ALTHOUGH this is the first time that a translation of the Tarikh-i-Rashidi, into English, has been presented to the public, it is necessary to explain that translators and historians have already used the book, to some extent, as a source from which to draw facts for their writings. Not only has its scope and its general purport, as a history of the Moghuls, been familiar to Orientalists for some fifty years, but much of its contents has also been made known, in a more or less scattered way, while its name is frequently found quoted in support of one historical passage or another. And if this is the case in English writings, it is the same when we refer to the works of Continental authors who have occupied themselves with the annals of Central Asia. Yet, though the value of the book has been acknowledged in this indirect manner, no complete translation into any European language has hitherto been made.
The nearest approach to an adequate translation, so far as I am able to ascertain, was that made by the late Mr. W. Erskine of the E. I. Company's service, more than half a century ago, and some fourteen years after the publication of the Memoirs of Baber. Mr. Erskine's work, however, has never been put into print, and seems, indeed, to be very little known outside the MS. department of the British Museum. It appears to have been taken in hand in 1840, after his retirement from the Company's service, and to have been completed at the beginning of the next year.* It consists of 221 folio pages closely written, and, in one form or another, includes the greater part of the Tarikh-i-Rashidi. But the work varies greatly in character; in some places the author has set himself to translate fully and accurately from the text, and has been at pains to produce a rendering that would seem to be intended for publication; in other places lengthy passages—sometimes whole folios—are summarised more or less briefly; and in others, again, mere memoranda, or headings, are given to show the drift of the author's narrative; while, finally, considerable sections of the book, at various places, are omitted altogether.
The document, therefore, valuable though it is, can scarcely be regarded as a translation of the Tarikh-i-Rashidi. Rather, it appears to me, after a close acquaintance with it, to have been prepared less with a view to producing a complete English version of Mirza Haidar's history, than for some other and more special purpose. Whether Mr. Erskine ever contemplated publishing the Tarikh-i-Rashidi in an English dress, there is nothing to indicate, but there are several circumstances connected with the MS. at the British Museum, which lead me to conjecture that it was intended rather as a preparatory study for the compilation of his second important work—The History of India under the Moghuls—of which the first and second volumes (the only ones ever completed) appeared in 1854. In the first place, the passages, or sections, of the Tarikh-i-Rashidi devoted to the dynastic history of the Moghul Khans and their transactions, are usually those which are translated in full in the manuscript. Secondly, the Tarikh-i-Rashidi is not only frequently cited in the two volumes of the history, but, in many parts of them, passages from the MS. are found transcribed word for word, while the author mentions, in his preface, that he has based his knowledge of the Moghuls and their chronicles chiefly on Mirza Haidar's evidence. Indeed, the greater part of Mr. Erskine's introduction is a summary of the Moghul annals as put forward by Mirza Haidar, and by Mirza Haidar alone, for no other Asiatic author deals with the subject in any but a merely incidental way. A third circumstance pointing to the same conclusion is, that bound up in the same volume of MSS. with the fragmentary translation of the Tarikh-i-Rashidi, we find a second document, which consists of a similar condensed translation, in Mr. Erskine's handwriting, of the third volume of the Ikbál Náma Jahángiri of Mutamad Khan, a work that seems to have been studied with a view to another—probably the fourth—volume of the History of India. Thus it seems very likely that the précis (if it may be so called) of the Tarikh-i-Rashidi, was drawn up as a preliminary study for the historical works the author was at that time planning; and if this is the case, no better proof could be offered of the care and thoroughness he devoted to the task, for this document alone seems to have needed nearly a year of labour, while the Tarikh-i-Rashidi is only one among many Oriental authorities whom Mr. Erskine studied, in the original, and made use of—a fact to which the footnotes of his History clearly testify.
