Akbar-nāmah - The Akbarnāma of Abū Fazl, Volume 1

The Book of Akbar

Text ID: 000701021 • View Author
CHAPTER XV.
HER MAJESTY ĀLANQUWĀ, THE CUPOLA OF CHASTITY AND VEIL
OF PURITY.

Whatever, God, the wondrous Creator, brings forth from the hidden places of secrecy to the light of manifestation, is attended by extraordinary circumstances. But the sons of men fail to perceive these, from the heedlessness which has its props and foundation in fulness of life and the wrappage of worldliness. Were it not so, man would be ever standing at gaze and not applying himself to action. Hence the world-adorning Initiator hides most of the wonders of His power from the sight of mortals, but lest they should be entirely shut out from the extraordinary spectacle of the Divine decrees, He raises this veil from before a few of the holy hiding places of His secrets. And again, after much seeing, a heedlessness which fate has made a constituent of their natures, causes this very sight to become a screen against perception. And again178a after that, the universal benevolence of the Deity, for a thousand diverse purposes—one being the instruction of the minds of negligent mortals,— brings forth a new creation, and raising the veils and curtains somewhat, displays a wondrous picture.

The extraordinary story of her Majesty is a case in point. She was the happy-starred daughter (dukhtar-i-qudsī-akhtar) of Jūīna Bahādur of the Qiyāt tribe and Barlās178b family. Her physical and178c mental beauty went on increasing from her earliest years, until by loftiness of thought and sublimity of genius, she became the Unique of the Age, and by acknowledgment of friends and foes, relatives and strangers, was magnanimous, pious, and a lover of wisdom. The lights of theosophy shone from her countenance, the Divine secrets were manifested on her forehead. She sat secluded behind the screen of chastity and abode in the privy chamber of meditation on the Unity, was a theatre of holy epiphanies and an alighting-stage of Divine emanations. When she arrived at maturity, she was, according to the custom of princes and the practice of great ones of Church and State, given in marriage to Ẕūbūn Bīyān, king of Mughulistān and her own cousin and (thus) they joined that unique pearl of purity with a temporal ruler. As he was not her match, he hastened to annihilation and her Majesty Ālanquwā who was the repose (āsāyish) of the spiritual world, became likewise the ornament (ārāyish) of the temporal world and, applying herself of necessity to outward acts, she became the sovereign of her tribe (alūs).

One night this divinely radiant one was reposing on her bed, when suddenly a glorious179a light cast a ray into the tent and entered the mouth and throat of that fount of spiritual knowledge and glory. The cupola of chastity became pregnant by that light in the same way as did her Majesty (Ḥaẓrat) Miryam179b (Mary) the daughter of ‘Imrān (Amram).

Praised be the God who maintained holy human souls from Adam down to this child of light, in prosperity and adversity, abundance and want, victory and defeat, pleasure and pain, and other contrasted conditions, one after another, and made them partakers of emanations of the holy light. Before this holy light made its fortunate alighting from high heaven, Qiyān was withdrawn from the associations of climates and cities and supported in a solitary wilderness, and many ancestors were given to her (Ālanquwā), generation after generation, for two thousand years in these Highlands (kōhistān), thereby purifying her and familiarizing her with the land of holiness and converting the human element into a collection of all degrees, Divine and earthly. When the spiritual preparation was complete, Yuldūz Khān was brought—for the ends of Divine wisdom—from the mountains to the city, and seated on a throne, till the turn of the holy series reached her Majesty Ālanquwā and that divine light, after passing without human instrumentality, through many eminent saints and sovereigns, displayed itself gloriously in the external world. That day180a (viz., of Ālanquwā's conception) was the beginning of the manifestation of his Majesty, the king of kings, who after passing through divers stages was revealed to the world from the holy womb of her Majesty Miryam-makānī for the accomplishment of things visible and invisible.

It needs a Plato of abstract thought to comprehend the saying “The Lord180b of Time (zamān) remains behind the veil whilst Time's products (zamāniyān), i.e., mortals, rend it with outward sorrow and inward anguish.”

But now returning to the beginning of the story, I repeat that the holy abode of that cupola of chastity was continually at auspicious times and seasons, made resplendent by the brilliance of that light and from time to time, her moral and material nature brightened by its effulgence. Those who by a soaring flight on the wings of genius, have passed beyond the worship of materiality and can behold the Causer, do not think occurrences like this strange or wonderful in the wide domain of Divine power, and the incredulity of worshippers of routine and superficiality is of no weight in their esteem. As for those who have remained among secondary causes and have not advanced their foot further and cannot, by auspicious guidance, forego superficial computations, they too do not abide by their first principles, (i.e., are not consistent). For instance they admit there was a child without father or mother, viz., the first man or Adam, and they accept a child without a mother, whom they call Eve. Why then not admit a child without a father? Especially when they are fully assured of such an occurrence in the case of Jesus and Mary.

Verse.

If you listen to the tale of Mary,
Believe the same of Ālanquwā.

But the world-fashioning Creator who from their inception brings all his works to their final accomplishment, effects His purposes by means of the contradictions and oppositions of His beautiful and His terrible Attributes (asmā, lit. names). Accordingly there is a section of mankind of lofty intelligence, right judgment, exalted thought, sublime power and correct thinking, whom He hath placed apart and whose condition He advances day by day. So also there is a multitude of human shapes, purblind, feeble of apprehension, crooked in thought and of evil imaginations, void of usefulness, whom He hath marked out and whom He keeps in a state of perturbation. And although the cup of His designs may be filled in either of these ways, yet there are many contrivances involved in the combination. Accordingly darkness is united with light, bad fortune with good, adversity with prosperity and the wicked and black-hearted are always putting forward stones of stumbling. But soon they are disgraced spiritually and temporarily and depart to the street of annihilation.

This brilliant event is an illustration of the above, for when such a wondrous thing occurred, evil thoughts arose in the hearts of the short-sighted dullards and worshippers of externals who had no share in real merit and were alien from the grace of Divine knowledge. That enthroned vestal (Ālanquwā), out of her perfect benevolence, did not desire that these blind wretches should remain caught in the slough of this thought and so apprized her nobles of the matter. She intimated that “if any dullard or simpleton, unaware of the wondrous power of God and the forms of Divine decrees, fall into the misfortune of evil thoughts and sully his mind's mirror with the rust of wicked imagination, he will for ever and ever abide in distress and loss. It is better then that I clear the courts of their intellect of such confusion. For this purpose, it is necessary that awakened-hearted truth-knowers and trusty persons of sincerity watch by night around the tent, so that the darkness of suspicion and doubt caused by the blackness of their hearts may by the light of Divine events and the beholding of hidden radiances, be changed into illumination and that evil thoughts may pass from their turbid minds.”

Accordingly several wakeful and prudent, keen-sighted watchers were placed around the tent and like night-burning stars, they closed not their eyes. Suddenly in the middle of the night,—which is the time for the descent of Divine mercies,—a shining light, like bright moonlight,—just as the lady, the curtain of chastity, had said,— came down from on high and entered the tent. A cry was raised by the watchers. For a little while, people were stunned and then their vain thoughts and evil imaginations were exorcised.

When the period of pregnancy was fulfilled, Ālanquwā bore three noble sons. The first was Būqūn Qanqī from whom the Qanqīn tribe is descended; the second was Yūsuqī Sāljī from whom the Sāljīūts are sprung. The third was Būzanjar Qāān. The descendants of these nobly-born ones are called Nairūn, i.e., light-produced and are considered to be the noblest class among the Mughuls.

BŪZANJAR QĀĀN.

Būzanjar Qāān is the ninth ancestor of Cingīz Khān and Qarācār Nūyān, the fourteenth of his Majesty, the Lord of Conjunction, and the twenty-second183a of his Majesty, the king of kings. When he came to years of discretion, he adorned the sovereignty of Tūrān, and the chiefs of the Tātār and Turk tribes, etc., who were like satraps (Mulūk-i-ṭawā'if, i.e., the Arsacidæ) bound the girdle of service on their waists. He composed the distractions of the time by the vigour of his administration, distributed justice and benevolence and, for a prolonged period, soothed and adorned the world by his nobility and wisdom. He was contemporary with Abū Muslim Marwazī.184a When his existence closed, there remained two sons, Būqā and Tūqabā (? Tūqtā).

BŪQĀ KHĀN.

Būqā Khān was the eldest son of Būzanjar Qāān and the eighth ancestor of Cingīz Khān and Qarācār Nūyān. He ascended the throne in accordance with his father's testament and adorned the royal dīvān by justice and equity. He devised new regulations for world-ruling and world-subduing and framed the code of the Khāqāns of the world. He so carried himself towards his subjects that one and all were rendered happy by him.

DŪTAMĪN KHĀN.

Ẕūtamīn184b Khān was the upright son of Būqā Khān. When the father perceived his own life passing away, he appointed him his heir and successor. Ẕūtamīn exerted himself in controlling the administration and in increasing the prosperity of the kingdom. He had nine sons, and on his death, their mother Manūlūn who was unique in wisdom and management, went into retirement and devoted herself to their upbringing. One day, the Jalāīrs who belong to the Darlgīn tribe, laid an ambush184c and killed Manūlūn and eight of her sons. Qāidū Khān, the ninth son, had gone off to China (Mācīn) in order to become his cousin's184d son-in-law and so escaped. With the help of Mācīn, the Jalāīrs were brought to rue their folly and induced to put to death seventy men who had been engaged in the murder of Manūlūn and her children. They also bound their wives and children and sent them to Qāidū Khān who marked their foreheads with the token of servitude. Their descendants remained for a lengthened period in the prison of slavery.

QĀIDŪ KHĀN.

Qāidū Khān after many adventures, sat upon the thone of sovereignty and supervised the world's civilization.185a He founded cities and had a following of many clans. He warred with the Jalāīrs and firmly established his power. When he passed away, he left three sons.

BĀYASANGHAR KHĀN.

Bāyasanghar Khān was the eldest son and the unique of his Age for administrative capacity and for the management of subjects and soldiers. He sat upon the throne agreeably to his father's testament.

TŪMANA KHĀN.

Tūmana was the worthy son of Bāyasanghar Khān. When his father was departing from this world, he made over the kingdom to him. The dīvān of sovereignty and world-rule gained lustre during his reign. He graced it by his courage and wisdom, and augmented the glory of the Age by his magnanimity and bearing of burdens. By strength of arm and vigour of mind, he increased his hereditary kingdom by adding to it, much of Mongolia (Mughulistān) and Turkistān. There was not his like for might and prestige in all Turkistān. He had two wives by one of whom he had seven sons and by the other twins. One of the twins was named Qabal and was the great-grandfather185b of Cingīz Khān and the other was named Qācūlī.

QĀCŪLĪ BAHĀDUR.

Qācūlī Bahādur is the eighth ancestor of his Majesty the Lord of Conjunction (Tīmūr). He was a theatre of the lights of dominion and a station of the impressions of auspiciousness. The refulgence of greatness radiated from his countenance and the glory of fortune shone from his brow. One night he beheld in a dream186a a shining star emerging from Qabal Khān's breast. It rose to the zenith and then was extinguished. This happened thrice. The fourth time, a wondrous bright star arose from his (Qabal's) breast and took the horizons with its light. The rays thereof reached and enkindled other stars, and each of them lighted up a region, so that when the globe of light disappeared, the world still remained illuminated. He awoke from his vision, and loosed the bird of thought that he might interpret the strange augury. Suddenly sleep again186b overcame him and he saw seven stars rise in succession from his own breast and disappear. The eighth time, a mighty star appeared and lighted up the whole world. Then some small stars branched off from it so that every corner of the universe was illuminated. When the great star became invisible, these other stars shone forth and the universe remained bright as before. At daybreak, Qācūlī Bahādur reported the occurrence to his honoured father Tūmana Khān. The latter gave the interpretation that from Qabal Khān there would come three princes who should sit on the throne of the Khānāte and be lords of lands. But the fourth time, a king would come after these, who should bring most of the earth under his sway and should have children, each of whom would govern a region. From Qācūlī would come seven dominant descendants, bearing on their brows the diadem of primacy and the crown of rule. The eighth time a descendant would arise who should exhibit world-wide sovereignty and exercise sway and chiefship over all mankind. From him would come descendants who should each rule a division of the earth.

When Tūmana Khān had made an end of his interpretation, the two brothers, in accordance with his orders, made a mutual league and covenant to the effect that the throne of the Khān should be committed to Qabal Khān and that Qācūlī should be Commander-in-Chief and Prime Minister. And it was established that the descendants of each should, generation after generation, observe this arrangement. They drew up a solemn compact (‘ahd-nāma) to this effect in Uighūr (Turkish) characters and each brother put his seal to it and it was styled the “Āltamgha of Tūmana Khān.” The illustrious ancestors of his Majesty, the king of kings,—who is the final cause of the series having been set in motion—were, from Adam to Tūmana Khān, distinguished by absolute sovereignty and by independent sway, and so established the throne of justice. Some members of the glorious company also attained to the spiritual world and so were, both outwardly and inwardly, plenipotent, as hath been set forth in ancient chronicles.

The Divine strategy—in providing for the apparition of the consummation of all degrees, spiritual and temporal, by the intervention of so many rulers of the visible and invisible worlds,—was awaiting the birth-time of his Majesty, the king of kings,—for, as being the quintessence of humanity, his robe must be gorgeously embroidered,—and so was day by day, accomplishing the preparations. Hence in order to completeness and to cause appreciation of the glory of service and the sweets of management, Qācūlī Bahādur was arrayed in the disguise of vicegerency (wakālat) so that the grades of this status too might come within the purview of this glorious company and a provision of every stage of development be accumulated for his Majesty, the king of kings. Thus, notwithstanding the guiding power, dexterity, greatness and high-mindedness of Qācūlī Bahādur, Qabal Khān became the heir. Though in the external point of age,—which is not regarded by the wise,—he was greater, yet in reality, the controlling power of the Divine wisdom was engaged in completing the work (of preparation for Akbar). When Tūmana Khān's star set in the west, Qabal Khān became established on the throne of rule and Qācūlī Bahādur, in accordance with that fidelity to his promise which is the material of eternal bliss, undertook with concord and singleness of aim, the management of the State in conformity with the rules of loving-mindedness and king-making.

And when Qabal Khān went from this world of troubled existence to the peaceful home of nothingness, Qūbila188a Khān who out of six sons was the one worthy of the throne and crown, obtained the sovereignty, and Qācūlī Bahādur remained engaged in the same high office of Commander-in-Chief, observed his compact and, by help of wisdom and courage, carried on the affairs of the State. Qūbila Khān with the support of such a grandee, who was possessed both of God-given wisdom and a world-conquering sword, took vengeance for his brother from Āltān Khān (i.e., the Golden Khān) the ruler of Cathay and having made great wars which were masterpieces of men of might, inflicted a heavy defeat on the army of Cathay.

The abstract of this affair is as follows:—The rulers of Cathay always were in dread of this noble race and always kept on friendly terms with it. When Āltān Khān was confirmed on the throne of Cathay, he became much alarmed at hearing of the bravery and ability of Qabal Khān. By means of skilful embassies, he established concord between them to such an extent that he invited Qabal Khān to Cathay. The Khān with the sincerity and honesty which are the characteristics of this family, made over the care of the kingdom to Qācūlī Bahādur and went to Cathay. His reception was very friendly and after indulging in pleasure and enjoyment,188b he set his face homewards. Some of Āltān Khān's grandees of base and ignoble nature, disturbed his mind with improper words so that he repented having said adieu to Qabal Khān and sent a message to recall him. Qabal Khān saw through the plot and replied that as he had left in an auspicious hour, it would not be proper to return.188c This enraged Āltān Khān who sent troops with orders to bring him back by hook or by crook. Qabal Khān caused the officer in command to alight at the house of a friend of his named Sāljūqī who had his dwelling by the way-side, and agreed to turn back. Sāljūqī secretly told him that to return was not advisable and that he had a swift and enduring horse which no one could come up with and that the proper189a thing for Qabal Khān was to mount this horse and get away as quickly as possible from this dangerous neighbourhood.

Qabal Khān acted on this advice and getting on the horse, proceeded to his own camp (yurt). When the Cathay messengers heard this, they pursued him with all rapidity but did not come up with him till he was in his own camp. Qabal Khān seized these wicked people and put them to death. Meanwhile his eldest child Ūqīn189b Barqāq who was matchless for beauty, was keeping company with the gazelles on the borders of the wilderness when a party of Tātārs surprised him and took him to Āltān Khān. The Khān put this delicate fawn189c to death189d in satisfaction for those dog-souled wolves.

When Qūbila Khān who was the second son, came to the throne, he collected an army and marched against Āltān Khān to revenge his brother's189e death. A great battle ensued and the Cathäians suffered a sore defeat and were plundered of their property.

When the onset of the army of death fell upon Qūbila Khān, his honoured brother Bartān Bahādur, was established on the throne, agreeably to the counsels of the nobles. He preserved the institutions (yāsāq, i. e. yāsā) of his father and brother and as in his time, he had no rival who could contend with him in war, the title Khān was marked in people's mouths by that of Bahādur and they stamped the coin of his courage with this awe-augmenting appellative. At this period, Qācūlī Bahādur who was at once a life-sacrificing brother and a Commander-in-Chief Bahādur, departed to the eternal world.

ĪRADAM-CĪ BARLĀS.

Īradam-cī Barlās was the upright son of Qācūlī Bahādur and was distinguished for his wisdom and military talent. On his father's death, the patent (ṭughrā) of the Commander-in-Chiefship was exalted by the entry of his name and he managed affairs according to the rules which his father had made illustrious. He was the first who bore the title of Barlās, the meaning of which fine word is brave and of noble lineage. The whole Barlās clan traces its origin190a from him.

When Bartān Bahādur died, Yesugai190b Bahādur, the third of his four sons, and father of Cingīz Khān, and who was adorned with the cuirass of wisdom and the helmet of courage, placed the crown of the Khānāte on his head and graced the throne of world-sway. At this time Īradam-cī Barlās died, leaving twenty-nine sons.

SŪGHŪ CĪCAN (THE WISE).

Sūghū Cīcan was distinguished among the noble sons of Īradam-cī Barlās for courage, wisdom and administrative ability. He was also the eldest son. He took the place of his honoured father; ostensibly he was Commander-in-Chief, in reality he was sovereign. Yesugai Bahādur, by the world-adorning advice of Sūghū Cīcan marched against the Tātārs and trod under foot their glory and their grandeur. When he had, by God's help and the might of good fortune, overcome the Tātārs, he set out for Dīlūn191a Būldaq. When he arrived there, his chief wife (Khātūn) Ūlūn Anaga191b whom he had left pregnant, gave birth to a noble son on 20th zī-l-qa‘da 549191c (26th Jan., 1155), in the cycle-year of the Hog (Tankūz). Yesugai Bahādur called him Temūcīn.191d Sūghū Cīcan, who possessed lofty intelligence and exalted understanding, told Yesugai Bahādur that by the secrets of calculation and the favourable aspects of the heavens, it was clear that this was the very star which had emerged the fourth time from Qabal Khān's breast.

CINGĪZ191e
KHĀN.

Though in the noble line of his Majesty, the king of kings, which in this book of Divine praise is the starting-point191f of utterance, it is unnecessary to mention Temūcīn who is a branch of the holy tree, yet as he was a ray of the divine light of Ālanquwā, a brief account of him is indispensable. The horoscope of Temūcīn was in Libra and the seven planets191g were in it. The Dragon's

NOTE
on page 180, line 4, from bottom of text.

The Society's MS. No. D. 29, in Maulavī Ashraf ‘Alī's Catalogue, omits the wāw between zamān wa-zamānīyān of the printed editions, and this appears to me preferable. The passage accordingly runs thus:—

◌ the translation would be: “The Lord of Time, for the advancement of timely beings, is in the habit of rending the curtain (i.e., he is born again and again) with pain of the eyes and dolour of the heart.”

The Lord of Time is Akbar, or rather the Divine Light conceived by Alanquwā, which had to go through a successive course of births, before it appeared in its final perfection in the person of His Majesty, King Akbar. This was done by him for the benefit of men, for the purpose of improving their condition (parda-ārāī). To the act of child-bearing the word zaḥīr lit. “pains” directly refers. The pun hardly can be translated. It lies in the fact that Akbar “rends the curtain for the purpose of mending it,” both expressions being used in a metaphorical sense.

T. BLOCH,

Hon. Philol. Sec., A. S. B.

Head192a was in the Third House and the Dragon's Tail192b in the Ninth. But some say that in 581192c (1185), when he became head of the Nairūn tribe and family, the seven planets were in conjunction in Libra.

QARĀCĀR NŪYĀN.

Qarācār Nūyān was the noble son of Sūghū Cījan and was of kingly mind and princely192d bearing. In the year of the Hog 562 (1167), Yesugai Bahādur died and in the same year, Temūcīn became thirteen and Sūghū Cījan, the centre of the sovereignty and administration and leader of the armies, marched nearly contemporaneously with this, to the camp of annihilation. Qarācār192e Nūyān was then of tender age. The Nairūn tribe left Temūcīn and joined the Tāījīuts192f so that Temūcīn was in difficulties and entangled in misfortunes. At length, by heaven's aid, he was rescued from these whirlpools and terrible dangers and waged war with the Jāmūqa, Tāījūt, Qanqarāt, Jalāīr and other tribes. When he was over thirty, he became head of his own clan and family (the Nairūn). On account of the opposition of various rulers of Turkistān, he went in his fortieth year, by the advice of Qarācār Nūyān to Āvang192g Khān, the chief of the Kerāyat tribe and who had an old friendship with Yesugai Bahādur. Temūcīn did good service for him and displayed pre-eminent excellence. His favour and intimacy with him and the loftiness of his rank came to such a point that the sweet savour of his sincerity was made fragrant by the pastile of friendship193a so that the great officers and relatives (of Āvang Khān) became jealous.

Jāmūqa, chief of the Jājarāt tribe, joined with Sankū,193b the son of Āvang Khān, to speak evil of him and they devised falsehoods against him whereby the heart of Āvang Khān was drawn away from the right path and he began to entertain evil thoughts. Temūcīn became alarmed and escaped from that danger by the counsels and assistance of Qarācār Nūyān. Twice were great battles fought between them in which Temūcīn was victorious.

When in his 49th, or as some say, his 50th year, he, in Ramaẓān 599 (May-June 1203), attained the rank of a sovereign and ruler of the world. When three years of his reign and rule had passed But Tengri,193c a seer of the invisible world and herald of the Divine Court, was inspired to give Temūcīn the title of Cingīz Khān or king of kings. Day by day, the star of his fortune rose higher and higher and year by year, the lightning of his majesty became more vivid. He acquired sway over all Cathay, Khotan, Northern and Southern China (Cīn ū Mācīn), the desert of Qibcāq, Saqsīn,193d Bulgaria,194a Ās,194b Russia, Ālān,194c etc. He had four sons, Jūjī, Caghatāī, Ōkadāī, Tūlī. He placed with Jūjī the management of feasts and hunting. Judiciary matters (yārghū) and the carrying out of punishment, in which administrative government is involved, were committed to the wisdom of Caghatāī. Government and political matters were assigned to Ōkadāī. The management of military affairs and the protection of the camp were made over to Tūlī.

In the months of 615 (1218), he marched to Transoxiana against Sulṭān Muhammad, king of Khwārizm194d and the people of that country received the chastisement of capital punishment.

When he had finished the affairs of Transoxiana, he crossed the Amu (Oxus) and turned his world-opening reins towards Bālkh. He despatched Tūlī Khān with a large army to Khurāsān and after conquering Īrān and Tūrān, he came from Bālkh to Ṭāliqān.194e From thence he went off to put an end to Jalālu-d-dīn Mangbarnī194f and in Ramaẓān195a 624 (Aug. 1227), defeated him up to the banks of the Indus. From thence he went to Transoxiana towards his permanent encampment (Karakoram). He died in the year of the Hog which was also that of his birth and accession, on 4th Ṣafar195b 624, in the borders of the country of Tangūt.195c

Before his death, he directed that when the inevitable event occurred, they should keep it secret until the affair of the people of Tangūt was completed and that there might be no commotion in distant countries. His sons and officers carried out his instructions and took steps to conceal the event till the people of Tangūt had come out195d and been made the forage of the sword. Then they marched off bearing the body (of Cingīz) in a chest, putting to death everybody whom they met, so that the news might not be quickly conveyed to the different countries. On 14th Ramaẓān of the same year, they brought the body to the great camp and proclaimed the death. They buried Cingīz at the foot of a tree which he had, one day when hunting, approved as a site for his grave. In a short space of time, the branches became so thick that the tomb was hidden by them and no one could ascertain the spot. There is a strange mystery in this which cannot be understood, except by the wisdom of the wise and far-seeing, to wit, that as in life he was under God's protection, so also in death did he come under God's supervision, in order that the short-sighted might not put forth hands of disrespect against the place. Though to take much thought about a tomb is to make one self ridiculous to mankind, yet as rulers have to deal chiefly with the superficial-minded, this providential guarding (of Cingīz' tomb) is a great blessing. And why should not the Divine protection watch over one who was so great that an universe abode in the shade of his guardianship?

Though this great man be in the eyes of the vulgar and even to the élite,196a at first glance, a leading exponent of Divine wrath, yet to the far-reading view of the wise, élite of the élite, he is an emanation of Divine blessings. For in the kingdom of Divine justice of which human government is a ray, there can be no injustice or oppression, and everything which comes into existence in the world of evil is based on certain spiritual principles, the real nature of which the superficial cannot perceive and which cannot be comprehended save by the intellects of the far-seeing and awakened-hearted.

His years were seventy-two complete and most of the seventy-third had also elapsed. Of them, twenty-five were spent in reigning and conquering. If we look to the dates196b of his birth and his death, as stated in histories, his age comes to seventy-four years and three months. Apparently the discrepancy is due to the difference between lunar and solar months and years, or it may be owing to some cause other than the ostensible one. During this period, the high matters of government and administration were made illustrious by the world-adorning counsels of Qarācār Nūyān. Why should not a potentate who hath such a kinsman (birādar) in blood and in spirit by his side as his director to dominion and fortune, brush with the head of majesty the highest zenith of conquest and rule?

Verse.

Qarācār and Cingīz are cousins (ibn-i-‘am and).
In conquest too, they are allied (qarīn-i-ham and).

When the drum of death was beat, the Khānship was made over to Ōkadāī. The gist of this distressful occurrence is that when on the China expedition, he (Cingīz) had one night an intimation by a vision, that the time of leaving this mirage-like world was at hand. He called his sons, Qarācār Nūyān, the Commander-in-Chief, and the other nobles and pillars of his empire and after imparting to them counsels which might dominate mankind, he appointed Ōkadāī as Khān. He sent to the treasury for the covenant which had been executed by Qāculī and Qabal Khān and which was the Āltamgha of Tūmana Khān and which his high-souled predecessors had successively signed, and had it read before the noble assembly. He observed, “I swore to this deed together with Qarācār Nūyān, do you also fulfil its conditions.” He also had another deed drawn up between Ōkadāī and his other sons and his kinsmen and made it over to Ōkadāī.

Transoxiana, Turkistān, the borders of Khwārizm, the cities of the Uighūrs, Kāshghar, Badakhshān, Bālkh and Ghaznih as far as the Indus, he assigned to Caghatāī Khān. He also made over the covenant of Qabal Khān and Qācūlī Bahādur to Caghatāī and said to him, “Depart not from the counsels of Qarācār Nūyān and regard him as your partner in rule and realm.” He also established between them the bond of fatherhood197a and sonship. In this way the noble line (Akbar's) came to be called Caghatāī;198a otherwise the relationship of Caghatāī and his ancestors with his Majesty, the king of kings, is one of glory and superiority not of propinquity and similarity.

The Princes and Nūyāns acted according to the testament. Good God! could there be such a breach198b of covenant by an eminently wise man like Cingīz Khān! The covenant which had been adorned by the seal-royal (Āltamgha) of Tūmana Khān should have been given to Ōkadāī Qā'ān and he should have been made over to be educated and succoured by the weighty counsels of Qarācār Nūyān so that the provisions of the compact might be carried into effect; or did they not produce198c that covenant till he (Cingīz) was carried away by the inbred forgetfulness199a of human nature, and thus the mark of censure in the book of his knowledge was obliterated by the line of obliviousness. It is strange too that old writers while treating of this subject with verbiage, cavilling and equivocation have not come to a right determination about it. It appears as if the world-adorning Deity desired to remove from the frame of this lofty lineage, the disguise of the Commander-in-Chiefship which Tūmana Khān had imposed but which had really been fashioned by the Divine artificers while completing the evolution of his Majesty, the king of kings, (and that so) a forgetfulness ensued which surpassed in excellence thousands of good designs. Inasmuch as the Divine protection was ever guarding this lofty line, no failure in the compact and agreement occurred on the part of Qācūlī Bahādur's descendants so that when the turn of sovereignty, which was due to their innate and acquired power of direction, arrived and they attained the divan-adorning Caliphate, there could be no reproach brought against them by the wise. Likewise this was the beginning199b of the rise of that light of fortune, his Majesty, the Lord of Conjunction (Tīmūr) whose holy existence was the forerunner of the perpetual dominion of his Majesty, the king of kings.

After his father's decease, Caghatāī Khān made Pēshbālīgh200a his capital and having made over the control of the army and of the subjects to Amīr Qarācār Nūyān, he spent most of his time in the service of Ōkadāī Qā'ān. Though Ōkadāī was younger than himself, he shewed no slackness in performing his duties and in the minutiæ of obedience and heartily observed the conditions of the will.

When Caghatāī Khān arrived at his life's term, he appointed Amīr Qarācān Nūyān administrator of the kingdom and made over his children to him. He died seven months before Ōkadāī Khān,200b in the year of the Ox, Ẕī-l-qa‘da 638 (May-June 1241). Qarācār Nūyān, in accordance with his promise, took charge of the management of the kingdom and after some time, made over to Qarā Hulāgū Khān, son of Mawātkān,200c son of Caghatāī, the government of his grandfather's dominions.

After some years, when Giyūk Khān, son of Ōkadāī became Khān (i.e., Khāqān) Qarācār Nūyān deposed200d Qarā Hulāgū Khān, and appointed Īsū Mangū, son of Caghatāī in his room. Let it not be concealed that Ōkadāī Qā'ān had, during his sovereignty, nominated his eldest200e son, Kūcū as his heir, but Kūcū died during his father's lifetime. He then made his (Kūcū's) son Shīrāmūn who was his favourite, his heir. When the Qā'ān (Ōkadāī) died, Giyūk Khān was in Russia, Circassia and Bulgaria (i.e., Great Bulgaria) and came to the great camp200f (i.e., the capital) three or four years afterwards He established justice and the cherishing of subjects. When Īsū Mangū was covered with the veil of annihilation, Qarācār Nūyān again appointed Qarā Hulāgū to the government of the country and died during his reign in 652 (1254),201a full of honours and success, at the age of 89.

AIJAL NŪYĀN.

Aijal Nūyān was the most distinguished for wisdom and godliness of Qarācār Nūyān's ten201b children. During the reign of Qarā Hulāgū he took, on account of his wisdom and vigour, the place of his father (Qarācār). In 662 (1264) he was confirmed on the divan of dominion. The Caghatāī tribe (alūs) was prosperous in his time, but as there was much opposition and strife among the descendants of Caghatāī Khān, he got disgusted with affairs and settled in his ancestral city of Kesh until the time when Mangū Qā'ān, son of Tūlī Khān, son of Cingīz Khān, sent his brother Hulāgū to Persia (Īrān) and attached to him officers and men from each of the four tribes (alūs) of Jūjī, Caghatāī, Ōkatāī (Ōkadāī) and Tūlī. By universal request, Aijal Nūyān was selected from the Caghatāī tribe and appointed as companion201c to Hulāgū Khān. That Khān treated him with great respect and assigned Marāgha-Tabrīz201d to him.

