The Bābur-nāma in English (Memoirs of Bābur) (part 5 of 6)

[1610] Maḥmūd himself may have inherited his father's title Khān-i-jahān but a little further on he is specifically mentioned as the son of Khān-i-jahān, presumably because his father had been a more notable man than he was. Of his tribe it may be noted that the Ḥaidarābād MS. uniformly writes Nuḥānī and not Luḥānī as is usual in European writings, and that it does so even when, as on f. 149_b_, the word is applied to a trader. Concerning the tribe, family, or caste vide G. of I. s.n. Lohānas and Crooke l.c. s.n. Pathān, para. 21.

[1611] i.e. west of Dihlī territory, the Panj-āb.

[1612] He was of the Farmul family of which Bābur says (f. 139_b_) that it was in high favour in Hindūstān under the Afghāns and of which the author of the Wāqi`āt-i-mushtāqī says that it held half the lands of Dihlī in jāgīr (E. and D. iv, 547).

[1613] Presumably he could not cut off supplies.

[1614] The only word similar to this that I have found is one "Jaghat" said to mean serpent and to be the name of a Hindū sub-caste of Nats (Crooke, iv, 72 & 73). The word here might be a nick-name. Bābur writes it as two words.

[1615] khaṣa-khail, presumably members of the Sāhū-khail (family) of the Lūdī tribe of the Afghān race.

[1616] Erskine suggested that this man was a rich banker, but he might well be the Farmulī Shaikh-zāda of f. 256_b_, in view of the exchange Afghān historians make of the Farmulī title Shaikh for Mīān (Tārīkh-i-sher-shāhī, E. & D. iv, 347 and Tārīkh-i-daudī ib. 457).

[1617] This Biban, or Bīban, as Bābur always calls him without title, is Malik Biban Jilwānī. He was associated with Shaikh Bāyazīd Farmulī or, as Afghān writers style him, Mīān Bāyazīd Farmulī. (Another of his names was Mīān Biban, son of Mīān Āṭā Sāhū-khail (E. & D. iv, 347).)

[1618] This name occurs so frequently in and about the Panj-āb as to suggest that it means a fort (Ar. maluẕat?). This one in the Siwāliks was founded by Tātār Khān Yūsuf-khail (Lūdī) in the time of Buhlūl Lūdī (E. and D. iv, 415).

[1619] In the Beth Jalandhar dū-āb.

[1620] i.e. on the Siwāliks, here locally known as Katār Dhār.

[1621] Presumably they were from the Hazāra district east of the Indus. The T̤abaqāt-i-akbarī mentions that this detachment was acting under Khalīfa apart from Bābur and marching through the skirt-hills (lith. ed. p. 182).

[1622] dūn, f. 260 and note.

[1623] These were both refugees from Harāt.

[1624] Sarkār of Baṭāla, in the Bārī dū-āb (A.-i-A. Jarrett, p. 110).

[1625] kūrūshūr waqt (Index s.n. kūrūsh).

[1626] Bābur's phrasing suggests beggary.

[1627] This might refer to the time when Ibrāhīm's commander Bihār (Bahādur) Khān Nūḥānī took Lāhor (Translator's Note in loco p. 441).

[1628] They were his father's. Erskine estimated the 3 krors at £75,000.

[1629] shiqq, what hangs on either side, perhaps a satirical reference to the ass' burden.

[1630] As illustrating Bābur's claim to rule as a Tīmūrid in Hindūstān, it may be noted that in 814 AH. (1411 AD.), Khiẓr Khān who is allowed by the date to have been a Sayyid ruler in Dihlī, sent an embassy to Shāhrukh Mīrzā the then Tīmūrid ruler of Samarkand to acknowledge his suzerainty (Maṯla`u's-sa`dain, Quatremère, N. et Ex. xiv, 196).

[1631] Firishta says that Bābur mounted for the purpose of preserving the honour of the Afghāns and by so doing enabled the families in the fort to get out of it safely (lith. ed. p. 204).

[1632] chuhra; they will have been of the Corps of braves (yīgīt; Appendix H. section c.).

[1633] kīm kullī gharẓ aul aīdī; Pers. trs. ka gharẓ-i-kullī-i-au būd.

[1634] Persice, the eves of Sunday and Monday; Anglice, Saturday and Sunday nights.

[1635] Ghāzī Khān was learned and a poet (Firishta ii, 42).

[1636] mullayāna khūd, perhaps books of learned topic but not in choice copies.

[1637] f. 257. It stands in 31° 50' N. and 76° E. (G. of I.).

[1638] This is on the Salt-range, in 32° 42' N. and 72° 50' E. (Āyīn-i-akbarī trs. Jarrett, i, 325; Provincial Gazetteer, Jīhlam District).

[1639] He died therefore in the town he himself built. Kitta Beg probably escorted the Afghān families from Milwat also; Dilāwar Khān's own seems to have been there already (f. 257).

The Bābur-nāma makes no mention of Daulat Khān's relations with Nānak, the founder of the Sikh religion, nor does it mention Nānak himself. A tradition exists that Nānak, when on his travels, made exposition of his doctrines to an attentive Bābur and that he was partly instrumental in bringing Bābur against the Afghāns. He was 12 years older than Bābur and survived him nine. (Cf. Dabistān lith. ed. p. 270; and, for Jahāngīr Pādshāh's notice of Daulat Khān, Tūzūk-i-jahāngīrī, Rogers and Beveridge, p. 87).

[1640] I translate dūn by dale because, as its equivalent, Bābur uses julga by which he describes a more pastoral valley than one he calls a dara.

[1641] bīr āqār-sū. Bābur's earlier uses of this term [q.v. index] connect it with the swift flow of water in irrigation channels; this may be so here but also the term may make distinction between the rapid mountain-stream and the slow movement of rivers across plains.

[1642] There are two readings of this sentence; Erskine's implies that the neck of land connecting the fort-rock with its adjacent hill measures 7-8 qārī (yards) from side to side; de Courteille's that where the great gate was, the perpendicular fall surrounding the fort shallowed to 7-8 yards. The Turkī might be read, I think, to mean whichever alternative was the fact. Erskine's reading best bears out Bābur's account of the strength of the fort, since it allows of a cleft between the hill and the fort some 140-160 feet deep, as against the 21-24 of de Courteille's. Erskine may have been in possession of information [in 1826] by which he guided his translation (p. 300), "At its chief gate, for the space of 7 or 8 gez (qārī), there is a place that admits of a draw-bridge being thrown across; it may be 10 or 12 gez wide." If de Courteille's reading be correct in taking 7-8 qārī only to be the depth of the cleft, that cleft may be artificial.

[1643] yīghāch, which also means wood.

[1644] f. 257.

[1645] Chief scribe (f. 13 n. to `Abdu'l-wahhāb). Shaw's Vocabulary explains the word as meaning also a "high official of Central Asian sovereigns, who is supreme over all qāzīs and mullās."

[1646] Bābur's persistent interest in Balkh attracts attention, especially at this time so shortly before he does not include it as part of his own territories (f. 270).

Since I wrote of Balkh s.a. 923 AH. (1517 AD.), I have obtained the following particulars about it in that year; they are summarized from the Ḥabību's-siyar (lith. ed. iii, 371). In 923 AH. Khwānd-amīr was in retirement at Pasht in Ghūrjistān where also was Muḥammad-i-zamān Mīrzā. The two went in company to Balkh where the Mīrzā besieged Bābur's man Ibrāhīm chāpūk (Slash-face), and treacherously murdered one Aūrdū-shāh, an envoy sent out to parley with him. Information of what was happening was sent to Bābur in Kābul. Bābur reached Balkh when it had been besieged a month. His presence caused the Mīrzā to retire and led him to go into the Darā-i-gaz (Tamarind-valley). Bābur, placing in Balkh Faqīr-i-`alī, one of those just come up with him, followed the Mīrzā but turned back at Āq-guṃbaz (White-dome) which lies between Chāch-charān in the Herī-rūd valley and the Ghūrjistān border, going no further because the Ghūrjistānīs favoured the Mīrzā. Bābur went back to Kābul by the Fīrūz-koh, Yaka-aūlāng (cf. f. 195) and Ghūr; the Mīrzā was followed up by others, captured and conveyed to Kābul.

[1647] Both were amīrs of Hind. I understand the cognomen Maẕhab to imply that its bearer occupied himself with the Muḥammadan Faith in its exposition by divines of Islām (Hughes' Dictionary of Islām).

[1648] These incidents are included in the summary of `Ālam Khān's affairs in section i (f. 255_b_). It will be observed that Bābur's wording implies the "waiting" by one of lower rank on a superior.

[1649] Elph. MS. Karnāl, obviously a clerical error.

[1650] Shaikh Sulaimān Effendi (Kunos) describes a tunqiṯār as the guardian in war of a prince's tent; a night-guard; and as one who repeats a prayer aloud while a prince is mounting.

[1651] rūd, which, inappropriate for the lower course of the Ghaggar, may be due to Bābur's visit to its upper course described immediately below. As has been noted, however, he uses the word rūd to describe the empty bed of a mountain-stream as well as the swift water sometimes filling that bed. The account, here-following, of his visit to the upper course of the Ghaggar is somewhat difficult to translate.

[1652] Hindūstāndā daryālārdīn bāshqa, bīr āqār-sū kīm bār (dūr, is added by the Elph. MS.), bū dūr. Perhaps the meaning is that the one (chief?) irrigation stream, apart from great rivers, is the Ghaggar. The bed of the Ghaggar is undefined and the water is consumed for irrigation (G. of I. xx, 33; Index s.n. āqār-sū).

[1653] in Patiāla. Maps show what may be Bābur's strong millstream joining the Ghaggar.

[1654] Presumably he was of Ibrāhīm's own family, the Sāhū-khail. His defeat was opportune because he was on his way to join the main army.

[1655] At this place the Elphinstone Codex has preserved, interpolated in its text, a note of Humāyūn's on his first use of the razor. Part of it is written as by Bābur:—"Today in this same camp the razor or scissors was applied to Humāyūn's face." Part is signed by Humāyūn:—"As the honoured dead, earlier in these Acts (wāqi`āt) mentions the first application of the razor to his own face (f. 120), so in imitation of him I mention this. I was then at the age of 18; now I am at the age of 48, I who am the sub-signed Muḥammad Humāyūn." A scribe's note attests that this is "copied from the hand-writing of that honoured one". As Humāyūn's 48th (lunar) birthday occurred a month before he left Kābul, to attempt the re-conquest of Hindūstān, in November 1554 AD. (in the last month of 961 AH.), he was still 48 (lunar) years old on the day he re-entered Dihlī on July 23rd 1555 AD. (Ramẓān 1st 962 AH.), so that this "shaving passage" will have been entered within those dates. That he should study his Father's book at that time is natural; his grandson Jahāngīr did the same when going to Kābul; so doubtless would do its author's more remote descendants, the sons of Shāh-jahān who reconquered Transoxiana.

(Concerning the "shaving passage" vide the notes on the Elphinstone Codex in JRAS. 1900 p. 443, 451; 1902 p. 653; 1905 p. 754; and 1907 p. 131.)

[1656] This ancient town of the Sahāranpūr district is associated with a saint revered by Hindūs and Muḥammadans. Cf. W. Crooke's Popular Religion of Northern India p. 133. Its chashma may be inferred (from Bābur's uses of the word q.v. Index) as a water-head, a pool, a gathering place of springs.

[1657] He was the eighth son of Bābur's maternal-uncle Sl. Aḥmad Khān Chaghatāī and had fled to Bābur, other brothers following him, from the service of their eldest brother Manṣūr, Khāqān of the Mughūls (Tārīkh-i-rashīdī trs. p. 161).

[1658] fars̱-waqtī, when there is light enough to distinguish one object from another.

[1659] dīm kūrūldī (Index s.n. dīm). Here the L. & E. Memoirs inserts an explanatory passage in Persian about the dīm. It will have been in one of the Wāqi`āt-i-bāburī MSS. Erskine used; it is in Muḥ. Shīrāzī's lithograph copy of the Udaipūr Codex (p. 173). It is not in the Turkī text or in all the MSS. of the Persian translation. Manifestly, it was entered at a time when Bābur's term dīm kūrūldī requires explanation in Hindustan. The writer of it himself does not make details clear; he says only, "It is manifest that people declare (the number) after counting the mounted army in the way agreed upon amongst them, with a whip or a bow held in the hand." This explanation suggests that in the march-past the troops were measured off as so many bow- or whip-lengths (Index s.n. dīm).

[1660] These arāba may have been the baggage-carts of the army and also carts procured on the spot. Erskine omits (Memoirs p. 304) the words which show how many carts were collected and from whom. Doubtless it would be through not having these circumstances in his mind that he took the arāba for gun-carriages. His incomplete translation, again, led Stanley Lane-Poole to write an interesting note in his Bābur (p. 161) to support Erskine against de Courteille (with whose rendering mine agrees) by quoting the circumstance that Humāyūn had 700 guns at Qanauj in 1540 AD. It must be said in opposition to his support of Erskine's "gun-carriages" that there is no textual or circumstantial warrant for supposing Bābur to have had guns, even if made in parts, in such number as to demand 700 gun-carriages for their transport. What guns Bābur had at Pānī-pat will have been brought from his Kābul base; if he had acquired any, say from Lāhor, he would hardly omit to mention such an important reinforcement of his armament; if he had brought many guns on carts from Kābul, he must have met with transit-difficulties harassing enough to chronicle, while he was making that long journey from Kābul to Pānī-pat, over passes, through skirt-hills and many fords. The elephants he had in Bīgrām may have been his transport for what guns he had; he does not mention his number at Pānī-pat; he makes his victory a bow-man's success; he can be read as indicating that he had two guns only.

[1661] These Ottoman (text, Rūmī, Roman) defences Ustād `Alī-qulī may have seen at the battle of Chāldirān fought some 40 leagues from Tābrīz between Sl. Salīm Rūmī and Shāh Ismā`īl Ṣafawī on Rajab 1st 920 AH. (Aug. 22nd 1514 AD.). Of this battle Khwānd-amīr gives a long account, dwelling on the effective use made in it of chained carts and palisades (Ḥabību's-siyar iii, part 4, p. 78; Akbar-nāma trs. i, 241).

[1662] Is this the village of the Pānī Afghāns?

[1663] Index s.n. arrow.

[1664] _Pareshān jam`ī u jam`ī pareshān; Giriftār qaumī u qaumī `ajā'ib._

These two lines do not translate easily without the context of their original place of occurrence. I have not found their source.

[1665] i.e. of his father and grandfather, Sikandar and Buhlūl.

[1666] As to the form of this word the authoritative MSS. of the Turkī text agree and with them also numerous good ones of the Persian translation. I have made careful examination of the word because it is replaced or explained here and there in MSS. by s:hb:ndī, the origin of which is said to be obscure. The sense of b:d-hindī and of s:hb:ndī is the same, i.e. irregular levy. The word as Bābur wrote it must have been understood by earlier Indian scribes of both the Turkī and Persian texts of the Bābur-nāma. Some light on its correctness may be thought given by Hobson Jobson (Crooke's ed. p. 136) s.n. Byde or Bede Horse, where the word Byde is said to be an equivalent of pindārī, lūtī, and qāzzāq, raider, plunderer, so that Bābur's word b:d-hindī may mean qāzzāq of Hind. Wherever I have referred to the word in many MSS. it is pointed to read b:d, and not p:d, thus affording no warrant for understanding pad, foot, foot-man, infantry, and also negativing the spelling bīd, i.e. with a long vowel as in Byde.

It may be noted here that Muḥ. Shīrāzī (p. 174) substituted s:hb:ndī for Bābur's word and that this led our friend the late William Irvine to attribute mistake to de Courteille who follows the Turkī text (Army of the Mughūls p. 66 and Mémoires ii, 163).

[1667] bī tajarba yīgīt aīdī of which the sense may be that Bābur ranked Ibrāhīm, as a soldier, with a brave who has not yet proved himself deserving of the rank of beg. It cannot mean that he was a youth (yīgīt) without experience of battle.

[1668] Well-known are the three decisive historical battles fought near the town of Pānī-pat, viz. those of Bābur and Ibrāhīm in 1526, of Akbar and Hīmū in 1556, and of Aḥmad Abdālī with the Mahratta Confederacy in 1761. The following lesser particulars about the battle-field are not so frequently mentioned:—(i) that the scene of Bābur's victory was long held to be haunted, Badāyūnī himself, passing it at dawn some 62 years later, heard with dismay the din of conflict and the shouts of the combatants; (ii) that Bābur built a (perhaps commemorative) mosque one mile to the n.e. of the town; (iii) that one of the unaccomplished desires of Sher Shāh Sūr, the conqueror of Bābur's son Humāyūn, was to raise two monuments on the battle-field of Pānī-pat, one to Ibrāhīm, the other to those Chaghatāī sulṯāns whose martyrdom he himself had brought about; (iv) that in 1910 AD. the British Government placed a monument to mark the scene of Shāh Abdālī's victory of 1761 AD. This monument would appear, from Sayyid Ghulām-i-`alī's Nigār-nāma-i-hind, to stand close to the scene of Bābur's victory also, since the Mahrattas were entrenched as he was outside the town of Pānī-pat. (Cf. E. & D. viii, 401.)

[1669] This important date is omitted from the L. & E. Memoirs.

[1670] This wording will cover armour of man and horse.

[1671] ātlāndūk, Pers. trs. sūwār shudīm. Some later oriental writers locate Bābur's battle at two or more miles from the town of Pānī-pat, and Bābur's word ātlāndūk might imply that his cavalry rode forth and arrayed outside his defences, but his narrative allows of his delivering attack, through the wide sally-ports, after arraying behind the carts and mantelets which checked his adversary's swift advance. The Mahrattas, who may have occupied the same ground as Bābur, fortified themselves more strongly than he did, as having powerful artillery against them. Aḥmad Shāh Abdālī's defence against them was an ordinary ditch and abbattis, [Bābur's ditch and branch,] mostly of dhāk trees (Butea frondosa), a local product Bābur also is likely to have used.

[1672] The preceding three words seem to distinguish this Shāh Ḥusain from several others of his name and may imply that he was the son of Yāragī Mughūl Ghānchī (Index and I.O. 217 f. 184b l. 7).

[1673] For Bābur's terms vide f. 209_b_

[1674] This is Mīrzā Khān's son, i.e. Wais Mīrān-shāhī's.

[1675] A dispute for this right-hand post of honour is recorded on f. 100_b_, as also in accounts of Culloden.

[1676] tartīb u yāsāl, which may include, as Erskine took it to do, the carts and mantelets; of these however, Ibrāhīm can hardly have failed to hear before he rode out of camp.

[1677] f. 217_b_ and note; Irvine's Army of the Indian Mughuls p. 133. Here Erskine notes (Mems. p. 306) "The size of these artillery at this time is very uncertain. The word firingī is now (1826 AD.) used in the Deccan for a swivel. At the present day, zarb-zan in common usage is a small species of swivel. Both words in Bābur's time appear to have been used for field-cannon." (For an account of guns, intermediate in date between Bābur and Erskine, see the Āyīn-i-akbarī. Cf. f. 264 n. on the carts (arāba).)

[1678] Although the authority of the Tārīkh-i-salāṯīn-i-afaghāna is not weighty its reproduction of Afghān opinion is worth consideration. It says that astrologers foretold Ibrāhīm's defeat; that his men, though greatly outnumbering Bābur's, were out-of-heart through his ill-treatment of them, and his amīrs in displeasure against him, but that never-the-less, the conflict at Pānī-pat was more desperate than had ever been seen. It states that Ibrāhīm fell where his tomb now is (i.e. in circa 1002 AH.-1594 AD.); that Bābur went to the spot and, prompted by his tender heart, lifted up the head of his dead adversary, and said, "Honour to your courage!", ordered brocade and sweetmeats made ready, enjoined Dilāwar Khān and Khalīfa to bathe the corpse and to bury it where it lay (E. & D. v, 2). Naturally, part of the reverence shewn to the dead would be the burial together of head and trunk.

[1679] f. 209_b_ and App. H. section c. Bābā chuhra would be one of the corps of braves.

[1680] He was a brother of Muḥibb-i-`alī's mother.

[1681] To give Humāyūn the title Mīrzā may be a scribe's lapse, but might also be a nuance of Bābur's, made to shew, with other minutiae, that Humāyūn was in chief command. The other minute matters are that instead of Humāyūn's name being the first of a simple series of commanders' names with the enclitic accusative appended to the last one (here Walī), as is usual, Humāyūn's name has its own enclitic nī; and, again, the phrase is "Humāyūn with" such and such begs, a turn of expression differentiating him from the rest. The same unusual variations occur again, just below, perhaps with the same intention of shewing chief command, there of Mahdī Khwāja.

[1682] A small matter of wording attracts attention in the preceding two sentences. Bābur, who does not always avoid verbal repetition, here constructs two sentences which, except for the place-names Dihlī and Āgra, convey information of precisely the same action in entirely different words.

[1683] d. 1325 AD. The places Bābur visited near Dihlī are described in the Reports of the Indian Archaeological Survey, in Sayyid Aḥmad's As̤ār Sanādīd pp. 74-85, in Keene's Hand-book to Dihlī and Murray's Hand-book to Bengal etc. The last two quote much from the writings of Cunningham and Fergusson.

[1684] and on the same side of the river.

[1685] d. 1235 AD. He was a native of Aūsh [Ush] in Farghāna.

[1686] d. 1286 AD. He was a Slave ruler of Dihlī.

[1687] `Alāu'u'd-dīn Muḥ. Shāh Khiljī Turk d. 1316 AD. It is curious that Bābur should specify visiting his Minār (minārī, Pers. trs. I.O. 217 f. 185_b_, minār-i-au) and not mention the Quṯb Minār. Possibly he confused the two. The `Alāī Minār remains unfinished; the Quṯb is judged by Cunningham to have been founded by Quṯbu'd-dīn Aībak Turk, circa 1200 AD. and to have been completed by Sl. Shamsu'd-dīn Altamsh (Aīltimīsh?) Turk, circa 1220 AD. Of the two tanks Bābur visited, the Royal-tank (ḥauẓ-i-khāẓ) was made by `Alāu'u'd-dīn in 1293 AD.

[1688] The familiar Turkī word Tūghlūq would reinforce much else met with in Dihlī to strengthen Bābur's opinion that, as a Turk, he had a right to rule there. Many, if not all, of the Slave dynasty were Turks; these were followed by the Khiljī Turks, these again by the Tūghlūqs. Moreover the Panj-āb he had himself taken, and lands on both sides of the Indus further south had been ruled by Ghaznawid Turks. His latest conquests were "where the Turk had ruled" (f. 226_b_) long, wide, and with interludes only of non-Turkī sway.

[1689] Perhaps this charity was the Khams (Fifth) due from a victor.

[1690] Bikramājīt was a Tūnūr Rājpūt. Bābur's unhesitating statement of the Hindu's destination at death may be called a fruit of conviction, rather than of what modern opinion calls intolerance.

[1691] 120 years (Cunningham's _Report of the Archaeological Survey_ ii, 330 et seq.).

[1692] The Tārīkh-i-sher-shāhī tells a good deal about the man who bore this title, and also about others who found themselves now in difficulty between Ibrāhīm's tyranny and Bābur's advance (E. & D. iv, 301).

[1693] Gūālīār was taken from Bikramājīt in 1518 AD.

[1694] i.e. from the Deccan of which `Alāu'u'd-dīn is said to have been the first Muḥammadan invader. An account of this diamond, identified as the Koh-i-nūr, is given in Hobson Jobson but its full history is not told by Yule or by Streeter's Great Diamonds of the World, neither mentioning the presentation of the diamond by Humāyūn to Taḥmāsp of which Abū'l-faẓl writes, dwelling on its overplus of payment for all that Humāyūn in exile received from his Persian host (Akbar-nāma trs. i, 349 and note; Asiatic Quarterly Review, April 1899 H. Beveridge's art. Bābur's diamond; was it the Koh-i-nūr?).

[1695] 320 ratīs (Erskine). The ratī is 2.171 Troy grains, or in picturesque primitive equivalents, is 8 grains of rice, or 64 mustard seeds, or 512 poppy-seeds,—uncertain weights which Akbar fixed in cat's-eye stones.

[1696] Bābur's plurals allow the supposition that the three men's lives were spared. Malik Dād served him thenceforth.

[1697] Erskine estimated these as dams and worth about £1750, but this may be an underestimate (H. of I. i, App. E.).

[1698] "These begs of his" (or hers) may be the three written of above.

[1699] These will include cousins and his half-brothers Jahāngīr and Nāṣir as opposing before he took action in 925 AH. (1519 AD.). The time between 910 AH. and 925 AH. at which he would most desire Hindūstān is after 920 AH. in which year he returned defeated from Transoxiana.

[1700] kīchīk karīm, which here seems to make contrast between the ruling birth of members of his own family and the lower birth of even great begs still with him. Where the phrase occurs on f. 295, Erskine renders it by "down to the dregs", and de Courteille (ii, 235) by "de toutes les bouches" but neither translation appears to me to suit Bābur's uses of the term, inasmuch as both seem to go too low (cf. f. 270_b_).

[1701] aīūrūshūb, Pers. trs. chaspīda, stuck to.

[1702] The first expedition is fixed by the preceding passage as in 925 AH. which was indeed the first time a passage of the Indus is recorded. Three others are found recorded, those of 926, 930 and 932 AH. Perhaps the fifth was not led by Bābur in person, and may be that of his troops accompanying `Ālam Khān in 931 AH. But he may count into the set of five, the one made in 910 AH. which he himself meant to cross the Indus. Various opinions are found expressed by European writers as to the dates of the five.

[1703] Muḥammad died 632 AD. (11 AH.).

[1704] Tramontana, n. of Hindū-kush. For particulars about the dynasties mentioned by Bābur see Stanley Lane-Poole's Muḥammadan Dynasties.

[1705] Maḥmūd of Ghaznī, a Turk by race, d. 1030 AD. (421 AH.).

[1706] known as Muḥ. Ghūrī, d. 1206 AD. (602 AH.).

[1707] sūrūbtūrlār, lit. drove them like sheep (cf. f. 154b).

[1708] khūd, itself, not Bābur's only Hibernianism.

[1709] "This is an excellent history of the Musalmān world down to the time of Sl. Nāṣir of Dihlī A.D. 1252. It was written by Abū `Umar Minḥāj al Jūrjānī. See Stewart's catalogue of Tipoo's Library, p. 7" (Erskine). It has been translated by Raverty.

[1710] bargustwān-wār; Erskine, cataphract horse.

[1711] The numerous instances of the word pādshāh in this part of the Bābur-nāma imply no such distinction as attaches to the title Emperor by which it is frequently translated (Index s.n. pādshāh).

[1712] d. 1500 AD. (905 AH.).

[1713] d. 1388 AD. (790 AH.).

[1714] The ancestor mentioned appears to be Naṣrat Shāh, a grandson of Fīrūz Shāh Tūghlūq (S. L. Poole p. 300 and Beale, 298).

[1715] His family belonged to the Rājpūt sept of Tānk, and had become Muḥammadan in the person of Sadharān the first ruler of Gujrāt (Crooke's Tribes and Castes; Mirāt-i-sikandarī, Bayley p. 67 and n.).

[1716] S. L.-Poole p. 316-7.

[1717] Mandāū (Mandū) was the capital of Malwā.

[1718] Stanley Lane-Poole shews (p. 311) a dynasty of three Ghūrīs interposed between the death of Fīrūz Shāh in 790 AH. and the accession in 839 AH. of the first Khiljī ruler of Gujrāt Maḥmūd Shāh.

[1719] He reigned from 1518 to 1532 AD. (925 to 939 AH. S.L.-P. p. 308) and had to wife a daughter of Ibrāhīm Lūdī (Riyaẓu's-salāṯīn). His dynasty was known as the Ḥusain-shāhī, after his father.

[1720] "Strange as this custom may seem, a similar one prevailed down to a very late period in Malabar. There was a jubilee every 12 years in the Samorin's country, and any-one who succeeded in forcing his way through the Samorin's guards and slew him, reigned in his stead. 'A jubilee is proclaimed throughout his dominions at the end of 12 years, and a tent is pitched for him in a spacious plain, and a great feast is celebrated for 10 or 12 days with mirth and jollity, guns firing night and day, so, at the end of the feast, any four of the guests that have a mind to gain a throne by a desperate action in fighting their way through 30 or 40,000 of his guards, and kill the Samorin in his tent, he that kills him, succeeds him in his empire.' See Hamilton's New Account of the East Indies vol. i. p. 309. The attempt was made in 1695, and again a very few years ago, but without success" (Erskine p. 311).

The custom Bābur writes of—it is one dealt with at length in Frazer's Golden Bough—would appear from Blochmann's Geography and History of Bengal (JASB 1873 p. 286) to have been practised by the Habshī rulers of Bengal of whom he quotes Faria y Souza as saying, "They observe no rule of inheritance from father to son, but even slaves sometimes obtain it by killing their master, and whoever holds it three days, they look upon as established by divine providence. Thus it fell out that in 40 years space they had 13 kings successively."

[1721] No doubt this represents Vijāyanagar in the Deccan.

[1722] This date places the composition of the Description of Hindustan in agreement with Shaikh Zain's statement that it was in writing in 935 AH.

[1723] Are they the Khas of Nepal and Sikkim? (G. of I.).

[1724] Here Erskine notes that the Persian (trs.) adds, "mīr signifying a hill, and kas being the name of the natives of the hill-country." This may not support the name kas as correct but may be merely an explanation of Bābur's meaning. It is not in I.O. 217 f. 189 or in Muḥ. Shīrāzī's lithographed Wāqi`āt-i-bāburī p. 190.

[1725] Either yak or the tassels of the yak. See Appendix M.

[1726] My husband tells me that Bābur's authority for this interpretation of Sawālak may be the Z̤afar-nāma (Bib. Ind. ed. ii, 149).

[1727] i.e. the countries of Hindūstān.

[1728] so pointed, carefully, in the Ḥai. MS. Mr. Erskine notes of these rivers that they are the Indus, Hydaspes, Ascesines, Hydraotes, Hesudrus and Hyphasis.

[1729] Āyīn-i-akbarī, Jarrett 279.

[1730] pārcha pārcha, kīchīkrāk kīchīkrāk, āndā mūndā, tāshlīq tāqghīna. The Gazetteer of India (1907 i, 1) puts into scientific words, what Bābur here describes, the ruin of a great former range.

[1731] Here āqār-sūlār might safely be replaced by "irrigation channels" (Index s.n.).

[1732] The verb here is tāshmāq; it also expresses to carry like ants (f. 220), presumably from each person's carrying a pitcher or a stone at a time, and repeatedly.

[1733] "This" notes Erskine (p. 315) "is the wulsa or walsa, so well described by Colonel Wilks in his Historical Sketches vol. i. p. 309, note 'On the approach of an hostile army, the unfortunate inhabitants of India bury under ground their most cumbrous effects, and each individual, man, woman, and child above six years of age (the infant children being carried by their mothers), with a load of grain proportioned to their strength, issue from their beloved homes, and take the direction of a country (if such can be found,) exempt from the miseries of war; sometimes of a strong fortress, but more generally of the most unfrequented hills and woods, where they prolong a miserable existence until the departure of the enemy, and if this should be protracted beyond the time for which they have provided food, a large portion necessarily dies of hunger.' See the note itself. The Historical Sketches should be read by every-one who desires to have an accurate idea of the South of India. It is to be regretted that we do not possess the history of any other part of India, written with the same knowledge or research."

"The word wulsa or walsa is Dravidian. Telugu has valasa, 'emigration, flight, or removing from home for fear of a hostile army.' Kanarese has valasĕ, ŏlasĕ, and ŏlisĕ, 'flight, a removing from home for fear of a hostile army.' Tamil has valasei, 'flying for fear, removing hastily.' The word is an interesting one. I feel pretty sure it is not Aryan, but Dravidian; and yet it stands alone in Dravidian, with nothing that I can find in the way of a root or affinities to explain its etymology. Possibly it may be a borrowed word in Dravidian. Malayalam has no corresponding word. Can it have been borrowed from Kolarian or other primitive Indian speech?" (Letter to H. Beveridge from Mr. F. E. Pargiter, 8th August, 1914.)

Wulsa seems to be a derivative from Sanscrit ūlvash, and to answer to Persian wairānī and Turkī būzūghlūghī.

[1734] lalmī, which in Afghānī (Pushtū) signifies grown without irrigation.

[1735] "The improvement of Hindūstān since Bābur's time must be prodigious. The wild elephant is now confined to the forests under Hemāla, and to the Ghats of Malabar. A wild elephant near Karrah, Mānikpūr, or Kālpī, is a thing, at the present day (1826 AD.), totally unknown. May not their familiar existence in these countries down to Bābur's days, be considered rather hostile to the accounts given of the superabundant population of Hindūstān in remote times?" (Erskine).

[1736] dīwān. I.O. 217 f. 190b, dar dīwān fīl jawāb mīgūīnd; Mems. p. 316. They account to the government for the elephants they take; Méms. ii, 188, Les habitants payent l'impôt avec le produit de leur chasse. Though de Courteille's reading probably states the fact, Erskine's includes de C.'s and more, inasmuch as it covers all captures and these might reach to a surplusage over the imposts.

[1737] Pers. trs. gaz=24 inches. Il est bon de rappeler que le mot turk qārī, que la version persane rend par gaz, désigne proprement l'espace compris entre le haut de l'épaule jusqu'au bout des doigts (de Courteille, ii, 189 note). The qārī like one of its equivalents, the ell (Zenker), is a variable measure; it seems to approach more nearly to a yard than to a gaz of 24 inches. See Memoirs of Jahāngīr (R. & B. pp. 18, 141 and notes) for the heights of elephants, and for discussion of some measures.

[1738] khūd, itself.

[1739] i.e. pelt; as Erskine notes, its skin is scattered with small hairs. Details such as this one stir the question, for whom was Bābur writing? Not for Hindūstān where what he writes is patent; hardly for Kābul; perhaps for Transoxiana.

[1740] Shaikh Zain's wording shows this reference to be to a special piece of artillery, perhaps that of f. 302.

[1741] A string of camels contains from five to seven, or, in poetry, even more (Vullers, ii, 728, sermone poetico series decem camelorum). The item of food compared is corn only (būghūz) and takes no account therefore of the elephant's green food.

[1742] The Ency. Br. states that the horn seldom exceeds a foot in length; there is one in the B.M. measuring 18 inches.

[1743] āb-khẉura kishtī, water-drinker's boat, in which name kishtī may be used with reference to shape as boat is in sauce-boat. Erskine notes that rhinoceros-horn is supposed to sweat on approach of poison.

[1744] aīlīk, Pers. trs. angusht, finger, each seemingly representing about one inch, a hand's thickness, a finger's breadth.

[1745] lit. hand (qūl) and leg (būt).

[1746] The anatomical details by which Bābur supports this statement are difficult to translate, but his grouping of the two animals is in agreement with the modern classification of them as two of the three Ungulata vera, the third being the tapir (Fauna of British India:—Mammals, Blanford 467 and, illustration, 468).

[1747] De Courteille (ii, 190) reads kūmūk, osseuse; Erskine reads gūmūk, marrow.

[1748] Index s.n. rhinoceros.

[1749] Bos bubalus.

[1750] "so as to grow into the flesh" (Erskine, p. 317).

[1751] sic in text. It may be noted that the name nīl-gāī, common in general European writings, is that of the cow; nīl-gāū, that of the bull (Blanford).

[1752] b:ḥ:rī qūṯās; see Appendix M.

[1753] The doe is brown (Blanford, p. 518). The word būghū (stag) is used alone just below and seems likely to represent the bull of the Asiatic wapiti (f. 4 n. on būghū-marāl.)

[1754] Axis porcinus (Jerdon, Cervus porcinus).

[1755] Saiga tartarica (Shaw). Turkī hūna is used, like English deer, for male, female, and both. Here it seems defined by aīrkākī to mean stag or buck.

[1756] Antelope cervicapra, black-buck, so called from the dark hue of its back (Yule's H.J. s.n. Black-buck).

[1757] tūyūq, underlined in the Elph. MS. by kura, cannon-ball; Erskine, foot-ball, de Courteille, pierre plus grosse que la cheville (tūyāq).

[1758] This mode of catching antelopes is described in the Āyīn-i-akbarī, and is noted by Erskine as common in his day.

[1759] H. gainā. It is 3 feet high (Yule's H.J. s.n. Gynee). Cf. A. A. Blochmann, p. 149. The ram with which it is compared may be that of Ovis ammon (Vigné's Kashmīr etc. ii, 278).

[1760] Here the Pers. trs. adds:—They call this kind of monkey langūr (baboon, I.O. 217 f. 192).

[1761] Here the Pers. trs. adds what Erskine mistakenly attributes to Bābur:—People bring it from several islands.—They bring yet another kind from several islands, yellowish-grey in colour like a pūstīn tīn (leather coat of ?; Erskine, skin of the fig, tīn). Its head is broader and its body much larger than those of other monkeys. It is very fierce and destructive. It is singular quod penis ejus semper sit erectus, et nunquam non ad coitum idoneus [Erskine].

[1762] This name is explained on the margin of the Elph. MS. as "rāsū, which is the weasel of Tartary" (Erskine). Rāsū is an Indian name for the squirrel Sciurus indicus. The kīsh, with which Bābur's nūl is compared, is explained by de C. as belette, weasel, and by Steingass as a fur-bearing animal; the fur-bearing weasel is (Mustelidae) putorius ermina, the ermine-weasel (Blanford, p. 165), which thus seems to be Bābur's kīsh. The alternative name Bābur gives for his nūl, i.e. mūsh-i-khūrma, is, in India, that of Sciurus palmarum, the palm-squirrel (G. of I. i, 227); this then, it seems that Bābur's nūl is. Erskine took nūl here to be the mongoose (Herpestes mūngūs) (p. 318); and Blanford, perhaps partly on Erskine's warrant, gives mūsh-i-khūrma as a name of the lesser mungūs of Bengal. I gather that the name nawal is not exclusively confined even now to the (mungūs.)

[1763] If this be a tree-mouse and not a squirrel, it may be Vandeleuria oleracea (G. of I. i, 228).

[1764] The notes to this section are restricted to what serves to identify the birds Bābur mentions, though temptation is great to add something to this from the mass of interesting circumstance scattered in the many writings of observers and lovers of birds. I have thought it useful to indicate to what language a bird's name belongs.

[1765] Persian, gul; English, eyes.

[1766] qūlāch (Zenker, p. 720); Pers. trs. (217 f. 192_b_) yak qad-i-adm; de Courteille, brasse (fathom). These three are expressions of the measure from finger-tip to finger-tip of a man's extended arms, which should be his height, a fathom (6 feet).

[1767] qānāt, of which here "primaries" appears to be the correct rendering, since Jerdon says (ii, 506) of the bird that its "wings are striated black and white, primaries and tail deep chestnut".

[1768] The qīrghāwal, which is of the pheasant species, when pursued, will take several flights immediately after each other, though none long; peacocks, it seems, soon get tired and take to running (Erskine).

[1769] Ar. barrāq, as on f. 278_b_ last line where the Elph. MS. has barrāq, marked with the tashdīd.

[1770] This was, presumably, just when Bābur was writing the passage.

[1771] This sentence is in Arabic.

[1772] A Persian note, partially expunged from the text of the Elph. MS. is to the effect that 4 or 5 other kinds of parrot are heard of which the revered author did not see.

[1773] Erskine suggests that this may be the loory (Loriculus vernalis, Indian loriquet).

[1774] The birds Bābur classes under the name shārak seem to include what Oates and Blanford (whom I follow as they give the results of earlier workers) class under Sturnus, Eulabes and Calornis, starling, grackle and mīna, and tree-stare (Fauna of British India, Oates, vols. i and ii, Blanford, vols. iii and iv).

[1775] Turkī, qabā; Ilminsky, p. 361, tang (tund?).

[1776] E. D. Ross's Polyglot List of Birds, p. 314, Chighīr-chīq, Northern swallow; Elph. MS. f. 230_b_ interlined jil (Steingass lark). The description of the bird allows it to be Sturnus humii, the Himālayan starling (Oates, i, 520).

[1777] Elph. and Ḥai. MSS. (Sans. and Bengālī) p:ndūī; two good MSS. of the Pers. trs. (I.O. 217 and 218) p:ndāwalī; Ilminsky (p. 361) mīnā; Erskine (Mems. p. 319) pindāwelī, but without his customary translation of an Indian name. The three forms shewn above can all mean "having protuberance or lump" (pinḍā) and refer to the bird's wattle. But the word of the presumably well-informed scribes of I.O. 217 and 218 can refer to the bird's sagacity in speech and be panḍāwalī, possessed of wisdom. With the same spelling, the word can translate into the epithet religiosa, given to the wattled mīnā by Linnæus. This epithet Mr. Leonard Wray informs me has been explained to him as due to the frequenting of temples by the birds; and that in Malāya they are found living in cotes near Chinese temples.—An alternative name (one also connecting with religiosa) allowed by the form of the word is bīnḍā-walī. H. bīnḍā is a mark on the forehead, made as a preparative to devotion by Hindus, or in Sans. and Bengālī, is the spot of paint made on an elephant's trunk; the meaning would thus be "having a mark". Cf. Jerdon and Oates s.n. Eulabes religiosa.

[1778] Eulabes intermedia, the Indian grackle or hill-mīna. Here the Pers. trs. adds that people call it mīna.

[1779] Calornis chalybeius, the glossy starling or tree-stare, which never descends to the ground.

[1780] Sturnopastor contra, the pied mīna.

[1781] Part of the following passage about the lūja (var. lūkha, lūcha) is verbatim with part of that on f. 135; both were written about 934-5 AH. as is shewn by Shaikh Zain (Index s.n.) and by inference from references in the text (Index s.n. B.N. date of composition). See Appendix N.

[1782] Lit. mountain-partridge. There is ground for understanding that one of the birds known in the region as monals is meant. See Appendix N.

[1783] Sans. chakora; Ar. durrāj; P. kabg; T. kīklīk.

[1784] Here, probably, southern Afghānistān.

[1785] Caccabis chukūr (Scully, Shaw's Vocabulary) or C. pallescens (Hume, quoted under No. 126 E. D. Ross' Polyglot List).

[1786] "In some parts of the country (i.e. India before 1841 AD.), tippets used to be made of the beautiful black, white-spotted feathers of the lower plumage (of the durrāj), and were in much request, but they are rarely procurable now" (Bengal Sporting Magazine for 1841, quoted by Jerdon, ii, 561).

[1787] A broad collar of red passes round the whole neck (Jerdon, ii, 558).

[1788] Ar. durrāj means one who repeats what he hears, a tell-tale.

[1789] Various translations have been made of this passage, "I have milk and sugar" (Erskine), "J'ai du lait, un peu de sucre" (de Courteille), but with short sh:r, it might be read in more than one way ignoring milk and sugar. See Jerdon, ii, 558 and Hobson Jobson s.n. Black-partridge.

[1790] Flower-faced, Trapogon melanocephala, the horned (sing)-monal. It is described by Jahāngīr (Memoirs, R. and B., ii, 220) under the names [H. and P.] phūl-paikār and Kashmīrī, sonlū.

[1791] Gallus sonneratii, the grey jungle-fowl.

[1792] Perhaps Bambusicola fytchii, the western bambu-partridge. For chīl see E. D. Ross, l.c. No. 127.

[1793] Jahāngīr (l.c.) describes, under the Kashmīrī name pūṯ, what may be this bird. It seems to be Gallus ferrugineus, the red jungle-fowl (Blanford, iv, 75).

[1794] Jahāngīr helps to identify the bird by mentioning its elongated tail-feathers,—seasonal only.

[1795] The migrant quail will be Coturnix communis, the grey quail, 8 inches long; what it is compared with seems likely to be the bush-quail, which is non-migrant and shorter.

[1796] Perhaps Perdicula argunda, the rock bush-quail, which flies in small coveys.

[1797] Perhaps Coturnix coromandelica, the black-breasted or rain quail, 7 inches long.

[1798] Perhaps Motacilla citreola, a yellow wag-tail which summers in Central Asia (Oates, ii, 298). If so, its Kābul name may refer to its flashing colour. Cf. E. D. Ross, l.c. No. 301; de Courteille's Dictionary which gives qārcha, wag-tail, and Zenker's which fixes the colour.

[1799] Eupodotis edwardsii; Turkī, tūghdār or tūghdīrī.

[1800] Erskine noting (Mems. p. 321), that the bustard is common in the Dakkan where it is bigger than a turkey, says it is called tūghdār and suggests that this is a corruption of tūghdāq. The uses of both words are shewn by Bābur, here, and in the next following, account of the charz. Cf. G. of I. i, 260 and E. D. Ross l.c. Nos. 36, 40.

[1801] Sypheotis bengalensis and S. aurita, which are both smaller than Otis houbara (tūghdīrī). In Hindustan S. aurita is known as līkh which name is the nearest approach I have found to Bābur's [lūja] lūkha.

[1802] Jerdon mentions (ii, 615) that this bird is common in Afghānistān and there called dugdaor (tūghdār, tūghdīrī).

[1803] Cf. Appendix B, since I wrote which, further information has made it fairly safe to say that the Hindūstān bāghrī-qarā is Pterocles exustus, the common sand-grouse and that the one of f. 49b is Pterocles arenarius, the larger or black-bellied sand-grouse. P. exustus is said by Yule (H. J. s.n. Rock-pigeon) to have been miscalled rock-pigeon by Anglo-Indians, perhaps because its flight resembles the pigeon's. This accounts for Erskine's rendering (p. 321) bāghrī-qarā here by rock-pigeon.

[1804] Leptoptilus dubius, Hind. hargīlā. Hindūstānīs call it pīr-i-dīng (Erskine) and peda dhauk (Blanford), both names referring, perhaps, to its pouch. It is the adjutant of Anglo-India. Cf. f. 235.

[1805] only when young (Blanford, ii, 188).

[1806] Elph. MS. mank:sā or mankīā; Ḥai. MS. m:nk. Haughton's Bengali Dictionary gives two forms of the name mānek-jur and mānak-yoī. It is Dissura episcopus, the white-necked stork (Blanford iv, 370, who gives manik-jor amongst its Indian names). Jerdon classes it (ii, 737) as Ciconia leucocephala. It is the beefsteak bird of Anglo-India.

[1807] Ciconia nigra (Blanford, iv, 369).

[1808] Under the Hindūstānī form, būza, of Persian buzak the birds Bābur mentions as buzak can be identified. The large one is Inocotis papillosus, būza, kāla būza, black curlew, king-curlew. The bird it equals in size is a buzzard, Turkī sār (not Persian sār, starling). The king-curlew has a large white patch on the inner lesser and marginal coverts of its wings (Blanford, iv, 303). This agrees with Bābur's statement about the wings of the large buzak. Its length is 27 inches, while the starling's is 9-1/2 inches.

[1809] Ibis melanocephala, the white ibis, Pers. safed buzak, Bengali sabut būza. It is 30 inches long.

[1810] Perhaps, Plegadis falcinellus, the glossy ibis, which in most parts of India is a winter visitor. Its length is 25 inches.

[1811] Erskine suggests that this is Platalea leucorodia, the chamach-būza, spoon-bill. It is 33 inches long.

[1812] Anas poecilorhyncha. The Ḥai. MS. writes gharm-pāī, and this is the Indian name given by Blanford (iv, 437).

[1813] Anas boschas. Dr. Ross notes (No. 147), from the Sanglākh, that sūna is the drake, būrchīn, the duck and that it is common in China to call a certain variety of bird by the combined sex-names. Something like this is shewn by the uses of būghā and marāl q.v. Index.

[1814] Centropus rufipennis, the common coucal (Yule's H.J. s.n. Crow-pheasant); H. makokhā, Cuculus castaneus (Buchanan, quoted by Forbes).

[1815] Pteropus edwardsii, the flying-fox. The inclusion of the bat here amongst birds, may be a clerical accident, since on f. 136 a flying-fox is not written of as a bird.

[1816] Bābur here uses what is both the Kābul and Andijān name for the magpie, Ar. `aqqa (Oates, i, 31 and Scully's Voc), instead of T. sāghizghān or P. dam-sīcha (tail-wagger).

[1817] The Pers. trs. writes sāndūlāch mamūlā, mamūlā being Arabic for wag-tail. De Courteille's Dictionary describes the sāndūlāch as small and having a long tail, the cock-bird green, the hen, yellow. The wag-tail suiting this in colouring is Motacilla borealis (Oates, ii, 294; syn. Budytes viridis, the green wag-tail); this, as a migrant, serves to compare with the Indian "little bird", which seems likely to be a red-start.

[1818] This word may represent Scully's kirich and be the Turkī name for a swift, perhaps Cypselus affinis.

[1819] This name is taken from its cry during the breeding season (Yule's H.J. s.n. Koel).

[1820] Bābur's distinction between the three crocodiles he mentions seems to be that of names he heard, shīr-ābī, siyāh-sār, and ghaṛīāl.

[1821] In this passage my husband finds the explanation of two somewhat vague statements of later date, one made by Abū'l-faẓl (A. A. Blochmann, p. 65) that Akbar called the kīlās (cherry) the shāh-ālū (king-plum), the other by Jahāngīr that this change was made because kīlās means lizard (Jahāngīr's Memoirs, R. & B. i, 116). What Akbar did is shewn by Bābur; it was to reject the Persian name kīlās, cherry, because it closely resembled Turkī gīlās, lizard. There is a lizard Stellio Lehmanni of Transoxiana with which Bābur may well have compared the crocodile's appearance (Schuyler's Turkistān, i, 383). Akbar in Hindūstān may have had Varanus salvator (6 ft. long) in mind, if indeed he had not the great lizard, al lagarto, the alligator itself in his thought. The name kīlās evidently was banished only from the Court circle, since it is still current in Kashmīr (Blochmann l.c. p. 616); and Speede (p. 201) gives keeras, cherry, as used in India.

[1822] This name as now used, is that of the purely fish-eating crocodile. [In the Turkī text Bābur's account of the ghaṛīāl follows that of the porpoise; but it is grouped here with those of the two other crocodiles.]

[1823] As the Ḥai. MS. and also I.O. 216 f. 137 (Pers. trs.) write kalah (galah)-fish, this may be a large cray-fish. One called by a name approximating to galah-fish is found in Malāyan waters, viz. the galah-prawn (hūdang) (cf. Bengālī gūla-chingrī, gūla-prawn, Haughton). Galah and gūla may express lament made when the fish is caught (Haughton pp. 931, 933, 952); or if kalah be read, this may express scolding. Two good MSS. of the Wāqi`āt-i-bāburī (Pers. trs.) write kaka; and their word cannot but have weight. Erskine reproduces kaka but offers no explanation of it, a failure betokening difficulty in his obtaining one. My husband suggests that kaka may represent a stuttering sound, doing so on the analogy of Vullers' explanation of the word,—Vir ridiculus et facetus qui simul balbutiat; and also he inclines to take the fish to be a crab (kakra). Possibly kaka is a popular or vulgar name for a cray-fish or a crab. Whether the sound is lament, scolding, or stuttering the fisherman knows! Shaikh Zain enlarges Bābur's notice of this fish; he says the bones are prolonged (bar āwarda) from the ears, that these it agitates at time of capture, making a noise like the word kaka by which it is known, that it is two wajab (18 in.) long, its flesh surprisingly tasty, and that it is very active, leaping a gaz (cir. a yard) out of the water when the fisherman's net is set to take it. For information about the Malāyan fish, I am indebted to Mr. Cecil Wray.

[1824] T. qiyünlīghī, presumably referring to spines or difficult bones; T. qīn, however, means a scabbard [Shaw].

[1825] One of the common frogs is a small one which, when alarmed, jumps along the surface of the water (G. of I. i, 273).

[1826] Anb and anbah (pronounced aṃb and aṃbah) are now less commonly used names than ām. It is an interesting comment on Bābur's words that Abū'l-faẓl spells anb, letter by letter, and says that the b is quiescent (Āyīn 28; for the origin of the word mango, vide Yule's H.J. s.n.).

[1827] A corresponding diminutive would be fairling.

[1828] The variants, entered in parenthesis, are found in the Bib. Ind. ed. of the Āyīn-i-akbarī p. 75 and in a (bazar) copy of the Qurānu's-sā`dain in my husband's possession. As Amīr Khusrau was a poet of Hindūstān, either khẉash (khẉesh) [our own] or mā [our] would suit his meaning. The couplet is, literally:—

Our fairling, [i.e. mango] beauty-maker of the garden, Fairest fruit of Hindūstān.

[1829] Daulat Khān Yūsuf-khail Lūdī in 929 AH. sent Bābur a gift of mangoes preserved in honey (in loco p. 440).

[1830] I have learned nothing more definite about the word kārdī than that it is the name of a superior kind of peach (Ghiyās̤u'l-lughat).

[1831] The preceding sentence is out of place in the Turkī text; it may therefore be a marginal note, perhaps not made by Bābur.

[1832] This sentence suggests that Bābur, writing in Āgra or Fatḥpūr did not there see fine mango-trees.

[1833] See Yule's H.J. on the plantain, the banana of the West.

[1834] This word is a descendant of Sanscrit mocha, and parent of musa the botanical name of the fruit (Yule).

[1835] Shaikh Effendī (Kunos), Zenker and de Courteille say of this only that it is the name of a tree. Shaw gives a name that approaches it, ārman, a grass, a weed; Scully explains this as Artemisia vulgaris, wormwood, but Roxburgh gives no Artemisia having a leaf resembling the plantain's. Scully has arāmadān, unexplained, which, like amān-qarā, may refer to comfort in shade. Bābur's comparison will be with something known in Transoxiana. Maize has general resemblance with the plantain. So too have the names of the plants, since mocha and mauz stand for the plantain and (Hindī) mukā'ī for maize. These incidental resemblances bear, however lightly, on the question considered in the Ency. Br. (art. maize) whether maize was early in Asia or not; some writers hold that it was; if Bābur's amān-qarā were maize, maize will have been familiar in Transoxiana in his day.

[1836] Abū'l-faẓl mentions that the plantain-tree bears no second crop unless cut down to the stump.

[1837] Bābur was fortunate not to have met with a seed-bearing plantain.

[1838] The ripe "dates" are called P. tamar-i Hind, whence our tamarind, and Tamarindus Indica.

[1839] Sophora alopecuroides, a leguminous plant (Scully).

[1840] Abū'l-faẓl gives galaundā as the name of the "fruit" [mewa],—Forbes, as that of the fallen flower. Cf. Brandis p. 426 and Yule's H.J. s.n. Mohwa.

[1841] Bābur seems to say that spirit is extracted from both the fresh and the dried flowers. The fresh ones are favourite food with deer and jackals; they have a sweet spirituous taste. Erskine notes that the spirit made from them was well-known in Bombay by the name of Moura, or of Parsi-brandy, and that the farm of it was a considerable article of revenue (p. 325 n.). Roxburgh describes it as strong and intoxicating (p. 411).

[1842] This is the name of a green, stoneless grape which when dried, results in a raisin resembling the sultanas of Europe (Jahāngīr's Memoirs and Yule's H.J. s.n.; Griffiths' Journal of Travel pp. 359, 388).

[1843] Aūl, lit. the aūl of the flower. The Persian translation renders aūl by bū which may allow both words to be understood in their (root) sense of being, i.e. natural state. De Courteille translates by quand la fleur est fraîche (ii, 210); Erskine took bū to mean smell (Memoirs p. 325), but the aūl it translates, does not seem to have this meaning. For reading aūl as "the natural state", there is circumstantial support in the flower's being eaten raw (Roxburgh). The annotator of the Elphinstone MS. [whose defacement of that Codex has been often mentioned], has added points and tashdīd to the aūl-ī (i.e. its aūl), so as to produce awwalī (first, f. 235). Against this there are the obvious objections that the Persian translation does not reproduce, and that its bū does not render awwalī; also that aūl-ī is a noun with its enclitic genitive yā (i).

[1844] This word seems to be meant to draw attention to the various merits of the mahuwā tree.

[1845] Erskine notes that this is not to be confounded with E. jāmbū, the rose-apple (Memoirs p. 325 n.). Cf. Yule's H.J. s.n. Jambu.

[1846] var. ghat-ālū, ghab-ālū, ghain-ālū, shafl-ālū. Scully enters `ain-ālū (true-plum?) unexplained. The kamrak fruit is 3 in. long (Brandis) and of the size of a lemon (Firminger); dimensions which make Bābur's 4 aīlīk (hand's-thickness) a slight excess only, and which thus allow aīlīk, with its Persion translation, angusht, to be approximately an inch.

[1847] Speede, giving the fruit its Sanscrit name kamarunga, says it is acid, rather pleasant, something like an insipid apple; also that its pretty pink blossoms grow on the trunk and main branches (i, 211).

[1848] Cf. Yule's H.J. s.n. jack-fruit. In a Calcutta nurseryman's catalogue of 1914 AD. three kinds of jack-tree are offered for sale, viz. "Crispy or Khaja, Soft or Neo, Rose-scented" (Seth, Feronia Nursery).

[1849] The gīpa is a sheep's stomach stuffed with rice, minced meat, and spices, and boiled as a pudding. The resemblance of the jack, as it hangs on the tree, to the haggis, is wonderfully complete (Erskine).

[1850] These when roasted have the taste of chestnuts.

[1851] Firminger (p. 186) describes an ingenious method of training.

[1852] For a note of Humāyūn's on the jack-fruit see Appendix O.

[1853] aīd-ī-yamān aīmās. It is somewhat curious that Bābur makes no comment on the odour of the jack itself.

[1854] būsh, English bosh (Shaw). The Persian translation inserts no more about this fruit.

[1855] Steingass applies this name to the plantain.

[1856] Erskine notes that "this is the bullace-plum, small, not more than twice as large as the sloe and not so high-flavoured; it is generally yellow, sometimes red." Like Bābur, Brandis enumerates several varieties and mentions the seasonal changes of the tree (p. 170).

[1857] This will be Kābul, probably, because Transoxiana is written of by Bābur usually, if not invariably, as "that country", and because he mentions the chīkda (i.e. chīka?), under its Persian name sinjid, in his Description of Kābul (f. 129_b_).

[1858] P. mar manjān, which I take to refer to the rīwājlār of Kābul. (Cf. f. 129_b_, where, however, (note 5) are corrigenda of Masson's rawash for rīwāj, and his third to second volume.) Kehr's Codex contains an extra passage about the karaūn dā, viz. that from it is made a tasty fritter-like dish, resembling a rhubarb-fritter (Ilminsky, p. 369).

[1859] People call it (P.) pālasa also (Elph. MS. f. 236, marginal note).

[1860] Perhaps the red-apple of Kābul, where two sorts are common, both rosy, one very much so, but much inferior to the other (Griffith's Journal of Travel p. 388).

[1861] Its downy fruit grows in bundles from the trunk and large branches (Roxburgh).

[1862] The reference by "also" (ham) will be to the kamrak (f. 283_b_), but both Roxburgh and Brandis say the amla is six striated.

[1863] The Sanscrit and Bengālī name for the chirūnjī-tree is pīyala (Roxburgh p. 363).

[1864] Cf. f. 250_b_.

[1865] The leaflet is rigid enough to serve as a runlet, but soon wears out; for this reason, the usual practice is to use one of split bamboo.

[1866] This is a famous hunting-ground between Bīāna and Dhūlpūr, Rājpūtāna, visited in 933 AH. (f. 33O_b_). Bābur's great-great-grandson Shāh-jahān built a hunting-lodge there (G. of I.).

[1867] Ḥai. MS. mu`arrab, but the Elph. MS. maghrib, [occidentalizing]. The Ḥai. MS. when writing of the orange (infra) also has maghrib. A distinction of locality may be drawn by maghrib.

[1868] Bābur's "Hindūstān people" (aīl) are those neither Turks nor Afghāns.

[1869] This name, with its usual form tāḍī (toddy), is used for the fermented sap of the date, coco, and mhār palms also (cf. Yule's H.J. s.n. toddy).

[1870] Bābur writes of the long leaf-stalk as a branch (shākh); he also seems to have taken each spike of the fan-leaf to represent a separate leaf. [For two omissions from my trs. see Appendix O.]

[1871] Most of the fruits Bābur describes as orange-like are named in the following classified list, taken from Watts' Economic Products of India:—"+Citrus aurantium+, narangi, sangtara, amrit-phal; +C. decumana+, pumelo, shaddock, forbidden-fruit, sada-phal; +C. medica+ proper, turunj, limu; +C. medica limonum+, jambhira, karna-nebu." Under C. aurantium Brandis enters both the sweet and the Seville oranges (nārangī); this Bābur appears to do also.

[1872] kīndīklīk, explained in the Elph. Codex by nāfwār (f. 238). This detail is omitted by the Persian translation. Firminger's description (p. 221) of Aurangābād oranges suggests that they also are navel-oranges. At the present time one of the best oranges had in England is the navel one of California.

[1873] Useful addition is made to earlier notes on the variability of the yīghāch, a variability depending on time taken to cover the ground, by the following passage from Henderson and Hume's Lahor to Yarkand (p. 120), which shews that even in the last century the farsang (the P. word used in the Persian translation of the Bābur-nāma for T. yīghāch) was computed by time. "All the way from Kargallik (Qārghalīq) to Yarkand, there were tall wooden mile-posts along the roads, at intervals of about 5 miles, or rather one hour's journey, apart. On a board at the top of each post, or farsang as it is called, the distances were very legibly written in Turki."

[1874] ma`rib, Elph. MS. magharrib; (cf. f. 285_b_ note).

[1875] i.e. nārang (Sans. nārangā) has been changed to nāranj in the `Arab mouth. What is probably one of Humāyūn's notes preserved by the Elph. Codex (f. 238), appears to say—it is mutilated—that nārang has been corrupted into nāranj.

[1876] The Elph. Codex has a note—mutilated in early binding—which is attested by its scribe as copied from Humāyūn's hand-writing, and is to the effect that once on his way from the Hot-bath, he saw people who had taken poison and restored them by giving lime-juice.

Erskine here notes that the same antidotal quality is ascribed to the citron by Virgil:—

Media fert tristes succos. tardumque saporem Felicis mali, quo non praesentius ullum, Pocula si quando saevae infecere novercae, Miscueruntque herbas et non innoxia verba, Auxilium venit, ac membris agit atra venena.

Georgics II. v. 126.

Vide Heyne's note i, 438.

[1877] P. turunj, wrinkled, puckered; Sans. vījāpūra and H. bijaurā (Āyīn 28), seed-filled.

[1878] Bābur may have confused this with H. bijaurā; so too appears to have done the writer (Humāyūn?) of a [now mutilated] note in the Elph. Codex (f. 238), which seems to say that the fruit or its name went from Bajaur to Hindūstān. Is the country of Bajaur so-named from its indigenous orange (vījāpūra, whence bijaurā)? The name occurs also north of Kangra.

[1879] Of this name variants are numerous, santra, santhara, samtara, etc. Watts classes it as a C. aurantium; Erskine makes it the common sweet orange; Firminger, quoting Ross (p. 221) writes that, as grown in the Nagpur gardens it is one of the finest Indian oranges, with rind thin, smooth and close. The Emperor Muḥammad Shāh is said to have altered its name to rang-tāra because of its fine colour (rang) (Forbes). Speede (ii, 109) gives both names. As to the meaning and origin of the name santara or santra, so suggestive of Cintra, the Portuguese home of a similar orange, it may be said that it looks like a hill-name used in N. E. India, for there is a village in the Bhutan Hills, (Western Duars) known from its orange groves as Santra-bārī, Abode of the orange. To this (mentioned already as my husband's suggestion in Mr. Crooke's ed. of Yule's H.J.) support is given by the item "Suntura, famous Nipal variety", entered in Seth's Nursery-list of 1914 (Feronia Nurseries, Calcutta). Light on the question of origin could be thrown, no doubt, by those acquainted with the dialects of the hill-tract concerned.

[1880] This refers, presumably, to the absence of the beak characteristic of all citrons.

[1881] melter, from the Sans. root gal, which provides the names of several lemons by reason of their solvent quality, specified by Bābur (infra) of the amal-bīd. Erskine notes that in his day the gal-gal was known as kilmek (galmak?).

[1882] Sans. jambīrā, H. jambīr, classed by Abū'l-faẓl as one of the somewhat sour fruits and by Watts as Citrus medica limonum.

[1883] Watts, C. decumana, the shaddock or pumelo; Firminger (p. 223) has C. decumana pyriformis suiting Bābur's "pear-shaped". What Bābur compared it with will be the Transoxanian pear and quince (P. amrūd and bihī) and not the Indian guava and Bengal quince (P. amrūd and H. bael).

[1884] The Turkī text writes amrd. Watts classes the amrit-phal as a C. aurantium. This supports Erskine's suggestion that it is the mandarin-orange. Humāyūn describes it in a note which is written pell-mell in the text of the Elph. Codex and contains also descriptions of the kāmila and santara oranges; it can be seen translated in Appendix O.

[1885] So spelled in the Turkī text and also in two good MSS. of the Pers. trs. I.O. 217 and 218, but by Abū'l-faẓl amal-bīt. Both P. bīd and P. bīt mean willow and cane (ratan), so that amal-bīd (bīt) can mean acid-willow and acid-cane. But as Bābur is writing of a fruit like an orange, the cane that bears an acid fruit, Calamus rotang, can be left aside in favour of Citrus medica acidissima. Of this fruit the solvent property Bābur mentions, as well as the commonly-known service in cleansing metal, link it, by these uses, with the willow and suggest a ground for understanding, as Erskine did, that amal-bīd meant acid-willow; for willow-wood is used to rub rust off metal.

[1886] This statement shows that Bābur was writing the Description of Hindūstān in 935 AH. (1528-9 AD.), which is the date given for it by Shaikh Zain.

[1887] This story of the needle is believed in India of all the citron kind, which are hence called sūī-gal (needle-melter) in the Dakhin (Erskine). Cf. Forbes, p. 489 s.n. sūī-gal.

[1888] Erskine here quotes information from Abū'l-faẓl (Āyīn 28) about Akbar's encouragement of the cultivation of fruits.

[1889] Hindustani (Urdu) gaṛhal. Many varieties of Hibiscus (syn. Althea) grow in India; some thrive in Surrey gardens; the jāsūn by name and colour can be taken as what is known in Malayan, Tamil, etc., as the shoe-flower, from its use in darkening leather (Yule's H.J.).

[1890] I surmise that what I have placed between asterisks here belongs to the next-following plant, the oleander. For though the branches of the jāsūn grow vertically, the bush is a dense mass upon one stout trunk, or stout short stem. The words placed in parenthesis above are not with the Ḥaidarabad but are with the Elphinstone Codex. There would seem to have been a scribe's skip from one "rose" to the other. As has been shewn repeatedly, this part of the Bābur-nāma has been much annotated; in the Elph. Codex, where only most of the notes are preserved, some are entered by the scribe pell-mell into Bābur's text. The present instance may be a case of a marginal note, added to the text in a wrong place.

[1891] The peduncle supporting the plume of medial petals is clearly seen only when the flower opens first. The plumed Hibiscus is found in florists' catalogues described as "double".

[1892] This Anglo-Indians call also rose-bay. A Persian name appears to be zahr-giyāh, poison-grass, which makes it the more probable that the doubtful passage in the previous description of the jāsūn belongs to the rod-like oleander, known as the poison-grass. The oleander is common in river-beds over much country known to Bābur, outside India.

[1893] Roxburgh gives a full and interesting account of this tree.

[1894] Here the Elph. Codex, only, has the (seeming) note, "An 'Arab calls it kāẕī" (or kāwī). This fills out Steingass' part-explanation of kāwī, "the blossom of the fragrant palm-tree, armāṯ" (p. 1010), and of armāṯ, "a kind of date-tree with a fragrant blossom" (p. 39), by making armāṯ and kāwī seem to be the Pandanus and its flower.

[1895] Calamus scriptorius (Vullers ii, 607. H. B.). Abū'l-faẓl compares the leaves to jawārī, the great millet (Forbes); Blochmann (A. A. p. 83) translates jawārī by maize (juwārā, Forbes).

[1896] T. aīrkāk-qūmūsh, a name Scully enters unexplained. Under qūmūsh (reed) he enters Arundo madagascarensis; Bābur's comparison will be with some Transoxanian Arundo or Calamus, presumably.

[1897] Champa seems to have been Bābur's word (Elph. and Ḥai. MSS.), but is the (B.) name for Michelia champaka; the Pers. translation corrects it by (B.) chambelī, (yāsman, jasmine).

[1898] Here, "outside India" will be meant, where Hindū rules do not prevail.

[1899] Hind aīlārī-nīng ibtidā-sī hilāl aīlār-nīng istiqbāl-dīn dūr. The use here of istiqbāl, welcome, attracts attention; does it allude to the universal welcome of lighter nights? or is it reminiscent of Muḥammadan welcome to the Moon's crescent in Shawwāl?

[1900] For an exact statement of the intercalary months vide Cunningham's Indian Eras, p. 91. In my next sentence (supra) the parenthesis-marks indicate blanks left on the page of the Ḥai. MS. as though waiting for information. These and other similar blanks make for the opinion that the Ḥai. Codex is a direct copy of Bābur's draft manuscript.

[1901] The sextuple division (r̤itu) of the year is referred to on f. 284, where the Signs Crab and Lion are called the season of the true Rains.

[1902] Bābur appears not to have entered either the Hindī or the Persian names of the week:—the Ḥai. MS. has a blank space; the Elph. MS. had the Persian names only, and Hindī ones have been written in above these; Kehr has the Persian ones only; Ilminsky has added the Hindī ones. (The spelling of the Hindī names, in my translation, is copied from Forbes' Dictionary.)

[1903] The Ḥai. MS. writes garī and garīāl. The word now stands for the hour of 60 minutes.

[1904] i.e. gong-men. The name is applied also to an alligator Lacertus gangeticus (Forbes).

[1905] There is some confusion in the text here, the Ḥai. MS. reading birinj-dīn tīshī(?) nīma qūīūbtūrlār—the Elph. MS. (f. 240_b_) biring-dīn bīr yāssī nīma qūīūbtūrlār. The Persian translation, being based on the text of the Elphinstone Codex reads az biring yak chīz pahnī rekhta and. The word tīshī of the Ḥai. MS. may represent tasht plate or yāssī, broad; against the latter however there is the sentence that follows and gives the size.

[1906] Here again the wording of the Ḥai. MS. is not clear; the sense however is obvious. Concerning the clepsydra vide A. A. Jarrett, ii, 15 and notes; Smith's Dictionary of Antiquities; Yule's H.J. s.n. Ghurry.

[1907] The table is:—60 bipals = 1 pal; 60 pals = 1 g'harī (24 m.); 60 g'harī or 8 pahr = one dīn-rāt (nycthemeron).

[1908] Qorān, cap. CXII, which is a declaration of God's unity.

[1909] The (S.) ratī = 8 rice-grains (Eng. 8 barley-corns); the (S.) māsha is a kidney-bean; the (P.) tānk is about 2 oz.; the (Ar.) miṣqāl is equal to 40 ratīs; the (S.) tūla is about 145 oz.; the (S.) ser is of various values (Wilson's Glossary and Yule's H. J.).

[1910] There being 40 Bengāl sers to the man, Bābur's word mānbān seems to be another name for the man or maund. I have not found mānbān or mīnāsā. At first sight mānbān might be taken, in the Ḥai. MS. for (T.) bātmān, a weight of 13 or 15 lbs., but this does not suit. Cf. f. 167 note to bātmān and f. 173_b_ (where, however, in the note f. 157 requires correction to f. 167). For Bābur's table of measures the Pers. trs. has 40 sers = 1 man; 12 mans = 1 mānī; 100 mānī they call mīnāsa (217, f. 201_b_, l. 8).

[1911] Presumably these are caste-names.

[1912] The words in parenthesis appear to be omitted from the text; to add them brings Bābur's remark into agreement with others on what he several times makes note of, viz. the absence not only of irrigation-channels but of those which convey "running-waters" to houses and gardens. Such he writes of in Farghāna; such are a well-known charm e.g. in Madeira, where the swift current of clear water flowing through the streets, turns into private precincts by side-runlets.

[1913] The Ḥai. MS. writes lungūtā-dīk, like a lungūtā, which better agrees with Bābur's usual phrasing. Lung is Persian for a cloth passed between the loins, is an equivalent of S. dhoti. Bābur's use of it (infra) for the woman's (P.) chaddar or (S.) sārī does not suit the Dictionary definition of its meaning.

[1914] When Erskine published the Memoirs in 1826 AD. he estimated this sum at 1-1/2 millions Sterling, but when he published his History of India in 1854, he had made further research into the problem of Indian money values, and judged then that Bābur's revenue was £4,212,000.

[1915] Erskine here notes that the promised details had not been preserved, but in 1854 AD. he had found them in a "paraphrase of part of Bābur", manifestly in Shaikh Zain's work. He entered and discussed them and some matters of money-values in Appendices D. and E. of his History of India, vol. I. Ilminsky found them in Kehr's Codex (C. ii, 230). The scribe of the Elph. MS. has entered the revenues of three sarkārs only, with his usual quotation marks indicating something extraneous or doubtful. The Ḥai. MS. has them in contents precisely as I have entered them above, but with a scattered mode of setting down. They are in Persian, presumably as they were rendered to Bābur by some Indian official. This official statement will have been with Bābur's own papers; it will have been copied by Shaikh Zain into his own paraphrase. It differs slightly in Erskine's and again, in de Courteille's versions. I regret that I am incompetent to throw any light upon the question of its values and that I must leave some uncertain names to those more expert than myself. Cf. Erskine's Appendices l.c. and Thomas' Revenue resources of the Mughal Empire. For a few comments see App. P.

