1. P. 59, n. 3. For Ilahad Faiẓ read Ilāhdād Faiẓī, and for No. 1890 read B.M. MS., Or., 1890.
2. P. 117, n. 2. Bajins probably means here “accurately, in facsimile.”
3. P. 119, n. 3. For Cholgīl read Cholgii.
4. P. 160, n. 4. For Farāj read Faraj.
5. P. 163, l. 8. For “Domes of Haramān” read “ancient domes.”
6. P. 192, l. 14. “The Jāmūqa tribe” should apparently be “Jāmūqa's tribe,” see p. 193.
7. P. 200, 7 ll. from foot. For Īsū Mangū read Īsū Mangā.
8. P. 203, last sentence. There is a variant which makes it the Amīr who honoured the saint.
9. P. 218, l. 3. For Abū Bakr read Abā Bakr.
10. Do., l. 6. For Bābī read Bābāī.
11. P. 225, last line. For “or” read “and.”
12. P. 227, l. 3. Put comma after “killed.”
13. P. 229, l. 10. See Sām Mīrzā's Taḥafat, B.M. MS. Add. 7670, p. 44, for an account of the origin of the name Khwāb-bīn.
14. P. 233, n. 1. For Maḥmūd Ḥasan read Muḥammad Ḥusain
15. P. 234, l. 9. Insert figure 5 after Jām.
16. Do., l. 13. “The country of Hindustan.” Akwardly expressed, for Bābar was not then seeing Hindustan. But the akwardness is in the original and is apparently due to the fact that Bābar wrote his Memoirs after conquering India. The word both in the Turkī and the Porsian is Nawāhī, and this is rendered by P. des Courteille “les abords.”
17. Do., n. 4. For Barīk-al read Bārik-ab.
18. P. 236, five lines from foot. For “his six brothers” read “six of his brothers.”
19. P. 237, n. 4. The remark near the end of this note is wrong, for the Muḥammadan Ararat is not what Europeans call Ararat, but is a mountain called Jūdī Dāgh belonging to a range south of Lake Van and east of Jazīra-b. Omar. It lies a long way S. S. W. of what is now known as Mount Ararat.
20. P. 239, l. 4 from foot. Akwardly expressed, for of course Humāyūn arrived before Lahore was taken. There should be a full stop after “taken,” the word “and” should be deleted, and “on” made On.
21. Do., n. 4. The Bāgh Wafā was at Adīnapur (Jalālābād), the Bāgh Ṣafā was higher up the river near Cār Bāgh, and there was another Bāgh Ṣafā in the Salt-Range.
22. P. 242, top line. For gabions substitute tūrās. They were not gabions, but light wattles (?) which the soldiers carried as they marched. See Bābar 86, and P. de. Courteille 151.
23. P. 248, l. 15. The words “according to their rank” are misplaced. They should come after “presents.”
24. P. 253, 4 lines from foot. Perhaps Qāẓī Zīā is the Zīau-d-dīn Nūr Beg of Khwandamīr's Humāyūn-nāma, and who, he says, got the title of Amīr-i-Zakāt.
25. P. 254, l. 3. Insert H.M. before Jahānbānī.
26. P. 256, l. 20. Jājamū'. This town is in Unao, Oude.
26a. P. 260, n. 1. Cancel note. Beg Mīrak was not Niāmu-d-dīn's grandfather.
27. P. 262, l. 3. For Urdū Shān read Urdu Shāh.
28. P. 265, l. 18. For Kram read Karim.
29. P. 267, l. 11. Insert comma after Qāsīm.
30. P. 277, Verse. The whole verse is given by Khwandamīr in his Humāyūn nāma. See translation by Sadu Sukh Lāl, p. 45, of B.M. MS. Add. 30,774.
31. P 281, last sentence. Perhaps this Kīcak or Kūcak was the brother whom Khwāja Kilān left in Qandahār, when he deserted his post, and who surrendered to ahmāsp. The Afal Tārīkh B.M. MS. Or. 4678, p. 96a says he was a brother of Khwāja Kilān. The Aḥsān T.B.M. MS. Or. 4134 calls him, p. 107, Kachī Khān and Maḥmūd Or. 2939, p. 1831 calls him Kechak khān.
32. P. 285, Verse. For the first two lines substitute
The year of his auspicious (humāyūnash) birth is “May Almighty God increase thy stature.”
The second line is a chronogram. In n. 4, for qadran read qadrā and for Zādakallāhu read Zādak Allah. Perhaps Sāmānī only means that he was a native of Sāmāna (in India).