AMIR AILANGAR KHĀN.

Amīr Ailangar Khān was the most distinguished son of Aijal Nūyān. When Aijal departed from Tūrān with Hulāgū Khān to Īrān, Ailangar was made his father's representative in the Caghatāī tribe and when Aījal left this deceitful world in Īrān, Davā Khān, son of Barāq Khān, son of Bīsūtavā, son of Mawātkān, son of Caghatāī Khān, son of Cingīz Khān who had become Sulṭān202a made him Amīru-l-umarā202b and gave him his father's rank and assigned to him powers of binding and loosing. And being full of wisdom and insight, he undertook the management of the affairs of the kingdom. He embraced the glorious Muhammadan religion.

AMĪR BARKAL.202c

Amīr Barkal was very high-minded and when his noble father, Amīr Ailangar Nūyān left this comfortless world, in the time of Tarmashīrīn Khān, son of Davā Khān, he was the only surviving son. As he was always occupied with the care of his own soul, he had no leisure for other things and so, abstaining from the companionship of Khāns, he transferred the paternal avocations to his cousins and remained independent in Kesh. He was assiduous in seeking God's favour and in acquiring virtues. He spent his life in that neighbourhood and provided for his daily sustenance from the various estates and villages which belonged to his old possessions and was content therewith till he went to the holy kingdom and the eternal country.

AMĪR ṬARĀGHĀĪ.

Amīr Ṭarāghāī was the distinguished son of Amīr Barkal and is the father of the Lord of Conjunction (Tīmūr). From early years and the flower of youth, the lights of dominion and fortune shone from the court of his nature and the notes of greatness and glory illuminated the antechamber of his ways. That noble-minded man had a younger brother, Haibat202d by name, who was a perfect paragon of truth and truth-seeking. But the lot of spiritual and temporal eminence had fallen on the elder brother. Like his honoured father (Barkal) he always kept his face on the threshold of the lords of holiness and was favoured by the associates of the portals of eternity. Especially that pattern of the masters of ecstacy, Shaikh Shamsu-d-dīn Kalāl,203a greatly honoured and respected the Amīr and by his spiritual insight apprized him of the advent of the star of the Lord of Conjunction.

CHAPTER XVI.
THE LORD OF GREAT CONJUNCTIONS, THIRD POLE204a
OF THE UNIVERSE,
POLE OF REALM AND RELIGION, AMĪR TIMUR GŪRGĀN.204b

The eternal decree and unchanging will of God hath adorned the world by assigning thousands of designs to everything. Thus the Almighty, by implanting in the fifty-two persons who form the lofty line of the king of kings and who are the instruction of the wise,—command, wisdom, sovereignty, guidance, favour, bounty and other glorious graces and illustrious qualities, fashioned and finished the unique pearl of the Imperial Vicegerency (Khilāfat). And from and after Qācūlī Bahādur, He caused seven heroes of the sacred line to descend from the position of visible sovereignty and awarded them the status of Commander-in-Chief and king-making (shāhinshāhī) so that by experiencing the stage of subjection in the garb of obedience, they might in an admirable manner, set forth to the apparatus of the universal laboratory. And as for the exalted ancestors who spent their days in Īrganaqūn, albeit we have no record of them, yet they too, generation after generation, were seized of greatness. Though the name of sovereignty was not, they possessed the reality and shewed it forth by preserving their honour while shut out from the haunts of men. And now that the stages of solitude and society had been fulfilled and a complete preparation had been made for the coming forth of the unique pearl of his Majesty, the king of kings, God, the Creator of the world, stripped off the disguise of dependency which had seemingly been imported into the line by the counsels of Tūmana Khān, and displayed a hero fit for and capable of a great sovereignty. Such was the appearance of his Majesty, the Lord of Conjunction, Adorner of the Seven Climes, Exalter of Throne and Diadem, Amīr Tīmūr Gūrgān. This great one came forth and planted his foot in existence in the environs of Kesh,205a commonly known as the Shahr-i-sabz (Green City) and one of the towns of Īrān,205b on the night of Tuesday, 25th Sha‘bān, 736205c (9th April, 1336) in the Mouse Year (First of the Turkish cycle) under the Sign of Capricorn, from the fair womb and pure veil of her Majesty, the perfection of modesty and blessedness, glory of choiceness and purity, guardian of realm and religion, Tagīna205d Khātūn. This axis of the sphere of the great vicegerency and ocean-centre of sublime sovereignty is the star of fortune which arose eighth from out the bosom of Qācūlī Bahādur.

According to the view of one historian,205e the true vision of Qācūlī Bahādur was fulfilled thereby but, as has already been indicated, this day was, according to the profound investigations of the wise and far-seeing,206a only the beginning of the ascent of the constellation and the flashing of the first star.

In the fortunate Age in which the Lord of Conjunction was born, Tarmashīrīn206b Khān, son of Davā Khān, son of Barāq Khān, son of Bīsūtawā, son of Bīsūkān, son of Caghatāī Khān was ruling in Transoxiana. In Īrān four months had passed since the death of Sulṭān Abū Sa‘īd207a and there was on that account universal confusion in that country.

Amīr Sāḥib Qarān from his earliest years up to the flower of his youth, was occupied in practising the art of hunting207b and the methods of war and battles. In the Mouse Year 762207c (1361) Amīr Ṭarāghāī departed from this world. He had four sons and two daughters, viz., Ṣāḥib Qarānī, ‘Ālam Shaikh, Siyūrghtamsh, Jūkī, Qutlagh207d Tarkān Āghā and Shīrīn Bēgī Āghā.

When Ṣāḥib Qarānī arrived at the age of 34208a solar years, he with auspicious horoscope and lofty fortune and by the counselling of his God-given wisdom which is a station of Divine inspiration, placed on his head on Wednesday, 12 Ramaẓān, 771 (9, April,208b 1370), corresponding to the year of the Dog (Īt) the diadem of rule and the crown of world-conquest and made lofty the throne of sovereignty and world-government. And for 36208c years which was the time of his supremacy and world-adornment, he brought under his control and into his permanent possession, the countries of Transoxiana, Khwārizm, Turkistān, Khurāsān, the two ‘Irāqs,208d Āẕarbāījān, Persia, Māzindarān, Kirmān, Dīyārbakr, Khūzistān, Egypt, Syria, Asia Minor (Rūm), etc., by means of his world-conquering courage and his capacious intellect, and uplifted the banners of authority and sovereignty in the four quarters of the world and in the seven climes.

Whosoever was befriended208e of Salvation, came forward to meet him with the foot of obedience and for such an one, the rose of auspiciousness bloomed on Fortune's pinnacle. Whoever had misfortune and eventual destruction enfolded in his skirt, and disengaged his head from the collar of submission, arrived with tearing of hair208f at the Judgment-seat of the Dispenser (Qahramān) of Justice and beheld in his own bosom the thorn-brake offspring of his acts.

On Monday of Ẕī-l-qa‘da208g 789, he massacred the inhabitants of Iṣpahān on account of their sedition and rebellion. Thence he turned the reins of resolution towards the capital (Shīrāz) of Persia (Fārs) where the Muẓaffar209a family (Āl-i-muẓaffar) became his servants. When news came of the opposition of Tūqtamish209b Khān the ruler of Dasht Qipcāk209c (the desert of Qipcāk, i.e., the Khirgiz Steppe) and one of those who had been supported209d by his Majesty (Tīmūr), he twice led his army against him and having exalted the banners of victory, he returned. He traversed Dasht Qipcāk which is a thousand leagues (farsangs) long and six hundred wide and cleared it of the rubbish of strife.209e A second time he marched against Īrān in 795 (1393) and brought death to Shāh Manṣūr209f who had cocked209g the bonnet of frowardness, and he extirpated the Muẓaffar race.

And in that country, he performed feats which obliterated those of Rustam209h and Afrāsīāb209i and for the sake of the repose of the ministers209j of his victorious dominion, converted the country of Persia into a thornless garden (gulzār-i-bīkhār). After209k that he conquered Baghdād by the strength of his dominion and fortune. He went several times into Georgia and brought there as his companions, victory and conquest. In 12 Muḥarram, 801 (23rd September, 1398), he made a noble210a bridge over the Indus and by dominion and fortune conquered Hindūstān.210b In 803 (October 1400) he made an expedition against Syria,210c and then raised the morning-breeze of fortune. The lights of celestial victories illumined that world-conqueror. On that occasion Aleppo was taken and then the army went to Damascus and shed the blood of the rulers of Syria who were confined in the wretchedness210d of prison.

Next year he raised his standards for the purpose of subduing Rūm and on Friday, 19210e Ẕī-l-ḥijja, 804 (20th July, 1402), having arrayed his army and adorned the flag of contest with the crescent of victory, he fought near Angora (Ancyra), a glorious battle with Īlderim (Thunderbolt), the Cæsar of Rūm, and by the secret aids which rode211a always beside this royal cavalier of the plain of supremacy, the assembled armies of victory and conquest became his stirrup-holders, and the proclamation211b of success was issued in the name of that world-subduing lord. Īlderim Bāyazīd (Bajazet) was made prisoner and when they produced him at the foot of the lofty throne, he was, out of perfect kindness and chivalry, given a seat above the princes.211c

From thence211d Tīmūr went to Āẕarbāījān and spent there eighteen months in the administration of justice. Kings and kings' sons from various countries came and did homage. The ruler of Egypt coined much red and white money in his name and sent it to the world-protecting Court. Other rulers of the surrounding countries raised the flag of well-wishing on the plain of obedience. And from the pulpits of Mecca, Medina and other holy places, the khuṭba was read in his name. In Ẕī-l-qa‘da, 806 (May, 1404), he marched against Fīrūza-kūh212a and having won victory there that very day, he, without delay, turned towards Khurāsān. In the beginning of Muḥarram 807 (9th-10th July, 1404) he went by Nīshāpūr to Transoxiana and there in his native country inaugurated a great feast212b such as astonished the lords of greatness and splendour.

After gratifying mankind with largesses and favours, he set forth to subdue the territories of China (Khiṭā).

On the night of Wednesday, 17 Sha‘bān, 807 (18th February, 1405) in the village (mauẓa‘) of Utrār212c which is 76 leagues (farsakh) from Samarqand, he, by the irresistible order of God turned his face towards the eternal city and rode the steed of life into the spacious abode of the everlasting world. They brought his sublime corse to Samarqand with the respect due to so great a man. The following lines record the years of the events of this world-adorner.

Quatrain.

Sulṭān Tīmūr is he to whom no king was like;
In 736, he came into existence;
In 771, he ascended the throne,
In 807, he bade the world adieu.

This auspicious Lord of Conjunction had four sons. (1) Ghiyāṯu-d-dīn Jahāngīr Mīrzā. He died in Samarqand in 776213a (1375) in the early part of his father's reign. He left two sons, Muḥammad Sulṭān whom Tīmūr made his heir but who died after the conquest of Asia Minor (Rūm) on 17 Sha‘bān, 805, at Sūrī213b a fort of Rūm; and Pīr Muḥammad who was made his heir after his brother's death and in whose favour his Majesty Ṣāḥib Qarānī made a will at the end of his life. At that time he (Pīr Muḥammad) was ruler of Ghaznīn and the borders of India. But he was martyred on 14 Ramaẓān, 809 (22nd February, 1407), by Pīr ‘Alī Tāz,213c one of his officers and thus the stain of an eternal curse was affixed to the brow of that disloyal one.

The second son of his Majesty Ṣāḥib Qarānī is Mīrzā ‘Umar Shaikh who ruled over Persia. He too died in his father's life-time in Rabī‘u-l-awwal, 796 (January, 1394), below the fortress of Kharmātū.213d

The third son was Jalālu-d-dīn Mīrān Shāh Mīrzā of whom a short account will be given as he belongs to this noble series.

The fourth son was Mīrzā Shāhrukh who governed Khurāsān and who attended his father's stirrup in many battles. Shortly after his father's death, he became confirmed in sovereignty; and Īrān, Tūrān and such other countries as had been under his father's control, were under his successful sway for 43 years. He was born on Thursday 14th Rabī‘u-l-ākhar, 779 (21st August, 1377), and died on New Year's Day (Pers. Era) Sunday morning, 25th Ẕī-l-ḥijja, 850 (13th March, 1447).

JALĀLU-D-DĪN MĪRĀN SHĀH.

Jalālu-d-dīn Mīrān Shāh is the sixth ancestor of the king of kings. His noble birth was in 769 and in his father's lifetime he governed the Arabian214a and Persian ‘Irāqs, Āẕarbāījān, Diyārbakr (Mesopotamia) and Syria.

When his Majesty Ṣāḥib Qarānī marched against India, all these countries214b were placed under his (Jalālu-d-dīn's) management so that not for a moment, was there intermission of justice and sovereignty.

One day while hunting roebuck,214c his horse shied (or perhaps took fright) in galloping and he was thrown from the point of the saddle to the ground and sustained grave injuries to his head and face.215a Able physicians and surgeons applied remedies and restored him to physical health but his mind remained clouded (lit. a mist encircled the centre of his mind's equability) from the accident. After Tīmūr's death, Mīrān Shāh's eldest son Abābakr Mīrzā read the khuṭba and struck coins in his father's name. His Highness the Prince (Mīrān Shāh) lived principally in Tabrīz215b and all affairs of sovereignty were carried on by Mīrzā Abābakr. On 24th Ẕī-l-qa‘da, 810 (21st April, 1408), he was killed215c in a battle with Qarā Yūsuf Turkmān in the environs of Tabrīz. He had eight sons,215d Abābakr, Alankar Mīrzā, ‘Uṯmān Calbī Mīrzā, ‘Umar Khalīl, Sulṭān Muḥammad Mīrzā, Ījil Mīrzā, Siyūrghtamish.

SULṬĀN MUḤAMMAD MĪRZĀ.

Sulṭān Muḥammad Mīrzā is the dominion215e -holding son of Mīrān Shāh. His noble mother was Mihr Nūsh215f and of the tribe of Fūlād Qīyā. The Mīrzā always lived with his brother Mīrzā Khalīl in Samarqand and when the latter proceeded to ‘Irāq, Mīrzā Shāhrukh told Mīrzā Ulugh Bēg (his son) what he knew of Muḥammad Mīrzā's good qualities and praised his noble character; and the Prince (Ulugh Bēg) always shewed him brotherly (i.e., cousinly) kindness. Muḥammad Mīrzā had two sons, Sulṭān Abū Sa‘īd Mīrzā and Manūcihr Mīrzā. When he was ill and about to die, Mīrzā Ulugh Bēg came to inquire after him and the latter strongly recommended his son Abū Sa‘īd to Mīrzā Ulugh Bēg. Accordingly Abū Sa‘īd was brought up with all enjoyment under the care of Ulugh Bēg and daily moved upwards on the steps of dominion and fortune under his guidance. One day,216a one of Ulugh Bēg's intimates observed to him “Your cousin (Abū Sa‘īd) is serving you very zealously,” to which the Mīrzā replied, “He is not serving us but is learning the arts of conquest and victory from our companionship.” And in this the Mīrzā was speaking from his perfect insight and perception.

SULṬĀN ABŪ SA‘ĪD MĪRZĀ.

Sulṭān Abū Sa‘īd Mīrzā's auspicious birth was in 830 (1427) and he became Sulṭān when he was 25. For 18 years he ruled Turkistān, Transoxiana, Badakhshān, Kābul, Ghaznīn, Qandahār and the borders of Hindūstān and in the end of his reign, ‘Irāq too came into his possession. And with this prosperity and extent of territory which might become a thousand-fold source of intoxication, he was discreet and open-minded and sought for enlightenment from dervishes and ascetics. In 872 (1468) Mīrzā Jahān Shāh, son of Qarā Yūsuf, the ruler of Āẕarbāījān, had marched to put down Āẕūn Ḥasan Āq-quyanlu216b but owing to his great carelessness and complete want of management, was killed by him.217a The Sulṭān (Abū Sa‘īd) led an army against him (Āẕūn Ḥasan). Though Āẕūn Ḥasan proferred peace, it was not accepted and being driven to extremity, he cut off the supplies of corn. Consequently a great famine arose in the camp (of Abū Sa‘īd) so that for 14 days the royal horses had no barley and as a result of the famine, the soldiers dispersed. Āẕūn Ḥasan gained the victory and on 22 Rajab, 873 (4th February, 1469), the Sulṭān fell by fate into the hands of Āẕūn Ḥasan's men. Three days afterwards he was made over to Yādgār Muḥammad Mīrzā, son of Sulṭān Muḥammad Mīrzā, son of Bāysanghar Mīrzā, son of Shāhrukh Mīrzā who was an ally of Āẕūn Ḥasan. This worthless inauspicious one slew that powerful king on the pretext217b of the murder of Gauhar Shād Bēgum who was the wife of Shāhrukh Mīrzā. The words Maqtal-i-Sulṭān Abū Sa‘īd (the slaughter-spot of Sulṭān Abū Sa‘īd) give the date (873=1469).

‘UMAR SHAIKH MĪRZĀ.

‘Umar Shaikh Mīrzā was the fourth217c son of Abū Sa‘īd Mīrzā, being younger than Sulṭān Aḥmad Mīrzā, Sulṭān Muḥammad and Sulṭān Maḥmūd Mīrzā and older than Sulṭān Murād Mīrzā, Sulṭān Walad Mīrzā, Ulugh Bēg Mīrzā, Abū Bakr Mīrzā, Sulṭān Khalīl Mīrzā and Shāhrukh Mīrzā. He was born in Samarqand in 860 (1455). Sulṭān Abū Sa‘īd Mīrzā at first gave Kābul to the Prince and sent him off under the guardianship of Bābā Kābulī, but he recalled him from Dara-gaz218a for the purpose of a festival.218b

After it was over, he gave him the country of Andijān and the Takhtī-Ōzjand218c and after providing him with officers, sent him to that country under the guardianship218d of Tīmūr Tāsh218e Bēg. The reason for giving this country to the best of his sons was an exceeding desire to preserve his ancestral territory and as his Majesty Sāḥib Qarānī gave it to his son ‘Umar Shaikh Mīrzā who was of singular ability, so did Abū Sa‘īd on account of the sameness of name, gave it to his son ‘Umar Shaikh. Sāḥīb Qarānī is reported to have repeatedly remarked, “We conquered the world by the might of ‘Umar Shaikh Mīrzā's sword, by his staying in Andijān and being a strong barrier between our territory and the desert of Qipcāk and by his guarding the passes, the people of Qipcāk were not able to rebel or be turbulent and we could in security brace ourselves up for the conquest of the world.”

And this wise ruler (‘Umar Shaikh the Second) also took extreme precautions that no hostile army should be able to cross this territory which was the boundary of Mongolia. And though Yūnus219a (Jonas) Khān tried, he could not get possession of it and not the slightest injury happened to its tranquillity. That fortunate and lofty-starred Prince was one who weighed his words and was eloquent; he had a great liking for poets and could recite poetry. He had a poetical temperament but was not solicitous of writing verses and spent most of his time in reading books, historical and poetical. The Shāhnāma was often recited before him and he was an excellent companion; of open brow and good disposition and fond of quoting good poetry. A lofty genius warmed his soul and the beauty of fortune was manifest on his brow. He had no equal among his contemporaries for administrative ability, care of his subjects and dispensing of justice. His courage and generosity were on an equal footing and his genius was companioned by his energy. He adorned the throne of sovereignty.219b

For example, once a caravan from China (Khiṭā) had come to the hill-country east of Andijān. There was a heavy snow-storm and the caravan was overwhelmed so that only two persons escaped. When this just man heard of the catastrophe, in spite of his necessities at the time, he did not touch any of the goods but appointed trustworthy persons and attached the property until the heirs were collected from their native country to receive the goods, the rights of each being ascertained.219c

This king was always of a dervish mind and inclined to the society of religious persons and asked for wisdom at the doors of the hearts of the God-knowing. Especially the holy Nāṣiru-d-dīn219d Khwāja ‘Abīdu-l-lāh, known by the name of Khwāja Aḥrār.

In succession to his father, he ruled in Andijān, the capital of Farghāna and also Tāshkand, Shāhrukhīya and Sīrām were in his possession. He several times led an army against Samarqand and he several times brought to his help Yūnus Khān who possessed the dominions of Caghatāī Khān and was Khān of the Mughals and was nearly related to him. Whenever he brought him, he assigned some province to him and then as occasion served, Yūnus Khān would go back to Mughalistān. On the last occasion ‘Umar Mīrzā gave him Tāshkand and up to 908 (1502-3) this and Shāhrukhīya were in the possession of the Caghatāī rulers. At this last date the Khānship of the Mughal tribes belonged to Maḥmūd Khān, eldest son of Yūnus Khān. This Maḥmūd Khān and Sulṭān Aḥmad Mīrzā brother of ‘Umar Shaikh ruler of Samarqand, having concluded an alliance, marched their forces against the Mīrzā (‘Umar Shaikh). Sulṭān Aḥmad Mīrzā proceeded from the south of the Khajand river and Sulṭān Maḥmūd Khān from the north of it. Just at this crisis an extraordinary thing happened to the Mīrzā. The brief account of it is as follows.

Akhsīkat which is known as Akhsī, is one of the seven towns of Farghāna. Mīrzā ‘Umar Shaikh had made it his capital. The town was on a precipitous ravine and all the buildings were on its edge.220a As fate would have it, on Monday 4th Ramaẓān, 899 (9th June, 1494), he was sitting near his pigeon house which was one of these buildings, watching the motions of his birds, when an attendant reported that the precipice was breaking away. The Mīrzā at once got up and had put one foot into its slipper but had not had time to put in the other, when the whole precipice gave way and the terrace fell down. The Mīrzā's outward form fell to the bottom but in reality, he ascended to the zenith. He was then 39 years old, having been born in 860, at Samarqand. (This last fact has been mentioned already.)

Be it known that Farghāna belongs to the fifth climate and is on the borders of the civilized world. East of it is Kāshghar and west, Samarqand; south, the mountains on the borders of Badakhshān. To the north, although formerly there were cities such as Almālīgh, Almātū, Yāngī, known as Utrār, but at present no traces or ruins even of them remain. In the west where are Samarqand and Khajand, there are no mountains. Except in this direction, there is no entry for foreigners. The river Sīhūn, known as the Āb-i-khajand, coming from the north-east flows west. It then runs on the north of Khajand and south of Finākat which is known as Shāhrukhīya. Then inclining to the north, it flows towards Turkistān and meeting no other river in its course, it disappears beyond Turkistān in the sands. In this country there are seven towns, (qaṣba) five to the south of the Sīhūn and two to the north. The southern towns are Andijān, Ūsh, Marghīnān,221a Asfara (var. Isfaraj) and Khajand. The northern are Akhsī and Kāsān.

This unique pearl of sovereignty had three sons and five daughters, the eldest son being his Majesty Firdūs-makānī Ẓahīru-d-dīn Muḥammad Bābar Pādshāh. Jahāngīr Mīrzā was the next and younger by two years and was the son of Fāṭima Sulṭān who belonged to the Tōmān officers (i.e., chiefs of 10,000 men) of the Mughals. The third was Nāṣir Mīrzā younger than Jahāngīr by two years. His chaste mother was from Andijān and was a concubine named Ummed. The eldest daughter was Khānzāda Bēgum, full sister of his Majesty Gītī-sitānī Firdūs-makānī and older than he by five years. When Shāh Isma‘īl Ṣafawī defeated the Uzbēgs (Shaibānī) at Merv, that chaste one was in Merv and Shāh Isma‘īl sent her with all respect to his Majesty Gītī-sitānī Firdūs-makānī at Qunduz.221b

After a lapse of ten years, an interview took place between them, and his Majesty Gītī-sitānī Firdūs-makānī says, “When they came I and Maḥmūdī Kōkultāsh (foster-brother) went to meet them but the Bēgum and her attendants did not recognize us, although we made ourselves known. After a while they recognized us.”221c

The next daughter was Mihr Bānū Bēgum, full sister of Nāṣir Mīrzā and eight years younger than Firdūs-makānī. The next was Yādgār Sulṭān Bēgum. Her mother was a concubine named Āghā Sulṭān. The next was Raẓīya Sulṭān Bēgum. Her mother was Makhdūma Sulṭān Bēgum known as the Qarā-gūz (Black-eyed) Bēgum. Then two daughters were born after ‘Umar Shaikh's death. There was also a daughter born of Anūsh Āghā, daughter of Khwāja Ḥusain who died young.222a

CHAPTER XVII.
HIS MAJESTY GĪTĪ-SITĀNĪ FIRDŪS-MAKĀNĪ ẒAHĪRU-D-DĪN MUḤAMMAD
BĀBAR PĀDSHĀH GHĀZĪ.223a

King of the four quarters,223b and of the seven heavens; celestial sovereign; diadem of the sublime throne; great of genius and great-ness-conferring; fortune-increaser; of excellent horoscope; heaven in comprehensiveness; earth in stability; lion-hearted; clime-capturer; lofty in splendour; of active brain; searcher after knowledge; rank-breaking lion rampant; exalter of dominion; ocean-hearted; of illustrious origin; a saintly sovereign; enthroned in the kingdom of reality and spirituality, Ẓahīru-d-dīn Muḥammad Bābar Pādshāh Ghāzī. His pearl-like nature was a station for the marks of greatness and sublimity; freedom and detachment together with lofty restraint and majestic power flashed forth in his nature; in asceticism and absorption (faqr ū fanā)223c a Junīd223d and Bāyazīd; while the magnificence and genius of an Alexander and of a Farīdūn shone from his brow. The holy birth of this majestic one was on 6 Muḥarram 888 (14th February 1483) from the holy womb and pure veil of the gloriously chaste and nobly-born, Qutlaq Nigār Khānum. That jewel of fortune's ocean and sparkling star (durrī) of the heaven of glory arose from a happy quarter. She, the coiffure of purity and scarf of chastity, was the second daughter of Yūnus (Jonah) Khān and elder sister of Sulṭān Maḥmūd Khān. Her lineage is as follows:—daughter of Yūnus Khān b. Vais Khān, b. Shīr 'Alī Ōghlān, b. Muḥammad Khān, b. Khiẓr Khwāja Khān, b. Tughlaq Tīmūr Khān, b. Isān Bughā Khān, b. Davā Khān, b. Barāq Khān, b. Īsūn Tava,224a b. Mutakan, b. Caghatāī Khān, b. Cingīz Khān. Maulānā Ḥisāmī224b Qarākūlī recorded the date of the noble birth as follows.

Verse.

Since on 6 Muḥarram was born that bounteous king,
His birth's chronogram is also 6 Muḥarram (shash-i-Muḥarram.)224c

Though the chronogram be of marvellous coincidence and unfathomable in its significance, there is something stranger yet, viz., the chronogram is in six letters which are reckoned by the masters of computation as a lucky number225a and also the phrase (lafẓ) shash ḥarf and the pips (naqsh) ‘adad-i-khair both indicate the date. Another wonderful thing is that the units, tens and hundreds of the date are all the same (8-8-8), thus pointing to equability of dispositions. His life corresponded to these mysteries of birth. That exemplar of high saints, Khwāja Aḥrār himself with his own bounty-shedding tongue gave him—the auspicious one—the names of Ẓahīru-d-dīn Muḥammad, but as this weighty appellation with its majesty and sublimity, was not readily pronounceable or current on the tongues of the Turks, the name of Bābar was also given to him.

His Majesty was the eldest and straightest of the sons of ‘Umar Shaikh Mīrzā. In his twelfth year, on Tuesday, 5 Ramaẓān, 899 (10th June, 1494), he sate upon the throne in Andijān. Few kings have encountered such difficulties as he, and the courage, self-reliance and endurance which he displayed in the battle-field and in danger were superhuman. When the inevitable accident of ‘Umar Shaikh Mīrzā occurred in Akhsī, his Majesty Gītī-sitānī Firdūs-makānī was in the Cārbāgh (Palace) of Andijān. Next day, viz., Tuesday, 5 Ramaẓān, the news was brought to Andijān. In a moment he mounted his horse and proceeded to the fort of Andijān. As he was alighting at the gate,225b Shīram225c Ṭaghāī seized his bridle and carried him towards the namāzgāh (place of prayer) in order to take him to Ōzkand and the foot of the hills. His idea was that, as Sulṭān Aḥmad Mīrzā was coming with great power, the treacherous officers might make over the country to him; if out of disloyalty, they did so, his Majesty's sacred person might be saved from this danger and be conveyed to his maternal uncles Ilanja225d Khān or Sulṭān Maḥmūd Khān. The officers, on becoming aware of this intention, sent Khwāja Muḥammad Darzī to dispel anxieties that had arisen in his mind. The cortêge had reached the namāzgāh when Khwāja Muḥammad came up with it. He calmed his Majesty and induced him to return. When he (Bābar) alighted at the citadel of Andijān, all the officers came to wait upon him and received marks of favour from him. It has already been mentioned that Sulṭān Aḥmad Mīrzā and Sulṭān Maḥmūd Khān had united and come against ‘Umar Shaikh Mīrzā. Now that by the decree of fate, an inevitable accident had occurred, all the officers, small and great, united to defend the fort. Sulṭān Aḥmad Mīrzā had taken possession of Ūrātippa, Khajand and Marghīnān which are districts of Farghāna, and had encamped within four kos of Andijān. Though they sent ambassadors and knocked at the door of peace, he did not listen but continued to advance. But as secret aids were always in attendance on this family, on account of the strength of the fort and the unanimity of the officers and of a pestilence which broke out in the camp and of the deaths of the horses,226a Sulṭān Aḥmad got into difficulties and came to despair of his former designs. He therefore came to terms and returned without effecting anything. Coming from the north side of the river of Khajand, Sulṭān Maḥmūd Khān invested Akhsī. Jahāngīr Mīrzā, brother of his Majesty, and a large number of loyal officers were there. The Khān made several assaults, the officers made a spirited resistance, and so the Khān also did not effect his purpose, and being attacked by a sickness, had to give up his vain enterprise and turn his reins towards his own country. For eleven226b years, his Majesty waged great wars in Transoxiana against the Caghatāī princes and the Uzbēgs. Thrice he conquered Samarqand, viz., once in 903 (end of November 1497) when coming226c from Andijān, he took it from Bāyasanghar Mīrzā, son of Sulṭān Maḥmud Mīrzā; secondly, from Shaibak (Shaibānī) Khān in 906 (autumn of 1500); and thirdly, after Shaibak Khān had been killed in 917 (October 1511). As God's plan was the revealing of that unique pearl, his Majesty the king of kings, and designed that the country of Hindustān should be acquired and that his Majesty should proceed to a strange land and there arrive at greatness and felicity,—he caused the gates of trouble to be opened in his own native land which is the meeting place of faithful servants, so that in no way could that be fit for him. He was compelled to proceed with a small force towards Badakhshān and Kābul. When he reached Badakhshān, all the people of Khusrū Shāh who was ruler there, accepted his service. And the ruler himself was compelled to do so, though this wretch was ring-leader of the unjust ones and had martyred227a Bāyasanghar and blinded Sulṭān Mas‘ūd Mīrzā, which two princes were his Majesty's cousins. He (Khusrū) also showed signs of pitilessness and inhumanity when at a time of calamity,227b his Majesty's army was passing into Badakhshān.