Besides serving the purpose of its own author, the précis translation has also been made to contribute much that is valuable to the works of Sir H. Howorth, whom little escapes that is authentic and original, however difficult of access. In his History of the Mongols more especially, Sir H. Howorth gathered much information regarding the tribes of Central Asia and the genealogy of Moghul Khans, and was able to throw light on some of the most obscure chapters of Asiatic history, from Mirza Haidar's data, as found in this document. Had it only been more complete, and had the geography and ethnography of Central Asia been known in Mr. Erskine's day as well as they are known now, the History of the Mongols would no doubt have contained all the essential parts of the Tarikh-i-Rashidi, and little would have been left to occupy the editor of the present translation. But it is precisely during the last fifty years that much has been learned on these subjects, so that a great deal of what was unintelligible to Mr. Erskine, and consequently left untranslated or in obscurity, is now easily filled in, by the light of more modern knowledge.
The only English writer besides Mr. Erskine who has made any extensive use of the Tarikh-i-Rashidi, in the original Persian, is the late Surg.-Gen. W. H. Bellew. In 1873 Dr. Bellew accompanied Sir D. Forsyth's mission to Kashgar, and compiled, as a contribution to the official report of the mission, a history of Eastern Turkistan, which is largely drawn from Mirza Haidar's data, for the period covered by the latter's narrative. Dr. Bellew had not set himself the task of translating the Tarikh-i-Rashidi, nor was he concerned with any part of it that did not bear directly on the country to which the mission report had reference. His history, therefore, is a compilation, only, from certain portions of Mirza Haidar's work, and though in some places it contains much detail, it cannot be compared, even as a précis of the book, with Mr. Erskine's MS. at the British Museum. In some respects—as for instance, the names of places and geographical notices—it is, perhaps, more valuable than that document, for the writer's local knowledge, and opportunities for deriving information from the natives of the country, gave him a distinct advantage over the earlier translator.
In the same way, Mr. R. B. Shaw, while on duty in Yarkand and Kashgar, took up a section of the book and translated some passages from it, which were published in the Geographical Society's Journal for 1876. These do not touch on the history, but relate exclusively to the geography of Eastern Turkistan and its neighbouring regions on the south and south-west. They contain translated extracts from Mirza Haidar's opinions, which are fully and accurately elucidated by Mr. Shaw, according to modern knowledge of the subject and local information.
Another short section of the Tarikh-i-Rashidi is found in Elliot's History of India told by its Own Authors—a work that consists of extracts (by various translators) from Asiatic writers, only when these relate to the history of India. The translation, in this instance, is by Professor Dowson, and comprises the one episode of the battle of Kanauj in 1540, when the Afghans, under Shir Shah, won for a time the so-called Moghul Empire of Hindustan. But even this has not been given in full: only the actual account of the battle being thought necessary, by the editor, as an illustration of the events of the period, while some rather lengthy passages, containing the author's views of the policy to be adopted by the Moghuls at that critical moment, have been omitted.
Whether Moorcroft used the book, is not clear from the posthumous narrative of his travels which has come down to us, through Professor H. H. Wilson. He mentions Mirza Haidar's name on one occasion only, and ascribes a statement to him connected with Kashmir, without directly citing his work. If, however, Moorcroft did know the Tarikh-i-Rashidi, he would be, probably, the first Englishman to become acquainted with it, for his reference to it dates from 1822.
In Russia, I believe Professor Grigorieff used the Tarikh-i-
As regards texts in the original Persian (for Mirza Haidar wrote in Persian), though not particularly rare in Europe, they are seldom to be obtained, as far as my experience goes, in any Asiatic country. In England, there are three copies at the British Museum, one in the possession of Professor Cowell, at Cambridge, and it would appear that three or four more, at least, are in the hands of private persons. But these are not all of equal value: one, at any rate, of those in the British Museum being a modern Indian copy, marred by many corruptions, while another is not quite complete. The British and Foreign Bible Society own two partial translations into Turki, which they were good enough to place at the disposal of the British Museum, to be used for purposes of collation in preparing the present English version. Neither of these, however, is complete; one of them consists of the Second Part only, and the other of merely a portion of that Part. In the public libraries on the Continent, I am informed that examples are often to be met with, but whether in the original or in Turki, I am not aware.
