xi. The style and wording of the passage are not in harmony

with those of the true text.

Other reasons for rejection are marked change in choice of the details chosen for commemoration, _e.g._ when Bābur mentions prayer, he does so simply; when he tells a dream, it seems a real one. The passage leaves the impression that the writer did not think in Turkī, composed in it with difficulty, and looked at life from another view-point than Bābur's.

On these various grounds, we have come to the conclusion that it is no part of the _Bābur-nāma_.

[APPENDICES TO THE KĀBUL SECTION.]

E.—NAGARAHĀR, AND NĪNG-NAHĀR

Those who consult books and maps about the riverain tract between the Safed-koh (Spīn-ghur) and (Anglicé) the Kābul-river find its name in several forms, the most common being Nangrahār and Nangnahār (with variant vowels). It would be useful to establish a European book-name for the district. As European opinion differs about the origin and meaning of the names now in use, and as a good deal of interesting circumstance gathers round the small problem of a correct form (there may be two), I offer about the matter what has come into the restricted field of my own work, premising that I do this merely as one who drops a casual pebble on the cairn of observation already long rising for scholarly examination.

_a. The origin and meaning of the names._

I have met with three opinions about the origin and meaning of the names found now and earlier. To each one of them obvious objection can be made. They are:—

1. That all forms now in use are corruptions of the Sanscrit word Nagarahāra, the name of the Town-of-towns which in the _dū-āb_ of the Bārān-sū and Sūrkh-rūd left the ruins Masson describes in Wilson's _Ariana Antigua_. But if this is so, why is the Town-of-towns multiplied into the nine of Na-nagrahār (Nangrahār)?[2773]

2. That the names found represent Sanscrit _nawā vihāra_, nine monasteries, an opinion the Gazetteer of India of 1907 has adopted from Bellew. But why precisely nine monasteries? Nine appears an understatement.

3. That Nang (Ning or Nung) -nahār verbally means nine streams, (Bābur's Tūqūz-rūd,) an interpretation of long standing (Section _b infra_). But whence _nang_, _ning_, _nung_, for nine? Such forms are not in Persian, Turkī or Pushtu dictionaries, and, as Sir G. A. Grierson assures me, do not come into the Linguistic Survey.

_b. On nang, ning, nung for nine._

Spite of their absence from the natural homes of words, however, the above sounds have been heard and recorded as symbols of the number nine by careful men through a long space of time.

The following instances of the use of "Nangnahār" show this, and also show that behind the variant forms there may be not a single word but two of distinct origin and sense.

1. In Chinese annals two names appear as those of the district and town (I am not able to allocate their application with certainty). The first is Na-kie-lo-ho-lo, the second Nang-g-lo-ho-lo and these, I understand to represent Nagara-hāra and Nang-nahār, due allowance being made for Chinese idiosyncrasy.[2774]

2. Some 900 years later (1527-30 AD.) Bābur also gives two names, Nagarahār (as the book-name of his _tūmān_) and Nīng-nahār.[2775] He says the first is found in several histories (B.N. f. 131_b_); the second will have been what he heard and also presumably what appeared in revenue accounts; of it he says, "it is nine torrents" (_tūqūz-rūd_).

3. Some 300 years after Bābur, Elphinstone gives two names for the district, neither of them being Bābur's book-name, "Nangrahaur[2776] or Nungnahaur, from the nine streams which issue from the Safed-koh, _nung_ in Pushtoo signifying _nine_, and _nahaura_, a stream" (_Caubul_, i, 160).

4. In 1881 Colonel H. S. Tanner had heard, in Nūr-valley on the north side of the Kābul-water, that the name of the opposite district was Nīng-nahār and its meaning Nine-streams. He did not get a list of the nine and all he heard named do not flow from Safed-koh.

5. In 1884 Colonel H. G. McGregor gives two names with their explanation, "Ningrahar and Nungnihar; the former is a corruption of the latter word[2777] which in the Afghān language signifies nine rivers or rivulets." He names nine, but of them six only issue from Safed-koh.

6. I have come across the following instances in which the number nine is represented by other words than _na_ (_ni_ or _nu_); _viz._ the _nenhan_ of the Chitrālī Kāfir and the _noun_ of the Panjābi, recorded by Leech,—the _nyon_ of the Khowārī and the _huncha_ of the Boorishki, recorded by Colonel Biddulph.

The above instances allow opinion that in the region concerned and through a long period of time, nine has been expressed by _nang_ (_ning_ or _nung_) and other nasal or high palatal sounds, side by side with _na_ (_ni_ or _nu_). The whole matter may be one of nasal utterance,[2778] but since a large number of tribesmen express nine by a word containing a nasal sound, should that word not find place in lists of recognized symbols of sounds?

_c. Are there two names of distinct origin?_

1. Certainly it makes a well-connected story of decay in the Sanscrit word Nagarahāra to suppose that tribesmen, prone by their organism to nasal utterance, pronounced that word Nangrahār, and by force of their numbers made this corruption current,—that this was recognized as the name of the town while the Town-of-towns was great or in men's memory, and that when through the decay of the town its name became a meaningless husk, the wrong meaning of the Nine-streams should enter into possession.

But as another and better one can be put together, this fair-seeming story may be baseless. Its substitute has the advantage of explaining the double sequence of names shown in Section _b_.

The second story makes all the variant names represent one or other of two distinct originals. It leaves Nagrahār to represent Nagarahāra, the dead town; it makes the nine torrents of Safed-koh the primeval sponsors of Nīng-nahār, the name of the riverain tract. Both names, it makes contemporary in the relatively brief interlude of the life of the town. For the fertilizing streams will have been the dominant factors of settlement and of revenue from the earliest times of population and government. They arrest the eye where they and their ribbons of cultivation space the riverain waste; they are obvious units for grouping into a sub-government. Their name has a counterpart in adjacent Panj-āb; the two may have been given by one dominant power, how long ago, in what tongue matters not. The riverain tract, by virtue of its place on a highway of transit, must have been inhabited long before the town Nagarahāra was built, and must have been known by a name. What better one than Nine-streams can be thought of?

2. Bellew is quoted by the Gazetteer of India (ed. 1907) as saying, in his argument in favour of _nawā vihāra_, that no nine streams are found to stand sponsor, but modern maps shew nine outflows from Safed-koh to the Kābul-river between the Sūrkh-rūd and Daka, while if affluents to the former stream be reckoned, more than nine issue from the range.[2779]

Against Bellew's view that there are not nine streams, is the long persistence of the number nine in the popular name (Sect. _b_).

It is also against his view that he supposes there were nine monasteries, because each of the nine must have had its fertilizing water.

Bābur says there were nine; there must have been nine of significance; he knew his _tūmān_ not only by frequent transit but by his revenue accounts. A supporting point in those accounts is likely to have been that the individual names of the villages on the nine streams would appear, with each its payment of revenue.

3. In this also is some weight of circumstance against taking Nagarahāra to be the parent of Nīng-nahār:—An earlier name of the town is said to be Udyānapūra, Garden town.[2780] Of this Bābur's Adīnapūr is held to be a corruption; the same meaning of garden has survived on approximately the same ground in Bālā-bāgh and Roẓābād.

Nagarahāra is seen, therefore, to be a parenthetical name between others which are all derived from gardens. It may shew the promotion of a "Garden-town" to a "Chief-town". If it did this, there was relapse of name when the Chief-town lost status. Was it ever applied beyond the delta? If it were, would it, when dead in the delta, persist along the riverain tract? If it were not, _cadit quæstio_; the suggestion of two names distinct in origin, is upheld.

Certainly the riverain tract would fall naturally under the government of any town flourishing in the delta, the richest and most populous part of the region. But for this very reason it must have had a name older than parenthetical Nagarahāra. That inevitable name would be appropriately Nīng-nahār (or Na-nahār) Nine-streams; and for a period Nagarahāra would be the Chief-town of the district of Na-nahār (Nine-streams).[2781]

_d. Bābur's statements about the name._

What the cautious Bābur says of his _tūmān_ of Nīng-nahār has weight:—

1. That some histories write it Nagarahār (Ḥaidarābād Codex, f. 131_b_);

2. That Nīng-nahār is nine torrents, _i.e._ mountain streams, _tūquz-rud_;

3. That (the) nine torrents issue from Safed-koh (f. 132_b_).

Of his first statement can be said, that he will have seen the book-name in histories he read, but will have heard Nīng-nahār, probably also have seen it in current letters and accounts.

Of his second,—that it bears and may be meant to bear two senses, (_a_) that the _tūmān_ consisted of nine torrents,—their lands implied; just as he says "Asfara is four _būlūks_" (sub-divisions f. 3_b_)—(_b_) that _tūqūz rūd_ translates _nīng-nahār_.

Of his third,—that in English its sense varies as it is read with or without the definite article Turkī rarely writes, but that either sense helps out his first and second, to mean that verbally and by its constituent units Nīng-nahār is nine-torrents; as verbally and by its constituents Panj-āb is five-waters.

_e. Last words._

Detailed work on the Kābul section of the _Bābur-nāma_ has stamped two impressions so deeply on me, that they claim mention, not as novel or as special to myself, but as set by the work.

The first is of extreme risk in swift decision on any problem of words arising in North Afghānistān, because of its local concourse of tongues, the varied utterance of its unlettered tribes resident or nomad, and the frequent translation of proper names in obedience to their verbal meanings. Names lie there too in _strata_, relics of successive occupation—Greek, Turkī, Hindī, Pushtū and tribes _galore_.

The second is that the region is an exceptionally fruitful field for first-hand observation of speech, the movent ocean of the uttered word, free of the desiccated symbolism of alphabets and books.

The following books, amongst others, have prompted the above note:—

Ghoswāra Inscription, Kittoe, JASB., 1848, and Kielhorn, _Indian Antiquary_, 1888, p. 311.

H. Sastrī's _Rāmacārita_, Introduction, p. 7 (ASB. Memoirs).

Cunningham's _Ancient India_, vol. i.

Beal's _Buddhist Records_, i, xxxiv, and cii, 91.

Leech's Vocabularies, JASB., 1838.

The writings of Masson (_Travels_ and _Ariana Antiqua_), Wood, Vigne, etc.

Raverty's _T̤abaqāt-i-nāsirī_.

Jarrett's _Āyīn-i-akbarī_.

P.R.G.S. for maps, 1879; Macnair on the Kafirs, 1884; Tanner's _On the Chugānī and neighbouring tribes of Kāfiristān_, 1881.

Simpson's _Nagarahāra_, JASB., xiii.

Biddulph's _Dialects of the Hindū-kush_, JRAS.

Gazette of India, 1907, art. Jalalābād.

Bellew's _Races of Afghānistān_.

F.—ON THE NAME DARA-I-NŪR

Some European writers have understood the name Dara-i-nūr to mean Valley of Light, but natural features and also the artificial one mentioned by Colonel H. G. Tanner (_infra_), make it better to read the component _nūr_, not as Persian _nūr_, light, but as Pushtū _nūr_, rock. Hence it translates as Valley of Rocks, or Rock-valley. The region in which the valley lies is rocky and boulder-strewn; its own waters flow to the Kābul-river east of the water of Chitrāl. It shews other names composed with _nūr_, in which _nūr_ suits if it means rock, but is inexplicable if it means light, _e.g._ Nūr-lām (Nūr-fort), the master-fort in the mouth of Nūr-valley, standing high on a rock between two streams, as Bābur and Tanner have both described it from eye-witness,—Nūr-gal (village), a little to the north-west of the valley,—Aūlūgh-nūr (great rock), at a crossing mentioned by Bābur, higher up the Bārān-water,—and Koh-i-nūr (Rocky-mountains), which there is ground for taking as the correct form of the familiar "Kunar" of some European writers (Raverty's _Notes_, p. 106). The dominant feature in these places dictates reading _nūr_ as rock; so too the work done in Nūr-valley with boulders, of which Colonel H. G. Tanner's interesting account is subjoined (P.R.G.S. 1881, p. 284).

"Some 10 miles from the source of the main stream of the Nur-valley the Dameneh stream enters, but the waters of the two never meet; they flow side by side about three-quarters of a mile apart for about 12 miles and empty themselves into the Kunar river by different mouths, each torrent hugging closely the foot of the hills at its own side of the valley. Now, except in countries where terracing has been practised continuously for thousands of years, such unnatural topography as exists in the valley of Nur is next to impossible. The forces which were sufficient to scoop out the valley in the first instance, would have kept a water-way at the lowest part, into which would have poured the drainage of the surrounding mountains; but in the Nur-valley long-continued terracing has gradually raised the centre of the valley high above the edges. The population has increased to its maximum limit and every available inch of ground is required for cultivation; the people, by means of terrace-walls built of ponderous boulders in the bed of the original single stream, have little by little pushed the waters out of their true course, until they run, where now found, in deep rocky cuttings at the foot of the hills on either side" (p. 280).

"I should like to go on and say a good deal more about boulders; and while I am about it I may as well mention one that lies back from a hamlet in Shulut, which is so big that a house is built in a fault or crack running across its face. Another pebble lies athwart the village and covers the whole of the houses from that side."

G.—ON THE NAMES OF TWO DARA-I-NŪR WINES.

From the two names, Arat-tāshī and Sūhān (Suhār) -tāshī, which Bābur gives as those of two wines of the Dara-i-nūr, it can be inferred that he read _nūr_ to mean rock. For if in them Turkī _tāsh_, rock, be replaced by Pushtū _nūr_, rock, two place-names emerge, Arat (-nūrī) and Sūhān (-nūrī), known in the Nūr-valley.

These may be villages where the wines were grown, but it would be quite exceptional for Bābur to say that wines are called from their villages, or indeed by any name. He says here not where they grow but what they are called.

I surmise that he is repeating a joke, perhaps his own, perhaps a standing local one, made on the quality of the wines. For whether with _tāsh_ or with _nūr_ (rock), the names can be translated as Rock-saw and Rock-file, and may refer to the rough and acid quality of the wines, rasping and setting the teeth on edge as does iron on stone.

The villages themselves may owe their names to a serrated edge or splintered pinnacle of weathered granite, in which local people, known as good craftsmen, have seen resemblance to tools of their trade.

H.—ON THE COUNTERMARK BIH BŪD ON COINS.

As coins of Sl. Ḥusain Mīrzā _Bāī-qarā_ and other rulers do actually bear the words _Bih būd_, Bābur's statement that the name of Bihbūd Beg was on the Mīrzā's coins acquires a numismatic interest which may make serviceable the following particulars concerning the passage and the beg.[2782]

_a. The Turkī passage_ (Elph. MS. f. 135_b_; Ḥaidarābād Codex f. 173_b_; Ilminsky p. 217).

For ease of reference the Turkī, Persian and English version are subjoined:—

(1) _Yana Bihbūd Beg aīdī. Būrūnlār chuhra-jīrga-sī-dā khidmat qīlūr aīdī. Mīrzā-nīng qāzāqlīqlārīdā khidmatī bāqīb Bihbūd Beg-kā bū `ināyatnī qīlīb aīdī kīm tamghā u sikka-dā ānīng ātī aīdī._

(2) The Persian translation of `Abdu'r-raḥīm (Muḥ. Shīrāzī's lith. ed. p. 110):—

_Dīgar Bihbūd Beg būd. Auwalhā dar jīrga-i-chuhrahā khidmat mikard. Chūn dar qāzāqīhā Mīrzārā khidmat karda būd u ānrā mulāḥaẓa namūda, aīnrā `ināyat karda būd kah dar tamghānāt sikka_[2783] _nām-i-au būd._

(3) A literal English translation of the Turkī:—

Another was Bihbūd Beg. He served formerly in the _chuhra-jīrga-sī_ (corps of braves). Looking to his service in the Mīrzā's guerilla-times, the favour had been done to Bihbūd Beg that his name was on the stamp and coin.[2784]

_b. Of Bihbūd Beg._

We have found little so far to add to what Bābur tells of Bihbūd Beg and what he tells we have not found elsewhere. The likely sources of his information are Daulat Shāh and Khwānd-amīr who have written at length of Ḥusain _Bāī-qarā_. Considerable search in the books of both men has failed to discover mention of signal service or public honour connected with the beg. Bābur may have heard what he tells in Harāt in 912 AH. (1506 AD.) when he would see Ḥusain's coins presumably; but later opportunity to see them must have been frequent during his campaigns and visits north of Hindū-kush, notably in Balkh.

The sole mention we have found of Bihbūd Beg in the _Ḥabību's-siyar_ is that he was one of Ḥusain's commanders at the battle of Chīkmān-sarāī which was fought with Sl. Maḥmūd Mīrzā _Mīrānshāhī_ in Muḥarram 876 AH. (June-July 1471 AD.).[2785] His place in the list shews him to have had importance. "Amīr Niẕāmu'd-dīn `Alī-sher's brother Darwesh-i-`alī the librarian (_q.v._ Ḥai. Codex Index), and Amīr Bihbūd, and Muḥ. `Alī _ātāka_, and Bakhshīka and Shāh Walī _Qīpchāq_, and Dost-i-muḥammad _chuhra_, and Amīr Qul-i-`alī, and" (another).

The total of our information about the man is therefore:—

(1) That when Ḥusain[2786] from 861 to 873 AH. (1457 to 1469 AD.) was fighting his way up to the throne of Harāt, Bihbūd served him well in the corps of braves, (as many others will have done).

(2) That he was a beg and one of Ḥusain's commanders in 876 AH. (1471 AD.).

(3) That Bābur includes him amongst Ḥusain's begs and says of him what has been quoted, doing this _circa_ 934 AH. (1528 AD.), some 56 years after Khwānd-amīr's mention of him _s.a._ 876 AH. (1471 AD.).

_c. Of the term chuhra-jīrga-sī used by Bābur._

Of this term Bābur supplies an explicit explanation which I have not found in European writings. His own book amply exemplifies his explanation, as do also Khwānd-amīr's and Ḥaidar's.

He gives the explanation (f. 15_b_) when describing a retainer of his father's who afterwards became one of his own begs. It is as follows:—

"`Alī-darwesh of Khurāsān served in the Khurāsān _chuhra-jīrga-sī_, one of two special corps (_khāṣa tābīn_) of serviceable braves (_yārār yīgītlār_) formed by Sl. Abū-sa`īd Mīrzā when he first began to arrange the government of Khurāsān and Samarkand and, presumably, called by him the Khurāsān corps and the Samarkand corps."

This shews the circle to have consisted of fighting-men, such serviceable braves as are frequently mentioned by Bābur; and his words "_yārār yīgīt_" make it safe to say that if instead of using a Persian phrase, he had used a Turkī one, _yīgīt_, brave would have replaced _chuhra_, "young soldier" (Erskine). A considerable number of men on active service are styled _chuhra_, one at least is styled _yīgīt_, in the same way as others are styled _beg_.[2787]

Three military circles are mentioned in the _Bābur-nāma_, consisting respectively of braves, household begs (under Bābur's own command), and great begs. Some men are mentioned who never rose from the rank of brave (_yīgīt_), some who became household-begs, some who went through the three grades.

Of the corps of braves Bābur conveys the information that Abū-sa`īd founded it at a date which will have lain between 1451 and 1457 AD.; that `Umar Shaikh's man `Alī-darwesh belonged to it; and that Ḥusain's man Bihbūd did so also. Both men, `Ali-darwesh and Bihbūd, when in its circle, would appropriately be styled _chuhra_ as men of the beg-circle were styled beg; the Dost-i-muḥammad _chuhra_ who was a commander, (he will have had a brave's command,) at Chīkmān-sarāī (_see_ list _supra_) will also have been of this circle. Instances of the use by Bābur of the name _khaṣa-tābīn_ and its equivalent _būītīkīnī_ are shewn on f. 209 and f. 210_b_. A considerable number of Bābur's fighting men, the braves he so frequently mentions as sent on service, are styled _chuhra_ and inferentially belong to the same circle.[2788]

_d. Of Bih būd on Ḥusain Bāī-qarā's coins._

So far it does not seem safe to accept Bābur's statement literally. He may tell a half-truth and obscure the rest by his brevity.

Nothing in the sources shows ground for signal and public honour to Bihbūd Beg, but a good deal would allow surmise that jesting allusion to his name might decide for _Bih būd_ as a coin mark when choice had to be made of one, in the flush of success, in an assembly of the begs, and, amongst those begs, lovers of word-play and enigma.

The personal name is found written Bihbūd, as one word and with medial _h_; the mark is _Bih būd_ with the terminal _h_ in the _Bih_. There have been discussions moreover as to whether to read on the coins _Bih būd_, it was good, or _Bih buvad_, let it be, or become, good (valid for currency?).

The question presents itself; would the beg's name have appeared on the coins, if it had not coincided in form with a suitable coin-mark?

Against literal acceptance of Bābur's statement there is also doubt of a thing at once so _ben trovato_ and so unsupported by evidence.

Another doubt arises from finding _Bih būd_ on coins of other rulers, one of Iskandar Khan's being of a later date,[2789] others, of Tīmūr, Shāhrukh and Abū-sa`īd, with nothing to shew who counterstruck it on them.

On some of Ḥusain's coins the sentence _Bih būd_ appears as part of the legend and not as a counterstrike. This is a good basis for finding a half-truth in Bābur's statement. It does not allow of a whole-truth in his statement because, as it is written, it is a coin-mark, not a name.

An interesting matter as bearing on Ḥusain's use of _Bih būd_ is that in 865 AH. (1461 AD.) he had an incomparable horse named Bihbūd, one he gave in return for a falcon on making peace with Mustapha Khān.[2790]

_e. Of Bābur's vassal-coinage._

The following historical details narrow the field of numismatic observation on coins believed struck by Bābur as a vassal of Ismā`īl _Ṣafawī_. They are offered because not readily accessible.

The length of Bābur's second term of rule in Transoxiana was not the three solar years of the B.M. Coin Catalogues but did not exceed eight months. He entered Samarkand in the middle of Rajab 917 AH. (_c._ Oct. 1st, 1511 AD.). He returned to it defeated and fled at once, after the battle of Kūl-i-malik which was fought in Ṣafar 918 AH. (mid-April to mid-May 1512 AD.). Previous to the entry he was in the field, without a fixed base; after his flight he was landless till at the end both of 920 AH. and of 1514 AD. he had returned to Kābul.

He would not find a full Treasury in Samarkand because the Aūzbegs evacuated the fort at their own time; eight months would not give him large tribute in kind. He failed in Transoxiana because he was the ally of a Shī`a; would coins bearing the Shī`a legend have passed current from a Samarkand mint? These various circumstances suggest that he could not have struck many coins of any kind in Samarkand.

The coins classed in the B.M. Catalogues as of Bābur's vassalage, offer a point of difficulty to readers of his own writings, inasmuch as neither the "Sulṯān Muḥammad" of No. 652 (gold), nor the "Sulṯān Bābur Bahādur" of the silver coins enables confident acceptance of them as names he himself would use.

I.—ON THE WEEPING-WILLOWS OF f. 190_b_.

The passage omitted from f. 190_b_, which seems to describe something decorative done with weeping willows, (_bed-i-mawallah_) has been difficult to all translators. This may be due to inaccurate pointing in Bābur's original MS. or may be what a traveller seeing other willows at another feast could explain.

The first Persian translation omits the passage (I.O. 215 f. 154_b_); the second varies from the Turkī, notably by changing _sāch_ and _sāj_ to _shākh_ throughout (I.O. 217 f. 150_b_). The English and French translations differ much (_Memoirs_ p. 206, _Mémoires_ i, 414), the latter taking the _mawallah_ to be _mūla_, a hut, against which much is clear in the various MSS.

Three Turkī sources[2791] agree in reading as follows:—

_Mawallahlār-nī_ (or _muwallah_ Ḥai. MS.) _kīltūrdīlār. Bīlmān sāchlārī-nīng yā `amlī sāchlārī-nīng ārālārīgha k:msān-nī_ (Ilminsky, _kamān_) _shākh-nīng_ (Ḥai. MS. _șākh_) _aūzūnlūghī bīla aīnjīga aīnjīga kīsīb, qūīūb tūrlār._

The English and French translations differ from the Turkī and from one another:—

(_Memoirs_, p. 206) They brought in branching willow-trees. I do not know if they were in the natural state of the tree, or if the branches were formed artificially, but they had small twigs cut the length of the ears of a bow and inserted between them.

(_Mémoires_ i, 434) On façonna des huttes (_mouleh_). Ils les établissent en taillant des baguettes minces, de la longeur du bout recourbé de l'arc, qu'on place entre des branches naturelles ou façonnées artificiellement, je l'ignore.

The construction of the sentence appears to be thus:—_Mawal-lahlār-nī kīltūrdīlār_, they brought weeping-willows; _k:msān-nī_ _qūīūbtūrlār_, they had put _k:msān-nī_; _aīnjīga aīnjīga kīsīb_, cut very fine (or slender); _shākh_ (or _șākh_)_-nīng aūzūnlūghī_, of the length of a _shākh_, bow, or _șākh_ ...; _bīlmān sāchlārī-nīng yā `amlī sāchlārī-nīng ārālārīgha_, to (or at) the spaces of the _sāchlār_ whether their (_i.e._ the willows') own or artificial _sāchlār_.

These translations clearly indicate felt difficulty. Mr. Erskine does not seem to have understood that the trees were _Salix babylonica_. The crux of the passage is the word _k:msān-nī_, which tells what was placed in the spaces. It has been read as _kamān_, bow, by all but the scribes of the two good Turkī MSS. and as in a phrase _horn of a bow_. This however is not allowed by the Turkī, for the reason that _k:msān-nī_ is not in the genitive but in the accusative case. (I may say that Bābur does not use _nī_ for _nīng_; he keeps strictly to the prime uses of each enclitic, _nī_ accusative, _nīng_ genitive.) Moreover, if _k:msān-nī_ be taken as a genitive, the verbs _qūīūb-tūrlār_ and _kīsīb_ have no object, no other accusative appearing in the sentence than _k:msān-nī_.

A weighty reason against changing _sāch_ into _shākh_ is that Dr. Ilminsky has not done so. He must have attached meaning to _sāch_ since he uses it throughout the passage. He was nearer the region wherein the original willows were seen at a feast. Unfortunately nothing shows how he interpreted the word.

_Sāchmāq_ is a tassel; is it also a catkin and were there decorations, _kimsān-nī_ (things _kimsa_, or flowers Ar. _kim_, or something shining, _kimcha_, gold brocade) hung in between the catkins?

Ilminsky writes _mu'lah_ (with _ḥamza_) and this de Courteille translates by hut. The Ḥai. MS. writes _muwallah_ (marking the _ẓamma_).

In favour of reading _mawallah_ (_mulah_) as a tree and that tree _Salix babylonica_ the weeping-willow, there are annotations in the Second Persian translation and, perhaps following it, in the Elphinstone MS. of _nām-i-dirakht_, name of a tree, _dīdān-i-bed_, sight of the willow, _bed-i-mawallah_, mournful-willow. Standing alone _mawallah_ means weeping-willow, in this use answering to _majnūn_ the name Panj-ābīs give the tree, from Leila's lover the distracted _i.e._ Majnūn (Brandis).

The whole question may be solved by a chance remark from a traveller witnessing similar festive decoration at another feast in that conservative region.

J.—ON BĀBUR'S EXCAVATED CHAMBER AT QANDAHĀR (f. 208_b_).

Since making my note (f. 208_b_) on the wording of the passage in which Bābur mentions excavation done by him at Qandahār, I have learned that he must be speaking of the vaulted chamber containing the celebrated inscriptions about which much has been written.[2792]

The primary inscription, the one commemorating Bābur's final possession of Qandahār, gives the chamber the character of a Temple of Victory and speaks of it as _Rawāq-i-jahān namāī_, World-shewing-portal,[2793] doubtless because of its conspicuous position and its extensive view, probably also in allusion to its declaration of victory. Mīr Ma`ṣūm writes of it as a Pesh-ṯāq, frontal arch, which, coupled with Mohan Lall's word arch (_ṯāq_) suggests that the chamber was entered through an arch pierced in a parallelogram smoothed on the rock and having resemblance to the _pesh-tāq_ of buildings, a suggestion seeming the more probable that some inscriptions are on the "wings" of the arch. But by neither of the above-mentioned names do Mohan Lall and later travellers call the chamber or write of the place; all describe it by its approach of forty steps, Chihil-zīna.[3]

The excavation has been chipped out of the white-veined limestone of the bare ridge on and below which stood Old Qandahār.[2794] It does not appear from the descriptions to have been on the summit of the ridge; Bellew says that the forty steps start half-way up the height. I have found no estimate of the height of the ridge, or statement that the steps end at the chamber. The ridge however seems to have been of noticeably dominating height. It rises steeply to the north and there ends in the naze of which Bābur writes. The foot of the steps is guarded by two towers. Mohan Lall, unaccustomed to mountains, found their ascent steep and dizzy. The excavated chamber of the inscriptions, which Bellew describes as "bow-shaped and dome-roofed", he estimated as 12 feet at the highest point, 12 feet deep and 8 feet wide. Two sculptured beasts guard the entrance; Bellew calls them leopards but tigers would better symbolize the watch and ward of the Tiger Bābur. In truth the whole work, weary steps of approach, tiger guardians, commemorative chamber, laboriously incised words, are admirably symbolic of his long-sustained resolve and action, taken always with Hindūstān as the goal.

There are several inscriptions of varying date, within and without the chamber. Mohan Lall saw and copied them; Darmesteter worked on a copy; the two English observers Lumsden and Bellew made no attempt at correct interpretation. In the versions all give there are inaccuracies, arising from obvious causes, especially from want of historical _data_. The last word has not been said; revision awaits photography and the leisured expert. A part of the needed revision has been done by Beames, who deals with the geography of what Mīr Ma`ṣūm himself added under Akbar after he had gone as Governor to Qandahār in 1007 AH. (1598 AD.). This commemorates not Bābur's but Akbar's century of cities.

It is the primary inscription only which concerns this Appendix. This is one in relief in the dome of the chamber, recording in florid Persian that Abū'l-ghāzī Bābur took possession of Qandahār on Shawwāl 13th 928 AH. (Sep. 1st 1522 AD.), that in the same year he commanded the construction of this _Rawāq-i-jahān-namāī_, and that the work had been completed by his son Kāmrān at the time he made over charge of Qandahār to his brother `Askarī in 9 ... (mutilated). After this the gravure changes in character.

In the above, Bābur's title Abū'l-ghāzī fixes the date of the inscription as later than the battle of Kanwāha (f. 324_b_), because it was assumed in consequence of this victory over a Hindū, in March 1527 (Jumāda II 933 AH.).

The mutilated date 9 ... is given by Mohan Lall as 952 AH. but this does not suit several circumstances, _e.g._ it puts completion too far beyond the time mentioned as consumed by the work, nine years,—and it was not that at which Kāmrān made over charge to `Askarī, but followed the expulsion of both full-brothers from Qandahār by their half-brother Humāyūn.

The mutilated date 9 ... is given by Darmesteter as 933 AH. but this again does not fit the historical circumstance that Kāmrān was in Qandahār after that date and till 937 AH. This date (937 AH.) we suggest as fitting to replace the lost figures, (1) because in that year and after his father's death, Kāmrān gave the town to `Askarī and went himself to Hindūstān, and (2) because work begun in 928 AH. and recorded as occupying 70-80 men for nine years would be complete in 937 AH.[2795] The inscription would be one of the last items of the work.

The following matters are added here because indirectly connected with what has been said and because not readily accessible.

_a. Birth of Kāmrān._

Kāmrān's birth falling in a year of one of the _Bābur-nāma_ gaps, is nowhere mentioned. It can be closely inferred as 914 or 915 AH. from the circumstances that he was younger than Humāyūn born late in 913 AH., that it is not mentioned in the fragment of the annals of 914 AH., and that he was one of the children enumerated by Gul-badan as going with her father to Samarkand in 916 AH. (Probably the children did not start with their father in the depth of winter across the mountains.) Possibly the joyful name Kāmrān is linked to the happy issue of the Mughūl rebellion of 914 AH. Kāmrān would thus be about 18 when left in charge of Kābul and Qandahār by Bābur in 932 AH. before the start for the fifth expedition to Hindūstān.

A letter from Bābur to Kāmrān in Qandahār is with Kehr's Latin version of the _Bābur-nāma_, in Latin and entered on the lining of the cover. It is shewn by its main topic _viz._ the despatch of Ibrāhīm _Lūdī_'s son to Kāmrān's charge, to date somewhere close to Jan. 3rd 1527 (Rabī`u'l-awwal 29th 933 AH.) because on that day Bābur writes of the despatch (Ḥai. Codex f. 306_b_ foot).

Presumably the letter was with Kāmrān's own copy of the _Bābur-nāma_. That copy may have reached Humāyūn's hands (JRAS 1908 p. 828 _et seq._). The next known indication of the letter is given in St. Petersburg by Dr. Kehr. He will have seen it or a copy of it with the B.N. Codex he copied (one of unequaled correctness), and he, no doubt, copied it in its place on the fly-leaf or board of his own transcript, but if so, it has disappeared.

Fuller particulars of it and of other items accompanying it are given in JRAS 1908 p. 828 _et seq._

K.—AN AFGHĀN LEGEND.

My husband's article in the Asiatic Quarterly Review of April 1901 begins with an account of the two MSS. from which it is drawn, _viz._ I.O. 581 in Pushtū, I.O. 582 in Persian. Both are mainly occupied with an account of the Yūsuf-zāī. The second opens by telling of the power of the tribe in Afghānistān and of the kindness of Malik Shāh Sulaimān, one of their chiefs, to Aūlūgh Beg Mīrzā _Kābulī_, (Bābur's paternal uncle,) when he was young and in trouble, presumably as a boy ruler.

It relates that one day a wise man of the tribe, Shaikh `Us̤mān saw Sulaimān sitting with the young Mīrzā on his knee and warned him that the boy had the eyes of Yazīd and would destroy him and his family as Yazīd had destroyed that of the Prophet. Sulaimān paid him no attention and gave the Mīrzā his daughter in marriage. Subsequently the Mīrzā having invited the Yūsuf-zāī to Kābul, treacherously killed Sulaimān and 700 of his followers. They were killed at the place called Siyāh-sang near Kābul; it is still known, writes the chronicler in about 1770 AD. (1184 AH.), as the Grave of the Martyrs. Their tombs are revered and that of Shaikh `Us̤mān in particular.

Shāh Sulaimān was the eldest of the seven sons of Malik Tāju'd-dīn; the second was Sulṯān Shāh, the father of Malik Aḥmad. Before Sulaimān was killed he made three requests of Aūlūgh Beg; one of them was that his nephew Aḥmad's life might be spared. This was granted.

Aūlūgh Beg died (after ruling from 865 to 907 AH.), and Bābur defeated his son-in-law and successor M. Muqīm (_Arghūn_, 910 AH.). Meantime the Yūsuf-zāī had migrated to Pashāwar but later on took Sawād from Sl. Wais (Ḥai. Codex ff. 219, 220_b_, 221).

When Bābur came to rule in Kābul, he at first professed friendship for the Yūsuf-zāī but became prejudiced against them through their enemies the Dilazāk[2796] who gave force to their charges by a promised subsidy of 70,000 _shāhrukhī_. Bābur therefore determined, says the Yūsuf-zāī chronicler, to kill Malik[2797] Aḥmad and so wrote him a friendly invitation to Kābul. Aḥmad agreed to go, and set out with four brothers who were famous musicians. Meanwhile the Dilazāk had persuaded Bābur to put Aḥmad to death at once, for they said Aḥmad was so clever and eloquent that if allowed to speak, he would induce the Pādshāh to pardon him.

On Aḥmad's arrival in Kābul, he is said to have learned that Bābur's real object was his death. His companions wanted to tie their turbans together and let him down over the wall of the fort, but he rejected their proposal as too dangerous for him and them, and resolved to await his fate. He told his companions however, except one of the musicians, to go into hiding in the town.

Next morning there was a great assembly and Bābur sat on the daïs-throne. Aḥmad made his reverence on entering but Bābur's only acknowledgment was to make bow and arrow ready to shoot him. When Aḥmad saw that Bābur's intention was to shoot him down without allowing him to speak, he unbuttoned his jerkin and stood still before the Pādshāh. Bābur, astonished, relaxed the tension of his bow and asked Aḥmad what he meant. Aḥmad's only reply was to tell the Pādshāh not to question him but to do what he intended. Bābur again asked his meaning and again got the same reply.

Bābur put the same question a third time, adding that he could not dispose of the matter without knowing more. Then Aḥmad opened the mouth of praise, expatiated on Bābur's excellencies and said that in this great assemblage many of his subjects were looking on to see the shooting; that his jerkin being very thick, the arrow might not pierce it; the shot might fail and the spectators blame the Pādshāh for missing his mark; for these reasons he had thought it best to bare his breast. Bābur was so pleased by this reply that he resolved to pardon Aḥmad at once, and laid down his bow.

Said he to Aḥmad, "What sort of man is Buhlūl _Lūdī_?" "A giver of horses," said Aḥmad.

"And of what sort his son Sikandar?" "A giver of robes."

"And of what sort is Bābur?" "He," said Aḥmad, "is a giver of heads."

"Then," rejoined Bābur, "I give you yours."

The Pādshāh now became quite friendly with Aḥmad, came down from his throne, took him by the hand and led him into another room where they drank together. Three times did Bābur have his cup filled, and after drinking a portion, give the rest to Aḥmad. At length the wine mounted to Bābur's head; he grew merry and began to dance. Meantime Aḥmad's musician played and Aḥmad who knew Persian well, poured out an eloquent harangue. When Bābur had danced for some time, he held out his hands to Aḥmad for a reward (_bakhshīsh_), saying, "I am your performer." Three times did he open his hands, and thrice did Aḥmad, with a profound reverence, drop a gold coin into them. Bābur took the coins, each time placing his hand on his head. He then took off his robe and gave it to Aḥmad; Aḥmad took off his own coat, gave it to Adu the musician, and put on what the Pādshāh had given.

Aḥmad returned safe to his tribe. He declined a second invitation to Kābul, and sent in his stead his brother Shāh Manṣūr. Manṣūr received speedy dismissal as Bābur was displeased at Aḥmad's not coming. On his return to his tribe Manṣūr advised them to retire to the mountains and make a strong _sangur_. This they did; as foretold, Bābur came into their country with a large army. He devastated their lands but could make no impression on their fort. In order the better to judge of its character, he, as was his wont, disguised himself as a Qalandar, and went with friends one dark night to the Mahūra hill where the stronghold was, a day's journey from the Pādshāh's camp at Dīārūn.

It was the `Īd-i-qurbān and there was a great assembly and feasting at Shāh Manṣūr's house, at the back of the Mahūra-mountain, still known as Shāh Manṣūr's throne. Bābur went in his disguise to the back of the house and stood among the crowd in the courtyard. He asked servants as they went to and fro about Shāh Manṣūr's family and whether he had a daughter. They gave him straightforward answers.

At the time Musammat Bībī Mubāraka, Shāh Manṣur's daughter was sitting with other women in a tent. Her eye fell on the qalandars and she sent a servant to Bābur with some cooked meat folded between two loaves. Bābur asked who had sent it; the servant said it was Shāh Manṣūr's daughter Bībī Mubāraka. "Where is she?" "That is she, sitting in front of you in the tent." Bābur Pādshāh became entranced with her beauty and asked the woman-servant, what was her disposition and her age and whether she was betrothed. The servant replied by extolling her mistress, saying that her virtue equalled her beauty, that she was pious and brimful of rectitude and placidity; also that she was not betrothed. Bābur then left with his friends, and behind the house hid between two stones the food that had been sent to him.

He returned to camp in perplexity as to what to do; he saw he could not take the fort; he was ashamed to return to Kābul with nothing effected; moreover he was in the fetters of love. He therefore wrote in friendly fashion to Malik Aḥmad and asked for the daughter of Shāh Manṣūr, son of Shāh Sulaimān. Great objection was made and earlier misfortunes accruing to Yūsuf-zāī chiefs who had given daughters to Aūlūgh Beg and Sl. Wais (Khān Mīrzā?) were quoted. They even said they had no daughter to give. Bābur replied with a "beautiful" royal letter, told of his visit disguised to Shāh Manṣūr's house, of his seeing Bībī Mubāraka and as token of the truth of his story, asked them to search for the food he had hidden. They searched and found. Aḥmad and Manṣūr were still averse, but the tribesmen urged that as before they had always made sacrifice for the tribe so should they do now, for by giving the daughter in marriage, they would save the tribe from Bābur's anger. The Maliks then said that it should be done "for the good of the tribe".

When their consent was made known to Bābur, the drums of joy were beaten and preparations were made for the marriage; presents were sent to the bride, a sword of his also, and the two Maliks started out to escort her. They are said to have come from Thana by M`amūra (?), crossed the river at Chakdara, taken a narrow road between two hills and past Talāsh-village to the back of Tīrī (?) where the Pādshāh's escort met them. The Maliks returned, spent one night at Chakdara and next morning reached their homes at the Mahūra _sangur_.

Meanwhile Runa the nurse who had control of Malik Manṣūr's household, with two other nurses and many male and female servants, went on with Bībī Mubāraka to the royal camp. The bride was set down with all honour at a large tent in the middle of the camp.

That night and on the following day the wives of the officers came to visit her but she paid them no attention. So, they said to one another as they were returning to their tents, "Her beauty is beyond question, but she has shewn us no kindness, and has not spoken to us; we do not know what mystery there is about her."

Now Bībī Mubāraka had charged her servants to let her know when the Pādshāh was approaching in order that she might receive him according to Malik Aḥmad's instructions. They said to her, "That was the pomp just now of the Pādshāh's going to prayers at the general mosque." That same day after the Mid-day Prayer, the Pādshāh went towards her tent. Her servants informed her, she immediately left her divan and advancing, lighted up the carpet by her presence, and stood respectfully with folded hands. When the Pādshāh entered, she bowed herself before him. But her face remained entirely covered. At length the Pādshāh seated himself on the divan and said to her, "Come Afghāniya, be seated." Again she bowed before him, and stood as before. A second time he said, "Afghāniya, be seated." Again she prostrated herself before him and came a little nearer, but still stood. Then the Pādshāh pulled the veil from her face and beheld incomparable beauty. He was entranced, he said again, "O, Afghāniya, sit down." Then she bowed herself again, and said, "I have a petition to make. If an order be given, I will make it." The Pādshāh said kindly, "Speak." Whereupon she with both hands took up her dress and said, "Think that the whole Yūsuf-zāī tribe is enfolded in my skirt, and pardon their offences for my sake." Said the Pādshāh, "I forgive the Yūsuf-zāī all their offences in thy presence, and cast them all into thy skirt. Hereafter I shall have no ill-feeling to the Yūsuf-zāī." Again she bowed before him; the Pādshāh took her hand and led her to the divan.

When the Afternoon Prayer time came and the Pādshāh rose from the divan to go to prayers, Bībī Mubāraka jumped up and fetched him his shoes.[2798] He put them on and said very pleasantly, "I am extremely pleased with you and your tribe and I have pardoned them all for your sake." Then he said with a smile, "We know it was Malik Aḥmad taught you all these ways." He then went to prayers and the Bībī remained to say hers in the tent.

After some days the camp moved from Dīārūn and proceeded by Bajaur and Tankī to Kābul.[2799]...

Bībī Mubāraka, the Blessed Lady, is often mentioned by Gul-badan; she had no children; and lived an honoured life, as her chronicler says, until the beginning of Akbar's reign, when she died. Her brother Mīr Jamāl rose to honour under Bābur, Humāyūn and Akbar.

L.—ON MĀHĪM'S ADOPTION OF HIND-ĀL.

The passage quoted below about Māhīm's adoption of the unborn Hind-āl we have found so far only in Kehr's transcript of the _Bābur-nāma_ (_i.e._ the St. Petersburg Foreign Office Codex). Ilminsky reproduced it (Kāsān imprint p. 281) and de Courteille translated it (ii, 45), both with endeavour at emendation. It is interpolated in Kehr's MS. at the wrong place, thus indicating that it was once marginal or apart from the text.

I incline to suppose the whole a note made by Humāyūn, although part of it might be an explanation made by Bābur, at a later date, of an over-brief passage in his diary. Of such passages there are several instances. What is strongly against its being Bābur's where otherwise it might be his, is that Māhīm, as he always calls her simply, is there written of as Ḥaẓrat Wālida, Royal Mother and with the honorific plural. That plural Bābur uses for his own mother (dead 14 years before 925 AH.) and never for Māhīm. The note is as follows:—

"The explanation is this:—As up to that time those of one birth (_tūqqān_, womb) with him (Humāyūn), that is to say a son Bār-būl, who was younger than he but older than the rest, and three daughters, Mihr-jān and two others, died in childhood, he had a great wish for one of the same birth with him.[2800] I had said 'What it would have been if there had been one of the same birth with him!' (Humāyūn). Said the Royal Mother, 'If Dil-dār Āghācha bear a son, how is it if I take him and rear him?' 'It is very good' said I."

So far doubtfully _might_ be Bābur's but it may be Humāyūn's written as a note for Bābur. What follows appears to be by some-one who knew the details of Māhīm's household talk and was in Kābul when Dil-dār's child was taken from her.

"Seemingly women have the custom of taking omens in the following way:—When they have said, 'Is it to be a boy? is it to be a girl?' they write `Alī or Ḥasan on one of two pieces of paper and Fāṯima on the other, put each paper into a ball of clay and throw both into a bowl of water. Whichever opens first is taken as an omen; if the man's, they say a man-child will be born; if the woman's, a girl will be born. They took the omen; it came out a man."

"On this glad tidings we at once sent letters off.[2801] A few days later God's mercy bestowed a son. Three days before the news[2802] and three days after the birth, they[2803] took the child from its mother, (she) willy-nilly, brought it to our house[2804] and took it in their charge. When we sent the news of the birth, Bhīra was being taken. They named him Hind-āl for a good omen and benediction."[2805]

The whole may be Humāyūn's, and prompted by a wish to remove an obscurity his father had left and by sentiment stirred through reminiscence of a cherished childhood.

Whether Humāyūn wrote the whole or not, how is it that the passage appears only in the Russian group of Bāburiana?

An apparent answer to this lies in the following little mosaic of circumstances:—The St. Petersburg group of Bāburiana[2806] is linked to Kāmrān's own copy of the _Bābur-nāma_ by having with it a letter of Bābur to Kāmrān and also what _may be_ a note indicating its passage into Humāyūn's hands (JRAS 1908 p. 830). If it did so pass, a note by Humāyūn may have become associated with it, in one of several obvious ways. This would be at a date earlier than that of the Elphinstone MS. and would explain why it is found in Russia and not in Indian MSS.[2807]

[APPENDICES TO THE HINDŪSTĀN SECTION.]

M.—ON THE TERM _BAḤRĪ QŪT̤ĀS_.

That the term _baḥrī qūṯās_ is interpreted by Meninski, Erskine, and de Courteille in senses so widely differing as _equus maritimus_, mountain-cow, and _bœuf vert de mer_ is due, no doubt, to their writing when the _qūṯās_, the yāk, was less well known than it now is.

The word _qūṯās_ represents both the yāk itself and its neck-tassel and tail. Hence Meninski explains it by _nodus fimbriatus ex cauda seu crinibus equi maritimi_. His "sea-horse" appears to render _baḥrī qūṯās_, and is explicable by the circumstance that the same purposes are served by horse-tails and by yāk-tails and tassels, namely, with both, standards are fashioned, horse-equipage is ornamented or perhaps furnished with fly-flappers, and the ordinary hand-fly-flappers are made, _i.e._ the _chowries_ of Anglo-India.

Erskine's "mountain-cow" (_Memoirs_ p. 317) may well be due to his _munshī's_ giving the yāk an alternative name, _viz._ _Kosh-gau_ (Vigne) or _Khāsh-gau_ (Ney Elias), which appears to mean mountain-cow (cattle, oxen).[2808]

De Courteille's _Dictionary_ p. 422, explains _qūtās_ (_qūṯās_) as _bœuf marin_ (_baḥrī qūṯās_) and his _Mémoires_ ii, 191, renders Bābur's _baḥrī qūṯās_ by _bœuf vert de mer_ (f. 276, p. 490 and n. 8).

The term _baḥrī qūṯās_ could be interpreted with more confidence if one knew where the seemingly Arabic-Turkī compound originated.[2809] Bābur uses it in Hindūstān where the neck-tassel and the tail of the domestic yāk are articles of commerce, and where, as also probably in Kābul, he will have known of the same class of yāk as a saddle-animal and as a beast of burden into Kashmīr and other border-lands of sufficient altitude to allow its survival. A part of its wide Central Asian habitat abutting on Kashmīr is Little Tibet, through which flows the upper Indus and in which tame yāk are largely bred, Skardo being a place specially mentioned by travellers as having them plentifully. This suggests that the term _baḥrī qūṯās_ is due to the great river (_baḥr_) and that those of which Bābur wrote in Hindūstān were from Little Tibet and its great river. But _baḥrī_ may apply to another region where also the domestic yāk abounds, that of the great lakes, inland seas such as Pangong, whence the yāk comes and goes between _e.g._ Yārkand and the Hindūstān border.

The second suggestion, _viz._ that "_baḥrī qūṯās_" refers to the habitat of the domestic yāk in lake and marsh lands of high altitude (the wild yāk also but, as Tibetan, it is less likely to be concerned here) has support in Dozy's account of the _baḥrī_ falcon, a bird mentioned also by Abū'l-faẓl amongst sporting birds (_Āyīn-i-akbarī_, Blochmann's trs. p. 295):—"_Baḥrī, espèce de faucon le meilleur pour les oiseaux de marais. Ce renseignment explique peut-être l'origine du mot. Marguerite en donne la même etymologie que Tashmend et le Père Guagix. Selon lui ce faucon aurait été appelé ainsi parce qu'il vient de l'autre côté de la mer, mais peut-être dériva-t-il de baḥrī dans le sens de marais, flaque, étang._"

Dr. E. Denison Ross' _Polyglot List of Birds_ (_Memoirs of the Asiatic Society of Bengal_ ii, 289) gives to the _Qarā Qīrghāwal_ (Black pheasant) the synonym "Sea-pheasant", this being the literal translation of its Chinese name, and quotes from the Manchū-Chinese "Mirror" the remark that this is a black pheasant but called "sea-pheasant" to distinguish it from other black ones.

It may be observed that Bābur writes of the yāk once only and then of the _baḥrī qūṯās_ so that there is no warrant from him for taking the term to apply to the wild yāk. His cousin and contemporary Ḥaidar Mīrzā, however, mentions the wild yāk twice and simply as the wild _qūṯās_.

The following are random gleanings about "_baḥrī_" and the yāk:—

(1) An instance of the use of the Persian equivalent _daryā'ī_ of _baḥrī_, sea-borne or over-sea, is found in the _Akbar-nāma_ (Bib. Ind. ed. ii, 216) where the African elephant is described as _fīl-i-daryā'ī_.

(2) In Egypt the word _baḥrī_ has acquired the sense of northern, presumably referring to what lies or is borne across its northern sea, the Mediterranean.

(3) Vigne (_Travels in Kashmīr_ ii, 277-8) warns against confounding the _qūch-qār_ _i.e._ the gigantic _moufflon_, Pallas' _Ovis ammon_, with the _Kosh-gau_, the cow of the Kaucasus, _i.e._ the yāk. He says, "Kaucasus (_hodie_ Hindū-kush) was originally from Kosh, and Kosh is applied occasionally as a prefix, _e.g._ _Kosh-gau_, the yāk or ox of the mountain or Kaucasus." He wrote from Skardo in Little Tibet and on the upper Indus. He gives the name of the female yāk as _yāk-mo_ and of the half-breeds with common cows as _bzch_, which class he says is common and of "all colours".

(4) Mr. Ney Elias' notes (_Tārīkh-i-rashīdī_ trs. pp. 302 and 466) on the _qūṯās_ are of great interest. He gives the following synonymous names for the wild yāk, _Bos Poëphagus_, _Khāsh-gau_, the Tibetan yāk or Dong.

(5) Hume and Henderson (_Lāhor to Yārkand_ p. 59) write of the numerous black yāk-hair tents seen round the Pangong Lake, of fine saddle yāks, and of the tame ones as being some white or brown but mostly black.

(6) Olufsen's _Through the Unknown Pamirs_ (p. 118) speaks of the large numbers of _Bos grunniens_ (yāk) domesticated by the Kirghiz in the Pamirs.

(7) Cf. Gazetteer of India _s.n._ yāk.

(8) Shaikh Zain applies the word _baḥrī_ to the porpoise, when paraphrasing the _Bābur-nāma_ f. 281_b_.

N.—NOTES ON A FEW BIRDS.

In attempting to identify some of the birds of Bābur's lists difficulty arises from the variety of names provided by the different tongues of the region concerned, and also in some cases by the application of one name to differing birds. The following random gleanings enlarge and, in part, revise some earlier notes and translations of Mr. Erskine's and my own. They are offered as material for the use of those better acquainted with bird-lore and with Himālayan dialects.

_a._ _Concerning the lūkha_, _lūja_, _lūcha_, _kūja_ (f.135 and f.278_b_).

The nearest word I have found to _lūkha_ and its similars is _likkh_, a florican (Jerdon, ii, 615), but the florican has not the chameleon colours of the _lūkha_ (var.). As Bābur when writing in Hindūstān, uses such "book-words" as Ar. _baḥrī_ (_qūṯās_) and Ar. _bū-qalamūn_ (chameleon), it would not be strange if his name for the "_lūkha_" bird represented Ar. _awja_, very beautiful, or connected with Ar. _loḥ_, shining splendour.

The form _kūja_ is found in Ilminsky's imprint p.361 (_Mémoires_ ii, 198, _koudjeh_).

What is confusing to translators is that (as it now seems to me) Bābur appears to use the name _kabg-i-darī_ in both passages (f.135 and f.278_b_) to represent two birds; (1) he compares the _lūkha_ as to size with the _kabg-i-darī_ of the Kābul region, and (2) for size and colour with that of Hindūstān. But the bird, of the Western Himālayas known by the name _kabg-i-darī_ is the Himālayan snow-cock, _Tetraogallus himālayensis_, Turkī, _aūlār_ and in the Kābul region, _chīūrtika_ (f.249, Jerdon, ii, 549-50); while the _kabg-i-darī_ (syn. _chikor_) of Hindūstān, whether of hill or plain, is one or more of much smaller birds.

The snow-cock being 28 inches in length, the _lūkha_ bird must be of this size. Such birds as to size and plumage of changing colour are the _Lophophori_ and _Trapagons_, varieties of which are found in places suiting Bābur's account of the _lūkha_.

It may be noted that the Himālayan snow-cock is still called _kabg-i-darī_ in Afghānistān (Jerdon, ii, 550) and in Kashmīr (Vigne's _Travels in Kashmīr_ ii, 18). As its range is up to 18,000 feet, its Persian name describes it correctly whether read as "of the mountains" (_dari_), or as "royal" (_darī_) through its splendour.

I add here the following notes of Mr. Erskine's, which I have not quoted already where they occur (cf. f. 135 and f. 278_b_):—

On f. 135, "_lokheh_" is said to mean _hill-chikor_.

On f. 278_b_, to "_lūjeh_", "The Persian has _lūkheh_."

" to "_kepki durrī_", "The _kepkī deri_, or _durri_ is much larger than the common _kepk_ of Persia and is peculiar to Khorāsān. It is said to be a beautiful bird. The common _kepk_ of Persia and Khorāsān is the _hill-chikor_ of India."

" to "higher up", "The _lujeh_ may be the _chikor_ of the plains which Hunter calls bartavelle or Greek partridge."

The following corrections are needed about my own notes:—(1) on f. 135 (p. 213) n. 7 is wrongly referred; it belongs to the first word, _viz._ _kabg-i-darī_, of p. 214; (2) on f. 279 (p. 496) n. 2 should refer to the second _kabg-i-darī_.

_b. Birds called mūnāl (var. monāl and moonaul)._

Yule writing in _Hobson Jobson_ (p. 580) of the "_moonaul_" which he identifies as _Lophophorus Impeyanus_, queries whether, on grounds he gives, the word _moonaul_ is connected etymologically with Sanscrit _muni_, an "eremite". In continuation of his topic, I give here the names of other birds called _mūnāl_, which I have noticed in various ornithological works while turning their pages for other information.

Besides _L. Impeyanus_ and _Trapagon Ceriornis satyra_ which Yule mentions as called "_moonaul_", there are _L. refulgens_, _mūnāl_ and _Ghūr_ (mountain)-_mūnāl_; _Trapagon Ceriornis satyra_, called _mūnāl_ in Nipāl; _T. C. melanocephalus_, called _sing_ (horned)-_mūnāl_ in the N.W. Himālayas; _T. himālayensis_, the _jer_- or _cher-mūnāl_ of the same region, known also as _chikor_; and _Lerwa nevicola_, the snow-partridge known in Garhwal as _Quoir_- or _Qūr-mūnāl_. Do all these birds behave in such a way as to suggest that _mūnāl_ may imply the individual isolation related by Jerdon of _L. Impeyanus_, "In the autumnal and winter months numbers are generally collected in the same quarter of the forest, though often so widely scattered that each bird appears to be alone?" My own search amongst vocabularies of hill-dialects for the meaning of the word has been unsuccessful, spite of the long range _mūnāls_ in the Himālayas.

_c. Concerning the word chīūrtika, chourtka._

Jerdon's entry (ii, 549, 554) of the name _chourtka_ as a synonym of _Tetraogallus himālayensis_ enables me to fill a gap I have left on f. 249 (p. 491 and n. 6),[2810] with the name Himālayan snow-cock, and to allow Bābur's statement to be that he, in January 1520 AD. when coming down from the _Bād-i-pīch_ pass, saw many snow-cocks. The _Memoirs_ (p.282) has "_chikors_", which in India is a synonym for _kabg-i-darī_; the _Mémoires_ (ii, 122) has _sauterelles_, but this meaning of _chīūrtika_ does not suit wintry January. That month would suit for the descent from higher altitudes of snow-cocks. Griffith, a botanist who travelled in Afghānistān _cir._ 1838 AD., saw myriads of _cicadæ_ between Qilat-i-ghilzai and Ghazni, but the month was July.

_d._ _On the qūṯān_ (f. 142, p. 224; _Memoirs_, p. 153; _Mémoires_ ii, 313).

Mr. Erskine for _qūṯān_ enters _khawāṣil_ [gold-finch] which he will have seen interlined in the Elphinstone Codex (f. 109_b_) in explanation of _qūṯān_.

Shaikh Effendi (Kunos' ed., p. 139) explains _qūṯān_ to be the gold-finch, _Steiglitz_.

Ilminsky's _qūtān_ (p. 175) is translated by M. de Courteille as _pélicane_ and certainly some copies of the 2nd Persian translation [Muḥ. _Shīrāzi's_ p. 90] have _ḥawāṣil_, pelican.

The pelican would class better than the small finch with the

herons and egrets of Bābur's trio; it also would appear a more likely bird to be caught "with the cord".

That Bābur's _qūṯān_ (_ḥawāṣil_) migrated in great numbers is however against supposing it to be _Pelicanus onocrotatus_ which is seen in India during the winter, because it appears there in moderate numbers only, and Blanford with other ornithologists states that no western pelican migrates largely into India.

Perhaps the _qūṯān_ was Linnæus' _Pelicanus carbo_ of which one synonym is _Carbo comoranus_, the cormorant, a bird seen in India in large numbers of both the large and small varieties. As cormorants are not known to breed in that country, they will have migrated in the masses Bābur mentions.

A translation matter falls to mention here:—After saying that the _aūqār_ (grey heron), _qarqara_ (egret), and _qūtān_ (cormorant) are taken with the cord, Bābur says that this method of bird-catching is unique (_bū nūḥ qūsh tūtmāq ghair muqarrar dūr_) and describes it. The Persian text omits to translate the _tūtmāq_ (by _P. giriftan_); hence Erskine (_Mems._ p. 153) writes, "The last mentioned fowl" (_i.e._ the _qūṯān_) "is rare," notwithstanding Bābur's statement that all three of the birds he names are caught in masses. De Courteille (p. 313) writes, as though only of the _qūtān_, "_ces derniers toutefois ne se prennent qu'accidentelment_," perhaps led to do so by knowledge of the circumstance that _Pelicanus onocrotatus_ is rare in India.

O.—NOTES BY HUMĀYŪN ON SOME HINDŪSTĀN FRUITS.

The following notes, which may be accepted as made by Humāyūn and in the margin of the archetype of the Elphinstone Codex, are composed in Turkī which differs in diction from his father's but is far closer to that classic model than is that of the producer [Jahāngīr?] of the "Fragments" (Index _s.n._). Various circumstances make the notes difficult to decipher _verbatim_ and, unfortunately, when writing in Jan. 1917, I am unable to collate with its original in the Advocates Library, the copy I made of them in 1910.

_a._ _On the kadhil_, _jack-fruit_, _Artocarpus integrifolia_ (f. 283_b_, p. 506; Elphinstone MS. f. 235_b_).[2811]

The contents of the note are that the strange-looking pumpkin (_qar`_, which is also Ibn Batuta's word for the fruit), yields excellent white juice, that the best fruit grows from the roots of the tree,[2812] that many such grow in Bengal, and that in Bengal and Dihli there grows a _kadhil_-tree covered with hairs (_Artocarpus hirsuta_?).

_b._ _On the amrit-phal_, _mandarin-orange_, _Citrus aurantium_ (f. 287, p. 512; Elphinstone Codex, f. 238_b_, l. 12).

The interest of this note lies in its reference to Bābur.

A Persian version of it is entered, without indication of what it is or of who was its translator, in one of the volumes of Mr. Erskine's manuscript remains, now in the British Museum (Add. 26,605, p. 88). Presumably it was made by his Turkish _munshi_ for his note in the Memoirs (p. 329).

Various difficulties oppose the translation of the Turkī note; it is written into the text of the Elphinstone Codex in two instalments, neither of them in place, the first being interpolated in the account of the _amil-bīd_ fruit, the second in that of the _jāsūn_ flower; and there are verbal difficulties also. The Persian translation is not literal and in some particulars Mr. Erskine's rendering of this differs from what the Turkī appears to state.

The note is, tentatively, as follows:[2813]—"His honoured Majesty Firdaus-makān[2814]—may God make his proof clear!—did not favour the _amrit-phal_;[2815] as he considered it insipid,[2816] he likened it to the mild-flavoured[2817] orange and did not make choice of it. So much was the mild-flavoured orange despised that if any person had disgusted (him) by insipid flattery(?) he used to say, 'He is like orange-juice.'"[2818]

"The _amrit-phal_ is one of the very good fruits. Though its juice is not relishing (? _chūchūq_), it is extremely pleasant-drinking. Later on, in my own time, its real merit became known. Its tartness may be that of the orange (_nāranj_)and _lemu_."[2819]

The above passage is followed, in the text of the Elphinstone Codex, by Bābur's account of the _jāsūn_ flower, and into this a further instalment of Humāyūn's notes is interpolated, having opposite its first line the marginal remark, "This extra note, seemingly made by Humāyūn Pādshāh, the scribe has mistakenly written into the text." Whether its first sentence refer to the _amrit-phal_ or to the _amil-bīd_ must be left for decision to those well acquainted with the orange-tribe. It is obscure in my copy and abbreviated in its Persian translation; summarized it may state that when the fruit is unripe, its acidity is harmful to the digestion, but that it is very good when ripe.—The note then continues as below:—

_c. The kāmila, H. kauṅlā, the orange._[2820]

"There are in Bengal two other fruits of the acid kind. Though the _amrit-phal_ be not agreeable, they have resemblance to it (?)."

"One is the _kāmila_ which may be as large as an orange (_nāranj_); some took it to be a large _nārangī_ (orange) but it is much pleasanter eating than the _nārangī_ and is understood not to have the skin of that (fruit)."

_d. The samṯara._[2821]

"The other is the _samṯara_ which is larger than the orange (_nāranj_) but is not tart; unlike the _amrit-phal_ it is not of poor flavour (_kam maza_) or little relish (_chūchūk_). In short a better fruit is not seen. It is good to see, good to eat, good to digest. One does not forget it. If it be there, no other fruit is chosen. Its peel may be taken off by the hand. However much of the fruit be eaten, the heart craves for it again. Its juice does not soil the hand at all. Its skin separates easily from its flesh. It may be taken during and after food. In Bengal the _samṯara_ is rare (_ghārib_) (or excellent, _`asīz_). It is understood to grow in one village Sanārgām (Sonargaon) and even therein a special quarter. There seems to be no fruit so entirely good as the _samṯara_ amongst fruits of its class or, rather, amongst fruits of all kinds."

_Corrigendum_:—In my note on the _turunj bajāurī_ (p. 511, n. 3) for _bijaurā_ read _bījaurā_; and on p. 510, l. 2, for _palm_ read _fingers_.

_Addendum_:—p. 510, l. 5. After _yūsūnlūk_ add:—"The natives of Hindūstān when not wearing their ear-rings, put into the large ear-ring holes, slips of the palm-leaf bought in the bāzārs, ready for the purpose. The trunk of this tree is handsomer and more stately than that of the date."

P.—REMARKS ON BĀBUR'S REVENUE LIST (fol. 292).

_a. Concerning the date of the List._

The Revenue List is the last item of Bābur's account of Hindūstān and, with that account, is found _s.a._ 932 AH., manifestly too early, (1) because it includes districts and their revenues which did not come under Bābur's authority until subdued in his Eastern campaigns of 934 and 935 AH., (2) because Bābur's statement is that the "countries" of the List "are _now_ in my possession" (_in loco_ p. 520).

The List appears to be one of revenues realized in 936 or 937 AH. and not one of assessment or estimated revenue, (1) because Bābur's wording states as a fact that the revenue was 52 _krūrs_; (2) because the Persian heading of the (Persian) List is translatable as "Revenue (_jama`_)[2822] of Hindūstān from what has so far come under the victorious standards".

_b. The entry of the List into European Literature._

Readers of the L. and E. _Memoirs of Bābur_ are aware that it does not contain the Revenue List (p. 334). The omission is due to the absence of the List from the Elphinstone Codex and from the `Abdu'r-raḥīm Persian translation. Since the _Memoirs of Bābur_ was published in 1826 AD., the List has come from the _Bābur-nāma_ into European literature by three channels.

Of the three the one used earliest is Shaikh Zain's _T̤abaqāt-i-bāburī_ which is a Persian paraphrase of part of Bābur's Hindūstān section. This work provided Mr. Erskine with what he placed in his _History of India_ (London 1854, i, 540, Appendix D), but his manuscript, now B.M. Add. 26,202, is not the best copy of Shaikh Zain's book, being of far less importance than B.M. Or. 1999, [as to which more will be said.][2823]

The second channel is Dr. Ilminsky's imprint of the Turkī text (Kāsān 1857, p. 379), which is translated by the _Mémoires de Bāber_ (Paris 1871, ii, 230).

The third channel is the Ḥaidarābād Codex, in the English translation of which [_in loco_] the List is on p. 521.

Shaikh Zain may have used Bābur's autograph manuscript for his paraphrase and with it the Revenue List. His own autograph manuscript was copied in 998 AH. (1589-90 AD.) by Khwānd-amīr's grandson `Abdu'l-lāh who may be the scribe "Mīr `Abdu'l-lāh" of the _Āyīn-i-akbarī_ (Blochmann's trs. p. 109). `Abdu'l-lāh's transcript (from which a portion is now absent,) after having been in Sir Henry Elliot's possession, has become B.M. Or. 1999. It is noticed briefly by Professor Dowson (_l.c._ iv, 288), but he cannot have observed that the "old, worm-eaten" little volume contains Bābur's Revenue List, since he does not refer to it.

_c. Agreement and variation in copies of the List._

The figures in the two copies (Or. 1999 and Add. 26,202) of the _T̤abaqāt-i-bāburī_ are in close agreement. They differ, however, from those in the Ḥaidarābād Codex, not only in a negligible unit and a ten of _tankas_ but in having 20,000 more _tankas_ from Oudh and Baraich and 30 _laks_ of _tankas_ more from Trans-sutlej.

The figures in the two copies of the _Bābur-nāma_, _viz._ the Ḥaidarābād Codex and the Kehr-Ilminsky imprint are not in agreement throughout, but are identical in opposition to the variants (20,000 _t._ and 30 _l._) mentioned above. As the two are independent, being collateral descendants of Bābur's original papers, the authority of the Ḥaidarābād Codex in the matter of the List is still further enhanced.

_d. Varia._

(1) The place-names of the List are all traceable, whatever their varied forms. About the entry L:knū [or L:knūr] and B:ks:r [or M:ks:r] a difficulty has been created by its variation in manuscripts, not only in the List but where the first name occurs _s.a._ 934 and 935 AH. In the Ḥaidarābād List and in that of Or. 1999 L:knūr is clearly written and may represent (approximately) modern Shahābād in Rāmpūr. Erskine and de Courteille, however, have taken it to be Lakhnau in Oudh. [The distinction of Lakhnaur from Lakhnau in the historical narrative is discussed in Appendix T.]

(2) It may be noted, as of interest, that the name Sarwār is an abbreviation of Sarjūpār which means "other side of Sarjū" (Sarū, Goghrā; E. and D.'s H. of I. i, 56, n.4).

(3) Rūp-narā[:i]n (Deo or Dev) is mentioned in Ajodhya Prasad's short history of Tirhut and Darbhanga, the _Gulzār-i-Bihār_ (Calcutta 1869, Cap. v, 88) as the 9th of the Brahman rulers of Tirhut and as having reigned for 25 years, from 917 to 942 _Faslī_(?). If the years were Ḥijrī, 917-42 AH. would be 1511-1535.[2824]

(4) Concerning the _tanka_ the following modern description is quoted from Mr. R. Shaw's _High Tartary_ (London 1871, p. 464) "The _tanga_" (or _tanka_) "is a nominal coin, being composed of 25 little copper cash, with holes pierced in them and called _dahcheen_. These are strung together and the quantity of them required to make up the value of one of these silver ingots" ("_kooroos_ or _yamboo_, value nearly _£_17") "weighs a considerable amount. I once sent to get change for a _kooroos_, and my servants were obliged to charter a donkey to bring it home."

(5) The following interesting feature of Shaikh Zain's _T̤abaqāt-i-bāburī_ has been mentioned to me by my husband:—Its author occasionally reproduces Bābur's Turkī words instead of paraphrasing them in Persian, and does this for the noticeable passage in which Bābur records his dissatisfied view of Hindūstān (f. 290_b_, _in loco_ p. 518), prefacing his quotation with the remark that it is best and will be nearest to accuracy not to attempt translation but to reproduce the Pādshāh's own words. The main interest of the matter lies in the motive for reproducing the _ipsissima verba_. Was that motive deferential? Did the revelation of feeling and opinion made in the quoted passage clothe it with privacy so that Shaikh Zain reserved its perusal from the larger public of Hindūstān who might read Persian but not Turkī? Some such motive would explain the insertion untranslated of Bābur's letters to Humāyūn and to Khwāja Kalān which are left in Turkī by `Abdu'r-raḥīm Mīrzā.[2825]

Q.—CONCERNING THE "RĀMPŪR DĪWĀN".

Pending the wide research work necessary to interpret Bābur's Hindūstān poems which the Rāmpūr manuscript preserves, the following comments, some tentative and open to correction, may carry further in making the poems publicly known, what Dr. E. Denison Ross has effected by publishing his Facsimile of the manuscript.[2826] It is legitimate to associate comment on the poems with the _Bābur-nāma_ because many of them are in it with their context of narrative; most, if not all, connect with it; some without it, would be dull and vapid.

_a. An authorized English title._

The contents of the Rāmpūr MS. are precisely what Bābur describes sending to four persons some three weeks after the date attached to the manuscript,[2827] _viz._ "the Translation and whatnot of poems made on coming to Hindūstān";[2828] and a similar description may be meant in the curiously phrased first clause of the colophon, but without mention of the Translation (of the _Wālidiyyah-risāla_).[2829] Hence, if the poems, including the Translation, became known as the _Hindūstān Poems_ or _Poems made in Hindūstān_, such title would be justified by their author's words. Bābur does not call the Hindūstān poems a _dīwān_ even when, as in the above quotation, he speaks of them apart from his versified translation of the Tract. In what has come down to us of his autobiography, he applies the name _Dīwān_ to poems of his own once only, this in 925 AH. (f. 237_b_) when he records sending "my _dīwān_" to Pūlād Sl. _Aūzbeg_.

_b. The contents of the Rāmpūr MS._

There are three separate items of composition in the manuscript, marked as distinct from one another by having each its ornamented frontispiece, each its scribe's sign (_mīm_) of Finis, each its division from its neighbour by a space without entry. The first and second sections bear also the official sign [_ṣaḥ[h.]_] that the copy has been inspected and found correct.

(1) The first section consists of Bābur's metrical translation of Khwāja `Ubaidu'l-lāh _Aḥrārī's Parental Tract_ (_Wālidiyyah-risāla_), his prologue in which are his reasons for versifying the Tract and his epilogue which gives thanks for accomplishing the task. It ends with the date 935 (Ḥai. MS. f. 346). Below this are _mīm_ and _ṣaḥ[h.]_, the latter twice; they are in the scribe's handwriting, and thus make against supposing that Bābur wrote down this copy of the Tract or its archetype from which the official _ṣaḥ[h.]_ will have been copied. Moreover, spite of bearing two vouchers of being a correct copy, the Translation is emended, in a larger script which may be that of the writer of the marginal quatrain on the last page of the [Rāmpūr] MS. and there attested by Shāh-i-jahān as Bābur's autograph entry. His also may have been the now expunged writing on the half-page left empty of text at the end of the Tract. Expunged though it be, fragments of words are visible.[2830]

(2) The second section has in its frontispiece an inscription illegible (to me) in the Facsimile. It opens with a _masnawī_ of 41 couplets which is followed by a _ghazel_ and numerous poems in several measures, down to a triad of rhymed couplets (_matla`_?), the whole answering to descriptions of a _Dīwān_ without formal arrangement. After the last couplet are _mīm_ and _ṣaḥ[h.]_ in the scribe's hand-writing, and a blank quarter-page. Mistakes in this section have been left uncorrected, which supports the view that its _ṣaḥ[h.]_ avouches the accuracy of its archetype and not its own.[2831]

(3) The third section shows no inscription on its frontispiece. It opens with the _masnawī_ of eight couplets, found also in the _Bābur-nāma_ (f. 312), one of earlier date than many of the poems in the second section. It is followed by three _rubā`ī_ which complete the collection of poems made in Hindūstān. A prose passage comes next, describing the composition and transposition-in-metre of a couplet of 16 feet, with examples in three measures, the last of which ends in l. 4 of the photograph.—While fixing the date of this metrical game, Bābur incidentally allows that of his _Treatise on Prosody_ to be inferred from the following allusive words:—"When going to Saṃbhal (f. 330_b_) in the year (933 AH.) after the conquest of Hindūstān (932 AH.), two years after writing the _`Arūẓ_, I composed a couplet of 16 feet."—From this the date of the Treatise is seen to be 931 AH., some two years later than that of the _Mubīn_. The above metrical exercise was done about the same time as another concerning which a Treatise was written, viz. that mentioned on f. 330_b_, when a couplet was transposed into 504 measures (Section _f_, p. lxv).—The Facsimile, it will be noticed, shows something unusual in the last line of the prose passage on Plate XVIII B, where the scattering of the words suggests that the scribe was trying to copy page _per_ page.

The colophon (which begins on l. 5 of the photograph) is curiously worded, as though the frequent fate of last pages had befallen its archetype, that of being mutilated and difficult for a scribe to make good; it suggests too that the archetype was verse.[2832] Its first clause, even if read as _Hind-stān jānibī `azīmat qīlghānī_ (i.e. not _qīlghālī_, as it can be read), has an indirectness unlike Bābur's corresponding "after coming to Hindūstān" (f. 357_b_), and is not definite; (2) _bū aīrdī_ (these were) is not the complement suiting _aūl dūrūr_ (those are); (3) Bābur does not use the form _dūrūr_ in prose; (4) the undue space after _dūrūr_ suggests connection with verse; (5) there is no final verb such as prose needs. The meaning, however, may be as follows:—The poems made after resolving on (the)

Hindūstān parts (_jānibī_?) were these I have written down (_taḥrīr qīldīm_), and past events are those I have narrated (_taqrīr_) in the way that (_nī-chūk kīm_) (has been) written in these folios (_aūrāq_) and recorded in those sections (_ajzā'_).—From this it would appear that sections of the _Bābur-nāma_ (f. 376_b_, p. 678) accompanied the Hindūstān poems to the recipient of the message conveyed by the colophon.

Close under the colophon stands _Ḥarara-hu Bābur_ and the date Monday, Rabī` II. 15th 935 (Monday, December 27th 1528 AD.), the whole presumably brought over from the archetype. To the question whether a signature in the above form would be copied by a scribe, the Elphinstone Codex gives an affirmative answer by providing several examples of notes, made by Humāyūn in its archetype, so-signed and brought over either into its margin or interpolated in its text. Some others of Humāyūn's notes are not so-signed, the scribe merely saying they are Humāyūn Pādshāh's.—It makes against taking the above entry of Bābur's name to be an autograph signature, (1) that it is enclosed in an ornamented border, as indeed is the case wherever it occurs throughout the manuscript; (2) that it is followed by the scribe's _mīm_. [See end of following section.]

_c. The marginal entries shown in the photograph._

The marginal note written length-wise by the side of the text is signed by Shāh-i-jahān and attests that the _rubā`ī_ and the signature to which it makes reference are in Bābur's autograph hand-writing. His note translates as follows:—This quatrain and blessed name are in the actual hand-writing of that Majesty (_ān ḥaẓrat_) _Firdaus-makānī_ Bābur Pādshāh _Ghāzī_—May God make his proof clear!—Signed (_Ḥararā-hu_), Shāh-i-jahān son of Jahāngīr Pādshāh son of Akbar Pādshāh son of Humāyūn Pādshāh son of Bābur Pādshāh.[2833]

The second marginal entry is the curiously placed _rubā`ī_, which is now the only one on the page, and now has no signature attaching to it. It has the character of a personal message to the recipient of one of more books having identical contents. That these two entries are there while the text seems so clearly to be written by a scribe, is open to the explanation that when (as said about the colophon, p. lx) the rectangle of text was made good from a mutilated archetype, the original margin was placed round the _rifacimento_? This superposition would explain the entries and seal-like circles, discernible against a strong light, on the reverse of the margin only, through the _rifacimento_ page. The upper edge of the rectangle shows sign that the margin has been adjusted to it [so far as one can judge from a photograph]. Nothing on the face of the margin hints that the text itself is autograph; the words of the colophon, _taḥrīr qīldīm_ (_i.e._ I have written down) cannot hold good against the cumulative testimony that a scribe copied the whole manuscript.—The position of the last syllable [_nī_] of the _rubā`ī_ shows that the signature below the colophon was on the margin before the diagonal couplet of the _rubā`ī_ was written,—therefore when the margin was fitted, as it looks to have been fitted, to the _rifacimento_. If this be the order of the two entries [_i.e._ the small-hand signature and the diagonal couplet], Shāh-i-jahān's "blessed name" may represent the small-hand signature which certainly shows minute differences from the writing of the text of the MS. in the name Bābur (_q.v. passim_ in the Rāmpūr MS.).

_d. The Bāburī-khat̤t̤_ (_Bābūr's script_).

So early as 910 AH. the year of his conquest of Kābul, Bābur devised what was probably a variety of _nakhsh_, and called it the _Bāburī-khat̤t̤_ (f. 144_b_), a name used later by Ḥaidar Mīrzā, Niẕāmu'd-dīn Aḥmad and `Abdu'l-qādir _Badāyūnī_. He writes of it again (f. 179) _s.a._ 911 AH. when describing an interview had in 912 AH. with one of the Harāt Qāẓīs, at which the script was discussed, its specialities (_mufradāt_) exhibited to, and read by the Qāẓī who there and then wrote in it.[2834] In what remains to us of the _Bābur-nāma_ it is not mentioned again till 935 AH. (fol. 357_b_) but at some intermediate date Bābur made in it a copy of the Qorān which he sent to Makka.[2835] In 935 AH. (f. 357_b_) it is mentioned in significant association with the despatch to each of four persons of a copy of the Translation (of the _Wālidiyyah-risāla_) and the Hindūstān poems, the significance of the association being that the simultaneous despatch with these copies of specimens of the _Bāburī-khat̤t̤_ points to its use in the manuscripts, and at least in Hind-āl's case, to help given for reading novel forms in their text. The above are the only instances now found in the _Bābur-nāma_ of mention of the script.

The little we have met with—we have made no search—about the character of the script comes from the _Abūshqa_, _s.n._ _sīghnāq_, in the following entry:—

_Sīghnāq ber nū`ah khat̤t̤ der Chaghatāīda khat̤t̤ Bāburī u ghairī kibī ki Bābur Mīrzā ash`ār'nda kīlūr bait_

_Khūblār khat̤t̤ī naṣīb'ng būlmāsā Bābur nī tāng?_

_Bāburī khat̤t̤ī aīmās dūr khat̤t̤ sīghnāqī mū dūr?_[2836]

The old Osmanli-Turkish prose part of this appears to mean:—"_Sīghnāq_ is a sort of hand-writing, in Chaghatāī the _Bāburī-khat̤t̤_ and others resembling it, as appears in Bābur Mīrzā's poems. Couplet":—

Without knowing the context of the couplet I make no attempt to translate it because its words _khat̤t̤_ or _khaṭ_ and _sīghnāq_ lend themselves to the kind of pun (_īhām_) "which consists in the employment of a word or phrase having more than one appropriate meaning, whereby the reader is often left in doubt as to the real significance of the passage."[2837] The rest of the _rubā`ī_ may be given [together with the six other quotations of Bābur's verse now known only through the _Abūshqa_], in early _Taẕkirātu 'sh-shu`āra_ of date earlier than 967 AH.

The root of the word _sīghnāq_ will be _sīq_, pressed together, crowded, included, _etc._; taking with this notion of compression, the explanations _feine Schrift_ of Shaikh Effendi (Kunos) and Vambéry's _pétite écriture_, the Sīghnāqī and Bāburī Scripts are allowed to have been what that of the Rāmpūr MS. is, a small, compact, elegant hand-writing.—A town in the Caucasus named Sīghnākh, "_située à peu près à 800 mètres d'altitude, commença par être une forteresse et un lieu de refuge, car telle est la signification de son nom tartare_."[2838] _Sīghnāqī_ is given by de Courteille (Dict. p. 368) as meaning a place of refuge or shelter.

