THE DEATH OF MOHAMMAD TAGHLAK 145 ing; frequent executions and massacres had exasper- ated them. No one trusted the changeable and impet- uous king, whose fiery temper had been maddened by disappointment and revolts, and who punished small and great offences with the same merciless ferocity. The end came while he was putting down a rebellion in Gujarat and Sind. He pursued the chief rebel toward the mouth of the Indus; but he was already ill with fever, and, still full of eager plans for crushing the Sumras of Thatta and seizing the rebel leader whom they were sheltering, Mohammad Taghlak died on the banks of the river in March, 1351. He had brought exceptional abilities and a highly cultivated mind to the task of governing the greatest Indian empire that had so far been known, and he had failed stupendously. It was a tragedy of high intentions self-defeated. After his death India recovered like a sick man after an exhausting fever, and the troubles subsided as the waves after a storm. The disturbing force was gone, and the people showed that they could be quiet enough if they were let alone. Mohammad Taghlak left no sons, but his cousin, Firoz Shah, was at once elected to the throne by the chiefs of the army then fighting in Sind, and after defeating the rebels he had no difficulty in making his accession sure. An attempt to set up a pretended son of the late Sultan at Delhi collapsed on the approach of Firoz^and thenceforward during the thirty-seven years of his reign there was not a single rebellion. This was certainly not due to any vigour of the Sultan. Firoz was a man of forty-five,