Now when he beheld the face of his deeds in the mirror of recompense, and fortune had turned away her countenance from his worthless self, his Majesty from perfect humanity and excessive generosity, did not exercise retaliation,227c but gave orders that he should carry away as much of his property as he desired and go off to Khurāsān. So he took five or six strings227d of mules and camels, laden with jewelry and gold ornaments and went off to Khurāsān. And his Majesty Gītī-sitānī Firdūs-makānī having put Badakhshān into order, went to Kābul.

At that time Muḥammad Muqīm, son of Ẕū-n-nūn Arghūn had taken Kābul from ‘Abdu-razzāq Mīrzā, son of Ulugh Beg Mīrzā, son of Sulṭān Abū Sa‘īd Mīrzā, who was his Majesty's cousin. On hearing the noise of the coming of the victorious standards, he fortified himself, but after some days he sought for peace and obtained permission to go to his brother Shāh Bēg in Qandahār with his property. Kābul fell into the hands of his Majesty's servants in the end of Rabī‘u-l-awwal 910 (beginning of October 1504). After that his Majesty proceeded in 911 to capture Qandahār, and Qilāt (Khelat) which is a dependency of Qandahār was conquered. After that, for reasons of state policy, he abandoned the taking of Qandahār and went south and having attacked the Afghān tribes of Sawāsang and Alātāgh,228a returned to Kābul.

In the beginning228b of this year there was a great earthquake in Kābul and its environs. The ramparts of the fort and many buildings in the citadel and city fell down. All the houses in the village of Pemghan228c fell down and there were three-and-thirty shocks in one day and for a month the earth shook two or three times day and night. Many persons lost their lives, and between Pemghān and Baktub a piece of ground a stone's throw228d in breadth separated itself and descended the length of a bowshot and springs burst out from the breach. From Istirghac229a to Maidān,229b a distance of six farsangs, (cir. 24 m.) the ground was so contorted that part of it rose as high as an elephant. In the beginning of the earthquake, clouds of dust rose from the tops of the mountains. In the same year there was a great carthquake in India.229c

One of the occurrences of this time was that Shaibak (Shaibānī) Khān collected an army and proceeded towards Khurāsān. Sulṭān Ḥusain Mīrzā assembled all his sons and marched to oppose him. He also sent Sayyid Afẓal, the son of Mīr Sulṭān ‘Alī Khwāb-bīn (vision-seer) to urge on the advance of his Majesty Firdūs-makānī. Accordingly he proceeded towards Khurāsān in Muḥarram 912 (end of May 1506). On the way he received at Kāhmard229d the news of Sulṭān Ḥusain's death. His Majesty Firdūs-makānī, thinking it still more necessary229e to advance, went on towards Khurāsān contrary to the calculations of politicians. Before his army reached Khurāsān, short-sighted229f and inexperienced men had placed jointly on the throne the Mīrzā's sons, Badī‘u-z-zamān and Muẓaffar Ḥusain Mīrzās.

On Monday, 8th Jumāda-l-ākhar his Majesty met the Mīrzās at the Murghāb and at their request came on to Herāt. But as he did not perceive in them signs of guidance and dominion, he set out on his return to Kābul on 8th Sha‘bān (24th Dec., 1506). While in the Hazāra Hills, news arrived that Muḥammad Ḥusain Mīrzā Daghlāt230a and Sulṭān Sanjar Barlās had drawn over to their side all the Mughals left in Kābul and had raised up Khān Mīrzā230b and were besieging Kābul. They also spread among the commonalty a report that the sons of Sulṭān Ḥusain Mīrzā were meditating230c treachery against his Majesty Firdūs-makānī. Mullā Bābāī230d Bashāgharī, Amīr230e Muḥibb ‘Alī Khalīfa, Amīr Muḥammad Qāsim Kōhbar230f Aḥmad Yūsuf and Aḥmad Qāsim to whom the protection of Kābul had been entrusted, were looking after the defence of the fort. As230g soon as he heard this news, he made over the baggage to Jahāngīr Mīrzā who was somewhat ill,230h and accompanied by a few men crossed the passes of the Hindū Kōh which were full of snow, under great difficulty, and descended one morning early upon Kābul. The rebels all crept into concealment at the news of his Majesty's approach. He first went to his step-grandmother (mother's step-mother) Shāh230i Bēgum, who had been the cause of the putting forward of Khān Mīrzā, and addressed her after kneeling down before her. Knowing well what her state of mind was, he spoke to her with modesty and magnanimity, and with soothing words observed to her, “If a mother have special affection for one child, why should another child be aggrieved?, there is no limit to her authority.” Then he said, “I have been up long and have come a long way,” and laying his head on her lap, he went to sleep. Thus in order to reassure the Bēgum who was very uneasy, he behaved in a very kind manner231a to her. Ere he had fully fallen asleep, his aunt, Mihr231b Nigār Khānum, came in and his Majesty hastily arose and saluted her (īshān-rā daryāftand). They arrested Muḥammad Ḥusain Mīrzā and brought him in. His Majesty being a mine of kindness, gave him his life and gave him permission to go to Khurāsān. After that the Khānum (Mihr Nigār) brought in Khān Mīrzā and said, “O life of your mother! I have brought your guilty cousin (birādar), what is your pleasure?” His Majesty took him in his arms and spoke kindly to him. After that he left it to his option to go or stay. The Khān Mīrzā was so ashamed that he could not make up his mind to remain. He took leave and went to Qandahār.233a This happened in the same year.

Next year he (Bābar) proceeded to Qandahār233b and fought a great battle with Shāh Bēg, son of Ẕū-n-nūn Arghūn and Muḥammad Muqīm his younger brother. The Khān did good service here. His Majesty presented Qandahār to Nāṣir Mīrzā, the younger brother233c of Jahāngīr Mīrzā and returned to Kābul. He permitted Shāh Bēgum and Khān Mīrzā to proceed to Badakhshān. After many adventures Khān Mīrzā put Zabīr Raghī233d to death and became confirmed in the dominion of Badakhshān. He always retained his loyalty (to Bābar).

In 916 (early in December 1510) an express233e brought the news that Shaibānī Khān was killed and that it was proper for Bābar to move in that direction. Accordingly in Shawwāl, he proceeded233f there and fought great battles with the Uzbēgs. He was ever victorious and took Samarqand for the third time, in 917 (Oct. 1511). He ruled there for eight months but in Ṣafar 918 (April 1512) he had a great battle at Kūl Malik with ‘Ubaidu-l-lāh Khān. Though he had won the victory, suddenly by the jugglery of the heavens, he sustained a defeat and proceeded to Ḥiṣār.

On another occasion,234a he along with Najm Bēg, had a great battle below Fort Ghajdiwān with the Uzbēgs. Najm Bēg was killed and his Majesty went towards Kābul.234b Moreover by secret inspiration, he was led to lay aside marching to Transoxiana and to press forward to the conquest of Hindustān. Four times did he turn towards this enterprise and as often did he, from stress of circumstances, retrace his steps. The first234c time was in Sha‘bān 910 (Jan. 1505) when he went by Bādām Cashma234d (Almond Spring) and Jagdalīk, passed through the Khaibar and halted at Jam (Jamrūd). In the Wāqi‘āt-i-bābari, a Turkī book written by his Majesty himself, it is stated that when in six marches, he went from Kābul to Ādīnapūr,234e he had never before seen the Garmsīr234f (warm regions) nor the country of Hindustān. “Immediately on reaching them, I beheld a new world. The grass was different, the trees different, the wild animals of a different sort, the birds of a different plumage, the manners and customs of the people (◌234g ail ū ālūs) of a different kind. I was struck with astonishment, and indeed there was room for wonder.”234h Nāṣir Mīrzā came to this stage from Ghaznīn to pay his respects. He (Bābar) halted at Jamrūd and consulted about crossing the river Indus known as the Nīlāb. Owing to the avarice of Bāqī235a Caghanā'īānī the crossing of the Indus was postponed and he proceeded against Kohāt. After taking Kohāt, they attacked Bangash and Naghz.235b Then they went to the country of the ‘Isā Khail and halted in the environs of Tarbīla235c which is a village on the Indus and in the country of Multān. Then he made several marches down the river. From thence he came to the borders of Dūki235d and after some days to Ghaznīn. In the month Ẕīḥajja (May 1505) he returned to Kābul.

The second235e time, the illustrious army proceeded in the month of Jumāda-l-awwal 913 (Sep. 1507) by way of Little Kābul (Khurd Kābul) to the conquest of Hindustān. They went first from Mandraur235f by ‘Atar and Shiweh and then returned owing to differences of opinion among the officers. They crossed by Kūner235g and Nūrgil235h and from Kūner he (Bābar) came on a raft (jāla)235i to the camp and then by way of Bādīj235j to Kābul. By order of his Majesty, the date of his crossing was engraved on a stone above Bādīj. This wondrous236a writing still exists. Till this time, the noble descendants of the Lord of Conjunction were called Mīrzās. His Majesty ordered that in this inscription,236b he should be styled Pādshāh.

On Tuesday, 4 Ẕī-l-qa‘da of this auspicious year (6th March, 1508), occurred, in the citadel of Kābul, the fortunate birth of his Majesty Jahānbānī Jannat-āshīyānī (Humāyūn). Of this an account will be given hereafter.

The third time, on Monday,236c 1 Muḥarram 925 (3rd Jan., 1519), while the army was marching against Bajaur, there was a great earthquake which lasted for half a sidereal hour. Sulṭān ‘Alā'u-d-dīn Siwādī (of Swat) arrived as an envoy on the part of Sulṭān Vais Siwādī. In a short time, the fort of Bajaur was captured and was presented to Khwāja236d Kilān Bēg, son of Maulānā Muḥammad Ṣadr, who had been one of the great officers under Mīrzā ‘Umar Shaikh. This Khwāja was related to his Majesty in a singular manner for his six brothers had given their lives in his service. He himself was a special protegé of his Majesty on account of his wisdom and sagacity. When his Majesty was contemplating the Siwād (Swat) expedition and the conquest of the Yūsufzāīs, Ṭāūs Khān, the younger brother of Shāh Manṣūr, who was chieftain of the Yūsufzāī tribe, brought the latter's daughter237a and uttered words of humility and submission. There was also a difficulty about supplies of corn in that country of wild beasts. His (Bābar's) fixed determination too was to undertake the expedition to Hindustān. He turned his rein from Siwād. Although the preparations for the march to India had not been made and the officers were not in favour of it, he lighted the torch of courage and set forth for the tenebrous regions237b of Hindustān. On the morning of Thursday, 16 Muḥarram, he crossed the river (Indus) with horses, camels and baggage,237c while the camp (urdū) bāzār was floated across on rafts. They encamped at Kacākōt.

Seven kos from Bhīra,237d towards the north, there is a mountain, called in the Ẓafarnāma and other books, the hill of Jūd and there they encamped. His Majesty writes in his Memoirs (Erskine, 254), “At first I was ignorant of the origin of its name, but afterwards discovered that in this hill there were two races of men descended of the same father. One tribe is called Jūd, the other Jenjūḥeh.” He sent ‘Abdu-r-raḥīm Shaghāwāl to Bhīra in order to reassure the people and prevent anyone from committing violence. At the end of the day, he halted east of Bhīra, on the bank of the river Bihat (Jhelam, the ancient Hydaspes). He levied 400,000 shāhrukhīs238a from Bhīra as the price of protection, and presented the country to Hindū Bēg, assigning the revenues of it to him as a maintenance. Khushāb he made over to Shāh Ḥasan238b and arranged that he should assist Hindū Bēg. He sent Mullā Murshid238c on an embassy to Sulṭān Ibrāhīm, son of Sulṭān Sikandar Lōdī, who had succeeded his father five or six months previously238d in the kingdom of Hindustān, in order to convey to him salutary counsels. Daulat Khān, the governor of Lāhōr, detained the ambassador and with utter folly, sent him back without having fulfilled his mission. On Friday, 2 Rabī‘u-l-awwal (4th March, 1519), the news came of the birth of an auspicious son. As the expedition against Hindustān was then in progress, he was by secret inspiration and augury, named Hindāl.238e On Monday,238f 5 Rabī‘u-l-awwal the administration of Bhīra was given to Hindū Bēg and he (Bābar) for state reasons, proceeded to return to Kābul. On Thursday, the last day of Rabī‘u-l-awwal (31st March) he arrived at Kābul. On 25 Rabī‘u-l-ākhar (April 25th) Hindū Bēg who, out of carelessness,239a had left Bhīra, came to Kābul.

The date of the setting out of the fourth expedition has not come to light but it appears that he (Bābar) returned after the taking of Lāhōr and from the chronogram239b of the taking of Dīpālpūr, which will be stated hereafter, it appears that the expedition was in 930 (1524). As every event has its special time, this splendid project (of conquering India) was postponed. The ostensible cause of this was the sluggishness of the officers and the non-co-operation of his brothers. At last, on the fifth time, by the guidance of God and the leadership of Fortune, on Friday, 1st Ṣafar 932 (17th Nov., 1525), when the Sun was in Sagittarius, the standards of light were unfurled, such as might disperse the darkness of an universe, and placing the foot of resolve in the stirrup of reliance on God and of abstention from sin,239c he proceeded towards the conquest of India. Mīrzā Kāmrān was left in Qandahār and the care of Kābul was also entrusted to him. When this expedition was made, victory followed on victory and fortune upon fortune. Lāhōr and some other large cities of India were taken and on 17 Ṣafar (3rd Dec.) his Majesty Jahānbānī, Jannat-āshīyānī, Naṣīru-d-dīn Muḥammad Humāyūn arrived from Badakhshān with his army, at the camp which was in the Bāgh-i-wafā239d (Garden of Fidelity). Khwāja Kilān Bēg also came at this time from Ghaznīn.

On 1st Rabī‘u-l-awwal (16th Dec.) he crossed the Indus near Kacakōt240a and held a muster240b of the army. Twelve thousand240c cavalry, Turks, Tājīks, merchants,240d etc., were reckoned up. Then they crossed the Bihat (Jhelam) above240e Jīlum (Jhelam). Near Buhlūlpūr they crossed the Cīnāb and encamped.

On Friday, 14 Rabī‘u-l-awwal (29th Dec.) they encamped at Sīālkōt and his Majesty formed the plan of transferring its population to Buhlūlpūr. At this time news came that the enemy was assembling and when his Majesty reached Kalānūr, Muḥammad Sulṭān Mīrzā, ‘Ādil Sulṭān and the other officers who had been appointed to defend Lāhōr, arrived and paid their respects.

On Saturday, 22 (Text 24) Rabī‘u-l-awwal, the fort of Milwat240f was taken. Booty was obtained and the books of Ghāzī Khān which were in the fort were got possession of. Some of them were given to his Majesty Jahānbānī and some were sent as a present to Kāmrān in Qandahār. As it was reported that Ḥamīd Khān, governor240g of Ḥiṣār-fīrūza240h had advanced two or three stages, on Sunday, 13 Jumāda-l-awwal the army marched from Ambāla and halted on the bank of a tank (kūl) and Humāyūn was sent against him (Ḥamīd Khān). Amīr Khwāja Kilān Bēg, Amīr Sulṭān Muḥammad Dūldāī, Amīr Walī Khāzin, Amīr ‘Abdu-l-‘azīz, Amīr Muḥibb ‘Alī, Khwāja Khalīfa and some of the officers who had stayed in Hindustān such as Hindū Bēg, ‘Abdu-l-‘azīz, Muḥammad ‘Alī Jang-jang were appointed to accompany him. Baban, who was one of the nobles of Hindūstān, came in on this day and did homage. His Majesty Jahānbānī gained an easy victory.

On Monday, the 21st of the same month, he returned to the camp. His Majesty bestowed on him, Ḥiṣār-fīrūza with its dependencies and subordinate districts (lawāḥiq) which were worth a kror aud also a kror in money as a guerdon for this victory which was the first of countless ones. The army continued its march. News repeatedly came that Sulṭān Ibrāhīm was advancing with 100,000 cavalry and 1,000 elephants. The army encamped near Sirsāwah (Sirsa). Here Ḥaidar Qulī (Text, ‘Alī) a servant of Khwāja Kilān Bēg who had been sent to procure information brought the news that Dāūd Khān and Ḥaitim Khān (Text, Ḥātim) had advanced in front of Sulṭān Ibrāhīm's camp with five or six thousand horse. Accordingly on Sunday, 18 Jumāda-l-ākhar (1st April) Cīn Tīmūr Sulṭān, Muḥammad Sulṭān Mīrzā, Mahdī Khwāja, ‘Ādil Sulṭān, with the whole left wing commanded by Sulṭān Junaid, Shāh Mīr Ḥusain and Qutlaq Qadam, as well as part of the centre under Yūnus ‘Alī, ‘Abdu-l-lāh Aḥmadī, Kita Bēg and others, were appointed to operate against this body. And these heroes proceeding swiftly to the field of battle, were victorious over the enemy and slew a great number of them with the lightning of the sword and the rain of the arrow. Ḥaitim Khān with 70 others were made prisoners and sent alive to the exalted camp where they suffered capital punishment. Orders241a were issued that wheeled carriages should be collected and Ustād ‘Alī Qulī was directed to yoke them together in the Ottoman241b (Rūm) manner with chains241c and cow-hides of which they made ropes. Between every two carriages there were placed six or seven gabions242a so that the matchlock men might fire their pieces from behind them in security. In a few days these arrangements were completed.

At length on Thursday, the last day of Jumāda-l-ākhar (12th April) the phœnix (humā) of victory made a shade with his wings at the city of Pānīpat. The ranks of the army were arranged in an excellent manner. The right wing rested on the city and environs, and the carriages and gabions were placed in front of the centre. The left wing was defended by trees and ditches. Sulṭān Ibrāhīm, with a large army was drawn up six kōs from the city and for a week the young men and the veterans daily engaged numerous bodies of the enemy on the borders of the hostile camp and were always victorious. At length on Friday, 8 Rajab (20th April) Sulṭān Ibrāhīm marched against the camp with a mighty army and an array of elephants. His Majesty Gītī-sitānī also drew up his forces and adorned the battle-field in the following manner.242b

BATTLE BETWEEN HIS MAJESTY GĪTĪ-SITĀNĪ FIRDŪS-MAKĀNĪ
AND SULṬĀN IBRĀHĪM AND ACCOUNT OF THE ARRAY.

As the Protector and Doer desired to repair old defeats and to convert past afflictions into felicities, He arranged the preliminaries for this, and set things in order. Among such arrangements were the advancing of Sulṭān Ibrā hīm for the purpose of giving battle and the drawing up of the army of his Majesty Gītī-sitānī. As the Divine aid was accompanying the latter, and ever-increasing fortune was in his van, he, in spite of a plenitude of difficu lties and a paucity of favouring circumstances, had recourse with a tranquil mind and firm soul to the inalterable Arbiter and addressed himself to the marshalling of his troops.

The centre was adorned by the presence of his Majesty in person. In the right centre which the Turks call ūnk-ghūl,242c Tīmūr Sulṭān, Sulaimān Mīrzā, Amīr Muḥammadī Kōkultāsh, Amīr Shāh Manṣūr Barlās, Amīr Yūnus ‘Alī, Amīr Darwēsh Muḥammad Sārbān, Amīr ‘Abdu-l-lāh Kitābdār were stationed. On the left centre which the Turks call sūl-ghūl, Amīr Khalīfa, Khwāja Mīr Mīrān Ṣadr, Amīr Aḥmadī Parwāncī, Amīr Tardī Bēg, brother of Kūc Bēg, Muḥibb ‘Alī Khalīfa, Mīrzā Bēg Tarkhān were stationed. The right wing was in charge of his Majesty Jahānbānī Jannat-āshīyānī; Amīr Khwāja Kalān Bēg, Sulṭān Muḥammad Dūldāī, Amīr Hindū Bēg, Walī Khāzin, Pīr Qulī Sīstānī were in attendance on him. On the left wing were stationed Muḥammad Sulṭān Mīrzā, Sayyid Mahdī Khwāja, ‘Ādil Sulṭān, Sulṭān Junaid Barlās, Khwāja Shāh, Mīr Ḥusain, Amīr Qutlaq Qadam, Amīr Jān (text, Khān) Bēg, Amīr Muḥammad Bakhshī and other heroes. In the vanguard were Khusrū Kōkultāsh and Muḥammad ‘Alī Jang-jang;243a Amīr ‘Abdu-l-‘azīz had charge of the reserve. At the flank of the right wing, Walī Kazil,243b Malik Qāsim, Bābā Qashqa with their Mughals, were appointed as a flanking-party (tūlghāma). At the extremity of the left wing, were stationed Qarāqūzī, Abū-l-Muḥam-mad Nīzabāz (lance-player), Shaikh ‘Alī, Shaikh Jamāl, Tengrī Qulī Mughal, as a flanking-party. Accordingly the brave swordsmen stood with firm foot on the battle-field and with life-taking arrows (sahām) and blood-drinking scimitars (ṣamṣām) displayed bravery and daring.

Verse.

The brave stood with firm foot,
Trees learned from them how to stand.

At length after great contest, the heavenly aids accompanied the centre and wings of the army and by the Divine aid, there ensued victory and the defeat of the enemy. A great victory for the servants always taking refuge in God became manifest. Sulṭān Ibrāhīm was slain unrecognised and in a corner, and numerous Afghāns were the harvest of the royal sword, and the caravans of the city of destruction were conducted to the rest-house of annihilation by the escort of victorious soldiers and the flambeaux of world-opening swords. Near the body of Sulṭān Ibrāhīm, there lay on one spot five or six thousand dead. The sun had mounted spear-high when the onset of battle began and at noon there blew the breeze of victory, and the north wind of vernal conquest.

How can this great victory, which was the masterpiece of fortune, be explained? And how can language describe what is beyond the bounds of comprehension? When Sulṭān Maḥmūd244a Ghaznavī came to Hindūstān, he was in possession of Khurāsān; the kings of Samarqand and Dāru-l-Marz244b and of Khwārizm were subject to him and he had an army of over 100,000 men. Nor was Hindūstān subject to one monarch. Rāīs and Rājas were stationed here and there and were not on terms with one another. Sulṭān Shihābu-d-dīn244c Ghōrī came to the conquest of India with 120,000 cuirassiers, mounted on mail-clad244d horses. Then too, there was no ruler in all that vast territory. And though his brother Ghiyāṯu-d-dīn held Khurāsān, yet he was not outside his influence. His Majesty,244e the Lord of Conjunction (Tīmūr), at the time of his conquest of Hindūstān, gave orders for a muster of his troops in the plain of Samānah,244f and Maulānā Sharafu-d-dīn ‘Alī Yazdī states (Ẓafarnāma II, 83) that the line of the army (ṭūl-i-yesāl) occupied a space of six farsakhs in length, and persons experienced in military matters have calculated that a farsakh represents 12,000 horse, consequently, exclusive of the servants of servants (naukar-i-naukar)244g there were 72,000 horsemen. The servants of servants occupied two kos.244h His opponent, Mallū Khān, had 10,000245a horse and 120 elephants. Yet with all this, many of those in the Lord of Conjunction's camp were frightened and his Majesty observed the alarm of his soldiers and heard improper remarks from them. And in order to reassure them, he commanded that a palisade should be made of branches of trees, in front of his troops, and that in front of this, a ditch should be dug and that behind that bullocks and buffaloes should be placed opposite each other, and fastened by their necks and feet with leathern thongs. Also many triangular (caltrops) iron prongs245b were made and it was arranged that foot soldiers should take these and throw them in the way at the time of the onset and when the elephants came on. His Majesty Gītī-sitānī Firdūs-makānī who was the fourth world-soother (gītī-nawāz) of India, in that great victory, which was one of the glorious gifts of God, had not with him more that 12,000 men, both soldiers and others. More astonishing still, his territories consisted of Badakhshān, Qandahār and Kābul. Nor did he get assistance from these countries for his armies; on the contrary, the expenditure, in order to protect some of the borders from the enemy and for other state purposes, was such as to exceed the receipts. And the contest was with Sulṭān Ibrāhīm who had nearly 100,000 cavalry and 1,000 war-elephants and who ruled from Bhīra to Bihār without an opponent. It was solely by the Divine aid and the assistance of heaven that that glorious work was accomplished. Men of judgment and experience feel powerless to panegyrize properly this masterpiece of the Ages. Hail, Holy One, carrier of the world illuminating light of his Majesty, the king of kings, what marvel if such feats were wrought by Thee! In short, his Majesty Gītī-sitānī Firdūs-makānī, on the rising of the lights of victory glorified his forehead-mirror with the dust of thanksgiving prostration. He proclaimed presents to all mankind and sent his servants to all countries and regions.

But a deed fit to surpass the lofty designs of those world-opening princes who conquered Hindūstān, was the victory of his Majesty Jahānbānī Jannat-āshīyānī which by the blessing of the existence of his Majesty, the king of kings (Akbar) took place in the plain of Siḥrind.246a Accordingly an account will hereafter be given of how with 3,000 men, he delivered India from Sikandar Sūr who had more than 80,000 men. Still stranger is the masterpiece of fortune of the Shadow of God (Akbar) who by the Divine aid so rescued India with a few men from the hands of many rebellious246b chiefs that the tongue of the Age becomes dumb before it. An abridged account will be given in its proper place.

Verse.

Should Fortune grant me hope,
Heaven, leisure and opportunity,
By the kindling society of the truthful,
I shall embroider tale upon tale.246c
On this tablet of immortals,
I'll draw a picture for posterity's behoof.

On the very day of the victory, his Majesty Jahānbānī Jannat-āshīyānī, Amīr Khwāja Kalān Bēg, Amīr Muḥammad Kōkultāsh, Amīr Yūnus ‘Alī, Amīr Shāh Manṣūr Barlās, Amīr ‘Abdul-l-lāh Kitābdār, Amīr ‘Alī Khāzin were by orders of the king sent with a force to Agra, the capital, the seat of Sulṭān Ibrāhīm's government, to take possession of the treasure. They gave confidence to the inhabitants— who are trusts from God—by diffusing the lights of justice. Sayyid Maḥdī Khwāja, Muḥammad Sulṭān Mīrzā, ‘Ādil Sulṭān, Amīr Junaid Barlās, Amīr Qatlaq Qadam were sent to Delhi, to preserve the treasures and secret stores of that place and to acquaint the subjects and inhabitants with the royal graciousness. On the same day proclamations of victory were written and sent by couriers to Kābul, Badakhshān and Qandahār. And he himself, on Wednesday, 12 Rajab, (25th April, 1526), alighted at Delhi. On Friday, 21247a (4th May) he unfolded the umbrella of fortune in Agra and dispelled the darkness of the land.

Everyone,247b small and great, in Hindūstān experienced the royal kindness and balminess. Out of his comprehensive kindness, the mother, children and dependants of Sulṭān Ibrāhīm were made partakers of his bounty and special stipends were assigned to them. An allowance of a property worth seven lakhs of tankas was made to Ibrāhīm's mother. Similarly pensions were bestowed on his other relatives. The distracted world was soothed. His Majesty Jahānbānī Jannat-āshīyānī who had previously arrived at Agra, presented a diamond eight miṯqāls247c in weight and which was valued by jewellers at one-half of the daily expenditure of the inhabited world. They said that this diamond had belonged to the treasury of Sulṭān ‘Alā'u-d-dīn (Khiljī). He247d (Humāyūn) got it from the family of Bikramājīt, the Rāja of Gwālīār. His Majesty, from the nobility of his nature, first accepted it and then returned it to him (Humāyūn) as a present.

On Saturday,248a 29th Rajab, he began to examine and distribute the treasures and hoards, the collections of many kings. He gave his Majesty Jahānbānī, 70 lakhs of Sikandarī tankas and a treasure-house of which no account or inventory had been taken. To the Amīrs, he gave in accordance with their rank from five to ten lakhs of tankas and to every soldier and servant he gave presents superior to their position. All the man of learning, small and great, were made happy by gifts. No one, either in the camp or the cantonment (urdū-bazār) went without a share in the good fortune. The scions248b of the royal family in Badakhshān, Kābul and Qandahār also received presents, viz., Kāmrān Mīrzā, 17 lakhs of tankas; Muḥammad Zamān248c according to their rank 15 lakhs and similarly ‘Askarī Mīrzā, Hindāl Mīrzā and all the ladies of the harem and shining stars248d of the Khilāfat and all the officers and servants who were absent from the dais received in accordance with their degree, jewels and rich varieties and also gold and silver money. Also to all the relatives and dependants, of his Majesty in Samarqand, Khurāsān, Kāshghar and ‘Irāq, there were sent valuable gifts. Presents too were despatched to the holy sepulchres (mashāhid) and blessed shrines in Khurāsān, Samarqand, etc. And an order was issued that to every inhabitant of Kābul, Ṣaddara,248e Warask, Khūst, and Badakhshān, male and female, small and great, a shāhrukhī should be sent. Thus all and sundry, the élite as well as the commonalty, were fed from the table of his Majesty's bounty.

Verse.

From the showering of the jewel-shedding hand,
Joy burst out afresh in the world.
Pleasant is the gift that cometh from afar,
As the Moon sheds light on earth from her sphere.

It is a fixed law that when the world-adorning Creator designs to reveal a unique jewel from its casings, he brings strange things to pass so that a man being tried in such ways by word and deed may become glorious in the minds of all for firmness and foreseeing. Among these, there was this strange circumstance that with all this victory and largesse, there was a defect of similitude (qillat-i-mujānasat) which worked a want of intimacy (‘illat-i-‘adam-i-muwānasat) with the people of India.

The soldiery and the peasantry (of India) abstained from intercourse (with the invaders). Although Delhi and Agra had come into possession, opponents held the country. Many of the neighbouring forts were held by rebels. Qāsim Sanbalī held Sanbal (Rohilkhand) and in the fort of Bīāna (Bhartpūr) Niẓām Khān was beating the drum of opposition. Ḥasan Khān Mewātī had established himself in Mewāt (south of Delhi) and raised the standard of revolt. Muḥammad Zaitūn had established himself in Dhōlpūr (Rājpūtānā) and was breathing opposition. Tātār Khān Sārangkhānī (Firishta, son of Sārang Khān) was holding Gwālīār; Ḥusain Khān Lōḥānī, Rāprī (on the Jumna); Quṭb Khān, Etāwa, ‘Alām Khān, Kālpī. Marghūb, a slave of Sulṭān Ibrāhīm, held Mahāwan (Mathurā) which is near Agra. Qanauj and the other cities beyond the Ganges, were in the hands of the Afghāns, under the headship of Nāṣir Khān Lōḥānī and Ma‘rūf Farmulī who had contended also with Sulṭān Ibrāhīm. After his death, they had acquired many other countries and having advanced some stages, had made Bahār Khān, son of Daryā Khān, king and styled him Sulṭān Muḥammad.251a

During this year, while his Majesty had his head-quarters in Agra, the hot winds were very oppressive. An impure samūm and sickness were added to the pusillanimity of the camp. A large number absconded out of senseless imaginations. Owing to the rebels, the inclement weather, the impassableness of the roads, the delay of coming by merchants, there was distress for food and a want of necessary articles. The condition of the people became bad. Many officers resolved to leave Hindūstān for Kābul and its neighbourhood, and many soldiers deserted. Though many old officers and veteran soldiers used improper language in the Presence, and also secretly used language disagreeable to his Majesty, yet his Majesty Gītī-sitānī who was unique for far-seeing and endurance, did not heed this but set about the administration of the country. At length on the part of the élite and those who had been trained by his Majesty and from whom different things were to be looked for, there were stale movements of old times.252a Especially was this the case with Aḥmadī Parwāncī and Walī Khāzin. Still more astonishing, Khwāja Kalān Bēg,—who in all the battle fields and occasions, especially in the expedition to Hindūstān, had always spoken gallantly and given such opinions as befitted a brave man—now changed his views and was the foremost in advocating the abandonment of the country, both openly and by covert hints. At length his Majesty summoned his officers and spoke wise words of counsel to them, unveiling their secret imaginings (makhṭūrāt) and forbidden (maḥẓūrāt) ideas. He announced his firm determination, saying, “We have won this fine country by labour and hardship, to give it up for a little fatigue and contrariety, is neither the way of world-conquerors nor method of wise men. Joy and sorrow, comfort and distress are linked together. Now that all those labours and troubles have been brought to their end, assuredly rest and smoothness will appear in like degree. You must lay firm hold on the strong cable of reliance on God and not utter any more vain and factious words. Whoever has a mind to depart to Kābul (Wilāyat) and to exhibit his own worthlessness, it matters not, let him go. But we, relying on the lofty courage which rests on the Divine help, have fixed India in our heart.” At last all the officers, after consideration and meditation, agreed and confessed that what his Majesty said was true and that “the king's word was the word-king.” With heart and soul they placed the head of submission on the ground of command and bound themselves to remain. Khwāja Kalān who was keener than the others about leaving for Kābul (Wilāyat) received permission to depart and the presents for the princes and others were sent with him.252b Ghaznīn, Gardēz,252c and the Sulṭān Mas‘ūdī Hazārca253a were given to him in fief. In Hindūstān too the pargana of Ghurām253b was given to him. Mīr Mīrān also got leave to go to Kābul.