The _Bāburī-khat̤t̤_ will be only one of the several hands Bābur is reputed to have practised; its description matches it with other niceties he took pleasure in, fine distinctions of eye and ear in measure and music.

_e. Is the Rāmpūr MS. an example of the Bāburī-khat̤t̤?_

Though only those well-acquainted with Oriental manuscripts dating before 910 AH. (1504 AD.) can judge whether novelties appear in the script of the Rāmpūr MS. and this particularly in its head-lines, there are certain grounds for thinking that though the manuscript be not Bābur's autograph, it may be in his script and the work of a specially trained scribe.

I set these grounds down because although the signs of a scribe's work on the manuscript seem clear, it is "locally" held to be Bābur's autograph. Has a tradition of its being in the _Bāburī-khat̤t̤_ glided into its being in the _khat̤t̤-i-Bābur_? Several circumstances suggest that it may be written in the _Bāburī-khat̤t̤:_—(1) the script is specially associated with the four transcripts of the Hindūstān poems (f. 357_b_), for though many letters must have gone to his sons, some indeed are mentioned in the _Bābur-nāma_, it is only with the poems that specimens of it are recorded as sent; (2) another matter shows his personal interest in the arrangement of manuscripts, namely, that as he himself about a month after the four books had gone off, made a new ruler, particularly on account of the head-lines of the Translation, it may be inferred that he had made or had adopted the one he superseded, and that his plan of arranging the poems was the model for copyists; the Rāmpūr MS. bearing, in the Translation section, corrections which may be his own, bears also a date earlier than that at which the four gifts started; it has its headlines ill-arranged and has throughout 13 lines to the page; his new ruler had 11; (3) perhaps the words _taḥrīr qīldīm_ used in the colophon of the Rāmpūr MS. should be read with their full connotation of careful and elegant writing, or, put modestly, as saying, "I wrote down in my best manner," which for poems is likely to be in the _Bāburī-khat̤t̤_.[2839]

Perhaps an example of Bābur's script exists in the colophon, if not in the whole of the _Mubīn_ manuscript once owned by Berézine, by him used for his _Chréstomathie Turque_, and described by him as "unique". If this be the actual manuscript Bābur sent into Mā warā'u'n-nahr (presumably to Khwāja Aḥrārī's family), its colophon which is a personal message addressed to the recipients, is likely to be autograph.

_f. Metrical amusements._

(1) Of two instances of metrical amusements belonging to the end of 933 AH. and seeming to have been the distractions of illness, one is a simple transposition "in the fashion of the circles" (_dawā'ir_) into three measures (Rāmpūr MS. Facsimile, Plate XVIII and p. 22); the other is difficult because of the high number of 504 into which Bābur says (f. 330_b_) he cut up the following couplet:—

_Gūz u qāsh u soz u tīlīnī mū dī? Qad u khadd u saj u bīlīnī mū dī?_

All manuscripts agree in having 504, and Bābur wrote a tract (_risāla_) upon the transpositions.[2840] None of the modern treatises on Oriental Prosody allow a number so high to be practicable, but Maulānā Saifī of Bukhārā, of Bābur's own time (f. 180_b_) makes 504 seem even moderate, since after giving much detail about _rubā`ī_ measures, he observes, "Some say there are 10,000" (_Arūẓ-i-Saifī_, Ranking's trs. p. 122). Presumably similar possibilities were open for the couplet in question. It looks like one made for the game, asks two foolish questions and gives no reply, lends itself to poetic license, and, if permutation of words have part in such a game, allows much without change of sense. Was Bābur's cessation of effort at 504 capricious or enforced by the exhaustion of possible changes? Is the arithmetical statement 9 × 8 × 7 = 504 the formula of the practicable permutations?

(2) To improvise verse having a given rhyme and topic must have demanded quick wits and much practice. Bābur gives at least one example of it (f. 252_b_) but Jahāngīr gives a fuller and more interesting one, not only because a _rubā`ī_ of Bābur's was the model but from the circumstances of the game:[2841]—It was in 1024 AH. (1615 AD.) that a letter reached him from Māwarā'u'n-nahr written by Khwāja Hāshim _Naqsh-bandī_ [who by the story is shown to have been of Aḥrārī's line], and recounting the long devotion of his family to Jahāngīr's ancestors. He sent gifts and enclosed in his letter a copy of one of Bābur's quatrains which he said Ḥaẓrat Firdaus-makānī had written for Ḥaẓrat Khwājagī (Aḥrārī's eldest son; f. 36_b_, p. 62 n. 2). Jahāngīr quotes a final hemistich only, "_Khwājagīra mānda'īm, Khwājagīrā banda'īm_" and thereafter made an impromptu verse upon the one sent to him.

A curious thing is that the line he quotes is not part of the quatrain he answered, but belongs to another not appropriate for a message between _darwesh_ and _pādshāh_, though likely to have been sent by Bābur to Khwājagī. I will quote both because the matter will come up again for who works on the Hindūstān poems.[2842]

(1) The quatrain from the _Hindūstān Poems_ is:—

_Dar hawā'ī nafs gumrah `umr ẓāi` karda'īm_ [_kanda'īm_?]; _Pesh ahl-i-allāh az af`āl-i-khūd sharmanda'īm; Yak naẕr bā mukhlaṣān-i-khasta-dil farmā ki mā Khwājagīrā mānda'īm u Khwājagīrā banda'īm._

(2) That from the _Akbar-nāma_ is:—

_Darweshānrā agarcha nah as khweshānīm, Lek az dil u jān mu`taqid eshānīm; Dūr ast magū`ī shāhī az darweshī, Shāhīm walī banda-i-darweshānīm._

The greater suitability of the second is seen from Jahāngīr's answering impromptu for which by sense and rhyme it sets the model; the meaning, however, of the fourth line in each may be identical, namely, "I remain the ruler but am the servant of the _darwesh_." Jahāngīr's impromptu is as follows:—

_Āī ānki marā mihr-i-tū besh az besh ast, Az daulat yād-i-būdat āī darwesh ast; Chandānki'z muẕẖ dahāt dilam shād shavad Shadīm az ānki laṯif az ḥadd besh ast._

He then called on those who had a turn for verse to "speak one" _i.e._ to improvise on his own; it was done as follows:—

_Dārīm agarcha shaghal-i-shāhī dar pesh, Har laḥẕa kunīm yād-i-darweshān besh; Gar shād shavad'z mā dil-i-yak darwesh, Ānra shumarīm ḥaṣil-i-shāhī khwesh._

R.—CHANDĪRĪ AND GŪĀLĪĀR.

The courtesy of the Government of India enables me to reproduce from the _Archæological Survey Reports_ of 1871, Sir Alexander Cunningham's plans of Chandīrī and Gūālīār, which illustrate Bābur's narrative on f. 333, p. 592, and f. 340, p. 607.

S.—CONCERNING THE BĀBUR-NĀMA DATING OF 935 AH.

The dating of the diary of 935 AH. (f. 339 _et seq._) is several times in opposition to what may be distinguished as the "book-rule" that the 12 lunar months of the Ḥijra year alternate in length between 30 and 29 days (intercalary years excepted), and that Muḥarram starts the alternation with 30 days. An early book stating the rule is Gladwin's _Bengal Revenue Accounts_; a recent one, Ranking's ed. of Platts' _Persian Grammar_.

As to what day of the week was the initial day of some of the months in 935 AH. Bābur's days differ from Wüstenfeld's who gives the full list of twelve, and from Cunningham's single one of Muḥarram 1st.

It seems worth while to draw attention to the flexibility, within limits, of Bābur's dating, [not with the object of adversely criticizing a rigid and convenient rule for common use, but as supplementary to that rule from a somewhat special source], because he was careful and observant, his dating was contemporary, his record, as being _de die in diem_, provides a check of consecutive narrative on his dates, which, moreover, are all held together by the external fixtures of Feasts and by the marked recurrence of Fridays observed. Few such writings as the Bābur-nāma diaries appear to be available for showing variation within a year's limit.

In 935 AH. Bābur enters few full dates, _i.e._ days of the week and month. Often he gives only the day of the week, the safest, however, in a diary. He is precise in saying at what time of the night or the day an action was done; this is useful not only as helping to get over difficulties caused by minor losses of text, but in the more general matter of the transference of a Ḥijra night-and-day which begins after sunset, to its Julian equivalent, of a day-and-night which begins at 12 a.m. This sometimes difficult transference affords a probable explanation of a good number of the discrepant dates found in Oriental-Occidental books.

Two matters of difference between the Bābur-nāma dating and that of some European calendars are as follows:—

_a. Discrepancy as to the day of the week on which Muḥ 935_ AH. _began._

This discrepancy is not a trivial matter when a year's diary is concerned. The record of Muḥ. 1st and 2nd is missing from the _Bābur-nāma_; Friday the 3rd day of Muḥarram is the first day specified; the 1st was a Wednesday therefore. Erskine accepted this day; Cunningham and Wüstenfeld give Tuesday. On three grounds Wednesday seems right—at any rate at that period and place:—(1) The second Friday in Muḥarram was `Āshūr, the 10th (f. 240); (2) Wednesday is in serial order if reckoning be made from the last surviving date of 934 AH. with due allowance of an intercalary day to Ẕū'l-ḥijja (Gladwin), _i.e._ from Thursday Rajab 12th (April 2nd 1528 AD. f. 339, p. 602); (3) Wednesday is supported by the daily record of far into the year.

_b. Variation in the length of the months of 935_ AH.

There is singular variation between the _Bābur-nāma_ and Wüstenfeld's _Tables_, both as to the day of the week on which months began, and as to the length of some months. This variation is shown in the following table, where asterisks mark agreement as to the days of the week, and the capital letters, quoted from W.'s _Tables_, denote A, Sunday; B, Tuesday, _etc._ (the bracketed names being of my entry).

_Bābur-nāma._ _Wüstenfeld_ Days. Days. Muḥarram 29 Wednesday 30 C (Tuesday) Ṣafar 30 Thursday* 29 E (Thursday)* Rabī` I. 30 Saturday 30 F (Friday) " II. 29 Monday 29 A (Sunday) Jumadā I. 30 Tuesday 30 B (Monday) " II. 29 Thursday 29 D (Wednesday) Rajab 29 Friday 30 E (Thursday) Sha`bān 30 Saturday* 29 G (Saturday)* Ramẓān 29 Monday 30 A (Sunday) Shawwal 30 Tuesday* 29 C (Tuesday)* Ẕū'l-qa`da 29 Thursday 30 D (Wednesday) Ẕū'l-ḥijja 30 Friday* 29 T (Friday)*

The table shows that notwithstanding the discrepancy discussed in section _a_, of Bābur's making 935 AH. begin on a Wednesday, and Wüstenfeld on a Tuesday, the two authorities agree as to the initial week-day of four months out of twelve, _viz._ Ṣafar, Sha`bān, Shawwal and Ẕū'l-ḥijja.

Again:—In eight of the months the _Bābur-nāma_ reverses the "book-rule" of alternative Muḥarram 30 days, Ṣafar 29 days _et seq._ by giving Muḥarram 29, Ṣafar 30. (This is seen readily by following the initial days of the week.) Again:—these eight months are in pairs having respectively 29 and 30 days, and the year's total is 364.—Four months follow the fixed rule, _i.e._ as though the year had begun Muḥ. 30 days, Ṣafar 29 days—namely, the two months of Rabī` and the two of Jumāda.—Ramẓān to which under "book-rule" 30 days are due, had 29 days, because, as Bābur records, the Moon was seen on the 29th.—In the other three instances of the reversed 30 and 29, one thing is common, _viz._ Muḥarram, Rajab, Ẕū'l-qa`da (as also Ẕū'l-ḥijja) are "honoured" months.—It would be interesting if some expert in this Musalmān matter would give the reasons dictating the changes from rule noted above as occurring in 935 AH.

_c. Varia._

(1) On f. 367 Saturday is entered as the 1st day of Sha`bān and Wednesday as the 4th, but on f. 368_b_ stands Wednesday 5th, as suits the serial dating. If the mistake be not a mere slip, it may be due to confusion of hours, the ceremony chronicled being accomplished on the eve of the 5th, Anglicé, after sunset on the 4th.

(2) A fragment only survives of the record of Ẕū'l-ḥijja 935 AH. It contains a date, Thursday 7th, and mentions a Feast which will be that of the _`Īdu'l-kabīr_ on the 10th (Sunday). Working on from this to the first-mentioned day of 936 AH. _viz._ Tuesday, Muḥarram 3rd, the month (which is the second of a pair having 29 and 30 days) is seen to have 30 days and so to fit on to 936 AH. The series is Sunday 10th, 17th, 24th (Sat. 30th) Sunday 1st, Tuesday 3rd.

Two clerical errors of mine in dates connecting with this Appendix are corrected here:—(1) On p. 614 n. 5, for Oct. 2nd read Oct. 3rd; (2) on p. 619 penultimate line of the text, for Nov. 28th read Nov. 8th.

T.—ON L:KNŪ (LAKHNAU) AND L:KNŪR (LAKHNŪR, NOW SHĀHĀBĀD IN RĀMPŪR).

One or other of the above-mentioned names occurs eight times in the _Bābur-nāma_ (_s.a._ 932, 934, 935 AH.), some instances being shown by their context to represent Lakhnau in Oudh, others inferentially and by the verbal agreement of the Ḥaidarābād Codex and Kehr's Codex to stand for Lakhnūr (now Shāhābād in Rāmpūr). It is necessary to reconsider the identification of those not decided by their context, both because there is so much variation in the copies of the `Abdu'r-raḥīm Persian translation that they give no verbal help, and because Mr. Erskine and M. de Courteille are in agreement about them and took the whole eight to represent Lakhnau. This they did on different grounds, but in each case their agreement has behind it a defective textual basis.—Mr. Erskine, as is well known, translated the `Abdu'r-raḥīm Persian text without access to the original Turkī but, if he had had the Elphinstone Codex when translating, it would have given him no help because all the eight instances occur on folios not preserved by that codex. His only sources were not-first-rate Persian MSS. in which he found casual variation from terminal _nū_ to _nūr_, which latter form may have been read by him as _nūū_ (whence perhaps the old Anglo-Indian transliteration he uses, Luknow).[2843]—M. de Courteille's position is different; his uniform _Lakhnau_ obeyed the same uniformity in his source the Kāsān Imprint, and would appear to him the more assured for the concurrence of the _Memoirs_. His textual basis, however, for these words is Dr. Ilminsky's and not Kehr's. No doubt the uniform _Lakhnū_ of the Kāsān Imprint is the result of Dr. Ilminsky's uncertainty as to the accuracy of his single Turkī archetype [Kehr's MS.], and also of his acceptance of Mr. Erskine's uniform _Luknow_.[2844]—Since the Ḥaidarābād Codex became available and its collation with Kehr's Codex has been made, a better basis for distinguishing between the L:knū and L:knūr of the Persian MSS. has been obtained.[2845] The results of the collation are entered in the following table, together with what is found in the Kāsān Imprint and the _Memoirs_. [N.B. The two sets of bracketed instances refer each to one place; the asterisks show where Ilminsky varies from Kehr.]

_Ḥai. MS._ _Kehr's MS._ _Kāsān Imprint._ _Memoirs._ 1. {f. 278_b_ L:knūr L:knū L:knū, p. 361 Luknow. 2. {f. 338 L:knū " " p. 437 "

3. f. 292_b_ L:knūr L:knūr " p. 379* not entered.

4. f. 329 L:knūr L:knūr " p. 362* Luknow. 5. f. 334 L:knū L:knū " p. 432* "

6. {f. 376 L:knū L:knūr " p. 486* " 7. {f. 376_b_ L:knūr " " p. 487* " 8. {f. 377_b_ L:knū " " p. 488* "

The following notes give some grounds for accepting the names as the two Turkī codices agree in giving them:—

The first and second instances of the above table, those of the Ḥai. Codex f. 278_b_ and f. 338, are shown by their context to represent Lakhnau.

The third (f. 292_b_) is an item of Bābur's Revenue List. The Turkī codices are supported by B.M. Or. 1999, which is a direct copy of Shaikh Zain's autograph _T̤ābaqāt-i-bāburī_, all three having L:knūr. Kehr's MS. and Or. 1999 are descendants of the second degree from the original List; that the Ḥai. Codex is a direct copy is suggested by its pseudo-tabular arrangement of the various items.—An important consideration supporting _L:knūr_, is that the List is in Persian and may reasonably be accepted as the one furnished officially for the Pādshāh's information when he was writing his account of Hindūstān (cf. Appendix P, p. liv). This official character disassociates it from any such doubtful spelling by the foreign Pādshāh as cannot but suggest itself when the variants of _e.g._ Dalmau and Bangarmau are considered. L:knūr is what three persons copying independently read in the official List, and so set down that careful scribes _i.e._ Kehr and `Abdu'l-lāh (App. P) again wrote L:knūr.[2846]—Another circumstance favouring L:knūr (Lakhnūr) is that the place assigned to it in the List is its geographical one between Saṃbhal and Khairābād.—Something for [or perhaps against] accepting Lakhnūr as the _sarkār_ of the List may be known in local records or traditions. It had been an important place, and later on it paid a large revenue to Akbar [as part of Saṃbhal].—It appears to have been worth the attention of Bīban _Jalwānī_ (f. 329).—Another place is associated with L:knūr in the Revenue List, the forms of which are open to a considerable number of interpretations besides that of Baksar shown _in loco_ on p. 521. Only those well acquainted with the United Provinces or their bye-gone history can offer useful suggestion about it. Maps show a "Madkar" 6 m. south of old Lakhnūr; there are in the United Provinces two Baksars and as many other Lakhnūrs (none however being so suitable as what is now Shāhābād). Perhaps in the archives of some old families there may be help found to interpret the entry _L:knūr u B:ks:r_ (var.), a conjecture the less improbable that the _Gazetteer of the Province of Oude_ (ii, 58) mentions a _farmān_ of Bābur Pādshāh's dated 1527 AD. and upholding a grant to Shaikh Qāẓī of Bīlgrām.

The fourth instance (f. 329) is fairly confirmed as Lakhnūr by its context, _viz._ an officer received the district of Badāyūn from the Pādshāh and was sent against Bīban who had laid siege to L:knūr on which Badāyūn bordered.—At the time Lakhnau may have been held from Bābur by Shaikh Bāyazīd _Farmūlī_ in conjunction with Aūd. Its estates are recorded as still in Farmūlī possession, that of the widow of "Kala Pahār" _Farmūlī_.—(_See infra._)

The fifth instance (f. 334) connects with Aūd (Oudh) because royal troops abandoning the place L:knū were those who had been sent against Shaikh Bāyazīd in Aūd.

The remaining three instances (f. 376, f. 376_b_, f. 377_b_) appear to concern one place, to which Bīban and Bāyazīd were rumoured to intend going, which they captured and abandoned. As the table of variants shows, Kehr's MS. reads Lakhnūr in all three places, the Ḥai. MS. once only, varying from itself as it does in Nos. 1 and 2.—A circumstance supporting _Lakhnūr_ is that one of the messengers sent to Bābur with details of the capture was the son of Shāh Muḥ. _Dīwāna_ whose record associates him rather with Badakhshān, and with Humāyūn and Saṃbhal [perhaps with Lakhnūr itself] than with Bābur's own army.—Supplementing my notes on these three instances, much could be said in favour of reading Lakhnūr, about time and distance done by the messengers and by `Abdu'l-lah _kitābdār_, on his way to Saṃbhal and passing near Lakhnūr; much too about the various rumours and Bābur's immediate counter-action. But to go into it fully would need lengthy treatment which the historical unimportance of the little problem appears not to demand.—Against taking the place to be Lakhnau there are the considerations (_a_) that Lakhnūr was the safer harbourage for the Rains and less near the westward march of the royal troops returning from the battle of the Goghrā; (_b_) that the fort of Lakhnau was the renowned old Machchi-bawan (cf. _Gazetteer of the Province of Oude_, 3 vols., 1877, ii, 366).—So far as I have been able to fit dates and transactions together, there seems no reason why the two Afghāns should not have gone to Lakhnūr, have crossed the Ganges near it, dropped down south [perhaps even intending to recross at Dalmau] with the intention of getting back to the Farmūlīs and Jalwānīs perhaps in Sārwār, perhaps elsewhere to Bāyazīd's brother Ma`rūf.

U.—THE INSCRIPTIONS ON BĀBUR'S MOSQUE IN AJODHYA (OUDH).

Thanks to the kind response made by the Deputy-Commissioner of Fyzābād to my husband's enquiry about two inscriptions mentioned by several Gazetteers as still existing on "Bābur's Mosque" in Oudh, I am able to quote copies of both.[2847]

_a._ The inscription inside the Mosque is as follows:—

1. _Ba farmūda-i-Shāh Bābur ki `ādilash Banā'īst tā kākh-i-gardūn mulāqī_,

2. _Banā kard īn muhbiṯ-i-qudsiyān Amīr-i-sa`ādat-nishān Mīr Bāqī_

3. _Bavad khair bāqī! chū sāl-i-banā'īsh `Iyān shud ki guftam_,—_Buvad khair bāqī_ (935).

The translation and explanation of the above, manifestly made by a Musalmān and as such having special value, are as follows:—[2848]

1. By the command of the Emperor Bābur whose justice is an edifice reaching up to the very height of the heavens,

2. The good-hearted Mīr Bāqī built this alighting-place of angels;[2849]

3. _Bavad khāir bāqī!_ (May this goodness last for ever!)[2850]

The year of building it was made clear likewise when I said, _Buvad khair bāqī_ ( = 935).[2851]

The explanation of this is:—

1st couplet:—The poet begins by praising the Emperor Bābur under whose orders the mosque was erected. As justice is the (chief) virtue of kings, he naturally compares his (Bābur's) justice to a palace reaching up to the very heavens, signifying thereby that the fame of that justice had not only spread in the wide world but had gone up to the heavens.

2nd couplet:—In the second couplet, the poet tells who was entrusted with the work of construction. Mīr Bāqī was evidently some nobleman of distinction at Bābur's Court.—The noble height, the pure religious atmosphere, and the scrupulous cleanliness and neatness of the mosque are beautifully suggested by saying that it was to be the abode of angels.

3rd couplet:—The third couplet begins and ends with the expression _Buvad khair bāqī_. The letters forming it by their numerical values represent the number 935, thus:—

_B_ = 2, _v_ = 6, _d_ = 4 total 12 _Kh_ = 600, _ai_ = 10, _r_ = 200 " 810 _B_ = 2, _ā_ = 1, _q_ = 100, _r_ = 10 " 113 ___ Total 935

The poet indirectly refers to a religious commandment (_dictum_?) of the Qorān that a man's good deeds live after his death, and signifies that this noble mosque is verily such a one.

_b._ The inscription outside the Mosque is as follows:—

1. _Ba nām-i-anki dānā hast akbar Ki khāliq-i-jamla `ālam lā-makānī_

2. _Durūd Muṣṯafá ba`d az sitāyish Ki sarwar-i-aṃbiyā' dū jahānī_

3. _Fasāna dar jahān Bābur qalandar Ki shud dar daur gītī kāmrānī._[2852]

The explanation of the above is as follows:—

In the first couplet the poet praises God, in the second Muḥammad, in the third Bābur.—There is a peculiar literary beauty in the use of the word _lā-makānī_ in the 1st couplet. The author hints that the mosque is meant to be the abode of God, although He has no fixed abiding-place.—In the first hemistich of the 3rd couplet the poet gives Bābur the appellation of _qalandar_, which means a perfect devotee, indifferent to all worldly pleasures. In the second hemistich he gives as the reason for his being so, that Bābur became and was known all the world over as a _qalandar_, because having become Emperor of India and having thus reached the summit of worldly success, he had nothing to wish for on this earth.[2853]

The inscription is incomplete and the above is the plain interpretation which can be given to the couplets that are to hand. Attempts may be made to read further meaning into them but the language would not warrant it.

V.—BĀBUR'S GARDENS IN AND NEAR KĀBUL.

The following particulars about gardens made by Bābur in or near Kābul, are given in Muḥammad Amīr of Kazwīn's _Pādshāh-nāma_ (Bib. Ind. ed. p. 585, p. 588).

Ten gardens are mentioned as made:—the Shahr-ārā (Town-adorning) which when Shāh-i-jahān first visited Kābul in the 12th year of his reign (1048 AH.-1638 AD.) contained very fine plane-trees Bābur had planted, beautiful trees having magnificent trunks,[2854]—the Chār-bāgh,—the Bāgh-i-jalau-khāna,[2855]—the Aūrta-bāgh (Middle-garden),—the Ṣaurat-bāgh,—the Bāgh-i-mahtāb (Moonlight-garden),—the Bāgh-i-āhū-khāna (Garden-of-the-deer-house),—and three smaller ones. Round these gardens rough-cast walls were made (renewed?) by Jahāngīr (1016 AH.).

The above list does not specify the garden Bābur made and selected for his burial; this is described apart (_l.c._ p. 588) with details of its restoration and embellishment by Shāh-i-jahān the master-builder of his time, as follows:—

The burial-garden was 500 yards (_gaz_) long; its ground was in 15 terraces, 30 yards apart(?). On the 15th terrace is the tomb of Ruqaiya Sulṯān Begam[2856]; as a small marble platform (_chabūṭra_) had been made near it by Jahāngīr's command, Shāh-i-jahān ordered (both) to be enclosed by a marble screen three yards high.—Bābur's tomb is on the 14th terrace. In accordance with his will, no building was erected over it, but Shāh-i-jahān built a small marble mosque on the terrace below.[2857] It was begun in the 17th year (of Shāh-i-jahān's reign) and was finished in the 19th, after the conquest of Balkh and Badakhshān, at a cost of 30,000 _rūpīs_. It is admirably constructed.—From the 12th terrace running-water flows along the line (_rasta_) of the avenue;[2858] but its 12 water-falls, because not constructed with cemented stone, had crumbled away and their charm was lost; orders were given therefore to renew them entirely and lastingly, to make a small reservoir below each fall, and to finish with Kābul marble the edges of the channel and the waterfalls, and the borders of the reservoirs.—And on the 9th terrace there was to be a reservoir 11 x 11 yards, bordered with Kābul marble, and on the 10th terrace one 15 x 15, and at the entrance to the garden another 15 x 15, also with a marble border.—And there was to be a gateway adorned with gilded cupolas befitting that place, and beyond (_pesh_) the gateway a square station,[2859] one side of which should be the garden-wall and the other three filled with cells; that running-water should pass through the middle of it, so that the destitute and poor people who might gather there should eat their food in those cells, sheltered from the hardship of snow and rain.[2860]

FOOTNOTES

[1] From Atkinson's _Sketches in Afghanistan_ (I.O. Lib. & B.M.).

[2] _See_ p. 710 (where for "Daniels" read Atkinson).

[3] _See_ Gul-badan Begim's _Humayun-nama_ Index III, _in loco_.

[4] Cf. Cap. II, PROBLEMS OF THE MUTILATED BABUR-NAMA and _Tarīkh-i-rashīdi_, trs. p. 174.

[5] The suggestion, implied by my use of this word, that Babur may have definitely closed his autobiography (as Timur did under other circumstances) is due to the existence of a compelling cause _viz._ that he would be expectant of death as the price of Humayun's restored life (p. 701).

[6] Cf. p. 83 and n. and Add. Note, P. 83 for further emendation of a contradiction effected by some malign influence in the note (p. 83) between parts of that note, and between it and Babur's account of his not-drinking in Herat.

[7] Teufel held its title to be _waqi`_ (this I adopted in 1908), but it has no definite support and in numerous instances of its occurrence to describe the acts or doings of Babur, it could be read as a common noun.

[8] It stands on the reverse of the frontal page of the Haidarabad Codex; it is Timur-pulad's name for the Codex he purchased in Bukhara, and it is thence brought on by Kehr (with Ilminski), and Klaproth (Cap. III); it is used by Khwafi Khan (d. _cir._ 1732), _etc._

[9] That Babur left a complete record much indicates beyond his own persistence and literary bias, _e.g._ cross-reference with and needed complements from what is lost; mention by other writers of Babur's information, notably by Haidar.

[10] App. H, xxx.

[11] p. 446, n. 6. Babur's order for the cairn would fit into the lost record of the first month of the year (p. 445).

[12] Parts of the Babur-nama sent to Babur's sons are not included here.

[13] The standard of comparison is the 382 fols. of the Haidarabad Codex.

[14] This MS. is not to be confused with one Erskine misunderstood Humayun to have copied (_Memoirs_, p. 303 and JRAS. 1900, p. 443).

[15] For precise limits of the original annotation _see_ p. 446 n.—For details about the E. Codex _see_ JRAS. 1907, art. _The Elph. Codex_, and for the colophon AQR. 1900, July, Oct. and JRAS. 1905, pp. 752, 761.

[16] _See_ Index _s.n._ and III _ante_ and JRAS. 1900-3-5-6-7.

[17] Here speaks the man reared in touch with European classics; (pure) Turki though it uses no relatives (Radloff) is lucid. Cf. Cap. IV The Memoirs of Babur.

[18] For analysis of a retranslated passage _see_ JRAS. 1908, p. 85.

[19] _Tuzuk-i-jahangiri_, Rogers & Beveridge's trs. i, 110; JRAS. 1900, p. 756, for the Persian passage, 1908, p. 76 for the "Fragments", 1900, p. 476 for Ilminski's Preface (a second translation is accessible at the B.M. and I.O. Library and R.A.S.), _Memoirs_ Preface, p. ix, Index _s.nn._ de Courteille, Teufel, Bukhara MSS. and Part iii _eo cap._

[20] For Shah-i-jahan's interest in Timur _see_ sign given in a copy of his note published in my translation volume of Gul-badan Begim's _Humayun-nama_, p. xiii.

[21] JRAS. 1900 p. 466, 1902 p. 655, 1905 art. _s.n._, 1908 pp. 78, 98; Index _in loco s.n._

[22] Cf. JRAS. 1900, Nos. VI, VII, VIII.

[23] Ilminski's difficulties are foreshadowed here by the same confusion of identity between the _Babur-nama_ proper and the Bukhara compilation (Preface, Part iii, p. li).

[24] Cf. Erskine's Preface _passim_, and _in loco_ item XI, cap. iv. _The Memoirs of Baber_, and Index _s.n._

[25] The last blow was given to the phantasmal reputation of the book by the authoritative Haidarabad Codex which now can be seen in facsimile in many Libraries.

[26] But for present difficulties of intercourse with Petrograd, I would have re-examined with Kehr's the collateral Codex of 1742 (copied in 1839 and now owned by the Petrograd University). It might be useful; as Kehr's volume has lost pages and may be disarranged here and there.

The list of Kehr's items is as follows:—

1 (_not in the Imprint_). A letter from Babur to Kamran the date of which is fixed as 1527 by its committing Ibrahim _Ludi's_ son to Kamran's charge (p. 544). It is heard of again in the Bukhara Compilation, is lost from Kehr's Codex, and preserved from his archetype by Klaproth who translated it. Being thus found in Bukhara in the first decade of the eighteenth century (our earliest knowledge of the Compilation is 1709), the inference is allowed that it went to Bukhara as loot from the defeated Kamran's camp and that an endorsement its companion Babur-nama (proper) bears was made by the Auzbeg of two victors over Kamran, both of 1550, both in Tramontana.(1)

2 (_not in Imp._). Timur-pulad's memo. about the purchase of his Codex in cir. 1521 (_eo cap. post_).

3 (_Imp. 1_). Compiler's Preface of Praise (JRAS. 1900, p. 474).

4 (_Imp. 2_). Babur's Acts in Farghana, in diction such as to seem a re-translation of the Persian translation of 1589. How much of Kamran's MS. was serviceable is not easy to decide, because the Turki fettering of `Abdu'r-rahim's Persian lends itself admirably to re-translation.(2)

5 (_Imp. 3_). The "Rescue-passage" (App. D) attributable to Jahangir.

6 (_Imp. 4_). Babur's Acts in Kabul, seeming (like No. 4) a re-translation or patching of tattered pages. There are also passages taken verbatim from the Persian.

7 (_Imp. omits_). A short length of Babur's Hindustan Section, carefully shewn damaged by dots and dashes.

8 (_Imp. 5_). Within 7, the spurious passage of App. L and also scattered passages about a feast, perhaps part of 7.

9 (_Imp. separates off at end of vol._). Translated passage from the _Akbar-nāma_, attributable to Jahangir, briefly telling of Kanwa (1527), Babur's latter years (both changed to first person), death and court.(3)

[Babur's history has been thus brought to an end, incomplete in the balance needed of 7. In Kehr's volume a few pages are left blank except for what shews a Russian librarian's opinion of the plan of the book, "Here end the writings of Shah Babur."]

10 (_Imp. omits_). Preface to the history of Humayun, beginning at the Creation and descending by giant strides through notices of Khans and Sultans to "Babur Mirza who was the father of Humayun Padshah". Of Babur what further is said connects with the battle of Ghaj-davan (918-1512 _q.v._). It is ill-informed, laying blame on him as if he and not Najm Sani had commanded—speaks of his preference for the counsel of young men and of the numbers of combatants. It is noticeable for more than its inadequacy however; its selection of the Ghaj-davan episode from all others in Babur's career supports circumstantially what is dealt with later, the Ghaj-davani authorship of the Compilation.

11 (_Imp. omits_). Under a heading "Humayun Padshah" is a fragment about (his? Accession) Feast, whether broken off by loss of his pages or of those of his archetype examination of the P. Univ. Codex may show.

12 (_Imp. 6_). An excellent copy of Babur's Hindustan Section, perhaps obtained from the Ahrari house. [This Ilminski places (I think) where Kehr has No. 7.] From its position and from its bearing a scribe's date of completion (which Kehr brings over), _viz._ _Tamt shud 1126_ (Finished 1714), the compiler may have taken it for Humayun's, perhaps for the account of his reconquest of Hind in 1555.

[The remaining entries in Kehr's volume are a quatrain which may make jesting reference to his finished task, a librarian's Russian entry of the number of pages (831), and the words _Etablissement Orientale, Fr. v. Adelung_, 1825 (the Director of the School from 1793).(4)]

[27] That Babur-nama of the "Kamran-docket" is the mutilated and tattered basis, allowed by circumstance, of the compiled history of Babur, filled out and mended by the help of the Persian translation of 1589. Cf. Kehr's Latin Trs. fly-leaf entry; Klaproth _s.n._; A.N. trs. H.B., p. 260; JRAS. 1908, 1909, on the "Kamran-docket" where are defects needing Klaproth's second article (1824).

[28] For an analysis of an illustrative passage _see_ JRAS. 1906; for facilities of re-translation _see_ _eo cap._ p. xviii, where Erskine is quoted.

[29] _See_ A.N. trans., p. 260; Prefaces of Ilminski and de Courteille; ZDMG. xxxvii, Teufel's art.; JRAS. 1906.

[30] For particulars about Kehr's Codex see Smirnov's Catalogue of the School Library and JRAS. 1900, 1906. Like others who have made statements resting on the mistaken identity of the Bukhara Compilation, many of mine are now given to the winds.

[31] _See_ Gregorief's "Russian policy regarding Central Asia", quoted in Schuyler's Turkistan, App. IV.

[32] The Mission was well received, started to return to Petrograd, was attacked by Turkmans, went back to Bukhara, and there stayed until it could attempt the devious route which brought it to the capital in 1725.

[33] One might say jestingly that the spirit in the book had rebelled since 1725 against enforced and changing masquerade as a phantasm of two other books!

[34] Neither Ilminski nor Smirnov mentions another "Babur-nama" Codex than Kehr's.

[35] A Correspondent combatting my objection to publishing a second edition of the _Memoirs_, backed his favouring opinion by reference to `Umar Khayyam and Fitzgerald. Obviously no analogy exists; Erskine's redundance is not the flower of a deft alchemy, but is the prosaic consequence of a secondary source.

[36] The manuscripts relied on for revising the first section of the Memoirs, (_i.e._ 899 to 908 AH.-1494 to 1502 AD.) are the Elphinstone and the Ḥaidarābād Codices. To variants from them occurring in Dr. Kehr's own transcript no authority can be allowed because throughout this section, his text appears to be a compilation and in parts a retranslation from one or other of the two Persian translations (_Wāqi`āt-i-bāburī_) of the _Bābur-nāma_. Moreover Dr. Ilminsky's imprint of Kehr's text has the further defect in authority that it was helped out from the Memoirs, itself not a direct issue from the Turkī original.

Information about the manuscripts of the _Bābur-nāma_ can be found in the JRAS for 1900, 1902, 1905, 1906, 1907 and 1908.

The foliation marked in the margin of this book is that of the Ḥaidarābād Codex and of its facsimile, published in 1905 by the Gibb Memorial Trust.

[37] Bābur, born on Friday, Feb. 14th. 1483 (Muḥarram 6, 888 AH.), succeeded his father, `Umar Shaikh who died on June 8th. 1494 (Ramẓān 4, 899 AH.).

[38] _pād-shāh_, protecting lord, supreme. It would be an anachronism to translate _pādshāh_ by King or Emperor, previous to 913 AH. (1507 AD.) because until that date it was not part of the style of any Tīmūrid, even ruling members of the house being styled Mīrzā. Up to 1507 therefore Bābur's correct style is Bābur Mīrzā. (_Cf._ f. 215 and note.)

[39] See _Āyīn-i-akbarī_, Jarrett, p. 44.

[40] The Ḥai. MS. and a good many of the W.-i-B. MSS. here write Aūtrār. [Aūtrār like Tarāz was at some time of its existence known as Yāngī (New).] Tarāz seems to have stood near the modern Auliya-ātā; Ālmālīgh,—a Metropolitan see of the Nestorian Church in the 14th. century,—to have been the old capital of Kuldja, and Ālmātū (var. Ālmātī) to have been where Vernoe (Vierny) now is. Ālmālīgh and Ālmātū owed their names to the apple (_ālmā_). _Cf._ Bretschneider's Mediæval Geography p. 140 and T.R. (Elias and Ross) _s.nn._

[41] _Mughūl u Aūzbeg jihatdīn._ I take this, the first offered opportunity of mentioning (1) that in transliterating Turkī words I follow Turkī lettering because I am not competent to choose amongst systems which _e.g._ here, reproduce Aūzbeg as Ūzbeg, Özbeg and Euzbeg; and (2) that style being part of an autobiography, I am compelled, in pressing back the Memoirs on Bābur's Turkī mould, to retract from the wording of the western scholars, Erskine and de Courteille. Of this compulsion Bābur's bald phrase _Mughūl u Aūzbeg jihatdīn_ provides an illustration. Each earlier translator has expressed his meaning with more finish than he himself; `Abdu'r-raḥīm, by _az jihat `ubūr-i_ (_Mughūl u_) _Aūzbeg_, improves on Bābur, since the three towns lay in the tideway of nomad passage (_`ubūr_) east and west; Erskine writes "in consequence of the incursions" etc. and de C. "_grace aux ravages commis_" etc.

[42] Schuyler (ii, 54) gives the extreme length of the valley as about 160 miles and its width, at its widest, as 65 miles.

[43] Following a manifestly clerical error in the Second W.-i-B. the _Akbar-nāma_ and the Mems. are without the seasonal limitation, "in winter." Bābur here excludes from winter routes one he knew well, the Kīndīrlīk Pass; on the other hand Kostenko says that this is open all the year round. Does this contradiction indicate climatic change? (_Cf._ f. 54b and note; A.N. Bib. Ind. ed. i, 85 (H. Beveridge i, 221) and, for an account of the passes round Farghāna, Kostenko's _Turkistān Region_, Tables of Contents.)

[44] Var. Banākat, Banākas̤, Fīākat, Fanākand. Of this place Dr. Rieu writes (Pers. cat. i, 79) that it was also called Shāsh and, in modern times, Tāshkīnt. Bābur does not identify Fanākat with the Tāshkīnt of his day but he identifies it with Shāhrukhiya (_cf._ Index _s.nn._) and distinguishes between Tāshkīnt-Shāsh and Fanākat-Shāhrukhiya. It may be therefore that Dr. Rieu's Tāshkīnt-Fanākat was Old Tāshkīnt,—(Does Fanā-kīnt mean Old Village?) some 14 miles nearer to the Saiḥūn than the Tāshkīnt of Bābur's day or our own.

[45] _ hech daryā qātīlmās._ A gloss of _dīgar_ (other) in the Second W.-i-B. has led Mr. Erskine to understand "meeting with no other river in its course." I understand Bābur to contrast the destination of the Saiḥūn which he [erroneously] says sinks into the sands, with the outfall of _e.g._ the Amū into the Sea of Aral.

_Cf._ First W.-i-B. I.O. MS. 215 f. 2; Second W.-i-B. I.O. MS. 217 f. 1b and Ouseley's Ibn Haukal p. 232-244; also Schuyler and Kostenko _l.c._

[46] Bābur's geographical unit in Central Asia is the township or, with more verbal accuracy, the village _i.e._ the fortified, inhabited and cultivated oasis. Of frontiers he says nothing.

[47] _i.e._ they are given away or taken. Bābur's interest in fruits was not a matter of taste or amusement but of food. Melons, for instance, fresh or stored, form during some months the staple food of Turkistānīs. _Cf._ T.R. p. 303 and (in Kāshmīr) 425; Timkowski's _Travels of the Russian Mission_ i, 419 and Th. Radloff's _Réceuils d'Itinéraires_ p. 343.

N.B. At this point two folios of the Elphinstone Codex are missing.

[48] Either a kind of melon or the pear. For local abundance of pears _see_ _Āyīn-i-akbarī_, Blochmann p. 6; Kostenko and Von Schwarz.

[49] _qūrghān_, _i.e._ the walled town within which was the citadel (_ark_).

[50] _Tūqūz tarnau sū kīrār, bū `ajab tūr kīm bīr yīrdīn ham chīqmās._ Second W.-i-B. I.O. 217 f. 2, _nuh jū'ī āb dar qila` dar mī āyid u īn `ajab ast kah hama az yak jā ham na mī bar āyid_. (_Cf._ Mems. p. 2 and _Méms._ i, 2.) I understand Bābur to mean that all the water entering was consumed in the town. The supply of Andijān, in the present day, is taken both from the Āq Būrā (_i.e._ the Aūsh Water) and, by canal, from the Qarā Daryā.

[51] _khandaqnīng tāsh yānī._ Second W.-i-B. I.O. 217 f. 2 _dar kīnār sang bast khandaq_. Here as in several other places, this Persian translation has rendered Turkī _tāsh_, outside, as if it were Turkī _tāsh_, stone. Bābur's adjective _stone_ is _sangīn_ (f. 45b l. 8). His point here is the unusual circumstance of a high-road running round the outer edge of the ditch. Moreover Andijān is built on and of loess. Here, obeying his Persian source, Mr. Erskine writes "stone-faced ditch"; M. de C. obeying his Turkī one, "_bord extérieur_."

[52] _qīrghāwal āsh-kīnasī bīla. Āsh-kīna_, a diminutive of _āsh_, food, is the rice and vegetables commonly served with the bird. Kostenko i, 287 gives a recipe for what seems _āsh-kīna_.

[53] b. 1440; d. 1500 AD.

[54] Yūsuf was in the service of Bāī-sunghar Mīrzā _Shāhrukhī_ (d. 837 AH.-1434 AD.). _Cf._ Daulat Shāh's _Memoirs of the Poets_ (Browne) pp. 340 and 350-1. (H.B.)

[55] _gūzlār aīl bīzkāk kūb būlūr._ Second W.-i-B. (I.O. 217 f. 2) here and on f. 4 has read Turkī _gūz_, eye, for Turkī _gūz_ or _goz_, autumn. It has here a gloss not in the Ḥaidarābād or Kehr's MSS. (_Cf_. Mems. p. 4 note.) This gloss may be one of Humāyūn's numerous notes and may have been preserved in the Elphinstone Codex, but the fact cannot now be known because of the loss of the two folios already noted. (_See_ Von Schwarz and Kostenko concerning the autumn fever of Transoxiana.)

[56] The Pers. trss. render _yīghāch_ by _farsang_; Ujfalvy also takes the _yīghāch_ and the _farsang_ as having a common equivalent of about 6 _kilomètres_. Bābur's statements in _yīghāch_ however, when tested by ascertained distances, do not work out into the _farsang_ of four miles or the _kilomètre_ of 8 _kil._ to 5 miles. The _yīghāch_ appears to be a variable estimate of distance, sometimes indicating the time occupied on a given journey, at others the distance to which a man's voice will carry. (_Cf._ Ujfalvy _Expédition scientifique_ ii, 179; Von Schwarz p. 124 and de C.'s Dict. _s.n._ _yīghāch_. In the present instance, if Bābur's 4 y. equalled 4 f. the distance from Aūsh to Andijān should be about 16 m.; but it is 33 m. 1-3/4 fur. _i.e._ 50 _versts_. Kostenko ii, 33.) I find Bābur's _yīghāch_ to vary from about 4 m. to nearly 8 m.

[57] _āqār sū_, the irrigation channels on which in Turkistān all cultivation depends. Major-General Gérard writes, (Report of the Pamir Boundary Commission, p. 6,) "Osh is a charming little town, resembling Islāmābād in Kāshmīr,—everywhere the same mass of running water, in small canals, bordered with willow, poplar and mulberry." He saw the Āq Būrā, the _White wolf_, mother of all these running waters, as a "bright, stony, trout-stream;" Dr. Stein saw it as a "broad, tossing river." (Buried Cities of Khotan, p. 45.) _Cf_. Réclus vi, cap. Farghāna; Kostenko i, 104; Von Schwarz _s.nn._

[58] _Aūshnīng faẓīlatīdā khailī aḥādis̤ wārid dūr._ Second W.-i-B. (I.O. 217 f. 2) _Faẓīlat-i-Aūsh aḥadis̤ wārid ast._ Mems. (p. 3) "The excellencies of Ush are celebrated even in the sacred traditions." _Méms._ (i, 2) "_On cite beaucoup de traditions qui célèbrent l'excellence de ce climat._" Aūsh may be mentioned in the traditions on account of places of pilgrimage near it; Bābur's meaning may be merely that its excellencies are traditional. _Cf._ Ujfalvy ii, 172.

[59] Most travellers into Farghāna comment on Bābur's account of it. One much discussed point is the position of the Barā Koh. The personal observations of Ujfalvy and Schuyler led them to accept its identification with the rocky ridge known as the Takht-i-sulaimān. I venture to supplement this by the suggestion that Bābur, by Barā Koh, did not mean the whole of the rocky ridge, the name of which, Takht-i-sulaimān, an ancient name, must have been known to him, but one only of its four marked summits. Writing of the ridge Madame Ujfalvy says, "_Il y a quatre sommets dont le plus élevé est le troisième comptant par le nord_." Which summit in her sketch (p. 327) is the third and highest is not certain, but one is so shewn that it may be the third, may be the highest and, as being a peak, can be described as symmetrical _i.e._ Bābur's _mauzūn_. For this peak an appropriate name would be Barā Koh.

If the name Barā Koh could be restricted to a single peak of the Takht-i-sulaimān ridge, a good deal of earlier confusion would be cleared away, concerning which have written, amongst others, Ritter (v, 432 and 732); Réclus (vi. 54); Schuyler (ii, 43) and those to whom these three refer. For an excellent account, graphic with pen and pencil, of Farghāna and of Aūsh _see_ Madame Ujfalvy's _De Paris à Samarcande_ cap. v.

[60] _rūd._ This is a precise word since the Āq Būrā (the White Wolf), in a relatively short distance, falls from the Kūrdūn Pass, 13,400 ft. to Aūsh, 3040 ft. and thence to Andijān, 1380 ft. _Cf._ Kostenko i, 104; Huntingdon in Pumpelly's _Explorations in Turkistān_ p. 179 and the French military map of 1904.

[61] Whether Bābur's words, _bāghāt_, _bāghlār_ and _bāghcha_ had separate significations, such as orchard, vineyard and ordinary garden _i.e._ garden-plots of small size, I am not able to say but what appears fairly clear is that when he writes _bāghāt u bāghlār_ he means _all sorts of gardens_, just as when he writes _begāt u beglār_, he means _begs of all ranks_.

[62] Madame Ujfalvy has sketched a possible successor. Schuyler found two mosques at the foot of Takht-i-sulaimān, perhaps Bābur's Jauza Masjid.

[63] _aūl shāh-jū'īdīn sū qūyārlār._

[64] Ribbon Jasper, presumably.

[65] Kostenko (ii, 30), 71-3/4 versts _i.e._ 47 m. 4-1/2 fur. by the Postal Road.

[66] Instead of their own kernels, the Second W.-i-B. stuffs the apricots, in a fashion well known in India by _khūbānī_, with almonds (_maghz-i badām_). The Turkī wording however allows the return to the apricots of their own kernels and Mr. Rickmers tells me that apricots so stuffed were often seen by him in the Zar-afshān Valley. My husband has shewn me that Niẕāmī in his Haft Paikar appears to refer to the other fashion, that of inserting almonds:—

"I gave thee fruits from the garden of my heart, Plump and sweet as honey in milk; Their substance gave the lusciousness of figs, In their hearts were the kernels of almonds."

[67] What this name represents is one of a considerable number of points in the _Bābur-nāma_ I am unable to decide. _Kīyīk_ is a comprehensive name (_cf._ Shaw's Vocabulary); _āq kīyīk_ might mean _white sheep_ or _white deer_. It is rendered in the Second W.-i-B., here, by _ahū-i-wāriq_ and on f. 4, by _ahū-i-safed_. Both these names Mr. Erskine has translated by "white deer," but he mentions that the first is said to mean _argālī_ _i.e._ _ovis poli_, and refers to _Voyages de Pallas_ iv, 325.

[68] Concerning this much discussed word, Bābur's testimony is of service. It seems to me that he uses it merely of those settled in towns (villages) and without any reference to tribe or nationality. I am not sure that he uses it always as a noun; he writes of a _Sārt kīshī_, a Sārt person. His Asfara Sārts may have been Turkī-speaking settled Turks and his Marghīnānī ones Persian-speaking Tājiks. _Cf._ Shaw's Vocabulary; _s.n._ Sārt; Schuyler i, 104 and note; Nalivkine's _Histoire du Khanat de Khokand_ p. 45 n. Von Schwarz _s.n._; Kostenko i, 287; Petzbold's _Turkistan_ p. 32.

[69] Shaikh Burhānu'd-dīn `Alī _Qīlīch_: b. _circa_ 530 AH. (1135 AD.) d. 593 AH. (1197 AD.). _See_ Hamilton's _Hidāyat_.

[70] The direct distance, measured on the map, appears to be about 65 m. but the road makes _détour_ round mountain spurs. Mr. Erskine appended here, to the "_farsang_" of his Persian source, a note concerning the reduction of Tatar and Indian measures to English ones. It is rendered the less applicable by the variability of the _yīghāch_, the equivalent for a _farsang_ presumed by the Persian translator.

[71] Ḥai. MS. _Farsī-gū'ī_. The Elph. MS. and all those examined of the W.-i-B. omit the word _Farsī_; some writing _kohī_ (mountaineer) for _gū'ī_. I judge that Bābur at first omitted the word _Farsī_, since it is entered in the Ḥai. MS. above the word _gū'ī_. It would have been useful to Ritter (vii, 733) and to Ujfalvy (ii, 176). _Cf._ Kostenko i, 287 on the variety of languages spoken by Sārts.

[72] Of the Mirror Stone neither Fedtschenko nor Ujfalvy could get news.

[73] Bābur distinguishes here between Tāshkīnt and Shāhrukhiya. _Cf._ f. 2 and note to Fanākat.

[74] He left the hill-country above Sūkh in Muḥarram 910 AH. (mid-June 1504 AD.).

[75] For a good account of Khujand _see_ Kostenko i, 346.

[76] Khujand to Andijān 187 m. 2 fur. (Kostenko ii, 29-31) and, helped out by the time-table of the Transcaspian Railway, from Khujand to Samarkand appears to be some 154 m. 5-1/4 fur.

[77] Both men are still honoured in Khujand (Kostenko i, 348). For Khwāja Kamāl's Life and _Dīwān_, _see_ Rieu ii, 632 and Ouseley's Persian Poets p. 192. _Cf._ f. 83b and note.

[78] _kūb artūq dūr_, perhaps brought to Hindūstān where Bābur wrote the statement.

[79] Turkish arrow-flight, London, 1791, 482 yards.

[80] I have found the following forms of this name,—Ḥai. MS., M:nūgh:l; Pers. trans. and Mems., Myoghil; Ilminsky, M:tugh:l; _Méms._ Mtoughuil; Réclus, Schuyler and Kostenko, Mogul Tau; Nalivkine, "d'apres Fedtschenko," Mont Mogol; Fr. Map of 1904, M. Muzbek. It is the western end of the Kurāma Range (Kīndīr Tau), which comes out to the bed of the Sīr, is 26-2/3 miles long and rises to 4000 ft. (Kostenko, i, 101). Von Schwarz describes it as being quite bare; various writers ascribe climatic evil to it.

[81] Pers. trans. _ahū-i-safed_. _Cf._ f. 3b note.

[82] These words translate into _Cervus marāl_, the Asiatic Wapiti, and to this Bābur may apply them. Dictionaries explain _marāl_ as meaning _hind_ or _doe_ but numerous books of travel and Natural History show that it has wider application as a generic name, _i.e._ deer. The two words _būghū_ and _marāl_ appear to me to be used as _e.g._ drake and duck are used. _Marāl_ and duck can both imply the female sex, but also both are generic, perhaps primarily so. _Cf._ for further mention of _būghū-marāl_ f. 219 and f. 276. For uses of the word _marāl_, _see_ the writings _e.g._ of Atkinson, Kostenko (iii, 69), Lyddeker, Littledale, Selous, Ronaldshay, Church (Chinese Turkistan), Biddulph (Forsyth's Mission).

[83] _Cf._ f. 2 and note.

[84] Schuyler (ii, 3), 18 m.

[85] Ḥai. MS. _Hamesha bū deshttā yīl bār dūr. Marghīnānghā kīm sharqī dūr, hamesha mūndīn yīl bārūr; Khujandghā kīm gharībī dūr, dā'im mūndīn yīl kīlūr._

This is a puzzling passage. It seems to say that wind always goes east and west from the steppe as from a generating centre. E. and de C. have given it alternative directions, east or west, but there is little point in saying this of wind in a valley hemmed in on the north and the south. Bābur limits his statement to the steppe lying in the contracted mouth of the Farghāna valley (_pace_ Schuyler ii, 51) where special climatic conditions exist such as (_a_) difference in temperature on the two sides of the Khujand narrows and currents resulting from this difference,—(_b_) the heating of the narrows by sun-heat reflected from the Mogol-tau,—and (_c_) the inrush of westerly wind over Mīrzā Rabāṯ. Local knowledge only can guide a translator safely but Bābur's directness of speech compels belief in the significance of his words and this particularly when what he says is unexpected. He calls the Hā Darwesh a whirling wind and this it still is. Thinkable at least it is that a strong westerly current (the prevailing wind of Farghāna) entering over Mīrzā Rabāṯ and becoming, as it does become, the whirlwind of Hā Darwesh on the hemmed-in steppe,—becoming so perhaps by conflict with the hotter indraught through the Gates of Khujand—might force that indraught back into the Khujand Narrows (in the way _e.g._ that one Nile in flood forces back the other), and at Khujand create an easterly current. All the manuscripts agree in writing to (_ghā_) Marghīnān and to (_ghā_) Khujand. It may be observed that, looking at the map, it appears somewhat strange that Bābur should take, for his wind objective, a place so distant from his (defined) Hā Darwesh and seemingly so screened by its near hills as is Marghīnān. But that westerly winds are prevalent in Marghīnān is seen _e.g._ in Middendorff's _Einblikke in den Farghāna Thal_ (p. 112). _Cf._ Réclus vi, 547; Schuyler ii, 51; Cahun's _Histoire du Khanat de Khokand_ p. 28 and Sven Hedin's _Durch Asien's Wüsten s.n. būrān_.

[86] _bādiy__a_; a word perhaps selected as punning on _bād_, wind.

[87] _i.e._ Akhsī Village. This word is sometimes spelled Akhsīkīs̤ but as the old name of the place was Akhsī-kīnt, it may be conjectured at least that the _s̤ā'ī mas̤allas̤a_ of Akhsīkīs̤ represents the three points due for the _nūn_ and _tā_ of _kīnt_. Of those writing Akhsīkīt may be mentioned the Ḥai. and Kehr's MSS. (the Elph. MS. here has a lacuna) the _Z̤afar-nāma_ (Bib. Ind. i, 44) and Ibn Haukal (Ouseley p. 270); and of those writing the word with the _s̤ā'ī muṣallas̤a_ (_i.e._ as Akhsīkīs̤), Yāqūt's Dict, i, 162, Reinaud's Abū'l-feda I. ii, 225-6, Ilminsky (p. 5) departing from his source, and I.O. Cat. (Ethé) No. 1029. It may be observed that Ibn Haukal (Ouseley p. 280) writes Banākaṣ for Banākat. For As̤īru'd-dīn _Akhsīkītī_, _see_ Rieu ii, 563; Daulat Shāh (Browne) p. 121 and Ethé I.O. Cat. No. 1029.

[88] Measured on the French military map of 1904, this may be 80 kil. _i.e._ 50 miles.

[89] Concerning several difficult passages in the rest of Bābur's account of Akhsī, _see_ Appendix A.

[90] The W.-i-B. here translates _būghū-marāl_ by _gazawn_ and the same word is entered, under-line, in the Ḥai. MS. _Cf._ f. 3b and note and f. 4 and note.

[91] _postīn pesh b:r:h._ This obscure Persian phrase has been taken in the following ways:—

(_a_) W.-i-B. I.O. 215 and 217 (_i.e._ both versions) reproduce the phrase. (_b_) W.-i-B. MS., quoted by Erskine, p. 6 note, (_postīn-i mīsh burra_). (_c_) Leyden's MS. Trs., a sheepskin mantle of five lambskins. (_d_) Mems., Erskine, p. 6, a mantle of five lambskins. (_e_) The Persian annotator of the Elph. MS., underlining _pesh_, writes, _panj_, five. (_f_) Klaproth (Archives, p. 109), _pustini pisch breh, d.h. gieb den vorderen Pelz_. (_g_) Kehr, p. 12 (Ilminsky p. 6) _postin bīsh b:r:h_. (_h_) De. C, i, 9, _fourrure d'agneau de la première qualité_.

The "lambskins" of L. and E. carry on a notion of comfort started by their having read _sayāh_, shelter, for Turkī _sā'ī_, torrent-bed; de C. also lays stress on fur and warmth, but would not the flowery border of a mountain stream prompt rather a phrase bespeaking ornament and beauty than one expressing warmth and textile softness? If the phrase might be read as _postīn pesh perā_, what adorns the front of a coat, or as _postīn pesh bar rah_, the fine front of the coat, the phrase would recall the gay embroidered front of some leathern postins.

[92] Var. _tabarkhūn_. The explanation best suiting its uses, enumerated here, is Redhouse's second, the Red Willow. My husband thinks it may be the Hyrcanian Willow.

[93] Steingass describes this as "an arrow without wing or point" (barb?) and tapering at both ends; it may be the practising arrow, _t`alīm aūqī_, often headless.

[94] _tabarraklūq._ Cf. f. 48b foot, for the same use of the word.

[95] _yabrūju'ṣ-ṣannam._ The books referred to by Bābur may well be the _Rauzatu'ṣ-ṣafā_ and the _Ḥabību's-siyār_, as both mention the plant.

[96] The Turkī word _āyīq_ is explained by Redhouse as _awake_ and _alert_; and by Meninski and de Meynard as _sobered_ and as _a return to right senses_. It may be used here as a equivalent of _mihr_ in _mihr-giyāh_, the plant of love.

[97] Mr. Ney Elias has discussed the position of this group of seven villages. (_Cf._ T. R. p. 180 n.) Arrowsmith's map places it (as Iti-kint) approximately where Mr. Th. Radloff describes seeing it _i.e._ on the Farghāna slope of the Kurāma range. (_Cf. Réceuil d'Itinéraires_ p. 188.) Mr. Th. Radloff came into Yītī-kīnt after crossing the Kīndīrlīk Pass from Tāshkīnt and he enumerates the seven villages as traversed by him before reaching the Sīr. It is hardly necessary to say that the actual villages he names may not be those of Bābur's Yītī-kint. Wherever the word is used in the _Bābur-nāma_ and the _Tārīkh-i-rashīdī_, it appears from the context allowable to accept Mr. Radloff's location but it should be borne in mind that the name Yītī-kīnt (Seven villages or towns) might be found as an occasional name of Altī-shahr (Six towns). _See_ T.R. _s.n._ Altī-shahr.

[98] _kīshī_, person, here manifestly fighting men.

[99] Elph. MS. f. 2b; First W.-i-B. I.O. 215 f. 4b; Second W.-i-B. I.O. 217 f. 4; Mems. p. 6; Ilminsky p. 7; _Méms._ i. 10.

The rulers whose affairs are chronicled at length in the Farghāna Section of the B.N. are, (I) of Timūrid Turks, (always styled Mīrzā), (_a_) the three Mīrān-shāhī brothers, Aḥmad, Maḥmūd and `Umar Shaikh with their successors, Bāī-sunghar, `Alī and Bābur; (_b_) the Bāī-qarā, Ḥusain of Harāt: (II) of Chīngīz Khānīds, (always styled Khān,) (_a_) the two Chaghatāī Mughūl brothers, Maḥmūd and Aḥmad; (_b_) the Shaibānid Aūzbeg, Muḥammad Shaibānī (Shāh-i-bakht or Shaibāq or Shāhī Beg).

In electing to use the name _Shaibānī_, I follow not only the Ḥai. Codex but also Shaibānī's Boswell, Muḥammad Ṣāliḥ Mīrzā. The Elph. MS. frequently uses _Shaibāq_ but its authority down to f. 198 (Ḥai. MS. f. 243b) is not so great as it is after that folio, because not till f. 198 is it a direct copy of Bābur's own. It may be more correct to write "the Shaibānī Khān" and perhaps even "the Shaibānī."

[100] _bī murād_, so translated because retirement was caused once by the overruling of Khwāja `Ubaidu'l-lāh _Aḥrārī_. (T.R. p. 113.)

[101] Once the Mīrzā did not wish Yūnas to winter in Akhsī; once did not expect him to yield to the demand of his Mughūls to be led out of the cultivated country (_wilāyat_). His own misconduct included his attack in Yūnas on account of Akhsī and much falling-out with kinsmen. (T.R. _s.nn._)

[102] _i.e._ one made of non-warping wood (Steingass), perhaps that of the White Poplar. The _Shāh-nāma_ (Turner, Maçon ed. i, 71) writes of a Chāchī bow and arrows of _khadang_, _i.e._ white poplar. (H.B.)

[103] _i.e._ Rābī`a-sulṯān, married _circa_ 893 AH.-1488 AD. For particulars about her and all women mentioned in the B.N. and the T.R. see Gulbadan Begīm's _Humāyūn-nāma_, Or. Trs. Series.

[104] _jar_, either that of the Kāsān Water or of a deeply-excavated canal. The palace buildings are mentioned again on f. 110b. _Cf._ Appendix A.

[105] _i.e._ soared from earth, died. For some details of the accident _see_ A.N. (H. Beveridge, i, 220.)

[106] Ḥ.S. ii,-192, Firishta, lith. ed. p. 191 and D'Herbélot, sixth.

It would have accorded with Bābur's custom if here he had mentioned the parentage of his father's mother. Three times (fs. 17b, 70b, 96b) he writes of "Shāh Sulṯan Begīm" in a way allowing her to be taken as `Umar Shaikh's own mother. Nowhere, however, does he mention her parentage. One even cognate statement only have we discovered, _viz._ Khwānd-amīr's (Ḥ.S. ii, 192) that `Umar Shaikh was the own younger brother (_barādar khurdtar khūd_) of Aḥmad and Maḥmūd. If his words mean that the three were full-brothers, `Umar Shaikh's own mother was Ābū-sa`īd's Tarkhān wife. Bābur's omission (f. 21b) to mention his father with A. and M. as a nephew of Darwesh Muḥammad Tarkhān would be negative testimony against taking Khwānd-amīr's statement to mean "full-brother," if clerical slips were not easy and if Khwānd-amir's means of information were less good. He however both was the son of Maḥmūd's wāzir (Ḥ.S. ii, 194) and supplemented his book in Bābur's presence.

To a statement made by the writer of the biographies included in Kehr's B.N. volume, that `U.S.'s family (_aūmāgh_) is not known, no weight can be attached, spite of the co-incidence that the Mongol form of _aūmāgh_, _i.e._ _aūmāk_ means _Mutter-leib_. The biographies contain too many known mistakes for their compiler to outweigh Khwānd-amīr in authority.

[107] _Cf._ _Rauzatu'ṣ-ṣafā_ vi, 266. (H.B.)

[108] Dara-i-gaz, south of Balkh. This historic feast took place at Merv in 870 AH. (1465 AD.). As `Umar Shaikh was then under ten, he may have been one of the Mīrzās concerned.

[109] Khudāī-bīrdī is a Pers.-Turkī hybrid equivalent of Theodore; _tūghchī_ implies the right to use or (as hereditary standard-bearer,) to guard the _tūgh_; Timūr-tāsh may mean _i.a._ Friend of Tīmūr (a title not excluded here as borne by inheritance. _Cf._ f. 12b and note), Sword-friend (_i.e._ Companion-in-arms), and Iron-friend (_i.e._ stanch). _Cf._ Dict. _s.n._ Tīmūr-bāsh, a sobriquet of Charles XII.

[110] Elph. and Ḥai. MSS. _qūbā yūzlūq_; this is under-lined in the Elph. MS. by _ya`nī pur ghosht_. _Cf._ f. 68b for the same phrase. The four earlier trss. _viz._ the two W.-i-B., the English and the French, have variants in this passage.

[111] The apposition may be between placing the turban-sash round the turban-cap in a single flat fold and winding it four times round after twisting it on itself. _Cf._ f. 18 and Hughes _Dict. of Islām s.n._ turban.

[112] _qaẓālār_, the prayers and fasts omitted when due, through war, travel sickness, etc.

[113] _rawān sawādī bār īdī_; perhaps, wrote a running hand. De C. i, 13, _ses lectures courantes étaient...._

[114] The dates of `Umar Shaikh's limits of perusal allow the Quintets (_Khamsatīn_) here referred to to be those of Niẕāmī and Amīr Khusrau of Dihlī. The _Maṣnawī_ must be that of Jalālu'd-dīn _Rūmī_. (H.B.)

[115] Probably below the Tīrāk (Poplar) Pass, the caravan route much exposed to avalanches.

Mr. Erskine notes that this anecdote is erroneously told as of Bābur by Firishta and others. Perhaps it has been confused with the episode on f. 207b. Firishta makes another mistaken attribution to Bābur, that of Ḥasan of Yaq`ūb's couplet. (H.B.) _Cf._ f. 13b and Dow's _Hindustan_ ii, 218.

[116] _yīgītlār_, young men, the modern _jighit_. Bābur uses the word for men on the effective fighting strength. It answers to the "brave" of North. American Indian story; here de C. translates it by _braves_.

[117] _ma`jūn._ _Cf._ Von Schwarz p. 286 for a recipe.

[118] _mutaiyam._ This word, not clearly written in all MSS., has been mistaken for _yītīm_. _Cf._ JRAS 1910 p. 882 for a note upon it by my husband to whom I owe the emendation.

[119] _na'l u dāghī bisyār īdī_, that is, he had inflicted on himself many of the brands made by lovers and enthusiasts. _Cf._ Chardin's _Voyages_ ii, 253 and Lady M. Montague's _Letters_ p. 200.

[120] _tīka sīkrītkū_, lit. likely to make goats leap, from _sīkrīmāk_ to jump close-footed (Shaw).

[121] _sīkrīkān dūr._ Both _sīkrītkū_ and _sīkrīkān dūr_, appear to dictate translation in general terms and not by reference to a single traditional leap by one goat.

[122] _i.e._ Russian; it is the Arys tributary of the Sīr.

[123] The Fr. map of 1904 shows Kas, in the elbow of the Sīr, which seems to represent Khwāṣ.

[124] _i.e._ the Chīr-chīk tributary of the Sīr.

[125] Concerning his name, _see_ T.R. p. 173.

[126] _i.e._ he was a head-man of a horde sub-division, nominally numbering 10,000, and paying their dues direct to the supreme Khān. (T.R. p. 301.)

[127] _ghūnchachī i.e._ one ranking next to the four legal wives, in Turkī _aūdālīq_, whence odalisque. Bābur and Gul-badan mention the promotion of several to Begīm's rank by virtue of their motherhood.

[128] One of Bābur's quatrains, quoted in the _Abūshqa_, is almost certainly addressed to Khān-zāda. _Cf._ A.Q. Review, Jan. 1911, p. 4; H. Beveridge's _Some verses of Bābur_. For an account of her marriage _see Shaibānī-nāma_ (Vambéry) cap. xxxix.

[129] Kehr's MS. has a passage here not found elsewhere and seeming to be an adaptation of what is at the top of Ḥai. MS. f. 88. (Ilminsky, p. 10, _ba wujūd ... tāpīb_.)

[130] _tūshtī_, which here seems to mean that she fell to his share on division of captives. Muḥ. Ṣaliḥ makes it a love-match and places the marriage before Bābur's departure. _Cf._ f. 95 and notes.

[131] _aūgāhlān._ Khurram would be about five when given Balkh in _circa_ 911 AH. (1505 AD.). He died when about 12. _Cf._ Ḥ.S. ii, 364.

[132] This _fatrat_ (interregnum) was between Bābur's loss of Farghāna and his gain of Kābul; the _furṣatlār_ were his days of ease following success in Hindūstān and allowing his book to be written.

[133] _qīlālīng_, lit. do thou be (setting down), a verbal form recurring on f. 227b l. 2. With the same form (_aīt_)_ālīng_, lit. do thou be saying, the compiler of the _Abūshqa_ introduces his quotations. Shaw's paradigm, _qīlīng_ only. _Cf._ A.Q.R. Jan. 1911, p. 2.

[134] Kehr's MS. (Ilminsky p. 12) and its derivatives here interpolate the erroneous statement that the sons of Yūnas were Afāq and Bābā Khāns.

[135] _i.e._ broke up the horde. _Cf._ T.R. p. 74.

[136] _See_ f. 50b for his descent.

[137] Descendants of these captives were in Kāshghar when Ḥaidar was writing the T.R. It was completed in 953 AH. (1547 AD.). _Cf._ T.R. pp. 81 and 149.

[138] An omission from his Persian source misled Mr. Erskine here into making Abū-sa`īd celebrate the Khānīm's marriage, not with himself but with his defeated foe, `Abdu'l-`azīz who had married her 28 years earlier.

[139] Aīsān-būghā was at Āq Sū in Eastern Turkistān; Yūnas Khān's head-quarters were in Yītī-kīnt. The Sāghārīchī _tūmān_ was a subdivision of the Kūnchī Mughūls.

[140] _Khān kūtārdīlār._ The primitive custom was to lift the Khān-designate off the ground; the phrase became metaphorical and would seem to be so here, since there were two upon the felt. _Cf._, however, Th. Radloff's _Récueil d'Itinéraires_ p. 326.

[141] _qūyūb īdī_, probably in childhood.

[142] She was divorced by Shaibānī Khān in 907 AH. in order to allow him to make lawful marriage with her niece, Khān-zāda.

[143] This was a prudential retreat before Shaibānī Khān. _Cf._ f. 213.

[144] The "Khān" of his title bespeaks his Chaghatāī-Mughūl descent through his mother, the "Mīrzā," his Tīmūrid-Turkī, through his father. The capture of the women was facilitated by the weakening of their travelling escort through his departure. _Cf._ T.R. p. 203.

[145] Qila`-i-ẕafar. Its ruins are still to be seen on the left bank of the Kukcha. _Cf._ T.R. p. 220 and Kostenko i, 140. For Mubārak Shāh _Muẓaffarī_ _see_ f. 213 and T.R. _s.n._

[146] Ḥabība, a child when captured, was reared by Shaibānī and by him given in marriage to his nephew. _Cf._ T.R. p. 207 for an account of this marriage as saving Ḥaidar's life.

[147] _i.e._ she did not take to flight with her husband's defeated force, but, relying on the victor, her cousin Bābur, remained in the town. _Cf._ T.R. p. 268. Her case receives light from Shahr-bānū's (f. 169).

[148] Muḥammad Ḥaidar Mīrzā _Kūrkān Dūghlāt Chaghatāī Mūghūl_, the author of the _Tārīkh-i-rashīdī_; b. 905 AH. d. 958 AH. (b. 1499 d. 1551 AD.). Of his clan, the "Oghlāt" (Dūghlāt) Muḥ. ṣāliḥ says that it was called "Oghlāt" by Mughūls but Qūngūr-āt (Brown Horse) by Aūzbegs.

[149] _Baz garadad ba aṣl-i-khūd hama chīz, Zar-i-ṣāfī u naqra u airzīn._

These lines are in Arabic in the introduction to the _Anwār-i-suhailī_. (H.B.) The first is quoted by Ḥaidar (T.R. p. 354) and in Field's _Dict. of Oriental Quotations_ (p. 160). I understand them to refer here to Ḥaidar's return to his ancestral home and nearest kin as being a natural act.

[150] _tā'ib_ and _ṯarīqā_ suggest that Ḥaidar had become an orthodox Musalmān in or about 933 AH. (1527 AD.).

[151] Abū'l-faẓl adds music to Ḥaidar's accomplishments and Ḥaidar's own Prologue mentions yet others.

[152] _Cf._ T.R. _s.n._ and Gul-badan's H.N. _s.n._ Ḥaram Begīm.

[153] _i.e._ Alexander of Macedon. For modern mention of Central Asian claims to Greek descent _see i.a._ Kostenko, Von Schwarz, Holdich and A. Durand. _Cf._ Burnes' _Kābul_ p. 203 for an illustration of a silver _patera_ (now in the V. and A. Museum), once owned by ancestors of this Shāh Sulṯān Muḥammad.

[154] _Cf._ f. 6b note.

[155] _i.e._ Khān's child.

[156] The careful pointing of the Ḥai. MS. clears up earlier confusion by showing the narrowing of the vowels from _ālāchī_ to _alacha_.

[157] The Elph. MS. (f. 7) writes _Aūng_, Khān's son, Prester John's title, where other MSS. have Adik. Bābur's brevity has confused his account of Sulṯān-nigār. Widowed of Maḥmūd in 900 AH. she married Adik; Adik, later, joined Shaibānī Khān but left him in 908 AH. perhaps secretly, to join his own Qāzāq horde. He was followed by his wife, apparently also making a private departure. As Adik died shortly after 908 AH. his daughters were born before that date and not after it as has been understood. _Cf._ T.R. and G.B.'s H.N. _s.nn._; also Mems. p. 14 and _Méms._ i, 24.

[158] Presumably by tribal custom, _yīnkālīk_, marriage with a brother's widow. Such marriages seem to have been made frequently for the protection of women left defenceless.

[159] Sa`īd's power to protect made him the refuge of several kinswomen mentioned in the B.N. and the T.R. This mother and child reached Kāshghar in 932 AH. (1526 AD.).

Here Bābur ends his [interpolated] account of his mother's family and resumes that of his father's.

[160] Bābur uses a variety of phrases to express Lordship in the Gate. Here he writes _aīshīknī bāshlātīb_; elsewhere, _aīshīk ikhtiyārī qīlmāq_ and _mīnīng aīshīkīmdā ṣāḥib ikhtiyārī qīlmāq_. Von Schwarz (p. 159) throws light on the duties of the Lord of the Gate (_Aīshīk Āghāsī_). "Das Thür ... führt in eine grosse, vier-eckige, höhe Halle, deren Boden etwa 2 m. über den Weg erhoben ist. In dieser Halle, welche alle passieren muss, der durch das Thor eingeht, reitet oder fahrt, ist die Thorwache placiert. Tagsüber sind die Thore beständig öffen, nach Eintritt der Dunkelheit aber werden dieselben geschlossen und die Schlüssel dem zuständigen Polizeichef abgeliefert.... In den erwähnten Thorhallen nehmen in den hoch unabhängigen Gebieten an Bazar-tagen haufig die Richter Platz, um jedem der irgend ein Anliegen hat, so fort Recht zu sprechen. Die zudiktierten Strafen werden auch gleich in diesem selben locale vollzogen und eventuell die zum Hangen verurteilten Verbrecher an den Deckbalken aufgehängt, so dass die Besucher des Bazars unter den gehenkten durchpassieren müssen."

[161] _bu khabarnī `Abdu'l-wahhāb shaghāwaldīn `arẓa-dāsht qīlīb Mīrzāghā chāptūrdīlār._ This passage has been taken to mean that the _shaghāwal_, _i.e._ chief scribe, was the courier, but I think Bābur's words shew that the _shaghāwal's_ act preceded the despatch of the news. Moreover the only accusative of the participle and of the verb is _khabarnī_. `Abdu'l-wahhāb had been `Umar Shaikh's and was now Aḥmad's officer in Khujand, on the main road for Aūrā-tīpā whence the courier started on the rapid ride. The news may have gone verbally to `Abdu'l-wahhāb and he have written it on to Aḥmad and Abū-sa`īd.

[162] Measured from point to point even, the distance appears to be over 500 miles. Concerning Bābā Khākī _see_ Ḥ.S. ii. 224; for rapid riding _i.a._ Kostenko iii, cap. Studs.

[163] _qūshūqlārnī yakhshī aītūrā īkān dūr._ Elph. MS. for _qūshūq_, _tūyūk_. _Qūshūq_ is allowed, both by its root and by usage, to describe improvisations of combined dance and song. I understand from Bābur's tense, that his information was hearsay only.

[164] _i.e._ of the military class. _Cf._ Vullers _s.n._ and T.R. p. 301.

[165] The Hūma is a fabulous bird, overshadowing by whose wings brings good-fortune. The couplet appears to be addressed to some man, under the name Hūma, from whom Ḥasan of Yaq`ūb hoped for benefit.

[166] _khāk-bīla_; the _Sanglākh_, (quoting this passage) gives _khāk-p:l:k_ as the correct form of the word.

[167] _Cf._ f. 99b.

[168] One of Tīmūr's begs.

[169] _i.e._ uncle on the mother's side, of any degree, here a grandmother's brother. The title appears to have been given for life to men related to the ruling House. Parallel with it are Madame Mère, Royal Uncle, Sulṯān Wālida.

[170] _kīm dīsā būlghāī_, perhaps meaning, "Nothing of service to me."

[171] Wais the Thin.

[172] _Cf._ Chardin ed. Langlès v, 461 and ed. 1723 AD. v, 183.

[173] n.e. of Kāsān. _Cf._ f. 74. Ḥai MS., erroneously, Samarkand.

[174] An occasional doubt arises as to whether a _ṯaurī_ of the text is Arabic and dispraises or Turkī and laudatory. _Cf._ Mems. p. 17 and _Méms._ i, 3.

[175] Elph. and Ḥai. MSS. _aftābachī_, water-bottle bearer on journeys; Kehr (p. 82) _aftābchī_, ewer-bearer; Ilminsky (p. 19) _akhtachi_, squire or groom. Circumstances support _aftābachī_. Yūnas was town-bred, his ewer-bearer would hardly be the rough Mughūl, Qaṃbar-`alī, useful as an _aftābachī_.

[176] Bābur was Governor of Andijān and the month being June, would be living out-of-doors. _Cf._ Ḥ.S. ii. 272 and Schuyler ii, 37.

[177] To the word Sherīm applies Abū'l-ghāzī's explanation of Nurūm and Ḥājīm, namely, that they are abbreviations of Nūr and Ḥājī Muḥammad. It explains Sulṯānīm also when used (f. 72) of Sl. Muḥammad Khānika but of Sulṯānīm as the name is common with Bābur, Ḥaidar and Gul-badan, _i.e._ as a woman's, Busbecq's explanation is the better, namely, that it means My Sulṯān and is applied to a person of rank and means. This explains other women's titles _e.g._ Khānīm, my Khān and Ākām (Ākīm), My Lady. A third group of names formed like the last by enclitic _'m_ (my), may be called names of affection, _e.g._ Māhīm, My Moon, Jānīm, My Life. (_Cf._ Persian equivalents.) Cf. Abū'l-ghāzī's _Shajarat-i-Turkī_ (Désmaisons p. 272); and Ogier Ghiselin de Busbecq's _Life and Letters_ (Forster and Daniel i, 38.)

[178] _Namāz-gāh_; generally an open terrace, with a wall towards the Qibla and outside the town, whither on festival days the people go out in crowds to pray. (Erskine.)

[179] _Bēglār (nīng) mīnī u wilāyatnī tāpshūrghūlārī dūr_; a noticeably idiomatic sentence. _Cf._ f. 16b 1. 6 and 1. 7 for a repetition.

[180] Maḥmūd was in Tāshkīnt, Aḥmad in Kāshghār or on the Āq-sū.

[181] The B.N. contains a considerable number of what are virtually footnotes. They are sometimes, as here, entered in the middle of a sentence and confuse the narrative; they are introduced by _kīm_, a mere sign of parenthetical matter to follow, and some certainly, known not to be Bābur's own, must have stood first on the margin of his text. It seems best to enter them as Author's notes.

[182] _i.e._ the author of the Hidāyat. _Cf._ f. 3b and note; Blochmann _Āyīn-i-akbarī s.n. qulij_ and note; Bellew's _Afghan Tribes_ p. 100, _Khilich_.

[183] Ar. dead, gone. The precision of Bābur's words _khānwādalār_ and _yūsūnlūq_ is illustrated by the existence in the days of Tīmūr, in Marghīnān, (Burhānu'd-dīn's township) of a ruler named Aīlīk Khān, apparently a descendant of Sātūq-būghrā Khān (b. 384 AH.-994 AD.) so that in Khwāja Qāẓī were united two dynasties, (_khānwādalār_), one priestly, perhaps also regal, the other of bye-gone ruling Khāns. Cf. D'Herbélot p. 433; _Yarkand Mission_, Bellew p. 121; _Taẕkirat-i Sulṯān Sātūq-būghrā Khān Ghāzī Pādshāh_ and _Tārīkh-i-nāṣirī_ (Raverty _s.n._)

[184] _darzī_; Ḥ.S. _khaiyāṯ_.

[185] _bīr yīrgā_ (_qūyūb_), lit. to one place.

[186] _i.e._ reconstructed the earthern defences. _Cf._ Von Schwarz _s.n._ loess.

[187] They had been sent, presumably, before `Umar Shaikh's death, to observe Sl. Aḥmad M.'s advance. _Cf._ f. 6.

