50 SOCIAL SCIENTIST Fyzabad simply as a passenger. For details of Fyzabad happenings, see Taib: 15: 1065-1097. 24. Hutchinson, op.cii, cf. Syed Moinul Haq, op.cit, p.61. The incident of Fyzabad became widely known and all the leading newspapers reported it in detail. (See Tilism, No.33, dated 4th March, 1857 Delhi Urdu Akhbar No.10, dated 8th March, p.3, Sahr-i Samiri, No. 17, dated March 1857. The editor, Raghubir Narayan 'Aysh notes that "he is the same person who had established himself at Ghasiyarimandi, but considering him a dangerous person, the kotiwl had expelled him..... earlier Maulavi Amir Ali had also led a jehad, inspite of the opposition of the king he was able to enrol many, but in the end every body met destruction, they were beheaded when they came face to face with the soldiers." 25. Taib: 15: 1065-1097. Shah was not just roaming from place to place aimlessly, but infact his preachings and sermons had considerable impact upon his disciples. The testimony of Hutchinson is worth noticing: "This man (Ahmadullah Shah) after passing through a vast number of cities and stations under our rule, in all parts of India, and establishing his disciples therein reached Fyzabad in February 1857. subsequent investigations elicited that everywhere he had preached jehad, or religious war against the kafirs, or infidels, as the Europeans were politely designated. From some places he had been summarily ejected, but in others evaded expulsion, meeting with no real check until he came to Fyzabad.", p.292. 26. H.R. Nevill, Fayzabad: A Gazetteer, Allahabad, 1920, p. 165. See also M.H. Fisher, A Clash of Culture: Awadh, the British and the Mughals, Delhi, 1987, pp.231-2. 27. Taib: 16: 1135-1155. 28. Taib: 1170-1236. 29. Taib: 18:1243-1288. The arguments setout by Taib over the question of imamat, on the role of muj abide en and on the necessity of jehad find strange corroboration from the arguments on these issues in a pamphlet called Risala-i Fath-i Islam. Although the authorship of the pamphlet is yet to be determined, one can fairly conclude that it is the most representative piece of writing on the ideology and organisation of the mujabideen. It is divided into two portions. The first portion contains a discussion of highly academic nature about the necessity of jehad, the role the mujahideen and the ghazi were to play, the difference between plunder and distribution of ghanimah (the war booty), the appointment of an amir and the necessity of offering him bayat on the specific issue of jehad, the wisdom of the sages behind the theory of Quraish descent of the imam and its impracticability in the then prevailing circumstances, and last but not least, an appeal to Hindus for joining the struggle against the common enemy. Apart from this, certain practical measures were also suggested to continue the struggle. While the second portion of the pamphlet was in the form of an ishtihar "meant for the Hindus and the Muslims of India, so that they should think over, and should prepare themselves for the slaughter of the English in order to protect their din and dharam" This call was to be popularised among the masses by the maulavis and the pundits. By its very nature, the ishtihar was meant for public consumption in the form of propaganda literature for the rural poor. In fact when one compares the British describing the 'rebels and their Leaders as scroundals, badmash, shuhda, riffraffs, and the mujahideens as ca debased class of the people and fanatics, and also employ the most abusive language (which they never do for the Irish rebels or for Australian convicts, or during the American war of Independence) in their dispatches and reports throughout