The Khwāja got leave to depart (to Kābul) on Thursday,253c 20 Ẕī-ḥijja (28th August). It is manifest that every right-minded, fortunate one who conducts business with subtle prudence, is more and more successful in proportion as he arrives at high positions. A mirror of this is the grand story of his Majesty Gītī-sitānī Firdūs-makānī who in such a commotion of the soldiery and in presence of much opposition, had recourse to world-conquering courage, and who, relying on the Divine protection, set bis face to accomplish his work and achieve his desires and made the city of Agra, which is the centre of Hindūstān, his fixed residence and with strength of counsel and courage and abundant liberality and justice, composed the distractions of the country. Accordingly many of the officers of Hindūstān and rulers of the country gradually entered his service. Among them was Shaikh Ghūran253d who brought with him as many as 3,000 men of mark.253e Everyone of them received favours above his condition.

There were also Fīrūz Khān, Shaikh Bāyazīd, Maḥmūd Khān Lōḥānī, Qāẓī Jīā, who were amongst the famous sirdārs, and who entered the service and obtained their desires. Fīrūz Khān received a jāgīr from Jaunpūr of one kror odd253f of tankas. Shaikh Bāyazīd one kror253g from Oudh; Maḥmūd Khān 90253h lakhs from Ghāzīpūr. Qāzī Jīā had an assignment of 20 lakhs from Jaunpūr. In a short time, there was peace and comfort and joy and pleasure and such prosperity as belongs to a permanent government. Some253i days after the ‘Id of Shawwāl, there was a great feast at Agra, in the palace of Sulṭān Ibrāhīm when a treasury of gifts was showered into the lap of the public. Sambal was assigned to Jahānbānī, in addition to Sarkār Ḥiṣār-fīrūza which formerly had been given him as the reward of valour. Amīr Hindū Bēg was appointed as his deputy to preside over that district. As Bīban had besieged the fort of Sambal, the aforesaid Amīr, Kita Bēg, Malik Qāsim, Bābā Qashqa with his brothers and Mallā Āpāq, Shaikh Ghūran and his soldiers from the middle Dūāb were rapidly sent there. Biban engaged them and was defeated and as that seditious and disloyal one (ḥarām-nimak) after having experienced the sweets of service, had out of evil nature turned his back, never again did he behold fortune's face.

CHAPTER XVIII.255a
DELIBERATIONS OF HIS MAJESTY GĪTĪ-SITĀNĪ (BĀBAR) AND UNDERTAKING
BY HUMĀYŪN OF THE EXPEDITION TO THE EASTWARD.

As his Majesty Gītī-sitānī Firdūs-makānī was now victoriously established in Agra, the capital of the kingdom, and as the rainy season,—which is the spring of India and the period of freshness and verdure, of enjoyment with one's friends, and of garden delights,—had passed away and the time for expeditions had arrived, he consulted with his ministers as to whether he should proceed to the east to quell the Lōḥānīs who had advanced with nearly 50,000 cavalry beyond Qanauj and were meditating hostilities, or should march westward against Rānā Sāngā255b and subdue him, as he was very strong and had recently got possession of the fort of Khandār255c and was cocking the cap of disobedience. After consultation, it was decided that as Rānā Sāngā had repeatedly sent representations to Kābul and had made protestations of loyalty, the facts of his not having done so since and of his having taken the fort of Khandār from Ḥasan, the son of Makan, who had not yet done homage,—were not sufficient evidence of disloyalty, and that it was not advisable to proceed against him at present. The proper course was to send capable men to ascertain his dispositions and that until the truth about him was known, the first thing was to march eastwards and put down the Lōḥānīs. The Emperor intimated that he would attend to this matter in person, but meantime his Highness Jahānbānī,— the plant of whose greatness had grown tall in the garden of hope,— represented that if this weighty affair were committed to him, he would by the help of the royal fortune, bring it to a successful termination. The Emperor greatly approved of this request and gladly accepted the offer, and his Highness Jahānbānī girded himself for the task with energy and good fortune. Orders were issued that there should join themselves to Humāyūn, ‘Ādil Sulṭān, Muḥammad Kōkultāsh, Amīr Shāh Manṣūr Barlās, Amīr Qatlaq Qadam, Amīr ‘Abdu-l-lāh, Amīr Walī, Amīr Jān Bēg, Pīr Qulī, Amīr Shāh Ḥusain,—who had been deputed to take Dhōlpūr and its neighbourhood from Muḥammad Zaitūn and to make it over to Sulṭān Junaid Barlās and then to march against Bīānā. For this purpose Kābulī Aḥmad Qāsim was despatched in all haste to direct these officers to meet Humāyūn at Candwār. Sayyid Mahdī Khwāja, the jāgīrdār (fief-holder) of Etāwa, Muḥammad Sulṭān Mīrzā, Sulṭān Muḥammad Dūldī, Muḥammad ‘Alī Jang Jang and ‘Abdu-l-‘azīz,256a Master of the Horse, with the rest of the army which had been sent to subdue Quṭb Khān Afghān who had raised the standard of revolt in Etāwa,—were also appointed to serve his Highness (Humāyūn). On Thursday, 13 Ẓilq‘ada (21st August, 1526) he came out from Agra at an auspicious moment and encamped at a distance of three kos from the city. He marched on from there, accompanied by the breeze of victory. Naṣīr Khān who had collected an army in Jājamū‘, fled while Humāyūn was 15 kos distant, and crossing the Ganges went to the territory of Kharīd.256b Humāyūn also went in that direction, and having brought that region into order, partly by severity and partly by gentle measures, turned the reins of enterprise towards Jaunpūr. Having reduced Jaunpūr to order by justice and equity, he administered the country with the wisdom of age and the energy of youth. When near Dalman, Fatḥ Khān Sarwānī, who was one of the great nobles of India and whose father had received from Sulṭān Ibrāhīm the title of A‘ẓam Humāyūnī, came and did homage to his Highness Jahānbānī. He (Jahānbānī) sent him to the imperial Court under the charge of Sayyid Mahdī Khwāja and Muḥammad Sulṭān Mīrzā. There he was royally256c treated and received a robe of honour. He received the allowances of his father and also a kror and six lakhs in addition. Though out of simplicity he wished for the title which his father had possessed, he received that of Khān Jahān and was dismissed to his estates. His son Maḥmūd Khān was exalted by obtaining permanent service. His Majesty Gītī-sitānī was both in appearance and in reality successful and munificent in the capital.

In Muḥarram 933 (Oct. 1526) the joyful news came from Kābul that Māham Bēgam, the mother of his Highness Jahānbānī, had given birth to a son. His Majesty Gītī-sitānī named him Muḥammad Fārūq. His birth occurred on 23 Shawwāl, 932 (2nd Aug., 1526), and he died in 934 before his father had ever seen him.

DESCRIPTION OF VARIOUS AUSPICIOUS EVENTS IN THIS YEAR (933), OF THE NEWS OF THE REBELLION OF RĀNĀ SĀNGĀ AND OF THE MEETING OF HIS HIGHNESS JAHĀNBĀNĪ WITH HIS MAJESTY GĪTĪ-SITĀNĪ.

On Wednesday, 24 Ṣafar257a (30th Nov., 1526), orders were issued to his Highness Jahānbānī that he should make over Jaunpūr to some officers and himself return with all speed, as Rānā Sāngā was advancing with a large army of Hindūs and Muḥammadans. The conveyance of this message was given to Muḥammad ‘Alī, son of Mihtar Ḥaidar Rikābdār.

In this year Niẓām Khān, the governor of Bīāna, did homage through the instrumentality of that fountain of blessings Rafī‘u-d-dīn Ṣafavī,257b and made over the fortress of Bīāna to the imperial officers. Tātār Khān also tendered Gwālīār and kissed the threshold; and Muḥammad Zaitūn made over Dhōlpūr and submitted himself. Everyone received royal favours corresponding to his sincerity and loyalty and was secured against calamities.

On 16 Rabī‘u-l-awwal (21st Dec.) of this year, the mother of Sulṭān Ibrāhīm formed a plot257c by the means of the cooks which had a happy257d issue,—the crude imaginings of evil-disposed persons coming to nothing and they themselves meeting with punishment.

When the orders were received by his Highness Jahānbānī, he appointed Shāh Mīr Ḥusain and Amīr Sulṭān Junaid Barlās to the command of Jaunpūr, and leaving Qāẓī Jīā who was one of those trained up by his Majesty Gītī-sitānī, to assist these two officers, he set out for the capital. He also appointed Shaikh Bāyazīd to Oudh and as ‘Ālam Khān held Kālpī and it was necessary to dispose of him, either peaceably or by force, he led his victorious army thither. By working on his hopes and fears, he brought him into the path of obedience, and taking him in his train, presented him at the world-protecting Court. On Sunday, 3rd Rabī‘u-ṯ-ṯānī, he arrived at the Cārbāgh,258a known later as the Hasht Bihisht (Eight Paradises) and which was by its verdure the spring of power and fortune, and presented himself before his Majesty Gītī-sitānī. On the same day Khwāja Dōst Khāwand arrived from Kābul, and was received with honour.

At this time representations were continually arriving from Mahdī Khwāja who was in Bīāna, about the rebellion of Rānā Sāngā and his warlike preparations.

CHAPTER XIX.
OF HIS MAJESTY GĪTĪ-SITĀNĪ FIRDŪS-MAKĀNĪ'S DRAWING UP
HIS FORCES AGAINST RĀNĀ SĀNGĀ, AND UPREARING
THE STANDARDS OF VICTORY.

Whene'er a design takes root in the bosom of an auspicious one, on whose honoured head God, the world-arranger, hath placed the diadem of true sovereignty, and whose lofty intellect is set on obeying the behests of the Lord of Lords, his action rises above the petty views of the vulgar, and he achieves success in realm and religion (dīn ū dunyā). The wondrous deeds of his Majesty Gītī-sitānī Firdūs-makānī are an instance of this, for as his felicity increased so also did his wisdom, and in proportion as the causes of dizziness augmented, so also did his prudence become enhanced. He ever took refuge in the Divine Unity, and in the administration of justice and the management of State affairs, never deviated a hair's breadth from the highway of reason. And at this time when Rānā Sāngā, in the pride of his numbers and courage and with his brains full of boastful madness, began to act presumptuously, and to remove his foot from the circle of equanimity, and was drawing nigh with the stride of boldness, he (Bābar) made the favour of God his stronghold, and gave no admission to the attacks of dismay but proceeded to quell that ill-fated disturber of the Age.

On Monday, 9 Jumāda-l-awwal (11th February, 1527), he marched out from Agra to extirpate this sedition, and pitched his camp in the neighbourhood of the city. Reports were continually arriving that the ill-fated one (Rānā Sāngā) had attacked Bīāna with a large army, and that the troops who had come out of that town, had not been able to withstand him and had turned back. Sankar Khān Janjūha was killed on that occasion, and Amīr Kita Bēg259a wounded. Having halted four days, he (Bābar) marched on the fifth and encamped in the plain of Mandhākar259b which lies between Agra and Sikrī. It occurred to him that there was no water-supply for the troops except in Sikrī—(which after returning thanks for his victory, his Majesty Gītī-sitānī, by giving diacritical points, named Shukrī (thanksgiving) and which is now by the auspicious felicity of the king of kings, known as Fatḥpūr, from its giving victory to hearts)—and it might happen that the hostile army by using despatch, would get possession of this. In consequence of this just thought, he proceeded next day towards Fatḥpūr and sent Amīr Darvēsh Muḥammad Sārbān in advance in order that he might find a proper ground for encampment. The said Amīr fixed on an eligible spot in the neighbourhood of Fatḥpūr Lake (Kūl) which is a broad sheet of water and an ocean-like reservoir, and that was made the pleasant ground of encampment. From thence messengers went to summon Mahdī Khwāja and the other officers who were in Bīāna. Bēg Mīrak260a who was a servant of Jahānbānī and a number of the Emperor's special attendants were sent to collect information. In the morning intelligence was brought that the opposing army had advanced one kos beyond Bisāwar and were eighteen kos distant. On the same day Mahdī Khwāja,260b Muḥammad260c Sulṭān Mīrzā and the other officers who had been in Bīāna, arrived and did homage. During this time, daily skirmishes took place between the outposts in which gallant soldiers distinguished themselves and received the royal approbation.

At length on Saturday, 13 Jumāda-l-ākhar 933 (16th March, 1527), Rānā Sāngā advanced with a large army to a hill near the village of Khānwa260d in the Sarkār of Bīāna and about two kos from the imperial camp.

His Majesty states in his Memoirs that according to the Indian calculation by which territory yielding one lakh of revenue furnishes 100 horse, and one of a kror of revenue, 10,000 horse, the dominions of Rānā Sāngā, as yielding ten krors of revenue, furnished 100,000 horse. Many chiefs also, who had never served under him before, gave in their allegiance and increased his army. Thus Silāḥu-d-dīn,261a the ruler of Rāīsīn and Sārangpūr, etc., supplied 30,000 horse; Rāwal Ūdī Singh of Nagaur, 12,000; Ḥasan Khān Mewātī, ruler of Mewāt, 12,000; Bihārī261b Mal Īdarī,261c 4,000; Nirpat Hādā, 7,000; Sitarvī Kacī (of Cutch), 6,000; Dharan261d Deo, ruler of Mīrtha, 4,000; Narsingh Deo Cūhān,261e 4,000; Maḥmūd Khān, son of Sikandar Sulṭān, though he had no territory, yet261f in hope of regaining his ancestral throne, brought with him 10,000 horse; so that the whole force amounted to two lakhs and 1,000 horse.

When his Majesty heard of the arrival of the enemy, he set about arranging his forces. The royal station was in the centre. Cīn Tīmūr261g Sulṭān, Mīrzā261h Sulaimān, Khwāja Dōst Khāwand, Yūnus ‘Alī, Shāh Manṣūr Barlās, Darvēsh Muḥammad Sārbān,261i ‘Abdu-l-lāh Kitābdār, Dōst Īshak Āqā and others of the great officers were stationed in the right. On the left were ‘Alā'u-d-din,261j son of Sulṭān Buhlūl Lōdī; Shaikh Zain Khwāfī, Amīr Muḥibb ‘Alī, son of Niẓāmu-d-dīn ‘Alī Khalīfa; Tardī Bēg, brother of Qūc Bēg; Shīrāfgan, son of Qūc Bēg; Ārāish Khān, Khwāja Ḥusain and many other servants of the Sulṭānate and pillars of the State.

The right wing was adorned by the fortunate presence of his Highness Jahānbānī and on his right were Qāsim Ḥusain Sulṭān, Aḥmad Yūsuf Ōghlāqū, Hindū Bēg Qūcīn, Khusrū Kōkultāsh, Qawām Bēg, Urdū-shān, Walī Khāzin, Qarāqūzī, Pīr Qūli Sīstânī, Khwāja Pahlwān Badakhshī, ‘Abdu-l-shakūr and many other gallant men. On the victorious left of his Highness Jahānbānī, were Mīr Hama, Muḥammadī Kōkultāsh, and Khwājagī Asad Jāmdār.

And on the right wing there were nobles of India such as the Khān-khānān, Dilāwar Khān, Mulkdād Karāranī and Shaikh Ghūran.

On the left wing were Sayyid Mahdī Khwāja, Muḥammad Sulṭān Mīrzā, ‘Ādil Sulṭān, son of Mahdī Sulṭān, ‘Abdu-l-‘azīz Mīr Akhūr, Muḥammad ‘Alī Jang Jang, Qatlaq Qadam Qarāwal, Shāh Ḥusain Bārbēgī, Jān Bēg Atka. And of the nobles of India there were Jalāl Khān and Kamāl Khān, sons of Sulṭān ‘Alā'u-d-dīn, ‘Alī Khān Shaikhzāda Farmulī, Niẓām Khān of Bīāna and many other brave warriors who girt the waist of service with perfect loyalty. And as a flanking party, there were Tardī Īkka, Mulk Qāsim, brother of Bābā Qushqa and many Mughals on the right wing. Mūman Atka and Rustam Turkamān with many of the Emperor's special dependants were stationed on the left wing.

For the sake of protection, the practise of the holy warriors of Rūm was followed and a line of carts was arranged and connected by chains so that there might be cover for the matchlock-men and cannoniers, who were in front of the soldiers,—and Niẓāmu-d-dīn ‘Alī Khalīfa was appointed to command this line. Sulṭān Muḥammad Bakhshī, after arranging the commanders and officers in their posts, stood near the Emperor to hear his commands which were allied to Divine inspiration,—and despatched adjutants (tawācīān) and couriers to all sides who conveyed the orders to the officers. When the pillars of the army had been arranged in this excellent manner, a command was issued that no one should stir without orders from his position, nor without permission advance his foot into the battle. A watch of the day had passed262a when the fire of war was kindled.

Verse.

The soldiers bestirred themselves on each side,
Day and night were commingled,

On each side arose a war-cry,
Two seas of hate foamed at the lips,
The steel-shod hoofs of the chargers
Reddened the ground with the blood of the brave.
The world-holder mid his glorious camp
Moved exultant on his prancing steed.

Such a battle raged on the right and left wings that the earth quaked and the universe resounded with the clangour. The left wing of the enemy moved against the imperial right and fell upon Khusrū Kōkultāsh, Mulk Qāsim and Bābā Qushqa. Cīn Tīmūr Sulṭān was ordered to go to their assistance and by his intrepid aid he drove the enemy nearly to the rear263a of their centre. A noble reward was assigned to him for this. Muṣṭafā Rūmī brought forward the carts from the centre of his Highness Jahānbānī's division and by his matchlocks and culverins (ẓarbzan) so broke up the ranks of the enemy that the rust was scoured off from the mirror-hearts of the brave combatants, and many of the enemy were laid level with the earth and were annihilated. And, as from time to time, the hostile troops advanced, so did his Majesty Gītī-sitānī send on picked men to succour his victorious soldiers.

At one time orders were given to Qāsim Ḥusain Sulṭān, Aḥmad Yūsuf and Qawām Bēg; at another to Hindū Bēg Qūcīn; at another to Muḥammad Kōkultāsh and Khwājagī Asad. After that Yūnus ‘Alī, Shāh Manṣūr Barlās and ‘Abdul-l-lāh Kitābdār received orders. Then Dōst Īshak Āqā, Muḥammad Khalīl Ākhta Bēgī were sent to assist. The enemy's right wing repeatedly attacked the left wing of the victorious army but every time the loyal souled Ghāzīs affixed some of them to the ground by a rain of calamitous arrows, and slew many of them with the lightning of daggers and scimitars. Mūman Atka and Rustam Turkamān acting according to orders, attacked the benighted bands from the rear, and Mullā Maḥmūd and ‘Alī Atka Bāshlīq who were servants of Khwāja Khalīfa went to their assistance. Muḥammad Sulṭān Mīrzā, ‘Adil Sulṭān, ‘Abdu-l-‘azīz Mīr Akhūr, Qatlaq Qadam Qarāwal, Muḥammad ‘Alī Jang Jang, Shāh Ḥusain Bārbēgī and Mughal Ghānjī engaged in action and maintained a firm position. Khwāja Ḥusain went with a body of the household troops (dīwānīān) to their assistance and all the victorious warriors,—who with jeopardy of their lives devoted themselves to service,—made lofty the standards of toil by taking vengeance on the enemy, and choked the springs of the enemy's hope with the dust of failure.

Verse.

The hands264a of the javelin-throwers were knot upon knot (girih bar girih),
The backs of the brazen-bodied ones were cuirass upon cuirass (zirih bar zirih).
On each side, the rock-piercing spears
Closed with thorns the path of safety.
The shining of caerulean scimitars
Deprived eyes of sight by their gleaming.
The dust of the earth put a cap on the Moon
And stopped the breath in the throat.

As the engagement was long, owing to the numbers of the enemy, orders were issued to the household troops, who were behind the carts like chained tigers,—to emerge from the right and left centre and after leaving a space in the middle for the musketeers, to charge from both sides. In accordance with the noble call the gallant youths and valiant warriors, like tigers breaking from their chains and gaining their liberty, dashed forward. The clashing (cakācāk) of swords and the whizzing (shipāshāp) of arrows reached the heavens, and that rare one of the Age, ‘Alī Qūli,264b stood with his following in front of the centre and performed wonders in discharging stones264c and in firing of culverins and muskets. Just then orders were issued for moving forward the carriages of the centre and his Majesty himself moved against the foe. When this was perceived by the glorious army, they became agitated like a billowy sea and all at once made an assault on the hostile ranks. At the end of the day the flame of conflict so blazed up that the right and left of the victorious army forced and drove the enfeebled left and right of the enemy into one mass with their centre, and so beat upon that wretched body that all those ill-fated ones washed their hands of life and rushed upon the right and left centre of the imperialists. They approached very near but the high-minded Ghāzīs stood firm and quitted themselves like men. By heaven's help, the opponents were unable to abide the contest and those ill-fated, wretched ones were compelled to loose the rein of firmness from the palm of contrivance and to take flight and to regard as meritorious their escaping half-dead from such a courage-testing contest. The breezes of victory and success blew on the grove of fortunate standards, and the buds of strength and help blossomed on the branches of faith and exertion. Many of the hostile troops became the food of the blood-drinking sword and of the hawking arrow. And many wounded, the remains of the sword, turned the dust-stained cheek of courage, and the besom of dismay swept away the rubbish of their presence from the field of battle, quivering like moving sands, they became a Sahara of wretchedness. Ḥasan Khān Mēwātī was killed by a bullet and Rāwal Uday Singh,265a Mānik Cand Cūhān, Rāī Candrabhān Dilpat Rāī, Gangū, Kram Singh, Rao Nagarsī(?)265b and many of their great chiefs were slain. Many thousand wounded were destroyed by the hands and 'neath the swift feet of the victorious army. Muḥammadī Kōkultāsh, ‘Abdu-l-‘azīz Mīr Ākhūr, ‘Alī Khān and some others were sent to pursue Rānā Sāngā.

His Majesty Gītī-sitānī Firdūs-makānī having become victorious returned thanks for this great victory and sublime blessing to Almighty God, Glory be to His Name, (who arranges the series of fates by re-setting the openings and shuttings of things visible and invisible), and pursued the enemy for one kos from the field of battle, till at length night fell; that day was black for foes and that night joyful for friends. Then he recalled his lofty spirit from the enemy and beating high the drum of success, turned and reached his camp some hours after night-fall. As it was not ordained of God that that abandoned one (Rānā Sāngā) should be taken, the men who were sent in pursuit of him, did not manage well. His Majesty observes thereon, “The time was critical, I should have gone myself and not have trusted to others.” Shaikh Zain the Ṣadr who was possessed of distinguished qualities, found the date of this great victory in the words Fatḥ-i-Bādshāh-i-Islām266a and Mīr Gēsū sent the same chronogram from Kābul. His Majesty writes in his Memoirs that there was a similar coincidence in the chronograms of the former victory of Dīpālpūr when two persons found the date Wasaṭ-i-shahr-i-Rabī‘u-l-awwal.266b

When so great a victory had been gained, the pursuit of Rānā Sāngā and the attack on his country were postponed and preference was given to the conquest of Mēwāt. Muḥammad ‘Alī Jang Jang, Shaikh Ghūran and ‘Abdu-l-Mulūk Qūrcī were sent with a large force against Ilyās Khān who had raised the head of sedition in Kōil266c in the Dūāb and had imprisoned Kacak ‘Alī the governor of that place. When the victorious army approached, he was unable to resist them and retired. After the victorious army had reached Agra, that rebel was produced before the royal Court and met with capital266d punishment.

As the conquest of Mēwāt had been determined upon by the world-adorning soul (of Bābar), he proceeded to that province. On Wednesday, 6 Rajab (7th April, 1527), he arrived at Alwar which is the capital of Mēwāt. The treasures of Alwar were bestowed on his Highness Jahānbānī. And when this territory had been annexed, he returned to the capital in order to undertake the reduction of the eastern territories.

DEPARTURE OF HIS HIGHNESS JAHĀNBĀNĪ FOR KĀBUL AND BADAKHSHĀN,
AND THE MARCH OF THE ROYAL ARMY TO AGRA.

As it was necessary to arrange for the administration of Kābul and Badakhshān, and as the time was exigent, and as Badakhshān had been committed to Humāyūn since 917266e (1511) when Mīrzā Khān had died, and as many servants were employed there, his Highness Jahānbānī, ornament of world-subduing, jewel of the sword of fortune, forehead of glory, frontispiece of splendour and glory, preamble of an incomparable model, pupil of the eyes of sovereignty and the Khilāfat, the father of victory (abū-n-naṣr), Naṣīru-d-dīn Muḥammad Humāyūn was, on 9th Rajab of this auspicious (humāyūn-fāl) year (11th April, 1527), at 3 kos from Alwar despatched to that country. At the same time, the Emperor swiftly applied himself to the reduction of Biban Afghān who during the Rānā's disturbance had besieged Lakhnaw and taken possession of it. Qāsim Ḥusain Sulṭān, Malik Qāsim Bābā Qashqa, Abū'l-Muḥammad Nīzabāz, Ḥusain Khān, and —from among the Amīrs of India,—‘Alī Khān Farmulī, Mulkdād Kararānī, Tātār Khān and Khān Jahān were sent along with Muḥammad Sulṭān Mīrzā against him. That luckless one, on hearing of the approach of the glorious army, left all his goods behind him, and fled with naught but the coin of life in his palm. His Majesty at the end of this year, visited Fatḥpūr (Sīkrī) and Bārī267a and then proceeded to Agra. In 934 he visited Koil and went from thence to Sambal267b to hunt, and after viewing these delightful Highlands, returned to the capital. On 28th Ṣafar (23rd Nov.) Fakhrjahān Bēgam267c and Khadīja Sulṭān Bēgam arrived from Kābul, and his Majesty embarked on a boat and went to meet them and behaved with liberality towards them.

As news was frequently brought that Medinī Rāī, the ruler of Candērī268a was collecting troops and that the Rānā also was preparing war and putting together the materials of his own destruction, the Emperor marched in a fortunate hour against Candērī and also sent 6,000 or 7,000 gallant men from Kālpī under Cīn Tīmūr Sulṭān to Candērī. On the morning of Wednesday, 7th Jumāda'l-awwal (29th Jan., 1528), a splendid victory was gained at Candērī. Fatḥ-i-dāru-l-ḥarb (Conquest of the hostile country, i.e., of the country of the infidels = 934) is the chronogram of this Divine aid. After this Candērī was made over to Aḥmad Shāh, grandson of Sulṭān Naṣīru-d-dīn and then the Emperor returned on Sunday, 11th Jumāda'l-awwal (2nd Feb.).

It has been stated by trustworthy annalists that the Rānā (Sāngā) had meditated revolt and been collecting an army before the Emperor marched against Candērī, and that when the former came to Īrij,268b Āfāq,268c a servant of his Majesty Gītī-sitānī Firdūs-makānī, had put it into a condition of defence. That black-fated one came and besieged the place, but one night he beheld in a dream an ancestor of his under a dreadful appearance. He awoke in terror and horror and began to tremble in all his limbs. After this he immediately set about his return and on the way, the forces of death attacked him and he died. The victorious army crossed the river of Burhānpūr and it came to the ears of the Emperor that Ma‘rūf, Biban and Bāyazīd had gathered their forces and that the imperial servants had abandoned Kanauj and come to Rāberī and that the enemy had taken the fort of Shamsābād from Abū'l-muḥammad Nīzabāz. Accordingly the reins of resolution were turned to that quarter and a number of heroes were sent on in advance. Merely on seeing the soldiers, the son of Ma‘rūf became dumbfounded and fled from Kanauj; and Biban, Bāyazīd and Ma‘rūf having heard of the royal army, crossed the Ganges and remained on the east side, opposite Kanauj, with a view to dispute the passage. The royal army continued to advance and on Friday, 3rd Muḥarram, 935 (18th Sept., 1528), Mīrzā ‘Askarī who had been sent for from Kābul before the Candērī disturbance, to advise (with the Emperor) on the affairs of Multān, arrived and entered upon auspicious service. On Friday next, the ‘Āshūrā, (10th Muḥarram) his Majesty halted at Gwālyār and next morning surveyed the palaces of Bikramājīt and Mān Singh and then proceeded towards the capital. He arrived there on Thursday, 25th Muḥarram.

On Monday, 10th Rabī‘u-l-awwal, couriers arrived from his Highness Jahānbānī in Badakhshān and brought several pieces of good news. It was written that a son had been born to his Highness Jahānbānī by the chaste daughter of Yādgār Ṭaghāī and that he had received the name of Al-amān.269a As this name was equivocal and had an improper meaning among the generality, it was not approved of. It was not acceptable also because it had not received the assent of his (Bābar's) holy heart. The pleasing of the father, especially such a father and such a king, is fruitful of blessings, visible and invisible, and the displeasing of him is the cause of a hundred evils, external and internal. What marvel then if men of experience regard the rapid disappearance of this first fruits of sovereignty as a mark of this displeasure.

When his Majesty had been settled in the capital, he convened the Turkī and Indian nobles and had a splendid feast and held a consultation about the settlement of the eastern districts and the extinguishing of the flame of rebellion. After much discussion it was agreed, that before his Majesty took the field, Mīrzā ‘Askarī should be sent to the east with a large force and that when the trans-Gange-tic Amīrs had joined him with their forces, some great expedition might be undertaken. In accordance with this determination, Mīrzā ‘Askarī departed on Monday, 7th Rabī‘u-l-ākhar, while the Emperor himself went for a visit and for hunting towards Dhōlpūr.

On 3rd Jumāda'l-awwal news came that Maḥmūd,270a the son of Iskandar, had taken Bihār and was raising the head of rebellion. His Majesty returned from hunting to Agra and it was settled that he should proceed in person to the eastern districts.

At this time, couriers came from Badakhshān with the intelligence that his Highness Jahānbānī had collected the troops of those provinces and accompanied by Sulṭān Wais,270b had set out with 40 or 50 thousand men on an expedition against Samarkand. It was also reported that there was talk of a peace. In an auspicious moment a message was sent that, if the time for negociations had not passed, he should make peace until the affairs of India had been cleared off. The letter also summoned Hindāl Mīrzā and mentioned that Kābul was to be a royal domain. He (Bābar) also wrote “God willing, when the affairs of Hindūstān which are near settlement, shall be finished, we shall leave these faithful servants and ourselves visit our hereditary kingdoms. It is proper270c that all the servants of these countries should make preparations for the expedition and await the arrival of the imperial army.” (Bābar's)

On Thursday, the 17th of the said month, he crossed the Jumna and went towards the eastern districts.