[188] The time-table of the Andijān Railway has a station, Kouwa (Qabā).

[189] Bābur, always I think, calls this man Long Ḥasan; Khwānd-amīr styles him Khwāja Ḥasan; he seems to be the brother of one of `Umar Shaikh's fathers-in-law, Khwāja Ḥusain.

[190] _bātqāq._ This word is underlined in the Elph. MS. by _dil-dil_ and in the Ḥai. MS. by _jam-jama_. It is translated in the W.-i-B. by _āb pur hīla_, water full of deceit; it is our Slough of Despond. It may be remarked that neither Zenker nor Steingass gives to _dil-dil_ or _jam-jama_ the meaning of morass; the _Akbar-nāma_ does so. (H.B. ii, 112.)

[191] _ṯawīla ṯawīla ātlār yīghīlīb aūlā kīrīshtī_. I understand the word _yīghīlīb_ to convey that the massing led to the spread of the murrain.

[192] _jān tārātmāqlār_ _i.e._ as a gift to their over-lord.

[193] Perhaps, Bābur's maternal great-uncle. It would suit the privileges bestowed on Tarkhāns if their title meant _Khān of the Gifts_ (Turkī _tar_, gift). In the _Bāburnāma_, it excludes all others. Most of Aḥmad's begs were Tarkhāns, Arghūns and Chīngīz Khānids, some of them ancestors of later rulers in Tatta and Sind. Concerning the Tarkhāns _see_ T.R. p. 55 and note; A.N. (H.B. _s.n._) Elliot and Dowson's _History of India_, 498.

[194] _Cf._ f. 6.

[195] _beg ātākā_, lit. beg for father.

[196] T.R. _s.n._ Ābā-bikr.

[197] _Cf._ f. 6b and note.

[198] _faqra u masākin_, _i.e._ those who have food for one day and those who have none in hand. (Steingass.)

[199] For fashions of sitting, _see_ _Tawārīkh-i-guzīda Naṣrat-nāma_ B.M. Or. 3222. Aḥmad would appear to have maintained the deferential attitude by kneeling and sitting back upon his heels.

[200] _bīr sūnkāk bār īkān dūr._ I understand that something defiling must have been there, perhaps a bone.

[201] _Khwājanīng ham āyāghlārī ārādā īdī._

[202] _īlbāsūn_, a kind of mallard (_Abūshqa_), here perhaps a popinjay. _Cf._ Ḥ.S. ii, 193 for Aḥmad's skill as an archer, and Payne-Gallwey's _Cross-bow_ p. 225.

[203] _qabāq_, an archer's mark. Abū'l-ghāzī (Kāsān ed. p. 181. 5) mentions a hen (_tūqūq_) as a mark. _Cf._ Payne-Gallwey _l.c._ p. 231.

[204] _qīrghīcha, astar palumbarius._ (Shaw's Voc. Scully.)

[205] Perhaps, not quarrelsome.

[206] The T.R. (p. 116) attributes the rout to Shaibānī's defection. The Ḥ.S. (ii, 192) has a varied and confused account. An error in the T.R. trs. making Shaibānī plunder the Mughūls, is manifestly clerical.

[207] _i.e._ condiment, _ce qu'on ajoute au pain_.

[208] _Cf._ f. 6.

[209] _qāzāqlār_; here, if Bābur's, meaning his conflicts with Taṃbal, but as the Begīm may have been some time in Khujand, the _qāzāqlār_ may be of Samarkand.

[210] All the (Turkī) Bābur-nāma MSS. and those examined of the W.-i-B. by writing _aūltūrdī_ (killed) where I suggest to read _aūlnūrdī_ (_devenir comme il faut_) state that Aḥmad killed Qātāq. I hesitate to accept this (1) because the only evidence of the murder is one diacritical point, the removal of which lifts Aḥmad's reproach from him by his return to the accepted rules of a polygamous household; (2) because no murder of Qātāq is chronicled by Khwānd-amīr or other writers; and (3) because it is incredible that a mild, weak man living in a family atmosphere such as Bābur, Ḥaidar and Gul-badan reproduce for us, should, while possessing facility for divorce, kill the mother of four out of his five children.

Reprieve must wait however until the word _tīrīklīk_ is considered. This Erskine and de C. have read, with consistency, to mean _life-time_, but if _aūlnūrdī_ be read in place of _aūltūrdī_ (killed), _tīrīklīk_ may be read, especially in conjunction with Bābur's _`āshīqlīklār_, as meaning _living power_ or _ascendancy_. Again, if read as from _tīrik_, a small arrow and a consuming pain, _tīrīklīk_ may represent Cupid's darts and wounds. Again it might be taken as from _tīrāmāk_, to hinder, or forbid.

Under these considerations, it is legitimate to reserve judgment on Aḥmad.

[211] It is customary amongst Turks for a bride, even amongst her own family, to remain veiled for some time after marriage; a child is then told to pluck off the veil and run away, this tending, it is fancied, to the child's own success in marriage. (Erskine.)

[212] Bābur's anecdote about Jānī Beg well illustrates his caution as a narrator. He appears to tell it as one who knowing the point of a story, leads up to it. He does not affirm that Jānī Beg's habits were strange or that the envoy was an athlete but that both things must have been (_īkān dūr_) from what he had heard or to suit the point of the anecdote. Nor does he affirm as of his own knowledge that Aūzbegs calls a strong man (his _zor kīshī_) a _būkuh_ (bull) but says it is so understood (_dīr īmīsh_).

[213] _Cf._ f. 170.

[214] The points of a _tīpūchāq_ are variously stated. If the root notion of the name be movement (_tīp_), Erskine's observation, that these horses are taught special paces, is to the point. To the verb _tīprāmāq_ dictionaries assign the meaning of _movement with agitation of mind_, an explanation fully illustrated in the B.N. The verb describes fittingly the dainty, nervous action of some trained horses. Other meanings assigned to _tūpūchāq_ are roadster, round-bodied and swift.

[215] _Cf._ f. 37b.

[216] _Cf._ f. 6b and note.

[217] _mashaf kitābat qīlūr īdī._

[218] _Cf._ f. 36 and Ḥ.S. ii. 271.

[219] _sīnkīlīsī ham mūndā īdī._

[220] _khāna-wādalār_, _viz._ the Chaghatāī, the Tīmūrid in two Mīrān-shāhī branches, `Alī's and Bābur's and the Bāī-qarā in Harāt.

[221] _aūghlāqchī_ _i.e._ player at _kūk-būrā_. Concerning the game, _see_ Shaw's Vocabulary; Schuyler i, 268; Kostenko iii, 82; Von Schwarz _s.n. baiga_.

[222] Ẕū'l-ḥijja 910 AH.-May 1505 AD. _Cf._ f. 154. This statement helps to define what Bābur reckoned his expeditions into Hindūstān.

[223] Aīkū (Ayāgū)-tīmūr _Tarkhān Arghūn_ d. _circa_ 793 AH.-1391 AD. He was a friend of Tīmūr. _See_ Z̤.N. i, 525 etc.

[224] _āndāq ikhlāq u aṯawārī yūq īdī kīm dīsā būlghāī._ The _Shāh-nāma_ cap. xviii, describes him as a spoiled child and man of pleasure, caring only for eating, drinking and hunting. The _Shaibānī-nāma_ narrates his various affairs.

[225] _i.e._, _cutlass_, a parallel sobriquet to _qīlīch_, sword. If it be correct to translate by "cutlass," the nickname may have prompted Bābur's brief following comment, _mardāna īkān dūr_, _i.e._ Qulī Muḥ. must have been brave because known as the Cutlass. A common variant in MSS. from _Būghdā_ is Bāghdād; Bāghdād was first written in the Ḥai. MS. but is corrected by the scribe to _būghdā_.

[226] So pointed in the Ḥai. MS. I surmise it a clan-name.

[227] _i.e._ to offer him the succession. The mountain road taken from Aūrā-tīpā would be by Āb-burdan, Sara-tāq and the Kām Rūd defile.

[228] _īrīldī._ The departure can hardly have been open because Aḥmad's begs favoured Maḥmūd; Malik-i-Muḥammad's party would be likely to slip away in small companies.

[229] This well-known Green, Grey or Blue palace or halting-place was within the citadel of Samarkand. _Cf._ f. 37. It served as a prison from which return was not expected.

[230] _Cf._ f. 27. He married a full-sister of Bāī-sunghar.

[231] _Gulistān_ Part I. Story 27. For "steaming up," _see_ Tennyson's Lotus-eaters Choric song, canto 8 (H.B.).

[232] Elph. MS. f. 16b; First W.-i-B. I.O. 215 f. 19; Second W.-i-B. I.O. 217 f. 15b; Memoirs p. 27.

[233] He was a _Dūghlāt_, uncle by marriage of Ḥaidar Mīrzā and now holding Khost for Maḥmūd. _See_ T.R. s.n. for his claim on Aīsān-daulat's gratitude.

[234] _tāsh qūrghān dā chīqār dā._ Here (as _e.g._ f. 110b l. 9) the Second W.-i-B. translates _tāsh_ as though it meant _stone_ instead of outer. _Cf._ f. 47 for an adjectival use of _tāsh_, stone, with the preposition (_tāsh_) _din_. The places contrasted here are the citadel (_ark_) and the walled-town (_qūrghān_). The _chīqār_ (exit) is the fortified Gate-house of the mud circumvallation. _Cf._ f. 46 for another example of _chīqār_.

[235] Elph. Ḥai. Kehr's MSS., _ānīng bīla bār kīshi bār beglārnī tūtūrūldī_. This idiom recurs on f. 76b l. 8. A palimpsest entry in the Elph. MS. produces the statement that when Ḥasan fled, his begs returned to Andijān.

[236] Ḥai. MS. _awī mūnkūzī_, underlined by _sāgh-i-gāū_, cows' thatched house. [_T. mūnkūz_, lit. horn, means also cattle.] Elph. MS., _awī mūnkūsh_, underlined by _dar jā'ī khwāb alfakhta_, sleeping place. [T. _mūnkūsh_, retired.]

[237] The first _qāchār_ of this pun has been explained as _gurez-gāh_, _sharm-gāh_, hinder parts, _fuite_ and _vertèbre inférieur_. The Ḥ.S. (ii, 273 l. 3 fr. ft.) says the wound was in a vital (_maqattal_) part.

[238] From Niẕāmī's _Khusrau u Shirīn_, Lahore lith. ed. p. 137 l. 8. It is quoted also in the A.N. Bib. Ind. ed. ii, 207 (H.B. ii, 321). (H.B.).

[239] _See_ Hughes _Dictionary of Islām s.nn._ Eating and Food.

[240] _Cf._ f. 6b and note. If `Umar Shaikh were Maḥmūd's full-brother, his name might well appear here.

[241] _i.e._ "Not a farthing, not a half-penny."

[242] Here the Mems. enters a statement, not found in the Turkī text, that Maḥmūd's dress was elegant and fashionable.

[243] _n:h:l:m._ My husband has cleared up a mistake (Mems. p. 28 and _Méms._ i, 54) of supposing this to be the name of an animal. It is explained in the A.N. (i, 255. H.B. i, 496) as a Badakhshī equivalent of _tasqāwal_; _tasqāwal_ var. _tāshqāwal_, is explained by the _Farhang-i-aẕfarī_, a Turkī-Persian Dict. seen in the Mullā Fīroz Library of Bombay, to mean _rāh band kunanda_, the stopping of the road. _Cf._ J.R.A.S. 1900 p. 137.

[244] _i.e._ "a collection of poems in the alphabetical order of the various end rhymes." (Steingass.)

[245] At this battle Daulat-shāh was present. _Cf._ Browne's D.S. for Astarābād p. 523 and for Andikhūd p. 532. For this and all other references to D.S. and Ḥ.S. I am indebted to my husband.

[246] The following dates will help out Bābur's brief narrative. Maḥmūd _æt._ 7, was given Astarābād in 864 AH. (1459-60 AD.); it was lost to Ḥusain at Jauz-wilāyat and Maḥmūd went into Khurāsān in 865 AH.; he was restored by his father in 866 AH.; on his father's death (873 AH.-1469 AD.) he fled to Harāt, thence to Samarkand and from there was taken to Ḥiṣār _æt._ 16. _Cf._ D'Herbélot _s.n._ Abū-sa`ad; Ḥ.S. i, 209; Browne's D.S. p. 522.

[247] Presumably the "Hindūstān the Less" of Clavijo (Markham p. 3 and p. 113), approx. Qaṃbar-`alī's districts. Clavijo includes Tīrmīẕ under the name.

[248] Perhaps a Ṣufī term,—longing for the absent friend. For particulars about this man _see_ Ḥ.S. ii, 235 and Browne's D.S. p. 533.

[249] Here in the Ḥai. MS. is one of several blank spaces, waiting for information presumably not known to Bābur when writing. The space will have been in the archetype of the Ḥai. MS. and it makes for the opinion that the Ḥai. MS. is a direct copy of Bābur's own. This space is not left in the Elph. MS. but that MS. is known from its scribe's note (f. 198) down to f. 198 (Ḥai. MS. f. 243b) to have been copied from "other writings" and only subsequent to its f. 198 from Bābur's own. _Cf._ JRAS 1906 p. 88 and 1907 p. 143.

[250] The T.R. (p. 330) supplies this name.

[251] _Cf._ f. 35b. This was a betrothal only, the marriage being made in 903 AH. _Cf._ Ḥ.S. ii, 260 and Gul-badan's H.N. f. 24b.

[252] Kehr's MS. supplies Aī (Moon) as her name but it has no authority. The Elph. MS. has what may be _lā nām_, no name, on its margin and over _tūrūtūnchī_ (4th.) its usual sign of what is problematical.

[253] _See_ Ḥ.S. ii, 250. Here Pīr-i-Muḥammad _Aīlchī-būghā_ was drowned. _Cf._ f. 29.

[254] Chaghānīān is marked in Erskine's (Mems.) map as somewhere about the head of (Fr. map 1904) the Ilyak Water, a tributary of the Kāfir-nighān.

[255] _i.e._ when Bābur was writing in Hindūstān.

[256] For his family _see_ f. 55b note to Yār-`alī _Balāl_.

[257] _bā wujūd turklūk muhkam paidā kunanda īdī._

[258] Roebuck's _Oriental Proverbs_ (p. 232) explains the _five_ of this phrase where _seven_ might be expected, by saying that of this Seven days' world (qy. days of Creation) one is for birth, another for death, and that thus five only are left for man's brief life.

[259] The cognomen _Aīlchī-būghā_, taken with the bearer's recorded strength of fist, may mean Strong man of Aīlchī (the capital of Khutan). One of Tīmūr's commanders bore the name. _Cf._ f. 21b for _būghū_ as _athlete_.

[260] Hazārāspī seems to be Mīr Pīr Darwesh Hazārāspī. With his brother, Mīr `Alī, he had charge of Balkh. _See Rauzatu'ṣ-ṣafā_ B.M. Add. 23506, f. 242b; Browne's D.S. p. 432. It may be right to understand a hand-to-hand fight between Hazārāspī and Aīlchī-būghā. The affair was in 857 AH. (1453 AD.).

[261] _yārāq sīz_, perhaps trusting to fisticuffs, perhaps without mail. Bābur's summary has confused the facts. Muḥ. Aīlchī-būghā was sent by Sl. Maḥmūd Mīrzā from Ḥiṣār with 1,000 men and did not issue out of Qūndūz. (Ḥ.S. ii, 251.) His death occurred not before 895 AH.

[262] _See_ T.R. _s.nn._ Mīr Ayūb and Ayūb.

[263] This passage is made more clear by f. 120b and f. 125b.

[264] He is mentioned in _`Alī-sher Nawā'ī's Majālis-i-nafā'is_; _see_ B.M. Add. 7875, f. 278 and Rieu's Turkish Catalogue.

[265] ? full of splits or full handsome.

[266] This may have occurred after Abū-sa`īd Mīrzā's death whose son Abā-bikr was. _Cf._ f. 28. If so, over-brevity has obscured the statement.

[267] _mīnglīgh aīldīn dūr_, perhaps of those whose hereditary Command was a Thousand, the head of a Mīng (Pers. Hazāra), _i.e._ of the tenth of a _tūmān_.

[268] _qūrghān-nīng tāshīdā yāngī tām qūpārīb sālā dūr._ I understand, that what was taken was a new circumvallation in whole or in part. Such double walls are on record. _Cf._ Appendix A.

[269] _bahādurlūq aūlūsh_, an actual portion of food.

[270] _i.e._ either unmailed or actually naked.

[271] The old English noun _strike_ expresses the purpose of the _sar-kob_. It is "an instrument for scraping off what rises above the top" (Webster, whose example is grain in a measure). The _sar-kob_ is an erection of earth or wood, as high as the attacked walls, and it enabled besiegers to strike off heads appearing above the ramparts.

[272] _i.e._ the dislocation due to `Umar Shaikh's death.

[273] _Cf._ f. 13. The Ḥ.S. (ii, 274) places his son, Mīr Mughūl, in charge, but otherwise agrees with the B.N.

[274] _Cf._ Clavijo, Markham p. 132. Sir Charles Grandison bent the knee on occasions but illustrated MSS. _e.g._ the B.M. _Tawārīkh-i-guzīda Naṣrat-nāma_ show that Bābur would kneel down on both knees. _Cf._ f. 123b for the fatigue of the genuflection.

[275] I have translated _kūrūshūb_ thus because it appears to me that here and in other places, stress is laid by Bābur upon the mutual gaze as an episode of a ceremonious interview. The verb _kūrūshmak_ is often rendered by the Persian translators as _daryāftan_ and by the L. and E. Memoirs as _to embrace_. I have not found in the B.N. warrant for translating it as _to embrace_; _qūchūshmāq_ is Bābur's word for this (f. 103). _Daryāftan_, taken as to grasp or see with the mind, to understand, well expresses mutual gaze and its sequel of mutual understanding. Sometimes of course, _kūrūsh_, the interview does not imply _kūrūsh_, the silent looking in the eyes with mutual understanding; it simply means _se voyer_ _e.g._ f. 17. The point is thus dwelt upon because the frequent mention of an embrace gives a different impression of manners from that made by "interview" or words expressing mutual gaze.

[276] _dābān._ This word Réclus (vi, 171) quoting from Fedschenko, explains as a difficult rocky defile; _art_, again, as a dangerous gap at a high elevation; _bel_, as an easy low pass; and _kūtal_, as a broad opening between low hills. The explanation of _kūtal_ does not hold good for Bābur's application of the word (f. 81b) to the Sara-tāq.

[277] _Cf._ f. 4b and note. From Bābur's special mention of it, it would seem not to be the usual road.

[278] The spelling of this name is uncertain. Variants are many. Concerning the tribe _see_ T.R. p. 165 n.

[279] Niẕāmu'd-dīn `Alī _Barlās_: _see_ Gul-badan's H.N. _s.n._ He served Bābur till the latter's death.

[280] _i.e._ Ẕū'n-nūn or perhaps the garrison.

[281] _i.e._ down to Shaibānī's destruction of Chaghatāī rule in Tāshkīnt in 1503 AD.

[282] Elph. MS. f. 23; W.-i-B. I.O. 215 f. 26 and 217 f. 21; Mems. p. 35.

Bābur's own affairs form a small part of this year's record; the rest is drawn from the Ḥ.S. which in its turn, uses Bābur's f. 34 and f. 37b. Each author words the shared material in his own style; one adding magniloquence, the other retracting to plain statement, indeed summarizing at times to obscurity. Each passes his own judgment on events, _e.g._ here Khwānd-amīr's is more favourable to Ḥusain Bāī-qarā's conduct of the Ḥiṣār campaign than Bābur's. _Cf._ Ḥ.S. ii, 256-60 and 274.

[283] This feint would take him from the Oxus.

[284] Tīrmīẕ to Ḥiṣār, 96m. (Réclus vi, 255).

[285] Ḥ.S. Wazr-āb valley. The usual route is up the Kām Rūd and over the Mūra pass to Sara-tāq. _Cf._ f. 81b.

[286] _i.e._ the Ḥiṣārī mentioned a few lines lower and on f. 99b. Nothing on f. 99b explains his cognomen.

[287] The road is difficult. _Cf._ f. 81b.

[288] Khwānd-amīr also singles out one man for praise, Sl. Maḥmūd _Mīr-i-ākhwur_; the two names probably represent one person. The sobriquet may refer to skill with a matchlock, to top-spinning (_firnagī-bāz_) or to some lost joke. (Ḥ.S. ii, 257.)

[289] This pregnant phrase has been found difficult. It may express that Bābur assigned the sulṯāns places in their due precedence; that he seated them in a row; and that they sat cross-legged, as men of rank, and were not made, as inferiors, to kneel and sit back on their heels. Out of this last meaning, I infer comes the one given by dictionaries, "to sit at ease," since the cross-legged posture is less irksome than the genuflection, not to speak of the ease of mind produced by honour received. _Cf._ f. 18b and note on Aḥmad's posture; Redhouse _s.nn. bāghīsh_ and _bāghdāsh_; and B.M. Tawārīkh-i-guzīda naṣrat-nāma, in the illustrations of which the chief personage, only, sits cross-legged.

[290] _siyāsat._ My translation is conjectural only.

[291] _sar-kob._ The old English noun _strike_, "an instrument for scraping off what appears above the top," expresses the purpose of the wall-high erections of wood or earth (_L. agger_) raised to reach what shewed above ramparts. _Cf._ Webster.

[292] Presumably lower down the Qūndūz Water.

[293] _aūz pādshāhī u mīrzālārīdīn artīb._

[294] _sic._ Ḥai. MS.; Elph. MS. "near Tāliqān"; some W.-i-B. MSS. "Great Garden." Gul-badan mentions a Tāliqān Garden. Perhaps the Mīrzā went so far east because, Ẕū'n-nūn being with him, he had Qandahār in mind. _Cf._ f. 42b.

[295] _i.e._ Sayyid Muḥammad `Alī. _See_ f. 15 n. to Sherīm. Khwāja Changāl lies 14 m. below Tāliqān on the Tāliqān Water. (Erskine.)

[296] f. 27b, second.

[297] The first was _circa_ 895 AH.-1490 AD. _Cf._ f. 27b.

[298] Bābur's wording suggests that their common homage was the cause of Badī`u'z-zamān's displeasure but _see_ f. 41.

[299] The Mīrzā had grown up with Ḥiṣārīs. _Cf._ Ḥ.S. ii, 270.

[300] As the husband of one of the six Badakhshī Begīms, he was closely connected with local ruling houses. _See_ T.R. p. 107.

[301] _i.e._ Muḥammad `Ubaidu'l-lāh the elder of _Aḥrārī's_ two sons. d. 911 AH. _See Rashaḥāt-i-`ain-alḥayāt_ (I.O. 633) f. 269-75; and _Khizīnatu'l-aṣfīya_ lith. ed. i, 597.

[302] _Bū yūq tūr_, _i.e._ This is not to be.

[303] d. 908 AH. He was not, it would seem, of the _Aḥrārī_ family. His own had provided Pontiffs (_Shaikhu'l-islām_) for Samarkand through 400 years. _Cf._ _Shaibānī-nāma_, Vambéry, p. 106; also, for his character, p. 96.

[304] _i.e._ he claimed sanctuary.

[305] _Cf._ f. 45b and Pétis de la Croix's _Histoire de Chīngīz Khān_ pp. 171 and 227. What Tīmūr's work on the Gūk Sarāī was is a question for archæologists.

[306] _i.e._ over the Aītmak Pass. _Cf._ f. 49.

[307] Ḥai. MS. _ārālighīgha_. Elph. MS. _ārāl_, island.

[308] _See_ f. 179b for _Binā'ī_. Muḥammad Ṣāliḥ Mīrzā _Khwārizmī_ is the author of the _Shaibānī-nāma_.

[309] Elph. MS. f. 27; W.-i-B. I.O. 215 f. 30b and 217 f. 25; Mems. p. 42.

[310] _i.e._ Circassian. Muḥammad Ṣāliḥ (Sh.N. Vambéry p. 276 l. 58) speaks of other Aūzbegs using Chirkas swords.

[311] _aīrtā yāzīghā._ My translation is conjectural. _Aīrtā_ implies _i.a._ foresight. _Yāzīghā_ allows a pun at the expense of the sulṯāns; since it can be read both as _to the open country_ and as _for their_ (_next_, _aīrtā_) _misdeeds_. My impression is that they took the opportunity of being outside Samarkand with their men, to leave Bāī-sunghar and make for Shaibānī, then in Turkistān. Muḥammad Ṣāliḥ also marking the tottering Gate of Sl. `Alī Mīrzā, left him now, also for Shaibānī. (Vambéry cap. xv.)

[312] _aūmāq_, to amuse a child in order to keep it from crying.

[313] _i.e._ with Khwāja Yahya presumably. _See_ f. 38.

[314] This man is mentioned also in the _Tawārikh-i-guzīda Naṣratnāma_ B.M. Or. 3222 f. 124b.

[315] Ḥ.S., on the last day of Ramẓān (June 28th. 1497 AD.).

[316] Muḥammad _Sīghal_ appears to have been a marked man. I quote from the T.G.N.N. (_see supra_), f. 123b foot, the information that he was the grandson of Ya`qūb Beg. Zenker explains _Sīghalī_ as the name of a Chaghatāī family. An _Ayūb-i-Ya`qūb Begchīk Mughūl_ may be an uncle. See f. 43 for another grandson.

[317] _baẓ'ī kīrkān-kīnt-kīsākkā bāsh-sīz-qīlghān Mughūllārnī tūtūb._ I take the word _kīsāk_ in this highly idiomatic sentence to be a diminutive of _kīs_, old person, on the analogy of _mīr_, _mīrāk_, _mard_, _mardak_. [The Ḥ.S. uses _Kīsāk_ (ii, 261) as a proper noun.] The alliteration in _kāf_ and the mighty adjective here are noticeable.

[318] Qāsim feared to go amongst the Mughūls lest he should meet retaliatory death. _Cf._ f. 99b.

[319] This appears from the context to be Yām (Jām) -bāī and not the Djouma (Jām) of the Fr. map of 1904, lying farther south. The Avenue named seems likely to be Tīmūr's of f. 45b and to be on the direct road for Khujand. _See_ Schuyler i, 232.

[320] _būghān buyīnī._ W.-i-B. 215, _yān_, thigh, and 217 _gardan_, throat. I am in doubt as to the meaning of _būghān_; perhaps the two words stand for joint at the nape of the neck. Khwāja-i-kalān was one of seven brothers, six died in Bābur's service, he himself served till Bābur's death.

[321] _Cf._ f. 48.

[322] Khorochkine (Radlov's _Réceuil d'Itinéraires_ p. 241) mentions Pul-i-mougak, a great stone bridge thrown across a deep ravine, east of Samarkand. _For_ Kūl-i-maghāk, deep pool, or pool of the fosse, _see_ f. 48b.

[323] From Khwānd-amīr's differing account of this affair, it may be surmised that those sending the message were not treacherous; but the message itself was deceiving inasmuch as it did not lead Bābur to expect opposition. _Cf._ f. 43 and note.

[324] Of this nick-name several interpretations are allowed by the dictionaries.

[325] _See_ Schuyler i, 268 for an account of this beautiful Highland village.

[326] Here Bābur takes up the thread, dropped on f. 36, of the affairs of the Khurāsānī mīrzās. He draws on other sources than the Ḥ.S.; perhaps on his own memory, perhaps on information given by Khurāsānīs with him in Hindūstān _e.g._ Ḥusain's grandson. _See_ f. 167b. _Cf._ Ḥ.S. ii, 261.

[327] _bāghīshlāb tūr._ _Cf._ f. 34 note to _bāghīsh dā_.

[328] _Bū sozlār aūnūlūng._ Some W.-i-B. MSS., _Farāmosh bakunīd_ for _nakunīd_, thus making the Mīrzā not acute but rude, and destroying the point of the story _i.e._ that the Mīrzā pretended so to have forgotten as to have an empty mind. Khwānd-amīr states that `Alī-sher prevailed at first; his tears therefore may have been of joy at the success of his pacifying mission.

[329] _i.e._ B.Z.'s father, Ḥusain, against Mū`min's father, B.Z. and Ḥusain's son, Muz̤affar Ḥusain against B.Z.'s son Mū`min;—a veritable conundrum.

[330] Garzawān lies west of Balkh. Concerning Pul-i-chirāgh Col. Grodekoff's _Ride to Harāt_ (Marvin p. 103 ff.) gives pertinent information. It has also a map showing the Pul-i-chirāgh meadow. The place stands at the mouth of a triply-bridged defile, but the name appears to mean Gate of the Lamp (_cf._ Gate of Tīmūr), and not Bridge of the Lamp, because the Ḥ.S. and also modern maps write _bīl_ (_bel_), pass, where the Turkī text writes _pul_, bridge, narrows, pass.

The lamp of the name is one at the shrine of a saint, just at the mouth of the defile. It was alight when Col. Grodekoff passed in 1879 and to it, he says, the name is due now—as it presumably was 400 years ago and earlier.

[331] Khwānd-amīr heard from the Mīrzā on the spot, when later in his service, that he was let down the precipice by help of turban-sashes tied together.

[332] _yīkīt yīlāng u yāyāq yālīng_; a jingle made by due phonetic change of vowels; a play too on _yālāng_, which first means stripped _i.e._ robbed and next unmailed, perhaps sometimes bare-bodied in fight.

[333] _qūsh-khāna._ As the place was outside the walls, it may be a good hawking ground and not a falconry.

[334] The Ḥ.S. mentions (ii, 222) a Sl. Aḥmad of Chār-shaṃba, a town mentioned _e.g._ by Grodekoff p. 123. It also spoils Bābur's coincidence by fixing Tuesday, Shab`ān 29th. for the battle. Perhaps the commencement of the Muḥammadan day at sunset, allows of both statements.

[335] Elph. MS. f. 30b; W.-i-B. I.O. 215 f. 34 and 217 f. 26b; Mems. p. 46.

The abruptness of this opening is due to the interposition of Sl. Ḥusain M.'s affairs between Bābur's statement on f. 41 that he returned from Aūrgūt and this first of 903 AH. that on return he encamped in Qulba.

[336] _See_ f. 48b.

[337] _i.e._ Chūpān-ātā; _see_ f. 45 and note.

[338] _Aūghlāqchī_, the Grey Wolfer of f. 22.

[339] A sobriquet, the _suppliant_ or perhaps something having connection with musk. Ḥ.S. ii, 278, son of Ḥ.D.

[340] _i.e._ grandson (of Muḥammad Sīghal). _Cf._ f. 39.

[341] This seeming sobriquet may show the man's trade. _Kāl_ is a sort of biscuit; _qāshūq_ may mean a spoon.

[342] The Ḥ.S. does not ascribe treachery to those inviting Bābur into Samarkand but attributes the murder of his men to others who fell on them when the plan of his admission became known. The choice here of "town-rabble" for retaliatory death supports the account of Ḥ.S. ii.

[343] "It was the end of September or beginning of October" (Erskine).

[344] _awī u kīpa yīrlār._ _Awī_ is likely to represent _kibitkas_. For _kīpa yīr_, _see_ Zenker p. 782.

[345] Interesting reference may be made, amongst the many books on Samarkand, to Sharafu'd-dīn `Alī _Yazdī's Z̤afar-nāma_ Bib. Ind. ed. i, 300, 781, 799, 800 and ii, 6, 194, 596 etc.; to Ruy Gonzalves di Clavijo's _Embassy to Tīmūr_ (Markham) cap. vi and vii; to Ujfalvy's _Turkistan_ ii, 79 and Madame Ujfalvy's _De Paris à Samarcande_ p. 161,—these two containing a plan of the town; to Schuyler's _Turkistan_; to Kostenko's _Turkistan Gazetteer_ i, 345; to Réclus, vi, 270 and plan; and to a beautiful work of the St. Petersburg Archæological Society, _Les Mosquées de Samarcande_, of which the B.M. has a copy.

[346] This statement is confused in the Elp. and Ḥai. MSS. The second appears to give, by abjad, lat. 40° 6" and long. 99'. Mr. Erskine (p. 48) gives lat. 39' 57" and long. 99' 16", noting that this is according to Ūlūgh Beg's Tables and that the long. is calculated from Ferro. The Ency. Br. of 1910-11 gives lat. 39' 39" and long. 66' 45".

[347] The enigmatical cognomen, Protected Town, is of early date; it is used _i.a._ by Ibn Batūta in the 14th. century. Bābur's tense refers it to the past. The town had frequently changed hands in historic times before he wrote. The name may be due to immunity from damage to the buildings in the town. Even Chīngīz Khān's capture (1222 AD.) left the place well-preserved and its lands cultivated, but it inflicted great loss of men. _Cf._ Schuyler i, 236 and his authorities, especially Bretschneider.

[348] Here is a good example of Bābur's caution in narrative. He does not affirm that Samarkand became Musalmān, or (_infra_) that Quṣam ibn `Abbās went, or that Alexander founded but in each case uses the presumptive past tense, resp. _būlghān dūr_, _bārghān dūr_, _bīnā qīlghān dūr_, thus showing that he repeats what may be inferred or presumed and not what he himself asserts.

[349] _i.e._ of Muḥammad. See Z̤.N. ii, 193.

[350] _i.e._ Fat Village. His text misleading him, Mr. Erskine makes here the useful irrelevant note that Persians and Arabs call the place Samar-qand and Turks, Samar-kand, the former using _qaf_ (q), the latter _kaf_ (k). Both the Elph. and the Ḥai. MSS. write Samarqand.

For use of the name Fat Village, _see_ Clavijo (Markham p. 170), Simesquinte, and Bretschneider's _Mediæval Geography_ pp. 61, 64, 66 and 163.

[351] _qadam._ Kostenko (i, 344) gives 9 m. as the circumference of the old walls and 1-2/3m. as that of the citadel. _See_ Mde. Ujfalvy p. 175 for a picture of the walls.

[352] _Ma`lūm aīmās kīm mūncha paidā būlmīsh būlghāī_; an idiomatic phrase.

[353] d. 333 AH. (944 AD.). _See_ D'Herbélot art. Mātridī p. 572.

[354] _See_ D'Herbélot art. Aschair p. 124.

[355] Abū `Abdu'l-lāh bin Ismā`īlu'l-jausī b. 194 AH. d. 256 AH. (810-870 AD.). _See_ D'Herbélot art. Bokhārī p. 191, art. Giorag p. 373, and art. Ṣāḥiḥu'l-bokhārī p. 722. He passed a short period, only, of his life in Khartank, a suburb of Samarkand.

[356] _Cf._ f. 3b and n. 1.

[357] This though 2475 ft. above the sea is only some 300 ft. above Samarkand. It is the Chūpān-ātā (Father of Shepherds) of maps and on it Tīmūr built a shrine to the local patron of shepherds. The Zar-afshān, or rather, its Qarā-sū arm, flows from the east of the Little Hill and turns round it to flow west. Bābur uses the name _Kohik Water_ loosely; _e.g._ for the whole Zar-afshān when he speaks (_infra_) of cutting off the Dar-i-gham canal but for its southern arm only, the Qarā-sū in several places, and once, for the Dar-i-gham canal. _See_ f. 49b and Kostenko i. 192.

[358] _rūd._ The Zar-afshān has a very rapid current. _See_ Kostenko i, 196, and for the canal, i, 174. The name Dar-i-gham is used also for a musical note having charm to witch away grief; and also for a town noted for its wines.

[359] What this represents can only be guessed; perhaps 150 to 200 miles. Abū'l-fidā (Reinaud ii, 213) quotes Ibn Haukal as saying that from Bukhārā up to "Bottam" (this seems to be where the Zar-afshān emerges into the open land) is eight days' journey through an unbroken tangle of verdure and gardens.

[360] _See_ Schuyler i, 286 on the apportionment of water to Samarkand and Bukhārā.

[361] It is still grown in the Samarkand region, and in Mr. Erskine's time a grape of the same name was cultivated in Aurangābād of the Deccan.

[362] _i.e._ _Shāhrukhī_, Tīmūr's grandson, through Shāhrukh. It may be noted here that Bābur never gives Tīmūr any other title than Beg and that he styles all Tīmūrids, Mīrzā (Mīr-born).

[363] Mr. Erskine here points out the contradiction between the statements (i) of Ibn Haukal, writing, in 367 AH. (977 AD.), of Samarkand as having a citadel (_ark_), an outer-fort (_qūrghān_) and Gates in both circumvallations; and (2) of Sharafu'd-dīn _Yazdī_ (Z̤.N.) who mentions that when, in Tīmūr's day, the Getes besieged Samarkand, it had neither walls nor gates. _See_ Ouseley's Ibn Haukal p. 253; Z̤.N. Bib. Ind. ed. i, 109 and Pétis de la Croix's Z̤.N. (_Histoire de Tīmūr Beg_) i, 91.

[364] Here still lies the Ascension Stone, the _Gūk-tāsh_, a block of greyish white marble. Concerning the date of the erection of the building and meaning of its name, _see_ _e.g._ Pétis de la Croix's _Histoire de Chīngīz Khān_ p. 171; Mems. p. 40 note; and Schuyler _s.n._

[365] This seems to be the Bībī Khānīm Mosque. The author of _Les Mosquées de Samarcande_ states that Tīmūr built Bībī Khānīm and the Gūr-i-amīr (Amīr's tomb); decorated Shāh-i-zinda and set up the Chūpān-ātā shrine. _Cf._ f. 46 and note to Jahāngīr Mīrzā, as to the Gūr-i-amīr.

[366] Cap. II. Quoting from Sale's _Qur'ān_ (i, 24) the verse is, "And Ibrāhīm and Ismā`īl raised the foundations of the house, saying, 'Lord! accept it from us, for Thou art he who hearest and knowest; Lord! make us also resigned to Thee, and show us Thy holy ceremonies, and be turned to us, for Thou art easy to be reconciled, and merciful.'"

[367] or, _buland_, Garden of the Height or High Garden. The Turkī texts have what can be read as _buldī_ but the Z̤.N. both when describing it (ii, 194) and elsewhere (_e.g._ ii, 596) writes _buland_. _Buldī_ may be a clerical error for _bulandī_, the height, a name agreeing with the position of the garden.

[368] In the Heart-expanding Garden, the Spanish Ambassadors had their first interview with Tīmūr. _See_ Clavijo (Markham p. 130). Also the Z̤.N. ii, 6 for an account of its construction.

[369] Judging from the location of the gardens and of Bābur's camps, this appears to be the Avenue mentioned on f. 39b and f. 40.

[370] _See_ _infra_ f. 48 and note.

[371] The Plane-tree Garden. This seems to be Clavijo's _Bayginar_, laid out shortly before he saw it (Markham p. 136).

[372] The citadel of Samarkand stands high; from it the ground slopes west and south; on these sides therefore gardens outside the walls would lie markedly below the outer-fort (_tāsh-qūrghān_). Here as elsewhere the second W.-i-B. reads _stone_ for _outer_ (_Cf._ index _s.n._ _tāsh_). For the making of the North garden _see_ Z̤.N. i, 799.

[373] Tīmūr's eldest son, d. 805 AH. (1402 AD.), before his father, therefore. Bābur's wording suggests that in his day, the Gūr-i-amīr was known as the Madrāsa. _See_ as to the buildings Z̤.N. i, 713 and ii, 492, 595, 597, 705; Clavijo (Markham p. 164 and p. 166); and _Les Mosquées de Samarcande_.

[374] Hindūstān would make a better climax here than Samarkand does.

[375] These appear to be pictures or ornamentations of carved wood. Redhouse describes _islīmī_ as a special kind of ornamentation in curved lines, similar to Chinese methods.

[376] _i.e._ the Black Stone (_ka'ba_) at Makkah to which Musalmāns turn in prayer.

[377] As ancient observatories were themselves the instruments of astronomical observation, Bābur's wording is correct. Aūlūgh Beg's great quadrant was 180 ft. high; Abū-muḥammad _Khujandī's_ sextant had a radius of 58 ft. Jā'ī Singh made similar great instruments in Jā'īpūr, Dihlī has others. _Cf._ Greaves Misc. Works i, 50; Mems. p. 51 note; _Āiyīn-i-akbarī_ (Jarrett) ii, 5 and note; Murray's Hand-book to Bengal p. 331; Indian Gazetteer xiii, 400.

[378] b. 597 AH. d. 672 AH. (1201-1274 AD.). _See_ D'Herbélot's art. Naṣīr-i-dīn p. 662; Abū'l-fidā (Reinaud, Introduction i, cxxxviii) and Beale's Biographical Dict. _s.n._

[379] a grandson of Chīngīz Khān, d. 663 AH. (1265 AD.). The cognomen _Aīl-khānī_ (_Īl-khānī_) may mean Khān of the Tribe.

[380] Ḥarūnu'r-rashīd's second son; d. 218 AH. (833 AD.).

[381] Mr. Erskine notes that this remark would seem to fix the date at which Bābur wrote it as 934 AH. (1527 AD.), that being the 1584th. year of the era of Vikramāditya, and therefore at three years before Bābur's death. (The Vikramāditya era began 57 BC.)

[382] _Cf._ index _s.n._ _tāsh_.

[383] This remark may refer to the 34 miles between the town and the quarries of its building stone. _See_ f. 49 and note to Aītmāk Pass.

[384] Steingass, any support for the back in sitting, a low wall in front of a house. _See_ Vullers p. 148 and _Burhān-i-qāṯi`_; p. 119. Perhaps a _dado_.

[385] _beg u begāt, bāgh u bāghcha._

[386] Four Gardens, a quadrilateral garden, laid out in four plots. The use of the name has now been extended for any well-arranged, large garden, especially one belonging to a ruler (Erskine).

[387] As two of the trees mentioned here are large, it may be right to translate _nārwān_, not by pomegranate, but as the hard-wood elm, Madame Ujfalvy's '_karagatche_' (p. 168 and p. 222). The name _qarā-yīghāch_ (_karagatch_), dark tree, is given to trees other than this elm on account of their deep shadow.

[388] Now a common plan indeed! _See_ Schuyler i, 173.

[389] _juwāz-i-kaghazlār_ (_nīng_) _sū'ī_, _i.e._ the water of the paper-(pulping)-mortars. Owing to the omission from some MSS. of the word _sū_, water, _juwāz_ has been mistaken for a kind of paper. _See_ Mems. p. 52 and _Méms_. i, 102; A.Q.R. July 1910, p. 2, art. Paper-mills of Samarkand (H.B.); and Madame Ujfalvy p. 188. Kostenko, it is to be noted, does not include paper in his list (i, 346) of modern manufactures of Samarkand.

[390] Mine of mud or clay. My husband has given me support for reading _gil_, and not _gul_, rose;—(1) In two good MSS. of the W.-i-B. the word is pointed with _kasra_, _i.e._ as for _gil_, clay; and (2) when describing a feast held in the garden by Tīmūr, the Z̤.N. says the mud-mine became a rose-mine, _shuda Kān-i-gil Kān-i-gul_. [Mr. Erskine refers here to Pétis de la Croix's _Histoire de Tīmūr Beg_ (_i.e._ Z̤.N.) i, 96 and ii, 133 and 421.]

[391] _qūrūgh._ Vullers, classing the word as Arabic, Zenker, classing it as Eastern Turkī, and Erskine (p. 42 n.) explain this as land reserved for the summer encampment of princes. Shaw (Voc. p. 155), deriving it from _qūrūmāq_, to frighten, explains it as a fenced field of growing grain.

[392] _Cf._ f. 40. There it is located at one _yīghāch_ and here at 3 _kurohs_ from the town.

[393] _ṯaur._ _Cf._ Zenker _s.n._ I understand it to lie, as Khān Yūrtī did, in a curve of the river.

[394] 162 m. by rail.

[395] _Cf._ f. 3.

[396] _tīrīsīnī sūīūb._ The verb _sūīmāk_, to despoil, seems to exclude the common plan of stoning the fruit. _Cf._ f. 3b, _dānasīnī alīp_, taking out the stones.

[397] _Mīn Samarkandtā aūl (or auwal) aīchkāndā Bukhārā chāghīrlār nī aīchār aīdīm._ These words have been understood to refer to Bābur's initial drinking of wine but this reading is negatived by his statement (f. 189) that he first drank wine in Harāt in 912 AH. I understand his meaning to be that the wine he drank in Samarkand was Bukhārā wine. The time cannot have been earlier than 917 AH. The two words _aūl aīchkāndā_, I read as parallel to _aūl_ (_bāghrī qarā_) (f. 280) 'that drinking,' 'that bird,' _i.e._ of those other countries, not of Hindūstān where he wrote.

It may be noted that Bābur's word for wine, _chāghīr_, may not always represent wine of the grape but may include wine of the apple and pear (cider and perry), and other fruits. Cider, its name seeming to be a descendant of _chāghīr_, was introduced into England by Crusaders, its manufacture having been learned from Turks in Palestine.

[398] 48 m. 3 fur. by way of the Aītmāk Pass (mod. Takhta Qarachi), and, Réclus (vi, 256) Buz-gala-khāna, Goat-house.

[399] The name Aītmāk, to build, appears to be due to the stone quarries on the range. The pass-head is 34 m. from Samarkand and 3000 ft. above it. _See_ Kostenko ii, 115 and Schuyler ii, 61 for details of the route.

[400] The description of this hall is difficult to translate. Clavijo (Markham 124) throws light on the small recesses. _Cf._ Z̤.N. i, 781 and 300 and Schuyler ii, 68.

[401] The Tāq-i-kisrī, below Bāghdād, is 105 ft. high, 84 ft. span and 150 ft. in depth (Erskine).

[402] _Cf._ f. 46. Bābur does not mention that Tīmūr's father was buried at Kesh. Clavijo (Markham p. 123) says it was Tīmūr's first intention to be buried near his father, in Kesh.

[403] Abū'l-fidā (Reinaud II, ii, 21) says that Nasaf is the Arabic and Nakhshab the local name for Qarshī. Ibn Haukal (Ouseley p. 260) writes Nakhshab.

[404] This word has been translated _burial-place_ and _cimetière_ but Qarshī means castle, or royal-residence. The Z̤.N. (i, 111) says that Qarshī is an equivalent for Ar. _qaṣr_, palace, and was so called, from one built there by Qublāī Khān (d. 1294 AD.). Perhaps Bābur's word is connected with Gūrkhān, the title of sovereigns in Khutan, and means great or royal-house, _i.e._ palace.

[405] 94 m. 6-1/2 fur. via Jām (Kostenko i, 115.)

[406] See Appendix B.

[407] some 34 m. (Kostenko i, 196). Schuyler mentions that he heard in Qarā-kūl a tradition that the district, in bye-gone days, was fertilized from the Sīr.

[408] _Cf._ f. 45.

[409] By _abjad_ the words _`Abbās kasht_ yield 853. The date of the murder was Ramẓān 9, 853 AH. (Oct. 27th. 1449 AD.).

[410] This couplet is quoted in the _Rauẓatu'ṣ-ṣafā_ (lith. ed. vi, f. 234 foot) and in the Ḥ.S. ii, 44. It is said, in the R.Ṣ. to be by Niẕāmī and to refer to the killing by Shīrūya of his father, Khusrau Parwīz in 7 AH. (628 AD.). The Ḥ.S. says that `Abdu'l-laṯīf constantly repeated the couplet, after he had murdered his father. [See also Daulat Shāh (Browne p. 356 and p. 366.) H.B.]

[411] By _abjad_, _Bābā Ḥusain kasht_ yields 854. The death was on Rabi` I, 26, 854 AH. (May 9th. 1450 AD.). See R.Ṣ. vi, 235 for an account of this death.

[412] This overstates the time; dates shew 1 yr. 1 mth. and a few days.

[413] _i.e._ The Khān of the Mughūls, Bābur's uncle.

[414] Elph. MS. _aūrmaghāīlār_, might not turn; Ḥai. and Kehr's MSS. (_sar bā bād_) _bīrmāghāīlār_, might not give. Both metaphors seem drawn from the protective habit of man and beast of turning the back to a storm-wind.

[415] _i.e._ betwixt two waters, the Miyān-i-dū-āb of India. Here, it is the most fertile triangle of land in Turkistān (Réclus, vi, 199), enclosed by the eastern mountains, the Nārīn and the Qarā-sū; Rabāṯik-aūrchīnī, its alternative name, means Small Station sub-district. From the uses of _aūrchīn_ I infer that it describes a district in which there is no considerable head-quarters fort.

[416] _i.e._ his own, Qūtlūq-nigār Khānīm and hers, Aīsān-daulat Begīm, with perhaps other widows of his father, probably Shāh Sulṯān Begīm.

[417] _Cf._ f. 16 for almost verbatim statements.

[418] Blacksmith's Dale. _Ahangarān_ appears corrupted in modern maps to _Angren_. _See_ Ḥ.S. ii, 293 for Khwānd-amīr's wording of this episode.

[419] _Cf._ f. 1b and Kostenko i, 101.

[420] _i.e._ Khān Uncle (Mother's brother).

[421] n.w. of the Sang ferry over the Sīr.

[422] perhaps, messenger of good tidings.

[423] This man's family connections are interesting. He was `Alī-shukr Beg _Bahārlū's_ grandson, nephew therefore of Pāshā Begīm; through his son, Saif-`alī Beg, he was the grandfather of Bairām Khān-i-khānān and thus the g.g.f. of `Abdu'r-raḥīm Mīrzā, the translator of the Second _Wāqi`āt-i-bāburī_. _See_ Firishta lith. ed. p. 250.

[424] Bābur's (step-)grandmother, co-widow with Aīsān-daulat of Yūnas Khān and mother of Aḥmad and Maḥmud _Chaghatāī_.

[425] Here the narrative picks up the thread of Khusrau Shāh's affairs, dropped on f. 44.

[426] _mīng tūmān fulūs_, _i.e._ a thousand sets-of-ten-thousand small copper coins. Mr. Erskine (Mems. p. 61) here has a note on coins. As here the _tūmān_ does not seem to be a coin but a number, I do not reproduce it, valuable as it is _per se_.

[427] _ārīqlār_; this the annotator of the Elph. MS. has changed to _āshlīq_, provisions, corn.

[428] _Samān-chī_ may mean Keeper of the Goods. Tīngrī-bīrdī, Theodore, is the purely Turkī form of the Khudāī-bīrdī, already met with several times in the B.N.

[429] Bast (Bost) is on the left bank of the Halmand.

[430] _Cf._ f. 56b.

[431] known as _Kābulī_. He was a son of Abū-sa`īd and thus an uncle of Bābur. He ruled Kābul and Ghaznī from a date previous to his father's death in 873 AH. (perhaps from the time `Umar Shaikh was _not_ sent there, in 870 AH. _See_ f. 6b) to his death in 907 AH. Bābur was his virtual successor in Kābul, in 910 AH.

[432] Elph. MS. f. 42; W.-i-B. I.O. 215 f. 47b and 217 f. 38; Mems. p. 63. Bābur here resumes his own story, interrupted on f. 56.

[433] _aīsh achīlmādī_, a phrase recurring on f. 59b foot. It appears to imply, of trust in Providence, what the English "The way was not opened," does. _Cf._ f. 60b for another example of trust, there clinching discussion whether to go or not to go to Marghīnān.

[434] _i.e._ _Aḥrārī_. He had been dead some 10 years. The despoilment of his family is mentioned on f. 23b.

[435] _fatratlār_, here those due to the deaths of Aḥmad and Maḥmūd with their sequel of unstable government in Samarkand.

[436] _Aūghlāqchī_, the player of the kid-game, the gray-wolfer. Yār-yīlāq will have gone with the rest of Samarkand into `Alī's hands in Rajab 903 AH. (March 1498). Contingent terms between him and Bābur will have been made; Yūsuf may have recognized some show of right under them, for allowing Bābur to occupy Yār-yīlāq.

[437] _i.e._ after 933 AH. _Cf._ f. 46b and note concerning the Bikramāditya era. See index _s.n._ Aḥmad-i-yūsuf and Ḥ.S. ii, 293.

[438] This plural, unless ironical, cannot be read as honouring `Alī; Bābur uses the honorific plural most rarely and specially, _e.g._ for saintly persons, for The Khān and for elder women-kinsfolk.

[439] _bīr yārīm yīl._ Dates shew this to mean six months. It appears a parallel expression to Pers. _hasht-yak_, one-eighth.

[440] Ḥ.S. ii, 293, in place of these two quotations, has a _misra`_,—_Na rāy ṣafar kardan u na rūy iqāmat_, (Nor resolve to march, nor face to stay).

[441] _i.e._ in Samarkand.

[442] Point to point, some 145 m. but much further by the road. Tang-āb seems likely to be one of the head-waters of Khwāja Bikargān-water. Thence the route would be by unfrequented hill-tracks, each man leading his second horse.

[443] _tūn yārīmī naqāra waqtīdā._ _Tūn yārīmī_ seems to mean half-dark, twilight. Here it cannot mean mid-night since this would imply a halt of twelve hours and Bābur says no halt was made. The drum next following mid-day is the one beaten at sunset.

[444] The voluntary prayer, offered when the sun has well risen, fits the context.

[445] I understand that the obeisance was made in the Gate-house, between the inner and outer doors.

[446] This seeming sobriquet may be due to eloquence or to good looks.

[447] _qarā tīyāq._ _Cf._ f. 63 where black bludgeons are used by a red rabble.

[448] He was head-man of his clan and again with Shaibānī in 909 AH. (Sh. N. Vambéry, p. 272). Erskine (p. 67) notes that the Manghīts are the modern Nogais.

[449] _i.e._ in order to allow for the here very swift current. The Ḥ.S. varying a good deal in details from the B.N. gives the useful information that Aūzūn Ḥasan's men knew nothing of the coming of the Tāshkīnt Mughūls.

[450] _Cf._ f. 4b and App. A. as to the position of Akhsī.

[451] _bārīnī qīrdīlār._ After this statement the five exceptions are unexpected; Bābur's wording is somewhat confused here.

[452] _i.e._ in Hindūstān.

[453] Taṃbal would be the competitor for the second place.

[454] 47 m. 4-1/2 fur.

[455] Bābur had been about two lunar years absent from Andijān but his loss of rule was of under 16 months.

[456] A scribe's note entered here on the margin of the Ḥai. MS. is to the effect that certain words are not in the noble archetype (_nashka sharīf_); this supports other circumstances which make for the opinion that this Codex is a direct copy of Bābur's own MS. _See_ Index s.n. Ḥai. MS. and JRAS 1906, p. 87.

[457] _Musalmān_ here seems to indicate mental contrast with Pagan practices or neglect of Musalmān observances amongst Mughūls.

[458] _i.e._ of his advisors and himself.

[459] _Cf._ f. 34.

[460] _circa_ 933 AH. All the revolts chronicled by Bābur as made against himself were under Mughūl leadership. Long Ḥasan, Taṃbal and `Alī-dost were all Mughūls. The worst was that of 914 AH. (1518 AD.) in which Qulī _Chūnāq_ disgraced himself (T.R. p. 357).

[461] _Chūnāq_ may indicate the loss of one ear.

[462] _Būqāq_, amongst other meanings, has that of _one who lies in ambush_.

[463] This remark has interest because it shews that (as Bābur planned to write more than is now with the B.N. MSS.) the first gap in the book (914 AH. to 925 AH.) is accidental. His own last illness is the probable cause of this gap. _Cf._ JRAS 1905, p. 744. Two other passages referring to unchronicled matters are one about the Bāgh-i-ṣafā (f. 224), and one about Sl. `Alī T̤aghāī (f. 242).

[464] I surmise Aīlāīsh to be a local name of the Qarā-daryā affluent of the Sīr.

[465] _aīkī aūch naubat chāpqūlāb bāsh chīqārghalī qūīmās._ I cannot feel so sure as Mr. E. and M. de C. were that the man's head held fast, especially as for it to fall would make the better story.

[466] Tūqā appears to have been the son of a T̤aghāī, perhaps of Sherīm; his name may imply blood-relationship.

[467] For the verb _awīmāq_, to trepan, _see_ f. 67 note 5.

[468] The Fr. map of 1904 shews a hill suiting Bābur's location of this Hill of Pleasure.

[469] A place near Kābul bears the same name; in both the name is explained by a legend that there Earth opened a refuge for forty menaced daughters.

[470] Elph. MS. f. 47b; W.-i-B. I.O. 215 f. 53 and 217 f. 43; Mems. p. 70.

[471] From Andijān to Aūsh is a little over 33 miles. Taṃbal's road was east of Bābur's and placed him between Andijān and Aūzkīnt where was the force protecting his family.

[472] mod. Mazy, on the main Aūsh-Kāshghar road.

[473] _āb-duzd_; de C. i, 144, _prise d'eau_.

[474] This simile seems the fruit of experience in Hindūstān. _See_ f. 333, concerning Chānderi.

[475] These two Mughūls rebelled in 914 AH. with Sl. Qulī _Chūnāq_ (T.R. _s.n._).

[476] _awīdī._ The head of Captain Dow, fractured at Chunār by a stone flung at it, was trepanned (_Saiyār-i-muta`akhirīn_, p. 577 and Irvine l .c. p. 283). Yār-`alī was alive in 910 AH. He seems to be the father of the great Bairām Khān-i-khānān of Akbar's reign.

[477] _chasht-gāh_; midway between sunrise and noon.

[478] _ṯaurī_; because providing prisoners for exchange.

[479] _shakh tūtūlūr īdī_, perhaps a palisade.

[480] _i.e._ from Ḥiṣār where he had placed him in 903 AH.

[481] _qūba yūzlūq_ (f. 6b and note 4). The Turkmān features would be a maternal inheritance.

[482] He is "Saifī Maulānā `Arūzī" of Rieu's Pers. Cat. p. 525. _Cf._ Ḥ.S. ii, 341. His book, _`Arūz-i-saifī_ has been translated by Blochmann and by Ranking.

[483] _namāz aūtār īdī._ I understand some irony from this (de Meynard's Dict. _s.n._ _aūtmāq_).

[484] The _maṯla`_ of poems serve as an index of first lines.

[485] _Cf._ f. 30.

[486] _Cf._ f. 37b.

[487] _i.e._ scout and in times of peace, huntsman. On the margin of the Elph. Codex here stands a note, mutilated in rebinding;—_Sl. Aḥmad pidr-i-Qūch Beg ast * * * pidr-i-Sher-afgan u Sher-afgan * * * u Sl. Ḥusain Khān * * * Qūch Beg ast. Hamesha * * * dar khāna Shaham Khān * * *_.

[488] _pītīldī_; W.-i-B. _navishta shud_, words indicating the use by Bābur of a written record.

[489] _Cf._ f. 6b and note and f. 17 and note.

[490] _tūlūk_; _i.e._ other food than grain. Fruit, fresh or preserved, being a principal constituent of food in Central Asia, _tūlūk_ will include several, but chiefly melons. "Les melons constituent presque seuls vers le fin d'été, la nourriture des classes pauvres" (Th. Radloff. l.c. p. 343).

[491] _Cf._ f. 6b and note.

[492] _tūlkī_ var. _tūlkū_, the yellow fox. Following this word the Ḥai. MS. has _u dar kamīn dūr_ instead of _u rangīn dūr_.

[493] _bī ḥadd_; with which I.O. 215 agrees but I.O. 217 adds _farbih_, fat, which is right in fact (f. 2b) but less pertinent here than an unlimited quantity.

[494] Here a pun on _`ajab_ may be read.

[495] _Cf._ f. 15, note to T̤aghāī.

[496] Apparently not the usual Kīndīr-līk pass but one n.w. of Kāsān.

[497] A ride of at least 40 miles, followed by one of 20 to Kāsān.

[498] _Cf._ f. 72 and f. 72b. Tīlba would seem to have left Taṃbal.

[499] _Taṃbalnīng qarāsī._

[500] _i.e._ the Other (Mid-afternoon) Prayer.

[501] _ātīnīng būīnīnī qātīb._ _Qātmāq_ has also the here-appropriate meaning of _to stiffen_.

[502] _aīlīk qūshmāq_, _i.e._ Bābur's men with the Kāsān garrison. But the two W.-i-B. write merely _dast burd_ and _dast kardan_.

[503] The meaning of _Ghazna_ here is uncertain. The Second W.-i-B. renders it by ar. _qaryat_ but up to this point Bābur has not used _qaryat_ for _village_. Ghazna-namangān cannot be modern Namangān. It was 2 m. from Archīān where Taṃbal was, and Bābur went to Bīshkhārān to be between Taṃbal and Machamī, coming from the south. Archīān and Ghazna-namangān seem both to have been n. or n.w. of Bīshkārān (see maps).

It may be mentioned that at Archīān, in 909 AH. the two Chaghatāī Khāns and Bābur were defeated by Shaibānī.

[504] _bīzlār._ The double plural is rare with Bābur; he writes _bīz_, we, when action is taken in common; he rarely uses _mīn_, I, with autocratic force; his phrasing is largely impersonal, _e.g._ with rare exceptions, he writes the impersonal passive verb.

[505] _bāshlīghlār._ Teufel was of opinion that this word is not used as a noun in the B.N. In this he is mistaken; it is so used frequently, as here, in apposition. _See_ ZDMG, xxxvii, art. Bābur und Abū`l-faẓl.

[506] _Cf._ f. 54 foot.

[507] _Cf._ f. 20. She may have come from Samarkand and `Alī's household or from Kesh and the Tarkhān households.

[508] _Cf._ f. 26 l. 2 for the same phrase.

[509] He is the author of the _Shaibānī-nāma_.

[510] _dāng_ and _fils_ (_infra_) are small copper coins.

[511] _Cf._ f. 25 l. 1 and note 1.

[512] Probably the poet again; he had left Harāt and was in Samarkand (Sh. N. Vambéry, p. 34 l. 14).

[513] From what follows, this Mughūl advance seems a sequel to a Tarkhān invitation.

[514] By omitting the word _Mīr_ the Turkī text has caused confusion between this father and son (Index _s.nn._).

[515] _bīz khūd kharāb bū mu`āmla aīdūk._ These words have been understood earlier, as referring to the abnormal state of Bābur's mind described under Sec. _r_. They better suit the affairs of Samarkand because Bābur is able to resolve on action and also because he here writes _bīz_, we, and not _mīn_, I, as in Sec. _r_.

[516] For _būlghār_, rendezvous, _see_ also f. 78 l. 2 fr. ft.

[517] 25 m. only; the halts were due probably to belated arrivals.

[518] Some of his ties would be those of old acquaintance in Ḥiṣār with `Alī's father's begs, now with him in Samarkand.

[519] Point to point, some 90 m. but further by road.

[520] _Bū waqi` būlghāch_, manifestly ironical.

[521] Sangzār to Aūrā-tīpā, by way of the hills, some 50 miles.

[522] The Sh. N. Vambéry, p. 60, confirms this.

[523] _Cf._ f. 74b.

[524] Macham and Awīghūr, presumably.

[525] _gūzlār tūz tūtī_, _i.e._ he was blinded for some treachery to his hosts.

[526] Muḥ. Ṣāliḥ's well-informed account of this episode has much interest, filling out and, as by Shaibānī's Boswell, balancing Bābur's. Bābur is obscure about what country was to be given to `Alī. Pāyanda-ḥasan paraphrases his brief words;—Shaibānī was to be as a father to `Alī and when he had taken `Alī's father's _wilāyāt_, he was to give a country to `Alī. It has been thought that the gift to `Alī was to follow Shaibānī's recovery of his own ancestral camping-ground (_yūrt_) but this is negatived, I think, by the word, _wilāyāt_, cultivated land.

[527] Elp. MS. f. 57b; W.-i-B. I.O. 215 f. 63b and I.O. 217 f. 52; Mems. p. 82.

Two contemporary works here supplement the B.N.; (1) the (_Tawārikh-i-guzīda_) _Naṣrat-nāma_, dated 908 AH. (B.M. Turkī Or. 3222) of which Berezin's _Shaibāni-nāma_ is an abridgment; (2) Muḥ. Ṣāliḥ Mīrzā's _Shaibānī-nāma_ (Vambéry trs. cap. xix _et seq._). The Ḥ.S. (Bomb. ed. p. 302, and Tehran ed. p. 384) is also useful.

[528] _i.e._ on his right. The Ḥ.S. ii, 302 represents that `Alī was well-received. After Shaibāq had had Zuhra's overtures, he sent an envoy to `Alī and Yaḥya; the first was not won over but the second fell in with his mother's scheme. This difference of view explains why `Alī slipped away while Yaḥya was engaged in the Friday Mosque. It seems likely that mother and son alike expected their Aūzbeg blood to stand them in good stead with Shaibāq.

[529] He tried vainly to get the town defended. "Would to God Bābur Mīrzā were here!" he is reported as saying, by Muḥ. Ṣāliḥ.

[530] Perhaps it is for the play of words on `Alī and `Alī's life (_jān_) that this man makes his sole appearance here.

[531] _i.e._ rich man or merchant, but _Bī_ (_infra_) is an equivalent of Beg.

[532] Muḥ. Ṣāliḥ, invoking curses on such a mother, mentions that Zuhra was given to a person of her own sort.

[533] The Sh. N. and _Naṣrat-nāma_ attempt to lift the blame of `Alī's death from Shaibāq; the second saying that he fell into the Kohik-water when drunk.

[534] Harāt might be his destination but the Ḥ.S. names Makka. Some dismissals towards Khurāsān may imply pilgrimage to Meshhed.

[535] Used also by Bābur's daughter, Gul-badan (l.c. f. 31).

[536] Cut off by alien lands and weary travel.

[537] The Pers. annotator of the Elph. Codex has changed Alāī to _wīlāyat_, and _dābān_ (pass) to _yān_, side. For the difficult route _see_ Schuyler, i, 275, Kostenko, i, 129 and Rickmers, JRGS. 1907, art. Fan Valley.

[538] Amongst Turks and Mughūls, gifts were made by nines.

[539] Ḥiṣār was his earlier home.

[540] Many of these will have been climbed in order to get over places impassable at the river's level.

[541] Schuyler quotes a legend of the lake. He and Kostenko make it larger.

[542] The second occasion was when he crossed from Sūkh for Kābul in 910 AH. (fol. 120).

[543] This name appears to indicate a Command of 10,000 (Bretschneider's _Mediæval Researches_, i, 112).

[544] It seems likely that the cloth was soiled. _Cf._ f. 25 and Hughes Dict. of Islām _s.n._ Eating.

[545] As, of the quoted speech, one word only, of three, is Turkī, others may have been dreamed. Shaikh Maṣlaḥat's tomb is in Khujand where Bābur had found refuge in 903 AH.; it had been circumambulated by Tīmūr in 790 AH. (1390 AD.) and is still honoured.

This account of a dream compares well for naturalness with that in the seemingly-spurious passage, entered with the Ḥai. MS. on f. 118. For examination of the passage _see_ JRAS, Jan. 1911, and App. D.

[546] He was made a Tarkhān by diploma of Shaibānī (Ḥ.S. ii, 306, l. 2).

[547] Here the Ḥai. MS. begins to use the word _Shaibāq_ in place of its previously uniform _Shaibānī_. As has been noted (f. 5b n. 2), the Elph. MS. writes _Shaibāq_. It may be therefore that a scribe has changed the earlier part of the Ḥai. MS. and that Bābur wrote _Shaibāq_. From this point my text will follow the double authority of the Elph. and Ḥai. MSS.

[548] In 875 AH. (1470 AD.). Ḥusain was then 32 years old. Bābur might have compared his taking of Samarkand with Tīmūr's capture of Qarshī, also with 240 followers (Z̤.N. i, 127). Firishta (lith. ed. p. 196) ascribes his omission to do so to reluctance to rank himself with his great ancestor.

[549] This arrival shews that Shaibānī expected to stay in Samarkand. He had been occupying Turkistān under The Chaghatāī Khān.

[550] `Alī-sher died Jan. 3rd. 1501. It is not clear to what disturbances Bābur refers. He himself was at ease till after April 20th. 1502 and his defeat at Sar-i-pul. Possibly the reference is to the quarrels between Binā'ī and `Alī-sher. _Cf._ Sām Mīrzā's Anthology, trs. S. de Saçy, _Notices et Extraits_ iv, 287 _et seq._

[551] I surmise a double play-of-words in this verse. One is on two rhyming words, _ghala_ and _mallah_ and is illustrated by rendering them as _oat_ and _coat_. The other is on pointed and unpointed letters, _i.e._ _ghala_ and _`ala_. We cannot find however a Persian word _`ala_, meaning garment.

[552] Bābur's refrain is _ghūsīdūr_, his rhymes _būl_, _(buyur)ūl_ and _tūl_. Binā'ī makes _būlghūsīdūr_ his refrain but his rhymes are not true _viz._ _yīr_, _(sa)mar_ and _lār_.

[553] Shawwāl 906 AH. began April 20th. 1501.

[554] From the _Bū-stān_, Graf ed. p. 55, l. 246.

[555] Sīkīz Yīldūz. _See_ Chardin's _Voyages_, v, 136 and Table; also Stanley Lane Poole's _Bābur_, p. 56.

[556] In 1791 AD. Muḥ. Effendi shot 482 yards from a Turkish bow, before the R. Tox. S.; not a good shot, he declared. Longer ones are on record. _See_ Payne-Gallwey's _Cross-bow_ and AQR. 1911, H. Beveridge's _Oriental Cross-bows_.

[557] In the margin of the Elph. Codex, here, stands a Persian verse which appears more likely to be Humāyūn's than Bābur's. It is as follows:

Were the Mughūl race angels, they would be bad; Written in gold, the name Mughūl would be bad; Pluck not an ear from the Mughūl's corn-land, What is sown with Mughūl seed will be bad.

This verse is written into the text of the First W.-i-B. (I.O. 215 f. 72) and is introduced by a scribe's statement that it is by _ān Ḥaẓrat_, much as notes known to be Humāyūn's are elsewhere attested in the Elph. Codex. It is not in the Ḥai. and Kehr's MSS. nor with, at least many, good copies of the Second W.-i-B.

[558] This subterranean water-course, issuing in a flowing well (Erskine) gave its name to a bastion (Ḥ.S. ii, 300).

[559] _nāwak_, a diminutive of _nāo_, a tube. It is described, in a MS. of Bābur's time, by Muḥ. Budhā'ī, and, in a second of later date, by Amīnu'd-dīn (AQR 1911, H.B.'s _Oriental Cross-bows_).

[560] Kostenko, i, 344, would make the rounds 9 m.

[561] _bīr yūz ātliqnīng ātinī nāwak aūqī bila yakhshī atīm._ This has been read by Erskine as though _būz āt_, pale horse, and not _yūz ātlīq_, Centurion, were written. De. C. translates by Centurion and a marginal note of the Elph. Codex explains _yūz ātlīq_ by _ṣad aspagī_.

[562] The Sh. N. gives the reverse side of the picture, the plenty enjoyed by the besiegers.

[563] He may have been attached to the tomb of Khwāja `Abdu'l-lāh _Anṣārī_ in Harāt.

[564] The brusque entry here and elsewhere of _e.g._ Taṃbal's affairs, allows the inference that Bābur was quoting from perhaps a news-writer's, contemporary records. For a different view of Taṃbal, the Sh. N. cap. xxxiii should be read.

[565] Five-villages, on the main Khujand-Tāshkīnt road.

[566] _turk_, as on f. 28 of Khusrau Shāh.

[567] Elph. MS. f. 68b; W.-i-B. I.O. 215 f. 78 and 217 f. 61b; Mems. p. 97.

The Kehr-Ilminsky text shews, in this year, a good example of its Persification and of Dr. Ilminsky's dealings with his difficult archetype by the help of the Memoirs.

[568] _tāshlāb._ The Sh. N. places these desertions as after four months of siege.

[569] It strikes one as strange to find Long Ḥasan described, as here, in terms of his younger brother. The singularity may be due to the fact that Ḥusain was with Bābur and may have invited Ḥasan. It may be noted here that Ḥusain seems likely to be that father-in-law of `Umar Shaikh mentioned on f. 12b and 13b.

[570] This laudatory comment I find nowhere but in the Ḥai. Codex.

[571] There is some uncertainty about the names of those who left.

[572] The Sh. N. is interesting here as giving an eye-witness' account of the surrender of the town and of the part played in the surrender by Khān-zāda's marriage (cap. xxxix).

[573] The first seems likely to be a relation of Niẕāmu'd-dīn `Alī Khalīfa; the second was Mole-marked, a foster-sister. The party numbered some 100 persons of whom Abū'l-makāram was one (Ḥ.S. ii, 310).

[574] Bābur's brevity is misleading; his sister was not captured but married with her own and her mother's consent before attempt to leave the town was made. _Cf._ Gul-badan's H.N. f. 3b and Sh. N. Vambéry, p. 145.

[575] The route taken avoided the main road for Dīzak; it can be traced by the physical features, mentioned by Bābur, on the Fr. map of 1904. The Sh. N. says the night was extraordinarily dark. Departure in blinding darkness and by unusual ways shews distrust of Shaibāq's safe-conduct suggesting that Yaḥyā's fate was in the minds of the fugitives.

[576] The texts differ as to whether the last two lines are prose or verse. All four are in Turkī, but I surmise a clerical error in the refrain of the third, where _būlūb_ is written for _būldī_.

[577] The second was in 908 AH. (f. 18_b_); the third in 914 AH. (f. 216 _b_); the fourth is not described in the B.N.; it followed Bābur's defeat at Ghaj-diwān in 918 AH. (Erskine's _History of India_, i, 325). He had a fifth, but of a different kind, when he survived poison in 933 AH. (f. 305).

[578] Ḥai. MS. _qāqāsrāq_; Elph. MS. _yānasrāq_.

[579] _ātūn_, one who instructs in reading, writing and embroidery. _Cf._ Gulbadan's H.N. f. 26. The distance walked may have been 70 or 80 m.

[580] She was the wife of the then Governor of Aūrā-tīpā, Muḥ. Ḥusain _Dūghlāt_.

[581] It may be noted here that in speaking of these elder women Bābur uses the honorific plural, a form of rare occurrence except for such women, for saintly persons and exceptionally for The supreme Khān. For his father he has never used it.

[582] This name has several variants. The village lies, in a valley-bottom, on the Aq-sū and on a road. _See_ Kostenko, i, 119.

[583] She had been divorced from Shaibānī in order to allow him to make legal marriage with her niece, Khān-zāda.

[584] Amongst the variants of this name, I select the modern one. Macha is the upper valley of the Zar-afshān.

[585] Tīmūr took Dihlī in 801 AH. (Dec. 1398), _i.e._ 103 solar and 106 lunar years earlier. The ancient dame would then have been under 5 years old. It is not surprising therefore that in repeating her story Bābur should use a tense betokening hear-say matter (_bārib īkān dūr_).

[586] The anecdote here following, has been analysed in JRAS 1908, p. 87, in order to show warrant for the opinion that parts of the Kehr-Ilminsky text are retranslations from the Persian W.-i-B.

[587] Amongst those thus leaving seem to have been Qaṃbar-`alī (f. 99b).

[588] _Cf._ f. 107 foot.

[589] The Sh. N. speaks of the cold in that winter (Vambéry, p. 160). It was unusual for the Sīr to freeze in this part of its course (Sh. N. p. 172) where it is extremely rapid (Kostenko, i, 213).

[590] _Cf._ f. 4b.

[591] Point to point, some 50 miles.

[592] _Āhangarān-julgasī_, a name narrowed on maps to Angren (valley).

[593] _Faut shūd Nuyān._ The numerical value of these words is 907. Bābur when writing, looks back 26 years to the death of this friend.

[594] Āb-burdan village is on the Zar-afshān; the pass is 11,200 ft. above the sea. Bābur's boundaries still hold good and the spring still flows. _See_ Ujfalvy _l.c._ i. 14; Kostenko, i, 119 and 193; Rickmers, JRGS 1907, p. 358.

[595] From the _Bū-stān_ (Graf's ed. Vienna 1858, p. 561). The last couplet is also in the _Gulistān_ (Platts' ed. p. 72). The Bombay lith. ed. of the _Bū-stān_ explains (p. 39) that the "We" of the third couplet means Jamshīd and his predecessors who have rested by his fountain.

[596] _nīma._ The First W.-i-B. (I.O. 215 f. 81 l. 8) writes _tawārīkh_, annals.

[597] This may be the Khwāja Hijrī of the A.N. (index _s.n._); and Badāyūnī's Ḥasan _Hijrī_, Bib. Ind. iii, 385; and Ethé's Pers. Cat. No. 793; and Bod. Cat. No. 189.

[598] The Ḥai. MS. points in the last line as though punning on Khān and Jān, but appears to be wrong.

[599] For an account of the waste of crops, the Sh. N. should be seen (p. 162 and 180).

[600] I think this refers to last year's move (f. 94 foot).

[601] In other words, the T. preposition, meaning E. in, at, _etc._ may be written with t or d, as _ta(tā)_ or as _da(dā)_. Also the one meaning E. towards, may be _gha_, _qa_, or _ka_ (with long or short vowel).

[602] _dīm_, a word found difficult. It may be a derivative of root _de_, tell, and a noun with the meaning of English tale (number). The First W.-i-B. renders it by _san_, and by _san_, Abū'l-ghāzī expresses what Bābur's _dīm_ expresses, the numbering of troops. It occurs thrice in the B.N. (here, on f. 183b and on f. 264b). In the Elphinstone Codex it has been written-over into _Ivīm_, once resembles _vīm_ more than _dīm_ and once is omitted. The L. and E. _Memoirs_ (p. 303) inserts what seems a gloss, saying that a whip or bow is used in the count, presumably held by the teller to 'keep his place' in the march past. The _Siyāsat-nāma_ (Schefer, trs. p. 22) names the whip as used in numbering an army.

[603] The acclamation of the standards is depicted in B.M. W.-i-B. Or. 3714 f. 128b. One cloth is shewn tied to the off fore-leg of a live cow, above the knee, Bābur's word being _aūrtā aīlīk_ (middle-hand).

[604] The libation was of fermented mares'-milk.

[605] _lit._ their one way.

[606] _Cf._ T.R. p. 308.

[607] Elph. MS. f. 74; W.-i-B. I.O. 215 f. 83 and 217 f. 66; Mems. p. 104.

[608] It may be noted that Bābur calls his mother's brothers, not _ṯaghāī_ but _dādā_ father. I have not met with an instance of his saying 'My ṯaghāī' as he says 'My dādā.' _Cf._ index _s.n._ _taghāī_.

[609] _kūrūnūsh qīlīb_, reflective from _kūrmak_, to see.

[610] A rider's metaphor.

[611] As touching the misnomer, 'Mughūl dynasty' for the Tīmūrid rulers in Hindūstān, it may be noted that here, as Bābur is speaking to a Chaghatāī Mughūl, his 'Turk' is left to apply to himself.

[612] Gulistān, cap. viii, Maxim 12 (Platts' ed. p. 147).

[613] This backward count is to 890 AH. when Aḥmad fled from cultivated lands (T.R. p. 113).

[614] It becomes clear that Aḥmad had already been asked to come to Tāshkīnt.

[615] _Cf._ f. 96b for his first departure without help.

[616] Yagha (Yaghma) is not on the Fr. map of 1904, but suitably located is Turbat (Tomb) to which roads converge.

[617] Elph. MS. _tūshkūcha_; Ḥai. MS. _yūkūnchā_. The importance Aḥmad attached to ceremony can be inferred by the details given (f. 103) of his meeting with Maḥmūd.

[618] _kūrūshkāīlār._ _Cf._ Redhouse who gives no support for reading the verb _kūrmak_ as meaning _to embrace_.

[619] _būrk_, a tall felt cap (Redhouse). In the adjective applied to the cap there are several variants. The Ḥai. MS. writes _muftūl_, solid or twisted. The Elph. MS. has _muftūn-lūq_ which has been understood by Mr. Erskine to mean, gold-embroidered.

[620] The wording suggests that the decoration is in chain-stitch, pricked up and down through the stuff.

[621] _tāsh chantāī._ These words have been taken to mean whet-stone (_bilgū-tāsh_). I have found no authority for reading _tāsh_ as whet-stone. Moreover to allow 'bag of the stone' to be read would require _tāsh (nīng) chantāī-sī_ in the text.

[622] lit. bag-like things. Some will have held spare bow-strings and archers' rings, and other articles of 'repairing kit.' With the gifts, it seems probable that the _gosha-gīr_ (f. 107) was given.

[623] Vullers, _clava sex foliis_.

[624] Zenker, _casse-tête_. _Kīstin_ would seem to be formed from the root, _kīs_, cutting, but M. de C. describes it as a ball attached by a strap or chain to a handle. _Sanglākh_, a sort of mace (_gurz_).

[625] The _Rauzatu'ṣ-ṣafā_ states that The Khāns left Tāshkīnt on Muḥarram 15th (July 21st. 1502), in order to restore Bābur and expel Taṃbal (Erskine).

[626] lit. saw the count (_dīm_). _Cf._ f. 100 and note concerning the count. Using a Persian substitute, the Kehr-Ilminsky text writes _san_ (_kūrdīlār_).

[627] Elph. MS. _aṃbārchī_, steward, for Itārchī, a tribal-name. The 'Mīrzā' and the rank of the army-begs are against supposing a steward in command. Here and just above, the texts write Mīrzā-i-Itārchī and Mīrzā-i-Dūghlāt, thus suggesting that in names not ending with a vowel, the _iẓāfat_ is required for exact transliteration, _e.g._ Muḥammad-i-dūghlāt.

[628] _Alāī-līq aūrchīnī._ I understand the march to have been along the northern slope of the Little Alāī, south of Aūsh.

[629] As of Ālmālīgh and Ālmātū (fol. 2b) Bābur reports a tradition with caution. The name Aūz-kīnt may be read to mean 'Own village,' independent, as _Aūz-beg_, Own-beg.

[630] He would be one of the hereditary Khwājas of Andijān (f. 16).

[631] For several battle-cries _see_ Th. Radloff's _Réceuils_ etc. p. 322.

[632] _qāshqa ātlīq kīshī._ For a parallel phrase _see_ f. 92b.

[633] Bābur does not explain how the imbroglio was cleared up; there must have been a dramatic moment when this happened.

[634] _Darwāna_ (a trap-door in a roof) has the variant _dur-dāna_, a single pearl; _tūqqāī_ perhaps implies relationship; _lūlū_ is a pearl, a wild cow etc.

[635] Ḥai. MS. _sāīrt kīshī_. Muḥ. `Alī is likely to be the librarian (_cf._ index _s.n._).

[636] Elph. MS. _ramāqgha u tūr-gā_; Ḥai. MS. _tārtātgha u tūr-gā_. Ilminsky gives no help, varying much here from the true text. The archetype of both MSS. must have been difficult to read.