[1916] Here the Turkī text resumes in the Ḥai. MS.

[1917] Elph. MS. f. 243_b_; W. i. B. I.O. 215 has not the events of this year (as to which omission vide note at the beginning of 932 AH. f. 251_b_) and 217 f. 203; Mems. p. 334; Ilminsky's imprint p. 380; Méms. ii, 232.

[1918] This should be 30th if Saturday was the day of the week (Gladwin, Cunningham and Bābur's narrative of f. 269). Saturday appears likely to be right; Bābur entered Āgra on Thursday 28th; Friday would be used for the Congregational Prayer and preliminaries inevitable before the distribution of the treasure. The last day of Bābur's narrative 932 AH. is Thursday Rajab 28th; he would not be likely to mistake between Friday, the day of his first Congregational prayer in Āgra, and Saturday. It must be kept in mind that the Description of Hindūstān is an interpolation here, and that it was written in 935 AH., three years later than the incidents here recorded. The date Rajab 29th may not be Bābur's own entry; or if it be, may have been made after the interpolation of the dividing mass of the Description and made wrongly.

[1919] Erskine estimated these sums as "probably £56,700 to Humāyūn; and the smaller ones as £8,100, £6,480, £5,670 and £4,860 respectively; very large sums for the age". (History of India, i. 440 n. and App. E.)

[1920] These will be his daughters. Gul-badan gives precise details of the gifts to the family circle (Humāyūn-nāma f. 10).

[1921] Some of these slaves were Sl. Ibrāhīm's dancing-girls (Gul-badan, ib.).

[1922] Ar. ṣada. Perhaps it was a station of a hundred men. Varsak is in Badakhshān, on the water flowing to T̤āliqān from the Khwāja Muḥammad range. Erskine read (p. 335) ṣada Varsak as ṣadūr rashk, incentive to emulation; de C. (ii, 233) translates ṣada conjecturally by circonscription. Shaikh Zain has Varsak and to the recipients of the gifts adds the "Khwāstīs, people noted for their piety" (A. N. trs. H. B. i, 248 n.). The gift to Varsak may well have been made in gratitude for hospitality received by Bābur in the time of adversity after his loss of Samarkand and before his return to Kābul in 920 AH.

[1923] circa 10d. or 11d. Bābur left himself stripped so bare by his far-flung largess that he was nick-named Qalandar (Firishta).

[1924] Badāyūnī says of him (Bib. Ind. ed. i, 340) that he was kāfir kalīma-gū, a pagan making the Muḥammadan Confession of Faith, and that he had heard of him, in Akbar's time from Bairām Khān-i-khānan, as kingly in appearance and poetic in temperament. He was killed fighting for Rānā Sangā at Kānwaha.

[1925] This is his family name.

[1926] i.e. not acting with Ḥasan Mīwātī.

[1927] Gul-badan says that the Khwāja several times asked leave on the ground that his constitution was not fitted for the climate of Hindūstān; that His Majesty was not at all, at all, willing for him to go, but gave way at length to his importunity.

[1928] in Patiāla, about 25 miles s.w. of Aṃbāla.

[1929] Shaikh Zain, Gul-badan and Erskine write Nau-kār. It was now that Khwāja Kalān conveyed money for the repair of the great dam at Ghaznī (f. 139).

[1930] The friends did not meet again; that their friendship weathered this storm is shewn by Bābur's letter of f. 359. The Abūshqa says the couplet was inscribed on a marble tablet near the Ḥauẓ-i-khāṣ at the time the Khwāja was in Dihlī after bidding Bābur farewell in Āgra.

[1931] This quatrain is in the Rāmpūr Dīwān (q.v. index). The Abūshqa quotes the following as Khwāja Kalān's reply, but without mentioning where the original was found. Cf. de Courteille, Dict. s.n. taskarī. An English version is given in my husband's article Some verses by the Emperor Bābur (A. Q. R. January, 1911).

You shew your gaiety and your wit, In each word there lie acres of charm. Were not all things of Hind upside-down, How could you in the heat be so pleasant on cold?

It is an old remark of travellers that everything in India is the opposite of what one sees elsewhere. Tīmūr is said to have remarked it and to have told his soldiers not to be afraid of the elephants of India, "For," said he, "their trunks are empty sleeves, and they carry their tails in front; in Hindustan everything is reversed" (H. Beveridge ibid.). Cf. App. Q.

[1932] Badāyūnī i, 337 speaks of him as unrivalled in music.

[1933] f. 267_b_.

[1934] aūrūq, which here no doubt represents the women of the family.

[1935] `ain parganalār.

[1936] Bābur's advance, presumably.

[1937] The full amounts here given are not in all MSS., some scribes contenting themselves with the largest item of each gift (Memoirs p. 337).

[1938] The `Id of Shawwāl, it will be remembered, is celebrated at the conclusion of the Ramẓān fast, on seeing the first new moon of Shawwāl. In A.H. 932 it must have fallen about July 11th 1526 (Erskine).

[1939] A square shawl, or napkin, of cloth of gold, bestowed as a mark of rank and distinction (Memoirs p. 338 n.); une tunique enrichie de broderies (Mémoires, ii, 240 n.).

[1940] kamar-shamshīr. This Steingass explains as sword-belt, Erskine by "sword with a belt". The summary following shews that many weapons were given and not belts alone. There is a good deal of variation in the MSS. The Ḥai. MS. has not a complete list. The most all the lists show is that gifts were many.

[1941] f. 263_b_.

[1942] over the Ganges, a little above Anūp-shahr in the Buland-shahr district.

[1943] A seeming omission in the text is made good in my translation by Shaikh Zain's help, who says Qāsim was sent to Court.

[1944] This quatrain is in the Rāmpūr Dīwān. It appears to pun on Bīāna and bī(y)ān.

[1945] Kandār is in Rājpūtāna; Abū'l-faẓl writes Kuhan-dār, old habitation.

[1946] This is the first time Bābur's begs are called amīrs in his book; it may be by a scribe's slip.

[1947] Chandwār is on the Jumna, between Āgra and Etāwah.

[1948] Here āqār-sūlār will stand for the waters which flow—sometimes in marble channels—to nourish plants and charm the eye, such for example as beautify the Tāj-maḥal pleasaunce.

[1949] Index s.n. The tālār is raised on pillars and open in front; it serves often for an Audience-hall (Erskine).

[1950] tāsh `imārat, which may refer to the extra-mural location of the house, or contrast it with the inner khilwat-khāna, the women's quarters, of the next sentence. The point is noted as one concerning the use of the word tāsh (Index s.n.). I have found no instance in which it is certain that Bābur uses tāsh, a stone or rock, as an adjective. On f. 301 he writes tāshdīn `imārat, house-of-stone, which the Persian text renders by `imārat-i-sangīn. Wherever tāsh can be translated as meaning outer, this accords with Bābur's usual diction.

[1951] bāghcha (Index s.n.). That Bābur was the admitted pioneer of orderly gardens in India is shewn by the 30th Āyīn, On Perfumes:—"After the foot-prints of Firdaus-makānī (Bābur) had added to the glory of Hindūstān, embellishment by avenues and landscape-gardening was seen, while heart-expanding buildings and the sound of falling-waters widened the eyes of beholders."

[1952] Perhaps gaz, each somewhat less than 36 inches.

[1953] The more familiar Indian name is baoli. Such wells attracted Peter Mundy's attention; Yule gives an account of their names and plan (Mundy's Travels in Asia, Hakluyt Society, ed. R. C. Temple, and Yule's Hobson Jobson s.n. Bowly). Bābur's account of his great wāīn is not easy to translate; his interpreters vary from one another; probably no one of them has felt assured of translating correctly.

[1954] i.e. the one across the river.

[1955] tāsh masjid; this, unless some adjectival affix (e.g. dīn) has been omitted by the scribe, I incline to read as meaning extra, supplementary, or outer, not as "mosque-of-stone".

[1956] or Jājmāwa, the old name for the sub-district of Kānhpūr (Cawnpur).

[1957] i.e. of the Corps of Braves.

[1958] Dilmāū is on the left bank of the Ganges, s.e. from Bareilly (Erskine).

[1959] Marv-nīng bundī-nī bāghlāb, which Erskine renders by "Having settled the revenue of Merv", and de Courteille by, "Aprés avoir occupé Merv." Were the year's revenues compressed into a 40 to 50 days collection?

[1960] i.e. those who had part in his brother's murder. Cf. Niẕāmu'd-dīn Aḥmad's T̤abaqāt-i-akbarī and the Mīrat-i-sikandarī (trs. History of Gujrat E. C. Bayley).

[1961] Elph. MS. f. 252; W.-i-B. I.O. 215 f. 199b and 217 f. 208_b_; Mems. p. 343.

[1962] sīūnchī (Zenker). Fārūq was Māhīm's son; he died in 934 A.H. before his father had seen him.

[1963] ṣalaḥ. It is clear from the "tāsh-awī" (Pers. trs. khāna-i-sang) of this mortar (qāzān) that stones were its missiles. Erskine notes that from Bābur's account cannon would seem sometimes to have been made in parts and clamped together, and that they were frequently formed of iron bars strongly compacted into a circular shape. The accoutrement (ṣalaḥ) presumably was the addition of fittings.

[1964] About £40,000 sterling (Erskine).

[1965] The MSS. write Ṣafar but it seems probable that Muḥarram should be substituted for this; one ground for not accepting Ṣafar being that it breaks the consecutive order of dates, another that Ṣafar allows what seems a long time for the journey from near Dilmāū to Āgra. All MSS. I have seen give the 8th as the day of the month but Erskine has 20th. In this part of Bābur's writings dates are sparse; it is a narrative and not a diary.

[1966] This phrase, foreign to Bābur's diction, smacks of a Court-Persian milieu.

[1967] Here the Elph. MS. has Ṣafar Muḥarram (f. 253), as has also I.O. 215 f. 200b, but it seems unsafe to take this as an al Ṣafarānī extension of Muḥarram because Muḥ.-Ṣafar 24th was not a Wednesday. As in the passage noted just above, it seems likely that Muḥarram is right.

[1968] Cf. f. 15_b_ note to Qaṃbar-i-`alī. The title Akhta-begī is to be found translated by "Master of the Horse", but this would not suit both uses of akhta in the above sentence. Cf. Shaw's Vocabulary.

[1969] i.e. Tahangaṛh in Karauli, Rājpūtāna.

[1970] Perhaps sipāhī represents Hindūstānī foot-soldiers.

[1971] Rafī`u-d-dīn Ṣafawī, a native of Īj near the Persian Gulf, teacher of Abū'l-faẓl's father and buried near Āgra (Āyīn-i-akbarī).

[1972] This phrase, again, departs from Bābur's simplicity of statement.

[1973] About £5,000 (Erskine).

[1974] About £17,500 (Erskine).

[1975] Ḥai. MS. and 215 f. 201b, Hastī; Elph. MS. f. 254, and Ilminsky, p. 394, Aīmīshchī; Memoirs, p. 346, Imshiji, so too Mémoires, ii, 257.

[1976] About £5000 (Erskine). Bīānwān lies in the sūbah of Āgra.

[1977] Cf. f. 175 for Bābur's estimate of his service.

[1978] Cf. f. 268_b_ for Bābur's clemency to him.

[1979] Firishta. (Briggs ii, 53) mentions that Asad had gone to T̤ahmāsp from Kābul to congratulate him on his accession. Shāh Ismā`īl had died in 930 AH. (1524 AD.); the title Shāh-zāda is a misnomer therefore in 933 AH.—one possibly prompted by T̤ahmāsp's youth.

[1980] The letter is likely to have been written to Māhīm and to have been brought back to India by her in 935 AH. (f. 380_b_). Some MSS. of the Pers. trs. reproduce it in Turkī and follow this by a Persian version; others omit the Turkī.

[1981] Turkī, būā. Hindī bawā means sister or paternal-aunt but this would not suit from Bābur's mouth, the more clearly not that his epithet for the offender is bad-bakht. Gul-badan (H.N. f. 19) calls her "ill-omened demon".

[1982] She may have been still in the place assigned to her near Āgra when Bābur occupied it (f. 269).

[1983] f. 290. Erskine notes that the tūla is about equal in weight to the silver rūpī.

[1984] It appears from the kitchen-arrangements detailed by Abū'l-faẓl, that before food was dished up, it was tasted from the pot by a cook and a subordinate taster, and next by the Head-taster.

[1985] The Turkī sentences which here follow the well-known Persian proverb, Rasīda būd balāī walī ba khair guẕasht, are entered as verse in some MSS.; they may be a prose quotation.

[1986] She, after being put under contribution by two of Bābur's officers (f. 307_b_) was started off for Kābul, but, perhaps dreading her reception there, threw herself into the Indus in crossing and was drowned. (Cf. A.N. trs. H. Beveridge Errata and addenda p. xi for the authorities.)

[1987] gil makhtūm, Lemnian earth, terra sigillata, each piece of which was impressed, when taken from the quarry, with a guarantee-stamp (Cf. Ency. Br. s.n. Lemnos).

[1988] tirīāq-i-fārūq, an antidote.

[1989] Index s.n.

[1990] Kāmrān was in Qandahār (Index s.n.). Erskine observes here that Bābur's omission to give the name of Ibrāhīm's son, is noteworthy; the son may however have been a child and his name not known to or recalled by Bābur when writing some years later.

[1991] f. 299_b_.

[1992] The Āyīn-i-akbarī locates this in the sarkār of Jūn-pūr, a location suiting the context. The second Persian translation (`Abdu'r-raḥīm's) has here a scribe's skip from one "news" to another (both asterisked in my text); hence Erskine has an omission.

[1993] This is the Chār-bāgh of f. 300, known later as the Rām (Arām)-bāgh (Garden-of-rest).

[1994] Presumably he was coming up from Marwār.

[1995] This name varies; the Ḥai. MS. in most cases writes Qismatī, but on f. 267_b_, Qismatāī; the Elph. MS. on f. 220 has Q:s:mnāī; De Courteille writes Qismī.

[1996] artkāb qīldī, perhaps drank wine, perhaps ate opium-confections to the use of which he became addicted later on (Gulbadan's Humāyūn-nāma f. 30_b_ and 73_b_).

[1997] furṣatlār, i.e. between the occupation of Āgra and the campaign against Rānā Sangā.

[1998] Apparently the siege Bābur broke up in 931 AH. had been renewed by the Aūzbegs (f. 255_b_ and Trs. Note s.a. 931 AH. section c).

[1999] These places are on the Khulm-river between Khulm and Kāhmard. The present tense of this and the following sentences is Babur's.

[2000] f. 261.

[2001] Erskine here notes that if the ser Bābur mentions be one of 14 tūlas, the value is about £27; if of 24 tūlas, about £45.

[2002] T. chāpdūq. Cf. the two Persian translations 215 f. 205_b_ and 217 f. 215; also Ilminsky, p. 401.

[2003] būlghān chīrīkī. The Rānā's forces are thus stated by Tod (Rājastān; Annals of Marwār Cap. ix):—"Eighty thousand horse, 7 Rajas of the highest rank, 9 Raos, and 104 chieftains bearing the titles of Rawul and Rawut, with 500 war-elephants, followed him into the field." Bābur's army, all told, was 12,000 when he crossed the Indus from Kābul; it will have had accretions from his own officers in the Panj-āb and some also from other quarters, and will have had losses at Pānipat; his reliable kernel of fighting-strength cannot but have been numerically insignificant, compared with the Rājpūt host. Tod says that almost all the princes of Rājastān followed the Rānā at Kanwā.

[2004] dūrbātūr. This is the first use of the word in the Bābur-nāma; the defacer of the Elph. Codex has altered it to aūrātūr.

[2005] Shaikh Zain records [Abū'l-faẓl also, perhaps quoting from him] that Bābur, by varying diacritical points, changed the name Sīkrī to Shukrī in sign of gratitude for his victory over the Rānā. The place became the Fatḥpūr-sīkrī of Akbar.

[2006] Erskine locates this as 10 to 12 miles n.w. of Bīāna.

[2007] This phrase has not occurred in the B.N. before; presumably it expresses what has not yet been expressed; this Erskine's rendering, "each according to the speed of his horse," does also. The first Persian translation, which in this portion is by Muḥammad-qulī Mughūl Ḥiṣārī, translates by az daṃbal yak dīgar (I.O. 215, f. 205_b_); the second, `Abdu'r-rāḥīm's, merely reproduces the phrase; De Courteille (ii, 272) appears to render it by (amirs) que je ne nomme pas. If my reading of T̤āhir-tibrī's failure be correct (infra), Erskine's translation suits the context.

[2008] The passage cut off by my asterisks has this outside interest that it forms the introduction to the so-called "Fragments", that is, to certain Turkī matter not included in the standard Bābur-nāma, but preserved with the Kehr—Ilminsky—de Courteille text. As is well-known in Bāburiana, opinion has varied as to the genesis of this matter; there is now no doubt that it is a translation into Turkī from the (Persian) Akbar-nāma, prefaced by the above-asterisked passage of the Bābur-nāma and continuous (with slight omissions) from Bib. Ind. ed. i, 106 to 120 (trs. H. Beveridge i, 260 to 282). It covers the time from before the battle of Kanwā to the end of Abū'l-faẓl's description of Bābur's death, attainments and Court; it has been made to seem Bābur's own, down to his death-bed, by changing the third person of A.F.'s narrative into the autobiographical first person. (Cf. Ilminsky, p. 403 l. 4 and p. 494; Mémoires ii, 272 and 443 to 464; JRAS. 1908, p. 76.)

A minute point in the history of the B.N. manuscripts may be placed on record here; viz. that the variants from the true Bābur-nāma text which occur in the Kehr-Ilminsky one, occur also in the corrupt Turkī text of I.O. No. 214 (JRAS 1900, p. 455).

[2009] chāpār kūmak yītmās, perhaps implying that the speed of his horses was not equal to that of Muḥibb-i-'alī's. Translators vary as to the meaning of the phrase.

[2010] Erskine and de Courteille both give Musṯafa the commendation the Turkī and Persian texts give to the carts.

[2011] According to Tod's Rājastān, negotiations went on during the interval, having for their object the fixing of a frontier between the Rānā and Bābur. They were conducted by a "traitor" Ṣalaḥ'd-dīn Tūār the chief of Raisin, who moreover is said to have deserted to Bābur during the battle.

[2012] Cf. f. 89 for Bābur's disastrous obedience to astrological warning.

[2013] For the reading of this second line, given by the good MSS. viz. Tauba ham bī maza nīst, bachash, Ilminsky (p. 405) has Tauba ham bī maza, mast bakhis, which de Courteille [II, 276] renders by, "O ivrogne insensé! que ne goûtes-tu aussi à la pénitence?" The Persian couplet seems likely to be a quotation and may yet be found elsewhere. It is not in the Rāmpūr Dīwān which contains the Turkī verses following it (E. D. Ross p. 21).

[2014] kīchmāklīk, to pass over (to exceed?), to ford or go through a river, whence to transgress. The same metaphor of crossing a stream occurs, in connection with drinking, on f. 189_b_.

[2015] This line shews that Bābur's renouncement was of wine only; he continued to eat confections (ma`jūn).

[2016] Cf. f. 186_b_. Bābur would announce his renunciation in Dīwān; there too the forbidden vessels of precious metals would be broken. His few words leave it to his readers to picture the memorable scene.

[2017] This night-guard (`asas) cannot be the one concerning whom Gul-badan records that he was the victim of a little joke made at his expense by Bābur (H. N. Index s.n.). He seems likely to be the Ḥājī Muḥ. `asas whom Abū'l-faẓl mentions in connection with Kāmrān in 953 AH. (1547 AD.). He may be the `asas who took charge of Bābur's tomb at Āgra (cf. Gul-badan's H. N. s.n. Muḥ. `Alī `asas ṯaghāī, and Akbar-nāma trs. i, 502).

[2018] saqālī qīrqmāqta u qūīmāqta. Erskine here notes that "a vow to leave the beard untrimmed was made sometimes by persons who set out against the infidels. They did not trim the beard till they returned victorious. Some vows of similar nature may be found in Scripture", e.g. II Samuel, cap. 19 v. 24.

[2019] Index s.n. The tamghā was not really abolished until Jahāngīr's time—if then (H. Beveridge). See Thomas' Revenue Resources of the Mughal Empire.

[2020] There is this to notice here:—Bābur's narrative has made the remission of the tamghā contingent on his success, but the farmān which announced that remission is dated some three weeks before his victory over Rānā Sangā (Jumāda II, 13th-March 16th). Manifestly Bābur's remission was absolute and made at the date given by Shaikh Zain as that of the farmān. The farmān seems to have been despatched as soon as it was ready, but may have been inserted in Bābur's narrative at a later date, together with the preceding paragraph which I have asterisked.

[2021] "There is a lacuna in the Turkī copy" (i.e. the Elphinstone Codex) "from this place to the beginning of the year 935. Till then I therefore follow only Mr. Metcalfe's and my own Persian copies" (Erskine).

[2022] I am indebted to my husband for this revised version of the farmān. He is indebted to M. de Courteille for help generally, and specially for the references to the Qorān (q.v. infra).

[2023] The passages in italics are Arabic in the original, and where traced to the Qorān, are in Sale's words.

[2024] Qorān, Sūrah XII, v. 53.

[2025] Sūrah LVII, v. 21.

[2026] Sūrah LVII, v. 15.

[2027] Sūrah VII, v. 140.

[2028] Sūrah II, v. 185.

[2029] These may be self-conquests as has been understood by Erskine (p. 356) and de Courteille (ii. 281) but as the Divine "acceptance" would seem to Bābur vouched for by his military success, "victories" may stand for his success at Kanwā.

[2030] Sūrah II, 177 where, in Sale's translation, the change referred to is the special one of altering a legacy.

[2031] The words dīgūchī and yīgūchī are translated in the second Wāqi`āt-i-bāburī by sukhan-gūī and [wīlāyat]-khwār. This ignores in them the future element supplied by their component gū which would allow them to apply to conditions dependent on Bābur's success. The Ḥai. MS. and Ilminsky read tīgūchī, supporter- or helper-to-be, in place of the yīgūchī, eater-to-be I have inferred from the khwār of the Pers. translation; hence de Courteille writes "amīrs auxquels incombait l'obligation de raffermir le gouvernement". But Erskine, using the Pers. text alone, and thus having khwār before him, translates by, "amīrs who enjoyed the wealth of kingdoms." The two Turkī words make a depreciatory "jingle", but the first one, dīgūchī, may imply serious reference to the duty, declared by Muḥammad to be incumbent upon a wazīr, of reminding his sovereign "when he forgetteth his duty". Both may be taken as alluding to dignities to be attained by success in the encounter from which wazīrs and amīrs were shrinking.

[2032] Firdausī's Shāh-nāma [Erskine].

[2033] Also Chand-wāl; it is 25 m. east of Āgra and on the Jamna [T̤abaqāṭ-i-nāṣirī, Raverty, p. 742 n.9]

[2034] Probably, Overthrower of the rhinoceros, but if Gurg-andāz be read, of the wolf.

[2035] According to the Persian calendar this is the day the Sun enters Aries.

[2036] The practical purpose of this order of march is shewn in the account of the battle of Pānīpat, and in the Letter of Victory, f. 319.

[2037] kurohcha, perhaps a short kuroh, but I have not found Bābur using cha as a diminutive in such a case as kurohcha.

[2038] or Kānūa, in the Bīānā district and three marches from Bīāna-town. "It had been determined on by Rānā Sangrām Sīngh (i.e. Sangā) for the northern limit of his dominions, and he had here built a small palace." Tod thus describes Bābur's foe, "Sangā Rānā was of the middle stature, and of great muscular strength, fair in complexion, with unusually large eyes which appear to be peculiar to his descendants. He exhibited at his death but the fragments of a warrior: one eye was lost in the broil with his brother, an arm in action with the Lodī kings of Dehlī, and he was a cripple owing to a limb being broken by a cannon-ball in another; while he counted 80 wounds from the sword or the lance on various parts of his body" (Tod's Rājastān, cap. Annals of Mewār).

[2039] Here M. de C. has the following note (ii, 273 n.); it supplements my own of f. 264 [n. 3]. "Le mot arāba, que j'ai traduit par chariot est pris par M. Leyden" (this should be Erskine) "dans le sens de 'gun', ce que je ne crois pas exact; tout au plus signifierait-il affût" (gun-carriage). "Il me parait impossible d'admettre que Bāber eût à sa disposition une artillerie attelée aussi considérable. Ces arāba pouvaient servir en partie à transporter des pièces de campagne, mais ils avaient aussi une autre destination, comme on le voit par la suite du récit." It does not appear to me that Erskine translates the word arāba by the word gun, but that the arābas (all of which he took to be gun-carriages) being there, he supposed the guns. This was not correct as the various passages about carts as defences show (cf. Index s.nn. arāba and carts).

[2040] It is characteristic of Bābur that he reproduces Shaikh Zain's Fatḥ-nāma, not because of its eloquence but because of its useful details. Erskine and de Courteille have the following notes concerning Shaikh Zain's farmān:—"Nothing can form a more striking contrast to the simple, manly and intelligent style of Baber himself, than the pompous, laboured periods of his secretary. Yet I have never read this Firmān to any native of India who did not bestow unlimited admiration on the official bombast of Zeineddin, while I have met with none but Turks who paid due praise to the calm simplicity of Baber" [Mems. p. 359]. "Comme la précédente (farmān), cette pièce est rédigée en langue persane et offre un modèle des plus accomplis du style en usage dans les chancelleries orientales. La traduction d'un semblable morceau d'éloquence est de la plus grande difficulté, si on veut être clair, tout en restant fidèle à l'original."

Like the Renunciation farmān, the Letter-of-victory with its preceding sentence which I have asterisked, was probably inserted into Bābur's narrative somewhat later than the battle of Kānwa. Hence Bābur's pluperfect-tense "had indited". I am indebted to my husband for help in revising the difficult Fatḥ-nāma; he has done it with consideration of the variants between the earlier English and the French translations. No doubt it could be dealt with more searchingly still by one well-versed in the Qorān and the Traditions, and thus able to explain others of its allusions. The italics denote Arabic passages in the original; many of these are from the Qorān, and in tracing them M. de Courteille's notes have been most useful to us.

[2041] Qorān, cap. 80, last sentence.

[2042] Shaikh Zain, in his version of the Bābur-nāma, styles Bābur Nawāb where there can be no doubt of the application of the title, viz. in describing Shāh T̤ahmāsp's gifts to him (mentioned by Bābur on f. 305). He uses the title also in the farmān of renunciation (f. 313_b_), but it does not appear in my text, "royal" (fortune) standing for it (in loco p. 555, l. 10).

[2043] The possessive pronoun occurs several times in the Letter-of-victory. As there is no semblance of putting forward that letter as being Bābur's, the pronoun seems to imply "on our side".

[2044] The Bābur-nāma includes no other than Shaikh Zain's about Kanwā. Those here alluded to will be the announcements of success at Milwat, Pānīpat, Dībālpūr and perhaps elsewhere in Hindūstān.

[2045] In Jūn-pūr (Āyīn-i-akbarī); Elliot & Dowson note (iv, 283-4) that it appears to have included, near Sikandarpūr, the country on both sides of the Gogra, and thence on that river's left bank down to the Ganges.

[2046] That the word Nawāb here refers to Bābur and not to his lieutenants, is shewn by his mention (f. 278) of Sangā's messages to himself.

[2047] Qorān, cap. 2, v. 32. The passage quoted is part of a description of Satan, hence mention of Satan in Shaikh Zain's next sentence.

[2048] The brahminical thread.

[2049] khār-i-miḥnat-i-irtidād dar dāman. This Erskine renders by "who fixed thorns from the pangs of apostacy in the hem of their garments" (p. 360). Several good MSS. have khār, thorn, but Ilminsky has Ar. khimār, cymar, instead (p. 411). De Courteille renders the passage by "portent au pan de leurs habits la marque douloureuse de l'apostasie" (ii, 290). To read khimār, cymar (scarf), would serve, as a scarf is part of some Hindū costumes.

[2050] Qorān, cap. 69, v. 35.

[2051] M. Defrémery, when reviewing the French translation of the B.N. (Journal des Savans 1873), points out (p. 18) that it makes no mention of the "blessed ten". Erskine mentions them but without explanation. They are the 'asharah mubash-sharah, the decade of followers of Muḥammad who "received good tidings", and whose certain entry into Paradise he foretold.

[2052] Qorān, cap. 3, v. 20. M. Defrémery reads Shaikh Zain to mean that these words of the Qorān were on the infidel standards, but it would be simpler to read Shaikh Zain as meaning that the infidel insignia on the standards "denounce punishment" on their users.

[2053] He seems to have been a Rājpūt convert to Muḥammadanism who changed his Hindī name Silhādī for what Bābur writes. His son married Sangā's daughter; his fiefs were Raisin and Sārangpūr; he deserted to Bābur in the battle of Kānwa. (Cf. Erskine's History of India i, 471 note; Mirāt-i-sikandarī, Bayley's trs. s.n.; Akbar-nāma, H.B.'s trs. i, 261; Tod's Rājastān cap. Mewār.)

[2054] "Dejāl or al Masih al Dajjal, the false or lying Messiah, is the Muhammadan Anti-christ. He is to be one-eyed, and marked on the forehead with the letters K.F.R. signifying Kafer, or Infidel. He is to appear in the latter days riding on an ass, and will be followed by 70,000 Jews of Ispahān, and will continue on the Earth 40 days, of which one will be equal to a year, another to a month, another to a week, and the rest will be common days. He is to lay waste all places, but will not enter Mekka or Medina, which are to be guarded by angels. He is finally to be slain at the gate of Lud by Jesus, for whom the Musalmans profess great veneration, calling him the breath or spirit of God.—See Sale's Introductory Discourse to the Koran" [Erskine].

[2055] Qorān, cap. 29, v. 5.

[2056] "This alludes to the defeat of [an Abyssinian Christian] Abraha the prince of Yemen who [in the year of Muḥammad's birth] marched his army and some elephants to destroy the ka`ba of Makka. 'The Meccans,' says Sale, 'at the appearance of so considerable a host, retired to the neighbouring mountains, being unable to defend their city or temple. But God himself undertook the defence of both. For when Abraha drew near to Mecca, and would have entered it, the elephant on which he rode, which was a very large one and named Maḥmūd, refused to advance any nigher to the town, but knelt down whenever they endeavoured to force him that way, though he would rise and march briskly enough if they turned him towards any other quarter; and while matters were in this posture, on a sudden a large flock of birds, like swallows, came flying from the sea-coast, every-one of which carried three stones, one in each foot and one in its bill; and these stones they threw down upon the heads of Abraha's men, certainly killing every one they struck.' The rest were swept away by a flood or perished by a plague, Abraha alone reaching Senaa, where he also died" [Erskine]. The above is taken from Sale's note to the 105 chapter of the Qorān, entitled "the Elephant".

[2057] Presumably black by reason of their dark large mass.

[2058] Presumably, devouring as fire.

[2059] This is 50 m. long and blocked the narrow pass of the Caspian Iron-gates. It ends south of the Russian town of Dar-band, on the west shore of the Caspian. Erskine states that it was erected to repress the invasions of Yajuj and Mujuj (Gog and Magog).

[2060] Qorān, cap. lxi, v. 4.

[2061] Qorān, cap. ii, v. 4. Erskine appears to quote another verse.

[2062] Qorān, cap. xlviii, v. 1.

[2063] Index s.n.

[2064] Khirad, Intelligence or the first Intelligence, was supposed to be the guardian of the empyreal heaven (Erskine).

[2065] Chīn-tīmūr Chīngīz-khānid Chaghatāī is called Bābur's brother because a (maternal-) cousin of Bābur's own generation, their last common ancestor being Yūnas Khān.

[2066] Sulaimān Tīmūrid Mīrān-shāhī is called Bābur's son because his father was of Bābur's generation, their last common ancestor being Sl. Abū-sa`id Mīrzā. He was 13 years old and, through Shāh Begīm, hereditary shāh of Badakhshān.

[2067] The Shaikh was able, it would appear, to see himself as others saw him, since the above description of him is his own. It is confirmed by Abū'l-faẓl and Badāyūnī's accounts of his attainments.

[2068] The honourable post given to this amīr of Hind is likely to be due to his loyalty to Bābur.

[2069] Aḥmad may be a nephew of Yūsuf of the same agnomen (Index s.nn.).

[2070] I have not discovered the name of this old servant or the meaning of his seeming-sobriquet, Hindū. As a qūchīn he will have been a Mughūl or Turk. The circumstance of his service with a son of Maḥmūd Mīrān-shāhī (down to 905 AH.) makes it possible that he drew his name in his youth from the tract s.e. of Maḥmūd's Ḥiṣār territory which has been known as Little Hind (Index s.n. Hind). This is however conjecture merely. Another suggestion is that as hindū can mean black, it may stand for the common qarā of the Turks, e.g. Qarā Barlās, Black Barlās.

[2071] I am uncertain whether Qarā-qūzī is the name of a place, or the jesting sobriquet of more than one meaning it can be.

[2072] Soul-full, animated; var. Ḥai. MS. khān-dār. No agnomen is used for Asad by Bābur. The Akbar-nāma varies to jāmadār, wardrobe-keeper, cup-holder (Bib. Ind. ed. i, 107), and Firishta to sar-jāmadar, head wardrobe-keeper (lith. ed. p. 209 top). It would be surprising to find such an official sent as envoy to `Irāq, as Asad was both before and after he fought at Kānwa.

[2073] son of Daulat Khān Yūsuf-khail Lūdī.

[2074] These are the titles of the 20th and 36th chapters of the Qorān; Sale offers conjectural explanations of them. The "family" is Muḥammad's.

[2075] a Bāī-qarā Tīmūrid of Bābur's generation, their last common ancestor being Tīmūr himself.

[2076] an Aūzbeg who married a daughter of Sl. Ḥusain M. Bāī-qarā.

[2077] It has been pointed out to me that there is a Chinese title of nobility Yūn-wāng, and that it may be behind the words jang-jang. Though the suggestion appears to me improbable, looking to the record of Bābur's officer, to the prevalence of sobriquets amongst his people, and to what would be the sporadic appearance of a Chinese title or even class-name borne by a single man amongst them. I add this suggestion to those of my note on the meaning of the words (Index s.n. Muḥ. `Alī). The title Jūn-wāng occurs in Dr. Denison Ross' Three MSS. from Kāshghar, p. 5, v. 5 and translator's preface, p. 14.

[2078] Cf. f. 266 and f. 299. Yārāgī may be the name of his office, (from yārāq) and mean provisioner of arms or food or other military requirements.

[2079] or, Tardī yakka, the champion, Gr. monomachus (A. N. trs. i, 107 n.).

[2080] var. 1 watch and 2 g'harīs; the time will have been between 9 and 10 a.m.

[2081] jūldū ba nām al `azīz-i-barādar shud, a phrase not easy to translate.

[2082] viz. those chained together as a defence and probably also those conveying the culverins.

[2083] The comparison may be between the darkening smoke of the fire-arms and the heresy darkening pagan hearts.

[2084] There appears to be a distinction of title between the akhta-begī and the mīr-akhẉūr (master of the horse).

[2085] Qorān, cap. 14, v. 33.

[2086] These two men were in one of the flanking-parties.

[2087] This phrase "our brother" would support the view that Shaikh Zain wrote as for Bābur, if there were not, on the other hand, mention of Bābur as His Majesty, and the precious royal soul.

[2088] dīwānīān here may mean those associated with the wazīr in his duties: and not those attending at Court.

[2089] Qorān, cap. 14, v. 52.

[2090] Index s.n. chuhra (a brave).

[2091] hizabrān-i-besha yakrangī, literally, forest-tigers (or, lions) of one hue.

[2092] There may be reference here to the chains used to connect the carts into a defence.

[2093] The braves of the khāṣa tābīn were part of Bābur's own centre.

[2094] perhaps the cataphract elephants; perhaps the men in mail.

[2095] Qorān, cap. 101, v. 54.

[2096] Qorān, cap. 101, v. 4.

[2097] bā andākhtan-i-sang u ẓarb-zan tufak bisyārī. As Bābur does not in any place mention metal missiles, it seems safest to translate sang by its plain meaning of stone.

[2098] Also, metaphorically, swords.

[2099] tīr. My husband thinks there is a play upon the two meanings of this word, arrow and the planet Mercury; so too in the next sentence, that there may be allusion in the kuākib s̤awābit to the constellation Pegasus, opposed to Bābur's squadrons of horse.

[2100] The Fish mentioned in this verse is the one pictured by Muḥammadan cosmogony as supporting the Earth. The violence of the fray is illustrated by supposing that of Earth's seven climes one rose to Heaven in dust, thus giving Heaven eight. The verse is from Firdausī's Shāh-nāma, [Turner-Macan's ed. i, 222]. The translation of it is Warner's, [ii, 15 and n.]. I am indebted for the information given in this note to my husband's long search in the Shāh-nāmā.

[2101] Qorān, cap. 3, v. 133.

[2102] Qorān, cap. 61, v. 13.

[2103] Qorān, cap. 48, v. 1.

[2104] Qorān, cap. 48, v. 3.

[2105] [see p. 572] farāsh. De Courteille, reading firāsh, translates this metaphor by comme un lit lorsqu'il est défait. He refers to Qorān, cap. 101, v. 3. A better metaphor for the breaking up of an army than that of moths scattering, one allowed by the word farāsh, but possibly not by Muḥammad, is vanished like bubbles on wine.

[2106] Bāgar is an old name for Dungarpūr and Bānswāra [_G. of I._ vi, 408 s.n. Bānṣwāra].

[2107] sic, Ḥai. MS. and may be so read in I.O. 217 f. 220_b___; Erskine writes Bikersi (p. 367) and notes the variant Nagersi; Ilminsky (p. 421) N:krsī; de Courteille (ii. 307) Niguersi.

[2108] Cf. f. 318_b_, and note, where it is seen that the stones which killed the lords of the Elephants were so small as to be carried in the bill of a bird like a swallow. Were such stones used in matchlocks in Bābur's day?

[2109] guzāran, var. gurazān, caused to flee and hogs (Erskine notes the double-meaning).

[2110] This passage, entered in some MSS. as if verse, is made up of Qorān, cap. 17, v. 49, cap. 33, v. 38, and cap. 3, v. 122.

[2111] As the day of battle was Jumāda II. 13th (March 16th), the Fatḥ-nāma was ready and dated twelve days after that battle. It was started for Kābul on Rajab 9th (April 11th). Something may be said here appropriately about the surmise contained in Dr. Ilminsky's Preface and M. de Courteille's note to Mémoires ii, 443 and 450, to the effect that Bābur wrote a plain account of the battle of Kanwā and for this in his narrative substituted Shaikh Zain's Fatḥ-nāma, and that the plain account has been preserved in Kehr's Bābur-nāma volume [whence Ilminsky reproduced it, it was translated by M. de Courteille and became known as a "Fragment" of Bāburiana]. Almost certainly both scholars would have judged adversely of their suggestion by the light of to-day's easier research. The following considerations making against its value, may be set down:—

(1) There is no sign that Bābur ever wrote a plain account of the battle or any account of it. There is against his doing so his statement that he inserts Shaikh Zain's Fatḥ-nāma because it gives particulars. If he had written any account, it would be found preceding the Fatḥ-nāma, as his account of his renunciation of wine precedes Shaikh Zain's Farmān announcing the act.

(2) Moreover, the "Fragment" cannot be described as a plain account such as would harmonize with Bābur's style; it is in truth highly rhetorical, though less so as Shaikh Zain's.

(3) The "Fragment" begins with a quotation from the Bābur-nāma (f.310_b_ and n.), skips a good deal of Bābur's matter preliminary to the battle, and passes on with what there can be no doubt is a translation in inferior Turkī of the Akbar-nāma account.

(4) The whole of the extra matter is seen to be continuous and not fragmentary, if it is collated with the chapter in which Abū'l-faẓl describes the battle, its sequel of events, the death, character, attainments, and Court of Bābur. Down to the death, it is changed to the first person so as to make Bābur seem to write it. The probable concocter of it is Jahāngīr.

(5) If the Fragment were Bābur's composition, where was it when `Abdu-r-raḥīm translated the Bābur-nāma in 998 AH.-1590 AD.; where too did Abū'l-faẓl find it to reproduce in the Akbar-nāma?

(6) The source of Abū'l-faẓl's information seems without doubt to be Bābur's own narrative and Shaikh Zain's Fatḥ-nāma. There are many significant resemblances between the two rhetoricians' metaphors and details selected.

(7) A good deal might be said of the dissimilarities between Bābur's diction and that of the "Fragment". But this is needless in face of the larger and more circumstantial objections already mentioned.

(For a fuller account of the "Fragment" see JRAS. Jan. 1906 pp. 81, 85 and 1908 p. 75 ff.)

[2112] T̤ughrā means an imperial signature also, but would Bābur sign Shaikh Zain's Fatḥ-i-nāma? His autograph verse at the end of the Rāmpūr Dīwān has his signature following it. He is likely to have signed this verse. Cf. App. Q. [Erskine notes that titles were written on the back of despatches, an unlikely place for the quatrain, one surmises.]

[2113] This is in the Rāmpūr dīwān (E.D.R. Plate 17). Dr. E. Denison Ross points out (p. 17 n.) that in the 2nd line the Ḥai. Codex varies from the Dīwān. The MS. is wrong; it contains many inaccuracies in the latter part of the Hindūstān section, perhaps due to a change of scribe.

[2114] These words by abjad yield 933. From Bābur's use of the pluperfect tense, I think it may be inferred that (my) Sections a and b are an attachment to the Fatḥ-nāma, entered with it at a somewhat later date.

[2115] My translation of this puzzling sentence is tentative only.

[2116] This statement shews that the Dībālpūr affair occurred in one of the B.N. gaps, and in 930 AH. The words make 330 by abjad. It may be noted here that on f. 312_b_ and notes there are remarks concerning whether Bābur's remission of the tamghā was contingent on his winning at Kānwa. If the remission had been delayed until his victory was won, it would have found fitting mention with the other sequels of victory chronicled above; as it is not with these sequels, it may be accepted as an absolute remission, proclaimed before the fight. The point was a little uncertain owing to the seemingly somewhat deferred insertion in Bābur's narrative of Shaikh Zain's Farmān.

[2117] dā'ira, presumably a defended circle. As the word aūrdū [bracketed in the text] shows, Bābur used it both for his own and for Sangā's camps.

[2118] Hence the Rānā escaped. He died in this year, not without suspicion of poison.

[2119] aīchīmnī khālī qīldīm, a seeming equivalent for English, "I poured out my spleen."

[2120] var. malūk as e.g. in I.O. 217 f.225_b_, and also elsewhere in the Bābur-nāma.

[2121] On f. 315 the acts attributed to Ilīās Khān are said to have been done by a "mannikin called Rustam Khān". Neither name appears elsewhere in the B.N.; the hero's name seems a sarcasm on the small man.

[2122] Bābur so-calls both Ḥasan and his followers, presumably because they followed their race sympathies, as of Rājpūt origin, and fought against co-religionists. Though Ḥasan's subjects, Meos, were nominally Muḥammadans, it appears that they practised some Hindu customs. For an account of Mīwāt, see Gazetteer of Ulwur (Alwar, Alūr) by Major P. W. Powlett.

[2123] Alwar being in Mīwāt, Bābur may mean that bodies were found beyond that town in the main portion of the Mīwāt country which lies north of Alwar towards Dihlī.

[2124] Major Powlett speaking (p. 9) of the revenue Mīwāt paid to Bābur, quotes Thomas as saying that the coins stated in Bābur's Revenue Accounts, viz. 169,810,00 tankas were probably Sikandarī tankas, or Rs. 8,490,50.

[2125] This word appears to have been restricted in its use to the Khān-zādas of the ruling house in Mīwāt, and was not used for their subjects, the Meos (Powlett l.c. Cap. I.). The uses of "Mīwātī" and "Meo" suggest something analogous with those of "Chaghatāī" and "Mughūl" in Bābur's time. The resemblance includes mutual dislike and distrust (Powlett l.c.).

[2126] qīlūrlār aīkān dūr. This presumptive past tense is frequently used by the cautious Bābur. I quote it here and in a few places near-following because it supports Shaw's statement that in it the use of aīkān (īkān) reduces the positive affirmation of the perfect to presumption or rumour. With this statement all grammarians are not agreed; it is fully supported by the Bābur-nāma.

[2127] Contrast here is suggested between Sulṯāns of Dihlī & Hind; is it between the greater Turks with whom Bābur classes himself immediately below as a conqueror of Hind, and the Lūdī Sulṯāns of Dihlī?

[2128] The strength of the Tijāra hills towards Dihlī is historical (Powlett l.c. p. 132).

[2129] This is one of the names of the principal river which flows eastwards to the south of Alwar town; other names are Bārah and Rūparel. Powlett notes that it appears in Thorn's Map of the battle of Laswarree (1803 AD.), which he reproduces on p. 146. But it is still current in Gurgaon, with also a variant Mānas-le, man-killer (G. of Gurgaon 1910 AD. ivA, p.6).

[2130] aūltūrūrlār aīkān dūr, the presumptive past tense.

[2131] f.308.

[2132] qīlghān aīkān dūr, the presumptive past tense.

[2133] Sulṯān ātīghā juldū būlūb; Pers. trs. Juldū ba nām-i Sulṯān shud. The juldū guerdon seems to be apart from the fief and allowance.

[2134] f. 315.

[2135] Bābur does not record this detail (f. 315).

[2136] f. 298_b_ and f. 328_b_. Ja`far is mentioned as Mahdī's son by Gul-badan and in the Ḥabību's-siyar iii, 311, 312.

[2137] f. 388_b_.

[2138] The town of Fīrūzpūr is commonly known as Fīrūzpūr-jhirka (Fīrūzpūr of the spring), from a small perennial stream which issues from a number of fissures in the rocks bordering the road through a pass in the Mīwāt hills which leads from the town viâ Tijāra to Rewārī (G. of Gurgaon, p. 249). In Abū'l-faẓl's day there was a Hindū shrine of Mahadeo near the spring, which is still a place of annual pilgrimage. The Kūtila lake is called Kotla-jhil in the G. of G. (p. 7). It extends now 3 m. by 2-1/2 m. varying in size with the season; in Abū'l-faẓl's day it was 4 kos (8 m.) round. It lies partly in the district of Nūh, partly in Gurgaon, where the two tracts join at the foot of the Alwar hills.

[2139] This is the frequently mentioned size for reservoirs; the measure here is probably the qārī, cir. a yard.

[2140] Bābur does not state it as a fact known to himself that the Mānas-nī falls into the Kūtila lake; it did so formerly, but now does not, tradition assigning a cause for the change (G. of G. p. 6). He uses the hear-say tense, kīrār aīmīsh.

[2141] Kharī and Toda were in Akbar's sarkār of Rantaṃbhor.

[2142] Bhosāwar is in Bhurtpūr, and Chausa (or Jūsa) may be the Chausath of the Āyīn-i-akbarī, ii, 183.

[2143] As has been noted frequently, this phrase stands for artificial water-courses.

[2144] Certainly Trans-Hindū-kush lands; presumably also those of Trans-Indus, Kābul in chief.

[2145] aūstī; perhaps the reservoir was so built as to contain the bubbling spring.

[2146] Chūn jā'ī khẉush karda ām.

[2147] f. 315.

[2148] var. Janwār (Jarrett). It is 25 m. east of Āgra on the Muttra-Etāwa road (G. of I.).

[2149] kūcha-band, perhaps a barricade at the limit of a suburban lane.

[2150] This has been mentioned already (f. 327).

[2151] f. 315.

[2152] i.e. those professedly held for Bābur.

[2153] Or, according to local pronunciation, Badāyūn.

[2154] This is the old name of Shāhābād in Rāmpūr (G. of I. xxii, 197). The A.-i-A. locates it in Saṃbal. Cf. E. and D.'s History of India, iv, 384 n. and v. 215 n.

[2155] Perhaps the one in Sītapūr.

[2156] f. 305_b_.

[2157] As the Elphinstone Codex which is the treasure-house of Humāyūn's notes, has a long lacuna into which this episode falls, it is not known if the culprit entered in his copy of the Bābur-nāma a marginal excuse for his misconduct (cf. f. 252 and n.); such excuse was likely to be that he knew he would be forgiven by his clement father.

[2158] f. 305_b_.

[2159] Kāmrān would be in Qandahār. Erskine notes that the sum sent to him would be about £750, but that if the coins were rūpīs, it would be £30,000.

[2160] qiṯa`, for account of which form of poem see Blochmann's translations of Saifī's and Jāmī's Prosody, p. 86.

[2161] Rāmpūr Dīwān (E. D. Ross' ed. p. 16 and Plate 14_a_). I am uncertain as to the meaning of ll. 4 and 10. I am not sure that what in most MSS. ends line 4, viz. aūl dam, should not be read as aūlūm, death; this is allowed by Plate 14a where for space the word is divided and may be aūlūm. To read aūlūm and that the deserters fled from the death in Hind they were anxious about, has an answering phrase in "we still are alive". Ll. 9 and 10 perhaps mean that in the things named all have done alike. [Ilminsky reads khāir nafsī for the elsewhere ḥaz̤z̤-nafsī.]

[2162] These are 20 attitudes (rak`ah) assumed in prayer during Ramẓān after the Bed-time Prayer. The ablution (ghusl) is the bathing of the whole body for ceremonial purification.

[2163] This Feast is the `Id-i-fiṯṛ, held at the breaking of the Ramẓān Fast on the 1st of Shawwāl.

[2164] Erskine notes that this is the earliest mention of playing-cards he can recall in oriental literature.

[2165] f. 339_b_.

[2166] The two varieties mentioned by Bābur seem to be Diospyrus melanoxylon, the wood of which is called tindu abnūs in Hindūstānī, and D. tomentosa, Hindi, tindu (Brandis s.nn.). Bārī is 19 m. west of Dūlpūr.

[2167] mī`ād, perhaps the time at which the Shaikh was to appear before Bābur.

[2168] The Pers. trs. makes the more definite statement that what had to be read was a Section of the Qoran (wird). This was done with remedial aim for the illness.

[2169] As this statement needs comment, and as it is linked to matters mentioned in the Rāmpūr Dīwān, it seems better to remit remarks upon it to Appendix Q, Some matters concerning the Rāmpūr Dīwān.

[2170] risāla. See Appendix Q.

[2171] Elph. MS. lacuna; I.O. 215 lacuna and 217 f. 229; Mems. p. 373. This year's narrative resumes the diary form.

[2172] There is some uncertainty about these names and also as to which adversary crossed the river. The sentence which, I think, shews, by its plural verb, that Humāyūn left two men and, by its co-ordinate participles, that it was they crossed the river, is as follows:—(Darwīsh and Yūsuf, understood) Quṯb Sīrwānī-nī u bīr pāra rājalār-nī bīr daryā aūtūb aūrūshūb yakshī bāsīb tūrlār. Aūtūb, aūrūshūb and bāsīb are grammatically referable to the same subject, [whatever was the fact about the crossing].

[2173] bīr daryā; W.-i-B. 217 f. 229, yak daryā, one river, but many MSS. har daryā, every river. If it did not seem pretty certain that the rebels were not in the Miyān-dū-āb one would surmise the river to be "one river" of the two enclosing the tract "between the waters", and that one to be the Ganges. It may be one near Saṃbhal, east of the Ganges.

[2174] var. Shīrwānī. The place giving the cognomen may be Sarwān, a thakurāt of the Mālwā Agency (G. of I.). Quṯb of Sīrwān may be the Quṯb Khān of earlier mention without the cognomen.

[2175] n.w. of Aligarh (Kūl). It may be noted here, where instances begin to be frequent, that my translation "we marched" is an evasion of the Turkī impersonal "it was marched". Most rarely does Bābur write "we marched", never, "I marched."

[2176] in the Aligarh (Kūl) district; it is the Sikandara Rao of the A.-i-A. and the G. of I.

[2177] Rāmpūr Dīwān (E. D. Ross' ed., p. 19, Plate 16_b_). This Dīwān contains other quatrains which, judging from their contents, may well be those Bābur speaks of as also composed in Saṃbal. See Appendix Q, Some matters concerning the Rāmpūr Dīwān.

[2178] These are aunts of Bābur, daughters of Sl. Abū-sa`īd Mīrān-shāhī.

[2179] Sikandarābād is in the Buland-shahr district of the United Provinces.

[2180] It is not clear whether Bābur returned from Sīkrī on the day he started for Jalīsīr; no question of distance would prevent him from making the two journeys on the Monday.

[2181] As this was the rendezvous for the army, it would be convenient if it lay between Āgra and Anwār; as it was 6 m. from Āgra, the only mapped place having approximately the name Jalīsīr, viz. Jalesar, in Etah, seems too far away.

[2182] Anwār would be suitably the Unwāra of the _Indian Atlas_, which is on the first important southward dip of the Jumna below Āgra. Chandwār is 25 m. east of Āgra, on the Muttra-Etāwah road (G. of I.); Jarrett notes that Tiefenthaler identifies it with Fīrūzābād (A.-i-A. ii, 183 n.).

[2183] In the district of Kālpī. The name does not appear in maps I have seen.

[2184] āghā, Anglicé, uncle. He was Sa`īd Khān of Kāshghar. Ḥaidar M. says Bābā Sl. was a spoiled child and died without mending his ways.

[2185] From Kālpī Bābur will have taken the road to the s.w. near which now runs the Cawnpur (Kānhpūr) branch of the Indian Midland Railway, and he must have crossed the Betwa to reach Īrij (Irich, Indian Atlas, Sheet 69 N.W.).

[2186] Leaving Īrij, Bābur will have recrossed the Betwa and have left its valley to go west to Bāndīr (Bhander) on the Pahūj (Indian Atlas, Sheet 69 S.W.).

[2187] beneficent, or Muḥassan, comely.

[2188] The one man of this name mentioned in the B.N. is an amīr of Sl. Ḥusain Bāī-qarā.

[2189] It seems safe to take Kachwa [Kajwa] as the Kajwarra of Ibn Batūta, and the Kadwāha (Kadwaia) of the Indian Atlas, Sheet 52 N.E. and of Luard's Gazetteer of Gwalior (i, 247), which is situated in 24° 58' N. and 77° 57' E. Each of the three names is of a place standing on a lake; Ibn Batūta's lake was a league (4 m.) long, Bābur's about 11 miles round; Luard mentions no lake, but the Indian Atlas marks one quite close to Kadwāha of such form as to seem to have a tongue of land jutting into it from the north-west, and thus suiting Bābur's description of the site of Kachwa. Again,—Ibn Batūta writes of Kajwarra as having, round its lake, idol-temples; Luard says of Kadwāha that it has four idol-temples standing and nine in ruins; there may be hinted something special about Bābur's Kachwa by his remark that he encouraged its people, and this speciality may be interaction between Muḥammadanism and Hindūism serving here for the purpose of identification. For Ibn Batūta writes of the people of Kajwarra that they were jogīs, yellowed by asceticism, wearing their hair long and matted, and having Muḥammadan followers who desired to learn their (occult?) secrets. If the same interaction existed in Bābur's day, the Muḥammadan following of the Hindū ascetics may well have been the special circumstance which led him to promise protection to those Hindūs, even when he was out for Holy-war. It has to be remembered of Chandīrī, the nearest powerful neighbour of Kadwāha, that though Bābur's capture makes a vivid picture of Hindūism in it, it had been under Muḥammadan rulers down to a relatively short time before his conquest. The jogīs of Kachwa could point to long-standing relations of tolerance by the Chandīrī Governors; this, with their Muḥammadan following, explains the encouragement Bābur gave them, and helps to identify Kachwa with Kajarra. It may be observed that Bābur was familiar with the interaction of the two creeds, witness his "apostates", mostly Muḥammadans following Hindū customs, witness too, for the persistent fact, the reports of District-officers under the British Rāj. Again,—a further circumstance helping to identify Kajwarra, Kachwa and Kadwāha is that these are names of the last important station the traveller and the soldier, as well perhaps as the modern wayfarer, stays in before reaching Chandīrī. The importance of Kajwarra is shewn by Ibn Batūta, and of Kadwāha by its being a maḥāll in Akbar's sarkār of Bāyawān of the ṣūba of Āgra. Again,—Kadwāha is the place nearest to Chandīrī about which Bābur's difficulties as to intermediate road and jungle would arise. That intermediate road takes off the main one a little south of Kadwāha and runs through what looks like a narrow valley and broken country down to Bhamor, Bhurānpūr and Chandīrī. Again,—no bar to identification of the three names is placed by their differences of form, in consideration of the vicissitudes they have weathered in tongue, script, and transliteration. There is some ground, I believe, for surmising that their common source is kajūr, the date-fruit. [I am indebted to my husband for the help derived from Ibn Batūta, traced by him in Sanguinetti's trs. iv, 33, and S. Lee's trs. p. 162.]

(Two places similar in name to Kachwa, and situated on Bābur's route viz. Kocha near Jhansi, and Kuchoowa north of Kadwāha (Sheet 69 S.W.) are unsuitable for his "Kachwa", the first because too near Bandīr to suit his itinerary, the second because too far from the turn off the main-road mentioned above, because it has no lake, and has not the help in identification detailed above of Kadwāha.)

[2190] qūrūghīr which could mean also reserved (from the water?).

[2191] qāzān. There seems to have been one only; how few Bābur had is shewn again on f. 337.

[2192] Indian Atlas, Sheet 52 N.E. near a tributary of the Betwa, the Or, which appears to be Bābur's Burhānpūr-water.

[2193] The bed of the Betwa opposite Chandīrī is 1050 ft. above the sea; the walled-town (qūrghān) of Chandīrī is on a table-land 250 ft. higher, and its citadel is 230 ft. higher again (Cunningham's Archeological Survey Report, 1871 A.D. ii, 404).

[2194] The plan of Chandīrī illustrating Cunningham's Report (see last note) allows surmise about the road taken by Bābur, surmise which could become knowledge if the names of tanks he gives were still known. The courtesy of the Government of India allows me to reproduce that plan [Appendix R, Chandīrī and Gwālīāwar].

[2195] He is said to have been Governor of Chandīrī in 1513 AD.

[2196] Here and in similar passages the word m:ljār or m:lchār is found in MSS. where the meaning is that of T. būljār. It is not in any dictionary I have seen; Mr. Irvine found it "obscure" and surmised it to mean "approach by trenches", but this does not suit its uses in the Bābur-nāma of a military post, and a rendezvous. This surmise, containing, as it does, a notion of protection, links m:ljār in sense with Ar. malja'. The word needs expert consideration, in order to decide whether it is to be received into dictionaries, or to be rejected because explicable as the outcome of unfamiliarity in Persian scribes with T. būljār or, more Persico with narrowed vowels, bŭljăr. Shaw in his Vocabulary enters būljāq (būljār?), "a station for troops, a rendezvous, see malja'," thus indicating, it would seem, that he was aware of difficulty about m:ljār and būljāq (būljār?). There appears no doubt of the existence of a Turkī word būljār with the meanings Shaw gives to būljāq; it could well be formed from the root būl, being, whence follows, being in a place, posted. Maljā has the meaning of a standing-place, as well as those of a refuge and an asylum; both meanings seem combined in the m:ljār of f. 336_b_, where for matchlockmen a m:ljār was ordered "raised". (Cf. Irvine's Army of the Indian Moghuls p. 278.)

[2197] yāghdā; Pers. trs. sar-āshīb. Bābur's remark seems to show that for effect his mortar needed to be higher than its object. Presumably it stood on the table-land north of the citadel.

[2198] shātū. It may be noted that this word, common in accounts of Bābur's sieges, may explain one our friend the late Mr. William Irvine left undecided (l.c. p. 278), viz. shāṯūr. On p. 281 he states that nardubān is the name of a scaling-ladder and that Bābur mentions scaling ladders more than once. Bābur mentions them however always as shātū. Perhaps shāṯūr which, as Mr. Irvine says, seems to be made of the trunks of trees and to be a siege appliance, is really shātū u ... (ladder and ...) as in the passage under note and on f. 216_b_, some other name of an appliance following.

[2199] The word here preceding tūra has puzzled scribes and translators. I have seen the following variants in MSS.;—nūkrī or tūkrī, b:krī or y:krī, būkrī or yūkrī, būkrāī or yūkrāī, in each of which the k may stand for g. Various suggestions might be made as to what the word is, but all involve reading the Persian enclitic ī (forming the adjective) instead of Turkī līk. Two roots, tīg and yūg, afford plausible explanations of the unknown word; appliances suiting the case and able to bear names formed from one or other of these roots are wheeled mantelet, and head-strike (P. sar-kob). That the word is difficult is shewn not only by the variants I have quoted, but by Erskine's reading naukarī tūra, "to serve the tūras," a requisite not specified earlier by Bābur, and by de Courteille's paraphrase, tout ce qui est nécessaire aux touras.

[2200] Sl. Nāṣiru'd-dīn was the Khīljī ruler of Mālwā from 906 to 916 A.H. (1500-1510 AD.).

[2201] He was a Rājpūt who had been prime-minister of Sl. Maḥmūd II. Khīljī (son of Nāṣīru'd-dīn) and had rebelled. Bābur (like some other writers) spells his name Mindnī, perhaps as he heard it spoken.

[2202] Presumably the one in the United Provinces. For Shamsābād in Gūālīār see Luard l.c. i, 286.

[2203] chīqtī; Pers. trs. bar āmad and, also in some MSS. namī bar āmad; Mems. p. 376, "averse to conciliation"; Méms. ii, 329, "s'élevèrent contre cette proposition." So far I have not found Bābur using the verb chīqmāq metaphorically. It is his frequent verb to express "getting away", "going out of a fort". It would be a short step in metaphor to understand here that Medinī's men "got out of it", i.e. what Bābur offered. They may have left the fort also; if so, it would be through dissent.

[2204] f. 332.

[2205] I.O. 217, f. 231, inserts here what seems a gloss, "Tā īn jā Farsī farmūda" (gufta, said). As Bābur enters his speech in Persian, it is manifest that he used Persian to conceal the bad news.

[2206] The Illustrated London News of July 10th, 1915 (on which day this note is written), has an àpropos picture of an ancient fortress-gun, with its stone-ammunition, taken by the Allies in a Dardanelles fort.

[2207] The dū-tahī is the āb-duzd, water-thief, of f. 67. Its position can be surmised from Cunningham's Plan [Appendix R].

[2208] For Bābur's use of hand (qūl) as a military term see f. 209.

[2209] His full designation would be Shāh Muḥammad yūz-begī.

[2210] This will be flight from the ramparts to other places in the fort.

[2211] Bābur's account of the siege of Chandīrī is incomplete, inasmuch as it says nothing of the general massacre of pagans he has mentioned on f. 272. Khẉāfī Khān records the massacre, saying, that after the fort was surrendered, as was done on condition of safety for the garrison, from 3 to 4000 pagans were put to death by Bābur's troops on account of hostility shewn during the evacuation of the fort. The time assigned to the massacre is previous to the jūhar of 1000 women and children and the self-slaughter of men in Medinī Rāo's house, in which he himself died. It is not easy to fit the two accounts in; this might be done, however, by supposing that a folio of Bābur's MS. was lost, as others seem lost at the end of the narrative of this year's events (q.v.). The lost folio would tell of the surrender, one clearly affecting the mass of Rājpūt followers and not the chiefs who stood for victory or death and who may have made sacrifice to honour after hearing of the surrender. Bābur's narrative in this part certainly reads less consecutive than is usual with him; something preceding his account of the jūhar would improve it, and would serve another purpose also, since mention of the surrender would fix a term ending the now too short time of under one hour he assigns as the duration of the fighting. If a surrender had been mentioned, it would be clear that his "2 or 3 garīs" included the attacking and taking of the dū-tahī and down to the retreat of the Rājpūts from the walls. On this Bābur's narrative of the unavailing sacrifice of the chiefs would follow in due order. Khẉāfī Khān is more circumstantial than Firishta who says nothing of surrender or massacre, but states that 6000 men were killed fighting. Khẉāfī Khān's authorities may throw light on the matter, which so far does not hang well together in any narrative, Bābur's, Firishta's, or Khẉāfī Khān's. One would like to know what led such a large body of Rājpūts to surrender so quickly; had they been all through in favour of accepting terms? One wonders, again, why from 3 to 4000 Rājpūts did not put up a better resistance to massacre. Perhaps their assailants were Turks, stubborn fighters down to 1915 AD.

[2212] For suggestion about the brevity of this period, see last note.

[2213] Clearly, without Bābur's taking part in the fighting.

[2214] These words by abjad make 934. The Ḥai. MS. mistakenly writes Būd Chandīrī in the first line of the quatrain instead of Būd chandī. Khẉāfī Khān quotes the quatrain with slight variants.

[2215] Chandīrī ṯaurī wilāyat (dā?) wāqī` būlūb tūr, which seems to need dā, in, because the fort, and not the country, is described. Or there may be an omission e.g. of a second sentence about the walled-town (fort).

[2216] This is the "Kirat-sagar" of Cunningham's Plan of Chandīrī; it is mentioned under this name by Luard (l.c. i, 210). "Kirat" represents Kirtī or Kirit Sīngh who ruled in Gūālīār from 1455 to 1479 AD., there also making a tank (Luard, l.c. i, 232).

[2217] For illustrative photographs see Luard, l.c. vol. i, part iv.

[2218] I have taken this sentence to apply to the location of the tanks, but with some doubt; they are on the table-land.

[2219] Bābur appears to have written Betwī, this form being in MSS. I have read the name to be that of the river Betwa which is at a considerable distance from the fort. But some writers dispraise its waters where Bābur praises.

[2220] T. qīā means a slope or slant; here it may describe tilted strata, such as would provide slabs for roofing and split easily for building purposes. (See next note.)

[2221] `imārat qīlmāq munāsib. This has been read to mean that the qīālar provide good sites (Mems. & Méms.), but position, distance from the protection of the fort, and the merit of local stone for building incline me to read the words quoted above as referring to the convenient lie of the stone for building purposes. (See preceding note.)

[2222] Chandīrī-dā judai (jady)-nīng irtiqā`ī yīgīrma-bīsh darja dūr; Erskine, p. 378, Chanderi is situated in the 25th degree of N. latitude; de Courteille, ii, 334, La hauteur du Capricorne à Tchanderi est de 25 degrées. The latitude of Chandīrī, it may be noted, is 24° 43'. It does not appear to me indisputable that what Bābur says here is a statement of latitude. The word judai (or jady) means both Pole-star and the Sign Capricorn. M. de Courteille translates the quoted sentence as I have done, but with Capricorn for Pole-star. My acquaintance with such expressions in French does not allow me to know whether his words are a statement of latitude. It occurs to me against this being so, that Bābur uses other words when he gives the latitude of Samarkand (f. 44_b_); and also that he has shewn attention to the Pole-star as a guide on a journey (f. 203, where he uses the more common word Quṯb). Perhaps he notes its lower altitude when he is far south, in the way he noted the first rise of Canopus to his view (f. 125).

[2223] Mallū Khān was a noble of Mālwā, who became ruler of Mālwā in 1532 or 1533 AD. [?], under the style of Qādir Shāh.

[2224] i.e. paid direct to the royal treasury.

[2225] This is the one concerning which bad news reached Bābur just before Chandīrī was taken.

[2226] This presumably is the place offered to Medinī Rāo (f. 333_b_), and Bikramājīt (f. 343).

[2227] Obviously for the bridge.

[2228] m:ljār (see f. 333 n.). Here the word would mean befittingly a protected standing-place, a refuge, such as matchlockmen used (f. 217 and Index s.n. arāba).

[2229] sīghīrūrdī, a vowel-variant, perhaps, of sūghūrūrdī.

[2230] f. 331_b_. This passage shews that Bābur's mortars were few.

[2231] nufūr qūl-lār-dīn ham karka bīla rah rawā kīshī u āt aītīlār, a difficult sentence.

[2232] Afghānlār kūprūk bāghlāmāq-nī istib`ād qīlīb tamaskhur qīlūrlār aīkāndūr. The ridicule will have been at slow progress, not at the bridge-making itself, since pontoon-bridges were common (Irvine's Army of the Indian Moghuls).

[2233] tūīlāb; Pers. trs. uftān u khezān, limping, or falling and rising, a translation raising doubt, because such a mode of progression could hardly have allowed escape from pursuers.

[2234] Anglicé, on Friday night.

[2235] According to the Persian calendar, New-year's-day is that on which the Sun enters Aries.

[2236] so-spelled in the Ḥai. MS.; by de Courteille Banguermādū; the two forms may represent the same one of the Arabic script.

[2237] or Gūī, from the context clearly the Gumti. Jarrett gives Godi as a name of the Gumti; Gūī and Godī may be the same word in the Arabic script.

[2238] Some MSS. read that there was not much pain.

[2239] I take this to be the Kali-Sarda-Chauka affluent of the Gogra and not its Sarju or Saru one. To so take it seems warranted by the context; there could be no need for the fords on the Sarju to be examined, and its position is not suitable.

[2240] Unfortunately no record of the hunting-expedition survives.

[2241] One historian, Aḥmad-i-yādgār states in his Tārīkh-i-salāṯīn-i-afāghina that Bābur went to Lāhor immediately after his capture of Chandīrī, and on his return journey to Āgra suppressed in the Panj-āb a rising of the Mundāhar (or, Mandhar) Rājpūts. His date is discredited by Bābur's existing narrative of 934 AH. as also by the absence in 935 AH. of allusion to either episode. My husband who has considered the matter, advises me that the Lāhor visit may have been made in 936 or early in 937 AH. [These are a period of which the record is lost or, less probably, was not written.]

[2242] Elph. MS. f. 262; I. O. 215 f. 207b and 217 f. 234_b_; Mems. p. 382. Here the Elphinstone MS. recommences after a lacuna extending from Ḥai. MS. f. 312_b_.

[2243] See Appendix S:—Concerning the dating of 935 AH.

[2244] `Askarī was now about 12 years old. He was succeeded in Multān by his elder brother Kāmrān, transferred from Qandahār [Index; JRAS. 1908 p. 829 para. (1)]. This transfer, it is safe to say, was due to Bābur's resolve to keep Kābul in his own hands, a resolve which his letters to Humāyūn (f. 348), to Kāmrān (f. 359), and to Khwāja Kalān (f. 359) attest, as well as do the movements of his family at this time. What would make the stronger government of Kāmrān seem now more "for the good of Multān" than that of the child `Askarī are the Bīlūchī incursions, mentioned somewhat later (f. 355_b_) as having then occurred more than once.

[2245] This will be his own house in the Garden-of-eight-paradises, the Chār-bāgh begun in 932 AH. (August 1526 AD.).

[2246] To this name Khwānd-amīr adds Aḥmadu'l-ḥaqīrī, perhaps a pen-name; he also quotes verses of Shihāb's (Ḥabību's-siyar lith. ed. iii, 350).

[2247] Khwānd-amīr's account of his going into Hindūstān is that he left his "dear home" (Herāt) for Qandahār in mid-Shawwāl 933 AH. (mid-July 1527 AD.); that on Jumāda I. 10th 934 AH. (Feb. 1st 1528 AD.) he set out from Qandahār on the hazardous journey into Hindūstān; and that owing to the distance, heat, setting-in of the Rains, and breadth of rapid rivers, he was seven months on the way. He mentions no fellow-travellers, but he gives as the day of his arrival in Āgra the one on which Bābur says he presented himself at Court. (For an account of annoyances and misfortunes to which he was subjected under Aūzbeg rule in Herāt see Journal des Savans, July 1843, pp. 389, 393, Quatremère's art.)

[2248] Concerning Gūālīār see Cunningham's Archeological Survey Reports vol. ii; Louis Rousselet's L'Inde des Rajas; Lepel Griffin's Famous Monuments of Central India, especially for its photographs; Gazetteer of India; Luard's Gazetteer of Gwalior, text and photographs; Travels of Peter Mundy, Hakluyt Society ed. R. C. Temple, ii, 61, especially for its picture of the fort and note (p. 62) enumerating early writers on Gūālīār. Of Persian books there is Jalāl Ḥiṣārī's Tārīkh-i-Gwālīāwar (B.M. Add. 16,859) and Hirāman's (B.M. Add. 16,709) unacknowledged version of it, which is of the B.M. MSS. the more legible.

[2249] Perhaps this stands for Gwālīāwar, the form seeming to be used by Jalāl Ḥiṣārī, and having good traditional support (Cunningham p. 373 and Luard p. 228).

[2250] tūshlānīb, i.e. they took rest and food together at mid-day.

[2251] This seems to be the conjoined Gambhīr and Bāngānga which is crossed by the Āgra-Dhūlpūr road (G. of I. Atlas, Sheet 34).

[2252] aīchtūq, the plural of which shews that more than one partook of the powders (safūf).

[2253] T. tālqān, Hindī sattu (Shaw). M. de Courteille's variant translation may be due to his reading for tālqān, tālghāq, flot, agitation (his Dict. s.n.) and yīl, wind, for bīla, with.

[2254] in 933 AH. f. 330_b_.