It appears, in any case, that European collectors have, in a great measure, exhausted the supply that might be thought to be available in one part of Asia or another. In India, I believe that copies exist in some of the libraries of Calcutta and perhaps elsewhere, but a search among the native booksellers, which was made for me in 1891, resulted in finding nothing. In Persia and Afghan Turkistan I have never been able to hear of the Tarikh-i-Rashidi, while in the country to which it chiefly refers, and where it would be most likely to be in request, there is reason to think that scarcely any examples are now left; at any rate, all the inquiries that I was able to make from 1880 to 1885, at Yarkand and Kashgar, produced only the Turki fragment alluded to above, as consisting of a portion of the Second Part of the book. In Kashmir, no copy was ever procurable by native inquirers, who endeavoured, at different times, to obtain one for me; yet it seems probable that the more perfect Turki copy in the Bible Society's library, may have been acquired, some twenty or twenty-five years ago, by a civil officer in Kashmir.
For the present translation, Mr. Ross made use, chiefly, of the Persian text numbered Add. 24,090, of the British Museum Catalogue, and with this he collated the one marked Or. 157, that of Professor Cowell (who very kindly lent it for the purpose) and, in the Second Part, the more perfect of the two Turki versions belonging to the Bible Society. This last proved a valuable aid in clearing up obscure passages, and in deciphering ill-spelled and badly written names of places and tribes. It is the work of an intelligent man, who knew the countries his author wrote about, and who read what he translated with judgment and discrimination. He constantly interpolates a word or two, or a sentence, in order to make the meaning clearer, and frequently spells the names of places in Turki-speaking countries, with vowel points, and in so clear a way that they can be recognised, if not identified. This is a service few Asiatic translators, or copyists, are able to render to the modern European reader; and the only pity is that the anonymous scholar was unable to do for the Tibetan names, what he accomplished for the Turki ones. He nowhere gives his name, but the end of his work is subscribed by a line as follows: “I completed this translation in the year 1263, Jamád II. 22nd, in the town of Khotan”—i.e., in the year 1845 A.D.
A few words may be necessary to explain how this English version has come to see the light, and how it is that it should have been undertaken by one who has not enough Persian to be his own translator. My attention was first called to the Tarikh-i-Rashidi as far back as 1877, by my friend the late Mr. R. B. Shaw, who had used portions of it when he himself was living and travelling in the countries it describes. He was enthusiastic in his admiration of the author's intelligence, and of the value of the work as a “guide book” to Eastern Turkistan and the surrounding regions. He had intended, as I always understood, to take up the translation of it after completing his Turki vocabulary; but in June 1879 he died, while on service in Burma, leaving the vocabulary only just finished.*
For some years after this, I endeavoured to find a copy, believing that, with the help of native Munshis, my small knowledge of Persian might be sufficient to produce a practical, working, English version, though by no means a scholarly translation. But where, and when, I could avail myself of native assistance, no text was forthcoming, and it was only on returning to England in 1893, that I became acquainted with Mr. Erskine's partial translation among the MSS. of the British Museum. My first impression was that by filling up the gaps in this document, and rectifying the names, etc., a version might be obtained, which would be sufficiently complete to publish under Mr. Erskine's name. It soon became apparent, however, that the bulk of the MS. was only a summary of the text, and in some places was so brief, that the word “translation” could in no way be made to apply to it. It was also found that in addition to many other omissions— some long, some short—the whole of the lengthy extracts from the Zafar-Náma of Sharaf-ud-Din Ali, Yazdi, which the author embodies in the First Part of the Tarikh-i-Rashidi, to tell the story of Timur's times, had been left untouched; while certain marginal notes showed that Mr. Erskine had, in many passages, been uncertain of the author's meaning. In these circumstances, there seemed no course open but to make a new translation. Accordingly I sought advice in the only quarter where a knowledge of Mirza Haidar's original work was to be found. Dr. Charles Rieu, in compiling his catalogue of the Oriental MSS. in the British Museum, had thoroughly examined the Tarikh-i-Rashidi, and had described its contents; he knew its difficulties and saw, also, how imperfect would be the result of trying to expand and piece together Mr. Erskine's document. It was owing to his advice therefore, and through his good offices, that I obtained the assistance of his former pupil, Mr. Ross, to undertake a new translation; and I believe that although Mr. Ross holds a diploma for Persian from the Ecole des Langues Orientales Vivantes of Paris, and has won the Ouseley scholarship, no better guarantee for his proficiency is needed than Dr. Rieu's recommendation. It need hardly be added that in the new translation Mr. Erskine's précis was extensively used, and that Mr. Ross derived from it much light and assistance.