In these days the ambassadors of Nuṣrat Shāh,270d the ruler of Bengal, brought valuable presents and did homage.

On Monday, 19th Jumāda'l-ākhar, Mīrzā ‘Askarī arrived on the banks of the Ganges and tendered his duty. He was ordered to march with his army down the opposite bank of the river. Near Karra271a news came of the defeat of Maḥmūd Khān, the son of Sulṭān Sikandar. Having advanced near the borders of Ghāzīpūr, he stopped at Bhōjpūr271b and Bihīya.271c In that place Bihār was bestowed on Mīrzā Muḥammad Zamān.271d On Monday, 5th Ramaẓān,271e being set at ease with regard to Bengal and Bihār, he proceeded to Sirwār271f to put down Biban and Bāyazīd. The enemy engaged with the victorious army and was defeated. After visiting Kharīd271g and Sikandarpūr and being satisfied with the state of things there, he rode post271h towards Agra which he reached in a short space of time.

His Highness Jahānbānī Jaunat-āshiyānī had spent one year pleasurably in Badakhshān. Suddenly a desire for the society of his Majesty Gītī-sitānī,—who was a world of internal and external perfections,—took possession of him and being unable to restrain himself, he made over Badakhshān to Sulṭān Wais, the father-in-law of Mīrzā Sulaimān, and proceeded towards the Qibla of fortune and Ka‘ba of hopes. Thus in one day he arrived at Kābul. Mīrzā Kāmrān had come there from Qandahār. They met in the ‘Īdgāh271i and Kāmrān being surprised to see him, asked him the cause of his journey. Humāyūn replied it was a desire to see his sovereign, and that though he was always seeing him with his mind's eye, yet this was not equal to a personal interview. He ordered Mīrzā Hindāl to proceed from Kābul for the protection of Badakhshān and putting the foot of purpose in the stirrup of courage, and urging along the charger of joy on the highway of determination, he in a short time reached Agra and was rewarded by tendering his service.

A wonderful thing was that his Majesty Gītī-sitānī was sitting at table and talking with his (Jahānbānī's) mother about him when suddenly272a the shining star emerged from the ascension-point of Badakhshān. Their hearts were rejoiced and their eyes brightened. Each day of princes is a feast but that day, by the advent of his Highness Jahānbānī, was made a feast such as cannot be described.

Mīrzā Ḥaidar writes272b in his Tārīkh-i-rashīdī that his Highness Jahānbānī came to Hindūstān in 935 (1528-29) at the summons of his Majesty Gītī-sitānī and that he left Faqr ‘Alī in Badakhshān.

At this time the darling (lit. eye-pupil) of the Sulṭānate, Mīrzā Anwar273a had just died and his Majesty was deeply grieved on that account. The coming of his Highness Jahānbānī was therefore a great comfort to his heart. His Highness Jahānbānī remained for a while in attendance on him and the Emperor many times declared that Humāyūn was an incomparable companion. In fact the name of Insān-i-kāmil (Perfection of Humanity) might well be applied to that majestic one. When he left Badakhshān for India, Sulṭān Sa‘īd Khān, who was the Khān of Kāshghar and was related273b to his Majesty and who, moreover, had been in his service and had received favours and instruction from him,—being stimulated to crude imaginations by messages from Sulṭān Vais and other Amīrs of Badakhshān, left Rashīd Khān (his son) in Yārkand and marched against Badakhshān. Before he arrived there Mīrzā Hindāl had reached Badakhshān and established himself in Qil‘a Ẓafar.273c Sa‘īd Khān besieged the fort for three months and then returned, re infectâ to Kāshghar. His Majesty Gītī-sitānī heard that the Kāshgharīs had taken possession of Badakhshān and he directed Khwāja Khalīfa to go and put the affairs of that country in order. But the Khwāja in his folly delayed to obey. Then his Majesty asked Jahānbānī who by his fortune had come to reside with his Majesty,—what he thought about going there himself. He represented in reply, that he had suffered affliction by being debarred from the blessing of his Majesty's presence, and had vowed that he would never again voluntarily exile himself but that there was no help for it, if he were ordered to go.

Accordingly Mīrzā Sulaimān was despatched to Badakhshān and a letter written to Sulṭān Sa‘īd saying, “Considering274a my numerous claims on your consideration, this affair seems strange; I have recalled Hindāl Mīrzā and have sent Sulaimān. If you have any regard for hereditary rights, you will be kind to Sulaiman and leave him in possession of Badakhshān, for he is as a son to us both. This would be well. Otherwise I, having given up my responsibility, will place the inheritance in the hands of the heir. The rest you know.”274b

Before Mīrzā Sulaimān had reached Kābul,275a Badakhshān had been freed from the oppression of evil-thoughted men and been made an abode of peace, as has been already stated. When he arrived at Badakhshān, Hindāl in accordance with orders (from Bābar) made over the country to him and proceeded to India.

After some time spent in attendance, his Majesty sent his Highness Jahānbānī to Sambal275b which was his fief (jāgīr). He remained happily there for six months and then was suddenly attacked by fever. The malady gradually increased and his Majesty Gītī-sitānī Firdūs-makānī, growing disturbed at the alarming news, ordered, in his affection for him, that he be brought to Delhi and thence by water to Agra, in order that he might be treated by skilful physicians under the Emperor's own eyes. A large number of learned doctors who were always in attendance at the royal Court, were directed to employ their talents in effecting a cure. In a short space of time, he was conveyed by boat. Though physicians used their skill and exhibited Messiah-like science, he did not get better. As the sickness was prolonged, the Emperor one day was seated with the wise men of the Age by the Jumna and considering about remedies. Mīr Abū Baqā275c who was one of the most distinguished saints of the Age, represented that it had been received from the ancient sages, that in a case like this, when physicians were at a loss, the remedy was to give in alms the most valuable thing one had and to seek cure from God. His Majesty Gītī-sitānī said, “I am the most valuable thing that Humāyūn possesses; than me he has no better thing; I shall make myself a sacrifice for him. May God the Creator accept it.”

Khwāja Khalīfa and the other courtiers represented that Humāyūn would, by the grace of God, recover and attain to the limit of his natural life under the shadow of his Majesty's fortune. Why had such an expression come from his tongue? The meaning of the saying of the great men of old was that the most valuable article of property should be given in charity, consequently the priceless diamond which had in a mysterious way been obtained in the war with Ibrāhīm and had been presented to Humāyūn, should be sacrificed. He replied, “What value has worldly wealth? and how can it be a redemption for Humāyūn? I myself shall be his sacrifice. He is in extremity and I have lost the power (ṭāqat) to behold his powerlessness (bī-ṭāqatī), but I can endure all his pain.” Thereafter he retired to his oratory and having performed such special rites as befitted the occasion, he thrice walked round his Highness Jahānbānī Jannat-āshiyānī. When his prayer had been heard by God,—Glory be to His name!—he felt a strange effect on himself and cried out, “We have borne it away. We have borne it away.” Immediately a strange heat of fever surged upon his Majesty and there was a sudden diminution of it in the person of his Highness Jahānbānī. Thus in a short time he entirely recovered, while Gītī-sitānī Firdūs-makānī gradually grew worse and the marks of dissolution and death became apparent.

Then out of his active mind and truth-seeking soul, he summoned his officers and nobles and making them place the hands of homage276a to the empire (Khilāfat) in the hands of Humāyūn, appointed him his heir and successor, placing him on the throne of sovereignty, while he himself remained bed-ridden (ṣāḥib-i-farāsh) at the foot of the throne. Khwāja Khalīfa, Qambar ‘Alī Bēg,276b Tardī Bēg, Hindū Bēg, and all the others were in attendance. Lofty counsels and weighty mandates, such as might form a stock of lasting fortune and eternal auspiciousness,—were imparted. Advice was given about munificence and justice, about acquiring the favour of God, cherishing subjects, protecting mankind, the accepting of apologies of those who had failed in duty and the pardoning of transgressors; about the honouring of those who did good service and the casting down of the rebellious and the oppressors. And he exclaimed “The cream of our testamentary directions is this, ‘Do naught against your brothers even though they may deserve it.’” In truth it was owing to his observing the mandates of the Emperor that his Majesty Jahānbānī Jannat-āshiyānī suffered so many injuries from his brothers without avenging himself, as will clearly appear from this history.

When his Majesty Gītī-sitānī Firdūs-makānī was at the height of his disorder, Mīr Khalīfa took a short-sighted view — as is the nature of mankind—and from a suspicion that he entertained about his Highness Jahānbānī wished to place Mahdī Khwāja on the throne.277a The Khwāja too, from his evil disposition and wickedness and folly, gave way to vain thoughts and coming every day to the Darbār, made a disturbance. At last by the intervention of right-speaking, far-sighted men, Mīr Khalīfa was brought to the true path and passing from such thoughts, forbade the Khwāja to appear at the Darbār, and also prohibited anyone from visiting him. Thus, by the Divine aid, things came to their own place, and Right was fixed in its own centre.

He (Bābar) left this world on 6th Jumāda'l-awwal,277b 937, in the Cahārbāgh, on the banks of the Jumna in Agra. The eloquent of the Age composed chronograms and elegies about his Majesty. Among them was this chronogram by Maulānā Shihāb Mu‘ammā'ī (the Enigmatist).

Verse.

Humāyūn becomes his kingdom's heir.277c

It would be impossible even if volumes were employed to detail the perfections of this Holy One. Among them he possessed the eight essentials of empire, viz. (1) high fortune; (2) great designs; (3) conquering power; (4) administrative capacity; (5) civilizing faculty; (6) devotion to the welfare of God's servants; (7) the cherishing of the army; (8) the restraining it from evil.

And in acquired accomplishments, he was at the head of his Age. He held high rank as a poet and a prose-writer, and especially in Turkī poetry. The Turkī dīwān278a (dīwān-i-turkī) of his Majesty is of great eloquence and purity, and its contents are charming. His book of Maṯnawī which has the name of Mubīn278b (clear) is a famous composition and is mentioned with great applause by critics. He versified the Risāla-i-wālidīya278c of Khwāja Aḥrār which is a pearl from the ocean of knowledge, and very excellent it was. He also wrote his Acts (Wāqi‘āt) from the beginning of his reign to the time of departure with fidelity and in a lucid and eloquent style. It is an Institute for all earthly sovereigns and a manual for teaching right thoughts and proper ideas. This Institute of dominion and fortune was, by the world-obeyed commands of the king of kings, translated into Persian by Mīrzā Khān Khān-khānān, son of Bairam Khān, in the 34th year of the Divine Era, at the time of the return of the standards of glory from the roseate vernal abode of Kashmīr and Kābul, so that its exquisite bounties might moisten the lips of all the thirsty and that its hidden treasures might be beheld by those whose hands were empty of learning.

His Majesty was also eminently skilled in music and composed charming verses in Persian. Among them the following quatrain is a product of his bounteous muse.

Verse.279a

Though I be not related to dervishes,
Yet am I their follower in heart and soul.
Say not a king is far from a dervish;
I am a king but yet the slave of dervishes.

The following two Maṭla‘ are also sparkles from his enlightened mind.

Maṭla‘ I.

Parting from thee were perdition,
Else could I depart from this world.

Maṭla‘ II.

Whilst my heart is bound with her cypress locks,
I am free from the griefs of the world.

His Majesty was also famous for treatises on prosody, and among them is a book called Mufaṣṣal which is a commentary on the science.

His Majesty left four sons and three daughters:—(1) His Majesty Jahānbānī Naṣīru-d-dīn Muḥammad Humāyūn Pādshāh, (2) Kāmrān Mīrzā, (3) ‘Askarī Mīrzā, (4) Hindāl Mīrzā.

The daughters were:—Gulrang Bēgam; Gulcihra Bēgam; Gulbadan Bēgam, all three by one mother.279b

Among the illustrious men, courtiers and companions who attained to felicity in the field of honour of his Majesty Firdūs-makānī, there were:—

(1). Mīr Abū-l-baqā280a who was of lofty rank in learning and wisdom.

(2). Shaikh Zain Ṣadr, grandson of Shaikh Zainu-d-dīn Khwāfī.280b He had acquired practical sciences (‘ulūm-i-muta‘ārifa)280c and had distinguished abilities. He was skilled in prose and the art of letter-writing. He was distinguished by his long association with his Majesty. He280d was also noted in the time of his Majesty Jahānbānī Jannat-āshiyānī.

(3). Shaikh Abū-l-wajd Fārighī,280e paternal uncle of Shaikh Zain. He was a pleasant companion and of good disposition. He wrote poetry.

(4). Sulṭān Muḥammad Kūsa (beardless.) A pleasant man and a critic of poetry. He was a companion of Mīr ‘Alī Shīr280f and lived in the glorious society of his Majesty.

(5). Maulānā Shihāb Mu‘ammāī280g (the Enigmatist) whose poetical name was Ḥaqīrī.280h He had an abundant share of learning, eloquence and poetry.

(6). Maulānā Yūsufī the physician. He was sent for from Khurāsān. He was distinguished for good qualities, for dexterity as an operator281a and for assiduity.

(7). Surkh Widā‘ī. An old and inartificial poet. He wrote in Persian and Turkī.

(8). Mullā Baqāī. He had a correct taste (salīqa-i-darast) in poetry. He composed maṯnawī in the metre of the makhzan,281b in the name of his Majesty.

(9). Khwāja Niẓāmu-d-dīn ‘Alī Khalīfa.281c On account of his long service, trustworthiness, soundness of understanding and steadfastness of counsel, he held high rank under his Majesty. He possessed various qualities and excellences and in particular was a successful physician.

(10). Mīr Darwīsh Muḥammad Sārbān,281d a favourite pupil of Nāṣiru-d-dīn Khwāja Aḥrār. He was distinguished for learning and social qualities and was much relied upon at Court.

(11). Khwānd Mīr,281e the historian. He was learned and an agreeable companion. His writings are well known, e.g., the Ḥabību-s-siyar, Khulāṣatu-l-akhbār,281f Dastūru-l-wuzarā,281g etc.

(12). Khwāja Kilān Bēg, one of the great officers and who was allowed the honour of a seat.281h Distinguished for gravity of manners and discretion. His brother Kīcak Khwāja281i was keeper of the seals and was especially trusted and was allowed a seat.281j

(13). Sulṭān Muḥammad Dūldāī, one of the great officers and of excellent morals.

I refrain from mentioning others as the design of this glorious work is to describe the lofty lineage of his Majesty, the king of kings, and I proceed to the holy traits of his Majesty Jahānbānī Jannat-āshiyānī. And in completing the accounts of those ancestors (buzurgān) I prepare myself for the description of the great one of realm and religion and lord of the visible and invisible.

The passage is obscure, but I think the sense is that men get accustomed to the wonderful and so their very seeing becomes blindness. The B.M. No. 5610 (Halhed's) omits the az after bisyār, thus making ghaflatī (heedlessness) the nominative. I have adopted this reading as I think it makes the better sense.

↩

Erdmann says she belonged to the tribe of Qūrulas ◌. See also Tārīkh-i-rashīdī, Ney Elias and Ross 51, where the author states that she was a Kurkluk (?). In B.M. No. 7628 of Rashīdu-d-dīn's great work, 456b, the name of the tribe is written ◌ Qūrūlas. Barlās then must be a copyist's error.

↩

Khāfī Khān Bib. Ind. I, 7n. According to one copy of the Ẓafarnāma—Prolegomena, Jūbīna was a woman and a daughter of Yuldūz Khān.

↩

Cf. Khāfī Khān I, 8. He says the light was like the sun's disk, and that it entered Ālanquwā's mouth which was open (from astonishment apparently, at the spectacle).

↩

The Virgin Mary whom Muḥammad calls the daughter of ‘Amrān, apparently because he confounded her with the sister of Moses.

↩

I should have been inclined to read nūr, light here, instead of rōz, day, but all the MSS. seem to have rōz.

↩

I do not fully understand this passage. It seems to be a quotation, a sort of Sybilline utterance, and is naturally dark, since we are told that it needs the utmost meditation of a Plato to understand it. The Lucknow editor says the meaning is that a master of wisdom should study with might and main how the veil may be rent for suffering humanity, but I do not see that this sense can be got out of the words. The translation which I have given is the result of a good deal of reflection and of a consultation with my friend Mr. Beames. Mr. Beames has given me the following note. “Though the construction of the sentence is somewhat harsh and irregular, yet the general meaning of the passage seems clear from the context.” “A.F. starts (Lucknow ed. 52 1, 2) by the amazing assertion that the beginning of the manifestation of Akbar, dated from the day of Ālanquwā's miraculous conception by the Sun and continued through many generations till he ultimately saw the light from the womb of Miryam-makānī.”

“Then it evidently occurs to him that this is rather a hard saying and that some one might object. ‘How could Akbar be conceived in the womb of Ālanquwā, seeing that she lived so many centuries before him?’ To this he replies that only a sage who devotes himself to profound thought and meditation can understand this mystical saying, viz., that while ordinary mortals rend the veil (parda-dar), i.e., are born, in due course, Akbar was miraculously held back from being born, he remained behind the veil or, in courtier-like phrase, adorning the veil (parda-ārāī)—for many ages till his full time arrived. The passage may therefore be translated as follows:—

“It requires a Plato of deep meditation to accept this statement with the car of his understanding, that the Prince of the Age is in the condition of adorning the veil, while (ordinary) mortals rend the veil with visible pain and inward groaning.”

“The grammatical awkwardness lies in A.F.'s putting ast after parda-dar instead of and (they are) which would agree better with the plural subject zamāniyān; and in leaving out ast after āraī. But this kind of construction is not unusual. The substitution of the uncouth phrase dar parda-ārāī ‘in veil adorning-ness’ for the simpler parda-ārā, ‘veil adorning’ is perhaps due to a desire to play upon the two meanings of dar (1), in and (2) tearing; contrasting the lot of Akbar who remained for some generations miraculously reserved behind the veil, i.e., in the womb of successive females, with the lot of ordinary mortals who when they are conceived and developed, rend the veil, i.e., are born; a contrast which, as he justly observes, it takes a Plato, at least, to grasp.”

I have adopted Mr. Beames' note with some modifications. My idea is that A.F. means to say it is so extraordinary that the Lord of Time or Prince of the Age should remain behind the veil (i.e., continue unborn), while wretched mortals come into existence to their own loss as well as to the detriment of the epoch, that only a Plato can comprehend the mystery or final cause thereof. Perhaps A.F.'s thought is illustrated by the words of St. Paul, “For we know the whole Creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now.” See also Cap. XI where A.F. speaks of Khāqānī, a poet of a former age, vainly longing for the appearance of a Ṣāḥib-i-waqt, a Lord of the Age or Time.

I think too that he, as usual, has a double meaning, and that he plays upon the double sense of parda-dar which means both to rend a veil and to be dissolute, thus corresponding to the double meaning of the Latin profanus. I have consulted a number of MSS. for variants but without success. Several e.g., I, O. 564 and Add. B.M. No. 4944 have pardadōst, veil-loving (? loving blindness). But this seems no improvement. Parda-dar is probably right as enabling A.F. to take advantage of the two words dar fr. darīdan, to tear, and dar, within, and to contrast dar parda-ārāī with parda-dar.

↩

So Text, but apparently it should be twenty-first.

↩

Abū Muslim ‘Abdu-r-raḥmān, son of Muḥammad and called the missionary of the ‘Abbasides, i.e., Ṣāḥib-i-da‘wat or author of the call of the ‘Abbasides, (Gibbon cap. 52.) and also called ◌ Jaryān. He was a general of the ‘Abbasides and the origin of their power but was put to death 136 H. 753 by Khalīf Manṣūr. (Mas‘ūdī, Meynard. VI, 58, 176, etc.) Merv was one of the four chief cities of Khurāsān and its inhabitants were called Marwazī. (D'Herbélot art. Merou.)

↩

The Text follows the MSS. which spell the name in two ways.

↩

The Shajratu-l-atrāk has a long story as to the cause of these murders.

↩

The Shajrat makes Mācīn his grand-uncle's son, viz., son of Tūqtā or Tūqabā the brother of Būqā who was Qāidū's grandfather.

↩

The Shajrat says he dug a canal.

↩

Though he was only the third in ascent from Cingīz Khān, the latter was fourth in succession for Qūbila, the son of Qabal was succeeded by his brother Bartān Bahādur and he by his son Yasūkā the father of Cingīz. This accounts for Cingīz being the fourth star which emerged from Qabal's bosom. (See infra).

↩

Khāfī Khān (I, 9) makes each brother have a dream but says that the stars seen by Qācūlī were less bright than those beheld by the elder brother Qabal. Apparently he either rejects the application to Timur or holds that he was descended from the elder brother (through Cingīz Khān). D'Herbélot has a full account of the dream. (Art. Toumanah Khān). See also Sharafu-d-dīn's Ẓafarnāma, (Prolegomena), and Bābar and Humāyūn, Erskine I, 70 and Shajratu-l-atrāk (Miles). There is a good deal about the dream and the covenant between the brothers in the so-called Memoirs of Timur.

↩

There is a play on the word bāz, the other meaning being “the hawk (bāz) of his sleep snatched at” the bird of thought.

↩

Text, Qūīla, but a note says that the Ẓafarnāma (Prolegomena) has Qūbila and this appears the correct reading.

↩

The Prolegomena l.c. and the Shajrat say that Qabal got drunk and insulted Āltān.

↩

Prolegomena l.c. has Shagūn na mīdānam “I do not regard it as of good omen (to return).”

↩

The meaning apparently is that when Qabal was on his way back with Āltān's officer he got the latter to halt at the house of a friend by the wayside. The Prolegomena (l.c.), tells the story somewhat differently, stating that Qabal evaded his pursuers by entering the house of a friend but was inclined to give himself up and return with them, etc.

↩

The iẓāfat of the Text after kalān is wrong. See D'Herbélot art. Kil Khān and Prolegomena l.c.

↩

Ghazāl-i-shīrnizhād, “a milk-born gazelle.” Cf. Dryden's milk-white hind.

↩

It is said that Āltān nailed or sewed him to a wooden ass in revenge for the death of his messengers. One account says he was hunting but A.F.'s words seem to imply that he was too young for this, that he was, as it were, a fawn himself and so, sporting with the gazelles. The Prolegomena seems to say that the child had strayed into the plain.

↩

The word birādar is loosely used and for the sake of assonance with bahādur. Qācūlī was really uncle of Bartān.

↩

If so, it seems an anachronism to speak of Ālanquwā as belonging to the Barlās family in the way A.F., (according to the MSS.,) has done in his account of that lady. And indeed there seems no doubt that Barlās is a clerical error for Qūrūlās which is the word in Rashīdu-d-dīn. The Text has lafẓ-i-mu‘allā “lofty word,” but Quatremère (Rashīdu-d-dīn 250n.) thinks that mu‘allā is a clerical error for mughalī and translates “un homme brave et d'une naissance illustre;” and adds “le mot barlās dans la langue des Mongoles désignait un homme brave et d'une naissance illustre.”

↩

Text, Bīsūkā, but a note states that many MSS. have Yasūkā. It is Yasūkā in the Prolegomena l.c., Yesugai or Jesugai seems to be the correct form.

↩

Text, Dīlūn Yuldaq. Howorth (I, 47) says the place is called Deligun Buldagha, near the Onon by Ssanang Ssetzen and that it is still known by the same name, viz., Delūn Boldaq. It is in northern Mongolia, near the Russian frontier and on the right bank of the Onon. D'Herbélot art. Genghiz Khān calls it Diloun Joloun.

↩

Called by Hammer Ūlūn Ike and by Erdmann Ulun Egeh. Apparently the Turkish pronunciation of anaga is enegeh. The a is not long.

↩

Chinese historians put his birth seven years later, viz., 1162 A.D. for they say he died in 1227 at the age of 66 and not of 72, as Muhammadans state. D'Herbélot, Supplément, (Visdelou) art. Ganghiz Khān. Hammer-Purgstall (56) prefers the date 1155.

↩

Howorth, Temudjin and Temujin. The word is said to mean “finest iron.” It may be noted here that the best biography of Cingīz appears to be Prof. Franz von Erdmann's Temudschin der Unerschütterliche. (Leipsic, 1862.) There is a Chinese Life of Cingīz trs. by Prof. R. R. Douglas, Lond., 1877.

↩

Gibbon, Zingis; Howorth, Jingis.

↩

Meaning, I suppose, that the book is called the Akbarnāma.

↩

i.e., the five known to the ancients plus the Sun and Moon. Their conjunction is supposed to indicate a cataclysm. (D'Herbélot art. Keran). According to the Ḥabību-s-siyar, the seven planets were in conjunction in Cancer—the horoscope of the world—at the time of the Deluge. See History of the Golden Horde, Hammer-Purgstall, 75 n., for statement of position of five of the planets on 6th Jan., 1155, i.e., shortly before Temūcīn's birth.

↩

Anabibazon and Katabibazon. They are evil influences. The Third House is that of brethren and short journeys. D'Herbélot says that Libra which is regarded by us as the Sign of Justice, is considered by Orientals to be that of winds and tempests.

↩

Anabibazon and Katabibazon. They are evil influences. The Third House is that of brethren and short journeys. D'Herbélot says that Libra which is regarded by us as the Sign of Justice, is considered by Orientals to be that of winds and tempests.

↩

I do not find this date in any of the lives of Cingīz Khān. He assumed the name of Cingīz, which apparently means the Powerful or Unshakeable, in 599 (1202). The period 581 seems again referred to a little lower where we are told that Cingīz became head of his tribe when over thirty. A.F.'s date does not differ greatly from the 1187 given by Marco Polo as that of Cingīz', recognition nor from the 1189 given by Ssanan Ssetzen.

↩

Shahryār-nishān. Qu. kingmaker.

↩

If A.F.'s other dates are right, Qarācār must have been an infant at this time for,—if he died in 652 at the age of 98,—he must have been some 12 years younger than Cingīz.

↩

Text, Tāljūt and another form is Tānjūt. It seems a different word from Tangūt.

↩

Or Wang,—the Prester John of mediæval writers and travellers D'Herbélot art. Kerit and Supplement (Vīsdelou) 279. Hammer-Purgstall says Toghril was the proper name of Āvang or Owang.

↩

According to one account, noticed by D'Herbélot, Cingīz married a daughter of Āvang.

↩

Also Shankū and Shakūn.

↩

Text, Tab Tengri; but I adopt the variant of But Tengri, given also in No. 564. Hammer-Purgstall (65) calls him Buttanri, the son of Itschke and says he was step-brother of Cingīz, being son of Cingīz's mother by her second husband.

↩

Text, ◌ Safīn, but the notes give variants, Saqīn and Sabaqīn and the Āīn (Jarrett III. 100, where see note) Saqsīn. It is the Sacassīn mentioned in D'Ohsson. (I. 346n.) “Sacassīn, dit le géographe de Bacu, était une grande ville du pays des Khazares. Sacassīn est à présent submergée.” As D'Ohsson remarks it seems connected with the Sakae or Scythians. Apparently it was a place or country near the Caspian and is used by A.F. to indicate the extent of Cingīz' conquests in the West. The Ẓafarnāma Prolegomena says, in reference to Cingīz' conquests, that they extended az ibtidā'i Bulghār ū Saqīn tā intihā'i Cīn ū Saqsīn (?) ū Mācīn where apparently Saqsīn denotes an eastern country. Vullers s.v. Saqsīn, says “nom. regionis ignotae” and refers to the Burhān-i-qāṭi‘ and the Farhang-i-Rashīdī. The latter says it is a country of Turkistān and quotes a line of Niẓāmī which contains the expression “from Saqsīn to Samarkand.”

In 1652 Greaves published two Geographical Tables one by Naṣīru-d-dīn Ṭūsī and the other by Ulugh Bēg. These are in great measure identical and perhaps the repetitions in Āīn (Jarrett III. 47 et seq), are due to indiscriminate copying from both. In Greaves' Tables, Saqsīn is given in Long. 86° 36' and Lat. 43° and as belonging to the 5th climate; Bolgar, Long. 90° and Lat. 49° and as belonging to the 7th climate.

Quatremère (Hist. des Mongoles) states that Klaproth has treated at great length of the subject of Saqsīn.

↩

Bular, i.e. Bulghār, (Āīn. Jarrett, etc.) III. 103) a town on the Caspian. This is therefore not the European Bulgaria to the west of the Black Sea but Great Bulgaria on the Volga.

↩

Vullers (34a) gives Ās as a town in Qibcāk from which the Osseti took their name. But the Ās of the Text appears to be the Crimea or its neighbourhood. See Jarrett III. 102 where it is spelled Aṣ a form not given by Vullers. Quatremère (Hist. des Mongoles, Pref. 70n. 87), says “Le mot Ās ou ◌ désigne les Alains qui portent encore aujour d'hui le nom de Ossets.”

↩

See Vullers and D'Herb. Ālān is said to be a town in Turkīstān but apparently the Ālān of the Text is the Allan of D'Herbélot which was in the Caucasus and the home of the tribe known as the Alānī, and which occupied country between the Caspian and Black Seas.

↩

The modern Khiva. The citizens were all massacred.

↩

Ṭāliqān, a town in Khurāsān, E. of Bālkh. (Jarrett III, 87). The Khurāsān and Badakhshān Ṭāliqāns seem to be identical. See Howorth's map.

↩

Text, Mankīrnī, but Āīn (II. 204 and Jarrett III. 343) has Mangbarnī or Mankbardī, Jarrett observes that Hammer-Purgstall says it should be written Mankbarnī but that on Jalālu-d-dīn's coins it is Mankbarīn. If as Hammer states, (74) the term means short or flat-nosed (stumpfnäsig) we should hardly expect to find such a nickname on coins. Vambéry (Hist. of Bukhara, 1342) says the word is Mengberdi, (heaven-sent); Raverty (Ṭabaqāt-i-naṣīrī, 285) that it means having a mole on the side of the nose. (See also 299n.) Mang is given as meaning a mole in Shaw's Vocabulary of Eastern Turkish. The epithet would thus be equivalent to Khāldar, and,—a mole being regarded as a beauty,—the sobriquet is honorific.

For an account of the gallant Jalālu-d-dīn see Gibbon Cap. 64 and D'Herbélot art. Jelaleddin and Āīn l.c.

↩

This date is wrong as perhaps the copyists might have inferred from the fact that just below Cingīz is described as dying in Ṣafar, the 2nd month of 624, whereas Ramaẓān is the ninth. Jalālu-d-dīn's defeat really occurred in Rajab 618 (Aug.-Sep. 1221). It was therefore the time of the rains which enhances the splendour of Jalālu-d-dīn's feat in swimming his horse over the Indus.

↩

D'Herbélot, 4th Ramaẓān. This agrees with Howorth and Hammer-Purgstall who also give the corresponding European date as 18th Aug. Apparently A.F. had inadvertently written the date of death as that of the defeat of Jalālu-d-dīn. 4th Ṣafar is 24th Jan. (1227). Ṣafar is given in one place by Rashīdu-d-dīn whom A.F. copies. (See Hammer-Purgstall, G. Horde 92 n. 4.) But see Erdmann l.c., p. 573.

↩

Text, Tankaqūt. It seems to be the Tunkah of the Āīn (Jarrett III. 98) in 5th climate and belonging to Tashkand. See D'Herbélot art. Tangat where it is stated that the Arabs call the town Tanghikunt a form which approaches that in Text. The country is also called Hia. (See Howorth I. 4 on Hia or Tangut). It lies north-west of China and west of the Yellow River. On some modern maps the country is marked as that of the Tangūts. See Supplement (Visdelou, 302), for remarks on Scheidercou and Tamghoul.