[2255] "Each beaked promontory" (Lycidas). Our name "Selsey-bill" is an English instance of Bābur's (not infrequent) tūmshūq, beak, bill of a bird.

[2256] No order about this Chār-bāgh is in existing annals of 934 AH. Such order is likely to have been given after Bābur's return from his operations against the Afghāns, in his account of which the annals of 934 AH. break off.

[2257] The fort-hill at the northern end is 300 ft. high, at the southern end, 274 ft.; its length from north to south is 1-3/4 m.; its breadth varies from 600 ft. opposite the main entrance (Hātī-pūl) to 2,800 ft. in the middle opposite the great temple (Sās-bhao). Cf. Cunningham p. 330 and Appendix R, in loco, for his Plan of Gūālīār.

[2258] This Arabic plural may have been prompted by the greatness and distinction of Mān-sing's constructions. Cf. Index s.nn. begāt and bāghāt.

[2259] A translation point concerning the (Arabic) word `imārat is that the words "palace", "palais", and "residence" used for it respectively by Erskine, de Courteille, and, previous to the Hindūstān Section, by myself, are too limited in meaning to serve for Bābur's uses of it in Hindūstān; and this (1) because he uses it throughout his writings for buildings under palatial rank (e.g. those of high and low in Chandīrī); (2) because he uses it in Hindūstān for non-residential buildings (e.g. for the Bādalgarh outwork, f. 341_b_, and a Hindū temple ib.); and (3) because he uses it for the word "building" in the term building-stone, f. 335_b_ and f. 339_b_. Building is the comprehensive word under which all his uses of it group. For labouring this point a truism pleads my excuse, namely, that a man's vocabulary being characteristic of himself, for a translator to increase or diminish it is to intrude on his personality, and this the more when an autobiography is concerned. Hence my search here (as elsewhere) for an English grouping word is part of an endeavour to restrict the vocabulary of my translation to the limits of my author's.

[2260] Jalāl Ḥiṣārī describes "Khwāja Raḥīm-dād" as a paternal-nephew of Mahdī Khwāja. Neither man has been introduced by Bābur, as it is his rule to introduce when he first mentions a person of importance, by particulars of family, etc. Both men became disloyal in 935 AH. (1529 AD.) as will be found referred to by Bābur. Jalāl Ḥiṣārī supplements Bābur's brief account of their misconduct and Shaikh Muḥammad Ghaus̤' mediation in 936 AH. For knowledge of his contribution I am indebted to my husband's perusal of the Tārīkh-i-Gwālīāwar.

[2261] Erskine notes that Indians and Persians regard moonshine as cold but this only faintly expresses the wide-spread fear of moon-stroke expressed in the Psalm (121 v. 6), "The Sun shall not smite thee by day, nor the Moon by night."

[2262] Agarcha lūk balūk u bī sīyāq. Ilminsky [p. 441] has balūk balūk but without textual warrant and perhaps following Erskine, as he says, speaking generally, that he has done in case of need (Ilminsky's Preface). Both Erskine and de Courteille, working, it must be remembered, without the help of detailed modern descriptions and pictures, took the above words to say that the buildings were scattered and without symmetry, but they are not scattered and certainly Mān-sing's has symmetry. I surmise that the words quoted above do not refer to the buildings themselves but to the stones of which they are made. T. lūk means heavy, and T. balūk [? block] means a thing divided off, here a block of stone. Such blocks might be bī sīyāq, i.e. irregular in size. To take the words in this way does not contradict known circumstances, and is verbally correct.

[2263] The Rājas' buildings Bābur could compare were Rāja Karna (or Kirtī)'s [who ruled from 1454 to 1479 AD.], Rāja Mān-sing's [1486 to 1516 AD.], and Rāja Bikramājīt's [1516 to 1526 AD. when he was killed at Panīpat].

[2264] The height of the eastern face is 100 ft. and of the western 60 ft. The total length from north to south of the outside wall is 300 ft.; the breadth of the residence from east to west 160 ft. The 300 ft. of length appears to be that of the residence and service-courtyard (Cunningham p. 347 and Plate lxxxvii).

[2265] kaj bīla āqārītīb. There can be little doubt that a white pediment would show up the coloured tiles of the upper part of the palace-walls more than would pale red sandstone. These tiles were so profuse as to name the building Chīt Mandīr (Painted Mandīr). Guided by Bābur's statement, Cunningham sought for and found plaster in crevices of carved work; from which one surmises that the white coating approved itself to successors of Mān-sing. [It may be noted that the word Mandīr is in the same case for a translator as is `imārat (f. 339_b_ n.) since it requires a grouping word to cover its uses for temple, palace, and less exalted buildings.]

[2266] The lower two storeys are not only backed by solid ground but, except near the Hātī-pūl, have the rise of ground in front of them which led Bābur to say they were "even in a pit" (chūqūr).

[2267] MSS. vary between har and bīr, every and one, in this sentence. It may be right to read bīr, and apply it only to the eastern façade as that on which there were most cupolas. There are fewer on the south side, which still stands (Luard's photo. No. 37).

[2268] The ground rises steeply from this Gate to an inner one, called Hawā-pūl from the rush of air (hawā) through it.

[2269] Cunningham says the riders were the Rāja and a driver. Perhaps they were a mahout and his mate. The statue stood to the left on exit (chīqīsh).

[2270] This window will have been close to the Gate where no mound interferes with outlook.

[2271] Rooms opening on inner and open courts appear to form the third story of the residence.

[2272] T. chūqūr, hollow, pit. This storey is dark and unventilated, a condition due to small windows, absence of through draught, and the adjacent mound. Cunningham comments on its disadvantages.

[2273] Agarcha Hindūstānī takalluflār qīlīb tūrlār walī bī hawālīk-rāq yīrlār dūr. Perhaps amongst the pains taken were those demanded for punkhas. I regret that Erskine's translation of this passage, so superior to my own in literary merit, does not suit the Turkī original. He worked from the Persian translation, and not only so, but with a less rigid rule of translation than binds me when working on Bābur's ipsissima verba (Mems. p. 384; Cunningham p. 349; Luard p. 226).

[2274] The words aūrtā dā make apt contrast between the outside position of Mān-sing's buildings which helped to form the fort-wall, and Bikramājīt's which were further in except perhaps one wall of his courtyard (see Cunningham's Plate lxxxiii).

[2275] Cunningham (p. 350) says this was originally a bāra-dūrī, a twelve-doored open hall, and must have been light. His "originally" points to the view that the hall had been altered before Bābur saw it but as it was only about 10 years old at that time, it was in its first form, presumably. Perhaps Bābur saw it in a bad light. The dimensions Cunningham gives of it suggest that the high dome must have been frequently ill-lighted.

[2276] The word tālār, having various applications, is not easy to match with a single English word, nor can one be sure in all cases what it means, a platform, a hall, or etc. To find an equivalent for its diminutive tālār-ghina is still more difficult. Raḥīm-dād's tālār-ette will have stood on the flat centre of the dome, raised on four pillars or perhaps with its roof only so-raised; one is sure there would be a roof as protection against sun or moon. It may be noted that the dome is not visible outside from below, but is hidden by the continuation upwards of walls which form a mean-looking parallelogram of masonry.

[2277] T. tūr yūl. Concerning this hidden road see Cunningham p. 350 and Plate lxxxvii.

[2278] bāghcha. The context shews that the garden was for flowers. For Bābur's distinctions between bāghcha, bāgh and baghāt, see Index s.nn.

[2279] shaft-ālū i.e. the rosy colour of peach-flowers, perhaps lip-red (Steingass). Bābur's contrast seems to be between those red oleanders of Hindūstān that are rosy-red, and the deep red ones he found in Gūālīār.

[2280] kul, any large sheet of water, natural or artificial (Bābur). This one will be the Sūraj-kund (Sun-tank).

[2281] This is the Telī Mandīr, or Telingana Mandīr (Luard). Cf. Cunningham, p. 356 and Luard p. 227 for accounts of it; and G. of I. s.n. Telīagarhi for Telī Rājas.

[2282] This is a large outwork reached from the Gate of the same name. Bābur may have gone there specially to see the Gūjarī Mandīr said by Cunningham to have been built by Mān-sing's Gūjar wife Mṛiga-nayāna (fawn-eyed). Cf. Cunningham p. 351 and, for other work done by the same Queen, in the s. e. corner of the fort, p. 344; Luard p. 226. In this place "construction" would serve to translate `imārat (f. 340 n.).

[2283] āb-duzd, a word conveying the notion of a stealthy taking of the water. The walls at the mouth of Urwā were built by Altamsh for the protection of its water for the fort. The date Bābur mentions (a few lines further) is presumably that of their erection.

[2284] Cunningham, who gives 57 ft. as the height of this statue, says Bābur estimated it at 20 gaz, or 40 ft., but this is not so. Bābur's word is not gaz a measure of 24 fingers-breadth, but qārī, the length from the tip of the shoulder to the fingers-ends; it is about 33 inches, not less, I understand. Thus stated in qārīs Bābur's estimate of the height comes very near Cunningham's, being a good 55 ft. to 57 ft. (I may note that I have usually translated qārī by "yard", as the yard is its nearest English equivalent. The Pers. trs. of the B. N. translates by gaz, possibly a larger gaz than that of 24 fingers-breadth i.e. inches.)

[2285] The statues were not broken up by Bābur's agents; they were mutilated; their heads were restored with coloured plaster by the Jains (Cunningham p. 365; Luard p. 228).

[2286] rozan [or, aūz:n] ... tafarruj qīlīb. Neither Cunningham nor Luard mentions this window, perhaps because Erskine does not; nor is this name of a Gate found. It might be that of the Dhonda-paur (Cunningham, p. 339). The 1st Pers. trs. [I.O. 215 f. 210] omits the word rozan (or, auz:n); the 2nd [I.O. 217 f. 236b] renders it by jā'ī, place. Manifestly the Gate was opened by Bābur, but, presumably, not precisely at the time of his visit. I am inclined to understand that rozan ... tafarruj karda means enjoying the window formerly used by Muḥammadan rulers. If aūz:n be the right reading, its sense is obscure.

[2287] This will have occurred in the latter half of 934 AH. of which no record is now known.

[2288] He is mentioned under the name Asūk Mal Rājpūt, as a servant of Rānā Sangā by the Mirāt-i-sikandarī, lith. ed. p. 161. In Bayley's Translation p. 273 he is called Awāsūk, manifestly by clerical error, the sentence being az jānib-i-au Asūk Mal Rājpūt dar ān (qila`) būda....

[2289] ātā-līk, aūghūl-līk, i.e. he spoke to the son as a father, to the mother as a son.

[2290] The Mirāt-i-sikandarī (lith. ed. p. 234, Bayley's trs. p. 372) confirms Bābur's statement that the precious things were at Bikramājīt's disposition. Perhaps they had been in his mother's charge during her husband's life. They were given later to Bahādur Shāh of Gujrāt.

[2291] The Telī Mandīr has not a cupola but a waggon-roof of South Indian style, whence it may be that it has the southern name Telingana, suggested by Col. Luard.

[2292] See Luard's Photo. No. 139 and P. Mundy's sketch of the fort p. 62.

[2293] This will be the Ghargarāj-gate which looks south though it is not at the south end of the fort-hill where there is only a postern approached by a flight of stone steps (Cunningham p. 332).

[2294] The garden will have been on the lower ground at the foot of the ramp and not near the Hātī-pūl itself where the scarp is precipitous.

[2295] Mūndīn kīchīkrāq ātlānīlghān aīkāndūr. This may imply that the distance mentioned to Bābur was found by him an over-estimate. Perhaps the fall was on the Mūrar-river.

[2296] Rope (Shaw); corde qui sert à attacher le bagage sur les chameaux (de Courteille); a thread of 20 cubits long for weaving (Steingass); I have the impression that an arghamchī is a horse's tether.

[2297] For information about this opponent of Bābur in the battle of Kānwa, see the Asiatic Review, Nov. 1915, II. Beveridge's art. Silhadī, and the Mirāt-i-sikandarī.

[2298] Colonel Luard has suggested to us that the Bābur-nāma word Sūkhjana may stand for Salwai or Sukhalhari, the names of two villages near Gūālīār.

[2299] Presumably of night, 6-9 p.m., of Saturday Muḥ. 18th-Oct. 2nd.

[2300] f. 330_b_ and f. 339_b_.

[2301] Between the last explicit date in the text, viz. Sunday, Muḥ. 19th, and the one next following, viz. Saturday, Ṣafar 3rd, the diary of six days is wanting. The gap seems to be between the unfinished account of doings in Dhūlpūr and the incomplete one of those of the Monday of the party. For one of the intermediate days Bābur had made an appointment, when in Gūālīār (f. 343), with the envoys of Bikramājīt, the trysting-day being Muḥ. 23rd (i.e. 9 days after Muḥ. 14th). Bābur is likely to have gone to Bīāna as planned; that envoys met him there may be surmised from the circumstance that when negociations with Bikramājīt were renewed in Āgra (f. 345), two sets of envoys were present, a "former" one and a "later" one, and this although all envoys had been dismissed from Gūālīār. The "former" ones will have been those who went to Bīāna, were not given leave there, but were brought on to Āgra; the "later" ones may have come to Āgra direct from Ranthaṃbhor. It suits all round to take it that pages have been lost on which was the record of the end of the Dhūlpūr visit, of the journey to the, as yet unseen, fort of Bīāna, of tryst kept by the envoys, of other doings in Bīāna where, judging from the time taken to reach Sīkrī, it may be that the ma`jūn party was held.

[2302] Anglicé, Tuesday after 6 p.m.

[2303] aghaz aīchīb nīma yīb, which words seem to imply the breaking of a fast.

[2304] Doubtless the garden owes its name to the eight heavens or paradises mentioned in the Qurān (Hughes' Dictionary of Islām s.n. Paradise). Bābur appears to have reached Āgra on the 1st of Ṣafar; the 2nd may well have been spent on the home affairs of a returned traveller.

[2305] The great, or elder trio were daughters of Sl. Abū-sa`īd Mīrzā, Bābur's paternal-aunts therefore, of his dutiful attendance on whom, Gul-badan writes.

[2306] "Lesser," i.e. younger in age, lower in rank as not being the daughters of a sovereign Mīrzā, and held in less honour because of a younger generation.

[2307] Gul-badan mentions the arrival in Hindūstān of a khānīm of this name, who was a daughter of Sl. Maḥmūd Khān Chaghatāī, Bābur's maternal-uncle; to this maternal relationship the word chīcha (mother) may refer. Yīnkā, uncle's or elder brother's wife, has occurred before (ff. 192, 207), chīcha not till now.

[2308] Cf. f. 344_b_ and n.5 concerning the surmised movements of this set of envoys.

[2309] This promise was first proffered in Gūālīār (f.343).

[2310] These may be Bāī-qarā kinsfolk or Mīrān-shāhīs married to them. No record of Shāh Qāsim's earlier mission is preserved; presumably he was sent in 934 AH. and the record will have been lost with much more of that year's. Khwānd-amīr may well have had to do with this second mission, since he could inform Bābur of the discomfort caused in Herī by the near leaguer of `Ubaidu'l-lāh Aūzbeg.

[2311] Albatta aūzūmīznī har nu` qīlīb tīgūrkūmīz dūr. The following versions of this sentence attest its difficulty:—Wāqi`āt-i-bāburī, 1st trs. I.O. 215 f. 212, albatta khūdrā ba har nū`ī ka bāshad dar ān khūb khẉāhīm rasānad; and 2nd trs. I.O. 217 f. 238_b_, albatta dar har nu` karda khūdrā mī rasānīm; Memoirs p. 388, "I would make an effort and return in person to Kābul"; Mémoires ii, 356, je ferais tous mes efforts pour pousser en avant. I surmise, as Pāyanda-i-ḥasan seems to have done (1st Pers. trs. supra), that the passage alludes to Bābur's aims in Hindūstān which he expects to touch in the coming spring. What seems likely to be implied is what Erskine says and more, viz. return to Kābul, renewal of conflict with the Aūzbeg and release of Khurāsān kin through success. As is said by Bābur immediately after this, T̤ahmāsp of Persia had defeated `Ubaidu'l-lah Aūzbeg before Bābur's letter was written.

[2312] Sīmāb yīmāknī bunyād qīldīm, a statement which would be less abrupt if it followed a record of illness. Such a record may have been made and lost.

[2313] The preliminaries to this now somewhat obscure section will have been lost in the gap of 934 AH. They will have given Bābur's instructions to Khwāja Dost-i-khāwand and have thrown light on the unsatisfactory state of Kābul, concerning which a good deal comes out later, particularly in Bābur's letter to its Governor Khwāja Kalān. It may be right to suppose that Kāmrān wanted Kābul and that he expected the Khwāja to bring him an answer to his request for it, whether made by himself or for him, through some-one, his mother perhaps, whom Bābur now sent for to Hindūstān.

[2314] 934 AH.-August 26th 1528 AD.

[2315] The useful verb tībrāmāk which connotes agitation of mind with physical movement, will here indicate anxiety on the Khwāja's part to fulfil his mission to Humāyūn.

[2316] Kāmrān's messenger seems to repeat his master's words, using the courteous imperative of the 3rd person plural.

[2317] Though Bābur not infrequently writes of e.g. Bengalīs and Aūzbegs and Turks in the singular, the Bengalī, the Aūzbeg, the Turk, he seems here to mean `Ubaidu'l-lāh, the then dominant Aūzbeg, although Kūchūm was Khāqān.

[2318] This muster preceded defeat near Jām of which Bābur heard some 19 days later.

[2319] Humāyūn's wife was Bega Begīm, the later Ḥājī Begīm; Kāmrān's bride was her cousin perhaps named Māh-afrūz (Gul-badan's Humāyūn-nāma f. 64_b_). The hear-say tense used by the messenger allows the inference that he was not accredited to give the news but merely repeated the rumour of Kābul. The accredited bearer-of-good-tidings came later (f. 346_b_).

[2320] There are three enigmatic words in this section. The first is the Sayyid's cognomen; was he daknī, rather dark of hue, or zaknī, one who knows, or ruknī, one who props, erects scaffolding, etc.? The second mentions his occupation; was he a ghaiba-gar, diviner (Erskine, water-finder), a jība-gar, cuirass-maker, or a jibā-gar, cistern-maker, which last suits with well-making? The third describes the kind of well he had in hand, perhaps the stone one of f. 353_b_; had it scaffolding, or was it for drinking-water only (khwāralīq); had it an arch, or was it chambered (khwāzalīq)? If Bābur's orders for the work had been preserved,—they may be lost from f. 344_b_, trouble would have been saved to scribes and translators, as an example of whose uncertainty it may be mentioned that from the third word (khwāralīq?) Erskine extracted "jets d'eau and artificial water-works", and de Courteille "taillé dans le roc vif".

[2321] All Bābur's datings in Ṣafar are inconsistent with his of Muḥarram, if a Muḥarram of 30 days [as given by Gladwin and others].

[2322] ḥarārat. This Erskine renders by "so violent an illness" (p. 388), de Courteille by "une inflammation d'entrailles" (ii, 357), both swayed perhaps by the earlier mention, on Muh. 10th, of Bābur's medicinal quick-silver, a drug long in use in India for internal affections (Erskine). Some such ailment may have been recorded and the record lost (f. 345_b_ and n. 8), but the heat, fever, and trembling in the illness of Ṣafar 23rd, taken with the reference to last's year's attack of fever, all point to climatic fever.

[2323] aīndīnī (or, āndīnī). Consistently with the readings quoted in the preceding note, E. and de C. date the onset of the fever as Sunday and translate aīndīnī to mean "two days after". It cannot be necessary however to specify the interval between Friday and Sunday; the text is not explicit; it seems safe to surmise only that the cold fit was less severe on Sunday; the fever had ceased on the following Thursday.

[2324] Anglicé, Monday after 6 p.m.

[2325] The Rashaḥāt-i-´aīnu'l-ḥayāt (Tricklings from the fountain of life) contains an interesting and almost contemporary account of the Khwāja and of his Wālidiyyah-risāla. A summary of what in it concerns the Khwāja can be read in the JRAS. Jan. 1916, H. Beveridge's art. The tract, so far as we have searched, is now known in European literature only through Bābur's metrical translation of it; and this, again, is known only through the Rāmpūr Dīwān. [It may be noted here, though the topic belongs to the beginning of the Bābur-nāma (f. 2), that the Rashaḥāt contains particulars about Aḥrārī's interventions for peace between Bābur's father ´Umar Shaikh and those with whom he quarrelled.]

[2326] "Here unfortunately, Mr. Elphinstone's Turki copy finally ends" (Erskine), that is to say, the Elphinstone Codex belonging to the Faculty of Advocates of Edinburgh.

[2327] This work, Al-buṣīrī's famous poem in praise of the Prophet, has its most recent notice in M. René Basset's article of the Encyclopædia of Islām (Leyden and London).

[2328] Bābur's technical terms to describe the metre he used are, ramal musaddas makhbūn ´arūẓ and ẓarb gāh abtar gāh makhbūn muhẕūf wazn.

[2329] aūtkān yīl (u) har maḥal mūndāq ´āriẓat kīm būldī, from which it seems correct to omit the u (and), thus allowing the reference to be to last year's illnesses only; because no record, of any date, survives of illness lasting even one full month, and no other year has a lacuna of sufficient length unless one goes improbably far back: for these attacks seem to be of Indian climatic fever. One in last year (934 AH.) lasting 25-26 days (f. 331) might be called a month's illness; another or others may have happened in the second half of the year and their record be lost, as several have been lost, to the detriment of connected narrative.

[2330] Mr. Erskine's rendering (Memoirs p. 388) of the above section shows something of what is gained by acquaintance which he had not, with the Rashaḥāt-i-´āinu'l-ḥayāt and with Bābur's versified Wālidiyyah-risāla.

[2331] This gap, like some others in the diary of 935 AH. can be attributed safely to loss of pages, because preliminaries are now wanting to several matters which Bābur records shortly after it. Such are (1) the specification of the three articles sent to Naṣrat Shāh, (2) the motive for the feast of f. 351_b_, (3) the announcement of the approach of the surprising group of envoys, who appear without introduction at that entertainment, in a manner opposed to Bābur's custom of writing, (4) an account of their arrival and reception.

[2332] Land-holder (see Hobson-Jobson s.n. talookdar).

[2333] The long detention of this messenger is mentioned in Bābur's letter to Humāyūn (f. 349).

[2334] These words, if short a be read in Shăh, make 934 by abjad. The child died in infancy; no son of Humāyūn's had survived childhood before Akbar was born, some 14 years later. Concerning Abū'l-wajd Fārighī, see Ḥabību's-siyar, lith. ed. ii, 347; Muntakhabu't-tawārikh, Bib. Ind. ed. i, 3; and Index s.n.

[2335] I am indebted to Mr. A. E. Hinks, Secretary of the Royal Geographical Society, for the following approximate estimate of the distances travelled by Bīān Shaikh:—(a) From Kishm to Kābul 240m.—from Kābul to Peshāwar 175m.—from Peshāwar to Āgra (railroad distance) 759 m.—total 1174 m.; daily average cir. 38 miles; (b) Qila`-i-ẕafar to Kābul 264m.—Kābul to Qandahār 316m.—total 580m.; daily average cir. 53 miles. The second journey was made probably in 913 AH. and to inform Bābur of the death of the Shāh of Badakhshān (f. 213_b_).

[2336] On Muḥ. 10th 934 AH.-Sep. 26th 1528 AD. For accounts of the campaign see Rieu's Suppl. Persian Cat. under Histories of T̤ahmāsp (Churchill Collection); the Ḥabību's-siyar and the `Ālam-ārāī-`abbāsī, the last a highly rhetorical work, Bābur's accounts (Index s.n. Jām) are merely repetitions of news given to him; he is not responsible for mistakes he records, such as those of f. 354. It must be mentioned that Mr. Erskine has gone wrong in his description of the battle, the starting-point of error being his reversal of two events, the encampment of T̤ahmāsp at Rādagān and his passage through Mashhad. A century ago less help, through maps and travel, was available than now.

[2337] tufak u arāba, the method of array Bābur adopted from the Rūmī-Persian model.

[2338] T̤ahmāsp's main objective, aimed at earlier than the Aūzbeg muster in Merv, was Herāt, near which `Ubaid Khān had been for 7 months. He did not take the shortest route for Mashhad, viz. the Dāmghān-Sabzawār-Nīshāpūr road, but went from Dāmghān for Mashhad by way of Kālpūsh (`Ālam-ārāī lith. ed. p. 45) and Rādagān. Two military advantages are obvious on this route; (1) it approaches Mashhad by the descending road of the Kechef-valley, thus avoiding the climb into that valley by a pass beyond Nīshāpūr on the alternative route; and (2) it passes through the fertile lands of Rādagān. [For Kālpūsh and the route see Fr. military map, Sheets Astarābād and Merv, n.e. of Basṯām.]

[2339] 7 m. from Kushan and 86 m. from Mashhad. As Lord Curzon reports (Persia, ii, 120) that his interlocutors on the spot were not able to explain the word "Radkan," it may be useful to note here that the town seems to borrow its name from the ancient tower standing near it, the Mīl-i-rādagān, or, as Réclus gives it, Tour de méimandan, both names meaning, Tower of the bounteous (or, beneficent, highly-distinguished, etc.). (Cf. Vullers Dict. s.n. rād; Réclus' L'Asie Antérieure p. 219; and O'Donovan's Merv Oasis.) Perhaps light on the distinguished people (rādagān) is given by the Dābistān's notice of an ancient sect, the Rādīyān, seeming to be fire-worshippers whose chief was Rād-gūna, an eminently brave hero of the latter part of Jāmshīd's reign (800 B.C.?). Of the town Rādagān Daulat Shāh makes frequent mention. A second town so-called and having a tower lies north of Ispahān.

[2340] In these days of trench-warfare it would give a wrong impression to say that T̤ahmāsp entrenched himself; he did what Bābur did before his battles at Panīpat and Kānwa (q.v.).

[2341] The Aūzbegs will have omitted from their purview of affairs that T̤ahmāsp's men were veterans.

[2342] The holy city had been captured by `Ubaid Khān in 933 AH. (1525 AD.), but nothing in Bīān Shaikh's narrative indicates that they were now there in force.

[2343] Presumably the one in the Rādagān-meadow.

[2344] using the yada-tāsh to ensure victory (Index s.n.).

[2345] If then, as now, Scorpio's appearance were expected in Oct.-Nov., the Aūzbegs had greatly over-estimated their power to check T̤ahmāsp's movements; but it seems fairly clear that they expected Scorpio to follow Virgo in Sept.-Oct. according to the ancient view of the Zodiacal Signs which allotted two houses to the large Scorpio and, if it admitted Libra at all, placed it between Scorpio's claws (Virgil's Georgics i, 32 and Ovid's Metamorphoses, ii, 195.—H. B.).

[2346] It would appear that the Aūzbegs, after hearing that T̤ahmāsp was encamped at Rādagān, expected to interpose themselves in his way at Mashhad and to get their 20,000 to Rādagān before he broke camp. T̤āhmāsp's swiftness spoiled their plan; he will have stayed at Rādagān a short time only, perhaps till he had further news of the Aūzbegs, perhaps also for commissariat purposes and to rest his force. He visited the shrine of Imām Reza, and had reached Jām in time to confront his adversaries as they came down to it from Zawarābād (Pilgrims'-town).

[2347] or, Khirjard, as many MSS. have it. It seems to be a hamlet or suburb of Jām. The `Ālam-ārāī (lith. ed. p. 40) writes Khusrau-jard-i-Jām (the Khusrau-throne of Jām), perhaps rhetorically. The hamlet is Maulānā `Abdu'r-raḥmān Jāmī's birthplace (Daulat Shāh's Taẕkirat, E. G. Browne's ed. p. 483). Jām now appears on maps as Turbat-i-Shaikh Jāmī, the tomb (turbat) being that of the saintly ancestor of Akbar's mother Ḥamīda-bānū.

[2348] The `Ālam-ārāī (lith. ed. p. 31) says, but in grandiose language, that `Ubaid Khān placed at the foot of his standard 40 of the most eminent men of Transoxania who prayed for his success, but that as his cause was not good, their supplications were turned backwards, and that all were slain where they had prayed.

[2349] Here the 1st Pers. trs. (I.O. 215 f. 214) mentions that it was Chalma who wrote and despatched the exact particulars of the defeat of the Aūzbegs. This information explains the presumption Bābur expresses. It shows that Chalma was in Ḥiṣār where he may have written his letter to give news to Humāyūn. At the time Bīān Shaikh left, the Mīrzā was near Kishm; if he had been the enterprising man he was not, one would surmise that he had moved to seize the chance of the sulṯāns' abandonment of Ḥiṣār, without waiting for his father's urgency (f. 348_b_). Whether he had done so and was the cause of the sulṯāns' flight, is not known from any chronicle yet come to our hands. Chalma's father Ibrāhīm Jānī died fighting for Bābur against Shaibāq Khān in 906 AH. (f. 90_b_).

As the sense of the name-of-office Chalma is still in doubt, I suggest that it may be an equivalent of aftābachī, bearer of the water-bottle on journeys. T. chalma can mean a water-vessel carried on the saddle-bow; one Chalma on record was a safarchī; if, in this word, safar be read to mean journey, an approach is made to aftābachī (fol. 15_b_ and note; Blochmann's A.-i-A. p. 378 and n. 3).

[2350] The copies of Bābur's Turkī letter to Humāyūn and the later one to Khwāja Kalān (f. 359) are in some MSS. of the Persian text translated only (I.O. 215 f. 214); in others appear in Turkī only (I.O. 217 f. 240); in others appear in Turkī and Persian (B. M. Add. 26,000 and I.O. 2989); while in Muḥ. Shīrāzī's lith. ed. they are omitted altogether (p. 228).

[2351] Trans- and Cis-Hindukush. Pāyanda-ḥasan (in one of his useful glosses to the 1st Pers. trs.) amplifies here by "Khurāsān, Mā warā'u'n-nahr and Kābul".

[2352] The words Bābur gives as mispronunciations are somewhat uncertain in sense; manifestly both are of ill-omen:—Al-amān itself [of which the alāmā of the Ḥai. MS. and Ilminsky maybe an abbreviation,] is the cry of the vanquished, "Quarter! mercy!"; Aīlāmān and also ālāman can represent a Turkmān raider.

[2353] Presumably amongst Tīmūrids.

[2354] Perhaps Bābur here makes a placatory little joke.

[2355] i.e. that offered by T̤ahmāsp's rout of the Aūzbegs at Jām.

[2356] He was an adherent of Bābur. Cf. f. 353.

[2357] The plural "your" will include Humāyūn and Kāmrān. Neither had yet shewn himself the heritor of his father's personal dash and valour; they had lacked the stress which shaped his heroism.

[2358] My husband has traced these lines to Niẕāmī's Khusrau and Shīrīn. [They occur on f. 256_b_ in his MS. of 317 folios.] Bābur may have quoted from memory, since his version varies. The lines need their context to be understood; they are part of Shīrīn's address to Khusrau when she refuses to marry him because at the time he is fighting for his sovereign position; and they say, in effect, that while all other work stops for marriage (kadkhudāī), kingly rule does not.

[2359] Aūlūghlār kūtārīmlīk kīrāk; 2nd Pers. trs. buzurgān bardāsht mī bāīd kardand. This dictum may be a quotation. I have translated it to agree with Bābur's reference to the ages of the brothers, but aūlūghlār expresses greatness of position as well as seniority in age, and the dictum may be taken as a Turkī version of "Noblesse oblige", and may also mean "The great must be magnanimous". (Cf. de C.'s Dict. s.n. kūtārīmlīk.) [It may be said of the verb bardāshlan used in the Pers. trs., that Abū'l-faẓl, perhaps translating kūtārīmlīk reported to him, puts it into Bābur's mouth when, after praying to take Humāyūn's illness upon himself, he cried with conviction, "I have borne it away" (A.N. trs. H.B. i, 276).]

[2360] If Bābur had foreseen that his hard-won rule in Hindūstān was to be given to the winds of one son's frivolities and the other's disloyalty, his words of scant content with what the Hindūstān of his desires had brought him, would have expressed a yet keener pain (Rāmpūr Dīwān E.D.R.'s ed. p. 15 l. 5 fr. ft.).

[2361] Bostān, cap. Advice of Noshirwān to Hurmuz (H.B.).

[2362] A little joke at the expense of the mystifying letter.

[2363] For yā, Mr. Erskine writes be. What the mistake was is an open question; I have guessed an exchange of ī for ū, because such an exchange is not infrequent amongst Turkī long vowels.

[2364] That of reconquering Tīmūrid lands.

[2365] of Kūlāb; he was the father of Ḥaram Begīm, one of Gul-badan's personages.

[2366] aūn altī gūnlūk m:ljār bīla, as on f. 354_b_, and with exchange of T. m:ljār for P. mī`ād, f. 355_b_.

[2367] Probably into Rājpūt lands, notably into those of Ṣalāḥu'd-dīn.

[2368] tukhmalīq chakmānlār; as tukhma means both button and gold-embroidery, it may be right, especially of Hindūstān articles, to translate sometimes in the second sense.

[2369] These statements of date are consistent with Bābur's earlier explicit entries and with Erskine's equivalents of the Christian Era, but at variance with Gladwin's and with Wüstenfeldt's calculation that Rabī` II. 1st was Dec. 13th. Yet Gladwin (Revenue Accounts, ed. 1790 AD. p. 22) gives Rabī` I. 30 days. Without in the smallest degree questioning the two European calculations, I follow Bābur, because in his day there may have been allowed variation which finds no entry in methodical calendars. Erskine followed Bābur's statements; he is likely nevertheless to have seen Gladwin's book.

[2370] Erskine estimated this at £500, but later cast doubts on such estimates as being too low (History of India, vol. i, App. D.).

[2371] The bearer of the stamp (ṯamghā) who by impressing it gave quittance for the payment of tolls and other dues.

[2372] Either 24ft. or 36ft. according to whether the short or long qārī be meant (infra). These towers would provide resting-place, and some protection against ill-doers. They recall the two mīl-i-rādagān of Persia (f. 347 n. 9), the purpose of which is uncertain. Bābur's towers were not "kos mīnārs", nor is it said that he ordered each kuroh to be marked on the road. Some of the kos mīnārs on the "old Mughal roads" were over 30ft. high; a considerable number are entered and depicted in the Annual Progress Report of the Archæological Survey for 1914 (Northern Circle, p. 45 and Plates 44, 45). Some at least have a lower chamber.

[2373] Four-doored, open-on-all-sides. We have not found the word with this meaning in Dictionaries. It may translate H. chaukandī.

[2374] Erskine makes 9 kos (kurohs) to be 13-14 miles, perhaps on the basis of the smaller gaz of 24 inches.

[2375] altī yām-ātī bāghlāghāīlār which, says one of Erskine's manuscripts, is called a dāk-choki.

[2376] Neither Erskine (Mems. p. 394), nor de Courteille (Méms. ii, 370) recognized the word Mubīn here, although each mentions the poem later (p. 431 and ii, 461), deriving his information about it from the Akbar-nāma, Erskine direct, de Courteille by way of the Turkī translation of the same Akbar-nāma passage, which Ilminsky found in Kehr's volume and which is one of the much discussed "Fragments", at first taken to be extra writings of Bābur's (cf. Index in loco s.n. Fragments). Ilminsky (p. 455) prints the word clearly, as one who knows it; he may have seen that part of the poem itself which is included in Berésine's Chrestomathie Turque (p. 226 to p. 272), under the title Fragment d'un poème inconnu de Bābour, and have observed that Bābur himself shews his title to be Mubīn, in the lines of his colophon (p. 271),

_Chū bīān qīldīm āndā shar`īyāt, Nī `ajab gar Mubīn dīdīm āt?_

(Since in it I have made exposition of Laws, what wonder if I named it Mubīn (exposition)?) Cf. Translator's Note, p. 437. [Berésine says (Ch. T.) that he prints half of his "unique manuscrit" of the poem.]

[2377] The passage Bābur quotes comes from the Mubīn section on tayammum masā'la (purification with sand), where he tells his son sand may be used, Sū yurāq būlsā sīndīn aīr bīr mīl (if from thee water be one mīl distant), and then interjects the above explanation of what the mīl is. Two lines of his original are not with the Bābur-nāma.

[2378] The ṯanāb was thus 120 ft. long. Cf. A.-i-A. Jarrett i, 414; Wilson's Glossary of Indian Terms and Gladwin's Revenue Accounts, p. 14.

[2379] Bābur's customary method of writing allows the inference that he recorded, in due place, the coming and reception of the somewhat surprising group of guests now mentioned as at this entertainment. That preliminary record will have been lost in one or more of the small gaps in his diary of 935 AH. The envoys from the Samarkand Aūzbegs and from the Persian Court may have come in acknowledgment of the Fātḥ-nāma which announced victory over Rānā Sangā; the guests from Farghāna will have accepted the invitation sent, says Gul-badan, "in all directions," after Bābur's defeat of Sl. Ibrāhīm Lūdī, to urge hereditary servants and Tīmūrid and Chīngīz-khānid kinsfolk to come and see prosperity with him now when "the Most High has bestowed sovereignty" (f. 293a; Gul-badan's H.N. f. 11).

[2380] Hindū here will represent Rājpūt. D'Herbélot's explanation of the name Qīzīl-bāsh (Red-head) comes in usefully here:—"KEZEL BASCH or KIZIL BASCH. Mot Turc qui signifie Tête rouge. Les Turcs appellent les Persans de ce nom, depuis qu'Ismaël Sofi, fondateur de la Dynastie des princes qui regnent aujourd'hui en Perse, commanda à ses soldats de porter un bonnet rouge autour duquel il y a une écharpe ou Turban à douze plis, en mémoire et à l'honneur des 12 Imams, successeurs d'Ali, desquels il prétendoit descendre. Ce bonnet s'appelle en Persan, Tāj, et fut institué l'an 907^e de l'Hég." T̤ahmāsp himself uses the name Qīzīl-bāsh; Bābur does so too. Other explanations of it are found (Steingass), but the one quoted above suits its use without contempt. (Cf. f. 354 n. 3).

[2381] cir. 140-150ft. or more if the 36in. qārī be the unit.

[2382] Andropogon muricatus, the scented grass of which the roots are fitted into window spaces and moistened to mitigate dry, hot winds. Cf. Hobson-Jobson s.n. Cuscuss.

[2383] A nephew and a grandson of Aḥrāri's second son Yahya (f. 347_b_) who had stood staunch to Bābur till murdered in 906 AH.-1500 AD. (80_b_). They are likely to be those to whom went a copy of the Mubīn under cover of a letter addressed to lawyers of Mā warā'u'n-nahr (f. 351 n. 1). The Khwājas were in Āgra three weeks after Bābur finished his metrical version of their ancestor's Wālidiyyah-risāla; whether their coming (which must have been announced some time before their arrival), had part in directing his attention to the tract can only be surmised (f. 346).

[2384] He was an Aūzbeg (f. 371) and from his association here with a Bāī-qarā, and, later with Qāsim-i-ḥusain who was half Bāī-qarā, half Aūzbeg, seems likely to be of the latter's family (Index s.nn.).

[2385] sāchāq kīūrdī (kīltūrdī?) No record survives to tell the motive for this feast; perhaps the gifts made to Bābur were congratulatory on the birth of a grandson, the marriage of a son, and on the generally-prosperous state of his affairs.

[2386] Gold, silver and copper coins.

[2387] Made so by bhang or other exciting drug.

[2388] ārāl, presumably one left by the winter-fall of the Jumna; or, a peninsula.

[2389] Scribes and translators have been puzzled here. My guess at the Turkī clause is aūrang aīralīk kīsh jabbah. In reading muslin, I follow Erskine who worked in India and could take local opinion; moreover gifts made in Āgra probably would be Indian.

[2390] For one Ḥāfiẕ of Samarkand see f.237_b_.

[2391] Kūchūm was Khāqān of the Aūzbegs and had his seat in Samarkand. One of his sons, Abū-sa`īd, mentioned below, had sent envoys. With Abū-sa`īd is named Mihr-bān who was one of Kūchūm's wives; Pulād was their son. Mihr-bān was, I think, a half-sister of Bābur, a daughter of `Umar Shaikh and Umīd of Andijān (f. 9), and a full-sister of Nāṣir. No doubt she had been captured on one of the occasions when Bābur lost to the Aūzbegs. In 925 AH.-1519 AD. (f. 237_b_) when he sent his earlier Dīwān to Pulād Sl. (Translator's Note, p. 438) he wrote a verse on its back which looks to be addressed to his half-sister through her son.

[2392] T̤ahmāsp's envoy; the title Chalabī shews high birth.

[2393] This statement seems to imply that the weight made of silver and the weight made of gold were of the same size and that the differing specific gravity of the two metals,—that of silver being cir. 10 and that of gold cir. 20—gave their equivalents the proportion Bābur states. Persian Dictionaries give sang (tāsh), a weight, but without further information. We have not found mention of the tāsh as a recognized Turkī weight; perhaps the word tāsh stands for an ingot of unworked metal of standard size. (Cf. inter alios libros, A.-i-A. Blochmann p. 36, Codrington's Musalman Numismatics p. 117, concerning the miṣqāl, dīnār, etc.)

[2394] tarkāsh bīla. These words are clear in the Ḥai. MS. but uncertain in some others. E. and de C. have no equivalent of them. Perhaps the coins were given by the quiverful; that a quiver of arrows was given is not expressed.

[2395] Bābur's half-nephew; he seems from his name Keepsake-of-nāṣir to have been posthumous.

[2396] 934 AH.-1528 AD. (f. 336).

[2397] Or, gold-embroidered.

[2398] Wife of Muḥammad-i-zamān Mīrzā.

[2399] These Highlanders of Asfara will have come by invitation sent after the victory at Panīpat; their welcome shows remembrance of and gratitude for kindness received a quarter of a century earlier. Perhaps villagers from Dikh-kat will have come too, who had seen the Pādshāh run barefoot on their hills (Index s.nn.).

[2400] Here gratitude is shewn for protection given in 910 AH.-1504 AD. to the families of Bābur and his men when on the way to Kābul. Qurbān and Shaikhī were perhaps in Fort Ajar (f. 122_b_, f. 126).

[2401] Perhaps these acrobats were gipsies.

[2402] This may be the one with which Sayyid Daknī was concerned (f. 346).

[2403] Bābur obviously made the distinction between pahr and pās that he uses the first for day-watches, the second for those of the night.

[2404] Anglicé, Tuesday, Dec. 21st; by Muḥammadan plan, Wednesday 22nd. Dhūlpūr is 34 m. s. of Āgra; the journey of 10hrs. 20m. would include the nooning and the time taken in crossing rivers.

[2405] The well was to fill a cistern; the 26 spouts with their 26 supports were to take water into (26?) conduits. Perhaps tāsh means that they were hewn in the solid rock; perhaps that they were on the outer side of the reservoir. They will not have been built of hewn stone, or the word would have been sangīn or tāshdīn.

[2406] One occupation of these now blank days is indicated by the date of the "Rāmpūr Dīwān", Thursday Rabī` II. 15th (Dec. 27th).

[2407] The demon (or, athlete) sulṯān of Rumelia (Rūmlū); once T̤ahmāsp's guardian (Taẕkirat-i-T̤ahmāsp, Bib. Ind. ed. Phillott, p. 2). Some writers say he was put to death by T̤ahmāsp (æt. 12) in 933 AH.; if this were so, it is strange to find a servant described as his in 935 AH. (An account of the battle is given in the Sharaf-nāma, written in 1005 AH. by Sharaf Khān who was reared in T̤ahmāsp's house. The book has been edited by Veliaminof-Zernof and translated into French by Charmoy; cf. Trs. vol. ii, part i, p. 555.—H. Beveridge.)

[2408] This name, used by one who was with the Shāh's troops, attracts attention; it may show the composition of the Persian army; it may differentiate between the troops and their "Qīzīl-bāsh leader".

[2409] Several writers give Sārū-qamsh (Charmoy, roseau jaune) as the name of the village where the battle was fought; Sharaf Khān gives `Umarābād and mentions that after the fight T̤ahmāsp spent some time in the meadow of Sārū-qamsh.

[2410] The number of T̤ahmāsp's guns being a matter of interest, reference should be made to Bābur's accounts of his own battles in which he arrayed in Rūmī (Ottoman) fashion; it will then be seen that the number of carts does not imply the number of guns (Index s.n. arāba, cart).

[2411] This cannot but represent T̤ahmāsp who was on the battle-field (see his own story infra). He was 14 years old; perhaps he was called Shāh-zāda, and not Shāh, on account of his youth, or because under guardianship (?). Readers of the Persian histories of his reign may know the reason. Bābur hitherto has always called the boy Shāh-zāda; after the victory at Jām, he styles him Shāh. Jūha Sl. (Taklū) who was with him on the field, was Governor of Ispahān.

[2412] If this Persian account of the battle be in its right place in Bābur's diary, it is singular that the narrator should be so ill-informed at a date allowing facts to be known; the three sulṯāns he names as killed escaped to die, Kūchūm in 937 AH.-1530 AD., Abū-sa`īd in 940 AH.-1533 AD., `Ubaid in 946 AH.-1539 AD. (Lane-Poole's Muḥammadan Dynasties). It would be natural for Bābur to comment on the mistake, since envoys from two of the sulṯāns reported killed, were in Āgra. There had been time for the facts to be known: the battle was fought on Sep. 26th; the news of it was in Āgra on Nov. 23rd; envoys from both adversaries were at Bābur's entertainment on Dec. 19th. From this absence of comment and for the reasons indicated in note 3 (infra), it appears that matter has been lost from the text.

[2413] T̤ahmāsp's account of the battle is as follows (T.-i-T̤. p. 11):—"I marched against the Aūzbegs. The battle took place outside Jām. At the first onset, Aūzbeg prevailed over Qīzīl-bāsh. Ya`qūb Sl. fled and Sl. Wālāma Taklū and other officers of the right wing were defeated and put to flight. Putting my trust in God, I prayed and advanced some paces.... One of my body-guard getting up with `Ubaid struck him with a sword, passed on, and occupied himself with another. Qūlīj Bahādur and other Aūzbegs carried off the wounded `Ubaid; Kūchkūnjī (Kūchūm) Khān and Jānī Khān Beg, when they became aware of this state of affairs, fled to Merv. Men who had fled from our army rejoined us that day. That night I spent on the barren plain (ṣaḥra'). I did not know what had happened to `Ubaid. I thought perhaps they were devising some stratagem against me." The `A.-`A. says that `Ubaid's assailant, on seeing his low stature and contemptible appearance, left him for a more worthy foe.

[2414] Not only does some comment from Bābur seem needed on an account of deaths he knew had not occurred, but loss of matter may be traced by working backward from his next explicit date (Friday 19th), to do which shows fairly well that the "same day" will be not Tuesday the 16th but Thursday the 18th. Ghīāṣu'd-dīn's reception was on the day preceding Friday 19th, so that part of Thursday's record (as shewn by "on this same day"), the whole of Wednesday's, and (to suit an expected comment by Bābur on the discrepant story of the Aūzbeg deaths) part of Tuesday's are missing. The gap may well have contained mention of Ḥasan Chalabī's coming (f. 357), or explain why he had not been at the feast with his younger brother.

[2415] qūrchī, perhaps body-guard, life-guardsman.

[2416] As on f. 350_b_ (q.v. p. 628 n. 1) aūn altī gūnlūk bŭljār (or, m:ljār) bīla.

[2417] A sub-division of the Ballia district of the United Provinces, on the right bank of the Ghogrā.

[2418] i.e. in 16 days; he was 24 or 25 days away.

[2419] The envoy had been long in returning; Kanwā was fought in March, 1527; it is now the end of 1528 AD.

[2420] Rabī` II. 20th—January 1st 1529 AD.; Anglicé, Friday, after 6p.m.

[2421] This "Bengalī" is territorial only; Naṣrat Shāh was a Sayyid's son (f.271).

[2422] Ismā`īl Mītā (f. 357) who will have come with Mullā Maẕhab.

[2423] mī`ād, cf. f. 350_b_ and f. 354_b_. Ghīāṣu'd-dīn may have been a body-guard.

[2424] Lūdī Afghāns and their friends, including Bīban and Bāyazīd.

[2425] yūllūq tūrālīk; Memoirs, p. 398, "should act in every respect in perfect conformity to his commands"; Mémoires ii, 379, "chacun suivant son rang et sa dignité."

[2426] tawāchī. Bābur's uses of this word support Erskine in saying that "the tawāchī is an officer who corresponds very nearly to the Turkish chāwush, or special messenger" (Zenker, p. 346, col. iii) "but he was also often employed to act as a commissary for providing men and stores, as a commissioner in superintending important affairs, as an aide-de-camp in carrying orders, etc."

[2427] Here the Ḥai. MS. has the full-vowelled form, būljār. Judging from what that Codex writes, būljār may be used for a rendezvous of troops, m:ljār or b:ljār for any other kind of tryst (f. 350, p. 628 n. 1; Index s.nn.), also for a shelter.

[2428] yāwūshūb aīdī, which I translate in accordance with other uses of the verb, as meaning approach, but is taken by some other workers to mean "near its end".

[2429] Though it is not explicitly said, Chīn-tīmūr may have been met with on the road; as the "also" (ham) suggests.

[2430] To the above news the Akbar-nāma adds the important item reported by Humāyūn, that there was talk of peace. Bābur replied that, if the time for negotiation were not past, Humāyūn was to make peace until such time as the affairs of Hindūstān were cleared off. This is followed in the A. N. by a seeming quotation from Bābur's letter, saying in effect that he was about to leave Hindūstān, and that his followers in Kābul and Tramontana must prepare for the expedition against Samarkand which would be made on his own arrival. None of the above matter is now with the Bābur-nāma; either it was there once, was used by Abū'l-faẓl and lost before the Persian trss. were made; or Abū'l-faẓl used Bābur's original, or copied, letter itself. That desire for peace prevailed is shewn by several matters:—T̤ahmāsp, the victor, asked and obtained the hand of an Aūzbeg in marriage; Aūzbeg envoys came to Āgra, and with them Turk Khwājas having a mission likely to have been towards peace (f. 357_b_); Bābur's wish for peace is shewn above and on f. 359 in a summarized letter to Humāyūn. (Cf. Abū'l-ghāzī's Shajarat-i-Turk [Histoire des Mongols, Désmaisons' trs. p. 216]; Akbar-nāma, H. B.'s trs. i, 270.)

A here-useful slip of reference is made by the translator of the Akbar-nāma (l.c. n. 3) to the Fragment (Mémoires ii, 456) instead of to the Bābur-nāma translation (Mémoires ii, 381). The utility of the slip lies in its accompanying comment that de C.'s translation is in closer agreement with the Akbar-nāma than with Bābur's words. Thus the Akbar-nāma passage is brought into comparison with what it is now safe to regard as its off-shoot, through Turkī and French, in the Fragment. When the above comment on their resemblance was made, we were less assured than now as to the genesis of the Fragment (Index s.n. Fragment).

[2431] Hind-āl's guardian (G. B.'s Humāyūn-nāma trs. p. 106, n. 1).

[2432] Nothing more about Humāyūn's expedition is found in the B. N.; he left Badakhshān a few months later and arrived in Āgra, after his mother (f. 380_b_), at a date in August of which the record is wanting.

[2433] under 6 m. from Āgra. Gul-badan (f. 16) records a visit to the garden, during which her father said he was weary of sovereignty. Cf. f. 331_b_, p. 589 n. 2.

[2434] kūrnīsh kīlkān kīshīlār.

[2435] MSS. vary or are indecisive as to the omitted word. I am unable to fill the gap. Erskine has "Sir Māwineh (or hair-twist)" (p. 399), De Courteille, Sir-mouïneh (ii, 382). Mūīna means ermine, sable and other fine fur (Shamsu'l-lūghāt, p 274, col. 1).

[2436] His brother Ḥaẓrat Makhdūmī Nūrā (Khwāja Khāwand Maḥmūd) is much celebrated by Ḥaidar Mīrzā, and Bābur describes his own visit in the words he uses of the visit of an inferior to himself. Cf. Tārīkh-i-rashīdī trs. pp. 395, 478; Akbar-nāma trs., i, 356, 360.

[2437] No record survives of the arrival of this envoy or of why he was later in coming than his brother who was at Bābur's entertainment. Cf. f. 361_b_.

[2438] Presumably this refers to the appliances mentioned on f. 350_b_.

[2439] f. 332, n. 3.

[2440] zarbaft m:l:k. Amongst gold stuffs imported into Hindūstān, Abū'l-faẓl mentions mīlak which may be Bābur's cloth. It came from Turkistān (A.-i-A. Blochmann, p. 92 and n.).

[2441] A tang is a small silver coin of the value of about a penny (Erskine).

[2442] tānglāsī, lit. at its dawning. It is not always clear whether tānglāsī means, Anglicé, next dawn or day, which here would be Monday, or whether it stands for the dawn (daylight) of the Muḥammadan day which had begun at 6 p. m. on the previous evening, here Sunday. When Bābur records, e.g. a late audience, tānglāsī, following, will stand for the daylight of the day of audience. The point is of some importance as bearing on discrepancies of days, as these are stated in MSS., with European calendars; it is conspicuously so in Bābur's diary sections.

[2443] risālat ṯarīqī bīla; their special mission may have been to work for peace (f. 359_b_, n. 1).

[2444] He may well be Kāmrān's father-in-law Sl. `Alī Mīrzā T̤aghāī Begchīk.

[2445] nīmcha u takband. The tak-band is a silk or woollen girdle fastening with a "hook and eye" (Steingass), perhaps with a buckle.

[2446] This description is that of the contents of the "Rāmpūr Dīwān"; the tarjuma being the Wālidiyyah-risāla (f. 361 and n.). What is said here shows that four copies went to Kābul or further north. Cf. Appendix Q.

[2447] Sar-khaṯ may mean "copies" set for Kāmrān to imitate.

[2448] bīr pahr yāwūshūb aīdī; I.O. 215 f. 221, qarīb yak pās roz būd.

[2449] ākhar, a word which may reveal a bad start and uncertainty as to when and where to halt.

[2450] This, and not Chandwār (f. 331_b_), appears the correct form. Neither this place nor Ābāpūr is mentioned in the G. of I.'s Index or shewn in the I.S. Map of 1900 (cf. f. 331_b_ n. 3). Chandawār lies s.w. of Fīrūzābād, and near a village called Ṣufīpūr.

[2451] Anglicé, Wednesday after 6 p.m.

[2452] or life-guardsman, body-guard.

[2453] This higher title for T̤ahmāsp, which first appears here in the B.N., may be an early slip in the Turkī text, since it occurs in many MSS. and also because "Shāh-zāda" reappears on f. 359.

[2454] Slash-face, balafré; perhaps Ibrāhīm Begchīk (Index s.n.), but it is long since he was mentioned by Bābur, at least by name. He may however have come, at this time of reunion in Āgra, with Mīrzā Beg T̤aghāī (his uncle or brother?), father-in-law of Kāmrān.

[2455] The army will have kept to the main road connecting the larger towns mentioned and avoiding the ravine district of the Jumna. What the boat-journey will have been between high banks and round remarkable bends can be learned from the G. of I. and Neave's District Gazetteer of Mainpūrī. Rāprī is on the road from Fīrūzābād to the ferry for Bateswar, where a large fair is held annually. (It is misplaced further east in the I.S. Map of 1900.) There are two Fatḥpūrs, n. e. of Rāprī.

[2456] aūlūgh tūghāīnīng tūbī. Here it suits to take the Turkī word tūghāī to mean bend of a river, and as referring to the one shaped (on the map) like a soda-water bottle, its neck close to Rāprī. Bābur avoided it by taking boat below its mouth.—In neither Persian translation has tūghāī been read to mean a bend of a river; the first has az pāyān rūīa Rāprī, perhaps referring to the important ford (pāyān); the second has az zīr bulandī kalān Rāprī, perhaps referring to a height at the meeting of the bank of the ravine down which the road to the ford comes, with the high bank of the river. Three examples of tūghāī or tūqāī [a synonym given by Dictionaries], can be seen in Abū'l-ghāzī's Shajrat-i-Turk, Fraehn's imprint, pp. 106, 107, 119 (Désmaisons' trs. pp. 204, 205, 230). In each instance Désmaisons renders it by coude, elbow, but one of the examples may need reconsideration, since the word has the further meanings of wood, dense forest by the side of a river (Vambéry), prairie (Zenker), and reedy plain (Shaw).

[2457] Blochmann describes the apparatus for marking lines to guide writing (A.-i-A. trs. p. 52 n. 5):—On a card of the size of the page to be written on, two vertical lines are drawn within an inch of the edges; along these lines small holes are pierced at regular intervals, and through these a string is laced backwards and forwards, care being taken that the horizontal strings are parallel. Over the lines of string the pages are placed and pressed down; the strings then mark the paper sufficiently to guide the writing.

[2458] tarkīb (nīng) khaṯī bīla tarjuma bīlīr aūchūn. The Rāmpūr Dīwān may supply the explanation of the uncertain words tarkīb khaṯī. The "translation" (tarjuma), mentioned in the passage quoted above, is the Wālidiyyah-risāla, the first item of the Dīwān, in which it is entered on crowded pages, specially insufficient for the larger hand of the chapter-headings. The number of lines per page is 13; Bābur now fashions a line-marker for 11. He has already despatched 4 copies of the translation (f. 357_b_); he will have judged them unsatisfactory; hence to give space for the mixture of hands (tarkīb khaṯī), i.e. the smaller hand of the poem and the larger of the headings, he makes an 11 line marker.

[2459] Perhaps Aḥrārī's in the Wālidiyyah-risāla, perhaps those of Muḥammad. A quatrain in the Rāmpūr Dīwān connects with this admonishment [Plate xiv_a_, 2nd quatrain].

[2460] Jākhān (G. of Mainpūrī). The G. of Etāwa (Drake-Brockman) p. 213, gives this as some 18 m. n.w. of Etāwa and as lying amongst the ravines of the Jumna.

[2461] f. 359_b_ allows some of the particulars to be known.

[2462] Mahdī may have come to invite Bābur to the luncheon he served shortly afterwards. The Ḥai. MS. gives him the honorific plural; either a second caller was with him or an early scribe has made a slip, since Bābur never so-honours Mahdī. This small point touches the larger one of how Bābur regarded him, and this in connection with the singular story Niẕāmu'd-dīn Aḥmad tells in his T̤abaqāt-i-akbarī about Khalīfa's wish to supplant Humāyūn by Mahdī Khwāja (Index s.nn.).

[2463] yīgītlārnī shokhlūqgha sāldūq, perhaps set them to make fun. Cf. f. 366, yīgītlār bīr pāra shokhlūq qīldīlār. Muḥ. Shīrāzī (p. 323 foot) makes the startling addition of dar āb (andākhtīm), i.e. he says that the royal party flung the braves into the river.

[2464] The Gazetteer of Etāwa (Drake-Brockman) p. 186, s.n. Bāburpūr, writes of two village sites [which from their position are Mūrī-and-Adūsa], as known by the name Sarāī Bāburpūr from having been Bābur's halting-place. They are 24m. to the s.e. of Etāwa, on the old road for Kālpī. Near the name Bāburpūr in the Gazetteer Map there is Muhuri (Mūrī?); there is little or no doubt that Sarāī Bāburpūr represents the camping-ground Mūrī-and-Adūsa.

[2465] This connects with Kītīn-qarā's complaints of the frontier-begs (f. 361), and with the talk of peace (f. 356_b_).

[2466] This injunction may connect with the desired peace; it will have been prompted by at least a doubt in Bābur's mind as to Kāmrān's behaviour perhaps e.g. in manifested dislike for a Shīa`. Concerning the style Shāh-zāda see f. 358, p. 643, n. 1.

[2467] Kāmrān's mother Gul-rukh Begchīk will have been of the party who will have tried in Kābul to forward her son's interests.

[2468] f. 348, p. 624, n. 2.

[2469] Kābul and Tramontana.

[2470] Presumably that of Shamsu'd-dīn Muḥammad's mission. One of Bābur's couplets expresses longing for the fruits, and also for the "running waters", of lands other than Hindūstān, with conceits recalling those of his English contemporaries in verse, as indeed do several others of his short poems (Rāmpūr Dīwān Plate xvii A.).

[2471] Ḥai. MS. nā marbūṯlīghī; so too the 2nd Pers. trs. but the 1st writes wairānī u karābī which suits the matter of defence.

[2472] qūrghān, walled-town; from the maẓbūt following, the defences are meant.

[2473] viz. Governor Khwāja Kalān, on whose want of dominance his sovereign makes good-natured reflection.

[2474] `alūfa u qūnāl; cf. 364_b_.

[2475] Following aīlchī (envoys) there is in the Ḥai. MS. and in I.O. 217 a doubtful word, būmla, yūmla; I.O. 215 (which contains a Persian trs. of the letter) is obscure, Ilminsky changes the wording slightly; Erskine has a free translation. Perhaps it is yaumī, daily, misplaced (see above).

[2476] Perhaps, endow the Mosque so as to leave no right of property in its revenues to their donor, here Bābur. Cf. Hughes' Dict. of Islām s.nn. sharī`, masjid and waqf.

[2477] f. 139. Khwāja Kalān himself had taken from Hindūstān the money for repairing this dam.

[2478] sāpqūn ālīp; the 2nd Pers. trs. as if from sātqūn ālīp, kharīda, purchasing.

[2479] naẕar-gāh, perhaps, theatre, as showing the play enacted at the ford. Cf. ff. 137, 236, 248_b_. Tūtūn-dara will be Masson's Tūtām-dara. Erskine locates Tūtūn-dara some 8 kos (16 m.) n. w. of Hūpīān (Ūpīān). Masson shews that it was a charming place (Journeys in Biluchistan, Afghanistan and the Panj-āb, vol. iii, cap. vi and vii).

[2480] jībachī. Bābur's injunction seems to refer to the maintaining of the corps and the manufacture of armour rather than to care for the individual men involved.

[2481] Either the armies in Nīl-āb, or the women in the Kābul-country (f. 375).

[2482] Perhaps what Bābur means is, that both what he had said to `Abdu'l-lāh and what the quatrain expresses, are dissuasive from repentance. Erskine writes (Mems. p. 403) but without textual warrant, "I had resolution enough to persevere"; de Courteille (Mems. ii, 390), "Voici un quatrain qui exprime au juste les difficultés de ma position."

[2483] The surface retort seems connected with the jacket, perhaps with a request for the gift of it.

[2484] Clearly what recalled this joke of Banāī's long-silent, caustic tongue was that its point lay ostensibly in a baffled wish—in `Alī-sher's professed desire to be generous and a professed impediment, which linked in thought with Bābur's desire for wine, baffled by his abjuration. So much Banāī's smart verbal retort shows, but beneath this is the double-entendre which cuts at the Beg as miserly and as physically impotent, a defect which gave point to another jeer at his expense, one chronicled by Sām Mīrzā and translated in Hammer-Purgstall's Geschichte von schönen Redekünste Persiens, art. CLV. (Cf. f. 179-80.)—The word mādagī is used metaphorically for a button-hole; like nā-mardī, it carries secondary meanings, miserliness, impotence, etc. (Cf. Wollaston's English-Persian Dictionary s.n. button-hole, where only we have found mādagī with this sense.)

[2485] The 1st Pers. trs. expresses "all these jokes", thus including with the double-meanings of mādagī, the jests of the quatrain.

[2486] The 1st Pers. trs. fills out Bābur's allusive phrase here with "of the Wālidiyyah". His wording allows the inference that what he versified was a prose Turkī translation of a probably Arabic original.

[2487] Erskine comments here on the non-translation into Persian of Bābur's letters. Many MSS., however, contain a translation (f. 348, p. 624, n. 2 and E.'s n. f. 377_b_).

[2488] Anglicé, Thursday after 6 p.m.

[2489] What would suit measurement on maps and also Bābur's route is "Jumoheen" which is marked where the Sarāī Bāburpūr-Atsu-Phaphand road turns south, east of Phaphand (I.S. Map of 1900, Sheet 68).

[2490] var. Qabāq, Qatāk, Qanāk, to each of which a meaning might be attached. Bābur had written to Humāyūn about the frontier affair, as one touching the desired peace (f. 359).

[2491] This will refer to the late arrival in Āgra of the envoy named, who was not with his younger brother at the feast of f. 351_b_ (f. 357, p. 641, n. 2).—As to T̤ahmāsp's style, see f. 354, f. 358.

[2492] Shāh-qulī may be the ill-informed narrator of f. 354.

[2493] Both are marked on the southward road from Jumoheen (Jumandnā?) for Auraiya.

[2494] The old Kālpī pargana having been sub-divided, Dīrapūr is now in the district of Cawnpore (Kānhpūr).

[2495] That this operation was not hair-cutting but head-shaving is shewn by the verbs T. qīrmāq and its Pers. trs. tarāsh kardan. To shave the head frequently is common in Central Asia.

[2496] This will be Chaparghatta on the Dīrapūr-Bhognīpūr-Chaparghatta-Mūsanagar road, the affixes kada and ghatta both meaning house, temple, etc.

[2497] Māhīm, and with her the child Gul-badan, came in advance of the main body of women. Bābur seems to refer again to her assumption of royal style by calling her Walī, Governor (f. 369 and n.). It is unusual that no march or halt is recorded on this day.

[2498] or, Ārampūr. We have not succeeded in finding this place; it seems to have been on the west bank of the Jumna, since twice Bābur when on the east bank, writes of coming opposite to it (supra and f. 379). If no move was made on Tuesday, Jumāda II. 6th (cf. last note), the distance entered as done on Wednesday would locate the halting-place somewhere near the Akbarpūr of later name, which stands on a road and at a ferry. But if the army did a stage on Tuesday, of which Bābur omits mention, Wednesday's march might well bring him opposite to Hamirpūr and to the "Rampur"-ferry. The verbal approximation of Ārampūr and "Rampur" arrests attention.—Local encroachment by the river, which is recorded in the District Gazetteers, may have something to do with the disappearance from these most useful books and from maps, of pargana Ādampūr (or, Ārampūr).

[2499] tūshlāb. It suits best here, since solitude is the speciality of the excursion, to read tūshmāk as meaning to take the road, Fr. cheminer.

[2500] da`wī bīla; Mems. p. 404, challenge; Méms. ii, 391, il avait fait des façons, a truth probably, but one inferred only.

[2501] This will be more to the south than Kūra Khas, the headquarters of the large district; perhaps it is "Koora Khera" (? Kūra-khirāj) which suits the route (I.S. Map, Sheet 88).

[2502] Perhaps Kunda Kanak, known also as "Kuria, Koria, Kura and Kunra Kanak" (D.G. of Fatḥpūr).

[2503] Haswa or Hanswa. The conjoint name represents two villages some 6m. apart, and is today that of their railway-station.

[2504] almost due east of Fatḥpūr, on the old King's Highway (Bādshāhī Sar-rāh).

[2505] His ancestors had ruled in Jūnpūr from 1394 to 1476 AD., his father Ḥusain Shāh having been conquered by Sl. Sikandar Lūdī at the latter date. He was one of three rivals for supremacy in the East (Sharq), the others being Jalālu'd-dīn Nūhānī and Maḥmūd Lūdī,—Afghāns all three. Cf. Erskine's History of India, Bābur, i, 501.

[2506] This name appears on the I.S. Map, Sheet 88, but too far north to suit Bābur's distances, and also off the Sarāī Munda-Kusār-Karrah road. The position of Naubasta suits better.

[2507] Sher Khān was associated with Dūdū Bībī in the charge of her son's affairs. Bābur's favours to him, his son Humāyūn's future conqueror, will have been done during the Eastern campaign in 934 AH., of which so much record is missing. Cf. Tārīkh-i-sher-shāhī, E. & D.'s History of India, iv, 301 et seq. for particulars of Sher Khān (Farīd Khān Sūr Afghān).

[2508] In writing "Sl. Maḥmūd", Bābur is reporting his informant's style, he himself calling Maḥmūd "Khān" only (f. 363 and f. 363_b_).

[2509] This will be the more northerly of two Kusārs marked as in Karrah; even so, it is a very long 6 kurohs (12m.) from the Dugdugī of the I.S. Map (cf. n. supra).

[2510] bīr pāra āsh u ta`ām, words which suggest one of those complete meals served, each item on its separate small dish, and all dishes fitting like mosaic into one tray. T. āsh is cooked meat (f. 2 n. 1 and f. 343_b_); Ar. ta`ām will be sweets, fruit, bread, perhaps rice also.

[2511] The yaktāī, one-fold coat, contrasts with the dū-tāhī, two-fold (A.-i-A. Bib. Ind. ed., p. 101, and Blochmann's trs. p. 88).

[2512] This acknowledgement of right to the style Sulṯān recognized also supremacy of the Sharqī claim to rule over that of the Nūḥānī and Lūdī competitors.

[2513] mīndīn bītī tūrgān waqāī'. This passage Teufel used to support his view that Bābur's title for his book was Waqāī`, and not Bābur-nāma which, indeed, Teufel describes as the Kazaner Ausgabe adoptirte Titel. Bābur-nāma, however, is the title [or perhaps, merely scribe's name] associated both with Kehr's text and with the Ḥaidarābād Codex.—I have found no indication of the selection by Bābur of any title; he makes no mention of the matter and where he uses the word waqāī` or its congeners, it can be read as a common noun. In his colophon to the Rāmpūr Dīwān, it is a parallel of ash`ār, poems. Judging from what is found in the Mubīn, it may be right to infer that, if he had lived to complete his book—now broken off s.a. 914 AH. (f. 216_b_)—he would have been explicit as to its title, perhaps also as to his grounds for choosing it. Such grounds would have found fitting mention in a preface to the now abrupt opening of the Bābur-nāma (f. 1_b_), and if the Malfūzāt-i-tīmūrī be Tīmūr's authentic autobiography, this book might have been named as an ancestral example influencing Bābur to write his own. Nothing against the authenticity of the Malfūzāt can be inferred from the circumstance that Bābur does not name it, because the preface in which such mention would be in harmony with e.g. his Walidiyyah preface, was never written. It might accredit the Malfūzāt to collate passages having common topics, as they appear in the Bābur-nāma, Malfūzāt-i-tīmūrī and Z̤afar-nāma (cf. E. & D.'s H. of I. iv, 559 for a discussion by Dr. Sachau and Prof. Dowson on the Malfūzāt). (Cf. Z.D.M. xxxvii, p. 184, Teufel's art. Bābur und Abū'l-faẓl; Smirnow's Cat. of Manuscrits Turcs, p. 142; Index in loco s.nn. Mubīn and Title.)

[2514] Koh-khirāj, Revenue-paying Koh (H. G. Nevill's D. G. of Allāhābād, p. 261).

[2515] kīma aīchīdā, which suggests a boat with a cabin, a bajrā (Hobson-Jobson s.n. budgerow).

[2516] He had stayed behind his kinsman Khwāja Kalān. Both, as Bābur has said, were descendants of Khwāja `Ubaidu'l-lāh Aḥrārī. Khwāja Kalān was a grandson of Aḥrārī's second son Yahyā; Khwāja `Abdu'sh-shahīd was the son of his fifth, Khwāja `Abdu'l-lāh (Khwājagān-khwāja). `Abdu'sh-shahīd returned to India under Akbar, received a fief, maintained 2,000 poor persons, left after 20 years, and died in Samarkand in 982 AH.-1574-5 AD. (A.-i-A., Blochmann's trs. and notes, pp. 423, 539).

[2517] f. 363, f. 363_b_.

[2518] Not found on maps; OOjani or Ujahni about suits the measured distance.

[2519] Prayāg, Ilāhābād, Allāhābād. Between the asterisk in my text (supra) and the one following "ford" before the foliation mark f. 364, the Ḥai. MS. has a lacuna which, as being preceded and followed by broken sentences, can hardly be due to a scribe's skip, but may result from the loss of a folio. What I have entered above between the asterisks is translated from the Kehr-Ilminsky text; it is in the two Persian translations also. Close scrutiny of it suggests that down to the end of the swimming episode it is not in order and that the account of the swim across the Ganges may be a survival of the now missing record of 934 AH. (f. 339). It is singular that the Pers. trss. make no mention of Pīāg or of Sīr-auliya; their omission arouses speculation, as to in which text, the Turkī or Persian, it was first tried to fill what remains a gap in the Ḥai. Codex. A second seeming sign of disorder is the incomplete sentence yūrtgha kīlīb, which is noted below. A third is the crowd of incidents now standing under "Tuesday". A fourth, and an important matter, is that on grounds noted at the end of the swimming passage (p. 655 n. 3) it is doubtful whether that passage is in its right place.—It may be that some-one, at an early date after Bābur's death, tried to fill the lacuna discovered in his manuscript, with help from loose folios or parts of them. Cf. Index s.n. swimming, and f. 377_b_, p. 680 n. 2.

[2520] The Chaghatāī sulṯāns will have been with `Askarī east of the Ganges.

[2521] tūr hawālīk; Mems. p. 406, violence of the wind; Méms. ii, 398, une température très agréable.

[2522] yūrtgha kīlīb, an incomplete sentence.

[2523] ārāl bār aīkāndūr, phrasing implying uncertainty; there may have been an island, or such a peninsula as a narrow-mouthed bend of a river forms, or a spit or bluff projecting into the river. The word ārāl represents Aīkī-sū-ārāsī, Miyān-dū-āb, Entre-eaux, Twixt-two-streams, Mesopotamia.