33. P. 293, l. 4. Read Kanār for Kānār.
34. P. 294, n. 1. Abū Turab's account shows that Bahādur was present at the battle of Pānīpat, though he did not take part in it.
35. P. 295, Verse II. This comes from Ḥāfi Ode 220. Brockhaus 141.
36. P. 296, l. 9. Abū Turāb says in history of Gujrāt, p. 13a, that the twenty krors of old coinage were equal to 30 krors, 50 lakhs murādi. Murādī is explained in dictionaries as meaning small money.
37. P. 302, n. 1. Abū Turāb, p. 79, also gives the title of Khudāwand Khān to Khwāja Ṣafar.
38. P. , last line. Khwāndamīr gives his full name, p. 72 or 47, as Maulānā Muhīu-d-dīn Muḥammad Farghārī.
39. P. 315, n. 1. For Kaifu read Kaif. But I doubt if Humāyūn suspected any play on the word. The real explanation of Humāyūn's anger seems to be that the chapter of the Elephant is a denunciatory and terrifying one, and used in compositions which convey threats. Perhaps Humāyūn remembered that it was so used by Shāhrukh, the son of Taimur, in a threatening letter which he addressed in 833 or 835 A. H. to Barsbāī, the Sulān of Egypt. See the story in the extract from Makrīzī given in De Sacy's Chrestomathie Arabe II. 84. Instead of the letter beginning with Bismillah, it began with the Sura of the Elephant, and quoted the whole of it. The rest of the letter was filled with menaces. Barsabāī replied in similar style.
40. P. 316, n. 4. Apparently the ‘Alam Lūdī here mentioned is ‘Alāū-d-dīn, the uncle of Ibrāhīm Sulān.
41. P. 317, n. 1. Yes, Khudāwand Khān was a very old man. Abū Turāb says, 28b, that he was Akhūnd of Sulān Moaffar and had been Vizier and Vakīl of four Sulāns, Ferishta says he was the father of Cingīz Khān, not the son, and Abū Turāb makes the same statement.
42. P. 320, l. 7. Asāwal is spelt Ashāwal in Sir Theodore Hope's book on Aḥmadābād, and is the spot where the original chieftain was defeated by Qāsim.
43. P. 324, l. 10. Abū Turāb tells this story, but he does not give his informant's name. He only says that he was an Akhūnd and had been Bahādur's teacher and that in this way he had become acquainted with him. Nor does he say anything about his informant's taking an oath. Qu? is the Qubu-d-dīn of A.F's story Abū Turāb's uncle?
44. P. 325, n. 2. I have seen somewhere that there was a mosque in Aḥmadābād called Masjid Ṣafā, but that it was not built till 994 A.H.
45. P. 336, l. 19. For Bābā Khān read Bābā Beg.
46. P. 341. I now incline to think that Narhan is correct. It is a well-known ford and is mentioned in the 2nd volume. But though A.F. has written Narhan, it does not seem likely that Humāyūn went so far east.
47. P. 359, l. 17. For ‘Abdu-l-Mākrī read Abdāl Mākrī.
48. P. 368, n. 1. Shāh Ḥusain had a son by Gulbarak B. who died young.
49. P. 396, n. 1. For J. V. read I. O.
50. P. 407, n. 2. See Burnes' Cabool, 1842, p. 115. He says the correct name is Dingote, and that it is 6 m. above Kālā Bāgh.
51. P. 408, l. 10. After Khāwand, for Muḥammad read Maḥmūd.
52. P. 416, n. 4. The following note by George P. Tate, Esq., of the Indian Survey, has been kindly furnished to me by Mr. Irvine:—
“Qila'-i-Uk. Ūk is the ancient name of a small district to the north of the Hamūn-i-Helmand, and therefore of Seistān, the chief towns of which are Lāsh and Juwain. The names of these towns are existing at the present day, but the name of the district has apparently fallen into desuetude, as it does not seem to be generally known. Qila'-i-Ūk would therefore merely mean the principal fort, or capital of the district, the name of which, if it had one, was not generally known. A similar case can be found not far off from that locality. In the afarnāmah the author writes of the capital of Seistān as Shahr-i-Seistān, and does not mention it by name. This practice still holds good. The word “Shahr” is used, as we use the word “town,” with reference to London. Rarely, or never, is the “Shahr” or capital, spoken of by its name of Nasratābād. This is the modern capital. The site of the ancient capital of Seistān is at a short distance to the N.-E. of the modern capital. Ūk, judging from its propinquity to Seistān, probably was subject to the (Kāiānī) Maliks of Seistān, from whose country it was divided by the Helmand, if the Helmand at that time did not find a more southerly outlet for its waters, which seems to me to have possibly been the case.