↩

They came out under their king Shīdaqu (called by Minhāj, Tingū Khān) to treat with Cingīz who had promised them safety, but as he was dead, his heirs, I suppose, did not think themselves bound by his promise and put them all to death. Apparently it was to give a loophole for this that Cingīz bade the fact of his death to be concealed. (Ṭabaqāt-i-naṣīrī, Raverty 1087n.)

↩

Minhāj always calls Cingīz the accursed.

↩

i.e., reckoning the death as in Ṣafar. If Ramaẓān be taken, the age would be 74, there being 10 solar months in a lunar year.

↩

According to a MS. of Tīmūr's Memoirs Cingīz did this by marrying Qarācār to a daughter of Caghatāī. If so, Qarācār must surely have been many years younger than Cingīz and hardly fitted to be his counsellor. The passage in the Memoirs is dukhtar-i-Caghatāī Khānrā bā Qarācār Nūyān ‘aqd kard ū bar āō Gurkān nām nihād. But A.F.'s view and that commonly accepted is that Qarācār acted as a father to Caghatāī. (Shajratu-l-atrāk, Miles 344.)

↩

This does not seem quite correct. Bābar's mother was a Caghatāī being a daughter of Yūnus Khān, a descendant of Cingīz,—a fact which A.F. notices later on in his account of Bābar.

↩

A.F. holds that Cingīz broke the compact by not attaching Qarācār to the Khāqān (Great Khan). But Caghatāī was the elder son though passed over in favour of the younger, Ōkadāī and thus; in one sense, the assigning of Qarācār to him was right.

The Prolegomena l.c. states that Cingīz made the arrangement because Transoxiana had been assigned to Caghatāī and as Jalālu-d-dīn Mangbarnī was still alive, it was necessary to have Caghatāī supported by an experienced general like Qarācār.

Tīmūr does not seem to have thought there was a breach of agreement for he tells us that when Taghlāq Tīmūr shewed him the agreement—which had been written on a steel plate and signed by Qabal and Qācūlī,—he acquiesced and accepted the Commander-in-Chiefship. (Tīmūr's Memoirs, Stewart 12.) See too page 22 (Stewart) where Tīmūr's father tells him that he had been Sipāh-sālār. Apparently if there were a breach of compact, it occurred when Tīmūr's grandfather, Amīr Barkal gave up his duties as Sipāh-sālār and retired into private life.

↩

I am not sure of the meaning of this passage. My friend Mr. Beames thinks it is that the courtiers should not have produced the deed before Cingīz so that posterity might have ascribed his conduct to ignorance and not to a deliberate design of breaking the compact. But Cingīz had asked for the deed, so that they could not well have evaded its production, and it is difficult to see how an intentional omission to consult the deed could make Cingīz's conduct or that of his courtiers any better. Apparently the words “ḥāẓir namīsākhtand” must refer to the officers and not to Cingīz for they are commonly used of the act of inferiors in bringing something before their superior. I am inclined then to think that A.F. means to suggest as an excuse for Cingīz, that he was at death's door and incapable of recollecting the contents of the deed. Or it may be that the important word is ān (that) and that A.F. means to suggest that possibly the courtiers did not produce that deed, i.e., the real deed, but some other.

The Shajrat (344) remarks that Cingīz exceeded in recommending Qāracār to Caghatāī. Probably this remark is based on A.F. and indicates that the Shajrat was written after the Akbarnāma.

↩

Alluding to the Arabic proverb (Abū'l-ghāzī, Désmaisons, Preface) awwalu' n-nāsī awwalu' n-nās, “the first forgetter was the first man.” This again, I believe, refers to the tradition that Adam surrendered 40 years of life in favour of his descendant, King David but repudiated or forgot having done so when the Angel of Death came to him at the close of his 960th year. In consequence of this forgetfulness by Adam, it was laid down in the book which Seth received from heaven, that all promises or agreements should be ratified by the presence of two witnesses.

↩

Tīmūr is regarded as a lineal descendant of Qarācār Nūyān, though according to Vambéry, the claim is without foundation. It seems that Rashīdu-d-dīn says nothing about Qarācār's being Caghatāī's generalissimo. (D'Ohsson II. 109 n.) But he is mentioned in the Ṭabaqāt-i-naṣīrī by Minhāj who was born 60 years, before Rashīdu-d-dīn. (Bib. Ind. ed. 365, 1.3 and Raverty, 1063.) In these the name is written Nūyān Qarācār but there can be no doubt that Qarācār is meant. There is also a great deal about him in the Prolegomena which was written in 822 (1419).

↩

D'Herbélot, Bishbalīgh (Pentapolis) and this is no doubt right. It is described in Ney Elias' introduction to the Tārīkh-i-Rashīdī (62) but it is stated (l.c. 32 and 364) hat Caghatāī's capital was at Almālīgh.

↩

Ōkadāī died 11th Dec., 1241.

↩

Blochmann 429. (Howorth I. 158. D'Ohsson, II. 87.)

↩

The Shajratu-l-atrāk (Miles 355) states that Qarā Hulākū was deposed at the instance of Giyūk who represented that a grandson could not succeed before his uncle (Īsū Mangū).

↩

Third, Howorth, I, 160. Kiyūk or Giyūk was the eldest.

↩

Karakoram, the Cambalu of Chaucer and Milton.

↩

D'Ohsson (II. 109 n.) quotes Mīr Khwānd as saying that Qarācār died at the age of 79 but the lithographed ed. of the Rauẓatu-ṣ-ṣafā (Part V. 69) gives 89 as the age and Mīr Khwānd's source, the Ẓafarnāma, Prolegomena, gives also 89. He died in the year of the Hare in the Turkish cycle.

↩

Five, Prolegomena l.c. gives their names.

↩

Text, bi-rasm-i-sālbūrī Sālbūr does not occur in the dictionary and is perhaps sālār-i-bār, (princeps aulae regiae)—for which, see Vullers s.v. sālār. Possibly the true reading is ◌ sāwarī, a present. For an account of this word, see Quatremère, Notices, etc., XIV. 27n. The meaning would then be “He was sent as a naẓr or present to Hulākū.” I observe, however, that sālbūrī occurs as a title in the Ẓafarnāma. (See extract therefrom, Tārīkh-i-rashīdī, 26, where we have Khwāja Sālibarī.) A MS. however of the Ẓafarnāma gives the word as Salbarī. So too, Bib. Ind. ed. I. 88 and II. 23 l.5 fr. ft.). Sālbar occurs in the Burhān-i-qāṭi‘ but only with the meaning of a tree which bears every second year.

↩

Jarrett III. 81n.

↩

R. A. S. MS. No. 114 has ki salṭanat before ba ō rasīda būd and they seem needed.

↩

This is regarded as the third renewal of the compact between Qabal and Qācūlī. (Miles 381).

↩

Aḥmad b. ‘Arab Shāh gives Abghai as the name of Tīmūr's grandfather.

↩

In the Prolegomena l.c. the name seems to be Salbita or Malbita, and in the Khulāṣatu-t-tawārīkh to be Bīta I do not find his name in Tīmūr's Memoirs. An uncle, Ḥājī Barlās and another, Aidku, are spoken of, but they were probably his maternal uncles. They were unfriendly to him (Stewart's Tīmūr, 55).

↩

The Prolegomena l.c. and Khulāṣat call him Shamsu-d-dīn Kalār, and the former describes him as a successor of Shaikh Shihābu-d-dīn Shahrawardī (perhaps the famous Shahrawardī of Baghdād). The Prolegomena states also that in 775 (1374), Tīmūr removed his father's body to near Shamsu-d-dīn's shrine beside the chief mosque. Probably Kalār is right for the Amīr Kalāl whom Tīmūr often mentions seems a different person. (Price and Davey (Tīmūr's Institutes) call him Gulāl, a word which signifies red powder, i.e., abīr).

An Amīr Kalāl is described in the Safīnatu-l-auliyā also. D'Herbélot mentions a Shamsu-d-dīn al-Fakhaur-who lived in Kesh and was consulted by Tīmūr, but Tīmūr's special Pīr seems to have been Quṭbu-l-aqṭāb Shaikh Zainu-d-dīn Abū Bakr. (Davey and White's Tīmūr 4n.) Apparently Aḥmad b. ‘Arab Shāh is the authority for this, who in the beginning of his Life of Tīmūr, speaks of a Shaikh called Shamsu-d-dīn Al Fakhuri whom Tīmūr consulted.

A.F.'s reference to Shamsu-d-dīn's foretelling the greatness of Tīmūr to his father is interesting because it seems to be an allusion to Tīmūr's Memoirs where the story is told. If this is so, it goes to support the genuineness of the Memoirs by showing that they were in existence before, at least the reign of Shāh Jahān. The story, however, about Shamsu-d-dīn's prophecy also appears in the Ḥabību-s-siyar.

The Āīn (Jarrett III, 358) mentions an Amīr Kalāl who was a saint of the Naqshbandī order.

↩

Ṯāliṯu-l-quṭbīn. Probably this means that he is a Pole supplemental to the two Poles, making with them a Trinity. But it may mean umpire or arbitrator between the two Poles, or that he was three kinds of Pole, viz., quṭbu-l-millat (religion), quṭbu-d-dunyā (the world) quṭbu-d-dīn (faith), as Tīmūr is styled in the Prolegomena (Ẓafarnāma). Ruy Gonzales de Clavigo (Clements R. Markham trs. 124) says, “The arms of Timur Beg were three circles like “o”s drawn in this manner o o o and this is to signify that he is lord of three parts of the world.” He adds that Tīmūr ordered this device to be stamped on his coins and on everything that he had and that he ordered his tributaries to use it on their coins. Possibly the epithet in the Text alludes to this device.

↩

Tīmūr, we are told, never took any title higher than that of Amīr (officer) which is an allusion to the Commander-in-Chiefship held by his branch and was accordingly a title hereditary in his family. The title Gūrgān (son-in-law) refers apparently to his ancestor Qarācār Nūyān's marriage with a daughter of Caghatāī, son of Cingīz. But it may also refer to his own marriage with princesses.

↩

About 40 miles S. by E. of Samarqand. It was called the Green City on account of the verdure of its gardens. (Ẓafarnāma I. 301.) It has been described by Bābar (Erskine, 54) P. de Courteille (I. 106) and E. Schuyler. It is also mentioned in the Āīn (Jarrett, III. 97) as in the 5th climate and in Badakhshān (!). It is generally reckoned a day's journey from Samarqand.

↩

One MS. has Tūrān and so has Abdu-l-ḥamīd (Bādshāhnāma, Bib. Ind. I. 43) Īrān is perhaps right, for the word is vaguely used. (D'Herbelot s. v.). Kesh is in what is usually called Transoxiana and a variant gives Māwarā'u-n-nahr (Transoxiana) instead of Īrān.

↩

Gibbon quoting Hyde says 1336, 9th April, 11-57 P.M., lat. 36.

↩

Sometimes Nagīna, e. g., in Khāfī Khān.

↩

Sharafu-d-dīn ‘Alī Yazdī (Ẓafarnāma). The Ḥabību-s-siyar says the same thing. A.F. has already censured Sharafu-d-dīn (Cap. I. near the end) for identifying the seven stars which emerged from Qācūlī's bosom, with the seven descendants who intervened between Qācūlī and Tīmūr. A.F. says it is wrong to take for stars, men who did not rule, and holds that Tīmūr was the first of the eight stars and not the last. But his interpretation is liable to the same objection. It is true that Akbar was the eighth in descent from Tīmūr, but this was through a younger son of the latter, viz., the third, Mīrān Shāh, and neither Mīrān nor his son, Muḥammad Mīrzā (who also was not an eldest son) were ever kings. Certainly they were never what A.F. calls world-adorners and cannot for instance, be compared for kingly qualities, extent of dominion and duration of reign with Shāhrukh Mīrzā (Tīmūr's fourth son) or for intellectual eminence with Shāhrukh's illustrious son Ulugh Bēg. Indeed of the six who intervened between Tīmūr and Akbar, only three were kings, viz., Abū Sa‘īd, Bābar and Humāyūn.

↩

This is singular and perhaps refers to Amīr Fatḥu-l-lāh of Shīrāz.

↩

This seems a mistake. Tarmashīrīn was killed in 1330 according to D'Ohsson (IV. Table II.), and Mr. Oliver (R. A. S. J. XX. New Ser.) thinks he died in 1334. It would seem that he was living in 1333, for Ibn Baṭūṭa apparently visited him in that year and Mr. Oliver (J. A. S. B. 1891, II. eleven) gives one of his coins dated 733 (1333). Both D'Herbélot and Miles speak of Amīr Kazgān as ruling in Transoxiana at the time of Tīmūr's birth but Amīr Kazgān was only a rebellious subject. According to Sharafu-d-dīn—who ought to be a good authority and whom Mas‘ūdī servilely copies,—Sulṭān Qazān was the nominal ruler when Tīmūr was born and his reign lasted from 733-747 (1332-1346) but the real authority was possessed by Amīr Qazān.

(Bib. Ind. ed. has Qarān Sulṭān Khān and Prolegomena (A. S. B. MS. Oa, 26, p. 69a) Qarā Sulṭān Khān. Pétis de la Croix has Cazan. See also Miles 374. Sharafu-d-dīn dilates in the Prolegomena, on the birth of Tīmūr in this reign).

Later on, (I. 43) Sharafu-d-dīn states that Tughlaq Tīmūr, a grandson of Davā and nephew of Tarmashīrīn, came to Transoxiana in Rabī‘u-ṯ-ṯānī 761 (February 1360) and that in the 33 years previous, dating from the death of Tarmashīrīn, there had reigned eight kings of the Caghatāī line. This would fix Tarmashīrīn's death in 728 (1328). This is also the date expressly stated in the Prolegomena (A. S. B. MS. Oa, 26, p. 68b) as that when Tarmashīrīn was put to death by his cousin Purān.

The evidence of Ibn Baṭūṭa against this is perhaps not of overwhelming weight for he is always confused and vague about dates and he seemingly never clearly states when he saw Tarmashīrīn. But the evidence of the coin is more difficult to get over. It is not however quite conclusive for apart from the fact that posthumous coins are not unknown, we have the fact that there was an apparently fictitious claimant to the title of Tarmashīrīn and the coin of 733 might have been struck by him.

Mr. Oliver's opinion is that Jinkshī or Jinikishai was reigning in 736 and he doubts that Buzūn ever reigned. This is the statement in the R. A. S. J., but in the subsequent list in J. A. S. B., Buzūn is put down as having reigned from 742-44. On the other hand, Mr. Stanley Lane Poole, as quoted by Mr. Ney Elias, gives Buzūn as reigning in Transoxiana at Tīmūr's birth (Tārīkh-i-rashīdī, Intr. 49.)

↩

The Abū Sa‘īd “b. Algiaptou (i.e., son of Oljaitu)” of D'Herbélot who gives a long account of him and states that he was the last prince of the house of Cingīz whom the Mughals recognized. He was descended from Hulāgū Khān. The Shajratu-l-atrāk (Miles 309) says he died at the age of 32, childless, on 13 Rabī‘u-l-ākhar 736 (D'Ohsson and Beale, 30 Nov., 1335; Gladwin 1 Dec.). It was Abū Sa‘īd who put to death the famous historian and minister Rashīdu-d-dīn. D'Herbélot mentions that as the year 736 was full of calamities, it was designated ◌ lauẕ. This word both gives by abjad the figure 736 (viz., l=30, w=6, and ẕ=700), and also indicates by its meaning of “taking refuge,” the necessity for a protector of the Age, viz., Tīmūr.

↩

This is from the Ẓafarnāma (15) which states that Tīmūr practised hunting and the art of war from 10 years of age.

↩

Apparently he died in 761 or very early in 762, otherwise the corresponding cycle-year must have been that of the Ox. The Ẓafarnāma too, although not explicit, seems to say that Tīmūr's father died in 761,—the year in which Tughlaq Tīmūr invaded Transoxiana and Tīmūr's uncle, Ḥājī Barlās fled to Khurāsān. However the Tārīkh-i-Jahāngīr (the Prolegomena , of the Ẓafarnāma) gives (near the end) the date of Ṭarāghāī's death, 762.

↩

She died 785 (Ẓafarnāma I. 355).

↩

Abū-l-ḥamīd (Bādshāhnāma, 43), gives Tīmūr's age then as 35 yrs. 17 dys.

↩

Apparently on his birthday.

↩

Abū-l-ḥamīd says for 35 yrs. 11 ms. 5 dys.

↩

This might mean either Media and Babylonia or the cities of Kufa and Basra but here it is the former for Abū-l-ḥamīd who copies A.F. says (43) the ‘Irāqs of Arabia and Persia.

↩

Lit. to whomsoever Salvation was the friend of his fortune's day. Four MSS. have daulatash instead of daulat as in Text.

↩

Mūī-kashān lit. hair-dragging but here perhaps “dragged by the hair.”

↩

It was 6 Ẕī-l-qa‘da (6th November, 1387), according to Price (Retrospect III. 72.) The inhabitants rose against Tīmūr while negociations for the surrender of the city were going on and killed many of his soldiers. Tīmūr thus alludes to the affair (Institutes, White and Davy, 119) “And I conquered the city of Iṣpahān. And I trusted the people of Iṣpahān and I delivered the castle into their hands. And they rebelled and the Darogha whom I had placed over them, they slew with 300 of the soldiers. And I also commanded that a general slaughter should be made of the people of Iṣpahān.”

↩

D'Herbélot art. Madhaffar, and Rieu's Cat. I. 82 and 168a. The dynasty was known by the name of Āl-i-muẓaffar. It began in 718 (1318) and was overthrown by Tīmūr in 795 (1393). It ruled over Kirmān.

↩

D'Herbélot art. Toctamish.

↩

Jarrett III. 102.

↩

Tūqtamish at one time owed his kingdom to Tīmūr. He was a descendant of Cingīz through his son Jūjī.

↩

Khas ū khāshāk “weeds and briars.”

↩

D'Herbélot art. Mansor; Ẓafarnāma Bib. Ind. I. 608, and Gibbon Cap. 65. Manṣūr was killed by Shāhrukh and Gibbon says Tīmūr declared his esteem of the valour of his foe by extirpating all the males of so intrepid a race.

↩

Cf. Macaulay's account of Sir John Fenwick cocking his hat in Queen Mary's face.

↩

Alluding apparently to the taking of the famous White Fort (Qil‘a-i-safīd) 45 miles N.W. of Shīrāz and which was taken by Rustam also. (Hist. of Persia, Malcolm I. 27 and 46.)

↩

Afrāsīāb, i.e., conqueror of Persia. He was afterwards killed by Zāl and his son Rustam.

↩

Auliyā-i-daulat, but this phrase is often only a respectful way of mentioning the king himself.

↩

This was the first taking of Baghdād, in Sep. 1393. It was taken again 20th June, 1401.

↩

The bridge was of boats and rafts and made in two days and hardly entitled to be styled a jasr-i-‘ālī Tīmūr crossed where Jalālu-d-dīn Mangbarnī swam the river.

↩

A.F. has a short notice of this expedition in the Āīn, under the heading “Comers into India.” See Jarrett 349, where instead of “the booty obtained was not considerable” we should read “they did not value it” (the conquest of India). Sir A. Cunningham (Indian Eras) gives the date of the capture of Delhi as Wed. 18th Dec., 1398.

↩

The reference appears to be to the slaughter of prisoners from Aleppo, etc., after the first battle before Damascus (Ẓafarnāma II. 314). Among them were Shadūn, governor of Damascus and apparently many other rulers of Syrian cities. These had all assembled at Aleppo under the orders of the king of Egypt (l.c. II. 287.) Aḥmad ‘Arab Shāh tells how a number of the chief men of Damascus surrendered themselves to Tīmūr after the Sulṭān of Egypt had deserted the city and that many of these were afterwards put to death (Manger, II. Cap. VI and XIII).

Tīmūr killed them and also the prisoners taken in the battle, apparently because the king of Egypt had tried to have him assassinated and because he (the king) had put one of his ambassadors to death and imprisoned Altamsh Qujīn (l.c. II. 275). But the Text may also refer to Tīmūr's severities against the principal men of Damascus after he had taken the city. He was incensed against them because they were Sunnīs and belonged to the house of Yazīd, the slayer of Ḥusain, and because they had neglected the tomb of the Prophet's widows.

↩

I am not sure of the meaning of ẕall-i-qaid. Several MSS. write it without the iẓāfat and as if it were the name of a place. There is a town and fortress of Zillah in Asia Minor (near to which Cæsar gained his Veni, Vidi, Vici victory) but I cannot find that the Syrian Amīrs were confined there or that Tīmūr was ever there. Possibly ẕall is a variant for ẓill, shadow.

↩

Aḥmad ‘Arab Shāh, Thursday, 27 Zī-l-ḥijja (Thamuz). (Manger, II. 255.)

↩

Ham-‘inān, lit. equal-reined.

↩

Referring to announcements of victory sent to Persia, Tartary, etc. (Ẓafarnāma II. 447).

↩

Text, zīr-i-dast-i-shāhzāda but most MSS. have shāhzādahā and no doubt this is the true reading. I am also convinced that zīr is a mistake for zabar which I have found in one A.S.B.M.S. See Vullers s.v. zabardast where the meaning prior locus in consessu is given and also the phrase zabardast nishastan, locum altiorem, i.e., magis honoratum occupare, together with a very apposite Persian couplet.

I do not know whether A.F. was justified by his authorities for the statement in the Text. The Ẓafarnāma merely says Tīmūr gave Bāyazīd a seat near himself and the Rauẓatu-ṣ-ṣafā that Bāyazīd was given an honourable seat (sharaf-i-julūs).

A.F. knows nothing or says nothing about Bāyazīd's subsequent confinement in an iron cage (Gibbon). The story is, however, now regarded as disproved. The Rauẓat states that according to the testimony of an eye-witness, Tīmūr at first spoke roughly to Bāyazīd and reproached him for his obstinacy and folly. The Ẓafarnāma admits this but represents the reproaches as given after the removal of his chains.

Bāyazīd was restored to his kingdom and allowed the place of a subject or vassal prince (Ẓafarnāma II. 461). According to Hammer, the “cage” was a woman's litter. But a recent writer in the Z. D. M. G. has refuted Hammer and has, apparently unconsciously, vindicated the acumen of Gibbon.

↩

This statement is misplaced. Tīmūr went to Āẕarbāījān before the battle of Angora and the “18 months” referred to seems the interval between the taking of Damascus in January, 1401 and the battle of Angora in July, 1402. A.F. says nothing of the capture of Smyrna from the Knights of St. John which occurred after the battle of Angora in 805 (December, 1402) and was one of Tīmūr's greatest achievements. The whole of A.F.'s account of Tīmūr is very poor and bears marks of haste.

↩

A town in Māzindarān, on the Caspian. It takes its name from a neighbouring mountain which yields turquoise or according to another derivation, is the “Hill of Victory.” (D'Herbélot art. Firouzcouh and Réclus 242.) It was seen by Clavigo who calls it Berescote, when on his way to visit Tīmūr (Markham, 101).

↩

The Diet and entertainment described by Clavigo and Gibbon and at which six marriages of Tīmūr's grandchildren were celebrated. It took place September, 1404, at Samarqand.

↩

Lat. 44 N. Long. 67 E. and about 300 miles N. by E. of Samarqand on right bank of the Sīhūn (Jaxartes). Bābar (Erskine I. 11n.) says it was called also Yenghi. Hence it is the Yenghi-kent (New Town) of Turkistān mentioned in the Āīn (Jarrett, III. 101).

↩

Tīmūr's Memoirs and Ẓafarnāma, 777. See Ẓafarnāma I. 271 where it is said that 777 corresponds with the Crocodile Year. The death was in the beginning of 777 and so about June 1375.

↩

I do not know the authority for this statement. Sūrī Ḥiṣār is mentioned in the Ẓafarnāma (II. 448) and Pétis de la Croix says it is a fortress between Angora and Kutaya (Cotyaeum). See also Retrospect, Price, III. 397. In Réclus' map it is Sivri Hissar.

But the Ẓafarnāma does not say Muḥammad Sulṭān died there. What it says is (II. 492) that he died three stages from Qarā Ḥiṣār (Black Fort) while his father was having him conveyed in a travelling-litter,—apparently from Qarā Ḥiṣār for change of air. (See for account of his illness and death, Ẓafarnāma II. 490. Also Price l.c. III. 424.) The Ẓafarnāma gives date of death 18 Sha‘bān, (11th March, 1403), and thus about a fortnight after Bāyazīd's; according to Hammer, four days only—he putting Bāyazīd's death 14 Sha‘bān, 803 (8th March, 1403). According to Aḥmad ‘Arab Shāh (Manger, I. 147) Muḥammad Sulṭān died in Āq Shahr where died also Bāyazīd.

One MS. (B.M. Add. 27, 247) has dar sawārī for dar sūrī and possibly this is the true reading, for apparently Muḥammad Sulṭān died in his travelling-litter.

↩

D'Herbélot and several MSS., Yār. Tāz appears right. For account of the murder (which was committed near Shibarghan, W. of Balkh) see Hist. of Bukhārā, Vambéry 215 and ‘Abdu-r-razzāk, Quatremère, Notices et Extraits XIV. 101. Pīr ‘Alī was afterwards put to death by Shāhrukh.

↩

Also Kharmānū. It is a petty fort in Kurdistān. The prince had been sent for by his father from Persia and was on his way to join him in Diyārbakr. He was killed by an arrow from the fort while reconnoitering it. (Rauẓatu-ṣ-ṣafā B.M. Add. 27, 236, 107b, and lith. ed. VI. 69; also Retrospect, Price, III. 172).

↩

Text wa, after ‘Irāq, is wrong.

↩

Syria can hardly have been among these for it was not conquered until after the Indian expedition.

↩

Text ◌ sar-i-qūc, but Ẓafarnāma, qūc which Vullers translates aries bellicosus. But sar-i-qūc also means roe-deer and Pétis de la Croix translates it chevreuil (Book V. Cap. I. 189). The Ḥabību-s-siyar calls the animal a qūc-kuhi, qu. ibex. Sar-i-qūc does not occur in the Dictionaries and is perhaps a mistake for sāī-qūc, a desert-antelope. Shaw's voc. gives Sāī-kūk, for an antelope.

For an account of the accident which occurred in the autumn of 798 (1396) and thus some two yrs. before the Indian expedition, see Ẓafarnāma II. 200; Retrospect, Price, III. 292 and Rauẓatu-ṣ-ṣafā Book VI. 98 lith. ed. where further details are given such as that Mīrān Shāh took up the deer on his saddle bow and that it fell off and so startled the horse. The accident was near Tabrīz where there were not likely to have been wild sheep.

↩

Ẓafarnāma, head and face.

↩

Clavigo (Markham 95) saw Mīrān Shāh at Sultania and describes him as 40 yrs. of age and a large, corpulent and gouty man. He describes his misconduct and why he had been deprived of power by his father.

↩

Notices et Extraits, Quatremère XIV, 135 and Rauẓatu-ṣ-ṣafā lith. ed. VI. 168 and Price l.c. IV. 504. The last two give date 26 Zī-l-qa‘da 810.

↩

See Blochmann's Āīn, Genealogical Table.

↩

This is said merely for the jingle farzand-i-daulat-paiwand. In fact Sulṭān Muḥammad never reigned. It seems (Ẓafarnāma II. 735) that he died before his father and grandfather, i.e., before 807, for he is not named in the Ẓafarnāma, among Tīmūr's surviving 36 sons and grandsons. This may account for Clavigo's not mentioning him and it also shows how confused and unreliable A.F.'s account is. A.F. would lead us to suppose Sulṭān Muḥammad living when Khalīl was sent by his uncle Shāhrukh (Price l.c. IV. 521) in 812 (March, 1410), to Rhey or Rey (Rhages) where he died in Rajab 814 (2nd November, 1411). If as is most probable, Sulṭān Muḥammad Mīrzā died so early— before even his father had acceded to power—A.F.'s representing him as a Jahān-ārāī wālā-qadr (powerful world-adorner) and as typified by one of the seven stars of Qacūlī's dream, becomes doubly ridiculous.

↩

Perhaps the lady called Khānzāda by Sharafu-d-dīn (205), Clavigo, etc., who went off to Samarqand and reported her husband's insanity to Tīmūr. Clavigo says she was the mother of Khalīl and it seems probable from their living together that Khalīl and Sulṭān Muḥammad were full brothers. Clavigo (147) calls her Hansada. He says “She was of the lineage of the old emperors and for this reason, Timur Beg treats her with great respect.” This points to her identity with Mihr Nūsh to whose lofty lineage A.F. refers. Qīyā seems the same as Qiyāt mentioned by A.F. in the account of Irganaqūn but I do not know the tribe Fūlād (steel).

↩

Bābar, Erskine, Introduction LIV.

↩

White sheep. (Price l.c. III. 608). The proper spelling appears to be Āq-quyan-lū. The Black sheep are the Qarāquyanlū. Āẕūn Ḥasan, i.e., Ḥasan the Long, was maternal grandfather of Shāh Ismā‘īl Ṣafavī, king of Persia.

↩

This is the occurrence referred to by Herbélot in his notice of Abū Sa‘īd. He says that in 861 (1457), Abū Sa‘īd was in a bad humour owing to having failed to capture the citadel of Herāt and that at this time, some evil-disposed persons told him that Sulṭān Ibrāhīm Mīrzā (a grandson of Bāysanghar and great-grandson of Shāhrukh) had sent messengers to Sulṭāna Gauhar Shād and that he had a secret understanding with her. In consequence, Abū Sa‘īd hastily ordered her to be put to death. She was the widow of Shāhrukh, the great-grandfather of Yādgār and had been living in Herāt which had been her husband's capital and where he had died in 850 (1447). Abū Sa‘īd had taken the town but had failed to get possession of the citadel.

↩

Gauhar Shād (Jewel of Delight) seems to have been Shāhrukh's favourite wife, and Vambéry states (Hist. of Bukhārā, 236) that some of his verses about her are still remembered by the people of Herāt. Bābar speaks of visiting her tomb. She must have been an elderly woman when put to death, and the vengeance taken by her descendant was not excessive and was in accordance with the Muḥammadan law of retaliation. She was put to death on 10 Ramaẓān, 861 (31st July, 1457. Price l.c. IV, 598.) See inscription on her tomb in Cap. Yates “Notes on the City of Herāt.” (J.A.S.B. 1887, Vol. 56, p. 98.) She is there called Gauhar Shād Āghā and the date of her death is given only as the middle of Ramaẓān, 861. Yādgār was only a boy at the time, for Bābar (88) speaks of him as an inexperienced lad of 17 or 18 when he was killed at Herāt in the following year, 1470.

↩

A. F.'s list of Abū Sa‘īd's sons does not agree with Khwāndamīr and is incorrect. S. Maḥmūd was the second, and S. Muḥammad the third son. Abū Sa‘īd left eleven sons, and it would appear in spite of Bābar's own statements, that his father was the 6th and not the fourth son, the 5th being Ulugh Bēg. The 11th son was apparently a Sulṭān ‘Umar, who was distinct from ‘Umar Shaikh.

↩

“The valley of Gez or Manna which lies on the Dihas or Balkhab, south of Balkh.” (Erskine l. c. 7n.) According to Sir H. Rawlinson, (R. G. S. Pro. 1876, 170n.) Daragaz means valley of the tamarisk. As Abū Sa‘īd had sent ‘Umar Shaikh from Samarqand, the latter would pass Dara-gaz on his way to Afghānistān.

↩

Abū Sa‘īd's famous six months' festival which he celebrated at Merv, in 1465 and in honour of the circumcision of his sons.