[2524] qūl; Pers. trss. dast andākhtan and dast. Presumably the 33 strokes carried the swimmer across the deep channel, or the Ganges was crossed higher than Pīāg.

[2525] The above account of Bābur's first swim across the Ganges which is entered under date Jumāda II. 27th, 935 AH. (March 8th, 1529 AD.), appears misplaced, since he mentions under date Rajab 25th, 935 AH. (April 4th, 1529 AD. f. 366_b_), that he had swum the Ganges at Baksara (Buxar) a year before, i.e. on or close to Rajab 25th, 934 AH. (April 15th, 1528 AD.). Nothing in his writings shews that he was near Pīāg (Allāhābād) in 934 AH.; nothing indisputably connects the swimming episode with the "Tuesday" below which it now stands; there is no help given by dates. One supposes Bābur would take his first chance to swim the Ganges; this was offered at Qanauj (f. 336), but nothing in the short record of that time touches the topic. The next chance would be after he was in Aūd, when, by an unascertained route, perhaps down the Ghogrā, he made his way to Baksara where he says (f. 366_b_) he swam the river. Taking into consideration the various testimony noted, [Index s.n. swimming] there seems warrant for supposing that this swimming passage is a survival of the missing record of 934 AH. (f. 339). Cf. f. 377_b_, p. 680 and n. 2 for another surmised survival of 934 AH.

[2526] "Friday" here stands for Anglicé, Thursday after 6 p.m.; this, only, suiting Bābur's next explicit date Sha`bān 1st, Saturday.

[2527] The march, beginning on the Jumna, is now along the united rivers.

[2528] ẓarb-zanlīk arābalār. Here the carts are those carrying the guns.

[2529] From the particulars Bābur gives about the Tūs (Tons) and Karmā-nāśā, it would seem that he had not passed them last year, an inference supported by what is known of his route in that year:—He came from Gūālīār to the Kanār-passage (f. 336), there crossed the Jumna and went direct to Qanauj (f. 335), above Qanauj bridged the Ganges, went on to Bangarmāu (f. 338), crossed the Gūmtī and went to near the junction of the Ghogrā and Sardā (f. 338_b_). The next indication of his route is that he is at Baksara, but whether he reached it by water down the Ghogrā, as his meeting with Muḥ. Ma`rūf Farmūlī suggests (f. 377), or by land, nothing shews. From Baksara (f. 366) he went up-stream to Chausa (f. 365_b_), on perhaps to Sayyidpūr, 2m. from the mouth of the Gūmtī, and there left the Ganges for Jūnpūr (f. 365). I have found nothing about his return route to Āgra; it seems improbable that he would go so far south as to near Pīāg; a more northerly and direct road to Fatḥpūr and Sarāī Bāburpūr may have been taken.—Concerning Bābur's acts in 934 AH. the following item, (met with since I was working on 934 AH.), continues his statement (f. 338_b_) that he spent a few days near Aūd (Ajōdhya) to settle its affairs. The D.G. of Fyzābāa (H. E. Nevill) p. 173 says "In 1528 AD. Bābur came to Ajōdhya (Aūd) and halted a week. He destroyed the ancient temple" (marking the birth-place of Rāma) "and on its site built a mosque, still known as Bābur's Mosque.... It has two inscriptions, one on the outside, one on the pulpit; both are in Persian; and bear the date 935 AH." This date may be that of the completion of the building.—(Corrigendum:—On f. 339 n. 1, I have too narrowly restricted the use of the name Sarjū. Bābur used it to describe what the maps of Arrowsmith and Johnson shew, and not only what the Gazetteer of India map of the United Provinces does. It applies to the Sardā (f. 339) as Bābur uses it when writing of the fords.)

[2530] Here the lacuna of the Ḥai. Codex ends.

[2531] Perhaps, where there is now the railway station of "Nulibai" (I.S. Map). The direct road on which the army moved, avoids the windings of the river.

[2532] This has been read as T. kīnt, P. dih, Eng. village and Fr. village.

[2533] "Nankunpur" lying to the north of Puhari railway-station suits the distance measured on maps.

[2534] These will be the women-travellers.

[2535] Perhaps jungle tracts lying in the curves of the river.

[2536] jīrga, which here stands for the beaters' incurving line, witness the exit of the buffalo at the end. Cf. f. 367_b_ for a jīrga of boats.

[2537] aūzūn aūzāgh, many miles and many hours?

[2538] Bulloa? (I.S. Map).

[2539] Anglicé, Sunday after 6 p.m.

[2540] `alufa u qunal (f. 359_b_).

[2541] than the Ganges perhaps; or narrowish compared with other rivers, e.g. Ganges, Ghogrā, and Jūn.

[2542] yīl-tūrgī yūrt, by which is meant, I think, close to the same day a year back, and not an indefinite reference to some time in the past year.

[2543] Maps make the starting-place likely to be Sayyidpūr.

[2544] re-named Zamānīa, after Akbar's officer `Alī-qulī Khān Khān-i-zamān, and now the head-quarters of the Zamānīa pargana of Ghāzīpūr. Madan-Benāres was in Akbar's sarkār of Ghāzīpūr. (It was not identified by E. or by de C.) Cf. D.G. of Ghāzīpūr.

[2545] In the earlier part of the Ḥai. Codex this Afghān tribal-name is written Nūḥānī, but in this latter portion a different scribe occasionally writes it Lūḥānī (Index s.n.).

[2546] `arza-dāsht, i.e. phrased as from one of lower station to a superior.

[2547] His letter may have announced his and his mother Dūdū Bībī's approach (f. 368-9).

[2548] Naṣīr Khān had been an amīr of Sl. Sikandar Lūdī. Sher Khān Sūr married his widow "Guhar Kusāīn", bringing him a large dowry (A.N. trs. p. 327; and Tārīkh-i-sher-shāhi, E. & D.'s History of India iv, 346).

[2549] He started from Chaparghatta (f. 361_b_, p. 650 n. 1).

[2550] yīl-tūrgī yūrt.

[2551] "This must have been the Eclipse of the 10th of May 1528 AD.; a fast is enjoined on the day of an eclipse" (Erskine).

[2552] Karmā-nā['s]ā means loss of the merit acquired by good works.

[2553] The I.S. Map marks a main road leading to the mouth of the Karmā-nā['s]ā and no other leading to the river for a considerable distance up-stream.

[2554] Perhaps "Thora-nadee" (I.S. Map).

[2555] Anglicé, Sunday after 6 p.m.

[2556] aūtkān yīl.

[2557] Perhaps the dū-āba between the Ganges and "Thora-nadee".

[2558] yīl-tūr ... Gang-sūī-dīn mīn dastak bīla aūtūb, ba`ẓī āt, ba`ẓī tīwah mīnīb, kīlīb, sair qīlīlīb aīdī. Some uncertainty as to the meaning of the phrase dastak bīla aūtūb is caused by finding that while here de Courteille agrees with Erskine in taking it to mean swimming, he varies later (f. 373_b_) to appuyés sur une pièce de bois. Taking the Persian translations of three passages about crossing water into consideration (p. 655 after f. 363_b_, f. 366_b_ (here), f. 373_b_), and also the circumstances that E. and de C. are once in agreement and that Erskine worked with the help of Oriental munshīs, I incline to think that dastak bīla does express swimming.—The question of its precise meaning bears on one concerning Bābur's first swim across the Ganges (p. 655, n. 3).—Perhaps I should say, however, that if the sentence quoted at the head of this note stood alone, without the extraneous circumstances supporting the reading of dastak bīla to mean swimming, I should incline to read it as stating that Bābur went on foot through the water, feeling his footing with a pole (dastak), and that his followers rode through the ford after him. Nothing in the quoted passage suggests that the horses and camels swam. But whether the Ganges was fordable at Baksara in Bābur's time, is beyond surmise.

[2559] faṣl soz, which, manifestly, were to be laid before the envoy's master. The articles are nowhere specified; one is summarized merely on f. 365. The incomplete sentence of the Turkī text (supra) needs their specification at this place, and an explicit statement of them would have made clearer the political relations of Bābur with Naṣrat Shāh.—A folio may have been lost from Bābur's manuscript; it might have specified the articles, and also have said something leading to the next topic of the diary, now needing preliminaries, viz. that of the Mīrzā's discontent with his new appointment, a matter not mentioned earlier.

[2560] This suits Bābur's series, but Gladwin and Wüstenfeld have 10th.

[2561] The first is near, the second on the direct road from Buxar for Ārrah.

[2562] The Ḥai. MS. makes an elephant be posted as the sole scout; others post a sardār, or post braves; none post man and beast.

[2563] This should be 5th; perhaps the statement is confused through the gifts being given late, Anglicé, on Tuesday 4th, Islamicé on Wednesday night.

[2564] The Mīrzā's Tīmūrid birth and a desire in Bābur to give high status to a representative he will have wished to leave in Bihār when he himself went to his western dominions, sufficiently explain the bestowal of this sign of sovereignty.

[2565] jīrgā. This instance of its use shews that Bābur had in mind not a completed circle, but a line, or in sporting parlance, not a hunting-circle but a beaters'-line. [Cf. f. 251, f. 364_b_ and infra of the crocodile.] The word is used also for a governing-circle, a tribal-council.

[2566] aūlūgh (kīma). Does aūlūgh (aūlūq, ūlūq) connect with the "bulky Oolak or baggage-boat of Bengal"? (Hobson-Jobson s.n. Woolock, oolock).

[2567] De Courteille's reading of Ilminsky's "Bāburī" (p. 476) as Bāīrī, old servant, hardly suits the age of the boat.

[2568] Bābur anticipated the custom followed e.g. by the White Star and Cunard lines, when he gave his boats names having the same terminal syllable; his is āīsh; on it he makes the quip of the har āīsh of the Farmāīsh.

[2569] As Vullers makes Ar. ghurfat a synonym of chaukandī, the Farmāīsh seems likely to have had a cabin, open at the sides. De Courteille understood it to have a rounded stern. [Cf. E. & D.'s History of India v, 347, 503 n.; and Gul-badan's H. N. trs. p. 98, n. 2.]

[2570] mīndīn rukhṣat āldī; phrasing which bespeaks admitted equality, that of Tīmūrid birth.

[2571] i.e. subjects of the Afghān ruler of Bengal; many will have been Bihārīs and Pūrbiyas. Makhdūm-i-`ālam was Naṣrat Shāh's Governor in Ḥājīpūr.

[2572] This might imply that the Afghāns had been prevented from joining Maḥmūd Khān Lūdī near the Son.

[2573] Sl. Muḥammad Shāh Nūḥānī Afghān, the former ruler of Bihār, dead within a year. He had trained Farīd Khān Sūr in the management of government affairs; had given him, for gallant encounter with a tiger, the title Sher Khān by which, or its higher form Sher Shāh, history knows him, and had made him his young son's "deputy", an office Sher Khān held after the father's death in conjunction with the boy's mother Dūdū Bībī (Tārīkh-i-sher-shāhī, E. & D.'s History of India iv, 325 et seq.).

[2574] gūz bāghī yūsūnlūq; by which I understand they were held fast from departure, as e.g. a mouse by the fascination of a snake.

[2575] f. 365 mentions a letter which may have announced their intention.

[2576] Ganges; they thus evaded the restriction made good on other Afghāns.

[2577] Anglicé, Saturday 8th after 6 p.m.

[2578] The D. G. of Shāhābād (pp. 20 and 127) mentions that "it is said Bābur marched to Ārrah after his victory over Maḥmūd Lūdī", and that "local tradition still points to a place near the Judge's Court as that on which he pitched his camp".

[2579] Kharīd which is now a pargana of the Ballia district, lay formerly on both sides of the Ghogrā. When the army of Kharīd opposed Bābur's progress, it acted for Naṣrat Shāh, but this Bābur diplomatically ignored in assuming that there was peace between Bengal and himself.—At this time Naṣrat Shāh held the riverain on the left bank of the Ghogrā but had lost Kharīd of the right bank, which had been taken from him by Jūnaid Barlās. A record of his occupation still survives in Kharīd-town, an inscription dated by his deputy as for 1529 AD. (District Gazetteer of Ballia H. R. Nevill), and D. G. of Sāran (L. L. S. O'Malley), Historical Chapters.

[2580] Bābur's opinion of Naṣrat Shāh's hostility is more clearly shewn here than in the verbal message of f. 369.

[2581] This will be an unceremonious summary of a word-of-mouth message.

[2582] Cf. f. 366_b_, p. 661 n. 2.

[2583] This shews that Bābur did not recognize the Sāran riverain down to the Ganges as belonging to Kharīd. His offered escort of Turks would safe-guard the Kharīdīs if they returned to the right bank of the Ghogrā which was in Turk possession.

[2584] The Ḥai. MS. has wālī, clearly written; which, as a word representing Māhīm would suit the sentence best, may make playful reference to her royal commands (f. 361_b_), by styling her the Governor (wālī). Erskine read the word as a place-name Dipālī, which I have not found; De Courteille omits Ilminsky's w:ras (p. 478). The MSS. vary and are uncertain.

[2585] This is the "Kadjar" of Réclus' L'Asie antérieure and is the name of the Turkmān tribe to which the present ruling house of Persia belongs. "Turkmān" might be taken as applied to Shāh T̤aḥmāsp by Dīv Sulṯān's servant on f. 354.

[2586] Nelumbium speciosum, a water-bean of great beauty.

[2587] Shaikh Yaḥyā had been the head of the Chishtī Order. His son (d. 782 AH.-1380-1 AD.) was the author of works named by Abū'l-faẓl as read aloud to Akbar, a discursive detail which pleads in my excuse that those who know Bābur well cannot but see in his grandson's character and success the fruition of his mental characteristics and of his labours in Hindūstān. (For Sharafu'd-dīn Munīrī, cf. Khazīnatu'l-asfiyā ii, 390-92; and Āyīn-i-akbarī s.n.)

[2588] Kostenko's Turkistān Region describes a regimen for horses which Bābur will have seen in practice in his native land, one which prevented the defect that hindered his at Munīr from accomplishing more than some 30 miles before mid-day.

[2589] The distance from Munīr to the bank of the Ganges will have been considerably longer in Bābur's day than now because of the change of the river's course through its desertion of the Burh-gangā channel (cf. next note).

[2590] In trying to locate the site of Bābur's coming battle with the forces of Naṣrat Shāh, it should be kept in mind that previous to the 18th century, and therefore, presumably, in his day, the Ganges flowed in the "Burh-ganga" (Old Ganges) channel which now is closely followed by the western boundary of the Ballia pargana of Dū-āba; that the Ganges and Ghogrā will have met where this old channel entered the bed of the latter river; and also, as is seen from Bābur's narrative, that above the confluence the Ghogrā will have been confined to a narrowed channel. When the Ganges flowed in the Burh-ganga channel, the now Ballia pargana of Dū-āba was a sub-division of Bihiya and continuous with Shāhābād. From it in Bihiya Bābur crossed the Ganges into Kharīd, doing this at a place his narrative locates as some 2 miles from the confluence. Cf. D. G. of Ballia, pp. 9, 192-3, 206, 213. It may be observed that the former northward extension of Bihiya to the Burh-ganga channel explains Bābur's estimate (f. 370) of the distance from Munīr to his camp on the Ganges; his 12_k._ (24m.) may then have been correct; it is now too high.

[2591] De Courteille, pierrier, which may be a balista. Bābur's writings give no indication of other than stone-ammunition for any projectile-engine or fire-arm. Cf. R. W. F. Payne-Gallwey's Projectile-throwing engines of the ancients.

[2592] Sir R. W. F. Payne-Gallwey writes in The Cross-bow (p. 40 and p. 41) what may apply to Bābur's ẓarb-zan (culverin?) and tufang (matchlock), when he describes the larger culverin as a heavy hand-gun of from 16-18lb., as used by the foot-soldier and requiring the assistance of an attendant to work it; also when he says that it became the portable arquebus which was in extensive use in Europe by the Swiss in 1476 AD.; and that between 1510 and 1520 the arquebus described was superseded by what is still seen amongst remote tribes in India, a matchlock arquebus.

[2593] The two positions Bābur selected for his guns would seem to have been opposite two ferry-heads, those, presumably, which were blocked against his pursuit of Bīban and Bāyazīd. `Alī-qulī's emplacement will have been on the high bank of old alluvium of south-eastern Kharīd, overlooking the narrowed channel demanded by Bābur's narrative, one pent in presumably by kankar reefs such as there are in the region. As illustrating what the channel might have been, the varying breadth of the Ghogrā along the `Azamgarh District may be quoted, viz. from 10 miles to 2/5m., the latter being where, as in Kharīd, there is old alluvium with kankar reefs preserving the banks. Cf. Reid's Report of Settlement Operations in `Azamgarh, Sikandarpur, and Bhadaon.—Firishta gives Badrū as the name of one ferry (lith. ed. i. 210).

[2594] Muṣṯafa, like `Alī-qulī, was to take the offensive by gun-fire directed on the opposite bank. Judging from maps and also from the course taken by the Ganges through the Burh-ganga channel and from Bābur's narrative, there seems to have been a narrow reach of the Ghogrā just below the confluence, as well as above.

[2595] This ferry, bearing the common name Haldī (turmeric), is located by the course of events as at no great distance above the enemy's encampment above the confluence. It cannot be the one of Sikandarpūr West.

[2596] guẕr, which here may mean a casual ford through water low just before the Rains. As it was not found, it will have been temporary.

[2597] i.e. above Bābur's positions.

[2598] sarwar (or dar) waqt.

[2599] The preceding sentence is imperfect and varies in the MSS. The 1st Pers. trs., the wording of which is often explanatory, says that there were no passages, which, as there were many ferries, will mean fords. The Haldī-guẕr where `Askarī was to cross, will have been far below the lowest Bābur mentions, viz. Chatur-mūk (Chaupāra).

[2600] This passage presupposes that guns in Kharīd could hit the hostile camp in Sāran. If the river narrowed here as it does further north, the Ghāzī mortar, which seems to have been the only one Bābur had with him, would have carried across, since it threw a stone 1,600 paces (qadam, f. 309). Cf. Reid's Report quoted above.

[2601] Anglicé, Saturday after 6p.m.

[2602] yaqīn būlghān fauj, var. ta`īn būlghān fauj, the army appointed (to cross). The boats will be those collected at the Haldī-ferry, and the army `Askarī's.

[2603] i.e. near `Alī-qulī's emplacement.

[2604] Cf. f. 303, f. 309, f. 337 and n. 4.

[2605] "The yasāwal is an officer who carries the commands of the prince, and sees them enforced" (Erskine). Here he will have been the superintendent of coolies moving earth.

[2606] ma`jūn-nāk which, in these days of Bābur's return to obedience, it may be right to translate in harmony with his psychical outlook of self-reproach, by ma`jūn-polluted. Though he had long ceased to drink wine, he still sought cheer and comfort, in his laborious days, from inspiriting and forbidden confections.

[2607] Probably owing to the less precise phrasing of his Persian archetype, Erskine here has reversed the statement, made in the Turkī, that Bābur slept in the Asāīsh (not the Farmāīsh).

[2608] aūstīdā tāshlār. An earlier reading of this, viz. that stones were thrown on the intruder is negatived by Bābur's mention of wood as the weapon used.

[2609] sū sārī which, as the boats were between an island and the river's bank, seems likely to mean that the man went off towards the main stream. Mems. p. 415, "made his escape in the river"; Méms. ii, 418, dans la direction du large.

[2610] This couplet is quoted by Jahāngīr also (Tūzūk, trs. Rogers & Beveridge, i, 348).

[2611] This, taken with the positions of other crossing-parties, serves to locate `Askarī's "Haldī-passage" at no great distance above `Alī-qulī's emplacement at the confluence, and above the main Bengal force.

[2612] perhaps, towed from the land. I have not found Bābur using any word which clearly means to row, unless indeed a later rawān does so. The force meant to cross in the boats taken up under cover of night was part of Bābur's own, no doubt.

[2613] ātīsh-bāzī lit. fire-playing, if a purely Persian compound; if ātīsh be Turkī, it means discharge, shooting. The word "fire-working" is used above under the nearest to contemporary guidance known to me, viz. that of the list of persons who suffered in the Patna massacre "during the troubles of October 1763 AD.", in which list are the names of four Lieutenants fire-workers (Calcutta Review, Oct. 1884, and Jan. 1885, art. The Patna Massacre, H. Beveridge).

[2614] bī tahāshī, without protest or demur.

[2615] Anglicé, Wednesday after 6 p.m.

[2616] Perhaps those which had failed to pass in the darkness; perhaps those from Haldī-guẕr, which had been used by `Askarī's troops. There appear to be obvious reasons for their keeping abreast on the river with the troops in Sāran, in order to convey reinforcements or to provide retreat.

[2617] kīmalār aūstīdā, which may mean that he came, on the high bank, to where the boats lay below.

[2618] as in the previous note, kīmalār aūstīdā. These will have been the few drawn up-stream along the enemy's front.

[2619] The reproach conveyed by Bābur's statement is borne out by the strictures of Ḥaidar Mīrzā Dūghlāt on Bābā Sulṯān's neglect of duty (Tārīkh-ī-rashīdī trs. cap. lxxvii).

[2620] yūsūnlūq tūshī, Pers. trss. ṯarf khūd, i.e. their place in the array, a frequent phrase.

[2621] dastak bīla dosta-i-qāmīsh bīla. Cf. f. 363_b_ and f. 366_b_, for passages and notes connected with swimming and dastak. Erskine twice translates dastak bīla by swimming; but here de Courteille changes from his earlier à la nage (f. 366_b_) to appuyés sur une pièce de bois. Perhaps the swift current was crossed by swimming with the support of a bundle of reeds, perhaps on rafts made of such bundles (cf. Illustrated London News, Sep. 16th, 1916, for a picture of Indian soldiers so crossing on rafts).

[2622] perhaps they were in the Burh-ganga channel, out of gun-fire.

[2623] If the Ghogrā flowed at this point in a narrow channel, it would be the swifter, and less easy to cross than where in an open bed.

[2624] chīrīk-aīlī, a frequent compound, but one of which the use is better defined in the latter than the earlier part of Bābur's writings to represent what then answered to an Army Service Corps. This corps now crosses into Sāran and joins the fighting force.

[2625] This appears to refer to the crossing effected before the fight.

[2626] or Kūndbah. I have not succeeded in finding this name in the Nirhun pargana; it may have been at the southern end, near the "Domaigarh" of maps. In it was Tīr-mūhānī, perhaps a village (f. 377, f. 381).

[2627] This passage justifies Erskine's surmise (Memoirs, p. 411, n. 4) that the Kharīd-country lay on both banks of the Ghogrā. His further surmise that, on the east bank of the Ghogrā, it extended to the Ganges would be correct also, since the Ganges flowed, in Bābur's day, through the Burh-ganga (Old Ganges) channel along the southern edge of the present Kharīd, and thus joined the Ghogrā higher than it now does.

[2628] Bāyazīd and Ma`rūf Farmūlī were brothers. Bāyazīd had taken service with Bābur in 932 AH. (1526 AD.), left him in 934 AH. (end of 1527 AD.) and opposed him near Qanūj. Ma`rūf, long a rebel against Ibrāhīm Lūdī, had never joined Bābur; two of his sons did so; of the two, Muḥammad and Mūsa, the latter may be the one mentioned as at Qanūj, "Ma`rūf's son" (f. 336).—For an interesting sketch of Ma`rūf's character and for the location in Hindūstān of the Farmūlī clan, see the Wāqi`āt-i-mushtāqī, E. & D.'s History of India, iv, 584.—In connection with Qanūj, the discursive remark may be allowable, that Bābur's halt during the construction of the bridge of boats across the Ganges in 934 AH. is still commemorated by the name Bādshāh-nagar of a village between Bangarmau and Nānāmau (Elliot's Onau, p. 45).

[2629] On f. 381 `Abdu'l-lāh's starting-place is mentioned as Tīr-mūhānī.

[2630] The failure to join would be one of the evils predicted by the dilatory start of the ladies from Kābul (f. 360_b_).

[2631] The order for these operations is given on f. 355_b_.

[2632] f. 369. The former Nūḥānī chiefs are now restored to Bihār as tributaries of Bābur.

[2633] Erskine estimated the krūr at about £25,000, and the 50 laks at about £12,500.

[2634] The Mīrzā thus supersedes Junaid Barlās in Jūnpūr.—The form Jūnapūr used above and elsewhere by Bābur and his Persian translators, supports the Gazetteer of India xlv, 74 as to the origin of the name Jūnpūr.

[2635] a son of Naṣrat Shāh. No record of this earlier legation is with the Bābur-nāma manuscripts; probably it has been lost. The only article found specified is the one asking for the removal of the Kharīd army from a ferry-head Bābur wished to use; Naṣrat Shāh's assent to this is an anti-climax to Bābur's victory on the Ghogrā.

[2636] Chaupāra is at the Sāran end of the ferry, at the Sikandarpūr one is Chatur-mūk (Four-faces, an epithet of Brahma and Vishnu).

[2637] It may be inferred from the earlier use of the phrase Gogar (or Gagar) and Sarū (Sīrū or Sīrd), on f. 338-8_b_, that whereas the rebels were, earlier, for crossing Sarū only, i.e. the Ghogrā below its confluence with the Sarda, they had now changed for crossing above the confluence and further north. Such a change is explicable by desire to avoid encounter with Bābur's following, here perhaps the army of Aūd, and the same desire is manifested by their abandonment of a fort captured (f. 377_b_) some days before the rumour reached Bābur of their crossing Sarū and Gogar.—Since translating the passage on f. 338, I have been led, by enforced attention to the movement of the confluence of Ghogrā with Ganges (Sarū with Gang) to see that that translation, eased in obedience to distances shewn in maps, may be wrong and that Bābur's statement that he dismounted 2-3 kurohs (4-6 m.) above Aūd at the confluence of Gogar with Sarū, may have some geographical interest and indicate movement of the two affluents such e.g. as is indicated of the Ganges and Ghogrā by tradition and by the name Burh-ganga (cf. f. 370, p. 667, n. 2).

[2638] or L:knūr, perhaps Liknū or Liknūr. The capricious variation in the MSS. between L:knū and L:knūr makes the movements of the rebels difficult to follow. Comment on these variants, tending to identify the places behind the words, is grouped in Appendix T, On L:knū (Lakhnau) and L:knūr (Lakhnār).

[2639] Taking guẕr in the sense it has had hitherto in the Bābur-nāma of ferry or ford, the detachment may have been intended to block the river-crossings of "Sarū and Gogar". If so, however, the time for this was past, the rebels having taken a fort west of those rivers on Ramẓān 13th. Nothing further is heard of the detachment.—That news of the rebel-crossing of the rivers did not reach Bābur before the 18th and news of their capture of L:knū or L:knūr before the 19th may indicate that they had crossed a good deal to the north of the confluence, and that the fort taken was one more remote than Lakhnau (Oude). Cf. Appendix T.

[2640] Anglicé, Wednesday after 6 p.m.

[2641] These are recited late in the night during Ramẓān.

[2642] kaghaẕ u ajzā', perhaps writing-paper and the various sections of the Bābur-nāma writings, viz. biographical notices, descriptions of places, detached lengths of diary, farmāns of Shaikh Zain. The lacunae of 934 AH., 935 AH., and perhaps earlier ones also may be attributed reasonably to this storm. It is easy to understand the loss of e.g. the conclusion of the Farghāna section, and the diary one of 934 AH., if they lay partly under water. The accident would be better realized in its disastrous results to the writings, if one knew whether Bābur wrote in a bound or unbound volume. From the minor losses of 935 AH., one guesses that the current diary at least had not reached the stage of binding.

[2643] The tūnglūq is a flap in a tent-roof, allowing light and air to enter, or smoke to come out.

[2644] ajzā' u kitāb. See last note but one. The kitāb (book) might well be Bābur's composed narrative on which he was now working, as far as it had then gone towards its untimely end (Ḥai. MS. f. 216_b_).

[2645] saqarlāṯ kut-zīlūcha, where saqarlāṯ will mean warm and woollen.

[2646] Kharīd-town is some 4 m. s.e. of the town of Sikandarpūr.

[2647] or L:knū. Cf. Appendix T. It is now 14 days since `Abdu'l-lāh kitābdār had left Tīr-mūhānī (f. 380) for Saṃbhal; as he was in haste, there had been time for him to go beyond Aūd (where Bāqī was) and yet get the news to Bābur on the 19th.

[2648] In a way not usual with him, Bābur seems to apply three epithets to this follower, viz. mīng-begī, shaghāwal, Tāshkīndī (Index s.n.).

[2649] or Kandla; cf. Revenue list f. 293; is it now Sāran Khāṣ?

[2650] £18,000 (Erskine). For the total yield of Kundla (or Kandla) and Sarwār, see Revenue list (f. 293).

[2651] f. 375. P. 675 n. 2 and f. 381, p. 687 n. 3.

[2652] A little earlier Bābur has recorded his ease of mind about Bihār and Bengal, the fruit doubtless of his victory over Maḥmūd Lūdī and Naṣrat Shāh; he now does the same about Bihār and Sarwār, no doubt because he has replaced in Bihār, as his tributaries, the Nūḥānī chiefs and has settled other Afghāns, Jalwānīs and Farmūlīs in a Sarwār cleared of the Jalwānī (?) rebel Bīban and the Farmūlī opponents Bāyazīd and Ma`rūf. The Farmūlī Shaikh-zādas, it may be recalled, belonged by descent to Bābur's Kābul district of Farmūl.—The Wāqi`āt-i-mushtāqī (E. & D.'s H. of I. iv, 548) details the position of the clan under Sikandar Lūdī.

[2653] The MSS. write Fatḥpūr but Natḥpūr suits the context, a pargana mentioned in the Āyīn-i-akbarī and now in the `Azamgarh district. There seems to be no Fatḥpūr within Bābur's limit of distance. The D. G. of `Azamgarh mentions two now insignificant Fatḥpūrs, one as having a school, the other a market. The name G:l:r:h (K:l:r:h) I have not found.

[2654] The passage contained in this section seems to be a survival of the lost record of 934 AH. (f. 339). I have found it only in the Memoirs p. 420, and in Mr. Erskine's own Codex of the Wāqi`āt-i-bāburī (now B.M. Add. 26,200), f. 371 where however several circumstances isolate it from the context. It may be a Persian translation of an authentic Turkī fragment, found, perhaps with other such fragments, in the Royal Library. Its wording disassociates it from the `Abdu'r-raḥīm text. The Codex (No. 26,200) breaks off at the foot of a page (supra, Fatḥpūr) with a completed sentence. The supposedly-misplaced passage is entered on the next folio as a sort of ending of the Bābur-nāma writings; in a rough script, inferior to that of the Codex, and is followed by Tam, tam (Finis), and an incomplete date 98-, in words. Beneath this a line is drawn, on which is subtended the triangle frequent with scribes; within this is what seems to be a completion of the date to 980 AH. and a pious wish, scrawled in an even rougher hand than the rest.—Not only in diction and in script but in contents also the passage is a misfit where it now stands; it can hardly describe a village on the Sarū; Bābur in 935 AH. did not march for Ghāzīpūr but may have done so in 934 AH. (p. 656, n. 3); Ismā`īl Jalwānī had had leave given already in 935 AH. (f. 377) under other conditions, ones bespeaking more trust and tried allegiance.—Possibly the place described as having fine buildings, gardens etc. is Aūd (Ajodhya) where Bābur spent some days in 934 AH. (cf. f. 363_b_, p. 655 n. 3).

[2655] "Here my Persian manuscript closes" (This is B.M. Add. 26,200). "The two additional fragments are given from Mr. Metcalfe's manuscript alone" (now B.M. Add. 26,202) "and unluckily, it is extremely incorrect" (Erskine). This note will have been written perhaps a decade before 1826, in which year the Memoirs of Bābur was published, after long delay. Mr. Erskine's own Codex (No. 26,200) was made good at a later date, perhaps when he was working on his History of India (pub. 1854), by a well-written supplement which carries the diary to its usual end s.a. 936 AH. and also gives Persian translations of Bābur's letters to Humāyūn and Khwāja Kalān.

[2656] Here, as earlier, Natḥpūr suits the context better than Fatḥpūr. In the Natḥpūr pargana, at a distance from Chaupāra approximately suiting Bābur's statement of distance, is the lake "Tal Ratoi", formerly larger and deeper than now. There is a second further west and now larger than Tal Ratoi; through this the Ghogrā once flowed, and through it has tried within the last half-century to break back. These changes in Tal Ratoi and in the course of the Ghogrā dictate caution in attempting to locate places which were on it in Bābur's day e.g. K:l:r:h (supra).

[2657] Appendix T.

[2658] This name has the following variants in the Ḥai. MS. and in Kehr's:—Dalm-ū-ūū-ūr-ūd-ūṯ. The place was in Akbar's sarkār of Mānikpūr and is now in the Rai Bareilly district.

[2659] Perhaps Chaksar, which was in Akbar's sarkār of Jūnpūr, and is now in the `Azamgarh district.

[2660] Ḥai. MS. J:nāra khūnd tawābī sī bīla (perhaps tawābī`sī but not so written). The obscurity of these words is indicated by their variation in the manuscripts. Most scribes have them as Chunār and Jūnpūr, guided presumably by the despatch of a force to Chunār on receipt of the news, but another force was sent to Dalmau at the same time. The rebels were defeated s.w. of Dalmau and thence went to Mahūba; it is not certain that they had crossed the Ganges at Dalmau; there are difficulties in supposing the fort they captured and abandoned was Lakhnau (Oude); they might have gone south to near Kālpī and Ādampūr, which are at no great distance from where they were defeated by Bāqī shaghāwal, if Lakhnūr (now Shahābād in Rāmpūr) were the fort. (Cf. Appendix T.)—To take up the interpretation of the words quoted above, at another point, that of the kinsfolk or fellow-Afghāns the rebels planned to join:—these kinsfolk may have been, of Bāyazīd, the Farmūlīs in Sarwār, and of Bīban, the Jalwānīs of the same place. The two may have trusted to relationship for harbourage during the Rains, disloyal though they were to their kinsmen's accepted suzerain. Therefore if they were once across Ganges and Jumna, as they were in Mahūba, they may have thought of working eastwards south of the Ganges and of getting north into Sarwār through territory belonging to the Chunār and Jūnpūr governments. This however is not expressed by the words quoted above; perhaps Bābur's record was hastily and incompletely written.—Another reading may be Chunār and Jaund (in Akbar's sarkār of Rohtās).

[2661] yūlīinī tūshqāīlār. It may be observed concerning the despatch of Muḥammad-i-zamān M. and of Junaid Barlās that they went to their new appointments Jūnpūr and Chunār respectively; that their doing so was an orderly part of the winding-up of Bābur's Eastern operations; that they remained as part of the Eastern garrison, on duty apart from that of blocking the road of Bīban and Bāyazīd.

[2662] This mode of fishing is still practised in India (Erskine).

[2663] Islāmicé, Saturday night; Anglicé, Friday after 6 p.m.

[2664] This Tūs, "Tousin, or Tons, is a branch from the Ghogrā coming off above Faizābād and joining the Sarju or Parsarū below `Azamgarh" (Erskine).

[2665] Kehr's MS. p. 1132, Māng (or Mānk); Ḥai. MS. Tāīk; I.O. 218 f. 328 Bā:k; I.O. 217 f. 236_b_, Bīāk. Māīng in the Sulṯānpūr district seems suitably located (_D.G. of Sulṯānpūr_, p. 162).

[2666] This will be the night-guard (`asas); the librarian (kitābdār) is in Saṃbhal. I.O. 218 f. 325 inserts kitābdār after `Abdu'l-lāh's name where he is recorded as sent to Saṃbhal (f. 375).

[2667] He will have announced to Tāj Khān the transfer of the fort to Junaid Barlās.

[2668] £3750. Parsarūr was in Akbar's ṣūbah of Lāhor; G. of I. xx, 23, Pasrūr.

[2669] The estimate may have been made by measurement (f. 356) or by counting a horse's steps (f. 370). Here the Ḥai. MS. and Kehr's have D:lmūd, but I.O. 218 f. 328_b_ (D:lmūū).

[2670] As on f. 361_b_, so here, Bābur's wording tends to locate Ādampūr on the right (west) bank of the Jumna.

[2671] Ḥai. MS. aūta, presumably for aūrta; Kehr's p. 1133, Aūd-dāghī, which, as Bāqī led the Aūd army, is ben trovato; both Persian translations, mīāngānī, central, inner, i.e. aūrta, perhaps household troops of the Centre.

[2672] Anglicé, Saturday 12th after 6 p.m.

[2673] In Akbar's sarkār of Kālanjar, now in the Hamirpūr district.

[2674] £7500 (Erskine). Amrohā is in the Morādābād district.

[2675] At the Chaupāra-Chaturmūk ferry (f. 376).—Corrigendum:—In the Index of the Bābur-nāma Facsimile, Mūsa Farmūlī and Mūsa Sl. are erroneously entered as if one man.

[2676] i.e. riding light and fast. The distance done between Ādampūr and Āgra was some 157 miles, the time was from 12 a.m. on Tuesday morning to about 9 p.m. of Thursday. This exploit serves to show that three years of continuous activity in the plains of Hindūstān had not destroyed Bābur's capacity for sustained effort, spite of several attacks of (malarial?) fever.

[2677] Anglicé, Tuesday 12.25 a.m.

[2678] He was governor of Etāwa.

[2679] Islamicé, Friday, Shawwāl 18th, Anglicé, Thursday, June 24th, soon after 9 p.m.

[2680] Anglicé, she arrived at mid-night of Saturday.—Gul-badan writes of Māhīm's arrival as unexpected and of Bābur's hurrying off on foot to meet her (Humāyūn-nāma f. 14, trs. p. 100).

[2681] Māhīm's journey from Kābul to Āgra had occupied over 5 months.

[2682] Hindū Beg qūchīn had been made Humāyūn's retainer in 932 AH. (f. 297), and had taken possession of Saṃbhal for him. Hence, as it seems, he was ordered, while escorting the ladies from Kābul, to go to Saṃbhal. He seems to have gone before waiting on Bābur, probably not coming into Āgra till now.—It may be noted here that in 933 AH. he transformed a Hindū temple into a Mosque in Saṃbhal; it was done by Bābur's orders and is commemorated by an inscription still existing on the Mosque, one seeming not to be of his own composition, judging by its praise of himself. (JASB. Proceedings, May 1873, p. 98, Blochmann's art. where the inscription is given and translated; and Archæological Survey Reports, xii, p. 24-27, with Plates showing the Mosque).

[2683] Cf. f. 375, f. 377, with notes concerning `Abdu'l-lāh and Tīr-mūhānī. I have not found the name Tīr-mūhānī on maps; its position can be inferred from Bābur's statement (f. 375) that he had sent `Abdu'l-lāh to Saṃbhal, he being then at Kunba or Kunīa in the Nurhun pargana.—The name Tīr-mūhānī occurs also in Gorakhpūr.—It was at Tīr-mūhānī (Three-mouths) that Khwānd-amīr completed the Ḥabībū's-siyar (lith. ed. i, 83; Rieu's Pers. Cat. p. 1079). If the name imply three water-mouths, they might be those of Ganges, Ghogrā and Dāhā.

[2684] nīm-kāra. E. and de C. however reverse the rôles.

[2685] The Tārīkh-i-gūālīārī (B.M. Add. 16, 709, p. 18) supplements the fragmentary accounts which, above and s.a. 936 AH., are all that the Bābur-nāma now preserves concerning Khwāja Rāḥīm-dād's misconduct. It has several mistakes but the gist of its information is useful. It mentions that the Khwāja and his paternal-uncle Mahdī Khwāja had displeased Bābur; that Raḥīm-dād resolved to take refuge with the ruler of Mālwā (Muḥammad Khīljī) and to make over Gūālīār to a Rājpūt landholder of that country; that upon this Shaikh Muḥammad Ghaus̤ went to Āgra and interceded with Bābur and obtained his forgiveness for Raḥīm-dād. Gūālīār was given back to Raḥīm-dād but after a time he was superseded by Abū'l-fatḥ [Shaikh Gūran]. For particulars about Mahdī Khwāja and a singular story told about him by Niẕāmu'd-dīn Aḥmad in the T̤abaqāt-i-akbarī, vide Gul-badan's Ḥumāyūn-nāma, Appendix B, and Translator's Note p. 702, Section f.

[2686] He may have come about the misconduct of his nephew Raḥīm-dād.

[2687] The `Īdu'l-kabīr, the Great Festival of 10th Ẕū'l-ḥijja.

[2688] About £1750 (Erskine).

[2689] Perhaps he was from the tract in Persia still called Chaghatāī Mountains. One Ibrāhīm Chaghatāī is mentioned by Bābur (f. 175b) with Turkmān begs who joined Ḥusain Bāī-qarā. This Ḥasan-i-`alī Chaghatāī may have come in like manner, with Murād the Turkmān envoy from `Irāq (f. 369 and n. 1).

[2690] Several incidents recorded by Gul-badan (writing half a century later) as following Māhīm's arrival in Āgra, will belong to the record of 935 AH. because they preceded Humāyūn's arrival from Badakhshān. Their omission from Bābur's diary is explicable by its minor lacunæ. Such are:—(1) a visit to Dhūlpūr and Sīkrī the interest of which lies in its showing that Bībī Mubārika had accompanied Māhīm Begīm to Āgra from Kābul, and that there was in Sīkrī a quiet retreat, a chaukandī, where Bābur "used to write his book";—(2) the arrival of the main caravan of ladies from Kābul, which led Bābur to go four miles out, to Naugrām, in order to give honouring reception to his sister Khān-ẓāda Begīm;—(3) an excursion to the Gold-scattering garden (Bāgh-i-zar-afshān), where seated among his own people, Bābur said he was "bowed down by ruling and reigning", longed to retire to that garden with a single attendant, and wished to make over his sovereignty to Humāyūn;—(4) the death of Dil-dār's son Alwār (var. Anwār) whose birth may be assigned to the gap preceding 932 AH. because not chronicled later by Bābur, as is Farūq's. As a distraction from the sorrow for this loss, a journey was "pleasantly made by water" to Dhūlpūr.

[2691] Cf. f. 381b n. 2. For his earlier help to Raḥīm-dād see f. 304. For Biographies of him see Blochmann's A.-i-A. trs. p. 446, and Badāyūnī's Muntakhabu-'t-tawārīkh (Ranking's and Lowe's trss.).

[2692] Beyond this broken passage, one presumably at the foot of a page in Bābur's own manuscript, nothing of his diary is now known to survive. What is missing seems likely to have been written and lost. It is known from a remark of Gul-badan's (H.N. p. 103) that he "used to write his book" after Māhīm's arrival in Āgra, the place coming into her anecdote being Sīkrī.

[2693] Jauhar's Humāyūn-nāma and Bāyazīd Bīyāt's work of the same title were written under the same royal command as the Begīm's. They contribute nothing towards filling the gap of 936 AH.; their authors, being Humāyūn's servants, write about him. It may be observed that criticism of these books, as recording trivialities, is disarmed if they were commanded because they would obey an order to set down whatever was known, selection amongst their contents resting with Abū'l-faẓl. Even more completely must they be excluded from a verdict on the literary standard of their day.—Abū'l-faẓl must have had a source of Bāburiana which has not found its way into European libraries. A man likely to have contributed his recollections, directly or transmitted, is Khwāja Muqīm Harāwī. The date of Muqīm's death is conjectural only, but he lived long enough to impress the worth of historical writing on his son Niẕāmu'-d-dīn Aḥmad. (Cf. E. and D.'s H. of I. art. T̤abaqāt-i-akbarī v, 177 and 187; T̤.-i-A. lith. ed. p. 193; and for Bāyazīd Bīyāt's work, JASB. 1898, p. 296.)

[2694] Ibn Batuta (Lee's trs. p. 133) mentions that after his appointment to Gūālīār, Raḥīm-dād fell from favour ... but was restored later, on the representation of Muḥammad Ghaus̤; held Gūālīār again for a short time, (he went to Bahādur Shāh in Gujrāt) and was succeeded by Abū'l-fatḥ (i.e. Shaikh Gūran) who held it till Bābur's death.

[2695] Its translation and explanatory noting have filled two decades of hard-working years. Tanti labores auctoris et traductoris!

[2696] I am indebted to my husband for acquaintance with Niẕāmu'-d-dīn Aḥmad's record about Bābur and Kashmīr.

[2697] In view of the vicissitudes to which under Humāyūn the royal library was subjected, it would be difficult to assert that this source was not the missing continuation of Bābur's diary.

[2698] E. and D.'s H. of I. art. Tārīkh-i Khān-i-jahān Lūdī v, 67. For Aḥmad-i-yādgār's book and its special features vide l.c. v, 2, 24, with notes; Rieu's Persian Catalogue iii, 922_a_; JASB. 1916, H. Beveridge's art. Note on the Tārīkh-i-salāṯīn-i-afāghana.

[2699] Humāyūn's last recorded act in Hindūstān was that of 933 AH. (f. 329_b_) when he took unauthorized possession of treasure in Dihlī.

[2700] Tārīkh-i-rashīdī trs. p. 387.

[2701] T.-i-R. trs. p. 353 et seq. and Mr. Ney Elias' notes.

[2702] Abū'l-faẓl's record of Humāyūn's sayings and minor doings at this early date in his career, can hardly be anything more accurate than family-tradition.

[2703] The statement that Khalīfa was asked to go so far from where he was of the first importance as an administrator, leads to consideration of why it was done. So little is known explicitly of Bābur's intentions about his territories after his death that it is possible only to put that little together and read between its lines. It may be that he was now planning an immediate retirement to Kābul and an apportionment during life of his dominions, such as Abū-sa`īd had made of his own. If so, it would be desirable to have Badakhshān held in strength such as Khalīfa's family could command, and especially desirable because as Barlās Turks, that family would be one with Bābur in desire to regain Transoxiana. Such a political motive would worthily explain the offer of the appointment.

[2704] The "Shāh" of this style is derived from Sulaimān's Badakhshī descent through Shāh Begīm; the "Mīrzā" from his Mīrān-shāhī descent through his father Wais Khān Mīrzā. The title Khān Mīrzā or Mīrzā Khān, presumably according to the outlook of the speaker, was similarly derived from forbears, as would be also Shāh Begīm's; (her personal name is not mentioned in the sources).

[2705] Sa`īd, on the father's, and Bābur, on the mother's side, were of the same generation in descent from Yūnas Khān; Sulaimān was of a younger one, hence his pseudo-filial relation to the men of the elder one.

[2706] Sa`īd was Shāh Begīm's grandson through her son Aḥmad, Sulaimān her great-grandson through her daughter Sulṯān-Nigār, but Sulaimān could claim also as the heir of his father who was nominated to rule by Shāh Begīm; moreover, he could claim by right of conquest on the father's side, through Abū-sa`īd the conqueror, his son Maḥmūd long the ruler, and so through Maḥmūd's son Wais Khān Mīrzā.

[2707] The menace conveyed by these words would be made the more forceful by Bābur's move to Lāhor, narrated by Aḥmad-i-yādgār. Some ill-result to Sa`īd of independent rule by Sulaimān seems foreshadowed; was it that if Bābur's restraining hand were withdrawn, the Badakhshīs would try to regain their lost districts and would have help in so-doing from Bābur?

[2708] It is open to conjecture that if affairs in Hindūstān had allowed it, Bābur would now have returned to Kābul. Aḥmad-i-yādgār makes the expedition to be one for pleasure only, and describes Bābur as hunting and sight-seeing for a year in Lāhor, the Panj-āb and near Dihlī. This appears a mere flourish of words, in view of the purposes the expedition served, and of the difficulties which had arisen in Lāhor itself and with Sa`īd Khān. Part of the work effected may have been the despatch of an expedition to Kashmīr.

[2709] This appears a large amount.

[2710] The precision with which the Rāja's gifts are stated, points to a closely-contemporary and written source. A second such indication occurs later where gifts made to Hind-āl are mentioned.

[2711] An account of the events in Multān after its occupation by Shāh Ḥasan Arghūn is found in the latter part of the T̤abaqāt-i-akbarī and in Erskine's H. of I. i, 393 et seq.—It may be noted here that several instances of confusion amongst Bābur's sons occur in the extracts made by Sir H. Elliot and Professor Dowson in their History of India from the less authoritative sources [e.g. v, 35 Kāmrān for Humāyūn, `Askarī said to be in Kābul (pp. 36 and 37); Hind-āl for Humāyūn etc.] and that these errors have slipped into several of the District Gazetteers of the United Provinces.

[2712] As was said of the offering made by the Rāja of Kahlūr, the precision of statement as to what was given to Hind-āl, bespeaks a closely-contemporary written source. So too does the mention (text, infra) of the day on which Bābur began his return journey from Lāhor.

[2713] Cf. G. of I. xvi, 55; Ibbetson's Report on Karnāl.

[2714] It is noticeable that no one of the three royal officers named as sent against Mohan Mundāhir, is recognizable as mentioned in the Bābur-nāma. They may all have had local commands, and not have served further east. Perhaps this, their first appearance, points to the origin of the information as independent of Bābur, but he might have been found to name them, if his diary were complete for 936 AH.

[2715] The E. and D. translation writes twice as though the inability to "pull" the bows were due to feebleness in the men, but an appropriate reading would refer the difficulty to the hardening of sinews in the composite Turkish bows, which prevented the archers from bending the bows for stringing.

[2716] One infers that fires were burned all night in the bivouac.

[2717] At this point the A.S.B. copy (No. 137) of the Tārīkh-i-salāṯin-i-afāghana has a remark which may have been a marginal note originally, and which cannot be supposed made by Aḥmad-i-yādgār himself because this would allot him too long a spell of life. It may show however that the interpolations about the two Tīmūrids were not inserted in his book by him. Its purport is that the Mundāhir village destroyed by Bābur's troops in 936 AH.-1530 AD. was still in ruins at the time it was written 160 (lunar) years later (i.e. in 1096 AH.-1684-85 AD.). The better Codex (No. 3887) of the Imperial Library of Calcutta has the same passage.—Both that remark and its context show acquaintance with Samāna and Kaithal.—The writings now grouped under the title Tārīkh-i-salāṯīn-i-afāghana present difficulties both as to date and contents (cf. Rieu's Persian Catalogue s. n.).

[2718] Presumably in Tihrind.

[2719] Cf. G. B.'s H. N. trs. and the Akbar-nāma Bib. Ind. ed. and trs., Index s.nn.; Hughes' Dictionary of Islām s.n. Intercession.

[2720] A closer translation would be, "I have taken up the burden." The verb is bardāshtan (cf. f. 349, p. 626 n. 1).

[2721] See Erskine's History of India ii, 9.

[2722] At this point attention is asked to the value of the Aḥmad-i-yādgār interpolation which allows Bābur a year of active life before Humāyūn's illness and his own which followed. With no chronicle known of 936 AH. Bābur had been supposed ill all through the year, a supposition which destroys the worth of his self-sacrifice. Moreover several inferences have been drawn from the supposed year of illness which are disproved by the activities recorded in that interpolation.

[2723] E. and D.'s History of India v, 187; G. B.'s Humāyūn-nāma trs. p. 28.

[2724] dar khidmat-i-dīwānī-i-buyūtāt; perhaps he was a Barrack-officer. His appointment explains his attendance on Khalīfa.

[2725] Khalīfa prescribed for the sick Bābur.

[2726] khānwāda-i-bīgānah, perhaps, foreign dynasty.

[2727] From Saṃbhal; Gul-badan, by an anachronism made some 60 years later, writes Kālanjar, to which place Humāyūn moved 5 months after his accession.

[2728] I am indebted to my husband's perusal of Sayyid Aḥmad Khān's As̤ār-i-ṣanādīd (Dihlī ed. 1854 p. 37, and Lakhnau ed. 1895 pp. 40, 41) for information that, perhaps in 935 AH., Mahdī Khwāja set up a tall slab of white marble near Amīr Khusrau's tomb in Dihlī, which bears an inscription in praise of the poet, composed by that Shihābu'd-dīn the Enigmatist who reached Āgra with Khwānd-amīr in Muḥarram 935 AH. (f. 339_b_). The inscription gives two chronograms of Khusrau's death (725 AH.), mentions that Mahdī Khwāja was the creator of the memorial, and gives its date in the words, "The beautiful effort of Mahdī Khwāja."—The Dihlī ed. of the As̤ār-i-ṣanādīd depicts the slab with its inscription; the Lakhnau ed. depicts the tomb, may show the slab in sitû, and contains interesting matter by Sayyid Aḥmad Khān. The slab is mentioned without particulars in Murray's Hand-book to Bengal, p. 329.

[2729] Lee's Ibn Batuta p. 133 and Hirāman's Tārīkh-i-gūālīārī. Cf. G. B.'s Humāyūn-nāma trs. (1902 AD.), Appendix B.—Mahdī Khwāja.

[2730] In an anonymous Life of Shāh Ismā`īl Ṣafawī, Mahdī Khwāja [who may be a son of the Mūsa Khwāja mentioned by Bābur on f. 216] is described as being, in what will be 916-7 AH., Bābur's Dīwān-begī and as sent towards Bukhārā with 10,000 men. This was 29 years before the story calls him a young man. Even if the word jawān (young man) be read, as T. yīgīt is frequently to be read, in the sense of "efficient fighting man", Mahdī was over-age. Other details of the story, besides the word jawān, bespeak a younger man.

[2731] G. B.'s H. N. trs. p. 126; Ḥabību's-siyar, B. M. Add. 16,679 f. 370, l. 16, lith. ed. Sec. III. iii, 372 (where a clerical error makes Bābur give Māhdī two of his full-sisters in marriage).—Another yazna of Bābur was Khalīfā's brother Junaid Barlās, the husband of Shahr-bānū, a half-sister of Bābur.

[2732] Bābur, shortly before his death, married Gul-rang to Aīsān-tīmūr and Gul-chihra to Tūkhta-būghā Chaghatāī. Cf. post, Section h, Bābur's wives and children; and G. B.'s H. N. trs. Biographical Appendix s.nn. Dil-dār Begīm and Salīma Sulṯān Begīm Mirān-shāhi.

[2733] Cf. G. B.'s H. N. trs. p. 147.

[2734] She is the only adult daughter of a Tīmūrid mother named as being such by Bābur or Gul-badan, but various considerations incline to the opinion that Dil-dār Begīm also was a Tīmūrid, hence her three daughters, all named from the Rose, were so too. Cf. references of penultimate note.

[2735] It attaches interest to the Mīrzā that he can be taken reasonably as once the owner of the Elphinstone Codex (cf. JRAS. 1907, pp. 136 and 137).

[2736] Death did not threaten when this gift was made; life in Kābul was planned for.—Here attention is asked again to the value of Aḥmad-i-yādgār's Bāburiana for removing the impression set on many writers by the blank year 936 AH. that it was one of illness, instead of being one of travel, hunting and sight-seeing. The details of the activities of that year have the further value that they enhance the worth of Bābur's sacrifice of life.—Ḥaidar Mīrzā also fixes the date of the beginning of illness as 937 AH.

[2737] The author, or embroiderer, of that anonymous story did not know the Bābur-nāma well, or he would not have described Bābur as a wine-drinker after 933 AH. The anecdote is parallel with Niẕāmu'd-dīn Aḥmad's, the one explaining why the Mīrzā was selected, the other why the dāmād was dropped.

[2738] Bib. Ind. i, 341; Ranking's trs. p. 448.

[2739] The night-guard; perhaps Māhīm Begīm's brother (G. B.'s H. N. trs. pp. 27-8).

[2740] G. B.'s H. N. trs. f. 34_b_, p. 138; Jauhar's Memoirs of Humāyūn, Stewart's trs. p. 82.

[2741] Cf. G. B.'s H. N. trs. p. 216, Bio. App. s.n. Bega Begam.

[2742] f. 128, p. 200 n. 3. Cf. Appendix U.—Bābur's Gardens in and near Kābul.

[2743] Cf. H. H. Hayden's _Notes on some monuments in Afghānistān_, [Memoirs of the Asiatic Society of Bengal ii, 344]; and Journal asiatique 1888, M. J. Darmesteter's art. Inscriptions de Caboul.

[2744] ān, a demonstrative suggesting that it refers to an original inscription on the second, but now absent, upright slab, which presumably would bear Bābur's name.

[2745] Ruẓwān is the door-keeper of Paradise.

[2746] Particulars of the women mentioned by Bābur, Ḥaidar, Gul-badan and other writers of their time, can be seen in my Biographical Appendix to the Begīm's Humāyūn-nāma. As the Appendix was published in 1902, variants from it occurring in this work are corrections superseding earlier and less-informed statements.

[2747] Tārīkh-i-rashīdī trs. Ney Elias and Ross p. 308.

[2748] Bio. App. s.n. Gul-chihra.

[2749] The story of the later uprisings against Māhīm's son Humāyūn by his brothers, by Muḥammad-i-zamān Bāī-qarā and others of the same royal blood, and this in spite of Humāyūn's being his father's nominated successor, stirs surmise as to whether the rebels were not tempted by more than his defects of character to disregard his claim to supremacy; perhaps pride of higher maternal descent, this particularly amongst the Bāī-qarā group, may have deepened a disregard created by antagonisms of temperament.

[2750] Until the Yāngī-ārīq was taken off the Sīr, late in the last century, for Namangān, the oasis land of Farghāna was fertilized, not from the river but by its intercepted tributaries.

[2751] Ujfalvy's translation of Yāqūt (ii, 179) reads one farsākh from the mountains instead of 'north of the river.'

[2752] Kostenko describes a division of Tāshkīnt, one in which is Ravine-lane (jar-kucha), as divided by a deep ravine; of another he says that it is cut by deep ravines (Bābur's `umīq jarlār).

[2753] Bābur writes as though Akhsī had one Gate only (f. 112_b_). It is unlikely that the town had come down to having a single exit; the Gate by which he got out of Akhsī was the one of military importance because served by a draw-bridge, presumably over the ravine-moat, and perhaps not close to that bridge.

[2754] For mention of upper villages see f. 110 and note 1.

[2755] Cf. f. 114 for distances which would be useful in locating Akhsī if Bābur's yīghāch were not variable; Ritter, vii, 3 and 733; Réclus, vi, index s.n. Farghāna; Ujfalvy ii, 168, his quotation from Yāqūt and his authorities; Nalivkine's Histoire du Khanat de Kokand, p. 14 and p. 53; Schuyler, i, 324; Kostenko, Tables of Contents for cognate general information and i, 320, for Tāshkīnt; von Schwarz, index under related names, and especially p. 345 and plates; Pumpelly, p. 18 and p. 115.

[2756] This Turkī-Persian Dictionary was compiled by Mīrzā Mahdī Khān. Nādir Shāh's secretary and historian, whose life of his master Sir William Jones translated into French (Rieu's Turkī Cat. p. 264_b_).

[2757] The Pādshāh-nāma whose author, `Abdu'l-ḥamīd, the biographer of Shāh-jahān, died in 1065 AH. (1655 AD.) mentions the existence of lacunæ in a copy of the Bābur-nāma, in the Imperial Library and allowed by his wording to be Bābur's autograph MS. (i, 42 and ii, 703).

[2758] Akbar-nāma, Bib. Ind. ed. i, 305; H. B. i, 571.

[2759] Ḥai. MS. f. 118_b_; aūshāl bāghdā sū āqīb kīlā dūr aīdī. Bābur-nāma, sū āqīb, water flowed and aūshal is rare, but in the R.P. occurs 7 times.

[2760] gūzūm āwīqī-ghā bārīb tūr. B.N. f. 117_b_, gūzūm āwīqū-ghā bārdī.

[2761] kūrā dūr mīn, B.N. f. 83, tūsh kūrdūm and tūsh kūrār mīn.

[2762] ablaq suwār bīlān; P. suwār for T. ātlīq or ātlīq kīshī; bīlān for B.N. bīla, and an odd use of piebald (ablaq).

[2763] masnad, B.N. takht, throne. Masnad betrays Hindūstān.

[2764] Hamrā`īlārī (sic) bir bir gā (sic) maṣlaḥat qīlā dūrlār. Maṣlaḥat for B.N. kīngāsh or kīngāīsh; hamrāh, companion, for mīnīng bīla bār, etc.

[2765] bāghlāmāq and f. 119_b_ bāghlāghānlār; B.N. ālmāk or tūtmāq to seize or take prisoner.

[2766] dīwār for tām.

[2767] f. 119, āt-tīn aūzlār-nī tāshlāb; B.N. tūshmāk, dismount. Tāshlāmaq is not used in the sense of dismount by B.

[2768] pādshāh so used is an anachronism (f. 215); Bābur Mīrzā would be correct.

[2769] ẕāhirān; B.N. yāqīn.

[2770] Ilminsky's imprint stops at dīb; he may have taken kīm-dīb for signs of quotation merely. (This I did earlier, JRAS 1902, p. 749.)

[2771] Aligarh ed. p. 52; Rogers' trs. i, 109.

[2772] Cf. f. 63_b_, n. 3.

[2773] Another but less obvious objection will be mentioned later.

[2774] Julien notes (Voyages des pélerins Bouddhistes, ii, 96), "Dans les annales des Song on trouve Nang-go-lo-ho, qui répond exactement à l'orthographe indienne Nangarahāra, que fournit l'inscription découvert par le capitaine Kittoe" (JASB. 1848). The reference is to the Ghoswāra inscription, of which Professor Kielhorn has also written (Indian Antiquary, 1888), but with departure from Nangarahāra to Nagarahāra.

[2775] The scribe of the Ḥaidarābād Codex appears to have been somewhat uncertain as to the spelling of the name. What is found in histories is plain, N:g:r:hār. The other name varies; on first appearance (fol. 131_b_) and also on fols. 144 and 154_b_, there is a vagrant dot below the word, which if it were above would make Nīng-nahār. In all other cases the word reads N:g:nahār. Nahār is a constant component, as is also the letter g(or k).

[2776] Some writers express the view that the medial r in this word indicates descent from Nagarahāra, and that the medial n of Elphinstone's second form is a corruption of it. Though this might be, it is true also that in local speech r and n often interchange, e.g. Chighār- and Chighān-sarāī, Sūhār and Sūhān (in Nūr-valley).

[2777] This asserts n to be the correct consonant, and connects with the interchange of n and r already noted.

[2778] Since writing the above I have seen Laidlaw's almost identical suggestion of a nasal interpolated in Nagarahāra (JASB. 1848, art. on Kittoe). The change is of course found elsewhere; is not Tānk for Tāq an instance?

[2779] These affluents I omit from main consideration as sponsors because they are less obvious units of taxable land than the direct affluents of the Kābul-river, but they remain a reserve force of argument and may or may not have counted in Bābur's nine.

[2780] Cunningham, i, 42. My topic does not reach across the Kābul-river to the greater Udyānapūra of Beal's Buddhist Records (p. 119) nor raise the question of the extent of that place.

[2781] The strong form Nīng-nahār is due to euphonic impulse.

[2782] Some discussion about these coins has already appeared in JRAS. 1913 and 1914 from Dr. Codrington, Mr. M. Longworth Dames and my husband.

[2783] This variant from the Turkī may be significant. Should tamghānat(-i-)sikka be read and does this describe countermarking?

[2784] It will be observed that Bābur does not explicitly say that Ḥusain put the beg's name on the coin.

[2785] Ḥabību's-siyar lith. ed. iii, 228; Ḥaidarābād Codex text and trs. f. 26_b_ and f. 169; Browne's Daulat Shāh p. 533.

[2786] Ḥusain born 842 AH. (1438 AD.); d. 911 AH. (1506 AD.).

[2787] Cf. f. 7_b_ note to braves (yīgītlār). There may be instances, in the earlier Farghāna section where I have translated chuhra wrongly by page. My attention had not then been fixed on the passage about the coins, nor had I the same familiarity with the Kābul section. For a household page to be clearly recognizable as such from the context, is rare—other uses of the word are translated as their context dictates.

[2788] They can be traced through my Index and in some cases their careers followed. Since I translated chuhra-jīrga-si on f. 15_b_ by cadet-corps, I have found in the Kābul section instances of long service in the corps which make the word cadet, as it is used in English, too young a name.

[2789] This Mr. M. Longworth Dames pointed out in JRAS. 1913.

[2790] Habību's-siyar lith. ed. iii, 219; Ferté trs. p. 28. For the information about Ḥusain's coins given in this appendix I am indebted to Dr. Codrington and Mr. M. Longworth Dames.

[2791] Elphinstone MS. f. 150_b_; Ḥaidarābād MS. f. 190_b_; Ilminsky, imprint p. 241.

[2792] Muḥ. Ma`ṣūm Bhakkarí's Tārīkh-i-sind 1600, Malet's Trs. 1855, p. 89; Mohan Lall's Journal 1834, p. 279 and Travels 1846, p. 311; Bellew's _Political Mission to Afghānistān_ 1857, p. 232; Journal Asiatique 1890, Darmesteter's La grande inscription de Qandahār; JRAS. 1898, Beames' Geography of the Qandahār inscription. Murray's Hand-book of the Panjab etc. 1883 has an account which as to the Inscriptions shares in the inaccuracies of its sources (Bellew & Lumsden).

[2793] The plan of Qandahār given in the official account of the Second Afghān War, makes Chihil-zīna appear on the wrong side of the ridge, n.w. instead of n.e.

[2794] destroyed in 1714 AD. It lay 3 m. west of the present Qandahār (not its immediate successor). It must be observed that Darmesteter's insufficient help in plans and maps led him to identify Chihil-zīna with Chihil-dukhtarān (Forty-daughters).

[2795] Tārīkh-i-rashīdī trs. p. 387; Akbar-nāma trs. i, 290.

[2796] Ḥai. Codex, Index sn.n.

[2797] It is needless to say that a good deal in this story may be merely fear and supposition accepted as occurrence.

[2798] Always left beyond the carpet on which a reception is held.

[2799] This is not in agreement with Bābur's movements.

[2800] i.e. Humāyūn wished for a full-brother or sister, another child in the house with him. The above names of his brother and sister are given elsewhere only by Gulbadan (f. 6_b_).

[2801] The "we" might be Māhīm and Humāyūn, to Bābur in camp.

[2802] Perhaps before announcing the birth anywhere.

[2803] Presumably this plural is honorific for the Honoured Mother Māhīm.

[2804] Māhīm's and Humāyūn's quarters.

[2805] Gul-badan's Humāyūn-nāma, f. 8.

[2806] JRAS. A. S. Beveridge's Notes on Bābur-nāma MSS. 1900, [1902,] 1905, 1906, [1907,] 1908 (Kehr's transcript, p. 76, and Latin translation with new letter of Bābur p. 828).

[2807] In all such matters of the Bābur-nāma Codices, it has to be remembered that their number has been small.

[2808] Vigne's Travels in Kāshmīr ii, 277-8; Tārīkh-i-rashīdī trs., p. 302 and n. and p. 466 and note.

[2809] It is not likely to be one heard current in Hindūstān, any more than is Bābur's Ar. bū-qalamūn as a name of a bird (Index s.n.); both seem to be "book-words" and may be traced or known as he uses them in some ancient dictionary or book of travels originating outside Hindūstān.

[2810] My note 6 on p. 421 shows my earlier difficulties, due to not knowing (when writing it) that kabg-ī-darī represents the snow-cock in the Western Himālayas.

[2811] By over-sight mention of this note was omitted from my article on the Elphinstone Codex (JRAS. 1907, p. 131).

[2812] Speede's Indian Hand-book (i, 212) published in 1841 AD. thus writes, "It is a curious circumstance that the finest and most esteemed fruit are produced from the roots below the surface of the ground, and are betrayed by the cracking of the earth above them, and the effluvia issuing from the fissure; a high price is given by rich natives for fruit so produced."

[2813] In the margin of the Elphinstone Codex opposite the beginning of the note are the words, "This is a marginal note of Humāyūn Pādshāh's."

[2814] Every Emperor of Hindūstān has an epithet given him after his death to distinguish him, and prevent the necessity of repeating his name too familiarly. Thus Firdaus-makān (dweller-in-paradise) is Bābur's; Humāyūn's is Jannat-ashi-yānī, he whose nest is in Heaven; Muḥammad Shāh's Firdaus-āramgāh, he whose place of rest is Paradise; etc. (Erskine).

[2815] Here Mr. Erskine notes, "Literally, nectar-fruit, probably the mandarin orange, by the natives called nāringī. The name amrat, or pear, in India is applied to the guava or Psidium pyriferum—(Spondias mangifera, Hort. Ben.—D. Wallich)."... Mr. E. notes also that the note on the amrit-phal "is not found in either of the Persian translations".

[2816] chūchūmān, Pers. trs. shīrīni bī maza, perhaps flat, sweet without relish. Bābur does not use the word, nor have I traced it in a dictionary.

[2817] chūchūk, savoury, nice-tasting, not acid (Shaw).

[2818] chūchūk nāranj āndāq (?) maṯ`ūn aīdī kīm har kīm-nī shīrīn-kārlīghī bī masa qīlkāndī, nāranj-sū'ī dīk tūr dīrlār aīdī.

[2819] The lemu may be Citrus limona, which has abundant juice of a mild acid flavour.

[2820] The kāmila and samṯara are the real oranges (kauṅlā and sangtāra), which are now (cir. 1816 AD.) common all over India. Dr. Hunter conjectures that the sangtāra may take its name from Cintra, in Portugal. This early mention of it by Bābur and Humāyūn may be considered as subversive of that supposition. (This description of the samṯara, vague as it is, applies closer to the Citrus decumana or pampelmus, than to any other.—D. Wallich.)—Erskine.

[2821] Humāyūn writes of this fruit as though it were not the sang-tara described by his father on f. 287 (p. 511 and note).

[2822] M. de Courteille translated jama` in a general sense by totalit.' instead of in its Indian technical one of revenue (as here) or of assessment. Hence Professor Dowson's "totality" (iv, 262 n.).

[2823] The B.M. has a third copy, Or. 5879, which my husband estimates as of little importance.

[2824] Sir G. A. Grierson, writing in the Indian Antiquary (July 1885, p. 187), makes certain changes in Ajodhya Prasad's list of the Brahman rulers of Tirhut, on grounds he states.

[2825] Index s.n. Bābur's letters. The passage Shaikh Zain quotes is found in Or. 1999, f. 65_b_, Add. 26,202, f. 66_b_, Or. 5879, f. 79_b_.

[2826] Cf. Index in loco for references to Bābur's metrical work, and for the Facsimile, JASB. 1910, Extra Number.

[2827] Monday, Rabi` II. 15th 935 AH.—Dec. 27th 1528 AD. At this date Bābur had just returned from Dhūlpūr to Āgra (f. 354, p. 635, where in note 1 for Thursday read Monday).

[2828] Owing to a scribe's "skip" from one yībārīldī (was sent) to another at the end of the next sentence, the passage is not in the Ḥai. MS. It is not well given in my translation (f. 357_b_, p. 642); what stands above is a closer rendering of the full Turkī, Humāyūngha tarjuma [u?] nī-kīm Hindūstāngha kīlkānī aītqān ash'ārnī yībārīldī (Ilminsky p. 462, 1. 4 fr. ft., where however there appears a slight clerical error).

[2829] Hesitation about accepting the colophon as unquestionably applying to the whole contents of the manuscript is due to its position of close association with one section only of the three in the manuscript (cf. post p. lx).

[2830] Plate XI, and p. 15 (mid-page) of the Facsimile booklet.—The Facsimile does not show the whole of the marginal quatrain, obviously because for the last page of the manuscript a larger photographic plate was needed than for the rest. With Dr. Ross' concurrence a photograph in which the defect is made good, accompanies this Appendix.

[2831] The second section ends on Plate XVII, and p. 21 of the Facsimile booklet.

[2832] Needless to say that whatever the history of the manuscript, its value as preserving poems of which no other copy is known publicly, is untouched. This value would be great without the marginal entries on the last page; it finds confirmation in the identity of many of the shorter poems with counterparts in the Bābur-nāma.

[2833] Another autograph of Shāh-i-jahān's is included in the translation volume (p. xiii) of Gul-badan Begam's Humāyūn-nāma. It surprises one who works habitually on historical writings more nearly contemporary with Bābur, in which he is spoken of as Firdaus-makānī or as Gītī-sitānī Firdaus-makānī and not by the name used during his life, to find Shāh-i-jahān giving him the two styles (cf. Jahāngīr's Memoirs trs. ii, 5). Those familiar with the writings of Shāh-i-jahān's biographers will know whether this is usual at that date. There would seem no doubt as to the identity of ān Ḥaẓrat.—The words ān ḥaẓrat by which Shāh-i-jahān refers to Bābur are used also in the epitaph placed by Jahāngīr at Bābur's tomb (Trs. Note p. 710-711).

[2834] The Qāẓī's rapid acquirement of the mufradāt of the script allows the inference that few letters only and those of a well-known script were varied.—Mufradāt was translated by Erskine, de Courteille and myself (f. 357_b_) as alphabet but reconsideration by the light of more recent information about the Bāburī-khat̤t̤ leads me to think this is wrong because "alphabet" includes every letter.—On f. 357b three items of the Bāburī-khat̤t̤ are specified as despatched with the Hindūstān poems, viz. mufradāt, qita`lār and sar-i-khat̤t̤. Of these the first went to Hind-āl, the third to Kāmrān, and no recipient is named for the second; all translators have sent the qita`lār to Hind-āl but I now think this wrong and that a name has been omitted, probably Humāyūn's.