The work of translation was begun with the year 1894 and took seven months to finish. The method followed was for Mr. Ross to put sections of about five folios at a time into English, generally leaving out obscure or uncertain passages. Each of these sections was then gone through, in company with Mr. Ross and, usually, with one of the texts at hand. The uncertain passages were then discussed and filled in, or marked off for further investigation; but the revision of the English, and the addition of footnotes, together with the solution of the puzzles in which the book abounds, were subjects left for me to take up at a later opportunity. In editing the English version, my object has been to render the language fairly clear and readable, without so changing the translation as to alter the author's meaning. But this has proved to be not always an easy task, for numerous passages occur where the translation will only bear slight amendments, without impairing its accuracy. As a rule, indeed, the latitude that could be allowed was small, so that it has been necessary to leave many sentences and paragraphs standing in rather awkward phraseology, which it would have been easy—and was even tempting—to improve, had the author's words permitted the license.
As regards the spelling of proper names, it was at first intended that all should be reproduced according to the system in use at the British Museum—i.e., an exact transliteration, where each Persian and Arabic letter which has no single equivalent in English, is distinguished by some accent or diacritical sign. This design, however, could not be followed out for various reasons. Indeed, the work of translation was scarcely finished, when Mr. Ross left England to pursue his Oriental studies on the Continent, and the task of attempting to harmonise the spelling fell to me. I found it impossible, with the time at my disposal, to carry out the original intention, seeing that many of the names would have had to be searched out, afresh, ?? the vernacular texts—an undertaking that would have involved frequent attendance at the British Museum. I decided, therefore, to write all according to the simple method of Sir W. Jones, or that adopted by the Government of India in their official documents and publications. This system may be, to a certain extent, imperfect, for it does not, in every instance, show exactly what was the Persian or Arabic spelling of the word represented, and therefore is not a complete guide to re-conversion; but it gives, as nearly as possible, the correct pronunciation, while it secures a degree of accuracy sufficient for practical purposes.* It has moreover the advantage of simplicity, and avoids that air of pedantry which readers who do not occupy themselves with Oriental languages, usually discern in the more perfect system, and which they find repellant. On the other hand, those who are proficient in the languages concerned, do not require to be informed how the great majority of names are written by the original authors. A small number of new and unfamiliar place-names form the only exception to this proposition, but these are usually so carelessly and incompletely written in the original texts, that a critical transliteration can have no great value, even when it is possible to give one.
In endeavouring to throw light on the narrative, and to illustrate the author's statements on subjects connected with the people or the geography of the countries he speaks of, I have used, as far as possible, the authority of writers whose information may be cited, and verified, from works already before the public. Though I am personally acquainted, more or less, with all the tribes and races Mirza Haidar introduces, and with most of the localities, the reader will probably find it more satisfactory to be referred to a published authority, than to rely on the editor's own reminiscences. This remark, however, only applies to a portion of the footnotes and of the Introduction. For all historical matters, reference to acknowledged authorities would, in any case, be needed.