[637] The Ḥai. MS.'s pointing allows the sobriquet to mean 'Butterfly.' His family lent itself to nick-names; in it three brothers were known respectively as Fat or Lubberly, Fool and, perhaps, Butterfly.

[638] _bīrk ārīgh_, doubly strong by its trench and its current.

[639] I understand that time failed to set the standard in its usual rest. E. and de C. have understood that the yak-tail (_qūtās tūghī_ f. 100) was apart from the staff and that time failed to adjust the two parts. The _tūgh_ however is the whole standard; moreover if the tail were ever taken off at night from the staff, it would hardly be so treated in a mere bivouac.

[640] _aīshīklīk tūrlūq_, as on f. 113. I understand this to mean that the two men were as far from their followers as sentries at a Gate are posted outside the Gate.

[641] So too 'Piero of Cosimo' and 'Lorenzo of Piero of the Medici.' _Cf._ the names of five men on f. 114.

[642] _shashtīm._ The _shasht_ (thumb) in archery is the thumb-shield used on the left hand, as the _zih-gīr_ (string-grip), the archer's ring, is on the right-hand thumb.

It is useful to remember, when reading accounts of shooting with the Turkī (Turkish) bow, that the arrows (_aūq_) had notches so gripping the string that they kept in place until released with the string.

[643] _sar-i-sabz gosha gīr._ The _gosha-gīr_ is an implement for remedying the warp of a bow-tip and string-notch. For further particulars _see_ Appendix C.

The term _sar-i-sabz_, lit. green-head, occurs in the sense of 'quite young' or 'new,' in the proverb, 'The red tongue loses the green head,' quoted in the _T̤abaqāt-i-akbarī_ account of Bābur's death. Applied here, it points to the _gosha-gīr_ as part of the recent gift made by Aḥmad to Bābur.

[644] _Taṃbal aīkāndūr._ By this tense I understand that Bābur was not at first sure of the identity of the pseudo-sentries, partly because of their distance, partly, it may be presumed, because of concealment of identity by armour.

[645] _dūwulgha būrkī_; _i.e._ the soft cap worn under the iron helm.

[646] Nūyān's sword dealt the blow (f. 97b). Gul-badan also tells the story (f. 77) à propos of a similar incident in Humāyūn's career. Bābur repeats the story on f. 234.

[647] _yāldāghlāmāī dūr aīdīm._ The Second W.-i-B. has taken this as from _yāltūrmāq_, to cause to glisten, and adds the gloss that the sword was rusty (I.O. 217 f. 70b).

[648] The text here seems to say that the three men were on foot, but this is negatived by the context.

[649] Amongst the various uses of the verb _tūshmak_, to descend in any way, the B.N. does not allow of 'falling (death) in battle.' When I made the index of the Ḥai. MS. facsimile, this was not known to me; I therefore erroneously entered the men enumerated here as killed at this time.

[650] Elph. MS. _yakhshī_. Zenker explains _bakhshī_ (pay-master) as meaning also a Court-physician.

[651] The Ḥai. Elph. and Kehr's MS. all have _pūchqāq tāqmāq_ or it may be _pūḥqāq tāqmāq_. T. _būkhāq_ means bandage, _pūchāq_, rind of fruit, but the word clear in the three Turkī MSS. means, skin of a fox's leg.

[652] The _daryā_ here mentioned seems to be the Kāsān-water; the route taken from Bīshkhārān to Pāp is shewn on the Fr. map to lead past modern Tūpa-qūrghān. Pāp is not marked, but was, I think, at the cross-roads east of Touss (Karnān).

[653] Presumably Jahāngīr's.

[654] Here his father was killed (f. 6b). _Cf._ App. A.

[655] `Alī-dost's son (f. 79b).

[656] The sobriquet _Khīz_ may mean Leaper, or Impetuous.

[657] _kūīlāk_, syn. _kūnglāk_, a shirt not opening at the breast. It will have been a short garment since the under-vest was visible.

[658] _i.e._ when Bābur was writing in Hindūstān. Exactly at what date he made this entry is not sure. `Alī was in Koel in 933 AH. (f. 315) and then taken prisoner, but Bābur does not say he was killed,—as he well might say of a marked man, and, as the captor was himself taken shortly after, `Alī may have been released, and may have been in Koel again. So that the statement 'now in Koel' may refer to a time later than his capture. The interest of the point is in its relation to the date of composition of the _Bābur-nāma_.

No record of `Alī's bravery in Aūsh has been preserved. The reference here made to it may indicate something attempted in 908 AH. after Bābur's adventure in Karnān (f. 118b) or in 909 AH. from Sūkh. _Cf._ Translator's note f. 118b.

[659] _aūpchīnlīk._ Vambéry, _gepanzert_; Shaw, four horse-shoes and their nails; Steingass, _aūpcha-khāna_, a guard-house.

[660] Sang is a ferry-station (Kostenko, i, 213). Pāp may well have been regretted (f. 109b and f. 112b)! The well-marked features of the French map of 1904 allows Bābur's flight to be followed.

[661] In the Turkī text this saying is in Persian; in the Kehr-Ilminsky, in Turkī, as though it had gone over with its Persian context of the W.-i-B. from which the K.-I. text here is believed to be a translation.

[662] _Cf._ f. 96b and Fr. Map for route over the Kīndīr-tau.

[663] This account of Muḥ. Bāqir reads like one given later to Bābur; he may have had some part in Bābur's rescue (_cf._ Translator's Note to f. 118b).

[664] Perhaps reeds for a raft. Sh. N. p. 258, _Sāl aūchūn bār qāmīsh_, reeds are there also for rafts.

[665] Here the Turkī text breaks off, as it might through loss of pages, causing a blank of narrative extending over some 16 months. _Cf._ App. D. for a passage, supposedly spurious, found with the Ḥaidarābād Codex and the Kehr-Ilminsky text, purporting to tell how Bābur was rescued from the risk in which the lacuna here leaves him.

[666] As in the Farghāna Section, so here, reliance is on the Elphinstone and Ḥaidarābād MSS. The Kehr-Ilminsky text still appears to be a retranslation from the _Wāqi`āt-i-bāburī_ and verbally departs much from the true text; moreover, in this Section it has been helped out, where its archetype was illegible or has lost fragmentary passages, from the Leyden and Erskine _Memoirs_. It may be mentioned, as between the First and the Second _Wāqi`āt-i-bāburī_, that several obscure passages in this Section are more explicit in the First (Pāyanda-ḥasan's) than in its successor (`Abdu-r-raḥīm's).

[667] Elph. MS. f. 90b; W.-i-B. I.O. 215, f. 96b and 217, f. 79; Mems. p. 127. "In 1504 AD. Ferdinand the Catholic drove the French out of Naples" (Erskine). In England, Henry VII was pushing forward a commercial treaty, the _Intercursus malus_, with the Flemings and growing in wealth by the exactions of Empson and Dudley.

[668] presumably the pastures of the "Ilak" Valley. The route from Sūkh would be over the `Alā`u'd-dīn-pass, into the Qīzīl-sū valley, down to Āb-i-garm and on to the Aīlāq-valley, Khwāja `Imād, the Kāfirnigān, Qabādīān, and Aūbāj on the Amū. See T.R. p. 175 and Farghāna Section, p. 184, as to the character of the journey.

[669] Amongst the Turkī tribes, the time of first applying the razor to the face is celebrated by a great entertainment. Bābur's miserable circumstances would not admit of this (Erskine).

The text is ambiguous here, reading either that Sūkh was left or that Aīlāq-yīlāq was reached in Muḥarram. As the birthday was on the 8th, the journey very arduous and, for a party mostly on foot, slow, it seems safest to suppose that the start was made from Sūkh at the end of 909 AH. and not in Muḥarram, 910 AH.

[670] _chārūq_, rough boots of untanned leather, formed like a moccasin with the lower leather drawn up round the foot; they are worn by Khīrghīz mountaineers and caravan-men on journeys (Shaw).

[671] _chāpān_, the ordinary garment of Central Asia (Shaw).

[672] The _ālāchūq_, a tent of flexible poles, covered with felt, may be the _khargāh_ (kibitka); Persian _chādar_ seems to represent Turkī _āq awī_, white house.

[673] _i.e._ with Khusrau's power shaken by Aūzbeg attack, made in the winter of 909 AH. (_Shaibānī-nāma_ cap. lviii).

[674] Cf. ff. 81 and 81b. The armourer's station was low for an envoy to Bābur, the superior in birth of the armourer's master.

[675] var. Chaqānīān and Saghānīān. The name formerly described the whole of the Ḥiṣār territory (Erskine).

[676] the preacher by whom the _Khuṯba_ is read (Erskine).

[677] _bī bāqī_ or _bī Bāqī_; perhaps a play of words with the double meaning expressed in the above translation.

[678] Amongst these were widows and children of Bābur's uncle, Maḥmūd (f. 27b).

[679] _aūghūl._ As being the son of Khusrau's sister, Aḥmad was nephew to Bāqī; there may be in the text a scribe's slip from one _aūghūl_ to another, and the real statement be that Aḥmad was the son of Bāqī's son, Muḥ. Qāsim, which would account for his name Aḥmad-i-qāsim.

[680] Cf. f. 67.

[681] Bābur's loss of rule in Farghāna and Samarkand.

[682] about 7 miles south of Aībak, on the road to Sar-i-tāgh (mountain-head, Erskine).

[683] _viz._ the respective fathers, Maḥmūd and `Umar Shaikh. The arrangement was made in 895 AH. (1490 AD.).

[684] _Gulistān_ cap. i, story 3. Part of this quotation is used again on f. 183.

[685] Maḥmūd's sons under whom Bāqī had served.

[686] Uncles of all degrees are included as elder brethren, cousins of all degrees, as younger ones.

[687] Presumably the ferries; perhaps the one on the main road from the north-east which crosses the river at Fort Murgh-āb.

[688] Nine deaths, perhaps where the Amū is split into nine channels at the place where Mīrzā Khān's son Sulaimān later met his rebel grandson Shāh-rukh (_T̤abaqāt-i-akbarī_, Elliot & Dowson, v, 392, and A.N. Bib. Ind., 3rd ed., 441). Tūqūz-aūlūm is too far up the river to be Arnold's "shorn and parcelled Oxus".

[689] Shaibāq himself had gone down from Samarkand in 908 AH. and in 909 AH. and so permanently located his troops as to have sent their families to them. In 909 AH. he drove Khusrau into the mountains of Badakhshān, but did not occupy Qūndūz; thither Khusrau returned and there stayed till now, when Shaibāq again came south (fol. 123). See Sh. N. cap. lviii _et seq._

[690] From Taṃbal, to put down whom he had quitted his army near Balkh (Sh. N. cap. lix).

[691] This, one of the many Red-rivers, flows from near Kāhmard and joins the Andar-āb water near Dūshī.

[692] A _garī_ is twenty-four minutes.

[693] Qorān, _Surat_ iii, verse 25; Sale's Qorān, ed. 1825, i, 56.

[694] Cf. f. 82.

[695] _viz._ Bāī-sanghar, bowstrung, and Mas`ūd, blinded.

[696] Muḥ. Ṣāliḥ is florid over the rubies of Badakhshān he says Bābur took from Khusrau, but Ḥaidar says Bābur not only had Khusrau's property, treasure, and horses returned to him, but refused all gifts Khusrau offered. "This is one trait out of a thousand in the Emperor's character." Ḥaidar mentions, too, the then lack of necessaries under which Bābur suffered (Sh. N., cap. lxiii, and T.R. p. 176).

[697] Cf. T. R. p. 134 n. and 374 n.

[698] _Jība_, so often used to describe the quilted corselet, seems to have here a wider meaning, since the _jība-khāna_ contained both _joshan_ and _kūhah_, _i.e._ coats-of-mail and horse-mail with accoutrements. It can have been only from this source that Bābur's men obtained the horse-mail of f. 127.

[699] He succeeded his father, Aūlūgh Beg _Kābulī_, in 907 AH.; his youth led to the usurpation of his authority by Sherīm Ẕikr, one of his begs; but the other begs put Sherīm to death. During the subsequent confusions Muḥ. Muqīm _Arghūn_, in 908 AH., got possession of Kābul and married a sister of `Abdu'r-razzāq. Things were in this state when Bābur entered the country in 910 AH. (Erskine).

[700] var. Ūpīān, a few miles north of Chārikār.

[701] Suhail (Canopus) is a most conspicuous star in Afghānistān; it gives its name to the south, which is never called Janūb but Suhail; the rising of Suhail marks one of their seasons (Erskine). The honour attaching to this star is due to its seeming to rise out of Arabia Felix.

[702] The lines are in the Preface to the _Anwār-i-suhailī_ (Lights of Canopus).

[703] "Die Kirghis-qazzāq drücken die Sonnen-höhe in Pikenaus" (von Schwarz, p. 124).

[704] Presumably, dark with shade, as in _qarā-yīghāch_, the hard-wood elm (f. 47b and note to _narwān_).

[705] _i.e._ Sayyid Muḥammad `Alī, the door-ward. These _būlāks_ seem likely to have been groups of 1,000 fighting-men (Turki _Mīng_).

[706] In-the-water and Water-head.

[707] Walī went from his defeat to Khwāst; wrote to Maḥmūd _Aūzbeg_ in Qūndūz to ask protection; was fetched to Qūndūz by Muḥ. Ṣāliḥ, the author of the _Shaibānī-nāma_, and forwarded from Qūndūz to Samarkand (Sh. N. cap. lxiii). Cf. f. 29b.

[708] _i.e._ where justice was administered, at this time, outside Bābur's tent.

[709] They would pass Ajar and make for the main road over the Dandān-shikan Pass.

[710] The clansmen may have obeyed Aḥmad's orders in thus holding up the families.

[711] The name may be from Turkī _tāq_, a horse-shoe, but I.O. 215 f. 102 writes Persian _naqīb_, the servant who announces arriving guests.

[712] Here, as immediately below, when mentioning the Chār-bāgh and the tomb of Qūtlūq-qadam, Bābur uses names acquired by the places at a subsequent date. In 910 AH. the Taster was alive; the Chār-bāgh was bought by Bābur in 911 AH., and Qūtlūq-qadam fought at Kānwāha in 933 AH.

[713] The Kūcha-bāgh is still a garden about 4 miles from Kābul on the north-west and divided from it by a low hill-pass. There is still a bridge on the way (Erskine).

[714] Presumably that on which the Bālā-ḥiṣār stood, the glacis of a few lines further.

[715] Cf. f. 130.

[716] One of Muqīm's wives was a Tīmūrid, Bābur's first-cousin, the daughter of Aūlūgh Beg _Kābulī_; another was Bībī Zarīf Khātūn, the mother of that Māh-chūchūq, whose anger at her marriage to Bābur's faithful Qāsim Kūkūldāsh has filled some pages of history (Gulbadan's H.N. _s.n._ Māh-chūchūq and Erskine's B. and H. i, 348).

[717] Some 9 m. north of Kābul on the road to Āq-sarāī.

[718] The Ḥai. MS. (only) writes First Rabī but the Second better suits the near approach of winter.

[719] Elph. MS. fol. 97; W.-i-B. I.O. 215 f. 102b and 217 f. 85; Mems. p. 136. Useful books of the early 19th century, many of them referring to the _Bābur-nāma_, are Conolly's _Travels_, Wood's _Journey_, Elphinstone's _Caubul_, Burnes' _Cabool_, Masson's _Narrative_, Lord's and Leech's articles in JASB 1838 and in Burnes' _Reports_ (India Office Library), Broadfoot's _Report_ in RGS Supp. Papers vol. I.

[720] f. 1b where Farghāna is said to be on the limit of cultivation.

[721] f. 131b. To find these _tūmāns_ here classed with what was not part of Kābul suggest a clerical omission of "beyond" or "east of" (Lamghānāt). It may be more correct to write Lāmghānāt, since the first syllable may be _lām_, fort. The modern form Laghmān is not used in the _Bābur-nāma_, nor, it may be added is Paghmān for Pamghān.

[722] It will be observed that Bābur limits the name Afghānistān to the countries inhabited by Afghān tribesmen; they are chiefly those south of the road from Kābul to Pashāwar (Erskine). See Vigne, p. 102, for a boundary between the Afghāns and Khurāsān.

[723] Al-birūnī's _Indika_ writes of both Turk and Hindū-shāhī Kings of Kābul. See Raverty's _Notes_ p. 62 and Stein's _Shāhī Kings of Kābul_. The mountain is 7592 ft. above the sea, some 1800 ft. therefore above the town.

[724] The Kābul-river enters the Chār-dih plain by the Dih-i-yaq`ūb narrows, and leaves it by those of Dūrrīn. Cf. _S.A. War_, Plan p. 288 and Plan of action at Chār-āsiyā (Four-mills), the second shewing an off-take which may be Wais Ātāka's canal. See Vigne, p. 163 and Raverty's _Notes_ pp. 69 and 689.

[725] This, the Bālā-jūī (upper-canal) was a four-mill stream and in Masson's time, as now, supplied water to the gardens round Bābur's tomb. Masson found in Kābul honoured descendants of Wais Ātāka (ii, 240).

[726] But for a, perhaps negligible, shortening of its first vowel, this form of the name would describe the normal end of an irrigation canal, a little pool, but other forms with other meanings are open to choice, _e.g._ small hamlet (Pers. _kul_), or some compound containing Pers. _gul_, a rose, in its plain or metaphorical senses. Jarrett's _Āyīn-i-akbarī_ writes Gul-kīnah, little rose (?). Masson (ii, 236) mentions a similar pleasure-resort, Sanjī-tāq.

[727] The original ode, with which the parody agrees in rhyme and refrain, is in the _Dīwān, s.l. Dāl_ (Brockhaus ed. 1854, i, 62 and lith. ed. p. 96). See Wilberforce Clarke's literal translation i, 286 (H. B.). A marginal note to the Ḥaidarābād Codex gives what appears to be a variant of one of the rhymes of the parody.

[728] _aūlūgh kūl_; some 3 m. round in Erskine's time; mapped as a swamp in _S.A. War_ p. 288.

[729] A marginal note to the Ḥai. Codex explains this name to be an abbreviation of Khwāja Shamsū'd-dīn _Jān-bāz_ (or _Jahān-bāz_; Masson, ii, 279 and iii, 93).

[730] _i.e_. the place made holy by an impress of saintly foot-steps.

[731] Two eagles or, Two poles, used for punishment. Vigne's illustration (p. 161) clearly shows the spur and the detached rock. Erskine (p. 137 n.) says that `Uqābain seems to be the hill, known in his day as `Āshiqān-i-`ārifān, which connects with Bābur Bādshāh. See Raverty's _Notes_ p. 68.

[732] During most of the year this wind rushes through the Hindū-kush (Parwān)-pass; it checks the migration of the birds (f. 142), and it may be the cause of the deposit of the Running-sands (Burnes, p. 158). Cf. Wood, p. 124.

[733] He was Badī`u'z-zamān's _Ṣadr_ before serving Bābur; he died in 918 AH. (1512 AD.), in the battle of Kūl-i-malik where `Ubaidu'l-lāh _Aūzbeg_ defeated Bābur. He may be identical with Mīr Ḥusain the Riddler of f. 181, but seems not to be Mullā Muḥ. _Badakhshī_, also a Riddler, because the _Ḥabību's-siyār_ (ii, 343 and 344) gives this man a separate notice. Those interested in enigmas can find one made by T̤ālib on the name Yaḥya (Ḥ.S. ii, 344). Sharafu'd-dīn `Alī _Yazdī_, the author of the _Z̤afar-nāma_, wrote a book about a novel kind of these puzzles (T.R. p. 84).

[734] The original couplet is as follows:—

_Bakhūr dar arg-i Kābul mai, bagardān kāsa pāy dar pāy, Kah ham koh ast, u ham daryā, u ham shahr ast, u ham ṣaḥrā'._

What T̤ālib's words may be inferred to conceal is the opinion that like Badī`u'z-zamān and like the meaning of his name, Kābul is the Wonder-of-the-world. (Cf. M. Garçin de Tassy's _Rhétorique_ [p. 165], for _ces combinaisons énigmatiques_.)

[735] All MSS. do not mention Kāshghar.

[736] Khīta (Cathay) is Northern China; Chīn (_infra_) is China; Rūm is Turkey and particularly the provinces near Trebizond (Erskine).

[737] 300% to 400% (Erskine).

[738] Persian _sinjid_, Brandis, _elæagnus hortensis_; Erskine (Mems. p. 138) jujube, presumably the _zizyphus jujuba_ of Speede, Supplement p. 86. Turkī _yāngāq_, walnut, has several variants, of which the most marked is _yānghkāq_. For a good account of Kābul fruits _see_ Masson, ii, 230.

[739] a kind of plum (?). It seems unlikely to be a cherry since Bābur does not mention cherries as good in his old dominions, and Firminger (p. 244) makes against it as introduced from India. Steingass explains _alū-bālū_ by "sour-cherry, an armarylla"; if sour, is it the Morello cherry?

[740] The sugar-cane was seen in abundance in Lan-po (Lamghān) by a Chinese pilgrim (Beale, p. 90); Bābur's introduction of it may have been into his own garden only in Nīngnahār (f. 132b).

[741] _i.e._ the seeds of _pinus Gerardiana_.

[742] _rawāshlār._ The green leaf-stalks (_chūkrī_) of _ribes rheum_ are taken into Kābul in mid-April from the Pamghān-hills; a week later they are followed by the blanched and tended _rawāsh_ (Masson, ii, 7). _See_ Gul-badan's H.N. trs. p. 188, Vigne, p. 100 and 107, Masson, ii, 230, Conolly, i, 213.

[743] a large green fruit, shaped something like a citron; also a large sort of cucumber (Erskine).

[744] The _ṣāḥibī_, a grape praised by Bābur amongst Samarkandī fruits, grows in Koh-dāman; another well-known grape of Kābul is the long stoneless _ḥusainī_, brought by Afghān traders into Hindūstān in round, flat boxes of poplar wood (Vigne, p. 172).

[745] An allusion, presumably, to the renouncement of wine made by Bābur and some of his followers in 933 AH. (1527 AD. f. 312). He may have had `Umar _Khayyām's_ quatrain in mind, "Wine's power is known to wine-bibbers alone" (Whinfield's 2nd ed. 1901, No. 164).

[746] _pūstīn_, usually of sheep-skin. For the wide range of temperature at Kābul in 24 hours, _see_ Ency. Brtt. art. Afghānistān. The winters also vary much in severity (Burnes, p. 273).

[747] Index _s.n._ As he fought at Kānwāha, he will have been buried after March 1527 AD.; this entry therefore will have been made later. The Curriers'-gate is the later Lahor-gate (Masson, ii, 259).

[748] Index _s.n._

[749] For lists of the Hindū-kush passes _see_ Leech's Report VII; Yule's _Introductory Essay_ to Wood's _Journey_ 2nd ed.; PRGS 1879, Markham's art. p. 121.

The highest _cols_ on the passes here enumerated by Bābur are,—Khawāk 11,640 ft.—T̤ūl, height not known,—Pārandī 15,984 ft.—Bāj-gāh (Toll-place) 12,000 ft.—Walīān (Saints) 15,100 ft.—Chahār-dār (Four-doors) 18,900 ft. and Shibr-tū 9800 ft. In considering the labour of their ascent and descent, the general high level, north and south of them, should be borne in mind; _e.g._ Chārikār (Chār-yak-kār) stands 5200 ft. and Kābul itself at 5780 ft. above the sea.

[750] _i.e._ the hollow, long, and small-bāzār roads respectively. Panjhīr is explained by Hindūs to be Panj-sher, the five lion-sons of Pandu (Masson, iii, 168).

[751] Shibr is a Hazāra district between the head of the Ghūr-bund valley and Bāmīān. It does not seem to be correct to omit the _tū_ from the name of the pass. Persian _tū_, turn, twist (syn. _pīch_) occurs in other names of local passes; to read it here as a _turn_ agrees with what is said of Shibr-tū pass as not crossing but turning the Hindū-kush (Cunningham). Lord uses the same wording about the Ḥājī-ghāt (var. -kāk etc.) traverse of the same spur, which "turns the extremity of the Hindū-kush". _See_ Cunningham's _Ancient Geography_, i, 25; Lord's _Ghūr-bund_ (JASB 1838 p. 528), Masson, iii, 169 and Leech's _Report_ VII.

[752] Perhaps through Jālmīsh into Saighān.

[753] _i.e._ they are closed.

[754] It was unknown in Mr. Erskine's day (Mems. p. 140). Several of the routes in Raverty's _Notes_ (p. 92 etc.) allow it to be located as on the Īrī-āb, near to or identical with Bāghzān, 35 _kurohs_ (70 m.) s.s.e. of Kābul.

[755] Farmūl, about the situation of which Mr. Erskine was in doubt, is now marked in maps, Ūrghūn being its principal village.

[756] 15 miles below Atak (Erskine). Mr. Erskine notes that he found no warrant, previous to Abū'l-faẓl's, for calling the Indus the Nīl-āb, and that to find one would solve an ancient geographical difficulty. This difficulty, my husband suggests, was Alexander's supposition that the Indus was the Nile. In books grouping round the _Bābur-nāma_, the name Nīl-āb is not applied to the Indus, but to the ferry-station on that river, said to owe its name to a spring of azure water on its eastern side. (Cf. Afẓal Khān _Khattak_, R.'s _Notes_ p. 447.)

I find the name Nīl-āb applied to the Kābul-river:—1. to its Arghandī affluent (Cunningham, p. 17, Map); 2. through its boatman class, the Nīl-ābīs of Lālpūra, Jalālābād and Kūnār (G. of I. 1907, art. Kābul); 3. inferentially to it as a tributary of the Indus (D'Herbélot); 4. to it near its confluence with the grey, silt-laden Indus, as blue by contrast (Sayyid Ghulām-i-muḥammad, R.'s _Notes_ p. 34). (For Nīl-āb (Naulibis?) in Ghūr-bund _see_ Cunningham, p. 32 and Masson, iii, 169.)

[757] By one of two routes perhaps,—either by the Khaibar-Nīngnahār-Jagdālīk road, or along the north bank of the Kābul-river, through Goshṭa to the crossing where, in 1879, the 10th Hussars met with disaster. _See_ _S.A. War_, Map 2 and p. 63; Leech's _Reports_ II and IV (Fords of the Indus); and R.'s _Notes_ p. 44.

[758] Hāru, Leech's Harroon, apparently, 10 m. above Atak. The text might be read to mean that both rivers were forded near their confluence, but, finding no warrant for supposing the Kābul-river fordable below Jalālābād, I have guided the translation accordingly; this may be wrong and may conceal a change in the river.

[759] Known also as Dhān-kot and as Mu`az̤z̤am-nagar (_Ma`āṣiru'l-`umrā_ i, 249 and A.N. trs. H.B. index _s.n._ Dhān-kot). It was on the east bank of the Indus, probably near modern Kālā-bāgh, and was washed away not before 956 AH. (1549 AD. H. Beveridge).

[760] Chaupāra seems, from f. 148b, to be the Chapari of Survey Map 1889. Bābur's _Dasht_ is modern Dāman.

[761] _aīmāq_, used usually of Mughūls, I think. It may be noted that Lieutenant Leech compiled a vocabulary of the tongue of the Mughūl Aīmāq in Qandahār and Harāt (JASB 1838, p. 785).

[762] The _Āyīn-i-akbarī_ account of Kābul both uses and supplements the _Bābur-nāma_.

[763] _viz._ `Alī-shang, Alangār and Mandrāwar (the Lamghānāt proper), Nīngnahār (with its _bulūk_, Kāma), Kūnār-with-Nūr-gal, (and the two _bulūks_ of Nūr-valley and Chaghān-sarāī).

[764] _See_ Appendix E, _On Nagarahāra_.

[765] The name Adīnapūr is held to be descended from ancient Udyānapūra (Garden-town); its ancestral form however was applied to Nagarahāra, apparently, in the Bārān-Sūrkh-rūd _dū-āb_, and not to Bābur's _dārogha's_ seat. The Sūrkh-rūd's deltaic mouth was a land of gardens; when Masson visited Adīnapūr he went from Bālā-bāgh (High-garden); this appears to stand where Bābur locates his Bāgh-i-wafā, but he was shown a garden he took to be this one of Bābur's, a mile higher up the Sūrkh-rūd. A later ruler made the Chār-bāgh of maps. It may be mentioned that Bālā-bāgh has become in some maps Rozābād (Garden-town). _See_ Masson, i, 182 and iii, 186; R.'s _Notes_; and Wilson's _Ariana Antiqua_, Masson's art.

[766] One of these _tangī_ is now a literary asset in Mr. Kipling's _My Lord the Elephant_. Bābur's 13 y. represent some 82 miles; on f. 137b the Kābul-Ghaznī road of 14 y. represents some 85; in each case the _yīghāch_ works out at over six miles (Index _s.n._ _yīghāch_ and Vigne, p. 454). Sayyid Ghulām-i-muḥammad traces this route minutely (R.'s _Notes_ pp. 57, 59).

[767] Masson was shewn "Chaghatai castles", attributed to Bābur (iii, 174).

[768] Dark-turn, perhaps, as in Shibr-tū, Jāl-tū, _etc._ (f. 130b and note to Shibr-tū).

[769] f. 145 where the change is described in identical words, as seen south of the Jagdālīk-pass. The Bādām-chashma pass appears to be a traverse of the eastern rampart of the Tīzīn-valley.

[770] Appendix E, _On Nagarahāra_.

[771] No record exists of the actual laying-out of the garden; the work may have been put in hand during the Mahmand expedition of 914 AH. (f. 216); the name given to it suggests a gathering there of loyalists when the stress was over of the bad Mughūl rebellion of that year (f. 216b where the narrative breaks off abruptly in 914 AH. and is followed by a gap down to 925 AH.-1519 AD.).

[772] No annals of 930 AH. are known to exist; from Ṣafar 926 AH. to 932 AH. (Jan. 1520-Nov. 1525 AD.) there is a lacuna. Accounts of the expedition are given by Khāfī Khān, i, 47 and Firishta, lith. ed. p. 202.

[773] Presumably to his son, Humāyūn, then governor in Badakhshān; Bukhārā also was under Bābur's rule.

[774] Here, _qārī_, yards. The dimensions 10 by 10, are those enjoined for places of ablution.

[775] Presumably those of the _tūqūz-rūd_, _supra_. Cf. Appendix E, _On Nagarahāra_.

[776] White-mountain; Pushtū, Spīn-ghur (or ghar).

[777] _i.e._ the Lamghānāt proper. The range is variously named; in (Persian) Siyāh-koh (Black-mountain), which like Turkī Qarā-tāgh may mean non-snowy; by Tājīks, Bāgh-i-ātāka (Foster-father's garden); by Afghāns, Kanda-ghur, and by Lamghānīs Koh-i-būlān,—Kanda and Būlān both being ferry-stations below it (Masson, iii, 189; also the Times Nov. 20th 1912 for a cognate illustration of diverse naming).

[778] A comment made here by Mr. Erskine on changes of name is still appropriate, but some seeming changes may well be due to varied selection of land-marks. Of the three routes next described in the text, one crosses as for Mandrāwar; the second, as for `Alī-shang, a little below the outfall of the Tīzīn-water; the third may take off from the route, between Kābul and Tag-aū, marked in Col. Tanner's map (PRGS 1881 p. 180). Cf. R's Route 11; and for Aūlūgh-nūr, Appendix F, _On the name Nūr_.

[779] The name of this pass has several variants. Its second component, whatever its form, is usually taken to mean _pass_, but to read it here as pass would be redundant, since Bābur writes "pass (_kūtal_) of Bād-i-pīch". Pich occurs as a place name both east (Pīch) and west (Pīchghān) of the _kūtal_, but what would suit the bitter and even fatal winds of the pass would be to read the name as Whirling-wind (_bād-i-pīch_). Another explanation suggests itself from finding a considerable number of pass-names such as Shibr-tū, Jāi-tū, Qarā-tū, in which _tū_ is a synonym of _pīch_, turn, twist; thus Bād-i-pīch may be the local form of Bād-tū, Windy-turn.

[780] _See_ Masson, iii, 197 and 289. Both in Pashāī and Lamghānī, _lām_ means fort.

[781] _See_ Appendix F, _On the name Dara-i-nūr_.

[782] _ghair mukarrar._ Bābur may allude to the remarkable change men have wrought in the valley-bottom (Appendix F, for Col. Tanner's account of the valley).

[783] f. 154.

[784] _diospyrus lotus_, the European date-plum, supposed to be one of the fruits eaten by the Lotophagi. It is purple, has bloom and is of the size of a pigeon's egg or a cherry. See Watts' _Economic Products of India_; Brandis' _Forest Trees_, Illustrations; and Speede's _Indian Hand-book_.

[785] As in Lombardy, perhaps; in Luhūgur vines are clipped into standards; in most other places in Afghānistān they are planted in deep trenches and allowed to run over the intervening ridges or over wooden framework. In the narrow Khūlm-valley they are trained up poplars so as to secure them the maximum of sun. _See_ Wood's _Report_ VI p. 27; Bellew's _Afghānistān_ p. I75 and _Mems_. p. 142 note.

[786] Appendix G, _On the names of two Nūrī wines_.

[787] This practice Bābur viewed with disgust, the hog being an impure animal according to Muḥammadan Law (Erskine).

[788] The _Khazīnatu'l-asfiyā_ (ii, 293) explains how it came about that this saint, one honoured in Kashmīr, was buried in Khutlān. He died in Hazāra (Paklī) and there the Paklī Sulṯān wished to have him buried, but his disciples, for some unspecified reason, wished to bury him in Khutlān. In order to decide the matter they invited the Sultān to remove the bier with the corpse upon it. It could not be stirred from its place. When, however, a single one of the disciples tried to move it, he alone was able to lift it, and to bear it away on his head. Hence the burial in Khutlān. The death occurred in 786 AH. (1384 AD.). A point of interest in this legend is that, like the one to follow, concerning dead women, it shews belief in the living activities of the dead.

[789] The MSS. vary between 920 and 925 AH.—neither date seems correct. As the annals of 925 AH. begin in Muḥarram, with Bābur to the east of Bājaur, we surmise that the Chaghān-sarāī affair may have occurred on his way thither, and at the end of 924 AH.

[790] _karanj_, _coriandrum sativum_.

[791] Some 20-24 m. north of Jalālābād. The name Multa-kundī may refer to the Rām-kundī range, or mean Lower district, or mean Below Kundī. _See_ Biddulph's _Khowārī Dialect s.n_ under; R.'s _Notes_ p. 108 and _Dict. s.n. kund_; Masson, i, 209.

[792] _i.e._ treat her corpse as that of an infidel (Erskine).

[793] It would suit the position of this village if its name were found to link to the Turkī verb _chaqmāq_, to go out, because it lies in the mouth of a defile (Dahānah-i-koh, Mountain-mouth) through which the road for Kāfiristān goes out past the village. A not-infrequent explanation of the name to mean White-house, Āq-sarāī, may well be questioned. _Chaghān_, white, is Mughūlī and it would be less probable for a Mughūlī than for a Turkī name to establish itself. Another explanation may lie in the tribe name Chugānī. The two forms _chaghān_ and _chaghār_ may well be due to the common local interchange in speech of _n_ with _r_. (For Dahānah-i-koh _see_ [some] maps and Raverty's Bājaur routes.)

[794] Nīmchas, presumably,—half-bred in custom, perhaps in blood—; and not improbably, converted Kāfirs. It is useful to remember that Kāfiristān was once bounded, west and south, by the Bārān-water.

[795] Kāfir wine is mostly poor, thin and, even so, usually diluted with water. When kept two or three years, however, it becomes clear and sometimes strong. Sir G. S. Robertson never saw a Kāfir drunk (_Kāfirs of the Hindū-kush_, p. 591).

[796] Kāma might have classed better under Nīngnahār of which it was a dependency.

[797] _i.e._ water-of-Nijr; so too, Badr-aū and Tag-aū. Nijr-aū has seven-valleys (JASB 1838 p. 329 and Burnes' _Report X_). Sayyid Ghulām-i-muḥammad mentions that Bābur established a frontier-post between Nijr-aū and Kāfiristān which in his own day was still maintained. He was an envoy of Warren Hastings to Tīmūr Shāh _Sadozī_ (R.'s _Notes_ p. 36 and p. 142).

[798] _Kāfirwash_; they were Kafirs converted to Muḥammadanism.

[799] _Archa_, if not inclusive, meaning conifer, may represent _juniperus excelsa_, this being the common local conifer. The other trees of the list are _pinus Gerardiana_ (Brandis, p. 690), _quercus bīlūt_, the holm-oak, and _pistacia mutica_ or _khanjak_, a tree yielding mastic.

[800] _rūba-i-parwān_, _pteromys inornatus_, the large, red flying-squirrel (Blandford's _Fauna of British India_, _Mammalia_, p. 363).

[801] The _giz_ is a short-flight arrow used for shooting small birds _etc._ Descending flights of squirrels have been ascertained as 60 yards, one, a record, of 80 (Blandford).

[802] Apparently _tetrogallus himalayensis_, the Himalayan snow-cock (Blandford, iv, 143).Burnes (_Cabool_ p. 163) describes the _kabg-i-darī_ as the _rara avis_ of the Kābul Kohistān, somewhat less than a turkey, and of the _chikor_ (partridge) species. It was procured for him first in Ghūr-bund, but, when snow has fallen, it could be had nearer Kābul. Bābur's _bū-qalamūn_ may have come into his vocabulary, either as a survival direct from Greek occupation of Kābul and Panj-āb, or through Arabic writings. PRGS 1879 p. 251, Kaye's art. and JASB 1838 p. 863, Hodgson's art.

[803] Bartavelle's _Greek-partridge_, _tetrao-_ or _perdrix-rufus_ [f. 279 and Mems. p. 320 n.].

[804] A similar story is told of some fields near Whitby:—"These wild geese, which in winter fly in great flocks to the lakes and rivers unfrozen in the southern parts, to the great amazement of every-one, fall suddenly down upon the ground when they are in flight over certain neighbouring fields thereabouts; a relation I should not have made, if I had not received it from several credible men." See _Notes to Marmion_ p. xlvi (Erskine); Scott's _Poems_, Black's ed. 1880, vii, 104.

[805] Are we to infer from this that the musk-rat (_Crocidura cœrulea_, Lydekker, p. 626) was not so common in Hindūstān in the age of Bābur as it has now become? He was not a careless observer (Erskine).

[806] Index _s.n._ _Bābur-nāma_, date of composition; also f. 131.

[807] In the absence of examples of _bund_ to mean _kūtal_, and the presence "in those countries" of many in which _bund_ means _koh_, it looks as though a clerical error had here written _kūtal_ for _koh_. But on the other hand, the wording of the next passage shows just the confusion an author's unrevised draft might shew if a place were, as this is, both a _tūmān_ and a _kūtal_ (_i.e._ a steady rise to a traverse). My impression is that the name Ghūr-bund applies to the embanking spur at the head of the valley-_tūmān_, across which roads lead to Ghūrī and Ghūr (PRGS 1879, Maps; Leech's Report VII; and Wood's VI).

[808] So too when, because of them, Leech and Lord turned back, _re infectâ_.

[809] It will be noticed that these villages are not classed in any _tūmān_; they include places "rich without parallel" in agricultural products, and level lands on which towns have risen and fallen, one being Alexandria ad Caucasum. They cannot have been part of the unremunerative Ghūr-bund _tūmān_; from their place of mention in Bābur's list of _tūmāns_, they may have been part of the Kābul _tūmān_ (f. 178), as was Koh-dāman (Burnes' _Cabool_ p. 154; Haughton's _Charikar_ p. 73; and Cunningham's _Ancient History_, i, 18).

[810] Dūr-namāī, seen from afar (Masson, iii, 152) is not marked on the Survey Maps; Masson, Vigne and Haughton locate it. Bābur's "head" and "foot" here indicate status and not location.

[811] Mems. p. 146 and _Méms_, i, 297, Arabs' encampment and _Cellule des Arabes_. Perhaps the name may refer to uses of the level land and good pasture by horse _qāfilas_, since _Kurra_ is written with _tashdīd_ in the Ḥaidarābād Codex, as in _kurra-tāz_, a horse-breaker. Or the _tāziyān_ may be the fruit of a legend, commonly told, that the saint of the neighbouring Running-sands was an Arabian.

[812] Presumably this is the grass of the millet, the growth before the ear, on which grazing is allowed (Elphinstone, i, 400; Burnes, p. 237).

[813] Wood, p. 115; Masson, iii, 167; Burnes, p. 157 and JASB 1838 p. 324 with illustration; Vigne, pp. 219, 223; Lord, JASB 1838 p. 537; _Cathay and the way thither_, Hakluyt Society vol. I. p. xx, para. 49; _History of Musical Sands_, C. Carus-Wilson.

[814] _West_ might be more exact, since some of the group are a little north, others a little south of the latitude of Kābul.

[815] Affluents and not true sources in some cases (Col. Holdich's _Gates of India_, _s.n._ Koh-i-bābā; and PRGS 1879, maps pp. 80 and 160).

[816] The Pamghān range. These are the villages every traveller celebrates. Masson's and Vigne's illustrations depict them well.

[817] _Cercis siliquastrum_, the Judas-tree. Even in 1842 it was sparingly found near Kābul, adorning a few tombs, one Bābur's own. It had been brought from Sih-yārān where, as also at Chārikār, (Chār-yak-kār) it was still abundant and still a gorgeous sight. It is there a tree, as at Kew, and not a bush, as in most English gardens (Masson, ii, 9; Elphinstone, i, 194; and for the tree near Harāt, f. 191 n. to Ṣafar).

[818] Khwāja Maudūd of Chisht, Khwāja Khāwand Sa`īd and the Khwāja of the Running-sands (Elph. MS. f. 104b, marginal note).

[819] The yellow-flowered plant is not _cercis siliquastrum_ but one called _mahaka_(?) in Persian, a shrubby plant with pea-like blossoms, common in the plains of Persia, Bilūchistān and Kābul (Masson, iii, 9 and Vigne, p. 216).

[820] The numerical value of these words gives 925 (Erskine). F. 246b _et seq._ for the expedition.

[821] f. 178. I.O. MS. No. 724, _Haft-iqlīm_ f. 135 (Ethé, p. 402); Rieu, pp. 21_a_, 1058_b_.

[822] of Afghan habit. The same term is applied (f. 139b) to the Zurmutīs; it may be explained in both places by Bābur's statement that Zurmutīs grow corn, but do not cultivate gardens or orchards.

[823] _aīkān dūr._ Sabuk-tīgīn, d. 387 AH.-997 AD., was the father of Sl. Maḥmūd _Ghaznawī_, d. 421 AH.-1030 AD.

[824] d. 602 AH.-1206 AD.

[825] Some Musalmāns fast through the months of Rajab, Sha`bān and Ramẓān; Muḥammadans fast only by day; the night is often given to feasting (Erskine).

[826] The Garden; the tombs of more eminent Muṣalmāns are generally in gardens (Erskine). See Vigne's illustrations, pp. 133, 266.

[827] _i.e._ the year now in writing. The account of the expedition, Bābur's first into Hindūstān, begins on f. 145.

[828] _i.e._ the countries groupable as Khurāsān.

[829] For picture and account of the dam, _see_ Vigne, pp. 138, 202.

[830] f. 295b.

[831] The legend is told in numerous books with varying location of the spring. One narrator, Zakarīyā _Qazwīnī_, reverses the parts, making Jāī-pāl employ the ruse; hence Leyden's note (Mems. p. 150; E. and D.'s _History of India_ ii, 20, 182 and iv, 162; for historical information, R.'s _Notes_ p. 320). The date of the events is shortly after 378 AH.-988 AD.

[832] R.'s _Notes_ _s.n._ Zurmut.

[833] The question of the origin of the Farmūlī has been written of by several writers; perhaps they were Turks of Persia, Turks and Tājīks.

[834] This completes the list of the 14 _tūmāns_ of Kābul, _viz._ Nīngnahār, `Alī-shang, Alangār, Mandrāwar, Kūnār-with-Nūr-gal, Nijr-aū, Panjhīr, Ghūr-bund, Koh-dāman (with Kohistān?), Luhūgur (of the Kābul _tūmān_), Ghaznī, Zurmut, Farmūl and Bangash.

[835] Between Nijr-aū and Tag-aū (Masson, iii, 165). Mr. Erskine notes that Bābur reckoned it in the hot climate but that the change of climate takes place further east, between `Alī-shang and Aūzbīn (_i.e._ the valley next eastwards from Tag-aū).

[836] _būghūzlārīghā furṣat būlmās_; _i.e._ to kill them in the lawful manner, while pronouncing the _Bi'smi'llāh_.

[837] This completes the _bulūks_ of Kābul _viz._ Badr-aū (Tag-aū), Nūr-valley, Chaghān-sarāī, Kāma and Ālā-sāī.

[838] The _rūpī_ being equal to 2-1/2 _shāhrukhīs_, the _shāhrukhī_ may be taken at 10_d._ thus making the total revenue only £33,333 6_s._ 8_d._ See _Āyīn-i-akbarī_ ii, 169 (Erskine).

[839] _sic_ in all B. N. MSS. Most maps print Khost. Muḥ. Ṣāliḥ says of Khwāst, "Who sees it, would call it a Hell" (Vambéry, p. 361).

[840] Bābur's statement about this fodder is not easy to translate; he must have seen grass grow in tufts, and must have known the Persian word _būta_ (bush). Perhaps _kāh_ should be read to mean plant, not grass. Would Wood's _bootr_ fit in, a small furze bush, very plentiful near Bāmiān? (Wood's Report VI, p. 23; and for regional grasses, Aitchison's _Botany of the Afghān Delimitation Commission_, p. 122.)

[841] _nāzū_, perhaps _cupressus torulosa_ (Brandis, p.693).

[842] f. 276.

[843] A laborious geographical note of Mr. Erskine's is here regretfully left behind, as now needless (Mems. p. 152).

[844] Here, mainly wild-sheep and wild-goats, including _mār-khẉār_.

[845] Perhaps, no conifers; perhaps none of those of the contrasted hill-tract.

[846] While here _dasht_ (plain) represents the eastern skirt of the Mehtar Sulaimān range, _dūkī_ or _dūgī_ (desert) seems to stand for the hill tracts on the west of it, and not, as on f. 152, for the place there specified.

[847] Mems. p. 152, "A narrow place is large to the narrow-minded"; _Méms._ i, 311, "Ce qui n'est pas trop large, ne reste pas vide." Literally, "So long as heights are not equal, there is no vis-a-vis," or, if _tāng_ be read for _tīng_, "No dawn, no noon," _i.e._ no effect without a cause.

[848] I have not lighted on this name in botanical books or explained by dictionaries. Perhaps it is a Cis-oxanian name for the _sax-aol_ of Transoxania. As its uses are enumerated by some travellers, it might be _Haloxylon ammodendron_, _ta-ghas etc._ and _sax-aol_ (Aitchison, p. 102).

[849] f. 135b note to Ghūr-bund.

[850] I understand that wild-goats, wild-sheep and deer (_āhū_) were not localized, but that the dun-sheep migrated through. Antelope (_āhū_) was scarce in Elphinstone's time.

[851] _qīzīl kīyik_ which, taken with its alternative name, _arqārghalcha_, allows it to be the dun-sheep of Wood's _Journey_ p. 241. From its second name it may be _Ovis amnon_ (_Raos_), or _O. argalī_.

[852] _tusqāwal_, var. _tutqāwal_, _tus̱aqāwal_ and _tūshqāwal_, a word which has given trouble to scribes and translators. As a sporting-term it is equivalent to _shikār-i-nihilam_; in one or other of its forms I find it explained as _Weg-hüter_, _Fahnen-hüter_, _Zahl-meister_, _Schlucht_, _Gefahrlicher-weg_ and _Schmaler-weg_. It recurs in the B.N. on f. 197b l. 5 and l. 6 and there might mean either a narrow road or a _Weg-hüter_. If its Turkī root be _tūs_, the act of stopping, all the above meanings can follow, but there may be two separate roots, the second, _tūsh_, the act of descent (JRAS 1900 p. 137, H. Beveridge's art. _On the word nihilam_).

[853] _qūshlīk_, _aītlīk_. Elphinstone writes (i, 191) of the excellent greyhounds and hawking birds of the region; here the bird may be the _charkh_, which works with the dogs, fastening on the head of the game (Von Schwarz, p. 117, for the same use of eagles).

[854] An antelope resembling the usual one of Hindūstān is common south of Ghaznī (Vigne, p. 110); what is not found may be some classes of wild-sheep, frequent further north, at higher elevation, and in places more familiar to Bābur.

[855] The Parwān or Hindū-kush pass, concerning the winds of which _see_ f. 128.

[856] _tūrnā u qarqara_; the second of which is the Hindī _būglā_, heron, _egret ardea gazetta_, the furnisher of the aigrette of commerce.

[857] The _aūqār_ is _ardea cinerea_, the grey heron; the _qarqara_ is _ardea gazetta_, the egret. _Qūṯān_ is explained in the Elph. Codex (f. 110) by _khawāsil_, goldfinch, but the context concerns large birds; Scully (Shaw's Voc.) has _qodan_, water-hen, which suits better.

[858] _giz_, the short-flight arrow.

[859] a small, round-headed nail with which a whip-handle is decorated (Vambéry). Such a stud would keep the cord from slipping through the fingers and would not check the arrow-release.

[860] It has been understood (Mems. p. 158 and _Méms._ i, 313) that the arrow was flung by hand but if this were so, something heavier than the _giz_ would carry the cord better, since it certainly would be difficult to direct a missile so light as an arrow without the added energy of the bow. The arrow itself will often have found its billet in the closely-flying flock; the cord would retrieve the bird. The verb used in the text is _aītmāq_, the one common to express the discharge of arrows _etc._

[861] For Tīmūrids who may have immigrated the fowlers _see_ Raverty's _Notes_ p. 579 and his Appendix p. 22.

[862] _milwāh_; this has been read by all earlier translators, and also by the Persian annotator of the Elph. Codex, to mean _shākh_, bough. For decoy-ducks _see_ Bellew's _Notes on Afghānistān_ p. 404.

[863] _qūlān qūyirūghī._ Amongst the many plants used to drug fish I have not found this one mentioned. _Khār-zāhra_ and _khār-fāq_ approach it in verbal meaning; the first describes colocynth, the second, wild rue. See Watts' _Economic Products of India_ iii, 366 and Bellew's _Notes_ pp. 182, 471 and 478.

[864] Much trouble would have been spared to himself and his translators, if Bābur had known a lobster-pot.

[865] The fish, it is to be inferred, came down the fall into the pond.

[866] Burnes and Vigne describe a fall 20 miles from Kābul, at "Tangī Gharoi", [below where the Tag-aū joins the Bārān-water,] to which in their day, Kābulīs went out for the amusement of catching fish as they try to leap up the fall. Were these migrants seeking upper waters or were they captives in a fish-pond?

[867] Elph. MS. f. 111; W.-i-B. I.O. 215 f. 116b and 217 f. 97b; Mems. p. 155; _Méms._ i, 318.

[868] _mihmān-beglār_, an expression first used by Bābur here, and due, presumably, to accessions from Khusrau Shāh's following. A parallel case is given in Max Müller's _Science of Language_ i, 348 ed. 1871, "Turkmān tribes ... call themselves, not subjects, but guests of the Uzbeg Khāns."

[869] _tiyūl-dīk_ in all the Turkī MSS. Ilminsky, de Courteille and Zenker, _yitūl-dīk_, Turkī, a fief.

[870] _Wilāyat khūd hech bīrīlmādī_; W.-i-B. 215 f. 116b, _Wilāyat dāda na shuda_ and 217 f. 97b, _Wilāyat khūd hech dāda na shud_. By this I understand that he kept the lands of Kābul itself in his own hands. He mentions (f. 350) and Gul-badan mentions (H.N. f. 40b) his resolve so to keep Kābul. I think he kept not only the fort but all lands constituting the Kābul _tūmān_ (f. 135b and note).

[871] _Saifī dūr, qalamī aīmās_, _i.e._ tax is taken by force, not paid on a written assessment.

[872] _khar-wār_, about 700 lbs Averdupois (Erskine). Cf. _Āyīn-i-akbarī_ (Jarrett, ii, 394).

[873] Niẕāmu'd-dīn Aḥmad and Badāyūnī both mention this script and say that in it Bābur transcribed a copy of the Qorān for presentation to Makka. Badāyūnī says it was unknown in his day, the reign of Akbar (_T̤abaqāt-i-akbarī_, lith. ed. p. 193, and _Muntakhabu't-tawārīkh_ Bib. Ind. ed. iii, 273).

[874] Bābur's route, taken with one given by Raverty (_Notes_ p. 691), allows these Hazāras, about whose location Mr. Erskine was uncertain, to be located between the Takht-pass (Arghandī-Maidān-Unai road), on their east, and the Sang-lākh mountains, on their west.

[875] The Takht-pass, one on which from times immemorial, toll (_nirkh_) has been taken.

[876] _khāṯir-khwāh chāpīlmādī_, which perhaps implies mutual discontent, Bābur's with his gains, the Hazāras' with their losses. As the second Persian translation omits the negative, the Memoirs does the same.

[877] Bhīra being in Shāhpūr, this Khān's _daryā_ will be the Jehlam.

[878] Bābur uses Persian _dasht_ and Hindī _dūkī_, plain and hill, for the tracts east and west of Mehtar Sulaimān. The first, _dasht_, stands for Dāman (skirt) and Dara-i-jāt, the second, _dūkī_, indefinitely for the broken lands west of the main range, but also, in one instance for the Dūkī [Dūgī] district of Qandahār, as will be noted.

[879] f. 132. The Jagdālīk-pass for centuries has separated the districts of Kābul and Nīngnahār. Forster (_Travels_ ii, 68), making the journey the reverse way, was sensible of the climatic change some 3m. east of Gandamak. Cf. Wood's _Report_ I. p. 6.

[880] These are they whose families Nāṣir Mīrzā shepherded out of Kābul later (f. 154, f. 155).

[881] Bird's-dome, opposite the mouth of the Kūnār-water (_S.A. War_, Map p. 64).

[882] This word is variously pointed and is uncertain. Mr. Erskine adopted "Pekhi", but, on the whole, it may be best to read, here and on f. 146, Ar. _fajj_ or pers. _paj_, mountain or pass. To do so shews the guide to be one located in the Khaibar-pass, a _Fajjī_ or _Pajī_.

[883] mod. Jām-rūd (Jām-torrent), presumably.

[884] G. of I. xx, 125 and Cunningham's _Ancient History_ i, 80. Bābur saw the place in 925 AH. (f. 232b).

[885] Cunningham, p. 29. Four ancient sites, not far removed from one another, bear this name, Bīgrām, _viz._ those near Hūpīān, Kābul, Jalālābād and Pashāwar.

[886] Cunningham, i, 79.

[887] Perhaps a native of Kamarī on the Indus, but _kamarī_ is a word of diverse application (index _s.n._).

[888] The annals of this campaign to the eastward shew that Bābur was little of a free agent; that many acts of his own were merciful; that he sets down the barbarity of others as it was, according to his plan of writing (f. 86); and that he had with him undisciplined robbers of Khusrau Shāh's former following. He cannot be taken as having power to command or control the acts of those, his guest-begs and their following, who dictated his movements in this disastrous journey, one worse than a defeat, says Ḥaidar Mīrzā.

[889] For the route here _see_ Masson, i, 117 and Colquhoun's _With the Kuram Field-force_ p. 48.

[890] The Ḥai. MS. writes this Dilah-zāk.

[891] _i.e._ raised a force in Bābur's name. He took advantage of this _farmān_ in 911 AH. to kill Bāqī _Chagkānīānī_ (f. 159b-160).

[892] Of the Yūsuf-zāī and Ranjīt-sīngh, Masson says, (i, 141) "The miserable, hunted wretches threw themselves on the ground, and placing a blade or tuft of grass in their mouths, cried out, "I am your cow." This act and explanation, which would have saved them from an orthodox Hindū, had no effect with the infuriated Sikhs." This form of supplication is at least as old as the days of Firdausī (Erskine, p. 159 n.). The _Bahār-i-`ajam_ is quoted by Vullers as saying that in India, suppliants take straw in the mouth to indicate that they are blanched and yellow from fear.

[893] This barbarous custom has always prevailed amongst the Tartar conquerors of Asia (Erskine). For examples under Timūr _see_ Raverty's _Notes_ p. 137.

[894] For a good description of the road from Kohāt to Thāl _see_ Bellew's _Mission_ p. 104.

[895] F. 88b has the same phrase about the doubtful courage of one Sayyidī Qarā.

[896] Not to the mod. town of Bannū, [that having been begun only in 1848 AD.] but wherever their wrong road brought them out into the Bannū amphitheatre. The Survey Map of 1868, No. 15, shews the physical features of the wrong route.

[897] Perhaps he connived at recovery of cattle by those raided already.

[898] Tāq is the Tank of Maps; Bāzār was s.w. of it. Tank for Tāq looks to be a variant due to nasal utterance (Vigne, p. 77, p. 203 and Map; and, as bearing on the nasal, _in loco_, Appendix E).

[899] If return had been made after over-running Bannū, it would have been made by the Tochī-valley and so through Farmūl; if after over-running the Plain, Bābur's details shew that the westward turn was meant to be by the Gūmāl-valley and one of two routes out of it, still to Farmūl; but the extended march southward to near Dara-i-Ghazī Khān made the westward turn be taken through the valley opening at Sakhī-sawār.

[900] This will mean, none of the artificial runlets familiar where Bābur had lived before getting to know Hindūstān.

[901] _sauda-āt_, perhaps, pack-ponies, perhaps, bred for sale and not for own use. Burnes observes that in 1837 Lūhānī merchants carried precisely the same articles of trade as in Bābur's day, 332 years earlier (_Report_ IX p. 99).

[902] Mr. Erskine thought it probable that the first of these routes went through Kanigūram, and the second through the Ghwālirī-pass and along the Gūmāl. _Birk_, fastness, would seem an appropriate name for Kanigūram, but, if Bābur meant to go to Ghaznī, he would be off the ordinary Gūmāl-Ghaznī route in going through Farmūl (Aūrgūn). Raverty's _Notes_ give much useful detail about these routes, drawn from native sources. For Barak (Birk) _see_ _Notes_ pp. 88, 89; Vigne, p. 102.

[903] From this it would seem that the alternative roads were approached by one in common.

[904] _tūmshūq_, a bird's bill, used here, as in Selsey-bill, for the naze (nose), or snout, the last spur, of a range.

[905] Here these words may be common nouns.

[906] Nū-roz, the feast of the old Persian New-year (Erskine); it is the day on which the Sun enters Aries.

[907] In the [Turkī] Elph. and Ḥai. MSS. and in some Persian ones, there is a space left here as though to indicate a known omission.

[908] _kamarī_, sometimes a cattle-enclosure, which may serve as a _sangur_. The word may stand in one place of its _Bābur-nāma_ uses for Gum-rāhī (R.'s _Notes_ _s.n._ Gum-rāhān).

[909] Index _s.n._

[910] Vigne, p. 241.

[911] This name can be translated "He turns not back" or "He stops not".

[912] _i.e._ five from Bīlah.

[913] Raverty gives the saint's name as Pīr Kānūn (Ar. _kānūn_, listened to). It is the well-known Sakhī-sarwār, honoured hy Hindūs and Muḥammadans. (G. of I., xxi, 390; R.'s _Notes_ p. 11 and p. 12 and JASB 1855; Calcutta Review 1875, Macauliffe's art. _On the fair at Sakhi-sarwar_; Leech's _Report_ VII, for the route; _Khazīnatu 'l-asfiyā_ iv, 245.)

[914] This seems to be the sub-district of Qandahār, Dūkī or Dūgī.

[915] _khar-gāh_, a folding tent on lattice frame-work, perhaps a _khibitka_.

[916] It may be more correct to write Kāh-mard, as the Ḥai. MS. does and to understand in the name a reference to the grass(_kāh_)-yielding capacity of the place.

[917] f. 121.

[918] This may mean, what irrigation has not used.

[919] Mr. Erskine notes that the description would lead us to imagine a flock of flamingoes. Masson found the lake filled with red-legged, white fowl (i, 262); these and also what Bābur saw, may have been the China-goose which has body and neck white, head and tail russet (Bellew's _Mission_ p. 402). Broadfoot seems to have visited the lake when migrants were few, and through this to have been led to adverse comment on Bābur's accuracy (p. 350).

[920] The usual dryness of the bed may have resulted from the irrigation of much land some 12 miles from Ghaznī.

[921] This is the Luhūgur (Logar) water, knee-deep in winter at the ford but spreading in flood with the spring-rains. Bābur, not being able to cross it for the direct roads into Kābul, kept on along its left bank, crossing it eventually at the Kamarī of maps, s.e. of Kābul.

[922] This disastrous expedition, full of privation and loss, had occupied some four months (T.R. p. 201).

[923] f. 145b.

[924] f. 133b and Appendix F.

[925] They were located in Mandrāwar in 926 AH. (f. 251).

[926] This was done, manifestly, with the design of drawing after the families their fighting men, then away with Bābur.

[927] f. 163. Shaibāq Khān besieged Chīn Ṣufī, Sl. Ḥusain Mīrzā's man in Khwārizm (T. R. p. 204; _Shaibānī-nāma_, Vambéry, Table of Contents and note 89).

[928] Survey Map 1889, Sadda. The Rāgh-water flows n.w. into the Oxus (Amū).

[929] _birk_, a mountain stronghold; cf. f. 149b note to Birk (Barak).

[930] They were thus driven on from the Bārān-water (f. 154b).

[931] f. 126b.

[932] Ḥiṣār, presumably.

[933] Here "His Honour" translates Bābur's clearly ironical honorific plural.

[934] These two sulṯāns, almost always mentioned in alliance, may be Tīmūrids by maternal descent (Index _s.nn._). So far I have found no direct statement of their parentage. My husband has shewn me what may be one indication of it, _viz._ that two of the uncles of Shaibāq Khān (whose kinsmen the sulṯāns seem to be), Qūj-kūnjī and Sīūnjak, were sons of a daughter of the Tīmūrid Aūlūgh Beg _Samarkandī_ (Ḥ.S. ii, 318). _See_ Vambéry's _Bukhārā_ p. 248 note.

[935] For the deaths of Taṃbal and Maḥmūd, mentioned in the above summary of Shaibāq Khān's actions, _see_ the _Shaibānī-nāma_, Vambéry, p. 323.

[936] Ḥ.S. ii, 323, for Khusrau Shāh's character and death.

[937] f. 124.

[938] Khwāja-of-the-rhubarb, presumably a shrine near rhubarb-grounds (f. 129b).

[939] _yakshī bārdīlār_, lit. went well, a common expression in the _Bābur-nāma_, of which the reverse statement is _yamānlīk bīla bārdī_ (f. 163). Some Persian MSS. make the Mughūls disloyal but this is not only in opposition to the Turkī text, it is a redundant statement since if disloyal, they are included in Bābur's previous statement, as being Khusrau Shāh's retainers. What might call for comment in Mughūls would be loyalty to Bābur.

[940] Elph. MS. f. 121b: W.-i-B. I.O. 215 f. 126 and 217 f. 106b; Mems. p. 169.

[941] _tāgh-dāmanasī_, presumably the Koh-dāman, and the garden will thus be the one of f. 136b.

[942] If these heirs were descendants of Aūlūgh Beg M. one would be at hand in `Abdu'r-razzāq, then a boy, and another, a daughter, was the wife of Muqīm _Arghūn_. As Mr. Erskine notes, Musalmāns are most scrupulous not to bury their dead in ground gained by violence or wrong.

[943] The news of Aḥmad's death was belated; he died some 13 months earlier, in the end of 909 AH. and in Eastern Turkistān. Perhaps details now arrived.

[944] _i.e._ the fortieth day of mourning, when alms are given.

[945] Of those arriving, the first would find her step-daughter dead, the second her sister, the third, his late wife's sister (T. R. p. 196).

[946] This will be the earthquake felt in Agra on Ṣafar 3rd 911 AH. (July 5th 1505 AD. Erskine's _History of India_ i, 229 note). Cf. Elliot and Dowson, iv, 465 and v, 99.

[947] Raverty's _Notes_ p. 690.

[948] _bīr kitta tāsh ātīmī_; var. _bāsh ātīmī_. If _tāsh_ be right, the reference will probably be to the throw of a catapult.

[949] Here almost certainly, a drummer, because there were two tambours and because also Bābur uses _`aūdī_ & _ghachakī_ for the other meanings of _ṯambourchi_, lutanist and guitarist. The word has found its way, as _tambourgi_, into Childe Harold's Pilgrimage (Canto ii, lxxii. H. B.).

[950] Kābul-Ghaznī road (R.'s _Notes_ index _s.n._).

[951] var. Yārī. Tāzī is on the Ghaznī-Qalāt-i-ghilzāī road (R.'s _Notes_, Appendix p. 46).

[952] _i.e._ in Kābul and in the Trans-Himalayan country.

[953] These will be those against Bābur's suzerainty done by their defence of Qalāt for Muqīm.

[954] _tabaqa_, dynasty. By using this word Bābur shews recognition of high birth. It is noticeable that he usually writes of an Arghūn chief either simply as "Beg" or without a title. This does not appear to imply admission of equality, since he styles even his brothers and sisters Mīrzā and Begīm; nor does it shew familiarity of intercourse, since none seems to have existed between him and Ẕū'n-nūn or Muqīm. That he did not admit equality is shewn on f. 208. The T.R. styles Ẕū'n-nūn "Mīrzā", a title by which, as also by Shāh, his descendants are found styled (A.-i-a. Blochmann, _s.n._).

[955] Turkī _khachar_ is a camel or mule used for carrying personal effects. The word has been read by some scribes as _khanjar_, dagger.

[956] In 910 AH. he had induced Bābur to come to Kābul instead of going into Khurāsān (Ḥ.S. iii, 319); in the same year he dictated the march to Kohāt, and the rest of that disastrous travel. His real name was not Bāqī but Muḥammad Bāqir (Ḥ.S. iii, 311).

[957] These transit or custom duties are so called because the dutiable articles are stamped with a _ṯamghā_, a wooden stamp.

[958] Perhaps this word is an equivalent of Persian _goshī_, a tax on cattle and beasts of burden.

[959] Bāqī was one only and not the head of the Lords of the Gate.

[960] The choice of the number nine, links on presumably to the mystic value attached to it _e.g._ Tarkhāns had nine privileges; gifts were made by nines.

[961] It is near Ḥasan-abdāl (A.-i-A. Jarrett, ii, 324).

[962] For the _farmān_, f. 146b; for Gujūrs, G. of I.

[963] var. Khwesh. Its water flows into the Ghūr-bund stream; it seems to be the Dara-i-Turkmān of Stanford and the Survey Maps both of which mark Janglīk. For Hazāra turbulence, f. 135b and note.

[964] The repetition of _aūq_ in this sentence can hardly be accidental.

[965] _ṯaur_ [_dara_], which I take to be Turkī, round, complete.

[966] Three MSS. of the Turkī text write _bīr sīmīzlūq tīwah_; but the two Persian translations have _yak shuturlūq farbīh_, a _shuturlūq_ being a baggage-camel with little hair (Erskine).

[967] _brochettes_, meat cut into large mouthfuls, spitted and roasted.

[968] Perhaps he was officially an announcer; the word means also bearer of good news.

[969] _yīlāng_, without mail, as in the common phrase _yīgīt yīlāng_, a bare brave.

[970] _aūpchīn_, of horse and man (f. 113b and note).

[971] Manifestly Bābur means that he twice actually helped to collect the booty.

[972] This is that part of a horse covered by the two side-pieces of a Turkī saddle, from which the side-arch springs on either side (Shaw).

[973] _Bārān-nīng ayāghī._ Except the river I have found nothing called Bārān; the village marked Baian on the French Map would suit the position; it is n.e. of Chār-yak-kār (f. 184b note).

[974] _i.e._ prepared to fight.

[975] For the Hazāra (Turkī, Mīng) on the Mīrzā's road _see_ Raverty's routes from Ghaznī to the north. An account given by the _Tārīkh-i-rashīdī_ (p. 196) of Jahāngīr's doings is confused; its parenthetical "(at the same time)" can hardly be correct. Jahāngīr left Ghaznī now, (911 AH.), as Bābur left Kābul in 912 AH. without knowledge of Ḥusain's death (911 AH.). Bābur had heard it (f. 183b) before Jahāngīr joined him (912 AH.); after their meeting they went on together to Herī. The petition of which the T. R. speaks as made by Jahāngīr to Bābur, that he might go into Khurāsān and help the Bāī-qarā Mīrzās must have been made after the meeting of the two at Ṣaf-hill (f. 184b).

[976] The plurals _they_ and _their_ of the preceding sentence stand no doubt for the Mīrzā, Yūsuf and Buhlūl who all had such punishment due as would lead them to hear threat in Qāsim's words now when all were within Bābur's pounce.

[977] These are the _aīmāqs_ from which the fighting-men went east with Bābur in 910 AH. and the families in which Nāṣir shepherded across Hindu-kush (f. 154 and f. 155).

[978] _yamānlīk bīla bārdī_; cf. f. 156b and n. for its opposite, _yakhshī bārdīlār_; and T. R. p. 196.

[979] One might be of mail, the other of wadded cloth.

[980] Chīn Ṣūfī was Ḥusain _Bāī-qarā's_ man (T.R. p. 204). His arduous defence, faithfulness and abandonment recall the instance of a later time when also a long road stretched between the man and the help that failed him. But the Mīrzā was old, his military strength was, admittedly, sapped by ease; hence his elder Khartum, his neglect of his Gordon.

It should be noted that no mention of the page's fatal arrow is made by the _Shaibānī-nāma_ (Vambéry, p. 442), or by the _Tārīkh-i-rashīdī_ (p. 204). Chīn Ṣūfī's death was on the 21st of the Second Rabī 911 AH. (Aug. 22nd 1505 AD.).

[981] This may be the "Baboulei" of the French Map of 1904, on the Herī-Kushk-Marūchāq road.

[982] Elph. MS. f. 127; W.-i-B. I.O. 215 f. 132 and 217 f. 111b; Mems. p. 175; _Méms._ i, 364.

That Bābur should have given his laborious account of the Court of Herī seems due both to loyalty to a great Tīmūrid, seated in Tīmūr Beg's place (f. 122b), and to his own interest, as a man-of-letters and connoisseur in excellence, in that ruler's galaxy of talent. His account here opening is not complete; its sources are various; they include the _Ḥabību's-siyār_ and what he will have learned himself in Herī or from members of the Bāī-qarā family, knowledgeable women some of them, who were with him in Hindūstān. The narrow scope of my notes shews that they attempt no more than to indicate further sources of information and to clear up a few obscurities.

[983] Tīmūr's youngest son, d. 850 AH. (1446 AD.). Cf. Ḥ.S. iii, 203. The use in this sentence of Amīr and not Beg as Tīmūr's title is, up to this point, unique in the _Bābur-nāma_; it may be a scribe's error.

[984] Fīrūza's paternal line of descent was as follows:—Fīrūza, daughter of Sl. Ḥusain _Qānjūt_, son of Ākā Begīm, daughter of Tīmūr. Her maternal descent was:—Fīrūza, d. of Qūtlūq-sulṯān Begīm, d. of Mīrān-shāh, s. of Tīmūr. She died Muḥ. 24th 874 AH. (July 25th 1489 AD. Ḥ.S. iii, 218).

[985] "No-one in the world had such parentage", writes Khwānd-amīr, after detailing the Tīmūrid, Chīngīz-khānid, and other noted strains meeting in Ḥusain _Bāī-qarā_ (Ḥ.S. iii, 204).

[986] The Elph. MS. gives the Begīm no name; Badī`u'l-jamāl is correct (Ḥ.S. iii, 242). The curious "Badka" needs explanation. It seems probable that Bābur left one of his blanks for later filling-in; the natural run of his sentence here is "Ākā B. and Badī`u'l-jamāl B." and not the detail, which follows in its due place, about the marriage with Aḥmad.

[987] _Dīwān bāshīdā ḥāṣir būlmās aīdī_; the sense of which may be that Bāī-qarā did not sit where the premier retainer usually sat at the head of the Court (Pers. trs. _sar-i-dīwān_).

[988] From this Wais and Sl. Ḥusain M.'s daughter Sulṯānīm (f. 167b) were descended the Bāī-qarā Mīrzās who gave Akbar so much trouble.

[989] As this man might be mistaken for Bābur's uncle (_q.v._) of the same name, it may be well to set down his parentage. He was a s. of Mīrzā Sayyidī Aḥmad, s. of Mīrān-shāh, s. of Tīmūr (Ḥ.S. iii, 217, 241). I have not found mention elsewhere of "Aḥmad s. of Mīrān-shāh"; the _sayyidī_ in his style points to a sayyida mother. He was Governor of Herī for a time, for Sl. H.M.; `Alī-sher has notices of him and of his son, Kīchīk Mīrzā (_Journal Asiatique_ xvii, 293, M. Belin's art. where may be seen notices of many other men mentioned by Bābur).

[990] He collected and thus preserved `Alī-sher's earlier poems (Rieu's Pers. Cat. p. 294). Mu'inu'd-dīn al Zamji writes respectfully of his being worthy of credence in some Egyptian matters with which he became acquainted in twice passing through that country on his Pilgrimage (_Journal Asiatique_ xvi, 476, de Meynard's article).

[991] Kīchīk M.'s quatrain is a mere plagiarism of Jāmī's which I am indebted to my husband for locating as in the _Dīwān_ I.O. MS. 47 p. 47; B.M. Add. 7774 p. 290; and Add. 7775 p. 285. M. Belin interprets the verse as an expression of the rise of the average good man to mystical rapture, not as his lapse from abstinence to indulgence (l.c. xvii, 296 and notes).

[992] Elph. MS. _younger_ but Ḥai. MS. _older_ in which it is supported by the "also" (_ham_) of the sentence.

[993] modern Astrakhan. Ḥusain's guerilla wars were those through which he cut his way to the throne of Herī. This begīm was married first to Pīr Budāgh Sl. (Ḥ.S. iii, 242); he dying, she was married by Aḥmad, presumably by levirate custom (_yīnkālīk_; f. 12 and note). By Aḥmad she had a daughter, styled Khān-zāda Begīm whose affairs find comment on f. 206 and Ḥ.S. iii, 359. (The details of this note negative a suggestion of mine that Badka was the Rābī`a-sulṯān of f. 168 (Gul-badan, App. _s. nn._).)

[994] This is a felt wide-awake worn by travellers in hot weather (Shaw); the Turkmān bonnet (Erskine).

[995] Ḥai. MS. _yamānlīk_, badly, but Elph. MS. _namāyan_, whence Erskine's _showy_.

[996] This was a proof that he was then a Shī`a (Erskine).

[997] The word _perform_ may be excused in speaking of Musalmān prayers because they involve ceremonial bendings and prostrations (Erskine).

[998] If Bābur's 40 include rule in Herī only, it over-states, since Yādgār died in 875 AH. and Ḥusain in 911 AH. while the intervening 36 years include the 5 or 6 temperate ones. If the 40 count from 861 AH. when Ḥusain began to rule in Merv, it under-states. It is a round number, apparently.

[999] Relying on the Ilminsky text, Dr. Rieu was led into the mistake of writing that Bābur gave Ḥusain the wrong pen-name, _i.e._ Ḥusain, and not Ḥusainī (Turk. Cat. p. 256).

[1000] Daulat-shāh says that as he is not able to enumerate all Ḥusain's feats-of-arms, he, Turkmān fashion, offers a gift of Nine. The Nine differ from those of Bābur's list in some dates; they are also records of victory only (Browne, p. 521; _Not. et Extr._ iv, 262, de Saçy's article).

[1001] Wolves'-water, a river and its town at the s.e. corner of the Caspian, the ancient boundary between Russia and Persia. The name varies a good deal in MSS.

[1002] The battle was at Tarshīz; Abū-sa`īd was ruling in Herī; Daulat-shāh (l.c. p. 523) gives 90 and 10,000 as the numbers of the opposed forces!

[1003] f. 26b and note; Ḥ.S. iii, 209; Daulat-shāh p. 523.

[1004] The loser was the last Shāhrukhī ruler. Chanārān (variants) is near Abīward, Anwārī's birth-place (Ḥ.S. iii, 218; D.S. p. 527).

[1005] f. 85. D.S. (p. 540) and the Ḥ.S. (iii, 223) dwell on Ḥusain's speed through three continuous days and nights.

[1006] f. 26; Ḥ.S. iii, 227; D.S. p. 532.

[1007] Abū-sa`īd's son by a Badakhshī Begīm (T.R. p. 108); he became his father's Governor in Badakhshān and married Ḥusain _Bāī-qarā's_ daughter Begīm Sultān at a date after 873 AH. (f. 168 and note; Ḥ.S. iii, 196, 229, 234-37; D.S. p. 535).

[1008] f. 152.

[1009] Abā-bikr was defeated and put to death at the end of Rajah 884 AH.-Oct. 1479 AD. after flight before Ḥusain across the Gurgān-water (Ḥ.S. iii, 196 and 237 but D.S. p. 539, Ṣafar 885 AH.).

[1010] f. 41, Pul-i-chirāgh; for Halwā-spring, Ḥ.S. iii, 283 and Rieu's Pers. Cat. p. 443.

[1011] f. 33 (p. 57) and f. 57b.

[1012] In commenting thus Bābur will have had in mind what he best knew, Ḥusain's futile movements at Qūndūz and Ḥiṣār.

[1013] _qālīb aīdī_; if _qālīb_ be taken as Turkī, survived or remained, it would not apply here since many of Ḥusain's children predeceased him; Ar. _qālab_ would suit, meaning _begotten_, _born_.

There are discrepancies between Bābur's details here and Khwānd-amīr's scattered through the _Ḥabību's-siyār_, concerning Ḥusain's family.

[1014] _bī ḥuẓūrī_, which may mean aversion due to Khadīja Begīm's malevolence.

[1015] Some of the several goings into `Irāq chronicled by Bābur point to refuge taken with Tīmūrids, descendants of Khalīl and `Umar, sons of Mirān-shāh (Lane-Poole's _Muhammadan Dynasties_, Table of the Timūrids).

[1016] He died before his father (Ḥ.S. iii, 327).

[1017] He will have been killed previous to Ramẓān 3rd 918 AH. (Nov. 12th, 1512 AD.), the date of the battle of Ghaj-dawān when Nijm S̱ānī died.

[1018] The _bund_ here may not imply that both were in prison, but that they were bound in close company, allowing Ismā`īl, a fervent Shī`a, to convert the Mīrzā.

[1019] The _bātmān_ is a Turkish weight of 13lbs (Meninsky) or 15lbs (Wollaston). The weight seems likely to refer to the strength demanded for rounding the bow (_kamān guroha-sī_) _i.e._ as much strength as to lift 40 _bātmāns_. Rounding or bending might stand for stringing or drawing. The meaning can hardly be one of the weight of the cross-bow itself. Erskine read _gūrdehieh_ for _guroha_ (p. 180) and translated by "double-stringed bow"; de Courteille (i, 373) read _guirdhiyeh, arrondi, circulaire_, in this following Ilminsky who may have followed Erskine. The Elph. and Ḥai. MSS. and the first W.-i-B. (I.O. 215 f. 113b) have _kamān guroha-sī_; the second W.-i-B. omits the passage, in the MSS. I have seen.

[1020] _yakhshīlār bārīb tūr_; lit. good things went (on); cf. f. 156b and note.

[1021] Badī`u'z-zamān's son, drowned at Chausa in 946 AH. (1539 AD.) A.N. (H. Beveridge, i, 344).

[1022] Qalāt-i-nādirī, in Khurāsān, the birth-place of Nādir Shāh (T.R. p. 209).

[1023] _bīr gīna qīz_, which on f. 86b can fitly be read to mean daughterling, _Töchterchen, fillette_, but here and _i.a._ f. 168, must have another meaning than diminutive and may be an equivalent of German _Stück_ and mean _one only_. Gul-badan gives an account of Shād's manly pursuits (H.N. f. 25b).

[1024] He was the son of Mahdī Sl. (f. 320b) and the father of `Āqil Sl. _Aūzbeg_ (A.N. index _s.n._). Several matters suggest that these men were of the Shabān Aūzbegs who intermarried with Ḥusain _Bāī-qarā's_ family and some of whom went to Bābur in Hindūstān. One such matter is that Kābul was the refuge of dispossessed Harātīs, after the Aūzbeg conquest; that there `Āqil married Shād _Bāī-qarā_ and that `Ādil went on to Bābur. Moreover Khāfī Khān makes a statement which (if correct) would allow `Ādil's father Mahdī to be a grandson of Ḥusain _Bāī-qarā_; this statement is that when Bābur defeated the Aūzbegs in 916 AH. (1510 AD.), he freed from their captivity two sons (descendants) of his paternal uncle, named Mahdī Sl. and Sulṯān Mīrzā. [Leaving the authenticity of the statement aside for a moment, it will be observed that this incident is of the same date and place as another well-vouched for, namely that Bābur then and there killed Mahdī Sl. _Aūzbeg_ and Ḥamza Sl. _Aūzbeg_ after defeating them.] What makes in favour of Khāfī Khān's correctness is, not only that Bābur's foe Mahdī is not known to have had a son `Ādil, but also that his "Sulṯān Mīrzā" is not a style so certainly suiting Ḥamza as it does a Shabān sulṯān, one whose father was a Shabān sulṯān, and whose mother was a Mīrzā's daughter. Moreover this point of identification is pressed by the correctness, according to oriental statement of relationship, of Khāfī Khān's "paternal uncle" (of Bābur), because this precisely suits Sl. Ḥusain Mīrzā with whose family these Shabān sulṯāns allied themselves. On the other hand it must be said that Khāfī Khān's statement is not in the English text of the _Tārīkh-i-rashīdī_, the book on which he mostly relies at this period, nor is it in my husband's MS. [a copy from the Rampūr Codex]; and to this must be added the verbal objection that a modicum of rhetoric allows a death to be described both in Turkī and Persian, as a release from the captivity of a sinner's own acts (f. 160). Still Khāfī Khān may be right; his statement may yet be found in some other MS. of the T. R. or some different source; it is one a scribe copying the T. R. might be led to omit by reason of its coincidences. The killing and the release may both be right; `Ādil's Mahdī may be the Shabān sulṯān inference makes him seem. This little _crux_ presses home the need of much attention to the _lacunae_ in the _Bābur-nāma_, since in them are lost some exits and some entries of Bābur's _dramatis personae_, pertinently, mention of the death of Mahdī with Ḥamza in 916 AH., and possibly also that of `Ādil's Mahdī's release.