[2835] f. 144_b_, p. 228, n. 3. Another interesting matter missing from the Bābur-nāma by the gap between 914 and 925 AH. is the despatch of an embassy to Czar Vassili III. in Moscow, mentioned in Schuyler's Turkistan ii, 394, Appendix IV, Grigorief's Russian Policy in Central Asia. The mission went after "Sulṯān Bābur" had established himself in Kābul; as Bābur does not write of it before his narrative breaks off abruptly in 914 AH. it will have gone after that date.

[2836] I quote from the Véliaminof-Zernov edition (p. 287) from which de Courteille's plan of work involved extract only; he translates the couplet, giving to khat̤t̤ the double-meanings of script and down of youth (Dictionnaire Turque s.n. sīghnāqī). The Sanglākh (p. 252) s.n. sīghnāq has the following as Bābur's:—

_Chū balai khat̤t̤ī naṣīb'ng būlmāsa Bābur nī tang? Bare khat̤t̤ almanṣūr khat̤t̤ sighnāqī mū dūr?_

[2837] Gibb's History of Ottoman Poetry i, 113 and ii, 137.

[2838] Réclus' L'Asie Russe p. 238.

[2839] On this same taḥrīr qīldīm may perhaps rest the opinion that the Rāmpūr MS. is autograph.

[2840] I have found no further mention of the tract; it may be noted however that whereas Bābur calls his Treatise on Prosody (written in 931 AH.) the `Arūẓ, Abū'l-faẓl writes of a Mufaṣṣal, a suitable name for 504 details of transposition.

[2841] Tūzūk-i-jahāngīr lith. ed. p. 149; and Memoirs of jahāngīr trs. i, 304. [In both books the passage requires amending.]

[2842] Rāmpūr MS. Facsimile Plate XIV and p. 16, verse 3; Akbar-nāma trs. i, 279, and lith. ed. p. 91.

[2843] Cf. Index s.n. Dalmau and Bangarmau for the termination in double ū.

[2844] Dr. Ilminsky says of the Leyden & Erskine _Memoirs of Bābur_ that it was a constant and indispensable help.

[2845] My examination of Kehr's Codex has been made practicable by the courtesy of the Russian Foreign Office in lending it for my use, under the charge of the Librarian of the India Office, Dr. F. W. Thomas.—It should be observed that in this Codex the Hindūstān Section contains the purely Turkī text found in the Ḥaidarābād Codex (cf. JRAS. 1908, p. 78).

[2846] It may indicate that the List was not copied by Bābur but lay loose with his papers, that it is not with the Elphinstone Codex, and is not with the `Abdu'r-raḥīm Persian translation made from a manuscript of that same annotated line.

[2847] Cf. in loco p. 656, n. 3.

[2848] A few slight changes in the turn of expressions have been made for clearness sake.

[2849] Index s.n. Mīr Bāqī of Tāshkīnt. Perhaps a better epithet for sa`ādạt-nishān than "good-hearted" would be one implying his good fortune in being designated to build a mosque on the site of the ancient Hindū temple.

[2850] There is a play here on Bāqī's name; perhaps a good wish is expressed for his prosperity together with one for the long permanence of the sacred building khair (khairat).

[2851] Presumably the order for building the mosque was given during Bābur's stay in Aūd (Ajodhya) in 934 AH. at which time he would be impressed by the dignity and sanctity of the ancient Hindū shrine it (at least in part) displaced, and like the obedient follower of Muḥammad he was in intolerance of another Faith, would regard the substitution of a temple by a mosque as dutiful and worthy.—The mosque was finished in 935 AH. but no mention of its completion is in the Bābur-nāma. The diary for 935 AH. has many minor lacunæ; that of the year 934 AH. has lost much matter, breaking off before where the account of Aūd might be looked for.

[2852] The meaning of this couplet is incomplete without the couplet that followed it and is (now) not legible.

[2853] Firishta gives a different reason for Bābur's sobriquet of qalandar, namely, that he kept for himself none of the treasure he acquired in Hindūstān (Lith. ed. p. 206).

[2854] Jahāngīr who encamped in the Shahr-ārā-garden in Ṣafar 1016 AH. (May 1607 AD.) says it was made by Bābur's aunt, Abū-sa`īd's daughter Shahr-bānū (Rogers and Beveridge's Memoirs of Jahāngīr i, 106).

[2855] A jalau-khāna might be where horse-head-gear, bridles and reins are kept, but Āyīn 60 (A.-i-A.) suggests there may be another interpretation.

[2856] She was a daughter of Hind-āl, was a grand-daughter therefore of Bābur, was Akbar's first wife, and brought up Shāh-i-jahān. Jahāngīr mentions that she made her first pilgrimage to her father's tomb on the day he made his to Bābur's, Friday Ṣafar 26th 1016 AH. (June 12th 1607 AD.). She died æt. 84 on Jumāda I. 7th 1035 AH. (Jan. 25th 1626 AD.). Cf. Tūzūk-i-jahāngīrī, Muḥ. Hādī's Supplement lith. ed. p. 401.

[2857] Mr. H. H. Hayden's photograph of the mosque shows pinnacles and thus enables its corner to be identified in his second of the tomb itself.

[2858] One of Daniel's drawings (which I hope to reproduce) illuminates this otherwise somewhat obscure passage, by showing the avenue, the borders of running-water and the little water-falls,—all reminding of Madeira.

[2859] chokī, perhaps "shelter"; see Hobson-Jobson s.n.

[2860] If told with leisurely context, the story of the visits of Bābur's descendants to Kābul and of their pilgrimages to his tomb, could hardly fail to interest its readers.

THE HISTORY OF BABUR OR BABUR-NAMA

Index I. Personal

+Abā-bikr Mīrzā+ Mīrān-shāhī Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, son of Abū-sa`īd and a Badakhshī begīm—particulars 22, 26; his attack on Ḥiṣār 51; defeated by Ḥusain Bāī-qarā and his death (884) 260; his Bāī-qarā marriage 266; a Badakhshī connection 51; [♰884 AH.-1479 AD.].

+Abā-bikr Mīrzā+ Dūghlāt Kāshgharī, son of Sāniz and a Chīrās (var. Jarās) begīm—invades Farghāna (899) 32; his annexations in Badakhshān 695; his Mīrānshāhī wife 48; [♰920 AH.-1514 AD.].

+`Abbās+, a slave—murderer of Aūlūgh (Ūlūgh) Beg Shāh-rukhī (853) 85.

+`Abbās Sulṯān+ Aūzbeg—marries Gul-chihra Mīrān-shāhi, Bābur's daughter (954) 713.

+`Abdu'l-`alī Tarkhān+ Arghūn Chīngīz-Khānid—particulars 38, 39; [♰cir. 899 AH.-1494 AD.].

+`Abdu'l-`azīz+ mīr-akhẉur—ordered to catch pheasants (925) 404; ☛[2861] posted in Lāhor (930) 442; sent into Milwat (932) 460; on service 465-6, 471, 530; the reserve at Pānīpat 472-3; reinforces the right 473; surprised and defeated by Sangā (933) 549, 550; in the left wing at Kānwā 567, 570; pursues Sangā 576; ordered against Balūchīs (935) 638; writes from Lāhor about the journey of Bābur's family 659, 660; arrested 688; ☛ sequel to his sedition not given in the Akbar-nāma 692; ☛ reference to his sedition 698.

+`Abdu'l-`azīz Mīrzā+ Shāh-rukhī Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, son of Aūlūgh Beg—his Chaghatāī wife 19-20.

+`Abdu'l-bāqī+—surrenders Qandahār to Bābur (928) 436, 437.

+`Abdu'l-bāqī Mīrzā+ Mīrān-shāhī Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, son of `Us̤mān—particulars 280; referred to 266 n. 6; goes to Herī (908) 336; his wife Sulṯānīm Bāī-qarā 265 n. 5, 280.

+`Abdu'l-ghaffār+ tawāchī—conveys military orders (935) 638.

Mīr +`Abdu'l-ghafūr+ Lārī, of Ḥusain Bāī-qarā's Court—particulars 284, 285; [♰912 AH.-1506-7 AD.].

Khwāja +`Abdu'l-ḥaqq+, brother of Khwāja Makhdūmī Nūrā—waited upon by Bābur (935) 641, 686; has leave to stay in Āgra 641.

+`Abdu'l-karīm+ Ushrit (var.) Aūīghūr[2862] (var.)—serving Aḥmad Mīrān-shāhī 40; captured by an Aūzbeg (902) 65.

+`Abdu'l-khalīq Beg+ Isfarāyini—particulars 273-4 (where read Isfarāyinī for "Isfārayinī").

Shaikh +`Abdu'l-lāh+ aīshīk-āghā—with Jahāngīr (899) 32; leaves Bābur for home (902) 191.

Sayyid +`Abdu'l-lāh+ Andikhūdī—his Bāī-qarā wife Bairām-sulṯān and their son Barka q.v.

Khwāja +`Abdu'l-lāh+ Anṣārī—his tomb visited by Bābur (912) 305; a surmised attendant on it 145 n. 1; [♰, 481 AH.-1088 AD.].

Shaikh +`Abdu'l-lāh+ bakāwal—with the Bāī-qarā families (913) 328.

Shaikh +`Abdu'l-lāh+ Barlās—particulars 51; excites the Tarkhān rebellion (901) 61-2; his daughter a cause of attempt on Samarkand 64; with his son-in-law Mas`ūd Mīrān-shāhī (903) 93.

Khwāja +`Abdu'l-lāh Khwājagān Khwāja+—fifth son of `Ubaidu'l-lāh Aḥrārī—his son `Abdu'sh-shahīd, q.v.

Mullā +`Abdu'l-lāh+ kitābdār—one of eleven left with Bābur (913) 337; given the third of a potent confection (925) 373; a drunken lapse 398; induced by Bābur to restrict his drinking 399; at a party where Bābur, abstaining, watches the drinkers 400-1; rebuked for an offending verse 416; joins Bābur in an autumn garden 418; on service (932) 468, 530; in the right centre at Pānīpat (932) 472, 473; and at Kānwa (933) 565, 569; sent to take possession of Āgra 475; is sarcastic 581; in attendance on Aūzbeg envoys (935) 631; sent to take charge of Saṃbhal (935) 675, 687; conveys orders 676; sends news of Bīban and Bāyazīd 679; arrives in Āgra, 687.

Khwāja +`Abdu'l-lāh+ Marwārīd—particulars 278-9; preeminent on the dulcimer 291; [♰922 AH.-1516 AD.].

+`Abdu'l-lāh Mīrzā+ Shāh-rukhī Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk—succeeds his father, Ibrāhīm, in Shīrāz (838) 20, and his cousin `Abdu'l-laṯīf in Transoxiana (854) 85-6; Yūnas Khān his retainer q.v.; [♰ Jumāda I. 22, 855 AH.-1450 AD.].[2863]

Khwāja +`Abdu'l-lāh Qāẓī+, see Khwāja Maulānā-i-qāẓī.

+`Abdu'l-lāh Sulṯān+ Aūzbeg-Shaibān—particulars 267; serving Bābur in Hindūstān (after 933?) 267.

+`Abdu'l-laṯīf+ bakhshī—serving Ḥusain Bāī-qarā (901) 57; acts for Bābur from Qūndūz (932-3) 546.

+`Abdu'l-laṯīf Mīrzā+ Shāh-rukhī Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk—murders and succeeds his father Aūlūgh Beg (853) 15; a couplet on his parricide 85[2864]; [♰ Rabī` l .26, 854 AH.-1450 AD.[2865]].

+`Abdu'l-laṯīf Sulṯān+ Aūzbeg, Shaibānī Chīngīz-khānid, son of Ḥamza— Bābur's half-sister Yādgār (æt. cir. 8) his share of spoil (908) 18.

Mullā +`Abdu'l-malūk+ Khwāstī (var. malik)—at Bajaur (925) 368; sent ahead into Bhīra 381; and to Kābul 415; returns from an embassy to `Iraq (932) 446 (here qūrchī); sent again (935) 642; on service (933) 576, 582.

+`Abdu'l-minān+, son of Mullā Ḥaidar—holding Bīsh-kīnt (907) 151.

Amīr +`Abdu'l-qadūs Beg+ Dūghlāt—slays Jamāl Khar Arghūn (877) 35; conveys wedding gifts to Bābur and arouses suspicion (900) 43; [for his death see T.R. trs. pp. 94, 103].

+`Abdu'l-qadūs Beg+ Kohbur Chaghatāī—with Bābur at Māḏū (Māẕū) (905) 109 (where for "qāsim" read qadūs); one of the eight fugitives from Akhsī (908) 177.

Mīrak +`Abdu'r-raḥīm+ Ṣadr—his servant Badru'd-dīn q.v.

+`Abdu'r-raḥīm+ shaghāwal—sent to speak the Bhīra people fair for Bābur (925) 381; given charge of Ibrāhīm Lūdī's mother (933) 543; fetches a hostage to Court 578; who escapes 581.

Maulānā +`Abdu'r-raḥīm+ Turkistānī—fleeces Khwānd-amīr 328.

Mulla +`Abdu'r-raḥmān+ Ghaznawī—particulars 218; [♰921 AH.-1515 AD.].

Maulānā +`Abdu'r-raḥmān+ Jāmī—his letters imitated by Nawā'ī 271; his sarcasm on Shaikhīm's Verse 277; his tomb visited by Bābur (912) 285, 305; Bābur's reverential mention of him 283, 286; his example followed by production of the Wālidiyyah-risāla (935) 620; his birth-place 623 n. 8; his disciple `Abdu'l-ghafūr 284; [898 AH.-1492 AD.].

+`Abdu'r-raḥmān Khān+ Barak-zāī Afghān, Amīr of Afghānistān—mentioned in connection with Jāmī's tomb 305 n. 6; [♰1319 AH.-1901 AD.].

+`Abdu'r-razzāq Mīrzā+ Mīrān-shāhī Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, son of Aūlūgh Beg Kābulī—loses Kābul (910) 195, 365; out with Bābur 234; surmised part-vendor of Bābur's mother's burial-ground 246 n. 2; in Herāt (912) 298; escapes Shaibānī and joins Bābur (913) 331; in the left wing at Qandahār 334; his loot 337-8; deserts Qalāt in fear of Shaibānī 340; left in charge of Kābul ib.; given Nīngnahār 344; rebels (914) 345; his position stated 345 n. 6; [♰915 AH.-1509 AD.?].

Khwāja +`Abdu'sh-shahīd+, son of Aḥrārī's fifth son Khwājagān-khwāja (`Abdu'l-lāh)—placed on Bābur's right-hand (935) 631; gifts made to him 632; invited to a ma`jūn-party 653; particulars 653 n. 4; ☛ a likely recipient of the Mubīn 438, 631 n. 3; [♰982 AH.-1574 AD.].

+`Abdu'sh-shukūr+ Mughūl, son of Qaṃbar-i-`alī Silākh—serving Jahāngīr Mīrān-shāhī (after 910) 192; in the right wing at Kānwa (933) 566.

+`Abdu'l-wahhāb+ Mughūl—given Shaikh Pūrān to loot (913) 328.

+`Abdu'l-wahhāb+ shaghāwal, servant of `Umar-shaikh and Aḥmad Mīrān-shāhī—forwards news (899) 25; gives Khujand to Bābur 54; his son Mīr Mughūl q.v.

+Abraha+ Yemenī, an Abyssinian Christian—his defeat (571 AD.) 563 n. 3.

Imām +Abū Ḥanīfa+—his followers' respect for the Hidāyat 76; his ruling that peacock-meat is lawful food 493.

Khwāja +Abū'l-barka+ Farāqī—criticizes Banā'ī's verse (906) 137.

Shaikh +Abū'l-fatḥ+, servant of the Shāh-zāda of Mungīr—envoy from Bengal to Bābur (934, 935) 676; placed on Bābur's right-hand (935) 631.

+Abū'l-fatḥ Sa`īd Khān+, see Sa`īd Khān Chaghatāī.

+Abū'l-fatḥ+ Turkmān, son of `Umar—his joining Bābur from `Iraq 280; made military-collector of Dhūlpūr (933) 540; Bābur visits his hammām (935) 615.

+Abū'l-faẓl+, see Akbar-nāma.

+Abū'l-ḥasan+ qūr-begī—in the right wing at Qandahār (913) 334; does well (925) 404; his brother Muḥammad Ḥusain q.v.

+Abū'l-ḥasan+ qūrchī—in the centre at Qandahār (913) 335.

+Abū'l-hāshim+, servant of Sl. `Alī [T̤aghāī Begchīk]—overtakes Bābur with ill news (925) 412.

+Abū'l-ma`ālī+ Tīrmīẕī—☛ his burial-place has significance as to Mahdī Khwāja's family 705; [♰971 AH.-1564 AD.].

Khwāja +Abū'l-makāram+—supports Bāī-sunghar Mīrān-shāhī (901) 62, (902) 65; acts for peace (903) 91; meets Bābur, both exiles (904) 99; at Bābur's capture of Samarkand (906) 132, 141; leaves it with him 147 n. 2; speaks for him (908) 157-8; fails to recognize him 161; ☛ at Archīān 184; [♰908 AH.-1502 AD.].

Shaikh +Abū'l-manṣūr+ Mātarīdī—his birthplace Samarkand 75, 76; [♰333 AH.-944 AD.].

+Abū'l-muḥammad+ neza-bāz—in the tūlghuma of the left wing, at Pānīpat (932) 473; on service (933) 582, (934) 589, 598.

+Abū'l-muḥammad+ Khujandī—his sextant 74 n. 4.

+Abū'l-muḥsin Mīrzā+ Bāī-qarā Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, son of Ḥusain and Laṯīf—particulars 262 (where for "ḥusain" read muḥsin), 269; serving his father (901) 58; defeats his brother Badī`u'z-zamān (902) 69, 70; defeated by his father at Halwā-spring (904) 260; his men take Qarākūl from Aūzbegs (906) 135; co-operates against Shaibānī (912) 296; rides out to meet Bābur 297; they share a divan 298; presses him to winter in Herī 300; returns to his district (Merv) 301; his later action and death 329-30, 331; [♰913 AH.-1507 AD.].

+Abū'l-muslim Kūkūldāsh+—brings an Arghūn gift to Bābur (925) 401, 402.

+Abū'l-qāsim+ Jalāīr—tells Bābur a parrot story. (935)[2866] 494.

+Abū'l-qāsim+—a musician (923) 387, 388 (here Qāsim only).

+Abū'l-qāsim+, Kohbur Chaghatāī, son of Ḥaidar-i-qāsim—on service with Bābur (902) 68, (906) 130, 131, 133; in the right wing at Sar-i-pul (Khwāja Kārdzan) 139; killed 141; [♰906 AH.-1501 AD.].

Shaikh +Abū'l-wajd+ Fārighī, maternal-uncle of Zain Khawāfī—makes verse on the Kābul-river (932) 448; his chronogram on Al-amān's birth (935) 621; [♰940 AH.-1533 AD.[2867]].

Shaikh +Abū-sa`īd Khān+ Dar-miyān[2868]—particulars 276.

Sulṯān +Abū-sa`īd Mīrzā+ Mīrān-shāhī Tīmūrid, _Barlās Turk_—his descent 14; asserts Tīmūrid supremacy over Chaghatāī Khāqāns (855) 20, 344, 352; takes Māwarā'u'n-nahr (855) 86; forms his Corps of Braves 28, 50; a single combat in his presence (857) 50; defeats Ḥusain Bāī-qarā (868) 259; a swift courier to him 25; joined by the Black-sheep Turkmāns (872) 49; orders the Hindūstān army mobilized 46; defeated and killed by the White-sheep Turkmāns (873) 25, 46, 49; appointments named 24, 37; his banishment of Nawā'ī 271; reserves a Chaghatāī wife for a son 21, 36; his Badakhshī wife and their son 22,[2869] 260; his Tarkhān Arghūn wife and their sons, 33, 45; his mistress Khadīja q.v.; his daughters Pāyanda-sulṯān, Shahr-bānū, Rābi`a-sulṯān, Khadīja-sulṯān, Fakhr-i-jahān, Apāq-sulṯān, Āq Begīm q.v.; retainers named as his `Alī-dost Sāghārīchī, Muḥammad Barandūq, Aūrūs, and Ẕū'n-nūn Arghūn q.v.; his marriage connection Nūyān Tīrmīẕī q.v.; [♰873 AH.-1469 AD.].

+Abū-sa`īd Pūrān+, see Jamālu'd-dīn.

+Abū-sa`īd Sulṯān+ Auzbeg-Shaibān, Chīngīz-khānid, son of Kūchūm—☛ at Ghaj-davān (918) 360; at Jām (935) 622, 636; sends an envoy to Bābur 631, 632, 641; [♰940 AH.-1533-4 AD.].

Shaikh +Abū-sa`īd Tarkhān+ (var. Bū-sa`īd)—his house Mīrzā Khān's loot in Qandahār (913) 338.

+Abū-turāb Mīrzā+ Bāī-qarā Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, son of Ḥusain and Mīnglī—particulars 262, 269; his son Sohrab q.v.; [♰ before 911 AH.-1505-6 AD.].

+Adīk Sulṯān+ Qazzāq, Jūjī Chīngīz-khānid (var. Aūng Sulṯān), son of Jānī Beg Khān (T.R. trs. 373)—husband of Sulṯān-nigār Chaghatāī q.v.

+`Ādil Sulṯān+ Auzbeg-Shaibān(?), Chingīz-khānid(?), son of Mahdī and a Bāī-qarā begīm—marries Shād Bāī-qarā 263; suggestions as to his descent 264 n. 1; waits on Bābur at Kalānūr (932) 458; on Bābur's service 468, 471, 475, 530; in the left wing at Pānīpat 472; and at Kānwa (933) 567, 570; ordered against Balūchīs (935) 638; ☛ mentioned as a landless man 706.

Sayyida +Afāq+, a legendary wife of Bābūr 358 n. 2; her son and grandson ib.

+Afghānī Āghāchā+, see Mubārika.

Sayyid +Afẓal Beg+, son of `Alī Khwāb-bīn—conveys Ḥusain Bāī-qarā's summons to Bābur for help against Shaibānī (911) 255; particulars 282; takes news to Herāt of Bābur's start from Kābul (912) 294; sends him news of Ḥusain's death 295; [♰921 AH.-1516 AD.].

+Āghā Begīm+ Bāī-qarā Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, daughter of Ḥusain and Pāyanda-sulṯān—parentage and marriage (or betrothal, Ḥ.S. iii, 327) 266; [♰ died in childhood].

+Āghā-sulṯān+, ghūnchachi of `Umar Shaikh—her daughter Yādgār-i-sulṯān q.v.

+Āhī+—his feet frost-bitten (912) 311.

+Āhī+, a poet—particulars 289; [♰ 907 AH.-1501-2].

+Ahlī+, a poet—particulars 290; (for 4 writers using Āhlī as their pen-name see 290 n. 6).

Sulṯān +Aḥmad+ Aīlchī-būghā, Mughūl—one of four daring much (912) 315; in the left wing at Qandahār (913) 334.

Pīr +Aḥmad+—leaves Samarkand with the Tarkhāns (905) 121; fights for Bābur at Sar-i-pul (Khwāja Kārdzan) (906) 139.

+Aḥmad+ Afshār Turk—a letter to him endorsed by Bābur (935) 617.

Mīrzā +Aḥmad `Alī+ Farsī, Barlās—particulars 273.

+Aḥmad `Alī Tarkhān+ Arghūn, brother of Qulī Beg—favours Bābur and admits him to Qandahār (913) 337.

Mullā +Aḥmad+ Balkhī— conveys treasure to Balkh (932) 446.

Mirzā Sayyidī +Aḥmad+ Mīrān-shāhī Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, son of Mīrān-shāh—particulars 257 n. 5; named in a line of descent 280 n. 1; his son Aḥmad and grandson `Abdu'l-bāqī q.v.

Mīr +Aḥmad Beg+ Itārajī Mughūl, paternal-uncle of Taṃbal—guardian of a son of The Khān (Maḥmūd) 115; reinforces Bābur (903) 92; acts against him (905) 115, 116; acts against `Alī Mīrān-shāhī 112; makes a contemptuous speech about Taṃbal (906) 145.

+Aḥmad Beg+ Ṣafawī—☛ leads a reinforcement to help Bābur (917) 353.

Sulṯān +Aḥmad+ Chār-shaṃba'ī, see Chār-shaṃba.

+Aḥmad+ chāshnīgīr—helps in poisoning Bābur (933) 541; [♰933 AH.-1526 AD.].

+Aḥmad Ḥājī Beg+ Dūldāī, Barlās Turk—particulars 25, 37, 38; his pen-name Wafā'ī and a couplet of his 38; his hospitality to `Alī-sher Nawāī 38, 271; drives Khusrau Shāh from Samarkand (900) 51; supports Bāī-sunghar Mīrān-shāhī in the Tarkhān rebellion (901) 62, 63; his death at the hands of slaves and slave-women 63-4; [♰901 AH.-1496 AD.].

+Aḥmadī+ parwānchī—on service (925) 377, (932) 458, 460, (933) 540; sent to surprise Ibrāhīm Lūdī (932) 468 (his name is omitted in my text); in the left centre at Pānīpat 472, 473; his ill-behaviour in the heats 524.

Sulṯan +Aḥmad Khān+—+Alacha Khān+—Chaghatāī Chīngīz-khānid, son of Yūnas and Shāh Begīm—particulars 23, 160; meaning of his sobriquet Alacha Khān 23; younger Khān-dādā, Bābur's name for him 129; considered as a refuge for Bābur (899) 29, (903) 92, (906) 129, (908) 158; visits Tāshkīnt (908) 159; ceremonies of meeting 160-1, 171-2; moves with his elder brother Maḥmūd against Taṃbal 161, 168, 171; his kindness to Bābur 159, 166-7, 169, 171; is given Bābur's lands and why 168; retires from Andijān in fear of Shaibānī 172; defeated by Shaibānī at Archīān (908 or 909) 7, 23, ☛ 182-3; his death (909) reported to Bābur (911) 246 and n. 4; his sons Manṣūr, Sa'īd, Bābā (T.R. trs. 160, Bābājāk), Chīn-tīmūr, Tūkhtā-būghā, and Aīsan-tīmūr q.v.; his grandson Bābā q.v.; ☛ followers of his return from forced migration (908) when Shaibānī is killed (916) 351; [♰end of 909 AH.-1504 AD.].

+Aḥmad Khān+ Ḥājī-tarkhānī (Astrakhānī)—marries Badī`u'l-jamāl (Badka) Bāī-qarā (899?) 257, 258; their sons (Maḥmūd and Bahādur) 258; their daughter Khān-zāda q.v.

Sulṯān +Aḥmad Mīrzā+ Dūghlāt—sent by The Khān (Māḥmūd) to help Bābur (908) 161.

Sulṯān +Aḥmad Mīrzā+ Mīrān-shāhī Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, son of Abū-sa`īd—the lands his father gave him 35, 86; his brother Maḥmūd taken to his care (873 or 4) 46; his disaster on the Chīr (895) 17, 25, 31, 34; a swift courier to him 25; defeats `Umar Shaikh 17, 34; 12 n. 2; 53; invades Farghāna (899) 13, 30; given Aūrā-tīpā 27; dreaded for Bābur 29; retires and dies 31, 33; particulars 33, 40; referred to by Ḥusain Bāī-qarā (910) 190; his wives and children 35-6; an honoured Beg Nūyān Tīrmīẕī q.v.; [♰899 AH.-1494 AD.].

Sulṯān +Aḥmād Mīrzā+, Mīrān-shāhī Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, son of Mīrzā Sayyidī Aḥmad—particulars 257 n. 5; his wife Ākā Begīm Bāī-qarā and their son Kīchīk Mīrzā q.v.; 266 n. 6; a building of his at Herī 305.

+Aḥmād+ mushtāq, Turkmān—takes Maḥmūd Mīrān-shāhī to Ḥiṣār (873 or 4) 46-7.

Sulṯān +Aḥmad+ qarāwal, father of Qūch (Qūj) Beg, Tardī Beg and Sher-afgān Beg q.v.—defends Ḥiṣār (901) 58; enters Bābur's service (905) 112; in the left Wing at Khūbān (905) 113; holds Marghīnān 123.

+Aḥmad-i-qāsim+ Kohbur Chaghatāī, son of Ḥaidar-i-qāsim—with Bābur (906) 133; invited to a disastrous entertainment (907) 152; joins Jahāngīr and Taṃbal 156; in Akhsī (908) 171; defeats an Aūzbeg raider (910) 195; helps to hold Kābul for Bābur (912) 313; pursues Mīrzā Khān 317, 320; holding Tāshkīnt against Aūzbegs (918) 356, 358, 396, 397; a Kābulī servant of his 351.

+Aḥmad-i-qāsim+ Qībchāq Turk, (grand-?) son of Bāqī Chaghānīānī and a sister of Khusrau Shāh, perhaps son of Bāqī's son Muḥammad-i-qāsim (189 n. 3)—holding Kāhmard and Bāmīān (910) 189; given charge of the families of Bābur's expeditionary force 189; ill-treats them and is forced to flee 197, 243; goes to Ḥusain Bāī-qarā ib.; killed at Qūndūz 244; [♰910 AH.-1505 AD.].

Sulṯān +Aḥmad Qāẓī+ Qīlīch—particulars 29; his son Khwāja Maulānā-i-qaẓī q.v.

+Aḥmad+ qūshchī—seen by the fugitive Bābur (908) 180.

Khwāja +Aḥmad+ Sajāwandī—his birthplace 217.

+Aḥmad Shāh+ Khīljī Turk—dispossessed of Chandīrī by Ibrāhīm Lūdī 593; restored by Bābur (934) 598.

+Aḥmad Shāh+ Durrānī, Abdālī Afghān—his victory at Pānīpat (1174) 472; [♰1182 AH.-1772 AD.].

+Aḥmad Tarkhān+ Arghūn Chīngīz-khānid (?)—joins Bābur in Samarkand (906) 133; loses Dabūsī to Shaibānī 137; [♰906 AH.-1500 AD.].

+Aḥmad (son of) Tawakkal+ Barlās, amir of Ḥusain Bāī-qarā—particulars 272.

+Aḥmad+ yāsāwal—conveys a message from Bābur to the begs of Kābul Fort (912) 314.

Khwāja +Aḥmad+ Yasawī—+Sayyid Ātā+—Shaibānī's vow at his shrine 348, 356; [♰514 AH.-1120-1 AD.].[2870]

+Aḥmad-i-yūsuf Beg+ Aūghlāqchī, son of Ḥasan, nephew of Yūsuf—managing Yār-yīlāq for `Alī Mīrān-shāhī (904) 98; dismissed on suspicion of favouring Bābur 98; probably joins Bābur with his uncle (910) 196; remonstrated with him for fighting unmailed (911) 252; helping loyalists in Kābul (912) 313; saves Bābur a blow 315, 316; at Bājaur (925) 369, 401 (here Aḥmad Beg); joins Bābur in Hindūstān (933) 550; in the right wing at Kānwa 566 (where in n. 1 for "may" read is), 569; governor of Sīālkot 98.

Malik +Aḥmad+ Yūsuf-zāī Afghān, nephew of Sulaimān q.v.—particulars App. K.

+Aī Begīm+ Mīrān-shāhī Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, daughter of Maḥmūd and Khān-zāda II.—betrothed to Jahāngīr. (cir. 895) 48; married (910) 189; their daughter 48.

+Aīkū-sālam+ Mughūl—rebels against Bābur (914) 345.

+Aīkū[2871]-tīmūr Beg Tarkhān+ Arghūn—his descendant Darwesh Beg q.v.; [♰793 AH.-1391 AD.].

Sulṯān? +Aīlīk+ Māẓī Aūīghūr (Ūīghūr)—his descendant Khwāja Maulānā-i-qāẓī q.v.

+Aīrzīn Beg+ (var. Aīrāzān) Bārīn Mughūl—supports Yūnas Chaghatāī (cir. 830), takes him to Aūlūgh Beg Shāh-rukhī (cir. 832) 19; ill-received and his followers scattered 20; [♰832 AH.-1428 AD.].

+Aīsān-būghā Khān+ Chaghatāī Chīngīz-khānīd, son of Dāwā—named in Yūnas Khān's genealogy 19; [♰cir. 718 AH.-1318 AD.].

+Aīsān-būghā Khān II.+ Chaghatāī Chīngīz-khānid, son of Wais—particulars 19; invades Farghāna and defeated at Aspara (cir. 855) 20; quarrels with the begs of the Sāghārīchī tūmān and leads to the elevation of Yūnas ib.; [♰866 AH.-1462 AD.].

+Aīsān-daulat Begīm+ Kūnjī (or Kūnchī) Mughūl, wife of Yūnas Chaghatāī—particulars 20, 21; her good judgment (900) 43; entreats Bābur's help for Andijān (903) 88-9; joins him in Khujand after the loss of Andijān 92; and in Dikh-kat after that of Samarkand (907) 151; news of her death reaches Kābul (911) 246; rears one of `Umar Shaikh's daughters 18; her kinsmen `Alī-dost, Sherīm, Ghiyās̤ q.v.; [♰910 AH.-1505 AD.].

+Aīsān-qulī Sulṯān Aūzbeg-Shaibān, Chīngīz-khānid—his Bāī-qarā marriage, 265, 397.

+Aīsān-tīmūr Sulṯān+ Chaghatāī Chīngīz-khānid, son of Aḥmad (Alacha Khān)—on Bābur's service 318, 682; meets Bābur (935) 654; in the battle of the Ghogrā 672, 673; thanked 677; angers Bābur 684.

+Ākā Begīm+, Barlās Turk, daughter of Tīmūr—an ancestress of Ḥusain Bāī-qarā 256.

+Ākā Begīm+ Bāī-qarā Tīmūrid, daughter of Manṣūr and Fīrūza—particulars 257; her husband Aḥmad and their son Kīchīk Mīrzā q.v.

Abū'l-fatḥ Jalālu'd-dīn Muḥammad +Akbar+ Mīrān-shāhī Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, grandson of Bābur and Māhīm—☛ 184; ☛ an addition about him made to the Chihil-zīna inscription 432; ☛ his visit to Pānīpat (963) 472; his change in the name of the cherry explained by Bābur's words 501, n. 6; [♰1014 AH.-1605 AD.].

+Alacha Khān+, see Aḥmad Chaghatāī.

+Al-amān+, son of Humāyūn—his birth and name (935) 621, 624, 642; [♰ in infancy].

+`Ālam Khān+ Kālpī, son of Jalāl Khān Jik-hat (or Jig-hat)—holding Kālpī and not submissive to Bābur (932) 523; goes to Court (933) 544; disobeys orders 557; is Bābur's host in Kālpī (934) 590; on service (935) 682; an order about him 684.

`Alāu'u'd-dīn +`Ālam Khān+ Lūdī Afghān, son of Buhlūl—☛ a principal actor between 926-32 AH. 428; ☛ asks and obtains Bābur's help against his nephew Ibrāhīm (929) 439-441; placed by Bābur in charge of Dībālpūr (930) 442; ☛ defeated by Daulat Khān Yūsuf-khail (931) 444; flees to Kābul and is again set forth 444, 455; defeated by Ibrāhīm and returns to Bābur (932) 454-8; his relations with Bābur reviewed 455, n. 1; in Fort Ginguta 457, 463; in the left centre at Kānwa (933) 565; his sons Jalāl, Kamāl, and Sher Khān (Lūdī) q.v.

Sulṯān `Alāu'u'd-dīn +`Ālam Khān+ Sayyidī—holding Dihlī 481; [♰855 AH.-1451 AD.].

+`Ālam Khān+ Tahangarī, brother of Niẕām Khān of Bīāna—works badly with Bābur's force (933) 538; defeated by his brother 539; sent out of the way before Kānwa 547.

+`Alāu'u'd-dīn Ḥusain Shāh+, ruler in Bengal—the circumstances of his succession 483; his son Naṣrat q.v.; [♰925 AH.-1518 AD.?].

+`Alāu'u'd-dīn Ḥusain+ Jahān-soz Ghūrī—his destruction in Ghazni (550) 219; [♰556 AH.-1161 AD.?].

Sulṯān +`Alāu'u'd-dīn Muḥammad Shāh+ Khīljī Turk—Bābur visits his tomb and minār (932) 476; his bringing of the Koh-i-nūr from the Dakkhin 477; [♰715 AH.-1315 AD.].

Sulṯān +`Alāu'u'd-dīn+ Sawādī—waits on Bābur (925) 372, 375-6.

+`Alāūl Khān+ Sūr Afghān—writes dutifully to Bābur (935) 659.

+`Alāūl Khān+ Nūḥānī Afghān—his waitings on Bābur (934, 935) 677, 680.

Sharafu'd-dīn Muḥammad +al Buṣīrī+—his Qaṣīdatu'l-būrda an example for the Wālidiyyah-risāla 620; [♰cir. 693 AH.-1294 AD.].

+Alexander of Macedon+, see Iskandar Fīlqūs (Failaqūs).

Sayyid +`Alī+—escapes from a defeat (909) 102; out with Bābur (925) 403; sent against Balūchīs (935) 638.

Sulṯān +`Alī+ aṣghar Mīrzā Shāh-rukhī Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, son of Mas`ūd Kābulī—particulars 382.

+`Alī Ātāka+, servant of Khalīfa—reinforces the right wing (tūlghuma) at Kānwa (933) 569.

Shaikh +`Alī Bahādur+, one of Tīmūr's chiefs—his descendant Bābā `Alī 27.

Khwāja +`Alī Bāī+—mentioned (906) 127; fights for Bābur at Sar-i-pul (Khwāja Kārdzan) 139; his son Jān-i-`alī q.v.

Shaikh +`Alī+ Bārīn Mughūl, son of Shaikh Jamāl—in the left wing (tūlghuma) at Pānīpat (932) 473; sent against Balūchīs (935) 638.

+`Alī+ Barlās Turk—his son Muḥammad Barandūq q.v.

+`Alī Beg+ Jalāīr Chaghatāī, father of Ḥasan-i-`Alī and Apāq Bega—his Shāh-rukhī service 278.[2872]

Mīr (Shaikh) +`Alī Beg+ Turk (inferred 389), governor of Kābul for Shāh-rukh Tīmūrīd—his sons Bābā Kābulī, Daryā Khān, and Ghāzī (Apāq) Khān (q.v.) cherished by Mas`ūd Shāh-rukhī 382; (see his son Ghāzī's grandson Minūchihr for a Turk relation 386).

Sulṯān +`Alī+ chuhra, Chaghatāī—his loyalty to Bābur doubted (910) 239; rebels (914) 345.

Sayyid +`Alī-darwesh Beg+ Khurāsānī—particulars 28; with Jahāngīr (æt. 8), in Akhsī (899) 32, leaves Bābur for home (903) 91; on Bābur's service (904) 106, (905) 28, 118.

Mīr +`Alī-dost T̤aghāī+ Kūnjī Mughūl, a Sāghārīchī-tūmān beg—particulars 27-8; his appointment on Bābur's accession (899) 32; has part in a conference (900) 43; surrenders Andijān (903) 88-9; asks Bābur's pardon (904) 99; gives him Marghīnān 100; defeated by Taṃbal 106; in the right wing at Khūbān (905) 113; his ill-timed pacifism 118; his self-aggrandizement 119, 123; joins Bābur against Samarkand 123; in fear of his victims, goes to Taṃbal 125; his death ib.; his brother Ghiyās̤, his son Muḥammad-dost, and his servant Yūl-chūq q.v.; [♰a few years after 905 AH.-1500 AD.].

Mīr Sayyid +`Alī+ Hamadānī—his death and burial 211; [♰786 AH.-1384 AD.].

Mullā +`Alī-jān+ (var. Khān)—fetches his wife from Samarkand (925) 403; is taught a rain-spell (926) 423; makes verse on the Kābul-river (932) 448; a satirical couplet on him made and repented by Bābur 448; host of Mullā Maḥmūd Farābī (935) 653.

+`Alī Khān+ Bāyandar, Āq-qūīlūq Turkmān—joins Ḥusain Bāī-qarā (873) 279.

Shaikh-zāda +`Alī Khān+ Farmūlī Afghān—his family-train captured (932) 526; waits on Bābur 526-7; in the left wing at Kānwa (933) 567; on service 576, 582, 678.

+`Alī Khān+ Istiljū—leads Ismā`īl Ṣafawī's reinforcement to Bābur (917) 353.

Sayyid +`Alī Khān+ Turk, son of Ghāzī (Apāq) Khān and grandson of Mīr (Shaikh) `Alī Beg—one of Sikandar Lūdī's Governors in the Panjāb (910) 382; leaves Bhīra on Bābur's approach ib.; his lands made over by him to Daulat Khān Yūsuf-khail 382-3; his son Minūchihr and their Turk relation (389) q.v.

+`Alī Khān+ Turkmān, son of `Umar Beg—defends the Bāī-qarā families against Shaibānī (913) 328.

+`Alī Khān+ Yūsuf-khail Lūdī Afghān—eldest son of Daulat Khān—his servants wait on Bābur (925) 382; comes out of Milwat (Malot) to Bābur (932) 459-60; sent under guard to Bhīra 461; his son Ismā`īl q.v.

Sayyid +`Alī+ Khwāb-bīn, father of Sayyid Afẓal q.v. (cf. Ḥ.S. lith. ed. iii, 346).

Mullā Sulṯān +`Alī+ khẉush-nawīs, calligrapher of Ḥusain Bāī-qarā—particulars 291; given lessons in penmanship by Shaibānī (913) 329; [♰919 AH.-1513 AD.].

+`Alī-mazīd Beg+ qūchīn—particulars 26; leaves Bābur for home (903) 91.

Mīr +`Alī+ mīr-akhẉur[2873]—particulars 279; helps Ḥusain Bāī-qarā to surprise Yādgār-i-muḥammad Shāh-rukhī in Herī (875) 134, 279.

Sulṯān +`Alī Mīrzā+ Mīrān-shāhī Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, son of Maḥmūd and Zuḥra—particulars 47; serving his half-brother Bāī-sunghar (900) 27, 55; made pādshāh in Samarkand by the Tarkhāns (901) 62-3, 86; meets Bābur 64; their arrangement 66,(902) 65, 82, 86; gives no protection to his blind half-brother Mas`ūd (903) 95; suspects a favoured beg (904) 98; quarrels with the Tarkhāns (905) 121; desertions from him 122; defeats Mīrzā Khān's Mughūls ib.; is warned of Bābur's approach 125; gives Samarkand to Shaibānī and by him is murdered (906) 125-7; his wife Sulṯānīm Mīrān-shāhī and sister Makhdūm-sulṯān q.v.; [♰906 AH.-1500 AD.].

Sulṯān +`Alī Mīrzā T̤aghāī+ Begchīk (Mīrzā Beg T̤aghāī), brother(?) of Bābur's wife Gul-rukh—movements of his which bear on the lacuna of 914-924 AH. 408; arrives in Kābul (925) ib.; Kāmrān marries his daughter (934) 619; conveys Bābur's wedding gifts to Kāmrān (935) 642; takes also a copy of the Wālidiyyah-risāla and of the Hindūstān poems, with writings (sar-khat̤t̤) in the Bāburī script 642.

Ustād +`Alī-qulī+—his match-lock shooting at Bajaur (925) 369; shoots prisoners (932) 466; ordered to make Rūmī defences at Pānīpat 469; fires firingīs from the front of the centre 473; casts a large mortar (933) 536, 547; his jealousy of Muṣṯafa Rūmī 550; his post previous to Kānwa 558; his valiant deeds in the battle 570-1; a new mortar bursts (934) 588; his choice of ground at Chandīrī 593; his stone-discharge interests Bābur 595, 670-1-2; uses the Ghāzī mortar while the Ganges bridge is in building 599; a gift to his son (935) 633; his post in the battle of the Ghogrā 667, 668, 669.

+`Alī-qulī+ Hamadānī—☛ sent by Bābur to punish the Mundāhirs, and fails (936) 700.

Mīr +`Alī+ qūrchī—conveys playing-cards to Shāh Ḥasan Arghūn (933) 584.

Malik +`Alī+ quṯnī(?)—in the left centre at Bajaur (925) 369.

+`Alī Sayyid+ Mughūl—in the right wing at Qandahār (913) 334; rebels (914) 345[2874]; his connection Aūrūs-i `Alī Sayyid 335.

+`Alī+ shab-kūr (night-blind)—one of five champions defeated in single combat by Bābur (914) 349.

Mīr +`Alī-sher Beg+ Chaghatāī, pen-names Nawā'ī and Fanā'ī—his obligations to Aḥmad Ḥājī Beg and return to Herāt 38; fails in a mission of Ḥusain Bāī-qarā's (902) 69[2875]; his Turkī that of Andijān 4; checks Ḥusain in Shī`a action 258; opposes administrative reform 282; particulars 271-2; his relations with Banā'ī 286-7, 648; corresponds with Bābur (906) 106; exchanges quatrains with Pahlawān Bū-sa`īd 292; some of his poems transcribed by Bābur (925) 419; his restoration of the Rabāṯ-i-sang-bast 301 n. 1; his flower-garden (bāghcha) and buildings visited or occupied by Bābur (912) 301, 305, 306; his brother Darwesh-i-`alī q.v.; a favoured person 278; a mystic of his circle 280-1; his scribe 271; [♰906 AH.-Dec. 1500 AD.].

+`Alī-shukr Beg+, of the Bahārlū-aīmāq of the Āq-qūīlūq[2876] Turkmāns—his daughter Pasha, grandson Yār-i-`alī Balāl, and descendant Bairām Khān-i-khānān q.v.

Sulṯān +`Alī Sīstānī+ Arghūn—his help against Shaibānī counselled (913) 326; ☛ one of five champions worsted by Bābur in single combat (914) 349; with Bābur and chops at a tiger (925) 393.

Shaikh +`Alī T̤aghāī+ Mervī(?)—holding Balkh for Badī`u'z-zamān Bāī-qarā (902) 70; joint-dārogha in Herī (911) 293.

+Allāh-bīrdī+ (var. qūlī)—serving Bābur (910) 234.

+Allāh-wairān+ Turkmān—in the van at Qandahār (913) 335.

+Alūr+ or Alwar,[2877] son of Bābur and Dil-dār—mentioned 689 n. 5. ☛ 712; [♰died an infant].

+Amīn Mīrzā+—an Aūzbeg envoy to Bābur (935) 631; receives gifts 632, 641.

+Amīn-i-muḥammad Tarkhān+ Arghūn—punished for disobedience (925) 390-1; deals with a drunken companion 415.

+Amīr Khān+, chief guardian of T̤ahmāsp Ṣafawī—☛ negociates with Bābur (927) 433.

Mullā +Apāq+—particulars 526; on Bābur's service (932) 526, 528, (933) 539, (934) 590; surprised by Sangā (933) 549; made shíqdār of Chandīrī 598; his retainers on service (935) 679.

+Apāq Bega+ Jalāīr Chaghatāī, sister of Ḥusan-i-`alī—a poet 286.

Sayyida +Apāq Begīm+ Andikhūdī—particulars 267, 268, 269; visited in Herāt by Bābur (912) 301.

+Apāq Khān+, see Ghāzī Khān.

+Apāq Khān+ Yūsuf-khail, see Ghāzī Khān.

+Apāq-sulṯān Begīm+ Mīrān-shāhī Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, daughter of Abū-sa`īd—one of the paternal aunts visited by Bābur (912) 301 n. 3.

+Āq Begīm+ (1), Bāī-qarā Tīmūrid, Barlāṣ Turk, daughter of Ḥusain and Pāyanda-sulṯān—particulars 265; [pre-deceased her husband who died ♰911 AH.-1504 AD.].

+Āq Begīm+ (2), Mīrān-shāhī Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk—daughter of Abū-sa`īd and Khadīja—particulars 262, 268; waited on by Bābur (935) 606.

+Āq Begīm+ (3), ut supra, daughter of Maḥmūd and Khān-zāda II.—brought to join Bābur's march (910) 48.

+Āq Begīm+ (4), see Ṣāliḥa-sulṯān.

+Āq-būghā Beg+, one of Tīmūr's chiefs—collateral ancestor of Khudāī-bīrdī Tīmūr-tāsh 24.

+`Āqil Sulṯān+ Aūzbeg-Shaibān, son of `Ādil and Shād Bāī-qarā—his conjectured descent 264 n. 1 (where in l. 4 for "`āqil" read `ādil).

+Arāīsh Khān+—proffers support to Bābur against Ibrāhīm Lūdī (932) 463; in the left centre at Kānwa (933) 565; negociates about surrendering Chandīrī (934) 594; his gift of a boat to Bābur 663.

+Arghūn Sulṯān+, elder brother of Muḥammad `Alī Jang-jang—deputed to hold Milwat (Malot., 932) 461.

Shaikh +`Ārif+ Āẕarī, nephew of Tīmūr's story-teller, see Index s.n. Aūlūgh Beg Shāh-rukhī; [♰866 AH.-1461-2 AD. æt. 82, Beale].

+Arslān+ Jazāla—his building of the Rabāṯ-i-sang-bast 301 n. 1.

+Asad Beg+ Turkmān—joins Ḥusain Bāī-qarā 279; his brother Taham-tan q.v.

Khwāja and Khwājagī +Asadu'l-lāh+ Jān-dār, Khawāfī—with Bābur in Dikh-kat (907) 150; envoy to T̤ahmāsp Ṣafawī (933) 540, 583; has charge of Ibrāhīm Lūdī's mother 543; in the right wing at Kānwa 566, 569.

Khwāja +Āṣafi+—particulars 286; waits on Bābur (912) 286; [♰920 or 926 AH.-1514 or 1520 AD.].

+`Asas+, see Khwāja Muḥammad `Alī `asas.

+`Āshiq+ bakāwal—with advance-troops for Chandīrī (934) 590; ordered on service (935) 638.

+`Āshiq-i-muḥammad Kūkūldāsh+ Arghūn, son of "Amīr Tarkhān Junaid" (Ḥ.S. lith. ed. iii, 359)—defends Ālā-qūrghān against Shaibānī (913) 328; his brother Mazīd Beg q.v.

+`Āshiqu'l-lāh+ Arghūn—killed fighting against Bābur at Qandahār (913) 333 (where for "`Ashaq" read `Āshiq).

+Asīru'd-dīn+ Akhsīkītī, a poet—his birthplace Akhsī-village (kīt-kīnt) 9-10; [♰608 AH.-1211-2 AD.].

Muhammad +`Askarī+ Mīrān-shāhī Tīmūrīd, Barlās Turk, son of Bābur and Gul-rukh—☛ his birth (922) 364; gifts to him (932) 523, (933) 628; ☛ his recall from Multān (934) 603-4-5, 699[2878]; waits on his father (935) 605; made Commander (æt. cir. 12) of the army of the East 628, 637; at a feast 631; takes leave 634; waits on his father at Dugdugī 651; east of the Ganges 654; in the battle of the Ghogrā 668-9, 671-3; waits on Bābur after the victory 674; [♰965 AH.-1557-8 AD.].

+Asūk Mal+ Rājpūt—negociates with Bābur for Sangā's son (934-5) 612-3.

Sayyid +`Atā+, see Khwāja Aḥmad Yasawī.

Khwāja Jamālu'd-īn +`Aṯā+—particulars 282 (where in n. 3 for (Ḥ.S. iii), "345" read 348-9).

+Atākā+ bakhshī (var. Ātīkā, Pers. Atka)—a surgeon who dresses a wound of Bābur's (908) 169.

+Atā+ mīr-ākhẉur—gives Bābur a meal (925) 418.

Mīr Burhānu'd-dīn +`Aṯā'u'l-lāh+ Mashhadī—particulars 285 (Ḥ.S. iii, 345); [♰926 AH.-1520 AD.].

+Atūn Māmā+, a governess—walks from Samarkand to Pashāghar (907) 148; mentioned? (925) 407 l. 4.

+Aūghān-bīrdī+ Mughūl (var. Afghān-bīrdī and -tardī)—on service (925) 376, 377; of a boat-party 387; in the battle of the Ghogrā (935) 671, 672.

Sayyid Āūghlāqchī, see Murād.

+Auliya Khān+ Ishrāqī—waits on Bābur (935) 677.

+Aūlūgh Beg Mīrzā+ Bāī-qarā Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, son of Muḥammad Sulṯān Mīrzā—his (?) journey to Hindustan (933) 265.

+Aūlūgh Beg Mīrzā+ Kābulī, Mīrān-shāhī, ut supra, son of Abū-sa`īd—particulars 95; his earliest guardians amusingly frustrate his designs against them 270; his dealings with the Yūsuf-zāī App. K. xxxvi; his co-operation with Ḥusain Bāī-qarā against the Aūzbegs 190; his praise of Istālīf 216; his death (907) 185; gardens of his bought by Bābur (perhaps one only) 216, (911) 246; another garden 315; houses of his 247, 251; his Almshouse 315; referred to 284; his joint-guardians Muḥammad Barandūq and Jahāngīr Barlās, his later one Wais Ātāka q.v.; his sons `Abdu'r-razzāq and Mīrān-shāh, his daughter Bega Begīm and daughter-in-law Manauwar q.v.; [♰907 AH.-1501-2 AD.].

+Aūlūgh Beg Mīrzā+ Shāh-rukhī, ut supra (Ūlūgh), son of Shāh-rukh—his Trans-oxus rule 85[2879]; receives Yūnas Chaghatāī badly (832-3?) 19-20; defeated by Abā-bikr Mīrān-shāhī 260; his family dissensions 20; his constructions, Astronomical and other 74, 77, 78-9[2880]; his sportsmanship 34[2881]; his murder and its chronograms 85; Bābur resides in his College (906) 142; his sons `Abdu'l-laṯīf and `Abdu'l-`azīz q.v.; a favoured beg Yūsuf Aūghlāqchī q.v.; Preface, q.v. On the misnomer "Mughūl Dynasty". [♰853 AH.-1449 AD.].

+Aūlūs Āghā+ (Ūlūs), daughter of Khwāja Ḥusain q.v.—particulars 24.

+Aūrdū-būghā Tarkhān+ Arghūn (Ūrdū)—his son-in-law Abū-sa`īd Mīrān-shāhī and son Darwesh-i-muḥammad q.v.

+Aūrdū-shāh+—murdered as an envoy (923) 463 n. 3.

+Aurangzīb Pādshāh+ Mīrān-shāhī Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk—☛ referred to as of Bābur's line 184; [♰1118 AH.-O.S. 1707 AD.].

Amīr +Aūrūs+—☛ flees from his post on Shaibānī's death (916) 350.

+Aūrūs-i `Alī Sayyid+ Mughūl, son? of `Alī Sayyid—in the centre at Qandahār (913) 335.

+Aūrūs+ Arghūn—his son Muḥammad-i-aūrūs q.v.

+Aūzbeg Bahādur+ (Ūzbeg)—☛ one of five champions worsted in single combat by Bābur (914) 349 n. 1.

+Aūzūn Ḥasan Beg+ Āq-qūīlūq Turkmān—his defeat of the Qarā-qūīlūq Turkmāns and of Abū-sa`īd Mīrān-shāhī 49; [♰883 AH.-1478 AD.].

Khwāja +Aūzūn Ḥasan+ (Ūzūn)[2882]—negociates for Bābur (899) 30; his appointment 32; confers in Bābur's interests (900) 43 (where add his name after `Alī-dost's); acts for Jahāngīr against Bābur (903) 87, 88, 91, (904) 100, 101, 102; his servant's mischievous report of Bābur's illness (903) 89; his men defeated by Bābur's allies 102; loses Akhsī and Andijān 102-3; captured and released by Bābur 104; goes into Samarkand to help Bābur (907) 146; his brother Ḥusain and adopted son Mīrīm q.v.

+`Ayisha-sulṯān Begīm+ Bāī-qarā Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, daughter of Ḥusain—particulars 267; her husbands Qāsim Aūzbeg-Shaibān and Būrān, her sons Qāsim-i-ḥusain and `Abdu'l-lāh q.v.

+`Ayisha-sulṯān Begīm+ Mīrān-shāhī, ut supra, daughter of Aḥmad (Alacha Khān) and first wife of Bābur—particulars 35, 36; married (905) 35, 120, 711; joins Bābur in Samarkand (906) 135-6; her child 136; leaves Bābur 36.

Mīr +Ayūb Beg+ Begchīk—particulars 50; sent by The Khān (Maḥmūd) to help Bābur (903) 92, (906) 138, 161, 170; his Mughūls misbehave at Sar-i-pul (Khwāja Kārdzan) 140; claims post in the right wing (tūlghuma) 155; his Mughūls confuse pass-words 164; in the right wing at Qandahār (913) 334; ☛ vainly tempts Sa`id Chaghatāī to betray Bābur (916) 351; ☛ does not then desert 352, 362; ☛ rebels in Ḥiṣār (918) 362; ☛ dying, repents his disloyalty (920) 362; his sons Buhlūl-i-ayūb, Ya`qūb-i-ayūb and Yūsuf-i-ayūb q.v.; [♰920 AH.-1514 AD.].

+`Aẕim Humāyūn+ Sarwānī—invests Gūāliār 477; his title changed and why (933) 537; his son Fatḥ Khān q.v.

Mīr +`Azū+, a musical composer—particulars 292.

+Bābā `Alī+ aīshīk-āghā (īshīk), a Lord-of-the-Gate of Ḥusain Bāī-qarā—particulars 278; his son Yūnas-i-`alī and friend Badru'd-dīn q.v.

Bābā-qulī's Sulṯān +Bābā `Alī Beg+[2883]—particulars 27; his sons Bābā-qulī, Sayyidīm `Alī and Dost-i-anjū (?) Shaikh q.v.; [♰900 AH.-1495 AD.].

+Bābā-aūghūlī+, see Pāpā-aūghūlī.

+Bābā Chuhra+, a household brave—reprieved from death (914) 344; on Bābur's service (932) 474, 534, (934) 590, 602; does well in the battle of the Ghogrā (935) 671.

+Bābā Ḥusain+, see Ḥusain.

+Bābā Jān+ akhtachī, a groom or squire—Bābur dislocates his own thumb in striking him (925) 409.

+Bābā Jān+ qābūzī—musician at entertainments (925) 386-7, 388.

+Bābā Kābulī+ Turk, son of Mīr `Alī, Shāh-rukh (Tīmūrid)'s Governor of Kābul—nominated `Umar Shaikh's guardian when Kābul was allotted to the boy 14; particulars 382; his brothers Daryā Khān and Ghāzī (Apāq) Khān q.v.

+Bābā Khān Sulṯān+ Chaghatāī Chīngīz-khānīd, (Bābājāk), son of Aḥmad (Alacha Khān)—his ceremonious meeting with Bābur (908) 159; [living in 948 AH.-1542—T.R.].

+Bābā Khān+ Chaghatāī, son of The Khān (Maḥmūd)—murdered with his father and brothers by Shaibānī (914) 35.

+Bābā Qashqa+ Mughūl (perhaps identical with Qashqa Maḥmūd Chīrās q.v.)—out with Bābur (925) 404, 405; in charge of Dībālpūr (930) 442; his brothers Malik Qāsim and Kūkī; his sons Shāh Muḥammad, Dost-i-muḥammad and Ḥājī Muḥammad Khān Kūkī q.v.; [♰cir. 940 AH.-1553 AD.].[2884]

Sulṯān +Bābā-qulī Beg+, son of Sulṯān Bābā `Alī Beg—serving under Khusrau Shāh (901) 60, 61; with Bābur and captured (903) 72; staunch to him 91; in the centre at Qandahār (913) 335; conveys royal letters (932) 529.[2885]

+Bābā Sairāmī+—pursues Bābur in his flight from Akhsī (908) 178; promised fidelity but seems to have been false 179-182.

+Bābā Shaikh+ Chaghatāī, brother of Mullā Bābā Pashāgharī—in the left centre at Qandahār (913) 335; ☛ rebels at Ghaznī (921) 363; forgiven (925) 397; deserts Humāyūn (932) 546; his capture and death 545; a reward given for his head id.; [♰932 or 933 AH.-1526 AD.].

+Bābā Shaikh+—sent out for news (935) 661.

+Bābā Sher-zād+—one of three with Bābur against Taṃbal (908) 163; does well at Akhsī 174; fights against rebels at Kābul (912) 315; at Qandahār (913) 335.

+Bābā Sulṯān+ Chaghatāī Chīngīz-khānid, son of Khalīl son of Aḥmad (Alacha Khān)—waits on Bābur near Kālpī (934) 590; particulars 590; on service 318, (934) 599; not at his post (935) 672.

+Bābā Yāsāwal+—at the siege of Bajaur (925) 370; chops at a tiger's head 393.

+Bābū Khān+—holding Kalanjar and looking towards Hātī Kākar (925) 387.

Ẓahīru'd-dīn Muḥammad Bābur Pādshāh Mīrān-shāhī Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk—b. Muḥarram 6th 888 AH.-Feb. 14th 1483 AD. p. 1; ♰Jumāda I, 6th 937 AH.-Dec. 26th 1530 A.D. 708; +Parentage+:—paternal 13; maternal 19, 21; +Titles+:—Mīrzā (inherited) Pādshāh (taken) 344; Ghāzī (won) 574; Firdaus-makānī (Dweller-in-paradise, posthumous) see Gladwin's Revenue Accounts; +Religion+:—[2886]belief in God's guidance 31, 72-3, 103-13-37-94-99; in His intervention 73, 247, 316, 446-51-74-79, 525-96, 620; that His will was done 55, 100-16-32-34-35-67, 269, 316-22-23-36-37-70, 454-70-71-80, 542-94, 627-28-70; that He has pleasure in good 331; that to die is to go to His mercy 67; reliance on Him 100-08-16-32, 311, 463, 678; God called to witness 254 and invoked to bless 624; His punishment of sin 42-5, 449-77 (Hell), and of breach of Law 449; His visitation of a father's sins on children 45; His predestination of events 128, 243-46-53, 469, 594; —prayer to Him for a sign of victory 440, for the dead 246, against a bad wife 258; a life-saving prayer 316; +Characteristics+:—ambition 92-7; admiration of high character 27, 67, 89, 90; bitterness and depression (in youth) 91, 130-52-57-78; consideration for dependants 91-9, 158-78-96, 469; distrust of the world 95, 144-56; silent humiliation 119; fairness 15, 24, 91, 105, 469; fearlessness 163-5-73; fidelity:—to word 104, 129 (see 118-9), 172-3, 194, to salt 125, to family-relation,—filial 88-9, 135-49-57-58-88, —fraternal see Jahāngīr and Nāṣir,—Tīmūrid 41, 149-57-68, Chaghatāī 54, 169-72, Mughūl 27, 119-25, Aūzbeg 37; friendship see Nūyān and Khw. Kalān; good judgment 43, 87, 91, 134-37-55; gratitude 99, 633; insouciance 150; joy at release from stress 99, 134-35-48-81; bashfulness and passion 120; persistence 92-7 and passim; promptitude 117, 170; reprobation of vice, tyranny and cruelty 42-5-6, 50, 66, 70, 90-6, 102-10-25-97, 290 and of an unmotherly woman 125-28; self-reproach 147; self-comment on inexperienced action 165-67-73; dislike of talkativeness 28, 97, 143-92-93; vexation at loss of rule (æt. 14) 90-1-9, 129-30-57; truth for truth sake 135, 318; seeking and weighing counsel 73, 100-14-31-41-65-70-73-97-98, 229-30-31-48, 340-76-78, 410-12-69, 524-30-77, 628-39-67-69-82; enjoins Humāyūn to take counsel 627; +Occupations+ (non-military):—archery i.a. 175; calligraphy see infra; literary composition see infra; metrical amusements see verse; Natural History passim; travel, excursions, sight-seeing, social intercourse passim; building 5, 217-9, 375-98, in Dūlpūr 585, 606-07-42, in Āgra 642, in Kābul 646-7, in Sīkrī 588, Ajodhyā mosque 656 n. 3, App. U, Pānīpat mosque 472 n. 1; gardening and garden-making passim; —Bābur's script (Bāburī-khat̤t̤) devised 910 AH. 228, Qorān transcribed by him in it 228 n. 4; studied by an enquirer 285; alphabet and specimens sent to Bābur's sons 642; Abūshqa account of, App. Q, lxii to lxv; +Observance and breaches of Muḥ. Law+:—signs of his Sunnī mind e.g. 25, 44, 111, 262, 370-7, 483, 547-51-74-89-96, in the Mubīn and Wālidiyyah-risāla q.v.; his orthodox reputation 711; his heterodox seeming 354, and arrow-sped disclaimer 361; —his boyish obedience as to wine 302, up to his 23rd year 299, 302-3-4; for breach see Law and Wine; +Writings+:—a. Verses in the B.N. down to 926 AH. see infra; b. First Dīwān 402;* perhaps containing the Abūshqa quotations 438; c. Diary of 925 and 926 q.v. AH. (probably a survival of more) *438; d. The Mubīn (928 AH.) 426-37-38-49; quoted 630-31 n. 3; e. Treatise on Prosody (931 AH.) 586, App. Q, lx, lxvi; f. The Wālidiyyah-risāla (935 AH.) 619-20-31 n. 3, (tarjuma) 642-3, App. Q, lix; g. The Hindūstān Poems 642, App. Q; h. Rāmpūr MS. of 6 and 7. App. Q, referred to *438, 620 n. 6, 642 n. 3; i. Diary of 932 to 936 q.v.; j. Narrative of 899 to within 914 AH. q.v.; +Bābur's verse quoted in the Bābur-nāma+:—(Turkī,) love-sickness 120-1; the worldling 130; granting a request 137; respite from stress 148; praise of a beloved 153; the neglected exile 154; isolation 156; the New Years 236; Fortune's cruelty 309; ? Turkmān Hazāra raid 312; Spring 321; God only is strength 337; dealing with tribesmen 393; greeting to absent convives 401; message to a kinswoman 402; his broken vow 449, 450 n.; reply to Khw. Kalān 526; disobedience to Law (T. & P.) 556; Death inevitable (T. & P.) 556 (?); the Ghāzī's task 575; to those who have left him 584; couplet used in metrical amusement 586, App. 2, sect. 2; fever 588; Chandīrī 596; on his first grandson's birth 624; Mūbīn quoted 637; Pagan lands 637; pain in renunciation 648; an invitation 683; [Persian,] good in everything 311; insight of Age 340; on casting off his Shī`a seeming 361; parting from Khw. Kalān 372; a message 411; satirical couplet 448; before Pānīpat 470; Bīāna warned 529. See Table of Contents, On Bābur's Naming.

+Bābur Mīrzā+ Arlāt, son of Muḥammad-i-qāsim and Rābi`a-sulṯān Mīrān-shāhī—his Bāī-qarā marriage 266.

`Abdu'l-qāsim +Bābur Mīrzā+ Shāh-rukhī Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, son of Bāī-sunghar—his sister 265; his retainers Muḥammad Barandūq and Mazīd q.v.; his pleasure-house 302; [♰861 AH.-1457 AD.].

Bāburī—a bāzār-boy (905) 120.

+Badī`u'l-jamāl Begīm+ Mīrān-shāhī Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, daughter of Abū-sa`īd—waited on by Bābur near Āgra (935) 616.

Badī`u'l-jamāl +Badka Begīm+ Bāī-qarā, ut supra, daughter of Manṣūr and Fīrūza—particulars 257, 258; her husband Aḥmad Ḥājī-tarkhānī, their sons Maḥmūd and Bahādur and daughter Khān-zāda q.v.

+Badī`u'z-zamān Mīrzā+ Bāī-qarā, ut supra, son of Ḥusain and Bega Mervī—serving his father against Khusrau Shāh (901) 57; defeated 61; takes offence with his father 61, 69; in arms and defeated by his father 69, 70; his retort on Nawā'ī (q.v.); goes destitute to Khusrau Shāh and is well-treated 70, 130; on Khusrau Shāh's service 71; moves with Arghūn chiefs against his father (903) 95, 261; gives Bābur no help against Shaibānī (906) 138; his co-operation sought by his father (910) 190, 191; takes refuge with his father 243; has fear for himself (911) 292-3; joint-ruler in Herī 293; concerts and abandons action against Shaibānī (912) 296-7, 301; his social relations with Bābur 297, 8, 9, 300, 2, 4; courteous to Bābur as a non-drinker 303; a false report of him in Kābul (912) 313; irresolute against Shaibānī (913) 326; his army defeated 275, 327; abandons his family and flees (1) to Shāh Beg Arghūn, (2) to Ismā`īl Ṣafawī 327; captured in Tabrīz by Sulṯān Sālim Rūmī (920) and dies in Constantinople (923) 327 n. 5; a couplet on his name 201-2; musicians compete in his presence 291; his host-facility 304; his son Muḥammad-i-zamān, his begs Jahāngīr Barlās and Ẕū'n-nūn Arghūn q.v..; joined by Sayyidīm Dārbān q.v; his College in Herī 306; [♰923 AH.-1517 AD.].

Sayyid +Badr+—particulars 276; safe-guards Maḥmūd Mīrān-shāhī 46-7; seen by Bābur in Herāt (912) 299; (see Ḥ.S. lith. ed. iii, 233).

+Badru'd-dīn+—particulars 278; his friend Bābā `Alī q.v.; his son (?) receives Kachwa (934) 590.

Maulānā +Badru'd-dīn+ Hilālī, Chaghatāī—particulars 290; his poet-daughter 286 n. 1; [♰939 AH.-1532-3 AD.].

+Bahādur Khān+ Sarwānī—Bābur halts at his tomb (935) 686.

+Bahādur Khān+ Gujrātī, Tānk Rājpūt—ill-received by Ibrāhīm Lūdī (932); exchanges friendly letters with Bābur 534; becomes Shāh in Gujrāt 535; is given the Khīljī jewels 613 n. 1; [♰943 AH.-1547 AD.].

+Bahjat Khān+ (or Bihjat), a Governor of Chandīrī—Bābur halts near his tank (934) 592, 594.

+Bāī-qarā Mīrzā+ `Umar-shaikhī Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, grandson of Tīmūr—mentioned in a genealogy 256; a grandson `Abdu'l-lāh Andikhūdī q.v.

+Bāī-qarā Mīrzā+ `Umar-shaikhī, ut supra, son of Manṣūr and Fīrūza—particulars 257; his brother Ḥusain, and sons Wais and Iskandar q.v.

+Bairām Beg+[2887]—☛ reinforces Bābur from Balkh (918) 359; serving Najm S̤ānī 360.

+Bairām Khān+ Bahārlū-Qarā-qūīlūq Turkmān (Akbar's Khān-i-khānān), son of Saif-`alī—his ancestry 91 n. 3, 109 n. 5 (where for "father" read "grandfather"); ☛ mention of a witness of his assassination 348; quotation of his remarks on Ḥasan Khān Mewātī 523 n. 3; [♰968 AH.-1561 AD.].

+Bairām-sulṯān Begīm+ Bāī-qarā Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, daughter of Ḥusain and Mīnglī—particulars 266; her husband `Abdu'l-lāh Andikhūdī, their son Barka q.v.

+Bāī-sunghar Mīrzā+ Mīrān-shāhī, ut supra, son of Maḥmūd and Pasha—particulars 47, 110-112; succeeds in Samarkand (900) 52, 86; withstands The Khān (Maḥmūd) 52; the khuṯba read for him in Bābur's lands 52; his man surrenders Aūrā-tīpā 55-6; his favouritism incites the Tarkhān rebellion (901) 38, 61; escapes from Tarkhān imprisonment 62, 86; defeated by his half-brother `Alī 38, 63; prosperous (902) 65; moves against `Alī 65; retires before Bābur 66; at grips with him 67; asks Shaibānī's help (903) 73; goes to Khusrau Shāh 74; made ruler in Ḥiṣār 93, 5, 6, 261; murdered (905) 110; his death referred to 50, 112; his pen-name `Ādilī 111; his sister's marriage 41; his brother Mas`ūd, his guardian Ayūb q.v.; [♰905 AH.-1499 AD.].

+Bāī-sunghar Mīrzā+ Shāh-rukhī Tīmūrid, son of Shāh-rukh—his servant Yūsuf Andijānī 4; [♰837 AH.-1433-4 AD.].

+Balkhī+ falīz-kārī—grows melons in Āgra (935) 686.

+Bāltū+—rescues Khalīfa's son Muḥibb-i-`alī (933) 550.

Mullā +Banā'ī+—Maulānā Jamālu'd-dīn Bana'ī—in Khwāja Yaḥyā's service and seen by Bābur (901) 64, in Shaibānī's (906) 136, in Bābur's 64, 136; particulars 286-7; given the Herī's authors to loot (913) 328; Bābur recalls a joke of his (935) 648; two of his quatrains quoted 137; his musical composition 286, 292; [murdered 918 AH. -1512 AD.].

+Banda-i-`alī+, dāroghā of Karnān—pursues Bābur from Akhsī (908) 178-9, 180, 181.

+Banda-i-`alī+ Yāragī Mughūl, son of Ḥaidar Kūkūldāsh—sent to reinforce Bābur (904) 101; in the van at Sar-i-pul (906) 139; his mistimed zeal (908) 176; his son-in-law Qāsim Beg qūchīn q.v.