It may be observed that in reproducing Mirza Haidar's lengthy extracts from the Zafar-Náma, at the beginning of the book, his transcription was not relied upon. Mr. Ross translated these sections directly from the texts of the work in the British Museum, and only added the Mirza's interpolation (which is repeated in several places) that the country called “Jatah,” by the author of the Zafar-Náma, was one and the same with “Moghulistan.” Neither was the very free version of the Zafar-Náma, by Pétis de la Croix, used for any purpose beyond the comparison of names, and Mr. Ross's translation will be found, I believe, to be much more perfect than the French one of two hundred years ago. It has been embodied in the text without any break in the numbering of the chapters, as Mirza Haidar embodies it in his original manuscript, but it has been printed in somewhat smaller type than the rest of the text, in order to distinguish the difference of authorship.
A few words, only, are needed in explanation of the map. In the first place, its object is to show all the places mentioned in the Tarikh-i-Rashidi, which can surely be identified, and the positions of which can be established. In the second place, it was obviously necessary to lay down all the localities alluded to, on a basis of the best data available, regarding the physical geography of the region concerned. But a map containing only the names mentioned by Mirza Haidar would have had little significance. As a guide to their whereabouts, easily recognised points of some kind were needed, and for this purpose a number of the most ordinarily known, and least irrelevant, names in modern geography, have been used. They are marked at fairly wide intervals all over the included region, and may be regarded, for the most part, as mere “signposts” for pointing to the places spoken of by the author.
It might appear, at first sight, that the map would have been more useful, if the designations of the tribes had been inserted, and marked in such a way as to show the regions they inhabited; also that the boundaries, or approximate limits, of the various countries and kingdon s should have been indicated. But information of this kind it is impossible to give on a single sheet, intended to serve for a period of over two centuries in duration. The whole burden of the history to be illustrated is “mutability”; and a series of maps, instead of one, would be requisite to show the boundaries that existed from time to time, or the moves that occurred among the tribes. It has been found expedient, therefore, to omit all information of a transitional nature from the face of the map, and rather to make it exclusively geographical.
For the rest, everything has been done to render it plain and easy to refer to; and with this end in view, all needless details, both in the matter of names and of physical features, have been avoided. It will be found, I believe, to be the only map which contains most of the names used in historical works relating to Central Asia during the Middle Ages. The original drawing is by Mr. H. Scharbau, and is clear and excellent of its kind.
It is with pleasure that I take this opportunity to acknowledge my indebtedness to several gentlemen who have been so good as to lend me a helping hand, at various stages of my task. To no one am I more grateful than to Sir Henry Howorth, whose interest in the book, from first to last, has been manifested in so many practical ways, that it is perhaps doubtful whether, in its absence, the manuscript would ever have reached the printer. Dr. Rieu's good offices I have already alluded to; but I herewith offer him my thanks for the grace and patience with which he rendered them, in part to myself, and in part to Mr. Ross in connection with the technicalities of the translation. My gratitude is also due to Mr. Stephen Wheeler for the valuable advice he has accorded me, and for many references to books and other documents which his extensive reading— perhaps unsurpassed on most Asiatic subjects—enabled him, with great generosity, to place at my disposal. In tendering my acknowledgments to Dr. L. A. Waddell for the favour he has done the reader in adding some notes to Mirza Haidar's chapters on Tibet, I have only to refer to his able and original work on ‘Lamaism in Tibet,’ to guarantee appreciation of his remarks. I gladly avail myself of this occasion, also, to express my sense of obligation to Her Majesty's Secretary of State for India, for the material assistance so liberally accorded by him, towards securing the publication of the volume.