[1025] A _chār-ṯāq_ may be a large tent rising into four domes or having four porches.

[1026] Ḥ.S. iii, 367.

[1027] This phrase, common but not always selected, suggests unwillingness to leave the paternal roof.

[1028] Abū'l-ghāzī's _History of the Mughūls_, Désmaisons, p. 207.

[1029] The appointment was made in 933 AH. (1527 AD.) and seems to have been held still in 934 AH. (ff. 329, 332).

[1030] This grandson may have been a child travelling with his father's household, perhaps Aūlūgh Mīrzā, the oldest son of Muḥammad Sulṯān Mīrzā (A. A. Blochmann, p. 461). No mention is made here of Sulṯānīm Begīm's marriage with `Abdu'l-bāqī Mīrzā (f. 175).

[1031] Abū'l-qāsim Bābur _Shāhrukhī_ presumably.

[1032] The time may have been 902 AH. when Mas`ūd took his sister Bega Begīm to Herī for her marriage with Ḥaidar (Ḥ.S. iii, 260).

[1033] Khwāja Aḥmad _Yāsawī_, known as Khwāja Ātā, founder of the Yāsawī religious order.

[1034] Not finding mention of a daughter of Abū-sa`id named Rābī`a-sulṯān, I think she may be the daughter styled Āq Begīm who is No. 3 in Gul-badan's guest-list for the Mystic Feast.

[1035] This man I take to be Ḥusain's grandfather and not brother, both because `Abdu'l-lāh was of Ḥusain's and his brother's generation, and also because of the absence here of Bābur's usual defining words "elder brother" (of Sl. Ḥusain Mīrzā). In this I have to differ from Dr. Rieu (Pers. Cat. p. 152).

[1036] So-named after his ancestor Sayyid Barka whose body was exhumed from Andikhūd for reburial in Samarkand, by Tīmūr's wish and there laid in such a position that Tīmūr's body was at its feet (_Z̤afar-nāma_ ii, 719; Ḥ.S. iii, 82). (For the above interesting detail I am indebted to my husband.)

[1037] _Qīzīl-bāsh_, Persians wearing red badges or caps to distinguish them as Persians.

[1038] Yādgār-i-farrukh _Mīrān-shāhī_ (Ḥ.S. iii, 327). He may have been one of those Mīrān-shāhīs of `Irāq from whom came Ākā's and Sulṯānīm's husbands, Aḥmad and `Abdu'l-bāqī (ff. 164, 175_b_).

[1039] This should be four (f. 169_b_). The Ḥ.S. (iii, 327) also names three only when giving Pāpā Āghācha's daughters (the omission linking it with the B.N.), but elsewhere (iii, 229) it gives an account of a fourth girl's marriage; this fourth is needed to make up the total of 11 daughters. Bābur's and Khwānd-amīr's details of Pāpā Āghācha's quartette are defective; the following may be a more correct list:—(1) Begīm Sulṯān (a frequent title), married to Abā-bikr _Mīrān-shāhī_ (who died 884 AH.) and seeming too old to be the one [No. 3] who married Mas`ūd (Ḥ.S. iii, 229); (2) Sulṯān-nizhād, married to Iskandar _Bāī-qarā_; (3) Sa`ādat-bakht also known as Begīm Sulṯān, married to Mas'ūd _Mīrān-shāhī_ (Ḥ.S. iii, 327); (4) Manauwar-sulṯān, married to a son of Aūlūgh Beg _Kābulī_ (Ḥ.S. iii, 327).

[1040] This "after" seems to contradict the statement (f. 58) that Mas`ūd was made to kneel as a son-in-law (_kūyādlīk-kā yūkūndūrūb_) at a date previous to his blinding, but the seeming contradiction may be explained by considering the following details; he left Herī hastily (f. 58), went to Khusrau Shāh and was blinded by him,—all in the last two months of 903 AH. (1498 AD.), after the kneeling on Ẕū'l-qa`da 3rd, (June 23rd) in the Ravens'-garden. Here what Bābur says is that the Begīm was given (_bīrīb_) after the blinding, the inference allowed being that though Mas`ūd had kneeled before the blinding, she had remained in her father's house till his return after the blinding.

[1041] The first W.-i-B. writes "Apāq Begīm" (I.O. 215 f. 136) which would allow Sayyid Mīrzā to be a kinsman of Apāq Begīm, wife of Ḥusain _Bāī-qarā_.

[1042] This brief summary conveys the impression that the Begīm went on her pilgrimage shortly after Mas`ūd's death (913 AH. ?), but may be wrong:—After Mas`ūd's murder, by one Bīmāsh Mīrzā, _dārogha_ of Sarakhs, at Shaibāq Khān's order, she was married by Bīmāsh M. (Ḥ.S. iii, 278). How long after this she went to Makka is not said; it was about 934 AH. when Bābur heard of her as there.

[1043] This clause is in the Ḥai. MS. but not in the Elph. MS. (f. 131), or Kehr's (Ilminsky, p. 210), or in either Persian translation. The boy may have been 17 or 18.

[1044] This appears a mistake (f. 168 foot, and note on Pāpā's daughters).

[1045] f. 171b.

[1046] 933 AH.-1527 AD. (f. 329).

[1047] Presumably this was a _yīnkālīk_ marriage; it differs from some of those chronicled and also from a levirate marriage in not being made with a childless wife. (Cf. index _s.n._ _yīnkālīk_.)

[1048] Khwānd-amīr says that Bega Begīm was jealous, died of grief at her divorce, and was buried in a College, of her own erection, in 893 AH. (1488 AD. ḤS. iii, 245).

[1049] _Gulistān_ Cap. II, Story 31 (Platts, p. 114).

[1050] _i.e._ did not get ready to ride off if her husband were beaten by her brother (f. 11 and note to Ḥabība).

[1051] Khadīja Begī Āghā (Ḥ.S. ii, 230 and iii, 327); she would be promoted probably after Shāh-i-gharīb's birth.

[1052] He was a son of Badī`u'z-zamān.

[1053] It is singular that this honoured woman's parentage is not mentioned; if it be right on f. 168b (_q.v._ with note) to read Sayyid Mīrzā of Apāq Begīm, she may be a sayyida of Andikhūd.

[1054] As Bābur left Kābul on Ṣafar 1st (Nov. 17th 1525 AD.), the Begīm must have arrived in Muḥarram 932 AH. (Oct. 18th to Nov. 17th).

[1055] f. 333. As Chandīrī was besieged in Rabī`u'l-ākhar 934 AH. this passage shews that, as a minimum estimate, what remains of Bābur's composed narrative (_i.e._ down to f. 216b) was written after that date (Jan. 1528).

[1056] _Chār-shambalār._ Mention of another inhabitant of this place with the odd name, Wednesday (Chār-shamba), is made on f. 42b.

[1057] Mole-marked Lady; most MSS. style her Bī but Ḥ.S. iii, 327, writes Bībī; it varies also by calling her a Turk. She was a purchased slave of Shahr-bānū's and was given to the Mīrzā by Shahr-bānū at the time of her own marriage with him.

[1058] As noted already, f. 168b enumerates three only.

[1059] The three were almost certainly Badī`u'z-zamān, Ḥaidar, son of a Tīmūrid mother, and Muz̤affar-i-ḥusain, born after his mother had been legally married.

[1060] Seven sons predeceased him:—Farrukh, Shāh-i-gharīb, Muḥ. Ma`ṣūm, Ḥaidar, Ibrāhīm-i-ḥusain, Muḥ. Ḥusain and Abū-turāb. So too five daughters:—Āq, Bega, Āghā, Kīchīk and Fāṯima-sulṯān Begīms. So too four wives:—Bega-sulṯān and Chūlī Begīms, Zubaida and Laṯīf-sulṯān Āghāchas (Ḥ.S. iii, 327).

[1061] Chākū, a Barlās, as was Tīmūr, was one of Tīmūr's noted men.

At this point some hand not the scribe's has entered on the margin of the Ḥai. MS. the descendants of Muḥ. Barandūq down into Akbar's reign:—Muḥ. Farīdūn, bin Muḥ. Qulī Khān, bin Mīrzā `Alī, bin Muḥ. Barandūq _Barlās_. Of these Farīdūn and Muḥ. Qulī are amīrs of the _Āyīn-i-akbarī_ list (Blochmann, pp. 341, 342; Ḥ.S. iii, 233).

[1062] Enforced marches of Mughūls and other nomads are mentioned also on f. 154b and f. 155.

[1063] Ḥ.S. iii, 228, 233, 235.

[1064] _beg kīshī_, beg-person.

[1065] Khwānd-amīr says he died a natural death (Ḥ.S. iii, 235).

[1066] f. 21. For a fuller account of Nawā'i, _J. Asiatique_ xvii, 175, M. Belin's article.

[1067] _i.e._ when he was poor and a beg's dependant. He went back to Herī at Sl. Ḥusain M.'s request in 873 AH.

[1068] Niẕāmī's (Rieu's Pers. Cat. s.n.).

[1069] Farīdu'd-dīn-`at̤t̤ar's (Rieu l.c. and Ency. Br.).

[1070] _Gharā'ibu'ṣ-ṣighar_, _Nawādiru'sh-shahāb_, _Badā'i`u'l-wasaṯ_ and _Fawā'idu'l-kibr_.

[1071] Every Persian poet has a _takhalluṣ_ (pen-name) which he introduces into the last couplet of each ode (Erskine).

[1072] The death occurred in the First Jumāda 906 AH. (Dec. 1500 AD.).

[1073] Niẕāmu'd-dīn Aḥmad bin Tawakkal _Barlās_ (Ḥ.S. iii, 229).

[1074] This may be that uncle of Tīmūr who made the Ḥaj (T. R. p. 48, quoting the _Z̤afar-nāma_).

[1075] Some MSS. omit the word "father" here but to read it obviates the difficulty of calling Walī a great beg of Sl. Ḥusain Mīrzā although he died when that mīrzā took the throne (973 AH.) and although no leading place is allotted to him in Bābur's list of Herī begs. Here as in other parts of Bābur's account of Herī, the texts vary much whether Turkī or Persian, _e.g._ the Elph. MS. appears to call Walī a blockhead (_dūnkūz dūr_), the Ḥai. MS. writing _n:kūz dūr_(?).

[1076] He had been Bābur _Shāhrukhī's yasāwal_ (Court-attendant), had fought against Ḥusain for Yādgār-i-muḥammad and had given a daughter to Ḥusain (Ḥ.S. iii, 206, 228, 230-32; D.S. in _Not. et Ex._ de Saçy p. 265).

[1077] f. 29b.

[1078] _Sic_, Elph. MS. and both Pers. trss. but the Ḥai. MS. omits "father". To read it, however, suits the circumstance that Ḥasan of Ya`qūb was not with Ḥusain and in Harāt but was connected with Maḥmūd _Mīrānshāhī_ and Tīrmīẕ (f. 24). Nuyān is not a personal name but is a title; it implies good-birth; all uses of it I have seen are for members of the religious family of Tīrmīẕ.

[1079] He was the son of Ibrāhīm _Barlās_ and a Badakhshī begīm (T.R. p. 108).

[1080] He will have been therefore a collateral of Daulat-shāh whose relation to Fīrūz-shāh is thus expressed by Nawā'i:—_Mīr Daulat-shāh Fīrūz-shāh Beg-nīng `amm-zāda-sī Amīr `Alā'u'd-daula Isfārayīnī-nīng aūghūlī dur_, _i.e._ Mīr Daulat-shāh was the son of Fīrūz-shāh Beg's paternal uncle's son, Amir `Alā'u'd-daula _Isfārayīnī_. Thus, Fīrūz-shāh and Isfārayīnī were first cousins; Daulat-shāh and `Abdu'l-khalīq's father were second cousins; while Daulat-shāh and Fīrūz-shāh were first cousins, once removed (Rieu's Pers. Cat. p. 534; Browne's D.S. English preface p. 14 and its reference to the Pers. preface).

[1081] _Tarkhān-nāma_, E. & D.'s _History of India_ i, 303; Ḥ.S. iii, 227.

[1082] f. 41 and note.

[1083] Both places are in the valley of the Herī-rūd.

[1084] Badī`u'z-zamān married a daughter of Ẕū'n-nūn; she died in 911 AH. (E. & D. i, 305; Ḥ.S. iii, 324).

[1085] This indicates, both amongst Musalmāns and Hindūs, obedience and submission. Several instances occur in Macculloch's _Bengali Household Stories_.

[1086] T.R. p. 205.

[1087] This is an idiom expressive of great keenness (Erskine).

[1088] Ḥ.S. iii, 250, _kitābdār_, librarian; so too Ḥai. MS. f. 174b.

[1089] _mutaiyam_ (f. 7b and note). Mīr Mughūl Beg was put to death for treachery in `Irāq (Ḥ.S. iii, 227, 248).

[1090] Bābur speaks as an eye-witness (f. 187b). For a single combat of Sayyid Badr, Ḥ. S. iii, 233.

[1091] f. 157 and note to _bātmān_.

[1092] A level field in which a gourd (_qabaq_) is set on a pole for an archer's mark to be hit in passing at the gallop (f. 18b and note).

[1093] Or possibly during the gallop the archer turned in the saddle and shot backwards.

[1094] Junaid was the father of Niẕāmu'd-dīn `Alī, Bābur's Khalīfa (Vice-gerent). That Khalīfa was of a religious house on his mother's side may be inferred from his being styled both Sayyid and Khwāja neither of which titles could have come from his Turkī father. His mother may have been a sayyida of one of the religious families of Marghīnān (f. 18 and note), since Khalīfa's son Muḥibb-i-`alī writes his father's name "Niẕāmu'd-din `Alī _Marghīlānī_" (_Marghīnānī_) in the Preface of his _Book on Sport_ (Rieu's Pers. Cat. p. 485).

[1095] This northward migration would take the family into touch with Bābur's in Samarkand and Farghāna.

[1096] He was left in charge of Jaunpūr in Rabī` I, 933 AH. (Jan. 1527 AD.) but exchanged for Chunār in Ramẓān 935 AH. (June 1529 AD.); so that for the writing of this part of the _Bābur-nāma_ we have the major and minor limits of Jan. 1527 and June 1529.

[1097] Ḥ.S. iii, 227.

[1098] _See_ Appendix H, _On the counter-mark Bih-būd on coins_.

[1099] Niẕāmu'd-dīn Amīr Shaikh Aḥmadu's-suhailī was surnamed Suhailī through a _fāl_ (augury) taken by his spiritual guide, Kamālu'd-dīn Ḥusain _Gāzur-gāhī_; it was he induced Ḥusain _Kashīfī_ to produce his _Anwār-i-suhailī_ (Lights of Canopus) (f. 125 and note; Rieu's Pers. Cat. p. 756; and for a couplet of his, Ḥ.S. iii, 242 l. 10).

[1100] Index _s.n._

[1101] Did the change complete an analogy between `Alī _Jalāīr_ and his (perhaps) elder son with `Alī Khalīfa and his elder son Ḥasan?

[1102] The Qūsh-begī is, in Central Asia, a high official who acts for an absent ruler (Shaw); he does not appear to be the Falconer, for whom Bābur's name is Qūshchī (f. 15 n.).

[1103] He received this sobriquet because when he returned from an embassy to the Persian Gulf, he brought, from Bahrein, to his Tīmūrid master a gift of royal pearls (Sām Mīrzā). For an account of Marwārīd _see_ Rieu's Pers. Cat. p. 1094 and (_re_ portrait) p. 787.

[1104] Sām Mīrzā specifies this affliction as _ābla-i-farang_, thus making what may be one of the earliest Oriental references to _morbus gallicus_ [as de Saçy here translates the name], the foreign or European pox, the "French disease of Shakespeare" (H.B.).

[1105] Index _s.n._ Yūsuf.

[1106] Ramẓān 3rd 918 AH.-Nov. 12th 1512.

[1107] _i.e._ of the White-sheep Turkmāns.

[1108] His paternal line was, `Abdu'l-bāqī, son of `Us̤mān, son of Sayyidī Aḥmad, son of Mīrān-shāh. His mother's people were begs of the White-sheep (Ḥ.S. iii, 290).

[1109] Sulṯānīm had married Wais (f. 157) not later than 895 or 896 AH. (Ḥ. S. iii, 253); she married `Abdu'l-bāqī in 908 AH. (1502-3 AD.).

[1110] Sayyid Shamsu'd-dīn Muḥammad, Mīr Sayyid _Sar-i-barahna_ owed his sobriquet of Bare-head to love-sick wanderings of his youth (Ḥ.S. iii, 328). The Ḥ.S. it is clear, recognizes him as a sayyid.

[1111] Rieu's Pers. Cat. p. 760; it is immensely long and "filled with tales that shock all probability" (Erskine).

[1112] f. 94 and note. Sl. Ḥusain M. made him curator of Anṣārī's shrine, an officer represented, presumably, by Col. Yate's "Mīr of Gāzur-gāh", and he became Chief Justice in 904 AH. (1498-99 AD.). _See_ Ḥ.S. iii, 330 and 340; JASB 1887, art. _On the city of Harāt_ (C. E. Yate) p. 85.

[1113] _mutasauwif_, perhaps meaning not a professed Ṣūfī.

[1114] He was of high birth on both sides, of religious houses of T̤abas and Nishāpūr (D.S. pp. 161, 163).

[1115] In agreement with its preface, Dr. Rieu entered the book as written by Sl. Ḥusain Mīrzā; in his Addenda, however, he quotes Bābur as the authority for its being by Gāzur-gāhī; Khwānd-amīr's authority can be added to Bābur's (Ḥ.S. 340; Pers. Cat. pp. 351, 1085).

[1116] _Dīwān._ The Wazīr is a sort of Minister of Finance; the Dīwān is the office of revenue receipts and issues (Erskine).

[1117] a secretary who writes out royal orders (Ḥ.S. iii, 244).

[1118] Count von Noer's words about a cognate reform of later date suit this man's work, it also was "a bar to the defraudment of the Crown, a stumbling-block in the path of avaricious chiefs" (_Emperor Akbar_ trs. i, 11). The opposition made by `Alī-sher to reform so clearly to Ḥusain's gain and to Ḥusain's begs' loss, stirs the question, "What was the source of his own income?" Up to 873 AH. he was for some years the dependant of Aḥmad Ḥājī Beg; he took nothing from the Mīrzā, but gave to him; he must have spent much in benefactions. The question may have presented itself to M. Belin for he observes, "`Alī-sher qui sans doute, à son retour de l'exil, recouvra l'héritage de ses pères, et depuis occupa de hautes positions dans le gouvernement de son pays, avait acquis une grande fortune" (_J. Asiatique_ xvii, 227). While not contradicting M. Belin's view that vested property such as can be described as "paternal inheritance", may have passed from father to son, even in those days of fugitive prosperity and changing appointments, one cannot but infer, from Nawā'i's opposition to Majdu'd-dīn, that he, like the rest, took a partial view of the "rights" of the cultivator.

[1119] This was in 903 AH. after some 20 years of service (Ḥ.S. iii, 231; Ethé I.O. Cat. p. 252).

[1120] Amīr Jamālu'd-dīn `Atā'u'l-lāh, known also as Jamālu'd-dīn Ḥusain, wrote a _History of Muhammad_ (Ḥ.S. iii, 345; Rieu's Pers. Cat. p. 147 & (a correction) p. 1081).

[1121] Amongst noticeable omissions from Bābur's list of Herī celebrities are Mīr Khwānd Shāh ("Mirkhond"), his grandson Khwānd-amīr, Ḥusain _Kashifī_ and Muinu'd-dīn al Zamjī, author of a _History of Harāt_ which was finished in 897 AH.

[1122] Sa'du`d-dīn Mas`ūd, son of `Umar, was a native of Taft in Yazd, whence his cognomen (Bahār-i-`ajam); he died in 792 AH.-1390 AD. (Ḥ.S. iii, 59, 343; T.R. p. 236; Rieu's Pers. Cat. pp. 352, 453).

[1123] These are those connected with grammar and rhetoric (Erskine).

[1124] This is one of the four principal sects of Muḥammadanism (Erskine).

[1125] T.R. p. 235, for Shāh Ismā`īl's murders in Herī.

[1126] Superintendent of Police, who examines weights, measures and provisions, also prevents gambling, drinking and so on.

[1127] f. 137.

[1128] The rank of Mujtahid, which is not bestowed by any individual or class of men but which is the result of slow and imperceptible opinion, finally prevailing and universally acknowledged, is one of the greatest peculiarities of the religion of Persia. The Mujtahid is supposed to be elevated above human fears and human enjoyments, and to have a certain degree of infallibility and inspiration. He is consulted with reverence and awe. There is not always a Mujtahid necessarily existing. _See_ Kaempfer, _Amoenitates Exoticae_ (Erskine).

[1129] _muḥaddas̤_, one versed in the traditional sayings and actions of Muḥammad.

[1130] Ḥ.S. iii, 340.

[1131] B.M. Or. 218 (Rieu's Pers. Cat. p. 350). The Commentary was made in order to explain the _Nafaḥāt_ to Jāmī's son.

[1132] He was buried by the Mullā's side.

[1133] Amīr Burhānu'd-dīn `Atā'u'l-lāh bin Maḥmūdu'l-ḥusainī was born in Nishāpūr but known as Mashhadī because he retired to that holy spot after becoming blind.

[1134] f. 144_b_ and note. Qāẓī Ikhtiyāru'd-dīn Ḥasan (Ḥ.S. iii, 347) appears to be the Khwāja Ikhtiyār of the _Āyīn-i-akbarī_, and, if so, will have taken professional interest in the script, since Abū'l-faẓl describes him as a distinguished calligrapher in Sl. Ḥusain M.'s presence (Blochmann, p. 101).

[1135] Saifu'd-dīn (Sword of the Faith) Aḥmad, presumably.

[1136] A sister of his, Apāq Bega, the wife of `Alī-sher's brother Darwīsh-i-`alī _kitābdār_, is included as a poet in the _Biography of Ladies_ (Sprenger's Cat. p. 11). Amongst the 20 women named one is a wife of Shaibāq Khān, another a daughter of Hilālī.

[1137] He was the son of Khw. Ni`amatu'l-lāh, one of Sl. Abū-sa`īd M.'s wazīrs. When dying _aet._ 70 (923 AH.), he made this chronogram on his own death, "With 70 steps he measured the road to eternity." The name Āsaf, so frequent amongst wazīrs, is that of Solomon's wazīr.

[1138] Other interpretations are open; _wādī_, taken as _river_, might refer to the going on from one poem to another, the stream of verse; or it might be taken as _desert_, with disparagement of collections.

[1139] Maulānā Jamālu'd-dīn _Banā'i_ was the son of a _sabz-banā_, an architect, a good builder.

[1140] Steingass's Dictionary allows convenient reference for examples of metres.

[1141] Other jokes made by _Banā'i_ at the expense of Nawā'i are recorded in the various sources.

[1142] Bābur saw Banā'i in Samarkand at the end of 901 AH. (1496 AD. f. 38).

Here Dr. Leyden's translation ends; one other fragment which he translated will be found under the year 925 AH. (Erskine). This statement allows attention to be drawn to the inequality of the shares of the work done for the Memoirs of 1826 by Leyden and by Erskine. It is just to Mr. Erskine, but a justice he did not claim, to point out that Dr. Leyden's share is slight both in amount and in quality; his essential contribution was the initial stimulus he gave to the great labours of his collaborator.

[1143] So of Lope de Vega (b. 1562; d. 1635 AD.), "It became a common proverb to praise a good thing by calling it _a Lope_, so that jewels, diamonds, pictures, _etc._ were raised into esteem by calling them his" (Montalvan in Ticknor's _Spanish Literature_ ii, 270).

[1144] Maulānā Saifī, known as 'Arūẓī from his mastery in prosody (Rieu's Pers. Cat. p. 525).

[1145] Here pedantry will be implied in the mullahood.

[1146] _Khamsatīn_ (_infra_ f. 180_b_ and note).

[1147] This appears to mean that not only the sparse diacritical pointing common in writing Persian was dealt with but also the fuller Arabic.

[1148] He is best known by his pen-name Hātifī. The B.M. and I.O. have several of his books.

[1149] _Khamsatīn._ Hātifī regarded himself as the successor of Niẕāmī and Khusrau; this, taken with Bābur's use of the word _Khamsatīn_ on f. 7 and here, and Saifī's just above, leads to the opinion that the _Khamsatīn_ of the _Bābur-nāma_ are always those of Niẕāmī and Khusrau, _the_ Two Quintets (Rieu's Pers. Cat. p. 653).

[1150] Maulānā Mīr Kamālu'd-dīn Ḥusain of Nishāpūr (Rieu l.c. index s.n.; Ethé's I.O. Cat. pp. 433 and 1134).

[1151] One of his couplets on good and bad fortune is striking; "The fortune of men is like a sand-glass; one hour up, the next down." _See_ D'Herbélot in his article (Erskine).

[1152] Ḥ.S. iii, 336; Rieu's Pers. Cat. p. 1089.

[1153] Āhī (sighing) was with Shāh-i-gharīb before Ibn-i-ḥusain and to him dedicated his _dīwān_. The words _sāḥib-i-dīwān_ seem likely to be used here with double meaning _i.e._ to express authorship and finance office. Though Bābur has made frequent mention of authorship of a _dīwān_ and of office in the _Dīwān_, he has not used these words hitherto in either sense; there may be a play of words here.

[1154] Muḥammad _Ṣāliḥ_ Mīrzā _Khwārizmī_, author of the _Shaibānī-nāma_ which manifestly is the poem (_mas̤nawī_) mentioned below. This has been published with a German translation by Professor Vambéry and has been edited with Russian notes by Mr. Platon Melioransky (Rieu's Turkish Cat. p. 74; Ḥ.S. iii, 301).

[1155] Jāmī's _Subḥatu'l-abrār_ (Rosary of the righteous).

[1156] The reference may be to things said by Muḥ. _Ṣāliḥ_ the untruth of which was known to Bābur through his own part in the events. A crying instance of misrepresentation is Ṣāliḥ's assertion, in rhetorical phrase, that Bābur took booty in jewels from Khusrau Shāh; other instances concern the affairs of The Khāns and of Bābur in Transoxiana (f. 124b and index _s.nn._ Aḥmad and Maḥmūd _Chaghatāī_ _etc._; T.R. index _s.nn._)

[1157] The name Fat-land (Taṃbal-khāna) has its parallel in Fat-village (Sīmīz-kīnt) a name of Samarkand; in both cases the nick-name is accounted for by the fertility of irrigated lands. We have not been able to find the above-quoted couplet in the _Shaibānī-nāma_ (Vambéry); needless to say, the pun is on the nick-name (_taṃbal_, fat) of Sl. Aḥmad _Taṃbal_.

[1158] Muḥ. Ṣāliḥ does not show well in his book; he is sometimes coarse, gloats over spoil whether in human captives or goods, and, his good-birth not-forbidding, is a servile flatterer. Bābur's word "heartless" is just; it must have had sharp prompting from Ṣāliḥ's rejoicing in the downfall of The Khāns, Bābur's uncles.

[1159] the Longer (Ḥ.S. iii, 349).

[1160] Maulānā Badru'd-dīn (Full-moon of the Faith) whose pen-name was Hilālī, was of Astarābād. It may be noted that two dates of his death are found, 936 and 939 AH. the first given by de Saçy, the second by Rieu, and that the second seems to be correct (_Not. et Extr._ p. 285; Pers. Cat. p. 656; Hammer's _Geschichte_ p. 368).

[1161] B.M. Add. 7783.

[1162] Opinions differ as to the character of this work:—Bābur's is uncompromising; von Hammer (p. 369) describes it as "_ein romantisches Gedicht, welches eine sentimentale Männerliebe behandelt_"; Sprenger (p. 427), as a mystical _mas̤nawī_ (poem); Rieu finds no spiritual symbolism in it and condemns it (Pers. Cat. p. 656 and, quoting the above passage of Bābur, p. 1090); Ethé, who has translated it, takes it to be mystical and symbolic (I.O. Cat. p. 783).

[1163] Of four writers using the pen-name Ahlī (Of-the-people), _viz._ those of Turān, Shīrāz, Tarshīz (in Khurāsān), and 'Irāq, the one noticed here seems to be he of Tarshīz. Ahlī of Tarshīz was the son of a locally-known pious father and became a Superintendent of the Mint; Bābur's `_āmī_ may refer to Ahlī's first patrons, tanners and shoe-makers by writing for whom he earned his living (Sprenger, p. 319). Erskine read _'ummī_, meaning that Ahlī could neither read nor write; de Courteille that he was _un homme du commun_.

[1164] He was an occasional poet (Ḥ.S. iii, 350 and iv, 118; Rieu's Pers. Cat. p. 531; Ethé's I.O. Cat. p. 428).

[1165] Ustād Kamālu'd-dīn Bih-zād (well-born; Ḥ.S. iii, 350). Work of his is reproduced in Dr. Martin's _Painting and Painters of Persia_ of 1913 AD.

[1166] This sentence is not in the Elph. MS.

[1167] Perhaps he could reproduce tunes heard and say where heard.

[1168] M. Belin quotes quatrains exchanged by `Alī-sher and this man (_J. Asiatique_ xvii, 199).

[1169] _i.e._ from his own camp to Bābā Ilāhī.

[1170] f. 121 has a fuller quotation. On the dual succession, _see_ T.R. p. 196.

[1171] Elph. MS. f. 144; W.-i-B. I.O. 215 f. 148_b_ and 217 f. 125_b_; Mems. p. 199.

[1172] News of Ḥusain's death in 911 AH. (f. 163b) did not reach Bābur till 912 AH. (f. 184_b_).

[1173] Lone-meadow (f. 195_b_). Jahāngīr will have come over the `Irāq-pass, Bābur's baggage-convoy, by Shibr-tū. Cf. T. R. p. 199 for Bābur and Jahāngīr at this time.

[1174] Servant-of-the-mace; but perhaps, Qilinj-chāq, swords-man.

[1175] One of four, a fourth. Chār-yak may be a component of the name of the well-known place, n. of Kābul, "Chārikār"; but also the _Chār_ in it may be Hindūstānī and refer to the permits-to-pass after tolls paid, given to caravans halted there for taxation. Raverty writes it Chārlākār.

[1176] Amongst the disruptions of the time was that of the Khānate of Qībchāq (Erskine).

[1177] The nearest approach to _kipkī_ we have found in Dictionaries is _kupaki_, which comes close to the Russian _copeck_. Erskine notes that the _casbeké_ is an oval copper coin (Tavernier, p. 121); and that a _tūmān_ is a myriad (10,000). _Cf._ Manucci (Irvine), i, 78 and iv, 417 note; Chardin iv, 278.

[1178] Muḥarram 912 AH.-June 1506 AD. (Ḥ.S. iii, 353).

[1179] I take Murgh-āb here to be the fortified place at the crossing of the river by the main n.e. road; Bābur when in Dara-i-bām was on a tributary of the Murgh-āb. Khwānd-amīr records that the information of his approach was hailed in the Mīrzās' camp as good news (Ḥ.S. iii, 354).

[1180] Bābur gives the Mīrzās precedence by age, ignoring Muz̤affar's position as joint-ruler.

[1181] _mubālgha qīldī_; perhaps he laid stress on their excuse; perhaps did more than was ceremonially incumbent on him.

[1182] _`irq_, to which estrade answers in its sense of a carpet on which stands a raised seat.

[1183] Perhaps it was a recess, resembling a gate-way (W.-i-B. I.O. 215 f. 151 and 217 f. 127_b_). The impression conveyed by Bābur's words here to the artist who in B.M. Or. 3714, has depicted the scene, is that there was a vestibule opening into the tent by a door and that the Mīrzā sat near that door. It must be said however that the illustration does not closely follow the text, in some known details.

[1184] _shīra_, fruit-syrups, sherbets. Bābur's word for wine is _chāghīr_ (_q.v._ index) and this reception being public, wine could hardly have been offered in Sunnī Herī. Bābur's strictures can apply to the vessels of precious metal he mentions, these being forbidden to Musalmāns; from his reference to the Tūra it would appear to repeat the same injunctions. Bābur broke up such vessels before the battle of Kanwāha (f. 315). Shāh-i-jahān did the same; when sent by his father Jahāngīr to reconquer the Deccan (1030 AH.-1621 AD.) he asked permission to follow the example of his ancestor Bābur, renounced wine, poured his stock into the Chaṃbal, broke up his cups and gave the fragments to the poor (_`Amal-i-ṣāliḥ_, Hughes' _Dict. of Islām_ quoting the _Hidāyah_ and _Mishkāt_, _s.nn._ Drinkables, Drinking-vessels, and Gold; Lane's _Modern Egyptians_ p. 125 n.).

[1185] This may be the Rabāṯ-i-sanghī of some maps, on a near road between the "Forty-daughters" and Harāt; or Bābur may have gone out of his direct way to visit Rabāṯ-i-sang-bast, a renowned halting place at the Carfax of the Herī-T̤ūs and Nishāpūr-Mashhad roads, built by one Arslān _Jazāla_ who lies buried near, and rebuilt with great magnificence by `Alī-sher _Nawā'i_ (Daulat-shāh, Browne, p. 176).

[1186] The wording here is confusing to those lacking family details. The paternal-aunt begīms can be Pāyanda-sulṯān (named), Khadīja-sulṯān, Apāq-sulṯān, and Fakhr-jahān Begīms, all daughters of Abū-sa`īd. The Apāq Begīm named above (also on f. 168_b_ _q.v._) does not now seem to me to be Abū-sa`īd's daughter (Gul-badan, trs. Bio. App.).

[1187] _yūkūnmāī._ Unless all copies I have seen reproduce a primary clerical mistake of Bābur's, the change of salutation indicated by there being no kneeling with Apāq Begīm, points to a _nuance_ of etiquette. Of the verb _yūkūnmāk_ it may be noted that it both describes the ceremonious attitude of intercourse, _i.e._ kneeling and sitting back on both heels (Shaw), and also the kneeling on meeting. From Bābur's phrase _Begīm bīla yūkūnūb_ [having kneeled with], it appears that each of those meeting made the genuflection; I have not found the phrase used of other meetings; it is not the one used when a junior or a man of less degree meets a senior or superior in rank (_e.g._ Khusrau and Bābur f. 123, or Bābur and Badī`u'z-zamān f. 186).

[1188] Musalmāns employ a set of readers who succeed one another in reading (reciting) the Qorān at the tombs of their men of eminence. This reading is sometimes continued day and night. The readers are paid by the rent of lands or other funds assigned for the purpose (Erskine).

[1189] A suspicion that Khadīja put poison in Jahāngīr's wine may refer to this occasion (T.R. p. 199).

[1190] These are _jharokha-i-darsān_, windows or balconies from which a ruler shews himself to the people.

[1191] Mas`ūd was then blind.

[1192] Bābur first drank wine not earlier than 917 AH. (f. 49 and note), therefore when nearing 30.

[1193] _aīchkīlār_, French, _intérieur_.

[1194] The obscure passage following here is discussed in Appendix I, _On the weeping-willows of_ f. 190_b_.

[1195] Here this may well be a gold-embroidered garment.

[1196] This, the tomb of Khwāja `Abdu'l-lāh _Anṣari_ (d. 481 AH.) stands some 2m. north of Herī. Bābur mentions one of its numerous attendants of his day, Kamālu'd-dīn Ḥusain _Gāzur-gāhī_. Mohan Lall describes it as he saw it in 1831; says the original name of the locality was Kār-zār-gāh, place-of-battle; and, as perhaps his most interesting detail, mentions that Jalālu'd-dīn _Rūmī's Maṣnawī_ was recited every morning near the tomb and that people fainted during the invocation (_Travels in the Panj-āb_ etc. p. 252). Colonel Yate has described the tomb as he saw it some 50 years later (JASB 1887); and explains the name Gāzur-gāh (lit. bleaching-place) by the following words of an inscription there found; "His tomb (Anṣarī's) is a washing-place (_gāzur-gāh_) wherein the cloud of the Divine forgiveness washes white the black records of men" (p. 88 and p. 102).

[1197] _juāz-i-kaghazlār_ (f. 47_b_ and note).

[1198] The _Ḥabību's-siyār_ and Ḥai. MS. write this name with medial "round _hā_"; this allows it to be Kahad-stān, a running-place, race-course. Khwānd-amīr and Daulat-shāh call it a meadow (_aūlāng_); the latter speaks of a feast as held there; it was Shaibānī's head-quarters when he took Harāt.

[1199] _var._ Khatīra; either an enclosure (_qūrūq_?) or a fine and lofty building.

[1200] This may have been a usual halting-place on a journey (_safar_) north. It was built by Ḥusain _Bāī-qarā_, overlooked hills and fields covered with _arghwān_ (f. 137_b_) and seems once to have been a Paradise (Mohan Lall, p. 256).

[1201] Jāmī's tomb was in the `Īd-gah of Herī (Ḥ.S. ii, 337), which appears to be the Muṣalla (Praying-place) demolished by Amīr `Abdu'r-raḥmān in the 19th century. Col. Yate was shewn a tomb in the Muṣalla said to be Jāmī's and agreeing in the age, 81, given on it, with Jāmī's at death, but he found a _crux_ in the inscription (pp. 99, 106).

[1202] This may be the Muṣalla (Yate, p. 98).

[1203] This place is located by the Ḥ.S. at 5 _farsakh_ from Herī (de Meynard at 25 _kilomètres_). It appears to be rather an abyss or fissure than a pond, a crack from the sides of which water trickles into a small bason in which dwells a mysterious fish, the beholding of which allows the attainment of desires. The story recalls Wordsworth's undying fish of Bow-scale Tarn. (_Cf._ Ḥ.S. Bomb. ed. ii, _Khatmat_ p. 20 and de Meynard, _Journal Asiatique_ xvi, 480 and note.)

[1204] This is on maps to the north of Herī.

[1205] d. 232 AH. (847 AD.). _See_ Yate, p. 93.

[1206] Imām Fakhru'd-dīn _Raẓī_ (de Meynard, _Journal Asiatique_ xvi, 481).

[1207] d. 861 AH.-1457 AD. Guhār-shād was the wife of Tīmūr's son Shāhrukh. _See_ Mohan Lall, p. 257 and Yate, p. 98.

[1208] This Marigold-garden may be named after Hārūnu'r-rashīd's wife Zubaida.

[1209] This will be the place n. of Herī from which Maulānā Jalālu'd-dīn _Pūrānī_ (d. 862 AH.) took his cognomen, as also Shaikh Jamālu'd-dīn Abū-sa`īd _Pūrān_ (f. 206) who was visited there by Sl. Ḥusain Mīrzā, ill-treated by Shaibānī (f. 206), left Herī for Qandahār, and there died, through the fall of a roof, in 921 AH. (Ḥ.S. iii, 345; _Khazīnatu'l-asfiya_ ii, 321).

[1210] His tomb is dated 35 or 37 AH. (656 or 658 AD.; Yate, p. 94).

[1211] Mālān was a name of the Herī-rūd (_Journal Asiatique_ xvi, 476, 511; Mohan Lall, p. 279; Ferrier, p. 261; _etc._).

[1212] Yate, p. 94.

[1213] The position of this building between the Khūsh and Qībchāq Gates (de Meynard, l.c. p. 475) is the probable explanation of the variant, noted just below, of Kushk for Khūsh as the name of the Gate. The _Tārīkh-i-rashīdī_ (p. 429), mentions this kiosk in its list of the noted ones of the world.

[1214] var. Kushk (de Meynard, l.c. p. 472).

[1215] The reference here is, presumably, to Bābur's own losses of Samarkand and Andijān.

[1216] Ākā or Āgā is used of elder relations; a _yīnkā_ or _yīngā_ is the wife of an uncle or elder brother; here it represents the widow of Bābur's uncle Aḥmad _Mīrān-shāhī_. From it is formed the word _yīnkālīk_, levirate.

[1217] The almshouse or convent was founded here in Tīmūr's reign (de Meynard, l.c. p. 500).

[1218] _i.e._ No smoke without fire.

[1219] This name may be due to the splashing of water. A Langar which may be that of Mīr Ghiyās̤, is shewn in maps in the Bām valley; from it into the Herī-rūd valley Bābur's route may well have been the track from that Langar which, passing the villages on the southern border of Gharjistān, goes to Ahangarān.

[1220] This escape ought to have been included in the list of Bābur's transportations from risk to safety given in my note to f. 96.

[1221] The right and wrong roads are shewn by the Indian Survey and French Military maps. The right road turns off from the wrong one, at Daulat-yār, to the right, and mounts diagonally along the south rampart of the Herī-rūd valley, to the Zirrīn-pass, which lies above the Bakkak-pass and carries the regular road for Yaka-aūlāng. It must be said, however, that we are not told whether Yaka-aūlāng was Qāsim Beg's objective; the direct road for Kābul from the Herī-rūd valley is not over the Zirrīn-pass but goes from Daulat-yār by "Āq-zarat", and the southern flank of Koh-i-bābā (bābār) to the Unai-pass (Holdich's _Gates of India_ p. 262).

[1222] _circa_ Feb. 14th 1507, Bābur's 24th birthday.

[1223] The Hazāras appear to have been wintering outside their own valley, on the Ghūr-bund road, in wait for travellers [_cf._ T.R. p. 197]. They have been perennial highwaymen on the only pass to the north not closed entirely in winter.

[1224] The Ghūr-bund valley is open in this part; the Hazāras may have been posted on the naze near the narrows leading into the Janglīk and their own side valleys.

[1225] Although the verses following here in the text are with the Turkī Codices, doubt cannot but be felt as to their authenticity. They do not fit verbally to the sentence they follow; they are a unique departure from Bābur's plain prose narrative and nothing in the small Hazāra affair shews cause for such departure; they differ from his usual topics in their bombast and comment on his men (_cf._ f. 194 for comment on shirking begs). They appear in the 2nd Persian translation (217 f. 134) in Turkī followed by a prose Persian rendering (_khalāṣa_). They are not with the 1st Pers. trs. (215 f. 159), the text of which runs on with a plain prose account suiting the size of the affair, as follows:—"The braves, seeing their (the Hazāras) good soldiering, had stopped surprised; wishing to hurry them I went swiftly past them, shouting 'Move on! move on!' They paid me no attention. When, in order to help, I myself attacked, dismounting and going up the hill, they shewed courage and emulation in following. Getting to the top of the pass, we drove that band off, killing many, capturing others, making their families prisoner and plundering their goods." This is followed by "I myself collected" _etc._ as in the Turkī text after the verse. It will be seen that the above extract is not a translation of the verse; no translator or even summariser would be likely to omit so much of his original. It is just a suitably plain account of a trivial matter.

[1226] _Gulistān_ Cap. I. Story 4.

[1227] Bābur seems to have left the Ghūr-bund valley, perhaps pursuing the Hazāras towards Janglīk, and to have come "by ridge and valley" back into it for Ushtur-shahr. I have not located Tīmūr Beg's Langar. As has been noted already (_q.v._ index) the Ghūr-bund narrows are at the lower end of the valley; they have been surmised to be the fissured rampart of an ancient lake.

[1228] Here this may represent a guard- or toll-house (Index _s.n._).

[1229] As _yūrūn_ is a patch, the bearer of the sobriquet might be Black Aḥmad the repairing-tailor.

[1230] _Second Afghān War_, Map of Kābul and its environs.

[1231] I understand that the arrival undiscovered was a result of riding in single-file and thus shewing no black mass.

[1232] or _gharbīcha_, which Mr. Erskine explains to be the four plates of mail, made to cover the back, front and sides; the _jība_ would thus be the wadded under-coat to which they are attached.

[1233] This prayer is composed of extracts from the Qorān (_Méms_, i, 454 note); it is reproduced as it stands in Mr. Erskine's wording (p. 216).

[1234] Bābur's reference may well be to Sanjar's birth as well as to his being the holder of Nīngnahār. Sanjar's father had been thought worthy to mate with one of the six Badakhshī begīms whose line traced back to Alexander (T. R. p. 107); and his father was a Barlās, seemingly of high family.

[1235] It may be inferred that what was done was for the protection of the two women.

[1236] Not a bad case could have been made out for now putting a Tīmūrid in Bābur's place in Kābul; _viz._ that he was believed captive in Herī and that Mīrzā Khān was an effective _locum tenens_ against the Arghūns. Haidar sets down what in his eyes pleaded excuse for his father Muḥ. Ḥusain (T.R. p. 198).

[1237] _qūsh_, not even a little plough-land being given (_chand qulba dihya_, 215 f. 162).

[1238] They were sons of Sl. Aḥmad Khān _Chaghatāī_.

[1239] f. 160.

[1240] Ḥaidar's opinion of Bābur at this crisis is of the more account that his own father was one of the rebels let go to the mercy of the "avenging servitor". When he writes of Bābur, as being, at a time so provoking, gay, generous, affectionate, simple and gentle, he sets before us insight and temper in tune with Kipling's "If...."

[1241] Bābur's distinction, made here and elsewhere, between Chaghatāī and Mughūl touches the old topic of the right or wrong of the term "Mughūl dynasty". What he, as also Ḥaidar, allows said is that if Bābur were to describe his mother in tribal terms, he would say she was half-Chaghatāī, half-Mughūl; and that if he so described himself, he would say he was half-Tīmūrid-Turk, half-Chaghatāī. He might have called the dynasty he founded in India Turkī, might have called it Tīmūriya; he would never have called it Mughūl, after his maternal grandmother.

Ḥaidar, with imperfect classification, divides Chīngīz Khān's "Mughūl horde" into Mughūls and Chaghatāīs and of this Chaghatāī offtake says that none remained in 953 _AH._ (1547 _AD._) except the rulers, _i.e._ sons of Sl. Aḥmad Khan (T.R. 148). Manifestly there was a body of Chaghatāīs with Bābur and there appear to have been many near his day in the Herī region,—`Alī-sher _Nawā`i_ the best known.

Bābur supplies directions for naming his dynasty when, as several times, he claims to rule in Hindūstān where the "Turk" had ruled (f. 233_b_, f. 224_b_, f. 225). To call his dynasty Mughūl seems to blot out the centuries, something as we should do by calling the English Teutons. If there is to be such blotting-out, Abū'l-ghāzī would allow us, by his tables of Turk descent, to go further, to the primal source of all the tribes concerned, to Turk, son of Japhet. This traditional descent is another argument against "Mughūl dynasty."

[1242] They went to Qandahār and there suffered great privation.

[1243] Bārān seems likely to be the Baian of some maps. Gul-i-bahār is higher up on the Panjhīr road. Chāsh-tūpa will have been near-by; its name might mean _Hill of the heap of winnowed-corn_.

[1244] f. 136.

[1245] Answer; Visions of his father's sway.

[1246] Elph. MS. f. 161; W.-i-B. I.O. 215 f. 164 and 217 f. 139_b_; Mems. p. 220.

[1247] The narrative indicates the location of the tribe, the modern Ghilzāī or Ghilzī.

[1248] Sih-kāna lies s.e. of Shorkach, and near Kharbīn. Sar-i-dih is about 25 or 30 miles s. of Ghaznī (Erskine). A name suiting the pastoral wealth of the tribe _viz._ Mesh-khail, Sheep-tribe, is shewn on maps somewhat s. from Kharbīn. _Cf._ Steingass _s.n._ Masht.

[1249] _yāghrūn_, whence _yāghrūnchī_, a diviner by help of the shoulder-blades of sheep. The defacer of the Elphinstone Codex has changed _yāghrūn_ to _yān_, side, thus making Bābur turn his side and not his half-back to the north, altering his direction, and missing what looks like a jesting reference to his own divination of the road. The Pole Star was seen, presumably, before the night became quite black.

[1250] From the subsequent details of distance done, this must have been one of those good _yīghāch_ of perhaps 5-6 miles, that are estimated by the ease of travel on level lands (Index _s.v._ _yīghāch_).

[1251] I am uncertain about the form of the word translated by "whim". The Elph. and Ḥai. Codices read _khūd d:lma_ (altered in the first to _y:lma_); Ilminsky (p. 257) reads _khūd l:ma_ (de C. ii, 2 and note); Erskine has been misled by the Persian translation (215 f. 164_b_ and 217 f. 139_b_). Whether _khūd-dilma_ should be read, with the sense of "out of their own hearts" (spontaneously), or whether _khūd-yalma_, own pace (Turkī, _yalma_, pace) the contrast made by Bābur appears to be between an unpremeditated gallop and one premeditated for haste. Persian _dalama_, tarantula, also suggests itself.

[1252] _chāpqūn_, which is the word translated by gallop throughout the previous passage. The Turkī verb _chāpmāq_ is one of those words-of-all-work for which it is difficult to find a single English equivalent. The verb _qūīmāq_ is another; in its two occurrences here the first may be a metaphor from the pouring of molten metal; the second expresses that permission to gallop off for the raid without which to raid was forbidden. The root-notion of _qūīmāq_ seems to be letting-go, that of _chāpmāq_, rapid motion.

[1253] _i.e._ on the raiders' own road for Kābul.

[1254] f. 198_b_.

[1255] The Fifth taken was manifestly at the ruler's disposition. In at least two places when dependants send gifts to Bābur the word [_tassaduq_] used might be rendered as "gifts for the poor". Does this mean that the _pādshāh_ in receiving this stands in the place of the Imām of the Qorān injunction which orders one-fifth of spoil to be given to the Imām for the poor, orphans, and travellers,—four-fifths being reserved for the troops? (Qorān, Sale's ed. 1825, i, 212 and Hidāyat, Book ix).

[1256] This may be the sum of the separate items of sheep entered in account-books by the commissaries.

[1257] Here this comprehensive word will stand for deer, these being plentiful in the region.

[1258] Three Turkī MSS. write _ṣīghīnīb_, but the Elph. MS. has had this changed to _yītīb_, having reached.

[1259] _bāsh-sīz_, lit. without head, doubtless a pun on Aūz-beg (own beg, leaderless). B.M. Or. 3714 shows an artist's conception of this _tart-part_.

[1260] Bābā Khākī is a fine valley, some 13 _yīghāch_ e. of Herī (f. 13) where the Herī sulṯāns reside in the heats (_J. Asiatique_ xvi, 501, de Meynard's article; Ḥ.S. iii, 356).

[1261] f. 172_b_.

[1262] _aūkhshātā almādī._ This is one of many passages which Ilminsky indicates he has made good by help of the Memoirs (p. 261; _Mémoires_ ii, 6).

[1263] They are given also on f. 172.

[1264] This may be Sirakhs or Sirakhsh (Erskine).

[1265] _Tūshlīq tūshdīn yūrdī bīrūrlār._ At least two meanings can be given to these words. Circumstances seem to exclude the one in which the Memoirs (p. 222) and _Mémoires_ (ii, 7) have taken them here, _viz._ "each man went off to shift for himself", and "chacun s'en alla de son côté et s'enfuit comme il put", because Ẕū'n-nūn did not go off, and the Mīrzās broke up after his defeat. I therefore suggest another reading, one prompted by the Mīrzās' vague fancies and dreams of what they might do, but did not.

[1266] The encounter was between "Belāq-i-marāl and Rabāṯ-i-`alī-sher, near Bādghīs" (Raverty's _Notes_ p. 580). For particulars of the taking of Herī _see_ Ḥ.S. iii, 353.

[1267] One may be the book-name, the second the name in common use, and due to the colour of the buildings. But Bābur may be making an ironical jest, and nickname the fort by a word referring to the defilement (_ālā_) of Aūzbeg possession. (Cf. Ḥ.S. iii, 359.)

[1268] Mr. Erskine notes that Badī`u'z-zamān took refuge with Shāh Ismā`īl _Ṣafawī_ who gave him Tabrīz. When the Turkish Emperor Sālim took Tabrīz in 920 AH. (1514 AD.), he was taken prisoner and carried to Constantinople, where he died in 923 AH. (1517 AD.).

[1269] In the fort were his wife Kābulī Begīm, d. of Aūlūgh Beg M. _Kābulī_ and Ruqaiya Āghā, known as the Nightingale. A young daughter of the Mīrzā, named the Rose-bud (Chūchak), had died just before the siege. After the surrender of the fort, Kābulī Begīm was married by Mīrzā Kūkūldāsh (perhaps `Āshiq-i-muḥammad _Arghūn_); Ruqaiya by Tīmūr Sl. _Aūzbeg_ (Ḥ.S. iii, 359).

[1270] The _Khuṯba_ was first read for Shaibāq Khān in Herī on Friday Muḥarram 15th 913 AH. (May 27th 1507 AD.).

[1271] There is a Persian phrase used when a man engages in an unprofitable undertaking _Kīr-i-khar gerift_, _i.e._ _Asini nervum deprehendet_ (Erskine). The Ḥ.S. does not mention Banā'i as fleecing the poets but has much to say about one Maulānā `Abdu'r-raḥīm a Turkistānī favoured by Shaibānī, whose victim Khwānd-amīr was, amongst many others. Not infrequently where Bābur and Khwānd-amīr state the same fact, they accompany it by varied details, as here (Ḥ.S. iii, 358, 360).

[1272] _`adat._ Muḥammadan Law fixes a term after widowhood or divorce within which re-marriage is unlawful. Light is thrown upon this re-marriage by Ḥ.S. iii, 359. The passage, a somewhat rhetorical one, gives the following details:—"On coming into Her[i.] on Muḥarram 11th, Shaibānī at once set about gathering in the property of the Tīmūrids. He had the wives and daughters of the former rulers brought before him. The great lady Khān-zāda Begīm (f. 163_b_) who was daughter of Aḥmad Khān, niece of Sl. Ḥusain Mīrzā, and wife of Muz̤affar Mīrzā, shewed herself pleased in his presence. Desiring to marry him, she said Muz̤affar M. had divorced her two years before. Trustworthy persons gave evidence to the same effect, so she was united to Shaibānī in accordance with the glorious Law. Mihr-angez Begīm, Muẓaffar M.'s daughter, was married to `Ubaidu'llāh Sl. (_Aūzbeg_); the rest of the chaste ladies having been sent back into the city, Shaibānī resumed his search for property." Manifestly Bābur did not believe in the divorce Khwānd-amīr thus records.

[1273] A sarcasm this on the acceptance of literary honour from the illiterate.

[1274] f. 191 and note; Pul-i-sālār may be an irrigation-dam.

[1275] Qalāt-i-nādirī, the birth-place of Nādir Shāh, n. of Mashhad and standing on very strong ground (Erskine).

[1276] This is likely to be the road passing through the Carfax of Rabāṯ-i-sangbast, described by Daulat-shāh (Browne, p. 176).

[1277] This will mean that the Arghūns would acknowledge his suzerainty; Ḥaidar Mīrzā however says that Shāh Beg had higher views (T. R. p. 202). There had been earlier negotiations between Ẕū'n-nūn with Badī`u'z-zamān and Bābur which may have led to the abandonment of Bābur's expedition in 911 AD. (f. 158; Ḥ.S. iii, 323; Raverty's account (_Notes_ p. 581-2) of Bābur's dealings with the Arghūn chiefs needs revision).

[1278] They will have gone first to Tūn or Qāīn, thence to Mashhad, and seem likely to have joined the Begīm after cross-cutting to avoid Herī.

[1279] _yāghī wilāyatī-ghā kīlādūrghān._ There may have been an accumulation of caravans on their way to Herāt, checked in Qalāt by news of the Aūzbeg conquest.

[1280] Jahāngīr's son, thus brought by his mother, will have been an infant; his father had gone back last year with Bābur by the mountain road and had been left, sick and travelling in a litter, with the baggage when Bābur hurried on to Kābul at the news of the mutiny against him (f. 197); he must have died shortly afterwards, seemingly between the departure of the two rebels from Kābul (f. 201_b_-202) and the march out for Qandahār. Doubtless his widow now brought her child to claim his uncle Bābur's protection.

[1281] Persians pay great attention in their correspondence not only to the style but to the kind of paper on which a letter is written, the place of signature, the place of the seal, and the situation of the address. Chardin gives some curious information on the subject (Erskine). Bābur marks the distinction of rank he drew between the Arghūn chiefs and himself when he calls their letter to him, _`arẓ-dāsht_, his to them _khat̤t̤_. His claim to suzerainty over those chiefs is shewn by Ḥaidar Mīrzā to be based on his accession to Tīmūrid headship through the downfall of the Bāī-qarās, who had been the acknowledged suzerains of the Arghūns now repudiating Bābur's claim. Cf. Erskine's _History of India_ i, cap. 3.

[1282] on the main road, some 40 miles east of Qandahār.

[1283] var. Kūr or Kawar. If the word mean _ford_, this might well be the one across the Tarnak carrying the road to Qarā (maps). Here Bābur seems to have left the main road along the Tarnak, by which the British approach was made in 1880 AD., for one crossing west into the valley of the Argand-āb.

[1284] Bābā Ḥasan _Abdāl_ is the Bābā Walī of maps. The same saint has given his name here, and also to his shrine east of Atak where he is known as Bābā Walī of Qandahār. The torrents mentioned are irrigation off-takes from the Argand-āb, which river flows between Bābā Walī and Khalishak. Shāh Beg's force was south of the torrents (cf. Murghān-koh on S.A.W. map).

[1285] The narrative and plans of _Second Afghan War_ (Murray 1908) illustrate Bābur's movements and show most of the places he names. The end of the 280 mile march, from Kābul to within sight of Qandahār, will have stirred in the General of 1507 what it stirred in the General of 1880. Lord Roberts speaking in May 1913 in Glasgow on the rapid progress of the movement for National Service thus spoke:—"A memory comes over me which turns misgiving into hope and apprehension into confidence. It is the memory of the morning when, accompanied by two of Scotland's most famous regiments, the Seaforths and the Gordons, at the end of a long and arduous march, _I saw in the distance the walls and minarets of Qandahar, and knew that the end of a great resolve and a great task was near._"

[1286] _mīn tāsh `imārat qāzdūrghān tūmshūghī-nīng alīdā_; 215 f. l68_b_, _`imarātī kah az sang yak pāra farmūda būdīm_; 217 f. 143_b_, _jāy kah man `imāratī sākhtam_; Mems. p. 226, where I have built a palace; _Méms._ ii, 15, _l'endroit même où j'ai bâti un palais_. All the above translations lose the sense of _qāzdūrghān_, am causing to dig out, to quarry stone. Perhaps for coolness' sake the dwelling was cut out in the living rock. That the place is south-west of the main _ạrīqs_, near Murghān-koh or on it, Bābur's narrative allows. Cf. Appendix J.

[1287] _sic_, Ḥai. MS. There are two Lakhshas, Little Lakhsha, a mile west of Qandahār, and Great Lakhsha, about a mile s.w. of Old Qandahār, 5 or 6 m. from the modern one (Erskine).

[1288] This will be the main irrigation channel taken off from the Argand-āb (Maps).

[1289] _tamām aīlīkīdīn—aīsh-kīlūr yīkītlār_, an idiomatic phrase used of `Alī-dost (f. 14_b_ and n.), not easy to express by a single English adjective.

[1290] The _tawāchī_ was a sort of adjutant who attended to the order of the troops and carried orders from the general (Erskine). The difficult passage following gives the Turkī terms Bābur selected to represent Arabic military ones.

[1291] Ar. _aḥad_ (_Āyīn-i-akbarī_, Blochmann, index _s.n._). The word _būī_ recurs in the text on f. 210.

[1292] _i.e._ the _būī tīkīnī_ of f. 209_b_, the _khāṣa tābīn_, close circle.

[1293] As Mughūls seem unlikely to be descendants of Muḥammad, perhaps the title Sayyid in some Mughūl names here, may be a translation of a Mughūl one meaning Chief.

[1294] _Arghūn-nīng qarāsī_, a frequent phrase.

[1295] in sign of submission.

[1296] f. 176. It was in 908 AH. [1502 AD.].

[1297] This word seems to be from _sānjmāq_, to prick or stab; and here to have the military sense of _prick_, _viz._ riding forth. The Second Pers. trs. (217 f. 144_b_) translates it by _ghauta khūrda raft_, went tasting a plunge under water (215 f. 170; Muḥ. _Shīrāzī_'s lith. ed. p. 133). Erskine (p. 228), as his Persian source dictates, makes the men sink into the soft ground; de Courteille varies much (ii, 21).

[1298] Ar. _akhmail_, so translated under the known presence of trees; it may also imply soft ground (Lane p. 813 col. b) but soft ground does not suit the purpose of _arīqs_ (channels), the carrying on of water to the town.

[1299] The S.A.W. map is useful here.

[1300] That he had a following may be inferred.

[1301] Ḥai. MS. _qāchār_; Ilminsky, p. 268; and both Pers. trss. _rukhsār_ or _rukhsāra_ (f. 25 and note to _qāchār_).

[1302] So in the Turkī MSS. and the first Pers. trs. (215 f. 170_b_). The second Pers. trs. (217 f. 145_b_) has a gloss of _ātqū u tika_; this consequently Erskine follows (p. 229) and adds a note explaining the punishment. Ilminsky has the gloss also (p. 269), thus indicating Persian and English influence.

[1303] No MS. gives the missing name.

[1304] The later favour mentioned was due to Saṃbhal's laborious release of his master from Aūzbeg captivity in 917 AH. (1511 AD.) of which Erskine quotes a full account from the _Tārīkh-i-sind_ (History of India i, 345).

[1305] Presumably he went by Sabzār, Daulatābād, and Washīr.

[1306] f. 202 and note to _Chaghatāī_.

[1307] This will be for the Nīngnahār _tūmān_ of Lamghān.

[1308] He was thus dangerously raised in his father's place of rule.

[1309] ff. 10_b_, 11_b_. Ḥaidar M. writes, "Shāh Begīm laid claim to Badakhshān, saying, "It has been our hereditary kingdom for 3000 years; though I, being a woman, cannot myself attain sovereignty, yet my grandson Mīrzā Khān can hold it" (T. R. p. 203).

[1310] _tībrādīlār._ The agitation of mind connoted, with movement, by this verb may well have been, here, doubt of Bābur's power to protect.

[1311] _tūshlūq tūshdīn tāghghā yūrūkāīlār._ Cf. 205_b_ for the same phrase, with supposedly different meaning.

[1312] _qāngshār_ lit. ridge of the nose.

[1313] _bīr aūq ham qūīā-ālmādīlār_ (f. 203_b_ note to _chāpqūn_).

[1314] This will have been news both of Shaibāq Khān and of Mīrzā Khān. The Pers. trss. vary here (215 f. 173 and 217 f. 148).

[1315] Index _s.n._

[1316] Māh-chūchūk can hardly have been married against her will to Qāsim. Her mother regarded the alliance as a family indignity; appealed to Shāh Beg and compassed a rescue from Kābul while Bābur and Qāsim were north of the Oxus [_circa_ 916 AH.]. Māh-chūchūk quitted Kābul after much hesitation, due partly to reluctance to leave her husband and her infant of 18 months, [Nāhīd Begīm,] partly to dread less family honour might require her death (Erskine's _History_, i, 348 and Gul-badan's _Humāyūn-nāma_).

[1317] Erskine gives the fort the alternative name "Kaliūn", locates it in the Bādghīs district east of Herī, and quotes from Abū'l-ghāzī in describing its strong position (_History_ i, 282). Ḥ.S. Tīrah-tū.

[1318] f. 133 and note. Abū'l-faẓl mentions that the inscription was to be seen in his time.

[1319] This fief ranks in value next to the Kābul _tūmān_.

[1320] Various gleanings suggest motives for Bābur's assertion of supremacy at this particular time. He was the only Tīmūrid ruler and man of achievement; he filled Ḥusain _Bāī-qarā_'s place of Tīmūrid headship; his actions through a long period show that he aimed at filling Tīmūr Beg's. There were those who did not admit his suzerainty,—Tīmūrids who had rebelled, Mughūls who had helped them, and who would also have helped Sa`īd Khān _Chaghatāī_, if he had not refused to be treacherous to a benefactor; there were also the Arghūns, Chīngīz-khānids of high pretensions. In old times the Mughūl Khāqāns were _pādshāh_ (supreme); Pādshāh is recorded in history as the style of at least Sātūq-būghra Khān Pādshāh Ghāzī; no Tīmūrid had been lifted by his style above all Mīrzās. When however Tīmūrids had the upper hand, Bābur's Tīmūrid grandfather Abū-sa`īd asserted his _de facto_ supremacy over Bābur's Chaghatāī grandfather Yūnas (T. R. p. 83). For Bābur to re-assert that supremacy by assuming the Khāqān's style was highly opportune at this moment. To be Bābur Supreme was to declare over-lordship above Chaghatāī and Mughūl, as well as over all Mīrzās. It was done when his sky had cleared; Mīrzā Khān's rebellion was scotched; the Arghūns were defeated; he was the stronger for their lost possessions; his Aūzbeg foe had removed to a less ominous distance; and Kābul was once more his own.

Gul-badan writes as if the birth of his first-born son Humāyūn were a part of the uplift in her father's style, but his narrative does not support her in this, since the order of events forbids.

[1321] The "Khān" in Humāyūn's title may be drawn from his mother's family, since it does not come from Bābur. To whose family Māhīm belonged we have not been able to discover. It is one of the remarkable omissions of Bābur, Gul-badan and Abū'l-faẓl that they do not give her father's name. The topic of her family is discussed in my Biographical Appendix to Gul-badan's _Humāyūn-nāma_ and will be taken up again, here, in a final Appendix on Bābur's family.

[1322] Elph. MS. f. 172_b_; W.-i-B. I.O. 215 f. 174_b_ and 217 f. 148_b_; Mems. p. 234.

[1323] on the head-waters of the Tarnak (R.'s _Notes_ App. p. 34).

[1324] Bābur has made no direct mention of his half-brother's death (f. 208 and n. to Mīrzā).

[1325] This may be Darwesh-i-`alī of f. 210; the Sayyid in his title may merely mean chief, since he was a Mughūl.

[1326] Several of these mutineers had fought for Bābur at Qandahār.

[1327] It may be useful to recapitulate this Mīrzā's position:—In the previous year he had been left in charge of Kābul when Bābur went eastward in dread of Shaibānī, and, so left, occupied his hereditary place. He cannot have hoped to hold Kābul if the Aūzbeg attacked it; for its safety and his own he may have relied, and Bābur also in appointing him, upon influence his Arghūn connections could use. For these, one was Muqim his brother-in-law, had accepted Shaibānī's suzerainty after being defeated in Qandahār by Bābur. It suited them better no doubt to have the younger Mīrzā rather than Bābur in Kābul; the latter's return thither will have disappointed them and the Mīrzā; they, as will be instanced later, stood ready to invade his lands when he moved East; they seem likely to have promoted the present Mughūl uprising. In the battle which put this down, the Mīrzā was captured; Bābur pardoned him; but he having rebelled again, was then put to death.

[1328] Bāgh-i-yūrūnchqā may be an equivalent of Bāgh-i-safar, and the place be one of waiting "up to" (_ūnchqā_) the journey (_yūr_). _Yūrūnchqā_ also means _clover_ (De Courteille).

[1329] He seems to have been a brother or uncle of Humāyūn's mother Māhīm (Index; A. N. trs. i, 492 and note).

[1330] In all MSS. the text breaks off abruptly here, as it does on f. 118_b_ as though through loss of pages, and a blank of narrative follows. Before the later gap of f. 251_b_ however the last sentence is complete.

[1331] Index _s. n. Bābur-nāma_, date of composition and gaps.

[1332] _ibid._

[1333] Jumāda I, 14th 968 AH.-Jan. 31st 1561 AD. Concerning the book _see_ Elliot and Dowson's _History of India_ vi, 572 and JRAS 1901 p. 76, H. Beveridge's art. _On Persian MSS. in Indian Libraries_.

[1334] The T. R. gives the names of two only of the champions but Firishta, writing much later gives all five; we surmise that he found his five in the book of which copies are not now known, the _Tārīkh-i Muḥ. `Ārif Qandahārī_. Firishta's five are `Ali _shab-kūr_ (night-blind), `Alī _Sīstānī_, Naẕar Bahādur _Aūzbeg_, Ya`qūb _tez-jang_ (swift in fight), and Aūzbeg Bahādur. Ḥaidar's two names vary in the MSS. of the T. R. but represent the first two of Firishta's list.

[1335] There are curious differences of statement about the date of Shaibānī's death, possibly through confusion between this and the day on which preliminary fighting began near Merv. Ḥaidar's way of expressing the date carries weight by its precision, he giving _roz-i-shakk_ of Ramẓān, _i.e._ a day of which there was doubt whether it was the last of Sha`bān or the first of Ramẓān (Lane, _yauma'u'l-shakk_). As the sources support Friday for the day of the week and on a Friday in the year 915 AH. fell the 29th of Sha`bān, the date of Shaibānī's death seems to be Friday Sha`bān 29th 915 AH. (Friday December 2nd 1510 AD.).

[1336] If my reading be correct of the Turkī passage concerning wines drunk by Bābur which I have noted on f. 49 (_in loco_ p. 83 n. 1), it was during this occupation of Kābul that Bābur first broke the Law against stimulants.

[1337] Mr. R. S. Poole found a coin which he took to be one struck in obedience to Bābur's compact with the Shāh (B.M.Cat. of the coins of Persian Shāhs 1887, pp. xxiv _et seq._; T.R. p. 246 n.).

[1338] It was held by Aḥmad-i-qāsim _Kohbur_ and is referred to on f. 234_b_, as one occasion of those in which Dost Beg distinguished himself.

[1339] Schuyler's _Turkistān_ has a good account and picture of the mosque. `Ubaid's vow is referred to in my earlier mention of the _Sūlūku'l-mulūk_. It may be noted here that this MS. supports the spelling _Bābur_ by making the second syllable rhyme to _pūr_, as against the form _Bābar_.

[1340] _aūrūq._ Bābur refers to this exodus on f. 12_b_ when writing of Daulat-sulṯān Khānīm.

[1341] It is one recorded with some variation, in Niyāz Muḥammad _Khukandī's Tārīkh-i-shāhrukhī_ (Kazan, 1885) and Nalivkine's _Khānate of Khokand_ (p. 63). It says that when Bābur in 918 AH. (1512 AD.) left Samarkand after defeat by the Aūzbegs, one of his wives, Sayyida Āfāq who accompanied him in his flight, gave birth to a son in the desert which lies between Khujand and Kand-i-badām; that Bābur, not daring to tarry and the infant being too young to make the impending journey, left it under some bushes with his own girdle round it in which were things of price; that the child was found by local people and in allusion to the valuables amongst which it lay, called Altūn bīshik (golden cradle); that it received other names and was best known in later life as Kḥudāyān Sulṯān. He is said to have spent most of his life in Akhsī; to have had a son Tīngrī-yār; and to have died in 952 AH. (1545 AD.). His grandson Yār-i-muḥammad is said to have gone to India to relations who was descendants of Bābur (JASB 1905 p. 137 H. Beveridge's art. _The Emperor Bābur_). What is against the truth of this tradition is that Gul-badan mentions no such wife as Sayyida Āfāq. Māhīm however seems to have belonged to a religious family, might therefore be styled Sayyida, and, as Bābur mentions (f. 220), had several children who did not live (a child left as this infant was, might if not heard of, be supposed dead). There is this opening allowed for considering the tradition.

[1342] Bābur refers to this on f. 265.

[1343] The _Lubbu't-tawārīkh_ would fix Ramẓān 7th.

[1344] Mr. Erskine's quotation of the Persian original of the couplet differs from that which I have translated (_History of India_ ii, 326; _Tārīkh-i-badāyūnī_ Bib. Ind. ed. f. 444). Perhaps in the latter a pun is made on Najm as the leader's name and as meaning _fortune_; if so it points the more directly at the Shāh. The second line is quoted by Badāyūnī on his f. 362 also.

[1345] Some translators make Bābur go "naked" into the fort but, on his own authority (f. 106_b_), it seems safer to understand what others say, that he went stripped of attendance, because it was always his habit even in times of peace to lie down in his tunic; much more would he have done so at such a crisis of his affairs as this of his flight to Ḥiṣār.

[1346] Ḥaidar gives a graphic account of the misconduct of the horde and of their punishment (T.R. p. 261-3).

[1347] One of the mutineers named as in this affair (T.R. p. 257) was Sl. Qulī _chūnāq_, a circumstance attracting attention by its bearing on the cause of the _lacunae_ in the _Bābur-nāma_, inasmuch as Bābur, writing at the end of his life, expresses (f. 65) his intention to tell of this man's future misdeeds. These misdeeds may have been also at Ḥiṣār and in the attack there made on Bābur; they are known from Ḥaidar to have been done at Ghaznī; both times fall within this present gap. Hence it is clear that Bābur meant to write of the events falling in the gap of 914 AH. onwards.

[1348] In 925 AH. (ff. 227 and 238) mention is made of courtesies exchanged between Bābur and Muḥammad-i-zamān in Balkh. The Mīrzā was with Bābur later on in Hindūstān.

[1349] Mīr Ma`ṣūm's _Tārīkh-i-sind_ is the chief authority for Bābur's action after 913 AH. against Shāh Beg in Qandahār; its translation, made in 1846 by Major Malet, shews some manifestly wrong dates; they appear also in the B. M. MS. of the work.

[1350] f. 216_b_ and note to "Monday".

[1351] Elph. MS. f. 173_b_; W.-i-B. I.O. 215 f. 178 and 217 f. 149; Mems. p. 246. The whole of the Ḥijra year is included in 1519 AD. (Erskine). What follows here and completes the Kābul section of the _Bābur-nāma_ is a diary of a little over 13 months' length, supplemented by matter of later entry. The product has the character of a draft, awaiting revision to harmonize it in style and, partly, in topic with the composed narrative that breaks off under 914 AH.; for the diary, written some 11 years earlier than that composed narrative, varies, as it would be expected _à priori_ to vary, in style and topic from the terse, lucid and idiomatic output of Bābur's literary maturity. A good many obscure words and phrases in it, several new from Bābur's pen, have opposed difficulty to scribes and translators. Interesting as such _minutiae_ are to a close observer of Turkī and of Bābur's diction, comment on all would be tedious; a few will be found noted, as also will such details as fix the date of entry for supplementary matter.

[1352] Here Mr. Erskine notes that Dr. Leyden's translation begins again; it broke off on f. 180_b_, and finally ends on f. 223_b_.

[1353] This name is often found transliterated as Chandul or [mod.] Jandul but the Ḥai. MS. supports Raverty's opinion that Chandāwal is correct.

The year 925 AH. opens with Bābur far from Kābul and east of the Khahr (fort) he is about to attack. Afghān and other sources allow surmise of his route to that position; he may have come down into the Chandāwal-valley, first, from taking Chaghān-sarāī (f. 124, f. 134 and n.), and, secondly, from taking the Gibrī stronghold of Ḥaidar-i-`alī _Bajaurī_ which stood at the head of the Bābā Qarā-valley. The latter surmise is supported by the romantic tales of Afghān chroniclers which at this date bring into history Bābur's Afghān wife, Bībī Mubāraka (f. 220_b_ and note; Mems. p. 250 n.; and Appendix K, _An Afghān legend_). (It must be observed here that R.'s _Notes_ (pp. 117, 128) confuse the two sieges, _viz._ of the Gibrī fort in 924 AH. and of the Khahr of Bajaur in 925 AH.)

[1354] Raverty lays stress on the circumstance that the fort Bābur now attacks has never been known as Bajaur, but always simply as Khahr, the fort (the Arabic name for the place being, he says, plain _Shahr_); just as the main stream is called simply Rūd (the torrent). The name Khahr is still used, as modern maps shew. There are indeed two neighbouring places known simply as Khahr (Fort), _i.e._ one at the mouth of the "Mahmand-valley" of modern campaigns, the other near the Malakand (Fincastle's map).

[1355] This word the Ḥai. MS. writes, _passim_, Dilah-zāk.

[1356] Either Ḥaidar-i-`alī himself or his nephew, the latter more probably, since no name is mentioned.

[1357] Looking at the position assigned by maps to Khahr, in the _dū-āb_ of the Charmanga-water and the Rūd of Bajaur, it may be that Bābur's left moved along the east bank of the first-named stream and crossed it into the _dū-āb_, while his centre went direct to its post, along the west side of the fort.

[1358] _sū-kīrīshī_; to interpret which needs local knowledge; it might mean where water entered the fort, or where water disembogued from narrows, or, perhaps, where water is entered for a ford. (The verb _kīrmāk_ occurs on f. 154_b_ and f. 227 to describe water coming down in spate.)

[1359] _dīwānawār_, perhaps a jest on a sobriquet earned before this exploit, perhaps the cause of the man's later sobriquet _dīwāna_ (f. 245_b_).

[1360] Text, t:r:k, read by Erskine and de Courteille as Turk; it might however be a Turkī component in Jān-i-`alī or Muḥibb-i-`alī. (Cf. Zenker _s.n. tirik_.)

[1361] _aūshūl gūnī_, which contrasts with the frequent _aūshbū gūnī_ (this same day, today) of manifestly diary entries; it may indicate that the full account of the siege is a later supplement.

[1362] This puzzling word might mean cow-horn (_kau-sarū_) and stand for the common horn trumpet. Erskine and de Courteille have read it as _gau-sar_, the first explaining it as _cow-head_, surmised to be a protection for matchlockmen when loading; the second, as _justaucorps de cuir_. That the word is baffling is shewn by its omission in I.O. 215 (f. 178_b_), in 217 (f. 149_b_) and in Muḥ. _Shīrāzī_'s lith. ed. (p. 137).

[1363] or _farangī._ Much has been written concerning the early use of gun-powder in the East. There is, however, no well-authenticated fact to prove the existence of anything like artillery there, till it was introduced from Europe. Bābur here, and in other places (f. 267) calls his larger ordnance Firingī, a proof that they were then regarded as owing their origin to Europe. The Turks, in consequence of their constant intercourse with the nations of the West, have always excelled all the other Orientals in the use of artillery; and, when heavy cannon were first used in India, Europeans or Turks were engaged to serve them (Erskine). It is owing no doubt to the preceding gap in his writings that we are deprived of Bābur's account of his own introduction to fire-arms. _See_ E. & D.'s _History of India_, vi, Appendix _On the early use of gunpowder in India_.

[1364] var. _quṯbī_, _qūchīnī_.

[1365] This sobriquet might mean "ever a fighter", or an "argle-bargler", or a brass shilling (Zenker), or (if written _jing-jing_) that the man was visaged like the bearded reeding (Scully in Shaw's Vocabulary). The _T̤abaqāt-i-akbarī_ includes a Mīrak Khān _Jang-jang_ in its list of Akbar's Commanders.

[1366] _ghūl-dīn (awwal) aūl qūrghān-gha chīqtī._ I suggest to supply _awwal_, first, on the warrant of Bābur's later statement (f. 234_b_) that Dost was first in.

[1367] He was a son of Maulānā Muḥ. _Ṣadr_, one of the chief men of `Umar-shaikh M.'s Court; he had six brothers, all of whom spent their lives in Bābur's service, to whom, if we may believe Abū'l-faẓl, they were distantly related (Erskine).

[1368] Bābur now returns towards the east, down the Rūd. The _chashma_ by which he encamped, would seem to be near the mouth of the valley of Bābā Qarā, one 30 miles long; it may have been, anglicé, a spring [not that of the main stream of the long valley], but the word may be used as it seems to be of the water supplying the Bāgh-i-ṣafā (f. 224), _i.e._ to denote the first considerable gathering-place of small head-waters. It will be observed a few lines further on that this same valley seems to be meant by "Khwāja Khiẓr".

[1369] He will have joined Bābur previous to Muḥarram 925 AH.

[1370] This statement, the first we have, that Bābur has broken Musalmān Law against stimulants (f. 49 and n.), is followed by many others more explicit, jotting down where and what and sometimes why he drank, in a way which arrests attention and asks some other explanation than that it is an unabashed record of conviviality such conceivably as a non-Musalmān might write. Bābur is now 37 years old; he had obeyed the Law till past early manhood; he wished to return to obedience at 40; he frequently mentions his lapses by a word which can be translated as "commitment of sin" (_irtqāb_); one gathers that he did not at any time disobey with easy conscience. Does it explain his singular record,—one made in what amongst ourselves would be regarded as a private diary,—that his sins were created by Law? Had he a balance of reparation in his thoughts?

Detaching into their separate class as excesses, all his instances of confessed drunkenness, there remains much in his record which, seen from a non-Musalmān point of view, is venial; _e.g._ his _ṣubūhī_ appears to be the "morning" of the Scot, the _Morgen-trank_ of the Teuton; his afternoon cup, in the open air usually, may have been no worse than the sober glass of beer or local wine of modern Continental Europe. Many of these legal sins of his record were interludes in the day's long ride, stirrup-cups some of them, all in a period of strenuous physical activity. Many of his records are collective and are phrased impersonally; they mention that there was drinking, drunkenness even, but they give details sometimes such as only a sober observer could include.

Bābur names a few men as drunkards, a few as entirely obedient; most of his men seem not to have obeyed the Law and may have been "temperate drinkers"; they effected work, Bābur amongst them, which habitual drunkards could not have compassed. Spite of all he writes of his worst excesses, it must be just to remember his Musalmān conscience, and also the distorting power of a fictitious sin. Though he broke the law binding all men against excess, and this on several confessed occasions, his rule may have been no worse than that of the ordinarily temperate Western. It cannot but lighten judgment that his recorded lapses from Law were often prompted by the bounty and splendour of Nature; were committed amidst the falling petals of fruit-blossom, the flaming fire of autumn leaves, where the eye rested on the _arghwān_ or the orange grove, the coloured harvest of corn or vine.

[1371] As Mr. Erskine observes, there seems to be no valley except that of Bābā Qarā, between the Khahr and the Chandāwal-valley; "Khwāja Khiẓr" and "Bābā Qarā" may be one and the same valley.

[1372] Time and ingenuity would be needed to bring over into English all the quips of this verse. The most obvious pun is, of course, that on Bajaur as the compelling cause (_ba jaur_) of the parting; others may be meant on _guzīd_ and _gazīd_, on _sazīd_ and _chāra_. The verse would provide the holiday amusement of extracting from it two justifiable translations.

[1373] His possessions extended from the river of Sawād to Bāramūla; he was expelled from them by the Yūsuf-zāī (Erskine).

[1374] This will be the naze of the n.e. rampart of the Bābā Qarā valley.

[1375] f. 4 and note; f. 276. Bābur seems to use the name for several varieties of deer.

[1376] There is here, perhaps, a jesting allusion to the darkening of complexion amongst the inhabitants of countries from west to east, from Highlands to Indian plains.

