānīpat, Lodī Empire (now in India)

Ibrāhīm Lodī, a greedy and tyrannical ruler, withdrew the power of his nobles and ministers, who then rebelled, resulting in the Mongol seizure of the Delhi sultanate.

Early Life

Ibrāhīm Lodī (ihb-rah-HEEM law-DEE) was the eldest son of Delhi sultan Sikandar Lodī. Under Sikandar’s rule, the sultanate of Delhi had expanded from the Punjab to Bihar, and the city ofĀgra was founded and then named the sultanate’s capital. Sikandar, a superb administrator who controlled ancient chiefdoms, delegated power to nobles to manage his vast and rapidly expanding kingdom more effectively. Ibrāhīm, however, would alter his father’s success radically, to the detriment of the Delhi sultanate.

Ibrāhīm and his brothers were well-educated, but from an early age Ibrāhīm had demonstrated a demanding and uncompromising attitude, which would endure throughout his reign and would contribute to his and the sultanate’s downfall.

Life’s Work

Ibrāhīm Lodī succeeded his father as sultan in 1517 because of his seniority among his brothers, but it was not a peaceful succession. Ibrāhīm attempted to return the sultanate to absolute authority, thus removing the power that Sikandar had vested in the nobles. Also, Sikandar had moved the capital to Āgra, but Ibrāhīm returned it to Delhi. Greedy for power and money, Ibrāhīm intensified his quest for absolute power, signifying to the nobles a regression from the progressive rule of Sikandar. A number of nobles who had increased their power under Sikandar viewed Ibrāhīm as incompetent and headstrong, so they advocated a partition of the realm to two of Sikandar’s sons. Ibrāhīm would rule from Delhi and his younger brother, Jalāl Khan, would rule Jaunpur. Ibrāhīm and his supporters did not condone this division, so they assassinated Jalāl Khan. Darya Khan of Bihar also revolted against Ibrāhīm, striking his own coin to demonstrate his secession from the sultan.

In addition to political and economic conquest, Ibrāhīm made demands on the religious men of his kingdom. When Nānak, the founder of Sikhism , passed through Delhi, tradition states that he healed and revived a dead elephant belonging to Ibrāhīm. When the elephant died again, Ibrāhīm demanded that Nānak repeat the miracle, but the guru refused, telling Ibrāhīm that because he was a holy man, his healing powers were not subject to the whims of the emperor but to God. Also, Ibrāhīm discontinued the patronage of intellectual life characteristic of Sikandar’s rule, fomenting great discontent among the learned populace.

Finally, Ibrāhīm’s tyrannical ineptitude led his uncle,ՙĀlam Khan, and Daulat Khan, governor of Lahore, to plot against Ibrāhīm. They invited foreign invasion from Bābur, who was then the ruler of Kabul. Daulat Khan had hoped that Bābur would assist their coalition in deposing Ibrāhīm and then return to Kabul, allowing Daulat to become sultan in Delhi; this was not to be the case.

Bābur reached Panipat in early April of 1526, and Ibrāhīm’s army had become aware of the engagement and had begun to advance toward Panipat as well. At a council of war, the coalition decided to give battle there, using the remaining days to plan carefully. As a barricade for his front lines, Bābur collected about seven hundred carts and bound them together with rawhide, repeating the same tactic that Afghan nomads had utilized against Roman expansion.

Bābur utilized a new technological innovation, field artillery, in this battle. Combining the old with the new, he situated the guns among the carts. After every two hundred yards, a gap for about two hundred horsemen remained. Panipat village would hide the location of Bābur’s right flank, and his left flank was reinforced by a ditch and tree branches.

Ibrāhīm Lodī arrived on April 12 with 100,000 men and one thousand elephants. The armies faced each other for eight days. While Bābur’s men were content and adept, Ibrāhīm’s men were paid poorly and were unhappy. On the night of April 19, Bābur sent a raid of five thousand men to Ibrāhīm’s camp, but this was an atypical movement for Bābur in that it was poorly accomplished. Nevertheless, the next morning, Ibrāhīm advanced, arrayed with grandeur and ceremony appropriate for battle.

Bābur eschewed military pageantry, but his complex strategy was in place. His son, Humāyūn, was on his right; on his left was his trusted commander. When Ibrāhīm’s army advanced on Bābur’s front, the flanks were to turn and attack Ibrāhīm from the rear.

At dawn on April 20, Ibrāhīm’s army approached Bābur’s right, so Bābur reinforced with his right reserve. Ibrāhīm continued the advance, but when his forces saw Bābur’s reinforced front lines, they halted. Ibrāhīm was unable to make his men resume the advance. Bābur’s center engaged, his artillery fired, and his flanks, as planned, turned and attacked Ibrāhīm’s rear. Ibrāhīm attempted to break away from the assault but was trapped between the line of carts and artillery and the flanks. Ibrāhīm soon was defeated; sixteen thousand men were killed, among them Ibrāhīm.

Significance

After the victory at Panipat, Bābur recognized the valor of his men and distributed money and gifts to his entire army. Bābur’s act is symbolic of his success and of Ibrāhīm’s failure. In his memoirs, Bābur recognized that Ibrāhīm’s fatal flaw was his greed and wondered how Ibrāhīm could content his subjects when his own avarice had overpowered him. Bābur noted that Ibrāhīm’s insatiable desire to grow his coffers superseded any concern for the welfare of his subjects.

Bābur’s immense power prevented Daulat Khan from succeeding Ibrāhīm at Delhi; Bābur inaugurated his court there and, in doing so, began the process of consolidating India under Mongol authority, paving the way for a dynasty that would remain strong until 1707 and remain in power after. Ibrāhīm’s incompetence and greed enabled both his own downfall and the demise of the Lodī Dynasty.

Bibliography

Bābur. The Baburnama: Memoirs of Babur, Prince and Emperor. Translated by Wheeler Thackston. New York: Random House, 1996. This translation includes a preface by Salman Rushdie, historical background, a chronology, a glossary, and many more aids for the student.

Majumdar, R. C., ed. The Delhi Sultanate. Vol. 6 in The History and Culture of the Indian People. Bombay, India: B. V. Bhavan, 1960. Part of a superb eleven-volume set that covers India from the Vedic age to 1947. Covers the entire Delhi sultanate to the fall of Ibrāhīm and the Mongol possession.

Nigam, S. B. P. Nobility Under the Sultans of Delhi, A.D. 1206-1398. Delhi, India: Munshiram Manoharlal, 1967. A study of the evolution of the nobles throughout the Delhi sultanate that contextualizes their discontent under Ibrāhīm.

Qureshi, Ishtiaq Husain. Administration of the Sultanate of Delhi. 1942. Reprint. New Delhi, India: Oriental Books Reprint, 1996. Qureshi’s study remains the foremost analysis of the administrative and political structures of the Delhi sultanate. Attempts at revising these structures led to Ibrāhīm’s demise.