+Bāqī Beg+ Chaghānīānī, Qībchāq Turk—his influence on Mas`ūd Mīrān-shāhī (901) 57, (903) 95; defends Ḥiṣār for him (901) 58; acts against him (902) 71; joins Bābur (910) 48, 188-9; advises sensibly 190, 197; leaves his family with Bābur's 191; dislikes Qaṃbar-i-`alī Silākh 192; helps his brother Khusrau to make favourable terms with Bābur 192-3; quotes a couplet on seeing Suhail 195; his Mughūls oppose Khusrau 197; mediates for Muqīm Arghūn (910) 199; Bābur acts on his advice 230-1, 239, (911) 246, 249; particulars 249-50; dismissed towards Hindūstān 250; killed on his road 231, 251; his son Muḥammad-i-qāsim and grandson(?) Aḥmad-i-qāsim q.v.; [♰911 AH.-1505-6 AD.].

+Bāqī+ Gāgīānī Afghān—his caravan through the Khaibar (911) 250.

+Bāqī+ (khīz)ḥīz—opposes Bābur (908) 174, 396.

Khwāja +Bāqī+, son of Yaḥyā son of Aḥrārī—murdered 128; [♰906 AH.-1500 AD.].[2888]

+Bāqī Beg+ Tāshkindī, shaghāwal and (later) mīng-bāshī (= hazārī)—sent to Balkh with promise of head-money (932) 463, 546; on service (934) 590, 601, 2; reports from Aūd (Oudh) (935) 679; on service with the Aūd (Oudh) army 684, 5; leave given him for home 685.

+Bāqī Tarkhān+, Arghūn Chīngīz-khānid, son of `Abdu'l-`alī and a daughter of Aūrdū-būghā—particulars 38, 40; consumes the Bukhārā revenues (905) 121; defeated by Shaibānī 124; occupies Qarshī (qy. Kesh) (906) 135; plans to join Bābur 138; goes to Shaibānī and dies in misery 40.

+Bārāq Khān+, Chaghatāī Chīngīz-khānid—mentioned in the genealogy of Yūnas 19.

+Bārāq Sulṯān+ Aūzbeg-Shaibān Chīngīz-khānid, son of Sīūnjuk—at Jām (934) 622.

Sayyid +Barka+ Andikhūdī, Tīmūr's exhumation of his body 266 n. 4.

Sayyid +Barka+ Andikhūdī, descendant of the last-entered, son of `Abdu'l-lāh—particulars 266; serving Bābur (917) 266.

+Bār-mal+ Īdrī—his force at Kānwa (933) 562.

+Bā-sa`īd+ Tarkhānī, see Abū-sa`īd Tarkhānī.

+Basant Rāo+—killed by (Bābā Qashqa's brother?) Kūkī in the battle of the Ghogrā 673; [♰935 AH.-1529 AD.].

+Baṯalmīūs+ (Ptolemy)—mentioned as constructor of an observatory 79.

Sulṯān +Bāyazīd+[2889]—urges attack on the Afrīdī (925) 411, 412.

Shaikh +Bāyazīd+, Farmūlī Afghān—acts for his dead brother Muṣṯafa[2890] (932) 527; waits on Bābur and receives Aūd (Oudh) 527; on service 530; in Aūd (933) 544; his loyalty tested (934) 589; with Bīban, opposing Bābur 594, 598-601, 2, (935) 638; serving Maḥmūd Lūdī against Bābur 652, 673; Bābur resolves to crush him and Bīban 677-8; mentioned 679, 692; takes Luknūr(?) 681, App. T; action continued against him 681, 2, 5; his comrade Bīban q.v.; [♰937 AH.-1531 AD.].

Shaikh +Bāyazīd+ Itārachī Mughūl, brother of Aḥmad Taṃbal—holding Akhsī for Jahāngīr (908) 170; sends a force against Pāp 171; receives Bābur in Akhsī 171-2; made prisoner against Bābur's wish 173; escapes 175; reported as sending Yūsuf dāroghā to Bābur's hiding-place 182.

+Bega Begīm (1)+, Bāī-qarā Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, daughter of Ḥusain and Pāyanda—particulars 266; [♰ before Ḥusain 911 AH.-1505 AD.].

+Bega Begīm (2)+, Mīrān-shāhī ut supra, daughter of Aūlūgh Beg Kābulī—her marriage with Muḥammad Ma`ṣūm Bāī-qarā (902) 264.

+Bega Begīm (3)+, Mīrān-shāhī ut supra, daughter of Mahmud and Khān-zāda II—betrothed to Ḥaidar Bāī-qarā (901) 48, 61, 263; married (903) 48; their child 263.

+Bega Begīm (4)+, Shāh-rukhī ut supra, daughter of Bāī-sunghar (Shāh-rukhī)—her grandson's marriage 265.

+Bega Begīm (5)+,—Ḥājī Begīm—daughter of Yādgār T̤aghāī, wife of Humāyūn—her son Al-amān q.v.

+Bega Begīm (6)+,—"the Bībī"—, see Mubārika.

+Bega Sulṯān Begīm+ Mervī, wife of Ḥusain Bāī-qarā—particulars 261, 7, 8; divorced 268; her son Badī`u'z-zamān q.v.; [893 AH.-1488 AD.].

Wais Lāghari's +Beg-gīna+,—brings Bābur news of Al-amān's birth (935) 621, 4.[2891]

The +Begīms+, Bābur's paternal aunts—waited on by him 301, 616, 686.

+Begīm Sulṯān+, see Sa`ādat-bakht.

+Begī Sulṯān Āghācha+, ghūnchachī of Ḥusain Bāī-qarā—particulars 269.

+Beg Mīrak+ Mughūl—brings Bābur good news (932) 466; on service (933) 548.

+Beg Mīrak+ Turkmān, a beg of the Chīrās (Mughūl) tūmān—acts for Yūnas Khān 191; [♰832 AH.-1428-9 AD.].

+Beg Tīlba+ Itārachī Mughūl, brother of Aḥmad Taṃbal—induces the Khān (Maḥmūd) not to help Bābur (903) 91, (905) 115; his light departure perplexes his brother 116; invites Shaibānī into Farghāna (908) 172.

+Bhupat Rao+, son of Ṣalāḥu'd-dīn—killed at Kānwa 573; [♰933 AH.-1527 AD.].

+Bīān Shaikh+ (Biyān)—his rapid journeys 621, 624; brings news of the battle of Jām (935) 622, 623 n. 3; the source of his news 624 n. 1; hurried back 624, 627.

+Bīān-qulī+—his son Khān-qulī q.v.

Malik +Bīban+ Jilwānī?[2892] Afghān—deserts `Ālam Khān Lūdī (932) 457 and n. 2; writes dutifully to Bābur 464; is presuming at an audience 466; deserts Bābur 468, 528; is defeated 528-9; with Bāyazīd, besieges Luknūr (933) 582; defeats Bābur's troops 594, 598; opposes Bābur in person (934) 598-601; referred to as a rebel (935) 638; serving Maḥmūd Lūdī 652, 675; Bābur resolves to crush him 677-8; mentioned 679 n. 7, 692; takes Luknūr(?) 681, App. T; action taken against him 681, 2, 5; his constant associate Bāyazīd Farmūlī q.v.

Muḥammad Shāh, +Bihār Khān+ Bihārī, Nūḥānī Afghān, son of Daryā Khān—declared independent in Bihār (932) 523; particulars 664; his widow Dūdū and son Jalāl q.v.; [♰934 AH.-1527 AD.].

+Bihār Khān+ Lūdī (or Pahār Khān),[2893] a Panj-āb amīr of Ibrāhīm Lūdī's in 930 AH.—[2894] defeated by Bābur (930) 208, 441 (where add "or Pahār"), 578; a chronogram which fixes the date 575.

+Bihjat+, see Bahjat.

+Bih-būd Beg+—particulars 277, App. H, and Additional Notes under p. 277.

Ustād Kamālu'd-dīn +Bih-zād+—particulars 291; his training due to Nawā'ī 272; is instructed in drawing by Shaibānī (913) 329.

+Rāja of Bījānagar+ (Vījāyanagar)—mentioned as ruling in 932 AH. 483.

+Rāja Bikam-deo+, named in the Hindūstān Revenue List.

+Rāja Bīkam-chand+, ut supra.

+Rāja Bīkramājīt+, ut supra.

+Bī-khūb Sulṯān+ (var. Nī- or Naī-khūb)? Aūzbeg-Shaibān—on Bābur's service (934) 589, 602, (935) 651, 682; in the battle of the Ghogrā 669.

Rānā +Bikramājīt+, son of Sangā and Padmāwatī—negotiations for him with Bābur (934) ☛ 603, 612, (935) 612-3, 615, 616; pact made with him 616-7; possessor of Khiljī jewels 613; his mother Padmāwatī and her kinsman Asūk Mal q.v.

Rājā +Bikramājīt+ Gūālīārī, Tūnwar Rājpūt—his ancestral fortress 477; his Koh-i-nūr (932) 477; his buildings 607-610 and nn.; his palace Bābur's quarters (935) 607; his death (932) 477; [♰932 AH.-1526 AD.].

Rāja +Bikramājīt+ (Vikramādītya)—his Observatory and Tables 79.

+Bīrīm Deo+ Malinhās—on Bābur's service (932) 462.

Rāja +Bīr-sing Deo+—named in the Revenue List (935) 521; his force at Kānwa (933) 562; serving Bābur 639.

Khalīfa's +Bīshka+(?)—a woman who leaves Samarkand with Bābur's mother (907) 147.

+Bīshka Mīrzā+ Itārachī Mughūl—brings and receives gifts (925) 415, 416.

+Brethren of Bābur+—removal of their opposition to his aim on Hindūstān 478.

+Buhlūl-i-ayūb+ Begchīk, son of Ayūb—Bābur warned against him (910) 190; joins Bābur 196; his misconduct 241, (911) 254.

Sulṯān +Buhlūl+, +Sāhū-khail Lūdī+, Afghān—grandfather of Ibrāhīm 463; his treasure 470; his tomb visited by Bābur 476; his capture of Jūnpūr and Dihlī 481; his sons Sikandar and `Alau'u'd-dīn q.v.; [♰894 AH.-1488 AD.].

Pahlawān +Buhlūl+, tufang-andāzī—receives gifts (935) 633.

+Būjka+, a household bravo—on Bābur's service (932) 458, 474, 534, (933) 545; his success at Bīāna 547.

Malik +Bū Khān+ Dilah-zāk (Dilazāk) Afghān—receives gifts from Bābur (925) 394; brings tribute 409.

+Būrān Sulṯān+ Aūzbeg-Shaibān—his marriage with `Āyisha-sulṯān Bāī-qarā 267; their son `Abdu'l-lāh q.v.

Shaikh +Burhānu'd-dīn `Alī Qīlīch+, Marghīnānī, author of the Hidāyat—his birthplace Rashdān 7; a descendant 29, 89; [♰593 AH.-1197 AD.].

Malik +Bū-sa`īd+ Kamarī—a guide (910) 230, 231; doubted 233.

+Chaghatāī Khān+, second son of Chīngīz Khān—his yūrt (camping-ground) occupied by his descendant Yūnas 12; mentioned in the genealogy of Yūnas 19; [♰638 AH.-1241 AD.].

+Chākū+ Barlās, one of Tīmūr's noted men—an ancestor of Muḥammad Barandūq 270; descent of his line to Akbar's day 270 n. 2.

Rāī +Chandrabān+, Chauhān Rājpūt—killed at Kānwa (933) 573; [♰933 AH.-1527 A.D.].

+Chāpūq+ (Slash-face), see Ibrāhīm Begchik.

Sulṯān Aḥmad +Chār-shaṃba+—unhorses Muḥammad Mūmin[2895] Bāī-qarā (902) 71; coincident occurrences of "Chār-shaṃba" 71.

Ismā`īl +Chilma+ (or Chalma), son of Ibrāhīm Jānī—writes particulars of the battle of Jām (935) 624.

+Chilma+ Mughūl (or Chalma)—in the centre at Qandahār (913) 335; rebels in Kābul (914) 345.

+Chilma+ tāghchī Mughūl (? shoeing-smith)—in the centre at Qandahār (913) 335.

+Chīngīz Khān+ Mughūl—counted back to in Yunās Khān's genealogy 12, 19; his capture of Samarkand (619 AH.-1222 AD.) 75; referred to concerning the name Qarshī 84; his Rules (Tūra) 155, 298; [♰624 AH.-1227 AD.].

+Chīn+ Ṣūfī—defends Khwārizm for Ḥusain Bāī-qarā against Shaibāni (910) 242 n. 3, 244; killed in the surrender 255-6; [♰911 AH.-1505-6 AD.].

+Chīn-tīmūr Sulṯān+ Chaghatāī Chīngīz-khānid, son of Aḥmad—mentioned s.a. 912 as serving Bābur 318; succeeds against Ibrāhīm Lūdī's advance (932) 467; in the right centre at Pānīpat 472, and at Kānwa (933) 565, 568 n. 3; rewarded 527, 578-9; on service (933) 540; at Chandīrī (934) 590; pursues Bīban and Bāyazīd 601, 602; in command against Balūchīs (935) 638, 676; met on a journey 639; writes of loss of reinforcement 675; ordered to Āgra 676; waits on Bābur 688; his brothers Manṣūr, Aīsān-tīmūr, Tūkhtā-būghā, Sa`īd, Khalīl q.v.; [♰936 AH.-1530 AD.].

+Chīqmāq Beg+—sent on road-surveyor's work (935) 629-30; the Mubīn quoted in connection with his orders 630; his clerk Shāhī q.v.

+Chirkas qīzlār+ (Circassian girls), see Gulnār and Nār-gul.

+Chūlī Begīm+, Aẕāq Turkmān—particulars 265, 268; her husband Ḥusain Bāī-qarā and their daughter Sulṯānīm q.v.; [♰before 911 AH.-1505 AD.].

+Dāmāchī+ Mughūl—in the centre at Qandahār (913) 335.

+Dankūsī+ var. Nigarsī—killed at Kānwa 573; [♰933 AH.-1527 AD.].

+Darwesh-i-`alī+—serving Humāyūn in Saṃbhal (934) 587.

+Darwesh-i-`alī Beg+ Chaghatāī, brother of Nawā'ī—particulars 275; in Bābur's service (916) 275 and (917) 277; his poet-wife Āpāq Bega q.v.

+Darwesh-i-`alī+ pīāda and, later, tūfang-andāz—takes news of Hind-āl's birth to Bābur (925) 385.

+Darwesh-i `Alī Sayyid+ Mughūl—in the centre at Qandahār (913) 335.

+Darwesh Beg Tarkhān+, Arghūn—particulars 39; [♰895 AH.-1490 AD.].

+Darwesh Gāū+ Andijānī—put to death as seditious (899) 30.

Shaikh +Darwesh Kūkūldāsh+ qūr-begī—at a household-party (906) 131; his death, successor in office, and avengeance 251, 253; [♰911 AH.-1505-6 AD.].

+Darwesh-i-muḥammad+ Faẓlī—defeated (910) 241; degraded for not supporting a comrade (925) 405.

+Darwesh-i-muḥammad Sārbān+—Mīrzā Khān's envoy to Bābur (925) 402; a non-drinker not pressed to disobey 406; replaces a china cup 407; enters Bābur's service 408; over-pressed to break the Law 410; eats a strange fruit 410-1; at ma`jūn-parties 412, (935) 683; asks a fruitful question (932) 470-1; in the right-centre at Pānī-pat 472 and at Kānwa (933) 565; recals a vow to Bābur 553; in the battle of the Ghogrā (935) 673.

+Darwesh-i-muḥammad Tarkhān+ Arghūn Chingīz-khānid—particulars 38; envoy to the Andijān begs (899) 31; his part in the Tarkhān rebellion (901) 62; his death 38, 63;

his relationship to Mīrān-shāhīs 13 n. 5, 33, 38, and his kinsman `Abdu'l-`alī q.v.; [♰901 AH.-1496 AD.].

+Darwesh Sulṯān+ (? Chaghatāī)—on Bābur's service (934) 599.

+Daryā Khān+ Turk, son of Mīr (Shaikh) `Alī Beg—particulars 382; his sons Yār-i-ḥusain and Ḥasan q.v.

+Daryā Khān+ Nūḥānī, Afghān—his sons Saīf Khān and Bihār Khān, his grandson Jalāl q.v.

Mullā +Dāūd+—killed serving Bābur 549; [♰933 AH.-1527 AD.].

Sayyid +Dāūd+ Garm-serī—receives gifts (935) 633.

+Dāūd Khān+ Lūdī—defeated by Bābur's troops (932) 467-8.

+Dāūd+ Sarwānī, see Rāwū'ī Sarwānī.

+Daulat Khān+, Yūsuf-khail Lūdī, Afghān, son of Tātār—is given Bhīra etc. 382, 383; concerning his lands, Author's Note 383; ☛ a principal actor from 926 to 932 AH. 428; dreads Ibrāhīm Lūdī 439; ☛ proffers allegiance to Bābur (929?) 439, 440; ☛ his gift of an Indian fruit decides Bābur to help him 440, 503 n. 6; ☛ his action causes the return to Kābul of Bābur's fourth expedition into Hindūstān 442; his strength and action 443-4; his rumoured attack on Lāhor (932) 451, 453; negotiates with `Ālam Khān (931?) 455-6; loses Milwat to Bābur (932) 459; his death 461; his sons `Alī, Apāq, Dilawār q.v.; his relations with Nānak 461 n. 3; [♰932 AH.-1526 A.D.].

+Daulat-i-muḥammad Kūkūldāsh+, see Qūtlūq-i-muḥammad.

+Daulat-qadam ?+—his son Mir Mughūl q.v.

+Daulat-shāh+ Isfarāyinī, author of the Taẕkiratu'sh-shu`arā—at Taẕkir`atu'sh the battle of Chīkmān-sarāī (876) 46 n. 2; [♰895 AH.-1490 AD.?].

+Daulat-sulṯān Khānīm+, Chaghatāī Chīngīz-khānid, daughter of Yūnas Khān and Shāh Begīm—particulars 24; her long family separation (907) 149; meets her brother Aḥmad (908) 159; married as a captive by Tīmūr Aūz-beg (909) 24; rejoins Bābur (917) ib. and 358 n. 1; letters from her reach Bābur (925) 409; sends letters and gifts to him (932) 446.

+Dāwā Khān+, Chaghatāī Chīngīz-khānid—-mentioned in Yūnas Khān's genealogy 19; [♰706 +AH.+-1306-7 AD.].

+Dejal+, the false Messiah 563 n. 1.

+Deo Sulṯān?+, see Div.

Rāja +Dharmankat+ Gūālīārī—stirs trouble (933) 539; lays siege to Gūālīār 557.

+Dharm-deo+—his force at Kānwa (933) 562.

+Dilāwar Khān+ Yūsuf-khail Lūdī, Afghān, son of Daulat Khān—☛ ill-received by Ibrāhīm Lūdī (929?) 439; ☛ goes to Kābul to ask help from Bābur 439-40; imprisoned by his father (931) 442, 443; escapes and joins `Ālam Khān 455, 456; joins Bābur 457, 461; location of his mother's family 462; does not sit in Bābur's presence 466; entrusted by Bābur with care for the corpse of Ibrāhīm Lūdī 474 n. 1; in the right wing at Kānwa (933) 567 (here styled Khān-i-khānān); [♰946 AH.-1539 AD.].

+Dil-dār Begīm+ (? Ṣālḥa-sulṯān 3rd daughter of Maḥmūd Mīrān-shāhī and Pasha), wife of Bābur—her unborn child forcibly adopted (925) 347, and App. L; her son Alwar (Alūr)'s death (935) 689 n. 5; particulars 712-4; her sons Hind-āl and Alūr, her daughters Gul-rang, Gul-chihra and Gul-badan q.v.

+Dilpat Rāo+—killed at Kānwa 573; [♰933 AH.-1527 AD.].

+Div Sulṯān+ Rūmlū (or Deo)—recaptures Balkh (cir. 919) 363; particulars 635 n. 2; his servant describes the battle of Jām (935) 635-6.

+Dīwa Hindū+, son of Sīktū—waits on Bābur in Bhīra (925) 382; made prisoner and ransomed 399.

+Dīwāna+ jāma-bāf—put to retaliatory death 73; [♰903 AH.-1497 AD.].

+Bābā Dost+—put in charge of Humāyūn's Trans-Indus district (925) 391; conveys wine to Bābur's camp (933) 551 (here sūchī).[2896]

+Dost+, son of Muḥammad Bāqir—drunk (925) 415.

+Dost-anjū+?[2897] +Shaikh+, son of Bābā `Alī—left in charge of Ghaznī (911) 307.

+Dost Beg+ Mughūl, son of Bābā Qashqa and brother (p. 588) of Shāh Muḥammad—at a social gathering and sent to Bhīra 388 (here muhrdār); made a dīwān (932) 476; in charge of Bīāna (933) 539 and made its shiqdār 579 (here Lord-of-the Gate); in the right centre at Kānwa 565, 569; waits on Bābur 581; pursues rebels (934) 601 (here Dost-i-muḥammad); in the battle of the Ghogrā (935) 673; for his kinsmen see s.n. Bābā Qashqa.

Khwāja +Dost-i-khāwand+—lets himself down over the wall of Qandahār (913) 343; at boat-parties (925) 385, 388; comes from Kābul to Āgra (933) 544; in the left-centre at Kānwa 565; ☛ sent on Bābur's family affairs to Humāyūn in Badakhshān (934) 603; delayed in Kābul till Kāmrān's arrival 618 and nn. 2-6; his letters reach Bābur (935) 618.

+Dost-kīldī+ Mughūl—in the centre at Qandahār (913) 335.

+Dost-i-nāṣir Beg+—Dost Beg—(Nāṣir's Dost), son of Nāṣir—enters Bābur's service (904) 103; on service (906) 131, (908) 163, 165; one of three standing by Bābur 166, 167, 396; with him at Akhsī 174, 396; one of the eight in the flight 177, 396; at the recapture of Kābul (912) 315; in the left centre at Qandahār (913) 335, 338; at Tāshkīnt (918) ☛ 356 n. 1, ☛ 358, 396-7; opposing rebels (921) ☛ 364, 397; leading the left at Bajaur (925) 368 (here first styled Beg), 369, 370, 397; his revenue work 384; at wine parties 387, 388; at Parhāla 390; attacked by fever 394; his death and his burial at Ghaznī 395-6; his brother Mīrīm q.v.; particulars 395-7; [♰925 AH.-1519 AD.].

+Dost+ Sar-i-pulī, pīāda and (later) kotwāl—attacks Bābur blindly (912) 316-7; wounded (913) 324; [♰913 AH.-1507 AD.].

+Dost-i-yāsīn-khair+—wrestles well with eight in successive (935) 653; 656.

+Dūdū Bībī+, widow of Bihār Khān Bihārī—news of her bringing her son to Bābur (935) 664; encouraging letters sent to her 665; Sher Khān _Sūr _her co-guardian for her son 664 n. 2; her son Jalālu'd-dīn Nuḥānī q.v.

+Faghfūr Dīwān+—on service (933) 551; his servants sent for fruit to Kābul (935) 687. Ḥai. MS. reads Maghfūr.

+Fajji+ Gāgīānī, Afghān—guides Bābur's first passage of the Khaibar (910) 229.

+Fakhrū'n-nisā'+, daughter of Bābur and `Āyisha—died an infant 35-6, 136; [♰906 AH.-1500-1 AD.].

+Faqī-i-`alī+—reprieved (914) 345; with Bābur and left in charge of Balkh (923) 463; ☛ left in charge of Qila`i-ẕafar by Humāyūn (936) 695.

+Farīd Khān+ Nuḥānī, Afghān, son of Naṣīr—writes dutifully to Bābur (935) 659.

+Farīdūn+, (an ancient Shāh of Persia)—mentioned in a verse 85.

+Farīdūn-i-ḥusain Mīrzā+ Bāī-qarā Tīmūrid, son of Ḥusain and Mīnglī—particulars 263, 269; [♰915 AH.-1509 AD.].

+Farīdūn+ qabūzī—summoned by Bābur (935) 617.

Mullā +Farrukh+—placed on Bābur's left at a feast (935) 631; gifts made to him 632.

+Farrukh+ Arghūn—surrenders Qalāt-i-ghilzāī to Bābur (911) 248-9.

Mīrzā +Farrūkh+ Aūghlāqchī, son of Ḥasan—mentioned for his qualities 279.

+Farrukh-i-ḥusain Mīrzā+, Bāī-qarā Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, son of Ḥusain and Pāpā—particulars 264; [♰915 AH.-1509 AD.].

+Farrukh-zād Beg+—Bābur dismounts in his garden at Qandahār (913) 337.

+Farūq+, son of Bābur and Māhīm—his birth (932) announced to Bābur (933) 536, 689 n. 5; [933 AH.-1526-7 AD.].

+Fatḥ Khān+ Sarwānī Khān-i-jahān, son of `Azim-humāyūn—is escorted to Bābur (932) 534; well-received (933) 537; his hereditary title superseded ib.; invited to a wine-party ib.; serving Maḥmūd Lūdī (935) 652; his son Maḥmūd q.v.; ? a kinsman Daud q.v.

+Fāṯima-sūlṯān Āghā+ Mughūl—first wife of `Umar Shaikh Mīrān-shāhī 17, 24; their son Jahāngīr q.v.

+Fāṯima-sultān Begīm+ Bāī-qarā Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, daughter of Ḥusain and Mīnglī—particulars 266; her husband Yādgar-i-farrukh Mīrān-shāhī q.v.; [♰before 911 AH.-1505 AD.].

+Fāẓil Kūkūldāsh+—serving Shāh Beg Arghūn (910) 238; ☛ a good account of him named 443; his death a crushing grief to Shāh Beg ib.; [♰930 AH.-1514 AD.].

+Fāẓil Tarkhān+—a Turkistān merchant created a Tarkhān by Shaibānī, [Author's Note] 133; his death ib.; [906 AH.-1500 AD.].

+Faẓlī+, see Darwesh-i-muḥammad.

+Ferdinand the Catholic+—his action in 1504 (910 AH.) 187 n. 2 (Erskine).

+Fīrūza Begīm+ Qānjūt, wife of Manṣūr Bāī-qarā her Tīmūrīd ancestry 256; her children Bāī-qarā (II), Ḥusain, Ākā and Badka q.v.; [♰874 AH.-1469-70 AD.].

+Fīrūz Khān+ Mewatī—reprieved (932) 477-8.

+Fīrūz Khān+, Sārang-khānī, Afghān—on Ibrāhīm Lūdī's service 527; waits on Bābur (932) 527, and on his service 530.

Sulṯān +Fīrūz Shāh+, Tūghlūq Turk—his servants' dynasties 481, 482; his relations with the rulers of Mālwā 482 (where in n. 3 for "Gujrāt" read Mālwā); [♰790 AH.-1388 AD.].

+Fīrūz Shāh Beg+—his grandson `Abdu'l-khalīq q.v.

+Gadāī+ Balāl—rejoins Bābur (913) 330-1.

+Gadāī+ bihjat—misbehaves (925) 414.

+Gadāī T̤aghāī+—shares a confection (925) 375; at social gatherings 385, 7, 8, 400, 412; rides carrying a full pitcher 386; out with Bābur 404; removes a misbehaving namesake 414.

+Gauhar-shād Begīm+, wife of Shāh-rukh Tīmūrid—Bābur visits her college and tomb (912) 305; [♰861 AH.-1457 AD.].

+Gauhar-shad Begīm+ Mīrān-shāhī Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, daughter of Abū-sa`īd—visited by Bābur (935) 616.

Mīr +Gesū+—finds chronogram identical with Shaikh Zain's 575.

Apāq +Ghāzī Khān+ Turk, son of Mīr (Shaikh) `Alī Beg—particulars 382; his brothers Bābā Kābulī and Daryā Khān, his son `Alī and his relation Naẕar-i-`alī Turk q.v.

Apāq +Ghāzī Khān+ Yūsuf-khail Lūdī Afghān, son of Daulat Khān—☛ arrested by Bābur (930) 442; moves against Bābur (932) 451, 453; not trusted 455; agrees to help `Ālam Khān 455-6; receives him ill on defeat 457-8; pursued for Bābur 458, 460, 461, 462, 463; Bābur's reproach for his abandonment of his family 460-1; his forts in the Dūn 462; his library less valuable than was expected by Bābur 460; his kinsman Ḥāji Khān and his own son 465.

+Ghiyās̤+, a buffoon 400 (where erroneously Ghīāṣ).

Mīr +Ghiyās̤+, building entrusted to him (935) 642.

Mīr +Ghiyās̤ T̤aghāī+ Kūnjī Mughūl, brother of `Alī-dost—particulars 28; enters the Khān (Maḥmūd)'s service (899) 28, 32; [♰ before 914 AH.-1507-8 AD.].

Amīr +Ghiyās̤u'd-dīn+, ☛ patron of Khwānd-amīr and supposed ally of Bābur—killed in Herāt (927) 432.

+Ghiyās̤u'd-dīn+, nephew of Khwānd-amīr—☛ conveys the keys of Qandahār to Bābur (928) 432, 435, 436.

Sulṯān +Ghīyāṣu'd-dīn+ Balban—Bābūr visits his tomb (932) 475; [♰ 686 AH.-1287 AD.].

+Ghiyās̤u'd-dīn+ qūrchī—takes campaigning orders to Junaid Barlās (935) 628; returns to Court 636; takes orders to the Eastern amirs 638.

+Ghulām-i-`alī+—returns from taking Bābur's three articles to Naṣrat Shāh (935) 676.

+Ghulām bacha+, a musician—heard by Bābur in Herāt (912) 303.

+Ghulām-i-shādī+, a musician—particulars 292; his younger brother Ghulām bacha q.v.

Mullā +Ghulām+ Yasāwal—makes an emplacement for the Ghāzī mortar (935) 670; sent to collect the Bihār tribute 676.

Ghūrī Barlās—on Bābur's service (905) 125; in the left wing at Qandahār (913) 334; wounded 336; [♰919 AH.-1513 AD.].

+Gūjūr Khān+—ordered on service (935) 638.

+Gul-badan Begīm+ Mīrān-shāhī Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, daughter of Bābur and Dil-dār—☛ her birth (929 or 930) and her book (cir. 995) 441; her journey to Āgra (935) 650 n. 2; ☛ her parentage 712; [♰1011 AH.-1603 AD.].

+Gul-barg+ Barlās Turk, daughter of Khalīfa—☛ betrothed(?) to Shāh Ḥasan Arghūn (924-5) 366; ☛ married (930) 443.

+Gul-chihra Begīm+, full sister of Gul-badan supra—her marriage with Tūkhtā-būghā Chaghatāī 705 n. 1, 708; her parentage 712; ☛ perhaps the mother of Salīma Chaqānīanī 713.

+Gul-rang Begīm+ Mīrān-shāhī Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, daughter of Bābur and Dil-dār—☛ born in Khwāst (920) 363; ☛ married to Aīsān-tīmūr Chaghatāī (937) 705 n. 1, 708; parentage 712.

+Gul-rukh Begīm+ Begchīk, wife of Bābur—☛ with Bābur on the Trans-oxus campaign (916-20) 358; particulars 712; her sons Kāmrān and `Askarī and her brother(?) Sulṯān `Alī Mīrzā T̤aghāī q.v.

Mīrak +Gūr+ dīwān (or Kūr) captured by Shaibānī (913) 328.

Shaikh Abū'l-fatḥ +Gūran+ (G'hūran)—serving Bābur (932) 526, 528-9, (933) 539, 567, (934) 590; in the right wing at Kānwa (933) 567; host to Bābur in Kūl (Koel) (934) 587; takes lotus-seeds to him 666; sends him grapes (935) 686; given Gūālīār (936) 688, 690; ☛ holds it till Bābur's death 692 n. 1.

+Ḥabība-sulṯān Begīm+ Arghūn, wife of Aḥmad Mīrān-shāhī—particulars 36, 37; arranges her daughter Ma`ṣūma's marriage with Bābur (912) 306, (913) 330.

+Ḥābība-sulṯān Khānīsh+ Dūghlāt, daughter of Muḥammad Ḥusain and Khūb-nigār Chaghatāī—her marriages 21-2; depends on Bābur (917) 22.

+Ḥāfiẕ Ḥājī+, a musician—heard by Bābur in Herī (912) 303.

+Ḥāfiẕ+ kabar-kātib—his brother conveys Bābur's earliest Dīwān to Samarkand (925) 482; at a feast (935) 631, 632.

+Ḥāfiẕ Mīrak+—composes an inscription (913) 343.

+Ḥāfiẕ-i-muḥammad Beg+ Dūldāī Barlās—particulars 25; in Aūrā-tīpā (893) 17, 25; ☛ joint-guardian of Mīrzā Khān (905) 25, 122; his death 26; his sons Muḥammad mīskīn and T̤āhir q.v.; his (?) Chār-bāgh 108; [♰cir. 909-10 AH.-1504 AD.].

Khwāja Shamsu'd-dīn Muḥammad +Ḥāfiẕ+ Shīrāzī—parodied (910) 201; [♰791 AH.-1389 AD.].

+Ḥāfiẕ+ Tāshkīndī—gifts made to him (935) 632.

+Haibat Khān+ karg-andāz, Hindūstānī—leaves Bābur (933) 557.

+Haibat Khān+ Samana'ī—☛ perhaps the provider of matter to fill the lacuna of 936 AH., 693.

Mullā +Ḥaidar+—his sons `Abdu'l-minān and Mūmin q.v.

+Ḥaidar+ `Alamdār—on Bābur's service (925) 383, (926) 421.

+Ḥaidar-`alī Sulṯān+ Bajaurī—obeys custom in testing his dead mother's virtue 212; ☛ his Gibrī fort taken by Bābur (924) 366, 7, 8.

+Ḥaidar Kūkūldāsh+ Yāragī Mughūl, Maḥmūd Khān's "looser and binder"—defeated 35, (900) and killed 52, 111-2; his garden 54; his son Banda-i-`alī and a descendant (?) Ḥusain Yārajī q.v.

+Ḥaidar-Mīrzā+ Bāī-qarā Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, son of Ḥusain and Pāyanda-sulṯān—his Mīrān-shāhī betrothal at Ḥiṣār (901) 48, 61; rejoins his father opportunely (903) 261; particulars 263; his wife Bega q.v.; [♰908 AH.-1502-3 AD.].

Muḥammad +Ḥāidar Mīrzā Kūrkān+ Dūghlāt, author of the Tārīkh-i-rashīdī—particulars 21-2,[2898] 348; ☛ takes refuge with Bābur (916) 350; ☛ his first battle (917) 353; ☛ ill when Kūl-i-malik was fought (918) 357-8; goes to Sa`īd Khān in Kāshgar 22, 362; on Sa`īd's service (933) 590, (936) 695-6; [♰958 AH.-1551 AD.].

+Ḥāidar-i-qāsim Beg+ Kohbur Chaghatāī—father of Abū'l-qāsim, Aḥmad-i-qāsim and Qūch (Qūj) Beg q.v.

+Ḥaidar-qulī+—on Aūzūn Ḥasan's service (904) 102.

+Ḥaidar-qulī+, servant of Khwāja Kalān—on service (932) 467; mentioned by Bābur in writing to the Khwāja (935) 648.

+Ḥaidar+ rikābdār—stays with Bābur at a crisis (903) 91; his son Muḥammad `Alī q.v.

+Ḥaidar+ tāqī—his garden near Kābul 198 n. 1.

+Ḥājī Ghāzī+ Manghīt—sent to help Bābur (904) 101 where in n. 3 add Vambéry's Note 29 to the references.

+Ḥājī (`Alī) Khān+ Yūsuf-khail Lūdī Afghān—acting with `Ālam Khān Lūdī (932) 445-6-7.

+Ḥājī pīāda+—killed at the Lovers'-cave 68; [902 AH.-1497 AD.].

+Ḥājī Pīr+ bakāwal—negociates for Ḥusain Bāī-qarā with the Ḥiṣār begs (901) 61.

+Halāhil+—on service (925) 391, (925) 638.

+Ḥalwāchī Tarkhān+ Arghūn—engages Bābur's left wing at Qandāhar (913) 336.

Sayyid Mīr +Hamah+—gets the better of two traitors (932-3) 546; receives head-money (933) 546; in the right wing at Kānwa 566.

+Ḥamīd Khān+ Khāṣa-khaīl Sārang-khānī Lūdī—opposes Bābur (932) 465; defeated by Humāyūn 466; defeated (633) 540; sent out of the way before Kānwa 547.

+Hāmūsī+, son of Dīwa—sent to make a Hindū pact with Sangā's son (935) 616.

Amīr +Ḥamza+—a poem mentioned imitating that in which he is celebrated 280; [♰3 AH.-625 AD.].

+Ḥamza Beg+ qūchīn, son of Qāsim and a daughter of Banda-i-`alī—his wedding gifts to Bābur on his marriage with Khalīfa's daughter (925) 400; joins Bābur on summons from Qūndūz 406, 410.

+Ḥamza Bī+ Mangfīt Aūzbeg—defeated, when raiding, by Bābur's men (910) 195.

+Ḥamza Khān+, Malik of `Alī-shang—made over to the avengers of blood (926) 425; [♰926 AH.-1520 AD.].

+Ḥamza Sulṯān+ Aūzbeg—his various service 58, 59, 131; defeated by Ḥusain Bāī-qarā (901) 58; enters Bābur's service 59; given leave 64; his Mughūls rebel against Bābur (904) 105; serving Shaibānī (906) 131, 139, (910) 244; ☛ holding Ḥiṣār and comes out against Bābur (916) 352; defeated at Pul-i-sangīn and put to death by Bābur (917) 18, 37, 262, 353; his defeat announced to Ismā`īl Ṣafawī 354; his sons in the battle of Jām (935) 622; his sons `Abdu'l-laṯīf and Mamāq q.v.; his Mīrān-shāhī wife 37; [♰917 AH.-1511 AD.].

+Ḥaq-dād+, headman of Dūr-namā—makes offering of his garden to Bābur (926) 420.

+Ḥaq-naẕar+—finds the body of his nephew (Nūyān) Kūkūldāsh (907) 152.

+Ḥaq-naẕīr+ chapā—to punish his raid, beyond the power of the Herāt Mīrzās (912) 300.

+Ḥarūnu'r-rashīd Khalīfa+—his second son Māmūn Khalīfa (d. 218 AH.) 79; [♰193 AH.-809 AD.].

Ustād +Ḥasan-i-`alī+—orders given for the completion of work he had begun in Kābul (935) 646-7.

+Ḥasan-i-`alī+ Chaghatāī—receives a pargana (935) 689.

+Ḥasan-i-`alī+ Jalāīr Chaghatāī, son of `Alī (q.v.)—particulars 278, 286; meets Bābur (912) 299; his poet-sister 286 n. 1; [♰925 AH.-1519 AD.].

Sayyid +Ḥasan+ Aūghlāqchī Mughūl, son of Murād—particulars 279; serving Bābur (917) 279; his son Farrukh q.v.; [♰918 AH.-1522 AD.].

+Ḥasan+ Barlās—his rough dealing with Bābur (910) 194.

Shāh +Ḥasan Beg+ Arghūn, son of Shāh (Shuja`) Beg—quarrels with his father and goes to Bābur (924) 365, ☛ 430; his betrothal (?) to Gul-barg (924-6) 366 and marriage (930) 443; in the left centre at Bajaur (925) 369; sent to claim ancient lands of the Turks 383-4; is successful 388; out with Bābur 395; gifts to him ib. 414, 584;☛ social matters 400, 7, 10, 12; Bābur sends him a quatrain 401; (see s.n. Shāh-zāda), ☛ a principal actor between 930 and 932 AH. 427; his attack on Multān 437, 442 and s.n. `Askarī; accedes in Sind (930) 443; reads the khuṯba for Bābur 430; his envoy to Bābur (935) 632; [♰962 AH.-1555 AD.].

+Ḥasan+ Chalabī—T̤ahmāsp Ṣafawī's envoy to Bābur (935), arrives late 631, 632 n. 3, 641; Bābur accepts excuse for his delay 649; Bābur's envoy accompanies him on his return 641; his servant gives Bābur's envoy an account of the battle of Jām 649.

+Ḥasan-dīkcha+ of Akhsī—supports Bābur (904) 101.

+Ḥasan-i-khalīfa+, son of Niẕāmu'd-dīn `Alī—sent on service 679.

+Ḥasan Khān+ Bārīwāl Hindūstānī—leaves Bābur for Sangā (933) 557.

+Ḥasan Khān+ Daryā-khānī, son of Daryā Khān son of Mīr `Alī Beg—on service for Bābur (933) 582; in the battle of the Ghogrā (935) 669; pursuing rebels 678.

+Ḥasan-i-makan+, loses Kandār to Sangā (932) 529-30.

+Ḥasan Khān+ Mewātī—his change of capital (930) 578; his opposition to Bābur (932) 523 and n. 3, (933) 545, 547; his force at Kānwa 562 and death 573; Bairām Khān's remarks on him 523 n. 3; his son Nāhar q.v.; [♰933 AH.-1527 AD.].

+Ḥasan Nabīra+, grandson of Muḥammad Sīghal—waits on Bābur (902) 66; captures his elder brother (903) 72; leaves `Alī for Mīrzā Khān (905) 122; goes as envoy (?) to Bābur from Mīrzā Khān (925) 415; his elder brother Muhammad Qāsim Nabīra q.v.

Mullā +Ḥasan+ ṣarrāf—given custody of gifts for Kābul (932) 525.

+Ḥasan+ sharbatchī—helps Bāī-sunghar Mīrān-shāhī's escape (901) 62.

+Ḥasan-i-yaq`ūb Beg+, son of Nūyān Beg?—particulars 26; supports Bābur (899) 30, 31; his appointments 32; shows disloyalty (900) 43; his death 44; his sobriquet Nūyān's Ḥasan 273; [♰900 AH.-1494 AD.].

Malik +Hast+ Janjūha—receives an envoy from Bābur (925) 380; serving Bābur 380, 389; his injuries from Hātī Kakar 391.

+Hātī+ Kakar—particulars 387; his misdeeds provoke punishment (925) 387, 9, 91; abandons Parhāla 390; sends Bābur tribute and is sent an envoy 391-2; referred to 452.

`Abdu'l-lāh +Hātifī+, nephew of Jāmī—particulars 288.

+Ḥātīm+ qūrchī—promoted to be qūr-begī (911) 252; in the centre at Qandahār (913) 335.

+Hazārāspī+, see Pīr-i-muḥammad.

+Henry VII of England+—his Intercursus malus contemporary with 910 AH. 187 n. 2.

+Henry of Navarre+—☛ his difficulties, as to creed, less than those of Bābur in 917 AH.-1511 AD., 356.

+Hilālī+, see Badru'd-dīn Hilālī.

Abū'l-nāṣir Muḥammad +Hind-āl Mīrzā+ Mīrān-shāhī Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, son of Bābur and Dil-dār—his pre-natal adoption (925) 374; meaning of his name Hind-āl 385; gifts to him or his servants 522, (935) 633, 642; the Wālidiyyah-risāla and Hindūstān verses sent to him 642; under summons to Hind 645, ☛ 696; ☛ sent by Humāyūn to Qila`-i-ẕafar (936) 695; referred to 697; ☛ waits on his father in Lāhor 699; ☛ his dying father's wish to see him (937) 708; his escort of Bābur's family in 946 AH. referred to 710; [♰958 AH.-1551 AD.].

+Hindī+—Mindī,—Mahndī, see Mahndī.

+Hindū Beg+ qūchīn—leaves `Alī Mīrān-shāhī for Mīrzā Khān (905) 122; sent to raid Panj-kūra (925) 374; in Bhīra 386-8; leaves it 399; out with Bābur 403; serving under Humāyūn (932) 465-6, 528-9; in the right wing at Pānīpat 472 and at Kānwa (933) 566 and n. 2, 569; escorts Māhīm from Kābul (935) 687; sent to Saṃbhal ib.; waits on Bābur ib. and n. 2, 689; his mosque in Saṃbhal 687 n. 2.

☛ +Hulākū Khān+ Aīl-khānī (Īl-khānī)—referred to 79; [♰663 AH.-1264 AD.].

+Ḥul-hul Anīga+—a woman drinker 417.

Naṣīru'd-dīn Muḥammad +Humāyūn Mīrzā+ Mīrān-shāhī Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, son of Bābur and Māhīm—his birth (913) 344; his mother's parentage 344 n. 3, ☛ 712-3; death of elder brethren referred to 374; a Trans-indus district given to him (925) 391; carried in haste to meet his father 395; makes a good shot 417; prefers not to go to Lamghān (926) 421; ☛ appointed to Badakhshān (927) 427; with his father in the Trans-oxus campaign (916-20) 358; his delay in joining the Hindūstān expedition (932) 444, 446 n. 3, 447; a desertion from him 545; first sight of a rhinoceros 451; books given to him at Milwat 460; his story-teller killed ib.; a successful first military affair 466-7; on service 471; in the right wing at Pānīpat 472; sent to take possession of Āgra 475, 476, 526; becomes owner of the Koh-i-nūr 477; receives Saṃbhal and other gifts 522, 7, 8; appointed against the Eastern Afghāns, his campaign 534, 544; mentioned in connection with the title `Aẕam-humāyūn (933) 537; his return to Āgra 544; his dislike of wine 545; in the right wing at Kānwa 566, 568-9; his departure for Kābul (and Badakhshān) 579-80; misappropriates treasure 583, ☛ 695 n. 1; a daughter born (934 or 5) 618; his father's messenger, detained a year by him, arrives in Āgra (935) 621, 626; birth of a son (934) 621, 624-5; letter to him from his father quoted 624-27; ordered to act with Kāmrān against the Aūzbegs 625-6; news of his action reaches Bābur 639, 640; gifts sent to him on his son's birth and with them the Wālidiyyah-risāla and the Hindustān poems 642; topics of a letter to him enumerated 645; the letter despatched 649; gifts from him to his father 687; a family tradition that his father wished to abdicate in his favour 689 n. 5; ☛ misery of his creation 692; concerning a plan to set him aside from the succession 644 n. 4, 688 n. 2, ☛ 692-3, ☛ 702-7; deserts his post in Badakhshān (936) 694; its sequel 695, 6, 7-8; ordered by his father to Saṃbhal 697; his illness and his father's self-surrender (937) 701-2; goes back to Saṃbhal 702; summoned and is declared successor at his father's last audience 708; [♰963 AH.-1556 AD.].[2899]

Bāba +Ḥūsain+—his murder of Aūlūgh Beg Shāh-rukhī (853) 85 and n. 3.[2900]

Maulānā Shaikh +Ḥusain+—particulars 283-4.

+Ḥūsain+ Aīkrak (?) (or Ḥasan)—receives the Chīn-āb country from Bābur (925) 386; misbehaves (926) 423.

Sayyīd +Ḥusain Akbar+ Tīrmīẕī, a maternal relative of Maṣ`ūd Mīrān-shāhī—attacks the fugitive Bāī-sunghar (903) 74; out with Bābur (910) 234; suspected 239; in the left wing at Qandahār (913) 334.

Sulṯān +Ḥusain+ Arghūn Qarā-kūlī—particulars 40; leaves Samarkand with the Tarkhāns (905) 121; fights for Bābur at Sar-i-pul (Khwāja Kārdzan) (906) 139; his great-niece Ma`ṣūma a wife of Bābur 36.

+Ḥusain Āqā+ Sīstānī—in the right wing at Kānwa (933) 566.

+Ḥusain+ `aūdī, lutanist of Ḥusain Bāī-qarā—particulars 292; owed his training to `Alī-sher Nawā'ī 272.

Shāh +Ḥusain+ bakhshī—brings Bābur news of a success (935) 685.

Khwāja +Ḥusain Beg+, brother of Aūzūn Ḥasan—particulars 26; his daughter a wife of `Umar Shaikh 24, 146 n. 3; leaves Samarkand with the Tarkhāns (905) 121; fights for Bābur at Sar-i-pul (Khwāja Kārdzan) (906) 139; one of eight in the flight from Akhsī (908) 177 (here Khwāja Ḥusainī); his lameness causes him to leave Bābur 178; sends Lāhor revenues to Kābul (932) 446; waits on Bābur 458; on service (933) 549 (here Mullā Ḥusain); in the left centre at Kānwa 566.

Shāh +Ḥusain+ chuhra, a brave of Ḥusain Bāī-qarā—left in Balkh (902) 70.

Sulṯān +Ḥusain+ Dūghlāt—joins Bābur (901) 58-9; conspires against Taṃbal (907) 154; sent by The Khān (Maḥmūd) to help Bābur (908) 161.

+Ḥusain+ Ghainī—a punitive force sent against him (911) 253.

+Ḥūsain-i-ḥāsan+—out with Bābur (925) 403; killed and avenged 404, 405; [♰925 AH.-1519 AD.].

Maulānā Shāh +Ḥusain+ Kāmī, a poet—particulars 290.

+Ḥūsain Kashifī+—his omission from Bābur's list of Herāt celebrities 283 n. 1.

+Ḥusain Khān+ Lashkar (?) Wazīr—writes from Naṣrat Shāh, accepting Bābur's three articles (935) 676.

Sulṯān +Ḥusain Mīrzā+ Bāī-qarā Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, son of Manṣūr—defeats Maḥmūd Mīrān-shāhī (865) 46, 259 and (876) 260; his relations with Nawā'ī 33, 272; his campaign against Khusrau Shāh (901) 57, 58-61, 130; his dissensions with his sons 61, 69, (902) 68-70, 260, (903) 94-5; his capture of Herī (875) compared with Bābur's of Samarkand (906) 134-5; does not help Bābur against Shaibānī 138, 145; asks Bābur's help against him (910) 190-1, (911) 255; his death 256, and burial 293; particulars of his life and court 256-292: —(personal 256 —amīrs 270 —ṣadrs 280 —wazīrs, etc. 281 —poets 286 —artists 291) —his dealings with Ẕū'n-nūn Arghūn and Khusrau Shāh 274; his kindness to Maṣ'ūd Mīrān-shāhī (903) 93, 95; his disorderly Finance Office 281-2; delays a pilgrim 284; his copyist 291; his splendid rule 300; his buildings 305; his relation Nuyān Beg Tīrmīẕī 273; Bābur writes to him in ignorance of his death (912) 294; Bābur's comments on him 60, 191, 225; a poem mistakenly attributed to him 281; [♰911 AH.-1506 AD.].

Sulṯān +Ḥusain Mīrzā+ Mīrān-shāhī, son of Maḥmūd and a Tīrmīzī wife—his death (æt. 13) in his father's lifetime, 47, 110.

Mīr +Ḥusain+ mu`ammā'ī Nishāpūrī—particulars 288 and n. 7; [♰904 AH.-1498-9 AD.].

+Ḥusain Khān+ Nūḥānī Afghān—holding Rāprī and not submissive to Bābur (932) 523; abandons it 530; takes it again (933) 557; drowned in flight 582; [♰933 AH.-1527 AD.].

Sulṯān +Ḥusain+ Qānjūt, maternal grandfather of Ḥusain Bāī-qarā—his Tīmūrid descent 256 n. 5.

Shāh Mīr +Ḥusain+ Qārlūq—waits on Bābur (925) 403 (here var. Ḥasan) 409; sent to Bajaur (926) 422; meets Bābur on his road 423; in charge of impedimenta (932) 458; allowed to raid from Milwat 464; fighting for Bābur 468, 471; in the left wing at Pānīpat 472; posted in Jūnpūr (933) 544.

+Ḥusain-i Shaikh Tīmūr+—particulars 273 (where in n. 2 read grand("father")).

Sulṯān +Ḥusain+ Sharqī—rise and fall of his dynasty 481; [♰905 AH.-1500 AD.].

Shāh +Ḥusain+ Yāragī Mughūl Ghanchī—in the left wing at Pānīpat (932) 472, and at Kānwa (933) 567; on service 530.

+Ḥusamu'd-dīn `Alī+ Barlās, son of Khalīfa—on service (934) 601; waits on Bābur (935) 687.

+Ibn-i-ḥusāin Mīrzā+ Bāī-qarā Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, son of Ḥusain and Pāpā—parentage 265; joins his brothers against Shaibānī (912) 296; fails in etiquette when meeting Bābur 297; his place at a reception 298; goes back to his districts Tūn and Qāīn 301; mentioned 331; the poet Āhī his servant 289; [♰919 AH.-1513 AD.].

+Ibrāhīm Ātā+ (Father Abraham)—his tomb in Turkistān 159.

+Ibrāhīm Beg+ Begchīk, brother of Ayūb—in the right wing at Qandahār (913) 334.

Mīr +Ibrāhīm+ Begchīk—fights and kills a guardian of `Umar Shaikh Mīrān-shāhī (cir. 870) 25.

+Ibrāhīm+ Chaghatāī—joins Ḥusain Bāī-qarā 279,[2901] 689 n. 4.

+Ibrāhīm+ chuhra—conveys a quatrain of Bābur's (925) 401.

+Ibrāhīm+ Dūldāī Barlās—particulars 274.

Sulṯān +Ibrāhīm+ Ghaznawī—his tomb 218; [♰492 AH.-1098 AD.].

+Ibrāhīm-i-ḥusain Mīrzā+ Bāī-qarā Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, son of Ḥusain—particulars 265; on his father's service (901) 57; receives Balkh (902) 70; besieged (903) 93-4; [♰910 AH.-1504-5 AD.].

+Ibrāhīm+ Jānī—fights for Bābur at Sar-i-pul (906) 139; one of three Ibrāhīms killed there 141, 624 n. 1; his son Chilma q.v.; [♰906 AH.-1501 AD.].

Mīr +Ibrāhīm+ qānūnī—waits on Bābur (935) 605; his kinsman Yūnas-i-`alī q.v.

Sulṯān +Ibrāhīm+ Sahu-khail Lūdī Afghān, son of Sikandar—Bābur sends him a goshawk and asks for the ancient lands of the Turk (925) 385; ☛ co-operation against him proffered to Bābur by Sangā 426, 529; ☛ a principal actor in the years of the lacuna from 926 to 932 AH. 427; ☛ no indication of Bābur's intending to attack him in 926 AH. 429; his misdoing leads to appeal for Bābur's help (929) 439; defeats his uncle `Ālam Khān (932) 456-7; Bābur moves from the Dūn against him 463; his military strength 463, 470; imprisons humble men sent by Bābur 464; various news of him 465, 466-7; Bābur's estimate of him 470; defeated and killed at Pānīpat 473-4, 630 n. 4; an Afghān account of Bābur's care for his corpse ib.; references to his rule in Gūālīār 977, to the rebellion of his Eastern amīrs 523, 527, to his capture of Chandirī and defeat at Dhūlpūr by Sangā 593, to Bābur's route when he was defeated (932) 206, and to his "prison-house" 459; his resources contrasted with Bābur's 480; his treasure at an end (935) 617; his mother q.v. s.n. mother; his son sent to Kāmrān's charge in Qandahār (933) 544; [♰932 AH.-1526 AD.].

+Ibrāhīm Sārū+ Mīnglīgh Beg—Chāpūk—particulars [Author's Note] 52; disloyal to Bābur (900) 52; besieged and submits 53; receives Shīrāz (902) 66; remains with Bābur at a crisis (903) 91; on service (904) 101, 106; his man holds fast in Aūsh 107; plundered by `Alī-dost (905) 119; waits on Bābur 125; one of three Ibrāhīms killed at Sar-i-pul (Khwāja Kārdzan) 139, 141; his brother Samad q.v.; his good bowman 66; [♰906 AH.-1501 AD.].

+Ibrāhīm Sulṯān Mīrzā+ Shāh-rukhī Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, son of Shāh-rukh—his rule in Shīrāz, death and successor (838) 20; referred to 85; [♰838 AH.-1414-5 AD.].

+Ibrāhīm T̤aghāī Beg+ Begchīk, brother of Ayūb—wounded and nicknamed Chāpūk (902) 67; leaves Bābur (903) 86; in Akhsī with Bāyazīd Itārachī (908) 171; sent against Pāp ib.; arrests Bāyazīd 173-4; wounded but fights for Bābur 174; soon falls behind in the flight from Akhsī 176; in the right wing at Qandahār (913) 334; holds Balkh for Bābur (923) 463 n. 3; sent as Bābur's envoy to Aūzbeg Khāns and Sulṯāns (935) 643.

+Ibrāhīm Tarkhān+ Arghūn—serving Ḥusain Bāī-qarā (901) 58; holding Shīrāz (906) 130; reinforces Bābur 131; one of three Ibrāhīms killed at Sar-i-pul 140-1; his brother Aḥmad q.v.; [♰906 AH.-1501 AD.].

Qāẓī +Ikhtiyār+—particulars 285; waits on Bābur and examines the Bāburī script (912) 285; is instructed in the exposition of the Qorān by Shaibānī (913) 329; [♰928 AH.-1521 AD.].

+Ilīās Khān+, see Rustam.

Shāh +`Imād+ Shīrāzī—brings Bābur friendly letters from two amīrs of Hind (932) 463.

+`Imādu'd-dīn Mas`ūd+—an envoy of Jahāngīr Mīrān-shāhī to Tramontane clans (911-912) 296.

+`Imādu'l-mulk+, a slave—strangles Sikandar Gujrātī (932) 535.

+Imām-i-muḥammad+—Bābur's company drink at his house (925) 418; his master Khwāja Muḥammad-amīn q.v.

+Īsān+, see Aīsān.

+Isḥāq Ātā+ (Father Isaac)—his tomb in Turkistān 159.

+Iskandar+, see Sikandar.

+Islīm+ Barlās—particulars 276.

+Ismā`īl+ chilma, see Chilma.

+Isma`īl Khān+ Jilwānī (not Jalwānī)—with `Ālam Khān Lūdī (932) 456; deserts him 457; writes dutifully to Bābur 464; speaks of waiting on him (934?) 680; does it (935) 677, 679.

+Ismā`īl Khān+ Yūsuf-khail Lūdī, son of `Alī—parleys with Bābur at Milwat (932) 459; deported 461.

+Ismā`īl Mītā+—Naṣrat Shāh's envoy to Bābur (935) 640-1, 664-5.

+Ismā`īl+ Ṣafawī `Arab, Shāh of Persia—reference to his capture of `Irāq (cir. 906) 280, 336; gives refuge to a fugitive Bāī-qarā (913) 327 n. 5; ☛ hostilities begin between him and Shaibānī (915) 350; defeats Shaibānī at Merv (916) 18, 318, ☛ 350; sends Khān-zāda back to Bābur 18, 352; ☛ asked by Bābur for reinforcement (917) 352-4; ☛ his alliance dangerous for Bābur 355; ☛ indication of his suzerain relation with Bābur 355; ☛ a principal actor in the lacuna years from 926-930, 427; ☛ his relations with Shāh Beg Arghūn 430; relations with Bābur (927) 433-4; ☛ his death after defeat (930) 443; ☛ Lord Bacon on his personal beauty 443 n. 1; his son T̤ahmāsp q.v.; his (presumed) Bāī-qarā disciple in Shī`a heresy 262; [♰930 AH.-1524 AD.].

+Ja`far Khwāja+, son of Mahdī Khwāja and step-son of Bābur's sister Khān-zāda—fills his father's place in Etāwa (933) 579, 582; sent to collect boats (934) 598; pursues Bīban and Bāyazīd (935) 682.

+Jahāngīr+ Barlās, son of Ibrāhīm and a Badakhshī Begīm (T.R. trs. p. 108)—particulars 273; joint-governor of Kābul for Abū-sa`īd 270, 273.

+Jahāngīr Mīrzā+ Barlās Turk, eldest son of Tīmūr—named in Abū-sa`īd's genealogy 14; is given Samarkand by Tīmūr 85; his tomb in Kesh 83; his son Muḥammad 78, 85; [♰776 AH.-1374-5 AD.].

+Jahāngīr Mīrzā+ Mīrān-shāhī Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, son of `Umar Shaikh and Fāṯima Mughūl—particulars 17; sent (a child) to reinforce an uncle (cir. 895) and then betrothed 48, 189; comes to Andijān after his father's death (899) 32; Mughūl support for him against Bābur (900) 43-4, (903) 87-8, (904) 101; joins Taṃbal 103; a "worry" 104; defeated at Khūbān (905) 113; waits on Bābur 119; summoned for a Samarkand expedition 122; reinforces Bābur (906) 138; a gift to him from the exiled Bābur (907) 150; joins Bābur (908) 173; acts against Bābur's wishes 173-4; flees in panic 174-5; rumoured a prisoner 176; ☛ his occupation of Khujand (909?) 182; Bābur rejects advice to dismiss him (910) 191; deference to him from Khusrau Shāh 193; his part in occupying Kābul 198, 199; receives Ghaznī 227; out with Bābur 233-4, 235-6, 239; rejects counsel to betray him 239; is Bābur's host in Ghaznī 240; his experiences in an earthquake (911) 247; insists on a move for Qalāt-i-ghilzāī 248; waits on Bābur and does service 252-3; his misconduct 254; causes Bābur to mobilize his troops 255; goes to Yaka-aūlāng (912) 294; the clans not supporting him, he goes to Herī with Bābur 295-6; at social gatherings 298, 302; defeats his half-brother Nāṣir 321; his death 331 n. 3, 345; his widow brings their son Pīr-i-muḥammad to Bābur (913) 331; [♰912 or 913 AH.-1507-8 AD.].

Nūru'ddin Muḥammad +Jahāngīr Pādshāh+ Mīrān-shāhī Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, son of Akbar—his work in Bābur's burial-ground 710; words of his made clear by Bābur's 501 n. 6; mentioned concerning the tamghā 553 n. 1; [♰1037 AH.-1627 AD.].

+Jahāngīr+ Turkmān—revolts in Badakhshān against the Aūzbegs (910) 242; keeping his head up (913) 340.

+Jahān-shāh+ Barlās, son of Chakū—mentioned in his son Muḥammad Barandūq's genealogy 270.

+Jahān-shah Mīrzā+ Barānī, Qarā-qūīlūq Turkmān—ruling in Tabrīz while Yūnas Chaghatāī stayed there 20; his sons defeated by the Āq-qūīlūq (872) 49; his son Muḥammadī's wife Pasha 49;[2902] [♰872 AH.-1467-8 AD.].

Rāī +Jāīpal+ Lāhorī—a legend of his siege of Ghaznī 219; [♰cir. 392 AH.-1002 AD.].

Rāja +Jāī-singh+ Jāīpūrī—his astronomical instruments 79 n. 4; [♰1156 AH.-1743 AD.].

+Jalāl Khān+ Jig-hat—waits on `Ālam Khān Lūdī (932) 456 and n. 4; his house in Dihlī Bābur's quarters 476; his son `Ālam Khān Kālpī q.v.

+Jalāl Khān+ Lūdī, son of`Ālam Khān—deserts his father (932) 457; in the left wing at Kānwa (933) 567 (where for "Jamāl" read Jalāl).

+Jalāl+ Tāshkīndī—brings Bābur news of Bīban and Bāyazīd (935) 685.

+Jalālu'd-dīn Maḥmūd+ nāī—a flautist, heard in Herāt (912) 303.

Sulṯān +Jalālu'd-dīn+ Nūḥānī—Jalāl Khān, son of Bihār Khān and Dūdū—one of three competitors for rule (935) 651 n. 5; writes dutifully to Bābur 659; news of his and his mother's coming 664; waits on Bābur 676; receives revenue from Bihār 676.

Maulānā +Jalālu'd-dīn+ Pūrānī—origin of his cognomen 306; his descendant Jamālu'd-dīn Abū-sa`īd Pūrān q.v.; [♰862 AH.-1458 AD.].

Sulṯān +Jalālu'd-dīn+ Sharqī, son of Ḥusain Shāh—waits on Bābur (935) 651; particulars 651 n. 5; his man abandons Benares 652; entertains Bābur 652; his son styled Sulṯān ib.; his gift of a boat to Bābur 663; in the battle of the Ghogrā 669; on service 678.

Shaikh +Jamāl+ Bārīn Mughūl—his son(?) Shaikh `Alī q.v.

Shaikh +Jamāl+ Farmūlī Afghān—deserts `Ālam Khān (932) 457; serving Bābur (933) 551.

Shaikh +Jamālī+—at a feast (935) 631; conveys encouragement to Dūdū Bībī 665-6.

Shaikh +Jamālu'd-dīn Abū-sa`īd+ Pūrān—particulars 306 n. 2; ill-treated by Shaibānī (913) 306 n. 2, 328; [♰921 AH.-1515 AD.].

Shaikh +Jamālu'd-dīn+ khar, Arghūn—captor of Yūnas Khān and Aīsān-daulat Begīm (T.R. trs. p. 94) —slain 35; [♰877 AH.-1472-3 AD.].

Mīr +Jamālu'd-dīn+ muḥaddas̤—particulars 284; [living 934-7 AH.-1527-31 AD.].

Shaikh +Jāmī+—ancestor of Akbar's mother 623 n. 8.

+Jāmī+, see `Abdu'r-raḥmān Jāmī.

+Jamshīd+, (an ancient ruler of Persia)—mentioned 85, 152.

Mīr +Jān-aīrdī+, retainer of Ẕū'n-nūn Arghūn—sells provisions to Bābur (912) 308.

+Jānak+—recites in Turkī (912) 304.

+Jānaka Kūkūldāsh+, (or Khānika)—escapes after Sār-i-pul (906) 141.

+Jān-i-`alī+—murdered by Shaibānī (906) 127, 128; [♰906 AH.-1500 AD.].

+Jān Beg+—in charge of impedimenta (932) 458; allowed leave for a raid 464; in a night-attack 471; in the left wing at Pānīpat 472 and at Kānwa (933) 567 (here Jān-i-muḥammad Beg Ātāka); on service (935) 682 (here Jānī Beg).

Mīr +Jān+ Dīwān—his house in Qandahār reserved as loot for Nāṣir Mīrān-shāhī (913) 338.

+Jānī Beg+ Dūldāī Barlās Turk—particulars 37 (where nn. 2 and 3 should be reversed).

+Jānī Beg Sulṯān Khān+ Aūzbeg-Shabān Chīngīz-khānid—his two Mīrān-shāhī marriages of conquest 18, 35; fights for Shaibānī at Sār-i-pūl (906) 139 (where read Jānī Beg Sulṯān); he and his sons at Jām (935) 622; flees to Merv 636 n. 2.

+Jān-i-ḥasan+, Bārīn Mughūl—sent to reinforce Bābur (903) 92, (908) 161, 170.

+Jān-i-nāṣir+—answers a call-to-arms (925) 408.

Mīr +Jān+ Samarkandī—his distasteful singing (912) 303.

+Jān-wafā Mīrzā+—serving Shaibānī in Samarkand (906) 131; escapes on Bābur's success 133.

Barlās +Jūkī+—brings Bābur good news, a live Aūzbeg, and a head (925) 408.

+Jūha Sulṯān+ Taklū,Governor of Ispahān—with T̤ahmāsp Ṣāfawī on the battle-field of Jām (935) 635.

+Jūjī Khān+ Chīngīz-khānid—a Qāzzāk descendant mentioned 23.

Muḥammad +Jūkī Mīrzā+ Shah-rukhī Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, son of `Abdu'l-laṯīf (♰854)—mentioned as besieged by Abū-sa`īd Mīrān-shāhī 24; [♰868 AH.-1463-4 AD.].

Sulṯān +Junaid+ Barlās (or Junīd)—particulars 276; his sons Niẕāmu'd-dīn `Alī Khalīfa and Junaid q.v.

Sulṯān +Junaid+ Barlās (or Junīd), son of the last-entered—incites an attempt on Samarkand (900) 52, 111; serving Bābur (932) 460, 468, 471; in the left wing at Pānīpat 472; sent to help in occupying Dihlī 475; given Dūlpūr 530-1; posted in Jūnpūr (933) 544; in Kharīd (935) 637 and n. 1; joins Bābur late and is not received 667; gives local information 668; in the battle of the Ghogrā 669; on service 679, 682 and n. 2; his wife Shahr-bānū Mīrān-shāhī q.v.

+Kābulī Begīm+ Mīrān-shāhī Tīmūrīd, Barlās Turk—abandoned by her husband Badī`u'z-zamān Bāī-qarā and captured by Shaibānī (913) 328.

+Kahil+ ṣaḥib-i-qadam—gives his horse to Bābur (908) 174.

Pahlawān +Kalāl+—wrestles (935) 650.

+Kalāntar of Dikh-kat+ (var. kālāntar and kīlāntar)—his house used by Bābur (907) 150; his aged mother's story ib.

+Kalīmu'l-lāh Shāh+ Bahminī Afghān—ruling the Dakkhin (932) 482.

+Kal-qāshūq+—put to retaliatory death (903) 73.

Sayyid +Kāmal+—serving Khusrau Shāh (903) 96 (where for "Qasīm" read Kāmal).

+Kamāl Khān+ Sāhū-khail Lūdī Afghān, son of `Ālam Khān—in the left wing at Kānwa (933) 567.

+Kamāl Khwāja+—his birth-place Khujand 8; [♰803 AH.-1400-1 AD.].

+Kamāl+ sharbatchī—in the right wing at Qandahār (913) 335.

Pahlawān Khwāja +Kamālu'd-dīn+ Badakhshī—in the right wing at Kānwa (933) 566.

Khwāja +Kamālu'd-dīn Ḥusāin+ Gāsur-gāhī—particulars 280, 281; sent as envoy to Shaibānī (904) 145.

Khwāja +Kamālu'd-dīn Maḥmūd+, retainer of Ismā`īl Ṣafawī—☛ with Bābur after the defeat at Ghaj-davān (919) 362-3; [♰cir. 919 AH.-1514 AD.].

+Kamālu'd-dīn+ Qīāq (var.)—lays before Bābur complaint of the begs of the Balkh frontier (935) 649.

+Kāmrān Mīrza+ Mīrān-shāhī Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, son of Bābur and Gul-rukh Begchīk—☛ the date of his birth App. J, xxxv; ☛ taken on the Transoxus campaign (916-920) 358; carried in haste to meet his father (920) 395; joins his father 417; ☛ the Mubīn written for his instruction (928) 438; ☛ left in charge of Kābul and Qandahār (932) App. J, xxxv; a letter from Bābur to him ib. and App. L, xliii; his copy of the Bābur-nāma App. J, xxxv-vi; gifts sent to him (932) 460, 522, 642; put in charge of Ibrāhīm Lūdī's son (933) 544; ☛ of his transfer to Multār (934-5) ☛ 604, 605 n. 3, 645; of his proceedings in Kābul 618; his marriage to a cousin 619; the Wālidiyyah-risāla, Hindustān Poems and specimens of the Bāburī script sent to him 642; heads of a letter to him 645, 646; ☛ meets Humāyūn in Kābul (935) 696; ☛ meets Bābur in Lāhor (936) 699; ☛ of his governments 699; ☛ later action in Multān and Lāhor (938) (which read for 935) 699; ☛ visits his father's tomb near Āgra (946) 709; [♰964 AH.-1556 AD.].

+Kankū+ or Gangū—killed at Kānwa 573; [♰933 AH.-1527 AD.].

+Karīm-bīrdī+—on Bābur's service (935) 661.

+Karīm-dād+ Turkmān—at a household party (906) 131; escapes from Sar-i-pul (Khwāja Kārdzan) 141; one of four fighting with Bābur (908) 166, 396; reprieved from a death sentence (914) 345.

+Karm-chand+—acting for Ḥasan Mewatī (933) 545, 578; asks peace from Bābur for Ḥasan's son Nāhar 578.

+Kārm Singh+—killed at Kānwa 573; [♰933 AH.-1527 AD.].

+Rāja Karna+ Gūālīārī, (or, Kirtī), Tūnwar Rājpūt—his buildings in Gūālīār 608 n. 3.

+Khadīja Āghā+, and later, Begīm, mistress of Abū-sa`īd Mīrān-shāhī, wife of Ḥusain Bāī-qarā—particulars 262, 268; her dominance 268, 292; visited in Herī by Bābur (912) 301; at an entertainment to him 302; a suspicion against her 302 n. 1; captured by Shaibānī (913) 327; given for a traitor to loot 328; her daughter Āq Begīm and sons Shāh-i-gharīb and Muẓaffar-i-ḥusain q.v.

+Khadija-sulṯān Begīm+ Mīrān-shāhī Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, daughter of Abū'sa`īd—(probably) seen by Bābur in Herī (912) 301; Bābur visits her near Āgra (934) 588 and in Āgra Fort (935) 606, 616.

+Khaldār+ Yāragī Mughūl, son of Ḥaidar Kūkūldāsh—fights for Bābur at Sar-i-pul (Khwāja Kārdzan) (906) 139.

+Khalīfa+, see Niẕamu'd-dīn `Alī Barlās.

+Khalīl+ chuhra—a brave who fought well for Bābur (904) 101.

+Khalīl+ dīwāna—on Aūzūn Ḥasan's service (904) 102 (where for "Dīwān" read dīwāna).

Sulṯān +Khalīl Mīrzā+, Mīrān-shāhī Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, son of Mīrān-shāh—mentioned 262 n. 2; [♰814 AH.-1411-2 AD.].

Sulṯān +Khalīl Mīrzā+ Mīrān-shāhī (ut supra), son of Abū-sa`īd—his daughter sole wife of Bāī-sunghar Mīrān-shāhī 112.

+Khalīl Sulṯān+ Chaghatāī Chīngīz-khānid, son of Aḥmad, (Alacha Khān), full brother of Sa`īd—his son Bābā Sulṯān q.v.