[1377] In Dr. E. D. Ross' _Polyglot list of birds_ the _sārigh(sārīq)-qūsh_ is said to frequent fields of ripening grain; this suggests to translate its name as Thief-bird.

[1378] _Aquila chrysaetus_, the hunting eagle.

[1379] This _ārālīgh_ might be identified with the "Miankalai" of maps (since Soghd, lying between two arms of the Zar-afshān is known also as Mīānkal), but Raverty explains the Bajaur Miankalai to mean Village of the holy men (_mīān_).

[1380] After 933 AH. presumably, when final work on the B.N. was in progress.

[1381] Mr. Erskine notes that Pesh-grām lies north of Mahyar (on the Chandāwal-water), and that he has not found Kahrāj (or Kohrāj). Judging from Bābur's next movements, the two valleys he names may be those in succession east of Chandāwal.

[1382] There is hardly any level ground in the cleft of the Panj-kūra (R.'s _Notes_ p. 193); the villages are perched high on the sides of the valley. The pass leading to them may be Katgola (Fincastle's Map).

[1383] This account of Hind-āl's adoption is sufficiently confused to explain why a note, made apparently by Humāyūn, should have been appended to it (Appendix L, _On Hind-āl's adoption_). The confusion reminds the reader that he has before him a sort of memorandum only, diary jottings, apt to be allusive and abbreviated. The expected child was Dil-dār's; Māhīm, using her right as principal wife, asked for it to be given to her. That the babe in question is here called Hind-āl shews that at least part of this account of his adoption was added after the birth and naming (f. 227).

[1384] One would be, no doubt, for Dil-dār's own information. She then had no son but had two daughters, Gul-rang and Gul-chihra. News of Hind-āl's birth reached Bābur in Bhīra, some six weeks later (f. 227).

[1385] f. 218_b_.

[1386] Bībī Mubāraka, the Afghānī Aghācha of Gul-badan. An attractive picture of her is drawn by the _Tāwārikh-i-ḥāfi-i-raḥmat-khānī_. As this gives not only one of Bābur's romantic adventures but historical matter, I append it in my husband's translation [(A.Q.R. April 1901)] as Appendix K, _An Afghān Legend_.

[1387] _Bī-sūt aīlī-nīng Bajaur-qūrghānī-dā manāsabatī-bār jīhatī_; a characteristic phrase.

[1388] Perhaps the end of the early spring-harvest and the spring harvesting-year. It is not the end of the campaigning year, manifestly; and it is at the beginning of both the solar and lunar years.

[1389] Perhaps, more than half-way between the Mid-day and Afternoon Prayers. So too in the annals of Feb. 12th.

[1390] _tīl ālghālī_ (Pers. _zabān-gīrī_), a new phrase in the B.N.

[1391] _chāsht_, which, being half-way between sunrise and the meridian, is a variable hour.

[1392] See n. 2, f. 221.

[1393] Perhaps Maqām is the Mardān of maps.

[1394] Bhīra, on the Jehlam, is now in the Shāhpūr district of the Panj-āb.

[1395] This will be the ford on the direct road from Mardān for the eastward (Elphin-stone's _Caubul_ ii, 416).

[1396] The position of Sawātī is represented by the Suābī of the G. of I. map (1909 AD.). Writing in about 1813 AD. Mr. Erskine notes as worthy of record that the rhinoceros was at that date no longer found west of the Indus.

[1397] Elph. MS. _ghura_, the 1st, but this is corrected to 16th by a marginal note. The Ḥai. MS. here, as in some other places, has the context for a number, but omits the figures. So does also the Elph. MS. in a good many places.

[1398] This is the Harru. Mr. Erskine observes that Bābur appears to have turned sharp south after crossing it, since he ascended a pass so soon after leaving the Indus and reached the Sūhān so soon.

[1399] _i.e._ the Salt-range.

[1400] Mr. Erskine notes that (in his day) a _shāhrukhī_ may be taken at a shilling or eleven pence sterling.

[1401] It is somewhat difficult not to forget that a man who, like Bābur, records so many observations of geographical position, had no guidance from Surveys, Gazetteers and Books of Travel. Most of his records are those of personal observation.

[1402] In this sentence Mr. Erskine read a reference to the Musalmān Ararat, the Koh-i-jūd on the left bank of the Tigris. What I have set down translates the Turkī words but, taking account of Bābur's eye for the double use of a word, and Erskine's careful work, done too in India, the Turkī may imply reference to the Ararat-like summit of Sakeswar.

[1403] Here Dr. Leyden's version finally ends (Erskine).

[1404] Bhīra, as has been noted, is on the Jehlam; Khūsh-āb is 40 m. lower down the same river; Chīnīūt (Chīnī-wat?) is 50 miles south of Bhīra; Chīn-āb (China-water?) seems the name of a tract only and not of a residential centre; it will be in the Bar of Kipling's border-thief. Concerning Chīnīūt _see_ D. G. Barkley's letter, JRAS 1899 p. 132.

[1405] _ṯaur yīrī waqī` būlūb tūr._ As on f. 160 of the valley of Khwesh, I have taken _ṯaur_ to be Turkī, complete, shut in.

[1406] _chashma_ (f. 218_b_ and note).

[1407] The promised description is not found; there follows a mere mention only of the garden [f. 369]. This entry can be taken therefore as shewing an intention to write what is still wanting from Ṣafar 926 AH. to Ṣafar 932 AH.

[1408] Mīr Muḥ. may have been a kinsman or follower of Mahdī Khwāja. The entry on the scene, unannounced by introduction as to parentage, of the Khwāja who played a part later in Bābur's family affairs is due, no doubt, to the last gap of annals. He is mentioned in the Translator's Note, _s.a._ 923 AH. (_See_ Gul-badan's H.N. Biographical Appendix _s.n._)

[1409] or Sihrind, mod. Sirhind or Sar-i-hind (Head of Hind). It may be noted here, for what it may be found worth, that Kh(w)āfī Khān [i, 402] calls Sar-i-hind the old name, says that the place was once held by the Ghaznī dynasty and was its Indian frontier, and that Shāh-jahān changed it to Sahrind. The W.-i-B. I.O. 217 f. 155 writes Shahrind.

[1410] Three krores or crores of dāms, at 40 to the rupee, would make this 750,000 rupees, or about £75,000 sterling (Erskine); a statement from the ancient history of the rupī!

[1411] This Hindustānī word in some districts signifies the head man of a trade, in others a landholder (Erskine).

[1412] In Mr. Erskine's time this sum was reckoned to be nearly £20,000.

[1413] Here originally neither the Elph. MS. nor the Ḥai. MS. had a date; it has been added to the former.

[1414] This rain is too early for the s.w. monsoon; it was probably a severe fall of spring rain, which prevails at this season or rather earlier, and extends over all the west of Asia (Erskine).

[1415] _az ghīna shor sū._ Streams rising in the Salt-range become brackish on reaching its skirts (G. of I.).

[1416] Here this will be the fermented juice of rice or of the date-palm.

[1417] _Rauḥ_ is sometimes the name of a musical note.

[1418] a platform, with or without a chamber above it, and supported on four posts.

[1419] so-written in the MSS. Cf. Raverty's _Notes_ and G. of I.

[1420] Anglicé, cousins on the father's side.

[1421] The G. of I. describes it.

[1422] Elph. MS. f. 183b, _manṣūb_; Ḥai. MS. and 2nd W.-i-B. _bīsūt_. The holder might be Bābā-i-kābulī of f. 225.

[1423] The 1st Pers. trs. (I.O. 215 f. 188b) and Kehr's MS. [Ilminsky p. 293] attribute Hātī's last-recorded acts to Bābur himself. The two mistaken sources err together elsewhere. M. de Courteille corrects the defect (ii, 67).

[1424] night-guard. He is the old servant to whom Bābur sent a giant _ashrafī_ of the spoils of India (Gul-badan's H.N. _s.n._).

[1425] The _kīping_ or _kīpik_ is a kind of mantle covered with wool (Erskine); the root of the word is _kīp_, dry.

[1426] _aūlūgh chāsht_, a term suggesting that Bābur knew the _chota ḥāẓirī_, little breakfast, of Anglo-India. It may be inferred, from several passages, that the big breakfast was taken after 9 a.m. and before 12 p.m. Just below men are said to put on their mail at _chāsht_ in the same way as, _passim_, things other than prayer are said to be done at this or that Prayer; this, I think, always implies that they are done after the Prayer mentioned; a thing done shortly before a Prayer is done "close to" or "near" or when done over half-way to the following Prayer, the act is said to be done "nearer" to the second (as was noted on f. 221).

[1427] _Juldū Dost Beg-nīng ātī-gha būldī._

[1428] The disarray of these names in the MSS. reveals confusion in their source. Similar verbal disarray occurs in the latter part of f. 229.

[1429] Manifestly a pun is made on the guide's name and on the _cap-à-pié_ robe of honour the offenders did not receive.

[1430] _aūrdū-nīng aldī-gha_, a novel phrase.

[1431] I understand that the servants had come to do their equivalent for "kissing hands" on an appointment _viz._ to kneel.

[1432] spikenard. Speede's _Indian Handbook on Gardening_ identifies _saṃbhal_ with _Valeriana jatmansi_ (Sir W. Jones & Roxburgh); "it is the real spikenard of the ancients, highly esteemed alike as a perfume and as a stimulant medicine; native practitioners esteeming it valuable in hysteria and epilepsy." Bābur's word _dirakht_ is somewhat large for the plant.

[1433] It is not given, however.

[1434] _i.e._ through the Indus.

[1435] Perhaps this _aīkī-sū-ārāsī_ (_miyān-dū-āb_) was the angle made by the Indus itself below Atak; perhaps one made by the Indus and an affluent.

[1436] _ma'jūnī nāklīkī_, presumably under the tranquillity induced by the drug.

[1437] _massadus_, the six sides of the world, _i.e._ all sides.

[1438] This is the name of one of the five champions defeated by Bābur in single combat in 914 AH. (Translator's Note _s.a._ 914 AH.).

[1439] f. 145_b_.

[1440] Humāyūn was 12, Kāmrān younger; one surmises that Bābur would have walked under the same circumstances.

[1441] _ṣabuḥī_, the morning-draught. In 1623 AD. Pietro della Vallé took a _ṣabuḥī_ with Mr. Thomas Rastel, the head of the merchants of Surat, which was of hot spiced wine and sipped in the mornings to comfort the stomach (Hakluyt ed. p. 20).

[1442] f. 128 and note.

[1443] Anglicé, in the night preceding Tuesday.

[1444] f. 106b.

[1445] This would be the under-corselet to which the four plates of mail were attached when mail was worn. Bābur in this adventure wore no mail, not even his helm; on his head was the under cap of the metal helm.

[1446] Index s.n. _gharīcha_.

[1447] The earlier account helps to make this one clearer (f. 106b).

[1448] f. 112 _et seq._

[1449] Catamite, mistakenly read as _khīz_ on f. 112b (_Mémoires_ ii, 82).

[1450] He was acting for Bābur (Translator's Note _s.a._; Ḥ.S. iii, 318; T.R. pp. 260, 270).

[1451] "Honoured," in this sentence, represents Bābur's honorific plural.

[1452] in 921 AH. (Translator's Note _s.a._; T.R. p. 356).

[1453] _i.e._ Mīr Muḥammad son of Nāṣir.

[1454] _i.e._ after the dethronement of the Bāī-qarā family by Shaibānī.

[1455] He had been one of rebels of 921 AH. (Translator's Note _s.a._; T.R. p. 356).

[1456] f. 137.

[1457] This is the Adjutant-bird, Pīr-i-dang and Hargila (Bone-swallower) of Hindūstān, a migrant through Kābul. The fowlers who brought it would be the Multänīs of f. 142_b_.

[1458] f. 280.

[1459] _Memoirs_, p. 267, sycamore; _Mémoires_ ii, 84, _saules_; f. 137.

[1460] Perhaps with his long coat out-spread.

[1461] The fortnight's gap of record, here ended, will be due to illness.

[1462] f. 203_b_ and n. to _Khams_, the Fifth. _Taṣadduq_ occurs also on f. 238 denoting money sent to Bābur. Was it sent to him as Pādshāh, as the Qorān commands the _Khams_ to be sent to the Imām, for the poor, the traveller and the orphan?

[1463] Rose-water, sherbet, a purgative; English, jalap, julep.

[1464] Mr. Erskine understood Bābur to say that he never had sat sober while others drank; but this does not agree with the account of Harāt entertainments [912 AH.], or with the tenses of the passage here. My impression is that he said in effect "Every-one here shall not be deprived of their wine".

[1465] This verse, a difficult one to translate, may refer to the unease removed from his attendants by Bābur's permission to drink; the pun in it might also refer to _well_ and _not well_.

[1466] Presumably to aid his recovery.

[1467] _aūtkān yīl_, perhaps in the last and unchronicled year; perhaps in earlier ones. There are several references in the B.N. to the enforced migrations and emigrations of tribes into Kābul.

[1468] Pūlād (Steel) was a son of Kūchūm, the then Khāqān of the Aūzbegs, and Mihr-bānū who may be Bābur's half-sister. [Index _s.n._]

[1469] This may be written for Mihr-bānū, Pūlād's mother and Bābur's half-sister (?) and a jest made on her heart as Pūlād's and as steel to her brother. She had not left husband and son when Bābur got the upper hand, as his half-sister Yādgār-sulṯān did and other wives of capture _e.g._ Ḥaidar's sister _Ḥabība_. Bābur's rhymes in this verse are not of his later standard, _āī ṣubāḥ, kūnkūīkā, kūnkūlī-kā_.

[1470] _Taṣadduq_ sent to Bābur would seem an acknowledgment of his suzerainty in Balkh [Index _s.n._].

[1471] This is the Gīrdīz-pass [Raverty's _Notes_, Route 101].

[1472] Raverty (p. 677) suggests that Pātakh stands for _bātqāq_, a quagmire (f. 16 and n.).

[1473] the dark, or cloudy spring.

[1474] _yāqīsh-līq qūl_, an unusual phrase.

[1475] var. Karmān, Kurmāh, Karmās. M. de C. read Kīr-mās, the impenetrable. The forms would give Garm-ās, hot embers.

[1476] _balafré_; marked on the face; of a horse, starred.

[1477] Raverty's _Notes_ (p. 457) give a full account of this valley; in it are the head-waters of the Tochī and the Zurmut stream; and in it R. locates Rustam's ancient Zābul.

[1478] It is on the Kābul side of the Gīrdīz-pass and stands on the Luhugūr-water (Logar).

[1479] f. 143.

[1480] At this point of the text there occurs in the Elph. MS. (f. 195_b_) a note, manifestly copied from one marginal in an archetype, which states that what follows is copied from Bābur's own MS. The note (and others) can be seen in JRAS 1905 p. 754 _et seq._

[1481] Masson, iii, 145.

[1482] A _qūlāch_ is from finger-tip to finger-tip of the outstretched arms (Zenker p. 720 and _Méms._ ii, 98).

[1483] Neither _interne_ is said to have died!

[1484] f. 143.

[1485] or Atūn's-village, one granted to Bābur's mother's old governess (f. 96); Gul-badan's guest-list has also an Atūn Māmā.

[1486] f. 235_b_ and note.

[1487] _miswāk_; _On les tire principalement de l'arbuste épineux appelé capparis-sodata_ (de C. ii, 101 n.).

[1488] Gul-badan's H.N. Index s.n.

[1489] This being Ramẓān, Bābur did not break his fast till sun-set. In like manner, during Ramẓān they eat in the morning before sun-rise (Erskine).

[1490] A result, doubtless, of the order mentioned on f. 240_b_.

[1491] Bābur's wife Gul-rukh appears to have been his sister or niece; he was a Begchīk. Cf. Gul-badan's H.N. trs. p. 233, p. 234; T.R. p. 264-5.

[1492] This remark bears on the question of whether we now have all Bābur wrote of Autobiography. It refers to a date falling within the previous gap, because the man went to Kāshghar while Bābur was ruling in Samarkand (T.R. p. 265). The last time Bābur came from Khwāst to Kābul was probably in 920 AH.; if later, it was still in the gap. But an alternative explanation is that looking over and annotating the diary section, Bābur made this reference to what he fully meant to write but died before being able to do so.

[1493] Anglicé, the right thumb, on which the archer's ring (_zih-gīr_) is worn.

[1494] a daughter of Yūnas Khān, Ḥaidar's account of whom is worth seeing.

[1495] _i.e._ the water of Luhugūr (Logar). Tradition says that Būt-khāk (Idol-dust) was so named because there Sl. Maḥmūd of Ghaznī had idols, brought by him out of Hindūstān, pounded to dust. Raverty says the place is probably the site of an ancient temple (_vahāra_).

[1496] Qāsim Beg's son, come, no doubt, in obedience to the order of f. 240_b_.

[1497] The `Īd-i-fitr is the festival at the conclusion of the feast of Ramẓān, celebrated on seeing the new moon of Shawwāl (Erskine).

[1498] f. 133_b_ and Appendix G, _On the names of the wines of Nūr-valley_.

[1499] _i.e._ of the new moon of Shawwāl. The new moon having been seen the evening before, which to Musalmāns was Monday evening, they had celebrated the `Īd-i-fitr on Monday eve (Erskine).

[1500] Dīwān of Hāfiẕ lith. ed. p. 22. The couplet seems to be another message to a woman (f. 238); here it might be to Bībī Mubāraka, still under Khwāja Kalān's charge in Bajaur (f. 221).

[1501] Here and under date Sep. 30th the wording allows a ford.

[1502] This may be what Masson writes of (i, 149) "We reached a spot where the water supplying the rivulet (of `Alī-masjid) gushes in a large volume from the rocks to the left. I slaked my thirst in the living spring and drank to repletion of the delightfully cool and transparent water."

[1503] Mr. Erskine here notes, "This appears to be a mistake or oversight of Bābur. The eve of `Arafa" (9th of Ẕū'l-ḥijja) "was not till the evening of Dec. 2nd 1519. He probably meant to say the `Id-i-fitr which had occurred only five days before, on Sep. 26th."

[1504] This was an affair of frontiers (T.R. p. 354).

[1505] Manucci gives an account of the place (Irvine iv, 439 and ii, 447).

[1506] Sep. 8th to Oct. 9th.

[1507] _khūsh rang-i khizān._ Sometimes Bābur's praise of autumn allows the word _khizān_ to mean the harvest-crops themselves, sometimes the autumnal colouring.

[1508] This I have taken to mean the Kābul _tūmān_. The Ḥai. MS. writes _wilāyatlār_ (plural) thus suggesting that _aūl_ (those) may be omitted, and those countries (Transoxiana) be meant; but the second Pers. trs. (I.O. 217 f. 169) supports _wilāyat_, Kābul.

[1509] joyous, happy.

[1510] _y:lk:rān._ This word has proved a difficulty to all translators. I suggest that it stands for _aīlīkarān_, what came to hand (_aīlīk see_ de C.'s Dict.); also that it contains puns referring to the sheep taken from the road (_yūlkarān_) and to the wine of the year's yield (_yīlkarān_). The way-side meal was of what came to hand, mutton and wine, probably local.

[1511] f. 141_b_.

[1512] f. 217 and n.

[1513] I think Bābur means that the customary announcement of an envoy or guest must have reached Kābul in his absence.

[1514] He is in the T.R. list of the tribe (p. 307); to it belonged Sl. Aḥmad _Taṃbal_ (_ib._ p. 316).

[1515] _Qābil-nīng kūrī-nīng qāshī-ka_, lit. to the presence of the tomb of Qābil, _i.e._ Cain the eponymous hero of Kābul. The Elph. MS. has been altered to "Qābil Beg"!

[1516] Mr. Erskine surmised that the line was from some religious poem of mystical meaning and that its profane application gave offence.

[1517] His sobriquet _khāksār_, one who sits in the dust, suits the excavator of a _kārez_. Bābur's route can be followed in Masson's (iii, 110), apparently to the very _kārez_.

[1518] In Masson's time this place was celebrated for vinegar. To reach it and return must have occupied several hours.

[1519] Kunos, _āq tūīgūn_, white falcon; _`Amal-i-ṣāliḥ_ (I.O. MS. No. 857, f. 45_b_), _taus tūīghūn_.

[1520] f. 246.

[1521] Nawā'ī himself arranged them according to the periods of his life (Rieu's Pers. Cat. p. 294).

[1522] Elph. MS. f. 202_b_; W.-i-B. I.O. 215 f. 175 (misplaced) and 217 f. 172; Mems. p. 281.

[1523] _pushta aūstīda_; the Jūī-khwūsh of f. 137.

[1524] The Ḥai. MS. omits a passage here; the Elph. MS. reads _Qāsim Bulbulī nīng awī_, thus making "nightingale" a sobriquet of Qāsim's own. Erskine (p. 281) has "Bulbulī-hall"; Ilminsky's words translate as, the house of Sayyid Qāsim's nightingale (p. 321).

[1525] or Dūr-namā'ī, seen from afar.

[1526] _narm-dīk_, the opposite of a _qātīq yāī_, a stiff bow. Some MSS. write _lāzim-dīk_ which might be read to mean such a bow as his disablement allowed to be used.

[1527] Mr. Erskine, writing early in the 19th century, notes that this seems an easy tribute, about 400 _rupīs_ _i.e._ £40.

[1528] This is one of the three routes into Lamghān of f. 133.

[1529] f. 251_b_ and Appendix F, _On the name Dara-i-nūr_.

[1530] This passage will be the basis of the account on f. 143_b_ of the winter-supply of fish in Lamghān.

[1531] This word or name is puzzling. Avoiding extreme detail as to variants, I suggest that it is Dāūr-bīn for Dūr-namā'ī if a place-name; or, if not, _dūr-bīn_, foresight (in either case the preposition requires to be supplied), and it may refer to foreseen need of and curiosity about Kāfir wines.

[1532] _chīūrtika_ or _chīūr-i-tika_, whether _sauterelle_ as M. de Courteille understood, or _jānwār-i-ranga_ and _chīkūr_, partridge as the 1st Persian trs. and as Mr. Erskine (explaining _chūr-i-tīka_) thought, must be left open. Two points arise however, (1) the time is January, the place the deadly Bād-i-pīch pass; would these suit locusts? (2) If Bābur's account of a splendid bird (f. 135) were based on this experience, this would be one of several occurrences in which what is entered in the Description of Kābul of 910 AH. is found as an experience in the diary of 925-6 AH.

[1533] Ḥai. MS. _maḥali-da maẕkūr būlghūsīdūr_, but W.-i-B. I.O. 215 f. 176 for _maḥali-da_, in its place, has _dar majlis_ [in the collection], which may point to an intended collection of Bābur's musical compositions. Either reading indicates intention to write what we now have not.

[1534] Perhaps an equivalent for _farẓ-waqt_, the time of the first obligatory prayer. Much seems to happen before the sun got up high!

[1535] Koh-i-nūr, Rocky-mountains (?). _See_ Appendix F, _On the name Dara-i-nūr_.

[1536] Steingass gives _būza_ as made of rice, millet, or barley.

[1537] Is this connected with Arabic _kīmiyā'_, alchemy, chemistry?

[1538] Turkī, a whirlpool; but perhaps the name of an office from _aīgar_, a saddle.

[1539] The river on which the rafts were used was the Kūnār, from Chītrāl.

[1540] An uncertain name. I have an impression that these waters are medicinal, but I cannot trace where I found the information. The visit paid to them, and the arrangement made for bathing set them apart. The name of the place may convey this speciality.

[1541] _panāhī_, the word used for the hiding-places of bird-catchers on f. 140.

[1542] This will be the basis of the details about fishing given on f. 143 and f. 143_b_. The statement that particulars have been given allows the inference that the diary was annotated after the _Description of Kābul_, in which the particulars are, was written.

[1543] _qānlīqlār._ This right of private revenge which forms part of the law of most rude nations, exists in a mitigated form under the Muhammadan law. The criminal is condemned by the judge, but is delivered up to the relations of the person murdered, to be ransomed or put to death as they think fit (Erskine).

[1544] Here the text breaks off and a _lacuna_ separates the diary of 11 months length which ends the Kābul section of the _Bābur-nāma_ writings, from the annals of 932 AH. which begin the Hindūstān section. There seems no reason why the diary should have been discontinued.

[1545] Jan. 2nd 1520 to Nov. 17th 1525 AD. (Ṣafar 926 to Ṣafar 1st 932 AH.).

[1546] Index _s.nn._ Bāgh-i-ṣafā and B.N. _lacunae_.

[1547] Nominally Balkh seems to have been a Ṣafawī possession; but it is made to seem closely dependent on Bābur by his receipt from Muḥammad-i-zamān in it of _taṣadduq_ (money for alms), and by his action connected with it (_q.v._).

[1548] _Tārīkh-i-sind_, Malet's trs. p. 77 and _in loco_, p. 365.

[1549] A chronogram given by Badāyūnī decides the vexed question of the date of Sikandar _Lūdī's_ death—_Jannātu'l-firdūs nazlā_ = 923 (Bib. Ind. ed. i, 322, Ranking trs. p. 425 n. 6). Erskine supported 924 AH. (i, 407), partly relying on an entry in Bābur's diary (f. 226_b_) _s.d._ Rabī`u'l-awwal 1st 925 AH. (March 3rd 1519 AD.) which states that on that day Mullā Murshid was sent to Ibrāhīm whose father _Sikandar had died five or six months before_.

Against this is the circumstance that the entry about Mullā Murshid is, perhaps entirely, certainly partly, of later entry than what precedes and what follows it in the diary. This can be seen on examination; it is a passage such as the diary section shews in other places, added to the daily record and giving this the character of a draft waiting for revision and rewriting (fol. 216_b_ n.).

(To save difficulty to those who may refer to the L. & E. _Memoirs_ on the point, I mention that the whole passage about Mullā Murshid is displaced in that book and that the date March 3rd is omitted.)

[1550] Shāl (the local name of English Quetta) was taken by Ẕū'l-nūn in 884 AH. (1479 AD.); Sīwīstān Shāh Beg took, in second capture, about 917 AH. (1511 AD.), from a colony of Barlās Turks under Pīr Walī _Barlās_.

[1551] Was the attack made in reprisal for Shāh Beg's further aggression on the Barlās lands and Bābur's hereditary subjects? Had these appealed to the head of their tribe?

[1552] Le Messurier writes (_l.c._ p. 224) that at Old Qandahār "many stone balls lay about, some with a diameter of 18 inches, others of 4 or 5, chiselled out of limestone. These were said to have been used in sieges in the times of the Arabs and propelled from a machine called _manjanic_ a sort of balista or catapult." Meantime perhaps they served Bābur!

[1553] "Just then came a letter from Badakhshān saying, 'Mīrzā Khān is dead; Mīrzā Sulaimān (his son) is young; the Aūzbegs are near; take thought for this kingdom lest (which God forbid) Badakhshān should be lost.' Mīrzā Sulaimān's mother (Sulṯān-nigār Khānīm) had brought him to Kābul" (Gul-badan's H. N. f. 8).

[1554] _infra_ and Appendix J.

[1555] E. & D.'s _History of India_, i. 312.

[1556] For accounts of the _Mubīn_, _Akbar-nāma_ Bib. Ind. ed. i. 118, trs. H. Beveridge i. 278 note, Badāyūnī _ib._ i, 343, trs. Ranking p. 450, Sprenger ZDMG. 1862, Teufel _ib._ 1883. The _Akbar-nāma_ account appears in Turkī in the "Fragments" associated with Kehr's transcript of the B.N. (JRAS. 1908, p. 76, A. S. B.'s art. _Bābur-nāma_). Bābur mentions the _Mubīn_ (f. 252_b_, f. 351_b_).

[1557] JRAS. 1901, _Persian MSS. in Indian Libraries_ (description of the Rāmpūr _Dīwān_); AQR. 1911, _Bābur's Dīwān_ (_i.e._ the Rāmpūr _Dīwān_); and _Some verses of the Emperor Bābur_ (the _Abūshqa_ quotations).

For Dr. E. D. Ross' Reproduction and account of the Rāmpūr _Dīwān_, JASB. 1910.

[1558] "After him (Ibrāhīm) was Bābur King of Dihlī, who owed his place to the Pathāns," writes the Afghān poet Khūsh-ḥāl _Khattak_ (Afghān Poets of the XVII century, C. E. Biddulph, p. 58).

[1559] The translation only has been available (E. & D.'s H. of I., vol. 1).

[1560] The marriage is said to have been Kāmrān's (E. & D.'s trs.).

[1561] Erskine calculated that `Ālam Khān was now well over 70 years of age (H. of I. i, 421 n.).

[1562] A. N. trs. H. Beveridge, i, 239.

[1563] The following old English reference to Isma`il's appearance may be quoted as found in a corner somewhat out-of-the-way from Oriental matters. In his essay on beauty Lord Bacon writes when arguing against the theory that beauty is usually not associated with highmindedness, "But this holds not always; for Augustus Cæsar, Titus Vespasianus, Philip le Bel of France, Edward the Fourth of England, Alcibiades of Athens, Isma`il the Sophy (Ṣafawī) of Persia, were all high and great spirits, and yet the most beautiful men of their times."

[1564] Cf. _s.a._ 928 AH. for discussion of the year of death.

[1565] Elph. MS. f. 205_b_; W.-i-B. I.O. 215 f. 199_b_ omits the year's events on the ground that Shaikh Zain has translated them; I.O. 217 f. 174; Mems. p. 290; Kehr's Codex p. 1084.

A considerable amount of reliable textual material for revising the Hindūstān section of the English translation of the _Bābur-nāma_ is wanting through loss of pages from the Elphinstone Codex; in one instance no less than an equivalent of 36 folios of the Ḥaidarābād Codex are missing (f. 356 _et seq._), but to set against this loss there is the valuable _per contra_ that Kehr's manuscript throughout the section becomes of substantial value, losing its Persified character and approximating closely to the true text of the Elphinstone and Ḥaidarābād Codices. Collateral help in revision is given by the works specified (_in loco_ p. 428) as serving to fill the gap existing in Bābur's narrative previous to 932 AH. and this notably by those described by Elliot and Dowson. Of these last, special help in supplementary details is given for 932 AH. and part of 933 AH. by Shaikh Zain [_Khawāfi_]'s _T̤abaqāt-i-bāburī_, which is a highly rhetorical paraphrase of Bābur's narrative, requiring familiarity with ornate Persian to understand. For all my references to it, I am indebted to my husband. It may be mentioned as an interesting circumstance that the B.M. possesses in Or. 1999 a copy of this work which was transcribed in 998 AH. by one of Khwānd-amīr's grandsons and, judging from its date, presumably for Abū'l-faẓl's use in the _Akbar-nāma_.

Like part of the Kābul section, the Hindūstān one is in diary-form, but it is still more heavily surcharged with matter entered at a date later than the diary. It departs from the style of the preceding diary by an occasional lapse into courtly phrase and by exchange of some Turkī words for Arabic and Persian ones, doubtless found current in Hind, _e.g._ _fauj_, _dīra_, _manzil_, _khail-khāna_.

[1566] This is the Logar affluent of the Bārān-water (Kābul-river). Masson describes this haltingplace (iii, 174).

[1567] _muḥaqqar saughāt u bīlāk or tīlāk._ A small verbal point arises about _bīlāk_ (or _tīlāk_). _Bīlāk_ is said by Quatremère to mean a gift (N. et E. xiv, 119 n.) but here _muḥaqqar saughāt_ expresses gift. Another meaning can be assigned to _bīlāk_ here, [one had also by _tīlāk_,] _viz._ that of word-of-mouth news or communication, sometimes supplementing written communication, possibly secret instructions, possibly small domestic details. In _bīlāk_, a gift, the root may be _bīl_, the act of knowing, in _tīlāk_ it is _tīl_, the act of speaking [whence _tīl_, the tongue, and _tīl tūtmāk_, to get news]. In the sentence noted, either word would suit for a verbal communication. Returning to _bīlāk_ as a gift, it may express the _nuance_ of English _token_, the maker-known of friendship, affection and so-on. This differentiates _bīlāk_ from _saughāt_, used in its frequent sense of ceremonial and diplomatic presents of value and importance.

[1568] With Sa`īd at this time were two Khānīms Sulṯān-nigār and Daulat-sulṯān who were Bābur's maternal-aunts. Erskine suggested Khūb-nigār, but she had died in 907 AH. (f. 96).

[1569] Humāyūn's non-arrival would be the main cause of delay. Apparently he should have joined before the Kābul force left that town.

[1570] The halt would be at Būt-khāk, the last station before the Adīnapūr road takes to the hills.

[1571] Discussing the value of coins mentioned by Bābur, Erskine says in his _History of India_ (vol. i, Appendix E.) which was published in 1854 AD. that he had come to think his estimates of the value of the coins was set too low in the _Memoirs_ (published in 1826 AD.). This sum of 20,000 _shāhrukhīs_ he put at £1000. Cf. E. Thomas' _Pathan Kings of Dihli and Resources of the Mughal Empire_.

[1572] One of Masson's interesting details seems to fit the next stage of Bābur's march (iii, 179). It is that after leaving Būt-khāk, the road passes what in the thirties of the 19th Century, was locally known as Bābur Pādshāh's Stone-heap (cairn) and believed piled in obedience to Bābur's order that each man in his army should drop a stone on it in passing. No time for raising such a monument could be fitter than that of the fifth expedition into Hindūstān when a climax of opportunity allowed hope of success.

[1573] _rezāndalīk._ This Erskine translates, both here and on ff. 253, 254, by _defluxion_, but de Courteille by _rhume de cerveau_. Shaikh Zain supports de Courteille by writing, not _rezāndalīk_, but _nuzla_, catarrh. De Courteille, in illustration of his reading of the word, quotes Burnes' account of an affection common in the Panj-āb and there called _nuzla_, which is a running at the nostrils, that wastes the brain and stamina of the body and ends fatally (_Travels in Bukhara_ ed. 1839, ii, 41).

[1574] Tramontana, north of Hindū-kush.

[1575] Shaikh Zain says that the drinking days were Saturday, Sunday, Tuesday and Wednesday.

[1576] The Elph. Codex (f. 208_b_) contains the following note of Humāyūn's about his delay; it has been expunged from the text but is still fairly legible:—"The time fixed was after `Āshūrā (10th Muḥarram, a voluntary fast); although we arrived after the next-following 10th (_`āshūr_, _i.e._ of Ṣafar), the delay had been necessary. The purpose of the letters (Bābur's) was to get information; (in reply) it was represented that the equipment of the army of Badakhshān caused delay. If this slave (Humāyūn), trusting to his [father's] kindness, caused further delay, he has been sorry."

Bābur's march from the Bāgh-i-wafā was delayed about a month; Humāyūn started late from Badakhshān; his force may have needed some stay in Kābul for completion of equipment; his personal share of blame for which he counted on his father's forgiveness, is likely to have been connected with his mother's presence in Kābul.

Humāyūn's note is quoted in Turkī by one MS. of the Persian text (B.M. W.-i-B. 16,623 f. 128); and from certain indications in Muḥammad _Shīrāzī_'s lithograph (p. 163), appears to be in his archetype the Udaipūr Codex; but it is not with all MSS. of the Persian text _e.g._ not with I.O. 217 and 218. A portion of it is in Kehr's MS. (p. 1086).

[1577] Bird's-dome [f. 145_b_, n.] or The pair (_qūsh_) of domes.

[1578] _gūn khūd kīch būlūb aīdī_; a little joke perhaps at the lateness both of the day and the army.

[1579] Shaikh Zain's maternal-uncle.

[1580] Shaikh Zain's useful detail that this man's pen-name was Sharaf distinguishes him from Muḥammad Ṣāliḥ the author of the _Shaibānī-nāma_.

[1581] _gosha_, angle (_cf._ _gosha-i-kār_, limits of work). Parodies were to be made, having the same metre, rhyme, and refrain as the model couplet.

[1582] I am unable to attach sense to Bābur's second line; what is wanted is an illustration of two incompatible things. Bābur's reflections [_infra_] condemned his verse. Shaikh Zain describes the whole episode of the verse-making on the raft, and goes on with, "He (Bābur) excised this choice couplet from the pages of his Acts (_Wāqi`āt_) with the knife of censure, and scratched it out from the tablets of his noble heart with the finger-nails of repentance. I shall now give an account of this spiritual matter" (_i.e._ the repentance), "by presenting the recantations of his Solomon-like Majesty in his very own words, which are weightier than any from the lips of Aesop." Shaikh Zain next quotes the Turkī passage here translated in _b. Mention of the Mubīn_.

[1583] The _Mubīn_ (_q.v._ Index) is mentioned again and quoted on f. 351_b_. In both places its name escaped the notice of Erskine and de Courteille, who here took it for _mīn_, I, and on f. 351_b_ omitted it, matters of which the obvious cause is that both translators were less familiar with the poem than it is now easy to be. There is amplest textual warrant for reading _Mubīn_ in both the places indicated above; its reinstatement gives to the English and French translations what they have needed, namely, the clinch of a definite stimulus and date of repentance, which was the influence of the Mubīn in 928 AH. (1521-2 AD.). The whole passage about the peccant verse and its fruit of contrition should be read with others that express the same regret for broken law and may all have been added to the diary at the same time, probably in 935 AH. (1529 AD.). They will be found grouped in the Index _s.n._ Bābur.

[1584] _mūndīn būrūn_, by which I understand, as the grammatical construction will warrant, _before writing the Mubīn_. To read the words as referring to the peccant verse, is to take the clinch off the whole passage.

[1585] _i.e._ of the _Qorān_ on which the _Mubīn_ is based.

[1586] Dropping down-stream, with wine and good company, he entirely forgot his good resolutions.

[1587] This appears to refer to the good thoughts embodied in the _Mubīn_.

[1588] This appears to contrast with the "sublime realities" of the _Qorān_.

[1589] In view of the interest of the passage, and because this verse is not in the Rāmpūr _Dīwān_, as are many contained in the Hindūstān section, the Turkī original is quoted. My translation differs from those of Mr. Erskine and M. de Courteille; all three are tentative of a somewhat difficult verse.

_Nī qīlā mīn sīnīng bīla āī tīl? Jihatīng dīn mīnīng aīchīm qān dūr. Nīcha yakhshī dīsāng bū hazl aīla shi`r Bīrī-sī faḥash ū bīrī yālghān dūr. Gar dīsāng kūīmā mīn, bū jazm bīla Jalāu'īngnī bū `arṣa dīn yān dūr._

[1590] The Qorān puts these sayings into the mouths of Adam and Eve.

[1591] Ḥai. MS. _tīndūrūb_; Ilminsky, p. 327, _yāndūrūb_; W.-i-B. I.O. 217, f. 175, _sard sākhta_.

[1592] Of `Alī-masjid the _Second Afghān War_ (official account) has a picture which might be taken from Bābur's camp.

[1593] Shaikh Zain's list of the drinking-days (f. 252 note) explains why sometimes Bābur says he preferred _ma`jūn_. In the instances I have noticed, he does this on a drinking-day; the preference will be therefore for a confection over wine. December 9th was a Saturday and drinking-day; on it he mentions the preference; Tuesday Nov. 21st was a drinking day, and he states that he ate _ma`jūn_.

[1594] presumably the _karg-khāna_ of f. 222_b_, rhinoceros-home in both places. A similar name applies to a tract in the Rawalpindi District,—Bābur-khāna, Tiger-home, which is linked to the tradition of Buddha's self-sacrifice to appease the hunger of seven tiger-cubs. [In this Bābur-khāna is the town Kacha-kot from which Bābur always names the river Hārū.]

[1595] This is the first time on an outward march that Bābur has crossed the Indus by boat; hitherto he has used the ford above Attock, once however specifying that men on foot were put over on rafts.

[1596] f. 253.

[1597] In my Translator's Note (p. 428), attention was drawn to the circumstance that Bābur always writes Daulat Khān _Yūsuf-khail_, and not Daulat Khān _Lūdī_. In doing this, he uses the family- or clan-name instead of the tribal one, _Lūdī_.

[1598] _i.e._ day by day.

[1599] _daryā_, which Bābur's precise use of words _e.g._ of _daryā_, _rūd_, and _sū_, allows to apply here to the Indus only.

[1600] Presumably this was near Parhāla, which stands, where the Sūhān river quits the hills, at the eastern entrance of a wild and rocky gorge a mile in length. It will have been up this gorge that Bābur approached Parhāla in 925 AH. (Rawalpindi Gazetteer p. 11).

[1601] _i.e._ here, bed of a mountain-stream.

[1602] The Elphinstone Codex here preserves the following note, the authorship of which is attested by the scribe's remark that it is copied from the handwriting of Humāyūn Pādshāh:—As my honoured father writes, we did not know until we occupied Hindūstān (932 AH.), but afterwards did know, that ice does form here and there if there come a colder year. This was markedly so in the year I conquered Gujrāt (942 AH.-1535 AD.) when it was so cold for two or three days between Bhūlpūr and Guālīār that the waters were frozen over a hand's thickness.

[1603] This is a Kakar (Gakkhar) clan, known also as Baragowah, of which the location in Jahāngīr Pādshāh's time was from Rohtās to Hātya, _i.e._ about where Bābur encamped (_Memoirs of Jahāngīr_, Rogers and Beveridge, p. 97; E. and D. vi, 309; Provincial Gazetteers of Rawalpindi and Jihlam, p. 64 and p. 97 respectively).

[1604] _āndīn aūtūb_, a reference perhaps to going out beyond the corn-lands, perhaps to attempt for more than provisions.

[1605] _qūsh-āt_, a led horse to ride in change.

[1606] According to Shaikh Zain it was in this year that Bābur made Buhlūlpūr a royal domain (B.M. Add. 26,202 f. 16), but this does not agree with Bābur's explanation that he visited the place because it was _khalṣa_. Its name suggests that it had belonged to Buhlūl _Lūdī_; Bābur may have taken it in 930 AH. when he captured Sīālkot. It never received the population of Sīālkot, as Bābur had planned it should do because pond-water was drunk in the latter town and was a source of disease. The words in which Bābur describes its situation are those he uses of Akhsī (f. 4_b_); not improbably a resemblance inclined his liking towards Buhlūlpūr. (It may be noted that this Buhlūlpūr is mentioned in the _Āyīn-i-akbarī_ and marked on large maps, but is not found in the G. of I. 1907.)

[1607] Both names are thus spelled in the _Bābur-nāma_. In view of the inclination of Turkī to long vowels, Bābur's short one in Jat may be worth consideration since modern usage of Jat and Jāt varies. Mr. Crooke writes the full vowel, and mentions that Jāts are Hindūs, Sikhs, and Muḥammadans (_Tribes and Castes of the North-western Provinces and Oude_, iii, 38). On this point and on the orthography of the name, Erskine's note (_Memoirs_ p. 294) is as follows: "The Jets or Jats are the Muḥammadan peasantry of the Panj-āb, the bank of the Indus, Sīwīstān _etc._ and must not be confounded with the Jāts, a powerful Hindū tribe to the west of the Jamna, about Agra _etc._ and which occupies a subordinate position in the country of the Rājpūts."

[1608] The following section contains a later addition to the diary summarizing the action of `Ālam Khān before and after Bābur heard of the defeat from the trader he mentions. It refutes an opinion found here and there in European writings that Bābur used and threw over `Ālam Khān. It and Bābur's further narrative shew that `Ālam Khān had little valid backing in Hindūstān, that he contributed nothing to Bābur's success, and that no abstention by Bābur from attack on Ibrāhīm would have set `Ālam Khān on the throne of Dihlī. It and other records, Bābur's and those of Afghān chroniclers, allow it to be said that if `Ālam Khān had been strong enough to accomplish his share of the compact that he should take and should rule Dihlī, Bābur would have kept to his share, namely, would have maintained supremacy in the Panj-āb. He advanced against Ibrāhīm only when `Ālam Khān had totally failed in arms and in securing adherence.

[1609] This objurgation on over-rapid marching looks like the echo of complaint made to Bābur by men of his own whom he had given to `Ālam Khān in Kābul.

[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.].

+Yūsuf dārogha+ of Akhsī?—interviews Bābur during the flight (908) 181-2.

Sayyid +Yūsuf+ _Machamī_—particulars 118; opposes Bābur (905) 118, 117 n. 2.

+Zāhid Khwāja+—abandons Saṃbhal (933) 557; on service (935) 682; [♰953 AH.-1546 AD.].

Shaikh +Zain+ _Khawāfī_—verse-making on the Kābul-river (932) 448; his account of Bābur's regretted couplet 448 n. 5; goes into Dihlī for the Congregational Prayer 476; makes a garden at Āgra 532; recalls a vow to Bābur (933) 553; his _inshā_ on Bābur's renunciation of wine and of the _tamghā_ 553-6; his _Fatḥ-nāma_ of Kānwa 559-574, and chronograms of victory 575; in the left centre of the battle 565; prefers requests for Muḥammad-i-zamān _Bāī-qarā_ (935) 662; invited in verse by Bābur 683; his maternal uncle Abū'l-wajd _q.v._; [♰940 AH.-1533-4 AD.].

+Zainab-sulṯān Begīm+—her granddaughter met by Bābur near Āgra (935) 616.

+Zainab-sulṯān Begīm+ _Mīrān-shāhī Tīmūrid_, _Barlās Turk_, daughter of Maḥmūd—particulars 48; married to Bābur (910) 48, 711; [♰_cir._ 912 AH.-1506-7 AD.].

+Zard-rūī+—on Bābur's service (935) 668, 669.

+Zar-dusht+ ("Zoroaster")—mentioned in a verse 85.

Bībī +Zarīf Khātūn+—her daughter Māh-chūchūq 199 n. 1, 342 n. 3.

+Zubaida Aghācha+ _Jalāīr_—particulars 267, 273 n. 2; [♰before 911 AH.-1506 AD.].

+Zubaida Khatūn+, wife of Khalīfa Hārūnu'r-rashīd—a surmise concerning her 306 n. 1; [♰216 AH.-831 AD.].

+Zubair+ _Rāghī_—revolts against Aūzbeg rule in Badakhshān (910) 242, (912) 295; defeats Nāṣir _Mīrān-shāhī_ 321; standing firm (913) 340; [♰914 AH.-1508 AD.].

+Zuhra Begī Āghā+ _Aūzbeg_, concubine of Maḥmūd _Mīrān-shāhī_—particulars 47, 49; intrigues disastrously with Shaibānī (905) 125-6, (906) 127-8.

Mīr Shaikh +Ẕū'n-nūn Beg+ _Arghūn_—particulars 274-5; captures Shāl (Quetta) (884) 429 n. 1; his ward-ship of `Alī _Mīrān-shāhī_ (900) 55; imprisons Khalīfa 55; surrenders Aūrā-tīpā 56; serving Ḥusain _Bāī-qarā_ (901) 57, 60 n. 3; becomes an ally of the rebel Badī`u-z-zamān (902) 71, (903) 94-5, 260; invited by Ḥusain to co-operate against Shaibānī (910) 190, 191; goes for refuge to Ḥusain 243; dealings with his son Muqīm 198, 227, 248; his title Lion-of-God 281; part of the coalition government in Herāt (911) 293; defeats Aūzbegs (912) 296; social matters 298, 299, 307; hears plain speaking from Qāsim Beg _qūchīn_ 304; his futile opposition to Shaibānī (913) 326; defeated and killed 275, 327; his retainer Jān-aīrdī; [♰913 AH.-1507 AD.].

Index II. Geographical.

Ābāpūr (S.E. of Āgra), Bābur at 642-3.

Abā-qūrūq (Kābul), Bābur at 197.

Āb-burdan (Upper Zar-afshān), description of 152; spring and pass of 152; a route through 40 n. 4.

Āb-dara (Ḥiṣār-shādmān), Bābur takes up good ground at 353.

Āb-dara (Hindū-kush), a winter-route through 205, 242, 321, 351.

Āb-i-khān (Farghāna), Taṃbal in 110, 112.

Āb-i-rahmat = Qarā-sū _q.v._ (Samarkand), mentioned to locate Kān-i-gil 78, 81.

Āb-istāda (S.E. of Ghaznī) described 239; Bābur at 218, 239.

Abīward (Khurāsān), Anwārī's birthplace 260 n. 1.

Āb-i-yār-qūrūq (Samarkand), Bābur in 66.

Abuha or Anuha (N.W.F.P. India), limits Sawād 400.

Ābūn- or Ātūn-village (Kābul), Bābur at 407.

Ādampūr or Ārampūr-_pargana_ (U.P. India), Bābur at 650, 684; 682 n. 1; location of 650 n. 3; 684 n. 3.

Adīnapūr (Kābul), on the Surkh-rūd 209; of the name 207, App. E, xxi; a dārogha's head-quarters 208; the Bāgh-i-wafā near 421, 443; Bābur at 229.

Adūsa-and-Mūrī (U.P. India), Bābur at 645.

Afghānistān, Bābur's limitation of the name 200; demerits of its mountains 223.

Āgra, revenue of 521; `Ālam Khān plans to attack 455-6, 474; estimate of Pānīpat casualties made in 474; submits to Bābur 523; exhaustion of treasure in 617; a military rendezvous 676; supplies from 685; hot season in 524; measurement of Kābul-Āgra road 629; water-raising in 487; Bābur takes oleanders to 610; his workmen in 520, 630, 642; keeps Rāmẓān in 584; receives letters from 639; comes and goes to and from 478, 548, 581, 606, 686; others ditto 475, 526, 540, 576-8, 606, 621-4, 650; mentioned to locate places 529, 531 (2), 588, 597, 641, 650-8, 680.

Āhangarān (on the Herī-rūd, Khurāsān), 308 n.

Āhangarān-julgā[2941] (S.E. of Tāshkīnt), Bābur at 90, 152, 161.

Ahār-passage (Ganges), Bābur's troops at 528.

Aībak, mod. Hāībak, Fr. map Boukhara, Hai-bagh (Kābul-Balkh route), Bābur at 189; a rebel near 546, and for location 546, n. 2.

Aīkarī-yār (Kābul), Bābur's scouts fight near 196.

Aīkī-sū-ārā[2942] = Mīyān-dū-āb = Between-the-two-waters (Farghāna) an alternative name Rabāṯik-aūrchīn 88; located 88, n. 2; Mughūls in 88, 105; Bābur in 114; Taṃbal in 116.

Aīlāīsh- or Aīlāmīsh-daryā, ? Qarā-daryā (Farghāna), Bābur's men defeated on, 105; game near 114.

Aīlāk-yīlāq (Ḥiṣār-shādmān), Bābur at 187-8, 194.

Aīlchī (E. Turkistan), of the name 50, n. 2.

Aīndīkī var. (Kābul), Bābur gathers tooth-picks near 407.

`Aīsh-pushla (Farghāna), Taṃbal near 106; Bābur near 165.

Aītmāk-dābān (Samarkand) described 83; a boundary 84; 64 n. 1; 80 n. 2.

Āī-tūghdī (Kābul) position of 253 n. 3; Bābur at 253.

Ajar Fort (in Kāhmard, or Kahmard _q.v._ Fr. map Maïmènè), Bābur's and his followers' families left in 189; various occurrences in 197, 243, 293; a plan to defend 191; gifts to its peasantry 633 n. 5.

Akhsī, Akhsīkīt (Farghāna), described 9; book-name of 9 and n. 4; position of 13; —`Umar Shaikh's capital 10; exploit at 16; death at 13; —a rebel at 26; a death in 40; appointments to 32, 115; a notable of 110; a village of 171; a melon of 82; besieged 31-2, 54; threatened 44; army of, called up against Bābur 110; comings and goings from and to 87, 90, 101-3, 124, 161, 176, 180, 182, 183; river-fight below 102; Bābur at 54, 116, 170-1-2; apportioned to Jahāngīr 118-9; an army hostile to Bābur near 162; promised to Bābur 168; his attempt to defend 173-6; his flight from 176, 396; Shaibānī defeats the Chaghatāī Khāns near 18, 182, 351-6.

Akrīāda-_pargana_ (Panj-āb), a holder of 453.

Alāī-tāgh (Farghāna), on a Ḥiṣār—E. Turkistān route 129; sub-districts of 162.

Alangār-_tūmān_ (Kābul), described 210; a constituent of the true Lamghānāt 210; a holder of 241; Bābur in 424.

Ālā-qūrghān = Ikhtiyāru'd-dīn (Herāt), Bābur reported captive in 313; the Bāī-qarā households in 327; captured by Shaibānī 328.

Ālā-sāī-_bulūk_ (Kābul), described 220-1; wines of 221.

Ālā-tāgh (s. of Qalāt-i-ghilzāī, Afghānistān), over-run 249.[1]

Alexander's Iron-wall (Darband _q.v._ Caspian Sea), mentioned in metaphor 564; purpose of 564 n. 3.

Alexandria ad Caucasum (Kābul), site of 214 n. 7.

Alghū-tāgh var. Aūlūgh-tāgh (mid-Oxus valley), a Bāī-qarā arrival near 60.

`Alī-ābād (Samarkand), Shaibānī in 135.

`Alī-masjid (Khaibar-route), Bābur passes 394, 411-2, 450; description of its spring 412 n. 1.

`Alī-shang-_tūmān_ (Kābul), described 210; a constituent of the tune Lamghānāt 210; a holder of 241; Bābur in 342, 424.

Allāhābād (India), _see_ Pīāg.

Almālīgh (E. Turkistān), depopulation of 1; located 2 n. 1; referred to 162 n. 2.

Almār (s. of Maïmènè, Fr. map), Bābur passes through, 296.

Ālmātū (E. Turkistān), depopulation of 1; located 2 n. 1; referred to 162 n. 2; *a battle near 349.

Altī-shahr (E. Turkistān), an occasional name of Yītī-kīnt 11 n. 6.

Alwār, Alūr (Rājpūtāna), a rebel leaves 545; an arrival from 687; mentioned to fix limits 577-8-9; gift made of its treasure 519; an appointment to 578.

Aṃbahar (N.W.F.P. India?), on a suggested route 376; pass of 376.

Aṃbāla (Panj-āb), Bābur at 465.

`Aṃbar-koh (Qūndūz), a fight on 61.

Amla (Kābul), Bābur at 422.

Amrohā (U.P. India), revenue assigned of 685.

Amū-darya, Oxus, Bābur on 48, 189, 249, others on 57, 74, 193, 244, *359[2943]; of Trans-Amū tribes 242; limits territory 49; *Bābur's fortunes lost beyond 426; —ferries of, Aūbāj, 93, 95 (where for Aūbāj read Chār-jūī), 110, 189, Chārjūī (which read for Aūbāj), Kilīf 57, 191, Kīrkī 191, Tīrmīz 191.

Andar-āb (n. of Hindū-kush), a n. boundary of Kābul 200; mountains of 221; roads from 205; a holder of 403; comings through 51, 193 (Bābur's), 196.

Andarābā (Panj-āb), Bābur at 391-2.

Andijān (Farghāna), description of 3-4; the capital, sport in, pure Turkī in, climate of 4 —its water 5, mountains of 15, 55, 102, 118, 125; tribes of 162; a grass of 221; its Chār-bāgh 29; celebrities of 4, 280; mentioned to locate places, etc., 4, 8, 10, 16, 113, 396; its railway 30 n. 5; given to `Umar Shaikh I and II, 14; people of led into captivity 20, 22; Bābur its governor 29 n. 1; succeeds in it 29; attacks on 27, 30, 54, 87-8, 106-8, 161-8, 171, 192; captures of 18, 20, 89, 90, 122, 192, 244; demanded from Bābur 87, 168, 318, 351-2; Aūzbeg chiefs wait on Bābur in 58; lost by Bābur 89-90, 122; his attempts to regain 92-7-8, 162-5; succeeds, 103-4, 115; proposed disposition of 118; the cause of his second exile from 105; he compares it with Samarkand 123; a raid near 164; its army on service, 48, 87, 101, 171-2; occupied by Sa`īd Khān 351-7, 362; commandants of 25, 32, 44; gifts sent to 633; comings and goings to and from 32, 58, 64, 102-3-6-8-9, 113, 145, 150, 165-8, 170, *183, 399; Bābur's comings and goings to and from 55, 66, 71, 114-9, 174; hint of another visit 358 and n. 2; (_see_ Farghāna).

Andikān (Farghāna), 161 _see_ Andijān.

Andikhūd (w. of Balkh, Khurāsān), fighting near 46, 260; plan to defend 191; Sayyids of 266-7-8; a commandant of 279; a traitor in 325.

Anwār, ? Unwāra (near Āgra), Bābur at 589, 641.

Āqār-tūzī (Samarkand), a battle near 34.

Āq-būrā-rūd (Farghāna), rapid descent of 5 n. 3.

Āq-kūtal (between Soghd and Tāshkīnt), a force passes 111.

Āq-qāchghāī (Aūrā-tīpā, Samarkand), a rapid message through 25.

Āq-sū (Aūrā-tīpā, Samarkand), Aḥmad _Mīrānshāhī_ dies on 33.

Āq-sū (Eastern Turkistān), 20 n. 5, 29 n. 5.

`Arabia, a bird of 497.

Arāt (Kābul), App. G. xxv.

Archa-kīnt (Farghāna), a road through 116.

Archīān-qūrghān (Farghāna), Taṃbal enters 117; scene of the Chaghatāī Khāns' defeat 117 n. 2, *182, *351 (where read Archīān for "Akhsī"), 356 (here read near Akhsī).

Argand-āb (Qandahār) irrigation off-takes of 332 n. 4, 333 n. 4.

Ārī-_pargana_, Arrah (Bihār, India), Bābur in 664-6.

Arind-water, Rind (U.P. India), Bābur on 684.

Arūpār (U.P. India), _see_ Rūpār.

Arus-, Urus-, Arys-sū (W. Turkistān), a battle near 16.

Asfara (Farghāna), described 7; Persian-speaking Sārts of 7 and n. 3; a holder of 115; Bābur takes refuge in 7 and sends gifts to Highlanders of 633 and n. 4; Bābur captures 53; Bābur in a village of 123.

Asfīdūk (Samarkand), Bābur in 131-2.

Aspara or Ashpara (Mughūlistān), Abū-sa`id _Mīrān-shāhī_ leads an army to 20.

Astar-āb (e. of Pul-i-chiragh, Fr. map Maïmènè), tribes in 255.

Astarābād (Khurāsān), partridge-cry in 496; oranges of 510; a poet of 290 n. 3; Ḥusain _Bāī-qarā_ and 46, 95, 259, 260, 261, 272; assignments of 61-9, 70, 94; commandants in 272 (Nawā'ī), 275; two Bāī-qarās put to death in 262, 266.

Atak, "Attock" (on the Indus), locates Nīl-āb 206 n. 3, and Bābā Walī _Qandahārī's_ shrine 332 n. 4.

Atar (Kābul), located 211; Bābur at 343, 422-3.

Aūba, Ubeh, "Obeh" (on the Herī-rūd), a holder of 274.

Aūd (U.P. India), _see_ Oude, Oudh.

Aūlābā-tū (Ghazni), Bābur at 323.

Aūlīā-ātā (E. Turkīstān), 2 n. 1.

Aūlūgh-nūr (Kābul), located 209; a route past 209; on the "nur" of the name App. F, xxiii; Bābur at 421-5.

Aūnjū- or Ūnjū-tūpa (Farghāna), Bābur at 110.

Aurangābād (Ḥaidarābād, Dakhin, India), a grape of 77 n. 2.

Aūrā-tīpā (between Khujand and the Zarafshān, Samarkand), its names Aūrūsh and Aūrūshna 77; an alp of 25; Dikh-kat a village of 149, 154; locates Khwās 17; escapes to 124, 141, 156; transfers of, to `Umar `Shaikh 17, to Aḥmad 27, 30, 35, to Muḥ. Ḥusain _Dūghlāt_ 97; Aḥmad dies in 33; The Khān in 92; Bābur's family in 136; Bābur in 98-9, 124, 149 (2); enemies of Bābur in 152, 154.

Aūrganj or Ūrgenj (Khwarizm), a claim to rule in 266.

Aūrgūt (Samarkand), surrenders to Bābur, 68.

Aūsh, Ūsh (Farghāna), described 4; a trick of the ragamuffins of 6; course of its water 10; appointments to 32, 65; a raid near 25; an arrival from 112; fugitive to 168; dependencies of 109, 110; Taṃbal and 103-7, 123; Bābur's men in 114; oppression of 172; good behaviour at 176; Bābur at 108, 161-2-4-7-9 (advice to go to).

Aūṯrār, Ūṯrār, "Oṯrār" (W. Turkistān), _see_ Yāngī.

Aūtrūlī, Atraulī (U.P. India), Bābur at 587.

Aūz-kīnt (Farghāna), refuge in planned, for the child Bābur, 29; Mughūls take refuge in 105; Jahāngīr, with Taṃbal, and 103, 114-6-8, 123; Bābur and 29, 108-9, 118, 161-2-9; Bābur's note on 162.

Awīghūr (Farghāna), a holder of 118, 125 n. 2.

Āẕarbāījān (on the Caspian), taken by White Sheep 49; cold of 219; a comer from 280; Tīmūr's workmen in 520.

Bābā Ḥasan _Abdāl_, _i.e._, Bābā Walī _Qandahārī_ (Qandahār), irrigation-channels towards 332-6; shrine of the saint near Atack (Attock) 332 n. 4.

Bābā Ilāhī (Herāt), Ḥusain _Bāī-qarā_ dies at 256; (_see_ Fr. map Herat, Baboulei).

Bābā Khākī (Herāt), a rapid message from Farghāna to 25; an army at 326; located 25 n. 2, 326 n. 1.

Bābā Lūlī (Kābul), Bābur advances towards 315.

Bābā Qarā (Bajaur _q.v._), spring of 371; ?identical with Khwāja Khiẓr 371 n. 1; valley of 367 n. 3.

Bābā Tawakkul's Langar (Farghāna), the younger Khān halts at 168.

Bābā Walī (Atak, Attock), _see_ Bābā Ḥasan.

Bābur-khāna (Panj-āb), 450 n. 5.

Bāburpūr (U.P. India), Bābur at 644 n. 6.

Bachrātā var. (Farghāna), a ferry crossed near 116, 170 (by Bābur).

Badakhshān, Farghāna's s. boundary 1; Hindū-kush divides Kābul from 204; trees of 221; locates Kāfiristān 46; Kābul trade of 202; Bābur sends sugar-cane to 208; a poet of 288; Rusta Hazāra of 196; unprofitable to Bābur 480; reference to his conquest of 220; Greek descent of its Shāhs 22, 242; a series of rulers in 47-9, 208 n. 8, 243, 340, *426, *433, *697; a plan for defence of 191; Aūzbegs and 242, 294; considered as a refuge for Bābur 340; various begīms go to 21-2-4, 48; Nāṣir's affairs in 242-3, 321-2; a letter of victory sent to 371; Bābur plans going to 412; Bābur and Māhīm visit Humāyūn in 426, 436; Sa`īd _Chaghatāī's_ affairs with 412, *695-6; *Humāyūn's desertion of 690, 707; *offered to Khalīfa 697 and n. 1; *contingent disposition of 706.

Badām-chashma (Kābul), climatic change at pass of 203; Bābur at 229, 409, 445.

Badāyūn (U.P. India), appointments to 267, 582.

Bādghīs (Khurāsān, n. of Herāt), Aūzbegs defeat Bāī-qarās in 275; Bābur in 296, 307.

Bād-i-pīch-pass, Bād-pakht? (Kābūl), a route through 209; Bābur goes through 343, 421; places an inscription in 343.

Badr-aū-_bulūk_, Tag-aū (Kābul), described 221; water of 227 n. 1; a route through 209; Bābur in 421.

Badrū-ferry (Ghogrā, Sarū); 667 n. 5.

Bādshāh-nagar (U.P. India), Bābur's visit gives the name to 678 n. 1.

Bāgar (Rājpūtāna), a holder of 573; identified 573 n. 2.

"Bāghdād," a variant for Būghdā 40 and n. 2.

Bāghlān (Qūndūz), nomads leave Kābul for 402.

Bahār or Bihār (Kābul), seat of a tribe 413; Bābur at 414.

Bahat, Bihat, Jhelum-river (Panj-āb), course of 485; Bābur on 382, *441, 453; crossed in fear of him 382.

Bahraich (U.P. India), revenue of 521; locates Ghazrā crossings 669.

Bajaur (N.W.F.P. India), concerning its name 367 n. 4, 571 n. 3; once a Kābul dependency 207; wines and fruit of 372, 510-1; monkeys and birds of 492-3-4; beer made in 423; a test of women's virtue in 211; Bābur and 367 to 370, 371-3, 377, *429; repopulation of 375; tribute of 400; Dost Beg's valour at 370, 397; Khwāja Kalān and 370, 411, 422-3; Bībī Mubārika left in 376; arrivals from 401.

Bakkak-pass (between Yaka-aūlāng and the Herī-rud valley), Bābur's perilous crossing of 309; an alternative pass (Zirrīn) 310 n. 2.

Baksar _sarkār_ (U.P. India), revenue of 521.

Baksara (U.P. India), Bābur at *603, 660.

Balādar, Bīlādar (U.P. India), Bābur at 686.

Bālā-ḥiṣār (Kābul), present site of 198 n. 4; (_see_ Citadel).

Bālā-jūī (Kābul), maker and name of 200 and n. 5.

Ballia (U.P. India), sub-divisions of 637 n. 1, 664 n. 8, 667 n. 2.

Balkh (Oxus valley), border-countries of 76, 261, 204; heat in 520; a melon-grower of 686; its trade with Kābul 202; holders of 18, 61-9, 257, 263, 275; exploits at 50, 93, 270; Ḥusain _Bāī-qarā_ and 70, 191; Khusrau Shāh and 93-4, 110, 270; Shaibānī and 294-6, 300, *363; Kītīn-qarā and 545-6; `Ubaid and 622; *Ismā`īl _Ṣafawī_ and 359, 363; Muḥammad-i-zamān and *364, 385, *428; Bābur and 220, *359, *426-7, *442-4-5-6, 463 and n. 3, 546 n. 1, 625.

Balkh-āb, headwaters of 216; Bābur crosses 295.

Balnāth Jogī's hill (Panj-āb), Bābur near 452.

Bāmīān (Khurāsān ? w. of Ghūr-bund, Kābul), mountains of 215; how reached from Kābul 205; Khusrau Shāh and 96 (where for "Qāsim" read Kāmal); Bābur and 189, 311, *351, 409.

Bām-valley (Herāt), a _langar_ in 308 n. 1; Bābur in 296, 297 n. 1.

Banākat, Fanākat = Shāhrukhiya (Tāshkīnt) 2 n. 5, 76.

Banāras, Benares (U.P. India), crocodiles near 502; threatened 652-4; Bābur near 657.

Banas-river (India), course of 485.

Bāndīr, Bhander (C. India), a fruit of 507; Bābur at 590-8.

Band-i-sālār Road (Farghāna), Bābur on 55, 116.

Bangarmāwū, Bangarmau (U.P. India), Bābur near 601.

Bangash _tūmān_ (Kābul), described 220, 209, 233, 405; a holder of 27, 252; plan of attack on 229, 231-3, 382.

Bannū plain (N.W.F.P. India), a limit of Kābul territory 200; a waterless plain near 234; date of the modern town 232 n. 5; Bābur and 218, 231-2, 382, 394.

Bānswāra (Rājpūtāna), an old name of 573 n. 1.

Banūr (Patiāla, Panj-āb), Bābur on (Ghaggar) torrent of 464.

(The) Bar (Panj-āb), 380 n. 4.

Baraich (U.P. India), _see_ Bahraich.

Barak or Birk (?N.W.F.P. India), mentioned as between Dasht and Farmū l 235.

Barakistān, Birkistān (Zurmut, Kābul), a tomb in 220; ? tongue of 207.

Barā-koh (Farghāna) described 5; position of 5 n. 2.

Bāramūla (Kāshmir), a limit of Sawād territory 372 n. 3.

Bārān-sū,[2944] Panjhīr-sū (Kābul), affluents to 210-1; the bird-migrants' road 224; migration of fish in 225; bird-catching on 228; routes crossing 209, 342; locates various places 207 n. 5, 215, App. E, xvii; —passers along 195, 242; Bābur and 254, 420, _see_ Koh-dāman.

Bārān _wilāyat_ (Kohistān, Kābul), Bābur in 253, 320, 405.

Bāra (N.W.F.P. India), road of 411; Bābur fords the water of 230.

Bārī (Rajpūtāna), hills of 486; hunting-grounds in 509 n. 2; Bābur at 509, 585.

Bārīk-āb (affluent of the "Kābul-river"), Bābur on 409, 414, 446.

Bast, Bost, Bust (on the Helmand, Afghānistān), Ḥusain _Bāī-qarā's_ affairs at 94, 260.

Basṯam (`Irāq), a w. limit of Khurāsān 261 (where read Basṯam); captured 622.

Bateswār (U.P. India), ferry of 643 n. 3.

Bāzār and Tāq (India), _see_ Dasht.

Bāzārak (Hindū-kush), described 205.

Beg-tūt (Kābul), earthquake action near 247.

Benares (India), _see_ Banāras.

Bengal, Bangala (India), particulars of the rules and customs in 482; envoys to and from 637, 640, 665; army of 663; Bābur at ease about 677, 679 n. 7; traversed by the Ganges 485; a bird of 495; fruits of 504.

Between-two-waters (Farghāna), _see_ Aīkī-sū-ārā.

Betwī-river, Betwa (C. India) described 597.

Bhānder (C. India), _see_ Bāndīr.

Bhīlsān (C. India), Sangā's 483; Bābur's plan against 598.

Bhīra (Panj-āb), history of 382; revenue of 521; tribes of 387; Balūchīs in 383; locates places 379, 380, 381; limit of Lūdī Afghān lands 481, and of Bābur's in Hindūstān 520; servants from 616, 678; arrivals from 228, 391, 419; local soldiery 389, 539, rhinoceros in 490, Bābur and 377-8, 382-3-7, *429, 478; he stays in the fort of 384; safeguards people of 383, 478; sends prisoners into 461; summons by Māhīm of an escort from 650; a governor 386-8, 392-9.

Bhūjpūr (Bihār, India), Bābur at 662.

Bīah-sū, Beas (Panj-āb), course of 485; Bābur crosses 458.

Bīāna, Bayāna (Rājpūtāna), mountains in 486; red-stone of 532, 611; water-raising in 487; a dependency of 563; locates places 539, 613; disaffection to Bābur of 523-9; taken 530-8, 540-5; a gun made to use against it 537; praise of its soldiers 548, 550; an appointment to 579; asked for 613; Bābur at 577, 581; his workmen in 520; revenue from assigned to support his tomb *709.

Bīānwān _pargana_ (U.P. India), assignment on 540.

Bībī Māh-rūī (Kābul), Bābur at 314.

Bīgrām, Bīkrām (Panj-āb), four ancient sites so-named 230 n. 2; Bābur at 230, 394, 450-1.

Bihār (India), a limit of Afghān lands in Hind 480-1, and of Bābur's 520; revenue of 521; Bābur and 639, 656, 677-9; an assignment on 676; mentioned as if Bābur's 561; Muḥammad-i-zamān and 661-3-4; an earlier Lūdī capture of 675; a dīwān of 661.

Bihiya (Bihār, India), Bābur at 662-7 n. 2.

Bih-zādī (Kābul), Bābur at 398, 416-8; wine fetched from 417; 19th century vinegar of 417 n. 2.

Bījānagar, Vījāynagar (Dakhin, Deccan, India), a ruler of 483.

Bīlādar (U.P. India), _see_ Balādar.

Bīlah (Panj-āb), Bābur at 237.

Bilkir? (Kābul), Bābur at 420.

Bilwah ferry (Ganges), Bābur at 658.

Bīmrūkī _pargana_ (Panj-āb), a holder of 453.

Birk and Birkistān, _see_ Barak.

Bīshkhārān (Farghāna), good fighting at 28; Bābur at or near 117-8, 170.

Bīsh-kīnt (on the Khujand-Tāshkīnt road), Taṃbal at 145, 154; Bābur at 151.

Bī-sūt (Kābul), Bī-sūtīs migrated to Bajaur 375.

Bolān-pass (Balūchistān), *Shah Beg's entrance to Sind 429.

"Bottam" (? débouchement of the Zar-afshān), a word used by Ibn Hankal 76 n. 6.

Būdana-_qūrūq_ (Samarkand), described 82; Bābur at 131 (here Quail-reserve).

Buhlūlpūr (Panj-āb), Bābur at 454.

Bukhārā (Transoxiana), described 82; w. limit of Samarkand 76, and of Soghd 84; deficient water-supply of 77; trade with Kābul 202; wines of 83; melons of 10, 82; bullies in 7; Bābur sends sugar-cane to 208; various rulers of 35, 38, 112; governors in 40, 52, 121; taken by Shaibānī 125; various attacks on 63-5, 124, *356-7-9, *354, *359, *360; Bābur's capture of 21, 704 n. 3; Mahdī Khwāja and 704 n. 3; various comings and goings from and to 62-3-4, 135, 534.

Būlān (Kābul), a route through 209.

Būlī (Rājpūtāna), revenues of 521.

Burhānpūr (C. India), Bābur on water of 592-8.

Burh-ganga (Old Ganges), its part in the battle of the Ghogrā 667 n. 2, 674 n. 6, 667 n. 2.

Būrka-yīlāq (Aūrā-tīpa _q.v._), Bābur at the fort of 92, 124.

Busāwar (Rājpūtāna), Bābur at 548 (where read Busāwar) 581.

Bū-stān-sarāī (Kābul), Bābur at 251-4.

Bū-stān-sarāī (Samarkand), 62; Bābur at 74, 134.

Būt-khāk (Kābul), damming of its water 647; Bābur at 409, 446 n. 4.

Buz-gala-Khāna (Samarkand), _see_ Aītmāk-dābān.

Chāch, _see_ Tāshkīnt.

Chachāwalī (U.P. India), Bābur at 649.

Chach-charān (on the Herī-rūd), a holder of 274; Bābur at 308.

Chaghānīān (Ḥiṣar-ṣhādmān), located 48 n. 5; an earlier extension of the name 188 n. 4; Nūndāk dependent on 471; a meadow (_aūlāng_) of 129; a ruler in 47; Khusrau Shāh at 93; Bābur in 188.

Chāghān-sarāī _bulūk_, Chīghān-sarāī (Kābul), described 212; water of 211-2; name of 212 n. 2; a governor of 227; Bābur's capture of 211 (where for "920" _read_, *366-7 n. 3.)

Chahār _see_ Chār.

*Chak-chaq pass (Ḥiṣār-shādmān), Bābur traverses 359.

Chāldirān (Persia), cart-defence in the battle of 469 n. 1.

Chaṃbal-river (C. India), course of 485; Bābur on 509, 585-9, 607, 614; Shāh-i-jahān pours wine into 298 n. 3.

Champāran (Bihār, India), revenue of 521.

Chanārān (n.w. of Mashhad), Ḥusain _Bāī-qarā's_ victory at 260; located 260 n. 1 and Ferté _q.v._ p. 39 n. 2.

Chandāwal (Bajaur, N.W.F.P.), of its name 367 n. 3; torrent of 372; Bābur hunts near 372.

Chandawār, Chandwār (U.P. India), correct name of 642 n. 8; water-raising in 487; comings and goings from and to 531, 552, 582; Bābur at 589, 642-3; he loses it 557, 581.

Chandīrī (C. India), described 582-3-6; hills of 486; death of a holder of 573; mentioned to fix dates 269, 483, 605; Bābur's capture of 589, 590-2-4-8.

Chapar-kuda (U.P. India), identity of with Chaparghatta 650 n. 1; a start from 659 n. 5; Bābur at 650.

Chār-dār _col_ (Hindū-kush), 204 n. 4.

Chār-dih plain (w. of Kābul-town), the Kābul-river traverses 200 n. 4; *overlooked from Bābur's tomb 710.

Chārikār, Chār-yak-kār (Kābul), altitude of 204 n. 4; name of _ib._ 295 n. 1; Judas-trees of 216 n. 3.

Chār-jūī ferry (Oxus), 95 (where "Aūbāj" is wrong).

Char-shaṃba = Wednesday (Oxus valley _see_ Fr. map Maïmènè), 71 n. 2.

Chār-sū (Samarkand), an execution in 196.

Chār-yak (Fr. map Maimènè), over-run 295, 94 (where for "San-chīrīk" _read_ San and Chār-yak).

Chashma-i-tūra pass (Kābul), Bābur at 403-4.

Chāsh-tūpa (Kābul), Bābur at 320.

Chatsū (Rājpūtāna), revenue of 521.

Chā-tū var. Jāl-tū (Kābul), Bābur at 228.

Chatur-mūk (U.P. India), a Ghogrā-crossing at 669, 677.

Chaupāra (N.W.F.P. India), an Indus ferry at 206; a limit of Bannū 233; Bābur near 234.

Chaupāra (U.P. India), ferry of 677-9.

Chausa (Bihār, India), a death at 273 n. 3; Bābur at *603, 659, 660.

Chausa or Jūsa (C. India), Bābur at 581.

Chīchīk-tū (Balkh-Herāt road), located 300; Bābur at 296.

Chihil-dukhtarān (Farghāna), 107, 162; (Herī) 296, 301; (Kābul), 107 n. 1.

Chihil-qulba (Kābul), Bābur hunts near 420.

Chīkmān-sārāī (Andikhūd, Oxus valley), a defeat at 46, 260, 268.

Chīn, Chīna, Kābul trade with 203; a Chīnī cup 407; [for "Chīna" _see_ Khiṯāī].

Chīn-āb, Chān-āb, tract and river (Chen-āb, Panj-āb), course of 485; the Bar in 380 n. 4; a Turk possession 380-2; Bābur resolves to regain 380; he on the river *441, 453; envoys to him from 386; his family reach 659; an appointment to 386.

Chīna-qūrghān (Kābul), Bābur at 407.

Chīnīūt or Chīnīwat (Panj-āb), a Turk possession 380-2; Bābur resolves to regain 380.

Chirāgh-dān (Upper Herī-rūd), Bābur at 309; _see_ Add. Note p. 309 for omitted passage.

Chirkh (Kābul), described 217; a mullā of 284; a soldier of 669, 678.

Chīr-sū, Chīr-chīk (Tāshkīnt lands), Aḥmad _Miran-shāhī's_ disaster at 17, 25, 31-4-5.

Chitr (Panj-āb), Bābur at 645.

Chītūr, Chitor (Rājpūtāna), hills of 486; Bābur's plan against 598; Rānā Sangā's 483, 617.

Chunār (U.P. India), advance on 652-4; arrival from 657; appointments 682-3; Bābur at 658; road measured from 659; question of identity 682 n. n.

Chūpān-ātā (Samarkand), 72 n. 3, 76 (Kohik), 76 n. 4; Bābur crosses 124; [_see_ Kohik].

Chūtīalī (Dūkī, Qandahār), Bābur at 238-9.

Cintra (Portugal), oranges of 511 n. 4.

Citadel (_arg_) of Kābul, 201; Bālā-ḥiṣār 198 n. 4; —of Samarkand, 77; position of 78 n. 6; Bābur in 134, 141.

Dabūsī (Samarkand), Aūzbeg victories at 40, 124, 137.

Dahānah (_see_ Fr. map Maimènè), corn from 295; traversed 194-7, 243, 295.

Dakka (Kābul), App. E. xx; [_see_ note to Bārān-sū].

Dakkan, Dakhin, Deccan (India), rulers in 482; ? Daknī = Dakkanī 619, 631, Add. Note pp. 619, 631.

Dāman (N.W.F.P. India), _see_ Dasht.

Dāmghān (Persia), a w. limit of Khurāsān 261; Bāī-qarās captured in 263; Aūzbegs defeated at 618, 622.

Dandān-shikan pass (Khurāsān), Bābur crosses 294.

Dara-i-bām (Badghīs, Khurāsān), Bābur in 296.

Dara-i-gaz (s. of Balkh), a recall from 14.

Dara-i-Ghāzī Khān (Panj-āb), 233 n. 3.

Dara-i-khẉush (Kābul), Bābur in 27, 251-3.

Dara-i-nūr (Kābul) described 210; unique character of 210, 241, App. F; wines of 210, 410, App. G, xxv; monkeys of 211, 492; name of App. F, xxiii, xxiv; a holder of 227, 344; attacked 241; Bābur in 422.

Dara-i-pūr-amīn (Kābul), Bābur at 342 (where for "anīm" _read_ amīn).

Dara-i-ṣūf (Khurāsān), character of 222.[2945]

Dara-i-zang (Khurāsān), defence for planned 191.

Dara-i-zindān (Kābul-Balkh road), mountains of 222; located 189 n. 6; Bābur in 189.

Darband (Caspian Sea), 564 n. 5.

Darband-i-ahanīn (Ḥiṣār-shādmān), a limit of territory 47; a name of Qulūgha, Quhqa, 194; *Bābur at 353; Najm S̤āmī near 359.

Dar-i-gham canal (Samarkand) described 76, 84; Bābur on 124-5; (_see_ Kohik-water).

Darūta (Kābul), Bābur at 421-2.

Darwāza (Bājaur ? N.W.F.P. India), a road through 376.

Dasht (Plain), Dāman, Bāzār and Tāq (N.W.F.P. India), names of 229 n. 1, 233 and n. 1; (Mehtar Sulaimān) mountains of 223; limits Bannū 233; a route through 206; Bābur and 229, 235-7, 394.

Dasht-i-shaikh, Kurrat-tāziyān (Kohistān, Kābul) described 215.

Dāwar (Kohistān, Kābul), Bābur at 421; perhaps Dūr-nāma 421 n. 5.

Dhar (C. India), observatory in 79.

Dībālpūr (Panj-āb), revenue of 521; water-wheels in 486, 532; commandants in 442-3, 463; Bābur captures 208, *441, 575-8.

Dih-i-afghān (Kābul), a rebel in 345; a goer to 402.

Dih-i-ghulāmān (Kābul), Bābur at 413.

Dih-i-yaq`ūb (Kābul), narrows of 200; water of 241; Bābur at 409, 445.

Dihlī, mountains of 485; the capital of Hindūstān 463; a Lūdī possession 481; revenue of 521; Mīwāt and 577; `Ālam Khān and 455-6; Ibrāhīm marches from 465; Sangā gives Bābur rendezvous near 529; Bābur takes possession of 475; appointments to 476; submissive 523; mentioned as Bābur's 561; Khwāja Kalān's inscription in 525; an arrival from to Bābur 526; treasure of 583, *695 n. 1, 617.

Dikh-kat (Aūrā-tīpa, Samarkand), described 149, 152; an arrival in 151; Bābur in 149, 150, 633 n. 4.