Finally, I must echo the author's words when he tells his readers that he knows his book to be full of mistakes. The subject on which I have chiefly to beg the indulgence of the critical is that of the spelling of Asiatic names, though there may be other errors and omissions, due to a want of those minute and repeated revisions of the proofs, that a book of this kind requires. My time on furlough, however, is limited, and as it has been necessary to complete the revisions before leaving England to return to Khorasán, some hurry has been inevitable.
Mirza Haidar also tells his readers that no one but a Moghul can be interested in this history. Let us hope that he may not be entirely right in his forecast. Some few who are not Moghuls may regard the preservation of his work as an advantage, and may find some attraction in it, even in an English dress; but how far these will bear with an editor who knows but little of his author's language, is another question. It may be thought that a scholarly knowledge of the language of a book is essential in one who undertakes to elucidate it, in order that he may realise the true significance of its scope, and properly understand its design. This may occasionally be the case; but if there be any virtue in the words of the German poet—
Wer den Dichter will verstehen,
Muss in Dichter's Lande gehen,
I would plead that the present is an instance in which something besides language may help lead to a right interpretation of the author, and to an appreciation of his theme.
N. E.
ORIENTAL CLUB,
25th March, 1895.
| The Dughlát Amirs | page 50 |
| The House of Chaghatái | to face 50 |
| The House of Timur | to face 51 |
Page 6, line 9 from foot. For “it” read “is.”
Page 18, line 4. For “Councillors” read “Counsellors.”
Page 23, line 23-4. It has been pointed out by a reviewer that this statement
is incorrect—that Abul Fazl mentions the “Tar-Rashidi” in the Akbar-
náma.
Page 62, line 20. For “Oirát Kalmák” read “Oirát or Kalmák.”
Page 80, line 4 of note 1. Omit the last sentence: “Nikudar” is certainly correct.
Page 87, note 2. Insert after first full-stop “(See Elliot, III. p. 529.).”
Page 103, line 10. After the word “subdued” insert “(nominally, at all
events).”
Page 112, lines 10-11. In place of “150 or 200 feet” read “300 feet or over.
(See J. R. G. S., August, 1896).”
The First Part of the Tarikh-i-Rashidi is called, by the Author, the Tarikh-i-Asl, or ‘Real History.’ The Second Part he styles Mukhtasar, or ‘Epitome.’
The First Part was written after the Second Part had been completed. This accounts for the Author remarking, in several places in Part I., that he has written certain passages in Part II.; while in Part II. he promises to make certain statements in Part I.
The First Part covers the entire period with which the Author deals— viz., from about 1321 to 1547—in the form of a brief Epitome. The Second Part takes up the history again at about the year 1484, and recounts in detail to 1546. This Part contains the life and adventures of the Author.
The system adopted in spelling proper names has been explained in the Preface, pp. x. and xi., which see.
It has also been noticed in the Preface (p. xii.) that the extracts from the Zafar-Náma are printed in smaller type than the rest of the text. No difference in type, however, has been made for the extracts from the Tarikh-i-Jahán Kushai. Those from the former work (with the exception of the very brief one in Chapter XCIX. of Part II.) were translated from original texts; while those from the latter (though collated with a copy of the Jahán Kushai) were translated from the Tarikh-i-Rashidi, as Mirza Haidar gives them.
The ordinary, or curved, parentheses in the text, are the Author's. The light angular brackets enclose words inserted by the translator or the editor, in order to render a passage complete in English, or to make sense. The heavy angular brackets contain words, or sentences, interpolated by the Turki translator, or substituted from his version, and are the outcome of the collation of the Turki text with the Persian. They appear first at page 177 and continue, at intervals, to the end of the book.
The foot-notes to the text, referring to the translation, and signed R., are those of Mr. Ross. Those in Section IV. of the Introduction, when signed H. H., are by Sir Henry Howorth. Those in Chapters LXXXIX. to XCI. added by Dr. L. A. Waddell on certain Tibetan subjects, are signed with his initials. The rest of the notes are editorial.