+Khalīl Sulṯān+ Itārajī Mughūl, brother of Aḥmad Taṃbal—holding Māḏū for Taṃbal (905) 109; captured ib., and released 119; surprises Aūsh 125; helps Bābur against Shaibānī (906) 138; killed at Sar-i-pul 141; [♰906 AH.-1501 AD.].

+Khalwī+ pīāda (or Khalwā)—his spear-head bitten off by a tiger (925) 393.

The +Khatīb of Qarshī+—an envoy to Bābur (910) 188.

+Khān-i-jahān+, see Fatḥ Khān Sarwānī.

+Khān-i-jahān+, a "pagan"—opposes Bābur (933) 539.

+Khān-qulī+, son of Bīān-qulī—leaves Bābur in Samarkand (903) 86; at a household party (906) 131 (where read Khān-qulī for "Khān-i-qulī"); gives ground for suspicion (907) 156; one of eight in the flight from Akhsī (908) 176, 177; in the right-centre at Qandahār (913) 335.

+Khān-zāda Begīm (1)+, Mīrān-shāhī Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, daughter of Maḥmūd—particulars 48.

+Khān-zāda Begīm (2)+, ut supra, daughter of Maṣ`ūd and Sa`ādat-bakht—particulars 267; visited by Bābur near Āgra (935) 616.

+Khān-zāda Begīm (3)+, ut supra, daughter of `Umar Shaikh and Qūtlūq-nigār—particulars 17; her marriage with Shaibānī (907) 18, 147, ☛ 184; her divorce and remarriage with Sayyid Hādī Khwāja 352 [Ḥ.S. iii], 364; her reunion with Bābur (916) 18, 352, 356; her marriage with Mahdī Khwāja q.v.; her summons to Hindūstān (935) 647; his son Khurram Shāh q.v.; [♰952 AH.-1545 AD.].

+Khān-zādā Begīm (4)+, Tīrmīẕī, wife of Maḥmūd Mīrān-shāhī—particulars 48; her son Mas`ūd q.v.; her niece 48.

+Khān-zāda Begīm (5)+, Tīrmīẕī, niece of the above, wife of Maḥmūd—particulars 48, 9; her son Ḥusain q.v.; her five daughters 47-8.

+Khān-zāda Begīm (6)+, Tīrmīẕī, wife of Aḥmad Mīrān-shāhī—particulars 37; Bābur, a child, pulls off her wedding veil (893) 37.

+Khān-zāda Khānīm+ Ḥājī-tarkhānī, daughter of Aḥmad and Badī`u'l-jamāl (Badka)—particulars 258 n. 2, 329; illegally married by Shaibānī (913) 329; her husband Muzaffar-i-ḥusain Bāī-qarā q.v.

+Khawānd Shāh Amīr+, ("Mirkhond"), author of the Rauzatu'ṣ-ṣafā—omitted (or lost) from Bābur's list of Herāt celebrities 283 n. 1; [♰903 AH.-1498 AD.].

+Khiẓr Khwāja Khān+ Chaghatāī Chīngīz-khānid—mentioned in Yūnas Khān's genealogy 19.

Khwāja +Khiẓr+ Nūḥānī, a merchant—killed by a Mughūl (910) 235 (where for "Lūḥānī" read Nūḥānī).

+Khūb-nīgār Khānīm+ Chaghatāī Chīngīz-khānid, daughter of Yūnas and Aīsān-daulat—particulars 21, 22; her death announced to Bābur (907) 148, 149; her rebel husband forgiven for her sake (912) 319; her husband Muḥammad Ḥusain Dūghlāt, their son Ḥāidar and daughter Ḥabība q.v.; [♰907 AH.-1501-2 AD.].

+Khudā-bakhsh+ Chaghatāī, retainer, (1) of Khusrau Shāh, (2) of Bābur—in the right wing at Qandahār (913) 334; rebels against Bābur (914) 345.

+Khudāī-bīrdī Beg+ tūghchī, Mughūl—stays with Bābur at a crisis (903) 91; made a beg and on service 110; killed at Sar-i-pul 141; [♰906 AH.-1501 AD.].

+Khudāī-bīrdī+ būqāq, Mughūl—killed at Asfara (900) 53 (here ātākām, my guardian); his favour from Bābur 105; his son Qulī chūnāq q.v.; [♰900 AH.-1495 AD.].

+Khudāī-bīrdī+ tūghchī Tīmūr-tāsh—made `Umar Shaikh's Lord-of-the-Gate (cir. 870) 14; particulars 24-5; [♰a few years after 870 AH.-1466 AD.].

+Khurram Shāh+ Aūzbeg-Shaibān, Chīngīz-khānid, son of Shaibānī and Khān-zāda—particulars 18; [♰a few years after 916 AH.-1510-11 AD.].

+Khūsh-kīldī+[2903] Mughūl—in the centre at Qandahār (913) 335.

+Khusrau+, an ancient ruler of Persia—mentioned in a couplet 85.

+Khusrau+ Gāgīānī—waits on Bābur (910) 230 (where insert his name in the last line); taken as a guide 231.

+Khusrau Kūkūldāsh+—at a household party (906) 131 (where insert his name after that of Shaikh Darwesh); captured by Taṃbal (908) 168; rejoins Bābur (913) 330-1; in the right centre at Qandahār 335; out with Bābur (925) 377, 403; an enquiry 405; ☛ posted in Sīālkot (930) 442; seeming still to hold it (932) 453; on service 465, 471; in the van at Pānīpat 472; in the right wing at Kānwa (933) 566, 568; given Alūr (Alwar) by mistake 578; sent against Balūchīs (935) 638; at social gatherings 385-7-8.

Amīr Khwāja +Khusrau+ Lāchīn Turk—a couplet of his quoted 503; [♰725 AH.-1325 AD.].

+Khusrau Shāh+[2904] Turkistānī, Qībchāq Turk, —particulars 49-50; takes Maḥmūd Mīrān-shāhī (æt. 17) to Ḥiṣār (cir. 873) 46-7; referred to as a rival 50; his tolerance of Ḥiṣārī ill-conduct (899) 41-2; expelled from Samarkand on Maḥmūd's death (900) 51-2; opposes Ḥusain Bāī-qarā (901) 57, 60-1; his rise helped by Bāī-qarā failures 61; supports Mas`ūd Mīrān-shāhī 64; falls out with him 71, 93; blinds him (903) 95; defeats Badī`u'-zamān Bāī-qarā 60-1; re-equips him defeated by his father (902) 70; receives well the fugitive Bāī-sunghar Mīrān-shāhī (903) 74; makes him pādshāh in Ḥiṣār 93; strangles him (905) 110; a fugitive Tarkhān goes to him (906) 120, 141; his niggardliness to Bābur 129, 130; gives him no help against Shaibānī 138, ☛ 183; Qāsim Beg quchīn takes refuge with him (907) 27; his position less secure (910) 188; followers of his join Bābur 189, 192, 196, 227 n. 3; invited to co-operate with the Tīmūrid Mīrzās against Shaibānī 190; takes the Kābul road on Bābur's approach 192, 244; offers him service 192; the interview of his submission 193-4; allowed to go towards Khurāsān 194, 195; breaks his pact and is put to flight 197, 243; gets sensible counsel in Herāt 243; makes trouble for Nāṣir Mīrān-shāhī in Badakhshān 244-5; beheaded at Qūndūz by the Aūzbegs 244; good results from his death for Bābur 245; Bābur's reflections on the indiscipline of his followers 199, 230 n. 5, 239, 244-5; his former following rebels (914) 335; his brothers Walī and Bāqī, and nephew Aḥmad-i-qāsim q.v.; [♰910 AH.-1505 AD.].

+Khwāja Chishtī+ var. Ḥusaini—at a feast (935) 631.

`Abdu'l-lāh +Khwājagān-khwāja+, fifth son of `Ubaidu'l-lāh Aḥrarī—his son `Abdu'sh-shahīd 653 n. 4.

+Khwājakā Khwāja+, Muḥammad-i-`ubaidu'l-lāh, eldest son of Aḥrarī—protects Bāī-sunghar Mīrān-shāhī in the Tarkhān rebellion (901) 62 (where, erroneously, "Khwājakī"); becomes his spiritual guide 63; visited in Farkat by Bābur (907) 149; his brother Yaḥyā q.v.

+Khwāja Kalān+, descendant of `Ubaidu'l-lāh Āḥrarī—☛ a likely recipient of the Mubīn 438, 631 n. 3 (where for "son" read grandson of Yaḥyā); at a feast in Āgra (935) 631; gifts and leave given 632, 641-2; a copy of Bābur-nāma writings sent to him 653.

Mīr +Khwāja Kalān+, son of Maulānā Muḥammad Ṣadru'd-dīn—receives Bajaur (925) 370; particulars 370 n. 2; prisoners pardoned at his request 371; out with Bābur 372; returns to Bajaur 376; is recalled on grounds given (926) 422-3; joins Bābur for Hindūstān (932) 447; on service 465-6; in the right wing at Pānīpat 472; helps to secure Āgra 475; of his leaving Hindūstān 520, 531; his offending couplet about leaving, and Bābur's reply 525-6; has charge of Kābul and Ghaznī 524; conveys money to repair the Ghaznī dam 219, 524 n. 2, 647 n. 1; Bābur's various writings sent to him, quatrains (925) 372, (932) 525-6, (935) the Wālidiyyah-risāla and Hindūstān poems 642 —letters (925) 411, (935) 604, 618 n. 2, quoted 645-8; commended to Humāyūn as a friend 627; a letter of his mentioned 644; wine parties in his house (925) 371-2, 375; has Ghaznī wine at Milwat (932) 461; urged to renounce wine 648; tells Bābur of a fruitful orange-tree (935) 510, cf. 483 n. 2; ☛ quotation from his ode on Bābur's death 709.

`Abdu'l-lāh +Khwāja Maulānā-i-qāzī+—particulars 29, 89-90; supports Bābur (899) 30; chases off an invader 32; confers with other well-wishers of the boy (900) 43; mediates for Ibrāhīm Sārū 53, for Aūrgūtīs (902) 68; envoy to Aūzūn Ḥasan (903) 87; open-handed to Bābur's followers 88; entreats him to save Andijān 88-9; Mīr Mughūl aids him in its defence 122; hanged by Taṃbal and Aūzūn Ḥasan 89; `Alī-dost fears retaliation for his death (905) 119; his right guidance recalled by Bābur (912) 303; [♰903 AH.-1498 AD.].

+Khwājakī Mullā-i-ṣadr+, son of Maulānā Muḥammad Ṣadru'd-dīn, and elder brother of Khwāja Kalān—particulars 67; killed near Yām 67; [♰902 AH.-1497 AD.].

+Khwāja Mīr-i-mīrān+—speaks boldly at Akhsī (908) 174; in charge of baggage camels (925) 376, 377, and of Bābur's camp 389, 391; Bābur halts near his Lamghān village (926) 424; given charge of Daulat Khān Yūsuf-khail (932) 459-60; in the left-centre at Pānīpat 973; entrusted with gifts for Kābul 525.

+Khwāja Mīr Sulṯān+—he and his son receive gifts (935) 632.

+Khwānd-amīr+, grandson of Khāwand Shāh Amīr ("Mīrkhond") —☛ associated with Muḥammad-i-zamān Bāī-qarā (923) 364-5, 463 n. 3; fleeced by Shaibānī's order (913) 328 n. 2; his discomforts in Herāt 617 n. 2; waits on Bābur (935) 605; Bābur invites him in verse 693; completes the Ḥabību's-siyar while at Tīr-mūhānī with Bābur 687 n. 3; his omission (or loss) from Bābur's list of Herāt celebrities 283 n. 1; his and Bābur's varied choice of details 328 n. 2; ☛ his patron Amīr Ghiyās̤u'd-dīn and nephew Ghiyās̤u'd-dīn 436; [♰942 AH.-1535 AD.].

Khwāja +Khwānd-sa`īd+—Bābur visits his tomb (925) 407.

Mīr +Khāwand+—Shāh Amīr ("Mīrkhond")—author of the Rauzatu'ṣ-ṣafā, grandfather of Khwānd-amīr—his omission (or loss) from Bābur's list of Herāt celebrities 283 n. 1; [♰903 AH.-1498 AD.].

+Kīchīk `Alī+—his courage (908) 176; made prisoner (933) 557, 576; shiqdār of Koel 176.

+Kīchīk Bāqī+ dīwāna—suspended (911) 248; killed at Qalāt-i-ghilzāī 248; [♰911 AH.-1505 AD.].

+Kīchīk Begīm+ Bāī-qarā Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, daughter of Ḥusain and Pāyanda-sulṯān—refused in marriage to Mas`ūd Mīrān-shāhī 265; "afterwards" marries Multā Khwāja 266.[2905]

+Kīchīk Khwāja+—on `Askarī's service (935) 681, 682.

+Kīchīk Khwāja Beg+, son of Maulānā Muḥammad Ṣadru'd-dīn and elder brother of Khwāja Kalān—in the left wing at Khūbān (905) 113; killed at Qalāt-i-ghilzāī 248[2906]; [♰911 AH.-1505 AD.].

+Kīchīk Mīrzā+ Mīrān-shāhī Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, son of Aḥmad (Mīrzā Sayyidī) and Ākā Bāī-qarā—particulars 257.

+Kīchkīna+ tunqṯār—sent with orders to Tramontane begs (925) 406.

+Kīpa+ and +Kīpīk+, see Kūpūk.

Rāja +Kirtī+ Gūālīārī, see Karna.

+Kītīn-qarā Sulṯān+ Aūzbeg—in Balkh (932) 545-6; at Jām (935) 622 (where in n. 1 read 935 for "934"); makes complaint to Bābur 649, 645 n. 1.

+Kitta Beg+ Kohbur Chaghatāī, son of Sayyidī Qarā—convoys Yūsuf-khail chiefs to Bhīra (932) 461; on Bābur's service 465-6, 468, 528, (933) 545, (935) 638; wounded at Bīāna (933) 548.

+Kitta Māh+ and +Kīchīk Māh+, slaves of Muz̤affar-i-ḥusain Bāī-qarā—offend Bābur by their performance (912) 304.

+Kūchūm Khān Sulṯān+—Kūchkūnjī—Aūzbeg-Shaibān, Chīnqīz-khānid—particulars 632 n. 3; ☛ his force gathered at Qarshī (917) 353; ☛ a principal actor between 926 and 932 AH. 427; his position in relation to `Ubaidu'l-lāh (935) 618 n. 6; in the battle of Jām 622; various accounts of his escape or death 623, 636; his envoy to Bābur 631, 632; his sons Abū-sa`īd and Pulād q.v.; [♰937 AH.-1530-1 AD.].

+Kūkī-i+[1] +Bābā Qāshqa+, see Hājī Muḥammad Khān Kūkī.

+Kūkī+,[2907] paternal-uncle of the last-entered (A.N.)—on Bābur's service (934) 589, (935) 674, 679; in the battle of the Ghogrā 673; [♰940 AH.-1553 AD.?].

+Kūpuk Beg+, var. Kīpik, Kīpa (hunchbacked)—in Bābur's service (910) 237; promoted (911) 253; frost-bitten (912) 311; in the centre at Qandahār (913) 335; envoy to Mīrzā Khān (925) 405.

+Kūpuk Bī+ Aūzbeg var. ut supra—blamed for three murders (906) 128; given Khwārizm by Shaibānī (911) 256; his son Qaṃbar-i-`alī q.v.

+Kūpuk Mīrzā+ Bāī-qarā, Muḥammad Muḥsin, son of Ḥusain and Laṯīf-sulṯān—parentage 262; defeated by his father (904) 260; does not join his brothers against Shaibānī (912) 296-7; defeated and killed 329-30; [♰913 AH.-1507 AD.].

Sayyid +Lāchīn+—bearer of an urgent message from Bābur (932) 453.

Ḥaẓrat +Lām+, (Lāmak, Lāmakān), father of Noah—his reputed tomb, 210.

+Langar Khān+ Janjūha—on Bābur's service (925) 380, 381, 388-9, 412; one of a raft-party 385; waits on Bābur 391, 411.

+Langar Khān+ Nīazāī Afghān—one of a raft-party (925) 412; waits on Bābur (926) 421.

+Laṯīf Begīm+ Dūldāī Barlās Turk—particulars 37 (where for "916" read 917 AH.).

+Laṯīf-sulṯān Āghācha+ Chār-shaṃba'ī, a mistress of Ḥusain Bāī-qarā—particulars 269; her sons Abū'l-muḥsin and Kūpuk q.v.; [♰before 911 AH.-1506 AD.].

+Lope de Vega+—a popular use of his name resembling one of Nawā'ī's 287 n. 3.

+Luṯfī Beg+—measures the Ganges-bank on Bābur's journey (933) 659.

+Maghfūr+, see Faghfūr.

+Māh-afrūz+—married by Kāmrān (934) 619 n. 1.

+Mah-chūchūq+ Arghūn, daughter of Muqīm and Zarīf—marries Qāsim Kūkūldāsh (913) 342, 199 n. 1, ☛ 365; their daughter Nahīd q.v.; [♰cir. 975 AH.-1568 AD.].

+Mahdī Sulṯān+ Aūzbeg, the constant associate (brother?) of Ḥamza—defeated by Ḥusain Bāī-qarā (901) 58; enters Bābur's service 59; deserts 64; defeats `Alī Mīrān-shāhī and goes back to Shaibānī 65; his Mughūls are disloyal to Bābur (904) 105; serving Shaibānī (906) 131; at Sar-i-pul 139; at Ḥiṣār (910) 244; ☛ retires before Bābur (916) 352; defeated and killed by him at Pul-i-sangīn (917) 18, 37, 262, 353, 354; his Mīrān-shāhī wife 36; his sons at Jām (935) 622; [♰917 AH.-1511-12 AD.].

+Mahdī-Sulṯān+ Auzbeg-Shaibān?—his identity discussed 264 n. 1; his son `Ādil and grandson `Āqil q.v.

Sayyid +Mahdī Khwāja+, son of Mūsa Khwāja and third husband of Bābur's sister Khān-zāda—Bābur's dīwān-begī (916-7) 704 n. 3; ☛ dissuades Muḥammad-i-zamān from accepting Bābur's invitation to Kābul (after 920) 364; on Bābur's service (932) 468, 471; in the left wing at Pānīpat 472, 473; commands troops sent to seize Dihlī 475; gifts made to him 527; given Etāwa 530; orders changed 531; serves as an escort (933) 534, 537; given Bīāna 539; sends news of Sangā's approach 544; joins Bābur quickly 548; in the left wing at Kānwa 567; given leave for Kābul 579; host to Bābur near Etāwa (935) 644; waits on him returning to Āgra 686; displeases him 688 n. 2, 704 n. 2; summoned to Court 689; later particulars 644 n. 4, 688 n. 2, ☛ 692; ☛ discussion of a plan to make him Pādshāh 703-7; ☛ his name may be a gloss in the story 705; his son Ja`far q.v.; his inscribed slab at Amīr Khusrau's tomb 704 n. 1; his surmised Tīrmīzī descent 704; his relation or servant Mīr Muḥammad (925) 381.

+Māhīm Begīm+, wife of Bābur—particulars 344 n. 3, 711, ☛ 712, 714; ☛ with Bābur during the Transoxus campaign (916-920) 358; adopts Hind-āl (925) 374, 385, ☛ 715, App. L; ☛ visits Humāyūn in Badakhshān (928) 436; goes to Āgra (935) 640 n. 2, 650 n. 2, 665, 686-7, 689 n. 2, 690; ☛ her influence probably misused on Humāyūn 694, 707; meets him, sick, in Muttra (937) 701-2; ☛ her care of Bābur's Āgra tomb (937) 709; [♰940 AH.-1533-4 AD.].

Sayyid +Maḥmūd+ Aūghlāqchī, Mughūl—forced to go on foot (910) 239.

+Maḥmūd Beg+ Nūndākī, Barlās Turk—particulars 51; defends Ḥiṣār against Abā-bikr Mīrān-shāhī ( 873) 51, and against Ḥusain Bāī-qarā (901) 58; negociates with Ḥusain 61.

Sultān +Maḥmūd+ Dūldāī Barlās Turk—expelled from Andijān (900) 44; turns informer (905) 125.

Mulla +Maḥmūd+ Farābī, associated with Khalīfa—reads the Qorān to Bābur (925) 401; rebukes a jest at Khalīfa's expense 416; reads the Khuṯba first for Bābur in Dihlī (932) 476; reinforces the right wing [tūlghuma] at Kānwa (933) 569; leads the Morning Prayer at Rāprī (935) 643 (where for "Muḥammad" read Maḥmūd).

Sulṯān +Maḥmūd Ghāzī+ Ghaznawī Turk—his humble capital Ghaznī 217, 219; his and his descendants' tombs 218; Dost-i-nāṣir's tomb near his 396; his dam and Bābur's gift from Hindūstān for its repairs 219; Būt-khāk traditionally named from his idol-breaking 409 n. 3; mentioned as a conqueror of Hindūstān 479; contrast made between his position and Bābur's 479; [♰421 AH.-1030 AD.].

Sulṯān +Maḥmūd Khān+ Chaghatāī Chīngīz-khānid, Khāqān of the Mughūls, elder son of Yūnas and Shāh Begīm—succeeds his father (892) 13; his disaster on the Chīr (895) 31, 34, 39; invades Farghāna (899) 13, 31; thought of as a refuge for Bābur 29, (908) 178; retires from Farghāna 32; attempts Samarkand and is defeated (900) 52, 111, (905) 122; takes Aūrā-tīpā (900) 55-6; demands Andijān (903) 87; is visited by Bābur (900) 54, (903) 90, 92, (907 and 908) 153-159; sends help to Bābur (903) 90, 92, (904) 101, (906) 138, 139; his men abandon Bābur (903) 91, 92; he opposes Bābur (905) 115-6, 116; moves out against Taṃbal (907) 154, 156; numbers his army 154; acclaims his standards 155; ceremonies on his meeting his brother Aḥmad (908) 160; goes with him against Taṃbal 161, 168, 171; they number their armies 161; retires to Tāshkīnt 172; defeated at Archīān by Shaibānī (909) 7, 23, ☛ 182-3; his præ-accession sobriquet Khāmka Khān 23; his summer retreat in Farghānā 5; his Mīrān-shāhī marriage (cir. 892) 13, 35; retainers of his 25, 28; former followers, deported (908) by Shaibānī, return after his death (916) 351; Bābur's comment on him as a soldier 91, 157, and as a verse-maker 154; ☛ murdered with five young sons by Shaibānī 350; [♰914 AH.-1509 AD.].

+Māḥmūd Khān+ Lūdī Afghān, son of Sikandar—fights for Sangā at Kānwa (933) 562; reported to have taken Bīhar (935) 639, 675; one of three competitors for rule 651 n. 5; gathers an army to oppose Bābur 651-2; it breaks up 654; is near the Son 658; flees before Bābur's men 662; referred to 664 n. 7, 679 n. 7; on his title Sulṯān 652 nn. 2, 6, 653-4 n. 1; [♰945 AH.-1543 AD.].

+Maḥmūd Khān+ Nūḥānī Afghān —holding a district from Bābur; taken by `Ālam Khān (932) 455, 456; deserts `Ālam Khān; waits on Bābur and given revenue from Ghāzīpūr 527; sent against Etāma 530; waits on Bābur (935) 659; searches for a passage through the Ghogrā 668; in the battle of the Ghogrā 669 (here Ghazīpūrī); receives a grant on Bihār 676; on service against Bīban and Bāyazīd 682.

+Maḥmūd Khān+ shikdār of Sikandarpūr—collects boats for Bābur's passage of the Ghogrā (935) 668.

+Maḥmūd Khān Sulṯān+ Aūzbeg-Shaibān Chīngīz-khānid—in the battle of Sar-i-pul (Khwāja Kārdzan) (906) 139; receives Qūndūz (910) 244; his protection sought 196 n. 5; dies 244; [♰910 AH.-1504 AD.].

Sulṯān +Maḥmūd+ Khīlīj Turk, ruler in Mālwā—particulars 482 (where in n. 2 for "Gujrāt" read Mālwā); his territory (916) 593; his jewels (925 and 935) 612-3; thought of by Raḥīm dād as a refuge 688 n. 2 (where for "Muḥammad" read Maḥmūd); [♰937 AH.-1531 AD.].

+Maḥmūd+ kūndūr-sangak, pīāda—killed fighting 68; [♰902 AH.-1497 AD.].

Sulṯān +Maḥmud+ mīr-akhẉur, see Mīrzā Beg fīrmgī-bāz (58 and n. 4).

Sulṯān +Maḥmūd Mīrzā+ Ghāzī, Mīrān-shāhī Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, son of Abū-sa`īd—particulars 45-51; defeated by Ḥusain Bāī-qarā (865 and 876), 46, 259-60, 268; succeeds his brother Aḥmad (899) 40-1, 86; alienates allegiance 41-2; sends Bābur wedding-gifts (900) 43; his death 27, 45, 50, 52; his family joins Bābur (910) 189; referred to 12 n. 2, 13 n. 5, 190, 194; his Ḥiṣār house 93; [♰900 AH.-1495 AD.].

Sayyid +Maḥmūd Ṣaifī+, Maulānā `Arūẓī—author of the `Arūẓ-i-saifī—tutor of Bāī-sunghar Mīrān-shāhī 111.

+Maḥmūd+ Sarwānī, son of Fatḥ Khan Khān-i-jahān—ordered to stay at Court (933) 537.

+Maḥmūd Shāh+ Ilyās—his murder mentioned to illustrate a succession custom of Bengal 483.

Sulṯān +Maḥmūd+ Sharqī, son of Jalālu'd-dīn—Bābur gives him the title of Sulṯān (935) 652.

+Maḥmūd+, son of Muḥammad-i-makhdūmī—beheaded in Badakhshān 242; [♰910 AH.-1504-5 AD.?].

(?) +Mahndī+ (415, 473), or Mindī or Hindī (235, 335)—kills an Afghān trader (910) 235; in the centre at Qandahār (913) 335; wine first given to him (925) 415; in the left wing [tūlghuma] at Pānīpat (932) 473.

Khwāja +Majdu'd-dīn Muḥammad+ Khawāfī—particulars 281, 282.

+Makan+ Farmūlī(?) Afghān—not submissive to Bābur (932) 529; sent out of the way before Kānwa (933) 547; his son Ḥasan q.v.

+Makhdūm-i-`ālam+, Naṣrat Shāh's Governor in Ḥājīpūr—his defences on the Gandak (935) 663.

Ḥaẓrat +Makhdūmī Nūrā+—mentioned 641 n. 1.

+Makhdūm-sulṯān Begīm+ Mīrān-shāhī Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, daughter of Maḥmūd and Zuhra—in Badakhshān (cir. 935) 48.

+Makhdūm-sulṯān Begīm+ Qarā-gūz, wife of `Umar Shaikh—particulars 18, 24.

+Malik-dād+ Kararānī (Karānī)[2908]—reprieved (932) 477-8; on service (933) 540, 582, (935) 682; in the right wing at Kānwa (933) 557.

+Malik-i-muḥammad Mīrzā+ Mīran-shāhī, nephew of Abū-sa`īd—aspires to rule (899) 41; murdered 41; his wife 47; his house 146; [♰899 AH.-1494 AD.].

+Maliks of Alangār+—their garden a halting-place (926) 424.

+Malik of Fān+—stingy to Bābur (906) 130.

+Malik-qulī+ Kūnārī—Bābur halts at his son's house (926) 423 (where read qulī for "`Alī").

+Malik Sharq+—returns from service (935) 683.

+Mallū Khān+ of Mālwā—his tank at Chanderī 597 n. 8, 598.

+Mamāq Sulṯān+ Aūzbeg-Shaibān Chīngīz-khānid, son of Ḥamza—takes service with Bābur (901) 58, 59; ☛ his death 353; [♰917 AH.-1511-2 AD.].

+Māmūm Khalīfa+, `Abbāsī, son of Hārūnu'r-rashīd—his Observatory and Tables, Author's Note 79; [♰218 AH.-833 AD.].

+Mānik-chand+ Chauhān Rājpūt—killed at Kānwa 573; [♰933 AH.-1527 AD.].

Rāja +Man-sing+ Gūālīārī, Tūnwar Rājpūt—his buildings 607, 608; his son Bikramājīt q.v.; [♰924 AH.-1518 AD.].

Shāh +Manṣūr+ bakhshī—helps Shaibānī to take Herāt (913) 325; given Khadīja Begīm to loot 326.

Shah +Manṣūr+ Barlās—on service (932) 465-6, 475, 530, (933) 545; in the right centre at Pānīpat (932) 472, 473, and at Kānwa (933) 565, 569; his untimely praise of the Rājpūt army 548, 550.

Sulṯān +Manṣūr Khān+ Chaghatāī Chīngīz-khānid, eldest son of Aḥmad, Alacha Khān—☛ defeats his half-brother Sa`īd (914) 349; ☛ mentioned as Khāqān of the Mughūls, Sa`īd as Khān in Kāshghar 427; [♰950 AH.-1543 AD.].

+Manṣūr Mīrzā+ Bāī-qarā, `Umar-shaikhī Tīmūrid, _Barlās Turk_—mentioned in his son Ḥusain's genealogy 256; his not-reigning 256; his wife Fīrūza and their children 256, 257; his beg Walī q.v.

+Manṣūr+ Turkmān—in the centre at Qandahār (913) 335.

Malik Shāh +Manṣūr+ Yūsuf-zāī Afghān, son of Sulaimān—envoy of his tribe to Bābur (924) 371; his daughter's marriage with Bābur (925) 375, App. K; waits on him 399, 400; his brother T̤aus Khān and cousin Aḥmad q.v.; a follower 377.

+Maqṣūd+ sūchī, shārbatchī, karg—in the left centre at Qandahār (913) 335, 338; his tossing by a rhinoceros (karg) 400.

+Marghūb+ qul—in Mahāwīn (932) 523.

Mīān +Ma`rūf+ Farmūlī Afghān[2909]—disaffected to Ibrāhīm and (later) to Bābur (932) 523; his opposition 530; flees 533-4; his son Muḥammad (?) leaves him (934) 598; his sons Muḥammad and Mūsa q.v.

+Ma`rūf+ Yaq`ūb-khaīl Dilah-zāk (Dīlazāk) Afghān—waits on Bābur at `Alī-masjid (925) 394.

Shaikh +Maṣlaḥat+ Khujandī—his birthplace 8; dreamed of by Bābur (906) 132; his tomb visited by Tīmūr (790) 132 n. 2.

+Mastī+ chuhra—deals with a drunken man (925) 415; intoxicated by beer (926) 423.

Sulṯān +Mas`ūd+ Ghaznawī—his tomb 218.

Sulṯān +Mas`ūd Mīrzā+ Mīrān-shāhī Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, son of Maḥmūd and Khān-zāda I—particulars 47, 48; holding Ḥiṣār (900) 52; opposes Ḥusain Bāī-qarā and flees (901) 57-8, 130; one of three besieging Samarkand; retires with his desired Barlās bride 64; quarrels with Khusrau Shāh (902) 71, and with the Ḥiṣār begs (903) 93; takes refuge with Ḥusain Bāī-qarā 93, 95, 261, 265; returns to Khusrau and is blinded by him 95, 50; goes back to Ḥusain 95, 266; mentioned as older than Bāī-sunghar 110; meets Bābur in Ḥerāt (912) 302; murdered by Aūzbegs (913) 267; his wives Ṣāliḥa-sulṯān Mīrān-shāhī, and Sa`ādat-bakht Bāī-qarā q.v.; his betrothed (?) Kīchīk Begīm Bāī-qarā q.v.; [♰913 AH.-1507 AD.].

Sulṯān +Mas`ūd Mīrzā+ Kābulī, Shāh-rukhī, ut supra—particulars 382; his cherished followers, sons of Mīr `Alī Beg q.v.; his son `Alī aṣghar q.v.; [deposed 843 AH.-1439-40 AD.].

Mullā +Mas`ūd+ Sherwānī, of Ḥusain Bāī-qarā's Court—no particulars 284.

+Ma`ṣūma-sulṯān Begīm+ Mīrān-shāhī Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, daughter of Aḥmad and Habība-sulṯān, and wife of Bābur—particulars 36, ☛ 711; her marriage arranged (912) 306, ☛ 714; brought from Ḥerāt (913) 330; married 339; dies in child-bed and her name at once given to her child 36; [♰cir. 915 AH.-1509 AD.].

+Ma`ṣūma-sulṯān Begīm+, ut supra, daughter of Bābur and Ma`ṣuma-sulṯān (supra)—her birth 36; with her father in the Transoxus campaign (916-920) 358; her marriage (or betrothal) to Muḥammad-i-zamān Bāī-qarā (923 or 924) 365; gifts made to her servants (935) 633; ☛ in the family-list 705, 706.

+Maulānā Sayyidī+, or Mashhadī—his chronogram on Humāyūn's birth (913) 344.

Shaikh +Mazīd Beg+, Bābur's first guardian—particulars 26, 27; [♰ before 899 AH.-1494 AD.].

Mīr +Mazīd T̤aghāī+ Kūnjī Mughūl, brother or uncle of Aīsān-daulat—takes part in a sally from Samarkand (906) 142; wounded at Akhsī (908) 168; rebels (921) 363, 397; his relations, `Alī-dost, Sherīm, Qul-naẕr q.v.; [♰cir. 923 AH.-1517 AD.].

+Mazīd Beg Tarkhān+ Arghūn, son of Amīr Tarkhān Junaid (Ḥ.S. lith. ed. iii, 359)—his retainer Khusrau Shāh 49; his action in 873 AH. 51; his brother `Āshiq-i-muḥammad q.v.

Shaikh +Mazīd Kūkūldāsh+—envoy of Muḥammad-i-zamān to Bābur (925) 402.

+Medinī Rāo+ var. Mindī etc.—particulars 593 n. 5; his force at Kānwa (933) 562; holding Chanderī (934) 483, 593; Bābur negociates with him 594; his house the scene of a supreme rite 595.

+Mihr-angez Begīm+ Bāī-qarā Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk—married as a captive (913) 329 n. 1.

+Mihr-bān Khānīm+ (see infra)—gifts to and from Bābur (935) 631, 632, 641; her husband Kūchūm Aūzbeg and their son Pūlād q.v.; a verse seeming to be addressed to her (925) 402.

+Mihr-bānū Begīm+ Mīrān-shāhī, half-sister of Bābur (perhaps the Khānīm last entered)—particulars 18.

+Mihr-nigār Khānīm+ Chaghatāī Chingīz-khānid, daughter of Yūnas—particulars 21, 149; joins Bābur in Kābul (911) 246; visited by him after her disloyalty (912) 315; goes to Badakhshān (913) 341; dies a prisoner 21.

+Millī Sūrdūk+—reprieved from death (932) 477, 478.

+Mīnglī Bī Āghācha+, a mistress of Ḥusain Bāī-qarā—particulars 269; her sons and daughters 262-3, 266.

+Mīnglīk Kūkūldāsh+—leaves Samarkand (907) 147.

+Minūchihr Mīrzā+ Mīrān-shāhī Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, brother of Abū-sa`īd—an attributed descendant 24; his son Malik-i-muḥammad q.v.

+Minūchihr Khān+ Turk—delayed in waiting on Bābur by a forcible marriage (925) 386, 388; on Bābur's service in Bhīra 389; leading Daryā-khānīs (934) 589; his relation Naẕar-i-`alī Turk q.v.

+Mīrak+—entrusted with building work (935) 642.

+Mīrak Kūr Dīwān+ (or Gūr)—in Ālā-qūrghān when Shaibānī took Herāt (913) 328.

+Mīrān-shāh Mīrzā+ Mīrān-shāhī Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, son of Aūlūgh Beg Kābulī—rebels against his father and goes to Khusrau Shāh 95; sent to Bāmīān 96.

+Mīrān-shāh Sulṯān Mīrzā+ Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, 3rd son of Tīmūr—mentioned in a genealogy 14; his daughter's son Aḥmad Bāī-qarā q.v.; [♰810 AH.-1407-8 AD.].

+Mīr Buzurg+ Tīrmīẕī—his daughter and granddaughter, wives of Maḥmūd Mīrān-shāhī 47-8, 49.

+Mīrīm+—Mīr Muḥammad?[2910]—adopted son of Aūzūn Ḥasan—killed fighting against Bābur 170; [♰908 AH.-1502 AD.].

+Mīrīm Dīwān+—ut supra—captured serving Bābur (904) 106; released (905) 119; discovers a rebel (912) 319.

+Mīrīm+ Lagharī—ut supra—leaves Bābur for home (903) 91; captured serving Bābur (904) 106; killed 167; [♰904 AH.-1499 AD.].

+Mīrīm-i-nāṣir Beg+—ut supra—enters Bābur's service (904) 103; one of a household-party (906) 131; in the left centre at Qandahār (913) 335, 338; at social gatherings (925) 385, 388; on service 389, 391; receives his dead brother's district 397.

+Mīrīm Tarkhān+—ut supra—drowned while serving Bāī-sunghar Mīrān-shāhī 74; [♰903 AH.-1497 AD.].

+Mīr Khurd+ bakāwal—one of a boat-party (925) 388; ordered to catch pheasants 404; made Hind-āl's guardian 408; on service (935) 640.

+Mīr Mughūl+, son of `Abdu'l-wahhāb shaghāwal—helps to defend Andijān (903) 122; his son killed (904) 102 (here Mughūl Beg); sent by Tarkhāns to invite Bābur to Samarkand (905) 122, 123; on service (925) 389 (here Beg Muḥammad Mughūl); measures Bābur's marches (935) 658 (here Mughūl Beg); in the battle of the Ghogrā 673-4 (here Mughūl-i `Abdu'l-wahhāb).

+Mīr Sang-tarāsh+—entrusted with building-work (935) 642.

+Mīrzā Beg+ firīngī-bāz—in Ḥusain Bāī-qarā's service (901) 58.

+Mīrzā Beg Kaī-khusrawī+—in Ālā-qūrghān when Shaibānī took Herī (913) 328.

+Mīrzā Beg T̤aghāī+, see Sl. `Alī M. T̤aghāī Begchīk.

+Mīrzā Beg Tarkhān+—in the left centre at Pānīpat (932) 472.

Wais +Mīrzā Khān+ Mīrān-shāhī Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk—Khān Mīrzā—son of Maḥmūd and Sulṯān-nigār Chaghatāī—particulars 47; sent by The Khān (Maḥmūd Chaghatāī) against Samarkand (905) 122; in Tāshkīnt (908) 159; at Khusrau Shāh's audience of submission (910) 193; demands vengeance on him 194; on service 234; disloyal (912) 313-20; captured and banished 320; rejoins Bābur from Herāt (913) 331; in the right wing at Qandahār 334; his loot 338; goes to Badakhshān on Shāh Begīm's insistance 340-1, 342; his claim to rule in it 698 nn. 1-3; serves as a refuge for Sa`īd Chaghatāī (915) 349 and Ḥaidar Dūghlāt 350; sends Bābur news of Shaibānī's defeat at Merv (916) 350; invites his help in recovering their ancestral lands ib.; messenger of Bābur to Ismā`īl Ṣafawī 352; helps him to defend Ḥiṣār (918) 359; receives him plundered 362; sends him an envoy (925) 402; loses lands to Sa`īd Chaghatāī 695; ☛ mentioned 427; his death announced to Bābur (927) 433, 621 n. 5; his titles 21 n. 5; his guardians 26, 122; [♰927 AH.-1521 AD.].

+Mīr-zādas+ of Khwāst—wait on Bābur (925) 399.

+Mīrzā-i-malū+ Qārlūq?—his son Shāh Ḥusain or Ḥasan q.v.

+Mīrzā Mughūl+, son of Daulat-qadam-i-turk—conveys letters (932) 526-7.

+Mohan+ Mundāhir Rājpūt—☛ a punitive expedition against him (936) 700-1; [♰936 AH.-1529 AD.?].

The +Mother+ of the Head-man of Dikh-kat—particulars 150.

Ibrāhīm Lūdī's +Mother+—receives an allowance from Bābur (932) 478; attempts to poison him (933) 541; started under guard for Kābul 543; her grandson sent to Kāmrān 544; [♰933 AH.-1527 AD.].

+Mīrzā-qulī Kūkūldāsh+ (Mīrzā's servant?)—with Jahāngīr (æt. 9) in Akhsī (899) 32; one of three with Bābur (908) 166, 396; fights for him in Akhsī 174-5; one of eight in flight 177; his horse fails 178; at social gatherings (925) 385, 387, 388; out with Bābur 403; behaves in his own fashion 407.

+Mūātūkān+ Chaghatāī Chīngīs-khānid—mentioned in Yūnās Khān's genealogy 19.

Bībī +Mubāraka+ Yūsuf-zāī Afghān, a wife of Bābur—referred to 367 n. 3; her courtship App. K; asked and given in marriage 375, 376; a couplet suiting her 411; accompanies Mahīm to Āgra (935) 689 n. 5; ☛ her probable charge of conveying Bābur's body to Kābul 709-10; her brother Jamāl App. K, xli; [♰ early under Akbar 963 AH.-1556 AD.].

+Mubārak Khān+ Jilwānī—killed serving Bīban (935) 685.

+Mubārak Shāh+ Muz̤affarī—rises in Badakhshān against Shaibānī (cir. 910) 242; invites Nāṣir Mīrān-shāhī 242, 243; defeats Aūzbegs (912) 294-5; defeats Nāṣir 321; in force (913) Author's Note 340; invites Mīrzā Khān to Qila`i-ẕafar 21; [♰cir. 913 AH.-1508 AD.].

+Mughūl Beg+, amīr of Ḥusain Bāī-qarā—particulars 275.

A +Mughūl servant+—aims an arrow at Bābur (912) 316.

+Mūḥammad+, the Prophet—reference to 75; a saying on travel 184; his edicts do not include the imposition of the tamghā 555; on the duty of a wazīr 556; mentioned in the farmān and the fatḥ-nāma (933) 553, 559-574.

Khwāja +Muḥammad+, an old tailor of `Umar Shaikh's—allays anxiety for Bābur (899) 30.

Mīr +Muḥammad-i-Mahdī Khwāja+—on service (925) 381.

Pahlawān Ḥajī +Muḥammad+—gifts made to him (935) 633.

Ustad Sulṯān +Muḥammad+, a Kābul builder—orders for his work (935) 646-7.

+Muḥammad `Alī+, son of Ḥaidar kikābdār—brings a gift (925) 418; summons Humāyūn (933) 537-8; sent out for news (935) 661, 662.

+Muḥammad `Alī+ bakhshī—on Abū-sa`īd's service and defeated by Ḥusain Bāī-qarā (868) 259.

+Muḥammad `Alī+ Jang-jang—in the centre at Bajaur (925) 370; at boat-parties 387, 388; his servant's service 391, 392; his districts 392-3, 530; reinforced 412; waits on Bābur 403, 419, (932) 458; at Milwat (932) 460, 461; at Hiṣār-fīrūza 465-6; wounded 471; in the van at Pānīpat 472; on service 530, (933) 549, 550, 576, 582; in the left wing at Kānwa 557; acts unsuccessfully against Bīban and Bāyazīd (934) 589, 594, 598; pursues from near Qānūj 601; sent against Balūchīs (935) 638; his brother Arghūn and sons Tardī-muḥammad and Nan-roz q.v.

Khwāja +Muḥammad `Alī+ kitābdār—messenger to Khwāja Yaḥyā (905) 124; confuses a pass word (908) 164 (here sāīrt-kīshī = sārt); captured by Taṃbal 168; fights against rebels (912) 315; in the left centre at Qandahār (913) 335; in charge of treasure 338; at entertainments (925) 410, 411, 413; ☛ at Kalanūr (930) 442 (here Tājik = Sārt).

+Mūḥammad `Alī+ Mubashir-beg—stays with Bābur at a crisis (903) 91; at Khūbān (905) 113; in the flight from Akhsī (908) 163; captured by Taṃbal 168; killed on service 252; his servant Sulaimān 175; [♰911 AH.-1506 AD.].

+Muḥammad `Alī+ pīāda—deserts Nāṣir Mīrān-shāhī (913) 343.

Khwāja +Muḥammad `Alī T̤aghāī+—`Asas—brother of Mahīm Begīm?—in the van at Qandahār (913) 335; meets Bābur at a crisis (914) 346; waits on Bābur (925) 399, 403; answers a military summons 408; the first to follow Bābur in renouncing wine (933) 552; at various entertainments (925) 387, 388, 400, 412, (926) 423, (935) 683; on his identity 522 n. 4; ☛ in charge of Bābur's Āgra tomb (937) 709.

Khwāja +Muḥammad-amīn+—out with Bābur (910) 230; deserts from Qandahār (913) 343; at a garden-wine-party (925) 418; his servant Imām-i-muḥammad ib.

+Muḥammad-āmīn Khān+ Qāzānī, Jūgī Chīngīz-khānid—Shaibānī sends him a Herāt musician 292; [♰925 AH.-1519 AD.].

Ustād +Muḥammad-amīn+ jībachī—attention for him desired from Khwāja Kalān (935) 647.

+Muḥammad+ Andijānī—sent to Kābul (912) 313-4.

+Muḥammad+ Arghūn—with Mughūls against Bābur (904) 106.

Sayyid +Muḥammad-i-aūrūs+ Arghūn, son of Aūrūs—particulars 279.

Shāh Sulṯān +Muḥammad+ Badakhshī—his claim to Greek descent and his six daughters 22. (Cf. T.R. trs. p. 107.)

Mīir +Muḥammad+ Badakhshī of Ishkīmīsh—particulars 288-9; waits on Bābur (917) 289.

+Muḥammad+ bakhshī—on service at Qandahār (913) 338.

+Muḥammad Bāqir Beg+ Andijānī—with Jahāngīr (899) 32; disloyal to Bābur (900) 44; with Bāī-sunghar (902) 65; leaves Bābur for home (903) 91; in Akhsī and seen in the flight (908) 189, 181; ☛ 182; his son Dost q.v.

+Muḥammad Barandūq Beg+ Barlās Turk—particulars 270; on Ḥusain Bāī-qarā's service (901) 58; retorts on Khusrau Shāh (910) 243; retainer of Muz̤affar-i-ḥusain Bāī-qarā (911) 274, 293; acts against Shaibānī (912) 296, 297; at a feast 298; concerning Bābur's reception at the Herī Court 299; presses him to winter in Herī 307; his plan of defence rejected (913) 326.

+Muḥammad Beg+ Begchīk, brother of Ayūb—in the right wing at Qandahār (913) 334.

Pahlawān +Muḥammad Bū-sa`īd+—particulars 292.

Shāh +Muḥammad+ dīwāna, receives a fugitive Bāī-qarā 263; his son brings Bābur news of Bīban and Bāyazīd (935) 681.

+Muḥammad-dost T̤aghāī+ Kūnjī Mughūl, son of `Alī-dost—with Bābur (900) 53; remains at a crisis (903) 91; captured by Taṃbal (904) 106; released (905) 119; his self-aggrandizment 119; deserts to Taṃbal 125; negociates for him with Bābur (908) 173; blinded by the Aūzbegs 125.

Sayyid +Muḥammad+ Dūghlāt Ḥiṣārī—enters Bābur's service (901) 58, 59; his Mughūls desert Bābur (904) 105; conspires against Taṃbal and goes to The Khān (Maḥmūd) (907) 154; sent with Bābur against Taṃbal (908) 161.

Sulṯān +Muḥammad+ Dūldāī, Barlās Turk—Bābur's messenger to Ḥusain Bāī-qarā (912) 294; returns with news of Ḥusain's death 295; in the right centre at Qandahār (913) 335; waits on Bābur from Bajaur (925) 401; overtakes him at Jūī-shāhī 410; at a wine-party ib.; at Ḥiṣār-fīrūza (932) 465-6; in the right-wing at Pānīpat 472; given Qanūj 530; abandons it (933) 557; unwilling to return there 582; sent against Balūchīs (935) 638; ordered to Āgra 676.

Shāh +Muḥammad+ Farmūlī Afghān, son of Ma`rūf—particulars 675; Bābur gives him Sārūn (934) 603, 675; waits on Bābur (935) 675, 679.

Sulṯān +Muḥammad+ Galpuk, Itārachī Mughūl—opposing Bābur (908) 165.

Shaikh +Muḥammad+ Ghaus̤—particulars 539; helps Bābur to gain Gūālīār (933) 539-40; intercedes for Raḥīm-dād (936) 688, 690.

+Muḥammad Ḥaidar Mīrzā+ Dūghlāt, see Ḥaidar.

+Muḥammad Ḥusain Mīrzā Kūrkān+ Dūghlāt, receives Aūrā-tīpā (900) 56; effects Qāsim qūchīn's dismissal (903) 90; sent by The Khān (Maḥmūd) to help Bābur 92; lends him Pashāghar (904) 97, and Dikh-kat (907) 148; sent against Samarkand (905) 122; keeps back Aūrā-tīpā from Bābur (907) 149; goes to him in Kābul (911) 246; incites a Mughūl revolt against him (912) 313-17; captured and banished 319; ungrateful for leniency ib.; Shaibānī avenges Bābur ib.; his son Ḥaidar's excuses for him 317 n. 3; his wife Khūb-nigār, son Ḥaidar, daughter Ḥabība q.v.; [♰914 AH.-1508 AD.].

+Muḥammad Ḥusain+, brother of Abū'l-ḥasan qūr-begī—joins Mīrzā Khān (912) 315; on Bābur's service (925) 413 (here qūrchī).

+Muḥammad-i-ḥusain Mīrzā+ Bāī-qarā Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, son of Ḥusain and Mīnglī—particulars 262, 268; hostile to his father (903) 94; his flight into `Irāq 262.

Mīr +Muḥammad+ jāla-bān—examines a ford through the Sind-water (Indus) (925) 378; selects a site for a pontoon-bridge across the Ganges (934) 599; examines fords above Aūd (Oudh) 602; advises about crossing the Sarū (Goghrā) 674; rewarded for his pontoon-bridge (935) 635; his raft-mishaps (925) 407, 423.

+Muḥammad Jān+, Najm S̤ānī's Lord-of-the-Gate—☛ envoy to Bābur and discontented with his reception (917) 355.

+Muḥammad Khalīl+ akhta-begī—sent raiding (933) 538; at Kānwa (933) 569.

+Muḥammad Khān+ Chaghatāī Chīngīz-khānid—mentioned in Yūnas Khān's genealogy 19.

+Muḥammadī Kūkūldāsh+, kinsman of Bābā Qashqa (?—q.v.)—seen with Bābur by Khān-zāda (before 907 and in 916) 18; on service at Milwat (932) 458, 460; in the right centre at Pānīpat 472, 473, 475; sent against Dūlpūr 530; receives Samāna 528; in the right wing at Kānwa (933) 566, 569, 576; sends news of a second[2911] Balūchī incursion (935) 605 n. 3, 638; reports action 675; ordered to Āgra 676; at various entertainments (925) 385, 388, 412.

+Muḥammad-i-makhdūmī+—his son Maḥmūd q.v.

+Muḥammad Ma`ṣum Mīrzā+ Bāī-qarā Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, son of Ḥusain and Mīnglī—particulars 264, 269; his wife Bega Mīrān-shāhī q.v.; [♰907 AH.-1501-2 AD. See ḤS. iii, 290].

Mullā +Muḥammad+ Maẕhab—profers support to Bābur (932) 463; Bābur's envoy to Bengal (935) 637.

+Muḥammad Mazīd Tarkhān+ Arghūn Chīngīz-khānid, son of Aūrdū-būghā—particulars 39; has charge of Nāṣir Mīrān-shāhī (899) 32; leaves Samarkand after the Tarkhān rebellion (901) 62; displeases `Alī Mīrān-shāhī (905) 121; plotted against ib.; invites Mīrzā Khān and Bābur 122, 123; welcomes Bābur 40, 124; joins Khusrau Shāh (906) 129; fights for Bābur at Sar-i-pul (Khwāja Kārdzan) 139; takes refuge with Khusrau Shāh 141; at Kūl-i-malik (918) ☛ 357; killed there 39; his house a post of Bābur's 143; [♰918 AH.-1512 AD.].

Sulṯān +Muḥammad Mīrzā+ Bāī-qarā Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk—parentage 257.

Sayyid +Muḥammad Mīrzā+ Dūghlāt, uncle of Ḥaidar—sent to help Bābur (906) 139; envoy of Sa`īd Chaghatāī to him (917) 22; escorts his niece to Kāshghar ib.

Sulṯān +Muḥammad Mīrzā+ Mīrān-shāhī, grandson of Tīmūr—his son Abū-sa`īd q.v.

Sultan +Muḥammad Mīrzā+ Mīrān-shāhī Tīmūrid—his father Abū-sa`īd q.v.

+Muḥammad+ mīskīn, Dūldāī Barlās, son of Ḥafiẓ—captured by Bābur's men (903) 72.

+Muḥammad Muḥsin+ Bāī-qarā, see Kūpūk.

+Muḥammad Muqīm Beg+ Arghūn, son of Ẕū'n-nūn—takes possession of Kābul (908) 195 n. 3; loses it to Bābur (910) 198, 199, 227, 246 n. 3; loses Qalāt-i-ghilzāī to him (911) 248-9; seeks his co-operation against Shaibānī (913) 330; withdraws and fails in etiquette 331-2; opposed to Bābur at Qandahār 333-7; flees in defeat 339.

Khwāja +Muḥammad Muqīm+ Herāwī, father of Niẕāmu'd-dīn Aḥmad the historian—☛ mentioned 691 n. 1, ☛ 692; ☛ his story of a plan to supersede Humāyūn as Pādshāh in 937 AH. 703; discussion of it 704-7; its incredibility as told 704-5.

+Muḥammad Mūmin+ Bāī-qarā Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, son of Badī`u'z-zamān—Astarābād claimed for him (902) 69; defeated by an uncle 71 (where delete the `aīn from his name); his murder attributed to Khadīja Begim 268.

Shaikh +Muḥammad+ Muṣalmān, ancestor of the Farmūlī Shaikh-zādas—his tomb and descendants 220.

Sulṯān +Muḥammad Muz̤affar+ Gujrātī, Tānk Rājpūt—particulars 481-2; his death 481; his sons Sikandar Shāh and Bahādur Khān q.v.; [♰932 AH.-1526 AD.].

+Muḥammad+ Nūḥānī, see Bihār Khān.

Mullā +Muḥammad+ Pargharī—loquacious (932) 453.

+Muḥammad-i-qāsim+ Barlās—comes accidentally on Bābur (925) 417.

+Muḥammad-i-qāsim Mīrzā+ Arlāt, son of Abū'l-qāsim (Ḥ.S. iii, 327)—his Bāī-qarā wife and their child 265; his sons (?) Bābur and Murād q.v.

+Muḥammad-i-qāsim Mīrzā+ Bāī-qarā Tīmūrid, son of Ḥusain and Pāpā—parentage 265.

+Muḥammad-i-qāsim+ Nabīra, grandson of Muḥammad Sīghal—made prisoner when opposing Bābur (903) 72.

+Muḥammad-i-qāsim+ Qībchāq Turk, son of Bāqī Chaghānīānī—leaves his family in Ajar (910) 191; father (?) of Aḥmad-i-qāsim q.v.

+Muḥammad-qulī+ qūchīn—Mīr Shāh qūchīn—helps Bāī-sunghar's escape from Samarkand (901) 62; with Bābur at Samarkand and wounded (902) 68; stays with him at a crisis (903) 91; captured (904) and released by Taṃbal (905) 119; in the van at Sar-i-pul (Khwāja Kārdzan) (906) 139; besieged in Samarkand 142-144; with Bābur when surprised by Taṃbal (908) 163; in the left wing at Qandahār (913) 334; in a raid (925) 403.

+Muḥammad+ qūrchī, retainer of Khusrau Shāh—rises against the Aūzbeg occupation of Badakhshān (910) 242; expels Nāṣir Mīrān-shāhī (912) 321; keeping up his head (913) 340.

Ustād +Muḥammad+ sabz-banā—his son Banā'ī q.v.

Maulānā +Muḥammad Ṣadru'd-dīn+ Andijānī—his six sons' service to Bābur 370 n. 2; his sons Khwājaka Mullā-i-ṣadr, Kīchīk Khwāja, Khwāja Kalān q.v.

+Muḥammad Ṣāliḥ Mīrzā+ Khwārizmī, author of the Shaibānī-nāma—in Khwāja Yaḥyā's service[2912] and waits on Bābur (901) 64; leaves Samarkand with the Tarkhāns (905) 121; enters Shaibānī's service 65 n. 3; on Shaibānī's service (910) 196 n. 5; couplets of his quoted by Bābur 120-1, 448; [♰941 AH.-1534-5 AD.].

Ustād Shāh +Muḥammad+ sang-tarāsh—cuts an inscription (913) 343; receives orders for work (933) 585, 606, (935) 642.

+Muḥammad Shāh+ Khīljī Turk, son of Nāṣiru'd-dīn of Mālwā—takes Chanderī and seeks Ibrāhīm Lūdī's protection (916) 593; his young son Aḥmad q.v.; [♰931 AH.-1524 AD.?].

+Muḥammad Shāh Pādshāh+ Mīrān-shāhī Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk—his change of name for an orange 511 n. 4; [♰1161 AH.-1748 AD.].

+Muḥammad+ Shaibānī, see Shaibānī.

Shaikh +Muḥammad-i Shaikh Bhakarī+ (?)—on service (933) 382.

Shāh +Muḥammad Shaikh-zāda+ Farmūlī Afghān, son of Ma`rūf—leaves his Afghān associates (934) 598 (no name here); favoured by Bābur 603, 675; compelled to act with Bīban and Bāyazīd (935) 675; writes dutifully to Bābur ib.; waits on `Askarī and Bābur ib. and 679.

+Muḥammad Sharīf+ munajjim (astrologer)—comes to Kābul (925) 399 and to Āgra (933) 551; augurs defeat at Kānwa 551, 576; offers congratulations on victory, blamed and banished with a gift 576.

Sulṯān +Muḥammad+ Sīghal, Chaghatāī—his descendants Muḥammad-i-qāsim and Ḥasan q.v. (Cf. 66 n. 4 and Ḥ.S. lith. ed. iii, 275 for tribe and title resp.).

+Muḥammad Sulṯān+ bakhshī—left behind to catch pheasants (925) 404; in a night-attack on Ibrāhīm's camp (932) 471; in the left wing at Pānīpat 472; has custody of the cook who poisoned Bābur (933) 542; staff-officers at Kānwa 568; host to Bābur (935) 629; introduces a Kābul messenger 644; brings news of Maḥmūd Lūdī 653-4; writes that Bābur's family is on its way from Kābul 657; waits on Bābur 606; his servant Shāh Qāsim q.v.

Sulṯān +Muḥammad Sulṯān+ Chaghatāī Chīngīz-khānid—Sulṯānīm and Khānika—eldest son of The Khān (Maḥmūd)—sent to help Bābur (903) 92; his guardian and he oppose Bābur (905) 116; his part in acclaiming the standards (907) 155; goes out to meet his uncle Aḥmad (Alacha Khān) (908) 159; ☛ murdered 350; [♰914 AH.-1508 AD.].

+Muhammad Sulṯān-i-jahāngīr Mīrzā+ Jahāngīrī Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk—Samarkand given to him by his grandfather Tīmūr 85; his college 78.

+Muḥammad Sulṯān Mīrzā+ Bāī-qarā Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, son of Wais and Sulṯānīm—particulars 265; waits on Bābur at Kalānūr (932) 458; on Bābur's service 468, 471, 475, 530, 534, (933) 545, 548, 582, (934) 589, (935) 682; in the left wing at Pānīpat (932) 472 and at Kānwa (933) 567, 570; gifts to him 527; given Qānūj 582; joins Bābur (935) 651; in the battle of the Ghogrā 671, 672, 674; ☛ mentioned 706 (where wrongly classed with half-Tīmūrids); once owner of the Elphinstone Codex 706 n. 3.

Beg +Muḥammad+ ta`alluqchī—conveys gifts to Humāyūn (Muḥ. 934) and returns (Rabī`I, 935) 621; Bābur complains of his detention.

+Muḥammad T̤āhir+—captured (903) 74.

Muḥammad +Tīmūr Sulṯān+ Aūzbeg-Shaibān, Chīngīz-khānid, son of Shaibānī—at Samarkand (906) 128; at Sar-i-pul (Khwāja Kārdzan) 139; defeats and kills two Bāī-qarā Mīrzās (913) 263, 329-30; leaves Samarkand on Bābur's approach (917) 354; at Ghaj-davān (918) 360; his marriages with captives 24, 36, 328 n. 1.

Mullā +Muhammad+ ṯālib-mu`ammāī—an enigmatist of Ḥusain Bāī-qarā's Court—particulars 201 n. 7[2913]; a couplet of his quoted 201-2; [♰918 AH.-1512 AD.].

Pahlawān Ḥājī +Muḥammad+ tufang-andāzī—receives gifts (935) 633.

Mullā +Muḥammad+ Turkistānī, retainer of Khusrau Shāh—makes Qūndūz safe for Shaibānī Khān (910) 192.

+Muhammad-i-`ubaidu'l-lāh+, son of Aḥrārī, see Khwāja Khwāja.

Sulṯān +Muḥammad Wais+—waits on Bābur (902) 66; runs away and is suspected (907) 156; serving Bābur at Akhsī (908) 174; his retainer Kīchīk `Alī q.v.

+Muḥammad Walī+ Beg—particulars 277; on Ḥusain Bāī-qarā's service (901) 57, (902) 70, (903) 94.

+Muḥammad-i-yūsuf+ Aūghlāqchī, elder son of Yūsuf—waits on Bābur (905) 125.

Mīr +Muḥammad-i-yūsuf+—particulars 285; waits on Bābur in Herāt (912) 285; Shaibānī instructs him in exposition (913) 329.

+Muḥammad+ Zaitūn[2914]—opposing Bābur (932) 523; written to and makes false excuse 529, 530; waits on Bābur (933) 540; sent out of the way before Kānwa 547.

Khwāja +Muḥammad Ẕakariya+,[2915] son of Yaḥyā—murdered 128; [906 AH.-1500 AD.].

+Muḥammad-i-zamān Mīrzā+ Bāī-qarā Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, grandson and last surviving heir of Ḥusain—particulars 261, 269 n. 6, 279; spared by Shaibānī 263; his wanderings and association with Khwānd-amīr 364-5, 463 n. 3; sent to Bābur and married to his daughter Ma`ṣūma-sulṯān (923-4) 365; in Balkh 365, 522; dutiful letters and tribute sent by him to Bābur (925) 385, 402, ☛ 427, ☛ (926-932) 428; with Bābur (935) 606, 631, 639, 659; objects to the Bihār command 661-2; does homage for it and is given insignia of royalty 662, ☛ 706; starts for Bihār but is recalled 663, 664; in the battle of the Ghogrā 668, 669, 671; ☛ given Jūnpūr 682; pursues Bīban and Bāyazīd 682; grounds for surmising in Bābur the intention to leave him as ruler in Hindūstān 705-7; ☛ of his later uprisings against Humāyūn 714 n. 1; [♰drowned at Chausa 946 AH.-1539 AD.].

+Muḥibb-i-`alī Khān+ Barlās Turk, son of Khalīfa—☛ marries Nāhid Begim (930) 443; in a night-attack (932) 471; in the left centre at Pānīpat 472, 473 and at Kānwa (933) 565; unhorsed in `Abdu'l-`azīz' discomfiture 549-50; on service (934) 601.

+Muḥibb-i-`alī+ qūrchī—on Khusrau Shāh's service (901) 60, (902) 71; joins Bābur (910) 188; Bābur's praise of him (912) 307, 308; loyal 313, (914) 346; in the van at Qandahār (913) 335; collector of an impost (925) 384; at Ḥiṣār-fīrūza (932) 465-6; at an entertainment 410.

+Muḥibb-sulṯān+ Mīrān-shāhī Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, daughter of Maḥmūd—particulars 48, 49.

Sāqī +Muḥsin+—wrestles (935) 660.

+Muḥsin+ Dūldāī Barlās—at Chanderī (934) 590.

+Muīnu'd-dīn al Zamjī+—omitted (or lost) from Bābur's list of Herāt celebrities 283 n. 1.

+Mujāhid Khān+ Multānī—on Bābur's service (933) 540.

The +Mulla+, see `Abdu'r-raḥmān Jāmī.

+Mullā Bābā+ Farkatī—brings Bābur news of Shaibānī (913) 343.

+Mullā Bihishtī+—conveys gifts to Hind-al (935) 642.

+Mullā Bābā+ Pashāgharī, Chaghatāī—comes into one of Bābur's dreams (906) 132; at Sar-i-pul 141; envoy for Bābur to Khusrau Shāh (910) 188; loyal (912) 313, (914) 346; ☛ disloyal in Ghaznī (921) 363; deserts Humāyūn (932) 545; joins the Aūzbegs; his proceedings 546; his brother Bābā Shaikh q.v.; his Kābul garden 315.

+Mullā Hijrī+, a poet—waits on Bābur (907) 153.

+Mullā Kabīr+—his devious route to wait on Bābur (925) 399.

+Mullā Khwājakā+—prescribes for Bābur (925) 399 (where read Khwajakā).

+Mullā Khwāja-i Sayyid Ātā+—his Bāī-qarā wife 265-6.

+Mullā Tabrīzī+—conveys gifts (935) 642.

+Mullā T̤aghāī+—envoy to Bābur of Abū-sa`īd Aūzbeg (935) 631, 632, 641.

+Mūmin+—suspected of the death of Nūyān Kūkūldāsh (907) 151-2.

+Mūmin-i-`alī+ tawāchī—conveys orders (932) 451; conveys the Kānwa Letter-of-victory to Kābul (933) 580.

+Mūmin Ātākā+—out with Bābur (925) 404; on service (932) 465, 534; in the left wing (tūlghuma) at Kānwa (933) 568, 569; his brethren (935) 679.

Khwāja +Munīr+ Aūshī—incites attack on Bukhāra (902) 65.

Sayyid +Murād+ Aūghlāqchī[2916]—referred to as father of Yūsūf 39 and Ḥasan 279; [♰874 AH.-1469-70 AD.].

+Mūrād Beg+ Bāyandarī Turkmān—his joining Ḥusain Bāī-qarā (908) 280, 336.

+Murād Mīrzā+ Arlāt, son of Muḥammad-i-qāsim and Rābi`a-sulṯān Mīrān-shāhī—his Bāī-qarā (?) marriage 266.[2917]

+Murād+ Qajar Turkmān, qūrchī—`Irāqī envoy to Bābur (935) 666, 688, 689, n. 4.

Mullā Khwāja +Murshid+ `Irāqī—envoy of Bābur to Ibrāhīm Lūdī (925) 385, ☛ 427 n. 3; made Dīwān of Bihār (935) 661, 662.

Mīr +Mūrtāẓa+—particulars 284.

+Musā Khwāja+—whispers of Mughūl rebellion (914) 346.

Malik +Musā+ Dilah-zāk (Dilazāk) Afghān—receives gifts (925) 394; brings tribute 409.

+Musā Sulṯān+ Farmūlī, son of Ma`rūf—waits on Bābur (935) 685; in the battle of the Ghogrā 669.

+Muṣṯafa Shaikh-zāda+ Farmūlī Afghān—on service for Ibrāhīm Lūdī (932) 527; his brother Bāyazīd q.v.; [♰932 AH.-1525-6 AD.].

+Muṣṯafa+ Rūmī, tawāchī—his culverin-discharge at Pānīpat (932) 474; has carts made for defence at Kānwa (933) 550; at Kānwa 550, 568-9; at the Gangas bridge (934) 599; in the battle of the Ghogrā (935) 668, 669, 670.

+Mū'yad+—leading Daryā-khānīs for Bābur (933) 582.

Shāh +Muz̤affar+—particulars 291; his artist-training owed to Nawā'ī 272.

+Muz̤affar+ Barlās—particulars 270-1.

Sulṯān +Muz̤affar+ Gujrātī—his death and successor 534 (where for [Jumāda II] "and" read 932); [♰932 AH.-1526 AD.].

+Muz̤affar-i-ḥusāin Mīrzā+ Bāī-qarā Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, son of Ḥusain and Khadīja—particulars 262, 268; serving under his father (901) 58, (902) 71; given Astarābād (902) 61, 69; made joint-ruler in Herī (911) 292-3; combines in action against Shaibānī (912) 296-7 and withdraws 301; fails in etiquette 297; in social relation with Bābur 298, 299, 300, 302-3; plain speech to him from Qāsim Beg 304; a false report of him in Kābul 313; irresolute in opposing Shaibānī (913) 326; his army defeated 327; flees (to Astarābād) abandoning his family ib.; his wife Khān-zāda Khānīm q.v.

Sulṯān +Muz̤affar Shāh+ Ḥabshī, mentioned in illustration of a Bengal custom 483.

Mīrzā Yār-i-aḥmad +Najm S̤ānī̤+, wazīr of Ismā`īl Ṣafawī—his killing Sohrāb Bāī-qarā 262; ☛ his commission to correct Bābur (918) 355, 359; ☛ his massacre in Qarshī 360; ☛ slain at Ghaj-dawān 262 n. 4, 361; Bābur's alleged failure to support him 361; his retainer Muḥammad Jān q.v.; [♰918 AH.-1512 AD.].

+Nādir Shāh+ Afshārid—his birthplace (mod.) Qalāt-i-nādirī 329 n. 4; [♰1160 AH.-1747 AD.].

+Nahār+, son of Ḥasan Khān Mewātī—released by Bābur from capture (933) 545; returns to Court 578; escapes 581.

Nāhid Begīm—☛ her marriage (930) 443.

+Na`man Chuhra+—captured by Taṃbal (908) 168; at a wine-party (925) 385.

Gurū +Nānak Shāh+—his relations with Daulat Khān Yūsuf-khail and traditionally with Bābur 461 n. 3; [♰946 AH.-1539 AD.].

Napoleon—☛ his problem of creed in Egypt less difficult than that of Bābur with Shī`a support 356.

+Nārpat Hāra+ Chauhān Rājpūt—his force at Kānwa (933) 562.

+Nāṣir Beg+—makes over Andijān to Bābur (904) 103; counsels him (908) 165; captured by Taṃbal 168; his sons Dost-, Mīrīm-, and Shāhīm-i-nāṣir; his brother-in-law Aūzūn Ḥasan q.v.

+Naṣīr Khān+ Nūḥānī Afghān—particulars 659 n. 4; disaffected to Ibrāhīm Lūdī and unsubmissive to Bābur (932) 523; discussion of his movements 530; assembles a force but flees before Bābur's 533-4, 544; his son Farīd q.v.

+Nāṣir Mīrzā+ Mīrān-shāhī Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, son of `Umar Shaikh—particulars 17; in Kāsān (æt. 8) (899) 32; taken to his uncle Aḥmad 32; meets Bābur (908) 172, 178; at the capture of Kābul (910) 198, 199; Zurmut hostility 220; given Nīngnahār 227; misconduct 229, 241-2; accepts an invitation to Badakhshān 242-3; has an imbroglio with Khusrau Shāh 243; clans which had left him 255; defeats Aūzbegs (912) 295; defeated by Badakhshīs and goes to Bābur 321; Bābur's reflections on the situation 322; out with Bābur (913) 324; in the van at Qandahār 335; his loot and command and beleaguerment in Qandahār 339-40; goes to Ghaznī 343, 344; ☛ given Kābul (917) 363; ☛ returns it to Bābur (920) 363; dies in Ghaznī (921) 363; his sister Mihr-bānū and wife Qarā-gūz Bāī-qarā q.v.; [♰921 AH.-1515 AD.].

Khwāja +Naṣīru'd-dīn+ T̤ūsī—his Astronomical Tables 79; [♰672 AH.-1274 AD.].

Sulṯān +Nāṣiru'd-dīn+ Khīljī Turk, Sulṯān of Malwā—events following his death 593; his son Maḥmūd q.v.; [♰916 AH.-1510 AD.].

+Naṣrat Shāh+ Ḥusain-shāhī, Sulṯān in Bengal—particulars 482-3; reported friendly to Bābur (935) 628, 637; sends him an envoy 637; negociations with him 661, 664, 676; referred to as at peace with Bābur 665; mentioned 667, 677, 679; his troops defeated on the Ghogrā 671-4; peace made 676; [♰939 AH.-1532 AD.].

+Naṣrat Shāh+ Tūghlūq Turk—receives Dihlī from Tīmūr 481 n. 4.

+Naurang Beg+—☛ punishes the Mundāhirs (936) 700, 701.

+Nau-roz+, brother of Muḥammad-`alī Jang-jang—at Bajaur (925) 370.

+Naukar Hindū+, see Tūka.

+Naẕar-i-`alī+ Turk—on Bābur's service (925) 389; his relation Minūchihr q.v.

+Naẕar Bahādur+—killed on Khusrau Shāh's service 93, 94, 279; [♰903 AH.-1497-8 AD.].

+Naẕar Bahādur+ Aūzbeg—one of five champions worsted by Bābur in single combat (914) 349 n. 1.

Shāh +Naẕar+ Turkmān—in the centre at Qandahār (913) 335; rebels (914) 345.

+Ni`amat+ Arghūn—his defeat 34.

Mullā +Ni`amat+—killed in a surprise by Sangā 549; [♰933 AH.-1527 AD.].

Khwāja +Ni`amatu'l-lāh+—his son Āṣafī 286 n. 2.