Dilmāū var. (U.P. India), comings and goings from and to 534-7, 681-4; variants of name of 681 n. 3.

Dīn-kot, Dhānkot (N.W.F.P. India), location and name of 206 n. 6; limit of Koh-i-jūd 380 and of Bannū 233; routes through 206, 399.

Dīrapūr (U.P. India), Bābur in 649.

Dīrī pass (Kābul), a route through 209.

Diyūl (Samarkand), allies of Bābur in 138.

Dīzak (Samarkand), Bābur a fugitive in 148; a governor of 26.

"Doāb," _see_ Miyān-dū-āb.

Dū-āba (U.P. India), Gangetic changes in 667 n. 2.

Dugdūgī (U.P. India), Bābur at 651-2.

Dūghāba river (Khurāsān), head-waters of 216.

Dūkī (Qandahār), mountains of 223, 236; Bābur in 218, 238, 382.

Dūlpūr, "Dholpur" (Rājpūtāna), mountains of 486; Ibrāhīm _Lūdī's_ begs in 593; Bābur and 520, 552, 585, *603-6, 614, 634-5-9, 689; accounts of work in 606, 634, 642; a view from 610.

Dūn (Jaswān, Panj-āb); `Ālam Khān in 457; Bābur in 461-2.

Dungarpūr (Rājpūtāna), old name of 573 n. 1.

Dūr-nāma or -namā'ī (Kohistan, Kābul), described 215; Bābur at 420; (_see_ Dāwar).

Dūrrin- or Dīūrrīn-tangī (Kābul), a limit of Shāh-i-Kābul 200, 417.

Dū-shaṃba (Badakhshān), Humāyun at 621.

Dūshī (n. of Hindū-kush), Khusrau Shāh submits to Bābur at 51, 191-5.

Egypt, _see_ Miṣr.

Etāwa, Itāwa (U.P. India), hostile to Bābur 523-9, 530; appointments to 530-3, 579, 582; comings and goings from and to 541, 645, 689; Bābur at 644, 686.

Faizābād (Badakhshān), *? Bābur and Māhīn at 436.

Fakhru'd-dīn-aūlūm (Balkh-Herāt road), Bābur at 296; (_see_ Fr. map Maïmènè).

Fanākat, Banākat = Shāhrukhiya (Tāshkīnt), passed by the Sīr-daryā 2; identity of 2 n. 5, 7 n. 5.

Fān-tāgh (Ḥiṣār-shādmān), Lake Iskandar in 129; Bābur in 130.

Fārāb (W. Turkistan?), a mullā of 643.

Farāghīna (Farghāna), Bābur at 168.

Farghāna mod. Kokand, description of 1 to 12; extent of 2 n. 3; included in Trans-oxiāna 76; Alps of 223; nick-name of 289; winter-route into 2, *183; capitals of 3, 10, 162; an e. limit of Samarkand 76; Kābul trade of 202; celebrities of 4, 7, 76, 90, 289; `Umar Shaikh's (I and II) 14-7, 24; Bābur succeeds in 1, 29; invasions of 13, 20-9, 54, *183; proposal to dispossess Bābur 168; an arrival in 28; an exit from 190; Bābur's loss of 19 n. 1, *183; Bābur's leaving 187; (_see_ Andijān).

Far-kat (n. of Kīndīr-tau _q.v._), a refugee in 149; a mullā of 343; reached from Ghawā (Farghāna, Fr. map, Gava), 179.

Farmūl _tūmān_ (Kābul), described 220; a s. limit of Kābul 200; Ūrghūn in 206 n. 2; roads through 206, 231-3-5; Shaikh-zādas of 220, 679 n. 7.

Fatḥpūr (U.P. India), Bābur at 643, 686.

Fatḥpūr or Natḥpūr (U.P. India), a dependency of 680; lake of 681.

Fatḥpūr-Aswa (U.P. India), Bābur at 651.

Fīrūzābād (U.P. India), 643 n. 3.

Fīrūz-koh (Ghūr-Kābul road), Bābur on 365.

Fīrūzpūr (-jhirka; Gurgaon, Panj-āb), described 580 n. 1; Bābur at 580.

Fulūl (Badakhshān), Khusrau Shāh and 60; Mughūls from, join Bābur 192 (where _read_ Fulūl).

Gagar, Ghaggar, Kakar river (Patiāla, Panj-āb), Bābur visits and describes 464-5; called _rūd_ (torrent) of Banūr and Sanūr 464.

Gagar, Kakar (U.P. India), a constituent of the Gogrā, Ghogrā _q.v._; the word Gagar or Kakar used 602.

Gamb(h)īr-water (India), Bābur crosses 606.

Gandak river (India), course of 485; defence of 663.

Gandamak (Kābul), Bābur at 394, 414, 446.

Gang-river, Ganges (India), course of 485; changed course of 667 n. 2, 674 n. 6-7 n. 2, 682 n. 1; bridged by Bābur 495, 599, 633; lands and chiefs east of 523, 628, 638, 651; various crossings made of 530, 544, 583-7, 598, 669, 681-4; Bābur on 598 to 665, 666-7; a battle-station east of 371; Bābur swims 603-5, 655, 660.

Garm-chashma (Kābul), Bābur at 229, 411, 448.

Garm-sīr (S. Afghānistān), *432; a bird of 496.

Garzawān (Khurāsān, Fr. map Maïmènè, Ghourzistan), mountains of 222; locates a place 69; a plan for defence of 191; Bābur at 296 (where mis-spelled "Gurzwān").

Gau- or Kau-water (Kābul), Kāfiristān the source of 210.

Gawār or Kawār (Kābul), position of 210.

Ghain (Kābul), a punitive force against 253.

Ghaj-davān (Bukhārā), *besieged 360; *battle of 361, 279: a fugitive from 363.

Gharjistan, Ghurjistān (Khurāsān), mountains of 222; Bābur near 308; Muḥammad-i-zamān in 365.[2946]

Ghawā (Farghāna, Fr. map, Gava), Bābur seeks the road to 179, 180-1-*2.

Ghāzipūr (U.P. India), crocodiles of 502; an assignment on 527; a holder of 669; threatened 544, 680; Bābur at 659; his boats sent to 679.

Ghaznī = Kābul and Zābulistan, Ghaznīn (Kābul); describes 217, 321; a N.W. limit to Hindūstān 481; cold of 219, 526; game in 224; no honey from 203; firewood of 223; highwaymen on road to 228; wines of, taken to Hindūstān 461, 551; repairs of a dam at 219, 646; a route to 206; locates Zurmut 220; a Shāhrukhī's 382 (here Kābul); Aūlūgh Beg and 95 n. 2; Dost Beg buried at 396; various governors of 227, 253-4, 307, 343-4, 363, 397, 525; not subjected to Bābur (912 AH.) 300; rebellion in (912 AH.) 363; Khwāja Kalān and 447, 526; Bābur and 199, 228, 239, 240, 330, 526.

Ghūr (Khurāsān), mountains of 222; w. limit to Kābul 200; road from Kābul to 214; a holder of 274.

Ghurām (Panj-āb), an assignment of 525.

Ghūr-bund _tūmān_ (Kābul), described 214; Nīl-āb (Naulibis) in 206 n. 3; roads from 205; a tulip of 215; Bābur in 195, 294, 314.

Ghūrī (Khurāsān), position of 409; a route through 94; corn from 295; a failure in 546.

Ghurjistān, _see_ Gharjistān.

Ghwālirī pass (on the Gūmāl _q.v._, India), a surmised route through 235 n. 2.

Gibrik or Kibrik (Kāfiristān), people of 207.

Gingūta (Panj-āb), described 462; an occupation of 457.

Gīrdīz (Kābul), head-quarters in Zurmut 220; tribesmen on road to 228, 403; a road for 405; locates a place 403; Khwāja Kalān's 525; Tang-i-waghchān a name for its pass 403 n. 1.

Gogrā, Ghogrā, Gagar, Kakar river (U.P. India), _see_ Sarū.

Gosfand-liyār (n. of Bannū-plain), a sheep-road travelled by Bābur 233.

Goshta (Kābul), 206 n. 4.

Gūālīār, Gwālior (C. India), described 607 to 612, 613-4; Bābur's building in 520; hills of 486; revenue of 521; forms of the name 486; ruler of killed at Pānīpat 477; hostile to Bābur 523-9 (where add "Gūālīār" after Dūlpūr, l. 4 fr. foot), 539; assigned 539; gained 540; reinforced 547, 557; Bābur's visit to 605, 552, 607 to 614; on envoy from 612; sedition in 688-9, 690, *692 n. 1.

Gūī-water, Gumtī (U.P. India), course of 485 (where for "Gumtī" _read_ (Bābur's) Gūī); Bābur on 601, 658, 683-4.

Gujrāt (Panj-āb), a tree of; a ruler in 481; affairs of 534-5.

Gūk-sarāī (Samarkand), described 41 n. 2, 63, 77; ascension-stone in 77 n. 5; a Mīrzā sent to 41.

Gul-i-bahār (Kohistān, Kābul), described (without name) 214-5; fish-catching in 226, Bābur at 320-1, 406-7.

Gūmāl valley and river (N.W.F.P. India), Bābur and 235-6.

Guṃbazak pass (Khurāsān; _see_ Fr. map Maïmènè), Bābur at 294.

Guṃhaz-i-chaman (Farghāna), Bābur at 176.

Gūra-khattrī (Panj-āb), Bābur and 230, 294.

Gurgān-sū (s.e. of the Caspian), Ḥusain _Bāī-qarā_ swims 259, 260 n. 6.

Guzar var. (Qandahār?), Bābur at 332.

Hā-darwesh waste (Farghāna), described 9, 9, 151; *birthplace of Bābur's legendary son 358 n. 2.

Haft-bacha pass (Hindū-kush), described 205.

Ḥājī-ghāt pass (Hindū-kush), turns Hindū-kush 205 n. 2.

Ḥājipūr (Bihār, India), Bābur and 674; a governor of 663 n. 6.

Ḥājī-tarkhān = Astrakhān (on the Caspian), a chief of 258.

Haldī-guẕr (U.P. India), location of 668 n. 2, 669 n. 1, 671 n. 1; Bābur's men cross 668-9, 675.

Ḥalwā-chashma (Khurāsān), a victory at 260.

Hamadān (Persia), a saint of 211; *a soldier of 700.

Hamtātū pass (Panj-āb), Bābur crosses 381.

Hangū (N.W.F.P. India), Bābur at 231-2.

Harmand-, Halmand-river (Afghānistān), source of 216; a drowning in 307.

Hārū, Kacha-kot water (Panj-āb), Bābur crosses 379, 452; an Indus-ford near 206 n. 5.

Hash(t)-nagar (N.W.F.P. India), a limit of Kābul 200; desolate 207; rhinoceros in 490; birds of 497, 500; locates a place 376; Bābur advised to raid 410-1.

Hasht-yak (W. Turkistān), Bābur near 151.

Hātya (Panj-āb), limit of a clan 452 n. 5.

Hazārasp (Khwārizm), a holder of 50.

Herī, Herāt (Khurāsān), description of 304 to 306; Ḥusain _Bāī-qarā's_ birthplace 256, conquest of 134, splendid rule in 273, ease in 261, feast in 264, delay of a pilgrim in 284, reception of fugitives 243, burial in 293; —joint-rule in 293, 326; weakness before Aūzbeg attack on 296-9, 326; —Shaibānī's capture of 207, 326-8-9; —Ismā`īl _Ṣafawī's_ capture of *350-5; —`Ubaidu'l-lāh _Aūzbeg_ and *434; —`Ali-sher _Nawā'ī_ in 4, 271, 286-7; Banā'ī and 286-7; *Shāh Beg and 365, 429, 430; Khwānd-amīr and *432, 605; fugitives from 331; governors of 24, 37, 274 (Koh-dāman), 275, *633; envoys to Bābur from *436; a Begīm comes from 267; Maṣ`ūma brought from 330; Bābur at 300-1-2, 302 to 307; his marriage with Māhīm in *704; —locates a place 25; fixes a date 258.

Ḥimār or Khimār (? Khurāsān), a passer through 260.

Hind, Hindūstān, Hindustānāt—a northern limit of Kābul 200; routes between it and Kābul 206; a journey to Makka made from Kābul through 26; trade and traders 202, 331, 416; Jats and Gujūrs in 454; a saint honoured in 238; a rāja of 219; comings and goings to and from 250, 265, 267, 368; Khwānd-amīr in *432, 605 and n. 6; —Astronomical Tables in 79; names for outside places used in 202; gold from 446; titles in 537; building style in 609; greetings in 640; mentioned by Bābur in a verse 584; Hind-āl named from 385; of Bīānā in 529; of the Betwa 597; —a seemingly limited use of the name Hindūstān 386; of its three names used by Bābur, Hind 26, 219, 385, 525, 532, 577, 577 n. 6, 578, Hindūstānāt 485, Hindūstān usually; —Hindūstān the Less (?) 46 and 46 n. 4; —Lūdī rise in 383; Lūdī possessions in 463, 480; Ibrāhīm's accession in 385; *torn by faction 439; envoys to Bābur from *426, *436; Bābur's comments on its chiefs 219, 385, 459; Farmūlī ascendancy in 220; begs in 387; armies in 547; —Tīmūr's conquest of 382; his employment in Samarkand of workmen from 77; pictures of his victories in 78; tradition of a soldier in his army of 150; —Bābur's persistent wish to regain Turk possessions in 340, 377, 380-1-2, 478-9; working-out of his desire for *426; varied opposition to his aims 478; *his five expeditions to:—

910 AH.—39, 229, 382; 925 AH.—378 et seq., 478, 480; 926 AH.—*428, *429; its frustration *429, *430, *441; 930 AH.—575, *442; its frustration 442; 932 AH.—*444, 445, 479;

—one start frustrated in Kābul 913, AH. 341-3; `Ālam Khān asks and obtains help in *439, *441, 455; Daulat Khān proffers allegiance *440; *Bābur's prayer for a sign of victory *440; his fifth expedition fixes dates 269, 545; indications that only the fifth aimed at Dihlī *429, *444, 480; his decisive victories, at Pānīpat 475, at Kānwa 574; references to his conquest 220, 561; some of his Begs wish to leave 524-5, 579, 584; his Hindūstān poems 642, App. Q; his ease in and hints at leaving 617, 645, 686; his family brought to 646, 686; —the *_Akbar-nāma_ chronicles no public events of 936-937 AH. in 682; *Bābur's journey to Lāhor (936 AH.) may point to his leaving Hindūstān 707; *Humāyūn's arrival in 696, 707; *on Bābur's intended disposal of Hindūstān 702 to 708; *burial of his body in 709 and later removal from 709-710; —Bābur's description of Hindūstān 478 to 531, _viz._:—Introduction, on earlier Tramontane expeditions into 478 to 480, boundaries and capital of 480, rulers in 932 AH. 481, varied climate, character of and northern mountains 484; rivers and Arāvallī range 485; irrigation 486, other particulars 487, —mammals 488, birds 493, aquatic animals 501, fruits 503, flowers 513; —seasons of the year 515, days of the week 516, division of time 516, weights and measures 517, modes of reckoning 518; —Hindūs in 518; —defects and advantages of 518-9, 531, 532, revenues 520-1.

Hindū-kush mountains, n. boundary of Kābul 200-4; connected ranges 210, 380; called Hindū-kush in Kābul 485; account of their prolongation in Hind (_i.e._ Himālayas), 485; roads and passes of 204-5; the clouds a hindrance to bird-migration 224; limits of territory fixed by 47-9, 194; an episode on 270 *Bābur's crossing 930 AH. 442.

Ḥiṣār-fīrūza (Panj-āb), revenue of 521; given to Humāyūn 465, 466, 528; opposition near 540.

Ḥiṣār (-shādmān; Transoxiana), mountains of 222; clans from 228; Kābul trade with 202; —Abā-bikr and 51; Maḥmūd and 47-9; Mas`ūd and 52, 64, 71, 93-5, 261; Bāī-sunghar and 52, 61, 96, 110-2; Ḥusain and 48, 57-8-9, 61, 130, 191, 260-3, 275; Bābur traverses 128, 130, 187-8, moves for *352, takes 37, 262, *352-3, defends *358, 471, attacked in 345, *361-2, leaves 362-3; —Mughūls leave 58 and rebel 105; goers to 104, 141; Shaibānī and 192, 244, *362; abandoned by the Aūzbegs 622-4; Khusrau Shāh and _see s.n._; *threefold catastrophe in 362; Humāyūn ordered to attack 625; Qāsim _qūchīn_ and 66; a governor in 46-7; occupied for Bābur 640.

Hormuz (Persia), Farghāna almonds imported to 9.

Hūnī (Kābul), Bābur at 405.

Hūpīān pass, Ūpīān (Kābul), Bābur crosses 195; locates a place 647 n. 3.

Hurūr (Panj-āb), taken from Bābur 464.

Hushīār (Farghāna), a subdivision of Asfara 7; Bābur a refugee in 7, *181; his gifts to envoys from 633.

Ilyāk-sū, Kāfirnighān (Ḥiṣār-shādmān), locates a place 48 n. 5.

Indrī (U. P. India), an arrival at 456.

Indus, _see_ Sind-daryā.

`Irāq (Persia), Kābul trade with 202; various captures of 49, 51, 280, 336; envoys to and from 540, 583, 666; other comings and goings from and to 20, 46, 260-2-8, 275, 282-7, 291-4 n. 3, 622; Bābur's gifts to kinsfolk in 522.

`Iraqain, _i.e._ `Irāq-i-`ajam and `Irāq-i-`arabī, places noted for cold in 219.

`Iraq-pass (n. w. of Kābul), a presumed crossing of 294 n. 3.

Īrij or Īrich (C. India), Bābur at 590.

Ishkīmīsh (Qūndūz?), not in Badakhshān 288; on a named route 321; military action at 60, 192, 243.

Ispahān (Persia), a governor of 635 n. 6.

Istālif (Kābul), described 216; a garden at 246; fishing at 226; Bābur at 246, 406, 416-8.

Jagdālik pass (Kābul), Bābur crosses 229, 341, 414.

Jahān-namā fort (Bhīra, Panj-āb), Bābur in 384 (where for "nūma" _read_ namā).

Jahān-namā hill (Dihlī district), 485.

Jahān-namā'ī (Kābul), Bābur at 421; _see_ Jūī-shāhī.

Jajmāū or Jajmāwa (U. P. India), rebels in 533; a submission near 534.

Jakīn _pargana_ (U. P. India), Bābur in 644.

Jālandhar (Panj-āb), an appointment to 442.

Jalīsar, Jalesar (on the Jumna, U. P. India), Humāyūn at 531; Bābur at 589, 640 (in both places _read_ Jalīsar).

Jalīsar, Jalesar (on the Ghogrā, U. P. India), Bābur at 681; perhaps Chaksar 681 n. 4.

Jālmīsh (w. frontier, Kābul), 205 n. 2.

Jāl-tū var. Chā-tū (Kābul), Bābur at 228.

Jām, mod. Jām-rūd (N. W. F. P. India), Bābur at 229, 230, 412.

Jām (Khurāsān), Hātifī's birthplace 288; how marked in maps 623 n. 8, *714; Jāmī the cognomen of Maulānā `Abdu'r-raḥman _q.v._; Aūzbeg defeat near 622 n.1, 625 n. 4, 635, 636 n. 2, details as to location of the battle 623 n. 8, 635 n. 4.

Janāra or Chanāra (U. P. India), rebels take refuge in 682; not identified 682 n. 1.

Janglīk (Kābul), Bābur at 251-3, 311-4 n. 1.

Jaswān-dūn (Panj-āb), described 462; Bābur in 461-3.

Jaunpūr (U. P. India), _see_ Jūnpūr.

Jauz-wilāyat (Khurāsān), 46 n. 3.

Jīhlam, Jīlam, Jhelum (Panj-āb), Bābur near 453; _see_ Bahat for Jhelum river.

Jūd mountains (Panj-āb), _see_ Koh-i-jud.

Jūduk (Samarkand), Bābur at 147.

Jūī-shāhī (Kābul), Bābur at 229, 394, 410, 422; (_see _Jahān-namā'ī).

Jumandnā, mod. "Jumoheen" ? (U. P. India), Bābur at 649.

Jūn-river, Jumna (India), course of 485; locates a place 532; a drowning in 582; Bābur on or crossing 467, 475, 531, 605, 616, 638-9, 640, 650-5, 684-6; he bathes in 644; orders his officers to cross 684; in flood 685.

Jūnahpūr, Jūnapūr (U. P. India), an old form of Jūnpūr or Jaunpūr 676 n. 4; used by Bābur 276 (where read it for "Jaunpur"), 544, 636, 676, 682; _see infra_ Jūnpūr.

Jūnpūr, Jaunpūr (U. P. India), water of 658; formerly a Sharqī possession 481; revenue of 521; taken by Humāyūn 544; an assignment on 527; appointments to 276, 538, 544, 676, 682; arrivals from 636, 667.

Jūrgha-tū (Kābul), _see_ Qūrgha-tū.

Jūsa or Chausa (C. P. India), Bābur at 581.

Kābul town and country, description of 199 to 227, —position and boundaries 199, 481, town and environs 200, fort 201, 344, bridges 198, 314, 417, trade 202, climate 77, 201-3, 223, 314, 584, snow in 208-9, 223, 314, dividing line between hot and cold climates 208, 220, 229, fruits 202, 510, cultivated lands 243, meadows 204, Hindū-kush roads 204, Lamghānāt roads 201, Khurāsān road 205, Hindūstān roads 205, 206 n. 3, 231, 308, 629; highwaymen 205, 341, peoples 207, 221, subdivisions 207 to 221, dependencies 214-5, revenue 221, mountain-tracts 221, firewood 223, fauna 223, 496-8, bird-catching 224, fishing 225; —rivers of, Bārān _q.v._—Kābul, Luhūgur (Logar); _garm-sīl_ 208, 484; unfitness for nomads 228, 402; use "Hindū-kush" in 485; use of "Kābul" in Āgra 532; a mullā of 284; —given to `Umar Shaikh 14; Aūlūgh Beg _Kābulī_ and 95 and n. 2 (where "2" should follow "Mīrzā" and not "son"), *185; Abā-bikr and 260; `Abdu-r-razzāq and 195; Muqīm _Arghūn_ and 195, 198-9, 227; Khusrau Shāh and 192; —Bābur's move to win it 7, 189, 191-7; his capture of 198-9; dates fixed, by the capture of, 19 n. 1, 21, 26, 39, 48, 227, 251, 274, 282, 377, 383, 394, and by his possession of 27, 529; a sequel of its capture 243; reserved by him for himself 227, 227 n. 5, 627, 645-6; —his comings and goings to and from 27, 229, 241, 248-9, 294, 323, 325, 330, 339, *350, *363-4-5, 389, 395, 403-4-5-7-8, 415-18-19,441-2-3; other comings and goings 51, 196, 228, 321, 349, 364-5, 385, 399, 531, 539, 544, *696, 687, 699; men sent to 343, 413, 466, 476; various Begims arrive in or leave 36, 306, 339—265, 397—21—264—267—269—606, 616; family journey from 646-7, 650-5-7-8, 686-7-9 n. 5; followers delay to go to 307; *landless men in 706; excess levy of grain on 228; its _sir_ (weight) 632; officers in 250, 270, 273, 382, 646 n. 3; newly-made begs of 458, 524; —anxiety for 300, 307; disloyalty in 313-320, 331, 345; *tranquil 349; *Mughūls of 357; of its troops 375, 550, 579, 625; —Bābur in it the last ruling Tīmūrid 340, *427; envoys to him in *439-440, *441, 529; his poverty in 525; learns the word _sangur_ in 232; family affairs in *603-4; —letters of victory sent to 371, 466, 580; other letters to and from 374, 541, 618, 639, 644-5, 6; gifts 463, 523, 642; Bābur's seeming intention of return to 698 n. 5, *705-6-7; his chosen centre *705; the taking of his body to *709-10; his burial-garden and grave *710-11.

Kābul-water, Nīl-āb a name of 206 n. 3; fords of 206, 345, 411; App. E xvii, xix, xx; Bābur on 451.

Kābud (Soghd, Samarkand), 73, 98.

Kacha-kot (Panj-āb), a holder of 250; Bābur crosses water of (Hārū) 379, 403, 452.

Kachwa (C. India), described 590; Bābur at 590-2.

Kāfiristān, mountains connecting with its own 480; former extent of 212 n. 3; borderlands of 210-1-2; wines of 211-2, 372; highwaymen of 205, 214; a _ghāzī_ raid into 46.

Kahadstān (Herī), Bābur at 305; Shaibānī at 329.

Kāhān (Sind, India), Shāh Beg's capture of 398, *430-5.

Kahlūr (Simla Hill-state, India), taken for Bābur 464; *its Rāja visits him, 692-9.

Kāhmard or Kalmard (Kābul-Balkh route, Fr. map Maïmènè), a plan for defence of 191; a governor in 409, 546 n. 2; exposed to Aūzbeg attack 409; various occurrences in it 239, 250, 295; Bābur in 48, 189; households left in 189, 194-7; Bābur loyal to Jahāngīr in 190, 239; he sends gifts to peasants of 633; (_see_ Ajar).

Kahrāj (N.W.F.P. India), Bābur at 373-4.

Kakar river (N. India), _see_ Gagar, Ghaggar.

Kālābāgh (Panj-āb), locates Dīnkot 206, n. 5.

Kalānjar (Panj-āb), perverted allegiance of 387 (where in n. 3 _delete_ the second sentence).

Kalānjar (U.P. India), revenue of 521; Mahuba a dependency of 685 n. 3.

Kalānūr (Panj-āb), a governor of 442; Bābur and 451-8.

Kalda-kahār (Panj-āb), described 381; Bābur at 381-9, 391.

Kalpī (U.P. India), revenue of 521; elephants in 488; dependencies of 649, 686; locates places 544, 590, 659; hostile to Bābur 523; Bābur in 590; boats from 598, 684.

Kālpūsh (Khurāsān), 622 n. 3.

Kāma _bulūk_ (Kābul), described 213; water of 211.

Kamarī (Kābul), meadow of 204; Bābur at 244; (on the Indus), Bābur at 230.

Kām-rūd valley (Ḥiṣār-shādmān), a flight through 58; Bābur in 129-30.

Kanār ferry (Jumna U.P. India), Bābur at 589, 590-8.

Kān-bāī (Samarkand), locates places 52, 64; Maḥmūd (Khān) at 53, 111.

Kandār, Kuhandār (Rājpūtāna), besieged by Sangā, surrenders 530-9.

Kand-i-badām (Farghāna), described 8, locates a place 20; a governor of 115; passers through 44, 172; Bābur at 92, *358 n. 2 (a legendary visit).

Kandla or Kūndla (U.P. India), revenue of 521; an assignment on 679.

Kāngra (Panj-āb), a "Bajaur" north of 511 n. 3.

Kānhpūr, "Cawnpore" (U.P. India), 649 n. 7.

Kanigūram (Dasht-Kābul route), 235 n. 2.

Kanwā, Kanwāha (Rājpūtāna), Bābur's victory of 549, 557 to 574, 523 n. 3.

Kanwāhīn (Panj-āb), Bābur at 458.

Karal (Panj-āb), Bābur at 464.

Karā-sū, Qarā-sū? (Kābul), a tribe on 413.

Karg-khāna, _see_ Sawād.

Kark ? (Kābul), Bābur at 395.

Karmān (`Irāq), surrenders 51; an intruder in 260.

Karmā-nā['s]ā river (Bihār, India), ill-repute of 659; Bābur on 659-60.

Kar-māsh mountain (Kābul), located 403; Bābur near 403-5.

Karmīna (Samarkand), mentioned as a _wilāyat_ 84.

Karnāl (U.P. India), *Bābur at 701.

Karnān (Farghāna), a village of 161; locates place 162, 168 (where in section heading for "Kāsān" _read_ Karnān); a _darogha_ of 179-80; Bābur and 179, *182.

Karrah (U.P.I.), a dependency of 651; Bābur at 652.

Karrah-Mānikpūr (U.P. India), revenue of 521; elephants in 488; Humāyūn near 544.

Kāsān (Farghāna), described 10; fixes a date 28; a raid near 26; a departure to 32; a holder of hostile to Bābur 170; Bābur at 104, 116.

Kāshghar (E. Turkistān), an e. limit of Farghāna 1, of Samarkand 76; a border tribe of 55; *Kāshghar-Farghāna road 183; trade with Kābul 202, Andijānī captives in 20 n. 3; rulers in 21, 29 n. 5, 32-7, 318, 415, 427, 695-6; Mughūls in *184, 351, 364; arrivals from 399, 415-6; Bābur's kinsfolk in 21-4, 318, 409, 522; a devious journey through 399; a return from 408, and to 590.

Kashmīr, mountains of 380-7, 481; a bird of 494; lost dependencies of 484; Bābur on name of 484, *sends an expedition to 692-3-8 n. 5, 701. Additional Note p. 693.

Kātlāng (N.W.F.P. India), Bābur at 377.

Kattawāz-plain (Ghaznī ?), torrent of 240; Bābur in 323-5.

Kawārī-water (C. India), Bābur crosses 607, 614.

Kechef-dara (Khurāsān), leads down to Mashhad 622 n. 3.

Kesh = Shahr-i-sabz (Samarkand), described 3, 83; a blinded refugee in 95; Banā'ī dismissed to 136; an arrival from 137; Bābur and 125-8, 138.

Keshtūd (Ḥiṣār-shādmān tract), Bābur at 130.

Khaibar-mountains (Kābul), route through 206; crossings of 250, 260, 492; Bābur's crossings of 229, 382, 411-3.

Khairābād (U.P. India), revenue of 521; Bābur's army at 583.

Khākān-ārīq (Farghāna), Bābur on 165-7.

Khalīla (Soghd, Samarkand), Bābur at 148.

Khalishak (Qandahār), a water-head 332; Bābur at 333.

Khamalangān (Badakhshān), a holder of 242.

Khamchān (Badakhshān), military move to 321.

Khān-yūrtī (Samarkand), described 82; Bābur at 67-8, 82, 124, 131.

Kharābūk (Farghāna), Bābur near 163-8.

Kharbīn (s.e. of Ghaznī), 323 n. 3.

Kharī (U.P. India), Bābur at 580.

Kharīd _pargana_ (on the Sarū = Ghogrā), formerly on both banks of the river 561 n. 2, 664 n. 8, 674 n. 6; present limits 637, n. 1; position of town of 679 and n. 1; a (now) Bihār pargana of 674; Humāyūn plunders 544; capture of mentioned 561; Bābur's man in 637; position of its army opposing Bābur 664, 676 n. 5.

Khartank (Samarkand), a celebrity of 76.

Khasbān plain (Farghāna), Bābur crosses 124.

Khaṣlar (W. Turkistān), Bābur at 151.

Kawāk road (Hindū-kush), 205; height of its pass 204, n. 4.

Khawāl-i-qūtī (_see_ Zirrīn pass), Bābur in 309.

Khinjan (n. of Hindū-kush), roads to 205.

Khirgird or Khirjard (Khurāsān), Jāmī'sbirthplace 623, n. 8; battle of Jām fought near 623, 635.

Khirs-khāna (Kābul), Bābur passes 417.

Khiṯāī = N. China, a caravan from 15; porcelain, etc. from 80, 157-9, 160; trade profits in 202. [N. B.—For all instances Bābur's word is Khitāī and not "China".]

Khozār or Khūzār (Samarkand), mentioned as a _wilāyat_ 84; lost by Aūzbegs, 135, 359.

Khūbān or Khūnān (Farghāna), approx. site of Bābur's first ranged battle 113.

Khujand var. (Farghāna), described 7; not counted by all as in Farghāna 17; locates a place 55; holders of 35, 115; Aḥmad _Mīrān-shāhī_ takes 30; surrender to Bābur of 53; Bābur's first marriage made in it 35, 120; he in it 89, 90-1-2; a "poor place" 97-8; he halts in a village of 100; his legendary transit of 358 n. 2; a follower's compulsory journey to 124.

Khujand-water, Saiḥūn, Sīr-daryā _see_ Saiḥūn.

Khūlm (Kābul-Balkh road, Fr. map Bokhara), vine-culture in 210 n. 6; places on its river 546 n. 2.

Khūqān (Farghāna), an arrival at 44; Bābur at 161.

Khurāsān, Khurāsānāt (219), Hindustānī use of the name 202; Kābul roads from 205, 300; Kābul trade with 202, 225; melons and oranges of 203, 510, compared with Kābul Koh-dāman 216; _ḥammāms_ in 79; medical practice in 246; refined manners of Khurāsānīs 303; nomads of 221; *enforced migration of Mughūls to 351; —Maḥmūd _Ghaznawī_ and 479; Abū-sa`īd's Cadet Corps of 28, 50, App. H, xxvi, xxvii; Yūnas Khān in 20; Abā-bikr defeated in 260; Maḥmūd expelled from 46; Mas`ūd "did not stay in" 95 (where add the quoted words, l. 12, after "service"); Badī`u'z-zamān returns to 70; Ḥusain _Bāī.qarā_ and 57, 94, 259-60-80-3; Bābur and 185-7-8, 255, 285-6, 295, 300, 330-2; Ma`sūma in 36, 339; —troops of 61, 296; dismissals to 98, 128, 194-7, 319, 320; comings and goings from and to 15, 194, 197, *243, 264, 270, 331, 363; distinguished men of 280-2-4, 291; Bābur's kinsfolk in 246, 253, 522, 617; a verse well known in 328.

Khūrd (Khẉurd)-Kābul (Kābul), wild asses in 224; river-dam of 647; Bābur in 341.

Khurram (Kābul-Balkh route), traitors to Bābur near 546 (Fr. map Maïmènè, Khouram).

Khūsh-āb (Panj-āb), Abā-bikr in 260; Bābur regards it as his own 380-2; Balūchīs in 383; an enemy to 383-4, 388; a governor of 388; a fugitive through 399.

Khutan, Khotin (E. Turkistān), Aīlchī the capital of 50 n. 2; Gūrkhān a title of rulers in 84 n. 2; a ruler in 32.

Khutlān (Ḥiṣār-shādmān territory), river and alps of 60, 222; a saint's burial in 211; a ruler and holders of 47, 58, 93, 191-6; Bābur's victory in 18.

Khwāja `Abdu'ṣ-ṣamad (Kābul), 201.

Khwāja Basta (Kābul), a water-course near 647.

Khwāja Bikargān (Farghāna), water of 99 n. 4.

Khwāja Changal (Tāhqān), 61; located 60 n. 4.

Khwāja Chār-tāq (Qūndūz) 244.

Khwāja Dīdār (Samarkand), Bābur's winters in 73-4; Shaibānī near 130-1-5; Bābur passes 147.

Khwāja Ḥasan (Kābul), Bābur passes 398, 418.

Khwāja `Imād (Ḥiṣār-shādmān), Bābur at 188.

Khwāja Ismā`īl _Sirītī_ (s.e. of the Kābul territory), mountains of 223; Bābur at 323-4.

Khwāja Kafshīr (Samarkand), escapes by 62, 144.

Khwāja Kārdzan var. Kardzīn (Samarkand), 65, 128; Shaibānī at 138.

Khwāja Khāwand Sa`īd (Kābul), wines of 203, 215.

Khwāja Kitta (Farghāna), Bābur at 165.

Khwāja Khiẓr (N.W.F.P. India), Bābur at 372-6.

Khwāja Khiẓr's Qadam-gāh (Kābul), 201, 407.

Khwāja Khiẓr's Mosque (Samarkand), 142.

Khwāja-rabāṯ (Samarkand), 73, 97, 127-8, 130-1.

Khwāja Raushānā'ī's _Chashma_ (Kābul), 201.

Khwāja Reg-i-rawān (Kohistān, Kābul), described 215; Bābur at 420.

Khwāja Riwāj (Kābul), rebels go to 245, 345.

Khwāja Rustam (Kābul), Bābur near 447.

Khwāja Shabāb (Kābul), Bābur at 418.

Khwāja Shamū's tomb (Kābul), 201.

Khwāja Sih-yārān (Kābul), described 216; names of the "Three friends" 216, n. 4; Bābur at 398, 405-6-20.

Khwāja Zaid (n. of Hindū-kūsh), Bābur at 195.

Khwāṣ (Samarkand border?), `Umar Shaikh defeated at 17, 34; located 17 and n. 1.

Khwārizm = Khiva, w. limit of Samarkand 76; and northern of Khurāsān 261; cold in 219; Maḥmūd _Ghaznawī's_ over-rule in 479; Chīn _Ṣufī_ defends 242, 255-6; Khusrau Shāh's head sent to 244; a Bāī-qarā refugee in 397; governors of 256, 274; Muḥammad _Ṣāliḥ_ of it 289 n. 4.

Khwāst, "Khost" (n. of Hindū-kush), mountains of 221; name and character of 221 n. 4; a mullā of 368; Mīr-zādas of 412; comers and goers from and to 399, 403, 196 n. 5; piety of Khwāstīs 523 n. 1; *Māhīm Begīm's connection with 714; Bābur at *363, 408.

Kīlā-gāhī (n. of Hindū-kush), a fugitive through 321.

Kilirah? (U.P. India), Bābur at 680.

Kilīf ferry (Oxus), Ḥusain _Bāī-qarā_ and 57, 191.

Kīndīr-tau, Kurāma (Farghāna's n.w. border-mountains), 8n. 5, 11 n. 6; —Kīndīrlīk pass, when open 2 n. 4, *183; distinguished 116 n. 2; The Khāns and 90, 161, 172; Bābur crosses 54, 90, 161.

Kind-kir (Kābul), described 424; (_see_ Masson, iii, 193).

Kintit (U.P. India), identified 657 n. 2; Bābur at 657.

Kīrkī ferry (Oxus), 191.

Kishm (Badakhsḥān), Aūzbeg defeat at 295; Humāyūn near 621, 624 n. 1; ? *Bābur winters in (919 AH.), 362.

Kisrī-tāq (below Bāghdād), height of 83.

Kītib or Kīb (Panj-āb), an appointment to 393.

Koel, Kūl, Kūīl (U.P. India), _see_ Kūl.

Kohāt (Panj-āb), Bābur in 218-31-33-50, 382-94.

Koh-bacha (var. ? a common noun; Kābul), tooth-picks gathered on 407.

Koh-dāman (Herāt), an appointment to 274.

Koh-dāman (Kābul), described 215 to 217; Bābur on 320, 405, 416, 420.

Koh-i-jūd, Salt-range (Panj-āb), described 379; places connecting with 381, 452; a note of Erskine's on 380 n. 2.

Koh-khirāj (U.P. India), Bābur at 653.

Kohik, Chūpān-ātā _q.v._ (Samarkand), described 76 n. 4; gardens on 78, 80; bounds a meadow 82; Bābur near 72.

Kohik-sū = Zar-afshān (Samarkand), course and name 76, 76 n. 4; bounds a meadow 82, and a _tūmān_ 84; suggested drowning in 128 n. 2; Bābur and 64, 130-1; swims it in flood 140.

Koh-i-nūr, Rocky-mountain (Kābul), _see_ Kūnār.

Koh-i-safed, Spīn-ghur (Kābul), described 209; Pushtū name of 209 n. 2; App. E, xvii, xix, xx.

Kohistan (Badakhshān), begs of 296; —(Kābul), villages of described 214 and n. 7; a _tūmān_ of 213; _rara avis_ of 213 n. 7.

Kohtin mountains (s. of Samarkand), limits possessions of territory 47.

Kūfīn (Samarkand), 65.

Kūkcha-sū (Badakhshān), 321.

Kūl, Kūīl, Koel (U.P. India), a governor of 176; Bābur's building-work in 520 (here Kūīl), his envoy to 526, loss of 557, 576, visit to 586-7.

Kūl-āb (Badakhshān), a chief of 627 n. 2, *696.

Kula-grām (Kūnār, Kābul), Bābur at 423.

Kuldja (E. Turkistān), Ālmalīgh the former capital of 2 n. 1; *The Khāns escape after defeat by its road 183 (where _read_ Kuldja).

Kul-kīna or Gul-kīnā (Kābul), a place of revel 200-1, 395.

Kūl-i-malik (Bukhārā), Bābur defeated at 40, *357.

Kūnār with Nūr-gal (Kābul), described 211; is Koh-i-nūr (Rocky-mountain), the true name of, App. F, xxiii, xxiv; torrent of 212; beer made in 423; peacocks in 493; a test of woman's virtue in 212, governors in 227, 344; Bābur in 343, 376, 423.

Kundī (Lamghānāt, Kābul), _see_ Multa-kundī.

Kūndih or Kūndbah (Bihār, India), Bābur at 674-7, 687 n. 5 (where read the name as above).

Kūra pass (Kābul), divides the hot and cold climates 220; Bābur at 421.

Kūrarah (U.P. India), Bābur at 651.

Kūrdūm-dabān (Farghāna), 5 n. 3.

Kūrīa (U.P. India), Bābur at 651.

Kurrat-tāziyān (Kābul), _see_ Dasht-i-shaikh.

Kusār (U.P. India), Bābur at 652.

Kushan (Persia), locates Rādagān 622 n. 4.

Kūtila (Panj-āb), Bābur gains 462; strength of 463.

Kūtila-lake, mod. Kotila-jhil (Gurgaon, Panj-āb), Bābur at 580 and n. 1.

Kūy-pāyān, Low-lane (Samarkand), 146.

Lāhūr, Lahor (Panj-āb), revenues of 446, 521; snows seen from 485; water-wheels of 486, 532; locates Sīālkot 429; Daulat Khān and 382-3, *428, *441-2-3, 451; Bābur's envoy detained in 385; `Ālam Khān and 444, 455-8; Bābur's begs in 443, 453-4; sedition in 688; *Bābur's visit to (936 AH.) 604 n. 1, *692-3-7-8-9, 707; Māhīm and 650-9; *taken by Kāmrān (where for "935" _read_ 938).

Lak-lakān (s. of Tāshkīnt), a hostile meeting at 145.

Laknau, Lakhnau, Luknau, "Lucknow" (U.P. India), a bird of 495; abandoned by Bābur's men 594; Bābur at 601; ? Bīban and Bāyazīd approach it 677; ? news of capture of 679 and n. 2, 681; variants in name of 677 n. 3, 678 n. 1, 582 n. 6, App. T; _see_ Luknūr.

Lamghānāt _tūmāns_ (Kābul), described 207-13; true use of the name 210; classification of 200; a tūmān of 318; mountains of 222; tribes in 229, 242; fruits of 203, 424, 510-1; birds of 494-5, 500; fishing in 226; routes into 206-9; locates 208, 211; Bābur in 414-19-21-*29; (_see_ Lamghān).

Lamghān _tūmān_ (Kābul), the name of 200 n. 1, 210; a fruit and tree of 508; limits a tribe 341; Bābur's retreat to 21, 340; Bābur in 407-14-19-21-*29.

Lār (Persia) a native of 284.

Laswaree, Battle of (1803 AD.) 578 n. 1.

Lāt-kīnt (Farghāna), Bābur at 108.

Lawāīn (U.P. India), Bābur at 656.

Lombardy (Italy), wine culture in 210 n. 5.

Luhūgur, mod. Logar (Kābul), described 217; Chirkh its one village 217; a celebrity of 184, 217; vine-culture in 210 n. 6.

Luknūr (Rāmpūr, U.P. India), revenue of 521; besieged by Bīban 582; ? approached by Bīban and Bāyazīd 677; ? news of its capture 679 and n. 2, 681.

Macha (Upper Zar-afshān), located 149, 152; `Alī _Mīrān-sḥāhī_ takes refuge in 55; Bābur in 27, 67, 152-3.

Macham (Farghāna), a foot-hill 118, 125 n. 2.

Madan-Banāras, Zamania (U.P. India), Bābur at 658.

Madīna (Arābia), Bābur sends gifts to 523.

Māḏu, Māzū (Farghāna), Bābur takes 109.

Madhākūr (U.P. India), Bābur at 548, 616 (where read as here).

Maghāk-pul (Samarkand), Bābur at 68, 132.

Mahan (Farghāna), Bābur at 123.

Mahāwīn (Muttra; U.P. India), not submissive to Bābur 523.

Mahūba (U.P. India), rebels take flight to 685, 682 n. 1.

Māhūrā-sangur (N.W.F.P. India), locates a tribe 376.

Mahyar (N.W.F.P. India), 373 n. 6.

Maidān (Kābul), the road to 228; earthquake action near 247; white marble of 710.

Maidan-i-Rustam (Kābul), Bābur at 405.

Māīng (U.P. India), Bābur near 683.

Makka (Arabia), Bābur sends money gifts to 522, and a Qorān in his script 228 n. 3; pilgrims to 26, 267 n. 2, _etc._

Malabar, a succession-custom in 482 n. 5.

Malarna (Rājpūtāna), revenue of 521.

Malot, _see_ Milwat.

Mālwa (C. India), an observatory at 79; known in Bābur's day as Mandāū _q.v._ 79.

Māmā Khātūn (Kābul), 405.

Mānas-nī (nai; Rājpūtāna), other names of 578 n. 1; reputed outfall of 580; Bābur on 578-9.

Mandaghān (Khurāsān), Bābur at 295.

Mandāū, Mandū (C. India), capital of Mālwa 482 n. 2; Mālwa known as 79, 482; hills of 486; a ruler of 482; a holder of 593, 688 n. 2, downfall of sulṯāns of 483; [Elphinstone Codex _passim_ and Ḥaidarabad Codex, except on p. 79 where "Mandu" occurs, write Mandāū].

Mandīsh, Mandesh (N.W.F.P. India), Bābur at 375.

Mandrāwar _tūmān_ (Kābul), described 210; one of the three constituents of the true Lamghānāt 210; a village of 424; holders of 229, 344; Bābur in 321, 421.

Mānikpūr (U.P. India), revenue, of 521; elephants in 489.

Maqām (N.W.F.P. India), perhaps mod. Mardān 377 n. 2; Bābur near 377-8.

Marāgha (Āẕar-bāyigān, Caspian Sea), astronomical Tables constructed at 79.

Marghīnān (Farghāna), described 6; bullies of 7[2947]; a celebrity of 7, 76; locates a place 7; comings and goings from and to 30, 97 n. 2, 173; lost to Bābur 30; recovered by him 99-100; rebel attack on 101-2; Bābur in 103, 123, 162-9, 172.

Marūchāq (on the Murgh-āb, Khurāsān), Āūzbeg raiders defeated at 296.

Marwār (Rājpūtāna), Sangā's approach from 544 n. 5.

Mashhad (Khurāsān), a celebrity of 285; a Bāī-qarā holder of 263, 296, 329-30; held by Aūzbegs 534, 623; T̤ahmāsp's route to 622 n. 3.

Masht (Ghaznī?), a tribe in 323.

Masjid-i-jauza (Farghāna), described 5.

Masjid-i-laqlaqa (Samarkand), described 80.

Masjid-i-maquṯa` (Samarkand), described 79.

Mastūng, Quetta (Balūchistān), Shāh Beg and 337, *427 (where read Mastūng).

Mātarīd (Samarkand), a celebrity of 75.

Māwarā'u'n-nahr, Transoxiana, name of the country of Samarkand 74; name includes Farghāna 76; melons and wines of 82-3; bullies in 7 (_see s.n._ Marghīnān for an omission); Leaders of Islām born in 7, 75-6; three strong forts in 3; an appointment in its interests 61, 85; in Aūzbeg hands 427, 480, 618; *Bābur's desire to regain 697 n. 1 (and _s.n._ Bābur).

Mehtar-Sulaimān range (Afghān border), a shrine on 238; Bābur and 236-8.

Merv, Marv (Khurāsān), comings and goings from and to 135-7, 296, 301, *357, 623; chiefs of 261, 244; `Alī-sher winters in 287; Bābur's sister in 18, *352; Shaibānī defeated and killed near 318, *350; `Ubaid and 534, 618, 622.

Mewāt, Mīwāt (Rājpūtāna), revenue of 521; hills of 486; account of 577-8-9; holders of 523, 551; Bābur orders a raid on 551; Kānwa casualties on the road to 577; Bābur at 578.

Mīān-dū-āb, "Doab" (between Ganges and Jumna), revenue of 521; archers of 526-8, 551-7; a _pargana_ bestowed in 539; `Ālam Khān goes to 457; Ibrāhīm advances into 467; Bābur puts down a rebel in 576.

Mīān-kāl, Miyān-kāl (Samarkand), returns to Bābur 135; Aūzbegs in 622.

Mīān-kalāī (N.W.F.P. India), Bābur in 373; ? a dū-āb 373 n. 6.

Mīān-wilāyat, Miyān-wilāyat (U.P. India), revenue of 521.

Mīch-grām (Kābul), a tribe in 413; Bābur at 414.

Mīl (Kāfiristān), position of 210.

Milwat, Malot (Panj-āb), prisoners sent to 461.

Milwat, Malot (U.P. India), Bābur's capture of 457-8, 461.

Minār-hill (Kābul), Bābur crosses 314.

Mīr Ghiyaṣ-langar (Khurāsān), Bābur at 307-8.

Mīrzā-rabāṯ, (Farghāna), w. wind over 9 n. 2, *183.

Misr, Egypt, compared with a Samarkand _tūmān_ 84; *Napoleon's task in 356.

Mīta-kacha (Kohistān, Kābul), described 214.

Mughūlistān, mountains of 222; game in 325; Aspara in 20; Yūnas Khān in 12; a Mughūl _tūmān_ enters 20; *Mughūls forced to go far from 351; a dweller in 114; Bābur thinks of going to 158, *184.

Muḥammad Āghā's village (Kābul), Bābur at 405.

Muḥammad Chap's Bridge (Samarkand), 72.

Muḥammad-fajj (N.W.F.P. India), meaning of the name 229 n. 5; Bābur at 231.

Multā-kundī (Kābul), defined 211.

Multān (Panj-āb), the Five-rivers meet near 485; a dependency of 237; fowlers migrated from 225; Abā-bikr at 260; Daulat Khān and 441-2; `Askarī recalled from *603, 605; Kāmrān and 645, 699.

Mungīr (Bengal), Bābur's envoy to 676.

Munīr (Bihār, India), Bābur at 666-7, 670.

Munūghul-tāgh (Farghāna), variants in name of 8 n. 5; mines and malarial influence of 8; surmised action on wind of (here Mogol-tau) 9 n. 2; (_see_ Abū'l-ghāzī, Désmaisons p. 12).

Muqur (Afghānistān), Bābur at 345.

Mūra-pass (Ḥiṣār-shādmān), 58 n. 1; Bābur crosses 129 (not named).

Murgh-āb river and fort (Khurāsān), Ḥusain _Bāī-qarā_ and 191, 260; Bābur on 285, 297-9, 300; Shaibānī at 327.

Murghān-koh (Qandahār), position of 332 n. 4; Bābur at 336.

Mūrī and Adūsa, Bāburpūr (U.P. India), Bābur at 644.

Muttra (U.P. India), _see_ Mahāwīn.

Naghr or Naghz (Kābul), a s. limit of Kābul 200; position of 206, 231-3.

Nagūr, Nagor (Rājpūtāna), revenue of 521.

Nakhshab (Samarkand), _see_ Qarshī.

Namangān (Farghāna), new canal of App. A, ii, n. 1; Bābur near 117.

Nānāpūr (U.P. India), Bābur at 657.

Nānī (Ghaznī), Bābur at 240; old Nānī plundered 254.

Napoleon's* task in Egypt compared 356.

Nardak* (U.P. India), a hunting-ground 701.

Nārīn (n. of Hindū-kush), a fugitive through 321.

Nārīn-river (n. arm of Saiḥūn), 88 n. 2, App. A, ii.

Nārnūl (U.P. India), an assignment on 677.

Nasūkh (Farghāna), Bābur at 92.

Natḥpūr or Fatḥpūr (U.P. India), Bābur near 680-1.

Naugrām (U.P. India), Bābur meets his sister at 689 n. 3.

Nijr-aū _tūmān_ (Kābul), described 213; mountains of 222; products of 203, 213; boiled wine in 213; a dependency of 220; locates Ālā-sāī 220; Bābur in 253, 420-1, his frontier-post of 213 n. 2.

Nīl-āb (Indus), various instances of the name 206 n. 3; a tribal limit 378, 387; routes to Kābul from 206; old Nīl-āb located 392; comings and goings from and to 250, 265, 399, 419, 422, 647, 659; given to Humāyūn 391; Bābur at 392, counts his army at 451.

Nile (The),* used as an illustration 9 n. 2; Alexander takes the Indus for 206 n. 3.

Nīng-nahār _tūmān_ (Kābul) described 207-9; its book-name Nagarahār 207; meaning of the name 208, App. E; not included in the Lamghānāt 210; a dependency of 213; waters of 209, App. E; wintering tribes 242; a bird of 493; division of hot and cold climates n 229; Bāgh-i-wafā laid out in 208; holders of 227, 317, 344, 421; an arrival from 345; Bābur at 342.

Nīrah-tū or Tīrah-tū, Kalīūn (Herī), Shaibānī's family in 343.

Nirhun (Bihār, India), Bābur at 674.

Nirkh-pass, Takht-pass (Kābul), Bābur crosses 228.

Nīshāpūr (Khurāsān), mentioned as on a route 622 n. 3.

Nīshīn-meadow (Herī), Ḥusain _Bāī-qarā_ and 95, 261.

Nū-kīnt (Farghāna), locates an enemy 116; threatened 170.

Nulibā (U.P. India), Bābur at 657.

Nūndāk, Ḥ.S. Nawāndāk (Chaghānīān _q.v._), located 471; Barlās family of 51 (where "Badakhshān" is wrong); Bābur near 129; Aūzbegs retire to 471.

Nūr-gal (Kābul), described 211; meaning of its name, App. F, xxiii; holders of 227, 334; Bābur at 343, 423.

Nūr-lām (Kābul), _see_ App. F, xxiii.

Nūr-valley (Kābul), _see_ Dara-i-nūr.

Nūsh-āb (Farghāna), Bābur near 114.

Otrār (W. Turkistān), _see_ Aūtrār.

Oude, Oudh, Aūd, Adjodhya (U.P. India), revenue of 521; river-crossings to 669; locates places 601-2, 679 n. 2; army of 684-5; a bird of 495; appointment to 544; ? Bābur at 680 and n. 2; his Mosque in App. U.

Paklī, Pakhlī (Panj-āb), formerly part of Kashmīr 484.

Palghar (Samarkand), limit of Samarkand on upper Zar-afshān 152.

Pamghān range and village, Paghmān (Kābul), described 215-6; village destroyed by earthquake 247; Shāh Begīm's 318; *snows seen from Bābur's burial-garden 710.

Pāmīr routes, *spring re-opening of 695.

Pānī-mālī or -mānī (N.W.F.P. India), the road to 376.

Pānīpat (Panj-āb), battles at 472 n. 1; Bābur's victory at 457, 469, 470-1-2, 534.

Panj-āb (India), of the name App. E, xx; *Bābur's power in 426, 430; *Daulat Khān's strength in 412, 443; Bābur's journey to (937 AH.), 604 n. 1, *698.

Panj-dih, Pand-dih (Khurāsān), Aūzbeg raiders beaten at 296.

Panjhīr, Panj-sher _tūmān_ (Kābul), described 214; pass-roads of 195-6, 205; highway-men of 214; river of 407; a _dārogha_ in 250.

Panj-kūra (N.W.F.P. India), Bābur at 373-4.

Pāp (Farghāna), holds fast for Bābur 91, 101; affairs in 171-4-6 n. 3.

Pārandī-pass (Hindū-kush), described 205; height of 204 n. 4.

Parashāwar, Peshāwar (N.W.F.P. India), a limit of Kābul 200; beauty of flowers near 393; rhinoceros of 490; partridges in 496; Bigrām near 230 n. 2; Bābur and 382, 393, 410-2.

Parhāla (Panj-āb), a Kakar stronghold 387-9; described and taken by Bābur 396-7.

Parsarū-river (U.P. India), Bābur on 682-3.

Parsrūr, Parsarūr (Panj-āb), an assignment on 684; Bābur at 458; G. of India form of name Pasrūr 684 n. 1.

Pārwān (Kohistān, Kābul), described 214-5; wind of 201, 224; road and pass of 205; fishing in 226, 406; wines and flowers of 215.

Pashāghar (Samarkand), described 97; a native of 188; Bābur at 97-8, 148.

Pātakh-i-āb-i-shakna (Kābul), meaning of the name 403 n. 2; Bābur at 403.

Pawat-pass (Mehtar Sulaimān range), Bābur crosses 238.

Pehlūr, Phillaur (Panj-āb), Bābur at 458.

Pesh-grām (N.W.F.P. India), Bābur at 373.

Pīāg, Allāhābād (U.P. India), Bābur at 654-5; incident of his march from 657.

Pīchghān (Kābul), bird-catching in 220; punitive attack on 253.

Pīch-i-Kāfiristān (n. of Kābul country), wines of 212; hostile to Bābur 212.

Pīr Kānū, _see_ Sakhī-sarwār.

Pul-i-chirāgh, Bīl-i-chirāgh (Balkh-Herāt road), located 69; a victory at 69, 260.

Pul-i-sālār (Herāt), 329-30.

Pul-i-sangīn (Ḥiṣār-shadmān), *Tīmūr's and Bābur's victories at 353-4.

Pushta-i-`aīsh (Farghāna), forces near 106, 165.

Qabā (Farghāna), swamp of 31; invaded 30; Bābur at 123, 162.

Qa`bādīān (Ḥiṣār-shādmān), Bābur at 188; taken for him 640.

Qabil's tomb, _i.e._ Cain's (Kābul), Bābur at 415.

Qāīn (Khurāsān), held by a Bāī-qarā 296, 301.

Qaiṣār (s.w. of Maïmènè, _see_ Fr. map), Bābur at 296.

Qalāt-i-ghilzāī (Qandahār), Bābur takes 248-9, 339; road south from 333; a governor of 340; fugitives join Bābur near 331; Hindūstān traders at 331.

Qalāt-i-nādirī (n. of Mashhad, Khurāsān), birthplace of Nādir Shāh 263 n. 4, 329 n. 4; Bāī-qarā holders of 263, 329.

Qanauj (U.P. India), revenue of 521; appointments in 265, 582; hostile both to Ibrāhīm and to Bābur 523-9; military occurrences at 530, 557, 582-9, 594-8.

Qandahār (Afghānistān), sometimes reckoned as part of Ghaznī 217; a s. limit of Khurāsān 261; irrigation-waters of 332-6; heat of compared 520; Kābul trade with 202; routes to 206, 308; —governors in 264, 274; Arghūns in 71, 227, 326, 336, 429; Ḥusain _Bāī-qarā's_ failure at 94; —Bābur's campaigns against 220, 246-8, 330-9, *365, *426-28-36-39; unremunerative to him 480; his rock-residence (Chihil-zīna) near 333-5, App. J; Shaibānī's siege of 21, 331-9, 340-3; Nāṣir in 338; Kāmrān in 583, *694-9, *706; —Khwānd-amīr leaves 605; a rapid journey to 621, *705; Lord Roberts on his first view of 333 n. 1; ruins of in 1879 AD. 430.

Qarā-bāgh (Kābul), Bābur at 196; ? a rebel of 687.

Qarā-bāgh-meadow (Qandahār), flood-waters of 240; spoils shared out at 339; ? a rebel of 687.

Qarā-būgh (Samarkand), Bābur at 147.

Qarā-būlāq (Samarkand), Bābur at 66-7; a punishment at 66, 153.

Qarā-daryā (s. arm of Saiḥūn), now supplies Andijān 3 n. 6; 88 n. 2; App. A, ii.

Qarā-kūl (Samarkand), mentioned 84; irrigation of 76-7; a governor of 40; lost and regained by Aūzbegs 135-7.

Qarā-kūpa pass, ? Malakand (N.W.F.P. India), Bābur on 376.

Qarā-nakarīq ? (Kābul), a route through 209.

Qārlūq _wilāyat_ (Panj-āb), a governor of 403.

Qarshī, Nashaf, Nakhshāb (Samarkand), described 84; Tarkhāns in 62, 88, 135 (here ? Kesh, p. 138); Aūzbegs and 135, *353-4; Bābur's wish to spare and Najm S̤ānī's massacre 359-60, 361.

Qarā-rabāṯ (n. of Herāt), Bāī-qarā defeat at 327.

Qarā-sū, Siyāh-āb (Kābul), Bābur fords 396; (N.W.F.P. India), he crosses 450; (s. arm of Zar-afshān, Samarkand) 78; course of 82; a meadow on 81; known as Āb-i-raḥmat 78.

Qarā-tīgīn (n. of Ḥiṣār-shādmān), passers through 58, 112, *349; Bābur plans to go through to Kāshghar 129; *his Mughūl assailants retire to 362.

Qarā-tū (Kābul), located 208-9; Bābur at 395, 409, 425.

Qarghā-yīlāq (Kābul), low hills of 320.

Qīāq-tū (Ghaznī ?), Bābur at 323.

Qībchāq road and pass (Hindū-kush), described 205; Bābur on 197.

Qīlaghū (Kābul), Bābur at 413.

Qīrīq-arīq (Kābul), Bābur at 410, 448.

Qila`-i-Ikhtiyāru'd-dīn, Ālā-qūrghān (Herāt), Bābur rumoured captive in 313; Bāī-qarā families abandoned in 327.

Qila`-i-ẕafar, Shāf-tiwār (Badakhshān), former name Shāf-tiwār 242; sends an envoy to Bābur 618; a rapid journey from 621; offered to Mīrzā Khān 21, *349; a Chaghatāī fugitive through 349; opposes the Aūzbegs 242; —Humāyūn's departures from (932 AH.) 545, *(935 AH.) 694-5; *Hind-āl in charge 696-7; *beleaguered by Sa`īd 697; *made over to Sulaimān 699.

Qīzīl-sū, Surkh-āb, _q.v._ (n. of Hindū-kush), locates a road 205; a fugitive on 321; Bābur near 192-3.

Quhlugha, Quhqa (Ḥiṣār-shādmān), _see_ Dar-band-i-ahanīn.

Qulba meadow (Samarkand), described 82; 80; a murder in 128; Bābur in 72, 141.

Qūndūz (Badakhshān), n. limit of Kābul 200; pass-roads 204-5; head-waters of 216; tribes of 228, 402; Mughūls of 345, 361; a ruler in 47; Ḥusain _Bāī-qarā_ and 48, 50-7, 61, 94, 191, 260, 275; Khusrau Shāh and 57, 60, 70-4, 93, 110, 141, 196, 244; Shaibānī and 192, 242-4; goings to 270, 546; Bābur and 51, 318, *352-3, *362-3, *427-80; letters of victory sent to 371; his sister sent to 18, *352.

Qurgha-tū (Kābul), a route through 376.

Qurūq-sāī (Kābul), located by context 208-9, 341, 395; Bābur at 341, 395, 414.

Qūsh-khāna (Ḥiṣār-shādmān), an encounter at 71.

Qūsh-khāna meadow (Qandahār), Bābur in 338.

Qūsh-guṃbaẕ (Kābul), Bābur at 229, 241, 447.

Qūsh-nādir or nāwar (Kābul), Bābur at 247, 417.

Qūtlūq-qadam's tomb and bridge (Kābul), position of 208; Bābur at 198, 395.

Rabāṯ-i-duzd or -dūdur (n. of Herāt), a Bāī-qarā defeat at 263.

Rabāṯ-i-khwāja (Samarkand), head-quarters of Shavdār 97; Bābur's men in 73; Bābur in 97, 130-1, 127-8.

Rabāṯ-i-sarhang (Farghāna), Taṃbal in 108, 110.

Rabāṯ-i-Soghd (Samarkand), a battle near 111.

Rabāṯ-i-surkh (Kābul), Bābur at 341.

Rabāṯ-i-zauraq or -rūzaq (Farghāna), Bābur at 165, 396.

Rabāṯik-aūrchīn (Farghāna), _see_ Aīkī-sū-ārā.

Rādagān (n.w. of Mashhad), T̤ahmāsp at 622; name and location of 622 nn. 4, 5, 623 nn. 4, 7.

Rāgh (Badakhshān), uprisings in 242, 321.

Rahap river, ? Raptī (India), course of 485.

Rāīsīng (C. India), Bābur's intention against 598.

Rant(h)ambūr (Rājpūtāna), revenue of 521; hills of 486; Sangā's 483.

Rāprī (U.P. India), a _pargana_ of 644; a dependency of 686; military vicissitudes at 523-30-57-81-82-98; Bābur at 643.

Rashdān (Farghāna), birthplace of the author of the Hidāyat 7, 76.

Rāvī river (Panj-āb) 458; source of 485.

Rechna dū-āb (Panj-āb), *Bābur in 429.

Rivers of Hindūstān 485.

Rohtās (Panj-āb), a tribal limit 452 n. 5.

Rūm (Turkey-in-Asia), Kābul trade with 202; a medical remedy of 657; Rūmī defence of connected carts 469, 550, 564, 635.

Rūpar (Panj-āb), Bābur at 464.

Rūstā-hazāra, ? a tribe name (Badakhshān), men of join Bābur 196; (Elph. and Ḥai. MSS. Rūstā, Ilminskī, p. 153, Rūstākh; is it Rūstāq _infra_ ?).

Rustam-maidān (Kābul), described 405; Bābur at 405.

Rūstāq (Badakhshān), revolts against Aūzbegs 242; _see_ Rūstā-hazāra _supra_.

Sabzawār (Khurāsān), a return from 261; on a route 622 n. 3.

Ṣāf-koh (Kābul-Herāt route), Bābur on 295-6.

Safed-koh (Kābul), _see_ Koh-i-safed.

Saighān (Khurāsān; _see_ Fr. map Maïmènè), on the summer-road by Shibr-tū 205; Bābur in 294.

Saiḥūn-daryā, Sīr-darya, Khujand-water (Transoxiana), course of 2, 84 n. 5, App. A, ii; the Khāns and 13, 31, 156, 172; various crossings of 101-16; a proposed limit of lands 118-62; Bābur's crossings of 151 (on ice), 161, 170-9, *183; his men's success on 102; his father's defeat on 16; _see_ Nārīn and Qarā-daryā for constituents of.

Sāī-kal (Kābul), Bābur at 342.

Sairām (n. of Tāshkīnt), locates Yagha 159; holders of 17, 35; name of used as a password 164; *withstands the Aūzbegs 358.

Sajāwand (Kābul), celebrities of 217; Bābur at 241.

Sakān (Farghāna), a ferry near 161.

Sakhan (Ghaznī), ruined dam of 219.

Sakhī-sawār (Dara-i-Ghāzī Khān, India), Pīr Kānū's tomb at 238; Bābur at 238.

Salt-range (Panj-āb), _see_ Koh-i-jūd.

Sāmāna (Panj-āb), river of 465; fixes a limit 638; an appointment to 528; *a surmised source of historic information 693; *a complaint from to Bābur and punitive results 700.

Samarkand (mod. Asiatic Russia), description of 74-86; names of 74, 75 and n. 4; sub-divisions, _see_ Bukhārā, Karmīna, Kesh, Khozār, Qarā-kūl, Qarshī = Nashaf and Nakhshab, Shāvdār or Shādwār, Soghd; meadows of 67-8, 70-77, 81-2, 128, 131; buildings and constructions in:— (1) Tīmūr's 77-8 and _s.n._ Gardens, (2) Aūlūgh Beg's 78-9, 80, 133, 142-4, (3) others 75-7 nn. 6-8; — Alps of 222; cold in 202-4; a comparison of 216; fruits 8, 510; bullies 7; Aimāqs 221; trade with Kābul 202; name locates places or fixes dates 1, 2, 25, 44-9, 136, 150-1-2, 244, 284, 289; Corps of Braves 28, App. H, xxvii; _tūghchīs_ 28; rulers of 13, 35, 41-6, 52, 65, 74, 90, 111, 121-7, 147, 152, 479, 622; governors of 37, 131; comings and goings to and from 15, 20-2-4, 64, 88, 136-7, 148-9, 256, 300, 402-3; refugees to 46, 51, 58, 95 (plan for), 271; an execution in 51, 196; a raid near 16; `Umar Shaikh and 12, 15; Tarkhān revolt in 61-3; besieged for a bride 64; Abū-sa`īd takes 20-8; Maḥmūd _Chaghatāī_ and 23, 88, 122; — Bābur _æt._ 5, taken to 35-7; his desire for 97-8, *706; desired by others 64, 111-2; his attempts on 64-6-8, 72-4, 92-3-7, 112-5-9, 131-2, *354; invited to 122-3-4; captures of 18, 35-9, 40, 74, 88, 132-4, 266, 277-9, *355, 471; his surprise capture compared 134-5[2948]; rule in 86-7, 135, 147; leaves it to help Andijān 88-9, 190; defeated at 133-141; besieged in and surrenders 141-7, 168, 24; leaves it 147, 358, 471; — Shaibānī receives it in gift 125; loss and gain of 74, 147, 168; occupation of 125-8, *183, 256, 300, 325-8, 360; — *Ḥaidar _Dūghlāt_ in 357; Merv Mughūls near 357; Humāyūn attempts to recover 625, 639; — envoys from to Bābur 438, 630-1, 642; gifts to 522; Bābur's 1st _Dīwān_ and the _Mūbīn_ sent to 402, App. Q, viii, *438.

Samnān (Persia), a fruit of 6.

Saṃbhal (U.P. India), revenue of 521; snows seen from 485; hostile to Bābur 523; Bābur's 528, 547; abandoned by his men 557; Bābur at 586-7; deaths of officers in 675, 683 n. 4, 687; Humāyūn's fief 697, *700-2.

Sām-sīrak (s. of Tāshkīnt), The Khān's army counted near 154; hunting near 156; Bābur at 152.

Sān (Balkh territory ?), plundered 94, 295 (p. 94 for "Sān-chīrīk", _read_ Sān and Chār-yak).

Sanām (C. India), river of 465.

Sang (Farghāna), Bābur at 176, *183.

Sang-i-āīna (Farghāna), described 7.

Sang-i-barīda (Kābul), Bābur passes 407.

Sang-i-lakhshak (Qandahār), Bābur at 333.

Sang-i-sūrākh (Kābul), Bābur passes 228; and (Dasht-Farmūl road) _do._ 235.

Sangdakī pass (Panj-āb), Bābur crosses 379, 392.

Sangzār (Samarkand), Bābur and 92, 124, 131; (p. 92, l. 9, _read_ "to Sangzār by way of Yār-yīlāq").

Sanjī-tāq (Kābul), a pleasure resort 200 n. 6.

Sanjid-dara (Kābul), Bābur at 196, 406.

Sanūr (C. India), torrent of 464.

Sapān (Farghāna), a hostile force at 101.

Saqā (Farghāna), Bābur's victory near 113.

Sarāī Munda (U.P. India), Bābur at 651.

Sarāī Bāburpūr (U.P. India), _see_ Mūrī and Adusa.

Sarakhs (on the Herī-rūd), Aūzbeg capture of 534.

Saran (Bihār, India), revenue of 521; held by a Farmulī *602, 675; an assignment on 679; locates troops 672 n. 4.

Sarangpūr (C. India), Sangā's 483; Bābur's intention against it 598.

Sara-tāq pass (Ḥiṣār-shādmān), described 129; mentioned on routes 40 n. 4, 58, 129; Bābur crosses 129.

Sār-bāgh (Kābul-Balkh route), traitors to Bābur near 546; (_see_ Fr. map Maïmènè).

Sar-i-dih (Ghaznī), dam of 218; Bābur at 240, 323.

Sārīgh-chūpām (Badakhshan), *annexed to Kāshghar 695; *Ḥaidar _Dūghlāt_ at 697.

Sar-i-pul, Bridge-head (Kābul), Bābur at 314; (Samarkand), an army at 65; Bābur defeated at 18, 137-8 to 141, 188.

Sarjū affluent of the Gogrā, _q.v._ 602 n. 1.

Sarsāwa spring (U.P. India), Bābur at 467.

Sarū-daryā, Gagar, Gogra, Ghogrā (India), two constituent rivers Sīrd (Sarda) and Gagar (or Kakar) 602, 1677 n. 2; course of (Gagar) 485; confluence and _dū-āb_ with Gang (Ganges) 665-6-7, 677 n. 2; narrowed below and above the confluence 668 n. 1, 674 nn. 1, 2; rhinoceros and water-hogs of 490, 502; — various crossings of 544, 668, 671-4-5-7, 685; Bābur crosses after his victory on 674-7-9; leaves it 682; Battle of the Gogrā 671-7.

Sārū-qamsh (Khurāsān), an ascribed site of the battle of Jām 635 n. 4.

Sarwār (U.P. India), revenue of 521; Bībān and Bāyazīd sent towards 642; an assignment on 679; 682 n. 1; Bābur at ease about 679.

Sawād (N.W.F.P. India), a limit fixed 400; trees of 222; various products of 492-4, 510-11; brewing in 422; desolate 207; a test of women's virtue in 211; chiefs of 372-4; Yūsuf-zāī in 410, App. K, xxxvii, an arrival from 399; Bābur and 373-6-7, 411-2.

Sawā-sang (Qandahār), Bābur over-runs 249.

Sawātī, ? an adjective=of Sawād, _q.v. kargkhāna_ and Bābur's rhino-hunting in 378, 450.

Sayyidpūr ? or Sidhpūr (Panj-āb), Bābur takes 429.

Sehonda, Seondhā (C. India), revenue of 521.

Shāf-tiwār (Badakhshān), _see_ Qila`-i-ẕafar.

Shāhābād (Panj-āb), Bābur at 466.

Shāh-i-Kābul mountain, Sher-darwāza (Kābul), located 200-1; *Bābur buried on 710.

Shahmang ? (Panj-āb), once part of Kashmīr 484.

Shahr-i-sabz (Samarkand), _see_ Kesh.

Shahr-i-ṣafā (Ḥiṣār-shādmān), a holder of 188; (Qandahār), Bābur at 332-3.

Shāhrukhiya = Fanākat _q.v._ (Tāshkīnt), a limit of Samarkand 76; names of 2 n. 5, 7 n. 5, 13, 76; holders of 13, 17; various military occurrences at 21-4, 16, 54, 7, 23, 151; Champion's-portion taken at 53.

Shakdān (Badakhshān), a force at 295.

Shāl = Quetta (Balūchistān), Shāh Beg goes to 337, *427.

Shām, Syria, a Samarkand _tūmān_ compared with 84.

Shamsābād (U.P. India), exchanges of 477, 594-8, 613; an assignment on 677.

Sham-tū (n. of Hindū-kush), on a route 192.

Shāsh (W. Turkistān), _see_ Tāshkīnt.

Shatlut river, ? Sutlej (Panj-āb), Bābur crosses 457.

Shāvdār or Shādwār _tūmān_ (Samarkand), described 84; a fort of 68; head-quarters in 97; a Tarkhān in 122; joins Bābur 125.

Sherkot (Bhīra, Panj-āb), a holder of 382.

Sherūkān ? (Ghaznī?), a fight near 397.

Sherwān (n.e. of Mashhad, Persia), a native of 284; (_see_ Fr. map Maïmènè).

Shibarghān (Khurāsān), besieged 94; defence planned 191; battle near 260.

Shibr-tū pass (Hindū-kush), described 205; height of 204 n. 4; meaning of name 205 n. 2; crossed 242, 321; Bābur crosses 294, 311; (for an omission on p. 205, _see_ Add. Note p. 205).

Shīrāz (Persia), Yūnas Khān in 20; (Samarkand), a Commandant of 130; Bābur near 64-6, 73; raided by Shaibānī 92; 98.

Shīwa (Kābul-river), Bābur at 343.

Sniz (Kābul-Ghaznī road), Bābur near 248.

Shorkach (Ghaznī ?), locates a place 323 n. 3.

Shulut (Kābul), App. F, xxiv.

Shunqār-khāna mountains (n.w. rampart of Zar-afshān valley), Bābur crosses 130.

Shutur-gardan (Samarkand), described 142 n. 1, 143.

Sīālkot (Panj-āb), revenue of 521; officers of 98, *442-3; *attacked 443; Bābur and *429-52-54-58.

Sidhpūr (Panj-āb), _see_ Sayyidpūr.

Sihkāna (Afghānistān), a tribe in 323.

Sihrind, Sahrind, Sirhind (Panj-āb), revenue of 521; names of 383 n. 1; rivers rising n. of 485; fixes a limit 638; fixes a date 457; snows seen from 485; a holder of 383; an assignment on 582; Bābur and *441-64, *693-9, *700-1.

Sikandar's dam (C.P. India), described 606; Bābur at 585.

Sikandara (U.P. India), Bābur at 587.

Sikandaräbād (U.P. India), Bābur passes 588.

Sikandarpūr (U.P. India), a ferry station of 677; an official of 668; Bābur at 679.

Sikrī (U.P. India), hills of 485; *Bābur keeps Rāmẓān at 351, changes name of 548 n. 2; selects it for his camp (933 AH.) 548; Bābur at 549, 581-5-8, 600, 615-6; revenues of support his tomb *709.

Sind (India), *Shāh Beg and 427-9.

Sind-daryā, Indus, of "Nīl-āb" as a name of 206 n. 3; fords and ferries of 206; tributaries of 216, 485; rhinoceros of 490; limits lands 206 n. 6, 231-3, 380, 392, 484, 525; — *Shāh Beg and 431; — *Bābur's compulsion to seek territory across 706; Bābur on 230-7-8, 378-92, *452-3; mentions it in verse 525-6.

Singar-water, Sengar (U.P. India), Bābur bathes in 649.

Sinjid-dara (Kābul), Bābur in 196, 406.

Sīr-āb or Sar-i-āb (n. of Hindū-kush), a pass-route to 205; a defeat near 51, 196.

Sīr-auliya (U.P. India), Bābur at 654.

Sīrd, Sīrda, Sarda (U.P. India), a constituent of the Gagar, Gogrā, Ghogrā 602.

Sirhind (Panj-āb), _see_ Sihrind.

Sīrkāī, ? Sirakhs (Khurāsān), Shaibānī near 327.

Sīstān (Khurāsān), a s. limit of Khurāsān 261; plan of defence for 326.

Siwālik-hills, or Sawālak (N. India), Bābur on the name 485.

Sīwī, Sībī (Balūchistān), an official in 238; an incursion into 260; Sīwīstān, *427.

Siyāh-āb, _see_ Qarā-sū.

Siyāh-koh (Kābul), located (unnamed) 209; various names of 209 n. 3.

Siyāh-sang (Kābul), meadow of 201; *scene of an Afghān massacre, App. K, xxvi.

Soghd _tūmān_ (Samarkand), described 84, 147; Bābur and 64, 135, 147.

Son-water (Bihār, India), an enemy near 658; crossed for Bābur 662; Bābur on 666.

Spīn-ghur (Afghānistān), _see_ Safed-koh.

Sūf-valley (Khurāsān), _see_ Dara-i-ṣūf.

Sūgandpūr (U.P. India), Bābur at 686.

Sūhān-nūrī, or Sūhār-nūrī (Kābul), App. G, xxv.

Sūhān-sū (Panj-āb), a tribe on 380; Bābur on 379, 391.

Sūkh (Farghāna), Bābur's refuge in 7, 130 n. 1, 176 n. 1, *184-5; gifts to envoys from 633.

Sukhjāna (C.P. India), Bābur near 614.

Sulaimān-range (Afghān border), _see_ Mehtar Sulaimān.

Sulṯānīa (Persia), cold of 219.

Sulṯānpūr (Kābul), Bābur at 409-13-47.

Sulṯānpūr (Panj-āb), founder of 442-61; a return to 457; *taken from Bābur 443.

Sūnkār (Rājpūtāna), Bābur at 581.

Sūrkh-āb (n. of Hindū-kūsh), _see_ Qīzīl-sū.

Surkh-āb, Qizil-sū (Ḥiṣār-shādmān), Bābur's victory on 352-3.

Surkh-āb and rūd, Qīzīl-sū (Kābul), 207 n. 5; Bāgh-i-wafā on 208, Adīnapūr-fort on 209; wild-ass near 224; Bābur crosses 395; ruins near App. E, xvii.

Surkh-rabāṯ (Kābul), _see_ Rabāṯ-i-surkh.

Sūsān-village (Kābul), Bābur at 422.

Sutluj and Shutlūt (_sic_ Ḥai. MS.), Sutlej-river (Panj-āb), limits lands 383; course of 485; crossed 457; Trans-Sutluj revenues 521.

Syria, _see_ Shām.

Tabrīz (Persia), cold of 204-19; Yūnas Khān in 20.

Tag-aū (Kābul), _see_ Badr-aū.

Tahangar (Rājpūtāna), hostile to Bābur 538.

Takāna (? Khurāsān), a fight at 260.

"Takhta Qarachi" (Samarkand), 83 n. 2; _see_ Aītmāk-dābān.

Takht-i-sulaimān (Farghāna) 5 n. 2.

T̤āliqān, T̤āīkhān (Oxus), a Bāī-qarā at 60; Mughūls from 192.

Tal Ratoi (Nathpūr, U.P. India), 681 n. 1.

Tang-āb (Farghāna), Bābur at 100; located 99 n. 4.

Tang-i-wāghchān pass (Kābul), _see_ Gīrdīz.

Tank, Tāq (N.W.F. Province), _see_ Dasht.

T̤arāz or T̤arar (E. Turkistān), _see_ Yāngī.

Tarnak river (Qandahār), _see_ Turnūk.

Tarshīz (Khurāsān), Ḥusain _Bāī-qarā's_ victory at 259 and n. 5 (where _read_ p. 524).

Tāshkīnt, Tāshkend (Russia-in-Asia), of its names 2 n. 5, 7 and n. 5, *184; its book-names Shāsh and Chāch 13, 76; ravines of App. A, ii; holders of 32-5, 115, 154, 161; a rebel at 36; Khalīfa sent to 90; name of used as a pass-word 164; Shaibānī's capture of (908 AH.) 23-4, *184; holds out for Bābur (918 AH.) 356-8, 396; its Aūzbeg Sulṯāns at Jām 622.

Tāsh-rabāṯ (n. of Herī), Bābur at 301.

Tatta (Sind, India), course of the Indus through 485; playing cards sent to 584.

Tāzī var. Yārī (Ghaznī-Qalāt road), Bābur at 248.

Tibet, Bābur locates 485.

Tijāra (Rājpūtāna), a chief town in Mīwāt 578; given to Chīn-tīmūr 578-9, 688.

Tīka-sīkrītkū, Goat-leap (Farghāna), `Umar Shaikh defeated at 16.

Tīl, Thāl (Kohāt, N.W.F.P. India), Bābur at 232.