↩

Apparently Ōzkand in Eastern Farghāna.

↩

‘Umar Shaikh was then only ten years old. Much of this is from Bābar's Memoirs.

↩

His full name is Khudābandī Tīmūr Tāsh. (Bābar, Erskine 8 and 14.)

↩

This is hardly a fair description of Yūnus Khān's proceedings. ‘Umar Shaikh made over his capital Akhsī to Yūnus and then repented and made war on him. He was defeated and taken prisoner and owed his life to Yūnus’ generosity. (Tār. Rashīdī, 96.)

↩

All this is from Bābar. (Erskine 8 and also Pavét de Courteille.) But the Turkish seems more concise than the Persian. A.F. probably used the latter for his account is in closer accord with Erskine than with De Courteille.

↩

This story is told in Bābar's Memoirs (8). The stress laid on this simple act of honesty by Bābar and A.F. is rather significant of the morals of the time. Probably ‘Umar Shaikh's self-denial on this occasion inspired his son Bābar to similar action towards the Hindustānī merchants at Kilāt-i-ghilzāī. (Memoirs 225.)

↩

For references to this saint, see Tār. Rashīdī 97, etc., and Nafaḥātu-l-uns, Lees, 465. He lived in Samarqand. Dr. Rieu gives the date of his death as 29th Rabī‘ I. 895 (2nd March, 1490), (Pers. Cat. III, 1086a). See also Blochmann 423.

↩

Apparently only the fort was on the edge of the ravine and the town some distance off. The fort looked down on the Sīhūn and ‘Umar Shaikh had increased the steepness of the precipice by scarping the rock of the ravine. Perhaps this partly caused the accident.

↩

The modern name is Marghīlān (Erskine l.c. 3n.) It is west of Andijān.

↩

A town north, of Kābul and east of Balkh. Sometimes spelled Khunduz. (Tārīkh-i-rashīdī, 239.)

↩

Perhaps the meaning is that she could not distinguish Bābar from his foster-brother. (See Erskine, 10 and P. de Courteille, 17). The non-recognition of her brother is curious considering that she was about 24 when separated from him and also that Ḥaidar Mīrzā says (Ney Elias 239) that Shaibānī divorced her on account of his suspecting her attachment to her brother. When Bābar left her she became the wife of Shaibānī and had a son by him. The Shaibānī-nāma says her marriage with Shaibānī was a love-match and it seems probable that Bābar has not mentioned the whole of the circumstances and that her being left behind was a part of Bābar's agreement with Shaibānī. Ḥaidar Mīrzā, Bābar's cousin, distinctly states (Tārīkh-i-rashīdī, Ney Elias, 175, 196 and 239) that Bābar gave his sister to Shaibānī. Bābar's own daughter Gulbadan mentions the arrangement in her Memoirs, so that there can be no doubt as to the fact. When Shaibānī divorced Khānzāda, he gave her in marriage to a Sayyid, but he as well as Shaibānī, was killed in the battle of Merv.

↩

A.F.'s account of ‘Umar Shaikh's family as well as of Farghāna (Khōkand) is taken almost verbatim from Bābar, Memoirs. He omits the name of Bābar's third daughter, Shahrbānū Bēgum, from the list, nor can she be the nameless daughter mentioned at the end of his account by A.F. for her mother was Anūsh Āghā whereas Shahrbānū was full sister of Nāṣir Mīrzā son of a concubine named Ummēd. In fact A.F. has confused Mihrbānū and Shahrbānū. The former was two years older than Bābar and it was Shahrbānū, misnamed Mihrbānū by A.F., who was eight years younger than Bābar. Bābar gives the youngest daughter's name as Ruqīya and not Raẓīya as in A.F.

The Turkish version of Bābar's Memoirs gives, apparently wrongly, Qarā-gūz as a sobriquet of Bābar's sister instead of his step-mother. The nameless daughter mentioned by A.F. is referred to later by Bābar (Erskine 14 and P. de Courteille 25) so that in fact ‘Umar Shaikh had six daughters. The wife whom the text calls Anūsh Āghā is called by Bābar, Ūlūs Āghā and a note to the text states that this name appears in many MSS. She was removed from the harem a few months after she had given birth to a daughter.

With reference to A.F.'s omission of the name of the third daughter Shahrbānū, it is curious to note that a similar omission occurs in two MSS. of the Persian translation of Bābar's Memoirs, B. M. Add. 24, 416 and 26,200, though No. 26,200 has a marginal correction giving her name.

↩

World-gripper, Paradise-inhabiting, Defender of the Faith, Muḥammad Bābar (Lion), the holy warrior-king. Bābar is commonly said to mean lion or tiger, but this seems to me a little doubtful, for the word for lion is babr, not bābar. Besides why should the Turks use a Persian word? May it not be connected with the Caghatāī word bābari or bayarī old or primitive. See P. de Courteille, Turc Dict. 155.

↩

Cār bālish-i-haft manẓar, lit. four cushions or elements, seven scenes or theatres. The four cushions mean four thrones and so four quarters of the world.

↩

Another favourite expression is fanā ū baqā for which see Notices et Extraits, S. de Sacy, XII., 327n. Fanā is used by mystics for the Ṣūfī's relation to externals, viz. his dying to them and baqā for his relation to God.

↩

Usually Junaid but here Junīd, unless Bāyazīd be written Bāyazaid. Junaid was a famous ascetic known as Al-Baghdādī and is said to have performed the pilgrimage to Mecca thirty times, on foot and alone. (Beale art. Junaid). He died about 909 A.D. See Nafaḥātu-l-uns, Lees, 89, No. 81 and Jarrett III. 352, where however A. F.'s account is only an abridgement of Jānī. S. de Sacy has translated Jāmī's life of Junaid. (Notices et Extraits XII, 366 et seq.)

Bāyazīd is Bāyazīd Bisṭāmī, also known as Ṭayfūr b. ‘Īsā. He, as well as Junaid, belonged to the Naqshbandī order and he was Junaid's his predecessor and teacher. According to the Khazīnatu-l-auliyā (I, 519) Junaid said, “Bāyazīd among us is like Gabriel among the angels.” Bāyazīd was descended from a family of fire-worshippers and was a native of Bisṭām in Persia. (S.S.E. of the Caspian and 3 m. N.E. of Shāhrūd.) He died 261 A.H. (874 A.D.) and is buried in Bisṭām. See Meynard's Yāqūt 104, Jarrett III., 352 and 359 and Curzon's Persia I., 283 who spells the name of the town Bostam and notices the saint's tomb.

↩

Text, Bīsun Tava.

↩

T. R. 173, calls the author of the chronogram Munīr Marghīnānī and describes him as having been one of the ‘ulamā of Ulugh Bēg. The Luck. ed. calls him Jāmī Qarākūlī. I have consulted the B. M. MSS. of T. R., the name is not clear, it may be Munīr or Mushīr. Erskine (MS. trs. Add. No. 26, 612) calls him merely Maulānā Marghīnānī. Munīr means illustrious in Arabic and may here be descriptive, so that the difference between the two names may be only as to that of origin, viz., Marghīnān or Qarākūl.

Qarākūl (Black Lake) is about 28 miles S. W. of Bukhārā. (Bābar, Ers. 54.)

↩

Bābar, Ers. Intro. LXI.

↩

Referring to throws at dice, I suppose. Shash-ḥarf and ‘adad-i-khair both yield 888, viz., 2sh=600, ḥ=8, r=200 and f=80, total 888. Again, a=70, 2d=8, kh=600, i=10, r=200, total 888. The great standard was called shash tughjī. (T. R.l. c. 93.) The chronogram is in six letters, viz., sh, sh, m, ḥ, r, m.

↩

Bābar, Ers., Mīrzā's Gate.

↩

Apparently the Shīrun Ṭaghāī mentioned in T. R. l. c. 228, as maternal uncle of Bābar and as a pillar of the State. See too Bābar, Ers. 59 and 94. Apparently he was Bābar's grand-uncle, being his mother's uncle. (Erskine, B. and H. I, 334) Ṭaghāī or ṭaqāī means maternal uncle in Caghatāī and Firishta calls him the taghāī of ‘Umar Shaikh Mīrzā.

↩

P. de C. (I. 32), Alaja and Bābar, (Ers. 18) Ilcheh. His real name was Sulṭān Aḥmad Khān and Ilcheh is a sobriquet meaning slayer. (Ers. l. c. 13). He was a son of Yūnus Khān and half-brother of Bābar's mother.

↩

Many horses were drowned in crossing the Kaba and many died of discase.

↩

Apparently a clerical error for 18, viz., for the period from 899 to 917. Some MSS. seem to have 15 (which is easily confounded with 11) and Price has 15. (Ret. IV, 666.)

↩

The Text reads as if it were Bāyasanghar who came from Andijān but Bābar's Mem. show what is meant.

↩

(Bābar, Ers. 73.) Bāyasanghar, who was a poet, was second son of Sulṭān Muḥammad Mīrzā of Herāt, the second son of Abū Sa‘īd. He was put to death on 17th August, 1499. (Bābar, Ers. 72.) Mas‘ūd was his brother. See account of his being blinded l. c. 63. It was in 1497 that Bābar drove Bāyasanghar out of Samarqand.

↩

Text ṣāḥibqarānī which does not make sense. Luck. ed. and several MSS., qarānī, calamity or crisis. ◌ qairān seems to be Turkish for breaking. This passage must refer to Khusrū Shāh's treatment of Bābar when he came to Ḥiṣār (Ḥiṣār-i-shādmān) on his flight from Samarqand in 907. Bābar says, (Ers. 126), “Twice did my course lie through the country of this Khusrū Shāh, so famed for his liberal conduct and generosity, and that humanity which he displayed to the meanest of men, he never showed to me.” See also T. R. 175. See Ers.'s remarks on Bābar's behaviour to Khusrū Shāh (125).

↩

Bābar, Ers. 131 and 132. T. R. 176.

↩

Leyden states that seven mules go to a string (qaṭār), (Bābar 132) but A. F. (Blochmann 152) gives five as the number.

↩

Bābar, Ers. 171n.

↩

The year 905 began 4th June but the earthquake must have been in July. From Bābar's Memoirs, it appears that it occurred about 40 days after his mother's death which was in the beginning of the year.

↩

Also Pemghān. Bābar, Ers. 146. It is S. or S. W. of Kābul.

↩

Text, yak kata bāsh andāz which is unintelligible. I have examined the two B. M. Persian MSS. of Bābar's Memoirs. In both, the passage is the same but in the margin of Add. No. 26, 200—the copy used by Erskine—we have bir kata tāsh andāz. No doubt tāsh (Turk. stone) is correct. Kata is Turkish for large but its use here in that sense is not apparent unless we take tāshandāz as one word and say “a great” or “long stone-throw.” Neither Erskine nor P. de Courteille translates kata by great. I should be inclined to regard it as the Hindūstānī kitta and as pleonastic; yak kitta tāsh might then mean merely a stone. The passages in the B. M. MSS. are p. 135b of No. 24,416 and p. 141a of No. 26,200.

↩

Now Sirghac. Bābar, Ers. 146n.

↩

Ers. (Bābar, 170) has “to the plain” (maidān) but P. de C. (I, 349) seems correct in taking it as the name of a place, Maidān. His trs. completes the description by saying there were holes large enough for a man to hide in.

↩

Ers. (B. and H. I, 229) notes that there was an earthquake at Āgra on 5th July, 1505. Elliot (V, 99) gives Sunday, 3rd Ṣafar (6th July).

↩

P. de C., Kāhmard. Wood (Journey to Source of the Oxus, 132), Kamrūd. It is in Afghanistān, N.-W. of Kābul and according to Bābar (Ers. 199) in a valley not far from the Dandān-shikan (tooth-breaking) Pass.

↩

Bābar (Ers. 200) says that he went on “from a regard to the reputation of our family though I also had other motives,” apparently to try conclusions once more with Shaibānī.

↩

The folly consisted in the dual appointment for A.F. and his school held that kingship, being the shadow of Godhead, must be single. Bābar, referring to the joint appointment, says, (199) “This was a strange arrangement. A joint kingship was never before heard of. The well-known words of Shaikh Sa‘dī in the Gulistān (I, 3) are very applicable to it. Ten dervishes sleep in one coverlet (galīm) but two kings have not room in one clime (iqlīm).” See also T. R. 196.

↩

Text, wrongly, wafāt kard ōghlat (Bābar, Ers. 214). This Muḥammad Ḥusain was the father of Bābar's cousin Ḥaidar, author of the T. R.

↩

Bābar's cousin; being son of Sulṭān Muḥammad Mīrzā, third son of Sulṭān Abū Sa‘īd and Sulṭān Nigār Khānum, daughter of Yūnus Khān and Shāh Bēgum. He was thus doubly Bābar's cousin, being son of Bābar's father's elder brother and of his mother's half-sister. Mīrzā Khān's proper name was Sulṭān Vais Mīrzā. Khusrū Shāh killed his brother Bāyasanghar and blinded his brother Mas‘ūd. He afterwards became king of Badakhshān.

↩

The report was that they had imprisoned Bābar in the Eagle Castle, near Herāt. (Mem. 214).

↩

T. R. l. c. 356. Both Bābāī and Muḥammad Aḥmad Kōhbar afterwards rebelled against Bābar.

↩

Bābar, Ers. 214, Khalīfa Muḥibb ‘Alī Qurca.

↩

Price (Ret. IV, 67) renders this, mountain-piercer, but it probably comes from the town Kōhbar, in Sind, mentioned by Jarrett, (II, 337). Kōhbar appears also to be the name of a Caghatāī tribe (Blochmann 613n.) Mr. Blochmann quotes the name of Muḥammad Qāsim Kōhbar as that of a poet; perhaps this is the Kōhbar of the Text.

↩

Taken from T. R. l. c. 200.

↩

Apparently from excessive drinking.

↩

Daughter of the king of Badakhshān and widow of Yūnus, Bābar's maternal grandfather. Bābar's own grandmother was Ais or Isān Daulat Bēgum. (Memoirs, Ers. 12.)

↩

Ers. B. and H. I, 253 and T. R. 200. The Text is not quite clear.

↩

Eldest daughter of Yūnus Khān. She was first married to Sulṭān Aḥmad Mīrzā, uncle of Bābar, and on his death, to Shaibānī. (T. R. 96 and 196). Bābar, in order that he might escape from Samarqand, gave his sister Khānzāda in marriage to Shaibānī and as she was niece of Mihr Nigār, Shaibānī divorced the latter “as it was unlawful for both to be married to the same man.” Mihr Nigār died childless. (T. R. 155).

A.F. has apparently taken his account from the Tārīkh-i-rashīdī but has altered its language. Erskine who, I believe, had not read the T. R. when editing Leyden's Bābar, makes some mistakes here. (Bābar, 217 and 218). It is clear that the Khānum was Mihr Nigār, Bābar's maternal aunt. She was probably called Khānum because she was the eldest daughter and indeed eldest child of Yūnus Khān, by his chief wife, Isān Daulat Bēgum. (T. R. 86). She was also the only surviving daughter of that marriage, for her younger sister, Bābar's mother, had lately died. The Khānum was certainly not Khūb Nigār for she had died some years earlier. (Bābar, Ers. 99 and T. R. 157 where we are told that Khūb Nigār died a year and a half before 907=1500 or 1501). Nor is it correct to say that A.F. speaks of Mīrzā Khān's being brought by his mother Sulṭān Nigār. His mother was the daughter of Yūnus Khān by Shāh Bēgum but, as Erskine correctly states, she does not appear to have been at Kābul at the time. (It should, however, here be said that Gulbadan, in her Memoirs, describes Khān Mīrzā as having been brought before Bābar by his mother, Sulṭān Nigār. This must be a mistake, I think). She was first married to Sulṭān Maḥmūd, son of Sulṭān Abū Sa‘īd, and had by him one son, viz., the Mīrzā Khān or Sulṭān Vais of the Text and afterwards king of Badakhshān. Sulṭān Maḥmūd died in January, 1495, and some years later (Bābar 13) she was married to ‘Ādil Sulṭān (Ers., Uzbak Sulṭān) and when ‘Ādil died, to his brother, Qāsim Khān (the famous ruler of the Kirghises who defeated Shaibānī's troops, T. R. 373). Ḥaidar Mīrzā's account, from which A.F. has copied, may be seen in Ney Elias and Ross’ trs. (200) but the word grandson is there a mistake for nephew. The MS. of Ḥaidar's Text has apparently not nabīra but yugan or “yezneh,” nephew, as Erskine has written in the margin of his MS. trs. of T. R. B. M. Add. No. 26,162. Erskine has apparently written yezneh but the right word seems to be ◌ yugan which like the Latin nepos, means both a nephew and a grandchild. Perhaps nabīra has a similar double meaning. ◌ the yezneh of Erskine is given by P. de Courteille as brother-in-law or son-in-law. A.F. calls Mihr Nigār the Khālazāda, i.e., cousin of Bābar and the same word appears in the T. R. Erskine in a marginal note (B. M. Add. No. 26, 612, 192) observes that this word which signifies cousin, seems an error. I am not sure that the original word is not khālazāid which perhaps might be held to mean a birth-aunt or full-aunt. Or perhaps it is khānazāda, home-born in allusion to her being his mother's full sister.

The discrepancies in the three accounts, viz., Bābar's (Ers. 217, etc.) Ḥaidar's and A.F.'s, are curious. Bābar is presumably most correct. for Ḥaidar was but a child at the time, but Ḥaidar's account, derived presumably from his father, is the most graphic. He says that just after Bābar had laid his head in his grandmother's lap, the aunt Mihr Nigār Khānum came in. He saluted her and then she bade him go to the castle and see his family and that she would come there after him. He went and she followed, bringing with her, her nephew (Mīrzā Khān) and Ḥaidar's father, Muḥammad Ḥusain. Bābar advanced to meet her and she said, “O life of your (dead) mother, I have brought your guilty nephew and your unfortunate cousin.” (Ai jān-i-mādar yezneh (or yugan)-i-gunāhgār ū birādar-i-nāsāzkār bar āwurdam.) “What do you say to them?” A. F. has altered the words which Bābar used to his grandmother. Shāh Bēgum and Mihr Sulṭān afterwards went towards Badakhshān with Khān Mīrzā but the ladies were caught on the road by Abū Bakr and taken to Kāshghar where they were imprisoned and eventually perished miserably. Evidently Mihr Nigār was strongly attached to her step-mother and her nephew and perhaps she was displeased with Bābar for having contributed to her divorce. Bābar expresses himself as vexed at her leaving him for Badakhshān. “It would have been better and more becoming for her to have remained with me.” (Ers. 232).

↩

This is in accordance with T. R. 201, but Bābar says he got leave to go to Khurāsān. It would seem from T. R. that both Mīrzā Khān and Maḥmūd Ḥasan got leave to go to Qandahār but that the latter went as far then, while Mīrzā Khān stayed. Ḥaidar says his father went on because he wished to go to Mecca. He, however accepted an invitation from Shaibānī and was killed by him.

↩

T. R. 357, Bābar besieged Qandahār for 5 years and 5 months.

↩

Half-brother only of Jahāngīr and Bābar, his mother being a concubine. (Bābar, Ers. 10).

↩

Probably Rāgh a hill-district in N.-W. Badakhshān and not the Rāg which is the Rhages of Tobit and lies south of Teheran. See T. R. 203n.

↩

The express was sent by Mīrzā Khān from Badakhshān. The courier had traversed the Hindū Kush in the snow and got frost-bitten. He arrived early in Ramaẓān which in that year began 3rd December. Ers. B. and H. I, 306 and T. R. 237).

↩

Lit. turned the reins of his world-traversing steed. Ers. B. and H. I, 322 and T. R. 260 for account of battle. ‘Ubaidu-l-lāh, called also Sulṭān, married Mīrzā Ḥaidar's sister and became king of Bukhārā. He was Shaibānī's nephew.

↩

Ers. B. and H. I, 325 and T. R. 261. Ghajdiwān is north of Bukhārā. The battle was apparently fought on 3 Ramaẓān 918 (12th November, 1512). Najm means star and the real name of the general was Yār Muḥammad. He is said to have been Finance Minister. He seems to have been put to death in cold blood and in revenge for the massacre of Karshī.

↩

He did not go direct to Kābul but first to Ḥisār and was there nearly murdered by the mutinous Mughals. Thence to Kunduz and “at last, despairing altogether of recovering Ḥiṣār, he returned to Kābul.” The date of his return does not seem known but probably it was in 920, (1514). Ers. B. and H. I, 329n.

↩

Bābar, Ers. 156. Bābar (309) seems to reckon the expedition of 925 as the first of the five, and Firishta and Khāfī Khān take the same view. Ers. B. and H. I, 417n.

↩

Jarrett II, 399 and Bābar, Ers. 141n. Bādām Cashma is a pass S. of the Kābul River and between Little Kābul and Barīk-āl.

↩

Now Jalālābād. Ers. (B. and H. I, 233. Jarrett II, 405). But Ādānīapūr lay about a mile south of the modern Jalālābād.

↩

Āīn V. Jarrett II, 394.

↩

From Jamrūd, Bābar rode out to Bikram (Peshawar).

↩

The change here described occurs at Gandamak. Bābar's Mem. 157 and Erskine's note.

↩

Text, “some Caghatāīs.” The Luck. ed. is right. (Bābar Ers. 156 and 256). The “avarice” refers to Bāqī's love of plunder. He was younger brother of Khusrū Shāh, Bābar's Memoirs, 128, Caghānīān was in Transoxiana. T. R. 177n.

↩

Text, Newar. Jarrett II, 389, 399 n. 6.

↩

The Belah of Ers. p. 163. Apparently the Darbēlah of the Āīn Jarrett II, 334. Caghānīān is a name given to Ḥiṣār. Bābar. Ers. Intro. XXXV.

↩

Jarrett, II, 397. Dukī means a hill or hill-country. Text, Kī. Luck. ed. ◌. See Bābar 164n. and 149 where the expedition is described.

↩

Bābar, Ers., 232.

↩

Jarrett II, 406.

↩

Also ◌ zhāla. (Farhang-i-rashīdī s. v.). The Burhān-i-qāṭi‘ describes a raft as a thing made of wood and grass on (? under) which inflated massaks are laid and which is used for crossing deep streams. Probably Bābar used one only for crossing the river. Raverty (Notes, 34) quotes a description of a raft from Jahāngīr's Memoirs. This kind of raft is still in use. “From Jalālābād we embarked on rafts of inflated skins and dropped down with the stream to Peshawur.” (Journey to the source of the Oxus. Wood, 280). See too “At the Court of the Amīr,” Gray, 12.

↩

Bābar, Ers., 143. The two places are on opposite sides of the river of Caghānserāī or Kameh, Jarrett II, 392n.

↩

Also ◌ zhāla. (Farhang-i-rashīdī s. v.). The Burhān-i-qāṭi‘ describes a raft as a thing made of wood and grass on (? under) which inflated massaks are laid and which is used for crossing deep streams. Probably Bābar used one only for crossing the river. Raverty (Notes, 34) quotes a description of a raft from Jahāngīr's Memoirs. This kind of raft is still in use. “From Jalālābād we embarked on rafts of inflated skins and dropped down with the stream to Peshawur.” (Journey to the source of the Oxus. Wood, 280). See too “At the Court of the Amīr,” Gray, 12.

↩

This name does not seem known now. Ers. (Bābar, 142n.) suggests Bādpāsh. Price remarks (173n.) that he has not been able to find in the maps any of the places mentioned in this expedition. I have altered the names of the Text so as to accord with Erskine.

↩

One MS. has “This writing has not yet disappeared.”

The pass was east of Kābul and near the Lamghan (Laghman) district. (Bābar, Ers., 142). According to Raverty, (Notes, 100) the proper spelling is ◌ Bādpaj;— bād meaning wind and paj or fajj Ar. for pass. “Thus Bādpaj means the Windy Pass, the name being given on account of the strong wind generally blowing there and which at times, renders its passage impracticable.” Probably then this is the pass described by a friend (? Alexander Burnes, Erskine Hist. I, 517) of Mr. Erskine as Bādpāsh. (Bābar, Ers., 142n.) “Bādpāsh is a steep kotal (pass) half a day's journey to the north of Andrūr on the Kābul River and about 16 or 18 miles west of Targarī where the streams of Alingār and Alishang join.” (l. c. 142n.)

↩

Bābar merely says that the change took place at this period but, by the word tārīkh, A.F. seems to mean that the title was adopted in the inscription. It would be interesting to know if it still exists. Bābar complains that it was not well cut.

↩

Text, Saturday but Monday, MSS. and Bābar's Memoirs? de Courteille II. 36 note.

↩

T. R., 468. According to Bābar's Mem. Bajaur was taken before Sulṭān ‘Alā'u-d-dīn's arrival and not after, as A. F.'s account implies.

↩

Bābar married her. (Ers., 250n.) Her name was Bībī Mubārak according to Raverty. (Notes, 234). Erskine, Bābar's Memoirs, 251n. calls her Bībī Macherikah.

↩

Siwād means also blackness.

↩

Text, partāl but the word is Hindūstānī and spelt partal.

↩

Perhaps there are two Bhīras. (Bābar, Ers., 253n.) Bābar speaks (253) of Jūd as 7 kos from Bhīra and (255) of the middle of Jūd's being 10 kos from Bhīra. Jūd evidently belonged to the Salt Range. Erskine remarks that Bābar's account of it is not very exact and that he considered all the rough and mountainous country between the Khaibar and Salt Ranges to be one hill. Erskine or rather Leyden (for the latter's translation comes down to this point) says (254) “This hill got the name of Jūd from a supposed resemblance to the celebrated hill of Jūd (Ararat).” This makes Bābar and A.F. more intelligible but the passage is not in the Turkish (P. de C. II, 54) and has the air of being a marginal note which has slipped into the text. Moreover Ararat is Jūdī or Jūda and not Jūd. Nor does it seem likely that there is any resemblance between the lofty isolated Ararat and a spur of the Salt Range. Jūd is probably Sanscrit yuddha ‘war.’ The reference to the Kūh-i-Jūd in the Ẓafarnāma is at II, 48, 1. 1.

↩

About ten or eleven pence each, (Bābar, Ers., 254n. and 335) so that the sum levied was some £20,000. The Text might read that this money was given to Hindū Bēg and has been so understood by Price (Ret. IV, 674), but if so, A F. seems to have mistaken his anthority (Bābar, 256, 258 and 309) where Bābar says he divided the money among his troops. P. de C. (II, 64) does not mention the sum 400,000 shs. but represents Bābar as stating that he assembled the headmen of Bhīra and fixed their ransom at a thousand shāhrukhīs apiece. A.F.'s Text has cahār ṣad shāhrukhī māl and which is unintelligible. The MSS. give the correct māl-i-amān, price of peace.

↩

Incorrect. Bābar says (Ers., 260) that he bestowed Khushāb on Lenger Khān who was the prime cause and adviser of the expedition and that he left him behind to support Hindū Bēg. Khushāb is on the right bank of the Jhelam while Bhīra is on the left.

↩

P. de C. II, 62 gives Thursday 1 Rabī'u-l-awwal (3rd March, 1519). Apparently the ambassador was sent partly to claim some portions of the Panjāb which had been held by the Turks from the days of Tīmūr.

↩

Erskine considers the date of Sikandar's death uncertain but would put it in 1518 (B. and H. I, 407n.) but there does not seem sufficient reason for doubting Firishta's statement that he died in November 1517. Bābar's statement (Ers., 257) is too loosely expressed to be relied on.

↩

The affix āl is Turkish and means ‘to take,’ so that Hindāl would mean “taken of India.” According to Bābar, P. de Courteille II, 46 (the passage is not in Erskine) the name was given by Māhim the wife of Bābar and adopting mother of Hindāl.

↩

Text, Sunday, 15th, but vide Bābar, 259. One MS. has 11 (eleventh) which is the right day of the month for Sunday.

↩

Bābar does not blame him but says he was left without sufficient means. (267).

↩

This is explained by Bābar (Ers., 368) where Wāsiṭ shahr Rabī‘u-l-awwal is given as the chronogram of the taking of Dīpālpūr. These words yield “Middle of Rabī‘u-l-awwal 930” and so the conquest occurred about 22nd Jan., 1524. See Akbarnāma I. 110 where the reading is Wasaṭ. This seems the more correct as Wāsiṭ would yield 931. Bābar thus alludes to this expedition (Ers., 141). “In the year in which I defeated Bahar Khān and conquered Lāhōr and Dībālpūr, I brought plantains and planted them here,” (in the Bāgh-i-wafā, near Jalālābād). Dīpālpūr is in the Montgomery District, Panjāb, and formerly on the Beas. It is now in a state of decay owing to its distance from the river. Text, Dībālpūr and according to Raverty, this is correct. (J.A.S.B. 1892, Part I. 375n. 380) Khāfī Khān (I, 47) has a good deal to say about this expedition.

↩

For Bābar's vows of penitence, see Memoirs, Ers., 292.

↩

Bābar made this garden in 914, (1508). It was opposite Ādīnapūr which was south of the Kābul River and about a mile south of Jalālābād. (Bābar, Ers., 141 and 278 and Raverty, Notes, 49).—Eleven years later, he made the Bāgh-i-ṣafā at the lake of Keldeh-Kehār, in the Salt Range. (Ers., 255).

↩

Bābar (293) says they crossed the river of Kacākōṭ, i.e., the Haroh (Jarrett, II, 324).

↩

Text shān but I prefer the variant sān, viz., a review or counting of an army. It would seem from P. de C.'s version (II, 36) and from Erskine (Bābar, 293) that advantage was taken of the crossing to count the troops while they were embarking or disembarking.

↩

“Great and small, good and bad, servants and no servants, they amounted to 12,000 persons.” (Bābar, 293).

↩

Saudāgar. So too, Bābar (Ers., 310) but the meaning here seems doubtful, perhaps mercenaries.

↩

Bābar, below.

↩

The Malot of the Imp. Gaz.

↩

Text, ḥākim. Bābar, shikdār.

↩

(Ḥīṣār, Jarrett II, 105, 293).

↩

The corresponding passage about collection of carts, is not in Erskine (Bābar, 304, 1. 1) but in P. de Courteille, (II, 161) we read, “I ordered all the soldiers to bring carriages, each according to his means. They collected in this manner 700.”

↩

Elliot (VI, 468) observes that the reference is doubtless to the victory obtained by Sulṭān Salīm the Grim (Yāwaz) over Shāh Isma‘īl in 1514, in which this method had been found very effective. The battle was fought on 23rd Aug. at Caldīrān near Tabrīz. (His. of Persia, Malcolm I, 504 and Hist. of Ottoman Empire, Hammer-Purgstall II, 412). Probably Ustād ‘Āli had been present in it.

↩

A.F.'s rendering does not seem quite correct. The twisted cowhides were in lieu of chains.

↩

Turā, (Vullers s. v. and Quatremère, Hist. of the Mongols, 337n. 130). The latter quotes the passage from the Akbarnāma.

↩

Text, ◌ which may be intended for cuirasses but the true word seems āncunān, as follows.

↩

Text, ūn. Erskine ung. See Bābar, Ers., 227 where this and other terms are explained.

↩

(Ers. 305) states that this officer was wounded on the day before and unable to take his place in the battle. But in S. Zain's recension we are told that though wounded he contrived to take part in the great battle.

↩

Text, Sharmal.

↩

Jarrett, III, 340. A.F. bewails there Sulṭān Maḥmūd's bigotry but was it worse than Bābar's?

↩

Lit., Land of the marches. Redhouse, Turkish Dict. explains that it means the whole country under the chain of the Persian Caucasus, bordering on the Caspian Sea.