+Nīgārsī+, see Dankūsī.

+Niẕām Khān+ Bīāna'ī—not submissive to Bābur (932) 523; receives letters and a quatrain from him 529; defeats Bābur's troops (933) 538-9; waits on Bābur 539; in the left wing at Kānwa 567; on service (935) 678.

Khwājā +Niẕāmu'd-dīn Aḥṃad+, the author of the [T.]abaqāt-i-akbarī, son of Muḥammad Muqīm—☛ discussion of his story of the intended supersession of Bābur's sons 702-8; [♰1003 AH.-1594 AD.].

Sayyid +Niẕāmu'd-dīn `Alī Khalīfa+ Marghīlānī, Barlās Turk son of Junaid—escapes from prison and death (900) 55; driven from Bābur's presence (903) 90, (905) 119; defends Kābul (912) 313; mediates (914) 345; hears rumours of Mughūl revolt 346; in the left centre at Bajaur (925) 369 and at Pānīpat (932) 473; given charge of Ibrāhīm's corpse 474 n. 1; at Kānwa (933) 556, 558, 564-5; on service 384, 395, 666; communicates bad news at Chanderī (934) 594 and (935) 639; mediates for Raḥīm-dād 689; ☛ declines the Badakhshān government (936) 697; ☛ discussion of his plan to set Humāyūn aside (in Hindūstān?) 702-8; his seat at a feast 631; host to Bābur 408; his sons Muḥibb-i-`alī, Ḥusamu'd-dīn-i-`alī, Ḥamza and daughter Gul-barg q.v.

Shaikh +Niẕāmū'd-dīn Auliyā+—his tomb visited by Bābur (932) 475; [♰725 AH.-1325 AD.].

+Niẕāmu'l-mulk+ Khawāfī, Dīwān in Herī—arrested and put to death 282; [♰903 AH.-1497-8 AD.].

Hazrat +Nuḥ+ (Noah)—his father Lām q.v.

+Nūr Beg+ (perhaps Sayyid Nūru'd-dīn Chaghānīānī infra)—disobeys the Law, plays the lute (925) 395; joins Bābur in an autumn garden 418; his brethren on service (932) 446; with Bābur in the East (935) 653; in the battle of the Ghogrā 673; sent to allay Rahīm-dād's fears 688-9; his brother Shāham q.v.

Sayyid +Nūru'd-dīn+ Chaghānīānī—Sayyid Amīr—a son-in-law of Bābur and father of Salīma-sulṯān ☛ 713; perhaps Nūr Beg supra.

Shaikh +Nūru'd-dīn Beg+ Turkistānī, Qībchāq Turk—grandfather, through a daughter, of Yūnas Chaghatāī 19 (see T.R. trs. p. 64).

+Nūru'l-lāh+ ṯambūrchī—his experience in an earthquake (911) 247.

Sayyid +Nūyān Beg+ Tīrmīẕī—particulars 273; his son Ḥasan-i-ya`qūb q.v.

+Nūyān Kūkūldāsh+ Tīrmīẕī—makes a right guess (906) 131-2; on service against Shaibānī 142; his sword sent as a gift to Taṃbal (907) 150; that sword wounds Bābur's head (908) 151, 167, 396; his suspicious death 151-152; Bābur's grief 152; Nūyān's uncle Ḥaq-naẕar q.v.; [♰907 AH.-1502 AD.].

+Padmāwatī+, wife of Rānā Sangā—in Rantanbhūr (935) 612; mentioned 613 n. 1; her son Bikramājīt and kinsman Asūk-māl q.v.

+Pahār Khān+ Lūdī, see Bihār.

+Pahār Mīrza+, a father-in-law of Jahāngīr Mīrān-shāhī—his daughter brings her son Pir-i-muḥammad to Bābur (913) 331.

+Pahlawān+ Aūdī (Oudhī)—wrestles (935) 683, 688.

+Pahlawān+ Lāhorī, a boatman—wrestles (935) 656.

+Pāpa Āghācha+, a mistress of Ḥuṣain Bāī-qarā—particulars 266, 268-9; her five sons and three daughters ib.[2918]

+Pāpā-aūghūlī+, of Bābur's household—out with Bābur (910) 234; at Qandahār (913) 335.

+Parbat+ Kakar—conveys tribute to Bābur (925) 391, 392, 393.

+Pasha Begīm+ Bahārlū, Āq-qūīlūq Turkmān, daughter of `Alī-shukr Beg—particulars 49; her nephew Yār-`alī Balāl q.v.[2919]

+Pāyanda-muḥammad+ Qīplān—out with Bābur (925) 404.

+Pāyanda-sulṯān Begīm+ Mīrān-shāhī Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, daughter of Abū-sa`īd and wife of Ḥusain Bāī-qarā—particulars 263, 265, 268; her son Ḥaidar and her daughters ib.; visited in Herāt by Bābur (912) 301; arranges a marriage for him 306; captured by Shaibānī (913) 327.

+Pietro della Vallé+—an illustration drawn from his recorded morning-draught (1623 AD.) 395.

Khwāja +Pir Aḥmad+ Khawāfī—his son 281.

+Pir Budāgh Sulṯān+, Khāqān in Desht Qībchāq (Ḥ.S. iii, 232)—his Bāī-qarā marriage 258 n. 2.

Mīr +Pīr Darwesh+ Hazār-aspī—in charge of Balkh (857) 50; fights there ib.

+Pīrī Beg+ Turkmān—joins Bābur (913) 336; particulars Author's Note, 336.

+Pīr Kānū+ of Sakhī-sarwār—Bābur halts at his tomb (910) 238.

+Pīr Muḥammad+ Aīlchī-būghā, qūchīn—particulars 50 and nn.; drowned 48 n. 4, 50; [895 AH.-1490 AD.].

+Pīr Muḥammad+ Mīrān-shāhī Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, son of Jahāngīr—brought by his widowed mother to Bābur (913) 331.

+Pīr-qulī+ Sīstānī—in the right wing at Pānīpat (932) 472, and at Kānwa (933) 566; on service (932) 530.

+Pīr Sulṯān+ Pashāī—one of Bābur's guides (912) 308.

Prester John, Wang Khān [T.R. trs. 16], Ong Khān [Abu'l-ghāzī, Desmaisons' trs. p. 55]—his title 23 n. 3.

+Pulād Sulṯān+ Aūzbeg-Shaibān Chīngīz-khānid—son of Kūchūm—Bābur sends him his earliest-mentioned Dīwān (925) 402, 632 n. 3; at Jām (934) 622; an envoy goes from him to Bābur (935) 631, 632, 641.

+Pūrān+ (Allāh-bīrdī or Allāh-qulī)—out with Bābur (910) 234; wounded (913) 342; his father-in-law Qāsim qūchīn q.v.

+Qābil+ (Cain)—Bābur goes alone to his tomb (925) 415.

+Qādīr-bīrdī+ Ghainī—spoken to by Bābur when in hiding (908) 180-1.

+Qāītmās+ Turkmān, retainer of Jahāngīr—drowned (910) 237.[2920]

+Qalandar+ pīāda—on Bābur's service (932) 529.

+Qaṃbar-i-`alī+ Arghūn—on Bābur's service (935) 688.

+Qaṃbar-i-`alī Beg+—mobilizes the Hindūstān army by Abū-sa`īd's order (873?) 46; expelled from Khurāsān with Maḥmū Mīrān-shāhī 47.

+Qaṃbar-i-`alī Beg+ qūchīn, son of Qāsim—races with Bābur (?) (907) 147; wounded, brings Bābur a message (908) 174; one of the eight in flight from Akhsī 177; gives Bābur his horse 177-8; beats down snow for a road (912) 308-9; fights rebels in Kābul 315; at Qandahār (913) 334; wounded 336; hurries from Qūndūz against rebels in Ghaznī (921) 364; brings Bābur a letter from Balkh (?) (925) 385.

+Qaṃbār-i-`alī Be+g Silākh, Mughūl—particulars 28; his inconvenient absence (904) 106; recalled (905) 108; goes away 110; returns 112; in the van at Khūbān 113; goes away 115; returns and is ill-tempered 117; his districts 115, 124; his ill-timed pacificism 118; his misconduct 123; goes to Taṃbal, made prisoner, escapes to Bābur 124; on Bābur's service (906) 130, 131; at Sar-i-pul 138, 139; sends his family out of Samarkand 141; ? races with Bābur (907) 147; ? leaves Bābur in Dikh-kat 150 n. 3; conspires against Taṃbal and goes to The Khān (Maḥmūd) 154; serves Bābur against Taṃbal (908) 161, 162, 165, 166; counsels Bābur distastefully and flees 168, 170; talks to him of peace with Taṃbal 173; made prisoner in Akhsī against Bābur's wish 174; leaves Khusrau Shah for Bābur (910) 189; dismissed by Bābur and why 192, 532 n. 1; his son `Abdu'-shukūr q.v.

+Qaṃbar Bī+ Aūzbeg—blamed by Shaibānī for three murders (906) 128; on service for him (910) 242, 244; defeated by T̤ahmāsp Ṣafawī's men (934) 622.

+Qarā Aḥmad+ yūrūnchī—Bābur's messenger to the Kābul begs (912) 314.

+Qarā Barlās+—leaves Samarkand with the Tarkhāns (905) 121; fights for Bābur at Sar-i-pul (906) 139; besieged and holds out to the end 143, 144.

Sayyid +Qarā Beg+ Kohbur Chaghatāī—remains with Bābur at a crisis (903) 91; invited into Akhsī (for Bābur) (904) 101; escapes after defeat 106; at Khūbān (905) 113; released 119[2921]; his (?) hasty retreat to entrenchments (906) 138, 232 n. 4; his son `Abdu'l-qadūs q.v.

+Qarā Bīlūt+—surrenders Qalāt-i-ghilzāī to Bābur (911) 248-9.

+Qaracha Khān+—punished for disobedience (925) 390-1; on service (934) 602, (935) 638; his messenger with news of Mahīm's journey 650, 659.

+Qārā-gūz Begīm+ Arlāt—her marriage with Nāṣir Mīrān-shāhī 265.

+Qarā-gūz Begīm+, see (1) Makhdūma, (2) Rābi`a-sulṯān.

+Qarā-qūzī+—on Bābur's service (932) 471; in the left-wing [tūlghuma] at Pānīpat 473.

+Qārlūghāch Bakhshī+ kills Mughūl Beg's son (904) 102.

+Qashqa Maḥmūd+ (or Qāshqa), Beg of the Chīrās tūmān of Mughūls—sent to help Bābur (906) 138; quarrels with a Begchīk for the military post of honour (907) 155. (He may be "Bābā Qashqa" q.v.)

Mullā +Qāsim+—building work given to him (935) 642.

Sayyid +Qāsim+ (p. 96), see Sayyid Kāmal.

+Qāsim-i-`ajab Beg+—remains with Bābur at a crisis (903) 91; promoted to beg's rank (904) 104; captured by Taṃbal's men (905) 115-6; released 119.

+Qāsim-i-`alī+ tariyākī—musician at entertainments (925) 385, 387, 388.

+Qāsim Beg+ qūchīn—particulars 26; supports Bābur (899) 30, (900) 43; his appointments 43, 44 (where delete Sayyid as his title); punishes misconducted Mughūls (902) 66-7, 153 and has to leave Bābur (907) 27, 67; on missions (903) 90, (904) 100, 101; remains with Bābur at a crisis (903) 91; defeated by Mughūls (904) 105-6; in the centre at Khūbān (905) 113; banished from Andijān by `Alī-dost 119; rejoins Bābur for Samarkand 123, (906) 130; suspects Banā'ī 136; in the centre at Sar-i-pul 139; defending Samarkand 141, 142, 143, 144; races with Bābur (907) 147; advises a tactful gift 150; out with Bābur (910) 234; rewarded (911) 252; goes with a punitive force to Nigr-aū 253; a saying of his twisted for ill 254; defeats Aūzbegs (912) 295; insists in Herāt on ceremony due to Bābur 298; angered by Bābur's being pressed to drink wine 304; mistaken as to a route 308-9; mistakenly compassionate 313; allowed to keep his Fifth of spoil (913) 324; in the left wing at Qandahār 334, 335; wounded 336; retainers allotted to him 339; his counsel 339-40; mediates for suspects (914) 345; waits on Bābur returned from Hindūstān (925) 395; mediates for Tramontane clans to leave Kābul 402; Bābur breaks fast at his house 408; his sons Ḥamza, Tīngrī-bīrdī, Qaṃbar-i-`alī q.v.; his ill-conducted nephew 414; a servant 313; a father-in-law Banda-i-`alī q.v.; [♰928 AH.-1522 AD.].

+Qāsim+ Duldāī, Barlās Turk—serving Bāī-sunghar Mīrān-shāhī (902) 65; joins Bābur 66.

+Qāsim-i-ḥusain+ Aūzbeg-Shaibān, son of Qāsim and `Āyisha-sulṯān Bāī-qarā—particulars 267, 298; joins Bābur (933) 550; at Kānwa 556, 559; receives Badāūn 582; on service 582, (934) 589, (935) 682; in the battle of the Ghogrā (935) 669; mentioned 631 n. 4, ☛ 706.

Sayyid +Qāsim+ Jalāīr—wins the Champion's Portion at Asfara (900) 53; takes it at Shāhrukhiya 53; stays with Bābur at a crisis (903) 91; joins him for Samarkand (905) 123-4; at Sar-i-pul (Khwāja Kārdzan) (906) 139; his strange doings in Pāp (908) 171; his unseasonable arrival in Akhsī 174; defeats an Aūzbeg raider (910) 195; out with Bābur 234, (925) 403; drunk 415; Bābur pays him a consolation-visit 418; a party in his country-house (926) 420; assigned to reinforce Khwājā Kalān in Kābul (935) 647.

+Qāsim Khān+ Qāzzāq, Jūjī Chīngīz-khānid—his marriage with Sulṯān-nigār Chaghatāī 23; his good administration 23-4; [♰924 AH.-1518 AD.].

+Qāsim+ Khītka (?) Arghūn, (var. Jangeh)—in Akhsī (908) 171.

+Qāsim Khwāja+—succeeds in his brother Yakka's appointments (935) 674; on service 682.

+Qāsim Kūkūldāsh+—at a household party (906) 131 (his name is omitted from the Ḥai. MS. f. 83 and from my text); helps Bābur at his mother's burial (911) 246; at Qandahār (913) 335; his Arghūn marriage 342, 199 n. 1, ☛ 443.

+Qāsim Mīr-akhẉūr+—stays with Bābur at a crisis (903) 91; on service (933) 548.

Malik +Qāsim+ Mughūl, brother (p. 568) of Bābā Qashqa—in the right-wing [tūlghuma] at Pānīpat (932) 473, and at Kānwa (933) 568; on service with his brethren (932) 528, (933) 558, 582, (934) 589; his good service near Qanūj and his death 599; his kinsmen, see s.n. Bābā Qashqa; [♰934 AH.-1528 AD.].

Shāh +Qāsim+ pīāda—sent on a second mission to Bābur's kinsfolk in Khurāsān (935) 617.

+Qāsim+ Saṃbhalī—not submissive to Bābur (932) 523; surrenders 528, 529; sent out of the way before Kānwa (933) 547 (where the Ḥai. MS. adds "Beg", by clerical? error).

+Qāsim Sulṯān+ Aūzbeg-Shaibān Chīngīz-khānid—his Bāī-qarā marriage 267; at a reception (912) 298; his son Qāsim-i-ḥusain q.v.

+Qātāq Begīm+, wife of Aḥmad Mīrān-shāhī—particulars 36; of Aḥmad's escape from her dominance 36 n. 1.

+Qayyām Beg+—Aūrdū (Ūrdū) Shāh—out with Bābur (925) 403; waits on Bābur as Governor of Nīngnahār (926) 421; joins him in Hindūstān (933) 550 (here Qawwām Aūrdū-shāh); at Kānwa 556, 569.

+Qāẓī Bihzādī+—Bābur forbids unlawful drinks in his house (925) 398.

+Qāẓī Ghulām+—escapes death by pretending to be a slave (904) 102.

+Qāẓī Jīā+—waits on Bābur (932) 527; on service 530, (933) 544, (935) 639; joins Bābur 667; on service 668, 682.

+Qāẓī of Kābul+—waits on Bābur (925) 395.

+Qāẓī of Samāna+—☛ complains of Mundāhir attack (936) 693, 700.

+Qismatāī Mīrzā+—on Bābur's service in Hindūstān (932) 474, (933) 545, 546-7, 548; his untimely praise of the Rājpūt army 548, 550.

+Qilka+ Kāshgharī—escapes death (904) 102.

+Qīzīl+ tawāchī—messenger of Shāh Beg Arghūn to Bābur (925) 395.

+Qublāī Khān+, great-grandson of Chīngīz Khān—his building at Qarshī 84 n. 2; [♰693 AH.-1294 AD.].

+Qūch Beg+ (Qūj), son of Aḥmad qarāwal—in the left wing at Khūbān (905) 113; his courage at Bīshkharān 118; leaves Bābur for Ḥiṣār (906) 129; ? reprieved at Qāsim qūchīn's request (914) 345; on Bābur's service (925) 374, (925) 384; at Parhāla 390; comes on summons to Kābul 409; referred to as dead (933) 565; his brother Tardī Beg q.v.

+Qūch+ Arghūn—allotted in Qalāt to Qāsim qūchīn (913) 339.

+Qūch Beg+ Kohbur Chaghatāī, son of Ḥaidar-i-qāsim—at Sar-i-pul (906) 139; in Samarkand besieged 142, 143, 144.

+Qul-arūk+—drowned in the Sind-water (910) 237.

+Qul-bāyazīd+ bakāwal—particulars 237; swims the Sind-water (910) 237; at Qandahār (913) 335, 338; his son Tīzak q.v.; his tomb near Kābul 198.

+Qulī Beg+ Arghūn—known as attached to Bābur (913) 337; returns from an embassy to Kāshghar (925) 415; his brother Aḥmad-`alī Tarkhān q.v.

+Qūlij Bahādur+ Aūzbeg—mentioned in T̤ahmāsp Ṣafawi's account of Jām (935) 636 n. 2.

Mīrzā +Qūlī Kūkūldāsh+, see Mīrzā-qulī.

+Qulī-muḥammad+ Būghdā qūchīn—particulars 40.

Ustād +Qul-muḥammad+ `Aūdī—particulars 291; his musical training owed to Nawa'ī 272.

+Qul-nachāq+—holding Balkh for the Bāī-qarās (912) 294, 296; surrenders it to Shaibānī 300.

+Qul-naẕar+ of T̤aghāī Beg—sallies out from Samarkand (906) 142; does well 144.

+Qurbān+ Chīrkhī—sent into Bhīra (925) 381; a false rumour about him as invited into Balkh (935) 625; gifts to his servants 633; in the battle of the Ghogrā 669; on service 678.

+Qus̤am ibn `Abbās+, one of the Companions—his tomb at Samarkand 75.

+Qusum-nāī (?)+—on service (932) 534.

+Quṯb Khān+ Sarwānī—not submissive to Bābur (932) 523; Mahdī Khwāja sent against him in Etāwa 530; takes Chandwār (933) 557; abandons both places 579, 582; defeated 587.

Khwāja +Quṯbu'd-dīn+ Aūshī (Ūshī)—his birthplace in Farghāna 475 n. 6; Bābur visits his tomb in Dihlī (932) 475; [♰633 AH.-1235 AD.].

+Qūtlūq Khwāja Kūkūldāsh+—with Bābur in Samarkand (906) 143, 144; host to Bābur (925) 398, 407; held up as an example 406.

+Qūtlūq-muḥammad Kūkūldāsh+, foster-brother of Daulat-sulṯān Khānīm—brings Bābur letters from Kāshghar (925) 409 (where for "Daulat" read Qūtlūq).

+Qūtlūq-nigār Khānīm+ Chaghatāī Chīngīz-khānid, mother of Bābur—particulars 21; mentioned 17, 19; in Andijān (900) 43; entreats her son's help (903) 88, 89; sent to join him in Khujand 92, and in Aūrā-tīpā (905) 136; her Mughūls rebel (904) 105; with Bābur in Samarkand (906) 136; leaves the town with him (907) 147; hears of a sister's death 148-9; goes to her own family in Tāshkīnt 149; her dangerous illness ib.; her safety leaves Bābur free (908) 157, 158; ☛ with him in Sūkh 184; uses his tent in the exodus from Farghāna (910) 188; left in Kāhmard 189; crosses Hindū-kush and rejoins him in Kābul 197; her death (911) 21, 246; her treatment as a refugee in Tāshkīnt (908) contrasted with that of her refugee-relations in Kābul (912) 318; her concern for her son's marriage affairs (905) 120, (910) 48; her old governess 148; [♰911 AH.-1505 AD.].

+Qūtlūq-qadam+ qarāwal—out with Bābur (910) 236-7; in the left-centre at Qandahār (913) 335; on service (925) 403, (932) 458, 460, 468, 471, 530; in the left wing at Pānīpat 472 and at Kānwa (933) 567, 570; on service 475; host to Bābur (926) 424; his tomb and bridge near Kābul 198, 204; [♰934 AH.-1528 AD.?].

+Qūtlūq-sulṯān Begīm+, daughter of Mīrān-shāh son of Tīmūr—wife of Ḥusain Qānjūt 256 n. 5.

+Rābi`a-sulṯān Begīm+ Mīrān-shāhī Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk—Qarā-gūz Begīm—daughter of Aḥmad—particulars 13, 35.

Sayyid +Rafī`u'd-dīn+ Ṣafawī—Mullā Rafī`—mediates for Niẕām Khān with Bābur (933) 539; concocts tonic powders (935) 606; at a feast 631.

Khwāja +Raḥīm-dād+, paternal-nephew of Mahdī Khwāja—receives and obtains possession of Gūālīar (933) 539, 540, 547; his quarters and constructions there (935) 607, 610, 613; Bābur sleeps in his flower-garden 612, 613; action against him as seditious 688-9, (936) 690; his son held as hostage and escapes (935) 688-9; ☛ Ibn Batuta's account of him 692 n. 1; ☛ no sequel of his rebellion mentioned in the Akbar-nāma 692.

+Raḥmat+ pīāda—conveys letters to Kābul (932) 466.

+Rāja of Kahlūr+—☛ waits on Bābur (936) 699.

+Rajab-sulṯān Begīm+ Mīrān-shāhī Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, daughter of Maḥmūd—particulars 48, 49.

+Ramẓān+ lūlī—a musician at parties (925) 387, 388.

+Rāo+ Sarwānī, see Dāūd.

Sulṯān +Rashīd Khān+ Chaghatāī Chīngīz-khānid, son of Sa`īd and Makhtūm Qālūchī (T.R. trs. p. 187)—his Qāzzāq marriage 23.

Mr. Thomas +Rastel+—an illustration drawn from his morning-draught recorded [1623 AD.] 395.

+Rānā Ratan-sī+—successor of his father Sangā in Chītor 613; mentioned in connection with the Khīljī jewels ib.; his younger brother Bikramājīt q.v.

+Rauḥ-dam+—musician at entertainments (925) 385, 387, 388; in a raft-misadventure 407.

+Rawū'ī+ Sarwānī (Rāo)—serving Bābur (933) 538 (here read as Dāūd), (935) 682; host to Bābur (934) 588.

+Rīnīsh+ (var. Zīnīsh) Aūzbeg—his defeat by T̤ahmāsp Ṣafawī (934) 618, 622 (where in n. 1 for "934" read 935 as the date of the battle of Jām); [♰934 AH.-1528 AD.].

A +Rūmī+ prescribes for Bābur (935) 657, 660.

Rāja Rūp-narāin—included in Bābur's Revenue List 521.

+Ruqaiya Aghā+, wife of Badī`u'z-zamān Bāī-qarā—captured in Herāt and married by Tīmūr Aūzbeg 328.

+Ruqaiya-sulṯān Begīm+ Mīrān-shāhī Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, daughter of `Umar Shaikh—particulars 18, 19; [♰cir. 935 AH.-1528 AD.].

+Rūstam-i-`alī+ Turkmān—in the centre at Qandahār (913) 335; on service (925) 377, (933) 538; in the tūlghuma of the left-wing at Kānwa 568, 569.

+Rustam Khān+—Ilīās (p. 576)—captures Bābur's commander at Kūl (Koel) (933) 557, 576; captured and flayed alive 576.

+Sa`ādat-bakht Begīm++—Begīm Sulṯān+—Bāī-qarā Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, daughter of Ḥusain—particulars 266-7.

Nāṣiru'd-dīn +Sabuktīgīn+ Ghaznawī Turk—the humble status of his capital 217; a legend concerning him 219; his son Maḥmūd q.v.; [♰387 AH.-997 AD.].

+Sadharān+ Tānk Rājpūt—his acceptance of Islām 481 n. 5.

Pahlawān +Ṣādiq+—made to wrestle (935) 650; forbidden as an antagonist 653; wrestles 688.

Mullā +Sa`du'd-dīn Mas`ūd+ Taftazānī—a descendant of 283; [♰792 AH.-1390 AD.].

Sulṯān +Sa`īd Khān+ Ghāzī, Chaghatāī Chīnqīz-khānid, son of Aḥmad—particulars 698 nn. 2, 3, 349; meets Bābur (908) 159; stays with him in Kābul (914) 318, 349-50; receives Andijān from him (916) 318, 357; loyal to him 344 n. 2, ☛ 351-2; sends an envoy to him (917) 22; Ḥaidar Dūghlāt goes from Bābur to Sa`īd (918) 362; two kinswomen take refuge with him (923 and 924) 24 (where in n. 1 delete the second sentence); reported to have designs on Badakhshān (925) 412; an envoy to him returns 415; ☛ named as a principal actor between 926 and 932 AH. 427; writes and sends gifts to Bābur (932) 446; ☛ invades Badakhshān (936) 695-6; ☛ gist of a letter from Bābur to him 697-8; ☛ Bābur moves menacingly for the North-west 698; his full-brother Khalīl, his son Rashīd, his wife Ḥabība, and kūkūldāsh Yāngī Beg q.v.; [♰939 AH.-1533 AD.].

+Sa`īdlīq Sa`d+ Turkmān—defeated by Ḥusain Bāī-qarā (873?) 260.

+Saif-i-`alī Beg+ Bahārlū Qarā-qūīlūq Turkmān, father of Bairām Khān-i-khānān—particulars 91 n. 3.[2922]

Maulānā +Saifī+ Bukhārī—`Arūẓī—particulars 288; [♰909 AH.-1503-4 AD.].

+Saif Khān+ Nūḥānī, son of Daryā Khān—deserts `Ālam Khān Lūdī (932) 457.

+Saifu'd-dīn Aḥmad+, Shaikhu'l-islām in Herāt—particulars 283; takes the keys of Herāt to Shaibānī (913) 328; his pupil Muḥammad-i-yūsuf q.v.; killed by Shāh Ismā`īl 283; [♰916 AH.-1510 A.D.].

Ḥājī +Saifu'd-dīn Beg+, ? uncle of Tīmūr—his descendant Walī Beg 272.

+Sakma+ Mughūl—rebels against Bābur (914) 345.

+Ṣalāḥu'd-dīn+ (Silhādī)—particulars 562 n. 3, 614 n. 2; his force at Kānwā (933) 562; attack on him planned and abandoned (934) 598; Bābur visits village near his birthplace (935) 614; mentioned 628 n. 2.

+Ṣāliḥa-sulṯān Begīm+ Mīrān-shāhī, daughter of Maḥmūd and Pasha, wife of Bābur—(name not now in the Turkī text) 47; ☛ the likelihood that she and "Dil-dār" were one 713 (where read Ṣāliḥa).

+Ṣāliḥa-sulṯān+ Mīrān-shāhī—Āq Begīm—daughter of Aḥmad and Qātāq—particulars 35; gifts from her wedding reach Bābur (900) 43.

+Salīma-sulṯān Begīm+—☛ her parentage 713.

Sulṯān +Sālīm+ Rūmī—takes Badī`u-z-zamān Bāī-qarā, a captive, to Constantinople (920) 327 n. 5; ☛ defeats Ismā`īl Ṣafawī at Chāldirān (920) 443, 469; [♰926 AH.-1520 AD.].

+Ṣamad+ Mīnglīghī—wounded and dies 106; [♰904 AH.-1499 AD.].

Mehtar +Saṃbhal+, slave of Shāh Beg Arghūn—particulars 338 n. 2; captured at Qandahār and escapes (913) 338; ☛ Commander in Qandahār and revictuals it for Shāh Beg 432.

Sulṯān +Sanjar+ Barlās Turk, son of `Abdu'l-lāh—incites a Mughūl revolt in Kābul (912) 313-17; spared on family grounds 317.

Sulṯān +Sanjar Mīrzā+ Mervī—his daughter Bega Sulṯān Begīm's Bāī-qarā marriage (cir. 860) 267.

Rānā +Sangā+ Mewārī—particulars 483, 558 n. 2; his capture of Chanderī 593; proffers Bābur co-operation against Ibrāhīm Lūdī (931?) 426, 529; fails him (932) 529; takes Kandār 530, 539; Bābur's attack on him deferred 530-1 and determined (933) 538; his strength and approach 544, 547; defeated at Kānwa 559-574; escapes 576; references to the battle 267, 533, 579, 582, 583, 599, 600, 630 n. 4, 637, 663; his lands not invaded, on climatic grounds 577, 578; Bābur's planned attack on him in Chītor frustrated (934) 598; his wife Padmāwatī and sons Ratan-sī and Bikramājīṯ q.v.; his trusted man Medinī Rāo q.v.; [♰934 AH.-1528 AD.].[2923]

+Sangur Khān+ Janjūha—waits on Bābur (925) 383; on service 389, 419; killed in a sally from Bīāna 548; [♰933 AH.-1527 AD.].

Mīr +Sar-i-barhana+, see Shamsu'd-dīn Muḥammad.

+Sārīgh-bāsh Mīrza+ Itārachī—sent by The Khān (Maḥmūd) to help Bābur (908) 161, 170.

Mullā +Sarsān+—Kāmrān's messenger and custodian of Ibrāhīm Lūdī's son (933) 544.

+Sar-u-pā+ Gujūr—Bābur's guide to Parhāla (925) 389, 391.

+Satrvī Kachī+—his force at Kānwa (933) 562.

Sulṯān +Sātūq-būghra Khān Ghāzī Pādshāh+ (b. 384 AH.-994 AD.).—a surmised descendant 29 n. 8; his style Pādshāh 344 n. 2.

+Sayyid Amīr+, see Nūru'd-dīn Chaghanīānī.

+Sayyid Dakkanī+—Shāh T̤āhir Khwāndī Dakkani—present at a feast (935) 631.[2924]

+Sayyid Daknī+ Shīrāzī, or Ruknī, or Zaknī—receives honours and orders (935) 619; on his name and work ib. n. 2, 634 n. 1; (see supra).

+Sayyidī Beg T̤aghāī+, see Sherīm T̤aghāī.

+Sayyidīm `Alī+ darbān (? Muhammad-`alī), son of Bābā `Alī Beg—particulars 307; serving Khusrau Shāh (901) 60-1; leads the Rustā-hazāra to join Bābur (910) 196; a follower punished 197; takes Bāī-qarā service (912) 307; drowned by Badī`u'z-zamān 307-8; [♰cir. 913 AH.-1507 AD.].

+Sayyid Mashhadī+ (var. Masnadī)—brings Bābur news of Khwāja Raḥīmdād's sedition (935) 688.

+Sayyid Mīrzā+ Andikhūdī, ? brother of Apāq Begīm—his two Bāī-qarā marriages 267.

+Sayyid Rūmī+—at a feast (935) 631.

+Sayyid T̤abīb+ Khurāsānī—attends Bābur's mother (911) 247.

+Shād Begīm+ Bāī-qarā Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk—particulars 263-4; her husband `Ādil Sulṯān Aūzbeg q.v.

+Shādī+, a reciter—his son Ghulām-i-shadī 292.

+Shādī Khān+ Kīwī Afghān—fights and submits to Bābur (910) 233.

+Shādmān+ chuhra—wrestles (935) 660.

+Shāh Bābā+ bīldār—entrusted with building work (935) 642.

+Shah-bāz+ qalandar—his tomb destroyed by Bābur (925) 377.

+Shah-bāz+ Qārlūq—serving Taṃbal (908) 170.

+Shāh Beg+ Arghūn—Shuja` Beg—son of Ẕū'n-nūn—his close association with his father 274; mentioned as with him in Qandahār (902) 71, (910) 198, 227; they give refuge to Badī`u'z-zamān Bāī-qarā (902) 71, (913) 307; act with the Mīrzā (903) 94, 95; favoured by Ḥusain Bāī-qarā 264; his dominance ib.; proffers and renounces co-operation with Bābur against Shaibānī (913) 330, 331-2; loses Qandahār to him 337-8; ☛ released from Ṣafawī imprisonment by his slave Saṃbhal's devotion (917) 338 n. 2, 365; news of his taking Kāhān reaches Bābur (925) 395; his interpretation of Bābur's reiterated attack on Qandahār 365, ☛ 427; other suggestions for the attack of 926 AH. 430; ☛ action of his checks an expedition into Hindūstān (926) 428, 429, 430; ☛ his position and political relations 429; Bābur's campaign against Qandahār (926-928) 366, 430-436, App. J. xxxiv; ☛ final surrender to Bābur (928) ib.; ☛ his death 437, 443; his son Shāh Ḥasan, brother Muḥammad Muqīm, slave Mehtar, commissary Qīzīl q.v.; [♰930 AH.-1524 AD.?].

+Shāh Begīm+ Badakhshī, wife of Yūnas Khān Chaghatāī—particulars 22-3; visited by Bābur (903) 92, (907) 149, (908) 157; delays to accept his plans 158; meets her younger son Aḥmad 159; ☛ ordered by Shaibānī to stay in Tāshkīnt 184; comes to Bābur in Kābul (911) 246; disloyal (912) 317; his reflections on her conduct 318-9; goes to Badakhshān (913) 21, 35, 341; captured by Abā-bikr Kāshgharī; her sons Maḥmūd and Aḥmad, her daughter Daulat-sulṯān, her nephew Sanjar Barlās; her grandsons Mīrzā Khān and Sa`īd (and his brothers) q.v.

+Shāh-i-gharīb Mīrzā+ Bāī-qarā Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, son of Ḥusain and Khadīja—particulars 261, 268; his retainer Āhī the poet 289 n. 3; [♰902 AH.-1496-7 AD.—Ḥ.S. lith. ed. iii, 260].

+Shāhī+ qalandar—plays the ribāb (925) 417.

+Shāhī+ ṯamghāchī—appointed clerk (935) 629.

+Shāhīm+ (Shāh Muḥammad?)—sent for news (932) 454; climbs into Chanderī (934) 595 (here yūz-bāshī); his brother Nūr Beg q.v.

+Shahīm-i-nāṣir+—one of eight fugitives from Akhsī (908) 177.

+Shāh-jahān Pādshāh+ Mīrān-shāhī Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk—☛ 184; his imitation of Bābur (1030) 298 n. 3; ☛ his work in Bābur's burial-garden 710, App. V, lxxx; [♰1076 AH.-1666 AD.].

+Shāh Muhammad+ muhrdār, son of Bābā Qashqa—on Bābur's service (925) 388, (935) 688; his kinsmen see s.n. Bābā Qashqa; [♰958 AH.-1551 AD.].[2925]

+Shāh-qulī+ ghichakī—a guitar-player—particulars 291.

+Shāh-qulī+ Kūl-ābī—goes into Ḥiṣāt (935) 640; his brother Wais q.v.

+Shāh-qulī+, ? servant of Div Sulṯān (p. 635)—sent to give Bābur a report of the battle of Jām (935) 649; conveys from Bābur an acceptance of excuse to T̤ahmāsp Ṣafawī 649.

+Shahrak+—conveys letters and a copy of Bābur-nāma writings (935) 652, 653.

+Shahr-bānū Begīm+ Mīrān-shāhī Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, daughter of Abū-sa`īd—particulars 268; married to Ḥusain Bāī-qarā (cir. 873) and divorced (876) 21 n. 1, 268.

+Shahr-bānū Begīm+ Mīrān-shāhī, (ut supra), daughter of `Umar Shaikh, wife of Junaid Barlās—particulars 18.

+Shāhrūkh Mīrza+ Barlās Turk, son of Tīmūr—mentioned in a genealogy 14; ruling in Herāt when Ḥusain Bāī-qarā was born there (842) 256; his wazīr serves Ḥusain (after 873) 281; [♰850 AH.-1447 AD.].

+Shāhrukh-Sulṯān+ Afshār Turk—commands a reinforcement for Bābur from Ismā`īl Ṣafawī (917) 354.

+Shāh Ṣufī+—does well in Samarkand (906) 144.

+Shāh Sulṯān Begīm+ (? Arghūn), wife of Ābū-sa`īd Mīrān-shāhī and mother of `Umar Shaikh—her parentage not stated 13 n. 5,[2926] 45 n. 1; goes from Akhsī to Andijān when widowed (899) 32; a mediator (905) 113; her death announced (907) 149; [♰906 AH.-1501 AD.].

+Shāh-suwār+ Mughūl—fights in single combat (904) 106.

+Shāh T̤ahir+ Khwāndī Dakkanī, see Sayyid Dakkanī.

+Shāh-zāda+, ? Shāh Ḥasan Arghūn—(926) 417, 418.

+Shāh-zādā+ Mungīrī, son of Naṣrat Shāh—negociates with Bābur (935) 676 (where the note reference "5" should follow Mungir).

+Shaibak+ pīāda—brings news of Hind-āl's birth (925) 385.

A +Shaibān-Aūzbeg Sulṯān's+ marriage 23.

Muḥammad +Shaibānī Khān+—Shaibāq Khān[2927]—_Aūzbeg-Shaibān Chīngīz-khānid_—his relations with Ḥamza and Mahdī Sulṯāns q.v.; invited to help Bāī-sunghar (903) 73; raids Shīrāz 92; defeats Tarkhāns in Dabūsī (905) 40, 124, (906) 137; takes Bukhārā 125; is given Samarkand by `Alī Mīrān-shāhī 125; murders the Mīrzā (906) 128; his men murder Khwāja Yaḥyā and two sons 128; loses Samarkand by Bābur's surprise attack 131, 132, 134; Bābur's comparison of this capture with Ḥusain Bāī-qarā's of Herāt 135; Bābur's estimate of Shaibāni's position 137-8; defeats Bābur at Sar-i-pul (Khwāja Kārdzan) 138-141; besieges Samarkand and effects its surrender (906) 142-7; receives an envoy from Ḥusain Bāī-qarā 145; crosses the frozen Saiḥūn and raids Shahrukhiya 151; plunders Aūrā-tīpā 152-3; referred to (908) 158, 168; invited into Farghāna 172; defeats the Chaghatāī Khāns and Bābur at Archīān 18, ☛ 183; captures Andijān (909?) 192; beheads Walī Qībchāq (910) 196; takes Khwārizin (911) 242, 255-6; co-operation against him invited by Ḥusain Bāī-qarā (910) 190, (911) 255; his men beaten in Badakhshān (911-2) 294-5; takes Balkh 300; his capture of Herāt (913) 263, 275, 296-7, 325-330; besieges Nāṣir Mīrān-shāhī in Qandahār and retires 339-40, 343; a recognized menace to Kābul 21 n. 4, 340, 342; orders Sa`īd Chaghatāī's death (914) 349; ☛ murders Chaghatāī and Dughlāt chiefs 350; war begun with Shāh Ismā`īl (915) 350; defeated and killed at Merv 350; his wives Mihr-nigār Chaghatāī, Khān-zāda Mīrān-shāhī, Zuhra Aūzbeg q.v.; his sons Tīmūr and Khurram q.v.; Banā'ī his retainer (906) 136; creates a Tarkhān 133; [♰915 AH.-Dec. 1510 AD.].

+Shaikhī+—receives gifts (935) 633.

+Shaikhīm Beg+, amīr and poet of Ḥusain Bāī-qarā—particulars 277, 286; [♰918 AH.-1512-3 AD.].

+Shaikhīm Mīrzā+ Aūzbeg—holding Qarshī for his nephew `Ubaidu'l-lāh (918) 360.

+Shaikhīm+ mīr-shikār—loses one of Bābur's good hawks (925) 394.

+Shaikhī+ nāyī, flautist in Ḥusain Bāī-qarā's Court—particulars 291; owed his training to Nawā'ī 272.

Shaikh +Sharaf+ Qarā-bāghī—his arrest for sedition (935) 687-8.

Shaikh +Sharafu'd-dīn+ Munīrī—his father Shaikh Yaḥyā Chishtī 666; his writings read aloud to Akbar 666 n. 7; [♰782 AH.-1380 AD.].

+Shāmī+ (Syrian)—deserts from Qandahār (913) 343.

+Sher-afgan+, brother of Tardī and Qūj Begs—on Bābur's service (933) 538.

+Sher-i-aḥmad+—belittled as good company (935) 648.

+Sherak Beg+ Argūn (var. Sher, Sherka)—serving Muqīm Arghūn (910) 195; defeated and takes service with Bābur 196, 198; in the centre at Qandahār (913) 335.

+Sher-i-`alī+ Aūghlān,[2928] Chaghatāī Chīngīz-khanīd—mentioned in Yūnas Khān's genealogy 19.

+Sher-i-`alī+ chuhra (a brave?)—deserts Bābur (906) 129; put to death under suspicion (911) 248.

Mīr +Sher Ḥājī Beg+ Kūnjī Mughūl—his daughter's marriage with Yūnas Khān 20 (where for "`Alī-sher" read Sher Ḥājī).

+Sherīm+ (Sher-i-muhammad?) chuhra, a brave?—defends Ḥiṣār (910) 244; killed at Qūndūz ib.; [♰910 AH.-1505 AD.].

+Sherīm T̤aghāī+ Kūnjī Mughūl—T̤aghāī Beg—maternal uncle of Bābur's mother—supports Bābur (899) 29, (903) 91, 98; captured by Taṃbal (905) 110; released 119; in Samarkand (906) 141, 143, 188; Bābur's reflections on his conduct 141, 188; thinks of leaving Bābur (910) 188; on his service 194, 197, 234; loses an index-finger 235; his post against rebels (912) 314; an opinion on game (kiyīk) (913) 325; in the right wing at Qandahār (913) 334, 337; counsels a retreat to Badakhshān from Kābul 340; ☛ disloyal (916) 351; heads Mughūl revolt in Ghaznī (921) 363; defeated 364, 397; takes refuge with Bābur 364; his son Tūqā q.v.; his (and other) abbreviated names 29 n. 2.

+Sherīm Z̤ikr Beg+—put to death in Kābul under `Abdu'r-razzāq (909?) 195 n. 3.

+Sher Khān+ Lūdī Afghān, son of `Ālam Khān—on his father's service (932) 455.

+Sher Khān Sūr+ Afghān—Farīd Khān—Sher Shāh—favoured by Bābur (934) 652; serving Maḥmūd Lūdī (935) 652; co-guardian of Jalāl Khān Nūḥānī with Dūdū Bībī 652 n. 1, 664 n. 2; writes dutifully to Bābur 659; his training, cognomen and one of his marriages 664 n. 2, 659 n. 4; his victory over Humāyūn (1540) 652 n. 3.

+Sher Khān+ Tarkalānī—host to Bābur (926) 424.

+Sher-qulī+ qarāwal Mughūl—loyal to Bābur (912) 315; at Qandahār (913) 333, 335; rebels (914) 345.

Bābā +Sher-zād+, see Bābā Sher-zād.

Mullā +Shams+—very riotous (932) 453.

Sulṯān +Shamsu'd-dīn+ Āīltmīsh[2929] (Altamsh) of the Slave dynasty in Dihlī—his buildings in Gūālīār 610, 611; [♰633 AH.-1236 AD.].

Sayyid +Shamsu'd-dīn Muḥammad+—Mīr Sar-i-barahna—particulars 280.

+Shamsu'd-dīn Muḥammad+—bearer of letters between Khwāja Kalān and Bābur (935) 644, 645, 649.

Maulānā +Shihāb+ mu`ammāī—arrives in Āgra from Herāt (935) 605; invited in verse by Bābur 683; [♰942 AH.-1535 AD.].

Khusrau's +Shihabu'd-dīn+—on Bābur's service (935) 689, (936) 690.

Shaikh +Shihābu'd-dīn+ `Arab—at a feast (935) 631.

Mu`z̤z̤u'd-dīn +Shihābu'd-dīn Muḥammad+ Ghūrī—his capital Ghaznī 217; mentioned as a conqueror of Hindūstān 479; his position contrasted with Bābur's 479-80, 481; [♰602 AH.-1206 AD.].

Shāh +Sikandar+—on Bābur's service (932-3) 546; sent to Bihār (935) 664.

+Sikandar-i-Filkūs+—Alexander of Macedon—Badakhshī chiefs claim of descent from him 22; a surmise that he founded Samarkand 75; his supposition that the Indus was the Nile a probable root of a geographical crux 206 n. 3; [♰327 B.C.].

Sulṯān +Sikandar Mīrzā+ Bāī-qarā Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, nephew of Ḥusain—parentage 257; his wife Sulṯān-niẕhad q.v.; [♰908 AH.-1502-3 AD.].

Sulṯān +Sikandar+ Lūdī Afghān, son of Buhlūl—over-lord in Bhīra (910) 382, 383; his treasure 470, exhausted (935) 617; his siege of Gūālīār 477; his capture of Jūnpūr and Dihlī (881) 481, 571 n. 5; Bābur visits his tomb (932) 476; his brother `Ālam Khān and sons Ibrāhīm and Maḥmūd q.v.; ☛ his death and its date 427 and n. 3; [♰923 AH.-1517 AD.].

+Sikandar Shāh+ Gujrātī—his accession and murder 534-5 (where for "2nd" read 932); [♰932 AH.-1526 AD.].

+Sīktū+ Hindū—father of Dīwa q.v.

+Sīūndūk+ Turkmān—his hands frost-bitten (912) 311; in the centre at Qandahār (913) 335; rebels against Bābur (914) 355.

+Sīūnjuk Sulṯān Khān+ Aūzbeg-Shaibān, Chīngīz-khānid, son of Abu'l-khair—☛ besieges Tāshkīnt (918) 358, 396; his son Bārāq at Jām (935) 622.

+Sohrāb Mīrzā+ Bāī-qarā, son of Abū-turāb—particulars 262.

The +Spanish Ambassadors+—the place of their first interview with Tīmūr 78 n. 2.

+Sulaimān+—offers his horse to a wounded man (908) 175.

+Sulaimān Āqā+ Turkmān—envoy of T̤ahmāsp Ṣafawī to Bābur (933) 540, 583; in the right wing at Kānwa 566.

+Sulaimān Mīrzā+ Mīrān-shāhī Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, son of Mīrzā Khān (Wais)[2930]—☛ brought to Kābul on his father's death (927) 433 n. 1; in the right centre at Pānīpat (932) 472, and at Kānwa (933) 565; ☛ sent to govern Badakhshān (936) 697-8, 699; ☛ Bābur's protective warning to Sa`īd Chaghatāī 697-8 (here styled Shāh Mīrzā); on his descent 698 nn. 2, 3; meets his rebel grandson Shāhrukh (cir. 983) 191 n. 2; [♰997 AH.-1589 AD.].

Mīān Sūlaimān Shaikh-zāda Farmūlī Afghān—reinforces `Ālam Khān Lūdī (932) 456; gives him 4 laks 457; Bābur dismounts at his Dihlī home 476.

Malik Shāh +Sulaimān+ Yūsuf-zāī Afghān—murdered by Aūlūgh Beg Kābulī App. K, xxxvi; his sons Manṣūr and T̤āūs, his nephew Aḥmad q.v.

+Sulṯān-bakht Begīm+ Mīrān-shāhī Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, daughter of Abū-sa`īd—her daughter visited by Bābur (935) 616.

+Sulṯānīm Begīm+ Mīrān-shāhī (ut supra), daughter of Aḥmad and Qātāq—particulars 36.

+Sultānīm Begīm+ Bāī-qarā (ut supra), daughter of Ḥusain and Chūlī Begīm—particulars 265; arrives in Kābul (925) 397; dies on her way to Āgra (933) 265; her husbands Wais Bāī-qarā and `Abdu'l-bāqī Mīrān-shāhī, her son Muḥammad Sulṯān Mīrzā and grandson Aūlūgh Mīrzā (265 n. 5) q.v.; [♰933 AH.-1527 AD.].

+Sulṯān Malik+ Kāshgharī, Duldāī Barlās Turk—his sons Ḥāfiz Muḥammad and Aḥmad Ḥājī Beg, his brother Jānī Beg q.v.

+Sulṯān-nigār Khānīm+ Chaghatāī Chingīz-khānid, daughter of Yūnas Khān and Shāh Begīm—particulars 23; long parted from a half sister (907) 149; meets her brother Aḥmad (908) 159; mentioned in Bābur's reflection on disloyal kinsfolk (912) 318; writes to him from Kāshghar (932) 446 n. 2; her son Wais [Mīrzā Khān] and grandson Sulaimān q.v.[2931]; [♰934 AH.-1527-8 AD.].

+Sulṯān-niẕhād Begīm+ Bāī-qarā Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, daughter of Ḥusain and Pāpā—particulars 266; her husband Sikandar Bāī-qarā q.v.

+Sultān-qulī+ and +Sulṯān `Alī+, see Bābā-qulī and Bābā `Alī.

+Sulṯān-qulī+ chūnāq, Mughūl—his fidelity (904) and treachery(?) (914 and 921) 105, 109 n. 5; falls into a pit outside Kābul (910) 198; does a bold deed 236; out with Bābur (911) 252-3; rejoins Bābur from Herāt (913) 330-1; in the Mughūl rebellion at Ghaznī (921) 364 n. 1.

Sulṯān +Suyūrghatmīsh Mīrzā+ Shāh-rukhī Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, son of Shāh-rukh—mentioned in his son Mas`ūd's genealogy 382.

+T̤aghāī Beg+, see Sherīm T̤aghāī.

+T̤aghāī Shāh+ bakhshī—put in charge of Shāh Beg's treasury (913) 338.

+Tāham-tan+ Turkmān—particulars 279; his grandson Muḥammad-i-zamān q.v.

+T̤āhir Beg+ Dūldāī Barlās Turk, son of Ḥāfiẓ-i-muḥammad—joint governor of Mīrzā Khān (905) 122; feeds the famished Bābur (907) 148.

+T̤āhir+ tībrī—finds Ibrāhīm Lūdī's body (932) 475; surprised by Rājpūts (933) 549.

Shāh-zāda[2932] +T̤ahmāsp+ Ṣafawī `Arab, son of Ismā'īl—☛ mentioned as reigning from 930-932 AH. 427; Bābur's envoy to him (930) returns with gifts (933) 540, 560 n. 2, 538, ☛ 712; his campaigns against the Aūzbegs (934) 618, (935) the battle of Jām 617 n. 3, 622-4 (where on p. 622 n. 1 read 935 for "934"), 625 n. 4, 635-6; his own account of the battle 635-6; desires peace 639 n. 3; his envoys in Āgra 630, 632; his friendship enjoined on Kāmrān 645; [♰984 AH.-1576 AD.].

+Tāj Khān+ Sārang-khānī Afghān—sends Bābur news that Maḥmūd Lūdī's army has broken up (935) 654; waits on Bābur 657; brings news which prevents hunting 658; sent on service 682; superseded in Chunār by Junaid Barlās 683.

+Tāju'd-dīn Maḥmūd+ Arghūn—holding Qalāt for Muqīm (913) 339; waits on Bābur (925) 418.

Sulṯān Aḥmad +Taṃbal+ Itārachī Mughūl—with Bābur at Asfara (900) 53; wounded near Samarkand (902) 67; promoted (903) 86; deserts Bābur under privation 86, 87; joins Aūzūn Ḥasan in supporting Jahāngīr in Farghāna 87-8; induces The Khān (Maḥmūd) to withdraw support from Bābur 91; his tyranny (904) 100-1; brings Jahāngīr against Bābur in Marghīnān 101; his men drubbed out of Akhsī and defeated at the ferry 101-2; loses Andijān 103; is joined by anxious Mughūls 105; takes Jahāngīr against Andijān and retires 106-7; Bābur's campaign against him (905) 108-110, 112-5; defeated at Khūbān 113; helped feebly by The Khān 115-6; opposes Bābur at Archīān 117 and at Bīshkārān 118; terms made 118-9; waits on Bābur 119; his ill-influence 119, 125; makes Qaṃbar-i-`alī prisoner 124; deserters to him 118, 125, 156; moves against The Khān (906) 145, 154; an uncle's rough comment on him 145; is sent Nūyān's sword by Bābur (907) 150-1; conspiracy against him 154; the two Khāns join Bābur against him (908) 161-176; wounds Bābur with Nūyān's sword 166-7, 396; terms with him repudiated by Bābur 169, 171; invites Shaibānī into Farghāna 172; occupies Akhsī citadel 173; left by Jahāngīr 173-174; mentioned to Bābur in the flight from Akhsī 178, 182; ☛ helped by Shaibānī 183; defeated by him and killed 244 and n. 3; a couplet of Muḥammad Ṣāliḥ's about him 289; his brothers Beg Tīlba, Khalīl, Muḥammad and Bāyazīd q.v.; [♰909 AH.-1504 AD.].

+Tāng-ātmīsh Sulṯān+ Aūzbeg-Shaibān?—at a feast (935) 631; his descent 631 n. 4; in the battle of the Ghogrā 669.

+Tardī Beg+, brother of Qūj (Qūch) and Sher-afgān—in the left centre at Pānīpat (932) 472, 473, and at Kānwa (933) 565; on service 538-9, 582, (934) 590, 602; [♰946 AH.-1539 AD.].

+Tardī Beg+ khāksār—Bābur visits him (925) 417-8; makes verse dropping down the Kābul-river (932) 448; praises a spring and receives a district 467, 581; returns to the darwesh-life (933) 583; conveys a gift to Kāmrān in Qandahār 583.

+Tardīka+—Tardi yakka (568 n. 1)—on service (932) 462; in the right wing [tūlghuma] at Kānwa (933) 568, 579; joins Bābur at Dugdugī (935) 651; on service 678.

+Tardī-muḥammad+ Jang-jang, son of Muḥammad Jang-jang—sent into Bhīra (935) 661, 664.

+Tardī-muḥammad+ Qībchāq—at entertainments (925) 386, 400.

+Tarkhān Begīm+ Arghūn Chīngīz-khānid, daughter of `Abdu'l-`alī—particulars 36.

+Tarsam Bahādur+—punishes the Mundāhirs (936) 700-1.

+Tarsūn-muḥammad Sulṯān+—serving Humāyūn (935) 640.

Malik +T̤āūs+ Yūsuf-zāī Afghān—escorts his sister Mubāraka to her wedding with Bābur (925) 375.

+Tātār Khān+ Kākār (or Gakar)—particulars 387; detains one travelling to Bābur (925) 386; killed by his cousin Hātī 387, 389; Bābur dismounts at his house in Pauhāla 390; [♰925 AH.-1519 AD.].

+Tātār Khān+ Sārang-khāni Afghān—Khān-i-jahān—in Gūālīār and not submissive to Bābur (932) 523; surrenders (933) 539-40; on Bābur's service (935) 582 (here Khān-i-jahān).

+Tātār Khān+ Yūsuf-khail Lūdī Afghān—particulars 382, 383; his son Daulat Khān q.v.; [♰a few years before 910 AH.-1504-5 AD.].

Amīr +Tīmūr Beg+ Barlās Turk—Ṣaḥib-i-qirān—mentioned in genealogies 14, 256; his birthplace Kesh 83; Samarkand his capital 75, 77, 78; his description of Soghd 84; his removal of the body of Sayyid Barka to Samarkand 266 n. 4; circumambulates Shaikh Māṣlaḥat's tomb (790) 132 n. 2; and Aḥmad Yassawī's (799) 356; captures of Qarshī 134 n. 1; his example followed in the bestowal of Farghāna 14; his gifts of the governments of Dihlī 487 and Samarkand 85; his descendants styled Mīrzā down to 913 AH. 344; Ḥusain Bāī-qarā the best swordsman of his line 259 and greatest in his lands 191; a descendant 567; favoured begs 19, 39; one of his old soldiers 150; a descendant effects the migration of fowlers to Multān 225; Bābur's victory where his had been at Pul-i-sangīn 352; his and his descendants rule in Hindūstān 382; their loss of lands to the Aūzbegs 340; his builders and Bābur's numerically compared 520; [♰807 AH.-1405 AD.].

+Tīmūr `Us̤mān+ Mīrān-shāhī Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk—mentioned 280.

+Tīngrī-bīrdī+ Bashaghī (?) Mughūl—in the left wing [tūlghumā] at Pānīpat (932) 473.

+Tīngrī-bīrdī Beg+, son of Qāsim qūchīn—helps to beat down snow for a road (912) 308-9; in the left wing at Qandahār (913) 334, 336; his servant at Bajaur (925) 361; entertains Bābur 401; returns to his districts Khwāst and Andar-āb 403; overtakes Bābur at Jūī-shāhī 410; acts swiftly for him (932-3) 546.

+Tīngrī-qūlī+, a musician—plays at Bābur's entertainments (925) 385, 386, 388; upset into the Parwān-water 407; first given wine 415.

+Tīrahī Sulṯān+—takes a letter to Khwāja Kalān (925) 411.

Mulla +Tirik-i-`alī+ (= Pers. Jān-i-`alī ?)—fights for Bābur at Bajaur (925) 368 and (on his name) n. 5; on service (933) 551 (where read Tirik).

+Tīzak+, son of Qūl-i-bāyazīd bakāwal—captured as a child and kept 4 years (910) 197.

+T̤ūfān+ Arghūn—joins Bābur and so creates a good omen (913) 333.

Sayyid +T̤ufān+—on Bābur's service (932) 453.

+Tūghlūq-tīmūr Khān+ Chaghatāī Chīngīz-khānid—mentioned in Yūnas Khān's genealogy 19.

+Tūka+ Hindū (var. Nau-kār)—given charge of gifts for Kābul (932) 525.

+Tūkhtā-būghā Sulṯān+ Chaghatāī Chīngīz-khānid, son of Aḥmad (Alacha Khān)—waits on Bābur (934) 601; at a feast (935) 631; referred to as serving Bābur 318; works magic 654; in the battle of the Ghogrā 672, 673; receives praise, thanks, and guerdon 674, 677; on service 682; [♰cir. 940 AH.-1533-4 AD.].

+Tūlik Kūkūldāsh+[2933]—Taṃbal strikes him with Bābur's sword (912) 316; defeats Aūzbegs in Badakhshān (925) 408; on Humāyūn's service (935) 640; his servant Barlās Jūkī q.v.

+Tūlmīsh+ Aūzbeg—in the battle of the Ghogrā (935) 669; on service 678.

+Tūlūn Khwāja Beg+, Bārīn Mughūl—particulars 87; on Bābur's service (902) 66, (903) 88; killed 88; [♰903 AH.-1498 AD.].

+Tūn-sulṯān+ (var. Yūn) Mughūl—ghūnchachī of `Umar Shaikh 24.

+Tūqā Beg+, son of Sherīm T̤aghāī—captured by Taṃbal when serving Bābur (904) 106; killed as a prisoner 107; [♰904 AH.-1499 AD.]

Khwāja +`Ubāidu'l-lāh+ Aḥrārī Naqshbandī—his righteous influence in Samarkand 42; his intervention for peace between `Umar Shaikh and kinsmen 62 and n. 1; Pashāghar once his village 97; disciples named by Bābur, Aḥmad and `Umar Shaikh Mīrān-shāhī, Darwesh Beg Tarkhān, and Maulānā-i-qāẓī q.v.; held in slight esteem by Maḥmūd Mīrān-shāhī 46; his family ill-treated by Maḥmūd (899) 41; dreamed of by Bābur (906) 132; his Wālidiyyah-risāla versified by Bābur 619-20, 468 n. 4, ☛ 604; his sons [Muḥammad `Ubaidu'l-lāh] Khwājakā Khwāja and Yaḥya q.v.; [♰895 AH.-1491 AD.].

+`Ubaidu'l-lāh Sulṯān Khān+ Aūzbeg, Shaibānī Chīngīz-khānid, son of Maḥmūd and nephew of Shaibānī—defeats two pairs of Bāī-qarā Mīrzās (913) 263, 329-30; defeated at Merv (917) 354; defeated north of Bukhārā ib.; his vow and return to obedience 348, 356; victorious over Bābur at Kūl-i-malik (918) 201 n. 7, 357-8; routs Najm S̤ānī at Ghaj-davān 360-1; avenges Mughūl tyranny in Ḥiṣār 362; attacks Herāt (927) 434; takes Merv (932) 534, 617 n. 2; takes Mashhad (933) 534, 623 n. 3; attacked by T̤ahmāsp Ṣafawī (934) 618, 622; defeated at Jām (935) 622 (where in n. 1 for "934" read 935), 635-6; T̤aḥmāsp's description of him 636 n. 2[2934]; his wives by capture Ḥabība Dūghlāt and Mihr-angez Bāī-qarā q.v.; [♰946 AH.-1539 AD.].

Rāwāl +Ūdai-singh+ Bāgarī—his force at Kānwa (933) 562; his death 573; [♰933 AH.-1527 AD.].

+Ūlugh, Ūlūs+, see Aūlūgh, Aūlūs.

Mīr +`Umar Beg+ Turkmān—particulars 279; his sons Abū'l-fatḥ and `Alī Khān q.v.

+`Umar Mīrzā+ Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, son of Mīrān-shāh—mentioned 262 n. 3.

+`Umar Shaikh Mīrzā I+, son of Tīmūr—mentioned 14 (where in l. 3 for "and" read who); receives Farghāna 14; [♰797 AH.-1395 AD.].

+`Umar Shaikh Mīrzā II+ Mīrān-shāhī, father of Bābur—particulars 16-19, 24-28; his lands 17, 24, 50, 55, 95 n. 2, 103; Akhsī his capital 10; his ambition 12; his family relations 12; betroths Bābur 35, 120; Farghāna invaded (899) 13; his death 13, 29, 32, App. A, i, iii; his house used by Bābur (908) 172 and his tomb visited (900) 54, (908) 173; his mother Shāh Sulṯān Begīm q.v.; his retainers Tūlūn Khwāja, `Abdu'l-wahhāb, Khwājakī Khwāja q.v.; his old tailor 30; mentioned 6; [♰899 AH.-1494 AD.].

+Umīd Āghācha+ Andijānī, ghūnchachī of `Umar Shaikh—her son Nāṣir q.v.; [♰before 899 AH.-1494 AD.].

+`Us̤mān+, the Third Khalif—Bābur surmised that Samarkand became Musalmān in his reign 75; [♰murdered 35 AH.-665 AD.].

Mullā-zāda Mullā +`Us̤mān+—particulars 284; his birthplace Chīrkh 217.

Amīr +Wāḥid+—his tomb in Herāt visited by Bābur (912) 306; [♰35 AH.-655-6 AD. ?]

Beg +Wais+—brings news from Kābul to Āgra (933) 536.

Pīr (or Mīr) +Wais+—stays with Bābur at a crisis (903) 91; released (905) 119; leaves Samarkand during the siege (906-7) 146.

Shaikh +Wais+—stays with Bābur at a crisis (903) 91; leaves Samarkand during the siege (906-7) 146.

+Wais Ātāka+—his canal at Kābul 200.

+Wais Khān+ Chaghatāī Chīngīz-khānid, father of Yūnas Khān—mentioned 19; his sons Yūnas and Aīsān-būghā q.v.; [♰832 AH.-1428-9 AD.].

Sulṯān +Wais+ Kūlābī—his friendship recommended to Humāyūn (935) 627; ☛ reinforces Qila`-i-ẕafar (935 or 936) 696; his daughter Ḥaram Begīm q.v.

+Wais+ Lāgharī +Beg+ tūghchī—particulars 28; joins The Khān (Maḥmūd) (899) 32; safe-guards his ward Nāṣir Mīrān-shāhī ib.; on service for Bāī-sunghar (902) 65; waits on Bābur 66; stays with him at a crisis (903) 91; on his service (904) 98, 100, 101, 106; at Khūbān (905) 113; advises 117; plundered by `Alī-dost 119; leaves Samarkand during the siege (906-7) 146; his son (?) Beg-gīna q.v.

+Wais+ Mīrān-shāhī, see Mīrzā Khān.

Sulṯān +Wais Mīrzā+ Bāī-qarā Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, son of Bāī-qarā II—parentage 257; his cousin and wife Sulṯanīm q.v.

Sulṯān +Wais+ Sawādī—mentioned 372; sent to collect a tax he had fixed (925) 374; receives gifts and leave 376.[2935]

Sulṯān +Wālāma+ Taklū—mentioned in Shāh T̤ahmāsp's account of the battle of Jām (935) 626 n. 2.

Pīr +Walī+ Bārlas Turk—☛ loses Sīwīstān to Shāh Beg (cir. 917) 429 n. 1.

+Walī Beg+ Barlās—particulars 272-3; his son Muḥammad-i-Walī q.v.; [♰973 AH.].

+Walī Beg+ Qībchāq Turk, brother of Khusrau Shāh[2936]—particulars 51; on his brother's service (901) 60, 64, (902) 71, (903) 93-4; mentioned (906) 129, (910) 191 by Ḥusain Bāī-qarā; inquired for from Khusrau by Bābur 193; defeated by Aīmaqs 196; his death 51, 196; his former followers gathered together 242; [♰910 AH.-1504 AD.].

+Walī+ khazānchī, Qarā-qūzī—captured by Taṃbal in Akhsī (908) 181; in the left centre at Qandahār (913) 335; his matchlock shooting at Bajaur (925) 369; on service 391, (932) 458, 465-6, 471; in the right wing at Pānīpat 472, 475, and at Kanwā (933) 566; his ill-behaviour in the heats 524.

+Walī+ pārschī (cheeta-keeper)—receives a gift (935) 633.

+Walī Qīzīl+ Mughūl—rebuked (932) 453; in the right-wing [tūlghuma] at Pānīpat 473; made shiq-dār of Dihlī 476; on service (934) 601, (935) 638.

+Yādgār-i-muḥammad+[2937] +Mīrzā+ Shāh-rukhī Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, son of Muḥammad—his capture of Herāt referred to 278; his defeat by Ḥusain Bāī-qarā at Chanārān (874) 260; his loss of Herāt to Ḥusain (875) 260, 279, compared with Shaibānī's of Samarkand to Bābur (906) 134-5; the date of his death referred to 259 n. 1; his Master-of-horse Mīr (Qambar-i-)`alī q.v.; [♰875 AH.-1470-1 AD.].

+Yādgār-i-nāsir Mīrzā+ Mīrān-shāhī Tīmūrid, Barlās Turk, son of Nāṣir—gifts made to him (935) 632; [♰953 AH.-1546 AD.].

+Yādgār-i-sulṯān Begīm+ Mīrān-shāhī (ut supra), daughter of `Umar Shaikh—particulars 18; her Aūzbeg marriage (908) 18, 356; her return to Bābur (917) 356.

+Yādgār T̤aghāī+—his daughter Bega Begīm q.v.

Khwāja +Yaḥyā+, younger son of `Ubaidu'l-lāh Aḥrārī—his part in the Tarkhān revolt (901) 63; treats with Bābur (904) 98; welcomes him to Samarkand (905) 124; waits on Shaibānī (906) 127; banished by him and murdered with two sons 128, 147 n. 4; his house mentioned 133; his sons Muḥammad Zakariya and Bāqī, his grandsons `Abdu'sh-shahīd and Khwāja Kalān q.v.; [♰906 AH.-1500 AD.].

Shaikh +Yaḥyā+ Chīshtī—his tomb visited by Bābur (935) 666; his son Sharafu'd-dīn Munīrī q.v.

+Yaḥyā+ Nūḥānī, at the head of Hindūstān traders—allowed to leave Kābul (925) 416.

+Yaḥyā Nūḥānī+ (perhaps the man last entered)—waits on Bābur (935) 676; a grant and leave given 683; his younger brother (no name) 683.

+Yakka Khwāja+—on Bābur's service (934) 598; in the battle of the Ghogrā (935) 671; drowned 674; his brother Qāsim q.v.; [♰935 AH.-1529 AD.].

+Yāngī Beg Kūkūldāsh+—brings Bābur letters and gifts from Kāshghar (932) 445-6.

+Ya`qūb-i-ayūb+ Begchīk, son of Ayūb—on Ḥusain Bāī-qarā's service (901) 58; proffers Khusrau Shāh's service to Bābur (910) 192-3.

Sulṯān +Ya`qūb Beg+ Āq-qūīlūq Turkmān—a desertion to him 275; affords refuge to Banā'ī 287; his beg Tīmūr `Uṣman Mīrān-shāhī q.v.; [♰896 AH.-1491 AD.].

Maulānā +Ya`qūb+ Naqshbandī—his birthplace Chīrkh 217; [♰851 AH.-1447 AD.].

+Ya`qūb+ tez-jang—☛ one of five champions defeated in single combat by Bābur (914) 349 n. 1.

+Ya`qūb Sulṯān+—mentioned as at Jām 636 n. 2.

Mullā +Yārak+—plays one of his compositions and incites Bābur to compose (926) 422.

+Yārak T̤aghāī+ (var. Yārīk)—stays with Bābur at a crisis (903) 91; locum tenens in Akhsī (905) 116; retaliates on Turkmān Hazāras (911) 253; takes charge of sheep raided by Bābur (912) 313; in the right wing at Qandahār (913) 334.

+Yār-i-`alī+ Balāl, Bahārlū Qarā-qūīlūq Turkmān, grandfather of Bairām Khān-i-khānān—stays with Bābur at a crisis (903) 91; wounded (905) 109 (where in n. 5 for "father" read grandfather); rejoins Bābur (910) 189; on his Tramontane service (932-3) 546.

+Yār-i-ḥusain+, grandson of Mīr (Shaikh) `Alī Beg—waits on Bābur (910) 228; asks permission to raise a force in Bābur's name 231; kills Bāqī Chaghānīānī (911) 250-1.

+Yārīm Beg+—Yār-i-muḥammad?—on Bābur's service (913) 337.

+Yīlī-pars Sulṯān+ Aūzbeg-shaibān—his brother Aīsān-qulī (q.v.) 265.

+Yīsūn-tawā Khān+ Chaghatāī Chīngīz-khānid—mentioned in Yūnas Khān's genealogy 19.

+Yūl-chūq+—conveys a message to Bābur (904) 99.

+Yūnas-i-`alī+, son of Bābā `Alī Lord-of-the-Gate—surprised at a Tuesday's fast (925) 398; on Bābur's service 278, 468 (where read his name in l. 3) 475, 521; in the right centre at Pānīpat (932) 472, 473 and at Kānwa (933) 565, 569; has charge of Ibrāhīm's mother 543, 545; makes a garden (932) 532; in social charge of T̤ahmāsp Ṣafawī's envoys (935) 631; inquires into Muḥammad-i-zamān Bāī-qarā's objections to Bihār 661, 662; in the battle of the Ghogrā 671; at entertainments (925) 400, (935) 683; his kinsman Ibrāhīm qanūnī q.v.

+Yūnas Khān+ Chaghatāī Chīngīz-khānid, Bābur's maternal grandfather—particulars[2938] 19-24; made Khān of the Mughūls by Bābur's grandfather 20, 344 n. 2, 352; his friendly relations with Bābur's father 12; receives Tāshkīnt from him 13; defeats him 16; his sons Maḥmūd and Aḥmad q.v. and daughters 21-4; his servant Qaṃbar-i-`alī q.v. mentioned 92 n. 1, 149, 565 n. 1; [♰892 AH.-1487 AD.].

Khwāja +Yūnas+ Sajāwandī—his birthplace in Luhūgur (Logar) 217.

+Yūsuf-i-`alī+—musician at entertainments (925) 385, 387, 388, 418.

+Yūsuf-i-`alī+ bakāwal—on Bābur's service in Bajaur (925) 375.

+Yūsuf-i-`alī Kūkūldāsh+—made joint-dārogha in Herāt (911) 293; Bābur's cicerone in Herāt (912) 304; his good dancing 303.

+Yūsuf-i-`alī+ rikābdār—conveys a letter concerning Hind-āl's pre-natal adoption (925) 374; receives a gift for swimming 401; meets Bābur 418; (?) in Saṃbhal (934) 587; (?) dies there 675, 687 (here `Alī-i-yūsuf); [♰935 AH.-1529 AD.].[2939]

Khwāja +Yūsuf+ Andijānī, a musician—particulars 4.

+Yūsuf-i-ayūb+ Begchīk, son of Ayūb—Bābur warned against him (910) 190; takes service with Bābur 196; winters with Nāṣir 241; leaves Bābur for Jahāngīr (911) 190, 254.

+Yūsuf+ badī`[2940]—particulars 289; [♰897 AD.-1492].

Sayyid +Yūsuf Beg+ Aūghlāqchī, son of Murād—particulars 39; waits on Bābur from Samarkand (903) 72; holding Yār-yīlāq for `Alī Mīrān-shāhī (904) 98; dismissed from Khurāsān on suspicion 98; joins Bābur (910) 196; advises him 197; his death 241; his brother Ḥasan and sons Muḥammad-i-yūsuf and Aḥmad-i-yūsuf q.v.; [♰910 AH.-1505 AD.].