Tīimūr Beg's Langar (Kābul), Bābur at 313.

Tīpa (Kābul), assigned for a camp 199; earthquake damage in 247; an exit from 254.

Tirāk-pass (Farghāna), 15 n. 5.

Tirhut (Bihār, India), revenue of 521.

Tīrmīẕ (Ḥiṣār-shādmān territory), a s. limit of Samarkand 76, Begīms of 37, 47-8; Ḥusain _Bāī-qarā_ and 5, 191; a governor of 74; Bāqī _Chaghānīānī's_ 188, 249; a sayyid of *704-5; Najm _S̤ānī_ at 359; entered for Bābur 640.

Tīr-mūhānī (Bihār, India), mentioned 679, 675 n. 1, 687 and n. 2; the _Ḥabību's-siyar_ finished at 687 n. 2.

Tīzīn-dara (Kābul), 208 n. 4.

Tochī-valley (N.W.F.P. India), ? to be traversed by Bābur 231.

Toda-bhīm (Rājpūtāna), Bābur at 581; Sangā at 545 (where "Āgra district" is wrong).

Tons-river, Tūs-sū (U.P. India), Bābur on 656, 683.

Tramontana (between the Oxus and Hindū-kush), army of 447; *706.

Tūghlūqābād (Dihlī), Bābur at 476.

T̤ūl-pass and road (Hindū-kush), account of 205; height of 204 n. 4.

Tūn (Khurāsān), a Bāī-qarā holder of 296, 301.

Tūp (Kābul-Herāt road), Bābur at 295.

Tūqūz-aūlūm (Oxus), a defence question 191.

T̤urfān (Chinese Turkistān), Bābur plans going to 158.

Turkistān, course of the Saiḥūn in 2-3; trade with Kābul 202; gold-cloth of 641 n. 5; Shaibānī and 65 n. 3, 73-4, 135; his vow in Haẓrat Turkistān 356; *`Ubaid in 354.

Turnūk, Tarnak (Qandahār), 332 n. 3; a holder of 340.

Tūs-sū (U.P. India), _see_ Tons.

T̤ūs (`Irāq), an astronomer of 79; Shaibānī attacks 534.

Tūta (U.P. India), Begims from Kābul pass 616.

Tūtlūq-yūl, Mulberry-road (Farghāna), Bābur on 165.

Tūtūn-dara (Kābul), water taken from 647.

Udyānapūra (Kābul), App. E, xxi; _see_ Adīnapūr.

Ujjain (Mālwa, C. India), an observatory in 79.

`Umān-sea, receives the Indus 485.

`Umarābād (Khurāsān), an ascribed site of the battle of Jām 635 n. 4.

Ūnjū-tūpā (Farghāna), _see_ Aūnjū-tūpā.

`Uqābain (Kābul), site of the Bālā-ḥiṣār 201.

Ūrgenj (Khwārizm), _see_ Aūrgānj.

Ūrghūn (Kābul), _see_ Aūrghūn.

Urūs-sū (W. Turkistān), _see_ Arūs.

Ush (Farghāna), _see_ Aūsh.

Ushtur-shahr (Kābul), Bābur in 195, 294, 314.

`Uṯrār, Otrār, Aūṯrār (W. Turkistān), _see_ Yāngī.

Varsak (Badakhshān), position of 523 n. 1, Bābur's gifts to 523.

Vierney, Vernoe (E. Turkistān), position on site of old Ālmātū 2 n. 1.

Wakhsh (Ḥiṣār-shādmān), Aūzbegs at 352, 362.

Walīān pass (Hindū-kush), account of 205; height of 204 n. 4.

Warūkh (Farghāna), account of 7.

Wasmand fort (Samarkand), Bābur at 132.

Wazr-āb (Ḥiṣār-shādmān), 58 n. 1.

Yada-bīr (Kābul), Bābūr at 394, 411, 448.

Yaftal (Badakhshān), a force at 321.

Yagha or Yaghma (n. of Tāshkīnt), tombs at 139; Bābur at 139.

Yāī (Khurāsān), tribes in 255.

Yaka-aulang (w. of Bāmīān, _see_ Fr. map Maïmènè), Jahāngīr goes to 294; passes from Herī-rūd valley to 310 n. 2; Bābur in 311.

Yak-langa (Kābul), Bābur crosses 445.

Yām (Samarkand), Bābur at 67; 84 n. 3.

Yān-bulāgh (Kābul), Bābur on road of 425.

Yāngī-ḥiṣār (Kāshghar), *a death-bed repentance at 362.

Yāngī = Tarāz (E. Turkistān), depopulated 2; book-name of 2 and n. 1; an army at 20.

Yāngī = Ūṯrar, Otrar (W. Turkistān), a mistaken entry of in some MSS. 2 n. 1.

Yāngī-yūl pass (Hindū-kush), described 205.

Yārī (Ghaznī-Qalāt road), _see_ Tazī.

Yārī (Zar-afshān), Bābur crosses the bridge to 130.

Yārkand (E. Turkistān), *696.

Yār-yīlāq (Samarkand), Tīmūr's "head" of Soghd 84; fights near 35, 122; villages of 97-8; submits to Bābur 98; Bābur in 64, 92, 125, 130-1.

Yasān (Farghāna), _see_ Khasbān.

Yāsī-kījīt (Farghāna), Bābur's men defeated at 27, 105.

Yīlān-aūtī or Yīlān-aūt (Samarkand), Bābur at 147.

Yīlān-chaq (n. of Hindū-kush), a tribe of 196.

Yītī-kīnt (Farghāna), mandrake in 11; of its position 11 n. 6; Yūnas Khān's headquarters 20 n. 5.

Zābul, Zābulistān, a name of Ghaznī _q.v._

[Z.]aḥāq fort, "Zohak" (s. of Bāmīān), Bābur at 294; (_see_ Fr. map Maïmènè).

Zamānia (U.P. India), _see_ Madan-Banaras.

Zamīn (Samarkand), locates places 34, 64; Bābur at 97.

Zamīn-dāwar (Qandahār), Arghūn chiefs in 71, 337-9; Zū'n-nūn's 274; taken by Bābur 27; plan to defend 326.

Zar-afshān river, Kohik-sū _q.v._ (Samarkand), described 76 and nn. 4, 5; Macha village on 149 n. 4; Bābur crosses 67, 130; *Najm _S̤ānī_ crosses 360.

Zardak-chūl (w. of Balkh), over-run 94.

Zarqān or Zabarqān (Farghāna), Bābur at 161.

Zindān valley (Kābul-Balkh road), _see_ Dara-i-zindān.

Zirrīn-pass (between Herī-rūd valley and Yaka-aūlāng), Bābur misses it 309-10.

Zurmut _tūmān_ (Kābul), described 220; floods in 240; Gīrdīz head-quarters in 220.

Index III. General

Abbreviated names 29.

Abdu'l-wahhāb _Ghaj-dāvānī_ see _Wāqi`-nāma-i-pādshāhī_.

Ablution—before death 188; reservoirs 208, 217, 580, 639, 683.

Abū-ṯālib _Ḥusainī_ or Abū'l-ḥusain _Turbatī_ _see_ _Malfūzāt-i-tīmūri_.

_Abūshqa_, a Turki—Turkish Dict.—quotes verses as Bābur's 438; quotes Khw. Kalān 526; the Bāburī-script App. Q, lxiii.

Account-rolls of palm leaves 510.

Adoption—of a son 170; præ-natal 374, App. L.

_Afghanistan and the Afghans_, H. W. Bellew—vine-culture 210; decoy-ducks 225 (_where_, _in n. 5_, _read title as above_).

_Afghan Poets of the XVII Century_, C. E. Biddulph—Khūsh-āb _Khattak_ mentions Bābur 439.

Afẓal Khān _Khattak_—(_Raverty's Notes_ _q.v._)—Nīl-āb (_ferry-station_) 206.

Agriculture—seed-corn and money advances 86; young millet grazed 215; methods of vine culture 210; water-raising appliances 388, 486-7; irrigation, "running waters":—Farghāna 4, 5, 7, Samarkand 76-7, 147; Hindūstān 486-7, 519-31-81, Qandahār 332-6, Chandīrī 596; —canals:—Farghāna 67, Samarkand 76, 147; —grain, corn:—Farghāna 2, 3, 55, 114-46, Kābul 203, 228, 373-4, [green corn] 394, Qandahār 333, Hash-nagar 410, Bārā 414, Bhīra 381; —raft of corn seized on the Sind 392; horse-corn fails on a march 238-9; (rice) 342-74-94, 410.

_Akbar-nāma_, Shaikh Abū'l-faẓl _`Allāmīy_, (_trs. H. Beveridge_)—(_see notes on pp. given_) +meanings+:—_bāt-qāq_ 31; _nihilam_ and _tasqāwal_ 45; Tardīka 568; Tarkhān 34; _fīl-i-daryā'i_ App. M. xlvii; —+persons+:—13, 22, 263-4, 346, 552, 562, 641, 657; —+various places+:—191, 206, 441, 523, App. J, xxxv; —winter access to Farghāna 2; Niẕāmī quoted 44; an inscription of Bābur's 343; Rūmi defences 469; the(Koh-i-nūr) diamond 477; a cognomen 566; risks to MSS. App. D, x; Akbar-nāma material *441-5, *691-3; Bābur supplemented 639; length of work on it *692 n.; Mubīn passage translated in the "Fragments" (_q.v._) *437-8; Bābur's self-devotion *701; his choice of a successor *702 to 705, mentioned Preface xxxiii; translated from by Jahāngīr (?) xlv.

`Alī-sher _Nawā'ī's_ comforts 287.

_Allgemeine Erdkunde_, Carl Ritter—Barā-koh 5; Bābur's _farsī-gūī_ useful 7; Akhsī distances App. A, v.

_`Amal-i-ṣāliḥ_, Muḥ. Ṣāliḥ—Shāh-jahān's destruction of wine 298; _tūīgūn_ (bird) 418.

_Amanitates exoticae_, Engelbertus Kæmpfer—_Ijtihād_ 284.

Amusements _see_ Games.

_Ancient Geography of India_, Major-Gen. Sir Alex. Cunningham—(_see nn. on pp. named_) Shibr-tu 205; Nīl-āb 206; Kohistān villages 214; Gūrkhattri 230; Bigrām 230; Udyān-apūra App. E, xxi.

_Annals and Antiquities of Rajastan_ Col. James Tod—Sangā's force 547; negociations with Bābur 550; appearance 558; Ṣalāḥu'd-dīn (Silhādi) 562.

Antidotes—lime-juice 511, Lemnian earth 543.

_Anwar-i-suhailī_, Ḥusain Wā`iẕu 'l-kāshīfī—quoted 22; Firdausi quoted 557, Add. N, P. 557.

Apostates 577-8, 590-1.

Arabic Sciences 283-5.

_`arāq_ see fermented drinks, _s.n._ Wine.

Archery[2949]—[_see nn. on pp. named_], _good bowmen_ 16, 22, 26, 34 (2), cross-bowman 53, 263; remarkable feats 276, 279; —_archer's marks_:—_ilbāsūn_ (duck), _qabāq_ (gourd), _tūqūq_ (hen) 34, _takhta_ (target); _qabāq-maidān_ 276;— _arrows_:—_aūq_ 22, 34, 255, _etc._, _giz_ 213, 225, _khadang_ (white poplar) 13, _tīr-giz_ 11 (_where preface n. 2 by the name_), 34; arrow-barb, _paikān_ 22, -notch, _gosha_ App. C, -flight 8, 140; flights of arrows 52; rain of, 138; quiver T. _sāghdāq_ 160, 166, P. _tarkash_ 526; an arrow-borne letter 361; —_bows_:—Chāchī bow (_kamān_) 13; cross-bow _takhsh-andāz_, _kamān-i-guroha_ 55, 263; _narmdīk yāī_, an easy-bow 420; _qātīq yāī_, a stiff-bow 490; —bows ruined by Hindūstān climate 519, *700; —_various_:—_chaprās_, _daur_, _gosha_, _kamān-khāna_, _kardāng_ explained App. C; _gosha-gīr_, a repairing-tool 166, App. C; Turkish bow-making a fine craft App. C, ix; dismounting to shoot 52; —_to bow-string_ (T. _kīrīsh sālmāq_) 110.

Architecture Timuriya and Timurid Pr. xxxi.

_Archiv für Asiatische Litteratur_ H. J. Klaproth (_q.v._)—Kasan gardens 10; his extracts from the Bukhara Compilation MSS. Pr. xxxix, xlvii.

_Ariana Antiqua_, H. H. Wilson—_Masson's art. Actīnapūr Region_ 227, Nagarāhāra App. E, xvii.

_Army of the Indian Moghuls_, W. Irvine—trepanning 109; misled 470; on _muljār_ (_q.v._) 592; "_shātur_" explained 593; _firingi_ (gun) 473, pontoon-bridges 600.

_`Arūz-i-saifi_, Maulāna Sayyid Maḥmūd _Saifi_ of Bukhāra, (_trs. Blochmann and Ranking_)—a note by Rieu 288; Saifi's pupil Bāī-sunghar 111; his high number of rubā'i measures App. Q, lxvi.

_Asia Portuguesa_, Manuel de Faria y Sousa—Habshi succession custom 482.

_Astronomy and Astrology_—Tables and Observatories 74, 79, Pr. xxx; Canopus (Suhail) 195; forecasts 139, 551; houses of Scorpio 633; Pole-star a guide 323, its altitude at Chandīrī 597; Capricorn 597.

_Ayīn-i-akbarī_, Abū-faẓl (_trs. Blochmann, Jarrett_)—(_see nn. on pp. named_); Climates 1; _qīlīj_ (cognomen) 29; observatories 79; guns 473; clepsydra 516; kitchen rules 541; fruits 3, 501-3-4-5, 512; _chalma_ 624; hunting deer 630; _baḥrī_ (falcon) 632; _mīlak_ (gold, cloth) 641; _yak-tai_ (unlined) 652; —+(weights and measures)+ _khar-war_ 228, _tānāb_ 630, _sang_=_tāsh_ 632; —a title 209; a child traveller 265; Barlās begs 270; +(places)+ Kābul 207, 221; Kacha-kot 250; Sidhpūr 429; Nagarāhāra App. E, xxiii; Buhlūlpūr 454; Kanwāhīn 458; Milwat (Malot) 461; Jahān-nāma 485; Chausath 581; Lakhnūr 582; Sikandra Rao 587, Godi, Gūī 601; —+(persons)+ 285, 653, 666, App. P, lvi; —Bābur's expedition to Kashmīr 693.

_Agār-i-sanādīd_, Sayyid Aḥmad Khān—places Bābur visited 475; Mahdī Khwāja and Amīr Khusrau's tomb 704.

+Noticeable words+: —P. _āb-duzd_ 109 = P. _dū-tahī_ 62, 595-6; _aīkī-sū-ārā_ = P. _miyān-dū-āb_ (Mesopotamia) _i.a_ 88; _aīmāq_ (clan) 51, 196, 207-15-55, Add. Note P. 49; M. _ālāchī_ whence _Alacha_ 23; _arghamchī_ 614; _āsh-kīna_ (stew) 4; _aūdālīq_ (odalisque) = P. _ghūnchachī_ _q.v._; _aūghlān_ (child, boy, non-regnant chief) 19; _aūgh-lāqchī_ 39; _aūrchīn_ 44, 88; _aūng_, _ūng_ (Prester John's title) 23; _aūpchīn_ 176, 282; Aūz-beg, -khān, -kīnt, _i.a_ 162, (_see_ A.N. trs. i, 160, 170); _āyīk-aūt_ = P. _mihr-giyāh_ (mandrake) 11.

_The Bābur-nāma_, Z̤ahīru'd-dīn Muḥ. Bābur (Lion) Mīrzā and (later) Pādshāh _Ghāzī_.

I. SECTIONS OF THE BOOK:—(_The record of præ-accession years is lost Pr. xxxvi_); (1) +Farghāna+ 1-182, (Trs. N. [_bridging a gap_] 182-185); (2) +Kābul+ 187-346, (Trs. N. 347-366), 367-425, (Trs. N. 426-444); (3) +Hindustān+ 445-602, (Trs. N. 603-4), 605-690, (Trs. N. 691-716);

SUB-SECTIONS:—(_a_) +Descriptions+ of Farghāna 1-12, Kābul 199-227, Herāt 304-5, Hindustān 480-521, Chandīrī 592, 596, Gūālīār 605-614; (_b_) +Biographies+ of Yūnas Khān 19-24 (_see infra, displacements_), of Mīrān-shāhīs _viz._ `Umar Shaikh 13-19, 24-28, Aḥmad 33-40, Maḥmūd 45-51, Bāī-sunghar 110-112, of Ḥusain _Bāī-qarā_ 256-292, of amīrs _etc._ 24, 37, 49, 270;

II. LACUNÆ:—(_other than mentioned above_); minor in 935 AH. _see_ dating and nn. on pp. 617, 621, 630, 636, 687, and for surmised patching from fragments of 934 AH. 654, 655, 680; (1) +References to events of the gaps+ _see_ nn. on pp. 105, 364 —208, 441, 575 —381 —408, 422 —(of 934 AH.) 603, 617, 618, 621 —an Akbar-nāma indication 639; (2) +Varia concerning the gaps+:—Causes of, Pr. xxxiv; misinterpreted xxxv; results in present displacement xxxvi;

III. VARIA CONCERNING THE BOOK:— (1) +Date of composition+, [_see nn. on pp. named_]; 48, 50, 79, 98 —102, 105 —139, 154, 176, 190 (l. 5 fr. ft.) 198 —203-4-6-8 —214-18-19-20 (_para. 3_), 269-76-78-85 —313 ("now" _para. 2_), 314 ("now" l. 4), 315 (l. 2), 318 (_para._ 2), 337 (l. 16), 373 (l. 8 fr. ft.), 374; (2) +Literary style and idiom+:— plain diction 2, precise wording _e.g._ 5, 79, 475, 485, appreciation of words 67, 265, 283, 627, comments on style _e.g._ 22, 67, and pronunciation 210, 484, early diary differs in wording from the narrative 367; lapses into courtly Persian 445, 537, 539; (3) +Grammatical details+:— relatives not used Add. Note, P. 167; uses of "we" and "I" 104, 118; distinctions of meaning expressed by Ar. and T. plurals _e.g._ 5, 80; uses of the presumptive tense 37, 75, 162, 167, 577 (cf. Shaw's Grammar); examples of idiom 29, 44, 66, 75, Add. Note, P. 167 (_gharīcha_); (4) +Varied information+ _see_ Preface _passim_; (5) +Bābur's notes+: —Khwāja Maulānā-i-qāẓī 29 —Ibrāhīm Sārū 52 —Champion's portion 53 —Gūk-sarāī 63 —Fāzīl Tarkhān 133 —Aūz-kīnt 163 —Pass-words 169 —Multā-kundī 211 —Military terms 334 —Pīrī Beg 336 —Badakhshān 340 —Sl. Ma`sūd M. 382 —Campaign of 910 AH. 382 —Daulat Khān 383 —_daqīqa_ 516 —_pol_ 517 —Mullā Apāq 526 —_kuroh_ (from the _Mubīn_) 630 —_tāsh_ weight 632;

IV. WORK DONE ON THE BOOK:— (1) +Turki Codices+ _see_ Preface, Cap. III, Part II and Table xli; —(_a_) _Haidar Mīrzā's Codex_—its importance Pr. xxxiv, xxxv, xxxviii, xli, xlii (No. iv); (_b_) _Elphinstone Codex_—archetypes 405, Pr. xli, xlii, xliii (No. v); its losses of pages 445; defacement 129, 325, 415, 548; Erskine's use of it Add. Note, P. 287; reliance on it _in loco_ 1, 187, 445; preserves Humayun's attested notes 447-52-67, 510-14 and attributed notes 216, 494, 507 —also a quatrain on Mughūls 140; "Rescue-passage" not in it App. D; divergency from it in the Kasan Imprint _ib._ xiv; a former owner 706; referred to in nn. on pp. 7, 10, 12, 14, 23-6-8, 31-6, 44-7-8, 60-4, 75, 88, 112-3, 133 (Shaibāq), 143-8, 154 (_dīm_), 159, 161-4-9; Preface xli, xlii, xliii (No. v), xlvii; _cf._ JRAS _Notes infra_; (_c_) _Haidarabad Codex_, published in Facsimile by the Gibb Trust, ed. A. S. Beveridge—basis of the _B.N. in English_ 1, 187, 445, Preface xxvii; appears a direct copy of Bābur's autograph Codex 47, 103, 515; contains (Jahangir's?) Rescue-passage App. D; divergency of Kasan Imprint from it _ib._ xiv; referred to in nn. on pp. 2, 8, 9, 10, 12, 133 (Shaibāq), 14, 18, 23 (careful pointing clears away a doubt), 28, 31, 36, 40 (Bāghdād corrected to Būghdā), 60-4, 75, 88, 132, 140-6-8, 153 (a mistake?), 154 (_dīm_), 159, 164 (_sāīrt kīshī_), 165, 168, 177 (Pers. _dictum_), App. A, i (Akhsī); Preface xxvii, xxxiii (title), xxxv, xli (Table), xlvi (No. x), xlvii;—[2950]

(2) +Persian work+:— (_a_) _Tabaqāt-i-bāburī_, described 445; made known to Erskine 520; its deference to Bābur App. P, lvii; shews a date 496; shews nature of an illness (B.'s) 446; specifies drinking-days 447, 450; gives a useful pen-name 448; Buhlūlpūr 454; of a gun 489; Varsak and Khwāstis 523; Naukar or Tuka 525; Bābur points "Sīkrī" to read _shukrī_ 548; styles him "Nawāb" 560 _etc._; describes a porpoise as _baḥrī_ App. M, xlvii; helps as to "Luknūr" App. T, lxxiv; (_b_) _Wāqi`āt-i-bāburī_ (Acts of Bābur), (_the first Pers. Trs. 1583_), Pāyanda-ḥasan _Mughūl_ of Ghaznī and Muḥ-qulī _Mughūl_ of Ḥiṣār—explicit 187, 198; useful variants 267, 624, 645; a puzzling phrase 549, and passage 617; title Pr. xxxiii; described liii (No. vi); (_c_) _Wāqi`āt-i-bāburī_ (Acts of Bābur), (_the second Pers. Trs. 1589_), `Abdu'r-raḥīm M. _Turkmān_—misleading glosses 2 n. 1, 3 n. 1; _tāsh_ misread 312 _etc._; verses doubtfully Babur's 312; a gloss unsupported 337; a difficult passage 617; a fine illustrated copy (B.M. 3714) 155, 298, 325; Erskine's account of its diction (quoted) Pr. xliv (No. vii); on its title xxxiii;

(3) +Persian-English work+:—_The Memoirs of Baber_, Leyden and Erskine (1826)—[_see nn. on pp. named_]; +Varia+:— Leyden's slight collaboration 287, 367, 380, Add. Note, P. 287, Pr. xlviii, Cap. iv, [L. and E. _Memoirs_]; two notes by Leyden 10, 219; not fully representative of Bābur's autobiography 2, Cap. iv; advance in help (MSS. and other) since Erskine worked 347, 620-22, App. T, lxxiii; his own MSS. 680; Indian guidance 632, 661; dating agrees with Bābur's 629; misled by his Persian source [_q.v._ 3 _etc._] and by a scribe's slip 544; his help to Ilminski 1, 187, 326, Pr. lv; misleads by uniform "Luknow" App. T; omissions 2, 632, 468, 559 (_important_); a prayer reproduced in its words 316; quoted 715; —+questioned readings+:—143, 223-5-9, 324-7, 333-7, 369, 400-16, Add. Note, P. 416, 446-49-57-62-67 (shaving-passage), 478, 523-34-49-55-59-61, 608-9, 617-19-26-38-40-46-47; —[_Numerous verbal explanations and other notes are reproduced as Erskine's and each identified_];

(4) +Turki-English work+:—_The Bābur-nāma in English_ (_Memoirs of Babūr_), Annette S. Beveridge—_see_ Preface and other contents of these volumes.

_Bābar_, Stanley Lane Poole—the Eight Stars 139; a misled note 468.

_Bābur und Abu'l-faẓl_, Teufel [_ZDMG, 1862_]—an opinion negatived 119; useful critique on "Fragments" (_q.v._) Preface Cap. III, Part III and App. D; Mubīn MS. used by Berézine 438; Babur-nama title 653, Pr. xxxiii.

_Bahar-i-`ajam_ (Pers. Dict.) _see_ Dictionaries.

_Bāz-nāma_ (Book of Sport), Muḥibb-i-`alī _Barlās_—its author's descent 276; _l_ exchanged with _n_ (_cf._ _Luḥānī and Nuḥānī_) _ib._

Bélin M.—[_Journal Asiatique xvi, xvii_] 257-8, 271-82-92.

_Bengali Household Stories_, Macculoch—a sign of obedience 275.

Beveridge Annette S.—JRAS. Notes in referred to _in loco_:—MSS. of the B.N. Turki text 1900; Further Notes 1902, Haidarabad Codex and all others 1905, 1906; Elphinstone Codex 1907; Material for a definitive text and account of Kehr's Codex and its Persian alloy 1908; Kehr's Latin Version of part of his source _i.e._ the _Wāqi`-nāma-i-pādshāhī_ (Bukhara Compilation _q.v._) 1908, Klaproth's _Archiv_ 1909, and (expected) on the confused identity of the Bukhārā Compilation with the _Bābur-nāma_ 1922; —(2) Grounds for making a new translation Preface Cap. IV; the mistaken identity of Kehr's source (_supra_) Cap. III[2951]; of the _Bābur-nāma_, Preface _passim_.

Beveridge Henry—(1) +Notes _in loco_+:—_tabalghū_ 11; Bābā-i-kābulī 14; Quintets 15, 288; a mistake by Firishta 15; Lotus-eaters 42; Daulat-shāh 46; Ḥāfiẓ parodied 201; Byron's _tambourgī_ 247; Jāmī plagiarized 258; _Khazīnatu'l-asfiyā_ quoted 211; Tīmūr's burial-position 266; syphilis 279; an illegal marriage 329; Bābur's satirical verse and Shaikh Zain 448; _Z̤afar-nāma_ (?) quoted 485; "_kaka_" 502; Khw. Khusrau's couplet 503; the name "Cintra" for an orange 512; Tīmūr on Hindūstān 526; fate of Ibrāhim _Lūdī's_ mother 543; _ṯamghā_ 553; a pun 571; versus traced 571, 625-6;

Ibn Batūta quoted 591; date of Bābur's visit to Lāhor from Āgra 604; Khwānd-amīr 605; Raḥīm-dād 608, 688; Mahdi Khw. 704; Scorpio and Libra 623; Battle of Jām 635; "bulky Oolak" 663; Kashmīr expedition 693; a poor MS. App. P, lv; Shaikh Zain's deference _ib._ lvii; —(2) +Translations+: —(_a_) Akbar-nāma _q.v._ and Tūzūk-i-jahāngīrī _q.v._ —(_b_) revision of Persian _farmān_ 553, and the Kānwa Letter-of-victory 559; —(3) +Articles referred to+: —(_a_) A.Q.R. 1899, _Bābur's Diamond, was it the Koh-i-nūr?_ 447; 1901, _An Afghān Legend_ 375, App. K; 1910, _Paper-mills of Samarkand_ 81; 1911, _Oriental Cross-bows_ 140, 142; _Bābur's Dīwān_ (Rāmpūr MS.) 439; _Some verses by the Emperor Bābur_ 439 —1915, Silhādī and the _Mirāt-i-sikandari_ 614; —(_b_) Calcutta Review 1884, _the Patna Massacre_ 672; —JASB. 1898, _Bāyazīd Bīyāt_ 691; —1905, _The Emperor Bābur's legendary son_ 558; —1884, _Authorship of the Dabistān_; —1916, _Tārīkh-i-salāṯīn-i-afāghana_ 693; —(_c_) JRAS. 1900, _On the word nihilam_ 45, 224 —1901, _Pers. MSS. in Indian Libraries_ 348 —1910, _On the word mutaiyīm_ 16, 275 —1913-14, _Coinage of Ḥusain Bāī-qarā_ App. H, xxvi —1916, _Rashaḥāt-i-`ainu'l-ḥayāt_ 620; —(4) +Other related articles+:— (_a_) A. S. Q.—_Emperor Bābur and the Habību's-siyar_ 1906; _Emp. B. and Khwānd-amīr_ 1909 (_2 parts_); _Emp. B.'s opinion of India_ 1917; _Attempt to poison B._ _ib._; _Was `Abdu'r-raḥīm the translator of B.'s Mems. into Persian?_ 1900 (_2 parts_); (_b_) JRAS.—_The B.N. "Fragments"_ 1908; _Date of Shāh Ḥasan Arghūn's death_ 1914; _An obscure quatrain by Banā'i_ 1917; _The Mongol title Tarkhān_ _ib._; _Tarkhān and Tarquinius_ 1918[2952]; —(5) +His help+: _see_ Postscript of Thanks, Preface lxi.

The Bible—untrimmed beard 552; moon-stroke 608.

_Bibliothèque Orientale_, B. d'Herbélot—(_see nn. on pp. named_), `Umar Shaikh 13; Sātūq-būghrā Khān 29; Maḥmūd _Mīrān-shāhī_ 46; Mātarīdiyah and Ash`ariyah Sects 75-6; Ismā`īl _Khartank_ 76; Naṣīru'd-dīn _Tūsī_ 79; Nīl-āb 206; "Qīzīl-bāsh" explained 630.

_Biographie Universelle_, Langlésart. _Babour_ xlv.

_Biographies of Ladies_ (_Sprenger's Cat._)—two women-poets 286.

_Birds of India_, T. C. Jerdon—partridge-tippets 496; cries _ib._; bustard 498; _mānek_ 499; _likhh_ (florican) App. N; _kabg-i-darī_and _chīūrtīka_ (snow-cock) _ib._

"Blessed Ten" 562.

Blochmann H. (_JASB. 1873_)—Bābur's Mosque in Saṃbhal 687; _see_ _Āyīn-i-akbari._

Blood-ransom 461; retaliation 64, 102, 119, 194, 251-53, 424.

Boats—383-5-7-8, 407-10-22-23-54, 589, 652-4-5-6-8-9, 660, 662; Bābur names his Ganges flotilla 663, 669, 670-1-4-9, 681-4; pontoon bridge 599, 633.

Book-names—Akhsīkīt = Akhsī 9; Banākat = Shāhrukhiya 76; Chāch and Shāsh = Tāsh-kīnt 13, 76; Gālīūr or Gālīwar = Gūālīār 605; Nashaf and Nakhshab = Qarshī 84; Nagarahāra = Nīng-nahār 207; Tarāz = Yāngī 2.

Book-room—Ghāzī Khān _Lūdī's_ 460.

Books (_no titles_)—Exposition of the _Nafaḥāt_ 284; On Jurisprudence 285, —prosody 271, —rhyme 285, —riddles 289.

_Botany of the Afghan Delimitation Commission_, Aitchison—regional grasses 222; _qarqand_ = _sax-aol_(_?_) 223.

Brahminical thread 561.

Bridge of boats _see_ Boats.

_Buddhist Records_, S. Beal—Greater Udyāna-pūra App. E, xxi; sugarcane in Lāmghān 203 (_where read Beal_).

Browne, Professor Edward Granville—the Ḥaidarābād Codex Facsimile, Preface xlvi (No. x).

Building-stone—Samarkand 83, Kābul 710, Chandīrī 597, Dūlpūr 606, Gūālīār 608, Bīāna 611.

"Bukhārā Compilation," known as "_Bābur-nāma_" see _Wāqī`nāma-i-pādshāhī_.

Bullies of Marghīnān (Marghīlān) 7 (_where in line 1, add_, "They are notorious in Mā-warā'u'n-nahr for their bullyings").

_Burhān-i-qāṯi`_ (Pers. Dict.) _see_ Dictionaries.

_Buried Cities of Khotan_, Sir M. Aurel Stein—Aq-būrā-rūd 4.

_Bū-stān_, Sa`dī—couplets quoted 139, 152, 626.

+Noticeable words+:— (P.-Ar.-T.) _bāghāt_, _bāghlār_, _bāghchā_ and _begāt_, _beglār_ 5, 80, 478; _bāghīsh_ 59, 69; _bakhshī_ (in M. surgeon) 169; _bāshlīqlār_ (commanders) 119; _bātmān_ (a weight) 261; _bātqāq_ (slough of despond) 31; _bāī_ (rich man) 127; _bāīrī_ (old servant) 30; _bī_ = beg 127-8; _bīldūrga_ 225; _b:d-hindī_ = P. _sih-bandī_ (Byde Horse) 470; _bīlāk_ 446; _būghū-marāl_ 8, 10; _būghdā_ (cutlass) 40; _būlāk_ and _balūq_ 196, 17 and 221; _būsh_ (bosh) 507.

_Cabool_ (Kabul), Sir Alex. Burns—(_see nn. on pp. named_); wind and running sands 201, 215; climate 204; _kabg-i-darī_ 213; Kohistān 214; millet 215; Bābur's Burial-garden 710.

Cadell, Jessie E.—quoted Preface xxvii.

Cadet-corps formed 28, App. H, xxvii.

Cairn _i.e._ "Bābur Pādshāh's Stone-heap" 446, Preface xxxvii.

Candles and candlesticks—none in Hind 518; offensive substitutes _ib._

Canopus _see_ Suhail.

Capitals of Farghāna—Andijān 3, Akhsi 10, Aūz-kīnt 162.

Caravans—15, 202, 250, 331.

Carruthers, Mr. Douglas—help from App. B, vii.

Carving—Bābur no carver 304.

Caste-names—518.

Catalogues:—(_see nn. on pp. named_); " Coins of the Shahs of Persia (B.M.), R. S. Poole—Bābur's surmised vassal coin 355, App. H, xxx, Preface xxxv; " Feronia Nursery Calcutta, Seth—Jack-fruit 506; _sang-tarā_ orange 511; " Library of the King of Oudh, A. Sprenger—Biographies of Ladies 286; _Shāh u Darwesh_ 290; Ahlī 290; " Library of Tippoo Sulṯān, C. Stewart—_T̤abaqāt-i-naṣīrī_ 479; " _Manuscrits Turcs de l'Institut des langues orientales_, W. D. Smirnov—_Malfūzāt-i-tīmūri_ 653; Bābur's writings _ib._ " Persian MSS. (B.M.), C. Rieu—Shāsh and Fanākat 2, 7; Khw. Kamāl 8; Akhsīkītī 9; `Abdu'l-lāh _Barlās_ 51; Saifī 111, 288; Halwa-spring 260; Niẓāmī 271; Daulat-shah 274; _Bāz-nāma_ 276; Suhailī 277; Marwārīd 278; Amīr Ḥamza 280; `Atā'u'l-lāh 282; Taftazānī 283; _Khamsatīn_ 288; Husain _Nishapūrī_ 288; Yūsuf of Farghāna 289; Hilālī 290; a scribe-poet 291; _Sūlūku'l-mulūk_ 348; Nawā'ī's Dīwāns arranged 419; Histories of T̤ahmāsp 622; _Ḥabibu's-siyar_ finished 687; _Tārīkh-i-ṣalātīn-i-afāghāna_ 693, 701; —Kasan Imprint misleads 259; a questioned reading 266; " Persian MSS. in the I.O. Library, H. Ethé—Khw. Hijrī 153; Ḥusain _Nishapūrī_ 288; _Shāh u Darwesh_ 290; a scribe-poet 293[2953]; " Turki MS. in B.M., C. Rieu—the author of the _Sang-lākh_ App. A, v; the _Shaibānī-nāma_ 289.

Catamites 26, 42-5-9, 278, 396 (_cf._ 174 n.).

_Cathay and the way thither_, ed. Sir H. Yule (Hakluyt Society vol. i, p. 20)—running-sands 215.

_Caubul_ (Kābul), Hon. Mountstewart Elphinstone—millet 215; Judas-tree 216; Indus ford (_Nīl-āb_) 378; "Nangrahaur" App. E, xix.

"Chaghatāī Castles" 208.

Chaghatāī families—`Alī-sher _Nawā'ī_ a member of one, Preface xxxi.

Chaghatāī-Osmanisches Wörterbüch _see_ Dictionaries.

Chaghatāīsche Sprach-studien, H. Vambéry—(_mil._) pass-words (_aūrān_) 219; meaning of _gepanzert_ 221, _bīldurga_ 225, _sīghnāq_ App. Q, lxiv.

Champion's portion won and explained 53.

_Charikar_, T. C. Haughton—Kohistan of Kabul 214-5.

Charles XII's sobriquet Iron-head 14.

_Chār-ūlūs_ (Four hordes), Aulugh Beg Mirza, Preface xxx.

_Childe Harold's Pilgrimage_—tambourgi 247.

_Chinese Turkistan_, P. W. Church—marāl 8.

Chīngīz-tūrā (_ordinances_) respected 155, 298.

_Chīnīūt_, D. G. Barkley [_JRAS._ 1899]—its position 380.

Chirkas sword 65.

Chishti order 666.

_Chrestomathie Turque_, Berézine—the _Mubīn_ quoted 438, 630.

Chronograms 85, 135, 152, 217, 344, 427, 575, 596.

Cider 83.

Circumcision 14, 69.

Coincidences 71, 123, 261, 686.

Coins—_ashrafī_ 446-60; _dām_ 383; _kipkī_ 296; _sikka_ (coined money ?) 277; _shāhrukhi_ 379-83, 400, 408, 417-46-78-9, 523; _tang_ 641; _tanka_ "black" (_i.e._ _copper_) 521, "white" (_i.e._ _silver_) 338-9, 344, 446, 521-7, 641, App. P, lvii; "red and white" (money) 522; Bābur's "vassal coins" 354-5-6, App. H, xxx.

Confections—_ma`jūn_:—used in excess 16; gifts of 373; parties on non-drinking-days 447; eating of 377-83-84-88-93, 410-12-15-16-18, 420-2, 448-50, 580-8, 615-50-59-83; _kamālī_ 373.

Congregational Prayer—unbroken attendance at 283.

Countermark [_Bih-būd_] on coins 277, App. H, xxv, xxvi, xxix.

_Cross-bow_, Sir W. F. Payne-Gallwey—archers' marks 34; bow-shot distances 140; what may apply to Bābur's _ẕarb-zan_ and _tūfang_ 667.

Cunningham, Maj.-Gen. Sir Alex. _see_ _Indian Eras_ and Reports on Arch. Survey.

Customs—Musalmān scruples about burial-places 246; the Champion's-portion 53; circumambulation of tombs 54, 285, 301-5-6, 475, and of the sick 701; amongst combatants' wives 22, 268; dipping 16 times in bathing 151; levirate marriage 23; mourning rites 32, 246, 293; a nativity-feast 344; nine a mystic number _see s.n._ nine; an ordeal of virtue 211; divining from sheep-blade-bones 233; pillars of heads 232, _i.a._ 573-6; rock-inscription 153; signs of submission 53, 232-3, 248; succession in Bengal 482-3 n. 5; unveiling a bride 37; gifts from those marrying 43, 400; gifts by wives _q.v._

Cyclopædia of Archery _see_ _Kulliyatu'r-rāmī_.

Czar Vassili III—Bābur's embassy to, App. Q, lxiii.

+Noticeable words+:—_Chāchī_ 13; _chāghīr_ 83, 298; _chāpūk_, slash-face 68; P. _chār-dara_ 80, 629; _chaughān_ (polo) 26; P. _chalma_ 624; H. _chaukandī_ = Ar. _ghurfat_ and P. _chār-dara_ (?) 629-63; _chāpkūn_ 324; _chiqār_ (exit) 44; _yinka-chīcha_ 616; _chuhra-jīrga_ 50, 227, App. H, xxvi-vii.

_Dabistān_, Mir Ẕū'l-fiqār `Alī'u'l-ḥusaini (_pen-name Mūbad_)—Nānak founder of the Sikh religion 461; Rādiyān sect 622; [concerning the authorship of the book _see_ JRAS. H.B.'s art. _q.v.s.n._].

Darwesh-life—soldiering abandoned for 262; return to 583.

Dating by events:—Battle of the Goat-leap 16, Dispersion of Aīrzīn 20, Battle of Kānbāī 111-2 [_T.R. trs._ 119]; the dating of 935 AH. 605, App. S.

Defrémery C.—[_J. des Savans_ 1873], art. _Les Mémoires de Baber_ (P. de C.) 562.

_De Paris à Samarcande_, Madame Ujfalvy—(_see nn. on pp. named_); Barā-koh 5, 6; Samarkand 74-5; _qarā yīghāch_ (hard-wood elm) 81; paper-pulping mortars 81.

De Saçy, A. L. Silvestre (_Nat. et Ex._ 265, 285)—Ḥusain Shaikh Tīmūr 273 (_cf._ _Daulat-shah_ (Browne) 538-9); date of Hilāli's death 290.

_Dialects of the Hindu-kush_, Col. J. Biddulph—Khowārī 211; forms of "nine" App. E, xix.

Dictionaries, Lexicons, Vocabularies:—[_see nn. on pp. named_]; " of Antiquities, W. W. Smith—clepsydra 516; " Arabic-English Lexicon, E. W. Lane—_akhmail_ 336; " _Arabes, Supplèment aux Dictionnaires_, R. Dozy—_baḥri_ (a falcon) App. M, xlvi; " _Bahār-i-`ajam_ (Pers. Dict.), Rāī Tikchana Bahār—a sign of fear 232; the Taftazānī Shaikhs of Islām 283; " _Burhān-i-qāti`_ (Pers. Dict.), Muḥ. Ḥusain b. Khalfa'u't-tabrīzī—_izāra_ (dado) 80; " _Chaghatāī-osmanisches Wörterbuch_, Shaikh Sulaiman Effendi (ed. Kunos)—_tunqiṯār_ 464; _qūtān_ App. N, 1; _sīghnāq_ App. Q, lxiv; " English-Persian, A. N. Wollaston—a rare meaning 648; " Hindustani-English, D. Forbes—changed name of an orange 511; "needle-melting" citron 513; great millet (maize?) 514; names of days 516; gongman _ib._; " Hindustani-English, J. Taylor [ed. W. Hunter]—"sang-tara" and "Cintra" App. O lii; " of Islām, J. P. Hughes—turbans 15; eating of food 44; _maẕhab_ 463; the Eight Paradises 646; legal endowment 701; " Oriental Biographical, T. W. Beale [_ed._ _Keene_]—Khw. Naṣīr _Tūsī_ 79; " of Oriental Quotations, C. Field—a common couplet 22; " Persian-English, F. Steingass—176, 202, 286, (_metres_) 514, 527, 630; _qīzil-bāsh_ 643; " Persico-Latinum Lexicon, I. A. Vullers—_shash-par_ 160; _kaka_ 502; _gharau_ 514; _rād_ (_whence Rādagān_) 622; " Pushtū-English, H. J. Raverty—Multakund 211; " _Sang-lākh_ (Turki-Persian), Muḥ. Mahdi Khān—described App. B, v; _kharpala_ (the "Qarshi birdie") _ib._; contains verses entered as by Bābur 439; " Sanscrit-Bengali-English, Haughton—a stork 499; gula-prawn 502; " of Towns (_Majama`u'l-buldān_), Yāqūt—"Akhsīkīs̤" 9, 10; " _Turc Orientale_, A. Pavet de Courteille—Bābur's verses quoted 439, 526; a wag-tail 501; a meaning 626; Bābur's script App. Q, lxiii; " Turki Vocabulary, R. B. Shaw—_kūk-būrā_ (a game) 39; _qūrūgh_, reserved land 81; _aūpchīnlīk_, 4 horse-shoes and their nails 176; _chārūq_, brogues, and _chāpān_, long coat 187; _qālpāq_, felt wide-awake 258; _qūsh-begi_, a Court official 278; _shaghāwal_ ib. 463; _jīrān_, a deer 491; _qīn_, scabbard 503; _akhta-begi_, master-gelder 538; _būljār_, a rendezvous _etc._ 592; —Part II. J. Scully—_qodan_, water-hen 224; _kīklīk_ (_caccabis_, _chikūr_) 496; _`aqqa_, magpie 501; _qīrīch_, swift 501; _būīā_, a plant 505; _amān-qarā_ (perhaps maize) 504; _aīrkāk-qūmūsh_, male-reed 514.

Diseases and accidents:—(_a_) +Babur's+ saddle turns 147; sciatica 253-4; boils 254, 657-60; dislocated wrist 409-13-20; tooth breaks 424; ear-ache 310, 601-8-15; fall of river bank 655; fall of tent 678; wounds of head 150-167, —leg 167-9, —arm-pit 176; +his illnesses+:—unspecified (923) 365; catarrhal discharge (_rezāndalīk_) 446-49-51; fever (903 AH.) 88-9, (911) 247, (925) 399 to 401, (934) 585-6-8, 603-4, (935) 619-20, (937) 702-3-5; (_b_) +Of others+:—child-birth 36; small-pox 48; "violent illness" 45; frost-bite 116, 311; cold 151; ulcerated hand 125; siphylis 279; pestilence 524; paralysis 620; malarial fever 4, 8; fever 33, 246.

Diversity of place-names through trs. _see_ (_e.g._) Qīzīl = Surkh, Safed = Spīn.

Dividing line of the Afghāns and Khurāsān 200.

Divorces 267-8, 329.

_Dīwān-i Bābur Pādshāh_, [_ed. Sir E. D. Ross_]—not Bābur's earliest collection 438-9, 447; appears referred to 642; verses suiting his moods and deeds 604, 626-44, 705; verses of the Dīwān in the B.N. 526-75-84-89; the _Wālidiyyah-risala_ and B.'s new ruler 643; Elizabethan conceits 645; concerning the Rāmpūr MS. App. Q, (illustration); 585; 635.

_Dīwān-i Khwāja Ḥāfiẓ_ [_ed. H. Brockhaus, trs. W. Clarke_]—a couplet 411.

_Dīwān-i Nūru'd-dīn `Abdu'r-raḥmān Jāmī_—a quatrain plagiarized 257.

Dīwān-writers mentioned by Bābur—Āhī 289; Ahlī 290; `Alī-sher _Nawā'ī_ (Pers.) 272; Ḥusain _Bāī-qarā_ (_Turkī_) 259; Kāmī 290; Saifī 288; Suhailī 277; Maḥmūd _Barlās_ 51; Maḥmūd _Mīrān-shāhī_ 46.

Domestic animals—ass 144; buffalo 231, 393, 454, 490; camel:—_khachar_ 74, 249, _tīwa_ 232-5, 240, 376-91; camels counted 391; flesh eaten 251; cost of keep 489; gift of 382; —cattle 150, 231-4-5-8, 333-96, 454; symbol of submission 232; —dog 144, 224; elephant _s.n._ Nat. Hist.; horse _see s.n._; mule 194, 338; sheep 50-5, 71, 228, 234-5-8-9, 249-50, 394; swine 211; yāk 55, 490 (here _baḥrī-qūtās_) App. M; —fowls 82, 213; goose 82; pigeon 13, 259, 401.

Domestic appliances—china 80, 195, 407; festal ornament 304, App. I; drinking cups 489, 298 and 552; fuel 223, 311; goatskins 371, 421; gong 515; knife 44; lamp 518; litter 254 and 401, 331 n. 3, 268; rope 509; spoon 44, 73 n. 1, 407, 509; table-cloth 44, 132; tooth-pick 407; torch 213-34, 387-8, 518.

Dreams—Bābur's 132, (attributed) 132 n. 2, App. D, xi; another's App. D, xii.

Dress, articles of—_bāsh-ayāq_ = _sar-u-pā_ (head to foot) _i.a._ 159, 393; bathing-cloth (_fūṯa_) 275, 527; brogues (_chārūq_) 187; caps:—black lambskin (_qarā-qūzī būrk_) 258, ermine (_ās būrk_) 150, _Mughūl būrk_ 15, 179; _muftūl_ or _mūftūnlūq Mughūl būrk_ 159; helm-cap (_dūwulgha būrk_) 167; —_chār-qab_ 304, 527; clasp (_qulāb_) 156; girdle (_tak-bund_) 156, (_bīl-bāgh_ lit. waist-band) 298, (_kamr-bund_) 642; cymar (_khimār_) 561; coats and tunics:—_jāma_ 652, surtout (_jība_) 303, 632, long coat (_chāpān_) 187, sheep-skin coat (_postīn_) 181; short tunic (_nīmcha_) 652; tunic and coat (_tūn_) 14, 51, 159, 166, 371, 400; clothes-in-wear (_artmāq_, _artmāq_) 339; torque (_ṯauq_) 561; head-wear (_bāshlīq_) 632; _lung_ (_dhoti_) 519; rain-cloak (_kīpīng_) 389; feather tippet 496; turban 14, 33, 101, 258; turban-aigrette 225, 325; wide-awake (_qālpāq_); vest (_kūnglāk_) 171.

Drums—nagaret 144, 155, 250, 337, 369, 628; of departure 235, morning 392, saddle 163-4; drumming sound [at the Running Sands] 315; dismissal of 595; tambour-player 247.

_Durch Asien's Wüsten_, Sven Hedin—Farghāna wind 9.

Dynasties—Bāhmani 482; Qīlīch 29; Tūghlūq 451; Shaibānī's destruction of 39; "Mughūl Dynasty" a misnomer in Hind 158 (_see s.nn. Turk and Mughūl_).

+Noticeable words:+— _dābān_, a difficult defile; _dādā_ 157 (_see ṯaghāī_); Ar. _daur_, warp of a bow, App. C; _dīm_ [_T root de_, _telling_] = P. _san_, numbering 154[2954], 161, 468, Add. Note, P. 54.

Ear-rings 510 (_where add (in l. 5) an omitted passage entered in App. O, liv_).

_Economic Products of India_, Watts—date-plum 210; fish-drugs 226; oranges var. 512.

Editors mentioned _in loco_—A. S. Beveridge, G. B.'s _Humāyūn-nāma_, and Fac-simile of the Ḥaidarābād Codex; H. Brockhaus, _Die Lieder des Hafis_; E. G. Browne, _Taẕkirātu'sh-shu`arā_ (Memoirs of Poets), _Tārīkh-i-guzīda_ (Select History); C. M. Fræhn, _Shajarat-i Turk_ (Genealogical Tree of the Turk); N. I. Ilminski, _Bāber-nāma_ (Kasan Imprint); I. Kūnos, Shaikh Sulaimān _Effendī's_ Vocabulary; D. C. Phillott, _Taẕkirāt-i T̤ahmāsp_; E. D. Ross, _Bābur's Dīwān_ (Rāmpūr MS.), and Three Turkī MSS. from Kashghar; C. Schafer, _Siyāsat-nāma_; R. C. Temple, _Peter Munday's Travels_; F. Veliaminof-Zernov, _Abūshqa_; H. Yule, Wood's _Journey_.

_Einblicke in das Farghana Thal_—A. I. v. Middendorf—winds 9.

Elphinstone, Hon. M.—his Codex _see s.n. Bābur-nāma_.

Embassy from Bābur to Moscow App. Q, lxiii.

_Embassy to Timur_, Ruy Gonsalves di Clavigo (_trs. Sir C. Markham_)—Hindustan the Less 46; kneeling in greeting 54; Samarkand 74-5-8; Kesh 83.

_Encyclopædia Britannica_—range of temperature 204; Farīdu'd-dīn _`At̤t̤ār_ 271; rhinohorns 408; maize when first in Asia 509.

_Encyclopædia of Islām_—Réné Basset's art. Al-buṣīrī 620.

Erskine William—Preface xxxiii, xliii-iv-viii-ix, Cap. IV, [_see Memoirs of Baber and History of India_].

_Essays_, Lord Bacon—Ismā`īl _Ṣafawī's_ personal beauty 441.

Etiquette and decorum—well-mannered 45, 271-3-6, 303; knees not crossed 33; feet hidden 34; deference to elders 303; epistolary 332; farewell 330; —+Interviews+:—kneeling 61-9, 301, 408; looking one another in the eyes (_i.a._) 54, 64; embrace 160; +—Meetings+:—The Khāns with Bābur 54, 159, 169; the two Khāns 160; Tīmūriya reception 59; Bābur and the Bāī-qarā Mīrzās 297-8-9, and elder Begims 301-97; his reception of Khusrau Shāh 193, Daulat Khān 459, Naṣrat Shāh's envoy 640-1.

Exemplars of Bābur—Preface, Cap. I.

_Expédition scientifique Française_, C. E. Ujfalvy—_yīghāch_ (_measure_) 4; Aūsh (Ūsh) 5; Barā-koh 5; Bābur's serviceable "Farsī-gūī" 7; misreading (?) App. A, ii; distances near old Akhsī _ib._ v; Samarkand 74; Āb-burdan 152.

_Explorations in Turkistan_, R. Pumpelly—Āq-būrā-rūd (_Huntingdon's art._) 5; Akhsī App. A, i, v.

_Fair at Sakhī-sarwār_, Michael Macauliffe—238.

_Famous Monuments of Central India_, Sir Lepel H. Griffin—Gūālīār 605.

_Fān-valley_, W. R. Rickmers—[_JRGS. 1907_], Sara-tāq-dābān 129; Āb-burdan 152.

_Farhang-i-aẕfarī_ [_Turki-Pers. Dict._] _nihilam_ explained 45.

_Fauna of British India_, Oates and Blanford—flying-squirrel and snow-cock 213 nn. 5, 6, 7; various birds 495, 497, 501.

Festivals—Bābur's Rāmẓān rule 584; Īd-i-fiṯr 66, 235, 311, 351, 410, 584, 683, 689; Īd-i-qurb-ān 154; Nū-roz 236; approximation of Nū-roz and Īd-i-fiṯr 236.

Fifth-share (_Khams_) 324.

Five-days' World 50, 128, 328.

_Flora Indica_, W. Roxburgh—spikenard 392; _mahuwā_ 505; _gūlar_ 508; _chirūnji_ _ib._; _kīūrā_ 514.

"Florio Beg _Beneveni_", Secretary to a Russian Mission, Preface xliv.

Folk-lore—test of a dead woman's virtue 212; blizzard-raising spring 219; "commerce with the Spheres" 275; eye-bewitchment 664; omen as to sex of an unborn babe App. L; succession customs 482.

Food (_ex. birds and fruits_)—bread 148 (_cf. A.N. trs. i, 421 for spiced bread, also Memoirs p. 144 n._); brochettes (_kabāb_) 148, 415; betel 440; camel-flesh 493; carrots 542; cheese 394; meat cold 411; date-palm cheese 508; dried meat 542; fritters 541; haggis 506; hare 542; honey 203, 409, 440; lotus seed 660; mango preserve 440; millet porridge 181; pistachio nuts 508 (cf. _s.n._ Nat. Hist.).

_A Frontier Campaign_, Lord Fincastle—_khahr_ = _shahr_ 367; Katgola and Panj-kūra 374.

Frontier-posts 213.

Games and amusements—acrobats 635; cards 584; chess 38, 275-84-87; dancing 276-99, 303; dancing-girls 522, 634; dice 16, 275-8; draughts 16, 278; feats of archery _q.v._; fights of cocks 259, rams 259, elephants 631, camels 631; improvisation and recitation of verse 16, 26, Preface xxx; _kūk-būrā_ 39; leap-frog 26; pigeon-flying 13, 259; polo (_chaughān_) 26; wrestling 292, 660-83, Index I. _s. nn._ Dost-i-yāsīn, Ṣādīq; hawking and fowling _see s.n._

Gardens—+Andijān+:—Chār-bāgh 29, Ḥāfiẓ Beg's 108, Birds' 168, Aūsh 5, Asfara 7, Kāsān 10; Tāshkīnt:—Ḥaidar Kūkūl-dāsh's 54, Poplar 145, 146; +Samarkand+:—Heart-expanding 78, 82, New 62, 138, North, Paradise, Plane-tree 78, Plain's 92, Porcelain, World-picture 78, Darwesh Tarkhān's 80, 81; +Kābul+:—Almshouse 315, Avenue 647, Bābur's Burial-garden 709 _see_ illustrations, Chār-bāgh 249-51-54, 346-97-98, 416-7-8, Ḥaidar _Tāqī's_ 198, 401, Khalīfa's 315, Little 198, Paradise 315-6-7, Plane-tree 401, 418, Private 346-97, Rendezvous (?) 346, Violet 395, 415-7; +Koh-dāman+:—Istālif 216-7, 398, 416, New Year's 246, Royal 418; +Nīng-nahār+:—447, Adīnapūr 207 and n. 5, Chār-bāgh, Fidelity 207 n. 5, 208, 394, 409, 414-21-22, 443-7; Qarā-tu 395; +Herāt+:—`Alī-sher's 305, Marigold, Town, White 306, Raven's 134, 306; +Hindustan+:—_Ṣafā_ (purity) 381, 665, (Agra), Chār-bāgh, Eight-paradises 531-3-7, 543-4, 548, 616-34-86, Gold-scattering 640-41, 689 n. 3, *708, Garden of Rest 709, (+Dūlpūr+) Chār-bāgh 603-6-15, Lotus 639, (on the Gagar) 465, (Sīkrī) 581-4, (+Gūālīār+) 607-10-12-13-14.

Gardening _see_ "Indian" and "Manual".

The Gate—Lordship in 24; Bābur's 26, 32; the place of judgment 24, 197, 259; Gate-house 43; between-the-doors 24, 100, 133; waiting in 277; gate-ward post 166.

_Gates of India_, Sir T. H. Holdich—a Central Asian claim to Greek descent 22; headwaters in Koh-i-baba 216; a route 310.

Gazetteers:—[_see nn. on pp. named_];

" of India [ed. 1908-9]—Observatories 79; Nīl-āb 206; Gūr-khattri 230; Pīr Kānū 238; Sawātī 378; Parhāla 387; Nagarahāra App. E, xvii, xx (Bellew); the Gagar (Kakar, Ghagghar) 465; Bāgar 573; Chandawār, Chandwār 581-9, 643; Lukhnūr 582; Sarwān 587; Sikandra Rao _ib._; Gūālīār 605, 610, 611; Parsarūr 684;—Gujūr 250; Kakar 386; Luḥānī (var.) 455; Mundāhir 700; —brackish streams 384; a ruined range 486; a hunting-ground (Bārī) 509; Jūna(h)pūr = Junpūr 676; —tree squirrel 492; frogs 503; _yāk_ App. M, xlvii.

District Gs. of India:—Allahabad, (H. G. Neville), 653; `Azamgarh, ("), 680; Ballia, ("), 664, 667; Etawa, (Drake-Brockmann), 644 nn. 2, 6; Fathpur, (H. G. Neville), 651; Fyzabad, (") 656, App. U; Ghazipur, (Drake-Brockmann), 658; Gualiar, C. E. Luard, 590-4-7, 605-9, 610-12-13-14; Gurgaon, (F. Cunningham), 578-80; Jihlam, ("), 452, 461; Mainpuri, (E. R. Neave), 643-4; Rawalpindi, (F. A. Robertson), 452; Saran, (L. L. S. O'Malley), 664; Shahabad (D. B. Allen), 664; Sultanpur, (H. G. Neville), 683; Ulwar, Alwar (P. W. Powlett), 557-8.

Gazetteers of the Province of Oude, App. T, lxxv, lxxvi.

" of the Turkistan Region, Col. L. F. Kostenko —+Farghāna:+—passes 2; fruits 3; cooking recipe 4; fever 4; running-waters 5; Āq-būrā-rūd 5; Khujand 7, 8; Mogol-tau 8; Sang-ferry 176; —+Samarkand:+—74; extent of town 75, 145; Kohīk-sū 76; paper-making 81; Āb-burdan 15; three passes 83, 90, 129; Lake Iskandar 129; —distances 4, 6, 75, 84; ravines App. A, ii; various _ib._ v; rapid riding 25; _kūk-būrā_ 37; Sārts and their tongues 6, 7; Central Asian claim to Greek descent 22.

_Géographie_, Abū'l-feda [_trs. Reinaud_]—land cultivated by the Zar-afshān (Kohik) 76; Naṣīr _Tūsī_ 79; names of Qarshī 84.

_Geography and History of Bengal_, H. Blochmann—Habshi succession-customs 452.

" _of the Qandahār Inscription_, T. Beames [JRAS. 1898]—revision incomplete App. T. xxxiv.

" _Oriental_ [_Ashkālu'l-bilād_] Ibn Ḥauqāl, [_trs. Ouseley_]—absorption of the Sīr 3; "Banakas̤" 9; Akhsī App. A, ii, iii; Kohik irrigation 76; Samarkand Gates 77; Qarshi names 84.

Geographical unit, [_village and its cultivated land_] 3.

_Geschichte von schönen Redekünste Persiens_, Freiherr v. Hammer-Purgstall—Hilālī 290; _Shāh u Darwesh_ 290; Sām Mīrzā's jeer 648.

_Ghiyāsu'l-lughāt_ (Pers. Dict.), Muḥ. Ghiyāsu'd-dīn _Rāmpūrī_—_kardi_-peach 504.

Ghulām-i-muḥammad (_collaborator with Raverty_)—Nijr-au 213; Nīl-āb 206; Bābur's frontier-posts 213; a route 208.

Gibb, E. J. Wilkinson, Memorial Trust—Preface xlvii.

_Glossary of Terms_, H. H. Wilson—_ser_ (_sīr_)-measure 517; _tanāb_-measure 630.

_The Golden Bough_, T. G. Frazer—a succession custom 482.

_Goswara Inscription_, Kittoe and Kielhorn [_I.A. 1888_]—App. E, xviii-ix, xxii.

Grant, Mr. Ogilvie—his help App. B, vii.

_Great Diamonds of the World_, E. W. Streeter—its Koh-i-nūr account incomplete 477.

Greek descent, 22, 341.

Guest-begs 141, 227.

Gul-badan Begīm (_Lady Rosebody_) _see_ H. N.

_Gulistān_, Sa`dī [_trs. Eastwick_]—quoted 42, 152-8, 190, 313.

_Gulzār-i-Bihār_, Ajodhya Prasad—rulers in Tirhut and Darbanga App. P, lvii; varied by Sir G. A. Grierson (_I. A._ 1885) _ib._ n. 1.

+Noticeable words:+— P. _gosha_, bow-tip and notch App. C; P. _gosha-gīr_, an archer's repairing-tool 160-6, App. C, = _chaprās_ and _kadāng_; P. _ghūnchachī_ 17.

_Ḥabību's-siyar_, Khwānd-amīr—[_see nn. on pp. named_]; relations with the _Bābur-nāma_ 57, 127, 256, 328; value as a source 70, 348, 426; not used for _The Memoirs_ 347; used by Bābur 11, 256-91; completion of 687; —Kinsmen of Bābur 13,[2955] 18, 34-5, 46-8, 50, 61, 90, 111, 127; —Bābur 29, 147, 184, 297, 354-7, 432-7, 704; —various persons 25, 38, 47, 50-4-8, 72, 98, 111, 128, 249, 396; [Bih-būd] 227 and App. H, xxvi, 579, 621; _varia_ 133, 244-96, 327-8-9, 463 (_n. where read Tamarisk_), 469, 617-22; —Herāt 305; Chār-shaṃba 71; _kīsāk_ 66; Niẕāmī 85 (_where in n. read l. 2_), Ḥ.S. iii, 44, 167.

_Haft Iqlīm_, Amīn Aḥmad _Rāzī_—celebrities of Chīrkh 217.

Hand-book to Dihli, H. J. Keene—places visited by Bābur 475.

" to Bengal, Murray's—observatories 79; Dihli 475, 704.

" to the Panj-āb, Murray's—Qandahār Inscription App. J, xxxiii.

Hawking and fowling—experts in 31-8, 40-5, 67, 270-3-6; birds with dogs 224; a story 254; lost hawk 394; Bābur's gift of a goshawk (_qārchīgha_) 385; Aḥmad _Mīrān-shāhī_ and goshawks 34, Add. Note, P. 34.

Herāt's high standard of proficiency 283, Preface xxx; _see_ Index II.

_Herat, On the city of_, Col. C. E. Yule [_JASB. 1887_]—280, 305-6.

" B. de Meynard (J. A. xvi)—257, 305-6-7, 326.

_Hidāyat_, Burhānu'd-dīn `Alī _Qīlīch_ (_trs. C. Hamilton_)—its author's birth-place 7, 76; held in honour 76; his descendant 29; _Khams_, the Fifth 324.

_Hidāyatu'r-rāmī_ (The Archer's Guide), Amīnu'd-dīn (T. O. MS. 2768)—_nāwak_ 142; _gosha-gīr_ App. C, viii; (_cf._ _AQR. 1911_, _H.B.'s art. Oriental Cross-bows_).

_High Tartary_, R. Shaw—_tanga_, (_coin_) App. P, lvii.

Hindū-shāhī rulers in Kābul 200.

Hindustani uses of "Khurāsān" 202 and other words 455-88-91-92-99 (_where for yak-rang read bak-ding_); pronunciation 380, 484.

Hinks, Mr. A. E. (_R.G.S._), estimate of distance from Kishm to Qandahār 621.

_Histoire de Chingiz Khan_, F. Pétis de la Croix, the elder—Gūk-sarāī 63, Ascension Stone 77.

_Histoire du Khanat de Khokand_, L. Cahun—Farghāna winds 9.

" _du Khanat de Khokand_, Gen. V. R. Nalivkine—Sarts 6; Akhsī App. A, i, iv, v; tradition of Bābur's abandoned child 358.

" _de Timur Beg_, F. Pétis de la Croix, the younger—Samarkand Gates and walls 77 (_see Z̤afar-nāma_).

_Historical Sketches_, Col. Mark Wilks—_wulsa_ (flight _en masse_) 486-7 (_where for "ūlwash" read ūlwan_); Add. Notes, P. 487.

Histories:—(_see nn. on pp. named_).

" of Bukhara, A. Vambéry—descent of chiefs 244.

" of Gujrāt, E. C. Bayley trs. _see Mirāt_.

" of India, Elliott and Dowson—Tarkhāns 31 (_where add (n. 4) references vol. i, 300, 320-1, 498_); Farmūlis 456, 675; Bugīāls 452; _varia_ 274, 440-77, 652-9, 693; places 191, 219, 457, 582, 699; earthquake 247; Mīān = Shaikh 457; a B. N. source 348, 428-39, 621; _The Malfūzāt-i-tīmūrī_ 653; supers-session of B.'s sons proposed 703.

" of India, Baber, W. Erskine—148-94, 247, 332-8, 343-6, 361, 440-78, 520-2, 562, 651, 702; gunpowder 369; coins and Revenue List 446-78, 520-22, 627, App. P, lv; value of the book 428.

" of Musical Sounds, C. Carus-Wilson—215.

" of Ottoman Poetry, E. J. Gibbs—double meaning in composition App. Q, lxiv.

_Hobson-Jobson_, Sir H. Yule (_ed. Crookes_)—(_see nn. on pp. named_), Byde (_var._) Horse 470; the Koh-i-nūr 477; black-buck 491; gynee-cow 492; partridge cries 496; rock-pigeon (bāghrī-qarā?) 498; coucal 500; _koel_ 501; mango 503; plantain 504; "mohwa" 505; _kīshmīsh_ 505; _jambū_ 506; jack-fruit 506; toddy 509; an orange 511; shoe-flower 513; ghurry (clepsydra) 516; _ser_ (measure) 517; "bowly" (_baoli_) 533; "talookdār" 621; "cuscuss"-grass 631; "moonaul" (monal) App. N, xlix; "choki" App. V, lxxxi.

Holy War—against Kāfiristān 46; Bābur's against Sangā 547 _et seq._ and Chandīrī 589; references to 579-83, 637.

Horse-accoutrement—Mughūl 160; mail 140-67, 380; saddle-bags 338.

Horses—_tīpūchāqs_;—a breeder of 38; mentioned 235, 303 and 336 (grey), 383 (almond-coloured), 401, captured at Qandahār 338; —Kābul horse-trade 202; horses bred for sale 235; how fed in a siege 145; eaten on a journey 148; swim the Zarafshān in mail 140; in snow 253, 308-11; single-file in snow 314; women's use of during a battle 268; murrians 31; abandoned 239, 379; invalided to Kābul 376-8; trodden down by elephants 457; restorative treatment 666; —tribute in 228, _etc._; raided by Bābur 313; galloping-ground for 222; steps counted to estimate a distance 666; —_qūsh-āt_, a change-horse led by a rider 453; corn and grass for 186, 221-2-3, 238; 311, 394; unfit grass 222; anatomical similarity with the rhinoceros 490.

Hot-bath, _ḥammān_—Samarkand 78, Akhsī 173, Kābul 346, Bābur finds none in Hindūstān 518, constructs in Agra, 532, 634, in Dūlpūr 614, 639.

Households and families—various 32, 123, 125-9, 141; Bābur's sent to him 71-2, 151-3; (B.'s) 184, 306; marching for Kābul 189, 191-7; Mughūls' come to B.'s army 192-4; B. safeguards 199, 460-1; driven like sheep 242 (2); Bāī-qarās desert 327; Shaibānī anxious about 135, 343; B.'s come to Hind 645-6, 650-7-8, 665-75-89; his wives and children 711-4.

Houses—high 221, windowed 201; in Chandīrī 597; in Gūālīār 608.

Huma, a fabulous bird 26.

Hunting:—circle (_jīrga_) 114, 325, 424-50, 657; Babur's hunting 296, 602, 707.

_Humāyūn-nāma_, Bāyazīd Bīyāt—a commanded book 691.

_Humāyūn-nāma_, Gul-badan Begīm—(_trs. and ed. A. S. Beveridge_)—[_see nn. on pp. named_]; Adik Sl. 23; a betrothal 48; Khān-zāda 147; Māh-chūchūk 199, 342; Apāq B. 301; Mahdī Khw. 381, 688, 703-4, 579; `Asas (1) 387, (2) 552; Māmā Atūn 148, 407; various men 408 and 640, 526; a begīm's manly pursuits 263; Māhim B. 344, 686; Mirzā Khān 433 (_where, l. 2 fr. ft. read grand-"mother"_); Bābur's sons 436, App. J, xxxv, 619, App. L, xliii, 545; B.'s daughters 441, 522, 708, 713; Bābur's wounds 167, 524, 616, 630; his self-devotion 701, (illustration 702, Preface xxxii;) his death 708-9; removal of body to Kābul 709; —references to the H.N. 347, 689, 691-4, Pref. xxviii; its Biographical App. 13, 705, 711.

Ibn Batuta _see_ Travels.

" Ḥauqāl _see_ Geography.

_Illustrated London News_—fortress gun and stone ammunition 595; rafts 673.

_Indian Eras_, Sir Alex. Cunningham—intercalary months 515; discrepant dates App. S, lxxi.

_Indian Forest Trees_, D. Brandis—[_see nn. on pp. named_], date-plum 210; cypress 222; weeping-willow App. I, xxxii; "mohwa" 505; bullace-plum 507; orange-like fruits 510; ebony-tree 585.

_Indian Hand-book of Gardening_, G. T. F. Speede—_sinjid_ (jujube) 203; _amlūk_ (date-plum) 210; _saṃbal_ (spikenard) 392; "keeras" (cherry) 501; _kamrak_ (_averrhoa carambola_) 506; _sang-tāra_ (orange) 511; under-ground jack-fruit App. O, lii.

Inscriptions—Bābur's atĀb-burdan 152, Bād-i-pīch pass 343, Qandahār App. T; —on Ajodhya Mosque App. U; on B.'s tomb 710.

_Inscriptions de Caboul_, J. Darmesteter [_J.A. 1888_]—in Bābur's Burial-garden 710.

Intercession—Bābur's, through Aḥrārī 620; through Imām `Alī, 702.

"Islam"'s foes killed 370; its army 564.

Ivory 489.

Jogis—at Gūr-khattrī 230.

_Journal of Travel_, W. Griffiths—red apple 507; _cicadæ_ s. of Ghazni App. N, l.

_Journey from Bengal to England_, G. Forster—division of climates 229 (_where for "Travels" read Journey_).

_Journey to the Sources of the Oxus_, J. Wood (_ed. Yule_)—Kābul 199; Running-sands 201, 215; Hindu-kush passes (_Yule's Introduction_) 204; dun sheep 224; Nagarahāra regions App. E, xxiii.

_Journeys in Biluchistan, Afghanistan and the Panj-ab_, E. Masson—(_see nn. on pp. named_), Kābul 199, 200, 201, (fruits) 203-4; Shibr 215; Panjhīr 205; Nīl-āb (in Ghūr-bund) 216; Adīnapūr 207; Chaghatāī castles 208; a meaning of "Lām" 210; Running-sands 215; Judas-tree 216; —places 405, 412-17-45, 647; routes 231, 417; sign of submission 232; Nagarahāra App. E, xvii; "Babur Padshah's stone-heap" (cairn) 416; Preface p. xxxviii.

_Journey to India overland_, A. Conolly—Kābul 199; _rawāj_ (rhubarb) 203.

Kabul _see_ "Cabool" and "Caubul".

"Kāfir"—uses of the word 481-3; 518, 577.

_Kafirs of the Hindu-kush_, Robertson—their wines 212.

_Kaiser Akbar_, Count F. v. Noer (_trs. A. S. Beveridge_)—finance reform 282.

Kehr, Dr. G. J. [_scribe of the Pet. F. O. School Codex of the "Bukhārā Bābur-nāma"_] see _Wāqi`-nāma-i-pādshāhī_.

The _Khamsatīn_ (Two Quintets)—a reader of 15; imitated 288.

_Khazīnatu'l-asfiyā_ [Treasury of Saints], Ghulām-i-sarwār—Khwājakī Khw. 67; Mīr Sayyid `Alī _Ḥamadānī's_ grave 211; Pīr Kānū 238; Jālalu'd-dīn _Pūrānī_ 306; Sharafu'd-dīn _Munīrī_ 666.

_Khuṯba_—read disloyally 52, 328; Bābur's compact 354-6; read in Dihli for him 476.

The (Koh-i-nūr) diamond 477, 702.

Klaproth Jules—Preface xxxix, xlvii; [_see_ _Archiv_ and _Mémoires relatifs etc._].

_Kulliyatu'r-rāmī_ (Cyclopædia of Archery), Muḥ. Budhā'ī—_nāwak_ 142; _gosha-gīr_ App. C, viii; (_cf. Oriental Cross-bows, H.B. AQR. 1911_).

+Noticeable words:+—_khachar_ 74, 249; _khāk-bīla_ (leap-frog) 26; _Khān-dāda_; _kīsāk_ (old person) 66; _kīm_ (yeast) 423; _kīyīk_ 6, 8, 10, 224, 491; _khimār_ = cymar (scarf) 561; _kūīlāk_ syn. _kūnglāk_ (pullover vest, jersey) 171-5; _kūkbūrā_ see _aūghlāqchī_; _kūr-khāna_; Qarshī = Ar. _qaṣr_ 84; _kūrūsh_, looking in the eyes, interviewing _i.a._ 54, 64, 640 (_cf. qūchūsh_, embracing); _kusarū_[?] 369; _kūshlūq_ 250.

_La Grande inscription de Qandahar_, J. Darmesteter (_JAS. 1890_), App. J, xxxiii-iv.

_Lahor to Yaṛkand_, Hume and Henderson—_yāk_ App. M, xlvii.

Laidlaw (_JASB 1848_)—nasal utterance App. E.

Lane's Lexicon _see_ Dictionaries.

Langlés art. Babour Preface xiv.

Law (Muḥammad's)—on blood-vengeance 194, 251-8; Shaibānī's disregard of 329; Ḥusain _Bāī-qarā's_ regard for 258; Bābur's orthodox observance shown _e.g._ 25, 44, 111, 262, 370-7, 483, 547-51-74-89-96, and in the _Mubīn and Wālidiyyaḥ-risāla_ _q.v._; his orthodox reputation (_epitaph_) 711; his observance as to intoxicants 302, beyond his 23rd year 299, 302-3-4; his return to obedience (933) in 44th year 551-5; referred to 203 (_verse_) 645-7-8; his breaches of Law:—against types of verse 447, repented 448; against wine, _see s.n._ Wine.

_Les Mosquées de Samarcande_, Pet. Archeol. S.—74-8-7.

_Les six voyages en Turquie, en Perse, et aux Indes_, Jean Baptiste le Tavernier—the coin _casbeke, kipkī_ 296.

_Letters of Lady Mary W. Montagne_—lovers' marks 16.

Letters—Nawā'ī's imitation of Jāmī's collection 271; Bābur keeps a letter of 910 to 935 AH. 190; his royal-letters (_farmān_) 463-4, 526, 617 (_with autograph marginal couplet_), others (_khaṯ_ṯ) 331-2; to Khw. Kalān 411 (_with autograph couplet_), 603 n. 3, 627, and (_reproduced_) 645; to Humāyūn (_reproduced_) 624; to Kāmrān 645-6, Preface xxxv, xliii; to Māhīm 374, 541; Letters-of-victory:—Kābul 319, Bajaur 371, Ḥiṣar-fīrūza 466, Kānwa 559-74, 580.

Levirate marriage 23, 267.

Levy on stipendiaries 617.

Lexicon Persico-Latinum, I. A. Vullers _see_ Dictionaries.

Leyden John—tentative trs. of the Bukhara Compilation, Preface xlvii-viii-ix, lviii.

_Life and Letters of Ogier G. de Busbecq_ [_trs. Forster & Daniel_]—explains "Sulṯanīm" 29.

_L'Inde des Rajas_, L. Rousselet—Gūālīār 605.

_Linguistic Survey of India_, Sir G. A. Grierson—forms of "nine" App. E, xviii.

Loess 3, 30, App. A, ii.

Looting of assigned individuals 328.

Lord [JASB 1838]—Ghūrbund 205; Running-sands 215.

"Lords of the Elephant" 563-73.

Lordship in the Gate _see_ Gate.

_Lotophagi_, a fruit they ate 210; quoted 42.

Lover's-marks 16, Add. Note, P. 16.

_Lubbut't-tawārīkh_, Yaḥya _Kazwīnī_—an early (brief) source 349; dates the battle of Ghaj-dāvān 361.

+Noticeable words+:— _lām_ (fort) 210; _likh_, _lūja_, _lūkha_ (a bird) 498, App. N, xlvii.

_Ma`āṣir-i-raḥīmī_ (a Life of `Abdu'r-raḥīm Mirza _q.v._), `Abdu'l-bāqī _Nahavandī_—Bābur's wife Ṣalḥa 713.

_Ma`āsiru'l-`umrā_, Shāh-navāz-Khān—Mu'az̤z̤am-nagar = Dīn-kot 206.

McGregor, Col. H. G.—meaning of "_ningrahar_" and "_nungnihar_" = 9 streams, App. E, xix.

Magic—rain making with the jade-stone (_yada-tāsh_) 27, 67, 654; the stone used to ensure victory 623; Bābur's talisman to stop rain 423.

_Majālis-i-nafā'is_, `Alī-sher _Nawā'ī_—mentions `Abdu'l-lāh _Barlās_ 51.

_Making of a Frontier_, A. G. A. Durand—Greek descent 22.

_Malfūzāt-i-tīmūrī_ (Tīmūr's Turki Annals)—not discredited by no-mention in the mutilated B.N. 653; Yūnas Khān and the book Preface xxix; an incentive to Bābur xxx, perhaps also at xxxii; their acceptance in a Persian translation by Shāh-jahān xlvi.[2956]

_Mammals of India_, T. E. Jerdon—hog-deer 491.

_Manners and customs of the modern Egyptians_, E. W. Lane—drinkables 298.

_Manual of Gardening_, Firminger—cherries 203; _kamrak_ fruit 506; an orange 511; _sadā-fal_ 512.

Manufactures of Samarkand, cramoisy and paper 81, 305.

_Marmion_ (_Scott's Notes to_), wild geese checked in flight 214.

Marriage, compelled 386; levirate 23, 267; legitimate 269; illegal 329.

The _Maṣnawī_ of Jalālu'd-dīn _Rūmī_ (_trs. E. H. Whinfield_)—read by `Umar Shaikh 15, Preface xxx.

_Materials for the History of India_, Nassau Lees—amongst the sources for filling out Bābur-nāma gaps 428.

_Maṯla`u's-sa`dain_, `Abdu'r-razzāq (_N. et Ex. xiv_)—Timurid suzerainty acknowledged in Dihli [in 814-1411] 459.

Meal-hours—big breakfast 389; nooning 614-861.

Measures—+Linear+:—_aīlīk_ (finger-breadth) 489, 630; _arghamchī_ (rope) 614; arrow's-flight (_i.a._ bow-shot), _i.a._ 8, 640; from gate-ward to Gate 316; _gaz_ 611 n. 3; _kuroh_ _i.a._ 76; _qadam_ (step, pace) 75, 630, (of a horse) 666; _qārī_ 7, 208-9, 489, 550, 611-29-30-31; _qārīsh_ (inch) 489; _qūlāch_ 406-93; _shar`ī_ 76, 200; spear's length 196, 377, 474; _tanāb_ (rope) 630; _tūtām_ (hand-breadth) 630; _yīghāch_ (Prs. trs. _farsang_) 4, 7, 9, 10, 25, 55, 76, 82-3-4, 99, 138, 208-17-18, 323, App. A, v. n. 1; —+Time+:—Hindūstān divisions of the year 515 to 517; boiling of milk 175, 237; —+Weight+:—bātmān 263, 276; _mān_ 699; miṣqāl 421-77, 632; _ratī_ 477 n. 6, 517; _tāsh_ (stone, silver & gold) 632; Kābul _sīr_ (_ser_) 632, 546; Table of weights of Hind 517-8; _tūla_ 517-41; —ass-load (_kharwar_) 228, 338-9, 374; —+Numeration+ (Indian) 518; —+Capacity+:—_x_ mills water-power _i.a._ 208, 216, 462-5, 581; (coins by the) quiverful 632.

Medical and surgical remedies:—dried plums (_prunes_) 82; water dropped from cotton 89; trepanning 106-9; seton, bandage (_yīldīz_) 169; powder for bone-growing 169; water-melon and narcissus 246, 399, 401; rose-water (_jūl-āb_) 400; antidotes to poison 511, 543; tonic powders 606; opium 608, 661; quicksilver 618; pepper-steaming 657, 660.

_Mediæval geography and history of Central and Western Asia_, E. Bretschneider—Ālmālīgh and other old towns 2; Sīmīz-kīnt [_Fat-village_], a name of Samarkand 75; _Nūyān_ explained 131.

_Mémoires relatifs à l'Asie_ (_ii, 134_), J. Klaproth—its valuable extracts from the Bukhara Compilation, Preface, Cap. III,