↩

Called also Mui‘zzu-i-dīn. Jarrett, III, 342 and Bābar, Ers., 148.

↩

“Cataphract horse” (Bābar, Ers., 310). Minhāju-d-dīn is the authority referred to by Bābar. See his Ṭabaqāt-i-nāṣirī. Raverty, 465.

↩

It is singular that Bābar (Ers., 309) takes no account of the conquest of India or at least, of Delhi, by his ancestor Tīmūr. He mentions the expeditions of Maḥmūd of Ghaznih, Shihābu-d-dīn and then says his own was the third. Evidently he did not count Tīmūr's because it was not followed by any permanent settlement in the country. He has a reference to Tīmūr's expedition at p. 255.

↩

W. of Thaneswar and cir. lat. 29.55 and lat. 76.6. (Bābar, Ers., 301n. See also Jarrett, II, 296).

↩

The Text is incorrect here.

↩

Sharafu-d-dīn says 2 miles (mīl). A.F.'s description is not clear neither is Sharafu-d-dīn's account (Ẓafarnāma II, 83) from which A.F.'s is taken, easy, to understand. Apparently the length of the line of the army was 20 kos or 6 farsakhs (about 40 miles) (Sic Sharafu-d-dīn but according to A.F. (Jarrett II, 415), 6 farsakhs would be 18 kos.) Perhaps, however, A.F. is justified in regarding a mīl which he says was the third of a farsakh, as equal to one kos. (Jarrett II, 415 and 417). The breadth according to Sharafu-d-dīn was two miles (dū mīl) and not two kos as A.F. puts it.

The cavalry are called naukar and their servants naukar-i-naukar. The latter would probably be on foot. See trs. of these passages in Retr., Price, III, 250 and IV, 681. Major Price considers that the horse were arranged two deep.

Gibbon, quoting the Institutes, says Tīmūr had 92 squadrons of each 1,000, corresponding to the 92 names of Muḥammad.

↩

Text, two, but MSS. and Retr., Price, show this a mistake. 10,000 also is named in Ẓafarnāma (II, 100). Mallū Khān was Prime Minister of Maḥmūd Tughlaq, the young king of India.

↩

Ẓafarnāma II, 102.

↩

22nd June, 1555. (B. and H. Ers. II, 518).

↩

Referring apparently to the rebellion of ‘Alī Qulī and others against Akbar which is known as the Rebellion of Jaunpūr. (Emperor Akbar, Von Noer, A. S. Beveridge, I, 106 et seq).

↩

Text dāstān dāstān. One MS. has dāstān darastān.

↩

Bābar, 22, but if Wed., 12 Rajab, be right, Friday was the 21st.

↩

Mīrzā Ḥaidar remarks that all the world, from Turkey to China, benefited by the expedition, for the treasures obtained by the army, enabled them to buy the goods of these countries. An interesting allusion to the effects of commerce!

↩

320 ratīs=2799/16 carats. (Bābar, Ers., 308) Erskine (B. and H. I, 438) inclines to identify this diamond with the one shewn by Aurangzēb to Tavernier and valued by him at £888,000. By some it is regarded as identical with the Kōh-i-nūr. For full discussion of the question, see Tavernier's Travels trs. Valentine Ball, II, 431 et seq.

I have treated of this subject in the Calcutta Review, &c., and my conclusion is that the Bābar diamond is the Kōh-i-nūr. Humāyūn carried the diamond away with him and gave it to Shāh Ṭahmāsp who sent it to the king of Aḥmadnagar.

↩

The text seems to say that ‘Alā'u-d-dīn got it from Vikramāditya's heirs and has been so understood by Price. But both Ers. and P. de C. make it Bābar's statement that Humāyūn got it from Vikramāditya's heirs. How ‘Alā'u-d-dīn got it is not explained. Khāfī Khān says ‘Alā'u-d-dīn got it in the Deccan.

↩

Saturday, Erskine (Bābar, 334) says the date is wrong, for 29th Rajab was a Friday and suggests that the distribution of treasure on a Friday might have interfered with Bābar's religious duties. P. de C., Monday, 29th Rajab. Price, “30th of the month.”

↩

Lit. trees of the garden of success. The reference is to the presents sent to Kāmrān and others. (Bābar, Ers. 335).

↩

Son of Badī'u-z-zamān Mīrzā, son of Sulṭān Ḥusain Mīrzā of Herāt, but the gift was probably made to him as being the emperor's son-in-law. He served under Bābar and Humāyūn and was drowned in the Ganges at Causa in 1539. (Elliot, V. 203).

↩

Darrārī, pl. of Ar. durrī, a sparkling star or gem.

↩

There are some unintelligible words here. P. de C. (II, 233) has “Dans toute la circonscription de versek et la principauté de Kābul, il n'y eut pas une âme vivante, maître ou dame, esclave ou homme libre, adulte ou non adulte qui ne reçut un bâberi de gratification,” and adds in a note to “circonscription,” “Le mot que je traduis ainsi par conjecture est sada que la version persane se contente de réproduire sans l'intrepréter.” To “bâberi,” he has the note, “Un chahrokhi suivant la version persane et la traduction anglaise.” Erskine (Bābar, 335) seems to have considered that ṣada ū rasak should be read ba sadur rashk, (for producing emulation), for he translates, “To the country of Kābul, as an incentive to emulation, to every soul, man and woman, slave or free, of age or not, I sent one shahrukhī as a gift!” I have examined the passage in the two B.M. MSS. Add. Per. of Bābar's Memoirs, viz., No. 24,416, p. 269b, and No. 26,200, p. 285a. The latter was used by Erskine and the passage is as follows:— ◌

* ◌

There is nothing in either MS. about Badakhshān or Khūst.

The explanation of their mention in the A.N. however seems to be that A.F. used Shaikh Zain's trs. of Bābar's Memoirs. This was made much carlier than ‘Abdu-r-raḥīm's for Shaikh Zain was one of Bābar's courtiers and wrote for him the pompous firmāns given by Bābar. (Ers., 355 and 359). He is also mentioned in the Akbarnāma (I, 119) as Shaikh Zain, the Ṣadr and grandson of Shaikh Zainu-d-dīn Khwāfī (Blochmann, 592n). There are two fragments of this translation in the B.M., viz., Add. No. 26,202 (Rieu, I, 246) and Or. No. 1999 (l. c. III, 926) Shaikh Zain's version is written in an ornate and rhetorical style and in the third person. Both fragments contain the transactions of 932 and both speak of Khūst or Khwāst Badakhshān in describing the sending of the shāhrukhīs. The passage in Add. No. 26,202 occurs at 70a, and in Or. No. 1999 at 70b. It runs thus, ◌

— ◌

“And an order was passed that all the inhabitants of the capital (? Kābul) and the dwellers in Ṣada Darask (or Warask) and Khust Badakhshān, who were distinguished for religion and piety, should each get a shāhrūkhī.” Apparently then, Ṣada Darask is some hamlet of Khūst in Badakhshān. All the other B.M. MSS. of ‘Abdu-r-raḥīm's trs. agree with the two already named in omitting any mention of Badakhshān.

The Ṣaddara of the Text might mean the hundred valleys and according to Steingass Dara is a district in Badakhshān. Ṣada is given by Vullers, on the authority of Notices et Extraits, (XIV, 771) as meaning a company of 100 men and possibly it may be the title of a division of a country, e.g., the English hundred. I can find no such district as Warsak or Versak but possibly Wakhsh or Vakhsh is meant. (T. R. N. E. & R. 263, and Bābar, Ers. Intro. XXX).

“Khūst or Khost is a district on the northern slope of the Hindū Kūsh, between south and south-east of Kunduz and lies very near the hill tracts known on our time as Kāfiristān.” T. R., trs. 103n.). Khūst is given in Raverty's Pushtū Dictionary, as a province in Afghānistān. (See Bābar, Ers. 151, 268 and 270.) It lay in the west of Badakhshān. Mr. Ney Elias' map marks it as north of Cārīkār and west-north-west of Citrāl.

On the whole it appears that Erskine's rendering “to excite emulation” cannot be correct though he adheres to it in his Bābar and Humāyūn (I, 440) adding that perhaps Bābar's object was to assist in recruiting his army, but Mr. Erskine had not then probably examined Shaikh Zain's translation. It appears to me that Bābar's motive was rather to enable the people of Afghānistān to defend themselves against the Uzbēgs and to strengthen their loyalty. It is probably to these presents that he alludes when he says (Ers. 310) that Badakhshān, Kunduz, Kābul and Qandahār were dependent on him, but that instead of being a help, he had to send extensive supplies to some of them, on account of their being near the enemy. This enemy can only mean the Uzbēgs. I should note that the last ū of the Text, viz. that between Khūst, and Badakhshān does not occur in all the MSS. Price (Retr. IV, 684) has “at Kābul and the neighbourhood.” Firishta too has nothing about Badakhshān and merely speaks of the inhabitants of the city of Kābul, adding that Bābar received, on account of his improvidence, the title of Qalandar. Nor does Khāfī Khān (Bib. Ind. I, 53) speak of Badakhshān. Bābar sought afterwards to recoup his extravagance by adding 30 per cent. to the taxes (Memoirs, 387).

There is still another trs. of Bābar's Memoirs, that by Mīrzā Pāyanda Ḥasan Ghaznavī and Muḥd. Qulī Mughal Ḥiṣārī. Rieu, II, 799b.

Since writing the above note I have seen Wood's Journey to the Source of the Oxus (Lond. 1872) and am now inclined to think that Ṣada is a mistake for the Arabic ◌ ṣadda, a gate or pass. Ṣad or Ṣadda seems a common name of places in Badakhshān and in one of Wood's maps (p. XC) there is a pass marked Sad-īshtragh or Ishtrākh which may be the Ṣada or Ṣaddara rasak of the Text. It is north of Citrāl and perhaps recent expeditions to that neighbourhood, have thrown or will throw light on the locality mentioned in the Text. Ṣad seems to be used in Badakhshān as equivalent to dara.

↩

B. and H., Ers. I, 412.

↩

The meaning is not clear, but I think A.F. is sneering at the presumptuous ways of old servants, Cf. text 133, seven lines from foot.

↩

He received money also for repairing a reservoir at Ghaznīn. (149).

↩

Cir. 65 m. south-east of Kābul. Jarrett II, 407. Bābar, Ers., 150).

↩

Bābar, Ers., 151 and 156. Jarrett, 401n.

↩

Guhrām, Jarrett II, 296. As my friend Mr. Beames has pointed out to me, this is Ghurām in Sihrind. It is now in the native State of Patiala and on the Ghaghar (the old and famous Saraswatī), about 25 miles south-west of Ambāla and 24 miles due west of Shāhābād.

↩

Bābar, Ers., 341.

↩

Ers. and P. de C., Kūren. Badāonī I, 337, Khūran. Badāonī speaks of him as unrivalled in his knowledge of music.

↩

Bābar calls them bowmen (tarkashband) from the Dūāb.

↩

I kr., 46 lakhs, 5,000, P. de C.

↩

I kr., 48 lakhs, 50,000, P. de C.

↩

90 lakhs, 35,000 P. de C. See also Ers. B. and H. I, 446n., correcting trs. of Mem.

↩

About 11th July, 1526.

↩

Chalmers resumes his translation here after missing out from p. 112, p. 102 of the text.

↩

According to Tod, Sāngā is a contraction of Sangrām Singh, “the lion of battle.”

↩

Kandār is a strong hill-fort a few miles east of Rantanbhur. Bābar, Ers., 339. Text and Jarrett II, 275, Khandār.

↩

Text, ‘Alī, but this is wrong as Bābar's Mem. and A.S.B. MS. C. 27 and Text 107 and 108 show.

↩

Mentioned also in Bābar's firmān. Ers., 360. It is a large pargana in the district of Balia, N.-W. P. Jarrett II, 163.

↩

Cf. Bābar, Ers., 344. The total amount of the allowances is there stated as one kror and 60 lakhs.

↩

24 Muḥarram, Ers. and P. de C. This is probably correct. A.F. has probably written Ṣafar because that month appears in a preceding entry in Bābar's Mem. 24 Muḥarram= 31st October.

↩

A native of Īj near the Persian Gulf. He was a teacher of A.F.'s father and was buried opposite Agra. Blochmann, Preface ii and 523 and Jarrett II, 180 and III, 423.

↩

She attempted to have Bābar poisoned. Bābar, Ers., 347.

↩

Bakhair guẕasht, qu. turned out well. Price (IV. 691) seems to have read bukhīr guẕasht, went into darkness, i.e., was killed. But it would seem from the Memoirs that she was only put into confinement. See too Firishta.

↩

Now called Rāmbāgh; A. F.'s birthplace and opposite Agra. Blochmann, ii and Jarrett II, 180 and 423.

↩

T.R. 313ff. He was brother of Mīr Aḥmad Qāsim Kohbar.

↩

Perhaps the Mandāwar of the Āīn. Jarrett II, 182.

↩

Possibly the grandfather of Niẓāmu-d-dīn Aḥmad, the author of the Ṭabaqāt.

↩

Bābar's brother-in-law. The statement that he was a son-in-law is a mistake of Erskine. Khwāndamīr tells us near the end of the Ḥabību-s-siyar that Mahdī Khwāja was married to Bābar's sister Khānzāda.

↩

A grandson of Sulṭān Ḥusain of Herāt. Bābar made him governor of Kanauj, Mem. 181.

↩

37 miles west of Agra, in the Bhartpur State.

↩

Text, Silhadī. See Erskine's B. & H. I, 471n.

↩

Erskine, Bārmal (360).

↩

Īdar or Edar in Kāthiāwar, Gujrāt.

↩

Text, Parm and also in fragment of Bābar's Mem. trs. by P. de C. II, 445.

↩

This passage occurs in the report of the victory drawn up by Shaikh Zainu-d-dīn (Bābar, Ers., 360). There is some discrepancy about the proper names and I have corrected some of those in the Text.

↩

Copied from Bābar (Ers., 360), but the meaning there is that 10,000 horsemen followed him because they hoped that he would recover his ancestral possessions.

↩

The eighth son of Sulṭān Aḥmad Khān and grandson of Yūnus Khān, so he was Bābar's cousin, i.e., his mother's nephew. He died of dysentery at Agra. (T.R. N. & R., 161).

↩

Son of Mīrzā Khān and afterwards ruler of Badakhshān.

↩

A disciple of Khwāja Aḥrār.

↩

Brother of Sulṭān Sikandar and uncle of Ibrāhīm Sulṭān who was killed at Pānīpat. Ers. B. & H. I, 423 and 421n. According to another account, ‘Alā'u-d-dīn was Ibrāhīm's brother. He was generally known as ‘Ālam Khān.

↩

About|9 A. M.

↩

Bābar, nearly to their centre.

↩

The meaning seems to be that the opposing soldiers were locked together in flight. The phrase brazen-bodied was an epithet of Isfandiyār, a Persian hero killed by Rustam.

↩

Ustād ‘Alī Qūlī the cannonier.

↩

Sang. It may also mean cannon-balls.

↩

Tod, “of Dangarpūr.”

↩

Text, Ḍūngarsī. Erskine, Rao Bikersī with the variant Nagarsī. P. de C., Rao Niguersī.

↩

The letters make 933.

↩

The letters make 930. See supra. Bābar (Ers., 368) says that it was the same persons, Shaikh Zain and Mīr Gēsū, who found out the Dīpālpūr chronogram.

↩

Jarrett II. 188. Text, Kōl. It is in ‘Alīgarh.

↩

He was flayed alive. Ers., Bābar, 368 and P. de Courteille II. 310.

↩

As pointed out by Ers. (B. & H., I. 341) and Blochmann (311n.) and Mr. Ney Elias (T. R. 373n.), this date which is also given by Ḥaidar Mīrzā, must be wrong and is perhaps a mistake for 927 (1521). In 917, Humāyūn was only three or four years old, and in the T. R. (353) we have an account of Mīrzā Khān as reigning in Badakhshān in 924. According to P. de C.'s fragment of Bābar's Mems. (II. 452) Mīrzā Khān did not die till 934. This must be wrong, for Bābar speaks of Badakhshān as belonging to himself at the time (932) of his conquest of India, and it is plain that Mīrzā Khān was not alive after 927. (Bābar, Ers. 286 and note.) Most probably he died in 926, as Firishta says and as is in accordance with Ḥaidar Mīrzā's statement (Elias & Ross 387) that Humāyūn's reign in Badakhshān began in 926. The events of this year, with the exception of those of the first month, are not recorded in Bābar's Memoirs which are blank for the six years from Ṣafar 926 to 932. Gulbadan does not give any precise date for the death but says that ambassadors from Badakhshān brought the news about the time of the Bajaur campaign. Apparently they brought Sulaimān, Mīrzā Khān's young son, with them. Gulbadan says that thereupon, Bābar sent Humāyūn to Badakhshān and she adds the interesting circumstance that Bābar and Māham (Humāyūn's mother) followed him there and stayed a few days.

↩

In Dhōlpūr, Rājpūtānā and 44 miles south-west of Agra.

↩

Or Sambhal. See Jarrett II, 281, where A. F. states that the rhinoceros is found in Sambhal.

↩

Bābar's paternal aunts; they seem to have made a short stay only with him and then to have returned to Kābul. (Bābar, Ers. 382 and 387.) Gulbadan says there were seven of them, all daughters of Abū Sa‘īd and she gives some of their names.

↩

Jarrett II, 196. It is in Gwālyār.

↩

Jarrett II, 187.

↩

Bābar, Ers. 387, Mullā Āfāq.

↩

Al-amān, in Arabic, means peace or protection; also the protected one, the trusty. But Bābar did not like the name because people in general pronounce it alaman or ilaman, and these words in Turkī have bad meanings, viz., alaman is a plunderer or runner, and ilaman, “I do not feel.” (P. de C. II, 363n. See also Dicts. s. v.) Bābar's objections to the name are given in his letter to Humāyūn (Ers., 391). Besides the ambiguity mentioned above, he objected because it was unusual to place the article al thus before a name.

↩

Brother of the Ibrāhīm slain at Pānīpat.

↩

Ers., B. & H., I. 509. He was an Amīr of Khatlān (T.R. 21n.) and is often called Sulṭān Awais or Uwais. He was Sulaimān's father-in-law. (Blochmann, 311.) Bābar refers to him in a letter to Humāyūn (392). Apparently he was at one time king of Swāt. (Bābar, Ers., 249).

↩

In this and other passages of this chapter, describing the events of 935, A.F.'s abstract agrees with P. de C.'s trs. (Vol. II.) rather than with Ers. The meaning is not clear in the text, but seems to be that the army to be awaited is Bābar's. The corresponding passage occurs in a letter to Humāyūn (P. de C. II, 456) and refers to Bābar's desire that all his subjects should assist Humāyūn in his projected expedition against the Uzbēgs. P. de C. has, “En attendant, il est nécessaire que tous nos sujets se joignent à Humaiun dans cette éxpedition et le servent avec fidélité.”

↩

Son of ‘Alā'u-d-dīn Ḥusain Shāh. Bābar has a short notice of him (Ers., 311). He was also called Naṣīb and apparently reigned 1518-1532.

↩

42 miles north-west of Allāhābād and in Allāhābād district. Jarrett II, 167.

↩

Towns in Shāhābād.

↩

Towns in Shāhābād.

↩

The Mems. say (418), that the government of Jaunpūr was conferred on Muḥammad Zamān but he also held Bihār (409 and 410).

↩

Should be 15th (24th May). (Ers., 419).

↩

So in Text, but in Mems. (Ers., 419) instead of Sirwār, we have the river Sarjū or Gogra mentioned and are told that Bābar marched from his station on its banks to put down the rebels. But A.F. is nearly in accord with P. de C. II, 456, where Bābar says that on Thursday, 7th Ramaẓān, he marched towards Sirwār to repulse Biban and Bāyazīd. Sirwār is also mentioned in Mem. (Ers. 420) and appears in the list of Bābar's provinces. (Ers., B. & H., I. 541). See Blochmann, 381n. where it is stated that Sirwār got its name from the river Sarwa.

↩

In Jaunpūr. Jarrett II, 163 and 164.

↩

Probably because his family had just arrived from Kābul. He met Māham, his favourite wife and Humāyūn's mother at midnight on Sunday, 27th June, 1529.

↩

P. de C. (II, 457) has “lors des céremonies du Bairām.” Probably Kāmrān came there for this festival. There are two Bairāms (Vullers s. v.), one on 1st Shawwāl and one on 10th Ẕī-l-ḥijja. Probably the latter is meant. On the other hand Bābar (Ers., 428) seems to imply that Humāyūn was at Agra on 8th July, 1529. If so the Bairām referred to must have been that of 1st Shawwāl (June 8th) and Humāyūn must have reached Agra at about the same time as his mother. This too would harmonize with A.F.'s story that he appeared all of a sudden when his father and mother were talking of him. It agrees better too with Ḥaidar's statement that Sa‘īd Khān left Kāshghar for Badakhshān in the beginning of Muḥarram 936 (Sept. 1529). If Humāyūn only left Badakhshān in the middle of August, there was hardly time for the Badakhshīs to send to Sa‘īd Khān for help and for him to get his army together by the beginning of September. According to P. de C. (II, 457n.) and Ers., (Bābar, 426) Humāyūn did not leave Badakhshān till 936 (1530).

↩

We are not told the date of his arrival but as he was at Kābul during the Bairām and reached Agra in a few days (Bābar, P. de C. II, 457) he probably arrived at end of August, 1529. His mother had come about two months before, for Bābar met her on Sunday night, 27th June. She had been six months on the journey.

↩

T.R., E. & R., 387. Ers. (B. & H., I. 508) has given good reason for doubting the statement. Very probably Humāyūn gave out that his father had sent for him and Ḥaidar, who was in Badakhshān shortly afterwards, may have recorded what he heard then.

↩

Gulbadan calls him Alūr or Alwar Mīrzā and he appears in her list as the youngest child of her own mother, Dildār Bēgam. He must have been quite a child when he died in 1529, for his elder sister Gulbadan was only eight when Bābar died in December 1530. She describes Alūr's illness and death. He was born at Kābul. Bābar says (Ers. 250) that several children were born to him in 925 (1519) but none of them lived. See in P. de C. (II. 45) a paragraph on this subject which is not in Ers. Its language causes confusion about the birth of Hindāl for it would appear from Bābar (Ers. 250 and P. de C. II. 45) that he was born in 925. But if so, how could Bābar make over the infant to his mother (P. de C., II. 46) who had died in 911. The explanation is that there is a mistake in P. de C.'s trs., and that the child was made over to Māham, Bābar's wife, and not to his mother and thus became at once a son to Bābar and a brother to Humāyūn.

↩

Bābar's cousin, being the son of Sulṭān Aḥmad, the brother of Bābar's mother. He was indebted to Bābar for hospitality at Kābul and for the government of Farghāna (Mems., Ers. 217). It was Bābar who suggested to Sa‘īd Khān that he should call his son ‘Abdu-r-rashīd. (T. R., E. & R., 140). The account of Sa‘īd's raid into Badakhshān is given in the T. R., 387. It began at the commencement of 936 (about 5th September 1529; l. c. 388).

↩

The old capital of Badakhshān. It was on the Kōkca and was built by one Mubārak Shāh about the beginning of the 16th century. He called it Qil‘a-ẓafar on account of a victory which he gained there over the Uzbēgs and because he belonged to the Muẓaffar tribe (qu. the Ahl-i-muẓaffar of Tīmūr's day?) The ruins of the fort still exist but the modern capital is Faiẓābād. (T. R. 220 and n.) The old name of Qil‘a-ẓafar was Shāf-tiwār, (Bābar, Ers. 167).

↩

Bābar says (Ers. 217) “Sulṭān Sa‘īd Khān, the Khān of Kāshghar” (he was not so then which shows that Bābar did not write his Memoirs year by year) “came to me with five or six naked followers on foot. I received them like my own brothers and gave him the Tumān of Mandrāur.”

↩

I have substituted Mr. Ross' trs. (T.R., 389) for A.F.'s abstract. The meaning of the last sentence in the letter, is more clearly brought out by Ers.' paraphrase (B. & H. I. 512) “If not,” (i.e., if Sulṭān Sa‘īd did not yield), “the Emperor, having resigned to him (Sulaimān) his own claims, would know how to support him against the pretensions of others.” It seems evident that Ers. is right (508) in rejecting Ḥaidar Mīrzā's statement that Humāyūn left Badakhshān in obedience to his father's commands. Perhaps he is confounding 935 with 932, when Bābar summoned Humāyūn to help him in the conquest of India. It is clear that Humāyūn's abrupt departure in 935, deranged Bābar's project of reconquering his ancestral kingdom and also that it led to disasters in Badakhshān. But Bābar was probably too near his end and too fond of Humāyūn to quarrel with him for leaving his post and coming to Agra. As Ers. remarks, the visit was probably arranged between Humāyūn and his mother. See P. de C. II. 457, for the passage which A.F. must have had before him.

↩

Meaning that Sa‘īd Khān had already retreated. Mr. Ney Elias (389n) supposes that Kābul is a mistake in the T.R. for Badakhshān, but no correction seems needed, for Sulaimān would go by Kābul from India to Badakhshān. (Price IV. 715) Sulaimān was then 16, having been born in 920 (1514). In the passage already referred to, (P. de C. II. 457) “Sulaimān” must be a mistake for Sulṭān Wais and the meaning be that the latter was Sulaimān's father-in-law.

↩

In the Muradābād district; north of Agra and east of Delhi. It was given to Humāyūn in fief in 1526 (Bābar, Ers., 338).

↩

T.R. (E. & R.) 478. He was apparently related to Khwāja Khwānd Maḥmūd also called Khwāja Nūra.

↩

◌—This Arabic word is derived from ◌ a contract or sale. In swearing allegiance it was usual, says Lane, for the person making the covenant to place his hand in that of the prince in confirmation of the covenant, as is done by the seller and buyer.

↩

T. R. (E. & R.) 307, 357, 422. He belonged to a family of Bārkī and was a son of Mīr Kāka also called, apparently, Amīr Qāsim Kucīn. Perhaps he is the Qambar ‘Alī Mughal of Bābar's Mem. (Ers., 17).

↩

For an account of this intrigue see Ers. (B. & H., I. 515 and Elliot, V. 187). Mahdī Khwāja was Bābar's brother-in-law. Perhaps Mīr Khalīfa was afraid of Humāyūn's addiction to opium (T. R. E. & R. 469). Humāyūn's sudden leaving his post in Badakhshān must have given the old man a bad opinion of him.

↩

Firishta, Monday, 5th Jumāda'l-awwal (21st December, 1530). Erskine B. & H., I. 517.

↩

Humāyūn buwad wāriṯ-i-mulk-i-wai.

↩

Probably A. F. could not read Turkī and has copied Ḥaidar Mīrzā's panegyric (T. R. E. & R. 173) for he seems only to use the Persian trs. of the Memoirs.

↩

Perhaps, Mubayyan. It was in Persian and Erskine says he has never met with it. According to Badāonī (I. 343) it was a versified treatise on Muḥammadan law or Theology according to the Ḥanafī school and Shaikh Zain wrote a commentary on it which he called Mubīn. See also Dr. Ranking's translation, 450. There are two excellent articles on Bābar and Abū'l-faẓl by Dr. Tempel in the Z. D. M. G. In one he mentions that a poem by Bābar has been published by Ilminsky.

↩

Bābar, Ers., 388 and P. de C., II. 358. The Wālidīya or Walidīya was a treatise in honour of Khwāja Aḥrār's parents. Bābar put it into verse about two years before his death, in hopes that the Khwāja (then dead) would cure him of his fever, in the same way as the author of a Qaṣīda had been cured of his paralysis. The trss. differ here. P. de C. says it was Sharafu-d-dīn al-Būsīrī, the author of the Borda, who was cured. He wrote an Arabic poem in praise of Muḥammad and died in 694 (1294-5). But if the cure was effected by the Khwāja, it must have been for another Sharafu-d-dīn, possibly of Bukhārā.

↩

I have in part copied Ers.' trs. (Bābar, 431).

↩

Dildār Bēgam who was also Hindāl's mother. A. F.'s list of Bābar's children is very imperfect. According to Gulbadan, her father had eighteen children, all of whom were born at Kābul except two daughters, born at Khōst. Apparently she does not reckon the Fakhru-n-nisā, who was born at Samarqand and lived only some 40 days. Her list is as follow:

I. Māham Bēgam's children:— Humāyūn, Bārbūl, Mihr Jahān, Īshān Daulat, Fārūq.

II. Gulrukh's children: Kāmrān, ‘Askarī, Sulṭān Aḥmad, Gul‘aẕār.

III. Dildār's children: Gulrang, Gulcihra, Hindāl, Gulbadan, Ālūr.

IV. Ma‘ṣūma's child, Ma‘ṣūma.

These do not bring up the number to eighteen for Mihr Jān and Gulrang were the daughters born at Khōst; perhaps 18 is a mistake for 16. Gulbadan says the taking of Kābul was clearly a good omen, for Bābar, then 23 and without a son, had many children born thereafter and she gives it as a reason for his liking Kābul that it was their birthplace. His attachment to it is also proved by his choosing it as his place of burial.

↩

T. R. E. & R. 478 and A. N. I. 128. The learning (‘ilm) meant is probably religious learning. He was a brother of Khwāja Dōst.

↩

Blochmann, 592n.

↩

Perhaps, the science of exposition and arrangement. Dict. of T. T., 1066.

↩

He was the first to translate or rather to paraphrase Bābar's Memoirs into Persian. Badāōnī, I. 341, 471, and Elliot, IV. 288.

↩

Waḥīd, in corresponding passage of P. de C. (II. 463). He made chronograms (Bābar, Ers. 389).

↩

Bābar, Ers. 184 and Elliot, IV. App. 527.

↩

He came from Herāt with Khwānd Amīr in 1528. Bābar, Ers. 382.

↩

P. de C., Faqīrī.

↩

“Trés habile dans l'art de tâter le pouls et de faire le diagnostic des maladies.” (P. de C. l. c. 463.) He is Yūsuf bin Muḥammad Harātī and the author of several medical works. Rieu, Pers. Cat. II. 475b. and Browne, Cat. Pers. MSS. Camb. 278.

↩

The Makhzanu-l-asrār of Niẓāmu-d-dīn.

↩

Commonly known as Mīr Khalīfa.

↩

Bābar, Ers. 273. Honourably distinguished for temperance.

↩

Joined Bābar only two years before the death of the latter. See account of meeting, Elliot, IV. 143, 155.

↩

Text, akhyār.

↩

Contains the biographies of famous ministers. Elliot, IV. 148.

↩

Ahl-i-nishast. This epithet is generally applied to hermits, but I think it means here that Khwāja Kilān and his brother were allowed to sit in Bābar's presence. Khwāja Kilān was a poet and composed an elegy upon Bābar's death. Badāonī, I. 341.

↩

A Kūcak Bēg, an elder brother of Khwāja Kilān, is mentioned in the Mems. (Ers., 171) but he was killed in 911. Apparently there were seven brothers and all were killed in Bābar's service except Khwāja Kilān (248n.) There is a Kūcak Khwāja mentioned in Bābar, Ers., 420. Possibly A.F. means Khwāja Mullā, also an elder brother of Khwāja Kilān. He was a Ṣadr (Chief Judge), and Bābar's father made him keeper of the seals. He was killed by an arrow in 902. (Bābar, Ers. 43.)

↩

Ahl-i-nishast. This epithet is generally applied to hermits, but I think it means here that Khwāja Kilān and his brother were allowed to sit in Bābar's presence. Khwāja Kilān was a poet and composed an elegy upon Bābar's death. Badāonī, I. 341.

↩